City Council Agenda Packet 06-26-1989AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, June 26, 1989 - 7:00 p.m.
L
Mayor: Ren Maus
Council Members: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held June 12, 1989.
3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
4. Consideration of accepting the 1988 Audit Report for the City of
Monticello.
5. Consideration of bids and award of garbage pickup contract.
6. Consideration of bids and award of annual sealcoating project.
7. Review public transportation needs study, review comparative data
regarding municipal transportation systems operating in Minnesota.
Consider authorizing MTRAC to develop Transportation Management Plan and
prepare State Transit Assistance application materials.
8. Consideration of an ordinance amendment regulating hours of operation of
(r off -sale liquor store.
9. Consideration of type of restroom building - Bridge Park.
10. Consideration of final payment for Project 88-04A, Well 04.
11. Consideration of hills for the wnth of June.
127. Adjournment.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, June 12, 1989 - 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen, Shirley Anderson,
Fran Fair
Members Absent: done
2. Approval of minutes.
Motion made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to approve the
minutes of the special meeting held May 19, 1989. Voting in favor of the
motion was Ken Maus, Dan Blonigen, Shirley Anderson, Warren Smith.
Voting to abstain: Fran Fair.
Motion made by Fran Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously
carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held May 22, 1989.
Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
John Simola requested Council direction with regards to special requests
submitted by an owner of a 4-plex with regards to the recycling program.
It was the request of the owner that the City not require distribution of
individual containers to each household within the 4-plex that this
individual owns. It was the desire of the petitioner to utilize one set
of 90 -gallon containers rather than requiring each household to have
individual recycling containers. According to the petitioner, his
ability to manage the waste coming from the 4-plex units would be
enhanced if he were required to utilize fewer, larger containers. John
Simola noted that the individual petitioning is the owner of the 4-plex
units and occupies the structures as well. As caretaker of the 4-plex
units, he is responsible for managing the garbage collection process.
Dan Blonigen suggested that requiring that this individual utilize
individual containers might not be reasonable. Ken Maus noted that the
City wants to be flexible in the administration of its recycling
program. Under this particular situation, it is possible that we could
make an exception to the rule that individual households within 4-plexes
must have its own set of containers. The fact that there is a person
designated in this situation to maintain the recycling program for this
group of 4-plexes provides a reasonable assurance that recycling will
occur. Fran Fair suggested that the existing program be maintained on a
60 -day trial period and that no variances at this time be granted. It
was also her view that by not requiring that individual households
recycle, the City loses control in terms of monitoring recycling
participation.
After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair to maintain the program 60
days and ro-evaluate this situation after 60 days. Motion died for lack
of a second.
Council Minutes - 6/12/89
` Motion was made by Dan Blonigen to grant a 60 -day variance, after which
the situation will be re-evaluated. Special consideration is given in
this situation because the owner of the 4-plex units occupies one of the
units and is responsible for policing the garbage and recyclable
materials generated by the 4-plexes he owns and operates. Voting in
favor: Dan Blonigen, Shirley Anderson, Ren Maus, Warren Smith.
Opposed: Fran Fair.
4. Continue public hearing on assessing project 81-1 - Edgar Rlucas.
City Administrator, Rick Wolfsteller, informed Council that the League of
Minnesota Cities has indicated that the City may only assess a project
based on the cost of the project at the time the project was completed.
He also noted that the City has the option of charging the then going
interest rate at the time the project was completed.
After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen and seconded by
Warren Smith to assess the Edgar Rlucas property the sum of $31,026.31
and to assess the Meadow Oaks Second Addition portion of the project the
amount of $6,179.92. The interest rate shall reflect the 1981 rate and
term. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 89-19.
5. Consideration of bond sale for street improvement projects 89-02 and
89-03.
Robert Thistle of Springsted, Inc., was in attendance and outlined a
recommendation on the sale of the bonds that will be used for financing
the Mississippi Drive reconstruction and Oakwood Industrial Park
overlay. A total bond issuance amount equals $245,000. The proposed
bond issue would be supported by the ad valorem taxes and special
assessments of approximately 22 percent of project cost for Mississippi
Drive and 50 percent of project cost for Oakwood Industrial Park. Mayor
Maus asked what the bond rating would be for this bond issue.
Mr. Thistle stated that the bond issue would have the current rating of
which is A.
After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Warren Smith,
to approve a resolution authorizing the sale of said bonds necessary to
finance the Mississippi Drive reconstruction and Oakwood Industrial Park
overlay projects. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 89-17.
6. Consideration of a resolution authorizing the sale of bonds for Tax
Increment Dlat[ict 1-2 (elderly housing prolectl.
Administrator Wolfateller informed Council that the HRA will be
completing a transfer of property in Block 51 to Broadway Square Limited
Partnership on Wednesday, June 14, for the construction of the elderly
housing project. The HRA has acquired four parcels of property over the
? past year in Block 51 and has recently modified the tax increment
,.► district budget allowing the project to proceed. Wolfateller went on to
inform Council that the timing is right for this bond issuance, as it can
It be completed in conjunction with the sale of bonds for the Mississippi
d
Council Minutes - 6/12/89
Drive and Oakwood Industrial Park improvements. Combining the bond
issuance will result in a lower net cost to the City. Robert Thistle of
Springsted, Inc., noted that the bond issuance amount for this particular
project is $260,000. Bonds sold for this project are revenue bonds and,
therefore, not tax exempt, which results in an expected interest rate of
9.5 percent.
After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Warren Smith,
to adopt a resolution authorizing the sale of bonds for Tax Increment
District 1-2 (elderly housing project). Motion carried unanimously.
SEE RESOLUTION 89-18.
7. Consideration of relinquishing pledge agreement with HRA regarding excess
TIF revenue.
Administrator Wolfsteller explained that a few of the present tax
increment projects are generating more tax increment revenues than
originally anticipated. He went on to explain that although most of
these projects require bond issues or other financing loans initiated, in
some cases revenues are exceeding our debt service requirements
annually. He noted that in some of the bond issues, the HRA has agreed
to pledge for the debt service on three bond issues 105 percent of the
next three payment dates or 1-1/2 years in advance before there is
considered any surplus revenue. He went on by saying that this certainly
is added protection for each bond issue; however, there is no legal
requirement or necessity to have the HRA pledge more than two debt
service payments in advance. In effect, on three of the current bond
issues, an extra 50 percent is being required to be held in reserve
before any funds are available for HRA use on other projects.
Wolfsteller noted that by relinquishing the pledge agreement, there is a
very good likelihood that in the future sufficient reserves will be
available to be used by the HRA on a tax increment project or other
lawful purpose, thus avoiding additional tax levies or bond issuance
cost. For this reason, staff recommends that this pledge agreement be
modified to correspond with requirements of normal tax increment
financing bond issues.
Ken Maus noted that relinquishing this pledge agreement will provide the
reserve funds necessary to operate HRA activities without the added
expense of issuing bonds. He also noted that this action will reduce the
likelihood that the HRA will need to exercise its authority to levy for
financing of HRA activities. Ken Maus also noted that the logic at the
time of bond issuance to require the pledge agreement made sense. The
current logic to relinquish the pledge agreement now that funds are
available and the bond issues are secure also makes sense.
After discussion, motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair,
to adopt a resolution modifying the pledge agreements for the three bond
issues affecting properties 1985 (Raindance), 1987A (Construction 5), and
19878 (NAWCO). The modifications would then mend the requirements of the
bond issuance to match normal requirements for bond issues which require
e reserve equal to the next year's annual payments. Motion carried
unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 89-20.
3 O
Council Minutes - 6/12/89
Consideration of request by abutting property owner to lease the balance
of undeveloped Linn Street.
After discussion, it was determined that the proposed use of the
undeveloped portion of Linn Street by Mr. Eisele is not inconsistent with
current City policy regarding use of undeveloped streets by adjoining
property owners. Therefore, it was determined that a lease agreement
would not be necessary and that Mr. Eisele would be allowed to use the
property so long as it is used in a manner compatible with existing City
policy.
Eisele was informed that the undeveloped street that his property abutts
represents the boundary between a residential zone and commercial zone.
He was informed that no commercial usage of the undeveloped portion of
Linn Street would be allowed without first obtaining proper approvals.
After discussion, motion was made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Shirley
Anderson, to allow Eisele to use undeveloped Linn Street in a manner
consistent with City policy regarding use of undeveloped streets by
abutting property owners. In addition, Eisele is granted permission to
install a fence on Linn Street and that the fence must meet all City
setback requirements. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of advertisement for bids for garbage collection services
for the City of Monticello.
Public Works Director, John Simola, noted that negotiations with the
existing hauler have failed and that the City staff is recommending that
the Council advertise for bids for garbage collection services for the
City of Monticello. At this point in the meeting, Council discussed the
potential contract specifications. It was the consensus of Council that
the specifications should include two alternatives for pickup, one
including a once per week pickup and the other including a twice per week
pickup. Ren Maus noted that home businesses should be nnnitored for
placing business related debris in with home garbage pickup materials.
After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Warren Smith,
to authorize advertising for bids for garbage collection services for the
City of Monticello. The bid specifications should include the following:
Cost of once per week and twice per week pickup. It should provide for
payment of escalating landfill disposal cost. It should change from
disposal by the cubic yard to disposal by the ton. Contract
specification should change from six cans per household per pickup to two
to three cans per household per pickup. And the specification should
include three separate leaf pickups per year. Motion carried
unanimously.
10. Consideration of letter of interest to Wright County for suppplying
nitrogen for the proposed Wright County solid waste composting facility.
John Simola reviewed the ongoing problem of finding a rtwthod of disposing
waste created by the City treatment plant. Ho went on to describe the
potential of utilizing the Wright County solid waste composting facility
(2)
Council Minutes - 6/12/89
as a disposal site for City waste. The cost of this disposal would
amount to 1.1 cents to 4.5 cents per gallon. Simola requested Council
input regarding this method of disposal of City waste water sludge.
Simola also noted that the City is working at finding property suitable
for application and disposal of sludge. Fran Fair asked how long a
typical site could last. John Simola noted that the City would need 200
acres and that such a site would last at least 60 years.
Dan Blonigen noted that prior to making a commitment to the County, the
City would have to look at the cost of providing the County with the
sludge versus the cost of applying the sludge to land that the City might
lease or purchase.
Fran Fair mentioned that maybe the City could look at a combination of
methods of disposal of the material.
Warren Smith asked how many gallons per year does the City produce.
Sinola noted that 500,000 gallons of sludge is produced by the City per
year.
After discussion, motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair,
to resolve the continuing problem of sludge disposal by 1) continuing to
work with the Township and local farmers in establishing sites suitable
for application of sludge; 2) respond to Wright County with a letter of /
interest in the program so long as the disposal cost is between cents v Y
aad= cents per gallon, with the City committing no more than 300,000
gallons per year; and 3) the cityabould continue to seek out possible
purchase of land wbm,^ ��_ _ __� -.6j for application of sludge
material. Motion carried unanimously.
11. Consideration of City policy regarding distribution and maintenance of
water pressure reducing valve.
Public works Director Simola noted that the installation of the new water
storage facility will create an expected boost in water pressure between
25 and 27 PSI. This pressure increase will be conducted in small
incremental increases that will provide the City with an opportunity to
monitor the effect of the increase in pressure on City water mains and
individual water services. Simola noted that a policy needs to be
established for providing water pressure reducing valves for City
residents.
After Simola's presentation, a discussion ensued. Dan Blonigen was
concerned that in some areas there will be water pressure higher than the
capacity of the pressure valves on water heaters.
Fran Fair noted that under this policy, an individual with a home that
might qualify for a pressure reducing valve is not required to obtain a
valve. She asked if the City will be liable if an individual that
qualifies for the program does not actually purchase and install a
y valve. John Simola responded by saying that the City would not be liable
because we will be providing adequate information regarding potential
Council Minutes — 6/12/89
problem and solution. At this point, a discussion ensued regarding
installation of valves for homes that do not qualify or appear to be at
risk for having water pressure related problems.
Motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair, to adopt the
policies as outlined. Voting in favor of the policies as outlined: Fran
Fair, Warren Smith. Opposed: Ken Maus, Dan Blonigen, Shirley Anderson.
Motion made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to adopt the
policies as outlined with the addition of City provision of replacement
parts for valves purchased and installed by homeowners with homes that
are not considered at risk for water pressure related problems. Motion
includes the following policies:
1. The City would offer to any resident whose maximum water pressure as
determined by the City Engineer is expected to exceed 60 PSI and
whose home was built prior to 1965 a water pressure reducing valve, a
pressure gauge, among, and meter connection fitting for the
purpose of reducing the pressure in the home.
2. That the City would provide installation instructions and maintenance
instructions for installing the valves, which would include the
recommendation for checking the pressure relief protection on the hot
water heater.
3. That the City would provide spare parts or replacement valves, either
rebuilt or new, to all residents who have installed one of our valves
in their home. That we will continue to provide these valves and
parts as long as they are needed but will provide no replacement or
maintenance labor.
4. That the City of Monticello recommends that the valve be installed by
a professional plumber: and if the homeowner does so, the City of
Monticello would pay $25 toward the installation coat.
5. That the City of Monticello does not warranty that these valves on
occasion Troy not fail and that it is the homeowner's responsibility
to maintain these valves. The City recommends that outdated,
questionable plumbing systems be replaced to ensure no leaks.
6. That the existing ordinance remain in force in regard to the
homeowner being responsible for maintenance and repair of the entire
water service from the street main to the home and that, however, for
a period of one year after the water system reaches maximum pressure,
the City will provide or pay for at its option street restoration
necessary for water service repair or replacement.
