City Council Agenda Packet 06-22-1981AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
June 22, 1981 - 7:30 P.M.
Mayor: Arve Grimsmo
Council Members: Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Philip White.
Meeting to be taped.
Citizens Comments.
1. Public Hearing on Set Back Variance - Lot 29, Block 2, R.itze Manor -
Angie and John Praught.
2. Public Hearing on the Consideration of a Resolution Increasing Indus-
trial Development Revenue Bonds for the Monticello Scot Wood Partner-
ship.
3. Consideration of an Award of a Contract on the 1981-1 and 1981-2
Improvement Project.
4. Consideration of Amendments to State Building Code.
5. Consideration of an Extension of the Variance Request for Hard
Surface Requirements for a Parking Lot - Mel Wolters - Dairy Queen.
6. Consideration of a 3.2 Beer License for the, Lion's Club - July 4th
Celebration.
7. Consideration of Setting Rates for 1981 Tree Removal and Tree
Replacement.
8. Consideration of a Resolution Approving the Election of Gary Wicber
to be Excluded from the Public Employees's Retirement Association
and a Resolution Authorizing an Agreement with the City Administrator
Relating to Deferred Compensation.
9. Approval of Bills - Juno 1981.
10. Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting of Juno 8, 1981
Unfinished Business
Now Buaineso
Council Agenda - 6/22/81
AGENDA SUPPLEMENT
1. Public Hearinq on Set Back Variance - Lot 29, Block 2, Ritze Manor -
Anqie and John Prauqht.
PURPOSE: To consider a request by Mr. and Mrs. John Praught to build
a garage five feet over the property line into the County Highway 75
right-of-way. It should be pointed out that in accordance with the
ordinance, Charles and Mary Ritze have filed an appeal from the
Planning Commission's approval of this variance. A copy of their
letter appealing this decision is enclosed.
You may recall that at a recent meeting, the City Council granted a
variance to Mr. John Praught to build a second garage on his property
within five feet of the property,line.
However, during the construction of Mr. Draught's building, he was
mistaken in the property corners of his property and inadvertently,
built his new building five feet over the property line into the
County Highway 75 right-of-way. (The Praught property is Lot 29,
Block 2, Ritze Manor and zoned R-1).
Since discovering that his building was five feet across his property
line in the right-of-way of County Highway 75 rather than five feet in
his property line, Mr. Praught has contacted Mr. Larry Kooning of the
Wright County Engineer's Office. Mr. Koening has indicated that if the
city were willing to go along with a variance allowing him to build to the
property line, that they would be willing to allow the five foot over
build onto the right-of-way provided that, if in the future, it wore
necessary to move that garage building or to do work along that right-
of-way, that it would be the owners responsibility for removal of the
building or damages which might occur to it. That responsibility would
have to be by a signed agreement which would he contingent upon the
property and all subsequent property owners.
Also, enclosed with the agenda is a letter from Mert and Sandy Capon who
live in the area and are opposing the variance.
According to our huilding inspector, a verbal stop order was inaued once
it was determined that John Praught was actually in violation of the set
back variance previously granted. According to the building inspector,
the only portion competed thereafter was to reinforce what was already
put up. After this work was done, no further work has occurred.
- 1 -
Council Agenda - 6/22/81
`L-- POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval or denial of variance.
If the variance is approved, it should be contingent upon the owner
providing the City of Monticello with an agreement holding both
Wright County and the City of Monticello harmless and indicating
that it would be the owners responsibility to move the structure if
it were necessary to have such building moved to do work in the right-
of-way. If the variance is denied, a reasonable amount of time should
be, granted to Mr. Praught to bring the building in compliance with the
City of Monticello's set back ordinances and with the variance pre-
viously granted.*
REFERENCES: The Planning Commission minutes of June 9, 1981, pre-
viously sent out and an appeal letter from Charles and Mary Ritze and
a letter from Pert and Sandy Capes.
2. A Public Hearin on the Consideration of a Resolution Increasing Indus-
trial Development Revenue Bonds for the Monticello Scot Wood Partnership.
PURPOSE: To consider approval of amending a previous resolution adopted
February 25, 1980, increasing the amount of industrial revenue bonds
from $750.000.00 to $1,250,000.00.
The reason for the increase for the proposed Scot Wood Motel just cast
of the Perkins Cake and Steak in Monticello is the expansion from 36
to 48 units. Additionally, there has been an increase in the construc-
tion costs since the approval of the resolution in 1980.
In accordance with State Statutes, a public hearing is necessary. It
should be noted that at the public hearing on the Initial amount of
$750,000.00 in 1980, there was no opposition to the proposal.
On April 28, 1980, after the council approved the initial amount for
the Scot Wood Motel, the City of Monticello adopted guidelines for
future issues. Although this is an amendment to the initial resolution,
I have asked Miller 6 Schroeder, which is the fiscal consultant for the
partnership, to provide the necessary information to determine if it
meets those guidelines.
Our city attorney, Gary Pringle, has reviewed all the documonts rela-
tive to the matter and his opinion is enclosed. Additionally, a repro-
sentativo from miller s Schroeder, the fiscal consultant, will be at
Monday night'a meeting to answer any questions that the council may have.
'NOTE.: All variances require 4/5'a
vote of Council for approval.
- 2
Council Agenda - 6/22/81
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of approval of a resolution amending
the previous resolution increasing industrial revenue bonds for the
Monticello Scot wood Partnership to $1,250,000.00.
REFERENCES: A copy of the proposed resolution and opinion from
Crary Pringle.
3. Consideration of an Award of a Contract on the 1981-1 and 1981-2
Improvement Proiect.
PURPOSE: To consider awarding a contract on the above two projects.
Included with the 1981-1 Improvement Project are the extension of
sewer, water, street paving and storm -sewer improvements to parts of
the Meadows Subdivision and west River Street. This extension of
improvements on west River Street would service Edgar Klucas, N.S.P's
Training Center, the Alanon Society and Electro Industries. On the
1981-2 Improvement Project, Cedar Street between the Burlington
Northern Railroad tracks and 7th Street would be improved with storm -
sewer.
Bids are to be returnable on June 19, 1981, and these will be reviewed
by our engineer with a recommendation to the council on Monday night.
Total estimated construction cost is approximately $450,000.00.
it POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of an award of a contract on the 1981-1
and the 1981-2 improvement Project.
I
REFERENCES: A list of bids will be handed out at Monday night's meeting.
4. Consideration of Amendments to State Buildina Code.
PURPOSE: To consider the following two amendments to the State Building
Code:
An amendment to the State Building Code, as provided for in Minnesota
Statutes, to provide stricter fire prevention standards. Section 1214
of the Uniform Building Codes (UBC) shall be adopted as otated, "Doors
between the garage and the dwelling must be self closing".
An amendment to Monticello Zoning Ordinance Section 110. 10-3-4 (A) to
change the height limitation in R-3, R -B, B-1, 0-2, B-3, B-4, I-1 and
I-2 zoning districts from three (3) stories to two (2) stories. Three
stories would be allowed only as a conditional use contingent upon
strict application of a requirement that firs-extingulahing systems be
required throughout the building, installed an though they were required
throughout the entire building by the State Building Code, as adopted
by the City of Monticello.
- 3 -
Council Agenda - 6/22/81
During the 1981 legislative session, a bill was passed allowing a
statutory city to adopt stricter fire prevention standards than
those contained in the State Building Code. As a result, the amend-
ment relative to doors between the garage and the dwelling is being
suggested by our building inspector. Additionally, the fire depart-
ment previously had requested that the City of Monticello amend its
ordinance to allow three (3) story buildings only as a conditional
use contingent upon proof that sprinkler systems were installed. It
should be noted that the language, as suggested above, was written
by our building inspector. As a result of this amendment, any building
that is three (3) stories would require a conditional use contingent
upon the building being sprinklered. It should be noted that any
buildings that are more than three (3) stories would require a vari-
ance as is the case now. Additionally, an opportunity could be given
to a builder who would want a variance from constructing a three (3)
story building without a sprinkler system.
At their meetings on these items, the Planning Commission recommended
approval. However, they did indicate that the recommendation relative
to requiring a three (3) story building being sprinklered, be passed
only if there could be a possible increase in insurance premiums or
that a new hook and ladder truck may one day be required. It should
be pointed out that insurance premiums are in fact, based to some
extent on the number of buildings that are three (3) stories or
greater. Additionally, if the city does have a number of these build-
ings, insurance ratings could suffer if the city did not have a hook
and ladder truck. As a result, with the passage of the proposed or-
dinance amendment, the city's rate should stay the same or could pos-
sibly be improved. However, since this is only a part of the whole
rate structure, these factors alone may not necessarily change the
city's insurance rating. Of more concern, is the City of Monticello' e
Fire Department's ability to fight a fire in a three (3) story building
that Is not sprinklared.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of amending Monticello Ordinances as
indicated ahove.•
REFERENCES: The Planning Commission minutes of June 9, 1981, previously
sent out and two letters from the Minnesota State Fire Chief's Associa-
tion along with a bill which allowed a city to adopt stricter fire pre-
vention standards than those contained in the State Building Code.
*NOTE: All ordinances require 4/5's
vote of. the Council for approval.
4
c
Council Agenda - 6/22/81
i
5. Consideration of an Extension of the Variance Request for Hard
Surface Requirements for a Parkina Lot - Mel Wolters. (Dairy Queen)
PURPOSE: To consider a request for the extension of a variance per-
viously granted two times by the city, once on June 25, 1979, and
renewed on August 25, 1980, for a period of one year to allow Mr. Mel
Wolters, owner of the Dairy Queen in Monticello, to utilize the abut-
ting property as a parking lot with._.:: having the property hard sur-
faced or provide curbing. The reason for his initial request was
that he had planned to build an office building on this piece of
property and that he wmild just have to tear up the black topping
i to construct the new building which would be a waste of material and
�l/ money.
� On August 25, 1980, Mr. Mel Wolters indicated that he still had plans
ao proceed with the proposed office building and requested that the
ariance be extended for an additonal period of time to provide extra
7 parking or overflow parking for the Dairy Queen until the construction
p' of the office building was completed. His plans are that a new office
r, �0 building will be constructed as soon as he can obtain lease agreements
y
3 n with enough tenants in order to secure financing.
At the August 25, 1980, Council Meeting this variance was granted until
.e7 June 1, 1981.
It is Mr. Wolters intention now, to request an extension of that vari-
ance so that he may allow himself time to secure the lease agreements
C' so that he may pursue construction. At this time Mr. Wolters is not
encouraging utilizing that gravel parking lot as an overflow lot. How-
ever, it would be a staff recommendation that the council consider
extending this variance. The reason for this is that during the
summer months, as we are now entering into, it would keep the traffic
which utilizes the Dairy Queen from parking on the streets and causing
possible traffic congestion. 4
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of extending a variance to July, 1982,
for hard surface requirements for the parking lot beside the Dairy
Queen.•
6. Consideration of a 3.2 Boor Licence for the Lion's Club - July 4th Celebration.
PURPOSE: The Monticello Lion's Club again requested a temporary license
to call 3.2 beer on the 4th of July as part of their Independence Day Cola-
bration taking place in the Bridge Park. As with the Softball Association,
the Lion's Club is being requested to provide tho city with a certificate
of insurance for general liability and liquor liability. According to a
Lion's Club representative, the club has general liability coverage and
is seeking liquor liability coverage. According to this member, the Lion's
Club may decide not to sell 3.2 beer if coverage is too costly.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Conaideration of temporary 3.2 Boor On -Sale License for
July 4, 1981 to the Lion's Club contingent upon proof of general and liquor
liability insurance.
•NOTE: A variance requires 4/5 'a vote
of Council for approval.
- 5 -
1,
C
C
Council. Agenda - 6/22/81
7. Consideration of Setting Rates for 1981 for Tree Removal and Tree
PePlacements.
PURPOSE: To consider revising the city's current charge to a property
owner of S90.00 for tree removal and $30.00 for replacement tree if on
private property and a free tree if on the boulevard.
Reasons for consideration of revising the current schedule indicated
above is due primarily to the fact that the State will be reducing
their funding portion from 50 percent to 20 percent for removal and
replacement. Additionally, the rate for removal and replacement has
increased siner_ the rates were last set in 1979.
AS you are aware, the City of Monticello has its own tree inspector
and equipment for tagging and removing the trees. Additionally, it
is the policy of the city to attempt to replace very tree removed
as a result of Dutch elm with another tree.
