City Council Agenda Packet 02-09-1987AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
1_ Monday, February 9, 1987 - 7:30 p.m.
Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo
Council Members: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Warren Smith, Dan B1onlgen
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutee of the Regular Meeting Held January 26, 1987.
3. Citizens Comments /Petitions, Requests, and Complaints.
Public Hearings
6. Continuation of a Public Hearing on an Amendment to the Tax Increment
District 05 Finance Plan.
Old Business
5. Consideration of Approving Plans and Specifications for Public
Improvements in Construction Five Subdivision and Authorizing
!! a Call for Bids.
1 New Business
6. Consideration of Ratifying the Appointment of Mr. Al Larson to
the Monticello HRA.
7. Adjourn.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, January 26, 1987 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair, warren Smith,
Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: None.
2. Approval of Minutes.
Councilmember Dan Blonigen requested that the minutes for item number
five be amended to indicate that he had abstained from the vote.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously
carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held January 12,
1987, with the change in voting on item number five being corrected.
3. Additional Agenda Item.
Couneilmember Bill Fair requested that an additional agenda item
be added under new business to discuss the Senior Citizen Center
position and how it relates to the City government. Motion was made
by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously carried to
place this item under now business as 8A.
4. A Public Hearing on a Proposal to Issue Commercial Development Current
Refunding Bonds for Monticello Medical Facilities Company.
A representative from Juran 6 Moody, bond consultants for the Medical
Facilities Company, was present to request preliminary approval of
allowing the Medical Facilities project to refinance Industrial Revenue
Bonds that were originally issued in 1981. The original bonds were
sold in the amount of 51,300,000 at an overage coupon rate of 14.84 percent
for the purpose of building the Medical Facilities Clinic adjacent
to the hospital. Currently the owners aro able to refinance the
original bond issue at a lower interest rate and require the City's
approval to do so.
The City's bond counsel and financial consultants indicate no difficulty
with the refunding proposal.
As a result, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Warren Smith,
and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution granting preliminary
approval to the issuance of the refunding bonds. See Resolution 87-2.
5. A Public Hearing on a Proposal to Amend the Finance Plan and Budget
for Tax Increment District 45, Construction Five Addition.
The original Tax Increment Plan for the Construction Five Addition
contained a proposal to erect an 18 -unit apartment building (now
-1-
C-
Council Minutes - 1/26/87
completed) and a 25,000 aq ft office/warehouse. The estimated tax
increment generated by these two structures would have been enough
to finance a $390,000 bond to allow for public improvements such
as sewer, water, storm sewer, and streets. The developer is now
proposing and has received approval from the City Council for a 24 -unit
and a 30 -unit apartment building within the District. The tax increment
projected from these two multiple housing structures would be sufficient
to pay for a 5490,000 construction project. The proposed improvements
would include sanitary sewer extended along Lauring Lane from Washington
to Fallon and down Fallon Avenue to serve both existing properties
owned by Malones and the Rand property. Water would also be extended
along Lauring Lane from Washington to Fallon and would be looped
around Fallon.
As part of the Tax Increment Financing Law, if a finance plan or
budget for the district is changed, a public hearing is required.
The HRA has recently approved and adopted the amended budget and
finance plan based on the new apartment structures being built within
the district; and since the Wright County Auditor's office has 30
days to respond to the amended tax increment plan, the City Administrator
noted that the public hearing should be continued for an additional
30 days to allow for any response from other government authorities.
In the meantime, the City Administrator noted that the plans and
specifications for the improvements could be approved at the next
Council meeting and advertisement for bids could also be approved
February 9. By consensus, the public hearing on the amendment of
the finance plan and budget for Tax Increment District 15 was continued
until February 9.
6. Consideration of Adopting a Position of Zoning Administrator/Planner.
Recently, the City Council requested that the staff prepare an in-depth
evaluation on whether or not it would be beneficial for the City
to add a Zoning Administrator/Planner position to help eliminate
the work load of the present Building Official/Zoning Administrator.
