City Council Agenda Packet 06-24-2013AGENDA
REGULARMEETING–MONTICELLOCITYCOUNCIL
Monday,June24,2013–7p.m.
MississippiRoom,MonticelloCommunityCenter
Mayor:ClintHerbst
CouncilMembers:LloydHilgart,TomPerrault,GlenPosusta,BrianStumpf
1.CalltoOrderandPledgeofAllegiance
2A.ApprovalofMinutes–June10,2013RegularMeeting
2B.ApprovalofMinutes–June13,2013SpecialMeeting
3.Considerationofaddingitemstotheagenda
4.Citizencomments,publicserviceannouncements,andupdates
a.CitizenComments:
b.PublicServiceAnnouncements:
1)MovieinthePark(6/29)
2)SunsetWalkatBertramChainofLakesPark(7/21)
c.Updates:
1)XcelEnergy–EnergyEfficiencyPrograms
5.ConsentAgenda:
A.ConsiderationofapprovingpaymentofbillsforJune24th
B.ConsiderationofapprovingnewhiresanddeparturesforCitydepartments
C.ConsiderationofappointingrepresentativestotheTransportationAdvisory
Committee
D.Considerationofapproving2012StormWaterPollutionPreventionProgram
(SWPPP)AnnualReport
E.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2013-050acceptingquotesandawardinga
contractforthe2013StreetPavementMarkingProject
F.Considerationofapprovinganapplicationfortemporaryon-saleliquorlicensefor
theMonticelloLionsfortheirBrewfesteventtobeheldinWestBridgeParkon
August17,2013
G.ConsiderationofapprovingaSpecialEventPermitallowingexclusiveuseof
WestBridgeParkandrelatedassistanceinconjunctionwiththeBrewfestevent
onAugust17,2013.Applicant:MonticelloLionsClub
H.ConsiderationofapprovingaSpecialEventPermitallowinguseofcitystreets
andrelatedassistancefortheDowntownBlockPartyonJuly10,2013.
Applicant:MonticelloChamber
I.ConsiderationofapprovingaSpecialEventPermitallowinguseofcitystreets
andparksandrelatedassistanceinconjunctionwithRiverfestactivitiesfrom
Thursday,July11toSunday,July14,2013.Applicant:Monticello
Lions/RiverfestCommittee
J.ConsiderationofapprovingSpecialEventPermitallowinguseofEllisonParkand
relatedassistanceinconjunctionwithArtintheParkonSaturday,July13,2013.
Applicant:MonticelloChamber
K.ConsiderationofapprovingacontractwithWSB&AssociatestoprovideMarket
MatchingEconomicDevelopmentServices
L.Considerationofapprovingcaterers/alcoholprovidersfortheMonticello
CommunityCenterfor2014and2015
M.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2013-051statingintenttoreimbursefrom
bondproceedsfortheFallonAvenueOverpass,CityProjectNo.11C005
N.Considerationofacceptingquotesandauthorizingpurchaseofreplacement
refrigerationequipmentforcoolersatHi-WayLiquors
6.Considerationofitemsremovedfromtheconsentagendafordiscussion
7.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2013-049approvingamendmentstothe
MonticelloComprehensivePlan,Chapter2–CommunityContext,Chapter3–Land
Use,andChapter4–EconomicDevelopment
8.ConsiderationofapprovingcitymatchforaPhaseVIacquisitionattheBertramChainof
LakesRegionalPark/YMCACampManitou
9.Addeditems
10.AgendaFeedbackfromCouncil
11.Adjournment
City Council Minutes – June 10, 2013 Page 1
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING – MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, June 10, 2013 – 7 p.m.
Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center
Present: Clint Herbst, Lloyd Hilgart, Tom Perrault, Glen Posusta, Brian Stumpf
Absent: None
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Mayor Herbst called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and declared a quorum present.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
2A. Approval of Minutes – May 13, 2013 Special Meeting
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO ACCEPT THE MAY 13, 2013 SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES AS PRESENTED. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
2B. Approval of Minutes – May 28, 2013 Regular Meeting
GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO ACCEPT THE MAY 28, 2013 REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES AS PRESENTED. LLOYD HILGART SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda
Wright County recognition program (Jeff O’Neill)
Signal lights (Brian Stumpf)
Zoning ordinance (Clint Herbst)
Beyond the Yellow Ribbon committee (Tom Perrault)
4. Citizen comments, public service announcements, and updates
a. Citizen Comments: None
b. Public Service Announcements:
1) Certificate of Commendation for Waste Water Treatment Facility – Jeff
O’Neill commented on the award received from the MN Pollution Control
Agency for the Waste Water Treatment Facility for superior performance.
Chuck Keyes talked about the award and what it takes to earn the
commendation. He noted this is the 19th year out of 24 receiving the
award.
c. Updates:
City Council Minutes – June 10, 2013 Page 2
1) ADS Solid Waste Midwest (formerly Veolia ES) – Rob Holzer spoke on
behalf of Advanced Disposal Service (ADS), which is a privately owned
company that recently purchased Veolia Solid Waste. This sale does not
affect the division of Veolia Water that manages the Waste Water
Treatment Facility. ADS will be operating out of St Cloud, one of three
divisions in Minnesota. Over time, the sanitation trucks will be changed
over to the new name and logo. Operations will remain the same with the
waste taken to Elk River or Alexandria. If the public has other items not
normally picked up on regular routes, they can still call for a pickup.
Lloyd Hilgart asked if there has been much feedback on the size of the
carts. He noted that his recycling cart is always full or more and the trash
cart is only partly full. Rob Holzer said they will ask the drivers to pay
attention to the recycling carts and how full they are. He also noted that
some residents have purchased a second cart for recycling; there is no
charge for the recycling pick up.
5. Consent Agenda:
A. Consideration of approving payment of bills for June 10th. Recommendation:
Approve the bill and purchase card registers for a total of $505,828.08.
B. Consideration of approving new hires and departures for City departments.
Recommendation: Ratify new hires and terminations for Water, MCC, and
Liquor Store.
C. Consideration of adopting Resolution #2013-046 accepting quotes and awarding a
contract for the 2013 Street Bituminous Sealcoat Project. Recommendation:
Adopt Resolution #2013-046 accepting the quotes and awarding a contract to
Allied Blacktop Company for the 2013 Street Bituminous Sealcoat Project in the
amount of $79,646.10.
D. Consideration of adopting Resolution #2013-047 approving final specifications
and authorizing the advertisement for bids for the purchase of the aeration blower
and ancillary equipment for Phase 1 of the Waste Water Treatment Facility
Biosolids Dewatering, Energy Efficiency, Headworks, and Site Improvements,
City Project No. 12C003. Recommendation: Adopt Resolution #2013-047
approving final specifications and authorizing the advertisement for bids for the
purchase of the aeration blower and ancillary equipment for Phase 1 of the Waste
Water Treatment Facility Biosolids Dewatering, Energy Efficiency, Headworks,
and Site Improvements, City Project No. 12C003.
E. Consideration of adopting Resolution #2013-048 approving final plans and
specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids for West 7th Street
Extension (Minnesota to CR39) and Elm Street (7th Street to terminus), City
City Council Minutes – June 10, 2013 Page 3
Project No. 12C002. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT
AGENDA.
F. Consideration of adjusting summer hours for the FiberNet Customer Office.
Recommendation: Approve adjusting the summer hours for the FiberNet
Customer Office to open from 12 to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday.
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE
REMOVAL OF ITEM E. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED 5-0.
6. Consideration of items removed from the consent agenda for discussion
5E. Consideration of adopting Resolution #2013-048 approving final plans and
specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids for West 7th Street Extension
(Minnesota to CR39) and Elm Street (7th Street to terminus), City Project No. 12C002
Glen Posusta removed this item because he noticed the engineer’s estimate is $150,000
for the mill and overlay of West 7th Street between Elm Street and CR 39. He feels the
cost is too high to warrant making the improvements at this time. He suggested that there
may be other alternatives for resurfacing that section. Shibani Bisson explained that item
is being bid as an alternate so Council will be able to see how the bids come in and
decide whether to accept that part of the project.
GLEN POSUSTA MOVED FOR ALTERNATIVE #1 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION
#2013-048 APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND
AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR WEST 7TH STREET
EXTENSION AND ELM STREET PAVING, CITY PROJECT NO. 12C002, WITH
MILL & OVERLAY BID AS AN ALTERNATE AS INDICATED IN THE PLANS
AND SPECS. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED
5-0.
7. Consideration of FiberNet Bond litigation options (pending outcome of 6 p.m. closed
meeting)
Jeff O’Neill noted that the closed meeting was not held and is being moved to June 13,
2013 at 5:30 p.m.
GLEN POSUSTA MOVE TO TABLE THIS ITEM TO A SPECIAL MEETING ON
JUNE 13, 2013 AT 6 P.M. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED 5-0.
8. Consideration of authorizing an appraisal of Church of St. Henry land that could be
impacted by the Fallon Avenue Overpass alignment, City Project No. 11C005
City Council Minutes – June 10, 2013 Page 4
Bret Weiss mentioned that Bruce Westby worked on this project previously and had met
with landowners that would be affected by the project. St. Henry’s Church owns
property on the south side of 7th Street that would be impacted by the alignment and right
of way for the proposed overpass. Bret Weiss recommends that an appraisal include all
the land south of 7th Street that is owned by St Henry’s Church. Glen Posusta asked why
the city would need to purchase the piece of land west of the overpass site. Bret Weiss
explained that St Henry’s owns the land on both sides of the proposed overpass site and is
probably not interested in retaining the section of land that would be left on the west side
of the overpass and would likely prefer to have the city purchase the entire section. Bret
Weiss suggests that the appraisal should include all of the land so that the city knows
what to expect. Brian Stumpf commented that, if Council is in favor of an appraisal, that
they proceed with consideration of the purchase of land for the project and not let it drop
for several years. Clint Herbst stated that the next steps would be contingent on what
comes back from the appraisal. Brian Stumpf asked when the overpass design would be
selected. Bret Weiss noted that the design displayed on the screen is only one of the
possibilities and that discussion on the alignment will take place sometime in the future.
GLEN POSUSTA MOVED FOR ALTERNATIVE #1 AUTHORIZING AN
APPRAISAL FOR THE CHURCH OF ST. HENRY PROPERTY BETWEEN I-94 AND
7TH STREET, RELATED TO THE FALLON AVENUE OVERPASS PROJECT, AT A
COST NOT TO EXCEED $5,000. LLOYD HILGART SECONDED THE MOTION.
MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
9. Added items
Signal Lights on River Street and Hwy 25 – Brian Stumpf noted that the lights are
not working the way they should. He has noticed that the left turn arrows will
change to green during traffic hours, which really impedes traffic flow. He also
noted that the lights at Broadway and CR 18 seem to be changing randomly
without regard to traffic volumes. Bret Weiss noted that they will look into that.
Jeff O’Neill commented that this might be the time to inquire with Mn/DOT on
adding the flashing yellow arrows to some of those intersections and asked WSB
to check into that.
Recognition Ceremony – Jeff O’Neill reported that Wright County will be
recognizing former Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment members for
their years of service. The ceremony will take place at 10 am on June 18th in the
Wright County Board Room. Some of those being recognized include Franklin
Denn, Jack Russek, and Nancy Kopff.
Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Committee – Tom Perrault noted that there will be a
ceremony at Fort Ripley on June 19 at 3 p.m. to officially recognize Monticello as
a Beyond the Yellow Ribbon community and the group will continue to offer
services to military families in the area.
Zoning ordinance related to noise – Clint Herbst commented that there seems to
be a lot of vehicle noise beyond what the ordinance allows and is looking for
Council to support enforcement of the noise ordinance by Wright County. He
feels that law enforcement officials should be asked to enforce the ordinance as
City Council Minutes – June 10, 2013 Page 5
indicated by the signs in different places in the city. Glen Posusta concurred with
better enforcement efforts. Mayor Herbst directed city staff to talk to the Sheriff’s
Department about this and possibly consider ticketing violators.
10. Adjournment
GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 7:34 P.M. BRIAN
STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
Recorder: Catherine M. Shuman ___
Approved:
Attest: __________________________
City Administrator
City Council Special Meeting Minutes – June 13, 2013 Page 1
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, June 13, 2013 – 6:00 p.m.
Academy Room, Monticello Community Center
Present: Clint Herbst, Lloyd Hilgart, Tom Perrault, Glen Posusta, Brian Stumpf
Absent: None
Other: Wayne Oberg, Jeff O’Neill, Joel Jamnik, Cliff Greene, Megan Walsh
1. Call to Order
Mayor Herbst called the special meeting to order, which had been tabled from June 10,
2013, at 6:03 p.m. and declared a quorum present.
2. Purpose of Special Meeting: Consideration of FiberNet Bond Litigation options
Attorney Cliff Green introduced himself and Megan Walsh, with the firm of Green Espel,
and noted they are representing the city in regard to possible litigation regarding the
FiberNet Bonds. He explained that there were potential claims of securities fraud
involving the sale of the FiberNet Monticello bonds. Green Espel was selected by the
League of MN Cities to research the claims to determine whether the potential for a
lawsuit existed. Although there was no indication of securities fraud and it was felt that
the City would win in the event of a lawsuit, the Council did direct Green Espel to
negotiate in good faith with the bondholders’ trustee to determine whether a settlement
could be reached. Attorney Cliff Green talked about the settlement terms which have
been negotiated which would result in a payment of $5.75 million to the bondholders in
exchange for dropping all claims against the city. This settlement is subject to approval
of the courts prior to any payments being made.
Attorney Cliff Green explained that Council was apprised of the terms of settlement in
the closed meeting and no straw poll was taken or opinions expressed in regard to the
proposed settlement. Attorney Cliff Green asked for any comments or questions from
Council.
GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
RELATED TO THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS REVENUE BONDS (FIBERNET
MONTICELLO PROJECT) AS DETAILED IN THE TERM SHEET FOR
SETTLEMENT, DATED JUNE 13, 2013, SUBJECT TO FINAL DOCUMENTATION
TO BE PREPARED BY THE CITY’S LEGAL COUNSEL AND CITY STAFF AND
TO DIRECT THE CITY’S OFFICERS AND STAFF TO EXECUTE SUCH
DOCUMENTS AND TAKE ALL STEPS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE THAT
SETTLEMENT. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED 5-0.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes – June 13, 2013 Page 2
3. Adjourn
BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO ADJOURN THE SPECIAL MEETING AT 6:10 P.M.
TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 5-0.
Recorder: Catherine M. Shuman ____
Approved:
Attest: ___________________________
City Administrator
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
5A.ConsiderationofapprovingpaymentofbillregistersforJune24th (WO)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
Citystaffsubmitstheattachedbillregistersandpurchasingcardregistersforapprovalby
Council.Thebillregisterscontainallinvoicesprocessedandthepurchasingcard
registerscontainallcardpurchasesmadesincethelastCouncilmeeting.SubjecttoMN
Statutes,mostinvoicesrequireCouncilapprovalpriortoreleasingchecksforpayment.
ThedayfollowingCouncilapproval,paymentswillbereleasedunlessdirected
otherwise.AcreditpurchasingagreementandpolicywasapprovedbyCouncilinitially
andcardpurchasesmustcomplywiththepolicy.
IfCouncilhasnoquestionsorcommentsonthebillandpurchasecardregisters,thesecan
beapprovedwiththeconsentagenda.Ifrequested,thisitemcanberemovedfrom
consentanddiscussedpriortomakingamotionforapproval.
A1.BudgetImpact:None
A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Noadditionalworkrequired
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.Motiontoapprovethebillandpurchasecardregistersforatotalamountof
$556,567.55.
2.MotiontoapprovetheregisterswithchangesdirectedbyCouncil.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1or#2,perdirectionofCouncil.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
Billregisters
PurchaseCardregisters
User:
Printed:06/19/2013 - 12:19PM
Ann.Zimmerman
Computer Check Proof List by Vendor
Accounts Payable
Batch:00203.06.2013
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
Vendor:2519 ALBERG WATER SERVICES INC Check Sequence: 1 ACH Enabled: True
2665 12C009 - well #4 - disconnect/remove 75hp motor 2,200.00 06/25/2013 601-00000-165010
2,200.00Check Total:
Vendor:1038 APPERTS FOOD SERVICE Check Sequence: 2 ACH Enabled: False
1943352 freight 5.25 06/25/2013 226-45122-433300
1943352 party room supplies 51.16 06/25/2013 226-45127-421460
1943352 re-sale 173.20 06/25/2013 226-45127-425410
1943353 re-sale 292.45 06/25/2013 226-45203-425410
1943354 Friendship Island 317.80 06/25/2013 226-45127-421980
1946752 re-sale 428.29 06/25/2013 226-45127-425410
1946752 Party room - (2) 40 pk 6oz Capri Sun juice 32.24 06/25/2013 226-45127-421460
1946752 frieght 5.25 06/25/2013 226-45122-433300
1946753 re-sale 125.86 06/25/2013 226-45203-425410
1946754 Friendship Island 92.02 06/25/2013 226-45127-421980
1,523.52Check Total:
Vendor:1039 AQUA LOGIC INC Check Sequence: 3 ACH Enabled: True
40672 Spas - both heaters (1) flame rod; (1) igniter assembly 121.05 06/25/2013 226-45122-421610
121.05Check Total:
Vendor:1059 BARTON SAND AND GRAVEL CO Check Sequence: 4 ACH Enabled: False
130531 38.29 ton class 5 gravel base 274.18 06/25/2013 101-43120-422400
274.18Check Total:
Vendor:1062 BEAUDRY OIL COMPANY Check Sequence: 5 ACH Enabled: True
784510 522.4 gallons Diesel B5 1,867.05 06/25/2013 101-43120-421200
784511 573.1 gallons unleaded plus 1,996.68 06/25/2013 101-43120-421200
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 1
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
3,863.73Check Total:
Vendor:1065 BELLBOY CORPORATION Check Sequence: 6 ACH Enabled: True
78499500 63.45 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
78499500 5,830.35 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
78531900 re-sale 128.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
78600100 freight 14.85 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
78600100 re-sale 982.30 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
88568100 re-sale 111.07 06/25/2013 609-49750-425500
88568100 freight 4.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
7,134.02Check Total:
Vendor:1067 BERNICK'S Check Sequence: 7 ACH Enabled: False
306338 re-sale 321.00 06/25/2013 226-45203-425410
307769 re-sale 156.40 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
307770 re-sale 1,400.70 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
308381 re-sale 230.00 06/25/2013 226-45127-425410
310273 re-sale 109.40 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
310273 re-sale 16.40 06/25/2013 609-49750-425500
310274 re-sale 768.50 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
311058 re-sale 640.50 06/25/2013 226-45127-425410
3,642.90Check Total:
Vendor:2221 BIG TEN NETWORK LLC Check Sequence: 8 ACH Enabled: True
F01990 Big 10 May 2013 1,091.27 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
F01990 Big 10 Bulks May 2013 187.50 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
1,278.77Check Total:
Vendor:2535 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY Check Sequence: 9 ACH Enabled: False
905741260 (4000) ft EXTT - 51-240-31 4PR/24CMX-CMR-CAT5E-GY-PP-I/O ... 564.30 06/25/2013 656-49877-421990
905748058 (20) ZYXE - VSG-1432 VDSL2 combo WAN Gateway 1,838.25 06/25/2013 656-49877-421800
2,402.55Check Total:
Vendor:1080 BRAEMER MAILING SERVICE INC Check Sequence: 10 ACH Enabled: False
54666 June 2013 bills (1515) fold 1x; insert2x; seal postal prep 126.86 06/25/2013 655-49870-431990
54666 utx - June 2013 bills - lettershop set up 25.00 06/25/2013 655-49870-431990
151.86Check Total:
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 2
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
Vendor:1083 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION Check Sequence: 11 ACH Enabled: True
369006 ZCULPS-CLEANX - 329 Brdwy W -Petrofund Application 100% complete 500.00 06/25/2013 213-46522-431990
369533 10C010 - Great River Trailways - project mgmt 521.50 06/25/2013 400-43300-459010
1,021.50Check Total:
Vendor:2047 BRIDGE WATER TELEPHONE COMPANY Check Sequence: 12 ACH Enabled: True
0665FNMT-S-1316 Voice - monthly access charges interstate 6/13-7/12/13 399.20 06/25/2013 655-49860-430910
399.20Check Total:
Vendor:2220 CBS SPORTS NETWORK Check Sequence: 13 ACH Enabled: True
064907 CBS College Sports May 2013 71.02 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
71.02Check Total:
Vendor:2213 CBS TV STATIONS Check Sequence: 14 ACH Enabled: False
May - 13 WCCO May 2013 909.54 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
909.54Check Total:
Vendor:1102 CENTERPOINT ENERGY Check Sequence: 15 ACH Enabled: False
5/31/13 MGFARM - 9739641-0 12.82 06/25/2013 213-46522-438300
5/31/13 MGFARM - 9429449-3 12.82 06/25/2013 213-46522-438300
5/31/13 MGFARM - 9429448-5 12.82 06/25/2013 213-46522-438300
5/31/13 MGFARM 62.60 06/25/2013 213-46522-438300
6/10/13 5804618-6 12.82 06/25/2013 101-45201-438300
6/11/13 5863599-6 26.41 06/25/2013 101-42700-438300
6/3/13 5864452-7 148.75 06/25/2013 211-45501-438300
6/3/13 5788570-9 13.52 06/25/2013 609-49754-438300
6/3/13 5768542-2 148.98 06/25/2013 101-41940-438300
6/3/13 5768542-2 3,445.17 06/25/2013 226-45122-438300
6/3/13 5768542-2 55.87 06/25/2013 101-45175-438300
6/3/13 5768542-2 74.49 06/25/2013 101-42800-438300
6/3/13 5828859-8 16.37 06/25/2013 101-41940-438300
6/3/13 8235331-9 61.16 06/25/2013 101-41941-438300
6/3/13 8235333-5 12.82 06/25/2013 101-41941-438300
6/3/13 MGFARM 9739645-1 69.65 06/25/2013 213-46522-438300
4,187.07Check Total:
Vendor:2654 CENTURYLINK Check Sequence: 16 ACH Enabled: False
L04003703713152 Voice - CABS Usage billing cycle 5/1-5/31/13 143.35 06/25/2013 655-49860-430910
R72010610613152 Voice - Private Line Transport 6/1-6/30/13 Intrastate 600.00 06/25/2013 655-49860-430910
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 3
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
R97006006013152 Voice - Private Line Transport 6/1-6/30/13 Interstate 141.89 06/25/2013 655-49860-430910
885.24Check Total:
Vendor:2935 CUSTOMIZED FIRE RESCUE TRAINING INC Check Sequence: 17 ACH Enabled: False
229 (2) 30 hr course - NFPA1031 Inspector 1 - D.A.; J.R. 680.00 06/25/2013 101-42200-433200
680.00Check Total:
Vendor:1129 DAHLHEIMER BEVERAGE LLC Check Sequence: 18 ACH Enabled: True
1066853 re-sale 21,630.83 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
1066853 re-sale 57.50 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
1066930 re-sale 177.25 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
1066930 re-sale 15.50 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
12775 605.30 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
12780 re-sale 142.00 06/25/2013 226-45203-425200
12872 re-sale 98.60 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
12872 re-sale 17,922.45 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
12874 87.30 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
12942 re-sale 258.00 06/25/2013 226-45203-425200
13037 re-sale 116.60 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
41,111.33Check Total:
Vendor:1134 DAY DISTRIBUTING COMPANY Check Sequence: 19 ACH Enabled: True
703821 1,867.50 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
703821 re-sale 21.50 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
704818 re-sale 1,016.45 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
2,905.45Check Total:
Vendor:1153 ECM PUBLISHERS INC Check Sequence: 20 ACH Enabled: False
1163697 March Food Shelf Drive 25.00 06/25/2013 609-49754-434990
1164704 Section 4.3 D Amend 5/23; 5/30 163.61 06/25/2013 101-41910-435100
1164705 ZDOLLR - 9350 Cedar Street 5/23; 5/30 163.61 06/25/2013 101-41910-435100
1164707 CH 2-4 Amendment 5/23; 5/30 163.61 06/25/2013 101-41910-435100
1166962 Ordinance 578A 6/6 95.23 06/25/2013 101-41910-435100
1166964 Ordinance 579A 6/6 102.55 06/25/2013 101-41910-435100
713.61Check Total:
Vendor:2989 TIM ERNST Check Sequence: 21 ACH Enabled: False
6/12/13 safety boots (T. Ernst) 69.99 06/25/2013 101-43120-420650
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 4
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
69.99Check Total:
Vendor:2498 ESPIAL INC Check Sequence: 22 ACH Enabled: True
Espial EG4770 Invoice AV01907 - 6/10-9/9/13 Video-MediaBax & CWM mtc/support 1,468.00 06/25/2013 655-49870-431900
1,468.00Check Total:
Vendor:3318 FIBERNET MONTICELLO Check Sequence: 23 ACH Enabled: False
6/11/13 Bullseye May 2013 statement - Collected 87.71 06/25/2013 655-49875-443980
87.71Check Total:
Vendor:2273 FIBERNET MONTICELLO - ACH Check Sequence: 24 ACH Enabled: True
6/20/13 City Hall #1949 March - June 2013 399.80 06/25/2013 702-00000-432100
6/20/13 City Hall #1949 March - June 2013 3,303.52 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
6/20/13 MCC #1950 March - June 2013 2,757.84 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
6/20/13 MCC #1950 March - June 2013 1,027.74 06/25/2013 226-45122-432500
6/20/13 MCC #1950 misc prof services - March - June 2013 69.95 06/25/2013 702-00000-431900
6/20/13 Ballfields #1857 April - June 167.88 06/25/2013 702-00000-432100
6/20/13 Ballfields #1857 April - June 109.97 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
6/20/13 DMV #1850 March - June 2013 167.80 06/25/2013 702-00000-432100
6/20/13 DMV #1850 March - June 2013 1,174.66 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
6/20/13 DMV #1850 misc prof services - May 2013 69.95 06/25/2013 702-00000-431990
6/20/13 Hi-Way Liquor #1260 March - June 2013 167.80 06/25/2013 702-00000-432100
6/20/13 Hi-Way Liquor #1260 March - June 2013 997.16 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
6/20/13 Fire Department #1486 March - June 2013 167.80 06/25/2013 702-00000-432100
6/20/13 Fire Department #1486 March - June 2013 1,167.84 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
6/20/13 Animal Shelter #1481 March - June 2013 110.14 06/25/2013 702-00000-432100
6/20/13 Public Works #1435 March - June 2013 279.80 06/25/2013 702-00000-432100
6/20/13 Public Works #1435 March - June 2013 1,594.12 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
6/20/13 Parks Dept #1868 April - June 2013 473.06 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
6/20/13 Prairie Center #1967 (elevator) March - June 2013 82.06 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
6/20/13 Sheriff Dept #1865 April - June 2013 167.80 06/25/2013 702-00000-432100
6/20/13 Sheriff Dept #1865 April - June 2013 320.20 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
14,776.89Check Total:
Vendor:2222 FOX SPORTS NET INC Check Sequence: 25 ACH Enabled: True
F01986 Fox Sports North May 2013 4,944.28 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
F01986 Fox Sports North Taverns May 2013 187.50 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
5,131.78Check Total:
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 5
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
Vendor:2462 FOX TELEVISION STATIONS INC Check Sequence: 26 ACH Enabled: False
KMSP May-13 KMSP May 2013 1,222.50 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
WFTC May-13 WFTC May 2013 195.60 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
1,418.10Check Total:
Vendor:2274 FUEL Check Sequence: 27 ACH Enabled: True
F01985 FUEL May 2013 55.90 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
55.90Check Total:
Vendor:3398 GERTKEN BROTHERS INC Check Sequence: 28 ACH Enabled: False
Voucher 1 10C010 - Great River Trail Ways and Trailhead 27,094.90 06/25/2013 400-43300-459010
27,094.90Check Total:
Vendor:1859 GODFATHER'S EXTERMINATING INC Check Sequence: 29 ACH Enabled: False
59425 Quarterly extermination 53.44 06/25/2013 101-41941-431990
59497 Quarterly extermination 85.50 06/25/2013 226-45122-431990
59498 Quarterly extermination 37.41 06/25/2013 217-41990-431990
59499 Quarterly extermination 53.44 06/25/2013 211-45501-431990
229.79Check Total:
Vendor:2433 NICHOLAS R HACKENMUELLER Check Sequence: 30 ACH Enabled: True
6/5/13 6/4/13 Planning Comm mtg recording 53.30 06/25/2013 101-41910-431990
53.30Check Total:
Vendor:1224 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD Check Sequence: 31 ACH Enabled: False
B064644 utx - (1) d/s sdl epoxy w/e-g bales 103.36 06/25/2013 601-49440-422700
B068026 (154) omni cplg bxb 165.29 06/25/2013 601-49440-422700
B082706 (50) 3/4 meters 498.75 06/25/2013 601-49440-422710
767.40Check Total:
Vendor:3397 HERITAGE CONST CO LLC AND ROBERT BUTLER Check Sequence: 32 ACH Enabled: False
Relocate Clm #4 MGFARM - 112 Broadway East - Relocate Claim #4 13,790.00 06/25/2013 213-46522-443990
13,790.00Check Total:
Vendor:3229 JEFF HOGLUND Check Sequence: 33 ACH Enabled: False
0161813 12"x18" sign logo (Adopted Sign) 25.00 06/25/2013 101-45201-431990
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 6
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
25.00Check Total:
Vendor:2305 HOME BOX OFFICE Check Sequence: 34 ACH Enabled: True
Jan-Mar Balance HBO Cinemax January thru March 2013 balance 18.48 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
May-13 HBO Cinemax May 2013 118.08 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
May-13 HBO Bulk May 2013 509.74 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
May-13 HBO May 2013 459.23 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
1,105.53Check Total:
Vendor:2214 HUBBARD BROADCASTING INC Check Sequence: 35 ACH Enabled: False
KSTC May-13 KSTC May 2013 391.20 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
391.20Check Total:
Vendor:2214 HUBBARD BROADCASTING INC Check Sequence: 36 ACH Enabled: False
KSTP May-13 KSTP May 2013 391.20 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
391.20Check Total:
Vendor:1259 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING Check Sequence: 37 ACH Enabled: False
2039088 3.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
2039088 235.50 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
2065826 freight 3.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
2065826 re-sale 131.20 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
372.70Check Total:
Vendor:1263 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESALE LIQUOR Check Sequence: 38 ACH Enabled: False
1586880 re-sale 7,062.69 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
1586880 freight 93.93 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1586881 re-sale 1,721.50 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
1586881 re-sale 249.61 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
1586881 freight 55.60 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1586882 re-sale 151.94 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
1589751 freight 3.02 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1589751 re-sale 609.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
1589752 re-sale 1,848.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
1589752 freight 50.74 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1591639 re-sale 640.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
1591639 freight 16.24 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1592348 re-sale 2,711.13 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
1592348 freight 34.76 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 7
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
1592349 freight 92.45 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1592349 re-sale 32.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
1592349 re-sale 3,963.04 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
1592350 re-sale 20.99 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
578570 Refer to inv# 0304201 -9.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
578571 Refer to inv# 1473188 -8.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
578572 Refer to inv# 1531269 -13.75 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
578573 Refer to inv# 1567222 -2.33 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
578574 Refer to inv# 1569968 -11.73 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
579642 Refer to inv# 1550406 -192.80 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
19,119.03Check Total:
Vendor:2251 KARE GANNETT CO INC Check Sequence: 39 ACH Enabled: False
208-1017 KARE May 2013 978.00 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
978.00Check Total:
Vendor:1290 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Check Sequence: 40 ACH Enabled: False
183417 HR001 Preventing Harassment/Promoting Respect - T.E. 15.00 06/25/2013 101-41800-433200
15.00Check Total:
Vendor:1300 DOUGLAS WILLIAM LYSENG Check Sequence: 41 ACH Enabled: True
1251 (4) Logitech 520 keyboard/mouse 255.00 06/25/2013 702-00000-421990
1251 Server Intel S2600GZ motherbd; licenses; backup software; ect. 17,013.02 06/25/2013 702-00000-457020
1251 Station 2 - (1) 2013 Microsoft Office Home and Business 293.91 06/25/2013 217-41990-420990
1251 Video recorder computer - (1) pwer supply 64.11 06/25/2013 609-49754-421990
17,626.04Check Total:
Vendor:1303 M AMUNDSON LLP Check Sequence: 42 ACH Enabled: True
153895 re-sale 94.20 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
153895 re-sale 916.04 06/25/2013 609-49750-425500
1,010.24Check Total:
Vendor:3392 RACHEL MATTESON Check Sequence: 43 ACH Enabled: False
FNM Refund FiberNet Monticello acct #1982 10.10 06/25/2013 655-00000-115025
10.10Check Total:
Vendor:1318 JONATHAN CALEB MELLBERG Check Sequence: 44 ACH Enabled: True
6/10/13 6/10/13 City Council meeting recording 80.00 06/25/2013 101-41110-431990
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 8
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
80.00Check Total:
Vendor:2215 METRO GOLDWYN MAYER INC Check Sequence: 45 ACH Enabled: False
May-13 MGM HD May 2013 29.64 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
29.64Check Total:
Vendor:1330 CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS Check Sequence: 46 ACH Enabled: True
400413004036 (176) transactions - May 2013 158.40 06/25/2013 101-42100-431990
158.40Check Total:
Vendor:2179 MINNESOTA 9-1-1 PROGRAM Check Sequence: 47 ACH Enabled: False
May - 13 May 2013 911 Wright Co 981.64 06/25/2013 655-00000-208170
981.64Check Total:
Vendor:3393 KIM MITCHELL Check Sequence: 48 ACH Enabled: False
FNM Refund FiberNet Monticello acct #1602 13.94 06/25/2013 655-00000-115025
13.94Check Total:
Vendor:2217 MLB NETWORK LLC AFFILIATE SALE Check Sequence: 49 ACH Enabled: False
113158 MLB May 2013 249.66 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
249.66Check Total:
Vendor:1364 MOBILE HEALTH SERVICES LLC Check Sequence: 50 ACH Enabled: True
21582 (5) SCBA User- Medical Exam; (5) Quantitaive Fit Test-FD 452.50 06/25/2013 101-42200-431990
452.50Check Total:
Vendor:1743 CITY OF MONTICELLO Check Sequence: 51 ACH Enabled: False
6/7/13 3/5/13; 3/6/13; 3/7/13 Parking - Rural Water Conf St Cloud 15.00 06/25/2013 601-49440-433100
6/7/13 1/9/13 Parking - Green Expo Mpls 9.00 06/25/2013 101-45201-433100
6/7/13 1/10/13 Parking - Green Expo Mpls 9.00 06/25/2013 101-43110-433100
33.00Check Total:
Vendor:2512 MONTICELLO PLBG HTG AC LLC Check Sequence: 52 ACH Enabled: False
002469 Labor - free standing air compressor - replaced (2) belts 80.00 06/25/2013 101-42200-440440
002469 Parts - free standing air compressor - replaced (2) belts 40.00 06/25/2013 101-42200-440440
002469 (250) lbs solar salt 45.42 06/25/2013 101-42200-422990
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 9
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
165.42Check Total:
Vendor:1376 MONTICELLO PUBLIC LIBRARY Check Sequence: 53 ACH Enabled: True
5/1-5/31/13 utx - Program supplies 160.18 06/25/2013 211-45501-421990
5/1-5/31/13 Program services 165.20 06/25/2013 211-45501-430150
325.38Check Total:
Vendor:1377 MONTICELLO SENIOR CENTER Check Sequence: 54 ACH Enabled: True
June 2013 Monthly appropriation 4,291.67 06/25/2013 101-45175-444310
4,291.67Check Total:
Vendor:1821 MOOSE SHERRITT ICE ARENA Check Sequence: 55 ACH Enabled: False
6/17/13 Revenue split Men's Hockey League 2013 4,386.64 06/25/2013 226-45127-431990
4,386.64Check Total:
Vendor:2218 MUSIC CHOICE Check Sequence: 56 ACH Enabled: True
May-13 Music Choice May 2013 161.20 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
161.20Check Total:
Vendor:2275 NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC WILD Check Sequence: 57 ACH Enabled: True
F01989 National Geographic Wild May 2013 50.00 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
50.00Check Total:
Vendor:2072 NATIONAL TELCO TELEVISION CONSORTIUM Check Sequence: 58 ACH Enabled: True
1520 NTTC - May 2013 29,748.33 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
29,748.33Check Total:
Vendor:3138 NBC UNIVERSAL Check Sequence: 59 ACH Enabled: True
630108 Bravo May 2013 333.45 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630110 Chiller May 2013 34.40 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630111 CLOO May 2013 34.40 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630112 CNBC May 2013 598.50 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630114 CNBC World May 2013 24.73 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630115 E! May 2013 316.35 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630117 G4 May 2013 153.90 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630121 MSNBC May 2013 448.88 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630122 MUN2 May 2013 45.57 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630124 Oxygen May 2013 303.53 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 10
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
630126 PBS Kids Sprout May 2013 24.73 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630128 Style May 2013 230.85 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630129 SYFY May 2013 384.75 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630130 The Golf Channel May 2013 376.20 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630131 Telemundo May 2013 54.25 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630132 Universal HD May 2013 44.00 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630134 USA Network May 2013 1,154.25 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
630135 NBC Sports Network May 2013 290.70 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
4,853.44Check Total:
Vendor:2518 NEOFUNDS BY NEOPOST Check Sequence: 60 ACH Enabled: False
6/6/13 Account Number 7900 0440 6327 5196 1,000.00 06/25/2013 101-00000-155010
1,000.00Check Total:
Vendor:2134 NFL NETWORK Check Sequence: 61 ACH Enabled: False
113158 NFL May 2013 812.25 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
812.25Check Total:
Vendor:2216 NHL NETWORK Check Sequence: 62 ACH Enabled: False
May-13 NHL May 2013 273.60 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
273.60Check Total:
Vendor:1401 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS INC Check Sequence: 63 ACH Enabled: True
20828 Meetings - 5/7/13 & 5/21/13 Planning Commisssion 300.00 06/25/2013 101-41910-431990
300.00Check Total:
Vendor:1405 OFFICEMAX INCORPORATED Check Sequence: 64 ACH Enabled: False
288323 (1) pk post-it notes, (1) pk batteries, (1) dz blue pens 62.49 06/25/2013 101-43110-420990
62.49Check Total:
Vendor:1419 PAN O GOLD CO ST CLOUD Check Sequence: 65 ACH Enabled: True
010004315815 re-sale 30.60 06/25/2013 226-45127-425410
010004316520 re-sale 30.60 06/25/2013 226-45127-425410
61.20Check Total:
Vendor:1273 PAUSTIS & SONS WINE CO Check Sequence: 66 ACH Enabled: False
8403876-IN freight 20.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
8403876-IN re-sale 1,347.48 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 11
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
1,367.48Check Total:
Vendor:3340 PERFECTION PACKAGING INC Check Sequence: 67 ACH Enabled: False
111440 re-sale 136.80 06/25/2013 226-45203-425410
136.80Check Total:
Vendor:1427 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS CO Check Sequence: 68 ACH Enabled: False
2431750 freight 170.97 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
2431750 re-sale 8,201.60 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
2432250 re-sale 591.76 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
2432250 freight 7.41 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
2432251 re-sale 1,294.01 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
2432251 re-sale 96.75 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
2432251 freight 36.60 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
2434085 freight 13.90 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
2434085 re-sale 1,588.75 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
2435260 re-sale 2,354.18 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
2435260 freight 29.19 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
2435261 freight 9.73 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
2435261 re-sale 347.55 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
2435714 re-sale 1,376.73 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
2435714 freight 15.29 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
2435715 freight 33.82 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
2435715 re-sale 170.65 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
2435715 re-sale 794.67 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
17,133.56Check Total:
Vendor:1455 RED'S MARATHON Check Sequence: 69 ACH Enabled: False
5/7/13 Fuel for small engines 35.20 06/25/2013 101-42200-421200
35.20Check Total:
Vendor:2602 RFD TV Check Sequence: 70 ACH Enabled: False
1926-1253 RFD TV May 2013 33.76 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
33.76Check Total:
Vendor:1474 PATRICIA A SALZWEDEL Check Sequence: 71 ACH Enabled: True
5/1-5/31/13 Mileage reimbursement 152.55 06/25/2013 101-42700-433100
6/30/13 Contract 1,593.75 06/25/2013 101-42700-431200
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 12
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
1,746.30Check Total:
Vendor:1476 SCHLUENDER CONSTRUCTION INC Check Sequence: 72 ACH Enabled: False
19083 5/17/13 (2) hrs - jetting from pool drains 150.00 06/25/2013 226-45122-440100
150.00Check Total:
Vendor:2301 SHOWTIME NETWORKS INC Check Sequence: 73 ACH Enabled: False
201305-40843608 Showtime May 2013 227.43 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
227.43Check Total:
Vendor:1487 CATHY SHUMAN Check Sequence: 74 ACH Enabled: True
6/11/13 ZZZNED - 6/11/13 Nuclear Preparedness Drill - State EOC St Paul 54.73 06/25/2013 101-42500-433100
54.73Check Total:
Vendor:2212 SINCLAIR TELEVISION GROUP INC Check Sequence: 75 ACH Enabled: False
May - 13 WUCW May 2013 303.18 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
303.18Check Total:
Vendor:3309 SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS OF MINNESOTA Check Sequence: 76 ACH Enabled: False
1040811 30.62 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1040811 2,727.65 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
1040812 1.25 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1040812 re-sale 40.12 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
1040813 10.42 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1040813 722.32 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
1043351 re-sale 459.17 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
1043351 freight 5.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1043352 freight 8.75 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1043352 re-sale 422.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
4,427.30Check Total:
Vendor:3395 WENDY STONE Check Sequence: 77 ACH Enabled: False
5/3/13 5/3/13 Silver Sneakers Training - Coon Rapids 35.60 06/25/2013 226-45122-433100
35.60Check Total:
Vendor:1506 STRATEGIC EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY COMPANY Check Sequence: 78 ACH Enabled: False
2050287 re-sale 138.38 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
2050287 (1) cs each - coffee filter; facial tissue; 24x32 canliner 83.70 06/25/2013 609-49754-421990
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 13
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
2050287 (5) bale - assorted brown bags 139.31 06/25/2013 609-49754-421990
361.39Check Total:
Vendor:1518 TDS TELECOM Check Sequence: 79 ACH Enabled: True
665-837-0005 Voice - LNP conversion charges 60.00 06/25/2013 655-49870-432600
665-837-0005 Voice - nonpublished number charges 84.00 06/25/2013 655-49860-430910
665-837-0005 Voice - service order charge - residential 5.00 06/25/2013 655-49870-432600
149.00Check Total:
Vendor:1518 TDS TELECOM Check Sequence: 80 ACH Enabled: True
665-838-0000 Voice - LNP conversion charges 65.00 06/25/2013 655-49870-432600
665-838-0000 Voice - nonpublished number charges 310.80 06/25/2013 655-49860-430910
375.80Check Total:
Vendor:1518 TDS TELECOM Check Sequence: 81 ACH Enabled: True
763-271-3248 11.50 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
11.50Check Total:
Vendor:1518 TDS TELECOM Check Sequence: 82 ACH Enabled: True
763-271-3230 169.35 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
169.35Check Total:
Vendor:1518 TDS TELECOM Check Sequence: 83 ACH Enabled: True
763-295-4054 46.56 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
46.56Check Total:
Vendor:1518 TDS TELECOM Check Sequence: 84 ACH Enabled: True
763-295-3714 159.71 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
159.71Check Total:
