Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 02-10-1992AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL 01 Monday, February 10, 1992 - 7:00 p.m. Mayor: Ren Maus Council Members: Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle, Clint Herbst, Dan Blonigen 1. Call to order. _ 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held January 27, � r S� 1992. ni UC/ 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. 4. Consideration of revised concept plan for warming house/ community building/restrooms In West Bridge Park. S. Consideration of adopting revised job evaluation results/ comparable worth study appeals. 6. Consideration of annual maintenance agreement for county state aid highways in Monticello. 7. Consideration of adopting an ordinance amendment to Section ) 12-2 of the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance which would allow a convenience store to operate as a permitted use in a B-2 zone. B. Review of 1991 Liquor Store financial report. 9. Adjournment. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, January 27, 1992 Members Present: Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brad Fyle, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: None Approval of minutes of the reqular meetinq held January 13, 1992. Ken Maus noted that Parks Commission member Fran Fair's term should be revised to show an expiration of 1994 rather than 1991, as noted by mistake in the meeting minutes. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint Herbst to approve the meeting minutes with the change as noted. Motion carried unanimously. Citizens comments/pet it ions, requests, and complaints. Area residents representing the Hockey Association were in attendance to voice t heir concern regarding the possibility of the development of an aquatic center without first reviewing the potential for the development of a hockey arena. It was noted by other representatives from the group that the growth and popularity of hockey has been tremendous in the area. Other communities have responded to the popularity of the sport by developing hockey arenas. These arenas help draw businesses to the area and if operated properly can be self- supporting. Maryann Porter voiced her opposition to the aquatic center concept because the aquatic center cannot be used all year around. It was her view that the hockey arena should take priority over an aquatic center. Marianne Foldesi noted that development of a hockey arena could include an area for meeting rooms and senior citizen areas. The facility could be used for a wide variety of community events. Ken Maus suggested that the question of whether or not the City should be participating in the development of a hockey arena should be passed on to the Parks Commission for comment and then referred to the Council for later review, Shirley Anderson wondered, "why can't the development of a hockey arena be a combined effort between neighboring townships and the City of Mont Ice Ilo? ". Ken Maus also noted that the City will work closely with townships or the school district when it's time to move ahead on development of a hockey arena. Council Minutes - 1/27/92 Brad Fyle noted that the school district has a larger taxing area that matches the population that will be using the arena; therefore, it is his view that the school district be the entity that funds development of a hockey arena. Consideration of a resolution adopting an ordinance requirinq licensing businesses conducting adult use/principal or adult use/accessory activities. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reminded Council that at the previous meeting Council adopted the zoning ordinance amendments defining and regulating adult uses and tabled consideration of the companion ordinance requiring licensing of adult use as principal and adult use as accessory. The Council tabled the matter pending development of a resolution outlining findings supporting the establishment of the ordinance. In addition, few modifications to the ordinance were needed in response to Council discussion. O'Neill outlined the proposed amendments to the ordinance and requested that Council consider adoption of a resolution supporting establishment of the ordinance. Paulette Conroy and others were in attendance to request that the City Council consider increasing the fee for adult/use accessory from $50 to a higher number to reflect the fact that the City spends more than $50 to process each adult/use accessory license application. She noted that extensive background checks are done on each applicant, public hearing notices must be sent, a business site inspection must be conducted, and, on occasion, it is probably likely that legal fees are spent in review of the application. Therefore, when looking at these costs, it appears that it could be justified that the City should increase the fee above $50. Assistant Administrator O'Neill noted that it is very possible that the fees could be increased to reflect the actual City costs. He noted, however, that the City Attorney indicated that the City must be careful to avoid using the licensing as a revenue -raising measure or as a method to make it difficult for this type of use to locate in the City. If the court finds that the City is charging a high licensing fee as a cover for trying to keep this typo of use out of the City, the ordinance could be thrown out, and then there would be no regulations governing this activity. O'Neill noted that it was the City Attorney's view, therefore, that the fee be relatively low so as to assure the City that the ordinance is viable. Council Minutes - 1/27/92 Council then reviewed the costs associated with processing an adult use accessory license. After reviewing the costs in detail, it was determined that the costs do exceed $250 per license application and therefore the licensing fee as proposed should be revised from $50 to $250 and the proposed resolution supporting the ordinance should be amended by including a listing of all the expenses associated with processing an adult accessory use license. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve the resolution adopting an ordinance requiring licensing businesses conducting adult/use principal or adult/use accessory activities with the exception that the proposed ordinance be amended to include a $250 fee for licensing rather than a $50 fee as proposed. In addition, the resolution should be modified by including the following list of expenses associated with processing of the license application. The cost to the City of conducting investigations and issuing licenses for adult use/accessory are as follows: Police investigations: $175 Cost of Assistant City Administrator: $30 Publication costs: $80 Cost of City Administrator: $50 Legal fees: $0 Motion carried unanimously. At this point in the meeting, the Monticello Hockey team arrived. A number of members were given the floor and they expressed the desire that the City consider development of a hockey arona. They aro tired of being on the bus 1 1/2 hours every day to practices and games. Ken Maus thanked them for their comments and noted that the matter has been referred to the Parks Commission for further review. 5. Consideration of ordering plans and specs for now warming house/community building/'Year-round restrooms for West Bridgo Park. John Simola presented a warming house plan for west Bridge Park and noted that the plan has boon reviewed and approved by the Parks Commission. In his review, Simola noted that this Item has boon in the City budget since 1988, with no action taken on it. Simola reviewed the concept which included the possibility of using an A -frame construction in the park to Council Minutes - 1/27/92 take advantage of the view of the river along with providing an aesthetically -pleasing building at the entrance to the community. Some of the features of the building would be as listed below. 1. A -frame construction using standard shingled roof. 2. incorporation of a loft over the restroom area for a view of the river. 3. The use of 4 -foot high burnished block on the exterior walls and burnished block on the interior walls to provide durability and low maintenance. 4. The use of pine or popple 6 -inch wide paneling in the community room area, loft, and ceilings to add warmth to the building. 5. Low -maintenance concrete floors throughout. 6. Handicapped -accessible year-round restrooms, accessible when the community room/warming house area is locked. 