City Council Agenda Packet 12-11-1995AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, December 11, 1988 - 7 p.m.
Mayor. Brad Fyle
Council Members: Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault
1. Call to order.
2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held November 27, 1995, and the
special meeting held December 6, 1995.
3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda.
4. Citizens commentstpetitions, requests, and complaints.
5. Consent agenda. L �+ 4 l 4" =
A. Consideration of a request for a carnival license--Montioello Mall
Merchants Association.
B. Consideration of approving the 1996/1997 contract for police protection
with the Wright County Sheriffs Department.
C. Consideration of fund transfers for 1995.
Consideration to review Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund (GMEF)
Loan No. 011 (Tapper's Inc.) for compliance of the GMEF Guidelines.
6. Public Hearing—Adoption of 1996 Budget and consideration of a resolution
setting the 1996 tax levy.
7. Consideration of renewing Joint Fire Agreement with Monticello Township
and adopting a policy on charging for false alarm responses.
8. Consideration of renewing an option agreement with H -Window Company
concerning future acquisition of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial
Park Second Addition.
9. Consideration of adopting escrow policy allowing final occupancy prior to
completion of grading and tree planting.
10. Consideration of granting a variance which would allow filling of a .10 -acre
wetland in the scenic river shoreland district.
Agenda
Monticello City Council
December 11, 1995
Page 2
11. Consideration of conditional use permit which would allow expansion of the
wastewater treatment plant in a PZM zone.
12. Consideration of salary schedule adjustments for 1996.
13. Consideration of adopting revised job evaluation results.
14. Consideration of establishing full-time secretarial position for the public
works department.
15. Consideration of authorizing the hiring of an additional public works
department employee.
16. Consideration of renewing contract with Hoglund Coach Lines for providing
Heartland Express bus service.
17. Consideration of bills for the month of December to date.
18. Adjournment.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, November 27, 1898 - 7 p.m.
Members Present: Brad Fyle, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom
Perrault
Members Absent: None
Approval of minutes of thp Flpeeial meeting held November 8. nnd the reinfla_r
meetinyht--Id November 3, 1995,
It was noted that the potential industrial area discussed under item 6C of the
November 13 minutes is located to the southwest rather than the northwest
of the community.
Councilmember Perrault requested that the title City Engineer be deleted
from items #7 and #8 when referring to engineer Bret Weiss.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY
ANDERSON TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD
NOVEM13ER 8, 1995, A3 WRITTEN. Motion carried unanimously.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY TOM
PERRAULT TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD
NOVEMBER 13, 1995, AS CORRECTED. Motion carried unanimously.
A.
City Administrator Rick Wolfateller reported that the Willi Hahn
Corporation has presented a purchase agreement offering $66,000 for
Lots 6 and 6 of the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition. The
current asking price is $32,815 for Lot B and $31,560 for Lot 6, for a
total of $64,475. He noted that in October the Council made a
counteroffer of $30,000 for Lot 6 to a potential buyer, which was an
8.8% reduction in price. Council was asked to consider the offer of
$66,000 or propose a counteroffer.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND
SECONDED BY SHULLEY ANDERSON TO PROPOSE A COUNTEROFFER
OF $30,000 FOR LOT 5 AND $31,580 FOR LOT 6, FOR A TOTAL OF
$61,560. Motion carried unanimously.
Page 1 O
Council Minutes - 11/27/95
B. Update on School Bo l v rd traffic study.
Public Works Director John Simola reported that the School Boulevard
traffic study was ordered from MN/DOT as proposed at the previous
Council meeting. He noted that he recently received calls from school
officials regarding the amount of traffic on School Boulevard and the
stop sign that was removed at Fallon Avenue; however, Simola noted
that School Boulevard was built as a collector road, and it's unlikely
that the Fallon AvenuvEchool Boulevard intersection would qualify
for installing a 4 -way stop. In preparation for discussion of this
subject, John Simola asked Bret Weiss of WSB to reviow this item with
the Council. No changes were reonmmended by the Consulting
Engineer, and Sheriff Hozempa agreed to have deputies patrol the
area for speed. No action was taken by Council.
C. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported a favorable response to the
Theresa Washburn visit regarding downtown redevelopment. A
second follow-up meeting was scheduled for November 28.
Rick Smith, HIV/AIDS Coordinator for the Wright County Red Cross
requested that the Mayor proclaim December 1, 1995, as World Aids
Day, as education regarding the disease is very important.
After discussion, Mayor Fyle agreed to proclaim December 1, 1996, as
World Aids Day.
rnngentatronfln.
Developer Tom Holthaus requested that item 6B be removed from the
consent agenda for discussion.
A. rnnaidnrafinn of tinn adn9ting aaseasment roll for Klein
Farms- EMject 96-02C. Recommendation: Adopt resolution
adopting assessment roil as presented. SEE RESOLUTION 96.86.
B. Cn aidera ion of a regointinn adppting aaaps m nt roll for G rdinal
Hills B h Ad iio _ Pr ipet 96-06C. Removed Brom consent agenda for
discussion (see next page).
Page 2 O
Council Minutes - 11/27/95
C. Co sideration of a r sol +tion adpp 'ting thp City . nP oral Record
a
Rot++ntion hem ,la for records maintenance and d s ruction,
Recommendation: Adopt resolution adopting entire City General
Records Retention Schedule as proposed. SEE RESOLUTION 95-67.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBSP AND SECONDED BY TOM
PERRAULT TO APPROVE ITEMS 6A AND 6C OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AS
RECOMMENDED. Motion carried unanimously.
Tom Holthaus of Value Plus Homes stated that the Cardinal Hills 6th
Addition project wasn't complete at this time, and it was his view that
the amount of the assessment was too high. He requested that the
project be assessed neat year as has been done with past projects. In
addition, if the Council adopted the assessment roll at this time,
Holthaus requested that the amount be final and that they not be re-
assessed at a later date for additional costs incurred during completion
of the project.
City Administrator Wolfsteller reported that because the improvement
was part of the $3.9 million bond issue sold earlier this year, staff
anticipated assessing the project prior to December 1 for collection on
1996 taxes in order to meet the debt service requirements of the bond
issue. The final project coat was estimated at $356,552, of which
$46,750 would be paid directly by the developers for site grading,
leaving $309,802 as special assessments against 32 residential lots.
Wolfsteller noted that he was comfortable with the proposed
assessment amount and that if the final project cost was less than the
amount certified, it could be credited to the Cardinal Hills 6th
Addition.
After reviewing with the developer the engineering and administration
fees yet to be incurred in tho project, Wolfstellor proposed a $4,500
decrease in the assessment roll to $305,276.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND
SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION
ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR CARDINAL HILLS 8TH
ADDITION IN THE AMOUNT OF $308,276. Motion carried unanimously.
SEE RESOLUTION 95-66.
Page 3 Z
Council Minutes - 11/27/95
1 1 • M :II . 1VWF ■ .. r.
.a. t Ate
Assistant Administrator ONeill reviewed the history of the Sixth Street
Annex mall, noting that in 1994, the applicant failed to obtain sufficient
votes necessary to rezone a portion of Lot 4, Block 1, Lauring Hillside
Terrace, from R-3 to PZM for additional parking to accommodate expansion
of a restaurant within the mall; however, they did obtain an amendment to
the conditional use permit which allowed expansion of the restaurant in the
mall subject to a number of stipulations and conditions. One of the
conditions required that 9,100 aq R of the available space in the mall be left
vacant in order to maintain sufficient parking for the restaurant and current
uses at the aite.
After two years of operating the mall under the restricted use of the facility,
the developer has again requested rezoning so that land is available for
future parking demands and the building can be fully occupied. O'Neill
noted that a buffer area would have to be established between the parking
area and the neighboring residential area, and it was the recommendation of
the Planning Commission that Council approve the requests. He also
reported that the owner of the neighboring R-3 property would not support
expansion of the restaurant or additional after-hours activity but was
satisfied with the current use of the property.
Councilmember Herbst expressed opposition to rezoning the proposed area
for parking because it is adjacent to a residential area.
Councilmembers suggested that perhaps rear entrances for customers should
be required as retail spaces are leased to new tenants. It was their view that
customers would not use the rear parking spaces if there were no entrances
in the back c,f the building. The Assistant Administrator noted that Council
could require additional rear entrances as a condition of the conditional use
permit.
Page 4 2
Council Minutes - 11/27/95
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND
SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
REZONING A PORTION OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, LAURING HILLSIDE TERRACE,
FROM R-3 TO PZM TO ACCOMMODATE 66 ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES.
Motion is based on the finding that the expansion proposed and associated
rezoning is consistent with the character of the area and is consistent with
the comprehensive plan for the city. Voting in favor. Brian Stumpf, Tom
Perrault, Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle. Opposed: Clint Herbst. Motion
passed. SEE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 276.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND
SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT WHICH WOULD ALLOW FULL USE OF THE SIXTH STREET ANNEX
MALL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE PARKING, GRADING, AND
DRAINAGE PLANS SUPPORTING DEVELOPMENT OF AN
ADDITIONAL 66 STALLS. PRIOR TO THE CITY GRANTING AN
OCCUPANCY PERMIT TO ANY OF THE RETAIL AREA
PREVIOUSLY OFF LIMITS, THE DEVELOPER SHALL OBTAIN
WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE PARKING, GRADING, AND
DRAINAGE PLANS FROM THE CITY ENGINEER.
