City Council Agenda Packet 08-24-1987AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, August 24, 1987 - 7:30 p.m.
Mayor: Arve A. Grimamo
Council Members: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held August 10, 1987,
and the Special Meeting Held August 17, 1987.
3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests and Complaints.
4. Wright County Recycling Program - Slide Presentation.
5. Public Hearing to Consider the Vacation of Property Line Easements
Within Lauring Hillside Addition.
6. Public Hearing to Consider Modification of Finance Plan for Tax
Increment District 42.
7. Consideration of Conditional Use Request to Allow a Beauty Shop
as a Home Occupation in an R-1 Zone. Applicant, Joann Hoerchler.
S. Consideration of Conditional Una Request to Allow Major Auto
Repair in a 8-4 Zone. Applicant, Fred 6 Patricia Culp.
9. Consideration of Cable Franchise Ordinance Amendment.
10. Consideration of Change Order 67 for 86-1 Project.
11. Consideration of Final Payment on 86-1 Project.
12. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing for Adoption of Assessment
Rolls on 86-1 Project and Highway 25 Improvement Project.
13. Consideration of Purchase of Replacement Pickup for Public Works
Department.
14. Consideration of Planning Commission Appointment.
15. Consideration of Bills for the Month of August.
16. Adjourn.
MINUTES
r-- REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUfiCIL
Monday, August 10, 1987 - 7:30 p.m.
i
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Hill Fair, Warren Smith,
Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: None
2. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously
carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held July 13
and July 27, 1987.
3. Citizens Comments/Petitions.
Mr. Bruce Thielen, resident of Meadow Oak Subdivision, presented
a petition to the City Council from 80-90 percent of the current
residents within Meadow Oak requesting that the City consider deleting
the recently adopted ordinance amendment regarding the placement
of cluster boxes used by ADS Delivery Service for advertising supplements.
Mr. Thielen felt the cluster box concept was unsightly and preferred
that the dolivery of shoppers, etc., be done door to door. The Council
noted that the recantly edoptad ordinance allowing cluster boxes
for ADS Setrvicea was similar to the cluster Postal Service boxes
and felt this would be the best solution for most subdivision areae
and did not feel it was appropriate at this time to amend the ordinance.
The Council did authorizo the City Administrator to contact the ADS
Services to indicate the residents' opposition to the cluster boxes
and request that they ratur„ to their previous method of delivery.
It was noted that the previous delivery was not necessarily door
to door service, but the shoppers were delivered somewhere on each
Individual's property.
Mr. Steve Luddars, representing the American Legion Post, informed
the Council that the Legion Club would like to donate street signs.
poets, etc., that could be placed at entrances to the City which
indicated welcome to Monticello and a safety message such as "drive
safely."
The Council authorized the Public Works Department to review and
recommend the type of sign design and possible locations and report
to the Council at the next meeting.
6. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing to modify Tax Increment
District e2.
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Monticello is currently
in the process of purchasing the Monticello Ford, Inc., property
on West Broadway which is part of Tax Increment Finance District 02.
Council Minutes - 8/10/87
In order to use part of the tax increments being generated from this
district for the purchase and redevelopment of the Ford property,
the Tax Increment Finance Plan would have to be modified to include
the additional cost of this purchase. The Housing and Redevelopment
Authority has requested the City Council hold a public hearing on
the modification to this tax increment pian.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by warren Smith, and unanimously
carried to set a public hearing for the purpose of Modification 82
for the Tax Increment Finance Plan District Y2 for August 2e, 1987.
See Resolution 87-20.
5. Consideration of Appointing New Member to NRA Committee.
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority had presented the name of
Everette Ellison for consideration by the Council to fill the recently
vacated position held by Marlys Erickson. The term would expire
December 1987 and could be renewed at that time for another five
year term.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously
carried to appoint Everette Ellison to the HRA Commission to fill
the unexpired term of Marlys Erickson.
6. Consideration of Renting or Demolition of City Owned House Adjacent
to East Bridge Park.
The City of Monticello had previously rented a residantial dwelling
adjacent to Eeat Bridge Park which Is now currently vacant. As part
of the proposed East Bridge Park expansion after the now bridge is
completed, the home was scheduled for demolition to make way for
e parking lot for the park property. Demolition of the property
had boen scheduled for no later than June 1, 1988, but the Council
discussed demolition of the property at this time rather than continuing
to rent the property because of the amount of repairs that would
be needed to make the property suitable for rental purposee. It
was noted that repairs to the upstairs ceiling, refinishing cr recarpeting
of the living room floor, along with recarpeting the one bedroom
and additional work could cost over 51,000. As a result, quotes
and bids ware received on the demolition of the property at this
time, and the low bid was recaivad from Brenteson Construction Company
in the amount of $5,550, which includod filling in of the basement
area and disconnecting the mower and water services.
Council members were informed that two women had been tentatively
informed that they could rent the property until June of 1988 at
$300 per month, but after reviewing the amount of repairs that should
be completed prior to renting, it was the consensus of the Council
that continuing to rant the property did not appear feasible or cost
effective.
-2-
9
Council Minutes - 8/10/87
As a result, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen,
and unanimously carried to accept the low bid for demolition of the
property from Brenteson Construction in the amount of $5,550.
Due to the recent purchase of a residential home adjacent to City
Ball, the City Administrator was instructed to offer this home for
rent to the two women who were previously interested in the house
located adjacent to East Bridge Park,
7. Consideration of Resolutions Allowing City Administrator to be Excluded
from Public Employees Retirement Association.
Minnesota Statutes allow a newly appointed City Administrator to
be excluded from membership in the Public Employees Retirement Association
if so desired.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously
carried to adopt resolutions authorizing the City Administrator to
be excluded from PERA and set up his own deferred compensation plan.
See Resolutions 87-21 and 87-22.
8. Consideration of Setting a Special Meeting for Coals and Objectives -
1988 Budget.
It was the consensus of the City Council members that a special meeting
would bo held on August 17 at 6:30 p.m. to review goals and objectives
for the upcoming year in regards to the 1988 Budget preparation.
9. Review of Quarterly Liquor Store Report.
Liquor Store Manager, Joe Hartman, reviewed with the City Council
the six month financial statement for the Liquor Store operations.
Mr. Hartman noted that the total net income of $46,611 for the first
six months appeared in line with projections, and he anticipated
a not income for the entire year at over $105,000.
Council members also discussed the current improvements being constructed
at the Liquor Store. including the expanded parking lot and the desire
to comploto a landscaping project yet this year. The Public Works
Director was instructed to request proposals on landscaping designs
in different cost ranges from $5,000 to $15,000.
10. Consideration of Senior Citizen Building Roof Repairs.
Previously, the Council was informed that the Senior Citizens building
was experiencing leaking problems; and the Building Inspector obtained
quotas for repairing the existing roof and also received quotas for
replacement with a now flat rubber roof and a now pitched roof with
roof trusses and shingles.
-3.
Council Minutes - 8/10/87
The installation of a now one-piece rubber roofing system would cost
;,7,250; and the installation of a new roof using trusses, roof sheathing,
and roof shingles would coat $12,124. A quote was received for repairing
and recoating the existing roof from P.A. Tenny Company in the amount
of 5800.
After reviewing the possible options, a motion was made by Slonigen,
seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to authorize Tenny
Roofing Company to recoat and repair the flashing on the roof as
needed for the 5800 bid amount.
II. Discussion on City Hall Security System.
The Building Inspector informed the Council of the difficulty the
staff has in changing the locking system at City Hall when employees
terminate employment with the City. In the past, parts have had
to be taken from other door locks within City Hall to allow for new
keys to be made; and it was recommended that new locks be installed
on the exterior doors to City Hall. A quote was received from a
local locksmith for an American made lock that would allow for easier
conversion of keys if necessary. The estimated cost was approximately
$500 to complete the installation.
Motion was made by warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair, and unanimously
carried to authorize the staff to expend the $500 for the now locking
system as prl
RickW''o``�� op_os/ed. t %
R l f atelier
City Adminiatrator
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, August 17, 1987 - 6:30 p.m.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Dan Blanigen.
Members Absent: Warren Smith
1. Review of Goals and Objectives for the 1988 Budget.
Mayor Grimsmo opened the meeting noting that the primary purpose
was to review any goals and objectives the Council was interested
in seeing implemented in the upcoming year to enable staff to obtain
input for the preparation of the 1988 Budget. The Council was presented
with a possible list of capital outlay items the Public works Department
and staff felt might be necessary to consider for the year 1988.
The capital outlay items included major improvements such an the
water tower and additional well previously discussed and equipment
needs along with street improvements planned within the city. It
was noted that many of the items may require the sale of bonds to
finance and would not nocesearily be part of the tax levy for 1988
but were presented for comments from the Council. In addition, it
was the consensus of the Council that the City staff continue negotiations
with MN/DOT and the contractor for the new Highway 25 river crossing
bridge to determine if it would be feasible for the City to pursue
the idea of salvaging the existing river bridge for use as part of
our park system.
Councilmember Bill Fair suggested that the City should consider receiving
public input an what types of services or needs the public would
like the City to pursue. He felt there may be many issues or services
that the public in general were interested in seeing implemented but
staff may not be aware of.
It was noted by the Administrator that moat cities are under stringent
levy limitations, including Monticello, which would limit the City
to approximately an 8 percent increase over last year's levy. Because
of the levy limitation, many improvement projects may have to be
financed by other methods than through tax levy, such as the sale
of bonds, etc. The staff was directed to prepare the preliminary
budget using the information received at the meeting where appropriate.
2. Discussion on Senior Citizen Center Human Riqhts Comolaint.
The Council members discussed a letter received from the Minnesota
Department of Human Rights regarding a complaint filed by Senior
Citizen Center employee, Karen Hanson, regarding alleged unfair,
discriminatory practice regarding compensation, The letter received
indicates that the Department had made a daterminetion that probable
cause existed to credit the allegation that an unfair discriminatory
practice has been committed by the City. Council members discussed
Special Council Minutes - 8/17/87
what options were available to the City regarding an appeal and were
informed by the City Administrator that initially the City had the
option of requesting the Commissioner of the Human Rights Department
review the file and information presented by the City for a possible
reconsideration of their findings. Another alternative available
at the present time was for the City to indicate a willingness to
attempt resolution of the problem by agreeing to conciliate the matter
with the Department and Karen Hanson. Because the Council felt the
Human Rights Department's decision that Karen Hanson was actually
a full-time employee was incorrect based on the information supplied,
a motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously
carried to authorize the City Administrator to request the Commissioner
reconsider its findings through an appeal process.
3. Review of Joint Meeting Between Municipal Board Staff and Township
Officials.
Mayor Grimsmoo and Councilmember Fran Fair reviewed the outcome of
the joint meeting hold between the Executive Director of the Municipal
Board and Township and City officials regarding a possible solution
to the annexation question Thursday, August 13. Councilmember Fair
summarized that the City's position was made known to the Township
and Municipal Board Officials in that the City's previous proposal
regarding immediate annexation of approximately 2,200 acres out of
the total 5.700 acres in the OAA area would be the least that the
City could accept under a joint agreement without Municipal Board
action. It was noted that Township Officials were reluctant to commit
to any agreement on annexation at thin time, and the Executive Director
of the Municipal Board requested that both parties review the matter
for 30 days at which time another meeting will be scheduled to see
if any solutions can be arrived at. The Executive Director of the
Municipal Board set September 15 as the deadline for reaching any
joint agreements; and thereafter if a resolution is not obtained
by both parties, the Municipal Board would proceed with its deliberation
on annexation question.
i
Rick wolf stail'er
City Administrator
Council Agenda - 8124/87
4. Wright County Recycling Proqram - Slide Presentation. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As part of Wright County Government's involvement with solid waste
disposal methods for the future, Wright County has established a
recycling program. Approximately a month ago, Z vas contacted by
Val Donahue representing the Wright County Recycling Program requesting
permission to attend one of our Council meetings to present approximately
a 20 -minute slide presentation they had developed. My understanding
is that the slide presentation will briefly outline possible ways
the City of Monticello and other communities can implement a recycling
program in an effort to help reduce the amount of items being disposed
of in landfills at the present time. The presentation may give the
City staff and Council additional ideas on how a program could be
implemented and what efforts have been effective in other communities.