Vendor:1518 TDS TELECOM Check Sequence: 85 ACH Enabled: True
763-271-3257 97.17 06/25/2013 702-00000-432300
97.17Check Total:
Vendor:1522 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY Check Sequence: 86 ACH Enabled: True
756658 re-sale 26.30 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
756659 13,147.60 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 14
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
758079 re-sale 44.85 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
758081 re-sale 14,018.40 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
758610 re-sale 175.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425200
27,412.15Check Total:
Vendor:2252 TOWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY Check Sequence: 87 ACH Enabled: False
321347 WGN May 2013 234.16 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
234.16Check Total:
Vendor:2165 TV GUIDE NETWORKS LLC TV GUIDE ENTERTAINMENT GROUP LLC Check Sequence: 88 ACH Enabled: True
120735 TV Guide Network May 2013 422.99 06/25/2013 655-49860-430920
422.99Check Total:
Vendor:1544 US POSTAL SERVICE Check Sequence: 89 ACH Enabled: False
6/5/13 Permit #42 - 6/5/13 June FNM bill mailing 576.60 06/25/2013 655-49870-432200
6/7/13 Permit #42 Delinquent UB Qtr1 2013 (1/2) 227.32 06/25/2013 602-49490-432200
6/7/13 Permit #42 Delinquent UB Qtr1 2013 (1/2) 227.33 06/25/2013 601-49440-432200
1,031.25Check Total:
Vendor:3396 MARIA VALENZUELZ Check Sequence: 90 ACH Enabled: False
Refund 6/30/13 Reservation 93.57 06/25/2013 101-45201-347100
Refund 6/30/13 Reservation 6.43 06/25/2013 101-00000-208100
100.00Check Total:
Vendor:2534 VAULTAS ALEXANDRIA LLC Check Sequence: 91 ACH Enabled: True
1438 Data - Cross Connect to XO Comm July 2013 250.00 06/25/2013 655-49860-430930
1438 Data - Gigabit Transport July 2013 2,250.00 06/25/2013 655-49860-430930
2,500.00Check Total:
Vendor:1550 VEOLIA WATER N AM OPERATING SERV LLC VEOLIA WATER N AM OPERATIONS INC Check Sequence: 92 ACH Enabled: False
00028352 12C003 - WWTP DEEH - Upgrades Ph 1 Design - Progress INv #6 3,901.23 06/25/2013 602-00000-165010
3,901.23Check Total:
Vendor:1552 VIKING COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Check Sequence: 93 ACH Enabled: False
1134670 re-sale 226.50 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
1140025 re-sale 207.10 06/25/2013 609-49750-425400
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 15
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
433.60Check Total:
Vendor:1684 VINOCOPIA Check Sequence: 94 ACH Enabled: True
0078799-IN freight 10.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
0078799-IN re-sale 622.50 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
78438-IN 21.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
78438-IN 1,337.75 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
78438-IN 400.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
2,391.25Check Total:
Vendor:1566 WERNER ELECTRIC SUPPLY Check Sequence: 95 ACH Enabled: False
S7378937.002 (2) replacement poles (snd to insurance) 6,025.38 06/25/2013 101-43160-421530
6,025.38Check Total:
Vendor:1567 WES OLSON ELECTRIC LLC Check Sequence: 96 ACH Enabled: False
6043 Ellison Park - labor receptacle not re-setting 60.00 06/25/2013 101-45201-443910
6049 Labor - Pool Equipmt Rm - repair burnt breaker & panel equipmt 180.00 06/25/2013 226-45122-440100
6049 Materials-Pool Equipmt Rm - repair burnt breaker & panel equipmt 3,070.00 06/25/2013 226-45122-440100
6063 12C009 - well #4 - supplies (15) PVC conduits, ect 32.10 06/25/2013 601-00000-165010
6063 12C009 - well #4 - labor - re-install wiring 90.00 06/25/2013 601-00000-165010
6074 W Brdge Prk supp/3 GFI's 67.62 06/25/2013 101-45201-422990
6074 W Brdge Prk labor- J Box issues replaced 3 GFI's 120.00 06/25/2013 101-45201-422990
3,619.72Check Total:
Vendor:1573 WINE MERCHANTS INC Check Sequence: 97 ACH Enabled: False
458297 1.39 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
458297 104.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
105.39Check Total:
Vendor:1209 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE & SPIRITS Check Sequence: 98 ACH Enabled: False
1080047728 26.26 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1080047728 1,136.53 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
1080047728 2,348.00 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
1080050563 freight 67.10 06/25/2013 609-49750-433300
1080050563 re-sale 3,508.12 06/25/2013 609-49750-425100
1080050563 re-sale 594.60 06/25/2013 609-49750-425300
7,680.61Check Total:
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 16
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
Vendor:3394 SUSAN WOHLSDORF Check Sequence: 99 ACH Enabled: False
FNM Refund FiberNet Monticello acct #1630 Parham 25.46 06/25/2013 655-00000-115025
25.46Check Total:
Vendor:2645 WRIGHT CO AUDITOR-TREAS Check Sequence: 100 ACH Enabled: False
155-500-113207 155-500-113207 - Deed tax for QCD City to Riverwood Bank 6.65 06/25/2013 101-41310-431990
6.65Check Total:
Vendor:1577 WRIGHT CO AUDITOR-TREAS - ACH Check Sequence: 101 ACH Enabled: True
6/7/13 Fines and Fees May 2013 3,915.52 06/25/2013 101-00000-208020
3,915.52Check Total:
Vendor:1581 WRIGHT CO RECORDER Check Sequence: 102 ACH Enabled: False
201300000082 A1236180 Satisfaction of Mortgage Olson/Larson 46.00 06/25/2013 101-41310-431990
201300000082 A1236181 Resolution to Vacate City Res #20133-024 46.00 06/25/2013 101-41310-431990
201300000082 A1236182 Certificate Misc Carlisle Village LLC 46.00 06/25/2013 101-41310-431990
201300000082 A1236183 Easement NSP 46.00 06/25/2013 101-41310-431990
201300000082 A1237796 Vacation 46.00 06/25/2013 101-41310-431990
230.00Check Total:
Vendor:1583 WRIGHT HENNEPIN COOP ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION Check Sequence: 103 ACH Enabled: False
6/9/13 5/1-6/1/13 99.69 06/25/2013 602-49490-438100
6/9/13 August service 21.32 06/25/2013 217-41990-431900
6/9/13 Security Line switched from TDS to FNM 90.00 06/25/2013 217-41990-431990
6/9/13 Phone service switched from TDS to FNM 90.00 06/25/2013 226-45122-431990
6/9/13 August service 38.96 06/25/2013 101-45203-431900
6/9/13 August service 29.87 06/25/2013 101-42200-431900
6/9/13 August service 21.32 06/25/2013 601-49440-431900
6/9/13 August service 29.87 06/25/2013 226-45122-431900
6/9/13 August service 35.22 06/25/2013 601-49440-431900
6/9/13 August service 21.32 06/25/2013 601-49440-431900
6/9/13 August service 21.32 06/25/2013 601-49440-431900
6/9/13 August service 29.87 06/25/2013 101-41940-431900
6/9/13 August service 21.32 06/25/2013 101-45201-431900
6/9/13 1,429.66 06/25/2013 101-43160-438100
1,979.74Check Total:
Vendor:1584 WSB & ASSOCIATES INC Check Sequence: 104 ACH Enabled: True
14946802 12C009 - Well No. 4 Design Ph 1 - proj mgmt/coord 532.00 06/25/2013 601-00000-165010
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 17
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
14946802 12C009 - Well No. 4 Design Ph 1 - design 1,743.50 06/25/2013 601-00000-165010
14946802 12C009 - Well No. 4 Design Ph 1 - office survey 218.00 06/25/2013 601-00000-165010
14946802 12C009 - Well No. 4 Design Ph 1 - 1-person suvey crew 456.00 06/25/2013 601-00000-165010
14946901 Z25/75 - 2013 TH 25/CR 75 CIMS Appl - Total Fee 100% Complete 8,500.00 06/25/2013 101-43111-430300
11,449.50Check Total:
Vendor:1585 XCEL ENERGY Check Sequence: 105 ACH Enabled: False
6/10/13 51-0371645-4 18.71 06/25/2013 101-45201-438100
6/10/13 51-4400193-4 17.07 06/25/2013 101-43160-438100
6/12/13 MGFARM - 51-0517384-8 12.94 06/25/2013 213-46522-438100
6/12/13 51-6505909-4 166.73 06/25/2013 217-41990-438100
6/13/13 51-6505912-9 76.32 06/25/2013 101-42700-438100
6/13/13 51-9069641-8 1,827.18 06/25/2013 655-49870-438100
6/13/13 ZCULPS - 51-0623082-8 17.07 06/25/2013 213-46522-438100
6/13/13 MGFARM - 51-0592578-0 17.07 06/25/2013 213-46522-438100
6/13/13 MGFARM - 51-0517365-5 94.30 06/25/2013 213-46522-438100
6/13/13 51-0395766-0 3,506.03 06/25/2013 601-49440-438100
6/13/13 51-6505907-2 25.21 06/25/2013 101-43140-438100
6/3/13 51-6505914-1 1,022.44 06/25/2013 101-43127-438100
6/3/13 51-6505906-1 1,148.02 06/25/2013 602-49490-438100
6/3/13 51-6505915-2 746.46 06/25/2013 101-45201-438100
6/3/13 51-6505915-2 120.62 06/25/2013 601-49440-438100
6/3/13 51-6505915-2 183.55 06/25/2013 226-45203-438100
6/3/13 51-6505915-2 429.50 06/25/2013 101-45203-438100
9,429.22Check Total:
Vendor:1907 XO COMMUNICATIONS LLC Check Sequence: 106 ACH Enabled: True
0259621486 Data - Internet access 6/1-6/30/13 9,166.50 06/25/2013 655-49860-430930
9,166.50Check Total:
Vendor:1907 XO COMMUNICATIONS LLC Check Sequence: 107 ACH Enabled: True
0259619854 Data - Internet access 6/1-6/30/13 7,577.50 06/25/2013 655-49860-430930
7,577.50Check Total:
Vendor:2076 ZAYO BANDWIDTH LLC Check Sequence: 108 ACH Enabled: True
003293 6/13 6/1-6/30/13 Private Line Intrastate; Cost Recovery Surcharges 2,250.01 06/25/2013 655-49860-430910
2,250.01Check Total:
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 18
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
Total for Check Run:
Total of Number of Checks:
358,864.39
108
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/19/2013 - 12:19 PM)Page 19
User:
Printed:06/20/2013 - 9:26AM
Ann.Zimmerman
Computer Check Proof List by Vendor
Accounts Payable
Batch:00201.06.2013
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
Vendor:1604 HEALTH PARTNERS Check Sequence: 1 ACH Enabled: True
43649796 July 2013 57,002.90 06/15/2013 101-00000-217060
43649796 July 2013 5,826.96 06/15/2013 101-00000-217062
62,829.86Check Total:
Vendor:3241 LINCOLN FINANCIAL GROUP Check Sequence: 2 ACH Enabled: True
6/1/13 June 2013 1,871.65 06/15/2013 101-00000-217066
1,871.65Check Total:
Vendor:3337 SECURE PAYMENT SYSTEMS INC Check Sequence: 3 ACH Enabled: True
01185616 (203) verification inquiries 101.50 06/15/2013 655-49875-443980
101.50Check Total:
Vendor:2811 US BANK CORPORATE PMT SYSTEM Check Sequence: 4 ACH Enabled: True
6/6/13 Fire Safety USA - (1) Jaflite HD fire hose 1.5"x25' - truck hose 77.00 06/15/2013 101-42200-422110
6/6/13 OfficeMax - (1) 4ct king size black marker (markers for hose) 10.68 06/15/2013 101-42200-421990
6/6/13 Grady's - (1) 8pk Ace battery alkaline D 12.81 06/15/2013 101-43115-422990
6/6/13 Ancom Technical Ctr - replaced pager (bad reset button; ect.) 95.00 06/15/2013 101-42200-440440
6/6/13 Ancom Technical Ctr - replaced pager (won't charge) 107.00 06/15/2013 101-42200-440440
6/6/13 Arctic Glacier - re-sale 195.42 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Streicher's - (4) orange combat application tourniquet (C-A-T) 149.58 06/15/2013 101-42200-421990
6/6/13 G & K Services - floor mat cleaning 61.98 06/15/2013 609-49754-431990
6/6/13 Central Hydraulics - #110 - (2) O-rings 19.30 06/15/2013 101-43120-422110
6/6/13 Napa - #110 & #212 - (1) adapter, (1) idler sprocket 35.25 06/15/2013 101-43127-422110
6/6/13 Central McGowan - montly rental fee 48.09 06/15/2013 226-45122-441500
6/6/13 Horizon Pool - chemical product 713.64 06/15/2013 226-45122-421600
6/6/13 Horizon Pool - (2) adapter clips 8.08 06/15/2013 226-45122-421610
6/6/13 JME - ag lime 1,345.40 06/15/2013 101-45203-421990
6/6/13 Biffs - (8) parks & public works 183.97 06/15/2013 101-45201-431990
6/6/13 Midway Iron - (1) smith plate 132.05 06/15/2013 602-49490-422100
6/6/13 Brother's Fire Protection - (1) labor/supp speaker strobe 515.00 06/15/2013 226-45122-440100
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 1
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
6/6/13 AmeriPride - uniform rental 19.54 06/15/2013 226-45122-441700
6/6/13 AmeriPride - laundry services 60.04 06/15/2013 226-45122-431110
6/6/13 AmeriPride - towel rental 19.43 06/15/2013 226-45122-441710
6/6/13 AmeriPride - credit over-charged uniform rental -46.00 06/15/2013 226-45122-431110
6/6/13 Push Pedal Pull - labor/supp - upper treadmill board 480.04 06/15/2013 226-45122-440800
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - disp glvs, foam cups, paper plates 120.78 06/15/2013 226-45127-425410
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - hair & body wash 48.57 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - can liners, wipes, disinfect 298.00 06/15/2013 226-45122-421100
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - can liners 42.32 06/15/2013 211-45501-421100
6/6/13 Marties - annual rye 61.99 06/15/2013 101-45201-422500
6/6/13 Park Supply - (6) stretch hose, (6) shower shutoff 101.26 06/15/2013 226-45122-422990
6/6/13 SuperAmerica - motor fuel 39.55 06/15/2013 217-41990-421200
6/6/13 Central Hydrualics - #110 - (2) O-rings, (1) wiper seal, ect 191.52 06/15/2013 101-43120-422110
6/6/13 Fastenal - (200) ear plugs, (1) load binder, (6) hooks, ect 291.05 06/15/2013 101-45201-421990
6/6/13 M & M Express - #226 & #228 blades/whipline 220.76 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Fastenal - chop saw parts 0.43 06/15/2013 101-43127-422100
6/6/13 Fastenal - (100) screws 5.84 06/15/2013 101-43127-421990
6/6/13 Gradys - #108 - (2) locknut conduits 2.54 06/15/2013 101-43120-422100
6/6/13 Auto Value - (1) socket, (1) wrench 7.09 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Marties - 4 gal embark 375.44 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Gradys - street lght supplies 9.18 06/15/2013 101-43160-422990
6/6/13 Marties - barn lime (dead deer) 3.90 06/15/2013 101-43120-421990
6/6/13 Marties - treflan, (2) gypum 53.17 06/15/2013 101-43120-422500
6/6/13 General Rental - (3) 100lb propane fill (crack fill trailer) 208.50 06/15/2013 101-43120-421990
6/6/13 Home Depot - yellow striping spray 17.54 06/15/2013 226-45127-421980
6/6/13 Home Depot - 5 gal water jug 12.86 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 Unique Paving - 2.27 ton cold mix 303.26 06/15/2013 101-43120-422400
6/6/13 Hi-Way Liquors - (3) 5# bag ice for rehab cooler 4.77 06/15/2013 101-42200-443990
6/6/13 Wall Street Journal - monthly subscription 25.99 06/15/2013 101-41520-443300
6/6/13 Northstar Chapter - APA-6/6/13 St. Cld 1/2 day Deductions - H.E. 45.00 06/15/2013 101-41520-433200
6/6/13 US Postal Serv - (1) coil/100 Forever stamps 46.00 06/15/2013 655-49870-432200
6/6/13 Home Depot-(1) Lincoln propane torch (back firing wildland fires 80.09 06/15/2013 101-42200-421990
6/6/13 Home Depot - (1) Echo bpk blower; (1) Husky 100 pc tool set; ect 572.75 06/15/2013 101-42200-421990
6/6/13 Spirit Comm - C.A.L.E.A. 5/1-5/31/13 656.37 06/15/2013 655-49870-431970
6/6/13 SuperAmerica - (11.539) gallons unit #3 B.N. 43.49 06/15/2013 655-49870-421200
6/6/13 Chatters - ZZZNEP - Nuclear Emerg Preparedness mtg - R.H. 13.08 06/15/2013 101-42400-433200
6/6/13 Station - Rehab food - primary search assist Eden Prarie woman 36.18 06/15/2013 101-42200-443990
6/6/13 M & M Express - supplies for toro line painter 58.77 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 M & M Express - (2) cables, (1) comb wrench, 24 ft rope, ect 30.70 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Gradys - supp for E Bridge Prk table 2.22 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Gradys - 8 ft shelf paper 21.29 06/15/2013 101-43120-421990
6/6/13 Fastenal - (2) punch sets, (3) load binders 147.58 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Fastenal - (250) swing chain stock 310.66 06/15/2013 101-45201-440800
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 2
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
6/6/13 Home Depot - hose, nozzle, rack - (Freeway Fields Ballfield) 54.41 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 MAC Tools - (1) hex bit rachet, (1) crimper/stripper 111.73 06/15/2013 101-45201-424100
6/6/13 Napa - (4) oil filters 15.99 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Marties - (2) 503 special 171.00 06/15/2013 101-45201-422500
6/6/13 General Rental - tiller rental (center median) 58.78 06/15/2013 101-43120-441500
6/6/13 Continental Research - (4) on the dot macho mango 367.92 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Fleet Farm - work boots - (T. Barnes) 90.00 06/15/2013 101-43120-420650
6/6/13 Water Laboratories - April 2013 water testing 210.00 06/15/2013 601-49440-422740
6/6/13 SuperAmerica - (11.15) gallons motor fuel 46.83 06/15/2013 217-41990-421200
6/6/13 Walmart - bananas 1.46 06/15/2013 226-45127-425410
6/6/13 Walmart - batteries, latch boxes 17.89 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 NBP - (19) ream paper, (1) bx lam pouches 88.73 06/15/2013 226-45122-420990
6/6/13 utx - Extractor Corp - (1) motor w/parts, connectors, ect 215.00 06/15/2013 226-45122-440800
6/6/13 A Catered Event - (18) bx lunches (attendees reimb) 201.80 06/15/2013 226-45122-433200
6/6/13 Walmart - cupcakes 36.00 06/15/2013 226-45127-421460
6/6/13 utx - A Catered Event - gratuity 28.32 06/15/2013 226-45122-433200
6/6/13 Walmart - staples (community garden) 4.40 06/15/2013 226-45122-420990
6/6/13 Walmart - lemonade, pitchers, ect 50.87 06/15/2013 226-45127-421780
6/6/13 Fastenal - (2) wheels for grinding cracks 189.37 06/15/2013 101-43120-422100
6/6/13 Fastenal - (12) 17oz rustol, ect 30.97 06/15/2013 101-43120-421510
6/6/13 General Rental - edger & 1 edger blade rental 61.34 06/15/2013 101-43120-441500
6/6/13 Dyna - cable ties, washers, screws, ect 387.19 06/15/2013 101-43127-421990
6/6/13 Zep - (1) dz brake wash, (4) cherry bombs, ect 214.12 06/15/2013 101-43127-421600
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - (2) cs 1/ply tissue 138.15 06/15/2013 101-43120-422400
6/6/13 Pipeline Supply - irrigation supplies 190.65 06/15/2013 101-45201-422510
6/6/13 Marties - peat moss (E Bridge Prk) 61.92 06/15/2013 101-45201-440900
6/6/13 12C009 - well #4 - Home Depot - (6) 10ft rebar 30.65 06/15/2013 601-00000-165010
6/6/13 G & K Services - floor mat cleaning 51.21 06/15/2013 217-41990-431990
6/6/13 Fastenal - (12) 17oz rustol, (3) marking paint 42.51 06/15/2013 101-43120-420650
6/6/13 Napa - (2) blades 29.90 06/15/2013 101-43120-422100
6/6/13 Gradys - marking spray, garden wire, ect (comm garden) 26.25 06/15/2013 226-45127-421980
6/6/13 Home Depot - (3) 10pk labels (comm garden) 9.20 06/15/2013 226-45127-421980
6/6/13 Gradys - (6) shild expansions, (1) trap 17.30 06/15/2013 226-45122-422990
6/6/13 Walmart - cupcakes 18.00 06/15/2013 226-45127-421460
6/6/13 Walmart - produce re-sale 7.34 06/15/2013 226-45127-425410
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) 12pk steelwool, (2) mount tape, ect 46.78 06/15/2013 226-45122-421610
6/6/13 Gradys - (3) sponge contractor (spa's grout) 18.56 06/15/2013 226-45122-422990
6/6/13 Home Depot - (2) showerheads 16.00 06/15/2013 226-45122-422990
6/6/13 Auto Value - hose, anitfreeze (outside generator) 13.52 06/15/2013 226-45122-440440
6/6/13 12C009 - well #4 General Rental - (1) concrete vibrator rental 21.38 06/15/2013 601-00000-165010
6/6/13 Continental Research - (5) gal tuff stuff, (2) pail pump, ect 660.36 06/15/2013 101-43127-421600
6/6/13 Auto Value - #214 - (1) etching primer, (1) rebuilders cast 18.74 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Marties - (1) ton 18-0-8 w/ 20% slow rel 551.48 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 3
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
6/6/13 Marties - (1) ton 18-0-8 w/ 20% slow rel 551.48 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Marties - 50# per rye, 50# sunny 189.70 06/15/2013 101-45201-422500
6/6/13 Home Depot - coupling, PVC tee, PVC pipe 25.05 06/15/2013 101-45201-422510
6/6/13 Home Depot - gold spray, (6) digging shovels 68.46 06/15/2013 101-45201-421510
6/6/13 Davis Equipment - #216 - (2) V belts, (1) water belt 41.65 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Davis Equipment - #216 - spring, AY governor 522.60 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 PAI - (12) assort paints, (12) striping tips, ect 260.99 06/15/2013 101-45201-421510
6/6/13 CSI - (1,000) gift cards (for use @ MCC) 1,170.00 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 utx - CSI - (20%) 6/1/13-5/31/14 software support 848.12 06/15/2013 226-45122-430910
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - (20) pk cold compress, hair & body wash 76.58 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - bleach, can liners, wipes, ect 373.15 06/15/2013 226-45122-421100
6/6/13 US Postal Service - del to St Paul - flouride nitrate samples 9.35 06/15/2013 601-49440-432200
6/6/13 General Rental - edger & (2) blade rental 61.34 06/15/2013 101-43120-441500
6/6/13 Napa - #217 - (2) hose fittings, (2) chain links 51.58 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Napa - #217 - gas cap 8.22 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Napa - #218 - (2) hose fittings, (3) hydraulic hose 26.93 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Gradys - (2) pr gloves, cultivator, ect (E Bridge Prk) 28.27 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Moon Motors - tiller 341.95 06/15/2013 101-45201-424100
6/6/13 Cub - re-sale 12.68 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Cub - re-sale 17.10 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Home Depot - (1) gun/hose replace fo elec PW; (2) 10pk elec tape 39.35 06/15/2013 656-49877-421990
6/6/13 US Postal Serv - (1) .40 oz letter Return Recpt Certified 6.11 06/15/2013 213-46522-443990
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - (1) cs 9" 2ply tissue; (1) cs 250c sanit bag 61.19 06/15/2013 101-41941-421990
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - April 2013 31,444.27 06/15/2013 101-43230-431000
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - April 2013 10,396.23 06/15/2013 101-43230-431010
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - April 2013 34.00 06/15/2013 655-49870-431010
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - April 2013 101.72 06/15/2013 655-49870-431000
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - April 2013 35.45 06/15/2013 101-43127-431000
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - April 2013 70.90 06/15/2013 101-45201-431000
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - April 2013 112.26 06/15/2013 602-49480-431000
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - April 2013 206.80 06/15/2013 226-45122-431000
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - April 2013 11.82 06/15/2013 211-45501-431000
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - April 2013 23.63 06/15/2013 609-49754-431000
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - MGFARM - 100 Brdway E - April 2013 7.98 06/15/2013 213-46522-431000
6/6/13 Advanced Disposal - MGFARM - 100 Brdway E - April 2013 2.47 06/15/2013 213-46522-431000
6/6/13 Arctic Glacier - re-sale 132.01 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Walmart - (1) dry erase; (1) 2c Expo marker 5.03 06/15/2013 101-43115-421990
6/6/13 Metro Fire - (1) SCBA Flow test 65.00 06/15/2013 101-42200-431990
6/6/13 Metro Fire - (1) FireHawk slide button assy 22.10 06/15/2013 101-42200-422990
6/6/13 Metro Fire - (5) Elite face piece lens 284.25 06/15/2013 101-42200-422990
6/6/13 Metro Fire - WCF-SRU equipment (Cargill to reimburse) 9,272.14 06/15/2013 101-42200-115030
6/6/13 Finance and Commerce - 12C003 - (2) Bids/Const 4/25 - 5/2/13 246.36 06/15/2013 602-00000-165010
6/6/13 NBP - (1) bx 9x13 28# clasp envelope 8.54 06/15/2013 101-41940-420990
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 4
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
6/6/13 NBP - (1) print 12dig calculator; (1) 2x800" clr pack tape; ect 197.78 06/15/2013 101-41940-420990
6/6/13 NBP - (1) door coat hook 27.58 06/15/2013 101-41940-421990
6/6/13 NBP - (2) monitor stand; (2) file organizer; (1) cubicle hanger 99.87 06/15/2013 101-41940-420990
6/6/13 NBP - (1) bx 2pc 3"cap fastener 19.70 06/15/2013 101-41940-420990
6/6/13 NBP - (1) ct ppr plate; (1) ct lunch napkins; (1) garment hook 184.04 06/15/2013 101-41940-421990
6/6/13 utx - Amazon.com - (1) print cartridge for postage machine 63.98 06/15/2013 101-41940-420990
6/6/13 AVP - city card used in error-V.L. reimb city recpt 70275 81.00 06/15/2013 101-41940-443990
6/6/13 G & K Services - floor mat cleaning 136.20 06/15/2013 609-49754-431990
6/6/13 NBP - (80) rm copy paper 277.88 06/15/2013 101-41940-420300
6/6/13 MailFinance - 3/4-6/3/13 C.H. mailing system 704.93 06/15/2013 101-41940-441500
6/6/13 McDowall Co - beer cooler repair 2,685.11 06/15/2013 609-49754-440440
6/6/13 utx - Vistaprint - (5) self-inking stamp "I declare under..." 138.71 06/15/2013 101-41520-421990
6/6/13 Bailey Nurseries-Spring Tree order-(148) trees sold to residents 3,683.78 06/15/2013 224-46102-421680
6/6/13 utx -Bailey Nurseries-Spring Tree order-(7) donated; (65) city 1,693.57 06/15/2013 224-46102-421680
6/6/13 Gopher - returned basketballs - orig invoice 5/6/13 batch -7.05 06/15/2013 226-45127-421730
6/6/13 AST Sports - (6) embroidery logo 44.89 06/15/2013 101-45201-421110
6/6/13 Viking Industrial - (6) safety T-shirts 138.51 06/15/2013 101-45201-420650
6/6/13 AmeriPride - uniform rental 19.63 06/15/2013 226-45122-441700
6/6/13 AmeriPride - uniform laundry services 59.95 06/15/2013 226-45122-431110
6/6/13 AmeriPride - towel rental 19.43 06/15/2013 226-45122-441710
6/6/13 Big Lake Lumber - deck screws 91.38 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 12C009 - well #4 - Big Lake Lumber - (4) pine ply ect 159.90 06/15/2013 601-00000-165010
6/6/13 John Deere - (16) 5 gal white paint 581.23 06/15/2013 101-45201-421510
6/6/13 John Deere - (20) pop-up sprinklers, sawhorse blade, ect 952.04 06/15/2013 101-45201-422510
6/6/13 John Deere - (1) back-flow (prking) 72.46 06/15/2013 101-42700-422990
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) threadlocker (flag poles) 9.61 06/15/2013 101-43120-421990
6/6/13 G & K Services - floor mat cleaning 39.94 06/15/2013 217-41990-431990
6/6/13 US Postal Service - THM & HAA5 samples 11.85 06/15/2013 601-49440-432200
6/6/13 H & L Mesabi - (12) carbide inserted blades 3,530.85 06/15/2013 101-43125-422450
6/6/13 A H Hermel - freight on re-sale 3.95 06/15/2013 226-45122-433300
6/6/13 A H Hermel - on re-sale 230.96 06/15/2013 226-45203-425410
6/6/13 Marties - annuals, fertilizer, fountain grass 1,005.60 06/15/2013 101-45201-440900
6/6/13 Marties - (2) limestone 12.61 06/15/2013 101-45201-422500
6/6/13 Marties - 50# prem sunny 101.53 06/15/2013 101-43120-422500
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - can liners, (24) pr gloves 245.93 06/15/2013 101-45201-421990
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - phosphoric cleaner 42.84 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - (12) pair glove return -26.88 06/15/2013 101-45201-421990
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - (8) cs paper towel 208.45 06/15/2013 101-43127-421100
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) pool pace tabs 29.91 06/15/2013 601-49440-421600
6/6/13 AmeriPride - uniform rental 19.63 06/15/2013 226-45122-441700
6/6/13 AmeriPride - laundry services 59.95 06/15/2013 226-45122-431110
6/6/13 AmeriPride - towel rental 19.43 06/15/2013 226-45122-441710
6/6/13 M & M Express - combination wrench 2.32 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 5
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
6/6/13 NBP - (2) bx ltr pocket; (6) staple remover; (2) 12" scale; ect. 148.93 06/15/2013 101-41940-420990
6/6/13 Wright Henn Elec - (14) lights School Blvd 4/16-5/15/13 193.90 06/15/2013 101-43160-431900
6/6/13 Wright Henn Elec - (30) lights School Blvd 4/16-5/15/13 415.50 06/15/2013 101-43160-431900
6/6/13 Wright Henn Elec - (9) lights 7th St & Highland 4/16-5/15/13 90.00 06/15/2013 101-43160-431900
6/6/13 Wright Henn Elec - Cedar St Dundas to Chelsea 4/16-5/15/13 124.65 06/15/2013 101-43160-431900
6/6/13 Wright Henn Elec - Chelsea Rd E 4/16-5/15/13 180.00 06/15/2013 101-43160-431900
6/6/13 Wright Henn Elec - School Blvd Fenning/18/Edmondson 4/16-5/15/13 372.00 06/15/2013 101-43160-431900
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 4/4-5/3/13 105.34 06/15/2013 101-42400-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 4/4-5/3/13 132.47 06/15/2013 101-43115-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 4/4-5/3/13 289.96 06/15/2013 655-49870-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 4/4-5/3/13 132.47 06/15/2013 226-45122-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 4/4-5/3/13 71.50 06/15/2013 101-43110-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 4/4-5/3/13 43.67 06/15/2013 101-45201-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 4/4-5/3/13 110.18 06/15/2013 101-43120-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 4/4-5/3/13 (1/2) 81.15 06/15/2013 601-49440-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 4/4-5/3/13 (1/2) 81.15 06/15/2013 602-49490-432100
6/6/13 Cub - coffee 26.55 06/15/2013 101-43127-443990
6/6/13 Cub - kleenex, forks, disp containers, ant killer, ect 18.62 06/15/2013 101-43127-421990
6/6/13 Securitas - wedding security 5/4 & 5/5 Dylan King R2072 179.56 06/15/2013 226-45122-431992
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - hair & body wash, handwash 149.44 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - bleach, detergent, wipes, can liners, ect 444.94 06/15/2013 226-45122-421100
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - (ballfields) coffee filers, 16oz cups, ect 204.43 06/15/2013 226-45203-425410
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - disp gloves, paper plates, 16oz cups 189.73 06/15/2013 226-45127-425410
6/6/13 Midstates - (1) 4" stem 3" dial thermometer 38.87 06/15/2013 101-43120-422100
6/6/13 Thyssenkrupp Elevator - Maintenance Agreement 5/1/13 - 7/31/13 690.00 06/15/2013 226-45122-431900
6/6/13 Thyssenkrupp Elevator - Maintenance Agreement 11/1/12 - 1/31/13 690.00 06/15/2013 226-45122-431900
6/6/13 Dish - 5/22/13 - 6/21/13 (digital music) 78.02 06/15/2013 226-45122-432500
6/6/13 Napa - (1) 20'x2" tow strap 31.09 06/15/2013 101-43127-424100
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) large Q/C 3/8" arbor 5.34 06/15/2013 101-43127-424100
6/6/13 Titan Machinery - #163 - (1) V-belt 45.03 06/15/2013 101-43120-422100
6/6/13 Fleet Farm - (4) pr work pants (T. Moores) 131.96 06/15/2013 101-43120-421110
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) rubber stopper, (1) saw hole, ect 28.94 06/15/2013 101-43127-424100
6/6/13 Walmart - lysol 5.31 06/15/2013 217-41990-421100
6/6/13 Walmart - kleenex 11.20 06/15/2013 217-41990-421990
6/6/13 SuperAmerica - motor fuel 27.15 06/15/2013 217-41990-421200
6/6/13 RecSupply - (10) basketball nets, (6) lanyards, ect 111.36 06/15/2013 226-45127-421750
6/6/13 utx - Lanair Products - (1) pump head, (1) coupler pump, ect 765.07 06/15/2013 101-43127-422300
6/6/13 O Ryans - (12.813) gallons unit #3 B.N. 55.08 06/15/2013 655-49870-421200
6/6/13 Cub - re-sale 19.18 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Cub - re-sale 19.01 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 utx - Vistaprint - 2nd order - (5) self-inking stamp "I declare" 138.71 06/15/2013 101-41520-421990
6/6/13 GTS Ed - 10/16/13 Little Falls - Variance in Shorelands - A.S. 70.00 06/15/2013 101-41910-433200
6/6/13 Walmart - (2) panel; (1) clr sm hook; (1) tension rod; ect. 47.14 06/15/2013 655-49870-421990
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 6
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
6/6/13 Walmart - (1) magnets -6.38 06/15/2013 655-49870-421990
6/6/13 Walmart - (1) cup hook 1.04 06/15/2013 655-49870-421990
6/6/13 Marties - 1 ton 18-0-8 20% slow rel 551.48 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Marties - 1 ton 18-0-8 20% slow rel 551.48 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Marties - 50# perennial 98.86 06/15/2013 101-45201-422500
6/6/13 Marties - 1 ton 18-0-8 20% slow rel 551.48 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Marties - flat, (8) accent, peat moss (Riverside Cemetery) 75.44 06/15/2013 651-49010-421990
6/6/13 Marties - (2) preen 64.10 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Burnham - 4 yrds red mulch (City mulch beds) 128.25 06/15/2013 101-45201-422500
6/6/13 Burnham - 12 yards red mulch, 20 bags cocoa bean 496.96 06/15/2013 101-45201-422500
6/6/13 Home Depot - hose, hose nozzle 40.01 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Home Depot - (6) aggregate step stones 31.93 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Gartner's Hallmark - thank-you cards (vol groups, retiring comm) 8.53 06/15/2013 101-45201-443990
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) rnd eye swv snap 4.80 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) rstp spry return -5.33 06/15/2013 101-43160-421510
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) rstp spry, (1) 12oz grn spray paint 9.60 06/15/2013 101-43160-421510
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) 60lb concrete mix (4th Cedar sign post) 6.94 06/15/2013 101-43120-422600
6/6/13 Gradys - (3) hitch pin 32.56 06/15/2013 101-43120-422100
6/6/13 Pipeline Supply - (1) liqu fill press gauge, (1) rectorseal 11.64 06/15/2013 601-49440-421990
6/6/13 Pipeline Supply - (1) vall valve 8.18 06/15/2013 601-49440-421990
6/6/13 12C009 - well #4 - Home Depot - (15) concrete block 20.68 06/15/2013 601-00000-165010
6/6/13 12C009 - well #4 Fastenal - (20) 3/4"-10 FHN Z 5.63 06/15/2013 601-00000-165010
6/6/13 Auto Value - #221 - tubing, hose, funnels, fem plug, ect 107.04 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Marties - (round-a-bout, chamber corner) - annuals, ect 1,102.34 06/15/2013 101-45201-440900
6/6/13 Gradys - (4) shield expansions, (4) screw lags, ect 76.67 06/15/2013 226-45122-422990
6/6/13 Gradys - (12) toggle bolts, (12) washers, ect 22.85 06/15/2013 226-45122-422990
6/6/13 AmeriPride - unifrom rental 19.63 06/15/2013 226-45122-441700
6/6/13 AmeriPride - laundry services 59.95 06/15/2013 226-45122-431110
6/6/13 AmeriPride - towel rental 19.43 06/15/2013 226-45122-441710
6/6/13 Aramark - uniform rental 14.36 06/15/2013 101-43110-441700
6/6/13 Aramark - uniform rental 135.13 06/15/2013 101-45201-441700
6/6/13 Aramark - uniform rental 59.30 06/15/2013 602-49490-441700
6/6/13 Aramark - uniform rental 59.30 06/15/2013 601-49440-441700
6/6/13 Aramark - uniform rental 190.87 06/15/2013 101-43120-441700
6/6/13 Aramark - shop towels 172.12 06/15/2013 101-43127-421990
6/6/13 Arctic Glacier - re-sale 329.90 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Arctic Glacier - re-sale 104.52 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Home Depot - 7 # Turf Builder Sun & Shade grass seed-restoration 28.83 06/15/2013 655-49870-421990
6/6/13 Marties - 30 gal surge 1,702.11 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 IKEA - cabinet (friendship island) 341.05 06/15/2013 226-45127-424600
6/6/13 Cub - re-sale 21.59 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Cub - re-sale 19.57 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Cub - re-sale 9.88 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 7
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
6/6/13 Cub - Re-hab - water; Powerade; Gatorade 78.71 06/15/2013 101-42200-443990
6/6/13 DISH -6/2-7/1/13 digital music 54.51 06/15/2013 609-49754-432500
6/6/13 Home Depot - Air Packs-(12) Duracell C size 4; (2) 4pk Duracel D 111.77 06/15/2013 101-42200-422990
6/6/13 Metro Fire - Eng 4 - (1) TIC Fire Truck Kit 1,057.75 06/15/2013 101-42200-421990
6/6/13 utx - Napa - (1) 7 pc 2dr hxbt set-sae 73.64 06/15/2013 226-45122-421610
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) 3" level, (1) 2" PVC plug 5.11 06/15/2013 601-49440-421990
6/6/13 Jo-Ann - Friendship Island - dry erase mrkers, job chrts, ect 5.24 06/15/2013 226-45127-421980
6/6/13 Horizon Commercial - pool chemical product 1,205.45 06/15/2013 226-45122-421600
6/6/13 Pipeline Supply - (2) close nipples, (1) 1" union, (1) coupling 29.82 06/15/2013 101-45201-422510
6/6/13 M-R Sign - (150) U channel posts 3,104.18 06/15/2013 101-43120-422600
6/6/13 Gradys - (3) trash cans 57.68 06/15/2013 101-43120-421990
6/6/13 Gradys - (center island) irrigation parts 30.41 06/15/2013 101-45201-422510
6/6/13 Gradys - (Meadow Oak sign) concrete mix 36.29 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Marties - 1 ton 18-0-8 20% slow rel 551.48 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Top Line Advertising - supp/labor electronic message sign 1,242.50 06/15/2013 609-49754-440440
6/6/13 NBP - calc paper, power stapler, blk pens 102.23 06/15/2013 217-41990-420990
6/6/13 NBP - colored pencils, pncl shrp, refl pens 64.32 06/15/2013 217-41990-420990
6/6/13 Central McGowan - carbon dioxide 95.65 06/15/2013 226-45122-421600
6/6/13 utx - Central McGowan - carbon dioxide freight 21.50 06/15/2013 226-45122-421600
6/6/13 Biffs - (8) parks & public works 403.11 06/15/2013 101-45201-431990
6/6/13 Marties - 4 gal surge 313.96 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Napa - (stock) oil, coolant, air & fuel filters 271.13 06/15/2013 101-43127-422120
6/6/13 Titan Machinery - (2) cs unive joints 198.65 06/15/2013 101-43120-422100
6/6/13 Vance Brothers - 200 gal SS-1H tac oil 545.06 06/15/2013 101-43120-422400
6/6/13 AmeriPride - uniform rental 19.63 06/15/2013 226-45122-441700
6/6/13 AmeriPride - laundry services 59.95 06/15/2013 226-45122-431110
6/6/13 AmeriPride - towel rental 19.43 06/15/2013 226-45122-441710
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - straws, plastics forks, coffee filters 48.62 06/15/2013 226-45127-425410
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - wipes, can liners 216.06 06/15/2013 226-45122-421100
6/6/13 Spectrum Supply - hair & body wash, 9" tissue, paper towels 827.78 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 Napa - battery for generator 109.63 06/15/2013 226-45122-422100
6/6/13 Schluender Construction - jet 2 lines in pool 225.00 06/15/2013 226-45122-440100
6/6/13 Trueman Welters - supp for chop saw 77.88 06/15/2013 101-43127-422100
6/6/13 Fastenal - supp for street lights 16.85 06/15/2013 101-43160-421530
6/6/13 Fastenal - (YMCA dock supp) brushes, nuts, ect 32.18 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Home Depot - (2) tape measures, (2) hammers, ect 62.66 06/15/2013 101-45201-424100
6/6/13 Napa - (2) oil filters 8.64 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Pipeline Supply - (1) pnt primer, (1) pnt cement 18.63 06/15/2013 602-49490-421990
6/6/13 Reds - (1) battery 69.47 06/15/2013 602-49490-422100
6/6/13 JRK Seed - Ballfield 50# conditioner, 50# rapid dry 3,368.01 06/15/2013 101-45203-422990
6/6/13 Belson Outdoors - (3) cease-fire cig receptacles 340.64 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 Gradys - (community garden) fence, wire, snip 60.56 06/15/2013 226-45127-421980
6/6/13 Walmart - re-sale 54.55 06/15/2013 226-45127-425410
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 8
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
6/6/13 Walmart - cupcakes 12.00 06/15/2013 226-45127-421460
6/6/13 Walmart - (2) flashlights 10.65 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 Kwik Trip - (29.515) gallons unit #2 D.S. 119.80 06/15/2013 655-49870-421200
6/6/13 Kwik Trip - (13.484) gallons unit #4 D.S. 56.62 06/15/2013 655-49870-421200
6/6/13 Holiday - (26.414) gallons unit #1 D.S. 113.55 06/15/2013 655-49870-421200
6/6/13 Home Depot - tools to dig service lines Bluffs building entry 109.09 06/15/2013 656-49877-421990
6/6/13 Monticello City of - ROW Permit 25.00 06/15/2013 656-49877-443700
6/6/13 Perfect Exteriors of MN Inc - Itel report on siding 150.00 06/15/2013 656-49877-431990
6/6/13 Arctic Glacier - re-sale 119.16 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Arctic Glacier - re-sale 233.24 06/15/2013 609-49750-425500
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 763-688-5387 5/21-6/20/13 26.02 06/15/2013 655-49870-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 763-688-5616; 763-688-5936 5/21-6/20/13 52.04 06/15/2013 101-43115-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 763-954-1070 5/21-6/20/13 26.02 06/15/2013 101-43120-432100
6/6/13 Verizon Wireless - 763-954-1076 5/21-6/20/13 26.02 06/15/2013 101-43110-432100
6/6/13 Wright Henn Elec - HADCO lights @ East 7th St - May 2013 357.75 06/15/2013 101-43160-431900
6/6/13 NBP - inv # 585027-0 (2) ct suckers 155.51 06/15/2013 609-49754-443990
6/6/13 NBP - inv # C 584574-1 - (1) door coat hook -27.58 06/15/2013 101-41940-421990
6/6/13 First Hospital dba First Lab - (2) DOT Drug Screen Random 79.90 06/15/2013 101-45201-431990
6/6/13 First Hospital dba First Lab - (1) DOT Drug Screen Random (1/2) 39.95 06/15/2013 601-49440-431990
6/6/13 First Hospital dba First Lab - (1) DOT Drug Screen Random (1/2) 39.95 06/15/2013 602-49490-431990
6/6/13 Emergency Apparatus Mtc Inc - Eng 4 NFPA Pump Test; ect. 615.66 06/15/2013 101-42200-440500
6/6/13 Emergency Apparatus Mtc Inc - Eng 1 (1162) NFPA Pump Test; ect. 425.35 06/15/2013 101-42200-440500
6/6/13 Emergency Apparatus Mtc Inc - Lad 1 (1164) NFPA Pump Test; ect. 425.35 06/15/2013 101-42200-440500
6/6/13 Big Lake Lumber - (xcel ballfield building) cedar 231.49 06/15/2013 101-45203-422300
6/6/13 Big Lake Lumber - supp BCOL docks 307.71 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Gradys - (1) shop vac, 100lb concrete mix 91.88 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Burnham - (EB Park flower beds) - 4 1/2 yrds blackdut 115.43 06/15/2013 101-45201-422500
6/6/13 utx - Belson - (1) steel waste basket w/cover 320.00 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Monticello Vacuum - vac bags 19.20 06/15/2013 226-45122-421100
6/6/13 Monticello Vacuum - vac bags 19.18 06/15/2013 101-41940-421990
6/6/13 Monticello Vacuum - vac bags 19.18 06/15/2013 101-41941-421100
6/6/13 Monticello Vacuum - vac bags 19.18 06/15/2013 211-45501-421100
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -1,225.89 06/15/2013 101-00000-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -73.90 06/15/2013 101-42200-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -71.73 06/15/2013 101-43120-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -49.04 06/15/2013 101-43125-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -135.89 06/15/2013 101-43127-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -48.21 06/15/2013 101-43160-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -95.58 06/15/2013 101-45201-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -2.29 06/15/2013 211-45501-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -3.18 06/15/2013 213-00000-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -21.47 06/15/2013 217-41990-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -7.37 06/15/2013 224-46102-362970
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 9
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -418.33 06/15/2013 226-45122-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -136.79 06/15/2013 226-45127-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -135.19 06/15/2013 601-49440-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -79.56 06/15/2013 602-49480-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -62.90 06/15/2013 602-49490-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -83.37 06/15/2013 609-49750-362970
6/6/13 US Bank Rebate Q1 2013 -99.53 06/15/2013 655-00000-362970
6/6/13 utx - Google Apps - calender app (1 month) 60.00 06/15/2013 655-49870-421990
6/6/13 Marties Farm Serv - Median - (15) flats; (1) fountain grass 496.97 06/15/2013 101-43120-422500
6/6/13 Dyna - (shop supplies) fuses, screws, washers, ect 284.53 06/15/2013 101-43127-421990
6/6/13 Titan Machinery - (milling machine) (100) bits 697.89 06/15/2013 101-43120-422100
6/6/13 General Rental - (2) 100lb propane fills 139.00 06/15/2013 101-43120-421990
6/6/13 PAI - (24) assorted paints 170.58 06/15/2013 101-43127-421510
6/6/13 NBP - invisible tape, laminating pouches, clips, ect 90.12 06/15/2013 226-45122-420990
6/6/13 12C009 - well #4 - Home Depot - posts (fencing around well) 118.64 06/15/2013 601-00000-165010
6/6/13 Fastenal - 12 pr gloves 133.21 06/15/2013 101-43120-420650
6/6/13 Tulsat - ZZZFNM - Multi Receivers - (1) D9824; (1) D9828 5,007.00 06/15/2013 655-49870-421830
6/6/13 CSI - (80%) 6/1/13-5/31/14 software support 3,392.48 06/15/2013 226-45122-430910
6/6/13 Auto Value - (1) carb-kit, (1) vinyl permatex (vac seat repair) 65.50 06/15/2013 101-45201-422100
6/6/13 Grainger - (5) fans for fitness area 190.13 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 utx - Paypal Expresscont - (6) volleyball nets w/steel cables 167.94 06/15/2013 101-45201-421650
6/6/13 Marties - x/ref w/#900271 balance - eubarkto 20.00 06/15/2013 101-45201-421600
6/6/13 Home Depot - ballfield irrigation supplies 19.24 06/15/2013 101-45203-422990
6/6/13 Logmein - application to run temp ect from phone (disputing fee) 29.99 06/15/2013 226-45122-421990
6/6/13 Home Depot - (2) Energizer Max AA24 29.88 06/15/2013 656-49877-421990
6/6/13 12C009 - well #4 - Fastenal - (8) misc nuts 2.66 06/15/2013 601-00000-165010
6/6/13 12C009 - well #4 - Fastenal - (10) misc screws 27.70 06/15/2013 601-00000-165010
6/6/13 A E Michaels - (prty rm flooring) carpet tiles, adhesive, ect 1,307.22 06/15/2013 226-45122-440100
6/6/13 JME/Monticello Block - (200) edging stakes 89.78 06/15/2013 101-45201-422500
6/6/13 12C009 - well #4 - AME - buckeye fiber, ect 619.34 06/15/2013 601-00000-165010
6/6/13 Audio Communications - parts/labor - bench repair test (kenwood) 132.71 06/15/2013 101-43127-431990
6/6/13 Napa - #105 - (2) couplings 6.60 06/15/2013 101-43120-422110
6/6/13 Holiday - motor fuel 31.77 06/15/2013 217-41990-421200
6/6/13 Gradys - (2) hole saws 27.23 06/15/2013 601-49440-422700
6/6/13 12C009 - well #4 - Home Depot - (4) concrete solid blocks 13.79 06/15/2013 601-00000-165010
6/6/13 Central McGowan - monthly rental fee 48.09 06/15/2013 226-45122-441500
6/6/13 Home Depot - (2) 36' nifty nabbers 42.69 06/15/2013 101-45201-421990
132,749.60Check Total:
Vendor:2438 VANCO SERVICES LLC Check Sequence: 5 ACH Enabled: True
00005575361 Vanco Fitness Rewards May 2013 77.25 06/15/2013 226-45122-430700
00005577001 Gateway fees May 2013 (1/2) 36.65 06/15/2013 601-49440-443980
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 10
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Acct Number Reference
00005577001 Gateway fees May 2013 (1/2) 36.65 06/15/2013 602-49490-443980
150.55Check Total:
Total for Check Run:
Total of Number of Checks:
197,703.16
5
AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/20/2013 - 9:26 AM)Page 11
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
5B.ConsiderationofapprovingnewhiresanddeparturesforCitydepartments (TE)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
TheCouncilisaskedtoratifythehiringanddeparturesofemployeesthathaveoccurred
recentlyinthedepartmentslisted.ItisrecommendedthattheCouncilofficiallyratifythe
hiring/departureofalllistedemployeesincludingpart-timeandseasonalworkers.
