Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 07-27-2009AGENDA REGULAR MEETING — MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, July 27, 2009 — 7 p.m. SPECIAL MEETING 5 p.m. — Demo of new Fire Truck 5:30 p.m. — Workshop: Wastewater Biosolids Treatment Options Mayor: Clint Herbst Council Members: Tom Perrault, Glen Posusta, Brian Stumpf, Susie Wojchouski Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance. 2A. Approve minutes of July 13, 2009 special meeting. 2B. Approve minutes of July 13, 2009 regular meeting. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. 4. Citizen comments, public service announcements and Council updates. a. Public Service Announcements, if any: 1) National Night Out — Aug 4 2) Movies in the Park — July 24 & Aug 14 b. Council Updates: 1) 5. Consent Agenda: A. Consideration of approving new hires and departures for Liquor Store, Parks and FiberNet Monticello. B. Consideration of accepting contribution of $250 from Tom Perrault to go to the General Fund and contribution of $2000 from the Monticello Lions Club to the Parks Department for a flag pole in West Bridge Park. C. Consideration of accepting 2 "d Quarter Financial Report. D. Consideration of approving contribution to I94 West Corridor Coalition. E. Consideration of approving MCC part-time pay schedule to accommodate minimum wage law changes. 6. Consideration of items removed from the consent agenda for discussion. Consideration of authorizing staff to obtain quotes on cost to purchase and install an electronic reader board sign and to prepare an application for related planning approvals, Consideration of approving concept plan for reorganization of City Hall and Community Center office space and authorize obtaining quotes for design services. 9. Consideration of appointing City Council representation on the Zoning Ordinance Revision Steering Committee. 10. Approve payment of bills for July 27`h 11. Adjournment. AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING — MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, July 27, 2009 — 5:30 p.m. Mayor: Clint Herbst Council Members: Tom Perrault, Glen Posusta, Brian Stumpf, Susie Wojehouski Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Workshop — Wastewater Biosolids Treatment Options. Adjournment. Council Agenda: 7127109 Workshop: Wastewater Biosolids Treatment Options. (BW/BP /CK) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The purpose of this workshop is to update the Council on what staff feels are the most viable short-term and long -term treatment options for the City's wastewater biosolids, including their potential triggering events and relative timing related to growth. Attached is a flow chart that summarizes each of the six options, including their estimated costs in 2009 dollars. Current Biosolids Treatment ProEram The City currently produces a class B biosolids which we dispose of by applying uniformly to the City's farm land on CR 39 twice a year, once before crops are planted and once after the crops are harvested. The farm is comprised of a total of 158 acres of land, of which about 141 acres can be used for land application due to required setbacks and other restrictions as defined by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The entire site is farmed with biosolids being uniformly applied to each of the 4 plots. The City currently contracts with Peter Ewing, a farmer who plants crops on our biosolids farmland using a rotation of corn and soybeans. This crop rotation has been working fine to this point to achieve the required Nitrogen removal through plant uptake however, recent test results have shown that we are getting closer to exceeding our permitted concentration of Nitrogen which is 200 ppm. Test results have also shown that Bray Phosphorus concentrations have been increasing on our biosolids farm recently. This is because phosphorus is not used by crops and therefore continues to accumulate. We are permitted to have concentrations of Bray Phosphorus in the top 6" of the soil in the amount of 200 parts - per - million (ppm). Recent test results have shown that our concentrations of phosphorus on site have been trending upwards. If levels reach 200 ppm the MPCA could pull our permit and suspend all land application of biosolids until a MPCA approved Management Plan to control erosion is developed by the City and instituted. Phosphorus concentrations have tested as high as 188 ppm in 2007. Staff has discussed these issues with Mr. Ewing and he is willing to change his planting rotation to a corn-on -corn rotation next year, which is option 1 in this report. According to our crop consultant, this should allow us to apply our biosolids to the current property for several more years without purchasing additional land. Future Biosolids Treatment Options As previously mentioned, staff has identified what it believes are the six most viable biosolids treatment options in the flow chart attached. Included below is some language that expands on each of the options outlined in the flow chart. Council Agenda: 7127109 ➢ Option 1 (short-term) Option 1 consists of continuing to land apply our class B biosolids using a corn - on -corn rotation to extend the useable life of our current biosolids farm. This option would require no capital expenditures. Annual O &M costs related to hauling our class B biosolids to the farm, which includes contracting with Schluenders to haul our class A tanker to the farm, and changing our crop rotation to a corn -on -corn rotation totals $60,000. This option is the most cost effective over the short term and as mentioned above our current farmer has agreed to try this approach for a three year duration. ➢ Option 2 (short-term) Option 2 consists of continuing to land apply our class B biosolids using a corn - on- soybean rotation as is presently done, and using a rented portable press to dewater and landfill any excess class B biosolids, which staff estimates will be about 300 wet tons per year. This option would require no capital expenditures. Annual O &M costs related to renting a portable press to dewater 300 wet tons of class B biosolids, hauling our class B biosolids to the farm, which includes contracting with Schluenders to haul our class A tanker to the farm, and land filling the dewatered biosolids, totals $93,247. The drawback to this option is that the portable press would be situated in the parking lot in front of our W WTF and since there are no odor control facilities in place the odors will very likely be noticeable to people on adjacent properties. This option is still fairly cost effective over the short term, but is slightly most costly than option 1. ➢ Option 3 (short-term) Option 3 consists of discontinuing land application by using a rented portable press to dewater and landfill all of our class B biosolids, which are estimated to be about 2,000 wet tons per year. This option would require no capital expenditures. Annual O &M costs related to renting a portable press to dewater 2,000 wet tons of class B biosolids and land filling the dewatered biosolids totals $180,829. As with option 2, the drawback to this option is that the portable press would be situated in the parking lot in front of our W WTF and since there are no odor control facilities in place the odors will very likely be noticeable to people on adjacent properties. This option is significantly more costly than options 1 or 2. ➢ Option 4 (long -term) Option 4 consists of expanding our current land application operations by purchasing another applicator, an ME tanker and a disk, which is estimated to cost about $600,000. In addition, another 160 acres of land would be required so Council Agenda: 7127109 assuming a purchase price of $20,000 per acre this would cost the City another $3,200,000. The W WTF would also need to be expanded by adding another digester and additional sludge storage capacity, which would add approximately $2,400,000 in capital costs. The total capital outlay for this option would be $6,200,000. Annual O &M costs related to hauling and land applying our class B biosolids to an expanded farm, which includes contracting with Schluenders to haul two class A tankers to the site(s), totals $90,000. ➢ Option 5 (long -term) Option 5 consists of expanding our W WTF to add dewatering facilities composed of a steel building, dewatering process equipment and odor control equipment, which has an estimated capital cost of $2,400,000. Staff researched and verified these costs which were provided to us by Bolton -Meek. We compared them to estimates received from two other consulting firms to confirm the accuracy of the costs. In doing so we verified that Bolton - Menk's cost estimate of $2.5 million was reasonable as all the estimates fell between $2.3 and $2.5 million to construct a portion of the previously proposed class A drying facility improvements. It should be noted that if the Council wishes to pursue a class A system by constructing the dewatering facility, many of the processes will be reusable which will effectively allow us to build a class A process in stages without incurring a large financial burden all at once. This will also give technology an opportunity to evolve in the drying process, and in the interim Monticello will have an inexpensive disposal method. The dewatered biosolids can then be disposed of in one of two ways, as outlined under options 5b and 5e on the attached flow chart as follows: o Option 5b - Consists of hauling and land filling the dewatered biosolids, which is estimated to have an annual O &M cost of $86,045. o Option 5e - Consists of hauling and drying the dewatered biosolids at the City of Big Lake W WTF, which has an estimated annual O &M cost of $274,495. The City of Big Lake supplied the City of Monticello with a proposal letter outlining their biosolids dryer fees on July 23, 2009. This letter is attached as supporting data. As the letter illustrates, the yearly fee for 2011 and 2012 is $226,370. Following Council direction, staff entered into negotiations with Big Lake in an attempt to reduce their dryer fees as much as possible. However, it is staffs opinion that the proposed fees are high and should be reduced substantially. ➢ Option 6 (long -term) Option 6 consists of expanding our W WTF to add a dewatering and drying facility, which is composed of a precast concrete building, dewatering process Council Agenda: 7127109 equipment, odor control equipment and a dryer, which has an estimated cost of $8,780,000. Annual O &M costs related to the W WTF dryer expansion totals $225,000. It should be noted that land filling is a fairly common practice. The Metropolitan Council and numerous cities, especially those in the twin cities metro area, dispose of their biosolids in landfills. The costs associated with hauling our dewatered cake to a landfill were carefully researched and the prices listed in the flow chart are guaranteed until 2011 with Veolia. Should Council wish to continue with our current class B program, three of the options listed would be acceptable over the short-term, which staff defines as five years or less before one of the long -term options is up and running. This means a Council decision would likely be needed within the next two to three years to allow staff to design, bid and construct the improvements or purchase the land. However, if Council wishes to change to a class A biosolids treatment program this would require the construction of dewatering facilities at our wastewater treatment facility (W WTF). It should be noted that if option 5 is chosen, Council could still decide to shift to option 6 over time as this would still allow the dewatering equipment needed for option 5 to be used for option 6, thereby reducing the capital costs identified under 6b in the attached flow chart. A.1 Budget Impact: The attached flow chart defines the costs associated with each of the options that will be discussed at the workshop. The costs shown were estimated using 2009 costs. As such, actual costs may come in higher depending on the timing of the improvements. However, costs may also come in lower is the improvements are ordered in the near future due to the current bidding environment. Stimulus grants may be available for some of the improvements and reapplication would be relatively simple with changes to the last application. Funding through low interest PFA loans will probably not apply as our rating points will remain at 41, while the minimum needed will probably change in 2010 to 45. A.2 Staff Impact: Impacts to staff will be on- going, and will vary depending on the short- term and long -term options approved by Council. