City Council Agenda Packet 10-28-1985A
AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, October 28, 1985 - 7:30 P.M.
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held October 15, 1985.
3. Citizens Comments/Petitions/Requests.
Public Hearings
4. Public Hearing on a Proposal for a Tax Increment Finance
Plan - Project, Raindanco Partnership.
Old Business
5. Consideration of a Resolution Ordering the Preparation
of Plans and Specifications for the Improvement of West
County Road 39.
6. Consideration of Establishing a Scheduie/Deadline for
the Completion of Plans and Specifications and the Ordering
of the Improvement of the Sever Interceptor Line.
7. Consideration of Entering an Agreement with Monticello
Township Calling for the Continued Payment of Funds from
the City to the Township.
Nov Business
S. Consideration of Authorizing the Preparation of a Request
for Proposals (RFP) for the Purpose of Soliciting Proposals
from Private Entorprizo to Operate and Maintain the Monticello
Wastewater Treatment Facility.
9. Quarterly Department Hoed Reports.
a. Low Enforcement
b. Fire Department
c. Senior Citizens
d. Zoning, Building, Assessing
a. Economic Development
-. Public Works
g. Finance and Administration
10. Payment of Bills.
11. Adjourn.
? MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, October 15, 1985 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Mayor Arve Griesmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair,
Jack Maxwell and Dan Blonigen.
Members Absent None.
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen, and
unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting held September 23, 1985.
3. Citizen's Comments/Petitions/Complaints.
Mr. Ken Larson appeared before the Council to request
that the Council hear his request for a conditional use
permit to allow for a two-family dwelling expansion to
his home at the corner of Washington and 4th Street.
Mr. Larson noted that the Planning Commisaion, at their
previous meeting, tabled action on his request due to
Insufficient information regarding parking requiremente.
it was recommendad by the City Administrator that since
theta was some opposition to the conditional use request
at the Planning Commission level, and because the item
was tabled by the Planning Commission, it was recommended
that the item be hoard again by the Planning Commission
at their next regular meeting before the Council considers
this item. As a result, motion was made by Bill. Fair,
ssecondad by Fran Fair, unanimously carried to d host the
applicant to return to the Planning Commiaaion first for
their comments before Council consideration.
Mr. Kurt Corrow of Corrow Sanitation, appeared before
the Council to provide information substantiating their
Increase that was granted in May of 1985 to offact the
landfill taxes that was required starting in May. At
the time the increase was granted, the Council requested
that in six months Corrow Sanitation provide sufficient
records that would indicate the additional amount granted
was justified. The Council directed Mr. Corrow to provide
the information to tha Public works Director or City Administrator
and that it was not nocaaaary for the Council to discuss
this itom at the Council meeting at this time.
Council Minutes - 10/15/85
4. Public Hearing - 1986 Budget and Revenue Sharing and Consideration
of Adopting 1986 Annual Budget and Setting the Tax Levy.
As required by law, the City Council held a public hearing
on the 1986 annual budget and on the proposed Revenue
Sharing uses as part of the budget. No comments were
heard from the public regarding the budget except that
joint Fire Department Representative Paul Kline requested
that the Council consider increasing the training allowance
for the Fire Department from the proposed 51,800.00 to
approximately $2,700.00 to allow for additional men to
attend the recommended training sessions each year. Mr.
Kline noted that at least nine men should go to training
sessions each year and the average cost has been close
to $300.00 per man. Council members noted that the City
has never denied a Fire Department member from attending
a training session and felt the budget could remain as
is and actual expenditures will be again reviewed next
year. Mr ° Kline also requested that the Fire Department's
hourly wages be raised from the present $7.00 per hour
for the first hour and $5.00 thereafter, to 510.00 per
hour for the first hour and $7.00 thereafter ab the department
has not had a raise in 6 years. Mayor Grimsmo noted that
the Fire Department is supposed to be a volunteer organization
in that the department should not expect to receive raises
equivalent to what full time employees receive and felt
the City compensation is comparable to other communities.
Mr. Klico also noted that the Fire Department would like
to raise its retirement benefits from $500.00 par year
of service to S700.00 per year of service, which would
require approximately a $138.00 levy by the City to fund
their liability. The City Administrator noted that a
Fire Department can raise its own retirement benefits
provided they have a 108 surplus which, at the present
rate of income should occur in the next few years.
The proposed budget as presented would require a tax levy
to be certified for collection in 1986 of $1,577,250.00.
Motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Dan Blenigon,
unanimously carried to adopt resolution setting the tax
levy at $1,577,250.00. (Sao Resolution 1985 #18)
5. Public Hearing - A Proposal to Issue Revenue Bonds - Raindanco
Partnership and Consideration of a Resolution Granting
Preliminary Approval for the Issuance of Industrial Revenue
Bonds for a Commercial Devolopment Project for Raindanco
Partnership.
In August, the City Council gave approval to Raindanco
Partnership to apply to the State of Mlnn000ta for authority
to issue Industrial Revenue Bonds in the amount of S1,500,000.00
for the purpose of building a 33,000 aquars foot commercial
facility aituatod on Block 15 adjacent to the railroad
tracks and Hwy. 25.
-2-
Council Minutes - 10/15/85
The State of Minnesota granted the allocation and the
Partnership was now requesting preliminary approval of
the issuance of the Bonds.
Incorporated with the overall project in a proposed Tax
Increment District which will allow for the Monticello
RRA to acquire the parcels currently owned by Wilbur Eck
and the parcels owned by the City and sell them to Raindance
Partnership at a reduced rate to allow the development
to occur. As part of tho Tax Increment proposal, the
City would construct an extension of 6th Street from Hwy.
25 to Cedar Street and the post of the improvement being
paid for by the taxes generated from the new building
under the Tax Increment Plan.
Hearing no public comments regarding the project, motion
was made by Maxwell, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously
carried to adopt a resolution granting preliminary approval
to the project in authorizing preparation of necessary
documents for the issuance of the Bonds. (Sea Rosolution 1985
6. Public Hearing - Consideration of Adopting A:scoaeent
Roll for Delinquent Sewer and Water Bills.
Minnesota Statutes allow cities to certify as spacial
assessments all delinquent sower and water bills past
due. A list of 12 individual accounts delinquent more
�- than 60 days was presented to the Council for certification.
Hearing -no comments from the public, motion was made by
Fran Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried
to adopt a resolution establishing the assessment roll
for certification to the County Auditor for collection
with 1986 taxes. (Soo Resolution 1985 016)
8. Consideration of a Resolution Setting a Public Hearing
Concerning Tax Increment District and Tax Increment Finance
Plan - Raindanco Partnership.
On October 10, the Monticello HRA approved a Tax Increment
Finance Plan for the Raindanco Partnership proposal to
build a 33,000 square foot retail complex on Block 15.
The Plan calls for the 0410 of 5350,000.00 in Tax Increment
General Obligation Bonds that will be used by the HRA
to acquire the property and make improvements to 6th Street
as part of the project. The Finance Plan projects that
annual Tax Increments of approximately $41,000.00 shall
be collected from the project over 18 years to retire
the 5350,000.00 bond i00uo with no tax levy required from
the general public.
-3-
Council Minutes - 10/15/85
-4-
A motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and
unanimously carried to adopt a resolution setting a public
hearing at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, October 28, for the purpose
of receiving public input regarding the proposed Tax Increment
Plan and District q6. (See Resolution 1985 #19)
10. Consideration of Change Order Al - Fire Hall Construction
Project.
The Fire Hall Bulding Committee recently learned that
a slightly higher efficiency gas furnace was available
for the Fire Hall construction project that would cost
an additional $122.00 for the two furnaces.
A motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair,
and unanimously carried to approve Change Order #1 on the
Fire Hall construction project with Fullerton Lumber Company
for an additional $122.00 for the two higher efficiency
Lennox gas furnaces.
11. Consideration of Making Final Payment on Public Improvement
Projects 84-1, 84-2, 84-3 and 85-1.
The above projects have been recently completed and recommended
for final payment by the City Engineer and City Public
Works Director. Projects 84-1, 84-2 and 84-3 consisted
of County Road 75 improvement, Cedar Street improvement
and Hart Boulevard improvements, with a final construction
cost of $587,896.67. The final payment duo is $110,882.00
to Buffalo Bituminous.
The 85-1 project consisted of interceptor sower work
by LaTour Construction which has a balance duo of $2,500.00.
A motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Maxwell,
and unanimously carried to approve the final payment
in the amount of $110,882.00 to Buffalo Bituminous for
Projects 84-1, 84-2 and 84-3 and to also approve final
payment in the amount of $2,500.00 to LaTour Construction
as final payment on 85-1 interceptor sewer project.
12. Considertion of Entering a Losse with Northern States
Power Company for the Development of Softball Fields.
Previously, Northern States Power Company has agreed
to loans lands lying wast of the training cantor on West
River Street to the City for the now softball field development
complex that is being partially constructed with a State
Grant. In order to submit the final grant application
to the State, the City must enter into the lease agreement
to demonstrate that the property in under the control
of the City of Monticello.
-4-
Council Minutes - 10/15/85
During the pact number of yearn, a portion of the interceptor
Dower line has boon constructed from the wastowater Treatment
Plant to Washington Street and also a aogment was installed
under Hwy. 25 during the summer of 1985. Recently, the
Public works Department performed a small mount of flow
tenting on the Dewar lino near West Bridge Park and dotormined
that the capacity of the lino in reaching near maximum
flow at certain times necessitating the construction
of the interceptor cower in the noar future. It han
been roughly estimated that the interceptor cower construction
from Hwy. 25 to Washington Street and from Hwy. 25 weatorly
to Linn Stroot would coat in the neighborhood of $600,000.00
and could eliminate approximately 301 of the flow now
going down River Stroot through the lift stations. It
was estimated that tho entire interceptor cower project
from Washington Street westerly to Elm Street would coot
approximately S1,000,000.00.
The Public Worka Director racommondod that tho Council
consider building approximately 708 of the interceptor
Dower lino from Linn Street to Washington street to alleviate
part of the problem of near capacity flowage on the Bridge
Park lift stations. The City Council diccusnod whether
doing the ontiro project in one year would raoult in
a batter price for the City rather than doing the project
in two or three phasoo and it wan Duggoated that possibly
plane and o pecificationc regarding the interceptor cower
.5_
A motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Maxwell,
1�
and unanimously carried to authorize the execution of
the lease agreement with Northern States Power for the
property to be used as the City -s Softball Field Complex.
13. Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing Submittal of
a Final Grant Application for Legislative Commission
on Minnesota Resources Grant Funds.
Recently the City of Monticello has been approved for
funding for the softball field project. The City expects
to receive $27,500.00 in grant monies that must be matched
with City funds in the development of the softball field
complex and must submit this final grant application
by October 25, 1985. (See Resolution 1985 017)
A motion was =ado by Maxwell, seconded by 8111 Fair,
and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution authorizing
the filing of the final grant application for the LAWCON
Grant funds to the State Department of Natural Resources.
14. Consideration of Construction of a Portion or All of
the Interceptor Sower.
For the past several years, the City has boon considering
the construction of an interceptor cower running west
to coot through the community adjacent to the railroad
tracks for the purpose of diverting sowago flow from
the Bridge Park Lift Stations to eliminate overloading
conditions on the lift stations in the Bridge Parks.
During the pact number of yearn, a portion of the interceptor
Dower line has boon constructed from the wastowater Treatment
Plant to Washington Street and also a aogment was installed
under Hwy. 25 during the summer of 1985. Recently, the
Public works Department performed a small mount of flow
tenting on the Dewar lino near West Bridge Park and dotormined
that the capacity of the lino in reaching near maximum
flow at certain times necessitating the construction
of the interceptor cower in the noar future. It han
been roughly estimated that the interceptor cower construction
from Hwy. 25 to Washington Street and from Hwy. 25 weatorly
to Linn Stroot would coat in the neighborhood of $600,000.00
and could eliminate approximately 301 of the flow now
going down River Stroot through the lift stations. It
was estimated that tho entire interceptor cower project
from Washington Street westerly to Elm Street would coot
approximately S1,000,000.00.
The Public Worka Director racommondod that tho Council
consider building approximately 708 of the interceptor
Dower lino from Linn Street to Washington street to alleviate
part of the problem of near capacity flowage on the Bridge
Park lift stations. The City Council diccusnod whether
doing the ontiro project in one year would raoult in
a batter price for the City rather than doing the project
in two or three phasoo and it wan Duggoated that possibly
plane and o pecificationc regarding the interceptor cower
.5_
Council Minutes - 10/15/85
be prepared for the entire project now and then a decision
could be made as to whether only 708 should be constructed
in 1986 or whether the entire project should be done.
It was noted that the plans and specifications for the.
entire sewer line will be necessary in the future oven
if only part of it is constructed in 1986.
As a result, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by
Maxwell, and unanimously carried to authorize the City
Engineer to prepare plans and specifications for the
entire interceptor sewer line from Elm Street to Washington
Street. It was noted that funding for the project could
be partially financed by available City funds with the
balance coming from a bond sale.
15. Consideration of a Request for a Conditional Use Allowing
a 'Day-care Center - Applicant, NRM Partnershio.
NRM Partnership, a St. Cloud based firm is proposing
to constn,rr,a e6 x 64 foot 2,944 cquarc fcot day -caro
center in a lot of the now Victoria Square Addition.
The Planning Commission recently approved the Conditional
use Permit for the day-care center.
Motion was made by Fill Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and
unanimously carried to approve the zonditional use request
to allow the day-care center in a B-2 limited business
zone contingent upon the recording of the final plat
of the Victoria Square Addition by the developer with
the appropriate foes being paid to the City of Monticello
for the Plot recording.
16. City Ball Roof Construction.
Mr. Grog Votach, the labor contractor on a recently completed
City Rall roof project, appeared before the Council to
request that final payment in the amount of approximately
57,000.00 be romitted. Mr. Votach indicated that it
was his understanding the City of Monticello had all
the necessary inouranco coverages regarding the reroofing
project and felt he was only a subcontractor to do the
labor portion of the project ani) that the City wan the
general contractor and should now hold hiW reaponoibio
for damage that occurred because of a rainstorm during
the project. Mr. Vatach noted that motoria! ware not available
on site for cloning in the roof prior to taw rain damage
and that it should not have boon his rosponoibility to
got the material. Mr. Votach claimed he was unaware
that his contract required incuranco covarago and requested
that the matter be settled noon.