A1.BudgetImpact:(positionsaregenerallyincludedinbudget)
A2.StaffWorkLoadImpact:Ifnewpositions,theremaybesometraining
involved.Ifterminatedpositions,existingstaffwouldpickupthosehours,as
needed,untilreplaced.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.Motiontoratifythehire/departuresoftheemployeesasidentifiedontheattached
list.
2.Motiontodenytherecommendedhiresanddepartures.
C.RECOMMENDATION:
BystatutetheCityCouncilhastheauthoritytoapproveallhires/departures.Citystaff
recommendsAlternative#1,fortheCounciltoapprovethehiresand/ordeparturesas
listed.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
Listofnew/terminatedemployees
Name Title Department Hire Date Class
Tina Quist Liquor Store Clerk Liquor Store 6/4 PT
Name Reason Department Last Day Class
Gerardo Ortiz Involuntary MCC 6/3 PT
Allysa Swan Voluntary Liquor Store 6/7 PT
Lauren DePatto Voluntary MCC 6/11 PT
Sherry Say Involuntary DMV 6/13 PT
NEW EMPLOYEES
TERMINATING EMPLOYEES
Book1: 6/18/2013
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
5C.ConsiderationofappointingrepresentativestotheTransportationAdvisory
Committee (AS)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
CityCouncilisaskedtoappointPlanningCommissionerCharlotteGablerasa
representativetofilloutatermontheMonticelloTransportationAdvisoryCommittee
(TAC).ThePlanningCommissionpositionwaspreviouslyheldbyRodDragsten.In
2011,Mr.DragstenresignedfromthePlanningCommissiontoserveontheEconomic
DevelopmentAuthority.Assuch,inasimultaneousaction,theCouncilisaskedto
formallyappointMr.Dragstentotheat-largeresidentseat.Mr.Dragstenhasbeen
servinginthatpositionunofficiallysincehisresignationfromthePlanningCommission,
asnoapplicationswerereceivedforthecitizenposition.
CommissionerGablerwasunanimouslyrecommendedforappointmenttotheTACby
thePlanningCommission.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.MotiontoapprovetheappointmentofPlanningCommissionerCharlotteGabler
totheTransportationAdvisoryCommitteeandRodDragstenasCitizenAt-Large
representative,effectiveimmediately.
2.Motiontonotapprovetheappointments.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
CityStaffandthePlanningCommissionrecommendAlternative#1.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
None
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/2013
1
5D.Considerationofapproving2012StormWaterPollutionPreventionProgram
(SWPPP)AnnualReport (WSB)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
In2005theCityofMonticellowasdesignatedasaregulatedsmallmunicipalseparate
stormsewersystem(MS4)underMinnesotaRules,Chapter7090.ThisrequiredtheCity
toobtainaNationalPollutantDischargeEliminationSystem/StateDisposalSystem
(NPDES/SDS)stormwaterpermit,andtodevelopandimplementaStormWater
PollutionPrevention(SWPPP)toreducethedischargeofpollutants,includingsediments,
fromourstormsewersystemtothemaximumextentpracticable.
OnFebruary15,2007ourdraftSWPPPwassubmittedtotheMinnesotaPollution
ControlAgency(MPCA)forreviewandapproval.OnMarch24,2008theMPCA
approvedourdraftSWPPPandweweregrantedgeneralpermitcoverage.
Asrequired,ourSWPPPaddressessixminimumcontrolmeasures(MCM’s)asfollows:
1.PublicEducationandOutreach,
2.PublicParticipationandInvolvement,
3.IllicitDischargeDetectionandElimination,
4.ConstructionSiteStormwaterRunoffControl,
5.Post-ConstructionStormwaterManagementMeasures;and,
6.PollutionPrevention/GoodHousekeepingMeasures.
Atotalof40bestmanagementpractices(BMP’s)andmeasureablegoalsassociatedwith
the6minimumcontrolmeasures(MCM’s)areidentifiedintheSWPPPfor
implementation.Ashasbeendiscussedbefore,theseBMP’srequireseveralhoursof
stafftimeeachyeartoadministerandcompletethetasksidentifiedinourSWPPP.These
tasksincludesuchitemsprovidingarticlesinCitynewslettersandonthewebsite,
educatingthepublicatcommunityevents,holdinganannualpublicmeeting,monitoring
erosioncontrolonconstructionanddevelopmentsitesandinventoryingandmappingour
entirestormsewersystemincludingponds,pipes,structures,outfalls,waterbodies,etc.
Repairstothesesystemswillbecompletedasstafftimeandbudgetallows.
EachyearwearerequiredtosubmitourannualreporttotheMPCAbyJune30th.The
reportsummarizesourSWPPPimplementationeffortsoverthepreviouscalendaryear
forthesixMCM’s.Ourdraft2012annualreportisattachedassupporting
documentationforCounciltoreviewandapprovepriortosubmittingtotheMPCA.
ShouldCouncilwishtodirectanychangestothe2012AnnualReport,staffwillmake
anychangesnecessarypriortosubmittingthereporttotheMPCAbyJune30th.
CouncilmaybeawarethattheMPCAhasfinalizedandreissuedanewMS4General
PermitthatallcurrentMS4citieswillneedtocomplywith.Overthesummerandfall,
engineeringstaffwillbeassessingthecurrentsystem,identifygapswithourcurrent
permitandrevisingthecurrentSWPPPtomeetthenewpermitrequirements.Thenew
permitwillbecomelawonAugust1,2013.TheCityofMonticellohas90days(October
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/2013
2
30th,2013)toupdateourSWPPPinaccordancewiththenewrulesandregulationsset
forthinthenewpermit.
A1.BudgetImpact:Completingthe2012AnnualReporthadnodirectimpacttothe
budget.
A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Staffhasspentseveralhourspreparingthe2012
AnnualReport,includingallbackgrounddocumentationtocompletethereport.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.Motiontoapprovethe2012SWPPPAnnualReportandauthorizeimmediate
submittaltotheMPCA.
2.Motiontodenyapprovalandsubmittalofthe2012SWPPPAnnualReporttothe
MPCApendingrevisionsbasedonCouncilinput.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
2012SWPPPAnnualReport(draft)
www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-06 • 1/23/2013 Page 1 of 5
MS4 Annual Report for 2012
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s)
Reporting period January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012
Due June 30, 2013
Doc Type: Permitting Annual Report
Instructions: By completing this mandatory MS4 Annual Report form, you are providing the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) with a summary of your status of compliance with permit conditions, including an assessment of the appropriateness of your
identified best management practices (BMPs) and progress towards achieving your identified measurable goals for each of the
minimum control measures as required by the MS4 Permit. If a permittee determines that program status or compliance with the permit
can not be adequately reflected within the structure of this form additional explanation and/or information may be referenced in an
attachment. This form has significant limitations and provides only a snap shot of MS4 compliance with the conditions in the permit.
After reviewing the information, MPCA staff may need to contact the permittee to clarify or seek additional information.
Submittal: This MS4 Annual Report must be submitted electronically to the MPCA using the submit button at the end of the form,
from the person that is duly authorized to certify this form. All questions with an asterisk (*) are required fields (these fields also
have a red border), and must be completed before the form will send. A confirmation e-mail will be sent in response to electronic
submissions.
If you have further questions, please contact one of these MPCA staff members (toll-free 800-657-3864):
• Scott Fox 651-757-2368 scott.fox@state.mn.us
• Claudia Hochstein 651-757-2881 claudia.hochstein@state.mn.us
• Cole Landgraf 651-757-2880 cole.landgraf@state.mn.us
• Dan Miller 651-757-2246 daniel.miller@state.mn.us
• Rachel Stangl 651-757-2879 rachel.stangl@state.mn.us
General Contact Information (*Required fields)
*Name of MS4: *Contact name:
*Mailing address:
*City: *State: *Zip code:
*Phone (including area code): *E-mail:
Minimum Control Measure 1: Public Education and Outreach [V.G.1] (*Required fields)
A. The permit requires each permittee to implement a public education program to distribute educational materials to the
community or conduct equivalent outreach activities about the impacts of stormwater discharges on water bodies and steps
that the public can take to reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff. [Part V.G.1.a]
Note: Please indicate which of the following distribution methods you used. Indicate the number distributed in the spaces
provided (enter “0” if the method was not used or “NA” if the data does not exist):
Media type Number of media Number of times published
Circulation/
Audience
Example: Brochures: 3 different brochures published 5 times about 10,000
Brochures:
Newsletter:
Posters:
Newspaper articles:
Utility bill inserts:
Radio ads:
Television ads:
Cable Access Channel:
Other:
Other:
Other:
www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-06 • 1/23/2013 Page 2 of 5
B. *Do you use a website as a tool to distribute stormwater educational materials? Yes No
What is the URL:
C. If you answered yes in question B. above, do you track hits to the website? Yes No
How many hits were to the stormwater webpage:
D. *Did you hold stormwater related events, presentations to schools or other such activities? Yes No
If yes, please describe:
E. *Have specific messages been developed and distributed during this reporting year for Minimum Control Measure (MCM):
MCM 1: Yes No MCM 4: Yes No
MCM 2: Yes No MCM 5: Yes No
MCM 3: Yes No MCM 6: Yes No
F. *Have you developed partnerships with other MS4s, watershed districts, local or state governments,
educational institutions, etc., to assist you in fulfilling the requirements for MCM 1?
Yes No
G. List those entities with which you have partnered to meet the requirements of this MCM and
describe the nature of the agreement(s): (Attach a separate sheet if necessary.)
H. *Have you developed methods to assess the effectiveness of your public education/outreach
program?
Yes No
If yes, please describe:
Minimum Control Measure 2: Public Participation/Involvement [V.G.2] (*Required fields)
A. *Did you hold a public meeting to present accomplishments and to discuss your Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP)? [Part V.G.1.e]
Yes No
If no, explain:
B. What was the date of the public meeting (mm/dd/yyyy):
C. How many citizens attended specifically for stormwater
(excluding board/council members and staff/hired consultants)?
D. Was the public meeting a stand-alone meeting for stormwater or was it combined with some other
function (City Council meeting, other public event, etc.)?
Stand-alone
Combined
E. *Each permittee must solicit and consider input from the public prior to submittal of the annual
report. Did you receive written and/or oral input on your SWPPP? [Part V.G.2.b.1-3]
Yes No
F. *Have you revised your SWPPP in response to written or oral comments received from the public
since the last annual reporting cycle? [Part V.G.2.c]
Yes No
If yes, describe: (Attach a separate sheet if necessary.)
www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-06 • 1/23/2013 Page 3 of 5
Minimum Control Measure 3: Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination [V.G.3] (*Required fields)
The permit requires permittees to develop, implement, and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges as defined
in 40 CFR 122.26(b)(2). You must also select and implement a program of appropriate BMPs and measurable goals for this
minimum control measure.
A. *Did you update your storm sewer system map? Yes No
If yes, please explain which components (ponds, pipes, outfalls, waterbodies, etc.) were
updated/added:
Note: The storm sewer system map was to be completed by June 30, 2008. [Part V.G.3.a]
B. *Have you modified the format in which the map is available? Yes No
C. If yes, indicate the new format:
Hardcopy only GIS system CAD Other system:
D. *Did you inspect for illicit discharges during the reporting year? Yes No
E. If you answered yes in question D above, did you identify any illicit discharges? Yes No
F. If you answered yes in question E above, how many illicit discharges were detected during the
reporting period:
G. If you answered yes in question F above, did the illicit discharge result in an enforcement action? Yes No
If yes, what type of enforcement action(s) was taken (check all that apply):
Verbal warning Notice of violation Fines Criminal action
Civil penalties Other (describe):
Minimum Control Measure 4: Construction Site Stormwater Runoff [V.G.4] (*Required fields)
The permit requires that each permittee develop, implement, and enforce a program to reduce pollutants in any stormwater
runoff to your small MS4 from construction activities within your jurisdiction that result in a land disturbance of equal to or greater
than one acre, including the disturbance of less than one acre of total land area that is part of a larger common plan of
development or sale if the larger common plan will ultimately disturb one or more acres. [Part V.G.4.]
A. The permit requires an erosion and sediment control ordinance or regulatory mechanism that must include sanctions to
ensure compliance and contains enforcement mechanisms [Part V.G.4.a]. Indicate which of the following enforcement
mechanisms are contained in your ordinance or regulatory mechanism and the number of actions taken for each
mechanism used during the reporting period (enter “0” if the method was not used or “NA” if the data does not exist).
Check all that apply.
Enforcement mechanism Number of actions
Verbal warnings #
Notice of violation #
Administrative orders #
Stop-work orders #
Fines #
Forfeit of security of bond money #
Withholding of certificate of occupancy #
Criminal actions #
Civil penalties #
Other: #
B. *Have you developed written procedures for site inspections? Yes No
C. *Have you developed written procedures for site enforcement? Yes No
D. *Identify the number of active construction sites greater than an acre in your jurisdiction during
the reporting period year:
E. *On average, how frequently are construction sites inspected (e.g., weekly, monthly, etc.)?
F. *How many inspectors, at any time, did you have available to verify erosion and sediment control
compliance at construction sites during the reporting period:
www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-06 • 1/23/2013 Page 4 of 5
Minimum Control Measure 5: Post-construction Stormwater Management in New Development
and Redevelopment [V.G.5] (*Required fields)
The permit requires each permittee to develop, implement, and enforce a program to address stormwater runoff from new
development and redevelopment projects within your jurisdiction that disturb an area greater than or equal to one acre, including
projects less than one acre that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale that discharge into your small MS4. Your
program must ensure that controls are in place that would prevent or reduce water quality impacts. You must also select and
implement a program of appropriate BMPs and measurable goals for this minimum control measure.
Note: The MS4 permit requirements associated with this minimum control measure were required to be fully developed and
implemented by June 30, 2008.
A. *Have you established design standards for stormwater treatment BMPs installed as a result of
post-construction requirements?
Yes No
B. *Have you developed procedures for site plan review which incorporate consideration of water
quality impacts?
Yes No
C. *How many projects have you reviewed during the reporting period to ensure adequate long-term
operation and maintenance of permanent stormwater treatment BMPs installed as a result of
post-construction requirements? [Part V.G.5.b.and Part V.G.5.c].
D. *Do plan reviewers use a checklist when reviewing plans? Yes No
E. *How are you funding the long-term operation and maintenance of your stormwater management
system? (Check all that apply)
Grants Stormwater utility fee Taxes Other:
Minimum Control Measure 6: Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal
Operations [V.G.6] (*Required fields)
The permit requires each MS4 to develop and implement an operation and maintenance program that includes a training
component and has the ultimate goal of preventing or reducing pollutant runoff from municipal operations. Your program must
include employee training to prevent and reduce stormwater pollution from activities, such as park and open space maintenance,
fleet and building maintenance, new construction and land disturbances, and stormwater system maintenance.
A. *Indicate the total number of structural pollution control devices (for example-grit chambers, sumps,
floatable skimmers, etc.) within your MS4, the total number that were inspected during the
reporting period, and calculate the percent inspected. Enter “0” if your MS4 does not contain
structural pollution control devices or none were inspected. Enter “NA” if the data does not exist:
*Total number *Number inspected *Percentage
*Structural pollution control devices:
B. *Did you repair, replace, or maintain any structural pollution control devices? Yes No
C. *For each BMP below, indicate the total number within your MS4, how many of each BMP type
were inspected and the percent inspected during the reporting period. Enter “0” if your MS4
does not contain BMPs or none were inspected. Enter “NA” if the data does not exist:
Structure/Facility type *Total number *Number inspected *Percentage
*Outfalls to receiving waters:
*Sediment basins/ponds:
*Total
D. Of the BMPs inspected in C. above, did you include any privately owned BMPs in that number? Yes No
E. If yes in D. above, how many:
Section 7: Impaired Waters Review (*Required fields)
The permit requires any MS4 that discharges to a Water of the State, which appears on the current U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) approved list of impaired waters under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, review whether changes to the
SWPPP may be warranted to reduce the impact of your discharge [Part IV.D].
A. *Does your MS4 discharge to any waters listed as impaired on the state 303 (d) list? Yes No
B. *Have you modified your SWPPP in response to an approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)? Yes No
If yes, indicate for which TMDL:
www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-06 • 1/23/2013 Page 5 of 5
Section 8: Additional SWPPP Issues (*Required fields)
A. *Did you make a change to any BMPs or measurable goals in your SWPPP since your last
report? [Part VI.D.3.]
Yes No
B. If yes, briefly list the BMPs or any measurable goals using their unique SWPPP identification
numbers that were modified in your SWPPP, and why they were modified: (Attach a separate
sheet if necessary.)
C. *Did you rely on any other entities (MS4s, consultants, or contractors) to implement any portion
of your SWPPP? [Part VI.D.4.]
Yes No
If yes, please identify them and list activities they assisted with:
Owner or Operator Certification (*Required fields)
The person with overall administrative responsibility for SWPPP implementation and Permit compliance must certify this MS4
Annual Report. This person must be duly authorized and should be either a principal executive (i.e., Director of Public Works, City
Administrator) or ranking elected official (i.e., Mayor, Township Supervisor).
*Yes - I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the
information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly
responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true,
accurate, and complete (Minn. R. 7001.0070). I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false
information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment (Minn. R. 7001.0540).
*Name of certifying official:
*Title: *Date:
(mm/dd/yyyy)
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
5E.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2013-050acceptingquotesandawarding
contractforthe2013StreetPavementMarkingProject (BP/TM)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
Councilisrequestedtoconsideracceptingquotesandawardingacontractforthe2013
StreetPavementMarkingProject.The2013projecttotalsapproximately16,721linear
feetofpavementmarkings.ThestreetstobestripedareSchoolBoulevard(fromDeegan
AvenuetoRedfordLane),andMeadowOakAvenue(fromEastBroadwaytoFenning
Avenue).Thesestreetsarescheduledtobechipsealedthisyearsothepavement
markingswillbecovered.TheothertwoareasincludedareChelseaRoadWest(from
90th StreettoCSAH39West)thecenterline,andportionsofRiverStreetforabikepath.
TheareaofRiverStreet,whichwasadvertisedintheRequestforProposals(RFP)is
asked not tobeconsideredatthistime.Thisareawillbeconsideredin2014when
signagewillbeplacedfortheGreatRiverBikeTrail.
PublicWorksadvertisedforquotesforArea1whichcoversportionsofSchool
Boulevard,MeadowOakAvenueandChelseaRoadandArea2whichcoversportionsof
RiverStreettobeopenedonJune19,2013.Atotalofone(1)quotewasreceivedfrom
AAAStripingServiceCo.ofSt.Michael,MN.Area1wasquotedat$3,116.81and
Area2wasquotedat$899.13;however,Area2is not beingconsideredatthistimeand
willbeconsideredin2014whenthesignagewillbeplacedfortheGreatRiverBike
Trail.Thetotalcostforthe2013PavementMarkingProjectwillbe$3,116.81.
A1.BudgetImpact:Inpreparationforthisproject,sufficientfundswereplacedin
the2013StreetDepartmentBudget.Theportionoftheprojectcoveredunderthis
amountwillbeallofthestreetslistedinArea1asdescribedabove.
A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Aprojectofthissizenormallytakesoneday.The
projectwillbeinspectedbytheCityEngineeringDepartment.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.MotiontoadoptResolution#2013-050acceptingthequoteforthepavement
markingprojectandawardingthecontracttoAAAStripingServiceCo.ofSt.
Michael,MNintheamountof$3,116.81forArea1ofthe2013StreetPavement
MarkingProject.
2.Motiontodenythequotesandnotawardthecontractatthistime.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
CitystaffrecommendstheCityCouncilapproveAlternative#1,acceptingthequoteand
awardingthecontracttoAAAStripingServiceCo.ofSt.Michael,MNintheamountof
$3,116.81forArea1.ThePublicWorksDepartmentandEngineeringDepartmentwill
beinspectingtheprojecttoseethatthecontractoradherestotheplansandspecifications.
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
2
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
Resolution#2013-050
2013PavementMarkingProjectQuoteTabulation
2013PavementMarkingProjectMap
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
5F.Considerationofapprovinganapplicationfortemporaryon-saleliquorlicensefor
theMonticelloLionsClubfortheirBrewfesteventonAugust17,2013 (CS)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
TheMonticelloLionsClubisrequestingapprovalofanapplicationfora1-daytemporary
on-saleliquorlicenseonAugust17,2013fortheir2nd annualBrewfestevent.TheLions
ClubwillbesettinguptheeventinWestBridgePark,locatedat107WestRiverStreet.
TheLionsClubwillprovideacertificateofinsuranceforthisevent.TheLionsClubhas
alsosubmittedanapplicationforaspecialeventpermitforuseofWestBridgePark.
CityCouncilisrequiredtoapprovetemporaryliquorapplicationspriortosendingthem
totheStateAlcoholandGamblingDivisionforapproval.
A1.BudgetImpact:None
A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:MinimalstafftimetosendapplicationtoStateAlcohol
andGamblingDivisionforapproval.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.Motiontoapprovetheapplicationforatemporaryliquorlicenseforthe
MonticelloLionsonAugust17,2013atWestBridgePark,contingenton
receivingacertificateofliquorliabilityinsurance.
2.Donotapprovetheapplicationforatemporaryliquorlicense.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1forapprovaloftheapplication.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
Applicationfortemporaryliquorlicense
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
5G.ConsiderationofapprovingaSpecialEventPermitallowingexclusiveuseofWest
BridgeParkandrelatedassistanceinconjunctionwiththeBrewfesteventon
August17,2013.Applicant:MonticelloLionsClub (PW/AS)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
TheCityCouncilisaskedtoconsiderapprovalofaspecialeventpermitfortheBrewfest
event,acraftbeer-tastingfundraiserorganizedbytheMonticelloLionsClub.Therequest
hasseveralassociatedconsiderations:
a)ApprovalforuseofWestBridgeParkandcityparkinglotsinthe
downtownarea
b)Approvalforcitystaffassistanceforpreparationandset-up
Thisadult-orientedcommunityeventisproposedtooccurSaturday,August17th,2013,
from3to7p.m.,andisbeingpromotedandheldincooperationwitheligibleMinnesota
craftbrewvendorsandlocalfoodvendors.
Asitemapfrom2012illustratingtheproposedconfigurationofdisplayspacesis
includedinthesupportingdata.Brewfestrepresentativeshaveindicatedthattheset-up
fortheparkwillbeverysimilartolastyear’sevent,althoughtheorganizerswillplanfor
additionalvendorsoverlastyear’snumber.Asaconditionofapproval,afinalsiteplan
isrequested.
TheBrewfestCommitteeisseekingCityassistanceforprovidingbarricades,cones,
picnictables,andset-upofthoseitems.TheCommitteehasarrangedfordumpster
serviceandgarbagecartsandisalsoarrangingforportablebathroomstobebroughtinto
theParkfortheevent.
Asillustratedinthesiteplan,theeventisproposedtobelocatedinWestBridgePark.
EventattendeeswouldaccesstheParkfromdifferentlocationsnearby,withrestricted
pointsofentryintotheeventareaitself.Lastyear,shuttleservicetotheParkfrom
designatedlocationsatBuffaloWildWings,RiverCityExtremeandTheStationwas
provided.Noinformationonshuttleservicehasbeenprovidedwiththisyear’s
application.
Aswiththe2012event,PublicWorksstaffhasproposedaplantoblockoffsomestreets
intheareaofWestBridgeParkinordertocontroltrafficflowintoandoutofthepark
vicinity.AnyapprovaliscontingentoncoordinationwiththeStreetsDepartmentand
WrightCountySherriff’sOfficeforfinaltrafficcontrolandstreetclosures.
TheLionsClubisrequestingthatWestBridgeParkbeclosedfortheentiredaystarting
withset-upbyvolunteersonSaturdayat8a.m.andconcludingat8p.m.whichallows
timeforclean-upandtear-downbyLionsClubmembers.TheBrewfestCommittee
indicatesintheattachedapplicationthattheeventareawithintheparkwillbesectioned
offwithtemporaryfencinginordertorestrictthepointofentrytothoseover21yearsof
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
2
age,asthiseventwillbelimitedtoonlythosepersonsover21holdinganeventticket.
TheLionsClubwillberesponsibleforplacementoffencingaroundtheparkperimeter
andforsignageattheparkinglots,withsnowfenceandpostsprovidedbytheCityasis
available.Uponapprovalofthepermit,theStreetsDepartmentwillplaceasignatWest
BridgeParkindicatingthattheentireparkwillbeclosedforprivateuseonAugust17th
andtherewouldbenoaccesstotheparkplaygroundonAugust17th.
TheBrewfesteventwillincludeabandwithbluegrasstypeofmusicforbackground
listening.Itisnotanticipatedthatthiswouldcreateanyconcernsaboutsoundorvolume.
However,theLionsClubisbeingaskedtoprovideadvancenoticeoftheeventto
surroundinghomesandbusinesseswithina2-blockradius.
TheMonticelloLionsClubisrequiredtoobtaininsurancetocovertheeventandits
activities,includingliquorliabilitycoverage,withtheCitynamedassecondinsured.The
LionsClubisresponsibleforverifyingthatindividualfoodandbeveragevendorshave
theappropriateinsurancecoverageandstatepermits.TheLionsClubisexpectedto
providesecurityfortheeventthroughtheWrightCountySheriff’sDepartment.
Brewfestisdesignedtobeafundraiserforthisnon-profitorganization.Thegrouphas
indicatedthattheLionswereabletogivebackapproximately$22,000tothecommunity
asadirectresultoflastyear’sBrewfestevent.
A1.BudgetImpact:None.
A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:TheLionsClubisrequestingCityassistancefor
deliveryandpick-upofbarricades,cones,andpicnictables.Thesewillbe
deliveredtothesiteandpickedupduringregularstaffhoursbytheParks
Department(estimated16hours).TheStreetSuperintendentpreparedasiteplan
forbarricadeandconeplacementwhichisincludedinthesupportingdata.The
StreetsDepartmentwillberesponsibleforplacingandremovingallstreet
barricadesandsignage(estimated12hours).
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.MotiontoapprovetheSpecialEventPermitallowingtemporaryuseofWest
BridgeParkfortheMonticelloLionsBrewfesteventfrom8a.m.to8p.m.on
Saturday,August17,2013,includingCityassistanceasdescribedinthestaff
reportofJune24th,2013;contingenton:
a.Finalsiteplansubmittalandcontinuedsiteplancoordinationwiththe
StreetSuperintendentandParkSuperintendent.
b.AppropriatesignageandfencingincoordinationwiththeStreetandPark
Superintendents.
c.Verificationofnotificationofaffectedlocalbusinessesandresidents
withina2-blockradiusoftheParkbypermitholderstartingJuly29th.
(Cityprovidingnamesandaddresses)
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
3
d.ProvideaCertificateofInsurancefortheevent,includingliquorand
generalliability,withtheCitynamedasasecondinsured.
2.MotiontodenySpecialEventPermitforBrewfesteventonAugust17,2013.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
CitystaffsupportsAlternative#1above.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
A.Application&Narrative–LionsClub
B.WestBridgeParksitedrawing,2012
C.AerialSiteImageshowingproposedstreetandparkinglotclosures,2012
ONE
WAY
PATHWAY
CLOSED
A-FRAME
BARRICADEROADCLOSED
AHEAD
ROAD
CLOSED
ONE
WAY
ROADCLOSED
AHEAD
ROADCLOSED
AHEAD
A
-
F
R
A
M
E
B
A
R
R
I
C
A
D
E
A-FRAMEBARRICADE A-FRAMEBARRICADE
A-FRAMEBARRICADE
ROADCLOSEDTO
THRUTRAFFIC ROAD
CLOSED
AHEAD
ROADCLOSEDAHEAD
LOTCLOSEDFORBREWFEST
BREW-FESTPARKING
2012MONTICELLO
BREW-FEST
RIVERSTW.
RIVERSTE.
CEDARST
BROADWAYSTE.
BROADWAYSTW.
WALNUTST
FRONTST
LINNST
LINNST
3RDSTW.
WALNUTST
HWY25
HWY25
WESTBRIDGEPARK
EASTBRIDGEPARK
RIVERSTW.
BROADWAYSTW.
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
5H.ConsiderationofapprovingaSpecialEventPermitallowinguseofcitystreetsand
relatedassistancefortheDowntownBlockPartyonJuly10,2013.Applicant:
MonticelloChamber (AS)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
TheCityCouncilisaskedtoconsiderapprovalofaspecialeventpermitfortheDowntown
BlockParty,occurringonWednesday,July10,2013.Aspartoftheapproval,theCity
CouncilisaskedtoconsidertheclosureofWalnutStreet,theuseofthe3rd Streetparkinglot,
andrelatedCityassistanceandequipmentfortrafficcontrolandeventamenities.
ThePartnersforDowntown,undertheumbrellaoftheChamberofCommerce,are
requestingtheclosureinordertocoordinatetheirannualDowntownMonticelloBlock
Party,whichwillbepromotedandheldincooperationwiththedowntownbusinesses.
ThispubliccommunityeventisproposedtooccurWednesdayeveningduringtheweek
ofRiverfest.
Similartopreviousyears,therequestincludestheclosureofWalnutStreetbetween
BroadwayWestandThirdStreet.Theeventwillutilizetheentirerightofway,including
portionsoftheboulevardinfrontofWalnutStreetbusinessesinthatarea.Theapplicant
hasrequestedthatthestreetbeclosedbetween7:00AMand10:00PMtoaccommodate
volunteerset-upandtake-downbeforeandaftertheevent.Theeventitselfwilloccur
from4:30PMto9:00PM.
Asitemapillustratingtheproposedconfigurationofactivities,includingclosurepoints,
isincludedandwaspreviouslydevelopedincooperationwiththeMonticelloStreets
Superintendent.
ThePublicWorksDepartmenthasbeenrequestedtotakeresponsibilityforprovidingthe
barricadesandconesandwillreviewfinalbarricadeplacement.PublicWorkswillalso
notifyWrightCountyoftheWalnutStreetclosure,asitisclosedattheintersectionof
CountyHighway75.TemporarysignagesignalingthisclosurewillbeplacedalongWest
Broadway/CountyHighway75duringtheevent.
TheeventorganizershaveindicatedthattheyhavealsocontactedtheWrightCounty
Sheriff’sOfficeregardingtheevent.Theeventwillbestaffedbyoneofficerfromthe
Sheriff’sOffice,wellastworeserveofficers.
ThePartnersforDowntownarealsorequestingCouncilapprovalforuseofthemunicipal
parkinglotsalong3rd Streetforeventactivities.Aspartofthestreetclosureandparking
lotuse,thegroupisalsoseekingCityassistanceforprovidingandplacingpicnictables
andgarbagecansfortheevent.
Eventorganizershaveobtainedinsurancetocovertheeventanditsactivitieswiththe
Citynamedassecondinsured.
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
2
ThepropertyandbusinessownersalongthissectionofWalnutStreetwillberequiredto
becontactedabouttheBlockParty.
TheBlockPartywasdevelopedasawaytopromoteDowntownMonticelloasa
communitydestinationforalocaleventthatcanbringpeopleoutoftheirhomesandinto
thecoredowntownofthecity,sponsoredbythebusinesscommunityandorientatedto
familysocialactivitiesforlocalfellowshipandgathering.
A1.BudgetImpact:None.
A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Staffimpactsareasnotedaboveandincludedrop-off
andpickupofbarricades,picnictablesandtrash/recyclingreceptaclesduring
PublicWorksnormalbusinesshours.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.MotiontoapprovetheSpecialEventPermitallowingtemporaryclosingof
WalnutStreetfrom7:00AMuntil10:00PM.onWednesday,July10 th,2013,
includingtheuseofpublicparkingfacilitiesandamenitiesasdescribed,
contingenton:
a.Paymentandsignedpermitapplication.
b.ContinuedsitecoordinationwithStreetSuperintendent.
c.Verificationofnotificationofaffectedlocalbusinessesbypermitholder.
2.MotiontodenytheSpecialEventPermitfortemporaryclosureofWalnutStreet
anduseofpublicfacilitiesandamenitiesasdescribed.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
CitystaffsupportsthePartnersforDowntown’seffortsandrecommendsAlternative#1
above.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
ApplicationforSpecialEvent
ApplicationNarrative
SitePlans
CertificateofInsurance
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
5J.ConsiderationofapprovingSpecialEventPermitallowinguseofEllisonParkand
relatedassistanceinconjunctionwithArtinthePark/TasteofMonticelloon
Saturday,July13,2013.Applicant:MonticelloChamberofCommerce (AS/PW)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
TheCityCouncilisaskedtoconsiderapprovalofuseofEllisonPark,aswellasrelated
Cityassistanceforparkset-up,fortheArtintheParkandtheTasteofMonticelloevent.
TheeventiscoordinatedbytheMonticelloChamberofCommerceandisproposedto
occuronSaturday,July13,2013.
Theeventhoursare8AMto3PM.However,theChamberofCommerceisrequesting
useoftheparkbeginningat5:00AM.Althoughthenarrativedoesnotrequesttear-
downtimeafter3:00PM,thattimeiscustomarilyaccountedforaspartofevent
approval.Assuch,theeventapprovalwouldallowuseoftheparkforthiseventfrom
5:00AMto5:00PM.
TheChamberhasindicatedthatitwillberesponsibleforset-upandtear-downrelatedto
theevent,andwillproviderequiredportablesatellitesandwastedisposalservices.The
Chambercoversthecostofthosefacilitiesforthisevent,althoughtheywillalreadybein
placeaspartoftheRiverfestevent.TheChamberwillalsocoordinatewiththeSheriff’s
Departmentfortrafficcontrolandsecuritypurposes.
CityPublicWorksstaffhaspreviouslybeeninvolvedwithassistinginparkpreparation,
Therequestistoallowsuchassistance,alongwithwaiverofparkrentalfeetocontinue
for2013.
A1.BudgetImpact:Thereisthepotentialforaminorlossofrevenueforparkrental
forthedateArtinthePark/TasteofMonticellooccursatEllison.Noother
budgetimpactisanticipated.
A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:TheParksDepartmentstaffwillassistduringtheweek
priortotheeventpreparingforthisactivity,inadditiontootherRiverfest
activitiesplannedforEllisonPark.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.MotiontoapprovetheSpecialEventPermitallowinguseofEllisonParkand
relatedassistanceinconjunctionwiththeArtinthePark/TasteoftheTown
celebrationonJuly13,2013asdescribedinthestaffreportofJune24 th,2013,
subjecttosubmissionofacertificateofgeneralliabilitycoveragewiththeCity
namedasadditionalinsured.
2.MotiontodenytheSpecialEventPermit.
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
2
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
CitystaffsupportsAlternative#1infavoroftheSpecialEventpermitforArtinthe
Park/TasteofMonticello.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
ArtinthePark/TasteofMonticelloapplication
EDAAgenda:06/24/13
1
5K.ConsiderationofapprovingacontractwithWSB&AssociatestoprovideMarket
MatchingEconomicDevelopmentServices (JO/WO/AS)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
TheCityCouncilisaskedtoapproveandenterintoacontractwithWSB&Associates
forMarketMatchingEconomicDevelopmentServices.Thisactionisrequestedas
follow-uptorecentEDAactiontofund50%ofthecostoftheserviceasproposedbythe
CityCouncil.
TheCityCouncilandEDAhaveconductedtwoworkshopstoexploretheMarket
MatchingconceptproposedbyWSB&Associates.Followingthesecondworkshop,
heldinMay,theEDAauthorizedthepreparationofacontractforservicesoutliningthe
termsandconditionsassociatedwiththeMarketMatchingproposal.OnMay13 th,2013,
theCityCouncilsimilarlyauthorizedpreparationofacontractforservices,alongwithan
allocationof50%oftheannualcostoftheprogram,includingarequestthattheEDApay
theother50%.Inturn,onJune12th,theEDAadoptedtheattachedcontractforservices
andvotedinsupportofthe50%oftherequiredcontractfundingasproposedbytheCity
Council.The2013GeneralFundbudgetincludes$80,000foreconomicdevelopment
activitiesasatransfertotheEDAFund.Thefundingforbothshareswilllikelycome
fromthe$80,000.Thedistributionoftheexpensebetweenthetwofundshasyettobe
determined.AllthatisleftnowisfortheCityCounciltoconsiderapprovalofthe
contractasadoptedbytheEDA.
ThecontractpreparedbyWSB&Associatesincludesasummarizationofthekey
deliverablesfortheMarketMatchingconceptandatimelineforthecompletionofeach.
ThecontractisfurthersupportedbythefullEconomicDevelopmentServicesscope,
(datedApril,2013)asanaddendum.
Inadditiontotheseimportantitems,thecontractoutlinesadditionaltasksnotdirectly
referencedintheEconomicDevelopmentServicesscope.Theseincludethe
developmentofmarketingcollateralmaterials,adefinedsetofmembershipsinexternal
organizationsandthelevelofWSBparticipation,scheduleandframeworkforreporting,
presentationanddemonstrationofInfoTrackertostakeholderorganizations,andthe
requirementthattheeconomicdevelopmentrepresentativeattendCityPhaseI&IIpre-
designmeetings.InregardtothePhaseIandPhaseIIattendancerequirements,WSB
representativeshaveavestedinterestinfacilitatingsmoothdevelopment,asthe
reputationoftheCityofMonticelloandassociatedMarketMatchingprogramdependson
thedeliveryofcommitmentsmadeattheprospectingstage.Duetothismotivating
factor,theWSBrepresentativewillbeengagedinthedevelopmentprocesstosome
degreefrombeginningtotheend,notjustthePhaseIandPhaseII,withthelevelof
involvementcorrelatingwiththecomplexityoftheproject.
Inadditiontotheoutlineforactualmarketingandsalesactivities,thecontractprovides
detailontheoperationaltermsofthepartnership,including:
2
Termofcontractandcontractextensionrights
Terminationrights
Costsforservicesoutsidethescopeofthecontract
ItshouldbenotedthatbothBigLakeandStMichaelhavebeencontactedbyWSB
regardingmarketmatchingservices;however,itisnotknownifeithercommunity
issigningup.
Additionalbackgroundinformationonthistopiccanbefoundintheattachments
provided.
Followingisare-statementofthereasonsforconsiderationofsupportforthemarket
matchingconceptmentionedduringpreviousworkshops.
ItisrecognizedthatWSBwillbedeployingthemarketmatchingconceptinother
communitiesovertime.BeingpartofapoolofcommunitiesmarketedviaWSB
viathisconceptisapositivefeatureoftheprogramasbusinessprospectsare
morelikelytoutilizeWSBforassistancewithsiteselectionifWSBhasavariety
ofoptionstopresenttoprospects.Thisconceptispredicatedonthebeliefthatthe
presenceestablishedforMonticelloviamarketmatching,andconcurrentpotential
reachingawideraudienceofprospectsthatareagoodmatchwithMonticello,
outweighsconcernsaboutcompetingwithothercommunitiesinthesamepool.
ThisisbecauseMonticelloiscompetingwiththesecommunitiesanyway.
TheproductistailoredtoMonticello’sneedsandtheevolvingideaofasales-
basedeconomicdevelopmentstrategy.
Theprogrambuildsanimportantfoundationofinventoryandassetinformation
thattheCitywouldpaytocreateaboveandbeyondthesalarypaidtoastaff
personforexclusivesales-relatedactivities.Thecosttocreatetheinventoryas
describedcouldlikelycosttheCitythousandsofdollarsandwouldneedtobe
completedpriortoanysalesactivityforaneweconomicdevelopmentposition.
TheuseofconsultingservicesallowstheCitytocontractforaspecifictimeframe.
TheCitycanterminatethecontractifitfindsthatitisnotmeetingintendedgoals.
Thesystemsforcollectingandreportingdatathatisincludedinthemonthlyfee
wouldnotbewastedandcouldbeusedbyafuturecityemployeeiftheWSB
programisdiscontinued.
TheuseofcontractservicesallowstheCitytodeterminethesuccessofasales-
focusedapproachforeconomicdevelopment,withoutbeinglockedintothe
creationofastaffposition.TheCitycanthenassesstheresultsofboththe
contractandthenewsalesapproach.
Staffwasstrugglingwiththeissuesofincentives,commission-basedsalaryand
expensegenerationwhichwouldcomewiththecreationofacity-employed
economicdevelopmentsalesperson.Duetopayequityrequirementsand
statutorylimitationsrelatedtotheuseofpublicfunds,atruesales-basedposition
couldbedifficulttostructure.
Asanewproduct,WSBhasindicatedthatadditionaltailoringoftheservicecan
bemadetomeetMonticello’sneeds.
3
Thecosttoimplementthesales-basedapproachthroughconsultingservicesis
lessthantheCitywouldlikelyneedtopaytogeneratetheequivalenttask
productsnotedabove.
Usingaconsultingserviceforleaddevelopmentandinitialleadresponsewill
allowexistingcitystafftofocustheirattentiononcontinuedcommunity
marketingandbusinessretentionefforts.
Citystaffwillbeactivelyinvolvedinworkingwithprospectsastheydevelopand
movethroughthedecisionprocess.Existingstaffandconsultants(Ehlers,
Kennedy&Graven,NorthlandSecurities)willalsocontinuetheirrolesin
supportingthedevelopmentoffinancialandlegalpackagesnecessaryforany
transaction.
ItisrecognizedthatMarketMatchingisoneelementoftheCity’seconomicdevelopment
program.MarketMatchingcouldalsobepairedwithalargermarketingprogram
intendedtocastanevenwidernet.Thisprogramcouldbedevelopedaspartof2014
budgetingprocess.
Inaddition,throughexistingstaff,theChamberofCommerce,andtheIEDC,theCity
willneedtomaintainstrongconnectionswithlocalbusinessesinordertomeetthe
ComprehensivePlan’sgoalofnotonlyattracting,butretainingjobs.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.MotiontoapprovetheproposedcontractforservicesbetweentheCityof
MonticelloandWSB&AssociatesforMarketMatching,includingfunding50%
ofthetotalannualexpenseof$48,000($24,000)bytheCityCouncil,subjectto
contractrevisionsassuggestedbytheCityCouncil.