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: None. Council Agenda: 7127109 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Short-term Staff recommends approval of option 1 since the farmer has agreed to this option, and since it is the only option that prevents any issues with odors being released from the untreated off -gases from the rental press situated outside the W WTF. This also appears to be the most cost - effective short-term option. At a minimum, staff recommends that Council identify which of the short-term approaches presented herein makes the most sense to them to pursue at this time. Long -term Staff recommends approval of option 5 which as noted herein is necessary for any of the class A options. And since this process equipment can be reused if a class A dryer facility expansion is ever ordered this appears to be a cost - effective option. At a minimum, staff recommends that Council provide direction on whether they would prefer to pursue a class A or class B biosolids process in the long -term. This will at least allow staff to focus on one particular direction over another which is important since any of the short-term options will likely only buy a few years before a long -term decision needs to be made. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Monticello Biosolids Treatment Options flow chart Big Lake biosolids treatment fee letter dated July 23, 2009 Letter from Rick Gilbertson - Consultant to the city for City bio disposal site Letter from Pete Ewing — contracted farm operator for City bio disposal site May 6h memo from Chuck Keyes Wastewater principals m 0 0 N M N O 4-J^^ ^L W O t6 I bfl O J L L O t LIO i O ` o c 0 TN u o H o „ o � a m O L a L v v N N SUPPORTING DATA ° m 0 O p a O n N QJ N n « _ ii p L a' W '° uu o p x W m -F; U �a c a « u o °o° a o v m o y Q v ob n � o d � L y O m i n O m C C O a O n ` Q_ ni O a V y Q q o f 3: z 3 m r ov -mo° N a N bo s •O _ a Q � � v o T E V yC n q n v O O N 6 c � O v V ; J =a $H t6 I bfl O J L L O t LIO i O ` o c 0 TN u o H o „ o � a m O L a L v v N N SUPPORTING DATA ° m 0 O p a O n N QJ N n « _ ii p L a' W '° uu o p x W m -F; U �a c a « u o °o° a o v m o y Q v ob n � o d � L y O m i n O m C C O a p > C V g a q ? O IV R o l 3 a t J c d n c °m « y W n V qda a 0 0 0 Y] O� N J a q y y J O � O a v o a m N N n � uR O .Nr N .Nr n � v' O D N = a M c p O V '✓ b a � n v � ° v v a y j 0 L d � � q 6 M ° C v c 3 O 3 ° N v i L V y ° V O p G j b u E q a., a V V N L O a 3 c N E n n a ` � � a ' b O R o a n E n c e _ N V T O C V L C N q u d d a, QUO O l l l l O Q_ Q q o f 3: z 3 m N N a N p > C V g a q ? O IV R o l 3 a t J c d n c °m « y W n V qda a 0 0 0 Y] O� N J a q y y J O � O a v o a m N N n � uR O .Nr N .Nr n � v' O D N = a M c p O V '✓ b a � n v � ° v v a y j 0 L d � � q 6 M ° C v c 3 O 3 ° N v i L V y ° V O p G j b u E q a., a V V N L O a 3 c N E n n a ` � � a ' b O R o a n E n c e _ N V T O C V L C N q u d d a, QUO O l l l l �MMBS�� July 23, 2009 BO L_._TOI-I & M E—= N K Consulting Engineers & Surveyors 7533 Sunwood Drive NW, Suite 206 • Ramsey, MN 55303 Phone (763) 433 -2851 • Fox (763) 427.0833 www.bolton- monk.com Mr. Bruce Westby, Monticello City Engineer City of Monticello 505 Walnut Avenue, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 RE: Biosolids Treatment City of Big Lake Project No: M21.034065 Dear Bruce: S IN o As directed by the City Council of the City of Big Lake, I have prepared a summary of the proposed costs for the City of Monticello to have their biosolids treated at the City of Big Lake Wastewater Treatment Facility. The costs listed below are estimates and would be billed to the City of Monticello based on actual project costs and actual operating expenses. The estimates listed below were calculated with the following assumptions: 1) The dryer capacity being installed at the City of Big Lake Wastewater Treatment Facility has the capacity of 7,846 wet pounds of biosolids per hour. 2) Electrical costs are estimated at $0.08 per KWhr. 3) Natural gas costs are estimated at $0.70 per therm. 4) Capital costs of biosolids drying equipment = $6,100,000.00. 5) Dryer life expectancy costs are based on $254.00 (based on 38,000 hours of operating life). 6) Staff time — $45.00/hour. At start up of the facility, it is estimated that Big Lake will produce 45,313 pounds of biosolids per week and Monticello will produce 80,110 pounds of biosolids per week in 2011(assuming 16% solids). Monticello is anticipating receiving a phosphorous limit in 2012 that will drive biosolids production to 110,470 pounds per year. The anticipated costs for Monticello regionalizing with Big Lake in 2011 and 2012 are summarized in the attached table. Regional Dryer at Big Lake Anticipated Operating Erp eases for Monticello Production Year 201I 2213-2018 Total Mass lbs/week 80,110 110 470• Dryer Capacity Ibs/hour) 9846 Operating Hours per Week II 14 Operating Hours per Year 572 728 Hours Per Year Start/Clean 104 104 Total Staff Hours 676 832 Sts. Cosf S45/hnur $30 420.00 $37,440.00 DESIGNING FOR A BETTER TOMORROW Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer. Mr. Brace Westby July 23, 2009 Page 2 SUPPORTING DATA Dryer Electrical Cost $15.56/hour $8900.32 $11327.68 Dryer Gas Cost 63.00/hour $36 036.00 $45,864.00 Auxiliary Power 25 k $1150.00 $1664.00 Maintenance Cost $8.00/hour $4,576.00 $5,824.00 Dryer Life Expectancy Cost $254.00 /hour $145,288.00 $184,912.00 Total Project Cost $226,370.32 $297,031.68 "Assumes Phosphorous Limit of 1.0 m The basis of the above costs assumes the following: 1) The City of Big Lake will pay all the capital costs associated with the purchase of the biosolids treatment process and therefore, will retain ownership of the facility. 2) Based on projected loadings, it is estimated that an agreement could be developed for the City of Big Lake to treat the City of Monticello's biosolids for the next ten years. If growth takes place faster than expected, the City of Big Lake would need to give the City of Monticello a three -year notice prior to the termination of the agreement. 3) The City of Monticello would need to give the City of Big Lake a three -year notice prior to termination of the agreement. 4) The City of Big Lake would want a commitment that all biosolids produced at the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant would be treated at the Big Lake facility. 5) The City of Monticello will own the dried product produced from their biosolids. 6) The City of Big Lake will own the dried product produced from their biosolids. If you have any questions on the items addressed in this letter, please call. sincerely, BOLTON & MENK, INC. C . A�1Y Bradley C. DeWolf, P.E. Big Lake City Engineer E cc: Scott Johnson, City Administrator, City of Big Lake Corey Boyer, Finance Director, City of Big Lake Mike Goebel, Public Works Director, City of Big Lake H:1 Biglske1M210 7406AWatbyMonticellol.l2.doc 1926 East Hlghvfew Drive Sauk Rapids, MN 56379 -2631 (320) 251.0523 (320) 203.0213 FAX Memo To: Chuck Keyes Franz Rick L. Gilbertson CC: Bob Paschke Date: July 23, 2009 Re: Continuous Corn Rotation Concerns at Biosolids Application Site I'm sorry I won't be able to be In attendance at the July 27 biosolids City Council workshop due to previous vacation plans, but here are summary points of concems I have regarding a change from the current oom- soybean rotation to one of continuous corn. ✓ Increased crop production costs for additional tillage, purchasing biotech seed necessary to address different pest problems in corn on corn production, increased herbicide costs and additional harvesting costs associated with com versus soybeans. Total increased cost per acre is approximately $50. ✓ Yield loss to corn associated with delayed planting. If the site is spread in the spring as well as the fall as is now the case, the spring application will delay corn planting on that portion of the field. Looking at historical records of when spring applications have taken place at the site, the yield loss on that portion of the field may be as high as 25 bushels per acre. I would anticipate the grower farming the land would want some additional compensation for the planting delay. ✓ There may be Increased costs to dry the corn crop. In order to facilitate early fall application of biosolids on the site, the grower may need to harvest the corn while it is still high in moisture, forcing him to spend more money drying it down to a marketable moisture content before selling it. The grower currently has the same concerns. ✓ Yield -based allowable nitrogen application rates for the site will continue to need to be monitored and adjusted as they are now. If corn yields drop dramatically due to delayed planting, less biosolids (containing nitrogen) will be allowed to be applied on the site, possibly negating any gains made in total volume applied by changing the rotation. Once your workshop is completed, and If anyone has questions, please feel free to give me a call or forward any concerns City Council members may have to me and I will do my best to address them. Jul 23 09 11:29a Pete 763- PA Ewing Farms Inc. This is a letter to whom it may concern on behalf of Ewing farms Inc. in Big Lake, MN. This is regarding the land we rent from the city of Monticello on cty rd 39 west of town. We want to let the town board and anyone else it may concern that we do wish to continue farming the land. It has taken us several years to figure out the proper way to farm the land with the biosolids being used as a source of fertilizer. We think it would be in the best interest of the city to let us continue to bring our yields up so that your application of biosolids is not in jeopardy. Also, just a reminder to anyone that did not know, we did help the city out back when the new irrigation equipment was installed. We financed the equipment for them at the time and just deducted the payments of the rent. Thank You, Pete Ewing MEMORANDUM To: BobPaschke From: Chuck Keyes Date: May 6, 2009 [SUPPORTING DATA RE: Class "B" Biosolids land application / Equipment age, Maintenance, Replacement Bob: As we were discussing yesterday, if we were to consider staying with the land application of a liquid class "B" biosolids, even in the short term, it is not without some cost. ➢ The current City owned sludge facility is sufficient for the next fewyears, even with the addition of the ball fields. We would however have the expense of planting trees and fencing to control public access so we could reduce the setbacks. ➢ The cities equipment is sufficient but is getting up therein age, even our new equipment is going on 12 years old and the maintenance is increasing. 1. We found a hole in the 1998 Ag -Chem tank after this spring haul that we are repairing (this tank is steel not stainless). 2. We had to replace all the seals on the hatches on the 1982IME sludge truck. IME went out of business and it getting almost impossible to locate parts for this anymore. 3. We have to replace several bearing and disks on the 1998 J. Deere disk after every haul, this equipment was purchased used back in 1999 and we are constantly welding, replacing cylinders, hoses, bearings and disks. If land application of a Class "B" biosolids is the long term solution than we must look at the replacement of the: 1. 1982IME sludge truck road unit 2. 1982IME field unit 3. 