City Council Agenda Packet 01-14-1991AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, January 14, 1991 - 7:00 p.m.
Mayor: Ken Maus
Council Members: Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen,
Brad Fyle, Clint Herbst
1. Call to order.
2. Oath of office.
3. Approval of minutes of the special meetings held November 30,
1990, December 3, 1990, December 10, 1990, December 17, 1990,
and the regular meeting held December 10, 1990.
4. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
5. Consideration of an ordinance amendment to Section 3-9 [C]4 to
include: (j) A permit for a public sign in the form of a
decorative banner to be displayed on public property for a
period of one (1) year. A permit shall be issued for each
year that the decorative banners are displayed. Applicant,
City of Monticello.
6. Consideration of approving public banner system proposal.
Applicant, Monticello Chamber of Commerce.
7. Consideration of an ordinance amendment to Section 2-2 [HB) of
the Monticello Zoning Ordinance by adding "beautician" to the
list of home occupations allowed by ordinance. Amendment to
also include additional conditions associated with the
operation of a home occupation and establishment of a home
occupation permitting process. Applicant, City of Monticello.
8. Consideration of a resolution declaring costs to be assessed
and ordering preparation of proposed assessment roll and
setting a public hearing for Project 90-4 (Sandberg East
Improvement).
9. Consideration of resolution releasing conditional use
restriction--Outlot A of Sandberg East plat.
10. Consideration of accepting petition for annexation and
agreeing to enter into a joint resolution with Monticello
Township for annexation of West Kjollborgs Mobile Homo Park.
11. Consideration of accepting partial payment of delinquent
assessments from Farm Credit Services to allow sale of 49 -acro
parcel to school district.
City Council Agenda
January 14, 1991
Page 2
12. Consideration of an Interim ordinance imposing a moratorium on
adult oriented land uses on certain property located within
the city of Monticello. Applicant, City of Monticello.
13. Consideration of purchasing additional scanner and software
for the recycling program.
14. Consideration of amendment to contract with Professional
Services Group for change in scope of services, i.e.,
laboratory certification requirements.
15. Consideration of making annual appointments.
16. Consideration of approving 1991 contract for police protection
with Wright County Sheriff.
17. Ratification of salary adjustments for 1991.
18. Consideration of authorizing the purchase of a vehicle for the
Building Inspection Department.
19. Consideration of bills for the last half of December.
20. Adjournment.
OBJECTION TO ASSESSMENT FOR JEFF AND COLLEEN NELSON
BOX 6EE. GILLARD AVENUE
HISTORICAL REFERENCE:
- We built and moved into our home in October of 1987. Al that time we
were in the OAA and there were no plans for annexation of Sandberg
East or extension of city services. Services at that time only extended
out to Mississippi Drive.
- We were annexed into the city along with Sandberg East in mid 1988.
We were never notified of the annexation proceedings until after it
happened. We believe that the city did not realize that anyone lived
in Sandberg East.
- In fall of 1988, city services were extended out up to the Halliger
property with the East County Rd. 39 project. These services were
installed at the request of the property owners.
In fall of 1989, a building permit for a lot in Sandberg East was denied
since the home would be built with private well and septic.
BENEFITS FROM THE PROJECT:
- We have Ctie own well and septic system, only 3 years old.
- We I1dVe talked to realtors and an appraiser. Their opinion is, from a
mdrket alir38point, thut there is no benefit from city services.
In addiliiih to the assessment costs, we will be forced to hookup to
sewer aviihin 3 years, at an estimated cost of 11200 to $1500.
In (fie piellctiditry discussions for this project, the "target" for
deterdiini6g if the project was feasible seemed to be (6000/lot. How
does the ciiy ri'tionalize that we have "benefited" by $9225 when we
already have adequate private services?
- We challenge the idea that we*automatically "benefit" more because
we have more front footage, simply because the costs are allocated that
way. We still only have one building site.
LOSS OF VALUE TO OUR PROPERTY:
We feel that due to this project, we have actually had a loss of property
value due to the loss of approximately 30 mature trees in front of our
house.
In addition to aesthetic value, the trees provided a barrier for
privacy, noise, mind and sun.
In addition, this winter we found that they provided a barrier for
snowmobiles.
SUMMARY:
We did not request city services since we have nothing to gain by them.
We just happened to be in the way.
We do not believe that city services provide any tangible benefit to our
property.
We feel that we have actually lost property value due to the loss of
a majority of the trees in front of our house.
Slate lav requires that assessments against property must be
consistent with the benefit to the property owner. We believe there
is no way that the assessment against our property meets this criteria.
5-1
C/_31
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Friday, November 30, 1990 - 9:00 a.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Warren
Smith, Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: None
Consideration of aut horizinq purchase of equipment and
services associated with replacement of wastewater treatment
plant control center.
Public Works Director, John Simola, reported the City staff,
along with OSM, has reviewed the proposals submitted by
Dynamic Systems and by Bentec, Inc. Simola reported that both
proposals were reviewed on a step-by-step basis taking into
account both performance and cost considerations. Simola
reported that staff Is recommending that the City Council
select the proposal submitted by Dynamic Systems in the amount
of $79,875. Simola based the recommendation on the fact that
Dynamic Systems will completely remove and install a new
control center, whereas the proposal submitted by Bentec
called for utilization of a portion of the existing system.
The system offered by Dynamic Systems will also provide 20
control screens, providing information regarding the operation
of the system and its various parts to the operator, whereas
the Bentec system utilizes a PC system that may not be able to
provide the same level of reliability. The companies
utilizing equipment furnished by Dynamic Systems have been
pleased with the work and equipment provided by Dynamic
Systems; and in summary, Dynamic Systems provides the best
product for an industrial application.
Ken Maus asked if Bentec has the right to challenge the City's
decision in light of the fact that Bentec' s proposal was less
expensive. Simola responded by saying that duo to the
emergency situation, the request for proposals process
provides the City with the flexibility to make a selection on
factors other than cost factor.
Warren Smith noted that he's well satisfied with the staff
recommendation and noted that price is not the sole
consideration when purchasing such an important piece of
equipment.
Page I
Special Council Minutes - 11/30/90
After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by
Warren Smith, to purchase the wastewater treatment control
center and associated services from Dynamic Systems at a cost
of $79,875, including the performanco bond. Motion carried
unanimously.
Other matters.
John Simola reviewed a proposal to install street lights along
Gillard Avenue in front of lots created with the development
of the Sandberg East Second Addition.
Dan Blonigen noted that we may be jumping the gun in
installing the lights at this time, as there are no residences
established on the city side of Gillard. Ken Maus concurred
and suggested that we wait until the housing density in the
area is increased. In the meantime, it may make sense to
place one light at the intersection of Gillard and County
Road 39.
After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen, seconded
by Shirley Anderson, to direct Wright Hennepin County Electric
to place one light at the intersection of Gillard and County
Road 39 and consider adding additional street lights at such
time that the residential development along Gillard justifies
additional street lights. Motion carried unanimously.
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
Pago 2
38
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, December 3, 1990 - 4:00 p.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Warren
Smith, Dan Blonigen
Members Absent : None
City Council reviewed the proposed budget submitted by City
Administrator, Rick Wolfsteller. Wolfsteller reported that the
proposed budget results in a tax levy of $2,752,778, which amounts
to a 7.28 increase over last year's tax levy. This increase in the
tax levy, when combined with the effect of the increase in property
valuation, will result in an actual property tax increase of less
than 69, which is fairly close to the cost of living adjustments
projected. It was the consensus of Council to support the adoption
of the proposed budget as it now stands with any subsequent changes
to be made as a result of input from the public at the upcoming
public hearing.
Dan Blonigen noted that he can support the budget and the increases
projected with the understanding that major items purchased in 1991
would again be considered by the Council before purchases are made.
There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Warren
Smith, seconded by Dan Blonigen, to present the budget and proposed
tax levy of $2,752,778 to the public at the public hearing on
adoption of the 1991 budget and tax levy scheduled for December 10,
1990. Motion carried unanimously.
Ken Maus requested an itemized list of the bond issues now
currently being paid by the City, the list to include the
expiration data of each bond issue.
There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned.
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
0
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, December 10, 1990 - 6:30 p.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Warren
Smith, Dar, Blonigen
Members Absent: None
Administrator Wolfsteller discussed the potential of establishing
a policy for establishing annual pay adjustments. He noted that
there are many different methods used by various communities for
establishing annual pay adjustments. The policy, if implemented,
would relate employee performance to cost of living increases and
merit increases and also establish position pay ranges. In
addition, the policy would be integrated with a comparable worth
program that must be developed by December 31, 1991, as mandated by
state law.
Shirley Anderson remarked that a "step" system for adjusting pay
based on degrees or credits earned, seniority, or other criteria
can work in some situations but may not be as easy to implement in
a city setting.
Dan Blonigen noted that it is important to establish a range of pay
for each position and make sure that position ranges are
comparable. Blonigen also remarked that cost of living increases
noted by the Kiplinger report include increases in the cost of
insurance; therefore, cost of living increases granted to employees
should be adjusted downward to reflect increases in City payments
to employee insurance programs. Blonigen also noted that
individuals not performing to expectations should not receive a
cost of living increase. Rick Wolfsteller responded by saying that
employees should be considered for termination if they are not
performing up to expectations.
Ken Maus suggested the concept of establishing a pool to be used
for merit increases and to be used to make comparable worth
adjustments.
Warren Smith responded by saying that it was his understanding that
we were moving away from the merit pay concept.
Wolfstellor emphasized that we may need a pool to be used to adjust
for comparable worth adjustments.
Warren Smith suggested adjusting pay as done the previous year with
a bonus for people who should got recognition.
Page 1
C13)
Special Council Minutes - 12/10/90
At this point in the meeting, Council discussed establishment of a
pay increase pool to be distributed by the City Administrator.
Fra P it noted that the cost of living increase for the past year
therefore, the pool should consist of an amount equal to
S 5.6 of the current payroll.
After discussion, a motion was made by Fran Fair and seconded by
Warren Smith to establish a pay adjustment pool of $26,000 to be
distributed as pay increases to employees as deemed appropriate by
the City Administrator, with the City Administrator's pay
adjustment to be considered later. Voting in favor of the motion:
Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley Anderson, Ken Maus. Opposed: Dan
Blonigen.
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
Pago 2
D3
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - CITY COUNCIL
Monday, December 10, 1990 - 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley
Anderson, Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: None
2. Approval of minutes.
After discussion, a motion was made by Warren Smith and
seconded by Shirley Anderson to approve the minutes of the
meeting held November 26, 1990. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
None forthcoming.
4. Public hearinq on adoption of 1991 budqet and consideration of
resolution settinq 1491 tax levv.
Mayor Maus opened the public hearing for citizens, comments.
There being no comments forthcoming, Mayor Maus closed the
public hearing. Mayor Maus noted that the City Council had
conducted a special meeting for the purpose of reviewing the
proposed budget and that no changes to the budget had resulted
from that meeting.
There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Fran
Fair, and seconded by Shirley Anderson, to adopt a resolution
adopting the 1991 budget and setting the total tax levy at
$2,752,778. Motion carried unanimously.
SEE RESOLUTION 90-55.
5. Consideration of final plat request to replat portions of the
Sandberg East residential subdivision. Applicant, John
Sandberg.
Assistant Administrator, Jeff O'Neill, reported to the Council
that John Sandberg had completed two of the throe conditions
required by Council prior to City approval of the final plat
of the Sandberg Eaet Second Addition. He went on to state
that is likely that the third condition will be met in the
near future and that staff fools comfortable in withholding
the actual signing of the plat until the third requirement is
completed. Brat Woiss of OSM reported that the third
condition included the requirement that the grading and
drainage plan be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
Pago 1
4
Council Minutes - 12/10/90
It appears at this time that there are no major issues to
contend with regarding the drainage plan; therefore, it
appears appropriate at this time to approve the plat with
final signing of the plat to be withheld until the drainage is
entirely complete. Ken Maus asked John Sandberg if he was
aware that the drainage plan is not quite complete. John
Sandberg stated that there did not appear to be any problems
in making the requested changes to the drainage plan as
requested by the City Engineer.
Fran Fair asked if a park dedication fee would be required
with this plat. Assistant Administrator, Jeff O'Neill,
responded by saying that the plat park dedication requirement
did not apply because the original land was platted prior to
being annexed by the City, and a park dedication had been paid
with the platting of the land while it was in the township.
After discuss ion, a motion was made by Fran Fair, and seconded
by Dan Blonigen, to approve the final plat of the Sandberg
East Second Addition but withhold signing of the plat until
such time that the City Engineer grants final approval of
grading and drainage plans and subject to acquisition of
necessary storm water drainage easements. Monumentation
associated with new plat must be in place, and monumentation
associated with the previous plat must be replaced prior to
issuance of a building permit on any of the new lots created
with the Sanciberg East Second Addition.
At this point in the meeting, John Sandberg asked if Council
would consider assessing the lots created with the plat now
being approved at the same rate as was previously planned with
an earlier version of the Sandberg East plat. Sandberg noted
at the time the earlier plat was considered, Council was
willing to fix the assessment at $92,000 to be assessed
against the entire length of the lots along Gillard Avenue.
Sandberg requested that Council consider applying the same
cost per lot to the now plat.
Rick Wolfsteller noted that the City at this time has not
compiled all the costs associated with construction of the
sewer and water line. In addition, a fair and consistent
strategy for assessing all benefiting property owners has not
boon developed. It would appear at this time, given the
situation, it is premature to guarantee an assessment amount.
woifateilor went on to report that staff will have the
accurate project totals and a proposed assessment roll ready
for Council within one weak. It was the consensus of Council
to discuss this matter at a spacial meeting of the City
Council scheduled for 3:00 p.m., Monday, December 17, 1990.
Pago 2
0
Council Minutes - 12/10140
Consideration of renewinq Joint fire aqreement with Monticello
Township.
Administrator Wolfsteller reviewed the method by which the
contribution made by Monticello Township for operation of the
fire department is established. Wolfsteller noted that the
existing contract calls for utilization of the assessed value
as part of the calculation used in determining the Township
contribution. Wolfsteller went on by saying that due to
changes in the method by which the property taxes are
collected, it now appears that utilization of market value in
lieu of assessed value in the fair share formula will make
more sense and result in more fair allocation of costs.
Dan Blonigen reviewed the potential increase in charges to the
Township resulting from change in the method of calculating
the Township contribution and noted that the added charge of
48 is not excessive, is more understandable, and is a fair
method by which the Township's share can be calculated.
Shirley Anderson agreed with the potential change because it
appears that the City taxpayer is subsidizing a portion of the
cost to provide service to the township.
After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen, and
seconded by Warren Smith, to agree to renew the contract and
adjust the formula for cost sharing by establishing market
value in lieu of formerly used assessed value in the fair
share formula. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of a resolution establishinq an additional
deferred compensation plan for municipal employees.
Rick Wolfsteller requested that the City Council consider
allowing IDS Financial Services to establish a deferred
compensation program for City employees. There is no cost to
the City for this service, and this service would be in place
along side the existing International City Management
Association Deferred Compensation Pian now in place.
Wolfstellor also noted there is another plan in place offered
by the Safoco Insurance plan. Up to this date, no City
employees have utilized the Safeco plan.
After discussion, a motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by
Warren Smith, to adopt the IDS deferred compensation pian and
eliminate the Safeco deferred compensation plan. Voting in
favor: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson.
Opposed: Dan Blonigon.
SEE RESOLUTION 90-56.
Pago 3
Council Minutes - 12/10/90
Consideration of replacement of tractor mower/ snowblower for
the parks department.
John Simola reported that approximately three years ago the
City purchased a tractor mower/blower combination unit for a
front mounted Toro mower unit. It was decided at that time
that we could install a snowblower on the cab of our 650 John
Deere and use that as our primary snowblowing piece of
equipment for sidewalks and miscellaneous cleanup. This
combination has not been successful, as the John Deere does
not have sufficient horsepower and, coupled with a non -
hydrostatic drive, has made it impractical for blowing snow
from areas with any significant accumulation of snow. The
underpower problems continue, and we, therefore, felt it was
time to replace the 650 John Deere with something more suited
to blowing snow. In addition, the parks department has been
considering acquisition of an additional mower, as at times it
has been dlfficult to keep up with the mowing on city
properties. In preparation for this, it was felt that we
could purchase heavy duty snowblower/mower unit with various
attachments for sidewalk maintenance and keep the John
Deere 650 but limit it to mowing only with occasional backup
as a snowblower. An amount of $55,000 was requested and
placed in the 1991 budget.
We have further investigated our needs, and with Councilmember
Blonlgen's assistance, we have determined that the cost of
such a heavy duty piece of equipment for snowblowing with its
limited suitability for mowing operations limits its
practicality for the City of Monticello. We, therefore, have
reassessed the needs for 1991 and feel they would be better
met replacing the 650 John Deere with a larger, more powerful
tractor which could handle our snowblowing and mowing needs.
Simola reported that the City could purchase a 955 John Deere
4 -wheel drive tractor with 27 horsepower in the area of
$20,000. With this purchase, the trade-in value of the John
Deere would be about $5,000; therefore, we could expect the
cost of the roplac emont unit to be under $15,000. The City
prefers the John Deere 955 due to experience with past units,
and parts and service are available in Monticello and nearby
Rogers. Another option would be to rent tho unit at $1,032
per month or $6,192 for a six-month period should wo choose to
rent it that long . During the time we are using the now
tractor and chocking it out, the City staff could furthor
evaluate the need for additional mowing oquipmont.
Page 4
D
Council Minutes - 12/10/90
Ken Maus asked if the unit proposed for purchase is limited in
terms of maneuverability. Simola responded by saying that the
unit, though larger, is not so large as to have problems in
maneuvering in areas where the unit is needed most.
Dan Blonigen stated that he is not ready to vote for this. He
would like to study it further. fie suggested that this unit
may not be used enough and may not be designed to fit our
needs, as utilization of a plow may be better.
After discussion, Council concluded that the unit could be
rented for a short term on a trial basis. After the unit has
been used in operation, the City could determine whether or
not to purchase it.
After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by
Shirley Anderson, to authorize City staff to rent the John
Deere 955 for a period of one month starting after the first
snowfall and consider purchase of the unit only after its
effectiveness is well understood. Motion carried unanimously.
9. Consideration of adoot-a-street program terms and conditions.
Public Works Director, John Simola, reported that he has
spoken with the City Attorney and obtained information from
MN/DOT regarding a cleanup program similar to the adopt -a -
highway program operated by the State of Minnesota. Simola
noted that the Minnesota Department of Transportation has done
most of the legwork and has a number of terms and conditions
already identified that could be applied to the Monticello
program. Simola suggested that the City obtain certificates
of insurance when possible from organized groups.
Kon Maus asked if tho adopt -a -street program could apply to a
Park. John Simola noted that the program could be modified to
apply to a park.
Warren Smith remarked that the terms and conditions require
that an organization pick up materials at least three times a
year. It may be in certain areas that cleanup should occur at
a greater frequency.
Shirley Anderson concurred that in curtain areas it may make
sense to require the cleanup to occur at the discretion of the
Public Works Director.
Pago 5
n
Council Minutes - 1.^./10 /90
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson,
seconded by Fran Fair, to adopt the terms and conditions as
presented with the addition that the program could be applied
to cleanup of cemetery and park property, placement of signs
indicating the organization responsible for cleanup is
optional, and in order to receive recognition through
placement of an adapt -a -street sign, organizations interested
in the program must be willing to be involved for two years at
a minimum. City staff will be responsible for administering
the program with update on citizen participation provided to
Council.
10. Consideration of a curb -side recvclino program for plastics.
John Simola reported that as authorized by the City Council,
a pilot recycling program for plastics was conducted from July
to October. As a result of the pilot program, it appeared
that the best method for collecting plastics would be to
utilize curb -side collection.
Ken Maus asked if the City is being premature regarding
collection of plastic and should be getting better
participation on the other items first.
Fran Fair suggested that the City move forward and that the
citizens of the community are ready to recycle plastics.
Shirley Anderson concurred. People want to recycle plastics.
Maus noted that he is not against the idea of recycling
plastics; however, it may make sense to take a slow approach.
After discusa ion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson,
seconded by Fran Fair, to authorize an amendment to the
existing contract with Polka Dot Recycling to include curb-
side recycling of plastics at a cost of $.30 per household per
month for single family and $,20 per unit per month for
apartment units at an estimated yearly cost of $6,000. In
addition, this alternative would pay for one-half of the cost
of the 90 -gallon containers for plastic at the apartment sites
with the program to begin January 3, 1991. Motion carried
unanimously.
11. Consideration of bills for the first half of December.
Ken Maus asked if some of the chocks being approved by Council
have already been processed prior to Council approval. Rick
Wolfstollor noted that some chocks aro mailed previous to
final Council approval. These chocks are for financial
commitments that the City has made previously or chocks that
Pago 6
0
( Council Minutes - 12/10/90
will result in the City not paying finance charges. Many of
the checks, however, are withheld until such time that Council
approves the check register.
Ken Maus asked if the report could somehow be structured to
place the items that are pre -approved in one category and
those not already approved in another category.
Rick Wolfsteller noted that he would look into this
possibility.
Motion was then made by Warren Smith, seconded by Shirley
Anderson, to approve the payment of bills for the first half
of December. Motion carried unanimously.
12. Other matters.
A special meeting of the City Council was scheduled for
3:00 p.m., December 17, 1990, for the purpose of consideration
of awarding the 1991/1992 transportation service contract and
for the purpose of reviewing the public improvement cost and
proposed assessment roll associated with the City project
extending utilities to the Sandberg East Second Addition.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
Pago 7
RE
MINUTES
l CONTINUATION OF SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, December 10, 1990 - 10:10 P.M.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Warren
Smith, Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: None
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ken Maus.
A discussion was held on the strengths and weaknesses of the City
Administrator, Rick Wolfsteller. The Council agreed that Rick by
and large was doing a fine job but needed to work in certain areas
such as public relations.
Council further discussed the relationship of Administrator to
Assistant Administrator and all agreed Assistant Administrator
should receive a merit increase.
Motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair, to grant a
5.4% salary increase to the City Administrator and further to
direct the Administrator to grant a 5.4% increase to Assistant
1 Administrator, Jeff O'Neill, along with a $1,000 merit increase.
(The merit increase was to be added to the package increase already
authorized by Council . ) Voting in favor: Fran Fair, Warren Smith,
Ken Maus. Opposed: Dan Blonigen. Abstaining: Shirley Anderson.
Ken Maus
Mayor
I
C
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, December 17, 1990 - 3:30 p.m.
Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley
Anderson, Dan Slonigen
Members Absent: None
2. Consideration of awarding the Monticello Heartland Express
dial -a -ride bus system contract for 1991 and 1992.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the staff and
Monticello Transportation Advisory Committee analysis of the
two bids submitted to the City of Monticello. O'Neill
summarized the analysis by saying that the bid submitted by
Hoglund Coach Lines and the bid submitted by Medavan over a
four-year time period would result in approximately the same
cost. In terms of performance, Hoglund Coach Lines has shown
throughout the first year of service that the organization is
capable of providing excellent transportation service. It is
not likely that Medavan will be able to improve upon the
service provided by Hoglund Coach Lines; therefore, given the
fact that the costs are relatively equal, the Monticello
Transportation Advisory Committee, along with staff,
recommends that the City select Hoglund Coach Lines as the
transportation service provider for 1991 and 1992.
Warren Smith remarked that he is happy with the way the
transportation system has operated. He stated that the system
is still relatively new and building its ridership.
Fran Fair agreed that the transportation system is good for
the city.
After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by
Warren Smith, to award the 1991/1992 Monticello Heartland
Express contract to Hoglund Coach Lines of Monticello. Motion
carried unanimously.
3. Consideration of establishina an assessment formula for the
Sandbera East, 90-4 orolect.
City Administrator, Rick Wolfstoller, reported that the 1990-4
improvement project servicing the Sandberg East development is
nearing completion with primarily restoration work left to do
in the spring. Staff has boon accumulating costs involved in
Page 1
Special Council Minutes - 12/17/90
this project and has compiled a total project cost, including
change orders and al l indirect casts. Total project cost for
construction only will total $172,230. To this figure we must
add indirect costs such as engineering, legal fees, bonding
costs, etc., to arrive at total project cost. With indirect
costs, the total project cost has amounted to $123,400.
wolfsteller then reviewed two methods by which the costs could
be allocated to benefiting property owners. t:olfsteller
reviewed Option A which essentially called for the entire
project cost to be assessed to benefiting property owners
except for the City assuming 285 feet of side frontage along
Gillard and also would include the City paying for the
oversizing expenses associated with future extension of the
utilities. wolfsteller noted that utilizing this option may
result in a proposed assessed amount for each lot that might
be excessive. The reason why it is excessive is because only
one side of the roadway can be developed, and there are not
enough property owners to spread the total cost to.
wolfsteller remarked that under Exhibit B the City would
assume 258 of the lateral sewer and water cost, with the
remaining amount to be assessed to benefiting property owners
011 a front footage basis plus service connections.
Woifsteller noted that under this option, the individual
assessment amounts will not be excessive. In this situation,
a precedent for the City paying 251 of the cost of the lateral
sewer and water cost is not being set because the City is, to
some extent, forced to provide sewer and water to the area
that was annexed as platted land. In addition, the only path
available to get to the annexed property had limited access to
the sewer and water lines from one side of the improvement.
Finally, wolfsteller noted that although the City will be
paying for a portion of the lateral sewer and war -or costs
associated with this project, in the long run, the City will
be able to recover a major portion of that expense through the
application of an area assessment to be applied against those
properties that utilize this wator and sewer service line at
some point in the future.
Ken Maus noted that Council decided to go ahead with this
project for environmental reasons. Extending the utilities to
Sandberg East was the right way to do it but not the least
expensive_
Page 2
Special Council Minutes - 12/17/90
Fran Fair asked if staff feels costs can be picked up with
area assessments associated with future projects in the area.
Rick Wolfsteller responded by saying that the area assessment
could be applied to pick up a major portion of the City's
contribution to the project.
Ken Maus asked if the cost per foot being charged to the
benefiting property owners under Option B is similar to that
charged to properties improved as part of other City projects.
John Simola reported that the cost per foot under Option B is
nearly the same as that which was charged to property owners
that received benefit from the Highway 39 project done a few
years earlier; therefore, the cost per foot being charged is
consistent with what other property owners have paid. Under
Option B, the cost per foot is quite higher than what the
normal improvement cost per foot would be, essentially because
only one side of the roadway is being assessed.
Dan Blonigen remarked that City payment of 25% of the project
cost amounts to a City subsidy. He asked why we are dipping
into the taxpayers bag. Ken Maus responded by saying that
this is a unique situation where it was important to the City
future considerations that utilities be extended to this area.
At the same time, however, the project costs have to be at a
level that the property owners can live with. At some point,
the assessments become too large which could result in the
City ultimately obtaining the property.