2.MotiontodenytheproposedcontractforservicesbetweentheCityofMonticello
andWSB&AssociatesforMarketMatching.
3.MotiontotableforfurtherresearchanddiscussionasdirectedbytheCity
Council.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
StaffrecommendsAlternative#1.Staffbelievesthecontract,withtheEconomic
DevelopmentServicesproposalasanaddendum,providesasolidfoundationfor
administrationofWSB’sproposedservices.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
ProposedWSBEconomicDevelopmentServicesContractwithaddendumofMarket
Matchingproposal
WSB & Associates, Inc.
4140 Thielman Lane
Suite 204
St. Cloud, MN 56301
wsbeng.com
WSB & Associates, Inc.
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
wsbeng.com
WSB & Associates, Inc.
477 Temperance Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
wsbeng.com
Table of Contents
Contact:
John Uphoff
763.267.2942
juphoff@wsbeng.com
A proposal to provide:
April 2013
Economic Development Economic Development
ServicesServices
Approach and Scope of Services .......................................1
• Task 1: Data Collection
• Task 2: Market Matching
Deliverables .....................................................................4
Appendix A - Data Collection ...........................................8
Appendix B - Data Deployment.......................................10
Appendix C - InfoTracker ................................................11
Appendix D - Market Matching Team .............................12
Appendix E - Market Matching Sales Process ...................15
April 17, 2013
Monticello City Council and EDA
City of Monticello
505 Walnut Street
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: Economic Development Services
Dear Members of the City Council and EDA:
Thank you for taking time to discuss WSB’s proposal to provide Economic Development services. For
more than 17 years, WSB and the City of Monticello have enjoyed a success by partnering to deliver
projects that have led to growth and prosperity. We are confident the addition of Economic
Development services will continue this track record.
Understanding and directly marketing Monticello’s assets is at the heart of WSB’s approach to
economic development. Building relationships is the central tenet to success in directly marketing your
city. WSB has an expansive network of professional organizations and maintains relationships within
the development community. As part of our Economic Development services, we will continue to grow
our network and will strategically deploy data representing the unique attributes the City of Monticello
has to offer. In addition, WSB offers the full capacity of our Market Matching team and more than 170
team members in representing your community. Finally, we will utilize our expertise in community
development to assist in all phases of the development process from pre-application to identifying
potential funding opportunities. The Monticello EDA exists to direct goals and objectives to attract
higher wage level jobs and expand City tax base. WSB’s Economic Development service is aimed
directly at helping you achieve your City’s goals and objectives.
The proposed price of WSB’s Economic Development services is $4,000 per month with a minimum
term of one year. We appreciate the opportunity to propose our services to fill this important role
within your community. We further look forward to meeting with you to discuss firsthand how WSB
can apply its capacity and expertise to help the City of Monticello continue to grow and prosper.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
John Uphoff Brian J. Bourassa, PE
Economic Development Specialist Principal/Senior Project Manager/
(320) 534-5951 Economic Development Specialist
(763) 287-8356
1Approach and Scope of Services
Approach and Scope of Services
Introduction
WSB & Associates has been in the economic development business for 17 years. We
represent more than 35 cities as city engineer and perform services for more than 90
cities overall. We provide daily assistance to our clients in the area of infrastructure
development related to growth opportunities in all types of development. Much of this
work is related to how to best accommodate new development while respecting the
needs of the existing system users and being fair from a cost and use perspective. It is
beneficial to WSB when our clients are successful and are developing. We work hard
to make sure that we represent our clients with their best interest first, knowing that
what is good for our clients will be good for WSB. To that end, we get involved with
short term strategies that will allow for development to occur without compromising the
long term goals of the city. We are very strategic in finding funding for infrastructure
projects that allow City funds to be used in other places of need.
Our company has grown beyond the traditional engineering firm in an effort to
recognize the benefits of economic development to our clients and to WSB. We have
become active in local chambers, economic development groups and have developed
relationships with many of the large developers and builders. Once these private
organizations work with WSB, they appreciate how hard we work to make their project
successful while preserving the needs and goals of the City. Additionally, we have
developed a grant and funding program to provide searchable options for project
funding. We have expanded our team to include community planning to complement
our full array of services including engineering, environmental, survey, right of way
and relocation. This most recent addition of economic development was necessary to
complete our team approach to provide full services to our clients. We intend to team
with the financial consultants when a deal requires funding analysis, but we have the
resources to fulfill all of the other economic development analysis and support.
WSB is continually improving in order to provide value to our clients and economic
development is an obvious area that we can contribute to your success. Our vision
for this effort is unique and focused on relationships, information and visibility. The
following scope details how we will make an impact for your organization!
2Approach and Scope of Services
Task 1: Data Collection
During this task, WSB will analyze existing data related to Monticello’s market sectors.
We will examine the data that is available on the City’s website as well as related city,
county, and state-based economic development websites. We will also examine internal
documents containing market data. Once we have completed our analysis, we will
report our findings to City staff and the EDA.
Based on our report, we will ask for a recommendation from the EDA to determine
priority for data collection and for targeted prospects. Where data is incomplete or
unavailable, WSB will research and compile new data sets to ensure all local market
sectors are appropriately represented and the information is readily available (see
Appendix A - Data Collection).
To ensure the City’s market data is readily available, WSB will deploy information
where appropriate including the City’s website, local economic development websites,
GreaterMSP and MNDEED’s customer relationship management systems. WSB will
also utilize a GIS-based platform to deploy the City’s market data during the Market
Matching process (see Appendix B - Data Deployment).
The dynamic nature of market data requires a built-in process of content management
to ensure accuracy and relevance. Therefore, WSB proposes a system of periodic review
which includes real-time updates. To support the real-time updates, WSB has developed
the InfoTracker tool, which is made available to City staff and EDA (see Appendix C -
InfoTracker).
The deliverables provided in Task 1 include the following and are further described on
pages 4 and 5.
• Deliverable 1: Market Data Report
• Deliverable 2: New Data Sets (ongoing)
• Deliverable 3: Data Deployment (ongoing)
• Deliverable 4: System of Periodic Review of Market Data (ongoing)
• Deliverable 5: InfoTracker (ongoing)
Task 2: Market Matching
The focus of Task 2 is to strategically and directly market Monticello’s assets to
prospective market entrants. WSB achieves this by utilizing our team’s professional
background and network to connect with prospects within our varied areas of expertise.
The Market Matching team executes outreach to prospects through our Market Matching
Network. Each member of WSB’s Market Matching team is assigned to a market
sector and systematically markets the City’s assets within their respective network (see
Appendix D - Market Matching Team).
Also during Task 2, WSB’s Market Matching team collects feedback from prospects
and catalogs opportunities in our Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system.
Prospects that become leads are moved into the development or pre-application process
involving City staff, EDA, and consultants (see Appendix E).
The deliverables provided in Task 2 include the following and are further described on
page 5.
• Deliverable 6: Profile of targeted prospects (ongoing)
• Deliverable 7: System of targeted prospect outreach (ongoing)
• Deliverable 8: Deliver leads/assist in closing (ongoing)
3Approach and Scope of Services
Asset Identification/Market Review - Task 1
1. General Market Data
2. City & EDA Owned
Property
3. Housing
4. Manufacturing and
Industrial Market Data
5. Retail Market Data
Build-out/Update Asset Database - Task 1
1. GIS-Based with Web
Access
2. Traditional Collateral
Information Deployment
- Task 2
1. Direct Marketing
2. Deliver Leads
3. Provide Feedback
4. Customer Relationship
Management (CRM)
Market Matching Network - Task 2
Positively MN
Greater MSP Investor
MN Precision
Manufacturing Association
NAIOP
MN High Tech Association
Minnesota Shopping Center
Association
Wright County Economic
Development Partnership
St. Cloud Downtown
Alliance Foundation
Greater St. Cloud
Development Corporation
MN Chamber
More
This chart describes WSB’s unique and comprehensive approach to economic
development. WSB strives to present relevant asset information in the most
effective and strategic manner possible. The graphic represents the ongoing flow of
information and the continuous process of data management and market matching.
4Deliverables
Deliverables
Task 1: Data Collection
Deliverable 1: Market Data Report
WSB will provide City staff and EDA with a report that analyses the inventory and
availability of the City’s market data. The Market Data report will tell you if the assets
embedded in your community are well defined and if the information related to your
community’s assets is open and accessible. The report will identify any weakness in the
identification and/or presentation of your community’s assets. If any asset is found to
be misidentified or underrepresented, the report will provide details for recommended
corrective action. This report will is also aimed at determining the City’s Unique
Selling Proposition (USP). The end result is your community’s enhanced ability to help
existing businesses expand, as well as attract, and communicate with, a wider array of
prospective developers and business owners.
Deliverable 2: New Data Sets
The collection of new data sets is prioritized based on recommendations from the EDA.
The goal of this deliverable is to achieve maximum effectiveness for data availability
and diffusion. WSB will collect and organize data from existing sources and will
conduct independent research to obtain data that is not otherwise available. It is
important to note that the process of research and data collection is ongoing and is
rolled into the system of periodic review.
Deliverable 3: Data Deployment
Data deployment occurs on a macro level - local, regional, and state-wide websites
and databases, and on a micro level - through the direct marketing efforts of WSB’s
Market Matching team. As part of this process, WSB will provide data to GreaterMSP
and MNDEED as requested, provide content for the City’s websites, develop a GIS-
based reporting tool, and provide a quarterly report to City staff and EDA on the status
of data deployment.
Deliverable 4: System of Periodic Review of Market Data
City staff and the EDA review the Market Data Report and prioritize data collection
efforts. WSB organizes a system of periodic review based on recommendations it
receives from City staff and EDA. The figure on page 6 is a sample of the market data
review and deployment timeline.
5Deliverables
Deliverable 5: InfoTracker
City staff and EDA are often the first to become aware of changes in the marketplace.
WSB will provide City staff and EDA with access to the InfoTracker tool, which provides
the means to quickly and easily hand-off information to WSB so our team can update
market data in a highly expedited manner. Please see Appendix C for a detailed
description of the InfoTracker tool.
Task 2: Market Matching
Deliverable 6: Profi le of Targeted Prospects
Upon completion of the Market Data Report, WSB will ask the EDA for priority in
determining a profile of targeted prospects. The profile of targeted prospects is
derived from the City’s asset information. WSB will utilize the City’s asset information
to highlight market strengths and to determine Monticello’s USP. WSB recommends
reviewing the profile of targeted prospects on a semiannual basis.
Deliverable 7: System of Targeted Prospect Outreach
Once the City’s USP and profile of targeted prospects is developed, WSB’s Economic
Development Specialist briefs the Market Matching Team, providing them with
relevant market data. Then the Market Matching Team will begin the process of
converting prospects to leads through direct marketing to business contacts, association
networking activity, responding to inquiries, and actively pursuing opportunities
through various economic development agencies. WSB will provide the EDA with a
quarterly report on targeted prospect outreach activity.
Deliverable 8: Deliver Leads/Assist in Closing
The closing component of the Market Matching process is a culmination of the
successful execution of the steps that preceded it. WSB will work directly with potential
market entrants from the prospecting phase to the pre-application or development
phase. We will act as a conduit to provide information to City staff/EDA and act as a
resource in identifying potential constraints. WSB will aid in identifying potential sites,
and act as a resource in implementing a funding package as needed.
6Deliverables
Deliverable 9: Annual Bus Tour
WSB places a high value on the importance of face-to-face interaction. Your
community has a sense of place that can only be fully realized from an on-the-ground
point of view. The annual bus tour gives your community the opportunity to show the
best you have to offer and provides you an opportunity to promote your community’s
assets directly to potential market entrants. WSB’s Market Matching team identifies
and invites developers and business owners who are active in your region as well
as those who are operating elsewhere but who have expressed interest in opening
your market. We take care of all of the logistics, allowing you to refine and tailor
your outreach to maximize your impact. The relationship your community makes
with potential market entrants pays instant dividends, and also serves as a valuable
resource for years to come.
Deliverable 10: Annual Open House
Economic Gardening is quickly becoming a buzz phrase. This concept is born out
of the idea that economic growth happens brick by brick, primarily with those who
are already living and doing business in your community. These are firms that have
roots in your community and view the world around them, not simply through the
lens of profitability, but also with an eye toward overall success of their community.
The vitality of these firms is extremely important in realizing positive sustainable
socioeconomic conditions. WSB’s Economic Development service aims to support the
firms and developers who are already doing business in your community. In addition
to collaborating with local business owners and developers during the asset analysis
phase, the Market Matching team gathers local operators for an annual open house
to review the state of the local markets, as well as to provide them with opportunities
to network with potential investors. The open house facilitates an intersection of
landowners, business owners, and developers allowing them to share relevant market
information leading to increased investment opportunities.
7Market Data Review and Deployment Timeline
20
1
3
20
1
4
AC
T
I
V
I
T
Y
AN
A
L
Y
Z
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
D
A
T
A
A
P
R
M
A
Y
J
U
N
J
U
L
A
U
G
S
E
P
O
C
T
N
O
V
D
E
C
J
A
N
F
E
B
M
A
R
A
P
R
M
A
Y
MA
R
K
E
T
D
A
T
A
R
E
P
O
R
T
T
O
CI
T
Y
S
T
A
F
F
/
E
D
A
RE
C
O
M
M
E
N
D
E
D
P
R
I
O
R
I
T
Y
FO
R
N
E
W
D
A
T
A
S
E
T
S
GE
N
E
R
A
L
M
A
R
K
E
T
D
A
T
A
CI
T
Y
&
E
D
A
O
W
N
E
D
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
MA
N
U
F
A
C
T
U
R
I
N
G
&
IN
D
U
S
T
R
I
A
L
M
A
R
K
E
T
D
A
T
A
RE
T
A
I
L
M
A
R
K
E
T
D
A
T
A
DA
T
A
D
E
P
L
O
Y
M
E
N
T
**
HO
U
S
I
N
G
M
A
R
K
E
T
D
A
T
A
QU
A
R
T
E
R
L
Y
D
A
T
A
D
E
P
L
O
Y
M
E
N
T
RE
P
O
R
T
T
O
C
I
T
Y
S
T
A
F
F
/
E
D
A
Co
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s
U
p
d
a
t
e
s
(
i
n
f
o
t
r
a
c
k
e
r
)
Ne
w
D
a
t
a
S
e
t
s
PR
O
F
I
L
E
O
F
T
A
R
G
E
T
E
D
PR
O
S
P
E
C
T
S
SY
S
T
E
M
O
F
T
A
R
G
E
T
E
D
PR
O
S
P
E
C
T
O
U
T
R
E
A
C
H
DE
L
I
V
E
R
L
E
A
D
S
/
A
S
S
I
S
T
I
N
CL
O
S
I
N
G
RE
C
O
M
M
E
N
D
E
D
P
R
I
O
R
I
T
Y
FO
R
T
A
R
G
E
T
E
D
P
R
O
S
P
E
C
T
S
RE
V
I
E
W
O
F
T
A
R
G
E
T
E
D
PR
O
S
P
E
C
T
S
QU
A
R
T
E
R
L
Y
P
R
O
S
P
E
C
T
OU
T
R
E
A
C
H
R
E
P
O
R
T
Market Data Review and Deployment Timeline
8Appendix A - Data Collection
WSB recognizes that cities desire to move forward with marketing efforts as quickly as
possible. Based on our research, WSB understands that we must have a good deal
of information to be of value to prospects; they require market data. By providing a
preliminary report on the inventory and availability of market data, we are providing
City staff and the EDA with an opportunity to decide which market sector you would
like to place your focus and prioritize WSB’s data collection efforts.
It is important to note that the process of collecting and deploying data is ongoing.
The process of systematizing data collection carries added value in that it relieves the
City of the obligation to conduct expensive periodic market study projects. The Market
Data Report sheds light on the availability of critical data. It also aids in understanding
the community’s assets and informs the prospect identification and marketing process.
This list below is a sample of the market data likely to be requested by prospects, and
completed by WSB as part of the ongoing data collection effort:
General Market Data
• Population (MSA or County)
–Age distribution
• Annual per capita income
–Household Income
• Race and ethnicity
• Unemployment rate
• Cost of living index
• Quality of life
–Parks and trails
–School data
• Transportation and transit
Appendix A - Data Collection
City & EDA-Owned Property
• Available inventory
• Size (developable acres)
• Cost per acre
• Zoning requirement
–Uses permitted
• Setbacks
–Percent of site that may be utilized
–Control of nuisances (dust, smoke, noise, etc.)
–Site mitigation required
• Available incentives
• Inventory and list price of homes currently on the market
9Appendix A
• Infrastructure of manufacturing and industrial
areas
–Truck access
–Rail served or adjacent to a rail line
–On-site storage available
* Trailer
* Outdoor
–Distance to:
* Nearest commercial airport (name, miles)
* Nearest inland port (name, miles)
* Nearest ocean port (name, miles)
* Nearest rail spur (name, miles)
* Nearest intermodal facility (name, miles)
* Nearest state highway (name, miles)
* Nearest interstate exchange (name, miles)
• Utilities available in manufacturing and industrial
areas
–Electric (on-site: Y/N; capacity)
–Gas (on-site: Y/N; capacity)
–Sewer (on-site: Y/N; capacity)
–Water (on-site: Y/N; capacity)
–Data/voice/fiber (on-site: Y/N; capacity)
–Stormwater (on-site: Y/N; capacity)
–Utility consumption incentives (rate discounts,
hedging, etc.)
• Retail market data
–Synthesize data collected from previous retail
market analysis
Housing
• Age and condition of current housing stock
• Inventory and list price of homes currently on the market
• Housing values
• Renter-occupied units
• Senior housing
Manufacturing and Industrial
Market Data
• Existing available buildings
–Size of building (square feet)
–Cost per square foot
–Year built
–Previous use
–Condition of building
–Floor area ratio
–Suitability of building for manufacturing
–Current zoning
–Climate controlled
* Air conditioning
* Heat
–Surrounding uses
–Opportunity for expansion
• Existing available land
–Size (developable acres)
–Cost per acre
–Zoning requirement
* Uses permitted
* Setbacks
* Percent of site that may be utilized
* Control of nuisances (dust, smoke, noise, etc.)
* Site mitigation required
–Surrounding uses
10Appendix B - Data Deployment
Appendix B - Data Deployment
Market
Matching
The following are some of the locations where the City of Monticello’s market
information will be deployed:
11Appendix C - InfoTracker
Appendix C - InfoTracker
12Appendix D - Market Matching Team
Appendix D - Market Matching Team
John Uphoff
Economic Development Specialist
John is an economic development specialist with broad experience working with
communities and organizations to achieve their economic goals. He earned a
Bachelor of Arts degree in Planning and Community Development from St. Cloud
State University, where he also minored in Economics. John has direct experience in
the areas of local economic development, housing, historic preservation, promotion,
and marketing. He has served as the project manager on a downtown development
initiative and a neighborhood stabilization/communication plan in the historic South
Side Neighborhood, both located in St. Cloud.
John will be the City’s primary contact for WSB’s Economic Development Services
offering. He will lead the Asset Identification/Market Review and Asset Build-out
efforts, and coordinate the efforts of the Economic Development Team. John will
provide ongoing feedback to City staff regarding economic development opportunities
discovered and provide reports/presentations and feedback to the EDA on a bi-monthly
basis. Essentially, he will be an extension of City staff and will respond to both staff and
EDA requests for information as the City’s economic development expert.
(320) 534-5951
juphoff@wsbeng.com
WSB’s Economic Development Team includes the seven key individuals identified
below and is supported by the entire WSB Team. The key staff have numerous direct
connections to private sector businesses and development entities and have been
assigned to various trade associations and business networks. Their collective network
and emphasis on establishing economic development connections will raise the bar for
traditional municipal economic development activities and will deliver ongoing value
for the City of Monticello.
Brian Bourassa, PE
Principal, Senior Project Manager, Economic Development Specialist
Brian is a registered professional engineer with more than 20 years of experience
in many types of municipal and general civil engineering projects. His engineering
experience includes all phases of the project and has involved representation of both
public and private entities. Brian’s experience in the private development market
sector has included both residential and commercial projects. He also has first-hand
experience as a private developer. Brian is known for his focus on client needs and
excellent customer service.
Brian will take direction from John and identify and market to potential developer
matches for the City of Monticello. He will focus on both the commercial, senior
housing, and residential markets.
(763) 287-8536
bbourassa@wsbeng.com
13Appendix D - Market Matching Team
Jason Wedel, PE
Associate, Senior Project Manager, Economic Development Specialist
Jason is a Senior Project Engineer in our Municipal Group. He has proven managerial
expertise related to municipal engineering and land development. Jason’s experience
working as an in-house public works director/city engineer provides him with the
management level expertise to work cooperatively with City Councils, Advisory Boards,
and City staff at a high level. Jason also has experience working for a national home
building company (Pulte Homes) as their Director of Land. In that role, Jason performed
duties related to land acquisition, entitlement, and development, which gives him a
unique perspective and understanding of how developers and cities can collaborate to
develop mutually beneficial assets for the community. He is versed in public speaking,
administration, financial analysis, project estimating, resolving complicated entitlement
and design problems, document preparation, and site management.
Jason will take direction from John and identify and market to potential developer
matches for the City of Monticello. He will focus primarily on the residential market.
(763) 287-8520
jwedel@wsbeng.com
Morgan Dawley PE
Associate, Municipal Senior Project Engineer
Morgan is a registered professional engineer with nearly 20 years of experience
in municipal and civil engineering projects including streets, storm sewers, water
distribution systems, sanitary sewer systems, water and wastewater treatment, site
grading, park improvements, development review, and municipal state aid systems.
His current responsibilities include planning, coordination, design, and construction
administration of a wide variety of municipal projects. Morgan has been a staff or
consultant city engineer for the past 10 years.
Morgan will take direction from John and identify and market to potential developer
matches for the City of Monticello. He will focus on both the commercial and senior
housing markets.
(763) 287-7173
mdawley@wsbeng.com
()
14Appendix D - Market Matching Team
Kelsey Johnson, AICP
Community Planner, Grant and Funding Specialist
Kelsey is a community planner with extensive public sector experience. She has served
as the project manager and lead planner on land use plans, comprehensive land use
plan updates, zoning ordinance updates, subdivision regulation updates, housing
action plans, and small area studies. As a grant and funding specialist, Kelsey tracks
funding and grant opportunities for WSB.
Kelsey’s role on the Economic Development Team will be to support John and the City
in identifying potential funding opportunities to support development projects.
(763) 287-8521
kjohnson@wsbeng.com
Addison Lewis
Community Planner, Research Analyst
Addison brings a variety of experiences in working with local communities. He has a
passion for sustainability and is an adept researcher. Addison’s experience with working
on municipal planning projects and interpreting zoning and land use ordinances has
provided him with a unique perspective on the necessity of preparing realistic and
implementable plans.
Addison will support John with research during the Asset Identification/Market Review
tasks and on an ongoing basis.
(763) 231-4873
alewis@wsbeng.com
Bret Weiss, PE
President
Bret is a registered professional engineer with more than 25 years of diverse municipal
and general civil engineering experience. He is an accomplished city engineer and
project manager responsible for the planning, coordination, design, and construction
administration of a wide variety of municipal projects. Bret is a skilled negotiator and is
passionate about serving the City of Monticello.
Bret’s role on the Economic Development Team will be to support John in identifying
potential developer matches, make introductions of the other team members to key
stakeholders in the area, and be part of the City’s team regarding the developer
negotiation process.
(763) 287-7190
bweiss@wsbeng.com
15Appendix E - Market Matching Sales Process
Appendix E - Market Matching Sales Process
Potential Business Lead Generation
• City staff/EDA
• Business Contacts
• Association Networking Activity
• Economic Development Agency
Initial Market Matching
• Business discovery – client needs assessment
• Respond to a Request for Information - RFI
• Preliminary information exchanged and discussion regarding known community asset(s)
Follow-up Market Matching Presentation – if necessary
• Complete information exchanged regarding community assets
• Further business discovery and client needs assessment
Community Development Engagement
• Preliminary Project Review
• Letter of Intent – LOI
Community Development Process Review
• Site Plan Approval/Developer Agreement Process
• Project Review
–Planning
–Engineering
–Financial
–Legal
16Appendix E - Market Matching Sales Process
Ta
r
g
e
t
e
d
Pr
o
s
p
e
c
t
s
Ma
r
k
e
t
M
a
t
c
h
i
n
g
•
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
C
o
n
t
a
c
t
s
•
As
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
N
e
t
w
o
r
k
i
n
g
Ac
t
i
v
i
t
y
•
Ec
o
n
o
m
i
c
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
WS
B
’
s
C
R
M
Re
m
a
i
n
s
Ac
t
i
v
e
In
a
c
t
i
v
e
Qu
a
l
i
f
i
e
d
Le
a
d
Cl
o
s
i
n
g
T
h
e
D
e
a
l
•
WS
B
no
t
i
f
i
e
s
C
i
t
y
St
a
f
f
/
E
D
A
o
f
q
u
a
l
i
f
i
e
d
le
a
d
•
WS
B
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
s
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
n
e
e
d
s
as
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
•
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
s
i
t
e
s
•
Sp
e
c
i
f
i
e
d
m
a
r
k
e
t
da
t
a
•
Id
e
n
t
i
f
y
co
n
s
t
r
a
i
n
t
s
•
WS
B
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
C
i
t
y
S
t
a
f
f
/
E
D
A
de
t
a
i
l
i
n
g
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
f
r
o
m
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
n
e
e
d
s
as
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
•
WS
B
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
s
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
p
l
a
n
a
n
d
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
i
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s
in
p
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
w
i
t
h
C
i
t
y
S
t
a
f
f
a
n
d
E
D
A
•
Pr
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
r
e
v
i
e
w
•
Le
t
t
e
r
o
f
i
n
t
e
n
t
(
L
O
I
)
•
Si
t
e
p
l
a
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
/
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
Appendix E - Market Matching Sales Process
CityCouncilAgenda:6/24/13
1
5L.Considerationofapprovingcaterers/liquorprovidersfortheMonticelloCommunity
Centerfor2014-2015 (KB)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
EverytwoyearstheCommunityCentersendsoutrequestforserviceproposalstoinvite
caterersandalcoholproviderstosubmittheirnameforconsiderationtobeonthelistof
preferredcaterers/alcoholprovidersforourMississippiBanquetRoom.Weviewour
cateringandalcoholvendorsasanintegralpartofourbanquetfacilityteam.Ourgoalis
toprovideourrenterswithaqualityproduct,excellentserviceandgoodpriceoptions.
Wefeelthatthevendorswhosubmittedtheirserviceproposalswillprovideusandour
customerswithallofthesequalitiesandmore.
Unfortunatelyyouwillnotethatweonlyhaveonelocalvendoronourlist.Wehadafew
requestsfromlocalrestaurantstobeincludedonourpreferredlist.Theywereincludedin
theRFP’sforinclusion;however,wedidonlyreceivearesponsebackfromCornerstone
Café.Wewillcontinuetoinvitelocalcaterers/fullserviceliquorproviderseverytime
thelistisupforrenewal.
TheStateStatuesrequirethatouralcoholprovidersbeapprovedbytheCityCouncilto
beallowedtosellalcoholicbeveragesonourpremises.Eachofthesevendorsholdsa
Caterer’sLicense,aretailon-saleliquorlicenseandcarriesinsurancetocoverworkingat
thecommunitycenter.InthisStatute,thecatererisallowedtosellalcoholasapartof
theirfoodservice.
ThisisthelistofPreferredCaterersandAlcoholProvidersfortheMonticello
CommunityCenterfor2014and2015submittedforyourapproval:
1.CornerstoneCafé(Monticello)
2.Henry’sCatering(Foley)
3.Russell’sontheLakeCatering(BigLake)
4.Steven’sRestaurantandCatering(Princeton)
5.Reichel’sCateringService(Annandale)
A1.BudgetImpact:Eachofourcaterersandalcoholprovidersarerequiredtopaya
feebasedonapercentageofthetotalfoodbillaswellasabarsetupfee.Thisfee
providesthecommunitycenterwithapproximately$10,000to$15,000inrevenue
peryear.Thefeeprovidesforthevendorsusageofthefacilityandequipmentas
wellasexclusiveadvertisingasourPreferredVendor.
A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Onceourlistisapproved,wemeetwiththevendorsto
gooverexpectationsandquestions.OurEventHostsworkcloselywitheach
vendorduringtheeventthattheyareprovidingfoodandalcoholfor.Thestaff
workloadimpactisotherwiserelativelylow.
CityCouncilAgenda:6/24/13
2
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.MotiontoapprovethelistofCatererandAlcoholprovidersaspresented.
2.MotiontodenythelistofCaterersandAlcoholprovidersaspresented.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
TheCommunityCenterAdvisoryBoardvotedattheirJunemeetingtorecommendthe
caterers/liquorprovidersforapproval,andCitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1based
onexcellentpastperformanceofourVendors.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
CopiesofCertificateofLiabilityInsurance,Foodlicense,Caterer’spermit–Cornerstone
Cafe&Catering,Henry’sCatering,Russell’sontheLake,Steven’sClassicCatering,
Reichel’sCateringService
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
5M.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2013-051statingintenttoreimbursefrom
bondproceedsfortheFallonAvenueOverpass,CityProjectNo.11C005 (WO)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
TheInternalRevenueServicerequirestheCitytoadoptaresolutiondeclaringtheofficial
intenttoreimbursecertainprojectexpendituresfrombondproceeds,iftheCityplansor
wouldissuebondstofinanceprojectcosts.Bypassingthisresolutionitwouldallowthe
CitytoincludetheFallonAvenueOverpassprojectinafuturebondissue.Itmightalso
allowcurrentbridgeplanningexpenditurestobepaidbacktotheCity’sGeneralFundvia
theproceedsofthebondsale.Withouttheresolution,theprojectcouldnotbefundedby
bonds.AtthistimetheCityisplanningonissuingbondstofinancethisproject.
A1.BudgetImpact:Byadoptingtheresolution,theCitywouldhavetheabilityto
includetheFallonAvenueOverpassprojectinafuturebondissue.
A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Therewouldbenoimpactonthestaffbythisaction.
WhentheCityissuesbondstherewouldbestafftimeandconsultantcostsrelated
tothebondissue.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.MotiontoadoptResolution#2013-051declaringtheofficialintenttoreimburse
expendituresfromtheproceedsofbondsfortheFallonAvenueOverpass,City
ProjectNo.11C005.
2.Motiontonotadoptaresolutiondeclaringtheofficialintenttoreimburse
expendituresfromtheproceedsofbondsatthistime.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
CitystaffsupportsAlternative#1.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
Resolution#2013-051
1
CITYOFMONTICELLO
WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTIONNO.2013-051
DECLARINGTHEOFFICIALINTENTOFTHECITYOFMONTICELLOTO
REIMBURSECERTAINEXPENDITURESFROMTHEPROCEEDSOFBONDSTOBE
ISSUEDBYTHECITYFORTHEFALLONAVENUEOVERPASS,
CITYPROJECT11C005
WHEREAS,theInternalRevenueServicehasissuedTreas.Reg.§1.150-2providingthat
proceedsoftax-exemptbondsusedtoreimbursepriorexpenditureswillnotbedeemedspent
unlesscertainrequirementsaremet;and
WHEREAS,theCityexpectstoincurcertainexpenditureswhichmaybefinancedtemporarily
fromsourcesotherthanbonds,andreimbursedfromtheproceedsofabond;
WHEREAS,theCityhasdeterminedtomakethisdeclarationofofficialintent(“Declaration”)to
reimbursecertaincostsfromproceedsofbondsinaccordancewiththeReimbursement
Regulations.
NOW,THEREFORE,BEITRESOLVEDBYTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOF
MONTICELLO(THE“CITY”)ASFOLLOWS:
1.TheCityreasonablyintendstomakeexpendituresfortheprojectsdescribedinExhibitA
(the“Projects”),andreasonablyintendstoreimburseitselfforsuchexpendituresfromthe
proceedsofdebttobeissuedbytheCityinthemaximumprincipalamountdescribedin
ExhibitA.Allreimbursedexpenditureswillbecapitalexpenditures,costsofissuanceof
thebonds,orotherexpenditureseligibleforreimbursementunderSection1.150-2(d)(3)
oftheReimbursementRegulations.
2.ThisDeclarationhasbeenmadenotlaterthan60daysafterpaymentofanyoriginal
expendituretobesubjecttoareimbursementallocationwithrespecttotheproceedsof
bonds,exceptforthefollowingexpenditures:(a)costsofissuanceofbonds;(b)costsin
anamountnotinexcessof$100,000or5percentoftheproceedsofanissue;or(c)
“preliminaryexpenditures”uptoanamountnotinexcessof20percentoftheaggregate
issuepriceoftheissueorissuesthatfinanceorarereasonablyexpectedbytheCityto
financetheprojectforwhichthepreliminaryexpenditureswereincurred.Theterm
“preliminaryexpenditures”includesarchitectural,engineering,surveying,bondissuance,
andsimilarcoststhatareincurredpriortocommencementofacquisition,constructionor
rehabilitationofaproject,otherthanlandacquisition,sitepreparation,andsimilarcosts
incidenttocommencementofconstruction.
3.ThisDeclarationisanexpressionofthereasonableexpectationoftheCitybasedonthe
factsandcircumstancesknowntotheCityasofthedatehereof.Theanticipatedoriginal
expendituresfortheProjectandtheprincipalamountofthebondsdescribedinparagraph
1areconsistentwiththeCity’sbudgetaryandfinancialcircumstances.Nosourcesother
thanproceedsofbondstobeissuedbytheCityare,orarereasonablyexpectedtobe,
reserved,allocatedonalong-termbasis,orotherwisesetasidepursuanttotheCity’s
budgetorfinancialpoliciestopaysuchprojectexpenditures.
4.TheCityAdministratorisauthorizedtodesignateappropriateadditionstoExhibitAin
circumstanceswheretimeisoftheessence,andanysuchdesignationshallbereportedto
theCouncilattheearliestpracticabledateandshallbefiledwiththeofficialbooksand
recordsoftheCityasprovidedinSection3.
5.Thisresolutionisintendedtoconstituteadeclarationofofficialintentforpurposesof
Treas.Reg.§1.150-2andanysuccessorlaw,regulation,orruling.
ADOPTEDBY theCityCouncilthis24thdayofJune,2013.
CITYOFMONTICELLO
__________________________________
ClintHerbst,Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator
3
EXHIBITA
TOOFFICIALINTENTRESOLUTIONNO.2013-051
ADOPTEDJune242013
DATEOF
DECLARATION DESCRIPTIONOFPROJECT
MAXIMUM
PRINCIPAL
AMOUNTOFDEBT
FORPROJECT
6/24/2013 FALLONAVENUEOVERPASS,CITY
PROJECTNO.11C005-including,butnot
limitedto,constructionofimprovementsand
indirectcosts,suchaslegal,engineering,
administrative,rightofwayacquisition(land,
etc.)andfinancingcosts.Engineeringcosts
includessurvey,feasibilitystudy,
environmentaldocuments,permitting,
preliminaryandfinaldesign,preparationof
plansandspecs,biddingadministration,
constructionmanagement,staking,inspection
andmaterialtesting.
$6,000,000
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
5N.Considerationofacceptingquoteandauthorizingpurchaseofreplacement
refrigerationequipmentforcoolersatHi-WayLiquors (WO/RJ)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
ThelargerefrigerationunitkeepingtheoldercoolercoldatHi-WayLiquorshasbeen
besetwithproblemsforthepasttwoyears.Indeed,overthepasttwoyears,repaircoststo
thelargeunittotaled$12,242.Thereareatotalofthreerefrigerationunits,twosmall
unitsservingthenewercoolerandonelargeunitservingtheoldercooler.Thecoolersare
notseparated.Giventhemaintenancehistoryofthelargeunit,staffbeganexploring
replacingitinFebruary.OnJune10,thelargeunitbeganactingupagainandeventually
completelyfailedovertheweekendofJune15th and16th.Thecityimmediatelybegan
exploringitsoptionsonJune10th,seekingquotesforthework.Initially,wehadonlyone
quotewithtwooptions:replacesidelargeunitwithanotherlargesideunit($22,800)or
withtwosmallerroofunits($21,600)withincidentalcostssuchaselectricalwork
chargeddirectlytotheCity.Morequotesweresoughtanddiscussionswithvarious
vendorsregardingdifferentoptionsensued.Responsesfromothervendorswerenot
timely.Eventually,itwasdecidedthattwosmallerunitswerebetterthanonebecauseif
onefailedtheotherscouldjustworkharderuntilthefailedunitcouldberepairedor
replaced.Thetwounitswouldbeputontheroofwiththeothertwo.Aftervisitingwith
thevendorthatcoulddotheworkthesoonest,itwasdecidedthetwosmallerunitscould
belocatedonthesideofthebuildingwherethelargeunitsits.Thechangeinlocation
fromtherooftothesidesaves$2,400withthevendorpickingupthecostoftheelectrical
workinsteadoftheCity.
Ifthecitywouldhavechosenthesameapproachbyreplacingthelargersideunit,we
maystillbewaitingfordeliverytheunit,whichhasatwoweekdeliveryschedule.
Consequently,thetwosmallerunitoptioncanbeinstalledmorequicklybecausetheunits
areintheareaandmaybeupandrunningbytheweekendofJune22th.Sincetimeisof
theessence,thisisessentiallyaretroactiveapprovalofapreviouslychosencourseof
action.Beersalesare60%ofHi-WayLiquors’salesand90%ofthatiscoldbeer.Work
beganonWednesday,June19th.Thearrivaloftherefrigerationequipmentisscheduled
forThursdaymorning.OneoftheunitsmaybeupandrunningbyFriday.
Ourliquorstoremanagerhasdoneanoutstandingjobinpassionatelypursuingthebest
courseofactionandheisalsousingthiseventasopportunitytobuildcustomergoodwill.
Hi-WayLiquorManagerRandallJohnsenwillbeatthemeetingtoprovideadditional
information.
A1.BudgetImpact:TheCitydidnotbudgetreplacementoftherefrigerationunitfor
2013.Ongoingrepaircostsandequipmentinstabilitymakereplacementthebetter
option.Thenewequipmentcomeswithawarrantyandanextendedwarrantywill
bepurchasedatminimalcosts.
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
2
A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Staffwillworkwiththevendorasneededtofacilitate
theexpeditiousreplacementoftheequipment.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.Motiontoacceptquotesandauthorizepurchaseofmechanicalequipmentto
replacecoolersatHiWayLiquorsfromMcDowall,locatedinWaitePark,ata
costof$21,600.
2.MotiontonotauthorizepurchaseofreplacementrefrigerationequipmentatHi
WayLiquorsatthistime.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
Quoteswillbeavailableatthemeeting
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
1
7.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2013-049approvingamendmentstothe
MonticelloComprehensivePlan,Chapter2–CommunityContext,Chapter3–
LandUse,andChapter4–EconomicDevelopment (AS/HKGi)
A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND:
TheCityCouncilisaskedtoapproveamendmentstotheMonticelloComprehensivePlan
forChapters2,3and4.Theamendmentsrepresentthecompleterevisionand
replacementofChapters2and4,andminorsupportingamendmentsinChapter3.A
listingoftheproposedamendmentsisincludedwiththeresolutionforadoption.
TheMonticelloComprehensivePlanistheCity’sguidingdocumentforlandusepolicy.
TheComprehensivePlanisastatutorilyrequiredplanningdocument,providingthe
underpinningforallCityland-usedecisions.Theplanincludesgoalsandstrategies
relatedtooveralllanduse,transportation,economicdevelopmentandparks.Itis
intendedtoguidedevelopmentwithintheCityanditsgrowthareaforthenext20years.
Monticello’sComprehensivePlanidentifiestheneedforanannualreviewtoensurethat
itremainsarelevantplanningdocumentforMonticello’sgrowthpolicies.ThePlanning
Commissionhaspreviouslycompletedtheseannualreviews,focusingonChapter3,the
LandUsePlan.For2013,staffrecommendedtothePlanningCommissionthat Chapter
2-CommunityContext beupdatedtoincludemorerecentdata,including2010census
info.Thismorerecentdataprovidesanimportantperspectiveonthecomplexionofthe
communityandsetsaframeofreferenceforlandusepolicy.
Also,astheParks,TransportationandLandUsechaptershavebeenupdatedwith
recentlyadoptedplans,theCommissionrequestedamorefocusedreviewofthe
EconomicDevelopmentChaptersincetheCityisreachingthe5-yearmarkfortheplan.
Foramoreinclusivereviewprocessofthesetwochapters,twomembersofthePlanning
CommissionwerejoinedbytwomembersoftheIEDCandonememberoftheEDA.
TheCityCouncilwasalsoinvitedtoparticipate.CouncilmemberPerraultwaspresent
duringthemajorityoftheplanningsessions.TheCityalsoengagedHKGiconsultantsto
assistintheamendmentprocess,asHKGiwastheleadconsultantforthepreparationof
theoriginal2008document.
SummaryofSmallGroupReview
ThefirstmeetingofthesmallgroupoccurredinNovemberof2012.Thegroupprovided
specificrecommendationsforupdatingthebaselinedataandreferenceinformationin
Chapter2–CommunityContext.Thegroupdirectedthatadditionsandrevisionsto
Chapter2weretoinclude2010Censusdata,applicableBusinessRetention&Expansion
informationandreferencestodatafromthenewEmbracingDowntownplan.
Duringafollow-upmeeting,thegroupthenspentsometimereviewingtheavailabledata
preparedbyHKGiforinclusionin Chapter2–CommunityContext.Thegroupprovided
feedbackonclarificationswhichwouldhelpmakethedatamoreusableandrelevantto
decision-makingandpolicydevelopment.
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
2
TheoutcomeofthisdatacollectionandanalysisprovidestheCitywithimportant
backgroundandsupportinginformationrelatedtoeconomicdevelopment,housingand
transportation.SomenotablefindingsincludedwithinChapter2arelistedbelow.
o Likemanysurroundingcommunities,Monticelloexperiencedrapidgrowthover
thelastdecade,growing64%from2000to2010.
o Single-familydetachedhousingisthemostprevalenthousingtype,at55%ofall
units.
o RentalunitstendtobeolderthanotherMonticellohousingstock,with40%ofall
rentalunitsbeingbuiltbefore1970ascomparedtoonly18%ofownedunits.
o The2010medianageofMonticello’spopulationwas32.4years.Thiscompares
with35yearsforthecountyand37yearsfortheregion.
33%ofMonticello’spopulationisundertheageof19.
o AcomparisonwithWrightCountyandtheTwinCitiesStandardMetropolitan
StatisticalArea(SMSA)showsthatMonticellohasalargerpercentageof
families*withchildren(72%)thantheTwinCitiesSMSA(63%)
43%ofallhouseholds*includedchildrenundertheageof18.Only33%
ofallhouseholdsintheregioncontainedchildren.
o Manyhouseholdshaveonlyrecentlybeenestablishedinthecommunity.Of
householdsheadedbyindividualsaged15to34,40%areownerswholiveina
homebuiltsince2000.
o 57%ofallhouseholdsareheadedbythoseaged35to64,82%ofthoseinthatage
bracketarehomeowners.
o Monticellohasmorehouseholdsearninglessthan$35,000thanWrightCounty.
Inaddition,thecommunityhasalowerpercentageofhighincomehouseholds
thaneitherthecountyorregion.
o Commutetimeisincreasing-the2000Censusreportedameancommutetimeof
24minutesforMonticelloworkers.Inthe2007-2011ACS,themeantraveltime
toworkwas28.5minutesforMonticello.
o Themajorityoftheworkforcedoesnotbothliveandworkinthecommunity:
employeesareinsteadcommutingintooroutofMonticello.
30%ofpeopleworkinginthecommunityliveelsewhereinWright
County,includingBuffaloandSt.Michael.Another26%oftheworkforce
livesinSherburneCounty,includingBeckerandBigLake.
Nearly40%ofMonticelloresidentsworkinHennepinCounty
The2010datashowsthatalargerpercentageofresidentsareabletoearn
ahigherwageworkingoutsidethecommunitythanwithinthecommunity.
TheaboveinformationsupportstheideaofMonticelloasagrowingandrelativelyyoung
community,withalargepercentageoffamilyhouseholds.ManyofMonticello’s
householdsarebothnewtothecommunityandincludememberscommutingto
employmentoutsideofthecommunity.Thisanalysis,anditsimpactsfortheCity’s
communicationandengagementefforts,willbediscussedinmoredetailinafuture
CouncilitemonCity-widecommunicationsstrategy.
*Ahouseholdiscomposedofoneormorepeoplewhooccupyahousingunit.Notallhouseholdscontain
families.UndertheU.S.CensusBureaudefinition,familyhouseholdsconsistoftwoormoreindividuals
whoarerelatedbybirth,marriage,oradoption,althoughtheyalsomayincludeotherunrelatedpeople.
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
3
Afterhavingestablishedafirmunderstandingofthemostrecentdataavailableforthe
community,thesmallgroupturnedtheirattentiontoeconomicdevelopment.Thegroup
begantheiranalysiswithageneralreviewof Chapter3–LandUse.Chapter3identifies
wheretheCitywillseektoestablishnewindustriallanduses,designated“Placesto
Work”,anddescribestheimportanceofthislandusetotheCity’soverallgrowth
objectives.ThePlacestoWorksectionnotesthat“ItiscriticalthatMonticellopreserve
sufficientlandforPlacestoWorkforthenexttwenty-fiveyears.”