The trees are tagged and a notice sent to the property owner indicating
that the tree will have to be remuved. The property owner has an op-
tion either to remove the tree and dispose of it or have the city's
crew do this. If the resident chooses to remove the tree himself, he
also has the furt.her option of using the city's dumping facility at an
additional $30.00 charge.
Since the City of tdontieello's own removal crew is left with the harder
trees, the cost per average to be removed is approximately $440.00.
This includes removal of the tree, stump removal, clean up of the
property and disl4sal. with the State reducing their assistance, it
Is recommended that the stump removal be the responsibility of the
property owner unless the stump would be in the boulevard and is
suggested in these cases, that it would be the city's responsibility.
Additionally, it is recommended that the fee for removal be increased
to $120.00 per treo. Following, to a schedule showing the fee had the
State funding remained at 50 percent with the city and resident split—
ting the remaining cost. Also shown, is the proposed metha9 with the
State funding 20 percent:
If State funding had remained same
State $220.00
City 110.00
Resident 110.00
$440.00
Proposed method, State funding ?Oe.
l,a
$ 80.00 loom Ile
200.00 is? a ev tic
•120.00 1; ".0 1-
$400.00 4-0 '41
-Does not Include stump removal charge and cleanup of $40.00 which would
ho property ownera rnsponsibility unless tree was in boulevard.
C
Council Agenda - 6/22/81
It is also recommended that the city pay up to $20.00 for a replace-
ment tree. In 1980 the State and the city shared any replacement
tree costs for one removed from the boulevard and split the cost for
replacement trees for a tree removed from private property with the
property owner. This :method was established since the State of
mLnnesota did grant assistance to trees removed on the boulevard but
not on private property.
In the proposed new method for replacement trees, the city would allow
the property owner to either plant his own tree or to have the tree
planted for him allowing up to $20.00 for a replacement tree. The
new proposed m•:thod would be as follows if the property owner selected
a replacement tree at $60.00 which was approximately the city's cost
for a tree planted in 1980.
Replacement Tree
Proposed methal Current method
In many eases the property owner could reduce the replacement tree coot
by planting his uwn gree and it is not unreasonable that this cost for the.
same tree planted in 1980 would only be $40.00. By planting his own
tree, the city would still pink tip half of the root even on private
property for such a replacement. tree. If a property owner roplaend a
boulevard tree. and planted his own tree it would only cost the resident
$12.00.
With the State funding reduced, it in the feeling of many commnunitins
that: they may drastically reduce their notch elm disease. program. While
the proposed fee schedule above is going to increase the cost to the
property owner, you can see that the city itself will M) picking up an
even qroater portion of the increase. Part of this increase will have
to be. absorbed by the approximate $24,000.00 balance in the tree fund.
11ow•ever, it should be pointed out that a good share of this reserve
should still remain intact for future equipment purchases.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of adoption of fee schedule increasing
removal coot to $120.00 per tree with stump removal to be the responsi-
bility of the property owner unless it is in the boulevard. Also to be
considered, is the rate for private tree replacement and boulevard tree
replacement. at $20.00 per tree subsidized by thn city.
- 7 -
Boulevard
Private Property
r I.
Proposed
method '?= Current
method
State
$12.00 �'�
$30.00
S -0-
$ -0-
City
20.00 •�
30.00
20.00
30.00
Resident
28.00
-0-
40.00
30.00
$60.00 .�
$60.00
$60.00
$60.00
Proposed methal Current method
In many eases the property owner could reduce the replacement tree coot
by planting his uwn gree and it is not unreasonable that this cost for the.
same tree planted in 1980 would only be $40.00. By planting his own
tree, the city would still pink tip half of the root even on private
property for such a replacement. tree. If a property owner roplaend a
boulevard tree. and planted his own tree it would only cost the resident
$12.00.
With the State funding reduced, it in the feeling of many commnunitins
that: they may drastically reduce their notch elm disease. program. While
the proposed fee schedule above is going to increase the cost to the
property owner, you can see that the city itself will M) picking up an
even qroater portion of the increase. Part of this increase will have
to be. absorbed by the approximate $24,000.00 balance in the tree fund.
11ow•ever, it should be pointed out that a good share of this reserve
should still remain intact for future equipment purchases.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of adoption of fee schedule increasing
removal coot to $120.00 per tree with stump removal to be the responsi-
bility of the property owner unless it is in the boulevard. Also to be
considered, is the rate for private tree replacement and boulevard tree
replacement. at $20.00 per tree subsidized by thn city.
- 7 -
Council Agenda - 6/22/81
i
8, Consideration of a Resolution Approving the Election of Gary Wieber
to be Excluded from the Public Employee's Retirement Association and
a Resolution Authorizinq an Aqrcement with the City Administrator
Relating to Deferred Compensation.
PURPOSE: On May 22, 1981, the governor signed a bill which allowed
city managers and administrators that were appointed as the chief
administrative officer of a city, to be excluded from the Public
Employment Retirement Association and allow the employer to contribute
the same amount on behalf of the individual, to a deferred compensa-
tion program which meets the requirements of Section 457 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1954 as amended through December 31, 1980.
I would like to request that the council approve the resolutions,
whereby I would withdraw from PERA and a resolution authorizing
agreement relative to the deferred compensation plan.
The bill signed by the governor on may 22, 1981, requires any city
manager or city administrator to make the election by June 22, 1981,
if they are currently employed in this capacity within the State of
Minnesota. It should be pointed out that the City Manager's Associa-
tion reviewed this item with city managers and city administrators
in the State of Minnesota as part of the League of Cities Conference.
All the resolutions enelored were based on the examples provided at
the workshop by Walter R. Fehst, City Manager of Robbinsdale, with
hin council passing the same resolutions. It should be pointed out
that a good share of the city managers and administrators will be
requesting their councils to approve the same resolutions. For
example, Curt Snesrud in Dig Lake has already had his council approve
such resolutions.
Currently, the City of Monticello contributes 5� percent and the
employee 4 percent of the groes salary to PERA. If tho resolutions
were approved, the contributiono an behalf of the city and myself
would go to a deferred compensation program which meets the require-
ments of Section 457 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 as amended
through December 30, 1980.
For your information, in addition to the two resolutions, pleaco find
the following:
Position Paper of the League of Minn000ta Cities and Minnesota
City Management Association.
Application for Exclusion from PERA membership by a city managor.
Agreement relating to deferred compenoation.
A copy of the bill itself.
t -e -
Council Agenda - 6/22/81
J It should be noted that within the definition of city manager in
the bill, is included a person appointed to and holding the position
of chief administrative officer of a statutory city. This would
qualify the position of city administrator in Monticello.
My reasons for requesting approval for these resolutions are as
follows:
In the PERA program, vesting only takes place after ten years
of service. In a deferred compensation program, there is
immediate vesting.
Poor earnings performance of Public Employment Retirement Associa-
tion.
Currently, PERA allows only a rate of 3% percent interest for the
amount contributed to PERA.
POSSIBLE ACTION: Consideration of a motion to adopt the resolution
authorizing agreement with the City Administrator relating to deferred
compensation and a resolution approving election of Gary Wieber to be
excluded from the Public Employment Retirement Association.
REFERENCES: Copies of both resolutions, an agreement relating to
deferred compensation, an application for exclusion from PERA member-
ship, Position Paper of League of Cities, and a copy of the bill it-
self.
- 9 -
I ?"
ez, L 1.
e,7&-
tl
y
cx
ez, L 1.
e,7&-
tl
y
1
T
CERTIFICATE OF 1.11NUTES RELATING TO
IldDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT 12EVEIIUE BONDS
,7 (SCOTli00D MOTEL PROJECT)
i Issuer: City of Monticello, Minnesota
Governing body: City Council
Hind, date, time and place of meeting: a regular: meeting, held
on June 22, 1981, at 7:30 o'clock P.I., at the City Hall. •_
Members present:
Members absent:
Documents attached:
Minutes of said meeting (pages).:
RESOLUTION NO.
IIESOLUTIO14 AMENDING RESOLUTION GIVINf7
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A PROJECT UNDEII
THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL ]DEVELOPMENT ACT,
AND REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO Till. COVMISSIONER
OF SECURITIES FOR APPROVAL
T, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting
recording officer of the public corporation issuing the obligations
referred to in the title of this: certificate, certify that the
documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully
compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal
custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents
are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting
of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete
copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all docu-
ments approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they
relate to said obligations; and that said meeting was duly held by
the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout
by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such
meeting given as requires by ]aw.
WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this
day of June, 1981. '
Signature
r ir,;�y_r'lc,r}•- !r ninist.ratc r
(SEAL) Name and 1'it 0
-2
Member introduced the following �J
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AMENDING RP.SOLUTION GIVING
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A PROJECT UJJDER
THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAi. DEVELOPMENT ACT
AND REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO THE COINLMISSIO'NER
OF SECURITIES FOR APPROVAL
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Monticello, Minnee:ota, as follows:
1. This Council. by resolution adopted February 25,
1980, gave preliminary approval to a project under the Municipal
Industrial Development Act, on behalf of Monticello Scotwood
Partnership (the Borrower), a Minnesota partnership, and approved
the issuance of revenue bonds or notes of the City in the
principal amount of $750,000 to finance a Project (as defined in
said resolution) at a cost estimated to be approximately $892,050.
The Council is now advised by the Borrower that because of current
high interest rates, the limited availability of mortgage money,
and the escalating costs in the construction industry, the
estimated cost of the Project has increased and the Borrower J
anticipates that the amount of rovi.niue honds or note^ neceL;:,ary
to finance the cost of the Project will be increased to $1,7.50,000.
The Borrower has noylrequested that the resolution adopted by
this Council on February 25, 1980, be amended to reflect approval
of revenue_ bonds in the amount of $1,250,000.
2. A public hearing on the proposed amendment was held
on ,lune 22, 1981, after notice given pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 474.01, Subdivision 7b, at which hearing all
interested persons appearing were given the opportunity to be
heard.
3. The resolution adopted February 25, 1980, is hereby
amended by deleting the figure "$750,000" wherever i.t appears
and substituting therefor the figure "51,250,000.^
4. The resolution adopted February 25, 1980, is in all
other resk'eces confirmed.
5. The City Clerk -Administrator is hereby authorized
and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the
Commissioner of Securities for her information and, if necessary,
her approval.
_
C
Adopted this 22nd clay of June, 1981.
Attest.
City Clerk -Administrator
(SEAL)
Mayor
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing
resolution was duly seconded by Member and upon
vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof. -
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
.111— SMITH. PRINGLE & HAYES 11. .1— .111.1
101 BOOTH WALNUT 114t9T ATTORNEYS AT LAW 691 NATIONAL BAN'WL.INIS.
... TICELLO, MINNESOTA 55362 LOVY.. ICY -
GREGORY V, SMITH, 1. 0. 11. MAIN ST -Fl
GARY L. PP-GLE, J. O. ELK RIVER, MINNESOTA 55330
....... THOMAS O. HAYES. J.O.
June 16, 1981
Mr. Gary Wieber
City AdministraLur
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
Re: Documents for Increased Amounts for ln(lu.--,Lrial. Revenue Bonds -
Scot Wood Motel.
Dear Mr. Wleber:
As I indicated when I spoke to you about this matter, I see no
problems pertaining to the increase from $750.000.00 to $1,250,000.0C)
Yours truly,
Gary L. llrin&le
GLP/jyh
File 5180-9705
C. "
ff,
December i , 1980
rM....d,,•, re,.,
Mn1.L.N.o.n.n...,,, TO: ALL MINNESOTA FIRE CHIEFS •»•-.•a+..»w
5, ,.,1 ., --1S116
^ " ..0 rnlc, rb., FROM: ORVILLE N. MERTZ, CHAIRMAN OF LEGISLATIVE ' ^��• • e�,..Jru.•.rw,
, Mm,,»• Ww.a.r 11. LP t ..Mwlgfq, C"K.
COMMITTEE
rda.�lti a SUBJECT: FiRE PROTECTION IN MiGH-RISE AND HiGH LIFE HAZARD
BU I LD I NGS.
As you are all well aware, no city or c—nunity in thu State of Minnesota is pumitted to
ithike any laws, ordinances. or building requirements that exceed the State Building Code
without permission from the State Building Code Division, and then only after a lengthy
hearing. Our experience with the State Building Code, in so far as it regards r,>rc fire
protection for the buildings in question, has been about as negative as you can qct.
Those of you who attended the adoption hearings of the State Building Code can testify to
the opposition the State Fire Chiefs received from the State Building Code Division Itself,
when we proposed fire safety rules to prevent Las Vegas MGM Grand fires, as wool a,, the
opposition we received from them In subsequent legislative sessions then atter;+Ls were
--ode to correct this inadequecy.