Motion was made by Fran Fair to select Exhibit B as a program
for assessing benefiting property owners, which includes City
absorbing 25% of the lateral sewer and water expenses due to
the unique situation whereby only one side of the improvement
can be assessed. This alternative was chosen with the
understanding that a portion of all of the amount absorbed by
the City may be recapturod in the future through area
assessments when additional properties are developed or
annexed.
Dan Blonigen noted that he might support a compromise between
Option A and Option B. Shirley Anderson was concerned that a
precedent might be set here. Wolfstoller reiterated that the
precedent is diminished because of the unique situation.
Ken Maus seconded the motion and expressed support for moving
ahead with Option B. voting in favor of the motion: Fran
Fair, Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Warren Smith. Opposed: Dan
Blonigen.
Pago 3
IN
Special Council Minutes - 12/11/40
Rick Wolfsteller noted that John Sandberg requested that the
assessment be placed against four lots. Council did not
oppose placing assessments against 4 of the 13 lots owned by
Sandberg so long as there is sufficient security that in the
event the assessments are not paid, the City will be able to
obtain a property without going through the tax forfeiture
process.
4. Ratification of salary adjustments for 1991.
City Administrator Wolfsteller presented Council with an
outline of proposed salary adjustments for all non-union
employees . Ken Maus reviewed previous Council action which
called for providing the City Administrator with the
flexibility to provide staff increases utilizing a $26,000
pool.
Marlene Heilman expressed her concern that the method by which
the overall employee increases were distributed was not fair.
She complained that the evaluation system was not consistent,
and the method by which the money was distributed was not
fair.
Rick Wolfsteller noted that he would be happy to sit down with
Marlene and discuss the specific reasons behind her salary
adjustment.
Shirley Anderson noted that if Rick can support the increase
proposed for each employee, she can support the overall plan.
Rick Wolfsteller described instances where individual salary
adjustments could be readjusted in a manner that would improve
comparable worth relationships.
Ken Maus noted that he would not be against providing the City
Administrator an additional sum to provide latitude to
increase certain individuals as deemed appropriate by the City
Administrator.
After discussion, motion was made by Shirley Anderson,
seconded by Warren Smith, to adopt the salary schedule as
proposed with the addition of $500 to be used to correct
inequities in the proposed schedule as deemed appropriate by
the City Administrator. voting in favor of the motion: Ken
Maus, warren Smith, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson. Absent: Dan
Blonigen.
Page 4
Special Council Minutes - 12/17/90
Rick Wolfsteller stated that it is certainly a good idea to
begin implementation of a formal evaluation system. We have
the forms already, and we should be evaluating each person at
their anniversary date.
Jeff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
Page 5
0
Council Agenda 1/14/91
5. Consideration of an ordinance amendment to Section 3-9 1C14 to
include: (1) A permit for a public sign in the form of a
decorative banner to be displayed on public property for a
period of one (1) year. A permit shall be issued for each
year that the decorative banners are displayed. Applicant„
City of Monticello. (J.O.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the December meeting of the Planning Commission, the
Commission continued the public hearing and directed staff to
work with Councilmember Blonigen toward development of
language that would establish standards and requirements
associated with display of public banners. Staff met with Dan
Blonigen, along with Shirley Anderson, and also received input
from Barb Schwientek and has prepared a proposed ordinance
amendment governing public banners, which was presented to the
Planning Commission last Tuesday. Also included is a
definition of a public banner, which can be inserted into the
definition section of the zoning ordinance. The Planning
Commission acted to approve the ordinance amendment based on
the finding noted under alernative A1.
I will review the ordinance amendment and rationale for the
standards noted in more detail at the meeting.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to recommend approval of the zoning ordinance
amendment with any modifications that City Council may
wish to make as a result of discussion .
This motion could be based on the finding that allowing
development of a public banner system will servo to
beautify the community and enhance our environment and
should not result in negative side effects that will
depreciate property or result in visual obstructions to
private or traffic signs. Based on the potential finding
above, Council could approve the proposed zoning
ordinance amendment.
Motion to recommend donial of the proposed zoning
ordinance amendment.
If the City Council does not agree with the potential
finding under alternative #I, then the Commission should
select this alternative.
C
Council Agenda 1/14/91
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff appreciates the assistance that Shirley Anderson, Barb
Schwientek, and Dan Blonigen have provided in development of
language that I feel is an improvement over the language that
was presented to the Planning Commission at the previous
meeting in December. The ordinance amendment as proposed will
allow development of a banner system that will accomplish the
goal of beautifying the city and promoting a sense of place.
It does not severely restrict the development of banners;
however, it does impose some limitations and standards that
will, in the long run, assure the City that the banners are
installed in a thoughtful manner that complements existing
sign regulation.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the proposed ordinance amendment.
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAT
SECTION 2-2 AND SECTION 3-9 [C)4 OF THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE
BE AMENDED BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING:
2-2: DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, wherever they
occur in this ordinance, shall be interpreted as herein
defined:
[PM) PUBLIC BANNER: Decorative banners are City -owned
banners hung primarily from City light fixtures in
ccnjunction with a City Council approved public banner
system. Public banners are intended to serve a public
purpose through beautification of the city or by
advertising of a community event or special occasion.
3-9: SIGNS:
[C) GENERAL PROVISIONS
4.(j ) Public banners may be hung from City street
light fixtures for a period of up to one (1)
year. Design and placement of the public
banners shall be consistent with the following
standards:
Design and placement of public
sign/decorative banners must first be
approved by the City Council and annually
therea fter. Prior to Council
consideration, applicant shall submit a
banner placement plan which shows
propos ed banner design, size, pole
locati on/elevation, duration, and
proposed manner by which the banners
shall be hung. Banner placement plan
shall also describe financing sources for
purchasing and installing public banners.
Public banners may be hung from parking
lot light fixtures or from other
structures on private property only in
conjunction with a City Council approved
public banner system. Except for
roquirements outlined in section 4 . (j) of
this ordinance, said banners are exempt
from sign regulations. The City shall
not pa rticipato in financing any portion
of the cost of public banners placed on
private property. City crows may assist
with t ho installation of public banners
placocl on private property if compensated
at actual cost to install banners.
0
Ordinance Amendment No.
Page 2
3. Except for Christmas banners, all banners
shall contain an element of the City
colors and/or City logo. No private
advertising may be allowed on any banner
hung in conjunction with a public banner
system.
4. Public banners hung from streetscape
fixtures shall be no larger than 14" by
45". Banners hung from standard street
lights shall be no larger than 28" by
80".
5. Public banners shall be not hung in a
position that will cause a substantial
obstruction of visibility from the street
to advertising, traffic, and directional
signs and shall not be hung in a position
so as to interrupt corner sight lines.
6. Public banners may be hung only on
alternate streetscape fixtures unless
otherwise approved by Council.
7. Banners placed on City fixtures shall
become the property of the City. If
damaged or in need of repair, banners may
be removed by City staff. The public
banner system may be discontinued, and
all banners, including those on private
property, may be ordered removed at the
discretion of the City Council.
8. The bracket system used to hang banners
shall be of sufficient strength to
withstand strong winds and shall be
designed in a manner that allows easy
installation and removal of banners.
Adopted this day of , 1991.
Mayor
City Administrator
0
Council Agenda - I/14/91
6. Consideration of approving public banner system proposal.
Applicant, Monticello Chamber of Connnerce. (J.O.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
if the amendment to the zoning ordinance allowing development
of public banner systems is approved, Council is asked to
consider approving a plan resubmitted by the Chamber of
Commerce. In accordance with the new ordinance, the Chamber
submits the attached banner placement plan.
The following is a review of the plan in terms of the proposed
ordinance. Please review the plan before reading staff
remarks below.
Information Requirements
The information regarding the plan is sufficient and
consistent with the information requirements noted by
ordinance.
Banner Design
The banner design does contain the City logo. No specific
advertising is proposed for any of the banners. The design
appears to be consistent with the intent of the ordinance;
however, Council has the latitude to deny approval if the
design is not acceptable. Please note that three finished
banners have been hung on Broadway in front of Johnson's
Clothing for your roferenco per the Chamber of Commerce banner
proposal. Color pictures of what tho same block would look
like with six banners are included in your packet.
Banner Size
Streotscapo banners will be 14" by 45" . Standard light pole
banners will be 28" by 80". The size proposed is consistent
with the ordinance.
Pole Location/Elovation
The proposal does not identify all individual light poles that
will be used and asks that City staff or Council members
assist with idontlfying banner locations. This plan is
acceptable, as it provides the City with flexibility in
d otermining which polos should be used given nearby signs,
traffic sight lines, otc.
3
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
Public�Iner System Duration
The proposal to kee he anner system place a minimum f
'one 4ear lis cons tent ith the a al eview r ement
out ined y ord ance. Council ea ha a the tit de to
re ova in ivid 1 banner or th entire yste t an time.
A ording to a manufact er he banner a uld be a le to
w thstand years of use.
TheChamber of Commerce has indicated that some time in the
future the City may receive a request to allow placement of
seasonal banners on streetscape lights notused with the
present program. Although the ordinance limits use of every
other streetscape light for hanging banners, the option to use
every light is possible with special permission from Council.
Banner Bracket Desiqn
The bracket system proposed appears to be consistent with the
ordinance, as it is being used successfully by other
communities.
On the other hand, although the drawing of the bracket design
is useful, it is difficult to determine how good the bracket
system actually is. Prior to installation of all the
brackets, staff will evaluate them and determine if another
system is appropriate.
Banner Budqet
According to previous Council action, the City has committed
to financing 754 of the cost to purchase banners and brackets,
which according to the original budget amounted to $5,400.
The budget proposed is consistent with this arrangement.
Under this proposal, City staff will be installing brackets
and banners.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to approve or modify and approve the public banner
system as proposed by the Chamber of Commerce.
If Council is comfortable that tho proposal moots the
requirements as outlined by the ordinance, then this
option should be selected. If there aro any concerns
regarding design, they should be addressed at this point.
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
If the banner system becomes unpopular over time, the
City Council has the latitude to remove the banners at
any time.
If Council feels that more than three banners per block
is acceptable, then special permission to hang more than
three banners could be granted.
In addition, a Council member or members may wish to
volunteer to help staff with establishing proper
placements of banners in terms of location and elevation.
2. Motion to deny approval of the public banner system as
proposed by the Chamber of Commerce.
If Council determines that the proposal does not meet the
standards as outlined by ordinance, then this option
should be selected. If Council denies approval of the
plan because of design or other factor, Council still may
be morally obligated to pay 75% of the Chamber banner
expenses to date. At this time, it is not known what
that amount is.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
i
Staff recommends that Council approve the plan as proposod.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Public banner systom proposal.
5
PUBLIC BANNER SYSTEM PROPOSAL
MONTICELLO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
JANUARY 14, 1991
General Description/Purpose
The promotion committee of the Monticello Chamber of Commerce
has been developing a comprehensive image enhancing program.
The central thrust of this initiative revolves around
expressing what Monticello has to offer. We have found that
the perceptions of the general public have been less than
accurate in terms of what businesses and services actually can
be found in the Monticello area.
The main theme that we hope to emphasize is "Monticello, Your
Hind of Place." This line was chosen as a result of extensive
consumer research In our specific area. It can be easily
modified to include a reference for any type of business or
service. We will, through this program, emphasize that the
Monticello businesses and professional community are part of
their community and life. We must implant this image in the
minds of the public If we are to keep pace with the Increasing
competitions from surrounding regional commercial centers. We
have much to offer, but that message has not been presented as
effectively as we could have in the past. We must meet this
/ challenge in the future to remain viable in an increasingly
\ competitive environment.
Displaying banners throughout the city is one element of this
image enhancement program.
Banner Desiqn
The banners will be constructed of weather resistant vinyl
Impregnated poly canvas, which includes a yellow background
color, the City logo, and the words "Monticello, Your Rind of
Place." The design Is consistent with the design reviewed by
City Council In November of 1990.
Banner Size
Strootscape banners will be 14" by 45". Standard light pole
banners will be 28" by 80".
BANNER PLAN: 1/11/91 Pago 1
0
Pole Location/ Elevation
It is proposed that the large banners start at the freeway
exit by Hawk's Bar. There are light poles on alternate sides
of the street until over the hill then the light poles are on
every block through Monticello. Banners would alternate sides
of street at the beginning and then on alternate poles except
for the downtown area. In the down�own area, the small
banners would be located on alternate sides of the street on
every other decorative light pole. One or two small banners
would go on Walnut Street on decorative poles.
On Highway 25 from the bridge to the freeway, the large
banners would go on all light poles except for those at the
semaphores.
Options based on the number of banners could be placing two to
four large banners on Walnut Street.
Barb Schwientek will work with City Council members and/or
staff when the banners are to be put up to specifically mark
each pole that a banner will go on.
No banners are planned for private property with this order.
It remains likely that banners will be placed on prlvato
commercial property. Exact locations aro not known at this
time.
i
Public Banner System Duration
At this time, no termination date has been contemplated. It
Is requested that the banners be displayed for a period of at
least one year.. At some point in the future, the Chamber of
Commerce may be requesting display of seasonal banners on
streetscapo lights not being used In conjunction with this
baunor proposal.
Banner Bracket Doslgn
Ban nors placed on standard light poles aro designed as
described in the attached drawing.
BANNER PLAN: 1/11/91 Pago 2
Banner Budqet
C40 14" x 45" @ $.44 each . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,760
40 28" x 80" @ $.68 each . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,720
Design of screens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 500
2 Setup screens @ $325 each . . . . . . . . . . $ 650
80 Brackets for large banners @ $25 each . . . . $2,000
$7,630
The City Council approved a request for funding of the banners
at $5,400 in November 1990.
All banners placed on public property become the property of
the City.
The full cost to place banners on private property shall be
paid by the Chamber or the benefiting property owner.
Purchasing of banners for private property will be done
separate from the original order noted above.
The Chamber of Commerce requests that the City of Monticello
install brackets and banners.
1
BANNER PLAN: 1/11/91 Page 3
9
Brackets: T. iota has developed a unique Ba..cs -c;w n'" bracket that is
spring tensioned, protecting your banners from wind damage by tipping in
approximately 25 MPH winds, allowing a "spilling" of the wind.
k
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
Consideration of an ordinance amendment to Section 2-2 [HBI of
the Monticello Zoninq Ordinance by adding "beautician" to the
list of home occupations allowed by ordinance. Amendment to
also include additional conditions associated with the
operation of a home occupation and establishment of a home
occupation permittinq process. Applicant, City of Monticello.
(J.O.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
A request to allow a beautician to conduct a home occupation
as an accessory use in a residential zone has been presented
to City staff. Staff seeks assistance from Planning
Commission and City Council in determining if this type of
home occupation qualifies as an allowable home occupation. In
addition, staff requests that the Planning Commission and City
Council establish a simple process for licensing home
occupation use of residential property. This process will
enable City staff to determine if the operation of the
proposed home occupation is consistent with the standards
outlined by ordinance. At present, the City becomes aware of
a home occupation when there is a problem or violation of the
home occupation operating standards. A simple, inexpensive
permitting process would enable the City to get a good
description of the proposed home occupation operation before
it starts, thereby providing us with the opportunity to head
off potential problems.
The location of the proposed beautician home occupation is 115
Kevin Longley Drive in the Par West development. The request
has been submitted by Karla Dicky, who is a potential buyer of
the property. This party received a conditional use permit in
1988 to operate a beauty shop as a conditional use in a
residential zone in another neighborhood in the community.
Actually, the matter of allowing a beauty shop to operate in
a residential zone transcends this particular request.
Council should be reviewing this as a city-wide matter and not
a neighborhood Issue.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this
matter and received verbal testimony from a number of citizens
along with a petition that requests that the City allow a
"beautician" to operate in a residential zone with conditions.
The Planning Commission also was informed by the applicant
that she is comfortable with the conditions prescribed by
ordinance. In response to the information presented, Planning
Commission acted to recommend Including beautician as a home
occupation and also recommended establishment of a home
occupation permit process.
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
"Beautician" as a Home Occupation
Past history shows that the City is supportive of allowing a
beautician to operate out of a residence. On two occasions in
the past few years, the City has allowed a beautician to
operate out of a residence as a conditional use. Technically,
the City erred by requiring that the applicant obtain a
conditional use permit, as "beautician" is not listed as a
conditional use in any residential zoning district. In terms
of the two previous beautician applications, the City should
have reviewed the applications in terms of the regulations
governing home occupations and then determined if "beautician"
fits the home occupation definition. If the Planning
Commission and City Council had then interpreted the ordinance
so as to include beautician as an allowable home occupation,
then no special permission to operate is required. The only
requirement is that the beautician must operate in a manner
consistent with home occupation operation standards.
Following is the definition of a home occupation. As you will
note in the bold print below, beautician is not specifically
noted as an allowable home occupation. At the same time, the
ordinance does not limit allowable home occupations to the
vocations listed.
(HB) HOME OCCUPATION: Any gainful occupation engaged in
by the occupants of a dwelling at or from the
dwelling. Such activity shall be clearly
incidental and secondary to the residential use of
the premises. Permissible home occupations shall
not include the conducting of a retail business
other than by mail, manufacturing business, or a
repair shop of any kind on the premises, and no
stock in trade shall be kept or sold. No other
than persons residing on the premises shall be
employed, no mechanical equipment shall be employed
that is not customarily found in the home, and no
more than one ( 1) room may be dovoted to home
occupation use. Such home occupation shall not
require internal or external alterations or involve
construction features not customarily found in
dwellings. The entrance to the space devoted to
such occupations shall be within the dwelling.
There shall be no exterior display, no exterior
signs except as allowed in the sign regulations for
the zoning district in which such homo occupation
Is located. There shall bo no extortor storage of
equipment or materials used in the home occupation.
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
No home occupation shall be permitted which results
in or generates more traffic than one (1) car for
off-street parking at any given point in time.
Permissible home occupations include, but are not
limited to, the following: art studio,
dressmaking, special offices of a clergyman,
lawyer, architect, engineer, accountant, or real
estate agent or appraiser, when located in a
dwelling unit occupied by the same; and teaching,
with musical, dancing, and other instruction
limited to one (1) pupil at one time.
Arouments in Support of "Beautician" as an Allowable Home
Occupation:
According to City Planner, John Uban, a beautician operating
out of a home in a residential district will not cause the
adjoining properties to depreciate in value as long as
relatively strict regulations governing the operation of the
home occupation are maintained. The restrictions noted by
Uban are consistent with most of the restrictions that are
already in place under the home occupation definition. At
this time, there is no formal method for monitoring the
operation of home occupations. Following are restrictions
emphasized by John Uban that will serve to minimize the
negative Impact of a beautician operating in a residential
area.
Ono parking stall must be provided off-street. No
customer parking on the street, with total vehicles
parked outside at any one time limited to two
vehicles. The home should not have a "parked up"
appearance.
No signs allowed indicating the presence of
commercial use of the property.
This is consistent with the ordinance in place;
however, the City has in the past mistakenly
allowed home occupation identification/
advertising signs to be displayed in residential
areas. According to the City Planner, display of
Identification signs clearly indicating a
commercial use of residential property is not
consistent with existing ordinance and is adverse
to maintaining the purely rosidontal character of
the areas in which the home occupation signs aro
located. The presence of a home occupation should
be transparent if adjoining land values are to be
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
unaffected. Home occupation identification signs
have a clear commercial purpose and as such tend to
diminish the value of adjoining property. if
Council agrees with this point, a number of home
occupation identification signs would need to be
removed.
The applicant that initiated this proposal does
have a sign that reads Karla's Klips. Shp has
indicated that she does not object to removing her,
sign. It is proposed that the residence be allowed
to have a simple sign that states the name of the
property owner and address only with no reference
to a commercial identification. This restriction
has implications for other home occupation sites
already operating in town. There are a handful of
sites in town that would be required to remove
their signs in accordance with existing ordinance.
Home occupation sites that have non -conforming
signs include The Puppy Parlor, Joann's
Hairstyling, Dahlgren Jewelers, and Berrlgan s
Licensed Daycare. There may be others.
Home occupation use of the property limited t o
normal 9 - 5 business hours.
The Planning Commission did not specifically
recommend that the hours of operation be restricted
to 9 - 5. Rather, the Commission recommended that
the home occupation be limitea to "normal business
hours," thereby providing some flexibility.
Arguments Aciains t Includi nq Beautician in the List o f
Allowable Home Occupations:
Almost all of the home occupations listed involve occupations
that do not require each customer to visit the alto of the
home occupation. For instance, lawyers, real estate agents ,
and accountants may conduct much of their business off site or
over the phone. An argument could be made that a beautician
does not belong In the home occupation category because the
nature of the business is almost a retail service, as it
requires each customer to visit the residence. In other
words, as compared to other allowable home occupations, a
beautician may result in a higher and unacceptable rate of
commercial traffic in a residential area.
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
This particular home occupation is not a hobby. It is a full-
time job with as many as eight to ten customers served on any
one day. An argument could be made that this level of
business activity is better suited to a commercial area.
Commercial space is available, and it has been demonstrated by
others that such an enterprise with one beautician or barber
can thrive in the commercial zone. To some extent, the
presence of beautician as a home occupation presents an unfair
advantage over beauty shops operating in commercial districts,
as home occupations have no overhead and have flexibility in
scheduling appointments. An argument could be made that
allowing proliferation of retail oriented services such as
beautician, barber, or the like as home occupations could
undermine commercial land values by reducing demand, while
decreasing residential land values through the negative impact
of commercial use.
The fact that the City has allowed beauticians to operate as
a conditional use in the past does not necessarily dictate
that Council must automatically allow a beautician to operate
in a residential zone as an accessory use.
Adoption of a Home Occupation Permit Process:
City Planner, John Uban, has noted that certain home
occupations such as beautician will not tend to depreciate
adjoining properties if the use is transparent. In order to
achieve this goal, it is important that the requirements and
restrictions be monitored and enforced. In order to enforce
home occupation regulations, Uban recommends that the City
adopt a process for administering regulations governing home
occupations. He has suggested that each home occupation
request be reviewed at an administrative level for consistency
with the home occupation requirements. Those home occupations
that comply with the minimum requirements would then be
granted a permit that would be subject to an annual review.
Staff is concerned that without a simple home occupation
permit process, the City will often be placed in the position
where the City is reacting to home occupation problems after
the fact. In order to head off problem situations, it may be
prudent to require property owners to obtain a permit prior to
initiating the home occupation. The permit process would
clearly identify the nature and manner of operation and
provide the City with the opportunity to outline ordinance
requirements and, thereby, shape the manner in which the home
occupation is conducted. Annual review of the home occupation
provides the City with the opportunity to withhold renewal of
the permit in the event of continued violations of the permit.
10
I�
L
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
If the City adopts the permit requirement, those residences
that have established a home occupation after the inception of
the original zoning ordinance would be required to obtain a
permi t.
It is suggested that the permit consist of a two-page form as
outlined below. As you will note, many of the questions on
the form pertain to various requirements noted by ordinance.
The Planning Commission has suggested that annual renewal of
home occupation permits include a "short form" for those home
occupations that have no record of violation during the year.
This will streamline the review process after the first year.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Planning Commission is asked to make two decisions. Decision
one pertains to whether or not to include beautician among the
list of allowable home occupations. Decision two pertains to
whether or not to establish a home occupation permit process.
Ia. Motion to amend the ordinance by including beautician
among the list of home occupations allowed by ordinance.
Under this alternative, the City would make the finding
that beautician activity in a residential area is
consistent with the definition of allowable home
occupations and when properly regulated should not
negatively impact the value of adjoining residential
areas and should not create an unreasonable increase In
traffic.
A 4/5 vote of the Council is required for this amendment
to be ratified. If a 4/5 vote is not obtained, a
beautician could be allowed to operate with a simple
majority of Council making the interpretation that
"beautician" is allowable under the existing language.
Ib. Motion to deny adoption of an ordinance amendment and
deny permission to allow a beautician to operate as a
home occupation In a residential zone.
Under this alternative, Planning Commission/Council could
find that beautician activities are not consistent with
residential use of proporty, and the rules governing home
occupations will not sufficiently protect the residential
character of the neighborhood in which a beautician home
occupation is located. To allow a beautician to oporate
in a residontia 1 zone would create an unreasonable
di
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
increase in residential traffic and cause adjoining
properties to depreciate in value, which is adverse to
the requirements of the City zoning ordinance.
2a. Motion to adopt permit process for the purpose of
monitoring and enforcing home occupation operation
standards.
Under this alternative, the City could make a finding
that a home occupation permitting process is necessary in
order to properly enforce the home occupation operaticn
requirements. Consistent enforcement provides assurances
that home occupations remain incidental and secondary to
residential uses, thereby protecting the value of
adjoining residential properties. This ordinance
amendment requires a 4/5 vote; however, a permitting
process could be established without amending the
ordinance.
If a permit process is established, staff would contact
residences that operate a home occupation and ask them to
complete the appropriate forms. Permits would be issued
to all home occupations that operate in a manner
consistent with the home occupation requirements.
Council should be aware that there are a few home
occupations that are operating in violation of the zoning
ordinance. It Is likely that enforcement of this
ordinance will result in some conflicts.
2b. Motion to deny adoption of a home occupation permit
process.
Council could take the position that public complaints
regarding home occupations are infrequent; therefore,
there does not appear to be a great need at this time to
establish a home occupation permit process. Under this
alternative, enforcement of the home occupation
requirements would occur as problems arise or on an "as
needed" basis. The ability to enforce the ordinance is
diminished under this option.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the ordinance be amended to include
beautician as an allowable home occupation only if Council
also establishes a formal process for monitoring and
regulating the operation of home occupations. It does not
appear that a beautician, when operating a home occupation in
a manner consistent with the requirements of the ordinance,
will negatively impact the adjoining residential properties or
12
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
diminish the residential character of the area. On the other
hand, if the beautician violates the requirements, the
operation could have a significant detrimental effect on the
adjoining property. It should be remembered that individuals
that purchased land zoned as residential for the purpose of
enjoying residential uses have rights that rise above the
rights of a neighbor to utilize residential land for
commercial purposes. It is, therefore, important to establish
a permit process that will allow home occupations to exist
while protecting the residential character and residential
value of neighborhoods.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of proposed amendment to zoning ordinance; Copy of
proposed Home Occupation Permit Form; Pertinent sign ordinance
excerpts.
1
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAI'
THE SECTION 2-2 [HB) OF THE MONTICELLO ZONI14G ORDINANCE BE AMENDED
TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
(IIB) HOME OCCUPATION: Any gainful occupation engaged in by the
occupants of a dwelling at or from the dwelling. Such activity
shall be clearly Incidental and secondary to the residential use
of the premises. Permissible home occupations shall not include
the conducting of a retail business other than by mail,
manufacturing business, or a repair shop of any kind on the
premises, and no stock in trade shall be kept or sold. No other
than persons residing on the premises shall be employed, no
mechanical equipment shall be employed that is not customarily
found Ln the home, and no more than one (1) room may be devoted
to home occupation use. Such home occupation shall not require
internal or external alterations or involve construction features
not customarily found in dwellings. The entrance to the space
devoted to such occupations shall be within the dwelling. There
shall be no exterior display, no exterior signs except as allowed
in the sign regulations for the zoning district in which such
home occupation is located. There shall be no exterior storage
of equipment or materials used in the home occupation. No home
occupation shall be permitted which results in or generates more
traffic than one (1) car for off-street parking at any given
point in time.