2. THE DEVELOPER SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL THE
PARKING AREA PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OF THE NEW RETAIL
AREA; HOWEVER, A FINANCIAL GUARANTEE AND ASSOCIATED
AGREEMENT SHALL BE ESTABLISHED THAT WOULD ALLOW
THE PARKING LOT AND ASSOCIATED REQUIRED LANDSCAPING
TO BE INSTALLED AT THE FULL DISCRETION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE FULL COST OF THE
DEVELOPER
3. THE PORTION OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, LAURING HILLSIDE
TERRACE, NEEDED FOR PARKING SHALL BE SPLIT AWAY FROM
LOT 4, BLOCK 1, AND ADDED TO THE SIXTH STREET ANNEX
MALL PROPERTY.
4. PRIOR TO THE CITY GRANTING OCCUPANCY OF THE UNUSED
RETAIL AREA, THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE A
LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING PLAN THAT MEETS THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY AS APPROVED BY CITY STAFF.
6. ALL OTHER CONDITIONS AS NOTED BY ORDINANCE AND
INCLUDED IN PREVIOUS CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS ISSUED.
6. PARKING ALONG THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE
LIMITED TO 16 -MINUTE PARKING ONLY AND SIGNED
ACCORDINGLY.
Pago 5 0
Council Minutes - 11/27/95
ADDITIONAL LIGHTING SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE REAR OF
THE FACILITY TO IMPROVE SECURITY.
REAR PUBLIC ENTRANCES MUST BE INSTALLED AS NEW
TENANTS LEASE RETAIL SPACE.
Motion carried unanimously. Motion is based on the finding that the
conditional use permit with conditions as noted will result in a land use that
is consistent with the character of the area, will not result in a depreciation
of adjoining land values, and is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY
ANDERSON TO APPROVE THE SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOT 4,
BLOCK 1, LAURING HILLSIDE TERRACE. Voting in favor. Brian Stumpf,
Shirley Anderson, Tom Perrault, Brad Fyle. Opposed: Clint Herbst. Motion
passed.
onaiderntion of fiin ;ng a portion of the Chamber of CnmmPrce community
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that the Monticello Chamber of
Commerce is requesting that Council contribute $2,500 toward funding of the
community sign to be placed near the Chamber office and $1,100 for
installation of electricity to the sign. The reason for the request is that the
sign will feature a third side showing a map of the city. Council granted
approval of the placement of the sign at a previous meeting; however, O'Neill
noted that at the time the sign placement was brought before Council, staff
was not aware of the request for funding due to a misunderstanding.
Council expressed their disappointment in being asked to pay a portion of the
sign coat but not being included in the discussion of the layout and design of
the sign.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND
SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO PAY $2,600 TOWARD THE COST OF
THE SIGN. THE ELECTRICAL EXPENSE OF $1,100 WOULD NOT BE FUNDED
BY THE CITY AND WOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CHAMBER.
Voting in favor. Brian Stumpf, Shirley Anderson, Tom Perrault, Clint
Herbst, Opposed: Brad Fyle. It was Fyle's view that the City should not be
responsiblo for paying for a portion of the sign since it is was designed and
ordered prior to the request. Motion passed.
, , , ' I , 1 �1fT1, 1 ' , •,1 '� „1 I,y/:Il , '.l , 1:� , M
r 1 r;1 � ,4 '1 •� • 1 , ,y1
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that on July 24, 1995, Council
adopted on a preliminary basis an escrow policy allowing final occupancy
Page 6 (P
Council Minutes - 17/27/95
prior to completion of required home site grading and directed staff to mail
the proposed policy to builders for input at an upcoming meeting. As a result
of staff's discussion with builders, a modified policy was presented for
Council adoption.
The purpose of the policy is to provide the City with assurance that site
improvements will be made after the City has allowed final occupancy of a
home. The proposed policy would require deposits from builders that seek
final occupancy prior to completion of grading and tree planting. The deposit
amounts were proposed at $2,000 for 1.5 times the cost (whichever is greater)
for grading and $125 for trees during the summer months, and $750 or an
amount equal to the cost (whichever is greater) for grading and $125 for trees
during the winter months. A $35 reinspection fee would also be required
under both fee structures. Assistant Administrator O'Neill noted that the
two fee structures were proposed in order to discourage the use of the escrow
option during the summer months since, for the most part, work should be
completed prior to final occupancy during the construction season.
Tom Holthaus of Value Plus Homes noted his objection to the proposed
escrow policy stating that there were too many regulations and that the
deposit amount for a builder working on 10 or more homes during the winter
months would be substantial. Holthaus suggested that' -ha City require one
deposit for each builder rather than for each home.
Other builders expressed concern about having to escrow funds with the City
and the mortgage companies. Staff explained that mortgage companies
would most likely release or not require an escrow if the City required a
deposit.
Consulting Engineer Bret Weiss noted that it would be possible to identity
which lots in each project would be critical for drainage, and the developers
and builders could then be informed of which lots would be subject to the
escrow policy.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND
SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO TABLE ADOPTION OF THE ESCROW
POLICY, AND STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO RESEARCH WHAT OTHER
COMMUNITIES REQUIRE AND AGAIN MEET WITH INTERESTED BUILDERS
TO DISCUSS AND ESTABLISH AN ACCEPTABLE POLICY. Motion carred
unanimously.
11. Review of clnas'A' sludge alterna iv s and w n owa er Lreatmont plant ma
es imntes. —
Bob Peplin of HDR Engineering was present to review estimated project costs
and to present three different processes to achieve class `A' sludge,
Pago 7 0
Council Minutes - 11/27/95
specifically an exceptional quality class "A" sludge. Peplin noted that they
had originally proposed the heat pasteurization process as a final step after
digestion, which would be a total pathogen kill, at an estimated construction
cost of $666,000; however, HDR recently learned that it would be best to
perform the heat pasteurization process ahead of digestion, which would kill
all of the bad pathogens and leave only minute amounts of good pathogens.
This process would produce an exceptional quality class "A" sludge at an
estimated cost of $798,000, with a yearly operational cost of $10,500.
The second process presented was the Aerobic Thermophilic Pretreatment
(ATP), which is a European pretreatment process similar to the pre -digestion
heat pasteurization but at lower temperatures. This process is licensed and
manufactured by CBI Walker in the United States with an estimated
construction cost of $984,000 and a yearly operational cost of $7,000. Peplin
noted that one of the advantages of the ATP process is that CBI Walker is a
large equipment manufacturer and offers a process guarantee.
Peplin also presented a third option of Thermophilic Anaerobic Digestion,
which is an experimental process developed within the last year. It is
currently being tested in a laboratory and at three treatment plants in Iowa
and would offer a relatively low-cost option for class "A' sludge; however, due
to the limited experience with this process, a laboratory teat using
Monticello's waste activated sludge was recommended at an estimated cost of
$8,000. The construction cost of this process is estimated at $762,000 with a
yearly operational cost of $29,200.
Kelsie McGuire of PSG noted that the ATP process appears to be the most
reliable from an operability standpoint. It was his view that it may be better
to spend the additional funds for construction of this process.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND
SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO CONTINUE WITH THE HEAT
PASTEURIZATION PROCESS BUT CHANGE TO PREDIGESTION HEAT
PASTEURIZATION AT A COST OF $798,000. MOTION INCLUDES
AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL TESTING AT A COST OF $8,000 AS
REQUESTED BY BOB PEPLIN OF HDR. Voting in favor: Clint Herbst, Brian
Stumpf, Brad Fyle. Opposed: Shirley Anderson and Tom Perrault. Anderson
and Perrault prefer: ed the ATP process because it included a process
guarantee and would not require additional testing. Motion passed.
12. Connide do of aidownIWnthwn)e mAintennnea on Rim Street nd
Wanhineton R rent.
Public Works Director John Simola reported that with the pathway project, a
significant amount of 8 -ft bituminous pathway was established, and 3 ft in
Page 8 ?,
Council Minutes - 11/27/95
width was added to some existing 5 -ft concrete sidewalks to make them a
combination sidewalk/pathway. In addition, some new 8 -ft sections of
concrete sidewalk/pathway were also constructed.
Simola noted that the 8 -ft bituminous pathway recently constructed was not
originally proposed to be cleared of snow in the winter, and the Parke
Commission suggested that pathway snow removal be considered only if
there appears to be a large amount of support from the public.
In regard to the existing concrete sidewalk located along Broadway at the
High School which was increased in width by 3 ft, the High School has been
performing snow and ice removal of the 64 sidewalk and have continued to
do so on the additional sidewalk width.
An additional 3 R of width was also added to the existing 5 -ft concrete
sidewalk from Elm Street to the Pinewood School property. Since the City is
already performing winter maintenance on this area as part of the City's
original sidewalk improvement project several years ago, staff has continued
to maintain the extra width.
Simola noted that it is unclear at this time whether two new sidewalks/
pathways should be maintained by the City or by the private homeowner.
The first is located on the east side of Washington Street from Broadway to
7th Street. The School has been maintaining the sidewalk adjacent to their
property up to Territorial Road near the railroad tracks; however, south of
the railroad tracks, property owners have not been informed that, according
to ordinance, they must remove snow and ice from the 8 -ft sidewalk/pathway.
The second new sidewalk/pathway is located on the west side of Elm Street
from Broadway to Golf Course Road. This area consists of single family
residential, multi -family residential, and commercial buildings.
Simola noted that no cost for installation of the sidewalk/pathway was
assessed to adjoining property owners; therefore, no public hearing notices
were sent to individual property owners. If the combination sidewalks/
pathways are considered part of the sidewalk grid system, the adjoining
property owners would be responsible for winter maintenance; however, since
most of the city's sidewalks are only 6 ft wide, Simola recommended that, if
that option is chosen, the property owners be required to clear snow and ice
from only 5 ft of the 8 -ft sidewalk/pathway.
