Document - process/ work product - Cedar Grove Utilities Financial Statements from 1961 to 1969. - 1/1/1961Patch T/
Transfer Patch
EAGAN TOWNSHIP 7250-c
Cedar Grove Utility Company -Financial
Statements
ce ciA Zatf
•
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
3216 SOUTH GROVE LANE * * SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Phone 451 —6426 55076
May 12, 1970
Mr. Luther Stalland
2340 Dain Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Dear Mr. Stalland:
Enclosed please find a copy of our 1969 Certified
Audit Report of the Cedar Grove Utilities Company
as per agreement.
Another copy of this report is being sent directly
to the Town Board of Supervisors.
Sinerely,
J. H. Dielecntheis
JHD/meo
Enclosure
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
3216 SOUTH GROVE LANE
SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Phone 451 —6426 55076
April 2, 1969
Mr. Paul Hauge
Suite 2340
Rand Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Hauge:
Enclosed please find a copy of the 1968 Certified Audit
report of the Cedar Grove Utilities Company.
DRW/dfs
Enc.
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICII
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
510 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
MUMS111S AN(RlCAM U STITUTI OP C1,1T1111D ►UMuC ACCOUNTANTS
TtLIPMONN I1 .II1S
CLAUOE C. ANDERSON, C. P. A.
JOSEPH C. SEIBERLICH. C. P. A.
Board of Directors
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
7343 Concord Blvd. East
South Saint Paul, Minnesota 55075
Gentlemen:
RICHARo A. MCMAHON. C. ►. A.
We have examined the balance sheet of Cedar Grove Utilities Co.,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota, as of December 31, 1969, and the related
statements of earnings and accumulated losses for the year then ended.
Our examination was made in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards and accordingly, included such tests of the accounting records
and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the cir-
cumstances.
In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheet, statements of earn-
ings and accumulated losses present fairly the financial position of
Cedar Grove Utilities Co. at December 31, 1969, and the results of its
operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles applied on a basis consistent with that of the prior
year.
Respectfully submitted,
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
Certified Public Accountants
rs
LIABILITIES
CAPITALIZATION
Common stock, no par value, 2500 shares
authorized, 100 shares issued and outstanding
Accumulated losses - Exhibit C
Grants in aid of construction - Exhibit D
Total Capitalization
LONG-TERM DEBT
Notes payable - Southview State Bank
Notes payable - Cedar Grove Construction Co.
Note 1
First mortgage - 6-1/2% bonds - Note 2
Total
Less: Current maturities
Total Long -Term Debt
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Contracts payable - construction
Current maturities of long-term debt
Accounts payable - trade
Accounts payable - related companies
Meter deposits
Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings
Accrued property taxes
Accrued interest payable
Income taxes payable
Total Current Liabilities
-3-
1969
1968
1,000.00 $
153,900.75)(
777,554.89
624,654.14
195,000.00
135,000.00
330,000.00
142,000.00
188,000.00
1,000.00
159,659.99)
774,305.45
615,645.46
96.22
195,000.00
160,000.00
355,096.22
122,596.22
232,500.00
756.87 2,256.87
142,000.00 122,596.22
5,952.23 6,184.23
915.62 10,618.16
15,885.00 15,810.00
290.38 155.16
35,374.64 31,107.58
5,827.42 6,668.64
2,651.51 10.00
209,653.67 195,406.86
$1,022,307.81 $1,043,552.32
ANDERSON &. SEII3ERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
•
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES COMPANY
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES
Year Ended December 31 Exhibit C
1969 1968
EARNINGS FOR THE YEAR - EXHIBIT B $ 5,759.24 $ 2,660.52
ACCUMULATED LOSSES - JANUARY 1 ( 159,659.99)( 162,230.51)
ACCUMULATED LOSSES - DECEMBER 31 ($ 153,900.75)($ 159659.99)
-6-
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES COMPANY
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION
December 31, 1969 Exhibit D
BALANCE - DECEMBER 31, 1968
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION - 1969
BALANCE - DECb`B ER 31, 1969
-7-
$ 774,305.45
3,249.44
$ 777,554.89
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
•
NOTE 1:
NOTE 2;
NOTE 3:
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES COMPANY
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
December 31, 1969
Annual installments of $19,500.00 are to be made on January 31st of each
year beginning in 1965. The note, dated January 30, 1962, bears interest
at 5l., payable semi-annually on July 31st and January 31st. On December
31, 1969, the current portion was $117,000.00.
The first mortgage, 6-1/2% bonds, payable to the Northwestern National
Life Insurance Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota, are secured by a
mortgage on the land, buildings and equipment of the corporation. The
agreement provides that the corporation may have $1,000,000.00 of bonds
outstanding at any time. The initial issue was for $150,000.00.
(Series 1962) and is due January ,1974, with 6-1/2% interest payable
semi-annually on January 15th and July 15th of each year. The second
issue was for $100,000.00 (Series 1963) and is due January, 1975, with
the same interest specifications prevailing. The corporation is
required to retire $15,000 yearly of the principal amount of Series
1962 beginning on January 15, 1965, and $10,000 yearly of the principal
amount of Series 1963 beginning on January 15, 1966.
Among other covenants, the indentures impose limitations on the payment
of dividends, distribution of cash, and the incurrence of indebtedness
other than amounts resulting from current operations while the Series
of 1962 and 1963 are outstanding.
On October 1, 1967, the Company requested a rate increase of its sewer
utility. It has been enjoined from enforcing the rate increase until
it has been approved through judicial review. The amount thus in abey-
ance approximates $73,000.00. This amount is not reflected in the
financial statements as of December 31, 1969.
-8-
ANDERSON &. SEIBERLICB
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
TOWN OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER F; WATER SYSTEM ACQUISITION
2-18-69
A. TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS $1,000,000
B. ESTIMATED AVERAGE ANNUAL REQUIREMENTS:
1. Principal F, Interest on $1,000,000-30 years (2-18-69) $ 68,800
2. Engineer's Estimate - Operation $ Maintenance 40,000
3. Total Average Annual Requirements $ 108,800
C. ESTIMATED AVERAGE ANNUAL RECEIPTS:
1. Assessments
(A) 900 Sewer Conn. @ $400.00 = $360,000
(B) 1,170 Water Conn. @ $350.00 = $374,500
(C) Total Assessed $734,500
(D) Average Annual Receipts with Interest $ 47,252
2. Service Charges
(A) 900 Sewer & Water @ $6.50/mo.
(B) 170 Water @ $3.50/mo.
(C) Total Average Annual
3. Grand Total Receipts
D. INDICATED AVERAGE ANNUAL SURPLUS C.3 LESS B.3
$ 70,200
7,130
$ 77,3 c
**********
E. SUMMARY = FEASIBILITY
1. Total Indicated Surplus-30 years = $473,460
2. Minimum Assessments "Break Even"
Utilizing Surplus to Reduce Assessments:
Sewer $267.00
Water $233.00
3. Indicated Surplus would Finance Additional
$230,000 over 30 Years.
$ 77,330
$ 124,582
$ 15,782
6CL€4kt's
kJa - "(A
0-4
C6-eh9:(---
AA-Ak 4--g
Cw 014, cfAc
('Q'tjeL)
1, oc �OZ
4. 2
Qom, 7S 1) 673, Oo d
Co 2�463
bi, 4� a
47,s,.
• •
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER & WATER SYSTEM ACQUISITION
(CEDAR GROVE)
JULY 19, 1967
1. TOTAL ESTIMATED ACQUISITION COST $1,0001_000.00
2. ESTIMATED AVERAGE ANNUAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR PRINCIPAL & INTEREST ON $1,000,000 $ 61,E+00.00
3. ESTIMATED AVERAGE ANNUAL RECEIPTS
A. ASSESSMENTS TOTAL ASSESSED
900 CONNECTIONS @ $750 . $675,000
ESTIMATED AVERAGE ANNUAL RECEIPTS
WITH INTEREST
B. ANNUAL TRANSFER FROM REVENUES
FROM 900 CONNECTIONS
NOTE: NO TAX LEVIES REQUIRED.
$ 39,937.00
21,463.00
$ 61,E+00.00
ESTIMATED COST TO AVERAGE HOME OWNER IN CEDAR GROVE
TOTAL ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT $ 750.00
ASSESSMENT MAY BE PAID IN FULL AT ANY TIME OR MAY BE PAID
OVER A 30-YEAR PERIOD. IF PAID IN 30 ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS,
THE AVERAGE ANNUAL COST IS ESTIMATED AS FOLLOWS:
1. AVERAGE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT INSTALLMENT
INCLUDING INTEREST
1ST YEAR
LAST YEAR
$ 70.00
26.50
$ 96.50
2. AVERAGE ANNUAL MINIMUM SEWER & WATER CHARGE
12 MONTHS @ $6.50
3. TOTAL AVERAGE ANNUAL COST
MONTHLY EQUIVALENT
$ 48.75
78.00
$ 126.75
$ 10.56
d or
- - 35 :07
s
II
12
17
II
1s
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
N
1z
▪ 4-- . —4
ti.r.noast
a
a
O 13j s
raw Avaistiosigai,
-•-ter----�'r - �'-
N
ti
H
4-
4-
4-
IT
•
Or-
—4
•
41.1-14
, 1
•
r 3.
1, Prig
rr
4
4 44 P
t1 ' - t$-
—
t
4'
it
i1
14
17
1�
a
ff
31
•
•
-r' '✓. -se.wene1444 ,..Ty.‘ rots) Accpc,l r 3i--
11
30
S TiJa7.4 TEO /IC.Sr.� SE > 'i el- 11,01,9 DiQ/
PR t n,3 . t ivT o f 3
Ofpc,r4g724Ai 4 M& i.
,111
!, :>sc�seiv7 5—
yR. AQ06.1'4,07 ..-'
c 8o cb..,a•(s€«2b,
Tp `• 60. rR `s ► 50- %.OoO
—AveR. 4MA.I• RC•
3 _ _
. A 4 Trcc^ PT3
A ilJ► ep-L ti7J'-/QR/:Ty
ec.51c.uiJH 0414 L ,4 w - c ' ,C3 iy JCg-tciQ ywow.
al — —
AN,4LiSfs ,or �+J7 oT f7�/r7eir:
31
4ss ss.11 r..
• 34
o. t 47-arq
5f oo —
1Q4TE1Q m FcvSal
9Vi.o7r" 3
3cto -
t5°
11
-2/0 - 6 7
ma9trzez4.6.0t2---
y,
127o. So
3C19. )-9
Alz&
o da-E � g•Lb
'y'�^e�.f- ek R,a.ace.a,,c.1t (J1/%) /, =s
� 9 �s
•
tSti
Q...L �Cc
(P67
14 a I-Qt Y. 4 -.ntn. Jr A:Q,t i, . L & &' A 0 1AI 11^.1
zs Oar
•
2. 4o c ,,
SZ�r., a Zo--t Ae.-t
eA4L-'1,7 A. 444/1-cirtAtaort, .11 Lt_ Aehart)
t, s- A Ary‘• 44.4_44megit
?v r 1 r Sows r
(' °3 s o..
3 D /tot
«'
.vr..11-t
alb
�"rr ti'V p~
•
•
- f-s--__,Q 4
-- f S1.1I
--14,00-00449‘;y 6-r4•4&
•
5,1
NO
5.!_.
yj4Q 41;,I,z ' 1,, Qrl,«--_
Z i G2-st"}
4 71 8) `134 eJ3
_5“14-._ut_ - 1 i i _,_ _!!!fir. .. �.•
�...'L.,...�.
Co
al- a o.en.h.'» f J•
ehaiirr
The Aeerd wants Jendric to sensor at its mee . ing •n
November let Ai to talk about rates. 1 would suggest that
we ask "endric to get his data to us et least 10 days before
the meeting se this ern be r,viewed before the meeting.
Also, I would eu gest we get in writing a consent by Jandric
to waive the increase in rates at least for vct•ber and or until
the time that final review is rude by the Beard.
•
CEDAR GROVE_ UTILITIES CO,
Statement of Profit & Loss
/.2- months ended Des, 3 J (3 196f
O
CJ
1
WATER
$EWER
O
Opera
, in _ Income
1
al --
s
{rD1.,�
7 Y
iiiii
a•
Adr
',►L
2
en
lties & Misc.
I I
•
T
3
MMIMIII
-
MN
III
7.
:
-
4
MMIMIM
1
IMI111I
l
5
Operating Expenses
i
! Depxeciation
s�f
.
/,
_ T
L Electricity
.
/3"
j.1
,7,3
4,57
INN
I
_
Fu`L
M11M
6/711��
3
a "
Repairs. .and_ Maint.--
Re_a1 & Pers. Prop Tax
_.
/7?'
J
_
IIP-
73
11
1
.
/FSOA4is'J
f
t
��
- Insurance
'I
1
— "
_ Chlorination .
I
11
!!
I
t
,
_�2 : 13
— Lng;i &Surveyin8
��'
�M
j Tp
—.�;.
Wages
—
15
1
l�
.
fs
T
"�_
'a
Administrative Expenses_(X►
Legal and Accounting
8a
,
es.
4
�_,
%
a
1S
Loan
Office Supplies
/30f
'
//D%%I
1
49b
ill'2
i
i
i
4�.
22
Rent. —
a"sr/& Postage
f
D�/
4�
/
1!
1
�,!///'
i
_
n
Telephone_
/30
`/
' 1
.36b13
/02lf/
'
24
Entertain_&_Travel
r"1
I I
y
1
_ ,
�70
,
rl
,
il .
aG�1,`
..
i
il
25
A,,i
1nc[Viz Ta4I
,71.27-):
n
I
21
Net
Operating
Profit_
�.4
Co72
`'
.f94"f
30
Other
TnQme
c,
I
j
1 i
1
31
Interest
r,
�`
.. =
'`
` i%Q
',
II_
32
Misc.
Inc.
4
_
_
1
_I-
_
u
I
x
4
Less
C
her Expenses
I
a'
__ ._.
ke_st
,
,
31
_7nt
2
3e
Net
roflt
(Ln
- I.,
'5
'1
bC
.
.-.71
:17-
J/
it
--
;
I
`i4�Il�
I1I\1
IIi\�1'ii
%!���''+
A
11.
•
1,J
in: Income
Ities & Misc.
ing Expenses
eciation
trinity
_Rep 'iruandJ atAt-
1l & Pers Prop Tax
s I ance
1 rinati•.
__Eng _ S.urveyin:
___Sal ies_&_Wagea
16
17 Adl in trative _Expeasea
16 __Leg 1_and_Accounti•
19 Ioaq -
II�
n men 1111C
23_1tamps & _Poo tage
elaphone_
21 _Entsxtaia &sravel�
4?R De TS
, r'vn► T,J E T11 Y
32 �1e _ 4p erating Profit__
23
31
31
32
33
►i
SnpplivA
Oth:r
_Intest
•
TIL CEZAILD110VE UITIES CQ.
Statement of Profit 64_L4gss
_ months
the ended fie G 3% , 196(
ber exyai oP.miglipplitimmuompip
ll. es ,_.,0 _, 1_.. I 4 -..46A
f 1111111■I■nip■i11iM11111111 a1nna
..!!l .b,, INIIII■iulllocrorl,!miIINI NIIII wen,
• I1IIBI11UIN11Nl-'(I■iIllllnilllllr 'y1
3
1
3
10
I3
.3
22
23
24
:3
7:
n
31
32
33
11
31
:7
• •
WILLIAM R. BUSCH
ATTORNEY AT LAW
803 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
222-0781
October 10, 1966
Luther M. Stalland, Esq.
Attorney at Law
Rand Tower Building
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Re: Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Dear Mr. Stalland:
In accordance with our conversation of last week, I have secured
from Cedar Grove Utilities Co. and am enclosing for your reference
a breakdown of its revenue and expenses for each of the years 1964 and
1965 between its water and its sanitary sewer operations.
As is indicated by the enclosures, the company's continuing
operating losses are a product of the excess of its sanitary sewer
service expenses over the income that it was receiving from that
phase of its business.
The attached financial detail is intended as a supplement to the
audit reports for the subject years that were previously filed by the
company with the Township. The company's certified public account-
ants will be requested to incorporate this type of income and expense
analysis as part of their certified report for the current year, and a
copy thereof will be submitted to the Township as soon as it is received.
A copy of this letter and of the enclosures are going forward to
the Chairman of the Township's Board of Supervisors so that the
records of the Board will include this data.
Sins rely yours,
WRB:jd 14 illiam R'
Enclosures
cc: Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Mr. Arthur Rahn
Luther; As to rates for sewer services
under `'re'-chiro take s 1e^k at 300.03
and 300.04 and cases. Generally the
cases say that where there is • franchise
erntreet in fore• covering rates, that tney
ee..stim,...s ;hanged during the franchise.
(But see warding of 300.04)
However, we have no previrin se to
g verning of rstee, rye we can ',rune that
they rust be reasonable and therefore
could review the r etas.
Also see 412.221 re general welfare
ALAS BOLtW, CIARv
lawn Township - Debate County
1365 Deerrsod Drive
St. Paul, Minnesota 55111
October 4, 1966
Mr. Mail T. Jandric, President
Ceder Gress Vtilitiee Cs.
3216 $soth Grove Len
ninth it. Paul, Minnesota 55076
Deer Mt. Jamdric s
•
lulu Cedar Greve sever rate inisssse
Since receipt of netiticatiaa that your eenpeny has increased its sewer
rotes to enstonera is the Cedar prove *red by 61.00 per names. pan leave
received a ember of Wviriss se is whether sisal lacrosse it justified sad
Leasegable.
iM vedsr par is to dst.sssiss this, weld yea kindly forverd appropriate
spsrattmi statements for year part fiscal year pertaining only to the
sewer operatics. Ms ere in receipt of your financial statemeets let 1964
and 1965 covering the erMined ester end sew operations bet feel tint
this does not Mims us .efficient inlornation as to the saver niceties
slew
Mqr ve heat free yea st year early coavvetwCe eft this natter.
Tours very truly,
DOAN OF SVPUVIBpiM r
Iimia TR:a1SKIP
r 1
f .e...
ALYCE BOLKE, CLERK
Cagan Township - Dakota County
1365 Deerwoo3 give
St, Paul, Minnesota 55111
Octot+aa 4, 1966
Mir. Bell F. Jendric, President
Ceder Grove Utilities Co.
3216 South Czove Lane
South St. Paui, Ifinut ots 55O76
RE: Cpiier Greve sewer rate iacroase
Deer Mr. .Iaudric:
Since receipt of notification that your company hal increased its sever
rstes to customers in the Cedar Crave area by $1.00 per month, we have
received a der of inquiries as to whathez such increase is justified and
t•ssdaable.
Y:n ordei for us to determine this, would you kindly forward appropriate
operating statements for your past flees/ year pertsinin$ anly to the
:Amer operation. We are La receipt of your finsuriel statements for 1964
aai 1965 covering the combined water end sower operations but feel that
chJ% does not give us sufficient informations to the sewer operation
alone.
May we Imo: from you at your early convenience on thin matter.
Yours very truly,
BOARD OF 5UP'1W 1$OEs ,
EAGAN TI.WWSEiii'
By
•
Law Orric$s
LUTHER M. STALLAND
Sv=rE 2940, Rum Towzk
Mrx\t_APor.xs 2. MrNNSwo'rA
PALL H. Hiuoe
lleord01 Svtawca
140 Iltesabtp. MOW Goolor
St. IMrl. a.te l3111
Oast UMW
Ocsober 4, 111411
RTt leeks. boodle lloa4
Aimee the Last ward to miot 1 Man Jetocsise4 that the ce enty►
board cot at Mr time upw its bets resolution roveko ae4 genies
any aenety reed. Wasre, as is the cage of Wakes Boodle Mod, It
is leeeted eeloiyr within a twwehtp, lak reed meld revert a the
to hip ail basem *salt a ettmehlp reed. l[taeta Stonotes,
Sestina 143.11, lid. S, provtdes is pact:
The earl► ward. by resolution. wsly revoke any
emir irlphofa . the highway aay shell thereupon Fewest
to the twat fi vbich it is lecate.i ; . . .
This Leo wee r■Matrl iA 12$0. In 1160 the Attorney General
Atty. 4Ms. 377b»3, April 1', 1110) ruled that'
OP.
'A county board ovoid take ewer a taus road by resolution,
glad also solid revoke a comity highway by rssolutfoa,
*hereupon the eanoty wily world became a torts roe 1.
'tears very trvLy,
Luther N. italLaad
Urn t sera
LLw OFFICES
LUTHER M. STALLAND
SurrE 2640, Rum TvwER
MTNNEAPOLIS 2, MINNEsarA
Para. H. HscOE
Snarl of Supervisai:s
two Town l hi p , nkot county
St. Paul, HLnae-.ots, 55111.
Gott: k Mom:
ik bO x r 4 , 19 5
KZ! iv :o. Doodle Roe.
Since the Zest boe.1 meeting; I have JetetmiI -i that the county
bonar;i 4an at any time upon it.t own ce.4olution ,evolve ini it,«ni
any county Innis Whoia. as in the cage of Yankee Doolke Poet, it
is ioacatei o1s1y within & town.;hip, .Duch road would saved to the
town:hip end become *gat* a townAhip road. Minnesota Statute ,
Section 163.11, %bd. 5, pl ovides in pa -t:
The county heard, by a esolution, may rovo::e any
county h ighwely . The hiet ay shell thereupon reve t
to the tairao: in which it is located; .
ThiJ ;.air wen o react i in 1959. In 1960 the i.ttorn y Generc 07.
Atty. Gen. 377b•3, April 1'`, 1960) ru.el than
1 county board could take over c town road by reiolution,
end a1w.o could revoke a county highway by reaolution,
whereupon the county highway would l*ecame a town rout.
Yazi very truly.
Luther M. S to A lea :1
STATEMENT OF EAGAN TOWNSHIP
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
REGARDING CEDAR GROVE SEWER AND WATER SYSTEMS
The Eagan Town Board has recently received inquiries from residents
of Cedar Grove and other interested persons regarding the water and sewer
systems in this area. It appears that rumors about them
have sprung from statements made by representatives of the Federal Housing
Administration and real estate brokers to home owners in the Cedar Grove
development. The Board wishes to clarify the situation with this statement.
In April of 1959 the Town Board entered into water and sewer franchise
agreements with Cedar Grove Utilities Company for a period of twenty-five
(25) years whereby this private company would provide water and sewer service
to the proposed Cedar Grove development. At that time the population of
Eagan was perhaps 2,500 and the Board did not feel the town was in any
position to either install or operate central utility systems, much less
attempt to finance them for an undeveloped area. The alternative if the
franchises had not been granted would have been individual wells and septic
systems which in a potentially concentrated area was felt to be unwise.
At the time the Cedar Grove developers proposed the franchises, they
assured the Board that the cost of the systems would be borne by the investors
and by private borrowing and would not be included in the cost of the homes
except to the partial extent of a connection charge made against each home for
hook-up to the systems.
Under the franchises the utility company is permitted to make reasonable
charges for monthly service which presumably and permissibly includes a
profit for the utility company. No doubt a portion of these charges is
bing applied by the company to amortize the cost of the systems. These
- 1 -
service charges are subject to the reviec, and regulation at all times by the
Town Board. Like any privately owned public utility, the investors are
entitled to a reasonable profit on their investment.
The franchises further reserve the right to the township to purchase
these systems at any time. The price to be paid is the reasonable value of
the systems. If the township and Cedar Grove Utilities Company cannot agree
upon the price, the franchises provide for arbitration. In addition, the
township has reserved the right to condemn.
The rumors circulated which have come to the attention of the Board
are presented and answered as follows:
1. The water and sewer systems in Cedar Grove are being paid for by
the homeowners because the cost of the systems is proportionately included
in the price of the homes.
To the Board's knowledge :.his not true except to the extent of a
portion of the initial connection charge. Cedar Grove Utilities Company affirms
this. The FHA says that it is true but acknowledges that it cannot prove
that it is true. For this reason, unfortunately, FHA has apparently valued
the houses in Cedar Grove for mortgage tending and guarantee purposes at
something; less than the sales prices of the homes. This has been the situation
since the development began. The township, of course, has no control over
either the pricing of houses nor mortgage valuations.
2. The FHA has or, within the next two years, will place an assessment
against benefited property in Cedar Grove for the water and sewer systems.
The amount of the assessment will be about $1,200.
Untrue. The FHA has no power to assess for water and sewer systems.
Only the Eagan Town Board has this power and before the Board can exercise
its power a public hearing must be held and written notice of the proposed
assessment given to all property owners affected. Since there have been no
negotiations, there is no way of determining how much the assessment might be.
•
3. Because of the rumored assessment the home values in Cedar Grove are
being depressed.
The Board has no knowledge that this is so. In any event, the Board
does not control fluctuations in real estate values based upon rumor of
assessments.
4. The township has decided to purchase the systems and will assess
the cost against benefited property in Cedar Grove.
The Town Board has not decided to purchase the systems and has taken no
formal action in this regard whatever. The Board has from time to time
discussed this possibility and will likely study the matter in the future.
If the township does at some future time take over the systems it would
probably assess part or all of the cost against benefited property.
In conclusion, the Eagan Town Board wishes to assure all residents in
Cedar Grove that if and when 't fiver considers the taking over of these water
and sewer systems and levying assessments on benefited property, each owner
will receive notice and be afforded the opportunity to be heard in support
or in opposition prior to the Board taking any final action.
3/14/66
Board of Supervisors
Eagan Township
• •
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES COMPANY
SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
AUDIT REPORT
DECEMBER 31, 1968
1
i • •
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
403 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
MEMBERS AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
TELEPHONE 227-6326
' CLAUDE C. ANDERSON, C. P. A.
JOSEPH C. SEIBERLICH. C. P. A. RICHARD A. McMAHON, C. P. A.
March 21, 1969
1
1
Board of Directors
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
7343 Concord Blvd. East
South Saint Paul, Minnesota 55075
Gentlemen:
t
We have examined the balance sheet of Cedar Grove Utilities Co.,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota, as of December 31, 1968, and the related
statements of earnings and accumulated losses for the year then ended.
Our examination was made in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards and accordingly, included such tests of the accounting records
and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the cir-
cumstances.
In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheet, statement of earn-
ings and accumulated losses present fairly the financial position of
Cedar Grove Utilities Co. at December 31, 1968, and the results of its
operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles applied on a basis consistent with that of the prior
year.
Respectfully submitted,
1 ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
Certified Public Accountants
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES COMPANY
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31
ASSETS
CAPITAL ASSETS (Schedule A-1)
Utility System (at original cost)
Land
Land improvements
Deep well #1
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Total
Less: Accumulated depreciation
Utility System (net)
Trucks
Office equipment
Signs
Total
Less: Accumulated depreciation
Other Capital Assets (net)
Total Capital Assets (net)
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Notes receivable - Jandric Realty Co.
Accounts receivable - trade
Accounts receivable - related companies
Prepaid expenses
Total Current Assets
SEE NOTES TO FINANCIAL
-2 -
1968
$ 22,237.93
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,612.40
3,984.87
431,653.04
389,075.57
98,238.17
178,146.07
9,585.60
1,232,804.12
235,188.63
997,615.49
2,317.61
1,145.25
330.14
3,793.00
2,484.54
1,308.46
998,923.95
17,375.20
11,500.00
12,463.76
2,760.00
529.41
44,628.37
$ 1,043,552.3
STATEMENTS
Exhibit A
1967
$ 22,237.93
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,612.40
3,984.87
426,969.32
389,075.57
98,238.17
178,146.07
8,404.04
1,226,938.84
201,973.08
1,024,965.76
2,317.61
712.76
330.14
3,360.51
1,815.44
1,545.07
1,026,510.83
22,987.99
11,500.00
11,826.19
1,840.00
510.74
48,664.92
$ 1,075,175.75
LIABILITIES
CAPITALIZATION
Common stock, no par value, 2500 shares
authorized, 100 shares issued and outstanding
Accumulated losses - Exhibit C
Grants in aid of construction - Exhibit D
Total Capitalization
LONG-TERM DEBT
Notes payable - Southview State Bank
Notes payable - Cedar Grove Construction Co.,
Note 1
First mortgage - 6-1/2%, bonds Note 2
Total
Less: Current maturities
Total Long -Term Debt
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Contracts payable - construction
Current maturities of long-term debt
Accounts payable - trade
Accounts payable - related companies
Meter deposits
Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings
Accrued property taxes
Accrued interest payable
Income taxes payable
Total Current Liabilities
-3-
1968
1967
1,000.00 $
159, 659.99)
774,305.45
615,645.46
96.22
195,000.00
160,000.00
355,096.22
122,596.22
232500.00
2,256.87
122,596.22
6,184.23
10,618.16
15,810.00
155.16
31,107.58
6,668.64
10.00
195,406.86
1,000.00
162,320.51)
730,737.69
569,417.18
1,250.86
195,000.00
185,000.00
381,250.86
104,154.64
277,096.22
28,256.87
104,154.64
787.94
47,555.57
14,205.00
366.50
27,074.05
6,251.78
10.00
228,662.35
$ 1.043,552.3Z $ 1.075.175.75
ANDERSON ez SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES COMPANY
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF EARNINGS BY OPERATIONS
Year Ended December 31
OPERATING REVENUE
Water and sewer charges
Penalties and miscellaneous
Total Operating Revenue
OPERATING EXPENSES
Depreciation
Salaries and wages
Payroll taxes
Property taxes
Electricity
Fuel
Repairs and maintenance
Insurance
Chlorination
Truck expenses
Surveying and engineering
Operating supplies
Meter reading
Total Operating Expenses
GROSS MARGIN (Loss)
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Legal and audit
Office rent and utilities
Office expense and miscellaneous
Bad debt expense
Telephone
Total Administrative Expenses
OPERATING EARNINGS (LOSS)
OTHER EXPENSE LESS OTHER INCOME
Interest expense
Loan expense
Total
Interest income
Other Expense Less Other Income
EARNINGS (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES
Provision for Income Taxes
NET EARNINGS FOR THE YEAR
Combined
Exhibit B
1968
Amount Percent
1967
Amount Percent
$118,149.67 98.3% $113,135.70
2,083.99 1.7 1,644.96
120,233.66 100.0 114780.66 100.0
98.6%
1.4
34,147.41 28.4 33,607.81 29.3
12,172.85 10.1 13,414.69 11.7
609.51 .5 687.98 .6
31,249.86 26.0 27,074.05 23.6
4,433.27 3.7 4,708.54 4.1
419.46 .3 209.12 .2
6,088.13 5.1 4,283.21 3.7
1,066.01 .9 1,533.73 1.3
1,324.54 1.1 1,004.04 .9
624.84 .5 428.04 .4
1,298.50 1.1 1,158.36 1.0
907.01 .8 391.33 .3
354.56 .3
94,6.95.95 78.8 88,500.90 77.1
25,537.71 21.2 26,279.76 22.9
1,476.00 1.2 1,050.00 .9
1,860.00 1.6 1,860.00 1.7
2,405.65 2.0 1,366.60 1.2
49.95 35.02
241.17 .2 239.42 .2
6,032.77 5.0 4,551.04 4.0
19,504.94 16.2 21,728.72 18.9
17,584.00 14.6 18,787.67
200.00 .2 200.00
17,784.00 14.8
18,987.67
949.58 .8 951.48
16.3
.2
16.5
.6
16,834.42 14.0 18,036.19 15.7
2,670.52 2.2 3,692.53 3.2
10.00 10.00
S 2,660.52 2.2/ S 3.682.53 3.27.
-4-
Water
1968
Amount Percent
$ 62,474.34
1,316.97
63,791.31
14,553.19
4,057.62
203.17
12,499.94
1,864.99
88.01
4,082.55
430.06
698.82
312.42
237.15
118.19
39 146.11
24.645.20
811.80
1,023.00
1,289.67
27.47
132.64
3,284.58
21.360.62
7,033.60
110.00
7,143.60
379.83
6.763.77
14.596,85
1967
Amount Percent
97.9% $ 57,240.54
2.1 950.18
100.0 58.190.72
22.8 14,103.68
6.4 4,471.56
.3 229.33
19.6 10,829.62
2.9 1,823.61
.1 53.75
6.4 1,860.91
.7 622.95
1.1 60.27
.5 214.02
225.68
.4 70.03
.2
61.4 34,565.41
Sewer
1968
Amount Percent
98.47. $ 55,675.33
1.6 767.02
100.0 56.442.35
24.3 19,594.22
7.7 8,115.23
.4 406.34
18.7 18,749.92
3.1 2,568.28
.1 331.45
3.2 2,005.58
1.1 635.95
.1 625.72
.4 312.42
.2 1,298.50
.1 669.86
236.37
59.4 55.549.84
38.6 23,625.31 40.6
1.3
1.6
2.0
577.50
1,023.00
751.63
19.26
.2 131.68
5.1 2.503.07
33.5 21.122.24
11.0 7,515.07
.2 110.00
11.2 7,625.07
.6 380.59
10.6 7.244.48
22.9" S 13,8.77.76.
1967
Amount Percent
98.67. $ 55,895.16 98.87.
1.4 694.78 1.2
100.0 56,589.94 100.0
34.7
14.4
.7
33.2
4.6
.6
3.6
1.1
1.1
.5
2.3
1.2
.4
98.4
19,504.13 34.5
8,943.13 15.8
458.65 .8
16,244.43 28.7
2,884.93 5.1
155.37 .3
2,422.30 4.2
910.78 1.6
943.77 1.7
214.02 .4
932.68 1.6
321.30 .6
53,935.49 95.3
892.51 1.6 2.654.45 4.7
1.0 664.20 1.2 472.50 .8
1.8 837.00 1.5 837.00 1.5
1.3 1,115.98 2.0 614.97 1.1
22.48 15.76
.2 108.53 .2 107.74 .2
4.3 2,748.19 4.9 2,047.97 3.6
36.3 ( 1,655.68)( 3.3 ) 606.48 1.1
12.9 10,550.40
.2 90.00
13.1 10,640.40
.7 569.75
12.4 10,070.65
18.7 11,272.60 19.9
.1 90.00 .2
18.8 11,362.60 20.1
1.0 570.89 1.0
17.8 10.791.71 19.1
23.9/.($ 11,926.33) l 21, 17.) (S10 185.23) ( 18,07)
-5-
ANDERSON (t SEIEERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
1 i •
1
i
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES COMPANY
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
II COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES
Year Ended December 31 Exhibit C
II
1963 1967
-
EARNINGS FOR THE YEARExhibit B $ 2,660.52 $ 3,682.53
IIACCUMULATED LOSSES - January 1 ( 162,320.51)( 166,003.04)
ACCUMULATED LOSSES - December 31 ($ l59.65S,49)(S _162,320.51)
II
' ANDERSON & SRIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
•
•
BALANCE
GRANTS IN
BALANCE
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES COMPANY
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION
December 31, 1968
DECEMBER 31, 1957
AID OF CONSTRUCTION 1968
DECEMBER 31, 1968
-7-
Exhibit D
$ 730,737.69
43,567.76
774,305.45
ANDERSO` tic SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
1
t
t
t
1
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES COMPANY
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
December 31, 1968
NOTE 1: Annual installments of $19,500.00 are to be made on January 31st of each
year beginning in 1965. The note, dated January 30, 1962, bears interest
at 3/, payable semi-annually on July 31st and January 31st. On December
31, 1963, the current portion was $97,500.00.
NOTE 2: The first mortgage, 6-1/2°, bonds, payable to the Northwestern National
Life Insurance Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota, are secured by a
mortgage on the land, buildings and equipment of the corporation. The
agreement provides that the corporation may have $1,000,000.00 of bonds
outstanding at any time. The initial issue was for $150,000.00 (Series
1962) and is due January, 1974, with 6-1/2% interest payable semi-annually
on January 15th and July 15th of each year. The second issue was for
$100,000.00 (series 1963) and is due January, 1975, with the same interest
specifications prevailing. The corporation is required to retire $15,000
yearly of the principal amount of Series 1962 beginning on January 15,
1965, and $10,000.00 yearly of the principal amount of Series 1963 beginn-
ing on January 15, 1966.
Among other covenants, the indentures impose limitations on the payment
of dividends, distribution of cash and the incurrence of indebtedness
other than amounts resulting from current operations while the Series
of 1962 and 1963 are outstanding.
NOTE 3: On October 1, 1967, the Company requested a rate increase on its sewer
utility. It has been enjoined from enforcing the rate increase until it
has been approved through judicial review. The amount thus in abeyance
approximates $39,000.00. This amount is not reflected in the financial
statements as of December 31, 1968.
NOTE 4: The following amounts are available on future income tax returns:
Federal Minnesota
Net operating loss carryforward $ 10,273.08 $ 13,212.84
Investment credit 3,150.21
-8-
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICII
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
I • •
1
1
1
1
1 CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
I AUDIT REPORT
DECEMBER 31, 1966
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
INDEX
Page Number
AUDITOR'S CERTIFICATE 1
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET EXHIBIT A 2 - 3
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF EARNINGS EXHIBIT B 4
CO 1PARAT IVE STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES EXHIBIT C 5
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION EXHIBIT D 6
FOOTNOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 7
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
STATEMENT OF WORKING CAPITAL EXHIBIT E 8
STATEMENT OF SOURCE AND APPLICATION
OF FUNDS EXHIBIT F 9
CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEPRECIATION SCHEDULE A-1 10
SCHEDULE OF EARNINGS BY OPERATIONS SCHEDULE B-1 11 - 12
•
A_NI)ERSON SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
403 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101
MEMBERS AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ACCOUNTANTS
CLAUDE C ANDERSON. C.P.A.
JOSEPH C. SEIBERLICH. G.P.A.
February 24, 1967
Board of Directors
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
3216 South Grove Lane
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
Gentlemen:
PHONE 227-4324,
We have examined the balance sheet of Cedar Grove Utilities Co.,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota, as of December 31, 1966, and the related
statementsof earnings and accumulated losses for the year then ended.
Our examination was made in accordance with generally accepted audit-
ing standards and accordingly included such tests of the accounting
records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary
in the circumstances.
In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheet, statements of
earnings and accumulated losses present fairly the financial position of
Cedar Grove Utilities Co., at December 31, 1966, and the results of its
operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles applied on a basis consistent with that of the
prior year.
R:spectfully submitted,
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
Certified Public Accountants
rs
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHUT
December 31
ASSETS
CAPITAL ASSETS (Schedule A-1)
Utility System (at original cost)
Land
Land improvements
Deep well #1 D
Deep well #62 %
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Total
Less: Accumulated depreciation
grading
Utility System (net)
50 F)
Office equipment
Signs
Total
Less: Accumulated depreciation
Other Capital Assets (net)
Total Capital Assets (net)
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Notes receivable - related companies -
all current, 87., unsecured notes due 12/31/66
Notes receivable - Jandric Realty Co.
Accounts receivable - trade
Accounts receivable - related companies
Prepaid expenses
Total Current Assets
1966
$ 22,237.93
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,612.40
3,984.87
401,478.03
389,054.40
98,238.17
178,146.07
8,404.04
1,201,426.38
169,146.98
1,032,279.40
712.76
330.14
1,042.90
1,033.73
9.17
1,032,288.57
4,080.45
11,500.00
10,680.11
920.00
381.54
27,562.10
$1,059,850.67
SEE NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
-2-
Exhibit A
1965
$ 22,237.93
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,612.40
3,984.87
339,450.98
379,455.00
98,238.17
178,146.07
3,183.68
1,124,579.57
138,218.16
986,361.41
712.76
330.14
1,042.90
870.82
172.08
986,533.49
8,840.49
45,700.00
9,078.08
36.13
45,893.09
109,547.79
$1,096,081.28
• •
LIABILITIES
CAPITALIZATION
Common stock, no par value, 2,500
shares authorized, 100 shares issued and
outstanding
Accumulated losses - Exhibit C
Grants in aid of construction - Exhibit D
Total Capitalization
1966 1965
$ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00
( 166,003.04)( 158,838.08)
699,140.23 630,772.70
534,137.19 472,934.62
LONG-TERM DEBT
Note payable - Cedar Grove Const., Co. - Note 1 195,000.00 195,000.00
First mortgage - 6-1/2'!o bonds - Note 2 210,000.00 235,000.00
Total 405,000.00 430,000.00
Less: Current maturities 83,500.00 64,000.00
Total Long -Term Debt
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Note payable - Buron (8%, unsecured note dated
February 20, 1961 and due December 31, 1966)
Contracts payable - construction
Current maturities of long-term debt
Accounts payable - trade
Accounts payable - related companies
Meter deposits
Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings
Accrued property taxes
Accrued interest payable
Income taxes payable
Total Current Liabilities
-3-
321,500.00 366,000.00
50,000.00
23,800.20
83,500.00 64,000.00
4,762.39 1,411.74
42,315.15 101,677.03
13,245.00 11,865.00
490.30 220.30
23,984.19 20,960.99
12,106.25 7,001.60
10.00 10.00
204,213.48 257,146.66
$1,059,850.67 $1,096,081.28
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF EARNINGS
Year Ended December 31
OPERATING REVENUE
Water and sewer charges
Penalties and miscellaneous
Total Operating Revenue
OPERATING EXPENSES
Depreciation
Salaries and wages
Payroll taxes
Property taxes
Electricity
Fuel
Repairs and maintenance
Insurance
Chlorination
Surveying and engineering
Operating supplies
Water turn-off expense
Total Operating Expenses
GROSS MARGIN
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Legal and audit
Office rent and utilities
Office expense and miscellaneous
Bad debt expense
Telephone
Total Administrative Expenses
1966
Amount
% of
Revenue
Exhibit B
1965
Amount
7, of
Revenue
$ 97,461.48 98.37e $ 80,105.24 98.5%
1,730.12 1.7 1,193.51 1.5
99,191.60 100.0 81,298.75 100.0
31,091.73 31.4
10,771.93 10.9
438.50 .5
23,984.19 24.2
4,793.43 4.8
274.67 .3
6,512.85 6.6
1,040.09 1.0
643.25 .6
1,526.00 1.5
300.13 .3
125.56 .1
81,502.33 82.2
17,689.27 17.8
1,031.00 1.0
1,860.00 1.9
1,578.18 1.6
171.49 .2
230.87 .2
4,871.54 4.9
OPERATING EARNINGS 12,817.73 12.9
OTHER EXPENSE LESS OTHER INCOME
Interest expense
Loan expense
Total
Interest income
Other Expense Less Other Income
EARNINGS (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES
Income taxes
EARNINGS (LOSS) FOR THE YEAR
(
23,567.15 23.8
201.10 .2
23,768.25 24.0
3,795.56 3.9
19,972.69 20.1
29,954.25 36.8
8,468.43 10.4
247.21 .3
21,002.83 25.8
4,110.42 5.1
281.89 .3
6,532.82 8.0
778.42 1.0
515.40 .6
753.75 .9
132.77 .2
72,778.19 89.4
8,520.56 10.6
1,050.00 1.3
1,860.00 2.3
1,917.32 2.4
47.34 .1
240.33 .3
5,114.99 6.4
3,405.57 4.2
25,412.64 31.2
225.00 .3
25,637.64 31.5
3,843.16 4.7
21,794.48 26.8
7,1.54.96)( 7.2 )( 18,388.91)( 22.6 )
10.00 10.00
{$_ 7,164.96)( 7.27, )($ 18,398.91)( 22.6°I )
-4-
ANDERSON & SEIIIERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
1
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES
Year Ended December 31 Exhibit C
1966 1965
LOSS FOR THE YEAR - Exhibit B $ 7,164.96 $ 18,398.91
ACCUMULATED LOSSES - January 1 158,838.08 140,439.17
ACCUMULATED LOSSES - December 31 $ 166.003.04 $ 158.838.08
-5-
ANDERSON 8i SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
GRANTS IN All) OF CONSTRUCTION
December 31, 1966 Exhibit D
BALANCE - December 31, 1965 $ 630,772.70
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION 1966 68,367.53
BALANCE December 31, 1966 $ 699,140.23
-6-
ANDERSON SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
FOOTNOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
December 31, 1966
NOTE 1: This note to Cedar Grove Construction Co., for $195,000.00 was written
January 30, 1962, is unsecured and bears interest at the rate of 3%
per annum. Payments of $19,500.00 are to be made on January 1st of
each year, beginning in 1965. The current portion of this note at
December 31, 1966 is $58,500.00.