Permissible home occupations include, but are not limited to, the
following: art studio, dressmaking, special offices of a
clergyman, lawyer, architect, engineer, accountant, beautician,
or real estate agent or appraiser, when located in a dwelling
unit occupied by the same; and teaching, with musical, dancing,
and other instruction limited to one (1) pupil at one time.
Operation of n home occupation as an accessory use of residential
property first. requires issuance of n home occupation permit from
the City of Monticello. Ilome occupation permits shall be
reviewed and renewed on an annual basis. Failure to operate home
occupaLloils In n manner consistent with the standards slated
hor.nln or. fallure Lo comply with bulldinq code or public nuisance
requlaLlnus will result In withdrawal or non-renowal of home
occupation permlLs. Tho cost of the permit shall be established
by the City and subiect to change from time to time.
Adopted this day of , 1991.
City Administrator
Mayor
0
/ ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT APPLICATION
HOME OCCUPATION
C
A home occupation administrative permit allows certain commercial
use of residential land that is clearly incidental or secondary to
the principal residential use of the property. The purpose of the
permit process is to protect the value of residential property by
assuring that commercial use of residential land is properly
regulated and conducted in a manner consistent with rules governing
the operation of home occupations. The information required with
this application will assist the City in determining if the
proposed home occupation and its manner of operation are consistent
with rules governing operation of home occupations.
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name: Phone-Home/Business:-/
Address: Business Name:
Location: Application Date:
Zoning District:
1. Please describe the proposed home occupation activity in
general terms.
2. Describe retail sales activity, if any.
3. Describe manufacturing or repair activity proposed, if any.
4. Describe inventory to be kept on the premises, if any.
5. Will any person other than those residing on the promises be
employed in the home occupation? if so, please describe.
6. will any mechanical equipment be used in conjunction with the
home occupation not customarily found in tho home? If so,
please describe.
7
r 7. How many rooms will be devoted to the home occupation use?
C
8. Will the home occupation require internal or external
alterations or involve construction? If so, please describe.
9. Where will the entrance to the space devoted to the home
occupation be located?
10. Please describe signage proposed. Please note that home
occupations in residential districts prohibit signage.
11. Will the home occupation result in outside storage of
equipment or materials used in conjunction with the home
occupation? If so, please describe.
12. Is there sufficient hard surface off-street parking available
for one car? Will the home occupation result in more than one
customer's car being parked on the premises at any given point
in time?
CITY STAFF COMMENTS
Building Inspector; Public Works Director; Assistant City
Administrator:
It has been determined by staff that an administrative permit
should be approved/denied with the following conditions:
RENEWAL: Providing that the use for which the permit is
granted remains In conformance with the terms and
intent of the ordinance, the permit shall be
automatically renewed each year during the month of
January.
0
APPLICABLE SIGN REGULATIONS
[E] DISTRICT REGULATIONS: The following sections concern signs
which require application and permit.
1. Within the A-0, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, and PZR districts,
signs are subject to the following size and type
regulations :
(a) Institutional or area identification signs provided
that the gross square footage of sign area does not
exceed eighteen (18) square feet, and if the sign
Is freestanding, the height does not exceed eight
( 8) feet.
[AI] AREA IDENTIFICATION SIGN: A freestanding sign which
identifies the name of a neighborhood, a residential
subdivision, a multiple residential complex consisting of
three (3) or more structures, a shopping center consisting of
five (5) or more separate business concerns, an industrial
area, an office complex cons Seting of three (3) or more
structures, or any combination of the above, located on
contiguous property.
[IF) INSTITUTIONAL SIGN: A sign or bulletin board which identifies
the name and other characteristics of a public, semi-public,
or private institution on the site whore the sign is located.
Institutions shall include churches, hospitals, nursing home,
schools, and other non-profit and charitable organizations.
[ D ] NON -CONFORMING SIGNS:
1. The following are nonconforming signs:
(c) All other signs not expressly prohibited but which
do not conform to the provisions of this
subdivision.
NON -APPLICABLE SIGN REGULATIONS
[B] PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS:
1. PERMITTED SIGNS: The following signs aro allowed without a
permit but shall comply with all other aoplicable provisions
of this subdivision:
(b) Identification signs: There may be one (1) per promise,
not to exceed two (2) square feet in area. If the sign
isfreo-standing, the total hoight may not exceed five
(5) foot.
0
C-
C
[IAJ IDENTIFICATION SIGNS: Signs in all districts which identify
the business or owner, or manager, or resident and set forth
the address of the premises where the sign is located and
which contain no other material.
0
I
PETITI ON
CITY OF MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 8, 1990
Having made major investments in property properly zoned for
residential use, we are concerned about a potential depreciation in
residential property values due to encroachment of commercial use
of land into residential neighborhoods. At the same time, it is
our view that certain home occupations, when properly regulated,
can operate within residential areas without conflict and should be
a l lowed.
Furthermore, in order to fully retain the residential character of
neighborhoods, "beautician" along with other home occupations
identified by the zoning ordinance should be allowed only under the
following circumstances:
1. A permit process should be established that would include an
annual renewal of each home occupation permit. Property
owners conducting home occupations must be required to comply
with all existing provisions of the home occupation rules,
building code, and public nuisance ordinances. More than three
violations per year should result in termination or non-
renewal of the home occupation permit. A permit process will
enable the City to properly enforce city home occupation
regulations.
2. Home occupations that require customer vlsits should be
allowed to operate during normal working hours only.
3. The presence of a home business in a residential district
should be transparent, there foro no sign identifying
residential property as a commercial site should he allowed.
Thank you for considering our views on this important matter.
Signed.
Name
Address
14 b'C t
0
PETITION
CITY OF MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 8, 1990
Having made major investments in property properly zoned for
residential use, we are concerned about a potential depreciation in
residential property values due to encroachment of commercial use
of land into residential neighborhoods. At the same time, it is
our view that certain home occupations, when properly regulated,
can operate within residential areas without conflict and should be
allowed.
Furthermore, in order to fully retain the residential character of
neighborhoods, "beautician" along with other home occupations
identified by the zoning ordinance should be allowed only under the
following circumstances:
A permit process should be established that would include an
annual renewal of each home occupation permit. Property
owners conducting home occupations must be required to comply
with all existing provisions of the home occupation rules,
building code, and public nuisance ordinances. More than three
violations per year should result in termination or non-
renewal of the home occupation permit. A permit process will
enable the City to properly enforce city home occupation
regulations.
2. Home occupations that require customer visits should be
allowed to operate during normal working hours only.
3. The presence of a home business in a residential district
should be transparent, therefore no sign identifying
residential proporty as a commercial site should be allowed.
Thank you for considering our views on this important matter.
Signed.
Name Address
r
0
PETITION
CITY OF MONTICELLO PLAN14ING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 8, 1990
Having made major investments in property properly zoned for
residential use, we are concerned about a potential depreciation in
residential property values due to encroachment of commercial use
of land into res Iden tial neighborhoods. At the same time, it is
our view that certain home occupations, when properly regulated,
can operate within residential areas without conflict and should be
allowed.
Furthermore, in order to fully retain the residential character of
neighborhoods, "beautician" along with other home occupations
identified by the zoning ordinance should be allowed only under the
following circumstances:
A permit process should be established that would include an
annual renewal of each home occupation permit. Property
owners conducting home occupations must be required to comply
with all existing provisions of the home occupation rules,
building code, and public nuisance ordinances. More than three
violations per year should result in termination or non-
renewal of the home occupation permit. A permit process will
enable the City to properly enforce city home occupation
regulations .
Home occupations that require customer visits should be
allowed to operate during normal working hours only.
The presence of a home business in a residential district
should be transparent, therefore no sign identifying
residential property as a commercial site should be allowed.
Thank you for considering our views on this important matter.
Signed.
Name
a� i �Jzt
Address
r.0
v
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
s. Consideration of a resolution declaring costs to be assessed
and orderinq preparation of proposed assessment roll and
settinq a public hearing for Proiect 90-4 (Sandberg East
Improvement). (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the December 17 special Council meeting, the Council was
supplied with a proposed assessment breakdown for the 90-4
improvement project that serviced the Sandberg East
development. Total project costs were estimated at
$223,387.49 at completion. Primarily, only restoration work
is left to be done in the spring; and as a result, it is
recommended that the Council schedule the assessment hearing
for this project at its next regular Council meeting
January 28, 1991.
At the December meeting, the Council approved the method of
the City assuming 258 of the lateral sewer and water cost with
the remaining amount being assessed to benefiting property
owners on a front foot basis. The rationale used by the
Council for this assessment method was because of the unique
situation created by this improvement whereby only one side of
the improvement received benefit. In addition, this project
was unique in that the City annexed a platted parcel (Sandberg
East) a few years ago and as part of the annexation agreed
that it was able to provide utility services when needed. The
amount proposed to be absorbed by the City at this time may be
able to be recaptured in the future through an area assessment
when additional properties are developed or annexed that can
utilize the sewer and water trunk lines. Based on the
Council's decision, the total proposed assessment would amount
to $173,530.30. The City's share of the project would amount
to $49,857.19.
At the time this project was commenced, the Council indicated
that property owners involved in this improvement that had
unplatted, unsubdivided properties involved in this
improvement would be eligible for up to a three-year deterral
of interest charges on the proposed assessment. The interest
would be deferred for either three years or until the property
was subdivided. After the three-year deferral, interest would
start to accumulate, and the assessmont would be payable over
the remaining seven years of the original ton-yoar assessmont.
Parcels Involved at this point would include property owned by
Mr.. Robert Krautbauor and Ms. Joanne Halliger. The balance of
the property proposed for assessment currently are platted
residential properties.
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
While a decision does not have to be made at this Council
meeting, Mr. John Sandberg, owner of 13 lots in the Sandberg
East development, has requested that the City consider
assessing the $70,632.40 only against four lots in his plat.
This would amount to an assessment of $17,658.01 against each
lot. If the City were to agree to this arrangement, we would
have to have added protection that would allow the City to
acquire title to these four lots immediately upon default of
any payment installment that was due, and we should also
restrict building permit issuance to any of the remaining nine
lots until such time as these four are paid in full. If the
assessment installments are not kept current, the City could
be faced with the assessments increasing with interest and
penalties to a point where the assessments would exceed the
value of the property. Actually, there is no real benefit to
the City in agreeing to assess only four lots, and I'm not
sure if we would not be setting a precedent in allowing a
property owner to assess only certain lots for the benefits
that actually covered a larger area. I would suggest that if
the City considered assessing only a small number of lots in
the development, an additional down payment of $3,000 per lot
be obtained in order to provide us with more protection to
insure that the value of the property will exceed the
assessments in the future. As I noted, this decision does not
have to be made tonight and can be addressed at the public
hearing; but if the Council has any direction on what would be
acceptable, this information can be provided to the property
owner prior to the assessment hearing. Naturally, the easiest
method for the Council to take is that each lot should be
assessed for the benefit received, and any arrangements by the
property owner to prepay assessments should be handled on
their and.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the resolution declaring the costs to be assessed
and set the public hearing for January 28, 1991. If the
Council is in agreemont with assessing the Krautbauer and
Halligor properties on a deferred interest basis for the
first three years because the property is unplatted, the
resolutions will be prepared accordingly.
2. Adopt the resolution as noted above and indicate how tho
Council intends to consider assessments against the
Sandberg East plat.
3. Do not adopt the resolution. At this point, with the
project cost known and nearly completed except for
restoration, there is no reason why we should not hold
the assessment hearing and start accumulating intorost on
the project.
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Since the costs of the project have been determined, staff
recommends that the assessment hearing be scheduled for
January 28. Since we also informed the property owners that
had unplatted properties affected by this improvement that we
would also consider deferring the interest for the first three
years if their property remained unplatted, I would recommend
also that the assessments for Krautbauer and Halliger
properties receive this option at the assessment hearing.
I believe initially the Council was willing to consider
assessing only three or four lots in the Sandberg East
development per Mr. Sandberg's request, but the staff does
have some reservations if this method is used. Under this
method, the City must protect itself in being able to obtain
title to the property immediately upon default of any
installment payment and also insure that our assessment would
not exceed the value of each lot. Any placement of
assessments against only three or four lots, in my opinion,
would require restrictions on the remaining lots clearly
labeling those lots as unbuildable until such time as all
assessments are paid. In order for the City to obtain title
to the property that is in default, we would have to have
either a first mortgage or some other legal document prepared
by an attorney enabling us to foreclose immediately. The
restriction on building permits for the balance of the lots
would also need to be recorded as part of the plat. The
Council also has to be aware that is there any valid reason
for treating this property different than we normally do by
only assessing a few lots rather than all the properties that
benefit from the improvement. While this property can be
considered unique in that the City did require the property to
be served with sewer and water before building permits would
be issued, I do not believe we are under any obligation to
create a now assessment format that may sot precedence in the
future that we'll have to deal with.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of resolution; Copy of proposed assessment schodulo
previously approved by the Council in December.
RESOLUTION 91 -
RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED,
ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT,
AND SETTING A HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT
WHEREAS, a contract has been let and the costs determined for Lite
improvement of East County Road 39 and Gillard Avenue with sanitary
sewer, water main, and appurtenant work, and the contract price for
such improvements is $172,243.68, and the expenses incurred or to
be Incurred in the making of such improvements amount to
$51,143.81, so that the total cost of the improvement will be
4223, 387 . 49.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA:
1. The portion of the cost of such improvement to be paid by the
City is hereby estimated to be $49,857.19, and the portion of
the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is
estimated to be $173,530.30.
2. The City Administrator shall forthwith calculate the proper
amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against
every assessable lot, piece, or parcel of land within Lhe
district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as
provided by law, and he shall file a copy of such proposed
assessment in his office for public inspection.
3. A hearing shall be held on the 28th day of January, 1991, In
the City hall at 7:00 p.m. to pass upon such proposed
assessment, and at such time and place all persons owning
property affected by such Improvement will be given an
opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment.
4. The City Administrator is hereby directed to cause a notice of
the hearing on the proposed assossmont to be published once In
the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the
hearing, and he shall state in the notice the total cost of
the improvement. lie shall also cause mailed assessment roll
not less Lhan two wooks prior to the hearings.
Adopted by the Council this 14th day of January, 1991.
Mayor
CCity Administrator
EXHIBIT B
PROJECT 90-4
City assumes 25% of lateral sewor and water costs with remaining amount assessed to benelitting
Property owners on a front loot basis, plus service connections.
Latoral Water
Lateral
Sewer
Properly Water Services
Sewer
Service
Owner $23.24/LF $400.29/LF30$
35 LF
$250.49/LF Total
John Sandberg
1160.14 LF $26,961.65 $5,203.77
$35,210.25
$3.256.37 $70,632.04
13 lols
Jell Nelson
160 LF
1 lot
Rod Norell
302.77 LF
2 Iota
2 stubs
Joanne Halligor
895 LF
11 lots
Peterson
100 LF
water only
Kraulbauer
530 LF
water only
2 stubs
City of Monticello
254 of sower 8
water lateral costs
$3,718.40 $400.29 $4.856.00 $250.49 $9,225.18
$7,036.37 $000.58 $9,189.07 $500.98
$2,779.66 $790.35 $21,097.01
$20,799.80 $4,403.19 $27,163.25 $2,755.39 $55,121.63
$2.324.00 $400.29
$12,317.20
$2.412.95
$24,385.59 $25,471.60
$2,724.29
$14,730.15
$49,857.19
$223,387.49
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
9. Consideration of resolution releasing conditional use
restriction--Outlot A of Sandberq East plat. (R.W.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
When the Sandberg East plat was approved in January 1987 by
the Monticello Orderly Annexation Board, a conditional use
permit was granted and recorded as part of the abstract that
indicated that Outlot A of the plat would not be considered as
a building site until it is approved for further development
by the City or MOA.A Board. The original Sandberg East plat
created nine 1 -acre lots that were further subdivided into
1/2 -acre lots to allow for an easier transition if the
property was within the city limits. Outlot A was an
unplatted parcel containing approximately 25 acres that has
subsequently been sold to Mr. Rod Norell. I believe the
original intent of having the restriction on Outlot A was to
put on record the fact that Outlot A would require further
approval by both the City and the Orderly Annexation Board
before allowing that parcel to be considered for a building
permit.
Mr. Rod Norell has been purchasing Outlot A from Mr. John
Sandberg on a contract for deed and is now in the process of
obtaining conventional financing for this parcel. The finance
institution has some concerns over the restriction that
indicates Outlot A is not a buildable parcel in that they feel
it may create a legal impediment to future development of this
parcel. Since the property has boon annexed into the city,
the Orderly Annexation Board no longer has control or
jurisdiction over how the property is developed, which is
entirely under our control. I indicated to the financial
institution that this outlot is not meant to be subject to
anymore controls or regulations than any other parcel in the
city as far as development processes aro concerned; but the
bank would fool mo=o comfortable with having this rostrictlon
released by the City before financing. If a parcel of
property, Including an outlet, has sufficient square footage
according to City ordinances, it can be considered a building
site provided it meets all our other building code
regulations. I contacted the City Attorney regarding this
restriction, and although he did not seem to feel it would be
a problem for the financial institution, he did not have a
problem with the City adopting a resolution as proposed. The
resolution as proposed merely notes that the parcel is now
considered under the regulations and requirements of the City
of Monticello, not the OAA Board, and that the parcel would
still be subject to all normal zoning, subdivision, and
permitting procossos of the City. By adopting the resolution,
the City will maintain its right to review and approve any
future subdivision proposals, and tho property would be
treated just like any other parcel of property in the city.
c
C
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the resolution which releases the condition
established at the time the original plat was approved by
the OAA and clarifies that it is under the jurisdiction
of the City of Monticello only.
2. Do not adopt the resolution.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
While I do not necessarily agree with the financial
institution that the restriction is causing a legal impediment
to development of the property, I do not see a problem with
the City indicating that the OAA Board no longer controls the
development of lands for this outlot. If the resolution
satifies the lending institution, the City of Monticello Is
still adequately protected, as the property is still subject
to all our normal zoning and subdivision rules. As a result,
I recommend Council adopt the resolution as proposed.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of original conditional use restriction; Copy of letter
from Buffalo National Bank requesting release of restriction;
Copy of proposed resolution.
is
ACTIVE"UATE -This Ordinance shall be 3n full forte and effect aftereta passagt and•
,oubiication.according co Vow.
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING RECULATIONS FOR THE SUBDIVISION AND PLATTING OVLAND WITHIN THc
CITY OF MONTICELLO, .DEFiN1NG' CERTAIN TERMS USED Timm; PROVIDING FOR THE'2REPAQATION OF
PLATS; PROVIDING: FOR THE INSTALLATION OF STREETS AND OTHER. IMPROVEME`ITS; PROVIDII;C FOR
THE OEnicAttos OF CERTAIN LAND FOR' PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS; ESTABLISHING' PROCEDUT_E4, FOR
APPROVAL AND THE RECORDING OF PLATS; PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR 'VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE;
AND REPEALING ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES 14CONSISTENT HEREVITH.
( A Copy of Chia instrument in its entirety is available at the Wright Councy Recorder's
Office)
97. Order Granting Conditional Use Dated Jan. 7, 1987 Rec. July 27, 1987 at 12:10 ?`!
Book 90 of Misc., page 939 Pile No. 429708
Wright County, Minnesota Signed by Chairman of Monticello Orderly
Monticello Orderly Annexation Board Annexation Board
In the Matter of John W. Sandberg
REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit for a platted residential subdivision consisting of
aims (9) lots as regulated in Section 605 of the Wright County Zoning Ordinance
and Subdivision Regulations.
John W. Sandberg. Owner
{ The mutter was heard on January 7. 1987, on a petition for a conditional use pursuant to
tha Wright County Zoning Ordinance, for the following described property: All lots in
j Sandberg East, plat of record on file in the Office of the Wright County Recorder Office
In Section 18, Township 121, Range 24, Wright County, Minnesota. (Montitallo Township)
IT IS ORDERED that a conditional use be granted as upoa the following conditions or
'` reasons;
t Preliminary plat be approved as subtitted subject to the following canditionsr
I
{ 1. ,Park dedication fat as. required by County subdivision regulations ba
i} tuh, and not applied to the area designated Outlot A.
2. Until annexed bp' the City', lot ownership must be grouped in pairs .as
I
designated on the; preliminary plat.
3. Prior to developing any 'lot 'i a'tha Township. the owner shall submit
„ a survey and site plan of the entire property which shows both lots
i, in this pair. and the ,location of tha proposed house, well arid; sever.
All wells must be located on the east side of the lot, and all sever
systems must be located on the vast side of tba lot. A11 veils -and'
.structures trust fit within a single lot and maintain appropriate ast-
'backs from all individual lot lines. Wherever Outlot A borders e,
numbered lot, 'the setback from the border will be as required frog ,a
City street in Monticello City regulations.
A. Outlot A will not be considered as a building sit# until. it is approved
for furthar development by the City or M.O.A.A. board.
S. The survey and site plans submitted for Lots 13 and 14. Block 2, and
Lot 1 and 2. Block 3 -shall include specific and detailed pians for
fill. including existing and proposed topography, driveway and
structure location and plans to retain drainage from all hard sur-
faces on sits.
Copy certified July 27. 1987 by Wright County Zoning Adaintatrrtor
Q
CIIBLIffalo
tional Bank
December 21, 1990
Rick Wolfsteller
City Administrator
250 East Broadway
Monticello, MN 55362-9245
Re: Conditional use restrictions--Outloc A of Sandberg East
Dear Mr. Wolfsteller:
Thank you for your letter of December 18, 1990. Our concern about paragraph
four on the Conditional Use Permit is that it creates a legal impediment to
development over and above the normal platting and zoning requirements that
would apply to any unplatted parcel pursuant to city ordinance. The language
of that conditional use permit seems to indicate that the City must go
through a step we might call "approval for further development" before it
can approve any proposed plat on Outlet A. Otherwise, there would have
been no need to put that provisions in the conditional use permit. It seems
to us that by operation of the City ordinances, property can not be built
upon unless the ordinances are complied with. Therefore, we are puzzled as
to why this additional provision was included in the conditional use permit.
It would seem that the appropriate thing to do would be to have the City
Council, by resolution, remove paragraph four from the Conditional Use
Permit. Then Outlet A would be a platted parcel, undeveloped, subject co
the normal zoning, platting, and permitting processes applicable to any
other parcel.
Sincerely yours,
P,� W,
ohn M. Lundstan
President
]b
cc: Rod Norall
P.O. Boa 10 Buffalo. Minnesota 35313 Telephone 612/682.2311 or Metro 473.7532 Member FDIC
RESOLUTION 91 -
WHEREAS, the Monticello Orderly Annexation Board granted a
conditional use permit for a residential subdivision known as
Sandberg East on January 7, 1987, and
WHEREAS, the Sandberg East plat contained nine (9) lots and an
Outlot A, and
WHEREAS, as part of the preliminary plat approval, the following
restriction was recorded in Book 90 of Misc., page 939, on July 27,
1987, at 12:10 p.m. in the Wright County Recorder's office:
4. Outlet A will not be considered as a building site until
It is approved for further development by the City or
Monticello Orderly Annexation Area Board.
WHEREAS, the Sandberg East plat, including Outlet A, has since been
annexed into the corporate limits of the city of Monticello and is
now under the jurisdiction of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS:
1. Outlot A of the Sandberg East plat is considered an
undeveloped parcel subject to all normal zoning, subdivision,
and permitting processes and regulations of the City of
Monticello.
2. The condition outlined in paragraph (4) as recorded in Bk. 90
of Misc. , page 939, is hereby released.
Adopted this 14th day of January, 1991.
Mayor
City Administrator
N
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
1o• Consideration of accepting petition for annexation and
acreeinq to enter into a joint resolution with Monticello,
Township for annexation of West Kjellbergs Mobile Home Park.
(R.W.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
For the past several months, the City staff has been
negotiating and discussing the possible annexation of the West
Mobile Home Park with Mr. Kent Kjellberg. These discussions
occurred because of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's
determination that the mobile home park's on-site sewage
disposal system was inadequate and needed to be upgraded if it
was to continue its operation. As part of the annexation
discussions with Mr. Kjellberg, he had many concerns,
including the cost of connecting to the city system, the
financing of the improvement, and the cost associated with our
hookup charge. Since there did not seem to be any benefiting
property owners that could help defray the cost of a sanitary
sewer connection from the mobile home park, Mr. Kjellberg had
planned on installing a force main at his own expense.
In regard to the City's normal hookup fee for a sewer
connection, the staff had proposed a financing plan that would
allow Mr. Kjellberg five years to pay off the hookup charge at
an interest rate of 6-1/28. These terms were similar to the
terms in the developer's agreement concerning the East Mobile
Home Park. These financing terms were recommended as an
incentive to encourage Mr. Kjellberg to make the connection as
soon as possible and also due to the large estimated hookup
fee of $20,000.
Mr. Kjellberg petitioned for annexation of approximately
120 acres of land and presented the petition to the City
Council on November 13, 1990. The Council discussed the
merits of the annexation and did not take any action on
accepting the petition at that time but referred the petition
to the Monticello Township Board for their comments and
recommendations before official Council action.
During the City Council's discussion on the annexation
potition at the November meeting, concerns wore expressed over
when Mr. Kjollberg would actually make the connection to our
sanitary sewer system. It was the consensus of the Council
that the City should be assured that the connection would take
place soon and indicated that before annexation proceeded,
Mr. Kjellborg should either guarantee through a performance
bond or a letter of credit the installation of the sower
connection or complete this sower connection first. The
primary reason for acquiring a guarantee is that if annexation
occurred first, the City would be incurring cost associatod
19
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
with garbage collection for the trailer park without any
offsetting revenue from the sewer usage charges. In addition,
the Township officials had expressed concerns over allowing
annexation to occur without be ing guaranteed that the reason
for the annexation was to eliminate an environmental problem.
The Monticello Township Board discussed the annexation request
at their December 17 board meeting and indicated to the City
in writing that they would agree to a joint resolution in
regard to the mobile home park's annexation provided the
annexation encompassed only ti -ie acreage associated with the
mobile home park and that Mr . Kjellberg either guaranteed
funds to cover the cost of the sewer system connection or made
the connection first. The original petition requested that
120 acres be annexed into the city, and we are currently in
the process of trying to determine the approximate acreage
involved in the mobile home park, including the acreage
currently utilized for their on-site sewage disposal system.
It is estimated by the ata ff that this will encompass
approximately 80 acres, not the 120 acres petitioned for, but
also more than the 40 or so that the Township Board
recommended. Assuming both governing bodies can agree on the
amount of acreage to annex, the next step would be for the
City Council to accept the annexation petition with any
conditions deemed appropriate . I believe the concerns the
Township has concerning annexation are also the City's
concerns in that we should not be submitting a joint
resolution to the Municipal Board until we are assured of the
sewer being connected or it's actually constructed first. By
accepting the petition under the same conditions recommended
by the Township, the annexation is assured if Mr. Kjellberg
lives up to his end of the bargain.
