City Council Agenda Packet 04-23-1984AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, April 23, 1984 - 7:30 P.M.
Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo
Council Members: Fran Fair, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen, Ken Maus.
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held on
April 9, 1984.
3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests, and Complaints.
Public Bearings
4. Public Hearing - Modification No. 1 of Tax Increment Financing
District 01 and Adoption of Tax Increment Financing District q4.
Old Business
5. Consideration of a Resolution Approving Modification No. 1 to
Tax Increment Financing District 01.
G. Consideration of a Resolution Approving Tax Increment Financing
District 04,
7. Consideration of a Resolution Requesting Certification of Tax
Increment Financing District 04 with County Auditor,
8. Consideration of a Resolution Requesting Certification of Tax
Increment Financing District 03 with County Auditor,
9. Consideration of a Resolution Awarding Sale of Tax Increment Bonds.
10. Consideration of Pump Nouse Nos. 1 & 2 Bids.
Now Business
11. Considoration of Final Acceptance for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Construction.
12. Consideration of Conditional Use Permit for Car Wash and Gas
Station/Convenienco Store In a B-3 Zone, ApplLcant - Samuel
Construction.
13. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to Allow Outdoor Sales
Lot and Minor Auto Repair in a B-3 Zone, Applicant - Eugono Kunkel.
14. Considoration of a Proposal to Allan Dahlgren s Associates to be
Engaged by Wright County State Dank of al.
Agenda for the meeting of the City Council
Monday, April 23, 1984 - 7:30 P.M.
Page 2
15. Consideration of a Feasibility Report on (deconstruction of
Highway 39/75 and Transmitting to County Engineer, and
Consideration of a Resolution Ordering Plans and Specifications
Contingent on County Approval of Feasibility Study.
16. Consideration of Feasibility Report on the Reconstruction of
Hart Boulevard and Cedar Street and Adopting a Resolution Setting
a Public Hearing and Ordering the Preparation of Plans and
specifications.
17. Consideration of a Feasibility Report on Construction of a Portion
of Interceptor Sewer and Adopting a Resolution Ordering Plans
and Specifications.
18. consideration of Replacing Paint Striper.
19. Consideration of Approval of Bills for the Month of April.
20. Adjournment.
MINUTES
FiEGUZnR I-.EETING - 1•:ONTICELL0 CITY COUNCIL
L-1
April 9, 1984 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Jack Maxwell, Ken Maus, Fran Fair,
Dan Blonigan.
Members Absent: None.
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Blonigen, to approve the minutes
of the regular meeting held March 26, 1904. Voting in favor was
Fair, Blonigen, Maus. Abstaining: Grimsmo and Maxwell due to their
absence at the last meeting.
4 1. G. Public 11carinq - Fulfillment Svstems, Inc., Tax Increment Finance
District, and ConsidoraLlon of a Resolution Approvinq the Tax
Increment Finance District for Fulfillment SVatema, Inc.
Tho Council held a public hearing on the Redevelopment Project Plan
Modification A1, which consisted primarily of changes in the legal
pr language of tho first Redevelopment Plan approved by Lho City. The
Modification ill merely adds SCatWenL'e of Statutory Authority and
EEEE�zzz references to particular chapters, sections, and subdivisions of
Minnesota Statutas. In addition, a section oil environmental controls
would be added.
Hearing no comments frun Lila public, mutton was made by Blonigon,
seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to approve a Resolution
adopting Modification #1 to t1io Monticello Redevelopment Project.
Seo Resolution 1984 00 .
c
A public hearing was also Feld by the Council for the purpose of
considering establishing a Tax Increment Financing Economic District
02 for Fulfillment Systems. Inc. FSI, Inc., has plans to construct
a 43,200 aq. ft. building on Lots G. 7, and 0, in Block 2, Lauring
Hillaido Terrace. The Tax Incromtnt Financing Economic Development
District 02 would have a duration of approximately 9% years with Llta
City collecting Lax increments for Lho last eight years. Tho HRA
proposal would be to acquire $oto G, 7, and 8, Block 2, for approximately
$130,000 and gall tltia property to FSI for Lilo sum of $25,000 resulting
In a writo down in the coot of Lilo land to Fulfillment Systems in Lho
amount of $105,000. 11ila $1.07,000 would be recaptured by Lho City
- 1 -
Council Minutes - 4/9/84
during the eight years through tax increments estimated at approximately j
$28,000 to $34,000 per year. The initial funds to acquire the property J
would come from a bond sale proposed in the amount of $155,000.
Motion was made by Fair, seconded by BIonigen, and unanimously carried
to adopt the Resolution establishing a Tax Increment Financing Economic
fevelopment District 02. See Resolution 1984 09 .
7. Consideration of a Resolution Authorizinct the Sale of Bonds.
Mr. Jerry Shannon of Springsted, Inc., the City's bonding Consultant,
was present at the Council meeting to review the procedures necessary
for the City to authorize the sale of bonds for the Tax Increment
Financing Plan recently approved by the Council. The proposed sale
of bonds would be in the amount of $155,000 for the purpose of financing
the acquisition of land for Fulfillment Systems' Tax Increment Financing
Plan.
The $155,000 bonds would be payable over a 10 -year period of time at
an estimated 9% interest. Mr. Shannon noted that since this amount
is under $300,000.00, Springsted, Inc., may negotiate the sale on
the City's behalf without going to a formal bid process.
Motion was made by Maus, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried
to adopt a Resolution authorizing Springstcd, Inc., to solicit bids
and quotas for the sale of $155,000 in tax increment bonds by April 23, J
1984. See Resolution 1984 010.
5 6 8. Public Ilearinry and Consideration of VaCaLinn Hennepin Street and the
Sallinq of the Street to Construction S.
in October of 1983, the City Council hold a public hearing and received
no negative comments regarding the vacation of Hennepin Street between
Iduring Lano and bio Burlington Northern Railroad tracks. Construction
5 was also the applicant at that time and the City Council asked a
price of $24,000 for the sale of the vacated street. Construction 5
had made a conker-offor of $6,500 for the street and there being no
further offorn, the solo did not occur. 'Hic City Council than invalidated
its own motion to vacate Bennepin Street.
Ra Cantly, the City staff diaeeVerad that ConatrUCtion 5 was excavating
fill material out of Hennepin Street to use at their construction site
adjacent to this street. Construction 5 was advised that they must
immediately cases their mining efforts and rosters the street to
procisoly the condition that it was found.
2
D
_ r
Council Minutes - 4/9/84
C Mr. Gus LaFromboiso of Construction 5 then petitioned for the vacation
of Hennepin Street again, as he felt that he would not be able to
restore the street to its original condition. The City, in the
meantime, issued an excavation permit to Construction 5 in the amount
of $24,000 to cover the cost of restoration should a vacation and
sale not take place. It was noted by the City staff that if the
sale was authorized by the Council, the $24,000 would be applied to
the sale price.
No comments were heard from the public regarding the proposed
vacation of Hennepin Street between Lauring Lane and the Burlington
Northam Railroad tracks; and as a result, a motion was made by
Blonigen, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to vacate this
portion of Hennepin Street. Motion was also made by Maxwell, seconded
by Fair, and unanimously carried to approve the sale of this portion
of vacated Hennepin Street to Construction 5 at a total cost of $24,750
with the $24,000 excavation permit being applied to the purchase price.
9. Consideration of Amondmrnt to the Zoninq Ordinance Rsaardinq Signa.
Recently, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of an
Ordinance Amendment that would clarify the number of signs and
the aguare footage of uignu that would be allowed on an office
building that had more than one occupant or tenant. Previously,
the City Ordinance regarding signs did not clearly identify the
options available for a building that has more than one tenant
except for :.Lopping centers.
7be Ordinance Amendment proposed by the Planning Oommission would
allow any principal building to have six sign boards or place cards,
no more than four of which may be product identification signs with
two walls allowed for display of the signs. 7be total maximum size
of the wall signs could not be more than 20• of the gross silhouette
area of the front of the building up to 300 square fast, whichever is
less.
In the case of a building where there were three or more business uses,
the owner of the building would have to apply for a Conditional'Use
Permit and file with the Zoning Administrator a datailed plan for
signing including size of the signs and number, etc. No tenant would
have more than one sign nor could one tenant exceed 25• of the total
allowable sign area. - {
Motion was made by Fair, ascended by Blonigen, and unanimously carried
to adopt an Ordinance Amendment regulating the number and size of signs
for a principal building including clarification for buildings with
more than one occupant. See Ordinance Amendment No. 133.
Council Minutes - 4/9/84
10. Consideration of a Conditional Use Request, 1lnplicant - Metcalf and
Larson.
Metcalf and Larson, owners of a new office building, requested a
Conditional Use Permit under the newly adopted Sign Ordinance to
allow 208 of their silhouette area of the building for a total of
224 square feet of sign footage. The proposal presented by Metcalf
and Larson would allow six individual signs with the maximum per
tenant being 56 square feet.
Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously
carried to approve the Conditional Use Permit for the Metcalf and
Larson Professional Building consisting of six signs for the
occupants as proposed in their plan.
11. Consideration of Amendment to the Zoninq ordinance Allowinq More
than Five Children, Includinq Family's Orn, in a Day Care or Foster
Care Rome as a Permitted Use in an R-1 Zone.
Currently, the City Ordinances allow as Permitted Uses in an R-1
Single Family Zoning District foster homes provided there are no
more than five children, including the foster family's own children,
and a day care home also providing there are no more than five
children. In the past, several requests )lave been made by individual
home owners to allow for day care centers that may have in excess of
five children total including the family's own children. Tha state
legialatura is currently considering passing legislation that would
require communities to allow up to 12 people in a day care facility
and up to six people in a foster care home. Since it appears likely
that this legislation will pass this seusion, it was recommended ley
the Staff that the Council consider amrnding its ordinance at the
present time to allow similar regulations ay proposed by the otate.
Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Bloiigen, and unanimously carried
to adopt an Ordinance Amendment that would allow boarding homes or
for foster children to have up to six 0 ildren, including the family's
own children and also to allow a day care home in an R-1 Zone to have
up to 12 children, including the family'u own children. See Urdinance
Amendment No. 134.
12. Consideration of RLntinq the Saxwi Pr.g;orty.
Co March 30, 1984, Lha City completed the real estate transaction
acquLring the Bob Saxon property adjacent to Fest Bridge Park. The
potential use of the property will be for park expansion after Uw
Highway Impartment completes its proposed highway 25 Bridge project.
In the meantime, a temporary City employee list indicated a desire to
rent the property from the City.
- 4 -
0
Council Minutes - 4/9/84
?'Ire City staff in reviewing the condition of the home felt that a
L small amount of capital outlay would be needed to clean up the home
and make it rentable. Tlrc City employee interested in the property
11.10 indicated a willingness to do Lho work himself, and it was
recommended that if the Council decided to rent the property, a
$300 per month rental fee would be appropriate for the home.
Motion was made by Maus, seconded by Fair, and unanimously carried
to approv0 renting Lhe Saxon property to Lha temporary City employee
in ttre amount of $300 per month with the first and last month's rent
payable in advance, and the rental to be on a month to month basis
without a lease.
13. Consideration of Ilealth Course for Anders Wilhelm/Par west Park.
At the previous Council meeting, tiro City staff was directed to
look into several facets of the development of the Health Course
for the Anders Wilhelm/Par Wout Park. A map depicting the overall
development of Lire park including a planting schedule and an under-
ground sprinkler system was reviewed by the Council. John Simola,
Public Works Director, estimated that the total cost of the park
development would be approximately $17,300 without restroom facilities
but including paving of the parking lot and a picnic shelter. of
this $17,300.00, part of the plantings of trees and shrubs in the
amount of $1,000 was recommended to be delayed for one year along
with the picnic ahelter, which would reduce the cost to approximately
$15,300 in 1984.
The Council discussion centered on whether this type of park would
be used by clic majority of Lira public or whether it would be a specialized
type of facility only for those intutested in physical fitness. Although
it was noted it is a specialized activity, all of Lhe City parka in one
way or another may not appeal to all of Lila residences, as some parks
havu playground equipment just for children, others have boat launching
faciliLiea which also ate specialized.
7110 City AdminiutraLot informed Ulu Council that tic had researched
uthur communities which have Health Courses in their parka and
indicated that these cummwli Liou strongly recommend Lhiu Lypo of
installaLion. It watt also noted that only $4,000 of the estimated
$15,300 pertains precisely to the Iicalth Course facilities and that
Lha majority of Lila expenditures for Lha park would have to be dono�
regardleas of w1raL tyi,a of park development occurred.
Motion was madu by Maxwell, seconded by Fair, to approve the oxpendituroe
for 1904 totaling approximatoly $15,300 for the improvement of the
Anduru wilholm/Pnr West Park with a Vita Health Courso facility including
bunches, truou and shrubs, black dirt underground sprinkling system, atc.
Voting In favor was Fal r, Maxwell, Maus, Grimsmo. Voting in the opposition
was Olonigon.
1
_5- 0---)-
Council Minutes - 4/9/84
14. Consideration of Approval of Plans and Specifications for Additions
11 to Pump Houses 1 6 2 and Authorization to Advertise for Bids.
t
J John Simola, Public works Director, presented plans and Specifications
for the new additions to Pump (louses 1 R 2. The estimated cost of
the two additions was $16,000. Mr. Simola requested that the plans
and specifications be approved as presented and requested that a
bid letting date of Monday, April 23, be approved.
' Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously
carried to approve the plans and specifications for the additions
to Pump (louses 1 6 2 and to authorize the Public Works Director
to advertise for bids returnable Monday, April 23, 1984.
15. Consideration of orderinq Financial Feasibility Studies for Hart
Boulevard from Ute Hospital East to County Foad 75 and Codar StrceL
from the Burlington Northern Railroad to Lauring lute.
The Public Works Director recommended to the Council that consideration
be given to improving Ilam Boulevard and Codar Street during 1984.
Cedar Street is presently a Class V surfaced street, and it was
recommended that this section of street be improved with curb and
gutter and bituminous surfacing. A significant portion of this
project could be assessed to the benefiting property owners.
Concerns wore expressed by Council members as to whether all of
the sewer and water utilities were presently installed in Cedar
Street or whether any of this street would have to be torn up in
the future for the installation of Sewer or water. It was noted
Oat the water main is currently installed along Cedar Street, but
the property adjacent does not hava sewer service, which was planned
as part of the interceptor project in the future. It was also noted
by the Public Works Director that the installation of sower at a future
data should not cause a problem, as the curb would be eliminated near
the railroad tracks where the interceptor would cross Cedar Street.
Tho section of Ilart Boulevard from the Ilospital past the Wastewater
Treatment Plant is currently bituminous surfacing but is in bad need
of repair. It was rocommended that Hart Boulevard adjacent to
residential property be improved with curb and guttor and new
bituminous surfacing and that the balance of Hart Boulevard near
U10 WauLewator Treatment Plant to County Road 75 bu blacktoppud in
a rural type suction without Cult) and gutter.
Motion was made by Maus, ueconded try Maxwell, and unanimuuuly carried
to authorizo the City Engincor to preparo a feasibility study for
improving Cedar Straol with bituminous surfacing only and to prepare
a feasibility study on improving Hart Houlovard with a Cond)ination of
curb and gutter near tho rouidential Area mid hlnaktopping only for
the balance 01the street. It was not -7d that the City Engineer in his
feasibility study will dotrrmino whothar bituminova surfacing only on
Cedar Street iu the hoot method rather than also installing curb sell
-- guttor at tJte present time.
Council Minutes - 4/9/84
16. Consideration of aProposal for Professional Services for the Citv
Fire (fall.
At a previous Council meeting, the City staff had presented possible
site locations for a new Fire Hall and possible building layouts for
the new Fire [fall.
Mr. Jerry Corrick, of the City's Consulting Engineering Firm of OSM,
presented a proposal to the City Council offering their services with
Bernard Jacob Architects Ltd. to study the potential sites for
compatibility of a new Fire Hall and also present building layouts
to fit cacti potential site. The proposal would look at each
specific site to see how suitable the soils and location are for
a new Fire Hall and would also present basic building layouts for
the lots and estimated cost of construction for various types of
buildings. Mr. Corrick noted that Lhu total fee for this service
would lie approximately $2,000.00, but would not include a design
of a building, which would b0 a separate Contract for architectural
services.
'1110 Council noted that dL the pteuent time the City does not have
enough lnlormatiun on U,0 availability and coat of the two or three
recommended sites and felt that Ulu City is not in a hurry at the
present timt to seek professional advice.
17. Consideration of a Resolution SotLinq a Public Ilcarinq for Tax
1-1
Increment Financinq, Applicant - I%1.
I%I, Inc., has indicated a desire to begin now construction at their
manufacturing complex in Oakwood Industrial Park. They are proposing
to purchase the remainder of I.ot 7, Block 3, In Oakwood Industriol
Park and construct rout new buildings in 1984. Previously, I%I
purchased half of Lot 7, Block 3, as part of the Tax Increment Diatrict
01 and the intent now would bu, to sell the second half of the lot
and create another Tax Increment Financing District. In ardor to
conaidor ontablishing a new Tax Increment Financing District for
thin new construction, a public hearing hau to be huld by the City
Council.
Motion wan made by Blunigen, acconded by Fair, and unanimously carried
to adopt a WaoluLion uutLing Munday, April 23, 1984, as a date for the
public huaring regarding the eotabliahment of a Tax Increment Financing
1'liutr i ct q4. Sae Resolution 1984 #11.
10. Conuidatation of luuuiuq a 3.2 Baur Licanne and a Sot -up Liconsn to
the Monticollu Liunu Club and lunuinq a 3.2 Boar License to Lila Monticello
Softball Aunociatiou.
Mask limiter, repreauntun;h the Lions Club. roquoatod a ono -day 3.2 Boor
I Licunou and a ono -day Sat -up licmisu ao that the Lions could again host
Council Minutes - 4/9/84
the Ducks Unlimited Banquet at the Monticello Roller Rink.
The Monticello Softball Association also requested a 3.2 Beer
License to sell beer at the softball fields during the sumer
months.
Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously
carried to approve the issuance of a 3.2 Beer License and a set-up
License to the Monticello Lions Club for their Ducks Unlimited
'? Banquet May 7, 1984; and approve issuing a 3.2 Beer License to
the Monticello Softball Association for the summer months provided
appropriate bonds and insurance forms are submitted as required.
19. Department Bead Reports.
The following Department Heads were present at the Council meeting
and reviewed items with the Council: Karen Hanson, Senior Citizens
Center Director; Cary Roitan, Wright County Sheriff's Department;
John Simola, Public works Director; Allen Polvit, Economic Development
Director; and City Administrator Tom Eidem.
Rick Wolfste Ver
Assistant Administrator
-o-
J
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
4. Public Hearinq - Modification No. 1 of Tax Increment Financing
District #1 and Adoption of Tax Increment Financinq District q4. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUNDt
This public hearing actually is addressing two separate yet very
closely related issues. Because of the configuration of the
buildings IXI proposes to build this summer, one of the buildings
would lie partly in Tax Increment District N1 and partly in Tax
Increment District b4. Since it is virtually impossible to divide
the value of a building between two separate districts, it is
necessary to detach a portion of land from Tax Increment District
01 and incorporate it in the new Tax Increment District 44. The
land which is being severed from District #1 and incorporated in
District #4 is totally vacant, and thus, will not jeopardize the
tax increment values in Tax Increment District 41. The buildings
that have been constructed in District R1 will remain entirely in
that District. However, under state law, any modification to an
existing district does require a public hearing. Likewise, under
state law, before the adoption of any new district there must be
a public hearing. Thio is the hearing that the Council established
by resolution at their loot regular meeting. No action need be
taken except for the acceptance of public comment. The items
following the public hearing relate directly to both of the issues.
There are no alternative actions, nor staff recommendation on this
issue.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Drawing of the oito indicating the change in district boundaries.
