Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 08-25-1986 (2)The-Cibllow.n9 Ckoc u mtn+ -s were 4ank a.�l 4bvmoo bdkk 0 m ow; 4 Ueamw box40 0 �lenaa -}heti W efr cok of O,f p�aer 0 6.4 PSG's liability to CITY under this Agreement specifically excludes any and all indirect or consequential damages arising from the operation, maintenance, and management of Project except for those directly attributable to PSG's negligence. 6.5 Each party shall obtain and maintain insurance coverage of a type and in the amounts described in Appendix G. Each party shall name the other party as an additional insured on all insurance policies covering the Project and shall provide the other party with satisfactory proof of insurance. 7. TERM AND TERMINATION DEFAULT REMEDIES 7.1 The initial term of this Agreement shall be forty (40) months commencing on September 1, 1986. Thereafter, this Agreement shall be automatically renewed for successive terms of five (5) years each unless cancelled in writing by either party no less than one hundred and twenty (120) days prior to expiration. 7.2 Either party may terminate this Agreement for a material breach of the Agreement by the other party after giving written notice of breach and allowing the other party thirty (30) days to correct the breach. Excepting breaches by CITY for non-payment of PSG's invoices, neither party shall terminate this Agreement without giving the other party thirty (30) flays written notice of intent to terminate after failure of the other party to correct the breach. 7.3 Upon notice of termination by CITY, PSG shall assist CITY in resuming operation of the Project. At the date of termination PSG will provide the quantities of chemicals shown in Appendix K. CITY will pay PSG the Cost of quantities greater of the quantities shown in Appendix K. If additional Cost is incurred by PSG at request of CITY, CITY shall pay PSG such Cost in accordance with Article 5.2. CITY may employ any and all employeea assigned to the Project. 7.4 Either party to this Agreement may terminate services under this Agreement for no cause by providing the other party one hundred twenty (120) days written notice and paying an amount equal to the unearned base fee as specified in Article 4.1 in total and by year in Appendix E. 7.5 Upon termination of this Agreement and all renewals and extensions of it, PSG will return the Project to the CITY In the same or better condition as it was upon the Effective Date of this Agreement, ordinary wear and tear excepted. The Project will be in better condition if CITY provides improvements to Project during the t ,v B. DISPUTES FORCE MAJEURE 8.1 In the event activities by CITY'S employee groups or ��tump- unions cause a disruption in PSG's ability to perform at the Project, CITY, with PSG's assistance or PSG at J its own option, may seek appropriate injunctive court orders. During any such disruption, PSG shall operate the facilities on a best-efforts basis until any such disruptions cease. 8.2 If any litigation is necessary to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees which are directly attributed to such litigation in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled. 8.3 Neither party shall be liable for its failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement if performance is made impractical, abnormally difficult, or abnormally costly, due to any unforeseen occurrence beyond its reasonable control. However, this Article 8.3 may not be used by either party to avoid, delay or otherwise affect any payments due to other party. 9. MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT 9.1 The Mutual Aid Agreement contained in Appendix 3 has been negotiated between the parties. The purpose of said Agreement is 1) to assist in events of civil emergency 2) to share equipment and personnel, and 3) for the benefit of both parties. Doth parties indicate their approval of this Agreement by their signatures below. AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: ��tump- is M. President J PROFESSIONAL SERVICCES GROUP, INC. CITY OF MONTICELLO DATE: CL 7o. DATE: WITNESS: J\ WITNESS: 0 1 APPENDIX A DEFINITIONS A.1 The "Project" means all equipment, vehicles, grounds, sewers and facilities described in Appendix B and where appropriate, the management, operations and maintenance of such. A.2 "Capital Expenditures" means any expenditures for (1) the purchase of new equipment or facility items that cost more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000); or (2) major repairs which significantly extends equipment or facility service life and cost more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000) or (3) expenditures that are planned, non -routine and budgeted by CITY. A.3 "Cost" means all Direct Cost and Indirect Cost determined on an accrual basis in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A.4 "Direct Cost" means the actual cost incurred for the direct benefit of the Project including, but not limited to, expenditures for direct labor, employee benefits, chemicals, lab supplies, repairs, repair parts, maintenance parts, safety supplies, gasoline, oil, equipment rental, travel, office supplies, other supplies, uniforms, telephone, postage, utilities, tools, memberships, and training supplies. A.5 "Indirect Cost" means expenditures incurred by PSG for the indirect benefit of the Project. A.6 "Maintenance" means the cost of those routine and/or repetitive activities required or recommended by the equipment or facility manufacturer or PSG to maximize the service life of the equipment, sewer, vehicles, and facility. A.7 "Repairs" means the cost of those non-routine/non-repetitive activities required for operational continuity, safety, and performance generally due to failure or to avert a failure of the equipment, sewer, vehicle, or facility or some component thereof. A.8 "Biologically Toxic Substances" means any substance or combination of substances contained in the plant influent in sufficiently high concentration so as to interfere with the biological processes necessary for the removal of the organic and chemical constituents of the wastewater required to meet the discharge requirements of the CITY'S NPDES permit. Biologically toxic substances include but are not limited to heavy metals, phenols, cyanides, pesticides, and herbicides. 0 A.9 "Adequate Nutrients" means plant influent nitrogen, phosphorus and iron contents proportional to BODS in the ratio of five (5) parts nitrogen, one (1) part phosphorus, and one half (0.5) part iron for each one hundred (100) parts BODS. A.10 "Electrical Cost" means the monthly cost of 85,000 KWH of energy and 180 KW of demand calculated utilizing Northern States Power Company's municipal rate in effect on the last day of the month. A.11 "Natural Gas Cost" means the monthly cost of 3,000 Therms calculated utilizing North Central Public Service Companies standard commercial rate in effect on the last day of the month. 0 APPENDIX B DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PSG agrees to provide the services necessary for the management, operation and maintenance of the following: a) All equipment, vehicles, grounds and facilities now existing within the present property boundaries of or being used to operate CITY'S Wastewater Treatment Facility located at: 1401 Hart Boulevard, Monticello, Minnesota. O APPENDIX C NPDES PERMIT AND PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS C.1 PSG will operate so that effluent will meet the requirement of NPDES permit no. MN 0020567 (copy attached). PSG shall be responsible for meeting the effluent quality requirements of CITY'S NPDES permit unless one or more of the following occurs; ( 1 ) the Project influent does not contain Adequate Nutrients to support operation of Project biological processes and/or contains Biologically Toxic Substances which cannot be removed by the existing process and facilities; (2) dischargers into CITY'S sewer system violate any or all regulations as stated in the current Water and Sewer Ordinance and have a direct detrimental effect on the project; (3) the flow, influent BOD5 and/or suspended solids exceeds the project design parameters which are 0.91 million gallons of flow per day, a daily peaking factor of 1.5 time flow and sustained peak of 1.4 MGD, 6207 pounds of BODS per day, 3225 pounds per day of suspended solids. The daily peaking factor is determined on a daily basis. All other design parameters will be determined on a 30 day moving average. (4) if the Project is inoperable or can operate only at a reduced capacity on account of construction activities, fire, flood, adverse weather conditions, labor disputes other than PSG, or other causes beyond PSG's control. C.2 In the event any one of the Project influent characteristics, suspended solids, BODS or flow, exceeds the design parameters stated above, PSG shall return the plant effluent to the characteristics required by the NPDES permit in accordance with tho following schedule after Project influent characteristics return to within design parameters. Characteristics Exceeding Recovery Period Design Parameters By Maximum 109 or Less 5 days Above 109 Less than 20% 10 days 209 and Above 30 days Not withstanding the above schedule if the failure to meet effluent quality limitations is caused by the presence of Biologically Toxic Substances or the lack of Adequate Nutrients in the influent, then PSG will have a thirty (30) day recovery period after the influent is free from said substances or contains Adequate Nutrients. C.3 PSG shall not be responsible for fines or legal action as a result of discharge violations within the period that influent a ) exceeds design parameters, b) does not contain Adequate Nutrients, c) contains Biologically Toxic Substances, or if the plant is inoperable and the subsequent recovery period shall be considered as being within the period of discharge violation. C.4 The estimated Costs for services under this Agreement are based upon the following Project characteristics:* 0.548 Millions of gallons per day flow 1566 Pounds per day BOD 960 Pounds per day TSS Any change of twenty percent (20%) or more in any of these characteristics, based upon a twelve (12) month moving average, will constitute a change in scope. *Figures based upon 12 month moving avg. 7/1/85 -6/30/86. e APPENDIX D INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGERS AND MONITORING PROGRAM Below is a listing of all industries discharging into the collection system and monitored under the current water and sewer use ordinance and pretreatment program Project no. C 270855-03: Wrightco Northern States Power Bondhus Corp. 9 APPENDIX E TYPICAL EXPENSE STATEMENT OPERATING EXPENSE STATEMENT JULY 1965 - JUNE 1986 A/N ACCOUNT BUDGET ACTUAL BALANCE 5501 LABOR ADMIN 5502 LABOR ENG 5503 LABOR CLER 5516 EMP BENEF 5517 EMP THRIFT 5538 HOSP/DENT 5540 WORK COMP 5564 FICA 5574 PENSION 5504 TEMP LABOR 5505 SUBCONTRACT 5506 CONSULTANTS 5507 CHLORINE 5508 POLYMER 5509 CHEM OTHER 5510 LAB SERV 5511 LAB SUPPLY 5523 COMPUTER 5527 BOOKS/MACS 5528 DUES/REGIS 5532 FIELD EQUIP RENT 5533 OFFICE EQUIP 5534 FOOD/TRAV/LODGE 5535 GASOLINE 5540 INSURANCE 5544 LICENSE/PERMIT 5546 POSTAGE/FREIGHT 5548 OFFICE SUPPLY 5550 PROF DEVELOP 5554 UTILITIES 5556 REPAIR 6 MAINTENANCE 5560 OPERATING SUPPLIES 5563 STATE/LOCAL TAXES 5566 TELEPHONE 5568 VEHICLE REPAIR 5570 MISC EXP 5590 ADMIN SERVICES 5572 VEHICLE LEASE TOTAL EXPENSES a BUDGET LINE ITEM DESCRIPTION 5501 - Labor Administrative - Includes all cost for direct management personnel. 5502 - Labor Enqineerinq - Includes all cost for direct operating personnel. 5503 - Labor Office - Includes all cost for direct laboratory and clerical personnel. Note: Subcontractors and outside technical experts are not included in the above three categories. 5516 - Employee Benefit Misc - Miscellaneous covers items such as tuition for outside training. 5517 - Emplovee Benefit Thrift - Includes company's contribution to PSG's Thrift Plan. 5538 - Emp. Ben Ins Gen and Health - Includes health, dental, life and long term disability insurance for direct labor. 5540 - Employee Benefit Worker Compensation - Includes Workman's Compensation insurance for direct labor. 5564 - Employee Benefit Pavroll Taxes - Includes FICA, SUI and UI for direct labor. 5574 - Employee Benefit Pension - Includes pension provision for direct labor. 5504 - Temoorary Help - Seasonal or temporary personnel direct labor. 5505 - Subcontractor - Subcontracts items such as sludge hauling and disposal, and instrumentation maintenance and calibration. 5506 - Consultants - Engineers, scientists, legal personnel retained for the specific benefit of the facility. 5507 - Chemicals - Chlorine - Chlorine for use in plant operations. 5508 - Chemicals - Polvmer - Polymer for use in plant operations. 5509 - Chemicals - Other - Chemicals for weed kill, rodent control, etc. 5510 - Lab Services (External) - Water well analysis, water suitability tests, other required tests where inhouse capability is not economical. 5511 - Lab Supplies - Miscellaneous glassware, reagents, plasticware, chemicals, and supplies. 5523 - Computer Expenses - Computer supplies software, outside service for hardware maintenance, and spare parts. 5527 - Books, Maqazines and Subscriptions - Reference books, magazines and subscriptions pertaining to Wastewater/water treatment. 5528 - Dues and Reqistration - Professional organization dues and registration fees for technical conferences. 5532 - Field Equipment Rental - Crane, backhoe, and tool rental. 5533 - Office Equipment Rental - Office equipment, copiers, etc. 5534 - Food, Travel, Lodginq diem, motel, eirfaro, car rental, 5535 - Gasoline and Fuel - 5540 - Insurance General - Employee reimbursement for per etc. Vehicle fuel. Required insurances. N 5544 - Licenses/Bonds/Permits - Lab Certifications, auto license tag, performance bonds, business licenses, and permits. 5546 - Postage/Freight/Delivery - Postage, freight and delivery charges directly related to facility. 5548 - Printinq and Office Supplies - Stationery, copy paper, printing, miscellaneous Office supplies. 5550 - Professional Development - Staff management development, training supplies, materials, lectures and specialist for Operator certification. 5554 - Utilities - Electric Power, water, and gas charges. 5556 - Repair and Maintenance - Parts, grease, oil, tools, bolts, nuts, hoses, paint, belts, seals, bearings, packing, electrical components, etc., required for repairs and routine maintenance. In plant labor for maintenance is accounted for in 5501. Outside. repair service, i.e., motor repairing is included here. 5563 - State/Local Taxes - All relevant taxes paid by PSG. 5566 - Telephone/Radio Equipment - Local and long distance phone services, 2 way radios, and ancillary equipment where needed.' 5568 - Vehicle Repair and Maintenance - Parts, outside service or repair and maintenance of facility vehicles. 5570 - Miscellaneous - Items not in other accounts. 