I also bolievo it will be important to establish a deadline by
which Mr. Kjellberg has to either guarantee the cost of the
sower construction or implement the actual construction. The
reason for both governing bodies to agree to allow annexation
to occur is to eliminate the defective sewage system; and
without a deadline, there will be no incentive for
Mr. Kjellberg to proceed with his plans. A deadline would
also notify tho PCA that annexation can occur if Mr. Kjellberg
is serious about connecting to the City's sower system. It is
the staff's rocommondation that if we agree to the annexation
with the conditions attached by the Township, a deadline of no
later than Juno 15 be establis had for Mr. Kjollborg to either
guarantee the project cost or commence construction. If the
sower connection has not boon started by this time, it would
allow sufficient time for the PCA to proceed with their action
to have the on-sito system upgraded yet in 1991.
20
C
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Council could agree to accept the petition for annexation
and agree to enter into a joint resolution with the
Monticello Township Board on the annexation of the West
Mobile Home Park, with the acreage to be determined
jointly with the Township.
2. Council could determine that it's not in the best
interest of the City to annex the mobile home park with
the conditions requested by the Township.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff feels that the conditions recommended by the
Township are reasonable and are also in the best interest of
the City before annexation occurs. By accepting the petition
under these terms, Mr. Kjellberg should be comfortable that
both the Township and the City will agree to jointly petition
the Municipal Board for annexation upon his meeting the terms.
In order to insure that the connection does take place as soon
as possible, a June 15 deadline should be established as part
of the motion so that if Mr. Kjellberg does not proceed as
planned, the PCA still has sufficient time to proceed with
their action.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of petition; Copy of Township's letter agreeing to
annexation; Copy of resolution.
21
,g10�22<t.
Q� mss'
�o
PETITION FOR ANNEXATION
To the Council of the City of rAonticello, Wright County, Minnesota:
1, the undersigned, the owner of the territory described below,
hereby request the City Council of Monticello, Minnesota, to annex
this territory to the City and to extend the City boundaries to
include the same, and for that purpose respectfully state:
I. The territory to be annexed consists of approximately 120 acres
All of this land lies entirely within the County of Wright,
Minnesota, and the description of such land is as follows:
SECT -15 TWP-121 RANG -25 UNPLATTED LAND
SE S OF A LINE BEG 100.20 RDS S OF SE POST
W 19 ROADS N 28D E 14 RDS W 147 RDS TO 1-4
LINE EXC S 2 RDS W OF RD.
2. The territory described above abuts upon the City limits at the
east boundary thereof and none of It is presently Included
within the corporate limits of any incorporated city.
3. All of this territory Is or is about to become urban or suburban
In character.
Kent K,lellb g, AnPS
�=
K jellberg' s7ncorporated••��
c
Monticello Township
County Road 117
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
December 17, 1990
Mr. Rick Wolfsteller, Administrator
City of Monticello
Monticello, Mn. 55362
Re: Kjellberg's [vest Mobile Home
Park Annexation.
Dear Rick:
The Board of Supervisors will agree on a
joint --resolution in the above regard,ppro-
f viding the annexation encompasses the 40
acres more or less that the court is
situated on; and providing there is a
guarantee of upfront money to cover the
cost of the sewer system connection plus
25%; or if the sewer connection is con-
structed by Mr. Kjellberg first.
Y" erely,
,.,. it Yt{�E4/ �-
anChaizman
Monticello Township Board
FD/d s
C
0
RESOLUTION 91 -
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PETITION FOR ANNEXATION
WHEREAS, Kent Kjellberg, owner of territory described below,
requests that the City Council of Monticello, Minnesota, annex this
territory to the city and to extend the city boundaries to include
the same; and
WHEREAS, the territory requested to be annexed consists of
approximately 120 acres, all of which is entirely within the county
of Wright, Minnesota, and the description of such land is as
follows:
Section 15, Township 121, Range 25, Unplatted Land
SE S of a line beg 100.20 Rds S of SE post
W 19 Roads r4 28D E 14 Rds W 147 Rds to I-4
Line exc S 2 Rds W of Rd.
WHEREAS, the territory described above abuts directly upon the city
limits at the southwest boundary thereof, and none of it is
presently included within the corporate limits of any incorporated
city; and
WHEREAS, annexation of this parcel is consistent with the land use
guide plan adopted by the Monticello Orderly Annexation area; and
WHEREAS, the parcel is primarily developed as a mobile home park
and has been directed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to
either upgrade the on-site sewage disposal system or make
connection to the City of Monticello sewer system; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monticello is now capable of providing
municipal sanitary sewer service to this area; and
WHEREAS, the annexation petition hao been referred to the
Monticello Township Board for their review and comments in
accordance with the joint urbanization plan agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Monticello Township Board has agreed to enter into a
joint resolution with the City of Monticello to allow for the
annexation of the mobile home park property (exact acreage to be
determined) provided the property owner either constructs the sewer
connection to the city system or provides a suitable guarantee of
up -front funds to cover the cost of the sower system connection
equal to 125% of the estimated cost.
NOW, THEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY OF MONTICELLO accepts
said petition for annexation and agrees to enter into a joint
resolution for annexation with Monticello Township contingent upon
the following:
0/0
Resolution 91 -
Page 2
P ltione rovide a suitab a guarantee to the City
e u 1 t 5% o the a ated se Gonne ion
Crn tuc ion osts ap roval f 11 const uct on pl n by
tie ty of mo ti ello, an all cmpor y an pe an r.t �,
:em necessary to complete co t ction b ne 1 OW
1 91; or Q S/�� - Q1s,.t ��Ir'��o•ST07
Petitioner has either completed construction or���;/y�
progressed with the actual construction of the sewer
connection to the satisfaction of the City of Monticello
4 ,
�'1
y* u` . 31 14 c( /
Adopted by theCity Council this 14th day of January, 1991.
CCity Administrator
Mayor
N u f A-, A S, 4.
G)
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
lt.
Consideration of acceptinq partial payment of delinquent
assessments from Farm Credit Services to allow sale of 49 -acre
parcel to school district. (R.W.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Farm Credit Services, the owner of the former Jim Boyle
property along Chelsea Road, has entered into a purchase
agreement with the school district to sell the school 49 acres
of property adjacent to the present middle school site. The
proposed land will be used by the school for expansion of
their school facilities and would bring their total acreage to
approximately 129 acres.
In order for this sale to occur, all delinquent taxes and
special assessments must be brought current before the parcel
can be transferred. The 49 -acre parcel is a portion of a
larger tax parcel containing 144.5 acres. Please refer to the
enclosed map outlining the area being purchased by the school
and the total parcel acreage that currently has special
assessments outstanding. Since the school is only buying a
portion of the original parcel, Farm Credit Services is
requesting to be allowed to only pay a portion of the
delinquent assessments that pertain to the parcel being sold.
The 49 acres is approximately 348 of the total parcel; and as
such, they would like to pay this amount of the assessments
that are delinquent.
I had the Wright County Auditor's office calculate the
delinquent assessments that have occurred since 1985 with
penalty and Interest that total $140,572.71. When including
the 1991 payment that is due along with the remaining
assessment balance, the total assessments for this original
parcel would be $174,870.67. If Farm Credit was to pay 344 of
the assessments based on acreage sold, they would owe
$59,456.0 3. In addition, delinquent real estate taxes for the
past five years total $16,565.82 for a total payment proposed
of $76,021.85.
Since special assessments are under the jurisdiction of the
City, the City Council can reallocate the assessments in any
manner it chooses and does not need approval from other taxing
jurisdictions. If the City is not willing to reallocate the
assessments, Farm Credit would be faced with two options,
either pay the entire assessment balance in full to allow the
sale to occur, or not B011 the 49 acres to the school as
proposed. Based on acreage sold, the proposed payment by Farm
Credit does seem reasonable, but the City always has the
choice of requiring full payment according to State Statutes.
The major drawback to reallocating the delinquent assessments
at this point would be that the remaining balance of
$115,414.64 no longer is considered delinquent, and the City
may have to wait to collect this amount in the future. I
believe the County Auditor's office is currently considering
22
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
a tax forfeiture sale this spring, which would include this
parcel. If a tax forfeiture sale is commenced, Farm Credit
will be faced with either paying the assessments in full, or
the City could own the property in question. While I'm sure
It's not the City's intent to acquire this property and we
would rather have the assessments paid, removing the
delinquencies would, in effect, buy Farm Credit additional
time to pay off the assessments. Farm Credit representatives
have indicated that if all their property is part of the tax
forfeiture proceedings this year, they will probably be paying
all assessments at that time, including the Meadow Oak
Subdivision assessments.
It should be noted that Farm Credit Services has cooperated
with the City In the past in allowing the City to acquire a
small parcel of land adjacent to Remmele Engineering last
year. Farm Credit has indicated that if the City is too
restrictive on the amount of delinquent assessments it expects
to collect on this sale, they may be forced to void the
potential sale to the school and continue efforts to sell the
entire parcel as one tract. It doesn't appear that any future
sales of the Boyle property by Farm Credit will require
respreading of assessment balances, as the parcels are smaller
and should be able to be sold without subdividing.
It should be noted that the entire land now owned by Farm
Credit, including the Meadow Oak Subdivision property, has
outstanding delinquent taxes and assessments totaling over
$600,000. I believe Farm Credit also has invested into this
property about the same amount of money, and the Council could
also propose that since both the City and Farm Credit are
equally in debt on this property, maybe we should be getting
half of any proceeds from sales to lower the special
assessment debt. While I'm not advocating this action, the
City does want to make sure that as the parcels aro sold by
Farm Credit, we do receive our appropriate special assessment
payments. Accepting 349 of the assessments in this case still
does leave a substantial amount of property adjacent to
Chelsea Road that should have sufficient value to cover our
remaining assessments, but it does not insure that assessments
will be paid soon.
Reasons for agreeing to accept partial payment of delinquent
assessments:
Farm Credit was cooperative with the City when the
City needed to acquire a few acres of property for
the Rommele manufacturing deal.
Payment of 34% of the assessments is a fair
allocation when considering the total acreage the
original assessment was levied against.
23
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
Reasons for requiring full delinquent assessments to be paid:
1. No payments have been made on this project in over
seven years, and our bond rating has been subject
to stricter review and criticism by Moody's, Inc.,
because of high delinquencies .
All property owned by Farm Credit is likely to be
subject to tax forfeiture procedures during 1991;
and as a result, Farm Credit will most likely have
to pay all delinquent assessments or lose title to
the land.
While the request before the Council at this time only
concerns the allocation of special assessments, the sale of
the 49 acres to the school will result in Council decisions in
the future on utility and road extensions for this property.
The 49 -acre parcel is the proposed location of the new
elementary school, and the school district would like to
service the new site by extending sewer and water from Dundas
Road and Fallon Avenue to the northwest corner of this parcel.
This short extension will then bring up the question of how
will sewer and water be extended in the future to the south to
service the balance of the Farm Credit property, and who will
pay for these extensions in the future? The school expansion
will also bring up the question as to whether the City will
i assess the school property an area assessment equal to the
$2,500 per acre for having City sewer and water trunk lines
avai lablo.
In addition, the school would like to see a road constructed
along their southorn boundary between Fallon Avenue and County
Road 118 with half the cost of the road being picked up by the
school and the other half being assessed to Farm Credit. The
question that will need to be answered is whether the City
will be willing to assess Farm Credit for their share of this
road construction, or will we be expecting full payment from
both parties before construction. With over $600,000 in
assessments outstanding against the Farm Credit property at
this time, will the City consider assessing another $100,000
or more? It may not be prudent to construct a road along the
southern boundary of the school property without having sower
and water services available and still expect assessments to
be paid if the property can't be developed immediately. A
feasibility study by our engineer will have to be prepared in
order to answer some or all of those questions when the school
is ready to develop.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
I . Agree to pro-rato the assessments based on acreage and
accept 34% of the special assossment balances and require
that the entiro delinquent real estate taxes be paid as
part of the sale to the school.
C
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
2. Do not agree to reallocate the assessments and require
full payment of approximately $170,000 to allow the sale
to occur.
3. Agree to reallocate assessments but at a different amount
than proposed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
From the City's standpoint, there does not appear to be any
immediate need to reallocate the delinquent assessments, as
tax forfeiture procedures will more than likely be started in
1991, which should result in either the City obtaining all its
assessment dollars soon or title to the land. On the other
hand, Farm Credit has been cooperative in the past; and
accepting 34% of the delinquent assessments is a fair
allocation based on acreage involved. By accepting the
partial payment, the City does lose the right to have this
property subject to tax forfeiture, which could mean that the
remaining balance of $115,000 in assessments could take a
while to collect depending on how fast Farm Credit is able to
sell the property.
If the Council agrees to pro -rate the delinquent assessments
for this 49 -acre parcel, I would suggest that the motion also
inform Farm Credit that future sales will require full payment
of delinquent assessments and taxes. Because this Is an
unusually large parcel in that it contains over 144 acres, the
remaining property after the sale should have sufficient value
to cover the outstanding assessments that would be respread
over the remaining two years of the assessment roll.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of map outlining area; Schedule of delinquent taxes and
assessments for the parcel.
25
I
0
Q*,
VIC
or
I
0
Q*,
C
PROPOSED ALLOCATION AND RE -ASSESSMENT OF
DELINQUENT TAXES AND ASSESSME14TS
THROUGH FEBRUARY 1, 1991
PARCEL #155-011-000171 (144.5 ACRES)
Proposed Sale of 49 -acre parcel to school
Special assessments (1985-1990)
$100,934.00
Penalty
14,130.78
Interest
25,507.93
Subtotal
$140,572.71
1991 assessment installment
13,392.53
Remaining assessment balance
20,905.43
$174,870.67
8 of property being sold
X 348
Proposed assessment payment
$ 59,456.03
Delinquent real estate taxes including
penalty 6 interest (1985-1990)
S 16,565.82
TOTAL TAX 6 ASSESSMENT PAYMENT PROPOSED S 76,021.85
Proposed assessment balance to be re -assessed to remaining
95.5 acres: $115,414.64
D11
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
12. Consideration of an interim ordinance imposing a moratorium on
adult oriented land uses on certain property located within
the city of Monticello. Applicant, City of Monticello.
(J.O.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Sometime ago, the City Council acted to impose a moratorium on
the establishment of adult book store and adult entertainment
establishments. This moratorium was established in response
to problems nearby communities have had with the establishment
of this type of land use within t heir jurisdiction. The
moratorium Council established at that time was not delineated
by ordinance. It is the view of City staff that we should act
to formally adopt an ordinance placing a moratorium on
establishment of adult entertainment centers until such time
that land use regulations can be drawn up that properly
regulate this type of activity in our community. Formal
adoption of a moratorium by ordinance gives the City improved
footing for denial of any request for a building or occupancy
permit associated with an adult oriented land use.
The ordinance proposed is very similar to an ordinance
recently adopted by the City of Elk River. It calls for a
moratorium to last one year during which time City staff will
be preparing a formal amendment to the zoning ordinance.
At this time, I have compiled quite a bit of information
regarding what other communities have done to regulate the
establishmcnt of adult book stores. Suffice it to say that
the U.S. Constitution does not allow us to completely
eliminate the development of adult book stores; however, the
City does have significant authority in defining where this
type of land use may be conducted. The Planning Commission
will be reviewing the zoning map and pinpointing areas where
this type of land use should be allowed.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to adopt an interim ordinance imposing a
moratorium on adult oriented land uses on certain
proporty located within the city of Monticello.
Under this alternative, the moratorium would be In place
for one year or until the City Council terminates the
moratorium. Council may want to select this altornative
based on the finding that it to nocossary to adopt the
ordinance in order to protect tho planning process and
the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of
/ Monticello.
26
t
C.
C
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
Motion to deny adoption of an interim ordinance opposing
a moratorium on adult oriented land uses on certain
property located within the city of Monticello.
This alternative should be selected if Council does not
agree with the finding noted under alternative #I. Under
this alternative, an adult oriented book store or
entertainment center could be 1 -cared in any portion of
a 6-3 or 8-4 zone, next to daycare centers, schools, etc.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of proposed ordinance amendment.
27
ORDINAINCE AMENDMENT NO.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAT
THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORD2NANCE BE AMENDED BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING
CHAPTER:
Chapter 29
AN INTERIM OREDINANCE IMPOSING A MORATORIUM
ON ADULT ORIENTED LAND USES ON CERTAIN PROPERTY
LOCATED WIT HIN THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
SECTION :
29-1: Purpose
29-2: Definitions
29-3: Moratorium
29-4: Effective Date
29-1: PURPOSE: The C Sty of Monticello is presently conducting
a planning study identified as "A Study for the Location
of Adult Oriented Land Uses" (the Study) for the purpose
of considering adoption and/or amendment of official
controls as defined in Minnesota Statutes,
Section 462.352, Subdivision 15, including Chapters 3-16
of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. In recognition of
the documented secondary Impacts that "Adult Oriented
Land Uses" pose to the property values, minors, and
nearby sensitive land uses, the City Council of the City
of Monticello does determine that prior to the completion
and implemontation of the study, interim regulations are
necessary. The official controls and amendments will
consider, among other things, appropriate land use
regulations relating to "Adult Oriented Land Uses" as
defined below. The Study will consider regulations of
zoning districts for tho property identified as "Zoning
Districts A0, ER -1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R -PUD, PZR, PZ M, B-1,
B-2, 0-3, B-4, I-1, and 1-2" as shown on the City of
Monticello Zoning Map attached as Exhibit A to this
ordinance. Therefore, in order to protect the planning
process and the health, safety, and welfare of the
citizens of the city of Monticello, it is necessary and
desirable to impose the following moratorium pursuant to
the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes,
Section 462.355, Subdivision 4 .
Ordinance Amendment No.
j Page 2
29-2: DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, wherever
they occur in this ordinance, shall be interpreted as
herein defined:
[AA] ADULT BOOK STORE: Any building or structure which
contains or is used for the display or sale of
books, magazines, movie films, still pictures, and
any and all other written materials, photographic
material, novelties, devices, and related sundry
items, which are distinguished or characterized by
their emphasis on matters depicting, describing,
or relating to "Specified Sexual Activities" or
"Specified Anatomical Areas," or an establishment
with a segment or section devoted to the sale or
display of such material.
[AB] SPECIFIED SEXUAL ACTIVITIES: Specified Sexual
Activities shall mean:
I. Acts of human masturbation, sexual intercourse
or sodomy, or any acts of bestiality.
2. Fondling or other erotic touching of human
genitals, pubic region, buttock, or breast of
either male or female.
3. Human genitals in a state of sexual
stimulation or arousal.
(AC) SPECIFIED ANATOMICAL AREAS: Specified Anatomical
Areas shall mean:
1. Loss than completely and opaquely covered:
(a) human genitals, pubic region;
(b) buttock; and
(c) female breast below a point immediately
above the top of the areola; and
2. Human male genitals in a discernibly turgid
state, oven if completely and opaquely
covered.
[AD) ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENT: Any building
or structure which contains or is used for
commercial entertainment where the patron directly
or indiroctly is charged a fee to engage in
personal contact with or to allow a personal
contact by employees, devices or equipment, or by
Cpersonnel provided by the establishment, or
Ordinance Amendment No.
Page 3
viewing of a series of dance routines, strip
performances, or other gyrational choreography
provided by the establishment which appeals to the
prurient interest of the patron to include, but
not to be limited to, bath houses, massage
parlors, and related or similar activities.
[AE] ADULT THEATER: Any building or structure which is
used for the viewing of performances or activities
by others, whether such performances or activities
are by others, whether such performances are in
the form of live shows, motion pictures, slide
shows or other forms of photographic or visual
display, which are distinguished or characterized
by their emphasis on matters depicting,
describing, or relating to "Specified Sexual
Activities" or "Specified Anatomical Areas" as
heretofore defined, or an establishment with a
segment or section devoted to the sale or display
of such material.
29-3: MORATORIUM: From the effective date of this ordinance to
and including January 13, 1992, unless earlier terminated
by resolution of the Monticello City Council, the City
Council, Planning Commission, and the City of Monticello
staff shall not accept any applications for or continue
to process or act on any applications or requests for
building permits, rezoning, conditional use permits,
variances, plats, administrative subdivisions, or other
land use approvals for land uses described in Section 29-
2 above within the area identified in Section 29-1 above.
29-4: EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be in full force
and effect upon its passage and publication.
Adopted this 14th day of January, 1991.
City Administrator
C
Mayor
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
13. Consideration of purchasinq additional scanner and software
for the recyclinq program. (J.S.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
During the preparation of the 1990 budget, staff placed an
amount of $1,650 in the budget for the purchase of one
additional scanner and some additional computer programming
for our recycling program. An additional scanner was needed
as a backup unit during periods of wet weather in the summer
and the extreme conditions encountered in the winter. When
the scanners don't scan, the contractor has to enter the code
numbers by hand, which causes delays and can result in some
errors. The purchase of this equipment in 1990 was delayed,
as we learned the City of St. Louis Park• was considering an
alternate hand-held scanner which was not as susceptible to
moisture and freezing conditions as the existing Telxon units
we're now using. Thinking that we would have to do some
additional programming to add a different scanner to our
existing system, we placed another $300 in the 1991 budget.
In November, we learned that the City of St. Louis Park had
switched over to the MEQ 130 hand-held scanner from Mars
Electronics. This unit can be used as a hand scanner or
attached to the belt with a removable remote wand scanner.
The unit is more weather resistant than the Tolxon units, and
the scanner head uses a convex glass, which is self cleaning,
rather than the concave glass of the Telxon unit, which
catches bar code scrapings, frost, and moisture. We have
replaced two tips on the Tolxon unit so far at a cost of $250
each. The self-cleaning tips for the Mars unit sell for $18
and rarely need replacement. The Mars units aro priced at
$1,895 each versus the estimated replacement cost of the
Telxon units of approximately $1,350.
The only drawback with switching to the Mars MEQ 130 units is
that the computer programming necessary to integrate these
into our system is estimated to cost approximately $2,300••.
Cathy Shuman, who is responsible for computer interfacing at
City Hall, indicates that this computer programming provided
by Vertical Systems, Inc., is a step forward from whore our
existing recycling program is in that the new programming
would also include the documentation and would adapt to a wide
variety of scanners, whero our existing system is adaptable to
tho Tolxon units only. It appears that the charge of $2,300
would bo a one-time charge and would allow us to use both the
•NOTE: Our scanner system was originally sot up based upon
the City of St. Louis Park's system.
•• NOTE: Quoto available at Monday's meeting.
28
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
Telxon and the Mars systems concurrently. In future years, we
would phase out the Telxon units should the Mars units prove
to be more dependable and trouble free.
The purchase of the MEQ 130 Mars scanner, one spare battery
pack, and self-cleaning tip, as well as the programming, would
come to $4,288. This is approximately $2,300 above the amount
budgeted in 1990 and 1991 for this expenditure.
For your information, the scanners have tracked and billed
$11,381.76 in special processing fees from non-recyclers for
the 12 -month period ending September 30, 1990.
Incidentally, the cost of Polka Dot's recycling contract for
the same period was approximately $11,900.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to purchase the Mars
scanner from Tursso Companies, Inc., St. Paul, Minnesota,
with the Vertical Systems, Inc., programming at a cost of
$4,288.
2. The second alternative would be to purchase an additional
Telxon scanner at an es timated cost of $1,350 with one
spare scanner head at $250 for a total of $1,600.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the staff's recommendation (Rick, John, and Cathy) that
the City Council authorize the purchase of the Mare MEQ
scanner and the Vertical Systema programming as outlined in
alternative Y1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the data on existing scanners; Copy of the product
Information shoot on the MEQ 130.
29
rELK(/////PM
Portable Tele -Transaction
Computer Operator's Guide
c
0
BARS .ELECT nonics."
Porlable Dote Terminal
Prod' ctInforMation
Ti,et',,IEQ QQPOroole,Datj , 'T&ifthat
P is ifes(g6odtVabich
0 q tn?w I;ra fin ns qol
'WO,
I Ll-
Full -Function Data Terminal
The MARS ELECTRONICS' MEO" 130 displays. teles and stores bar-
coded or manually -entered data. Up to a tial'-megadyte of memory can
be supplied. Battery back-up protects all data and the program stored
in RAM A standard communication pan allows the MEO 130 to
communicate with other RS -232C compatible products. Available
with an alphanumeric or numeric keypad.
Optical Communications
The MEO 130 features an optical communications poi Mat provides
convenient cableless transfer of data from the MEO '130 to the Mars
Electronics'" MEO'-1260 Communications Node.
SPECIFICATIONS
Terminal
Oaplay
Memory
Clock
Communications Pon
indicators
Keypad Options
Software
Autodiscnminate and
Decode
LLD: 2lines by 16 cnaracters
128E to 5124 byte RAM: 32k bye PONT
Real time clock calendar: automatic
leap year
RS -232C interlace-XOMYOFF. MRTS
Programmable baud rate.
300-19,200 bdslsec.
Good read LED: audible beeper
Alpna•numenc: numeric: custom overlays
Programmable in BASIC
Code 11 UPC
Code 39 Codabar
Coae 128 EAN
1.2015 Plessey
Optical Communications
Optical
Intrafed (960nm)
Communicabods Pon
RS -232C Type optical Imk
Optical Range - 12 Inches
Hall duplex
Principal Focal Point
300 to 91300 bds
XON XOFF
Power Source
and projection of scanner axis parallel to bar
Power Source
Rechargeable NlckeliCadmium
usage
Minimum 12 hours
Charge Cycles
730 minimum
Charge Time
14 hours
Power Save Mode
Back -up battery preserves data & program
in RAM
Indicator
La:: aanor; message
Backup Battery
Nick.ePCadmium: trickle charge from main
battery: preserves RAM tot 7 days
MARK'IT SYSTEMS
612-292-1055
223 E. PLATO BLVD.
ST. PAUL, MN 55107
MARS ELECTRonics
,%" tram A, 19 No
us+
ti(i Ian 113!:'/MU,1C w1:
Na1:53l'171 FA, I: N.10 .V4
,1Wr A111)
Programmable in BASIC
The t.l 0"Q0 is resigned to be programmed,n BASIC. the universal) -
known, easy to use Diagramming language of business and lnaustry.
Digital Contact Wand
Optional contact wands are available from Mars Electronics to read low,
medium and high density bar codes. Utilizing a modular lack. the wand Is
easily attached to the fAEO'• 130.
Digital Contact Wand (optional)
vi,ive Rea Ugtit
The visible red LED operates in the 660nm
Sources
range. peminhng the scanner to see colored
inks which are invisible to infrared light sources.
Principal Focal Point
Set at 0.04" (1 mm)
Preferred Oneniabon-rip in contact with target
and projection of scanner axis parallel to bar
code lines. Role angle..1, =30`.
