City Council Agenda Packet 05-28-1991AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, May 28, 1991 - 7:00 p.m.
Mayor: Ken Maus
Council Members: Clint Herbst, Brad Fyle, Shirley Anderson, Dan
Blonigen
1. Cali to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held May 13, 1991.
3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
4. Public hearing to consider the 1991 Annual Sidewalk Inspection
Report.
5. Public hearing on Sidewalk Improvement Project 91SW-1.
6. Consideration of a resolution accepting bids and award of
contract for Sidewalk Improvement Project 91SW-1.
7. Consideration of reviewing evaluations of properties discussed
at the Board of Review --City Assessor.
8. Consideration of authorizing legal action to remove
construction equipment illegally stored on property located in
a PZM zoning district.
9. Consideration of bids and award of annual sealcoating project.
10. Consideration of reviewing first quarter liquor store report.
11. Consideration of renting or demolition of the recently
acquired house adjacent to City Hall.
12. Consideration of granting annual approval for municipal
licenses.
13. Consideration of a resolution requesting funding for a Wright
County Overall Economic Development Plan.
14. Consideration of bids and award of contract for purchase of
173 kW emergency generator.
14A. Consideration of reaffirming our request for a signal to be
Installed at County Road 118 and County Road 75 intersection.
15. Consideration of establishing a defined contribution plan for
elected officials.
16. Consideration of bills for the month of May.
17. Adjournment.
NOTE: THE MEETING MILL B6 HELD TUESDAY DUE TO MEMORIAL DAY ON
MONDAY.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, May 13, 1991 - 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen, Clint Herbst,
Brad Fyle, Ken Maus
Members Absent: None
Approval of minutes.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded
by Shirley Anderson to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting held April 22, 1991, and the special meeting held
April 22, 1991. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints.
None forthcoming.
4. Consideration of an ordinance amendment ailowina limited open
sales and rummaqe and oarage sale activity as an accessory use
in the R-1 district.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that the Planning
Commission recommends approval of the zoning ordinance
amendment regulating limited open sales and rummage and garage
sales in the R-1 district. The Planning Commission's
recommendation is based on the finding that limited open sales
activity and garage sale activity should be regulated in order
to properly protect the character of residential areas.
Excessive use of private residential property for the sale of
vehicles along with consignment sales and other large sales of
a commercial nature serve to detract from the residential
character of the R-1 zone.
During discussion, Ken Maus noted some problems with the
enforcement of the transient merchant ordinance. He noted
that the Bridge Water Telephone parking area was being used as
a station for selling live bait. Rick Wolfstollor said that
he would contact the Sheriff's Department to determine what
action was taken on this matter and to make sure that the
Sheriff's Department has a full understanding of the City's
transient merchant ordinance.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Dan Bionigon to approve the adoption of an
ordinance amendment establishing limited open sales and
rummage and garage sales as an accessory use in an R-1 zone.
The motion is based on the finding that limited open sales
activity and garage sale activity should be regulated in order
to properly protect the character of residential areas.
Consignment sales and other largo sales of a commercial nature
Page 1
Council Minutes - 5/13/91
serve to detract from the residential character of the R-1
zone; therefore, such activity should be controlled. The
proposed amendment will contribute to the ability of the City
to regulate such sales; therefore, the ordinance amendment
should be approved. Motion carried unanimously.
SEE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NOS. 208 AND 209.
5. Consideration of adopting a modified concept plan for
extending city utilities to the elementary school site and to
the Value Plus development site.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed a concept plan
outlined in the agenda supplement for extending and financing
sewer, water, and road improvements to the new elementary
school site and to the Value Plus development site.
Shelly Johnson reported that the school district will be
locating the elementary school in the southwest corner of the
site, which means that the sewer line will be extended the
full length of the school property along Fallon Avenue. The
school will finance this expense. Johnson went on to note
that he prefers that the roadway be installed by the fall of
1992. The school district will pay one-half the cost,
Johnson reported that the Value Plus developers will be able
to pay their share of the roadway by 1993. Value Plus
representative, Tom Holthaus, was in attendance and concurred
with this statement.
Ren Maus suggested that the City look at upgrading Fallon
Avenue along with this project. John Simola reported that the
roadway is deteriorating and would likely need to be upgraded
within the next five years. Maus emphasized that improving
Fallon Avenue might be necessary in the future and that the
school district should be aware of this possibility.
Tom Holthaus was in attendance and requested that the City
Engineer prepare grading plans associated with the Value Plus
subdivision. Bret Weiss of OSM noted that ordinarily the City
Engineer does not get involved with preparing grading plans
associated with private development; however, in this case,
given the complexity of the project and the need to integrate
site grading work with road grades, it may make sense to
combine the two projects. Weiss did suggest that the
developer provide up -front money for the grading work to the
City, with the City actually making payment to OSM for the
grading plans prepared.
It was the consensus of Council to approve the concept of
authorizing the City Engineer to prepare the grading plan for
the Value Plus development site.
Page 2
Council Minutes - 5/13/91
It was also the consensus of Council to approve the concept
plan for extending and financing utilities to the Value Plus
development site as outlined in the staff report.
6. Consideration of petition for sanitary sewer feasibilitv
study --Stuart Hoglund, petitioner.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill noted that Stuart Hoglund
requested that the City conduct a feasibility study which
would provide information regarding the cost to extend sewer
and water to his property. Hoglund needs this information in
order to sell his property or develop it himself. O'Neill
stated that the estimated cost of $2,900 would be prepaid by
Stuart Hoglund. If the feasibility report is ultimately used
to design a construction project, the $2,900 to do the study
would be deducted from the engineering fee for design of the
project. This fee would then be incorporated into the overall
project cost and then assessed back to the parties that
benefit from the project.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded
by Dan Blonigen to accept Hoglund's petition and authorize a
feasibility study of sewer and water service to the Stuart
Hoglund property contingent on the City receiving $2,900 from
Stuart Hoglund. Motion carried unanimously.
Consideration of pilot program for garbage pickup utilizing
roll -around cart type containers.
Public works Director, John Simola, reported that an optional
cart system would allow residents to continue to use their
bags or existing garbage cans, or for a small rental fee
switch to roll -around containers available in sizes from 65—
gallon to 95 -gallon. The cart system has proven to reduce
litter, dross up a neighborhood, stop animal intrusion into
garbage, and control the amount of rainwater entering the
garbage system. Significant amounts of rainwater can enter
the garbago. One only has to look around at the enormous
amount of garbage cans in Monticello without lids and look at
our garbage tonnage going into the landfill during wet weather
to see that this is a factor. This becomes extremely
significant whon tipping fees reach $70 to $80 per ton, which
is foreseeable in the next few years.
Simola went on to review the two quotes, one from Zarn, Inc.,
direct and the other from Versa Cart utilizing 218 carts.
Simola reported that for the pilot program purposes, Zarn,
Inc., would not charge for the use of the carts; and if the
City elects to move forward with the program, the initial 218
carts cost about $3,000 less than the bid submitted by Versa
Cart. Simola went on to recommend that City staff be
Pago 3
Council Minutes - 5/13/91
authorized to begin the pilot program utilizing the Zarn,
Inc., proposal at a cost of $0. At the end of the program, we
would then present the Council with cost data from Vasko and
prepare recommendations as to whether or not to implement the
residential optional garbage pickup system using the 95 -gallon
and 65 -gallon carts.
Dan Blonigen asked what our commitment is to Zarn. John
Simola reported that if we do not go ahead with the program,
all we have to do is wash the carts that they have provided.
Clint Herbst was concerned that the pilot study would show
that the efficiency in collecting garbage will not be enhanced
through the program and that ultimately it will cost the City
more to operate the program. Herbst reminded the Council that
the City recently eliminated two pickups per week service, and
he was concerned about starting a program that might result in
a further reduction of service level or result in a charge
being paid by property owners for garbage pickup.
Shirley Anderson noted that there is no financial outlay
associated with the pilot program, and it appears reasonable
to allow the program to proceed just for the sake of getting
information on how successful it might be.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Brad Fyle to authorize City staff to operate a
pilot program for garbage pickup utilizing the cart system for
a period of up to three months utilizing Zarn, Inc., at a cost
of $0. voting in favor: Ker, Maus, Brad Fyle, Shirley
Anderson. Opposed: Dan Blonigen, Clint Herbst.
8. Consideration of a resolution on the 1991 sidewalk improvement
approving plans and specifications, authorizinq advertisement
for bids, and ordering a public hearing; and consideration of
acceptinq the 1991 Sidewalk Inspection Report and ordering a
public hearinq on its contents.
Council reviewed the sidewalk improvement plan for the 1991
improvement season and reviewed the inspection report
submitted by the public works department.
Dan Blonigon noted that the sidewalks proposed for Walnut
should be located where it would not damage the existing
trues.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fylo and seconded
by Shirley Anderson to approve the plane and specifications
for the 1991 sidewalk improvement project, authorize
advertisement for bids, and order a public hearing on the
improvement. Motion carried unanimously.
SEE RESOLUTION 91-10.
Page 4
\J
Council Minutes - 5!13!91.
Council reviewed the sidewalk inspection report. After
discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded
by Clint Herbst to accept the sidewalk inspection report and
order a public hearing on its contents. Motion carried
unanimously.
9. Consideration of appointing individuals to membership on the
newly -established parks commission.
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that four individuals
have volunteered to serve on the commission. These include
Larry Nolan, Dick Frie, Bruce Thielen, and Fran Fair.
Ken Maus suggested that the parks commission, once
established, be asked to search for the fifth member.
Clint Herbst noted that everyone that has volunteered for the
position is well qualified.
Dan Blonigen was opposed to the appointment of Fran Fair to
the parks commission.
A motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint
Herbst to appoint all four individuals, including Larry Nolan,
Dick Frie, Fran Fair, and Bruce Thielen, to the parks
commission. Voting in favor of the motion: Ken Maus, Brad
Fyle, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst. Opposed: Dan Blonigen.
10. Consideration of further action regardina police commission
appointments.
Administrator wolfateller reported that to date the City has
received two formal applications from individuals interested
in serving on the commission, ono from Curt Schmidt, the other
from David Gerads. In addition, former Couneilmember, Warren
Smith, has expressed interest in serving on the commission.
City Administrator Wolfstellor noted that it is not likely
that additional advertisements will generate anymore
intorosted parties. It was suggested that if a police
advisory commission is going to be established, it appears
that Council may have to personally contact and select othor
individuals to serve on tho commission.
Ken Maus suggested that the first task of the police
commission might be to define the role of the commission and
prepare bylaws for future consideration.
Brad Pyle noted that he thinks there is a need for a police
commission and that he �/w}�ould volunteer to serve on it. (
.4 c, c,, r.+-1 yp S .L, ,-1
OJ Pago 5
m
Council Minutes - 5/13/91
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and
seconded by Brad Fyle to establish an ad hoc committee charged
with defining the role and duties of a potential police
commission, with Warren Smith, Curt Schmidt, David Gerads,
along with Brad Fyle appointed to the committee.
Dan Blonigen mentioned the policy dispute in Big Lake
regarding the police response to heart attack victims in
transport in private vehicles. Blonigen requested that City
staff contact Don Hozempa and ask Hozempa what the current
policy in Monticello is for assisting transport of heart
attack victims either by transferring victims to squad cars or
by providing an escort.
11. Consideration of purchase of additional pipe locator for the
water department.
John Simola reported that the water and sewer collection
department currently has two locators. Simola noted that each
locator has certain limitations. A signal generator or
transmitter must be located ne?: the search area. The
operator cannot move any sionificant distance away from the
transmitter. In addition; it is easily sidetracked by such
things in the area as telephone lines, gas lines, and electric
lines and often picks up false readings.
Simola proposed to purchase an additional locator, which would
be a Model 850 Metrotech. It is easier to operate, has a
stronger signal, and is not susceptible to picking up false
signals from piping or wires. The 850 will locate the exact
spot of the obstruction, whereas the 810 may wander a few feet
and gives only an approximate location. Simola reported that
this item was placed in the budget in the amount of $2,300.
Unfortunately, the purchase of a new special clamp is needed
which adds to the expected cost; therefore, the purchase price
is $2,650, which is $350 over budget.
Brad Fyle noted that the existing equipment appears to be
working well enough. It was his view that this is more of a
"want" item than a "need" item.
John Simola noted that the equipment proposed for purchase is
much more accurate than the existing equipment.
Dan Blonigen noted that despite the fact we have this typo of
equipment, he suggested that the accuracy is worth the added
cost of a now, updated locator.
Pago 6
Council Minutes - 5/13/91
After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen and
seconded by Shirley Anderson to purchase the Metrotech 850
from Davis water Equipment with a special clamp and case at a
price of $2,650. Voting in favor: Dan Blonigen, Shirley
Anderson, Ken Maus, Clint Herbst. Opposed: Brad Fyle.
12. Consideration of advertisement for bids for emergencv
qenerator for the water and sewer collection department.
This item was tabled until the end of the meeting.
13. Consideration of final vavment ro Arriaoni Brothers for the
Monticello Streetscape protect.
John Simola reported that construction of the Monticello
Streetscape project was finished in early summer of 1989.
Final payment was dragged on due to unknown final quantities.
Attempts to meet with the contractor during the summers of
1989 and 1990 failed due to lack of response from the
contractor.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Dan Blonigen to authorize final payment to
Arrigoni Brothers for the streetscape project in the amount of
$38,679. Motion carried unanimously.
14. Consideration of final payment to Minnesota Valley Landscape,
Inc., for work on the Monticello Streetscape Proiect.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Brad Fyle to authorize final payment to Minnesota
Valley Landscape, Inc., in the amount of $3,497.30. Motion
carried unanimously.
15. Consideration to adopt a resolution caliinq for a public
hearinq,to modify Redevelopment Protect Plan No. 1, to modifv
TIF Districts 1-1 throuqh 1-11 to establish TIF District 1-12
and the plans relating thereto.