Council members informed Mr. Votach that the matter has
boon turned over to the City Attorney and without hia
advice the Council was not able to roopond to Mr. Votachle
commonto at thio time. As a roault, no action was taken
regarding Mr. Votach-aA request.
lilt
Rick'WolfotolIQV, Assistant Administrator
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
I9 4. Public Hearinq on a Proposal for a Tax Increment Finance Plan-
- Project, Raindance Partnership. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
At the last regular Council meeting, you adopted a resolution
accepting a tax increment plan from the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority and setting a public hearing. This is that hearing.
Only the hearing will be held at this meeting. Formal adoption
will have to follow the completion of negotiations and the
execution of the de veloper-s agreement between the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority and the developer. One of the
technicalities of Statute states that for any project which
involves a major soils corrections, the tax increment plan
cannot be adopted by the City Council prior to the execution
of the development agreement. In addition, the 30 day period
in which the school and county may comment on the plan has
not yet expired, so final adoption should bo postponed until
that waiting period is complete. Consequently, the only action
for this meeting shall bo the opening of the hearing, the
accepting of comment and testimony, and the closing of hearing.
Final action on tho tax increment plan snall be on the agenda
for November 12.
There are no altorn ative actions, supporting data, nor staff
recommendation for this Stem.
C
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
The County has requested that the plane be completed for their
review no later than January 15, 1986, and that the final eat
of drawings or mylars with the corrections needed to be provided
no later than February 1, 1986. For this preliminary engineering
the County will reimburse the City up to 5% of the contract
bid price or the actual engineering coat whichever is lose.
The County has also requested that they be allowed to perform
the inspection during the construction project, as they fool
they will have bettor control over the project and they will
have an inspector in the area. I concur with this request.
I have spoken with the City Attorney, Gary Pringle, about acquiring
the necessary easements and obtaining a definition of the existing
easements along West County Road 39. We will make ovary attempt
to obtain those easements in liou of asoosamonts to property
owners.
The expected cost to the City of Monticello would be approximately
$47,100.00 construction coot (which In 301 of the estimated
total coat),thoeo engineering costa exceeding 5% and right-of-way
�� costa.
5. Consideration of a Resolution Ordering the Preparation of Plans
�-
and Specifications for the Improvement of West County Road 39. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
At the September 9 meeting the Council discussed improvements
to West County Road 39. Wright County had indicated they would
include this portion with their project to begin the spring
of 1986. The Council discussed the pros and cone of a rural
typo section costing approximately $157,000.00 and an urban
section costing $424,000.00. Council at that time as you may
remember chose the rural type section. OSM-s preliminary estimate
was $157,000.00.
Since that time, at the request of Councilman Bill Fair, I have had
several conversations with the right-of-way people from NSP,
it does appear that the poles will be moved at no cost to the
City of Monticello. We will, of course, be responsible for
acquiring the easements to place these poles where easements
do not currently exist.
I then discussed the project with the Wright County Highway
Engineer, Mr. Wayne Fingaleon, and our County Board representative,
Mr. Basil Schillewaart, the County's work load is currently
such that their staff would be unable to prepare the plane for
the plane for this project. They have requested that the City
of Monticello prepare the necessary plan documents to be included
with their plans. Since State Aid monies will be involved,
it will be necessary to prepare the plans accordingly. Specifications
needed will be minimal as spot numbers and quantities will be
the only information needed.
The County has requested that the plane be completed for their
review no later than January 15, 1986, and that the final eat
of drawings or mylars with the corrections needed to be provided
no later than February 1, 1986. For this preliminary engineering
the County will reimburse the City up to 5% of the contract
bid price or the actual engineering coat whichever is lose.
The County has also requested that they be allowed to perform
the inspection during the construction project, as they fool
they will have bettor control over the project and they will
have an inspector in the area. I concur with this request.
I have spoken with the City Attorney, Gary Pringle, about acquiring
the necessary easements and obtaining a definition of the existing
easements along West County Road 39. We will make ovary attempt
to obtain those easements in liou of asoosamonts to property
owners.
The expected cost to the City of Monticello would be approximately
$47,100.00 construction coot (which In 301 of the estimated
total coat),thoeo engineering costa exceeding 5% and right-of-way
�� costa.
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Order plans to be prepared by Orr-Schelen-Mayeron and to
be completed as per State Aid and County requirements for
preliminary review by January 15, 1986, with the final plans
provided by February 1, 1986.
2. Do not authorize preparation of plane for this project.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
It is the staff recommendation that you authorized Orr-Schelen-Mayeron
to prepare the plane as described in alternative number one.
No supporting data.
110
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
6. Consideration of Establishing a Schedulo/Deadlino for the
completion of Plans and Specifications and the Ordering of
the Improvement of the Sewer Interceptor Line. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
At the last Council meeting, the City Council authorized preparation
of plans and specifications for the entire interceptor sewer
from Washington Street to Elm Street through Monticello.
No time table was given to the Engineer for completion of his
work. I have some concerns in this area. There is generally
a considerable monetary advantage to have a bid letting during
the winter or early spring rather than having a bid opening
in late spring or early summer. Contractors will traditionally
bid early jobs at a low rate to be guaranteed work early in
the year. They will consequently bid the following jobs at
a higher rate. In addition, in this instance we have the
possible construction of the Veit project on the old City
and Wilbur Eck property. In speaking with Voit-s representative,
it is their plan to have the soil correction done on this
project during the months of January and February. They had
anticipated breaking ground for the building in late April
or early May. Inorder for them to begin construction of their
building, it will be necessary to construct that portion of
the interceptor sewer from where we left off near Hwy. 25 easterly
to Cedar Street.
In order for thin portion of the project to be constructed
by early to mid-May, it would be necessary to award the project
to a contractor in early February. This would allow the contractor
ample time to move hie equipment in priorto road limits being
enacted and allow for time for matorialo to b, delivered
to the site. Tharp is alno some additional lend time here
needed to begin the do-watoring operations. If we aro to uao
this an a timo table for Luo project, we would need the plane
and specifications returned to the City for our review no
later than January 14, 1986. We could then open bids in early
February and award the project or whatever portion of the
project the Council fools appropriate on Fabruarty 11, 1986.
The above time table would onouro the City of throe thingo:
1. Wo would receive bids from a variety of contractors.
2. We would rocoivo very competitive bids.
3. The work on that portion of the interceptor oawor in the
area of the Volt project could be completed without delay
to tho Veit projoct.
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
If the Council so chooses to follow such a time table it would
be oxtremely important that the Engineer deliver his plans
and specifications on time. There has been some difficulty
in the past,for various reasons, in obtaining plan space or
studies on time.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Request that the final plans and specifications for the
interceptor sower project be completed no later than January 10, 1986.
And that on that date the Council review those plans to
determine the scope of the interceptor sewer project and
a bid letting data for the actual construction.
2. Set some other time table for the delivery of the plans
and specifications to the City of Monticello.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is staff recommendation that the Council consider alternative #1
as listed above. This alternative appears to be in the best
interest of Monticello and allows us the most flexibility.
No supporting data for this item.
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
7. Consideration of Entering an Agreement with Monticello Township
Calling for the Continued Payment of Funds from the City to
the Township. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
In 1974, when the annexation of the Nuclear Plant occurred,
the Minnesota Municipal Board issued the order of annexation.
Within that order there was a formula for certain payments
of revenues. That formula contained certain elements that
could severely affect the amount of money trasferred between
the two governments if they were altered by some other governmental
body, mainly the State Legislature or Federal Congress. In
addition, in 1975 a joint resolution was entered into so that
the Township could continue to receive approximately $36,000.00
in local government aid which, under ordinary annexation circumstances,
would have become rightfully the City's local government aid.
This issue occurred as a result of the Township agreeing to
the annexation order out of court. When the local government
aid was awarded to the City rather than the Township in 1975
by the State Department of Revenue, the Township indicated
that they had not agreed to giving up that revenue source
in the original agreement. After negotiations it was agreed
that the Department of Revenue would compute local government
aid under normal circumstances and than an amount of $36,000.00
would be credited to the Township'a local government aid.
/( 8oically, the Township had originally agreed to give up its
V� lawsuit and the Nuclear Plant tax base in exchange for the
payment formula laid out in the order, but they had never
agreed to give up the local government aid that was computed
to cover the Lando involved in the annexation. Consequently,
the local government aid continued to go to the Township but
under ordinary circumstances would have boon the City's.
The formula, which used local government aid as one of the
olomonts for determining payment, was than computed using
the adjusted LOA.
Also, in the original order from the Municipal Board one of
the final paragraphs in the order states that the Municipal
Board would retain jurisdiction in the avant that unforeseen
extraordinary circumstances arise. In 1984, the Minnesota
State Legislature radically reduced local government aid to
Townehipa. when the reduced local government aid figure was
plugged into the formula, the City suddenly became responsible
for making up that shortfall to the Township. The estimated
payment required to comply with the torma of the formula for
1984 would have boon approximately $78,000.00. The highest
payment we have made to the Township prior to thoL• was S9,688.00.
Upon working through the formula to determine the City'a payment
to the Township and seeing the result. I felt that an unusual
and unforeseen circumstance had occurred by the Legislature's
reduction of Township government aid, and mot with the Municipal
Board.
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
This was in the fall of 1984. I inquired at that time as
�. to how we would go about requesting the Municipal Board to
exercise its right of jurisdiction to adjust this formula.
They indicated that they could take no act ion without a resolution
from the City Council. I then carried this information back
to Mayor Grimamo and requested direction. Mayor Grimsmo requested
that I delay any immediate action while we sought for various
solutions. The Mayor then mot with the Town Board Chair to
discuss this matter. The Mayor also called a meeting with
the Town Board Chair and the City Attorney to further discuss
how the issue might be resolved.
After these initial meetings, Mayor Grimsmo asked me to set
up a meeting with the Town Board Chair, himself, the City
Attorney, the Township Attorney, and mysol £. He indicated
to me that he and Mr. Denn had reached a conceptual agreement
to amend and extend the payment agreement. I then scheduled
that meeting and also requested that Rick Wolfsteller, Finance
Director, attend. At this meeting Rick and I expressed the
otaff's point of view that perhaps the agreement had outlived
its usefulness in light of the radical changes and requested
that we investigate dissolving the agreement at this point.
Lengthy discussion followed and it was oventually decided
upon by Mr. Dean and Mayor Grimsmo to direct the two attorneys
to moot and negotiate on an agreement that would amend the
formula and extend the provisions for the City paying the
,{ Township. During the summer of 1985, the two attorneys worked
out an agrooment that woo presented to both the City and the
Town and to the Municipal Board. On Friday, October 11, 1985,
the Mayor, the City Attorney, the Township Attorney, the Town
Board Chair, and I mot with the Municipal Hoard to review
the proposed agreement. The attorneys indicated to the board
that there was basic agreement between the two governing bodies
(noting that neither body had formerly acted on it), and having
reached a tentative agreement would approc sato rocoiving the
prolioinary bl000inge of the Municipal Board. The memborn
of the Municipal Board responded that they would be comfortable
with any agreement that the Town and City could reach.
With the preliminary approval of the Municipal Board in plocw,
the two attorneys finalized the payment ag woomont and submitted
it to their respective governmental bodies for action. The
Town Board has already mot and adopted tho agreement and the
Chair and Clark have executed the agroomon t. The signed copies
aro now in my office and being brought to you for action at
this meeting.
The above summary to a groan oversimplification of the events
that occurred between 1974 and 1985. The issue to axtromoly
complex, not because the subject matter is so difficult to
comprehend, but rather, because the myriad amount of negotiations,
court orders, petitions, and o0 on. The weaving and intertwining
Cof all the various issues and elements our rounding the entire
annexation makes the iosuo complex.
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
It simply strikes me as unnecessary to try to provide a detailed
analysis and history of the sequence of events for you at
this time. As always, I am open to answering your questions
or discussing this matter at any time, but for this supplement
it seems unnecessary to go into such detail.
This issue is perhaps the most difficult issue I have dealt
with in my entire career. It can have far reaching implications
with respect to both government administration and political
decision making. For this reason, I will be attempting to
provide you with as an objective analysis as is possible.
I am hoping that staff will in no way become involved in the
decision making process except to answer factual questions
and provide data. In the following paragraphs I am attempting
to lay out the pros and cons of the agreement as objectively
as I can.
First, about the agreement itself. The agreement is a stipulation
attached to the original agreement of September 19, 1974.
The current agreement acknowledges that the formula in the
original agreement is no longer appropriate due to changes
in the intor-governmcntal transfers section. The agreement
stipulates that the purpose of the agreement is to assist
with expenses for the operation of the orderly annexation
area. The now agreement stipulates that the payments shall
be paid through the year 1995. The agreement states that
the Minnesota Municipal Board shall continue their jurisdiction
4� for the purpose of adjusting the apportionment according to
the order of September 19, 1974. The agreement calla for
predetermined sums to be paid annually rather than a fluctuating
amount based on a formula. In essence, this agreement has
a termination date of 1995. For payments to continuo beyond
1995 the Township sholl have to filo with the Minnesota Municipal
Board a request that they exercise their jurisdiction and
order the continuation of payment. The old agreement did
not have a payment termination date. Similarly, because of
the continuing jurisdiction of the Municipal Board, if any
other unforeseen circumstance should arias between now and
1995 either the City or the Town may go before the Board to
request adjustment. For example, if the annexation of the
OAA should occur, than it would seem logical to go before
the Municipal Board to request the termination of this agreement
since the area for which payment is being made to the Township
will no longer be in the Township.
Concerning the sums of money stated in paragraphs 1-4; I an
unable to comment on how thono sums were arrived at. I do
recall that in Ono of the meetings, Mr. Donn Indicated that
according to his figures, the Town generally received a benefit
of approximately $37-38,000.00 annually. Since the most we
over paid wan approximately $9,600.00, Mr. Donn must have
boon including the Original $36,000.00 of local government
i aid that woo transferred from City to Township. Thio amount
of money of course did not tomo from the City or out of the
City Treasury, but was transferred at the state level. It
woo not money the City received and than paid out, but rather
monion we never saw, and consequently never missed.