- 1 -
J
F
g r 30 2c'
SoX
I
r�
CrcX lolc -re Crcy. / C
gl
C.
I'� TI• F
1 I.
f � ��... �••." 'f •+�. � R`'•f'•�,' roti �':.
"t' , .• `.�,ja•�1`�• j': �: tib: zq .'�,_ ..
:.. ,s 'i: b''�..�•'d`a.'t4�:.ri.',��,., tr. ... -- z t k, '.•i'.ti_, '
': n: .-�ik ;. •sr�,� ',T='_� �:t•� -1 :,.,, .� � • Y>ihs ;fit K_,'• .�• •• .
1� .. V,�,' 7r�7 � _ ,�l , •: �.'vlw� .�_;i'i6'ff � � '���'f� � r � � `- •-
1 i :ii i ra.t• A , i
r Mar•. to.
VL
m7 '/ ! i
� ��- r{'_1 ., �/•ems ��i 1
i i c N US wL• i ,,
4,Ma1`l a �.....: ,- ,_•, `� � ^ .
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
5. Consideration of a Resolution Anprovinq Modification No. 1 to
Tax Increment Financinq District 41. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As noted in the preceding discussion, the north 175 ft. of the cast
180 ft. of Lot 7, Block 3, Oakwood Industrial Park, needs to be
severed from Tax Increment District kl so that it may be incorporated
into Tax Increment District p4. The need to transfer this property
from one district to the other is created by the placement of IXI's
warehouse. If left unchanged, part of the warehouse would lie in
one district while the balance would lie in the other. As noted
above, this would create an impossible situation with respect to
what value of the building was in each district and how would the
tax increment be distributed accordingly. Under Minnesota Statutes
as well as our own Redevelopment Plan, any modification to an
existing tax increment district must follow the exact same procedure
as the creation of the district. Having held the public hearing,
the Council is now prepared to address the resolution.
It should also he noted that it is essential that the modification
occur prior to the approval of Tax Increment District 114. It is
essential to get this particular parcel of land out of District M1
before it can be validly included in District 04.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the resolution - this will approve the Modification of
Diotrict 01 and thereby reduce the size of said District by
the north 175 ft, It will alive the later adoption and approval
of Tax Increment District 04.
2. Do not adopt the resolution - while this will not affect District
01 in any way, such an action would preclude the approval and
adoption of District p4. District #4 Wing proposed to have
four buildings will W the greatest revenue producing District
in this particular area.
C. STAFF RECO1MtENDATION.
It is recommended that the Council approve Modification No. 1 to
District Al 00 that approval of District 44 may follow in sequence.
D. SUPPORTING DATA,
Copy of the r000lution procentod for approval, copy of the HRA
resolution giving approval to Modification No. 1, copy of Modification
No. 1 to Tax Increment District: 01.
- 2 -
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION OF AN
EXISTING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE
PROVISIONS OF SECTION 273.71 TO 273.78
INCLUSIVE OF THE MINNESOTA STATUTES AND
AMENDING THE FINANCING PLAN FOR SAID TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota has
determined the need to modify the finance plan of an existing tax increment
financing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.71 to 273.78
inclusive, within the redevelopment project modification area created pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462.411 et meq.; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, found In
1982 that the tax increment financing district to be modified was a economic
development district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision
12; and
WHEREAS, the proposed modification to the finance plan will assist in
Increased employment in the City and will result in the preservation and
enhancement of the tax base of the City; and
WHEREAS, the planning commission has reviewed the proposed modification
of the tax Increment financing district; and
WHEREAS, the members of the School Board of Education of the Local
independent School District 8882 and the Board of Commissioners of the County of
Wright have been Informed of the fiscal and economic implications of the proposed
tax increment financing economic development district modification; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on April 23, 1984 at 7:00 o'clock p.m.
before the City Council in the Council Chambers In the City hall, in Monticello,
Minnesota, notice of which has been published once In the official newspaper for
the City, not less than ten, nor more than thirty days prior to April 23, 1984; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing all persons and parties were given full
opportunity to present written or oral testimony, comments, objections,
suggestions, and other matters, all of which were duly considered by the Council;
NOW, TIIEREFORP., BE IT RESOLVED BY TILE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO that the City of Monticello does hereby modify the
existing tax Increment financing economic development district, and emend the
financing plan for said modified tax increment financing economic development
district and finds:
1. That the tax Increment financing district as modified herein Is a tax
Increment financing economic development district shore the construction of the
IXI Assemblies facilities has resulted In and will result In approximately 15 new
jobs in the City and will Increase the assessed value and thus preserve and enhance
the tax base of the City.
0
2. That the proposed redevelopment within the tax increment financing
district as modified herein, would not have reasonably been expected to occur
solely through private investment because, in the opinion of the City, IXI
Assemblies would not have located its business within the City without the use of
tax increments to finance the acquisition of a suitable site for development; and
3. That the Planning Commission has reviewed the tax increment
financing plan as modified herein and it conforms to the general plan for the
development of the municipality as a whole because it will result in an increase in
the City's commercial economic activity.
4. That the tax increment financing plan as modified herein will afford
maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for
the development by private enterprise ns it will enable the City to assist the
developer with the construction of two mnnufncturing facilities by providing n
suitable site for development.
The City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota does hereby approve
the modification #1 to the lax increment district #1 and financing plan.
Adopted by the City Council this 23rd da,y of April. 1984.
Mayor
Attest;
City Clerk
0
J
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONTICELLO ilOUSING
AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MODIFYING
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 91 PURSUANT TO
MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 273.71 TO 273.78
INCLUSIVE, AND MODIFYING A FINANCE PLAN FOR
SAID TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Monticello (the "Authority") is carrying out the Monticello Redevelopment Project
(the "Project") and Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan"); and
WHEREAS, the Authority determined in 1982 that is was necessary to
create a tax increment financing economic development district pursuant to the
Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act, Minnesota Statutes. Section 273.71 to
273.78 inclusive (the "Act") within the redevelopment —p-Te—et—created pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 et s_ge ., the Municipal Housing and
eli�eveTopmen c ; and
WHEREAS, the Authority recommends that the project be undertaken as
rapidly as possible and be financed with local funds including tax Increment
financing as authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.71 through 273.78; and
WHEREAS, in connection with the undertaking of certain tax increment
district modifications by the Authority pursuant to the Act, the approval by the
Hoard of Commissioners (the "governing body") of the Authority of the
modifiention to the tax increment plan is required by the local governing body
before it will consider for approvnl said modification to the plan; and
WHEREAS, there was presented to this meeting of the governing body of the
Authority for Its consideration and approval, a copy of a tax increment plan for
said economic development dislrlet dated April, 1984 which plan Is entitled
Modification pl to Tax Increment District N1 ("Modification No. 1"); and
WHEREAS, the Authority has prepared Modification 01 and submitted
Modification 01 to the City Planning Commission of the City of Monticello (the
"Planning Commission") for its review and opinion; and
NOW, TIiEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED by the governing body of the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority In and for the City of Monticello:
1. That the tax Increment financing district as modified herein ie a tax
increment financing economic development district since the construction of the
IRI Assemblies facilities has resulted in and will result In approximately 15 new
jobs In the City and will Increase the assessed value and thus preserve and enhance
the tax baso of the City.
2. That the proposed redevelopment within the tax increment financing
district as modified herein, would not have reasonably been expected to occur
solely through private Investment because, In the opinion of the City IXI
Assemblies would not have located Its business within the City without the use of
tax Increments to finance the acquNitlon of a suitable alto for developments and
0!9
3. That the Planning Commission has reviewed the tax increment
financing plan as modified herein and it conforms to the general plan for the
development of the municipality because a whole as it will result in an increase in
the City's commercial economic activity.
4. , That the tax increment financing plan as modified herein will afford
maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for
the development by private enterprise as it will enable the City to assist the
developer with the construction of two manufacturing facilities by providing a
suitable site for development.
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Monticello, Minnesota does hereby
approve the lax increment financing plan modification and modification #1 to lax
increment district h1 as described insaid tax increment financing plan, and does
hereby transmit to the City Council said plan for their adoption.
Adopted by the Monticello (lousing and Redevelopment Authority this
70 *y day of Aaril. 1984.
A77TT:AUAd�A--
Chnirman
05-
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
G. Consideration of a Resolution Approvinq Tax Increment Financing
District 04. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
A substantial amount of information related to this item has been
provided in the previous two issues. Tax Increment Finance District
#4 will be comprised of all of the west half of Lot 7, Block 3,
Oakwood Industrial Park and the north 175 ft. of the cast half of
said Lot 7. The buildings proposed for construction on this parcel
are as follows: Two 60 x 120, one 60 x 220, and one 50 x 80, which
will also have a basement. All of the buildings on Lot 7 will be
connected by canopied passage ways. The tax increment intended to
be generated from the construction of these four buildings is
estimated at $20,000 annually. The debt assigned solely to the
west half of Lot 7 is approximately $57,000. Consequently, the
debt applied to the District itself will be retired in the first
three years of the District. The excess tax increment that is
generated can be applied to reduce the HRA debt for the acquisition
of Lots 5 and 6. While it is fully expected to eventually have
tax increment districts placed around Lots 5 and 6, we can begin
to retire the debt on these parcels even when the district is not
in place.
I also wish to note thaL on Tuesday, the 24th, the LIRA will be
( holding their public hearing concerning the disposition of public
lands. Tlnia relates to the sale of the west half of Lot 7 to IXI.
The sale of the land can occur prior to the actual placement of
tho district. Likewise, IXI can draw a building permit and begin
construction before the district is in place. After the conclusion
of the public hearing for disposition of lands, the HRA will enter
an agreement for development with IXI and then can proceed with the
sale of the land.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the resolution approving Tax Increment District q4 - this
will allow the project to proceed so that IXI may construct four
now manufacturing buildings and eventually generate surplus
increment i.n rotiro the debt for lands acquired.
2. Du not adopt the resolution - this would effectively stop the
sale of the land and tho further construction. I'm not sure
this is a real alternative anyway in light of the development
agreement that we entered into on the first Tax Increment District
wherein wo orated that so long as the financial feasibility was
there, the City would continuo to provide tax increment assistance
throughout the course of tlhe project.
- 3 -
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff cuconimends the adoption of the resolution approving Tax
Increment Financing District q4.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the HRA resolution approving TIF p4, copy of the Planning
Commission resolution approving TIF 04, copy of the Tax Increment
Finance Plan for District g4, copy of the resolution presented
for adoption.
4 .
HRA RESOLUTION 1984 02
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONTICELL0 HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPROVING A TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT g4 PURSUANT
TO MINI:EGOTA STATUES SECTIONS 273.71 TO 273.78
INCLUSIVE AND A FINANCE PLAN FOR SAID TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the
City of Monticello (the "Authority") is carrying out the Monticello Re-
development Project (the "Project") and redevelopment Plan (the "Plan"),
and
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Monticello,
Minnesota has determined that it is necessary to create a Tax Increment
Financing District pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to
273.78 inclusive, within the existing Redevelopment Project modified and
created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 of seq., the
Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, and
WHEREAS, the Authority recommends that the Project be under-
taken as rapidly as possible and be financed with local funds including
tax increaunt financing as authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Sections
273.71 through 273.78, and
C� WHEREAS, there was presented to this meeting of the governing
body of the Authority for its consideration and approval, a copy of
a Tax Increment Plan for said Project area dated March 15, 1984, which
Plan is entitled The Economic Development District 04 Tax Increment Plan,
and
WHEREAS, the Authority has prepared the Tax Incrarmnt Financing
Plan for the Economic Development District 04, dated March 30, 1984,
and cubmitted the Tax Increment Plan to the City Planning Commission
of the City of Monticello (tho"Planning Commission") for its review and
opinion, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE GOVC141ING BODY OF THE
HOUSING AND RF.DF.VF.tOPMF.NT AUTHORITY IN A`iD FOR WE CITY OF MONTICSLLO,
1. That the Tax Increment District to be ustablishad is an economic
development district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73,
Subdivision 12, and will result in increased employment to the City
and In the preservation and enhancement of the tax bass of the City.
2. That the proposed development would not occur solely through private
Investment within the reasonably forseeable future and, therefore,
the use of tax increment financing is doomed necessary.
- 1 -
0
HRA Resolution 1984 02
Page 2
3. That the proposed economic development involves a substantial
commitment to private investment and in conjunction with tax
increments is identified in the Tax Increment Financing Plan
will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with sound needs
of the City for the economic development of the Project by
private enterprise.
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Monticello,
Minnesota does hereby approve the Tax Increment Financing Plan and
the creation of a Tax Increment Financing District as described in
said Tax Increment Financing Plan and does hereby transmit to the
City Council said Plan for their adoption.
Adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority this 4th day of
April, 1984.
I Chair
ATTEST. 7
0
f
J
J
RESOLUTION 1984 012
RESOLUTION APPROVING TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING PLAN 04
WHEREAS, the Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority has adopted
a resolution approving Tax Increment Financing Plan 04 pursuant to M.S.
Eections 273.71, et seq., and
WHEREAS, said Tax Increment Finance Plan has been submitted to the
Planning Commission as required by M.S. 462,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY
OF MONTICELLO, MN THAT:
1) Tax Increment Financing Plan 04 is found to carry out the purpose
and policy of the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Monticello,
MN, and is hereby in all respects approved.
2) Copies of this resolution be forwarded to the City Council of the
City of Monticello.
Adopted this 10th day of April, 1984.
ATTESTS
9
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT #4
PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTIONS
273.71 to 273.78 INCLUSIVE, AND ADOPTING A
FINANCE PLAN FOR SAID TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota has
determined that it is necessary to create a tax Increment financing district
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to 273.78 inclusive, within the
existing redevelopment project modification #1 created pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 462.411 et sec., the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota finds that
the tax increment district to be established is an economic development district
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision 12 and that the project
will provide additional jobs, increase the tax base and prevent commerce and
industry from leaving the State; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has received a copy of the
proposed tax increment financing plan and has been given the opportunity to review
and comment upon said tax increment financing plan and the tax increment
financing district; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monticello has Informed the members of the Local
School Board of the Independent School District and the Board of Commissioners of
Wright County of the fiscal and economic Implications of the proposed tax
Increment financing district and invited said School Board members and County
Commissioners to the public hearing.
WHEREAS a public hearing was held on April 23, 1984 at 7 o'clock p.m.
before the City Gtouncil In the Council Chambers in the City Hall, In Monticello,
Minnesota, notice of which has been published once in the official newspaper for
the City, not less then ten, nor more than thirty days prior to April 23, 1984; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing all persons and parties were given full
opportunity to present written or oral testimony, comments, objections,
suggestions, and other matters, all of which were duly considered by the Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, that it does hereby establish tax increment economic
development district 04, adopts a finance plan for this economic development
district and finds pursuant to Section F of the document Identified as the tax
increment financing plan for the economic development district 110
(1) That the tax increment district to be established is an economic
development district pursuant to Minnenata Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision 12
and will result In increased employment In the City and in the preservation and
enhancement of the tax base of the City.
(2) That the proposed development would not occur solely through
private investment within the reasonable foreseeable future and, therefore, the use
of tax Increment financing is deemed necessary. ' t
1 6)
F
(3) That the Planning Commission has reviewed the tax increment
financing plan and it conforms to the general plan for the development of the
municipality as a whole.
(4) That the proposed economic development involves a substantial
commitment of private investment and in conjunction with tax increments as
identified in the tax increment financing plan will afford maximum opportunity,
consistent with sound needs of the City for the economic development of the
project by private enterprise.
The City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota does hereby approve
the lax increment financing plan and the creation of a tax increment financing
district as described in said tax increment financing plan.
Adopted by the City Council this 23rd day of April, 1984.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
6)
Mavor
C
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
7. Consideration of a Resolution Requesting Certification of Tax
Increment Financing District #4 with County Auditor. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
This resolution is a formality that should be submitted to the
County Auditor upon formal adoption of the Tax Increment Plan.
Once the Tax Increment Plan has been approved by the Council,
it is required that it be certified at the County Auditor for it
to go into affect. This resolution merely authorizes that
Certification .
There are no alternative actions.
C. STAFF RECOMENDATION:
Staff recommendation is to adopt.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the resolution for adoption.
- 5 -
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE COUNTY
AUDITOR TO CERTIFY THE OR10INAL ASSESSED
VALUE OF THE REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE
BOUNDARY OF THE MONTICELLO HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
N4.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello has determined that
it is necessary and desirable and in the public interest to designate, establish,
develop, and administer a tax increment financing economic development district
pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.71 to 273.78
inclusive;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MON710ELLO, MINNESOTA that the Wright County Auditor is hereby
requested to certify the assessed value of all real property within the boundaries of
the tax increment economic development district 44 as described in the attached
tax increment financing plan as of the date of the last equalized assessment, and
each year hereafter to certify the amount by which the assessed value ,has
increased or decreased from the original assessed value and also to certify the
proportion which any increase or decrease bears to the total assessed value for the
real property in said tax increment financing district for that year, excluding the
capture of assessed value pavable in 1985, which shall be "passed through" to the
taxing jurisdictions and also to remit to the Monticello Housino and Redevelopment
Authority, beRinnine in Julv. 1986, thnt pr000rtion of all taxes onid that veer on
real oroperty in the district which the captured assessed value bears to the tots'
current assessed value. all nursuant to Minnesota Statutes. Section 273.76,
Subdivision 1 and 2.
Adopted this 23rd day of April, 1984.
ATTEST:
C
City Clerk
0
Mayor
C
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
8. Consideration of a Resolution Requestinq Certification of Tax
Increment Financinq District R3 with County Auditor. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
This resolution is identical to the one in the preceding paragraph.
This resolution has to do with Tax Increment District #3 or the
Fulfillment V...
--.. project. it could have been aro rted at. the
last Council meeting when you approved District 03, but the copy
of the resolution had not been submitted and prepared. Thus,
adoption now is required so that I may go down and certify District
H3 with the County Auditor. This again is a formality that is
required.
There are no alternative actions.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the resolution for adoption.
- 6 -
RESOLUTION 1984 h
A RESOLUTIOIJ REQUESTING THE COUNTY
AUDITOR TO CERTIFY THE ORIGINAL ASSESSED
VALUE OF 771E REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE
BOUNDARY OF TILE MCtiTICELLO HOUSING AND
REDEVRLOPMENT AUTHORITY TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 43.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello has determined
that it is necessary and desirable and in the public interest to designate,
establish, develop, and administer a tax increment financing economic
development district pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes,
Section 273.71 to 273.78 inclusive;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF 711E CITY OF
MCVT10EL1.0, MINNESOTA that the Wright County Auditor is hereby requested
to certify the assessed value of all real property within the boundaries
of the tax increment economic dovelopmmt district as described in the
attached tax increment financing plan as of the date of the last equalized
ausecament, and each year heroaftor to cerci f.y the amount by which the
assoused value has increased or decreased from the original assessed value
and also to certify the proportion which any increase or decrease bears
to the total assessed value for the real property in said tax increment
financing district for that year, excluding the Capture of assessed value
Pavable in 1985. which shall be "passed throueh" to the taxinu Jurisdictions
and also to remit to the Monticelio Housino and Redevelopment Authority,
I.ayinninq in July. 1986. that proportion of all taxes said that year on
coal propertv in the district which the captured assessed value boars to the
total current assessed value, all pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. Section
273.76, Subdivision 1 and 2.
Adopted this 23rd day of April, 1984.