5572 - vehicles - Lease or amortized cost of facility vehicles. 55 00 i Administrative Services Q Personnel Services Accounting Payroll Accounts Payable Accounts Receivable Legal Services Training Services Safety Services Technical Services Non -Design Engineering Services Government Relations Planning Labor Relations Client Services General Management H APPENDIX F INSURANCE COVERAGE PSG SHALL MAINTAIN: Statutory workmen's compensation for all of PSG's employees at the Project as required by the State of Minnesota. Comprehensive general liability insurance in an amount not less than 1,000,000 combined single limits for bodily injury and/or property damage. CITY SHALL MAINTAIN: 1. Property damage insurance for all property including vehicles owned by CITY and operated by PSG under this Agreement. Any property including vehicles not properly or fully insured shall be the financial responsibility of the CITY. 0) APPENDIX G TRAINING We will implement our training program. The program consists of the following elements: A. general concepts of wastewater treatment plant operations and maintenance. B. basic treatment plant design required to meet objectives, of NPDES requirements. C. unit process operation including theory, design ranges, operation, maintenance and safety procedures. D. record keeping and interpretation of results. E. collection system maintenance including, sewer cleaning, TV inspections, smoke testing, manhole maintenance, and flow metering. F. preventive maintenance and PAMP. G. accepted safety practices and procedures. H. basic laboratory procedures. I. basic first aid techniques. J. emergency procedures: power failure, bypassing, fire, explosion, flood, etc. K. certification examination requirements. Technical training is accomplished using various methods: A. on-site training is conducted by PSG instructors, supervisors and managers utilizing standard classroom lecture and/or field demonstration methods, reinforced by direct hands-on application. Competence testing by written examination and performance evaluation is done regularly. B. individual use of technical correspondence courses is encouraged by tuition reimbursement upon successful course completion. C. off-site training is also encouraged by use of flexible shift scheduling. Special emphasis is given to developing supervisory skills for operations supervisors and working foremen. PSG's training program is continuous. Our training provides employees with increased diversity, depth of skills, leadership, and as a consequence, our clients enjoy a more efficient operating facility. APPENDIX H Chapter I PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT CONTROL SECTION 10-1-1 Purpose 10-1-2 Definitions 10-1-3 Procedure 10-1-1 PURPOSE: It is the purpose of this Chapter to maintain accountability of all tangible property and equipment purchased by the City, or otherwise acquired, or furnished by other agencies. This accountability shall be maintained by records kept by the City Administrator, and by the Director of Public Works, and the records shall be verified at least once each year by a physical inventory of the property in the City's possession, and reconciled appropriately. 10-1-2 DEFINITIONS: For the purpsoe of this Chapter the following terms, phrases, words and their derivations shall have the meaning given herein. ACQUISITION VALUE OR INDIVIDUAL UNIT VALUE: The price of the item paid at the time of purchase by the City, including applicable taxes, freight and installation costs. Donated items or items otherwise furnished shall have their acquisition value estimated on the basis of the current market replacement value. NONEXPENDABLE PERSONAL PROPERTY: Any tangible item of property not including land, permanent buildings or structures having a useful life of one year or more. This includes any items attached to a permanent structure that can be removed or replaced, and items that have been installed on other nonexpendable property. An example is a radio installed on a vehicle. Both the radio and the vehicle must be identified separately. 10-1-3 PROCEDURE: This procedure describes the requirements and procedures for maintaining accountability of all tangible nonexpendable personal property in possession of the City. All items, either owned by the City, or loaned or furnished to it from other sources, having an individual unit value of $300 or more and a useful life of one year or more are covered in this procedure. Items which have a useful life of one year or more and have an individual unit value of less than 5300 shall be grouped by like item, and the groups shall be accounted for in accordance with this procedure. Lend, permanent buildings and structures are excluded from this procedure. a APPENDIX I Notices shall be sent as follows to: The City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN 55362-9245 Professional Services Group, Inc. 1401 Hart Boulevard Monticello, MN 55362 and an exact duplicate of said notice to: Professional Services Group, Inc. Rydal Executive Plaza P.O. Box PSG, Suite 330 Rydal, PA 19046 j. Responsible department - the department responsible for the item, and to which the item is assigned. 4. The Director of Public Works or his authorized representative shall make up a property card, which contains the same information as the property log, for each individual item. The location entry on this card shall be revised each time the item is moved to a new location, and/or the responsible department changes. The acquisition value shown on the property card, and on the property log must agree at the time of acquisition. C. once a year a complete inventory of all City property shall be conducted. The purpose of this inventory is to assure that all City property is actually in the possession of the City and properly accounted for. The inventory shall consist of actually locating each item listed on the property log. The person conducting the inventory shall physically identify the property item by description, manufactuer's serial number and City identification number from the identification tag on the item. The location and responsible department shall be noted on an inventory sheet. The physical condition of the item shall also be noted. This shoot will then be sent to the City Administrator who will verify that the data on the inventory sheet matches the information on the property log. A copy of the inventory sheet shall also be sent to the Director of Public Works who will verify the information on the property cards. If any property items are located, which are not tagged, than these items shall be tagged immediately, and the appropriate entries made into the property log, and new property cards prepared. D. if any items are missing at completion of the inventory, or if any item is lost, stolen or vandalized at any item, the responsible department head shall imomdiately notify the City Police Department to initiate the appropriate investigation. The City Administrator and the Director of Public Works shall also be notified of the loss, and the action being taken to recover the lost item. E. If any item of property is disposed of, the City Administrator shall be notified and provided the following information for the property log: 1. The disposition of the property, and reason. 2. The date disposed of. 3. Dollar amount of revenue from the disposal action. The same information shall also be provided to the Director of Public Works for entry in the appropriate property card. (Ord.0123 - 5/9/83) 0 A (A) At the time an item of nonexpendable personal property is received by the City either through direct purchase, as part of a package contract, donation, or some other means, the item shall be assigned a City identification number, and a tag containing this number shall be permanently affixed to the item, in a conspicuous place. An entry shall be made in the City's property log maintained by the City Administrator and an individual property card shall be prepared and maintained on file by the Director of Public Works. (B) When the item, or group of items is received, but before the item is placed in service, the following actions will be performed: A copy of the contract or purchase order shall be sent to the City Administrator. A City identification number shall be assigned, and an identification tag bearing that number shall be afffixed to the item. The identification number of the item shall be provided to the City Administrator. 3. The City Administrator shall enter the item in the City property log, including all of the following information. a. Description of the item. b. Manufacturer's serial number. c. City identification number. d. Date of acquisition - this is the date the City took actual possession of the item. o. Acquistion cost - this is the price paid for the item, including applicable taxes, freight and any installation costs. If this cost information is not available because the item is not a direct City purchase, the value may be estimated based on current market replacment costs. f. Grant number - if the item is acquired using funds provided under a federal grant, the grant number shall be entered. g. Contract or P.O. number - the contract or purchase order under which the itom was purchased. h. Ownership - show "City" if procured by the City, or if on loan from another agency, identify the agency. i. Location - the physical location of the item when in use. If the item is a vehicle or portable, show its responsible department. APPENDS% J MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT FOR LABOR AND EQUIPMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MONTICELLO AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GROUP, CONTRACT OPERATOR OF THE MONTICELLO WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY This agreement is made on this let day of September, 1986, between the City of Monticello whose address is 250 East Broadway, Monticello, Minnesota, 55362, and Professional Services Group, whose address is Rydal Executive Plaza, Suite 330, P.O. Box PSG, Rydal, Pennsylvania 19066. 1. Professional Services Group agrees: Emergencies 1.1 To make a best effort to provide men and equipment immediately to assist during emergencies such as, but not limited to, lift station failure, sanitary sever line failure, rater main failure, water pumping station failure, water reservoir or tank failure, flood, fire or flood or civil emergency involving a portion of the community, or nuclear emergenciea. 1.2 To provide labor and City owned equipment when requested by the Public Works Director to assist City workers in the routine aspects of public works when it will not disrupt the activities or operations at the Wastewater Treatment Facility. 1.3 Provide City owned equipment normally used in conjunction with the wastewater treatment operations to other departments within the City when it will not disrupt the operations of the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Facility. Such equipment provided in, but not limited to, the IME sludge muse unit, the IME sludge applicator unit, the GMC pickup with hoist, miscellaneous shop tools and equipment, testing equipment, and other pumps, etc. 2. The City of Monticello agrees to: 2.1 To make a beat effort to furnish labor and City owned equipment immediately upon notification of an emergency as verified by the Public Works Director at the wastewater Treatment Facility. 2.2 Provide labor and City owned equipment for use at the Monticello wastewater Treatment Plant facility for non-amorgency moo when its use will not disrupt other normal operations within the City of Monticello. "4W Mutual Aid Agreement Page 2 2.3 Furnish City equipment only for use during normal operations at the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Facility when it will not disrupt other operations of other departments within the City of Monticello. Such equipment shall be, but not limited to, dump trucks, large rubber tire loader, small rubber tire loader, 3 point hitch backhoe, 4 -wheel drive tractor, sever jet, rodding machine, bucket machines, 6 -inch centrifugal pump, 3 -inch diaphragm pump, small portable generator, chain saw, concrete pipe saw, drill press, hydraulic press, miscellaneous hand tools, etc. 2.4 The City of Monticello shall plow the main driveway, the horseshoe driveway off of Hart Boulevard, and the lover parking lot utilizing the Public works Department and City snowplow trucks. The City will also sand the hill on the main driveway during its normal sanding operations and will use the City loader and forces to push back snow banks in the areas it plows. PSG will be responsible for snow removal in the central area of the complex as well as for clean up of walkways and around buildings. During the winter months, the City will provide a small tractor with snow blower in good operating condition for use by PSG at the wastewater Treatment Facility. During those months, the operation, maintenance, and repair costs for this tractor snow blower shell be borne by PSG. The unit shall be returned in the spring to the Public works Department in good operating condition. Snowplowing will be exempt from Section 3.2. 2.9 The City of Monticello may provide moving services to the Wastewater Treatment Plant facility if Public Works staffing and work load permits and requested by PSG. PSG agrees to reimburse the City of Monticello for actual costs incurred for such moving operations. 3. The City of Monticello and Professional Services Group agree to: 3.1 Keep track of all use of labor and equipment and to be responsible for equipment maintenance and operation costs when in use and to file with each other an annual report indicating amounts of labor and equipment used. APPENDIX K CHEMICAL INVENTORY TYPE QUANTITY TO BE COMPLETED AFTER STARTUP Mo SEWER FUND PLANT 6 LAB 1987 PROPOSED BUDGET Personal Services Salaries, Regular S 85,900 Overtime, Regular 5,000 Salaries, Temporary 4,400 PERA 3,900 Insurance, Medical 6 Life 10,300 Social Security 6,500 $116,000 Supplies Office Supplies S 1,900 General Operating Supplies 13,400 Motor Fuels b Lubricants 3,600 Clothing Supplies 2,200 Maintenance of Equipment Supplies 11,900 Maintenance of Vehicle Supplies 1,600 Maintenance of Building Supplies 500 Small Toole 6 Minor Equipment 200 S 35,300 Other Services and Chargee Profossional Services S 11,200 Communications 2,500 Travel -Conference -Schools 1,000 Utilities, Electrical 35,000 Utilities, Heating 22,000 Maintenance of Equipment 7,000 Maintenance of Vehicles 800 Maintenance of Building 1200 Rental of Equipment 800 Dues, Memberships, Subscriptions 300 Taxes 6 Licensee 1,350 Books 50 Miscellaneous 100 S 8 3, 300 Capital Outlay Buildings 6 Structures S 5,000 Improvements Other Than Buildings 1,500 S 6,500 TOTAL PLANT AND LAB 5241,100 3 Q Beling Consultants July 2, 1986 Mon. Mayor Grimso and City Council City Hall Building 250 E. Broadway Subject: Contract Operations Services Monticello, Minnesota 55362-9245 Wastewater Treatment Plant Monticello, Minnesota Our File: 20571-B-11,484 Gentlemen: On Thursday, June 26. 