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
Again, that is all the information I can provide on how the
�l predetermined amounts were established. I,am making the assumption
that since the attorneys are in agreement on the document
and it has been executed by the Town Board someone must have
agreed that these numbers accurately reflected an equitable division
of assets.
The positive aspects of the agreement is that it now has a
payment termination date, it still has recourse through the
Municipal Board in the event of unforeseen extraordinary circumstances,
and it has eliminated the unpredictable and fluctuating formula.
The negative aspects of the agreement is that it commits us
to a cum of $347,000.00 over the next 10 years without recourse.
(Again, except for the unforeseen extraordinary circumstance
provision.) One question that the committed payments raise
has to do with if the Legislature should reinstate local government
aid for townships. in the past, when local government aid
was at full funding, the most we ever paid was 59,600.00.
Under this agreement, even if the Legislature reinstates local
government aid to townships our required contribution will
not be reduced. The minimum annual payment is approximately
three times the largest payment we have over had to data. The
original formula was based in part on the local government
aid that the Township received, and when it was cut our contribution
increased substantially, which is why the issue was raised
in the first place. An I noted above, in 1975 under the revenue
/j department agreement the City forfeited an amount of approximately
�L 1
$36,000.00. That amount has never been received by the City.
In 1984 the Township lout that amount but it should be noted
that it didn't come to the City. Under the local governoment
aid formula the $36,000.00 was rightfully the City's but did
not come to us and we aro now being asked to pay an additional
$27,500.00. The not annual loan duo to various agreements
is $63,500.00.
The second part of my analysis rolatca more to the concept
of this agreement rather than to the specific issues within
the agreement itaolf. First, the proo:
It is acknowledged that the orderly annexation area is
a growth area. it is still under the jurisdiction of
the Township. It is presumed that an an orderly annexation
area, ovantually the area will become part of the City.
It must also be presumed that being a high demand area,
but still lying within the Township, the Township cannot
provide adequate services without the cash contribution.
That is to say, the growth rate in the area pr000nto
an extraordinary demand on an ordinary township government
budget. In onoonco, the growth that occurs in the OAA
by virtue of its being on our City's borders creates
an economic burden on the Township budget that wouldn't
ordinarily occur in a typical township without an nulcoar
�.� plant. The payment from the City to the Township is
intended to reduce the economic burden and allow tho
Township to maintain and provide services at a much higher
lovol mo that when annoxation occurs the City won't inherit
substandard facilities and be faced with the economic
burden of bringing services up to City standard.
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
A payment to the Township is intended to insure that
we will not eventually assume jurisdiction over an area
that has been poorly developed and maintained.
A second major positive position is reflected in the
Mayor's contentions that the amount of money in comparison
to the City's overall budget is a rather small price
to pay to maintain good working relationships.
The cons:
This payment from the City to the Township is a tax upon
City residents for a different jurisdiction. The payment
assists with the Township holding taxes down to their
residents at the expense of City residents. In essence,
City residents are subsidizing Township services.
The second negative aspect of the concept of the agreement
is that it goes against and of the basic premises of
urbanization and annexation. It is somewhat the flip
side of the first positive statement above.One of the
basic questions when evaluating the suitability for annexation
in whether or not the Township can provide services as
good as or batter than the City. This agreement says
the Township can provide those services, but only if
they receive financial aid from the City to lesson their
economic burden. The obvious question then is if we
�. ata paying for those quality services why don't we have
it within our City limits. Carrying this thought a atop
further, the Township might respond that they can provide
the services without our assistance
no annexation is not necessary. If that is the case
than I would ask why are we paying anything at all.
This point seems to indicate that the entire agreement
is established solely as a question of money not service
delivery.
The next issue is more a clarification of number one
above than a separate negative point of its own. The
original notion behind all of the agreements evolved
from the concept that the NSP tax baso was largo enough
for both governmental jurisdictions to benefit from.
The money raised by tax levy in the City and paid out
to the Township is not, however, a tax on NSP, but is
on each resident. It is not parmisoablo in Minnesota
to levy against a specified piece of property and axampt
others.
The last issue is also related to the taxing authority.
Their is somo discussion, very informal and perhaps no
more than rumor, that the taxing of one jurisdiction
for the undconditional payment to another jurisdiction
is ill agal. I have hoard talk (rumor only at this stage)
that there may be a class action, suit initiated against
the Citypagainot the Council members and administration.
as individuals, against the Town Board, and against the
Minnesota Municipal Board if this agreement In put into
place.
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
iy This may be an idle threat. The agreement may also be
perfectly legal. I wished to note that one of the negative
aspects of entering the agreement is a potential laysuit.
Thio then concludes my analysis of the positive and negative
aspects of both the agreement itself and the concept of entering
such an agreement.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Accept the agreement as procented - this action will commit
the City to payments of $72,000.00 by November 15 and
$27,5000.00 each year thereafter through 1995. As mentioned
several times, any unforeseen extraordinary circumstances
may be taken to the Minnesota Municipal Board.
2. Accept the agreement in concept but order a renegotiation
of amounts - this generally indicates that you are satisfied
with the concept of providing payment for the Township
to deliver services in the orderly annexation, but wish
to have the figures stipulated in the agreement by the
attorneys to be reviewed at greater length and adjusted
If necessary.
3. Reject the agreement - this means that the City is
still obligated to pay the Township under the provisions
(�J of the original agrooment executed in 1974. The City,
under those provisions, would owe the Township $74,896.00
for 1984 and $79,494.00 for 1985 with 1986 and years beyond
yet to be determined.
4. Reject the agreement and petition the Municipal Board
for the termination of all agreements - this action would
undoubtedly load us into the court system. If the Municipal
Board ruled in favor of the City I fool confident that
the Township would filo in district court. If the Municipal
Board ruled in favor of the Township, and the City felt
strongly enough about terminating the agroamont. thon
the City would logically filo in district court. I believe
it is also reasonable to conclude that the loser at the
district court level would filo at the appellate court
Level and so on through the supreme court.
5. Commonco annexation of the OAR - you have already authorized
a study of the area to determine its ouitability for annoxation.
While the financial questions of the agreement have generally
boon kept separate from questions of annexation, this
alternative brings them together. The two issues were
one in the beginning and separated thereafter. If the
City annexed, then the paymant would become oxtranoouo
since the arca would not be under the jurisdiction of
the Township and eonacquantly the Township would not require
funding.
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
•,f7 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Because this is an extremely delicate and potentially volatile issue
their will be no formal staff recommednation on this item.
This reluctance to submit a recommendation does not come from
a fear of being involved in a potentially contraversial issue
(I don't believe that I have ever been accused of avoiding
the issue.) rather, this issue strikes me as one that must
be addressed entirely at the legislative level, not at the
administrative level. It is uniquely a Council decision to
appropriate funds.
I must, however, clarify one matter. In light of the above
discussion on the potential of a class action lawsuit naming
the Council as a unit and City personnel as individuals, I
wish to have the records show that as the Chief Administrative
Officer I am opposed to the execution of this agreement.
I have no intentions whatsoever to debate the issue at the
meeting or to attempt to persuade anyone of the Council to
agree with me. I simply wish to have my position noted in
the public record; I see it as being essential to my own financial
preservation.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
Copy of the agreement, copy of the history of payments since 1976.
C
CVPLJ F2okk 0X16, I1JA1® 074-
Ae.tcaxaju-r
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED: That the City of Monticello shall pay
annually to the Town of Monticello from the proceeds of its ad valorem
tax a sum which is to be determined as follows:
A base amount of $150,000.00 less the sum of:
(1) All intergovernmental transfers (Federal
Revenue Sharing dnd Per Capita Aids) and
other non property tax revenues received by
the Town of Monticello during the calendar
year, and
(2) Seven mills times the assessed value in
the town for the calendar year.
A settlement shall be made in March of each succeeding year to reflect
the difference between estimated and actual intergovernmental transfers
received by the Town. The base amount of $150.000.00 shall be adjusted
annually by the per cent change in the "all items" category of the
consumer price index of the United States Department of Labor's Bureau
of Labor Statisxics between the year prior to and the year two years
prior to the tax year in question, but in no event shall the adjustment:
exceed 5.58 of the adjusted base amount determined in the previous year.
No adjustment shall be made for the tax year prior to January 1, 1975.
A
C
Township
City paid/
Paid City
owes Township
1976
$35,448.00
1977
33,988.00
1978
3,423.00
1979
S 699.00
1980
2,209.00
1981
7,200.00
1982
9,688.00
1983
7,346.00
1984
74,896.00
1985
79,494.00
A
C
Council Agenda - 10/28/65
8. Consideration of Authorizing the Preparation of a Request
for Proposals (RPF) for the Purpose of Soliciting Proposals
from Private Enterprize to Operate and Maintain the Monticello
Wastewater Treatment Facility. (T.E.)
A. REPERENCE P11D BACKGROUND
Informal discussion has been held on numerous occasions with
respect to investigating the possibility of contracting out
the operation of the sewer plant. This topic has come up
informally at Council meetings and has been debated by staff
on a number of occasions. Initially, staff thought it would
be best to bring the concept to the Council for formal discussion.
It then occurred to us that discussion at best would be limited
until we had acquired some specifics. The beet way to acquire
these specifics is to prepare our own request for proposals.
We are requesting that the Council authorize the preparation
of these RFPs solely because it will involve the expenditure
of small amounts of money to acture samples from other cities
and perhaps to engage either our engineer or another engineering
firm to help us cover all aspects of the request for proposals.
It is staff's intention that, upon completion of the RFP,
the document will be brought to the City Council for detailed
review and analyais. During that review period. we would
hope to address anything we may have missed in the initial
(( preparation and perhaps delete any matters that seem extraneous.
L! After the review is complete, we would then prepare a final
request for proposals for City Council approval. Along with
Council Approval of tho RFP would be an order to disseminate
the RFPs to qualifying contracting companies to oolicit their
proposalo/bids for the operation of our plant.
without the RPP in at least a preliminary form. I see our
discussion wandoring aimlessly without any final decisions
being made. It strikes me as being appropriate for tho staff
to asaomblo all of the necessary data thereby highlighting
those areas of operation and maintenance that would most offoctivoly
be contracted out. with that information assembled, the Council
would then have an opportunity to review in detail.
This process in vary similar to what we did when we procured
an architect for the Fire Rall. we solicited propoaalo for
architectural services. Thoao proposals, unlike bids, allowed
for a certain flaxibility within our given framework. An
with the Piro Nall architectural services, our ultimata concern
is the total amount, not how oath firm would handle its payroll,
its utility bills and am on.
C -/
Council Agenda - 10/28/85
j An RFP allows the bidding company to build in its own flexibility
to save money in the areas where it performs best in order
to pass along the best overall cost to the City.
Rather than debate the merits and demerits of contracting
in a general, non-specific way, we request the City Council
to authorize the staff's preparation of a request for proposals
for presentation at a future Council meeting. I do not anticipate
the cost of this preparation exceeding a thousand dollars.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. Authorize the preparation of a request for proposals for
sewer plant operations and maintenance.
2. Do not authorize a preparation of such an RFP, requesting
instead a discussion of the concept of contracting.
3. Dispense with the notion of contracting altogether, and
leave operations and maintenance as they are.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Council authorize the preparation
of an RFP to be returned to the Council at a future meeting.
There in no supporting data for this issue.
C
QUARTERLY REPORT - SENIOR CITIZENS
From Karen Hanson
The Center took an active part in the Miss Monticello Pageant
this year. We made the Center available for many functions,
bringing various ago groups into the Center both from local
people and out of town people. It was a very good way of
making people aware of our Center. July and August we had
a booth to sell our crafts at the Wright County Fair. Two
of our Monticello people were 1st and 2nd outstanding female
Senior Citizens of Wright County. First place winner was
Edna Kotilinick and 2nd place Esther Stokes. We had 72 entries
in competition at the fair, and brought home 74 ribbons, including
one Grand Champion and one Sweepstakes. We took 19 entries
to the state fair, returning with 15 ribbons, 3 -let, 5 -2nd,
5 -3rd, 2 -4th.
September we hosted the flu clinic, had a picnic in Ellison
park and a Senior dance. We also hosted poor counseling group
for Sherburne and Wright Countya, and host/hostosa training
for Wright County volunteers. Seventeen of our local Seniors
participated in the Hoot and Hoot000 training.
Ila entertained 60 Seniors from the Bloomington Crooksido Music
Department on September 26th, and had a free hearing screening
on Suptemhor 26.
Wo continua on a regular basis to offer free D.P. oarvico
ovary weak earving approximately 450/yr. Free legal aid onto
a month, free hearing aid checks once a month, and pot luck
dinnora once a month. we have a walking group Monday mornings.
Cards, visiting, pool, ceramics, woodworking, croft close,
rugmaking, availablo at all times.
On September 26th and 27th, I represented the Center at the
Senior Center Conference in St. Cloud. I conducted a roundtable
discussion on Centore and involving groups with epocial needs,
ouch as Nursing Home residents, man - and young/old participants.
Volunteers at the Canter helped do the Meetings for the United
Way Campaign.
The and of Soptambor I started mailing out a throe month calendar_
of events, to lot people be aware of services and activities
at the Cantor. My goal is to try and roach all Seniors in
our area.
Earlier this year, when there was talk of moving our Cantor,
I applied for a grant to help with the coot. I woo awarded
$1,900.00 to be refunded if we did not move. However, I have
L reapplied and boon granted the right to rodo the grant for
needed ropairo and equipment in the Cantor.
QUARTERLY REPORT - ZONING, BUILDING, ASSESSING, CIVIL DEFENSE
From Gary Anderson
CIVIL DEFENSE DIVISIN:
The Civil Defense has been very quiet as we had no tornado
or bad weather damage. in so far as this year to the present.
We did have a dry run exercise for the Monticello Nuclear
Plant on September 11, and on October 9 we had the actual
exercise with the Monticello Emergency Operation Center evacuated
and two of its personnel relocated to the Wright County Emergency
Operation Center, and two of them relocated to the State Emergency
Operation Center in St. Paul.