Statistical information was presented to the Council indicating the
approximate hours being spent by the Building Official/Zoning Administrator
on building permit related duties, planning and zoning duties, along
with assessing obligations.
Mayor Crimsmo noted that when the present Building Inspector was
hired, the City was primarily looking for a certified assessor that
would be able to entirely review the City's parcels and re-evaluate
and correct market valuations for tax purposes. Mr. Grimsmo noted
that over the poet few years, the Building Inspector has completed
this work and that possibly to eliminate some of his duties in regards
to assessing, possibly the City could return to using the County
Assessor for the future. Mayor Grimsmo also questioned whether the
City is currently large enough to support its own City Planner and
felt that currently the City has a good relationship with its consulting
Planner.
-2-
Council Minutes - 1/26/87
Councilmember Bill Fair noted that although the City has been entirely
reviewed in regard to assessing, assessment evaluation in an on-going
activity; and if the City returns to using the services of Wright
County for this purpose, he would like to know what the cost of this
service would be. In regards to using a consulting planner, Mr.
Fair felt that some of the primary duties of a staff planner would
be to review and regulate enforcement of the City's present ordinance
regulations and the day to day activities associated with development
which would not seem appropriate to refer to a consultant.
Councilmember Slonigen felt the City should evaluate the possibility
of relieving assessing duties from the Building Inspector's position
and that this may give him enough time to do the other duties the
City expects but currently didn't feel the City needs its own full
time planner on staff; Councilmember Fran Fair noted that originally
the discussion on the possibility of a full-time planner was instituted
not only to relieve the present Building Inspector of extra duties
but felt a full-time plemner would be needed in the future in regards
to the annexation procedures currently being considered and the potential
growth that will occur. No. Fair also noted that there are probably
jobs and duties that are not currently being done because the time
is not available and felt a full-time planner would also provide
more direction and support to the Planning Commission.
Mayor Grimsmo, in regards to annexation, felt the City should continue
using consultants who are familiar with the city's past history and
that a now staff planner may not be familiar with pest trends and
the city in general.
Administrator Eidem indicated that he would be able to gat the coat
of returning to Wright County for assessing within the City by the
next Council meeting. As a result, a motion was made by Bill Fair,
seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to continue consideration
of this item until the February 9 Council meeting to enable more
information to be supplied on the coat of returning to the County
for assessing.
-a-
Council Minutes - 1/26/87
7. Consideration of an Application for a Conditional Use Permit to Dispense
Automotive Foal Incidental to a Princioal Use.
At the January 13 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission
recommended that the Council grant approval to the issuance of a
conditional use permit for the purpose of allowing dispensing of
automotive fuel incidental to a principal use, namely, a convenience
store. A convenience store was proposed by Mr. Tom Holthaus at the
old site of Charlie's west Liquor Lounge/Supper Club. The site in
question existed as a legal non -conforming use grandfathered in when
annexation occurred, and City ordinances do allow that this non -conforming
use could be lessened by converting the structure to a convenience
store. The conditional use permit was required not for the convenience
store principal use, but to allow for dispensing of automotive fuel
an part of the new use.
At the public hearing held before the Planning Commission, substantial
public opposition was expressed concerning lighting, increased traffic,
and increased child pedestrian traffic because of its location near
an elementary school. The Planning Commission, after conclusion
of the public hearing, recommended the approval of a conditional
use permit for dispensing of motor fuels be allowed provided certain
conditions were attached, including a detailed landscaping and screening
plan, hard surfacing of the parking lot area with proper curb and
gutter, a maximum of four fuel dispensing pumps be allowed, no dispensing
of fuels for trucks exceeding one ton, and houra of operation not
to exceed 5 a.m. to 11 p.m. daily.