NOTE 2: The first mortgage, 6-1/27. bonds, payable to the Northwestern National
Bank of Minneapolis, Minnesota, are secured by a mortgage on the land,
buildings and equipment of the corporation. The agreement provides
that the corporation may have $1,000.00 of bonds outstanding at any
time. The initial issue was for $150,000 (Series 1962) and is due
January, 1974, with 6-1/27. interest payable semi-annually on January
15th and July 15th of each year. The second issue was for $100,000
(Series 1963) and is due January, 1975, with the same interest spec-
ifications prevailing. The corporation is required to retire $15,000
yearly of the principal amount of Series 1962 beginning on January 15,
1965, and $10,000 yearly of the principal amount of Series 1963 be-
ginning on January 15, 1966.
Among other covenants, the indentures impose limitations on the pay-
ment of dividends, distribution of cash and the incurrence of indebt-
edness other than amounts resulting from current operations while the
Series of 1962 and 1963 are outstanding.
NOTE 3: Cedar Grove Utilities Co., along with Cedar Grove Construction Co.,
Jandric, Inc., and Mr. Emil F. Jandric, are defendants in a suit for
$500,000.00. The plantiffs are three individual land owners and one
business who allege that in planning and constructing the housing
development in Cedar Grove areas 1 thru 4, the defendants negligently
or willfully caused the diversion of surface waters to flow upon their
land, thus creating flood conditions that damaged the plantiffs'
property. The Company's attorney has stated ".... it is my opinion
that the likelihood of this suit creating an uninsured actual liabil-
ity on the part of Cedar Grove Construction Co., Cedar Grove Utilities
Co., et al, is remote."
-7-
ANDERSON' R SEIHERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
•
e
i
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
• •
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Notes receivable:
Jandric Realty
Related companies
Accounts receivable
Accounts receivable
related companies
Prepaid expenses
Totals
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF WORKING CAPITAL
Year Ended December 31, 1966
1966 1965
$ 4,080.45 $ 8,840.49 ($
trade
11,500.00
45,700.00 (
10,680.11 9,078.08
920.00
381.54
$ 27,562.10
Decrease in Current Assets
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Notes payable - Buron
Contracts payable - c
Current maturities
Accounts payable - trade
Accounts payable -
related companies
Meter deposits
Accrued expenses
Income taxes payable
Totals
$
onst. 23,800.20
83,500.00
4,762.39
42,315.15
13,245.00
36,580.74
10.00
$ 204,213,48
Decrease in Current Liabilities
DECREASE IN NET WORKING CAPITAL
36.13
45,893.09 (
$ 109,547.79
$
50,000.00
64,000.00
1,411.74
101,677.03
11,865.00
28,182.89
10.00
$ 257,146.66
-8-
($
(
Increase
(Decrease)
4,760.04)
11,500.00
45,700.00)
1,602.03
883.87
45,511.55)
50,000.00)
23,800.20
19,500.00
3,350.65
59,361.88)
1,380.00
8,397.85
Exhibit E
$ 81,985.69
52,933.18
$ 29,052.51
ANDERSON & SEIRERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
•
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF SOURCE AND APPLICATION OF FUNDS
Year Ended December 31, 1966 Exhibit F
WORKING CAPITAL APPLIED TO
Water main additions
Sanitary sewer additions
Purchase of utility equipment
Decrease in long-term debt
$ 62,027.05
9,599.40
5,220.36
44,500.00
Total Working C pital Applied $ 121,346.81
WORKING CAPITAL PROVIDED BY
Operations
Depreciation not requiring
outlay of working capital
Less: Loss for the period
Total Provided by Operations
Current grants in aid of construction
$ 31,091.73
7,164.96
23,926.77
68,367.53
Total Working Capital Provided 92,294.30
EXCESS OF WORKING CAPITAL APPLIED
OVER WORKING CAPITAL PROVIDED $ 29.052, 51
REPRESENTED BY
Decrease in Net Working Capital - Exhibit E $ 29,052.51
-9-
ANDERSON A. SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEPRECIATION
Year Ended December 31
Assets
Land
Land improvements
Deep well to
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewer
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Office equipment
Signs
Totals
e
Accumulated Depreciation
Land improvements
Deep well #1
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Office equipment
Signs
Totals
CAPITAL ASSETS (net)
Balance
Dec.31,1965 Additions
$ 22,237.93 $
1,851.84
25,742.59 57Q
34,676.04 Si.
37,612.40 9 '>
3,984.87 77e
_9,450,98 2 62,027.05
---179,455.00'"' 9,599.40
98,238.17
178 ,146.07 S.
3,183.68 24 5,220.36
712.76
330.14
Schedule A-1
Balance
Dec. 31,1966
$ 22,237.93
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,612.40
3,984.87
401,478.03
389,054.40
98,238.17
178,146.07
8,404.04
712.76
330.14
$1,125.622,47 $ 76,846,81 $1,_202.469.28
-10-
Balance
Dec. 31,1965
$ 281.38
7,927.50
2,167.25
11,794.15
1,717.92
27,845.59
33,357.85
10,963.63
40,718.30
1,444.59
659.90
210.92
Current
Depreciation
$ 92.59
1,287.13
1,733.80
1,588.00
278.94
6,921.94
7,626.25
1,964.76
8,907.30
528.11
52.86
110.05
Balance
Dec. 31.1966
$ 373.97
9,214.63
3,901.05
13,382.15
1,996.86
34,767.53
40,984.10
12,928.39
49,625.60
1,972.70
712.76
320.97
$ 139,088,98 $ 31,091.73 $ 170,180.71
$ 986,533,49
45,755.08 $1,032.288.57
ANDERSON It SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
SCHEDULE OF EARNINGS BY OPERATIONS
Year Ended December 31, 1966
OPERATING REVENUE
Water & sewer charges
Penalties & miscellaneous
Total Operating Revenue
OPERATING EXPENSES
Depreciation
Salaries and wages
Payroll taxes
Property taxes
Electricity
Fuel
Repairs and maintenance
Insurance
Chlorination
Surveying & engineering
Operating supplies
Water turn-off expense
Total Operating Expenses
Water
$ 52,579.07
1,209.42
$ 53,788.49
12,471.73
3,590.64
146.17
9,593.68
1,730.16
57.49
2,369.41
416.04
41.50
243.19
125.56
30.785.57
GROSS MARGIN (LOSS) 23,002.92
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Legal and audit
Office rent & utilities
Office expense & misc.
Bad debt expense
Telephone
Total Administrative
Expenses
567.05
1,023.00
868.00
94.32
126.98
2.679.35
OPERATING EARNINGS (LOSS) 20,323.57
OTHER EXPENSE LESS OTHER INCOME
Interest expense
Loan expense
Total
Interest income
Other Expense Less
Other Income
9,426.86
110.60
9,537.46
1,518.22
EARNINGS (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES
8,019.24
$ 12.304,33
-11-
Schedule B-1
Sewer
$ 44,882.41
520.70
18,620.00
7,181.29
292.33
14,390.51
3,063.27 .
217.18
4,143.44
624.05
601.75
1,526.00
56.94
463.95
837.00
710.18
77.17
103.89
14,140.29
90.50
14,230.79
2,277.34
$ 45,403.11
50,716.76
5,313.65)
2,192.19
7,505.84)
11,953.45
($ 19,459,29)
1.
• •
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Total
$ 97,461.48
1,730.12
$ 99,191.60
31,091.73
10,771.93
438.50
23,984.19
4,793.43
274.67
6,512.85
1,040.09 4 •
643.25
1,526.00
300.13
125.56
1,031.00
1,860.00
1,578.18
171.49
230.87
23,567.15
201.10
23,768.25
3,795.56
81,502.33
17,689.27
4,871.54
12,817.73
19,972.69
($ 7,154 96)
-12-
1
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBUC ACCOUNTANTS
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 • •
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
AUDIT REPORT
DECEMBER 31, 1965
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
INDEX
Page Number
AUDITOR'S CERTIFICATE 1
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET Exhibit A 2 - 3
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF EARNINGS Exhibit B 4
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES Exhibit C 5
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION Exhibit D 6
FOOTNOTES TO F INANC IAL STATEMENTS 7
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
STATEMENT OF WORKING CAPITAL Exhibit E 8
STATEMENT OF SOURCE AND APPLICATION
OF FUNDS Exhibit F 9
CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEPRECIATION Schedule A-1 10
t
ANDERSON R. SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
403 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
MEMBERS AMERiCAN INSTITUTE OF ACCOUNTANTS
CLAUDE C. ANDERSON. C.P.A-
JOSEPH C. SEIBERLICH, C.P.A. PHONE 227-6326
March 7, 1966
Board of Directors
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
3216 South Grove Lane
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
Gentlemen:
We have examined the balance sheet of Cedar Grove Utilities Co.,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota, as of December 31, 1965, and the related
statement of earnings and accumulated losses for the year then ended.
Our examination was made in accordance with generally accepted audit-
ing standards and accordingly included such tests of the accounting
records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary
in the circumstances.
In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheet, statement of
earnings and accumulated losses present fairly the financial position
of Cedar Grove Utilities Co,, at December 31, 1965, and the results of
its operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles applied on a basis consistent with that
of the prior year.
j mf
Respectfully submitted,
. 1
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
Certified Public Accountants
•
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31 Exhibit A
ASSETS
1965 1964
CAPITAL ASSETS
Utility System (at original cost)
Land $ 22,237.93 $ 22,237.93
Land improvements 1,851.84 1,851.84
Deep well #1 25,742.59 25,742.59
Deep well #2 34,676 04 34,676.04
Water tower 37,612.40 37,162.40
Pump house 3,984.87 3,984.87
Water mains 339,450.98 313,198.15
Sanitary sewers 379,455.00 344,702.40
Earthmoving and grading 98,238.17 98,238.17
Treatment plant 178,146.07 178,146.07
Utility equipment 3,183.68 1,393.08
Total 1,124,579.57 1,061,333.54
Less: Accumulated depreciation 138,218.16 108,516.51
Utility System (net)
Office equipment
Signs
Total
Less: Accumulated depreciation
986,361.41 952,817.03
712.76 712.76
330.14 330.14
1,042.90
870.82
1,042.90
618.22
Other Capital Assets (net) 172.08 424.68
Total Capital Assets (net) 986,533.49 953,241.71
LONG-TERM RECEIVABLES
Notes receivable - related companies 45.J00.00
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Notes receivable - related companies -
all current, 8/, unsecured notes due 12/31/66
Notes receivable - Jandric Realty Co.
Accounts receivable - trade
Accounts receivable - related companies
Prepaid expenses
Total Current Assets
-2-
8,840.49 16,915.21
45,700.00
9,078.08
36.13
45,893.09
3,824.13
13,095.55
2,789.74
2,462.28
109,547.79 39,086.91
$1.096.081.28 $1.038.028.62
• 1
1
1
1
1
LIABILITIES
CAPITALIZATION
Common stock, co par value, 2,500
shares authorized, 100 shares issued
and outstanding
Accumulated losses - Exhibit C
Grants in aid of construction - Exhibit D
Total Capitalization
LONG-TERM DEBT
Note payable - Buron
Note payable - Cedar Grove Const., Co. - Note 1
First mortgage - 6 1/2% bonds - Note 2
Total
Less: Current maturities
Total Long -Term Debt
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Note payable - United Federal Savings & Loan Assn.
Note payable - Buron (8%, unsecured note dated
February 20, 1961 and due December 31, 1966)
Contracts payable - construction
Current maturities of long-term debt
Accounts payable - trade
Accounts payable - related companies
Meter deposits
Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings
Accrued property taxes
Accrued interest payable
Income taxes payable
Total Current Liabilities
-3-
1965
1964
$ 1,000.00 $
( 158,838.08)(
630,772.70
472,934.62
195,000.00
235,000.00
430,000.00
64,000.00
366,000.00
50,000.00
64,000.00
1,411.74
101,677.03
11,865.00
220.30
20,960.99
7,001.60
10.00
257,146.66
1,000.00
140,439.17)
551,790.50
412,351.33
50,000.00
195,000.00
250,000.00
495,000.00
34,500.00
460,500.00
10,000.00
8,651.92
34,500.00
550.38
76,045.29
10,110.00
137.71
17,510.06
7,661.93
10.00
165,177.29
$1,096.081,28 $1.Q, O22.62
ANDERSON & SEISERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
•
•
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF EARNINGS
Year Ended December 31
OPERATING REVENUE
Water and sewer charges
Penalties and miscellaneous
1965
of
Amount Revenue
$ 80,105.24
1,193.51
Total Operating Income 81,298.75
OPERATING EXPENSES
Depreciation
Salaries and wages
Real estate and personal
property taxes
Legal and audit expense
Electricity
Repairs and maintenance
Office rent and utilities
Office expense and miscellaneous
Payroll taxes
Stationery and postage
Fuel
Telephone
Insurance
Supplies
Bad debts
Chlorination expense
Engineering
Minnesota income tax
Exhibit B
1964
7. of
Amount Revenue
98.5% $ 72,874.62 98.47.
1.5 1,158.20
100.0
29,954.25 36.8
8,468.43 10.4
21, 002.83 25.8
1,050.00 1.3
4,110.42 5.1
6,532.82 8.0
1,860.00 2.3
964.19 1.2
247.21 .3
953.13 1.2
281.89 .3
240.33 .3
778.42 1.0
132.77 .2
47.34 .1
515.40 .6
753.75 .9
10.00
Total Operating Expenses 77_,903.18
OPERATING EARNINGS 3,395.57
Other Expenses
Interest expense
Loan expense
25,412.64
225.00
Total Other Expenses 25,637.64
Other Income
Interest income
95.8
4.2
31.2
.3
31.5
3,843.16 4.7
Other Expense Less
Other Income 21,794.48 26.8
EARNINGS (LOSS) FOR THE YEAR
1.6
74.032.82 100.0
27,288.72
7,135.00
17,510.06
1,172.45
5,839.03
4,124.95
1,860.00
481.54
214.95
837.23
133.05
232.88
972.54
177.64
36.9
9.6
23.7
1.6
7.8
5.6
2.5
. 7
. 3
1.1
.2
. 3
1.3
. 2
398.28 .5
193.24 .3
10.00
68,581.56 92.6
5,451.26 7.4
26,581.41
250.25
35.9
.3
26,831.66 36.2
4,167.32 5.6
22,664.34 30.6
(� 18,398.91)( 22. 67) (S 17.213.08)( 23.2%)
ANDERSON A&, 'u'"EIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
i 4
1
1
I CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
1 COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES
Year Ended December 31 Exhibit C
1965 1964
LOSS FOR THE YEAR - Exhibit B $ 18,398.91 $ 17,213.08
ACCUMULATED LOSSES - January 1 140,439.17 123,226.09
1 ACCUMULATED LOSSES - December 31 $ 158,838.08 $ 140,439.17
' ANDE SON' & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
•
•
BALANCE
GRANTS IN
BALANCE
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION
December 31, 1965
December 31, 1964
AID OF CONSTRUCTION 1965
December 31, 1965
-6-
Exhibit D
$ 551,790.50
78,982.20
$ 630,772.70
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUIUC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
FOOTNOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
December 31, 1965
Note 1: This note to Cedar Grove Construction Co., for $195,000.00 was written
January 30, 1962, is unsecured and bears interest at the rate of 3%
per annum. Payments of $19,500.00 are to be made on January 1st of
each year beginning in 1965. The current portion of this note at
December 31, 1965 is $39,000.00.
Note 2: The first mortgage 6 1/2% bonds, payable to the Northwestern National
Bank of Minneapolis, Minnesota, are secured by a mortgage on the land,
buildings and equipment of the corporation. The agreement provides
that the corporation may have $1,000.00 of bonds outstanding at any
time. The initial issue was for $150,000 (Series 1962) and is due Jan-
uary, 1974 with 6 1/2% interest payable semi-annually on January 15th
and July 15th of each year. The second issue was for $100,000 (Series
1963) and is due January, 1975 with the same interest specifications
prevailing. The corporation is required to retire $15,000 of the
principal amount of Series 1962 on January 1, 1965, and $10,000 of the
principal amount of Series 1963 on January 1, 1966, and on each Jan-
uary 15th thereafter.
Among other covenants, the indentures impose limitations on the pay-
ment of dividends, distribution of cash and the incurrence of indebted-
ness other than amounts resulting from current operations while the
Series of 1962 and 1963 are outstanding.
Note 3: Cedar Grove Utilities Co., along with Cedar Grove Construction Co.,
Jandric, Inc., and Mr. Emil F. Jandric, are defendants in a suit for
$500,000.00. The plaintiffs are three individual home owners and one
business who allege that in planning and constructing the housing
development in Cedar Grove areas 1 thru 4, the defendants willfully
caused the diversion of surface waters to flow upon their land, thus
creating flood conditions.
-7-
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICFI
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
I o o
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF WORKING CAPITAL
Year Ended December 31, 1965
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Notes receivable -
related companies
Accounts receivable trade
Accounts receivable
related companies
Prepaid expenses
Totals
1965 1964
Increase
(Decrease)
$ 8,840.49 $ 16,915.21 ($ 8,074.72)
45,700.00
9,078.08
36.13
45,893.09
$ 109,547.79
Increase in Current Assets
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Notes payable - banks
Notes payable - Buron
Contracts payable - const.
Current maturities
Accounts payable - trade
Accounts payable -
related companies
Meter deposits
Accrued expenses
Income taxes payable
Totals
50,000.00
64,000.00
1,411.74
101,677.03
11,865.00
28,182.89
10.00
$ 257.146.66
Increase in Current Liabilities
DECREASE IN NET WORKING CAPITAL
-8-
3,824.13
13,095.55 (
2,789.74 (
2,462.28
$ 39, 086.91
$ 10,000.00 (
8,651.92 (
34,500.00
550.38
76,045.29
10, 110, 00
25,309.70
10.00
$ 165,177.29
41,875.87
4,017.47)
2,753.61)
43,430.81
10,000.00)
50,000.00
8,651.92)
29,500.00
861.36
25,631.74
1,755.00
2,873.19
Exhibit E
$ 70,460.88
$ 91,969.37
$ 21,508.49
ANDERSON & SEITIER LICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
i •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF SOURCE AND APPLICATION OF VUNDS
Year Ended December 31, 1965 Exhibit F
WORKING CAPITAL APPLIED TO
Water main additions
Sanitary sewer additions
Purchase of safety railing for water tower
Purchase of utility equipment
Decrease in long-term debt
$ 26,252.83
34,752.60
450.00
1,790.60
94,500.00
Total Working Capital Applied $ 157,746.03
WORKING CAPITAL PROVIDED BY
Operations
Depreciation not requiring
outlay of working capital
Less: Loss for the period
Total Provided by Operations
Current grants in aid of construction
Elimination of long-term receivables
$ 29,954.25
18,398.91
11,555.34
78,982.20
45,700.00
Total Working Capital Provided 136,237.54
EXCESS OF WORKING CAPITAL APPLIED
OVER WORKING CAPITAL PROVIDED $ 21,508,49
REPRESENTED BY
Decrease in Net Working Capital - Exhibit E $ 21,508,49
-9-
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICA
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEPRECIATION
Year Ended December 31
Assets
Land
Land improvements
Deep well #1
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewer
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Office equipment
Signs
Totals
Accumulated Depreciation
Land improvements
Deep well #1
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Office equipment
Signs
Totals
CAPITAL ASSETS (net)
Balance
Dec. 31, 1964 Additions
$ 22,237.93 $
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,162.40
3,984.87
313,198.15
344,702.40
98,238.17
178,146.07
1,393.08
712.76
330. 14
450.00
26,252.83
34,752.60
1,790.60
Schedule A-1
Balance
Dec. 31, 1965
$ 22,237.93
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,612.40
3,984.87
339,450.98
379,455.00
98,238.17
178,146.07
3,183.68
712.76
330.14
$1,062,376.44 $ 63.246.03 $j,125.622.47
Balance
Dec. 31,1964
$ 188.79
6,640.37
433.45
10,206.15
1,438.98
21,419.06
26,200.67
8,998.87
31,811.00
1,179.17
517.35
100.87
Current Balance
Depreciation Dec. 31, 1965
$ 92.59
1,287.13
1,733.80
1,588.00
278.94
6,426.53
7,157.18
1,964.76
8,907.30
265.42
142.55
110.05
$ 281.38
7,927.50
2,167.25
11,794.15
1,717.92
27,845.59
33,357.85
10,963.63
40,718.30
1,444.59
659.90
210.92
$ 109,134.73 $ 29,954,25 $ 139,088.98
$ 986,533.49
-10-
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
! •
1
1
1
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
AUDIT REPORT
DECEMBER 31, 1964
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
INDEX
Page Number
AUDITOR'S CERTIFICATE 1
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET Exhibit A 2 - 3
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF EARNINGS Exhibit B 4
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED
LOSSES Exhibit C 5
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION Exhibit D b
FOOTNOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 7
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
STATEMENT OF WORKING CAPITAL
STATEMENT OF SOURCE AND
APPLICATION OF FUNDS
CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEPRECIATION
Exhibit E 8
Exhibit F 9
Schedule A-1 10
0 0
ANDERSON A, SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
403 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
MEMBERS AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ACCOUNTANTS
CLAUDE C. ANDERSON, C.P.A.
JOSEPH C. SEIBERLICH. C.P.A. PHONE 227.4324
March 23, 1965
1
1
Board of Directors
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
3216 South Grove Lane
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
Gentlemen:
' We have examined the balance sheet of Cedar Grove Utilities Co.,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota as of December 31, 1964 and the related
statements of earnings and accumulated losses for the year then ended.
Our examination was made in accordance with generally accepted audit-
ing standards and accordingly included such tests of the accounting
records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary
in the circumstances.
In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheet, statements of
earnings and accumulated losses present fairly the financial position
' of Cedar Grove Utilities Co. at December 31, 1964 and the results of
its operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles applied on a basis consistent with that
' of the prior year.
Respectfully submitted,
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
Certified Public Accountants
elk
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31
ASSETS
CAPITAL ASSETS
Utility System (at original cost)
Land
Land improvements
Deep well #1
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Unused federal investment credit
Total
Less: Accumulated depreciation
Utility System (net)
Office equipment
Signs
Total
Less: Accumulated depreciation
Other Capital Assets (net)
Total Capital Assets (net)
LONG-TERM RECEIVABLES
Notes receivable - related companies
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Note receivable - Jandric Realty
Accounts receivable - trade
Accounts receivable - related companies
Prepaid expenses
Total Current Assets
- 2 -
1964
$ 22,237.93
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,162.40
3,984.87
313,198.15
344,702.40
98,238.17
178,146.07
1,393.08
1,061,333.54
108,516.51
952,817.03
712.76
330.14
1,042.90
618.22
424.68
953,241.71
45:100.00
16,915.21
3,824.13
13,095.55
2,789.74
2,462.28
39,086.91
$1,038,028.62
Exhibit A
1963
$ 22,237.93
1,796.28
25,742.59
37,135.40
3,984.87
274,685.94
324,229.56
98,238.17
175,953.76
1,229.58
1t867.87
967,101.95
81,471.21
885,630.74
712.76
712.76
374.80
337.96
885,968.70
45,700.00
13,957.60
1,803.75
11,675.65
4,082.33
998.22
32,517.55
$ 964.186.25
1
1
1 LIABILITIES
' CAPITALIZATION 1964 1963
Common stock, no par value, 2,500 shares
11 authorized, 100 shares issued and out-
standing $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00
Accumulated losses (Exhibit C) ( 140,439.17)( 123,226.09)
' Grants in aid of construction (Exhibit D) 551,790.50 468,819.30
Total Capitalization 412,351.33 346,593.21
I
LONG-TERM DEBT
Notes payable - Buron 50,000.00 50,000.00
Notes payable - related companies 195,000.00 195,000.00
I
First mortgage - 6 7, bonds (Note 1) 235,000.00 250J000.00
Total Long -Term Debt 480,000.00 495000.00
IICURRENT LIABILITIES
Note payable - United Federal Savings and Loan 10,000.00
Accounts payable - trade 550.38 90.71
II Accounts payable - related companies 76,045.29 33,271.41
Meter deposits 10,110.00 8,640.00
First mortgage - 647. bonds - current (Note 1)11 15,000.00
Contracts payable - construction 8,651.92 61,597.56
Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings 137.71 153.79
Accrued real estate and personal property taxes 17,510.06 11,164.99
II
Accrued interest payable 7,661.93 7,664.58
Accrued income taxes payable 10.00 10.00
Total Current Liabilities 145,677.29 122 593.04
II
1
1
1 3 -
1 A TDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF EARNINGS
Year Ended December 31
OPERATING REVENUE
Water and sewer charges
Penalties and miscellaneous
Total Operating Income
OPERATING EXPENSES
Depreciation
Salaries and wages
Real estate and personal
property taxes
Legal and audit expense
Electricity
Repairs and maintenance
Office rent and utilities
Office expense
Payroll taxes
Stationery and postage
Fuel
Telephone
Insurance
Supplies
Bad debts
Chlorination expense
Engineering
Minnesota income tax
Total Operating Expenses
OPERATING EARNINGS
Other Expenses
Interest expense
Loan expense
Total Other Expense
Other Income
Interest income
Other Expense Less
Other Income
EARNINGS (LOSS) FOR THE YEAR
1964
Amount
of
Revenue
Exhibit B
1963
Amount
of
Revenue
$ 72,874.62 98.4% $ 61,996.42 96.27%
1_,158.20 1,6 2,455.02 3.8
74,032.82 100.0
27,288.72
7,135.00
17,510.06
1,172.45
5,839.03
4,124. 95
1,860,00
481.54
214.95
837.23
133.05
232.88
972.54
177.64
398.28
193.24
10.00
64,451.44 100.0
36.9 25,236.60 39.2
9.6 6,878.05 10.7
23.7 11,164.99 17.3
1.6 1,991.40 3.1
7.8 5,879.14 9.1
5.6 2,606.87 4.0
2.5 1,860.00 2.8
.7 642.37 1.0
.3 205.16 .3
1.1 881.55 1.4
.2 226.83 .4
.3 240.09 .4
1.3 487.53 .7
.2
7.24
.5 510.35 .8
.3 45.00 .1
10.00
68,581.56 92.6
51451.26 7.4
26,581.41 35.9
250.25 .3
26,831.66 36.2
4,167.32 5.6
22,664.34 30.6
581873.17 91.3
5,578.27 8.7
27,091.05
1,337.65
42.0
2.1
28,428.70 44.1
4,117.88 6.4
24,310.82 37.7
(S 17,213.08) ( 23i27,) (S 18,732.55) ( 29.0%)
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
LOSS FOR THE PERIOD
ACCUMULATED LOSSES
ACCUMULATED LOSSES
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES
Year Ended December 31
(Exhibit B)
- January 1
- December 31
- 5 -
1964
Exhibit C
1963
($ 17,213.08)($ 18,732.55)
( 123,226.09)( 104,493.54)
($ 140,43 2 17)($ 123.226.09)
ANDERSON SD SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION
December 31, 1964 Exhibit D
BALANCE - December 31, 1963
$ 468,819.30
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION 1964 82,971.20
BALANCE - December 31, 1964 $ 551,790,50
- 6
ANDERSON . SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
FOOTNOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE l: The first mortgage 647. bonds, payable to the Northwestern National Bank
of Minneapolis, Minnesota, are secured by a mortgage on the land, build-
ings and equipment of the corporation. Theagreement provides that the
corporation may have $1,000,000 of bonds outstanding at any time. The
initial issue was for $150,000 (Series 1962) and is due January, 1974
with 647. interest payable semi-annually on January 15 and July 15 of
each year. The second issue was for $100,000 (Series 1963) and is due
January, 1975 with the same interest specifications prevailing. The corp-
oration is required to retire $15,000 of the principle amount of Series
1962 on January 1, 1965, and $10,000 of the principle amount of Series
1963 on January 1, 1966 and on each January 15 thereafter.
Among other covenants, the indentures impose limitations on the payment of
dividends, distribution of cash and the incurrence of indebtedness other
than amounts resulting from current operations while the Series of 1962
and 1963 are outstanding.
- 7 -
ANDERSON ez SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Notes receivable
Jandric Realty
Accounts receivable trade
Accounts receivable
related companies
Prepaid expenses
Totals
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF WORKING CAPITAL
Year Ended December 31, 1964
1964 1963
Increase
(Decrease)._
$ 16,915.21 $ 13,957.60 $ 2,957.61
3,824.13
13,095.55
1,803.75
11,675.65
2,789.74 4,082.33 (
2,462.28 998.22
$ 39.0$f,91 $ 32,517.55
Increase in Current Assets
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Note payable - United
Federal
Accounts payable trade
Accounts payable related
companies
Meter deposits
First mortgage - 6 27, bond
current portion
Contracts payable - const.
Accrued payroll taxes and
withholdings
Accrued property taxes
Accrued interest payable
Income taxes payable
Totals
s
10,000.00
550.38
76,045.29
10,110.00
15,000.00
8,651.92
137.71
17,510.06
7,661.93
10.00
145.677.g9
Increase in Current Liabilities
DECREASE IN NET WORKING CAPITAL
8
90.71
33,271.41
8,640.00
61,597.56
153.79 (
11,164.99
7,664.58 (
10.00
122_,593,_04
2,020.38
1,419.90
1,292.59)
1.464.06
10,000.00
459.67
42,773.88
1,470.00
15,000.00
52,945.64)
16.08)
6,345.07
2.65)
Exhibit E
$ 6,569.36
23,084.25
16,514.89
ANDERSON & SRIBERLICFI
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF SOURCE AND APPLICATION OF FUNDS
Year Ended December 31, 1964 Exhibit F
WORKING CAPITAL APPLIED TO
Water main additions
Sanitary sewer additions
Treatment plant additions
Purchase of utility equipment
Purchase of signs
Decrease in long-term debt
Construction of deep well #2
$ 38,512.21
20,472.84
407.00
163.50
330.14
15,000.00
34.676.04
Working Capital Applied $ 109,561.73
WORKING CAPITAL PROVIDED BY
Operations
Depreciation not requiring
outlay of working capital
Less: Loss for the period
Total Provided by Operations
Current grants in aid of construction
$ 27,288.72
17.213.08
10,075.64
82,971.20
Working Capital Provided 93,046.84
EXCESS OF WORKING CAPITAL APPLIED OVER WORKING CAPITAL PROVIDED $ 16,514.89
REPRESENTED BY
Decrease in Net Working Capital (Exhibit E) $ 1L.14.9
- 9 -
ANDERSON dz SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEPRECIATION
Year Ended December 31
Assets
Land
Land improvements
Deep well #1
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Office equipment
Signs
Unused federal investment credit
Totals
Accumulated Depreciation
Land improvements
Deep well #1
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Office equipment
Signs
Balance
Dec. 31.0963 Additions
$ 22,237.93 $
1,796.28
25,742.59
37,135.40
3,984.87
274,685.94
324,229.56
98,238.17
175,953.76
1,229.56
712.76
55.56
34,676.04
27.00
38,512.21
20,472.84
2,192.31
163.50
330.14
1,867.87* ( 1,867.87)
Schedule A-1
Balance
Dec. 311 1964
$ 22,237.93
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,162.40
3,984.87
313,198.15
344,702.40
98,238.17
178,146.07
1,393.08
712.76
330.14
$ 967,814.71 S 94,561.73 _$1,062,376.44
Balance
Dec. 31.1963
Current Balance
Depreciation Dec. 31,1964
$ 96.20 $
5,353.24
8,643.15
1,160.04
15,693.80
19,549.45
7,034.11
22,912.55
1,028.67
374.80
Totals
CAPITAL ASSETS (net)
*Represents federal investment credit taken
ed back to the respective asset values in
92.59
1,287.13
433.45
1,563.00
278.94
5,725.26
6,651.22
1,964.76
8,898.45
150.50
142.55
100.87
$ 188.79
6,640.37
433.45
10,206.15
1,438.98
21,419.06
26,200.67
8,998.87
31,811.00
1,179.17
517.35
100.87
$ 81,846 01 $ 27.288 ,7Z $ 109,0 34.73
053.241.71
prior to January 1, 1964 which was add-
- 10 -
1964.
ANDERSON S. SEISERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
•
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
AUDIT REPORT
DECEMBER 31, 1964
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31
ASSETS
CAPITAL ASSETS
Utility System (at original cost)
Land
Land improvements
Deep well #1
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Unused federal investment credit
Total
Less: Accumulated depreciation
Utility System (net)
Office equipment
Signs
Total
Less: Accumulated depreciation
Other Capital Assets (net)
Total Capital Assets (net)
LONG-TERM RECEIVABLES
Notes receivable • related companies
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Note receivable - Jandric Realty
Accounts receivable - trade
Accounts receivable - related companies
Prepaid expenses
Total Current Assets
1964
$ 22,237,93
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,162.40
3,984.87
313,198.15
344,702.40
98,238,17
178,146.07
1,393.08
1,061,333.54
108,516.51
952,817.03
712.76
330.14
1,042.90
618.22
424.68
953,241.71
45.700.00
16,915.21
3,824,13
13,095.55
2,789.74
2,462,28
39,086.91
Exhibit A
1963
$ 22,237.93
1,796.28
25,742.59
37,135.40
3,984.87
274,685.94
324,229.56
98,238.17
175,953.76
1,229.58
1,867.87
967,101.95
81,471.21
885,630,74
712.76
712.76
374.80
337.96
885,968.70
45,700.00
13,957.60
1,803.75
11,675.65
4,082.33
998.22
32,517.55
$1,(m,.0 8. 62
r
r
r
L
4
LIABILITIES
CAPITALIZATION
Common stock, no par value, 2,500 shares
authorized, 100 shares issued and out-
standing
Accumulated losses (Exhibit C)
Grants in aid of construction (Exhibit D)
1964
1963
$ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00
( 140,439.17)( 123,226.09)
551.790,50 468,819.30
Total Capitalization 412 351.33 346,593,21
LONG-TERM DEBT
Notes payable - Buron
Notes payable - related companies
First mortgage - 64% bonds (Note 1)
50,000.00 50,000.00
195,000.00 195,000.00
235,000.00 250,000,00
Total Long -Term Debt 480 000.00 495,000.00
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Note payable - United Federal Savings and Loan 10,000.00
Accounts payable - trade 550.38 90.71
Accounts payable - related companies 76,045.29 33,271.41
Meter deposits 10,110.00 8,640.00
First mortgage - 6 47, bonds - current (Note 1) 15,000.0061,597.56
Contracts payable - construction 8,651.9251.91 59.5
Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings
9
Accrued real estate and personal property taxes 17,6610.93 11,164.99
7,664.58
Accrued interest payable 10.00 10.00
Accrued income taxes payable
Total Current Liabilities 145,677.29 122,593.04
2..6
-3
s 961_186.Z
ANDERSON Az SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF EARNINGS
Year Ended December 31
OPERATING REVENUE
Water and sewer charges
Penalties and miscellaneous
Total Operating Income
OPERATING EXPENSES
Depreciation
Salaries and wages
Real estate and personal
property taxes
Legal and audit expense
Electricity
Repairs and maintenance
Office rent and utilities
Office expense
Payroll taxes
Stationery and postage
Fuel
Telephone
Insurance
Supplies
Bad debts
Chlorination expense
Engineering
Minnesota income tax
1964
Amount
7, of
Revenue
Exhibit B
1963
7. of
Amount Revenue
$ 72,874.62 98.47. $ 61,996.42 96.27.
1,158.20 1,6 2,455,02 3.8
74, 032.82 100.0
27,288.72
7,135.00
17,510.06
1,172.45
5,839.03
4,124.95
1,860.00
481.54
214.95
837.23
133.05
232.88
972.54
177.64
398.28
193.24
10.00
64,451.44 100.0
36.9 25,236.60 39.2
9.6 6,878.05 10.7
23.7 11,164.99 17.3
1.6 1,991.40 3.1
7.8 5,879.14 9.1
5.6 2,606.87 4.0
2.5 1,860.00 2.8
. 7 642.37 1.0
. 3 205.16 .3
1.1 881.55 1.4
. 2 226.83 .4
.3 240.09 .4
1.3 487.53 .7
.2
7.24
.5 510.35 .8
.3 45.00 .1
10.00
Total Operating Expenses 68,581.56 92.6
OPERATING EARNINGS 5,451.26 7.4
Other Expenses
Interest expense
Loan expense
Total Other Expense
Other Income
Interest income
Other Expense Less
Other Income
EARNINGS (LOSS) FOR THE YEAR
26,581.41
250.25
26,831.66
4,167.32
35.9
. 3
36.2
5.6
22,664.34 30.6
581873.17 91.3
5,578.27 8.7
27,091.05
1,337.65
42.0
2.1
28,428.70 44.1
4,117.88 6.4
24,310.82 37.7
($ 173 213.08) ( 23.2%) ($ 18.232.55) ( 29, 0%)
-4
ANDERSO Sr, SEl13ERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
•
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES
Year Ended December 31 Exhibit C
LOSS FOR THE PERIOD (Exhibit 8)
ACCUMULATED LOSSES - January 1
ACCUMULATED LOSSES - December 31
- 5 -
1964 1963
($ 17,213.08)($ 18,732.55)
( 123.226.09)( 104.493.54)
(S 11O LOW.7) (S 1234,2A.09)
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
4.:.:WMMMIN....w.
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION
December 31, 1964 Exhibit D
BALANCE - December 31, 1963
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION - 1964
BALANCE - December 31, 1964
- 6
$ 468,819.30
82,971.20
,551+790.,�O
ANDERSON 3z SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
•
r
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
FOOTNOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1: The first mortgage 6 7. bonds, payable to the Northwestern National Bank
of Minneapolis, Minnesota, are secured by a mortgage on the land, build-
ings and equipment of the corporation. Theagreement provides that the
corporation may have $1,000,000 of bonds outstanding at any time. The
initial issue was for $150,000 (Series 1962) and is due January, 1974
with 6-7. interest payable semi-annually on January 15 and July 15 of
each year. The second issue was for $100,000 (Series 1963) and is due
January, 1975 with the same interest specifications prevailing. The corp-
oration is required to retire $15,000 of the principle amount of Series
1962 on January 1, 1965, and $10,000 of the principle amount of Series
1963 on January 1, 1966 and on each January 15 thereafter.
Among other covenants, the indentures impose limitations on the payment of
dividends, distribution of cash and the incurrence of indebtedness other
than amounts resulting from current operations while the Series of 1962
and 1963 are outstanding.
7
ANDERSOI .5: SILI73ERLICH
• •
SUPPLE: LENTARY DATA
3
•
•
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Notes receivable -
Jandric Realty
Accounts receivable
Accounts receivable
related companies
Prepaid expenses
Totals
CEDAR GROW:: UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF WORKING CAPITAL
Year Ended December 31, 1964
1964
1963
$ 16,915.21 $ 13,957.60
trade
3,824.13
13,095,55
2,789.74
2_,462.28
S 39.086.91
Increase in Current Assets
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Note payable - United
Federal $
Accounts payable trade
Accounts payable related
companies 76,045.29
Meter deposits 10,110.00
First mortgage - 647. bonds
current portion 15,000.00
Contracts payable - const. 8,651.92
Accrued payroll taxes and
withholdings 137.71
Accrued property taxes 17,510.06
Accrued interest payable 7,661.93
Income taxes payable 10.00
Totals $ 145.,627.?.2
10,000.00
550.38
Increase in Current Liabilities
DECREASE IN NET WORKING CAPITAL
8
1,803.75
11,675.65
4,082.33 (
998.22
32,517,.5
90.71
33,271.41
8,640.00
61,597.56
Increase
(Decrease
$ 2,957.61
2,020.38
1,419.90
1,292.59)
1.464.06
153.79 (
11,164.99
7,664.58 (
10,00
S 122,593.04
10,000.00
459.67
42,773.88
1,470.00
15,000.00
52,945.64)
16.08)
6,345.07
2.65)
Exhibit E
$ 6,569.36
23 ,084.25
$ el6,514.89
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• i
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF SOURCE AND APPLICATION OF FUNDS
Year Ended December 31, 1964 Exhibit F
WORKING CAPITAL APPLIED TO
Water main additions
Sanitary sewer additions
Treatment plant additions
Purchase of utility equipment
Purchase of signs
Decrease in long-term debt
Construction of deep well #2
$ 38,512.21
20,472.84
407.00
163.50
330.14
15,000.00
34.676.04
Working Capital Applied $ 109,561.73
WORKING CAPITAL PROVIDED BY
Operations
Depreciation not requiring
outlay of working capital
Less: Loss for the period
Total Provided by Operations
Current grants in aid of construction
$ 27,288.72
17,213.08
10,075.64
82,971.20
Working Capital Provided 93,046.84
EXCESS OF WORKING CAPITAL APPLIED OVER WORKING CAPITAL PROVIDED $ _16,5.4.89
REPRESENTED BY
Decrease in Net Working Capital (Exhibit E) $ 162,5,1449
9
ANDERS0 N & SIBLRLie H
• .q
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEPRECIATION
Year Ended December 31
A.Jsets
Land
Land improvements
Deep well #1
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Office equipment
Signs
Unused federal investment credit
Totals
Accumulated Depreciation
Land improvements
Deep well #1
Deep well #2
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Office equipment
Signs
Totals
CAPITAL ASSETS (net)
Balance
Dec. 310.963 Additions
$ 22,237.93 $
1,796.28
25,742.59
37,135.40
3,984.87
274,685.94
324,229.56
98,238.17
175,953.76
1,229.56
712.76
55.56
34,676.04
27.00
38,512.21
20,472.84
2,192.31
163.50
330.14
li867.87*( 1,867.87)
Schedule A-1
Balance
Dec. 31i 1964
$ 22,237.93
1,851.84
25,742.59
34,676.04
37,162.40
3,984.87
313,198.15
344,702.40
98,238.17
178,146.07
1,393.08
712.76
330.14
967,814.71 $ 94,561.73 S1,06 2,376.44
Balance Current Balance
Dec. 31,1963 Depreciation Dec. 31,1964
$ 96.20
5,353.24
8,643.15
1,160.04
15,693.80
19,549.45
7,034.11
22,912.55
1,028.67
374.80
81,a46.01
*Represents federal investment credit taken prior to
ed back to the respective asset values in 1964.