Councilmembers discussed the possibility of the City maintaining all
residential sidewalks on the grid system, as it was their view that the coat for
maintenance to these sidewalks should be bome by everyone. It was also
noted by Council that perhaps the pathway should be cleared of snow to
allow use in the winter.
Page 9 Z
Council Minutes - 11/27/96
The Assistant Administrator noted that a letter had been received from
Louise Bodem, a resident on Elm Street, questioning where the snow will be
stored when cleared from the pathway abutting her property. In addition,
James Fuller, also a resident of Elm Street, stated that the sidewalks on the
grid system should be maintained by everyone, not only the adjoining
property owner.
Councilmember Herbst suggested that the Public Works Director propose a
contract to have the School maintain the rest of the sidewalk on Washington
Street to 7th Street.
AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON AND
SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO AUTHORIZE CITY MAINTENANCE OF THE
NEW SECTIONS OF SIDEWAL"ATHWAY ON WASHINGTON STREET NOT
ALREADY MAINTAINED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ON ELM STREET.
THE SIDEWALK GRID SYSTEM AND ORDINANCE WILL BE REVIEWED FOR
CHANGES IN THE FUTURE. Motion carried unanimously.
13. (`nn;Idernfinn of hill; for the month of November.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY
ANDERSON TO APPROVE THE BILIS FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER AS
PRESENTED. Motion carried unanimously.
14. Other w tars.
A. Representative Mark Olson was present to update the Council on the
current legislative session. No action taken by Council.
B. Councilmomber Herbst requested that the City Assessor, Jerry
Kramber, and the appraiser of the Kruse property be contacted to
review the Kruse property located on Hart Boulevard for 1996 taxes.
It was the consensus of Council to direct staff to contact Kramber and
the appraiser to discuss the market value of the Kruse property which
is adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant.
C. Assistant Administrator O'Neill updated the Council regarding
completion of the comprehensive plan by Northwest Associated
Consultants.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Karen Doty
Office Manager
Page 10 ?/
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Wednesday, December 6, 1898.6 p.m.
Members Present: Brad Pyle, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom
Perrault
Members Absent: None
A special meeting of the City Council was held for the purpose of discussing the
proposed 1996 budget and resulting tax levy and receiving public comment.
Mayor Fyle opened the public hearing.
City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller reported that at the first workshop, Council
proposed a maximum 1996 levy increase of 6.5%, which resulted in a tax levy
increase of $2,997,460. At the second budget workshop, Council reviewed the
capital outlay items in more detail and further reduced the budget and resulting
tax levy by an additional $74,660. This resulted in a proposed maximum levy
increase of $2,922,800, which is a 1.31% increase over the 1996 tax levy.
Wolfsteller also noted that the portion of individual property taxes that is payable
to the City amounts to approximately 16% of the total tax amount.
A local resident questioned if the recycling program was a revenue source for the
City. Mayor Fyle explained that expenses for the recycling program are greater
than the revenue received.
There being no further comment from the public, the public hearing was closed.
It was the consensus of Council to leave the proposed tax levy at the 1.31%
increase, and final adoption of the budget will take place at the regular Council
meeting scheduled for December 11, 1996.
Other matters.
Council and staff discussed the current market value of the Kruse property located
adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant. It was noted by the City Administrator
that after further review of the property by the City Assessor and appraiser, he will
report back to the Council at a future meeting.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING. Motion carried unanimously.
Karen Doty
Office Manager
Council Agenda - 12/11/96
sA. Conaideration of a request for carnival lice se --Monticello Mall
Merchants Association. (R.W.)
Ms. Marilyn Gartner, representing the Monticello Mall Merchants
Association, has applied for a license to have Chuck's Amusements operate a
carnival at the Monticello Mall parking lot for 6 days, May 29 through
June 2, 1996. As you may recall, the Monticello Mall has been sponsoring
the carnival for the past few years around this same time period. City
ordinance requires that the City Council must approve the license for
carnivals, circuses, and traveling shows. In order to schedule future
bookings of the carnival, the Mall Association needs to know earlier than
usual whether the dates are acceptable to the City.
Last year the Mall had proposed to operate the carnival over a 13 -day period,
and the City Council ultimately reduced the number of days to 9 days,
excluding setup time. This year the Mall is only proposing a 6 -day event,
Wednesday through Sunday.
As in the past, the Merchants Association is also requesting that the fee
established within our ordinance for a carnival at $100 for the first day and
$60 per day thereafter be waived. The Merchants Association conaiders
themselves a non-profit organization established for the promotion of the
mall tenants and, therefore, should be exempt. The Merchants Association
has provided a certificate of insurance document indicating that the carnival
operator would have a $1 million liability policy in effect naming both the
mall owner and the City as additional insureds.
Enclosed with the agenda you will find a listing of the days and hours of
operation that the amusement park will be run during the 6 -day event.
Approve the issuance of a 6 -day carnival license to the Monticello Mall
Merchants Association for the dates May 29 through June 2, 1996, and
waive the daily fees by recognizing the Association as a non-profit
group.
Do not approve the license application.
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
C, %TAFF RErOMMi NnATION:
The staff is not aware of this carnival operation causing any problems as far
as the City regulations are concerned over the past three years. Since the
Council has determined in the past that the Mall Association was a non--
profit group, you may want to continue with this understanding and waive
the daily license fees as you have done in the past.
Copy of application and letter from Merchants Association.
CITY OF MONTICELLO
TRAVELING SHOW APPLICATION
` Fee: $100 - let day, $ 50 - thereafter
Applicant Name: Nnv)-� Q P H n Nall A swe in-I,on
Address:
MAI(/r 55.31,2.
ar\/ C
PhoneN'mhI �'nn4-nn MArlI11{1 -AV'+11F.Ir
Business Name: ekiIP W. Ah\Lt5NWFI)i-5
Address: 14330 Q ) I�; F- '7Sf
EIK , 0e -Y' Mk! 5!i,:�7.n
Phone Humbert 44 1 - 1--12 7 .
Name of organisation Sponsoring Amusement (if any):
Location where Show will be Held: 1 �rnr*
Date (a) of Carnival or Show: 5-1Q +k ruk- , rt 11%e- 2 -
Name of InsuranceCpmpany 1proof of insurance shall be provided
with application) : Il: r -I C� pada leu T� 'rrt- nP P .
Minimum requirements are: $100,000 - injury, liability
$300,000 - each occurrence
$ 50,000 - property damage
BURSTY BOND RB9UIRBMBNTSt A surety bond in the amount of $5,000
shall accompany application to ensure that all federal, state, and
local regulations are adhered to.
Applicand Signature
(For City Use Only)
Receipt • Approved Denied
City Signature
TRAVBLINO.APPI 9/16/92 !��
208
West Swenth SUM c�lonticel '"°�°°� �"
�Ma
Date: December S. 1995
To: City of Monticello
From Marilyn Gartner
Promotions Director
Re: Chuck's Amusements
In regards to Chuck's Amusement at the Monticello mall we are requesting the following
for approval:
1. Fee to be waived (as has been done in the past)
2. Approval of Carnival to run May 29-June2, 1995 with the following hours:
Wed-Thurs:
3-9:30 PM
Fri
2-10:30 PM
Sat
l lam -10:30 PM
Sun
noon -6 PM
Chuck's Amusements will out cleaning and clearing anytime after 6 PM on Sunday,
June 2. They all supply two portable sanitation units and garbage removal. 'their main
supply trucks all be parked in the back of the Mao so as not to interfere with prime frontal
parking spaces. A Certificate of insurance will be faced to the City of Monticello from
Chuck's Amusement's carrier.
If you have questions, please call me at (612)682.5061.
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
A F. .RF.N .. ND BACKGROUND:
Wright County has recently prepared a new two-year law enforcement
contract for police protection that the City Council was asked to ratify.
Currently, the City is receiving 9,176 hours of coverage for the 1995 year,
which breaks down into 24 hours per day with an additional 416 hours
annually that is used on Fridays and Saturdays for six months of the year.
The present hourly rate for 1995 is $32 per hour, for a total annual contract
fee of $293,632. For the year 1996, the proposed contract fee has been
increased by 3% to $33 per hour for an estimated total annual contract
amount of $302,808. The second year of the two-year contract (1997) is
proposed at $34.50 per hour, which is a 4.5% increase for a total annual
contract of $316,672 if the total hours remain the same.
As part of the 1996 preliminary budget, I was aware of the proposed $33 per
hour charge and $302,808 has been included in the preliminary budget
figures. The Police Advisory Commission also has previously met to review
the contract renewal and did not feel there was any additional need for more
hours of coverage at this time and recommended the Council continue with
the contract as proposed. Although the contract is technically a two-year
agreement, the agreement does allow the City to request an increase in
coverage if we should desire. The only stipulation would be that enough
advance notice be given to allow the Sheriffs Department to incorporate a
new deputy in their budget if we would want to see an increase in coverage
during 1997.
B. ALTERNATM ACTIONS:
Ratify the contract as proposed for the years 1096 and 1997 at the
hourly rates of $33 per hour for 1996 and $34.60 per hour for 1997.
Ratify the contract as proposed but set a different level of hours of
coverage.
As noted earlier, the Police Advisory Commission did not feel that any
additional hours of coverage were needed at this time, but the Commission
will continue to monitor the growth of the community and the level of citizen
Council Agenda - 12tlll95
complaints to determine if and when additional coverage hours are
warranted.
STAFF P. O NDATION:
The staff and Police Advisory Commission recommend that the contract be
ratified for two additional years at the hourly rates proposed. The County
Commissioners have actually set the rates in advance and there is very little
negotiating room available for the City other than to accept the contract
agreement as presented. The City's only option would be to reduce the level
of coverage, which would not seem feasible with our continued growth. It
should also be noted that the Police Advisory Commission recently, completed
a study comparing the costs of operating our own police department versus
contracting, and the conclusion was that it still seemed more feasible to
utilize the Sheriffs Department under a contract arrangement at this time.