Prior to the City Council meeting, area residents opposed to the
development submitted a petition to the Environmental Quality Board
requesting that an Environmental Assessment worksheet be completed
on this project. The petitioners indicated they felt the project
may have a significant harmful effect on the environment through
runoff, leakage. spillage, seepage or other forms of transfer of
contaminants from this project to the Mississippi River.
The City of Monticello was notified by the Environmental Quality
Hoard that the petition was received, and the Board named the City
of Monticello as the Responsible Governmental Unit. The Responsible
Governmental Unit has the requirement of evaluating the petition
to determine It the necessary evidence was presented that demonstrates
the project may have potential for significant environmental effects.
City Administrator Eidem Informed the Council that at this meeting
the issue of the conditional use request for dispensing of motor
fuels should not be considered at this time, but the main responsibility
of the Council would be to decide whether enough evidence was presented
by the petitioners to require an Environmental Aasesament worksheet;
or if not, tho petition should be rejected. Mr. Eidem noted that
if the Council's decision was to reject the petition, the conditional
use request should be tabled for approximately 30 days to allow for
any party to appeal the Council's decision.
-a-
Council Minutes - 1/25/87
Mr. Tom Holthaus briefly explained to the Council the proposed development
r and a representative from Bennett Petroleum Company briefly explained
to the Council how fuel tanks would be installed at the project.
The representative noted that many new safety features are incorporated
into underground storage tanks and that the State regulates the type
of tanks that can be installed in certain soil conditions. Mr. Bennett
noted that the area in question is quite sandy and very suitable
for this type of installation and that new methods such as double
wall construction and leak detectors, along with monitoring wells,
can be installed as extra precautions. In addition, he noted that
the tanks now being installed are epoxy coated and rust protected
and monitored by a cathodic system which indicates whether or not
rusting is occurring in a tank.
tar. Myron Haldy, representing the petitioners, again voiced their
opinion that possible environmental hazards could occur with the
site located near the Mississippi River. Mr. Haldy also noted that
previous Council action' has been to turn down requests for multiple
housing in R-1 zones and felt that a gas station which is normally
required in a B-3 commercial zone should, therefore, not be considered
anywhere close to a conforminn use in a residential area. Mr. Haldy
also referred to two other recent spills or leaks within the City
and felt that the risk was too great to allow additional underground
storage tanks.
Mayor Grimsmo questioned which two other leaks had occurred, and
t. it was determined that actual tank leakage had not been determined
but that a Standard station in downtown Monticello had some contaminated
soil from 20-30 yearn worth of ground surface spillage. Councilmember
Bill Fair also noted that previous Council action to deny multiple
family housing in an R-1 zone involved a vacant piece of property
and did not have to contend with an existing non -conforming use that
is being altered as in this case.
Councilmomber Fran Fair acknowledged the concerns of the petitioners
but questioned whether the City Council should be requiring a developer
to prepare an EAW for a project when other similar projects have
occurred and had never been required to prepare an EAW. Councilmember
Bill Fair noted that he did not feel this project could be considered
any more dangerous because of this location than any other similar
type project in Monticello. He noted that almost the entire City
drains eventually into the Mississippi River and didn't feel the
site location in question is anymore unique than any other area within
the City. He also noted that the petition reform to mainly speculations
about possible harards that could occur because of the development
and that no real hard facts are presented to indicate this project
Sa unique. Councilmembar Blonigen and Fran Fair, based on the information
presented, agreed that the petition did not merit an EAW. Councilmember
Warren Smith noted that the Council should consider the petition
seriously but also agreed that he could not find any proof submitted
by the petitioners that this project is unique and will cause environmental
hazards or that the noise levels, traffic, or any other concerns
would justify an EAW in this development. Mayor Grimsmo concurred
Council Minutes - 1/26/67
�
with other Council members and noted that traffic volume in the area
�_ shouldn't increase because of the convenience store being located
there over a lounge/tavern or even additional single family housing.