ASSESSMENTS:
The assessment books have been received by my office for the
1986 assessment process, the market value for residential
proportion in the sales ratio studies is at 928 of the market
with the commercial sales ratio study showing the City of
Monticello at 82% of the market. With those studies, the
Directive from the the County Asoossorls Office is to look
at the commercial property and reevaluate it, and the raoodential
property to pick up any now construction or renovation. Pretty
much leave the residential as is.
PLANNING AND ZONING:
The planning and zoning and has experienced a rather buoy
summer and into the fall ocason this year. With additional
time spent on the now proposed comprohonaivo plan with the
revision of come sections of the City Zoning Ordinance and
aloo some sections of the City zoning map. The addition or
deletions of the City Zoning Ordinance Text aro in the final
typing stages and should be ready within the next couple weeks
to be distributed to Planning Commission members and City
Council momboro. We aro looking at the possible adoption
of the now zoning map at the November 28 City Council mooting.
BUILDING INSPECTION:
Building inspection permits activity, as for as number of pormito
is pretty much about the same or a little more than loot year,
however, the total evaluation of the building permit activity
has surpassed last yaar-o total for the entire year as of
the and of thio month, October 31. With the favorable weather
we have had the last few days wo aro getting clot of prop000d
now housing and now building plane yet to be constructed in
this construction coacon before that front sots in.
The now andof the month building inspection report duo out
at the and of thin month, which you will receive at your first
Council meeting next month, will calf explain the building
permit activity over the previous year.
Quarterly Report - Economic Development Update
From Olive M. Koropchak
The Economic Development Quarterly Report covers the month of October, 1985,
because my employment date was October 1. Activities within the department
have been very active.
Active Prospects -
Raindance Partnership, Rogers, MN - currently on
the City Council Agenda.
American Converters, Inc., Minneapolis, MN - processor
of styrofoam, 40,000 square foot building, 45 employees.
Pyro Industries, Inc., Seattle, WA - manufacturer
of Whitfield Pellet - Burning Stoves, 25 employees.
(Referred to Clow Stamping Building for possible
lease.)
Snare Plumbing and Heating, Buffalo, MN - light
to medium commercial plumbing and heating firm,
2,400 square foot building, 13 employees.
Now Prospects -
Ehrlichmann Energy corporation, Alexander, MN -
heavy industry to manufacture 40 ton incinerators.
50,000 square foot building, 50-60 employees.
Poly -Flex, Inc., Walworth, WI - processor of 55
gallon plastic durms, 30,000 square foot building,
30 employees.
Harold Berklund, Buffalo, MN - manufactures electronic
components, 6-10,000 square foot building, 10-50
employees.
David Wondra, Frederic, WI - manufactures medical
and industrial garments, 15-20 employees.
St. Cloud firm looking for 20,000 square foot existing
building for hoadquartara, (Roforrod to Deet-In-Wobb
Building.)
LaHmann - Mushrooms, Lake Elmo, MN - 20-25,000 square
foot building, processor of muohroomo,oproute, and
salad drosaingo, 25r employees, prefers lease over
purchase. (Roforrod to Boat-In-wobb Building.,)
Patrick,J. Ryan, Vico President of Purchasing, Clark
Michigan Company, Banton Harbor,, Ml - interested
in purchasing an existing businoas or now business.
Presently Inactive Prospects -
IKI's expansion
�- Key Tool Plastics, Inc.
Northern Insulation, Gibbon MN
Wayne La Beaue - refurbishes buses
National Bushing - speculating to relocate
along Highway 25.
Minnesota Farm Bureau, Woodbury, MN
The Industrial Development Committee voted to set the airport and the
Metro Phone Service as top priorities for 1986. The VCR is currently
being edited. Estimates for a possible Industrial Park sign along Interstate 96
are being collected.
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority adopted the Tax Increment Finance
(TIF) for the Raindance Partnership Proposal and adopted the HRA's 1986
Operating Budget. The committee expressed an interest in purchasing
the land and building north of Moon Motors along Highway 25. The committee
will discuss their 1986 objectives following the next meeting.
The Chamber of Commerce will meet November 21, 1985, at the Riverwood
Conference Center. The Chamber Board Members will now receive all minutes
and agenda in the mail. The Chamber of Commerce Banquet has been set
for Saturday, January 18, 1985.
On October 26, 1985, I attended the Minnesota Community Improvement
Recognition Day at the Sunwood Inn, St. Cloud. I've contacted the Minnesota
Industrial Development Association(MIDA) for membership. On November 8-11, 1985,
I will be attending the National Real Estate Convention in Now Orleans, LA.
No expense to the City.
�/ QUARTERLY REPORT - PUBLIC WORKS
1G From John Simola
STREETS:
This summer saw the completion of the County Road 75 Project
through Monticello. The Hart Boulevard reconstruction and the
Cedar Street reconstruction. The extension of Sandberg Road
from its termination point in Sandberg South to Oakwood Drive
looks doubtful for completion this year.
In 1985 we completed approximately 52,000 square yards of seal
coating. These areas were primarily in the Country Club area,
Dundas Road and the Meadows.
On Friday, October 18, a final walk through inspection was hold
in Monticello,with City and State personnel, involving the Highway
25 Project. The final plans now will be put together with the
specifications for a winter bid letting, with construction to
begin in the spring.
Currently City crews aro involved in readying equipment for
the upcoming winter season. Major street sweeping will begin
on Monday. October 28. In addition, the compost facility which
is near completion will open on October 27. The hours for the
general public will be from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Corrow-s
(� leaf pick—up is planned for November 2 and will be performed
GJ from 9:00 a.m. to noon. Compooting facility will also be open
on this data.
PARKS AND CEMETARY:
This summer saw the installation of a variety of equipment in
the Country Club Park. The development of the park coincided
with the increased construction in Country Club. This area
is filling up with homes rapidly.
In addition to the work in Country Club, we have began some
grading oporationo in Hillcroot Park, mainly to alleviate a
depression area in o ballfiold. we have otrippod the top soil
in this area and aro filling in the lower areas with materials
hauled from other sitoo ouch as excoos material from the Fire
Hall oite.
City craws just completed a major resodding of the oast embankment
to Hillside Comotary, thio area had boon almost impossible to
mow and was developing into an ey000ro.
Thio summer also now additional work being performed out in
Par west Park with the completion of the black top surfacing
and some additional plantings. A major regrading operation
was undertaken between the properties in Andoro-Wilhelm and
�, the park to establish a drainage ditch between the two proportic a.
Yet to be completed this winter is some clean-up work in the
area of the outlet for the drainage of Anders -Wilhelm and the
Anders -Wilhelm Ba1Bou1 holding pond. We have proposed to do
some clean-up with a drag lino in this area, but the areas have
been too wet for access.
You may have seen some activity in East Bridge Park, this activity
is related to the construction of a now bridge over the Mississippi
River. The park was used as access for barges and drilling
equipment for the testing. We have received bonds and insurance
from the individuals doing the work so that they will be responsible
for total restoration. At this time we have not received word
to go ahead with the replacement of the band shelter in East
Bridge Park.
WATER DEPARTMENT:
We have completed the installation of the high and low level
alarms for the water system. We have some fine tuning to do
in this system as there is very little leeway between general
high pressure operation and the overflow of the water tower.
This summer we experienced another burn -out of one the 60 horse
power well motors. This is the fourth burn -out that we have
experienced in the lent few years, and the burn -outs continua
to occur oven with protective equipment installed on the electrical
control panels. NSP and Olson's Electric are working with us
L) to determine the cause of those burn-outo.
SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM:
Sower cleaning this oummor has progressed wall. We have began
to do come additional maintenance work in the area of root treatment
to retard growth in come areas. he you may recall, the only significant
problem we had thin summer was the failure of a transformer
wire for the Chestnut Street lift station. Our insurance
company hoe settled with those parties involved and will attempt
to recover coma monies from NSP.
The Elm Street oowor extension to completed and want well.
Total costa are at or slightly below estimates.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT:
The hooting system at the Wastewater Treatment Plant is now
back on line. We made repairo to approximately 401 of the
underground hooting lines. At this time we have received
no word back from John Badalich so the suspected cause of
the failure of the jointo and copper pipe. Wastewater Treatment
Plant has boon achieving excellent raoulto in the area of
waotowater treatment. The water discharged into the Mieaiaoippi
River remains wall below our permit limitations. Ono of the
currant problems facing the Treatment Plant currently is that
C,? it was constipated with sludge. If this sludge cannot be
disposed of ohortly, much of it will require hooting thin
winter.
rs' QUARTERLY REPORT - FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION
tFrom Tom Eidem
The following is a brief summary and description of activities
centering around City Hall and City operations in general.
ZONING:
As ordered by the City Council the required public hearing to
be held before the City Council will be scheduled for November 25.
Currently all chapters except one have been typed and are being
proof -road. We hope to generate sufficient copies and distribute
by November 5. The minor adjustments to the map that were raised
by public comment at the informational meetings will be incorporated
into the final design. We are also investigating one additional
PZ -M District, that area focusing around the Rand mansion and
the Little Mountain Settlement. The rationale for investigating
that area for PZ -M is that the Rand mansion is being offered
as a potential commercial enterprize and Little Mountain Settlement
already is a commercial enterprizo. In connection with that,
the area io also residential. By utilizing PZ -11 instead of
a regular commercial district we do limit the typos of permitted
uses that can be placed in the area.
COMPARABLE WORTH:
Our joint comparable worth study is scheduled to be completed
by December. All of the work required of us locally is complete,
and the information has boon sent to Control Data. John Simola,
on behalf of Public Works Directors, is involved with the task
valuing and he has indicated some problems. The entire process
may be slowing down because of the problems hohao indicated.
The breakdown in the valuing system eooma to be centered in
the Public works Division and largely resulting from the inclusion
of electric utilities. The other job classification create apparently
aro going smoothly. In accordance with the overall policy of
the joint study. I have established a local appeal procoso in
written form. This appeal proc000 has been distributed to all
City staff and copies aro available if you wish to sea the document.
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES:
As I have since 1978, I am carving on the Land Use Energy and
Environmont Legislative Committoo at the Loaugo of Minnesota
Cities. Docauso 1986 is a short legislative session, our League
Committee will only be mooting throe times this fall. Our first
mooting was hold on October 27. We will again be drafting policy
proposals P.or the League of Cities to support in the legislative
session. Our policies concern land use planning,, energy usage,
the environment, and tranaportatlon.
SECRETARY OF STATE TASK FORCE:
Since the beginning of 1985 I have been meeting approximately
one morning a month with the Office of the Secretary of State
on a task force to review the use of punch card voting systems.
After the last election, several jurisdictions reported problems
with the punch card voting system. We were not one of those
problem jurisdictions. As a result,Secretary of State, Joan
Grows, established a task force to review and recommend actions
concerning punch card voting. Having just spent a substantial
amount of money to purchase our own system, I was concerned
that the direction of the task force might recommend the elimination
of those systems. I was appointed by the Secretary of State
to serve on the task force and have been involved with all of
the policy making processes. The findings of the task force
showed that problems occurred in those jurisdictions where the
system was poorly managed by the City or County. The overwhelming
majority of punch card systems in the state are highly successful.
There were findings that some actions need to be legislated
by the State to ansict in voter training and machine preparation.
There are two meetings of the task force left to finalize the
final report of findings so that the information can be carried
to the Lcgislaturo for adoption. I believe that the task force
was a success and will ensure the quality use of punch card
voting for many elections.
RECREATION GRANT:
Our softball recreation grant application is fully complete
and was submitted to the Department of Energy and Planning in
St. Paul. Based on their tentative scheduling we should be
notified of final approval by the and of November or December.
Processing of the contracts will than occur and we will receive
the money in early spring. Prior to initiating the grant work,
we will need to make a dociolon as to the extent of extra work
we wish to do locally. I think it is essential that we authorize
the underground sprinkling system prior to field construction.
Even though the sprinkling oyotom is not a grant eligible activity,
I believe it is essential to good operation and maintenance.
PERSONNEL:
Karon Doty, who has boon on maternity leave since Auguat 1 will
return on a part-time basic on November 5. She will begin working
throe full days (Wednesday, Thursday, Friday) and we will retain
the services of BottY.forMonday and Tuesday. I have indicated
to Dotty that we do not expect her to make a commitmant to us
for the next throe months for only two days a weak when she
could be porouing full-time work for herself. Tentatively than,
wo will have two pooplo working pact -time to create full-timo
staffing, but if Dotty is fortunate enough to occurs full-timo
omploymont elsewhere, our clerical staffing will ba reduced
to 24 hours a weak.
In another personnel matter Jerry Schmidt has file for arbitration
under the terms of the union contract. In June Jerry Schmidt
was laid off duo to a lack of work which he was qualified to perform.
This situation occurred when our insurance carrier refused to
have Jerry Schmidt placed on the driver list as insurable.
Since all our employees are required to drive, we simply had
to lay him off since we had no work for non -driving staff.
Jerry filed a grievance under the union contract and we proceeded
through the first two steps without progress. By mutual consent,
we then went to mediation which produced no result. The union
has now filed for arbitration on Jerry's behalf and we are preparing
to carry through with that arbitration. I have engaged Frank
Madden, the Labor Attorney who has assisted on earlier personnel
issues, to work with me on this arbitration. The major difficulty
related to this issue is that we cannot formally declare his
position vacant and declare him terminated until the arbitration is
complete. Consequently, Streets and Park Department are operating
short handed.
COMPUTER:
Our computer search is continuing. I believe that before the
and of the year Rick and I should have a proposal for the City
Council to review with respect to engaging a technical consultant
to develop a request for proposals. In spite of all the education
I have received in the last two years of working on this project,
�j I still would not fool comfortable in writing a technical request
l� for proposals that would adequately protect the City -a interest.
DOWNTOWN REHABILITATION:
The proliminary renderings of downtown rehabilitation and estimated
costa have boon submitted to me by John Uban. I have scheduled
an early morning meeting with the downtown retailers for October 31
at City Hall. At that time we will be presenting the drawings
and the initial cost estimates and attempt to answer questions
for all parties involved.
