City Council Agenda Packet 01-25-2010AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING – MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, January 25, 2010 – 7 p.m.
Mayor: Clint Herbst
Council Members: Tom Perrault, Glen Posusta, Brian Stumpf, Susie Wojchouski
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
2A. Approval of Minutes – January 11, 2010 Regular Meeting
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda
4. Citizen comments, public service announcements and Council updates
a. Citizen Comments:
b. Public Service Announcements:
1) Community Gardens
b. Council Updates:
1) Citizen Service Desk
5. Consent Agenda:
A. Consideration of approving new hires and departures for City departments
B. Consideration of adopting Resolution #2010-03 accepting contribution of $250 from
Tom Perrault to go into the General Fund
C. Consideration of approving lease renewal and amended contract for City biosolids
farmland
D. Consideration of preliminary approval of fire contract with the Township of
Monticello
E. Consideration of renewing contract with Carefree Lawn Service
6. Consideration of items removed from the consent agenda for discussion.
7. Consideration of authorizing staff to proceed with office reorganization plan
8. Consideration of Junk Amnesty Day service level by: continuing status quo, establishing it as
a bi-annual event (to be held in odd-numbered years), or by discontinuing
9. Approve payment of bills for January 25th
10. Adjournment
Council Agenda: 01/25/10
1
5A. Consideration of approving new hires and departures for City departments. (TE)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Council is asked to ratify the hiring and departures of employees that have occurred
recently in the departments listed. It is recommended that the Council officially ratify the
hiring/departure of all listed employees including part-time and seasonal workers.
A1. Budget Impact: (positions are generally included in budget)
A2. Staff Work Load Impact: If new positions, there may be some training involved.
If terminated positions, existing staff would pick up those hours, as needed, until
replaced.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Ratify the hire/departures of the employees as identified on the attached list.
C. RECOMMENDATION:
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/terminated employees
Name Title Department Effective Date Class
Name Reason Department Last Day Worked Class
Kayla Tibboel Involuntary MCC 11/24/09 PT
NEW EMPLOYEES
TERMINATING EMPLOYEES
5A council_employee list.xls: 1/22/2010
Council Agenda: 01/25/10
1
5B. Consideration of adopting Resolution #2010-03 to accept a contribution of $250 from
Tom Perrault to go into the General Fund. (CS)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The City has received a donation of $250 from Tom Perrault to go to the General Fund
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.
A1. Budget Impact: None
A2. Staff Workload Impact: Staff accounts for and reconciles donations contributed
through the City.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the contribution 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. 2010-03
City of Monticello
RESOLUTION NO. 2010-03
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 MN 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 (Jan) $250
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
Adopted by the City Council of Monticello this 25th day of January, 2010.
______________________________
Mayor Clint Herbst
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Jeff O’Neill, City Administrator
City Council Agenda: 01/25/10
1
5C. Consideration of approving lease renewal and amended contract for city biosolids
farmland. (BP, CK, BW)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Property owned by the City of Monticello (150 acres), which is used as an application
site for the city’s biosolids, is currently leased for agricultural use. The current contract
is up on April 1, 2010. The last year of this previous contract the city received $21,000
annual revenue as rent by Ewing Farms.
Prior to 2009, for 11 years the city was paid annually approximately $12,240 for rent by
Ewing. There was also an agreement between parties that Ewing Farms would buy the
replacement irrigation system and improve the existing well at a cost of approximately
$54,000. Financing brought the liability to approximately $96,000 with annual
equipment payments for the term by Ewing of approximately $8,600. Ownership of the
equipment would be the city’s throughout the payment tenure. The total of rent received
by the city and the equipment payments equaled a $21,000 expense annually to Ewing
Farms toward farming our land.
Staff was directed by Council, prior to renewing the farm rental agreement for the next
contractual period, to open an opportunity for local farmers to bid on the parcel.
Currently there are no farmers within the city, but there are local area farmers in Big
Lake and Monticello Township with respective proximity to the city and bio-farm.
According to the current contract, an option to renew the lease by Ewing Spring Brook
Farms, Inc. is in place and reads: “Ewing Spring Brook Farms shall have the first option
to extend or renew this lease, dependent upon successful negotiation of terms by both
Ewing Spring Brook Farms and the City of Monticello”. This was done as a good faith
gesture since Ewing Farms helped the city by arranging the financing and simplified the
process for the city financially and professionally.