7. Homeowners that wish to install valves in homes that aro not
considered at risk for water pressure problems oust purchase and
install valves at their cost. The City would provide spare parts or
replacement valves, either rebuilt or new, to all residents who have
installed one of our valves in their home. we will continue to
provide these valves and parts as long as they are needed but will
provide no replacement or maintenance labor.
6 9
Council Minutes - 6/12/89
12.
Consideration of repaving senior citizen parking lot in conjunction with
the resurfacing of the Holker parking lot.
John Simola described the inter -relationship between the Holker parking
lot and the senior citizens parking area. He noted that in order for the
senior citizens to park next to the senior building, vehicles must pass
over the Holker parking area. In addition, a parking area utilized by
the Holker development includes City right-of-way along Cedar. Mayor
Maus noted that the seniors citizen users have cooperated by parking in
their areas and that the developer has been cooperative by providing
access to the property for senior parking. The Mayor voiced his hope
that this cooperative arrangement would continue.
Shirley Anderson asked if seniors would be able to park along the back of
the Holker building. Mr. Holker said no, the parking area in the back of
U'the
office building is necessary for the tenants of the building and that
�U
seniors would not be able to park there.
/-,
�
�l
lct
1n4\
After discussion, motion was made by Shirley Anderson, seconded by Dan
Blonigen, to approve City
S/
payment of a portion of the repaving cost
associated with the paving of the Holker property. The repaving cost
def �pC11
()
should be based on the cost to repave the area used for parking along the
4
Cedar Street boulevard and also should include the cost to pave the
11V.
parking area used by seniors directly adjacent to the senior citizen
center. Motion carried unanimously.
13.
Consideration of granting annual approval for municipal licenses.
Motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair, to approve
municipal liquor licenses for the following organizations:
Intoxicating Liquor, On -sale (Fee $3,300)
Renewals
1. Monticello Liquor, Inc.
2. Silver Fox
3. Joyner's Lanes
4. Stuart Hoglund - Comfort Inn
Intoxicating Liquor, On -sale, Sunday (Fee $200 - set by Statute)
Renewals
1. Monticello Liquor, Inc.
2. Silver Fox
3. Joyner's Lanes
4. VFW Club
5. American Legion Club
6. Comfort Inn
Council Minutes - 6/12/$9
C�
i
Ilan -Intoxicating Malt, On -sale (Fee $250)
1. Rod and Gun
2. Pizza Factory
3. Country Club
Non -Intoxicating Malt, off -sale (Fee $75.00)
Renewals
1. Monticello Liquor
2. Riverroad Plaza
3. Maus Foods
4. River Terrace
5. Tom Thumb
6. Holiday
7. Plaza Car Wash
Wine /3.2 Beer Combination, On -sale (Fee $450)
Renewal
1. Dino's Deli
Set-up License (Fee $250)
1. Country Club
2. Rod 6 Gun
Club Licenses (Fee - set by Statute)
1. V.P.W. - $500 (membership )
2. American Legion - $650 (meWEFrship _)
Bingo, Temporary (Fee $20)
1. St. Henry's Fall Festival - September 16 6 17
Gambling, Temporary ($20 per device)
1. St. Henry's Fall Festival - $60 - September 166 17
Motion carried unanimously.
on a related matter, Dan Olonigen mentioned concerns regarding noise at
the Legion Club. He requested that staff send a letter to the Legion
Club requesting that the noise level be kept at a reasonable level.
14. Consideration of approving gambling licenses - VFW and Legion Club.
Council reviewed the license applications and reviewed the financial
reports. Since no opposition was forthcoming from Council regarding
these licenses, information was received only with no action taken.
8 (�
Council Minutes - 6/12/89
15. Consideration of requirements for testing of sanitary sewer and water
services from the property lines of the home.
Public Works Director, John Simola, reported to Council that he is
recommending that the City require testing of sanitary sewer and water
services prior to allowing occupancy of newly built homes. He noted that
the individuals to benefit most from the testing will be future owners of
the property. Pressure testing of the water service lines should add no
additional cost to the homeowner whatsoever. Pressure testing of the
sanitary sewer line could add slightly to the cost due to the addition of
a cleanout or by the small delay the contractor would encounter to make
the final connection at the property line after the air test is
performed. Ken Maus asked if there were other cities that require this
testing procedure. John Simola indicated that there are other cities
that require testing of sanitary sewer and water services.
After discussion, motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Shirley
Anderson, to require testing of newly constructed sanitary sewer and
water services. Such policy is to take effect 30 days after publication
of notification of policy. If no objections are received regarding the
policy, the program will be initiated upon expiration of the 30 -day
notification period. Motion passed unanimously.
16. Consideration of ordinance amendment which would allow limited expansion
of a non -conforming use (residences) in a B-4 District.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the proposed ordinance amendment
which would allow the expansion of a residential structure in the B-4
(regional business) zone. Such expansion may not constitute more than
50 percent of estimated market value. O'Neill informed Council that the
Planning Commission recommended approval of this amendment, as it is
consistent with the municipal Comprehensive Plan and consistent with the
character and geography of the area. The amendment will also not
depreciate the value of adjoining lands. In making its decision, it was
the view of the Planning Commission that allowing limited expansion of
residential uses in the B-4 zone will not significantly inhibit the
transition of this land from residential to B-4 uses.
Warren Smith suggested that the amendment include wording that limits the
number of times that n residential structure can be expanded to
50 percent of its original value. Smith recommended that a structure be
only allowed to expand once from the date of the inception of this
ordinance amendment. Mayor Maus suggested that the City adopt an
administrative procedure to follow when a residential structure makes
application for expansion of a residential use. Maus suggested that
adjoining owners of commercial property be notified of the impending
expansion and be given the opportunity to negotiate the purchase of the
residential property prior to further investments in said property.
After discussion, motion was made by Warren Smith, and seconded by
Shirley Anderson, to adopt an amendment to Section 3-1(J1 of the
Monticello Zoning Ordinance which would allow expansion of residential
LOS
Council Minutes - 6/12/89
structures in the B-4 district provided that the value of expansion does
not constitute more than 50 percent of market value of existing structure
and provided all setbacks associated with residential structure expansion
must meet R-1 yard requirements, and provided that residential structure
may be expanded to only once after the date of June 12, 1989, and after a
30 -day notification period has expired. Notice of plans for expansion to
be provided to all adjoining property owners and to the Monticello
Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Motion carried unanimously. SEE
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 176.
18. Consideration of establishment of land use zone for Evergreens
Subdivision Outlots A and B.
After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Shirley
Anderson, to rezone Outlots A and B of the Evergreens from agricultural
usage to PZM usage based on the finding that 1) potential negative
impacts of allowable uses in the PZM zone can be mitigated through the
conditional use permit; 2) multi -family development could occur under PZM
regulations which allows the developer some flexibility in developing the
property for commercial or residential use; 3) the PZM zoning allows
development of retail businesses that have a limited market area which,
when allowed, will not significantly detract from the Comprehensive Plan
goal of centralizing regional and highway business activity. Motion
carried unanimously.
19. Consideration of replacing air dryer at the waste water treatment plant.
After discussion, motion was made by warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair,
to authorize replacement of the Pure Air cleaner with a larger, more
dependable unit at a cost of $3,700. Motion passed unanimously.
20. Assistant Administrator O'Neill presented the results of the community
goal setting session conducted at the special meeting of the City Council
Juno 5, 1989. Council received the report and took no formal action.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Assistant Administrator
10 (7)
C
C
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
a. Consideration of accepting the 1988 Audit Report for the City of
Monticello. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Rick Borden and/or Kim Lillehaug of Gruys, Johnson a Associates will
be present at the meeting to present a brief overview of the 1988 audit
recently completed.
A copy of the audit report was previously delivered to each Council
member this week for your review. I realize an 80 -page document of this
type is hard to review and analyze in only a week's time, but the report
should be accepted by the Council prior to the end of June, as it has to
be submitted to the State Auditor by June 30, 1989. After the
presentation of the report by Gruys, Johnson representatives, if the
Council feels that it would like additional time to review the report,
this item can again be scheduled at a future Council meeting for further
review for questions, etc.
Should you have any specific questions regarding the information
presented in the audit report, you may contact myself prior to Monday
night's meeting, and I will hopefully try to answer any questions you may
have.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
The only action necessary by the Council is to accept the 1988 Audit
Report as presented so that it may be submitted to the State Auditor by
the required June 30 deadline.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Previously delivered copy of 1988 Audit Report.
ME
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
5. Consideration of bids and award of garbage pickup contract. O .S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As directed by the City Council, the staff prepared the bid
specifications for the new garbage hauling contract with the following
alternatives:
1. Continuing pickup twice per week on Mondays and Thursdays.
2. once per week pickup on Mondays only.
3. Utilizing 90 -gallon roll around containers with either of the
alternatives /1 and $2 above.
The specifications also provide for rental costs for dunpsters for
multiple family residences. The City will not be paying these costs but
needed to define them because of past problems. Lastly, the
specifications call for an "o Lionel" credit for our recycling program.
The credit is based upon the to T umber of tons of newspaper, cans, and
glass recycled in the city of Monticello during any given month.
The bids for the garbage contract are due in Monday at 2:00 p.m. we will
have a bid tabulation for you at Monday evening's meeting.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
The alternatives cannot adequately be addressed without the bid
information due to the number of alternatives.
C. STAFF RFX0MMENDATION:
Staff withholds its recommendation until after the bid opening.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the specifications.
-2-
GARBAGE COST CONTAINERS
Current Costs $ 74,995.00 Twice week pick -up -hauling only
54,000.00 Expected landfill costa
$128,995.00
Item $1
Continue as we are: 143.570.00 Twice weekly
54,000.00 Landfill charges
$197,570.00
Increase of $68.575.00 or 532 increase
Item 02
Once a week pickup. 103,610.00
54,000.00 Expected landfill costs
4
$I57,610.00
Increase of $28.615.00 or 222 increase
Deduct for 90 gal. containers 11,880.00 year
X 3 year (life of contrnct)
$35,640.00
1332 X 50.00 - $66.600 --- Cost of containers
A
CARBAGL PICKUP AND HAULING
BLD TABULATION
ITEM I ITEM 11 ITEM 111. ITEM V
MON 6 THUR THURSDAY ONLY 90 CAL DISCOUNT RECYCLE CREDIT
BIDDER BID BOND RASE IND PIULT' RASE LND M111.T RASE -----lND E -1'ER -7'ON
------- ---_ --- -------------------- --------------------- -------- --- -------------
BFI I DID OT BID!
M
Corrow I X $11.964.17 7.50 3.50 $8.634.17 5.00 3.5( 990.00
I
I I I I I
'Includee twice ppor week pic kip for epnrtme-
Should he nblo to ne8otinte owor nm
Dunt.
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
FOR
GARBAGE PICK UP AND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY given that the City of Monticello, Wright County,
Minnesota, will receive sealed bids for the pick up and transportation of
municipal solid waste from all residential property in the corporate
limits of Monticello.
BIDS WILL BE received until 2:00 p.m. on Monday, June 26, 1989, at the
Monticello City Hall, Monticello, Minnesota, at which time they will be
publicly opened and read.
ALL BIDS SHALL be addressed to the City Administrator, City of Monticello,
250 East Broadway, Monticello, Minnesota 55362, and shall be submitted on
a proposal form included in the specifications for garbage pickup and
hauling.
COPIES OF THE specifications and other proposed contract documents are on
file with the City Administrator and can be obtained by contacting City
Hall at 250 East Broadway, Monticello, Minnesota 55362.
ALL BIDS SHALL be accompanied by a cashier's check, certified check, or
bid bond payable to the City of Monticello for an amount not less than 58
of the bids. The City of Monticello reserves the right to reject any or
all bids, to waive any informalities in the bidding, and to accept any
bidding to be in the best interest of the City of Monticello. No bid may
be withdrawn within thirty (30) days of the bid opening.
B Order of the City Council
i
Richard Wo steller
City Administrator
City of Monticello, Minnesota
Wright County
SPECIFICATIONS
FOR
GARBAGE AND REFUSE PICKUP AND HAULING
FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
Prepared by John Simla
Public works Director
City of Monticello
June 15, 1989
L
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
1. EXAMINATION OF SPECIFICATIONS AND WORKSITE
The bidder shall examine to his satisfaction the quantities of work
to be done as determined from the specifications, and the physical
layout of all residential property within the corporate limits of
the City of Monticello. The bidder shall inform themselves of the
character and magnitude of the work and the conditions under which
the work is to be performed. No plea of ignorance of conditions
that exist or that may hereafter exist, or of difficulties that will
be encountered in the execution of work hereunder, which result from
failure to make necessary examinations and investigations will be
accepted as sufficient excuse for any failure or omission on the
part of the contractor to fulfill in every detail all the
requirements of this contract.
2. BID SECURITY
Each bid shall be accompanied by a bid proposal in the form as
specified in the advertising for bids. The amount shall be five
percent (58) of the base annual contract. Such bid security is a
guarantee that the bidder will enter into a contract with the owner
for the work described in the proposal and that the amount of the
bid security of a successful bidder shall be forfeited to the owner
as liquidated damages in the event that such bidder fails to enter
into a contract and furnish contractor's bond.
3. PREPARATION OF PROPOSAL
The bidder shall submit his proposal on the forms provided by the
City. The blank spaces in the proposal form shall be filled in
completely with ink, and the bidder shall state the prices for which
he proposes to do each item or section of the work contemplated.