The fact of the matter is that MGM Grand -type fires can happen in any one of otir cor.nunitics.
It does not have to be a high-rise or a hotel, It can oocur in apartment houses, office
buildings, banks or any large area where large amounts of combustibles and per.ple corw!
together in the some place.
The present State Building Code permi is curtain buildings to be cuivarutted .r. liigh dq
you want to, and stretch clear across your county, aa(I stili not he required t, in'.tait
complete automatic sprinkler protection. Sprinkler protection is given, in the State
Building Code, as an alternative to other building protectlt,n teLhnigtues. ail of %.hi:h
have miserable safety records, only when the buiidinq—tree,: , 751 In h,•ighl, 1h1 r,' iq
no mandator complete automatic sprinkler requirement in the Stare Buildinq Gni,' tnr the
bulldings mens oned here. ragardless ni size, coul'i,nu;,iiun, ,,,' 1.010a.
rurthermora. you can bui ld any size apartment house or hotel vnu want to, acir. not cr rs
put In an alarn system If It remains under three stories.
The Minnesota State Fire Chiefs, In conjunction with uthurq, are oy,011 gdinq to •,pon.ur
legislation that will permit individual communities to exce,•,i the State Builit:11 Cmje.
as it regards fire detection, alarting, and suppression drviL,•s. The state law pe, Its
us to amend our fire code, but we can make no amendnw•nts that vxcecd the buitnlimi todr
requirement.
We are asking you to please contact your local representative. ,mrd .,,tater-. a ,d Ir.fr•rm
them of the need for this legislation,
fire Ca N. -floc
'/— Fire Chief - Anchrsur
ONM:c}f Chairman of the MSFCA Lrgislativ, Conrwittra
7N'I lily' 0E A I'IAtI IU!•I0�tI
n.w..0
.. iel"c" r.awa, rn-I
-A. I., IMy.nw.m
Isla Man - c.. (n.,
Iv,v. gave.
., n..,y.,.
Attached to my letter is what I consider to be a very important
tneesage from Chief Mcrtz, Chairman of our I.e(;islative Committee.
This message relates to important leg.1slation that we have attempted
to pass through the Minnesota Legislature during; the past reveral
years. This legislation will be ro-introduced this year by the
'it nnesota State Fire Chiefs LeCislation Comtaittec. We hope to obtain
your support and the support of all other Fire Oervice Organizations
nn a State and Local lnvel. The Committee and rsy.self feel this In
it key year to have this legislation passed due to the heavy long, of
life suffered recently in Lan Versa and New York, and locally on u
:smaller scale in Brooklyn Park where three young; children lost their
lives.
KA
I am therefore requesting your help and efforts on s local level.
First, would you please make a copy of Chief ;cert:. letter and need
)t to your local Legialatora and then also send it espy to your ls.rl.
t.ewapuper. If at all possible, deliver it to then In peroun.
.'ecundly, I would like you to send it personal letter to Chlvf M.vrt.7,
;rum your department and possiLly your BeCiotlal AJ6el•iaLion,
.snderlinine your strong support of thin very important llt;is:Lat.l.n.
:•lease give this natter your prompt attention, dou't let it t,et
Inst in your mountains of paperwork.
I feel a concerted and combined effort on nur 1 -art .it ti...; tine
uuld be very instrumenlnl in ;ettingl this; very cru•inl .rpin,n.i r,
r -iii scd.
would personally appreciate your efforts to cuplurt tl,i:: ver;,
portant issue.
,Jordon F. Vadnais
Fire Chief - White Bear Lake
i,restdent - Minnesota State fire Chief's Associati,In
DUN I GIVE FIRE A ►TALI TO %'ARI
TO: FELLOW FIRE
C II I E F' S
v..—.11 .owe. cn-I
u•.,a N
,t w.ne I.. u.r..u....n
FROM: CORDON F.
VADNAIS, PHLSIDENT NSFCA
,u.,, i.. L.. II.Iw•r..m
.nm•euewmn.
•�^�"^w"-"
SUBJECT: SUPPORT
F01( UPCOMING FIRE SAFETY
LI:OIC'.A'Ii(JN:
Attached to my letter is what I consider to be a very important
tneesage from Chief Mcrtz, Chairman of our I.e(;islative Committee.
This message relates to important leg.1slation that we have attempted
to pass through the Minnesota Legislature during; the past reveral
years. This legislation will be ro-introduced this year by the
'it nnesota State Fire Chiefs LeCislation Comtaittec. We hope to obtain
your support and the support of all other Fire Oervice Organizations
nn a State and Local lnvel. The Committee and rsy.self feel this In
it key year to have this legislation passed due to the heavy long, of
life suffered recently in Lan Versa and New York, and locally on u
:smaller scale in Brooklyn Park where three young; children lost their
lives.
KA
I am therefore requesting your help and efforts on s local level.
First, would you please make a copy of Chief ;cert:. letter and need
)t to your local Legialatora and then also send it espy to your ls.rl.
t.ewapuper. If at all possible, deliver it to then In peroun.
.'ecundly, I would like you to send it personal letter to Chlvf M.vrt.7,
;rum your department and possiLly your BeCiotlal AJ6el•iaLion,
.snderlinine your strong support of thin very important llt;is:Lat.l.n.
:•lease give this natter your prompt attention, dou't let it t,et
Inst in your mountains of paperwork.
I feel a concerted and combined effort on nur 1 -art .it ti...; tine
uuld be very instrumenlnl in ;ettingl this; very cru•inl .rpin,n.i r,
r -iii scd.
would personally appreciate your efforts to cuplurt tl,i:: ver;,
portant issue.
,Jordon F. Vadnais
Fire Chief - White Bear Lake
i,restdent - Minnesota State fire Chief's Associati,In
DUN I GIVE FIRE A ►TALI TO %'ARI
del
t_ 00� ' P
T
t
(REVISOR I CEL/JC 81-171-2
•oJ::
FEB ! 6 1981
Messrs. Solon, Johnson, Knoll, Ulland and Vega introduced --
S. F. No. 169 Referred to the Committee on Gavevr..cn:yCuo��wru���'`"�"�'`•'• "`"'''uCcr,;mn�a�
'•::::,.• FEB 1 u P81
1 A bill for an act
2 relating to the state building code, authorizing
J stricter fire prevention standards in certain
4 municipalities; proposing new lav coded in Minnesota
5 Statutes, Chapte. 16.
6
7 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE. OF MINNESOTA:
a Section 1. 116.855 1 [STRICTER FIRE PREVENTION STANDARDS.
9 Whether or not it has adopted the state building code, a
--------------------------------------------------------
10 county, home rule charter or statutory city or town may adopt
11 Stricter fire prevention standards than those contained in the
--------------------------------------------------------------
12 code, including without limitation standards relating to fire
-------------------------------------------------------------
17 detection, alerting and suppression device,.
�z
I
AGREEMENT RELATI14G TO
DEFERRED COMPENSATION
_ J
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 22nd day of June, 1981, by and
between the City of Monticello, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City")
and Gary Wicber, a natural person serving in the capacity of City Adminis-
trator of City ("Wieber"), WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Wicber has elected to be excluded from membership in the Public
Employees Retirement Association of the State of Minnesota, which election
has been approved by the City Council of the City; and
WHEREAS, both City and Wicber are desirous of having an amount equal to
the employer contribution which would be required by Minnesota Statutes,
Section 353.27, if Wieber were a member of the association, added to his
other compensation, of whatever kind or nature, and contributed on behalf
of the City Administrator to a deferred compensation program which meets
the requirements of Section 457 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as
amended through December 31, 1980; and,
NOW, THEREFORE., City and Wieber agree as follows:
1. City agrees to increase Wicber's compensation in an amount
equal to the employer contribution which would be required by Section 353.27,
if the City Administrator were a member of the Public alploycon Retirement
Association. This compensation shall be in addition to his stated salary
now in effect or which may hereafter be established from time to time. J
2. City and wiebor agree that such additional compensation is to
be deferred and shall be cuntrlbuted on behalf of Wiehor to a deferred
compensation fund which meets the requirements of Section 457, of the
Internal Revenue Cade of 1954, as amended through Documber 31, 1980.
3. The provisions of this agreement are effective immediately
upon the effective date of Wieber'n election to be excluded from membership
in the Public tlnployee's Retirement Association.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement this
22nd day of June, 1981.
WITNESSED BY: CITY OF MONTICE11,0
BY
Its rmyor
Gary Wicber
9
1)
RESOLUTION 110.
RESOLUTIO:1 AUTHORIZI11C AGPtEFN,F_NT WITH
CITY ADMINISTRATOR RELATING TO DEFLRRED COMPENSATION
WHEREAS, Gary 14iebcr, ("Wieber"), City Administrator of the City of aonticello
has elected to be excluded from membership in the Public Employees Retirement
Association, which election has been approved by the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, prior to such action the City has contributed an employers' s contri-
bution to the Public Employees Retirement Association for his account; and,
WHEREAS, by reason of such election, the City • s employer contribution to PERA
on his account will cease; and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 353.025, Subdivision 3, provides as
follows:
"(DEFERRED COMPENSATION; CITY CWTRIE3UTICN.) If an election o1'
exclusion is made, and if the City manager and the governing
body of the City agree in writing that the addivional compensation
is to be deferred and shall be contributed on b, -half of the City
manager to a deferred compensation program whiCh meP.t.s the require-
ments of Section 457 of rho Internal Rovenue Code of 1954, as amended
through December 31, 1980, the governing body may compensate the City
Manages, in addition to the salary allowed under any limitation imposed
on salaries by law or charter, in an amount equal to the employer
contribution which would be, required by Section 353.27, Subdivision 3,
if the City mnager were a member of the association.
MIERFAS, the City Council desires to exercise the authority conferred by the
aforementioned Subdivision 3,
t10W, 711ERF.FORIi, RE IT Rt.SOLVED by the City Council Of the City of Monticello,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. In addition to the City Administrator's oalary now in effect or
which may hereafter be established from Limo t0 Limo as his stated salary,
Wiebar shall be componuated in an additional amount equal to the employer
contribution which would he rogtrired by Ninnesola Statuteo, Section 353.27,
if he were a member of the Public Employeas Retiromenl. A:rcoclation subject,
however, to the provisions of the following paragraph of thin resolution.
2. Such additional compenuation shall bo paid only if and during
the time that there ill an agreement between City and Wicl w`r wherein it is
agreed in writing that the additional compensation is to be deferrrd and ohall
be contributed on behalf of Wiebor to a deferred compensation program which
mouta the roquirenenta of Section 457 of the Internal pevenue Code of 1954,
ac amended through Uecember 31, 1980.
3. The Mayor, acting for and in behalf of the City, is hereby
authorized and directed to enter into an agreement of a type described in
the foregoing paragraph no. 2 with 4iieber. Upon the execution of such agree- J
ment, the Mayor, City Administrator and other appropriate oLficials of the
City are authorized to take the actions necessary to give effect to the pro-
visions of such agreement.
The question was on the adoption of the Resolution and upon a vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
WHEREUPON SAID RESOLUTION WAS DELCARED DULY PASSED A11D ADOPTED THIS
22nd day of June, 1991.
ATTEST:
Gary Wicber, City Clerk
(seal)
Arvc A. Grimsmo, Mayor
�� J
- _ T
Member moved and limber seconded the motion that the
following Resolution be adopted this 22nd day of .lune, 1981.
q RESOLUTI0:1 NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING ELECTION OF
GARY WIENER'
TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE PUBLIC EMPLOYC•.E';
RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION
WHEREAS, Giry Wieber has notified the City Council of his election
to be excluded from membership in the public employees retirement association
and has provided this Council with a copy of his written election to do so,
all as authorized by Minnesota Statutes 353.025.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Monticello as follows:
1. The Council makes the following findings:
(a) Gary Wicber is the City Administrator of the City of Monticello,
Minnesota.
(b) That position is provided for in the ordinances of the City
of Monticello.
(c) lie was duly appointed to serve in that position effective
July 14, 1975, and he has held that position continuously
since that date.
(d) Tho City Administrator Is the chief administrative officer
of the City of Monticello.
((1) Acting under Minnesota Statutes 353.025, he has elected to
be excluded from membership in tho Public Employees Retira-
ment At,::ocintion, effective upon his filing such election
with the Executive Director of that annociation.
(f) In making this election he has agreed that hu will not at.
any Limn in the future neck any authorization to purchase
service credit for any period of excluded aervic,:. lie has
further agreed that. this election in irrevocable.