TheLandUsechapterthenlaysoutfiveoveralllandusepoliciesforPlacestoWork,as
follows:
1.DesignateandpreservelandforPlacestoWork
2.ProvidelandusecontrolstoencouragedevelopmentofPlacestoWorksites
consistentwiththeCity’svisionfor“step-up”development
3.Providefor“businesscampus”developmentarea
4.Providefor“generalindustrial”developmentarea
5.Provideforareasforbusinesseswhichsupportbothtypesofindustrial
development
Withtheseoverallgoalsinmind,thesmallgroupreviewedthelocationandacreage
amountoflandareasguidedas“PlacestoWork”,aswellasaninventoryofcurrently
availableindustrialland.Insmallgroupdiscussions,itwasdeterminedthat,basedon
thisinventory,theCityhasanadequateexistingandplannedinventoryoflandguidedfor
“PlacestoWork”.Assuch,nomodificationtotheboundariesorlandareasdesignatedas
“PlacestoWork”wasrecommended.However,thegroupdidnotethatdevelopment
constraintsareinexistencefortheseareasandrecommendedthatdiscussiononthese
constraintsbeundertakenaspartofthereviewoftheEconomicDevelopmentChapter.
Withthelandusegoalsandareasfor“PlacestoWork”re-confirmedinChapter3,the
smallgroupthenfocusedtheirworkonChapter4.
Aspartoftheirrecommendations,thesmallgroupdirectedtheinclusionofreferencesto
theEmbracingDowntownstudy(whichwasadoptedasawholeintotheLandUse
chapterpreviously)andtheBusinessRetention&Expansionstudy.Thesetwo
documentsprovideadditionaleconomicdevelopmentbackgroundandstrategyforthe
City.Theirdirectreferencewithinthischapterwasviewedasasupportfortheir
continuedapplication.
ThesmallgroupthenconfirmedtheCity’sfouroveralleconomicdevelopmentgoals,
withonlyslightmodification:
Attract &Retain Jobs
ExpandtheTaxBase
EnhancetheDowntown
EncourageRedevelopment
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
4
Importantly,thegroupwasabletoutilizetheupdatedinformationin Chapter2-
CommunityContext inevaluatingthesegoals.Chapter4includesthestatement“The
creationandretentionofjobsisoneofthemostimportantobjectivesforMonticello.
Jobs,particularlyjobswithincomelevelscapableofsupportingafamily,arekeyto
achievingmanyelementsofMonticello’svisionforthefuture.”Thisisdirectlyrelated
totheChapter2findingthatMonticello’sresidentsachievehigherwagesbycommuting
outofthecity.Chapter4alsoincludesadditionalCensusandACSdata,aidinginthe
City’sunderstandingofitseconomicandemploymentcontext.
Thegroup’sfinaltaskwastodeterminewhetherthedevelopmentstrategiesinChapter4
adequatelyreflectedtheCity’scurrentandintendedmethodsfortheaccomplishmentof
thegoalsabove.
Theproposedamendmentstotheeightstrategystatementsreflectlessattentionon
specificallyattractingbioscienceindustries,withmorefocusonattractingbusinesses
whicharesynergistictoexistingbusinessesandservices.Theproposedamendmentsalso
suggestamorededicatedeffortinthenearfutureondeterminingtheutilityand
transportationimprovementsneededtosupportthedevelopmentofnew“Placesto
Work”inguidedareasandreducingtheaforementioneddevelopmentconstraintsfor
theseareas.
Thesmallgroupalsorecommendedminorchangesinthe LandUse chapterinthe“Places
toWork”sectionwhichcorrespondstotherevisionstothestrategiesinChapter4.These
changesareidentifiedintheattachedresolution.Itshouldbenotedthattherearealso
minortextamendmentsinChapter3whicharereflectiveofthedevelopmentofthe
NorthstarLineandprogressontheBertramproject.
Withtheproposedamendmentsasstatedabove,thesmallgroupconcludedtheirworkon
thedocumentsinMarch,referringthemtotheIndustrial&EconomicDevelopment
Committee(IEDC)andEconomicDevelopmentAuthority(EDA)forreviewand
recommendation.
IEDCRecommendation
TheIEDCreviewedthismaterialduringtheirMarchandAprilregularmeetingsand
unanimouslyrecommendsadoptionoftheamendments.TheIEDC’sonlyrequestwas
thattheComprehensivePlanalsoincludesmodificationfortheinclusionofthenewCity
logo.Assuch,anewdocumentcoverisincludedforreference.
EDARecommendation
TheEDAreviewedtheproposedamendmentsduringitsregularmeetingonApril10th,
2013.TheEDArecommendedanumberofsmallchanges,whichhavebeen
incorporatedintothedraftsreviewedbythePlanningCommissionandincludedwiththis
staffreport.Theyareasfollows:
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
5
o InChapter2,includeadefinition/decodingoftheacronymSMSA(Standard
MetropolitanStatisticalArea)
o Page2-2,topparagraph,lastline.“Inthefuture,Tthishighwaywill serves asthe
connectionwithcommuterrailtransitserviceinBigLake.”
o Page2-4intheOrderlyAnnexationsection–theoriginalagreementsignedin
2004,amendedin2005.
o Page2-22,Theparagraphbeginning“Figure2—41”needstostate:“While
MonticellohasnoticeablyhigherretentionratesthanBecker,BigLakeandSt.
MichaelMonticello,ithasalowerratethanBuffalo.”
o Page2-23,shouldsay“lower”or“higher”,notboth.
o 3-18and3-19shouldrefertoregionalparkastheBertramChainofLakes
RegionalPark.
TheEDAvotedunanimouslytorecommendapprovaloftheComprehensivePlan
amendmentswiththechangesnotedabove.
PublicHearing&PlanningCommissionRecommendation
Asnoted,thePlanningCommissionreviewedtheamendmentsduringapublichearingon
June4th,2013.Nopublictestimonywasofferedduringthehearing.ThePlanning
Commissionrequestednootheradditionalrevisionstotheamendmentsand
recommendedapprovaloftheproposedamendmentsina4-0vote.Commissioner
Burveewasabsent.
B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS:
1.MotiontoadoptResolution#2013-049,approvingamendmentstoChapter2–
CommunityContext,Chapter3–LandUse,andChapter4–Economic
Developmentofthe2008MonticelloComprehensivePlan,basedonfindingsas
statedinsaidresolution.
2.Motionofother.
C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
StaffrecommendsAlternative#1foradoptionoftheproposedamendments.
Theproposedamendmentsto Chapter2-CommunityContext provideaneededupdateto
thebaselinecommunityinformationtheCityusestomakepolicyandlandusedecisions.
AstheChapter2introductionstates,“Planningforthefuturedoesnotstartonaclean
slate.”ItisthereforeimportantfortheCitytohaveaclear,currentpictureofwhatexists
todayasafoundationfromwhichtobuild.Theupdatestothe CommunityContext
chapterarebasedonthemostrecentlyavailabledataandprovidetheneededfoundation
forplanningandpolicydecisionsfortheCity.
CityCouncilAgenda:06/24/13
6
Inrespecttotheproposedamendmentsfor Chapter4-EconomicDevelopment,staff
believesthatproposedamendmentssupportavigorousandmulti-facetedapproachto
economicdevelopment.WhilethemajorityoftheCity’soveralleconomicdevelopment
goalsremainthesame,overthelastfiveyears,minorshiftsinpolicyhavebeenidentified
byboththeIEDCandEDA.Theamendmentsreflecttheseshiftsandprovidearoadmap
fordirectingtheCity’seconomicdevelopmentactivities.
D.SUPPORTINGDATA:
Resolution#2013-049
A.PlanningCommissionResolution2013-023
B.MonticelloComprehensivePlan–coverpage
C.MonticelloComprehensivePlan–CommunityContext (Asproposed)
D.MonticelloComprehensivePlan–CommunityContext (Existing)
E.MonticelloComprehensivePlan–LandUse (Asproposed)
F.MonticelloComprehensivePlan–EconomicDevelopment (Asproposed)
G.MonticelloComprehensivePlan–EconomicDevelopment (Existing)
CITYOFMONTICELLO
WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTIONNO.2013-049
ADOPTINGAMENDMENTSTOCHAPTER2-COMMUNITYCONTEXT,CHAPTER
3-LANDUSE,ANDCHAPTER4-ECONOMICDEVELOPMENTOFTHE2008
COMPREHENSIVEPLANFORTHECITYOFMONTICELLO,ANDADOPTING
FINDINGSOFFACTINSUPPORTOFSAIDAMENDMENTS
WHEREAS,theCityofMonticelloadoptedaComprehensivePlanin2008toguidethegrowth,
development,landuse,andinfrastructureplanningfortheCity;and
WHEREAS,changestothesize,demographics,andeconomicdatafortheCityhaveoccurred
sincetheresearchanddevelopmentofthe2008ComprehensivePlan;and
WHEREAS,theCityhasconductedaninventoryandanalysisofdatamadeavailablethrough
the2010UnitedStatesCensusand2007-2011AmericanCommunitySurveyandsummarized
thefindingsinanamendmenttoChapter2,CommunityContext;and
WHEREAS,saidComprehensivePlanprovidesfortheeconomicdevelopmentoftheCityasa
partofsuchguidance;and
WHEREAS,theCityhascompletedananalysisoftheEconomicDevelopmentchapterofthe
ComprehensivePlanforpromotingandencouragingeconomicdevelopmentandhasdetermined
amendmentsasnecessarytosupporttheCity’slong-termeconomicdevelopmentgoals;and
WHEREAS,intheCity’sreviewoftheEconomicDevelopmentchapteritwasdeterminedthat
thePlacestoWorksectionofChapter3,LandUseshouldberevisedinsupportofthe
community’seconomicdevelopmentefforts;and
WHEREAS,theMonticelloPlanningCommissionheldapublichearingonJune4th,2013,on
theamendments;andmembersofthepublicwereprovidedtheopportunitytopresent
informationtothePlanningCommission;
NOWTHEREFORE,BEITRESOLVEDBYTHECITYCOUNCILOF
MONTICELLO,MINNESOTATHAT Chapter2,CommunityContext,Chapter3,LandUse
andChapter4,EconomicDevelopmentofthe2008ComprehensivePlanshallbeamendedas
foundinExhibitAattachedhereto;basedonthefollowingFindingsofFact:
1.Informationonthesize,demographics,andeconomicdatainfluencingthe
communityiscriticaltothedecisionmakingandplanningeffortsoftheCityof
Monticello.
2.Theuseof2010Censusinformationand2007-2011AmericanCommunity
SurveyinformationinarevisedChapter2,CommunityContextprovidesamore
current,usableandrelevantdatasourcefordecision-makingconsistentwiththe
goalsandobjectivesofthe2008ComprehensivePlan
3.TheproposedamendmentstoChapter3,LandUseandChapter4,Economic
DevelopmentwillsupporttheCity’seffortstoattractandretainjobs,expandthe
taxbase,enhancetheeconomicvitalityofDowntown,andfacilitate
redevelopment.
ADOPTEDBY theMonticelloCityCouncilthis24th dayofJune,2013.
CITYOFMONTICELLO
_________________________________
ClintHerbst,Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator
EXHIBITA
ProposedAmendmentsto2008MonticelloComprehensivePlan
Cover:
Inclusionofnewlogo
Chapter2:
Amendmenttoreplacefullchapterwithproposedtextandfigures
Chapter3:
Page3-11:Inplanningforsustainingexistingbusinessesandattractingnewdevelopment,itis
necessarytounderstandwhyPlacestoWorkareimportanttoMonticello.Theobjectivesforthis
landuseinclude:
Expandinganddiversifyingthepropertytaxbase.
ProvidingjobswithanincreasingopportunityforpeopletoworkandliveinMonticello.
Promotingwagelevelsthatprovideincomesneededtopurchasedecenthousing,support
localbusinessesandsupportlocalgovernmentservices.
Takeadvantageofopportunitiestoattractcorporateheadquarters/campusesand
businessesthat specializeinbiosciencesandtechnology.Takeadvantageofopportunities
toattractcompaniesthathaveasynergywithexistingcompaniesinthecommunity,
includingsuppliers,customersandcollaborativepartners.
EncouragingtheretentionandexpansionofexistingbusinessesinMonticello.
Page3-18:
AnothercriticalfactorinthefutureoftheNorthwestAreaisthefutureoftheYMCAcamp.The
CityandWrightCountyareinnegotiationswiththeMinneapolisYMCAtoacquirethe1,200-
acreCampManitou.TheComprehensivePlananticipatesthattheCampwillbeconvertedintoa
regionalpark.formerYMCAcampthatisbeingconvertedintotheBertramChainofLakes
RegionalPark.TheCityandWrightCountyformedapartnershipin2005tostartpurchasing
portionsofthe1,200acreYMCAproperty.Asof2013,495acreshavebeenpurchasedthrough
stategrantswithanother300plannedforacquisition.TheYMCAwillleaselandattheregional
parktoruntheirCampManitouSummerCamp.
Chapter4:
Amendmenttoreplacefullchapterwithproposedtextandfigures.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2013-023
Date: June 4th, 2013 Resolution No. 2013-023
Motion By __________________ Seconded By _______________________
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER
2, COMMUNITY CONTEXT, CHAPTER 3, LAND USE AND CHAPTER 4,
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY
OF MONTICELLO, AND ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT IN SUPPORT OF SAID
AMENDMENT.
WHEREAS, the City of Monticello adopted a Comprehensive Plan in 2008 to guide the growth,
development, land use, and infrastructure planning for the City; and
WHEREAS, said Comprehensive Plan provides for the economic development of the City as a
part of such guidance; and
WHEREAS, changes to the size, demographics, and economic data for the City have occurred
since the research and development of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City has conducted an inventory and analysis of data made available through
the 2010 United States Census and 2007-2011 American Community Survey and summarized
the findings in an update to Chapter 2, Community Context; and
WHEREAS, the City has completed an analysis of the Economic Development chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan for promoting and encouraging economic development; and
WHEREAS, in its review of the Economic Development chapter it was determined that the
Places to Work section of Chapter 3, Land Use should be revised in support of the community’s
economic development efforts; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission of the City of
Monticello recommends to the City Council the adoption of the amendments to Comprehensive
Plan Chapter 2, Community Context, Chapter 3, Land Use and Chapter 4, Economic
Development as found in Exhibit A attached hereto; based on the following Findings of Fact:
1. Information on the size, demographics, and economic data influencing the
community is critical to the decision making and planning efforts of the City of
Monticello.
2. The use of 2010 Census information and 2007-2011 American Community
Survey information in a revised Chapter 2, Community Context provides a more
current, usable and relevant data source for decision-making consistent with the
goals and objectives of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan
3. The proposed amendments to Chapter 3, Land Use and Chapter 4, Economic
Development will support the City’s efforts to attract and retain jobs, expand the
tax base, enhance the economic vitality of Downtown, and facilitate
redevelopment.
Approved by the City of Monticello Planning Commission this 4th day of June, 2013.
______________________________
William Spartz, Chair
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Angela Schumann, Community Development Director
EXHIBIT A
Proposed Amendments to 2008 Monticello Comprehensive Plan
____________________________________________________________________________________
Cover:
Inclusion of new logo
Chapter 2:
Amendment to replace full chapter with proposed text and figures
Chapter 3:
Page 3-11 In planning for sustaining existing businesses and attracting new development, it
is necessary to understand why Places to Work are important to Monticello. The objectives for
this land use include:
Expanding and diversifying the property tax base.
Providing jobs with an increasing opportunity for people to work and live in Monticello.
Promoting wage levels that provide incomes needed to purchase decent housing, support
local businesses and support local government services.
Take advantage of opportunities to attract corporate headquarters/campuses and
businesses that specialize in biosciences and technology. Take advantage of opportunities
to attract companies that have a synergy with existing companies in the community,
including suppliers, customers and collaborative partners.
Encouraging the retention and expansion of existing businesses in Monticello.
Page 3-18
Another critical factor in the future of the Northwest Area is the future of the YMCA camp. The
City and Wright County are in negotiations with the Minneapolis YMCA to acquire the 1,200-
acre Camp Manitou. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates that the Camp will be converted into a
regional park. former YMCA camp that is being converted into the Bertram Chain of Lakes
Regional Park. The City and Wright County formed a partnership in 2005 to start purchasing
portions of the 1,200 acre YMCA property. As of 2013, 495 acres have been purchased through
state grants with another 300 planned for acquisition. The YMCA will lease land at the regional
park to run their Camp Manitou Summer Camp.
Chapter 4:
Amendment to replace full chapter with proposed text and figures
2008 Comprehensive Plan
City of Monticello
2008 Comprehensive Plan
City of Monticello
Amendments
Applicant: Semper Development
Approval: 6/28/10
Amendment: Text Amendment - Downtown parking at Broadway & Pine
Resolution: 2010-049
Applicant: City of Monticello
Approval: 2/28/11
Amendment: Text Amendment – Chapter 6, Transportation Plan
Resolution: 2011-010
Applicant: City of Monticello
Approval: 6/27/11
Amendment: Text Amendment– Chapter 5, Park & Pathway Plan
Resolution: 2011-053
Applicant: RiverWood Bank
Approval: 9/26/11
Amendment: Map Amendment - Places to Work to Places to Shop
for Lot 1, Block 1, MCC 5th Addition
Resolution: 2011-092
Applicant: City of Monticello
Approval: 1/9/12
Amendment: Text Amendment – Chapter 3, Land Use for Embracing Downtown Plan
Resolution: 2012-011
Community Context | 2-12008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Figure 2-1: Regional Setting
Monticello
2Community Context
Chapter Contents
Physical Characteristics .............2-1
Location .....................................2-1
Planning Context .....................2-2
Existing Land Use ....................2-2
Street System ............................2-4
Orderly Annexation ................2-4
Growth ..........................................2-9
Housing ........................................2-9
Housing Type ............................2-9
Age of Housing ......................2-10
Age of Householder ..............2-11
Households .............................2-12
Mobility ...................................2-14
Demographics ...........................2-15
Age ...........................................2-15
Race ..........................................2-16
Income.....................................2-18
Educational Attainment .......2-19
Occupation .............................2-20
Commuting ............................2-21
Employment ...........................2-22
St. Cloud
Big Lake
St. PaulMinneapolis
Twin Cities Region
Planning for the future does not start on a clean slate. The future will be
built on the foundation of Monticello as it exists today. The Monticello of
today has evolved over time, shaped by a variety of forces. These forces
will continue to shape the community into the future.
The Community Context section of the Comprehensive Plan examines
a variety of forces and factors affecting development of Monticello. A
clear understanding of these influences provides the context for planning
decisions.
This Community Context chapter was updated in the first quarter of 2013
to incorporate updated data since the 2008 plan was prepared. This includes
references to the findings from the 2008 Natural Resource Inventory &
Assessment, 2011 Transportation Plan, the 2010 Census and the 2007-
2011 American Community Survey.
Community indicator analysis now includes both the U.S. Census and the
American Community Survey (ACS) as the U.S. Census eliminated its
historical long-form in the late 2000s. The long-form was replaced by the
American Community Survey, an ongoing survey that is sent to a sample
of the population each year. Data collected is analyzed and provided to
communities on an annual basis as five-year averages. ACS is now the
source for most socio-economic, income, household, and workforce data.
As is commonly the case, some data previously analyzed in this chapter
are no longer historically comparable. This is usually due to changes in the
wording of questions and responses, as well as challenges in comparing
monetary values across years. Historical comparisons have been provided
where possible.
It can be helpful in analyzing trends to compare a community to other
communities, the county, and the region. For Monticello, comparisons were
made to Wright County, as well as specific communities such as Becker, Big
Lake, Buffalo, and St. Michael. The analysis also provides a comparison to
the Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Area (SMSA), an area that includes 11 counties in Minnesota,
including Wright County, and 2 counties in Wisconsin.
2-2 | Community Context City of Monticello
Physical Characteristics
Location
Monticello’s location is a critical factor for the
future. Monticello is centrally located between the
Minneapolis/St. Paul and St. Cloud metropolitan areas
on the Interstate 94 corridor (see Figure 2-1). State
Highway 25 is a key north/south corridor on the west
edge of the Twin Cities metropolitan area. This highway
(with the Mississippi River bridge) connects Sherburne
County and other exurban areas with jobs and services
in the Twin Cities. STH 25 is an important route to
recreational areas in northern Minnesota. The highway
serves as the connection with commuter rail transit
service in Big Lake.
This location presents both opportunities and
challenges to Monticello’s future:
f The highway system provides convenient access to
employment, goods, and services in the Twin Cities
region. This location allows people to enjoy the
small town environment and lower housing costs
of Monticello while drawing upon employment and
amenities of the Twin Cities.
f This location makes Monticello vulnerable to
increased fuel costs, traffic congestion, and travel
time to work.
f Location and accessibility allow Monticello to
become an important center for employment,
services, and shopping between St. Cloud and
Minneapolis.
f Thousands of cars travel through Monticello every
day. These vehicles increase the potential market
for local business. On the downside, these trips add
to traffic congestion in Monticello.
The Comprehensive Plan seeks ways to seize the
opportunities and to mitigate the threats created by
Monticello’s location.
Planning Context
The map in Figure 2-2 is a composite of key physical
factors influencing future growth and development:
f Existing land use.
f Potential future street corridors, highway
interchanges and highway bridges.
f Planned expansion of the sanitary sewer system.
f Existing powerline corridors.
f Watershed breaklines.
f Public waters and wetlands.
This map illustrates the location and type of physical
factors that will shape future development of Monticello.
This map was used to form and evaluate land use
alternatives during the planning process.
The section that follows explains these physical factors
in greater detail.
Existing Land Use
The planning process began with the investigation and
analysis of existing land use. Monticello is constantly
changing. Development converts vacant land to built
uses. Redevelopment changes the character and,
at times, the use of land. The map in Figure 2-2 is
a snapshot of Monticello in 2007. This information
forms the foundation of the Comprehensive Plan by
describing:
f The nature and diversity of land uses in Monticello.
f The relationships between built and natural
features of the community.
f Areas with potential capacity to accommodate
future growth.
The map of existing land uses divides Monticello into
a series of residential, commercial, industrial, and
public use types. A brief description of each category
of existing land use follows.
Single Family Residential - Traditional single family
neighborhoods where housing units are “unattached”
to one another.
2 to 8 Units - Forms of housing with two to eight units
attached to one another or in a common structure, most
commonly duplexes, twin homes and townhouses.
8+ Units - Higher density residential land uses with
structures containing multiple housing units including
apartments and condominiums.
Community Context | 2-32008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Figure 2-2: Planning Context
10
10
2
5
14
11
43
50
68
5
81
9 4
25
75
18
37
117
39
1
3
1
106
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
July 11, 2007
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Planning Context
Legend Potential Interchange
Potential Bridge
Sanitary Sewer Expansion
5 Years
10 Years
20 Years
Beyond 20 Years
Watershed Break Line
Orderly Annexation Agreement
Proposed Highway 10 Bypass
Existing Arterial or Collector Road
Proposed Arterial or Collector Road
Powerline
Monticello City Boundary
Rivers and Streams
Public Waters Inventory
National Wetland Inventory
Agricultural
Single Family Residential
2 to 8 Units
8+ Units
Manufactured Home Park
Vacant - Commercial
Commercial
Vacant - Industrial
Industrial
K-12 School
Institutional
Public
Private Recreation Facility
Park
Railroad
Utility
2-4 | Community Context City of Monticello
Manufactured Home Park – Areas that are exclusively
designed for manufactured housing units.
Commercial – Primarily retail and service businesses.
The map shows properties that are currently planned
for commercial use, but have not yet developed.
Industrial - All forms of businesses with manufacturing,
distribution, warehousing, or other industrial use. The
map shows properties that are currently planned for
industrial use, but have not yet developed.
K-12 School – Elementary, middle, and high schools.
Institutional – Churches, cemeteries, hospitals, and
other quasi-public land uses.
Public – Property owned by local (not school), state
,and federal governments.
Park - Property in the public park system.
Private Recreation Facility – Golf courses and the
YMCA camp.
Railroad – Rail right-of-way.
Utility – Power plant.
Agricultural - Land outside of the city limits and not
occupied by some other land use.
Natural Features
The natural environment has shaped Monticello’s past
and will influence its future. The original community
grew along the Mississippi River. As Monticello grew
away from the River, flat land and reasonable soils
facilitated suburban growth. Looking to the future,
natural features will continue to influence development:
f Much of the prime farm land (as classified by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and
Wright County) is located in the southeastern
sections of the community.
f Abundant aggregate resources create the potential
for mining in future growth areas.
f Lakes, wetlands, and wooded areas offer amenities
to attract development and also to be protected.
In 2008, the City of Monticello adopted a Natural
Resource Inventory and Assessment (NRI/A). The
NRI/A is a set of maps and analysis information on
land, water, and air resources. Monticello’s NRI/A
also prioritized these resources based on their quality,
character, and community value.
The map in Figure 2-4 shows natural features in
and around Monticello, including sites of Ecological
Significance/Community Importance and High Quality
Natural Areas from the NRI/A.
Street System
The street system continues to play a key role in the
form and function of the community. Streets provide
access to property and the ability for land to develop.
Commercial and industrial land uses rely on this
access to conduct business. Streets allow people to
move throughout the community. The physical design
of streets influences the character of residential
neighborhoods and commercial districts.
The best way to describe the street system is in terms
of its functional classification (see Figure 2-5). Each
street serves a specific function. The pieces of the
street system must fit together to achieve the desired
functional outcomes. Monticello’s street system
consists of five functional classifications: Major
Arterial, Minor Arterial, Collector, and Local Streets.
f Major Arterial streets represent regional
transportation corridors that connect Monticello
with other cities. Only I-94 is in this classification.
f Minor Arterials are roadways connect Monticello
with the surrounding region. Within Monticello,
Minor Arterials connect districts and other
destinations. The safe and efficient movement of
vehicles is the most important function of these
streets. State Highway 25 and Broadway/County
75 east of Highway 25 are minor arterials.
f Collector streets form the link between arterials and
local streets. As the name suggests, these streets
are intended to “collect” traffic from an area and
channel it into the arterial system. Collector streets
are typically limited in distance to discourage use
for longer trips. Their design typically places equal
emphasis on mobility and access.
Community Context | 2-52008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Figure 2-3: Existing Land Use (2007)
10
10
2
5
14
11
43
50
68
5
81
9 4
25
75
18
117
39
106
37
1
3
1
Orderly
Annexation
Area
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
July 11, 2007
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Existing Land Use
Legend Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Agricultural
Single Family Residential
2 to 8 Units
8+ Units
Manufactured Home Park
Vacant - Commercial
Commercial
Vacant - Industrial
Industrial
K-12 School
Institutional
Public
Private Recreation Facility
Park
Railroad
Utility
39
10
10
2
5
14
11
43
50
68
5
81
9 4
25
75
18
117
39
106
37
1
3
1
Orderly
Annexation
Area
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
July 11, 2007
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Existing Land Use
Legend Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Agricultural
Single Family Residential
2 to 8 Units
8+ Units
Manufactured Home Park
Vacant - Commercial
Commercial
Vacant - Industrial
Industrial
K-12 School
Institutional
Public
Private Recreation Facility
Park
Railroad
Utility
2-6 | Community Context City of Monticello
Figure 2-4: Natural Resources
£¤10
£¤10
Æÿ2
5
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5
!(81
§¨¦9 4
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37
!(
1
3
1
Orderly
Annexation
Area
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Land Use Plan
Legend
Sites of Ecological Significance
High Quality Natural Area
MnDNR FEMA Floodplain
Prime Farmland
Aggregate Resources
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
£¤10
£¤10
Æÿ2
5
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5
!(81
§¨¦94
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37
!(
1
3
1
Orderly
Annexation
Area
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Land Use Plan
Legend
Sites of Ecological Significance
High Quality Natural Area
MnDNR FEMA Floodplain
Prime Farmland
Aggregate Resources
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
Community Context | 2-72008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Figure 2-5: Street System
£¤10
£¤10
Æÿ2
5
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5
!(81
§¨¦9 4
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37
!(
1
3
1
Orderly
Annexation
Area
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Land Use Plan
Legend
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Major Collector
Minor Collector
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
£¤10
£¤10
Æÿ2
5
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5
!(81
§¨¦9 4
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37
!(
1
3
1
Orderly
Annexation
Area
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Land Use Plan
Legend
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Major Collector
Minor Collector
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
2-8 | Community Context City of Monticello
f All other streets in Monticello are local streets.
These streets emphasize access to property. They
are typically designed for shorter distances and
lower speeds.
Orderly Annexation
The City of Monticello and Monticello Township
entered into an orderly annexation agreement in
2004 and amended it in 2005. The agreement covers
the property surrounding the City (see Figure 2-6).
This agreement provides a means for the orderly
development of the community without contentious
annexations. It also protects rural portions of the
Township from urbanization. All of the development
shown in the Comprehensive Plan occurs within the
orderly annexation area.
Growth
Monticello celebrated its 150th birthday in 2006. For
most of this time, Monticello was a small town on
the banks of the Mississippi River. Over the past 30
years, the suburban expansion of the Twin Cities has
brought new growth in Monticello. In 1970, the City’s
population totalled 1,636. By 2010, the population had
grown to 12,759 (see Figure 2-7). Between 2000 and
2010, the community grew by 62%.
As shown in Figure 2-8, most of the community’s
growth came in the first half of the decade. From 2000
to 2005, the City issued an average of 219 new housing
permits per year. In 2006, the overall slowdown in the
housing market dropped new growth to just 77 new
units. This growth trend continued with only 47 permits
issued in 2007 and 18 in 2008. After dropping to only 2
permits each in 2010 and 2011, housing growth started
to rebound in 2012 with 22 permits.
Prior to the housing slowdown Monticello was seeing
a shift from traditional single-family detached housing
to single-family attached housing. In 2004 and 2005,
there were more single-family attached homes built.
However, attached housing development seems to have
stopped with the slowdown and not yet recovered as the
City has not seen any new attached housing since 2008.
Housing
Housing is a critical part of the context of planning for
the future of Monticello. It is the single largest form of
built land use. Housing shapes the form and character
of the community. It influences who lives in Monticello
today and in the future.
Housing Type
Figure 2-9 shows the growth in Monticello’s housing
stock. Between the 2000 Census and the 2007-2011
ACS, Monticello added 1,933 new units, a 64% increase
in the total number of units. Single-family detached
housing remains the most prevalent housing type at
55% of all units.
Also seen in Figure 2-8, the fastest growing housing
type between 2000 and the 2007-2011 ACS was
Figure 2-8: Building Permits for New Housing
145
224
184
156
82
126
67
12 9 2 2
222218
31
48
147
130
10 6 0 0 0 00
50
100
150
200
250
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Single-family detached Single-family attached
Figure 2-7: Population Trends 1970-2010
1,636 1,830
4,941
7,868
12,759
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Community Context | 2-92008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Figure 2-6: Orderly Annexation Area
10
10
2
5
14
11
43
50
68
5
81
9 4
25
75
18
117
39
106
37
1
3
1
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
July 11, 2007
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Orderly Annexation
Agreement Area
Legend Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Agreement Area
10
10
2
5
14
11
43
50
68
5
81
9 4
25
75
18
117
39
106
37
1
3
1
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
July 11, 2007
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Orderly A
nnexation
A
greement A
rea
Legend Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Agreement Area
2-10 | Community Context City of Monticello
1-unit attached housing units. The
proportion of these units of all units
rose from 7% in 1990 to 16% in
the 2007-2011 ACS. Single-family
attached units are defined as 1-unit
structure that has one or more walls
extending from the ground to the
roof separating it from adjoining
structures. Common forms are
twinhomes, townhomes, or row
houses.
A comparison of Monticello to
Wright County and the Twin Cities
SMSA in Figure 2-10 shows that the
community has generally the same
mix of housing units as the Twin
Cities SMSA. The mix is different
than Wright County, which is to be
expected given its rural nature.
The 2007-2011 ACS identifies
20% of the population as living in
rental housing units. Over half of
all renters live in structures with
more than 5 units, while one-third
live in single-family structures. The
distribution of renters in Monticello
is similar to the Twin Cities SMSA.
Age of Housing
Given the growth of Monticello,
it is not surprising to find that the
housing stock is relatively new,
especially when compared to the
Twin Cities SMSA. One-third of
the housing stock in the 2007-2011
ACS was built in 2000 or later (see
Figure 2-12). Only 24% of all units
were built before 1970. Rental
units tend to be older with 40% of
all rental units being built before
1970 as compared to only 18% of
owned units.
Figure 2-10: Regional Housing Type Comparison (2007-2011 ACS)
55
%
16
%
1%2%2%
5%
11
%
8%
78
%
9%
0%1%1%2%4%5%
61
%
11
%
3%
2%2%4%
15
%
2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
1-unit,
detached
1-unit,
attached
2 units 3 or 4 units 5 to 9 units 10 to 19 units 20 or more
units
Mobile home
Al
l
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
Monticello Wright Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-11: Regional Housing Type and Tenure Comparison (2007-2011 ACS)
73
%
7%
1%2%
0%
12
%
85
%
7%
0%1%
0%
4%
72
%
8%
1%3%
2%
13
%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Owner SF Renter SF Owner 2 to 4 Renter 2 to 4 Owner 5 or more Renter 5 or more
Al
l
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
-
20
0
7
-20
1
1
Monticello Wright Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-9: Housing Type
90
3
13
1
12
6
92
44
7
20
9
1,
7
7
1
34
7
14
5
53
47
9
21
0
2,
7
1
3
77
5
15
6
10
9
79
0
39
5
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
1-unit detached 1-unit attached 2 to 4 units 5 to 9 units 10 or more units Mobile home, trailer,
or other
Al
l
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
1990 2000 2007-2011
Community Context | 2-112008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Figure 2-12: Regional Year Built Comparison (2007-2011 ACS)
Figure 2-13: Year Built/Tenure/Age of Householder (2007-2011 ACS)
Age of Householder
Figure 2-13 connects the age of
the housing with the age of the
householder and status as renter
or owner across all households in
Monticello. Analysis of this data
shows:
f 25% of all households are
headed by owners aged 35-64
who are living in homes built
between 1980 and 1999.
f Of households headed by
individuals aged 15 to 34, 40%
are owners who live in a home
built since 2000, while 21% were
renters who live in a home built
before 1980.
f 57% of all households are
headed by those aged 35 to 64,
82% of those in that age bracket
are homeowners.
f 61% of senior households
(householder age 65 and older)
lived in owned housing. Of
renters, 59% live in units built
between 1980 and 1999.
f 41% of rental units are occupied
by households headed by
persons age 34 or younger,
while 21% are occupied by
seniors.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Built 2005
or later
Built 2000
to 2004
Built 1990
to 1999
Built 1980
to 1989
Built 1970
to 1979
Built 1960
to 1969
Built 1950
to 1959
Built 1940
to 1949
Built 1939
or earlier
Year Built
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
15-34
35-64
65+
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Own
2000 or
later Own
1980 to
1999 Own
Before
1980 Rent
2000 or
later Rent
1980 to
1999 Rent
Before
1980
2-12 | Community Context City of Monticello
Households
A household includes all the people
who occupy a housing unit as
their usual place of residence.
Household characteristics offer
another perspective on the people
living in Monticello:
f 67% of Monticello households
are family households (see
Figure 2-14). This compares
with 74% for the entire County
and 64% for the region.
f 49% of all Monticello family
households include a married
couple. This is down from 53%
in 2000 and 56% in 1990.
f 43% of all households included
children under the age of 18.
Only 33% of all households in
the region contained children.
f Of the 1,749 households added
from 2000 to 2010, 63% were
family households. Of these
new family households, 69%
were married couple families.
Monticello has a smaller proportion
of nonfamily households than the
region as a whole (33% to 36%), but
more than Wright County (26%).
Monticello’s nonfamily households
consist largely of the householder
living alone (78% of nonfamily
households).
Marital status provides another view
of the general family orientation of
Monticello. The 2007-2011 ACS
indicates that 55% of the population
(age 15 and older) is currently
married. This is a lower level than
reported for the County, but above
the regional average (see Figure
2-16).
Figure 2-15: Household Type (1990 to 2010)
Figure 2-14: Regional Comparison of Household Type
28
%
21
%
12
%
6%
33
%
31
%
30
%
8%
5%
26
%
23
%
27
%
8%
6%
35
%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Married - children <18 Married - other Other family - children
<18
Other family - other Nonfamily
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
1,777
1,285
987
492 394
2,944
2,066
1,550
878 698
4,693
3,164
2,311
1,529
1,197
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
Total households Family households
(families)
Married-couple family Nonfamily households Householder living alone
1990 2000 2010
A Family Household includes a householder and one or more people living in the same household who are related
to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. A family household may contain people not related to the
householder, but those people are not included as part of the householder’s family in census tabulations. This
means that the population living in family household may exceed the population of families.
Nonfamiliy Households contain a group of unrelated people or one person living alone.
The Householder is the person in whose name the home is owned or rented.
Community Context | 2-132008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
The Census shows several trends
about the size of each household:
f The economy has slightly
reversed the historical trend
of households getting smaller.
While the average size of a
household dropped from 2.73
in 1990 to 2.64 in 2000, it
increased to 2.68 in 2010. (see
Figure 2-17).
f The rebound of household size
is due to renters where the
household size rose from 1.97
in 2000 to 2.25 in 2010. The size
of owner households continued
to drop between 2000 and 2010.
f The average household living in
owned housing is larger (2.85
people per household) than
the typical household in rental
housing (2.25 people).
f For each household and family
type in Figure 2-18, Monticello
has fewer people per household/
family than for Wright County
as a whole. However, it is larger
than the Twin Cities SMSA.
Figure 2-17: Household Size (1990 to 2010)
Figure 2-18: Regional Household Size Comparison (2010)
2.73
3.04
2.26
2.64
2.90
1.97
2.68 2.85
2.25
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
All households Owned housing Rental housing
1990 2000 2010
2.64
3.13
2.90
1.97
2.83
3.26
2.98
2.04
2.56
3.15
2.75
2.04
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
Average household size Average family size Average household size - own Average household size - rent
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
27
%
55
%
1%
5%
11
%
24
%
63
%
1%
4%
8%
32
%
52
%
1%
4%
10
%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Never married Now married, except
separated
Separated Widowed Divorced
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
1
5
y
e
a
r
s
a
n
d
o
l
d
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-16: Regional Marital Status Comparison (2007-2011 ACS)
2-14 | Community Context City of Monticello
Mobility
Mobility is an important
characteristic of Monticello’s
population. Unfortunately, between
the 2000 Census and the 2007-2011
ACS the question changed from
residence in previous five years to
residence previous year. While this
change helps with understanding
mobility moving forward, it does
prevent historical comparisons at
this time.
In the 2007-2011 ACS, 83% of the
population lived in the same house
the previous year. This compares
to 90% for Wright County and
85% for the region. The Census
does not report movement within
Monticello (the population that
moved to a different house in
Monticello) during this period.
However, it does note that 7% of the
population came from elsewhere
in Wright County. Monticello had
a higher percentage than both the
county or region of people who had
moved from a different Minnesota
county (7%) or a different state (3%)
Another measure of mobility is
the year moved into their current
residence. In the 2007-2011 ACS,
74% of Monticello’s population had
moved into their current house
2000 or later. This compares to 62%
in Wright County and 60% in the
region.
These mobility statistics suggest that
Monticello’s population is relatively
new to the community. These
residents have had limited time to
form connections to the community.
The sense of community history has
a short time horizon.
Figure 2-19: Regional Comparison of Residence Previous Year
Figure 2-20: Year Moved Into House (2007-2011 ACS)
83
%
17
%
7%
10
%
7%
3%
90
%
10
%
5%6%
4%
1%
85
%
14
%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Same house Different house in
the U.S.
Same county Different county Same state Different state
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
46%
28%
18%
5%
2%1%
35%
28%
21%
9%
5%3%
38%
21%21%
10%
5%4%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2005 or later 2000 to 2004 1990 to 1999 1980 to 1989 1970 to 1979 1969 or earlier
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Community Context | 2-152008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Demographics
A comprehensive plan focuses
most closely on the physical aspects
of community - land use, parks,
streets, and utilities. Planning
must recognize that the physical
and social aspects of community
are intertwined. It is impossible to
plan for the future without a careful
examination of the demographic,
social, and economic characteristics
of the community.
Age
Monticello’s population increased
from 4,941 in 1990 to 12,759 in
2010, a 158% increase. As shown in
Figure 2-21, the population grew in
all age brackets.
An issue raised at community
meetings was that Monticello
is a “starter” community. Young
families buy their first home in
Monticello, but move away later
in life. A comparison with Wright
County and the Twin Cities SMSA
does show that Monticello has a
larger percentage of families with
children (72%) than the Twin Cities
SMSA (63%).
Monticello has a smaller population
of older residents. Only 9% of the
2010 population was age 65 or older.
The senior population is slightly
smaller than for Wright County
(10%) or the Twin Cities region
(11%).
Monticello is a relatively young
community. The 2010 median age
of Monticello’s population was 32.4
years. This compares with 35 years
for the county and 37 years for the
region.
Figure 2-21: Age of Population (1990 to 2010)
Figure 2-22: Age Distribution City/County/Region (2010)
507
1,303
1,915
697 519799
1,846
3,333
1,192
698
1,292
2,893
4,977
2,390
1,207
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
Under 5 years 5 to 19/20 years 19/20 years to 44 45 to 64 Over 65 years
1990 2000 2010
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
65 and older 35 to 64 20 to 34 5 to 19 Under 5
2-16 | Community Context City of Monticello
Race
It is important to understand how
the Census addresses racial issues.
The Census allows people to select
the race or races with which they
most closely identify. The standards
for collecting and presenting data
on race and ethnicity were revised
for the 2000 Census. The new
guidelines are intended to reflect
“the increasing diversity of our
Nation’s population, stemming from
growth in interracial marriages and
immigration.” As a result, race data
from prior to 2000 is not directly
comparable.
An examination of Census data
shows diversity in Monticello did
increase from 3% in 2000 to 7%
in 2010. The racial diversity of
Monticello’s population is similar
to Wright County, but less than the
region as a whole (see Figure 2-24).
Another factor in understanding
race data is the reporting of the
Hispanic population. People who
identify their origin as Spanish,
Hispanic, or Latino are not classified
as a separate racial category. They
may be of any race. The number
of people reported as Hispanic or
Latino (of any race) rose from 160 in
2000 to 686 in 2010. Monticello’s 5%
proportion is notably greater than
Wright County’s 2% and the same
as the region.
School enrollment data collected
and reported by the Minnesota
Department of Education provides
a more current look at the racial
composition of Monticello’s
population. For the 2012/2013
school year, the four schools in
Figure 2-23: Race (1990 to 2010)
Figure 2-24: Regional Comparison of Race (2010)
Figure 2-25: Race of Elementary School Population (2006/07)
93%
2%1%1%2%2%
95%
1%0%1%1%2%
81%
7%
1%6%2%3%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
White Black or African
American
American Indian and
Alaska Native
Asian Some other race Two or more races
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
LITTLE MOUNTAIN ELEMENTARY
PINEWOOD ELEMENTARY
MONTICELLO MIDDLE
MONTICELLO SENIOR HIGH
American Indian Asian Hispanic Black White
7,
6
2
9
26 16 44 50 10
3
11
,
8
1
2
19
5
64 13
0
29
5
26
3
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
White Black or African
American
American Indian or
Native Alaskan
Asian Some other race Two or more races
2000 2010
Community Context | 2-172008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Monticello School District reported
that 9% of total enrollment was a
race other than white. (In this data,
Hispanic is classified as a category
of race) This is up from 7% in the
2006/2007 school year. The chart
in Figure 2-25 shows the racial
composition for each school. Little
Mountain Elementary has the most
diverse student population.
Another way of looking at the ethnic
characteristics of the population
is place of birth. Only 1.7% of
Monticello’s population was foreign
born in the 2007-2011 ACS. As
with race, the ratio of foreign born
residents is similar to county and
well below regional levels (see
Figure 2-26). Of note, the percent of
foreign born dropped slightly from
the 2000 Census.
The chart in Figure 2-27 compares
the place of birth for the foreign born
population. Latin America was the
most common place of birth for all
jurisdictions. 55% of Monticello’s
foreign born population was born
in Latin America.
Figure 2-27: Regional Place of Birth Foreign Born Population -Comparison
(2007-2011 ACS)
Figure 2-26: Regional Place of Birth Comparison (2007-2011 ACS)
79
%
19
%
0%1%1%
81
%
16
%
0%1%1%
64
%
26
%
1%
4%5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Native - born in MN Native - born in other
State
Native - born outside US Foreign born - naturalized
citizen
Foreign born - not a citizen
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
3%
9%
0%0%
55
%
33
%
17
%
24
%
11
%
1%
37
%
11
%
12
%
39
%
21
%
0%
26
%
3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Europe Asia Africa Oceania Latin America Northern America
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
2-18 | Community Context City of Monticello
Income
Income influences many aspects of
community. Income provides the
capacity to acquire housing (own
or rent) and to purchase goods
and services from local businesses.
Income influences the demand for
and the capacity to support public
services.
Census data shows that Monticello
has more households earning less
than $35,000 than the county. In
addition, the community has a
lower percentage of high income
households than either the county
or region. (see Figure 2-28).
Figure 2-29 compares Monticello
with other cities in the northwest
sector of the Twin Cities region.
For both measures of income,
Monticello falls below all
communities except Big Lake,
Becker, and Buffalo.