The bidder's proposal shall be signed correctly with ink. If the
proposal is made by an individual, his name and post office address
shall be shown. If mode by a firm or partnership, the name and post
office address of each member of the firm or partnership shall be
shown. If made by a corporation, the person signing the proposal
shall show the name of the state under the law of which the
corporation was chartered. All bids for corporations shall bear the
official seal of the corporation.
4. CONDITIONS IN THE BIDDER'S PROPOSAL
The bidder shall not stipulate in his proposal any conditions not
provided for on the proposal form.
5. DELIVERY OF PROPOSALS
All bids shall be placed in a sealed envelope with the statement
'. thereon showing the work covered by the bid, "Garbage Pickup and
Hauling Bid". The bid shall be addressed as stipulated in the
advertisement for bids. Proposals may be mailed or submitted in
person. No bids will be received after the time set for receiving
them. Bids arriving be mail at the office of the owner after the
hour designated for receiving bids will be returned to the sender
unopened.
6. REJECTION OF PROPOSAL
The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals and to
award the bid in the best interest of the City of Monticello.
7. EQUIPMENT
The bidder shall furnish a complete statement of the make, size,
weight, condition, and previous length of service of all equipment
to be used in the proposed work.
6. REQUIREMENTS OF THE CONTRACT BOND
The successful bidder at the time for the execution of the contract
shall furnish, and at all times, maintain a satisfactory and
sufficient bond in the full amount of the annual contract as
required by law, with a corporate security satisfactory to the
City. The form of bond is that required by statute.
9. FAILURE TO EXECUTE CONTRACT
Failure to furnish the contract bond in a sum equal to the amount of
the annual contract award or to execute the contract within ten days
of notice of award shall be just cause for annulment of the award,
and it shall be understood by the bidder that in the event of the
annulment of the award, the amount of the guaranteed deposit with
the proposal shall be retained by the owner, not as a penalty but as
liquidated damages.
i O
s
CURRENT OPERATING CONDITIONS IN THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
The City of Monticello currently contracts with a refuse hauler for the
pickup of municipal solid waste twice per week on Mondays and Thursdays
from all residential property within the community. The makeup of the
residential property in the City of Monticello is as follows: 906 single
family homes with 426 units of mobile homes, individual apartments,
duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and townhouses for a total of 1,332
households. There are currently 27 apartment buildings occupied or under
construction which contain 18 to 48 units for a total of 505 units. The
population of Monticello is estimated at slightly over 4,000.
Hauling records for the past 2 1/4 years show that 5,916 cubic yards of
mixed municipal waste is picked up from the above residential units on an
annual basis. This yardage does not include leaves which are collected
separately three times annually and deposited in a compost facility at the
west edge of town. This pickup usually requires two to three refuse
trucks and approximately three hours of time each pickup day. This 5,916
yards, as listed above, does include grass clippings.
Currently, all individual homes and many of the smaller rental units, as
well as townhouses and mobile homes, provide their own 20 to 30 gallon
garbage containers. Some of the fourplexes and many of the apartments
currently rent a dumpster from the city's hauler. Our current contractor
provides approximately six dumpsters at city property and parks, provides
pickup at six public buildings, and empties six litter containers at
various sidewalk locations in the downtown area; all included in the base
contract.
The waste that is picked up in the City of Monticello is deposited at the
Yonak Landfill approximately six miles from Monticello at the intersection
of County Roads 12 and 37. This landfill has capacity for Wright County's
garbage for several years in the future. Wright County is currently
considering building a composting facility adjacent to the Yonak Landfill
which could begin operation in 1991. Current disposal costs at the Yonak
Landfill are $9.00 per cubic yard. The Yonak Landfill is in the
construction stages of a scale installation which should be in place by
July 15, 1989, at which time the Yonak Landfill will switch to the ton
method for disposal. Estimated disposal costs at that time are in excess
of $30.00 per ton.
Current costs for the City of Monticello for approximately 6,000 cubic
yards of municipal solid waste and our three leave pickups per year are
approximately $75,000.00 for transportation and $54,000.00 for disposal
costs. As the City grows, new homes and apartments are tallied and added
monthly to the base contract at a rate of $5.10 per month for a single
family residence and $2.50 per month for each apartment unit. These
individual prices include thirty-seven percent (37%) of the landfill costs
or $3.30 per cubic yard. Our current contract expires July 31, 1989.
FUTURE SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
Beginning with the spring of 1989, our contractor is no longer responsible
for picking up grass clippings at curbside. These grass clippings are
transported by individual residents to the composting facility on the
western edge of the community. This is expected to have a significant
effect on the amount of refuse hauled from the community during the summer
growing season.
The City is beginning a very agressive recycling program for newspaper,
cans (including tin cans), glass, and corrugated cardboard, which begins
July 6, 1989. Individual homeowners have received three containers for
curbside recycling and apartments have received three 90 -gallon rollaround
containers for recycling. These recyclables will be picked up at curbside
every other Thursday. The city uses a computerized bar code tracking
system to monitor the recycling program and, because special processing
fees are charged to those who do not recycle, the City and its recycling
contractor expect large volumes to be removed from the waste stream.
Although, at this time it is difficult to estimate the actual cubic yards
of grass and recyclables that will be removed from the waste stream in the
City of Monticello, it is safe to say that the amount of waste to be
hauled should be significantly less than the average 5,916 cubic yards of
annual generation received over the last 2 114 years. A weight study of
the city's garbage performed over the past several months indicates that
our current contractor on an average basis is packing the refuse to a
density of 600 pounds per cubic yard or less. It appears that this could
be greatly improved throught the replacement of some of the older packer
units.
The City wishes to continue to offer its residents pickup on Mondays and
Thursdays if economically feasible. The City also recognizes the volatile
nature of disposal costs for municipal solid waste and, therefore, expects
to pay the disposal costs at the Yonak Landfill or the Wright County
Composting Facility either directly or by full reimbursement to the
contractor. Since the City will be paying all of the disposal costs, it
must have controls an the contractor so that no commercial, industrial, or
non -city residential garbage finds its way into the trucks during normal
pickup days.
Since the City feels that the recycling efforts in Monticello will result
in less tons or cubic yards of wasto having to be haulod from the City by
the hauling contra etor, the City would like to reap the benefits of those
savings even if not significant. The same can be said for removal of
grass clippings from the waste stream.
Lastly, the City of Monticello has learned that there are often
significant savings in pickup of solid waste by going to individual
90 -gallon rollarou ndcontainers. It also appears that these containers
reduce the amount of rainwater that finds its way into the waste stream
and can improve the image of the City. We, therefore, wish to consider
this as an option.
Ic
-4 - 0
SPECIFICATIONS
The following proposed agreement shall act as the specifications for the
pickup and hauling of garbage and refuse from all residential property
within the City of Monticello. The final agreement will be adjusted as
per the alternatives or options selected by the City of Monticello. The
proposal forms are included separately, as are the waste generation rates
for the past 2 1/4 years in the City of Monticello. Any questions should
be directed to the City Administrator, Richard Wolfsteller, at the
Monticello City Ball, 250 East Broadway, Monticello, MN 55362; phone:
612-295-2711.
- 5 0
AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT is between the CITY OF MONTICELLO, a governmental
subdivision of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and
, hereinafter referred to as HAULER.
WHEREAS, the CITY desires garbage and refuse pickup and hauling for all
its residents from cans or dumpsters on a contract at a monthly rate for
orderly and reliable pickup service and disposal of refuse, etc., thereof,
without the responsibility of the CITY maintaining equipment for said purpose
and a landfill for said disposal; and
WHEREAS, the HAULER is organized to and desirous of, carrying out such
CITY wants and desires, and has adequate equipment, assistance, and know-how to
carry out said project;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED, in consideration of the mutual promises of
the CITY and HAULER:
1. PAYMENT
A. That CITY shall pay HAULER the base sum of
starting on the last pickup day of August, 1989, and each and
every month thereafter, on the last collection day of each said
month, for the term of this AGREEMENT, unless the AGREEMENT is
terminated by either party as set forth in this AGREEMENT, said
sum shall be for the number of dwellings stipulated in the
Appendix attached hereto. The monthly payment shall not include
current or future surcharge or dumping fees incurred by the
ry HAULER at the nearest disposal facility. These fees shall be
�. paid by the City or reimbursed to the hauler at the City's
option.
- 6 - 05-
Refuse Agreement
Page 2
B. Prior to each monthly payment, the HAULER shall provide to the
CITY documentation of total cubic yards and tonnage hauled during
the previous month on a form supplied by the City. Documentation
shall be based on daily records, including driver identification,
truck number, disposal location, and tonnage/yards dumped.
C. Any additional residences picked up by the HAULER upon the
request of the CITY will be added to monthly payment at per
single family residence, with apartment units (fourplex and
greater) added at the rate of per unit. Additional
residences and apartments will be added to the monthly payment at
the end of the month and will be determined by the number of
certificates of occupancy issued during the month. Mobile homes,
duplexes, and triplexes shall also be counted as single family
residences per dwelling unit.
2. TERM OF AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT shall remain in force for a period of three (3) years
beginning on the first day of August, 1989, and ending on the 31st
day of July, 1992, unless otherwise terminated in accordance with
this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT may be renewed at any time before its
natural termination, by the written mutual consent of both parties
and resolution by the CITY. The firstip ckup shall be August 3,
1989.
3. TERMINATIONS
This AGREEMENT may be terminated by either party with or without
cause, upon a six -months' written notice to the other party.
C
Refuse Agreement
Page 3
4. INSURANCE
That HAULER shall carry public liability insurance with a recognized
insurance carrier and keep in force at all times during this
AGREEMENT the following minimum of coverage:
A. $100,000 per person.
B. $300,000 per accident.
C. $ 10,000 property damage.
D. Worker's compensation coverage.
5. SCOPE OF WORK
A. That HAULER shall not be required to pick up and dispose of any
refuse or garbage that is not placed in a container or bagged by
the resident and that HAULER shall not be required to use shovels
in the loading thereof. Further, the service herein conternplated
and provided for shall be furnished only to the residents within
the present corporate limits of the CITY.
B. That HAULER agrees to a twice weekly pickup of all garbage and
refuse at curbside for each residence in said CITY, including
branches if cut into dimensions of not longer than six (6) feet
and tied securely in bundles weighing not in excess of 50 pounds
and to dispose of same at a landfill or disposal facility. This
service extends only to residential property and not to
Commercial or industrial enterprise, except for City property
listed in paragraph 5(D). If the hauler picks up any garbage on
the City's pickup days not covered by this contract, he or she
shall report and deduct the landfill or disposal facility fees
appropriately. If the HAULER is providing twice weekly pickups,
Refuse Agreement
Page 4
the days of service shall be Monday and Thursday. The HAULER can
negotiate with any resident with regard to the placement of the
garbage and an increased number of pickups per week. HAULER
shall accept at least six containers per household, per week.
C. Garbage containers must not exceed 33 gallon capacity and should
be equipped with handles for ease of handling. Plastic garbage
bags are ideal for use of storing garbage. Paper bags are not
permissible unless inside a proper container. Sturdy cardboard
disposable cartons may be used for non -garbage refuse.
D. That HAULER shall include in the base bid the requirement to
provide, maintain, and empty twice weekly garbage dumpsters at
the following locations:
Minimum 1-1/2 cubic yard
1. City Maintenance Building - W. Co. Rd. 39 - Year Round
2. 4th Street Park - Year Round
3. West Bridge Park - Year Round
4. Ellison Park - May 1 through November 1
S. Sewage Disposal Plant - Year Round
Minimum 3 cubic yard
1. NSP Softball Fields - May 1 through October 1
The HAULER shall provide two garbage dumpsters for Ellison Park
and one garbage dumpster for West Bridge Park on the 4th of July
each year, containers to be at least 5 cubic yards.
The HAULER shall also provide weekly garbage pick-up at the
following City facilities:
1. Museum/Information Center
2. City Hall
Refuse Agreement
Page 5
3. Library
4. Fire Hall
5. Senior Citizen Center
6. Old Fire Hall
and also empty a maximum of eight (g) litter containers at
various sidewalk locations in the downtown area once weekly or
more often, as needed.
The HAULER shall, in addition to the regular garbage/refuse,
provide pickup of "screenings" twice weekly at the municipal
Waste Water Treatment facility. The screenings shall be double
bagged and placed in the garbage dumpster. It is understood that
the bags are not "leakproof."
E. That the following legal holidays will be exempt from pickup if
the HAULER is providing twice weekly service and one (1) pickup
day falls on:
New Year's Day
Memorial Day
Independence Day
Labor Day
Thanksgiving Day
Christmas Day
If HAULER is providing once -a -week pickup which falls on one of
the above holidays, arrangements shall be made by the HAULER for
pickup on another date that week.
F. The HAULER shall notify the CITY of each occurrence when articles
placed out for collection are not picked up due to their being
beyond the scope of this agreement (e.g. mattresses, appliances,
hot ash, etc.). HAULER shall, to the best of their ability,
- 10 - 0
Refuse Agreement
Page 6
provide address, name of customer, and nature of article not accepted
for pickup. HAULER may negotiate independently with customer for
collection of any articles that fall beyond the scrape of this
agreement. Any extra fees so charged shall be reported monthly to
the City listing resident, material, article, quantity, amount
charged, and date. If the items are not typical household garbage,
the HAULER must pay the disposal fee.
6. SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A. The HAULER shall not pick up grass clippings at curbside unless
they are contaminated with garbage. The HAULER shall report to
the CITY each time he or she picks up such a mixture, and the
CITY will notify the resident such a practice will not continue.
B. As part of this contract, the HAULER will pick up leaves at
curbside only three (3) times per year and transport them to the
City's compost facility on the west end of town. The date and
time of the pickups shall be as mutually agreed to by the HAULER
and CITY. The HAULER shall pick up and report mixtures of leaves
and garbage as they occur. The CITY shall notify the resident
such a practice will not continue.