7. Cross-flow ventilation using openable windows and a ceiling -mounted exhaust fan. B. A two -zone gas-fired boiler heat system to provide cooler temperatures in the community room/warming house area when not in use. 9. A central woodburning stove such as used at the state park building at Lake Maria State Park. The woodstove could be utilized when the skating rink attendant is on duty. Simola noted that the cost to build this structure is estimated at $70,000 included all site utility work and soil investigation. Simola stated that it is staff's opinion that the addition of this building to Bridge Park will enhance the winter usage as well as summer usage at the park. Simola then requested that the City order the preparation of plans and specs from either TKDA or RCM. Both proposals are reasonably priced and will result in a quality product. Clint Herbst liked the design of the building; however, he noted, that there is too much money in it. Just because the money's in tho budget doesn't moan it should be spent. Ken Maus asked if an activity or attendance log has boon taken for that park. He was concerned that we're developing a warming house for a park that may not got much use. Dan Bionigen noted that he has a little bit of a problem with the proposal as the warming house costa too much money for the area. Brad Fylo stated that the Parks Board wont overboard on the design. Herbst stated that the structure should be more practical and less expensive. After discussion, it was the consensus of Council that staff review the concept plans and look at Council Minutes - 1127192 reducing the scope of the structure. The new design should allow the structure to be enlarged at a later date. Consideration of authorization of soils investiqation for new Public works building. John Simola recommended that the Council authorize staff to conduct soil investigation performed in the area of the public works building by Braun Intertech at an estimated cost of $1,150. This investigation is necessary in order to properly plan for public works building construction. The cost would be higher if unstable soil conditions were encountered below 15 feet which is not expected as the maximum depth of the gravel pit in the area was believed not to exceed 15 feet. At the same time, Braun Intertech would perform the soil boring for the Bridge Park warming house at the cost of $775 and perform soil borings for School Boulevard project to be used in development of the feasibility study at a cost of $500. After discussion, a motion was made by Brad Fyfe and seconded by Shirley Anderson to authorize soil Investigation to be conducted by Braun Intertech at an estimated cost of $1,150 . Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of ordering plans and specs for ballfiel d lightlnq for two or four of the City's fields. John Simola reported that participation in softball and baseball at all levels has increased in recent years, and the present ballf iold facilities are not sufficient to keep up with the demand, and therefore it is being proposed that the City consider lighting two or four of the City's ballfields , which would allow these fields to be available for more hours and thus allow the City to avoid the expense of developing now ballflelds. Simola went on to request that Council authorize City staff, with OSM's assistance, to prepare and distribute a request for proposal for Lighting two or four fields at the City's balifield complex noar tho NSP Training Center. it is estimated that the technical assistance from QSM to complete the RFP would be in the area of $1,000. Proposals would be ready for Council review on February 24, 1992. Members from the Softball Association were present. It was noted that the fields are in constant use. If all fields were lighted, Lt would double the capacity of the NSP ballfield facility. Clint Herbst noted that the school uses the fioids on occasion and might be willing to stop in to help with paying for the lights. Herbst noted that we should try to spread the cost to othor jurisdictions that have citizens that use the ballfioids. Brad Fyle concurred that we need to look at a Council Minutes - 1/27/92 wide variety of sources to pay for the lighting. Dan Blonigen stated that the school should be involved with financing of lighting if their teams are using the fields. Ken Maus observed that the school use may be very limited. The school district may not wish to pay much to see that the fields are lighted. Dan Blonigen also noted that we need user fees to help finance installation of the lights. John Simola reminded the Council that the City does receive $3,000 a year for maintenance of the fields from the Softball Association, and the association has agreed to pay for all electricity needed to run the lights. After discussion, the motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Shirley Anderson to authorize City staff to prepare and distribute a request for proposal for lighting for two or four fields at the City's ballfield complex near the NSP Training Center at an estimated cost of $1,000 to complete the RFP. Motion carried unanimously. 8. Consideration of a request to abate special assessment penalties and interest on 82-2 Improvement Proiect--Ultra Homes, Dickman Knutson. Rick Wolfsteller outlined the circumstances leading to the accumulation of $515,304 of interest and penalties against Outlet C and D and other lots located in the Meadow Oaks Subdivision. Wolfsteller noted that the owner of this property, Dickman Knutson, has not paid any of the assessments against this property. He went on to note that the City Attorney is presently in the process of completing the foreclosure documents as no payments have been made. Wolfateller requested that the City Council consider abating a portion of the delinquent taxes and assesaments as was done with the delinquent taxes and assessments against the land owned by Farm Credit. Woifatellor noted that our previous settlement with Farm Credit Systems amounted to approximately 15 1/2 percent reduction. Dan Blonigen stated that it was a mistake to assess this undeveloped property in the first place as the assessment and interest quickly exceeded the value of the land. It was Dan Blonigen's view that the City should continue with the foreclosure and not offer a 15 percent reduction in the assessment amount. Rick wolfstellor was concerned that we look at providing the same reduction to Knutson as was provided to Farm Credit. It was his view that if we could got Knutson to pay off his debt at a 15 percent reduction, the City would be money ahead. -0 Council Minutes - 1/27/92 After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Brad Fyle to agree to accept a reduction of special assessments against all the land owned by Ultra Homes equal to the penalties and interest that have accumulated against the parcels, contingent upon Ultra Homes paying off all remaining assessments balances within 30 days, along with deeding to the City the remaining park dedication requirements. The special assessment penalties and interest reduction would total approximately 15 1/5 percent or $106,141. 9. Consideration of bills for the month of January. After discussion, a motion was made by Clint Herbst and seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve payment of the bills as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 10. Other matters. Shirley Anderson noted that she is aware of an interesting program in another city whereby certain businesses that maintain exceptional landscaping are given a plaque in recognition of their efforts to beautify the city. Anderson thought that the City should consider starting a similar program. There being no further business, meeting was adjourned. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator 7 City Council Agenda - 2/10/92 4. Consideration of revised concept plan for warminq house/ community buildinq/restrooms in west Bridoe Park. City of Monticello. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the last meeting, City Council directed staff to go ahead with the soil investigation for the proposed park building but to reduce the cost of the building itself by removing some of the amenities. The soil investigation itself went quite well. Very little topsoil was found and is underlain by sand. The surface materials were a little loose and will need some compaction, but the underlying soils are quite dense. No unusual foundation problems are expected to be found during the building construction. It is possible a pocket of poorer soil conditions exist in the area of the older park building, but they do not appear to extend to the location of the new building. The new concept plan for the building is enclosed. The following changes have been made. 1. The loft and gable and windows have been deleted. 2. The wood stove and chimney has been deleted. 3. The interior finishes on the exterior walls in the restroom area have been deleted by extending the burnished block to the ceiling. This makes the restroom area more vandal resistant at lose cost. 4. Two exterior doors to the main area have been deleted. 5. The heating system has been changed from a gas- fired boiler system to forced air. 6. The windows have been changed in the main area to economical sliding units. 