Depth of Field
.075- (1.9mm)
Depth of field is taken along the optical axis
Output Charac;enY:cs
TTL open collector
Power Consumption
Nominal Power Requirements:
mA-Enable Law 15mA
MA -Enable High 35mA
Physical Characieas:ICs
7.6 inch I19.3cm) from the tip to the end of
the strain relief.
Reading Aperture
Available wtin low. medium and nign resolution
optics
Cable
7'd- nominal coil length (stretches to 6')
Connector
6 position modular plug
Mechanical Specifications
Weight 1,11Ds 1.77 kgs)
Size IH - W . 0) 8 • 5 75 • 1.5-(20.4 • 14.7 . 4cm)
Envirormental Specifications
Operating Temperature 14° to - 12211-10° to - 50°C)
Storage Temperature - t3' to -140-F 1- 25° to - 60`CI
Humidity ovo to 90% )non -condensing)
MEO -"130 Configuration Options
t WKI V-0" ..ryp+a Pam %,M,
ME01302i 8 A'N9191-300147147
MEO 130 - 256 AN 91.30-072.4
MEO 130 - 512 - AN 91.30.0734
MEO 130 128 N 91.30-074.4
MEO 130 256 N 91.30-075.4
MEG 130 - 512 N 91-30-076.4
Mmimnwn .lWi.fl •'J c'-.. .,W MIS.
M4h$ELECTFia':iC$a+'ryol.�.! vo.w, of Mtn tic
Mf 0'- a."..—
f ...
.IR—
f... N_wa,"fr W
w,..r>Wn
m.w. %;IT 5.4: w
f, lLN1®r.IdO Tia. f'4tnln LWS d
rU 1NI fill 11a
r]WW;.OI
O.iw. Crim• &.3.0 tp ri-
;+solve,.
9.'yjtYw L.n Its
fnri •.7 tin 4_1`11 IFI i
kir. E'61'9'r] rMMMI In i'm AawA
im 10 191 1052 PiRSSO
. , 1
-.QUOTATION -
City of. no 12/14J90 -
'm . GATF
970 soot r,roadway C/0
t7unticallu , ?1N 55362-924'. "
QUOTE: P
ATTN:. Mo. Catlydrino OLnaao
SUBJECTTO ACCEPTANCE:
ouAArrrrr OESCRVTIOW proCE
1. eat Nars KBQ-1300 1299 with ILlphs//+wraric keypad; ����=•_.,
laaludeest'waad (10 NIL) with a s14-elleaaiea',tr.p /its.on/ta
1 ca, Additiumal buttery Pack S 95.00 /0a
04 Additional so]C-clearAin6 trip r lt.00/au
Poets' brand fax lrarpmlttd memo Im I • Nelpsx .
a rye �9
•
r3ob1-�.5 .
/�� F0.0 Prepoi0 4 add
®�llll$SO vuMpU:a6S. �y1tC.
223 P100 TERMO N r t 100 d n r a-
atoB� EW- AAM66107.0!0) . , runuut Y.or•.
O��r�, IY ,YIN a .. I,i,iIIM iNi Y lY k
rt1,r lrvn-l.••
�Y�' .•moi: �
/3
1
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
14. Consideration of amendment to contract with Professional
Services Group for change in scope of services, i.e.,
laboratory certification requirements. (J. S.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
In early 1990, the Minnesota Department of Health regulations
required all public and private environmental testing
laboratories to become certified by January 1991. The tests
covered by the new rules include those performed at the
Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant by Professional Services
Group and reported to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
under our current discharge permit.
The certification procedures for all laboratories are quite
extensive, requiring additional manpower and equipment.
During 1990, Professional Services Group, in preparation for
the effective date of the new rules, began operating a
certified lab at the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant to
determine the estimated cost of such a program.
PSG brought in additional equipment from other PSG
laboratories and began performing the tests on a certified
basis. The additional manpower required was approximately
four man-hours per day for each of the three test days per
week. After several months, PSG was able to determine that it
would be less costly to send those samples requiring
certification procedures to an outside certified laboratory
rather than running them in-house. The outside analysis costs
for PSG are estimated at approximately $11,000 per year. The
estimated annual difference in cost between laboratory
operations prior to certification and the cost of sending
samples out for the permit required testa is $5,807.
Currently, the most economical lab in the area is located in
Cambridge.
Since this change in Minnesota Department of Health rules took
effect after the inception of our last contract, it is
actually a change in scope of services provided by PSG;
therefore, a contract increase is warranted. The proposed
contract increase for 1991 is the actual cost of $5,807. This
cost is open to negotiation should an additional change in
scope of services occur or the cost of the quality control/
laboratory cortification program increase by over 10%. A copy
of the contract amondmont is enclosed for your review.
30
C
Council Agenda — 1/14/91
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative is to authorize a contract
amendment with PSG for a change in scope of services,
i.e., laboratory certification requirements by the
Minnesota Department of Health in the amount of $5,807
annually.
2. The second alternative would be not to authorize a change
in scope of services. This does not appear to be
applicable, as this is well-defined in our contract as a
change of scope of services, and both the City
Administrator and myself have negotiated this item with
PSG for several hours to arrive at the figure stated in
alternative S1, which is believed to be a true and
representative cost of the increase due to laboratory
certification requirements.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator and Public
Works Director that the City Council approve a contract
amendment for change of scope of services as outlined in
alternative #1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of memorandum and various data regarding the scope of
sorvices, including proposed amendment to the contract.
31
i�j
PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES GROUP, INC.
M E M O R A N D U M
TO J. SIMOLA
FROM K. MCGUIRE
DATE JANUARY 9, 1991
RE LABORATORY CERTIFICATION, CHANGE IN SCOPE OF SERVICES
John,
As discussed, attached are copies of letters sent to NPDES permit
holders by the MPCA. The City should already have received
copies addressed to the City, I didn't get a copy of the actual
letters to Monticello but these contain the information.
Also included with this memo is a draft amendment to the contract
for your review.
CPlease call if you have questions.
Thank you.
cc L. Breimhurst
Ll
Monticello Woetowator Treatment Plant
1401 Han Bled., Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Ph. (612) 295.2225 ��
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency F"-�
520 Lafayette Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155
Telephone (612) 296-6300 V
Juni 21, '1990
The Honorable Alfred Collinge ITT
Mayor, City of Monticello
Permit Number MN0025330 .
City Hall
Zumbrota. Mr] 55992
Dear Sir/Mad am:
Re: Laboratory Certification
In January 1990. a letter from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (HPCA)
was sent to all our permittees informing them of a Minnesota Department of
Health (MDH) rule (Minn. Rule pt. 4740.2040) vhich requires that all
environmental laboratories conducting tests for vastevater parameters must be
certified th rough the Department of Health. In February 1990, three seminars
were held to explain the rectification procedures and requirements. If your
representative did not attend one of the seminars or if you are uncertain
whether or not your laboratory must be certified, please direct questions you
may have to Lonna Volfateller, MDH, (612) 623-5681.
Knowing how and/or .whore to have your monitoring samples analyzed is important
because by January .1, 1991, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency staff will
accept only monitnring data that has been completed in a certified laboratory
or a laboratory that has received provisional certification.
One exception is the immediate testing for dissolved oxygen, pH and total
residual chlorine. If your laborar.nry is not certified, but IF all your other
samples are run in a certified lab, and TP npprnved methods are being used, you
may submit your performance data for dissolved oxygen, pH and total residual
chlorine on your monthly monitoring reports.
If you have questions regarding this matter, please feel free to toll Lonna
volEatollar as indicated shove or John Davenport of the HPCA at (612)5.
Sincerely,
LC
Mnrgo of J. Valky
Poll tion Control Sp cialist
R tl atory Com a c Section
va or Ouali ty D n
MJV:Jne
Regional Offices: Duluth • Brainard - Dotrod LAW • Marshall • Rocneetsr
Equal Opponuney Ernpiayer PdmW on 111 vcled P—
AINMinnesota Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 P1-
Telephone (612) 296.6300
ML44[ A1990
Dear:
Re: Laboratory Certification
As an agency responsible for regulating and controlling environmental
pollutants, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), through the permit
program, must rely on the self-monitoring data submitted by our parmittaos.
The permits require the testing and reporting of certain parameters which are
nocessary to ensure that Minnesota's air, land and voter is protected and
preserved. Because we base our compliance tracking on the data we receive,
accuracy and reliability are very important to us.
To Januory 1990, Minnesota Department of Health Rules pro. 4740.2010 through
4740.2040, Cortification Procaduras for Environmental Testing Laboratories,
will become effective. The rules establish procedures by which environmental
testing laboratories may become rartif.ied by the the Department of Health to
perform tests for certain spacitied parameters. The rule further establishes
appllcotinn proepdures, standards and procedures for the granting of
eartifiection, and procedures governing suspension and revocation of
certification.
Currently, rho above stated rule covers tooting for basic inorganic and
bacteriological parameters. At some future time, laboratory certificatinn will
be required of those laboratories performing analyses for organic substances
and metals other than lend. Lead, which is already required under the Sate
Drinking Vater Act, is included under Minn. Rules ch. 4740.
Within one yanr follnving the affarrivp date of the rule, or, by .January 1991,
all laboratories performing testing procedures for permittees holding NPDES or
State Disposal System permits must have obtained interim approval for
rertifiention. The submitted analytical data as required by the permits will
be acceptable only if tasting is performed in a certified laboratory.
Through a permit modification process, the Division of Vater Quality staff will
modify all permits to require that the analytical tasting requtrod to moot
permit conditions must be conducted in a laboratory mortified by the
Ropionai oitkas: ouiuth - Brainerd • ostroh Lakos • Marshall • tioeheater T
Equal Qpponunsv Empiovor Printed on Recycled Paps
Page 2
Minnesota Department of Health. We helleve that the uniformity of procedures
and the assurance that approved me chods are being used, will benefit both the
permittees and the MPGA in developing a compliance picture reflective of the
actual activity of your treatment facility.
Three saminara aro being planned to explain the cartif icatton procedures. The
seminars arc scheduled for Fahruary 20, 1990. in Borth Mankato. Februnry 22,
1990, in St. Cloud and February 23, 1990, in Shoreviev. Applications for
certification will be available at each seminar or can be obtained by
contacting the Department of Health.
If you would like more information regarding the rule or the application,
please contact Mr. Al Tupy, Minnesota Department of Health, (612) 629-5680. For
additional information regarding your NPDES and State Disposal System permits.
please contact Marge Velky at (612) 2905-724A,
Sincerely,
mothy K. Scherkanbach
Director 11
Division of Voter Quality
TKS t a is
R
OH
t
AGREEMENT FOR OPERATIONS AND
MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE
MONTICELLO WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
AMENDMENT 1 (EFFECTIVE 1/1/91)
CHANGE IN SCOPE OF SERVICES; LABORATORY CERTIFICATION
PSG shall provide for NPDES permit required analysis to be
performed by a laboratory certified by the State of Minnesota, to
conform with new laboratory certification requirements effective
1/1/91 by the State of Minnesota, and enforced by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency.
PSG's annual fee for the first year of this amendment (1991),
additional to the base fee, shall be Five Thousand Eight Hundred
and Seven Dollars ($5,807). The Annual Fee for these services
shall be negotiated annually or when a significant change in the
cost of these services occurs. A significant change in cost is
defined as an increase in the cost of the program of 10% or more
on an annual basis.
Both parties indicate their approval of this Amendment to the
Agreement for Operations and Maintenance Services for the
Monticello Wastewater Treatment Facility by their signatures
below:
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE:
Michael M. Stump
President
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. CITY OF MONTICELLO
DATE: DATE:
WITNESS:
C
WITNESS:
0
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
15. Consideration of makinq annual appointments. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Minnesota Statutes require that at the first meeting of each
new year, certain appointments be made. Attached you will
find a list of the required appointments that may be approved
in one single motion unless the Council chooses to consider
some appointments separately.
a. City Depositories. During the past year, three
official depositories were named, including Wright
County State Bank, Security Financial Savings b
Loan, and First National Bank of Monticello. In
addition, under Minnesota Statutes 239, the Chief
Financial Officer has also been designated the
authority to name other official depositories for
the purpose of investments. Since financial
institutions not within the city are depositories
for investment purposes only, the official
depositories are usually just the three mentioned
above, and the motion includes the authorization
for the Chief Financial Officer to designate other
depositories when necessary for investment purposes
only.
b. Official Newspaper. Monticello Times.
C. Health Officer. Historically, Dr. Maus has served
as the City Health Officer, and it is suggested
that this appointment simply be renewed annually.
d. Acting Mayor. Annually, one person on the Council
must be stipulated to act as Mayor in the absence
of the elected Mayor. For the past number of
years, Fran Fair has boon filling this role, but
the Council will now have to select a different
individual. No recommendation is made for this
position.
e. Representatives to Other Multi -Jurisdictional
Bodies. Three appointments are necessary for
selecting the City representative to serve on each
of the following bodies: Community Education
Advisory Board, Joint Fire Board, and the OAA
Board. I have boon asked to servo in the past as
the Fire Board representative, but the Council may
also want to add one Council member to this board
if it desires. Previously, the Mayor has boon the
representative on the OAA Board, and there is still
32
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
a vacancy for the Community Education Advisory
Board, which was previously filled by Councilmember
Warren Smith. The Community Education position can
be appointed from the Council or any other staff
member the Council designates.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Annually, one
appointment is required for the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority. A current five-year term
that is expiring has been filled by Mr. Ben Smith,
who has agreed to continue in this capacity and has
been approved by the HRA committee in general. The
HRA appointments are made by the Mayor with formal
ratification by the City Council.
Plannlnq Commission. The Planning Commission is
made up of five members serving one-year
appointments. For the year 1991, all current
members have indicated a willingness to accept
reappointment for another year. Since these
positions are appointed annually by the Council,
the Council does have the latitude to open the
positions up for applications if it desires. A
number of years ago, Cindy Lemm was appointed to
the Planning Commission who is a Monticello
Township resident. At the time the appointment was
made, the City was having difficulty in attracting
applicants for the Planning Commission; but as some
of you may recall , the City has had a number of
interested applicants for past openings. Our City
ordinances do not require that a member of the
Planning Commission be a city resident; I am only
pointing this out for your information if the
Council would prefer to seek applicants from the
city before considering residents from outside the
city.
h. Library Board. The Library Board by ordinance
requires a Mayoral appointment with Council
ratification. Currently, two members of the board
have terms that expired December 31, 1990, one
being Ed Solberg and the other Mary Jane Puncochar.
Both of those individuals have indicated a
willingness to serve and be reappointed by the
Council.
Rocvclinq Committee. Councilmember Dan Bionigen
has served on the Recycling Committee; and if
Mr. Slonigon does not object, it is recommended
that he be reappointed to this committee.
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
Economic Development Authority. The Economic
Development Authority is composed of seven members
appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City
Council. According to our ordinance that
established the EDA, two members of the committee
shall be members of the City Council. The terms of
office of the two members of the City Council shall
coincide with his/her remaining term of office as a
member of the City Council. In the past, Warren
Smith and Fran Fair were the representatives on the
EDA; and as a result, two new Council members
should be appointed to the EDA. Again, no
recommendation is made on this appointment that Is
necessary.
The following appointments are not required to be made
annually by statute, but each of them perform services on an
as -needed basis for the City. In the past, the Council has
made a practice of making these appointments along with the
required appointments at the annual meeting.
1. City Attorney. Mr. Tom Hayes has resigned his
position as City Attorney due to his election as
Sherburne County Attorney. The City is currently
in the process of soliciting applicants for this
position, and we have received a number of
qualified responses. It appears that we will have
at least two individuals locally that are
interested, and a number of firms/individuals from
outside Monticello have also expressed interest.
The deadline for submitting applications is
January 22; and at that point, the staff will be
reviewing the applicants and possibly scheduling an
interview process with the City Council. At this
point, no action is necessary by the Council until
this process is completed.
2. Consultinq Planner. Dahlgren, Shardlow 6 Uban has
been tho City's planning firm for a number of
years; and while it is not necessary to make a
formal appointment, such appointments can be made
at such time to continue this arrangement on an as -
needed basis.
3. City Auditor. This is also not required to be an
annual appointment but can be done on an ae-needed
basis or by specifications and through the bidding
process. Historically, Cru ys Johnson 6 Associates
has boon the City's auditor; and as a result, they
34
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
have become very familiar with the City's
accounting practices, and I do not have any problem
In reappointing them to this position.
Consulting Enqineer. For the past several years,
the Council has not made the annual appointment for
Consulting Engineer within the context of this
agenda item, but rather has analyzed and evaluated
the contract services provided by OSM as a separate
item. As the staff has done for the past few
years, we will be meeting with representatives of
OSM to discuss the proposed fee schedules for next
year and our overall relationship with their firm.
It is assumed that their engineering services will
continue to be utilized on an as -needed basis; and,
as I am sure the Council is aware, appointment of
any additional engineering firms to work for the
City can be made at any time the Council desires.
The attached sheet as supporting data lists all of the members
of the various commissions and the appropriate appointments,
both required and discretionary, for this year's meeting. The
underlined names are the ones needing appointment this year;
and in those cases where a recommendation is not available,
the space has been left blank.
If recommendations are decided on by the Council for any of
the vacant positions noted, a single motion is all that is
needed, or each category can be considered separately.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
List of appointments.
35
1991 ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS
Official Depositories:
Newspaper:
Hous ing and Redevelopment Authority:
(5 -year staggered terms)
Planning Commission:
Health Officer:
( 1 year)
Acting Mayor:
(1 year)
Joint Commissions:
Community Education:
Fire Board
OAA
Library Board:
(3 -year staggered)
Attorney: ( Intorm Appointment)
Planner:
Auditor:
Recycling Committee:
Economic Development Authority:
3 -
Wright County State Bank
Security Financial Savings 6 Loan
First National Bank of Monticello
Chief Financial Officer -
authorized to designate other
depositories for investment
purposes only.
Monticello Times
1. Tom St. Hilaire 12/91
2. Ben Smith 12/95
3. Bud Schrupp 12/94
4. Al Larson 12/93
5. Everette Ellison 12/92
1. Richard Carlson
2. Jon Bogart
3. Cindy Lemm
4. Richard Martie
5. Dan McConnon
Dr. Donald Maus
Dan Bloniqen
Shirley Anderson
Rick Wolfsteller
Ken Maus
1. Ed Solborq 12/93
2. Dr. Donald Maus 12/91
3. Mary Jane Punco char 12/93
4. Pat Schwarz 12/91
5. Rebecca Josins ki 12/92
Firm of Smith 6 Hayes
Dahlqren, Shardlow 6 Uban
Gruys, Johnson 6 Associates
Dan Bloniqen
1. Brad Fylo, Councilmember
2. Clint Herbst, Counc ilmomber
3. Harvey Kendall
4. Al Larson
5. Barb Schwionto k
6. Bob Morford
7. Ron Hoglund
0
1991 ANNUAL
APPOINTMENTS
Official Depositories:
Wright County State Bank
Security Financial Savings & Loan
First National Bank of Monticello
Newspaper:
Monticello Times
Housing and Redevelopment Authority:
1. Tom St. Hilaire 12/91
(5 -year staggered terms)
2. Ben Smith 12/95
3. Bud Schrupp 12/94
4. Al Larson 12/93
5. Everette Ellison 12/92
Planning Commission:
1. Richard Carlson
2. Jon Bogart
3. Cindy Lemm
4. Richard Martie
5. Dan McConnon
Health Officer:
Dr. Donald Maus
(I year)
Acting Mayor:
0-4,cit4
(I year)
Joint Commissions:
Community Education:
Fire Board
Rick We fsteller gy,
OAA
Ken Maus
Library Board:
1. Ed Solberq 12/93
(3 -year staggered)
2. Dr. Donald Maus 12/91
3. Mary Jane Puncochar 12/93
4. Pat Schwarz 12/91
5. Rebecca Jesinski 12/92
Attorney: -IkMa.cf- t4 4, Tr
?
Planner:
Dahlqron, Shardl-w & Ub.n
Auditor:
Gruys, Johnson & Associates
Recycling Committoo:
Dan Bloniqon
Economic Development Authority:
I. , , Councilmombor
2. Councilmombor
3. Harvey Kendall
4. Al Larson
5. Barb Schwiontok
6. Bob Moeford
7. Ron Hoglund
0
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
Consideration of aDZroving 1991 contract for police protection
with Wriqht County Sheriff. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The City Council is asked to ratify renewing the law
enforcement contract covering services for 1991 which will
total $172,043.50 for 7,321 hours of coverage. The total
hours again include the estimated 416 hours that will be used
by the sheriff's department for providing additional patrolmen
for Friday and Saturday evenings for continued enforcement of
the cruising and loitering activities. It should be noted
that if the Council feels these extra hours during Friday and
Saturday evenings are no longer needed, the City could either
cut back by 416 hours, saving approximately $9,776, or just
have the sheriff's department redirect these hours to other
time periods during the week.
The 1991 contract rate has increased from $20.50 per hour c3f
coverage to $23.50, or an approximate 14.6% increase. The
County Board initiated a study on the contracting services
provided by the shorif f's department and felt that an increase
is warranted to keep in line with their cost when compared to
other contracting arrangements through other counties. it
appears at this point that the City of Monticello could still
not provide its own police department for this cost. But we
will have to continue to watch tho projected increases that
may occur in the future; and if they continue in the 15% per
year category, there will be a point where we will have to
seriously look at our own police department.
The contract agreement is basically the same as last year's
except for an additional paragraph that has been added under
#11D. This paragraph states that statutes and ordinances which
prescribe enforcement by a different authority such as the
state electrical code or the uniform building code are
excluded from this agreement. In addition, the paragraph
specifies that City ordinances that are exclusive to our
municipality and enforcement of the municipal zoning code aro
the responsibility of the City and not tho sheriff 's
department. At first I had concorns over this paragraph, as
It appeared the Intent may be to roduco the level of sorvice
we were accustomed to. while the City has had to got the
sheriff's department involvod in onforcomont of our public
nuisance ordinances in the past, it doesn't appear that other
zoning code violations should be expected to be handlod by tho
sheriff's departmont. This was confirmed in my discussions
with Sheriff Hozompa on the intent of this paragraph.
Mr. Hozempa noted that the City of Monticello would not
recoive a level of service less than what wo were accustomed
to, and the intent was only to spocify that items such as
36
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
electrical code or building code violations are not the
responsibility of the police department but should be handled
by City staff through its own legal system. As far as
enforcement of public nuisance ordinances, the sheriff's
department will continue to handle these violations at our
request.
Based on my conversation with Sheriff Hozempa, I am
comfortable that the contract language is similar to past
agreements and recommend ratifying the contract for 1991.
Paragraph 613 in the contract states that for the purpose of
maintaining cooperation, local control, and general
information on existing complaints and problems in said
municipality, one member of the municipal Council, the Mayor,
or other person or persons shall be appointed by the Council
to act as police commissioners for the City. I point this
paragraph out in that this language has been in our past
contracts, and I believe there is interest in the City
establishing a police commission during 1991. In conjunction
with renewing our police contract, it may be an appropriate
time to consider supporting the establishment of a police
commission made up of one or more Council members along with
citizens who could act as an advisory board to make
recommendations on service levels and/or to receive complaints
or resolve disputes concerning our police protection. If the
Council is interested in this concept, I will check with other
communities to see if separate bylaws are needed for the
commission, and the Council may want to set specific duties
and/or responsibilities they would like to see the commission
accomplish. The actual appointment of members to the
commission could take place at a later meeting once more
information is available.
B. ALTERNATIVE. ACTIONS
1. Ratify the contract certifying the number of hours of
coverage at a maximum of 7,321 at a rate of $23.50 per
hour. This is the same level of coverage we've had for
the past two years.
2. Ratify the contract at the rate of $23.50 per hour but
sot a different level of hours. While it appears that
cruising and loitering are no longer the problem they
were a few years ago, there may be justification for
continuing the additional 416 hours of coverage to be
used by the sheriff's department as needed. At this
point, I believe the sheriff's department does distribute
some of those hours to parts of the day that are not
normally covered by our contract; but we would certainly
have the right to cut back the hours if we dosirod.
37
C
C
Council Agenda — 1/14/91
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the contract be ratified for 1991 at the
hourly rate of $23.50. While I believe we have to be
concerned about future increases in the police contract, the
City would still not be able to provide the level of service
for the amount we pay on our own. If it appears that the
additional manhours are not needed on Friday or Saturday
nights, the sheriff's department does not have a problem with
us redirecting those hours to other time periods.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of proposed contract with changes highlighted.
38
f)kEV100 Con17-Qgc-T% 64A�6[14ir�—
StatutSuch services shall include the enforcement of Minnesota State
s andLave and the municipal ordinances which are of the same
type and nature of Minnesota State Statutes and Laws enforced by the
Sheriff within the unincorporated territory of said County.
2. That it is agreed that the Sheriff shall have full cooperation and
assistance from the municipality, its officers, agents and employees, so as
to facilitate the performance of this agreement.
3. That the County anall furnish and supply all necessary labor,
supervision, equipment, communication facilities for dispatching, cost of
jail detention, and all supplies necessary to maintain the level of service
to be rendered herein.
4. The municipality shall not be liable for the direct payment of any
salaries, wages, or other compensation to any personnel performing services
herein for said County.
5. The municipality shall not be liable for compensation or indemnity
to any of the Sheriff's employees for injuries or sickness arising out of
its employment, and the County hereby agrees to hold harmless the munic-
ipality against any ouch claims.
6. The County. Sheriff, his officers. and employees shall not be
deemed to asoume any liability for intentional or negligent acts of said
municipality or any officer, agent, or employee thereof.
7. This agreement shall be effective from January 1. 1990
to December 31. 1990
8. The municipality hereby agrees to pay to the County the sum of
$150,080.50 for low eniorcoment protection for SEE APPENDIX A
hours per day/week OZ dally patrol service and 24 hours call and general
services from said b-herill's Office during said term Of this agreement.
9. If the annual salaries of the Deputy Sheriffe are increased at any
time during the term herein stated, this contract shall not be increased.
/Io
LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTRACT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
, 19 , by and between the County of Wright and
the Wright County Sheriff, hereinafter referred to as "County", and
the hereinafter referred to as the
"Municipality";
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Municipality is desirous of entering into a contract
with the County for the performance of the hereinafter described lav
enforcement protection with the corporate limits of said Municipality
through the County Sheriff; and
WHEREAS, the County is agreeable to rendering such services and
protection on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, such contracts are authorized and provided for by the
provision of Minn. Stat. 1957, Sec. 471.59 and Laws 1959, Chap. 372,
and Minn. Stat. Ann. 1961, Sec. 436.05:
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the terms of the aforesaid statutes,
it is agreed as follows:
1. That the County by way of the Sheriff agrees to provide
police protection within the corporate limits of the Municipality to
the extent and in the manner as hereinafter set forth:
a. Except as otherwise hereinafter specifically set forth, such
services shall encompass only duties and functions of the typo
coming within the jurisdiction of the Wright County Sheriff
pursuant to Minnesota Laws and Statutes.
b. Except as otherwise hereinafter provided for, the standard
level of service provided shall be the same basic level of
service which is provided for the unincorporated areas of the
q County of Wright, State of Minnesota.