C. The HAULER, in cooperation with the City's recycling program,
shall report to the CITY any dumpatere which routinely contain
significant amounts of recyclable items such as newspaper, glass
containers, and cans. The location, date, type, and approximate
amount of recyclable material shall be noted.
Refuse Agreement
Page 7
7. DUMPSTER RENTAL
The HAULER shall provide, as requested by apartment building owners,
covered rental dumps tens, including maintenance*, for residential
property at the following rates:
1 cu. yd. $ /month.
1-1/2 cu. yd. S /month.
2 cu. yd. $ /month.
3 cu. yd. $ /month.
4 cu. yd. $ /month.
5 cu. yd. $ /month.
*Contractor maintenance shall include covers, wheels, routine cleaning,
and paint to the degree as determined reasonable by the CITY OF ;
MONTICELLO.
{ The HAULER must, as part of this contract, pick up and dispose of all
residential garbage including that from multiple unit apartments.
These owners can provide their own containers or may elect to rent
containers.
8. PERFORMANCE BOND
HAULER shall furnish CITY, as a condition to his receiving
consideration under this contract as set out in Article 1, a
Performance Bond, said Bond shall remain in force during the term of
this AGREEMENT and ahall be placed with a Bonding Conpany acceptable
to CITY. Said Bond shall be payable to the CITY OF MONTICELLO, and
shall be in the amount of the annual value of the contract.
—22— 0
Refuse Agreement
Page 8
9. DISPOSAL
It is the obligation of the HAULER to obtain proper disposal at the
nearest facility for the refuse, garbage, etc., and pickup matter and
there is no responsibility of any kind upon the CITY to furnish said
disposal facilities to HAULER, only to pay or reimburse the disposal
cost at the nearest approved facility.
10. ASSIGNMENT
This AGREEMENT may not be assigned in whole or in part without the
written consent of the CITY.
11. GENERAL
This AGREEMENT contains the entire AGREEMENT between the HAULER and
the CITY and may be amended only by the mutual consent of CITY and
HAULER, in writing.
12. WAIVER
A waiver of one part of rights of either party is not a waiver of all
the rights that may accrue to either party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT on the date
of
ATTEST: CITY OF MONTICELLO
By:
Rick Wolfsteller Ren Maus
City Administrator Mayor
COMPANY
By:
C(CITY SEAL)
- 13 - 0-5-
PROPOSAL FORM
FOR
GARBAGE/REFUSE PICKUP AND HAULING
FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINt7ESOTA
To the City Council of the
City of Monticello
Monticello, Minnesota
Ladies and Gentlemen:
1. The following proposal is made for garbage/refuse pickup, hauling,
and appurtenant work.
The Undersigned certifies that the specifications and the
Instruction to Bidders have been carefully examined and that the
site of the work has been personally inspected. The Undersigned
declares that the amount and nature of the work to be done is
understood, and that at no time will misunderstanding of the
specifications be pleaded. On the basis of the specifications and
proposal form, the Undersigned proposes to furnish all necessary
labor and equipment to do all the work in the manner specified and
to accept as full compensation, therefore, the sum stated below.
3. Item I: Base Bid "Twice Per week Pickup"
Pickup and hauling (excluding disposal cost) of garbage and refuse
from all existing residential property in the City of Monticello
twice per week as specified, beginning August 3, 1989, (City to pay
or reimburse disposal costs at nearest approved disposal facility)
for the sum of dollars per
month. Each additional single family and multiple residences up to
and including triplex unite for
dollars per month per household. Each additional multiple unit in
fourplexes and greater for
dollars per month per unit.
4. Item II: Alternate Bid 1 "Once Per Week Pickup"
Pickup and hauling (excluding disposal costs) of garbage anti refuse
from all existing residential property in the City of Monticello
once per week, Monday, as specified, beginning August 3, 1989, (City
to pay or reimburse disposal costs at nearest approved disposal
facility) for the sum of dollars
par month. Each additional single family and multiple residences
up to and including triplex units for
dollars per month per household. Each additional multiple unit in
fourplexes and greater for
dollars per month per unit.
5. Item III: Alternate Bid 2 "Deduct for the City providing all
residents up to and including triplexes with 90 gallon rollaround
automated pickup containers"
Deduct the amount of dollars per
month from the base bid in Item I or II. Deduct the amount of
dollars per unit per month for
additional single family or multiple unit up to and including
triplexes.
6. Item IV: "Dumpster rental bid for multiple residential properties
including maintenance as specified (disposal is included in Item I
and II)"
A. 1 1/2 cubic yards dollars per
dumpster per month
B. 2 cubic yards dollars per
dumpster per month
C. 3 cubic yards dollars per
dumpster per month
D. 6 cubic yards dollars per
dumpster per month
E. 5 cubic yards dollars per
dumpster per month
7. Item V: "Recycling Credit"
Deduct from the base bid, as pickup and transportation credit, for
each ton of newspaper, cans, or glass removed from the waste stream
o: the City each month dollars
per ton. (Recycables to be weighed and certified by recycling
contractor.)
Failure to bid Item V will not invalidate the proposal. For the
purpose of bid calculations, however, it will be estimated that 15
tons per month will be recycled.
8. The Undersigned further proposes to execute the Contract Agreemeit
and to furnish satisfactory bond within ten (10) days after noti.:e
of the award of contract has been received. The Undersigned further
proposed to begin work as specified, to complete the work on or
before date specified, and to maintain at all times a Contract Bond,
approved by the City, in an amount equal to the total annual bid.
9. Accortpanyinn this proposal is the Bid Security required to be
furnished by the Contract Documents, the same being subject to
forfeiture in event of default by the Undersigned.
10. In submitting this proposal, it is understood that the right is
reserved by tho owner to reject any or all proposals and to waive
informalities.
11. This proposal may not be withdrawn after the opening of the
proposals and shall be subject to acceptance by the owner for a
period of thirty (30) calendar days from the opening thereof.
12. If a corporation, what is the state of incorporation:
13. If a partnership, state full names of all co-partners:
OFFICIAL ADDRESS FIRM NAME
Date:
By
Title
By
Title
_3_ 0
21
+
%
I- W.
IV
Residen I
75 CO
4%
% trial.
0' a
ge
r ation I
pen/A ri t1ur I
N it
-I
14
All
oil
............
lk
Xt
Ilk
4�—
Annexation Study t
L:
City of Monticello
r 4P
..... .....
wrighl County Minnesota
11 C R L L•
Existing Land U20
SOLID WAS1E GENERATION
CITY OF MORTICE LLO
OCTOBER 1986 - DECEMBER 1988
0A
J
Q p;.T Q ww = DEC
JTI"ELL.;
'LIG
�,.STE
17H
C•! :.FTEP•
1950
120-
2"1
11 C•
,�
i
i
SO
X
77
77
%V
tic'
%
/ \ /i
/ ♦
i '� /
%
\ //
! \
//
20
THR
M:•rd
TMR
t, "N
Tt+P.
110l'i
IHR
h40r1
TiiR
Q p;.T Q ww = DEC
I-1011TICELLO SOLID VIIASTE
151 tl,,-.TEF 10.7
17-
Z im, E3 rim EM ,,A
1.1-OUTICELLO SOLID V,'ASrE
:NO GUIFTER 125?
lea
-1
10
na
VH* I1Y1 1.11 Loll "0 14N. lwt too" TO LOO
1.10MICELLO SOLID ',','ASTE
3FD OUAFTER 1971
,W
n
Ic,
NO k. J11 Ip L.;,.I NP 1C., 1. LKI.
J -m -L, f=, 4-3 �] SEPT
I-P)MICILLO SOLID INASTE
I'M L1N4 1.11 uAl f I IN peril Im klo. I10 'CA4
Ml ocl C-3 IIov Lm, arc
7�
20
10
e.
11111 113N 1.0
11311 TO. m:., Dot
1811 110 11311
17-
Z im, E3 rim EM ,,A
1.1-OUTICELLO SOLID V,'ASrE
:NO GUIFTER 125?
lea
-1
10
na
VH* I1Y1 1.11 Loll "0 14N. lwt too" TO LOO
1.10MICELLO SOLID ',','ASTE
3FD OUAFTER 1971
,W
n
Ic,
NO k. J11 Ip L.;,.I NP 1C., 1. LKI.
J -m -L, f=, 4-3 �] SEPT
I-P)MICILLO SOLID INASTE
I'M L1N4 1.11 uAl f I IN peril Im klo. I10 'CA4
Ml ocl C-3 IIov Lm, arc
1.101.1TICELLO Sr -LID VI'ASTE
111 Q\uATLR I2!1
T -
If
ii
to
10
M* 1\JIl 11N UJIII r11R UCI1 11411 MCMI 1118 Holl
I'_:7 in, r1"J ne ESB U\R
1.101.1TICE U-0 SC11_ID l7.ASrE
ND o1nPTrPI nes
..J --------- ---'
PJ - ---.
1!,0 .rR M u+1 G:] +SP1
PO --'
I.IOI1110El.LO SOLID !PASTE
!FD WIPRP. IM
I:v -
110 1
r0
c
-
3
to
IIP u71 1N1 U:n NA- /.RP. iM MO. ruP UTI
Q x1, IGI .u0 M
SEPT
•UJ11
IIM
l^
T..P u/I IIIP LR11 f11P
1X:11 IM
4" f1111 y'/I
1!,0 .rR M u+1 G:] +SP1
J
I.IOI1110El.LO SOLID !PASTE
!FD WIPRP. IM
I:v -
110 1
r0
c
-
3
to
IIP u71 1N1 U:n NA- /.RP. iM MO. ruP UTI
Q x1, IGI .u0 M
SEPT
HOWICELLO SOLID WASrE
.1N aV\PIER Ills
110
-
3
to
a
•UJ11
IIM
1.01 Uyll Mp M71I
1M1 \IDII 11U1 11JN
(7-1 "T r- l 11-
r1
Office of the City Administrator June 20, 1989
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362.9245
Phone: (612) 295.2711
Metro: (612) 333.5739
Re: Addendum to specifications for waste hauler bids, June 26, 1989
Dear Waste Hauler:
Enclosed is an addendum lowering the performance bond requirements for the
City of Monticello's waste hauler. This change brings the bond
requirement in line with the 6 -month termination clause. Thank you.
Sincerely,
(/ CITY SOF MM'ONTIIIC/E/LLO e
Rick Wolfe /e/ller
City Administrator
RWAd
Enclosure
cc: Pile
0
ADDENDUM NO. 1
GARBAGE AND REFUSE PICKUP AND HAULING
FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Specifications Dated: June 15, 1989
This Addendum Dated: June 20, 1989
Bid Date: June 26, 1989, 2:00 p.m.
This addendum shall be attached to the specifications and shall be
included as part of said specifications. The items herein shall take
precedence over any clauses which they modify in the specifications or
contract documents.
A. Instructions to Bidders
8. Requirements of the Contract Bond
The amount of the performance bond shall be changed from "full
amount of the annual contract" to "one-half the amount of tEe
annual contract."
B. Agreement
8. Performance Bond
The amount of the performance bond shall be changed as follows
from "in the amount of the annual value of the contract" to "in
the amount or one-nalr the annual value or the contract."
Rick wolf eteJYle-r
City Admini2rator
Dated: June 20, 1989
O
C
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
6. Consideration of bids and award of annual sealcoating project. P.S.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The bids for our annual sealcoating project are due in Monday at
2:00 p.m. The area considered for sealcoating this year lies between Elm
Street and Highway 25, and Fourth Street and Seventh Street. The
estimated cost of the project at this time is $28,500. If the bids are
favorable, City staff may recommend increasing the size of the project to
pick up some miscellaneous isolated cul-de-sac streets in the western
portion of the community which are due this year or next.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative is to award the bid to the lowest responsible
bidder, keeping the scope of the project the same as bid.
2. The second alternative would be to award the project to the lowest
responsible bidder and add the miscellaneous streets. The actual
cost of doing this will be provided at Monday evening's meeting.
3. The third alternative is to do nothing.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff withholds a recommendation until after the bid opening on Monday.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
-3-
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
7. Review public transporation needs study, review comparative data regarding
municipal transportation systems operating in Minnesota. Consider
authorizing MTRAC to develop Transportation Management Plan and prepare
State Transit Assistance application materials. (J.0.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As you recall, City Council established a Public Transportation Advisory
Committee for the purpose of further defining the need for public
transportation and for the purpose of developing a public transportation
system if the need is demonstrated. The Monticello Transportation
Advisory Committee has completed the initial phase of its work and submits
the following report and recommendation for your consideration.
TRANSPORTATION NEED AND EXPECTED SERVICE DEMAND
MTRAC was directed by Council to further investigate the need for a public
transportation system in response to information gathered by a
transportation task force established by the Community Based Services
organization. With the assistance of the Minnesota Department of
Transportation, MTRAC completed two transportation studies in an effnrt to
establish transportation need and potential service demand. Also
developed is a rough estimate of the cost to provide service sufficient to
handle estimated demand. The first study compiles testimony from
organizations that typically serve the population that is most likely to
utilize a public transportation system. From such organizations is gained
an understanding of the expected demand and basic traffic patterns in
terms of time and destination of trips. The second study compares actual
statistics generated by public transportation systems operating in
communities very similar to Monticello. This information provides us with
additional information which can be used to make rough projections on
service level and cost.