7. The roof pitch has been lowered to lessen the amount of materials. The above changes aro expected to save in excess of $10,000 on the building bringing the cost of the structure to approximately $50,000. Architectural fees, along with sower and water and electrical hookup are expected to cost about $0,000 bringing the total cost of the building to $58,000, or L $2,000 loss than the 1992 budget. The estimated construction costa have boon verified by a local contractor. However, we City Council Agenda - 2/10/92 must stipulate at this time, without a detailed set of formal plans depicting more detail, the figures are only approximate. The Park Board met on February 5, and looked at the new concept of the building. The Park Board wishes to have the roof pitch raised to give it some aesthetic appeal to public eye as it's the last thing you see going out of town or it's the first thing you see coming into town on Highway 25 to the north. The Park Board felt that with a lower pitch roof it would look more like a garage than a park building. In addition, the Park Board felt that the building was to the minimum size to fill the current and near future needs, and it would be doubtful that any further significant cuts could be made. At the request of the Park Board, we discussed the possibility of raising the roof back up with a local contractor to look at costs. The contractor we spoke with indicated that the additional cost to raise the roof back up would not be significant; that Is, unless we started adding windows again into the gable ends. Based upon this information, if we add a couple more thousand dollars to the building cost to raise the roof back up, we would be very near the budget figure. The only way to tell is to have tho building designed and bid. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:F 4�d �� 1sP 3 5/4- 1. The first alternative is to appro ��a the concept as proposed with the low pitch roof and authorize staff to C have TKDA proparo plans and specifications f�Zfurte D y \ review at a future council meeting. wiA 2. The socond alternative is to approve the concept as proposed but with an A-framo typo of pitched roof and to authorize city staff to work with TKDA to prepare plane and specifications for review at a future council meeting. ]. A third alternative would be to approve the concept plan as proposed and to authorize staff to work with TKDA to develop plane and specs with an altornato for a high- pitched roof to be reviewed at a future council mooting. City Council Agenda - 2/10/92 4. The fourth alternative would be to look at further cost reductions to the building by reducing the quality or durability of materials used or by down sizing the building. This may not be in the best interests of the City as long range maintenance costs could exceed the initial costs of more durable construction. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director and Parks Superintendent that the City Council authorize the project to proceed as outlined in Alternative i2 with the higher pitched roof. Current estimated costs based upon this scenario are approximately $50,000 to $52,000 for the building and $8,000 for design, soil investigation, and utility hookups bringing the total project to the 1992 budgeted amount of $60,000. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the new building concept plan. U J 1 South Elevation City Council Agenda - 2/10/92 Consideration of adoptinq revised job evaluation results/ comparable study appeals. (R.W.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: When the City Council adopted the Comparable Worth Study completed by the League of Minnesota Cities in December, 1991, an appeals process was allowed whereby individual employees were given the opportunity to request a review of their job points. Eleven individuals in ten job classes requested a review of their job evaluation results, which were reviewed by their immediate supervisors and myself and then forwarded to Sherri Le at the League of Minnesota Cities. Sherri Le, Personnel Advisor for the League, was the primary consultant who initially prepared our new Comparable Worth Study. Enclosed with the agenda you will find a copy of Sherri Le's response for each individual's appeal and her decision regarding any point adjustments she felt were warranted. In most cases, employees who appealed did receive additional points, and two positions received points that would place them in a higher grade level than originally proposed. Based on Sherri's review, the Building and Zoning Inspector's position is recommended to increase to Grade 10 and the Water/Sower Collection Superintendent's position to Grade 12. All other employees who received modifications to their point values would remain in their initial grade, resulting in no change in our pay structure. With the appeals process now completed for all employees, the recommendations of the League should now be considered by the City Council for approval. It is assumed that since the Council originally approved the Comparable Worth Plan and allowed for the appeal process to occur, the recommendations of the League personnel would also so be adopted. It IR recommended that upon adoption, the two individuals who move into now grades should be granted retroactive pay adjustments to December 28, 1991, the effective date of the original plan adoption. For Gary Anderson, Building Inspector, the additional points would place Gary in Grade 10 and would result in an hourly Increase of 10 cents. For Matt Theisen, Water Superintendent, movement into Grade 12 would result In a 22 cents an hour j adjustment as of December 28, 1991. While I'm euro that many of the employees who appealed their original results may still be disappointed that they wore unable to move Into a now grade, all individuals wore given an opportunity to have their evaluations roviowod. Now that this City Council Agenda - 2/10/92 process has been completed, the Council should authorize the recommendations of the League to be adopted revising our comparable worth results for 1992. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: /1 1. Accept the recommendations of the League of Minnesota Cities' Sherri Le adjusting the point values for each of the job classes as noted along with any pay adjustments that result from this appeals process. ( Z -/,o 2. Do not adopt the recommendations of the consultant. with the Council authorizing an appeals process, it would seem unreasonable to now not accept the results of the appeals process. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: As I noted, all employees who appealed their job evaluation results did receive a change in points assigned, with one individual actually losing one point upon review, while no process is perfect, and many employees are still unsatisfied with the results, I believe the Council should adopt the recommendations of Sherri Le. Since the consultant prepared the original study, i assume the Council would want to accept their recommendations on their review of particular positions. Whilo the Council could certainly allow additional appeals to be made on their original appeals, this process could go on forever which may not be feasible. If particular positions change responsibilities and job duties, the option is always there in the future to again review a particular individual's job class to see if additional points are warranted in the future. A substantial change would have to occur to a particular job before the job is again reevaluated. Othorwiae, it is expected that all positions would be reevaluated on a three to five year time frame in the future. SUPPORTING DATA: Narrative review of each job class reviewed by Sherri Lo and a summary of the results. League of Minnesota Cities January 21, 1992 Mr. Rick Wolfsteller Ciry Administrator City of Monticello P.O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362 Dear Rick: 183 University Ave. East St. Paul, MN 55101.2526 (612)227•5600(FAX:221•0986) Our review of the appeals made by Monticello employees regarding their job evaluation points has been completed. Enclosed is a detailed summary of the appeals and the decisions and explanations regarding each. All appeals were reviewed and analyzed as to the merits of the request made. An explanation is provided in all cases where the original award was retained. Where the original award was changed, an explanation is provided in most cases except where there was agreement with the justification and no further explanation was necessary. If you have any questions regarding the decisions, please call me. Sincerely, Sherrie Le Personnel Advisor Lague of Minnesota Cities Enclosure I SUMMARY JOB EVALUATION APPEALS BY POSITION 0 New Total Point Job Class Change Total Grade Building b Zoning Inspector +12 154 10 City Bookkeeper + 1 74 same Computer Support Analyst + 1 142 same Deputy Registrar + 1 72 same Office Manager + 2 149 same Util. Billing Clerk/Recept. + 5 73 same Water/Sewer Coll. Supt. + 5 180 11 Econ. Devel. Director - 1 160 same Public Works Director + 5 231 same Asst. City Administrator + 6 239 same 0 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Accountabiliry for Actions The information provided does not support a move from "moderate" to "major" influence on budget and operations. This position reports directly to the Assistant City Administrator and provides professional staff support to the IDC, HRA, and EDA. Providing support and carrying out decisions of the IDC is not the same as being in the decision making position. The Committees make the decisions, the EDD position does research, makes recommendations, prepares agendas, takes minutes, and carries out decision of the Committees. It is also my understanding that the Committee, not the EDD, decides how funds will be spent. The Economic Development budget is reviewed and approved by the Assistant City Administrator. He also evaluates performance, oversees the work and provides direction to this position. The input the Economic Development Director has in these kinds of decisions is important, and was considered in the award of moderate. Decision: No Change. Planning Upon reconsideration, I agree that the length of