No action at this time is necessary by the Council other than to
review the elide presentation and ask any questions you may have.
The representative has indicated a notice will be included in the
Monticello newspaper noting that a slide presentation will be shown
at the Council meeting so citizens could attend if they were interested.
No supporting data for this item.
!M
Council Agenda - 8/24/87
5. Public Hearing to Consider the Vacation of Property Line Easements
Within Lauring Hillside Addition. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Over the past year or so, the U.S. Postal Service has been reviewing
the possibility of expanding the Postal Service building on West
Broadway or acquiring additional land within the city limits for
a new poet office facility.
The City recently received a request from Mr. Jack Tragiai, Real
Estate Specialist for the Postal Service, inquiring about the possibility
of vacation of the six-foot utility easements currently bordering
the lots within Lauring Hillside Addition. Mr. Tragiai indicated
that the Postal Service is considering acquiring Lots 3 and 4. Block 2,
Lauring Hillside Terrace Addition, for the purpose of a now postal
facility; and as part of their development, the utility easements
would have to be vacated to allow placement of a building over the
lot lines.
Vacation of utility esemonts similar to this have occurred in the
Construction 5 Addition for the placement of the 30 -unit apartment
structure and also within the Meadows for multiple family buildings
when a developer wishes to place a structure on more than one current
lot. Vacating of the easements is identical to the process of vacating
streeto in that a public hearing must be held and a finding must
be made that the vacating of the easements are in the best public
interest. A six-foot easement along the property line dividing Lots 3
and 4 are required for the purpose of drainage and minor utilities
such as telephone or electrical extensions; and there would be no
conflict that the City staff is aware of if this was eliminated,
as we would still have the easements around the perimeter of the
two lots.
At this point in time, I dont believe the Postal Service has actually
acquired the lots in question but may have an option on the lots;
but in order for them to proceed with their development plane, they
requested that the public hearing vacating the easements take place
at this time so that their real estate department is assured if the
land iu purchased that the easements would be vacated.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Upon closing of the public hearing, adopt a motion vacating the
easements immediately and ordering the action recorded at the
County.
2. Upon closing of the hearing, adopt a motion vacating the easements
contingent upon an approved site development plan being presented
by the Postal Service for a now facility.
-2-
Council Agenda - 8/24187
3. Do not vacate the easements - this would be somewhat inconsistent
since the City has granted similar vacations when appropriate.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the Council adopt the vacation motion contingent
upon the acceptance and approval of a final site plan from the Postai
Service for a new facility on Lots 3 and 4. Block 2, La uring Hillside
Addition.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Map showing easements to be vacated.
3.
Proposed vacation of the drainage and utility easements across the
following described property:
Lots 3 6 d, Block 2, Lauring Hillside Terrace
Said easements being six feet in width and adjoining the lot lines
between said Lots 3 and <.
The side lines of said easements are to be prolonged or shortened
to terminate on the inside line of the outside perimeter drainage
and utility easement of said Lots 3 and d.
D
LAURI NG HILLSIDE TERRACF-.1
MEYER-ROHUN,01
C.
L 7
!r. / r�
' / I ' �, �•, ` .�v`I /, may/ ���; 1 w•+.r •.a.r m
,, • � �4a /.' 11 a w``"� ,,,4"v."�"'
!•� �,� h 1. ( 4" �' •+x aaae+�.s a•wa. wa.
!i j�• �':' i/"' � " 4 '•? '+r,/ Icer.`• ; /. / �
ele % •r t'M�C
Fl
1 .�!• !r'air Mn a a a.hi �ti � �wy_ � 8 it �j ` ) n� ` l �i �� i
,' / • � CJI �Y'ta"�.,J"° ,,. �1 a� � � / _. ��.r � � i
. ��'h'�t5},1 tib. N� �a.".rrf •«*�! • •I ,Q/ J', \:•: w�etir �yy 7.
'IIlA" a•Ir� r •'�9 '`4 rIMI Ili'��.•�rf i �%�,w�'
I N• L ti''µ
s'r Tr 1~ t(b
oil
13 1+.
J`
• • ��`Y It t,y '' •is
'�`•.Yiw„"'`i�Y• ...a W.7Tee- 11 l 1i ` A� ve•h
i pl'l ter All tura thrwyM_ A.A., 4" 0rnr0er entered t1Ae_4t of
Wright Cash AWIOet = �' , ,•_`, /)
rh. - rtltt ttAtt theme PPAhIt 1A oto tsar—, A.A., so lank berets AnArQM are Mid thle_by of
4 �
office
dmirft"U r
city o/ Monticello
C
July, 29, . 1987
Mr. Jack D. Tragiai
Real Estate Specialist
United States Postal Service
Field Real Estate and Buildings Office
P.O. Box 69069
St. Paul, MN 55169-0069
Re: Possible vacation of Utility Easements
Dear Mr. Tragiai:
Phone: (61 21 295-2711
Metro: (612) 333-5739
As per the phone conversation this morning, approximately 9:45 a.m.,
July 29, 1987, I offer the following information.
The City of Monticello would consider possible vacation of the
6 -foot utility easement on either side of the lot line between
Lots 3 and 4. Block 2, Lauring Hillside Terrace Addition in the
City of Monticello. Easement requests similar to yours have already
been granted in previous years in two other businesses on either
side of your proposed new location.
If you should decide to request a vacation of eaeaments between
these two lots, it would require a two-week public hearing notice
to be published in our local newspaper, The Monticello Times, prior
to the scheduled public hearing date to be held at a City Council
meeting on the sacond or fourth Monday of the month.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
0.1ck wo�elle~
City Administrator
RwAd
cc: File
�I
250 East Broadway a Monticello. MN 55362-9245
Council Agenda - 8/26/87
6. Public Hearing to Consider Modification of Finance Plan for Tax Increment
District R2. (O.K.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
In late 1985, the Tax Increment Finance Redevelopment District 02
was modified to include the four parcels known as Hollenback, Stelton,
Gustafson, and the now River Park view (Modification 01). The original
redevelopment district included the parcels of Hasa, Teslow, Metcalf
6 Larson, Capps, Monticello Ford, Jones, O'Connor, and the City of
Monticello. The district was modified to enhance future HRA projects
and to capitalize on the increment of the elderly project for assistance
In other projects. Upon the execution of the purchase agreement,
the HRA became a willing buyer of the Monticello Ford property located
at 249 West Broadway. The site consists of 10,872.5 sq ft. The
HAA has adopted modification of the finance plan and requested the
City Council to set a public hearing for said purpose. Since the
City Council set the public hearing date, the Planning Commission
has approved Modification 12, and a notice of public hearing and
a copy of the modified finance plan was mailed to the local school
district and to the Wright County Board of Commissioners. This Is
in pursuant of Minnesota Statute, Section 273.74, Subdivision 4,
which states a Tax Increment Finance Plan must be modified by the
authority if 1) increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred
($90,000); 2) increase in theportion of the captured assessed value
to be retained by the authority ($193,756); 3) increase in total
estimated tax increment expenditures ($17,300) or designation of
additional property to be acquired by the authority shall be approved
upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing, and findings
required by for approval of the original plan.
ESTIMATED BUDGET FOR MODIFICATION 02
Property acquisition $75,000
Demolition Cost 13,000
Administration Coat 2,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST 590,000
Laos down payment $25,000
Less demolition 13,000
Lase administration 2,000
HRA General Fund $40,000
Contract for Dead $50,000
The HRA plane to retire the bonded indebtedness ($90,000) by the
increment generated from the elderly project lostimated annual tax
increment is $17,300). The Contract for Deed ($50,000) plus the
10 percent interest rate for 4.5 year• will be retired first; thereafter,
the increment will replenish the HRA General Fund. The HRA has the
right of prepayment privileges, without penalty, on the Contract
for Deed payment schedule. The average annual debt service on the
Contract for Deed is 814,000.
-4-
Council Agenda - 8/24/87
Having opened the public hearing, assuming no public comment, the
public hearing may be Closed. After closing of the public hearing,
the City Council should consider the approval or disapproval of Modification #2
of the finance plan for Tax Increment District #2.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve Modification 02 of the finance plan 'or Tax Increment
District #2 and execute the resolution.
2. Deny approval of Modification 42 of the finance plan for Tax
Increment District #2 and not execute the resolution.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends upon closing of an uncontested public hearing that
the City Council approve Modification #2 of the finance plan for
Tax Increment District #2 and execute the resolution; thereby, ensuring
the original purpose for the creation of Tax Increment District 02
and Modification #1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the Modification #2 of the finance plan for Tax Increment
District #2; Copy of the resolution approving Modification #2.
-5-
MODIFICATION 02
TAX INCREMENT FINANCE PIAN
REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT i2
0
MODIFIED TAX INCREMENT FINANCE PLAN
A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the 'Authority")
and the City of Monticello are authorized to modify the tax increment
finance plan for Redevelopment District #2 pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 4.
B. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
I ) Provide opportunities for development and expansion of new business;
2) Provide opportunities for growth of the tax base;
3) Eliminate blight or deterioration within an area;
4) Create a use for currently under-utilized land.
C. DEVEL40PMENT PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT
I ) Modification #1 included the addition of Hollenback, Stelton.
Gustafson, and City of Monticello percale to the original Redevelopment
District 12.
2) Metcalf& Larson, developers. constructed a 31 -unit elderly
home an the City of Monticello parcel (155-101-051130).
3) Modification 02. the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will
acquire the Monticello Ford property. parcels 155-010-051010
and 155-010-051020, and will raze the existing blighted structure.
D . DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
The HRA amd Monticello Ford, Inc., Lawrence Flaka, President, have
executed a purchase agreement for 575,000.00 for the acquisition
of said property located at 249 West Broadway. Monticello. Minnesota.
The HRA paid $500.00 earnest money and will pay 324,500.00 on the
closing date. The remaining balance of $50,000-00 will be on a
Contract for Dead at 10% interest rate for 4.5 years. The HRA has
the right of prepayment privileges, without penalty, on the contract
for dead payment schedule.
PAYMENT SCHEDULE
AMOUNT PRINCIPAL INTEREST PAYMENT DATE
S50,000
$5,556
32,500
58,056
June 30.
1988
544,444
$5,556
32.222
37,778
December
31 , 1988
$38,888
$5,556
31.994
$7,550
Juno 30,
1989
S33.332
$5.556
$1,667
37,223
December
31. 1989
$27,776
$5,556
31.389
36,945
June 30,
1990
522,220
85,556
$1.111
$6.667
December
31, 1990
$16,664
65.556
3 833
36.389
June 30,
1991
$11,108
$5.556
3 555
$6,111
December
31. 1991
S 5,552
$5.552
3 278
35,830
Juno 30.
1992
�1)
i
e
The RRA proposes to demolition and remove the blighted structure
prior to the and of year 1967;
thereby, provide opportunity for
development of a nev business.
E. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY IN
THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCE REDEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT.
District, Plat 6 Parcel 4
Legal Description
155-010-050010
N4 Lots 1,2, 6 3, Block 50
155-010-050011
Sy Lots 1,2, 6 3, Block 50
155-010-050081
Th prt of Lots 6 G 9 lyg Sly of fol
desc lne, Beg at SEly car of Lot 10,
the NEly 102.86 ft to a Ina par/v 6
diet 62 ft Sally as meas at R/ang to
NEly lne of Lots S. 9 6 10, the Nally
39.21 ft to POB of ins to be desc,
the cont ad lne as ext to a pt 3 ft
Wly of Ely Ina of Lot 8 6 th term. Block 50.