011ie Koropchak reported that TIF District No. 1-12 is
proposed as an economic district for Aroplax Corporation,
which is a business that has boon in existence for 43 years
and is a family-owned business. The company is a plastic
injection molding company now located in Minneapolis. Aroplax
has a purchase option on the west 480 foot of Lot 3, Block 2,
Oakwood Industrial Park. Aroplax proposes to construct a
22,400 sq ft concrete tool and production facility on Chelsea
Road. The lot proposed for development is located to the east
of the Minnesota Highway Department facility. Projected
employment is 20-25 jobs.
Pago 7
Council Minutes - 5/13/91
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Clint Herbst to adopt a resolution calling for a
public hearing date of June 10, 1991, for the modification of
the Redevelopment Project Plan and existing TIF district plans
and establishment of a TIF District No. 1-12 and plan. Motion
carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 91-11.
16. Consideration to receive and accept the Annual Greater
Monticello Enterprise Fund Report.
Council reviewed the status of the Greater Monticello
Enterprise Fund.
After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyle and seconded
by Clint Herbst to acknowledge the receipt and accept the
Annual Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund Report. Motion
carried unanimously.
17. Consideration to amend the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund
(GMEF) Guidelines and Economic Development Authority (EDA)
Bylaws.
Economic Development Director, 011ie Koropchak, reviewed the
proposed changes to the GMEF Guidelines and EDA Bylaws as
proposed by the Economic Development Authority.
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and
seconded by Brad Fyle to amend the fund guidelines by noting
that 1) one job is equivalent to 37.5 hours per week;
2) establish a minimum fee of $200 but not to exceed 1.5% of
total loan project; 3) include a requirement that prior to
issuance of an approved loan, the City shall review and/or
approve all contracts, legal documents, and intercreditor
assignments; and 4) amend the meeting time for the Economic
Development Authority to 7:00 p.m. Motion to include request
that the EDA give consideration to preparing an amendment that
would allow tho City Council to conduct a preliminary review
of loan applications prior to final approval by the EDA.
Motion carried unanimously.
18. Consideration of dedicatinq Urban Development Action Grant
funds to the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund,
011ie Koropchak reported that the City annually receives funds
from the Urban Development Action Grant program in the amount
of $27,971. The City will be receiving an annual payment in
this amount through December 1999. It is proposed by the EDA
that those funds be committed to future capital needs of the
Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund. Koropchak noted that the
UDAG program requires that such funds be used for economic
Page 8
Council Minutes - 5/13/91
development purposes and that committing UDAG funds to the
GMEF program is a use of UDAG funds that is common in other
cities.
After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and
seconded by Brad Fyle to authorize the commitment of UDAG
repayment income to the Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund.
Motion carried unanimously.
19. Consideration to authorize a commitment to maintaininq a
beginninq balance of $200,000 for the Greater Monticello
Enterprise Fund.
011ie Koropchak reported that the Economic Development
Authority requests that Council maintain an annual beginning
balance of $200,000 for the GMEF program. By establishing a
commitment of $200,000 as the beginning balance annually, the
Economic Development Authority would have funds available to
make the program workable. Currently, there is no commitment
to maintaining a minimum balance or loan commitment level,
which limits the flexibility of the GMEF program. It was
suggested by Koropchak that the minimum balance of $200,000
could be achieved by appropriating the remaining balance of
the original $200,000 commitment, which is $62,000, plus the
appropriation of UDAG funding available at $90,000, plus an
additional appropriation of $48,000 from the liquor fund.
Koropchak reminded Council that the proposal does not require
that the funds be transferred to the EDA, it only provides a
commitment that those funds would be available in the event
that they are needed.
After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen and
seconded by Clint Herbst to approve an additional
appropriation from the liquor fund of $48,000 and authorize a
commitment to provide a beginning balance of $200,000. Motion
carried unanimously.
20. Consideration of renting or demolition of the recently -
acquired house adjacent to City Hall.
This itom was tabled for further review by Council members.
It was suggested that each Council member visit the property
prior to further action on this matter.
21. Considoration of approval of plans and specifications for 1991
sealcoat project and authorization to advertise for bids.
A motion was made by Shirley Anderson and socondod by Dan
Slonigen to approve the specifications as drafted with the now
project scheduled and authorize advertisement for bids with an
anticipated cost of $4,500. Motion carried unanimously.
Pago 9
Council Minutes - 5/13/91
22. Consideration of approvina lease agreements for Food Shelf and
Christian Social Services' use of old fire hall.
Rick Wolfsteller reviewed the terms of the proposed lease
agreement.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Dan 8lonigen to approve the lease document as
presented. Motion carried unanimously.
12. Consideration of advertisement for bids for emeraencv
generator for water and sewer collection department.
John Simola reported the need to purchase an emergency
generator for use in conjunction with maintaining water levels
in the water tower and to power certain lift stations in the
event of a power outage. Simola reported that there are
sufficient funds budgeted for this item. The amount budgeted
for 1991 was $35,000.
After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and
seconded by Dan 8lonigen to approve the specifications as
presented and authorize advertisement for bids to be returned
May 28, 1991. Motion carried unanimously.
I There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned.
Joff O'Neill
Assistant Administrator
Page 10
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
Public hearing to consider the 1991 Annual Sidewalk Inspection
Report. (J.S.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the May 13, 1991, Council meeting, City staff presented the
1991 Annual Sidewalk Inspection Report. The report is broken
down into two sections, off the grid and on the grid. Most of
the items off the grid are left over from last year. Tom Bose
has informed the residents of the Council's decision last year
to have these dangerous sidewalks abated by the City as soon
as possible after June 1, 1991.
There are a few items of special concern on the off -grid
report. Item #3 concerns a set of steps at the northwest
corner of the intersection of River Street and Walnut Street.
These steps lead into the apartments at that location and
should be removed. Only a portion of these steps are on
public property. An additional Item is item ®9. Four panels
of sidewalk at the high school were noted to need repair. No
action is requested from the City Council on this item, as a
recommendation letter has been sent to the high school. These
panels are not on City street right-of-way.
All newly -noticed problem sidewalks off the grid should be
repaired or replaced by July 1, 1991.
For those panels on the grid, approximately 207.4 lineal feet
of side,ralk needs repair or replacement. The estimated total
cost is $4,946.54. This includes not only contracted
replacement but also removals by the City and construction
inspection. The cost is expected to be about $23.85 per
lineal foot of which 258 can be assessed to the property
owners with more than two panels. Twenty-five percent (254)
of this figure is $5.96. The actual figure will be determined
by using the lowest bid received on Tuesday.
There are only two sidewalks on the grid needing repair which
total over two panels in length. The first is a soven-panol
replacement (item #20) along the north side of Broadway at the
Lindquist Funeral Home. The owners of the Lindquist Funeral
Homo have already signed a petition asking the City to do the
repairs. The other is a four -penal replacement on the north
side of 3rd Strout just oast of Highway 25 along the A-V Room.
This sidewalk is heavily buckled due to an Elm tree root
system. The tree was taken down several years ago, but the
stump remained. The City removed the stump during its
boulevard beautification program last year. Consequently, now
the sidewalk can be replaced without concern for the tree
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
roots. We have not received word from the A-V Room concerning
this replacement. We will continue to check on this prior to
the meeting.
After citizens' comments during the public hearing, the City
Council can close the public hearing and take action on the
report.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to accept the report as
drafted or with modifications as so desired by the
Council and to order abatement of the hazardous sidewalks
listed therein. (June 1 for 1990 off -grid and July 1 for
1991 off -grid and on -grid by owners.)
For those off -grid residents requesting repairs to their
sidewalks, the City will use the low -bid contractor for
our sidewalk improvement project. Removals will be done
by local contractors after obtaining quotes. The
replacement sidewalk for those sidewalks on the grid is
Included in "Additional Bid B" for the sidewalk
improvement project.
2. The second alternative would be not to accept the report
with any amendments. This does not appear to be
applicable, as the ordinance requires the Council to take
action to abate hazardous sidewalks noted during an
annual inspection, and the inspection procedures are
credible with specific policies yet allow the inspector
to use common sense.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It Is the recommendation of the Public Works Director and the
City Inspector that the City Council accept the 1991 Annual
Sidewalk Inspection Report as drafted or with minor revisions
and order the abatement of the hazardous sidewalks therein as
outlined in alternative 01.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Ploaso refer to the Annual Sidewalk Inspection Report
completed on May 8, 1991, and included with the May 17, 1991,
agenda.
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
5. Public hearing on Sidewalk Improvement Project 91SW-1. (3.5.}
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
This public hearing is ordered to allow citizen input
concerning new sidewalk construction at the following
locations:
The west side of Maple Street from 4th Street to
6th Street.
2. The north side of 6th Street from Maple Street to
Minnesota Street.
3. The east side of Minnesota Street from 6th Street
south to the old 7th Street right-of-way.
4. The east side of Walnut Street from the Monticello
Library to 7th Street.
5. The north side of 7th Street from Walnut Street to
Highway 25.
The anticipated cost for this improvement project, which
contains 2,526 lineal feet of 5 -foot wide sidewalk, is
approximately $39,000, including not only construction but
miscellaneous removals and construction inspection by the
City. The anticipated cost per lineal foot of sidewalk is
$15.45. Under our current policy, 258 or $3.86 per lineal
foot would be assessed to the property owners. There are,
however, only 2,166 lineal feet of assessable sidewalk on this
project, which increased the cost per lineal foot of
assessable sidewalk to $18.02. This figure times the 258
assessable in $4.51 par lineal foot. This is the price that
was sent to affected property owners in the public hearing
notice.
Since the bids for this project are not due until Tuesday,
May 26, we do not have the revised figura for you. It will be
presented during the public hearing at the meeting Tuesday
evening.
Since no action is necessary during the public hearing other
than to take testimony from citizens, no alternatives are
provided for this item. Council may take action regarding the
ordering of the improvement, reduction of the improvement, or
changing the improvemont under item 16, "Consideration of bide
for sidewalk improvement 91SW-1."
3
BID TABULATION
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 91SW-1
Tuesday, May 28, 1991 - 10:00 a.m.
Contractor ' Base Bid "A" Alternate Bid "B" Total A + B Bid Bond
Ferber, Inc.
1707 Hillcrest Rd.
St. Cloud, MN 56303
251-4072
HCH Construction
Route 3, Box 242
Monticello, MN 55362
295-3292
295-5398
Mr. Joe Johnson
12008 Oregon Circle
Champlin, MN 55316
Sharp Lawns,
Landacaping, 6
Grounds Maintenance
11335 Magnolia St. NW
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
754-3881
Bruce Dalboc Const.
Route 1, Box 45
Maple Lake, MN 55358
963-3667
Marilyn DoKowskl
Route 4, Box 308A
Monticello, MN 55362
878-2845
BID TABULATION
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 91SW-1
Tuesday, May 28, 1991 - 10:00 a.m.
Page 2
Contractor Base Bid "A" Alternate Bid "B" Total A + B Bid Bond
Dan Nicholas $23,963.50 $6,113.55 $30,077.05 X
DNCON, Inc.
9870 - 161st St. W
Lakeville, MN 55044
Bill Mettenburg 532,032.25• 52,816.95• 534,849.20• Bank Money
1903 Summit Drive Order
St. Cloud, MN 56303
255-9761
Marvin Totz
,rotz Brothers
3452 Roosevelt Rd.
St. Cloud, MN 56301
251-5699
Donnie Arrigoni
Arrigoni Brothers
817 Vandalia St.
St. Paul, MN 55114
•CORRECTED AFTER EXTENSION OF UNIT PRICES.
Ail
)SID
14
S'Zo
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
6. Consideration of a resolution acceptinq bids and award of
contract for Sidewalk Improvement Project 91SW-1. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the previous meeting we discussed the sidewalk improvements
to connect the City's westerly sidewalk from its location at
4th and Maple to the existing sidewalk on Minnesota Street
near the old 7th Street right-of-way. The project also
includes sidewalk on Walnut Street from the library to the
mall and on 7th Street from Walnut to Pine.
The bids for the sidewalk project are due at 10:00 a.m.,
Tuesday, May 28. A copy of the bid tabulation will be
available for Tuesday evening's meeting.
The plans and specifications include not only new sidewalk
construction labeled "Base Bid A" but also sidewalk repairs on
our existing sidewalk grid system, which is labeled
"Additional Bid B." We are expecting the bids to come in
around $33,600 for the new construction and around $3,300 for
the repairs to sidewalks on the grid. This brings the total
estimated bid price to $36,600. These prices, of course, do
not include the City's cost for removals, blacktop patching,
and inspection.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative is to award Project 91SW-1,
including the new construction and the repairs to
existing sidewalks on the grid, to the lowest responsible
bidder.
2. The second alternative would be to award the project but
reduce the quantity of new sidewalk. It would be
possible to delete some smaller sections of new sidewalk
without the requirement to reject all the bids. We could
negotiate with the lowest responsible bidder.
3. The third alternative would be to reject the bids in
their entirety, including the repairs to existing
sidowalks on the grid; but this would require us to
obtain quotes from contractors, and the small amount of
work would be costly on a por unit basis.
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
If the bids are within budget constraints of $45,000,
including all costs, and if after the public hearing the
Council still wishes to follow our comprehensive sidewalk
improvement plans, including abatement of unsafe sidewalks,
City staff recommends that the Council adopt alternative 41
and award the project to the lowest responsible bidder.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of resolution for adoption; Please refer to agenda Item
concerning sidewalks on 5/13/91.
RESOLUTION 91 -
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND
ACCEPTING BID
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT SW91-1
WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted May 13, 1991,
fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed improvement of
sidewalks along Maple, Minnesota, 6th, 7th, and Walnut Streets; and
WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published notice of
the hearing was given, and the hearing was held on the 28th day of
May, 1991, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an
opportunity to be heard thereon; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the Improvement
of the sidewalks, bide were received, opened, and tabulated
according to law, and the following bids were received complying
with the advertisement:
and WHEREAS, it appears that
of is the lowest responsible bidder.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO,
MINNESOTA:
1. Such sidewalk improvements are hereby ordered as
proposed.
2. The Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized
and directed to enter into a contract with
for the improvement of
sidewalks along Maple, Minnesota, 6th, 7th, and Walnut
Streets according to the plans and specifications
therefore approved by the City Council and on file with
the City Administrator.