CABLE COMMUNICATIONS:
Cable is now active in all ton cities. Thorn is still some
final bugs that need to be worked out. Tharp also seems to
bo some complaints with roopoct to marketing issues of Rite
Cablo Company. The Commission mot with Rita Cable this past
Wodnooday and have indicated that we have in several communities
rocoivod various types of complaints that rolato to the marketing
of the system. we have requested a copy of the guidolinoo Rita
Cable uses to train their sales people. They will supply them,
and have also indicated they wish to be informed of any complaints
of unethical behavior by sales people. Ono Commiooionor also
reported what appeared to be a marketing complaint, which after
investigation turned out to be a lack of understanding on the
�.� c uatomor-o part. The Commissioner explained that the technology
is brand now and complex and totally unfamiliar to the consumer,
and frequently they buy the product without undarotanding it
only to have substantial quostiona and complaints thereafter.
Mr. Daniols of Rite Cable indicated that they frequently have
that problem and they do all they can within reason to explain
the system for the consumer.
ANNEXATION STUDY:
I have received an coral report from John Uban that the annexation
study is proceeding pretty much as planned. There has been
some delays caused by waiting for materials. The results are
still expected before the end of the year.
C
QUARTERLY REPORT - FINANCIAL UPDATE
From Rick Wolfeteller
Enclosed with your agenda you will find a copy of nine month revenue
and expenditure summaries compared to budget for the City's
basic operating funds. As you will note, the General Fund summary
of expenditures is broken down only by departments, but individual
line items for various types of expenditures is available at
City Hall if anyone fa interested for each department.
Overall, revenues and expenditures are fairly close to the amounts
anticipated for the first nine months of the year in most funds.
All current ad valorem tax revenues are really 1/2 of the anticipated
collections for the year whereas, the year to date budget assumes
that 9 months worth of revenue would have been col3,ected but
taxes are only payable twice a year. Basically, tax collections
for 1985, so far, have actually exceeded the budget by approximately
550,000.00 which is duo primarily to collection of delinquents
of prior years.
As far as special assessments collected, which aro part of the
semi-annual taxes, the City has collected approximately $49,000.00
lose than anticipated duo primarily to delinquents from the
Meadow Oak Project. On the plus side, we are starting to sea
collections on delinquent assessments from prior years from
the 78-1 Improvement Project due to the building activity in
Q Country Club Manor Addition.
As of September 30, 1985, the City of Monticello has approximately
$2,114,000.00 in cash and investments. Of this amount, approximately
$1,018,000.00 in in the debt retirement funds earmarked for
debt payments, otc. Also, approximately $588,000.00 is in construction
funds oarmarkod for completion of the Piro Hall Project and
other various improvement projects atill under construction.
Approximately $508,000.00 balance is cash and investments avallablo
from all other funds.
Generally by this time, a nine month financial statement for
liquor store operations would be available but because of the
special inventory and accounting necessary by the liquor atoro
staff, bocauso of the incroaso in liquor taxes October 1, 1985,
the nine month inventory has not boon oxtanded. This report
should be available within a few weeks.
(1)
CITY OF MONTICELLO
RFVF.NIIrS AND FY.PFNDITURF.S
GENERAL FUND - not
rnR THF 14INF MONTHS F.NDrD SF.PTEMRtR 30, 1983
THIS PFRTOD THIS FERMI
THI^
PFRIOD
Y - T - D
Y - T - D Y
- T - D
ANNUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
VARIANCE
Art UAL
BUDGET
VARIANCE
BUDGET
REVEHIIF
CURRENT AD VALOREM 6
0 f
43.7%-%
6(
43.73::)6
7:4,300 S
393.799 6(
139,499)6
S25,OA9
MAL TV/INTrRF.ST
0
7.000
(
2.000)
19,RAO
10,000
I,AAO
24,000
P 6 I-ARMT'S-Cn11N7Y-1
0
67
<
67)
594
Ann <
A)
900
LIniInR LICENSES
0
1.417
(
1.417)
19.275
12.760
6,47n
17,000
BEER
0
97
(
921
1r 210
625
390
1.100
OTHrR
O
25
(
25)
303
775
7R
300
UUILDINn PERMITS
2,04R
7,292
(
244)
32,134
70.67:)
11.509
27,,'.00
VAR IANr.FS/rnNTlljlnNA1. IIB
175
12r,
50
1.223
1,17 i
100
1.300
OTN00
0
t3
(
43)
173
113
60
150
ANIMAL. LICENSES
30
7
7A
110
19
91
OAMPI.IHn LICF.NRF
0
13
(
13)
105
113 (
n)
1.0
OTHER
750
47
2OA
50u
375
130
Soo
LOCAL OnVrRMrNT AID
28."1111
14.29.^.
14,^94
R^.Thi
17R.62G (
42.660)
171,500
HOMF.STrAD CREDIT
3,9,`.0
0
3.9:"0
11,651
0
11,1151
0
R R Rmino RrIMRIIR%FMF.Nt
0
0
0
1':.15
0
1.535
0
FIR, OEPARTMFNT Ain
71,1144
1,463
7^0,361
21,864
13.350
8.514
17,600
rnI. ICF DEPARTMENT AID
10,621
R75
9,746
10,A71
7,1177
2.746
10,500
UTATF GRANTS AILD AIDH -
463
373
131
67A
3,000 !
2,374)
4,000
r+ENrRAt. rnVFRMr;NT
55
17
.36
`Sao
150
35O
200
P11"I Tr SAFETY
1.613
1.0-31
792
7,608
9,1R/ <
1.3791
12'25o
31RFFT8 C.S.A.H. MATNTFN
0
4AO
f
4AO)
220
4.144 f
3,9741
5,525
UFFUTY RFOISTRAR
4.507
4.125
167
431492
37,126
6,367
49.500
IN11rrrTinN CHARM
0
4
(
4)
0
3/ f
37)
.;o
OTHFR (
534)
I67
{
703)
443
WIDO f
1,0771
7.ODD
4UnDIVi6Tn" rrr9 <
1.3381
0
(
I'MR)
1.176
O
1.176
0
CAD1r T.V. CONTRInIIT10N
0
0
0 f
4.140)
0 <
4.140)
0
TNTFRF"T INrnMF
0
1.54^
<
1'54?1
0
10,875 (
I3.677)
IR.5o0
ANTMAI IMPn11NDMrNT
1.349
INI
1,IA1
3,801
1,450
7r 1"1
2000
INfIIAT)nN - APPI_1EATIOH
0
6l
I
Ma)
5(lo
77.0 (
'301
1,000
ItrNT9
356
300,:O
2.000
2,700 f
700)
3, Ann
UAIP OF PRnPrRTY
847
A
4tv
6.117
75
6,072
loo
CON T R IIN IT InNR/nn NAT T ON9
0
IA7
i
1611
0
i, 3(10 t
1, Son)
2,000
0THFR
At
A
It
IAl
75
AN
Ion
REFIINIIR AND RFIhflHR%mrN
0
3!1
_..
(
Wit
..
5,173
1.006
7'173
4.000
------------
..-_-•-"-__..
TUTAI RFVFNIIFR 6
7,'u 094 6
-.._. •„__.._-._
"4
6-,
14911
.............
579.2111 9
------------ ------------
677.16'. 6(
677.694111
902.915
carNOi TIIRr6
MAYOR Alin rO11Nr.111, 6
1.791 6
3.69A
6
1.903 1
40.9.•,: 6
31.7A- 6I
7.69o)0
44,3.0
AnRFRRMrNTR
1.7"9
1.137
1
1'.;)
10,2A7
10.117 (
25)
1.1.650
ADMiNT"TRATinN
709.
7.OA7
I
32A)
47.779
63.5911 (
4.160)
44,ROO
FINANCIP
7'071
A.94"
<
173)
A4.RA4
47.511 1
2.133)
6.1.375
AUnIT
0
833
"33
4.300
7,100 (
1.000)
10.000
LCOAI
39"
704
310
9.439
6.375 (
.1.464)
11.500
a r Ar OUNTANTR• rOMPU.ATIGH RFPORT.
CITY OF MORTICEI.I.O
RF.VENIMS
AND F.XPFNOTTURFS
r,FNF.RAL FUND
- Oft
FOR THF NINr
MONTHF F.ND1'D
YFPTF.MMF.R 30• 19M:i
THIS PERIOD
TNIS PFRTOD
IHIR PFRIMD
Y - T - 0 Y -
T - D Y
- T - 0
ANNUAL.
ACTUAL
DIIDGrT
VARIANCE
ACTUAL WORT
VARIANLF.
DUDGf.T
PLANNING AND ZONING 61.00
2.3R!,
1,:,56
{ R29)
19,221
14,006 t
5,215)
18:675
DCPUTY RFOMTRAR
1,7RR
1,77.3
l 15)
16, 3h9
15,93A t
403)
21,275
CITY HALL
1,290
7,033
743
14,306
15,300
3,994
24,400
LAW FNFORCFMENT
9,782
9,743
1
88,039
RR.050
1L
117,400
FIRE DEPARTMENT
1,)54
3,982
2,778
27,591
35.5AR
7,977
47,425
CIVIL OFFrN4E
41A
657
73R
11.022
5,RR7 <
5,13.^.)
7,4.50
AN[MAL CONTROL
864
925
61
8,101
R.325
224
21,100
ADMINISTRATION 1 rNGtNFF
3x464
4.11..^_
648
42,58:'
37,012 t
5,570)
49,350
STRrFTB AND At I•FYS
7x3^4
9.711
2,39!
72,773
47.4R7
13,214
116,650
SNr2Y AND ICF
0
700
700
6.4114
6,300 !
318)
8,400
OTRFFT LIOHTINO
2,529
2,200
t 391)
19.068
19, R75
R07
26,500
PURI) ;C PARKING I(ITS
3R
329
291
58.4
2,962
2,379
3,930
SHOP AND OARAOr
817
1,067
21.10
6.265
f, 600
3,33'
12,400
R[Fum. r01.1.ECTTON
5,915
5,817
4 90)
01,24A
52.350
4,104
6►,400
SFNIDR CITIMNS/M118F.UH
2,041
7.062
2t
1f, 267
18,563 t
A25)
24,750
YMrA
4-SR
4511
0
3,AFr7
4.125
4nR
5,300
PARK AND RFCRFATION/CF.MC
A,273
5,416
4 855)
41.573
48,761
7,188
65,015
COMM. DFVF)., CC(IM. OFVF1.
343
3,283
1,940
15.90A
20..+50
4,644
27,400
MAINT. OF FOIIIPMrNT SUPP
0
0
0
,,,30
0 t
30)
0
PRnrF.RRIONAI. RFRVICFR
213
0
4 213)
2X3
0 <
213)
0
Pt ANT AND LAD
0
0
0
29
0 {
29)
0
TOTAI. rXPF,NDTTIIRFR ♦
•___.........
hS,0A2 ♦
...... �......_
7^,.242
__..._.......
♦ 10.200
..._.......�_ ......."
♦ 661,077 i
---------..._-
677. t7f ♦
..
14,102 ♦
------------
902.115
REVFNUrA OVrR rXrFNDt T))R♦
.__...._....__
10x0^,� i
•aa•aaaalaPa
_..._.........._
!
f .5s .+aaaM..
. ..•. �.........
1 20.0St
�a.aa 11=, ..
.....r... _......Y ....__..__...
it 13]x'/11.+11
p..-.'•..e.. Rf4 aSa.•aa�..,aa
...._�...._..
A tt
r:..
13.5, 792)9
Y..t at"r-
.---------_-
0
...........a
a r Ar OUNTANTR• rOMPU.ATIGH RFPORT.
THIS PFR10D
ACTUAL
REVENUE
CURRCNT AD VALOREM 6 0 6
P i I-AEMT'S-COUNTY-1 0
HOMESTEAD CREDIT 708
INTCRST INCOME 0
TRANSFER IN 0
•------------
• TOTAL RCVCNIICS $ 706 6
EXPENDITURES
CITY OF MONTICFLLO
REVENUES AND CXPFNDITIIRFS
CAPITAL OUTLAY RFVOLVINO -074
FOR THE NINE. MONTHS ENDED SFPTFM8FR 30. 198.;
.....................................................uv........ .............. a..
THIS PFRIDD THIS PFRIOD Y - T - D Y - T - D Y - T - 0 ANWAL
DIIDF.FT VARIANCE ACTUAL OIIDF,FT VARIANCE BUDGET
7.8-10 S( 7,850)1 45,681 t 70,630 S( 24,969)1 94.200
473 ( 475) 1,566 4,:73 ( 2,709) 3,700
0 7OR 2,125 0 2,125 0
( 583) ( 5R3) 0 ( 5,750) ( 5,250) ( 7,000)
3,833 ( 3,833) 0 34,300 ( 34,500) 4A,000
------------ ------------ ----------------------------------" --------'-
1.,74. 6( 12,034)1 49,373 6 114,675 6( 65,302)6 152.900
imPORVCMCNTS OTHER THAN f 22 6 833 6 811 6 4,^.R1 6 7,500 6 2.919 1 10,000
FURNITURC AND FIXTURCR 101 0 ( 101) 101 0 l 101) 0
MACIIINCRY AND FOIIIPMCNT 0 6.154 6.154 53.326 35.387 I.RA1 71.830
UNALLOCATCD 0 3.794 5.754 52.302 51.787 f 513) 69.050
TOTAL CXPL'NDITURCS 6 123 6 12,742 S 12,619 6 110,511 6 114.675 1 4.11+4 6 152.900
--------------- -------------------... .._---_----- .._.,_-�_--. •------------
REVCNUCE OVFR EXPFNDITURI SRI 6 0 6 583 6( 61, 138)6 0 6( 6),138)1 0
5CC ACCOUNTANTS' COMPILATION REPORT.
1
SE6 ACCOIINTANTN' [OMPA. AIIRN *(PORT.