1998 J. Deere disk 4. replacement the tank on the 1998 Ag -Chem We will also have to: 1. Construct addition Digesters 2. Build additional sludge storage 3. Purchase additional land SUPPORTING DATA Leasing land is not a guarantee of location, at any time a property owner can withdraw the option of land use. The ability of finding qualified land, the time for research and permitting can be a long process as we have observed. We have to keep in mind that if we started tomorrow, with the construction of whatever it is we decide to do, it is 18 months to 2 years before it would go on line. By not making a decision and delaying for a couple years we could really be delaying for four (4) years. As always I am available if you have any questions, my cell number is 612.219.1701. Cc: Peg Becker *TFN*DATA Wastewater Treatment Principles and Regulations Sewage is the wastewater released by residences, businesses and Industries In a community. It is 99.94 percent water, with only 0.06 percent of the wastewater dissolved and suspended solid material. The cloudiness of sewage is caused by suspended particles which In untreated sewage ranges from 100 to 350 mg/I. A measure of the strength of the wastewater Is biochemical oxygen demand, or BOD5. The BODs measures the amount of oxygen microorganisms require in five days to break down sewage. Untreated sewage has a BODs ranging from 100 mg/I to 300 mg /I. Pathogens or disease-causing organisms are present in sewage. Coliform bacteria are used as an indicator of disease - causing organisms. Sewage also contains nutrients (such as ammonia and phosphorus), minerals, and metals. Ammonia can range from 12 to 50 mg/1 and phosphorus can range from 6 to 20 mg /I in untreated sewage. Sewage treatment is a multi -stage process to renovate wastewater before it reenters a body of water, is applied to the land or is reused. The goal is to reduce or remove organic matter, solids, nutrients, disease- causing organisms and other pollutants from wastewater. Each receiving body of water has limits to the amount of pollutants it can receive without degradation. Therefore, each sewage treatment plant must hold a permit listing the allowable levels of BODs, suspended solids, coliform bacteria and other pollutants. The discharge permits are called NPDES permits which stands for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Preliminary Treatment Preliminary treatment to screen out, grind up, or separate debris is the first step in wastewater treatment. Sticks, rags, large food particles, sand, gravel, toys, etc., are removed at this stage to protect the pumping and other equipment in the treatment plant. Treatment equipment such as bar screens, comminutors (a large version of a garbage disposal), and grit chambers are used as the wastewater first enters a treatment plant. The collected debris is usually disposed of in a landflll. Primary Treatment Primary treatment is the second step in treatment and separates suspended solids and greases from wastewater. Waste -water is held in a quiet tank for several hours allowing the particles to settle to the bottom and the greases to float to the top. The solids drawn off the bottom and skimmed off the top receive further treatment as sludge. The clarified wastewater flows on to the next stage of wastewater treatment. Clarifiers and septic tanks are usually used to provide primary treatment. Secondary Treatment Secondary treatment is a biological treatment process to remove dissolved organic matter from wastewater. _ Sewage microorganisms are cultivated and added to the wastewater. The microorganisms absorb organic matter from sewage as their food supply. The approach used to accomplish secondary treatment is the suspended film system. Suspended Film Systems SUPPORTING DATA Suspended film systems stir and suspend microorganisms In wastewater. As the microorganisms absorb organic matter and nutrients from the wastewater they grow in size and number. After the microorganisms have been suspended in the wastewater for several hours, they are settled out as a sludge. Some of the sludge is pumped back into the incoming wastewater to provide "seed" microorganisms. The remainder is wasted and sent on to a sludge treatment process. Activated sludge, extended aeration, oxidation ditch, and sequential batch reactor systems are all examples of suspended film systems. Final Treatment Final treatment focuses on removal of disease - causing organisms from wastewater. Treated wastewater can be disinfected by adding chlorine or by using ultraviolet light. High levels of chlorine may be harmful to aquatic life In receiving streams. Treatment systems often add a chlorine - neutralizing chemical to the treated wastewater before stream discharge. U *L'Tc, I sWrtgo Toalmant ,w Ayn[� Advanced Treatment Advanced treatment is necessary in some treatment systems to remove nutrients from wastewater. Chemicals are sometimes added during the treatment process to help settle out or strip out phosphorus or nitrogen. Some examples of nutrient removal systems include coagulant addition for phosphorus removal and air stripping for ammonia removal. Sludges SUPPORTING DATA Sludges are generated through the sewage treatment process. Primary sludges, material that settles out during primary treatment, often have a strong odor and require treatment prior to disposal. Secondary sludges are the extra microorganisms from the biological treatment processes. The goals of sludge treatment are to stabilize the sludge and reduce odors, remove some of the water and reduce volume, decompose some of the organic matter and reduce volume, kill disease causing organisms and disinfect the sludge. Untreated sludges are about 97 percent water. Settling the sludge and decanting off the separated liquid removes some of the water and reduces the sludge volume. Settling can result in a sludge with about 96 to 92 percent water. More water can be removed from sludge by using sand drying beds, vacuum filters, filter presses, and centrifuges resulting in sludges with between 80 to 50 percent water. This dried sludge is called a sludge cake. Aerobic and anaerobic digestion are used to decompose organic matter to reduce volume. Digestion also stabilizes the sludge to reduce odors. Caustic chemicals can be added to sludge or it may be heat treated to kill disease - causing organisms. Following treatment, liquid and rake sludges are usually spread on fields, returning organic matter and nutrients to the soil. Wastewater treatment processes require careful management to ensure the protection of the water body that receives the discharge. Trained and certified treatment plant operator's measure and monitor the incoming sewage, the treatment process and the final effluent. Wastewater Treatment Regulations Clean water has been a concern nationwide since the early 1970's. In 1972, the U.S. Congress adopted the dean Water Act to protect the waters of the nation. Through this act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and corresponding state agencies were given the responsibility to regulate activities that threaten the quality of the nation's water resources. In the Federal Clean Water Act, Congress adopted a comprehensive water policy for the nation and set as a national goal the elimination of pollutant discharges to the navigable waters of the U.S. by 1985. An interim goal was set to Insure that all navigable waters would be fishable and swimmable by 1983. To reach these goals, the U.S. Congress established a regulatory framework: • No one has the right to pollute the navigable waters of the United States. Dischargers are required to obtain permits. • Permits shall set limits on the concentration of the pollutants being discharged. A violation of the limits carries a penalty of fines or Imprisonment. • The best technology available shall be used to control the discharge of pollutants. If the discharge from the treatment plant enters a stream, a NPDES permit Is required. The NPDES permit specifies the maximum allowable level of total suspended solids, biochemical oxygen demand, nutrients and bacteria that can be discharged to a stream as well as the minimum level of dissolved oxygen that must be present in the discharge. The levels specified in the NPDES permit are determined by the condition of the receiving stream. Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 5A. Consideration of approving new hires and departures for Liquor Store, Parks and FiberNet. (TE) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The Council is asked to ratify the hiring and departures of employees that have occurred recently at the Liquor Store, Parks and FiberNet. It is recommended that the Council officially ratify the hiring /departure of all new employees including part-time and seasonal workers. A.1 BUDGET IMPACT: None A.2 STAFF WORK LOAD IMPACT: Until the positions are filled again, existing staff would pick up those hours. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Cy Ratify the hire /departures of the employees as identified on the attached list. By statute the City Council has the authority to approve all hires /departures. There is no other recommendation but for the Council to exercise the authority given to them by state statute. D. SUPPORTING DATA: List of new employees. NEW EMPLOYEES Name Title Department Hire Date Class Matthew Henning Lead Fiber Technician FiberNet 07101/09 FT Ryan Phillips Liquor Store Clerk Liquor 07/07/09 PT Brent Stauffer FiberNet Locator FiberNet 07/06/09 FT TERMINATING EMPLOYEES Name Reason Department Last Day Class Brent Stauffer Transfer to FiberNet Parks 07/03109 Temp 5A hires & departures list.xls: 7/22/2009 Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 5B. Consideration of approving contribution of $250 from Tom Perrault to the General Fund and contribution of $2000 from the Monticello Lions Club to the Parks Department for a flag pole in West Bridge Park. (CS) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The City received two donations. One is a donation of $250 from the Tom Perrault. The donation is the equivalent of the pay increase that was approved for the Council. This donation will go to the general fund as that it is the fund from which the Council is paid. The other donation is in the amount of $2000 to the Monticello Parks Department, The funds are designated for materials and labor to construct a flag pole in West Bridge Park. As required by state statute, if the City accepts the donation of funds, the City Council needs to adopt a resolution specifying the amount of the donation and its use. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Approve the contributions and authorize use of funds as specified. 2. Do not approve the contributions and return the funds to the donors. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendation is to adopt the resolution accepting the contributions. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Resolution No. 2009 -39 City of Monticello RESOLUTION NO. 2009-39 RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRIBUTIONS WHEREAS, the City of Monticello is generally authorized to accept contributions of real and personal property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 465.03 and 465.04 for the benefit of its citizens and is specifically authorized to maintain such property for the benefit of its citizens in accordance with the terms prescribed by the donor. Said gifts may be limited under provisions of NIN Statutes Section 471.895. WHEREAS, the following persons and or entities have offered to contribute contributions or gifts to the City as listed: DONOR/ENTITY DESCRIPTION VALUE Tom Perrault Cash $250 Monticello Lions Cash $2000 WHEREAS, all said contributions are intended to aid the City in establishing facilities, operations or programs within the city's jurisdiction either alone or in cooperation with others, as allowed by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that it is appropriate to accept the contributions offered. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Monticello as follows: 1. The contributions described above are hereby accepted by the City of Monticello. 