3. The City Administrator Is hereby authorized and directed
to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with
their bids, except that the deposits of the successful
bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until
a contract has been signed.
Adopted this 28th day of May, 1991.
Mayor
City Administrator
v
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
7• Consideration of reviewing, evaluations of Rroperties discussed
at the Board of Review --City Assessor. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Based on the Council's action at the May 8 Board of Review,
Peggy Stencil, City Assessor, will be at the meeting Tuesday
to review with the Council the 11 residential and 6 commercial
properties the Board asked her to re-evaluate. The Board of
Review has 20 days in which to consider any adjustments to the
evaluations; and after the Council has had an opportunity to
review each property with the Assessor, the Council will need
to take action Tuesday night to meet the deadline.
Peggy is currently in the process of finishing up her review
of these parcels; and as such, no additional information is
being provided with the agenda at this time but will be
presented by Peggy at the meeting.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
I . Council can adjust each property based on the
recommendation of the assessor.
2. Council can determine that no adjustments are warranted.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
None at this time.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None,
Sy �. Y
1J �( f pes
e- -7:5-- GU`s
C5 IV
6
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
Consideration of authorizing leqal action to remove
construction eguipment illegally stored on property located in
a PZM zoninq district. (J.O.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As you have probably noticed, a large collection of
construction equipment related to the asphalt paving process
is being stored on property along Highway 75 across from
Bondhus Corporation. Equipment repair, oil changing, and
vehicle sales are also being conducted at the site. The site
is zoned for PZM uses, and in the PZM zoning district there is
no provision for outside storage of construction equipment.
City staff has taken the initiative to bring this item before
Council because the activity is in violation of the ordinance
and because the City has received complaints regarding the
presence of the construction equipment at one of the major
entrances to the city.
City staff discussed this matter with Floyd Kruse, the
property owner, and Lee Larson, the owner of the equipment.
Larson indicated that he needs 60 days to relocate the
equipment to another site.
Floyd Kruse indicated that he has allowed the equipment to be
stored there because he was informed by the Building Inspector
some time ago that it would be okay to locate a single truck
and trailer on the site; and because the Building Inspector
allowed placement of a single small storage shed on the site,
apparently Kruse and Larson interpreted this approval as the
okay to store numerous pieces of construction equipment.
Obviously, the Building Inspoctor's informal approval of a
short-term use of the property for parking of a truck did not
constitute an approval to place numerous construction vehicles
on the site.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Motion to authorize City staff to take legal action to
force removal of equipment stored illegally on a site
located in a PZM zone. Action is to be taken if the
equipment is not removed within 60 days.
Under this alternative, Council would grant the property
owner time necessary to find another parking spot for the
construction equipment. As was noted oarlior, the
Building Inspector did provide a limited approval
allowing storage of a single vehicle at the site. If
Council is concerned that this approval did somehow cause
Kruse and Larson to think that numerous vehicles could be
parked on the site, then Council may wish to grant Larson
60 days to find a now place to park his equipment.
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
Mr. Larson did indicate that he would be able to relocate
the equipment in 60 days. if he is true to his word, the
City may save legal expenses associated with taking legal
action sooner. If Council selects this option, we should
get Larson's 60 -day commitment to remove the equipment in
writing.
Motion to authorize staff to take legal action if the
equipment is not removed within 15 days.
Under this alternative, Council could take the position
that the presence of the vehicles at this site is in
violation of the ordinance, and there is no reason to
delay enforcement; therefore, the City should take legal
action immediately.
3. Encourage the contractor to apply for a zoning ordinance
amendment which would allow the placement of vehicles at
this location.
If Council feels that the storage of vehicles at this
location does not present a blighting influence or would
not create a problem in other PZM areas in town, then the
applicant should be encouraged to obtain a zoning
ordinance dioundment which would allow the present use of
the property to continue. This does not appear to be a
feasible option, as to allow vehicles to be stored at
this site would open the door to similar uses in other
PZM areas.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that City Council give Kruse/Larson 60 days
to remove the equipment from the site. It is our view that
the storage of construction oquipmont in the PZM zone should
not be allowed; however, requiring the immediate removal of
the equipment may not be nocessary, as the presence of the
vehicles at the site does not create a health and safety
problem. Also, there is evidence that the Building Inspector
did not completely discourage the use of this site for storage
of equipment; therefore, we may have led the applicant to
bellevo that this property could be used for storage of
vehicles. Finally, the applicant has Indicated that he would
bo willing and able to remove tho equlpmont in 60 days. If
the applicant is true to his word, the City can save legal
oxponsos associated with taking legal action immodiatoly.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Please rofor to your zoning ordinance if you would like more tie
�1 information on uses allowod in the PZM zona. ((;;
��'� til : U� ' � S.► ��V7."
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
9. Consideration of bids and award of annual sealcoatinq project.
(J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As stated at the previous meeting, this year's sealcoatinq
project involves the eastern portion of the core city. This
would be east of Highway 25 up to and including Dayton Street.
River Street would be done from Highway 25 to the hospital
property, as well as 3rd Street and 4th Street and those side
streets between River Street and the Burlington Northern
Railroad. This area contains 76,239 square yards of street
surface and was last sealcoated in 1983. The estimated cost
for the project is $45,000. The 1991 budget is for $47,500.
The bide are due in on Tuesday, May 28. we will have a bid
tabulation for review at the Council meeting.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to award the 1991
sealcoatinq project to the lowest responsible bidder,
providing the bide are within budget constraints.
2. The second alternative, should the sealcoatinq project
costs exceed the budget, would be to reduce the amount of
sealcoating done this year or to transfer the additional
funds needed from another source.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation that, should the bids come in within
budget, the City Council award the project as outlined in
alternative Y1.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Please refer to the Council agenda itom on May 13, 1991.
9
BID TABULATION
SEALCOATING AND APPURTENANT WORK
PROJECT SC 91-1
Tuesday, May 28, 1991 - 2:00 p.m.
Item I:
Base Bid "A"
Unit
Contractor Price Total
Bituminous Roadways, Inc. 51.090 $38,947.62
2825 Cedar Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55407
Astoch Corporation 50.00
PO Box 1025
St. Cloud, MN 56302
Allied Blacktop, Inc. 49.9E
10503 - 89th Avenue North
Maple Grove, MN 55369
MCBroom Construction, Inc.
On the Mill Pond
Now London, MN 56273
Attn: Bruce
Caldwell Asphalt Co. 52.2E
24060 - 175th
Nawlck, MN
•CORRECTED BID DUE TO EXTENSION OF UNIT PRICES.
$38,950.51•
$38,119.50
Item II:
Alternate Bid
Unit Bid
Price Total Bond
44.40 $33,851.62 X
$33,850.12 X
440 $33,545.16 X
$38,043.26 45.80 $34,917.46 X
$39,796.76 48.20 $36,747.20 X
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
to. Consideration of reviewinq first quarter liquor store report.
(R.W.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Enclosed with the agenda is a copy of the first quarter
financial statement for the liquor store compared to the first
quarter of 1990. Joe Hartman will be in attendance at the
Council meeting to review the statement along with myself.
Sales for the first quarter were up $22,645, or approximately
9.38, over the first quarter of 1990. The resulting gross
profit also increased $14,600, or 248, over the same period
last year. While these percentages look good, there will be
an adjustment to these figures because of a new federal tax
that was enacted January 1 that is payable by June 30, 1991.
In light of the tax increase, the sales reflect the collection
of the additional taxes estimated at $4,000 to $6,000; but the
actual tax figure has not yet been calculated and has not been
included in the cost of sales figure. As a result, I feel the
gross profit is over -stated somewhat at 27.888 gross profit
but will still be close to 268 after the tax is paid.
Expenses for salaries and benefits increased approximately
$4,200 over last year, which amounts for all of the increase
in total operating expenses. The total operating income is
shown as $34,202 for the quarter, or 12.898 of sales.
Typically we are in the 98 to 108 category; and even after
adjusting for the federal taxes that have to be paid, this
figure should still be above 108. Another factor which Is
attributable to the larger gross profit percentage the first
quarter is that Joe had a good inventory of merchandise bought
at a lower price at the and of 1990. with the overall pricing
structure increased slightly in 1991, this may account for the
above-average gross profit percentages. Regardless, the
operating income is a respectable figure considering our first
quartor is usually tho lowest for us on an annual basis.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
Accopt the report as prosented.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of financial statemont.
10
MONTICELLO MUNICIPAL LIQUOR
REVENUE AND EXPENSES
MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE
COMPARISON FOR THE
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1990 AND 1991
1990 1991
YEAR-TO-DATE YEAR-TO-DATE
AMOUNT AMOUNT
OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES
Professional services (audit)
$ 165
Communication
194
Travel -Conference -Schools
40
Advertising
1,160
Insurance, General
3,928
Utilities, Electrical
1,834
Utilities, Heating
493
Utilities, S S W
44
Maintenance of Equipment
1,814
Maintenance of Building
531
Taxed and Liconocs
18
Garbage
578
Depr.--Acquired Assets
3,528
TOTAL OTHER SERVICES
AND CHARGES
$14,327 5.90%
TOTAL GENERAL 6
ADMIN. EXPENSES
TOTAL OPERATING INCOME
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSES)
Interest Income
Cash Long/Short
TOTAL OTHER INCOME (EXPENSES)
NET INCOME
$35,572 14.65%
$23,819 9.81%
$11,394
(149)
$11,245 4.63%
$35,064 14.44%
$ -0-
195
86
1,754
3,984
1,192
562
96
2,053
176
-0-
604
3,082
$13,784 5.19%
$39,787 14.99%
$34,202 12.89%
$13,429
4
$13,433 5.06%
$47,635 17.95%
MONTICELLO MUNICIPAL LIQUOR
REVENUE AND EXPENSES
MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE
COMPARISON FOR THE
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1990 AND 1991
m
1990
1991
YEAR-TO-DATE
YEAR-TO-DATE
AMOUNT
AMOUNT
SALES
Liquor
$ 71,685
29.53%
S 74,455
28.05%
Beer
136,718
56.32%
153,861
57.97%
Wine
26,723
11.01%
30,537
11.51%
Other Merchandise
7,318
3.02%
6,286
2.37%
Misc. Non -Taxable Sales
328
.13%
338
(.13%)
Discounts
(15)(
01%)
(75)
TOTAL SALES
$242,757
100.00%
$265,402
100.00%
COST OF GOODS SOLD $(183,366)
75.53%
S 191,413
72.12%
GROSS PROFIT
S 59,391
24.47%
$ 73,989
27.88%
GENERAL AND ADMIN. EXPENSES
PERSONAL SERVICES
Salaries
$18,476
$19,967
PERA
853
847
Insurance, Med. b Life
1,999
2,240
Social Security
1,486
1,449
Unomployment Benefits
-0-
20
TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES
$20,022
8.25%
$24,523
9.24%
SUPPLIES
Office Supplies
5 63
$373
Gen. Operating Supplies
1,160
1,107
TOTAL SUPPLIES
$1,223
.50%
$1,480
.56%
m
MONTICELLO MUNICIPAL LIQUOR
BALANCE SHEET
MARCH 31, 1991
Current Assets
Cash $202,039
Change Fund 1,500
Investments 487,007
AIR - NSF Checks 203
Inventory 160,674
Prepaid Insurance 13,162
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS S 864,585
Fixed Assets
Land 6 Parking Lot $ 46,591
Buildings 185,445
Furniture 6 Equipment 64,292
Leas: Accumulated Depreciation (155,615)
TOTAL FIXED ASSETS S 140,713
TOTAL ASSETS $1,005,298
i
Liabilities
Accounts Payable S 49,429
Salaries Payable 1,680
Accrued Vacation/Sick Leave 5,471
Other Accrued Expenses 2,260
TOTAL LIABILITIES
Fund Balance
Retained Earnings 1/1/91 5898,823
Add'l Retained Earnings --1st Qtr 47,635
TOTAL FUND BALANCE
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE
$ 58,840
$ 946,458
$1,005,298
MONTICELLO MUNICIPAL LIQUOR
GROSS PROFIT BY PRODUCT
FOR 1ST QUARTER 1990 AND 1991
MARCH 31, 1990 MARCH 31, 1991
Amount % Amount %
Sales
$71,685.00
$74,455.00
100.00
(Liquor
Discounts
$(15.00)
(0.02)
$(75.00)
(Cost of Sales -Liquor
$52,958.00
73.88
$50.064.00
67.31
IGROSS PROFIT
$18,712.00
26.1
$24,316.00
32.69
IBeer Sales
$136.718.00
$153.861.00
100.00
(Cost of Sales -Beer
$108.656.00
79.47 I
$116,351.00
75.62
PROFIT
$28,062.00 I
20.53
$37,510.00
24.38
iGROSS
Wine Sales
$26,723.00
$30,537.00
100.00
(Cost of Sales -Wine
$13,959.00
52.23
$18,245.00
59.75
GROSS PROFIT
$12.764.00
47.77
$12,292.00
40.25
Misc. Sales
$7,316.00
I
$6.286.00
100.00
lCost of Sales -Mist.
$6.600.00
90.19
$5,528.00
87.94
PROFIT
$718.00
9.81 I
$758.00 I
12.06
(GROSS
Misc.-Non-Taxable Sales
$328.00
$338.00 I
100.00
(Cost of Sales -Mise. NT
$50.00
15.24$1
96.00 I
57.99
GROSS PROFIT
84,78 ._..
$142 00
a2.01
_. .
ITOT ASALES
$242,75 7.00
100
$285,4028.00
00
100.00
COST OF SALES
$182,223.00
75.06
$190.384.00
71.73
(TOTAL
TOTAL FREIGHT COST
$1,143.00
0.47
$1,
.39
(TOTAL GROSS PROFIT
$59,391.00
-
2a_47 I
,029.00
$73 9 89.00
_ -
27.86
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
Consideration of renting or demolition of the recently
acquired house adjacent to City Hall. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Last fall, the City purchased the Cole property near City Hall
for $50,000 to allow for future building expansion and/or
parking requirement needs. At the time of the purchase, the
Council chose to postpone a decision regarding possible rental
of the dwelling until this spring to determine whether the
building would be demolished for parking lot and/or building
expansion needs. The property was winterized, and the garage
was utilized by the public works department for storage in the
meantime.