C. The rendition of services, the standard of performance, the
discipline of the officors and the other matters incident to the
0
performance of such services and control of personnel so employed
shall remain in and under the control of the Sheriff.
d Services purchased pursuant to this contract shall include
he enforcement of Minnesota State Statutes, including but not
limited to the Traffic Code and the Criminal Code, as well as all
P� local ordinances enacted in conformance therewith. Statutes and
a ordinances which prescribe enforcement by a different authority,
i.e.: the State Electrical Code, the Uniform Building Code,
�� etc., shall be excluded from this agreement. Ordinances
pertaining exclusively to purely local city management matters,
i.e.: sever and water collection, etc., shall be excluded from
this agreement. The Municipality shall be responsible for
enforcement of the Municipal Zoning Code, except that the Sheriff
will enforce nuisance ordinances conforming to state lav, i.e.:
junk cars, etc., and traffic ordinances, i.e.: parking and
erratic driving.
2. That it is agreed that the Sheriff shall have full
cooperation and assistance from the Municipality, its officers, agents
and employees so as to facilitate the performance of this agreement.
3. That the County shall furnish and supply all necessary
labor, supervision, equipment, communication facilities for
dispatching, coat of jail detention and all supplies necessary to
maintain the level of service to be rendered herein.
a. The Municipality shall not be liable for the direct payment
of any salaries, wages or other compensation to any personnel
performing services herein for said County.
5. The Municipality shall not be liable for compensation or
indemnity to any of the Sheriff's employees for injuries or sickness
arising out of its employment, and the County hereby agrees to hold
harmleaa the Municipality against any such claims.
6. The County, Sheriff, his officers and employees shall not be
deemed to assume any liability for intentional or negligent acts of
said Municipality or any officer, agent or employee thereof.
7. This agreement shall be effective from January 1,
to December 31,
/6
8. The Municipality hereby agrees to pay the County the sum of
5 per hour for lav enforcement protection for hours
per week of daily patrol service and 24 hours call and general
services from said Sheriff Ia office during said term of this
agreement.
9. If the annual salaries of the Deputy Sheriffs are increased
at any time during the term herein stated, this contract shall not be
increased.
10. The Municipality shall have the option of renewing this
agreement for an additional successive 12 -month period. To exercise
this option, the Municipality shall notify the County Administrator
not later than 60 days prior to the expiration date of this agreement.
11. The County shall provide for all costa and prosecution
efforts with respect to violations charged by the Sheriff in the
g
performance of thio agreement. All fines arising from such
prosecutions shall accrue to the County. Violations of municipal
ordinances excluded from enforcement by this agreement shall be
prosecuted by the Municipality at its expense. All fines arising from
city prosecutions shall accrue to the 'Municipality unless otherwise
provided by law.
12. Pursuant to lav, the County Auditor/Treasurer shall remit to
the Municipality its share of all fines collocted. The Municipality
shall return to the County within 30 days all fine money attributable
to prosecutions initiated by the Sheriff in accord with paragraph 11
of this contract. The Municipality shall keep and retain any fine
money submitted by the Auditor/Traaaurer attributable to prosecutions
initiated by the Municipality.
C13. For the purpose of maintaining cooperation, local control
and general information on existing complaints and problems in said
Municipality, one member of the municipal council, the mayor or other
person or persons shall be appointed by said council to act as police
commissioner(s) for said Muncipality and shall make periodic contacts
with and attend meetings with the Sheriff or his office in relation to
the contract herein.
14. The County shall save, hold harmless and defend the City
from any and all claims arising from the acts or omissions, including
intentional acts and negligence, committed by employees or agents of
the County or Sheriff while in the performance of duties in futherance
of this contract.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Municipality, by resolution duly adopted
by its governing body, caused this agreement to be signed by its mayor
and attested by its clerk: and the County of Wright, by the County
Board of Commissioners, has caused this agreement to be signed by the
Chairman and clerk of said board and by the Wright County Sheriff,
effective on the day and year first above written.
Dated: 1990
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
BOARD OF WRIGHT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Dated: , 1990 By:
Chairperson
ATTEST:
Clerk, Board of County
Commissioners
Dated: , 1990
Wright County Sheriff
Approved as to form and execution.
William S. MacPhail
Wright County Attorney 0)(4
L
1991 Hourly Rate - $23.50
APPENDIX A
Annual Contract Fee - $172,043.50
Services provided by Wright County Sheriff:
a) 16 hours per day, four days per week (3,328 total hours).
b) 19 hours per day, three days per week, two of which shall
be Friday and Saturday (2,964 total hours).
c) 613 hours assigned at discretion of scheduling authority.
d) Additional 8 hours per day, Friday and Saturday, not to
exceed 416 total hours, assigned at discretion of
scheduling authority.
C
6)
I.
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
17. Ratification of salary adjustments for 1991. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At a special meeting in December, the Council established a
salary adjustment pool of $26,000 to be used by the
Administrator for establishing salaries for non-union
employees. At the special meeting held December 17, the
Council considered ratifying the proposed salaries recommended
by the Administrator but also requested additional supporting
data concerning justification for recommended increases. At
that time, the City Council also allowed the Administrator to
use an additional $500 for salary adjustments if he felt
necessary.
REVISED
PROPOSED SALARY ADJUSTMENTS FOR 1991
Annual
Approx. %
1991
Amount
Increase
Salary
John Simola
Public Works Director
$2,650
6.5
$43,344
Jell O'Nelil
Assistant Administrator
$2,100
5.5
$41,321
011ie Koropchak
Econ. Develop. Director
$1.850
6.4
$30,557
Roger Mack
Street/Park Supt.
$1.725
5.4
$33,940
Gary Anderson
Building Inspector
$1.650
5.2
$33,555
Matt Thiesen
Water/Sewer Supt.
S1.600
5.4
$31,085
Joe Hartman
Liquor Store Manager
$1.580
5.2
$32,190
Karen Hanson
Senior Citizen Director
$1.150
5.3
$22,819
Tom Bose
Utility Inspector
$1,225
4.7
$27,225
Cathy Shuman
Utility Billing Cooid.
$1.275
5.9
$22,803
Wanda Kramer
Utility Billing/Recept.
$1.075
5.5
$20,523
Marlene Hellman
Bookkeeper/Secretary
$1.235
5.4
$24,219
Karen Doty
Executive Secretary
$1.250
5.5
$23,756
Diane Jacobson
Deputy Registrar Clerk
$1.250
5.4
$24,692
Pat Kovich
Deputy Registrar Clerk
$1,050
5.4
$20.498
Clndi Erickson
Liquor Store Clerk
$8860
5.2
$17,417
$23,525
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
18. Consideration of authorizing the purchase of a vehicle for the
Buildinq Inspection Department. (R.W.}
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
For the past few years, Building Official, Gary Anderson, has
requested the City budget for a vehicle to be used for
building inspection purposes. During the preliminary budget
review process, the Council has eliminated this item from the
budget and continued with the $.25 per mile reimbursement.
Again, in 1991, I did place $10,000 in the building inspection
department budget. Since the funds will be available this
year, the staff has been researching cost quotations for the
purchase of a vehicle within the budget amount.
Previous Councils have determined that it is not economically
feasible for the City to provide a vehicle for the building
inspection department, which was the reason for eliminating it
from budget consideration. Based on $.25 per mile
reimbursement, this will continue to be the case, in that it
is cheaper for the City to reimburse $.25 per mile than it is
to own a vehicle for the employees use. This can be somewhat
mitigated if the vehicle was available for other employees to
use during the work week; but having more than one individual
use a vehicle is not always possible or feasible. The
Building Official has indicated that his own vehicle is in
need of replacement soon, and he does not feel it should be
his requirement to provide a vehicle for building inspection
purposes. It is Gary's opinion that at $.25 per mile
reimbursement, it is not cost effective for him to supply a
vehicle because of the number of short trips he makes.
Using the $10,000 budget figure, Gary Anderson obtained five
quotations for a used vehicle with varying mileage that ranged
from $7,200 to $10,000. The reason used vehicles were quoted
Is that a now, full-sized pickup would exceed the $10,000
budget amount.
If the Council would consider a vehicle purchase, there does
not seem to be a need for a full-sized pickup, and I believe
a now, compact truck similar to a Ford Rangor or an S-10
Chevrolet can be purchased now for under $10,000. Typically,
when the City does purchase vehicles for the public works
department, we do not necessarily need air conditioning, power
windows, steroo, radio, otc. John Simola, in discussions with
Gould Brothers Chevrolet and also with the City purchasing
under a state contract, indicated that a now subcompact pickup
should be able to be purchased for approximately $10,000 or
loss, including sales tax, otc. In the past, when the City
40
Council Agenda - 1/14/91
has needed a vehicle, it's been the Council consensus that
purchasing a new vehicle may be more economical in the long
run than choosing a used vehicle.
Assuming a new vehicle that costs $10,000 that was driven
4,500 miles per year, I estimated the annual ownership cost at
$2,050 per year. If the annual mileage was $6,000, the cost
would Increase slightly to $2,150 per year. Both of these
assumptions were based on a five-year life expectancy of the
vehicle with a salvage value of $3,500 at the end of five
years. While there is no way to know the exact cost of owning
the vehicle, this should give the Council some comparison to
the mileage we are currently reimbursing the Building
Inspector. The Building Inspector for 1990 was reimbursed the
equivalent of 4,500 miles, along with a car insurance
allowance which totaled $1,350. If the Building Inspector was
the only employee to use this vehicle, it is still cheaper to
reimburse on a per mile basis.
Assuming that a new vehicle was available at City Hall for
other purposes besides just the Building Inspector, the cost
of ownership gets a little closer to the cost of
reimbursements. In 1990, all clerical staff and the Assistant
Administrator were reimbursed approximately $1,500 for
approximately 6,000 miles. If one was to assume that the
vehicle would be available for 25% of the mileage currently
used by other clerical employees, the City would save
approximately $375 In mileage reimbursement with only an
additional $100 cost added to the ownership factor. This
would narrow the gap, but it would still cost approximately
$500 per year more to have the City own the vehicle rather
than pay through reimbursements.
Another consideration the Council would have to establish Is
would a vehicle used primarily by the Building Inspector
remain at City Hall during non -work hours, or would the
Building Inspector be allowed to take this vehicle home.
Currently, only the Public Works Director has been authorized
to take a City vehicle home, and that was for faster response
to emergency calls, etc. If the vehicle is to remain at City
Hall, the question becomes where do we store it, and is there
a security problem. Whilo I believe there may be some merit
in having a vehicle available for all City employees to use
when necessary, even assuming 25% of the mileage incurred by
staff members could be utilized through a City vehicle is just
a guess In that it may not be available when needed, depending
on the Building Inspector's schedule. While I do not have any
cost figures for this typo of vehicle, an all-purpose vehicle
at City Hall does not necessarily have to be a pickup, but
maybe the City should be looking at a small van that would
41
j Council Agenda - 1/14/91
C
meet all purposes. I believe the cost for this type of
vehicle would be more than a small pickup but could serve more
purposes.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Council could authorize staff to obtain firm quotes for
the purchase of a new compact pickup or basic mini -van.
Since the estimated cost is under $15,000, the City does
not have to bid for the purchase and can use quotations.
2. Council could authorize the purchase of a used, full-
sized pickup from the quotations received to date.
3. Council could determine to continue reimbursing mileage
to the Building Inspector at the current S.25 per mile
and not authorize purchase of a vehicle at this time.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
From a pure cost analysis, it will continue to be more
economical for the City to reimburse employees on a mileage
basis versus ownership of a vehicle. If the vehicle is used
exclusively by the Building Inspector, I estimate that the
City's additional cost would be about $700 per year. If the
vehicle would be available for some use by other clerical
employees, this cost difference is reduced to probably $500
per year. I believe the question the Council must decide is
whether the Building Inspector's position Is required to
provide his own vehicle at the reimbursement rate set by the
Council and whether that is adequate compensation. If the
decision is based on pure dollar cost, it still appears that
the City will save money by requiring employees to use their
own vehicles.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Five quotations on used pickups; Ownership cost summary.
42
NINETY-FOUR SERVICES, INC.
IY Low.00D at • rORCF -Y
/
j , I�mra - tnio iO./mn
.•r.. r.v. V .sr VpoOe Olen.00e
D... Mss G•' N4 r'
au.ec tNrca.n o>ots roe NYn us.n tN•.n .s.. _
_ --- rweNAicaY]ae QS�.�.L�
noon
orxw•saumano.�
rauuroY can.a.tr.. Wa...�
u.Y �MNlvr..Q raNArov[r•nr
......01... f lcglJr n
IA1Mlt Yr1M1
�
61AL"WeOrO dwmAww �•• AR[\IeINlfpl Rt]
_ _
_
S
/fNrcnasrm RI
w.tuArtla�
yY.y;,MIM rrL
vomtccmbrns
MmKr[oYnuCt .
0601rYL rpµIRYYm1tm,m
�.nv,:rsrv.'mncnauer,...�.r.pp..r. foto 00nwwn ,
.ay.sm;...� Hi.rw.•nrwwY•M•.p rrr
•- � • �- .. ate- roto AYDUNT DUQ ON ORUMeRY /?moo sty I
n.r•...p. rrcanucrnwY..p..wtmiuY tr.YYr.pe....ouu.rsr..�.•pn�N+ Yr..•v�+••
a ra�.rr..n,<awrsn-aw�rr snaWiYr w n r.wrY+.er r.aes.u• .r. s•As rew wtn..�o aYUY.rr•��Y��
M� �zrti
rr...r rw cams[I.�. grry.•.rr CON.Yrct.YrYar s.rrY. BMPORTA1NTl THIS MAY BE A BINDING CONTRACT
m.. w+.••..w• N W h~.•wt0. w r. r.rYr Y W AM VOU W LOSS ANY DBPWTB IF YW DO NOT
...war PENCIPI AACCORDINDromTERMS.
..nMl(r ru 1'JfM *rn NOI ...tY .M..rY.f.INrD
-� M.e.+�. w.•.f �.w•fw..n
Ymsmoklimmomm ButmNT ew Al9*M#ICNT Pisa Oval BYhpldd
r.rrYlrra� rr nY••rrr�.Yr/.eY�y...YAdow.q rrrr Y[a�1.YYwM�.Yr rrlYOn.Y.wunrr.rrYlrpspnw.
�n+l. - - --- -- --pww.W.w+.sr•a.rar w.. •YYI I...r...Y r.no w..w,
�..•....«wwinw.�YF A p ��w~a,�4.6�iprrOYY _ _ - re.n.Ow YYYh YYr.g--Pm
r„f1I��..N�.rY,rpMlfqr.Mpr...YiM�OM..h..V..'Y+�w...YrOYw.�•..O.Yf•
�m�N...n�•..rp..rwr ..s..Dlr..u.r.p
•MY.Yq - OD011[tee OACrN.L1'rrn1.. N•.+.W _
t
A. M. Maus and Son
A. J. Maus, Owner '•Service That Satisfies' Kimball, Minnecsta 55759
7.1. 79!.3710
67 c..
Cir I— O.Ip a p""th — sf"d" M — 1 Mhwr. C. V nh
0
P0.80%68 MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 55362
�„ tt��� ,� 4��+1✓ p6 Inj 6 i 2954056 METRO 421 6595 TOLL FREE 800 4504056
FORD • MERCURY
December 12, 1990
City of Monticello
Mont ices So, minoaeota 55162
Attn: Cary Anderson
Thank you for the opportunity to serve your automotive need.. We highly
value the business of our local patrons and businesses,
in response to your call for bids on A nev or used F150 Pickup. We after
the following options:
1) 1986 ford F150 4a2
300 6 cy1 Engine
Aut .esti c Trm nsmisa ion
Cloth Seat
Amtib Steroo
Sl Sding Rear Ufnd—
Pibetgiess Tapper
Mod Flaps
Running Roard a
Rm Nnu
Power Stesrin q
Povar snku
Two Tona pnln t
Platesgood until April 1991
55.J02 `f 11.a
Fstr. Clean. above average truck Your Price: S %010
Plus any eppl las,le les
and ifCenae fou.
IL
JOEL DIERS
%3 Ouo>rAnOM GOULD BROS. CHEVROLET l� Ie+a ��i
laron�e�e Mwv. 25 a 1.0e Mane lelz 5...11
❑ ORDER ,0MTKM0, MD M CVA SSaa!
7r, C,t- 'k 01—A.(.l. De'. 1-1-911
Yodel iody Style Color
Factory F.0.8. Lun Price ....................................................................... i s
yU.R A O4141•A l i ss �hae1l ayF r--.. 4�7
in sI V-% 54fleai.t,
W— 4 l
'1.f301 M,%,o
1 A,aN+9 y?i,Ck
tY r' -4r
TOTAL
Iaaa—Allwantr for Trade-in
MaLr Madel &4" ver,
NET CASH DELIVERED PRICIE OF VEHICLE (s�7
TDu fluetallan ozpm _
r,........ ..,.,. .. ,....... .. ,.. ..00.ems...
1...... •, r. • .,C.....,..... .. ...,. ,.. •..x _ _ .xw _ _-_
am e\..Vn
0
IL
JOEL DIERS
0110TAVON GOULC BROS. CHEVROLET
1aen4b xwy, 75 a 694
E30IIOU aaou7tma. AUMN foTA 557162
U
ait.. vn4 5s)tz
Ph" 191A 2957911
moo IatA 47 Z
Hone I81A 556EOOa
Da.,„ "-)-1 1
An. GAAP fq-. Ai—
]Hada! 'rely Style Color
ux ra.x r..
Factory F.O.B. IJrt Ria.............................................................. ..... { f
sa..►a ga'A A 14 R1 cl,..r ei.t i y.... y.I 9LhsT
i4 .i -
FS+0.
S-ky•,
.rl.
A. + w
TOTAL
Lwa—Alls.wwo Iv Tnda•■e
Mali Me& {oiy
NET CAM DELII'ERIC09RICE OF VEHICLE
'Au quatatlaa open
r.,...... .. ...... ........ ... ..
C
ESTIMATED ANNUAL OWNERSHIP COST
FOR A NEW $10,000 VEHICLE
If 258 of the mileage reimbursed to other employees (1,500 miles
annually) was added to the Building Inspoctor's vehicle, the City
would save approximately $275. When added to the current
reimbursement for Lhe Building Inspector of $1,350 = $1,625 versus
$2,150 estimated cost of ownership.
Annual
Annual
Mileage
Mileage
@ 4,500
@ 6,000
Fuel @ 18 mpg
$ 325—
$ 425
Oil & lubricants
125
125
Insurance
200
200
Misc. maintenance
100
100
Annual depreciation
1,300
1,300
(assuming 5 -yr life
with salvage value
of $3,500)
TOTAL
$2,050
$2,150
�A
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTS
1990
4
Building Inspector -
4,448 miles @ $•25 =
$1,112
Car ins. allowance
240
TOTAL REIMBURSED
$1,352% ---
All Clerical Staff -
3,052 miles @ $.25 =
$ 763
Asst. Administrator -
3,098 miles @ $.25
$ 775
If 258 of the mileage reimbursed to other employees (1,500 miles
annually) was added to the Building Inspoctor's vehicle, the City
would save approximately $275. When added to the current
reimbursement for Lhe Building Inspector of $1,350 = $1,625 versus
$2,150 estimated cost of ownership.
I
PRIMARY DEPT/
VEHICLE
ANNUAL
PURCHASE
EMPLOYEE
VEHICLE
MILEAGE
INS. AMT.
PRICE
(John Simola
1987 Ford Pickup
37,154
$184
$7,500 used
Roger Mack
1988 Ford Pickup
22,700
$177
$9.960 used
(Matt Theisen
1983 Chev. Ven
57,690
$184
$10,534 new
Rich Cline
1989 Ford Pickup
14,928
$179
$10,532 new
Tom Bose
VVVVTP
1984 Dodge Pickup
46,560
$189
$10,053 new
(Shared Vehicle
1983 Chev 1 Ton
61,840
$189
$7,200 used
Shared Vehicle
1989 Ford 1 Ton
11,580
$207
$16,346 new
...............................................................................
Gary Anderson
1979 Dodge Van'
151,658
$3601yr
$900 used
'Gary Anderson's personally owned vehicle
C
J
JOEL DIERS
QUOTATION GOULD BROS. CHEVROLET
Inrerstele Hwy. 25 6 1.94
❑ ORDER MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 55262
\1 City of Monticello
Monticello. MN 55362
Model CS10803 Body Style 7 1/3' Dox Color
Factory
F.O.B. List F rice.1991 Chevrolet s-10 4x2 Pickup
...............
gAA6/15J,
Tahoe Pkq
Pko special discount
VF6:
Rear SteD Bumper
TR9:
Auxiliary Liqhtinq
ZY4:
Two-tone Deluxe Paint
UM6:
Am/Fm Stereo Cassette with Clock
N40:
Power Steering
QSA:
P205/75R-1r white letter .,It season tires
Full Ciotti Bench Seat
Full Carpet
Fall Cloth lieadliner
D44:
Painted mirrors
GQ1/GT4:
3./3 Standard Axle Ratio
P06:
Chrome Wheel Trim Rings
ZJ7:
Styled Steel Wheels
M%0:
Automatic with Overdrive
L38:
2.51. Electronic Fuel Injection 4Cyl
Rear Anti-lock Brakes
20 Gal. Fuel Tank
Wheelbase 117.9"
FPA RATINGS: city 21 moq
highway 28 mpg
Net Ilorsepower: tub
Net Torque.: 1a5
Note: vehicle described was found on a dealer locate.
Rebate of $1,000.00 was floured in discount..
Phone (912)295.2911
Metro (812) 427.2047
Home (612)559-6704
Dato 1-11-91
Att. Gary Anderson
\1..
110,320.OU
1,836.00
1,602.00
n/c
n/c
n/c
n/c
n/c
n/c
n/c
n/c
n/c
n/c
n/c
n/c
n/C
tS/u.uu
n/c
std
std
TOTAL ........... ...... I I ...... . . ...........:11 , 424.00 1
[Asa—Allowance for Trade-in .................................................................................. I
Mak- Model Bode Yee,
NL -T CASH Il>1UM1tlG>scUO PHICE OF VF111CLE....�i!,���.1.!n�................ 19.690.00
quotation eapirer n
1. _ D.
►. ....1..4 .. 4.,• .r d•1...•r l... w.• ...•• (nJ,�. 1!<<'.'1 _ 1
/J x.w Muwn / oSj
E_E•C: f -IN (,,-:IAL 'S •9.4E"
2'. 14 iq.O i$''',@;-^5
�ENLYII. .?C4 iN.��
34171 1.'13•SQ nee7•Iec••.S pet ICEPoo
?C5;] 1.'/fI. ]'r. cap;.:••' 1/Niv 5"ATE
31,?C4 • OP NATUPAL
30965 12/13/90 aN DEPART OF NATURAL
30,-55'17!1±100 WAI TCEt LO F18E OEP9.
30086 1711./90 M•:Nf ICE -.'LO FIRE OEPA
30961 12/13/90 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO
?9859 .•111.90 1 1, 1 INFO
30AIS +71,11130 041P'S C•APDEN CEPIE4
3n•'S L7/�t/00 F41P'S nAP�Eu tFnTCP
30876-1,1111/0 FI(OPTTt CONTROLS. I
30077 13/U/OO FIRE it GMMANO
3oe1c1 +tn7/90 coDLER/c1.aR1A
y0819 y,?/1T/9ti 400LEP/FJLO4IA
nt1�;-1 '.,1v;g0 •joogl SIAM 111E CA,
5Use1 ••n.1y3 HELLM �N/Msell NE
?01'.' 7,.1•,;0 H('.L �At4/Marl ENE
D1NjVFswM.n['.1.OVnn.51 '
.{, �r;C Tt'T rF.•1 C.a-]irtll' fL4Jr
317 CNECF: VOIOEO/PAID BY I' 02.4'OCR
30809
17/11190
ACLIC:FAFT. INC.
118 WATEFCRAFT/Sr1OV/ATV RE 58.00
3 i1c 7i
':/17/40
•:'iY''' pl/t�L f. Ar lra� PPOO
t?5 fJPE 1!511'5 Ht.OE$ 7.704.00
135 F1RE"!Et;''S M301CARE'./H 10.72CR
-
1.753.28
a ,,a•:
.•0,]
01:15 1,�araP E9VIPMEd
15 FJPE PONE •:7+A P,iEi 4.40
3f111t
.
VJI;•J/S 1::JVL(rJ
4 1 COPY MrCMINE MTF,/LI6RA x3.00
a 1••.
h47 PLF.4 P1'+TC .•,•73
.1TP•; v1• stay
790 MISC S9PPt TES/WAT(P 0 73).L7
sale!•,
. FM1
IIJ•$TA'•: N/I.FPQ'F
?1A3 0t4 S.a At•v.k?L1I.1't5 65.00
293 OA.1 "M -%GE EOVIS? 09.50
30AIS +71,11130 041P'S C•APDEN CEPIE4
3n•'S L7/�t/00 F41P'S nAP�Eu tFnTCP
30876-1,1111/0 FI(OPTTt CONTROLS. I
30077 13/U/OO FIRE it GMMANO
3oe1c1 +tn7/90 coDLER/c1.aR1A
y0819 y,?/1T/9ti 400LEP/FJLO4IA
nt1�;-1 '.,1v;g0 •joogl SIAM 111E CA,
5Use1 ••n.1y3 HELLM �N/Msell NE
?01'.' 7,.1•,;0 H('.L �At4/Marl ENE
D1NjVFswM.n['.1.OVnn.51 '
.{, �r;C Tt'T rF.•1 C.a-]irtll' fL4Jr
317 CNECF: VOIOEO/PAID BY I' 02.4'OCR
771 INv�STMEvrS 615.040:00
118 WATEFCRAFT/Sr1OV/ATV RE 58.00
•
118 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 513.00
t?5 fJPE 1!511'5 Ht.OE$ 7.704.00
135 F1RE"!Et;''S M301CARE'./H 10.72CR
-
1.753.28
-CHECK
185 ADOPTIONS 105.00
15 FJPE PONE •:7+A P,iEi 4.40
392 MISC SHOP SUPPLIES 13.10
4 1 COPY MrCMINE MTF,/LI6RA x3.00
h47 PLF.4 P1'+TC .•,•73
790 MISC S9PPt TES/WAT(P 0 73).L7
295 C -AA SAtAVy/-EETTIuu$ A5.0C1
?1A3 0t4 S.a At•v.k?L1I.1't5 65.00
293 OA.1 "M -%GE EOVIS? 09.50
95.50
AOMFCv.