CITY OF NnNTIF.ELLO
REVENUER AND EXPFNDITIIRF.S
-,'
SEWER FIIND - 061
FOR THE N1NF MnNIHg £NnFD SFPTFNRFR
30, 1905
THi^. PFRiOn THIS PFRIRD THIS FERI00 Y -
T - D Y
- T - D Y
- T - O
ACTUAL
O(lDnET VF.RIAHCF ACTITAL
BUDGET
VARIANCC
MMI.ET
REVENUE
i -
CURRENT AD VALOREM 6
O M
O 6 0 1
546 6
0 4
546 t
0
P f I-A8MT'S-C(4JNTY-1
O
36 f :161
1,311
330
973
450
P o i-ASMT'S-DIRECT-1
0
0 0
2R
0
28
0
FEDERAL GRANT - OTIIFR
0
0 0
2,099
0
2,099
0 '
STATC AIDS - OTNFR
454
542 t $6)
494
4,R75 f
4.3111)
6,500
HOOK-UPS AND PERMITS
.500
333 2,2-17
9,065
3,000
6, RA5
4.000
USER (CCB
36,47^
19.933 IA,339
117,660
179.400 (
61,770)
239.200
LATE PCNAf.TIF6
107
50 52
S70
430
120
600
OTHER
SO
33 17
t10
300 (
1101
400
RCNT9
0
310 t 310)
-----`------
7,400
------------
3,130 t
------------
3301
------------
4.200
•«___"'__•�_
TOTAL. RCVCNUCS t
------------
39.656 i
.__..._......_
22,279 6 IRr379 6
136,34? 6
191.512 4t
St. 130)$
255,350
FXPCNDITIIRFS
i
PLANT ANT' LAD 6
19,5A5 *
10,303 t( i,tRn$
1A6,416 1
IN3,449 6(
1,007)1
220.600
COLLECTION SY6TEM
44,71
2,696 f 1,675)
27,221
.A.06. f
1.1..91
34.750
i
TOTAL £XPENDITIAES 6
~- _
24.135 M �_w��2t,279
------------
It -�--- ^r65M116
------------
193,677 t
-'__--_
195 x511 6f2,166){
,St.
_u•-r_._..•r.r..r
OVER FIFFttnIT{1R{
------------
i
•-
6 3K
0 r�...r
57.136
r
1 f
aa.
7....r.
0RCVENUCS
..
0..a.,...'
d
,
SE6 ACCOIINTANTN' [OMPA. AIIRN *(PORT.
CITY OF MONTICF.I.LO
SIIPPORTINO SCHEDULES
FOR THE NINE. MONTHS ENDED GEPTEMOFR 30, 1985
THIS PERIOD THIS PERIOD THIS PERIOD
Y - T - D
Y - T - 0 Y
- T - D
ANNUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET VARIANCE
Ar.T11A1.
BUDGET
VARIANCE
BUDGET
PLANT AND LAD
rcrSONAL SERVICES
SALAWS 6
7.046 6
6.792 •(
2541%
62.510 s
61.15 9(
1.393)$
53.500
CALARIES - OVERTIME
416
367 f
49)
3.376
3.300 (
.276)
4.400
SALARIES - TCMPORARY
322
625
303
5.090
5.635
535
7.500
PCRA frCNDIOti)
.236
39^
15h
2.77:
3.525
753
4.700
INSURANCE, MrDICAL AND L
5R9
567 <
221
6.005
5.100 t
901)
6.800
SOCIAL SECURITY - FICA
624
Son (
116)
4.678
-----------
4.575 f
----------- -
103)
----------
6.100
_--_--_-__-_
------------
TOTAL PrRSONAL SFRVIC s s
------------
9.232 s
-----------
9.250 s
18 s
06.639 $
0.1.230 St
3.309)s
111.000
SUPPLICB
urrice surrLIcs 6
0 $
1.^.R 6
158 s
919 s
1.425 s
Sea s
1.900
GENCRAL OPERATTNO SUPPLI
1.3118
950 1
430)
8.853
8.625 (
230)
11.300
MOTOR rurL7 AND LIIBRICAN
544
45R !
86)
1.696
4.125
2.4^9
5.500
r.LOT111NO SUPPLICO
317
300 f
17)
IL'•O
^.700
1.842
3.600
MAINT Or COUIPMENT SIIPPL
1.014
917 f
97)
9.005
8050 f
7'1)
11.000
MAINT. OF VECIIILC SUPPLE
95
lob
13
173
973
502
1.300
MAINT. OF SI.DO GUPPLIF.O
0
133
131
IA3
1.200
1.037
1.600
SMALL TOOLS AND MINORA r,
136
104 (
32)
735
-----------
9.17
------------ ---
202
-....-- --
1.250
------•-----
------------
------------
TOTAI. Surrl.ics 6
3.493 s
--....__----- __-_.._......._
3,137 •f
3591$
..404 s
..
O,^37 0
3.033 B
37.650
OiHER OrRVTCrB AND CIIAROF,S
PROFCSUIONAI. SrRVICr9 s
206 s
3..^S B
119 %
3.2C4 s
2.9.^5 sl
279)$
Sr700
COMMUNICATION
294
1!J f
1,11)
1.651
1.500 f
1:41
2.000
TRAVEL -CONT wNrc-sC)ID01,
0
F13
111
305
7'0
44'.
1.000
UTILITIES rLCCTRICAI,
3.134
3.000 f
13A)
^8.2111
27.000 l
1.218)
3A.000
UTILITICs - IIPATINO
1.073
1.750
611'
12,769
15.875
3.016
21.100
MA1NirNANCC Or Fn11IPMrNT
A40
133 f
607)
8,164
1.700 f
6.964)
1.600
MAINTCNANrr, or s111)_DINR
0
25
"5
750
2^' <
23)
300
Roo
MAINTruwx OF Vrr.)IIIrs
34
47
13
34
600
5116
350
RENTAL Or CfM11rMCNT
50
29 l
2t 1
50
76'
217
DUES, MCMSCRIIRIPB AND SII
0
R
R
-�
75
,�
100
75
O111rR
0
A
A
3
'h
51
VOOhS0
11
11
A
113
111
1'0
LAND ACOU LSITIONA
A30
lCA 4
5."U
3.740
9Sh 1
3041
1.2J'
TOTAL OTHER SrRVIrEs a Cs 6.OA6 $ 3.721 sf 341)$ 35.930 6 31.487 %t 4,446)1 68,650
CAPITAL OUTLAY
r
CITY OF MONTICF.I.LO
SUPPORTING SCHEDULED
FOR THE NINE MONTH'; FNIIF.O SFPTEMOFR 30. 1985
THIS PERIOD THIS PERIOD THIS PERIOD Y - T - D Y - T - D Y - T - D ANNUAL
ACTUAL DUDGET VARIAMW ACTUAL DIIDGET VARIANCE DUDrET
IMPORVEMENT OTHER THAN D• 0 • 67 • 67 • 0 • 600 • 600 • 000
FURNITURE AND FIXTURES f 771) ( 208) 363 1 1.4R1) 1 1.873) I 394) l ..300----------->
TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY • 771 • .75 •f 49A11 1.4RI • 475 • 994 • 3.300
___••_______ ------------ ___-_--__•__------------ -------- ---- ------------ ------------
TOTAL PLANT AND LAD • 19.365 • 10.3W3 •1 1 .1821• 166.456 • I&M .449 •( 1.007)• 220,600
lk
0
CITY OF MONTICELLO
SIIPPORTINO SCHEDULES
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1985
THIS PERIOD THIS PERIOD THIS PERIOD Y - T - D Y - T - D Y - T - D ANNUAL
ACTUAL DUDOET VARIANCC ACTUAL DIIDOF:T VARIANCF BUDGET
COLLCCTION SYSTEM
PERSONAL SERVICCS
SALARIES 6
2.012 0
1.200 0t
412)1
13.249 0
10.000 $f
2.449)1
14,400
SALARIES - OVERTIME
108
13R
30
1r 330
1, 238 f
92)
1.650
SALARIES - TEMPORARY
117
113 f
4)
2RS
1.013
72B
1.330
PERAIFCNSION'
A2
75
13
524
675
151
900
INSURANCE, MEDICAL AND L
245
154 l
9A)
1, 6.59
1,387 t
272)
1.850
SOCIAL SECURITY - FICA
168
9A f
72)
093
062 f
31)
1.130
------------
TOTAL PCRSONAI. SERVTCFS f
------------
_.713 {
-------
1,775 0t
_--- ------------
93S)$
------------
17,94. i
------------
15.975 •(
------------
1.967)9
21.300
SUPPLICS
GENERAL DPCRATINO SUPPLIS
368 $
79 0f
289)0
1,651 6
712 $4
939)0
950
MOTOR FUFLS AND LUBRIF,AN
213
50 l
lA3)
505
450 (
55)
600
CLOTHING SUPPLICS
in
^5
7
1��1
223
114
300 -
MAIIIT. OF EOIIIPMENT SUPP
57
104
47
45'!
937
4RO
1,250
MAINT. OF VECHILC SIIPPLI
0
13
13
23
113
OR
190
SMALL TOOLS AND MINORS C
0
------------
8
------------
R
------------
10
------------
75
------------
65
------------
100 ,.
------------
TOTAL SUPPLICS 0
655 6
279 •1
37A)$
2.740 0
2.512 0<
248)0
3,350
OTHER SFRVICER AND CIIAROFS
CONST COSTS RFIbURF.ARLE 6
99A 1
0 0f
998)0
994 0
0 $t
998)0
0
CROFCSSIONAL SERViCFR
0
350
350
2.7.'.9
3.1'0
391
4.200
CUMMUNIFATION
16
17
1
1SJ
150
0
200
TR.4VCL-CONFF4CNCF-SC11001.
0
19
19
45
149
124
223
UTILITIES - ELECTRICAL
124
ion 4
16)
1.0.^.2
975 4
77)
1.300 �
MAINTFIIANCC OF CRIIIPMFNT
64
179
119
203
1.612
1.409
2.130
MAINTCNANCC OF VFC)411FR
0
47
42
23
375
392
500
DUOS MEMSFAOHIPS-{11ASCRI
0
2
7
30
19 4
19)
25
TOTAL OTIICR SERVIf.FS i Cfs207
$
71: 0tr-....�._•4P,'1)i
CAPITAL OUTLAY
I URNIIURC AND FIXTURED 0
0
1^5 0
12: 0
1,-^.^•0 6
1.1^a $a
1^^,a
1.500
TOTAL CAPITAI, DUTIAY 6
0 $
125 6
125 0
1.250 0
1.125 it
125)$
1,300 -
TOTAL COI I-ECTION SYSTEM 0
............
4.071 0
............
-r MA 0-1
............
1.475)0
............
27r.^1 0
............
74.04. 0t
............
1,1591{
............
34.730
'(
CITY
OF MONTICELLO
REVENUES
AND EXPENDITURES
WATER
FUND - 063
FOR THE NINE MRNTH%
ENDED SFPTCMDFR
30, 1985
TII15 PFRiOO THIS PERIOD THIO
PFRIOD Y -
T - D Y
- T - 0 Y
- T - D
ANHUAl-
ACTUAL
DUDfFT VARIANFIF
ACTUAI.
DIIDOCT VARIANCC
OIILGCT
REVENUE
`-
CURRCIIT AD VALOREM f
O 1
921 f(
9211•
5,302 •
8.2S7 •(
2.9R5)•
11.050
P S I-ASMT'S-COUNTY-1
0
50 <
30)
S25
450
73
600
P S I-ASMT'S-DIRCCT-1
0
0
O
10
O
10
0
HOMCSTCAD CREDIT
84
0
84
252
0
0
STATE GRANTS 1 AID" - OT
15
A
IS
145
0
145
0
SALES 1AX
166
O
366
269
O
.^.A9
0
`
USE COLLECTIONS
7,963
4.95"
3,005
29.622
44.625 f
15,003)
59,500
HOOK -UPC AND PFRMTT"
1,564
417
1,147
7,292
3.750
3,342
5,000
LATE PCNAI.T IFR
8A
38
4R
461
338
-123
41.10
INTEREST INCOME
O
200 (
200)
0
1,800 1
1,800)
2:400
d
OTIICR
O
25 (
25)
A7
225 (
138)
300
TOTAL RCVCNUCC •
0
----------- _ __---'--•--•
9.079 1
_•-_--'_-_-__
6, LOO s
------'""---
3,270 •
•--__-.-_.__
43.946 t
------------
------�
59.473 f(
---
)..,5^9)$
_-__..-�---•
79.300
EXPENDITURES
1,
SALARIESf
1.75 4 1
.292 f
538 f
21.447 t
20:625 ft
022)1
27.500
SALA. CS - OVERTIME
147
123 f
22)
Ir5A3
1.125 1
438)
1.500
a
SALARICS - TEMPORARY
17
N4
37
346
487
141
650
'
PCRA (FCNSIOH)
6A
1.1,1
67
7'Ih
1.200
^44
1.600
INSURANCC. MCDICAL AND L
221
2RD
67
2.9.
2. 5R9 (
3751
3.450
SOCIAL SFLURITY - FICA
133
193
30
1,606
1.A^.0
44
.200
' q
CCNCRAL OPERATING SIIFPLT
993
1.0113
in"
12,503
9.730 1
2.75.11
13.000
GMALL TOOLS S M1NRR C011i
0
4
4
0
37
37
SO
S!
OTOR FUELS AND LUDRICAN
42
67
23
294
600
3OA
S00
LOTHING SIIPPLICS
lA
^5
9
199
^25
36
300
AINT. OF COUIPKCNT CUPP
MM
0
33
33
542
300 1
242)
400AINT.
OF VFCHILF. SUPPLI
0
11
13
11
113
102
150
AIH1. OF III DO SLIPPLIFS
O
^3
'- ^
9
2^"
216
300
1'ROFFGSIONAL SFRVIffS
35
230
NN
746
^, =0
1.504
3.000
COMMON TCATION
54
11
17
59A
A17
41
450
TRAVEL-CONFFRCIICC-Sf,1IR01.