Since the acquisition, a few people have inquired as to the
possibility of renting the structure but were informed that it
was not available for rent until a decision was made whether
the structure would have to be removed for parking lot
expansion. As part of our 1991 budget, we budgeted $7,500 for
the purpose of expanding the City Hall parking lot, which may
or may not encroach on this property. Related to the question
of whether or not to rent the house is the question of where
the parking lot expansion should occur. Assuming City Hall is
ever expanded, it appears likely that any expansion will occur
to the west toward Red's Mobil. Under this assumption, it
would be reasonable to assume the parking lot can be expanded
by 15-20 parking spaces by going directly south of the
existing parking lot. A number of options for the parking lot
expansion can be explored, some of which would not require our
rental properties to be removed. in all likelihood, the
easiest expansion would require one or both of our rental
dwellings to be demolished. while it doesn't appear that the
Colo house would immediately need to be removed unless we are
trying to create an access point to our parking lot from 3rd
Street, this dwelling does need approximately $5,900 in
estimated repairs if we should decide to become landlords.
The Public Works Director, Building Inspector, and Street
Superintendent inspected the Cole property and made up a list
of house repair items that should be accomplished if the
Council chooses to rent the dwelling rather than demolish.
Some of the suggested repairs are not necessarily life or
safety hazards but are included in the potential coat, as I
assumo the City does not want to be considered a slumlord.
Based on the estimated cost of approximately $6,000, it is
anticipated the City would have to rent this dwelling for at
least two years to recapture our investment before we would
see any return on the Improvements. Given the fact that the
City pays real estate taxes equal to 30% of our rental income,
we could expect to not approximately $3,500 per year in rental
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
income. This also assumes that we do not experience any other
major repair items within the next two years. If it is
determined that an access point to 3rd Street is not a
necessity at this time, nor that the parking lot needs to be
placed on the Cole property, it is recommended that we do not
consider renting the facility unless we anticipate it being
available for more than two years before demolition.
The City Hall parking lot could be expanded to the south
requiring the removal of our previously owned rental dwelling,
and City Hall could even see an expansion addition to the west
that would not require this Cole property to be demolished at
this time. On the other hand, if rental is only a shorter
term proposition, it is recommended the house be removed at
this time before we invest $6,000 to make it rentable.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Council could determine that any parking lot expansion
and/or future building expansion of City Hall would not
require immediate removal of the Cole dwelling and
authorize the staff to invest approximately $6,000 in
renovations and place the property for rent.
Under this alternative, we should be planning on renting
the property for at least two years to just recapture our
improvement cost.
2. Determine that it is not feasible to renovate the
structure for rent and instruct staff to develop
demolition specifications for removal.
At this time, it is recommended that the garage structure
remain, as it can be utilized by the public works
department for storage of park and lawn equipment; but
removal of the structure would allow for both parking lot
expansion and/or an access to 3rd Street to be developed
from our parking lot.
3. Continue to leave the home as is until it is determined
whether a parking lot expansion plan can be developed
without utilizing the property.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
While it appears that the home does not have to be removed to
allow for expansion of the parking lot or any immediate
building expansion needs, the $6,000 estimated repair cost
doesn't make it attractive to rent the property unless the
City is committed to ranting for two or more years at a
minimum. In all likelihood, if our parking lot is expanded
12
Council Agenda - 5/28/41
this summer, it may require the removal of our previously
owned rental dwelling (the Blanc house); but it may also be
beneficial to have an access to 3rd Street by removing the
Cole house also. Because we do not know what additional cost
or maintenance items may be needed on this home in the future,
the staff is somewhat uncomfortable with spending $6,000
remodeling this structure just to make it rentable for a few
years. Since we purchased the property for parking lot,
access, and building expansion needs, it may be beat to just
demolish the home and prepare the site for this purpose.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Map showing house in question; List of recommended repairs
before renting.
q �
f(j ( (i8 h b {� j, , T �
7119C1f aa�
13
—1 1 /♦ /
— --�—C! "proPf,ery,
/Jeau,aEp t3y t,}v
2,457 Fr411
EE�•�Yu rAL Pia?Ear y
pREV.ousfy lqca""-£o
gy c,�y
J�
0
CODE CORRECTION ITEMS
1. Fire stop the furnace vent pipe at: floor.
2. Frame and sheetrock around furnace vent pipe in kitchen area.
3. Install handrail on stairs leading to the second floor of the
house.
4. Install two electric smoke detectors, one on the main floor
and one on the second floor of tho house.
5. Install an exterior set of steps In front of the dining room
atrium door.
6. Complete exterior railing on the exterior walkway on the west
and south sides of the house.
7. Install NO -HUB rubber gasketed fitting where ABS waste pipe
meets the PVC waste pipe.
8. Install bathroom vent fan in the main floor bathroom.
9. Sheetrock walls and ceiling in main floor bathroom.
r 10. Complete kitchen cabinet countertop backsplash.
COLE HOUSE REPAIRS
I.
Water Service
Change galvanized to copper a lower (100 ft
long) E 800
II.
Plumbinq
Lower bathroom PVC 6 black plastic mix
$ 75
III.
First Floor
1. Kitchen:
Threshold, floor repair,
cabinet doors 6 drawers,
finish tape, paint, 6 trim
$
275
2. Bathroom:
Repair electrical, sheetrock,
tape & paint, door hardware,
exhaust fan
$
650
3. Living Room:
Misc. electrical repair,
replace smoke detector,
paint, repair ceiling,
repair roof leak
$
300
4. Bedroom/Den:
Door hardware, closet repair,
wall trim, wall taping repair
and paint
$
275
5. Entryway:
Tape 6 paint, door paint
t 150
TOTAL FIRST FLOOR:
$1,650
IV.
Second Floor
1. Bathroom:
Insulate wall to attic
$
150
2. NW Bedroom:
Floor/wall trim, coiling
tile, door trim, 6 paint
3
300
3. Hallway:
Ceiling repair
$
35
Handrail: install, stain,
and finish
$
65
0/1
V.
VI.
COLE HOUSE REPAIRS
Page 2
4. SW Bedroom:
Paint, closet hardware,
door trim
S 175
5. Smoke detector replacement
$ 30
TOTAL SECOND FLOOR:
Exterior
1. Paint trim 6 misc.
$ 250
2. Paint house
1,500
3. Deck code repair
300
4. Step on east (relocate faucet)
400
5. Establish lawn (NE)
200
TOTAL EXTERIOR:
Appliances
1. Dish washer
$ ?
2. Stove
?
3. Refrigerator
?
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST:
$ 755
$2,650
$5,930
Using summer help where possible, professional on plumbing and
electrical and house painting.
c
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
12. Consideration of grantinq annual approval for municipal
licenses. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
In the past you have renewed the licenses listed below in a
single motion. I believe that the motion has been a contingent
motion such that licenses are approved depending upon successful
completion of the application, approval at the state level, etc.
The licenses submitted for your consideration are as follows:
Intoxicatinq Liquor, On -sale (fee $3,750)
1. Monticello Liquor, Inc.
2. Silver Fox
3. Joyner's Lanes
® _:_yy�,]--Comfort Inn
Intoxicatinq Liquor, On -sale. Sunday (fee $200 --set by Statute)
Renewals
1. Monticello Liquor, Inc.
2. Silver Fox
3. Joyner's Lanes
4. VFW Club
5. American Legion Club
6. Comfort Inn
Non -intoxicating Malt, On -sale (fee $275)
1. Rod and Gun
2. Pizza Factory
3. Country Club
Non -intoxicating Malt, Off -sale (fee $75)
Ronewals J
1. Monticello Liquor d�
2. Riverroad Plaza
3. Maus Foods (1 11
4. River Terrace
5. Tom Thumb
6. Holiday S
7. Plaza Car Wash
14
E
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
Wine/3.2 Beer Combination, On -sale (fee $500)
Renewal
1. Dino's Deli
Set-up License (fee $275)
1. Country Club
2. Rod and Gun
Club Licenses (fee --set by Statute based on membership)
1. VFW --$500
2. American Legion --$650
Binqo, Temporary, (fee $20)
1. St. Henry's Fall Festival
Gamblinq, Temporary ($20 per device)
1. St. Henry's Fall Festival
2. Rod and Gun Club --Steak Fries in August
A single motion approving these licenses should read similar to,
"I move that the following licenses be approved effective
July 1, 1991."
There Is no supporting data for this item.
15
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
Consideration of a resolution requesting funding for a Wright
County Overall Economic Development Plan. (R.W.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
For the past several years, the Wright County Mayors
Association and county banking institutions have lobbied the
Wright County Board of Commissioners to become more involved
in developing a county -wide economic development program. The
Wright County Board of Commissioners has recently tabled any
action on developing a plan due to budget cuts as the stated
reason for denial of developing a plan. The County Mayors
Association has requested each city consider committing $500
as a contribution to the County Board to help start
Implementing a development plan. The hope is that if all
cities contributed $500 each, the County would have $7,500
available to encourage the County Commissioners to proceed
with the preparation of a plan.
Since larger cities within the county, including Monticello,
have already developed economic programs to attract industries
and have established economic incentives such as tax increment
financing and revolving loan funds, a county -wide economic
development program may at first glance not be that beneficial
to Monticello. It is assumed that a county -wide economic
development plan may be more beneficial for smaller
communities who do not have the resources or the staff
available to promote industrial growth, but I do believe that
the City of Monticello could see some spin-off advantages from
a county -wide program. While the City may not see direct
benefits, industries and businesses that are attracted to
Wright County because of a county -wide economic development
promotion may then look further into communities within the
county to see what individual cities have to offer. At that
point, the City of Monticello would be an attractive location
in that we have available additional programs such as our
revolving loan fund and tax increment financing programs,
which will still make us very competitive. Additionally,
additional Industrial growth within the county, no matter
where it's located, will ultimately benefit our citizens.
Mayor Maus may have somo additional comments at Tuesday
night's mooting as our representative of the Wright County
Mayors Association. I would suggest that if the Council is
favorable to committing $500 toward the development of a
county-wldo plan, you may want to make it contingent upon all
cities within Wright County committing a similar amount of
funding.
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt the resolution committing $500 in funding toward
the development of a Wright County economic development
plan.
2. Do not support City involvement at this time.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
While I do not see a county -wide economic development program
being a major benefit to the City of Monticello, a county -wide
plan could stimulate industrial prospects for the county at
which time I think an industry would take a good look at
Monticello. While the county government should have the funds
available to prepare a county -wide program, it doesn't appear
that the County Board will initiate such a program without
additional encouragement from all local cities. If all Wright
County cities commit to a $500 contribution, I would recommend
the City of Monticello do likewise.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of proposed resolution; Copy of letter from Wright County
Mayors Association.
Fi �..�""� w a F �t T� •'✓�3y� N I Dyy
M
c
17
r.)CIS
r '
L:
May 2, 1991
Dear Mayors:
RIGHT
QOUNTY
MAYORS ASSOCIATION
For several years the Mayors Association and bunking community has
lobbied the Wright County Pnard of Commissioners to become more involved
with cities and townships to promote and sponsor economic development
efforts.
In March the Wright Ccunty Mayors Association adopted a resolution
requesting the Wright County Hoard of Commissioners to authorize the
preparation of an Overall Economic Development Plan (OEDP).
On April 16th the Wrigl.t County Board of Commissioners reviewed the
resolution. Several city officials and bank representatives were in
attendance at the Commissioners meeting. After a brief discussion, the
Commissioners chose to table the matter of theOEDP. Stating the
reasons for this decision was based on the budget cuts that they are
being faced with. As we all are well aware of, we are all facing budget
cuts, however this does not stop the want and demand of services from
our residents. With an Overall Economic Development Plan cities and
townships would have a greater ability to seek state and federal monies
for such things as infraatructures, indust.rial/commercial development,
public improvements, etc. Thus, an OEDP greatly benefits all entitles
as growth brings in greater tax base and benefits for all.
Since the Wright County Commissioners meeting, t have spoken with
several city and banking officials. The consensus Is that preparation
of the Overall Economic Development Plan for Wright County will agj,
occur without a financial commitment by each city to share the cost.
Therefore, I am now requesting support by cities in Wright County, in
the amount of $500.00 each. As we are well aware of the fact that all
entities will be losing aid from the State and will therefore be
scrutinizing budgets, the suggested amount hopefully does not create a
burden to any city. Participation by all cities will total $7,500.00,
which would show and encourage Wright County Commissioners into a
partnership with the Mayors Association to proceed with the preparation
and completion of a plan in 1991.
/3
Attached you will find a sample resolution that has been prepared for
cities to review. If ,you are in agreement with this issue, and are in
support of this recommendation I urge yon to pass the attached
resolution and forward the resolution to myself, Mayor Maxine Ladda,
P.O. Box 278, Hanover, MN 55331.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this issue you may
contact either myself at 497-2564, or Mayor Melvin Swendra of Cokato at
286-5556.
Thank you for your support.
Sincerely,
Maxine Ladda
Mayor of Hanover
Chairperson of Wright County mayors Association
slv
enclosure
9
SAMPLE RESOLUTION
Requating Funding for a Wright County
Overall Economic Development Plan (OEDP)
WHEREAS, the Wright County Mayors Association has presented the Wright County
Board of Commissioners with a resolution requesting the preparation of an
Uverall Economic Development Plan (OEDP), however the Wright County Board of
Commissioners has chosen to table the Batter of the OEDP, due to budget cuts
which are being faced by all entities of government.
WHEREAS, the Wright County Mayors Association feels very strong on this issue
that a OEDP will benefit all entities within Wright County, as it is an
essential resource for qualifying for future state and federal funding for
purposes of infrastructure, public improvements and development projects.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Wright County Mayors Association is asking
that the government entities within Wright County look at the benefit that
they would receive from an OEDP, and consider a proposal from the Mayors
Association to contribute to Wright County for the cost of an OEDP.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of
does hereby agree with the Wright County Mayors Association that an Overall
Economic Development Plan would benefit the City, and does hereby agree to
contribute to Wright County the amount of $500.00, to be designated for the
sole purpose of the implementation of the Overall Economic Development Plan
for Wright County.