Copy of proposed contract and letter from County noting increase in fees.
a
a
TY
JN �
vp ma
A
COUNTY OF WRIGHT COMMISSIONERS
KENJUDE
10 2nd Street NW, RM 135Bu alo. Minnesota 55313.1188 Fnn AIZ it PATSAWATZKE
t S r.d thm—r
�i Tel: (612) 682.7378 JACK RUSSEK
d 1-800.362.3667 7h,,d [harm
7 dy Fax: 612.682.6178 JUDIEROSE
7850 R—rh Div—,
DICK MATTSOIV
RICHARD W. NORMAN
Cowry Cmrdiiwor
August 1, 1995
Mr. Rick Wolfsteller
City Administrator
City of Monticello
250 E. Broadway, Box 1147
Monticello MN 55362
Dear Mr. Wolfsteller:
Please be advised that the County Board of Commissioners, in cooperation with
the County Sheriff and County Attorney, has ectahlished rates for contract patrol
services for 1996 and 1997. The rate for 1996 shall be $33.00/hour. The rate
for 1997 shall be 534.50/hour.
As you're aware, the current contract states that municipalities must notify the
County in writing prior to August 15 regarding any change in the number of hours
to be contracted for in the coming year. Please provide this information if you
anticipate an increase or decrease from current contract hours.
Once again, it is felt that by setting the rate for two years, jurisdictions will be
able to consider rates in their budget discussions and analyze their particular
contract needs.
Sincerely,
/1 4-w-
Richard W. Norman
County Coordinator
RN/sib
cc: Don Hozempa, Sheriff
Wyman Nelson, Attorney
County Board
Earml OAportuwiiy / Affirmative Action Smpla)w �v
LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTRACT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 1995, by and
between the COUNTY OF WRIGHT and the WRIGHT COUNTY SHERIFF, hereinafter referred to as
"County" and the CITY OF MONTICELLO hereinafter referred to as the "Municipality%
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Municipality is desirous of entering into a contract with the County for the
performance of the hereinafter described taw enforcement protection within the corporate limits of said
municipality through the County Sheriff; and
WHEREAS, the County is agreeable to rendering such services, and protection on the terms and
conditions hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, such contracts are authorized and provided for by the provision of Minnesota Statutes
471.59 and Minnesota Statutes 436.05;
NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to the terms of the aforesaid statutes, and in consideration of the
mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed as follows:
I . That the County by way of the Sheriff agrees to provide police protection within the corporate
limits of the Municipality to the extent and in the manner as hereinafter set forth:
a. Except as otherwise hereinafter specifically set forth, such set -vices shall encompass
only duties and functions of the type coming within the jurisdiction of the Wright
County Sheriff pursuant to Minnesota Laws and Statutes.
b. Except as otherwise hereinafter provided for, the standard level of service provided
shall be the same basic level of service which is provided for the unincorporated areas
of the County of Wright, State of Minnesota.
C. The rendition of services, the standard of performance, the discipline of the officers,
and other matters incident to the performance of such services and control of personnel
so employed shall remain in and under the control of the Sheriff.
1
seg
d. Services purchased pursuant to this contract shall include the enforcement of Minnesota
State Statutes, including but not limited to the Traffic Code and the Criminal Code,
as well as all local ordinances enacted in conformance therewith. Statutes and
ordinances which prescribe enforcement by a different authority; i.e., the State
Electrical Code, the Uniform Building Code, etc., shall be excluded from this
agreement. Ordinances pertaining exclusively to purely local city management matters;
i.e., sewer and water collection, etc., shall be excluded from this agreement. The
Municipality shall be responsible for enforcement of the Municipal Zoning Code,
except that the Sheriff will enforce nuisance ordinances conforming to State law; i.e.,
junk cars, etc. and traffic ordinances; i.e., parking and erratic driving.
That it is agreed that the Sheriff shall have full cooperation and assistance from the
Municipality, its officers, agents and employees so as to facilitate the performance of this agreement.
That the County shall furnish and supply all necessary labor, supervision, equipment,
communication facilities for dispatching, cost of jail detention, and all supplies necessary to maintain the
level of service to be rendered herein.
4. The Municipality shall not be liable for the direct payment of any salaries, wages, or other
compensation to any personnel performing services herein for said County.
The Municipality shall not be liable for compensation or indemnity to any of the Sheriffs
employees for injuries or sickness arising out of its employment, and the County hereby agrees to hold
harmless the Municipality against any such claims.
The County, Sheriff, his officers, and employees shall not be deemed to assume any liability
for intentional or negligent acts of said Municipality or any officer, agent, or employee thereof.
This agreement shall be effective from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1997.
The Municipality agrees to pay to the County the sum of $33.00 per hour for law enforcement
protection during the calendar year 1996 and not to exceed $34.50 per hour during the calendar year 1997.
Jf salaries of Deputy Sheriffs are increased at any time during the term of this contract, the hourly rate of
this contract shall not be increased.
58CJ
9. This contract shall be extended automatically for successive one year periods at a rate to be
established by the County, unless the County or Municipality shall notify the other of termination, in
writing, prior to August 15 of each year.
10. The number of hours of service to be provided pursuant to this contract are as follows: 2.4
hours oer day: 416 additional hours on Fridays/Saturdays - 9.176 hours annually and shall provide 24-hour
call and general service. The Municipality shall notify the County in writing prior to August 15 regarding
any change in the number of hours for the subsequent year.
11. The County shall provide for all costs and prosecution efforts with respect to violations
charged by the Sheriff in the performance of this agreement. All fines arising from such prosecutions shall
accrue to the County. Violations of municipal ordinances excluded from enforcement by this agreement
shall be prosecuted by the Municipality at its expense. All fines arising from city prosecutions shall accrue
to the Municipality unless otherwise provided by law.
12. Pursuant to law, the County Auditor/Treasurer shall remit to the Municipality its share of all
fines collected. The Municipality shall return to the County within 30 days all fine money attributable to
prosecutions initiated by the Sheriff in accord with Paragraph 11 of this contract. The Municipality shall
keep and retain any fine money submitted by the Auditor/Treasurer attributable to prosecutions initiated by
the Municipality.
13. For the purpose of maintaining cooperation, local control and general information on existing
complaints and problems in said Municipality, one member of the Municipal Council, the Mayor or other
person or persons shall be appointed by said Council to act as police cornmissioner(s) for said Municipality
and shall make periodic contacts with and attend meetings with the Sheriff or his office in relation to the
contract herein.
3
58D
14. The County shall save, hold harmless and defend the City from any and all claims arising
from the acts or omissions, including intentional acts and negligence, committed by employees or agents of
the County or Sheriff while in the performance of duties in furtherance of this contract.
IN WTINFSS WHEREOF, The Municipality, by resolution duly adopted by it governing body,
caused this agreement to be signed by its Mayor and attested by its Clerk; and the County of Wright, by
the County Board of Commissioners, has caused this agreement to be signed by the Chairman and Clerk
of said Board, and by the Wright County Sheriff, effective on the day and year fast above written.
Dated:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
Dated:
WRIGHT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS:
Ken Jude, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Richard W. Norman
County Coordinator
Dated:
Donald Hozempa
Wright County Sheriff
Approved as to form and execution:
Wyman A. Nelson, Wright County Attorney
ssE
Council Agenda - 1211L95
With the end of the year approaching, a few housekeeping items should be
approved by the Council concerning fund transfers to close out unneeded
construction funds and/or other transfers to correspond with our budget. In
addition to closing out completed construction fund balances, some of the
transfers recommended will cover deficiencies in specific construction funds
that have occurred during the projects. In most of the deficiency cases, funds
were anticipated to be used from the capital outlay fund but have not yet
been transferred. For the wastewater treatment plant expansion project, we
are simply borrowing the funds from capital outlay until we can be
reimbursed from the PFA loan for the new plant next spring.
Rather than specifically listing a brief explanation for each transfer
recommended, you are asked to review the enclosed supplement summary
that outlines each proposed transfer, dollar amount, and purpose for the
transfer.
1. Approve the transfers as recommended.
C. RTAFF RRCOMM_F.NDATION:
I recommend for accounting purposes that the above transfers be approved
prior to the end of 1998. Technically, without official action, some of the
construction fiords would show deficit cash balances while other construction
fiords will be kept open unnecessarily. The transfers are basically
housekeeping items to more accurately reflect current year-end financial
statements.
List of proposed transfers.
SLThUdARY OF TRANSFERS PROPOSED
December 1998
Fmm
To
Amount
Huss
'84 TIF (FSI) Bond
'88 TIF (Raindance)
$ 899.71
To close out bond fund
that has been paid off
93-02C, Card. Hills 3rd
98.060, Card. Hills
$ 2,872.78
To close out completed
Addn. Const. Fund
Addn. Const. Fund
cont. prgject balance to
similar fund
84-1 O.O. Bond
'92 O.O. Refunding Bond
$ 6,482.66
To close out bond fund
balance to bond fund
that refinanced the debt
Liquor Fund
93-04C public works
$432,298.71
To cover deficiencies in
Phase II Const. Fund
const. prgject fund to
date
Capital Outlay
93-13C, Monticello Ford
$ 238.73
To cover deficiency in
Fund
Storm Sewer Project
completed const. Hind
Capital Outlay
93-08C, Pathway Prgject
$ 59,669.91
To cover deficiencies in
Fund
const. fund to date
Capital Outlay
93-14C, WWTP
$176,182.43
To cover deficiencies in
Fund
Expansion Prgject
const. fund to date
Capital Outlay
98.090, Maplewood
$ 7,077.88
To cover deficiencies in
Fund
Circle Prgject
completed const. prgject
HRA
(7) Various TIF Debt
$237,400.00
To transfer TIF reserve
Service Funds
from HRA to debt
service finds for bond
payments
General Fund
Debt Service Fund
$ 91,260.00
To transfer Kmart TIF
reserve to bond fund
7'RANSFER.LIS: lWIN SCA
Council Agenda - 12/11/96
The EDA requests that City Council review GMEF Loan No. 011 for
compliance of the GMEF Guidelines. The GMEF Guidelines state: "The
EDA shall have authority to approve or deny loans; however, within 21 days
of EDA approval, the City Council may reverse a decision by the EDA to
approve a loan if it is determined by Council that such loan was issued in
violation of the GMEF Guidelines."