Renewal of this contract is restructured with a recommended cropland rental rate
considering the restricted crop type due to the biosolid application and time in field
windows. It is important to note that crops yielded by biosolids application cannot be
used for human consumption so farmers are limited to less profitable crops thereby
reducing potential rental rates. Bio-fields also must be cropped and the crop must be
removed and not reintroduced to the site.
Staff has contacted surrounding equivalent communities to research rates with examples
as follows:
City of Big Lake: The City of Big Lake does not charge rent or receive
compensation on the city owned land on which their biosolids are applied.
City of St. Michael: The City of St Michael does not charge rent or receive
compensation on land that they own or apply biosolids.
City Council Agenda: 01/25/10
2
City of Otsego: The City of Otsego also does not charge rent or receive
compensation on land that they own or apply biosolids. Otsego currently hauls
their excess biosolids to Howard Lake for land application. Otsego has passed an
ordinance that does not allow the application of biosolids to any land (public or
private) within their city but allow themselves provision to do so.
City of Buffalo: The City of Buffalo dries and incinerates their biosolids and has
no need for land application.
Certain eccentricities to farm the property are known by Ewing Spring Brook Farms
which has value for a smooth operation with a symbiotic relationship of Veolia’s staff
such as familiarity with the well and irrigation systems, borders and set backs on which
the biosolids are placed. Ewing is also familiar with compaction that is a result of the
biosolids application. Furthermore is the ability to coordinate with Veolia staff in order to
apply bio matter within short windows, which allows them to get crops in and out sooner
to benefit both parties.
A1. Budget Impact: The attached contract incorporates a rate increase of 10%
at contract renewal ($155/acre) with a 3rd year automatic lease renewal
including a $5 increase ($160/acre) and a 4th year optional lease renewal
including another $5 increase ($165/acre), which Ewing has indicated is
acceptable.
A2. Staff Workload Impact: Minimal administrative contractual
implementation.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve contract with Ewing Spring Brook Farms as written.
2. Motion to deny contract renewal and request proposals for lease contract.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff recommends Alternative #1, approving this rental contract with Ewing Spring
Brook Farms as written. It is possible to receive a lower proposal than our current rate;
consequently, if no proposals were received we would be forced to hire a mobile press
and landfill. This proposed contract will provide us with greater revenue than any of the
previous contracts. The information given also discloses the information used by staff to
determine a fair rate. Staff has researched many approaches to increase the rate to a
maximum level but the major factor is the crop restricts higher profit margins due directly
to the biosolids application.
City Council Agenda: 01/25/10
3
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Proposed Contract with Ewing Spring Brook Farms
Minnesota cropland rental rates per acre
Acceptable crop price worksheet
Ewing’s profit/loss margin sheet for 2009
Council Agenda: 1/25/10
1
5D. Consideration of preliminary approval of fire contract with Monticello Township
(TK, SJ)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The current agreement for fire protection services between Monticello Township and the
City of Monticello is set to expire January 31, 2011. The City currently does not charge
for fire protection to Monticello Township based on the agreement of dissolution of the
joint fire board. Staff has met with Monticello Township and has presented the proposal
outlined below. As of this time, staff has not had a response from the Township
regarding this proposal, which is why we are requesting preliminary approval from the
City Council.
However, beginning in 2011 the City would use the same a formula as the formula for the
City of Otsego and Silver Creek Township to calculate the costs per parcel to be charged,
which is based on a number of factors including the annual fixed cost to have the fire
department available along with the number of man hours spent fighting fires in each
jurisdiction. The idea behind this allocation of cost is to try and recoup the City’s cost of
having a fire department available to provide coverage and to estimate the number of
fires and man hours that will be spent in each jurisdiction based on a three year average.
Enclosed with the agenda is a summary of the calculations used to estimate the contract
terms which indicate that the City should try to generate approximately $121,827 in 2010
between the City of Otsego, Silver Creek and Monticello Townships. If this fee was
adjusted by 3% annually for 2011 and 2012, the current charge per parcel of $51 would
generate around $130,000 each year, of which Monticello Township’s share would be
$76,500 in 2011 and 2012.
Fire Department representatives reviewed this information and are recommending that
the City Council adopt the fee schedule of $51 per parcel for the contract effective
January 1, 2011. With Council approval, the new contract would be sent to Monticello
Township for a two year term beginning in February 2011 and would expire at the same
time the contracts expire for the City of Otsego and Silver Creek Township. This way all
three contracting jurisdictions would be on the same contract renewal schedule going
forward.