2. Said election is therefore approved.
3. A certified copy of this Resolution ohnll be provided t.o tho,
Executive Director of anicl s000ciation.
The quention was on the adoption of tho Rcoolution and upon a veto being
taken thorcon, the following voted in favor thereof:
( and the following voted against the came:
WHEREUPON SAID RESOLUTION WAS DECLARED DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS
22nd day of June , 1981.
ATTEST:
Gary Wicber, City Clerk
(seal)
Arve A. Grimsmo, Mayor
PON
.J
�J
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION
Capitol Square Building
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Telephone (612) 296-7460
APPLICATION FOR EXCLUSION FROM PERA MEMBERSHIP BY A CITY MANAGER
Laws 1981, Chapter 254, Section 1, defines a city manager as follows:
(1) a person duly appointed to and holding the position of city
manager in a Plan B statutory city or in a home rule city operating under
the 'council-manager' form of government, or (2) a person appointed to and
holding the position of chief administrative officer of a home rule charter
city or a statutory city pursuant to a charter provision, ordinance, or
resolution establishing such a position and prescribing its duties and
responsibilities. . . .
1, the undersigned, a city manager as defined, elect to be excluded from membership in
the Public Employees Retirement Association.
I will not at any time in the future seek any authorization to purchase service credit
for any period of excludable service and I understand that this election is irrevocable.
I became a city manager as defined under Laws 1981, Chapter 254, for the City of
Monticello, Minnesota on July 14, 1975
Cneck one:
I choose to accept a refund of my accumulated salary deductions.
Q I choose to place my account on a deferred basis.
r.,ry wieber
r'rinted Name U Signature
475-50-6891 2 11-Miaaiaoippi Drtvo, P.O. Box 687
Social Security Number Street Address
Monticello, Minnanuta 55362
City, State, lip Code
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
191t day of .lune 19 al
Notary Public i All? iA h County
My commission expires
(SIftMW
IE
New
A u1� u1 1116 t,6J LU.1J u GOVERNING BODY OF YOUR CITY APPROVING YOUR EXCLUSION
FROM PERA MUST ACCOMPANY THIS FORM. F
POSITION PAPER
Backcround
I
The League of Minnesota Cities has adopted a policy position con-
cerning the problem of retirement benefits for certain pro-
fessional persons in city management working in the State of
Minnesota. The League felt that these critical positions were
unique in their problems of mobility and justified special con-
sideration for pension purposes _.__Ffe League policy closely
parallels the policy statement of the Minnesota City Management
Association.
The Minnesota City Management Association represents all the
positions of city management in this state recognized by the
International City Management Association as positions of broad
managerial responsibility. The Association's analysis of the
issue has resulted in the policy as follows in this position paper.
There are presently 92 positions of city management in the State
of Minnesota recognized by the International City Management
Association (ICMA). The ICMA sorVes as the professional org,,nf-
zation for city management professionals in the Unitcd States.
One feature of the city management profession is the mobility of
these individuals resulting in the lack of tenure in one locality.
The average tenure for the position averages 4.8 years. The lack
of tenure relates to the upward mobility of the profession (the
need to move out in order to move up) and the exposure to the
political process which tomos with the. unnition. The mobility
Of the profession crossen all 50 state boundaries and most pro-
fessionals rind themselves serving a number of localities anis
states during their careers of service to the public.
The characteristics of the profession re!;ult in difficulties for
many members of the profession to provide themselves with retire-
ment benefits upon reaching the age of retirement. The lack of
nece!.sary work time in various states in order to obtain vesting
(in Minnesota, vesting in obtained at ten years of service) and
vesting in some funds at benefit lovcls reflcgting salaries many
years outJotod by inflation, are unique problems to the profeusien.
Very few other public employees have the mobility problem on an
inrcrat..,te Scale and as a result are well served by the statewitln
retirom.nt (clans. It is felt that this problem shuuld be addre_,:;-
ed by appropriate legislative action.
Resolution of the Problem
The Minnesota City Management Association sugget;ts that the
resolution of the problem lies in amendment to the MinnvLuta
Statutes relating to the Public Employee,, Retirement Act (PrALN).
Munici)+alition through t)teir city council.,. should be given tho
opportunity to work with their city m011a90ment professional to
provi,le alternate retirement plans for that position. Legisla-
tion should allow for the exemption of the position from PERA
20,
-2 -
provisions on the condition that the contributions which would
have been made by the employer and employee would be donated to
a deferred compensation program for the employee's retirement
years. This program would provide the mobility necessary for the -
profession. The cities in Minnesota would be enhanced by the
more favorable position that they would find thcmoelves in for
recruiting of top level professionals.
I•lost city management professionals would opt to participate in
the deferred compensation plan of the international City Manaee-
ment Associatiu.1 - Retirement Corporation (ICMA-RC). IC,1A-RC
was organized in 1973 by sponsorship of the ICMA, National League
of Cities, U.S. Conference of Mayors, American Society for Public
Administration, and other interested parties. The ICMA-RC was
organized to provide portable retirenient bvnefits for mobile: public
servants who often lose, or experience a significant reduction in
their retirement benefits due to the career mobility. At the end
of 1980, the plan was utilized by 1100 local governments covering
7,600 omployces with receipts in 1980 of nearly $12.G million_
The option doeE:; not preclude other forms of deferred compensation.
The cost to the` state and municipality is no greater than the
existing PIRA plan. Rather than the contributions being made to
PERA, the local government makes them to the deferred compencation
plan.
There are three precedents existing on the exemption from local
pension pregralns in favor of other pension programs in Minnesota.
In 1977, the city coordinator and four asslotanto were exempted
from the minnompolis Municipal Employees Itotirem;nt Fund (MERE)
(422,1. .090 ;cct:ion 4) . This allowed the::e positions to utilize
the normal .MCR1' contributions for a deferred ct,..,plmsation program.
Also in 1977, the Metropolitan waste Control Commission was allow-
ed to exempt its trademen from the Minnesota State Retirement
System (;13RS) in favor of the more traditional trade union covcrugo
available to t) rem. In 1980, the Police Chief of the City of Dlinne-
apolis watt excluded from participation in the local Police Relief
Association and allowed to utilize a deferred compensation pl in.
All of these precedents face a similar unique problem that con-
fronts thu city management profession.
Summar -j
It is the u(linlon of the Leanuc of. Minnesora Cities and the
Mlnnr•,e;ta C1Ly Management Association that lavorable• consi6,rnlien
of len 19I•,tinil to correct the Jloromentlosh-0 4:rnlJlem is henol VI'li
to the- nrofessional in clly managenxmt, and con!.equently, to the
recruitment of these individuals by muniCi .elides in u.,r statty.
1'.n kOG in 71-runcj Iy encourarJr the tavura Uie cenulderation 01 Cr11U
macter .
HFI
227 SECC::O E::Cn03S?:5:^ IREV 350F I .•+ }{?/223-«E
-175 v
Stale of Minncsoln
�- HOUSE OF RE:PRESLiNTivrIVES
SES510'
�i:t'E,TY•5EC11. F. No. 1223
�
t"tmitoctd be Rtdin„ '
ita•,ut Frra T:Mn Apa^, 0st and riffrred to the Committee nn
Cocernmm r a I Opr railaru.
Committee Itto—vidatian ..it Adoption of Berate;
To 3'av ns A""" Apr. 15, 1951.
Itc.d Smnd Tima Apr. 15, 17at/%toy 7. 1951.
Cemovvta Ap"I th" tfhnln• Ry .ltntlon, Re-referred to the Committee on
To•.et
To l. l• N Amended 113y 7, 1981,
L
I A bill for an act
2 relating to retirement; providing for an oxerption
3 frc:n morberahtp ther.in for city managers, modifying
4 the Income, taxation of deferred comptinaat«en
5 con crih.tions by certain city managers; unending
6 Ninneseta statute* 1900, Beciton 290,01, oubdivtcicn
7 20; prapoaing now law coded in t9innesota Statutes, '
0 Chapter 353. l`
.!
30 DF. IT ENACTED BY THE LECI"aLATnnS Of Ttiw STAT OF PI n:a3 »O2Ar t
11 Section 1. 1353.0251 (CITY HAITACEFSt ELC-10.1): DEFFfi.FD
12 C0::PE:1SATION; I
13 Subdivision 1. InE57NMO115,1 For pitrpocos of thic urctitri
14 "city manager" means (1) a person duly appointed to and 110 d1^,7
15 the position of city manager -- a Plan R --------- city or in a
16 hero rule city-oporati na under the "council-manager form of
............................................................
17 govetnment. or (2) a person appointed to and holding the
SO positlon•of chluf+ administrative- officer .of _a home_ rule_ chartc-'
19 city of a-atatutory city qurauant to a chatter prevision.
20 o dinance, or ro.oltition eatnbllshtng auctt• positron and
.....................«_.-«-_..--_.-_..-_...._.__....-.__.
.21 preacrifii nQ its du"o" and r* !*ns tbilittae. "Gut'et Hing body"
22 "sans rile city coune3l of the csty a"p2oyinq lien city wet»a*r,
21 .
..................the e......lect...ion ... dost ...e.a . bid _.......t...--._._.._ 2....-...
......... weans .. ..........
24 sut'd, 2: gELLCT1011.1 A.city .ino-teye.- may elect. to .be
21 oxelud"11 rrom mumtiottlilp in the ausociation. ^The election of
..............................................---------------
2 (1
..............20 occlusion shall bu a,idu uithirt 10 dayu folluv.n0 tl.0
27:er-en--•ment`af•oTl-igymont•w.`vitiu n•30.days++aiiowinq_th.
1
MFC223 5EC:::3 IRECI50R ( fi5 :9y:2:3.2e
I
effective dato of thin act, t.'IstChcvar e-Cutn later. in « Yitii:T
2
on-a-fomwpre se Abed-by-the-executive diuector•and -hall
3
-be
approved by a ro2ofutlon 0} the qov-rntnq Lrdy«of-the Ct cy. T1t-
4
---------------------------------------------- ---------- '--•-----
election of exclusion shall not be offeetivo until it is fikh:d
5
........................................................._....
wl th the executive director. Maaberchip of a city mana;ar in
6
the ecceC1attOn`alsall -Cale On the date the written aleG t'.ipn SE
I
7
----- •-•---•---»---•----_--••-------------•----------•---�-•-_-_
received by the executive director or upon a later' data
.....
B
------------- -_---- •----------------------•-------
opectflvd. Tho oleCtlon to ba excluded from mombership shall
9
____________________. _.._
include a proviu on aq.....! that the pa---- will not at any
10
t;m in the future arek any authot,x=atitl ato purchaao service
it
a f-r any of ---luded ---vice and -hall ho
12
---- ------
irravocAble.
13
------------
Subd. 3. IDI:FFRRED COMPF*,MTIC:Is CITY CON— INT1011. ( It an
14
elaetton of exclusion is made• and if the city mana9or and the
...............»-----_--_.-_-___.--_- -------------
35
pot•ernlny .city .agree in wriuiq that the ad^d- tioa..l
--------------------
16
.body .oC .the
.._._._.._...............•_-••---,----------------,--
compensation is to ba deforred and sliali !a contributed o n
17
brhalf of the -ity managar to a defe rad tiwpennatson pre jt�.
... ..
30
......................................................... ....
whish meats the regal re-ionto of arc tIon 41R o! the Intel it al
19
Roveauu Code, of 1953• as amandad through ['rc �rhor 47, IE.?. al, LAr
20
----------------------- * ---------_... _.
q.^vrrntn! body nay cump*nsato rhe cl ty ma,iy.it•, in ad�itl on to
21
..............................................................
the salary allowed under any ltmith Lion tr,l n,ad on ia2Att•aA try
`
22
............................
lav or charter. in an amount actualtotie, t•icliloyorcontri l'uLicn
27
which would UE i.. ryuf ud by ►sells- 35].27, auUdiviaion 3- if the
24
city managtr were a eurbar of the arsoUau w.
' 25
..... ..............-------------------
Suttl. 4. (REFUIIDS, OrrERR£D AIIIIUITY. 1 A City waney er who
- _
26
•
mal,.oa An election to Uu excluded lion mesbushlp ssentitlad to
27
a+ratun:!_of•aeeuauta:ad dedict.ons-at,, •iL-.-tl u. wi all all t1eJ, A
f
\
20
drfurrnw' annuity sit use marinet larovtdby rrCtson od 353.34, at
an
29
.................................
the option of uw mannger.
30
..........................