He noted that the potential users of a convenience store would probably
be local residents in that area and that the traffic shouldn't increase
because of customers from other areas.
After thoroughly discussing the petition received, motion was made
by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously carried to
deny the petition on the grounds that the petition failed to present
material evidence that would demonstrate because of its nature or
location of the project that the project has potential for significant
environmental effects. The petition concerning the environmental
effects was highly speculative, did not demonstrate how or why the
nature or location of -this project was unique to consider the provisions
of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, and that the EPA and State
Fire Marshal regulate tank installation which should mitigate any
potential significant environmental effects.
In addition, a motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair,
and unanimously carried to continue the conditional use request for
the dispenaing of automotive fuels until March 23, 1987, Council
meeting to allow for 30 day period for an appeal to be filed in District
Court pertaining to this project.
S. Consideration of Authorizing Final Payment on City Hall Ceiling Resurfacing.
Lindberg Painting and Decorating has recently completed the interior
scaling of the roof docking and beams in the City Hall and requested
final payment be approved on the project.
Staff members noted that when the finish was applied with an airless
sprayer, a lot of overspray occurred on furniture, desks, registers.
electrical fixtures, along with windows and blinds, etc. Mr. Lindberg
has attempted to clean this up but has currently not finished the
project, and the staff recommended that until the clean up is completed.
final payment should not be made. it was also noted that if Mr.
Lindberg is unable to complete the clean up. the City may have to
consider an outside firm to finish the clean up procedures. City
Administrator suggested that the Council give Lindberg Decorating
an opportunity to finish their clean up work before considering other
alternatives.
Motion was made by Bili Pair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously
carried not to authorize final payment at this time but to allow
Lindberg's to attempt to clean the City Hall area first.
9. Consideration of Senior Citizen Canter Director's Position.
Recently, the City Council has discussed the position of Senior Citizen
Center Director and whether the position is a part-time or full-time
-6-
01;�_
Council Minutes - 1/26/87
staff position. Because of the recent comparable worth study, if
`�- it is determined that the Senior Citizen Center Director is a full-time
staff position, a substantial adjustment in salary would have to
be made to comply with the law.
Councilmember Bill Fair felt the Council should clarify what its
total relationship is to the Senior Citizens program and whether
the Director works for the City or the Senior Citizen Center. Mr.
Fair noted that no policy has ever been established by a previous
Council as to whether the City considers the Senior Citizen Center
another department of the City or whether past history has only shown
that the City government provides some support financially. It was
his opinion that if the City is to consider it an actual department
and the Director's position as a supervisor, more accountability
of not only the Director but the entire Senior Citizen's Center,
needs to be established. He noted that it was his opinion the Senior
Citizen Center has always been an autonomous service organization
and not a branch of city government; and if the City is to consider
it a branch, the Council would be involved in more policy making
and staffing determinations which could result in limiting services
at the Center or charging fees if necessary.
The Senior Citizen Center currently has its own Board of Directors
who, in Mr. Fair's opinion, are more capable of defining the role
and duties of the Director and how the Cantor is operated. It was
suggooted by Mr. Fair that the City continue to provide some financial
support to the Canter as it has during the past, but not to consider
the Center a branch of city government requiring more regulations
than currently exist.
Councilmember Fran Fair noted that the discussion has nothing to
do with the present Director's performance but cautioned that if
it is considered a branch of city government, the City would have
to have much more control over the activities that take place at
the Center along with the possibility of setting hours and limiting
membership, otc.
Senior Citizen Center member, Marie Peterson, briefly informed the
Council of how the Canter was established and how the Board of Directors
was set up and approved by the City Council. Cantor member, Loo
Nelson, requested that the Council consider a joint meeting with
the Senior Board to study the issue and determine what alternatives
would be available. It was also noted by the City Administrator
that other communitias who participated with Monticello in the comparable
worth study did not have any Senior Citizen Center Director positions
that were evaluated. The only other community that has a full-time
director was St. Cloud.