Data about the characteristics of
children enrolled in the public
school system provide some
insights about current economic
conditions. In the 20012/13 school
year, Monticello elementary schools
reported that 26% of the student
population was eligible for free
and reduced price lunches. This is
an increase from the 21% eligible
in 2006/2007 school year. For
individual schools, this segment of
the student population ranges from
less than 22% to 29% (see Figure
2-30).
Figure 2-28: Regional Income Comparison (2007-2011 ACS)
25%
32%
37%
6%
21%
34%
37%
8%
25%
32%32%
12%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Less than $35,000 $34,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $149,999 $150,000 and above
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-29: City Comparison Incomes (2007-2011 ACS)
66
,
7
4
8
77
,
0
3
8
84
,
6
6
1
83
,
8
9
0
64
,
1
4
8
67
,
7
5
0
66
,
2
0
0
74
,
2
0
8
63
,
5
3
3
76
,
0
3
4
70
,
2
2
4
83
,
9
5
2
73
,
7
1
1
77
,
7
5
7
94
,
7
6
9
99
,
9
4
0
86
,
1
6
3
89
,
2
2
0
69
,
6
7
4
78
,
5
4
3
66
,
1
5
7
82
,
4
4
8
-
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
Median household Median family
Monticello Albertville Becker Big Lake
Buffalo Elk River Otsego Rogers
-
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
LITTLE MOUNTAIN
ELEMENTARY
PINEWOOD
ELEMENTARY
MONTICELLO MIDDLE MONTICELLO SENIOR
HIGH
En
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
2
0
0
6
/
0
7
S
c
h
o
o
l
Y
e
a
r
Enrollment Free Lunch
Figure 2-30: Socio-Economic Indicators Monticello Schools (20012/13)
Community Context | 2-192008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Educational Attainment
The Census shows an increase
in college education among
Monticello residents. From 1990 to
the 2007-2011 ACS, the percentage
of the population age 25 and older
who was a college graduate of
some type (associate, bachelor, or
graduate) rose from 21% to 38%. In
the 2007-2011 ACS, only 5% of the
population did not graduate from
high school.
The chart in Figure 2-32 compares
educational attainment in
Monticello with Wright County
and the region. Monticello has a
noticeably lower level of residents
with bachelors or graduate degrees
than the region.
Employment
Employment touches many aspects
of community life. Jobs provide
the income to pay for housing and
to purchase goods and services.
The location of jobs influences
the amount of time Monticello
residents are in the community each
day. Commuting decisions impact
transportation systems.
Labor Force
The Census looks at the potential
working population as persons
age 16 and older. The Labor Force
includes all people classified in the
civilian labor force, plus members
of the U.S. Armed Forces. The
Civilian Labor Force consists of
people classified as employed or
unemployed.
Monticello’s labor force grew with
the population from 1990 to the
2007-2011 ACS (see Figure 2-33).
The share of the working age
Figure 2-31: Educational Attainment
Figure 2-32: Regional Educational Attainment Comparison (2007-2011 ACS)
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
Less than 9th
grade
9th to 12th
grade, no
diploma
High school
graduate
(includes
equivalency)
Some college, no
degree
Associate degree Bachelor's degree Graduate or
professional
degree
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
2
5
y
e
a
r
s
a
n
d
o
l
d
e
r
1990 2000 2007-2011
7%
32
%
24
%
13
%
18
%
6%7%
33
%
24
%
11
%
19
%
6%7%
24
%
22
%
9%
25
%
12
%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
No H.S. diploma High school graduate Some college, no
degree
Associate degree Bachelor's degree Graduate or
professional degree
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
2
5
y
e
a
r
s
a
n
d
o
l
d
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
2-20 | Community Context City of Monticello
population employed in the labor
force grew from 67% to 75%. It is
important to note, however, that
unemployment during the same
period also rose from 3.8% to 5.3%.
The increase in the employed
population primarily came from the
transition of folks not in the labor
force. This would include students,
stay at home parents, or seniors into
the labor force. The percentage of
those classifying themselves as not
in the labor force dropped from
29% in 1990 to 20% in the 2007-
2011 ACS.
Occupation
Figure 2-34 compares the occupation
of Monticello’s population with the
county and region. Monticello
stands out with a lower percentage
of the working population employed
in managerial and professional
occupations. Unfortunately due
to changes in occupation coding,
historical comparisons of this data
is unavailable.
An examination of Quarterly
Census of Employment and Wages
shows that between the 1st quarter
of 2002 to the 1st quarter of 2012,
Monticello did have an increase in
the number of establishments and
employees. Monticello’s 24% growth
in the number of employees was
greater than either Wright County
(18%) or the state (2%). Note that
given a change in data collection
methods, not all industries are
represented in the table. This data
shows a better overall growth than
was found in Table 2-5 of the 2010
Business Retention and Expansion
Research Report. That report looked
specifically at the change from 2008
Figure 2-33: Population in the Labor Force
67%
4%
29%
76%
2%
21%
75%
5%
20%
75%
5%
20%
72%
5%
24%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Employed Unemployed Not in labor force
%
o
f
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
1990 Monticello 2000 Monticello 2007-2011 Monticello 2007-2011 Wright County 2007-2011 Twin Cities SMSA
31
%
16
%
31
%
10
%
12
%
34
%
16
%
25
%
11
%
14
%
42
%
15
%
25
%
7%
11
%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Management, business,
science, and arts
occupations
Service occupations Sales and office
occupations
Natural resources,
construction, and
maintenance
occupations
Production,
transportation, and
material moving
occupations
Ci
v
i
l
i
a
n
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-34: Regional Occupation Comparison
20022012% Change20022012% Change
Total, All Industries 338 374 11%5,992 7,427 24%
Manufacturing 26 23 ‐12%780 1,041 33%
Retail Trade 57 60 5%1,058 1,273 20%
Information 7 8 14%83 87 5%
Finance and Insurance 28 22 ‐21%149 129 ‐13%
Real Estate and Rental
and Leasing 14 18 29%36 32 ‐11%
Arts, Entertainment, and
Recreation 6 4 ‐33%88 93 6%
Accommodation and
Food Services 25 38 52%562 720 28%
Other Services (except
Public Administration)17 34 100%152 166 9%
Public Administration 2 4 100%113 155 37%
Number of EstablishmentsNumber of Employees
Figure 2-35: Monticello Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Community Context | 2-212008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
to 2010 where there were losses
in retail trade, manufacturing,
accommodation and food service,
public administration, finance and
insurance, and arts, entertainment
and recreation.
Commuting
Travel to work data shows a very
automobile dependent pattern
(see Figures 2-36 and 2-37). The
percent of Monticello workers
driving alone to work increased
from 1990 (78%) to 2007-2011
ACS (86%). Less than 1 percent
of the labor force in Monticello
uses public transportation. More
people walked or worked at home
than used public transportation.
The share of workers that walked or
worked at home remained the same
at 5%. These commuting patterns
are reflective of other exurban
settings in the Twin Cities regions.
The employment and commuting
patterns contribute to the necessity
of owning an automobile in
Monticello. Only 7% of occupied
housing units did not have a vehicle
(see Figure 2-37). The percentage
of housing units with two or more
vehicles rose from 58% in 1990 to
65% in the 2007-2011 ACS.
The Census also collects data on
the average travel time to work.
The 2000 Census reported a mean
commute time of 24 minutes. In the
2007-2011 ACS, the mean travel
times to work were 28.5 minutes
for Monticello, 29.7 minutes for
Wright County, and 24.5 minutes
for the region.
78%
15%
1%1%5%
83%
12%
0%1%4%
86%
6%0%1%5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Drove alone Carpool Public transportation Other means Walked or worked at
home
Wo
r
k
e
r
s
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
1990 2000 2007-2011
Figure 2-36: Means of Travel to Work
Figure 2-37: Regional Means of Travel to Work Comparison (2007-2011 ACS)
86
%
6%
0%1%3%3%
84
%
8%
1%1%1%
5%
78
%
9%
5%
2%
2%5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Drove alone Carpool Public transportation Walk Other Work at home
%
W
o
r
k
e
r
s
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
7%
28%
43%
22%
3%
22%
46%
29%
8%
31%
41%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
None 1 2 3 or more
%
o
f
O
c
c
u
p
i
e
d
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-38: Regional Comparison of Number of Vehicles (2007-2011 ACS)
2-22 | Community Context City of Monticello
Employment
The U.S. Census Center for
Economic Studies now provides
local employment dynamic data
on its OntheMap website. 2010
data from that website shows that
Monticello provided employment
for 4,684 workers and had 5,432
residents in the workforce (see
Figure 2-39). Of those employed in
Monticello, only 17% also lived in
the community. Similarly, of those
who reside in Monticello, only 15%
work in the community. This means
that only 835 people both live and
work in the community. Figure 2-40
provides a snapshot of the inflow/
outflow for 2002 to 2010.
Figure 2-41 shows how well
Monticello is able to keep workers
residing in the community and
residents working in the community.
While Monticello has noticeably
higher retention rates than Becker,
Big Lake and St. Michael, it has a
lower rate than Buffalo.
Figure 2-42 shows the place of
residence for people traveling to
Monticello for work. The bulk
of the work force continues to
comes from the area surrounding
Monticello. 30% of people working
in the community live elsewhere in
Wright County, including Buffalo
and St. Michael. Another 26% of
the workforce lives in Sherburne
County, including Becker and Big
Lake.
Nearly 40% of Monticello residents
work in Hennepin County, with the
largest percentages in Minneapolis,
Plymouth, and Maple Grove.
Another 15% work elsewhere in
Figure 2-39: OntheMap 2010 Inflow/Outflow Job Counts
Inflow/Outflow Report
Inflow/Outflow Job Counts(Primary Jobs)
2010
Count Share
Employed in the Selection
Area 4,684 100.0%
Employed in the Selection
Area but Living Outside 3,849 82.2%
Employed and Living in the
Selection Area 835 17.8%
Living in the Selection Area 5,432 100.0%
Living in the Selection Area
but Employed Outside 4,597 84.6%
Living and Employed in the
Selection Area 835 15.4%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin-Destination Employment
Statistics (Beginning of Quarter Employment, 2nd Quarter of 2002-2010).
Notes:
1. Race, Ethnicity, Educational Attainment, and Sex statistics are beta release results and only
available for 2009 and 2010 data.
2. Educational Attainment is only produced for workers aged 30 and over.
Inflow/Outflow Report
Inflow/Outflow Job Counts(Primary Jobs)
2010
Count Share
Employed in the Selection
Area 4,684 100.0%
Employed in the Selection
Area but Living Outside 3,849 82.2%
Employed and Living in the
Selection Area 835 17.8%
Living in the Selection Area 5,432 100.0%
Living in the Selection Area
but Employed Outside 4,597 84.6%
Living and Employed in the
Selection Area 835 15.4%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin-Destination Employment
Statistics (Beginning of Quarter Employment, 2nd Quarter of 2002-2010).
Notes:
1. Race, Ethnicity, Educational Attainment, and Sex statistics are beta release results and only
available for 2009 and 2010 data.
2. Educational Attainment is only produced for workers aged 30 and over.
Figure 2-41: OntheMap 2010 Inflow/Outflow Regional Comparison
Figure 2-40: OntheMap 2002-2010 Inflow/Outflow Job Counts
2002 2006 2010
Employees 3,906 4,239 4,684
% Workers Living in Monticello 20.5%20%17.8%
Residents Employed 4,400 4,835 5,432
% Residents Employed in Monticello 18.5%17.5%15.4%
15%
18%
22%22%
7%
10%
6%
12%
6%
16%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Resident Employed in City Employee Living in City
Monticello Buffalo Becker Big Lake St. Michael
Community Context | 2-232008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Wright County, including Buffalo
and St. Michael.
OntheMap provides an ability
compare the wages earned by
residents and workers (see Figure
2-44). The 2010 data shows that
a larger percentage of residents
are able to earn a higher wage
working outside the community
than within the community. It also
shows that the spread of incomes
for jobs within the community held
by non-residents has a generally
equal spread amongst all income
brackets.
Figure 2-45 compares the reported
educational attainment of
Monticello workers when provided.
This figure indicates that workers in
Big Lake (64%) and Becker (66%)
are slightly more educated than in
Monticello (63%). Buffalo has the
same mix as Monticello. At 60%
St. Michael has slightly lower post
high school education levels than
in Monticello.
Monticello,
15.4%
Minneapolis,
7.8%
Plymouth, 4.6%
Buffalo, 4.5%
Maple Grove,
4.3%
St. Cloud, 3.9%
Other Hennepin
County, 23.0%
Other Wright
County, 9.8%
Other
Sherburne
County, 7.7%
Ramsey County,
5.0%
Anoka County,
5.0%
Other Place,
9.0%Monticello,
17.8%
Big Lake, 5.9%
Buffalo, 4.0%
St. Michael,
3.5%
Becker, 3.0%
Other Wright
County, 22.2%
Other
Sherburne
County, 17.7%
Hennepin
County, 5.3%
Stearns County,
5.0%
Anoka County,
3.2%
Other Place,
12.4%
Figure 2-42: OntheMap 2010 Where Employees Live Figure 2-43: OntheMap 2010 Where Residents Work
Figure 2-44: OntheMap 2010 Income Comparison
Figure 2-45: OntheMap 2010 Education Attainment by Worker
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
Bachelor's degree or
advanced degree
Some college or Associate
degree
High school or equivalent,
no college
Less than high school
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
More than $3,333 per
month
$1,251 to $3,333 per
month
$1,250 per month or less
2-24 | Community Context City of Monticello
OntheMap also enables a comparison of jobs by NAICS Industry Sector across communities for 2010. As shown
in Figure 2-46, the highest percentage of Monticello’s jobs are in the Retail Trade, Educational Services, and Health
Care and Social Assistance sectors. Monticello’s 11.6% of manufacturing jobs is less than Becker and Big Lake
but larger than St. Michael and Buffalo. When analyzing this table it is important to remember that Monticello
has 4,684 jobs while Buffalo has 5,625, Becker has 1,429, Big Lake has 2,155, and St. Michael has 2,797. This is
particularly important when comparing the communities as some communities may have a higher percentage
of workers in an industry, but yet the total number of employees in that sector may be less as they have a smaller
total workforce in that community. For example, while Big Lake has 26% of its workers in manufacturing compared
to Monticello’s 12%, Big Lake only has about 20 more workers in manufacturing than Monticello.
Figure 2-46: OntheMap 2010 Jobs by NAICS Industry Sector1
Industry Sector CountShareCountShareCountShareCountShareCountShare
Retail Trade 86818.5%88915.1%35725.0%29613.7%31711.3%
Educational Services 80717.2%5108.7%43730.6%34115.8%1836.5%
Health Care and Social
Assistance
80417.2%1,94333.0%1117.8%2009.3%1605.7%
Manufacturing 54511.6%3085.2%22415.7%56826.4%27910.0%
Accommodation and Food
Services
3277.0%4908.3%634.4%1627.5%49417.7%
Wholesale Trade 2645.6%811.4%795.5%602.8%45716.3%
Construction 2224.7%2354.0%151.0%261.2%42615.2%
Transportation and Warehousing1613.4%340.6%684.8%562.6%361.3%
Public Administration 1393.0%60610.3%00.0%653.0%281.0%
Other Services (excluding Public
Administration)
1202.6%1953.3%90.6%602.8%712.5%
Finance and Insurance 962.0%1101.9%312.2%281.3%602.1%
Professional, Scientific, and
Technical Services
831.8%1582.7%181.3%371.7%672.4%
Administration & Support, Waste
Management and Remediation
691.5%891.5%40.3%170.8%702.5%
Management of Companies and
Enterprises
701.5%200.3%00.0%20.1%682.4%
Real Estate and Rental and
Leasing
320.7%430.7%40.3%120.6%301.1%
Arts, Entertainment, and
Recreation
300.6%540.9%40.3%321.5%321.1%
Information 280.6%791.3%50.3%572.6%60.2%
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and
Hunting
190.4%510.9%00.0%60.3%130.5%
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and
Gas Extraction
00.0%00.0%00.0%00.0%00.0%
Utilities 00.0%00.0%00.0%1306.0%00.0%
Total 4,684100%5,625100%1,429100%2,155100%2,797100%
BuffaloBeckerBig LakeSt. MichaelMonticello
Worker Area Profile
Community Context | 2-12008 Comprehensive Plan
Planning for the future does not start on a clean slate. Th e future will be
built on the foundation of Monticello as it exists today. Th e Monticello of
today has evolved over time, shaped by a variety of forces. Th ese forces
will continue to shape the community into the future.
Th e Community Context section of the Comprehensive Plan examines
a variety of forces and factors aff ecting development of Monticello. A
clear understanding of these infl uences provides the context for planning
decisions.
Physical Characteristics
Location
Monticello’s location is a critical factor for the future. Monticello is cen-
trally located between the Minneapolis/St. Paul and St. Cloud metropolitan
areas on the Interstate 94 corridor (see Figure 2-1). State Highway 25 is a
key north/south corridor on the west edge of the Twin Cities metropolitan
area. Th is highway (with the Mississippi River bridge) connects Sherburne
County and other exurban areas with jobs and services in the Twin Cities.
STH 25 is an important route to recreational areas in northern Minnesota.
In the future, this highway will serve as the connection with commuter
rail transit service in Big Lake.
Th is location presents both opportunities and challenges to Monticello’s
future:
Th e highway system provides convenient access to employment,
goods and services in the Twin Cities region. Th is location allows
people to enjoy the small town environment and lower housing costs
of Monticello while drawing upon employment and amenities of the
Twin Cities.
Th is location makes Monticello vulnerable to increased fuel costs,
traffi c congestion and travel time to work.
Location and accessibility allow Monticello to become an important
center for employment, services and shopping between St. Cloud and
Minneapolis.
Figure 2-1: Regional Setting
Monticello
2
es not start on a clean slate. Th e future will be
Monticello as it exists today. Th e Monticello of
me, shaped by a variety of forces. Th ese forces
communityintothefuture
Community Context
Chapter Contents
Physical Characteristics .............2-1
Location .....................................2-1
Planning Context .....................2-2
Existing Land Use ....................2-2
Street System ............................2-4
Orderly Annexation ................2-4
Growth ..........................................2-9
Housing ........................................2-9
Housing Type ............................2-9
Age of Housing ......................2-10
Age of Householder ..............2-11
Demographics ...........................2-12
Age ...........................................2-12
Mobility ...................................2-13
Households .............................2-14
Income.....................................2-18
Educational Attainment .......2-19
Marital Status .........................2-19
Employment ...........................2-20
St. Cloud
Big Lake
St. PaulMinneapolis
Twin Cities Region
2-2 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
Th ousands of cars travel through Monticello every
day. Th ese vehicles increase the potential market
for local business. On the downside, these trips
add to traffi c congestion in Monticello.
Th e Comprehensive Plan seeks ways to seize the op-
portunities and to mitigate the threats created by
Monticello’s location.
Planning Context
Th e map in Figure 2-2 is a composite of key physical
factors infl uencing future growth and development:
Existing land use.
Potential future street corridors, highway inter-
changes and highway bridges.
Planned expansion of the sanitary sewer system.
Existing powerline corridors.
Watershed breaklines.
Public waters and wetlands.
Th is map illustrates the location and type of physical
factors that will shape future development of Monti-
cello. Th is map was used to form and evaluate land use
alternatives during the planning process.
Th e section that follows explains these physical factors
in greater detail.
Existing Land Use
Th e planning process began with the investigation and
analysis of existing land use. Monticello is constantly
changing. Development converts vacant land to built
uses. Redevelopment changes the character and, at
times, the use of land. Th e map in Figure 2-2 is a snap-
shot of Monticello in 2007. Th is information forms the
foundation of the Comprehensive Plan by describing:
Th e nature and diversity of land uses in Monti-
cello.
Th e relationships between built and natural fea-
tures of the community.
Areas with potential capacity to accommodate
future growth.
Th e map of existing land uses divides Monticello into a
series of residential, commercial, industrial and public
use types. A brief description of each category of exist-
ing land use follows.
Single Family Residential - Traditional single family
neighborhoods where housing units are “unattached”
to one another.
2 to 8 Units - Forms of housing with two to eight units
attached to one another or in a common structure, most
commonly duplexes, twin homes and townhouses.
8+ Units - Higher density residential land uses with
structures containing multiple housing units including
apartments and condominiums.
Manufactured Home Park – Areas that are exclusively
designed for manufactured housing units.
Commercial – Primarily retail and service businesses.
Th e map shows properties that are currently planned
for commercial use, but have not yet developed.
Industrial - All forms of businesses with manufacturing,
distribution, warehousing or other industrial use. Th e
map shows properties that are currently planned for
industrial use, but have not yet developed.
K-12 School – Elementary, middle and high schools.
Institutional – Churches, cemeteries, hospitals and
other quasi-public land uses.
Public – Property owned by local (not school), state
and federal governments.
Park - Property in the public park system.
Private Recreation Facility – Golf courses and the
YMCA camp.
Railroad – Rail right-of-way.
Utility – Power plant.
Agricultural - Land outside of the city limits and not
occupied by some other land use.
Community Context | 2-32008 Comprehensive Plan
Figure 2-2: Planning Context
Le
g
e
n
d
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
I
n
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
B
r
i
d
g
e
Sa
n
i
t
a
r
y
S
e
w
e
r
E
x
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
5
Y
e
a
r
s
10
Y
e
a
r
s
20
Y
e
a
r
s
Be
y
o
n
d
2
0
Y
e
a
r
s
Wa
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
B
r
e
a
k
L
i
n
e
Or
d
e
r
l
y
A
n
n
e
x
a
t
i
o
n
A
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
1
0
B
y
p
a
s
s
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
A
r
t
e
r
i
a
l
o
r
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
R
o
a
d
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
A
r
t
e
r
i
a
l
o
r
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
R
o
a
d
Po
w
e
r
l
i
n
e
Mo
n
t
i
c
e
l
l
o
C
i
t
y
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
Ri
v
e
r
s
a
n
d
S
t
r
e
a
m
s
Pu
b
l
i
c
W
a
t
e
r
s
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
Na
t
i
o
n
a
l
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
Ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
Si
n
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
2
t
o
8
U
n
i
t
s
8+
U
n
i
t
s
Ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
H
o
m
e
P
a
r
k
Va
c
a
n
t
-
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Va
c
a
n
t
-
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
K-
1
2
S
c
h
o
o
l
In
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l
Pu
b
l
i
c
Pr
i
v
a
t
e
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
Pa
r
k
Ra
i
l
r
o
a
d
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
2-4 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
Natural Features
Th e natural environment has shaped Monticello’s past
and will infl uence its future. Th e original community
grew along the Mississippi River. As Monticello grew
away from the River, fl at land and reasonable soils facili-
tated suburban growth. Looking to the future, natural
features will continue to infl uence development:
Much of the prime farm land (as classifi ed by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and
Wright County) is located in the southeastern sec-
tions of the community.
Abundant aggregate resources create the potential
for mining in future growth areas.
Lakes, wetlands and wooded areas off er amenities
to attract development and also to be protected.
Th e map in Figure 2-4 shows these natural features in
and around Monticello.
Street System
Th e street system continues to play a key role in the
form and function of the community. Streets provide
access to property and the ability for land to develop.
Commercial and industrial land uses rely on this ac-
cess to conduct business. Streets allow people to move
throughout the community. Th e physical design of
streets infl uences the character of residential neighbor-
hoods and commercial districts.
Th e best way to describe the street system is in terms
of its functional classifi cation (see Figure 2-5). Each
street serves a specifi c function. Th e pieces of the
street system must fi t together to achieve the desired
functional outcomes. Monticello’s street system con-
sists of fi ve functional classifi cations: Major Arterial,
Minor Arterial, Collector, and Local Streets.
Major Arterial streets represent regional transpor-
tation corridors that connect Monticello with other
cities. Only I-94 is in this classifi cation.
Minor Arterials are roadways connect Monticello
with the surrounding region. Within Monticello,
Minor Arterials connect districts and other des-
tinations. The safe and efficient movement of
vehicles is the most important function of these
streets. State Highway 25 and Broadway/County
75 east of Highway 25 are minor arterials.
Collector streets form the link between arterials
and local streets. As the name suggests, these
streets are intended to “collect” traffi c from an area
and channel it into the arterial system. Collector
streets are typically limited in distance to discour-
age use for longer trips. Th eir design typically places
equal emphasis on mobility and access.
All other streets in Monticello are local streets.
Th ese streets emphasize access to property. Th ey
are typically designed for shorter distances and
lower speeds.
Orderly Annexation
In 2005, the City of Monticello and Monticello Town-
ship entered into an orderly annexation agreement
covering the property surrounding the City. This
agreement provides a means for the orderly develop-
ment of the community without contentious annexa-
tions. It also protects rural portions of the Township
from urbanization. All of the development shown in
the Comprehensive Plan occurs within the orderly an-
nexation area. Th e boundaries of this area are shown
in Figure 2-6.
Community Context | 2-52008 Comprehensive Plan
Figure 2-3: Existing Land Use (2007)
10
10
2
5
14
11
43
50
68
5
81
94
25
75
18
117
39
10
6
37
1
3
1
Or
d
e
r
l
y
An
n
e
x
a
t
i
o
n
Ar
e
a
00
.
5
1
0.
2
5
Mi
l
e
s
Ju
l
y
1
1
,
2
0
0
7
Da
t
a
S
o
u
r
c
e
:
M
n
D
N
R
,
S
h
e
r
b
u
r
n
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
W
r
i
g
h
t
Co
u
n
t
y
,
a
n
d
W
S
B
&
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
.
39
Le
g
e
n
d
Mo
n
t
i
c
e
l
l
o
C
i
t
y
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
Or
d
e
r
l
y
A
n
n
e
x
a
t
i
o
n
A
r
e
a
Ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
Si
n
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
2
t
o
8
U
n
i
t
s
8+
U
n
i
t
s
Ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
H
o
m
e
P
a
r
k
Va
c
a
n
t
-
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Va
c
a
n
t
-
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
K-
1
2
S
c
h
o
o
l
In
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l
Pu
b
l
i
c
Pr
i
v
a
t
e
R
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
Pa
r
k
Ra
i
l
r
o
a
d
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
2-6 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
Figure 2-4: Natural Resources
10
10
2
5
14
11
43
50
68
5
81
94
25
75
18
117
39
10
6
3
7
1
3
1
Or
d
e
r
l
y
An
n
e
x
a
t
i
o
n
Ar
e
a
00
.
5
1
0.
2
5
Mi
l
e
s
Ju
l
y
1
1
,
2
0
0
7
Da
t
a
S
o
u
r
c
e
:
M
n
D
N
R
,
S
h
e
r
b
u
r
n
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
W
r
i
g
h
t
Co
u
n
t
y
,
a
n
d
W
S
B
&
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
.
Le
g
e
n
d
Mn
D
N
R
F
E
M
A
F
l
o
o
d
p
l
a
i
n
Na
t
i
o
n
a
l
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
Pr
i
m
e
F
a
r
m
l
a
n
d
Ag
g
r
e
g
a
t
e
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
Mo
n
t
i
c
e
l
l
o
C
i
t
y
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
Or
d
e
r
l
y
A
n
n
e
x
a
t
i
o
n
A
r
e
a
Community Context | 2-72008 Comprehensive Plan
Figure 2-5: Street System
Le
g
e
n
d
Pr
i
n
c
i
p
a
l
A
r
t
e
r
i
a
l
Mi
n
o
r
A
r
t
e
r
i
a
l
Ma
j
o
r
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
Mi
n
o
r
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
Mo
n
t
i
c
e
l
l
o
C
i
t
y
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
Or
d
e
r
l
y
A
n
n
e
x
a
t
i
o
n
A
r
e
a
2-8 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
Figure 2-6: Orderly Annexation Area
10
10
2
5
14
11
43
50
68
5
81
94
25
75
18
117
39
10
6
3
7
1
3
1
00
.
5
1
0.
2
5
Mi
l
e
s
Ju
l
y
1
1
,
2
0
0
7
Da
t
a
S
o
u
r
c
e
:
M
n
D
N
R
,
S
h
e
r
b
u
r
n
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
W
r
i
g
h
t
Co
u
n
t
y
,
a
n
d
W
S
B
&
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
.
Le
g
e
n
d
Mo
n
t
i
c
e
l
l
o
C
i
t
y
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
Or
d
e
r
l
y
A
n
n
e
x
a
t
i
o
n
A
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
A
r
e
a
Community Context | 2-92008 Comprehensive Plan
Growth
Monticello celebrated its 150th birthday in 2006. For
most of this time, Monticello was a small town on
the banks of the Mississippi River. Over the past 30
years, the suburban expansion of the Twin Cities has
brought new growth in Monticello. In 1970, the City’s
population totalled 1,636. By 2000, the population had
grown to 7,868 (see Figure 2-7). Th e combination of
new housing development and annexation has pushed
the current population over 10,000.
Th ese growth trends continued into the fi rst half of this
decade. From 2000 to 2005, the City issued an average
of 219 new housing permits per year (see Figure 2-8).
In 2006, the overall slowdown in the housing market
dropped new growth to just 77 new units. Th is growth
trend continued into 2007 with 47 permits issued.
Recent growth trends have seen an important shift in
the type of new housing development. In 2000-2004,
86% of all new housing was the traditional single-family
detached home. In 2005 and 2006, more single-family
attached housing was built. Th e Land Use chapter of
the Plan discusses projections for future growth and
housing development.
Housing
Housing is a critical part of the context of planning for
the future of Monticello. It is the single largest form of
built land use. Housing shapes the form and character
of the community. It infl uences who lives in Monticello
today and in the future.
Housing Type
Figure 2-9 shows the growth in Monticello’s housing
stock from 1990 to 2000. Th e Census reported 1,097
new housing units in Monticello over this decade, a
57.5% increase in the total number of units. Single
family detached housing (1-unit detached) accounted
for 79% of this growth. Th is type of housing is occupied
by a single family and is not physically connected to
any other housing unit. It is the typical home found
in Monticello.
An additional 20% of the growth came in the form of
single family attached housing (1-unit attached). Th is
housing type is a structure containing a single housing
unit that is physically connected to one more compa-
rable housing units. Twinhomes and townhomes are
1,636 1,830
4,941
7,868
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
1970198019902000
Figure 2-7: Population Trends 1970-2000
Figure 2-8: Building Permits for New Housing
145
224
184
156
82
126
67
22 18
31
48
147
130
10
0
50
100
150
200
250
2000200120022003200420052006
Single-family detached Single-family attached
90
3
13
1
12
6
92
44
7
20
9
1,
7
7
1
34
7
14
5
53
47
9
21
0
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
1-unit
detached
1-unit
attached
2 to 4 units5 to 9 units10 or more
units
Mobile home,
trailer, or other
Al
l
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
1990 2000
Figure 2-9: Housing Type (1990 and 2000)
2-10 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
1,
6
6
7
23
6
0 21
0 0 0 0
18
2
0
81
73
33 91
53
18
5
25
4
23 28
00
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
1, de
t
a
c
hed
1, at
t
a
c
h
ed 2
3 or
4
5 to
9
10 to
1
9
20 to
4
9
50 or
m
o
r
e
M
o
b
i
l
e
hom
e
Boa
t, RV
, va
n, et
c
.
Al
l
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
-
2
0
0
0
Own Rent
Figure 2-10: Housing Type and Tenure (2000)
Figure 2-11: Housing Type and Tenure - City/County/Region (2000)
Population in Units
66
%
3%
6%
2%3%5%6%7%
80
%
4%
2%
1%2%3%3%
7%
70
%
3%5%
2%
5%5%
9%
2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
SF detached
- own
SF detached
- rent
SF attached
- own
SF attached
- rent
2 to 45 to 1920 or moreOther
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
common examples single family
attached housing.
In 2000, single family housing (de-
tached and attached) made up 70%
of Monticello’s housing stock.
27% of the 2000 housing supply was
classifi ed as rental (see Figure 2-10).
Th e vast majority of rental housing
was a type other than single family
detached. Only 81 units (4.6%) of
all 1-unit detached housing were
rental.
There were very few options for
owned housing with a density above
one unit per building. Only 21 units
(3.1% of all units with 2 or more
units in a structure) were classifi ed
as owner occupied.
Monticello’s housing stock is more
diverse than the rest of Wright
County. 86% all housing in Wright
County was single family detached
and attached (see Figure 2-11).
Monticello has more multiple unit
housing than the County, but in
proportion to the overall regional
housing supply.
The distribution of the housing
stock is indicative of where Monti-
cello residents live. 66% of the 2000
population lived in single family
detached housing (see Figure 2-11).
12% of the population lived in rental
housing with fi ve or more units in
the building.
Age of Housing
Given the growth of Monticello,
it is not surprising to fi nd that the
housing stock is relatively new.
Forty-two percent (42%) of the 2000
housing supply was built in 1990 or
later (see Figure 2-12) and only 18%
17
7
58
1
32
0
39
8
21
7
10
5
13
5
17
3
6
91
31
38
4
20
1
25
51
32
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1999 to
March
2000
1995 to
1998
1990 to
1994
1980 to
1989
1970 to
1979
1960 to
1969
1940 to
1959
1939 or
earlier
Year Built
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
Own Rent
Figure 2-12: Year Built/Tenure (2000)
Community Context | 2-112008 Comprehensive Plan
1990 or later - Own
1970 to 1989 - Own
Before 1970 - Own
1990 or later - Rent
1970 to 1989 - Rent
Before 1970 - Rent
15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Ye
ar Bu
il
t/Te
nu
re
Ag e o f H o u s e h o l d e r
Figure 2-13: Year Built/Tenure/Age of Householder (2000)
of all units were built before 1970.
Sixteen percent (16%) of all rental
units were built in 1990 or later.
Age of Householder
Figure 2-13 connects the age of the
housing with the age of the house-
holder.
A householder age 44 or young-
er occupied 75% of all owned
housing built in 1990 or later.
62% of senior households
(householder age 65 and older)
lived in owned housing.
The majority of rental units
(63%) are occupied by house-
holds headed by persons age 44
or younger.
Th is data provides insights on both
the housing supply and the age of
the population attracted to Mon-
ticello.
Th e chart in Figure 2-14 off ers an-
other perspective on the relation-
ship between housing and the age of
the householder. Th is chart shows
the distribution of housing type
and tenure by age of householder.
With the exception of the youngest
(15-24) and oldest (75+) age groups,
the vast majority of Monticello’s
population lives in single fam-
ily owned housing. Th e 15-24 age
group is most likely to live in rental
housing. Th e oldest residents live
in either single family housing or in
larger rental structures.
1
-
O
w
n
2
t
o
4
-
O
w
n
5
t
o
1
9
-
O
w
n
20
o
r
m
o
r
e
-
O
w
n
Ot
h
e
r
-
O
w
n
1
-
R
e
n
t
2
t
o
4
-
R
e
n
t
5
t
o
1
9
-
R
e
n
t
20
o
r
m
o
r
e
-
R
e
n
t
Ot
h
e
r
-
R
e
n
t
15
-
2
4
25
-
3
4
35
-
4
4
45
-
5
4
55
-
6
4
65
-
7
4
75
+
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Units in Structure/Tenure
A g e o f H o u s e h o l d e r
Figure 2-14: Housing Type/Tenure/Age of Householder (2000)
2-12 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
507
1,303
1,915
697
519
799
1,846
3,333
1,192
698
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
Under 5 years5 to 19/20 years19/20 years to 4445 to 64Over 65 years
1990 2000
Figure 2-15: Age of Population 1990 and 2000
Figure 2-16: Age Distribution City/County/Region (2000)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
65 and older
35 to 64
20 to 34
5 to 19
Under 5
508
767
1,108
648
298
229
137
130
490
927
1,078
678
331
270
190
245
1,5001,000500005001,0001,500
Under 6
6-19
20-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75 and older
Male Female
Figure 2-17: Age and Gender Distribution (2000)
Demographics
A comprehensive plan focuses
most closely on the physical aspects
of community - land use, parks,
streets, and utilities. Planning
must recognize that the physical
and social aspects of community
are intertwined. It is impossible to
plan for the future without a careful
examination of the demographic,
social and economic characteristics
of the community.
Age
Monticello’s population increased
from 4,941 in 1990 to 7,868 in 2000,
a 59% increase. The population
grew in all age brackets (see Figure
2-15).
An issue raised at community
meetings was that Monticello is
a “starter” community. Young
families buy their first home in
Monticello, but move away later
in life. Much of the Census data,
beginning with the age of popula-
tion, supports this characterization
of Monticello. Th e most population
growth occurred in the age brackets
representing families with school
age (or younger) children.
Monticello has a smaller population
of older residents. Only 6% of the
2000 population was age 65 or older.
Th e elderly population is smaller
than for Wright County (8%) or
the Twin Cities region (10%) - see
Figure 2-16.
Monticello is a relatively young
community. Th e 2000 median age
of Monticello’s population was 29.8
years. Th is compares with 33.1 years
Community Context | 2-132008 Comprehensive Plan
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
Same houseDifferent House in
same county
Different House in
same state
Different stateElsewhere
1985 (1990 Census)1995 (2000 Census)
Figure 2-19: Residence Five Years Ago
41
%
23
%
32
%
5%
1%
58
%
17
%
20
%
5%
0%
54
%
21
%
13
%
9%
2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Same house in
1995
Same county Different MN
county
Other state Other location
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-18: Residence in 1995 - City/County/Region
82%
11%
4%3%
67%
16%
10%
7%
67%
16%
9%8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
1990 or later1980 to 19891970 to 19791969 or earlier
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-20: Year Moved Into House (2000)
for the County and 34.2 years for
the region.
Figure 2-17 shows the age distri-
bution of the 2000 population.
In 2000, women made up 52% of
Monticello’s population. Women
outnumbered men in all age groups
except 20-34 years old.
Mobility
Mobility is an important character-
istic of Monticello’s population. In
the 2000 Census, only 41% of the
population (age 5 and older) lived in
the same house in 1995 (see Figure
2-18). Th is compares with 58% for
all of Wright County and 54% for
the region. Th e Census does not
report movement within Monti-
cello (the population that moved
to a diff erent house in Monticello)
during this period. People moving
to Monticello from a diff erent house
in all of Wright County made up
23% of the 2000 population.
Th e greatest shift from 1990 to 2000
came in the share of the population
that moved to Monticello from out-
side of Wright County. In 1990, 23%
of Monticello’s population reported
living in another Minnesota county.
Th is group made up 32% of the 2000
population. Th ese statistics suggest
that Monticello was successful in
attracting people Minnesotans
relocating to and within the Twin
Cities region. Monticello was less
attractive to people moving from
other states. Less than 5% of the
2000 population lived in another
state in 1995.
Another measure of mobility is the
year moved into the 2000 residence.
82% of Monticello’s 2000 population
2-14 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
1,777
1,285
987
2,944
2,066
1,550
878
698
394492
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
Total householdsFamily households
(families)
Married-couple
family
Nonfamily
households
Householder living
alone
1990 2000
Figure 2-22: Household Type (1990 and 2000)
30
%
23
%
14
%
4%
30
%
34
%
30
%
8%
4%
24
%
26
%
26
%
8%
5%
35
%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Married - children
<18
Married - other Other family -
children <18
Other family -
other
Nonfamily
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-21: Household Type - City/County/Region (2000)
A Family Household includes a householder and one or more people living in the same household who are
related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. A family household may contain people not related
to the householder, but those people are not included as part of the householder’s family in census tabulations.
This means that the population living in family household may exceed the population of families.
Nonfamiliy Households contain a group of unrelated people or one person living alone.
The Householder is the person in whose name the home is owned or rented.
moved into their current house in
1990 or later. Th e Census does not
distinguish among people moving
to Monticello and people moving
into a new house within Monticello.
Given the other Census data, it is
reasonable to conclude that many
of these households were new to
Monticello. Th is degree of move-
ment is signifi cantly higher than
County and regional levels (see
Figure 2-20).
Th ese mobility statistics suggest that
Monticello’s population is relatively
new to the community. Th ese resi-
dents have had limited time to form
connections to the community. Th e
sense of community history has a
short time horizon. Th ese trends
are also important for the future. If
people move in and stay, the com-
munity will grow proportionately
older. If the population continues
to move up and out, then the future
Monticello may show many of the
same characteristics as in 2000.
Households
A household includes all the people
who occupy a housing unit as their
usual place of residence. House-
hold characteristics off er another
perspective on the characteristics
of people living in Monticello:
70% of Monticello households
are family households (see Fig-
ure 2-21). Th is compares with
76% for the entire County and
65% for the region.
53% of all Monticello family
households include a married
couple.
44% of all households included
children under the age of 18.
Community Context | 2-152008 Comprehensive Plan
2.73
3.04
2.26
2.64
2.90
1.97
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
All householdsOwned housingRental housing
1990 2000
Figure 2-23: Household Size (1990 and 2000)
2.64
3.13
2.90
1.97
2.83
3.26
2.98
2.04
2.56
3.15
2.75
2.04
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
Average household sizeAverage family sizeAverage household size
- own
Average household size
- rent
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-24: Household Size - City/County/Region (2000)
Figure 2-25: Population Per Housing Type and Tenure (2000)
3.
4
2
2.
6
6
1.
5
8
1.
8
2
1.
8
9
1.
7
7
1.
6
7
3.
7
0
2.
4
6
3.
1
4
2.
1
7
0.
0
0
1.
2
9
0.
0
0
0.
0
0
0.
0
0
0.
0
0
2.
5
8
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
1,
detached
1,
attached
23 or 45 to 910 to 1920 to 4950 or moreMobile
home
Rent Own
Only 34% of all households in
the region contained children.
Of the 1,167 households added
from 1990 to 2000, two-thirds
were family households (see
Figure 2-22). Of these new fam-
ily households, only 72% were
married couple families.
Monticello has a smaller proportion
of nonfamily households than the
region as a whole (30% to 35%), but
more than Wright County (24%).
Monticello’s nonfamily households
consist largely of the householder
living alone (79% of nonfamily
households).
Th e Census shows several trends
about the size of each household:
Th e average size of a household
is getting smaller. From 1990
to 2000, the average size of all
Monticello households dropped
slightly from 2.73 people to 2.64
people (see Figure 2-23).
Th e average household living in
owned housing is larger (2.90
people per household) than
the typical household in rental
housing (1.97 people).
For each household and family
type in Figure 2-24, Monticello
has fewer people per house-
hold/family than for Wright
County as a whole.
Th ese statistics come from specifi c
household size data. Th e Census
also reports the population living in
various types of housing. Th is data
can be used to calculate the average
number of people living in diff erent
housing types. Th e chart in Figure
2-25 compares average population
by housing type and tenure (own
or rent). Th is data provides some
2-16 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
4,
8
7
7
15 16 26 7 0
7,
6
2
9
26 16 44 50 10
3
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
WhiteBlack or African
American
American
Indian or
Native Alaskan
AsianSome other
race
Two or more
races
1990 2000
Figure 2-26: Race (1990 and 2000)
97%
0%0%1%1%1%
98%
0%0%0%0%1%
86%
5%
1%4%2%2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
WhiteBlack or African
American
American Indian
and Alaska
Native
AsianSome other raceTwo or more
races
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-27: Race - City/County/Region (2000)
-
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
PINEWOOD
ELEMENTARY
MONTICELLO
SENIOR HIGH
MONTICELLO
MIDDLE
LITTLE
MOUNTAIN
ELEMENTARY
En
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
2
0
0
6
/
0
7
S
c
h
o
o
l
Y
e
a
r
White
Black
Hispanic
Asian
American Indian
Figure 2-28: Race of Elementary School Population (2006/07)
interesting observations about the
use of housing in Monticello:
More people tend to live in a
single-family home (1 detached
and 1 attached) when the unit is
rented instead of owned.
Owner-occupied townhouses
(1 detached) do not appear to
be producing family housing
with an average size of 2.17
people/unit.
Structures with 2 to 49 units are
primarily occupied by one and
two person households.
Th e average population of owner oc-
cupied single family is equal to the
average family size in Monticello.
Th is data suggests that other hous-
ing types (except mobile homes) are
typically occupied by one and two
person households. Th e population
per housing unit shows little varia-
tion between structures with two
or more units.
Race
It is important to understand how
the Census addresses racial issues.
Th e Census allows people to select
the race or races with which they
most closely identify. Th e standards
for collecting and presenting data
on race and ethnicity were revised
for the 2000 Census. The new
guidelines are intended to refl ect
“the increasing diversity of our Na-
tion’s population, stemming from
growth in interracial marriages and
immigration.” As a result, race data
from the 2000 Census is not directly
comparable with any prior census.
Despite the data diff erences, it is
useful to compare the racial compo-
sition of the population in 1990 and
Community Context | 2-172008 Comprehensive Plan
15
%
11
%
0%
69
%
5%
27
%
20
%
7%
33
%
14
%
16
%
42
%
14
%
22
%
5%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Born in EuropeBorn in AsiaBorn in AfricaBorn in Latin
America
Born other place
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-30: Place of Birth Foreign Born Population - City/County/Region
(2000)
80
%
17
%
0%1%1%
82
%
16
%
0%1%1%
66
%
26
%
1%3%4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Native - born in MNNative - born in other
State
Native - born outside
US
Foreign born -
naturalized citizen
Foreign born - not a
citizen
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-29: Place of Birth - City/County/Region (2000)
19,229
53,566
45,384
21,844
60,940
53,945
26,219
65,450
54,304
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Median householdMedian familyPer capita
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-31: Income - City/County/Region (2000)
2000 (see Figure 2-26). Th is chart
shows little change in the diversity
of Monticello’s population. In 1990,
98.7% of the population was white.