155-010-050082
N 50 It of Lots 8,9, 6 10, Block 50
155-010-050100
Th prt of Lts 9 6 10 des: Beg SEly
car of Lt 10; the NEly alg SEly In
102.84 ft to In par/v 6 62 It Sally
of NEly In; the Nally alg ad par In
39.21 ft to In par/v 6 6 ft Nally
of SEly In of Lot 9; the Sally 102.86 ft
to Sally In of Lot 9. Block 50.
155-010-051010
Lot 1 exc Nly 30 ft Block 51
155-010-051011
Nly 30 ft of Lts 1 6 2 6 Nly 30 ft
of W 24 ft of Lt 3. Also S 15 ft
of Lt 15. Block 51
155-010-051020
it 2 exc Nly 30 ft G Lt 3 exc Nly
30 ft of W 24 ft 6 W 74 ft Of Lt 4.
Block 51
155-010-051040
E 254 ft of Lt 4 6 W 5% ft Lt 5, Block 51
155-010-050111
S4 of Lots 11 6 12, Block 50, Original Plat
155-010-051050
Lot 5, Block 51, exc w 54 ft f50Mis-921
Original Plat
155-010-051111
Lots 11 G 12, Block 51, axe 8 65 ft
and axe tr sesc in Ek 266-795
Original Plat
155-010-051130
Lots 13, 14, G Nly 150 ft of Lot 15,
Block 51, Original Plat
v
F. ESTIMATE OF COSTS
The estimate of public costs associated with the modified tax increment /
finance plan are outlined in the following line item budget.
BUDGET
Property Acquisition $75,000.00
Demolition Cost 13,000.00
Administration Cost 2,000.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST $90,000.00
Less Payment on Purchase Agreement 25,000.00
Less Demolition Cost 13,000.00
Less Administration Cost 2,000.00
HRA General Fund 40,800.00
Contract for Deed $50,000.00
G. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF BONDED INDEBTEDNESS
An estimate of the maximum amount of bonded indebtedness is expected
to be $90,000.00. The estimated annual tax increment generated
from the elderly home (517,300.00) will be applied to the contract
for dead payments (estimated average annual debt service is $14,000.00).
upon full payment of the contract for dead, the tax increment from
the elderly home will replenish the HRA General Fund for expenses
incurred. Debt retirement to be completed before the duration of
Redevelopment District 12. Bonded indebtedness of 590,000 is an addition
to the original budget. l
H. SOURCE OF REVENUE
The primary source of revenue to be used to retire the bond indebtedness
(contract for deed) will be tax increments generated from the River
Park View Elderly Project, a development completed in 1986 within
Tax Increment District 12. The other initial source of revenue
will be from HRA General Funds.
1. ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 273.74, Subdivision I, and 273.76,
Subdivision 1, the Original Assessed Value as modified for the Redevelopment
District 12 and certified by the County Auditor of Wright County
on the 17th day of November, 1985. This value is a total of $99,917.00.
Individual parcel assessed values are as follows:
Parcel Assessed Value
155-010-050010 -0-
155-010-050011 3 9,860
155-010-050081 $13.574
155-010-050082 S 7.616
1
155-010-050100 3 2,920
11
Parcel
Assessed Value
155-010-051010
5 3,760
155-010-051011
$12,070
155-010-051020
$17,974
155-010-051040
3 6,630
155-010-050111
3 8,960
155-010-051050
$10,276
155-010-051111
$ 6,277
155-010-051130
exempt
U
RESOLUTION 87-
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING MOLLIFICATION #2 OF THE
EXISTING TAX INCREMENT FINANCE PLAN FOR
REDEVEIgPMENT DISTRICT #2 PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
SECTION 273.71 TO 273.78 INCLUSZ VE OF THE MINNESOTA STATUTE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota,
has determined the need to modify the finance plan of an existing
tax increment finance redevelopment district pursuant to Minnesota
Statute, Section 273.74, Subdivision 4. within the redevelopment
project created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462.411 at seg;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota,
found in 1983 that it was necessary to create a tax increment finance
redevelopment district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.71
to 273.76 inclusive; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed modification
of the tax Increment finance pian; and
WHEREAS, the members of the School Board of Education of the
Local Independent School District #882 and the Board of Commissioners
of the County of Wright have been informed of the fiscal and economic
implications of the proposed modification of the existing Tax Increment
Finance Plan for Redevelopment District 02; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was hold on August 24, 1987, at
7:30 o'clock p.m. before the City Council in the Council Chambers
in the City Hall, in Monticello, Minnesota, notice of which has been
published twice in the official newspaper for the City, not lose
than ten, nor more than thirty days prior to August 24, 1987; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing all. persons and parties were
given full opportunity to present written or oral testimony, comments,
objections, suggestions, and other matters, all of which were duly
considered by the Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF MONTICELLO that the City of Monticello does hereby modify the
existing tax increment finance plan and finds:
1. That the proposed acquisition of commercial property lis*
as modified within the finance plan of the flax Increment
Redevelopment District 42 and that the intended demolition
will contribute to the elimination of blight or deterioration
within the area.
2. That the Tax Increment Finance Plan as modified will increase
the amount of bonded indebtedness.
LZID
Resolution 87 -
Page 2
3. That the Tax Increment Finance Plan as modified will increase
the portion of the captured assessed value to be retained
by the Authority.
4. That the Tax Increment Finance Plan as modified will increase
in total the estimated tax increment expenditures.
5. That the Planning Commission has reviewed the tax increment
finance plan as modified herein and it conforms to the general
plan for development of the municipality as a whole because
its final result will increase the City's commercial or
housing activity.
6. That the tax increment finance plan as modified herein will
afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs
of the City as a whole, for the development by private enterprise
as it will enable the City to assist a future developer
by providing a suitable site for development.
The City Council of the City of Monticello. Minnesota, does
hereby approve Modification #2 to the Tax Increment Finance Plan
for Redevelopment District 12.
Adopted by the City Council this 24th day of August, 1987.
Arve A. Grimamo, Mayor
ATTEST:
RiCk Wolfstellar
City Administrator
e
Council Agenda - 8/26/87
7. Consideration of a Conditional Use Request to Allow a Beauty Shop
as a Home Occupation in an R-1 Zone. Apolicant, Joann Hoerchler. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Ms. Hoerchler would like to operate an in-home beauty shop out of
their recently purchased home. Some of the conditions under the
home occupation definition of our ordinance have been satisfactorily
met or exceeded by the applicant.
One thing that is not mentioned in here but might be considered as
an additional condition put on k%y the City council may be the hours
of operation of such a business. But generally, this type of home
occupation would be hardly noticed by the residents in this area
once it was put into use.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the conditional use request to allow a beauty shop as
a home occupation in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zone.
2. Deny the conditional use request to allow a beauty shop as a
home occupation in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zone.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff recommends approval of the conditional use request to
allow a beauty shop as a home occupation in an R-1 (Single Family
Residential) Zone. The applicant, at her former location in another
Minnesota community, did oporat o such a business out of her home;
so the nature of her business is, not different than what she has
done in the poet. One additional condition that in not mentioned
under the home occupation definition may be a limitation as to the
hours of business in which she may operate the beauty shop.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location; Copy of tho definition section of the ordinance
for home occupation; Copy of the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes.
-6-
Conditional use request to allow
a beauty shop as a home occupation
in an R -I (Single Family Residential)
-----------
Zone.
-Joann Hoerchler.
7 ----------
-
----------------------
LO
&
VOL
L 0
A.,
TI.
i`ais.�1 d :ice I"'`r 4
01.01
I r 11 '. I*_N�
0
t A
11 %P
P
00
fit
more than five (5) feet from the building, between the
building and a 11ne five (5) feet from -the building.
(GE]
'GRADING: Changing the natural or exising topography
of land.
[GF]
GUEST ROOM: A room occupied by one () ) or more guests
for compensation and in which no provision is made for
'
cooking, but not including rooms in a dormitory for
sleeping purposes primarily.
(HA]
HOLIDAY SIGNS:• Signs or displays which contain or depict
a message pertaining to a national or state holiday,
and no other matter.
(HB]
HOME OCCUPATION: Any gainful occupation engaged in
by the occupants of a dwelling at cr from the dwelling.
Such activity shall be clearly incidental and secondary
to the residential use of the premises. Permissible
home occupations shall not include the conducting of
a retail business other than by mail, manufacturing
business, or a repair shop of any kind on the premises,
and no stock in trade shall be kept or sold. No other
thanpersons residing on the premises shall be employed,
and no mechanical equipment shall be employed the is
not customarily found in the home and no more than one
(1) room may ba devoted to home occupation use. Such
home occupation shall not require internal or external
alterations or involve conatructien features not custormarily
found in dwellings. The entrance to the space devoted
to such occupation shall be within the dwelling. "There
shall be no exterior display, no exterior signs except
as allowed in the sign regulations for the zoning district
in which such home occupation is located. ... _. ..... ....
There shall be no exterior storage of equipment or
materials used in the home occupation. No home occupation
shall be permitted which results.in or generates more
traffic than one (t) car for offstreet perking at any
given point in time. Parmissable home occupations include,
but are not limited to the following: art studio, dressmaking,
special officems of a clergyman, lawyer, architect, engineer,
accountant, or real estate agent or appraiser, when
located in a dwelling unit occupied by the same; and
teaching, with musical, dancing and other Instruction
limited to one (1) pupil at one time.
(HC)
HOTEL: Any building or portion thereof occupied as
the more or less temporary abiding place of individuals
and containing six (6) or more guest rooms, used, designated,
intended to be used, let or hired out to be occupied,
or which are occupied by six (6) or more individuals
for cmmpensation, whether the compensation be paid directly
or indirectly.
(IA)
IDENTIFICATION SIGNS: Signs in all districts which
identify the business or owner, or manager, or resident
and set forth the address of the promises where the
sign is located and which contain no other material.
(IB)
ILLUMINATED SIGN: Any sign which Is lighted by an artificial
•�
light source either directed upon it or illuminated
from an interior source.
(IC]
-IMPERVIOUS SUEFACE: An artificial or natural surface Ci)
through which water, air, or roots cannot penetrate.
Planning Commiasion Minutes - 8/11/87
8. Public Hearing - A conditional use request to allow a beauty shop
as a home occupation in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zone.
Applicant, Joann Hoerchler.
Ma. Joann Hoerchler was present to propose her conditional use request
to be allowed to operate a beauty shop out of her single family residence.
She indicated to Planning Commission members the location of her
proposed beauty shop within a certain portion of the house, also
indicating the number of off-street parking spaces that she would
have available to her prospective customers, and also the hours of
operation predominantly from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Chairperson
Richard Carlson then opened the meeting for any input from the public.
Gladys Piatz indicated that they were the adjoining property owner
immediately vest of the applicant and that they had no problem with
the applicant's request. They felt it would be vary beneficial to
the residents in this neighborhood. Chairperson Richard Carlson
then closed the public hearing. Chairperson Richard Carlson felt
very uneasy with not stipulating the actual hours of operation of
this beauty shop. Zoning Administrator Anderson countered that under
the definition section of our ordinance under home occupation pretty
much determines the conditions which would apply in the applicant's
request. It's pretty hard to dictate the hours of operation due
to seasonal type activities of this type of business. The neighborhood
pretty much dictates as to how this beauty shop operation operates
within this residential area. Chairperson Richard Carlson than asked
for a motion.
Motion by Joyce Dowling, seconded by Richard Martie, to approve the
conditional use request to allow a beauty shop as a home occupation
in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zona with the following condition:
a. The property be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator in
a six-month time period, which would be on or before February 1,
19es.