1986. a special committee net in the City Council Chambers to interview prospective private service contractors for the purpose of selecting a firm to operate and maintain the Monticello Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant. This letter -report presents the background and results of the interview/selection process. and makes recommendations relative to follow-up activities. COMMITTEE - The interview committee consisted of the following six members: Arve Grimso - Mayor Bili Fair - Councilman Tom Eidem - City Administrator John Simola - Director of Public Works John Badalich - City Engineer (OSM) Henry Mayer - Special Consultant (Beling Consultants) PURPOSE OF INTERVIEW - To: 1. review the overall feasibility of the City switching from 'public' to 'private" sector operations, and 2. select a firm(s) with whom to negotiate an 'Operation and Maintenance` agreement for a period of 3-1/4 years. FIRMS INTERVIEWED - Tte following three private service firms were interviewed based on an earlier pre -selection process rade by representatives of the City of Monticello. 1. Metcalf and Eddy Services. Inc. (146E) - Wakefield, Massachusetts 2. Professional Services Group (PSG) - Rydal. Pennsylvania 3. Water Environment Technology, Inc. (WET) - St. Paul, Minnesota (continued) Baling Consultants. Inc. Professional Engineering • Environmental Laboratory + Governmental Management Boling Building, i001 -16th Street. Moline. IL 61265 / 306757.98M 0 Page Two Mon. Mayor Grinso and City Council July 2, 1986 Monticello. Minnesota 20571-8-11.484 BACKGROUND BATA Over the past three years. the City of Monticello had been approached by several private firms who had suggested that the City investigate the possibility of having a private firm operate and maintain the City's wastewater treatment plant. Several months ago. the City decided to pursue this possibility, even though the plant was discharging flows within effluent standards set by the State regulatory agency. The reason for selecting this course of action was concerns that the City had relative to: 1. Costs being incurred to hvn' the plant at efficiencies much greater than that required by the discharge standards. 2. Lack of 'long -terse' maintenance of plant equipment and facilities. 3. Staffing deficiencies due to employee absences and request from treatment plant management for additional personnel. 4. Lack of adequate training of present staff. 5. Lack of proper sludge management techniques being practiced at the plant. 6. Non -proper operation of various plant equipment iters which required an increase in gas and electrical consuctation. with resulting increase in utility costs. 7. improper management at the plant. 8. Poor record-keeping practices. 9. Lack of toomtcations between *plant' and 'City Hall*. In April of 1986, private service contractors (hereinafter called 'contractor(S N were contacted by Mr. Simvola and given a 'Request for Proposal• which was to be completed and returned to the City by May 30. 1986. In addition. the contractors were invited to attend an on-site meeting and they were provided with an info►na- tional package giving details of plant operations, operating data, and cost/budget information. During this same time period. Beling Consultants. an engineering firm experienced in the design and operation of wastewater treatment facilities and the selection of ON contractors for municipalities. was retained by the City to assist the City in the proposal review and contractor interview/selection pro- cesses. Beling will also provide assistance during contract negotiations with the selected contractor. INTERVIEW/SELECTION PROCESS On June 26. 1986. the City Committee met at City Nall and reviewed the information package that Beling Consultants had prepared for the interviews. This material, which 1s in a bound book and available at City Nall. included the following: A. Summary of Contractor's Qualification - A matrix of information obtained from the Contractor's proposal submittals, from telephone contacts with the Contractors. and from Boling's past experience with the Contractor and/or Contractor's clients. This matrix categorized the information into the following areas: (continued) 0, / Y Page Three Hon. Mayor 6rimso and City Council July 2. 1986 Monticello. Minnesota 20511-8-11.484 Management 8 Administration Operations Maintenance Costs Alternative Proposals Experience Financial Stability B. Request for Proposal - prepared by the City of Monticello. C. Contractor Evaluation Criteria and Weight Factor Form - which was used by interview personnel to rate the Contractors. 0. List of Key Issues of Consideration and Relevant Questions That Must -be Addressed. E. Copies of the Contractors' proposed 'contracts'. Each Contractor was allowed up to one hour to make his presentation and the Com- mittee then used an additional one-half hour to ask specific questions of the Contractor. The Contractors. during their presentations. described the capa- bilities of their respective firms and discussed: (a) the wastewater plant and its operations; (b) areas where they might revise operations; (c) maintenance concerns; (d) training; (e) safety; (f) facility's management; (Q) personnel. including local short-term needs and long-term opportunities; (h) costs; (1) con- tracts; (j) industrial pretreatment programs; and (k) sludge management systems. Of specific note. the Contractors felt that: 1. The facility was being over -operated. i.e. that the quality of the dis- charges was over -achieved at the sacrifice of wasted energy and thus utility costs were too high. 2. Sludge was not being removed adequately from the facilities. again re- sulting in wasted energy and utility costs that were too high. 3. Maintenance was just passible (a grade of 'C' on an 'A to F' scale). but could be upgraded. 4. Plant could be operated with four (4) well-trained personnel. 5. Record-keeping systems were poor. 6. Personnel training was not adequate. 1. Safety procedures could be improved. CONCLUSIONS After the interviews were complete. the Committee decided that (1) contract service operations were appropriate. and (2) that the City should negotiate an operation (continued) C41) Page Four Mon. Mayor Grimso and City Council July 2. 1986 Monticello. Minnesota 20571-8-11.484 and maintenance contract with PSG subject to the condition that if the negotiations should break down. that negotiation would then be started with MBE. The Committee then requested that Beling prepare this report. summarizing the selection process. and voted to recommend that the Council (at the July 14th meeting) accept the Committee's decision as mentioned in the paragraph above. CONTINUING ACTIVITIES After Council action (expected at the July 14. 1986 meeting). the Contractor will submit a preliminary contract to the City and City representatives. with assistance from Beling, would then negotiate a formol contract. I would like to compliment the Committee on the very professional manner in which the selection process was made, and to commend Mr. Simola on his very comprehensive and well thought out proposal request statement. Should you have any questions and/or comments relative to this letter -report, please feel free to contact me. Respectfully submitted. BELING CONSULTAWS. INC. Henry Mayer. P.E. - Manager Civil Engineering Department Rd cc: Contract file City Council City Administrator City Director of Public Yorks John Bada 1 ich - OSA 9 Council Agenda - 6/25/86 5. Consideration of Granting an Advance Guarantee that a Non -Conforming Use may be Rebuilt if it is ever Destroyed to more than 508 of its Value. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Rick Wolfsteller and I have been contacted a couple of times recently concerning the City's policy on non -conforming uses, especially as it relates to replacement. Apparently what has happened is that the William Jongewaard home at 106 East Fourth Street is for sale. It is our understanding that the lending institution who is interested in providing a mortgage to the buyer has some reluctance because it is a non -conforming use, and according to our ordinance if it is destroyed to more than 508 of its value, it may not be replaced. Mr. Mike Lundquist, the realtor, has indicated a desire to appear before the City Council to be granted approval that will guarantee the owners the right to rebuild if the home in ever destroyed to more than 50% of its value. (The latest information Rick has received is that they may not need to coma to the City Council meeting, so this item may be deleted at the meeting.) There are two problems with this request. First. I do not believe the actions of one Council can bind the actions of a future Council. A letter of guarantee being passed through to an individual property owner would tend to undermine any of the land use controls of future Planning Commissions and City Council. The residence lies within a B-4 zone and is considered a non -conforming use. Non -conforming uses are legal uses, they simply do not conform to the current ordinance. Non -conforming uses may exist, but may not be expanded or altered to a more non -conforming use, nor may they be replaced if destroyed to more than 50% of its value by fire, storm, etc. At first blush, the request to get a replacement guarantee letter seems innocuous enough. I think that if the residence was damaged today, under existing conditions, and the owner came in to seek replacement, the Council might grant such an action. Consider, however, what might occur in the future if the Council granted such a letter of guarantee. The block is currently zoned 8-4, and is zoned that way to encourage commorcial development along Highway 25. It is extremely realistic to believe that commercial development will occur along Highway 25 in the future, especially in light of the Raindance Partnership development and the reconstruction of Highway 25. It is conceivable that this entire block could convert to commercial with this one house still being in existence as a non -conforming use. It would not make good land use management sense to guarantee a residential structure replacement if the entire block had, in fact, developed commercially. In essence, I do not believe the City Council can, nor should be able to bind the actions of a future Council in regulating land use. The second concern with this issue has to do with the request itself. The request has been stated as a variance from the requirement concerning replacement. In reality, the request is really a request to rezone -4- Council Agenda - 8/25/86 and spot zone a specific site to allow residential construction. By guaranteeing the right to construct a use which is currently prohibited under the terms of the ordinance is, in essence, granting its own zone. While the request may be called a variance, it is in reality a request for rezoning and a designation that single family dwellings become a permitted use on this specific site. Such an action runs directly counter to both the letter and the spirit of the ordinance. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Grant a letter guaranteeing reconstruction of a single family dwelling within a B -e zone if it is destroyed to more than 50% of its value. Such a letter might not withstand the test of court. Further, it would very likely be considered as a rezoning, spot zoning action not performed under due process. 2. Uphold the terms of the ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the ordinance be enforced in accordance with the terms covering non -conforming uses. To begin altering the ordinance for individual site consideration tends to undermine the foundation of the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance itself. It occurs to me that if the variance were over to be granted, it should only be granted based on the actual findings of fact when and if the current non -conforming use is ever destroyed to more than 50% of its value. I think it would be unwise to attempt to forecast that a reconstruction on this particular site will always be acceptable to the development of the block overall. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the appropriate section of the ordinance; Map showing the location of the property in question. -5- CHAPTER 3 GENERAL PROVISIONS SECTION: 3-1: Non -Conforming Buildings, Structures and Uses 3-2: General Buildings and Performance Requirements 3-3: Yard Requirements 3-4: Area and Building Size Regulations 3-5: Off -Street Parking Requirements 3-8: Off -Street Loading 3-7: Land Reclamation 3-8: Mining 3-g: Signs 3-1: NON -CONFORMING BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES AND USES: (A) PURPOSE: It is the Purpose of this Section to provide for the regulation of non -conforming buildings, structures and uses and to specify those requirements, circumstances and conditions under which non -conforming buildings, structures and uses will be operated and maintained. The Zoning Ordinance establishes separate districts, y each of which is an appropriate area for the location of uses which are permitted in that district. It is necessary and consistent with the establishment of these districts that non -conforming buildings, structures, and uses not be permitted to continue without restriction. Furthermore, it is the intent of this Section that all non -conforming } uses shall be eventually brought into conformity. [B) Any structure or use lawfully existing upon the effective date of this Ordinance shall not be enlarged, but may be continued at the size and in the manner of operation existing upon such date except as hereinafter specified or, subsequently amended. [C] Nothing in this Ordinance shall prevent the placing of a structure in safe condition when said structure is declared unsafe by the Building Inspector, providing the necessary repairs shall not constitute more than fifty (50) percent of estimated market value of such structure. Said value shall be determined by the City or County Assessor. 0 ID] No non -conforming building, structure or use shall be coved to another lot or to any other part of the parcel of land upon which the same was constructed or vas conducted at the time of this Ordinance adoption unless such move=ent shall bring the non-conformance into compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance. [E] when any lawful non -conforming use of any structure or land in any district has been changed to a conforming use, it shall not thereafter be changed to any non -conforming use. (F] A lawful non -conforming use of a structure or parcel of land may be changed to lessen. the non -conformity of use. Once a non -conforming structure or parcel of land has been charged, it shall not thereafter be so altered to increase the non -conformity. [G] If at any time a non -conforming building, structure' or use shall be destroyed to the extent of more than fifty (50)' percent of its estimated market value, said value to be determined by the City or County Assessor, then without further action by the Council, the building and the land on which such building was located or maintained shall, from and after the date of said destruction, be subject to all the regulations specified by these zoning regulations for the district in which such land and buildings are located. Any building which is damaged to an extent of leas than fifty (50) percent of its value may be restored to its former extent. Estimate of the extent of damage or destruction shall be made by the Building Inspector. (H] whenever a lawful non -conforming use of a structure or land is discontinued for a period of six (6) months, any future use of said structure or land shall be made to conform with the provisions of this Ordinance. 