Sul+d. S. (£LCCT loll, fiTlICR LRPI,.O7Pit'iT I if a city saisagei
71
,who Ila% made all election to be excluded at rt to employment.In
....
3:
............................................,.._..»......
aneuror yovot nmrntat atn.diviaion as -Cit 1,. rwitlolernt niliet
33
1h.n-As•a.. ivy .manhts't. it, the S..m.-r1: y`..liu.al.=t.un-a1..11.C.
74
Ja•nnJ to have bunti•iutc nW[J on the n11.•t iic.. J.ur al
35
......................................................
.......
».
■j\
36
C H.---tA Statutnt I?uu, lost tc.t :93 01,
2
e
IIFL23 SECC::D EI:CRO:S?:E::T 1w.ISOR I .,a Hf:223-:E
1
Subd:vislon 20, is emended to read,
2
Subd. 20. [CROSS I::CC::E•i Erccpt as other•::ne prov:ded in
,this
chapter• the term -gross :ncenc." es sppI ad tO
l�
4
corporations includes avory Y.1 lid of ecn•pansat:on for labor of
5
personal services of - ery kind from any privnte or public
6
ecplOynent• office, poaitiOn or services: Income derived from
7
the ownership or use of property; gains or profits derived from
0
every kind of dinpoeition of, or every kind of dealing in,
9
property; income derived from the transaction of any trade or
10
nosiness; and :nccme der:vcd from auy touted: except th..t 9.=t.;
11
Income shall :.3t include "eraept function income" of a
12
"homeowners asses cation" a■ those terms are doflred :n Sect:cn
12
520 of the Into rnal Revenue Coda of 11-54, as amended through
14
December 31. 1979,
15
The rerm "gross income" 1n iia application to ind:vidualt,
16
estates, and trusts shall mean the ad;usted gross lnecre as
,
�•• •��•'
27
computed for federal Income tax purpL:•es as defii.ed :n the
19
Internal Revenue Code of 19S4, as arei.ded threug:i the data
1
l
19
specified herein for the applicable t.xable year. with the
20
modifications specified in thins secti,n.
21
(1) The Internal Revenue Codu of 1954• as it"rde.] thrtOCh
_
22
December 31, 1974, a1ia11 he in affetL Lor the taxable years
23
beginning after Decelrber 31, 1974.
_
24
(til The Internal Rwunue C.iJn n1 1954, es amended tli rr.0 �h
25
December 31. 1976, luclud in9 Lha am r n_ @.it:, made to xei.tiun :6:}:1
26
(,elating to lieonc„d day care centric) in II.R. 3477 as It
21
passed the Con9rexs on May 16. 1777, &hall be in affect foi tko
26
taxable years beginning after Oeteml.el 31, 197o Tha provi&iel:a
29
of the Tax Ratutm Act of 1476, P.L. 9.1-455, uI,lch affect
30
adjusted gross Income rhall baromo ,flective (ar pul;,,r,s of
31
this chapter aL Lhe seen timu tilry hrtame ef(ectivn for fo(l,•;a.
32
lntome tax )wlpuave. ieG Llwli 207 (IelaLllul to wxtell&I111 of
33
period for noninhoynt tion of uain on sale o, exchan,io of
34
residence) and section -10. (telatini to t_INo tot mnY e,j
34
ientrlLutlans to petmien )llalin of arlf vaxiloyd pool lo) of M L.
O
J
36
94.12 shall bq effective fat taxable yaato bag uinutj a:rel
M
k:P1223 S=CC::] L::;,R055i:H:;T IR9'.'154R t :i5 Rf':-3-'2
I DeecrScr 31.19-74.,
2 The pro,intens of -action 4 of P.L. 95-458, and seetsana
3 131. 133. 134, 141. 152. M. 157, and 40S of P.L. 95-400
4 (relating to ponoton-, individual ra trroment accounts, defovred
5 compensation plans, and to the naln of a rosleeneel :hall be
G effective at the name time that these provisions become
7 effective for federal income tax purposes.
8 (iii) The internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amet:ded through
9 December 31, 1979, shall be in effect t for taxable years
10 bog:niting after December 31. 1979.
11 For to xnble years beginning after December 31, 1900 and
12 before January 1, 1983, the provisions of section 404 (relating
13 to partial exelistors of dividends and interest retalved by
14 individuals) of the Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act of 1960,
15 P.L. 96-223. shall apply.
16 References to the Internal Revenue Code of 3954 in clauses
37 to). (b) and (c) following shall moan the cods in effect for, the
10 purpose of defining gross income for the applicable taxable year.
39 (a) Haditieations increasing fe:leral adjua Fed gress
20 Income, There shall be added to federal aJ)uetnd gross inccmot
21 11) Interest income of obligations of any state oche• thea
i 22 ,MiAnOrrita or s oulitical aubdiviaion of any nthor state axe -pr
23 from federal income taxes under the Internal Revenue Code of
24 1954$
25 (2) Interest Income on obligations of any authority.
25 co=nlssion, or inateunentatity of the United Uncoil, uhl.h U:v
27 laws -of the United States aaompt from ledetal income tax, but
20 not tiom state income taxes;
29 01 Incaxn taxes ral:osed by U+i a atato or any othet tax'. g
30 juriadiction, to the extent deductible in det-amining federal
31 + adjusted gross income and not ct+.•Ji4. 1 oyattisl I+-daral slice -o
32 tan.
33 (41 Intat++at nn end-btrJnve,•. ui.-uund ut aontinuvd to
34 Sputrba.o or carry sututitta, the inwmu e n m which it exr-IL
35 rYen tax mn.rr Lb:t tLat'or, its th.- in
36 deletni:!Iiv) fvdutal soja -ted gto.0
$.: ta+itvr
M
0
SECC::O :•15 HF:225-=E
1
(5) ;ata.nto recalled an rc:nbu:tcr..ant for an expects. or
s C$tncas or in)ury which was dedactcd in a prior tara_1e year :o
3
the extCnt that the deduction for the reltb— 'acd ur.pend:turc
//
( r
4
reaultad in a tax benefit;
5
16) The amount of any federal income tax ovarpaymcnt for
•
6
any previous taxable year, received as refund or credited to
7
another taxable yonr'o,income tax l:abtltty, proportionate to
6
the percentage of fcdurnl income tax that woo claimed as a
9
ded+ictlon 1n detcrmining Minne Uoto income ins. for the pro- ous
10
taxaale year.
11
Tho ova:cd}.aent refund or credit, dotermined with rocpact
12
to a husband and wife on a fol nt federal income tax return for a
l�
i
a
prov%ous taxable year, shall be reported on )olnt or soparato
I4
MinnoeotA incomo tax returns. In the case of separate miuneoota
15
:atu.:io. the overpayment shall In. reported by oath opouae
16
proportionata)y according to the relative amounts of fedora.'
..... ,�....... ,,...
17
inccna tax claimed as a deduction on his or her oapat'ate
1S
Min -meta income tax raturn for such pra•:icus taxable year:
19
(7) In the code of a change of residence from Plannonota to
20
another stat. or notion, the amount of roving expenses which
.,
exceed total rasmburacmcnta slid vhlch were therefore deduc- ad in
22
arrivin0 at fudaral ad)ustod gross incomo:
23
(0) In the coca of property dlrpouad of on or cftor January
24
1, 1973, the amount of Any incranno in the tnxpayar's [adoral
25
tns liability under uaction 47 of the internal Aovonuo Code of
26
1054 to the extant of the credit under taction 36 of the
t
l
27
Int.rnal Rovenuo Cotte of 1454 that was prvviouaty -hewed as a
j
20
deduction Otthor undue' aoetion 290,01, aub.Ilvtsion 20 (h) (7) or
.• ^_�_�"�
29
Under SOCLI031 290.09, subdiviOton 24;
p
(9) rxponaos and loaenn artatng from a farm which are not•
'
31
al lowablu under section 290.09, autxhvinln„ 29;
32
(10) CKlienseu and depreciation Attt1hi.tahle to subotan.i.i.d
33
butldingo disnifuwed by —Cti Or, 290.101:
34
(11) The amount by witch the 9.111, dot,:rmu,ad purcu.11t to
35
taction 41.'19. Aut,•divIsten 2 excuedo th" Aiioune. or such qA:n
35
Includ ad in fadoral ad)liatwd grooa inter,:
$.: ta+itvr
M
0
1 112 ) To tte extent deducted in co=pu'titnl the taepayJL''a
�.✓
2 fedoral adjuotad gross Inca^o for the taxable year, losses
3 reeoquiacd upon a transfer of property to the cpousa or femur
a spouse of tho taxpayor in exchange for the reloaee of the
5 opousa'd rnt'Ital righto:
6 (13) Interest income from qualified sehotsrship fundint)
7 bonds as defined in section 10311e) of the Internal Revenue Codu
0 of 1954. if the nonprofit corporation is domiciled outside of
9 Mi enc o It a;
10 (I-; ) Exvmpt-IntoreeL dividotads, as defined in section
it 052(b)(5)(A) of the internal Revenue Code of 1954, not included
12 in fedora! adjusted groan income pursuant to section
11 H52{b)(5){0) of the internal R.:venue Code of 19f4, except: for
14 that portion of exempt-interest divldenda docivud from Interest.
15 incono on ebligationo of the state of Minnesota, any of its
26 politica' or governmontal subdivisions, any of Ito
1
'
17 n.unicipal-itiaa, or Any of Ito governmental og+nnten or
Ci
10 instrumantalitiea;
t✓
19 (15) The amount of any orcl.dad gain recag:trced by A trust
20 on the male or exchange of property au duftned in naetton
21 C4'(e)(3) of the Internal Rovonue Coda of 1954:
22 (10) An amount equal to ono-sixth of any (join from the sale
23 or litho r diapoaition of property deducted under sattions 1202(a)
24 and 1202(c)(1) of tho internal Revenue Coda of 19541
25 (17) To the extent not included in the taxpayer's federal
C
26 Ad)uetod gross income, the amount of any gain• from the Mala or
27 ot)+or dinponitlon of property having a taunt, adjusted basil Lor
20 I:tnnoloto income tax purponas than for todural income LAX
29 purpoan s. This modification 911411 not exceed the ditforeiico in
30, bssu. It thu gain Ss considerod a long torm ciipital gain for
31 fadural lucaao tar, purpocua. Lila modifiCnt:an Citall bo 12n1ted
32 to 50 poreont of the portion of thv Vann. This mmbfacot:on It,
33 Ilmrtoo :a p+q>•irr% that quaiiflud for Lite energy ero•l%;
SA con:aimed in section 290.04, tiLjlvs,loh 14, and to prapuity
35 acGuti•u•1 it. exrhwroiu ion the rel.iane of the L Al"Yet'o ixarit.il
in ser.tisu 290.1.1, eIoueo 191:
36 VAVn:L e•.^:pined
G
v
11?1223 SEC7::0 E..7.CSZ: Z: ( FE':ISCR I MS F:r 1223-C�'
I
(18) This amour.- or any loss from a source oc:sldo of
,
2
Minnesota which is not allowed under srte tion 7.90.17 including
3
any capital loss or netyoperat:ng loss car:7:ovwards or
�Q
4
carryback. resulting frcm the loss: end
5
(19) Tho amount of a distribution floc an individual
6
housing account wh:t-n is to be Included In gross ineomo as
7
required under clause (e) of section 290.09, subdivision 30.,
8
and
9
(20) To the extent excluded from federal adjusted gress
10
intone, in :`.. case oC a cSty nanngor or city admi ni atrntcr who
11
elects to b. e::c:c_ed frcm Cho public erployeos retirer..en:
(�
12
_---•--_-••-.----•--------------••__••--------------------
association and who makes eolltributiona to a deferred
---- - - -- --
13
•____•__•--_--_---•__•----•----_----" -----
compensation program pursuatit to section 1, the amount of
f......................................................
14
contributions made by the city manager or adml ni stray r-wh ch Ia
........ ..
75
equal to the amount which would have been Lhu city manage''. or
16
______________________________________________
edmfllf &tracer's omp loyoe coned button pursuant to section
_
17
353.27, subdivision 2, if he were a merber sf chs" " public
"
j8
_•.......................................
erployous retirement association.
•
.(b)•'Nodi
19
fico tions reducingfederal adjusted gross inc,,p.
20
There &hall be subtracted from federal adjusted gree ince-vs
21
(1) hitervat Income on obligations of any authority,
..
cornission or instrumentality of. the United States to the eatanl
.