$ 92.59
1,287.13
433.45
1,563.00
278.94
5,725.26
6,651.22
1,964.76
8.898.45
150.50
142.55
100.87
$ 188.79
6,640.37
433.45
10,206.15
1,438.98
21,419.06
26,200.67
8,998.87
31,811.00
1,179.17
517.35
100.87
. 242. 8,7.Z $ 109,.i13.4.73
S�_g53,24],J1
January 1, 1964 which was add-
- 10 -
ANDE1 SO S.: SEII3ERLIOH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
1 • •
1
1
1
1
1 CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
1 AUDIT REPORTDECEMBER 31, 1963
• •
ANDERSON Sr, SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
403 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
' MEMBERS AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ACCOUNTANTS
CLAUDE C. ANDERSON. C.P.A.
JOSEPH C. SEIBERLICH, C.P.A.
March 12, 1964
11 1
Board of Directors
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
3216 South Grove Lane
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
Gentlemen:
We have examined the balance sheet of Cedar Grove Utilities Co.,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota as of December 31, 1963 and the related
11 statements of earnings and accumulated losses for the year then ended.
Our examination was made in accordance with generally accepted audit-
ing standards and accordingly included such tests of the accounting
records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary
in the circumstances.
1
1
In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheet, statements of
earnings and accumulated losses present fairly the financial position
of Cedar Grove Utilities Co. at December 31, 1963 and the results of
its operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles applied on a basis consistent with that
of the prior year.
elk
Respectfully submitted,
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
Certified Public Accountants
PHONE 224-4847
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31
ASSETS
CAPITAL ASSETS
Utility System (at original cost)
Land
Land improvements
Deep well
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Unused federal investment credit
Total
Less: Accumulated depreciation
Utility System (net)
Office equipment
Less: Accumulated depreciation
Office Equipment (net)
Capital Assets (net)
LONG-TERM RECEIVABLES
Notes receivable - related companies
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Note receivable - Jandric Realty
Accounts receivable - trade
Accounts receivable - related companies
Prepaid expenses
Total Current Assets
1963
$ 22,237.93
1,796.28
25,742.59
37,135.40
3,984.87
274,685.94
324,229.56
98,238.17
175,953.76
1,229.58
1,867.87
967,101.95
8L471.21
885,630.74
712.76
374.80
337 .96
885,968.70
45,700.00
13,957.60
1,803.75
11,675.65
4,032.33
998.22
32,517 .55
Exhibit A
1962
$ 22,237.93
1,796.28
25,742.59
36,262.40
3,984.87
221,485.03
280,843 .05
98,238.17
161,416.62
1,161.12
61 .82
853,229.88
56 377.16
796,852.72
712.76
232.25
480 .51
797,333.23
45,700.00
38.13
9,432.16
2,838.31
406 .2 ,
12.714.Fr
855.748.0
- 2 -
•
II
AN'DERSON &s SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
LIABILITIES
CAPITALIZATION
Common stock, no par value, 2500 shares
authorized, 100 shares issued and out-
standing
Accumulated losses (Exhibit C)
Grants in aid of construction (Exhibit D)
1963
1962
$ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00
( 123,226.09)( 104,493.54
468,819.30 398,612.90
Total Capitalization 346,593.21
LONG-TERM DEBT
Notes payable - Buron
Notes payable - related companies
First mortgage - 6-1/2Z. bonds (Note 1)
50,000.00
195,000.00
250,000.00
Total Long -Term Debt 495,000.00
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Accounts payable trade
Accounts payable related companies
Meter deposits
Contracts payable - construction
Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings
Accrued real estate and personal property taxes
Accrued interest payable
Accrued income taxes payable
90.71
33,271.41
8,640.00
61,597.56
153.79
11,164.99
7,664.58
10.00
295419.36
50,000.00
195,000.00
150 000.00
395 ,000.00
44,284.79
68,848.90
7,635.00
34,510.82
158.75
10,180.46
10.00
Total Current Liabilities 122,593.04 165,628.72
9j4.184 .25 $_855.-/As.cc
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF EARNINGS
Year Ended December 31, 1963 Exhibit B
OPE RATING REVENUE
Water and sewer charges
Penalties and miscellaneous
$ 61,996.42
2,455.02
Total Operating Income $ 64,451.44
OPERATING EXPENSES
Depreciation
Salaries and wages
Real and personal property taxes
Legal and audit expense
Electricity
Repairs and maintenance
Office rent and utilities
Office expense
Payroll taxes
Stationery and postage
Fuel
Telephone
Insurance
Bad debts
Chlorination expense
Engineering
Minnesota income tax
25,236.60
6,873.05
11,164.99
1,991.40
5,879.14
2,606.87
1,860.00
642.37
205 .16
881.55
226 .83
240.09
487 .53
7 .24
510.35
45.00
10.00
Total Operating Expenses 58.873.17
OPERATING EARNINGS 5,578.27
OTHER EXPENSES
Interest expense
Loan expense
27,091.05 -
1,337.65
Total Other Expense 28,428.70
OTHER INCOME
Interest income 4,117.88
Other Expense Less Other Income 24,310.R'
EARNINGS (LOSS) FOR THE YEAR
4 -
($ 18�,73..2 , rt. .
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
! !
1
1
1 CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES
1 Year Ended December 31, 1263
Balance - January 1, 1963
Loss for the Period (Exhibit B)
Balance - December 31, 1963
Exhibit C
$ 104,493.54
1$,732.55
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
' CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION
December 31, 1963
Balance - December 31, 1962
Grants in aid of construction 1963
Exhibit D
$ 398,612.90
70,206.40
Balance - December 31, 1963 0.8,819.30
- 6
ANDERSON 8L SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
FOOTNOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1;
The first mortgage 6-1/2% bonds are secured by a mortgage on the land, buildings
and equipment of the corporation. The agreement provides that the corporation
may have $1,000,000 of bonds outstanding at any time. The initial issue was
for $150,000 (Series 1962) and is due January, 1974 with 6-1/2% interest pay-
able semi-annually on January 15 and July 15 of each year. The second issue
was for $100,000 (Series 1963) and is due January, 1975 with the same intere5.
specifications prevailing. The corporation is required to retire $15,000 of
the principal amount of Series 1962 on January 1, 1965, and $10,000 of the
principal amount of Series 1963 on January 1, 1966 and on each January 15
thereafter
Among other covenants, the indentures impose limitations on the payment of di-
vidends, distribution of cash or incurring any indebtedness other than that
owing from current operations while the Series of 1962 and 1963 are outstand-
ing.
•
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
1 • •
1
1
1
1
ICEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO,
SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
IAUDIT REPORT
DECEMBER 31, 1962
• 1
ANDERSON 8. SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
403 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL I. MINNESOTA
MEMBERS AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ACCOUNTANTS
CLAUDE C ANDERSON. C.P.A.
JOSEPH C. SEIBERLICH. C.P A. PHONE 2244M
' March 14, 1963
1
Board of Directors
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
tGentlemen:
We have examined the balance sheet of Cedar Grove Utilities Co.,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota as of December 31, 1962 and the related state-
ments of earnings and accumulated losses for the year then ended. Our
examination was made in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards and accordingly included such tests of the accounting records
' and such procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.
In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheet and statement of
' earnings and accumulated losses present fairly the financial position
of Cedar Grove Utilities Co. at December 31, 1962 and the results of
its operations for the year then ended in conformity with generally
accepted auditing principles applied on a basis consistent with that
' of the prior year.
Respectfully submitted,
•
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
Certified Public Accountants
ceh
1
1
1
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET
December 31
ASSETS
CAPITAL ASSETS
Utility System (at original cost)
Land
Land improvements
Deep well
Water tower
Pump house
Water mains
Sanitary sewers
Earthmoving and grading
Treatment plant
Utility equipment
Unused federal investment credit
Total
Less accumulated depreciation
Utility System (net)
Office equipment
Less accumulated depreciation
Office Equipment (net)
Capital Assets (net)
LONG-TERM RECEIVABLES
Notes receivable - related companies
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash
Accounts receivable - trade
Accounts receivable - related companies
Prepaid assets
Total Current Assets
- 2 -
1962
$ 22,237.93
1,796.28
25,742.59
36,262.40
3,984.87
221,485.03
280,843.05
98,238.17
161,416.62
1,161.12
61.82
853,229.88
56,377.16
796,852.72
712.76
232.25
480.51
7y7,333.23
45,700.00
38.13
9,432.16
2,838.31
406.25
12.714.85
Exhibit A
1961
$ 22,237.93
25,742.59
36,262.40
3,984.87
185,247.90
234,375.49
98,238.17
118,103.62
961.12
725,154.09
35,916.45
689,237.64
712.76
89.70
623,06
689,860.70
45,700.00
749.15
7,314.03
1,633.37
88.19
9,784 74
$ 8�5,748.08 S 745,345.44
li •
1
li
ILIABILITIES
1962 1961
CAPITALIZATION
IICommon Stock, no par value, 2,500 shares
authorized, 100 shares issued and outstanding $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00
Accumulated losses (Exhibit C) ( 104,493.54) ( 84,544.56)
II
Grants in aid of construction (Exhibit D) Note 1 398,612.90 316,985.10
Total Capitalization 295,119.36 233.440.52
1 LONG-TERM DEBT
Notes payable - Baron secured by real
I
estate mortgage 50,000.00 69,440.00
Notes payable - Mortgage Associates 5,000.00
Notes payable - related companies 195,000.00 266,926.00
First mortgage 6 1/27. bonds 150,000.00
II
Total 395,000.00 341.,366.00
Less current maturities listed below 24,440.00
II
Total Long -Term Debt 395.000.0Q 316,926.00.
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Bank overdraft
I
945.76
Accounts payable trade 44,284.79 10,899.50
Accounts payable related companies 68,848.90 33,927.13
Meter deposits 7,635.00 5,820.00
I Current
portion of long-term debt 24,440.00
Contracts payable - Construction 34,510.82 111,910.81
Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings 158.75 100.80
I
Accrued real estate and personal property taxes 10,18Q.46 6,924.92
Accrued income taxes 10.00 10.00
IITotal Current Liabilities 165,628,72 194,978.92
1
II
$.J55 , 748.08 5 745_, 345.44
• 3 -
i
' ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
• •
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATENENT OF EARNINGS
December 31, 1962 Exhibit B
OPERATING REVENUE
Water and sever charges $ 47,628.84
Penalties and miscellaneous 5,494.40
Total Operating Revenue $ 53,123.24
OPERATING EXPENSES
Depreciation
Salaries and wages
Real and personal property taxes
Legal and audit expense
Electricity
Repairs and maintenance
Office rent
Office expense
Payroll taxes
Stationery and postage
Entertainment and travel
Fuel
Telephone
Insurance
Bad debts
Chlorination expense
Minnesota income tax
Total Operating Expenses
OPERATING EARNINGS
OTHER EXPENSES
Interest expense
Loan expense
Total Other Expense
OTHER INCOME
Interest income
Other Expense Less Other Income
EARNINGS (LOSS) FOR THE YEAR
- 4 -
20,603.26
6,000.00
10,180.46
1,680.05
3,929.03
2,551.33
1,878.80
151.89
168.00
462.29
160.00
418.44
250.07
526.74
95.35
642.00
10,00
21,853.21
5.600.62
27.453.83
4,089,34
49.707.71
3,415.53
23,364,49
($ 19,944.96)
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
1 • •
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES
December 31. 1962 Exhibit C
Balance - December 31, 1961 $ 84,544.58
Loss for the Period (Exhibit B) 19,948,96
Balance - December 31, 1962 § 104.49 ,5A
ANDFRSON h SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED ►UIUC ACCOUNTANTS
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
' NOTE 1:
1
The first mortgage 6 1/2% bonds are secured by a mortgage on the land,
buildings and equipment of the corporation. The agreement provides that
the corporation may have $1,000,000 of bonds outstanding at any time.
The initial issue was for $150,000 (Series 1962) and is due January,
1974 with 6 1/2% interest payable semi-annually on January 15 and
July 15 of each year. The corporation is required to retire
$15,000 of the principal amount on January 1, 1965 and on each
January 15 thereafter.
Among other covenants, the indentures impose limitations on the
payment of dividends, distribution of cash or incurring any indebted-
ness other than that owing from current operations while the Series
of 1962 is outstanding.
ANDERSON di SEIBERLICFI
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
1 i •
1
1
1
1
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
1 SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
AUDIT REPORT
1 DECEMBER 31, 1961
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
• •
ANDERSON S, SEII3ERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
403 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL 1, MINNESOTA
MEMBERS AM ER ICAN IN/TITUT[ OF ACCOUNTANT/
CLAUD[ C. ANDERSON, C.P.A.
JO/[PH C. /[1/IRLICH. C.P.A.
Board of Directors
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
3216 South Grove Lane
South Saint Paul,Minnesota
Gentlemen:
March 2, 1962
We have examined the balance sheet of Cedar Grove Utilities Co.,
South Saint Paul, Minnesota as of December 31, 1961 and the statements
of earnings, accumulated losses and grants in aid of construction for
the year then ended. Our examination was made in accordance with
generally accepted auditing standards and accordingly included such
tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as
we considered necessary in the circumstances.
In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements present
fairly the financial position of Cedar Grove Utilities Co. as of
December 31, 1961 and the results of operations for the year then
ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles
applied on a basis consistent with that of preceding periods.
Respectfully submitted
N i/i/
ANDERSON & SEIBERLICR
Certified Public Accountants
ceh
/HOME 22/-$41
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET 1
December 31 Exhibit A
ASSETS
1961 1960 '
CAPITAL ASSETS
Utility System (at original cost)
Land $ 22,237.93 $ 22,237.93
II well 25,742.59 25,742.59
Water tower 36,262.40 36,262.40
Pump house 3,984.87 3,984.87
Water mains 185,247.90 153,636.85II
Sanitary sewers 234,375.49 207,174.39
Earthmoving and grading 98,238.17 98,238.17
Treatment plant 118,103.62 117,230.32
II
Utility equipment 961.12 505.00
Total 725,154.09 665,012.52
Less accumulated depreciation (Note 4) 35,916.45 25012.55 I
Utility System (net) 689,237.64 639_999.97
Office equipment 712.76 167.44 ,
Less accumulated depreciation 89.70
Office equipment (net) 623.06 167.44 '
Capital Assets (net) 689,860.70 640,167.41
LONG•TE RM RECEIVABLESII
Notes receivable » related companies 45,700.00
CURRENT ASSETS II
Cash 749.15 78.51
Accounts receivable - trade 7,314.03 4,974.71
Accounts receivable - related companies 1,633.37 852.09 II
Notes receivable - related companies 15,600.00
Prepaid expenses 88.19
Total Current Assets 9,784.74 21,505.31 11
LIABILITIES
CAPITALIZATION
Common stock, no par value, 2500 shares authorized
100 shares issued and outstanding
Accumulated losses (Exhibit C)
Grants in aid of construction (Exhibit D)(Note
Total Capitalization
LONG-TERM DEBT
Notes payable - Buron - secured by real
estate mortgage
Notes payable - Mortgage Associates
Notes payable - related companies
Construction contracts payable (Note 3)
Total
Less current maturities listed below
Total Long -Term Debt
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Bank overdraft
Accounts payable trade
Accounts payable - related companies
Meter deposits
Current maturities of long-term debt
Accrued payroll taxes and withholdings
Accrued real estate and personal property taxes
Accrued interest
Accrued income taxes
Total Current Liabilities
1961
1,000.00
84,544.58)
316,985.10
233,440.52
1960
1,000.00
66,024.80)
384,208.00
319,183.20
69,440.00 18,000.00
5,000.00 47,500.00
266,926.00 5,000.00
111,910.81 123,820.51
453,276.81 194,320.51
136,350.81 152,356.00
316,926.00 41,964.51
945.76
10,899.50 18,173.12
33,927.13 119,570.45
5,820.00 4,290.00
136,350.81 152,356.00
100.80 531.60
6,924.92 5,393.84
200.00
10.00 10.00
194,978.92
300,525.01
$ 745,345.44 $ 661,02.72
- 3 -
ANDERSON tt SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
1 STATEMENT OF EARNINGS
Year Ended December 31, 1961 Exhibit B
IIOPERATING REVENUE
Water and sewer charges $ 37,351.63
IIPenalties and miscellaneous 2,812.64
Total Operating Revenue $ 40,164.27
I
OPERATING EXPENSES
Depreciation (Note 4) 18,723.58
Salaries and wages 8,000.00
I
Real and personal property taxes 6,924.92
Legal expenses 3,975.38
Electricity 3,276.71
Repairs and maintenance 2,428.28
IIOffice rent 1,500.00
Office expense 839.62
Payroll taxes 633.60
I
Stationery and postage 575.16
Entertainment and travel 701.60
Fuel 225.73
I
Telephone 250.81
Insurance 99.26
Income tax (State of Minnesota) 10.00
IITotal Operating Expenses 48,164.65
OPERATING EARNINGS (LOSS) ( 8,000.38)
' OTHER EXPENSE
Interest expense 20,674.03
1 OTHER INCOME
Interest income 2,424.65
Other Expense Less Other Income 18,249.38
EARNINGS (LOSS) FOR THE YEAR ($ 26,249-76)
1
- 4 -
ANDERSON cL SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
1
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
STATEMENT OF ACCUMULATED LOSSES
Year Ended December 31, 1961 Exhibit C
1
' Balance - December 31, 1960 $ 66,024.80
Loss for the period (Exhibit B) 26,249.76
Total 92,274.56
Less: Prior years depreciation restored on water mains,
' sewer mains and earthmoving and grading (Note 4) 7,729.98
Balance - December 31, 1961 $4,544.58
- 5 -
ANDERSON & SEIEERLICH
CERTIRED PUILIC ACCOUNTANTS
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
South Saint Paul, Minnesota
GRANTS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION
December 31, 1961 Exhibit D
Balance - December 31, 1960 $ 384,208.00
Grants in aid of construction 66,379.60
Total 450,587.60
ilRefund of grants in aid of construction to Cedar Grove
Construction Co. (Note 1) 133,602.50
Balance - December 31, 1961 316,985.10
' AYDERSO` & SEIBERLICH
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
td
• •
SPRING LAKE PARK
All users
TYPICAL WATER RATES - 1963
$6.00/quarter minimum for 15,000 gallons
$0.30/1000 gals. for next 10,000 gals.
$0.25/1000 gals. for next 10,000 gals.
$0.20/1000 gals. for all over 35,000 gallons
WHITE BEAR LAKE
Residential $2.70/quarter minimum
First 7,500 gals. @ $0.36/1000 gals.
Next 15,000 gals. @ $0.27/1000 gals.
All over 15,000 gals. @ $0.20/L000 gals.
Commercial $6.00/quarter minimum
First 15,000 gals. $0.40/1000 gals.
Next 60,000 gals. @ $0.27/1000 gals.
All over 75,000 gals. @ $0.13.3/1000 gals.
COTTAGE. GROVE
Residential 6,000 gals. r.1-1 $3.00 minimum/quarter
up to 12,000 gals. @ $0.30/1000 gals.
13,000 to 20,000 gals. @ $0.25/1000 gals.
20,000 thru 40,000 gals $0.20/1000 gals.
All over 40,000 gals. @ $0,15/1000 gals.
Commercial & 15,000 gals./quarter @ $6.00/quarter
Church 15,000 gals. to 75,000 gals. @ $0.25/1000 gals.
75,000 gals. to 300,000 gals. 0 $0.131/1000 gals.
Over 300,000 gals :11 $0.06k/1000 gals.
Commercial water user outside Town and
Schools inside Town --
15,000 gals. @ $12.00/quarter
15,000 to 75,000 gals. @ $0.40/1000 gals.
75,000 to 300,000 gals. @ $0.20/1000 gals.
Over 300,000 gn1s. @ $0.13J/1000 gals.
Residential $15.00 meter deposit
Plumbing Inspection fee $3.00 permit 4 $0.50/fixture
Meter furnished by home owner or developer
Commercial $30.00 meter deposit
NEW HOPE
Residential $9.00/quarter Minimum for 25,700 gallons
$0.35/1000 gals. up to 30,000 gallons
$0.30/1000 gals. for all over 30,000 gallons.
•
BROOKLYN CENTER
Residential Minimum of $4.00/quarter for 11,500 gallons
@ $0.35/1000 gals. for all over 11,500.
BLOOMINGTON
MINNEAPOLIS
ST. PAUL
RICHFIELD
GOLDEN VALLEY
BURNSVILLE
Minimum of $6.00/quarter for 13,300 gallons
@ $0.45/1000 gals. for all usage up to 40,000 gal./quarter
$0.40/1000 gals. from 40,000 to 100,000 gal.
$0.35/1000 gals. over 100,000 gal./quarter
Minimum of $3.00/quarter for 5/8" meter
$0.27/1000 gals. for all residential usage.
Minimum of $3.00/quarter for 5/8" meter
$0.20/1000 gals. for first 375,000 gals./quarter.
Minimum of $6.00/quarter for 13,300 gallons
@ $0.45/1000 gals. for all usage.
Minimum of $4.50/quarter for 10,000 gallons
@ $0.45/1000 gals. for all usage.
Minimum of $6.00/quarter for 15,000 gallons
@ $0.30/1000 gals. from 15,000 to 50,000 gals/quarter
$0.20/1000 gals. over 50,000 gals./quarter.
• •
TYPICAL SEWER SERVICE RATES - 1963
ST. PAUL Sewer rental only -- residential, commercial & industrial
Water Meter Size Inside City Outside
5/8" $1.50/quarter $2.50/quarter
3/4" $1.02/quarter $3.17/quarter
1" $3.42/quarter
5. 7 quarter
1-1/4" $1.50/month $2.50/month
2" $5.40/month $8.90/month
NOTE: Sewer maintenance apparently comes from other funds.
BROOKLYN CENTER
Residential $4.50/quarter - flat rate
Commercial & Industrial connected to Municipal Water $0.33/1000 gallons
Commercial & Industrial not connected to Municipal Water $0.35/month/fixture unit.
FRIDLEY
Residential $5.00/quarter - paid in advance - flat rate
Multiple Dwelling $5.00/quarter first unit
$3.00/quarter for each additional unit
Commercial & Industrial - Bill based upon usage & number of fixtures connected to
sewer.
COTTAGE GROVE TOWNSHIP
Residential $1.75/month or $5.25/quarter for up to 13,000 gallons water
Based upon lowest winter quarter consumption.
ROSEVILLE
Residential $6.50/quarter - flat rate
Commercial & Industrial - worked out on an individual basis.
NEW HOPE
Residential $6.00/quarter sewer maintenance) flat rate
plus 3.00/quarter sewer use )
Commercial & Industrial - Billed by volume at approximately the same rate as
residential.
WHITE BEAR LAKE Note: All sewage is pumped into City of St. Paul for treatment.
Residential Minimum--$4.50/quarter for up to 1000 cu.ft. (7,460 gal.)
(Includes St.Paul charges for treatment)
First 1000 cu.ft. @ $0.45 per 100 cu.ft.($0.60/1000 gal.)
Next 2000 cu.ft. @ $0.30 per 100 cu.ft.($0.40/1000 gal.)
All Over 3000 cu.ft. @ $0.22 per 100 cu.ft.($0.29/1000 gal.)
1.
oit
• •
WHITE BEAR LAKE - Continn d:
Industrial, Commercial & Churches - Minimum $6.00/quarter
First 2000 cu.ft. @ $0.30/100 cu.ft.
Next 8000 cu.ft. @ $0.20/100 cu.ft.
Next 40,000 cu.ft. @ $0.10/L00 cu.ft.
All Over 50,000 cu.ft. @ $0.05/100 cu.ft.
Plus charges for
Treatment from
City of St. Paul
Schools - Same charges as for Commercial & Industrial outside of City Limits.
Outside City Limits
Residential All are required to be in City before a hookup is made
Industrial, Commercial & Churches
Minimum
Next
Next
Over
RICHFIELD
Residential
Apartments
Schools
Commercial
$12.00/quarter for up to 2000 cu.ft.)
8,000 cu.ft. @ $0.30/100 cu.ft. )
40,000 cu.ft. @ $0.15/100 cu.ft. )
50,000 cu.ft. @ $0.10/100 cu.ft. )
$1.00/month - flat rate
$1.00/month - per unit - flat rate
Elementary $5.00/100 pupils/quarter
High $12.00/100 pupils/quarter
$3.50/quarter minimum
rates upon request -
Plus charges for Treatment
from City of St. Paul
BL00MINGTON
Residential $2.00/month - flat rate
Commercial & Industrial $2.00/month minimum
@ $0.25/1000 gal. for all water used
Schools $0.25/1000 gal for all water used. Must write City a letter
for reduction in summer if much is used for watering.
GOLDEN VALLEY
Residential $2.00/month - flat rate
Commercial & Industrial $6.00/quarter minimum
@ $0.2247/1000 gal. for all water used.
2.
MMUS OF A SP4ICIAL M_:i,'I'ING
OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. KAGAN 1''O wlACAU.?
.. special a.!eting of the Board of :supervisors, Eagan Township,
Dakota County, Minnesota, at which the Township's attorney was pre-
sent, was held on April 82, 1959 at 8:00 o'clock P.M.
Kr. David L. Grannie, Jr., representing Cedar Grov- Utilities Co.
and Cedar Grove Construction Co., presented to the Bo rd preliminary
proposal for water and gas franchises und plat c• ve ce tain lands
acquired by said companies for the purposes o --a----rakicnt develop-
ment. �--
As proposed the plat would prov +e f ,mirilqium lots of 9,
square feet with no side diinensio le than set; u sewage disposal
system; all streets to have a six in gve1;�6ase and a two inch black
top; streets to be GO fee wide • the t O; way lines with a 30
foot top; curbing to
\
blacktop`3 Ai boulevards along
streets to be sodded :+diclude t _ one-half foot catalpa trees
planted at intervals ofy to f t ong both sides of the streets;
fire hydr s e th intersect ono each and every block; six inch,
eight
strutted
fore the To
Mr. Grannie
ns in the streets; and the streets to be con-
icatione and approval of the Town Board be-
ve any obligation to take them over.
sed the Board that the water franchise would be
owned by Cedar Grove Utilities Co., the stock of which would be owned
by J. E. Jandric and Hobert (Brandt. Mr. Grannie also presented forms of
franchise agreements for gas and water for examination by the Township's
attorney.
Dated this thy of April, 1959. BOARD OF SUPRVLstli 6,
:,;GAN TOSd4ZHIP
By
Clerk
CecJ
G co
/��� (Ctie3
MINUTE OF A SP4CIAL )LAIC
or
THE BOARD OF sUPRVISORS, EAGAN 1'OwNSRIP
A special mooting of the Board of Supervisors, Fain Township,
Dakota County, Minnesota, at which the Township's attorney was prw
sent, was held on April 8a, 1959 at 8'00 o'clock Y.H.
Mr. David L. Grannie, Jr., representing Cedar Grov Utilities Co.
and Cedar Grove Construction Co., presented to the Bo preliminary
propoaal for water and gas franchises and plat re os tain ]ands
acquired by said companies for the purposes o en develop -
went.
As proposed the plat would pro f• lots of 9,
square feet with no aids lo- than • t; a 'swage disposal
ayetea; all streets to have a six p and a two inch black
top; streets to be 60 foe wide the t wpy lines with a 30
foot top; curbing to blacktop boulevards along
streets to be sodded d ••ludo t oss.half foot catalpa tress
planted at intervals of to i t both sides of the streets;
fire intereec ono cash and every block; six inch,
eight ten h in the streets; and the streets to be con-
strreted ications and approval of the Town Board be-
fore the To p ••ld ve any obligation to take them over.
Mr. Grannie a' red the Board that the water franchise would be
owned by Cedar Grove Utilities Co., the stock of Width would be owned
by J. "4. Jaadric and Robert Brandt. Mr. Grannies also presented forma of
franchise agreements for gas and water for examination by the Township's
attorney.
Dated thin day of April, 1959. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS,
RAGAN TOWNSHIP
By
Clerk
LOUIS FISCHER
OFFICE OF CLERK EAGAN TOWNSHIP
ROUTE 1, ST. PAUL 11. MINN.
6L. 1-1661
Q'w. fi- -
_ __..-677czA 41-4-e_e__-14- 4Vti3C-
j(Ps e14,4# 6L'4- dft: CtFlae (e1AL /te • )74
Pfe/ Wri4C 4,V44/1441: /frte4e/.--. "e3C64, ,g02r4
keylvtot4--1
ee Afett-444eAr:e
C1-314,;„„_„‘, h 'A.0-o 1 #
ofnf1 Maart 74 ;
; 8 ,1) ,Q-e Gas er;44
� l
4-'4.,
CG /Y� I
11)A4 ce c„,,ce p24emhiti /7-7tz-
Ace
ace ,tutz.Ac .6,14 Aafe,:e di;4
/roart/11-'6 7;P-
iecto
1-4 141C4e,t/ Ac,44.eidjL, kk)t7
p.,W(,w141)4_, iL /04 aiccoe74--
ter-
cis.x. ,de c 3&
„ /9
`yj• y7,.fa, �,
,came, .P9
itc/-to
LOUIS FISCHER
OFFICE OF CLERK EAGAN TOWNSHIP
ROUTE 1, ST. PAUL 11, MINN.
6L. 1-1661
r
/y � l
ff)144`e
Jlitgei-,, 6,, 14. kt. ke_7(47
4._cd '7:14
deb-T'7 4
LfiliC ca- I 1-41,44 .4 C/tch-/�
CadraPiCk
4A 0-74- ,1-0-11- .4-6;6-0
ate2,4 c0)1-ttAt gez2Atoe.
ck_d-ztAA1 tk- ge-e/A_d 712a/ 1416 11100211---
Itt,frat ,t7t 70tt-e V'(A /g""J:6 A.AC-;-(44049 e-c)
LDUIS FISCHER
OFFICE OF CLERK EAGAN TOWNSHIP
ROUTE 1. BT. PAUL 11, MINN.
OL. 1-1661
ace°4-4-- erzii. #---4-e14,a..-t_ a--c;te ZW4i-A
1 w
t`a,✓.. o p
T ` c�
J Gc.l.2 /,07/
ce ,•h 07 E.
4,4
oziti 2kte, 4aDvad--4, .49".41teetzre.
04,t oc 4 -0e ,i: aP d
h14144_,bJ 4 64 / AO /i94-
& c, CGr*ria.i.•1 /f Kam a_ _
4'1°14 111 /g4-4-#'‘ if0V424E-4- 1/4 7-43-
,i-vt ct_d_c_ -
W-Latif--.- 44- ete -5---"4".74,a 47.4 e Ite-4 ex-
-t-cvekr--t;pe ae64- X ---&4 ele 470-x4-1.2et‘ ove.44, 444
ke).). t /3076-1416 44-c )14.4.4.4404
1 i c, AC.! r
5 it, gi
, 9 Sri • £ . li
(>7 ler-4441-4/ itce 0
Of ,ice e s 9 `? 1 F, � `2— o
Alec-
aet Aktex044 I1L t 0/ mar
d-Pet-4 Tor. 4(4-ay.-Li .. 4,444 7;-7. AL-ce,-
&0u aeeett:%det a° -
4e1/1-- 7-1-t..L.0 Ma...40e 00Jef-7 -rc
dreoce- 6414...47
/0,tty
�.m.•-vim f� .�.`�'
63( s -1.64.&,e4W c::14
ativAel ce,qpivi. At. "324c. ,
Oatob.r 21, 1060
Cedar Grove 'J ti li tt as Company
)216 So;ith Grove Lens
South 5 t. NIA, Minnesota
Gen tleman
W are spolosirc a cop
of puns on :taterooin rift
Township, IJ'alcota County, �`a
is also snaloe.d. .0
,r)Frre,r1117
OCT 5 1960
ROBERT J. ELLISON
IU\ 1 15o0
.1‘44.4e
°Teri ng an ani na ti on
r .dar Grove Addi tion at Eat
. ■ oo y of the identified plans
If you have any gnestions in regard to the information contained
in this report, please writs us.
Togs rem trulyi
F. L. Woodward, Director
moth on of F,rrri rciasntal Sant tat3 on
r..naloeurea
oc s f'ob.rt J. Bllisaai Consulting Engineer
•
T SOTA IBPARtPANT OF ilYAI.'B
Division of L:rrrlroia.ntal Sanitation
Section of :rater Supply and General Rngineering
Report on Plans on Wtthrsain yxtensi ons
Cedar Grove Addition
Ragan Itemehipa Dakota County, ttrmesota
Oo tuber 20, 1960
9 C
Rv3E11l J. ELLL.LLd"
1. Plans crer red and slbsd tted by Robert J. p111 sofa, Consul tiny r'n neer S t. °tali
lrtinnasata.
2. fate kece'ived — October 23e 1960 7Y1s No. Y-4657
3. scope of ?lane — '?ne plans r.r cr1 be thc iris ttlla V. on o f nronoewd sa t+erwain ex ten—
Sions to the s ng di s tribution syr. tom. I t 1s assaumed tha t prrri ously anorcred
specifications (File- No. I-3292) vril1 govern.
This report oovers the iesign of this project insofar as the safety and sanitary
quality of the water for or►olic cons :spoon fray be affected ..:sd applies to this
pro j ea t only and rto t to the er tire syn toe or any other part thereof.
?r. Osrnere n! o — Cedar Drove ties Germany, 3216 sou th G rov e Ls tie , Sou th 5 t. Paul,
nnes o ta.
5. Location — 5ix—inch :as t : ron Wa ter ruin
Pnhn Road from ac istirw, main oortsrard 2,335 feet.
:Diamond "rive from uarbls lane to r:arts Lane.
6. Coliance — 'Josp1iar ce i th Apnravad Plans. NC " Tr' r -1":"^11 '•r, TAfT 'I,tCF.
!a Ci..PT _ " .{ .:•'(%'int*' C" P{ Ti{'' A "'"ROVE:. °IANS . If i t is desired to toake deb is ti •ns
frog Use approved plans •!;e tate Department of Health she .1d be a^n�a 1 tad ana
approval of the changes o.-.tained before cxie true tion is started; othe'net se, such
ponetr}ction is installed arm t+wst proper approval rani ir, actrti as;; create
dangers to «ub1i c health.
C,oneau* ton
The plane or this waterworks ;,reject c:o'npl,-r in general with tie r+ey,...rreontc of
the V nanesota T4arxrteer.t of ne 1th and are recopmeAded for approve) frith ttsF u:,61. 1a1
rem sr, atiore as stated on the atta.hed st en ti tia.iw "Ir.for•nation -iati a to Plan
Eixasdnna ti on. "
F. A. Fhsaet, «ref
.1aatton of later Sunp1y
and C: tnsrsl f. ntginee ri ng
•
DEF'Lct NE.': T v:' HEA Tr:
Divis, „;n ?f E'.virC:ic entu i 3anitaticn
Ir.fcrmatir :. he ativ a t Flan Exami.naticr,
The exarr vatic:. and r-:F•-rt on plans and specificaticns for
water supply, sewer3E;d, and t l::m:::r,g systems is made to inform tt
State Board of Health concernfw the sanitary features of pro;sects
pres-crated for cvr,sideration in accordance with Regulation 2CG
ar.''- = 77, respectively, •-)f the ,state Doerr: of '.;eaith and tr e :•ta•
Wa* r. t _ ._ 1 ntr. . Act. :!. _ u r. 'i a .. sach 1 .
upon tne sub lsitior, that the survey and :trier .iata :1:,
iezign .s Lased are :,Jrrect, ar . tiiat necessary legal aut '..,f ity
has '.:een obtained to construct trc e: t. T!. _ re pc.r:s1:. .! J
for the design of structural fent;:res and t: e e. f :ency of
egtipLlnt must be taken by the engineer r architect who des, •ns
the proect.
Water -supply plans are examined with r edard to t!,e ;catirn,
construction and operational f _attires of t:ie '' 'i►n and maintenance
of all parts of tha system which :ray tiff est the safety d
sanitary quality of the water. }�:xar..i n ,tion is based Von tue
standards contained in the Manual of Water Sup-1y Car,ita;.ien.
Flans of sewerage ar.._' avast: disposal systems ar> examined
with regard to the f,:ntures of deaign whlen c,:)n.:ern tr.e operatic n
any; rnaintenane cf sanitary sewers and treatment works; the
efficiency cf proposed treatment prozessr:s, and comi_,liaiicc with
stre•irr. standaras. T►;- examir.yt.lon is bayzid upon the bulletin
entitled, ”Standards far Sewac•e 'forks, Report of Joint Corr.;. ittee,
r
1952, revised July, 1954, reprinted .July, 1957'', and t:....
bulletin, "Small Sewerage Systems".
Plans cn p:.n.tln,; syste:.:3 are exarrined cr.iv insofar rs thy
provisi ons of t h .:inr:esot:, Plumbing Code apply.
The State Lioar•i of Heath reserves tho right to withdraw its
apprrvai of plans if csr.strl_ct:.on of the pre ject is :;ct undertaken
within a period of two years. The fact that pla:is have been
approved by the .tate i card of health d 1)es nct necessarily mean
that recomr^endations for al ter?tL r.s or a.id:ti :r5 ma; not be
offered at some later time when. .'t!a:ls,e'i co:,dit ::9 or advanced
knowled.:e r:.ake emir:-v ^.•-r:tg
:.an. No. 17
MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL COMMISSION
In Re: Hearing, Fagan Township
January 10, 1962
The hearing was called to order by Chairman Joseph Robbie
at 10:00 A.M. on January 10, 1962. Commission members present:
secretary F. Robert Edman, and Vice -Chairman, Robert Johnson.
Ex-officio members present: Carl D. Gnischuk, Dakota County
Auditor, and H. B. Gackstetter, Chairman of the Dakota County
Board of Commissioners.
Appearances noted: Luther M. Stalland, Township Attorney,
234.0 Rand Tower, Minneapolis.
Mr. Stallard agreed that minutes of the hearing prepared
by the Commission would be acceptable to him,without need of
a full transcript, in absence of court reporter who failed to
appear.
First witness, ROBERT ROSENE, sworn by Chairman, and quali-
fied as an expert. He in a consulting engineer, 1381 Eustis,
St. Paul and retained by the township since late 1960, in land
matters as township engineer.
Familiar with township drainage problems and assisted in
preparing the base crap.
Assisted in street planning activities.
Reviews and comments an all new plats.
Made a study of the drainage situation.
Prepared official Eagan Township Zoning Map. Stipulated as
to its authenticity.
MINN D TA MUNICIPAL CO MJSI0N
In F e : is eari n; , Eagan Township
January 10, 1962
The hearing was called to order by Chairman Joseph Robbie
at 10:00 A.M. on January 10, 1962. Commission members present:
:secretary F. Robert ?;dman, and vice -Chairman, Robert Johnson.
Ex-officio members present: Carl D. Cnischuk, Dakota County
Auditor, and H. B. Gackstetter, Chairman of the Dakota County
Board of Commissioners.
Appearances noted: Luther Y. Stalland, 'township Attorney,
2340 Rand lower, !'.inneapolis.
Mrs. :.talland agreed that minutes of the hearing prepared
by the Comclission would be acceptable to him,without need of
a full transcript, in absence of court reporter who failed to
appear.
First witness, ROBERT RO5ENE, sworn by Chairman, and quali-
fied as an expert. He is a consulting; engineer, 1381 Eustis,
St. Paul and retained by the township since late 1960, in land
:..atters as township engineer.
Familiar with township drainage problems and assisted in
preparing the base nap.
Assisted in street planning activities.
:'eviews and comments on all new plats.
:ade a study of the drainage situation.
Prepared official Eagan Township Zoning :'tap. Stipulated as
to its authenticity.
♦ - 2 - 4
Petitioners' Exhibit No. 1, official Eagan Township Zoning
Map was marked.
The petition for incorporation was offered into evidence
with the facts as contained therein being true and accurate.
The Chairman established by inquiry that witnesses were
available who represented that if they were called they would
testify as to the facts contained in the petition. Based on
this, the petition was allowed into evidence, leaving the oppor-
tunity for anyone in opposition to controvert any facts therein
contained.
Fosene using the zoning map to testify established the
political subdivisions bordering on the township, testified
from the key of petitioners' exhibit no. 1 and explained the
maps
Character of Eagan Township -- majority rural, becoming
urban.
Eleven hundred residences
Central sewer system for one subdivision (Cedar Grove)
and central water system for the same subdivision.
Petitioners' Exhibit No. 2 marked, Map of Eagan Township
with overlay showing sewer and water system. The one central
sewer system gives primary and secondary treatment and dumps
effluent into the Minnesota River. Balance is by individual
septic tanks.
Testified that it is feasible to install other central
systems.
Lt. Paul Sewer and Sanitation, Volume 3, Chapter 27, page
3, seventh paragraph, was read into the record.
2
Petitioners' Exhibit No. 1, official Eagan Township Zoning
Map was marked.
The petition for incorporation was offered into evidence
with the facts as contained therein being; true and accurate.
The Chairman established by inquiry that witnesses were
available who represented that if they were called they would
testify as to the facts contained in the petition. Based on
this, the petition was allowed into evidence, leavin€ the oppor-
tunity for anyone in opposition to controvert any facts therein
contained.
rosene using the zoning nap to testify established the
political subdivisions bordering on the township, testified
from the key of petitioners' exhibit no. 1 and explained the
rap.
Character of Eagan. Township -- majority rural, becoming
urban.
Eleven hundred residences
Central sewer system for one subdivision (Cedar Grove)
and central water system for the sane subdivision.
Petitioners' Exhibit No. 2 marked, Map of Eagan Township
with overlay showing sewer and water system. The one central
sewer system gives primary and secondary treatment and dumps
effluent into the Minnesota River. Balance is by individual
septic tanks.
Testified that it is feasible to install other central
systems.