The following Council members voted in favor:
The following Council members voted against or abstained:
Whereupon the motion was declared duly passes and executed.
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
14. Consideration of bids and award of contract for purchase of,
125 kW emergency qenerator. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As presented at the last meeting, there is a need for an
emergency generator within the water system and the sewer
collection system. The specifications were so prepared as to
allow the generator to be housed in pump house N3 near the
water reservoir in the industrial park. From this location,
the unit could power well 43 or two of the booster pumps in
the reservoir and the lift station located nearby. The unit
Is mounted on a trailer so it could be taken to any of the
other lift stations within the community.
It's interesting to note that last week while we were
operating only on the 50,000 gallon old water tower, yet
another power failure occurred in the industrial park which
knocked out well Y3, well i4, all of the booster pumps, and
the lift station near the reservoir. The outage was caused by
a contractor cutting a cable. Luckily, no emergencies
occurred during that period of time which required the water
in the reservoir, as there would have been no way to retrieve
it without the new generator.
The bids are due Tuesday, May 28, and we will have a
tabulation available for the meeting. As previously
indicated, we placed $35,000 in the budget for this purchase.
Rick has indicated, however, that it may be bettor to use the
remaining bond funds intended for the original water
improvement to purchase the generator.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
The first alternative would be to award a contract for
the purchase of a generator after considering price,
equipment features, service, and delivery time.
The second alternative would be not to purchase a
generator at this time.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff is anticipating that the bids will come in near the
$35,000 estimate and that at least two or more of the machines
will moot our requirements as outlined in alternative /1.
Additional information will be presented at the meeting.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Please rofer to the generator agenda itom on May 13.
+s
BID TABULATION
125 kW PORTABLE POWER GENERATOR
Tuesday, May 28, 1991 - 10:00 a.m.
Bidder Name
Bid Amount
Make 6 Model
Delivery Bid Bond
Ziegler Power Systems
$42,759
125 kW Cat.
90 days X
901 West 94th Street
Model 3304T
Minneapolis, MN 55420
Flaherty Equip. Corp.
750 First Street SW
Now Brighton, MN 55112
Interstate Detroit
Diesel Inc.
2501 East 80th St.
Minneapolis, MN 55425
Cummins Diesel
$41,876•
125 DGEA
120 days X
Sales Inc.
Cummins/Onan
2690 Cleveland Avo. N.
PO Box 64576
St. Paul, MN 55164-0578
*FOUR EXCEPTIONS NOTED TO BID SPECIFICATIONS. ESTIMATE COST :100+
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
14A. Consideration of reaffirminq our request for a signal to be
installed at County Road 118 and County Road 75 intersection.
(R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As part of the County Road 39 realignment and improvement
project at the intersection of County Road 75 near Riverroad
Plaza, the City and the County installed the underground
portion for a future traffic signal at this location. As part
of our 1991 budget, we included $35,000 for the City's share
of the anticipated cost of this signal construction. The
balance of the project is intended to be paid for by the
County and state aid funds.
The Wright County Highway Department recently completed
another traffic count for this intersection; and although we
are extremely close, the count apparently still does not meet
state warrants for a signal construction. Mr. Ron Bray,
Traffic Engineer for OSM, feels that there is still a good
likelihood this project will be funded by the state; and there
are a number of alternatives they are going to pursue in an
attempt to get this project funded this year. At this point,
the City Council will need to adopt a resolution reaffirming
our desire to have this signal installed for our City Engineer
and County Highway Department representatives to pursue this
signal installation.
Bret Weiss of OSM will provide additional information at the
Council meeting regarding the traffic counts and the process
from here on.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Adopt a resolution reaffirming our desire to have the
signal installed.
2. Do not adopt a resolution.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Since we are extremely close to meeting the state warrants for
this traffic signal installation, this resolution will
eventually be needed to receive state and county funding
assistance. while there are no guarantees, we will be
attempting to convince the state that the signal installation t
is warranted at this time.
D. SUPPORTING DATA: 51' nnJ�("1 / lv�l
Copy of resolution proposed. �/I/ k-
1aA
RESOLUTION 91 -
RESOLUTION REQUESTING WRIGHT COUNTY HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
TO INSTALL A TRAFFIC ACTUATED SIGNAL CONTROL SYSTEM
AT THE INTERSECTION OF CSAH 75,
CSAR 39, AND COUNTY ROAD 118
WHEREAS, the traffic on CSAH 75 along with CSAH 39 and County
Road 118 justifies the installation of a traffic actuated signal
control system; and
WHEREAS, traffic has increased substantially in recent years; and
WHEREAS, increased traffic levels on weekends (Friday through
Monday) are now consistent throughout the year; and
WHEREAS, inadequate traffic gaps for entering CSAH 75 traffic flow
are causing substantial side street delay; and
WHEREAS, motorists are taking substantial risk In entering the high
speed traffic on CSAH 75; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes that Wright County has improved the
intersection geometrics to the extent practicable; and
WHEREAS, the City agrees to participate in the cost of the system
in accordance with Wright County funding policies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THAT the City of Monticello
requests that a traffic actuated signal control system be installed
at the intersection of CSAH 75, CSAH 39; and County Road 118 in
1991.
Passed by the City Council this 28th day of May, 1991.
Mayor
City Administrator
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
15. Consideration of establishing a defined contribution plan for
elected officials. (R.W.)
REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
While this item does not require a formal Council action at
Tuesday night's meeting, the information presented in the
agenda should be noted by the Council and discussed, as it
pertains to elected government officials (Mayor and Council
members). Each elected official will have the opportunity to
make their own choice on establishing a defined contribution
plan or contributing to social security.
The Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1990 states that public
employees not participating in a public retirement plan will
be required to pay full social security taxes of 7.65% of
earnings effective July 1, 1991. Currently, Council members
have not been required to participate in the state's public
retirement plan (PERA). As a result, if a retirement plan is
not elected by the Council members, all of you will be subject
to the 7.658 social security deduction from your monthly
compensation. For those of you who have been elected to
office after April 1, 1986, you may have noticed that the City
has been required to withhold 1.45% for medicaid, which is
part of the normal social security tax. This amount will
continue for those individuals, and an additional 6.28 for
social security taxes will start July 1 if elected officials
do not participate in a defined contribution plan that is
available from PERA.
In light of the 1990 federal law, the PERA retirement system
has set up a program that will allow elected officials to
enroll in a defined contribution pian in lieu of contributing
to social security. This program allows elected officials to
contribute 58 of their compensation to PERA and requires the
employer (City) to match the 54 contribution. This option
allows officials to be excluded from contributing the 6.28 to
social security. The defined contribution plan election is
basically a savings account for the employee that is available
for withdrawal aftor termination from elected service. The
employee, upon termination, will receive their 58 plus the
employer's 5% in a lump sum payment. An additional benefit
under the defined contribution plan is that your contribution
Is also considered tax deferred and is not considered
compensation for the current year tax purposes.
Since none of you are currently enrolled in a public
retirement plan, you can elect to participate in a defined
contribution plan at any time in the future; but if you do not
elect such an option by July 1, 1991, the City must start
withholding the full 7.655 social security tax. If you wish
Council Agenda - 5/28/91
to avoid participating in social security, you must enroll in
the PERA's defined contribution program by July 1.
Additionally, under this defined contribution program, elected
officials are allowed to contribute 5% of prior year's
earnings as a government official into this program, with the
City required to contribute a matching 58. There are
limitations on the maximum amount you can contribute in any
one year, but it would enable some of you who have prior years
of service to receive additional benefits for those past
years.
While no official Council action is required at this meeting,
I wanted to make you all aware of the fact that if a decision
is not made by each of you before July 1, social security
contributions will commence. I will provide additional
handouts and materials at Tuesday night's meeting that each of
you may want to review, and I will try to answer any questions
you have regarding what's available. I placed this item on
the agenda rather than as an informational item so that the
Council as a whole could discuss and ask questions. In order
for the City staff to process a defined contribution plan
prior to July 1, we should have your individual decisions on
what option you choose by June 15. If no decision is made at
this time, social security will automatically be withheld from
your compensation July 1, 1991.
20
AA
Treasury bills, bank certificates of deposit,
repurchase agreements and high grade
commercial paper. There is no investment in
stocks or longterm bonds.
Bond Market Account — The Bond Market
Account invests solely in fixed income securities
(bonds). These high quality government and
corporate txsnds have intermediate to long-term
maturities, from three to 20 years.
Guaranteed Ketarn Account — The most
secure fund offered by the Minnesota
Supplemental Investment Fund, the Guaranteed
Return Account invests in guaranteed
investment contracts (GlCs) offered by major
U.S. insurance companies and banks. The
Objective is to protea investors from toss of their
original investment while providing a fixed rale
of return over a three-year period. This
conservative approach, however, also limits the
potential for more substantial increases in value
offered by the other, less secure funds.
The State Board of Investment accepts bids
for GICs annually, Parlicipams in the fund make
contributions over the following 12 months and
receive the guaranteed rate for the remainder of
Itic lhrcc-year contract period.
Benefits
Upon terminal ion of service or death, the
benefit payable from the Defined Contribution
Plan is a lump -sum payment of the value of the
shares credited to a member's account. This
includes a proptuliunatc share of dividends or
irucrest earned. Final value of shares purchased
with employee and employer contributions,
except for the Guaruntccd Account, arc
dela mined by market conditions and the
economy. Thus, PIRA and the State of
Minnes[ta cannot guarantee that the value of an
account will not decrease u+ a level below that
tit iginully paid for the shores,
b
rerrxp..lc.,mb.rm. rm, mer .ra✓Nrl or,..,em�
CZ;_ Mt.S[37 wr ..U.S. !ureal
b Nr [ACP rA ls.rr rear Fbl,e b rump. Wb b . Ir/rrrr/
r.epr.rarb. pfaw.4 rr a4a raw,m.,r Nr r Iabr»arAr
N.rmu rs a bdhY.d rr4rru rrw.r aAA}.
Members who qualify for permanent
disability under the statutes regulating PERA
have the option of monthly payments from their
account instead of a lump -sum disbursement.
The amount of the monthly payments cannot
exceed 10 times the combined employee and
employer contributions of the month preceding
the disability and are to he in $100 increments.
The benefit ends when the disability status ends
or when the account is exhausted.
Proceeds of an account are payable 30 days
or more after the date of termination of service,
disability or death. An application for
withdrawal of the funds must be filed with
PERA by the member or by someone on the
member's behalf before payment can be made,
In the event of a mtmbc,.'s death, the value of all
accounts is payable to the member's designated
beneficiaries, or, if none are designated, to the
member's heirs.
The lump -sum payment may be used to
purchase an annuity from an insurance company.
PERA will, at the direction of the member, rcmit
the payment to an insurance company licensed
to do business in Minnesota.
Purchasing Prior Service
Elected public officials may make
contributions to the plan for (cast uncovered
elective service. If these addtional contributions
are made, employer contributions are also
required, Contact PCRA for details.
This publication Is meant in explain the
Provisions ofthe Minnesota Public Kmpioyses
Retirement Association law as dmply and ac.
curately as possible. If these b any dlscrepan.
ey between this publication and the actual taw,
the provisions of the taw will govern.
Public Employees
Retirement Association
}
efined
Contribution
Plan
A retirement program for
elected public officials and public
ambulance service personnel
august 1990
The Defined Contribution Plan (DCP)
administered by PERA Is a retirement program
for elected public officials and public
ambulance service personnel when
participants determine how employee and
employer contributions are to be Invested
through The purchase of shares In accounts of
the Minnesota Supplemental Investment Fund.
Total contributions plus Investment
performance determine the ultimate benefit,
which Is paid as a lump sum upon withdrawal.
Eligibility
All elected public officials — county (except
sheriff), city, township and school district — are
eligible to participate in the plan. There is no
minimum salary requirement. All public
ambulance service personnel whose employer
elects to participate in the program are also
eligible.
Participation in The plan u completely
voluntary for each individual.
Contributions
For elected public officials, the contribution
rate is 5 percent of salary for employees and 5
percent of that salary for employers.
The employer contributions for personnel of
ambulance services are set and made by the
employer as a fixed percentage of earnings for
salaried employees and as a unit value for
volunteers or largely uncompensated employees.
Salaried ambulance service employees may also
contribute in an amount not to exceed that of
their employer.
PERA invests contributions from you and
your employer, whether they arc for current or
past service. the first waking day of the month
following our seceipt of the payment. Thus, no
J
Defined Contribution Pian
matter whether we receive the contributions on the
first or last day of a given month, they are invested
into the DCP the fust working day of the following
month.
Two percent of the employer contribution to
the DCP is used by PERA for administrative costs
of the plan.
The Plan Is Tax Deferred
You do not pay taxes on your contributions to
the Defined Contribution Plan. It it a tax-deferred
program. That means all benefits derived from the
program are taxable upon withdrawal. The benefit
amount, however, may be rolled over into another
tax -qualified plan.
How It Works
Members must designate a percentage of total
contributions to be placed in one or more of the
accounts of the Minnesota Supplemental
Investment Fund. The total of the percentages
may not exceed 100 percent. If a member assigns
less than 100 percent of all contributions to specific
funds or makes no allocation, the balance will be
used to purchase ahares in the Income Share
Account.
In addition to members designating the
allocation of contributions when they join the
Defined Contribution Plan, they have the optioe of
transferring all or portions of previously purchased
shares from one account to another. For all
investments except the Guaranteed Account, this
option may be eurcised twice per calendar year on
previously invested funds. The minimum value of
shares being transferred must be SM. In addition,
unless all shares are transferred out of an account,
a minimum balance of $200 must remain in all
funds in which contributions are invested.
Members may also change how new contributions
are invested twice a year.
Participants have their choice of six
investment options, ranging from a guaranteed
return fund to a stock market index vehicle.
These funds were established by the State Board
of Investment to meet varying investment goals.