Trip Generation Study Summary
The method by which trip data was collected included a combination of
written and oral interviews with managers or owners of various
organizations that provide essential services. I do not claim that this
survey is scientific? however, I do feel it gives us a ballpark idea of
what we might expect in terms of user demand. The traffic pattern survey
focused on the elderly population traffic patterns. Please note that if
the City moves ahead to develop a state funded transportation program, the
service must be provided to all citizens. Opening up the service to all
citizens will likely result in a service level increase of 339 according
to state wide averages.
The organizations surveyed include the Monticello -Big Lake Hospital and
all of the associated programs, education and early childcare, Big Lake
Nutrituton Center, Senior Center, Snyder Drug Store, Maus Foods,
Monticello Clinic, and the Post Office. Obviously, this is not an
all-encompassing list of transportation destinations. However, it does
represent a good cross-section of the business and social destinations,
and as such can be used to provide us general information regarding
traffic patterns.
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
Data gathered from the organizations when corpiled results in the
following findings as outlined on Exhibit A. According to the survey, it
is estimated that 111 round trips will be generated per day. on certain
days, a greater number of trips will be generated because of special
programming conducted by certain organizations.
It is expected that the senior center will generate the greatest number of
trips at 36 percent of the total. Monticello -Big Lake Hospital programs
will generate 21 percent of the total trips, and the Mall/Snyder Drug
Store will include 18 percent of the total_
In terms of demand throughout the day, it appears that the highest demand
will occur between 10:00 a.m, and 2:00 p.m. , with 588 of trips generated
during that time period. Twenty-three percent (238) of the trips will
occur between 2:00 p.m, and 6:00 p.m. and fifteen (158) percent between
6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
The customer service area appears to be primarily the City of Monticello,
with 698 of trips generated by the City itself. It is interesting that
Big Lake Township will generate 148 percent of trips with Monticello
Township coming in next with 88.
Comparison of Transportation Systems - City Service Level and Cost
Pro)ections (See Exhibit B)
The survey described above provides the City with ballpark figures
regarding transportation demand. Initially, as I reviewed the results of
the traffic study, I became slightly uncomfortable, as my gut reaction was
that the expected number of trips shown by the survey exceeded what I
intuitively thought would occur. Because of this conflict in my mind, I
decided to look at some of the other communities in the state and compare
their population levels to trip levels in an attempt to determine the
average ratio of trips generated per capita. After averaging the rate of
usage per capita for four communities, I then applied that average usage
to the City of Monticello assuming a population of 4,500. The following
summarizes the result of this investigation.
If the City of Monticello residents utilize a local transportation system
at the average rate per person, it appears that the City could expect a
demand of 122 one-way rides or 61 round trip rides. This compares to 111
expected round trip rides as outlined in the traffic pattern study.
It, therefore, appears that the initial estimates of riders per day as
outlined in the traffic study may have been slightly overstated. However,
the difference in expected trips between the two studies (61 versus 111)
is diminished when one considers that the traffic pattern study was based
on serving the Monticello area including townships. On the other hand,
the comparative study was based on serving the City of Monticello only.
The comparative study examined only the City because demographic
statistics pertaining to the Monticello area were not available for
conparicon.
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
Financial Implications of Establishing a Public Transportation System (See
Exhibit B)
Along with the collection of information above, I combined other
statistics from the four communities to come up with information that will
assist the City in estimating system use and cost. This information is
included on Exhibit B, which I will review with you at the next meeting.
A quick summary of Exhibit B indicates that based on Monticello use of its
system at an "average" rate, it can be expected that the total annual cost
of the system will amount to around $70,000 (Column I). Of that amount,
the local share amounts to 408 or $28,000. of the $28,000 that makes up
the local share, it is expected that fare revenue will amount to $18,000
(Column P) with ad-velorem taxes paying the remaining $10,000 (Column Q).
In other words, City taxes would likely pay about 148 of the total price
tag to operate the system (Column S.)
Of course, these estimates are based on community system history as of
1987. It is likely that costs have gone up since that time and there may
be other factors on the horizon that we are not aware of that will impact
the cost to operate a local system. The numbers above provide a rough
idea regarding costs and should not be cast in stone. Only after the
management plan is complete, which includes a formal budget document, will
we have a clear idea regarding the ultimate cost.
AUTHORIZATION TO DEVELOP MANAGEMENT PLAN.
It is the view of MTRAC that the need for a public transportation system
has been sufficiently demonstrated. Furthermore, heavy participation in
the funding of a local transportation system by state and federal
agencies, combined with the opportunity to collect user fees, provides the
City with an opportunity to service the transportation need in a cost
effective manner. Therefore, MTRAC recommends that Council now authorize
staff to work with MN/DOT and MTRAC in developing a management plan and
materials associated with developing an application for state funding.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to direct staff to work with MN/DOT and MTRAC in developing a
management plan and an application for state transportation funding
assistance.
Under this alternative, staff will begin work on a management. plan
that will address all of the issues associated with actually operating
the transit system. The management plan along with all application
materials must be reviewed and approved by City Council prior to
submission to MN/DOT. MTRAC will begin work immediatly on the
management plan with the goal of implementing the system prior to the
onset of winter.
As a final note in support of development of a public transportation
/ system, this subject ranked third in priority by citizens that
L attended the recent joint meeting. In the public facilities category,
development of a transportation system ranked third behind development
of a civic center and maintenance of a firm l.nnitinn regarding the
cruising problem.
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
2. Motion to discontinue further investigation of establishing public
transportation.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff concurs with the recommendation submitted by RrRAC. There is a
concern, however, that development of this program will require
considerable staff time and effort. Other projects on the side or back
burner may not get attention as a result of allocation of time to this
project .
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Exhibit A - Trip Generation Summary; Exhibit B - Oooparison of
Transportation SystemsI Exhibit Bl - Transit program summaries including
Appleton, Benson, LeSueur, Montevideo, Morris.
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
- MAY 24, 1989
ORGANIZATIONS SURVEYED
IM
E B
S S M
M
P I A
T
T T
T W
A
P
IB
D L
R N A
0
0 I V
0
O 0
O E
V
E
IL
Y U
N
S I E
T
T T
T D
E
R
I
E N
C D S
T
T I
A A
A
R
C
IP
A U
E E
0 1 W
3
L L
L T
A
E
IG
R T
N R F
C
F I E
R
0
G
N
IM
L R
T S 0
L
F I E
0
M T
F T
E
T
IS
Y C
E 0
I
I K
0 U
R
I
C T
R D
N
I
M
N E
S M
0
H R
S
C
I D
0
D S
T I
A
I A
N
A
TUE D
Y
I Y
Y
MONTH
I
I
I
AVE DAILY TRIPS 123
1 12 40 20 10
0% 11$36$18$ 9%
1
1%
4 1 111 118
4%1
112 119
125
151 123
100%
PERCENT OF TOTAL 121%
ARRIVAL TIMES I
I
I
6:00 AM TO 10:00 AMI 7
0
0 3 6 0
0
I
0 1
17
17
17
17 23
17
18
15%
10:00 AM TO 2:00 PMI 6
0
12 32 7 5
0
2 1
64
70
64
64 64
104
72
58%
2:OOPM TO 6:00 PM 1 7
0
0 5 5 5
0
2 1
25
25
25
33 33
25
28
23%
6:00 PM TO 10:00 PMI 3
0
0 0 2 0
0
0 1
5
6
6
5 5
5
5
4%
10:00 PM TO 6:00 AMI 0
0
0 0 0 0
0
0 1
I
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0%
I
'EPARTURE TIME I
I
6:00 AM TO 10:00 AMI 1
0
0 3 6 0
0
I
0 1
10
10
10
10 16
10
11
9%
10:00 AM TO 2:00 PMI 5
0
12 0 7 5
0
2 I
31
37
31
31 31
71
39
32%
2:OOPM TO 6:00 PM 114
0
0 37 5 5
0
2 1
63
63
63
71 71
63
66
54%
6:00 PM TO 10:00 PMI 4
0
0 0 2 0
0
0 1
6
7
7
6 6
6
6
5%
10:00 PM TO 6:00 AMI 0
0
0 0 0 0
0
0 1
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0%
CUSTOMER SERVICE AREI
I
I
CITY OF MONTICELLO 1 9
0
0 39 13 9
1
I
3 1
74
80
75
81 85
113
85
69%
MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP 1 2
0
0 1 3 1
0
1 1
9
9
9
9 10
10
9
8%
WRIGHT CTY - OUTSIDEI 4
0
0 0 2 0
0
0 1
6
7
6
6 7
6
6
5%
BIG LAKE/BIG LAKE TNI 3
0
12 0 2 0
0
0 i
17
17
17
18 18
17
17
14%
OTHER 1 4
0
0 0 0 0
0
0 1
I
4
4
4
4 4
4
4
3%
I
EXISTING TRANSPORTATI
Drive Own Vohicla 1 2 0 0 7 0 2 0 1 1 12 14 12 14 16 17 14 12%
Walk - other altornal 0 0 0 2 6 2 0 01 10 10 10 11 11 13 11 9%
Transported by Frim 17 0 12 26 10 5 1 2 I 63 67 63 67 71 93 71 58%
Transoortod by Publ11 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 1 6 7 7 6 6 6 6 5%
Ctalk - no other altel 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 01 3 3 3 4 4 5 4 3%
.do transportation av112 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 11%
-each theso individul
0?
r/,t s
Gy,7,
t COMPARISON OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS JUNE 19. 1989
` CITY SERVICE LEVEL AND LOST PROJECTIONS
C
J
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I. J.
1POP.
SERV
ANNUAL
ANNUAL
TOTAL
RIDES
ANNUAL
MILES
TOTAL ANNUAL
AREA
SYSTEM
SYSTEM
ONE-WAY
PER
RIDES
PER
ANNUAL COST
SO.
MILES
MILES
R: DES
DAY
PER
RIDE
COST PER
I
MILES
PER CAP
1987
CAPITA
CAPITA
APPLETON
I
11,842
AIA
10.828
5.9
9.084
35
4.9
1.2
$20,765 $11.27
BENSON
13,660
9
26,392
7.2
20,612
66
5.6
1.3
$35.248 $9.63
LESUER
13.770
3
34,435
9.1
29,152
112
7.7
1.2
$75.767 $20.10
MONTEVIDEO
15,800
I
5
53,466
9.2
51,025
196
8.8
1.0
$97,567 $16.82
AVERAGE
I
13,760
6
31,280
7.9
27,468
102
6.8
1.18
$57,337 $14
MONTICELLO
14.500
8
35,372
7.9
30,480
122 6.8
1.16
$68,475 $15
ESTIMATES
1
I
'
MORRIS
I
5,367
4
65.219
45,166
124
8.4
1.4
$115.527 $21.53
C
J
K. L. M. N
]COST COST MIN MAX
]PER PER BUS BUS
IRIDE MILE FARE FARE
I
I
]
APPLETON I $2.29 $1.92 $0.50 $1.00
BENSON I $1.71 $1.34 $0.50 $0.50
LESUER I $2.60 $2.20 $0.35 $0.60
MONTEVIDEO I $1.91 $1.82 $0.75 $1.00
I
I
AVERAGE ( $2.13 $1.82 $0.53 $0.78
I
]
MONTICELLO I $2.25 $1.94 $0.50 $0.75
ESTIMATES I
k MORRIS $2.56 $1.77 $1.25 $1.25
0. P.
Q.
R.
S. T.
LOCAL EST.
CITY
AD -VEL
AD -VEL AD -VEL
SHARE FARE
AD -VEL
COST
CONTP.IB COST
REV.
COST
PER
AS % OF PER
CAP
TOTAL RIDE
COST
36% $6.359
$1.117
$0.61
5% $0.12
57% $10.306
$9,785
$2.67
28% $0.47
40% $12.681
$17.626
$4.68
23% $0.50
40% $42,606
($3.579)($0.62)
-4% ($0.07)
43% $17,988 $6,237 $1.83 13.18% $0.28
40% $17,831 $9.559 $2.12 14% $0.31
40% $56,458 ($10,247)($1.91) -9% ($0.23)
J
I
X. Y.
u.
AA 88. cc.
USERS
A
A 0
V TRANSPORTATION CLASS
G T
D
E H
A
0 E
M
R
APPLETON
60% 40%
BENSON
66% 34%
LESJER
66% 34%
MONTEVIDEO
66% 34%
AVERAGE
65% 36%
MONTICELLO
66% 34%
ESTIMATES
0 4
MORRIS
66% 34%
X. Y.
2.
AA 88. cc.
FL PT
A
B
V TRANSPORTATION CLASS
TM TM
D
U
A
EMP. ENP.
M
5
N
I
F
N
S
1 1
0.2
1
0 DIAL A RIDE
0 4
0
2
0 DIAL A RIDE/FLEXIBLE FIXED
2 2
0.5
2
1 DIAL A RIDE/FLEXIBLE FIXED
1 6
0.5
4
1 DIAL A RIDE AND FIXED ROUTE
1 3 0.3 2.3 0.5
1 4 0.5 1 1 DIAL A RIDE/FLEXIBLE FIXED
3 4 1 4 DIAL A RIDE/COLLEGE CAMPUS SERVICE
D7
_ Cr�•o•i tSl
APPLETON - CITY OF APPLETON
TRANSIT PROGRAM r.-7
_ ontact: Roman Fidler
.ddress: 323 W. Schheman Ave.. Appleton, MN 56208
Telephone: (612)289.1363
Operating Class: D al•A•R de
Funding Class: Rural
PROFILE OF SYSTEM
The Appleton Transit Program is owned and
operated by the City of Appleton. The City
ClerkfTreasurer is responsible for the day-to-day
management of the system.
The service operates primarily in the City of Ap-
pleton. However, service is also provided to the
nearby communities of Milan, Correll. Holloway,
and Lousburg.