A1. Budget Impact: The City’s 2010 budget would not be impacted and beginning
in 2011 the City would receive approximately $76,500 in revenue for this
contract.
A2. Staff Workload Impact: On average the fire department responds to 85 calls per
year to Monticello Township.
Council Agenda: 1/25/10
2
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Authorize preliminary approval of the fire contract with Monticello Township for
fire protection services at a per parcel rate of $51 for 2011-2012.
2. Approve contract renewals at some other rate to be determined.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the Fire Department, Director of Finance, and staff to
approve Alternative #1 to offer a 2-year fire protection contract to Monticello Township
at a rate of $51 per parcel. While this rate is anticipated to cover the City’s cost over the
two years, future adjustments to this rate may be needed if new fire trucks are purchased
or a new or second fire hall is added. The rate proposed has not included any unusual
capital expenditures at this time other than normal annual purchases.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Cost allocation summary
Proposed agreement with Monticello Township
Council Agenda: 01/25/2010
1
5E. Consideration of renewing contract with Carefree Lawn Service (TP)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Carefree Lawn Service has been providing supplemental mowing services for the City of
Monticello since 1995. Our first contracts with Carefree were for mowing the Library,
Hi-Way Liquor and the Fire Hall, and also included nuisance mowings for miscellaneous
private property around the community that were not keeping up with mowing as
required by City Ordinance. In 1997, Riverside Cemetery was added when the City took
over the cemetery from the Masonic Lodge. Our latest contract with Carefree originated
in February of 2008 and was for a period of two years with a one year extension. The
one year extension of the contract has to be agreed upon by both parties before the
contract is valid. Instead of the one-year extension on the 2010 contract, staff thought
Carefree’s proposal for a two year contract, with a third year extension, and no increase
in rates was the better option. The proposed contract will be for the duration 2010-2012,
with a one-year extension option to 2013.
A1. Budget Impact: Rates will remain the same for the next three years.
A2. Staff Workload Impact: The staff workload impact may be affected only in
Riverside Cemetery as we look for ways to make improvements to make mowing
and trimming easier in the cemetery.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve a new two-year contract with Carefree Lawn Service and to
also include a one-year extension option based upon approval of the City and
Contractor at the end of the two-year period, under the premise that all three years
would be at the fixed prices with no further increases.
2. Motion to approve a one year extension on the 2010 contract and re-evaluate in
2011.
3. Motion to deny contract with Carefree Lawn Service at this time and to go out for
bids for the mowing services.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City Staff recommends Alternate #1 to approve the contract for two years with a one-year
extension option with Carefree Lawn Service as outlined. Carefree has done a good job
of mowing for us over the years and has kept the cost extremely low and very
competitive. At this time we don’t think the prices could be beat by another contractor,
especially knowing the volume of the work and the time and effort it takes to perform
some of this mowing.
Council Agenda: 01/25/2010
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Proposed contract with Carefree Lawn Service
Schedule A – letter with pricing from James King of Carefree Lawn Service
Council Agenda: 01/25/10
1
7. Consideration of authorizing staff to proceed with office reorganization plan (JO,
KB, TE)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
City Council is asked to grant authorization to proceed with an office reorganization plan
designed to make better use out of current space available and take advantage of office
space that recently opened up at the Prairie Center Office building. As you know, staff
has been looking at solving a number of space problems. Now that the Prairie Center has
space available, it is time to consider making shifts that will help us become more
productive. Following is a list of goals that were in mind as we analyzed how to better
use our space.
Provide private office space for Sheriff’s Department
Enhance office/public interaction space for MCC staff
Provide private office for Deputy Clerk Cathy Shuman
Provide private office for Economic Development Director Megan Barnett
Maintain or expand current level of meeting space
Consolidate storage areas for office supplies and other office items
Consolidate or digitize paper copy files where possible
Provide cubicle space for outside staff visiting City Hall from time to time
Keep costs as low as possible by limiting need to move walls
Utilize existing office furniture on hand
Determine which department would be best suited for the shift and result in the
least disruption of City Hall activities
The proposed plan is identified on the attached layout. Following are the most notable
elements of the plan.
Engineering Department Moves to the Prairie Conference Center
After review of the situation by City Hall staff, it is our recommendation that space be
opened up at City Hall through relocation of the Engineering Department, which includes
Bruce Westby, Karen Ludvigson and Tom Bose. According to Bruce Westby, there is
sufficient space available for the Engineering Department to work out of in the area that
was occupied by a previous tenant at Prairie Center;, however, there is not enough room
to accommodate meetings in this space so Engineering will still need to utilize meeting
rooms at City Hall for meetings with consultants, developers and their engineers, etc.