Following is a brief description of the six
investment options. Refer to lhe'Investment
Options' brochure for more detailed information.
Income Share Account — This fund has an
objective of earning a high rate of return from
increases in market value and current yield. The
investment mix of the fund is approximately 60
percent common stocks, 35 percent bonds and 5
percent cash. This is a balanced investment
program involving some risk in return for a
higher average return than would he available
through a money market.
Growth Share Account — The primary
objective of this fund is to generale high returns
from increases in market value. Thus,
approximately 95 percent of the fund's awls are
invested in stocks with the remainder in cash.
This investment is for those who feel the stock
market, over time, will provide higher returns
than other types of investments. Conversely, the
risk In the investor is higher.
Common Stock Index Account — Ike the
Growth Share Account, this fund is invested in
common mocks. While the Growth Share's
assets are managed by advisors, however, the
Common Stock Index Account has its assets
invested in approximately 2,000 different stocks
chosen to match the return produced by the
Wilshire 5000. This is a stock index, much like
the Dow -Jones Industrial Average.
Money Market Account — The Money
Market Account invests in short maturity,
fixed-income investments that pay rales
competitive with those available in money
markets. The fund's assets are invested in high
quality, short-term investments, such as U.S.
(Continued on mere ride)
The ICP is open to all
local elected officials
and those appointed to
elective office, except
elected county shera, ffs.
There is no time limit
t on enrollment in the
DCF for officials who
are not presently
P'ERA members,
r
To enroll
PERA Defined
Contribution Plan,
the elected offical
must complete a
Membership form.
Mail the membership form
with the deduction report
in which the first deduction
appears.
C
Seminar 411991
aaIs.Wdw
O's-
E
t
Investment Options
Income Share Account
I Growth Share Account
J Common Stock Index Account
I�J Bond Market Account
Money Market Account
�J Guaranteed Return Account
Seminar 411941
0
Employee
Contribution
$$S
Employer
Contributions
Elected official
purchases shares
in selected
accounts:
$SS
Upon termination of elected
service the value of the
account is refunded in a
lump sum distribution.
Seminar 4/1991
c
Employee Contributions.
are Tax Deferred
PERA contributions are computed on total gross
salary or earnings. Federal and state taxes are
calculated on the amount remaining after PERA
contributions are subtracted from gross salary.
It is this amount, gross salary minus PERA
employee contributions (and other tax deferred
deductions), that is shown on the employee's
W-2 as federal and state gross wages.
$100.00 Gross salary
5.00 PERA deduction (5-2)
95.00 Taxable amount for
Federal and State
withholding
Seminar 4/1991
LM/16.0&W
C
® Officials in DCS'
may pay
contributions for
past service for
which an _employer
did not contribute
to a pension plan on
the official's behalf.
Note: Fast contributions may
be paid only, for service earned
before 5-9-90, the enactment
date of the law.
LsOW=
�s
The Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of
1990 states that public
employees not
participating in a public
retirement plan
(including PERA's
Basic, Coordinated, and.
Police and Fire Plans)
will be required to pay
full Social Security taxes
of 7.65 percent of
earnings effective
July 1, 1991.
Ljb%)h ,w
Employees exempt from the 1990
Budget Reconciliation Act (Social
Security tax) are:
® individuals hired under programs
such as CETA, MEED, or JPTA
* emergency employees
■ students employed by the same
educational institutions where they
are enrolled and regularly attending
classes
N election judges who earn less than
$100 per year
■ foreign students or visitors with an
F1 or J-1 visa
■ PERA retirees and disabilitants
■ Elected officials ineligible for
PERA's Coordinated Plan who are
enrolled in the Defined Contribution
Plan
IRS toll-free number is
1 800 829-1040.
Ub%U�
C)
I
Elected Official
Options
Social D C P Coordinated
Security 5% Pian - 4.23%
I
July 1, 1991
all elected
service
earnings
subject to
Social
Security and
Medicare
(7.65%)
Seminar 4/1991
Medicare - if
elected after
3/31/86
(1.45%)
I
Social
Security and
Medicare
payable if
monthly
elected salary
exceeds $425
(7.65%)
I
An elected
official cannot
participate in
this pian unless
monthly salary
exceeds $425.
I
Must pay
Social Security
and Medicare
taxes
(7.65%)
Uml7.WOv
0
PRCFINANCIAL SYSTEM
05/09/91 15:18:57
WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
31445 05/09/91 LUKACH/JOHN
31445 05/00/91 LUKACH/JOHN
31445 05/09/91 LUK AI:H/JOHN
31445 05/09/01 LU it
31570 05/09/91 ARMA INTERNATIONAL
31571 05/09/91 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
31577 05/09/91 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
11573 05/09/91 PFTTY CASH
31573 05/09/01 PETTY CASH
31571 05/09/91 PFTTY CASH
31513 05/09/91 PETTY CASH
31573 05/09/91 PFTTY CASH
31914 05/09/91 DUFFALO JUNCTION AMO
31575 05/09/91 MN DEPApE OF NATURAL
31576 OS/OO/91 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
31577 05/10/91 AOAM'9 PEST CONTROL
31578 05/10/91 ANNANDALE VETERINARY
31578 05/10/91 ARA CORY REFRESHMENT
11500 05/10/91 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON
31580 OS/10/01 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON
31580 05/10/91 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON
31580 05/10/91 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON
31500 05/10/91 DRIOGFWATER TELEPHON
31500 05/10/41 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON'
31500 05/10/91 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON
31500 05/10/91 OR IOGF.WATER TELEPHON
3159n 0S/10/91 CRIOGFWATFR TF.LEPHON
11560 05/10/01 62 IOGEWATF.R TELEPMON
31500 05/10/91 ORIDGFWATF'R TFIEPMON
31590 04/10/91 SRIOGFWATER TF.LFPMON
11580 0'1/10/91 ORIDIFWATFR TFLEPMON
31500 05/10/91 6FIDGEWAFER TELEPHON
115Rn OS/10/Q1 ORIDGFWATFk TFIEPMON
DF611Ur7ement JOL1 n41
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM INV•01
377 CORRECT CODE/CK 31445 8.F15CR
3t7 CORRECT CODE/CK 31445 O. OSCR
377 CORRECT CODE/CK 31445 8.85
327 CORRECT CODE/CK 31445 0.05
0.00
526 MEMBERSHIP DUES 120.00
110 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 559.00
118 WATERCRAFT REG 6 TITL 181.00
188 PETTY CASH 40.00
168 POSTAGE 3.42
IRS MTSC C17Y HALL SUPPLIES 1.45
188 SALE OF MAPS 10.00
160 MISC EXPENSE/PLAN 0 20 27.65
82.52
511 TIRE DISPOSAL 179.50
116 WATERCRAFT REO 0 T371. 261.00
110 WATERCRAFT 8 ATV REPO 305.00
3 PEST CONTROL/CITY HAIL 52.50
362 ANIMAL CONTROL/VET CHG 10.00
400 SUPPLIES/CITY HALL 60.00
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 599.09
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 78.39
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 67.10
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 47.72
24" TELEPHONE CHARGES 06.38
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 7&.21
2h TFI EPHONE CHARGES 20.n0
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 13.50
74 TELEPHONE CHAROES 171.35
24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 70.00
76 TELEPHONE CHARGES 30.70
74 TELEPHONE CHARGES 40.70
76 TFLEPNIINE CHARGES 15.00
th TELEPHONE CHARGES 18.14
76 TtLEPHOUE CHARGES 2n.80
1.259.61
'CHECK TOTAL
*CHECK TOTAL
-CHECK TOTAL
BRCFINANCIAL SYSTEM
05/08/91
15:19:51
Disbursement
Journal
'
WARRANT
DATE
VENDOR
OESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
CLAIM IIlVC
GENERAL CHECKING
31581
05/10/91
SUCK HEAD CHEMICAL C
S25
M1SC SUPPLIES/PARK OE
181.02
31592
05/10/91
CLARK BOARDMAN CORP
.00065
LAV BOOKS/PLAN 8 20NI
125.00
31583
05/10/91
COMPUTER PARTS L SER
500
COMPUTER EQUIPMENT
29n.25
31504
05/10/91
OAVIS WATER EQUIPMEN
290
REDUCING VALVES/WAT 1.141.67
31584
05/10/91
DAVIS WATER EQUIPMEN
290
VALVE KEYS/WATFR DEPT
50.72
1.192.39
-CHECK TOTAL
31585
05/10/91
DUERR'S WATER CARE S
4.9
WATER CARE/WWTP RENTAL
27.65
31589
OS/10/91
DULUTH TECHNICAL COL
528
FIRE DEPT TRAINING
120.00
31597
05/10/01
EGGHEAD OISCOUNT SOF
51
MISC OFFICF SUPPLIES
95.50
31567
05/10/91
EGGHEAD DISCOUNT SOF
51
COMPUTER SOFTWARE/REF
207.00
31587
05/10/91
EGGHEAD DISCOUNT SOF
51
COMPUTER OFFICE SUPPLI
40.00
1
342.50
*CHECK TOTAL
31588
05/10/91
FAIR'S GARDEN CENTER
55
IMPROVEMENTS/TREES/ 2.700.00
31580
05/10/01
GOPHER STATE ONE CAL
80
GOPHER STATE CALLS/WA
105.00
31590
05/10/91
GRIEFNOV SHEET METAL
73
FURNACE REPAIR/WWTP M9 32.50
31591
05/10/01
HFRMES/JERRY'
01
LIBRARY CLEANING CNTR
227.50
31592
05/10/91
HOGLUNO COACH LINES
403
BUS TRANSP CONTRACT 4.813.98
31593
05/10/91
HOLIOAV CREDIT OFFIC
85
GAS/FIRE DEPART
108.14
3154&
05/10/91
TNDUSTRIAL MAINT. SU
514
M16C SUPPLIES/SHOP •
155.35
31505
05/10/01
JAMES A. BALOGH. LTO
.90079
PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS
15.49
31596
05/10/91
LARKIN . WOFFMAN.DAL Y
497
LFGAL SERVICES
286.05
31597
05/10/91
LIBERTY COMPUTER SUP
09
COMPUTER PAPER/CITY M
119.70
31590
05/10/41
LLIKACH/JOHN
327
TRAVEL EXPENSE
22.38
31508
05/10/91
LUKACM/JOMN
327
'TRAVEL EXPENSE
22.30
31598
05/10/91
LLIKACH/JOHN
327
TRAVEL E3PENSE
87.08
31598
05/10/01
LLIKACH/JOKN
321
TRAVEL EXPENSE
27.38
'
134.. 14
ACHFCK TOTAL
31590
05/10/91
MANKATO BUBINESS PRO
820
COPY MACH REPAIR$/FIRE 74.42
31900
05/10/91
MINN. REAL ESTATE JO
338
MAGAZINE SUBCRIPTION
49.00
RRC FINANCIAL SVS1-EM
05/09/91 15:18:57 '
WARRANT nATE VFNOGR
GENERAL CHECKING
31601 05/10/91 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO
31601 05/10/91 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO
31602 05/10/91 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31607 05/10/91 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31802 05/10/81 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31602 05/10/91 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31602 05/10/01 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31607 05/10/91 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31802 05/10/91 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31507 05/10/91 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
3160? 05/10/91 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31507 05/10/91 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31502 05/10/91 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31602 05/10/91 NORTHERN STATES ROVE
31503 05/10/91 NORVEST INVESTMENT S
31604 05/10/91 O.E.I. BUSINESS FORM
31505 09/10/91 O'Nf ILL/JEFF
31005 05/10/91 O'NEILL/JEFF
31000 05/10/01 PALMER PRINTING COMP
31007 05/10/91 POLKA DOT RECYCLING
31000 05/10/91 PRINCIPAL MUTUAL LIF
31009 03/10/91 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE
31010 05/10/91 ROAD RESCUE. INC.
31011 05/10/01 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC
31611 03/10/91 ROVAL TIRE OF MONTIC
31611 01/10/91 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC
31612 05/10/91 RUBARO
31613 05/10/11 SENTRY 6Y6rEMS
31016 Oh/IO/91 SHARP CORPORATION
31015 09/10/01 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP
31511 0•/10/01 9IM')NSON LUMBER COMP
11015 OS/10/91 11MONSON IUMSER COMP
Ot.ONreement Journel
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM INVOI
185 ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRA'683.25
195 TRAVEL EXPENSE 40.00
503.25
148 UTILITIES 2.960.80
148 UTILITIES SS.59
148 UTILITIES 629.66
140 UTILITIES 82.65
148 UTILITIES 108.37
166 UTILITIES 7.05
140 UTILITIES 13.68
168 UTILITIES 12.78
148 UTILITIES 238.28
140 UTILITIES 184.07
140 UTILITIES 652.61
168 UTILITIES 393.51
5.138.20
155 COMPUTER PAYMENT 2.607.81
150 COPY MACHINE PAPER 19.10
161 TRAVEL EXPENSE 37.00
161 MISC EXPENSE/PLAN 0 10 36.00
93.00
340 C HALL BROCHURE INSERT 94.00
170 RECYCLING CHARGES 1.742.31
176 INSURANCE PREMIUM 40.00
176 WTP CONTRACT/MONI 29.891.76
163 CLEANING SUPPLIES/FIRE 7.00
227 MTC OF EQUIP/SEVER DER 25.00
227 MTC OF BLD INSPECT VAN 29.05
271 MTC OF VENICLt S/FIRE 219.71
276.16
510 DER REOISTRA SOFTVA 1.000.00
160 MTC AOREEMENt/FIRE BE 126.00
201 CLEANING SUPPLICI/DAR 670.03
19) INFO OLO REPAIRS 79.96
163 MISC SUPPLIES/PARK DEP 11.16
193 STREET MIC SUPPLIES 4.10
-CHECK TOTAL
•CHECK TOTAL
ACHECK TOTAL
*CHECK TOTAL
BRCFINANCIAL SYSTEM
05/08/61 15:16:51
WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
3161505/10/91 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP
31615 05/10/91 SII4ON SON LUMBER COMP
31615 05/10/91 SIMON
SON LUMBER COM
O
31016 05/10/01 SIOUX VALLEY ENTERPR
31617 05/10/01 UNITED LABS
3 1618 05/10/91 11NOCAL
31619 OS/10/01 VASKO RUBBiSN REMOVA
3 to tB 05/10/91 VASK0 RUBBISH REMOVA
31620 05/10/91 VONAK LANDFILL. INC
GENERAL CHECKING
Disburnement Journal
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
193 MISC SUPPLIES/WATER DEP 8.78
103 MISC SUPPLIE9/FREE OE 161.50
103 DOOR 6 REPAIRS/FIRE M 103.71
318.20
597 CHLORINE SCALE/WATF 1.031.60
655 MISC SUPPLIES/SHOP S 160.35
213 GAS/FIRE DEPT 38.83
526 GARBAGE CONTRACT 7.831.50
526 GARBAGE CONTRACT 397.89
8.229.39
273 LANDFILL CHARGES/GA 5.697.80
TOTAL 72.929.08
CLAIM INvr
*CHECK TOTAL
-CHECK TOTAL
BRCFINANCIAL SYSTEM
05/14/01 15:31:58
WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
31570 05/14/91 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
3 1811 05/14/01 ROYAL TIRE OF MO TIC
3:011 05/16/91 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC
31821 05/14/01 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
31622 05/th/91 U.S. POSTMASTER
31623 05/14/91 EGGHEAD DISCOUNT SOF
31626 05/16/91 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
31824 05/16/91 MIDWEST GAS -COMPANY
31026 05/16/01 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
31624 05/16/91 MIDWEST OAS COMPANY
31624 05/14/0: MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
31824 05/14/01 MIDWEST GA9 COMPANY
31626 05/16/01 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
31024 05/14/01 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
31625 05/16/01 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO
31020 05/14/01 MINN, DEPT OF PUBLIC
31027 05/14/01 WRIGHT COUNTY STATE
31628 05/16/91 WRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP
31820 05/23/91 A T A T INFO SYSTEMS
31030 OS/23/91 ANDERSON S ASSOCIATE
31030 05/21/01 ANDERSON 9 ASSOCIATE
31011 05/23/91 ARCA MINNESOTA. INC.