2. The contributions described above will be used as designated by the donor. This may entail reimbursing or allocating the money to another entity that will utilize the funds for the following stated purpose: DONOR/ENTITY RECIPIENT PURPOSE Tom Perrault City of Monticello General Fund contribution Monticello Lions Monticello Parks Dept Flag pole — West Bridge Pk Adopted by the City Council of Monticello this 27th day of July, 2009. Mayor ATTEST: Jeff O'Neill, City Administrator 2009 -39 RES contributions Perrault June & Lions,doc: 7/22/2009 Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 5C. Consideration of acceptine 2nd Quarter Financial Report. (TK) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Attached is the 2009 2" d quarter financial status report. The main concern through the 2 "d quarter of the year is building permit revenue compared to budget appears to be falling short and will need monitoring over the next few months. All other revenue and expenditures appear to be in line with budget amounts. Al. Budget Impact: The quarterly reports have very little budget impact other than staff time to prepare the report. A2. Staff Worldoad Impact: The report takes staff a couple of hours to prepare, but the hope is the new software system will reduce this time in the future. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Accept the 2009 2" d quarter financial status report. 2. Do not accept the 2009 2 "d quarter financial status report. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The City staff supports Alternative 1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: 20092 nd Quarter Financial Status Report. June 30d' Investment Schedule. 20092 ad Quarter Financial Report It doesn't seem possible that half the year is completed already. City staff is busy working on the 2010 City budget and the City received its official notice of the unallotment effects for 2009. The City was to receive $263,585 in market value homestead credit, which is the amount that we reduced the 2009 budget earlier this year in anticipation of these cuts; however, the City will only receive a cut of $247,566 under the governor's final unallotment of aids and credits. The City will still receive $16,019 in market value homestead credit for 2009. Other first half finance highlights or items to note include: The City requested and was reimbursed $2,930,426 of previous construction and start up costs related to the City's fiber project from the bond proceeds. Building permits and other revenues related to development remain weak or below budget. The City received $3,635,110 (70 %) advance on the July tax settlement in June. The balance of the settlement was received on July 6u' in the amount of $1,772,994.89 for a total first half tax settlement of $5,408,104.89 (includes taxes, special assessments and late penalties). The full tax settlement will be reflected in 3`d quarter financial report. Overall Financial Overview. Both revenues and expenditures for 2009 are comparable to 2008 revenues and expenditures except for the Debt Service Funds as reflected in the chart below: Revenues: 2008 2008 % 2009 2009 % Budget 2nd QTR YTD Received Budget 2nd QTR YTD Received General Fund 7,479,449 651,280 8.71% 7,157,601 858,651 12.00% Special Revenue Funds 6,719,308 1,345,198 20.02% 6,632,144 3,836,562 57.85% Debt Service Funds 5,575,499 25,510,760 457.55% 6,192,140 2,473,587 39.95% Capital Improvement Funds 0 59,216 #DIV /01 4,495,643 11,083 0.25% Enterprise Funds 6,029,868 2,397,836 39.77% 6,257,325 2,551,586 40.78% Total Revenues 25,804,124 29,964,290 116.12% 30,734,853 9,731,469 31.66% Expenditures: 2008 2008 % 2009 2009 % Budget 2nd QTR YTD Spent Budget 2nd QTR YTD Spent General Fund 7,421,909 3,143,704 42.36% 7,157,601 1,006,236 14.06% Special Revenue Funds 7,039,100 1,316,854 18.71% 9,065,958 6,038,261 66.60% Debt Service Funds 5,962,793 30,703,320 514.92% 9,134,080 6,963,510 76.24% Capital Improvement Funds 0 235 #DIV /0! 4,715,000 0 0.00% Enterprise Funds 7,174,908 3,540,137 49.34% 7,960,546 3,331,545 41.85% Total Expenditures 27,598,710 38,704,250 140.24% 38,033,185 17,339,552 45.59% The Debt Service Funds revenue and expenditures were much higher in 2008 due to the refinancing and early retirement of several debt issues. The refinancing of debt resulted in bond proceeds being recorded as revenue and the repayment of those debt issues increasing expenditures. The 2009 increase in revenues and expenditures for the Special Revenue Funds is due to two activities. The first is the receipt of the FEMA Grant for the fire department/public safety radios and the payment of those radios. The second and more significant is the reclassification of some City monies from one fund to another resulting in some operating transfers. For example, staff moved $2,010,190.50 held for future street improvements /reconstruction from the Capital Project Revolving Fund to the Street Reconstruction Fund. Overall, expenditures, which include the first half bond payments, are less than 50% spent half way through the year; and revenues, which do not have the first half tax settlement recorded, are about 32% of budgeted revenues. The City is in good shape financially through June 30th. The rest of this document will focus on each fund type to point out financial strengths and weaknesses of revenue budgets compared to revenues received and expenditures budgeted to actual funds spent. General Fund: For the most part General Fund revenues are lagging behind both budget amounts and last year's collection. The biggest reason for lagging 2008 collections is the revenue collected for building permits related to the hail storms. Building permit revenues typically are collected in the spring and summer months due to weather, but this year the City has collected only 21% of budgeted revenues through June. The economy is not only affecting building permit revenues but also the City fees collected related to planning and development. All of these fees are also below past and budgeted revenues, even though the City significantly reduced these revenue budgets for 2009. The table below compares budget to current revenues for 2008 and 2009. Total General Fund Revenues 7,479,449 651,279 8.71% 7,157,619 858,651 12.00% 2008 2008 % 2009 2009 % Budget 2nd QTR YTD Received Budget 2nd QTR YTD Received Property Taxes 5,743,929 0 0.00% 5,272,397 0 0.00% Licenses & Permits 592,295 330,469 55.79% 591,900 189,921 32.09% Intergovernmental Revenues 259,790 44,372 17.08% 498,056 60,461 12.14% Charges for Services 469,700 109,572 23.33% 383,950 158,138 41.19% Fines & Forfeits 150 1,045 696.67% 750 70 9.33% Miscellaneous 367,195 165,821 45.16% 291,452 100,061 34.33% Transfers from Other Funds 46,390 0 0.00% 119,114 350,000 293.84% Total General Fund Revenues 7,479,449 651,279 8.71% 7,157,619 858,651 12.00% The operating transfer of $350,000 was to repay the General Fund for the public works facility land purchase from the Capital Project Revolving Fund where $350,000 was set aside for new public works facility. While the revenue side of the General Fund doesn't look so good, the expenditure side is in good shape. General Government Public Safety Public Works Miscellaneous Parks Economic Development 2008 2008 % 2009 2009 % Budget 2nd QTR YTD Spent Budget 2nd QTR YTD Spent 1,531,524 756,323 49.38% 1,441,244 810,568 56.24% 1,960,553 731,104 37.29% 1,977,997 1,076,106 54.40% 2,685,593 1,176,868 43.82% 2,524,089 1,184,935 46.95% 384,665 192,580 50.06% 345,601 146,764 42.47% 816,113 239,178 29.31% 793,974 229,664 28.93% 43,461 47,652 109.64% 74,714 39,488 52.85% Total General Fd Expenditures 7,421,909 3,143,705 42.36% 7,157,619 3,487,525 48.72% While some of the departments are over 50% spent half way through the year, this is due to some one time expenditures, which are paid out in the first half of the year, such as memberships, the City's contract with the County Assessor, and Auditor. Also some of the capital items that were budgeted, such as the large scanner /copier /printer, computer equipment, part of the new fire truck, and the street sweeper were purchased and paid for in the first half of the year. The fire truck and street sweeper were budgeted over a number of years with the funds being reserved for these purchases. Thus, these line items will reflect as overspent by the amount that was budgeted in previous years. Also under the Public Safety Department there is an operating transfer of $80,000 for the storage garage improvements, which was unbudgeted but transferred to the Capital Project Fund for future improvements. Overall, the General Fund expenditures should finish the year below budget; however revenues will also finish the year below budget and more than likely below expenditures. Expenditures will more than likely exceed revenues in part due to the equipment that was purchased this year and budgeted in prior years but also because of the lack of development and permit activity. The General Fund does have reserves for the equipment and some reserves to absorb the loss of other revenues. Special Revenue Funds A lot of the activity in the Special Revenue Funds in the first half of the year was operating transfers either into the various Special Revenue Funds or out of them. Some of these transfers were budgeted as part of the funding sources for debt payments, while others were to move funds to better track reserves for future uses, such as building improvements from the General Fund to the Capital Project Funds. In July, the Library, Shade Tree, Street Improvement, Community Center, and EDA Funds, will receive their first half property tax payment. Also the park Dedication, Street Improvement, and Sewer, Water and Storm Water Access Funds will receive their first half payment of special assessments from the County. The table below-compares budget to current revenues for 2008 and 2009 for the various Special Revenue Funds. Special Revenue Funds 2008 2008 % 2009 2009 % In 2009 the City is administering a grant for the fire departments of Wright County. To properly track the revenues and expenditures of the grant, City staff created a fund called Grant Funding. So far the City has collected the grant funds and the matching funds from the various fire departments, and the City has paid for approximately 90% of the equipment authorized by the grant. Other revenues of note include the Community Center Fund which has collected 53% of its budget for charges and services (memberships & program fees). The Street Lighting Fund, for the first quarter, collected $69,532 (28 %) of the electric franchise fee revenue budget. Finally, the DMV has taken in 45% of budgeted revenues or $125,477 in spite of the poor economy and the loss of the Denny Hecker dealerships in Monticello. It should be noted that revenues still exceeded expenditures by $10,837 for the first half of the year for the DMV. As for the expenditures of the Special Revenue Funds, again most of these are below anticipated levels and should finish the year below budget. The funds with the most activity because of their operations were the Community Center and the DMV funds, with the Community Center having spent 31% of its budget and the DMV spending 51 %. The chart on the next page compares 2009 budgeted expenditures to year -to -date expenditures. 11 Budget 2nd QTR YTD Received Budget 2nd QTR YTD Received Library Fund 39,100 215 0.55% 38,225 444 1.16% Street Reconstruction Fund 570,535 17,807 3.12% 541,104 357,893 66.14% Minn Investment Fund 19,795 18,239 92.14% 32,884 3,275 9.96% EDA Fund 1,261,875 42,877 3.40% 1,261,270 1,383,140 109.66% Deputy Registrar Fund 275,000 228,442 83.07% 282,460 128,214 45.39% Shade Tree Fund 36,215 7,678 21.20% 50,134 47,980 95.70% Community Center Fund 2,520,150 605,880 24.04% 2,472,716 621,605 25.14% Park /Pathway Dedication Fund 172,113 27,364 15.90% 286,634 3,069 1.07% OAA Fund 7,310 67 0.92% 125 29 23.20% Capital Projects Revolving Fund 219,105 41,645 19.01% 182,825 192,894 105.51% Grant Funding 0 0 #DIV /0! 