This space is on the second floor in the northwest corner of the building. It was our view
that it made the most sense to move Engineering because this department, at this time,
has the least level of interaction with other staff at City Hall on an ongoing basis. Much
of the interaction that occurs happens during scheduled meetings. Also, it is our plan to
utilize technology to link Engineering Offices with City Hall virtually through
fiber/webcam access. Eventually, we would like to be able to have customers speak
directly to Engineering via webcam from City Hall, thus enabling the City Hall
receptionist to act as a receptionist for the Engineering Department as well.
Council Agenda: 01/25/10
2
This move will require additional office furniture, a new front door, minor rewiring to
add another phone and data jack outlet, and equipment for the Engineering Department,
including a color copier/printer/scanner. The total cost is currently being researched by
Bruce Westby. This shift is the first domino that must fall in order for the other moves to
occur.
Consolidating MCC Staff Space into Supply Room
One of the most pressing problems solved by this reorganization is provision of office
and public interaction space needed by MCC staff. Under the plan as proposed, the
Public Works Department would be employed to remove a portion of the wall separating
the current MCC offices from the office supply room. These two spaces will then be
consolidated into one space with multiple offices installed to support staff and interaction
with the public. Following is a summary of the work required along with cost estimates
from Kitty Baltos.
Summary of Work Required:
1. Remove the wall between the current community center office and the City Hall
copy/supply room. Public works has agreed to take the lead on this project with
assistance from the community center staff. The work involves:
a. Demo out the wall; this would require a building permit based on the
value of the work. Ron Hackenmueller is assisting with a materials list for
the project.
b. Terminating or moving the electrical lines currently in the wall to be
removed. This would be done by an electrician. The approximate quotes
from two electricians indicate that the cost would be between $600 and
$1,500 depending on the need to terminate the lines or move them.
c. Sheetrock, tape and paint to repair walls.
d. Create a soffit or ceiling grid to match one space to another space.
e. Piece in carpet to cover the floor area uncovered by the wall removal.
There are no carpet remnants available. The carpet would have to be
matched as closely as possible.
2. Once the supplies and shelving are moved from the copy/supply room, then an
assessment can be made on electrical, network and phone outlets needed. No cost
estimates on this yet. We would anticipate using a local electrician, Doug Lyseng
(IT) and TDS Telecom (phone) for the work.
3. Three quotes have been received for the partitions to create the new office spaces.
a. Office Furniture Solutions - $10,980.51
b. Parameters, Ltd - $10,292.68
c. Office Environment Brokers - $5,110.00. This is used equipment from the
old Ford Dealership that was not sold in the auction. If this is the
equipment that is purchased, the doors could be deleted from the quote to
Council Agenda: 01/25/10
3
save $2,550 but would like to add the $450 quoted to install the desks.
This would bring the cost down to $3,010.
d. The desks to be used were purchased at the Hecker auction this past
summer and will be used in the office space.
4. We do not anticipate doing any work on the air handling, lighting or fire
suppression systems. There could be some minor items that we didn’t think of,
but we hopefully have addressed all issues.
Other Shifts of Office Space or Staff
Other important shifts identified in the attached plan that have minimal costs associated
include the following:
Relocation of office supplies into the central area of the City Hall utilizing storage
cabinets on hand
Relocation of main printer to storage area adjacent to Engineering offices
Sheriff’s Department to Tracy Ergen’s office (was the Sheriff’s Dept former
office)
*Please note that, according to Sergeant Anderson, the space proposed would
work fine and is quite acceptable. He went on to note that the ideal space
would be a little bit larger and would feature more of a “store-front” presence.
Based on his input, it is proposed to preserve the City Hall space for Sheriff’s
Department use, but delay the move until viability of moving to the Prairie
Center building is analyzed. As you know, the Chiropractor is moving out
sometime before June which could potentially provide an opportunity for
relocation of the Sheriff’s Department at that time.
Tracy Ergen to City Engineer’s office
Cathy Shuman to Dawn’s old office
A1. Budget Impact: The total cost estimates to complete the shifts above have not
been completed; however, since the cost will be relatively small and there is a
fairly urgent need to get the project going during a window of opportunity for the
Public Works crews, staff is asking if Council would direct staff to proceed under
a not to exceed cost option.