The 2000 Census reported that
97.0% of Monticello’s population
identifi ed itself as white. Th e racial
diversity of Monticello’s population
is similar to Wright County, but
less than the region as a whole (see
Figure 2-27).
Another factor in understanding
race data is the reporting of the
Hispanic population. People who
identify their origin as Spanish,
Hispanic, or Latino are not classi-
fi ed as a separate racial category.
Th ey may be of any race. In the 2000
Census, 160 people were reported
as Hispanic or Latino (of any race).
This represents 2% of the total
population.
School enrollment data collected
and reported by the Minnesota De-
partment of Education provides a
more current look at the racial com-
position of Monticello’s population.
For the 2006/2007 school year, the
six elementary schools located in
Monticello reported that 7.1% of
total enrollment was a race other
than white. (In this data, Hispanic
is classifi ed as a category of race)
Th e chart in Figure 2-28 shows the
racial composition for each school.
Th e non-white portion of the stu-
dent population ranges from 4.5%
to 10.2%.
Another way of looking at the eth-
nic characteristics of the popula-
tion is place of birth. Only 1.9% of
Monticello’s 2000 population was
foreign born. As with race, the ratio
of foreign born residents is similar
2-18 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
45
,
3
8
4
53
,
5
6
6
19
,
2
2
9
58
,
2
6
0
63
,
5
7
8
21
,
4
2
4
49
,
5
7
3
59
,
2
5
0
21
,
4
2
4
58
,
1
1
4
65
,
4
7
1
21
,
8
0
8
57
,
4
2
2
59
,
3
1
9
20
,
2
0
9
73
,
1
4
3
76
,
9
8
4
25
,
8
4
5
69
,
9
0
3
74
,
2
3
6
24
,
7
4
2
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
Median householdMedian familyPer capita
Monticello Albertville Buffalo Elk River Otsego Rogers St. Michael
Figure 2-32: Income - Monticello and Selected Other Cities (2000)
-
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
PINEWOOD
ELEMENTARY
MONTICELLO SENIOR
HIGH
MONTICELLO MIDDLELITTLE MOUNTAIN
ELEMENTARY
En
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
2
0
0
6
/
0
7
S
c
h
o
o
l
Y
e
a
r
Enrollment Free Lunch Reduced Price Lunch Limited English Proficiency
Figure 2-33: Socio-Economic Indicators Monticello Schools (2006/07)
Figure 2-34: Household Income by Age of Householder (2000)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
15-2425-3435-4445-5455-6465-7475+
Age of Householder
#
o
f
H
o
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
Less than $35,000 $35,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $124,999 $125,000 to $199,999 $200,000 or more
to County and well below regional
levels (see Figure 2-29).
Th e chart in Figure 2-30 compares
the place of birth for the foreign
born population. Latin America
was the most common place of birth
for all jurisdictions. 69% of Monti-
cello’s foreign born population was
born in Latin America. A smaller
share of Monticello’s population
(compared with the Twin Cities
region) was born in Asia or Africa.
Income
Income infl uences many aspects of
community. Income provides the
capacity to acquire housing (own
or rent) and to purchase goods
and services from local businesses.
Income infl uences the demand for
and the capacity to support public
services.
Th e Census data on income adds to
the profi le of Monticello as an entry
level community. All measures of
income are below county and re-
gional levels (see Figure 2-32).
Figure 2-32 compares Monticello
with other cities in the northwest
sector of the Twin Cities region. For
all measures of income (household,
family and per capita), income in
Monticello falls below each of these
neighboring cities.
Data about the characteristics of
children enrolled in the public
school system provide some in-
sights about current economic
conditions. In the 2006/07 school
year, Monticello elementary schools
reported that 21% of the student
population was eligible for free and
Community Context | 2-192008 Comprehensive Plan
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
Less than 9th
grade
9th to 12th
grade, no
diploma
High school
graduate
(includes
equivalency)
Some
college, no
degree
Associate
degree
Bachelor's
degree
Graduate or
professional
degree
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
2
5
y
e
a
r
s
a
n
d
o
l
d
e
r
1990 2000
Figure 2-35: Educational Attainment (1990 and 2000)
16
%
29
%
24
%
10
%
16
%
6%
12
%
37
%
25
%
8%
14
%
4%
9%
25
%
24
%
8%
23
%
10
%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
No H.S.
diploma
High school
graduate
Some college,
no degree
Associate
degree
Bachelor's
degree
Graduate or
professional
degree
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
2
5
y
e
a
r
s
a
n
d
o
l
d
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-36: Educational Attainment - City/County/Region (2000)
Figure 2-37: Marital Status - City/County/Region (2000)
24
%
58
%
2%
6%
10
%
24
%
63
%
1%
5%
8%
30
%
55
%
1%
5%
9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Never married Now married,
except separated
Separated Widowed Divorced
Po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
1
5
y
e
a
r
s
a
n
d
o
l
d
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
reduced price lunches. For indi-
vidual schools, this segment of the
student population ranges from less
than 15% to 25% (see Figure 2-33).
Another perspective comes from
the relationship between income
and age. Th e chart in Figure 34
shows the distribution of household
income by age of the householder.
Less than 1% of all households have
income over $200,000. All of these
households are in the 55-64 age
bracket. The oldest and young-
est households have the lowest
incomes. Only one in fi ve senior
households has income above
$35,000.
Educational Attainment
Th e Census shows a sharp increase
in college education among Mon-
ticello residents. In 2000, 55.2% of
the population (age 25 and older)
had attended college. Th is share of
the population is up from 34.8% in
the 1990 Census (see Figure 2-35).
Less than 16% of the 2000 popula-
tion did not graduate from high
school.
Th e chart in Figure 2-36 compares
educational attainment in Mon-
ticello with Wright County and
the region. 21% of Monticello’s
population had earned a degree as
compared with 18% for the County
and 33% for the region.
Marital Status
Marital status provides another view
of the general family orientation of
the 2000 population in Monticello.
58% of the population (age 15 and
older) was currently married. Th is
is a lower level that reported for
2-20 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
Population
16 years and
over
In labor
force
Females 16
years and
over
Females 16+
in labor
force
Own
children
under 6
years
All parents
in family in
labor force
1990 2000
Figure 2-38: Population in the Labor Force (1990 and 2000)
1990 2000
67%
4%
29%
76%
2%
21%
74%
2%
24%
72%
3%
26%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
EmployedUnemployedNot in labor force
%
o
f
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
1990 Monticello 2000 Monticello 2000 Wright County 2000 Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-39: Employment Comparisons - City/County/Region (2000)
70
%
85
%88
%
68
%
31
%
13
%
61
%
82
%
88
%
66
%
30
%
9%
56
%
80
%
85
%
66
%
29
%
9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
16 to 19 years20 to 24 year25 to 54 years55 to 64 years65 to 69 years70 years and
older
%
o
f
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-40: Population in Labor Force by Age (2000)
the County, but above the regional
average (see Figure 2-37).
Employment
Employment touches many aspects
of community life. Jobs provide
the income to pay for housing and
to purchase goods and services.
The location of jobs influences
the amount of time Monticello
residents are in the community each
day. Commuting decisions impact
transportation systems.
Labor Force
Th e Census looks at the potential
working population as persons
age 16 and older. Th e Labor Force
includes all people classifi ed in the
civilian labor force, plus members of
the U.S. Armed Forces. Th e Civilian
Labor Force consists of people clas-
sifi ed as employed or unemployed.
Monticello’s labor force grew with
the population from 1990 to 2000
(see Figure 2-38). Th e share of the
working age population in the labor
force grew from 66.8% to 76.1%.
Th e change in the labor force comes
from a smaller portion of the popu-
lation reporting itself as not in the
labor force (29.3% in 1990 to 21.5%
in 2000). Persons not in the labor
force typically represent retirees,
students and stay at home mothers.
Th is change is not due to greater un-
employment. Th e percent reported
as unemployed fell from 3.9% in
1990 to 2.4% in 2000.
More of Monticello’s working age
population is part of the labor force
than the County or the region (see
Figure 2-39). This employment
status is consistent with its age and
demographic characteristics.
Community Context | 2-212008 Comprehensive Plan
70
%
75
%
85
%
64
%
15
%
11
%
66
%
78
%
83
%
62
%
26
%
7%
58
%
79
%
81
%
61
%
25
%
7%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
16 to 19 years20 to 24 year25 to 54 years55 to 64 years65 to 69 years70 years and
older
%
o
f
F
e
m
a
l
e
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-41: Female Population in Labor Force by Age (2000)
29
%
15
%
29
%
0%
10
%
17
%
29
%
13
%
26
%
1%
12
%
19
%
39
%
12
%
28
%
0%
8%
13
%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Management,
professional
ServiceSales, officeFarming,
fishing,
forestry
Construction,
extraction,
maintenance
Production,
transportation
Ci
v
i
l
i
a
n
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-42: Occupation (2000)8
Other Place
8%
Other Hennepin
County
24%
Plymouth
7%
Minneapolis
6%
Other Wright
County
15%
Sherburne
County
6%
Stearns County
3%Monticello
31%
Figure 2-43: Location
of Employment for
Workers in Monticello
(2000)
The Census looks at percent of
working age population in the labor
force for various age groups. Mon-
ticello is generally above Wright
County and the Twin Cities re-
gion for all age groups (see Figure
2-40).
Labor force statistics break out
data for the employment status of
women. As with the labor force as
a whole, the proportion of women
(by age group) in the labor force is
similar for Monticello, the County
and the region (see Figure 2-41). In
general, more of the female Monti-
cello population tends to be in the
labor force. Th e large number in
the 25 to 54 age group is indicative
of two income households.
Occupation
Figure 2-42 compares the occupa-
tion of Monticello’s population with
the County and region. Monticello
stands out with over one-half of
the working population employed
in managerial and professional oc-
cupations. Monticello tends to be
home to fewer people employed
in construction and production
fi elds.
Location and Commuting
Th e Census tracks the location of
work place for the population. Only
31% of workers living in Monticello
reported a place of employment in
Monticello (see Figure 2-43). Hen-
nepin County is the largest employ-
ment location (37% of all workers).
Only a small segment of the labor
force (9%) lived in Monticello and
worked in Stearns or Sherburne
counties.
2-22 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
Drove aloneCarpoolPublic
transportation
Other meansWalked or
worked at home
Wo
r
k
e
r
s
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
1990 2000
Figure 2-44: Means of Travel to Work (1990 and 2000)
83
%
12
%
0%1%
1%3%
80
%
13
%
0%1%
1%
5%
78
%
10
%
4%
2%
1%4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Drove alone Carpool Public
transportation
Walk Other Work at home
%
W
o
r
k
e
r
s
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-45: Means of Travel to Work - City/County/Region (2000)
6%
31%
49%
14%
4%
22%
47%
27%
8%
32%
43%
18%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
None123 or more
%
o
f
O
c
c
u
p
i
e
d
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
U
n
i
t
s
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Figure 2-46: Number of Vehicles Per Housing Unit (2000)
Travel to work data shows a very
automobile dependent pattern (see
Figures 2-44 and 2-45). Th e per-
cent of Monticello workers driving
alone to work increased from 1990
(77.9%) to 2000 (82.6%). Th e labor
force in Monticello makes limited
use of public transportation (0.7%
in 1990 and 0.3% in 2000). More
people walked or worked at home
than used public transportation.
Th e share of workers that walked
or worked at home decreased from
5.1% to 4.1% from 1990 to 2000.
Th ese commuting patterns are re-
fl ective of other suburban settings
in the Twin Cities regions.
Th e employment and commuting
patterns contribute to the neces-
sity of owning an automobile in
Monticello. Only 1.9% of occu-
pied housing units did not have a
vehicle (see Figure 2-46). Almost
three-quarters of all housing units
reported two or more vehicles.
Th e Census also collects data on
the average travel time to work
(see Figure 2-47). Th e 2000 Census
reported a mean commute time
of 24 minutes. (Th is statistic was
not reported in the 1990 Census.)
There are no significant differ-
ences in travel to work for Monti-
cello worker in comparison to the
County and the region.
Employment in Monticello
Monticello is a net importer of
employment. In the 2000 Census,
4,262 Monticello residents were
employed in the civilian labor force.
Monticello was the place of employ-
ment for 5,111 people.
Community Context | 2-232008 Comprehensive Plan
Other Place
9%Stearns County
5%
Hennepin County
5%
Other Sherburne Co.
8%
Becker Township
5%
Big Lake (city + town)
13%
Other Wright County
21%
Monticello Townsh
8%
Monticello
26%
Figure 2-48:
Residence of
Persons Working
in Monticello
(2000)
36
%
19
%
39
%
6%
28
%
24
%
37
%
11
%
26
%
41
%
28
%
4%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
< 15 15 to 29 30 to 59 60 or more
Minutes
%
W
o
r
k
e
r
s
A
g
e
1
6
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
Monticello Wright County Twin Cities SMSA
Mean travel time to
work - 26 minutes
Figure 2-47: Travel Time to Work - City/County/Region (2000)
Th e chart in Figure 2-48 shows the
place of residence for people trav-
eling to Monticello for work. Th e
bulk of the work force comes from
the area surrounding Monticello.
47% of people working in Monti-
cello live in Monticello Township,
other places in Wright County, Big
Lake, Big Lake Township, and Beck-
er Township. Th ere is little reverse
commuting. Only 5% of workers
live in Hennepin County.
The Minnesota Department of
Employment and Economic Devel-
opment collects data and prepares
profi les of Minnesota cities. One
part of the State’s community pro-
fi le is a listing of “major employers”.
Figure 2-49 contains major employ-
ers reported for Monticello.
Th ese employers account for 2,885
jobs. These jobs represent 56%
of the people that reported jobs
in Monticello as part of the 2000
Census. While this is somewhat
an apples-to-oranges comparison,
it does provide a sense of the nature
of employment in Monticello. Th e
employment base is not dominated
by several large employers, but
spread among a large number of
small and medium sized employers
in diff erent types of businesses.
Figure 2-49: Major Employers in Monticello (2007)
Employer Products/Services Employees
Monticello-Big Lake Community Hospital Hospital, nursing home and counseling center515
I.S.D. No. 882 (Monticello) Elementary and secondary education455
Xcel EnergyUtility422
Cargill Kitchen Solutions, Inc. Food processing396
Wal-Mart Supercenter Discount retail store325
City of Monticello Municipal government and services151
Denny Hecker Monticello Automobile dealership150
Ultra Machining Corp. Machine job shop130
Cub Foods Retail grocery store122
Monticello ClinicClinic98
Bondhus CorporationCutlery and hand-tool manufacturing73
Source: Written/telephone survey (November 2007), 2007 Minnesota State Business Directory, 2007 Minnesota Manufacturers Register
2-24 | Community ContextCity of Monticello
This page intentionally left blank
Land Use | 3-12008 Comprehensive Plan
3Land Use
The future vision for Monticello provides the foundation for the
Comprehensive Plan (the vision statement appears in Chapter 1). The
Land Use Plan, in turn, provides the framework for how land will be used
to help achieve the future vision for Monticello. The Land Use Plan seeks
to reinforce desirable land use patterns, identify places where change is
needed and guide the form and location of future growth.
The Land Use Plan for Monticello was shaped by a variety of factors,
including:
f Community input gathered through public workshops and Task Force
discussions.
f The existing built and natural environment in Monticello.
f The vision for Monticello’s future.
f Factors described in the Community Context chapter of the Plan.
f Systems plans for transportation, sanitary sewer and water supply.
This represents a departure in form from the 1996 Comprehensive Plan.
The 1996 Plan included the land use plan as part of a broader Development
Framework section. The 1996 Plan described Monticello’s land use
plan by general district of the community as a means of attending to the
unique issues in each district. The 2008 Update of the Comprehensive
Plan establishes a separate land use chapter consisting of the following
components:
f A section on Future Growth describes the implications of future
resident growth and the amount of growth anticipated by the Plan.
f The Land Use Plan Map (see Figure 3-2) shows the land uses assigned
to each parcel of land.
f Land Use Categories further explain the Land Use Plan by describing
the land uses depicted in the Map. This section includes land use
policies describe the objectives that Monticello seeks to achieve
through the implementation of the Land Use Plan and the supporting
elements of the Comprehensive Plan.
f Focus Areas provide a more detailed discussion of characteristics,
goals and policies for key areas of the community.
Chapter Contents
Future Growth ............................3-2
Growth Policies ........................3-2
Land Use Plan Map ....................3-3
Land Use Categories .................3-3
Places to Live .............................3-5
Places to Work .......................3-10
Places to Shop ........................3-13
Downtown ..............................3-13
Mixed Use ...............................3-14
Places to Recreate .................3-15
Places for Community ..........3-15
Urban Reserve .......................3-15
Interchange Planning Area .3-16
Private Infrastructure ...........3-16
Greenway ...............................3-16
Focus Areas ..............................3-16
Northwest Monticello ..........3-16
Downtown Focus Area ........3-19
South Central Focus Area ...3-22
East Focus Area .....................3-23
The Embracing Downtown Plan
was adopted by City Council
resolution 2012-011 on January 9,
2012 and is incorporated herein as
an appendix of the Comprehensive
Plan.
3-2 | Land Use City of Monticello
Future Growth
In looking to the future, Monticello must not just
consider the qualities of the future community, but also
the nature of growth. Assumptions about the amount
and pace of future growth are important parts of the
foundation for the Comprehensive Plan. Growth has
several important implications for the Comprehensive
Plan:
f Growth projections are used to plan for the capacity
of municipal utility systems.
f Growth projections are used to create and manage
finance plans for capital improvements.
f The school system uses growth projections to
forecast enrollments and to plan for programs and
facilities.
f Market studies use growth projections to analyze
the potential for locating or expanding businesses
in Monticello.
f The characteristics of growth influence the amount
of land needed to support this development.
f Growth adds trips to the local street system.
f Assumptions about growth influence the
policies and actions needed to implement the
Comprehensive Plan.
For these reasons, it is essential that the Comprehensive
Plan state assumptions of the nature of future growth. A
challenge in forecasting future residential development
is that the Comprehensive Plan influences, but does not
control, the factors that determine where people live.
These factors include:
f Quality of life.
f Access to employment.
f Availability of desired housing and neighborhood
options.
f Affordability.
f Competition from other places in the region.
Given these uncertainties, the Comprehensive Plan
seeks a balance between optimism and prudence.
For many reasons, the Plan should not significantly
understate the growth potential of Monticello. The
balancing force lies with the implications of assuming
more growth than is reasonable. The chart in Figure
3-1 shows the projection of future residential growth
assumed in the Comprehensive Plan.
The projections assumes that the rate of growth slowly
rises over the next five years and continues at a level
of 190 units per year from 2012 to 2020. This amount
falls below the 229 units/year average for 2001 through
2005. This rate of growth is intended to reflect several
factors. Monticello will remain a desirable place to
live, attracting both builders and residents. Housing
market conditions will improve from the weaknesses
experienced in 2006 and 2007. A combination
of market conditions, local policy objectives, and
changing demographics may reduce the potential for
achieving and sustaining higher rates of residential
growth. Slower future growth reflects the belief that
achieving the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, in
particular seeking more move up housing, will result
in less development than in previous years.
Growth Policies
1. The City will consistently review recent development
trends and update growth projections to serve as a
basis for public and private planning.
2. Over the life of this Comprehensive Plan, growth
will occur within the boundaries of the current
municipal boundaries and the Orderly Annexation
Area.
3. Future development should be guided to locations
that utilize existing infrastructure and locations
242
223
208
229
256
30 30
50
70
90
110
130
150150150150150150150167
77
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
Actual
Projected
Figure 3-1: Growth Trends and Projections
Land Use | 3-32008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
that facilitate the construction of street and
utility systems that meet the objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. The Comprehensive Plan does not anticipate
action by Monticello to annex or extend utility
systems to property immediately north of the
Mississippi River. Development in this area will
place additional traffic on STH 25 (particularly
in the Downtown area) and channel investment
away from other parts of the City, especially the
Downtown.
Land Use Plan Map
The Land Use Plan Map (shown in Figure 3-2) shows the
desired land use for all property in Monticello and the
Orderly Annexation Area The land use plan depicted
in this map builds on the previous community planning
in Monticello.
The Comprehensive Plan uses the Land Use Plan to
define the broad land use patterns in Monticello. The
Land Use Plan seeks to:
f Organize the community in a sustainable
manner.
f Make efficient use of municipal utility systems
and facilitate the orderly and financially feasible
expansion of these systems.
f Provide the capacity for the type of growth desired
by the community.
The Land Use Plan Map is only one piece of the land
use plan for Monticello. The other parts of the Land
Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan work with this
map to explain the intent and objectives for future land
use. Further, this map lays the foundation for land use
controls that are used by the City to implement the
Comprehensive Plan.
Land Use Categories
The Land Use Plan Map uses a set of specific categories
to guide land use in Monticello. One element missing
from the 1996 Comprehensive Plan was a description
of the land use categories shown in the Land Use
Plan. The ability to use the Comprehensive Plan as
an effective land use management tool requires a
definition of each land use. These definitions provide
a common understanding of the basic characteristics
of each category used in the Land Use Plan.
The 1996 Plan relies on three basic categories of private
land use: residential, commercial and industrial.
Each of these categories is further divided into
subcategories that distinguish between the character,
type and intensity of development desired in different
locations.
The 2008 update of the Comprehensive Plan uses a
different approach to achieve similar land use patterns.
The Land Use Plan map depicts series of “places” for
private development: Places to Live, Places to Shop,
Places to Work, and Downtown. This approach is based
on the following rationale:
f These broad categories more clearly illustrate the
pattern of development and the plan for future
growth.
f Although residential land uses vary by type and
density, they share many public objectives.
f This approach makes a more enduring
comprehensive plan. The Plan can guide an area
for the appropriate land use without the need
to predict future community needs and market
forces.
f The Plan relies on policies, land use regulations,
performance standards and public actions to
provide a more detailed guide for land use and
development. This approach conveys more
flexibility and control to the City Council and the
Planning Commission.
Role of Zoning Regulations
Zoning regulations play a critical role in implementing land use plans in
Monticello. State Law gives zoning regulations priority over the Comprehensive
Plan. If land uses are different, zoning regulations control the use of land.
Zoning regulations are particularly important in the application of the land
use categories in the Monticello Comprehensive Plan. The “places to” land
use categories set forth a broad and flexible land use pattern for Monticello.
Zoning regulations (and other land use controls) will be used to determine the
appropriate location for each form of development and other regulations on
the use of land, consistent with policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
3-4 | Land Use City of Monticello
Figure 3-2: Land Use Plan Map
£¤10
£¤10
Æÿ2
5
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5
!(81
§¨¦94
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37
!(
1
3
1
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Land Use Plan
Legend
Places to Live
Places to Shop
Places to Work
Places to Recreate
Places for Community
Downtown
Mixed Use
Interchange Planning Area
Urban Reserve
Infrastructure
Rivers and Streams
Public Waters Inventory
Wetlands (National & Public Waters Inventories)
Potential Greenway
Potential Interchange
Future Bridge
Existing Arterial or Collector Road
Proposed Arterial or Collector Road
Powerline
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
£¤10
£¤10
Æÿ2
5
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5
!(81
§¨¦94
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37
!(
1
3
1
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Land Use Plan
Legend
Places to Live
Places to Shop
Places to Work
Places to Recreate
Places for Community
Downtown
Mixed Use
Interchange Planning Area
Urban Reserve
Infrastructure
Rivers and Streams
Public Waters Inventory
Wetlands (National & Public Waters Inventories)
Potential Greenway
Potential Interchange
Future Bridge
Existing Arterial or Collector Road
Proposed Arterial or Collector Road
Powerline
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
£¤10
£¤10
Æÿ2
5
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5
!(81
§¨¦94
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37
!(
1
3
1
0
0.5
1
0.25
Miles
-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates.
Land Use Plan
Legend
Places to Live
Places to Shop
Places to Work
Places to Recreate
Places for Community
Downtown
Mixed Use
Interchange Planning Area
Urban Reserve
Infrastructure
Rivers and Stream
s
Public Waters Inventory
Wetlands (National & Public Waters Inventories)
Potential Greenway
Potential Interchange
Future Bridge
Existing Arterial or Collector Road
Proposed Arterial or Collector Road
Powerline
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly A
nnexation Area
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
Land Use | 3-52008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
The remainder of this section describes the categories
used in the Comprehensive Plan in greater detail.
Places to Live
The Comprehensive Plan seeks to create and sustain
quality places for people to live in Monticello (see Figure
3-3). This category designates areas where housing is
the primary use of land. The emphasis behind Places to
Live is to help ensure that Monticello offers a full range
of housing choices, while preserving and enhancing the
quality of neighborhoods. Although a single land use
category, Places to Live does not suggest housing is a
homogenous commodity or that any type of housing is
desirable or allowed in any location.
When someone says “house” the most common image
is a single family detached dwelling. This housing style
is characterized by several features. There is a one-to-
one relationship between house and parcel of land - the
housing unit is located on a single parcel. The house is
not physically attached to another housing unit. The
housing is designed for occupancy by a single family
unit. The typical neighborhood in Monticello is made
up exclusively of single family detached homes.
The primary variables become the design of the
subdivision, the size of the lot and the size and style of
the dwelling. Many older neighborhoods in Monticello
(north of Interstate 94) were built on a traditional grid
street system. Over the past thirty years, development
patterns have moved to a new suburban curvilinear
Figure 3-3: Land Use Plan - Places to Live
3-6 | Land Use City of Monticello
pattern, characterized by curvilinear street layout with
the use of cul-de-sacs.
A variety of factors, including consumer preference
and housing cost, have increased the construction
of attached housing in recent years. Duplexes, twin
homes quads and townhomes are common examples
of this housing style. Although the specific form
changes, there are several common characteristics.
Each housing unit is designed for occupancy by a single
family. The housing units are physically attached to
each other in a horizontal orientation.
Places to Live will include some neighborhoods designed
to offer a mixture of housing types and densities.
Mixed residential neighborhoods create a pattern of
that combines single-family detached housing with a
mixture of attached housing types. Using good design
and planning, these mixed residential neighborhoods
can achieve a higher density without compromising
the overall integrity of the low-density residential
pattern.
This integration strengthens neighborhoods by
increasing housing choice and affordability beyond what
is possible by today’s rules and regulations. It also avoids
large and separate concentrations of attached housing.
It enhances opportunities to organize development in
a manner that preserves natural features.
A complete housing stock includes higher density
residential areas that consist of multi-family housing
types such as apartments and condominiums. In the
near term, the Comprehensive Plan does not anticipate
expanding the existing supply of higher density housing.
It is likely that Monticello will need additional higher
density housing to:
f Provide housing suited to the needs of an aging
population.
f Facilitate redevelopment in the Downtown or in
other appropriate locations of the community.
f Provide housing needed to attract the work force
required to achieve economic development goals
of the City.
Higher density residential land uses should be located
where the setting can accommodate the taller buildings
and additional traffic.
Policies – Places to Live
The Comprehensive Plan seeks to achieve the following
objectives for residential land use in Monticello:
1. Provide a range of housing choices that fit all stages
of a person’s life-cycle (see below).
2. Support development in areas that best matches the
overall objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
3. Develop quality neighborhoods that create a
sense of connection to the community and inspire
sustained investment. The Comprehensive
Plan seeks to maintain the quality and integrity
of existing neighborhoods by encouraging the
maintenance of property and reinvestment into
the existing housing stock. Changes in housing
type should be allowed only to facilitate necessary
redevelopment.
4. Create neighborhoods that allow residents to
maintain a connection to the natural environment
and open spaces.
5. Seek quality over quantity in residential growth.
Achieving the objectives for quality housing and
neighborhoods may reduce the overall rate of
growth.
6. Reserve areas with high amenities for “move up”
housing as desired in the vision statement. These
amenities may include forested areas, wetland
complexes, adjacency to parks and greenways.
Some of the City’s policy objectives require further
explanation.
Life Cycle Housing
Housing is not a simple “one size fits all” commodity.
Monticello’s housing stock varies by type, age, style
and price. The Community Context chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan describes the characteristics of
the housing stock based on the 2000 Census and recent
building permit trends.
The concept of life cycle housing recognizes that
housing needs change over the course of a person’s
life (see Figure 3-4). Young adults may not have the
Land Use | 3-72008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
income capacity to own the typical single family
home. This segment of the population often seeks
rental housing. Families move through different sizes,
styles and prices of housing as family size and income
changes over time. With aging, people may desire
smaller homes with less maintenance. Eventually, the
elderly transition to housing associated with options
for direct care. As noted in the Vision Statement,
Monticello’s population will continue to become more
diverse. This diversity will be seen in age, race, culture
and wealth. These factors will influence the housing
needs of Monticello.
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes these differences
and seeks to create a balanced housing supply that
encourages people to move to and stay in Monticello.
This balance may not be achieved solely by market
forces guided by this Land Use Plan. Actions by the
City may be needed to promote the creation of housing
in underserved segments of the market.
Neighborhood Design
A priority for the community is diversification of the
housing stock by providing more “move up” housing.
In this context, the term “move up” housing refers to
larger homes with more amenities in structure and
setting. This type of housing may not be exclusively
single-family detached or low density. Attached forms
of housing with medium or high densities may meet
the objectives for move up housing in the appropriate
locations. In this way, the objectives for move up
housing and life cycle housing are compatible and
supportive.
While every community wants a high quality housing
stock, this issue has particular importance in Monticello.
It is a key to retaining population. Without a broader
variety of housing options, families may encouraged to
leave Monticello to meet their need for a larger home.
It is a factor in economic development. One facet of
attracting and retaining professional jobs is to provide
desirable housing alternatives.
It must be recognized that creating move up housing
requires more than policies in the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan provides a guide for achieving
the desired results. The desired outcomes require
Figure 3-4: Life Cycle of Housing Supply
3-8 | Land Use City of Monticello
private investment. This investment occurs when
demand exists or the City can provide an incentive to
attract investment.
Part of attracting move up housing comes from
creating great neighborhoods – places that will attract
and sustain the housing options sought by the City.
Neighborhoods are the building block of Places to Live
in Monticello. The goal of the Comprehensive Plan is
to create and maintain attractive, safe and functional
neighborhoods. The following policies help to achieve
this objective:
1. Neighborhoods should incorporate the natural
characteristics of the setting. Trees, terrain,
drainageways, and other natural features provide
character to neighborhoods.
2. Housing should be oriented to the local street,
minimizing access and noise conflicts with collector
streets.
3. The City will use public improvements to enhance
the appearance and character of a neighborhood.
Some examples of improvements that define an
area include streets with curb and gutter, trees in
the public boulevard, street lighting systems, and
storm water ponding.
4. Sidewalks, trails, and bikeways will connect the
neighborhood to other parts of the community.
5. Every neighborhood should have reasonable access
to a public park as a place for residents to gather
and play.
All of these elements work together to create a desirable
and sustainable place to live.
Balancing the Built and Natural Environments
The natural amenities of the growth areas (west and
south) in Monticello should serve as a catalyst for
residential development. The Bertram Chain of Lakes
Regional Park offers the dual assets of natural features
and recreational opportunities. Lakes, wetlands and
other natural amenities exist throughout the orderly
annexation area.
Studies have shown that parks and open space have a
positive economic effect on adjacent development. An
article published by the National Park and Recreation
Association states that “recent analyses suggest that
open spaces may have substantial positive impacts
on surrounding property values and hence, the
property tax base, providing open space advocates
with convincing arguments in favor of open space
designation and preservation.” Balancing the built and
natural environments should provide a catalyst to the
types of development desired by the City and in the
expansion of the property tax base.
In attempting to meet residential development
objectives, the City should not lose sight of long-term
public benefit from access to these same natural areas.
The original development of Monticello provides an
excellent illustration. The majority of the riverfront
in Monticello is controlled by private property. Public
Figure 3-5: Relationship Between Development and
Natural Features - Parkway
Figure 3-6: Relationship Between Development and
Natural Features - Trail Corridor
Land Use | 3-92008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
access to the River comes at points provided by public
parks.
A well known example of balancing public use with
private development is the Minneapolis chain of lakes
and Minnehaha Creek. Public streets (parkways)
and trails separate neighborhoods from the natural
features, preserving public use and access. These
neighborhoods are some of the most desirable in the
region, demonstrating that public use and private
benefit are not mutually exclusive.
The figures below show two options for integrating
housing, natural features and public use. Figure 3-5
is the parkway concept. An attractive street forms
the edge between the park (or natural area) and the
housing. A multi-use trail follows the street while
homes face the street and draw on the attractiveness
of both the parkway and the natural amenities.
The alternative is to use a trail corridor to provide public
access to these areas (see Figure 3-6). The trail follows
the edge of the natural area. Access to the trail between
lots should come at reasonable intervals.
There are a variety of real world examples of how
Minnesota cities have used conservation design
strategies to promote high quality development and
preserve the natural environment. The illustrations in
Figure 3-7 shows elements of the Chevalle development
in Chaska. Using open space design and rural
residential cluster development techniques, HKGi’s
concept plan provides for a variety of housing options
while preserving a majority of the area as permanent
open space, including public and common open
spaces. Amenities would include access to protected
open spaces (lakeshore, woods, meadows, pastures,
wetlands), walking/biking trails, equestrian trails
and facilities, common outdoor structures and an
environmental learning center. The experience of other
Figure 3-7: Example of Conservation Design Development
OPEN SPACE DESIGN
-Pastures
-Equestrian Facility
-Wetlands Enhancements
-Conservation Easements
-Central Park
-27 Acre Park South of Lake
NORTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD
Total Housing Units:66
Custom, Luxury Twin Homes
Lot Width:45’x 90’Twinhome
Lot Size:4,050 Sq. Ft.
House Sq. Ft.:2,800 to 3,800 Sq. Ft.
Price Point Packages:$475,000 to
$750,000
NORTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD
Total Housing Units:98
Semi-Custom, Single-Family Homes
Lot Width:82’Minimum
Lot Size:9,900 to 16,000 Sq. Ft.
House Sq. Ft.:2,400 to 4,800 Sq. Ft.
Price Point Packages:$450,000 to
$650,000
NEIGHBORHOOD FEATURES
-Central Park
-Northeast Neighborhood Green
-South Neighborhood Green
-Association Dock and Park
3-10 | Land Use City of Monticello
cities and developments can guide future planning and
decision making in Monticello.
Attractive Places
Attractive physical appearance is one of the most
common attributes of Places to Live in Monticello.
Attractiveness is a combination of design, construction
and maintenance. These characteristics apply to
buildings and sites. Attractiveness is relevant for both
private and public property. Attractiveness reflects
individual pride in property as well as an overall sense
of community quality.
The City may use a variety of regulatory tools to
influence the potential for attractive neighborhoods:
f Building codes and additional regulations to
promote quality construction.
f Subdivision regulations control the initial
configuration of lots.
f Zoning regulations establish limitations on the size
of lots, placement of the house on a lot, relationship
of structure size to lot area, and building height.
f Nuisance ordinances enable the City to prevent and
correct undesirable uses of property.
f Other City regulations control other ancillary uses
of residential property.
Maintenance of property is a factor in sustaining
quality neighborhoods. The tenure (form of ownership)
influences the responsibility for housing maintenance.
The owner-occupant of a single family detached home
is solely responsible for the maintenance of building
and grounds. If this same home is rented, maintenance
responsibilities are often shared between tenant and
owner. This relationship may include a third party
property manager retained by the owner to perform
maintenance duties. Owners of attached housing may
act collectively through a homeowner’s association.
In multiple family rental housing, the tenants have no
direct responsibility for property maintenance. This
discussion does not imply a preference, but is intended
solely to highlight the differences. This understanding
becomes relevant when public action is needed to
address a failure of the private maintenance approach.
Nuisance ordinances are one tool used by the City
to address failures in private maintenance and use of
property.
Economics also influences property maintenance. The
greater the portion of income devoted to basic housing
costs (mortgage/rent, taxes, utilities), the less money
available for maintenance activities. Maintenance
can be deferred, but not avoided. If left unchecked,
this cycle of avoided maintenance produces negative
effects.
Safe Places
Safety is frequently identified as the most desired
characteristic of Places to Live. Several aspects of the
Comprehensive Plan and city government influence
safe neighborhoods.
1. The City will encourage existing neighborhoods
and develop new neighborhoods where people
are involved in the community, interact with their
neighbors and support each other.
2. The City will design, build and maintain a system
of streets that collects traffic from neighborhoods,
allows movement within Monticello to jobs,
shopping and other destinations and minimizes
traffic that “cuts through” neighborhoods on local
streets seeking other destinations.
3. The City will provide, directly or by contract,
services needed to protect people and property.
4. The City will support the Land Use Plan with a
water supply that provides clean water at pressures
needed to support fire suppression.
5. The City will protect the natural environment
by requiring new development to connect to the
sanitary sewer system and by adequately treating
all municipal wastewater.
6. The City will provide water that is safe to drink by
protecting water supply sources.
Places to Work
This land use is primarily intended for industrial
development. Places to Work seeks to provide
locations for the retention, expansion and creation of
businesses that provide jobs for Monticello residents
and expansion and diversification of the property tax
base. In order to be a center of employment with a wide
Land Use | 3-112008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
range of job opportunities, it is critical that Monticello
preserve sufficient land for Places to Work over the
next twenty-five years. These land uses can be one of
the most challenging to locate because of its need for
convenient transportation access and influence on
surrounding land uses. In planning for future Places to
Work, the Comprehensive Plan considers the goals of
the community; what type of industrial development
is sought; and what factors should be considered when
locating an industrial land use.
In planning for sustaining existing businesses and
attracting new development, it is necessary to
understand why Places to Work are important to
Monticello. The objectives for this land use include:
f Expanding and diversifying the property tax base.
f Providing jobs with an increasing opportunity for
people to work and live in Monticello.
f Promoting wage levels that provide incomes
needed to purchase decent housing, support
local businesses and support local government
services.
f Take advantage of opportunities to attract
companies that have a synergy with existing
companies in the community, including suppliers,
customers and collaborative partners.
f Encouraging the retention and expansion of
existing businesses in Monticello.
Figure 3-8: Land Use Plan - Places to Work
£¤10 £¤10
Æÿ25
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5!(81
§¨¦
9
4
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37!(1 3 1
0 0.5 10.25
Miles-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates. Land Use Plan
Legend
Public Waters Inventory
Rivers and Streams
Potential Interchange
Potential Bridge
Powerline
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Jobs
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
3-12 | Land Use City of Monticello
Policies – Places to Work
1. The City will use the Comprehensive Plan to
designate and preserve a supply of land for Places
to Work that meets current and future needs.
2. Consistent with the vision for the future of
Monticello, the Land Use Plan promotes the
establishment of business campus settings that
provide a high level of amenities, including
architectural controls, landscaping, preservation of
natural features, storage enclosed within buildings,
and other features. The zoning ordinance,
subdivision regulations and other land use controls
will also be used to create and maintain the desired
business campus settings.
3. Places to Work supports the City’s desire to attract
businesses that complement existing businesses
or benefit from the community’s infrastructure,
including power and telecommunications.
4. The Comprehensive Plan also recognizes that
Places to Work should provide locations for
other general industrial development in the areas
of manufacturing, processing, warehousing,
distribution and related businesses.
5. Places to Work may include non-industrial
businesses that provide necessary support to the
underlying development objectives of this land use.
Examples of supporting land uses include lodging,
office supplies and repair services.
Additional public objectives and strategies for Places
to Work can be found in the Economic Development
chapter.
Figure 3-9: Land Use Plan - Places to Shop
£¤10 £¤10
Æÿ25
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5!(81
§¨¦
94
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37!(1 3 1
0 0.5 10.25
Miles-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates. Land Use Plan
Legend
Public Waters Inventory
Rivers and Streams
Potential Interchange
Potential Bridge
Powerline
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Commerce
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
Land Use | 3-132008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Places to Shop
Places to Shop designate locations that are or can be
developed with businesses involved with the sale of
goods and services. Places to Shop may include offices
for service businesses. Places to Shop guides land uses
that are both local and regional in nature.
Policies - Places to Shop
In guiding land uses for Places to Shop, the
Comprehensive Plan seeks to:
1. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to attract and retain
businesses that provide goods and services needed
by Monticello residents.
2. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to capture the
opportunity for commercial development that
serves a broader region. Places to Shop with a
regional orientation should be located where
the traffic does not disadvantage travel within
Monticello.
3. Commercial development will be used to expand
and diversify the local property tax base and as an
element of a diverse supply of local jobs.
4. Places to Shop will be located on property with
access to the street capacity needed to support
traffic from these businesses.
5. Each parcel should supply an adequate supply of
parking that makes it convenient to obtain the
goods and services.
6. Building materials, facades and signage should
combine with public improvements to create an
attractive setting.
7. Site design must give consideration to defining edges
and providing buffering or separation between the
commercial parcel and adjacent residential uses.
These policies help to create sustainable locations for
Places to Shop in a manner that enhances Monticello.
Downtown
The Embracing Downtown Plan was adopted by City
Council resolution 2012-011 on January 9, 2012
and is herein incorporated as an appendix of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Downtown is a unique commercial district that is part
of Monticello’s heritage and identity. It is, however,
no longer possible for Downtown to be Monticello’s
central business district. The mass of current and
future commercial development south of Interstate 94
along TH 25 and in east Monticello along interstate 94
have replaced the downtown area as primary shopping
districts. The future success of downtown requires it
to be a place unlike any other in Monticello.
The Comprehensive Plan seeks to achieve the Vision,
Guiding Principles and Goals described in the
Embracing Downtown Plan. Downtown is intended to
be a mix of inter-related and mutually supportive land
uses. Businesses involved with the sale of goods and
services should be the focus of Downtown land use.
Residential development facilitates reinvestment and
places potential customers in the Downtown area. Civic
uses draw in people from across the community.
During the planning process, the potential for
allowing commercial activity to extend easterly out of
the Downtown along Broadway was discussed. The
Comprehensive Plan consciously defines Cedar Street
as the eastern edge of Downtown for two basic reasons:
(1) Downtown should be successful and sustainable
before new areas of competition are created; and
(2) The Comprehensive Plan seeks to maintain and
enhance the integrity of residential neighborhoods
east of Downtown.
More than any other land use category, Downtown has
strong connections to other parts of the Comprehensive
The Comprehensive Plan describes issues, plans and policies related to the Downtown in several sections
of the Plan.
3-14 | Land Use City of Monticello
Plan. Therefore the City has adopted the Embracing
Downtown Plan as its guiding planning document
for the Downtown. The following parts of the
Comprehensive Plan also address community desires
and plans for the Downtown area:
f The Land Use chapter contains a specific focus
area on Downtown. The focus area contains a
more detailed discussion of the issues facing the
Downtown and potential public actions needed to
address these issues.
f The operation of the street system is a critical
factor for the future of Downtown. The
Transportation chapter of the Comprehensive Plan
and the Transportation chapter of the Embracing
Downtown Plan influence the ability of residents to
travel to Downtown and the options for mitigating
the impacts of traffic on Highway 25 and other
Downtown streets.
f The Parks chapter of the Comprehensive Plan
provides for parks in the Downtown and the trail
systems that allow people to reach Downtown on
foot or bicycle.
f The Economic Development chapter of
the Comprehensive Plan and the Financial
Implementation chapter of the Embracing
Downtown Plan lay the foundation for public
actions and investments that will be needed to
achieve the desired outcomes.
Policies/Guiding Principles – Downtown
1. Downtown is a special and unique part of
Monticello. It merits particular attention in the
Comprehensive Plan and in future efforts to achieve
community plans and objectives.
2. Downtown is intended to be an inter-connected
and supportive collection of land uses. The primary
function of Downtown is as a commercial district.
Other land uses should support and enhance the
overall objectives for Downtown.
3. The City will build on core assets of greater
Downtown Monticello as identified in the
Embracing Downtown Plan.
4. A shared vision among property owners, business
owners and the City is the foundation for effective
team work and long term success.
5. A shared understanding of realistic market potential
is the foundation for design and generation of a
healthy business mix.
6. A safe, attractive human scale environment and
entrepreneurial businesses that actively emphasize
personal customer service will differentiate
Downtown from other shopping districts.
7. Property values can be enhanced if property
owners and the City share a vision for Downtown
and actively seek to cultivate a safe, appealing
environment and attractive business mix.
8. Housing in the Downtown can facilitate necessary
redevelopment and bring potential customers
directly into the area. Housing may be free-
standing or in shared buildings with street level
commercial uses.
9. Downtown is the civic center of Monticello. To
the degree possible, unique public facilities (such
as the Community Center, the Library and the Post
Office) should be located in the Downtown area as
a means to bring people into the Downtown.
10. Downtown should emphasize connections with
the Mississippi River that are accessible by the
public.
11. Downtown should be a pedestrian-oriented place
in a manner that cannot be matched by other
commercial districts.
12. Downtown should have an adequate supply of free
parking for customers distributed throughout the
area.
13. The City and business community must work
actively with MnDOT to ensure safe local access
to business districts.
All of these policies work together to attract people to
Downtown and to enhance the potential for a successful
business environment.
Amendment to Comprehensive Plan/1997 Downtown
Revitalization Plan
Resolution 2010-049, adopted 7/12/10:
At the intersection of Broadway and Pine Streets,
parking lots may be constructed only when all of the
following conditions exist:
Land Use | 3-152008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
f Applicable traffic safety and access requirements
limit the ability to comply with building location
standards of this Plan.
f At least fifty (50) percent of either the Broadway
or Pine Street frontage is occupied by a building
(non-parking area).
f An alternative vertical element is located at
the street corner which, as determined by City
Officials, establishes an architecturally compatible
corner presence. Such elements may include, but
not be limited to public art, interpretive signage,
architectural business signs and architecturally
appropriate lighting.