31032 05/23/01 SEI! FRANKLIN
31533 05/23/01 BERGSTROM-$ LAWN 6 0
31016 05/79/91 CENTRAL MCGOWAN. INC
31035 05/23/01 COAST TO COAST
31035 05/23/91 COAST TO COAST
31038 05/23/01 COAST TO COAST
91635 05/29/91 COAST TO COAST
31635 05/29/01 COAST TO COAST
31035 00/23/01 COAST TO COAST
Disbursement Journal
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM INVOI
119 CHECK VOIDED 365.000R
221
CORRECT CODING
87.12
227
CORRECT COOING
07.72CR
0.00
CHECK TOTAL
110
WATERCRAFT/ATV/SNOW R
360.00
210
POSTAGE 1.000.00
51
COMPUTER CASE
0.50
115
UTILITIES
222.35
,
115
UTILITIES
59.56
115
UTILITIES
22.25
115
UTILITIES
274.77
115UTILITIES
33.00
115
UTILITIES
42.30
115
UTILITIES
3.00
115
UTILITIES
100.27
706.50
-CHECK TOTAL
185
ANIMAL SUPPLIES/DOG F
223.14
535
DRIVERS LICENSE LISTIN 52.00
,
221
2 C.O.'S/INVESTME 300.000.00
$12
UTILITIES
6.20
15
FIRE PHONE CHARGES
4.60
10
SIONS FOR RESALE
11.00
10
REFUSE SIGN/COMPOST SI 74.68
05.60
-CHECK TOTAL
$36
JUNK AMNESTY DAY CH 1.120.00
20
SUPPLIES/PW INSPECTION 13.01
441
VEHICLE REPAIRS/PARKS
06.02
90
SUPPLIES/$MOP 6 GAR
20.01
IS
MISC SUPPLIES/SEWER
18.11
35
OLD REPAIR $UP/MUSEUM
5.19
10
SMALL TOOLS/SHOP 6 GAR 12.07
30
8LO REPAIRS/PARKS DEP
132.39
3s
MISC SUPPLIEs/sMOP 6
0 10.46
30
MISC SUPPLIES/PARK{ OE 52.43
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
03/14/51 15:31:58
WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
31835 05/23/91 COAST TO COAST
31635 05/23/91 COAST TO COAST
3163505/23/9t COAST TO COAST
31835 05/23/01 COAST TO COAST
31035 05/23/91COAST TO COAST
31635 05/23/91 COAST TO COAST
31635 05/23/91 COAST TO COAST
31833 05/23/91 COAST TO COAST
31035 05/23/91 COAST TO COAST
31835 05123/9,, COAST TO COAST
31035 05/23/9, COAST TO COAST
31635 05/23/01 COAST TO COAST
31636 05/23/01 COMMUNICATION AUDITO
31637 05/23/91 COPY OUPLCATING PROD
3:030 09/23/01 CRAGUN'S CONFERENCE
31030 05/23/91 CRAGUN'8 CONFERENCE
31639 05/23/0, DEMCON DISPOSAL. INC
31860 05/23/91 DVNA SYSTEMS
31041 05/23/:5/23/:1 FEEORITE CONTROLS. I
31641 01 FEEDRITE CONTROLS, I
31642 05/23/01 FIRST CALL FOR HELP
)1063 05/23/01 FOSTER-FRANIEN-CARLS
31064 00/23/91 FRONTLINE PLUS,FIRE
)1040 05/23/91 GME CONSULTANTS. INC
311645 05/23/01 OME CONSULTANTS. INC
31648 05/23/01 GREG SMITH A ASSOC .
310►7 031771St MARRV'3 AUTO SUPPLY
31047 05/29/01 MARRv'S AUTO 5UPPLV
31067 03/23/01 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY
910117 05/23/91 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY
11067 09/23/91 HARRV'S AUTO SUPPLY
31647 05/23/91 MARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY
11061 05/29/:1 MARRV'1 AUTO SUPPLY
11067 09/27/01 HARRY'S AUTO •UPOLV
Disbursement Journal
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM INvO.�
35 BLD REPAIRS/L IBRARv 87..36
35 BLD REPAIRS/CITY MALL 78.53
35 MISC SUPPLIES/WATER D 111.18
35 EQUIP REPAIRS/TREE DEP 78.28
35 BLD REPAIRS/FIRE DEPT 1.09
35 STREET MTC MATERIAL 20.68
30 MISC SUPPLIES/PV INSPE 17.15
35 MISC REPAIR A MTC/FIRE b2.22
35 BLO REPAIR SUP/WATER 22.04
35SMALL TOOLS/WATER DEPT 6.70
3S CLEANING SUPPLIES/LISR 22.36
35 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/PARK 1.69
730.55
98 PAGER REPAIRS/FIRE DEP 20.07
bl COPY MACHINE MTC/LIBRA 03.09
63 SEMINAR EKPENBE/RICK W 06.00
63 SEMINAR EKPENSF/JEFF O 98.00
102.00
298 JUNK AMNESTY DAY CM 2.901.00
50 MISC SUPPLIES/SHOP A 0 54.50
50 PROF SERVICES/WATER OE 34.00
50 CHEMICALS/SEWER COL 3.053.23
3.007.23
.00135 INFORMATIONAL BOOKLET 15.00
O1 INSURANCE PREMIUM 50.00
,,
510 EOUIPMENT/FIRE DEPT 300.00
533 ENO FOES/7TH ST IMPRO 292.00
$33 MISC SERVICES/7TH ST 157.:0
970.90
196 LEGAL FEES 110.60
78 MISC SUPPLIES/SMOP 6 0 29.09
It MISC SUP/sew ER LOLL 15.06
76 EQUIP REP S MTC/SEWER 22.00
78 VEH REP PARTS/WATER DFP b.bb
78 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/8TR 21.76
78 REPAIRS/SWOP A OAR 8.65
11 V[N REPAIR PARTS/S TREE 51.64
10 MISC SUPPLI[S/PARR, OE 19.11
$CHECK TOTAL.
-CHECK TOTAL
-CHECK TOTAL
*CHECK TOTAL
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
05/14/01 15:31:5e
WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
31647 05/23/91 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY
31647 05/23/01 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY
31848 05/23/01 HERMES/JERRY
31649 05/23/91 KOROPCHAK/OLIVE
31650 05/23/01 LITTLE MOUNTAIN ELEC
31051 05/23/91 LOCATOR ► MONITOR SA
31652 05/23/01 MARCO BUSINESS PRODU
31653 05/23/91 MARTIE'S FARM SERVIC
31853 05/23/91 MARTIE'S FARM SERVIC
31053 05/23/91 MARTIE'S FARM SERVIC
31654 05/23/91 MAUS FOODS
31654 05/23/01 MAUS FOODS
31654 05/23/01 MAUS FOODS
31654 03/23/01 MAUS FOODS
31635 05/23/01 MtKE'S WELDING
21650 05/73/01 14TUN POLLUTION CONTR
31657 05/23/01 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR
31057 05/23/91 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR
31050 05/23/91 MONTICELLO PRINTING
31658 05/23/01 MONTICELLO PRINTING
31059 05/23/01 MONTICELLO TIMES
31659 05/23/01 MONTICELLO TIMES
31659 05/23/01 MONTICELLO TIMES
31050 05/23/91 MONTICELLO TIMIS
31859 05/23/01 MONTICELLO TIMES
31050 05/23/01 MONTICELLO TIMES
31680 05/23/91 MTI DISSTRIOUTING CO
31661 05/23/61 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR
31001 00/21/61 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR
61661 06/23/01 NATIONAL OUSMINO PAR
Disbursement Journal
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM IUVOI-
7e STREET MTC MATERIAL 1.64
70 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/PARK 1.35
169.ee
BI LIBRARY CLEANING CONT 227.50
97 TRAVEL EXPENSE/SEMINAR 22.00
101 ELEC MTC/SHOP 6 GARAG 516.14
634 EQUIP PARTS/SEWER COLL ee.01
100 TONER/COPY MACHINE 218.25
107 LAWN MIX/PARK DEPT 79.50
107 CLOTHING SUP/WATER DEP 10.05
107 MISC SUP/STREET DEPT 33.50
125.05
100 SUPPLIES/SHOP 6 GAR 31.88
100 CLEANING SUP/ANIMAL CO 43.03
100 MISC SUPPLIES/CITY MALL 3.21
100 CLEANING SUP/LIBRARY 55.31
134.23
325 VEHICLE MTC/FIRE DEPT 600.50
127 ANNUAL FEE/HAZARDOUS W 42.00
136 OFFICE SUP/P WORKS 7.95
130 CITY HALL OFFICE SUP 210.09
224.04
137 PRINTED FORMS/8L0 INSP 80.15
137 PRINTED FORMS/FIRE DEP 65.30
125.45
140 LEGAL NOTICES 795.56
140 OLD PERMIT INFORMATION 02.60
140 NEWSPAPER BOUND/IISRA 165.00
160 JUNK OAY/LEAF PU/OARS 504.80
140 WATER FLUSHING INFO 67.90
140 ASSESSMENT NOTICES 12.88
1.420.52
209 VEHICLE REP PART6/PAR 209.21
166 VEN REPAIR ► MTC/FIRE 449.37
164 VEHICLE REPAIR$/WATER 6.10
166 TOOLS R EQUIP/$MOP ► 600.62
•CHECK TOTAL
•CHECK TOTAL
•CHECK TOTAL
•CHECK TOTAL
•CHECK TOTAL
@CHECK TOTAL
RRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
05/16/01 15:31:56
O13buraement
Journal
WARRANT
DATE
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION.