Motion carried unanimously.
Council Agenda - 8/24/87
8. Consideration of a Conditional Use Request to Allow Major Auto Repair
in a B-4 Zone. Applicant, Fred and Patricia Culp. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Fred and Patricia Culp are currently the new owners of the existing
Broadway Auto Repair, formerly K 6 H Auto Repair under the ownership
of Mr. Ken Stolp. The existing business was allowed to exist under
the grandfather clause in that it was there under a different business
ownership before the Monticello City Ordinance was in place. The
applicants would like to run the same type of business out of this
location only under a new ownership and a new name. The only other
change would be that there would be no auto sales from this business
establishment. It would only be auto repair.
The Culps, however, would like to make acme changes to the property
to clean up the existing mess that constantly occurs around the property.
The Culps would only like to do major auto repair at this location
and have no intentions of being in the used auto sales business.
Therefore, some of the existing spaces which are currently taken
up by automobiles constantly parked on every available space of the
property will now be reworked to definitely mark the areae for customer
parking and the area for the employee parking with the entrances
to these areae marked. The Culps would also like to take the current
area as noted on their site plan in the front boulevard and plant
some shrubs and remove the green and put in some landscaping rock
where the weeds currently exist. The area to the east of the building
is currently where used auto parts debris tends to accumulate with
the current owner of the business. This area would now become parking
for the employees of thin new business. Culps would also like some
consideration on a couple of other conditions which may be attached
to this property, and they are as follows. For the existing semi -trailer
which is parkod to the rear or north of this building, they would
like that to remain for a short period of time until they can better
facilitate storage within the confines of the existing building.
They would also like consideration of a possible condition that the
area along the south and a portion of the cast property line screening
fence not be installed for a period of up to one year.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the conditional use request to allow major auto repair
in a 0-4 (Regional Business) Zone.
2. Deny the conditional use request to allow major auto repair in
a 9-4 (Regional Business) Zone.
3. Approve the conditional use request to allow major auto repair
in a 9-4 (Regional Business) Zone with the following conditions:
-7-
Council Agenda - 8/24/87
a. Off-street customer parking apace be striped on the existing
bituminous off-street parking surface as shown on the enclosed
site plan.
b. Employee parking area be in the area immediately east of
the existing building.
c. The existing semi -trailer parked on the north side of the
building be removed in a period of time as recommended by
the City Council.
d. The solid screening fence be installed along the entire north
side of the property and on a portion of the east side of
the property from the northeast corner up to the end of the
northwest corner of the Post Office building.
a. The front boulevard portion of this site be installed as
per site plan.
f. The conditional use permit be granted for a period of up
to one year. At that time, it would be reviewed by the
Zoning Administrator.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
In our conversations with the applicants, we feel the intent of the
applicants is definitely to improve the blighted condition which
occurred at the existing location. The use of this property would
not change, but we feel the overall appearance of this property and
the operation of the new business will more than compensate for the
conditions that exist there now. We recommend the applicant be given
consideration of up to one year from approval of their conditional
use request to install a solid screening fence along the south side
and part of the east aide of their property. we also feel that consideration
be given to the time frame for the removal of the existing semi -trailer
north of the existing buiding. we feel a one-year time limit should
be attached to the conditional use request and reviewed by the and
of this one year.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location; Copy of the site plan; Copy of the Planning
Commission Meeting Minutes.
-e-
kn
78 11- 31 9
Planning Commission Minutes - 8/11/87
.
S. Public Bearing - A conditional use request to allow major auto repair
in a B-4 (Regional Business) Zone. Applicant. Fred and Patricia
Culp.
Mr. Prod Culp was present to propose his conditional use request
to allow major auto repair in the former R 8 B Auto/Broadway Auto
business location. Mir. Culp explained his proposed conditional use
request explaining how he would be cleaning up the entire area around
the building. repainting the exterior of the building, and basically .
sprucing up the place. Commission member, Richard Martie, questioned
as to how long a time would be needed to remove the existing semi -trailer
in the back of the building. Mr. Culp indicated he didn't have any
use for the trailer and that he didn't have any idea how long it
would take him to facilitate removal of this semi -trailer.
Mr. William Jones, affected property owner, indicated to Planning
Commission members he had no problem with Mr. Culp's request in that
anything he could do to the property would only improve the property
from the situation that exists there now. Chairperson Richard Carlson
then closed the public hearing and asked for a motion.
Motion by Joyce Dowling, seconded by Barbara Koropchak, to approve
the conditional use request to allow major auto repair in a B-4 (Regional
Business) Zone with the following conditions:
a. Off-street customer parking space be striped on existing
bituminous off-street parking surface as shown on the enclosed
site plan.
b. The employee parking area be in the area immediately east
of the existing building.
c. The existing semi -trailer parked on the north side of the
building be removed by October 71, 1987.
d. A solid screening fence be installed along the entire north
aide of the property and on a portion of the east aide of
the property from the northeast corner up to the end of
the northwest corner of the Poet Office building. As part
of this condition also, the screening fence must be installed
by Augruet 1. 1988.
e. The front boulevard portion of this site be installed as
per site plan.
f. The conditional use permit be granted for a period of up to
one year. At that time, it would be reviewed by the Zoning
Administrator.
Motion carried unanimously.
In
0
Council Agenda - 8/26/87
9. Consideration of Cable Franchise Ordinance Amendment. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the March 23 Council meeting, the Council adopted a resolution
approving the transfer of ownership of the cable system from Rite
Cable Company to Jones Intercable, Inc. This process was approved
by all ten communities within the Cable Commission, and the final
step in the transfer of ownership process involves the formal amendment
to our Cable Television Franchise Ordinance.
The proposed ordinance amendments have been prepared by the Commission's
legal counsel, Tom Creighton. A copy of the proposed amendments
indicating new additions to the ordinance and/or deletions is enclosed
for your review. A copy of the new ordinance amendment with Jones
Intercable inserted where applicable is also enclosed for your review.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the ordinance amendment as presented.
2. Do not adopt the ordinance amendment.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed ordinance amendment is strictly a formality that needs
to be taken care of now that Jones Intercable has completed the ownership
process. The action taken by the Council in March to approve by
resolution the official transfer of ownership really takes precedent
over the ordinance amendment, and it is recommended that the ordinance
be adopted. It should be noted that the original cable television
franchise ordinance In approximately 90 pages long; and if the Council
does not have a copy. one is available at City Nall for your review.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of proposed amendments to the ordinance and the official ordinance
amendment document.
-9-
O'CONNOR & HANNAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
so..a
3600 105 CENTER
BO SOUTH EIGHTH STREET
w
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNCSOTA 55402.2254
_
V.s
16121341.3600
TELEX 29.0564
r
TELECOPIER 16121 343.1256
INCLUDING THE TORNER fIRM MACINTOSH 4 CO—ERS
.av . aai•.Pu
�v� i`ao' M
Yv e�'�� �r
,Nr. apafr
,oaw
Yr �6t�i+�+te tY ti Pt�s.a
DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Administrators, City Managers, and
City Clerks of the Sherburne/Wright County
Cable Communications Commission
FROM: Thomas D. Creighton, Legal Counsel
DATE: August 4, 1987
RE: Amendments to the Cable Television
Franchise Ordinance
The final step in the transfer of ownership process involving
the sale of the cable system from Rite Cable Company to Jones
Intercable, Inc. involves the formal amendment of your cable
television franchise ordinance. Since your City has formally
approved by resolution the sale and transfer of the system to
Jones Intercable, Inc., the formal ordinance amendment process
is more of a housekeeping matter.
The Commission has directed me to prepare the enclosed
ordinance amendments to finalize the transfer. I have also
enclosed for your review a red -lined copy of the amendment showing
the changes.
I would ask that your Council undertake to formally amend
your franchise ordinance in accordance with your standard ordinance
making requirements. Upon passage of the ordinance amendment,
I would ask that you return a certified original copy to my
office. I will undertake to secure the necessary signatures
from Jones Intercable, Inc.
C)'C0"N(:)R & HANNAN
ATTORNEYS AT {,AW
Memorandum
August 4, 1987
Page Two
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. if
you should have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact
me.
TDC:ph
cc: Barbara J. Guffey, Cable Administrator
Gary R. Katz, Legal Counsel for
Jones Intercable, Inc.
CJ
1.
2.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE
CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE ORDINANCE
ARTICLE 1, Section 2(J) is amended as follows:
H. "Grantee" means Jones Intercable, Inc. and/or one
or more of its controlled affiliates, Rite-eable-eampany
ef-Minnesat&T its agents and employees.
ARTICLE 1, Section 2(0) is amended as follows:
O. "Offering of Grantee" or "Offering" means that certain
document dated February 24, 1984, entitled "Application
for Cable Communication System Franchise For Member
Cities of Sherburne/Wright County Cable Communications
Commission' and signed by Grantee's Predecessor, as
amended from time to time by mutual written agreement
between Grantee and City or its delegates, and that
certain document dated July 11, 1984 entitled "Sherburne/
Wright County Cable Communications Commission", along
with any other written documentation supplied by Grantee's
Predecessor to City or the Commission in conjunction
with any public meeting of City or Commission, and
related documents and written information and documentation
or response to the "Request For Information" as part
of the transfer of the Franchise to Grantee., which
documents are on file with the City Clerk.
09
Passed and adopted this` day of 1987.
ATTEST: CITY OF
By
Mayor
This Franchise, as amended, is accepted, and we agree to
be bound by all its terms and conditions, subject to federal,
state and local laws.
JONES INTERCABLE, INC.
By By
Its its
Date Date
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 157
THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO HEREBY ORDAINS THAT THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCE
ENTITLED CABLE COMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE BE AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:
1. ARTICLE I, Section 2(J) is amended as follows:
H. "Grantee" is Jones Intercable, Inc. and/or one or
more of its controlled affiliates, its agents and
employees.
2. ARTICLE I, Section 2(0) is amended as follows:
0. "Offering of Grantee" or "Offering" means that certain
document dated February 24, 1984, entitled "Application
for Cable Communication System Franchise For Member
Cities of Sherburne/Wright County Cable Communications
Commission" and signed by Grantee's predecessor, as
amended from time to time by mutual written agreement
between Grantee and City or its delegatee, and that
certain document dated July 11, 1984, entitled "Sherburne/
Wright County Cable Communications Commission" along
with any other written documentation supplied by Grantee's
predecessor to City or the Commission in conjunction
with any public meeting of City or Commission, and
related documents and written information and documentation
or response to the "Request For Information" as part
of the transfer of the Franchise to Grantee, which
documents are on file with the City Clerk.
Passed and adopted this _ day of 1987. J
ATTEST: CITY OF
By By
Mayor
This Franchise, as amended, is accepted, and we agree to
be bound by all its terms and conditions subject to federal,
state and local laws.
JONES INTERCABLE, INC
By By
Its Its
Da to Date
J
K
Council Agenda - 8/26/87
10. Consideration of Change Order 47 for 86-1 Project. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
In preparation for finaling out the 86-1 Project, we met with the
contractor to discuss the request for extra compensation that he
had made during the project. One area involves the interceptor sewer
from Ramsey Street to Cedar Street. In this area, as well as others,
we experienced a shortage of backfill material due to compaction
during backfilling. The compaction of the backfill, although minimal,
yielded a greater density than the original in-place swells, thus
a significant depression was found in the area from Ramsey to Cedar
Street. Several attempts were made at rectifying this situation.
Many of these attempts included removal and replacement of topsoil,
as well as the pumping of standing water On several occasions.
Another extra compensation request involved the replacement of a
well pump for Nancy Maas on Ramsey Street. During the dewatering
process, Nancy Maas's well went dry, and her pump burned out due
to its age and running without water. The contractor, according
to specifications, was required to provide water during the dewatering
operation if a well should run dry. He was not, however, required
to purchase a new pump should one fail during this operation.