ATTEST:
9homae A. Eidnm
City Administrator
Arve A. Grimomo, mayor
C
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
9. Consideration of a Resolution Awarding Sale of Tax Increment Bonds. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGRODND:
At the April 9 meeting, Jerry Shannon of Springsted was present
to receive your authorization to prepare a flyer and secure bids
for the $155,000 bond issue. At the time of this writing, we have
not yet received the bids, but we anticipate receiving them on
Monday afternoon with the formal recommendation of Springsted. It
is my understanding at this time that Jerry Shannon will not be
present at the meeting. He will contact me by phone on Monday to
advise me of which bank is Uie successful bidder. Upon adoption
of the resolution awarding the sale, the bond opinion will be
prepared and submitted to the bank, the bonds will be printed
and submitted to the bearers, and the cash will be turned over to
the City. All of this should be completed by the end of May.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Award the sale of the tax increment bonds to the lowest bidder
this will keep the Fulfillment Systems Project going and will
initiate the process of preparing the bonds for transfer.
2. Do not adopt the resolution awarding the sale - this alternative
at this point should really only occur if the bids are Outrageous
in their terms and conditions.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION;
Depending on the terms and conditions of the moot attractive bid,
staff reconenenda that the bonds solo be awarded. We have worked
on the Fulfillment Systoms Project since July of last year and
we are seeing it develop slowly but surely. This is simply one
more critical step toward completion.
D. SUPPORTING DATA,
Copy of tho resolution for adoption, copy of the flyer distributed
by Springatud.
7 -
SPRINGSTED
'INCORPORATED
PUBLIC FINANCE
'ADVISORS
INVITATION FOR PROPOSALS
Rating: An applicaton has been made to
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
$155,000
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1984
Bonds Dated: May I, 1984 Interest Due: February I and August I,
commencing February I, 1985
The Bonds wil l mature February I as follows:
$15,000 1987-1989 $20,000 1990-1992 $25,000 1993-1994
The City may elect on February I, 1992 and on any interest payment date
thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February I, 1993. Redemption may be
in whole or in part of the Bonds subject to prepayment. If redemption is in part,
those Bonds remaining unpaid which have the latest maturity date will be prepaid
first. If only part of the Bonds having a common maturity date are called for
prepayment the specific Bonds to be prepaid will be chosen by lot by the Registrar.
All prepayments shall be at a price of par and accrued interest.
the Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its
full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes without
limit as to rate or amount. In addition, the City will pledge fox increment
revenues derived from the Economic Development District 113.
Bids must be for not less than $152,365 and accrued interest on the total principal
amount of the Issue. A good faith deposit will not be required.
Bidders shall specify rates in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. No rote for
any maturity shall be more than 1.0% lower than any prior rate. No rote nor the
net effective rate may exceed the maximum rate permitted by low.
The Bonds will be awarded to the Proposal offering the lowest dollar interest cost
to be determined by the deduction of the premium, if any, from, or the addition of
any amount less than par, to the total dollar interest on the Bonds from their date
to their final scheduled maturity. The City's computation of the total net dollar
interest cost of each Proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be
controlling.
The Bonds will be issued in integral multiples of $5,000 as requested by the
Purchaser, will be fully registered as to principal and interest, and will be delivered
without cost to the Purchaser within 40 days following the date of their award.
Delivery is subject to receipt of an approving legal opinion of Holmes & Graven,
Char tered.
The City will name the Registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC
regulations.
Proposals Received: By SPRINGS117D Incorporated at 2:00 P.M., Central Time,
April 23, 1984 (Monday).
Award: Proposals received will be presented to the City Council
for award of 7:30 P.M., Central Time, April 23, 1984.
The date of this Invitation is April 12, 1984.
800 Oshorn Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 (612) 2.22.4241
250 Nurlh Sunn�slopu Road, f3roo6fiela, Wlsconsm 53005 14141 702.0222
SCHEDULE OF BOND YEARS
$155,000
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1984
CUMULATIVE
YEAR PRINCIPAL BOND YEARS BOND YEARS
1987 $15,000 41.25 41.25
1988 $15,000 56.25 97.50
1989 $15,000 71.25 168.75
1990 $20,000 115.00 283.75
1991 $20,000 135.00 418.75
1992 $20,000 155.00 573.75
1993 $25,000 c 218.75 792.50
1994 $25,000 c 243.75 1,036.25
Average Maturity: 6.69 Years
Bonds Dated: May 1, 1984
Interest Due: February 1, 1985 and each August 1 and
February 1 to maturity.
Principal Due: February I, 1987-1994 Inclusive.
Redemption: Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 1993
are callabl a commencing February 1, 1992
and any interest payment date thereafter
at p-ir .
(See Official Terms of Offering.)
c:callable
J
9
Introductory Statement
The City of Monticello, Minnesota (tire "City") is issuing the $155,000 General
Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1984 (the "Bonds" or the "Issue") in order to
finance public costs connected with a project in the City's Economic Development
District f13, a tax increment district (the "District"). Fulfillment Systems, Inc., a
premium redemption company currently located in the City, plans to construct a
43,200 square foot facility for a keypunch :nail clearing office/ warehouse facility.
The construction of the facility will add about 65 jobs in Monticello.
The public costs of the project will be financed by proceeds of this Issue and a
$243,500 UDAG grant. The components of this Issue ore:
Land Acquisition
$105,000
Administration and planning
7,500
Bond Issuance Costs
8,240
Allowance for Discount Bidding
2,635
Copitalited Interest (through 2-1-86)
23,870
C ont i ngene iesl Miscei laneous
7,755
Bond Issue $155,000
Security
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which it will pledge its full
faith and credit and power to levy general ad valorem taxes without limit as to
rnte or ornount. In addition the City wit pledge tax increment revenues generated
on the increased value of the District. The original assessed value of the District
is $8,032. the building for Fulfillment Systems, Inc. is expected to be completed in
1984 and will be fully on the tax rolls as of January 2, 1985 at $433,788, producing
an incremental assessed value of $425,756. This value multiplied by the current
mill rate would generate tax increment revenue of $34,740 annually. At this level
of tax increment revenue, the City does not expect to levy taxes for debt service.
Future Finaming
The City of Monticello does not have any further borrowing plans for the next 90
days.
Litigation
The City is not aware of any threatened or pending litigation affecting the validity
of the Bonds or the City's ability to rnect its financial obligations.
Legality
The Bonds are subject to approval as to certain matters by Holmes R Graven,
Chartered, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, as 13ond Counsel. Bond Counsel has not
participated in the preparution of this Invitation for Proposals and will not pass
upon its accuracy, completeness, or sufficiency. Bond Counsel has not examined
nor attempted to examine or verity, oily of the financial or statistical statements,
or data contained in this Invitation for Proposals and will express no opinion with
tespect thereto.
9
STATISTICAL INFORMATION
1983 Indicated Market Value of Taxable Property: $240,813,210
1983 Taxable Assessed Value: $71,114,939•
Indicated
Taxable
Real Estate:
Market Value
Assessed Value
Residential
$ 6,764,123
9.5%
Residential Non -homestead
2,000, 147
2.8
Agricultural 8, Other
713,717
1.0
Cornmerciol/Industrial
6,334,563
8.9
Public Utility
54,551,936
76.7
Personal Property
750,453
1.1
Wright County State !lank
$71,114,939,
100.0%
' Includes $36,973 of captured tax Increment
value.
232,883
Trend of Values
Ten of the Largest Taxpayers
Indicated
Taxable
Taxpayer
Market Value
Assessed Value
1983
$240,813,210
$71,114,939
1982
194,921,681
58,492,537
1981
158,437,291
46,070,381
1980
151,733,024
41,882,945
1979
129,418,564
40,194,379
Ten of the Largest Taxpayers
$58,333,876•
' Represents 82% of tho total taxable assessed value.
J
J
1983 Taxable
Taxpayer
Type of Property
Assessed Value
Northern States Power Company
Utility
$55,792,006
MacDonald Properties
Restaurant
482,518
Medical Facilities Co.
Medical Clinic
448,016
Larson -Larson Partnership
Motel
275,086
Individual
Motel
250,447
Hillside Properties
Apartments
243,266
Wright County State !lank
Bank
236,191
Wrightco Products, Inc.
Manufacturing
232,883
Cedar Crest Apts., Ltd.
Apartments
196,890
Samuel Properties
Commercial
176,573
$58,333,876•
' Represents 82% of tho total taxable assessed value.
J
J
Summary of City Direct Debt Including This Issue
(As of 3-2-84)
Gross Sinking Net
Debt Funds* Debt
General Obligation Debt Supported
1983 Taxable
Toxinq Unit
Assessed Value
Solely By Taxes
$ 255,000
$ 30,046
$ 224,954
General Obligation Deb, Supported By
20.5% $ 96,350
Hospital District
137,368,753
Foxes and/or Special Assessments
$7,430,000
929,197
6,500,803
General Obligation Debt Supported By
G.O. Net Direct
Met Direct Debt and Indirect Debt
2.79%
Revenues (this issue)
`� 155,000
-0-
155,000
Flcvenue Debt
65,000
27,000
38,000
" Sinking fruuls are as of Atarch 1, 1984 and include
money to pay
both principal
and interest.
Indirect Debt
Debt Ratios
To 1983 Indicated Market Value
Per Copito (2,875 - Current Gstimuic)
Per Capita - Residential Share (9.546)
Mill Plates Per $1,000 of Assessed Value
1983 Taxable
Toxinq Unit
Assessed Value
Wright County
$346,089,695
ISD 882 (Monticello)
94,615,367
Monticello -Big Lake
20.5% $ 96,350
Hospital District
137,368,753
Debt Ratios
To 1983 Indicated Market Value
Per Copito (2,875 - Current Gstimuic)
Per Capita - Residential Share (9.546)
Mill Plates Per $1,000 of Assessed Value
1983/84
Debt
1979/80 1980181 1981E 1982/83 Total Service
Wright County 25.011 26.765 26.271
Debt Applicable To
23.580
Value in City
G.O. Debt
20.978
As of 3-2-84
Percent Amount
$ 470,000
20.5% $ 96,350
4,040,000
75.1 3,034,040
935,000
51.7 483,395
3.307
$3,613,785
G.O.
G.O. Net Direct
Met Direct Debt and Indirect Debt
2.79%
4.29%
$2,339
$3,596
$222
$342
1983/84
Debt
1979/80 1980181 1981E 1982/83 Total Service
Wright County 25.011 26.765 26.271
23.953
23.580
-0-
City of Monticello 22.327 25.007 23.938
20.978
17.734
7.471
ISD 882 (Non -Ag) 45.493 40.169 44.818
36.211
37.335
6.341
Monticello -pig Lake Hospital 3.263 3.949 3.688
3.424
3.307
0.257
Total 96.094 95.890 98.715
84.566
81.956
14.069
N07"E: The foregoing mill rates are computed on the basis of total levies
and taxable values,
( and do not reflect any reduction for property tax credits.
5-
Tax Collections for the City
1983/84 anticipated State -paid homestead credit: $61,746 or 4.9% of total levy.
FUNDS ON HAND
As of March 1, 1984
Cash & Investments
General, Special Revenue and Enterprise Funds $ 657,022
Special Assessment Funds 915,808
Debt Redemption Funds 43.435
$1,616,265
GENERAL IW"ORMATION CONCERNING THE CITY
Monticello is located on Interstate Highway 1-94 and the Mississippi River in
northern Wright County, approximately 45 miles northwest of Ilia
Minneapolis/Saint Patti metropolitan area. The City encompasses an area of 3,150
acres and hos a population of 2,830, according to Ilia 1980 U.S. Census. The City is
part of the Twin Cities -St. Cloud Corridor, which is one of the fastest growing
areas in the State. Monticello experienced a 90% population increase from 1970 to
1900. The State Demographer estimates that the City's current population is
2,875.
White the City has grown in population, the largest portion of Ilia tax base is still
provided by Northern States Power Company's Monticello nuclear power plant.
NSP's current taxable assessed value. is $55,792,006. The value accounts for
approximately 78.5% of the City's total taxable assessed value. The NSP plant,
which began operations in 1971, has a net generating capacity of 580 megawatts
and is part of the utility company's interconnecting electrical generating system
serving four states.
Collected During
Collected
As
Collection Year
Of 10-31-83
}
Amount
Levy/Collect
of Lev
Amount Percent
Amount
Percent
1983/84
$1,263,527
(In Process of
Collection)
1982/83
1,226,984
$1,208,302 98.5%
$1,208,302
98.5%
1981/82
1,166,897
1,147,897 98.4
1,154,677
98.9
1980/81
1,112,574
1,100,308 98.9
1,108,556
99.6
1979/80
911,333
890,192 97.7
908,963
99.7
1983/84 anticipated State -paid homestead credit: $61,746 or 4.9% of total levy.
FUNDS ON HAND
As of March 1, 1984
Cash & Investments
General, Special Revenue and Enterprise Funds $ 657,022
Special Assessment Funds 915,808
Debt Redemption Funds 43.435
$1,616,265
GENERAL IW"ORMATION CONCERNING THE CITY
Monticello is located on Interstate Highway 1-94 and the Mississippi River in
northern Wright County, approximately 45 miles northwest of Ilia
Minneapolis/Saint Patti metropolitan area. The City encompasses an area of 3,150
acres and hos a population of 2,830, according to Ilia 1980 U.S. Census. The City is
part of the Twin Cities -St. Cloud Corridor, which is one of the fastest growing
areas in the State. Monticello experienced a 90% population increase from 1970 to
1900. The State Demographer estimates that the City's current population is
2,875.
White the City has grown in population, the largest portion of Ilia tax base is still
provided by Northern States Power Company's Monticello nuclear power plant.
NSP's current taxable assessed value. is $55,792,006. The value accounts for
approximately 78.5% of the City's total taxable assessed value. The NSP plant,
which began operations in 1971, has a net generating capacity of 580 megawatts
and is part of the utility company's interconnecting electrical generating system
serving four states.
Employment
Some of the larger employers in the City are
Employer
Product/Service
Employment
Monticello -Big Lake Hospital
Hospital R Nursing Horne
243
Independent School District 882
Public Education
210
Northern States Power Company
Utility
138
Wrightco Products, Inc.
Egg Processing
125
Fulfillment Systems, Inc.
Premium Redemption
115
Decorative Services
Custom Draperies
51
Clow Stamping Company
Precision Metal Stamping
46
C3ondhus Corporation
Hand Tools
42
Electro Industries
Agricultural Heaters
24
Source: ,Alotltfcello Community Profile," dated February, 1983.
Wright County's January, 1984 preliminary unemployment rate is 9.3%, compared
to the State's 7.8%.
Building Permits
The following summary of building permits illustrates the City's growth in recent
years.
Total
Total
New Home
New Home
Year
Permits
Valuation
Permits Only
Valuation
1983
98
$5,134,374
26
$1,263,360
1982
38
2,878,679
15
987,020
1981
58
4,687,600
26
t,212,000
1980
69
8,664,000•
34
1,375,000
1979
102
3,928,500
55
1,911,500
• Includes $4.5 million for tho City's saworage treatment plant.
Goverrrnmt Organization and Services
The City of Monticello has been a municipal corporation since 1856 and become o
statutory city on January 1, 1974. The City has o council -administrator form of
government. Tile City Council consists of the Mayor, who serves a two-year term
of office, and four Council members, who serve four-year overlapping terms. All
Council members ore elected at -large.
Tile City Administrator is thu chief administrative officer of the City. The
Administrator which combines the offices of Clerk and Treasurer, is appointed by
the Council and serves at its discretion.
Monticello provides water and sewer service to all of ifs davela(�ed areas. The
water system, which was exlwnded in 1976 at an estimated cost of 1.3 million, has
wells as its source of water. The: pumping capacity is 2,400 gallons per minute.
Daily dernond averages 360,000 gallons, while peak demand has been 900,000
gallons per day. The water utility has a storage capocity of 800,000 gallon.
9
The City has completed o major $5.5 million addition to its treatment plant and a
new interceptor. The new plant has a treatment capacity of 900,000 gallons per
day. Peak demand is approximately 550,000 gallons per day. The cost of the plant
addition and interceptor was funded 90% from the Environmental Protection
Agency and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The City's local share was
financed from allocated federal revenue sharing funds.
Employees. Pensions
City employees are part of the Public Employees Retirement Assocation i"PERA")
which is administered by the State of Minnesota The City has no responsibility for
management of the pension plan. The City pays its employer's share of PERA costs
based on contribution rates which are determined on a Statewide basis and include
provisions for prior service costs. The amount of unfunded liability attributable to
any individual governmental vntif is not determinable.
City fire sworn personnel can belong to their fire pension plan. Tax levies for the
City contribution to the fire association include an amount sufficient to cover the
normal level cost as determined by an actuarial survey and interest at five percent
of the unfunded liability.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF
$155,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1984,
PLEDGING FOR THE SECURITY THEREOF TAX INCREMENT FROM
TAX INCREMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 3 AND AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF A TAX INCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota,
as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Monticclno (the "HRA'9 has heretofore adopted and this City Council (this
"Council") has duly approved the Central Monticello Redevelopment Plan, and
Modification No. One thereto, for the Central ,Monticello Redevelopment Project
(the "Project").
1.02. The HRA has established and this Council has duly approved Tax
lncremcnt Economic Development District No. 3 (the "District'9, and the HRA has
requested County Auditor of Wright County to certify the Original Assessed Value
of all taxable property in the District as of January 2, 1983, and to certify to the
NRA each year hereafter the Current Assessed Value of all taxable property in the
District (the Current Assessed Value). The Original Assessed Value of the District
is expected to be $8,032, and will be adjusted each year in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 1.
1.03. The HRA expects to enter into a Contract for Private
Redevelopment with Fulfillment Systems, Inc. (the "Developer') prior to delivery
of the Bonds issued pursuant to this Resolution, whereby the HRA will agree to sell
to the Developer certain property within the District, and the Developer will agree
to construct certain minimum improvements (the 'Improvements"), all as more
particularly described in the agreement, on or before January 1, 1985. It is
expected that upon completion of the Improvements the assessed value assigned by
the County Assessor to the property and the Improvements will be not less than
$433,788 which would result in a Captured Assessed Value of $425,756. If these
expectations prove true, based upon present and anticipated mil! rates for ad
valorem taxes to be levied on taxable property In the District, the Council hereby
determines that the annual tax increment to be derived by the HRA from the
District commencing in 198G will be approximately $34,000.
Section 2. Authorization. It is hereby determined that it Is necessary and
expedient for the City of Monticello (the "Issuer") to issue and sell, pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to 273.78, Its General Obligation Tax
Increment Bonds, Series 1984 (the "Bonds") in the aggregate principal amount of
$155,000 for the purpose of financing certain public redevelopment costs of the
Project. The solo of the Bonds has been negotiated pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 475.60, Subd. 2(2), and the Issuer has issued no other general obligation
bonds !it the three-month period precccding the date hereof, and will issue no other
general obligation bonds prior to the delivery of the Bonds.
Section 3. Sale, Terms.
3.01. The Issuer hereby accepts the offer of
to purchase the Bonds at the rate of
interest hereinafter set forth, and to pay therefcre the sum of $
plus accrued interest to the date of delivery. The Bonds shall be payable as to
principal at the office of in
, Minnesota (the "Registrar') or any successor
Registrar duly appointed by the Issuer. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable by
check or draft mailed from the office of the Registrar to the registered owners of
the Bonds.
3.02. The Bonds shall be dated May 1, 1984 and shall be issued forthwith as
fully registered bonds without coupons in denominations of $5,000 .or any
authorized integral multiple thereof. The Bonds shall mature on February 1 in the
years and amounts set forth below, and shall bear interest, payable on each August
1 and each February 1 at the following rates per annum for the following years of
maturity starting on February 1, 1985:
Year
Amount Interest Rate
1987
15,000 %
1988
15,000
19B9
15,000
1990
20,000
1991
20,000
1992
20,000
1993
25,000
1994
25,000
3.03. Pursuant to the terms of the pledge agreement described below to be
enteredinto the HRA and the Lssuer pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77
tax increment derived from the Project area will be pledged to the pnyment of
principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds. In compliance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.58, the estimated collection of tax increment from
the Project area exceeds 20% of the cost of the Project. The costs of the Project
shall include the costs enumerated in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 475.05, 273.75,
subdivision 4, and Minnesota Statutes, Section 402.411 et seq. and it is estimated
that said costs will be at least equal to the amount of the Bonds herein authorized.