Nearly sixty percent (60%) o1 the riders are elderly
people. with daily noon meat programs. apart-
ments. shopping areas and medical facilities be-
ing prime destinations.
LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT IIA
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 2
CHARACTERISTICS OF SYSTEM
Number of Vehicles: 1 Medium Bus
Number of Employees
Full Time: 1
Pan Time: 1
Administration: .2
Driver: 1
Days • Hours of Operation
Monday • Friday
8AM•4.30PM
Annual System Miles: 10.828
Base Fare: S.50 Senior C tizens. $1.00 Others
JIM
FUNDING AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Source of Funding = 1987
1984 — e 096
Stare 274b
I 1965 — 9 454
I
1965 —9531
Total Operating Cost
1963 — $17 6241
198. — 1e Zea 1
1981 — 22 208 1
r etleral a3M1b local 3646
1968— 236051
1997 — 20 755 f
—31—
System Data — 1987 fr' 4 S 2 o o 6
Passenaers+Mde 84 u. re A4r -
Coa6Mile $1 92
CosLPassenger $2 29
Ridership
1963 —8,061
l
1984 — e 096
I
I 1965 — 9 454
I
1965 —9531
1987 — 9 084
BENSON - CITY OF BENSON
TRANSIT SYSTEM
',EGISLATIVE DISTRICT IIA
- JONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 2
Contact: Robert Klingle -
Address: 1411 Pacific Avenue. Benson. MN i
56215
Telephone: (612)843.4775 '
Operating Class: Fixed Route and Dial -A -Ride
Funding Class: Small Urban
PROFILE OF SYSTEM
The City of Benson transit system is availabfeto ail �„4 t�.t ,
The transit system is a dial -a -ride and flexible fixed
residents of the city,
�,..:
route system that operates five days a week. -
f
Volunteers drive the vehicle for church services on
The transit system is owned and operated by the ""` '
Sundays.
City of Benson.
1 1985 - 5,831 (1
I 1988 - 8.292 1 I
1985 - 21 4601
The transit system has been in operation since
1086 - 25.193I
1976.
E...... N..ds .Fs„ F
CHARACTERISTICS OF SYSTEM 3 x 3— 1 1r 1 r_' i �`r, I
Number of Vehicles: 2 Medium Buses pays - Mours of Operations:
Number of Employees Monday • Friday
Annual System Miles: 26.392
Pan Time: 4 6:30 AM - 5:30 PM
Drivers: 1.5 Thursday Evening
Base Fare: $.50
5:30 PM -9 PM
Saturday 9 AM - Noon
FUNDING AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Ridership
Source of Funding • 1987
Total Operating Cost
1987 - 7,2431 I
State 18%
1984 - 5.502 �1
1983 -$22.2521
1984 - 21,111
1 1985 - 5,831 (1
I 1988 - 8.292 1 I
1985 - 21 4601
I 1987 -. 20.6112 j
1086 - 25.193I
1
1£87 - 35.248
Local 57%
—1
Federal 2546
System Data - 1987
PossengermMde .78
Cori $1,34
Cost/Passenger $1,71
It
-34-
r-
LeSUEUR - LeSUEUR PARATRANSIT ?.-
-EGISLATIVE
DISTRICT 23B Contact: Tim Donovan
,\ CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 2 Address: 203 South 2nd St., LeSueur. MN
56056
_ Telephone: (612)665.6211
Operating Class: Dial -A -Ride and Flexible Fixed
Route
Funding Class: Small Urban
PROFILE OF SYSTEM
The City of LeSueur owns and operates a public
transit service within its city limits. vehicles also
travel to Henderson for workers who commute daily
- o e to LeSueur for employment.
The service consists of a Monday through Friday
{{ 'ri!.??•' �` � `*f::i
dial•a-ride and flexible fixed route system. �- Senior citizens are regularly transooned to medical,
snooping, recreational and meal sites.
LeSueur's nursing home, nursery school, public
_ - and private schools. and the local Headstart Pro-
�,.�_.... ✓ j L gram, all depend on public transit t0 help meet ;heir
•-"----� "' •• _ transportation needs.
CHARACTERISTICS OF SYSTEM
Number of Vehicles �
Medium Bus: 1
- Smell Bus: 1
�. Van: t - R
(`.+A Number of Employees 4`F
Full Time: 2
-- - Part Time: 2 ° p
Administration: .5 y;
Drivers: 3.5 �•
Days •Hours of Operation
Monday • Friday r
_. 5:30 AM • 6:30 PM r
Annual System Miles: 34,435 IN. r Sal, ' `.'t
^• rho
Baso Fare: S.35 to $.60 �.rk
FUNDING AND PERFORMANCE DATA
1 —1 System Data - 1087
Source of Funding • 1087 V- PassengerslMila ,85
�4 f Cost/We $2.20
Siete 29%UPa
Cosssangor $2.60
Local 40aGoarai
Total Operating Cost Ridership
1083 -$ 69,854 I 1083 - 31.4061 1
1064 _ 72.682 IIy 1084 -33.404
i 1065 - 76.038 I "085 - 35.361
1066 - 74.1071 I 1088 - 33,116
I Jtap 1067 - 75.787 � � 1067 - 29,1521
MONTEVIDEO - CHIPPEWA BUS LINES
EGISLATIVE DISTRICT 20B
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 2
PROFILE OF SYSTEM
Contact: Greg Schwaegerl
Addresi-P.O: Box 676, Montevideo. MN 56265
Telephone: (612)269-7926 _
Operating Class: _Flexible Fixed Route and
Dial-A•Ride _
Funding Class: Small Urban -1
CHARACTERISTICS OF SYSTEM
Montevideo provides public transit seance within Number of Vehicles
its city limits ano to a senior atizen meal site In the Medium Bus: 3
nearoy community of Granite Falls.Small Bus: 1
o Van:1
Bosh dial-a-nde and regular route service is ottered. , 5,6
Vehicles are equipped with wheel cnarr Efts. e P Number of Employees
(/10•� Full Time: 1
Approximately 50 percent of the riders are eldeny ^ t S5 y Pan Time: 6
with th the remainder being children, physcal- 0 1 / Administration: .5
ly disabled people and other work commuters. Drivers: 6
The governing authority is the Cay Councl, The C ty Days - Hours of Operations
s comm tted to providing transportation to Nose Monday • Friday
people who have no other means of mob ply. 5.30 AM - 6 PM
Annual System Miles: 53.468
Base Fare: S.75 and Si 00
FUNDING AND PERFORMANCE DATA
Source of Funding1987 System Data 1987
• PauenpersM'e 9 95
CoeLMne $t 82
Site 32?4 CozPassenger S1.91
local e0%
GTotal Operating Cost Ridership
1983 —S 106 932 1983 — 56 Z'18
1984 — 105.418 toed — 85867
1985 — 117.493 ( 1995 — 53 211
1986— 117,518 1986 — 55.009
19e7 — 97,587 19e7 — 51,C25
Federal :5°b
Im
9 and EX
—51—
U
MORRIS - CITY OF MORRIS TRANSIT
LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT 11B
Contact: Eugene Krosscriell
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 2
Address: 609 Oregon Ave.. Morris, MN 56267
Telephone: (612) 5893141
Operating Class: Dial-A-Flice
Funding Class: Small Urban
CHARACTERISTICS OF SYSTEM
PROFILE OF SYSTEM
4�
Number of Vehicles: 4 Small Buses
The City of Morris transit system is ooeratea by ci-
Number of Employees
ty employees. The system is supervised by a Transit
Full Time:3
Director who reports to the Director of the Division
Finance.
Pan Time, 4 to'
of
Administration: 1
When the transit system was established in 1975.
Drivers: 4
ridership was 21.085, and has increased through
Days - Hours of Operation
the years to 45,166 in 1987.
Sunday 8;30 a.m. - 12:30 P.m, n
10
Three of the four vehicles used by the program are
8 p.m. - p.m.
Monday - Friday 6 a.m. . 10 p.m.
ecuipoea with wheelchair lifts.
Saturday 12 p.m. - 4 p.m.
The main uses of the transit orrograin are for work
Annual System Miles: 65,219 I*_Ip.
trips, to congregate dining saes far senior citizens.
shopping, students to the university, and to adult
Base Fare: 51.25
day activity centers.
U 1. \,V6
JND14NG AND PERFORMANCE DATA
System Data — 1987
PassengerwMile.69
Source of Funding - 1987
Cos:rMile $1,77
CostrPossenger $2,56
State 32%
Local 40% Total Operating Cost
Ridership
1983 —S 10o.526
1983 — 39.023
1984 — 101.321
G,Feceral
1984 — 42,995
9 85 51249
1085— IC4,533
1086 — 1 10,4491
—
1986 — 53,801
1987— 115,5271
1 1987 45,166 1
28% 1
1
—64—
E"
I
L
C7)1-
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
6. Consideration of an ordinance amendment regulating hours of operation of
off -sale liquor store. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Over the past two years, the state legislative bodies have changed the
statutes pertaining to when an off -sale liquor establishment can be open
for business. Previously, off -sale liquor stores were not allowed to be
open for business on New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day,
Thanksgiving Day, or Christmas Day, along with Sundays. Last session and
again this session, changes have been made by the State allowing off -sale
liquor stores to be open any holiday except Thanksgiving and Christmas.
Monticello Ordinances 3-3-5 pertaining to off -sale liquor stores
currently restrict our municipal store from being open on any of the
above holidays. As long as the state statutes allow, it is recommended
that our ordinance be amended to coincide with only Christmas Day and
Thanksgiving Day being restricted.
With the ordinance amendment being presented, this now brings up another
question as to whether the City of Monticello wishes to change its past
policy of being closed on these holidays. By adopting the ordinance
amendment, the City of Monticello could technically have its off -sale
liquor store open on July 4, 1989, if it so desired. Unless the Council
wishes to change its policy, I have informed Joe that I did not feel it
was necessary that our store be open July 4. This is a recognized
holiday for City enployees, and it becomes debatable whether being open
that day will actually generate a significant amount of sales increase.
I personally feel that a typical customer of our off -sale operation would
have made their purchases prior to July 4; and by the City being open
this day, sales that occur on this day would probably be lost on a prior
day. Of course, you my see some through traffic stopping; but the cost
of operating the store with holiday pay may not be worth it.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to adopt the ordinance amendment to
coincide with state statutes which allow off -sale liquor stores to be
open any day except Sunday, Thanksgiving, and Christmas.
2. The second alternative would be to remain with the present policy and
prohibit off -pale on any of the holidays noted in our ordinance.
C. STAFP RECOMMENDATION:
By adopting the ordinance amendment as proposed, the City's ordinances
would coincide with the state statutea; but this would not require the
City Council to change its policy regardTn—daya of operation. By this I
mean that the City Council can still decide to remain closed on July 4,
Christmas, Thanksgiving, New Year's Day, etc., or it gives the Council
rj the option to have the store open if it desires.
-B-
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
If the ordinance amendment is adopted, the Council can decide to remain
open this July 4 if it so desires; but I am not recommending that at this
time. If it is the City's desire to be open, I'm sure that sufficient
staff can be found to operate the facility.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of ordinance amendment proposed.
C
-9-
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO HEREBY ORDAINS THAT ORDINANCE SECfI ON3-3-5
PERTAINING TO HOURS OF OPERATION OF OFF -SALE LIQUOR BE AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:
3-3-5 Hours of Operation: No "Off Sale" shall be made before 8:00 a.m.
nor after 10:00 p.m. on any day. No "Off Sale" shall be made on
Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day, or any Sunday.
Passed by the City Council this 26th day of June, 1989.
Rick Wolfsteller
City Administrator
C
C
Ren Maus, Mayor
0
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
9. Consideration of type of restroom building - Bridge Park. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the May 22 meeting, the Council requested staff to look into two or
three types of restroom buildings for West Bridge Park. One of those
sceneries was to be an addition to the existing building.
When looking at the possibility to add on to the existing building, the
Park Superintendent and myself performed a detailed inspection of the
building and the location of the sanitary sewer trunk line which crosses
diagonally through the park. It was our opinion that the condition of
the building, its configuration, heating system, and the location of the
sanitary sewer, electrical, and gas services for the building, are not
conducive to a building addition that would be economically feasible or
architecturally pleasing. If one were to look at a large warming house
or a concession area which would also encompass heated restrooms, it
would be best to demolish the building in its entirety. Since the
building is currently in usable and satisfactory condition for its
purpose, this may not be practical. We, therefore, placed most of our
emphasis on an unattached building.
There are two spots where an unattached building could be easily
located. The most desireable spot for access to services and access from
the skating rink and sliders would be in the northeast corner of the
4 existing parking lot. A secondary location would be southwesterly of the
existing warming house. The existing restrooms could be kept intact
until completion of the new facilities.
The building itself could be a rectangular structure either of wood or
masonry and should contain approximately 300 sq ft to allow for handicap
access and a 4 -foot chaseway for plumbing access. The size of the
building should be a minimum of 14'x241. The following are estimated
costs for such a building.
I. BLOCK BUILDING/PITCHED ROOP (14X24)
A. Foundation and floor $ 2,000.00
B. Block work and materials 5,000.00
C. Roof, doors, insulation, and trim 5,000.00
D. Plumbing 5,500.00
E. Electrical 2,500.00
P. Sewer and water services 1,000.00
G. Paint 500.00
TOTAL S21,50U.00
-10-
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
II. WOOD FRAME BUILDING (14x241
A. Foundation and floor S 2,000.00
B. Building construction with wood siding,
milk house interior 12,500.00
C. Plumbing 5,500 .00
D. Electrical 2,500.00
E. Sewer and water services 1,000.00
F. Paint and stain 750.00
TOTAL,23f p 00
The above costs are to be used for planning purposes only to show that a
wood frame building with a milk house paneled interior is expected to
cost more than a basic block building. The following are some costs for
a 25 -foot hexagon building. This building would contain approximately
380 square feet of building area.