Mixed Use
The Mixed Use is a transition area between the
Downtown and the hospital campus. It has been
created in recognition of the unique nature of this area.
The area serves two functions. It is the edge between
long-term residential neighborhoods and a major
transportation corridor (Broadway Street). It is also a
link between the Downtown, the hospital campus and
the east interchange retail area.
The primary goal of this land use is to preserve and
enhance housing in this part of Monticello. Any
non-residential development should be designed to
minimize the impacts on and conflicts with adjacent
neighborhoods.
Policies - Mixed Use
1. Development should not have direct access to
Broadway street. Access should come from side
street.
2. Non-residential development should be limited to
small retail, service and office businesses. The scale,
character and site design should be compatible with
the adjacent residential neighborhoods.
3. All non-residential development will be oriented
to Broadway Street and not to 3rd Street or River
Street.
4. Commercial development compatible with the
Downtown should be encouraged to locate there.
5. More intense housing and commercial uses may be
allowed if directly related to the hospital.
Places to Recreate
Places to Recreate consist of public parks and private
recreation facilities. The land uses are essential
elements of the quality of life in Monticello. The Parks
and Trails chapter of the Comprehensive describes the
current park and trail system and the future plan to
maintain and enhance this system.
The Comprehensive Plan is only one aspect of managing
the land use for public parks and private recreation
facilities. The City’s zoning regulations place these
locations into a zoning district. Often, the purpose
of the zoning district is to guide private development,
such as housing. Under current State Law, zoning
regulations “trump” the Land Use Plan and govern the
use of land. With the potential for the redevelopment
of golf courses, it is important the Comprehensive Plan
and other land use controls work in concert to achieve
the desired outcomes.
The City’s plans and policies for parks, trails and
open space can be found in the Parks chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan
Places for Community
Places for Community consist of public and semi-
public land uses. Public uses include all governmental
facilities (city, county, state and federal) and schools.
This category also applies to churches, cemeteries,
hospitals, and other institutional uses.
It is important to note that these land uses relate only
to existing land uses. The Comprehensive Plan does
not guide the location of new churches, schools, public
buildings and other institutional land uses. Places for
Community will be needed in the Northwest area as
it develops.
These uses are typically allowed in residential areas and
governed by zoning regulations. These institutional
uses (such as schools and churches) are important parts
of the fabric of the community, but require guidance
to ensure a proper fit with its residential surroundings.
New institutional use should be allowed in residential
areas under certain conditions. These conditions
should address the aspects of the use that conflict with
3-16 | Land Use City of Monticello
desired characteristics of residential neighborhood.
Criteria for locating an institutional use in a residential
land use area include:
1. Size. Large buildings and site areas can disrupt
neighborhood cohesiveness. Use in lower density
residential areas should not be more than [to be
determined] square feet in lot area.
2. Parking. Parking may spill on to neighborhood
streets without adequate on-site facilities. The
parking needs will vary with the use of the facility.
Each facility should provide adequate on-site or
reasonable off-site shared parking based on the use
of the facility.
3. Traffic. Institutional uses should be oriented to
designated collector or arterial streets.
4. Lighting and signage. Site lighting and signage
needs may resemble commercial uses. These site
factors should be managed to fit the character of
the surrounding residential development.
Urban Reserve
The Urban Reserve contains all property in the Orderly
Annexation Area that it not shown for development
in the near term in this Plan. The objective is to
encourage rural and agricultural uses, preventing
barriers to future development opportunities. It is
anticipated that the City will grow into portions of the
Urban Reserve as planned land use areas become fully
developed and capacity for future growth in needed.
The Urban Reserve is not simply a holding area for
future development. Parts of the Urban Reserve are
likely to be preserved as natural resource areas or for
agricultural purposes. Future planning will consider
the locations in the Urban Reserve best suited for
development.
Interchange Planning Area
The Interchange Planning Area encompasses
undeveloped land in the northwest part of Monticello
around the site of a potential west interchange with
Interstate 94. The purpose of this land use is to
preserve the area for future development and prevent
the creation of development barriers.
If built, the area should be planned to support a mixture
of commercial, employment and residential land uses.
The interchange location and the routes of future
connecting roads are solely for illustration. Future land
use issues in this area are discussed in the Focus Area
for Northwest Monticello.
Private Infrastructure
This category applies to Xcel Energy’s power plant and
railroad right-of-way. This category recognizes the
unique role of the power plant in Monticello.
Greenway
The Land Use Plan Map shows a “potential greenway”
ringing the western and southern edges of Monticello.
The Greenway is intended to provide an environmental
corridor that connects large community parks and open
spaces to neighborhoods, schools, shopping areas and
places to work. They serve to protect environmentally
sensitive areas such as natural habitat, wetlands,
tree canopy, and drainage ways. Land within this
corridor could be comprised of a combination of
public and private open space. Development would
not be prohibited within the greenway but would be
reasonably restricted to ensure that development is
carefully integrated with the natural environment.
The Greenway is intended to shape development
patterns in a manner that is sensitive to the existing
environment and harmonious with the landscape. The
Greenway creates opportunities for a continuous trail
corridor connecting neighborhoods with large parks
and open spaces. A trail within this corridor is intended
to be fully accessible to the general public.
The following are the City’s goals for the Greenway:
1. To provide (where possible) a continuous green
corridor connecting large community parks and
open spaces to neighborhoods, shopping areas,
schools and places to work.
2. To connect people to significant places.
3. To protect the community’s natural resources
(trees, ponds, wetlands, slopes, etc).
4. To create environmentally sensitive development
and design.
Land Use | 3-172008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
5. To provide opportunities for corridors for wildlife
movement and ecological connections between
natural areas.
Focus Areas
For certain parts of Monticello, the intentions of the
Comprehensive Plan cannot be adequately described
solely with the land use map and the related category
descriptions. The following Focus Areas provide a more
detailed examination of the plans and issues in key
locations that will shape the future of Monticello.
Northwest Monticello
This focus area includes the entire northwest corner
of the community. The land use objectives in this area
include:
1. Encourage development in this part of the
community to utilize infrastructure investments
and to provide the capacity to develop in high
amenity areas.
2. Provide for a variety of housing alternatives based
on the natural features and the surrounding
land uses. Areas with high natural amenities or
proximity to the Bertram Chain of Lakes Regional
Park should be reserved for move up housing.
3. Expansion of existing Places to Work in a manner
that creates more “head of household” jobs.
4. Preserve and promote public use of natural
areas, including the establishment of greenway
corridors.
5. Identify and preserve key street corridors.
6. Preserve areas for future Places to Shop and Places
to Work around a future highway interchange, if
such an interchange proves viable.
The Comprehensive Plan envisions that growth will
extend westward from existing development. The
initial high amenity residential development is expected
to occur along the eastern perimeter of the Bertram
Chain of Lakes Regional Park. No Places to Live are
planned with the boundaries of this park. Future
development will be influenced by the capacity of the
street system, including plans for the construction of
a highway interchange.
The remainder of this section describes the land use
issues and objectives for northwest Monticello in
greater detail.
West Interchange
A new interchange with Interstate 94 is a critical
variable in the future development of this area. While
the Comprehensive Plan recognizes the potential for
a future interchange, in 2008 it is only a concept. It
is not part of the State’s plans for future highway
improvements for this district.
This interchange could be a valuable part of the long-
term transportation plan for Monticello if it is part of
a new river crossing that removes traffic from Highway
25. Without the bridge, the primary benefit is to
provide access to this area and expand the development
opportunities.
The Land Use Plan assumes that the interchange is a
future possibility. For this reason, property adjacent
to the interstate has been placed into a combination
of Places to Live, Work and Shop. The Plan seeks
to prevent development from limiting the location
£¤10 £¤10
Æÿ25
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5!(81
§¨¦
9
4
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37!(1 3 1
0 0.5 10.25
Miles-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates. Land Use Plan
Legend
Places to Live
Places to Shop
Places to Work
Places to Recreate
Places for Community
Downtown
Mixed Use
Interchange Planning Area
Urban Reserve
Infrastructure
Rivers and Streams
Public Waters Inventory
Wetlands (National & Public Waters Inventories)
Potential Greenway
Potential Interchange
Future Bridge
Existing Arterial or Collector Road
Proposed Arterial or Collector Road
Powerline
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
Figure 3-10: Land Use Plan - Northwest Monticello
3-18 | Land Use City of Monticello
of the interchange (or block it) and to preserve the
area around the interchange for future commercial,
industrial and residential development. Without
the access provided by the interchange, commercial,
industrial and residential development should not be
anticipated in this area.
Ideally, the City will pursue additional investigations
following the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan.
These investigations should be designed to resolve some
of the unanswered questions related to the interchange.
These questions include:
f Where should the interchange be located?
f What is the potential for a new river bridge
connection?
f How would the interchange be funded and what
are the financial and land use implications for the
City?
f What time frame should be used in planning for
the improvements?
The answers to these questions provide invaluable
guidance to future land use and transportation in
Monticello. The area included in future planning
should not be limited to the property in the Interchange
Planning Area land use category. An interchange
and the supporting street system has future land use
implications for a broader area.
Bertram Chain of Lakes Regional Park
Another critical factor in the future of the Northwest
Area is the former YMCA camp that is being converted
into the Bertram Chain of Lakes Regional Park. The
City and Wright County formed a partnership in 2005
to start purchasing portions of the 1,200 acre YMCA
property. As of 2013, 495 acres have been purchased
through state grants with another 300 planned for
acquisition. The YMCA will lease land at the regional
park to run their Camp Manitou Summer Camp.
The area around this park is guided for future Places to
Live. No residential development should be allowed
within the park. The amenity of this land and the
regional park provide an excellent setting (around
the perimeter of the park) for some of the “upscale”
neighborhoods and housing desired by the City.
In planning for this park, it is important to look
beyond the boundaries of the park and to its context
in the broader community. The illustration in Figure
3-11 highlights several key community development
opportunities:
f The City must create connections between the park
and other sections of Monticello.
f Building streets in a “parkway” design emphasizes
the desired qualities of a regional park and of the
surrounding Places to Live and Work.
f The park is a critical piece in creating a “greenway”
system that links to the Mississippi River and may,
over time, ring the community.
Industrial Growth
The Northwest area is a critical location for current and
future industrial development. The Monticello Business
Center, located south of Chelsea Road and west of 90th
Street, has already started to be developed as a high
amenity environment with protective covenants that
address building materials, loading docks, outdoor
storage, and landscaping. In order to provide sufficient
land for Business Campus uses over the next 25 years,
the Comprehensive Plan extends this land use south to
the planned expansion of School Boulevard.
It is important to recognize that activity generated
by business development can create conflicts with
residential development. The Comprehensive Plan
seeks to create both high quality business parks and
residential neighborhoods in this area. Careful site
planning and development management will be needed
to meet these objectives.
School Boulevard Extension
The Northwest Area serves as a good example of the
need to coordination land use and transportation
planning. An extension of School Boulevard is
needed to provide access to the area and to connect
development to the rest of the community. The route
of this roadway should be identified and preserved as
development occurs.
School Boulevard has several other Comprehensive
Plan implications:
Land Use | 3-192008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
f This major collector street will influence the nature
of adjacent land use.
f Streetscape improvements would help to define
the high quality character desired by the City as a
gateway to the Bertram Chain of Lakes Regional
Park and to new neighborhoods.
f The street is a means for bringing trail connections
to the park.
Golf Course
In 2006, the Silver Springs Golf Course was part of a
development proposal (Jefferson at Monticello) that
would have redeveloped this property mixing golf and
housing. The development did not proceed beyond the
environmental review.
The Comprehensive Plan shows the area as Places to
Recreate based on the continued use as a golf course.
This designation does not preclude a future proposal
and Comprehensive Plan amendment for residential
development. It is likely, however, that this scale of new
development will require the access provided by a new
highway interchange. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to
fill in other development areas and make effective use
of other infrastructure investments before extending
utilities for redevelopment of the golf course.
Downtown Focus Area
The Embracing Downtown Plan was adopted by City
Council resolution 2012-011 on January 9, 2012
and is herein incorporated as an appendix of the
Comprehensive Plan.
YMCA
Regional
Park
Existing
Natural
Land
Existing
Natural
Land
Potential Parkways
Potential
Greenway
Corridor
Potential
Greenway
Corridor
Existing
Green
Corridor
To Mississippi River
To Mississippi River
25
39
Z35W
Z394
Z94
Figure 3-11: Community Connections to Regional Park
3-20 | Land Use City of Monticello
Downtown Monticello needs special attention
in the Comprehensive Plan. Following the 2008
Comprehensive Plan update, the community undertook
a separate downtown planning process. This process
resulted in the Embracing Downtown Plan. This Plan
emphasizes the importance that the community places
on Downtown. The 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update
relies on the Embracing Downtown Plan as a guide for
public and private actions in the Downtown area.
Revitalizing and sustaining Downtown Monticello
requires a collaborative effort of the City, businesses,
property owners and other stakeholders. Planning
for the future of the Downtown must recognize the
practical realities facing commercial development in
Downtown:
f The configuration and traffic volumes of Highway
25 significantly reduce opportunities for direct
access from the Highway to adjacent properties.
f Traffic volumes on Highway 25 will continue to
increase. Greater volumes and congestion act as an
impediment for people living south of I-94 coming
to Downtown.
f There is no controlled intersection on Highway
25 between Broadway and 7th Street. The lack
of a controlled intersection combined with traffic
volumes make pedestrian connections between
Downtown and residential areas to the east very
difficult.
f “Big box” and retail development continue to occur
in other parts of Monticello. These businesses
directly compete with the Downtown and attract
smaller businesses (that might otherwise consider
a Downtown location) to adjacent parcels.
Downtown Goals
Given current plans and conditions, the Embracing
Downtown Plan and the Comprehensive Plan
recommends the following goals for Downtown.
Concepts for Downtown redevelopment should
provide solutions to problems and issues identified
in the research and analysis of Downtown conditions
that are directed by the stated goals for Land Use,
Transportation and Design and Image. The preferred
solutions should be those that best meet these goals.
Land Use
f Diversify land use in the Downtown; supplement
retail and service uses with other activities that
generate traffic.
f Encourage redevelopment of old and obsolete
structures; encourage consolidation of small
parcels with multiple ownerships.
f Balance parking and land use to ensure availability
of adequate parking at all times.
f Encourage mixed use but do not make it a
requirement or prerequisite for development or
redevelopment.
f Discourage residential as a free-standing land use
within the core downtown area.
f Establish physical connections between the core
Downtown area and the riverfront and park.
f Encourage land uses that serve as evening and
weekend attractions to the Downtown area.
f Expand facilities and parking adjacent to Westbridge
Park to help create an anchor attraction at the north
end of Walnut Street.
Transportation
f Acknowledge that Highway 25 will be limited in
terms of providing direct property access.
f Develop circulation patterns that utilize local
streets for individual site access.
f Recognize Highway 25 as a barrier between the
east and west parts of the historic Downtown core
areas extending to either side of the Highway 25
corridor.
f Consider developing in districts to reduce the need
or desire to cross Highway 25 between 7th street
and the river crossing.
f Strengthen pedestrian ties throughout Downtown
including connections to other parts of the City to
the south, west, and east. Downplay Highway 25
as a corridor for pedestrian movement.
f Improve pedestrian connections between Broadway
Street and the riverfront Park area to allow the park
to serve as an attraction that brings people into the
downtown area.
f Improve access to the Mississippi River to expand
on recreational opportunities.
Land Use | 3-212008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
51
Chapter 3 - Downtown Framework Plan and Design Guidelines Framework for Downtown Development
The alternative downtown redevelopment concepts, including the preferred alternative illustrated in
Refined Scheme A (Figure 20) represent and illustrate possibilities for ways that market demand that
exists in the Monticello Trade Area can fit within the northern half of the CD where the greatest
potential for redevelopment exists. The
plans show specific uses and parking
relationships that may, or may not
accurately depict how opportunities are
captured over time within the CCD.
However, what is specific about the
preferred alternative is the general
organization of uses, and the location
of types of uses within the CCD. Figure
21, the Redevelopment Framework
Plan, illustrates the recommended use
districts consistent with the
preferences illustrated in Refined
Scheme A.
Proposed use areas, or districts, in the
Framework Plan are based on access,
location within the CCD, and
surrounding land use relationships. The
Framework Plan represents the
flexibility needed to capture all
potential development and
redevelopment opportunities for the
CCD. As opportunities present
themselves and are evaluated,
locations for uses should fit the
purpose and capabilities of the districts
illustrated in the Framework Plan. The
use districts are defined in greater
detail as part of the proposed Design
Guidelines for the CCD.
Structure for Design Guidelines
The Design Guidelines are intended to correspond to the limits of the CCD Zoning District, and to
establish development controls within the CCD. With the recent modifications to the Monticello Zoning
Code, the development standards for the CCD District were revised to refer to the CCD Design
Guidelines as the controlling legislation for land use, site development standards, and building design
Figure 21 – Framework Plan
Figure 3-12: Framework Plan from the Embracing Downtown Plan
3-22 | Land Use City of Monticello
f Explore creation of a fourth signalized intersection
on Highway 25 between 7th Street and Broadway
Street to improve access to areas with development
and redevelopment potential on either side of the
Highway 25 corridor.
Downtown Design and Image
f Encourage design standards that elevate the quality
of Downtown development without creating undue
hardships for property and building owners.
f Acknowledge that the historic “Main Street”
buildings and developments along Broadway
Street are functionally obsolete for many tenants
and users in today’s automobile and convenience-
driven marketplace.
f The public realm of streets, boulevards and
sidewalks represents the best opportunity to create
an interim image for downtown as it redevelops.
f The Highway 25 and Broadway corridors should be
softened with streetscape and landscape features to
offset the effects of high traffic volumes, and to help
establish an identity for the Central Community
District (CCD).
f Development should orient toward the intersection
of Highway 25 with Broadway to take advantage of
high traffic volumes in the Highway 25 corridor.
f New development in the Highway 25 corridor
should be scaled to allow visibility to development
up to a block or more away from Highway 25.
f New buildings in the Highway 25 and Broadway
corridors should be located to allow for eventual
widening of the corridor right-of-way and
roadway.
f To the extent possible, buildings should occupy
street frontages and should front on public
sidewalks with connections to a continuous
“Downtown” sidewalk pedestrian system.
f Proposed uses should have adequate parking
(private or public) within easy and convenient
walking distance.
f The Downtown plan should provide strategically
located public gathering spaces to bring people
together to experience a sense of community that
is associated with downtown.
South Central Focus Area
Continued residential growth to the south is an
important element of the Comprehensive Plan. This
growth achieves several objectives:
f It helps to facilitate the expansion of the sanitary
sewer system in conjunction with the reconstruction
of Fallon Avenue. This sanitary sewer capacity is
The Comprehensive Plan seeks to enhance the existing commercial core along Broadway by building
strong connections with the riverfront and the civic/retail district on the south end of Walnut Street.
The current end of Walnut Street is a barrier to improving connections between Downtown and the
riverfront.
Land Use | 3-232008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
needed to support future industrial growth area
along Highway 25.
f These areas encourage growth in areas that could
use the new eastern interchange with I-94 rather
than Highway 25.
f These areas provide appropriate locations for
continued growth in entry-level single family homes
and medium density housing types. These Places
to Live are important elements of maintaining an
adequately diverse housing stock.
f Orderly expansion to the south moves development
towards area of higher natural amenity. Areas along
the southern edge of the Orderly Annexation Area
provide another location for potential “move up”
housing.
A key to development in this focus area is the
construction of the Fallon Avenue bridge. The bridge
leads to the reconstruction of Fallon Avenue and the
related expansion of municipal sanitary sewer and
water systems. Future development will be limited
without additional utility capacity.
East Focus Area
The Comprehensive Plan places greater priority on
growth to the west and south. Development should
be directed to areas that most effectively achieve the
objectives of this Plan.
Several factors could cause the City to encourage future
residential development in the East Focus Area:
Figure 3-14: Land Use Plan - East Focus Area
£¤10 £¤10
Æÿ25
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5!(81
§¨¦
9
4
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37!(1 3 1
0 0.5 10.25
Miles-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates. Land Use Plan
Legend
Places to Live
Places to Shop
Places to Work
Places to Recreate
Places for Community
Downtown
Mixed Use
Interchange Planning Area
Urban Reserve
Infrastructure
Rivers and Streams
Public Waters Inventory
Wetlands (National & Public Waters Inventories)
Potential Greenway
Potential Interchange
Future Bridge
Existing Arterial or Collector Road
Proposed Arterial or Collector Road
Powerline
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
£¤10 £¤10
Æÿ25
!(14
!(11
!(43
!(50
!(68
!(5!(81
§¨¦
9
4
Æÿ25
!(75
!(18
!(117
!(39
!(106
!(37!(1 3 1
00.510.25
Miles-
November 1, 2011
Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright
County, and WSB & Associates. Land Use Plan
Legend
Places to Live
Places to Shop
Places to Work
Places to Recreate
Places for Community
Downtown
Mixed Use
Interchange Planning Area
Urban Reserve
Infrastructure
Rivers and Streams
Public Waters Inventory
Wetlands (National & Public Waters Inventories)
Potential Greenway
Potential Interchange
Future Bridge
Existing Arterial or Collector Road
Proposed Arterial or Collector Road
Powerline
Monticello City Boundary
Orderly Annexation Area
Amended by City Council Resolution 2011-92, September 26, 2011
Figure 3-13: Land Use Plan - South Central
f Increased overall housing demand that exceeds the
capacity to support growth in other areas.
f Traffic congestion on Highway 25 that increases the
need to channel use to the east interchange.
f The need to solve stormwater and drainage
management issues (Ditch 33) in this area. Solving
drainage issues allows eastward expansion along
County Road 18.
Future growth in the east should continue to fill in the
development area within the Orderly Annexation Area
on the east side of Monticello. The natural features in
these areas allow for higher amenity neighborhoods.
This growth can occur with new collector/arterial
street corridors.
Economic Development | 4-12008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Ideally, the Comprehensive Plan does not have an Economic Development
chapter. The Land Use Plan would be sufficient to channel market forces
to meet the development objectives of the community. In reality, certain
development needs cannot be met without public intervention. The
Economic Development chapter of the Plan focuses on the aspects of
Monticello’s future that require particular attention and action by the City.
These actions include:
f Attracting and retaining jobs
f Expanding the tax base
f Enhancing the economic vitality of Downtown
f Facilitating redevelopment
Attracting and Retaining Jobs
The creation and retention of jobs is one of the most important objectives
for Monticello. Jobs, particularly jobs with income levels capable of
supporting a family, are key to achieving many elements of Monticello’s
vision for the future.
f Jobs attract residents to the community. Jobs will pay a critical role in
creating the type of “move up” housing sought by the City.
f Jobs provide the income needed to support local business and
government services.
f Retention of businesses promote community stability by keeping jobs
and residents in Monticello.
The Community Context chapter of the Comprehensive Plan contains a
section on Employment. This section contains data about employment in
Monticello and of its residents. Among the key findings in this section are:
f While the community added nearly 5,000 people between 2000 and
2010 according to the U.S. Census, it only added 1,430 jobs according
to the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW). In 2010,
the community had 6,992 jobs according to the QCEW but 7,093
people in the labor force according to the Census.
4Economic Development
Chapter Contents
Attracting Jobs ............................4-1
Expanding the Tax Base ............4-3
Enhancing Downtown ...............4-5
Facilitating Redevelopment .....4-7
Development Strategies ...........4-7
4-2 | Economic Development City of Monticello
f The U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic
Studies’ OntheMap website shows that in 2010
4,597 people leave the community each day to
work, while 3,849 people come into the community
to work. Only 835 both live and work in the
community.
f Approximately 15% of residents in 2010 are
employed within the community. This has dropped
from 18% in 2002.
f As shown in Figure 4.1, 2012 data from the
Minnesota Department of Employment and
Economic Development (DEED) on their
mnprospector.com website shows that Monticello
is made up of a wide range of small to medium
sized employers. Only 10 employers have more
than 100 employees. Over half have fewer than
four (4) employees.
f Workers for Monticello businesses come primarily
from Monticello and the surrounding region.
Nearly 75% of people working in Monticello live in
Monticello, adjacent townships, or other places in
Wright and Sherburne counties (2010 OntheMap).
f Nearly 40% of Monticello residents work in
Hennepin County, with the largest percentage in
Minneapolis, Plymouth, and Maple Grove. Another
15% work elsewhere in Wright County, including
Buffalo and St. Michael.
f The 2007-2011 American Community Survey
(ACS) Census reported a mean travel time to work
of 28.5 minutes. This is up from the 2000 Census
travel time of 24 minutes. The mean travel time in
the 2007-2011 ACS was 29.7 minutes for Wright
County and 24.5 minutes for the region overall.
Background Reports
The City of Monticello conducts studies and assessments
as needed to help guide its economic development
efforts. The findings and recommendations of these
studies are summarized below with the most recent
provided first.
2010 Business Retention and Expansion Research (BR&E)
Report
Monticello’s Business Retention and Expansion (BR&E)
program was initiated by the City of Monticello, the
Monticello Chamber of Commerce and Industry,
DEED, and the University of Minnesota Extension. It
was also sponsored by over a dozen local businesses.
Through the BR&E program, 60 businesses were
visited. Findings from the visits and data analysis found:
f 78% of the visited businesses were locally owned
and operated.
f 20% of businesses were in manufacturing, 18% in
retail trade, and 13% in other services.
f The businesses employed over 1,600 full-time and
975 part-time employees, with a trimmed average
(an average where the low and high were discarded
to prevent skewing) of 15.38 full-time employees,
slightly down from 15.52 three years ago. The
firms also had a trimmed average of 7.76 part-time
employees, up from 6.96 three years ago.
f Most full-time employees are in manufacturing,
food and beverage, retail trade, and medical, while
part-time employees are in medical, retail trade,
and tourism/recreational services.
f Survey results indicated that the medical industry
is the highest employer in Monticello, followed by
retail trade and manufacturing.
f Businesses in the community are fairly stable with
about half expecting some type of change.
The BR&E identified four strategies aimed at helping
businesses become more profitable. Each strategy
was accompanied by a list of potential projects
intended to be ideas for the community to explore.
The implementation of the projects is intended to be
a collaborative effort among the various sectors of the
community. The four strategies identified included:
Number of
Establishments by SizeNumberPercent
1-4 Employees 25452.05
5-9 Employees 9719.88
10-19 Employees 6413.11
20-49 Employees 428.61
50-99 Employees 214.30
100-249 Employees 71.43
250-499 Employees 20.41
500-999 Employees 10.20
Figure 4-1: 2012 Total Establishments by Size
Economic Development | 4-32008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
f Improve Business Retention and Expansion
Through Technical and Development Assistance.
f Improve Labor Force Availability and Productivity.
f Improve Infrastructure to Help Move Goods,
Customers, and the Labor Force More Efficiently.
f Improve and Promote the Quality of Life in
Monticello.
During the 2013 comprehensive plan economic
development update process, it was noted that the 2010
Business Retention and Expansion Research strategies
were similar to the 2008 Development Strategies. The
review process identified the need to continue similar
strategies into the future.
Preceding the development of the 2008 Comprehensive
Plan an assessment was conducted by St. Cloud State
University to determine whether a bioscience park
should be established in Monticello. At that time the
bioscience industry was an economic development
focus statewide. While the attraction of a bioscience
business is not a particular focus of Monticello today,
there are findings of that study that can be useful to
consider in the overall development of economic
development strategies for the community.
Some of the Monticello’s strengths for attracting
businesses included:
f Land availability (compared to Metro Area).
f Access to major highways (I-94, U.S. 10 and STH
25).
f Regional growth of employment base.
f Development of local fiber optic system.
f Proximity to universities.
f Overall location.
f Expansive park system.
f Monticello Community Center.
Recommended business development activities that
apply to the attraction and retention of all businesses
include ensuring that there are sites suitable and
attractive to potential businesses available and ready
for development. The community should continue to
explore and establish partnerships with a variety of
stakeholders that can work together to support business
attraction and retention. This includes the identification
of funding sources which may be an incentive for
businesses locating in Monticello. When available the
City should participate in special tax zones that have
been made available at the state and federal level to
support business development and retention.
Expanding the Tax Base
A traditional objective of local economic development
planning is the expansion of the property tax base.
Under the current system of local government finance,
property taxes are the largest source of city revenue.
For this reason, it is an important aspect of economic
development planning in Monticello.
Understanding the Property Tax System
Effective strategies to promote the growth of the tax
base require a clear understanding of the property tax
system.
Property Valuation
There are three forms of property valuation. The
foundation of the property tax system is Estimated
Market Value. This amount is the value of a parcel
of property as set by the County Assessor. In some
circumstances, the State Legislature limits the amount
of Estimated Market Value that can be used for taxation.
These adjustments result in the Taxable Market Value.
The value used to calculate property taxes is Tax
Capacity. Tax Capacity Value is a percentage of Taxable
Market Value. The percentage factors are set by the
State Legislature and vary by class of property.
Changes in the Tax System
Traditional economic development theory seeks
commercial and industrial development as a means of
building tax base. Historically, the system supported
this approach. A dollar of estimated market value of
commercial-industrial property carried a higher tax
capacity value than residential property. Over the past
twelve years, tax “reforms” by the State Legislature have
changed this situation.
4-4 | Economic Development City of Monticello
Industrial Retail Office Single Townhome Apt
Acres 10 10 10 10 10 10
Coverage 30%30%30%3 6 12
Development (SF or Units)130,680 130,680 130,680 30 60 120
EMV per SF or Unit 65 80 100 400,000 250,000 150,000
EMV 8,494,200 10,454,400 13,068,000 12,000,000 15,000,000 18,000,000
Tax Capacity 169,134 208,338 260,610 120,000 150,000 225,000
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
IndustrialRetailOfficeSingleTownhomeApt
Ta
x
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
V
a
l
u
e
Figure 4-3: Tax Capacity Comparison
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,00
1997 19981999200020012002 to 2012
Ta
x
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
V
a
l
u
e
Figure 4-2: Changes in Tax Capacity Value - Commercial/Industrial
Economic Development | 4-52008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
The chart in Figure 4-2 shows how legislative changes
have reduced the tax base created by commercial-
industrial development. This chart is based on the
tax capacity value for $3,000,000 of Taxable Market
Value. The legislative changes in the rates used to set
tax capacity mean that this property produced 56% less
tax base in 2012 than in 1997.
This trend takes on additional meaning when compared
to other classifications of property. Figure 4-3
compares the tax capacity value for the primary forms
of development in Monticello. The valuations in this
chart are based on assumptions about the density
of development and estimated market value of new
development. Changes in these assumptions will alter
the results.
This chart clearly illustrates the current reality for
economic development strategies. All forms of
development contribute tax base to the community.
It is risky placing too much weight on one type of
development for tax base growth. In addition, cities
do not control the critical elements of the tax system.
Changes in the system lead to unanticipated results at
the local level.
Tax base growth has implications that are unique
to Monticello. The chart in Figure 4-4 shows the
distribution of taxes payable in 2011. Utilities, likely
largely Xcel Energy, contributes about one-third of
the City’s taxes, while both commercial/industrial and
residential uses contribute 28% each.
Enhancing Downtown
Maintaining a successful Downtown is an important
element of the economic development plan for
Monticello. Downtown is a key business district
providing goods, services, and jobs for the community.
Downtown is unlike any other business district because
of its unique role in Monticello’s identity and heritage.
The Land Use chapter describes plans, policies, and
strategies related to Downtown Monticello. Downtown
is part of the Economic Development chapter because
of the likelihood that city actions and investments
will be needed to achieve community objectives for
Downtown. This intervention may include:
f Public improvements to provide services or to
enhance the Downtown environment.
f Provision of adequate parking supply.
f Acquisition of land.
f Preparation of sites for development.
f Removal of other physical and economic barriers
to achieve community objectives.
These actions may require the use of tax increment
financing, tax abatement, or other finance tools
available to the City.
In 2011, the City of Monticello conducted a retail market
study for Downtown Monticello. The report, Embracing
Downtown Monticello, has been incorporated in the
Comprehensive Plan as an appendix and serves as a
resource for the implementation of the Comprehensive
Plan. The study included many components including
an identification and analysis of existing businesses,
evaluation of shopping areas that are competition for
Downtown, a survey of customers, delineation of the
trade area, and the establishment of market demand
for various businesses.
Figure 4-4: Distribution of 2011 Taxes Payable
Public Utility
5,910,074
34%
Residential
Homestead
4,886,235
28%
Commercial/Industrial
4,846,152
28%
All Other
1,757,819
10%
4-6 | Economic Development City of Monticello
Some findings of the study included:
f Downtown Monticello enjoys a strategic location
between the Mississippi River and I-94. This
focuses traffic on TH-25 resulting in traffic counts
higher in Downtown than south of I-94
f Due to physical barriers created by the Mississippi
River and I-94, about one-third of Downtown and
secondary trade area shoppers must pass through
Downtown Monticello to reach the shopping areas
south of I-94.
f Downtown has the largest concentration of
shopping goods stores and restaurants.
f Downtown’s trade area population was estimated at
93,500 in 2010 and is projected to have an annual
growth rate of 2.2%.
f Monticello’s large anchor stores (Cub Foods,
SuperTarget, Walmart, and Home Depot) create
a secondary trade area. The population of the
combined Downtown and secondary trade areas
was 127,190 in 2010.
f CentraCare Health System, with 25 beds and 600
employees has established Monticello as a regional
medical center.
f Increased residential development stimulates
increased commercial development. The recent
economic conditions have slowed residential
development, thus resulting in reduced tenant
demand for retail space.
f Additional retail space in Downtown Monticello
can be supported by the trade area population. A
range of store types can be considered including
shopping goods, convenience goods, and food
establishments. Downtown’s existing wide variety
of services limits potential future opportunities.
However, market research indicates that Monticello
could support additional medical practices.
Figure 4-5: Embracing Downtown Monticello Primary and Secondary Trade Areas
Economic Development | 4-72008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2013
Facilitating Redevelopment
The Comprehensive Plan seeks to create a place where
land use plans, policies, and controls work together
with private investment to properly maintain all
properties in Monticello. It is recognized that this
approach may not succeed in all locations. Despite
the best plans and intentions, properties may become
physically deteriorated and/or economically inviable. In
such places, city intervention may be need to facilitate
redevelopment and prevent the spread of blight. This
intervention may include:
f Acquisition of land.
f Preparation of sites for development.
f Construction or reconstruction of public
improvements.
f Provision of adequate parking supply.
f Remediation of polluted land as needed.
f Removal of other physical and economic barriers
to achieve community objectives.
These actions may require the use of tax increment
financing, tax abatement, or other finance tools
available to the City.
Development Strategies
The following strategies will be used to implement
the Comprehensive Plan in the area of Economic
Development:
1. The City must use the Comprehensive Plan
to provide adequate locations for future job-
producing development (Places to Work).
2. The City should adhere to the Comprehensive Plan
to encourage stable business setting and promote
investment and expansion of facilities.
3. The City should coordinate utility planning
and manage other development to ensure that
expansion areas are capable of supporting new
development in a timely manner.
4. The City will continue to work with existing
businesses to maintain an excellent business
environment, retain jobs, and facilitate expansions.
5. In addition to assisting business seeking to locate
in Monticello, the City should actively target and
market to businesses which will be a supplier,
customer or collaborative partner to existing
businesses within the community.
6. The City should target and market to businesses
which would benefit from Monticello’s utility and
communications infrastructure.
7. The City will work with the CentraCare Health
System to ensure the retention and to promote the
expansion of health care services in Monticello.
8. The City will use the Comprehensive Plan to
maintain and enhance the quality of life in
Monticello as a tool for attracting businesses and
jobs.
Economic Development | 4-12008 Comprehensive Plan
Ideally, the Comprehensive Plan does not have an Economic Develop-
ment chapter. Th e Land Use Plan would be suffi cient to channel market
forces to meet the development objectives of the community. In reality,
certain development needs cannot be met without public intervention.
Th e Economic Development chapter of the Plan focuses on the aspects
of Monticello’s future that require particular attention and action by the
City. Th ese actions include:
Attracting jobs
Expanding the tax base
Enhancing the economic vitality of Downtown
Facilitating redevelopment
Attracting Jobs
Th e creation and retention of jobs is one of the most important objec-
tives for Monticello. Jobs, particularly jobs with income levels capable of
supporting a family, are key to achieving many elements of Monticello’s
vision for the future.
Jobs attract residents to the community. Jobs will pay a critical role in
creating the type of “move up” housing sought by the City.
Jobs provide the income needed to support local business and govern-
ment services.
Retention of businesses promote community stability by keeping jobs
and residents in Monticello
Th e Community Context chapter of the Comprehensive Plan contains a
section on Employment. Th is section contains data about employment
in Monticello and of its residents. Among the key fi ndings in this section
are:
Monticello has been a net importer of employment - there are more
jobs in Monticello than workers living in the community. According
to the 2000 Census, 5,111 people reported working in Monticello while
4,262 Monticello residents were part of the civilian labor force.
4
Comprehensive Plan does not have an Economic Develop-
er. Th e Land Use Plan would be suffi cient to channel market
eet the development objectives of the community. In reality,
elopmentneedscannotbemetwithoutpublicintervention
Economic Development
Chapter Contents
Attracting Jobs ............................4-1
Expanding the Tax Base ............4-2
Enhancing Downtown ...............4-5
Facilitating Redevelopment .....4-5
Development Strategies ...........4-5
4-2 | Economic DevelopmentCity of Monticello
Th e job base in Monticello is made up of a wide
range of small to medium sized employers. In 2007,
Only fi ve employers report more than 100 employ-
ees, Monticello Public Schools, Xcel Energy, Cargill
Kitchen Solutions, Monticello-Big Lake Hospital,
and Ultra Machining Company (according to listing
of major employers from Minnesota Department of
Employment and Economic Development).
Workers for Monticello businesses come primar-
ily from Monticello and the surrounding region.
Over 80% of people working in Monticello lived
in Monticello, adjacent townships, Big Lake, or
other places in Wright and Sherburne counties
(2000 Census).
Th e 2000 Census found that only 26% of people
working Monticello also lived in the city.
69% of working Monticello residents held jobs in
other places (2000 Census). More than one-third
worked in Hennepin County.
Th e 2000 Census reported a mean travel time to
work of 26 minutes. 45% of Monticello workers
indicated travel time to work of 30 minutes or
more.
In 2007, St. Cloud State University conducted an as-
sessment of establishing a bioscience park in Mon-
ticello. Th e results of this study provide important
insights on future job growth. Th e study identifi ed
a series “strengths” for attracting bioscience fi rms to
Monticello:
Land availability (compared to Metro Area).
Access to major highways (I-94, U.S. 10 and STH
25).
Regional growth of employment base.
Development of local fi ber optic system.
Proximity to universities.
Overall location.
Expansive park system.
Monticello Community Center.
Many of these factors would also apply to attracting
other types of businesses.
Th e St. Cloud State study also made note of several
weaknesses in attracting these business to the com-
munity. Th e list included:
Lack of hotels and lodging.
No defi ned plan.
Small community.
Low tax base.
Th e recommendations of this Study apply to eff orts to
establishing a bioscience park and to overall develop-
ment of Places to Work:
Site Location - Need to have site that are suitable
and attractive to potential businesses available and
ready for development.
Funding - Funding is essential to provide sites and
for incentives to attract and retain the appropriate
businesses. Local, state and private funding sources
should be explored.
Tax treatment - Th e City gains important tools
from special tax zones that have been made avail-
able at state and federal level.
Partnerships - Attracting jobs to Monticello re-
quires partnerships with other stakeholders.
Expanding the Tax Base
A traditional objective of local economic development
planning is the expansion of the property tax base.
Under the current system of local government fi nance,
property taxes are the largest source of city revenue.
For this reason, it is an important aspect of economic
development planning in Monticello.
Understanding the Property Tax System
Eff ective strategies to promote the growth of the tax
base require a clear understanding of the property tax
system.
Property Valuation
Th ere are three forms of property valuation. Th e foun-
dation of the property tax system is Estimated Market
Value. Th is amount is the value of a parcel of property
as set by the County Assessor. In some circumstances,
the State Legislature limits the amount of Estimated
Economic Development | 4-32008 Comprehensive Plan
Market Value that can be used for taxation. Th ese adjustments result in
the Taxable Market Value. Th e value used to calculate property taxes is
Tax Capacity. Tax Capacity Value is a percentage of Taxable Market Value.
Th e percentage factors are set by the State Legislature and vary by class
of property.
Changes in the Tax System
Traditional economic development theory seeks commercial and in-
dustrial development as a means of building tax base. Historically, the
system supported this approach. A dollar of estimated market value of
commercial-industrial property carried a higher tax capacity value than
residential property. Over the past twelve years, tax “reforms” by the State
Legislature have changed this situation.
Th e chart in Figure 4-1 shows how legislative changes have reduced the
tax base created by commercial-industrial development. Th is chart is
based on the tax capacity value for $3,000,000 of Taxable Market Value.
Th e legislative changes in the rates used to set tax capacity mean that this
property produced 56% less tax base in 2007 than in 1997.
Th is trend takes on additional meaning when compared to other classi-
fi cations of property. Figure 4-2 compares the tax capacity value for the
primary forms of development in Monticello. Th e valuations in this chart
are based on assumptions about the density of development and estimated
market value of new development. Changes in these assumptions will
alter the results.
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
199719981999200020012002 to 2007
Ta
x
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
V
a
l
u
e
Figure 4-1: Changes in Tax Capacity Value - Commercial/Industrial
4-4 | Economic DevelopmentCity of Monticello
Industrial Retail Offi ce Single Townhome Apt
Acres101010101010
Coverage30%30%30%3612
Development (SF or Units)130,680130,680130,6803060120
EMV per SF or Unit6580100400,000250,000150,000
EMV 8,494,20010,454,40013,068,00012,000,00015,000,00018,000,000
Tax Capacity169,134208,338260,610120,000150,000225,000
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
IndustrialRetailOfficeSingleTownhomeApt
Ta
x
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
V
a
l
u
e
Figure 4-2: Tax Capacity Comparison
Figure 4-3: Tax Capacity Comparison
Other "Larger"
6%
Xcel Energy
39%
All Other Tax Capacity
55%
Economic Development | 4-52008 Comprehensive Plan
Th is chart clearly illustrates the current reality for eco-
nomic development strategies. All forms of develop-
ment contribute tax base to the community. It is risky
placing too much weight on one type of development
for tax base growth. In addition, cities do not control
the critical elements of the tax system. Changes in the
system lead to unanticipated results at the local level.
Tax base growth has implications that are unique to
Monticello. Th e chart in Figure 4-3 shows the distribu-
tion of taxable (Tax Capacity) value in Monticello. Xcel
Energy creates almost 40% of the City’s tax base. While
it has provided a unique asset for the community, it
is essential that the tax base become more diversifi ed.
Enhancing Downtown
Maintaining a successful Downtown is an important
element of the economic development plan for Mon-
ticello. Downtown is a key business district providing
goods, services and jobs for the community. Down-
town is unlike any other business district because of its
unique role in Monticello’s identity and heritage.
Th e Land Use chapter describes plans, policies and
strategies related to Downtown Monticello. Downtown
is part of the Economic Development chapter because
of the likelihood that city actions and investments will
be needed to achieve community objectives for Down-
town. Th is intervention may include:
Public improvements to provide services or to
enhance the Downtown environment.
Provision of adequate parking supply.
Acquisition of land.
Preparation of sites for development.
Removal of other physical and economic barriers
to achieve community objectives.
Th ese actions may require the use of tax increment
fi nancing, tax abatement or other fi nance tools avail-
able to the City.
Facilitating Redevelopment
Th e Comprehensive Plan seeks to create a place where
land use plans, policies and controls work together with
private investment to properly maintain all properties
in Monticello. It is recognized that this approach may
not succeed in all locations. Despite the best plans and
intentions, properties may become physically deterio-
rated and/or economically inviable. In such places, city
intervention may be need to facilitate redevelopment
and prevent the spread of blight. Th is intervention
may include:
Acquisition of land.
Preparation of sites for development.
Remediation of polluted land.
Construction or reconstruction of public improve-
ments.
Provision of adequate parking supply.
Removal of other physical and economic barriers
to achieve community objectives.
Th ese actions may require the use of tax increment
fi nancing, tax abatement or other fi nance tools avail-
able to the City.
Development Strategies
Th e following strategies will be used to implement the
Comprehensive Plan in the area of Economic Develop-
ment:
Th e City must use the Comprehensive Plan to pro-1.
vide adequate locations for future job-producing
development (Places to Work).
Th e City should adhere to the Comprehensive Plan 2.
to encourage stable business setting and promote
investment and expansion of facilities.
Th e City should coordinate utility planning and 3.
manage other development to ensure that expan-
sion areas are capable of supporting new develop-
ment in a timely manner.
Th e City should evaluate the need and feasibility 4.
of additional city-owned business parks as a means
attracting the desired businesses.
4-6 | Economic DevelopmentCity of Monticello
Th e City should establish a plan to evaluate the 5.
feasibility of implementing the recommendation
of the St. Cloud State study and if feasible to take
necessary action to attract bioscience businesses
to Monticello.
Th e City will continue to work with existing busi-6.
nesses to maintain an excellent business environ-
ment, retain jobs and facilitate expansions.
Th e City will work with the Monticello-Big Lake 7.
Hospital to ensure the retention and to promote the
expansion of health care services in Monticello.
Th e City will use the Comprehensive Plan to main-8.
tain and enhance the quality of life in Monticello as
a tool for attracting businesses and jobs.