planning could fall into the range of 6 months to one year. I don't necessarily agree with the reasons stated, but I do agree with the conclusion. Decision: Add 2 points to Planning (41)). Working Conditions The City Administrator appealed the point awards for some of the subfactors within this factor. As anyone in the supervisory chain also had the right to appeal points, these were reviewed. Dust and Dirt To be consistent with the other position that has similar exposure to Dust and Dirt (.Assistant City Administrator), there is justification for the original award. Decision: No change. Extreme Heat and Cold Considering the amount of time during a year when it is either extremely hot or cold and the requirements of the position, the exposure isn't significant enough to qualify as rare. 1 agree with Rick. Decision: Subtract I point from Working Conditions for Extreme Heat and Cold. Rain, Snow, and Wind As with Dust and Dirt, there is enough justification to retain the original award. Decision: No change. Machinery and Power Tools I agree with Rick. No points should have been awarded. Decision: Subtract 1 point from Working Conditions for Machinery and Power Tools. Climbing and Heights As I mentioned on some of the other appeals, this subfactor was intended to cover climbing and heights considerably higher that what is required of this position. Decision: Subtract 1 point from Working Conditions for Climbing and Heights. TOTAL CHANGE: -1 point NEW PO4IIT TOTAL: 160 points GRADE: same d f�X��utZ�l�s'I1thII1►11~7L1I.:�y.t:•1� Knowledge and Experience I don't think it would be reasonable to increase the "minimum" qualification above a BA and five years of professional experience. I really feel that the requirement listed is sufficient, even with the diversity this position entails. In addition, I don't agree that Assistant Administrators in larger communities typically deal only with a single facet of local government. I am sure you could find examples of this but they would be the exception, not the rule. Decision: No Change. Planning I agree. Decision: Add 3 points to Planning (6F). Working Conditions Heavy lifting Sorry, volunteering to help move junk and to help move office furniture on occasion - even once or twice a year - doesn't count. Your job does not require you to do heavy lifting. Decision: No Change. Dust and Dirt 1 agree; wasn't aware. Decision: Add 1 point to Working Conditions for Dust and Dirt (781). Extreme Heat and Cold think this one is more questionable as I assume most construction doesn't occurs during the warmer months. Most of the time, even in summer, it is not "extremely" hot. 1 don't think this could ever occur enough to register on the than (in the relative sense). Decision: No Change. Rain, Snow, and Wind 1 agree. This is more likely to happen enough to register as rare. Decision: Add 1 point to Working Conditions for Rain, Snow, and Wind (981). Chemicals and Fumes 1 agree. Decision: Add I point to Working Conditions for Chemicals and Fumes (1181). Machinery and Power Tools This factor covers use of, not exposure to, machinery and power tools. Decision: No Change. TOTAL CHANGE: +6 points NEW POINT TOTAL: 239 points GRADE: same 0 OFFICE MANAGER Planning I understand that some planning will extend out over a longer period of time. But most planning, especially with your added office management responsibilities, would involve weekly and monthly planning. "Most" planning is the key here, so 1.6 months is most accurate. Decision: No Change. Working Conditions Abnormal Hours Occasionally working late because a deadline is going to be missed is not applicable here. But, in this case, working evenings is also due to others not providing information to you on time. It is also due to a decision by the City not to establish and enforce a strict time limit on submitting materials, for one reason or another. As this is beyond your control, occurs with some regularity, and is required of your position, 1 point could be awarded. Decision: Add I point to Working Conditions for Abnormal Hours (3131). Manipulating Objects Requiring Fine Coordination/Manual Dexterity I agree. Decision: Add 1 point to Working Conditions for Manipulating Objects (6E4). Climbing and Heights This factor is intended to cover climbing and heights that are considerably higher than a normal 6 foot ladder. Decision: No Change. In response to your other comments, I agree that there are some unknowns with a restructured position. 1 recommend this position be looked at again in one year to determine whether the job evaluation points are accurate. On the issue of minimum qualifications and knowledge required, 1 could foresee some possible growth in this area. 1 don't think the number of years of experience would be extended, but the type of experience might. It is also possible, depending on how the position evolves, that it could require I.2 years of college or completion of vo-tech training in the future. TOTAL CI IAN CE: +2 points NEW POINT TOTAL: 149 points GRADE: same j" PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Knowledge and Experience 1 don't think it would be reasonable to increase the minimum qualifications above two i years of college and six years of experience. This positron is very diverse, but i do believe that the requirements are sufficient. If the city were to hire for the position today, candidates with greater than the minimum qualifications would certainly receive high consideration. But I don't believe that higher level of knowledge and experience is essential to successfully complete the job of public works director. Throughout Minnesota, it is fairly rare for Public Works Director positions to require a bachelor's degree. Decision: No change. Planning I agree. Decision: Add 3 points to Planning (SE). Working Conditions Abnormal Hours I agree. I did not give credit for the requirement to attend City Council meetings. Decision: Add I point to Working Conditions for Abnormal Hours (381). Abnormal Human Behavior 1 agree that credit should be given for the number of complaints received and dealt with on a variety of issues. This category has strayed quite a bit from it's original intent and is now difficult to assess. Abnormal behavior in working conditions was initially intended to cover police officers and others who deal with criminals, suspects, people involved in domestic disputes, rowdy bar patrons, etc. t do agree that points should be awarded for dealing with irate citizens, particularly for a public works director. Decision: Add 1 point to Working Conditions for Abnormal Human Behavior (10111). TOTAL CHANGE: +5 points NEW POINT TOTAL 231 points GRADE: same 0 WATER/SEWER COLLEC PION SUPERINTENDS\T Supervision 1 agree. Decision: Add 3 points to Supervision (C complete - 13 points). Working Conditions Heavy lifting On the job questionnaire that you filled out, lifting objects up to 50 pounds is listed as occasionally. The occasional lifting and moving of 150 pound containers of chemicals was considered in the original decision. Decision: No Change. Abnormal Hours While on call at all times, you indicated that you work about one weekend a month. The Water/Sewer Collection Operator works significantly more on the weekends and does not receive higher points. Decision: No Change. Abnormal Human Behavior 1 agree that some points should be awarded for the large number of complaints received and dealt with on a variety of issues. Decision: Add 1 point to Working Conditions for Abnormal Human Behavior (1061). Excavating What is being measured by this condition is performing actual excavation (digging), not standing in an excavation site. Decision: No Change. Electrical Shock Because you do perform these tasks, I agree that some points should be awarded. However, if adequate safety measures are followed, 1 believe the risk of electrocution would be "limited' Decision: Add I point to Working Conditions for Electrical Shock (16131). TOTAL CHANGE: +5 points NEW POINT TOTAL: Igo points GRADE: Moves up one grade to Grade 11. UTILITY BILLING CLFRK/RI?CGP'1'IONIs'r Accountability for Actions The information provided was considered in making the original determination. In addition, there will now be an office manager to provide additional supervision to this position. As you know, that was approved by the Council while I was there, but some of the impact will be incorporated over time. However, I do think that a change from advisory to indirect may be more reflective of this position. Decision: Add 4 points to Accountability for Actions (Blb). Planning This is a very commonly misunderstood factor. It is intended to address major planning. For example, planning the direction of a department or major city projects, programs, Finances, or a department budget, etc. The other important aspect to remember is that a highly motivated individual may very well make suggestions for changes that will improve the job. This is a performance issue, not a requirement for the position. As much as 1 may want to reward an individual who is highly motivated, performance factors must be separated out and not considered in job evaluation. The task force put together to look at office remodeling is a one-time task force, not a regular part of the job, so cannot be considered in this process. Most of the issues cited on page 3 under "Utility Billing" are examples of individual tasks preformed in the job, not examples of planning done. Sticking to a schedule, prioritizing work, assigning numbers to accounts, etc. are all required tasks. They are not examples of the kind of planning intended to be addressed by this factor. The planning involved in converting the utility billing system and the planning involved in the newsletter work was given credit in the award of 2A. Decision: No Change. Working Conditions Abnormal Human Behavior I agree that points should be given for the large number of complaints received and dealt with on a variety of issues. However, "occasional" would be more appropriate. The majority of contacts with citizens are relatively friendly, whether the person is concerned, unhappy, or complaining. Abnormal behavior does not include every possible behavior that isn't cheerful and friendly. Abnormal behavior was intended to cover for example, suspects resisting arrest or firing a gun at an officer who is trying to arrest them; physical violence aimed at a social worker who is trying to intervene in a domestic situation, etc.. Responding to complaints on policy changes, bills, streets not plowed, and the like are minor compared to truly "abnormal" behavior. Decision: Add 1 point to Working Conditions for Abnormal Human Behavlor (3111). ,rOTAL CHANGE: +S points NEW POINT TOTAL: 73 points GRADE: same DEPUTY REGISTRAR Accountability for Actions Training, seminars and work-related association meetings are not your normal work. The job evaluation factors are intended to measure your normal job. Many employees attend these kinds of meetings and seminars. All sorts of things nut required in the normal job could come up. Job evaluation measures the normal job. Decision: No Change. Working Conditions Heavy Lifting 1 recognize that there is some lifting required in your positions. I don't think the weight described would fall into the category of "heavy" however. Although there is not a strict cutoff, 50 pounds and above would be more typical of heavy lifting. Decision: No Change. Manipulating Objects Requiring Fine Coordination/ Manual Dexterity I agree. Decision: Add 1 point to %forking Conditions fur Manipulating Objects (61114). Dust and Dirt When you view this in the relative light, your work is performed in very clean surroundings. this subfactor is trying to capture a whole different level of dust and dirt. Decision: No Change. TOTAL CHANG E: + I point NEW POINT TOTAL: 72 points GRADE: same c. M�VVI REWS'171AR Supplement Working Conditions Awkward Working Position As there 1s a lot of staudiug and surae sittiug, the amount of time spent In awkward working positions is limited. Credit was given at the occasional level for the amount required. Decision: No Change. Excessive Standing there is a signirictwt amount of time required to enter data in the computer, which is done while sitting. In addition, there is not n constant strearn of customers all day, everyday. When there are no customers, there is ample opportunity to sit. "Frequently" covers the amount of time Ute position is required to stand for excessive periods. Decislom No Change. Chenirds and Innes Itel:ulvely speaking, the uuartutt and type of tbendwls you work with in your job alc jinni nlll. I'llo intoln if oft mihfnotor was to gilt at chaulicals n.,J (1... wr nr ...ninr prupultion that pose health risks. 'Chis is guile different than nmr'mal office exposure. Decision: No Change. TOTAL CHANGE: 0 NI?W I'OIN'1"I'fJ'1'AI-: 72 points t RAIJE: same :u' d 91 U' utt GU: S 1 Z15 ill "1 936(1 -17L -Z19:131 53111 D 14W JU 3091JI'l C tb i� COMI'lITE'R SUITORT ANAL1'S'1' Accountability for Actions In response to your question, "Degree of Influence" on budget and operations has a relative scale from minor to maximum. Normally the amount of influence is measured in terms of influence on budget and operations. That is the case here. The City Administrator would be the only position that has the level of influence equated with the rating of maximum. That position clearly has considerable influence over budget and city-wide operations. A "true" department head is normally responsible for developing and adntinistering a department budget and for overseeing all operations including establishing policies and procedures and supervising staff. (1 should probably mention that this should not be confused with those who attend the "department head" staff meeting, because that meeting includes a number of positions that normally would not be considered department heads.) Actual department heads (including the Assistant City Administrator) fall into the "major" category. A rating of "moderate" would fit positions that have input and responsibility for recommending part of a department budget to their supervisor, and individuals who are responsible for a very small department. These positions also typically have responsibility for deciding some operational issues. That would fit your position. Within this same factor, you had a question oil how 'direct" control was defined. "Direct" control refers to positions that have ultimate control over the final results. 'This includes positions below the City Administrator, but only to the highest supervisory level over a department. If there is another level above a position thauapproves the more controversial or important operational and budget decisions before the City Administrator, that higher position really has the direct control. Both Rick and Je ff have ultimate authority over the various duties covered by your position. "Indirect" control refers to control that is inure spread out; where more than one mason is involved in the heavier decisions. Complex budgetary and operational issues must be approved by a higher level. 'Iltis doesn't mean that you, and others who are at a similar level, don't have to make independent decisions. Everyone, at every level, must make day to -day decisions that have relatively lesser impact. TYiat is assumed. -Ihis part of the Accountability Factor deals with ultimate (bottom line) control. Jeff has this control over computer issues and Rick over finance. Decision: No Change. Planning 'Ihe plartniug that you describe was taken into account in the original determination. Normally, any position that has planning responsibilities has a range of planning both in terms of complexity and time span covered. Considering that, I am comfortable with the original award of 3c. Decision: No Change. Working Conditions Heavy Lifting 1 wasn't aware of the requirement to move heavy computer equipment. If that is required, I point could be awarded for this as "rare." In the relative scheme of frequency, this would occur only rarely. Decision: Add 1 point to Working Conditions for Heavy Lifting (1131). Abnormal Hours Working some extra hours on occasion is not what was meant by this factor. Having a regular work schedule which requires working shifts other than days, either exclusively or on a rotating basis is the intent. Decision: No Change. Electric Shock 1 would assume that you are required to unplug the computer before doing any adjustment that could cause an electrical shock. While a computer technician may have some reasonable exposure to electric shock, your position should have no more exposure than anyone else who uses a computer in their work. Decision: No Change. TOTAL CHANGE: + 1 point NEW POINT TOTAL• 142 points GRADE: same 0 CITY BOOKKEEPER Planning The planning work you describe is probably not what is intended by this factor. However, 1 think your planning responsibilities are comparable to many other city positions that do very routine, minimal planning. Therefore, l think a change to 2A1 would be justified. Decision: Add 1 point to Planning (2A I). Working Conditions Heavy Lifting Forty pounds is getting pretty close to the number of pounds that would be considered heavy. But to be consistent, 50 pounds or more would be needed with some frequency to award anything for "heavy" lifting. Decision: No Change. TOTAL CHANGE: + I point NEW PO[NTTOTAL: 74 points Grade: same BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTOR On the issue of your job title, it is quite common for official titles and working titles to be different. I don't think the ordinances would have to be changed. As this position reports to the Assistant City Administrator who has review authority over many aspects of zoning and approves building and site plan reports, 1 think Building and Zoning Inspector is the more descriptive title. However, the title is a separate issue from the job evaluation point assignment. As such, I will leave the determination of the job title up to the City Council. Knowledge and Experience I agree that 3-5 years of experience would be more appropriate in light of the amount of the more complex inspections and plan review work. Note: The job description will need to be revised to reflect this change if adopted by the Council. l would suggest four years as a minimum requirement. Decision: Add 10 points to Knowledge and Experience (0). Planning According to notes from your interview, 99% of this position's time is spent on building and zoning and only one percent is spent on civil defense. The information justifying an increase in the planning points addressed only civil defea sc work. This factor measures the timeframe for "most" planning. As most planning involves building and zoning related issues, there is no support for an increase in points. Decision: No Change. Working Conditions Fleavy Lifting Relatively speaking, the type of lifting described does not fall into the category of 'heavy" lifting. Decision: No Change. Awkward Working Position Because there are a lot of duties and there is much time spent which does not involve an awkward working position, 2C2 is appropriate. Decision: No Change. Abnormal Hours Tile justification provided was already taken into account in the award of 3C2. Most normal hours are during the day. Decision: No Change. 