On November 28, 1995, the EDA approved GMEF Loan No. 011 for Tappers,
Inc. dba Genereux Fine Wood Products, Inc. and Westlund Distributing.
Current financial statements were submitted and analyzed as acceptable by
Public Resource Group, Inc. For your review, enclosed as supporting data is
the approved outline used by the EDA for determination of GMEF public
purpose and policy compliance.
The real estate/equipment loan was approved for $100,000 at a 6.75% fixed
interest rate amortized over 20 years, ballooned in 5 years. Loan fee was set
at not to -exceed $1,600 and the GMEF legal fees the responsibility of the
applicant. The GMEF Loan No. 001 and 011 will be in fifth and sixth
position, respectively, behind the two SBA 504 loans of third and fourth
position and the two bank loans. Collateral, guarantees, and other condition
requirements to be determined and prepared by the GMEF attorney. Per the
Marquette Bank's appraisal of the real estate property and machinery &
equipment, the total appraised value indicated a collateral shortfall of
approximately $53,000. The general agreement among the EDA members
was the appraisal was very conservative. The EDA viewed the loan request
as a definite compliance of the "gap financing" requirement while still
encouraging an existing industrial business to expand in Monticello. The
GMEF loan approval is subject to SBA and Bank commitment and approval.
As of November 27, 1995, the annual GMEF Appropriation balanco according
to disbursement records is $150,000 and according to approval records is
$100,000. The EDA approved the loan size of $100,000 because, in either
case, the loan disbursement would occur in 19% for compliance of the GMEF
Guidelines. Itis suggested the approved Loan No. 011($100,000) be
transferred fiom the UDAG account.
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
After review of the approved EDA outline for GMEF public purpose and
policy compliance, the EDA requests the City Council consider the following
actions.
A motion stating that City Council has determined the EDA approval
of GMEF Loan No. 011 for Tappers, Inc was approved without
violation of the GMEF Guidelines; therefore, Council supports the
decision by the EDA for loan approval.
A motion stating that City Council has determined the EDA approval
of GMEF Loan No. 011 for Tapper's Inc. was issued in violation of the
GMEF Guidelines; therefore, the Council reverses the decision by the
EDA for loan approval.
A motion to table action until the January 8, 1996, Council meeting
would violate the within 21 -day guideline for City Council to review
the EDA's decision of loan approval.
C STAFF F .O F.NDATION-
Staf supports alternative #1.
n SUPPORTING DATA -
Copy of the GMEF criteria used by the EDA; Copy of the preliminary loan
application; Copy of the GMEF Approval Form.
SDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 28, 1995
Consideration to review for approval the preliminary GMEF
application from applicant. Tappers. Inc.
Bill Tapper, Tappers, Inc., dba Genereux Fine wood Products
and westlund Distributing, will be present at the EDA meeting.
GMEP LOAN REQUEST:
$100,000 real estate and MSE, 6% interest rate, amortization
over 20 years, balloon in 5 years.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
ORIOINAL PROJECT Genereux Fine wood Products and westlund
Distributing relocated to Monticello in 1990 from a leased
facility in the St. Michael area. They constructed a 27,000
sq ft office/manufacturing/ warehouse facility at 212 Chelsea
Road. Genereux is a cabinet manufacturer and westlund
distributes cabinet hardware. The company currently employs
45-50 full-time people. Average wage per hour is $8.30.
The original TIP assistance was $74,000 of land write-down and
$15,500 of site improvements. The current property tax for
payable 1995 is $37,238.10 with a tax increment of $24,288.18.
The difference between the tax and tax increment results from
the 1990 tax rate of 81.843% which is froze upon TIF District
certification and the 1995 tax rate is 113.028%. Also, the
commercial/industrial classification rates have been reduced
somewhat.
GMEF Loan No. 001 was awarded in 1990 for $88,000 at 8% fixed
interest rate amortized over 20 years. The balloon payment of
$70,989.14 is due August 13, 1997. The loan was for real
estate and M/S. The loan payback is current and as of
November 13, 1995, the outstanding loan balance is $76,176.80
per Marquette Bank who services this loan.
EIPANSION PROJECT Bill and Barb Tapper propose to construct
an 18,000 sq ft manufacturing addition and estimate an
increase of employment by 15 for a total employment of 65.
Construction to begin April, 1996, and completed by December,
1996.
On November 1, 1995, the HRA approved additional TIP
aoeiotance in the amount of $25,000 (upfront) for site
improvements relating to the proposed expansion. Disbursement
.;O p
SDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 28, 1995
upon 904 completion of the proposed minimum improvements. The
proposed expansion project is estimated to generate $22,000 of
additional annual taxes or an annual tax increment of $16,500.
The additional $33,000 of tax increment over two years
(District decertifies in February of 2000) is sufficient to
cover the $25,000 assistance. At the time of the approval,
the NRA was unaware of the collateral shortfall.
The proposed uses/sources of funds for this expansion project
are estimated as follows:
Uses of Funds
Building Construction
$710,000
Equipment Purchase
190,000
Soft Coats
75.000
SUBTOTAL
$975,000
SBA Debenture Fees
13.000
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS
Funds
$988,000
Sources of
Marquette Bank
$460,000
SBA 504
403,000
GMEF
100,000
TIF
25.000
TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS
$988,000
The company currently has an SBA 504 loan on its existing
facility. The outstanding balances on those loans are as
follows:
Marquette Bank $300,554
SBA 338,236
The company received its first SBA loan in 1990 and has
therefore exceeded the three-year limitation regarding
seasoned loans.
The existing SBA 504 mortgages complicate the proposed
financing. Existing mortgages must be subordinated to MBNA to
achieve the proper torm collateral positioning covering the
building. The following outlines the final mortgage
positiona:
Page 2
SDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 28, 1995
Marquette Bank (first lien) $300,554
Marquette Bank (second lien) $460,000
(Prime + 1.25%, 20 year amortization, 10 year maturity)
SBA 504 (third lien) 338,236
SBA 504 (fourth lien) 403,000
GMEF (fifth lien) 76,576
GMEF (sixth lien) 100.000
TOTAL OVERALL SOURCES OF FUNDS
OR TOTAL LOANS $1,678,365
This expansion project would be structured as a participation
between Marquette Bank, SBA, GMEF, and TIF. The partnere
would document their expenses associated with construction of
the facility and "draw -down" funds accordingly through a title
company.
AS originally noted by Bill Endres, Marquette Bank, the total
collateral available of $1,625,000 less the total loans of
$1,678,365 creates a shortfall of $53,365. Bill suggests the
RDA disburse the GMEP loan at 50t completion of the building
expansion.
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE EMM (GMEF) GUIDELINES
PUBLIC PURPOSE CRITERIA: Must comply with four or more of the
criteria listed below, criteria #1
being mandatory.
Creates new jobs: 15 immediate new (37.5 hpw) jobs
within two years. Average wage,
$8.30 ph.
Increases the community tax base: Annual Estimated
Market value of
expansion, $475,000
or Annual Estimated
Taxes, $22,000.
Factors: Assiet existing industrial business to expand
their operations. The company's business
environment meets the City,s industrial
objectives: nature of business, service and
product, no adverse environmental effects, the
comprehensive plan and zoning policy.
Page 3
z
RDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 28, 1995
4. Used as a secondary source to supplement conventional
financing: Approximately 894 of the total (Phase I
and II) financial package is financed by
a lending institution (Marquette Bank)
and SBA. The GMEF and TIF makeup the
other 11%.
5. Used as gap financing: Used as gap financing (see item
# 6 below) and as an incentive
to encourage business retention
and expansion.
6. Used to assist other funds: Other sources of funds
used in addition to the
GMEF are SEA, TIF, and
the bank.
GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND POLICIES
I. BUSINESS ELIGIBILITY:
Industrial business: Yes.
Located within city limits: Yes, Zoned I-2.
Credit worthy existing business: Yes, per Public
Resource Group, Inc.
$10,000 loan per each job created, or $5,000 per every
$20,000 in property market valuation, whichever highest:
$150,000 or $118,750, respectively.
Compliances 0100,000
II. FINANCING METHOD:
Companion Direct Loan: All such loans may be
subordinated to the primary lenders) if requested by the
primary lender(o). The GMEF is leveraged and the lower
interest rate of the GMRF lowers the effective interest
rate on the entire project.
Approvedc G=V Loan No. 001 in 5th position and QWV
Loan No. 011 in 6th position.
III. USE OF PROCEEDS:
Real property development and machinery and equipment.
Page 4
SDD
HDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 28, 1995
IV. TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
Loan Size: Maximum not to exceed 504 of the
remaining GMEF balance. Remaining annual
GMEF Appropriation Balance based on
disbursements, November 22, 1995,
$150,000. ($75,000) Remaining annual
GMEF Appropriation Balance based on
approvals, November 22, 1995, $100,000.