St. Paul Sewer and )anitation, Volume 3, Chapter 27, page
3, seventh paragraph, was read into the record.
::jhowing map of SW region, Chapter 29, page 27, read; Chapter
31, page 5, alternate sewer project also.
Present sewage system would tie in with overal co-ordinated
metropolitan plan. Temporary plant would be abandoned and sys-
tem attached to interceptor; can be made into integrated system.
Petitioners' Exhibit No. 3, marked. Map showing Watershed
District.
Natural drainage mainly to the North.
Water Supply: Franchise water system in Cedar Grove Sub-
division. Car awed water for 500 homes. Second system 350 homes
being installed by developer to be turned over to township.
Water system can be integrated into one.
Rest of township have individual wells, 150' to 350' deep.
Storm sewer system Cedar Grove, Timberlain email sewer,
rest of area natural drainage.
Asked as to opinion of feasibility of incorporation, says
no physical reason why the area should not be incorporated.
Believes that long-range planning makes it desirable and that
the area is becoming urban.
Cverall plan for integrating major street system with
county -state system is under way.
Under examination by Mr. Robbie admitted they had mutual
problems with Burnsville Township, that as far as sanitary sewer
is concerned, it was best on overall basis, that area would be
kept large enough to be able to take advantage of any metropoli-
tan sewage system that might be developed and smaller units could
not do this.
Lhowinr Lap of region, Chapter 29, page 27, read; Chapter
33, page 5, alternate sewer project also.
Present sewage system would tie in with overal co-ordinated
L.etropolitan plan. Temporary plant would be abandoned and sys-
tem attached to interceptor; can be made into integrated system.
Petitioners' Exhibit No. 3, raarked. Kap showing ;;'atershed
District.
J:atural drainarre mainly to the `.'orth.
', ater ::apply: Franchise water system in Cedar Grove Sub-
division. Car moved water for 500 homes. Lecond system 350 homes
beinr installed by developer to be turned over to township.
Water system can be integrated into one.
Rest of township have individual wells, 1501 to 350' deep.
Ltorn sewer system Cedar Grove, Timberlain small sewer,
rest of area natural drainage.
Asked as to opinion of feasibility of incorponatiori, says
no physical reason why the area Should not be incorporated.
elieves that long-range planning makes it desirable and that
the area is becoming urban.
Overall plan for integrating major street system with
county -state system is under way.
Under examination by ter. Robbie admitted they had mutual
problems with 3urnsville Township, that as far as sanitary sewer
is concerned, it was best on everall 'oasis, that area would be
kept large enough to be able to take advantage of any metropoli-
tan sewage system that might be developed and smaller units could
not do this.
-4-
That population growth could very well eliminate logical
reason for present boundaries.
Transportation possibilities will determine the growth. No
question in his mind but that the North end of the township will
develop most rapidly.
Mr. Edman questioned regarding whether a small portion of
Eagan Township sewers might be better served by Mendota Heights.
UnderKr. Johnson's questioning about the LE and SE corners,
no extended study had been made as to whether these could be
better integrated with rest of township or in other manner.
5eaond witness, ARTHUR F, RAHN, sworn by Chairman. Is
Chairman of the Township Board.
Testified regarding fire protection -- special fire dis-
trict on an area outlined in Petitioners' Exhibit No. 2.
Regarding police protection: two constables, operate own
cars, township furnishes siren, stop lights, pistols.
Road maintenance: One Motor Patrol, 4 wheel drive, truck.
West half is plowed by this and East half is hired. Own small
tractor with mover and grader blade.
Rave been discussing possibility of incorporating for three
years.
Testified extensively regarding commercial developl,ent within
the township.
Testified regarding present territorial boundaries, would
be feasible for incorporation.
Ward system as per petition felt that it would give ade-
quate representation.
That population growth could very well eliminate logical
reason for present boundaries.
Transportation possibilities will deterr.:ine the growth. r;o
question in his mind but that the i.ortL end of the township will
develop most rapidly.
I'.r. Edi an questioned regarding- whether a small portion of
Eagan Township sewers right be better served by I,endota Heights.
Under Mr. Johnson's questioning about the NE and LE corners,
no extended study had been wade as to whether these could be
better integrated with rest of township or in other manner.
L'eoond witness, ARTHUR F. RAIHI. , sworn by Chairman. Is
Chairman of the Township 3oard.
Testified regarding; fire protection. -- special fire dis-
trict on an area outlined ir. Petitioners' Exhibit No. 2.
Regarding police protection: two constables, operate own
cars, township furnishes siren, stop lights, pistols.
oad maintenance: One Flotor Patrol, 4 wheel drive, true,:.
:cast half is plowed by this and East half is hired. Own small
tractor with mover and grader blade.
have been discussing possibility of incorporating for three
years.
Testified extensively rei;ardinco.3.ereial developr.:ent within
the township.
`i'estified regarding present territorial boundaries, would
be feasible for incorporation.
:ard systm. as per petition felt that it would give ade-
q;.►ate representation.
•
- 5 -
$1,400,000.00 in building permits issued in 1961.
Zoning and Planning ordinance furnished to the Commission.
Shopping done generally in 'West It . Paul.
County radio system.
Civic groups: U. Eagan Association -- Burnsville chool
District #1; Eagan Civic Association -- anyone can join.
Third witness, HERBERT PAULZ NE, sworn by Chairman. Is
Treasurer and Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission. Plann-
ing; Commission has been in existence for four years; has in
membership, farmers, architects, bonding exports, businessmen,
et c.
%ard system -- population distribution and to be furnished
to Commission.
Hearing continued at 12 noon on said date.
ROBERT W. JOHNSON,
Vice -Chairman
4'1,400,000.00 in building; permits issued in 1961.
Zoning and Planning ordinance furnished to the Commission.
hoppin7 done generally in .:est :,t. Paul.
County radio syster.
Civic groups: •. Eagan Association -- Tiurnsville ..chool
District ''1; Eaan Civic Association -- anyone can join.
Third witness, HEf3ERT PAULZENE, sworn by Chairman. Is
Treasurer and Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission. Plann-
in; Commission has been in existence for four years; has in
membership, farmers, architects, bonding experts, businessmen,
etc.
'r.'ard system -- population distribution and to be furnished
to Commission.
Hearin continued at 12 noon on said date.
ROBERT W. JOHNSON,
Vice -Chairman
�0t,
cS , (A)„, .
5- raa-
JIN 43v-\,vN-\ 0-6
„ej,,y,9
---C).(K 4Q 0 4 ° Q3L_QC.,Asj •/.1\)QQ
5°° w„A dxg.J\--.,:Th'3s" Se.S2t()c.)J\ j`fv,-Q ..,�
o �^ �w ,,.o--axe
ISO." • c() �`
J`O-^P--e LI'cvcAp-u�
�f 000 Qao_xxgv��
v
Lit"-"-)t'-'6LA
su—k LK5171),&A.Neg
,) wo„._4_.Q
rr \SL
\YYN L-Af \JV'kfkiN(st cliZA\
QLWY\St.,^- L.)QC .sue Cr.
i)•J\V J\-CLA3•A4N\
0\ h`n;{, ()QLk-
c3.)A�y
$cam
1.45LA &_LR c‘-f
.Jio o_.�,� d .�5.� .,moo--t ,J�sZ
As soon as your final billing from Cedar Grove Utilities Company is
paid in full, your account deposit of $15.00 will be forwarded to us.
Because we bill on a quarterly basis the account deposit for Eagan
Township is $30.00. Kindly complete this form and return with your
remittance of S15.00.
EAGAN TOWN SHI P
Sewer and Water Department
EAGAN TOWNSHIP
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
NAME 1 ytA E
01( d l .—DRA
ADDRESS
Additional account deposit of $15.00 paid
Kindly remit within 30 days.
C C C'G! ! ' i c L-ie
�.eciG�-r 6-rot)LtCLLr/,1 0
/951
-ter —
! d'l 7 / (/oti,e5,$0 N.
fa /at cs a_ b ,- » /7 ( & c/ i Jur
o Ge !a t� /: cf .-9Gc CePi%.y--
67--0 vL re-5 acia,) *v u - er cvzt
CtG u ram.
- - - /ownsfip
C
€ d'Qr 6:,/'uvG u e /i1/cJ ,
cc� /9I ? -44G %s" f --.
n 744C per" 140
,o or/(is ez ill ic=,s
f�C ,by., 4)
tw
under -Fr ,)e-4/5"c
G�.
/ 97o iI//- ou7 /ram/ b�zi_ re ;
n L�oj- LC�
%��-et �.�rr7�L�/1Sd7/ �diJ .cam
"ril '/0a/c'el4 cz. „.2/7 /aT�.cr c r
r ,7/ -9-4c , 0-1.4,-6,7r ier3
bCKS'3 Dr 7 nle--
WILLIAM R. BUSCH
ATTORNEY AT LAW
803 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101
222-0781
May :3, 1971
Luther M. Stalland, Esq.
Stalland & Hauge
Attorneys at Law
2340 Dain Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Re: Town of Eagan
vs. Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Dear Luther:
This will confirm our discussion of May 1st during which I
indicated that Cedar Grove Utilities Co. has concurred with my recom-
mendation that the subject litigation be settled and disposed of in line
with the Stipulation that you have drafted and that provides, in summary,
for the following:
(1) Cedar Grove Utilities Co. will deliver its sanitary sewer and
water system properties to the Township for the compromise price of
$1, 231,450 (which is $25, 000 less than the arbitration award). Title will
be transferred to the Township by warranty deed as to the fee owned
real estate, by a bill of sale with warranty of title as to the tangible
personal property, and by quit claim assignment of the company's real
estate easements. The transfers of the real estate will be subject, of
course, to the existing casements and restrictions of record since these
are matters over which the company has no control. The real estate and
personal property taxes for 1970 that are payable in 1971 will be paid by
the company. To the extent any taxes are assessable for 1971, payable
in 1972, they will be prorated so that the company bears only the portion
allocable to the first five months of this year since prior to May 31st the
judgment affirming the Township's purchase of all this property will most
likely have been entered by the Dakota County district court. Actually,
under the present circumstances where the Township's purchase of this
property has been pending since prior to 1971, it would seem that a full
elimination of the taxes for 1971, payable in 1972, should be attainable.
(2) The company will deliver its water and sanitary sewer system
properties in the same condition as they were in as of May 1, 1970, the
date as of which the arbitration award was determined, ordinary wear
and tear since that time being alone excepted.
(3) The company will waive and release its right to any interest
on the arbitration award and, also, to its rights against its system customers
for the rate increase that was enjoined from being put into effect by the
•
Luther M. Stalland, Esq.
May 3, 1971
Page 2
Town Board's resolution of October 17, 1967.
(4) The Township will pay in cash the stipulated purchase price
for the company's water and sanitary sewer system properties on or
before August 1, 1971. If there is any delay in payment from and after
that date, interest will accrue as provided by law on any judgment.
(5) The Township's engineers and agents will inspect the company's
water and sanitary sewer system properties as promptly as possible
after the Stipulation is formally executed in order that the Township will
be assured that the properties are in the same state of repair and condition
as they were as of May 1, 1970. This inspection procedure will also
afford the company time to correct any items of disrepair that may be
determined to exist as a result of this inspection and thus assure a timely
completion of the transaction's closing.
As soon as the Township's Board of Supervisors has entered its
authorization of your execution•of this Stipulation on the Township's behalf,
and this I gather is slated to be considered at tomorrow night's meeting,
please let me know in order that we can execute the Stipulation and submit
it to the Dakota County district court for its approval and the entry of the
intended settlement judgment in this cause.
WRB/ef
cc: John J. Todd, Esq.
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Sincerely yours,
W illiam I{ . Busch
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS at a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors, Town of
Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota held on May 4th, 1971 at 7:30 o'clock P.M. at
the Town Hall at which all members of the Board were present; and
WHEREAS the town attorney did present a form of Stipulation for
Settlement in re the matter of Town of Eagan v. Cedar Grove Utilities Co.,
District Court Clerk's File No. 68550 which he recommended for approval and
execution by the Board of Supervisors; and
WHEREAS the town attorney did advise the Board of Supervisors that
a public hearing was required by law pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section
429.031 (as amended by Laws of 1967, Chapter 57) and that an appropriate date
would be no sooner than May 25th, 1971; and
WHEREAS a public informational meeting was held for the Cedar Grove
residents on April 21st, 1971 for the purpose of informing them of the arbitra-
tion award in said lawsuit concerning the acquisition of the sewer and water
utility systems by Town of Eagan from Cedar Grove Utilities Co. and further
informing them of the current status of the litigation, appeal and settlement
possibilities under the circumstances; and
WHEREAS the overwhelming majority of the Cedar Grove residents
present at said informational meeting did indicate their desire to end the
litigation and purchase said systems upon the most favorable basis possible;
NOW 'THEREFORE BE I'T HEREBY RESOLVED by Lhe Board o[ Supervisors of
the Town of Eagan as follows:
1. That Town of Eagan purchase Cedar Grove Utilities Co.'s utility -
sewer and water systems upon the terms and conditions of that certain said
Stipulations( Settlement, a copy of which shall be attached to this resolution
and spread upon the minutes of this meeting of the Board of Supervisors.
2. That Town of Eagan shall issue its general obligation bonds in
the approximate sum of $1,300,000.00 to pay for said systems, the cost of which
shall be assessed 100% against benefited property in the Cedar Grove area.
3. Pursuant to law the Town Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to
publish and mail notice of a public hearing regarding the purchase of said
utility systems and the issuance of bonds to pay for them to be held on the
day of May, 1971 at 7:30 o'clock P.M. at the Cedar Grove Elementary
School.
Dated: May 4th, 1971.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
TOWN OF EAGAN
By
ATTEST:
Alyce Bolke, Town Clerk
John J. Klein, Chairman
1. The price at which plaintiff shall purchase said systems (which
hereinafter means all of defendant's utility systems properties according to
said Exhibit "A") is the sum of $1,231,450.00.
2. Closing of the sale and purchase shall be no later than ninety (90)
days after the date of execution of this Stipulation and shall be held at the
Eagan Town Hall at 10:00 A. M. on the 90th day after the execution hereof or
such earlier date as shall be agreed upon by counsel for the parties.
3. Immediately upon execution of this Stipulation, same shall be filed with
the Clerk of the District Court along with an Order of the Honorable Robert J.
Breunig approving this Stipulation for Settlement. Thereafter counsel for
defendant shall deliver within a reasonable time abstracts of title covering all
of the real property owned by defendant which is a part of the subject sale for
examination by plaintiff's counsel together with any and all documents showing
satisfaction of mortgages, liens or other encumbrances including payment of all
real estate and personal property taxes through the year 1970 due and payable in
1971 and its pro rata share of the taxes for the year 1972. If these 1971 taxes
cannot be determined at the date of closing defendant agrees that an amount equal
to 125% of the pro rata share of the 1970 taxes due and payable in 1971 shall be
withheld by plaintiff from the purchase price which shall be applied to the payment
of the 1971 taxes when determined and the balance, if any, shall be paid over to
defendant. As to any such mortgages, liens or encumbrances as may now exist against
said properties due documentary satisfaction thereof shall be proffered by defendant
to plaintiff at or before closing date so that plaintiff shall receive said systems
free and clear of any and all claims, demands or encumbrances of any kind or nature
whatsoever. In the event there are any defects in title to said real properties
to be conveyed, defendant shall immediately upon notification clear title to the
satisfaction of plaintiff's counsel prior to closing date. If for any reason title
cannot be cleared prior to closing date, then in such event plaintiff may withhold
a reasonable sum to cover the legal expense and costs of making title good until
such time as title is fully cleared and then the withheld sum shall be turned over
4. Defendant warrants that the said systems are in as good and
operable condition as they were on May 1st, 1970 subject only to reasonable
wear and tear from usage since that date. Plaintiff shall have the right to .
inspect said systems immediately following the execution hereof in order to
determine that they, in fact, are in such good and operable condition. In the
event they are not, plaintiff shall immediately notify defendant in writing of
any defective condition in the systems whereupon defendant shall forthwith repair
or eliminate any such defects at its expense or offer the amount required to so
repair or eliminate such defects to plaintiff which shall then be deducted from
the purchase price a closing provided that either party shall have the right to
make any necessary repairs or eliminate defects during the period of this agree-
ment with the understanding nonetheless than defendant shall be solely responsible
at its cost to operate said systems up to and including closing date.
5. Upon closing defendant shall deliver to plaintiff a bill of sale
covering all of the personal property assets of the corporation according to said
Exhibit "A" and a warranty deed covering all of the real property described in
said Exhibit "A" subject to easements and restrictions of record together with
a quit claim assignment transferring easements, if any, which defendant may have
of benefit to said systems. Defendant shall freely join in the execution of any
and all documents which plaintiff may deem necessary to the effective and full
purchase of said systems and to comply with any loca, state or federal rule,
regulation or law pertaining to this transaction.
6. In consideration of and in exchange for the transfer of title to said
systems properties, plaintiff at closing shall deliver to defendant its certified
or cashier's check for the sum of $1,231,450„00 less any withheld funds, if any,
hereinabove contemplated.
7. Defendant does h reby expressly waive any and all d aim to interest
upon the amount of the arbitrators award in the sum of $1,256,450,00 from and
after the filing of the award and order and the entry of judgment in consideration
of the plaintiff waiving the taking of an appeal from said award. Defendant further
•
the Cedar Grove area from any and all claim, demand and cause of action for
or on account of any said rate increases.
8. It is understood and agreed that this is strictly an asset purchase
and that plaintiff in no manner whatsoever assumes or agrees to pay any liabilities
or obligations of defendant corporation up to and including and after the date of
this purchase and that defendant hereby expressly agrees to hold plaintiff harmless
therefrom.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto and their respective counsel have
hereunto subscribed their names this _day of May, 1971, at Town of Eagan,
Minnesota.
TOWN OF EAGAN
By
Chairman of Board of Supervisors
Attest:
Clerk
STALLAND & HAUGE
By.
Luther M. Stalland
Attorneys for Plaintiff
2340 Dain Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
By
Its President
And
Its Secretary
William R. Busch
Attorney for Defendant
803 Degree of Honor Building
St. Paul, Minnesota
STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF DAKOTA FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
TOWN OF EAGAN,
Plaintiff,
vs.
STIPULATION
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO., a Minnesota File No. 68550
corporation,
Defendant.
WHEREAS, the above -entitled action relating to the buy-out of all
of defendant's utility systems properties has culminated in the filing of the
Court's Order confirming the award of arbitrators (dated February 19, 1971) on
the 29th day of March, 1971 in the principal sum of $1,256,450.00; and
WHEREAS, plaintiff has determined by appropriate resolution of its
Board of Supervisors not to appeal from this Order or on any other grounds or
from any other appealable matter; and
WHEREAS, the parties have negotiated a settlement of this entire matter,
subject of the pending litigation, in the manner and upon the terms and conditions
as hereinafter specified for the purchase of all of defendant's properties con-
sisting of sewer and water utility systems serving the Cedar Grove area in the
Town of Eagan; and
WHEREAS, the parties, by and through their respective counsel, Luther
M. Stalland, Esq., counsel for plaintiff, and William R. Busch, Esq., and John
J. Todd, Esq., counsel for defendant, have hereby reduced said settlement to the
terms and conditions stated in this Stipulation;
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED that plaintiff shall
purchase from defendant all of defendant's utility systems properties consisting
of cownr and water utility evttE me cnrv; no thn C.,.io,- r -_• �---
1. The price at which plaintiff shall purchase said systems (which
hereinafter means all of defendant's utility systems properties according to
said Exhibit "A") for the sum of $1,231,450.00.
2. Closing of the sale and purchase shall be no later than ninety
(90) days after the date of execution of this Stipulation and shall be held at the
Eagan Town Hall at 10:00 o'clock A. M. on the 90th day after the execution hereof
or such earlier date as shall be agreed upon by counsel for the parties.
3. Immediately upon execution of this Stipulation, same shall be filed
with the Clerk of the District Court along with an Order of the Honorable Robert
J. Breunig approving this Stipulation for Settlement. Thereafter counsel for
defendant shall deliver within a reasonable time abstracts of title covering all of
the real property owned by defendant which is a part of the subject sale for
examination by plaintiff's counsel together with any and all documents showing
satisfaction of mortgages, liens or other encumbrances including payment of all
real estate and personal property taxes through the year 1970 due and payable in
1971 and its pro rata share of the taxes for the year 1972. If these 1971 taxes
cannot be determined at the date of closing defendant agrees than an amount equal
to 125% of the 1970 taxes due and payable in 1971 shall be withheld by plaintiff
from the purchase price which shall be applied to the payment of the 1971 taxes
when determined and the balance, if any, shall be paid over to defendant. In lieu
of such documents proof that any such mortgages, liens or encumbrances as may exist
against said properties shall be proffered by defendant to plaintiff at or before
closing date so that plaintiff shall receive said systems free and clear of any and
all claims, demands or encumbrances or any kind or nature whatsoever. In the event
there are any defects in title to said real properties to be conveyed, defendant
shall immediately upon notification clear title to the satisfaction of plaintiff's
counsel prior to closing date. If for any reason title cannot be cleared prior to
closing date, then in such event plaintiff may withhold a reasonable sum to cover
the legal expense and costs of making title good until such time as title is fully
cleared and then the withheld sum shall be turned over to defendant or paid to
4. Defendant warrants that the said systems are in as good and
operable condition as they were on May 1st, 1970 subject only to reasonable
wear and tear from usage since that date. Plaintiff shall have the right to
inspect said systems immediately following the execution hereof in order to
determine that they, in fact, are in such good and operable condition. In the
event they do not, plaintiff shall immediately notify defendant in writing of
any defective condition in the systems whereupon defendant shall forthwith repair
or eliminate any such defects at its expense or offer the amount required to so
repair or eliminate such defects to plaintiff which shall then be deducted from
the purchase price at closing provided that either party shall have the right to
make any necessary repairs or eliminate defects during the period of this agree-
ment with the understanding nonetheless that defendant shall be solely responsible
at its cost to operate said systems up to and including closing date.
5. Upon closing defendant shall deliver to plaintiff a bill of sale
covering all of the personal property assets of the corporation according to said
Exhibit "A" and a warranty deed covering all of the real property described in
said Exhibit "A" subject to easements and restrictions of record together with
a quit claim assignment transferring easements, if any, which defendant may have
of benefit to said systems. Defendant shall freely join in the execution of any
and all documents which plaintiff may deem necessary to the effective and full
purchase of said systems and to comply with any local, state or federal rule,
regulation or law pertaining to this transaction.
6. In consideration of and in exchange for the transfer of title to
said systems properties, plaintiff at closing shall deliver to defendant its
certified or cashier's check for the sum of $1,231,450.00 less any withheld funds,
if any, hereinabove contemplated.
7. Defendant does hereby expressly waive any and all claim to interest
upon the amount of the arbitrator's award in the sum of $1,256,450.00 from and
after the filing of the award and order and the entry of judgment in consideration
of the plaintiff waiving the taking of an appeal from said award. Defendant further
releases plaintiff and each and every resident serviced by said systems in
the Cedar Grove area from any and all claim, demand and cause of action for or
on account of any said rate increases.
8, It is understood and agreed that this is strictly an asset purchase
and that plaintiff in no manner whatsoever assumes or agrees to pay any liabilities
or obligations of defendant corporation up to and including and after the date of
this purchase and that defendant hereby expressly agrees to hold plaintiff harmless
therefrom.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto and their respective counsel have
hereunto subscribed their names this day of May, 1971, at Town of Eagan,
Minnesota.
TOWN OF EAGAN
By
Chairman of Board of Supervisors
Attest:
Clerk
STALLAND & HAUGE
By
Luther M. Stalland
Attorneys for Plaintiff
2340 pain Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
By
Its
And
Its
Wil'ian R. Busch
Attorney for Defendant
803 Degree of Honor Building
•
4
• %
REPORT
ON
TOIN OF EAGAN VS. CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
HISTORY & BACKGROUI!D
In April of 1959 the Town Board entered into water and sewer fran-
chise agreements with Cedar Grove Utilities Company for a period of twenty-five
(25) years whereby this private company would provide water and sewer service
to the proposed Cedar Grove development. At that time the population of Eagan
was perhaps 2,500 and the Board did not feel the Town was in any position to
either install or operate central utility systems, much less attempt to finance
them for an undeveloped area. The alternative if the franchises had not been
granted would have been individual wells and septic systems which in a poten-
tially concentrated area was felt to be unwise.
At the time the Cedar Grove developers proposed the franchises, they
assured the Board that the cost of the systems would be borne by the investors
and by private borrowing and would not be included in the cost of the homes
except to the partial extent of a connection charge made against each home for
hookup to the systems.
Under the franchises the utility company is permitted to make reason-
able charges for monthly service which presumably and permissibly includes a
profit for the utility company. Undoubtedly a portion of these charges has
been applied by the utility company to amortize the cost of the systems.
In 1966 the Board of Supervisors began discussing the possibility of
purchasing the Cedar Grove water and sewer systems because of the anticipated
growth in the area and the beginning of township -wide utility systems. These
discussions culminated in the Board authorizing the Town engineer, fiscal
consultant and attorney to begin preliminary negotiations pursuant to the
water and sewer franchise agreements for the purchase of the systems.
By the spring of 1967 a preliminary recommendation was made to the
Board of Supervisors that these systems be purchased for a price of $999,500.00
and on this basis a public meeting was held for the residents of Cedar Grove
on July 19th, 1937 to discus the proposed purchase. The majority of the
residents felt the price was too high and consequently the Board of Supervisors,
in deference to the majority of the residents, rejected the negotiated purchase.
Thereafter the matter remained dormant for about a year until Cedar
Grove Utilities Company proposed a rate increase which activated the residents
to reconsider acquisition of the systems. Temporarily the Board of Supervisors
rejected the rate increase and put a freeze on it until the Board could again
consider acquisition.
On February 27th, 19G9 the Board held another public meeting for the
residents of Cedar Grove to determine what they wished to do in view of the
request for increased sewer and water rates. The consensus was that the systems
should be purchased but through the procedure of arbitration. The Board author-
ized this procedure and the appointment of Robert C. Bell of St. Paul as its
arbitrator.
Cedar Grove Utilities Co., upon being advised of the Town's demand
for arbitration, refused to appoint its arbitrator and to arbitrate on the
ground that the purchase price had been negotiated and there was nothing left
for the Town to do but purchase the systems as previously contemplated. The
Town rejected this theory because the Board of Supervisors had not formally
approved the purchase agreement and thereupon commenced a lawsuit to force
Cedar Grove Utilities Co. to arbitrate.
The parties thereafter appeared for trial of the arbitration issues
before the District Court, Dakota County the result of which was a stipulation
-2-
approved by the Court whereby the parties would go to arbitration with Mr. Bell
as the Town's arbitrator for the first of two phases of the case, namely, to
determine the reasonable market value of the systems but without regard to any
claimed set -offs for grants-in-aid (so-called) or any other credits.
Following the order of the Court, each of the parties appointed its
arbitrators, Robert C. Bell and Al Kennedy, both St. Paul attorneys, respective-
ly for the Town and the company, and they in turn appointed John Daubney,
another St. Paul attorney and former mayor of St. Paul, as the third member
and chairman of the Board of Arbitration. Thereafter lengthy proceedings were
held before the Board of Arbitrators to determine the reasonable market value
of the systems which resulted in the filing of the Board's report and arbitra-
tion award on February 19th, 1971. The amount of the award by the majority of
the Board was the sum of $1,256,450.00. Subsequently Mr. Bell filed a minority
report on March 17th, 1971 stating the value of the systems to be no more than
$250,000.00.
Meanwhile both plaintiff and defendant made motions- plaintiff Town
to permit the taking of additional evidence of set -offs and defendant company
to have a date set for closing and payment of the award. The Court denied the
Town's motion and set a date for closing on the basis of the majority award
for September 15th, 1971. This order was entered !larch 29th, 1971 and the
time for appeal is now running.
ALTERNATIVES
At this time the Town has the following alternatives:
1. Appeal from the award and/or various orders of the
District Court.
2. Attempt to renegotiate the purchase of the systems.
3. Accept. the award and prepare for the appropriate bond
issue.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
TOWN OF EAGAN
4-20-71
L1•iS
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
PROPOSED WATER E SEWER SYSTEM ACQUISITION
ESTIMATED COSTS
A. ESTIMATED ACQUISITION COST $1,300,000
B. ESTIMATED COST PER UNIT
1. 900 sewer @ $ 710
2. 1,070 water @ 620
C. ESTIMATED PROPERTY OWNER'S COST
(Assumes 100% assessed).
1. Sewer Assessment @ $ 710
2. Water Assessment @ 620
3. Total Assessment @ $1,330
$ 639,000
663,400
$1,302,400
Assessment may be paid in full or over a period of time 4eheriding
maturities.
D. ESTIMATED PROPERTY OWNER'S ANNUAL COST IF ASSESSMENT SPREAD
20 Yn. Pan
1. First Assessment Installment (Includes Int.) $172.90
2. Last Assessment Installment (Includes Int.) 71.82
3. Average Assessment Installment (Includes Int.)( 11Z.36)
on bond
25 YA. Phan 30 Yn. PEan
$150.73
( 99.,0)
$159.60
37.4s
( 108.53)
)4. A k fi Note: It is estimated that the combined average monthly sewer and water
service charge will be $6.50.
/ -fay e r
LAW OFFICES
STALLAND & HAUGE
4340 DAIN TnWLR
MINNIC*POLze. MINNi6OTA 36409
PHONs, 836-9841
Board of Supervisors
Town of Eagan
Dakota County, Minnesota
Gentlemen:
LC[RZR N. 6rALt.pD
rAcro 11. Uara■
ORORO■ H. HOLY
August 24, 1970
9908 SIBL=T MsMORIAL tiIOHWAT
KAOAN TOWNSHIP
ST, PAUL, MINNL90TA 65111
P11ON17 464-4914
Re: Town of Eagan vs. Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
You have requested a status report on the above litigation which
is currently pending before a Board of Arbitration and the Dakota County
District Court.
As you will recall, at the request of a group of residents in
Cedar Grove you directed me to proceed with arbitration pursuant to the
terms of the franchise agreement whereupon I notified the company which
then refused to arbitrate because we had appointed Mr. Robert Bell as
our arbitrator. At this juncture I commenced a lawsuit in the Dakota County
District Court to compel the company to arbitrate. After the matter had
been tried to the Court in two different stages, the parties, with the aid
and consent of the Court, worked out a stipulation of agreement by the terms
of which the current arbitration proceedings are being conducted.
Because of the unanticipated length of testimony, the complexities
of the evidence and the numerous rulings required to be made by the three
member Board of Arbitration, not to mention the difficulties becaue of other
committments of getting the Board, the attorneys and the many witnesses to-
gether at the same time, the trial has been held in progressive stages,
several days at a time.
As of now both parties have put in their case -in -chief with the
exception of 2 or 3 more witnesses. After this each party will no doubt have
some rebuttal evidence to put in and then there will probably be oral argument
and perhaps this followed by the submission of written briefs. As things are
now scheduled the trial will be reconvened September 16th. Then after argu-
ments and the filing of further briefs, if any, the Board of Arbitrators will
have to weigh all the evidence, meet privately and make their final decision
as to what reasonable market value of the utility systems is under the "willing
seller -willing buyer" concept as applied to condemnation cases in the State of
Minnesota. The decision of the Board then must be submitted in writing to
the District Court.
•
Board of Supervisors
Town of Eagan
August 24, 1970
Page Two
At this point the District Court will schedule another hearing
before it to determine, first, whether or not the plaintiff (Town of Eagan)
should be entitled to submit further evidence to the Board of Arbitrators
regarding grants-in-aid of construction of the utility system and any other
credits or set -offs plaintiff may wish to present. If the Court decides this
question in the affirmative, then it muct, secondly, decide whether or not
Mr. Bell is qualified to sit further as one of the arbitrators to hear this
evidence and make the further decision as to whether the price to be paid
for the systems should be less than the market value determination because
of these set -offs.
If the Court decides the first question in the affirmative, the
parties will then go back before the Board of Arbitration and sumbit further
evidence, pro and con, of these set -offs. Depending upon how the Court rules
on the second question, Mr. Bell may or may not continue on the Board. If
he does not, plaintiff will have to appoint a new member presumably to take
his place.
If, however, the Court rules negatively on the first question
(in which event the second question would be moot), then the Court will
make its Order confirming the arbitration award. At this juncture the
parties both either decide to accept the award or either party has the right
to appeal the award and, in plaintiffs case, the negative ruling on the first
question.
In other words, following the Court's final order, unless the parties
agree that the price is right and the systems are bought, both parties have
preserved their right of appeal on all matters. This appeal, of course, would
be to the State Supreme Court.
As to the time element, I can only guess that a final order of the
District Court is not likely before the first of next year. If the matter is
to be appealed to the Supreme Court, it would prgJ�ably be a year from now
before it could be resolved. ���`
LMS/cic
very t
to
Ze r and
L►w Orrzcza
STALLAND 8C HAUGE
SUITE S34o, DAIS Tow■
Mlillfs►TOLIs, Mux.Reo7► 5540E
Lams» M. ST►LuarD
Pws H. tboaos
Gammon H. Hosr
March 23, 1970
Board of Supervisors
Town of Eagan
Dakota County, Minnesota
ass& CODS GaG
.toi.*Se •Gala
Re: Town of Eagan vs. Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Gentlemen:
On March 19th Defendant's Motion to amend the Court's Findings
of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order for Judgment was heard by the
Court. In brief the result of that hearing is this.
In an attempt to get the show on the road, so to speak, we
tried to arrive at some solution whereby we could avoid running up to
the Supreme Court at this time, coming back down again, and starting
all over again. The plan is simply that the defendant would agree to
Bell being appointed arbitrator for the sole purpose of determining reasonable
market value of the systems, but the arbitration panelw uld not be permitted
to hear evidence on nor consider grants in aid at this point. We would then
go back to the District Court at which time the Court would determine
whether or not Town of Eagan should be permitted to 1.) put in evidence of
grants in aid, and if the Court decided affirmatively in this regard, then
2.) whether or not Bell should remain on the panel as an arbitrator to
consider this evidence and make a determination which would include grants
in aid. If the Court denied the second step on plaintiff's part (which I
am certain the Court will do on the ground that the franchise agreements
only permit the sole issue of reasonable value to be determined by the
arbitrators, which is what I have said all along) then the plaintiff would
have the right to appeal from that order to determine whether or not we
have the right to arbitration on the question of grants in aid and also
whether or not Bell is qualified to act as an arbitrator. The means by
which this would be accomplished is that the parties would enter into a
stipulation waiving any jurisdictional defect so that during these arbitration
proceedings we could again appear in District Court even though we might only
be at the halfway point; other wise there is a question in the Court's mind
whether it can make any ruling at that juncture.
The alternative to all this is simply to submit the matter on
our arguments over the motion and let the Court decide what to do from this
point on.
I have discussed this matter with Mr. Bell and he is inclined to
take a shot at the first proposition, that is being appointed as an
Board of Supervisors
Town of Eagan
March 23, 1970
Page Two
arbitrator to consider the sole issue of reasonable value. He has the
feeling that ip determining reasonable value the question of grants in
aid could be brought through the back door on the basis that reasonable
value can also be arrived at by determining return on investment which,
in turn, depends upon how much actually Cedar Grove utilities Co. has
actually invested in the company as against the rates that are being
charged.
Since, unfortunately, this whole thing has become more or less
a political football, I feel that I should make no recommendation as to
which way to go and leave the decision entirely up to the Board. I will
be out of town this week but you should confer on this and I can discuss
it further with you the first part of next week, after the first of April.
Yours very truly,
Luther M. Stalland
LMS/cic
LAW QPr1cEr
STALLAND & HAI.GE
SUITE Q f-,o, JAIM Tower
MIwwEAPOI.IN, MI'(P[RNOTA 56-IOW
LI,'Tw711/ M. STALLAND
Pain. H. Haaor
Board of Supervisors
Eagan Township
Minnesota
Dear Sir:
March 13, 1969
RE: Acquisition of Cedar Grove
Utilities company
MIRA CODR tRY
PRONE 396-11391
The question concerning the acquisition of the Cedar Grove Utilities Company
by the Town of Ragan bas been asked by the Board. As you recall we have
discussed several possibilities for the acquisition of same including
condemnation, u ler M. 8. A. 300.03 etc. and arbitration under the
franchise agreements and M. S. A. 572.
You will also recall that a special bill passed the Minnesota LsgislaSsrs
in 1967 giving Eagan the power to condemn water works utilities etc.
under franchise by the town. M. S. A. 300.05 provides that the Hoard:
. . at the end of any period of five years from the granting of a
franchise for the operation of . . . water works, gas works, or any
electrical Light, heat or power works when authorised so to do by a
2/3 majority of the votes cast upon the question, may acquire and
thereafter operate the name upon paying to the corporation or person *waft
the franchise the value of such property, to be ascertained in the alaaMOT
provided by law for acquiring property under the right of eminent donate,
upon petition of its governing body.Su..h vote shall be taken at a special
election called for the purpose and hell within three months next
preceding the expiration of the five year period."
The date of the Eagan water works and sewerage franchise agreements viththe
Cedar Grove Utilities Company wigs April 20, 1959 and it would therefore
appear that April 20, 1969 would be the end of the second five year period.
If condemnation is the method determined by the Board for acquisition of the
system it would appear that a vote by the necessary parties should be held
prior to April 20th. On the other hand if the arbitration method is used
the franchise agreements spell out the method of arbitration end M. S. A, 572
concerning arbitration would then be implement As to condemnation o a franchised
sewerage system, M. S. A. 115, 117 and 412.221 appear to give the town authority.
Yours very truly,
Paul H. Hauge
PHH:daw
LAW OFFICES
STALLAND Inc HAIlGE
SUITE 2340, VAIN TOWER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNE SOTA 5E402
LurnER M. STALLAXD
PAtn H. HAtjor
Board of Supervisors
Eagan TownshLp
Minnesota
Dear Sir:
March 18, 1969
RE: Acquisition of Cedar Grove
Utilities company
AREA CODE 6t2
PIIOYP, 276-6391
The question con erning the acquisition of the Cedar Grove Utilities Company
by the Town of Eagan has been asked by the Board. As you recall we have
discussed several possibilities for the acquisition of same including
condemnation, u ler M. S. A. 300.03 etc. and arbitration under the
franchise agreements and M. S. A. 57_.
You will also recall that a special bill passed the Minnesota Legislature
in 1967 giving Eagan the power to contemn water works utilities etc.
under franchise by the town. M. S. A. 300.05 provides that tha Board:
. at the end of any period of five years from the granting of a
franchise for the operation of . . . water works, gas works, or any
electrical light, heat or power works when authorized so to do by a
2/3 majority of the votes cast upon the question, may acquire and
thereafter operate the same upon paying to the cnrporation or person craning
the franchise the value of such property, to be ascertained in the manner
provided by law for acquiring property under the right of eminent domain,
upon petition of its governing body. Sueh vote shall be taken at a special
election for the purpose and held within three months next
preceding the expiration of the Live year period."
The date of the Ea*an water works and sewerage franchise agreements withthe
Cedar Grove Utilities Company was April 20, 1959 and it_ would therefore
appear that April 20, 1969 would be the end of the second five year period.
If condemnation is the method determined by the Board for acquisition of the
syateat it would appear that a vote by the necessary parties should be held
prior to April 20th. On the other hand if the arbitration method is used
the franchise agreements spell out the method of arbitration and M. S. A 572
concerning arbitration would then be implemented. As to condemnation of a franchised
sewerage system, M. S. A. 115, 117 and 412.221 appear to give the town authority.
Yours very truly,
Paul M. Hauge
PHH: d ew
2223 Dodge Street
Omaha, Nebraska 68102
Telephone 402-346-7600
I 0
ill Peoples
Natural Gas Division of
Northern Natural Gas Company
Town Of
Cedar Grove, Minnesota
• Rate per Mcf per month for natural gas billed after
December 14, 1968:
First .5 Mcf • $2.00
Next 4.5 Mcf @ 1.30
Next 45. Mcf @ .98
Next 50. Mcf @ .88
Excess
Over 100. Mcf @ .80
Minimum dill : The minimum monthly bill shall be $2.00
This rate schedule shall apply to firm gas service for
customers whose normal requirement does not exceed 1000 cubic feet
per hour and such service shall not be subject to curtailment or
interruption.
•
•
•
Peoples
Natural Gas Division or
Northern Natural Gas Company
November 12, 1968
Effective December 15, 1968, Peoples Natural Gas will increase
its interruptible and general commercial and domestic firm rates.
Attached to this letter is a cony of the revised rate schedule for the
commercial and domestic fire customers in your community. Customers in
your community who are on an interruptible rate schedule will be contacted
individually so as to process the necessary contracts.
This will be Peoples first rate increase in more than seven years.
During these seven years, we have been able to give the typical domestic
customer two refunds amounting to approximately $8.50 and one rate reduction
of $1.50 annually. This was possible by improving operating procedures
during a period when the consumer price index rose 13%, and the cost of
gas at the wellhead increased approximately 20%.
As we near the end of 1968, however, inflationary pressures can
no longer be resisted if we are to continue the quality of service that our
customers desire and we as a Company are unwilling to reduce. For example,
since 1962 Peoples' labor costs have increased 39%, construction costs
26%, and interest expense 33%. Additionally, our pipeline supplier has
filed with the Federal Power Commission for a rate increase to its utility
customers which will increase our cost of gas.
Even though we are forced to raise our retail rates, it is rewarding
to know that natural gas will continue to he the most economical and best
fuel available.
►:e are pleased to serve your community and look forward to our
continuing relationship. Should you have any questions regarding this,
please contact your local representative or the undersigned.
P.PR:dlb
Att.
Yours very truly,
Robert P. Raasch
Vice President F,
Regional Manager
Peoples Natural Gas
Peoples
Natural Gas Division of
Northern Natural Gas Company
November 12, 1968
•
Effective December 15, 1968, Peoples Natural Gas will increase
its interruptible and general commercial and domestic firm rates.
Attached to this letter is a cony of the revised rate schedule for the
commercial and domestic firm customers in your community. Customers in
your community whe are on an interruptible rate schedule will be contacted
individually so as to process the necessary contracts.
This will be Peoples first rate increase in more than seven years.
During these seven years, we have been able to give the typical domestic
customer two refunds amounting to approximately $8.50 and one rate reduction
of $1.50 annually. This was possible by improving operating procedures
during a period when the consumer price index rose 13%, and the cost of
gas at the wellhead increased approximately 20%.
As we near the end of 1968, however, inflationary pressures can
no longer be resisted if we are to continue the quality of service that our
customers desire and we as a Company are unwilling to reduce. For example,
since 1962 Peoples' labor costs have increased 39%, construction costs
26%, and interest expense 33%. Additionally, our pipeline supplier has
filed with the federal Power Commission for a rate increase to its utility
customers which will increase our cost of gas.