0
21
71
293
187 (
100)
250
UTILITIES _ FIPF.TRICAL
1.301
tr230 1
51)
10.661
11,250
697
16.000
UTILITI CS - CI CGTR ICAI,
3
0 (
31
24
0 f
74)
0
IIAINTFNANPF OP COIIIPMFNT
1,070
31.1 1
737)
1.',,883
3.000 f
9, OR%)
4,000
FURNiTURC AND rlXT31RES
1,610
350 (
1.^57)
I.A10
3,225
1.617
4.300
TOTAL CXPCNDIIURCO • 7.39.1 1 6,604 fl 773)$ 69.746 t 59.47•i 61 9,7731$ 79.300
RCVCHULO OVER CXCFNPITIN(f --�-•--2.496 1 ... 0 $ - •_--:,494 S( v 5.30.1$ -' -_0 f(' S,3C :11 -nM.-�0
SEC ACCOUNTANTS' COMPILATION REPORT.
OCC ACCOUNTANTS' COMPILATION REPORT.
N
1
r
s
l�
CITY
OF MONTICELLO
REVENUES
AND E%PF.NDITIIRES
�-
LIBRARY
FUND - I05
..........uuu..su..............su..........................................................................s__
FOR THE NINE MONTHS
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30. 1995
THIS
PERIOD THIS
PERIOD THIS
PERIOD Y -
T - R Y
- T - D Y
- T - D
AtINUAL
ACTUAL
DIIDOFT VARIANCE
Ar•TUAL
DIIDrrT
VARIANCE
DUOOf T
REVENUE
)-
CURRENT AO VALOREM f
0 {
1,675 ♦(
1.675){
9,689 {
15,075 s(
5,386){
20,100
HOMESTEAD CREDIT
151
0
151
453
0
433
0
INTERCST INCOME
0 t
25) l
25)
0 1
2751 f
225) f
300
RCNTAL CHARGES
0
42 (
42)
-;--;;)$ ------------
65
------------
375 f
------------
310)
500
1
------------
TOTAL RrVrtIUCs
---------7--
2
5
10,207 ♦
15,675 {(
------------
5.468)1
20.900
EIIPCNDITURES
SALARIES •
154 ♦
67 s(
07){
77R {
600 •t
1701•
000
,CRA (PrNSIONI
0
4
0
30
37
7
50
INSURANCC, MEDICAL AND L
30
4 f
2A)
140
37 (
103)
50
SOCIAL SECURITY - PICA
13
4 (
9)
53
37 t
161
50
a
Orr1CC SUPPL[CS
0
0
0
43
0<
431
0
CCNCRAL OPCRATINO SIIPPLI
5
p3
78
272
750
alp
1,000
MAINT. OF DIDD SIIPPLirs
SR
67
9
214
600
386
800
PROFCBs10NAL SERVICES
346
375
29
3,116
3,373259
4.300
COMMUNICATION
15
67
52
112
600
498
000
UTILITIES - CLCr.TRICAL
460
579
119
5.399
5.212 1
1R7)
6,950
•
MAINTCNANCE Or COIIT PMFNT
0
42
42
1,45fl
375 (
1.OH3)
300
PRINT[NO-DINDINr,-PUBLIRN
0
R
R
225
79 l
I.:O)
100
INGURANCR - OF•Nf.RAL
0
75
7-u
98A
675 f
3111
900
DUCE-MCMDrR5HIPS-S119SCRI
0
a8
0
75
75
100
a
OTHER
0
25
25
0
^'S
^25
300
UNALLOCATED
333
663
000
4=000
TOTAL C%FGNDITIIRFS •
1-109 •
1,742 {
-635 •
13.490 f
---------3=---
{
-.-----
2-104 ♦
--337 -----
20,900
---------
NUFB OVT ff L%PCNDI TIIR/1........'95
—� --.---
616
— -N-'----309
♦<.......r
--------
9567{1.....`
3,'83)1
♦t....._.3,a841•
eRCVf
.....suu.0
.......
.-...1
.......a.a...
OCC ACCOUNTANTS' COMPILATION REPORT.
N
1
r
3
`
Al
�)..
CITY
OF MONTICELLO
REVENUES
AND EXPENDITURES
"y+
SHADE
TREE FUND - 110
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED 6F.PTFMRFR 30. 19RS
THIS PFRIDD THIS PERIOD THIS
PERIOD Y - T
- 0 Y
- T - D
Y
- T - D
ANNUAL
ACTUAL"
01I1)OET VARIANCE
ACTUAL
mlDDF.T
VARIANCE
OUDCCT
REVENUC
A
CURRENT AD VALOREM 4
0 1
1.0311 1(
Sr05O)*
6.216 4
9,325
1l
3.309)*
12.700
P 1 I-ASMT'S-COUNTY-1
0
0
0
117
O
117
0
P i I-ASMT'O-DIRECT-1
0
0
0
12
0
12
0
i,
HOMCSTCAD CREDIT
95
0
90
28A
0
206
O
STATE GRANTS i AIDS OT14C
18
0
18
21
0
21
0
USCR FEES
600
33
567
2.107
300
1,007
400
•
INTCREST INCOME
0
300 f
300)
0
2.700
4
2,700)
3,600
OTHER
O
0
0
2
0
2
0
OTHCA t
5)
25 f
301
.323
225
100
300
_..-"-...._.."- ..........»
._........._.
-----------
----------;-
------------
------------
TOTAL RCVCt)t1CD *
700 *
1.4)7 %(
709)•
9.006 S
12.7'O
•t
3.664)*
17,000
EXPENDITURES
DALARIEO 6
SALARICS - TEMPORARY
630 1
249
500 *t
03 t
138)1
166)
5r201A 4
1.739
4.500
750
•1
i
78A)4
9891
6,000
1.000
1
PCRA (PENSION)
16
21 (
r)
235
187
f
40)
^50
INSURANCE, MEDICAL AND L
190
75 !
123)
651
675
24
900
SOCIAL SCCURITY - FICA
07
31 t
52)
431
319
t
112)
429
l
GCNCRAL OPERATING SUPPLI
0
0
R
6
75
69
100
r
SMALL TOOLS AND MINORS C
7
4 t
3)
41)
37
1
461
'.0
MOTOR FUCLO AND LUDRICAN
529
111 (
514)
529
131
(
398)
375
' Q
CLOTHINO SUPPLIER
27
4 1
23)
71
37
t
34)
^0
6R
MAINT. OF COUIPMCNT THIPP
0
17
9
239
L',0
(
09)
200
FROFCSSIONAI. SERVICES
0
03
03
2.470
730
1
1.720)
1,000
R
TRAVCL-CONFERCNCE-SCHOOL
0
0
0
40
0
1
40)
0
IMPROVEMFNTO OTHER THAN
177
50 (
427)
703
450
t
253)
600
MACHINCRY AND COUIPMENT
0
521
521
0
4,607
4,607
6.230
TOTAL LXPCNDITUFC9 f
1.9/6 •
1r1 L *t
.32.7)1
12.484 1
1 2.750
t
266 *
37 ,000
3
RCVCNUCO OVER CXPENOITURiH
1+230)1
0 *(
1.231110(
3.397)•
0
1(
3.397>1
0
...x.rz+r....
.....r...... ......:n:r
. ...........
............
......ssrar.
cxxx.s.s*rrr
SCC ACCOUNTANTS' COMPILATION RTPORT.
61P
r
SEE ACCOUNTANTS' COM►ILATION REPORT.
a
.F
CITY OF MONTICELLO
..-
REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
RE F..NIIF. SHARING - 120
FOR THE NINE MGNTHS CNDED SEPTEMBER 30. 1985
TIAs PERIOD
THIS PFRIOD
THIS PERIOD Y -
T - D Y
- T - D Y
-, T - D
A11HUI.L
ACTUAL
BUDGET
VARIANCE ACTUAL
BUDGET
VARIANCE
DUDCET
RCVENUE
FCDCRAL REVENUC SHARING 6
0 t
7.083
t( 7.OR3)t
45.740 0
63.750 %(
IR.01O)t
85.000
INTEREST INCOME
0
500
( 5001
----------- ' ------------
0
------------
4.500 l
------------
4.500)
6.000
------------
------------
TOTAL REVF.NIIFS 0
0 t
------------
7.383
64 7.SR3)6
45.740 S
An,250 tf
.7.510)•
91,000
EXPENDITURCS
AID TO OTHCR OGVT'8 t
0 t
1.125
t 1,125 S
13.300 t
10,125 tf
3.375)0
13,500
OUILDINO AND STRUCTURES
1.913
1.708
l 203)
17.070
15,375 (
1.6951
20.300
IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN
0
3,:92
3.292
29,784
29. A:5 f
IS9)
39400
FURNITURC AND FIXTURES
101
1,4.^.R
1,357
----.-.----_
30.271
.......-.
13.125
...,_.. __'--__._...-
2.8'4
17,500
----------•-
------------
TOTAL C%FCNDITURC6 0
2,019 t
------------
7.583
-.....�__-_.-..
t 5.SAR t
70.425 0
68.^..0 tf
..----------
2073)S
91.000
---------'--
^------'-_..�
REVCNNCS OVER CXPENDITURS4
2,01-)0
.... ....- ._,
0
.,... .. .._, ...,------------
i(.
-------------
21,885)$
0 t(wr.T^.7,05.10
J
Ye:`�2.01..)tfae...2
..........
".`....p1s
SEE ACCOUNTANTS' COM►ILATION REPORT.
a
.F
ICC ACCOUNTANT{' COMPILATION REPORT,
(�
CITY OF MONTICF.IA-0
REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
'11 .
ORDERLY ANNFXATION AREA - 130
FOR TIIF IJINF MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMDER
30, 1983
THIS PERIOD
THIO
PERIOD THIS PERIOD Y - T -
D Y
- T - D Y
- T - D
ANNUAL
ACTUAL
DU DGCT VARIANCE ACTUAL
BUDGET
VAR IANCF.
DIJDGF,T
REVENUE
l• CURRENT AO VALOREM 6
0 6
93 •( 9.13
538 t
033 sl
295)s
1,110
HOMESTEAD CREDIT
0
O R
.^.4
0
24
0
GRA14TS AND AIDS FROM LOf.
0
19 l 19)0
lA9 f
369)
225
t INTEREST INCOME
0
14 ( 14)
0
124 f
124)
----16S
TOTAL RCVENIIG® s
D {
1^5 {l 117){
562 s
1.123 t/
5M13)f
1"00
EXFENDITURCS
SALARIES •
0 {
03 { 03 {
445 t
730 •
305 •
1,000
1 PROFCiSIONAL SERVIOED
O
27 27
561
^.44 l
317)
325
TRAVEL-CCNFCRCNCC-SGNID).
0
15 13
127
131
4
175
--- ----- -.
' 70TAL CXFENDITURCS f --
-'-_
0 { -----------
___•_-__------------ -_-•_---__--------------
t 1_3 6 -1_33] • -------1_1_5
------------
------------
6(
-7)s
------------
----_--1,500
REVCIIUFS OVER CRPCN DITURt ............
R t os.uu...
t ............ {(a..o.....)t
........m.
{(...........)•
............
ICC ACCOUNTANT{' COMPILATION REPORT,
1
CITY OF MONTICELLO
REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
'
HRA FUND - 140
FOR THr NTNF.
MONTHS ENDEO Ef.PTEMRF.R 30. 19fl5
T11IS PERIOD THIS
PERIOD THIS
PERIOD Y -
T - D Y -
T - D
Y - T - D
ANNIIAI.
ArTIIAI.
DIIDRCT
VARIAHM ACTUAL
BUDGET
VARIANrr
DllnrrT
REVENUE
TAXCS •
0 4
0•
0•
17.812 t
0 4
17.812 •
0
AD VOLOREM fINCRCM)
0
3,142 (
3.142)
0
2n,275 f
20.273)
37.700
TAX INCRCMENTS - DIST •1
0
171 f
171)
2,996
1,537
1,459
.2..050
TAX INCRCMENTS - DIST •2
0
0
0
I8
0
SR
0
HOMES TCAD CREDIT
284
O
294
RSI
0
051
0
INTERET u+r.DMr.
0
230 f
2501
0
2'M0 f
- .250)
3,000
INITIATION - APrLIr,AT1nN
0
208 f
208)
2,400
1,07'1
525
2.500
SALE Or PRnrCRTY
0
0
0
IS, 531
0
15.5.51
0
TOTAL RC."CIIUES •
------------------------
2R4 •
3,771 fl
------------ ---"____-_
3, 4n7)•
------------
39,6.8^ •
33,937 •
------------ ------"----
5,671 /
43,250
CXPCHDITURr.S
1NTCREST CXrCNSE •
0 •
0 $
0 •
6,7n0 f
0 /(
6'7n0)s
p
a
O HCR CXrrNSC
0
0
0
30
0 (
30)
0
PROF[Sf470NA1 BCRVICCS
0
0
0
1^7
O l
t27)
0
i
1'RINC1rAL
241
0 f
2411
A,55.^,
0(
6,.552)
0
1
INTEREST
0 (
3'367)
3.367 l
9'2811 l
30,300)
21,019 l
40.400)
5
INTERCOT rXPCNSr
0
0
p
0
..56)
-
0
• 2
SALARIC�
0
371
371
2.96A
3.337
571
4,4,^.0
PLrA (PCIISION)
0
17
17
1.6
150
24
200
OOCIAL SECURITY - FICA
0
29
29
209
262
33
3:70
UrrICC SUPPLIES
0
37
37
50
PROrCS2I ONA1. SFRVI000
0
83
1,3
0
750
750
1.000
COMMUNICATION
0
4
4
0
37
37
SO
TRAVEL- CONrERENCr-Lr11n(m.
0
71
21
0
107
in,
25 0
ADVCRTICINO
0
75
75
l00
LCOAL rURL2CATI0N9
0
71t
211
0
lR7
11.7
750
j
1NOURANCC •• GENERAL
UUCS-MCM<tER8HI PR-SIIRSCRI
0
0
71
S
21
R
0
25
l07
tnl
•�
^^p
•
UTHLk
0
4
4
75
;17
77
oo
150
LAND ALDIIIRTION
0
0
0
6
SA
0<
SL)
0
TOTAL CXPCNDITURC5 •
241 /
1,930 •
3,717 4
2fl,4A f
35. A7 /
7..16 •
47,.00
1
RCVENUCt OVER CXPCNnITIIR/
47 /f
............ ............
187)•
.30 •
............ ............
/(
............,
1,6871/
1".907 fI
-- .