The H -window loan has not been disbursed.
($50,000)
Approved: $100,000.
The RDA determined 0X➢ Loan
No. 011
would be disbursed in 1996,
therebye,
meeting compliance of the loan
size policy.
Leveraging: Minimum
606 private/public non-GMEF.
Maximum 306
GMHF. Minimum 104 equity of
GMEF loan.
Marquette
$760,554 (456)
SBA
741,236 (446)
GMEF
176,576 (106)
TIF
25,000 ( 16) (146)
(1006)
Loan Term: Real estate property maximum of- 5 -year
maturity amortized up to 30 years.
Balloon payment at 5 years.
Approved and compliance for real estate/Kass
Amortisation of 20 years, balloon payment in 5 years.
Interest Rate: Fixed rate not less than 26 below
Minncapolio primo rate. Prime rate per
National Bank (First Bank) of Minneapolis
on date of HDA loan approval. (Prime 11-
22-95, 8.7560
Approved and compliance: 6.75% fixed interest rate.
Loan Fee: Minimum fee of $200 but not to exceed
1.56 of the total loan project. Fees are
to be documented and no duplication of
foes between the lending institution and
the GMEF.
Pago 5
SDE
BDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 28, 1995
Approved and compliance: $100,000 E .015 . not -to -exceed
$1,500.
Prepayment Policy: No penalty for prepayment.
Deferral of Payments: 1. Approval of the EDA
membership by majority vote.
2. Extend the balloon if unable
to refinance, verification
letter from two lending
institutions subject to Board
approval.
What is Tappers' Inc, plan for the balloon payment of
070,989.14 due August 13, 1997 relating to 03W Loan No.
001? The Tappers indicated they plan to honor the loan
agreement.
Interest limitation on guaranteed loans:
Subject to security and/or reviewal by EDA and
Attorney.
Aesumability of Loan: None.
e Business Equity Requirements:
Subject to type of loan; Board of Directors will
determine case by case, analysis under normal
lending guidelines.
No actual business equity, equity is 825,000 of TIP.
Collateral: Mortgage deeds, securities, and/or
guarantees as per the GMEF attorney.
Non -Performance: This approved GMEF loan shall become
null and void if funds aro not drawn
upon or disbursed within 180 days
from the date of BDA approval
(November 28, 1995).
Approved and compliances Null and void Nay 28, 1996.
GMEF Legal Fees: Responsibility of the GMEF
applicant.
r
l
Page 6
SDI
HDA AGENDA
NOVEMBER 28, 1995
B.
Recommendation is to review this information prior to the
HDA meeting for discussion and potential questions. The
financial analysis and annual debt service requirement
will be submitted at the meeting. Consideration to
approve or disapprove GMEF Loan No. 011 is the next
agenda item.
Items for discussion: Amount of loan size, collateral
shortfall, term length and rate, non-performance date,
and cashflow to debt service.
C. Sunnorting Data:
1. Copy of the preliminary application for GMEF.
2. Copy of the financial proposals of September, 1994
and October, 1995. Construction costs increased.
3. Copy of the information provided by Bill Endres,
Marquette Bank.
Forthcomming:
1. Copy of the Financial Credit Analysis by PRG and
annual debt service payments.
2. Copy of the current financial statements.
Page 7
r
s
GREAT`' -.R MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE
250 EAST BROADWAY
MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
PRELIMINARY APPLICATION FOR LOAN
APPLICANT: Tappers, Inc.
FIRM OR ?RADE NAME: Genereux Fine Wqod Prodggts 3 Westlund Distributing
BUSINESS ADDRESS: 21% Ctlelsea Road, Monticellq, M 55362
(# & Street) (City 5 State) (Zip Code)
TELEPHONE: BUSINESS 1 )612-245-4222 HOME ( )612-473-7919
DATE ESTABLISHED: business purchased 1984 EMPLOYER I.D. i:41-1470393
SOLE PROPRIETOR X CORPORATION PARTNERSHIP
MANAGEMENT
NAME TITLE OWNERSHIP %
William R. Tapper ?resident 50%
Barbarg R, Tapper gecretpry 508
Lance rartkoof General Manager (Genereux) 09
John Gammel General Manager (Westlund) 09
PROJECT LOCATION: Lot 4. Block 2 Oakwood Industrial Park
NEW BUSINESS x EXISTING BUSINESS, p
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE: i�'ftn D. Q 0 c7
PROPOSED USES:
RECUEST:
5 j U0.06
LAND S
AMOUNT OF IRAN
fAOM4„nn
EXISTING BUILDING
MATURITY i TERM'S
CONSTRUCTION 1te'210 Tl\6.coo
REQUESTED
5/69
MACHINERY CAPITAL -1-66TQOO % 40 . c 0 o
APPLICANT'S
-25.000
WORKING CAPITAL
EQUITY
39-rs6A (TIF)
OTHER A+,O" Woo o
LOAN PURPOSE
Ruildinct & Equip.
TOTAL USES $ R ilk . Omo
PROPOSED BEGINNING DATE: Anri1 1944-- \Qq IG
ESTIMATED COMPLETION WE: 5 g.0 .s.,.-Qa+^ \ 4 V U
TITLE TO
PROJECT ASSETS TO BE HELD BY: OPERATING ENTITY ALTER EGO
PARTICIPATING LENDER: M„r„ynrrn R 7
rein
t l 1 _
oncacc ernon ITelap ona
PRESENT + OF EMPLOYEES: _50 PROJECTED 1 OF FMPLOlEES 65
ADDITIONAL PROJECT IHFORMATIO �✓Sgni�ficnnt potnntial for productivity
growth. 1
APPLICANT S103A. DATE SIGiED,
00
SDS
APPROVAL OF
GREATER MONTIC,ELLO ENTERPRISE FUNDS
BY
ECONOMIC DEVELPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
Preliminary Loan Application Approval. JANUARY 20. 1995
Loan terms negotiated and agreed upon TAPPERS, EDA, AND MARQUETTE BANK
betweeen the developer, the lending
institution, and the EDA Executive Director.
Formal Loan Application and Financial PRG, INC. - RATIOS WITHIN
Statements analyzed by the lending INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS. NOTED
institution, BDS, Inc. or city staff. CGLLATERAl SHGRTI•A66 'ENDER
PRESUMES APPROVAL AND COMMITMENT
Building and Site Plan Preliminary and/or THROUGH HPLS HEADQUARTERS. 11-28-95
Final Review.
Building Permit approval or construction
commitment.
Loan documents reviewed and/or prepared TO BE PREPARED BY KENNEDY 6
by the City Attorney. C AVFN-
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL:
LOAN NUMBER GMEF LOAN NO. 011 LOAN APPROVED YFS
BORROWER WILLIAM R. AND BARBARA R. TAPPER
ADDRESS 212 CHELSEA ROAD, MN 55362 LOAN DISAPPROVED
LOAN AMOUNT 1100,000 REAL ESTATE AND M6E
RATE 6.752 FIRED INTEREST RATE DATE Nomm a A_
1905
TERMS AMORTIZED OVER 2n YEARS. B,LLOONF.D IN 5 YEARS.
FEE NOT TO EXCEED 11,590 AND PAID AT TIME OF GMEF DISBURSEMENT.
GMEF LEGAL FEES RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT. OTHER*
A motion was made by EDA Commissioner BARB SCHWIFNTFR
to
(approve - a`19FiAPPOM) Greater Monticello Enterprise
Funds in the
amount of ONE. HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS (31n0.000.001
dollars
and cents to developer WILLIAM 9. AND BARBARA R. TAPPER
(TAPPER'.;. TNr—a
this 28TH day of NO4..MRF.R . 1995
Seconded
by EDA Commissioner HARVEY KENDALL
YEAS: BARB SCHWIENTEK, HARVEY KENDALL. NAYS: NONE
CLINT HERBST. TOM PERRAULT.
RON HOGLUND, AL LARSON, AND
BILI. DEMEULES.
GMEF dioburoed 19 _ by Check No.
EDA Treasurer
DISBURSE FUNDS FROM THE IIDAG Fund
CITY COUNCIL 14AY REVERSE AN EDA LOAN DECISION WITHIN TWENTY-ONE
DAYS OF EDA APPROVAL. SCHEDULED FOR COUNCIL REVIEW ON DECEMBER I1, 1995.
5bs
i GMEF Approval
Page 2
ACCEPTANCE OF TERMS
NX (We) hereby accept the terms stated above as approved by the
Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Monticello.
DATED:
* OTHER
IF APPROVED GMEF LOAN NO. 011 DOLLARS OF ;100,000 ARE NOT DISBURSED BY
MAY 28, 1996, THE APPROVED LOAN BECOMES NULL AND VOID.
GMEF LOAN NO. 010 WILL TAKE. A SIXTH POSITION AND GMEF LOAN NO. 001 WILL TAKE A FIFTH
POSITION ON REAL ESTATE AND MACHTNERY 6 EQUIPMENT BEHIND THE LENDER (FIRST AND SECOND)
AND SBA (THIRD AND FOURTH).
APPROVED GN£F LOAN NO. 011 SUBJECT TU LENDER AND SBA COMMITMENT AND APPROVAL.
COLLATERAL, GUARANTEES, AND OTHER CONDITION REQUIREMENTS TO BE DETERMINED AND
PREPARED BY THE GMEF ATTORNEY.
SD r
Council Agenda - 12/11/96
atdget e
. (R.W.)
As part of the truth in taxation requirements, the City Council is required to
hold a second public hearing on the adoption of the 1996 budget and the
resulting tax levy. While this second meeting will technically be another
public hearing, the purpose of the new requirement delaying the actual
adoption of the budget and tax levy is to provide the Council and the public
with more time to digest the budget requirements proposed at our
Wednesday night meeting in case additional changes were warranted.