Even though we are forced to raise our retail rates, it is rewarding
to know that natural gas will continue to be the most economical and best
fuel available.
1'.e are pleased to serve your community and look forward to our
continuing relationshij. Should you have any questions regarding this,
please contact your local representative or the undersigned.
•
Robert P. Raasch
Vice President f,
Regional Manager
Peoples Natural Gas
RPR:dlb
Att.
Yours very truly,
l.Aw Orricvs
STALLAND LAC HAUCGE
SUITE 2840, RAND TowEi
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 554012
LUTHER M. STAL-LAND
PAUL H. HAUOE
Mry 3, 1968
Mr. John Klein, Chairman
Eagan Tema Board o supervisors
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Kagan Township, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Klein:
AURA COO= 612
Psoxr. 806-61361
RE: Cedar Grove Water end Beeper
Plant Acquisitions
Following last month's meeting at which the Cedar Grove citizen's
group presented a resolution requesting tha Town to consider the
hiriug of outside counsel to procure the Cedar G_ove water and
serer systems, I have attempted to determine, at your request,
what has taken place in other situations in the metropolitan area
similar to ours.
As you recall, the Cede_ Grove citizens' group recommended
hiring Mr. Robert Dell, St. Pcul attorney, to advise anJ represent
Eagan Township with respect to the curet rates being charged
Cede Grove residents for saver sad water and to ultimately take such
action a:1 would procure t:1e systems for the Township from Cedar
Grove Utilities Company.
At the 'Meet I should like to state that I bare known Mr. Bell
for a der of years. He enjoys a fine reputation and the respect
of his csllegues in the profession. Mr. Hell, as stated by the
Cedar Grove citizens group, has had experience in dealing with the
acquisition of private utilities by local smnicipalities.
In an effort to correlate other similar situations with Eagan's
in this regard I made inquiry o' various utility acquisitions
in this area in the past several years. As suggested by the Cedar
Grove citizens group I checked out the Roseville. Mendota Heights and
Inver Grove cituatioss. Categorically, those situations appear as
follows:
I_Aw OFFICES
STALI.AND 8c HAUGE
SU/Te 2840, RAND Towel'
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA lits $o2
LUTIIER M. STALLAND
PAUI. 11. HAUOE
!:. y a , 1968
Mr. John Klein, Chairmen
Eagan Town Boa d o ._ Supe ry i s o r
3795 Pilot Knob Rood
Eagan Township, Minnesota
near Mr. Klein:
AREA Cone 612
PHONr 8416-6t16t
RE: Cedar Grove Water LM Sewer
Plant Acquisitions
Following last month's meeting at which the Cedar Grove citizen's
group presented a resolution requesting tha Town to consider the
hiring of outside counsel to procure the Cedar Grove water and
sever systems, I have attempted to determine, et you request,
what hen taken place in other situations in the metropolitan area
similar to ours.
LA you recall, the Coda. Grove citizens' group recommended
hiring Mr. Robert Bell. St. Paul attorney, to advise an] represent
Eagan Township With respect to the curent rates being charged
Cede Grove residents for •ewer and water and to ultimately take such
action a would procure the systems for the Township from Cedar
Grove Utilities Company.
At the outset I should like to etate that I have known Mx. Bell
fora member of years. Be enjoys a fine reputation and they respect
of his collegues in the profession. Mr. Bell, as stated by the
Cedar Grove citizens group, has had experience in dealing with the
acquisition of private utilities by local municipalities.
In an effort to correlate other similar situations with Eagan's
in this regard I made inquiry or various utility acquisitions
in this area in the past several years. As suggested by the Cedar
Grove citizens group I cheered out the Roseville, Mendota Heights and
Inver Grove :situations. Categorically, those Situations appear as
follows:
4 r
Page 2
Kr. John Klein:
1. liosevilloitinassota Veter Coepaey
_his involved the buy-out of a water sybtem. The village's contention
wen that the system van worth only $13,000 is the grunts in aid (so -
celled) were excluded from the claim of value of the system se sw im-
taiaed the private comport. The utility company claimed the system
to he worth upwards of $100,000 since pureueat to their franchise
agreement they were entitled to the reasonable value of the system.
After preiista.nery litigation arbitrators were appointed asxl en award
was made totaling $120, 400 whica included c portion ot the grants in
aid but wee somsrrbet leas then cost less depreciation.
2. Meta P,Libta - Minn! ly Hi 1 is
The only this. I could determine about this is that tat private eweersbip
at one point was contested but n' buy-out by the Villoee of Mendota
Hsights has occurred.
3. rover Grove - South 0 oyy iitilitiea Coemps y
The Vi1ige of liver Grove wider a franchise agreeisreet determined to
buy out th., water system. The Village appraised the -_oat leas
depreciation or the system at something over $500,000. In
purchase negotiations tba uti] ity company asked $822,n40 which the
V i 1 lage reflood to pay. SubsequellI1y the Coo r t ordered the mma t ter
into rbitration alma thereafter a settlement was made for $400,000. 1---
Part of the consideratin in reechieg this lower figure, which of course ice'
included greats in aid, was that parts of the s ;tom were not in good
repair which fact was known to both parties.
ate unaware of any other atmmi la simui tions. It may be meted that in
each of the two acquisitions outlined, grants in aid ve_e taken into
account mend sot ded:cted free the final perches. prig.
litS: daw
Yours very truly,
Luther lie Sta l land
'rge 2
Ht. . Dhn Klein:
I. lioaevl l le-*finneaota Compagx
This involved the buy-out of e water sy.,tea. 1'he vi is Se's coote►ntion
was that the: system ura uoi tls t iy $' �,:10(� i_ th 1;,.Lnts in sid (sa-
c.ailed) were excluded from the cl.ain1 of value of the ovstewl co main -
the lrivote coalpi ny. the utility a sop; ry Himel the system
to be worth upwards of $tt0,00 since ptcrsucnt to them franchise
.,i;,1-ament they ware entitled to the _e.socuble vciue the system.
4:ftei preliminary litigation art-itretors were appointed aa'i en award
t:r.^ made tat..iiag $1:O,00(.., whic.. inc:iu•'ed a portion o the gents in
aid but vas somewhat less than cost less depreciation.
clendota Heights - Frieh1 iI bills
Tiu Daly chime I could iete►rm_r about this is that time private ownership
at one !, s 7.nt vrF route^ t • t.c t t.uy_ ut by the Vi' t: !•e or nen,dots
Heights h..s occurred.
J.Inver Grove - South G. ova Uti iities Company
The Vil '::►.;r of Inter Greve usdei a franchise egreets,:et {eterrlrted to
buy out t': water sy, teal. mho ' l ..r gr appraised the +"t ' -
deprec is tLon oi the mystem at <::+ iethi r over $500 , Grt. , . In
tircit: tr negotiation.; th • uC! irr _ 'rr'riy ask•," $c ". -eli: h the
Village refuaeft to pay. :2uhsecv7ntty the Crra t orOerc'' ths' sitter
into rraitration and therebatter s'ttleseat was mOc :or $4 )O,000. i
Pert o the constieratin in . er c!ii.ng this lower ttgvr. , whicb of course sue'
in_'ude. ; ntr. in ail, .•f,r• th.c.t a3 ten - , rc trt in good
repair which fact was known to both ,^.rrttes.
i em sinews a e nt any other siai _. a iruat tiopa. It mr.y he note- that in
e: ch cthe t--r . cc+uiaitiona oftline►& gr: nt5 in ail to en into
account amd not deducted from Ow final purchase price.
y mrs very truly.,
Luther H. Stella&
GL enview 1-6478
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
3216 SOUTH GROVE LANE
Mrs. Alice Boelke
Eagan Township
St. Paul, Minnesota 55111
SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
January 31, 1968
Dear Mrs. Boelke;
Thru January 31, 1968 the following are the 81 persons on the Eagan sewer system.
Possession Date
7/14/67
9/20/67
9/29/67
9/15/67
x 12/27/67
11/29/67
9/1/67
9/30/66
3/13/67
10/13/66
10/3/66
1/6/67
9/22/67
12/16/66
5/26/67
1/4/67
11/28/67
8/22/67
2/14/67
5/26/67
10/11 /67
6/15/67
11/23/66
1/13/67
6/16/67
3/17/67
.9/27/66
9/23/66
4/4/67
2/24/67
,. 8/1/67
2/24/67
8/25/66
-9/13/66
1/17/67
12/2/66
4/20/67
1/12/66
9,/1/67
9/9/66
Wayne Payne
Carlos R. McKee
Richard D. Thomas
Gregory J. Bezidcek
James M. Dunlap
David G. Darling
Robert J. Kennedy
David A. Witsoe
Patrick L. Veness
Peter J. Pustorino
Arthur R. Hayden
James A. Parks
Randy L. Daly
Richard E. Nelson
James L. Crimmins
Randall R. Swanson
Thomas H. Barfuss
Douglas M. Griller
Terence G. Halverson
Patrick J. Geagan
Merle D. Parker
Charles Rylander
Franklin D. Jones
Roger W. Johnson
James Visnovec
Cyril G. Bardson
William A. Morgens
Jeorge E. Woodis, Jr.
Glen E. Limstrom
John R. Anderson
Ronald C. Johnson
Harlon Tackett
James E. Mac Donald
Kermit C. Maland
Robert H. Knoof
Kenneth J. Robieson
Ronald C. Larson
Albert D. Brecke
Zane A. Younger
Clarence E. Dahlberg
3917
3947
3953
3959
1900
1908
1916
1817
120
1.821
3948
3949
3954
3955
3966
3901
3906
3912
3918
3919
3925
3030
3936
3942
3943
3948
3949
3955
3961
3966
3972
3973
3979
3984
3985
3990
3991
4011
4016
4017
Beryl Read
Beryl Read
Beryl Read
Beryl Reed
Carnelian Lane
Carnelian Lane
Carnelian Lane
Cinnabar Court
Cinnabar Court
Cinnabar Court
Cinnabar Drive
Cinnabar Drive
Cinnabar Drive
Cinnabar Drive
Cinnabar Drive
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
7.
,,7
GL enview 1-6478
8/11/67
11/29/67
5/25/67
8/12/66
11/11/66
--12/16/66
9/9/66
11/3/67
10/13/67
8/5/66
6/9/67
8/18/67
4/28./67
4/2S/67
4/29/67
4/5/67
1.12/21/67
2/27/67
11/15/66
10/28/66
12/14/66
12/22/66
10/7/66
11/17/66
11,/23/66
10/3/66
10/14/66
1/9/67
10/20/67
12/16/66
10/3/66
6/22/67
8/25/67
10/13/67
)12/26/67
11/10/67
x12/8/67
7/2 4/67
10/27/67
10/27/67
10/27/67
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
3216 SOUTH GROVE LANE
Norman Hagen
James M. Watschke
Ronald H. Martinson
Lester D. Myhrer
Gene A. Knutson
William K. Edwards
Donald J. Sampers
Richard A. Olsen
Richard O. Hart
William B. Hann, Jr.
Daniel E. Engstrom
Karl A. Tittl
Robert B. McDaniel
Gerald J. Romine
John C. Hickey
Robert F. Moore
Richard W. Thorne
Ralph L. M„ Bert
Robert G. Bull, Jr.
Robert +4. Jones
Richard D. Morris
Gerald A. Triggs
David G. Ashfeld
Joseph P. Vanyo
Jerry A. Hester
Richard R. Koellner
Manley A. Haugen
Robert R. Caylor
desley A. Driest
Larry R. Hill
James R. Halseth
Robert M. Plain
Richard W. Glynn
John C. Nord
Duane A. Ose
Richard D. Barnett
Donald J. Clough
Vernon J. Kleindl
John J. White
Gary R. Ensminger
John F. Ramberg
4023
4022
4035
4041
4047
4046
4047
4052
4064
4065
3942
3943
3966
3972
3973
3978
3979
3985
1801
1805
1409
1412
1013
1416
1 417
1820
1821
125
1 128
1329
1833
1837
1849
1853
1912
1913
1916
1917
1925
1928
1936
* SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Mica Trail
Olivine Drive
Olivine Drive
Olivine Drive
Olivine Drive
Olivine Drive
Pumice Court
Pumice Court
Pumice Court
Pumice Lane
Pumice Lane
Pumice Lane
Pumice Lane - q.33
Pumice Lane
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Turquoise
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
Trail
I will send monthly the names and addresses of persons on the Eagan sewer system ss
they take possession.
Joanne Polta
GL enview 1-6478
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
3216 SOUTH GROVE LANE * .'r SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
December 8, 1966
Eagan Town Board
Eagan Township
St. Paul, Minnesota 55111
Gentlemen:
The following is a list of charges for sanitary sewer service
for the period indicated below:
Kermit Maland, 3984 Mica Trail
11/1/66 thru 11/30/66 $ 4.25
William Morgens, 3949 Mica Trail
11/1/66 thru 11/30/66 4.25
- George Woodis, 3955 Mica Trail
11/1/66 thru 11/30/66 4.25
,. James MacDonald, 3979 Mica
11/1/66 thru 11/30/66
Albert Brecke, 4011 Mica Trail
11/1/66 thru 11/30/66
4.2 5
4.25
C. Dahlberg, 4017 Mica Trail 4.25 /7,:Q
f 11/1/66 thru 11/30/66
. L. Myhrer, 4041 Mica Trail
X 11/1/66 thru 11/30/66
4/Gene Knutson, 4047 Mica Trail
11/11/66 thru 11/30/66
`r J. Hals.td, 1833 Turquoise Trail
Y. 11/1/66 thru 11/30/66
4.25 ,:. v
3,se, - - / as a
2.52 S;s '`,, - 's6,
-8..7
4.25 ?A -
Manley Haugan, 1821 Turquoise Trail
\ 11/1/66 thru 11/30/66 4.25 V1'4-'
David Ashfeld, 1813 Turquoise Trail
V 11/1/66 thru 11/30/66 4.25
Richard Koellner, 1820 Turquoise Trail
11/1/66 thru 11/30/66 4.25
4 Arthur Hayden, 3948 Cinnabar
11/1/66 thru 11/30/66
4.25
page 2
f David Witsoe, 1817 Cinnabar
11/1/66 thru 11/30/66
Peter Pustorino, 1821 Cinnabar
%.( 11/1/66 thru 11/30/66
,f William Hann, 4065 Olivine
11/1/66 thru 11/30/66
Donald Sampers, 4047 Olivine
11/1/66 thru 11/30/66
DRW/dfs
cc:Robert Rosene
4.25
4.25
4.25 •' Y
4.25 i ✓,
Total $70.52
Sincerely,
l�tJ
Donald R. Waalen
r 1
CEDAR GRnVE UTILITY PURCHASE
Heir. ' 70 — p /A r-
No. 2.1031/2L
HASTINGS. MN -LOS ANGELES
LOGAN OH - McGREGOR. TX U. S. A
•
•
ROBERT J MEIERS
ASSESSOR
TELEPHONEr
F�2-437.3191 EXT. 21
Mrs. Alyce Bolke
Eagan Town Hall
3795 Pilot Knob Road
St. Paul, Minnesota 55111
DA KOTA f'0I]%T Y
Regarding: Taxes of Cedar Grove Utilities Company
Dear Mrs. Bolke:
In checking our tax records I find that the personal property
taxes of Cedar Grove Utilities Company which were payable in
the uear /971 were paid in full. The total amount paid was
$29,111.62, half of which was paid March 1, 1971 and half paid
June 30, 1971.
The tax book for the 1972 personal property accounts shows nothing
due in the name of Cedar Grove Utilities Company. Our assessment
book shows that this account is exempt for the 1971 assessment - 1972
taxes. This company was purchased by Eagan Township prior to
November 15, 1971, therefore it was exempted for 1972 taxes.
If I can be of any further assistance, please contact me.
Yours truly,
Robert J. keiers
Dakota County Assessor
RTM/ ghp
• •
WILLIAM R. BUSCH
ATTORNEY AT LAW
903 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILtuNG
SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101
222-078 t
February 14, 1972
Luther Li. Stalland, Esq.
Stalland & Ilauge
Attorneys at Law
2340 Dein Tower
Minneapolis, Zilinnesota 55402
Re: Cedar Grove Utilities Co. -
l:.agan Township -
1971 property taxes
Dear Luther:
The Dakota County Assessor's office confirmed to me by telephone
today that the property taxes that would have been assessed against the
water and sanitary sewer properties of the utility company for 1971,
payable in 1972, have been stricken by reason of the fact that the assets
involved were sold last summer to the Township.
Accordingly, these taxes for which the Township retained a
security deposit out of the purchase price, as per our letter arrangement
in this regard of August 12, 1971, will not be remittable and, thus, the
deposit itself can be released by the Township to the company.
A copy of my letter to you of August 12th as to the security deposit
arrangement is included for your current file reference convenience. As
is set out in this letter, some $22, 936. 53 has been retained by the Town-
ship for application against the 1971 taxes if and when the assessment
actually occurred. Now that this contingency has been removed, I assume
that the Township will proceed in due course to release these funds to
U. S. Lakes Development Co. as the successor through merger to Cedar
Grove Utilities Co.
A copy of this letter is being sent directly to the Township clerk
so that she will have an opportunity pending your return to the office from
your current trip to verify with the Dakota County Assessor's office that
this tax assessment matter has been disposed of by application of Minne-
sota Statute 272. 02 (7), as set out above, and thus enable the Township
to act on the deposit remittance here requested on the company's behalf
at an early date after you are back to the office.
WRB/ef
Enclosure
cc: Mrs. Alyce i3olke
Eagan Township Clerk
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Sincerely yours,
William R.
!�
WILLIAM R. BUSCH
ATTORNEY AT LAW
803 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101
222-078I
February 14, 1972
Luther Ni. Stallanci,
Stalland & liauge
Attorneys at Law
2340 Dain Tower
sad inneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Re: Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Eagan Township -
1971 property taxes
Dear Luther:
The Dakota County s'.ssessor's office confirmed to me by telephone
today that the property taxes that would have been assessed against the
water and sanitary sewer properties of the utility company for 1971,
payable in 1972, have been stricken by reason of the fact that the assets
involved were sold last summer to the Township.
Accordingly, these taxes for which the Township retained a
security deposit out of the purchase price, as per our letter arrangement
in this regard of August 12, 1971, will not be remittable and, thus, the
deposit itself can be released by the Township to the company.
4 copy of my letter to you of Iugust 12th as to the security deposit
arrangement is included for your current file reference convenience. As
is set out in this letter, some $22, 936.53 has been retained by the Town-
ship for application against the 1971 taxes if and when the assessment
actually occurred. Now that this contingency has been removed, I assume
that the Township will proceed in due course to release these funds to
U. S. Lakes Development Co. as the successor through merger to Cedar
Grove Utilities Co.
P. copy of this letter is being sent directly to the Township clert.
so that she will have an opportunity pending your return to the office from
your current trip to verify with the Dakota County Assessor's office that
this tax assessment matter has been disposed of by application of Minne-
sota Statute 272.02 (7), as set out above, and thus enable the Township
to act on the deposit remittance here requested on the company's behalf
at an early date after you are back to the office.
wRBlef
Enclosure
cc: Mrs. Alyce Bolke
Eagan Township Clerk
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Sincerel yours,
er
I�
L
William R. usch ' I , I
1
November 9, 1977
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
7343 Concord Blvd. East
South St. Paul, MinnesSta 55075
Ret Account Deposits • Cedar Grove Acquisition
Gentlemen:
Enclosed is your letter of October 29th along with your check iu the
amount of $242.24. In checking the agreement, it stated that we
would not be liable for any of your delinquent accounts. Your
remittance for balance of account deposits due us is leas the
delinquent accounts; therefore we are returning same for correction.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
EAGAN TOWNSHIP
Alyce Bolke, Clerk
1co
enc.
ps Please note - Rahn School payment from us in the amount of $27.66 is
going to be okayed for payment the 16th. We just received payment from the
School District.
i-ovember 9, 197'
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
7343 Concord Blvd. East
South St. Paul, Minneslta 55075
Re' Account Deposits - Cedar Grove Acquisition
Gentlemen:
Enclosed is your letter of October 29th along with your check la the
amount of $242.24. In checking the agreement, it stated that we
would not be liable for any of your delinquent accounts. Your
remittance for balance of account deposits due us is less the
delinquent accounts; therefore we are returning same for correction.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
EAGAN TOWNSHIP
Alyce Bolke, Clerk
lco
enc.
ps Please note - Rahn School payment from us in the amount of $27.66 is
going to be okayed for payment the 16th. we just received payment from the
School District.
}
110
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
7343 CONCORD BLVD. EAST 'r SOUTH SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55075 * PHONE 451.6426
Enclosed are payments which we receivr after Dct�bF
I ha,Ye made them payable t Farr' Township sirce ar of October 29 all our account -
were reroel out per our spree...
Jeanne
• •
gG) 3vs.. �)-
Less state ;geed Tax
Net Closir j t'ayment to Seller
•
f - ,
95.
/ ?, "/.s:3
12`+.30
$ 1,131,547.19
•
�wAHI* FtOM
FUNS T AMOUNT •
;. mind 12 —1--
nos' /M 7TRUMWT 1MN[N e10Mco Dv
THc TowPLaHir TRu9URCR SHALL ec-
p;;R o. TOIL HAY(t « MEo ,, c One Million One Hundred Sixteen ThousandPourHundred nULl.11Rti
froyNT -- - - - - -- - - - ---- - - -- ,}'1x '-e'I St" Mid 1611
ORDER - CHECK
TOWNSHIP OF EAGAN
DAKDTA COUNTY. ROUTE No. 1
BT. PAUL. MIHM. 65411
TO TIIE Titl:%SlatEtt:
868
75-1429
_A t_ 1?_, _-- 19 Z1 9so
1 316t468.16
PAY It } F__1.0 "edar_ arQve Utilitioa_ Co[—_
Fon_.fu3.1_Pay'"ent for tit i1 i systems
T,L11.a.
1../,t 417/
VALLEY NATIONAL a•1NK
Jwo s oLCT M[L.QR1A� Hw„wAT
IT. PAW.. MOW.. 53111
1:0960.11 LI, 291: L Sy►��U 7
• •
WILLIAM R. BUSCH
ATTORNEY AT LAW
003 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55t0t
222.0791
:august 12, 1971
Luther M. Stalland, Esq.
Town of l_:agan
3795 Pilot Knob Itoad
St. Paul, Minnesota
Re: Cedar Grove Utilities Co. -
Sanitar', s1•wer and water system properties
Transaction closing
Dear Mr. Stailind:
This will confirm our discussions of today with regard to the
real estate taxes on the subject premises which normally would accrue
and be payable in the year 1972 and, particularly, such responsibility
with respect to such taxes as ,nay exist under the settlement stipulation
in this cause on the part of Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
As is indicated in my letter to you in this regard of August 4, 1971,
it appears clea.- to me that under S 27'2.02 (7) of the Minnesota Statutes
the exempt status of the Township should preclude the imposition or
collection of any property to tc•s :I s to this real estate in 1972 or thereafter.
However, as I understand it, you want to heck this out with the
county offices to see if they corn•ur in this interpretation of 272.02 and
272.68. If they do, then the ,point is resolved without complication. If
they do not, the company reserves the right to object to tree imposition of
such taxes against the property, payable in 1972, as are considered to be
applicable to it.
As a means of resolving the matter without impeding today's in-
tended closing of this transaction, the company '.vill permit the Township
to reserve frorn the stipulated purchase price for the property the sums
of $5, 095ffor application against taxes payable in 1972 on the subject real
estate that may be pc•or.itable against the company if it should be ultimately
determined that such taxes are nonetheless leviable and collectable irres-
pective of the provisions of 272.02 (7) and 272.61-3,..,: r )c.,.:I%.
Sine your
William R. Busch
.N I-1B /ef
cc: Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
411, 4111
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
3716 SOUTH GROVE LANE SOUTH SAINI PAUI, MINNESOTA
Phone 451 —(1426 550P
1: :
August 12, 1971
Memo -
Re: Final Billing Procedures
August 1971
Water: 2 schools @ actual water consumption
5 High Site Apartment Buildings @ 11/31 x 74.75
Other accounts @ actual metered consumption
Sewer: 2 schools @ same as water charge
Other accounts @ 11/31 of mo. charge
each building
410 CLOSING STATEMENT 410
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES SYSTEMS
August 12, 1971
PURCHASE PRICE $1,231,450.00
Less --
Mortgage pay-offs
Real Estate Taxes
Parcel #1-2nd half
Parcel #2-2nd half
Parcel #2-Water shed
Parcel #2-San Sewer
Parcel #3-2nd half
Parcel #3-Water shed
Total Deductions
Net Proceeds to Seller
$86,305.42
3,561.89
417.66
89.79
1,190.59
96.70
258.96
191,921.01 91,921.01
S1,139,528.99
Less - pro -rate 1971 Taxes retention 5,095.00
(125 of 1970 Taxes) 17,841.53
Pro -rate 1971 Personal Property Taxes Retention ""
State Deed Tax 124.30
(Total Deductions $23,060.83)
Net Closing Payment to Seller $1,116,468.16
/2 5
Purchase Price
Less -
CLOSIPG STA'"T:' SENT
CDAR GP''!VE U^ILITi S SYSTE S
(Aupust 12, 1971)
Mortgage pay-offs
1970 real est. taxes
Assessments
iot:,I Deductions
1,231,450.E-0
89,0'7.92
4,076.50
1,831.71
. 94,946.13 94,946.13
Net Proceeds to Seller $ 1,136,503.87
Less- Pro-r?ta 1971 taxes
(125% of 1970 taxer -retention) 5,695.63 *
Closing P.^.yment to Seller `` 1,131, 408.24 **
* When the 1971 taxes have been determined, Seller's pro-
rata share will be converted by Buyer and the balance,
if any, will he refunfl,ed to Serer.
**
This payment shall hF: subject to a. further retention
for clean-up repairs to the s•rstems if not com-
pleted by closin-; c to par sTh ipu] a ti on.
• •
ALLOCA ITN OF TO:, PROCLDS
i
Bond Proceeds
Bond fees, coots, litigation, etc.
Net Bond Proceeds
1,325,000.00
45,000.00
w 1,280,000.00
Net Payment to Seller 1,140,000.00
Net Ret - n Lion to Buyer 140,000.00
•
LAW OrrICD6
STALLAND SC HA!.ciE
SUITE 2340. DAIS TONE!
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESoTA 5E402
LanaiH. STALa3ND
PAUL B. BACON
GEOYo■ H. Hoer
Alice Bolke
Eagan Town Clerk
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota
Dear Alice:
RE: Town of Eagan vs. Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
ANNA CODS QM
r ru,ae aae -eaw
July 26, 1971
I am enclosing herewith a copy of Mr. Busch's letter of June 24, in which
he sets forth his suggested method of closing the purchase of the utilities
systems. I am also enclosing a copy of the bill of sale, which he has
prepared in connection with the transfer of personal property.
Would you please examine these two documents carefully to (a) determine
if all the property we should be receiving is covered by the bill of sale
and (b) determine if Mr. Busch's suggested plan of turning over the systems
is reasonable and appropriate.
These same documents and a copy of this letter are also being sent to Bob
Rosene and Bill Branch and I ask that they do the same this: I am requesting
you to do prior to Wednesday's meeting which, as you know, s scheduled for
this Wednesday,July 28, at 4:00 p.m. at the Town Hall.
ruly your
: Stalla
UIS:bh
encl.
cc: Bob Rosene
Bill Branch
vezki6f
'!
010
Date: July 70, 1171
Re: Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Maintenance Survey
Topaz & #30 -- sewer needs cleaning
2076 Zircon -- sewer needs cleaning and manhole cover broken - replace
2029 Emerald -- manhole casting missing - replace
Topaz & Emerald - sewer plugged
Opal Place -- sewer needs cleaning
Topaz & Opal Place - sewer needs cleaning
Garnet & Topaz -- sewer needs cleaning
Diamond & Garnet -- gate valve full of sand NW corner - clean out
Diamond & Emerald --manhole casting missing - replace
Garnet Point & Sapphire -- gate valve full of sand SE corner - clean out
4124 cedar Service Road - sewer needs cleaning - manhole casting missing -
replace
2025 Jade -- sewer needs cleaning
Jade & Flint -- manhole cover broken - replace
2017 Flint - sewer needs cleaning
Jade & Rahn -- gate valve full of sand NW corner - clean out
Flint & Carnelian -- (:ate valve full of 'and `'W corner - clean out
SE coiner - c;in't operate valve
Bluestone S. Carnelian -- gate valve full of sand SW corner - clean out
Carnelian & Amethyst - gate valve replace broken top section - also sewer needs
cleanin;;
4034 Rahn - in driveway - sewer needs cleaning
Pumice & Turquoise - no G.V. cover and full of dirt - replacecvoer and clean out
Turquoise & Rahn -- gate valve full of sand - clean out
3996 Cinnabar - manhole off center - replace properly,
l;eryl & Turquoise -- gate valve full of sand - clean out.
JUL 271971'
7:EDED REPAIRS - SEWERS - CEDAR 110'VE UTILITIES
2083 & 2079 Shale Lane - Sewer needs cleaning
2124 Shale Lane - sewer needs cleaning
2146 Diamond Drive - Sewer needs cleaning
L Diamond Q Shale - Gate valve can't turn
Sandstone d. Copper - Plug sewer
2085 & 2094 Copper - Sewer needs cleaning
4358 Copper Point - Sewer plugged
Quartz & Diamond - Sewer needs cleaning
Marble & Diamond - Sewer needs cleaning - Gate valve SW corner full of rocks.
4316 Cedar Service Road - sewer needs cleaning
Sandstone & Marble - Sewer needs cleaning - Gate valve full of junk NW corner.
Marble & Diamond - Sewer plugged
Amber & Limestone - Gate valve/sand & bent can't get wrench on.
4260 Amber Drive - Sewer plugged
4242 Amber Drive - Needs Cleaning
4245 Diamond - Needs cleaning �,
4233 Diamond - Manhole cover moved - center it on manhole ( -i-1 kJ CA- 4't c
1
• •
WILLIAM R. BUSCH
ATTORNEY AT LAW
803 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101
222-0781
June 24, 1971
Luther M. Stalland, Esq.
Stalland & Hauge
Attorneys at Law
2340 Dain Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Re: Town of Eagan
vs. Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Dear Luther:
In keeping with our recent discussions in this connection, I am
enclosing for your review and approval a copy of each of the following
instruments which have been prepared for use at the forthcoming closing
of the subject utility system transfer as per the stipulation and the judg-
ment that have been entered in this cause:
(1) A warranty deed from Cedar Grove Utilities Co. to the Town-
ship as to the three parcels of real estate that are owned in fee by the
utility company, these being reflected in Exhibit 14 in the arbitration pro-
ceeding as items 1 through 3.
(2) A quit claim deed from the utility company to the Township
with respect to the existing easements that the company owns in conjunction
with the operation of its sewage lines. These three easements are shown
as items 4 through 6 of Exhibit 14 as above identified.
(3) A bill of sale from the company to the Township covering the
miscellaneous items of personal property that the company owns and uses
in the operation of its utility systems. This instrument also comprehends
the piping, fittings and other components of the water and sewer lines to
the extent that these are not situated in the real estate that is being con-
veyed under the deeds referred to above. Likewise, the meters that the
company owns and that are now located in the various user premises are
part of the subject matter of this transfer instrument. With respect to the
miscellaneous items of personal property shown in the document, please
note that these are taken from pages 23 and 24 of Carl Erickson's appraisal
report (Exhibit 19) in the arbitration proceeding.
Insofar as the mechanics of transferring the operations of the
systems to the Township as of the closing date are concerned, the following
Luther M. Stalland, Esq.
June 24, 1971
Page 2
steps and procedures are here suggested as being a suitable means of per-
mitting the transfer to be accomplished with a minimum of complications
to the parties involved:
(a) The meter deposits now in the company's possession from its
various customers will be turned over to the Township, rather than remitted
back to the individual customers for re -deposit by them with the Township,
immediately after the last billing from the company to the individual customer
has been paid. It is suggested that this be done in phases so that -- (i) on
August 31st, when the bulk of the account billings for July will have been
paid, the deposits for all these customers that have thus settled their accounts
in full with the company will be sent in one check to the Township for receipt
by it for the respective accounts on its books of these depositors; and (ii)
weekly thereafter the deposits of the customers who have paid their account
balances to the company as of the beginning of that week will be remitted in
like manner to the Township for crediting to the deposit accounts of these
particular customers. In the event any customer has not paid his account
due the company within 90 days after the closing of the transaction with the
Township, the deposit as to that account will be offset against the balance
due and only the difference, if any, will be remitted to the Township for
the customer's credit.
(b) The company's regular meter reading and billing procedure
will be followed for July, assuming that the closing does not occur until on
or after August 1st, and this will involve the reading of the meters during
the 4-day period preceding July 25th, thereby enabling the company's office
to process the billings so that they can be mailed to the customers on July
30th. The water consumption from the last meter reading as to each individual
account to the day of closing would seem best accounted for on an agreed
proration basis rather than through the use of a special meter reading since,
as I understand it, it is not possible to read all the meters on a single day
not only because of the number of meters involved but also due to the fact
that there is always a certain portion of the total customer list that is away
at the meter reading time so that a physical reading of these meters is pre-
cluded. Further, of course, the incidence of a special reading of the meters
and another billing will likely serve as an irritant to a number of the utility
customers and this, accordingly, will be of disadvantage both to the company
and to the Township. As to the exact formula for the proration to cover this
water usage and the related sewer charges for the interim from the last
meter reading to the closing date, it seems to me that a fair and_ logical
procedure is to start with the company's billing for August of 1970 as to
each account and to treat as earned by the company that part of the assumed
equivalent billing for August of 1971 as is arrived at by using the ratio of
the number of days starting with the middle day of the meter reading period
in July and ending with the closing date to the monthly total of 31 days. As
to any customer not on the company's system in August of 1970, the July,
1971 billing would seem to be a fair substitute as the assumed billing for
this August; and for any customer that first comes on the system on or
about August 1st of this year. the minimum billing rate can be used.
Luther M. Stalland, Esq.
June 24, 1971
Page 3
(c) Settlement of the account .due Cedar Grove Utilities for the
fraction of the month ending with the closing date (as determined under
the procedure suggested in the preceding paragraph) will be remittable
by the Township to the company 30 days after the Township sends out its
first billings to these customers which, as I understand it, will be in
keeping with its quarterly billing cycle as applied to the customers of its
existing utility systems.
After you have had a chance to discuss this closing procedure
and the suggestions set out above as to the handling of the water and
sewer usage through the closing date, please call me so that we can discuss
the situation if any changes appear to be needed. Otherwise, I would appre-
ciate a letter back from you confirming the Township's concurrence in this
approach.
Sincerel ou s
William R. Busch
W'RBfef
Enclosures
cc: Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
•
BILL OF SALE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Cedar Grove
Utilities Co., a Minnesota corporation, First Party, in consideration of
the sum of One Dollar and other good and valuable consideration to it
in hand paid by the Township of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, Second
Party, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant,
bargain, sell and convey unto Second Party, its successors and assigns,
the following described goods, chattels and other tangible personal
property, to wit:
(1) AU meters for measuring water consumption or flowage now
owned by First Party and located in Eagan Township, Dakota County,
Minnesota;
(2) All pipes, conduits, mains, fire hydrants, gate valves and
boxes, elbows, tees, fittings, corporation cocks, copper lines, curb
stops and boxes and connections, as well as all other material, apparatus
and components now owned by First Party and used or useful either in its
water distribution system or its sanitary sewage system in the Township
of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, whether such items of property be
located on real estate owned by First Party or be in, along, upon or over
streets, alleys, or other public ways or places in said Township;
(3) First Party's sanitary sewer treatment plant, its deep wells,
its water pumping facilities and its elevated water storage tank in the
Township of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, together with all equip-
ment and appurtenances thereto which are now owned by First Party; and
(4) The following items of equipment --
(a) Elliott addressing machine, Model No. 880,
together with addressing cards and storage trays;
(b) Fadden 3" electric pump;
(c) 115 lineal feet 2-1 /2" fire hose;
•
• •
(g) One curb box locator, Model 220, Metrotec;
(h) 1967 Chevrolet truck, 1/2-ton pickup, as identified
more particularly in the accompanying registration card which is con-
currently being delivered by First Party to Second Party;
(i) One sewer roder; and
(j) Miscellaneous testing equipment now located in the
structures on the real estate which is concurrently herewith being trans-
ferred by First Party to Second Party by warranty deed.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD THE SAME, unto Second Party, its
successors and•assigns, forever. The First Party, for itself and its
successors and assigns, hereby covenants and agrees to and with Second
Party, its successors and assigns, to warrant and defend the sale of the
afore -described goods, chattels and other tangible personal property hereby
made unto Second Party, its successors and assigns, against all and every
person and persons whomsoever lawfully claiming or to claim the same,
it being understood that Second Party is accepting each and all of said goods,
chattels and other tangible personal property in the respective places where
the same are now located and in their present condition, each and all of
said items being sold by First Party to Second Party without any repre-
sentation or warranty as to the quality, condition, state of repair, or fitness
for use thereof.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the First Party has executed this Bill
of Sale this
day of , 1971, effective as of the close
of business on this date.
In the Presence of: Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
By
Emil F. Jandric
By
President
J . H. Dielentheis
•
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
On this
day of , 1971, before me, a notary
public, personally appeared Emil F. Jandric and J. H. Dielentheis, to
me personally known, and who by me being first duly sworn did state
that they are, respectively, the President and Secretary of Cedar Grove
Utilities Co., a Minnesota corporation, that the foregoing instrument
was signed and sealed on behalf of said corporation by authority of its
Board of Directors, and the said Ernil F. Jandric and J. H. Dielentheis
did acknowledge that said instrument was signed and sealed by them as
the free act and deed of said corporation and as their free acts and deeds.
Notary Public
•
To: Luther July 28, 1971
Fr: George
Sj: Cedar Grove Property
I have reviewed all five abstracts from Cedar Grove and the chain
of title appears to be good for all of the deed descriptions and the easement
descriptions. The following incumberences appears from the record however:
Warranty Deed Description No. 1
An unsatisfied
(1)/ A mortgage running in favor of Northwestern National Bank in the
amount of $150,000.00--dated January 1, 1962 and recorded at book 245, page 309;
(2) Last Half taxes for 1971 in the amount of $3,561.89
Warranty Deed Description No. 2
(1) Same mortgage as in number 1 shows up
(2) Auditor's Tabular Assessment in the amount of $1,431.81
(3) Last Half Taxes for 1971 in the amount of $417.91
Warranty Deed Description Nn. 1
(1) Same mortgage as in numbers 1 and 2 Nth above
(2) Auditor's Tabular Assessment in the amounto of $369.90
for 1971
(3) Last Half Taxes/in the amount of $96.70
In addition a mortgage running in favor of the Northwestern Nation Rank of
Minneapolis dated Jan. 1, 1963 in the amount of $100,000.00 secured by pipes
in Cedar Grove No. 4 Addition and recorded in Book 254, page 47 appears to
he unsatisfied.
CLOSING STATEMENT
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES SYSTEMS
August 12, 1971
PURCiiA::E PRICE $1,231,450.00
Less --
Mortgage pay-offs
Real Estate Taxes
Parcel f1-2nd half
Parcel Pi-2nd half
Parcel q2-'rater shed
Parcel q2-San Fewer
Parcel #5-2nd half
Parcel l5 W4ter shed
Total Deductions
Net Proceeds to Seller
$86,305.42
3,561.89
417.66
E9.79
1,190.59
96.70
258.96
$91,921.01 91.921.01
$1,139,528.99
Less - pro -rate 1971 Tares retention
(125,':, of 1970 Taxes)
Pro -rate 1971 Personal Property Taxes Retention
State Deed Tax
(Total Deductions $23,060.83)
5,095.00
17,841.53
124.30
Net Closing Payment to Seller $1,116,468.16
LAW 0l• FICES C
ERWIN A. PETERSON
ROBERT C. BELL
WILLARD L. CONVERSE
OEOROE O. PETERSEN
•
•
•
PETERSON, BELL. & CONVERSE
PHONE: 612-.224.4703
Eagan Township
FOR PR0rE66IONAL SERVICES RENDERED:
1480 NORTHWESTERN BANK BUILDING
35 EAST FIFTH STREET
ST. PAUL, MINN ESOTA 53101
Re: Eagan Township -vs- Cedar Grove
Utilities Company
Court File No. 68550
Our File No. K7-156
For services rendered re arbitration proceedings by the Town of
Eagan -vs- Cedar Grove Utilities Co., relating to the acquisition
by the Township of the franchised sewer and water companies,
pursuant to the terms of the said franchise agreement and Stipulation
of May 1, 1970.
FOR THE ABOVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED: $4000.00
• •
CEDkR GROVE ASSESSMENT_ PoUCY
The following policy has Leen adopted by the Board of Super�io..L..
and Assessment Committee in accordance with state law with regard to the
recent assessments to cover the coat cf purchasing the Cedar Grove Utilities
Company's sewer and water systems.
This assessment roll was adopted by the Board on August 31st, 1971.
State law provides the property owners may pay their assessment in full
within 30 days without interest, or in this case by September 30th, 1971.
However, where funds have been escrowed by a mortgage company because of
this assessment, the amount of such escrowed funds - if not sufficient to
pay the assessment in full - may be made in partial payment of the assess-
ment and the balance, if paid within 30 days would be without interest.
If the assessment is not paid within 30 days, or by September 30th,
but is paid in full before November 15th, interest will be charged from
September 1st through December 31st, 1971. If the assessment is paid in
full after November 15th, 1971 but prior to November 15th, 1972, interest
will be charged from September 1st, 1971 through December 31st, 1972.
Luther M. Stalland
Town Attorney
• •
Lww prrtcrs
ST.ILLAND tic HAUGE
SkITE 2:I4O, DAM Tow
MI, NEAPOLIS, MIN►ESOTA 11.3-to2
LL-TU I. M STALLAND
PA(',. fl. lAt'or
Gr-omor U. floc'
William R. Busch
Attorney at Law
803 Degree of Honor Building
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Re: Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Dear Bill:
AREA CODE eu
PYOYE 336 - AJAI
August 3, 1971
I am herewith enclosing a proposed closing statement regarding the buy-out of
the Cedar Grove Utilities system. As to the purchase price, we have already
agreed upon this amount. The mortgage pay-off figure is identical with that
contained in your letter of July 29 and which I have confirmed directly with
Mr. Gary Jacobson of Northwestern National Life Insurance Company. The 1970
real estate taxes and assessments were obtained through our title search. Per
the stipulation, we took 125% of the 1970 taxes to retain because these taxes
have not as yet been computed, also per the stipulation.