99 Excessive Standing Based on your description,11 think too many points were awarded for excessive travel/sitting. These two subfactors go hand-in-hand. With the additional information, two changes should be made to be more accurate. One point should be removed from Excessive Travel/Sitting and one added to Excessive Standing. Decision: Subtract I point from Working Conditions for Excessive Travel/Excessive Sitting (5C2) and add 1 point to Working Conditions for Excessive Standing (4B1). Dust and Dirt The information provided was already considered in the award of 7133. Decision: No Change. Extreme Heat and Cold Information presented was assumed. If your position required you to do actual construction in "extreme conditions", the award may be higher. This would be caused by the need to be out in this type of weather much longer. Decision: No Change. Rain, Snow, and Wind As this position has a lot of work that is indoors or under some protection, overall "occasional" is appropriate. Decision: No Change. Abnormal Human Behavior I agree. Decision: Add 2 points to Working Conditions for Abnormal Human Behavior (100). Climbing & Heights Occurrences described were taken into account in the original award of 13C2. Decision: No Change. Excavating Points for this Working Condition are awarded only to positions who actually have to excavate. Decision: No Change. TOTAL CHANGE: +12 points NEW POINT TOTAL: 154 points GRADE: Moves up one to Grade 10. D City Council Agenda - 2/10/92 6. Consideration of annual maintenance agreement for county state aid highways in Monticello, City of Monticello. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Enclosed you will find a copy of the 1992 Maintenance Agreement for snow and ice removal for Country Road 75 from Willow Street near Pinewood Elementary School to Country Road 118 near Riverroad Plaza. In addition, the agreement covers 258 of snow and ice removal on CSAH 39 from the City Public Works building to County Road 75. The county state aid highways recently turned back to the City (CSAH 58 and 59) have been deleted from the agreement. As always, the coat paid the City is based upon Wright County's average annual cost per mile for routine maintenance 1k in the previous year. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: S� n v 1. The first alternative is to approve the maintenance 1� agreement with Wright County as presented. 2. The second alternative would be not to approve the maintenance agreement as presented. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the City Council approve the maintenance agreement as enclosed. This maintenance agreement results in a better level of service to the community for snow and ice removal than performed sulely by the County. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the 1992 Maintenance Agreement. 6 1992 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the City of Monticello 1-•-einafter referred to as the "City" and the County of Wright hereinafter referred is the "County". WHEREAS, Chapter 162, Minnesota Statutes, permits the County to designate certain roads and streets within the City as County State Aid Highways, and WHEREAS, the City has concurred In the designation of the County State Aid Highway within Its limits as Identified In County Hoard's resolutions of August 28, October 8, November 5, December 3, December 27, 1957 and January 7, 1958, and WHEREAS, It is deemed to the best Interest of all parties that the duties and responsibilities of both the City and the County as to maintenance on said County State Aid Highways to be clearly defined, NOW THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED with regard to said County State Aid Highway maintenance: That the City will be responsible for routine maintenance on the following, highways. MAINT. PLAN ROAD SEGMENT MILES COST/MI.* TOTAL COST* I. CSAII 75 From Willow St. to E. Jct. CSAII 39 3.74 530.38 1,983.62 (Includes four lane portion.) 2. CSAII 39 From City Pub. Works Bldg. to 0.32 132.59 42.43 W. Jct. of CSAII 75 TOTAI. 4.06 2,026.05 .net the routine maintenance shall consist of the following: (Malut. Plan) I. (CSAR 75) - Snow and ice removal 2. (CSAII 39) - 25% of the snow and ice removal *Based on 1990 overalls annual costs. That when the City deems It desirable to remove snow by hauling, it shall do so at Its own expense. The City shall also be responsible for all snow and Ice removal on sidewalks and other boulevard related maintenance outside the curb or street area. That the County will be responsible for all other maintenance . That the City shall Indemnify, save and hold harmless the County and all of Its agents and employees of any form ngnlnsL oily and all claims, demnnda, actions or causes of action of whatever nature or chnroeLor nrlsing out of or by reason of the execution or parformanco of the work provided for haraln to be performed by the City. It Is further ngreed that oily and all full-time employees of the City and all other employees of the City engaged In the performnnce of any work or services required or provided for herein to be performed by the City shall be considered employees of the City only and not of the County; and that any and all claims that may or might arise under Workmen's Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota oil behalf of said employees while so engaged and any olid all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said City employees while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be r—dorad heroin shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of the City. That the County shall indemnify, save and hold harmless the City and all of Its agents and employees of any form against any and all claims, demands, actions or causes of actions of whatever nature or character, whether at law or equity, arising out of or by ra--on of the execution, omission or performance of the work provided for herein to be p armed by the County including, but not 1 united to, claims made arising out of maintenance obligations of County, engineering, design, taking or inverse condemnation proceedings. It is further agreed that any and all full-time employees of the County and and all other employees of the County engaged In the performance of any work or services required or provided for herein to be performed by the County shell be considered employees of the County only and not of the City: and that any and all claims that may or might arise under the workman's compensation act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said employees while so engaged and any and all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of said County employees while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of the County. That in December of 1992 , the City shall receive payment from the County for their work. This amount shall be based on the 19 91 average annual cost per mile for routine maintenance on Munlcipsl County State Aid Nighvny n. The average annual cost per mile will reflect only those costs associated with the areae of routine maintenance for which the City is responsible. ADOPTED: 19 ATTEST: Mayor I ty Clark \` CF.RTI FICATI ON 1 hereby certify that the above Is a true and correct copy of a rosolution duly passed, adopted and approved by the City Council of said City on , 19_ APPROVED AND ACCEPTED: COUNTY OF Chairman of tho Board ATTEST: County Coordinator City Clark Name of City (2) He City Council Agenda - 2/10/92 7. Consideration of adoptinq an ordinance amendment to Section 12-2 of the City of Monticello Zoninq Ordinance which would allow a convenience store to operate as a permitted use in a B-2 zone. Applicant, City of Monticello. (J.O.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As you recall, a few months ago the City adopted a zoning ordinance amendment that moved convenience store use from the permitted use category in the B-1 zone to the conditional use category. This change had the inadvertent effect of eliminating convenience store as a permitted use in the B-2, B-3, and B-4 zones. This occurred because in the B-2 zone regulations, it states that all uses permitted in the B-1 zone are also permitted in the B-2 zone. Therefore, when Council took the previous action to remove convenience stores from the list of permitted uses in the B-1 zone, the convenience store use could no longer "roll into" the B-2, B-3, and B-4 zones. Since it was not the Intent of the Planning Commission and Council to eliminate convenience stores from operation in the B-2, B-3, and B-4 zones, it appears to be just a housekeeping matter to adopt an ordinance amendment which would allow convenience stores to operate in the 0-2 zone. Once identified as a permitted use in the B-2 zone, the convenience store permitted use would then roll forward into the 8-3 and B-4 zones. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to adopt an amendment to Section 12-2 of the City of Monticello Zoning Ordinance which would allow a convenience store to operate as a permitted use in the B-2 zone. 0 C1 Under this alternative, convenience store activity would be allowed to occur In the 8-2 through B-4 zones as it had been previously allowed prior to recent Zoning Ordinance amendment that made convenience storos a conditional use In the B-1 zone. This alternative would appear to be the most reasonable because I do not believe It was the Planning Commission or Council's intent to eliminate convenience store use from the B-2 through B-4 zones. Planning Commission recommended this alternativo. Motion to deny adoption of an amendment to the zoning ordinance which would allow a convenience store to operate as a permitted use in the B-2 zone. l City Council Agenda - 2/10/92 This alternative should be selected if for some reason the City Council believes that it is not proper to have a convenience store operating as a permitted use in the B-2 through B-4 zones. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council select alternative 01 for reasons stated. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of proposed ordinance amendment. 8 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELL0 HEREBY ORDAINS THAT CHAPTER 12, SECTION 2, OF THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO CONVENIENCE STORES AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE B-2 ZONE BE AMENDED BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING: 12-2: PERMITTED USES: The following are permitted uses in a B-2 district: [GG) Gas station/convenience store. Adopted this 10th day of February, 1992. Mayor (—. City Administrator A W City Council Agenda - 2/10/92 Review of 1991 Liquor Store financial report. (R.W.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Enclosed with the agenda you will find a copy of the liquor store financial report for 1991 comparing 1991 to 1990. Joe Hartman, Liquor Store Manager, will be in attendance at Monday night's meeting to review the report and along with myself, will answer any questions you may have. Generally speaking, the liquor store operations appear to be very favorable in that total operating income for 1991 is up over $18,000 or a 13% increase over 1990 income. When including other income consisting primarily of interest income on investments, the total liquor store revenues amounted to $215,192. This is $26,000 higher than last year. For determining how well the operation is doing, the Council should focus on the operating income which represents a truer picture of how the store 3s doing. While interest an investments is considered income for the liquor store, these surplus funds could be allocated or spent in the future for City projects and have no bearing on the liquor store business in general. Gross profit from operations also has shown an increase in 1991 to $331,689 compared to $295,696 in 1990. Gross profit margins are 23.498 of total sales which appear in line with our expectations. The overall net operating income of 10.88 is also satisfactory and is meeting our goals. Previously, Council members have also expressed concerns over the advertising expenditures the liquor store has been Incurring. For 1991, we had initially budgeted $4,500 for advertising expense and we did exceed this amount considerably with advertising expenses amounting to $7,542. While it appears our salvo havo increased to a now high of $1,412,000 it is also hard to determine whether this 1s attributable to our increased advertising cost or whether the sales would have occurred without advertising. For 1992, we again budgeted $4,500 for advertising and based on the Council's previous concerns, Mr. Hartman will be reducing advertising expenditures for 1992. For reference purposes, in 1988 we spent $3,456 for advertising, in 1989 - $4,606, in 1990 - $4,286. As you can see, advertising expenditures have increasod substantially in 1991 and if the Council so desires, we can certainly cut back our advertising expenditures. So far in 1992, Joe has boon cutting back advertising in light of the Council's concerns. The Council may wish to further discuss and provldo direction on advertising Monday evening. City Council Agenda - 2/10/92 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: After reviewing the financial report, the Council can accept the report as presented. In addition, if the Council would like to limit the advertising expenditures for 1992, the Council could provide direction to Mr. Hartman on an appropriate amount. C. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of year-end financial report and summary of 1991 advertising expenditures. 10 HONTICELLO MUNICIPAL LIQUOR BALANCE SHEET 31Dec91 Current Assets: Cash Change Fund Investments A/R - NSF Checks Inventory Prepaid Insurance TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS Fixed Assets Land & Parking Lot Buildings Furniture & Equipment less: Accumulated Depreciation -OTAL FIXED ASSETS TOTAL ASSETS Liabilities Accounts Payable Sales Tax Payable salaries Payable Accrued Vacation/Sick Leave other Accrued Expenses TOTAL LIABILITIES RETAINED EARNINGS TOTAL LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE I 32,942.56 1,500.00 737,349.06 417.72 191,290.61 4,497.23 ------------ 969,997.18 46,591.03 196,074.19 89,104.08 (174,865.06) 156,904.24 1,126,901.42 141.97 (10.10) 5,200.05 7,933.44 (960.60) ------------ 122,304.76 1,004,596.66 ------------ 1,126,901.42 =ccc_o_eeaoe N c] MONTICELLO MUNICIPAL LIQUOR REVENUE AND EXPENSES COMPARISON FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1990 AND 1991 1990 1991 YEAR-TO-DATE YEAR-TO-DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT SALES Liquor 360,989 382,719 Beer 704,553 822,602 wine 150,832 159,224 other Merchandise 42,933 45,581 Misc Non -Taxable Sales 2,082 2,277 Discounts (353) ---------- (277) ---------- TOTAL SALES 1,261,036 1,412,126 COST OF GOODS SOLD (965,340) (1,080,437) GROSS PROFIT 295,696 331,689 GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE :rsonal Services Salaries 79,478 88,247 PERA 3,020 2,849 FICA 5,007 5,808 Insurance 9,167 9,392 Unemployment Benefits 285 20 TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 96,957 106,315 Supplies Office Supplies 1,128 845 General Operating Supplie 5,947 6,183 Other Supplies 711 ---------- 881 ---------- TOTAL SUPPLIES 7,786 7,908 N c] MONTICELLO MUNICIPAL LIQUOR REVENUE AND EXPENSES COMPARISON FOR THE VEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31 , 1990 AND 1991 1990 1991 YEAR-TO-DATE YEAR-TO-DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT Other Services & Charges Professional Services 2,074 3,000 Maintenance Agreements 1,884 1,975 Communication 770 952 Travel -Conference -Schools 79 125 Advertising 4,286 7 , 542 Insurance 15,475 17,587 Utilities, Electric 9,146 8,457 Utilities, Heating 932 1,163 Utilities, Sewer & water 235 416 Utilities, Refuse 2,382 604 Maintenance, Equipment 472 1,294 Maintenance, Building 1,930 1,201 Maintenance, Other 472 194 Depreciation --Acquired As 15,909 19,635 Other Misc Expenses 664 691 TOTAL OTHER SERVICES & CH 56,710 64,837 TOTAL GENERAL & ADMIN EXPENS 161,453 179,061 TOTAL. OPERATING INCOME 134,243 (. 9• ea aaeaaaea 152,628 aeaaa:eceoe Other Income (Expense) Interest Income 55,034 60,749 Cash Lang/Short (164) (184) Sale of Property 2,000 TOTAL OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE) 54,870 62,564 NET INCOME (EXPENSE) 189,113 eaaaoeaesa 215,192 ocao a:oceaa Transfers In/Out (138,000) (4,444) ADJUSTED NET INCOME (EXPENSE 51,113 CCCCCaaaCa 210,749 aCC0 aia0Caa O MONTICELLO MUNICIPAL LIQUOR GROSS PROFIT BY PRODUCT COMPARISON FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1990 AND 1991 1990 1991 YEAR-TO-DATE YEAR-TO-DATE AMOUNT AMOUNT Liquor Sales 360,989 382,719 Discounts (353) (277) Cost of Sales 274,190 ---------- 280,639 ---------- GROSS PROFIT - LIQUOR 86,446 101,803 Beer Sales 704,553 822,602 Cost of Sales 569,948 666,982 GROSS PROFIT - BEER 134,604 155,619 Wine Sales 150,832 159,224 Cost of Sales 89,424 97,387 GROSS PROFIT - WINE 61,408 61,837 tac Sales 42,933 45,581 �.)at of Sales 24,819 28,479 GROSS PROFIT - MIBC TAXABLE 18,114 17,102 Misc Non-taxable Sales 2,082 2,277 Cost of Sales 1,206 1,453 GROSS PROFIT - MISC NON -TAXA 876 825 TOTAL SALES 1,261,036+ 1,412,126 TOTAL COST OF SALES 959,587 1,074,940 TOTAL FREIGHT COST 5,752 5,497 TOTAL GROSS PROFIT 295,696 CC��LCCC�C 331,689 ��C�93C��� O 1991 ADVERTISING EXPENSE SUMMARY U.S. West - Telephone Directory $ 264 Gronseth - Telephone Directory 396 KRWC Radio 792 Monticello Shopper News 633 Monticello Magazine 250 Wright Way Shopper 2,061 Travelers Directory 322 Cedar Map Co. 134 Monticello Times 2,027 T.V. Times 250 Minnesota J.C.'s 102 National Child Safety Council 66 Minnesota Amateur Baseball ABsn. 48 R. Karn - Dino's Restaurant Menu 99 World Marketing 40 KMOM Radio 59 S 7,542 MONTICELLO VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT Monticello, Minnesota SS362 QUARTERLY REPORT OF THE MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT President - Marn Flicker Vice President - Woody Haaland Secretary - Mark Wallen Treasurer - David Kranz Chief - Jerry Wein Joint Fire Board - Scott Douglas Assistant Chief - Mark Wallen Tom Lielen Captains - Scott Douglas Training Officers - Ted Farnam Mike Johnson Kevin Stumpf The following is a quarterly report of the Monticello Fire Department from October 1, 1991 to December 31. 