111 Normal maintenance of a building or other structure containing or related to a lawful non -conforming use is permitted, including necessary non-structural repairs and incidental alteration which do not physically extend or intensify the non -conforming use. [i) Alterations may be made to a building containing lawful non -conforming residential units when they will improve the livability thereof provided they will not increase the number of dwelling units or site or volume of the building. ` EK) Any proposed structure Mich will, under this .../1 Ordinance and subsequent amendments, become non -conforming but for which a building permit has been lawfully granted prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, may be completed in acordance with the approved plans; provided construction in started within sixty (60) days of the effective data of this Ordinance and subsequent amendments, is not abandoned for a period of more than one hundred twenty (120) days, and continues to completion within two (2) years. Such structure and use shall thereafter be a legally non -conforming structure and use. 0 Council Agenda - 8/25/86 6. Consideration of Granting an Increase in the Individual Pension for the Volunteer Fire Fighters Relief Association. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Members of the volunteer Fire Department will be attending the meeting to request that the Council increase the retirement benefit from $10,000.00 to 516,000.00. This benefit is payable in a lump sum after 20 years of service. The plans are also referred to on a per year basis, such as 5500.00 per year or 5800.00 per year, etc. I point this out to help avoid confusion, as during the discussion the terms may be used interchangeably. The Relief Association was granted an increase in retirement benefits to 510,000.00/$500.00'par year in 1979, and a request was made in 1982 to increase the amount to $14,000.00; but the request was turned down, as the increase at that time would have required a tax levy to support the increase. In 1982, the Council recommended that the Relief Association raise their retirement benefits in the future as long as their fund was self sufficient, e.g., assets were greater than their accrued liability and any increase would not result in a contribution from the City from general property taxes. By State Statutes, as long as there is a deficit in the Relief Association Fund, they must come to the City Council for approval of any increase in benefits. The Relief Association has submitted to the City a schedule of the computation of financial requirements for the Relief Association benefits for 1987 based on an increase to $16,000.00 per member after 20 years of service. The computations indicate a total deficit of $65,561.00 of which 539,285.00 would be a new deficit because of the requested increase in benefits. In going through the formula required, a total amount of income necessary to support this request would be $29,921.00 and anticipated revenues from state aid and interest income on their investments would be 531,250.00 resulting in a surplus of 51,329.00 next year. The requested increase in benefits to the 516,000.00 figure would not appear to require City support. The primary reason the Association is able to increase its benefits and not require City support is because of the increased amount of state aid being received. The state aid by Statutes is required to be paid to the Relief Association for benefits and cannot be used for other fire department purpose@. The increase may Boom substantial, but it appears that the fund can provide annual income to support the request. It should be noted that Council ratification is still necessary to allow for an increase in their retirement benefits, even though the Association hre sufficient funds to meet the annual liability. The only time the Association can increase its benefits without Council approval is if the fund has a surpluo, and then they aro allowed to increase their benefits up to an amount which would not increase their liability more than 90% of their previous surplus. I believe at this point, Eased on their current 510,000.00 benefit, they could -6- Council Agenda - 8/25/86 increase their benefi a to $11,500.00/5575.00 per year without City approval, and each year :could have to be recalculated. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Grant an increase to $800.00 per year/$16,000.00. This increase, according to the Relief Association schedule, would not require a City contribution and could be entirely funded through state aide and other interest earnings from the Association. 2. Do not ratify an increase in benefits requested. 3. Do not grant an increase in benefits, but allow the Association to raise their benefits only if they have a surplus and an increase would not require City contributions. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: In reviewing the computations supplied by the Relief Association, it appears the state aide received by the Fire Department will continue to increase an the City expands, etc. The request for a $16,000.00 benefit can be funded entirely through revenues received by the Association without municipal support, and the City staff has no objection to the increase being granted as long as a City tax levy is not required. If an increase would not be approved by the Council, the fund will continue to show a surplus and in the future, the Relief Association would be able to increase their benefits without Council approval as the surplus grows. By not granting the increase, the Association -e benefits will increase but probably at a slower rate. Since a City tax levy is not required, the City staff can support the first alternative, which would increase their benefits to $16,000.00 for 20 years of esrvic9. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Computation of benefits for each member at S800.00 par year. R -7- SCHEDULES I -II-III FOR LUMP SUM PENSION PLANS STATE FIRE AID YEAR 1987 Firefighters Relief Association of Monticello County of Wright SCHEDULE i Computation of benefit of relief association special fund (at $800 service) for all members based on their Per Year of members. Years of service as active fire department i 2�3 F.D. Entry Name Age Date 4 1986 5 6 I987 7 To End of this Year To End of next Year Yrs. Act Accrued Yrs. Act Accrued Service I Liability I Service I Liability 1 J. Maurice 1 6-58 j 29 2 P. Klein 1 1 6-58 y 29 3 G. Li0fact J I 5-63 24 4 D. pitt j I 5-61 74 5 G. Jensen 7-66 20 G D. Bit xer I 4-70 17 7 0. Kranz 4-70 17 8 W. Farnick 6-72 15 9 T. Farnam I 3-7314 11D_4�2 lcid Haaland I 7-74 12 1IM. Flicker 1 5-75 ! 12 12J. Morrell 1 1 5-75 1 12 13S. Douglas i 1 3-76 1 I t;,,FQH 14 W. Laiiree 1 5-77 1 j 10 ISM. Wallon 1 5-77 I t0 16C Dahlheimer 1 2-78 i 9 17J• Wain ' 12-79 7 18M. Johnson i j 9-80 6 19 M. Theisen j 1 5-62 1 5 20T. Liefort111-83 J 3 218. FY to I 5-84 22K. 1;tttmpr ! 5-85 Ii 2 23 G. Host I 1 0-85 t 24 T. Bremer 12-05 I 25T• McDermott 1 4-86 1 16 27 ( I 2c 1 1 29 1 i 30 1 I Total of Deferred Pensions, if Any Toizi of Unpaid installments. if Arra Total of Eariv Vested Pensions. If Anv A. accrues Liabtltty thru Nett Yr, 1987 (total, cot.7I 8. Accrued Liability Thru this Yr. 1986 (tout, cot.S1 C. Subtract Line B. from tine A. (normal cost: enter "ere ants On Line 6, Se". IN) 23.200 ( 30 1 24.000 123 aw ,30 i -A n00 +q,Zpn �s _ 17(I Dna +Q 7rJn 75 1 7n nnn 16.0007t A I tF_ar10 +Z,A@o i 3 SA4 11 Ago 1R 1 19 4A4 10.432 I 16 1 11.424 ' 9.472 1 15 11D_4�2 7.896 i 13 1 A 4Kn 7.696 1.3 f A.560 7 6Q 13 ! 6_. 56n �.Bb4 t7 I t;,,FQH 6.080 ii 6.864 6.080 ti K Ate_ I i'vic, 8 1 4.608 i 3.280 7 I 3 Q36 I, 2.672 a 1 '1. :'An i t 914 A 7 nqn I 992 i 3 1.570 I 4AP 7 QQ7 qn I'd 'A9, 7 Cal 7 QQ7 i y� 1j 14 a 227,488.00 208,464.00+ 1208,464.00 1 19.024.00 Fractional years of service must be calculated to nearest full year. Do not enter liability In Col's 5 or 7 for any person who will receive entire pension during this year. for Inst:11.nent liability, enter amount which will be payable after end of this year in both cot. 5 d cot. 7. If interest is to be Paid on unpaid pensions, add interest for i year in col. 7. A copy of these schedules must be presented to the City Council before Aug. i each year. `2 10 SCHEDULE II Projection of Relief Association Special fund assets to end of this year, (Decem.;er 31, 19B5J Assets atIanuary1.19_86 (this year) 1 s 137,946.00 Anticipated income to end of this year a) t+linnesota State Aid a 22.957.00 b) Receipts from local taxes c) I merest on investments 10,000.00 d) Other income Total of tines ab -cd $ 32,957.00 Beginning assets plus estimated ineorne for this year (L i + L 2) 3. $ 170.903.00 Estimated disburse -teats through end of this year e) Pensions S 26.400.00 t) Oth:: benefits 1.200.00 g) ni5FDA or VFBA dues, if any h) Administrative S overhead 400_nn Total of lines e•f-g•h 4. $ 28,000.00 P. ojet _ assets at end of this year i./31 fP6_ (1-3.1-4) $, r 142.903.00 Calculation of average special fund income per member (other than interest or Investment income) State Aid Municipal Support 10%ofsurplus (if any) Last year 21,864 --- --- 2years ago 18,947 --- 3years ago 16,716 --- --- Totals 57,527 + --- + --- a Total 3 year income S 57.527 + 3 o $ 19.176 + _Z5_, (no. of membats) 0 6. S_Ja7 CERTIFICATION OF SPECIAL FUND REQUIREMENTS This information must be certified to the governing body of the municipality or independent nonprofit firefighting corporation by August 1. 1986. We. the officers of the Firefighters Relief Association. state that the accompanying schedules have been prezared in accordance with the provisions of the Volunteer Firefighters Relief Association Guidelines Act of 1971 (including M.S. 69.772) and that the schedules are correct and complete to the best of our knowledge. The financial requirements of the relief associations Special Fund for 1987 are $29.921.00• Check here if no municipal support required The average non -investment income per member of said special fund for the past 3 years was $ 7r,7 5ignature of President Date Signature of 5ecretary Date Signature of freasurer Date SC4EXLE III Computation of Financial Requirements for Next Year - 1987 Column A Column B Column C 1. Assets from Line 5, Schedule It $ 142.903.00 2. Accrued liability to end of this year (from L.B,Sch 1) 208.464.00 3. a) If L2 is more than L1 , subtract Ll from L2. Deficit 65.561 .00 b) If Ll is more than L'_', subtract L2 from L1. Surplus If surplus exists, enter 10% of surplus amt. in col. C and go to Line 6. Amortization of deficit (or deficits) incurred prior to end of last year (see note). Year origin:] amt. ret. in amt. left incurred amount prior years to retire (1) (2) (3) 19 — 65,684.06 39,403.00 26.276.00 19- 10 _ L 4. Total orig. 26.276.00 deficit 65,684.00 x ,Do 6,568.00 5. Subtract col (3) total from Line 3 (a). (if cal 3 is equal to or greater than line 3 (a)-, no new deficit exists.) If col 3 is less than line 3 (a), difference is new deficit. Enter . 38. 285.00 Enter 1045 of this new deficit in col. B --•----------••-- 3,929.00 6. Increase fron Line C, Schedule I ••-----__ --X9,024.00 7. Antici;ated expenses Next Year, (other than pensions, or investments) 1997 estimates 400.00 8. Anticipated income Next Year 1997 estimates a) Minnesota State Aid --------. 24. 105.00 - b) 55 interest on amount of Line 1 above— T, {45.00 c) Other income (do not include local taxes or investment income) TOTAL 8 a -b -c 31,250. 0 9. TOTAL, Column B _--___—__ 29,921 .00 10, TOTAL, Column C. — 31,250.00 11. If line 9 is more than line 10, the difference is the amount of municipal support required. Certify this amount to city council before August 1, (bottom part of Schedule II) 12. If Line 10 is more than Line 9, no municipal support Is required. Certify that fact to council before August 1. Council is permitted to provide funds in excess of S1,329.00 SURPLUS requirement. Note: Deficits are generally retired in less than 10 years, because of increase instate aid, turnover gain and earned interest treater than 5%. If desired, the amount in col 2 may be increased so that the total of col 3 is equal to line 3 (a). If more than one deficit is being amortized (the law requires each deficit to be retired separately), adjust col 2 for the oldest deficit first. When col 2 equals col 1 for any deficit, that deficit has been retired and may be removed from the amortization schedule. Whenever a New Deficit appears in Line 5, the original anount of such deficit must be added to the amortization schedule the foL lowing year. MEMO TO: Monticello City Council RE: Bid Results for New Loader FROM: John Simola, Public Works Director DATE: August 25, 1986 The City of Monticello received two bide for a new loader this morning at 9:00 a.m., one bid from Ziegler, Inc., for a 936 Cat, and a bid from Carlson's Lake State Equipment Company for a 644D John Deere. The tabulation of those bide is enclosed for your review. The basic difference between the two bids by trading our 930 Ziegler for $69,400 or returning it as part of our total cost bid for $63,400 is $4,034 in favor of the John Deere 644D. We did, however, ask for some additional items for consideration in our bid proposals. Utilizing the figures given us for guaranteed repairs for five years an bid and the dealer's 5-yoar scheduled maintenance and fuel caste, there is lees difference in the bid. The actual difference when using these additional considerations as provided in the bid package is 51,876.83 in favor of the John Deere 644D based upon a 5 -year operation and maintenance schedule. Thera are two other items I believe which the Council should consider when making this decision. One is how wall each of these machines hold their value over the coming years, and another is the operator preference of City employees operating the equipment. There are two ways the City can protect its investment in such a loader. One is through a guaranteed repurchase such as the bid from Ziegler to guarantee repurchase of the 936 in five years for an amount of 554,800.00. I believe Ziegler has underestimated the value of this machine in five yearn. They have done no intentionally because they overestimated the value in 1981 when we bought