Given the information provided to me by Department Heads, it is projected that
the cost to consolidate the MCC/Office Supply room space, including provision of
office equipment, will range from $6000 to $8000. It is estimated that the cost of
office furnishings for the new Engineering Offices will be in the neighborhood of
$3,000. It is proposed that funds for this project be derived from reserve funds.
Please note that reserve funds include budgeted facility development funds that
were not spent.
Council Agenda: 01/25/10
4
A2. Staff Workload Impact: City staff and Public Works employees will be
assisting with various stages of the project, including design, construction,
moving, and other details.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to authorize City Staff to implement office reorganization plan with the total
cost not to exceed $11,000.
2. Motion to modify or deny said request.
3. Motion to table the matter for further review.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Personnel Committee and Staff recommend Alternative #1. This alternative will
result in achievement of a number of important goals at a relatively low cost. One of the
goals not achieved through this alternative includes providing a private office for Megan
Barnett, In the event the Sheriff’s Department ultimately locates to another site, Barnett
could occupy the space being preserved for the Sheriff’s department. In the meantime
Barnett will utilize one of the conference rooms when there is a need for private meeting
space.
Authorization today is somewhat important because the Public Works Department could
better integrate the work into their schedule so that it can get done on a timely basis.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Office reorganization plan layout
(a) Quote from Office Environment Brokers (OEB)
(b) Quote from Office Furniture Solutions (OFS)
(c) Quote from Parameters
City Council Agenda: 01/25/10
1
8. Consideration of Junk Amnesty Day service level change by: continuing status quo,
establishing it as a bi-annual event (to be held in odd-numbered years), or
by discontinuing. (BP, JO)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
City Council is asked to consider making changes to the Junk Amnesty Day program by
conducting it on alternate years or by discontinuing the service. The thought of
modifying the program stemmed from discussions at the Personnel Committee level
pertaining to finding ways to reduce overtime and regular hour duties for non-essential
functions. Junk Amnesty Day was brought to the table and discussed were real costs,
overtime and regular shift staff time. Also, there is some belief that much of the material
that is dumped in Monticello on Junk Amnesty Day comes from outside of the City and
that the expense to remove junk material from Monticello could be reduced by
encouraging individuals to be responsible for discarding junk in a traditional method.
The original purpose of Junk Amnesty Day was to provide a place to take refuse at about
the same time that the Building Staff was conducting public nuisance sweeps. Junk
Amnesty Day has proven to be quite successful with results showing an average of 450
vehicles bringing items to the recycling site each year. The items allowed include
appliances, vehicle batteries, used oil, furniture, tires, electronics such as TV’s and
computer equipment, and miscellaneous scrap metal. Anywhere from 10 to 18 tons of
household items are dropped off and over 10 tons of scrap metal are processed each Junk
Amnesty Day.
Provision of the service noted above does come at a cost and there could be alternative
methods to get the job done. A decision whether or not to continue Junk Amnesty Day
needs to occur early in the year to provide time to line-up contractors and recyclers.
Junk Removal Service in lieu of Junk Amnesty Day - Veolia
If Junk Amnesty Day was completely discontinued, a currently available service by
Veolia could be the norm. Residents would call Veolia and arrange a pick up any week
day. Junk, electronics and appliances require special handling. If Veolia is called, they
require payment up front and would need to pick up such items separate from the regular
route. This rate would be similar to the fee that is charged on Junk Amnesty Day. This
process would eliminate city staff involvement. The convenience and appeal of this for
residents is they don’t have to transport their refuse to a City site, and wait in lines. It
would all be done from home. In addition, there is some belief that material that would
otherwise be discarded once it becomes junk, ends up being stockpiled in anticipation of
the annual Junk Amnesty day. The thought is that if Junk Amnesty Day did not exist,
then people would get rid of their junk as it accumulates. In town such things as waste oil
and filters can be brought to Rapid Oil for free disposal or non ferrous metals and
electronics may be brought to Integrated Recycling Technologies who will pay residents
for these materials. If you call Public Works, we will receive clean scrap steel at our
City Council Agenda: 01/25/10
2
facility year round, or Midway Iron in St Cloud will pay for any ferrous iron or metal as
well.
Overall, eliminating Junk Amnesty Day as a City program could result in an increase or
decrease in the cost for an individual to remove junk from their property, depending on
their participation in Junk Amnesty. However, there appears to be added convenience
associated with being able to drop items at the curb.