The largest of the requests for extra compensation involves excess
depth of construction at the start of the project near Washington
Street and the Burlington Northern Railway. Last minute changes
In the plans were made just prior to the bidding process in that
the intereoptor sower line was turned further south in this area
than was originally intended, and thus became deeper, as there was
a stoop embankment near the apartments and parking lot in this area.
The engineer did not adjust the now center Sine profile or surface
elevation of the manhole to reflect this change on the plans. Thus,
the contractor had to dig approximately eight fast deeper in a very
tight portion of the interceptor sewer. The contractor is claiming
extra compensation for having to remove the additional material and
for decreased production in this area.
Other changes included here in this item aro for deductions for which
the contractor owes the City money for miscellaneous items.
Chuck Lopak is drafting Change Order #7 and will forward it to the
City by Friday ■o that it may be included with this agenda supplement.
H. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Alternative number one would be to approve Change order #7 as
outlined above and presented by Chuck Lepak.
2. Alternative number two would be to make additional attempts to
negotiate the extra compensation items. Since we have already
had several meetings over the peat many months about these items,
it does not appear that there would be any success in further
deliberating these requests.
-10-
council Agenda - 8/28/87
C. STAFP RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the City
Council approve Change Order 07 as outlined in alternative number
one.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of Change Order V.
NOTE: Chuck Lepak of OSM will be mailing the change order to you directly
from their office. Also, OSM has actually created four change orders,
numbers 7, 8, 9, and 1O, rather than just one change order 07.
am
Council Agenda - 8/24/87
11. Consideration of Final Payment on 86-1 Project. O.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Now that the interceptor sever project is in and complete, the City
wishes to make final payment to the contractor so that we may proceed
with our assessment hearings. As you may recall, although the project
is termed the interceptor sever project, it also included reconstruction
of Chestnut Street, the addition of water main to Chestnut Street,
the reconstruction and adding of sewer and water to Fifth Street,
the repaving and reconstruction of a short section of Locust Street
along with adding a new water main to that street, storm sewer and
water service for the Lucius Johnson property at Linn and Sixth Streets,
and the installation of utilities under Minnesota Street to the Tom
Brennan, Tom Holthaus, and Marvin Kramer properties. In addition,
under this project we replaced a major section of the 77-3 force
main located along Third Street and Elm Street. Also, there was
a significant overrun of common excavation and suitable backfill
material through the Sixth Street Station tax increment property.
The original contract amount for the interceptor sewer project was
$935,720.75. with the addition of change orders one through six,
the amount of the new contract became $997,685.71. Adding Change
Order Number 7 brings the total contract to $1,017.238.17
Due to the inclusion of the above -referenced projects and with the
contract (much of the work was done at standard unit prices causing
overruns in the original quantities), as well as the overruns in
the Sixth Street Station area and for the 77-3 force main replacement,
the total cost of the 86-1 project is $1.085,399.12
The total payments made to the contractor at this time are $1,058.340.16
Thus, the final payment to the contractor will be for $27,058.96
If the City of Monticello City Council authorizes final payment,
such payment will not be issued to the contractor until all lion
waivers and required documentation has been submitted to the City
of Monticello. Authorization of this final payment, however, will
allow us to move on to an assessment hearing by which each section
will be broken out from the interceptor sever project.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to authorize final paymant to
L 6 G Rahboin in the amount of $27,058.96 as outlined
above.
2. Alternative number two would be to delay or modify payment to
L 6 G Rohbein. This does not appear to be applicable, as the
work is complete and has been approved.
-t2-
Council Agenda - 8/24/87
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the Public works Director that the City
Council authorize final payment as outlined in alternative number
one and proceed with setting the assessment hearing.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copies of the final payment request from OSM.
-13-
Council Agenda - 8/26/87
12. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing for Adoption of Assessment
Rolls on 86-1 Project and Highway 25 Improvement Project. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
With the completion of the 86-1 interceptor sewer project, we do
have final figures which can be used to set assessments for the street
improvements and water improvements on Chestnut Street, the street
improvement along with water and sewer improvements to Fifth Street,
the street improvement and water improvement to Locust Street, the
water and storm sewer stubs for the Lucius Johnson property at Sixth
and Linn, and the Minnesota Street utility improvements. In addition,
within the next week we will have semi-final costs for the Highway 25
improvement project.
In order for us to most a goal of filing the proposed assessments
with the County in October of this year, we must hold a public hearing
no later than September 28, 1987, at which time the Council can determine
the assessment for individual properties. There has been considerable
discussion in the past about leas than 100 percent assessment toward
some of the properties on both projects.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative is to not a public hearing for assessments
for the 86.1 interceptor sewer project and the Highway 25 improvement
project for September 28, 1987.
2. The second alternative would be to delay the public hearing for
assessments. This would not be in the best interests of the
City, as we would miss our deadline with the County.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator and Public works
Director that the Council not a public hearing for the purpose of
making assessments on the above projects as outlined in alternative
number one.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
-1a-
Council Agenda - 8/24/87
13. Consideration of Purchase of Replacement Pickup for Public works
Department. 1J.S.1
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Unit 118 was purchased from the Federal Surplus Property late in
1981 at a coat of 5350. During that winter, the vehicle was painted
orange in the City shop by City employees. It was one of the better
buys that we have obtained through the Federal Surplus Property program.
Some six years later, the pickup has in excess of 90,000 miles on
it and is due for replacement. Over the past six years, the unit
has needed no major repairs other than minor work such as a starter,
fuel pump, break pads, and preventative maintenance such as oil changes
and grease jobs.
Lately the condition of the body has been deteriorating quite rapidly.
There are huge rust holes in the body in numerous places and other
systems aro showing their signs of age. some lubricants and greases
are leaking, and we recently had to replace the radiator. The valve
seals are extremely questionable at this time. The truck is definitely
slated for retirement. In preparation for this, during the preparation
of the 1987 budget, I felt that we could gat by with another used
vehicle if I could find one with under 40,000 miles with a rust -free
body, a small and economical V-8, and automatic transmission. A
quick check last summer indicated you would probably find such a
pickup for $6,500 to $7,000. Calculating the trade value of the
old Unit 118 at 5500 to S1,000, we placed $6,000 in the 1987 budget.
In the past couple of months I have been checking with the local
Chevrolet dealer and Ford dealer about vehicles meeting the general
specifications listed above. It appeared that there were numerous
4 -speed vehicles but very few automatics. Could Brothers Chevrolet
called when Vince Mayer traded off his pickup from the phone company.
Although it was a clean, well equipped unit, the $11,000 price tag
was out of the question. In addition, when Al Larson from Coast
to Coast traded off his clean pickup to Monticello Ford. I was notified.
But again the price tag was in excess of 59,000, so I didn't pursue
either of these vehicles. In addition, both were 4-whoel drives
which I felt would have been a luxury. Rocently. I was contacted
by Gould Brothers Chevrolet again, as they had a super clean 1982
Chevy half -ton with a small V-8 automatic, soma luxuries. It's a
two -toned vehicle, brown and tan, with 38.000 miles, very, very clean.
and very wall cared for. with trade, the price would be $6,400,
Gould Brothers has indicated they would paint the vehicle orange
for an additional $400, or for a total of $6.800.
Recently, while discussing the East County Road 39 project with Curtis
Hoglund, it was learned that he had a 1987 Ford F-150 pickup for
sale with only 8.000 actual miles. The pickup was a relatively plain
model, being brown in color, with an electronically fueled 6 -cylinder
but a 4-opeod tranamision. This unit is extremely clean, like now.
and Curtis would trade for 57,500.
Council Agenda - 8/24/87
For Monday evening's meeting, we will attempt to obtain prices on
what a new pickup would coat and also obtain some additional quotes
on some other pickups for your consideration.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to authorize the Public works
Director to replace Unit 018 with a used pickup selected at Monday
evening's meeting.
2. The second alternative would be to purchase a new vehicle in
1987 or budget for a new vehicle for 1988.
3. The third alternative would be to continue using the 1972 Chevy
pickup. This does not appear to be practical, as repairs will
be costly in the future, and the body will virtually dissolve
around the frame in the next year or two.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the 7ecommandation of the Public works Director that we replace
this vehicle as outlined in alternative number one or two, the actual
decision to be made at Monday evening's meeting by the Council.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Pictures and quotes available at Monday evening's meeting.
-16-
Council Agenda - 8/24/87
14. Consideration of Planning Commission Appointment. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As you are aware, Barbara Koropchak will be leaving her position
with the Monticello Planning Commission effective the end of the
August 11, 1987, Planning Commission meeting. we had submitted an
advertisement in the Monticello Times and most recently in the Monticello
Shopper to solicit for potential Planning Commission member applicants.
we received three written applications, which are enclosed, and two
oral applications, which are also enclosed. Four of these applicants
attended the August 11 Planning Commission meeting for an interview
In front of Planning Commission members.
Each of the applicants were sent a formal letter from myself asking
them to attend the August 11, 1987, Planning Commission meeting to
see how the Planning Commission works and how the members deal with
particular requests that come before them. I did also indicate to
the applicants that there was a specific agenda item which the Planning
Commission members may or may not ask questions of each of the individuals
in attendance. I also indicated in my letter, of which a copy is
enclosed, that the Planning Commission members may or may not make
e recommendation to the City Council for a Planning Commission member
at the August 11, 1987, Planning Commission meeting. The Planning
Commission did not make a recommendation at the August 11, 1987,
meeting. Enclosed you will find a summary of the Planning Commission
members' selections for a recommendation to the Monticello City Council
for a new Planning Commission member.
The three written applications were from Patrick Faltereack, Candy
Thilquiot, and Cindy Lamm. The oral applicants were Christopher
Maas and Ellen Maxwell.
The Planning Commission recommendation to you is that you appoint
Cindy Lamm to fill the remaining term of former Planning Commieaion
member, Barbara Koropchak.
Ono thing to note, Cindy Lamm is a resident of Monticello Township
and does not reside in the City of Monticello, as the other four
applicants do. The other four applicants, which are taxpayers in
the City of Monticello, do reside in the Monticello city limits.
S. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1 . Acknowledge Planning Commission members' recommendation of Cindy
Lemm for appointment to fill the term of Barbara Koropchak.
2. Deny Planning Commission members' recommendation of Cindy Lamm
for appointment to fill the term of Barbara Koropchak.
3. Select one of the four Monticello city residents to fill Barbara
Koropchak's Planning Commission term.
-17-
Council Agenda - 8/28/87
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff acknowledges Planning Commission members' recommendation
of City Lemm to fill Barbara Koropchak's Planning Commission term.
one thing we would like to mention is that Cindy Lemm is currently
a resident of Monticello Township and not the City of Monticello
like the other four applicants are. Cindy Lemm will be sent a letter
inviting her to attend the Monticello City Council meeting on Monday
night. If you would like the other four residents which applied
for the Planning Commission member position to attend. please let
me know and I will contact them.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the invitation sent to each of the prospective applicants;
Copy of applicants' submitted letters; Copy of the tabulation of
the Planning Commission members' recommendation.
My name is Cindy Lemm, and I would like to be considered for the
vacancy on the Monticello City Planning Commission. I live 4 miles
east of Monticello on County Road 39, and before that lived for 5
years on west River Street in Monticello.
Until August 3rd I worked full time as an Assistant Quality Circle
Facilitator for the Cornelius Company in Anoka. I taught groups of
employees how to identify, analyze and solve problems in their work
areas until I was laid off due to position elimination.
I am 3 classes away from my A.A. degree at Anoka Ramsey Community
College, and then plan to continue my education by completing my R.A.
in Business Administration.