our 930 loader. I did a comparison study based upon currant auction results of the size loader we bid in 1981 and also those bid prices which we received in 1981. From this information, which in provided for your review, I estimated Cat would lona approximately 5.1% of its value per year in depreciation, and John Deere would lose approximately 6.8% par year for depreciation. Using these figures, the Cat at the and of five years would hold Its resale value approximately $4,156.00 bettor than the John Deere. The actual difference between the two machines now changes to a plus in Cat's favor at the and of five years in the amount of $2,279.17. It is the City of Monticello's intention, unless this machine turns out to be a lemon, to keep it for a period of 7-9 years. The difference in resale value at that time will be even greater. Therefore, the City's investment would be bettor protected with the Cat 936. The other item to be considered, I believe, is the operator preference. All of the City employees who will operate the new loader were given a chance to operate a now 936 Cat and a new 644D John Deers. Both Memo Page 2 of the dealers brought the machines out and left them with us for a trial period of approximately two days. The machines were found to be very similar in capabilities and power. Both machines appear to be well designed and easy to service, with Cat possibly having a slight edge on the service. When asked for their preference, all of the operators, however, indicated they preferred the 936 Cat to the John Deere by a alight margin. They gave as their reasons better visibility, quieter, more stable in the field and especially on the road, and most preferred the twin lever bucket controls they are used to in lieu of the single lever control on the John Deere. Another reason given was the total operator control over the transmission. The Caterpillar can be kept manual and all four speeds forward, while the John Deere shifts automatically from first to second and then from third to fourth. Bearing all of the above information in mind, it is the recommendation of the Public Works Director and Street Superintendent that the Monticallo City Council award the bid for the new loader to Ziegler, as we feel it in the beet dollar value for the City of Monticello. The purchase of this loader would put us $3,366.00 under budget if purchased outright. I would request that the financial department make a determination as to whether or not to accept the simple interest annual rate of 7.5• and finance the machine. At the last Council meeting, it was questioned as to whether it may be beet to return our loader to Ziegler for $63,400.00 and buy it back at a much lower price. I questioned Ziegler about this. They Indicated to me that they would not sell the machine for less than their investment in it. They are not in the business to lose soney. It would be necessary for them to put the loader into their rental fleet until Duch time that they could make up the difference between the actual value of the machine and the total coat bid given the City of Monticello. ZW-a John Simola Public works Director JS/kd I . Nukeand Model of equipment being bid, out, I ght Purchase price a specified. Nodal: rake: r.O.s. ol-ticello. minnesol. 2. Trade-in value: Moduli 1991 930 Cat, S/N 41KI0742 3. Item 11 l... It.. 12 ITrade-In purcha.e prloe) 4. Guaranteed maintenance espanee for 5 year. or 4.000 hours. whichever occurs first, SIIALL NOT EXCEED. 5. Guaranteed 'Minimum sepurchna• in 5 years. d. Total coat bid [Its. /3, plus Item 14, Ina Ito 151 7. Bl mpls int.rael annual rata for loos Purchase or purchase 15 Yaer Program) and Ymer1Y payment for 5 payment.. attach schedule It payment. vary) Imasad upon Item 83) NOTE. ntdd.r moat bid on It." 1, 2, 3. and 4. railura tt bid on the.. items .111 disqualify bid. The City reserve. the right to award to bid wood on any of the above and or deviations true the epaclfIC.tins whichever is In the bast Interest of the City or to reject any or .11 bid.. J Ziegler. Inc 936 CAT s89.034 Car, some •. Laks Caes Pbvar St. to Equi P. CO. and FquIpment 644D John uedrn s_79. 000 s a $69,400 s 35.500 s s $19,634 a 43,500 a a 5 2,900 s 3,500 3 $ $54,000 3 "No aid- a $ -$32,266 $47,000 a s 7.5 7.5 e t a 4.514.26 s 10.751.69 a s BID TaOULATION CI Ty Or MONTICELLO 125 NOR SE POW" WAGES BID TABULATION - LOADER Cat 936 John Deere 644D Price $89,034 $79,000 Trade-in $69,400 $63,400 Trade Price $19,634 $15,600 (return Cat to Ziegler) Difference $4,034 ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION Guaranteed Repairs for 5 years as bid S 2,900.00 S 3,500.00 5 -year scheduled maintenance 6 fuel cost provided in bid S 7,248.83 S 8,806.00 Total Outlay 5 years 529,782.83 $27,906.00 Difference 51,876.83 in John Deere Ia favor based on bid ESTIMATED LOSS IN VALUE BASED UPON CURRENT AUCTION PRICES FOR 1978 LOADERS AND 1981 BID PRICES 1981 Bid (Monticello) Current Value 78 Model Loss in Value 1986 Bid CAT 930 $61,371 33,000 $28,371 61 ,371 - 46.2% loco ? 9 years a 5.1t/year $89,034 JOHN DEERE 544 $58,000 22,600 $35,400 } 58,000 a 61.0% lose 1 9 years - 6.8t/year $79,000 5 -year Depreciation as indicated above 25.5• - $22,704 34% - $26,860 Difference: $4,156.00 in Cat -a favor based on resale value The overall difference is: 54,156.00 gale - 1,876.83 bid difference 52,279.17 in Cate favor in 5 years based on bid and resale value i r � I —` WSSER'TIRED LOADERS JOIgb 6 4tG19t• 6r4/!r;1a/t-7T-e1/rs7•:gMarf6tNi,buurvca,ei;la; 10,000 *"a b: good firms; - gntooty-Stpttolia. 'JOB% OCCR2.964,5/0 89166 119691 lv.2 y t Riarlaow-Honda-rabruary. _ i� fi J011!1 DCaaL 6N 8/M 86877, ii9691`v/7. rut 1'0� buCtet',� 20,100 ]f of. 4s ht-td0o„ROPi. tC),Thory-Arlr Mgto.-Nai1hto- I - t) llltrwls-Aptii. ' text! MCRa'.444 818 86417 tit t! rlloq rent. s..tup 14.150 w' elaa0.. 'ut it lty wctoa: for"munttns, on,Yurr•. fair airaa,.(► I..rOrta•rayatto-A loser+•=January, ' Jobs DCCRa 6i4 8/r 86411 (19491`./xOrd. 'rami, .1b 0. 17.660 grr90l4 10.5%75 alres.-(.If tir00, tG1'orndrrian- AOnroa•LOrlsirM•Apr/1. _ J08a DCCRa. 5440,8/8 750114, 6910) r/Porti' snit eels, W busatf:./tooth,: t 1., 5115 tura, fa,r urrx,' W) UtthlPTic0tu-raaM nnc0n-t?,•carsba`r. F J0Nt1 MCRAwr$'."Gr �. buct,t: 17.9975 RInC. on". IAtiaY/11�• -tiro•. Btniuippt”+August• - ; JONB�MCRL'Su0:8/B"774Y19'1197t1 '7i',DP6 •.t ,tir'd; RUBBER TIRED LOADERS — 1037 CAT 910 SIN U0•I864 1197[1 .111.4 .hear. Irl Yoder- l tr.y-u saaas.-tiori da-r.bruary. 1;1 CAT 910 SIN419-1060 11911) w/1 yd. bucket, POPS. 16.000 1y, I7, S125 it tea, TAC-R.nthMCb[dove-Galito[nie•$.p94aDar. ;3; CAT 910 SIN 410.1147 119791 -/BOPS tab, bucket, bolder- 17,500 eon q.10 covpl.r hitch, iT.5RJ5 tura, very good tires. IVC1 111Ch1.- 4•W rgne•Trnno..le•5lDtewDer, '1 CAT 910 3/N 43.•8724 {1979) w/2 Y. Ductet, balder.on 47,000 gulct •touDlar, 9000 ats IGI rorke-Tul4a-Oklahowe- rX.. ry. CAT 930 SIN 411.1701 119791 w/2 1/4 yd. CP bucket. 40,000 {' coons—ctght. .rand cab, 17.5025 tine. -..ppr.e..d ..cN l.nt ore., IGf N111.r-S3Npk0nvtll 6outh-Caro- �! I IM-N4y. �1. CAT 910 SIN 411.4414 119711 w/C► bucket, p0p/, 17.3175 30,000 tiro, valleiy-C&rarl I10 -Ca l i forst.•August. oi'I Cat 910 B/N U0.141/ 119711 r/4 In 1 bucket, .1. 40,000 I� Cab. Il4thir•.irkY-Albert.-C4ntd.-AYquet. a CAT 910 SIN 419.7943 119711 ./...1. Dopa. 11,5125 10.000 11i'I tlr... good tit... tc) Pili.r-rt-worth-71i..• i aept.wD.r. � II CAT 910 6/N ))8.[434 119 111 r/3 1/2 yd, bucket r/ 261500 tarts, sate. buc6.t lrwl, POPI enel. cab, good �1 11.5,7! tire., ICI ■1111r•wacoldOCh4.-Teg6-April. CAT 110 6/N 410.76/4 119781 r/oe104e0 PD►/, CP buel4t. 71.500 r/test n, I1, 1133 1)111, 4000 tin., tJte-Chartel•!AU{i{inr-D.Mwb.r. 7(PL CAT 130 S/0 41:•71/9 12177! w/C► buctit, -olt rn /b"Sight. 43,000 t•; cu�tmY saes, 10pt e. b, re.r eounu20.5% 25 a 1 -Yo , ga tire.. utrhia•blton•Onl.rto-C.n.d.- Novar+pe r . CAT 910 ./p,rl+•114! 111 141 w/C► butter, POPa. l7, 302} 76.500 M, oras, t.ue +cos. tCI PiYier-SrReonwtie-$Doth- i; C. rOIInJ•aJy.' �1 Car 110 a/N 4yr-7227 14[77{ .ICP "r.a4, .Opo, mr 32,000 tl r... 111 Ill.[-Te.w-N.CPn-C.efgl.•Nt). '`� CAT 910 SIN i{..S i t 0 1147T7 r//' 4 +a i butte[. roar 70.000 eouuen.ivhu, POPE. 17.5[2! uroa, feu tear. Icl N.a•.ouu •t+.a•0e.ah•x.wii•Octobr[. ' ie, CAT 110 1%11 411.1111 119771 r/7 I/4 yd, butte. 1oP8 16,000 Co. . ,.00%21 ore.. V000 ttra., iG} Miii.r-AS bogus-- 4 Sur-Nv. •ra..t0•MPt.mprer. ' CAT 130 SIN AIP•7001 t167ti ./fully 4nci. 00". CP )%,000 ' butt.[. vary good /7.!125 fire.. ICI Or1ft-Orlando• r for la.•I.bf Wry, CAT 110 "1 410.1711 111171 r/2 td, Ouck ot. POPS anal. 11,000 1 Cab, 17,5[76 lire.. 900d Brea, (C! Mlll.r-Oe.• .I} +bine•+-IY.4-April. r If 1 / CITY OF MONTICELIA / PROPOSAL FORM FOR oNE (1) 125 HP ARTICULATED WHEEL LOADER 1. Mahe and modal of equipment being bid, outright purchase price as specified. MAKE: Cateroillar MODEL: 936 F.O.B. Monticello, Minnesota S 89,034.00 2. Trade-in Value: MODEL: 1981 930 Cat SIN 41K10742 5 69,400.00 3. Item 01 lass Item 02 (Trade-in Purchase Price) 5 19,634.00 4. Guaranteed Maintonanco Expense for 5 years or 4,000 hours, whichever occurs first, shall not exceed. S 2,900.00 5. Guaranteed "Minimum Repurchase" in 5 yearn. $ 54,800.00 6. Total Cost Did (Stem 93, Plus Item 44, Lege Item 95) 5 -32,266.00 7. Simple interest annual rate for leans purchase or purchase (5 year program) and yearly payment 7.5 for 5 payments. (Attach schedule if payments vary) S 4,b14.eb (Based upon Item 13) NOTE: Bidder must bid on items 1, 2. 3, and 4. Failure to bid on those items will disqualify bid. The City reserves the right to award the bid based on any of the abovo and or deviations from tho specifications, whichever in in the boat interact of the City or to reject any or all bids. NAME OF BIDDER: 2iealer Inc. ADDRESS: 901 West 94th Street MinneePc 55920 SIGNED BY: Vice President, Sales H. BID ACCEPTED: (data) BY: TITLE: f SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ESTIMATED COSTS / AND OPERATION COST CALCULATION FORM FOR NXEEL LOADERS INSTRUCTIONS. The intent of this form is to determine the total scheduled maintenance costa that can be expected during the first five (5) years of 2,000 hours of ownership. Service intervals, number of grease fittings, and capacities should be taken directly from the manufacturer•a Lubrication instructions. Costs given are equal for all bidders. Although there may be a alight variance due to ref ill capacities, these total costs are made up of labor, overhead, lost production, gaskets. lubricant, filters, and supervisory time. The comparison examines the service intervals for the various units bid and assumos that the manufacturer's recommendations, if followed exactly, will allow the costa that are to be incurred on each unit . to be calculated with reasonable accuracy. The City of Monticello believes that scheduled maintenance to an integral part of the overall cost of the operation of a wheel loader and is therefore asking for its inclusion for consideration an part of the total coat of the unit bid. I. Grease Fittings Total Hours of Service No. of Fittings Coot per Total Operation 1 interval X 6 Each Interval X Fitting Coat (aoo hre. yriy. i 10 Hre X None X 8.25 « 8 } 50 Hzo X 2 X 8.25 « S 2().{)0 (2,000 hra { 100 Hzs X 17 X 6.25 S-95= for 5 yro.) 200 Bra X None X 5.25 $ -0- 250 Mrs X 2 X 8.25 5 4.00 500 Kra X None X S.25 5 -0- t 1000 Bra X 8 X 5.25 5 0.00 TOTAL COST • 9.00 (xi Determine number of fittings at each interval, insert each number as indicated (if none, write none), perform calculations and total lot column. 1I. Engine Oil & Filter Total Hours Service of Operation Interval X Cost per Change • Total Coat 400 hre. yrly or 2,000 hra. for 5 years i 250 X 660.00 a MAI fII! C-3 ! From factory maintenance manual determine crankcase drain and fill interval. f Insert this -hourly number and perform the calculation to arrive at the total f coat for an engine oil change. r III. Transmission Oil Total Hours Service of Operation Z. Interval X Coat per Change Total Coat 400 hre. yrly or 2,000 hrs. j000 for 5 years x $100.00 $ 200.00 (111) From factory maintenance manual determine transmission drain and refill 1 interval. Insert this hourly number and perform the calculation to arrive at the total coat for a transmission oil change. IV. Other Pled or Oil Changes Total Hours Service Hyd. System Of Operation - Interval X Capacity (Gals.) - Total Coat I 400 hra. yrly or 2,000 hra. for 5 years 2000 x 38.5 $1.45 - S 55.83 (IV) i From the factory maintenance manual determine the service Interval for draining and filling the hydraulic system. Insert thin hourly number, Insert the total capacity (in gallons) and perform the calculation as indicated. I - V. Estimated Fuel Consumption at Workload 2,000 hours x 4 Gal por hour- X S.BO 4 Q0� (A(f (V) *See attached sheet ver gal. •NOTE: May require certification from a If currant owner of the same modal machine. Listed below are each of the categories just calculated. Insert the total number for each category and add the column. This total figure may be used in consideration of the award. I. Greece Pittings S 113.00 (I) II. Engine Oil 6 Filter S 080.00 (11) III. Tranamicaion 011 S '100.00 (III) IV. Other Fluid or Oil Changan S 55.83 (IV) V. Fuel Consumption S x00 (V) TOTAL 5 year scheduled a 12 83 maintenance and fuel cone .9- CITY OF MONTICELLO PROPOSAL FORM FOR onz (1) 125 BP ARTICULATED WHEEL LOADER 1. Make and model of equipment being bid, outright purchase price as specified. MAKE: John Deere MODEL: F44n F.O.B. Monticello, Minnesota 5_22,J900-00 2. Trade-in Value: MODEL: 1981 930 Cat SIN 41K10742 S 35.500.00 3. Item 01 loss Itam 02 (Trade-in Purchase Price) S 43.500.00 4. Guaranteed maintenance Expense for 5 years or 4,000 hours, whichever occurs first, shall not exceed. 5 3,500.00 5. Guaranteed "Minimum Repurchase" in 5 years. S No Bid 6. Total Coat Bid (Item 03, Plus Itom 04, Loss Item 05) 3--ijf000.00 7. Simple interest annual rate for lease purchase or purchase (5 year program) and yearly payment for 5 payments. (Attach schedule if payments vary) $_j0751.68 (Based upon Item 03) NOTE: Bidder must bid an items 1, 2, 3, and 4. Failure to bid on these Item will disqualify bid. The City resorvea the right to award the bid based on any of the above and or deviations from the opeeifications, whichover in in the best interest of the City or to reject any or all bide. NAME OF BIDDER: Carlson's Lake Sta(q EOuicmpnF Co- ADDRESS: 12500 Dupont Avenue South 3,7 SIGNED BY: BID ACCEPTED: (date) BY: TITLE: f SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ESTIMATED COSTS SD AND OPERATION COST CALCULATION FORM FOR WHEEL LOADERS INSTRUCTIONS: The intent of this form is to determine the total scheduled maintenance costs that can be expected during the first five (5) years of 2,000 hours of ownership. Service intervals, number of grease fittings, and capacities should be'taken directly from the manufacturer -a lubrication inatructions. Costs given are equal for all bidders. Although there may be a slight variance due to refill capacities, those total costa are made up of labor, overhead, lost production, gaskets, lubricant, filters, and supervisory time. The comparison examines the service Intervals for the various units bid and assumes that the manufacturer -s recommendations, if followed exactly, will allow the costa that are to be incurred on each unit to be calculated with roasonabLo accuracy. The City of Monticello believes that scheduled maintenance Is an integral part of the overall cost of the operation of a wheel loader and Is therefore asking for its inclusion for consideration as part of the total coat of the unit bid. I. Grease Fittinqs Total Hours of Service No. of Fittings Coat per Total Operation Interval X 0 Each Interval x Fitting Cost (400 hre. yrly. ; 10 Kra X 3 X 5.25 . 