23
includible in gross intone for federal income tax purposco tut
24
exempt from state Income tax under the "lava of the United Stntoai
25
(2) The portion of any gain. from the sato or other
26
disposition or property having a higher hd3tected basis for
27
Minnumota income tax purposes than feefedorAl Income tax
20
purposes, that does list nxceed such ell free encu in buia; b:it If
29
such gain Is,eonsidelud A Jong -term Capital gain for fedora:
. 30
income Lax purposes, the modsficn[1on %11.111 be limited to 5.. )•,r
31
enntuel of Cho pore on of the Valet Thin modification shat: nom:
32
hu applicable if the dlfferenu In bse.iu is duo La dlsallct...•+ra
C33
of doprocSatlor. pursuant to st:on 2"0.101.
34
(31 interest at dlvidand Inreme -let toCMILIOD to lila art,•:,;
C35
rtVVmpt frcm ll%ccMa Lax 11111 •l L11V law. of III:.. at,,la .ltit
311
Lhil 11, U&.'.0 Of lila ae CIII ll1VY b'IL Illi 11111 tie 111 Ql:a_ 11 _
v
l
H?:221'SEC--::7 E..JnCE53:'c::: `IR_VIEOR ( S tiF:_-. __
1
for federal inccae tax pu rpo sea;
i
2
(41 Lea sea, not othervtoo roductnq federal adiuoted groes
7
income assignable to 1.1, rneaota. arising from events or
4
transactions which are annignable to llrnno =ata under the
5
provisions of seetiono 290.17 to 290.20, including any capital
6
Iona' or not operating loss earryforvsrds or cart•ybacks resulting
7
from the losses;
0
(5) 11 inchded-in federal adlustad gross incone, the
9
amount of any credit received, whether received as a refund or
10
credit to another taxable year's income tax liability, pursuant
11
to chapter 290A, and the arount of any overpayment of irc:-e tax
12
to Minnesota, or any,othor state, for any previous taxable year.
I1
vhather the amount Is received as a refund or credited to
14
another taxable year's income tax liability;
15
(6) To the extent included.in federal adjuntod,grosn
16
income, or the amount reflected an the ordinary income porton
17
of n lump sum distribution under section 402(x) of the Inlarnal
'
10
R::•unuo Coda of 1954, notwithstardin9 any other• la, to the
19
�eencra ry, thio amount raeelved by any person (i) frim tha Cnited
o
20
States, its aganeioa•or instrumentalities, the Fndoral-Rocerve
21,
Oank.or from tho state of Minnesota or any.of its political or,
<22,
yovarnmental _subdivisions or, from any, other, stats or Su_ 4
23
political or'rgovornmental' subdivisions, or. a Mlnnoacto volunteer
c 23 yfl �ufighiur'o relic! acsoei'e Lion, -by'wny-of`po'ynent an a
' 25
pension, puhlic employes. rotironent benefit., or any combination
C
•"
26-
thereof, or. (ii) as a retirement or survivor's benefit mad* fret
27
a plan qualifying under section 401, 407. 404, 405, 400, 40f ar
20
409\ of the Internal R6vonuo Code of 1954. The na;dmum ar_ccnt
o/
`^
a 29
of thin subtractionshall be $11,000 leas the amount by which
20
the indiv idual'o fadural Ad)uoted groan incems, plias the
21
ordinary mecum portion of a lurp aum distribution as dof:ned in
32
section 402(ul of the Internal Revenue Code of 195-1, exceeds
75
517,000. In thq caw of A voluntaer fire fightar who roes:vas an
74
involuntary lurp flux tiratributien of his pension cr ratirarant
`
25
banofita, the na Y.inun amount of titre Guilt ract ion than be
e,/
76
S11.000: this aubtr.c .i n shall nos bu rad uend by :iu acva; of
a
11IF1220 SECCNO ::SOi ) ,. mss IIF1 n-�
1
ilio irdiy:d_al'o federal' adjusted gross rrtcla in ercca-of
1
2
517,000;
J
(7) In cite case of property acqu:t,_d on or ofto-January 1.
Q4
1973, the amount of any cradit to the taxpu•yer's federal tax,
S
liability under section 00 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954
6
but only to the extent that the credit is connected with or
7
alloeablo against the production or roceil•t of income included
8
in the measure of thc�tax imposed by this chapters-
9
(0) To the extent included in the taxpayer's federal
10
adjusted gross %.come for the taxable year• gain recoeni:ed u;.an
12
a transfer :f property 20 the=spouse or for-cr epcuzn of the
,
12
taxpayer in exchange for the release of tho spouoe'a marital
10
rights:
14
(9) The amount of any distribution from a qualified pe:ie:on
19
or profit sharing'plan included in federal adjusted gross inaore'
16,
in the year of raccipt to the extent of any • contribution no:
1
•
17
proviously allowed as o deduction by reason of a chango ill
10
federal lav which was not adopted byMinn—iia law for a taxable_
19
year beginning to 1974 or later:
I
20
(10) Interest, including payrenc a<13ustrenc to tt:a
�
,oxtail:
21
that it is applied to intareat, corned by, the Collor of the
;
k
1744im-soc,ur2
J u us
^
u
22,
23,
proporty tri A' Carl tyvloan c::ceut[d before Jaranry
1, IT02 that ds guaranteed by she comm mei ones- of agriculture Aa
o `
V
<21,
provided in, sections 41.91V to 41.60;
..
j �•
C,
29
(11) Thu first $1,000 0: eomprnsot:wi fob, persona! sv:gl:sus
,
26
in the armed forces of the United !!totes ur.thn United flat!ons,
-
•
27
andtho neat $2,000 of componantion for p�,rtanal oorvices sit, Ihp
20
armed forces•of the United States or this United Nations wholly,
29
potformnd outside this %Into of Mlnnauota. This modificaticn
70
does not Apply to compensation defined lit elal,.j Ib)I611
11
1121 The Amount of any Income n.u•n,•d for personal so--3r-
nrviret•72
32
rendorad uutr,ido of flinuenota pi -lot, to th.• data when the
•
L31
""payor bu[Omo a t•usldent of FllnnutOLit. jhs.i modification deet.
34
not 41;p1y to rotnponnntioti dufuied tit class ,i I1)146):
1�
09(10)
1it the case of wotjon or Saint -1.13 paid or rneutrITa ..
e
.rte
36
or atter Januaty 1. 11)77, the amount of any ceadit lar
,',/j
4?12-"3 SE_::17 ) ms
I
employment of certain new employees to:der'sectiorn 440 and 51 to
2
53 of the Irte:':al Fuvetiue Cede of 1954 which t, -mined as a
3
credit against the taxpayer's federal tax liabili'y, but cnly to
4
the extent that the credit is connected with or alloeablo
5
against rhu Production or receipt of income inelu•jed in the
6
measure of the tax imposed by this chapter:
(•
7
(14) In the case of work incentive program crprnses paid or
8
incurred on or after Jnnuary 1, 1979, the amount of any credit
9
for expenses of work incentive programs under secticnss 40. SOA
10
and 509 of the Interna: Ravcrtic Ctde of 195.1 which Ir e3aimud as
11
a credit Against the taxpayer's federal tax liability, tut only
12
to the extent that the credit is connected with or allocable
13
against the production or receipt of intone included in the
14
measure of the tax Imposed by this chapter:
15
(15) Unemployment ccmponsation to the extent irmluetble in
16
gross intorno for fuderal income tax purposes undo: section 85 of
37
the Internal Revenue Code of 1954:
1
IB
(lG)To the extent included in federal adjusted gress
19
income, aaver an co Pay that may he treated as a lurp sum
20,
distribution under the provisions of section 290.032,
21
subdivision 5,
22
(17)' Thu-ar,ount of any in.cime or pain-which -Is not.
23
assignable to 14innosota under the provisions of section 290.17:
24
and
25
(161 Minnesota exympt-interest dividends an provided by
26
subdivision 27: and -
27
('19) To the emenl Included In federal adjur,ted grog
28
Inc.... In the case of A city manager or city adminintlater who
29
to
;IocLPbe excluded from Lhe PUbIIC espluyoes retitemrnL
30
essoel a Uon end who mnkes conCri buss ons to a dvfeirod
31
----------------------------------
_____"""""'-"'--""""---31 e..rUns.atfon program purrunnt to section 1, the mount •.
32
--------------------------------------------------
payTents Item the deferred compenont ton piautnm vq.ir:a lt•nt to
1]
thv-amounL of contrtbiit_Ions tared un,lur ttausw lall.'UI
34
al•Nodifieattont•
ahrUial lei a•of- rL
(Affecting a ,•Itl nq uma11
C
35
36
buslnr r■ cetparau ens under wLuen 13'2 of rhu lin ••uial Fuvunuo
CLdt c i 1954, or ■ac ti un :91,9?;. e1 this chapter.
10 y
21
M=23 SC: --::D c:.:i:05L::£::: )RCL'I55R 1 •.5 HF:223-_c
1 ( I ) Shareholders iii a small bustrc+s cot post. cn. vh:ch has
elected to be ■o coxed under the Internal Revenue Cade of
3 but has :at made an ulectton under suction 290.97: of this
4 cnapter, shall deduct from federal adjusted grass ititcrie the
5 amount of any imputed income from the corporation and shell ad]
6 to federal adjusted 'gross income the amount of any loss clued
7 as a result of stock ownership. Also there shall be added to
0 federal acjusted gross intone the amount of any distrtbuticns in
9 cash or property made by said corporation to its shareholders
10 dur1.19 the taxable year.
13 (2) In :asps where the small bu a m'ss corporation has radu
12 an *leet3an under section 1372 of the Internal Revenue Coda o:
13 1954. but has not elected under soctiou 290.972 of this chapter
74 and the corporation in liquidet*d or the individual share.*.3leor
3S disposes of the stock and there is no capital lose reflected in
16 federal adjusted gross intone because of the fact that co. -;crate
17 losses have exhausted the shareholders baeis for federal
10 purposes, the shareholders shall be ent.tied, neverth*lees. to s
19 capital less eor*en.uiate to their Minre*ots basis for the stbek.
20 (3) in cases whore the election un('er section I372 of the
21 Internal Revenue Code of 1954 antedates the election order
22 section 240.972 of thir chapter and at the clam. of th., taxable
23 year immediately preceding the affective- election un.ar encu ^.n
24 298.97.^. the corpolatian has a ressiva of undistrfbut*A taxac:e
25 {i,to:* previously taxed to siar*heldcts under the prr.: it.cr;, of
26 the Iiituroal Rov*iiuo C,Qe of 1954. In tl.e event and to the
27 extent that the teoolv., is thatribnran to shareholder* the
20 ditittilitttion shall be CAA.d As a divWood fat putpcaoA of thin
29 act.
e30 it*•s of jl*,n in._c nv includible within th.se drftt;l-.2 +,
3) .hall tie dec'seu much t'eyaidlri.a of th, lot. in whir!. teiei'.e.I.
32 Itu*s at Vro.a tncomv r.h.tll fie in.lud,d fu y...es is,v --- of 1...
33 laxahlA yeas in•,hirh ticri�.ld by a 1,71'aylt 11..11-. )i.;,.1.', 1,
34 hu mreouutvd lot a.. of A dillute•ot 1.0,.11.1.• ye.et and t ict:. e.
35 a._.rnt•^'• t.l.ttteu by xurttun : j 0., .%"I t that (1) . .
U. tranLfettv.l fro. a t'etawt V•• Ur ethe' Air•tint, it in Affect
.J
12
I•)5 N.FU23-22
1
tranofers to aurplua, shall, to the extent that the amounts wet,,
2
ac cca.ulated through deduction* from gross income or entered tnto
]
.he cmrputatian of taxable not :neons du: -.-.g any taxable year.
4
be treated an groan income for the year In which the transfer
5
occurs, but only to the extant that the amounts resulted in a
6
redsetion of the tax icposed by this act, and (2) amounts
7
received as refunds on account of taxes deCucted from gicas
9
income during any taxable year shall be treated as groat, income
9
far the year in which actually received• but only to the oxtmu
10
that ouch amounts resulted in a red-t.cn cf the tax lmposud by
11
thin act.
12
(d) :eodiftcatlon in computcag taxable income of the estate
13
of a decedent. Amounts allo•:abla under section 291.07,
14
subdivision 1, clause (2) in cc.nput:rg %;2nnoaota Inharitancu or
15
estate tax liability shall not be allowed as n deduction in
16
ec .puting the taxable income of the estate unless there to fit*d
17
within the time and in the mariner and form prencrihed by the
18
c—.%o:.A statement that tho amounts have not liven allowed
19
as a deduction Yndor auction 292.07 and a waiver of the right to
20
have the amOUnts allOwed at any time as deductions under sactlan
21
291,07. The provisions of thio paragraph rhall not apply with
22
rerpoct to deductions allowed under noctiot. 290.077 liolating to
23
inccmo in respect of decedeIits). In the event that it,. .lection
24
made for federal tax purpoaas under section 642(9) of the
' 25
Internal Revenue Codn of 1954 differs from the election made
26
urder this paragraph approprieto modification of the estate's
27
federal taxable income thnit be made to impinmunt the aloction
20
mads uneor thin paragraph in accordance with vagulatiorin
29
proscribed by the commiealonor.