0 978,155 #DIV /01 Street Light Improvement Fund 280,000 65,717 23.47% 251,275 70,446 28.04% Water Access Fund 212,233 22,009 10.37% 149,007 5,184 3.48% Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 793,304 221,892 27.97% 697,455 36,019 5.16% Storm Sewer Access Fund 312,573 45,366 14.51% 386,030 8,215 2.13% Total 6,719,308 1,345,198 20.02% 6,632,144 3,836,562 57.85% In 2009 the City is administering a grant for the fire departments of Wright County. To properly track the revenues and expenditures of the grant, City staff created a fund called Grant Funding. So far the City has collected the grant funds and the matching funds from the various fire departments, and the City has paid for approximately 90% of the equipment authorized by the grant. Other revenues of note include the Community Center Fund which has collected 53% of its budget for charges and services (memberships & program fees). The Street Lighting Fund, for the first quarter, collected $69,532 (28 %) of the electric franchise fee revenue budget. Finally, the DMV has taken in 45% of budgeted revenues or $125,477 in spite of the poor economy and the loss of the Denny Hecker dealerships in Monticello. It should be noted that revenues still exceeded expenditures by $10,837 for the first half of the year for the DMV. As for the expenditures of the Special Revenue Funds, again most of these are below anticipated levels and should finish the year below budget. The funds with the most activity because of their operations were the Community Center and the DMV funds, with the Community Center having spent 31% of its budget and the DMV spending 51 %. The chart on the next page compares 2009 budgeted expenditures to year -to -date expenditures. 11 Budget to Actuels - Expenditures Debt Service Funds The revenue sources for the first half of the year for the Debt Service Funds was interest earnings and transfers in from other funds for their share of the 2009 debt payments. The only expenditures were for the February 1st bond payments and the City will be making the August 1st bond payments on time, which will be reflected in the 3rd quarter reports. Capital Project Funds Like development and permit fees in the General Fund, there really isn't a lot of activity taking place in the Capital Project Funds. The major revenue source has been interest earnings and there have only been a few expenditures related to engineering inspections, project review, or small contractor payments for work completed on prior year projects. No new projects have begun in the Capital Project Funds for 2009 through the first half of the year. Enterprise Funds The table on the next page compares budgeted and year -to -date revenues for 2008 and 2009 for the City's enterprise funds. Water Fund Sewer Fund Liquor Fund Cemetery Fund FiberNet Monticello Fund 2008 Budget 2008 2nd QTR YTD % Received 2009 Budget 2009 2nd QTR YTD % Received 932,558 146,860 15.75% 973,375 121,933 12.53% 1,395,140 380,335 27.26% 1,485,950 355,510 23.92% 3,665,570 1,856,238 50.64% 3,742,000 2,040,906 54.54% 36,600 14,403 39.35% 31,000 12,493 40.30% 0 0 0.00% 25,000 20,744 .100.00% Total 6,029,868 2,397,836 39.77% 6,257,325 2,551,586 Revenues for the Water and Sewer Funds reflect the City billing and revenues recorded for the first quarter of 2009 only. The second quarter will be billed and recorded in July. So while they appear to be below budgeted they will actually be close to budgeted revenues by year end. Revenues for the City's Liquor Fund are above 2009 budgets and ahead of last year's revenues, and the Cemetery Fund appears to be in line with past revenues and the 2009 budget. The revenue recorded in the FiberNet Monticello Funds was for inspection fees charged for managing the right of way and for locating services. Expenditures for the enterprise funds are comparable to last year and are below budget through the first half of the year. Water Fund Sewer Fund Liquor Fund Cemetery Fund FiberNet Monticello Fund 40.78% 2008 2008 % 2009 2009 % Budget 2nd QTR YTD Spent Budget 2nd QTR YTD Spent 1,195,843 433,436 36.25% 1,165,368 253,439 21.75% 2,249,437 1,169,852 52.01% 2,402,754 687,953 28.63% 3,694,016 1,669,909 45.21% 3,714,926 1,711,775 46.08% 35,612 10,980 30.83% 35,498 7,233 20.38% 0 255,960 0.00% 642,000 671,145 104.54% Total 7,174,908 3,540,137 49.34% 7,960,546 Conclusion 3,331,545 41.85% Most Funds revenues are in line with previous years' revenue collections through this same time period and are in line with the amounts budgeted for 2009. The exceptions would be building permits and development fee revenues in the General Fund, which are well below budgeted revenues and appear they will end the year below budgeted revenue amounts. It appears that expenditures will also end the year at or below budget with the exception of some equipment purchases which were budgeted in 2009 and in previous years. Reserves will be used to offset these purchases as anticipated; however the City may also need to use some reserves to offset the decline in permit and development fees. 6 Investments As of June 30t" the City had $24,921,195 invested in various instruments at an average interest rate of 3.895% and an average yield of 3.910 %. These figures are down from the I A quarter of 2009 when the City had $26,764,160 invested at an average interest rate of 4.212% and an average yield of 4.284 %. The City continues to have a number of investments at higher interest rates being called. In those cases, the City has been forced to extend maturity dates to maintain interest rates or reinvest at lower rates. Attached is the June 30a' Investment Schedule for the City, and the chart below shows the current breakdown of the investment pool. Investments by Type FHL FHLMC Money Markets CD's FFCB FNMA FHL = Federal Home Loan; Money Markets = Government Security Money Market Funds; CD's = Certificate of Deposits; FNMA = Federal National Mortgage Association; FFCB = Federal Farm Credit Bank; FHLMC = Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. ry m �Cr m ,oc� o ryT m m mono M (O (m O T ll�� TTTTT w w O O) O m O L T �N m t T OON p L T h m N y O O O O O O O�0 6 - a � o 0000 c ❑ 2 2 2 2 M O O RW Q O � m m h a m m N I� O m 0 0 I� O m m m N m 0 0 m O m ... m N N N m N r O N 0 0 m m M I� m m M 0 0 I� O N O O O O O N m m m O O h N N It N 0 Ism O O Ih Oj O W d' O N Y) O N l(1 N In W O O O N V O m N NN m M I� V m mO M mm1�O ml,I rM <Y m Om 0 V O ON NN mm 0 mmr OIL O NM -80mm rm rNm OMMNoo mmmmOl� N f (D (O 05 V h N W m NNN O r 0r W m W W N N Q M W W m W N r 2 Q c O h m m O m � o O m O m m O O O ccJ� N N O m V 0 M N m N O O O m d O m O 0 O 0-1 Ow--I �m IR mr Iqm NmMMM N M O O OO V NMm r r m m m O m a N M r N N O O N O h N O m m m m O O 0 O W W m m V V N Ih m m a m m m m v m m m m O m N m 0 0 0 0 Q. 0 0 Q. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q. 0 Q. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C I h 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m (0 m m m N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E �Or M O MMMN(D O(O (DN NN�ID(O(OO)(p tV (OOO(D (DOO(O O(O (pNNN0 N(O (D W OO N N> N r M M O m m N m O m m m m m m m m m m m m m O m m m m 0 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m O V U � o v o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m N m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I� V I� O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o o o 0 m m m m N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O m (O N 0 0 0 (p (O O O (O (D (O (D ((l N ((> (9 N (O W O O `m o E N a¢ 0 o e o 0 0 0 0 o e e o _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 00, 0 0 o e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o 000 0 o o 0 0 0 O o 0 o m o o O m 0 m r OOOO m O o Om O (000(00 00 000 m 00O (000 o Om m N O V't 0.N d' d' V mm OIL Ih mmm 01 mm0 m0 000 OO.-r OOI mm m N -O 00000 a7 V 07 N[h MMC'SO d' V N d' N t+> MM M (V V N V MC')(V d't+1M (•>M tY) N i 1 I a o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 g a o l �IO� 0 0 0 0 0 10 Flo a o N O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0n On 000 O O O O O OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O m O m O m O 0 O O0 O m m m O O m 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 O O O m m 0 0 m m O m m C ro w V 00000 V m M N v a V V "t V m O m V O NM 1� r t+)M m m Md'd' m m m V m N 0 d' m NMDC' O ro 0 0 mC) 0 m O r r c m 0 Cn O d'chM M N p N c ro v (L LL C Q Q m e m E (U)(�DR 2 X X ��m na Q p o QL y N N m cm Eau L W 0' m O o Cl) 0 m v v rn B m x o m� LL U c' 0' c_mQ m.°n� ��9 cu7 m 2a =0 Z ° ro m YLLm m r O Y<$ m �m E.y va Um� v m Y m00 TUY @LO OroLLWC 2' QmNYNNN w.UY Y.0 Nm v mC L C ,�, :n - Tit C @ 7 C @ m ro to v O U L r Y N C @ 2 w N t� @ m c @@ c 0 m c m@ > y LL @ m m U O v Y Y C m 2 m 0- 3 °' C d Y O Y c @ m a N Q m C Y C m `m m m m m m O i Y w N h� w } mZ I-- E¢ a Y m C Z 2 CO }: X X.Y mLL Y C m LL ro L� C Y m O m Y C C > C' Z N Y m 2 N Q J Y m Y m@ O Y m m c O m Y m Y C c O Z@ Y Z- ro E Y m W W G ro U y0 .'�-' U m O. O j� m U @ ll. O m_ m_ - -C Y @ m iAW- 0 C C❑ Y LL (O ro ryl E N > O@ C yp @ m Y CO c N N m m C m Y C 2 L9 C U C U m O_ O2 O.m N Q. k .O U N@ C U m c>>@ C C Y Y Y C U 2' LL F? 2 ,�@, m0 L m C O U @ d N .` U L @ U C> O p U a L L t Z .@O @ Gy1 @ O' LL 11 3 N O 0iLL(7(n y C N @ v> C L N 2 c m j U E@ 0 C Q N 0@ 0 2 2 L C T v v o 2il ❑ a'a v!- o v7 v ro E E W m._ ro❑❑❑'' c 0m �ii 1mmJ LL.❑ -xYKLL Q¢ m mUZ❑ mU UU 0553 LL W N G � .L T L L L T T T L T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T E @ N N N N UI N@ c > >> c E E 3 E E c E E E c c c c c c c c c c E E E c E mm �af of 0m mm mm mmm m m mm mmmmo00 mmm E .� � E E E '0 10 m E 2 E E E E E E E E E E E LL w LL E E E ❑m ❑❑O yN fn U)❑f0(A NNN N m mm m(A0 V) N w m UNm Y m zm� mmm -m �-�'z= (== z�= zi= zz�'�zz���� v vZ('��ZZZ >>ro�z�f Z Z >vv m LL W U K��> U LL U U C' U U LL U U U LL U LL U U U LL LL U U U U> LL U U U LL LL LL f� r r N I� r O mN N N m mOM�� m0m W mVV O=mmm m m m m m v m m I� m m m n m m 0 0 0 0 0 (� {� N m tIm r r r r (n In r O,�, a a a M� RTIOAM 0 M O M T TrM N O T� NNNM�m. m m O m -N.-N rn N h N� N N V V M �N.-rr M m M N o ccr M r �V N V w m° o o N M m m a m m 1 rn =o 0 00 00 0 °0 00 00 00 °0 00 W o0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 '�' 00 °0 �y 00 06 00 07} °0 a3 00 �' 06 00 — O 22 NOM--WWOQ V M Md.r V d.m aNa f0 W (O (O i11 Nil1r 7M�a NNM 4 h NIA NmmI�000 V mmMNOI�r mmN OOmNMoMMNmamNl�mq m h W r 0 N. r O V M M O0U M 0 rr W. NI�OOmgN Un lh r NM r Oh V m N M O 0 cp 0 M M m M m m N N N 0 O o a O m N m O O M N IR V m O m N 0 O O m m r " r O N O m N rnM m (p M_ m m O r N O O N m m I� N W N N O d'V' r r N m y �p (V N r N (V M oP O m O c+i M O N m R` N r r N r N r N M M N N N C Q I w O� 000 0000 000 00 O N N(O [�' <} O N 9 0 0 0 0 00.9 0 l- O T ma M M N M M O N N M O N O O O ON I� N m m I� MMN mm�M NhN m (+1 N (O Il NK1 mmm tNm M t OMN t W O I� N m y � 0 0 0 0 —ON O m " m M 7 V r m O m UI 'm Om m mom rn —MO 0000 m m 0 m o d' O r N N O N O m 0 m i n N -- o 0 o o o o o o o o 0 o o o O O m O m O O r 0 o O N o 0 0 0 o m m n m I V O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O m O O N - N m O O r o 0 o r 0 0 0 O 0 d' O m N N O 000 000000 00000 00 N N M OO 0000 - 0 O 0O N . N M C O o O o O o O o O o O o O o o o O O O o O O O O O O O O M N O O O O ry W m O o O o O O r O O O r M O O O O V M 7 amr N o R f 0" Dui 6 o-0m _ O OO O M 0 0 0 O O r Oo N r O N o r mI r w O 0 o 00 0 N m "m o O O O C V O c= N N m m rn m m rn m o m m o 0 o N N o v N o m m o m M m o 0 o m N o M N rn 11M' O > U� N N O O o O.O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � c N OO Ot -N 000000(0 0 00 0 0001(50 0 00 00 O0 0 000000 OO m m m m m m m O rn rn rn rn m 0 0 0 N 0 N O V N O O O O O m O 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 N `m O M N N N O h N M N r N N N O N O N O N O N O N O r N O m E N v a¢ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O N O m 0 N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r O O m N O m N O N V M r r r N O O O O O O r NO N N N N N O o N 0 0 0 0 N V N O N O O N O m W p V MM V V V l+J (V Nln d' d'd'vM lna 1(j V av w Ui (O N.wm M N } 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a m o o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o N U O N O O O N N O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m N O 0 o O m 0 0 0 m U .. @ V v M Mai r O V r V Cl V V MN�1N 0 0 0 0 d' 0 V' 0 V' r d'M NON O V' N lriavvMC>1n N N N 0 0 0 0 1n 0 1N 0 1n I� 1N N �- N V N N M O O1n N N O M Vi O �-(OM N O m C'l c � O Y C ¢ Mn Y m Y m T ¢ ¢ U _ J _ > >mz U) 0 @ Y m R m R Q¢ Y m O Q QZ Q N = UnM c o R m:_ U w rnm000 o L- m m E R m N 3 EQ m UJ 2 U * = m m ¢ w 16 Q 0 0= 0 0 0 Z Q R@ Q o o=== Z Z= LL LL== Z Z == Z= Z=_= Z Z Z== J J �0 U U 0 U U LL U U CD 2 N LL LL w w LL LL LL F- d N N N N N N N N Ul N N N N UI N T TTTTTTTTTTTTL Tt TTTTTLLLLLLLLLLLL LL C c C= C C C C C C C C C U1 C VI C=__=. N. U N.. U U U N_ U ✓! U N. U U N_ U U ✓J U N_ R R R R R R R R R R R R@ lry R @ @ @ @ @@ R R@ R @ @ @ @ @ @@ . R @@ CO U OM m m m m m m m m m Co m m Co m m m M (Y D� (Y W 0� W 0� w w w D� Q� ✓�E'w '=w'=www w.y YaL+r CYCL ✓�L EwLL E E E E E E E E E E E E10 E .