3 150.00 } 50 Hra X 14 X 3.25 S—Tzm (2,000 hra 100 Hre x 5 x 3.25 S 25.00 for 5 yre.) } 200 Hra X None X 3.25 - 3 None } 250 Hre X Ngne X S.25 3 None 500 Hre X _ 10 X 3.25 3_1= 1000 Hre X 2 x 3.25 3 --AM TOTAL. COST 3 326.00 (1) Determine number of fittings at each interval, insert each number as indicated (if none, write none), perform calculations and total lot Column. II. Enqine Oil i Filter Total Hours Service of operation Interval x Cost par Change - Total Cost 400 hrs. yrty or 2,000 hrs. for 5 years i 200 X $60.00 0 600.00 (1I) -6- / From factory maintenance manual determine crankcase drain and fill interval. Insert this -hourly number and perform the calculation to arrive at the total coat for an angina oil change. _j_D III. Transmission Oil Total Hours Service of Operation ; Interval x Coat per Change Total Cost 400 hrs. sly or 2,000 hra. for 5 years ' 1000 x $100.00 $ 200.00 (III) From factory maintenance manual determine transmission drain and refill interval. Insert this hourly number and perform the calculation to arrive at the total cost for a transmission oil change. IV. Other Flud or oil Changes Total Hours Service liyd. System Of Operation Interval x Capacity (Gals.) - Total Cost 400 hre. yrly or 2,000 hre. 37 gals. for 5 years 3000 x 51.45 3 None (IV) From the factory maintenance manual determine the service interval for draining and filling tho hydraulic system. Inaert this hourly number, insert the total capacity (in gallons) and perform the calculation as indicated. ` V. Estimated Fuel Consumption at Workload i 2,000 hours x 4.8 Gal per hour- x 5.80 - $7,680.00 (V) per gal. -NOTE: May require certification from a current owner of the same model machine. Listed below are each of the categories just calculated. Insert the total number for each category and add the column. This total figure may be used in consideration of the award. 1. Greece Fittinga $ 326.00 (I) 11. Engine Oil i Filter $ 600,00 (11) III. Tranomiasion Oil $ 200.00 (111) IV. Other Fluid or Oil Changan g None (IV) V. Fuel Consumption 5 7,680,00 (y) TOTAL 5 year schoduled 9 8,806.00 maintenance and fuel coat -9. CARLSON'S LAKE STATE EQUIPMENT COMPANY �JIJ12500 Avenue South • Ile, MN5=7 te12) • TotFtree number; 800-WAIOD August 20, 1986 City Council City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN 55362 Dear Council Members: If you exercise the buyback of $63,500.00 with Caterpillar, and apply all of the money to our purchase price of $79,000.00, you would then be financing $15,500.00 with us. The lease purchase would be set up as follows. Your first payment would be due 12 months after delivery and every 12 months thereafter - a total of five payments. After the final payment the machine would be yours. With this payment schedule, your yearly payments would be $3,831.06. Sincerely, ,crfil���y,i�rr Rudy G mitro Governmental Sales Manager RCC/gms 6 Go14�ip� tai G� Council Agenda - 8/25/86 7. Consideration of Awarding the Acquisition of a Loader. W.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the August 11 meeting, the Council approved specifications drafted by the Public works Department for a new loader and authorized the advertisement for bids. Those bids are to be returned on Monday. August 25, at 9:00 a.m. In preparation for this purchase, an amount of $23,000.00 was placed in the 1986 budget. This,added to our guaranteed buy back price of 563,4O0.00,totals $86,400.00. As we discussed at the meeting, we have included several options for the City in the specifications. After the bid opening on Monday morning, staff will summarize the bids and options and make a recommendation to the Council at Monday evening's meeting. -8. Council Agenda - 8/25/86 B. Consideration of a Proposal to Extend Sever and water Utilities down Minnesota Street. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At an earlier meeting, the City of Monticello received a petition unsigned from property owners along Minnesota Street. The petition was supposedly sent by Tom Holthaus, Marvin Kramer, and Tom Brennan. Their request was for a feasibility study to determine the costs of extending sever and water approximately 500 feet on Minnesota Street so that their properties could begin development. It appeared to be the most opportune time because of the 86-1 Project in the area already doing a major portion of the dewatering. It was expected that a significant portion of this project would be oversizing due to excess depth and possibility of continuing the sanitary sewer across I-94 to serve property to the south in the OAA Area. we later received Tom Holthaus' signature on the petition, and he indicated the other two property owners would sign. we then ordered the feasibility study based upon Tom Holthaus' signature and are in the process of ' obtaining the other two signatures on the petition, but will not in any way order any work without the other two signatures by Monday evening's meeting. The preliminary feasibility report is included for your review. 1•:o have made come minor changes to the costa in that our normal service line would be of 10 -inch rather than 8 -inch size. These preliminary costs indicate that the cost for a normal sower and water extension, not intending to go over I-94, would be $15,000.00 for vatermain, and $13,000.00 for sanitary sever, for an estimated cost of $28,000.00. Thin would serve the three property owners previously mentioned. If the City wished to service an area just south of I-94, which includes a small portion of the City in the area of Olson's Electric and a portion of the OAA Area such as Gould Brothers, D 6 D Bun, Stuart Hoglund's home, etc., the cost for this initial 500 and same feet of water and Bever would be approximately 849,000.00, or $21,000.00 of oversizing to be borne by the taxpayers of the City of Monticello. This extension is as planned in the City's Comprehensive Plan. It is also possible that this sanitary sower could be put in at such a depth as to further serve an area in the OAA such as the westerly Kjellborg Mobile Home Park and possibly the Dunes or Prairie Acres. The coat of building this initial 500 and some feet of water and sever to extend savor into that area sometime in the future would be $57,000.00, or approximately $29,000.00 in oversizing the taxpayers would have to pick up. There currently is no immediate need for sanitary sower by the westerly Kjellborg Mobile Home Park. However, thsre have been indications that some of this area is interested in annexation for future development. The Comprehensive Plan for the City of Monticello in regard to utilities shows this area being served from the east through the Industrial Park. -9- Council Agenda - 8/25/86 If the City does not intend to serve any portion of the OAA at the expense of the taxpayers, it would be best to install only that portion of sanitary sewer and water needed to serve the petitioners at a cost of $28,000.00. The problem here arises if at any time in the future the City of Monticello crosses I-94 with this sanitary sewer system and/or water, we would not be able to recover assessments for the first 500 feet of construction because those properties would already be served. In addition, the project would be very costly if the street already exists in that area. The Monticello City Council has indicated a reluctance to continue to extend utilities to or near the OAA area at the cost of the taxpayers of the City of Monticello. It seems most appropriate at this time to not extend those services toward the OAA area unless we are assured of this area being within the City in the near future or of developing a procedure by which an area assessment for oversizing would be in place. One thing that would have to be worked out is the actual payment of the $28,000.00 portion by the property owners and the funding of the City's portion of the project. Currently, there in about $60,000.00 left in the 86-1 Project for contingencies. In addition, there is approximately $70,000.00 left in the unallocatod portion of the Capital Outlay Etevolving Fund. This is assuming purchase of the NSP property at a cost of $75,000.00 in 1986. If the NSP property is not purchased, there is approximately $165,000.00 in that fund. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Alternative 11 would be to work out a financing plan with the property owners and install only that portion of sanitary sewer and water necessary to serve the area north of the freeway. 2. Alternative 12 would be to Install the first section of sanitary sower and water main in preparation for crossing I -9e and serving that portion of the OAA nearest I-94 at a cost to the City of $21,000.00. This would be done concurrently either with petitions from those people in the OAA or a method of area assessment for sanitary sewer. 3. Alternative 13 would be to install the sanitary sower in preparation for crossing 1-94 and serving a greater portion of the OAA area at a cost to the City for oversizing of approximately 529,000.00. This would be concurrent with petitions from property owners for a major portion of the OAA area end/or the preparation of an area assessment for sanitary sewer ovareizing. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The City staff recommendation is to stick with the Council's policy that we will not extend or prepare to extend services of any kind -10- Council Agenda - 8/25/86 into the OAA area unless we are assured of recovery of those oversizing chargee by that area. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the preliminary feasibility report. =LM FEASIBILITY REPORT SEWER AND WATER EXTENSIONS FOR MINNESOTA STREET PROJECT 86-7 - CHANGE ORDER NO CITY OF MONTICELLO AUGUST 15, 1986 1. TYPE OF WORK The proposed improvement involves the sanitary sewer and watermain extension and necessary appurtenant work along Minnesota Street in the City of Monticello. Ii. LOCATION OF PROJECT Minnesota Street is a north -south street five blocks west of State Trunk Highway 25. The project is in the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 121, Range 25, Wright County, Minnesota. between Sixth Street and Interstate Highway 1-94. iil. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Property owners abutting Minnesota Street have petitioned the City of Monticello to extend sewer and water service to their properties. In 1978, watermain was installed to the north edge of the quarter -quarter section as part of a general water improvement project. Project 86-7 will extend that water line southward along Minnesota Street a distance of about 500 feet. Lateral lines would be stubbed out to the right-of-way lines and hydrants would be in- stalled. The cost of extending a 12 -inch watermain and necessary lateral lines is esti- mated to be $19,000. This is approximately ! " more than the cost of an X inch watermain of the same length. 4,000 10 An interceptor sewer (Project 86-1) is presently being constructed and will pass along the north edge of the area served by this proposed improvement. The inter- ceptor sewer was designed to accept sanitary sewage from the 16 acre area to be served by the proposed Project 86-7. Access to the interceptor sewer for this Iz 0 area was included in Project 86-1. The proposed Project 86-7 will extend approxi- mately 600 feet into the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 11. In the Comprehensive Sewer Plan for the City, Minnesota Street was proposed as the route for the trunk sewer to serve an area of approximately 225 developable acres immediately south of 1-94 and west of T.H. 25. Local sanitary sewer service can be provided by three different design concepts or alternatives. Sanitary Sewer Alternative No. 1: The first design approach ignores the area south of I-94 because most of it is outside the existing City limits and in the Town of Monticello. The sanitary sewer would provide local service only and would be constructed at depths of 10-12 feet. Such an approach would require a deep trunk sewer in the future to be constructed parallel to the local sewer. It is rather difficult to make a comparison of this alternative to the other two because several "ifs" come into the picture. The largest unknown is whether or not future construction of a trunk sewer on Minnesota Street would require removal of an in-place paved street having a usable life remaining in its life- cycle. If such removal could be avoided, then the net additional cost of constructing only a local sewer at this time would be about $4,400.00 for 550 feet or $8.00 per foot including manholes. This cost is relatively low because the construction of costly vertical drop sections on the future trunk sewer would not be necessary if the local shallow sewer existed. The actual total construc- tion cost of the shallow sewer is estimated to be $11,000. Estimated Construction Cost 560 L.F. 8" PVC % @ $ 11.00/L.F. • S 6.160.00 2 Manholes 0 11.000.00/EACH • 2.000.00 8 L.F. Excess Depth 0 S 55.00/L.F. • 440.00 120 L.F. 6" Service 0 S 12.00/L.F. • 1.140.00 Miscellaneous 960.00 Total .................................. . 111.000.00 Q20 P M g w+ b cL r P.000'.0 _2. 