30
i Sac, ]. 1CYFCCTIVE BATC.I
31
This act Is oifueu VO the day follnvir.g final otiaetaont.
........................................................
12
t
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
_.mve
Wright County State Bank - Investments
210,000.00
14378
Harry's Auto Supply - Misc. supplies for St. 6 S/W Depts.
196.14
14379
Wright County Highway Dept. - Purchase of 100 County maps
25.00
14380
KN. State Treasurer - PERA payment
2,245.87
14381
State Capitol Credit Union - Union deductions
67.00
14382
Paul A. Laurence Co. - Payment 04 on WWTP
323,215.70
14383
S 6 L Excavating - Balance of contract on Oakwood
500.00
14384
Wright County State Bank - Daily int. acct.
260,000.00
14385
MN. State Treasurer - Dept. Reg. fees
198.00
14:86
George Liefert - Chain and wire for Fire Dept.
204.75
14387
Kr. Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary
125.00
14368
Mr. Dan Blonigen - Council salary
100.00
14389
Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary
100.00
14390
Mr. Ken Maus - Council salary
100.00
14391
Dr. Phil White - Council salary
100.00
14392
James Preusse - Cleaning City Hall
180.00
14393
YMCA of Mpls. - Contract payment
235.42
14394
Mrs. Ed Schaffer - Inf. Center salary
49.50
14395
Kra. Mae Ward - Inf. Center salary
85.50
14396
Gwen Bateman - Animal Imp. expense
617.06
14397
Wright County State Bank - FWT - May
3,860.40
14398
Holiday Inn - Sludge workshop res. - A. Meyer 6 S. Hancock
51.00
14399
United Parcel Service - Freight charge for Fire Dept. return
12.94
14400
Wright County State Bank - Investments
210,169.72
14401
W. H. Cates Const. Co. - Payment N1 on Library
16,975.00
14402
Hayes Contractors - Final Payment on 80-1 6 80-2 Projects
2,347.37
14403
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees
394.00
14404
Dept. of Employee Relations - Soc. Security - Mo. FICA
3,702.31
14405
MN. State Treasurer - PERA payment
1,087.92
14406
Commissioner of Revenue - SWT - May
1,675.56
14407
State Capitol Credit Union - Union deductions
67.00
14408
U. S. Postmaster - Stamps
90.00
14409
ianelle Martie - Smmner help salary difference
17.22
14410
Lee Trunnell - Fire Dept. wages
589.00
14411
A. C. Davenport s Sons - Freight charge on sign for office
1.40
14412
Chapin Publishing Co. - Adv. for bids
143.52
14413
Water Engineering a Mgmt. - Sub. to magazine - 3 yearn.
30.00
14414
Northern States Power Co. - Utilities
3,225.60
14415
MN. Center for Career Dov. - Seminar fees for G. Wiebor
135.00
14416
NCC, Inc. - 20 gal. wash 6 wax - St. Dept.
270.00
14417
Nelson Gymnastics - 2 picnic table frames
426.84
14418
Wright County Sheriff - Contract payment - May
7,488.00
14419
Wright County Auditor - S police finos - May
1,678.50
14420
Int. Conf. of Bldg. Officials - Membership duos for 82
50.00
14421
Monticello Office Products - Misc. office supplico
65.91
14422
Northwestern Bell - Fire phone
25.24
14423
Ruff Auto Parts - Pulling out city's loader
25.00
14424
t
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
Brenteson Const. - Class 5 S stump removal - Library site
1,100.00
14425
Olson s Sons Electric - Lift station reprs., rebuild pump
1,352.61
14426
Walt Mack - Operators school meeting expense
15.00
14427
Gary Wieber - Mileage 6 lodging at League of Cities Conf.
330.76
14428
Gary Wieber - MCMA Conference - Motel s food
49.01
14429
International Film Bureau - Film rental - St. Dept.
31.96
14430
Mr. Arve Grimsmo - Mileage, meals 5 parking- Leag. of Cities
30.90
14431
Phillips Petroleum - Gas S oil, used tire 6 tube
36.88
34432
Cnffey's Power Equipment - Repair parts - tractor 6 snow blower
261.97
14433
Monticello Ford - 75 Ford repairs
11.90
14434
Mr. Melvin Wolters - Easement - Meadows Subdivision
5,000.00
14435
Banker's Life Ins. - Group Ins.
1,784.17
14436
North Central Public Service - Utilities
102.82
14437
State Treasurer - Surplus Property Fund - Heater hose, weed killer
35.45
14438
Lindberg's Sod - Sod for ditches - Ritze Manor s Oak. Park
30.00
14439
Mr. Arve Grimsmo - 5 meetings of OAA Board
75.00
14440
Dr. Philip White - 1 meeting of OAA Board
15.00
1.4441
Mr. Franklin Denn - 6 meetings of OAA Board
90.00
14442
Mr. Paul McAlpine - 1 meeting of OAA Board 6 26 miles mileage
20.20
14443
Mr. LeRoy Engstrom - 5 meetings of OAA Board 6 120 miles mileage
99.00
14444
Mr. Tom Salkowski - 6 meetings of OAA Board
150.00
14445
Mrs. Marjorie Goetzke - 6 meetings of OAA Board 6 clerking
105.00
14446
Davis Electronic Service - 10 sets of batteries s pager reprs.
74.94
14447
Local 049 - Union dues
72.00
14448
Stokes Marine - Belts s Oil for chain saw
32.15
14449
Figs It Shop - Lawn mower repair
11.15
14450
Ben Franklin Store - 2 rolls color film
31.76
14451
Persian's Office Products - 6 tapes for dict. machine
24.00
14452
Monticello Printing - Newsletters, letter heads, envelopes, etc.
•357.90
14453
Central McGowan - Cyl, rental charge
2.40
14454
Moon Motors - Repairs to John Dears tractor
44.67
14455
Granite City Iron Works - Manhole cover 6 rings
193.50
14456
Fire Safety Products, Inc. - 2 chemical suits - Fire Dept.
1,556.12
14457
Bob Bodigheimer - Add. salary for summer help
46.84
14458
Kelly King -
26.80
14459
Jim King -
44.00
14460
Brian Weiman -
60.80
14461
Jeff Bruska -
26.80
14462
Footor'a Ins. Agency - InstiLutional policy
233.00
14463
Purcell Plumbing - Repairs in Park 6 Fire Hall
18.41
14464
Marco Business Products - Repairs to calculator r copier
224.71
14465
MN. Business Journal - 5 page ad in magazine
742.50
14466
Glass Ilut - Repair glass in cab of sweeper
70.28
14467
Smith Pringle Iiayco - Legal for April
792.00
14468
Food Rita Controls - Poly, chlorine, alum sulfate
3495.88
14469
Chris Lonmol - Prints of Oakwood
10.00
14470
Hoglund Bus Co. - Tire 6 mounting on 72 Int. truck
147.25
14471
Independent Lumber - Lumber for picnic tables
100.30
14472
Share Corp. - Bowl and glass cleaner
120.00
14473
MacQueen Cquipmont Co. - Sweeper parts
39.33
14474
-2-
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
Neenah Foundry - Door casting for Well #2
105.40
14475
Howard Dahlgren Assoc. - Ordinance review, horse arena report
160.00
14476
MCEnary, Krafft, Birch 6 Kilgore - Library s rest room in park
6155.75
14477
Mrs. Ed Schaffer - Inf. Center salary
13.50
14478
Mrs. Mae Ward - Inf. Center salary
90.00
14479
Mrs. Lucy Andrews - Inf. Center salary
117.00
14480
Int. City Mgmt. Assoc. - Sub, and 2 books
94.00
14481
Fair's Garden Center - 29 replacement trees, weed killer, etc.
2618.46
14482
15 trees for H. S. track perimeter
OSM - Misc. eng. fees -
16402.04
14483
Richard Wolfsteller - Misc. mileage
20.80
14484
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees
91.00
14485
Our Own Hardware - Trash cans, paint, brushes, chains, links, etc.
307.28
14486
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone
618.33
14467
Maus Foods - Dog food, paper towels, coffee, toilet tissue
51.32
14488
National Bushing - Battery cable, shipper, filter, parts, etc.
125.56
14489
Harry's Auto Supply - Paint, thinner, hose, filter, plugs, etc.
128.15
14490
Leef Bros. Inc. - Uniforms
132.15
14491
Coast to Coast - Bolts, nuts, caulking, cutter, etc.
75.90
14492
Sherburne County Equipment - York rake, trailer
1347.63
14493
G s G Industrial Supply - Band saw with extra blade
226.90
14494
Payroll for May
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS - JUNE
U
19354.69
$1,120,532.37
LIQUOR FUM - JUNE DISBURSEMENTS
AMOUNT CHECK
00.
Commissioner of Revenue - Sales tax - April
2430.69
9739
MN. State Treasurer PERA payment
230.59
9740
Ed Phillips & Sons Liquor
3160.75
9741
Griggs, Cooper & Co. - Liquor
1748.49
9742
Wright County State Bank - FWT - May
495.30
9743
Griggs, Cooper & Co. - Liquor
803.28
9744
Ed Phillips & Sons - Liquor
1750.22
9745
Twin City Wine - Liquor
588.12
9746
Wright County State Bank - Investments
47000.00
9747
Dept. of Revenue - Sales tax - May
3305.17
9748
MN. State Treasurer FICA- May
402.89
9749
=;. State Treasurer PERA payment
195.00
9750
Commissioner of Revenue - SWT - May
181.70
9751
Ed Phillips & Sons - Liquor
3932.09
9752
Internal Revenue Service - IRS Liquor tax
54.00
9753
MN. U. C. Fund - Unemployment Comp. for R. Michaelis
11.11
9754
Maus Foods - Store expense
19.96
9755
Yonak Sanitation - Contract for sanitation
69.00
9756
Northern States Power - Utilities
478.87
9757
MN. Dept. of Agriculture - Retail Food Handler license
18.00
9758
Banker's Life ins. - Group Ins.
103.81
9759
Our Own Hardware - Light bulbs, waste baokot & tape
23.00
9760
Trushenski Trucking Freight
330.60
9761
Griggs, Cooper & Co. Liquor
4016.04
9762
Twin City Wine Liquor
1497.61
9763
North Central Public Service - Utilitias
25.71
9764
Monticello Office Products - Pons, stamp pad
26.53
9765
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone
58.73
9766
Ed Phillips & Sons - Liquor
3809.40
9'767
Dahlheimer Dist. Co. Beer
14734.75
9766
Jude Candy & Tobacco = Misc. mdso.
582.83
9769
Viking Coca Cola - Misc. mdac.
926.55
9770
Thorpe Dist. Co. - Beer
3536.50
9771
Dick Beverage - Beer.
8939.75
9772
7 Up Bottling Co. - Misc. mdoo.
310.80
9773
Day Dist. Co. - Beer
194.75
9774
Old Dutch Foods - Misc. mduo.
150.76
9775
A. J. Ogle - Door
1074.55
9776
Grossloin Beverage Co. - Bear
14894.15
9777
Payroll for May
3112.49
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS JUNE
$125,224.54
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR AND CREATING THE OFFICE
OF ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
U11EREAS, the City of Monticello Council deems that
the administrative details of the City will be more ef-
ficiently and economically handled by the creation of the
office of City Administrator.
NOW THEREFORE, BE AND IT IS RESOLVED, that there is
created in the City of Monticello the office of adminis-
trator. That the administrator shall be appointed by the
Council on the basis of his training, experience and ad-
ministrative qualifications.
That an administrator may be appointed for an in-
definite period and may be removed by the Council at any
time; but that after an individual has served in such
capacity for a period of one year, said individual may demand
written charges and a public hearing on the charges before
the City Council prior to the date when said removal from
office shall take. place; that pending such hearing and
removal, the Council may suspend the administrator from
office and may designate some qualified person to per-
form the duties of the administrator during his absence.
That the administrator shall be the head of the
administrative branch of the City Government and shall
be responsible to the City Council for the proper ad-
ministration of all City affairs.