3.04. Bonds of this issue maturing on or after February 1, 1993 will be
subject to redemption prior to maturity at the option of the Lssuer in inverse order
of maturities, and by lot within a single maturity on February 1, 1992, and any
interest payment date thereafter at a price equal to par, plus accrued interest to
the date of redemption. Notice of redemption shnll In each case be published not
less than 30 days prior to the redemption date in a daily or weekly periodical
published in a Minnesota city of the first class, or its metropolitan area, which
circulates throughout the State of Minnesota and furnishes financial news as part
of its service, and at least thirty (30) days prior to the redemption date a copy of
the redemption notice shall be mailed by first class mail to the registered holders
of the Bonds.
Section 4. Form of the Bonds.
4.01. The Bonds shall be in substantially the following form, with the
necessary variations as to number, CUSIP Number, rate of interest and date of
maturity, the blanks to be properly filled in:
No. R -
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAR INCREMENT BOND, SERIFS 1984
Rate Maturity Date of Original Issue CUSIP
May 1, 1984
The City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "Issuer'l for value received, hereby
certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to
or registered assigns, the principal sum of
dollars ($ ) on the maturity date
specified above, upon the presentation and surrender hereof, and to pay to the
registered owner hereof interest on such principal sum at the interest rate
specified above from May 1, 1984, or the most recent interest payment date to
which interest has been paid or duly provided for as specified below, on August 1
and February 1 of each year, commencing February 1, 1985, until said principal
sum is paid. Principal and the redemption price are payable in lawful money of the
United States of America at , as Registrar,
Transfer Agent and Paying Agent, in Minhesota, or at the
office of such successor agent as the Issuer may designate upon 60 days notice to
the registered owners at their registered addresses (the "Registrar"). Interest shall
be paid on each August 1 and February 1 by check or draft mailed to the person in
whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the preceding
January 15 and July 15 (whether or not a business day) at his or her address set
forth on the bond register maintained by the Registrar. Any such interest not
punctually paid or provided for will be paid to the person In whose name this Bond
Is registered at the close of business on a special record data established by the
Registrar for the payment of such defaulted interest.
The Bonds of this series maturing on or after February 1, 1993, are subject
to redemption at the option of the issuer, In whole or in part In Inverse order of
maturity and by lot within a maturity, on February 1, 1992 and any Interest
payment date thereafter at a price equal to par and accrued interest. Thirty days'
prior notice of redemption will be given by mail to the Registrar and to the
registered owners, and notice of redemption will be published in the manner
provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475.
This Bond is one of a series of Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of
One Hundred and Fifty -Five Thou%and Dollars ($155,000), all of like date and tenor
except for number, Interest rate, denomination, date of maturity and redemption
privilege, and Is Issued for the purpose of providing funds to finance certain public
redevelopment costs of the Central Monticello Redevelopment Project, as
modified, and is issued pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the "Resolution') duly
adopted by the Issuer on April 23, 1984, and pursuant to and in full conformity with
the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 475 and Sections 273.71 through 273.78.
The Bonds of this series are payable from the General Obligation Tax
Increment Bonds, Series 1984 Fund of the Issuer. All taxable property within the
Issuer is subject to the levy of ad valorem taxes required by law to be levied and
extended if needed for this purpose, without limitation of rate or amount. The
issuance of this bond does not cause the indebtedness of the Issuer to exceed any
constitutional or statutory limitation thereon.
As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth
therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the Issuer kept for that purpose
at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or
by such owner's attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of this Bond
together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly
executed by the registered owner or such owner's duly authorized attorney. Upon
such transfer and the payment of any tax, fee or governmental charge required to
be paid by the Issuer or the Registrar with respect to such transfer, there will be
Issued In the name of the transferee a new Bond or Bonds of the same aggregate
principal amount as the surrendered Bond.
The Bonds of this series are issuable only as fully registered bonds without
coupons in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof not exceeding
the principal amount maturing in any one year. As provided in the Resolution and
subject to certain limitations therein set forth, the Bonds of this series are
exchangeable for a like aggregate principal amount of Bonds of this series of a
different authorized denomination, as requested by the registered owner or his duly
authorized attorney, upon surrender thereof to the Registrar.
It is hereby Certified and Recited that all acts, conditions and things
required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to
exist, to happen and to be performed in order to make this Bond a valid and binding
general obligation of the Issuer according to its terms, have been done, do exist,
have happened and have been performed in due form, time and manner as so
required.
This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose until the
Authentication Certificate hereon shall have been manually signed by a person
authorized to sign on behalf of the Registrar.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Monticello has caused this Bond to be
executed with the facsimile signatures of its Mayor and its City Administrator, all
as of the Date of Original Issue specified above.
Dated:
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
By
(Facsimile)
Mayor
(Facsimile)
City Administrator
Bond Registrar's Authentication Certificate
This is one of the Bonds described in the within mentioned Resolution.
By
Bond Registrar
Authorized Signature
The following provisions for abbreviations shall be printed on each Bond In
substantially the following form:
The following abbreviations, when used in the Inscription on the face of this
certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to
applicable laws or regulations:
1 EN COM - as tenants in common
TEN ENT - as tenants by the entiretles
JT TEN - as joing tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants In
common
UNIF GIFT MIN ACT - Custodian
(Gust) (Minor)
Under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act
t5tate)
ASSIGNMENT
FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers
unto
( Please Print or Typewrite Name and Address of Transferee.
Include information for all joint owners if the Bonds are held by joint account.)
the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and
appoints attorney to transfer the within Bond on
the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the
premises.
Dated:
Signature Guaranteed by:
Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a
commercial bank or trust company or
by a brokerage firm having
membership in one of the major stock
exchanges.
Please Insert Social Security Number
or Other Identifying Number of
Assignee
5
Notice: The signature(s) on this
assignment must correspond with the
name(s) which appear on the face of
this Bond in every particular, without
alteration or any change whatever.
(Form of Certificate)
CERTIFICATE AS TO LEGAL OPINION
1, Thomas Eidem, City Administrator of the City of Monticello, hereby
certify that except for the date line, the above is a full, true and compared copy of
the legal opinion of Holmes be Graven, Chartered, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which
was delivered to me upon delivery of the bonds and is now on file in my office.
(Facsimile)
City Administrator
City of Monticcllo, Minnesota
1.02. As long as any of the Bonds issued hereunder shall remain
outstan�, the Issuer shall cause to be kept at the principal office of the
Registrar the Register in which, subject to such reasonable regulations as the
Registrar may prescribe, the Registrar shall provide for the registration of Bonds
and the registration of transfers of Bonds.
In hereby appointed Registrar for the purpose orreiiitering Bonds and reQtste�►r�g
transfers of Bonds as herein provided.
Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond with a written instrument of
transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or his
ell. o
duly authorized attorney, and upon payment of any tax, fee or other governmental
charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer, the issuer shall execute
and the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated
transferee or transferees, one or more fully registered Bonds of any authorized
denominations and of a like aggregate principal amount, interest rate and maturity.
Any Bonds, upon surrender thereof at the office of the Registrar, at the option of
the registered owner thereof, may be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal
amount of Bonds of the same maturity and interest rate of any authorized
denominations. In ell cases in which the privilege of exchanging or transferring
fully registered Bonds is exercised, the Issuer shall execute and the Registrar shall
deliver Bonds in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. For every such
exchange or transfer of Bonds, whether temporary or definitive, the Issuer or the
Registrar may make a charge sufficient to reimburse it for any tax, fee or other
governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such exchange or transfer,
which sum or sums shall be paid by the person requesting such exchange or transfer
as a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege of making such exchange
or transfer. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution, the cost of
preparing each new Bond upon each exchange or transfer, and any other expenses
of the Issuer or the Registrar incurred in connection therewith (except any
applicable tax, fee or other governmental charge) shall be paid by the Issuer. The
Issuer shall not be obligated to make any such exchange or transfer of Bonds during
the fifteen (15) days next preceding the date of the first publication or the mailing
(if there is no publication) of notice of redemption in the case of a proposed
redemption of Bonds. The Issuer and the Registrar shall not be required to make
any transfer or exchange of any Bonds called for redemption.
4.03. interest on any Bond which is payable, and is punctually paid or duly
providedTor, on any interest payment date shall be paid to the person In whose
name that Bond (or one or more Bonds for which such bond was exchanged) is
registered at the close of business on the preceding January 15 or July 15, as the
case may be. Any interest on any Bond which is payable, but is not punctually paid
or duly provided for, on any interest payment date shall forthwith cease to be
payable to the registered holder on the relevant regular record date solely by
virtue of such holder having been such holder; and such defaulted interest may be
paid by the issuer to the person in whose name such Bond is registered at the close
of business on a special record date established by the Registrar for the payment of
such defaulted interest. Subject to the foregoing provisions of this paragraph, each
Bond delivered under this Resolution upon transfer of or in exchange for or In lieu
of any other Bond shall carry all the rights to interest accrued and unpaid, and to
accrue, which were carried by such other Bond and each such Bond shall bear
interest from such date that neither gain nor loss In interest shall result from such
transfer, exchange or substitution.
4.04. As to any Bond, the issuer and the Registrar and their respective
succcs—each in its discretion, may deem and treat the person In whose name
the same for the time being shall be registered as the absolute owner thereof for
all purposes and neither the Issuer nor the Registrar nor their respective successors
shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Payment of or on account of the
principal of any such Bond shall be made only to or upon the order of the registered
owner thereof, but such registration may be changed as above provided. All such
payments shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon
such Bond to the extent of the sum or aims so paid.
4.05. If (i) any mutilated Bond is surrendered to the Registrar, and the
Issuer and the Registrar receive evidence to their satisfaction of the destruction,
loss, or theft of any Bond, and (ii) there is delivered to the Issuer and the Registrar
such security or indemnity as may be required by them to save each of them
harmless, then, in the absence of notice to the Issuer or the Registrar that such
Bond has been acquired by a bona fide purchaser, the Issuer shall execute, and upon
its request the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in exchange for or in lieu
of any such mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond, a new Bond of like tenor and
principal amount, bearing a number not contemporaneously outstanding. In case
any such mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond has become or is about to
become due and payable, the Issuer in its discretion, instead of issuing a new Bond,
may pay such Bond.
Upon the issuance of any new Bond under this subsection, the Issuer may
require the payment of a sum sufficient to cover any tax or other governmental
charge that may be imposed in relation thereto. ,
Every new Bond issued pursuant to this subsection in lieu of any destroyed,
lost, or stolen Bond shall constitute an original additional contractual obligation of
the Issuer, whether or not the destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond shall be at any time
enforceable by anyone, and shall be entitled to all the benefits of this Resolution
equally and proportionately with any and all other Bonds duly issued hereunder.
The provisions of this Section are exclusive and shall preclude (to the extent
lawful) all other rights and remedies with respect to the replacement or payment
of mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bonds.
Section 5. Execution and Dellvery
5.01. The Bonds shall be executed by the respective facsimile signatures of
the Moyor and the City Administrator of the Issuer as set forth in the form of
Bond. The text of the approving legal opinion of Holmes @ Graven, Chartered, of
Minneapolis, Minnesota, as bond counsel, shall be printed on the reverse side of
each Bond and shall be certified by the facsimile signature of the City
Administrator. The Seal of the Issuer shall be omitted from the Bonds as permitted
by law. When said Bonds shall have been duly executed and authenticated by the
Registrar In accordance with this resolution, the same shall be delivered to the
Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price, and the receipt of the City
Administrator to the Purchaser thereof shall be a full acquittance; and the
Purchaser shall not be bound to see to the application of the purchase money. The
Bonds shall not be valid for any purpose until authenticated by the Registrar.
5.02. Unless litigation shall have been commenced end be pending
questio u�tng the Bonds, revenues pledged for payment of the bonds, or the
organization of the Issuer or incumbency of its officers, at the closing, the Mayor
and the City Administrator shall exerute and deliver to the Purchaser a suitable
certificate as to absence of material litigation, and a certificate as to payment for
and delivery of the Bonds, together with the arbitrage certificate referred to below
and the signed approving legal opinion of Holmes & Graven, Chartered as to the
validity and enforceability of the Bonds and the exemption of Interest thereon from
federal and Minnesota income taxation (other than Minnesota corporate and bank
excise taxes measured by Income) under present laws and rulings.
Section 6. Funds and Accounts.
6.01. There is hereby created a special fund designated "General Obligation
Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1984 Fund" (the "Bond Fund'9 held and administered by
the Finance Director of the Issuer separate and apart from all other Funds of the
Issuer. The Bored Fund shall be maintained in the manner specified until all of the
Bonds herein authorized, any refunding bonds issued to refund the Bonds, and any
other general obligation tax increment bonds hereafter issued to complete the
Project, including any modifications or additions thereto, and the interest thereon,
have been fully paid and the Issuer has been fully reimbursed from the pledge of
tax increment for all of the principal and interest of the Bonds paid by the Issuer
from taxes levied on property in the City other than the Project area. In the Bond
Fund there shall be maintained two separate accounts, to be designated as the
"Capital Account" and the "Debt Service Account", respectively.
Capital Account. The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds, less the amount
of the proceeds of the Bonds deposited in the Debt Service Account for capitalized
interest, and less any accrued interest received thereon deposited in the Debt
Service Account, shall be credited to the Capital Account, from which there shall
be paid all costs and expenses of the Project, including the cost of any
construction contracts heretofore let and all other costs incurred and to be
incurred, of the kind authorized in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 475.65, 273.75,
subdivision 4, and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.411 at sem.; and the moneys in
the Capital Account shall be used for no other purpose.
Debt Service Account. There is hereby pledged and there shall be credited
to the Debt Service Account (a) all accrued interest received upon delivery of and
payment for the Bonds, (b) an amount equal to $23,870 to pay Interest on the Bonds
prior to the anticipated date of collection of tax increment pledged for the
payment of the Bonds, (c) collections of tax increment derived from the District
and pledged to the payment of principal and interest on the Bonds, all taxes herein
levied for the payment of the Bonds, and revenues derived from other sources and
available and pledged to pay principal, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds,
and (d) all funds remaining In the Capital Account after completion of the Project
and payment of the costs thereof. The Debt Service Account herein created shall
be used solely to pay principal of, premium, If any, and Interest on the Bonds
and any other general obligation tax Increment bonds hereafter issued and made
payable from said Debt Service Account, except that upon discharge of the Bonds
and such already outstanding or additional Bonds, the Issuer may use the remaining
funds In the Debt Service Account to reimburse the Issuer as provided above.
6.02. The HRA will agree to segregate the tax increment derived from the
District—on its official books and records and to remit to the Bond Fund of the
Issuer the amount of tax Increment required to be remitted to the Issuer pursuant
to a Tax Increment Pledge Agreement in substantially the form attached hereto as
Exhibit A. The Mayor and City Administrator of the Issuer are hereby authorized
to execute on behalf of the Issuer a Tax Increment Pledge Agreement In
substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. To provide additional moneys
for the payment of said principal and interest there Is hereby levied upon all of the
taxable property in the Issuer a direct annual ad valorem tax which shall be equal
to 105% of the amount necessary to meet when due the principal and interest
payments on the Bonds and shall be epread upon the tax rolls and collected with and
as part of, other general property taxes in said Issuer for the years and in the
amounts as follows:
Levy Year Collection Year Amount Levied
(ATTACHED)
Said tax levies are such that if collected in full, they will produce at least
five percent (5516) in excess of the amount needed to meet when due the principal
and interest payments on the bonds (except for interest payable from funds which
shall be on hand and irrevocably deposited to the Debt Service Account as of the
date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds). Said tax levies shall be irrevocable
so long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the Issuer
reserves the right and power to reduce the levies in the manner and to the extent
permitted by Minnesota Statutes Section 475.61, subdivision 3.
The full faith, credit and taxing powers of the Issuer shall be and are hereby
irrevocably pledged for the prompt and full payment of the principal of and
interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due and payable.
6.03. Interest earnings from the investment of money in the Capital
Account shall be deposited in the Capital Account. Interest earnings from the
investment of money in the Debt Service Account shall be deposited in the Debt
Service Account
6.04. The Finance Director of the Issuer is directed to keep on file In his
office a tabulation of the dates and amounts of the principal and interest payments
to become due, on the Bonds, and amounts of the principal and interest payments
to become due on any other bonds made payable from the Bond Fund, and of the
balance required in the Bond Fund on October 1 in each year In order to cancel the
taxes levied pursuant to this Resolution for collection the following year.
Section 7. Miscellaneous.
7.01. The Issuer covenants and agrees with the Purchaser and holders of
the Bon a that the investments of proceeds of the Bonds, including the investment
of any revenues pledged to the Bonds which are considered proceeds under the
applicable regulations, and accumulated sinking funds, If any, shall be limited as to
amount end yield In such manner that the Bonds shall not be arbitrage bonds within
the meaning of Section 103(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended,
and regulations thereunder. On the basis of the existing facts, estimates and
circumstances, including the foregoing findings and covenants, the Issuer hereby
certifies that it is not expected that the proceeds of the Bonds will be used in such
manner as to cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds under Section 103(c) and
regulations thereunder. The Mayor and the City Administrator shall furnish an
arbitrage certificate to the Purchaser embracing or based on the foregoing
certification at the time of delivery of the Bonds to the Purchaser. The proceeds
of the Bonds will likewise be used in such manner that the Bonds are not Industrial
development bonds under Section 103(b) of the Internal Revenue Code.
7.02. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to certify a
copy o?—tFiis Resolution and to cause the same to be filed in the office of the
-10- 0
county auditor of Wright County together with the executed Pledge Agreement and
such other information as the county auditor may require, and to obtain from the
county auditor a certificate that the Bonds have been entered upon its bond
register and that the levy contained in this Resolution has been made.
7_03. The officers of the Issuer are authorized and directed to prepare and
furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies
of all proceedings and records of the Issuer relating to the power and authority of
the Issuer to issue the Bonds within their knowledge or as shown by the books and
records in their custody and control, and such certified copies and certificates shall
be deemed representations of the Issuer as to the facts stated therein.
Adopted this 23rd day of April, 1984.
City Administrator Mayor
-11-
EXHIBIT A
TAX INCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT
by and between
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
and
THE NOOSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on or as of the day of
, 1984, by and between the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the
"City"), and The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Monticello, Minnesota (the "Authority').
WHEREAS, the Authority established Central Monticello Redevelopment
Project (the "Project"), prepared the Central Monticello Redevelopment Plan (the
"Plan") for the Project, and approved the Plan on November 23, 1982, and has since
approved Modification No. 1 to the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City approved the Plan on December 13,
1982, and has since approved Modification No. 1 to the Plan; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to authority conferred by Minnesota Statutes, Section
273.77, and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, the City has agreed to finance
certain public redevelopment costs to be incurred by the Authority In the Project
through the issuance of general obligation bonds of the, City, designated the
$155,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1984, and hereinafter
referred to as the "Bonds"; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has agreed to pledge certain tax Increment
revenues to the City for the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(x), any
agreement to pledge tax increment revenues must be made by written agreement
by and between the Authority and the City and must be filets with the County
Auditor of Wright County;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Authority mutually agree to tho
following:
(1) The City will sell the Bonds.
(2) The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds and the earnings from
the investment of such proceeds will be made available to the Authority to
pay or reimburse the Authority for public redevelopment costs paid,
incurred, or to be paid or Incurred, by the Authority in the Project.
(3) All tax Increment generated by the Project, from and after
the date of this Agreement shall be deposited In a special fund (the "Project
Fund') held by the Authority, The Authority hereby pledges to the payment
of the principal and Interest on the Bonds, tax Increment from the Project
Fund in an amount equal to 10581 of the annual principal and interest due on
the Bonds.