13.000.0- i H Sanitary Sewer Alternative No. 2: The second design concept proposes a trunk sewer at a depth sufficient to serve the 225 developable acres south of 1-94. At the connection to the interceptor sewer, the trunk sewer would have an invert elevation of 922.0 and would be constructed at depths from 10-24 feet. Future extensions of this trunk line would require construction to depths of 30 feet. Shallower local sewer laterals would enter the trunk sewer utilizing vertical drops at manholes. Estioated Construction Cost 560 L.F. 12" PVC @ E 35.00/L.F. - 19,600.00 2 Manholes @ 51,000.00/EACH - 2,000.00 16 L.F. Excess Depth @ S 55.00/L. F. - 880.00 2 Drop Sections @ 51,900.00/EACH - 3,800.00 120 L.F. Lateral Sewers @ $ 11.00/L.F. - 1,320.00 Miscellaneous - 2,400.00 Total .................................. - 530.000.00 Sanitary Sewer Alternative No. 3: The third and final design alternative con- siders a still deeper trunk sewer beginning with an invert elevation of 918.0. This approach would allow a future gravity sewer to be extended further south beyond the previously mentioned 225 acre plot and into the Kjellberg's Prairie Acres and the Dunes Subdivisions. The Comprehensive Sewer Plan had planned for these subdivisions to receive service from a trunk line extending from east of T.H. 25. However, the subdivisions could cause sanitary waste disposal problems in the foreseeable future and it was therefore thought to be prudent to investi- gate and consider future service to the area. The total length of sewer required to service the 225 acre plot is 6,000 feet. The additional 4 feet of depth between Alternatives No. 2 and No. 3 translates into a cost of about $10.00 per foot or $60,000 for the entire trunk sewer (pro- posed and futurea). The work proposed for this project has the following cost estimate. .3 - CG Estimated Construction Cost 560 L.F. 12" PVC @ $ 45.00/L.F. a 25,200.00 2 Manholes @ $1,000.00/EACH - 2,000.00 24 L.F. Excess Depth @ $ 55.00/L.F. • 1.320.00 2 Drop Sections @ $2,180.00/EACH a 4,360.00 120 L.F. Lateral Sewers @ $ 11.00/L.F. - 1,320.00 Miscellaneous 3.800.00 Total .................................. a $38,000.00 IV. FEASiBILITY From a technical point -of -view, any of sanitary sewer design alternatives can be constructed without significant impact to local residents, properties or the environment. The area is not highly developed and there is adequate space for construction excavations. The major complicating factor is the fact that Minnesota Street 1s the planned route for a trunk sewer extending southward across 1-94 to serve a 225 acre plat which Is mostly within the OAA but outside the present City boundaries. A policy decision must be nade by the City regarding the site and depth of the sewer to be constructed. The lowest present cost approach would be to provide only shallow local sewers with the provision for a deep trunk sewer in the future. The other extreme would be to construct a sewer deep enough to provide future gravity sewer to the existing Prairie Acres and Dunes developments in the Town of Monticello. -4- (D INTERSTATE E I t i4) I1 'Aqq a vie r aa.s % pliwaw..�v6 w, 7 ° f� j t �1 E I Council Agenda - 8/25/86 9. Consideration of Ratifying an Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the Maintenance of Traffic Signals. O.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As you may recall, our previous agreement with MN/DOT addressed only the underground portion of the traffic signals at Broadway, Seventh Street, and Oakwood Drive on Highway 25. The above ground work, which included the wiring and fixtures, could not be ordered at that time because we were not eligible for federal funding until the bridge was sited. Now that the bridge has been sited and funding has been approved. MN/DOT is ready to take the project to bids for the installation of the traffic signals. They require us to enter into a formal agreement. Our share of the estimated coat for the three new signals is $13,300.00. Our share of the actual cost of the temporary traffic signal which was located at Oakwood Drive and Highway 25 is $8,842.00. This brings the total local share to $22,142.00. we expect to enter into an agreement with Wright County to pay one-half of those costs so that our total liability would be 511,071.00. It in my understanding that the traffic signals will have brackets for the installation of the street names and will include street lights on each pole. The City of Monticello will be responsible as long as those lights exist for the painting and relamping of the poles and fixtures and cost of getting electricity to that system and paying for it. Because of the time frame. MN/DOT requested approval of the agreement by Wednesday morning, August 20. Preliminary approval was given by the Mayor, City Administrator, and Public Works Director so that the project would not be delayed and the City would receive its traffic signals as soon as possible. During our discussions with MN/DOT, we asked them about the opticom system that the Fire Department had asked us to chock into. The opticom system allows firemen in a fire truck to change a signal from red to green in order for the fire trucks to pass more quickly through an intersection. Bud McCullough of the Brainard MN/DOT office indicated the cost to retrofit a single intersection to be controlled by a single fire truck would be 511,000.00. Consequently, for all three intersections the cost would be 833,000.00 to have the controls in one truck. MN/DOT does not participate in the cost of an opticom system. during a staff discussion, it was felt that the coat was extremely high and the actual benefit of ouch a system questionable. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative would be to approve the agreement with MN/DOT for the construction of the traffic signals. 2. The second alternative would be not to approve the agreement with MN/DOT. This appears to be totally impractical, as we would be without traffic lights in the City of Monticello. -12- Council Agenda - 8/25/86 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff reco®ends approval of the agreement vith MN/DOT as outlined In Alternative 01. D. SUPPORTING DATA: None. -13- Council Agenda - 8/25/86 10. Consideration of Granting Final Approval to the First Phase of a Planned Unit Development Known as Victoria Square. (G.A.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Mr. Mike Behar is back before you with a request for final approval of Block 1, Lots 1-55, portion of his previously approved preliminary plat of the Victoria Square Addition. what Mr. Behar is looking for is a preliminary plat approval of the previously approved preliminary plat of Victoria Square Addition, now to be known as Victoria Square Planned Unit Development. The Planned Unit Development portion would allow different types of zoning to exist and also outlots to exist prior to development and final approval. The portion that Mr. Raher is looking at for development and final approval is Block 1, Lots 1-55. Within this block are 27 separate townhouses with detached garages. With 27 total unit townhouses, it does require a conditional use, as it exceeds the maximum 12 multiple un its allowed. One thing to note is that Mr. Reher will also have to bring current any previous platting fees to the City of Monticello, and also prior to his plat being recorded, all delinquent special assessments and delinquent taxes would have to be paid. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the preliminary plat of a Planned Unit Development to be known as Victoria Square Planned Unit Development; approve the rezoning as proposed in the Outl ots A, B, C. and D. and also Block 1, Lots 1-55; approve the conditional use request to allow in excess of 12 multiple family houe Ing units in said Block 1, Lots 1-55. 2. Deny the preliminary plat of a Planned Unit Development to be known as Victoria Square Planned Unit Development; deny the rezoning as proposed in the Outlots A. B. C, and D. and also Block 1, Lots 1-55; and deny the conditional use request to allow in excess of 12 multiple family housing unite in said Block 1, Lots 1-55. 3. Approve the preliminary plat, approve the rsconing an proposed, and to approve the conditional use request. with the condition that all platting charges on this plat be paid up front to the City prior to recording, and all delinquent special assessments and taxes be paid prior to recording . and an approved grading and drainage plan be submitted prior to building permit application. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Victoria Square Planned Unit Development as laid out in Block 1, Lots 1-55, and Outlots A, 8, C, D, and E, the proposed layouts of the streets, and tha proposed extension of the existing Cedar Street or what he is yroposing to name Victoria Street; and also approval of the development stage and final stags of Block 1, Lots 1-55, with granting the conditional use request to allow in Council Agenda - 8/25/86 excess of 12 multiple family units; also that prior to isauarue of a building permit an approved grading and drainage plan be submitted. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the proposed Victoria Square Planned Unit Development; Copy of the Block 1, Lots 1-55; Copy of the first set of eight townhouse units; Copy of the landscaping plan. -15- CTORIA SQUARE ADDITIO= l,� it r. /s.ina ia+rw OUTIOT A uti��i �� o.R�u.en even / m rn.ou eaueq �1 OUTLOT 0 tj r.00ete mean 1 11 i `I NDUNDAS R 0 / •� r � � 1 _� .�-.e-.=��... � � �.....,,..... iii � i OUTIOT p BLOCK I y..e..�........n....n/�' ..�.r.../w• wire... ......r... '.7L.L T.iS'f,�.IP� I (D 4` ZI,l 1i�,r �^•„� r r p` •nN I r S �' •"N't/i I �I j " �r r � 1 NB9"!78'3!3"EI a•r7°r$OB' $r 'r7sd'Pa,.a �.,�� r +•t7t/,�� .I $i� r931SS5B3R:76000,? to„ior Goox�j fhm3�t�eiMc �,�t _ S i ,�! I • - NTB 39 i w.9or t 1 rsey _ ...rvaf'03'}a"E aTrl ..- •_�.., Cyt: - rr!! 7rQ•r1°0501" tlNe9 17 a4 E •-�7T)d • re.w r°3, ,dJI tat, ,a i, ,p„!,- re rrd ••` �,,.R,�iOb�•. I"rte; i 8 19 X20 :21 822 g23 2-24 �•$27d8.. sloe :W h: x, x rata 16 Myr rat, roar ,6 1, rata 28 8�$ o$wr8 $ a�� u e rm.•.:- ries .• • rdo log :m $ 8 28 E {. area ti ?� 5«w6w 47 : n0'd,'ftw•, 9 50 h� u'...uM^ 7'7M 40d tt - ♦rad r ?da T°d Y •loaf •.; ( 3 h�'=-----••': l.00 a ;g:rw8�:e arae o� Q War ce'sa c ,!r oo o : ti 30 �? 3 +� . ( n •� n, �.. "•'. i g'ugo oleo I �~ 444 16 V 30 s2 t. n o :$33P.8 •rr M•. -• ....mop 0a •L to? $f •••- N :Ca • : * 8 ` C:,P,4 -..ado00 xa:°ir»1 s 9 38 •w%?�r7T'w. $� i•,qt.��,''rrn $ r o faoat g 1 g1' 11 h ,1l+ ,al, ,in :oda :-rasa rodo ,sit ,alr ,°d, fid+ rt d0-Maa < K j",13 117 %18 $ 13 h "�? K 813 812 8 11 810 8 9 E • �! Nrr rat, ,a sr sees �--��° �'•�rpPa ra"r ,�„a!• rat: rAsr rads � ' `, VIZ —J j '- CO NAft AND UTN.ITY tASCM[NT9 ARt `Fy 1 lurA pAragrf w,th rdr N net of me tlrr ofthe NRJ/ of'sle, is 7 SNOwN THUSr 1 0 S 99,08''.S4 4,+7•+8•� r ,6 SZ SS en ," N 593914' i r- 20) •d.i2.O O �..,� � S•07 q, Sa4pp . :9�2i'aT•W j�. • ww•+t ORR•SCNELEN•MAYERON &ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineer's Land Surveyors August 21, 1986 City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN 55362 Attn: Mr. Gary Anderson Building Official Re: Victoria Square Plat Dear Gary: The Victoria Square plat, grading plan and preliminary utility plan were hand delivered to my office by Mike Reher last Friday. August 8th so that we could review these plans prior to the Monticello City Council meeting next Monday. The plat itself was reviewed by Ed Ames, land surveyor from our office, and the notations on both sheets have been discussed with Tom Bergquist the land surveyor for the developer. We would like to have seen Dundas Road platted at least to its centerline. Dundas Road to date is described only by an easement and may or may not be a concern in the future. Drainage and utility easements are shown on the plat but serve little purpose in that the utilities, including sanitary sewer, watermain and even the drainage, is not contained within the easement shown on the plat. I have noted this on the respective plans. This brings up a question as to the ownership and maintenance of the 6" watermain along the east and south perimeter of the plat and the parallel B" sewer lines plus another 6" water line in the center of the plat stubbed off of Dundas Road, and the same for a 6" sewer line. According to the Preliminary Utilities Plan, 29 individual I" water service lines and a" sewer service lines will be stubbed off of this watermain and sewer noted above. This to me Constitutes more than a single service private line or lines. If these main sewer and water lines are construed to be public utilities, then at least a 30' wide easement should be shown and dedicated on the plat. I have shown on the grading plan in yellow, copy enclosed, the various drainage patterns for which drainage easements should be shown on the plat to guarantee proper drainage of the site for future land owners. In the alternative, and for the sake of simplicity, it is suggested that Lot 55, see plat, which is the entire area surrounding the other 50 lots, be dedicated in its entirety for drainage and utility purposes. i would assume that Lot 55 will belong or be controlled by an association of the 29 or so future land owners. 2021 East Hennepin Avenue • Suite 238 • Minneapolis. Minre:ote 55473 • 5%2, 331 • d:i /li Page Two Mr. Gary Anderson August 21, 1986 Utility easements will also be needed to facilitate the sewer and water utility shown outside of the plat that will serve property to the west and adjacent to future Cedar Street extended. This completes our review of the latest submittal for Victoria Square. A marked up copy of the plans are enclosed. If you have any questions in this regard, please give me a call. Yours very truly, ORR-SCNELEN-MYERBN ASSOCIATES, InnNC. aIL�C� JoP. Bedelich, P.E. City Engineer JPB:mlj cc: Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. John Simola, Public Works Director is VA Council Agenda - 8/25/86 11. Consideration of Granting a Variance for a Reduction in Required Parking Spaces for the Monticello VFW. (G.A.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The Monticello VFW is proposing to construct a 24' x 50' addition to the existing VFW Club. If allowed construction of the new addition, the existing detached storage building would be removed and would be relocated from the current site. To allow construction of the proposed addition, the VFW Club is requesting a variance to be allowed less than the minimum number of off-street parking spaces as required by ordinance. The Monticello VFW Club has fully utilized nearly all of their property except for the building and horseshoe pits to accommodate off-street parking spaces. The total number of off-street parking spaces that are required is 104 total spaces, with the maximum number of spaces on site totaling 76 off-street parking spaces, therefore needing a 28 parking space variance. The reason the variance is before you without going to Planning Commission is that the VFW would like to commence with construction of their addition as soon as possible. Therefore, they are going to each of the affected property owners within a 350 foot radius of the property and obtaining their signatures to be allowed to waive the affected property owners right to a public hearing at the Planning Commission level. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the variance request to allow less than the minimum number of off-street parking spaces. 2. Deny the variance request to allow lose than the minimum number of off-street parking spaces. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the variance request to allow lase than the minimum number of off-street parking spaces. We don't approve of the format which is being used to speed up the process for this, but if it is appropriate with the Council members to make such a decision without the Planning Commission's decision, so be it. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the proposed addition to the VFW Club. -16- �lliilil� AP� ,u varrtV wr yy �/ N•G �/�J 1 w. T— r,�T. ��,K�} � EkY>faly CiILG1tJ�+ PM ' Z.t-rr :rte -we.am. qom ..," ...r,... � .