At Wednesday's official truth in taxation hearing, the Council's decision at
that time was to keep the proposed tax levy at the revised $2,922,800
amount, which would result in a 1..3196 increase over the 1996 tax levy. This
1.31% increase compares to the original preliminary levy that had proposed a
3% increase for the public hearing purposes.
To again briefly summarize, the original proposed tax levy that was adopted
in August proposed a maximum dollar amount of $2,997,460. The
preliminary tax levy would have amounted to an increase in our dollars
collected by $166,266. The Council's action at the second workshop and also
at Wednesday night's public hearing was to reduce the total tax levy
requirements to $2,922,800, which will provide $81,616 more in dollars
collected but will only result in a 1.31% increase. At Monday night's
meeting, the Council would have one final time to consider any changes that
you may want to make to this budget and tax levy before adoption. You
would not be allowed to increase the budget more than the preliminary
amount that was established in August, but you would still have the latitude
to lower it if you so choose. The resolution enclosed for adoption is prepared
under the assumption that the 1.31% increase will be acceptable, and the
total levy would be the $2,922,800.
B. Ai TERNATIVE ACTIONQ:
After the close of the public hearing, the Council should adopt the
resolution setting the tax levy requirements for next year at
$2,922,800, a 1.31% increase over the 1996 tax levy.
Council could adopt a final tax levy that is leas than the amount
proposed but in no case can it be higher than the $2,997,460 amount
established in August.
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
C. STAFF REMMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the resolution be adopted as proposed.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Tax levy summary sheet; Resolution for adoption.
Please refer to the agenda package summary provided for Wednesday nights
public hearing for additional details in the proposed budget.
M
TAE LEW SUMMARY
1996 BUDGET
ALL FUNDS
Net Payable**
1996 Adjusted
Levy After
Dpdurtino HACA
$1,966,209
31,095
15,590
12,038
1,196
17,497
597,270
291.905
$2,922,800•
Payable
Adjusted
Levy Before
Fund
Levy
Payable 1995
HACA Adj.
PAXAMP 1996
General
$1,696,139
$2,143,730
Library
30,735
31,095
Transportation
15,178
17,000
Shade Tree
23,425
13,135
OAA
26,544
1,300
HRA
16,088
19,090
Debt Service
637,098
651,187
Capital Imp. Revolving
195.978
307.362
TOTAL
$2,841,185
$3,183,899
Net Certified
Levy Increase -
$81,615 (+2.87$)
Net Payable**
1996 Adjusted
Levy After
Dpdurtino HACA
$1,966,209
31,095
15,590
12,038
1,196
17,497
597,270
291.905
$2,922,800•
Payable
1989
Tax Capacity
Rate
. . . . 14.283
Payable
1990
Tax Capacity
Rate
. . . . 16.187
Payable
1991
Tax Capacity
Rate
. . . . 15.511
Payable
1992
Tax Capacity
Rate
. . . . 16.492
Payable
1993
Tax Capacity
Rate
. . . . 16.313
Payable
1994
Tax Capacity
Rate
. . . . 17.527
Payable
1995
Tax Capacity
Rate
. . . . 18.228
Est. Payable
1996 Tax Capacity
Rate. . 18.467 (+1.318)
Tax
Tax
188/Payable
1989
$ 15,405,139
189/Payable
1990
15,873,242
190/Payable
1991
16,161,043
191/Payable
1992
15,513,574
192/Payable
1993
15,490,500
193/Payable
1994
15,154,786
194/Payable
1995
15,586,930
195/Payable
1996
(est) 15,826,867
14.283
$2,198,008
16.187
2,568,106
15.511
2,506,132
16.492
2,558,554
16.308
2,526,216
17.527
2,652,527
18.228
2,841,185
18.467
2,922,800
• Actual levy collected from taxpayers --balance received from state in
HACA aid payments ($261,099 is est. State Aid for 1996).
•' Did not deduct HACA from library levy, but deducted library portion of
HACA from general fund levy.
95BUDUM 2/2/95
V PC
Page 17
RESOLUTION 96-
RESt ELUTION ADOPTING THE 1996 BUDGET AND
SETTING THE TAX LEVY
WHEREAS, the City Administrator has prepared and submitted to the City Council a budget setl'ng
forth therein his estimated needs of the City of Monticello for all operations and the debt service r the
fiscal year commencing January 1, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the City Council tas reviewed the same and has made such changes therein as appear to
be in the best interest of the City of Monticello;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT R ESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO u at
the budget so submitted by the City Administrator, together with the changes made therein by th• City
Council, be and same hereby is adopted as a budget for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 19!
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Monticello that there be and hereby is
levied for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 1996, and the following sums for the respective
purposes indicated therein upon the taxable property of the City of Monticello, to wit:
The above resolution was introduced by Councilmember �1 , was duly seconded by
Councilmember n �% , with the following voting in favor thereof`.
The following voting in the opposition:
The City Admiulstrator is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the runty
Auditor of Wright County, Minnesota.
Adopted this 11th day of December, 1996.
Mayor
City Administrator ��
NET CERTIFIED
REVENUP
um
iiIACA
LEVY
General
$2,143,730
$177,621
$1,966,209
Library
31,096
0
31,096
OAA
1,300
104
1,196
HRA
19,090
1,693
17,497
Tree
13,136
1,097
12,038
Transportation
17,000
1,410
16,690
DERTRETMEMENT
Debt Service Fund
$ 661,187
$ 63,917
$ 697,270
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
Capital Improvement Revolving
It 307AG2
A 25,467
1 281906
TOTAL TAX LEVY
$3,183,899
$261,099
$2,922,800
The above resolution was introduced by Councilmember �1 , was duly seconded by
Councilmember n �% , with the following voting in favor thereof`.
The following voting in the opposition:
The City Admiulstrator is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the runty
Auditor of Wright County, Minnesota.
Adopted this 11th day of December, 1996.
Mayor
City Administrator ��
Council Agenda - 12/1 V95
,.
. .v.9 r7r.
As part of the original annexation that took place in 1994 when the City
annexed the NSP Power Plant, a joint advisory fire board was established
creating a joint fire department between the city and township. From 1976
until 1985, the original agreement indicated that Monticello Township would
reimburse the City for a portion of the fire department costs based primarily
on their percentage of assessed valuation compared to the city's valuation.
The Township's payment for services varied annually but was usually
between $3,000 and $7,000 per year for the protection provided depending on
the capital outlay purchases that were made by the department. In
summary, during the first ten years of this joint arrangement, the Township
probably covered lees than 10% of the actual cost of operating the
department, but they were responsible for over half of the fire calls made.
When the original agreement expired back in 1985, a revised joint agreement
was established that contained primarily the some language but changed the
method of the Township's contribution toward the operating coats. A formula
was used that was established by the University of Minnesota called a fair -
share formula, which primarily takes into account the valuations of each
member of the joint agreement and the number of fires that occur at each
location. These two components were averaged to determine each party's
share of the costs, and Monticello Township then saw their annual
contribution increased to approximately $30,000, or one-third of our normal
annual operating costs. While this was a dramatic increase, the Township
was now more in line with paying their share of the cost when considering
the number of fire calls they were contributing annually.
In 1990, the joint agreement was again renewed for another five years and,
likewise, the agreement remained primarily the same except for some
modifications to the formula. In the past, the one part of the formula
concerning valuations of each jurisdiction was referring to assessed
valuations, and we changed the wording to now use market valuations. The
original term `assessed valuations' had changed over the years to now terms
such as groes tax capacity and not tax capacity, and it was felt that market
value was more easily understandable by both parties and would be a better
indicator of comparisons between the communities. It shouldn't make any
difference whether a home is homesteaded or non -homesteaded if the value is
the same, and the change to market valuation in the formula made for a
better comparison in spreading the cost equally.
Council Agenda - 1211L95
Under the present arrangement, the Township has gradually seen their
share of the overall budget decrease slightly due to the fact that the city of
Monticello is growing faster in number of housing units and because of
annexation. The percentage of man-hours spent fighting fires in the
township has dropped from 57% ten years ago to around 40% today. Since
this is half of the formula, and the other half pertains to market valuations,
we are continuing to see the Township's share of the overall budget decrease
a little bit each year to where they're at approximately 30% of the operating
budget now. One thing to remember is that the Township has also used this
percentage in paying for any large capital expenditure purchases such as
new fire trucks in addition to the normal annual operating expenses.
With the present joint agreement scheduled to expire December 31, 1995, the
Joint Fire Board recently met to review the present joint agreement and to
discuss whether any changes should be recommended. The Joint Board,
along with fire department representatives, felt that the agreement has been
working fairly well the past five years, and Township representatives did not
see any need to make any changes at this time. As I noted earlier, the
Township's share of the operating costa is continuing to decrease slightly
each year, and this may be the reason for their satisfaction with the present
arrangement. Overall, I believe our relationship with the Township has
steadily improved over the years, and I also do not see any specific reasons
why changes should be implemented into the agreement at this time.
During the recent Joint Fire Board meeting, the Joint Board did want to
propose to the Township Board and the City Council that both jurisdictions
implement a new policy that would cover potential charges for the fire
department responding to numerous false alarms. With the advent of
security systems becoming more popular in businesses and residential
properties, the fire department is seeing an increase in the number of false
fire alarms that are occurring. Each fire call has to be responded to and costs
the Joint Board money for salaries of firemen who respond. The .Joint Board
felt that it would be appropriate to establish a policy that allows each
property owner up to (2) two fire alarms responses annually, but after that
each property owner would be charged $250 for each additional false alarm.