1 (9
(4) Before the date of certification of City taxes in each year for
collection by Wright County (such date being hereinafter referred to as the
"Certification Date'), there shall be transferred from the Project Fund to
the Debt Service Account maintained by the City for the payment of the
Bonds, an amount which when taken together with amounts already on
deposit in the Debt Service Account, is equal to 105% of all principal and
interest then due or to become due on the Bonds on the following three debt
service payment dates. If, prior to any Certification Date the Project Fund
contains an amount in excess of the amount to be transferred to the Debt
Service Account maintained by the City for the payment of the Bonds
before such Certification Date, then such excess amounts shall be available
to the Authority to pay or reimburse the Authority for public redevelopment
costs paid, incurred, or to be paid or incurred, by the Authority in the
Project
(5) Without regard to anything in this Agreement, to the contrary,
tax increment generated by the Project shall be available to* pay principal of
and interest on both the Bonds and any other obligations issued by the City,
Authority or any other public body to finance public redevelopment costs
paid or incurred by the Authority in the Project.
(6) When the entire public redevelopment costs of the Project
have been paid and all principal and interest on the Bonds and other
obligations issued to finance the public redevelopment costs of the Project
have been paid, and the City has been reimbursed from collections of tax
increment from the Project for collections of general ad valorem taxes used
to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds, then the Authority shall report
such fact to the City Council of the City and the Authority shall submit a
final statement of such payments. Upon audit of this statement and
approval thereof by the City Council, the payment of the expenditures of
the Authority in the Project shall be reported to the County Auditor of
Wright County.
(7) An executed copy of this Agreement shall be filed with the
County Auditor of Wright County pursuant to the requirement contained in
Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(x).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Authority have caused this
Agreement to be duly executed on their behalf and their seals to be hereunto
affixed and such signatures and seals to be attested, as of the day and year first
above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF MONTICELLO
By
City Administrator Mayor
(SEAL)
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
ATTEST: AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
By
secretary Chairman
(SEAL) Of2
(4) Not later than five (5) business days prior to each February 1
and August 1 debt service payment date for the Bonds, there shall be
transferred from the Project Fund to the Debt Service Account maintained
by the City for the payment of the Bonds, an amount which, when taken
together with amounts already on deposit in the Debt Service Account,
is equal to the psymont of principal and interest next due on the Hondo.
If at any time the Project Fwd contains an amount in excess of the
amount to be transferred to the Debt Service Account maintained by the
City for the payment of the Bonds on the following two debt service
paymonto dates (excluding debt service payment dates for which interest
is payable from proceeds of the Bonds deposited in the Debt Service
Account), then such excess amount shall be available to the Authority
to pay or reimburse the Authority for public redevelopment cost paid,
incurred, or to be paid or incurred, by the Authority in the Project.
(5) Without regard to anything in this Agreement, to the contrary,
tax increment generated by the Project shall be available to'pey principal of
and interest on both the Bonds and any other obligations Issued by the City,
Authority or any other public body to finance public redevelopment costs
paid or incurred by the Authority In the Project
(6) When the entire public redevelopment costs of the Project
have been paid and all principal and interest on the Bonds and other
obligations issued to finance the public redevelopment costs of the Project
have been paid, and the City has been reimbursed from collections of tax
Increment from the Project for collections of general ad valorem taxes used
to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds, then the. Authority shall report
such fact to the City Council of the City and the Authority shall submit a
final statement of such payments. Upon audit of this statement and
approval thereof by the City Council, the payment of the expenditures of
the Authority in the Project shall be reported to the County Auditor of
Wright County.
(7) An executed copy of this Agreement shall be filed with the
County Auditor of Wright County pursuant to the requirement contained in
Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.77(a).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the, Authority have caused this
Agreement to be duly executed on their behalf and their seals to be hereunto
affixed and such signatures and seals to be attested, as of the day and year first
tbuvo written.
ATTEST: CITY OF MONTICELLO
By
City Administrator Mayor
(SEAL)
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
ATTEST: AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
By
Secretary Chairman
(SEAL)
2
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
10. Consideration of Pump House Nos. 1 6 2 Bide. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the April 9 meeting the Council approved the plans and specifications
for additions to Pump Houses 1 s 2 and authorized advertisement for
bide. The bids are due to be returned on Monday, April 23, at 2.00 p.m.
The bids for the electrical work are due just shortly before the building
bids. As stated at the previous meetings, we have incorporated into
the specifications that the addition to Pump House 02 may be built
separately of the addition to Pump House R1. We did this so that if
there were insufficient funds available to build both buildings that
the addition to M2 could go ahead as planned.
At the present time, we only have five plan holders on the project.
The plans and specifications were originally to be approved at the
February 27 meeting. This month delay has resulted in many of the
contractors being already booked for the next few months. We can
only wait until Monday to see how the bids come forth. I will have
a complete bid tabulation along with alternative actions and staff
recommendations at the Monday evening's meeting.
Ib ero is no supporting data for this agenda item.
- 8 -
UPDATE
PUMP HOUSES
The Pump House additions bids were received at 2:00 P.M. this afternoon.
We received three (3) bids. The tabulation is enclosed for your review.
The low bidder is Jim Schleif Construction of Buffalo for a price of
$17,995.00 for both additions. His work experience includes the
Trinity Lutheran Church, the United Methodist Church, St. John's Lutheran
Church in Buffalo, and Cohen's addition in Buffalo. I checked one of
these projects and Mr. Schleif was given an excellent recommendation.
The electrical bids were also opened this afternoon. We received four
(4) bids. The tabulation is enclosed for your review. The low bidder
is Klatt Electric of Buffalo for a price of $1,081.37 for both additions.
Using the tabulations one can interpret the following costs:
Total Cost Pump House 92 - $12,784.37
Total Cost Pump House #1 - $ 6,292.00
TOTAL - $19,076.37
As you may recall, Pump House Y2 came in at $16,219.00 last year, or
62% over our budget of $10,000. This year Pump House R2 is 62,784.37
over our budget figure, and Pump House 01 is $292.00 over our budget of
$6,000. The total estimated overrun is $3,076.37, not taking into
consideration inflation over last year.
It is a staff recommendation that we build both additions as proposed
and that we fund the overrun from the sum received from the sale of.
Hennepin Street. We have already reviewed the building plans for costs
savings and could find no additional items.
JOW E. 8imola
Public Works Director
CONSTRUCTION BID TABS
COMPANY NAME
BID BOND OR CASH
NO. 1 6 2
N0. 2 ONLY
Jay Puller Const.
Cert. Check
$20,616.00
$14,678.00
Quintin Lanners
Cashier's check
$21,548
$15,523.00
Jim Schleif Const.
Bid Bond
$17,995
$12,139.00
ELECTRICAL BID TABS
COMPANY NAME 110. 1 NO. 2
Double "D" Electric $1,279.00 $1,691.00
Mortenson Electric $ 5113.00 $ 893.00
Olson s Sons Electric $1,832.00 (combined 1 6 2)
Klatt Electric Company $ 436.On $ 645.37
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
11. Consideration of Final Acceptance for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Construction. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The final inspection on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Project was
conducted on March 15, 1984, with representatives of the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Corp of Engineers, City staff members,
and Consulting Engineer representatives. Tile outcome of this
final inspection indicated that the contractor, Paul A. Laurence Co.,
would be able to complete the items on the punch list prepared by
OSM and the Public Works Department. The items on the punch list
were recently completed, and as a result, OSM is recommending that
the City accept the project and sign the Certificate of Final
Acceptance forms. Paul A. Laurence Co, has also submitted a final
payment request in the amount of $103,354.
The $103,000 balance was primarily retainage that was being withheld
until all of the punch list items were completed. Because of the
lawsuit still pending regarding weldor Pump and OSM's Stop 2 request.
for additional engineering fees, the City will be applying for a
grant amendment to extend the grant period from its present termination
date of July 1, 1984 to December 31, 1984. Tho Waldor Pump lawsuit
hall been tentatively scheduled for sometime during tlee fall of 1984
and it's hopeful that it will come to trial before the end of the year.
The primary reason for requesting an extension in the grant period
is to keep the grant open for possible reimbursement to the EPA of
legal fees should OSM will the lawsuit. If Ulu case is duceded in
Waldor Pump's favor, it appears that even if the grant is open until
December 31, 1984, there will bo no applicable funds available from
the EPA or PCA to cover aucli cost if OSM 101300 the lawsuit. Thia
doesn't mean that the City could not apply for additional grant funds,
but all indications are from the PCA that rho likelihood of any
additional grant monies being available wero very olim at best.
One negative aspect of asking for 0 grant extension is that the
City is not ablo to request all of its funding from the EPA and PCA
until the lawsuit in settled. By not being ablo to apply for additional
funding, the PCA will not rsimburoo more Ulan 90% of their funding
which loaves the City approximately $86,000 in lost revenue until
probably aftet the first of the year. In effect, it's costing the
City approximately $4,000 to $5,000 in loot interest income by not
Luing able to request full funding. A grant extension request until
rucambor 31 will morn than likely not allow tine City to apply for
any additional grant funds should OSM lose Ulu lawsuit, the extension
would Oily be for tho purpose of repaying some grant monios to tho
PCA to cover legal coats if 0614 wina tine lawsuit.
Even though tine contract has Ix)on completed by PAL.CO and roeommondod
to be finalized by OSM, OSM still has some contractual obligations
to us to comploto such as as builte and corrections of some pump
- 9 -
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
problems. Once the Certificate of Final Acceptance forms have
been signed and final payment has been made to Paul A. Laurence
Co., the contractor will be required to maintain their performance
bond for one full year after this date.
B. ALTE MATT VC ACTIONS:
1. Approve the Engineer's recommendation that the City accept
the project as complete and make final payment in the amount
of $103,354 to Paul A. Laurence Company. Also approve applying
for a grant extension to December 31, 1984.
2. Do not accept the WWTP as complete, nor make final payment
as requested. This alternative does not seem feasible,as
the project has been primarily completed for quite some time
and the contractor has completed the final punch list to our
satisfaction and, therefore, deserves his final payment in the
amount. of $103,354.
3. Approve final payment but not apply for a grant extension to
December 31. The grant extension request will not necessarily
allow the City to obtain additional grant funds even if OS14
loses its Waldor Pump lawsuit, but only allows us to reimburse
the PCA for grant monies expended for legal defense should OSM
win its lawsuit. The grant extension request also means that
the City cannot request the additional $86,000 in grant funds
from the PCA until after the lawsuit is settled.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It's the staff's recommonda[ion to accept tho project as completed
and make final payment to Paul A. Laurence Company for $103,354
and request a grant extension until December 31, 1984. The only
drawback to the grant extension is that there is no guarantee that
the lawn uit will be settled by the end of the year and we may again
be asking for an additional grant extension until sometime in
1985. Tho result is that tl:e City will always In wafting for the
$86,000 reimbucuamont until we actually decide to finalize the project
and oak for final payment.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Iaoctmwndation from OSM to accept project as complete along with
copy of the Certificate of Final Aeceptaneo form.
- 10 -
Paul A. Laurence Company
GENER4L CONTRACIORS
P.O Bo. 1267
10,000 Highway 55 west
Minneapolis, MN 55440
TeIephorle 612/546-6911
TLy 290730
April 16, 1984
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
Attention: Mr. Thomas A. Eidem, Administrator
RE: Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant
Upgrading and Appurtenant Work
EPA Project No. 0270855-03
Final Payment Request
Gentlemen:
Enclosed are four (4) copies of the Certificate of Final Acceptance and
l four (4) copies of a letter from Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 8 Associates, Inc.
recormlending final payment for the referenced project.
We would appreciate your prompt payment of this pay request.
If you have any further questions, please let me know.
Very truly yours,
PAUL A. LAURENCE COMPANY
Warren T. Peterson
Vice President
WTP:ps
Enclosures
cc: Mr. John Simola - City of Monticello
Mr. Gerald S. Corrick - Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 8 Associates, Inc.
Mr. Dudley Knutson - Paul A. Laurence Co., Monticello, MN
Suoafdlary of 6. J. Groves S Som Company
Paul A, Laurance Company Is an equal opportunity omploym
CERTIFICATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE
Dl!•.lr1M 1..1.11.1
WD WwIr00
ORR SCHELEN MAYERON A ASSOCIATES. INC.
"IS1o. u• 113Dt CONbO 1.•15 INC
A: t t.51-E-1-1...vt 5u t M -IN-9.^01-5 N 1Y111tltf 1)1m10 I... 1p(y.l
DATE: April 12, 1984
PROJECT TITLE: Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant 6 Appt. Work
PROJECT N0.: EPA C270855-03
LOCATION: Monticello, Minnesota
OWNER: City of Monticello
CONTRACTOR: Paul A. Laurence Co. Minneapolis, MN
CONTRACT DATE: 11/20/80 CONTRACT AMOUNT: S 4,988,079.07
The work performed under this contract has been inspected by author-
ized representatives of the Owner, Contractor, and Engineer, and the
project is hereby declared to be completed on the above date.
Orr-Schelen-Mayeron )
6 Associates, Inc. BY
ENGINEER AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE DATE
The Contractor hereby certifies that the project is completed in
accordance with the Contract Documents. The Contractor further certi-
fies that specified warranties and performance bonds are maintained in
Pccordance with the Contract Documents.
Pnul A. Laurence Cn. B-Y_LL�v/'Be%
CONTRACTOR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE DATE
The Owner accepts the project as complete and assumes full possession
of the project on the above date of Final Acceptance. The Owner is
hereby responsible for all maintenance, utilities, security, insur-
ance, and operating costs.
Citv of Monticello, M14 BY
OWNER AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE DATE
0
ORR•SCHELEN• MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
Laiid Surveyels
April 12, 1984
City of. Monticello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362
Attn: Mr. 'rhomas A. Eidem, Administrator
Re: Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant
Upgrading and Appurtenant Work
EPA Project No. C270855-03
Final Payment Request
Dear Mr.. Fidem:
`. Enclosed are four (4) copies of Paul A. Laurence Company's Final
Payment Request and four (4) copies of the Certificate of. Final
Acceptance for the referenced project.
The Contractor has completed all work specified in our final March 2,
1984 punchlist. Accordingly, we recommend that the City accept the
project by signing the attached Certificate of Final Acceptance forms
and make final payment of $103,354.00. The Contractor is required by
contract to maintain their performance bond in full force fnr one
year after the date of final acceptance.
Sincerely,
ORR-SCHELF.N-MAYERON
2z
ES INC.
-C�
Gera](] S. COrrick, P.E.
Projrct Manager
GSC: n]b
Enclosure
CC: Mr. John Simola, City of Monticello
Mr.. Warren Peterson, PALCO
Mr. John Iladalich, OSM
2021 Cost i fonnepin Avenuo • Suito 238 • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 • 612 / 331- 8660
rite of Mnntirpllr,
250 East Broadway
Nonticelln MN S;-AAJ
MINNCAPOLIS. MINN.la,uary 19. 1984
wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrading
and Appurtenant Work
EPA Project No. 0270855-03
Completed to Date (per Est. No. 28, dated 5-31-83)
Less Previous billings
TOTAL THIS INVOICE
0//
$4,988,079.07
4,884,725.07
$ 103,354.00
IN ACCOUNT WIT11
PAUL A. I.AURENCE COMPANY
GENERAL AND MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS
PAPCR MILLS - POWER PLANTS
WATER - W.- T.E-ENT PLANTS
ItiD-RIAL PLANTS
Job 9.50
Po Ro,IMT
RELEASE RETAINAGEo.Roo
Rc�W- vn sl
1A NLAPOLIB, Niv NCSON ]:..a
wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrading
and Appurtenant Work
EPA Project No. 0270855-03
Completed to Date (per Est. No. 28, dated 5-31-83)
Less Previous billings
TOTAL THIS INVOICE
0//
$4,988,079.07
4,884,725.07
$ 103,354.00
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
12. Consideration of Conditional Use Permit for aCar Wash and Gas Station/
Convenience Store in a B-3 Zone, Applicant - Samuel Construction. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Sam Peraro came before the Planning Commission on April 10 to
discuss his proposal for a convenience store/self-serve gas station.
Mr. Peraro indicated at that time that he would be in full conformance
with all conditions as stipulated in the Zoning Ordinance. It was
also noted that Peraro's original plans allocated four parking spaces,
but Gary had identified the need for four additional spaces. Immediately
preceding the meeting, Peraro, Ridgeway, and myself reviewed the
Ordinance and noted that he would be required to have 13 spaces.
Peraro indicated he had no difficulty with creating 13 parking spaces,
that he had ample land and would simply submit a revised situ plan
showing all 13 parking spaces. Based on Peraro's willingness to meet
all terms and conditions of the Ordinance, the Planning Commission
voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Conditional Use.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the Conditional Use for Samuel Construction - legally
speaking, this is really the only alternative you have. Conditional
Uses must be granted if all conditions are met.
2. Dony the Conditional Use - as noted above, for you to deny the
Conditional Use there must be a nonconformance with the Ordinance
in some aspect.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Since Samuel Construction has indicated that all terms and conditions
of the Ordinance will be mot, we recommend granting the Conditional
Use to Pcraro.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Minutsa of the Planning Commission, rendering of the site plan.
C
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICE LLO PLANNING COMMISSION
April 10, 1984 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, Don Cochran, Ed Schaffer.
Members Absent: Joyce Dowling, Richard Carlson.
Also Present: Tom Eidem, City Administrator.
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Monticello Planning Commission
was duly hold at 7:30 P.M. on April 10, 1984, in the City Council
Chambers. Members present were: Ridgeway, Cochran, Schaffer. Members
absent were: Dowling, Carlson. Also present was Tom Eidem, City
Administrator. The meeting was called to order by Ridgeway. On
a motion by Cochran with a second by Schaffer, the minutes of March 13,
1984, and March 26, 1984, were approved as read.
3. Public Hearinq - Conditional Use Request to Allow a Self-Servico
Car Wash and a Self -Service Cas Station/Convenienco Store in a 8-3
Zone, Applicant - Samuel Construction.
�^ Ridgeway convened the public hearing requesting any public comment.
1 Mr. Sam Peraro, representing Samuel Construction, addressed the
Planning Commission providing a brief explanation of his proposed
project. He noted that all conditions as stipulated in the ordinance
were to be complied with. Mr. Peraro acknowledged that in an earlier
discussion with Gary Anderson, Zoning Administrator, he was made aware
of the fact that he would have to increase the number of parking
spaces or apply for a Variance. Peraro indicated that Mr. Anderson
advised him that he would require eight parking spaces instead of
four. Peraro also indicated that immediately prior to this mooting
he had met with Ridgeway and Eidem to discuss the parking problem
and was informed that the project would require 13 spaces rather
than eight parking spaces. Peraro noted that he had ample land to
oupply those parking spaces and that he did not wish a Variance to
havo lesser parking spaces. He agreed to provide a now architectural
rendering of the site showing all 13 spaces. Peraro indicated that
he would have the rendering available to present to Anderson at the
time of filing for the building permit.
There being no additional public comment, Ridgeway closed the public
hearing. A motion was made by Cochran, duly seconded by Schaffer,
and carried unanimouuly to rucummend to the City Council that a
Conditional Use for a self-sorvice car wash and self-service convenience
stair/fuel station be granted.
- 1 -
,,U4.G�- .- - - - by yt, •+/ .F �� .•. %1
tj it /����•• _ 1 ,tl •: to
.ta ..`��:rl- r , .•i `••�,ei•. -^t-"".'+t ", �t%G!1'' -'fy 'd _ _��•••'-.•��'�V.