I would like to serve on the Planning Commission because decisions
made now will determine the future of Monticello, and although I do
not currently reside in the city of Monticello. I expect the area
where we live to be annexed sometime in the future. I have a lot of
free time now, and would like to do something worthwhile with it, as
well as to becotne involved in the community. I don't have a lot of
experience with city planning, but have strong communication and
leadership skills, and feel that I could serve the Commission well.
Cindy Lem 0,0� +'�
Rt. 2 Box 145A
Monticello, MN 55362
295-2642 (Unlisted)
July 31, 1987
Candi Thilqulst
116 Hedman Lane
Monticello, MIN 55362
Mr. Gary Anderson
Monticello City Hall
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Mr. Anderson,
Per our phone conversion regarding my application for the
Planning and Zoning Committee position that will be available
soon, here is a brief personal description.
My name is Candi Thilquist. I currently reside at
116 Hedman Lane, Monticello. Minnesota.
I have lived and worked in Monticello 18 years. My current
position is with NSP at hte Monticello Training Center as an
Administrative Aid. My duties are to maintain all personnel
records for Monticello Nuclear Plant personnel, oreer all
supplies, and general secretarial duties.
I have had several diverse pooitions locally, one of which
was with the City of Monticello as a cashier at Hi -Way Liquors
while under the management of Mark Irmiter.
I have three high school ago daughters currently attending
Monticello Senior High.
I am interacted in the Planning and Zoning Committee position
for at least two reasons, ono being personal change.
The second, additional knowledge of perhaps state and certainly
local Iowa and ordinances. 'rhere also seems to be a series of
issues In my neighborhood recently regarding everything from
peLa,to domestic arguements, to the care of one's home and
property. Hopefully thin experience will help all of us to
solve these problems in a civil manner.
Thank you for the opportunity to present thin application
and your attention to this matter.
Zicarely.
Candl Thilquist
July 6, 1989
Planning Commission
City of Monticello
Monticello, MN 55362
Planning Commission:
I am interested in serving on the MonticelIo Planning Commission.
Community development is an interest to me.
Previously, i was chairman of the Planning Commission for the City
of Madison Lake, MN for five years. In addition to that I served as
a volunteer fireman and police reserveman for the City of Madison
Lake.
If there is any additional information you need to know, please feel
free to contact me.
Sincerely,
QaioC
Patrick Faltersack
1014 Meadow Oak Drive
Monticello, MN 55362
(612) 295-4863
T Eon 6 er
miinneacte
$53a2•a2ab 16)
City o1 WontiAl.
_
MONTICELLO, MN 55382.9245
August 7, 1987
kme16121295.2711
evq IS, 21303.5738
'
Ms. Ellen Maxwell
149 Riverview Drive, Unit 45
Monticello, MN 55362
syor,
Area Grrnemo
n Coma:
Dear Rt. Maxwell:
Dan S7onµlen
Fran Foo
wltlym Feu
The Monticello Planning Commission will hold its regular monthly
Jack Mt ea
meeting on Tuesday, August 11, 1987, beginning at 7:30 p.m.
As a ltmnticello Planning Commission applicant, you are invited
to attend this meeting. On the enclosed agenda you will note
:n48""r:
Tom Us-
an agenda item for Monticello Planning Commission applicants.
-Mc e Ouacior:
The Monticello Planning Commission members may ask questions
akk wafalener
of you at this time.
,nuc works:
Jon, Simon
arming a Zoning:
The Monticello Planning Commission members, after their conversations
Gary lrutaraon
with Fou and other Monticello Planning Commission applicants,
:onomK Oereiooment:
may choose to make a recomcendation to the Monticello City Council
Dme KMgOCliale
members at this time or at a later date.
•
Their recommendation is subject to the approval of the Monticello
City Council members.
we encourage your attendance at the Tuesday. August 11, 1987,
Planning Commission meeting.
If you have any Questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
lQ�y r�1
Gary Anderson
Zoning Administrator
GAAd
Enclosure
cc: File
T Eon 6 er
miinneacte
$53a2•a2ab 16)
z6121
295-2711
9f 21.333-5739
Co d:
Nn 9longen
ran Fav
vmam Fas
eek M-00
nkkevemr:
am Esoem
&me Otrecw-
tick woz4ver
we works:
.S.
nnm a Zonoso:
ury u+aereon
uranle peveloommt
)me KorooCAUX
August 7, 1957
City o/ Monticello
MONTICELLO. MN 55352.9245
Ms. Candi Thilquist -
116 Redman Lane
Monticello, MN 55362
Dear Ms. Thilquist:
The Monticello Planning Commission will hold its regular monthly
meeting on Tuesday, August 11, 1987, beginning at 7:30 p.m.
As a Monticello Planning Commission applicant, you are invited
to attend this meeting. an the enclosed agenda you will note
an agenda item for Monticello Planning Commission applicants.
The Monticello Planning Commission members may ask questions
of you at this time.
The Monticello Planning Commission mambers, after their conversations
with you and other Monticello Planning Commission applicants,
may choose to make a recommendation to the Monticello City Council
members at this time or at a later date.
Their recommendation is subject to the approval of the Monticello
City Council members.
we encourage your attendance at the Tuesday, August 11, 1987,
Planning Commission meeting.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
S7��JJJ ..� �__
.Clo i
Gary Anderson
Zoning Administrator
GAAd
Enclosure
cc: File
felt 9rae+rav
xeuo. fainneeos /
:a39z•e2se i
city o/ Monticello
r MONTICELLO, MN 55362.9245
August 7, 1987
12 )295-2711
912)333.5739
Ms. Cindy Lemn
Aouta 2, Sox 145A
Monticallo, MN 55362
GAnumo Dear Me. Lemur:
sxua:
Fo�o0f1
FW The Monticello Planning Commission will hold its regular monthly
�+F■g meeting on Tuesday, August 11, 1987, beginning at 7:30 p.m.
Me%we4
As a Monticello Planning Commission applicant, you are invited
to attend this meeting. On the enclosed agenda you will note
ar■u>r: an agenda item for Monticello Planning Commission applicants.
Eaem The Monticello Planning Commission members may ask questions
wooesleerr of you at this time.
worlu:
�^p■ The Monticello Planning Commission members, after their conversations
g ZoMng: with you and other Monticello Planning Commission applicants,
ulaareon may choose to make a recommendation to the Monticello City Council
nK oevetoomam:
Koraocrok members at this time or at a later data.
Their recommendation is subject to the approval of the Monticello �'•�•
City Council members. `
We encourage your attendance at the Tuesday, August 11, 1987,
Planning Commission meeting.
If you have any questions, please feel free to Contact me,
Sincerely,
0-1 �1019101
QWA
Gary Anderson
Zoning Administrator
GAAd
Enclosure
cc: File
00. MI—esau 1jj
182-92*5 / T
i
s Eui 8meenav /�
naso. +anna.aia
i53az•a2+a
o1 Mont;'Ao
,,. •
MONTICELLO. MN 55382.9248
August 7, 1987
Pnone {812}28&?ttt
stew {8121313.5138
Mr. Patrick Faltersack
1010 Meadow Oak Drive '
Monticello, MH 55362 -
McYar
An* G+aawno
Dear Mr. Faltersack:
city Count-
Dm 8bngm
1. It
wauam Fu
The Monticello Planning Commission will hold its regular monthly
Jack Me:+.ae
meeting on Tuesday. August 11, 1987, beginning at 7:30 p.m.
As a Monticello Planning Commission applicant, you are invited
to attend this meeting. on the enclosed agenda you will note
Aemmutrata:
Tom Elden
an agenda item for Monticello Planning Commiesion applicants.
Finance Deecmr:
The Monticello Planning Commission members may ask questions
Fick waretle,
of you at this time.
puoec waw:
.wm se au
The Monticel:o Planning Commission members, after their conversations
punnmo aZaano:
Oary Am:wedn
with you and other Monticello Planning Commission applicants,
Ecandmc 04,18100"wt:
may choose to make a recommendation to the Monticello City Council
C0. KaoocneK
members at this time or at a later date. '
Their recommendation is subject to the approval of the Monticello
�•.
City Council members.
We encourage your attendance at the Tuesday, August 11, 1987.
Planning Commission meeting.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
"O�y J" -M
Gary Anderson
Zoning Administrator
GA1kd
Enclosure
cc: File
i
s Eui 8meenav /�
naso. +anna.aia
i53az•a2+a
J_ MONTICELLO, MN 55362.9245
'twee 4472)295.2711 August 21, 1987
Asan 1612)333.5739
RE: Recommendation for Planning Commission Applicant
uycs:
ane Gdmwm
sty Co u,cd:
��}
Oan Blom -gen
1 1 I
El
NONE OF THE BEIAW
Fran Far
Wfalem Fes
Jack Ma—ea
❑
PATRICK FALTERSACK
.cmmmuator:
Tom Eioem
a
CHRISTOPHER MMS
RiCM W0031611 f
JJohn SO
CANDI THIL42UIST
tannaiQ a Zonnp:
OW Anaerettn
conomc Devebament
Q
ELLEN MAXWELL
Ome Kmoocnok
C]
CINDY LEMM
As the above results indicate, the Monticello Planning Commission's
recommendation is for the appointment of Cindy Lemm to the Monticello
Planning Commission.
Sincerely,
C. y Andora�
Zoning Administrator
CA/kd
0 Ent BrwewaY
aceao. Mm 411013
56382.9245 / .�/
LIQUOR FUND
AMOUNT
CECK
LIQUOR DISBURSEMENTS FOR AUGUST
NO.
N0.
Johnson Bros. - Liquor
671.50
132I9
Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT
637.36
13220
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
170.00
13221
Commissioner of Revenue - SWT
232.00
13222
State Treasurer - PERA W1H
190.57
13223
Eagle Wine Co. - Liquor
840.25
13224
Griggs, Cooper - Liquor
2,970.16
13225
Ed Phillips - Liquor
1,886.12
13226
Quality Wine - Liquor
504.07
13227
Johnson Bra. - Liquor
1,227.32
13228
Northern States Power - Utilities
846.38
13229
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone
74.89
13230
North Central Public Service - Utilities
7.68
13231
MN. Bar Supply - Store supplies
98.16
13232
Dahlheimer Dist. Co. - Beer
22,417.65
13233
Viking Coca Cola - Misc. mdse.
362.45
13234
Grosslein Beverage - Beer
19,993.70
13235
The Glass Hut - Repair door
75.00
13236
Granite City Jobbing - Supplies
167.02
13237
Cloudy Town Diet. Co. - Store supplies
162.20
13238
Stromquist Dist. Co. - Misc. mdse.
19.50
13239
St. Cloud Fire Equip. - Service on fire extinguishers
22.50
13240
Koiles Sanitation - Garbage service
133.50
13241
Bernick's Pepsi Cola - Misc. mdss.
849.30
13242
Thorpe Diet. Co. - Beer
13,096.20
13243
Seven Up Bottling - Mist. mdse.
144.35
13244
Leifert Trucking - Freight
475.51
13245
Maus Foods - Store expense
18.20
13246
Monticello Office Products - Store expense
34.96
13247
City of Monticello - Sewer/water billing
207.19
13248
Griggs, Cooper - Liquor
1,895.61
13249
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
170.00
13250
Wright County State Bank - FICA.& FWT
624.08
13251
Johnson Bros. - Liquor
75I.74
13252
Banker's Life - Group Ins.
307.88
13253
Hoover Co. - Repair vacuum
34.23
13254
Adam's Pest Control - Pest control mtce.
75.00
13255
Rubald Beverage Co. - Wine purchase
249.61
13256
Cruys. Johnson - Computer fees
110.00
13257
Monticello Times - Adv.
134.60
13258
Yellow Pages - Adv.