Mayor Grimsmo recommended that the Council meet with the Senior Citizen
Center Board prior to the next Council meeting; and as a result,
motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by warren Smith, and unanimously
carried to have a special meeting at 6:10 p.m., February 9, 1987,
-7-
Council Minutes - 1/26/87
to discuss with theSenior Citizen Board the role of the Senior Citizen
Center and how it re la tea to the city government. Councilmember
Bill Pair and Warren Smith will meet with the Senior Citizen Board
prior to the special meeting to explain the options and alternatives
available if it is determined the Center is a branch of government.
10. Status Report, PSG.
Wastewater Treatment Plant Marager, Steve Sunt, reviewed with the
Council the November and December 1986 operations report on the Wastewater
Treatment Plant contract. Mr. Sunt noted that the operational cost
of the Wastewater Treatment Plant looked favorable at this time,
and they are currently under budget which may result in a rebate
to the City at the end of the contract period. After further discussion,
the report was accepted as presented.
11. Consideration of Bills for the Month of January.
Motion was made by Bill Pair, seconded by warren Smith, and unanimously
carried to approve the bills for the month of January as presented,
except for Check 023732 for Lindberg Paint 6 Decorating.
12. Appointment to Joint Airport Commission.
Administrator Cidem noted that the recently adopted Joint Airport
Commission consisting of the City of Monticello and the City of Big
Lake hao been established and that two members should be appointed
to the Commission. It was recommended that the City Administrator
and Economic Development Director, 011ie Koropchak, be appointed
members of this Commission.
Motion was made by Bill Pair, seconded by Fran Pair, and unanimously
carried to appoint 011ie Koropchak end Tom 6idem as the City's representatives
to the Joint Airport Commission recently established.
Rick Wolfatetler
Assistant Administrator
C
U
Council Agenda - 2/9/87
'1 4. Continuation of a Public Hearing on an Amendment to the Tax Increment
District 05 Finance Plan. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
This hearing is being continued from the last meeting in January
due to the notification term required for the school and county.
Wright County did not waive its 30 -day comment period. At the close
of the hearing, the Council will need to adopt the resolution amending
the finance plan and budget for Tax Increment District 05.
The following agenda item covering the public improvements is the
reason for the amended finance plan. John Simola's agenda supplement
will be reviewing the proposed plane and specifications prepared
by OSM. In essence, we are attempting to take full advantage of
the tax increment generated by this size of project. As a note of
general information, we may adopt the budget to be this large even
though for some reason we may scale back the program in the future.
Under state law, we may always reduce a budget or scope of project,
but we cannot enlarge a district, nor can we enlarge the budget without
the public hearing process.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Upon closing of the public hearing:
1. Adopt a resolution amending the finance plan for Tax Increment
District 45.
2. Do not adopt the resolution.
C. STAPP RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the resolution be adopted to allow the increased
public improvements to be installed.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the resolution was transmitted with your January 26 agenda.
ME
Council Agenda - 2/9/87
i
`�- 5. Consideration of Approving Plans and Specifications for Public Improvements
in Construction Five Subdivision and Authorizing a Call for Bide. (J.S.)
14
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The City Engineer has prepared plane for the improvements to Lauring
Lane. Washington Street, and Fallon Avenue in the area of the Construction
Five tax increment project. The project consists of construction
of a new section of Lauring Lane through the gravel pit ending near
the current civil defense siren site. Fallon Avenue will be upgraded
to a 36 -foot roadway with curb and gutter with a new entrance approximately
75-100 fact south of the existing entrance near the railroad tracks
and Washington. Washington will also receive curb and gutter from
the railroad tracks to Lauring Lane on both sides and will be upgraded
to a 9 -ton roadway.
The open ditch now existing on the east side of Washington Street
will be filled and a 60 -inch storm sewer and a box culvert system
will be installed in this area. A smaller storm sewer, 30 inches
in size, will be built along Lauring Lane from Washington Street
easterly toward the civil defense siren site.