+ i . ,,• � '"'t'�„�T ��ryy?r. ,a.,lla:,� •r��E, df jj ; ' i:. '�' y' '; �'
;. d • 1.. _ u
'ir. ' '• j: t, arh / �.. t rJ J+f �; . •»
',i , t`r "' -•' _ •l. ;�i, e )Jtt..,,�ttr�• i. f% }.i
,,• 't . j�'j�:�� 9a,,,• i, �> t.,"� ,J r/ r .. .� . "•��ff,J,�,
�••.., tiy7•.'.���j{�t./i •� rd. •' h, ::/;��°� 11ljtb �z. .,(„Lty Rt •t �P iN�t.��e. a._...r,•ti
��T"f::+•`i:• w OJj �t. (1�f� .r 1% FIrt•r yt"'-(:t+d t'J7
xr}'a 7.� c ;.r`� LLL[[[{ (�.N +jj�fr,ti
,M v�_�-'"j) r' •"'�_ �,+,• , f`- :.y, ter. tad �, �+,... •�•(.J' "•'O� J, t1r� t1'•
T � f t .,l. � i jv •� . � '^'> u} �,�• �. �� v, J• "^-:..r af'17`' 1�;;..' „r � aJ• j(�T �^r 4"'"'• f 'L
4p•'_ � •�:rlj•, ��+`at '� .�"`'� r"r:; • L...•. � .' a�;yoq +�' r ) J, �4,� i i
•� � •t t'(�t::'�fi,7.,,�(+ ""•+-K�?.�t''s"� j•� t �"` .•..ti;••�����,'"cg�CJ�'f d) r. t"��'+`,."„ �� ����' v._
r � y
? t • ! '� � •,ate -•• f,� '`�r • j; '(JF�j''���ff,l� '('•.a
H 1 GH WAY = •, "r• p. ••� •,' '"' j Y
94
•� a ym v"peco�
�itinn t ion , �.3 •q;,: - �� +
. e°,
"w,'
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
13. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to Allow Outdoor Sales
Lot and Minor Auto Repair in a B-3 Zone, Applicant - Eugene Kunkel. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission met on this request for a Conditional Use for
used car sales lot and minor repair on April 10, 1984. No one was
present to discuss the application. The Planning Commission reviewed
the site plan and felt that the 18 specific conditions as stipulated
in the Ordinance do, indeed, have to be met for this permit to be
valid. One question that arises from time to time on this particular
site has to do with the requirements for screering. Because the
lot is bordered by a fairly dense tree line, the question has been
asked whether fencing is necessary. There is obviously no question
that screening from the highway is essential for cars that are being
worked on,outside storage, and those sorts of items. The question
of screening on the other sides is what the Council should address.
The Planning Commission's recommendation to approve followed the
explicit letter of the Ordinance. The Council has the latitude to
forgive or abate any specific conditions if you wish.
Mr. Kunkel proposes to build a 24 x 40' permanent structure, re-
surface the entire area, as well as meet all other terns and conditions.
Mr. Kunkel is the owner of Tri Auto Sales in Buffalo.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Grant approval of the Conditional Use - much like the preceding
issue, if all terms and conditions are met including any additional
conditions you wish to stipulate, the Council really must grant
the Permit.
2. Deny the Request - this again must be based on some nonconformanco
with the terms of our Ordinance.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the approval be given with all terms and condrtiona
intact. Because tho woodo aro currently there and act as screening
deeu not mean that they will always be available for effective screening.
It would le much more difficult to cane in and enforce the acrouning
provisiona at a later data. I think it would be beneficial to the
City to require precise caiformancs to Lilo rules in the very beginning.
D. SUPPORTING DATAi
Minutes of Lila Planning Commission. site plans of Lila proposal.
- 12 -
Planning Commission Minutes - 4/10/84
issue and respond to Mr. Hammer and his attorney. Motion was made
by Cochran, duly seconded by Schaffer, and carried unanimously to
continue the public hearing to May 8, 1984, the next regularly
scheduled Planning Commission meeting. The Commission directed
Eidom to try to resolve any misunderstandings and confusion over
�\ the issues prior to that hearing.
j 8.) Public Hearinq - Conditional Use Request to Allow an Outdoor Sales
VLot and a Minor -Auto Repair Business in a B-3 Zone, Applicant -
Eugcno Kunkel.
Ridgeway convened the public hearing. The applicant for tho
Conditional Use was not represented. There being no other members
of the public present to speak to the issue, Ridgeway closed the
hearing. Mr. Cochran, upon noting the location of the proposed
Conditional Use, inquired as to the status of the Conditional Use
Permit that was granted at an earlier meeting to Murfin Landscaping
for the same site. Ridgeway indicated that Murfin Landscaping had
gone out of business, and hence, the Conditional Use was forfeit.
Eidem noted that there had been other Conditional Use Requests for
this site, and a major concern consistently arose over the landscaping
and hard surfacing requirements. Ridgeway noted that there were
18 requirements explicitly stipulated in the ordinance for auto
sales and minor auto repair, and that the applicant had agreed to
abide by all conditions. Motion was made by Cochran; duly seconded
by Schaffer, and carried unanimously to reeommand to the City
Council that a Conditional Use Permit be granted to Eugene Kunkel
to allow an outdoor sales lot and a minor auto repair business in
a B-3 Zone.
9. Eidam requested the Planning Commiesion to address a non-aganda item.
Eidem provided Commission members with copies of a proposed resolution
granting approval to Tax Increment Finance District 14. Ile noted that
the Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority had given their
approval to the Tax Increment Finance Plan on April 4, 1904. Eidam
explained Uiat while Dintrict 04 is a separate legal entity, the
projoot involving IKI is really an extension of Tax Increment Finance
District,411. Ito noted that individual districts were being established
to maximize the capturing of tax increment throughout the phased
construction of IXI's complex. Eidem further advised that the project
proposal was in full compliance with all City planning and coning
regulations. .A motion was made by Schaffer and duly seconded by Cochran
and carried unanimously to adopt the following resolution& Bee
Resolution 1984 6 12.
Motion was made by Cochran, duly seconded by Schaffer, and carried unanimously
for the April 10,, 1984, meeting of the Planning Commission to adjourn.
Thomas A. Eidam
City Administrator
4 9
"Pon ��i t
V, 'to allow outdo6r
7- /4,r-,,&,uto"r',O'pa i-rr, 6us i gcis' in) a. i
Cu9cii-o'Kur�k
Hi
jj(,( i t( Afa1iF_ r
+#i�'1, �;.�': ;�;•;'�:n. 12,1
CMESS P+I Ct 7i t . r r ! / } PERMITMMR
: % I
J:_cAL
CSCRIPTION LOT BLOCK ADDITION
`S0. tT.'OF SITE AREA S0. FT.'OF ARCA OCCUPIED BY OUIIDfNG ,
1NSTRIXTf011S TO APPLICANT
THIS ►ORM NECO NOT OC USCD-WHEN PLOT PLANS DR
AWN TO ]CAC[ AMCARC IILCO NIT" THC PC.IIf APPLICATION.
1.O# N[v at, iLOi NOD. PROYf OC TNC IOLCOvf..6 iNTORMAT 14x1 10CAT ION OT PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ANO CCf DTINO
'I MP.OVCMC NTD♦ DMOY OUiIOIAta Si7C AND SCTOACR 01 MCNSIQNi. 3N CASM["TO. 11x27" CONTOURS 0# 0JAINACC.
'TIROT IL00# CL[YATIOIIS. DTRCCT CLCVATION AND SCYC# CLEVATIO". SNOW LOCATION 01 W.fc SCY[#. OAS.
'AMO [CCCTRiCAL DC#Y ICC tINCS. S"OY LOCATIONS Or 3vRVCV PINS. S►CCI/T THE UDC of CAC",OUiLOINO
'ANO EAC" M.JO11 PORTION TNCRCO►A
,I
INDICAtE NORTH IN CIRCLE EACH GRAPH SQUARE EQUALS 10/-0' 8Y 101.0'
��.- /l fir_ �_ . _... ,y ¢ ,i t CS'. •t•� � Oc .tr , t:
• i 1
�j
Imo t+IviV 1b.1 IM O..;kd4d C6 Nt N ttt*.4IM I0 CD..fik m I. /N..'OM INM•`t s I'd NN`
V dumo /-biw. ,d aIMI 00 Clw4'..N,W
l b. N+YkRww
�w
............... ....................................................A
(/o. aln uu ola��
AtRp APPWVED ET DATE 1
� � r7
C
Council Agenda - 4/23/64
14. Consideration of a Proposal to Allow Dahlqren 6 Associates to be
Enqaqed by Wriqht County State Sank at al. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Dale Lungwitz of Wright County State Bank called me this week to
request permission to use Howard Dahlgren and Associates for the
purpose of designing the single access point along Highway 25.
He indicated that the Monticello Times, Wright County State Bank,
Stokes Marine, and National Bushing would be going together for
access and design purposes. Dale indicated that Howard stated he
would be willing to do the project if and only if he is given
authorization by the City to do the job. Because Howard has been
so involved with the entire discussion of this matter, I think
it would be beneficial that Howard work on behalf of these private
clients. Of course, there is no financial obligation to the City.
I think it would be important that in any motion allowing Dahlgron
to do that there be a clause stipulating that any design must
first and foremost .gddress the beet interests of the City while at
the same time addressing the interests of the private clients. A
simple motion allowing Dahlgron and Aesociatos to be employed by
private concerns is all that is necessary. There are no alternative
actions (except the obvious ones), no staff recommendations, nor
supporting data.
- 13 -
M
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
15. Consideration of a Feasibility Report on Reconstruction of Highway
39/75 and Transmittinq to County Engineer, and Consideration of a
Resolution Ordering Plans and Specifications Contingent on County.
Approval of Feasibility Study. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the January 9 meeting, the City of Monticello authorized OSM
to perform a feasibility study on the upgrading of County Road 75
and 39 through Monticello. The Council limited the amount of City
participation to the four lane portion from Chestnut Street to the
High School, but also included for City participation the paving
of the shoulders on the west end of town from Chestnut Street to
Otter Creek Road.
The Council requested that OSM delay the start of the feasibility
study for County Road 75 whtil such time that we receive official
word from the Wright County Board or Highway Engineer that they have
accepted the City's participation in the project. That letter came
on February 23 and is enclosed for your review. At that time OSM
was authorized to begin the feasibility study.
As part of the feasibility study, the old State records for the
highway were researched. They indicated that the highway was upgraded
in 1960 and that tile project included not only the curb and gutter
at that time but storm sewer and sanitary sewer separation. The
highway portion consisted primarily of 8 inches of gravel with a
1 inch overlay of road mix bituminous material. On top of this
course was placed 3 inches of plant mix bituminous material,
making the total depth approximately 4 inches. This pavement
sufficed until the early 70's. Sometime between 1972 and 1974 the
State of Minnesota placed 3/4 of an inch to 1 inch leveling overlay
in the driving lanes of the four lane portion of highway. This
then made the total thicknens in the main driving lanes 4 inches
of plant mix material with 1 inch of road mix material.
Part of the feasibility study will discuss the existing pavement
slid the gravel aubgrado. Approximately six test pita were dug
to determine ilia condition of those materials. In addition to that
investigation, the City staff performed an inspection of the curbing
along the four lane section and noted deficiencies in the curbing.
Theao will be corrected with the project and will be considered in
the feasibility study. Tho feasibility study is to be completed
late Friday afternoon. It is expected that OSM will distribute those
either late Friday evening or Saturday morning.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
7fiu alternative actions cannot be thoroughly discussed because,
of the Unavailability of the feasibility study at this time. The
- 14 -
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
logical course to follow, however, is to make a decision as to the
type of reconstruction to be used based upon the City Engineer's
recommendations and staff considerations. We would then make a
motion accepting the feasibility study and passing the feasibility
study to the Wright County Board for review and acceptance. It
may be valuable at this time to order the plans and specifications
for the projects contingent upon acceptance of the County Board.
This could conceivably move the project forward anywhere from seven
to ten days. It would not necessitate us coming with such a motion
at the May 14 meeting. The resolution is included for your review,
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
The staff will not make any recommendations at this time due to the
unavailability of the feasibility study.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Letter from Wayne Fingalson dated February 23, 1984; Resolution
for adoption.
- 15 -
RESOLUTION 1984 M
RESOLUTION REILIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT,
TRANSMITTING SAID REPORT TO WRIGHT COUNTY,
AND CALLPJG FOR 791E PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
KH EREAS, pursuant to a motion duly passed by the City Council on January 9,
1984, a feasibility report has been prepared by Orr-Seholen-Mayeron 6
Associates with reference to the improvement of County Highway 75/39 between
OLter Creek load and East County Highway 39 by surface reconstruction,
repair of curb, gutter, and drainage systems, and related repair, and
this report was received by the Council on April 23, 1984, and
WHEREAS, said improvement project is proposed to be a cooperative project
With Wright County, and
h9117RF.AS, Wright County must also give approval to the feasibility report
and the ordering of plans and specifications.
NOW, 791ERIiFORI_ BE IT ICSOLVED BY THE CITY COUJCIL OF MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA:
1. The Council will consider the improvement of such street in accordance
with the report submitted by Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 6 Associates at an
( estimated total cost of the improvement of ,
with the City share of said total cost to be
2. The Public Works Director for the City of Monticello is hereby ordered
to transmit copies of the feasibility report to the appropriate Wright
County officinls for their roviow•
3. Orr-Schu len-Mayo ron J. Associates in hereby designated as the engineer
for this improvement. Upon receipt of written notice that Wright County
has accepted and approved Ute above referenced feasibility report and
has nyroed to the authorization to prepare plans and specifications,
thuy nhaLl prepare said plans and opocifications for thin making of such
i np rove m, s t .
Adol,tud by the Council this 231d day of April, 1984.
A7'n'ST:
C71tomau A. Eidem
City Administrator
Arve A. Grimsmo, Mayor
015-
February 23, 1984'
Mi. John Siinola
Public Works Director
City of Monticello
Route 4, Box 83A
Monticello, Mn 55362
i
WRIGHT'COUNTY
DEPARTMENT.OF HIGHWAYS
1 Wright Counfy Publlc Warks Building
Route No. 1.Box 97.8
1 Buffalo; Minnesota 55313
JCI. T. H. 25 and C. R. 138 WAYNE A rINGMaON, v,
Telephone (612) 682.3900, 'COUNTY HIGHWAY ENCINI
Re: .Proposed Improvement- yPtoject on CSAR 75 in:Nonticello (SAP 86-675-02)
Dear John:
This letter will serve as Wright County -'e formal position regarding the funding scheme'
for the referenced project.-
As
roject.As we discussed previously, John, you have planned to discuss this item With the'Monticello
City Council at their upcoming' meeting on. Monday; Februa'ry.27, 1984. 'I.had hoped to attend
this sleeting, ,however; ',I have' a scheduled County road ievocition hearing that same evening.
(I know you aro familiar, with that kocesel. '-In 'view of this, .I trust this letter will
,ilearly,define the 'Wright County position on thi's matter.
I,certainly agree with many of the reasons which .you stajted,in your January I1, 1984, letter
to'mc,!regarding the Couneil's decision on the funding request. 'In view of this request, we
.haveanalyzed both the extent of proposed construction and the various funding strategies
for difforent project limits, This evaluation, which we just completed, maintains my,
original position that improvements bo made to the "rural" portion of CSAII 75 (those per=
tion's westerly of Otter Creek,Road and easterly. of Cho high school) as part ,of,State Aid'
:Project 86-675-02. The improvements here would includo bituminous overlay,and the 'add itioc
of 6ituminoui shoulders in these 'areas with, exact tormini yet',to be 'determined. ,My funding
.analysis revealed that Wright, County ecann support your, request regarding the extent of City
parta'cipaiion in'thia proposed project. This means that the 'scope of the project -;that the
City shall participate in (per Wright County's Municipal Construction, Funding Policy) shall
be limited to that 'stretch of CSAM 7S, from tho high school on the ,east 'end of town to Otter
Creek "Road near the elementary school on the west end of town.
I apologize for the delay on this formal responrccto.your January request; resulting from
our heavy workload, which I referred to in pievious,correspondence with you: _ I echo your
comments regarding the timing of the feaiibili.ty study, conducted by 'the, City's Consultant
Engineer. It is '•important that this study gets underway soon.
',. If pI` �rl� �-,•� fir. ��
/oh
ola ""a ' !Page 2 ,-L i Februe?y 23,,1984 N.
I I
Pleeee.feel fres- to; contact,me' .regalrding any,+questions ;that ,you or"Anyone has.'regarding�the
>•, r
contents of this'letteir �
We lookrfor4ard to working '!with the Cityof,.Monticeflo on thio proposed, CSAR 75 project.
Sincerely,
-Wayne' A. Fingalson//
Wright County HigAvay Engineer
cc: Basil Schi11evaert,. County Commissioner
_,XA'Eidem, MonEicello'City Administrator
WAF:kmb ..
Dr
I ,
i .r
, I
Pi
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
1G. Consideration of Feasibility Report on the Reconstruction of Hart
Boulevard and Cedar Street and Adoptinq a Resolution Settinq a
Public Hearinq and Ordering the Preparation of Plans and
Specifications. W .S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the April 9 meeting the City Council authorized the preparation
of feasibility studies for Cedar Street and Hart Boulevard. For
Cedar Street the feasibility study was to look into the feasibility
of paving the existing 24 ft. Class V surface and leaving the area
in a rural type setting. The feasibility study was also to address
how this type of construction would fit in with the overall plans
for the area such as the traffic flows and accesses and egresses for
different properties. In addition, the feasibility study was to
look into the possible sanitary sewer services for those properties
adjoining Cedar Street.
For Hart Boulevard the feasibility study was to address the construction
of an urban 33 ft. wide section with curb and gutter from the hospital
area cast to the low point on Hart Boulevard. This would carry the
urban type section past the residential area on Hart Boulevard. From
this point easterly to County Road 75, the feasibility study was to
look into a rural type section with a 2G ft, wide street with ditches
and culverts rather than curb and gutter.
`
The feasibility studies aro expected to be completed late Friday
evening or Monday morning. They will be transmitted to the Council
members as soon as they aro completed. The City staff, not having
been able to review the feasibility studios, is unable to offer
alternatives or recommandations. We would, however, expect that if
the typo of construction for each one of the streets can be agreed
upon that a resolution ordering a public hearing and the preparation
of plans and spec's for the two projects could be adopted. When
the public hearing is hold, we would have the actual plans and
specifications at hand so that Choy could be reviewed with the
adjoining property owners. We would than expect to, at that later
meeting, advertise for bids and act an assessment hearing both on
the aamo data. We would than have tho actual construction costs
rather than estimated costs to present to those individual property
owners. If ouch assessments mot with approval of all, then tho
project would be awarded and completed as designed.
C)
D. SUPPORTING nATA:
Copy of resolution for adoption.
- 16 -
RESOLUTION 1984 R_
RESOLUTION RECEIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT,
CALLING HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT,
AND ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS.
WNEPEAS, pursuant to a motion of the City Council adopted April 9, 1984,
a report has been prepared by Orr-Seholen-ttayeron 6 Associates with
reference to tho improvements of Hart Bnulovard between the west intersection
with Broadway and the east intersection with Broadway and to the improvement
of Cedar Street between the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way and
the north line of Lauring Lane by installing new hard surfacing and curb
and gutter, and this report was received by the City Council on April 23,
1984.
NCW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA,
1. The Council will consider the improvement of such street in accordance
with the report and the assessment of abutting property for all or a
portion of the Cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of
2. A publ c hearing shall be hold on such proposed improvement on the
IyrL day of kU , 1984, in the Council Chambers at the
City Hal at 7:70 P.m ., and the City Administrator shall give mailed
and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by
law.
3. Orr-Schalen-Mayeron 6 Associates is hereby designated as the engineer
for this proposed improvement. They.shall prepare plans and specifications
for the making of such improvement.
Adopted by the City Council thiu 23rd day of April, 1984.