III. HEXAGON BUILDING, 25-Pf ROOF, 380 SO FT
A.
Foundation and floor
5 2,600.00
B.
Building materials, prefab
15,000.00
C.
Building construction
7,000.00
D.
Plumbing
5,500.00
E.
Electrical
2,500.00
F.
Sewer and water service
1,000.00
G.
Paint and stain
750.00
TOTAL
370 . Sd
Again, the above cost estimates are extremely rough and should only be
used to show the comparative cost difference between the buildings.
Actual costs of any of the buildings would have to be determined through
the bidding process.
This item is brought before you again merely to obtain name further
direction on which type of building to pursue. Once that is decided,
plans can be drawn and bids obtained.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative is for the Council to arrive at a decision as
to the type of building to pursue along with the expected cost,
bearing in mind that the City's budget for this year for the project
is $20,000.
2. The second alternative is to look at the possibility of removing the
old warming house and building one entirely new large structure or
pavilion, including restrooms.
3. The third alternative is to do nothing but to continue Ll:� use the
existing restroores and maintain them as best as possible.
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The City staff would like to see some year-round restrooms constructed in
the park in the near future. Alternative #1 would serve that purpose.
However, if the City Council is conducive to the idea of a larger
structure, we could make plans for such a building and budget for it for
1990, whichever the Council so desires. I again must stress that the
above prices are for planning purposes only, and actual bid prices could
vary.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Floor plans and building views.
R
MOON •l NN ..
0
IN
ELEVATION
I I.c. I C Men's
me n s
GAZEBO WITH restroom
cls
RESTROOMS women's
Restroom
Council Agenda - 6/26/89
1
10. Consideration of final payment for Project 88—O4A, Well 14. Q.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
After being plagued with problems, it now appears that well i4 is
complete and operational. Most of the problems we have experienced have
steamed from the Fairbanks pump and pitless unit line shaft bearings.
During startup on December 12, 1988, a line shaft bearing seized causing
the main drive line to twist and break.
After repairs were completed, testing was performed in March and found
the punmp was producing 17 percent less water than originally expected.
It was pumping at just under 2,000 gallons per minute when the specified
capacity was 2,400 gallons per minute. After more testing, E.H. Renner
and Sons replaced the impeller on the pump in May, and this increased the
pumping capacity by about 7 percent. We are currently pumping at a rate
of 2,150 gallons per minute. It appears that this is the best the
current combination of pump, motor, and discharge pressures will produce.
OSM has recommended final payment of the project in the amount of
$6,621.54. The total cost of well 14 is $104,013.16. The original
contract was for $98,883.50. The increases are due to quantity overruns
and change order #1.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
l
1. The first alternative is to authorize final payment to E.H. Renner
and Sons in the amount of $6,621.54.
2. The second alternative is not to authorize final payment.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the City
Oouncil authorize final payment to E.H. Renner as outlined in alternative
11.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the request for final payment from OSMr Copy of the March 23,
1989, letter regarding well capacity.
JJ1 ci E3 fi-�d C=at r,FLS.t.,y P.
Orr
SCIXAM
2021 Last Hennepin Avcnue
KrimVdis, MN 65413,
612-331.9660 -
fAX331.3906 - Erqpnecrs....
Surveyors
Planners
June 21. 1989
City of Kontittllo
750 East Bromdoar Street
Konticello. Minnesota '3'W
Rp i Well No. a. Urbino Pump and Amrtonsot York
Project No. se -04 A
"t.riaa. No. air.
City Council :
Pclosed are feu, U1 coot#$ of Cnnrtructien Pomnt Vaucher Na. 4 Y FiMt on the reformed #'matt in if,# amount of
66?1.54.
V,rsuant to our field ahstrvatian. at per4onwd it accordance With our cont'art. aro haromy certify that the
►attrials are satisfactory and the Work Properly otrforard in accordance With the Naps mod mcificttions.
Uroo rectipt of affidavit. State of 111nneseta fare 134, and also Receipt and Waiver of Lien Rights from
E.H. Renner (+ SormInt..pleasr rake osyeer,t to E.H. Renner S Sans, Inc.. IW3 d.rvi$ St. N.W.. Elk Riven Mn. SSW
at your earliest convenience.
Very truly rcurs,
Om --WI.EIHAYE"
6 ASSOCIATES. ISS.
CA( ,
E.H. Andtrion,P.f..
Project Enlinttr
naircn
1tlures 1
E.N. Rrnr.or 4 Sem. In'.
sa.wcarP-V-"i,eptti , 0/0
X01 21 "c9 11:-_4 i5ri PiP 5. Nr l p.3 r
i
Est-ir;,te Voucher No. 4 d Final CONSTRUCTION PAY,' M V JD6
Da to .lune 21, 1999 For Period Ending June 21, 1989
act No. 88-04 A+
Class of York t Wei) No. 4, Turbine Pump and Appurtenant York
To : E.N. Renner 6 Sous, IAC. .
1569'8 Jarvis Street N.W.
totation Dundas Rd. beth. Oakwood 9r, and fiIIan Ave. Elk River, M. %=
(612) 427-6100
for City of Aonticelle, 6:riit,t Count., ti mnpsota {
A. Orisiral Contract Anount It 9e,8E3.57
0. Total Additions t »_ 1.495.66 C.D. No. 1 ,
C. Total Deductions
D. Total Funds Encuaoeted —A I t 100,319.16
E. Total Value of Work Cortifisd to Dete t I 104,013,16
F. Leu Retained Pepotntaat 3 f 0,00
0. Less Total Previous Payments ~`+ t 97,391.62
N. A—rovtd for Payment, This R.Port fMM + 6,621.54
Q 1. Total fitments Itcinding This Vonrh#r _w t 104,013.16
J, 8alante tarried Forward i t -3,634. CID
APqWALS
e.c_cscvuomssasavp-_z*�am--»+---- �._r_sr�-r¢s---�m.cr_-scut �:-_sccesev�..csreat-zas�=�
M-SCNIEN-FAYERON 5 ASSMIATES, INC.
Pursuant to our field ohtep%mhon. at verforaed it attordenC0 with our tnntrtCt, wo nerr6* Corti(, that the s.atrrials
are satisfactory and the work ero"rly perfurmtd in acrerdanre Pith tet Plans and tp#c i flret ions and ttat the total
wo,k is IM Y cotolttod as of Jot ?i, 1989 . W# htret+r rrcota#od Payment of this vouch#'.
Sighed i Nr Silr,td r /
Constructior, DSsr'var r
This is to certify that to in# bast of or knov4dik,-inforiatior. are. btltef,win* muthtities and values of work
Certifltd herein is a felt 0-10%im0e ettiNtt fol the Period Covered by this vAUCrsr.
Contractor t E.N. Renner 6 Stns, Inc. Signed Rr ;1 l
Date t
v.crsar:.rcm.vesvcrsao.aau..mvnms�.sszammavvmp �asvaa.esus--Omlewwoy acueePuasa.es..••_--••
tr of KantIcetlo Approved for Payment
+cher ,
Cheesed 9r : Autaotlxrd'R#presrntativ#
Date
PAs# 1 of 2 - U73
JLA 1 21 • S'S 11: 25 OSM rll"LS. ctrl
P. a
i
Esiipatr Voucher No. 4 6 Final
Contractor
: E.H. Renner 6
SdnS, Inc.
1568E Jarvis Street h.Y.
Lott i Jun* 21, 1989
Elk River, Mr..
5✓3d0
(612) 427-6100
;;:11 No. 4, Turbine Pub• and Appurtenant York.'
F r4i( �o. 83-04 A
I!
C:ty of Konticello. Wright County, Minnesota
II
Contract Date June 27. 19M
York
II
Started]
work Com,leted t Jurnr 21, 1999
Coapletion
Date
October 1e.. 19S1
lYork
Cnn,leteA
::eb
Contract
II'l This
Wour,t
Total to Dale
... Item
Quantity Unit Unit Price Total;Pricel Month This Month
Yuantity Total
Price
:!1 Mobilization for Moving onto Sitt. Set UP, and;
I.
Moving Off the Site.
1 L.S.
9212.00
9212.001
0.00
1
921?.00
'2) Furnish and Drive 24' Casing
50 L.F.
98.00,
4900.001
0.00
:A
4900.00
?) Drill 23' OPpn Mole
170 L.F.
30.00
5100.00
0.00
173
5190.00
•=) Furnish and Install 18' Screen
40 L.F.
IM.00
7400.00'
0.00
45
8325.00
.5) Furnish and Install 18' Casing
18n L.F.
33.00
6840.00,
0.00
177
6726.00
;M) Furnish and Install Cebent Grout
60 Ack
12.00
1720.00!
0.00
230
2760.01)
?7) Furnish and Install Air Compressor and Development
1!
Piping
1 L.S.
500.00
1500.001
0.00
1
:00.00
09) Drvelopment of Ya11
60 Mrs.
100.00
6000.001
0.00
60
6000.00
:9) Furnish and Install Test Pun►
1 L.S.
3541.00
W.00':
0.00
1
3500.00
:0) Testing Kapiho
20 Mrs.
90.00
180O.OD
0.00
25.7
7313.00
:11 Furoich and Install Pitless Adaptor u/
I I
Concrete Pad
t L.S.
16445.00
16445.00
O.lX1
I
If445.00
12) -,,nigh and Install POOP ane Motor
I L.S.
13116.50
13116.5771
0.00
1
13116.54
!3)nish and Install Electrical $,sten
mind Controls
1 L.S.
13500.00
13500.00
0.00
1
IWo. 00
:4) Furnish and Install 10' D.I.P. Cl. 52 r/
il I �.
12 r 10' Reducer
40 L.F.
45.00
1800.00
0.00
4•
1980.00
:5) Furnish and Install Chain Link Fence s/ Gates
I L.S.
1250.00
1:"10.00
0.00
1
1750.00'
:1-1 Rtstoration
1 L.S.
1400.00
61000.00
0.00
ea.,z>^_
1
aszareva=o
~800.00
Total .....................................................ate
a,.,a„crs
93.833.5' 0
i
_
g n.W
S
102.517.50
Chanif Order No. 1
1.495.66
i I
t
1.495.66
1.495.66
Total to rote....... ...............................
ee
....... s
I 1,
( ,.mp
100.379.1!,
!I i
.1
II
sa,rry=av
S 1.495.66
eesapeasasm
S !04.013.16
Fa)r... of 2
�a
C
C
Meaucollo, Minnebtn
Sa342.02�5 y
- CiEc� a/ /l/onticello
MONTICELLO. MN 553629245
Phone (alt) 295-2711
Metro (6121333-5739
March 23, 1989
Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 5 Associates, Inc.
uayoc
2021 East Hennepin Avenue
Arve Gnmemo
Suite 238
:;ryco.,nol:
Minneapolis, MN 55413
Dm Btonigen
Fran Fou
Attn: Mr. Gene Anderson, project Engineer
William Fair
Warren Smith
Re: Completion of Project 88-04A, Well $4, :carbine Pump, and
appurtenant work
Admimstrotor:
Reek woltsteuer
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Anstant Aamithostratorr
Planning a zoning:
It is now approximately two weeks since Renner Well Drilling and
Jen o'Nem
their representative from Fairbanks Pump conducted additional tests
Punic worts:
at the well $4 site to determine why the pumping capacity is
Jon. Stmote
approximately 17 percent low, at just under 2,000 gallons per
euGCtr.g OtSclatt
minute. It is my understanding at this time that the pumping
Gary Anoereon
capacity required by Change Order #1 can only be achieved through the
Ecom—C Devetaomont:
011ie KorCachak
change of an impeller. Please take proper steps to coordinate the
completion of this well and pumping system to the desired capacity of
2,400 gallons per minute.
As you know, Gene, we have already extended the completion date for
this project to January 1, 1989, which is almost three months ago.
In addition, we have yet to receive the extra column pipe and
shafting not placed in the well. Please inform me in writing as to
your plans to complete this project in the near future.
Re ctfuliy,
,
c' Mire,
John E. Simola
Public works Director
JESAd
cc: Rick wolfsteller, City Administrator
Matt Theisen, water Superintendent
JS -,
File
C
C
Meaucollo, Minnebtn
Sa342.02�5 y
GENERAL FUND AMOUNT
CASH DISBURSEMENTS - JUNE 1989
�---rr-Schelen-Mayeron 6 Associates - Engineering fees
49,406.97
Vacuum Cleaners Center - Parts - Library
23.51
Holdiay Gas - Gas - Fire Depart.
58.41
Holmes 6 Graven - Professional Services
592.00
Petty Cash - Petty Cash
62.60
Moores Excavating - Professional Services
1,715.00
Gary Anderson - Travel Expense
77.11
MacSoft - Computer Software
315.00
Fast Photo Image Center - Facsimile Transmissions
73.15
Gruys, Johnson 6 Associates - Computer charges - Jan. thru April
1,160.00
Bentec Engineering - Pumphouse Project
262.00
A.M. Leonard, Inc. - Rope - Sever Collection Depart.