95.00
13259
Day Diet. - Beer
1,336.65
13260
Dick Beverage - Beer
2,725.20
13261
Coast to Coast - Store expense
4.58
13262
Keith Trippe - Sever pipe for parking lot
$0.00
13263
PERA - Para W(H
196.77
13264
Ed Phillipe - Liquor
21452.18
13265
Quality Wine - Liquor
657.10
13266
Griggs. Cooper - Liquor
5,419.83
13267
Ron's Ice Co. - Ica purchase
799.49
13268
Jude Candy b Tobacco - Supplies
1,041.77
13269
OSM - Engineering fees for parking lot
2,673.44
13270
Commissioner of Revenue - Sales tax
4.613.92
13271
P 6 H Warehouse Sales - Irrigation system supplies
1.434.77
13272
Payroll for July
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS
3.885.80
S1nn.77s.4d
GENERAL FUND -- AUGUST ' AMOUNT CHECK NO.
Commissioner of Revenue - Water sales tax - 2nd Qtr.
450.19
24639
Thomas Meulebroeck - Fin. Off. 6 Clerks Assoc. annual dues
15.00.
24640
Corrow Sanitation - Garbage contract 16,755.20
24641
Holt Partnership Architects - Building prints
22.25
24642
ICMA Retirement - Payroll ded.
614.34
24643
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
123.04
24644
Data Mgmt. Design - Computer equipment
41,567.20
24645
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
106.00
24646
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
36.00
24647
Jerry Hermes - Janitorial library
216.67
24648
David Stromberg - Animal control expense
287.50
24649
Mrs. Beverly Johnson - Animal control expense
275.00
24650
Commissioner of Revenue - SWT
2,042.00
24651
State Treasurer - PERA
1.492.16
24652
Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT
5.006.88
24653
Federal Mtce. 6 Cleaning
591.41
24654
YMCA of Mpls. - Monthly contract payment
583.33
24655
Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary
175.00
24656
Dan Blonigen - Council salary
125.00
24657
Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary
125.00
24658
William Fair - Council salary
125.00
24659
Warren Smith - Council salary
123.19
24660
James Ridgeway - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24661
Dick Martie - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24662
Richard Carlson - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24663
Barbara Koropchak - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24664
Eugene and Helen Bland - Earnestmoney on residence
500.00
24665
Corrow Sanitation - Add'l. charges for land fill costs
2,557.40
24666
Janette Leerrsen - Inf. Center salary
106.87
24667
Wilma Hayes - Inf. Center salary
120.37
24668
Dept, of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees
71.00
24669
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
94.00
24670
Kuhn Properties - Purchase of Bland property
34,407.31
24671
Kuhn Properties - Purchase balance
2.000.00
24672
S b L Excavating - Chelsea Road project payment
1,275.00
24673
L 6 G Rohbein - Chelsea Road extension project
19.104.80
24674
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone '
991.56
24675
Astech Surface Contract. Corp. - Sealcoating streets
13,501.28
24676
Eugene 6 Helen Bland - Balance due on property
4.055.34
24677
Wright County State Bank - G. 0. Bond payment - 86-A
27,520.00
24678
Wright County Treasurer - lot half R. E. taxes - Bland property
211.14
24679
Wayne Mfg. - Christmas decorations
3,993.89
24680
Banker's Life Ins. - Group ins.
4,120.64
24681
Northern States Power - Utilities
7.103.53
24682
VOID
-0-
24683
Norweat Investment Services - Computer payment
2.407.61
24684
PSGI - WWTP contract payment - August
22.083.35
24685
ICMA - Payroll ded.
614.34
24686
State Treasurer - Ins. premiums - reimb.
27.00
24687
Rick Wolfsteller - Mileage allowance for August
300.00
24688
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
123.04
24689
J M Oil Co. - Gas
172.05
24690
Dept. of Not. Rea. - Dep. Reg. fees
31.00
24691
Dept. of Not. Rae. - Dep. Reg. fees
18.00
24692
ICMA - Add. cont. for Rick Wolfatelier
145.00
24693
David Stromborg - Animal control expense
287.50
24694
Jerry Hermes - Janitorial library
216.67
24695
GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NO.
Monticello Fire Dept. - Salaries
2,016.54
24696
North Central Public Service - Utilities
66.23
24,697
Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWr
4,506.52
24698
PERA - PERA W/H
1 .313.25
24699
,. Wright County Highway Dept. - Maps, crack filler
594.85
24700
Big Lake Equip. - Mtce. Dept. repaire
496.73
24701
Trueman Welter - Parts for equipment
33.30
24702
Wright County Auditor - Sheriff contract payment
10,645.21
24703
Pitney Bowes - Postage machine rental
72.00
24704
Marco Business Products - Copy machine repair at Mtce. Bldg.
82.38
24705
Simonson Lumber - Supplies
46.40
24706
Unitog Rental - Uniform rental
128.00
24707
Coast to Coast - Supplies for all Depts.
285.04
24708
Safety Kleen - Equipment mtce. - Public Works
40.00
24709
St. Cloud Restaurant - Hand soap
17.20
24710
Unocal - Gas - Fire Dept. 6 Walt's van
58.19
24711
St. Cloud Fire Equip. - Service fire ext.
72.75
24712
Sentry Systems - Alarm system for Fire Dept.
54.00
24713
Seitz S e rvi Star - Supplies for mtce.
218.14
24714
L 6 S Tool - Blades sharpened
25.00
24715
Phillips 66 - Gas - Fire Dept. 6 Walt's van
69.42
24716
Monticello Times - Publ.
324.62
24717
Cruys, Johnson - Computer fees for July
290.00
24718
Maus Foods - Supplies for all Depts.
161.08
24719
Monticello Township - i payment per OAA agreement
13,750.00
24720
Biff's Inc. - Latrine rental at softball fields
109.00
24721
Service Master - Services at Library
65.00
24722
AT&T Inf. Systems - Fire phone
3.96
24723
Monticello Printing - Office supplies - stationery 6 meter cds.
86.80
24724
Monticello Office Products - Misc. office supplies
211.55
24725
AME Ready Mix - Cement for parks
192.34
24726
McDowall Co. - Repairs at Fire Hall
161.16
24727
Lindberg Decorating - Paint for parks
78.55
24728
Gordon Link - Gas
387.57
24729
First Trust Center - Fire Hall bonds - ads. fees
691.75
24730
Century Fence - Material for softball fields
66.40
24731
Buffalo Bituminous - Gravel
48.55
24732
Barton Sand A. Gravel - Sand for parks
22.29
24733
Braun Big Lake Auto Parts - Parts for Fire Dept.
26.00
24734
Ben Franklin - Paper towels and tissue for parks
67.70
24735
Moon Minor Sales - Equip. repair
63.45
24736
Martie Fars Service - Park supplies
152.00
24737
Harry'n Auto Supply - Misc. supplies
43.92
24738
Campbell Abstract - Survey - Bland property
61.00
24739
Local N49 - Union dues
115.00
24740
Colleen Kuchenmeister - Reg. fee - seminar for 0. Koropchak
75.00
24741
NDC Training - Reg. fee - seminar for 0. Koropchak
125.00
24742
,lanatto Leerseen - Inf. Center salary
63.00
24743
Wilma Hayes - Inf. Center salary
120.39
24744
Karen tloty - Mileage
40.25
24745
Smith, Pringle, etc. - Legal hes - Annex. - 749.00
2.296.00
24.746
Braun Kngineering - Lauring Lane 4 Sth St. tasting
340.25
24747
Flicker's T -v - Dehumidifier - Water Dept.
269.00
24748
League of MN. Cities - Mosbershlp dues
1,446.00
24749
League of MN. Cities - MN. Mun. Officers Directory
32.25
24750
AJN Service - Sealcnating Library parking lot
1,125.31
24751
-2-
-3-
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
" CHECK NO.
Wright County Treasurer -'Property taxes - 2nd half
2,799.26
-24752
Bland, Johnson, Saxon, Oakwood Ind. and Haas properties
Mple. Star and Tribune - Planning '& Zoning Adm. adv.
184.80
24753
T W Hardware - Screws
4.04
24754
HumaneSociety of Wright County - Animal control services
85.00
24755
Marco Business Products - Ribbon and tape -
58.26
24756
Holmes & Graven - Prof. services - NAWCO
2,542.50
24757
Olson &'Sons - Hookup pump &•receptacle
114.27
24758
Dahlgren, Shardlow, etc. - Annexation study
823.24
24759
Feedrite Controls - Sample
10.00
24760
Gould's Chev. - Deposit to hold pick-up
50.00
24761
Anoka County Social Services - Payroll ded.
204.00
24762
Turnquist Paper Co. - Paper towels
18.92
24763
Economics Press - Sub. renewal
16.54
24764
OSM - Misc. engineering fees
14,875.76
24765
Raimer & Gries - Title reg. - Raindance Corp.
105.00
24766
Bowman Barnes - Nuts and bolts, etc.
31.35
24767
Water Products Co. - Meters, valves, etc.
5,916.66
24768
North Star Waterworks - Hydrant repairs
374.04
24769
Rick Wolfsteller - Mileage for July
109.14
24770
St. Michael Vet Clinic - Animal control expense
55.00
24771
Northern Oxygen Service - Oxygen for Fire Dept.
18.93
24772
Gary Anderson - Mileage expense
82.72
24773
Schillewaert Landscaping - Tree removal expense
300.00
24774
P & H Warehouse Sales - Irrigation equip.
54.47
24775
Granite Electronics - Batteries for pagers
24.00
24776
( Wright County Recorder - Recording fees for 2 leins
20.00
24777
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
43.00
24778
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
22.00
24779
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
18.00
24780
A-1 Security Locksmiths - New locks at City Hall 6 Public Wits. 407.65
24781
Mobil Oil - Gas - Fire & Water Depts.
47.70
24782
Payroll for July
29,044.29
TOTAL GENERAL FUND DISBURSEMENTS
$310,365.96
-3-
MEMO
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator
DATE: Friday, August 14, 1987
SUBJECT: Special Council Meeting, Monday, August 17, 1987 at
6:30 P.M.
The special meeting scheduled for Monday night, August 17th, at 6:30 P.M.
is primarily for the purpose of establishing goals and objectives for the
1988 Budget. My original intent for this meeting is to receive input
from the Council prior to the staff's preparation of the 1988 Budget
concerning goals and objectives the Council may wish to see included in
the budget for next year. As I indicated previously, the city staff
and department heads are currently working on the 1988 budget and I felt
that if council members had specific items, projects, or goals that they
would like to see implemented in 1988, it would be easier for the staff
to compile the preliminary budget with this information being received
a head of time rather than after the first preliminary budget is
reviewed. Certainly, this is the time to be thinking about future
needs of the City other than just during 1988. but major Improvements
and/or ideas may not necessarily be part of the 1988 Budget but may
require bonding to Implement.
Included with this notice is a copy of the recent determination made by
the Department of Human Rights regarding Karen Hansen's alegation
of sex discrimination in regard to her salary. In summary, the Human
Rights Department determined that there is probable cause to believe
that an unfair, discriminatory practice by the City has been made in
regard to Karen's position.
The Human Rights Department has invited the City to resolve this through
conciliation process and the City has 10 days to reply to their
invitation. According to their letter, the City 1a not admitting any
liability or agreeing to the compromise they will propose If we agree
to attempt a resolution of her complaint. The initial complaint along
with Tom's reply and a copy of this notice has been given to City
Attorney, Cary Pringle, who Indicated that it was his recommendation
that the City respond to their request for an attempted resolution as
this would give the City an opportunity to see what their proposal
would be. Needless to say, my first reaction was that the Department
of Human Rights had made a complete error in their investigation of
Karen's complaint and thought that possibly the City's only alternative
might be to discuss whether the position regarding the Senior Citizen's
Center should be abolished entirely. It seems unrealistlt that the
Department of Human Rights can be able to dictate to the City of
Monticello that It will have a full time employee working as a Senior
Citizen's Director and mandate a comparable salary for a full time
person. Although we have not gotten into discussions with Mr. Pringle
Memo - Council Members
August 14, 1987
L_ Page 92
on the subject at this point, it would seem that the City of Monticello
could make a decision not to continue funding a full time position
for the Senior Citizen's Center and basically abolish the position.