3,210)
._ ter.....
SEE ACCOUNTANTS' COMPILATInN REPORT.
u
C
GENERAL FUND OCTOBER - 1985
AMOUNT
CHECK NC
MN. State Treasurer - PERA W/H
455.88
21246
John Deere Distribution Service Center - Service Manuals
47.50
21247
Corrow Sanitation - Garbage Contract Payment
5,914.50
21248
MN. State Treasurer - Watercraft Receipts
25.00
21249
MN. State Treasurer - Snowmobile Receipt
36.00
21250
Dave Stromberg - Animal Control Service
212.50
21251
Jerry Hermes - Janitorial Services at Library
172.92
21252
Internal Revenue Service - Payroll, deductions
150.00
21253
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll deductions
160.04
21254
Mrs. Beverly Johnson - Animal Control Services
250.00
21255
Arve Grimsmo - Mayor Salary
175.00
21256
Dan Blonigen - Council Salary
125.00
21257
Fran Fair - Council Salary
125.00
21258
Bill Fair - Council Salary
125.00
21259
Jack Maxwell - Council salary
125.00
21260
YMCA of Mpls. - MDnthly contract payment
458.33
21261
James Preusse - Cleaning contract - City Hall
308.35
21262
PERA Insurance - Premium payment
18.00
21263
Commissioner of Revenue - State W/H
1,965.00
21264
Wright County State Bank - Federal W/H for September
4,059.00
21265
PERA Secretary - PERA W/H
854.34
21266
State Treasurer - FICA W/H
2,467.46
21267
State Treasurer - Building Permit Surcharge.
1,373.71
21268
Anoka County Social Services - Payroll deductions
88.00
21269
State of Minnesota - Seminar Registration Fee - Olive Koropehak
12.00
21270
MN. Stats Treasurer - PERA Withholdings
472.73
21271
Wright County Recorder - Annexation Study - Plat Copying
29.00
21272
Menard's - Fence
240.00
21273
Northern States Power.Co. - Utilities
7,519.81
21274
M.V. State Treasurer - Vatercraft Receipts
30.00
21275
MN. State Treasurer - Snowmobile Receipts
18.00
21276
David Stromberg - Animal Control Service
212.50
21277
Jerry Hermes - Janitorial Services at Library
172.92
21278
Void,
- 0 -
21279
Thomas Eidem - Mileage Allowance 6 MIsc. Expense
339.82
21280
Northern States Power Co. - Utilities
572.09
21281
University of Minnesota - Reg. Fee for Seminar - T. Moores b K.Trwippo 130.00
21282
PLV. State Treasurer - FICA W/H
2,626.22
21283
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll W/H
160.04
21284
Fullerton Lumber Co. - Payment No 0 - Now Fire Hall Const.
86,450.00
21285
PD1. State Treasurer - PERA W/H
1,411.81
21286
U.S. Postmaster - Stamps
176.00
21287
Commissioner of Revenue - Water 6 Sales Tax - 3rd Quarter
268.73
21288
Ronald Nienabor - Membership dues for G. Anderson
15.00
21289
Buffalo Bituminous - Payment 84-1 Project - Cty Rd. 75
48,675.20
21290
Justin Broo. Sod - Roploco sod at WWTP
202.50
21291
Monticello Fire Department - Firemen's Wages
1.125.00
21292
Nail Flatjord - Tree Spade
6,500.00
21293
Department of Natural Resources - Watercraft Receipts
19.00
21294
Department of Natural Resources - Snowmobile Receipts
58.00
21295
Daportmen[ of Natural Resources - 3 wheeler licanso receipts
54.00
21296
ICMA - Annual Subscription
239.00
21297
Bowman Barnes - Nuts, bolts, atc. - WWTP
192.16
21298
Griofnow Sheet Metal - Now Furnace at Piro Hall
850.00
21299
Harry's Auto Supply - Parts and supplies
364.30
21300
Joe's Precast, Inc. - Elm St. S6war Extension Repair
409.87
21301
Water Products, Co. - Motors, atc.
2,581.10
2002
GENERAL FUND OCTOBER AMOUNT
CHECK N(
Sentry Systems - Install Pressure Alarm system - Water Depart.
1,325.00
2130
MN. Deputy Registrar's Assoc. - 1986 Dues
140.00
2130,
Ranger Products - nuts, bolts, etc. - WWTP
213.79
21305
Earl F. Anderson - Signs for Street Depart.
345.75
21306
Share Corp. - oil for Street Depart.
55.08
21307
Capitol Supply Co. - Backwater Valve - Sewer Depart.
67.66
21308
Mobil Oil Corp. - Gas for Fire Depart. 6 Water Depart.
168.12
21309
Orkin Pest Control - Monthly contract payment
106.00
21310
Unitog Rental Services - Uniform rental
140.80
21311
Keith Kjellberg Plumbing 6 Heating - Misc. parts for New Fire Holl
26.11
21312
Tripp Oil Co. - Gas for Fire Depart.
77.32
21313
Hazard Control - Fire Extinguisher
36.78
21314
Flexible Pipe Tool - Repair Water Pump
641.75
21315
Foster Franzen Agency - Fire Depart. Insurance Premium
217.00
21316
Gould Bros. - Parts 6 Maint. of Fire Depart. Equip.
121.35
21317
Wright County Department of Highways - 5 frames and ring castings
1,000.00
21318
TKDA - August Fees for New Fire Hall Const.
1,322.49
21319
AT 6 T Info - Fire Phone Charges
3. 77
21320
Dahlgren, Shardlow 6 Uban - Planning Fees for September
481.42
21321
Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 6 Assoc. - Engineering Fees 6 Comp. Water Stud
ParaeKt
8,000.19
21322
Brock White Company - Stud Anchors - WWTP
124.50
21323
SMA Construction - Steel for Clarifier - WWTP
21.85
21324
Culligan - Service for Water Softner - WWTP
66.00
21325
MN. Depart. of Economic Services - Unemployment Benefits - G.ScYmidt
2.328.00
21326
Wright County Humane Society - Animal Impoundment Expenses
48.00
21327
La Tour Construction - Sanitary Sewer Costs
2,500.00
21328
Phillips Petroleum Cc - Gas for Fire 6 Sewer Depart.
52.39
2132
First Bank Mpls. - Public Fund Charges
4.00
21330 -
Feedrite Controls - Potassium Permanganate - Water Depart.
318.93
21331
Star 6 Tribune - Newspaper Subscription
13.72
21332
Grays, Johnson 6 Assoc. - Computer Chnrges for September
290.00
21333
University of Minn. - Assessor seminar fees for G. Anderson
50.00
21334
Arve Grimsmo - Travel Expense for Civil Defense Drill
57.00
21335
Vance's Service Center - Gas for Fire Department
9.81
21336
Fyle's Backhoe 6 Sewer Service - Digging 6 Backhoe services
1,282.50
21337
Brenteson Const. - ELm Street Construction Costs
2,760.00
21338
Fricke 6 Sons Sod, Inc. - Sod for Cednr St.
205.30
21339
Automatic Garage Door Co. - gnrago door openers at mtce. bldg.
994.50
21340
Hutchinson Mfg. 6 Sales, Inc. - Snow Plow Adaptor
2,600.00
21341
Banker's Life insurance - Insurance Premiums
3.717.90
21342
Simonson Lumber - Material for Streets and Sewer Depart.
321.21
21343
Safety-Kleen Corp. - Equip. mice. at Mice. bldg.
36.00
21344
Seelye Plastics. Inc. - Couplings, etc. - WWTP
40.42
21345
State Trensurer - Dictaphone 6 book - WWTP
76.00
21346
Davis Electronic Service Co. - Repair pagers - Fire Depart.
179.16
21347
Monticello Fire Depart. - 1985 Reimbursement from City
573.48
21348
Downtown Standard - Gas for Fire Department
13.50
21349
Conway Fire Safety - 40 Lightwater 5 gallon pails - Fire Depart.
760.00
21350
Maus Tire Service - Repairs for Park Depart.
12.64
21351
Monticello Office Products - Office Supplies
127.45
21352
Moon Motors - John Dears Tractor 6 mise. supplies
5,926.22
21353
National Bushing - Misc. Parts for all departs.
643.63
' 21351
Monticello TW Hardware - Supplies for Water Depart.
6.27
2135.
Monti Motors - Repair radiator - Stroat depart.
29.00
21356
Hawkins Chemical Inca. - Chlorine. for WWTP
482.70
21357
Jim Hatch Sales - Boots and Part's for Street Depart.
123.36
21358
Coodin Company - Parts for WWTP
15.20
21359
-_
I
GENERAL FUND - OCTOBER
AMOUNT
CHECK NC
Hoglund Bus Co. - Parts for Street Depart.
40.15
21360
J.M. Oil Co. - Gas for Street Depart.
212.30
21361
National Life Insurance. Co. - Ins. Premium for T. Eidem
100.00
21362
Beisswen ger's Hardware - Hose for Parks Depart.
29.58
21363
Big Lake Machine - Thermostat for mtce. bldg
12.95
21364
Big Lake Lumber - Elm Street construction
107.40
21365
Seitz Our Own Hardware - Supplies for all departs.
460.79
21366
Coast of Coast - Parts and supplies for all departs.
113.53
21367
Meadowood Inc. - 20 large blueprints for Kjellberg Plaza
63.00
21368
NSP - Construction cost of underground service for new Fire Hall
1,863.00
21369
Mpls. Star 6 Tribune - Ad for Snow Plow
44,00
21370
Current, Inc. - Ad for Snow Plow
20.40
21371
Monticello Times - Legal Publications
1,422.35
21372
Stephens - Peck, Inc. - New Deputy Registrar Book
26.00
21373
Maus Foods - Supplies for all departs.
144.77
21374
Little Mountain Electric - Shop and Garage Pole Barn
304.08
21375
Office Admin. 6 Automation - 3 yr. subscription
39.00
21376
Local d49 - Union Dues
147,00
21377
Wright County Sheriff's Depart. - Police contract payment - Oct.
9,782.13
21378
Economics Press, Inc. - Subscription Fee
12.69
21379
Monticello Printing - Office supplies
185.80
21380
Smith, Pringle d Hayes - Legal Fees
1,104.00
21381
Monticello Firemen's Association Relief - Retirement fund
21,864.00
21382
Foster Franzen Agency - Accident 6 Health Insur. Renewal - Fire
De. 340.20
21383
Rick Wolfsteller - Mileage
86.50
21384
League of MN. Cities - Self Insured Workers Comp. Program
16,847.00
21385
Audio Communications - Repair of radio at mtce. bldg
84.15
21386
Century Lab - Supplies for Snow 6 Ice Depart.
534.18
21387
Glass Hut - Glass for loader
99.10
21388
Midwest Computer Set -bice - Professional Services at WWTP
100.00
21389
Davis Water Equipment Co. - Pipes, flanges for WWTP
357.12
21390
Midwest Chem Specialties, Inc. - Acid solution for WWTP
341.00
21391
Marco Products - Copy machine, typewriter, office supplies
8,503.65
21392
Gary Anderson - Mileage and travel expense
228.61
21393
Wages for September
TOTAL FOR MONTH OF OCTOBER
26,892.89
315,632.67
LIQUOR FUND
AMOUNT
CASH DISBURSEMENTS - OCTOBER 1985
M. State Treasurer - PERA W/H
89,88
Twin City Wine Co. - Wine
835.65
Ed Phillips 6 Sons. Co. - Liquor
848.63
Commissioner of Revenue - Sales Tax for August
8,540.37
Griggs, Cooper 6 Co. - Liquor
1,680.27
Ed Phillips 6 Sons Co. - Liquor
359.19
Twin City Wine Co. - Liquor
1,428.00
Commissioner of Revenue - State W/H for September
173.00
Wright County State Bank - Federal W/H for September
449.00
M. State Treasurer - PERA W/H
87.66
State Treasurer - FICA W/H
303.44
MN. State Treasurer - PERA W/H
58.93
NSP - Utilities
666.73
Twin City Wine Co. - Wine
654.45
Quality Wine b Spirits Co. - Wine
436.30
Ed Phillips 6 Sons Co. - Liquor
4,921.39
Twin City Wine Co. - Wine
744.18
Quality Wine 6 Spirits Co. - Wine
7,352.20
MN. State Treasurer - FICA W/H
250.52
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll deductions
170.00
Ed Phillips d Sons Co. - Liquor
2,229.67
l IN. State Treasurer - PERA W/H
148.03
Commissioner of Revenue - Sales Tax for September
6,202.78
Griggs, Cooper and Company - Liquor
1,828.02
Eagle Wine Company - Wint•
258.16
Twin City Wine Co.
739.41
MN. Jaycees - Membership Dues
35.00
M.V. Municipal Liquor Stores Association - Membership dues
125.00
Frito-Lay, Inc. - mist. mdse.
84.79
Gruys, JOhnson, 4 Assoc. - Computer Chnrges
110.00
Banker's Life Insurance - Insurance premium
345.44
Granite City Cash Register - Paper supplies
153.24
The HTC 6 A/C Service Co. - Repair cooler
28.00
Const to Coast - mist. supplies
9.25
Maus Foods - supplies
22.84
Bridgewater Telephone Co. - Telephone
51.25
Richard Doerr - Repairs
15.00
Old Dutch Foods, Inc. - mist. mdse.
123.25
Viking Coca-Cola Bottling Co. - mise. mdse.
415.40
Monticello Office Products - Office supplies
31.13
Jude Candy 6 Tobacco Co. - misc. mdse.
453.17
Seven -Up Bottling Co. - pop and misc. mdse.
314.45
Grosslein Beverage Inc. - Beer
11,441.19
Thorpe Distributing Co. - Beer
3,818.65
Dick Beverage Co - Beer
2,612.10
Bernick's Pepsi-Cola Co. - misc. mdse.
413.50
/ nay Distributing Co - Boer
840.05
'�L_ ahlheimer Distributing Co. - Bear
13,285.83
Yonak Sanitation - Garbage service - September
91.50
Monticello TW Hardware - misc. supplies
4.97
Llefert Trucking - Freight Chargee
346.28
Studio Sign Co - 2 paper supplies
16.00