ATTEBTi
Thomas A. bids■
City Administrator
Arve A. Grimsmo, Mayor
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
17. Consideration of a Feasibility Report on Construction of a Portion
of Interceptor Sewer and Adoptinq a Resolution Orderina Plans and
Specifications. (.7.5.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROLIND
In the fall of 1983 during discussions for the reconstruction of
Highway 25, the City Council directed the City Engineer and the
Public Works Director to look into the feasibility of installing
a portion of the interceptor sewer under Highway 25 prior to the
highway upgrading. It was felt that by doing this work prior to
the upgrading that significant cost savings could be realized and
that the distance would be shorter for jacking or boring or that
the City or contractor for the City may be allowed to open cut the
area. When an agreement was reached with RC1/DOT as to the upgrading
of Highway 25, the staff discussed with OSM several important items
of concern with the interceptor sewer. We were given an estimate
of $1,600 for the feasibility study. If the project is performed,
of course, the feasibility study would be part of the normal fee.
The feasibility study is expected to be completed late Friday or
early Monday and will address not only the costs of the proposed
section of the interceptor but also the location for the interceptor.
It is expected Utat the interceptor will be located on or near the
south right-of-way for the Burlington Northern Railroad and that a
portion of it will be constructed east toward Cedar Street as well
as a short stub west of Highway 25. The feasibility study will
address the practicality of extending the interceptor sewer to the
east aide of Cedar Street no that this area will not have to be
disturbed again between Cedar Street and Highway 25.
The timing of the interceptor sower construction, at this time, is
not critical. We placed it on the agenda with the other foasibility
studies so we could have one bonding issue to cover the cost of all
the proposed projects, thereby probably receiving better interest
raLas. At this particular time no portion of the interceptor sewer
could low assessed, as it will not go anywhere, nor will it serve
anyone. The actual time table at which the project should be completed
depends upon Uio recommendations of the City Engineer as to whether
the area in goinq to lwi open cut. or bored.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Alternatives at Utiu titin appear to be only in the Limo table for
construction, in that Lho project may be completed with the Other
projects under a single bonding issue or delayed and put in just prior
to the actual upgrading of Highway 25 noxi spring or summer. The
rationale to delay the project until next year would, in my estimation,
be only a financial consideration in that we would not wish to bond
this year for it. Costs noxL year can only be higher.
17 -
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
Another alternative would be to not install the interceptor sewer
at this time but wait until the rest of the interceptor sewer is
completed. This, however, we feel would result in a higher overall
cost for this section of the interceptor sewer. we would expect
the interceptor sewer to be considered for construction within the
next three to four years.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Upon review of the feasibility study for the interceptor sewer
and acceptance of the study by the City Council, it would be the
staff's recommendation that we authorize preparation of plans
and specifications for that portion of the interceptor sewer for
review at a later meeting.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the Resolution for adoption.
RESOLL.IOt; 1984 4
t
RESOLUTION RECEIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT
AND CALLING FOR PREPARATION OF
PLANS AJO SPECIFICATIONS
wHeREAS, pursuant to a motion passed by the City Council on April 9, 1984,
a report has been prepared by Orr-Sche len -Mayo ron s Associate$ with
reference to the installation of a portion of interceptor sewer line
extending from the west side of Trunk Highway #25 to Cedar Street and
located at or near the south line of the Burlington Northern Railroad
right-of-way, and this report was received by the Council on April 23,
1984.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY 711E CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA
1. The Council will consider the making of such improvement in accordance
with the report submitted at an estimated total Cost of the improvement
of
2. Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 6 h.tsociates is hereby designated as the engineer
for this improvement. They shall prepare plans and specifications
for the making of such improvom�nt.
Adopted by the Council this 23rd day of April, 1984.
ATTEST:
Thomas A. Eidam
City Adminiatrator
Arvo A. Grimsmo, Mayor
(5
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
18. Consideration of Replacing Paint Striper. W .S.3
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The City's current paint striper is a 10• year old high pressure
air EZ -Liner model. The striper is used to paint stripes on
streets and parking lots as well as paint the block type pedestrian
crossings and various curbs and medians. Each year we use approximately
200 or more gallons of traffic paint and 40 to 50 gallons of thinner.
Paint typically costs $6.00 por gallon and thinner $4.30 per gallon
for a total cost of approximately $1,400 per year. This also involves
numerous man hours per summer, some of which are provided by summer
youth.
The City's current striper is becoming outdated for several reasons.
The first is that it does not have an "ASME" safety approved pressure
tank as required by current safety standards, although the tank
does appear heavy.
The second, of course,' is that the unit is wearing out and is becoming
a maintenance headache witli periodic breakdowns resulting in delays
and excessive man hour usage.
A third reason is the design of our old unit itself. Most of the new
high pressure units now use a constant air gun with a pressure solvent
injection system to keep the gun and hones clean. This requires much
less clean up, somewhat leas solvent Use, and greatly reduces the
number of gun plugG. This would add to the productivity greatly.
The staff has looked into the purchase of a new striper and budgeted
for one in previous years. We have in the past, however, decided to
repair rather than replace. The staff now feels Lhat it is Limo to
replace for the reasons previously listed. We have obtained three
quotas for stripurs from Uiroo ucparatc dealers. Each of the three
will perform the work previously discussed and increase productivity
while reducing some material costa and comply with current safety
regulations.
The three quotas aro no follows:
SUPPLIER 7Y Pr MOI11iL PRI Cl? DELIVER
Lu ckor Supply High Redland $2,231 Immediately
Co. Pressure Priamo
Madison, WI Air Modol 160
E.F. Anderson High Nelly-Croswoll $2,365 30 Days
Bloomington, A:I Pressure RD Model C
Air
Midway Ind. "Airless" Dinka Street $2,650 2 Weeks -
Supply Co. Walker 30 Days
St. Paul, MN Modal 98.346
- 19 -
Council Agenda - 4/23/84
There are some differences in the above machines. The major
difference is in the Hinks Unit. This is an airless machine with
no compressor or high pressure paint tank. It works on a simple
hydraulic principal and pulls the paint right out of the 5 gallon
pail it comes in. Clean up is extremely easy and requires much
less thinner and no injection system. The airless unit does not
require the paint to be thinned as is the case at times with the
}sigh pressure units. This is good, as the paint manufacturers
recommend thinning only if it cannot be sprayed as delivered.
The Hinks Unit is supplied with a separate hand gun and 50 feet
of hose that would enable us to paint City buildings and various
outdoor structures. This airless type of spraying is the most
predominant type of building painting today.
The Kelly -Creswell unit is one of the better high pressure units
in that most of the parts are manufactured for the specific task
of striping and not just an assembly of related parts manufactured
by others. It comes with an air type hand gun and 25 feet of hose
for spraying other than striping.
The Rodland-Priamo striper is also a good high pressure air unit
and camas with an optional hand gun (canister typo) assembly and
small spare parts.
We have placed $2,800 in the budget, and I estimate we could sell
our old unit for $250 to $350; so any of the above units are within
range.
B. ALTCRNATIVS ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would bo to continue to use our striper
and not replace it. This would not be practical due to
productivity and safety quootiais previously addressed.
2. The second alternativo would iw to contract out the striping
uorvicos. This the staff foela would not be practical duo to
many areas we paint and strips at off limen.
3. Thin alternativo would be to purchase one of the three listed
utripors and uoll our old one at the price indicated.
C. STAFF RFCOMMMOATION;
It is the Public Works Staff's rocomtmndation that we purchase tho
Hinks Unit (Alternative 03) from Midway Industrial for $2,850. Thin
unit in ompoctod to save in material Wiinner) an well an man hours
and would have many other uses throughout the City.
D. SUPPORTING DATA;
Brochures.
- 20 -
® MIDWAY INDUSTRIAL
(� SUPPLY CO., INC. Bulletin A98.102
Fl �! U19 aro LMU, s
unn
fnj.j.�, IOO�i! ram, ruussau $ssss
lalrr0111 fit?) 710•3000
announcing�s ¢�%��s� --`--- —
The Stree$Walker"
an airless line-striping machine
Proven by Professionals to be the fastesi applicator with the eletlnest edges. The
Street4valker is a high performance, t GPM outfit that can spray aS Slow or as last
as you can walk. Standard outfit will spray 2" to G" sharp edge lines. With Dual
Gun accessory kii, outfit can spray double lines or one 12" tine for crosswalks and
other wide line requirements.
In addition, the StreciWalker is a portable spray outfit when equipped with the
optional Hand Spray Kit. It will serve virtually all of your maintenance painting
needs. The SaeelWalker's quality construction, with all-Binks proven components,
is your assurance of dependable day-in, day-out performance, even on the
toughest jobs. Give the Street Walker a handling test and you'll never be satisfied
with any other striping machine.
"iuti" Model available tot use on glass playing fields.
Streen9alker Model 08746 tdodol 98340 SaeclivOaer will,cialorral Model 19.67 Mand Spray Kd
An Want machine tar lino , s t ' and optional MOMI 13,08 ouat Gun K,'1.
striping streets, parking lots. 'v
recreational areas, and fautity 4
aisles. Whoa lilted .1111 the '•E,Y•
accessory Hand Spray Kits,
tall Siroclwafker becomes a
complele. gb•anywhWo,
general purpose pahvingoutti .; 4 �- •!;
Inr conlraClers and fndu:ltdal
maintenance departments, r�d�,'
Model 00-340 eonsisto ol:
.5 HPEngmn—Clutch
connected to t CPM Alrlens '�i, .y1 Y
Pump, r tl
• Siphon Feed from standard _�• ` v
5 Gnt. Paull Container, t t
• HuOoud lubutar steal
tmnm—to" mutded on „••.�"'
rubber, Uall bcarmg.hucls
1
.ill] easter fit teat.
• U ulturtud AdtuslaWn Cue
13rackui.dh @ni,s 701
Air lw".s Gun. "ta`i r , �� .•r i . r
• Acqustdb11401111Wio11401111WRod
• Spray Tip selection for�, rT
materna bump used anelor
speed of llppllcalion. , t {,p[ 1 d.r,
Complet;sor Not ftorruned
0
Introducing the
"Sharp -Edge"
Line Striper
Model W30 StreelWaarer with epgaul
Model 13.87 Hand Spay Kit.
�-
f t`1r/i„/, y
Optlonel Harts Spray Kit
-�aY r<'-
1 G.P.M. Alrfon
B M.P. Gasoline
y\t�
Lt- Guide
Specifications Optional Equipment
5 Gallon
Contalner
r Wheal
'wlvol Caster
vallabla
r -581n
Engin: S H.R. 4 cyclo, ab cooled, gasoline engine Model 1366 Dual Gun Kit: Fa splaying two stripesincludes gun, tip. packet,
with rewind pug card and 1 gagon gaso9ro tank lot Wit manifold and control
hours. Continuous operon. Model 13.67 Hand Gun Kit: For treadling or maintenance painting Includes Quit.
Point Pump: Gas engine drkon, eladtrk operated 50' H,P. how, whip rota est adjustable spray tip,
clutch, l gallon peretnute. posiWedisplacannenl Model 20.6617 Swivel Cuter: Foressedmobility, 4" diameter wheal with
pump for 2 elrpmg gun operation, pressure adjuelablo swivel lock,
tram 0 to 3000 PS L. adjustable fluid packings est at,
wailed parts, corrosion resistant. PAmt Is fed to pump Model 13-89 Turf Spray Kit: t arae Is -wheats allow smooth, easy movement
through 3/4" siphon hose from 5 gatbn pent COM61nar, on turf or other playing holds Ka aickabe 4 wheafS, mfr axis and hardware
No filling of pump to change paint. for instlttallon,
Filters: Intake, 30 mash Manlold,.012 mesh Medial 13.93 nefleclhe Dead Dispenser Kli: Fur dd,Ixtr�inQ g'abcadauuu
Outlets Four outlets, 1l4" NPS(m) 2 standard, the wel paint, Kut hnr:udr, 3'j 9 ill mpud lank, ad;ustabin bcid mule, air
2 optional compnrw r .vld nnnusaing h.udw ❑p
Spray Gun: Mechanically actuated nouns nlomlzing
Ataures sharp ones without Iia necessity for Spry
shields. Spray ,r un packet U Tufty adluslable, 10 Insure
desired fuK width lines at any position, With the addition
of amt11ar spray gran, twe gnus can ba sN.nyuxd
simultaneously, Iipsare Interchangeable for varying I ,
lam thickness
Gun Control: Cable actuated
Chassis: Welded tubular steel frame with pnh In
eNjustable gni guide and smb chain,
Wheels: From, two IV A 2N" bell bes lnif wheat@ / i t I llllll J ,
rnth &Ad rubber his$. Rau. chat 4^ @talbnery poll l )II*
beating caster wnh sold rubber his.
Weight: 2201s batancw, (0
Olmenalong; Width, 26 inches, Haight 3515 Were. } ;i►' r
Length: 60"
Mndel 98 346 S11" W,ial'1 with optionalIMM. 13 80 lux f GLvay Kra
P"M.d n USA 3 62
einKtS6
Burks Manufacturing Company 1 1 9201 W Belmont Ave , Franklin Park, IL 031 ' Telephone (312) 671 30OU
a )
Model 160 Paint Striper -?2 3
p
Low Cost Striping For:
Parking Lots Stop Bars
Crosswalks Curb Markings
The Redland Prismo Model 160 is a quick -
loading, easy to operate, all-purpose paint
striper for commercial, industrial and
municipal shorlline work.
The even weight distribution and big pneu-
matic tires make the Model 160 easy to
maneuver, even on athletic fields. Less oper-
ator fatigue also means higher production.
The paint gun is strategically mounted so the
front lire protects it from head-on obstacles.
The gun can also be re -positioned in front of
the mount to permit striping right up to the
curb, or adjusted for painting the side or top
of the curb. The vertically -adjustable shroud
on the Nu -Matic spray gun provides sharp,
even lines, from 2" to 6" (5 cm to 15 cm).
The Model too applies all regular traffic
paints, or pie -mix paints with gun modifica-
tions. It is equipped with a solvent cleaning
system for flushing the tip of the continuous
bleeder gun,
Clean up is easy. The tank can be drained
on a flat surface — no need to raise the
machine.
The perfect exterior interior small job paint
striper, the Model 160 has also boon
engineered for easy maintenance and years
of troublo-froo operation.
Accossorfoa of additional coat:
Ll Hand Gun Tako-Off Assembly
O Six Gallon A.S.M.E. Paint Tank with 14"
(36 cm) Opening
C) Una Dolinoator Disco
U Piossuro Solvont,System
p Pmhing Wake
,d Pio,Mix Paint Gun Conversion Kit
I I Spherotiner Glass Dead Dispenser and Hopper
C1 Dcluxo Tool Kit
;4 Spare Pans Kit
U Covnntiner Tarpaulin
U Cany_linor Transport Trailer
Athletic Fields Industrial Plants
Warehouse Aisles Safety Lanes
Eary to manuuvor, low cal slrlpw rawiros mlNmal training,
nalancod da'iftn wish ovortizod whoob rodwas OparalOr lalli)uo,
Inaoxas proftcjion on largo proiocta.
A Oka all valvo permht uw or oplfan:l hand gun for paining
4a3mih, tyndufa and m:my orrwr owo.a WX.rlbno.
SPECIFICATIONS q.
�+j
Dimensions: Length 57' (Ii5 crit)
6x,
31"
%
Heigh 39' (99 cm) v
Weig 240 lbs (109 kg)
Cliassis: rek)iq uwei W0j,.,l itivulal Is.61m, q,
Power:,SA bhp.ai 3600 rpm - au cooled J
Line IN d1h: 7 to 6" , cm to' fr, rni)
Number of Lines: One,
Air Supply: Twin cylinder, piston -typo conipiin.qoi.
IP elm 'Pi0PlabOInCol At 80 psi 'I
Paint Supply: 6 gallon (23 L) lank with 6.1
(15:cm) opcninlj! hinged lid'
Spray Gun'-Rddland Ptisino Nu-lvl.lilicwilh
uniform cross-disinbuiion
Line Dellneat6r: Redland 176sinct Shiowl 1W J111mv Tt PAM Evol
(Patented) .11.43110ce"
Wheols:.Froni - Single .111400:5•pneuniaticlita -,;v j,
ith-,W' ball beatings .,j
.Two eumalic tires
Rear -
wo 46/400t� pni 7"
with ;IV' ball bearings
Controls: Micro -valve
Fitilngs: Standard thread
Regulators: D aptirngm.Iypp
with lock tealuto
Speed: Walking
Pointer: 30" (76 cin) slitting trilcs6opic
Clenneir System: I qunil (0.95 L) cdp,fctly,
gravity flow
Prasruro Gauges: Atomizing, Matiffold 3 Paint
NIL"
tamh n45 r
ham a to, OLI, uxy
W alai Itivii tv,m N tip" Out
Al
First in Transportation Safety.
Redland. Prismo
ficillarld tlhz_`ivo Qw;jato,
X.) Um�'. ria:a jlorrvplwJ Nd OICIM w � A
plTn') j;'j, I N4,I)PO Toe. 11311-301
Orl-mD Unweirril I avviru
Rswlat,4; CrL!..,,v IT'" I@ 414F U
I'l,c"O Crta"m 034AI "14"I'i9 Tow, Ir'I'm
n
...,.. _,..r. ." ....�„�„(";,^rw..,.. 4I, k'� i+1'�,Ter.�u'M:,,-,'!�'tirc'•i t'ar'a:y1+w�•+:�51_
�1 1k
,'is ''• .
►. 1:1' n Q � ..
. {. '/�`t�f.;:. 23 5, ;hal
The Meavy Duty Model C is excellent for application of parking lane., large parking areas, meter limit, ani ,.a".ct_
calk lion.Farinstduri.l concerns and email municip.liti_
It is sturdily built and correctly engineered. PERFECTLY
BALANCED FOR EASY MANEUVERING IN CLOSE
PLACES end equipped with pneumatic tired wheels for Per. .tion over rough ..daces. it is ..come for .tracing of bon
with spray anembly in direct line of operator's vision. Spring
loaded rear sale with bearing, in frame stabilises the machin.
eliminates wobbling and makes possible the application of
STRAIGHT lion and graceful sweeping curves.
SPECIFICATIONS
DIMENSIONS—Length 37'/.', width 37', height over dl
FRAME—Channel and 1.1/16. OD tubule, steel con.tauefon,
The motor and compressor are mounted crossways on an especially
designed bur,
WHEM S—Rau, s.00. a pneumatic tiro,'. roll,. beanngr in
frame; trans, 3.00. y pneumatie tire, ta' hall 11—o-ig. Spring
loaded tee, role, adjustable tension,
MATFFIIAI. CONTAINER--Mee,ftleolly welded, 1" Ms.
meter, 1.1brlurven prods. tested to 130 Iba- seven gallon ra.
partly, ,tamped -on Ili, Hnth the Plango and yoke are forging,.
miller enparlllea with 10' lid naartnbllea and paddle tyl.-
aRitntor. ovallable, A Y TYPE STRAINF:H IN FLUID LINT
MINATF_4 GUN STOPPAGES.
POWER 6 1 P. air conled Engine.
Cc I11H SS011 ,Twin cyhnde,ample air supply. 10 GC P,M,
SPRAY GUN-Kelly•C,w,ll hl APR 11 AGM UPFai A'II•:U
too,"vo.., .1 Mei. O.ry ii,
MODtt C, No;. In.l h.M
. •11..1 1.. k.l.. '
Reny Deco MODit C
STRIPING GUN. Adjustable volume, SQuare beginning, and
endings. Uniform application andperfeross
ct cd4l6bution so.
urrd. Width of line is variable between 3' and 6'.
GUIDE PLATES—Kelly.Cresseeli Air.Custaina use .h.u.1 gu
for pressure. Air -Curtain and Spray Gun Assembly it located
..aide the line of the wheels an that linea may be applied within
n inch or as of wall. and post..
REGULATORS AND CONTROL—Srp.,ste regulators msinlajn
desired material container pressure and desired atomising pressure.
fnttant and positive control of the spiny Nn is provided by a
Qui.k•as.Wmk control valve on the right handle bar.