Since our "dress rehersal" last week, the Town Engineer and Superintendent of
Public Works advised me that there is no way the clean up and necessary repairs
as contemplated in the stipulation can be accomplished prior to closing date,
August 12, 1971. Therefore, I have inserted the footnote regarding withholding
a certain amount to cover placing the system in the condition that they were
or should have been on May 1, 1970, reasonable wear and tear excepted. It is
my understanding that Mr. Rosene and Mr. Branch will be meeting with your
Mr. Wallin later this week to determine precisely what has to be done. At
this juncture, I will obtain a reasonable figure for this clean up and repair
work and, assuming that it cannot be accomplished before closing, the town will
retain such amount. Would you kindly contact me about this upon receipt
hereof.
LMS:bh
encl.
L
Very truly you s,
cc: Mr. Robert Rosene, Town Engineer
Mr. William Branch, Superintendent of Public Works
o •
i •
e •
• •
June 9, 1971
Mr. B. J. Nelson
Construction Valuation ::apartment
Veteran's Admini::trAtion
New Federal Building
Fort qnelling- Wit. Paul, MN 5;111
Dear Mr. Nelson:
Attached ;ilease find the el:tiaated rtport concerning the
acquisition of the Cedar Grove UtilitieJ Company.
A public hearing was held on June 0. 1971 in regard
and the Town will now proceed to p :rchase toe system.
We felt you would be intert..ted in the amount of the
a.ieea::ment which will be levied on the lot:. iri this; area.
Yours very truly,
Mrc. Alyce Bolke
C1 e _ it of Eagan Township
ABtkfw
Enclosure
June 9, 1971
B. J. i;elson
Construction Valuation .epartment
7rq:ran' :Hr)ini.trntion
Vederal
.ert nellin-5t. Paul, I 5;111
ear !r. Nelson:
AtacLed llease find t,e ei„timatel r ortc-1,corrAni.4 the
cuiition o the Celar '.1rove
... pull° i&arin„; hal on Jun: 1)71 in 1. egard
rinfAt proceed t rcha.ie t!le
We felt you 1:ci:11 ce intero.tu; in tre: %mCunt oL the
41...s.sesment wuie ill be levied oh the lot.. in area.
Your:, very truly,
'rs. Alyce N:elke
ol Ian Township
AB:kfw
Enclosure
• •
June 9, 1971
Mr. Bob Jefferson
Sub -Division Appraiser
Federal Housing Administration
Minneapolis, MN
Dear "'r. Jefferson:
Attached please find the estimated report concerning the
acquisition of the Cedar Grove Utilities Company.
A public hearing vas !geld on June 8, 1971 in this regard
and the Town will now proceed to ;.urohase the system.
we felt you would be interested in the amount of the
assessment which will be levied on the lots in this: area.
Yours very truly,
Mrs. Alyce Bolke
Clerk of Eagan Township
ABs kfw
Enclosure
June 9, 1971
Mr. Bob Jefferson
Sub -Division Appraiser
iederal `3ou..1n AdmintAration
. ,izutaa; oli.:,
1ey.r 'r. Jefferson:
Attache] plenz c find the e-timated r port concerning the
acquioition of tie Cedar Grove Uttli ti : ; i:oripany.
' pu; lic hearing wat; eld or. June 1971 in t .i:: _egari
iown will m,w procec , t:. :.F ors-_=e the
.:e felt you would intere-.ted ; i,.it- t.tioi t .. L.:e
p. Le:,srrt:nt which will be levied o;1 the lot.: it t::i.: area.
Yours very truly,
rs. Alyce ilolke
:,1er4 of E %an io..nship
AL:kfw
r nolosure
• •
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS ACQUISITION
PUBLIC I[EARING 6-8-71
A. ESTIMATED ACQUISITION COST $1,300,000
B. ESTIMATED COST PER UNIT
1. 900 sewer @ $ 707.00
2. 1,070 water @ $ 620.00
C. ESTIMATED PROPERTY OWNER'S COST
1. Sewer Assessment $ 707.00
2. Water Assessment 620.00
3. Total Assessment 11,327.00
$ 636,300
663,400
$1,299,700
Assessments may be paid in full or over a period of time depending on bond
maturities.
D. ESTIMATED PROPERTY OWNER'S ANNUAL COST IF ASSESSMENT IS SPREAD
Assumes 8% interest on assessments
20 yr. plan 25 yr. plan 30 yr. plan
1. First Installment (includes interest) $172.51 $159.24 $150.39
2. Last Installment (includes interest) $ 71.65 $ 57.33 $ 47.77
3. Average Installment (includes interest) $122.08 $108.28 $ 99.08
Note: It is estimated that the combined monthly sewer and water service charge
will be $6.50.
•
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul, Minnesota 55113
(REVISED)
Preliminary Report on
Acquisition of Cedar Grove Utilities Company
Water and Sanitary Sewer System
Public Improvement Project No. 33
Eagan Township, Minnesota
June 8, 1971
SCOPE:
This report covers the costs and feasibility of purchasing the Cedar Grove
Utilities Company water and sanitary sewer systems in order that they may become
part of the Township Municipal Water and Sewer Systems.
FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
This project is feasible and conforms with overall planning for municipal water
and sewer system development in Eagan Township. The interests of the present and
future residents of these additions can best be served by municipal ownership and
operation of these systems. Purchase of the water system together with the sanitary
sewer system is considered essential for the functioning of this utility system
as the sewer system cannot be operated without the water system.
DISCUSSION:
The present Cedar Grove water and sanitary sewer systems were established in
1959 by authority of the franchise agreement between the Township and the Cedar
Grove Utilities Company. The system has been expanded within the franchise area to
serve continued growth.
The system includes complete sanitary sewer and water facilities for approxi-
mately 910 sewer and 1075 water connections. Included are two 600 gallon per minute
deep wells, one 100,000 gallon elevated water storage tank, pump house with controls
and chlorinator, 12.8 miles of water main, 134 hydrants, 138 gate valves, 10.5 miles
of sanitary sewer main, 202 manholes, 1075 water and 910 sewer service lines,
11 acres of land, a sewage treatment plant providing both primary and secondary
treatment and miscellaneous operating equipment.
Due to the expressed desires of the property owners in the area, the Town
Board directed the Township Engineers and Attorney to investigate the feasibility
of acquiring the complete system.
The original franchise agreement provides that the Township may, at any time,
purchase the systems for their reasonable value. Such acquisition would allow the
system to be operated as a part of the established Township water and sanitary sewer
systems.
Page 1.
• •
Principal advantages of municipal operation are:
1. Lower cost of service to the property owners served by the systems.
2. More dependable and safe water and sewer service when integrated into
the Township network.
3. Future cost savings to the Township by avoiding duplicate lines as
development occurs in the area surrounding the Cedar Grove area.
After considerable negotiating relative to the fair value of the utility sys-
tem, it was recommended by the residents at a public hearing and so ordered by the
Town Board of Supervisors that the arbitration method outlined in the franchise
agreement be followed to determine the reasonable and fair value of this utility
system.
AREA TO BE INCLUDED:
The improvements herein discussed involve all of the property within the fol-
lowing described areas:
Cedar Grove Additions No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and all of the NE3, Sec. 19,
T27N, R23W lying easterly of Trunk Highway 13 except the Valley View
Apartment complex.
COST ESTIMATES:
The reasonable value of the system as determined by arbitration
Real Estate
Utility System
Miscellaneous Costs
Total Cost
$ 56,450
1,200,000
43,550
$1,300,000
is as follows:
ASSESSMENTS:
Assessments are to be levied against benefited property in accordance with
Township policy for benefits received. Those properties now served by the Township
sewer system will be assessed only for the water system.
Sanitary Sewer Assessment $ 710/Residential lot
Water Assessment 620/Residential lot
$1,330/Lot
Commercial and school property will be assessed on an equivalent basis de-
termined by water usage, front footage and area factors.
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I am a
duly Registered Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
Robert W. Rosene
Date: .: ?..e 3, n'71 Reg. No. 3488
Page 2.
•
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul, Minnesota 55113
(REVISED)
Preliminary Report on
Acquisition of Cedar Grove Utilities Company
Water and Sanitary Sewer System
Public Improvement Project No. 33
Eagan Township, Minnesota
June 8, 1971
SCOPE:
This report covers the costs and feasibility of purchasing the Cedar Grove
Utilities Company water and sanitary sewer systems in order that they may become
part of the Township Municipal Water and Sewer Systems.
FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
This project is feasible and conforms with overall planning for municipal water
and sewer system development in Eagan Township. The interests of the present and
future residents of these additions can best be served by municipal ownership and
operation of these systems. Purchase of the water system together with the sanitary
sewer system is considered essential for the functioning of this utility system
as the sewer system cannot be operated without the water system.
DISCUSSION:
The present Cedar Grove water and sanitary sewer systems were established in
1959 by authority of the franchise agreement between the Township and the Cedar
Grove Utilities Company. The system has been expanded within the franchise area to
serve continued growth.
The system includes complete sanitary sewer and water facilities for approxi-
mately 910 sewer and 1075 water connections. Included are two 600 gallon per minute
deep wells, one 100,000 gallon elevated water storage tank, pump house with controls
and chlorinator, 12,8 miles of water main, 134 hydrants, 138 gate valves, 10.5 miles
of sanitary sewer main, 202 manholes, 1075 water and 910 sewer service lines,
11 acres of land, a sewage treatment plant providing both primary and secondary
treatment and miscellaneous operating equipment.
Due to the expressed desires of the property owners in the area, the Town
Board directed the Township Engineers and Attorney to investigate the feasibility
of acquiring the complete system.
The original franchise agreement provides that the Township may, at any time,
purchase the systems for their reasonable value. Such acquisition would allow the
system to be operated as a part of the established Township water and sanitary sewer
systems.
Page 1.
Principal advantages of municipal operation are:
1. Lower cost of service to the property owners served by the systems.
2. More dependable and safe water and sewer service when integrated into
the Township network.
3. Future cost savings to the Township by avoiding duplicate lines as
development occurs in the area surrounding the Cedar Grove area.
After considerable negotiating relative to the fair value of the utility sys-
tem, it was recommended by the residents at a public hearing and so ordered by the
Town Board of Supervisors that the arbitration method outlined in the franchise
agreement be followed to determine the reasonable and fair value of this utility
system.
AREA TO BE INCLUDED:
The improvements herein discussed involve all of the property within the fol-
lowing described areas:
Cedar Grove Additions No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and all of the NE3, Sec. 19,
T27N, R23W lying easterly of Trunk Highway 13 except the Valley View
Apartment complex.
COST ESTIMATES:
The reasonable value of the system as determined by arbitration is as follows:
Real Estate
Utility System
Miscellaneous Costs
Total Cost
$ 56,450
1,200,000
43 550
$1,300,000
ASSESSMENTS:
Assessments are to be levied against benefited property in accordance with
Township policy for benefits received. Those properties now served by the Township
sewer system will be assessed only for the water system.
Sanitary Sewer Assessment $ 710/Residential lot
Water Assessment 620/Residential lot
$1,330/Lot
Commercial and school property will be assessed on an equivalent basis de-
termined by water usage, front footage and area factors.
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I am a
duly Registered Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
Robert W. Rosene
Date: Ju .e 3, 1F71 Reg. No. 3488
Page 2.
• •
AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING ACQUISITION OF THE
CEDAR GROVE SEWAGE AND WATER UTILITY SYSTEMS
TOUN OF EAGAN
June 8, 1971
7 : 30 P. M.
1. Introductory Remarks - John J. Klein, Chairman, Board of Supervisors.
2. Report on legal status of arbitration proceedings for the purchase
of the Cedar Grove Utility Systems - Luther M. Stalland, Town Attorney.
3. Report on the current status of the utility systems and proposed
integration with the Town's central systems - Robert Rosene, Tom
Engineer.
4. Recommendation - Paul Usel'ann, Town Board Supervisor.
5. Response to interrogatories of the Concerned Citizens of Cedar Grove
Committee - John J. Klein, Chairman, Board of Supervisors.
6. Public Discussion - John J. Klein, Chairman.
All individuals desiring to be heard shall be subject to the
following procedure:
a. Each individual wishing to speak shall first be recognized
by the Chairman.
b. Once recognized, each individual shall state his full name and
address and if representing any group or association, state
its full name and address.
c. Each individual shall then state his question or make his
comment which shall be limited to 3 minutes unless otherwise
determined by the Chairman.
d. All questions, comments and statements will be recorded along
with all the proceedings of the public hearing.
•
REPORT
ON
T0WN OF EAGAN VS. CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
HISTORY & BACKGROU D
In April of 1959 the Town Board entered into •water and sewer franchise
agreements with Cedar Grove Utilities Company for a period of twenty-five (25)
years whereby this private company would provide water and sewer service to the
proposed Cedar Grove development. At that time the population of Eagan was
perhaps 2,500 and the Board did not feel the Town was in any position to either
install or operate central utility systems, much less attempt to finance them
for an undeveloped area. The alternative if the franchises had not been granted
would have been individual wells and septic systems which in a potentially
concentrated area was felt to be unwise.
At the time the Cedar Greve developers proposed the franchises, they
assured the Board that the cost of the systems would be borne by the investors
and by private borrowing and would not be included in the cost of the homes
except to the partial extent of a connection charge made against each home for
hookup to the systems.
Under the franchises the utility company is permitted to make reason-
able charges for monthly service which presumably and permissibly includes a
profit for the utility company. Undoubtedly a portion of these charges has
been applied by the utility company to amortize the cost of the systems.
In 1966 the Board of Supervisors began discussing the possibility of
purchasing the Cedar Grove rater and sewer systems because of the anticipated
growth in the area and the beginning of tounchip-aide utility systems. These
discussions culminated in the Board authorizing the Town engineer, fiscal
• •
consultant and attorney to begin preliminary negotiations pursuant to the
water and sewer franchise agreements for the purchase of the systems.
By the spring of 1967 a preliminary recommendation was made to the
Board of Supervisors that these systems be purchased for a price of $999,500.00
and on this basis a public meeting was held for the residents of Cedar Grove
on July 19th, 1967 to discuss the proposed purchase. The majority of the
residents felt the price was too high and consequently the Board of Supervisors,
in deference to them, rejected the negotiated purchase.
Thereafter the matter remained dormant for about a year until Cedar
Grove Utilities Company proposed a rate increase which activated the residents
to reconsider acquisition of the systems. Temporarily the Board of supervisors
rejected the rate increases and put a freeze on them until the Board could again
consider acquisition.
On February 27th, 1969 the Board held another public meeting for the
residents of Cedar Grove to determine what they wished to do in view of the
request for increased sewer and water rates. The consensus was that the systems
should be purchased but through the procedure of arbitration. The Board author-
ized this procedure and the appointment of Robert C. Bell of St. Paul as its
arbitrator.
Cedar Grove Utilities Co., upon being advised of the Town's demand
for arbitration, refused to appoint its arbitrator and to arbitrate on the
ground that the purchase price had been negotiated and there was nothing left
for the Town to do but purchase the systems as previously contemplated. The
Town rejected this theory because the Board of supervisors had not formally
approved the purchase agreement and thereupon commenced a lawsuit to force
Cedar Grove Utilities Co. to arbitrate.
-2-
• •
The parties thereafter appeared for trial of the arbitration issues
before the District Court, Dakota County, the result of which was a stipulation
approved by the Court whereby the parties would proceed to arbitrate with
hr. Bell as the Town's arbitrator for the first of two phases of the case,
namely, to determine the reasonable market value of the systems but without
regard to any claimed set -offs for grants-in-aid (so-called) or any other
credits.
Following the order of the Court each of the parties appointed its
arbitrator, Robert C. Bell and Al Kennedy, both St. Paul attorneys, respectively
for the Town and the company, and they in turn appointed John Daubney, another
St. Paul attorney and former mayor of St. Paul, as the third member and chair-
man of the Board of Arbitration. Thereafter lengthy hearings were held before
the Board of Arbitrators to determine the reasonable market value of the systems
which resulted in the filing of the Board's report and arbitration award on
February 19th, 1971. The amount of the award by the majority of the Board was
the sum of $1,256,450.00. Subsequently Mr. Bell filed a minority report on
t•;arch 17th, 1971 stating the value of the systems to be no more than $250,000.00
but he apparently predicated his opinion on evidence that the District Court
had earlier ruled inadmissible.
Early in hiarch the Town attorney filed a motion in District Court to
permit the Town to put in additional evidence of the so-called grants-in-aid of
construction which was the second phase of the proceedings. Simultaneously the
utility company filed a motion to confirm the award and setting a time for
closing of the purchase. By order dated March %9th, 1971 the Court denied the
Town the right to put in such additional evidence and granted defendant's motion,
setting the closing of the buy-out for September 15th, 1971.
-3-
• •
Thereafter consideration was given to taking various appeals and it
was determined that the chances of overturning the award were quite remote and
that no more time nor money should be spent on litigation but rather a further
attempt made to negotiate a settlement.
Negotiations were then begun with representatives of the utility com-
pany which resulted in a stipulation of settlement being prepared providing
among other things the following major points:
1. Defendant agreed to reduce the awarded purchase price ,y
$25,000.00.
2. Defendant agreed to waive all interest on the award which, by
the time of closing is estimated to be about $35,000.00.
3. Defendant agreed to waive all claim against the Town and the
Cedar Grove residents for all retroactive rate increases which, it is
estimated, would have cost the residents approximately $100,000.00.
4. Plaintiff Town, in consideration of the foregoing concessions,
agreed to proceed immediately with the bonding and
to close the trans-
action and consummate the purchase within 90 days of the stipulation, or
about by mid -August.
Preliminary approval has been given to the issuance of the proposed
bonds and upon meeting the legal requirements it appears that the purchase will
be consummated according to the terms of the stipulation and the Cedar Grove
water and sewer systems ta.en over by the Town sometime in August of 1971.
6-8-71
LNS
HOARD OF SUFERVISORS
TO(7N OF EAGAN
-4 -
• •
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS ACQUISITION
PUBLIC HEARING 6-8-71
A. ESTIMATED ACQUISITION COST $1,300,000
B. ESTIMATED COST PER UNIT
1. 900 sewer @ $ 707.00
2. 1,070 water @ $ 620.00
C. ESTIMATED PROPERTY OWNER'S COST
1. Sewer Assessment $ 707.00
2. Water Assessment 620.00
3. Total Assessment $1,327.00
$ 636,300
663,400
$1,299,700
Assessments may be paid in full or over a period of time depending on bond
maturities.
D. ESTIMATED PROPERTY OWNER'S ANNUAL COST I.F ASSESSMENT IS SPREAD
Assumes 8% interest on assessments
20 yr. plan 25 yr. plan 30 yr. plan
1. First Installment (includes interest) $172.51. $159.24 $150.39
2. Last Installment (includes interest) $ 71.65 $ 57.33 $ 47.77
3. Average Installment (includes interest) $122.08 $108.28 $ 99.08
Note: It is estimated that the combined monthly sewer and water service charge
will be $6.50.
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS ACQUISITION
PUBLIC HEARING 6-8-71
A. ESTIMATED ACQUISITION COST $1,300,000
B. ESTIMATED COST PER UNIT
1. 900 sewer @ $ 707.00
2. 1,070 water @ $ 620.00
C. ESTIMATED PROPERTY OWNER'S COST
1. Sewer Assessment $ 707.00
2. Water Assessment 6:'0.00
3. Total Assessment T,527.00
$ 636,300
663,400
$1,299,700
Assessments may be paid in full or over a period of time depending on bond
maturities.
D. ESTIMATE.D PROPERTY OWNER'S ANNUAL COST IT ASSESSMENT IS SPREAD
Assumes 8% interest on assessments
20 yr. plan 25 yr. plan 30 yr. plan
1. First Installment (includes interest) $172.51 $159.24 $150.39
2. Last Installment (includes interest) $ 71.65 $ 57.33 $ 47.77
3. Average Installment (includes interest) $122.08 $108.28 $ 99.08
Note: It is estimated that the combined monthly sewer and water service charge
will be $6.50.
•
INTERROGATORIES AND ANSWERS
RE CEDAR GROVE UTILITY SYSTEMS
1. We request a copy of the Pollution Control Board's recommendations for
closing the present sewage plant.
To our knowledge there are no such recommendations.
What are the particulars regarding the hook-up of the Bloomington -Eagan -
Burnsville sewer systems?
Once the systems are taken over by the town, Cedar Grove residents
will be on the same footing with all other residents of the town
except that Cedar Grove residents will not have paid a $200 connection
fee for hook-up to the BEB plant like all other town residents will
have to pay because Cedar Grove has its own sewage treatment plant.
However, any money recovered from the Metro Sewer Board for this plant
will go into the Town Trunk Sewer Fund to help defray town costs for
the BEB plant.
3. If the Cedar Grove sewage will be "abandoned" due to the above hook-up,
what is the acquisition cost of the sewage plant alone?
No cost breakdown was provided by the Board of Arbitrators so it is
not possible to state what we are paying for it. Our 1970 estimated
value of the sewage treatment plant facilities was $232,320 less
$93,020 depreciation leaving a net value of $139,300 or $155 per
sewer connection.
4. After determination of that cost factor, justification as to why we should
have to purchase the sewage plant.
See the Board report for details. The treatment plant is an integral
part of the sewage system and therefore had to be purchased with the
entire system pursuant to the franchise agreement.
5. Is the present sewage system line of adequate quality to meet minimal
standards?
The sanitary sewer lines and also the water lines are of the scone
material specified for municipal sewer and water systems all over
the metropolitan area. They were of the best quality available at
time of construction.
6. Can we obtain definite proof that the present water system now meets the
minimal standards of the Minnesota Department of Health?
The last report of the Minnesota Department of Health states this.
Minor changes will give it an excellent rating. The system has been
• •
checked periodically and approved by the Minnesota Department of
Health since its first construction. All plans and specifications
were approved by the Minnesota Department of Health before construc-
tion was started.
7. How is the bond issue going to be handled?
Like any other bond issue. First the bonds will be approved by bond
counsel, then sent to the printer and then sold to the highest bidder
by our financial consultants.
8. Is a public vote by the registered voters of Cedar Grove residents necessary,
or can the Board pass this issue without a vote?
No public vote on the bond issue is required. The Board of Supervisors
simply adopts a resolution approving and ordering the sale of bonds.
9. What will the complete function of the water system we are acquiring be and
will there be a hook-up with the present Eagan water system?
Present master plan for township water system anticipated the Cedar
Grove System would be integrated into the township system. A new
trunk water main is scheduled for construction on County Road #30
and Cedar Avenue this year which will fully strengthen the Cedar
Grove System. Until this main is installed, additional water will
be supplied through Cedar Grove No. 6 into No. 5.
10. When is the anticipated hook-up of the Eagan water system?
The new trunk main should be completed by freezing this fall. Some
additional improvements will be added in the spring.
Interconnections through Cedar Grove No. 6 to No. 5 will be made
immediately to minimize the problems of low water pressure this
summer during peak water usage months.
11. What would the specifications for purification quality be?
The water needs no further purification to meet Minnesota Department
of Health Standards.
Long range plans of the township include construction of a central
iron removal and softening plant that will improve the quality of
the water.
12. Where can we procure both the Majority and Minority reports?
From the Clerk of District Court, Hastings, Minnesota or Town Attorney.
13. Where can we procure the complete findings and notes of testimony regarding
the Arbitration Board?
•
1' acie
19. '-:e are of the opinion that the Cedar .:rove Utilities Company has,
since ,and durinU the arbitration, through r,isfeasance or malfeasance
rieglec:tcd to properly maintain their water distriLation system in a
bac1.c•rtu or contamination -free manner resulting; since the arbitration
award In ttae delivery of completely unsatisfactory watt r; c:c,T Vyuently
this matter should be taken into consideration and the cost of chlorination
of the lines to each home to a satisfactory quality level be accomplished
as soon as possible, wholly at tne cost of the ::eiar 'rove Utilities Company
as this is solely their responsibility and they alone snould gear the cost
of dc'cr,ataminating the system.
20. Acc.ording to tne Town Board, all water and sewage was supposed to
be in:•tailed and operated by the builder with no cost or assessment to
the homeowners, has this been tested in Court'?
•:Ch IJNO!...RbIONtLD, ':: uLD LIE, THr_ AHovG A L) CLAKIF IEii
AN') •lid'.): 'i 1) I'1 ':'RIT1: & PY THE: T,):iN l;crAR:i.
• •
Copies of the transcript of the arbitration hearings can be examined
at the Clerk of District Court's office in Hastings or copies obtained
by purchase from the Court Reporter, Christopher Columbus & Associates,
St. Paul.
14. Why was there a million dollar difference between the two reports?
You'll have to ask the three arbitrators that one. We can only conclude
that the majority report based its findings and award of value on the
ground rules laid down by the District Court which was to determine the
reasonable value of the systems as of May 1st, 1970.
15. Where can we procure all reports regarding justification of all cost factors
involved in installing present system?
Complete itemized lists of materials installed each year plus the yearly
audit reports of the Cedar Grove Utility Company were used. There were
substantiated. by the plans of the system. Costs for current value
determination were developed from comparisons with actual contract costs
of similar construction in five other similar developments.
16. In the meeting of February 27, 1969 establishing the Arbitration Board, was
the exact purpose of this Board established and was it accomplished?
No. The Cedar Grove residents at the public informational meeting held
on February 27th, 1969 by an overwhelming straw vote rejected the Board
of Supervisors negotiated purchase price of $999,500.00 and indicated
a preference for rather going to arbitration and have a three member
panel determine the value. Thereafter pursuant to the franchise agree-
ments the Board of Supervisors appointed one arbitrator, Cedar Grove
Utilities appointed a second, and those two appointed the third. The
Judge of the District Court then confirmed the appointments and ordered
arbitration.
17. Since the Arbitration Board's decision is dated February 19, 1971, does it
take into consideration that the water system no longer adequately provides
water that is usable in the household, i.e., clothes cannot be washed satis-
factorily - should there not be an additional substantial setoff of the
Arbitration Board's price to properly rehabilitate the main water lines and
approximately 1000 homes involved, possibly $250,000 for such rehabilitation?
The Board of Arbitrators was ordered by the Court pursuant to the Stipula-
tion of the parties that the valuation would be determined as of May 1st,
1970. This was the approximate date that the arbitration proceedings were
commenced. Any valuation date in the future would preclude evidence of
value. There is no indication that rehabilitation of these systems would
entail any such expenditure as $250,000. However, the Settlement Agree-
ment for the purchase of the systems provides as follows:
"4. Defendant warrants that the said systems are in as good and
operable condition as they were on May 1st, 1970 subject only to
•
reasonable wear and tear from usage since that date. Plaintiff shall
have the right to inspect said systems immediately following the
execution hereof in order to determine that they, in fact, are in
such good and operable condition. In the event they are not, plain-
tiff shall immediately notify defendant in writing of any defective
condition in the systems whereupon defendant shall forthwith repair
or eliminate any such defects at its expense or offer the amount re-
quired to so repair or eliminate such defects to plaintiff which
shall then be deducted from the purchase price at closing provided
that either party shall have the right to make any necessary repairs
or eliminate defects during the period of this agreement with the
understanding nonetheless that defendant shall be solely responsible
at its cost to operate said systems up to and including closing date."
18. Since it is the responsibility of the Cedar Grove Utility Company to furnish
water under an implied warranty of suitability as a condition of doing busi-
ness, why doesn't the Town Board order them to meet the quality water levels
or cancel their -franchise?
There is no proof before the Board of Supervisors that the water is
unsuitable for human consumption. Neither the Minnesota Department of
Health nor any other private or public agency has stated this to the
Board's knowledge. Without such a statement from its own utility depart-
ment and/or the State Board of Health, the Board of Supervisors would have
no basis for cancelling the franchise.
19. We are of the opinion that the Cedar Grove Utilities Company has, since and
during the arbitration, through misfeasance or malfeasance neglected to
properly maintain their water distribution system in a bacteria or contamina-
tion -free manner resulting since the arbitration award in the delivery of
completely unsatisfactory water; consequently this matter should be taken
into consideration and the cost of chlorination of the lines to each home
to a satisfactory quality level be accomplished as soon as possible, wholly
at the cost of the Cedar Grove Utilities Company as this is solely their
responsibility and they alone should bear the cost of decontaminating the
system.
See paragraph 4 of the Settlement Agreement.
20. According to the Town Board, all water and sewage was supposed to be installed
and operated by the builder with no cost or assessment to the homeowners, has
this been tested in Court?
This statement is not true. The Board of Supervisors has never at any
time made this representation.
21. Where can we obtain a list of all Cedar Grove Utilities Stockholders and
Board Members?
From Cedar Grove Utilities Company.
-4-
• •
22. Are Cedarvale Shopping Center and associated businesses, Valley National
Bank etc., on the same, namely Cedar Grove Utility Company, water system?
Yes.
23. If so, what is their assessment?
They have already been assessed for water supply and storage. They will
be assessed after purchase of the systems for water laterals. No assess-
ments have as yet been actually computed.
24. Are Valley View and Hi -Site apartments on this water system?
No. Valley View is hooked up to the town's central systems. Hi -Site
is temporarily on the Cedar Grove water system but will automatically
be put into the town's system when it's ready and then will be assessed
for its part in the town system.
25. If so, what is their assessment?
This has not been computed.
6-8-71
RR & LMS
Paul Use lmann, ul;t r r, , ar
l'it3i' 2 i u f1� L'I517 Ir'F�
;}1r,iscr` •
Of t A : Y
1. '::e request. a ct. y 01 :i': Uil'..1" ,CRtro1 !loans'`i :'t( i'i!C11•''Lion.: 1ur
closin', the pros.:nt se
d. 'What are the partict. iar 5 : r c :t; : i-1r: the tloo-Li, o:
an-'=:urnsville srr(r s•�5'(:
3. If the :Edar rc tt ;« e ri,t.• 71 .1i 11 : E " ... lo:,•
hook-up, whatis the a:-c,uis:•.1,.' c1. t of titF Ee._, e 1 1 r+t
4. After determination'Air . st 1actcr, 1 n t v:,ly wt
should have to 1+urcn.a t r w IE i 1 ant.
Is tHc present jrrr; k : j:.ttll: line O: ailey.alk: ;:i::tirial
standards?
we :Lt-iin d(-1 1' itF !"•:' ::-t' r. .( present ',;=1( i- teft now f1CCts
the minimal :ltandar'1S . i ..: ,":s sot3 .,ei :.rt:•1ent of :eai'
(• iiow is the bond iS5(_E i:: to Le ha-)dledl
Li. Is a public ote Ly t.ilE t.••istered voters (,f edar rc\e re..l'.IentEi
necessary, or can t.rli t'o r i i this issLee .,;it::c'.:t it ot,s :
). + i 1 w111 the :ililetl l:i.. tl ..!i o1 the 'w.lter t• I ( :il UI1 .il
i:e an.i will there tt :: noci wi!.l tr present. t t
10. '..nen is the a:.tisipaten ,i,u:c-up o: The aLan wal.er
11. ''hat woul 1 t:1E si,eci: ic::' 10 i 1c.r purl! icnt.ic:1 yuni i'y LE
lc.'. ':?uere can we i.rc,;ure t:i. 1: l.i findings c:r;i nc ' e s of t E st 1!.,('n
re . ar ' i n trtf £tr: t trat i Ln car
13. 'iiE r E car. r 1 ty and i ". i ' ' I (
14. :.ly was 1.11E re a ,.i1.1 •. e.:-Erence :'et. k.• l
15. ''here can we procure all resorts rer-:ar-lint Justil ivatic n (:i <l11
cost :a' tors
i
1E1. In the MEEtirs ;.1 , :1 t'_::i1 j' c_i, Esta:.lisrtin- the ,1. itr'a1.1c:1
Board, a.as tllE exact pT r () e o: t .i:i ;.car..' €sta. 1ishe.s a ,d .as it ac,_C,r1-
plisned?
1 (. ,since the Art itra'ion--oard's decision is dated 1'eLr uar _'1 i i, 1-3(1,
does it, take into considEr.lti :•t char. tree water S SLErlr 1+- 1c...cr acre+;u:ttely
provides water t.lr,t is c.sa .1. i71 7.1,e :coc:seh':id, i.e.,
o+aslted satisla+ turtlj - i iulli'i t:Iere not he an ad 1 io i 1 sn.. t.ai.t lal `.Et
off of Inc Arbitrat.ic,l t«.:'It :'s price to properly 1 rii; i l i tatE :_Ile main
water lines and t:+e ai,i:I xi:..tt('iy Iuu0 ?tomes i.ivc i•E ,u:=i:.ly ;; U,Ut,U
:or s..cti r€ha:,ilitatiun.'
1d. ,ince it is in( e :..s.. ; : i . f t:tE
furnish water under an ir:„ l it . irrar;'' y
Joint' business, Arty :'J( 5'1st ''le N'. -.'ard r e:
water 1tvels cr cancel t:tFiT tr:.:hise
Ii•it. y u
ii.l•. Tl t)1
1 i : t J
Pa,:e 2
19. ''.7E are of L•lc 7 r VE . ' :!
since and i ri 11:; LI( i 1 r i s
fl€HA..ct,:d to ,roperly r • t r u t. in
haotk.ria ur coo t_ 1 r re ratj cn
aw'ar In Lht de 1 1VEry : . • t,i ;
thi s matter SI1(1 1: Zt' • i • • n i ia !t 1 r 1Ho' i
Ii
oi t.Je llnk Lo ci.h i i tt. r :4.
as soon as pOL i ulc , •,:t1:11y ;:t Tt 1 i i i Li, priny
as this is suit. 1 1tiir sit :li 31Gfle 1J dr t ci.st
of deco :Laminating ,,.H1E
20. Accord n, to the low- F 1 r a-, !,suppo A to
be installed and cper,it 1 / -t A 1,1er wi tn r s:t to
toe homeowncrs, as tni hr E teste:: in ...curt !
.1. Where can we oi.tain a list cf all „.:Edar jry Utilitis tokhol'jers
and Board kmbers?
22. Are Cedarva le .nopp.in .entc r and assoc iate _ 'va 1 1(-y la t cna 1
Bank etc. , on LAE SaME nami .j dar ;:rove t i 1 ity water systeria
23. If so, what is trii. r sl:ment ?
24. Are Valley View and te ai:paru-,E its on t hi s water sytem?
25. If so, what Is the i r a sse ssment ?
WE Rt.JF Ti1AT 1 !T.) A., I! !J A.
AN.-3WERED I A 1 T I ri6 -)Y I —
ei-11 CeA -it-c
46 4- ci.sc
Ar
.,t"
P.?OPOSEU ACQUItATIOOr CEDAR GROVE UTILITIr,S (. ANY BY TOWN OF EAGAN
1. We request a copy cf the Pollution Control Board's recommendations for
closing the present sewage plant.
2. What are the particulars re ;arding the hook-up of the Bloornington-
iagan-iiurnsville sewer system?
3. If the Cedar Grove sewage system will be "abandoned" due to the above
hook-up, what is the acquisition cost of the sewage plant alone?
4. After determination of that cost factor, Justification as to why we
should have to purchase the sewage plant.
5. Is the present sewage system line of adequate quality to meet minimal
standards/
6. Can we obtain definite proof that the present water system now meets
the minimal standards of the .inaesota Department of Health?
7. How is the bond issue going to be handled?
6. Is a public vote by the registered voters of ;:edar ;;rove residents
necessary, or can the Board pass /eels issue without a vote?
9. Wtiat will the complete function of the water system we are acquiring
be and will there be a hook-up with the present E.ac,an water system?
10. When is the anticipated hook-up of the Eagan water system?
11. What would the specifications for puril ication quality be?
12. Where can we procure the complete findings and notes ni testimony
regarding the Arbitration Board?
13. Where can we procure both the t a jority and ! iinority reports?
14. Why was there a million dollar difference between the two reports?
1 inhere can we procure all reports reyardin,_, justification o1 all
cost factors involved in installing present systcmY
lb. In the meeting of February 27, 1969 establishing the Arbitration
hoard, was the exact purpose of this Board established and was it accom-
plished?
17. Since the Arbitration P.oard's decision is dated Februar i 19, 1971,
does it take into consideration that the water system no longer adequately
provides water that is usable in the nousencli, i.e., clothes cannot be
washed satisfactorily - strould there not be an additional substantial set
off of the Arbitration Board's price to properly rehabilitate the main
water lines and the approximately 1000 homes involved, possibly S2W,00U
for such rehabilitation?
16. Since it is the responsibility of the Cedar Grove Utility Company to
furnish water under an implied warranty of suitability as a condition of
doing business, why doesn't the Town Board order tlie,ii to meet quality
water levels or cancel tneir franchise?
•
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS ACQUISITION
PUBLIC HEARING 6-8-71
A. ESTIMATED ACQUISITION COST $1,300,000
B. ESTIMATED COST PER UNIT
1. 900 sewer @ $ 707.00
2. 1,070 water @ $
C. ESTIMATED PROPERTY OWNER'S COST
1. Sewer Assessment $ 707.00
2. Water Assessment 6.41.00
3. Total Assessment , 3.'l.00
$ 636,300
663,400
$1,299,700
Assessments may be paid in full or over a period of time depending on bond
maturities.
D. ESTIMAATED PROPERTY OWNER'S ANNUAL COST IF ASSESSMENT IS SPREAD
Assumes 8% interest on assessments
20 yr. plan 25 yr. plan 30 yr. plan
1. First Installment (includes interest) $172.51 $159.24 $150.39
2. Last Installment (includes interest) $ 71.65 $ 57.33 $ 47.77
3. Average Installment (includes interest) $122.08 $108.28 $ 99.08
Note: It is estimated that the combined monthly sewer and water service charge
will be $6.50.
•
EAGAN, MTNNESOTA
PROPOSED WATER g SEWER SYSTEM ACQUISITION
ESTIMATED COSTS
A. ESTIMATED ACQUISITION COST
8. ESTIMATED COST PER UNIT
1. 900 sewer @ $ 710
2. 1,070 water @ 620
C. ESTIMATED PROPERTY OWNER'S COST
(Assumes 100% assessed)
1. Sewer Assessment @ $ 710
2. Water Assessment @ 620
3. Total Assessment @ $1,330
Assessment may be paid in full or
maturities.
over a period
$1,300,000
$ 639,000
663,400
$1,302,400
of time depending
D. ESTIMATED PROPERTY OWNER'S ANNUAL COST IF ASSESSMENT SPREAD
2 0 -M. -P..an
1. First Assessment Installment (Includes Int.)
2. Last Assessment Installment (Includes Int.)
3. Average Assessment Installment (Includes Int.)
S172.90
/1.82
( 121.)
on bond
25 Yn. Han
$159.60
5 7.46
( 1US.a)
30 Yn. PQczn
$150.73
( 9 3U)
Note: It is estimated that the combined average monthly sewer and water
service charge will be $6.50.
INTERROGATORIES ANI) ANSWERS
RE CEDAR GROVE UTILITY SYSTEMS
1. We request a copy of the Pollution Control Board's recommendations for
closing the present sewage plant.
To our knowledge there are no such recommendations.
2. What are the particulars regarding the hookup of the Bloomington -Eagan•
Burnsville sewer systems?
Once the systems are taken over by the town, Cedar Grove residents
will be on the same footing with all other residents of the town
except that Cedar Grove residents will not have paid a $200 connection
fee for hook-up to the BEB plant like all other town residents will
have to pay because Cedar Grove has its own sewage treatment plant.
However, any money recovered from the Metro Sewer Board for this plant
will go into the Town Trunk Sewer Fund to help defray town costs for
the BEB plant.
3. If the Cedar Grove sewage will be "abandoned" due to the above hook-up,
what is the acquisition cost of the sewage plant alone?
No cost breakdown was provided by the Board of Arbitrators so it is
not possible to state what we are paying for it. Our 1970 estimated
value of the sewage treatment plant facilities was $232,320 less
$93,020 depreciation leaving a net value of $139,300 or $155 per
sewer connection.
4. After determination of that cost factor, justification as to why we should
have to purchase the sewage plant.
See the Board report for details. The treatment plant is an integral
part of the sewage system and therefore had to be purchased with the
entire system pursuant to the franchise agreement.
5. Is the present sewage system line of adequate quality to meet minimal
standards?
The sanitary sewer lines and also the water lines are of the same
material specified for municipal sewer and water systems all over
the metropolitan area. They were of the best quality available at
time of construction.
6. Can we obtain definite proof that the present water system now meets the
minimal standards of the Minnesota Department of Health?
The last report of the Minnesota Department of Health states this.
Minor changes will give it an excellent rating. The system has been
•
checked periodically and approved by the Minnesota Department of
Health since its first construction. All plans and specifications
were approved by the Minnesota Department of health before construc-
tion was started.
7. How is the bond issue going to be handled?
Like any other bond issue. First the bonds will be approved by bond
counsel, then sent to the printer and then sold to the highest bidder
by our financial consultants.
8. Is a public vote by the registered voters of Cedar Grove residents necessary,
or can the Board pass this issue without a vote?
No public vote on the bond issue is required. The Board of Supervisors
simply adopts a resolution approving and ordering the sale of bonds.
9. What will the complete function of the water system we are acquiring be and
will there be a hook-up with the present Eagan water system?
Present master plan for township water system anticipated the Cedar
Grove System would be integrated into the township system. A new
trunk water main is scheduled for construction on County Road #30
and Cedar Avenue this year which will fully strengthen the Cedar
Grove System. Until this main is installed, additional water will
be supplied through Cedar Grove No. 6 into No. 5.
10. When is the anticipated hook-up of the Eagan water system?
The new trunk main should be completed by freezing this fall. Some
additional improvements will be added in the spring.
Interconnections through Cedar Grove No. 6 to No. 5 will be made
immediately to minimize the problems of low water pressure this
sunnier during peak water usage months.
11. What would the specifications for purification quality be?
The water needs no further purification to meet Minnesota Department
of Health Standards.
Long range plans of the township include construction of a central
iron removal and softening plant that will improve the quality of
the water.
12. Where can we procure both the Majority and Minority reports?
From the Clerk of District Court, Hastings, Minnesota or Town Attorney.
13. Where can we procure the complete findings and notes of testimony regarding
the Arbitration Board?
-2-
Copies of the transcript of the arbitration hearings can be examined
at the Clerk of District Court's office in Hastings or copies obtained
by purchase from the Court Reporter, Christopher Columbus & Associates,
St. Paul.
14. Why was there a million dollar difference between the two reports?
You'll have to ask the three arbitrators that one. We can only conclude
that the majority report based its findings and award of value on the
ground rules laid down by the District Court which was to determine the
reasonable value of the systems as of May 1st, 1970.
15. Where can we procure all reports regarding justification of all cost factors
involved in installing present system?
Complete itemized lists of materials installed each year plus the yearly
audit reports of the Cedar Grove Utility Company were used. There were
substantiated by the plans of the system. Costs for current value
determination were developed from comparisons with actual contract costs
of similar construction in five other similar developments.
