GAMBLING LICENCES
""'~
"'..t."~"'-- 4'
". ",''':~
'"
CITY OF HOPKINS
" _ 1 01 0 FIRST STREET SOUTH · HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 · 612/935-8474
Date: February II, 1985
To: Jerre Miller
From: Scott Renne
Subject: Gambling Licenses
The Hopkins City Councll has granted the followlng bingo/gambling
licenses in 1984 and 1985:
License #
1984
16
17
18
20
Organization
American Legion
El ks
Knights of Columbus
VFW
Special Licenses - 1984
Church of St. Johns
371
357
276
332
1985 16
17
28
20
227
.,
St. Joseph Church
Hopkins Community Center
El ks
American Legion
El ks
Knights of Columbus
VFW
Church of St. Johns
Type of License
Gambling & Bingo
Gambling
Gambling & Bingo
Gambling & Bingo
(1-7) Gambling license for
Parish Dance
(1-7) Bingo license for
Fall Festival
Bingo
(1-7) Bingo license for
Raspberry Day Festival
Gambling & Bingo
Gambling
Gambling & Bingo
Gambling & Bingo
(1) day Gambling for 2/16/85
The following Gambling License Applications have been made through
the Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board. The licenses are de-
liniated into three classes. Class A allows Bingo, Raffles, Paddlewheels,
Tipboards and Pull-Tabs. Class B allows everything in Class A excluding
Bingo. Class C is Bingo only.
Page 2
Applicant Location
Type of License
Elks 30-8th Avenue South
Class A
American Legion 10-12th Avenue South
Variety Club Heart
Hospital Association Oak Ridge Country Club
Class A
Class B
National MS Society
MN North Star Chapter Lindees, 919 Cambridge St. Class B
National MS Society
MN North Star Chapter Westwood Bar, 517 Excelsior Ave. Class B
All applicants have been notified that the City Council will be
considering their applications at the February 19 Council meetlng.
.
MEMO
Date:
February 15, 1985
.
To:
Mayor & CouncIl
From:
W1lllam P. CraIg, CIty Manager
Subject:
Report on Status of JOInt RecreatIon Program Contract
NegotIatIon for 1985-8.
I met WIth M1nnetonka CIty Manager JIm MIller on February 13,
1985, and we dIscussed the J01nt recreatIon contract negotIatIons
Inasmuch as the Hopk1ns Park Board and Counc1l w1sh to have D1Ck
W1lson formally termed the Hopk1ns Park D1rector, and M1nnetonka
feels that such a des1gnat1on amounts to extra work benef1tlng
one commun1 ty only, we have reached an 1mpasse. Cons1der the
reverse of the sltuat1on. If M1nnetonka were to ass1gn extra
dut1es and t1tles to DICk (for Instance, CIV1l Defense Dlrector),
then Hopk1ns people mlght feel unhappy to flnd themselves paYlng
for 1/3 of M1nnetonka's C1Vll defense blll.
Actually, of course, DICk's work t1me regardlng parks IS mlnlmal,
and pr1nc1pally Involves Insur1ng that park malntenance work
meshes wlth recreat10n programs and needs. J1m M1ller 1S w1ll1ng
to concede that, and to have language 1n the contract (as
prev10usly prov1ded) allow1ng the contlnuance of current
pract1ce, but w1thout the t1tle (I'm not so sure that one or two
of hIS more rambunctlous councll members would agree).
Jlm M1ller had not contemplated the Idea of charg1ng Hopklns more
money to let DICk keep the tltle, but Slnce It was brought up at
the last meet1ng, says he 1S wlll1ng to look at that as a way out
of the Impasse.
The 1ssue of JOlnt board reVlew of candldates IS really a concern
of JIm, rather than hlS Cou nCll. Slnce I th1nk a JOlnt Board
request to the Clty Counc1ls~to reV1ew the resumes would not be
denled, 1t IS somewhat of a non-1ssue In the real world. It dld
not strlke me as enough of a concern to endanger the JOlnt
agreement.
The JOlnt agreement has long survlved transltory polltlcal
concerns and the. hang-ups of the many managers Involved. I am
confIdent that, glven some negotIatIng room, my successor wlll be
able to reach a satlsfactory agreement.
Respectfully submltted,
U' rL G----~
W1lllam P. Cralg J
C1ty Manager