55 MISC SUPPLIES/CIT'3 HAL 35.00
59 OE (!75.00
9 '0.00
[CHECK
50 MISC SUPPLIES/VATIR OE 17,.00
-
• 644 SUBSCRIPT(011/PTRE 0107 10.00
.90106 Ptrv(:LIMd Ptftl 1'.0.04
294 OAA SALARY/IAEETIN99 • 85.00
794 OAA MILIAGE E7PI4SI 14.65
. 1 10.85
-CHM(
01 MisF 9101 5!:tYArt7(P 101.01]
00 MILE A61 EAP!Ntt/DATA P 11.00 ,
00 MISC: Mit EAOt 11Ptrlst 11.50
55.50
-CHECK
• gRt: „F'l e:urd7dt_
:.s g;TE-'
•
-
,
17%+Av9p
it5:-'.5':?G
- .:
0l rperF'sem�nt='Jour,nal��LSf t,
n
u.T C! ':T
oAT:
VE
PEECP1PTJt•H .AMOLIN 7 CLAIM
'im
30`:87
i1/17/90`HEr1•!S/•If
RRY
et
LIBRARY, CLEANING SE RV 227.90.,;-.
3O9^•?
11/t7/9P
1•^!✓�o, ,w/r_n
ab6
Ja.b•c:U.APV/—'r TTN.S 15.00
3GA96
+Ti 1,L/99,
r.nc•}:OM'avIQL'•i VE '.
. 97
MILEAGE EkPEIJSE
3088?
tart 7190
RPASv?o/-aav
.90109
TFgE REPLA eMENT 700.00.`,
1. T'u•.
669
..T,: o: Fl-Qlp/5--!9c' s,. G 177.89
30?d7
1?. tJ h90
.90101
REC'/C011G DPIZE 30.00•..• -• ,1� .
?4'•f5.
'?J•:r•;r
L•a:e rPr;n1 :: ,.:e a1?�•
Ace
v6M3ERSHID Oqr S/.ia RV A 15.00 t.
Tv •-x.'. ?90.7:
;G
•.,,.. •; Ef, •.;t•.
109
OAA' $AL'ADV/MEET)tJGS 60.00 -.
3009'
17/17100
111
FURNACE REPAIR/CITY H 136.63 ,
)0S
"/:"On
.. •.:r:rEtL 91 OE Da
133
Cf TM! FIDE OEDT/M13; 380.Ot
0,
39907
+?/1)1911
.r.juJlrc L1.O 'IDE OEDA
135
M? -6E R5N IP$/G 1,E OED1 0'
30097
17/17190'-?`+TIrEL40
FIRE 0e DA
135
REIMe FIRE OE DT/DOSTAG 30.69
30997
1?/17/90
MONI ICELLO FTRE 0EDA
13S
UPOATFO 60OKLETS/FIRED 6.00 `;•, .ti.;•
30397
17/17/SO
MONT ICE LLO FIRE OEPA
135
MISC PRINTING/FIRE Of 195..16 •., '.
• 765.16 ' •CHECr
TOTI
°Ol43
:1/'1190
11.0:1 rj:lOt; SALES. 111
167
EO9ID REee.1RS/Show 6 1 3t.OS
30693
1'7/17/00
MOO1J MOTOR SAM. IN
167
MISC SUPPLIES/TREE FUN 11.25'
'
67.30 •CHECr
T j
i
30096
1?l1?191)
OvrMf PN STATE$•PO'lE
11.6
STREET 1.3GHT INSTAL 1.668.19 �"`•"'
NT•:+!.SOrA
150
MS-3ERSHIo C1Vf!/OARV A 15.00
309-9
'?/I 100
O'NEILL/.rfFF
101
MILIAGI EXPENSE • e6.75
_
•'1
1ri;•;1r
$.;••$ Ir,Er,TRI
160
BLO oroATO $Lta/CT iv H 789.+0'
.,ir •J i 4C'+5 ELECTV.
160
-TSC OAT& DDOC INSTAL 132.4i
`
?3!':t
,-•' !•�'i.51:
. •: S EL lCIII
160
'Door s0%v ICES/eaeu 1.736.76
•.
1.656.32 " 6CHECr
IOTA
3485:
:41 ISO
oti0m. USIET.&eAf1 8
297
LEGAL SERVICES/OAA 1.950.21' '
• � :m,n�
.:/np
:+Sal -j )E AeTE
ahS
^+i }ALAPV/-lE TiNd! 35.00
'' - +•+"t:n
'' r n1)
PLU%Wtv-►U7'CFtt-i D
791
MISt. SUPPLIES/PAPv OOP 06.06'
3pnn0
,;,t 10
P0U-6EPY-0UVCtW S P
751
MISC SUPPLIES/WATER Of 93.30 c
99.56 -CHICK
IOTA
12/11/99WAT- : : — MPA
.-)% : - T F k . 2 C I t I
309D4 12/ 11: n0 1;. '-' a+ --Ok' IS ' i VF117
MIMI ?I Eit s C., . IN,
I. CL ATM 301V
ail OAA 200.00
25. 30 .(:HE4:v
218 METE RS, PARTS. ETI:/ 1.412. 2 2
217 MISC tYPENSE/ELECTIONS 34.03
275 IkAL'r { S.IIJC- -111STR 2.150.00
425 PARYSISTACET DEPT 204.73
TOTAL 692.331.57
J
SPC FTI 1ANCIAL
'SYSTEM',
'•,
•)°, „
' 12/2.1/90
13:n9s00`
,04 sDu roeme nt. Journal
WARRANT
'DATE
VENDOR'
OE SC RI PT ION AMOUNT
CLAIM;{ItP
GENERAL CHECKING
•
30934
17/19/90
TURNOUIST PAPER'COMP,,•
200,
CORRECT COOING 99.25CR'
30931:
t2/18/90
TURIJOUIST,• PAPER COMP
209
CORRECT CODING 99.26
-
0.00
-CHECK' TOT,
._30905,
1,2/,1.8/90
ZIEGLER. INC..,
4.25
CORRECT CODING 204.79
30905
11/18%90
ZIEGLER. INC.
625
CORRECT CODING 20,4 28CR
0.00
-CHECK' TOT.
30906
12/18/90
MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO
185
REIMS FOR ANIMAL SUPP 88.15
30907
17/19/90,
A,OEPSON/GARY
11
TRAVEL EXPENSE/CIVIL 0 15.91
30907
12/18/90
ANOERSON/GAOY
11
TRAVEL EIPENSE 67.00
62.61
*CHECK TOT.
30008
12/+0/90
E•ALOGH/JAMES A
.00079
PAYPOLL DEDUCTIONS 769.55
30999
12/18/90
RE11n.ELE ENGINEERING.
379
REIMS/COSTS PER TI 95.000.00
30009
12/18/90
ROMELE ENGINEERING.
329
9LO PERMIT CHARGE h.189.37CR
30909
17/18/90
REMvEIE ENGINEERING.
329
WATER METER CHARGE 1.200.000R'
"
30909
17/18/90
REMMiLE ENGINEERING.
329
SEVER A WATER HOOKU 1.500.000R
30909
12/19/90
REMMELE EUGINEERING.
329
SEWER 6 WATER MOOKUP 900.000R
30009
12/18/90
REMMELE ENGINEERING.
329
SEVER PERMITS 30.0008
57.160.03
-CHECK TOT.
30910
12/18/90
LEHMAN/SMERRSON
452
PURCHASE, 2 C.O'S 120.000.00
30911
1?/16/90
WRIGHT COUNTY STATE
222
FIREMENS MEDICARE W/M 10.77
30911
12/18/00
WRIGNT COUNTY STATE
222
FIREMENS MEDICARE W/M ' 10.12
"
21.6h
-CHECK` TOT
30012
12/t8/90'MN'DEPART,
OC' NATURAL
119,
WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 035.00
30913
17/t6/90
MN DEPART OF NATURAL
110
WATERCRAFT TITLE A REO 60.00,
300,16
12/16/90
JACOBSON/DIANE
02
MILEAGE REIMB/TRAVEL E 72.33
30915'
12/16/90
U.S'. POSTMASTER
210
POSTAGE/RECYCLING LET 289.4h
„
3001612
/.2 +/00'4
AA STRIPING SERVICE
453
STRIPPING STREETS 2.906.70
'
109117,
12/71790
ADOPT -A -PET
6
ANIMAL ADOPTIONS 3h 1.00
'300'fe
+7/2,1/00
AEC ENOINEER9 a DISI
494
FLOAT INSP/WATER TA 1'.650.00
'
30919
12'/?1/90
AP& COPY' REF-E5HMENT
,606
SUVOLIE4/CITY MALI 10.00
- `30970
12/21/00
AUDIO COMMUNICATIONS
17'
RADIO REPAIRS/StREETS 1,73.50•-
J
BRC FINANCIALSYSTEM ,
12/11/00 13:,5:00
WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
30921 12/?1/90 BERGSTROM'$ LAWN 8 G
30922 12/21/90 CENTRAL MCOOWAN. INC
30973 12/21/90 CENTVRV FENCE COMPAP;
30024 12/21/00 CONTINENTAL SIGN ! A
30925 12/21190 OAHLfiPSN SHAROLOV AM
30928 17/21/90 FEEORITE CONTROLS. I
30970 17/71/90 FEEORITE CONTROLS. I
30976 17/21/90 FEEORITE CONTROLS. I
30025 12/71/90 FEEOPTIE CONTROLS. I
30979 12/21/90 FEEORITE CON IROL S. I
30977 12/21/90 FIRST TRUST CENTER
30927 12/21/90 FIRST TRUST CENTER
30921 17/21/90 FLICKER'S T.V. 6 ADO
30929 12/21/90 MATCH -PETERSON SALES
30930 17/71/00 HOLIDAY CRIOIT OFFM
30931 12/21/90 MARTIE'S FARM SERVTC
30132 12/21/90 MCOOWALL COMPANY
30933 17/21/90 MID CENTRAL. Ir.C.
30934 12/21/90 MOSIL
30934 12/21/90 MOBIL
30934 17/71/90 M,)SIL
30934 12/21/00 MOBIL
30915 12/21/00 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO
30030 17/71/90 04ONTICELLO VACUUM CG
30037 17/21/00 ORR•SCHELEN-MAMION
30931 17/21/90 ORR•SCHELEN-MAVERON
30931 12/21/90 ORR-SCHF.LEN•MAYERON
Oisbursement Journal'
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM I NV1.
441 EQUIP REPAIR PAPTS/STRE 0.45
30 SUPPLIES/STREET DEPT 15.95
407 FENCE FOR SHOP 8 DA 2.360.00
433 HANDICAPPED SIGNS 146.72
45 PROF SERVICES 38.00
56 PROF SERVICES/WATER DE 12.OD
56 CHEMICAL PR00/MATER O 122.50
58 MIS PROF SERVICES 171.00
50 9.51
56 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 3,40. 00
655.01
58 DESTRUCTION FEE/9ECURI 96.25
58 DESTRUCTION FEE/9ECURI 57.50
153.75
60 SMALL TOOLS/CITY HALL 74.95
94 GLOVES/WATER DEPT 11.40
05 OAS/FIRE DEPT 71.07
107 SUPPLIES/PARK DIRT 19.00
111 REPAIRI/CITY HALL FURN 98.01
113 HELMETS/FIFE DEPT 05.00
131 GAS/SEWER DEPT 103.04
131 OAS/WATER DEPT 103.63
191 OAS/FIRE DEPT 17.37
131 OAS/STREET DEPT 244.75
469.39
195 ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRA 813.25
141 REPAIR//u ORARV 12.58
187 PROF SER 0 ENGTNEERIN 738.97
107 ENO FEEO/SANOSER0 E 9.016.54
197 REPLACE CONTROL SYS 3.104.71
12.739.87
/CHECK T07AL
*CHECK TOTAL
*CHECK TOTAL
'CHECK TOTAL
SRC .F:11+6,CIAI SYSTEM ` 0 0
12/21/90 13:45:00 - OtFbur'sement JoarnAY
^ WARRANT` DATE 'VENDOROESCRIP7I0M AMOUNT :Cl
GENERAL CHECKING
30938 17/21/90 PACE PRODUCTS. INC 450 ICE PELLETS 235.98+
i 30939 12/21/90 PHILLIPS 68 COMPANY 167 GAS/STREET DEPT 17.75
30940 12/21/90 RELIABLE CORPORATION 179 OFFICE SUPPLIES/CITY M 15.71
30941 12/21/90 RHEAUME'S HOUSE OF L 451 PLASTIC DECALS/RECVCL 280.00 0
30942 17/21/90 SAFETY-KLEEN CORP. 164 MAINT OF EQUIP/STREET 130.45
30943 12/21/90 SCHILLEVAERT LANOSCA 302'STUMP,GRINDING 1.258.30 0
30944 12/21/90 SHUMAN/CATHY 191 TRAVEL EXPENSE 18.00
30045 12/21/00 TAYLOR LAND SURVEYOR 703 SURVEY GEES/CEMETERY 450.00
30940 12/21/90 TURNOUIST PAPER COMP ._206 PAPER _TOWELS/CITY HALL 37.85
30947 17/21/90 UNITED LABS 495 CLEANING $UP/SHOD • G 127.58
30948 120-1/90 WATER PRODUCTS COMPA 216 SUPPLIES/WATER DEPT 1?1.23
GENERAL CHECKING TOTAL 204.003.37
ry 1
. �J
t
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
O1/03/91 15: 15:42
WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING'
29762 12/21/90 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO
29767 12/25/90 SYSrEMS SERVICE CC40
30014 12/26/90 AMERICAN NATIONAL SA
30074 12/26/90 AMERICAN'NA1l1_n Al SA
30147 1? /26/90 AUTO. ATEC 4ISTE`+S CO
301LI i2/26/90 SYSTEMS SERVICE COMP
30049 12/26/00 LATOUR CONSTRUCIICN
309$0 12 /20/90 WRIGHT COUNTY RECORD
30951 12/26/90 STATE OF MINNESOTA
30952 12 /26/90 TAYLER/TOM
30993 12/26/90 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
30054 12 /20/90 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
30093 12 /26/00 MCOUIRE/KELSIE
30950 12/20/90 COPPOW SANITATION
30956 12/15/90 CORRO'J 9ANITATI0N
30957 12/26/90 FIRST NAT BANK OF MO
30056 12/79/99 M?vT10ELLO PUBLIC LI
30058 12/25/00 MO-TICELLO PUBLIC LI
30959 12/20/90 MONTICRLO PUS LIC LI
30656 12/26/00 MONTTCELLO PUP, LIC LI
30956 17 /26/90 MONTICELLO PUS «IC LI
30940 12 /2$/90 MONTiCELLO PUS LIC LI
30056 12'/20/90 MONTICELLO PUS LIC LI
30959 12/31/90 AMC READY M27
30060 12/11/90 AMERI DATA
30001 17/11190 ANDERSON/GARY
30952 12/11/00 ANNANDALE CONTRACTIN
Disbursement Journal
OISCPIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM INV,
?TO CORRECT VENDOR a h.792.00CR.
202 COPRECT VENDOR A 4.792.00
0.00
-CHECK. IOTA
7 ADJUST COPING 15.662.50CR
7'AOJuS7 'COOINGr 15.692.50
0.00
$CHECK TOTAr
270 CORRECT" VENDOR 3 221.OSCR
202 CORRECT YE7IO0R 6 221.08
0.00
$CHECK IOTA -
685 FINAL PAVMT/CTY RD 2.380.00
254 FILING FEE/TAPPER PROJ 10.00
601 MISC EXPENSE/TAPPER RR 10.00
.90110 MISC EXPENSE/SNOW 0 ICE 6.74
110 WATERCRAFT REO 6 TITLE 37.00
110 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV 1.213.00
.90100 RECYCLXNGPRIZE 75.00
42 GARBAGE CONTPACT P 12.206.07
47 SALES TAI/GARSAGE CON 136.00
19.002.07
-CHECK TOTA
402 PURCHASE 3 C.019 125.000.00
404 MISC O0,E06TING SUP/LI SOS.07
464 POSTAGE/LISPAP,Y 20.00
466 CONFERENCE 6 SCHOOLS 53.37
666 VIDEO CAMERA 664.07
406 COOK$ Fn PAMPMLFTS 06.00
be4 14I1C REVENUE 1.001.47Ca
464 PETTV CASH/l TGRAPY 210.90CR
500.64
'CHECK TOTA1
0 USED BELT/SNOW 6 ICE 20.00
9 WOROPERPECT TRAINfNG 209.00
11 MILEAGE Eh PENBE 2h.hh
427 PROF SERVISANOBERG 02.103.09
'SRC _9 +_Alb:Iel SYSTEM.
0003_,91
WAPPA117 DATE: VEt:000
GENERAL- CHECKING
30903 1?/31/90 ANNANOALE VETER,INA21'
)0964 12/31/90 BUCKEYE PEACTY COMPA
30901. 1?/31190 BUCKEYE REALTY ,COMPA
30995 12/31/90 CLINE/RICMARO
30988 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30988 17/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30966 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30906 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30988 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30906 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30066 12/31/00 COAST TO COAST
30966 17/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30966 12/31/00 COAST TO COAST -
30968 17/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30966 17/31/00, COAST TO COAST
30960 12/7,190 COAST TO 1:1)A4T
30988 12/31/90 CC -IST TO COAST
30966 12/31/90 COAST Try COAST
30068 12/31/00 COAST TO COAST
30960 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST
3096817/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30906 1?/11/91) COAST TO COAST
30065 12/91/90 COAST TO COAST
30960 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30908 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST
30967 12/31/00 COPY EOUIPMENT. INC.
30900 12/31/90 ENO FOUNDATION
30909' 12/31/00 ORIEFNOW SWEET METAL
30970 t7/3 V 90'HARRY'8 AUTO SUPPLY
30070 :?/,3,1/90 HARPY'S AUTO SUPPLY
30870 17/3+/90 NAPRY'S AUTO SUPPLY
30,070 17/9'1,100 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY
30970 12/3!/90'1+ARRY'8 AUTO SUPPLY
3097,0 12/31/90 HARR'I'S AUTO SUPPLY,
30911 12/31/90 HOGLUND DUs COMOANV
3097.1'. ;:?/31/•9Q HnGL1AiD Gus :COMouiv
30011 12/31/00 WOa4vND DUs COMPANY
t-DioourFomenT journal -
AMOUNT CLAIM ;TNVI
982 VET FEES/ANIMAL CONTRO 48.00
459 REIMS/REFU3E COLLECTI 297.5,0
454 RE1M3/REFUSE COLLECTI 170.00
87 :so
458 MILEAGE- EYPENSE 98.25-
3S MISC SUPPLIES/WATER 75.11
35 MISC SUPPLIES/SEVER 8.27
35 CLOTHING SUPPLIES/SEWE 1.3.98
35 SMALL TOOLS/PARKS DEPT 5.00
35 SMALL TOOLS/SHOP 8 GAR 38.71
35 SLD'REPAIR SUP/PARKS 2.13
35 CLOTHING SUP/PARK DEPT 6.69
3% MISC SUPPLIES/SHOP 6 G 79.58
35 SHOP MATERTALS/WATER 108.94
35 MISC 911POl IES/CTTV HAIL 5.19
35 MISC REPAIRS/LTBDARY IS.85
3s SMALL TOOLS/STREETS 21.15
35 ?.1,0 REPAIR SUP/SHOP 19.45
39 BLD REPAID SUP/CITU Hal 5.39
35 BLD REPAIR SUP/ANIMAL 14.23
35 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/STAT 4.78
35 MISC SUP/STREET LIGHTNG 5.99
35 CLEANING SVD/LT9PAPV 15.79
35 MISC SUDDIIES/PARKS 2.31
35 MISC SUPPLIES/FIPE OEP 10.49
15 MISC SUPPLIES/ANIMAL s1.1)
407.98
436 SMALL TOOLS/0 WORKS 730.13
483 SUBSCRIPTION 30.00
73 REPAIRS/WELL HOUSE 41 110.15
70 EOUIP REPAIR PARTS/SEW 10.84
78 LUORICANTS/STREETS 1.08
70 VEHICLE REP PARTS/STP 290.05
M EOU1P REP PARTS/STREET 53.03
16 REPAIRS/FIRE DEPT 10.35
70 MISC SUPPLIES/,WATER DEP 9.04
loo.19
62 EOUI0 REPAID PAOTS/ST 779.96
,62 VEMTCLE,_REPAIR PARTS Ito' 76'
07 MISC 6U0PLLES/WATER 76.69
)73.02
-CHECK TOTA,
*CHECK T'0"i
-CHECK TOTAI
-CHECIr TOTAI
_411111> . .
ERC, FINANCIAL -SYSTEM
1% ..
003/91 -14,17,9142'
WARRANT OATS ven00R'
-GENERAL CHECKING
30972 12/3.1/90 HOOLUND TRANSPOP,TATI
30913 17/31/90 HOLMES 8 GRAVEN'
30974 17/31/90 HVOPO SUPPLY COMPANY
30975 12/31/00 INOVSTPIAL OEYELOP C.
30974 17011^:O •J M AIL C,.NPAI11
30077 i2131/OI1-t MART STORE
30978'12/31/90 LUVACH/JOHN
30010 12/31/ 90 '. UV LCH/JOH1+
30910 12/31/90 LUVACM/JOHN
30919 12/31/90 LUKACH/JDMN
30010 12/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
30979 12/31/90 mI0t+E4i GAS COMPANY
30079 12/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
30979 17/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
30979 12/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
30979 12/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPA7JV
30919 12/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
30979 12131/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
30900 17/31/90 MN DEPART OF NATURAL.
30080 12/31/90 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
)0987 171)1140 mC+nrlt[CLOOFFICE PR
30001 17131/90 MC)NTICELLO OFFICE PR
)0911 12/31/90 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR
)0981 17/31/90 MONTICILLO OFFICE PR
30901 171)11 90 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR
30911 OFFICE PO'
10997 121311 90 MONTICILLO PRINTING
30007 17/11/90 MONTICELLO PRINTING
?0902 17/11/90 A1/7NTICELL0 PRINTING
30912 17/31/ 00 MCr7TICELLO FRINTING
30993 17/11/90 NATIONAL GUSHING PAR
'Di7burs/n!nt Journal;
OESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM IN'
84 TRANSPORTATION CONT:4.637.40
OB PROF :SERV/ECON DEMO 1,,50.00
407 10 GAL TANK/WATER DED 656.34
89 CITY'S CONTRIS TO : 5.650.00
99 GAS/STREET OEP1 2.630.50
400 Tv/SEWER COLL INSPECT 249.00
377 MILEAGE EXPENSE 11.63
377 MILEAGE ODENSE 11.63
327 MILEAGE EIPENSE 11.03
927 MILEAGE EXPOSE 11.64
46.53
115 UTILITIES 616.13 -
115 UTILITIES 226.30
115 UTILITIES 66.60
115 UTILITIES 506.60
175 UTILITIES S9. t0
115 UTILITIES 113.63
115 UTILITIES 37.20
115 UTILITIES 303.11
2.00e.e6
116 WATERCRAFT/TITLE 6 REG 00.00
116 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 706.00
632.00
135 OFFICE SUPPLIES/Cli'r 392.32
130 FILE CA8INET/R7C1;'1 0' 800.00
118 FILE CABINET/JEFR'1 0 300.00
130 OFFICE SUP/COUNCIL 10.11
1)6 OFFICE /UP/PUO WORKS 185.01
130 OFFICE 1UP/WATEP DEPT 71.00
1 .210.56
137 ENVELOPES/CITY MALL 2.252.50
197 MIOC PRINTING/REFUSE 361.55
111 SEWER 1 v.Tee eAROB 90.)0
t)7 OCWER 8 WAY CR CARO/ 90.3D
2.796.65
144 VEHICLE REPAIR PARTS/3 63.66
.CHECK TOT,
-CHECK TOT,
CHECK TOT,
.CHECK TOT.
-CHECK TOTr
ORC•C,I t7 A11C IAL; S YSTE M.., - - ; F.-
Oi'/03/Bt ,1h i4582, e01lDue!!sle nt - VOu rnet
•4:AGRpIIT 04TE' :VE Ny+i4. - UESCPI'+.T I07J •A MOI:NT 'f.LAIMIW n
GENE?AL CHECKING
30984 12%31/90 :oEL5014 Oil
.'OMPA -JV 149 GAS/STREET
30095 i?/3+/90 NUTECM E NVIPC'NMENTAI. 157 CHE4ICALS/M9TP 1.199.50
30906 12'/3.1/90 O'NEILL'/JEFF 181 MILEAGE, EXPENSE - ?4.02 _
30907 12/31/90 PALMER CHEMICAL 'e EO ASS SUPPLIES/ANIMAL CONTRO 08.70
30989 12/31/90 POLKA OCT RECVCLI-+G 110 RECYCLING CONTRACT 1.?10.57
30909 12/31/90 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE' 11S.PROF SER/P56I/SVNNV F 083.32
30990 1?/31/90 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC 227 MAINT OF VEHICLES/FIR 711.59
30091 12/31/00 PUP; AUTO PARTS -269 RAOTO/STREETS f ALLEYS 60.00
10992 12/31/90 SIMQNSON LUMefR COMP 193 BLD REPAIR SUP/SHOP 332.49
30002 12/31/90 SIMON501J LUMBER COMP -193 OLD REPAIR SUP/PARKS 5.00
30093 12/31/40 SMITH f NAVES
30993 12+31/90 SMITH 6 MAVIS
30993 12/31/90 SMITH f HAVES
30993 12/31/90 SMITH f HAVES
30083 12/31/00 S141TH f HAVES
30096 12/31/00 ST. CLOUD TIMES
30995 12/31/90 SYSTEMS SERVICE COMP
30096 12/3-1/90 TMEISEN/MATT
30097 12/31/90 TODD 6 CO.. INC./MIC
30007 12/31/00 TODD f CO.. THC./MIC
30998 1?/31/„90 UN,ITOG RENTAL SERVIC
30996 12/11/90 VN I TOO'RENTAL SERVIC
30990 12/31/00 UNITOG RENTAL,SERVEC
30998 12/31/90 UNITOO RENTAL SERVIC
30000 ??/31/00 VNITOG RENTAL SEpVIC
30900, 12/31/00 UNOCAL
11000'19/31/90 V05S 'ELECTRIC=SUPPLV
GENERAL CHECKING
337.49 -CHECK TOT
104 PROF SERV/TRANSPGPTATI 24.00
104 PRO;'SEOV/SANC'OERG EAS 90.00
104
PROF"SERV/MISC
580.14
194
PROF SERV/OLD INSP
0.00
t06
PROF SEDWECON DEVELOP72.25
700.40
-CMECX TOT
-340
AD FOR'CITY ATTORNE'J
77.12
202
PROF SERV/ -.'YTP
807.25
(/
641
MILEAGE EX0eN9e
0e.25
( J
393
EOUIP REPAIR PARTS
207.27
303
MISC SUPPLIE MEVER
442.17
710.04
-CHICK TOT-
211
U1JIf ORM RENTAL
32.00
211
UNIFORM RENTAL
102.07
211
UNIFORM RENTAL
10.83
211
UNIFORM RENTAL
10.08
211
UNIFORM RENTAL
30.00
248.37 •
-[NECK TOT'
21V GAS/FIRe DEPT' 10.76
409 LIGNT'OULOS/SEN CIT CE`2h.01
TOTAL ` 295.101.13
'A
c
31001 12%3 t/Bd M1i DEPART OF NATURAL
31002 12/31790 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
31003 12/91/90 ADAM'S PEST CON7a0L
31000 1T/?1l90 ANOEc,j0,l/OAP1
31005 17/31/90 AU01OCC15.711CA T IONS
31000 12/ 31/90 BOSE/TOM
31007 12/31/00 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHOU
31007 1?/31/90 BPIOrEWATEP. TELEPHON
31001 12/31/90 BPIOGEWATEP TELE PHON
31007 12/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON
31007 12/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON
31007 12/31/90 0RIDGEWATER TELE PHON
31067 12/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON
31007 17/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON
31007 12/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON
31007 17/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON
31007 12/ 31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON
31007 12/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON
31007 12/31/90 OR IDGEWA TER TELE PHON
31007 12/31/90 BP IOGEWATER TELE PHON
l,t6 WATEPCPAFT/TITLE/AIV R 66.00
11.6 WATEPCRAFT TITLE. & RE 766.00
3 PEST CONTROL/LIBRARV 44.00
11 INS1ipm:E =ICA REINS 26.30
17 RAIDO REPAIRS/CITY HAL 46.50
330 INSURANCE alta REIMS 7.70
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 642.49
24 TELEPHONE CHAPGES L6.95
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 71.21
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 15.94 '
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 56.60
2& TELEPHONE CHAPGES 101.34
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 20.00
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 13.50
24 TELEPHONE• CHARGES 294.41
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES •20.00
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 37.11
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 44.97
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 11.00
24 TELEPHONE CHAPGES 10.74
1.362.31 *CHECK TOT,
BRCFI1:AnCIAI SYSTEM
01/09/91;
06:32,o8
�
010bVr0lmOnl
JOufnAI
WARRANT
'OATS 'VEN040
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
CLAIM I
GENERAL CHECKING�"�J
;J.