� aaysc+ owaurs+an,y c to- co r wtwr� a. r«u "D.0wrktgw 1. �y tv �, CITY F M t TnCELLO APV ED OATH d&r�& Vis' +r• �' ' t�r+tttt ur sov��� ,....�..._.�.. _�. XPAMnj .a. a V.P.W.. Post 8731 Montioello.mil 55362 8/20/86 The V.P.W. Post 8731 plans to add an addition of 25 feet onto the east end of the existing building. Z,, the undersigned, have no objection to this project. Thaak You, Members of the V.F.W. 0/1 NI.I J1.4 + I�LL..,nO ✓ � I .i 'i i i � 1 i 1 gsuwtc 1.aii,a� oZ r_ 1II i N t7..J t'S' • l o" � 3r t *r6«.ate CJPS N+J-1 i t � tb�rJcrty`.+"rb }io►r.t.a4.1L — II III�I �ti tura Boa ttai.kUtntptway R9161.CbuO.YN lO� is o, a1a4t, MORO lin 421.7440 GENERAL FUND -- AUGUST AMOUNT CHECK NO. Olive Koropchak - Misc. mileage 57.00 22824 Dept. of Employee Relations - Medicare W/H 37.84 22825 Anoka County Social Services - Payroll ded. 204.00 22826 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded. 50.04 22827 VOID -0- 22828 ICMA Retirement Corp. - Employee Retire. Contribution 74.67 22829 Beverly Johnson - Animal control contract payment 250.00 22830 Jerry Hermes - Janitorial services at Library 206.25 22831 Beverly Johnson - Animal control payment 25.00 22832 Dave Stromberg - Animal control contract 287.50 22833 Sean Hancock - WWTP contract 934.50 22834 PERA - PERA W/H 1,633.09 22835 Dept. of Employee Relations - FICA W/H 3,077.00 22836 Wright County State Bank - FWT 2,775.00 22837 Daryl Fischbach - Reimb. for shrubs & trees at Kent. Fried 1,000.00 22838 Commissioner of Revenue - State W/H 2,443.00 22839 Corrow Sanitation - Contract payment for July 6,185.50 22840 Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary 175.00 22841 Dan Blonigen - Council salary 125.00 22842 Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary 125.00 22843 William Fair - Council salary 125.00 22844 Jack Maxwell - Council salary 125.00 22845 James Preusse - Cleaning city hall 337.50 22846 YMCA of Mpls. - Monthly contract payment 529.17 22847 Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees 103.00 22848 Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees 36.00 22849 Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees 36.00 22850 Petty Cash - Reimb. petty cash fund 49.25 22851 Team Laboratory Chemical - Deodorant blocks - WWTP 76.65 22852 Fullerton Lumber Co. - Final payment - Fire Hall 22,930.38 22853 Wilma Hayes - Inf. Center salary 112.50 22854 Janette Leerssen - Inf. Center salary 37.13 22855 MWOA - Conf. reg. fee for Albert Meyer 60.00 22856 Marquette Bank Mpla. - 1971 Water Rev. bonds - Int. 6 fees 380.00 22857 PERA - Ina. premiums 18.00 22858 Federal Express - Postage for letter for WWTP 14.00 22859 State of MN. - Seminar fee for 0. Koropchak 732.50 22860 Con, Marion, Steve and Candace Johnson - Purchase of Lot 10 2,146.00 22861 Veit 6 Co. - 6th St. project - payment B4 11,894.00 22862 U. S. Postmaster - Refill postage machine 500.00 22863 Dept. of Natural Res. - Dep. Reg. fees 25.00 22864 Dept. of Natural Ree. - Dep. Reg. face 58.00 22865 Dept. of Employee Relations - Medicare W/H - summer help 38.32 22866 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded. 90.04 22867 ICMA Retirement Corp. - Employee Rat. contr. 74.67 22868 Tom Eidem - Car allowance for August 300.00 22869 Jerry Hermes - Janitorial services 206.25 22870 Dave Stromberg - Animal control contract 287.50 22871 North Central Public Service - Utilities 1,210.29 22872 Bridgewater Telephone - Phone chargee 1,115.01 22873 Northern Statos Power - Utilities 9,806.39 22874 MN. Dept. of Not. Roo. - Dep. Reg. fees 25.00 22875 MN. Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees 18.00 22876 Seen Hancock - Contract payment at WWTP 1,010.00 22877 L 6 G Rehbein, Inc. - Interceptor sewer project - payment 04 126,416.85 22878 PERA - PERA W/11 1,567.64 22879 GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NO. Dept. of Employee Relations - FICA W/H 2,963.56 22880 Wright County State Bank - FWT tax 2,643.00 22881 Monticello Fire Dept. - Salaries 1,974.00 22882 Janette Leerssen - Inf. Ctr. salary 18.00 22883 Wilma Hayes - Inf. Ctr. salary 52.88 22884 Wright County State Bank - Investments 98,000.00 22885 The Glass Hut - Glass for park 7.80 22886 Service Plus Foods - Animal supplies 13.90 22887 Braun Engineering Testing - Interceptor sever testing 1,332.15 22888 Barco Municipal Products - Gloves, boots, etc. - St. Dept. 208.38 22889 Hawkins Chemical - Chlorine - WWTP 505.00 22890 Automatic Control Systems - Controller 6 programmer - WWTP 2,616.00 22891 Holiday Inn Duluth - Travel expense - A. Meyer seminar 128.97 22892 Monticello Rotary - Membership dues - T. Eidem 175.00 22893 Power Process Equip. - Repair meter head - Well A2 317.77 22894 Holmes 4 Graven - Prof. services - IXI 6 Const. 5 projects 331.50 22895 Automatic Garage Door - Repair garage door - WWTP 45.09 22896 Wright County Treasurer - Police contract payment 10,357.50 22897 Cole Partner Inst. Co. - Electronic paper - WWTP 40.96 22898 Mobil Oil Corp. - Gas - Fire Dept. 67.54 22899 Unitog Rental Services - Uniform rental fees 172.60 22900 Seitz Hardware - Paint, gas can, filter, elbows, etc. 154.27 22901 Marco Business - Repair copy machine - Mtce. Bldg. 310.16 22902 . Monticello Office Products - 2 swivel chairs - Fire Hall, etc. 284.94 22903 Maus Foods - Towels, cups, filters. etc. - all Depts. 102.45 22904 J M 011 Co. - Diesel fuel 812.18 22905 Davis Electronic Service - Pager repairs - Fire Dept. 271.48 22906 Clarey's Safety Equip. - Fire door bar 54.50 22907 Banker's Life Ins. - Group ins. 3,936.35 22908' Boling Consultants - Professional Services - WWTP 3,178.71 22909 Biffs. Inc. - Latrine rentals - Softball fields 85.50 22910 Seelye Plastics - WWTP supplies 103.59 22911 Tripp 011 - Gas - Fire Dept. 10.00 22912 Local d49 - Union dues 126.00 22913 Unocal - Gas - Fire Dept. 32.52 22914 Feedrite Controls - Fluoride, hydro. acid, testing 253.89 22915 Simonsen Lumber - Supplies 22.80 22916 Martie's Farm Service - Dog food 33.94 22917 Pitney Bowes - Postage machine rental 59.25 22918 Maus Tire Service - Repairs - St. Dept. 46.24 22919 Moon Motors - Chain saw 501.71 22920 Monticello TW Hardware - Supplies 31.32 22921 Jae's Precast - Manholes for NSP softball fields 2,257.44 22922 R 4 K Heating b Plumbing - Drip pan for Fire hall 124.50 22923 State Treasurer - Surplus Prop. - Grinding machine, elbows, etc. 94.00 22924 Gruys. Johnson - Computer charges for July 290.00 22925 League of MN. Cities - Membership dues 1,362.00 22926 First Trust St. Paul - Paying agent fees - Fire Hall bonds 678.75 22927 General Rental Canter - Blades - St. Dept. 27.80 22928 Jim Hatch Sales - First aid kite, vests, batteries - St. Dept. 149.78 22929 Harry's Auto Supply -- Misc. supplies 22.77 22930 Centra Sots Coop. - 2 shovels - WWTP 19.90 22931 Bentec Eng. Corp. - Installation of level sensor - WWTP 461.00 22932 ABN Brake & Equip. - Equipment repair 17.41 22933 Big Lake Equip. - Mover blades, manifold, etc. - movers 306.02 22934 Monticello Times - Misc. printing 6 publishing 756.95 22935 GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NO. Ben Franklin - Toilet tissue - parks 27.60 22936 National Bushing - Misc. parts 45.79 22937 Coast to Coast - Vacuum - Fire Dept. - 183.78 6 mise. supplies 371.23 22938 Phillips 66 - Gas - Water Dept. 12.45 22939 A T 6 T Inf. Systems - Fire phone charge 3.96 22940 National Life Ins. - Ins. premium - T. Eidem 100.00 22941 Springsted, Inc. - Fee for issuance of G. 0. Bonds - $385,000 7,750.69 22942 Monticello Printing - Statement forms, meter reading cards 69.55 22943 Humane Society of Wright County - Animal control services 50.00 22944 Smith, Pringle 6 Hayes - Legal services - July 630.00 22945 Orkin Pest Control - Contract payment - WWTP 115.00 22946 American Management Assoc. - Membership dues - T. Eidem 125.00 22947 Wright County Treasurer - Taxes - Rental houses 1,170.00 22948 Olson Electric - Repairs at lift station, pump house, etc. 3,686.21 22949 Wright County State Bank - Purchase C. D. 160,000.00 22950 Northern States Power - Electricity 31.64 22951 Central Eyewear - Glasses 181.30 22952 OSM - Misc. eng. fees 10,119.42 22953 Schillewaert Landscaping - Tree removal (8) 6 stump grinding 2,240.00 22954 MacQueen Equip. - Cable - St. sweeper 24.54 22955 Ranger Products - Supplies - WWrP 76.78 22956 The Plumbery - Toilet tissue holder for park 74.98 22957 MN. Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees 62.00 22958 22959 MN. Dept. of Nat. Resources - Dep. Reg. fees 18.00 1,608.91 22960 Montedoro Whitney Corp. - Level sensor - WWTP 50.31 22961 Century Laboratories - Sand - WWTP Government Business Systems - Election forms manual 9.73 22962 EL Marketing - Election ballot frames 73.50 76.20 22963 22964 Glidden Coatings 6 Resins - Coal tar epoxy - WWCP 79.75 22965 St. Cloud Restaurant Supply - Towels - Parke 204.00 22966 Anoka County Social Services - Payroll ded. 26.00 22967 Rick Wolfsteller - Misc. mileage 79.30 22968 Gary Anderson - Misc. mileage 20.00 22969 Leifert Trucking - Freight for Fire Dept. Tom Eidem - Airport meeting expense 14.27 22970 Payroll for July 34,151.87 TOTAL GENERAL FUND DISBURSEMENTS -- AUGUST $564,488.33 LIQUOR FUND AUGUST DISBURSEMENTS - LIQUOR FUND SUNT MCK NO. Payroll for July 3,455.42 Eagle Wine Co. - Liquor 1,013.69 12547 Eagle Dist. Co. - Liquor 4,160.61 12548 Twin City Wine - Liquor 659.41 12549 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll W/H 170.00 12550 Commissioner of. Revenue - State W/H 195.00 12551 Social Security Retire. Div. - FICA W/H 273.82 12552 Wright County State Bank - FWT W/H 253.00 12553 PERA - PERA W/H 157.97 12554 Control Living Seminar - Reg. fee for Joe Hartman 40.00 12555 Grosslein Beverage - Beer 21,594.25 12556 Quality Wine 6 Spirits - Wine purchase 736.63 12557 Eagle Dist. Co. - Liquor 2,218.69 12558 Eagle Wine Co. - Wine purchase 614.58 12559 Twin City Wine - Wine purchase 1,088.41 12560 Stromquist Dist. - Misc. mdse. 45.75 12561 Cloudy Town Diet. - Misc. mdse. 149.50 12562 MN. Liquor Stores Assoc. - Membership dues 135.00 12563 City of Monticello - Sewer/water bill 263.03 12564 MN. Bar Supply, Inc. - Misc. mdse. 165.60 12565 Maus Foods - Store expense 18.10 12566 Twin City Demo's. - Misc. mdse. 46.00 12567 Bernick's Pepsi Cola - Misc. mdse. 920.00 12568 Dick Beverage - Beer, etc. 3,883.10 12569 Viking Coca Cola - Misc. mdse. 800.70 12570 Monticello Times - Advertising 44.00 12571 Seven Up Bottling - Misc. mdse. 398.00 12572 Day Diet. Co. - Misc. mdse. 905.60 12573 Yonak Sanitation - Garbage contract payment 91.50 12574 Liefert Trucking - Freight 618.01 12575 Northern States Power - Utilities 856.45 12576 Ed Phillips - Liquor 4,363.50 12577 Century Laboratories - Store expense 33.79 12578 Thorpe Diet. Co. - Beer 11,314.92 12579 Jude Candy 6 Tobacco - Misc. mdse. 781.90 12580 Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone 60.11 12581 Dahlheimer Dist. - Beer, etc. 19,834.21 12582 North Central Public Service - Utilities 8.28 12583 Twin City Wine - Liquor 1,050.30 12584 Deportment of Employee Relations - Social Sec. - PICA W/H 275.62 12585 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded. 170.00 12586 Wright County State Bank - FWT taxes 259.00 12587 PERA - PERA W/H 159.00 12588 City of Monticello - Postage reimbursement 167.00 12594 Ed Phillips - Liquor 1,996.66 12595 Eagle Wine Co. - Liquor 501.10 12596 Eagle Dist. Co. - Liquor 4,849.64 12597 Twin City Wine - Liquor 741.45 :2598 Quality Wine - Liquor 407.92 12599 Commissioner of Revenue - Sales tax for July 8,852.71 12600 Cruye, Johnson - Computer chargee for July 110.00 12589 James Electric Motor - Repair cooler 48.50 12590 Buffalo Vacuum - Repair vacuum cleaner 35.85 12591 Old Dutch Foods - Misc. mdse. 164.61 12592 Banker's Life ]ns. - Group ins. 310.41 12593 TOTAL LIQUOR DISBURSEMENTS $102.468.30 , •CITT OF HN7ricy"n ' Haltllly• Oullding Dcpsrt=,L Report I PUUUI3 oud USES Ilnth of .luly 1986 --1TIF- - "Sana Ibn Lb "L.st Tear "1'hao Tear PEIUBTS ISSUED 1Ln1th June ll nth July Leet icer To DsLc To Dots - ILMIDFIIT3AL 1+umber • 12 12 17 56 78 V9luetial 3 369,190.00 $416,060. 00 3 084,860.00 1 3,080.420.00 1 4,812,120.00 Feoe 1,959.10 2,297.70 4,980.64 16,261.96 23,335.46 Surchorges 184.55 206.00 442.35 1,539.90 2,405.60 - 0019UtCIAL Number 215 I 9 Veluetlon 760,000.00 1,713,960.00 -_ 1,562,000.00 Foes3,228.70 7,825.28 ., 7,092.70 Surcharges 380.00 656.95 - 781.00 Ii+wsml AL Ilumber I Value tion I Fees , Surcharges PLUWID0 1lumbor 6 e 15 44 46 Feoe 198.00 207.00 372.00 1,391.00 1,507.00 Surcharge. 3.00 4.00 7.50 25.00 23.00 O111F]L9 Ihuiber 1 1 4 YNueLlal 10,000.00 456,900.00 12,860.00 Fees 80.SO 2,205.02 119.10 Sw•c11u•gos s,00 228.25 6.90 - TOTAL 110. 1771$17$ -- --" 21 20 32 116 137 TOTAL VAIIIATIOR 1.139.190.00 416,060.00 884,060.00 5,251,280.00 6,386,980.00 TOTAL FLFt1 5.466.30 2,504.70 5,352.64 27,663.26 32,054.26 •1 UT61. GunCnn ncl.s 572.55 712.00 449.95 2,650.1 3.116_70 wlutF?rr MUM - ,. humlmr to j7Ete PkAfl1T IIA1VIlg Number 1.F PIIUIIT !!qljU1Ajt;. Vol uotlwl Yhln ycnr heel year single Fem11y 6 1 1,711.80 1 155.15 1310,,100.00 33 16 WPI as 1 386.00 42.30 04,600.00 5 2 Ih11L1-I.mlly 4 5 Co,nerclel 1 6 Ndu et rl al 0 0 Ree: Cnregeo 2 13 alvJ. 0 0 Fublic Dulldlesa ALTI]UTIUI (11 RLPAIR U.e1l Lige 5 199.90 10.55 '21,160.00 1 34 29 Comnm•c1 e1 B 9 ' L1duoLrl e] 0 0 PLUMBIC I All types 8 207.00 4.00 46 44 ACCCSSOnT STRUCTURES ' D.1-1..g Pool. 1. 1 0 Dec S. .. 7 0 MWOMRT PERMIT 1 0 0 01'110LITI08 •, 1 0 1 TOTA.3 20' '2.604.70 31'.00 416:090.00 137 ' 1,16, ti 1 111DIVIDUAL PEP.MIT ACTIVITY REPORT . MONTH OF July , 198 6 'ERMIT I DESCRIPTION P� NAMEILOCATION (VALUATION vUMBER A 86-922 1" Fatuity Dwelling 0 Dayls, vacbse CmstruCtlon/304 4 306 6 84,600.00 Marvin Blwood Road .. 86-923 Front entry otaJ110 Dayton Bt. AD Loweii RrMrim 1,430.00 86-924 Front Porch AD Brune Paraan/319 Gat Broadway 1,430.00 86-925 "Biagio rawly Dwelling Sr John Mitier/209 Aovin Longley Or. 60,000.00, 86-912 House Pad Garage Aoeidiog AD Dal* roolhoume/622 Get 3rd St. 5,800.00 66-926 Biaglo'rsmlly Dwelling 6► .Paul Booker/111 Kevin longloy-W. 57.600.00 86-927 Plumbing war Borders v- Lincoln Coapenise/200 N. 7th at. 66-928 eouoo And Garage Residing AD Gregory 900=tadt/1050 Galt Course R4, 10,000.00 86-929 aaeni Reno", _ AD John L1314/500 Meet 2rd St. 2.500.03 86-930 Biagio, really Dwelling Sr Marvin George Bulidere/1 Sandtrap Cl-:1*44.700.00 86-931 vinalo Family Dwelling 9F Raknnam Benders CP./915 Meadow Oak k.54,100.00 B6-932 Biagi. rawly Dwelling or Cyr Cona"matlm Ltd/2661 Oskview Late 47,200.00 66-933 ,Biagio really, Dwelling - 9r MAI .Suildera/1013 Oak k Dr. 46.700.00 0416.060.00 TOM a3vv= 0 2,716.70 ' ccc .. PERMIT ISURCHARGE PLUMBING- SURCHARRr 6 386.00 042.30 0 42.00 0'•50 14.30 .70 14.30 .70 113.00 I '10.00 24:_00 ,_.50 55.30 `2.90? ` '305., op 26.80" '24.00 1 ..Do - :24.00 :50, 00.50 5:00` .35.50 1.25 259.15 1 22.35 93.00 .50 295.30 27.05 -23.00, yeSO, 270:40 23.60 23.00 ,.50 268.15 21.35 ' 24.00' _ADO 02,207:70 8208.00 0207.001