Junk Removal Service on Alternating Years
If Junk Amnesty Day was switched to alternating years, vendors will be more difficult to
arrange due to the prioritization of previous year customers first. In some cases, vendors
may be unavailable since other communities host recycling on the same day as
Monticello and on the contiguous weekends. Funds will need to be budgeted in
alternating odd-numbered years. On even numbered years, Veolia would have the service
available as listed above as an option.
Under this option, residents might tend to stockpile junk on their properties over a two
year period while waiting for Junk Amnesty Day.
A1. Budget Impact: Net costs for 2009 Junk Amnesty Day was $25,147.20. Total
expenses were $35,640.27 and revenue was $10,493.07. The past trend is costs
are increasing annually for all aspects and the amount of refuse collected is also
increasing.
A2. Staff Workload Impact: 459 regular shift hours and 180 overtime hours.
Discontinuation of service would significantly reduce regular shift hour demand
and reduce overtime by approximate numbers above.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to completely discontinue Junk Amnesty Day
2. Motion to approve Junk Amnesty Day in alternating odd-numbered years.
3. Motion to leave Junk Amnesty day as an annual event.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Any of the options noted above are workable and thus staff offers no direct
recommendation. It is up to Council to determine if the benefit justifies the cost. The
original purpose of Junk Amnesty Day was to provide a place to take refuse at about the
same time that the Building Staff was conducting public nuisance sweeps. Junk Amnesty
Day has become a rite of spring and a positive tradition for the City. However, it does
come at a cost that all residents must share, and there could be alternative methods to get
City Council Agenda: 01/25/10
3
the job done. If Junk Amnesty Day is left as an annual event, costs would be similar to
the supporting documentation.
This was brought forward as a suggestion for reducing a service level, which can be done
without cost to the city with the service still being available on an individual basis.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Expense/Revenue Worksheet
Results Tracking Sheet
2009 Junk Amnesty Day brochure
DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT COST UNIT TOTAL COST DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT COST UNIT TOTAL COST
WASHER/DRYER 12.00$ EACH $ATV/MOTORCYCLE 2.00$ EACH $
FRIDGE/FREEZER 12.00$ EACH $CAR/VAN 2.00$ EACH $
DEHUMIDIFIER 12.00$ EACH $PICKUP/SUV 2.00$ EACH $
RANGE/STOVE 12.00$ EACH $SEMI TRUCK 8.00$ EACH $
MICROWAVE/OVEN 12.00$ EACH $TRACTOR (OVER 24" RIM)40.00$ EACH $
DISHWASHER $ 12.00 EACH $$
FURNACE 12.00$ EACH $
WATER HEATER 12.00$ EACH $
AIR CONDITIONER 15.00$ EACH $
$DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT COST UNIT TOTAL COST
MONITOR 5.00$ EACH $
CPU/TOWER 5.00$ EACH $
DESCRIPTION # OF UNITS UNIT COST UNIT TOTAL COST PRINTER/SCANNER/FAX 5.00$ EACH $
SOFA/LOVESEAT 10.00$ EACH $DESKTOP COPIER 5.00$ EACH $
SECTIONAL PIECE 10.00$ EACH $MOUSE/KEYBOARD FREE EACH $ -
HIDE-A-BED (TIE SHUT)10.00$ EACH $TELEVISIONS (ANY SIZE)10.00$ EACH $
MATTRESS/BOX SPRING 10.00$ EACH $$
CARPET/PAD ROLL 10.00$ EACH $
STUFFED CHAIR 10.00$ EACH $
WATER SOFTENER FREE EACH $ -
$
$
ELECTRONICS
FREE DISPOSAL ITEMS
GRAND TOTAL DISPOSAL COST
SCRAP METAL
USED CLEAN MOTOR OIL
VEHICLE BATTERIES
TREATED LUMBER NOT ACCEPTED!
TOTAL DEMOLITION DISPOSAL COST:
TOTAL HOUSEHOLD ITEM DISPOSAL COST:
TOTAL APPLIANCE DISPOSAL COST:
APPLIANCES TIRES
TOTAL TIRE DISPOSAL COST:
TOTAL ELECTRONIC DISPOSAL COST:
HOUSEHOLD ITEMS
DEMOLITION
THIS IS A LIMITED SERVICE PROVIDED FOR THE HANDICAP/ELDERLY ONLY!!!
* ABSOLUTELY NO EXCEPTIONS *
CONTACT DEADLINE: FRIDAY, APRIL 24, 2009
SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS WILL NOT BE MADE AFTER THIS DATE!
HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE
PAINTS -STAINS -VARNISHES -SOLVENTS -AEROSOL CANS
ADHESIVES -CAULK -INKS -WAXES -PESTICIDES -HERBICIDES
RECYCLABLES
CARDBOARD -PLASTIC -ALUMINUM CANS -GLASS
NEWSPRINT -JUNK MAIL
MANY OTHER MISC. HOUSEHOLD ITEMS ARE ACCEPTED FOR FREE !
Water Softeners are not considered an appliance -place in Household
SMALL ELECTRONICS FREE (RADIO, VCR, DVD PLAYER, CELL PHONE, ETC.)
NO COMMERCIAL OFFICE EQUIPMENT ACCEPTED
GRAND TOTAL DISPOSAL COST: $____________________
PLEASE MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
IF USING CASH, EXACT AMOUNT PREFERRED
** ITEMS NOT ACCEPTED **
CONTACT WRIGHT COUNTY AT (763) 682-7338
BRANCHES
LEAVES & GRASS CLIPPINGS
STOP BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
TO PICK UP A KEY FOR THE COMPOST FACILTY
FLUORESCENT LIGHT BULBS
CONTACT OLSON ELECTRIC AT (763) 295-2690
UNLOAD YOUR OWN DEMO
NO HELP IS AVAILABLE FOR DEMO
ABSOLUTELY NO TRUCKS OVER 1-TON ACCEPTED!
DOORS -WINDOWS -SHEETROCK -CONCRETE -BRICK -WOOD -SHINGLES
FIBER BOARD -CEILING TILE -PLASTIC BUILDING
PARTS -INSULATION -PLASTER -GLASS
MINIMUM DISPOSAL COST:
TOTAL GALLONS USED MOTOR OIL:
TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLE BATTERIES:
"SPECIAL NEEDS" CURBSIDE PICKUPS
Call 763-295-3170
IRON CAR PARTS/WHEELS -OUTBOARD MOTORS -BICYCLES
LAWN FURNITURE -LAWN MOWERS -METAL POLES -METAL BED FRAMES
SNOW BLOWER -GRILLS -ETC.
DRAIN OIL FROM MOTORS & MOWERS
REMOVE TIRES FROM BIKES (IF POSSIBLE)
PICKED UP EVERY OTHER WEEK WITH CURBSIDE
GARBAGE/RECYCLING PROGRAM
SPECIAL NEEDS CURBSIDE PICK-UPS ARE COMPLETED
THE WEEK OF APR 27TH
PICK-UPS ARE NOT DONE THE DAY OF THE EVENT!
NO ANTIFREEZE/OIL MIX OR WATER/OIL MIX!!!
TIRES MAY BE WITH OR WITHOUT RIM
CALL (763) 295-3170 FOR CURBSIDE CHIPPING
PROPANE TANKS
UP TO 100# : MIN. DISPOAL FEE
CONTACT WRIGHT COUNTY AT (763)682-7338
TREATED LUMBER
CONTACT VONCO II LANDFILL AT (763) 262-8662
Ci
t
y
o
f
M
o
n
t
i
c
e
l
l
o
Of
f
i
c
e
o
f
P
u
b
l
i
c
W
o
r
k
s
90
9
G
o
l
f
C
o
u
r
s
e
R
o
a
d
Mo
n
t
i
c
e
l
l
o
,
M
N
5
5
3
6
2
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
7
6
3
)
2
9
5
-31
7
0
-rain or shine -
9250 Deegan Avenue
(SEE MAP INSIDE FOR DIRECTIONS)
8 a.m. to 3 p.m.
* DIRECTIONS *
FOLLOW HWY 25 TO SCHOOL BLVD -TURN WEST AT THE
LIGHTS AT SCHOOL BLVD, THEN TURN SOUTH ON DEEGAN,
FOLLOW THE SIGNS FOR LINING UP IN THE MOVIE THEATER
PARKING LOT BEFORE ENTERING THE COMMUTER LOT
NO VEHICLES ACCEPTED IN LINE AFTER
3:00 P.M.
BU
L
K
R
A
T
E
U.
S
.
P
O
S
T
A
G
E
P
A
I
D
MO
N
T
I
C
E
L
L
O
,
M
N
PE
R
M
I
T
N
O
.