31008
12/31/90
BUSINESS R_ECOROS COR
27
VEHICLE RER/STREETS
127.27,
31009
12/31/90
CENTURY LABS
276
SNOW PLOY MI'r
651.53
31009
17/31/90
CENTURY 'CABS,
276
SUPPLIES%CARV.. DEPT
08.00
537..53,
-CHECK ,TOS'.
'
31010
12/3,1/90
CLINE/RICMARO
438
INSURANCE FICA REIMS
31.51
31011
17/31/90
CQMMUNICATION AUOITO
36
PAGER REPAIPS/FIRE DEP
53.09
31012
12/31/90
COMPANION PETS
30
AOUARIUM MTC/LIBRARY
76,91
31013
12/31/90
OOTY/cAREN
h0
INSURANCE 91CA REIMS
29.29
3101h
12/31/90
OUEPR'S WATER CAPE S
h9
WATER CAPE/PENT%L MOUS
14.74
-
31015
12/?1/94
n%"A SYSTEMS
SO
MISC OPERATING SUO/ST
366.80
31016
12/31/90
GAPTUSK I/AL
400
INSURANCE FICA REIMS
31.50
31017
12/?1/94
GENERAL FIRE EOVIPME
443
FIRE COATS/FIRE OEP 3,705.00
31016
12/31/90
HANSON/KAREN
470
INSURANCE FICA REIM$
6,11
31019
12/31/90
HELL MAN /MARLENF
00
INSURANCE FICA REIMS
29.32
31020
12/31/00
JACOBSON/DIANE
02
INSURANCE FICA REIMB
29.32 '
31071
12/31/90
KOROPCMAK/OLIVE'
07
INSURANCE FICA REIMS
6.19
31022;
12/31/,90
KOVICH%RATRICA', _
207.-INSURANCE:
FICA_REIMB,
20.30=
}
31023
12/31/90
-RAEMER/VANOA
356
I115LIRAf10E FICA REIMB
14.,55'
'
3102h
12/31/00
MACK/ROGER
471'
INSURANCE FICA REIMS
20.30'
I,f075'.
0!31/90
MANPOWER: ,INC, _ -
440
TEMP,SER410E9/CITY 'MA'
006.24
31070
12/31/00
MAUS FMOS
100
MISC SUPPLIES/LIBRARY
26.19
31070
1.2/31/90
MAUS FOSOS100
CL;AN 1i+0 SUP/ANIMAL CD 51.69
31028
1]131/00
MAUS FOODS
108
MISC SUPPL[E9/REFUSE
34.25
I1rj15
17/31/90
"US FOODS`
108
MISC Sup/R WORKS
17.92
c
31025
12/31690
m4US FOODIS
109
MISC SUR/CITY HALL
26.65
_
153.70
•CHICK,TOT'
'
11027
12/31/90
MAUS lit ENNE Ty
100
TRAVEL E'IPENSE _ _
10.50
'
31026
17/11/90
MINNESOTA' STATE TREA'
207
OUILOINO PERMIT SURCM
642.05
11 CF INANCLAL SYSTEM
01/09/91 08:52128
KAP.PWIT DATE L'ET:O.?R
GENERAL CHECKING
31029 17/3 1/90 MONTICELLO TIMES
?1029 12/31/00 M.CNTICELLO TIMES
31029 17/31/90 II�:L L•? TIMES
31029 +2/31/00 MCIITICELLO TIMES
31029 12/31/90 MOVT ICELLO TIMES
31029 12/31/00 MONT ICILLO TIMES
31029 12/31/90 MONT ICELLO TIMES
31030 12/31/90 MOORESITOM
31031 12/31/00 NORTHERN STATES POWE
31031 12/31/90 NORTMf PN STATES POWE
31031 12/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE
31031 17/31/90 NORTMERN STATES POWE
31031 12/31/00 NORTHERN STATES POWE
31031 12/31/90 NORTHERN STATES DOME
31031 12/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE
3103117/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE
31031 12/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE
3103112/31/90 NORTMERU STATES POWE
31031 12/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE
31031 17/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE
31037 17/31/90 O'HE ILL/JIF V
10 33 1 7/ 31/90 OLSCN 1 SOtA S ILECTRI
31033 12/31/90 OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI
)t0 31 1 7/31/90 OLSON 1 SONS ELECTRI
31033 +^/31/90 OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI
31 ICI 31 1 2/31/90 OL "N 1 SONS ELECTRI
31031 17/?1/90 ^L SON 6 SONS ELECTPI
110 31 1 7/31/90 OLSCN F SON S ELECTRI
31033 17/31/90 OLSON 4 SONS ELECTRI
11031 12/31/90 OLSON A SON S ELICTRI
31033 17/31/90 OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI
3 10 31 1 7/31/90 PLVM9IRV_PIE RCCI L' S P
310 35 1 2/ 31/00 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC
31038 17/31/90 SCHIIMACHfR/TOM
31031 17/31/00 SNUMAN/CATHY
31031 17/31190 SIMOLA/JON" E.
C
OLFDursement JoVrn4l,
OESCRIDTIOr/ AMOUNT CLAIM I
140 BLD PERMIT INFORMATION 82.00
140 SNOWDLO'+ING INFORMATI 103.75
140 LEGAL PUO/CITU ATT AD 805.07
SAO 6VS TAANSPOPTATION IN 130.90
140 AO FOR PAP.✓. ATTENOANT 65.20
140 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES 70.55
140 PUB MEARINO/ECON OEVEL 43.25
1.380.07
303 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 31.50
140 UTILITIES 3.260.4&
146 UTILITIES 174.34
148 UTILITIES 4.g 19.91
140 UTILITIES 100.42
140 UTILITIES 470.97
148 UTILITIES 16.43
140 UTILITIES 181.93
166 UTILITIES 17.99
146 UTILITIES 352.3h
149 UTILITIES 71-7.75
the UTILITIES 4S4.06
IAO UTILITIES 637.01
10.798.60
101 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 79.30
100 fOUIV REPAIR PARTS/ST 207.30
100 OPERATING SUP/WATER 6.32
160 EOUIP RE*1AID PARTS/y4T 40.00
100 SUPPLIIS/STREET 6IGMTN 37.99
160 tOUTO REPAID PAPTS/5w 211.10
100 BLD REPAID SUP/L 79PAtY 7.09
180 REPAIRS 0 MIC/LI6RARY $4.10
160 EOUIP REPAIPS/WATER 314.05
160 EOUIP REPAIRS/SEWER C 139:00
160 VEHICLE REPAIRS/FIRE 0 34.00
1.060.6)
751 VAN PACKS/WATtR DEPT 113.00
227 MAINT OF EOU1P/F IAA D8 64.00
.90117 INSURANCE FICA REINS 37.70
101 INSURANCE PICA REIMS 70.30
300 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 29.1+
-CHECK T(
-CHECK T(
-CHECK Tl
—„�,- --- cv — o
BRC, F 1114h,:'14 'S95TEM
01/09/91 09:52:29 01 aDuraSmant. Journal;
i
HARAAAfll 'PATE YENU`OP OESCPIPTION AMOUNT ',CL'AIM 11.
GENERAL CHECKING.
31039 12/31/90 SIMONSON LUM13ER COMP 193 REPAIRS/PARKS 236.29 .,
31040 12/31/90 STAR TRI9UNE 197 AD FOR CITY ATTORNEY 127.50
3106,1 12/31/90 STRANO/TONY .90111 INSURANCE FICA REIMa 18.90,
31042 12/31/90 THEISEN/MATT 457 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 29.31
31043 +2/31/,90 T1PPE.//KETTM 608 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 31.81
31066 12/31/90 VIKING PIPE SERVICES 216 CONST COSTS/SANOBERG 510.00 0 0
31046 12/31/90 VIKING PIPE SERVICES 21A TELEVISE SANITARY S 2.507.50
3.017.50 -CHECK TOT
31045 12/31/90 WIMSTELLEP/RICHARO 211 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 29.31
31048 12/31/90 YONAK LANOFILL. INC. 223 ADO'L LAND ,FILL CMA 9.072..30
310Ar, 1?/31/90 YONAK LANDFILL. INC. 223 LAND FILL CHG/STREETS 51.00
9.123.30 -CHECK TOT
GENERAL CHECFP+9 TOTAL 30.392.90
V
BPCFINANCIAL SYSTEM I
Ot/1-1)D% OBt t9:DO 045Aur#tment .1durnal !
uAaRAat {ATE L£NOGt' UESCP.TPTIOtt 001jCtT CLAIM I,, ' [
GEN£PAL C'HECW IIJG
29017 17731/90 OI SON 0 5065 ELECr01 140 CORRECT COO INO a .909.67CP
29817 t2/31/90 OLSON P SONS ELECTRI 140 CORPECT CODING 2 .909.62
0.00 -CHECK TO f
30700 ,17/31/90, PROFESSIONAL SERVICE tis CORRECT COOING 1 .200.00CR
30700 17/31/90 PCOFESSIONAt SERVICE ITS CORRECT CODING 1 .700.00
0.00 -CHECK TO
31000 12/31/90 HOGL VNO AUS COMPAN7 42 CORRECT VENDOR 177.21
31000 17/31/00 BUSINESS RECORDS COR 71 CORRECT VENDOR 127.2 VCR
0.00 'CHECK TO
31067 17/31/90 SMITH/LUCILLE .00113 REISSUE PAYROLL CHECK 40.00
31047 17/11/90 SMITH/LUCILLE .90113 REISSUE PAYROLL CHECW 0. 70CR
47.30 tCHECY TC
3104B 17/31/90 WATER PR7QUCTS COMPA 718 WATER METER/WATER DEP 117.6D
31049 17/31/90 GOPHER STATE ONE CAL 49 PROF SERVICES/WATER DE 21.25
31090 1701/90 COPV OUPLCATINO PP00 61 COPY MACMINE MICIt ILel VA 65,00
31051 17/11/90 WRIGHT COUNTY RECORD IS4 SIMPLE SUBDIVISION FLRE 10.00
GE++EAAL CHECV INO TOTAL 400.95
C,
c
Ev�c -.vs,:sm oij:nurs-?*,jnt jovrn,%I
12/11,/90 15:?, 7 :'�7
"-:;'JC-T I r�:f T
A I! c L A I
Nn
1566? 1 lNE SS F 000073 mISC OPeP4,TjfjG SliPPLIS el,.PS
I 'It 6c ri 160077 MIS..' OPF-ATIJI:G `j:; -.j 105.73
11".93
t566R 1? fj Pklz":rlA PLQMP;C-y 600092 mjS�.' OPiRATINC, SUDOL19 66.63
i 5t•6j- 1'/17190 r9iLIT1 Wlrje. a SOIkl SOOOLO 1.14)IjOP PlJc-(:HASS 1.3350.01
15670 , — iI,SCTPIC/ 300063 nc '14.0?
15471 1:,/ i7l?rj 1! S WEST COInMUMICATI 900093 AOVEPTISIMG 27.61
1.10VOO I:L'.'JD TOTA1. 4.690.58
_J
BRC FINANCl/LLSVSTEM
01/09/91 OE :Sb: t7
O110urswent Journal
WAPOAHT 0A"< VEC00p
OESrpiPTTr.;1
AMOUNT
C"TM
LIOUOp
15432 17/3 1 /90 A L M PRQjUr,TS
-900083 CHECV.. VOIDED
80.00CR
15437 12/31 /90 COnMISSIONEP OF RE'/E
800006 COPPECT COOING
8.484.53
15437 12/3 1/477 COMMISSIONER OF Rt vE
800005 CORRECT COOTNG
3.484.53CR
0.00
*CHECK 1
15472 12/31/90 JOHNSON EROS WHOLESA
800022 WINE PURCHASE
1.848.48
15472 12/3 1 /90 JOHNSON BROS WHOLE SA
800072 LIQUOR PUPCHASE
163.38
1.811.88
-CHECK T
15413 12/31/90 EAGLE WINE COMPANV
800017 WINE PURCHASE
244.13
15474 12/3 1/90 GRIGGS. COOPER S COM
800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE
2.578.05
15475 12/3 1/90 .HILLIPS !•. SONS CO/E
800037 LIQUOR PUPCHASE
732.94
15415 12/3 1/90 PHILLIPS 8 SONS CO/E
800037 WINE PURCHASE
1.134.82
1.387.70
-CHECK. 1
15478 12/3 1/00 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA
800022 MISC PUPCH ASES
76.98
15470 12/3 1/90 JOHNSON EPOS WHOLE$A
80002? LIOUOP PIiPCHA•SE
4.793.50
15418 12/3 1/00 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA
800022 Wt'JE PUPCHASE
1.093.87
6,.754.30
•cHECI! 1
15477 12/3 1/90 JOHNSON BROS WHOLE$A
800022 WINE PURCHASE
3.022.94
15470 1?/3 1/90 OVAL ITV WINE 6 SPIRI
800040 LTOUOP P3/P.CHASE'
453.44
15418 12/3 1190 OVAL ITV WINE 1 SPIRI
800040 WINE PURCHASE
017.89
15470 1?/3 1/90 CUAL LTV WINE & SPIRI
800040 MISC M1% PUPCHASES
50.10
1.131.23
•CHECK
15470 12/3 1/90 EAGLE WINE COMPANY
600012 WINE. PURCHASE
414.69
15480 12/3 1/00 GRIGGS. COOPER 6 COM
000018 LIQUOR PURCHASE
3.707.15
15441 12/3 1/00 JOHNSON EROS WHOLESA
800072 LIQUOR PURCHASE
2.413.89
15481 12/3 1/90 JOHNSON OROS WHOLESA
000022 WINE PURCHASE
807.00
3.220.89
*CHECK '
15482 12%3 1/00 BERNICK'S PEPSI COLA
800001 POP PURCHASE
181.20
15483 12/3'1/00 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHOG
800002 TELEPHONE CHARGES
00.12
15404 12/3 1/00 CARLSON REFRIGERATIO
000004 MAINT OF EQUIPMENT
20.17
15485 17/3 1/90 COMMISSIONER OF REVE
000000 SALES TAY DUE DEC
12.937.14
15416 17/3 1/00 DAHLMEIMER OISTRTElUT
000000 MIN PURCHASE
106.70
15400 11/3 1/90 OAHLHITMER OISTRIGUT
000009 BEER PURCHASE
10.237.10
10.345.00
•CHECK
_J
y
-
BRC FINArICIAL, SySJEN
01/09/91
08:54:;17;
6isDursement Journal
WARRANT
DATE
VENDOR
'DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
CLAIM
LIQUOR FUND
15487
12/31'/90
DAY DISTRIBUTING COM
800010
MISC PURCHASES
253.95
15498
1?/31/90
DICK BEVERAGE COMPAN
800011
MISC OPERATING SUPPLIE 35:SO
15483
1?/3,1/90
OIrv. BEVERAGE COMPAN
800011
BEER PUP.CHaSE
1.204.30
1.239.80
#CHECK
15489
12/31/90
ftICVSON/CINOIE
800096
FICA INS. REIMS
29.30
15490
1?/31/110
PLAHEPTY-S HAPPY TYM
800091
MIR PUPCKASE
9?.60
15491
12/31/90
GPOSSLEM SEVFPAGE I
800019
BEEP PUPCHASE
12.696.00
15491
12/3/290
GPOSSLETN BEVERAGE I
900019
MISC PUPCHASES
61,40
15491
12/31/90
GrOSSLEIN BEVERAGE 1
300019
MISC OPEPATING SUPPLIE 65.55
t?.780.05
'CHECK
15492
12/31/90
HARTMAN/.l Oe
800097
FICA INS. REIMS
29.3+
15403
12/31/90
JUDE CANOV R TOBACCO
900021
CIG. CIGAR. ETC
120.06
15693
1?/31/90
JUDE CANDY 6 TOBACCO
800021
BAGS
339.113
15493
12/31/90
JUDE CANDY 3 TOBACCO
800021
MISC OPERATING SUPPLIE 11.30
479.52
'CHECK
15494
12/31/90
KOLLES SANITATION
800023
GARBAGE CONTRACT
201.60
15695
12/31/90
KRMC RADIO STATION
800024
ADVERTISING
166.00
15488
12/31/90
LIEFERT TRUCKING
800025
FREIGHT CHARGES
518.28
15497
12/31/90
MAUS FOODS
800027
MISC OPERATING SUPPLI85
5.74
15498
12/31_/110
MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
900028
UTILITIES
210.06
15699
12/31/90
M4NTICECLO OFFICE OR
900031
OFFICESUPPLIES
59.10
15500
12/91,(90
MONTICELLO'SHOPPING
800095
ADVERTISING
255.50
15501
12/31/90
MONTICELLO TIMES
900092
ADVERTISING
1E6.03
15602
1?731,/410
400T,NEON STATES POVE
900035
UTILIT'(ES
9Sl.07
15503
12/71/90
RON-S ICE COMPANY
400041
ICE PURCHASE
106.06
15504
12/31/90
SEVEN-UP 80TYLINO CO
600043
POP PURCHASE
110.10
19905
12/31/90
ST. CLO-JO RESTAUPANT
800065
CLEANING SUPPLIES
9.99
15505
1?/31/90
Sr. CLOUD RESTAURANT
•00045
MISC PURCHASES
210.64
217.43
'CHEC6.
PRC FIr/Ar1CIAl SV -STEM )
01/09/0.1 08154:;17 0170urseinent journeti
BAGP.40 GATE VEt100P OE SCRIPTIOr1, AMOUNT
LIIOUOR FUND
15568 12/3'r/90 THORPE 01,57PI8UT1I1, 800048 BEER PURCHASE 13.884.25
15507 12/;1/90 Talr/ CITIES FLAG .SOU 800069 REPAIRS 133.86 II
15508 `12/31/90 MING COCA -'COLA BOT 800051 POP PURCHASE 4.17.10
15509 1?/31/00 VOSS ELECTRIC SuoPLV 800070 LIGHT BULBS 70.91
I
LIOVOR'FUr:O TOTAL 87.964.89
WE
COUNCIL UPDATE
January 10, 1991
Council Update on Sewer and Water Rates. (J.S.)
As discussed briefly at the special meeting on the budget, the City
is expecting its major industrial user, Sunny Fresh Foods, to cut
back significantly on sewer and water use in 1991 due to the
transfer of their hard boiled egg cooking operation to Iowa. Their
sewer and water usage is expected to be cut by 20% to 30%. In the
sewer fund, this is a drop of about $25,000 per year. In the water
fund, the effect is much less, being in the neighborhood of $2,200
to $2,500 per year. This is due to the extremely cheap water rate
of $.20 per 100 cu ft at the top end of the sliding scale, at which
the majority of the water usage by Sunny Fresh is billed.
it appears that for 1990, however, the revenue from Sunny Fresh
will exceed expectations by about $14,000. This will help smooth
out the drop in revenue for next year in the sewer fund. Based
upon projections of final costs for 1990, we expect a surplus in
the operation and maintenance sewer fund of about $20,000.
For 1991, costs of operating the wastewater treatment plant will
increase slightly due to a CPI adjustment in our contract with PSG,
increases In electric and natural gas rates, and the inclusion of
the change of scope of services for testing by a certified
laboratory. This, coupled with a shortfall in revenue expected
from Sunny Fresh, indicates a shortfall of approximately $17,500 in
the operation and maintenance sewer fund budget for 1991. There is
$4,000 in the 1991 sewer collection fund budget for a chemical feed
building for odor control chemicals to be built near the Sunny
Fresh Foods site. If Sunny Fresh cuts back significantly as
planned, this building may not be needed and would give us a $4,000
cushion for 1991.
There are several things that could stabilize or increase rates in
the future. The first, of course, is any further cutbacks or
Increases by Sunny Fresh Foods. Since they are a significant
portion of our use of the sower and water system, they have a great
effect. The City has yet to see the effect on residential sewer
use because of the water pressure increase. At the end of the
first quarter of 1991, we will have some indication. Another item
to consider is increased use by adding additional users.
Residential sewer use would be the most beneficial to add to our
system in that it is stable and does not have the negative effects
on our system such as heavy industrial or commercial. It appears
that there may be a remote possibility of adding the 200 to 300
mobilo homes in Kjollborgs Park to our sower system at some time in
the future. The increased use in revenue from Kjellborgs could
Council Update
January 10, 1991
Page 2
have a stabilizing effect on sewer rates and make up for lost
revenue from Sunny Fresh cutbacks. Unfortunately, it does not
appear likely that Kjellberg will be hooking up in the immediate
future.
In summary, there does not appear to be the need to change sewer
and water rates for 1991. However, if Sunny Fresh cuts back
further and the City does not see additional use of our sewer
system, a sewer rate increase may be likely in 1992.
C'
I
CITY Or MONTICELLA)
Monthly Building Ue NetLment Report
Month of DECEMBER 19�Q
PEBDITS MID USES
PERMITS ISSUED L°e1 Thle - Oeme Month Leet Y- 'Thio Yeer
Month November Xontll Do -bol Ili- Year To Date To De Le
RESIDENTIAL
Number 9 3 1 101 13`_
Veluetlon $ 121,800.00 5 16,900.00 5 5,000.00 9 2,923,400.00 S 2,722, 900.01
Pena 1,139.103 105.60 50.00 11,757.96 10,534.4(
5 ... he".. 59.90 6.20 1.50 1,452.25 1,065.4(
COMMERCIAL
Number 2 4 33 3:
Veluetlon 295,000.00 23,000.00 1,316,900.00 3,062,300.01
pee° 2,193.97 244.00 10,059.77 18,542.7"
Surcharge. 147.50 11.25 656.70 1,558.1.
INOUSTR IAL
Ilumbor 1 1 3 I
value tion 2,000.00 200,000.00 10,700.00 3,060, 300.00
pae. 20.00 989.50 107.00 10,271.20
Surchelge. 1.00 100.00 5.10 1, 530. 11
PLUMDING
Numher 2 2 42 4'
pee- 63.00 62.00 1,685.00 1,201.0('
Ourcharge. 1.00 1.00 21.00 21.5(
OTHMS
Number 1 3 7
ve lua Llon 0.00 0.00 95,000.O(
re°e 10.00 70.00 1,110.80
S-I-gls. .50 1.50 50.0(
TOTAL NO. PF31MITS 14 10 2 197 727
TOTA1. VALUATION 410,000.00 239,900.00 5,000.00 6,170,100.00 8,440,500.0(
TOTAL FEES 7,416.10 1,401.10 60.00 52,OSB.r,4 57,659.81
TOTAL SURCRARSr.O 209.40 110.45 3.00 3,097.15 4,225.20
CIIIIRF.IIT MUN1'II
rrr.BNumllnr to Nnle
1'1.11 M11' NATDRE Mumbai PERMIT - Sl1NC11ARSE Value thin 71114 Yenl I..:L Yeel
:I luDle remtly 9 8 8 27 26
uid ae 0 1
Nulll-1 nm11Y I f
Coaanl r.lel 6 5
IIID ua 1.1 lel 42
Res. Celeye. 1 50.05 2.50 5,000.00 9 14
01u- 0 0
Puh110 nu11UInVa 1 7
ALTERATION "I REPAIR
avail l null 2 135.60 5.70 II,g00:00 BO 60
C'oe.elalel 4 244.00 11.19 23,000.00 16 7fi
Ind,1e 11 I Al 1 909.50 100.00 200,000.00 h 1
Pill XRIND
All Type. 2 62.00 1.00 43 42
ACCE111001 STRUCTURES
Ovlm ln9 Pao 11
7 0
bcke 17 9
TLMPURARY PERMIT 0 0
U13101.ITION 5 3
TOTAGII 10 1,481.10 170.45 239,900.00 227 197
111
TOTAL REVENUE 1 1.601.55
INDIVLDUAL PERMIT ACTIVITY REPORT
Moth Of DFfFVRFR , 19SQ
PURIST
I
NUMBERI
I
DEBCRI PTI0.4
TYPE
NANE/LOCATION
VALUATION
�
�F
PERI IS
SURCRARGE
PLUMBItIG
SVMCBMG!
90-1605
Intortor
Reewdel
AC
Little Rountaln Blllte rd a/1180 Rvy. 25 S.
$ 17,000.00
f 144.00 $
6.30
1 25.00 f
90-1616
Detached
Carege
RC
Anton and Caca lfe Benyal/217 Reeeey St.
5.000.00
50.00
2.50
.50
90-1617
Fireplace
Insert
AD
Wilileo and Judy Bausch/205 Ifeefeslppl Dr
1,500.00
15.00
90-1618
Interior
Rueodel
Al
Sunny Fteeh Fnode/206V. 4th St.
200,000.00
989.50
.50
100.00
77.00
90-1619
Interior
Wall Partitions
AC
W.
Video Plue/loo V. Bra dvey
1,500.00
15.00
.50
90-1620
Intortor
Voll Par[lt lone
AC
Llber[y 9eving E. Bro.dvey, Ste. 2
7,500.00
75.00
.50
1.15
90-1621
Nouse end
Ce re ge Ra •f ding
AD
Robert snd Naren Ronson/507 Maple St.
10.400.00
120.60
5.20
90-1622
Building
Farads Facts
AC
Ilolldey Compeni-/107 V. 7th St.
5.000.00
50.00
2.50
TOTALS
S 279,900.00
11,419.10 S
119.45
F 62.00 1
1.00
PLAN REVIEW
TOTAL REVENUE 1 1.601.55