1991. There were 33 calls which required 814 man hours. The average attendance at a call was 18 men. During the past 3 -month period, we had 3 training sessions requiring 122 man hours. The average attendance per drill was 24 men. Also during the quarter, we had two special NRC drills which required 57 man hours: average attendance was 10 men. Activities for the quarter included: An open house at the fire station in October. Sincerely. D David B. Kranz Reporter MONTICELLO C VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT Monticello, Minnesota 55362 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE MONTICELLO FIRE DEPARTMENT President - Marn Flicker Vice President - Woody Haaland Secretary - Mark Wallen Treasurer - David Kranz Chief - Jerry Wein Joint Fire Board - Scott Douglas Assistant Chief - Mark Wallen Tom Liefert Captains - Scott Douglas Training Officers - Ted Farnam Mike Johnson Kevin Stumpf The following Is the annual report of the Monticello Fire Department for the year of 1991 There were 118 cells which required 2704 man hours. The average attendance at a call was 16.5 men. The breakdown of calls is as follows: City of Monticello — 60, Monticello Township — 44, Silver Creek Township — 10, and Otsego Township — 1. Mutual aid was given 3 times (not reflected in day or night totals). We had 58 calls during the daytime (6 a.m. to 6 p.m.) and 57 calls during the night (6 p.m. to 6 a. m.). During the past year, we had 12 training sessions requiring 504 man hours. The average attendance per session was 24.5 men. In addition, we had: 1) one work night requiring 32 man hours and 16 men in attendance; 2) two special drills which required 26 man hours, average attendance was 6 men; 3) one special county -wide drill which involved 9 men and required 27 man hours; 4) two special NRC drills requiring 57 man hours, average attendance was 10 men. Activities for the year included: Tours of the fire station were given to various community grmrps and organizations. Participated in the following colebrations — Big Lake Spud Fest. Monticello Riverlest, and the Buffalo Uays Parado Involved with Pinewood Elementary Family Day, and Camp Courage Wagon Train. Tho department had their Open House In October. Sincerely, D� David B. Kranz Reporter 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Commercial Permits Number 10 7 4 7 1 7 4 0 Valuation $3,804,500 $2,175.200 $119,000 $454,500 $225,000 $2,629.800 $7,522,200 $0 Industrial Permits Number 0 2 2 2 0 4 2 0 Valuation s0 $145,500 $1,242,700 $9,200 $0 $1,348,700 $116,000 $0 Residential Addition/ Remodel Permits Number 28 52 58 71 74 102 94 2 Valuation $146,970 5275,350 $371,500 $379,400 $248,800 5442,000 $281,400 $6,800 Commercial Addition/ Remodel Permits Number 17 17 21 27 25 28 22 1 Valuation $370,160 $1,804,730 $673,130 $862,400 $1,522,900 $517,500 $741,100 $1,500 Industrial Addition/ Remodel Permits Number 0 2 1 1 0 6 10 0 Valuation s0 $625,000 $12,100 $1,500 60 $1,711,600 $398,800 $0 Total Building Permits Number 78 90 58 56 32 48 43 2 Valuation $9,508,600 $10,171,400 $5,701,600 $4,926,800 $2,852,500 $5,769.400 $9,702,600 $103,500 Total Addllionl Remodel Permits Number 45 71 60 99 101 138 126 3 Valuation $517,130 $2,705,080 $1,075,230 $1,243,900 $1,854,800 $2,671,100 $1,421,300 $8,300 Total Permits Number 123 101 738 166 134 184 169 6 Valuation 610,025,730 $12,876,480 $6,776,830 $6,170,100 $4,754,400 98,440,500 $11,123,900 5111,800 (thru 1/31/92) Single Family Permits Number Valuation Two Family Permits Number Valuation 4 -unit Apartment Permits Number Valuation 6 -unit Apartment Permits Number Valuation 6 -unit Townhouse Permits Number Valuation 8 -unit Townhouse Permits Number Valuation 8 -unit Apartment Permits Number Valuation 12 -unit Apartment Permits Number Valuation BUILDING PERMITS 1965 1986 19877 19888 1989 1990 1991 1992 40 50 35 26 23 27 30 2 $2,166,800 $2,952,400 $2,210.200 $1,695,100 $1,503,400 $1,501,600 51,893,600 $103,500 5 12 2 1 0 0 1 0 5416,900 $1.025,100 x229,100 $86,000 $0 $0 $134,500 so 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 $173,900 5144,000 so $o $0 so $0 so 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 s0 s0 $0 $370,800 $0 $0 s0 s0 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 $523.400 5249,700 $307,300 $0 $384,800 50 so $o 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 $406,200 5459,700 60 $1,232.200 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 $o $0 $0 so $0 $249.300 $0 $0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 $460,060 5416,400 so $0 $0 to $0 $0 1965 1986 1987 1988 1989 ty 1991 1992 16 -unit Apartment Permits Number 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 Valuation $0 $0 $0 $988,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 18 -unit Apartment Permits Number 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Valuation $735,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 24 -unit Apartment Permits Number 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Valuation $737,500 $747,000 $678,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 26 -unit Apartment Permits Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Valuation $0 $839,200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 28 -unit Apartment Permits Number 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Valuation $0 $0 $0 $0 $693,700 $0 $0 $0 30 -unit Apartment Permits Number 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Valuation $0 $0 $858,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 31 -unit Apartment Permits Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Valuation $0 $973,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Residential Garage Permits Number 15 11 12 14 7 9 6 0 Valuation $81,600 $43,500 $70,300 $90,200 $45,600 $40,000 $36,300 $0 SUMMARY 1g�85 1986 1987 19888 1989 1990 1991 199 Sln9lerrwo-FamilylTw nhse Number 48 64 38 29 24 27 31 2 Valuation $3,515,300 54,686.900 $2,746,600 $3,013,300 $1,888,200 $1,501 ,600 $2,028,100 $103,500 Add(Remodet Valuation $228.470 $318,850 $441,800 5469,600 $294,400 $482.000 $317,700 $6.800 Multi -Family Number 5 6 2 4 1 1 0 0 Valuation $2,107,300 $3,120,300 $1,534,600 $1.359.600 $693,700 $249,300 $0 s0 Industrial New Number 0 2 2 2 0 4 2 0 Valuation $0 $145,500 $1,242,700 $9,200 $0 $1,348,700 $116.000 $0 Remodel Number 0 2 1 1 0 6 10 0 Valuation $0 $825,000 $12.100 $1,500 $0 $1,711,600 $398,800 $0 Commercial Now Number 10 7 4 7 1 7 4 0 Valuation $3,804,500 $2,175,200 $119,000 $454,500 $225,000 $2,629,800 $7,522.200 s0 Remodel Number 17 17 21 27 25 28 22 1 Valuation $370,160 $1,804,730 $673,130 $882,400 $1,622,900 5517,500 $741,100 $1,600 INDIVIDUAL PERMIT ACTIVITY REPORT Month of JANUARY . 1992 PERMIT I OESCR:PT:ON TYPE NAME/IACATIOt! VALUATION PCE- 1;Ulm ER PERMIT SURCHARGC PLUMR3::G SURCHARGE 92-1792 House end Gerega S.F. value Plua home a/5080 Me rtln Drlve 51.700.00 379.93 25.85 23.00 .50 92-1793 In[erlar Remodel A.C. Mancfeello Beke ry/100 Eaec Broaduey 1.500.00 13.00 .50 92-1194 Palo Encloaura A.D. Joseph Roton/409 Rivervlev Drive 1.500.00 15.00 .50 92-1795 House and Garage B.P. V41ue Plus Homes/5061 S[a rl ing Drive 51.800.00 380.34 25.90 20.00 .50 92-1796 Houea and Garage Residing A.D. hatch and Katrina Gates la r/17 Fairvey Drive 5.300.00 74.70 2.65 TOTALS 5111.800.00 t 864.97 1 55.40 1 43.00 1 1.00 PIAN REVIEW 92-1792 Houea and Gerega S.P. Value Plus Homo•/5080 Martin Drive 37.99 92-1795 House 4nd Garage S.F. Val ua Plus Hames/5061 Scar l Ing Drive 38.03 TOTAL PLAN REVIE11 76.02 TOTAL REVENUE 6 1.040.39 CITY OF MONTICELLO Monthly Building Department Report Month of JANUARY . 19-.2-Z PERMITS MID UGCa ' lamt 'Thin Gnma rbn Lh Lent 1- 'TNI- Yeer PERMI?a laaueU Month December Month JRnunry Loot Ymer To UA to ?o Uel- RCGIUI:NTIAI. Number 5 4 2 2 4 V. tuncien s 115.200.00 s ilo.3o0.00 s 3.000.00 s 3.000.00 s I1o.300 .00 Peen 948.87 925.99 30.00 30.00 925.99 6urchergae 57.10 54.90 1.00 1.00 54 .90 COMMERCIAL Number 12 2 I Vntuet ion 1.500.00 20.000.00 20.000.00 1.500.0 Pec. 15.00 212.00 212.00 15.00 Gurch-goe .50 10.00 10.00 .50 INDUSTRIAL Numt»r Vol uatlon Peee Ourrhargem PIM HlNC Numbor 2 2 I 1 2 Paan 46.00 43.00 22.00 22.00 43.00 Gurchergne 1.00 1.00 .50 .50 1 .00 OT11I.P 0 Number Valuation Poore Cu rcher9ne TOTAL 280. PIAMITO 7 7 5 5 7 T'UTAI. VALUATIOII 1 113,200.00 1 111.800.00 1 23.000.00 5 23.000.00 3111.800.00 Tu?AI, PC10 1 994.87 1 983.99 1 264.00 f 264.00 1 983.99 T'OTAI. .^.URCIIARCCN 1 58. 10 1 56.40 1 11.50 1 11.50 1 56.40 LMRIIENT MONTH . rl.la uumhar Ie Nnln rlTlru T' NAwnI: number PERMIT 81011CUAlM r. Vnl Rel tun vile Yoor Lml. veer nluOio Pamily 2 a 836.29 5 51.75 1 103 .500.00 2 0 alta n. n n nn 111-In+ny O D con.aalnlal 0 0 Inalm111a1 0 0 nnm. Oar ny-e 0 0 Olw,o 0a rlmllo nuunluv- 0 0 AIA'I:ItATIOII ERI nrPAI0 U..n 111 nne2 89.70 3.13 6,BOD.00 2 7 u:1al rinm�-ir 1 15.00 .90 1 .500.00 1 7 lnl 0 0 PIM Dulu All Tyne. 2 43.06 1.00 2 1 ALT:cacully VTAUCTU IIEa a..t-I ,j Poole 0 0 Dock. 0 0 0 0 TIAMIl AnY PERMIT OI'JIOIATIOII n n TVT'A].a 7 11983.99 9 56.40 1 111.600.00 7 5