GUIDE—An adjustable and r, --able guide is provided for
accurate application of tier lines at the settacing M old line,,
CLEANER—Kelly-Creswell Pressure Cleaner. One Quart Co.
Iwuty. (See 1:.dusive Features.)
Mary Dory 1110Dlt C. .IH Ra,.O.aha gsog Dla/aaur
There's o complete line of Kelly -Creswell Striping Equipment
All
rel ,
.. _ • . -^ �4• - frock —.led pvlia—M
age,
9-3 lot carearkipol opp0nlle. Yad,W.►
l
I, IIP' W ,.•
.Il.prspell.dp,ll./ ..ably, 1•Il.arepDd,
KELLY-CRESWELL
CURTAIiVS
Keen cut, straight -edged liner are op-
pGed to any type of surface, smooth
or rough, at;sny speed. by directing
compmued • r or -h...1 Co. sgsims
the edges of the spray pattern, through
s;reelslly designed millings in Kelly.
Creswell Air -Curtains,
Exclusive Features -,J
KELLY-CRESWELL DIAPIIRAGM OPERATED GUNS.
An automatic diaphragm operated internal mix spray gun, es-
pecially designed to Intel the rigorous rNulrements of highway.
municipal and industrial striping, it produces o romplrtrly
atomized, fon-shoped,pattern with uniform cross distribution.
An especially designed adjustable needle vnlve oc"rntrly and
positively controls the film thickness and produces squnre cut
beginnings and endings. The diophrogm mechanism provides
for Instantaneous operation without AIR LOSS because it
operates without the upper packing gland and nir cylinder
ordinarily used on automatic guar, It Is at least 25% mn--
conservative in Its air requirements, The gun In available in
three sizes depending upon the speed of applirotion required
and the viscosity of the sons -narking material. This striping
gun is not an adoption of production spray equipment; This
gun is designed solely to meet the requirements of highwny,
municipal and industrial striping, All working pmts are en.
closed. 'rhe two larger sins are opreinlly drsignrd for op•
plication of premix type, reflectorised rone-marking moteriaL
KFLLY•CRESWELL AIR CURTAINS. llrcouse the .Air-
Cuttuins do NOT tome in contact with the surface, cdrnnsrut,
attractive and uniform lines can be applied to any type of
surface, smooth or tough. at any speed, Up to 2",% of the
tonr•merking material can be conserved through the elimi.
nation of the heavy edges built up by mdinmy type of, sliding
of disc guide plates, No wear or breakage berouse they are
named one and one half inches above the surface, Instantly
adjusteblr. No necessity for complicated seroper merho nitro,
No unsightly guide -marks at the end of the line,
"KELLY-CRESWELL PRESSURE CLEANER NIECIIAN,
IBM. An especially designed pressure rtennrr mrchonism
which forces ATOMIZED elrarwr fluid not only through the
otomiAng line, but also through the fluid line of the spray
gun, thoroughlycicaning it internally. It is no'langer necessary
to disosscmble the spray gun to clean it. An entirely meehan-
1cnl ond_pnmrmille operation, it is available for use DURING
Tl Ili DAY by mnnipulnting two valvcs,'It is standard equip-
mcni an ALL MOVELS.
IMPROVED KF,LLV.CNF.SWELL TRACTION—Ribbrd
strive .If, on the drive shnfL which h actuated by compressed
air, provide constant traction and oesuro uniform film thick.
nrss, A xcmitive governor on the engine maintains constant
eptrd up bill and down. Wtibbling h eliminated, A wider range
of unction sperd 1/ provided. It Is taffy to apply, a straight
line with Kelly -Creswell Stripess because the rear wheels are
imh,r,l trrrthrr in lmrlion.
NOTFi Lon rmrrry IN, richt to alta cfvrlfltnllnnn without
nNtro on Impmvemenu fire developed. A full llnn of OoVllblan
hand-cptay rqulpnrrn6 attachable to nny of ,oar mooch for
painting guard rails, brldgts, garngn, ctc, na w0 as a
Gnnpltb� INVEVrORY OF nEPI.AVFMF.Nr PARTS Is
mnlnlninud at all timers, Pnrllltirs fnr cnrapIdn RE110Nph
'I`IONINU AND 0VF.It11A111. aro also nenllnhIP A aide do.
Ilcrry attvhment for the appllenlinn of airport numerals Is
oVaptnllle, IANYrOI'FHAT0R wiu. 1NorANTLY RECOC-
NWR THE VAI.PF OF TIIR.gn FRATURMU
FOR THE APPLICATION OF REFLECTIVE ZONE.
MARKINO h1ATFRIALS—Kelly-Creswell does, not mom
facture head dispensing equipment, but several maker a.,_%
evndnble for purchase which are especially designed to attach
tri our portable modrh, as well as our truck mounted c:lAp.
merit Ile sure to specify the width of the dine to be applied.
Further drtsils ranterning reflective material, and their op.
1,14 anon can be Irmur ed from Kelly -Cres -01 Compnny,
GENERAL FUND -- APRIL
AMOUNT
CHECK N,
Rick Wolfsteller - Mileage for March
61.50
18GGO
Gwen Bateman - Animal control
100.00
18661
Double "D" Electric - Install welder and grinder at Mtce. Bldg.
268.98
18662
Govt. Training Center - Reg. fee for T. Eiden - seminar
110.00
18663
Cragun's Conference Center - Dep. for Conf. for T. Eidem
50.00
18664
Equitable Life Assurance - Ins. for Hanson s Theisen (Reimb.)
40.00
18665
Comfort Craft Co. - Service on humidifiers - City Hall
155.95
18666
M11. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees
29.00
18667
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees
8.00
18668
Water Products Co. - Valves and meters
534.18
18669
Snap Training - Manuals for Fire Dept.
24.65
18670
Dr. Clarence McCarty - Refund of conditional use permit app.
75.00
18671
Corrow Sanitation - Contract payment
4,515.00
18672
Wright County Auditor - Delinquent taxes 6 penalties on Dev. Pro.
2,686.84
18673
Campbell Abstract Co. - Searches for Lots 1 6 5, Blk. 65, Lower
33.50
18674
Gwen Bateman - Animal control
565.00
18675
Jerry Hermes - Janitorial at Library
137.50
18676
State Capitol Credit Union - W/H
125.04
18677
Robert 6 Marietta Saxon - Purchase of dwelling
59,500.00
18678
State Treasurer - Social Security taxes
2,419.44
18679
State Treasurer - PERA W/H
1,530.58
18680
Wright County State Bank - FWT
4,127.20
18681
Commissioner of Revenue - State W/H
2,602.00
18682
State Treasurer - Building Inspector - surcharge fee - March
669.22
18683
James Preusse - Cleaning city hall
275.00
18684
YMCA of Mpla. - Monthly contract payment
312.50
18685
Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary
175.00
18686
Dan Blonigen - Council salary
125.00
18687
Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary
125.00
18688
Ken Maus - Council salary
125.00
18689
Jack Maxwell - Council salary
125.00
18690
Wright County State Bank - C. D. purchase
70,000.00
18691
Wright County State Bank - Investments
34,674.05
16692
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Reg. fees
72.00
18G93
MN. Stats Treasurer - Dep• Reg. fees
35.00
18694
Potty Cash - Reim. potty cash fund
38.20
18695
Cash - C.O.D. package from Eastwood for J. Simola
49.65
18696
MN. State Treasurer - Dep. Rag. fees
97.00
18697
MN. State Treasurer - Opp. Rag. fees
4.00
18698
Thomas Eidem - Car allowance
300.00
18699
Jerry Hermes - Janitnrial services
137.50
18700
t;tate Capitnl Credit Union - Payroll W/11
125.04
18701
Northern States Power - Electricity
8,614.94
18702
North Central Public Service - Gas
3,008.65
18703
State Treasurer - Social Security payment
2,353.44
18704
MN. State Treasurer - PERA W/H
1,484.82
18705
Leef Brothers - Uniform rental
221.65
18706
West publishing Co. - MN. Sessions Laws '84
65.00
18707
Motorola, Inc. - Charger for Walkle-Talkie - J. Simola
406.00
18708
Monti Truck Repair■ - Road grader repair
1,226.28
18709
Gary Anderson - Civil Defense conference expense - Tenn.
733.52
18710
Electronic Center - Supplies for WWTP
189.50
18711
Mid Central Fire, Inc. - Fire hose and nozzle
060.00
18712
Olson Electric - Misc. supplies
56.91
18713
National Chessearch - Mata -lox and scoot - R. Mack
280.95
18714
W. P. Johnson - WWTP supplies
164.27
10715
Maintenance Engineering - Traffic lights
45.71
16716
GENERAL FUND
MOUNT
Cleveland Cotton Products - Towels for Mtce. Bldg.
137.38
Maus Tire Service - Dolly rental
5.00
3 M Co. - Repair copy machine at Mtec. Bldg.
112.20
Little Mountain Flowers - Misc. expense
10.60
Central Eyewear - Glasses for Roger Mack 6 Keith Trippe
56.00
Allen Pelvit - Mileage
72.52
Monticello Fire Dept. - Salary thru 4/15/84
273.00
Bowman Sheet Metal - Library maintenance
219.00
Tom Eidem - Travel expense
45.52
Tom Hammer - Refund on conditional use application
75.00
Earl F. Andersen - Paint, batteries, flag with staff
1,056.05
Lindberg Decorating - Paint
14.58
Foster Franzen Agency - HRA Ins. - Prof. Liab.
113.30
Mobil Oil Corp. - Gas and oil - Fire, Street and Water Depts.
166.06
Banker's Life - Group Ins.
3,887.78
Butterworth Legal Publishers - Sub. - Public Sector Labor Law
55.00
Purolator Courier Corp. - Postage on letter to Norway
33.75
MN. Assoc. of Civil Def. Directors - Directory
3.00
Coast to Coast - Misc. - Ladder for library - 54.99
129.18
Waterous Co. - Fire Dept. supplies
15.89
Goodin Co. - WWTP supplies
124.27
Seelye Plastics - Pipe WWTP
57.80
2ep Mfg. Co. - 6 brusher, handles, 7,ep 0 san, Zep-ezo- WWTP
409.07
Northwestern Bell - Fire phone
38.97
Snap on Toole - 3 hammers, socket set, bit set, flare tool, exp.
226.07
SMA Construction - blueprints
33.00
L. N. Sickels - 2 tar squeegees
33.90
Coalition of Outstate Cities - Membership due■
25.00
Suburban Gas - Can
98.84
Our Own Hardware - Supplies for all Depts.
377.30
0. K. tfardwara - Filters, pipe, belt
82.07
Monticello Office Products - Misc. office supplies
228.56
A T 6 T information System■ - Fire phone charges
3.40
Great River Regional Library - Telephone service at Library
109.14
Phillips petro. - Gas WWTP 6 Water Dept.
56.78
Snyder Drug - Pilm and developing for signs - Planning 6 Zoning
97.15
State Treasurer - Surplus Property Fund - Desks, cab.-City Hall
100.80
Voss Electric - Lite bulbs
10.72
Vance's Service Center - Fire Dept. gas
19.01
Wright County Auditor - Computer run - 84 tax book
15.35
Wright County Sheriff Dept. - Contract for March
9,494.38
Wright County Journal Press - Sub.
10.00
Wright County Highway Dept. - 500 lbs. Karite
65.00
Dick's "66" Service - Gas filters - WWTP
5.90
Independent Lumber Co. - Material for dog pound and city hall
515.94
National Bushing Co. - Pump, helmet, filtar a.cleaner, etc.
234.39
Al 6 Julie Nelson - Sub.
11.70
J M Oil Co. - Gas and nozzle
1,686.10
rlicker's T V - Repair microphone
19.71
read Rite Control■ - Potable sample
7.50
Crane Company - 40 PVC head and manual - lA b - WWTP
473.59
Marco Business Products - Difference on paljer
2.00
Den Franklin Store - Mist. and film
13.10
American Linen Supply - Toilet tissue for Parks
35.35
Davis tle�tronic Service - Daticrle■ for Fire Dept.
51.50
)toward Uahlgren Assoc. - Consulting fees - March
3.052.51
Gould Aron. - Oil change - Walt's van
22.50
Earl's Welding - Sanding disc
39.98
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
CHECK NC
Cummins Diesel Sales - Gaskets
6.97
18775
Central McGowan, Inc. - Acetylene
13.27
18776
Local 149 - Union dues
114.00
18777
First Bank Minneapolis - Public fund charge
4.00
18778
National Life Insurance - Ins. premium - T. Eidem
100.00
18779
League of MN. Cities - 2 binders
9.00
1 18780
MN. State Documents Canter - MN.,guidebook to St. Agency Serv.
10.95
18781
Maus Foods - Coffee, filters, rani -flush, paper cups, dog food,
210.76
18782
toilet tissue -- $9.01 for library -- balance
on all depts.
Monticello Times - Publishing and Sub.
402.04
18783
Monticello Printing - Sewer and water record cards
19.15
18784
Thomas Nelson Co. - MN. State Atlas
27.50
18785
Cash - C.O.D. package postage from Eastwood Co. for J. Simola
29.95
18786
Tools
Rick Holfnteller - Mileage
26.00
18787
Payroll for March 25,565.93
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS FOR APRIL $257,784.04
LIQUOR FUND
LIQUOR DISBURSEMERrS FOR APRIL - 1984
AMOUNT
CHECK
NO.
Eagle Flinn Co. - Liquor quor
334.42
11155
Ed Phillips & Sons - Liquor
4,100.20
1115G
Griggs, Cooper & Co. - Liquor
2,502.69
11157
State Capitol Credit Union - W/H
20.00
11158
State Treasurer - FICA - Social Security taxes
272.94
11159
State Treasurer - PERA
189.26
11160
Wright County State Bank - FWT taxes
424.40
11161
Commissioner of Revenue - SWT taxes
261.00
11162
Twin City Wino - Liquor
1,284.44
11163
Arnold's Custom Cabinets - 12' countertop at Liquor Store
210.00
11164
State Capitol Credit Union - W/H
20.00
11165
Northern States Power - Electricity - March
446.07
11166
North Central Public Service - Gas
280.82
11167
Eagle Wine Co. - Liquor
204.53
11168
Griggs, Cooper & Co. - Liquor
2,439.05
11169
Twin City Wine - Liquor
682.91
11170
State Treasurer - Social Security taxes
298.72
11171
MN. State Treasurer - PERA W/H
196.51
11172
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone
42.59
11173
Viking Coca Cola - Mise. mdse.
521.80
11174
Banker's Life Ins. - Group Ins.
361.26
11175
Grosslein Boverago - Beer
6,604.42
11176
Monticello Office Products - Office supplies
26.97
IL177
Maus Foods - Kleenex, coffee, filters, comet, handl wipes
34.53
11178
Yonak Sanitation - Garbage service
82.50
11179
Seven -Up Bottling Co. - Misc. mdse.
511.25
11180
Dahlheimer Dist. Co. - Beer
11,513.16
11181
Dick Beverage Co. - Beer
1,625.05
11182
Thorpe Dist. Co. - Beer
2,891.55
11183
Day Dist. Co. - Beer
776.54
11184
Monticello Times - Financial statement pub. expense
56.31
11185
Schabel Beverage Co. - Beer
1.606.25
11186
Lelfert Trucking - Freight
263.02
11187
Old Dutch Foods - Misc. mdse.
144.48
11188
Jude Candy & Tobacco - Misc. mdes.
301.21
11189
Payroll for March
3,581.19
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS FOR APRIL
$45,312.04
INDIVIDUAL PERMIT ACTIVITY REPORT
MONTH OF March , 1984
PERMIT
NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
Pc)
NAME/LOCATION
VALUATION
(PERMIT
SURCHARGEFFFfPLUMBING
SURCHARGE
64-583
Attached Garage
RGI
Iarry Rohnert/345 Prairie Road
$ 6,000.00
$ 56.50
$ 3.00
$
$
84-587
Duplex
D
Hal Wehman/513h 6 5175 Lauring Lane
80,600.00
374.80
40.30
28.00
.50 i
84-569
C-rcial warohouse/Petah
Building
I C
John Plaisted/1219 Highway 25 South
30,000.00
193.00
15.00
23.00
.50
84-589
Basement Remodel
PD
James 6 Robin Cellette/143 Hedman Ln.
2,200.00
33.70
1.10
64-590
Single Family Dwelling
SP
Ultra Hems, Inc./920 Meador Oak Dr.
49,800.00
282.10
24.90
24.00
.50 '
84-591
Single Family Dwelling
SP
Ultra Homes, Inc./925 Meadow Oak Dr.
40,700.00
241.15
20.35 i
24.00
.50
Detached Garage
RG
Wayne Otten/1010 Golf Course Road
I
8,600.00
72.10
I
4.30 I
I
IB4-593
84-594
Single Family House
SP;
Ultra Howes, Inc./940 Meadow Oak Dr.
48,500.00
276.20
24.20
23.00
.50
TOTALS
$266,400.00
I $1,529.55
$133.15 i
$122.00
$2.50
PIA, CHEMNG
1
i
i
84 -SSB
Co.-..,..rcial Warehouse/Retaill
I
�
Building
'C
John Plaisted/1219 Highway 25 South
125.45
TOTAL
$ 12$.45
E
1
I
TOTAL REVENUE I
$ 1,912.65
i
TOTALS 13 1,777.00 135.65 1266.400.P1 _ 32 19
CITY OF M).+TTICELLO
Monthly Building Department Report
of March 1984
PERMITS and USESMonth
Last 'This 'Same Month -Last Year -This
Year
PERMITS ISa"IIFD Month February Month March Last Year To Date
To Date
RESIDENTIAL
Number
4
7
3 5
13
Valuation $
882,900.00 $
236,400.00 $
185,312.00 $ 190,368.00
$ 1,123,500.09
Fees
4,120.41
1,336.55
846.21 905.61
5,508.46
Surcharges
441.40
118.15
92.30 94.80
551.65
ODM MERCIAL
Number
6
1
5 B
9
Valuation
180,200.00
30,000.00
156,925.00 501,150.00
261,700.00 j
Fees
1,152.65
318.45
780.58 2,368.06
1,955.55 I
Surcharges
90.10
15.00
78.35 250.45
130.85
INUJSTR:IAL
Number
Valuation
Fees
Surcharges
PLUMBING
Number
4
5
1 5
10 f
CFees
242.00
122.00
65.00 191.00
380.00
Surcharges
2.00
2.50
.50 2.50
5.00
)TKERS
Number
1 1
Valuation
4,420.00 4,420.00
Fees
80.00 80.00
Surcharges
TOTAL NO. F RMIITS
14
13
10 19
32
TOTAL VALUATION 5 1,063,100.00 5
266,400.00 5
346,657.00 $ 695,938.00
5 1.385,200.00
TOTAL FEES
5,515.06
1,777.00
1,771.79 3,544.67
7,844.01
TOTAL SURCHARGES
533.50
135.65
251.15 347.75
687.50
CURRENT MONTH
pppq
_
i Number
to Date
PERMIT NATURE
Number
PERMIT 2M=r.;, Valuation _ This year Last Yearl
Single Family
3 $
799.45 $
69.45 $ 139,000.00 5
2
• Duplcx
1
374.80
40.30 80,600.00 1
1
M11ti-family
1
0
Commercial
1
318.45
15.00 30,000.00 3
2
Industrial
0
1
Res. Garages
2
128.60
7.30 14,600.00 2
1
II
ligns
0
1
Public Buildings
0
0
ALTERATION OR REPAIR
Dwellings
1
33.70
1.10 2,200.00 4
1
Commcrct Dl
6
5
Industrial
0
0
PLUHDIING
All typos
15
122.00
2.50 10
5
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Sviuning POuls
0
0
Decka
0
0
TENPORAPY PERMIT
0
0
DEMOLITION
0
0
TOTALS 13 1,777.00 135.65 1266.400.P1 _ 32 19