AMOUNT
CLAIM INVL ,)
GENERAL CHECKING
802.93
•CHECK TOTAL -
3$662
05/23/91
NUTECH ENVIRONMENTAL
167
CHEMICALS/WWTP 1.202.50
31603
05/23/91
OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI
180
SENIOR CITIZEN REPAIRS
65.19
31883
05/23/91
OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI
160
MISC SUPPLIESNATER OE
10.16
31063
OS/23/91
OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI
160
BLD REPAIR SVD/PARKS
13.39
31683
05/23/91
OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI
160
PUMP REPAIRS/WATER DEP
58.10
120.10
•CHECK TOTAL
31686
05/23/01
ORR-SCHELEN-MAVERON
162
ENGINEERING FEES/SOHO
558.00
31606
05/23/91
ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
162
MISC ENGINEERING FE 1.616.25
1.072.25
`CHECK TOTAL
31005
05/23/91
PLUMSERV-PURCELL'S P
251
OLD REPAIR SUP/PARKS
26.22
31665
05/23/91
PLUMBERY-PURCELL'S P
251
MISC SUPPLIES/WATER 0
297.91
320.13
*CHECK TOTAL
31886
05/23/01
POACH/GEORGE
180
LABOR/FIRE HALL DOOR
350.00
31007
05/23/91
POWER PROCESS EOUIPM
532
VAC ALL REPAIRS
713.30
31688
05/23/01
PREUSSE'8 CLEANING S
173
FIRE HALL CLEANING
50.00
31006
05/23/91
PREUSSE'S CLEANING 6
173
CITY HALL CLEANING
600.00
650.00
•CHECK TOTAL
31869
05/23/91
RENNER 8 SONS INC./E
161
LIFT PUMP INSPECTION
50.00
31860
05/23/91
RENNER R SONS INC./E
181
WATER PUMP INSPECTION
260.00
'
330.00
*CHECK TOTA r
3t8/0
05/23/91
SHUMAN/CATHY
191
TRAVEL EXPENSE
63.00
31070
05/23/01
SHUMAN/CATHY
191
MISC EXPENSE/CITY HALL
76.71
•
87.11
*CHECK TOTAL
31071
05/23/01
STENCEI/PEGOV
190
ASSE88ING CONTRACT
969.50
31672
05/23/01
UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC
211
UNIFORM RENTAL
6.56
31072
05/23/91
UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC
211
UNIFORM RENTAL
6.59
31672
05/23/01
UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC
211
UNIFORM RENTAL
12.50
31072
05/23/91
UN I TOO RENTAL SERVIC
211
UNIFORM RENTAL
12.60
31072
05/23/01
UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC
211
UNIFORM RENTAL
81.60
31072
05/21/91
UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC
211
UNIFORM RENTAL
61.07
•
161.63
*CHECK TOTAL
31073
05/23/91
WATER PRODUCTS COMPA
216
METER VALVE/WATER OEP
195.61
31676
05/21/01
WRIGHT COUNTY AUOITO
210
MAY SHERIFF'$ CONT 16.138.05
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM '
05/14/91 15:31:59 Disbursement Journal
I WARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM INVOICE
J
GENERAL CHECKING
31075 05/23/91 V.M.C.A. OF MINNEAPO 224 MAY CONTRACT PAYMENT 525.00
31575 05/23/91 ZIEGLER. INC. 425.EOUIP REPAIR PARTS/ST 355.2h
GENERAL CHECKIUG TOTAL 335.535.55
R
1 .Tk 1
".e
r
PRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
05/08/01
IS. 5:43
Disbursement Journal
VARRAN7
DATE
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
CLAIM 1NVOt
1,
"
V
LIQUOR FUNO
15063
05/07/81
JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA
900022
LIQUOR PURCHASE
1.533.35
15693
05/07/81
JOHNSON BROS VHOLESA
800022
VINE PURCHASE
1.807..27
•
3.230.62
-CHECK TOTAL
IS664
05/07/91
EAGLE VINE COMPANY
800012
VINE PURCHASE
420.74
16664
05/07/91
EAGLE VINE COMPANY -
800012
-1416C SUPPLIES
79.21
095.85
@CHECk TOTAL
10085
05/01/81
QUALITY VINE 6 SPINS
800040
110UOR PURCHASE
2.035.03
19885
09/07/81
DUALITY VINE A SPIRI
900040
VINE PURCHASE
628.58
-, -
2.682.42
'CHECK TOTAL
15868
05/07/91
HI
PLLIPS A SONS CO/E
900037
LIQUOR PURCHASE
997.05
15866
05/07/91
PHILLIPS 6 SONS CO/E
800037
MINE PURCHASE
447.80
1.445.03
-CHECK TOTAL
15067
OS/07/91
GRIGGS. COOPER 6 COM
800018
LIQUOR PURCHASE
3.104.17
15668
05/07/01
JOHNSON BROS VHOLESA
800022
PURCHASE
1.949.56
-VINE
16069
09/10/91
OERNICK'S PEPSI COLA
900001
POP PURCHASE
184.90
15670
05/10/111
BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON
800002•
TELEPHONE CHARGES
73.26
19871
05/10/91
CARLSON REFRIGERATIO
800084•COOLER DIVIDERS
349.94
15672
05/10/91
COAST TO COAST
600004
BLO MTC SUPPLIES
12.71
16073
05/10/91
9AHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT
000O0O.JUICE
PURCHASE
04.25
15673
05/10/91
DAMLMEIMER OISTRIBUT
800009
BEER PURCHASE
21.967.27
•
..
21.961.52
@CHECK TOTAL
1661409/10/91
DAY OISTRIBUTING COM
600010
BEER PURCHASE
935.30
15070
09/10/91
DAY DISTRIBUTING COM
800010
MISC PURCHASES
9.60
040.90
•[NECK TOTAL
15676
05/10/:1
OICK WHOLESALE CO.,.
600011
LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES
35.50
15679
05/10/01
OtCK WHOLESALE CO..
600011
0!!R PURCHASE
657.05
692.05
@CHECK TOTAL
15516
09/10/9t
EAGLE VINE COMPANY
600012
MISC PURCHASES
250.73
15676
05/10/01
FAGLE VINE COMPANY
600012
VINE PURCHASE
362.16
666.91
@CHECK TOTAL
15077
05/10101
CLASS MUT/THP
60005:
REPAIRS TO BUILDING 38.00
MIS
OS/10/91
GPOSSLEIN BEVERAGE I
600010
LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 46.79
16018
04/10/0I
GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE 1
600010
MISC OPERATING SUPPLIE 21.00
15676
09/10/91
GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE I
600019
JUICE PURCHASE
70.70
15610
09/10/41
GROSSLEIM BEVERAGE 1600010
BEER PURCHASE
16.061.10
BRCFINANCIAL SYSTEM
05/08/91 15:15:63
Disbursement
Journal
WARRANT DATE
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
CLAIM INVC1'
1•
LIQUOR FUND
:i
•
18,578.75
*CHECK TOTAL
15879
05/10/91
JOHNSON OROS WMOLESA
900022
WINE PURCHASE
285.72
,
15680
OS/10/91
JUDE CANDY & TOBACCO
800021
CIGARS & CIO$
132.34
13860
05/10/91
JUDE CANDY & TOBACCO
800021
MISC OPERATING SU PP LI
141.75
15080
05/10/91
JUDE CANDY & TOBACCO
800072
ti'STORE SUPPLIES
64.80
'
350.69
'CHECK TOTAL
15081
05/10/91
LTEFFRT TRUCKING
800075
FREIGHT CHARGES
019.30
15602
05/10/91
MCOOVALL COMPANY
tit
REPAIRS TO ICE MACHIN
107.00
15083
05/10/91
MIDWEST GAS COMPANY
800028
UTILITIES
01.15
' 15684
05/10/Ot
MONTICELLO OFFICE PR
800031
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
1.44
i
16005
03/10/91
MONTICELLO TIMES
900032
ADVERTISING
48.00
19888
09/10/0I
NORTHERN STATES POWE
900035
UTILITIES
509.03
18687
05/10/91
O'HARA BROS. COMPANI
900088
MISC RESALE ITEMS
142.20
'
15688
05/10/01
OLSON & SONSELECTRI
800038
REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE
121.40
.i
15889
05/10/91
PAUSTIS 0 SONS
600103'VINE
PURCHASE
38.00
18690
05/10/91
PHILLIPS & SONS CO/E
000037
VINE DURCH ASE
421.93
8&
1/
16880
05/10/91
PHILLIPS 3 SONS CO/E
800037•LIQUOR
PURCNA SE 1,137.02
;::,. >'t'i .�•: I.S5S.45
s,
-CHECK TOTA'� I
•
10881
05/10/91
RON'$ ICE COMPANY
00004 I:ICE PURCHASE
318.08
14802
05/10/91
SEVEN-UP BOTTLING CO
800063
POP PURCHASE
16.50
10693
05/10/91
ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT
000045.MISC
.SUPPLIES
58.50
15894
05/10/01
THORPE DISTRIBUTING
800048
SEER PURCHASE 16.586.00
• 15885
05/10/01
VIKING COCA-COLA BOT
800081
POP PURCHASE
310.00
LIQUOR FUND
TOTAL 77.381.31
z
vi
1•
:i
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
by 011ie Koropchak, Chamber Executive Secretary
May 23, 1991
Consideration of Information Pertaininq to the Establishment of the,
Chamber of Commerce Director's Position.
This information is intended to advise the City Council of the
Chamber's goal to establish a position known as the Director of the
Chamber of Commerce. It is my concern that the Council be advised
of the matter since the current job description for the Director of
Economic Development includes Chamber of Commerce functions.
Background information leading to the establishment of this
position began in the late 1980's when the Chamber Board identified
the need for such a position, later established the need as a goal,
and in 1991 the goal has been activated.
Under the direction of the Chamber Board of Directors, a
subcommittee of Ken Maus, Linda Mielke, Ron Hoglund, Bob Dawson,
and 011ie Koropchak was formed. In early March the committee
determined the need to obtain job descriptions from other
communities; the need to research the availability of office space;
the need to receive formal approval to proceed from the Chamber
Board and general membership; the need to research the Chamber
budget; the need to draft a job description; and the need to
determine position hours, salary, and benefits.
The subcommittee received formal endorsement from the Chamber Board
and general membership to continue the process to establish this
position. The position is being created to meet the challenges of
the Chamber's potential growth in relationship to the growth of the
community; to increase the promotional efforts of the Chamber's
professional, industrial, and commercial businesses; and to create
greater efficiency within the Chamber organization.
The position would be part-time with approximately twenty hours per
week or 1,000 hours starting, flexible hours, and has the
potentiality of developing into a full-time position. The position
will be funded by the Chamber of Commerce through the strength of
its membership fees. Suggested salary range is between $6.00 to
$7.00 per hour plus business expenses; compensated holiday and/or
sick time is yet to be determined with no benefits.
Enclosed is a copy of the Director's job description and a list of
qualifications as drafted by the subcommittee; however, neither the
job description nor qualifications have been reviewed or approved
by the Chamber Board or general membership. It is the hope of the
Chamber to begin advertisement for the position by late June. Yet
to be determined is the Chamber office location.
Upon review of the job description and qualifications, the Council
is encouraged to ask questions or give comment.
MONTICELLO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Job Description
Position: Director
RESPONSIBILITY:
The Chamber of Commerce Director is a non-voting member of the
Board of Directors. The Director is devoted entirely to the
affairs of the Chamber and is responsible for carrying out the
functions of the Chamber with special emphasis in the areas of
Membership, Fundraising, and Secretaryship. The Director is also
responsible for assisting the officers and Board of Directors in
maintaining the Chamber's purpose and achieving the Chamber's
goals.
DUTIES:
1. MEMBERSHIP: Develops programs and motivates committee
work which relates to the signing of new
members, the orientation of all members,
the retention of members, membership
L drives and related affairs designed to
maintain a membership level that will
ensure necessary income for the
operations of the Chamber.
2. FUNDRAISING: Develops creative activities and
motivates committee work which will
promote community pride and will enhance
the community's quality of life, while
providing supplemental income for the
operations of the Chamber.
3. COMMITTEES: (a) Attends committee meetings as
necessary; (b) Motivates, counsels and
suggasts programs and plans to the
committee chairperson(s); Ensures that
committee meetings and affiliated special
function groups are coordinated and
properly recorded.
4. PUBLIC RELATIONS: Maintains close contact with media
representatives, prepares news releasos
and holds press conferences with the
President to ensure that the Chamber
story Is told to the public and to the
membership. Also, to reflect the
attitudos and interests of business on a
wide variety of community issues and
Chamber Director Job Description
Page 2
serves as the "Voice of Business" to
local, state, federal, and other various
organizations.
5. PURPOSE/GOALS: Plays a major role in the development,
directing, implementing, and review of
the Chamber's purpose and goals.
Develops, coordinates and inspires the
voluntary leadership and manpower of the
Chamber toward accomplishment of those
goals.
6. POLICY: Recommends new policy and procedure as
well as interprets and communicates
objectives, policies, and procedures from
the President and the Board of Directors
to committees and volunteers.
7. PROMOTIONAL: Assist the committee with promotional
activities and assist in development of
new programs.
8. STAFF: Is responsible for the recruiting,
training, supervision, and morals of the
Chamber's committees and volunteers.
9. FINANCIAL: Exorcises control of expenditures as
directed by the Board of Directors.
Reviews budget needs with the committees
and assist in preparation of the budget,
financial statements, billing and
recording with the Treasurer.
10. OTHER: Other duties so assigned by the Board of
Directors.
MONTICELLO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
DIRECTOR
QUALIFICATIONS
The Monticello Chamber of Commerce seeks a Director to manage the
Chamber operations in a growing and progressive community.
WORK EXPERIENCE: Experience having worked in areas such as
economic development, public relations,
management personnel, business relations,
sales, sales management and
merchandising, fundraising, and public
policy issues.
EDUCATION & TRAINING: Business and management training
preferred. Previous chamber
participation and leadership
desired.
APTITUDES & ABILITIES: Desirable aptitudes are skills In
planning, organizing, handling details,
writing, fiscal management, and basic
public relations.
PERSONALITY TRAITS: Desirable personality traits including
integrity, initiative, willingness to
work, enthusiasm, flexibility, and sense
of humor.
C
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
May 22, 1991
90-04 improvement Proiect Assessment Appeal --Jeff Nelson,. (R.W.)
As part of the Sandberg East Improvement Project last fall, Jeff
and Colleen Nelson were assessed $9,225 for the sanitary sewer and
water main that was installed along Gillard Avenue. Because the
Nelsons had built their home on two lots containing 160 feet of
frontage, their assessment was almost twice as much as other lots
were assessed; and as a result, the Nelsons appealed their
assessment to District Court.
The Nelsons obtained an appraisal from Jack Maxwell, a local
appraiser, that indicated the increase in value to their property
was only $1,500 because their property already had a private water
and sewer system. In preparation for a potential court date, the
City of Monticello had to also obtain an appraisal, and we utilized
St. Cloud Appraisal for this service. Our initial discussions with
the appraiser indicated that it may be hard to substantiate an
increase in value of more than approximately $7,000 for the home
with city sewer and water versus the home value with its private
sewer and water system. Our City Attorney, Paul Weingarden, also
discussed the appraisal method with St. Cloud Appraisal to
determine the best way to substantiate our $9,225 assessment.
Although the Nolsons were aware that because they built their home
on two city lots that they would be subject to a higher assessment,
the fact that the building permit was granted by the Orderly
Annexation Board prior to annexation did not help our case even
though the property utilized two city lots. The fact remains that
the property at this point cannot be easily subdivided to create
two building lots, and it was the opinion of the City Attorney that
the City would have a difficult case in substantiating assessments
for the second lot if the property was not easily able to be
subdivided. While our appraiser did come up with a value higher
than $9,000, he was basing his theory on a city lot being worth so
much per square foot, with the Nelsons having twice as much
property as a normal residential lot has. While using this method
does substantiate a higher value for the property, it did appear
that a Judge may not agree that the value exists if the lot is not
readily available to be sold.
In light of the fact it was questionable whether we could
substantiate the additional assessment amount and because it was
estimated the City could incur legal costs of between $1,000 and
$1,500 to pursue the appeal through the court process, the City
Attorney has negotiated a settlement of $6,000 for the assessment
with the additional stipulation that the remaining assessment of
$3,225 would be deferred indefinitely and not be applicable to this
property unless the property is subdivided in the future.