A 12 -inch water main will be constructed on the new Lauring Lane,
and a 6 -inch water main will loop through Fallon Avenue, providing
service for Malonea and future development of the Rand Mansion site.
Sanitary sewer will be constructed on Lauring Lane, with a short
section extending off of Lauring Lane to serve the Malone home.
In addition, another short section of sanitary sewer will be built
on the north end of Fallon to serve development of the Rand Mansion
site in the future. The estimated project costs can be found in
the Tax increment Plan which was included with your last agenda.
I have enclosed a copy of the preliminary plane for the project.
John Badalich will be bringing a final set of plane for your review
for Monday evening's meeting. It is my understanding that Tom Eidom
will be making contact with the owners of the Rand property and Bill
Malone prior to Monday evening'a meeting if possible. It is our
intention to negotiate a direct contract with these property owners
to pay their fair share. If these negotiations are successful, there
would be no need to conduct future public hearings.
B. ALTERNATIVE. ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to approve the plane as presented
by the City Engineer and accept the cost estimate and to proceed
with the tax increment project an planned.
2. The second alternative would be to change, modify, or dismiss
the plane as prasentud.
-3-
L
Council Agenda - 2/9/87
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the staff recommendation that the Council select Alternative M1
and proceed with the project as planned.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Maps.
-4-
L AU RING
LANE
;S. ^ .. I� , �"" � ,� of � • r�_,;,,r
1'-,=' ltd, d o �. .R� ., �,. ;. ,, ., r2 ,�{� Y,, ^..,,}� �,�.'``� `aw'• A
� .` Z +''+ \` �,.'" I '� L---"" � ,�. , _.l ,►n:' ,,,v+�ti„ sem• -.�
LAUKINU IANC
1.D.wrrO .r wt 1r. DSO-'
♦ ryrtw I.�/ra0 /�rwWpr/
f r
0
rrncu utriDD
UUrDW t.rL
/
ov�
~-~
�
"0 tT. "10.
^
'---------
-------------------
'
ov�
L _J
NOTE: n -on, 1•L.111 \ of t..t• u'.c r • L•o uc+a•
+o un u.•aa n u•.+ r•,u ue Iw nrt utr•et.
w•sT wo o+Tc. meo a ... .........
A!"
+row
••o en n.torn, I eo c+ u ctm • a
ot • • .
�0 . e0 . i ♦L.. V.10 • —.e •a.T. \LO•l ••
NOTE : �•1+•LL 1••IT••• a ••TLM••ll TO "t" W- C -9-1e• TWO
.1IT • 1 •. • u\.L •+.0• • •.1
•. 1.1.•T.o• o. a•nn•ai .•rte.•[.
tl 1aw1 [m{Teat Tse e'M.u+••• \l Re.
wn .a..0 mo t.�u,.e u.n•.. •.,1
CV\)
C•l•Orl. YlrOl . 0l l.l. \ L•1[I
1•e •o c., eu.w • ., •.,ca
ue •a• . [ ul.•e1+r
n•0.1. \•Lbel \ NALn"nu t. a ••lo l•0
IIt+P • •ll �•' 01
�'� •, r•a<.ocsor acct* •.lL6M V(Yu[
�.1"
••• --' t..._ .... Ei� .
R
L'ill
Council Agenda - 2/9/87
6. Consideration of Ratifying the Appointment of Mr. Al Larson to the
Monticello RRA. (O.K.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The Monticello HRA bylaws state the authority shall consist of five
members. Since the resignation of Roger Hedtke, the HRA has functioned
with four members. At the February d, 1987, NRA meeting, the authority
voted between two nominees, Al Larson and Dr. C. McCarty, for HRA
membership. A motion was made by Ken Maus to recommend Al Larson,
owner of Coast to Coast and a Monticello resident, for HRA membership.