After discussing the response with Mr. Pringle, he does have a point
in his recommendation to hear what the Department's proposal would be
for an acceptable resolution to Karen's complaint. After receiving
their proposal, the Council at that time could accept or reject or
propose an alternate resolution.
In regard to the joint meeting held on Thursday morning in Buffalo with
township officials and municipal board staff, it appears that the
meeting may have been nonproductive. Executive Director, Terry Merrit,
basically summarized to the group possible types of solutions or
agreements that have been used In the past by other communities in the
hopes that the City and Township would have a starting point for future
negotiations. My interpretation of the meeting wa% basically, the City's
position that we were not very interested in deviating from our last
counter offer and it certainly appeared to me that Franklin Denn
speaking for the township indicated that they would be very reluctant
to any type of an agreement that allowed for annexation of parcels
against the wishes of the township residents. Although Mr. Merrit
felt each party should take a few weeks to consider possible solutions
and to review the needs of each party in the dispute. I believe the
only thing that will happen is another month goes by before the
Municipal Board again resumes their discussions on our annexation
hearings. Arve, Fran, and myself can provide additional information
at Monday's meeting.
1988 CAPITAL OUTLAY
1.
Grader
$ 80,000
2.
Concession Stand 6 Restrooms at Bellfield
30,000
(volunteer Labor )
3.
Bridge Park Parking Lot 6 Grading
10,000
4.
Meadow Oak Park
5,000
5.
Mississippi Drive Rehab.
40,000
6.
Hillcrest Area Overlay
145,000
7.
Sealcoat
28,400
8.
Two String Trimmers
500
9.
Bucket Truc)c
15,000
10.
Lauring Lane Park
8,000
11.
Aeator
1,200
12.
Lawn Vacuum
500
13.
East County Road 39 6 Frontage Road
53,000
14.
Intersection Cast 39 6 Co. Rd. 75
60,000
(Not Including Signal)
15.
Sever 6 water Cast 39 6 Frontage Road
50,000
16.
water Improvement Project
1.1 million
17.
Recycling Facility
20,000
18.
Nir1fP Office 6 Meeting Room
35,0007
COUNCIL UPDATE
Council Agenda Distribution
Prior to Tom's leaving, he and I had discussed the current policy
of preparing the Council agenda for distribution on Fridays prior
to the Council meetings. For approximately the last five years,
the agenda has been prepared and distributed to the Council members
on Friday prior to the meeting, whereas previous to 1982, the agenda
was distributed on Thursdays. I believe there has been some indication
in the past that the Council members maybe would like to receive
the agenda a day earlier to provide more time for review prior to
the meeting.
Currently with the agenda being distributed on Fridays, the cut-off
date for accepting any items for the agenda has been Tuesday afternoon
to allow for Wednesday and Thursday preparation of the agenda. This
has worked fairly well in allowing department heads and myself two
days to prepare agenda items and allow for Karen to type. Even with
the Tuesday cut-off date for additional agenda items, occasionally
a late item will be considered early Wednesday if the staff feels
there is sufficient time to prepare the item for distribution. No
matter when we establish the cut-off point, there may be someone
wishing to be on the agenda as a latecomer. If the Council wishes
to receive the agenda supplement by Thursday prior to the Council
meeting, I would have to recommend that the cut-off date for additional
agenda items would be at the end of Monday's business day to enable
sufficient time for preparation and typing. The drawback to the
Thursday agenda distribution date would be the Monday cut-off time,
as this is a whole week before the actual Council meeting; and I
may receive many requests for being on the agenda yet on Tuesday.
Although in a lot of the cases an item could still be included after
Monday, a lot depends on the length of the agenda and the amount
of time available by the staff. I believe overall, leaving Tuesday
as the cut-off data for the agenda with distribution on Friday would
provide a bettor service to the public then reverting to a Monday
deadline. As a result, unless the Council feels strongly about receiving
the agenda by Thursday, I would recommend that we continue this present
policy.
In the near future, an part of the agenda package, I hope to be Including
a listing of topics or tentative agenda items that will be scheduled
for the next regularly scheduled Council meeting. If I know of an
item or topic that will be on the next agenda item, this information
will be presented just so the Council can be made aware of upcoming
items and thus allow for any input a Council member may have regarding
the topic. Of course, any items listed would just be tentative and
would be subject to change, etc.
Council Update
Page 2
J
At the previous meeting, the Council authorized myself to begin negotiations
with Eugene and Helen Bland regarding the possible purchase of their
property adjacent to City Hall. A purchase agreement was presented
and accepted by the Blands to purchase their property for $42,000.
City Attorney, Gary Pringle, has been preparing the necessary documents
to complete the sale prior to August 10. Actually, by the time you
read this update, the City, if everything goes according to plan,
will be the owner of this property.
Gary Anderson, John Simola, and myself inspected the property prior
to the purchase agreement being presented, and there are a few items
that the City should take care of before the property is available
for rent. Additional expenditures of between $1,000 and $2,000 will
be necessary to update the property for rental purposes, including
installation of city water service, attic insulation, carpeting for
one bedroom, and minor electrical work such as beth fan and installation
of a smoke alarm. I believe the City was more than fair in its offer
to the Blands, and the City now has the additional land necessary
for any future expansion that may occur at the City Hall site.
/
CITY Or 11711TICFII.O
.\
Ilntull7'Du11d1ng DcpprL-t Rcport
••
Ila.th ar crux, IYMj
1`�UDT9 m1d USES
POUIITS ISSUED
...
Ma•a
I1a.lh .7una
I;f• `6w•
It., Jub
T6.:C� -L••a t••r T.D t••r 1
L -L I.- To Data :To Oata 1
RCIIDPIITIAL
dumber _
' Voluetlo0
4
S 72,200:00
B
S 2']4,]00.00
12 78
S 416,060.00 S 4,612,120.00 S
57
3,626,900.00
Feoe'
945.54
2.750.67
2,297.70 .23,335.46
]1.911.99
Surchargsa
]6.10
115.90
208.00 2,405.80
1,914.69 '•
OOIPtEI1CIAL
Iluad;ar
7
]
•' 9
17 ,
Valuatlm
127,500.00
29,300.00
1,562,000.00 ••
687.130.00
Feoe
1,266.17'
]1].70
7,092.70
.. S.0%.77
Surcharges
63.75
14.65 .,
761.00.
]47.80
INW97RIAL
Number
1
1
• Value Lim
752,000.00
752,00&.00
Feoe .
4,612.57
I
4,612.57
Surcliargee
176:00
376.00
PWIlDI1r0
tlumber
4
50
46
42
• Fess
117.00
140.00
207.00 1,507.00
1,474.00
Surcharges
2.00
2.50
4.00 23.00
21.00
07111]L9
Number
4
4
B
Velustlon
77,400.00
12,860.00
60.400.00
hes
1102. so
119.10
6a2.50
Surcharges
I.
6.90
40.00
TOTAL 110. "IU111S
17..
.... .... 20 -
._ _. 70 117
VAATION
TOTAL W
95;,700.00
341,000.00
416,060.00 6,366,980.00
5.]46,4]0.00
TOT* M,
'7,041.20
2,827.07
2.504.70 32 054.26
43.77R.4;
7'OrAL 6URCRAa4C9
477. BS
171.05
212.00 \'216.70,
]_A97.49
'
CUIUIPIrt 11,31771
• -- --.-_ ___- ---.,
__..-. -...--
_
_
Number
Ln�Optq '
PEIUUT IIAIV118
Nwbor
117UU7F�� "Ujjja1A111:R
Valuationyl,(s -,en[ MetYeear
SL;gle Fe1a11T
2
3 t,465.10 3
57.95 3 115,900.00 25
]] '
Duplex
1
1,061.47
62.45 t0/,900.00 2
5
IWltl-featly
]
4
Comoerelol
2
t
Industrial
1
!
o '
7
Dee: Caragse
1
78.50
1,50 5,000.00
Signs
0
0:
Peelle B•l leing•
.
AI.TMATIOI of R17'AIR
.
D4a11Sng4
4
143.00
4.00 I i 8,500A22
;4 '
CMsosercl •1
]
•]]].70
14.65 :29,300.00 1!
0
Industrial
1• .0
0
.
PWIm1110
1
'
All types
5
140.00
2.60 42
46
ACCCSSORP 11TRUCIUIICS'
35.00 70,000.00 1
1
11wIwIng Pool•
Deets
1
]
504.50
90.00
3.00 7,400.• 00 7
7
C
tCNI'OIIMt PCIUUT
1
0
0
0
DEMOLITION
H•��
•
,1�1•
TOTALS
Do
'3.827.07
171.05 141.000" 1 125
I,
177
WIDIVIDlAL PEN117 ACTIVITY REPORT
. MONTH OF 1OLt . 1987
'ERMIT
DESCRIPTION
Pr
NAME/LOCA'T ION
VALUATION
vunSEa
:7-1075
inground Pool 6 pool bldg.
66
Construction 5/706 Lauring La.
9 70,000.60
67.1076
scop home
AC
mecalcallo Comm" Club/1205 OOlt••
Course Road
1,000.00
97.1077
Detached Wage
RO
Pat 2a mea/216 6. 4th it.
5,000.00
67-1078
Sousa Rad garage
97
WA9olldars/2501 sed Oak La.
61.500.00
97.1075)
Decca and besamant finlah
As,
Craig Rnutaon/1000 Maslow, Oak Or.
1,000.00
B-)060
110444 roof abin6lo
rapiarasent
AD
Doug Pitt/235 6. tro"Way
2,000.00
97-1061
Deet Around azveWroand
Corinne CAriatianaeft/222 Marvin
plot
AS
81seed 14e4%
2,400.00
97.1067
Docks
A9
Lyte 6nekingbaa/117 91 L1Crut Rd.
. 2,000.00
67-1085
meurnt wlta 6 front
perch
AO
ihasaa "I Lim 9t.
2.000.00
67.10841
Base* and 9arago
9r
01,11eutldam/2921 Meadow, Laos
64.600.00
67.1065
saseaant fialsb
AD
Do" Rl4ta/1101 Clcb View, Dr.
2,000.00
47.1066
Ouplei w,ttn garages
D
Men tarsee/306 4 207 Moab. 9t.
104.900.00
97-1087
Detached garago add.
AD
William fair/10210 VISA 31 :t.
$00.00
97-10:6
office addttion
AC
Dskibslsar Otstr./107 s. CtY'., 140. 1111
24,200.00
117-1080
Perish now root
:t. laury"e Catholic Chum/
replacement
AC
501 rat 4th 9t.
6 000.00
•
ToTAN
sul.ogoo.m
MOLL flAN 09""
Si -1078
Mose and farga
sr
8LM 9utldua/2:01 led oak La.
a 206.06
97.1086
Mme and garage
6P
KA 9ufldars/2921 leadaw, IA.
102.26
:7.1086
ample* with garages
D
ram 1ara4b/205 6 207 Wash. at.
626.92
•
TOTAL Is As savl:e
i-Mr.T
'
?MAL ar.F"s
6 2„ 908.11
FA
- gr
PERMIT SURCHARGE PLUMBING SURCHARrr
a 504.50 9 15.00 6 16.00 6 .s0
15.00 so
30.50 1.50
464.25 30,75 21.00 .50
54.00 1.50
20.Ob 50
24.00 1.00
20.00 .50
54.00 1.30 ,
414.20 27.20 11.00 .50
54.00 1.50
656.65 •52.45 11.00 .50
15.00.
50
245.70 11.16 24.00 .50
61 00 2.00
42.� 61W."n 6 -#4-6107 MW