9
9
CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
AT 763-295-3170 WITH ANY QUESTIONS
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
2
0
0
9
2
0
0
8
2
0
0
7
2
0
0
6
2
0
0
5
2
0
0
4
2
0
0
3
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
9
9
9
VE
H
I
C
L
E
S
UN
L
O
A
D
E
D
5
0
7
4
4
5
4
0
6
4
0
9
3
8
2
4
2
5
4
3
5
4
2
5
6
2
2
4
5
0
4
6
3
AP
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
S
2
3
2
2
0
7
1
8
2
1
7
3
2
3
9
2
6
7
2
2
3
2
4
3
3
5
6
2
7
2
2
4
5
VE
H
I
C
L
E
BA
T
T
E
R
I
E
S
5
0
7
6
7
6
8
3
1
1
4
1
3
2
1
1
3
1
0
0
N
/
A
N
/
A
2
0
0
US
E
D
OI
L
(G
A
L
L
O
N
S
)
3
3
0
2
2
0
3
0
0
3
6
4
3
9
6
3
2
2
5
0
6
8
0
0
8
0
0
1
2
0
0
7
5
0
CO
U
C
H
7
0
7
4
8
8
6
7
4
9
6
0
6
2
7
5
1
0
1
9
3
5
8
CH
A
I
R
4
7
4
9
3
7
5
0
4
4
4
0
4
9
6
8
8
2
8
0
6
6
MA
T
T
R
E
S
S
/
B
O
X
SP
R
I
N
G
1
1
6
1
0
1
1
2
9
9
3
1
0
5
9
3
1
3
0
1
0
2
1
9
3
1
5
2
1
3
9
TI
R
E
S
2
5
8
1
0
7
1
7
0
1
7
4
1
9
8
1
4
3
2
8
4
3
3
8
3
4
0
4
3
4
2
5
4
TV
'
S
1
9
9
1
4
7
8
7
8
0
7
0
7
4
9
8
1
0
7
3
2
4
4
1
5
MO
N
I
T
O
R
/
C
P
U
/
P
R
I
N
T
E
R
2
7
8
2
3
0
1
8
0
9
0
8
2
7
1
8
4
6
3
7
0
N
/
A
1
8
SC
R
A
P
ME
T
A
L
(T
O
N
S
)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
2
2
2
**
*
*
1
4
DE
M
O
L
I
T
I
O
N
(C
U
.
YD
S
.
)
1
2
TO
N
S
1
4
0
2
1
9
1
5
0
1
8
0
1
4
0
**
*
*
1
5
0
HO
U
S
E
H
O
L
D
(T
O
N
S
)
1
8
1
7
1
6
1
4
1
0
/
W
M
*
*
WM
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
W
M
*
FR
O
M
20
0
0
TO
20
0
3
VE
I
T
DO
N
A
T
E
D
BO
X
E
S
FO
R
ME
T
A
L
AN
D
DE
M
O
(A
N
D
KE
P
T
TH
E
ME
T
A
L
)
SO
NO
WE
I
G
H
T
S
WE
R
E
GI
V
E
N
**
FR
O
M
19
9
9
TO
20
0
4
AL
L
HO
U
S
E
H
O
L
D
WA
S
DI
S
P
O
S
E
D
OF
AT
EL
K
RI
V
E
R
LA
N
D
F
I
L
L
(
D
B
A
WA
S
T
E
MA
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
)
,
WE
I
G
H
T
S
UN
K
N
O
W
N
.
IN
20
0
5
SO
M
E
HO
U
S
E
H
O
L
D
WA
S
DI
V
E
R
T
E
D
FR
O
M
LA
N
D
F
I
L
L
BY
US
I
N
G
VE
O
L
I
A
PA
C
K
E
R
TR
U
C
K
S
.
SW
I
T
C
H
E
D
OV
E
R
TO
AL
L
PA
C
K
E
R
TR
U
C
K
S
IN
20
0
6
.
‐‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
IT
IS
AS
S
U
M
E
D
TH
A
T
20
0
1
WA
S
A ST
O
R
M
OR
FL
O
O
D
YE
A
R
WI
T
H
TH
E
PA
R
T
I
C
I
P
A
T
I
O
N
NU
M
B
E
R
S
AN
D
FU
R
N
I
T
U
R
E
/
A
P
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
#'S SO HIGH
I CA
N
RE
M
E
M
B
E
R
IN
TH
E
PA
S
T
RI
V
E
R
TE
R
R
A
C
E
PA
R
K
MA
K
I
N
G
SE
V
E
R
A
L
TR
I
P
S
WI
T
H
AP
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
S
,
MA
T
T
R
E
S
S
E
S
,
ET
C
.
JU
N
K
AM
N
E
S
T
Y
DA
Y
RE
S
U
L
T
S
YE
A
R
L
Y
TR
A
C
K
I
N
G