The motion wao seconded by Ben Smith and passed 0-0. Thereby, the
HRA recommends Al Larson to the Mayor and City Council for ratification
of appointment as an HRA member. Al Larson -9 HRA term will expire
December, 1988.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Ratify the appointment of Al Larson to the Monticello HRA.
2. Deny ratification to appoint Al Larson to the Monticello RRA.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Mayor and City Council ratify the appointment
r of Al Larson to the Monticello HRA.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
-4-
(,ilk o� /I'/onficel[o
'r- Omce of me Poona (612) 2952711
C.1y A.mmistraid Mev. (612) 333-5739
�I
4 February, 1987
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Tom Eidery/Ifl.�--
RE: City Business
Absent from the regular meeting's agenda is any consideration of
the Senior Citizen Program. I have assumed that since you are
conducting a special meeting prior to the regular meeting, you
will also take action during that special meeting. Consequently,
the topic should be resolved, and there is no need for it to appear
on the second agenda. Obviously, if the issue requires additional
time during the regular meeting, a motion to renew the discussion
from the special meeting would be appropriate.
I have not placed the question of the Zoning Administrator on the
agenda for this meeting. Rather, since the last meeting I did
talk with Mr. Gruber of the County Assessor's office. A copy of
his letter 1s enclosed for your review. Mr. Gruber also stopped
in to see me on Tuesday afternoon, having met earlier In the day
with the County Board. Two things came from our conversation.
First, the County is not opposed to hiring additional assessing
staff in the future when the state of Minnesota initiatea the accredited
assessor requirement. It is very likely at that time a number
of local jurisdictions will opt to contract with the County rather
than seek out their own accredited assessor. We may be able to be
considered at that time. The other noteworthy point 1s that in
his estimation, Mr. Gruber foals that a city the size of Monticello
should have a person dedicating approximately 900 to 1000 hours
in assessment. The figures I gave you at the last meeting indicated
that Gary was, in fact, putting in approximately 600 hours on an
average. If we accept Mr. Gruber'• estimate as reasonably accurate,
then the position Clearly has greater time demands than we estimated.
Again, rather than placing this on the agenda, 1 am providing the
extra information for you to consider when evaluating various alternative
solutions. I anticipate placing thin issue on the February 23
agenda.
Lastly, as of the preparation of this agenda, Service Master of
Monticello is cleaning City Hall, with their fee to be paid by
Mr. Lindberg's insurance company. Based on current information,
we anticipate them to be complete by Monday evening. If the cleaning
250 East ®roadway a Monticello, MN 55362-9245
Mayor and Council
d February, 1987
Page 2
is complete, and is considered satisfactory to all, then I suggest
we authorize final payment to Mr. Lindberg at the end of the meeting.
I suggest you simply call City Hall Monday afternoon or come e
little early before the special meeting to look the place over.
If you're all satisfied, then we can authorize the insurance company
to pay Service Master, and we can authorize final payment to Mr.
Lindberg.
MEMO
TO: The Mayor of Monticello, Council Members, Tom Eidem,
City Administrator, and Karen Hansen, Senior Citizen
Director.
FROM: 8111 Fair, City Council Member.
DATE: January 26, 1987.
RE: Issues Concerning the City's Role to the Senior
Citizen's Program and Clarification of Employment
Status of the Senior Citizen Director.
The issue of whether the Director of the Senior Citizen Center is
or should be a full time City staff position has been brought before
this council for clarification. This became an issue due to the
City's comparable worth study.
In revealing the background information provided by the city adminis-
trator and the senior citizen director, i have come to the conclusion
that this council should clarify what its rel-ationship is to the
total senior citizens program in this community and clarification
should include who the senior citizen director works for and who is
responsible for establishing the terms of that employment. Is the
senior program a department of this city's administration or is It
an Independent organization which the city has historically provided
financial subsidy to?