51.00
Copy Duplicating Company - Toner - Copy machine - Library
144.14
Campbell Abstract Co. - Professional Services
216.50
Gateway Travel - Travel Expense - C. Shuman to DMDI
699.48
Omann Brothers, Inc. - Blacktop
164.22
Anoka County Social Services - Payroll Deductions
210.16
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll Deductions
90.04
I.C.M.A Corp. - Payroll Deductions
503.50
Monticello Ford, Inc. - Land Acquisition - Flake Property
40,619.50
Shelton Company - Software charges for recycling
1,375.00
Wright County State Bank - FICA, Federal 6 Medicare W?h
5,421.04
Commissioner of Revenue - State W/H for May
1,758.50
PERA - Payroll Deductions
1,583.98
6 -it. of Natural Resources - Snowmobile, Watercraft 6 ATV reg.
557.00
lght County Recorder - Recording fees - Flake Property
20.00
Wright County Treasurer - Deed Tax - Flake Property
252.50
Corrow Sanitation - Garbage service for May
7,735.80
McDowall Co. - Repairs at City Hall
53.00
Continental Safety Equip. - Repairs - Fire Depart.
75.35
Jerry Hermes - Library Cleaning Contract
227.50
Patty Salzwedel - Animal Contract 6 Adoptions
465.00
League of MN. Cities - 1989 Reg. Fee
25.00
Adopt A Pet, Inc. - Animal contract
80.00
U.S. Postmaster - Permit rental
60.00
Preusse Cleaning - Cleaning contract payment
450.00
Y.M.C.A. of Mpls. - Contract payment
625.00
PERA - insurance premium
18.00
1.C.M.A. Corp. - Payroll Deductions
503.50
Rick Wolfsteller - Mileage expense
300.00
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll deductions
90.04
Humane Society of Wright County - Animal services
180.00
Janette Leerssen - Info Center Salary
42.90
Dayle Vechos Const. - Concession stand
950.00
Dept. of Natural Resources - Snowmobile, :ntercraft 6 ATV reg.
668.00
Water Products - Supplies - Water Depart.
491.59
Corrow Sanitation - Add'1 land fill chsrg!s
2,889.90
- Reimburs. for weight slips - Garbage service
•.A
31.50
(Corrow
- Payroll Deductions
1,582.19
W-ight County State Bank - FICA, Federal & Medicare W/H
5,449.38
tralCollection Service - Payroll Dedurtions
578.60
orthstar Waterworks Products - Supplies - Water Depart.
1,658.45
GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK N(
CASH DISBURSEMENTS - JUNE 1989
Depart. of Natural Resources - Snowmobile, watercraft 6 ATV reg.
350:00
26992
MN. Pollution Control Agency - Hazardous Waste Generator Fees
126 00
26993
Norwest Investments - Corputer payment _
2,407.61
26994
PSG Inc. - WWTP contract payment
23,328.00
26995
NSP - Utilities
7,063.20
26996
Midwest Gas - Utilities
302.39
26997
Liefert Trucking - Freight Charges
180.00
26998
Reliance Data, Inc. - Fax Machine
1,800.50
26999
Martie's Farm Service - Seed, etc. - Parks Depart.
210.75
27000
Wright County Treasurer/Auditor - Sheriff's contract payment
12,049.14
27001
Local 049 - Union Dues
120.00
27002
Unocal - Gas
33.49
27003
Gruys, Johnson d Assoc. - Computer charges for May
290.00
27004
Plumbery - Concession Stand
1,539.00
27005
Moon Motors - Mover deck and parts
1,332.40
27006
Maus Foods - supplies
14.92
27007
Buffalo Bituminous - Gravel, etc.
442.69
27008
National Bushing Parts Co. - Parts 6 supplies
91.23
27009
Coast to Coast - Supplies
851.70
27010
Shirely Anderson - Mileage d travel expense
75.03
27011
Campbell Abstract - Professional Services
106.00
27012
Harry's Auto Supply - Parts and supplies
582.82
27013
Pawnee Rotational Moldings, Inc. - Recycling containers
7,631.70
27014
Rheaume's House of Lettering, Inc. - Recycling labels
187.50
27015
Shelton Co. - Recycling software
6,562.00
27r
J M 011 Co. - Gas
218.95
27
Link Oil Co. - Gas
702.25
27018
Monticello Printing - Printing - office supplies 6 Recycling Lettena
11988.85
27019
Monticello Times - Legal Advertisements
2,214.76
27020
Royal Tire of Monticello - Repairs
15.00
27021
Simonsom Lumber - Supplies
623.07
27022
Safety Kleen Corp. - Maint. of equip.
44.50
27023
Monticello Office Supplies - office supplies
491.03
27024
A T 6 T Info Systems - Fire phone charges
3.96
27025
Northern Oxygen Service - Supplies - Fire Depart.
12.30
27026
Smith 6 Hayes - Legal Fees
1,852.17
27027
Al 6 Julie Nelson - Newspaper subscription renewal
13.75
27028
I.C.M.A. Corp. - Membership dues
273.00
27029
League of MN. Cities - Bld. fund dues
138.00
27030
Earl F. Anderson - Signs - Street Depart.
3.793.77
27031
Dyno Systems - Shop supplies
274.13
27032
Unitog Rental Services - Uniform rental
134.25
27033
Void
---
27034
Bridgewater Telephone - Phone charges
1,187.39
27035
Keith Trippe - Hedge trimmer - Park Depart.
30.00
27036
U.S. Postmaster - Postage
500.00
27037
Janette Leerssen - info Center Salary
122.20
27038
Wright County Treasurer - Recording Deed Tex - Land Sale
184.80
27010
Motorola, Inc. - Pager - Fire Depart.
270.00
27
Corrow Sanitation - Reimburs. weight slips - Garbage contract
33.00
27041
Marjorie Goetzke - OAA Salary
157.50
27v
Tom Salkowski - OAA Salary
250.00
270..)
Fran Fair - OAA Salary
30.00
27044
GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NG
CASH DISBURSEMENTS - JUNE - 1989
Franklin Denn - OAA Salary
90.00
27045
Terrie Piram - OAA Salary
35.00
27046
Ken Maus - OAA Salary
45.00
27047
LeRoy Engstrom - OAA Salary d Mileage expense
165.60
27048
Olson, Useset, Agen 6 Weingarden - 'Legal Fees for OAA Board
859.00
27049
Rick Wolfsteller - Travel expense
202.67
27050
MN. CLerks 6 Finance Officers Assoc. - Membership Dues
25.00
27051
Cathy Schuman - Travel expense
277.51
27052
Richmar Construciton - Pump 6 Pumphouse Project
8,738.10
27053
Patty Salzwedel - Aminal Control contract
425.00
27054
Jerry Hermes - Library Janitoral Services
227.50
27055
Monticello Fire Depart. - Firemen's Wages
1,385.68
27056
Patty Salzvedel - Adoptions - Animal Control
90.00
27057
MN. Depart. of Natural Resources - Water, Snowmobile 6 ATV Reg.
314.00
27058
Egghead Software - Computer supplies
466.00
27059
Communication Auditors - Pager repairs - Fire Depart.
70.03
27060
St. Cloud Appraisal, Inc. - Appraisal Fees
750.00
27061
Central Eyewear - Glasses - Street Depart.
438.00
27062
Snyder Drug - Film
10.49
27063
Shamrock - Recycling containers
25,511.68
27064
Paulko Signs - Signs
370.00
27065
MIT Distributing - Parte - Street Depart.
29.79
27066
Expedfeted Freight Systems - Freight Charges
52.07
27067
Adams Products, Inc. - Small Tools - Shop 6 Garage
107.80
27068
Little Mountain Electric - Electrical Work - Concession Stand
2,234.06
27069
Tools Unlimited - Tools - Shop 6 Garage
130.00
27070
HCH Construction - Replace curbs 6 sidewalks
495.00
27071
Zack's Industrial Cleaning Supplies - Tools - Shop 6 Garage
44.63
27072
Camden Industrial Supply - Padlocks - recycling
187.77
27073
Menth Sod d Landscaping - Sod for new Fire Hall
85.00
27074
Demcon Disposal - Junk Amnesity
1,825.00
27075
Olson 6 Sons Electric - Repairs 6 Parte
552.71
27076
Scherer Sanitary Service - Laterine rental - Parks
34.00
27077
LMC Finance Dept. - Reg. Fee - R. Wolfateller
20.00
27078
Wright County Treasurer/Auditor - Assessments 6 Taxes - HRA Purchase
1,845.57
27079
Ben Franklin - Film
21.98
27080
Central Eyewear - Glasses
103.00
27081
Inter. Conference Of Bld. Officials - Membership dues
70.00
27082
Elk River Veterinary Clinic - Animal Control Services
27.00
27083
DATA Management Design - Computer software 6 Training
2,530.00
27084
Phillips 66 Co. - Gas
57.92
27085
Mobil Gas Co. - Gas
202.57
27086
Turnqulst Paper Co. - Paper Towels - City Hall
49.50
27087
Orr-Schelon-Mayeron 6 Assoc. - Engineering fees
3,355.08
27088
011ie Karopchak - Travel expense
65.00
27089
Campbell Abstract Co. - Profeeaional Services - HRA
51.00
27090
Commissioner of Transportation - State aid forms
5.11
27091
Monticello Community Education Program - 1989 Contribution
16,000.00
27092
Braun Engineering - Testing at Reservoir 6 Oakwood Industrial Pk
2,444.40
27093
GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK i
CASH DISBURSEMENTS - JUNE 1989
IN
.1
C
l
I.C.M.A. Retirement Co. -
Payroll deductions
568.88
27094
Anoka County Social Services
- Payroll deductions
210.16
27095
State Capitol Credit Union
- Payroll deductions
70.04
27096
Void
- 0 -
27097
Void
- 0 -
27098
Void
- 0 -
27099
PERA - Payroll deductions
1,605.77
27100
Wright County State Bank -
FICA. Federal 6 Medicare W/H
5.485.91
27101
Commissioner of Revenue -
State W/H for June
1.798.23
27102
Payroll for May
30,900.30
Total Disbursements
for May
329,641.21
IN
.1
C
LIQUOR FUND
CASH DISBURSEMENTS - JUNE 1989
AMOUNT
Ed Phillips 6 Sons Co. - Liquor
1,269.95
Gruys, Johnson 6 Associates - Computer charges for Jan, Feb; March 6
April
440.00
Stare Capitol Credit Union - Payroll deductions
250.00
Wright County State Bank - FICA, Federal 6 Medicare W/H
614.77
PERA - PERA W/H
201.00
Commissioner of Revenue - State W/H for May
210.47
Bureau of Alcohol. Tobacco, 6 Firearms - Tax Renewal
250.00
Quality Wine 6 Spirits Co. - Liquor
2,208.33
Eagle Wine Company - Wine
1,056.64
Griggs, Cooper 6 Co. - Liquor
4,588.32
Vacuum Center - Parts
20.50
PERA - Insurance premium
9.00
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll Deductions
250.00
Ed Phillips 6 Sons Co. - Liquor
1,616.13
Johnson Brothers Wholesale Liquor Co. - Liquor
852.18
PERA - PERA W/H
189.23
Wright County State Bank - FICA, Federal 6 Medicare W?h
603.47
Void
- 0 -
Griggs. Cooper 6 Co. - Liquor
6.206.76
Liefert Trucking - Freight Charges
449.07
Northern States Power Company - Utilities
704.82
:rosslein Beverage Co. - Beer and supplies
19,140.10
jahlheimer Distributing Co. - Beer and wine
26,246.78
Seven -Up Bottling Co. - Pop
225.50
Viking Coca Cola Co. - Pop
573.10
Kolles Sanitation - Garbage service
141.00
City Of Monticello - Insurance reimbursement
2,358.00
Monticello Office Products - Office supplies
37.02
Thorpe Distributing Co. - Beer
14,734.15
Gruys, Johnson 6 Associates - Computer Charges for May
110.00
Dick Beverage Co. - Beer
2.386.90
Ron's Ice Company - Ice
653.02
Bernick's Pepsi Cola Co. - Pop
33R.45
Judo Candy 6 Tobacco Co. - Supplies
441.65
Day Distributing Co. - Supplies
794.80
Minnesota Bar Supply - Supplies
683.18
Monticello Times - Advertising
219.30
Midwest Gas Co. - Utilities
37.30
Commissioner of Revenue - Sales Tax for May
8.921.54
Commissioner of Revenue - 1/2 Estimated Sales Tax for June
4.825.00
Quality Wine 6 Spirits Co. - Liquor
2,593.57
Superior Products Co. - Picnic pumps
250.28
Coast to Coast - Supplies
3,29
Bridgewater Telephone Co. - Phone Charges
77,69
! Maus Foods - Supplies
54.34
d Phillips 6 Sone Co. - Liquor
1,173.98
�fl
LIQUOR WND
APLUNT
CF rK
CASH DISBURSEMENTS - JUNE - 1989
H
Principal Mutual Life Ins. Co. - Insurance premium
728.18
14510
Eagle Wine Co. - Liquor
274.14
14511
Griggs, Cooper 6 CO. - Liquor
2,015.91
14512
Johnson Brothers Wholesale Co. - Liquor
1,148.67
14513
Quality Wine 6 Spirits Co. - Liquor
1,815.42
14514
Fair's Garden Center - Sod, seed, etc.
39.24
14515
Quality Wine 6 Spirits Co. - Liquor
3,387.54
14516
Ed Phillips b Sons Co. - Liquor
1,208.45
14517
Johnson Brothers - Liquor
1,474.18
14518
Griggs, Cooper 6 Co. - Liquor
420.19
14519
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll Deductions
250.00
14520
Commissioner of Revenue - State W/H for June
226.65
14521
Wright County State Bank - FICA, Federal b Medicare W/H
589.86
14522
PERA - Payroll Deductions
170.98
14523
Payroll for May
3,644.96
Total Disbursements for June
126,404.95
_J
J
J