16. In the meeting of February 27, 1969 establishing the Arbitration Board, was
the exact purpose of this Board established and was it accomplished?
No. The Cedar Grove residents at the public informational meeting held
on February 27th, 1969 by an overwhelming straw vote rejected the Board
of Supervisors negotiated purchase price of $999,500.00 and indicated
a preference for rather going to arbitration and have a three member
panel determine the value. Thereafter pursuant to the franchise agree-
ments the Board of Supervisors appointed owe arbitrator, Cedar Grove
Utilities appointed a second, and those two appointed the third. The
Judge of the District Court then confirmed the appointments and ordered
arbitration.
17. Since the Arbitration Board's decision is dated February 19, 1971, does it
take into consideration that the water system no longer adequately provides
water that is usable in the household, i.e., clothes cannot be washed satis-
factorily - should there not be an additional substantial setoff of the
Arbitration Board's price to properly rehabilitate the main water lines and
approximately 1000 homes involved, possibly $250,000 for such rehabilitation?
The Board of Arbitrators was ordered by the Court pursuant to the Stipula-
tion of the parties that the valuation would be determined as of May 1st,
1970. This was the approximate date that the arbitration proceedings were
commenced. Any valuation date in the future would preclude evidence of
value. There is no indication that rehabilitation of these systems would
entail any such expenditure as $250,000. However, the Settlement Agree-
ment for the purchase of the systems provides as follows:
"4. Defendant warrants that the said systems are in as good and
operable condition as they were on May 1st, 1970 subject only to
-3-
• •
reasonable wear and tear from usage since that date. Plaintiff shall
have the right to inspect said systems immediately following the
execution hereof in order to determine that they, in fact, are in
such good and operable condition. In the event they are not, plain-
tiff shall immediately notify defendant in writing of any defective
condition in the systems whereupon defendant shall forthwith repair
or eliminate any such defects at its expense or offer the amount re-
quired to so repair or eliminate such defects to plaintiff which
shall then be deducted from the purchase price at closing provided
that either party shall have the right to make any necessary repairs
or eliminate defects during the period of this agreement with the
understanding nonetheless that defendant shall be solely responsible
at its cost to operate said systems up to and including closing date."
18. Since it is the responsibility of the Cedar Grove Utility Company to furnish
water under an implied warranty of suitability as a condition of doing busi-
ness, why doesn't the Town Board order them to meet the quality water levels
or cancel their -franchise?
There is no proof before the Board of Supervisors that the water is
unsuitable for human consumption. Neither the Minnesota Department of
Health nor any other private or public agency has stated this to the
Board's knowledge. Without such a statement from its own utility depart-
ment and/or the State Board of Health, the Board of Supervisors would have
no basis for cancelling the franchise.
19. We are of the opinion that the Cedar Grove Utilities Company has, since and
during the arbitration, through misfeasance or malfeasance neglected to
properly maintain their water distribution system in a bacteria or contamina-
tion -free manner resulting since the arbitration award in the delivery of
completely unsatisfactory water; consequently this matter should be taken
into consideration and the cost of chlorination of the lines to each home
to a satisfactory quality level be accomplished as soon as possible, wholly
at the cost of the Cedar Grove Utilities Company as this is solely their
responsibility and they alone should bear the cost of decontaminating the
system.
See paragraph 4 of the Settlement Agreement.
20. According to the Town Board, all water and sewage was supposed to be installed
and operated by the builder with no cost or assessment to the homeowners, has
this been tested in Court?
This statement is not true. The Board of Supervisors has never at any
time made this representation.
21. Where can we obtain a list of all Cedar Grove Utilities Stockholders and
Board Members?
From Cedar Grove Utilities Company.
-4-
22. Are Cedarvale Shopping Center and associated businesses, Valley National
Bank etc., on the wane, nmely Cedar Grove Utility Company, water system?
Yes.
23. If so, what is their assessment?
They have already been assessed for water supply and storage. They will
be assessed after purchase of the systems for water laterals. No assess-
ments have as yet been actually computed.
24. Are Valley View and Hi -Site apartments on this water system?
No. Valley View is hooked up to the town's central systems. }Li -Site
is temporarily on the Cedar Grove water system but will automatically
be put into the town's system when it's ready and then will be assessed
for its part in the town system.
25. If so, what is their assessment?
This has not been computed.
6-8-71
RR & LMS
•
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul, Minnesota 55113
(REVISED)
Preliminary Report on
Acquisition of Cedar Grove Utilities Company
Water and Sanitary Sewer System
Public Improvement Project No. 33
Eagan Township, Minnesota
June 8, 1971
SCOPE:
This report covers the costs and feasibility of purchasing the Cedar Grove
Utilities Company water and sanitary sewer systems in order that they may become
part of the Township Municipal Water and Sewer Systems.
FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
This project is feasible and conforms with overall planning for municipal water
and sewer system development in Eagan Township. The interests of the present and
future residents of these additions can best be served by municipal ownership and
operation of these systems. Purchase of the water system together with the sanitary
sewer system is considered essential for the functioning of this utility system
as the sewer system cannot be operated without the water system.
DISCUSSION:
The present Cedar Grove water and sanitary sewer systems were established in
1959 by authority of the franchise agreement between the Township and the Cedar
Grove Utilities Company. The system has been expanded within the franchise area to
serve continued growth.
The system includes complete sanitary sewer and water facilities for approxi-
mately 910 sewer and 1075 water connections. Included are two 600 gallon per minutE
deep wells, one 100,000 gallon elevated water storage tank, pump house with controls
and chlorinator, 12.8 miles of water main, 134 hydrants, 138 gate valves, 10.5 mileE
of sanitary sewer main, 202 manholes, 1075 water and 910 sewer service lines,
11 acres of land, a sewage treatment plant providing both primary and secondary
treatment and miscellaneous operating equipment.
Due to the expressed desires of the property owners in the area, the Town
Board directed the Township Engineers and Attorney to investigate the feasibility
of acquiring the complete system.
The original franchise agreement provides that the Township may, at any time,
purchase the systems for their reasonable value. Such acquisition would allow the
system to be operated as a part of the established Township water and sanitary sewer
systems.
Page 1.
Principal advantages of municipal operation are:
1. Lower cost of service to the property owners served by the systems.
2. More dependable and safe water and sewer service when integrated into
the Township network.
3. Future cost savings to the Township by avoiding duplicate lines as
development occurs in the area surrounding the Cedar Grove area.
After considerable negotiating relative to the fair value of the utility sys-
tem, it was recommended by the residents at a public hearing and so ordered by the
Town Board of Supervisors that the arbitration method outlined in the franchise
agreement be followed to determine the reasonable and fair value of this utility
system.
AREA TO BE INCLUDED:
The improvements herein discussed involve all of the property within the fol-
lowing described areas:
Cedar Grove Additions No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and all of the NE'k, Sec. 19,
T27N, R23W lying easterly of Trunk Highway 13 except the Valley View
Apartment complex.
COST ESTIMATES:
The reasonable value of the system as determined by arbitration is as follows:
Real Estate
Utility System
Miscellaneous Costs
Total Cost
$ 56,450
1,200,000
43,550
$1,300,000
ASSESSMENTS:
Assessments are to be levied against benefited property in accordance with
Township policy for benefits received. Those properties now served by the Township
sewer system will be assessed only for the water system.
Sanitary Sewer Assessment $ 710/Residential lot
Water Assessment 620/Residential lot
$1,330/Lot
Commercial and school property will be assessed on an equivalent basis de-
termined by water usage, front footage and area factors.
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I am a
duly Registered Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
Robert W. Rosene
Date: May 8, 1971 Reg. No. 3488
Page 2.
• •
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul, Minnesota 55113
(REVISED)
Preliminary Report on
Acquisition of Cedar Grove Utilities Company
Water and Sanitary Sewer System
Public Improvement Project No. 33
Eagan Township, Minnesota
June 8, 1971
SCOPE:
This report covers the costs and feasibility of purchasing the Cedar Grove
Utilities Company water and sanitary sewer systems in order that they may become
part of the Township Municipal Water and Sewer Systems.
FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
This project is feasible and conforms with overall planning for municipal water
and sewer system development in Eagan Township. The interests of the present and
future residents of these additions can best be served by municipal ownership and
operation of these systems. Purchase of the water system together with the sanitary
sewer system is considered essential for the functioning of this utility system
as the sewer system cannot be operated without the water system.
DISCUSSION:
The present Cedar Grove water and sanitary sewer systems were established in
1959 by authority of the franchise agreement between the Township and the Cedar
Grove Utilities Company. The system has been expanded within the franchise area to
serve continued growth.
The system includes complete sanitary sewer and water facilities for approxi-
mately 910 sewer and 1075 water connections. Included are two 600 gallon per minute
deep wells, one 100,000 gallon elevated water storage tank, pump house with controls
and chlorinator, 12.8 miles of water main, 134 hydrants, 138 gate valves, 10.5 miles
of sanitary sewer main, 202 manholes, 1075 water and 910 sewer service lines,
11 acres of land, a sewage treatment plant providing both primary and secondary
treatment and miscellaneous operating equipment.
Due to the expressed desires of the property owners in the area, the Town
Board directed the Township Engineers and Attorney to investigate the feasibility
of acquiring the complete system.
The original franchise agreement provides that the Township may, at any time,
purchase the systems for their reasonable value. Such acquisition would allow the
system to be operated as a part of the established Township water and sanitary sewer
systems.
Page 1.
r
• •
Principal advantages of municipal operation are;
1. Lower cost of service to the property owners served by the systems.
2. More dependable and safe water and sewer service when integrated into
the Township network.
3. Future cost savings to the Township by avoiding duplicate lines as
development occurs in the area surrounding the Cedar Grove area.
After considerable negotiating relative to the fair value of the utility sys-
tem, it was recommended by the residents at a public hearing and so ordered by the
Town Board of Supervisors that the arbitration method outlined in the franchise
agreement be followed to determine the reasonable and fair value of this utility
system.
AREA TO BE INCLUDED:
The improvements herein discussed involve all of the property within the fol-
lowing described areas:
Cedar Grove Additions No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and all of the NE'k, Sec. 19,
T27N, R23W lying easterly of Trunk Highway 13 except the Valley View
Apartment complex.
COST ESTIMATES:
The reasonable value of the system as determined by arbitration is as follows:
Real Estate
Utility System
Miscellaneous Costs
Total Cost
$ 56,450
1,200,000
43,550
$1,300,000
ASSESSMENTS:
Assessments are to be levied against benefited property in accordance with
Township policy for benefits received. Those properties now served by the Township
sewer system will be assessed only for the water system.
Sanitary Sewer Assessment $ 710/Residential lot
Water Assessment 620/Residential lot
$1,330/Lot
Commercial and school property will be assessed on an equivalent basis de-
termined by water usage, front footage and area factors.
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I am a
duly Registered Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
Robert W. Rosene
Date: May 8, 1971 Reg. No. 3488
Page 2.
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul, Minnesota 55113
(REVISED)
Preliminary Report on
Acquisition of Cedar Grove Utilities Company
Water and Sanitary Sewer System
Public Improvement Project No. 33
Eagan Township, Minnesota
June 8, 1971
SCOPE:
This report covers the costs and feasibility of purchasing the Cedar Grove
Utilities Company water and sanitary sewer systems in order that they may become
part of the Township Municipal Water and Sewer Systems.
FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
This project is feasible and conforms with overall planning for municipal water
and sewer system development in Eagan Township. The interests of the present and
future residents of these additions can best be served by municipal ownership and
operation of these systems. Purchase of the water system together with the sanitary
sewer system is considered essential for the functioning of this utility system
as the sewer system cannot be operated without the water system.
DISCUSSION:
The present Cedar Grove water and sanitary sewer systems were established in
1959 by authority of the franchise agreement between the Township and the Cedar
Grove Utilities Company. The system has been expanded within the franchise area to
serve continued growth.
The system includes complete sanitary sewer and water facilities for approxi-
mately 910 sewer and 1075 water connections. Included are two 600 gallon per minute
deep wells, one 100,000 gallon elevated water storage tank, pump house with controls
and chlorinator, 12.8 miles of water main, 134 hydrants, 138 gate valves, 10.5 miles
of sanitary sewer main, 202 manholes, 1075 water and 910 sewer service lines,
11 acres of land, a sewage treatment plant providing both primary and secondary
treatment and miscellaneous operating equipment.
Due to the expressed desires of the property owners in the area, the Tawn
Board directed the Township Engineers and Attorney to investigate the feasibility
of acquiring the complete system.
The original franchise agreement provides that the Township may, at any time,
purchase the systems for their reasonable value. Such acquisition would allow the
system to be operated as a part of the established Township water and sanitary sewer
systems.
Page 1.
•
Principal advantages of municipal operation are:
1. Lower cost of service to the property owners served by the systems.
2. More dependable and safe water and sewer service when integrated into
the Township network.
3. Future cost savings to the Township by avoiding duplicate lines as
development occurs in the area surrounding the Cedar Grove area.
After considerable negotiating relative to the fair value of the utility sys-
tem, it was recommended by the residents at a public hearing and so ordered by the
Town Board of Supervisors that the arbitration method outlined in the franchise
agreement be followed to determine the reasonable and fair value of this utility
system.
AREA TO BE INCLUDED:
The improvements herein discussed involve all of the property within the fol-
lowing described areas:
Cedar Grave Additions No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and all of the NE2Z, Sec. 19,
T27N, R23W lying easterly of Trunk Highway 13 except the Valley View
Apartment complex.
COST ESTIMATES:
The reasonable value of the system as determined by arbitration is as follows:
Real Estate
Utility System
Miscellaneous Costs
Total Cost
$ 56,450
1,200,000
43,550
$1,300,000
ASSESSMENTS:
Assessments are to be levied against benefited property in accordance with
Township policy for benefits received. Those properties now served by the Township
sewer system will be assessed only for the water system.
Sanitary Sewer Assessment $ 710/Residential lot
Water Assessment 620/Residential lot
$1,330/Lot
Commercial and school property will be assessed on an equivalent basis de-
termined by water usage, front footage and area factors.
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I am a
duly Registered Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
Robert W. Rosene
Date: May 8, 1971 Reg. No. 3488
Page 2.
• •
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul, Minnesota 55113
(REVISED)
Preliminary Report on
Acquisition of Cedar Grove Utilities Company
Water and Sanitary Sewer System
Public Improvement Project No. 33
Eagan Township, Minnesota
June 8, 1971
SCOPE:
This report covers the costs and feasibility of purchasing the Cedar Grove
Utilities Company water and sanitary sewer systems in order that they may become
part of the Township Municipal Water and Sewer Systems.
FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
This project is feasible and conforms with overall planning for municipal water
and sewer system development in Eagan Township. The interests of the present and
future residents of these additions can best be served by municipal ownership and
operation of these systems. Purchase of the water system together with the sanitary
sewer system is considered essential for the functioning of this utility system
as the sewer system cannot be operated without the water system.
DISCUSSION:
The present Cedar Grove water and sanitary sewer systems were established in
1959 by authority of the franchise agreement between the Township and the Cedar
Grove Utilities Company. The system has been expanded within the franchise area to
serve continued growth.
The system includes complete sanitary sewer and water facilities for approxi-
mately 910 sewer and 1075 water connections. Included are two 600 gallon per minute
deep wells, one 100,000 gallon elevated water storage tank, pump house with controls
and chlorinator, 12.8 miles of water main, 134 hydrants, 138 gate valves, 10.5 miles
of sanitary sewer main, 202 manholes, 1075 water and 910 sewer service lines,
11 acres of land, a sewage treatment plant providing both primary and secondary
treatment and miscellaneous operating equipment.
Due to the expressed desires of the property owners in the area, the Town
Board directed the Township Engineers and Attorney to investigate the feasibility
of acquiring the complete system.
The original franchise agreement provides that the Township may, at any time,
purchase the systems for their reasonable value. Such acquisition would allow the
system to be operated as a part of the established Township water and sanitary sewer
systems.
Page 1.
•
Principal advantages of municipal operation are:
1. Lower cost of service to the property owners served by the systems.
2. More dependable and safe water and sewer service when integrated into
the Township network.
3. Future cost savings to the Township by avoiding duplicate lines as
development occurs in the area surrounding the Cedar Grove area.
After considerable negotiating relative to the fair value of the utility sys-
tem, it was recommended by the residents at a public hearing and so ordered by the
Town Board of Supervisors that the arbitration method outlined in the franchise
agreement be followed to determine the reasonable and fair value of this utility
system.
AREA TO BE INCLUDED:
The improvements herein discussed involve all of the property within the fol-
lowing described areas:
Cedar Grove Additions No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and all of the NEk, Sec. 19,
T27N, R23W lying easterly of Trunk Highway 13 except the Valley View
Apartment complex.
COST ESTIMATES:
The reasonable value of the system as determined by arbitration is as follows:
Real Estate
Utility System
Miscellaneous Costs
Total Cost
$ 56,450
1,200,000
43,550
$1,300,000
ASSESSMENTS:
Assessments are to be levied against benefited property in accordance with
Township policy for benefits received. Those properties now served by the Township
sewer system will be assessed only for the water system.
Sanitary Sewer Assessment $ 710/Residential lot
Water Assessment 620/Residential lot
$1,330/Lot
Commercial and school property will be assessed on an equivalent basis de-
termined by water usage, front footage and area factors.
I hereby certify that this report was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I am a
duly Registered Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
Robert W. Rosene
Date: May 8, 1971 Reg. No. 3488
Page 2.
AFFIDAVIT•UBLICATION
LEGAL NOTICE
NOTICE Of ►USUC HEARING
REACQUISITION OF SEWER AND
WATER SYSTEMS FROM CEDAR
GROVE UTILITIES CO. TOWN OF
EAGAN, DAIOTA COUNTY. MINNE-
SOTA
NOTICE. is hereby given that the Board
of Supervisors. Town of Eagan, Dakota
!County. Minnesota, will conduct a public
'heartrna at the Rahn Elementary School-
4424 Sandstone Drive, Cedar Grove, in
Town of Eagan on Tuesday. June 8. 1971
at 7 30 o'clock P M regarding the acquisi-
tion of the sewer systems and appurtenant
water systems now owned by Cedar Greve
Utilities Co . a Minnesota corporation.
which systems are more fully described
in -Preliminary Region on Public Improve
ment Project No. .1.3- prepared by Bones
moo. Roselle, Andertlk and A*sactatrs, Inc .
Town Engineers, which is on Ille in the
Office of the Town Clerk. The areas pre
posed to be assessed are as follows Cedar
Grove Additions Nos 1,2.-1.4 and 5. and
the Cedarvale area bounded by Cedar
Avenue South, State Trunk Highway No
13 and Beau d'Rue Drive The tptal esti•
mated cast of the acquistlon is S1,300.-
000.00
Dated: May 5, 1971
Town of Eason
Dakota County. Minnesota
■' ALYCE ROUE
Clerk
13-14
STATE OF MINNESOTA
County of Dakota I ss
ROGER CLAY, being duly sworn, on oath says he is and during all the times herein
stated has been the publisher and printer of the newspaper known as Dakota County
Tribune and has full knowledge of the facts herein stated as follows Said newspaper
is printed in the English language in newspaper formal and in column and sheet form
equivalent in printed space to at least 900 square inches. Said newspaper is a weekly
and is distributed at least once each week Said newspaper has 50 per cent of its news
columns devoted to news of local interest to the community which it purports to serve
and does not wholly duplicate any other publication and is not mode up entirely of
patents, plate matter and advertisements Said newspaper is circulated in and near
the municipality which it purports to serve, has at least 500 copies regularly delivered
to paying subscribers, has on overage of at least 75 per cent of its total circulation
currently paid or no more than three months in arrears and hos entry as second-class
matter in its local post -office. Said newspaper purports to serve the Villages in the
County of Dakota and it hos its known offices of issue in the Villages of Farmington,
Rosemount, Burnsville, Apple Volley, and Lakeville established and open during its
regular business hours for the gathering of news, sale of advertisements and sole of
subscriptions and maintained by the publisher or persons in their employ and subiect
to direction and control during all such regular business hours and devoted exclusively
during such regular business hours to the business of the newspaper and business
related thereto. Said newspaper files a copy of each issue immediately with the State
Historical Society. Said newspaper has complied with all the foregoing conditions
for at least two years preceding the day or dotes of publication mentioned below.
Said newspaper has filed with the Secretary of State of Minnesota prior to January 1,
1966 and each January 1 thereafter on affidavit in the form prescribed by the Secre-
tary of State and signed by the publisher and sworn to before a notary public stating
that the newspaper is a legal newspaper.
He further states on oath that the printed
hereto attached as a part hereof was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and
was printed and published therein in the English language, once each week,
fors?
successive weeks; that it was first so published
on Thursday, the _% day of _ f _ _ 19 7' and was
thereafter printed and published on every Thu day to and including Thursday
the t3 1 — day of 19 7/ and that the following
is a printed copy of the to er ci4 ess c phabet from A to Z, both inclusive, and is hereby
acknowledge as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and pub-
lication of said notice, to wit;
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ' - _ day of _
abedrstuvwttyz
19 ?e
Doris M. Mazurkiewicz
t140esmly filttblix, DisliOt9 C�yf1p t.M}c�P
Neffiratamilsicri Ebtplitcot/r1 3311 t i w
CEDAR •ROVEU T I L I T I E S IIC O.
7343 Concord Boulevard East
South Saint Paul, Minnesota 55075
Phone - 451-6426
IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
NOTICE NOTICE
May 28, 1971
TO: Cedar Grove Utilities Co. Water Customers
SUBJECT: Superchlorination of Water System SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD #30
On the evening of Friday, June 4, we are going to superchlorinate the water mains in
all streets south of the center of County Road #30. This work is being done on the
recommendation of the Minnesota Department of Health.
The procedure that we will be following will be that at 7:00 PM on June 4, the
affected area will be isolated by closing valves, and a strong chlorine solution
will be pumped into the system. The solution will be drawn through the system by
flushing fire hydrants in the area. The solution should be in place in about two
or three hours at which time the normal water pressure will be turned back on.
It is recommended that each home draw superchlorinated water from the system into
the house plumbing to serve the same purpose in cleaning the pipes. The procedure
would be to turn on a water valve until a strong chlorine odor is detected and
then shut it off. Toilets should be flushed at least twice for the same purpose.
Early on Saturday morning, June 5, the chlorine solution will be flushed from the
system and replaced with fresh water not later than 8:00 AM. Home plumbing should
be flushed at that time until the strong chlorine odor is no longer recognized.
The water flushed will very likely be very dirty in appearance.
During the hours of the treatment, the water should not be used except for flushing
toilets. Fresh water for all other purposes necessary during this time should be
drawn and stored in suitable containers before 7:00 PM. The chlorine solution is
not dangerous in small quantities, but would be very unpleasant to the taste and
would most likely bleach fabric and hair on prolonged contact.
The following summary includes the steps the water customer should take:
1. Mark your calendar for June 4 to remind you of the date.
2. On June 4, at 6:00 PM or earlier, draw water for drinking and other purposes
to last until the next morning.
3. After 10:00 PM or before going to bed, draw superchlorinated water through
house plumbing.
4. On Saturday morning after 8:00 AM, flush plumbing fixtures until fresh clean
water is again available.
We will appreciate your cooperation in this effort to improve water quality.
Sincerely yours,
CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
i
AGENCY MEMBERS
ROBERT C. TUVESON, CHAIRHAM.
ALeERT LEA
HOMER C. LUICK,YlCS CHAIRMAN,
MIMNEA►OLIS
HOWARD A. ANDERSEN. M.D..
ROCHESTER
JOHN R. BORCHERT.
GOLDEN VALLEY
MILTON J. FELLOWS,
WORTHINGTON
STEVE J. GADLER. P.E..
IT. ►AUL
MACE V. HARRIS,
CLOQUET
MRS. R. C. (DOROTHY) NELSON,
DULUTH
F. WAYNE PACKARD,
MINNEAPOLIS
• •
STATE OF MINNESOTA
POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
717 DELAWARE STREET S.E.
(OAK AND DELAWARE STREETS 5 E.)
MINNEAPOLIS 55440
612 .375.1320
May 18, 1971
Mr. Paul Hauge
Stalland and Hauge
2340 Dain Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Dear Mr. Hauge:
JOHN P. BADALICH. ►.E..
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
As requested, the following is a statement on Agency policies in regard to
small, privately -owned sewage treatment plants:
(1) It is Agency policy that, wherever it may prove feasible,
encouragement be given to joint treatment facilities rather
than permit the proliferation of several individual treat-
ment plants.
(2) Agency policy also requires governmental responsibility for
operation of small privately owned sewage treatment plants.
This would ensure operation by a local governmental unit
should ownership transitions cause a changeover in operating
personnel and/or procedures.
In the case of Cedar Grove Utilities wastewater treatment plant in Eagan
Township, as indicated in our letter of August 24, 1970, to Mr. Donald R.
Wealen of the Cedar Grove Construction Company (sea enclosure) the "Operational
Report" submitted May 15, 1970 indicated operational changes hed permitted
optimum operating efficiency considering the hydraulically overloaded con-
dition of the plant. At that time we also requested monthly reports for
continuing evaluation of the treatment plant until the raw sewage is diverted
to the Seneca Road treatment plant in the fell of 1971. Recently submitted
effluent data indicates the plant is producing an effluent within or near the
applicable effluent standards. In light of this we would only request the
flow be diverted as soon as possible in the fall of 1971 and the plant be ab-
andoned.
If you require further information, please 1st us know.
Yours very truly,
GJM/P T B:.w
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Donald Wealen -
Alyce Bolke - Eagan
Grant J. Merritt
Executive Director
Cedar Grove Construction Co.
Township Clerk
AGENCY MEMBERS
ROBERT C. TUVESON. CHAIRMAN,
ALBERT LEA
HOMER C. LUICK. VICE CHAIRMAN,
MINNEA►OLIS
HOWARD A. ANDERSEN. M.D..
ROCHESTER
JOHN R. BORCHERT.
GOLDEN VALLEY
MILTON J. FELLOWS.
WORTHIMGTON
STEVE J. GAOLER, P.E..
IT. PAUL
MACE V. HARRIS.
CLOQUET
MRB. R. C. (DOROTHY) NELSON.
DULUTH
F. WAYNE PACKARD.
MINNEArou1
Mr. Paul Hauge
Stalland and Hauge
2340 Dein Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota
STATE OF MINNESOTA
POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
717 DELAWARE STREET S E.
(OAK AND DELAWARE STREETS S E.)
MINNEAPOLIS 55440
612.378-1320
May 18, 1971
55402
JOHN P. BADALICH. P.C..
c7[EGUnY[ DINECTON
Dear Mr. Hauge:
As requested, the following is a statement on Agency policies in regard to
small, privately -owned sewage treatment plants:
(1) It is Agency policy that, wherever it may prove feasible,
encouragement be given to joint treatment facilities rather
than permit the proliferation of several individual treat-
ment plants.
(2) Agency policy also requires governmental responsibility for
operation of small privately owned sawage treatment plants.
This would ensure operation by a local governmental unit
should ownership transitions cause e changeover in eperatin
personnel and/or procedures.
In the case of Cedar Grove Utilities wastewater treatment plant in Eagan
Township, as indicated in our letter of August 24, 1970, to Mr. Donald A.
uaalen of the Cedar Grove Construction Company (see enclosure) the "Operational
Report" submitted May 15, 1970 indicated operational changes had permitted
optimum operating efficiency considering the hydraulically overloaded con-
dition of the plant. At that time we aleo requeated monthly reports for
continuing evaluation of the treatment plant until the raw sewage is diverted
to the Seneca Road treatment plant in the fell of 1971. Recently submitted
effluent data indicates the plant is producing an effluent within or near the
applicable effluent standards. In light of this we would only request the
flow be diverted as soon es possible in the fall of 1971 and the plant be ab-
andoned.
If you require further information, please let us know.
Yours very truly,
Grant J. Merritt
;:',JM/PTB:mw
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Donald Wealen - Cedar Grove Construction Co.
Alyce 0nike - Eagan Township Clerk
Executive Director
Auui t 24, 1970
lir. Dorv. d R. Waalcn
Cedar Grove Construction Company
7343 Concord boulevard East
South St. Paull, Minnesota 55075
Res Wastewater '1' ^ ttrent Facility
Cedar Grove tic lities
Dear Mr. Wv31en i
We have completed our review of tha "Opera
office. iLy 15, 1970, and the sampling d..'
July 3, 1970, for the a1Jove fa:.cility.
It appears that the operational eh=
increAsc;i the plant's efficiency. in
operational start-up d:tte of the 3-z-:i
hydraulic C..tp ci'L;y ccnu .t i.• n
operational procedures, in
fall, w' rcot est that a 24
this offic eve y t.g,
rerortinr' require;;lentis i.
Umber 1$, 19/J. Ala), i
will not have a = - elfc;
If you have
PTB: rw
r..
41113
RD1d
questions o
{our conaes
in Z1.:uii:d0ri
tie next
these
he crtr 3U ! ted tU this
ne 11-12, s•ibaitted
-lie plant have rubstanti:ll y
.
.aio ntici 7atei A ► u4t I 1971,
:.he P: o:.cnt :.t c r above
i to ei13ur^_ col:;,. . pdtimum
e:d irV.{ :ran ✓ chocl this
1e be tr.iicri d ::.1 .iitf el to
o "idha reru1 r Glass 4 p11:rt
..port should bu co: pleted i:.v Sopp-
o necessary th.t winter operation
operation... procedures .sail efficiency.
requests, please let us know.
Your° very truly
Perray T. ueaton
Section of Sew4ges forks
August 24, 1970
kr. Don:ld R. Waalcn
Cedar Grove Construction Company
7343 Concord Houlevard East
South St. Paul, if3 nnesota 55075
no: Wastewater `L' a .th ent Facility
Cedar GrtaYB 1,, lities
Dear 1:r. Wa,,.len:
We have completed our roview of the ' 0pola 1 ittwox t" su: 1 tea tr, this
office 1Ly 15, 1970, and tau sampling da'-./? rN 'rna 11-14, J, sibaittod
July 3, 1970, for the a ove
It appears that the operational chalva
increased the plant l oi'fi 4i c.ucy. . a
operational start-up ciete of the i
hydraulic capacity cousitit.
operational procedures, i —..u.:.inr; t.;.a
full, :ro request that a 2A ;dour co mean
thin officcovciry taro i:ut►t i ij in as iz:.c:.;
reportinr, requirements,
tether 1$, 1910. Also,
will not have a
,he plant Y :vc substantially
anticipated Au uit 1, 1971,
+,};o pro::cnt at or above
;4 to ensure continue.' o;rtis u21
.r.
a...:Lchocl this
5 be t ccn a:nd au iittei to
.a 4h r re ulur i:l..:,s G plant
-port should be conplotod by Sep--
)6a neco3sary that wincor operation
;.r operational proceduros and eifiCiency.
Tf you have a questions o these requests, please lot U3 know.
Your very truly,
Perry T. acato:t
P2;3: rw Section of Sew* Works
f/PTR
RDI4
August 24, 1970
Mr. Donald R. Waalcn
Cedar Grove Construction Company
7343 Concord boulevard East
South St. Paul, Minnesota, 55075
Ro: Wastewater 'fz
Cedar Grove L
Dear I!r. Waalen:
We have: completed our review of t1Ya s"Opc:-
office iLy 15, 1970, and Vat) a.a ling da
July 3, 1970, for the above facility.
It appears that the operational chin
increaoeJ the LIluit t a officicncy.
operational start.-ua data of the
hydraulic capacity ccrl.dti•)r'i
operational procedures, i:"1' }gang pcc.,
fall, we ronuest that a 24 ;(Our cor;cos
this off ice i e.i y two ,.x;:JLi :i in as . io:1
roportinr requirements, i. tAe next
tember 1j, 19&. Aijo, ,nil
will not have u. uui7ef e‘.3- tS j
PTJ rr
tncnt Facility
lities
1 RoArt" su . tut' to this
no L1-12, 1`i •i, submitted
he plant have subotanti,
1.4o anticipated ed August 1, 1971,
the pre deItt :t or :brava
'1 to cu.3iirc coilti;l.:.^.J optimum
o J f: o:1 ::ern :.c:i:,cl this
•uamnie be t"1:en and si!:littsi to
o vll f r Cclll.i.0 l..i.i::s t. pLnt
.port should be completed by Sop -
a nocus.;.xry tna;. ;:inter ope:•«tion
e operational procuxtu ros .and efficiency.
these requests, please let: us know.
Yours very truly,
Parry T. Heaton
Section of Sei.;,ge Works
•
Sr A
Minnesota Depertneut of lialth
District VI
Minneapolis Minnesota
Report on Inveatifatioa of C emrenity Water Purply
Cedar Grove Utilities Company, Eagan Tovnahip. D kota County
Date of Last Invecstijation - January 22, 1970
Bating at Last Investigation - 94
1
Chaves Since Lett Inyeatilraticn - None
hnnlvtical Data - (eeae attached sheets)
Because of a mbar of complaints about prcb1ccs encountered in the
laundering of clothes, an investigation of the Cedar Crovo water supply was
undertaken by this Department. Various types of s^. 7len were collected over
a period of time, and several specific cc ].etinte were studied.
The water for the area is supplied by tie well*. Both wells produce
water with a bardnesa of 270 milligrams per liter. Well No. 1 had an iron
content of 1.4 r11148rams per liter et the time of sampling and 1ie11 llo. 2
had an iron content of 0.37 milligrams prx liter. Both wells were ne *tiva
for coliform bacteria and mineral bacteria. They n a eae concentration in
Well no. 2, was O.07. It is our understanding that at this time of the year,
Wall No. 1 is on a :standby basis, and cost of the water zac3 comes from
Well No. 2. In any case, the water from these walks is typical of the ground
water aquifers in this area of Minnesota. Host such wells produce water that
is higher in iron and aanzaneses them is recommended in the U.S. Public Health
Service Drinking Water Standards, although water frog Well Vo. 2 io not erxcee-
nivel). high.
Because of conditions in the distribution cyst , the water actually
delivered to a consumer is not naeea ari y the came as the water emcr nz
from the well. Thin system was found to harbor iron bacteria. and these
bacteria are generally ansoeinted with oevsral typos of iron problem, in -
eluding accumulations of iron bearing deposits in the eyetem and in corrosion
problems. Although Well No. 2, with en iron level of 0.37 a+illf grema per
liter, was supplying water, the iron level in the eycteaa was quite variable,
and one sample contained 7.9 milligrams per liter. Iron at practically any
4
level, above 0.2 or 0.3 xtilli gcaaes per liter can cause trouble in the ].sundry.
Home water eofteni u6 can remove iron in tho ionic state at reasonable concen-
trationa, but in this situation, the iron is oxidized by the iron bacteria
and will not be removed by water sottenere.
In addition to the iron in the eater, filtration of large amounts of
water revealed a number of suspended particles. Same of these particles could
be identified and others could not. Saco particles of rubber were tourd and
are believed to originate from a rubber boa* used to make the pol,,ypho3phatc
solution injected into the oyster.. ether particles could be pipe oncrustanto
from the minerals in the water mixed with the products of mineral bacteria.
Gth r sources of particles could include salve gland packing materials, faucet
washers, and aggle eratea of silt particles parzed from the well.
Particles collected on laundered clothes a7pear in part to be similar to
thoeo deocribed above, but some eynthetic materials also picked up black oily
or tarry epots. In so tar as we can determine, this oily material is not
carried by the water. There have been many apron of oil or tar collected
on laundered week end near clothes that have been studied, and in all cares
the comclnaion has been that tar and oil dsporited on clothe* and tranafered
to the raahing machine in this canner could be reaoved from come materials
and rcdepo cited an synthetic fibers in the wanhina process. Watling con-
ditions were simply not rigorous enough to do en adequate cleaning job. third
water, low temperature°, inadequate dotergernta and ineffective waehing machines
contribute to the problem. The Cedar Grove water could be expected to be in-
volved in this problem only to the extent that it is a hard eater aid should
be softened before use in the laundry.
The practice of "stabilizing" iron by use of polyphosphates is of doubtful
merit. Without adequate chlorination, the addition of phosphate in any form
tends to promote biological activity in the4systcm. At the time of this inves-
tigation, no Chlorine rcaiduals were detectable in the eystes, and it iEs quite
probably that these conditions have permitted the proliferation of mineral
bacteria which appear to be part of the problem. The addition of chlorine to
control the bacteria sisaply changes the nature of the problem. Chlorine
oxidizes the ferrous iron in the rater to ferric iren, and the ferric iron
then tends to form a fine, dispersed sal of ferric hythoxide or hydrated
ferric oxide. This compound is not ionic and will not be removed by ion
exchange in softeners, and the remit is that home naftemixi in co loncer
effective for iron treatment. The exit of chlorine alone produces the same
effect. If crater which is to be used for general dememtic purposed contnina
eno' ;h iron to cause problems, it avpcsra to ua that the only real solution
is iron removal at the source.
Samples Nos. 924-932o inclusive, represent water collected from the wells
and cares points on the distribution eyrtem. Fitrato nitrogen, curfactant,
and organisms of the coliform group, which are used an indications of contami-
txttiee by this Department, were ztot fcund.
Iron as previous noted, ranged from 0.24 to 7.9 nilligran& per liter.
The fluoride concentration was 0.52 and 0.51 willigrane per liter. :his
Department recommends 1.2 minieraaro per liter for the control of dental curie*
(tooth decoy).
No chlorine residual could Lc found on the distribution aystea at the
time of the survey.
P,er..E^^c' ,tion
1. i2.m= be trrda to treat tho %later co to to rr;,d>ucs a r W duct that
vill fact tho I t3 of c0116:=75.
2. Containers used for tha sr; ^cticn of 4:::..bone into the water ou:771y
chc•!.1d by Y.Ppt clean.
a. di tributicn cyctcm ::l hcaciy,c:..1,:r_ to1 and fl
>. Fluthirz of tho rains on a perict.io ti: ba practiced 1.., :i ttitit t}
fluahain3 schedule be cdjt'.nted on tb.e bata., the. c=vint of rc . water flue ho.1
frcr th.- cyr'tcn.
J.
cat 'ent with polyrhosphntos bo r..,^� c •a.
C. .Inrreanci1 virile cc by rairtai%.:d el mll oll a3 .t can to
a r tir.: whcreby center instion may ha (Irwin into :.::o ka ter et ; 1y.
7. Chlorination bo practiced cio r,^G2rc:ry to control iron b^ctcria.
E. Fluoride coneentratioa iner e:;...orc3 as to z::�.iatiin 1.2 r_i11i;,;- a:~a Fn.r
liter.
9. The o :: ator should troop tho fc3 L ai4 r ccordz :
a) Gallons of water -;tr-cd ci--; from tho t. 110
U) AL -::ant of flu:ric'.- a 'c.c; 7:3r L-.J to th- timer
c) Fluoride rcnidt:nl (l,:t :rmir.::`_ ::nm car^ cm L yo di.ctr: ;::tic.^.
s 7 tom.
a) Chlorin: r sidual cm t :e ctiotrib':'4io7
ryctem.
10. httcndaaco at the :.omua1 l'or':a hci.-i in
rirr --^lie, is a valuables F7p^rienoo for tnycne e:.::,cod in tLic fIc1u.
...:.e field survey c!tcw:,d that this r=3.;, n' d u ma..eratcZy hioh c:. of
conitary safety at the, tim^ of tine inveatifnticn. Cc rut<J en tlIn baolf of
100 rrinta for complete conl 19 hies with tho ate.rdart:n of thin u:.partz.iat, th7.
prenont matte of this to estimated to be ' . An in ic7tc , this rc.tia;; ray
fie raisc-d to 97 by carryir5 out tho dove
Arproved:
Paul B. Johsi Chief
:Laotian of Water Supply
and General Ameinseriag
Jaa.oa L. Lauer
1'hlic iietilth Sanitarian
s.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
UNIVERSITY CAMPUS
MINNgAPQL15 55440
Cedar Grove Utilities Company
c/o Mr. Donald Waalen, Manager
7343 Concord Blvd. East
South St. Paul, Minnesota 55075
Gentlemen:
We are enclosing a copy of the report of our district office
covering an investigation of the water supply of your company
serving Cedar Grove Addition, Eagan Township, Dakota County.
If you have any questions concerning the information contained
in this report, please communicate with Mr. James L. Lauer,
Public Health Sanitarian, Minnoaota Department of Health
FFH:JLL:ew
Encl.
Cc:
Eagan Township Board
c/o John J. Klein,
David Darling, Water
R. L. Erickson, K.D.
Yours very truly,
Frederick F. Heieel, Director
Division of Environmental Health
Chairman ✓
Supt.
, health Officer
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
UNIVERSITY CAMPUS
M 1 N N APQL S *5440
Cedar Grove Utilities Company
c/o Mr. Donald Waalen, Manager
7343 Concord Blvd. East
South St. Paul, Minnesota 55075
Gentlemen:
We are enclosing a copy of the report of our district office
covering an investigation of the water supply of your company
serving Cedar Grove Addition, Sagan Township, Dakota County.
if you have Any questions concerning the information contained
in this report, please communicate with Mr. James L. Lauer,
Public Health Sanitarian, Minn-aota Department of Health
FFH :JLL: ew
Encl.
cc:
Swan
c/o
David
R. L.
Your vary truly,
Frederick F. Heisel, Director
Division of Environmental Health
Township Board
John J. Klein, Chairman ✓
Darling, Water Supt.
Erickson, M.D., Health Officer
411
Minnesota Department of health
District VI
Minneapolis Minnesota
Report on Investigation of Community Water Supply
Cedar Grow^ Utilities Company, Eagan Township, Dakota County
Date of last Investigation - January 22, 1970
Hating at Let Investigation - 94
Changes Since Least Investigation
Analytical Data - (nee attached sheets)
Because of a number of complaints about problems encountered in the
laundering of clothes, an investigation of the Cedar Grove water supply was
undertaken by this Department. Various types of samples were collected over
a period of time, and several specific complaints were studied.
The water for the area is supplied by two wells. Both wells produce
water with a hardness of 270 milligrams per liter. Well No. 1 had an iron
content of 1.4 milligrams per liter at the time of sampling and Well No.
had an iron content of 0.37 milligrams per liter. Both wells were negative
for coliform bacteria and mineral bacteria. The manganese concentration in
Well No. 2, was 0.0q. It is our understanding that at this time of the year,
Well No. 1 is on a standby basis, and most of the water used comes from
Well No. 2. In any cane, the water from these wells is typical of the ground
water aquifers in this area of Minnesota. Most such wells produce water that
is higher in iron and manganese than is recommended in the U.S. Public Health
Service Drinking Water StandarOms although water from Well No. 2 is not exces-
sively high.