The history of the senior citizen's organization began in 1967 when
a group of senior residents proposed to organize a senior citizen's
club and made a request to the village council for financial
assistance. As a result of that request a $100 a month subsidy
for the club was approved by the village council. The next request
a few months later dealt with providing the senior club a facility
for meetings and functions. This also was granted and eventually
a facility was purchased for this purpose. At about this same time
the village council also voted to approve the first board of directors
for the club. Why this council needed to approve the board of an
Independent club is not clear but 1 suspect It did so simply because
It was Asked to by the club and the council wished to be accommodating.
Whatever the rationala,council ratification of the board of directors
for the senior citizen'e club became the practice and was incorporated
Into the senior citizen center constitution and by -lows. As years
passed and councils changed, further requests for additional support
of the senior citizen's program were made and approved. Ultimately
this made the senior citizen's center almost totally dependent on
the city for its operating budget and the assumption seemed to evolve
that the senior citizen center was now a city owned and managed
program with a mandate to he funded. As it existstoday, the city
Memo - Senior Citizen Program
January 26, 1987
Page 2
does provide over $20,000 towards the annual operation of the center
besides providing a facility rent free.
With this large financial commitment by the City, it is easy to see
why this is assumed to be a city department. Yet while city funding
to this program has been generous, 1 do not believe the past councils
nor this council has ever defined the senior citizen's center as a
city department and tried to remove the autonomy it has as an
independent organization. The city has not controlled the income
generated by the center's various activities and it has never
insisted on limiting the participation in the center to its own
tax payers and the city has never considered dismissing the board
of directors or replacing the center's constitution or by-laws and
replacing them with city developed policies and procedures. By
choosing not to do these things, I believe past councils and this
council intend for the senior citizen's center to be an autonomous
body and not a city department.
However, because no policy has ever been established defining the
city's relationship with the senior citizen center, this council
now has no real policy to guide it in resolving the status of the
senior citizen director's position. Therefore, i believe this
council is obligated to state a firm position as to Its relationship
to the senior citizen's program and that program's directors
position.
For myself, i feel thnt the senior citizen's center should be an
autonomous service organization and not a branch of city government.
I feel that the City should continue with its finnncial subsidy
to the center, but I do not believe it should be involved in
policy making and resolving staffing needs. i believe our relation-
ship to the center can be similar to those you have with the
community education and YMCA programa which we also subsidize.
I feel the board of directors of the senior citizen's center should
administer subsidy provided by the city and should be the employer
of the center's director. it is my opinion that they are better
capable to define the role and duties of the director and decide
accordingly whether the position should be full or part time.
I further feel that the senior citizen's center should pursue
other sources of funding rather than relying so heavily on the
city's subsidy for its survival. As noted in the center's
constitution and by-lews, participation is open to residents of
the surrounding area, so perhaps the surrounding townships of
Memo - Senior Citizen Program
January 26, 1987
Page A3
Big Lake, Otsego, Monticello and Silver Creek should be petitioned
for support.
As for the current issue as to whether the director's position is
full time and whether the salary should be adjusted accordingly,
I must take the position that past council actions do not support
the argument that this is currently a full time position.
Although council minutes of February, 1978 refer to the position
as being elevated to full time status. I believe this simply was
to grant the director the fringe benefits available only to
full time employees in recognition of the excellent job she was
doing and continues to do. However, no salary increase was
authorized at the time and no redefining of the director's
duties was made. In fact, throughout the ensuing years the
director's salary has continued to reflect a part time status.
Before I can consider any change in that status, I believe
this council must address its relationship to the whole senior
citizen's center issue that I have stated above.
Thank you for your indulgence. I felt it was necessary to
submit my feelings in writing as the issue is an emotional
one. I wish to reiterate that I believe Karen Hansen has been
and continues to be an excellent senior citizen's director
and my hope is she will continue in that position in whatever
capacity is defined by this council or the senior citizen's
board of directors if they are deemed to be the appropriate
body for resnlving this issue.
Thank you.