� E E E E E y m w in Un UA (n V) Un NN Co N co N Uq O 0) 0 co U) UA Un Un 00 00 00000000 00 = � R������� U U U R ODUUUUUUUU_U U CLUKUUUUUKKK[Y ....MW mmmmmmMMMMZmm K[YKm K K K K w(Ym _m_:.) T— R N N m m t N t N m N W N W N m N m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rn m N N r� N oD N N N m N m r m m M m N r, h N m m a m V m V m a o M N o o N M r O r N I_ r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \ 0 0 w w (O N I� W O m l\ 1\ M M O d' M 1� h M u1 d' aD In N V a r N r a N M M M N r r r N r N a a N N a r @ a 1n 1n h N M N r M h N V a V a a V M a a w m r N D n. o _NM 0 o r o 0 0 o rrr o 0 0 0 o r o o r o o r o r r U a comlTim�lnvvMMmvMir�CM N aw�IMl� o� N r N r N r a N N M M N N p r r m N r a r r N r j� r I I r — r` I r r r r r r r I r r r r r r r O N N N M t� to�- N N N N� N N V N N M �U � R ri Council Agenda: 7127109 5D. Consideration of approving a contribution to the I -94 West Corridor Coalition. (BW/MB) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The I -94 West Chamber of Commerce is asking the City Council to authorize committing $5,626.50 to support the lobbying efforts for the expansion of I -94 between Maple Grove and Monticello. This amount is based on a standard contribution rate of $0.50 per capita, which the contributing cities along the corridor (St. Michael, Dayton, Otsego, etc.) have followed. The City Council previously adopted Resolution No. 2009 -3A on January 12, 2009 supporting the expansion efforts by the Chamber, however no financial contribution has been made to date. A copy of this resolution is attached as supporting data. The I -94 West Chamber of Commerce has retained the services of WSB and Associates to market the Coalition at the local and state levels, while the services of Lockridge Grindal Nauen, P.L.L.P. have been retained to help garner support for the Coalition at the Federal level. The requested funds would be utilized for marketing and lobbying efforts. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve a contribution to the I -94 West Corridor Coalition in the amount of $5,626.50. 2. Motion to deny contribution to the I -94 West Corridor Coalition. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Since this contribution will assist in efforts to make improvements to I -94 allowing for easier access to Monticello from the twin cities metro area, and since this contribution supports a public purpose, City staff recommends approving Alternative Action No. 1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of Resolution 2009 -3A EM15(T- 4 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2009-3A A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING I -94 CORRIDOR EXPANSION FUNDING WHEREAS, the City of Monticello is committed to the business and residential growth and expansion along the I -94 corridor from the 494/694 intersection in Maple Grove through Monticello (hereinafter the I -94 corridor); and WHEREAS, the I -94 Corridor has been one of the fastest growth corridors in the State of Minnesota and the Nation; and WHEREAS, the City of Monticello believes the continued growth and economic expansion along the I -94 corridor is dependent upon its continued viability as an uncongested major transportation corridor serving businesses and residents of the northwestern Metro area as well as the State of Minnesota as a whole; and WHEREAS, the I -94 Corridor functions as a major transportation route for access to Northern and Northwestern Minnesota recreation areas; and WHEREAS, the I -94 Corridor is routinely congested, particularly in morning and afternoon rush hours, and due to its role as a major transportation route to access Northern and Northwestern Minnesota recreation areas, congestion on the I -94 Corridor has expanded to weekends in the summer and holidays, as well as fishing and hunting seasons; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THAT THE CITY OF MONTICELLO fully supports increased capacity in the I -94 Corridor as a transportation priority for the State of Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Monticello along with cities, counties and the I -94 West Chamber of Commerce business members along the I -94 Corridor from Maple Grove to Monticello agree to work with congressional and legislative leaders, along with other Chambers of Commerce and business leaders throughout the state to help secure support from congressional and legislative leaders to advance the I -94 corridor improvement as a priority for the State of Minnesota. Adopted by the Monticello City Council this 12th day of January, 2009. Lzz &.& Clint erbst, Mayor ATTEST: Jeff ? . City Administrator Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 5E. Consideration of approving MCC part -time pay schedule to accommodate minimum wage law changes. (KB) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: In July 2008, the minimum wage law changed to $6.55 per hour. In July 2009, the minimum wage law had another increase to $7.25 per hour. The community center part-time employees operate under a pay scale specific to the MCC part-time employees. It was reviewed for points and approved during the pay equity review in 2007 and 2008. With the first minimum wage increase, only the first grade of the scale was affected and only that grade was adjusted to start at the new minimum wage. With this increase in 2009 to $7.25 per hour, the first four (4) grades of the MCC part-time scale are affected and require an adjustment. The first grade will have an entry level pay at minimum wage with the successive grades starting slightly higher due to the additional responsibilities and duties required for their position. While the minimum wage increase in 2009 was 9.6 %, this percentage was not applied to all the affected grades. Instead we review what the market is paying for comparable positions as well as review levels of responsibility for positions and then establish our rates accordingly. The MCC part-time pay scale is not adjusted annually if a COLA increase is approved. This pay scale has not had an increase since 2005 other than the minimum wage increase in 2008 for one affected grade only. We expect with this minimum wage increase and adjustment to four of the grades that the scale will be not need to be adjusted for some time. Again, we do continue to review what the market is paying. Budget Impact: For 2009, the budget impact is approximately $3,500. In 2010 the impact will be approximately $7,500 to $8,000. Staff Impact: While the pay scale for the MCC part-time staff is not the highest paid locally, we believe that we will be able to attract quality applicants to provide excellent service to our customers. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: To approve the MCC part -time pay schedule as proposed to meet the minimum wage requirements and slight increases for successive grades. 2. To make other adjustments to the MCC part-time schedule to meet minimum wage requirements. Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: The Personnel committee met to review the increases requested and approved bringing them forward for Council approval. City Staff supports Alternative #1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of current MCC part-time employee pay scale adjusted in 2008. Copy of proposed pay scale for MCC part-time employees. MONTICELLO COMMUNITY CENTER PAY SCHEDULE AbZ(,(S ED FOR RIM (k 0 �°.�° �a ���- �ri��r€� - ��.- u�•r�.'°'.;i�n�.�a�_P�r� ...m..,._ _ rr��. - — �x>8su *»�..t Slide Attendant d4 _ - -•-- E�,"�`- ��3'ati'3 d��i'1a;9 f•?LivP�.5C' ] M'' �P. FS3L�316m `�r:Cv'/3.':iLc�`eYE`3F9" M60 �a4`�R'.�9i'IPL�.'S�"'• 'IY.: �Y'S Ti�,`p�u�vl4s d3 Childcare Attendant It136`SA&Lrutw.- .£si�:ff'.�..W ma:'�. c..n.oSsb'i iia.raawr. �� 3 -.:.43 E3�= '3m- iwf- d €_n�+�°ex3-. a£T_+�L F:]s,�3'4LN w.'iA�91.sc ��"-" ••.•,y" � &F.Y1�F.A't4'tlE.a'43 �'- "�:�'+'��i ©Fill�aa'e- _a3hi3Z.ist'.�"'s"s:3sT9 i...�.:.°3£9 Gn�54T: }3T_'-'.�ale' vTiY A�Yl d�r'd '3 A2£Ti+'�'r]4 Ice Rink AttenZ`alWt 9�� 3�a,51CfA�1��'S�; WF'i.'�.L�3Pi A° � � !3 ®G:�%taP � 'x'�dk�.�_...umi 2��. _ -F-.0 �xN:.��..:.Fn.¢.. • •. &'3..�w:....�. L:__c3d G5VTn�ukFfldm� %YdNG.`5A}9EPA':ft�9 ",.�P,IA ^R2'E'&E6i16T£:s@C.Si� 1 E'1¢S v2�uv-- zn,mw+�,��re. • • .,.�. -- .a.gy��dyg gs��. --�-. ... Custodian, - . • GS PT Program instructor Lead Life Guard ..� - ". T�a�'c3��°@"` M1�F" Vii. Y2.G•'.auT1.b�5m:�5�"a., S:SA'L.'Zi -£'�2 Tom..¢ 2.Y1`J3 48'91�-„�- +^"�1`A?PL`�RiHIVs ® "tom°'*, euP' b_yYk9LL ®® �k. 4Y.§ 3' iY�i44 iA' ti�1S ".���JFkFR%itkY1�]L'f�u�s:]�3t' • , , I • Y6d�.k3ik1xFS9F6.RY3h I • �rea�= r'I&"t,�5 4.Ca�S�€§- �'.'.k11�F1A?�4'i�E rE"i "i].Tix'Sr ...cA��2� • - • �Certified °��.h3lxrm u�,.��a5'.L`�'ei'�""J6"PaE�p' Fitness Instructor MONTICELLO COMMUNITY CENTER PART -TIME PAY SCHEDULE Approved: 7/1512009 Personnel Committee Proposed: 7127/2009 City Council Pay Grade Step 1 SteE 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Position 3 6.18 6.49 6.82 7.17 7.39 Unused 4 7.25 7.61 7.99 8.39 8.64 Slide Attendant 5 7.35 7.72 8.11 8.52 8.78 Childcare Attendant 6 7.50 7.88 8.27 8.68 8.94 Climb Wall, GS2, Pro Hel er 7 7.60 7.98 8.38 8.80 9.06 Ice Rink Attendant 9 8.76 9.20 9.66 10.15 10.45 GS1,LG, Lead CW, Prou Assist 10 �MK 9.27 9.73 10.22 10.73 11.05 Unused 11 9.79 10.28 10.79 11.34 11.68 PT Custodian, Lead GS 12 10.00 10.50 11.03 11.58 11.93 Program Instructor 13 10.30 10.82 11.36 11.93 12.29 Lead Life Guard 14 12.36 12.98 13.63 14.31 14.74 WS 15 12.51 13.141 13.801 14.49 14.92 1 Not used 20 20.00 21.001 22.051 1 ICertified Fitness Instructor Pay increase takes effect 7 /24/2009 Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 7. Consideration of authorizing staff to obtain quotes on cost to purchase and install an electronic reader board sign and to prepare an application for related planning approvals, (KB) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: For quite some time, the Community Center Advisory Board has been discussing the possibility of installing an electronic reader board. After much discussion, they ultimately felt that installing an electronic reader board on the Hi -Way Liquor Store sign would be the best option. Some preliminary prices and drawings have been obtained. Before any further work is done, we'd like to see if the City Council is interested in securing firm prices and proceeding with the purchase and installation of an electronic reader board. The community center received $20,000 from Bernicks in 2004 when we re- signed our exclusive contract for beverage service. The Advisory Board felt that using the money towards an electronic reader board would be a valuable addition to the community center's marketing program. As this idea has been further discussed at a staff level, it was determined that not only would it be valuable to the community center, but to all City departments as well. In 2009, the City Administrator suggested that we do further research to take it to the City Council for approval and direction. This sign would become an important piece in the City's overall communication program. The electronic reader board would be used to promote city events, information and news. While no firm guidelines for use have been drawn up, the discussion has been to allow no more than four (4) messages per day. We would anticipate promoting not only community center events and programs, but City events such as Junk Amnesty Day, Wine Tasting events, DMV hours, Leaf Pick up, sprinkling restrictions, etc. It was felt that it would also be a great option to allow a community organization to reserve one of the messages to promote their community event as well. In the research that has been done thus far, it appears that an important factor is the number of pixels. The lower the pixel number, the closer the pixels are and the clearer the picture. Here are some prices obtained so far. If approved, we would need to finalize prices ensuring that the prices earlier quoted are still available. A one color, amber, LED electronic display sign that allows for up to 8 lines of characters and a non -lit top cabinet identifying the sign, the prices were approximately $31,000 to $35,000. Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 A full color LED electronic display and non -lit cabinet allowing for up to 8 lines of characters and a non -lit top cabinet identifying the sign, the price would be approximately $48,000. These prices include installation and the software to operate the sign. The operation of the sign would fall under the community center's responsibility. If approved by the Council, we would further recommend that staff verify current prices, check references and tour locations that have electronic reader boards currently in use. Please note, in a related matter, in an earlier agreement with Towne Center, the City committed to contributing an amount not to exceed $5,000 towards an electronic message board to be installed on the Towne Center sign. If this message board would be installed, the agreement stipulates that the community center would operate this board. While no use guidelines have been established for this message board, the City would be able to post messages on this electronic message board. However, the agreement does not require Towne Center to install the sign, and there has not been an interest expressed to do so. Worst case scenario is that we would spend $5,000 towards the sign and then have two signs to manage. We feel that we can have a clearer, less diluted, and more visible message with a reader board on the Hi -Way Liquor Store sign. Al. Budget impact: The community center hopes to earmark the Bernicks' money to be used towards an electronic reader board sign in the amount of $20,000. The balance of this project would need to be drawn from reserves. With this electronic sign in place there would no longer be a need for the City to use portable signs to advertise events and community organizations could also benefit in the savings on portable signs as well. A2. Staff Impact: The community center would operate the sign, but have not identified the individual or position that will maintain the reader board messages. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Approve authorizing staff to proceed with request for proposals for purchase and installation of an electronic reader board to be installed on the Hi -Way Liquor store sign and prepare the application for applicable permits. 2. Do not approve authorizing the staff to proceed with request for proposals for the purchase of an electronic reader board sign. Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: City Staff recommends Alternative #1. This item has been discussed off and on for a number of years with the MCC Advisory Board and City staff. A well designed and attractive electronic reader board is an effective means for communicating to the public. The location is excellent and the staff is in place to properly manage the sign. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A vendor rendition of a one -color amber LED electronic display sign with a non -lit top cabinet. (Pixel information was not received for this example and a color rendition was also not requested at this time. Additional information may be available at Monday's meeting.) mm�N a9..� m ° 3; Q 9 m a Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 8. Consideration of approving a concept plan for reorganization of City Hall and Community Center office space and authorize obtaining quotes for design services. (KB) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The City is facing space needs in a variety of areas. Due to this demand, Jeff O'Neill requested that a committee be formed to review current needs and cost effective solutions to meet the most pressing needs. The committee was comprised of City staff and Council members Glen Posusta and Susie Wojchouski. This committee met on July 14th to discuss concerns about office workspace and come up with potential solutions. Unfortunately, Council member Wojchouski was unable to attend this meeting. The areas that the committee focused on were: • Community Center office improvements • Warehouse (Teen Center) remodel • Sheriffs Office relocation • FiberNet Monticello's storefront location and possible overflow space availability • City Garage expansion/storage needs • Building Technician's workspace • Engineering and Finance department staff workspace layout The committee looked at the space needs of each activity area above and examined ways to address the needs through reorganizing. The following is a summary of the needs along with proposed solutions identified by activity area. Community Center Office: NEEDS IDENTIFIED: • The current work space offices four people in a small area. The space is an inefficient work environment and does not allow for good customer service. • The space is loud with no quiet or private area for conversations with customers or employees. • The MCC staff needs to utilize space in City Hall for additional staff work areas and file storage. SOLUTION PROPOSED: To have the community center offices move into the work room which is immediately adjacent to the north of the current offices. This new space would be expected to hold Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 three offices, two work stations, a copier /printer station and supplies, an employee break and locker room and a file storage area. This can be accomplished with the move of the City Hall computer servers to the Head End building and reallocate supplies and other items to another storage area. The servers are expected to be moved in early September this year. With this proposal, it would also be necessary to move the existing copier /printer and computer and office supplies to another workroom. To help accommodate equipment and supplies in the other area, staff will be scanning in and storing large plan sets with the large format scanner recently purchased for this use. Warehouse /Teen Center Remodel: NEEDS IDENTIFIED: The Warehouse's current configuration, lighting and hard surfaces make it difficult to utilize effectively. However, it is a much -used room with the possibility of even more use. It is a good revenue area for the community center as a popular party room rental and for fitness classes or programs offered by MCC. The rental revenue in 2008 was $5,280. This room serves as the Teen Center five afternoons per week and hosts family nights two evenings per week. Some fitness classes are held in this room as well as other classes from our program department. Areas to improve: a. The lighting is low which does not allow the room to be utilized for meetings or classes. b. The floor is concrete and therefore very hard on the legs and backs of the fitness class participants. c. There are architectural bump -outs that eat up a lot of usable space. d. There is lack of storage in the room. SOLUTION PROPOSED: The bump -outs could be removed making a large fairly square room. Part of the floor could be covered with a surface that would provide shock absorption for fitness classes but work well also for meeting room set up. We would maintain the booth seating and the game tables as these are extremely popular for renters, teens and families. It would be possible to build in storage to accommodate the varied uses of the room. The lighting would need to be improved and some electronics would need to be added. Sheriff s Office: NEEDS IDENTIFIED: a. They do not have a private space for information that needs to be kept confidential. b. They have limited local presence in their current location. Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 C. They would like room for 2 desks. The Fire Department has been extremely accommodating; however, the current office space in the Fire Hall is too small for the number of deputies who need to use it in addition to the Fire Department officers. SOLUTION PROPOSED: The Sheriffs Department and City Staff would prefer to have the Sheriff's office located in the community center. This would be possible with the enlargement of the community center offices as noted above. The community center currently maintains a separate break and locker area for its 70 plus employees in a room along the front hallway. In the plans for their office expansion, the employee break room and locker area would be relocated within the community center's office suite. This would open up the current break room for the Sheriff s offices. With this space located along the Walnut Street side of MCC, it would provide visibility and easy access for the deputies. They could have a secure space with the ability to maintain confidentiality. The Sheriffs Department has viewed other options for office space and determined that this will provide the best working space for them. FiberNet Monticello — Office and Storefront Space: FiberNet Monticello is currently looking for storefront space for their operations. The committee.discussed the possibility that some of City Hall's staff could be relocated to this new space thus freeing up more space in City Hall. It was felt that the City Hall and community center space needs could be met without moving staff at this time. Once the modifications are made per this plan, existing City Hall space should be sufficient for now. City Garage Expansion: The City has reviewed the suggestion of expanding the garage space behind the community center for the past few years. The Building department currently parks its three vehicles in a two bay garage area. Also in this area are tables and chairs from the community center as well as Farmer's Market equipment and supplies. The Fire Department utilizes the one larger bay but moved some of their equipment out to open up space to house the snow removal equipment that the community center uses. City Hall also stores some records in the garage, mainly large building plan sets. Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 As the work of the City continues to grow, expansion of the garage /storage area will become increasingly important for equipment safety and to meet general storage requirements. However, this is not a priority at this time. Building Technic ian Workspace: The Building Technician's relocation to the front desk was an excellent move from a customer service perspective. However, the small amount of space available for the Technician's desk and files has made the counter operations less efficient for the building department processes. With the enlarged office space for the community center, there are several filing cabinets that can be moved into the remodeled space, which could open up an area immediately behind the Building Technician's current workspace for expansion. This option should be researched to determine its feasibility. Engineering and Finance Department Staff Workspaces: The Engineering and Finance Department, because of space demands, have had to scatter their department staff around City Hall. The committee discussed different cubicle or office spaces configurations for employees to attempt to consolidate staff into a more close knit area. Each department believes that they will be much more efficient if this can be accomplished. After defining good solutions for the space needs, the committee felt that it was important to get Council authorization to move forward with preparation of preliminary plans and costs. Because of the technical expertise needed to accomplish some of these ideas, the committee feels that design services are needed in order to ensure appropriate use of space, lighting, electrical, network connections, air handling and fire suppression. We would expect to have a workable plan developed to get price quotes and to determine the ability to have the work done in -house and/or utilizing outside laborers. If approved, we would hope to bring remodeling plans back to the Council in early September, 2009. Budget impact: The committee attempted to find solutions that should be reasonable in their overall costs. The community center has allocated $20,000 in its 2009 budget for office improvements. As noted above, it would be in the best interest of the City to get an expert in design to provide a good working plan. Requests for quotes would be necessary. We would plan to bring final plans for remodeling back to the City Council in early September for further consideration and implementation. Staff Impact: Once a good plan is established, then it can be determined how to approach the completion of the work. It is possible that much of the work can be done by C. Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 City staff and would be important to schedule the project during periods when staff has the most capacity to get it done. User Impact: The ultimate goal is to make the best use of our space and maintain good customer service in an efficient fashion. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: To authorize moving forward based on the concept plan for reorganization of City Hall and Community Center office space and possibly utilize a company or individual to assist with design and cost options. 2. Do not approve moving forward with the reorganization of City Hall and Community Center office space. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City Staff recommends Alternative 41. Reorganization of office space would create more efficient working spaces and allow staff to better serve the public. City staff wishes to do this project in the most cost effective manner and realize the goals of the space needs committee. D. SUPPORTING DATA: None Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 9. Consideration of appointing City Council representation on the Zoning Ordinance Revision Steering Committee. (AS) A. REFERENCE AND BACI {GROUND: At its previous meeting, the City Council authorized moving forward with the comprehensive update of the Zoning Ordinance. As part of that authorization, the City Council requested clarification from the designated consultant, MFRA, on the "diagnostic" process described in their written and verbal proposal. Opportunities for feedback from various City committees, commissions and citizens will occur at critical points in the Zoning Ordinance development process. Attached for reference is a project overview, which includes a more in -depth description of the diagnostic. In short, MFRA will meet with staff, the steering committee, and key community stakeholders to determine the main priorities for the ordinance revision. The groups will describe the current concerns and problem areas within the ordinance and review potential formats and structures. Based on that feedback, MFRA will revise their original proposal scope of work and budget. The diagnostic process will help MFRA determine which pieces need the most focus versus those that can be blended into a new, streamlined ordinance format without large -scale review and revision. In the original proposal provided by MFRA, the first step of the project included the diagnostic process, a complete review of the ordinance, and project initiation process (which included a round of community meetings). This component was estimated at just over $7,300 and was included in the overall project cost of $44,050. At the time that the diagnostic process is complete and MFRA's revised final project proposal is prepared, staff will provide the Council with the revised scope of work and finalized budget. With this information in hand, the City Council is asked to provide representation to the Zoning Ordinance Steering Committee. The steering committee will assist staff and MFRA in guiding the ordinance revision process, providing critical feedback and oversight throughout the process. The Steering Committee is proposed to consist of 7 members, with the following representation: • 5 Planning Commissioners • 2 City Council members It would be ideal to include representation by Council member Wojehouski, currently serving as the Planning Liaison. Council Agenda: July 27, 2009 STAFF IMPACT: In terms of its role with the Steering Committee, staff will serve to coordinate meeting times and supporting information resources. The level of staff involvement in the overall project was reviewed with the Council item regarding the Zoning Ordinance as a whole. BUDGET IMPACT: An updated budget and scope of work will be provided at the conclusion of the diagnostic process, as noted above. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to appoint Council members Committee. 2. Motion of other. and to serve on the Zoning Ordinance Revision Steering C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City Staff supports the appointment of two Council members to the Steering Committee. Council representation will provide a critical link between the Steering Committee, the City Council and the project. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Project Overview - MFRA PROJECT OVERVIEW PROJECT OVERVIEW A. Background The City of Monticello is a free - standing urban fringe city, situated in a prime location on Interstate 94 between the Minneapolis /St. Paul metropolitan area and the City of St. Cloud. Similar to many communities on the outer edges of the Minneapolis /St. Paul area, Monticello experienced rapid residential growth within the last ten years. The residential population is currently estimated at 11,000. The community is home to a thriving business community and continues to build on its past success of attracting high - quality commercial and industrial enterprises. As a free - standing community, Monticello's residential, commercial and industrial components share equal importance in the City's plan for continued growth. The City approved an update to its Comprehensive Plan in May of 2008. The update was a response to the rapid growth of the community, the expansion of the City's Planning Area, and a preparation for land use decisions that lay ahead. The 2008 Comprehensive Plan reflects a new approach to the delineation of land uses for the community. Therefore, the adopted Comprehensive Plan states that priority should he given to the review and updating of zoning regulations. The current Zoning Ordinance, Title 10 of the Monticello City Code, was adopted in 1976. Since that time, the ordinance has been amended with the standard individual language revisions and with occasional amendments for the addition or revision of entire chapters. The lack of a regular comprehensive review of the ordinance has created a large, inconsistent and confusing zoning code which is to be rectified through the zoning rewrite process. B. Project Process In July of 2009, the City retained McCombs Frank Roos Associates (MFRA) to assist with the zoning ordinance update project. In approving MFRA to complete the work, the City Council was clear that the overall budget for the project was a focus of concern. MFRA agreed to begin by undertaking a scoping and diagnosis procedure to identify a final work plan from which a project budget would he established. 7 0 N I N G C O D E D I A G N O S I S & A N N it T A T E D O U T L I N E Y C I T Y 0 F M 0 N T I C E L L 0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The update project commenced in July 2009, and is expected to he complete by ? after completion of the following five project tasks: (I) Initiation and Scoping The project will kick off with a review of the current zoning code and comprehensive plan by MFRA staff, City staff, and the Zoning Ordinance Update Steering Committee (steering committee). MFRA will begin conducting interviews with people who have in -depth knowledge of the existing ordinance (elected officials, commission members, developers, engineers, attorneys and other community stakeholders). All parties will record their findings and compare notes at a joint meeting at a date to be determined. The meeting is intended to identify the final main goals of the update project, and to reach consensus on how to best involve the public throughout the process while staying true to budgetary realities. MFRA will conclude the initiation and scoping effort by preparing a final budget and contract for consideration by the City. (2) Annotated Outline Creation MFRA will begin this task by synthesizing the identified update goals into a trackable table that identifies options for achieving those goals. This table will include goals identified in the comprehensive plan in addition to the final issues identified by the steering committee in step 1. The table will formalize the structural, procedural, and specific code changes to be addressed during the update; and will identify the general approach recommended by MFRA for each item. Along with the table, MFRA will prepare a proposed framework for the new code. The table and framework will then be presented to the steering committee for final edits and approval. Once approved, MFRA will prepare a detailed outline of the new zoning ordinance that demonstrates the specific locations in which all issues will he addressed. The annotated outline will establish the final structure for the new code, and will include a section-by-section breakdown of the new ordinance with text to explain the ,purpose of each section. 2 Z O N I N G C O D E D I A G N O S I S R A N N O T A T E O Il T L I N E C I T Y 0 F M 0 N T I C E L L 0 PROJECT OVERVIEW (3) Draft Zoning Ordinance Creation To successfully navigate the drafting of the new ordinance in a manner that is easy for all parties to understand, the draft ordinance will he prepared in three phases: • Phase 1: Administration - this phase will establish all new code provisions that are generally applicable throughout the code and /or are procedural in nature. Specific issues to be addressed include the purpose of the zoning code; transitional regulations between the old and new code; the code's relation to other laws, agreements, and state statutes; rules of construction; application types and review procedures. • Phase 2: Zoning Districts and Uses - this phase will result in new codes establishing zoning districts, the regulations of uses in each district, and applicable overlay districts. Things to specifically he addressed include the final listing of all new zoning districts, permitted uses, conditionally permitted uses, interim permitted uses, accessory uses, temporary uses, and nonconforming uses. Site development standards (i.e. lot area, depth, and width) will also he established at this time, along with language governing how things will he measured (i.e. depth, width, height). • Phase 3: Development Standards - this phase will produce the language governing design standards for features that impact the visual character of the city which are applicable throughout the community. Examples of issues typically addressed in this phase include tree preservation (if desired), landscaping standards, fences & walls, parking & loading areas, exterior lighting, signs, and utilities. Each of the above phases will he completed using a three step process. First, MFRA will prepare a draft for City staff review and comment. Second, MFRA will edit the draft based on staffs comments for submission to the steering committee for review and comment. And finally, MFRA will incorporate steering committee input into the draft which will then he presented to public appointed and elected officials for public dialogue and input. Note that the final approach for public input into each phase will follow the agreed upon public input process established during Task 1: Initiation and Scoping. Z O N I N G C O D E D I A G N O S I S S A N N O T A T E D O D T LI N E 4 C I T Y 0 F \1 0 N T I C E L L 0 PROJECT OVERVIEW (4) Preparation of the Draft Zoning Ordinance for Review Upon completion of each phase under Task 3, MFRA will prepare a final draft of the new zoning code for consideration at a series of public hearings. (5) Adoption The final task will be review and adoption of the final draft by the City under the rules established by State Law. Upon adoption, MFRA will make the final revisions necessary as a result of the adoption process, and will produce the final draft of the zoning ordinance along with agreed upon end products. 4 L O N I N G C O D E D I A G N O S I S & A N N O T A T E D O U T L I N E C I T Y 0 F N 0 N T I C E t L 0