Because of conditions in the distribution system, the water actually
delivered to a consumer is not necessarily the same as the water emerging
from the well. This system was found to harbor iron bacteria, and these
Minnesota Department of health
District VI
Minneapolis Minnesota
Report on Investigation of Community Water Supply
Cedar Greve Utilities t;omp&ny, Eagan Township, Dakota County
Date of mast investigation - January 2Z, 1970
:rating at Lest Investigation - 94
Changes Since Last Investigation - None
Analytical Data - (see attached sheets)
Because of a number of complaints about problems encountered in the
laundering of clothes, an investigation of the Cedar Grove water supply was
undertaken by this Department. Various types of samples were collected over
a period of time, and several specific complaints were studied.
The water for the area is supplied by two wells. Both wells produce
water with a hardness of 270 milligrams per liter. well No. 1 had an iron
content of 1.4 milligrams per liter at the time of sampling and Well No.
had an iron content of 0.37 milligrams per liter. Both wells were negativti-
for coliform bacteria and mineral bacteria. The manganese concentration in
Well No. 2, was O.0V. It is our understanding that at this time of the year,
Well No. 1 in on a standby basis, and most of the water used comes from
Well No. 2. In any case, the water from these wells is typical of the ground
water aquifers in this area of Minnesota. Most Such wells produce water that
is higher in iron and manganese than is recommended in the U.S. Public Health
Service Drinking Water Standards, although water from Well No. 2 is not exces-
sively high.
Because of conditions in the distribution system, the water actually
delivered to a conzumor is not necessarily the same as the water emerging
from the well. This system was found to harbor iron bacteria, and these
- 2 -
bacteria are generally associated with several types of iron problems, in-
eluding accumulations of iron bearing deposits in the system and in corrosion
problems. Although Well No. 2, with an iron level of 0.37 milligrams per
liter, was supplying water, the iron level in the system was quite variable,
and one sample contained 7.9 m11ligrama per liter. Iron at practically any
level above 0.2 or 0.3 milligrams per liter can cause trouble in the laundry.
Name water softening can remove iron in the ionic state at reasonable concen-
trations, but in this situation, the iron is oxidised by the iron bacteria
and will not be removed by water softeners.
In addition to the iron in the water, filtration of large amounts of
water revealed a number of suspended particles. Some of these particles could
be identified and others could not. some particles of rubber were found and
aro believed to originate from a rubber hose used to sake the polyphosphate
solution injected into the system. Other particles could be pipe encrustanta
from the minerals in the water mixed with the products of mineral bacteria.
Cther sources of particles could include valve gland packing materials, faucet
washers, and agglomerates of silt particles pumped from the well.
Particles collected on laundered clothes appear in part to be similar to
thoee described above, but some synthetic materials also picked up black oily
or tarry spots. In so far as we can determine, this oily material is not
carried by the water. There have been many episodes of oil or tar collected
on laundered wash and wear clothes that have been studied, and in all cases
the conclusion has been that tar and oil deposited on clothea and tranefered
to the washing machine in this manner could be removed from some materials
and redeposited on synthetic fibers in the washing process. Washing con-
ditions were simply not rigorous enough to do an adequate cleaning job. Hard
water, low temperatures, inadequate detergents and ineffective washing machines
-2-
bacteria are generally associated with several typ'a of iron problems, in-
cluding accumulations of iron bearing deposits in thP syrt:m and in corrosion
problems. Although Well No. 2, with an iron level of C.37 milligrarac per
liter, was supplying- water, the iron level in the system was quite variable,
and one sample contained 7.9 milligrams per liter. Iron at practically any
level above J.' or 0.!: milligrams per liter can cause trouble in the laundry.
Home water softening can remove iron in the ionic state at reasonable concen-
trations, but in this situation, the iron is oxidized by the iron bacteria
and will not be removed by water softeners.
.n addition to the iron in the water, filtration of large amounts of
crater revealed a number of suspended particles. Some of these particles could
be identified and others could not. ,',ome particles of rubber were: found Fend
are believed to originate from a laabber hose used to make the polyphosphate
solution injected into the syat•rn. ..ther particles could be pipe encrustanta
from the minerals it the water- mixed with the products of mina:rai bacteria.
-ther sources of particles could include valve gland packing materials, faucet
washers, and agglomerates of silt particles pumped from the well.
Farticlea collected on laundered clothes appear in part to be similar to
those doacribed above, but some synthetic materials also picked up black oily
or tarry spots. In so far as we can determine, this oily material is not
carried by the water. There have been many episodes of oil or tar collected
on laundered wash and wear clothes that have been atudied, and in all caeca
the conclusion has been that tar and oil deposited on clothes and transfered
to the washing; machine in this manner could be removed from some materials
and redeposited on synthetic fibers in the washing; process. Washing con-
ditions were simply not rigorous enough to do an adequate cleaning job. Hard
water, low temperatures, inadequate 4_tergente and ineffective washing machines
contribute to the problem. The Cedar Grove water could be expected to be in-
volved in thin problem only to the extent that it is a hard water ai_d should
be softened before use in the laundry.
The practice of "stabilising" iron by use of polyphosphates is of doubtful
merit. Without adequate chlorination, the addition of phosphate in any form
tends to promote biological activity in the system. At the time of this inves-
tigation, mo chlorine residuals were detectable in the system, and it is quite
probable that these conditions have permitted the proliferation of mineral
bacteria which appear to be part of the problem. The addition of chlorine to
control the bacteria simply changes the nature of the problem. Chlorine
oxidizes the ferrous iron in the water to ferric iron, and the ferric iron
then tends to form a fine, dispersed sol of ferric hydroxide or hydrated
ferric oxide. This compound is not ionic and will not be removed by ion
exchange in softeners, and the result is that home softening is no longer
effective for iron treatment. The use of chlorine alone produces the same
effect. 1f water which is to be used for general domestic purposes contains
enough iron to cause problems, it appears to un that the only real solution
is iron removal at the source.
Samples Nos. 924-932, inclusive, represent water collected from the wells
and seven points on the distribution system. Nitrate nitrogen, surfactant,
and organisms of the coliform group, which are used as indications of contami-
nation by this Department, were not found.
Iron an previous noted, ranged from 0.24 to 7.9 ailligraas per liter.
The fluoride concentration woo 0.52 and 0.51 milligrams per liter. This
Department recommends 1.2 milligrams per liter for the control of dental caries
(tooth decay).
No chlorins residual could ,, found on the distribution system at the
time of the survey.
contribute to the problem. The Cedar Grove water could be expected to be in-
volved in this problem only to the extent that it is a hard water aid should
be softened before use in the laundry.
The practice of "stabilizing" iron by use of polyphosphates is of doubtful
merit. Without adequate chlorination, the addition of phosphate in any form
tends to promote biological activity in the system. At the time of this inves-
tigation, no chlorine residuals were detectable in the system, and it is quite
probable that these conditions have permitted the proliferation of mineral
bacteria which appear to be part of the problem. The addition of chlorine to
control the bacteria simply char e5 the nature of the problem. Chlorine
oxidizes the ferrous iron in the water to ferric iron, and the ferric iron
then tends to fora a fine, dispersed tool of ferric hydroxide or hydrated
ferric oxide. This compound is not ionic and will not be removed by ion
exchange in softeners, and the result is that hone softening is no loncer
effective for iron treatment. The use of chlorine alone products the sane
effect. If crater w:iich is to by used for general domestic purposed contains
enough iron to cause problems, it appears to ur; that the only real solution
is iron removal at the source.
Samples Kos. 924-432, inclusive, repn'sc;nt water collected from the wells
and seven points on the distribution system. Nitrate nitrogen, surfactant,
and organisms of the coliform group, which are used as indications of contami-
nation by this Department, were not found.
Iron as previous noted, ranged from 0.2+ to 7.9 milligrams per liter.
The fluoride concentration wale 0.52 and 0.51 milligrams per liter. This
Department recotmmende 1.2 milligrams per liter for the control of dental caries
(tooth decay).
No chlorine residual co..l' found on the distribution system at the
time of the survey.
Recommendations -
1, Plans be made to treat the water so as to produce a product that
will meet the n..,.;:; of consumera.
2. Containers used for the injection of solutions into the water supply
should by kept clean.
3. '2hs distribution system be heavily chlorinated and flushed.
4. Flushing of the swine on a periodic basis be practiced and that the
flushing schedule be adjusted on the basis of the amount of red water flushed
from the system.
5. Treatment with polyphosphates be abandoned.
6. Increased vigilance be maintained on all old plumbing, as it can be
a sears whereby contamination may be drawn into the eater supply.
7. Chlorination be practiced as necessary to control iron bacteria.
8. Fluoride concentration increased am to maintain 1.2 milligrams per
liter.
9. The operator should keep the following recorda:
a) Gallons of water pumped per der from the wells
b) Amount of fluoride added per day to the water
c) Fluoride residual determinationa made on the distribution
system.
d) Chlorine residual determinations made on the distribution
system.
10. Attendance at the Annual Water Works Operators' School, held in
Minneapolis, is a valuable experience for anyone engaged in this field.
Conclusion
The field survey /showed that this supply had a moderately high degree of
sanitary safety at the time of the investigation. Computed on the basis of
100 points for complete compliance with the stamdsrda of this Department, the
present status of this ie estimated to be 94. Am indicated, this rating may
be raised to 97 by carrying out the above recommendations.
Approved:
Paul B. Johnson, Chief
Section of Water Supply
and General Engineering
Jaasee L. Lauer
Public Health an1tarian
xccommendationa -
1. Plans be shade to treat the water ao as to produce a product that
will meet the r..of consumers.
c. Containers used for the inj:ction of solutions into the water supply
should by kept clean.
The distribution system by heavily chlorinated and flushed.
4. Flushing of the mains on a periodic basin be practiced and that t::a
flushing schedule be adjusted on the basis of the amount of red water flushed
from the system.
5. Treatment with polyphosphates be abandoned.
6. Increased vigilance be maintained on all old plumbing, as it can be
a means whereby contamination may be drawn into the water supply.
7. Chlorination be practiced as neoesihary to control iron bacteria.
8. Fluoride concentration increased an to maintain 1.2 milligrams per
liter.
9. The operator should keep the following records:
a) Gallons of water pumped per day from the wells
b) Amount of fluoride added per day to the water
c) Fluoride residual de►terminationsmade on the distribution
system.
d) Chlorine residual determinations made on the distribution
5yctem.
10. Attendance at the Annual ':rater Works Operators' School, held in
Minneapolis, is a valuable experience for anyone engaged in this field.
Zonclusion
The field survey chewed that this supply had a moderately high degree
sanitary safety at the time of the investigation. Computed on the basis of
100 points for complete compliance with the standards of this Department, the
present statuc of this is estimated to be 94. As indicated, this rating nay
be raised to ?7 by carrying out the above recommendations.
of
Approved:
Paul B. Johnson, Chief
Section of Water Supply
and General Engineering
Jamul L. Lauer
Public Health Sanitarian
40MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF •LrH
Section of Water Supply and General Engineering
Sanitation Safety Rating of Cedar
G OY3 Community
Date April 23, 1971
Hater Supply
Perfect
Score
As
Found
As
Recommended
Sea Recommendation No.
le Attached Report
(A) Source
Sanitary Safety
Adequacy of treatment
Bacteriological Quality
Physical quality
Chemical quality
Biological quality
Adequacy of quantity
Sub -total
Hazard adjustment factor deducted
20
10
2
4
2
2
40
0
19
10
2
3
2
2
20
10
2
3
2
2
1
I.
Total
40
(B) Prime Moving Equipment
Well or intake
8
8 8
Pumps
7
7 7
Piping arrangement
5
5 5
Reservoirs
7
7 7
Equipment housing
3
- - —-----►4
2 3
--------*-
2
---_______ _ -- — —
Sub-total
30
Hazard adjustment factor deducted
0
Total
30
3
(C) Distribution System
Street mains
5
2 4
3, 4& 5
Building services
2
1.5 1.5
Plumbing
3
1.5 2.5
6
Hydrants
1
1 1
Storage
4
4 4
Pressure
2
2 2
Tap water quality
3
2 3
1& 4
Sub -total
20
Hazard adjustment factor deducted
0
Total
20
14
•
:0) '.Operation and Operators
. Control of system 3
1
3
7, 8& 9
Condition of system 2
1
2
7, 8& 9
Operator qualifications
5
5
5
5
10
'Oa -total-
10
Hazard adjustment factor deducted 0
Total
10
7
1t
GRANO TOTAL AND RATING
100
aa
907
70 and upward - high degree of safety. Watchful maintenance needed.
MS to 80 - moderately high degree of safety. Correction and maintenance program continued.
70 to 84 - poor to dangerous condition. Prompt corrective action urgently needed.
R9 and loner - very dangerous condition. Emergency measures necessary.
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HL.+LTH
Section of Water Supply and General Engineering
Sanitation Safety Rating of Ceda_• :.-ova Corsiu:iit)'
Date April 23, 1971
Hater Supply
-
hrtoct
Scare
z
As
Found
As
Recommended
See Recommendation No.
In Attached Report
(A) Source
Sanitary Safety20
Adequacy of treatment
Bacteriological Quality
Physical quality
Chemical quality
Biological quality
Adequacy of quantity
10
2
4
2
2
19
10
2
3
2
2
20
10
2
3
2
2
1
Sub -total
Hazard adjustment rector deducted
40
0
Total
40
38
39
(B) Prime Moving Equipment
Well or intake
Pumps
Piping arrangement
Reservoirs
Equipment housing
8
7
5
7
3
8
7
5
7
2
8
7
5
7
3
2
......-
Sub -total
Hazard adjustment rector deducted
30
0
Total
30
29
30
(C) Distribution System
Street mains
Building services
Plumbing
Hydrants
Storage
Pressure
Tap water quality
5
2
3
1
4
2
3
2
1.5
1.5
1
4
2
2
t:
1.5
2.5
1
4
2
3
3, ': & 5
6
1& 4
Sub -total
Hazard adjustment rector deducted
20Ii
0
Total
20
14
1$
(D)'.OReration and Operators
Control of system
Condition of system
Operator qualifications)
3
2
5
1
1
5
3
2
5
7, 8& 9
7, 8& 9
10
S -total) 10
Hazard adjustment factor deducted 0
Total 10
7
1„
GRAND TOTAL AND RATING
100
92
(l7
,
90 and upward - high degree or safety. Watchrul maintenance needed.
85 to 99 - moderately high degree or safety. Correction and maintenance program continued.
70 to 114 - poor to dangerous condition. Prompt corrective action urgently needed.
69 and lower - very dangerous condition. Emergency measures necessary.
•MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Samples Collected By Jame L. Lauer
ANALYTICAL DATA
Report To DL11Ct VI
Field
Number
Town, County, Etc.
Sampling Point and Source of Sample
L
Codar Grove. Dniwta
Well itl. WS P.D.
L
2
il
well It CIS P.D.
3
4328 Csdar Ave. S.T.
L
4
n
Zircon S•4.
L
If
Inkaat ir.20 4328 Cedar Ave.
L
_____6._
This line for
Sample Nnmber
M
rat
0 2013 "zircon
Lab. use only.
to
4
Li
925926
IS
LI,Le
927
928
929
Lf
Date Collected
.23...71
i, — � — — 1
.... .�
Time Collected
1
Temperature °F
Date Received by Lab.
11.,.3..71
+ — — — am 1
.....
— — ar
r
r,
COI item ( M.P.N. per 100 ml.
<2.2
- 2.2
< 2.2
< ?.?
group } Con. 0 Comp. ❑
organisms M. F. C. per 100 mi.
Total Solids
280
270
Turbidi ty
Color
Total hardness as CaC08
Alkalinity as CaCO3
pH value
I ran
1-4
0�'97
1.7
O.24_
1.8
7.9
Manganese
0.16
ry
Q_
ID.
OsiW
1%09
Chloride
Residual Chlorine
Sulphate
Fluoride
0.92
0.51
Total Phosphorus
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
< 1
< 1
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
< _1
<.1
Calcium as CaCO3
Sodium
Potassium
Spec. Cond. ambos'an a 25 °C.
pHs ! 50 °F
IBrit_eir4..a
GZ�Cr.WL
CialisaslIs
Cr saathrix
' Results are inailiigrmas per liter except as noted.
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
ANALYTICAL DATA
Samples Col lected By Jactez L. lf.ue_'
Report To Di3triCt VI
Field
Number
Town, County, Etc.
Sampling Point and Source of Sample
L
Cams Grove Dakota
Well r'i1 rin P .D .
Well '1 KIS P.D.
L
3
it
42528 Cedar Ave . S.T.
d
'�
it
2008 ,Zircon S.T.
L
5
it
Ijdrart TV45I8 Cedar Ave.
L
6
It
bbirtimult 140 2008 Z�iroon
This line for Lab. use only.
Sample Number
to
924
911t15
1
L
926
III,
927
L
903
L
529
Date Collected
4..23 71
Time Collected
Temerature of
Date Received by Lab.
4_23..
.F
r
Conform( M. P. N. per 100 ml.
< 2.2
•� .2
< 2
<2.2
group ))[ Con. ❑ Comp. 0
organisms M. F. C. per 100 m1.
Total Solids
c�..pv
270
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as CaC030
Alkalinity as CaCO3
off value
Iron
}}�
�.Y
D..�l
r.
o.24
1.8
A
7.9
Manganese
20.6
0.0?
0
'1.5
0. Y7
O.C'9
Chloride
Residual Chlorine
Sulphate
Fluoride
ro.52
o.51
Total Phosphorus
Nitrite Nitrogen
Nitrate Nitrogen
< i.
C. 1
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
< L
z. _z
Calcium as CaCO3
Sodium
Potassium
Spec. Cond. $nhos'an ! 25 °C.
pHs 0 50 °F
Zt-ln 3i eta ^j
{a'p�.
Caliv-iG
%iio::ctla
IN. 1-uhert
Cr azattwi :
ITIL
A
<-cpwito 0
au. a
' Results are in milligrams per !titer except as noted.
• MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Samples Collected By Janes L. Lauer
ANALYTICAL DATA
Report To DiEtrtct VI
Numbed Fiel
Town, County, Etc.
Sampling Point and Source of Sample
L
7
Cectr. Grave, Dakota
2044 Copper Zane Ilydrant
r,
8
rr
4322 Cedar S.T.
-
9
It
Polyphopntlate Container
,'
L
IL
This line for Lab. use only.
Sample Number
k
930
931
232
Date Collectedj•-71
-
Time Collected
Temperature of
Date Received by Lab.
li'-0.-'7l -
Col i form ( M. P. N. per 100 ml.
group
Con. 0 Comp. 0
(]]
organisms
M. F. C. per 100 ml.
Total Solids
Turbidity
Color
Total hardness as CaCO3
Alkalinity as CaCO3
PH value
Iron
Manganese
Chloride
_
Residual Chlorine
Sulphate
Fluoride
Total Phosphorus
Nitrite Nitrogen
ja r
Rubber
j.G34G -
twat()
Nitrate Nitrogen
black. �a�.sd
. ,,,
f.�Zi
.�.1 ����r
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
GoDe". t
.-ticky buMcuito
rig r3
Calcium as CaCO3
atetortal.
probabby •
bonding ag4nt.
Sodium
Potassium
Spec. Cond. pmhos'an @ 25 OC.
pHs @ 50 of
Iran Bacteria_
ac linnol l
" Results are tiff milligrams per liter except as noted.
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Samples Collected By
James L. Law_
ANALYTICAL DATA
Report To Di:rt:-iet VI
Number
Town, County, Etc.
Sampling Poiot and Source of Sample
L
7
Ced-t: Gray ,
Dakota
27.0.- Co.0-)ar Lana Itrdrant
L
8
rt
y? Cedar S.T.
L
9
If
Poly_* oz,nhate Container
L
L
L
This line for Lab. use only.
Sample Number
L
93D
931
Date Collected
m
3-71 -
Time Collected
Tenperature of
Date Received by Lab.
4-23-71
Ceti form X.F.W. per 100 ml.
group Con- ❑ Comp. ❑
organisms [ M. F. C. per 100 ml_
Total Solids
Turbidity
F
Color
,
Total hardness as Ca003
Alkalinity as CaCO3
pH value
1 roo
Manganese
Chloride
Residual Chlorine
Sulphate
Fluoride
Total Phosphorus
Nitrite Nitrogen
)40@ti
Rubber T>a
"t5 4ir - aoi
rteerate
Nitrate Nitrogen
T2'O!2
black. aoo
t__6A.t.cd
LYitoria1,
yellow
j( but
non eL,..ntiv
Vita rigid
Methylene Blue Active Sub. as ABS
Calcium as CaCO3
t rob lbly 0
borldire aant.
Sodium
.
Potassium
Spec. Cood. jumbos ? an ! 25 °C.
'
pHs • 50 of
Iron alctc-~ir'
{',rtl inum la
• Results are in milligrams per liter except as noted.
• •
REPORT
ON
TOWN OF EAGAN VS. CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
HISTORY & BACKGROUI!
In April of 1959 the Town Board entered into water and sewer fran-
chise agreements with Cedar Grove Utilities Company for a period of twenty-five
(7.5) years whereby this private company would provide water and sewer service
to the proposed Cedar Grove development. At that time the population of Eagan
was perhaps 2,500 and the Board did not feel the Town was in any position to
either install or operate central utility systems, much less attempt to finance
them for an undeveloped area. The alternative if the franchises had not been
granted would have been individual wells and septic systems which in a poten-
tially concentrated area was felt to be unwise.
At the time the Cedar Grove developers proposed the franchises, they
assured the Board that the cost of the systems would be borne by the investors
and by private borrowing and would not be included in the cost of the homes
except to the partial extent of a connection charge made against each home for
hookup to the systems.
Under the franchises the utility company is permitted to make reason-
able charges for monthly service which presumably and permissibly includes a
profit for the utility company. Undoubtedly a portion of these charges has
been applied by the utility company to amortize the cost of the systems.
In 1966 the Board of Supervisors began discussing the possibility of
purchasing the Cedar Grove water and sewer systems because of the anticipated
growth in the area and the beginning of township -wide utility systems. These
discussions culminated in the Board authorizing the Town engineer, fiscal
• •
consultant and attorney to begin preliminary negotiations pursuant to the
water and sewer franchise agreements for the purchase of the systems.
By the spring of 1957 a preliminary recommendation was made to the
Board of Supervisors that these systems be purchased for a price of $999,500.00
and on this basis a public meeting was held for the residents of Cedar Grove
on July 19th, 1957 to discuss the proposed purchase. The majority of the
residents felt the price was too high and consequently the Board of Supervisors,
in deference to the majority of the residents, rejected the negotiated purchase.
Thereafter the matter remained dormant for about a year until Cedar
Grove Utilities Company proposed a rate increase which activated the residents
to reconsider acquisition of the systems. Temporarily the Board of Supervisors
rejected the rate increase and put a freeze on it until the Board could again
consider acquisition.
On February 27th, 19G9 the Board held another public meeting for the
residents of Cedar Grove to determine what they wished to do in view of the
request for increased sewer and water rates. The consensus was that the systems
should be purchased but through the procedure of arbitration. The Board author-
ized this procedure and the appointment of Robert C. Bell of St. Paul as its
arbitrator.
Cedar Grove Utilities Co., upon being advised of the Town's demand
for arbitration, refused to appoint its arbitrator and to arbitrate on the
ground that the purchase price had been negotiated and there was nothing left
for the Town to do but purchase the systems as previously contemplated. The
Town rejected this theory because the Board of Supervisors had not formally
approved the purchase agreement and thereupon commenced a lawsuit to force
Cedar Grove Utilities Co. to arbitrate.
The parties thereafter appeared for trial of the arbitration issues
before the District Court, Dakota County the result of which was a stipulation
-2-
• •
approved by the Court whereby the parties would go to arbitration with I ir. Bell
as the Town's arbitrator for the first of two phases of the case, namely, to
determine the reasonable market value of the systems but without regard to any
claimed set -offs for grants-in-aid (so-called) or any other credits.
Following the order of the Court, each of the parties appointed its
arbitrators, Robert C. Bell and Al Kennedy, both St. Paul attorneys, respective-
ly for the Town and the company, and they in turn appointed John Daubney,
another St. Paul attorney and former mayor of St. Paul, as the third member
and chairman of the Board of Arbitration. Thereafter lengthy proceedings were
held before the Board of Arbitrators to determine the reasonable market value
of the systems which resulted in the filing of the Board's report and arbitra-
tion award on February 19th, 1971. The amount of the award by the majority of
the Board was the sum of $1,256,450.00. Subsequently Mr. Bell filed a minority
report on March 17th, 1971 stating the value of the systems to be no more than
$750,000.00.
Meanwhile both plaintiff and defendant made motions- plaintiff Town
to permit the taking of additional evidence of set -offs and defendant company
to have a date set for closing and payment of the award. The Court denied the
Town's motion and set a date for closing on the basis of the majority award
for September 15th, 1971. This order was entered Iiarch 29th, 1971 and the
time for appeal is now running.
ALTERNATIVES
At this time the Town has the following alternatives:
1. Appeal from the award and/or various orders of the
District Court.
2. Attempt to renegotiate the purchase of the systems.
• •
4-20-71
Is
3. Accept the award and prepare for the appropriate bond
issue.
BOARD OF SUPEPVISORS
TOWN OF EAGAN
-4-
• •
REPORT
ON
TOIJN OF EAGAN VS. CEDAR GROVE UTILITIES CO.
HISTORY & BACKGROUI',D
In April of 1959 the Town Board entered into water and sewer fran-
chise agreements with Cedar Grove Utilities Company for a period of twenty-five
(25) years whereby this private company would provide water and sewer service
to the proposed Cedar Grove development. At that time the population of Eagan
was perhaps 2,500 and the Board did not feel the Town was in any position to
either install or operate central utility systems, much less attempt to finance
them for an undeveloped area. The alternative if the franchises had not been
granted would have been individual wells and septic systems which in a poten-
tially concentrated area was felt to be unwise.
At the time the cedar Grove developers proposed the franchises, they
assured the Board that the cost of the systems would be borne by the investors
and by private borrowing and would not be included in the cost of the homes
except to the partial extent of a connection charge made against each home for
hookup to the systems.
Under the franchises the utility company is permitted to make reason-
able charges for monthly service which presumably and permissibly includes a
profit for the utility company. Undoubtedly a portion of these charges has
been applied by the utility company to amortize the cost of the systems.
In 1966 the Board of Supervisors began discussing the possibility of
purchasing the Cedar Grove water and sewer systems because of the anticipated
growth in the area and the beginning of township -wide utility systems. These
discussions culminated in the Board authorizing the Town engineer, fiscal
• •
consultant and attorney to begin preliminary negotiations pursuant to the
water and sewer franchise agreements for the purchase of the systems.
By the spring of 1937 a preliminary recommendation was made to the
Board of Supervisors that these systems be purchased for a price of $999,500.00
and on this basis a public meeting was held for the residents of Cedar Grove
on July 19th, 1957 to discuss the proposed purchase. The majority of the
residents felt the price was too high and consequently the Board of Supervisors,
in deference to the majority of the residents, rejected the negotiated purchase.
Thereafter the matter remained dormant for about a year until Cedar
Grove Utilities Company proposed a rate increase which activated the residents
to reconsider acquisition of the systems. Temporarily the Board of Supervisors
rejected the rate increase and put a freeze on it until the Board could again
consider acquisition.
On February 27th, 1969 the Board held another public meeting for the
residents of Cedar Grove to determine what they wished to do in view of the
request for increased sewer and water rates. The consensus was that the systems
should be purchased but through the procedure of arbitration. The Board author-
ized this procedure and the appointment of Robert C. Bell of St. Paul as its
arbitrator.
Cedar Grove Utilities Co., upon being advised of the Town's demand
for arbitration, refused to appoint its arbitrator and to arbitrate on the
ground that the purchase price had been negotiated and there was nothing left
for the Town to do but purchase the systems as previously contemplated. The
Town rejected this theory because the Board of Supervisors had not formally
approved the purchase agreement and thereupon commenced a lawsuit to force
Cedar Grove Utilities Co. to arbitrate.
The parties thereafter appeared for trial of the arbitration issues
before the District Court, Dakota County the result of which was a stipulation
-2-
•
approved by the Court whereby the parties would go to arbitration with Mr. Bell
as the Town's arbitrator for the first of two phases of the case, namely, to
determine the reasonable market value of the systems but without regard to any
claimed set -offs for grants-in-aid (so-called) or any other credits.
Following the order of the Court, each of the parties appointed its
arbitrators, Robert C. Bell and Al Kennedy, both St. Paul attorneys, respective-
ly for the Town and the company, and they in turn appointed John Daubney,
another St. Paul attorney and former mayor of St. Paul, as the third member
and chairman of the Board of Arbitration. Thereafter lengthy proceedings were
held before the Board of Arbitrators to determine the reasonable market vclue
of the systems which resulted in the filing of the Board's report and arbitra-
tion award on February 19th, 1971. The amount of the award by the majority of
the Board was the sum of $1,25&,450.00. Subsequently Mr. Bell filed a minority
report on March 17th, 1971 stating the value of the systems to be no more than
$250,000.00.
Meanwhile both plaintiff and defendant made motions- plaintiff Town
to permit the taking of additional evidence of set -offs and defendant company
to have a date set for closing and payment of the award. The Court denied the
Town's motion and set a date for closing on the basis of the majority award
for September 15th, 1971. This order was entered March 29th, 1971 and the
time for appeal is now running.
ALTERNATIVES
At this time the Town has the following alternatives:
1. Appeal from the award and/or various orders of the
District Court.
2. Attempt to renegotiate the purchase of the systems.
• •
4-20-71
uis
3. Accept the award and prepare for the appropriate bond
issue.
BOARD OF SUPEPVISOAS
TOWN OF EAGAN
-4 -
PRESS STATEMENT REGARDING
TOWN OF EAGAN vs. CEDAR GROVE; UTILITIE.3 CO.
The Board of Supervisors, Eagan Township at a recent meeting
directed that a public informational meeting be held for the benefit
of the Cedar Grove residents with regard to the pending case of
Town of Fagan vs. Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
The purpose of this meeting will be to inform all the affected
residents in Cedar Grove of the status of the pending litigation and
what the legal and practical alternatives are with respect to the
ultimate acquisition of the sewer and water systems in the Cedar Grove
area. Following this the Board of Supervisors will have to make a
formal decision as to how to proceed.
This public meeting will be held on April 21st, 1971 at 7:30
P. R. at the Cedar Elementary School.
STATE OF MI NESOTA
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
DISTRICT COURT
FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
File No. 68550
TOWN OF EAGAN,
Plaintiff,
V3.
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.,
a Minnesota Corporation,
Defendant.
ORDER
Application of Plaintiff for Order directing further
arbitration for the purpote of permitting plaintiff to present
evidence of discounts or grants in aid of construction and
counter motion of Defendant for Order confirming the award of
the arbitrators came on for hearing before the Court at the
Courthouse, City of Ha3tings,Dakota County, Minnesota;
Luther M. Stalland appeared as Attorney for Plaintiff;
William R. Busch and John J. Todd appeared as attorney for
Defendant;
The Court having reviewed all records of proceedings
had herein and behg fully advised;
ORDERS .
1. Motion of Plaintiff denied.
2. The award of the arbitrators dated February 19, 1971
is hereby confirmed without prejudice to the rights reserved to
Plaintiff under and pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 572 of
Minnesota Statutes.
3. In the absence of further proceedings herein the
closing transaction shall be held on September 15, 1971 at 10:00
A. M. at the Eagan Town Hall.
Is/ Robert J. Breunig
Dated this 29th day
of March, 1971 District Judge
M E 0
0
..4/-AL•7 9
9�
PI
AsorL
.9 'd
��--C
- _17110- Jr�
G--- d A .d
/ �o dio/, �.!
/A;- 7,
IAR GROVE UTILITIES COMPANY 0
CEDAR GROVE # 1 Lots Block
11 1
Lot 12 excluded 33 2(Lot12 School) Lots 13 thru 19 Cedar School lots
19 3
9 4 (lot 10 NA Water Tower)
32 5 ry,.,._ct
20 6
18 7
5 8
19 9
24 10
22 11
212 Total Lote
CEDAR GROVE # 2
47 1
27 2
19 3
27 4
36 5
17 6
52 7
18 8 (Lot 19 excluded because of Skelly & Commer6tal:.
243 Total Area.)
CEDAR GROVE # 3
CEDAR GROVE N4
CEDAR GROVE i 5
CEDAR CREST
7 1
24 2
8 3
23 4
20 5
21 6
29 7
38 8 (Lots 1 thru 4 not connected)
14 Total Outlot A ?
31 1
10 2
26 3
41 4
28 5
34 6 (12 thru 16 & 20 thru 24 Peace Chruch)
17 7
45 8
232 Total
208 lots
174 Water only
34 Sewer & Water
7 Lots
Outlot 1 Block 8 ?
TOTAL LOTS 1072
Suer Only 898
GG'),Gyp,
7
7
A
1
•
WILLIAM R. BUSCH
ATTORNEY AT LAW
803 DEGREE OF HONOR BUILDING
SAINT PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101
222-0781
May 21, 1970
Luther M. Stalland, Esq.
Stalland & Hauge
Attorneys at Law
Suite 2340, Dain Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Re: Town of Eagan vs.
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Dear Mr. Stalland:
This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of May 20th con-
cerning the commencement of the arbitration proceedings in the subject
cause.
Since discussing your letter with John J. Todd, my co -counsel
in this proceeding, you advised me by telephone that Mr. Robert Rosene,
the town engineer, will not be available on June 10th and that, as a
consequence, June 15th is the date now to be regarded as the initial
hearing time, commencing at 9:00 A.M. at the town hall, for the arbi-
tration process.
This letter will confirm the acceptability of this time setting
on the part of Cedar Grove Utilities Co. and our understanding that --
(1) You will arrange to have a court reporter available through-
out the arbitration hearings with the cost of the reporter's services and
of the transcripts for the arbitrators and for counsel on each side to be
split equally between Cedar Grove Utilities Co. and the township;
(2) The fees and other charges of the township's arbitrator -
appointee (Robert Bell, Esq.) for his services and reimbursable expenses
throughout this arbitration process will be the sole responsibility of and
will be paid for directly by Eagan Township and, likewise, Cedar Grove
Utilities Co. will pay directly to its appointee (A. D. Kennedy, Jr., Esq.)
and will be solely responsible for ail fees and charges for his services
and reimbursable expenses throughout this arbitration process; and
(3) The fees of the third arbitrator in this cause (John Daubney,
Esq.) and his reimbursable expenses will be paid to the extent of one-
half by the township and to the extent of the remaining half by Cedar
Grove Utilities Co. as their respective direct liabilities to him, all to
Luther M. Stalland, Esq.
May 21, 1970
Page 2
the end that there will be no arbitration costs, fees or other expenses
which will be allocable under the terms of the arbitration determination
herein and neither party will have the right of recovery or reimburse-
ment from the other party, regardless of the outcome of the arbitration
process or any further litigation in this cause, as to the arbitration
expenses, fees and charges to be paid by such party as herein set forth.
A copy of this letter is included with the request that you endorse
your concurrence thereon as to the understandings set out above and
then return it to me as the formal agreement in this respect of the parties.
InSiely yours,
William . Busch
W RB f ee
cc: Honorable Robert Breunig
John J . Todd, Esq.
A, D. Kennedy, Jr., Esq.
John Daubney, Esq.
Robert Bell, Esq.
Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
•
LAW Orrlcix
STALLAND ec HAUGF
SUITE 12340. DAM TOV/Mit
MINNEAPOLIE, MINNE,.OTA 65,101.1
I.l%TBEY M. STALUPID
PAUL H. Hivu■
GEOEOE H. HOET
March 23, 1970
Board of Supervisors
Town of Eagan
Dakota County, Minnesota
A➢Et CODE OW
nIoNE 33A-6WJ
Re: Town of Eagan vs. Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Gentlemen:
On March 19th Defendant's Motion to amend the Court's Findings
of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order for Judgment was heard by the
Court. In brief the result of that hearing is this.
In an attempt to get the show on the road, so to speak, we
tried to arrive at some solution whereby we could avoid running up to
the Supreme Court at this time, coming back down again, and starting
all over again. The plan is simply that the defendant would agree to
Bell being appointed arbitrator for the sole purpose of determining reasonable
market value of the systems, but the arbitration panelwould not be permitted
to hear evidence on nor consider grants in aid at this point. We would then
go back to the District Court at which time the Court would determine
whether or not Town of Eagan should be permitted to 1,) put in evidence of
grants in aid, and if the Court decided affirmatively in this regard, then
2.) whether or not Bell should remain on the panel as an arbitrator to
consider this evidence and make a determination which would include grants
in aid. If the Court denied the second step on plaintiff's part (which I
am certain the Court will do on the ground that the franchise agreements
only permit the sole issue of reasonable value to be determined by the
arbitrators, which is what I have said all along) then the plaintiff would
have the right to appeal from that order to determine whether or not we
have the right to arbitration on the question of grants in aid and also
whether or not Bell is qualified to act as an arbitrator. The means by
which this would be accomplished is that the parties would enter into a
stipulation waiving any jurisdictional defect so that during these arbitration
proceedings we could again appear in District Court even though we might only
be at the halfway point; other wise there is a question in the Court's mind
whether it can make any ruling at that juncture.
The alternative to all this is simply to submit the matter on
our arguments over the motion and let the Court decide what to do from this
point on.
I have discussed this matter with Mr. Bell and he is inclined to
take a shot at the first proposition, that is being appointed as an
• •
Board of Supervisors
Town of Eagan
March 23, 1970
Page Two
arbitrator to consider the sole issue of reasonable value. He has the
feeling that 4( determining reasonable value the question of grants in
aid could be brought through the back door on the basis that reasonable
value can also be arrived at by determining return on investment which,
in turn, depends upon how much actually Cedar Grove Utilities Co. has
actually invested in the company as against the rates that are being
charged.
Since, unfortunately, this whole thing has become more or less
a political football, I feel that I should make no recommendation as to
which way to go and leave the decision entirely up to the Board. I will
be out of town this week but you should confer on this and I can discuss
it further with you the first part of next week, after the first of April.
LMS/c1c
• •
MINNESOTA POLLUTION CO:v;,, AGCNCY
717 CJ LA NArli: STREET S. E.
MINI MINNESOTA 55440
March 9, 1970
Mr. De Wayne C. Olson, P.E.
Suburban Engineering, Inc.
6875 Highway 65 Northeast
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432
ties Company
taunt Works
Dear Mr. Olson:
This will acknowledge receipt of yob March 5, 1S Q letter.
Based on the progress to data ertaken, it is agreed
that May 15, 1970 is a ion of the report.
If you have any wartime, cna, p1know.
very truly,
Gary F. Ginner, Acting Chief
Section of Sewage Works
GFG:dg
cc: Fagan Township sistAlpos Boike, Clerk
IIIMIP
h iNNE$o?., r ni-
717
?larch 9, 1970
Mr. De Wayne C. Olson, P.F.
Suburban Engineering, Inc.
6875 Highway 65 Northeast
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432
Dear Mr. Olson:
This will acknowledge receipt of
Based on the progress to date
that May 15, 1970 is a ream
If you have any quest ions , pl
GFG:dg
AGACY
E.
Regarding: C=•: Grove ties Company
Wastewater tnent Works
srtaksn, it is agreed
et ion of the repot t .
Gary F. Ginner, Acting Chief
Section of Sewage Works
cc: Fagan iownshipc/o Alyce Bolke, Clerk
.o
• •
few Orrlcrw
STALLAND & HIAUGE
&ATE aaao, Dane TowEE
MINNEAPOLIS, MINI ESOTA If 54Olit
1.LM. STIL I.Ajt �
P►crl H. IIAVOR
March 4, 1970
Nr. William 1. Busch
Attorney at Law
803 Degree of Spoor Building
St. Paul, Minnaeota 55101
Rs: Eagan Township v. Cedar Grove Utilities Co.
Dear Mr. Desch;
adopted by
the Tem' e
AAA& CODS .I.
moss OHO -Silas
I am herewith enclosing a certified copy of the Resolution
the Tore Nerd as hatch 3 appointing Robert C. tell as
arbitrator Ln the above matter.
In accordance with the Adamant of the District Court
dated February 26, 19710, this will constitute notice to you on
beholf of your client' Cedar Glove Utilities Co., that Plaintiff,
'ems of I an, is yeepesed to arbitrate at that we shall expect
to be advised of defendant's arbitrator on or before March 18, 1970.
Yours very truly,
�bs Luther H. Sta11e■d
tocloaure
CC:
Mr. Robert C. Bell
P.S. to Alyce Bolke:
Sign the original Resolution and have signed by John also,
attach certification and place in record book. Thank you.
LMS:bg
LAw OPPIcrs
STALLAND 8c HIAI;GE
SUITE ga-so, DAIM TOWER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 554O2
I.I;TM BM M. STALLAN D
Ravi. II. I ..toe
March 4, 1970
Mr. William R. Busch
Attorney at LAW
103 Degree of Honor Building
St, Paul, Minnesota 55101
Re: Ragan Township v. Cedar Grove utilities Co.
Dear Mr. Busch:
*DEA CODE .I9
PHONE 346-0361
I am herewith enclosing a certified copy of the Resolution
adopted by the Town Board on March 3 appointing Robert C. Bell as
the Town's arbitrator in the above matter.
In accordance with the Judgment of the District Court
dated February 26, 1970, this will constitute notice to you on
l,ehalf of your client, Cedar Grove Utilities Co., that Plaintiff,
Town of Lawn, is prepared to arbitrate and that we shall expect
to be advised of defendant's arbitrator on or before March 18, 1970.
Yours very truly,
LHEthg Luther M. Stalland
Enclosure
CC:
Mr. Robert C. Bell
P.S. to Alyce Bolke:
Sign the original Resolution and have signed by John also,
attach certification and place in record book. Thank you,
LMS:bg
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION
March 2, 1970
OFFICE Of TriE DIRECTOR
IN REPLY REFER TO:
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Valuation/JWG/elc
Mr. Pau]. H. Hauge
Stalland & Hauge
Attorneys at Law
Suite 2340, Dain Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota 5502
Re: Special Assessments - Cedar
Dear Mr. Hauge: Grove Utility Company
We have carefully reviewed the information with respect to the
acquisition of the Cedar Grove Utility Company by Egan Township
and the resulting special assessment against affected properties.
It has been concluded that FHA must consider this as a pending
assessment immediately, which means that the pending special
assessment will be required paid. It will be the mortgagees
responsibility to hold sufficient funds to pay the assessment
when it becomes due.
We realize that this is a unique situation and our requirement
will cause some difficulty in the sale of real estate in the area.
However, we also feel that to do otherwise would be unfair to
potential purchasers in the area and would adversely affect the
FHA mortgage insurance risk.
Sincerely,
Joseph F. Gableer
Director