That the administrator shall perform the following
dutios, including such other duties as the Council shall
designate from time to time:
i
`- a. Ile shall appoint upon the basic; of merit and
fitness, and subject to any applicable civil
service provision and except an herein pro-
vided, remove the heads of departments, and
al.l subordinate officers and employees, sub-
ject to council approval.
b. He shall see that the statutes relating to
cities and the laws, ordinances and resolutions
of the city are enforced.
c. lie #.hall exercise control over all depart-
ments and divisions of the city administration
which may be created by the Council.
d. lie shall recommend to the Council for
adoption such measures as he may doem
necessary for the welfare of the people
and the efficient administration of the
affairs of the City.
e. lie shall keep the Council fully advised
as to the financial condition and needs
of the City, and he shall prepare and
submit to the Council the annual budget.
F. lie shall be the chief purchasing agent
of the City. All purchases for the City
and all contracts shall be made or let
by the Administrator when the amount of
the purchase or contract docs not exceed
$13000.00. But all claims resulting there-
from shall be audited and approved by the
Council. All other purchases shall be
made and all other contracts let by the
Council after receiving recommendations,
and giving consideration to same from
the Admini-strator. All contracts, bonds
and instruments of any kind which the
City is a party shall be sided by the
Mayor and the Clerk on behalf of the
City and shall be executed in the name
of the City.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
BY:
ATTEST:
Clerk
Mayor
W
c
I
COUNCIL UPDATE
June 22, 1981 Meeting
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITY'S T.11', UAL CONFERENCE.
Arve Grimsmo and myself recently attended the League of Minnesota
City's Annual Conference in St. Paul. Among some of the items
at the conference were workshops on cable television, labor nego-
tiations, fire protection, and liquor store management. Also,
Senator Durenberger talked about the reduced role of federal
government and what impact this may have on cities. Mark Irmiter
was part of the panel on liquor store management.
ELECTRICAL PROBLEMS - WATER SYSTEM.
Recently, the city has experienced some problems in the relay
system between well no. #2 and the water tower. Additionally,
this has been compounded with an electrical problem between the
water reservoir and the water tank. Both of these problems,
according to our Public Works Director, John Simola, seem to have
been caused by the chlorine which has corrod:d the electrical wiring
system. John Simola will have more information on Monday night's
meeting, but it appears that we may have to segregate the chlorine
roan from the electrical relay panel.
LIBRARY BOARD.
The Library Board had their organizational meeting on June 11, 1981.
Loren Klein was elected chairman and Marge Bauer secretary. Regular
meetings were established at 6:30 A.M. the first Wednesday of each
month at Perkins. However, the next meeting is scheduled
for July 8th, 1981 at 6:30 P.M. at the City Hall. The immediate
concern of the ccemnittee will be to work with the architect in pro-
posing recommendations to the City Council on landscaping, interior
furnishings, shelving, otc.
ALLOCATION OF REVENUE SHARING FUNDS FOR THE LIBRARY FROM WRIGHT COUNTY.
Tentatively, the Wright County Board of Commissioners has approved an
allocation of $10,000.00 in general revenue sharing funds to the City
of Monticello for its library. Initially, Monticello had requested
$20,000.00 but this request was cut in half. However, it should be
pointed out that Monticello is one of the few communities which had
their request approved to any extent whatsoever. Apparently, the
[aright County Board of Commissioners wore trying to make their allo-
cations to communitiea who previously had not boon granted revenue
sharing funds. Final approval is subject to a public hearing which
will be hold very shortly, according to Ozzie Arlie, Wright County
Administrator.
4(
141 NUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
June 8, 1981 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Ar•e Grimsmo, Dan Blonigen, Fran Fair, Ken Maus,
Phil 'white
Members Absent: None
Citizens Comments.
Mr. Earl Lindenfelser, owner of Monticello Liquors, asked the council
why the annual liquor license fees have been increased $500.00 to
$3,000.00 annually. Mr. Lindenfelser felt that the $500.00 increase
was quite large at one time and should be increased more often than
waiting five or six years between increases. In addition, Mr. Linden-
felser along with other license holders in Monticello, felt that there
was an unfair competition by allowing such places as the V.F.W. Club
and the Legion Club to sell liquor.basically, to the public under the
Club License Ia w when their fees are only $200.00 annually.
The holders of the non -intoxicating and intoxicating liquor license
present at the meeting requested that the council either try to
restrict clubs likethe V.F.W. and Legion Club to allow only members
in their astabliehments or to require these places to have similar
license fees.
It was explained to Mr. Lindunfelser that the current State Statutes
limit the fee-- that cities can charge for club licenses to $200.00
annually. In addition, it was pointed out that it is very difficult
to p,)lice the club liconnes restricting their customoin to members
only and that the city would try talking to the V.F.W. and Legion
Club in an effort to receive voluntary compliance. In addition, Lh.:
council will review possible increases in the license fees annually
rather than over a longer period of Linc.
1. Consideration of an Approval of Monticello Firemen's Relief Associa-
tion Ry -rows Amendments.
The Monticello Firemen's Relief Association Board requested that the
council consider amending the associationa's by-laws that would
allow for a change in the venting procedures where as, pension vest-
ing would occur after tan years of service and fifty years of ago.
In addition, the Relief Association requested that. the retirement
bonefitn he increased from $300.00 annually to $600.00 per year
for (,sell year Of active service.
- 1 -
Council Minutes - 6/8/01
Currently, there is no vesting provided in the by-laws of the
Relief Association and if amended as requested, a member who would
retire with at least ten years of service in the fire department
- would receive a proportionate share of the normal retirement upon
reaching the age of fifty. A fireman with ten years of service
would have a sixty percent vested interest and any member serving
more than ten years would pick up an additional four percent for
each year until fully vested after twenty years.
The current Relief Association retirement benefit is $300.00 per
year of service and the Relief Association requested that this be
increased to $600.00 per year of service. At $300.00 per year of
service, there is presently sufficient revenue from State Aid and
interest earnings on investments to support the retircmunt fund,
however. if the retirement tinisfits were increased to the requested
$600.00 per year amount, the City of Monticello would have to levy
an additional $9,014.00 in 1982 to make the Relief Association's
retirement fund actuarially sound. It was noted that the retirement
benefit would be sound without requiring a city levy if the benefits
were increased to approximately $450.00 per year..
A motion was made by Phil White, seconded by Yen Maus and unanimously
carried to approve the by—law amendment for the Monticello Firemen's
Relief Association that would allow vesting in the pensions after
reaching ten years of service and fifty yearn of age.
Motion was also made by Phil White, seconded by raiz' to approve an J
increase in the yearly retlrcment benefits from 50300.00 to $G00.00
a year of active service requiring an approximate levy of $9,014.00
from the city for 1982. Voting in favor was Whitu and Fair Opposed;
ulonigen, Maur and Grimsmo.
Motion was then made by Maus, seconded by ulonigen to increase the
yearly retirement benefits for the Relief Association to $500.00 for
each year of active cervica with annual reviews thereafter. voting
in favor: Maus, ulonigen, GrimWno and Fair. Opposed: Phil White.
2. Consideration of Approval of Pians and Specifications for 1901-1
Improvement Proieets.
At a previous meeting, the City Council approved the pions and
specifications for the 1981-1 Improvement Project consisting of
sewer, water, storm -water drainage and street improvcmunts to a
portion of tltc Meadows Subdivision plat and a portion of West
River Street.
2
Council Minutes - 6/8/81
John Badalich, consulting city engineer, reviewed the final plans
and specifications with the council which included a change in the
size of the water main to a 12 inch main to serve for future expan-
sion in the western portions of Monticello.
Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Maus and unanimously carried
to adopt a resolution approving the final plans and specifications for
the 1981-1 Improvement Project.
It was noted that the bid letting will be held on June 19, at 2:00 P.M.
with the award of a contract scheduled for the City Council's regular
meeting on June 22, 1981. (See Resolution 1981 #21).
3. Consideration ,+f Authorization of Preparation of Plans and specifi-
cations and Advertisinq of Bids for Seal COatinq.
Public Works Director, John Simola, reviewed with the council the
areas in Monticello that are currently planned for seal coating
projects during 1981. The specific areas are as follows:
Anders Wilhelm Estates
Balboul Ratatea
All streets north of the freeway to the railroad tracks
west of Pine to Elm Street.
South Cedar Street by the Silver Fox Motel.
Previously, a plan had been submitted to the council for seal coating
projects from 1981 through 1986 showing areas within the city that
would he completed on an annual basis.
Motion was made by Maus, seconded by Pair and unanimuusiy cartiud iv
authorize the Public Works Director, John Simola, to prepare plans
and specifications for the 1981 street maintenance seal coating
program for the above four areas recommended and to advertise for
bids.
4. Consideration of ordinance Amendment Relative. to Water Service Line
Repnira.
Currently, the City of Monticello has an ordinance that reads that
the property owner shall be liable for all repairs required to any
water line on the owners premisoa or any sanitary a ntorm-sewur
lines from the street main to the property Owners home. This ordin-
ance conflicts with another ordinance which reads that the city shall
not ix! Iiabio at any time for any failure in the supply of water to
the customer.
Council Minutes - 6/8/81
The previous policy the council established in February of 1978, d
indicated that the property owner would be responsible for all "f+
repairs to a water service line including repairs necessary when
the water line froze which would be the responsibility of the
property owner.
In order to solve the apparent conflict in the two ordinances,
it was suggested that Ordinance Section 7-2-12 be amended to
read that liability for repairs after the initial connection has
been made to the sewer, sanitary sewer or water line be the
responsibility of the property owner from their home all the way
out to the street main including street repairs. This amendment
would clarify the orignal intent of the city policy established
in February of 1978 that all repairs would be thu responsibility
of the property owner.
As in the past, the city would still review cases where the apparent
problem in the service connections may be the result of a city
problem or negligence on the part of the city. If any failure in
the service line was deemed to be the problem of the city, the city
would,as in the past, be receptive to reimbursement for cost involved.
Motion was made by white, seconded by Fair and unanimously carried
to approve amending the Ordinance Section 7-2-12 to clarify lia-
bility for repairs on water service lines. (See Ordinance Amend-
ment 5/8/81 0101) ^1
5. Consideration of Chnnqo Orders 09 and 010 on the wastewater Treat-
ment Contract with Paul A. Laurence Comoanv.
John 8adnlich, city engineer, reviewed with the council two change
orders for an additional $2,801.82 and $1,550 respectively, to
cover the following changes in the contract;
Installation of 266.84 tons of crushed rock foundation
material for interceptor sewer excavation stabilization.
Removal of existing sludge drying beds to facilitate re-
location of existing maintenance garage and provide neceonary
excavation hackfill and compaction to grade.
Motion was made by white, Seconded by Porus and unanimously carried
to approve change orders 09 and #10 for a total of $4,351.82 with
the Paul A. Lau ronco Company on the Wastewater Treatment plant
Contract.
4
Council Minutes - 6/8/81
6. Approval of Minutes for Meeting of May 26, 1981.
A motion was made by Fsir, seconded by Maus and unanimously carried
` to approve the minutes of the regular Council Meeting held on
May 26, 1981 as presented.
7. Discussion on Heating System - Library.
Loren Klein, Building Inspector, informed the council that Merrill
Birch of the architectural firm on the new library, recently com-
pleted a feasibility analysis of the cost savings that the city
could incur by changing the heating system from an electrical
heat pump system to a natural gas furnace. Mr. Birch indicated
that the change order to convert from the electric furnace to
natural gas could range from an additional cost of $ -0- up to
approximately $1,000.00 but, that the city would realize savings
of approximately $1,200.00 to $1,500.00 annually in heating costs
by going to a gas furnace.
Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by White and unanimously
carried to have the City Administrator pursue obtaining a change
order with tho contractor for the installation of a gas furnace
for heating the library versus the heat pump system if the extra
cost of the change order could be recouped in two years or less.
B. Consideration of Final Pavment on 1980-1 6 2 Projects - Hayen
Contractors, Inc.
John Badalich, City Engineer, informed the council that the 1980-1
and 1980-2 Improvement Projects have been recently completed by
Hayes Contractors, Inc. and recommended that a final payment in the
amount of $2,347.37 be approved for payment.
Mi. It1zI ;ch indicated that tho total contract amounted to $117,360.65
including the final recommended payment amount.
Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Maua and unanimously carried
to approve the final payment for the, 1980-1 and 1980-2 Improvement
Projects to Mayes Contractors, Inc. in the amount of $2,347.37.
Mooting adjourned.
Rick Wolfa�Ini.lr.'I.r
Assi0tmnt
11 - - 5