Most false alarms occur when there may be a problem with their security
alarm system that needs adjusting. In some cases, property owners do not
make the effort to correct problems causing false alarms, and the potential of
a steep charge may encourage more individuals to ensure that their systems
are working properly. In all likelihood, there will be very few individuals
that will actually end up being charged for a fire call, but the Joint Board felt
it would be appropriate to adopt this policy giving us the opportunity to
charge if we find obvious violators.
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
Agree to renew the joint contract arrangement with Monticello
Township as it currently exists for an additional five years.
Agree to renew the joint arrangement but with modifications.
It is the recommendation of the Joint Fire Board that the agreement seems to
be working satisfactorily over the past number of years, and the Joint Board
is not aware of any changes that need to be made. The use of market values,
along with the number of fire calls in each jurisdiction, seems to be the
appropriate method for sharing the costs at this time. The only alternative if
the agreement is not renewed would be that one of the jurisdictions would
have to buy out the other's interest, which doesn't seem to be an
advantageous option for either party at this time.
Council could consider approving adoption of the false alarm billing
policy as recommended by the Monticello Joint Fire Board.
Do not recommend implementation of this policy at this time.
C. STAFF RFCOMMF.NDATION:
Again, it's the Joint Fire Board's recommendation that the proposed policy is
fair and reasonable when considering that numerous false alarms do provide
not only a budget cost to respond to them, but it is also extremely
inconvenient for the firemen. The policy is not intended to be a tool simply to
recapture costs from property owners for fire calls, but to be available for use
when the same individual is causing numerous false alarms by having a
faulty security system. All potential billing individuals would be warned in
advance allowing them sufficient time to make repairs to their systems.
Therefore, it is the Joint Boards recommendation that the Council adopt this
policy.
Copy of existing contract; copy of proposed false alarm policy.
12
AN AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES 471.59
v_ CREATING A JOINT FIRE BOARD BETWEEN
THE TOWN OF MONTICELLO AND THE CITY OF MONTICELLO
By this instrument the CITY OF MONTICELLO, a mun'.cipal corporation of
the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the City, and the
TOWN OF MONTICELLO, a corporate subdivision, State of Minnesota, hereinafter
referred to as the Town, agree with each other as indicated by the following
articles.
ARTICLE I: Explanatory, Material
(A] The City and the Town presently own fire fighting equipment both jointly
and separately. The City owns a fire hall. The City operates an effective
and efficient fire department with volunteer fire fighters including
a chief. It io assumed that, collectively, the CITY and the TOWN are
more financially able to provide fire fighting equipment and protection.
(B] The respective City Council and Town Board hereby find it advisable
to jointly asaume the coat, maintenance, and oporation of the fire department,
and to jointly purchase now fire fighting equipment, as may be doomed
noceacary. The purpooe of thio contract in to provide for a joint sharing
of costa and purcha000 eaoential to the effective operation and maintenance
of a voluntoor fire dopartmont.
(C) Thin contract hoo boon authorirod by the City Council for the City of
Monticello and the Town Board for the Town of Monticello pursuant to
Minn000to statute Section 471.59 (Joint Exorcioo of Powero).
ARTICLE II: Joint Advioory Board
(A) A Joint Advioory Fire Board, croatod purouant to the faro contract between
tho City of Monticollo and tho Townohip of Monticello dated April 26, 1976,
and executed June 3, 1976, is hereby extended to facilitate the performance
of this contract throughout its life. Such Board shall have the powers
v
specifically given to it in the articles of this Agreement, and shall
have the power to make recommendations to the City Council and to the
Town Board to improve cooperation and efficiency in carrying out the
intent of this Agreement, and to make recommendations for amendments
and supplements to this Agreement.
[B] The membership of said Board shall consist of one member from the City,
one member from the Town, and one member from the Volunteer Piro Department.
The member from the City shall be appointed by the City Council; the
member from the Town shall be appointed by the Town Board; and the member
from the volunteer Fire Department shall be elected by the members of
the Volunteer Piro Department.
[C] Said Board shall have two regular meetings each year. The first quarterly
meeting shall be hold on the first Tuesday in March of each year at
7:00 p.m. The second quarterly mooting shall be held on the first Tueaday
of August of each year at 7:00 p.m., at the City Hall in the City of
Monticello, unl000 such Board fixoa a different place for oaid meeting.
(D) In every calendar year prior to the month of March, the City Council
and the Town Board shall name the membero to the Joint Advisory Piro
Board. In ovary calendar year prior to the month of March, the volunteer
fire department shall elect ito member to the Joint Advisory Piro Board.
IN Such momboro ohall hold office from the first Tucoday in March until
the firot Tuesday in March of the following year. If the City and Town
fail to make ouch appointment in a timoly manor or the Volunteer Piro
Department failo to elect ito member, the proviouo incumbent ohall continua
in office until ouch cuccoasor to named.
(P) The Board may adopt rules and by -levo not inconoiotont with this Agreement
for the purp000 of carrying out their dutiao hereunder.
-2-
Imy
ARTICLE III: Duties of Joint Advisory Fire Board
(A] The Joint Advisory Fire Board shall, with the aid and advice of the
Monticello Volunteer Fire Department, prepare a budget prior to September 1
of each year for the maintenance, operation and purchase of equipment
for the following year. Such recommendations shall be submitted to
the City Council and Town Board on or before September 1 of each year.
ARTICLE IV: Joint Operating Fire Department Account
(A) The City and the Town agree to annually, prior to the commencement of
each calendar year of this Contract, mutually approve the budget of
the operating expenses for the ensuing calendar year as may be recommended
by the Joint Advisory Fire Board.
(B] Contribution of the City and the Town shall be paid to the City Treasurer
of the City of Monticello who shall keep the came in a departmental
account to be known so the "Joint Operating Piro Account." The City
Council for the City of Monticello shall approve all axpenditurea at
their regularly ochaduled Council mootingo. All other expendituroo
for the purchaao of cupplion, maintenance, and equipment which were
not part of the operating budget oholl be approved by both the City
Council and the Town Board before paid expondituroo aro made.
ARTICLE V: Contributiono to Joint Operating Piro Account
]A] The City and Town shall jointly contribute to the Joint Operating Piro
Account for the maintenance, operation, and purch000 of equipment of
the Volunteer Fire Department. The contribution by each party heroin
to the Joint Operating Fire Account for each calendar year shall be
calculated according to the following formula, known ao the "Fair Share
Formula":
Total Costo x (?A of Total Uco r % of Total Value) " Fair Shoro Costa
Z
Bos Appendix "A" for definition of itema used in Formula.
DIM
7C -o
[B) The City and Town shall deposit in advance to the Joint Operating Fire
Account the quarterly contributions of the accepted budget for the Volunteer
Fire Department. Said quarterly contributions shall be made on February 1,
May 1, August 1, and November 1 in the year in which the budget was
approved. All contributions shall be made in money, and not in material
or equipment.
[C] Credit towards the quarterly contribution requirements for the following
years budget shall be granted on the basis of percentage contribution
for any balance remaining in the Joint Operating Account as of December 31
of any year.
ARTICLE VI: Revenue from Adjacent Areas
[A] Revenue from contracts for fire protection to adjacent areas as mentioned
in Article I% [A] 3 and revenue from fire calla to these &roan shall
be deposited in the Joint Operating Fire Account.
ARTICLE VII: Purchaneo
(A) The City Council and the Town Board shall jointly agree upon any expendituroo
made for the purchaao of additional fire -fighting capital equipment.
They shall agree upon all opacifications for any and all joint purchasos
of capitol equipment, pursuant to the recommendation of the Joint Advisory
Piro Board. Purouant to oaid opacification, the City Adminiatrator
and the Town Clark ahall jointly iosuo a call for ocalod bids to be
prepared and published. Said call ohall rotor to the apocificationo
and to thio Agreement as baoic data binding upon each and ovary bidder.
The right to reject any and all bids oholl be rooervod by either the
City Council or the Town Board.
(B) At the time and place of opening bids, the City Adminictrator and the
Town Clark shall tally the bido in the pr000nce of the Joint Advioory
Fire Board. The Joint Advicory Fire Board shall make its recommsndatione
to the City Council and to the Town Board as to either accepting or
rejecting the bid or bids. The City and Town shall not be bound unless
both the City Council and the Town Board accept the bid or bids. If
either the City Council or Town Board rejects a bid or bide, and either
Board desme the purchase of said capital equipment necessary, either
party may accept the bid and purchase and pay for the capital equipment
outside the agreement herein. Said property shall be the exclusive
property of the respective governmental unit.
(C) If both parties purchase the equipment jointly, the seller of such joint
equipment shall execute duplicate bills of sale revealing the interest
of the City and the Town so that each has a signed copy.
ARTICLE VIII: Maintenance of Apparatus
(A] The present fire -fighting equipment as set out in Exhibit "A" shall
be that contribution of each respective governmental body. It shell
remain the sole and exclusive property of each of the respective governmental
unit. It shall be maintained and insured pursuant to thin agreement.
(B) The jointly purchased equipment shall be maintained and inoured by the
agreement herein. The control of the purchased equipment shall be retained
by the City and the Town.
(C) The coot of storage, maintenance, and insurance of the respective Lire -fighting
equipment and the jointly purchased faro -fighting capital equipment
shall be paid out of the Joint Operating Fire Account.
(D) The coot of the maintenance and insurance of the City Fire Hall shall
be paid out of the Joint Operating Piro Account.
ARTICLE Ix: Use of Fire Equipment
[A) The equipment so sot out in Exhibit "A" and the equipment jointly purchased
shall be used within the jurisdictional area of the City and Sown and
nowhere eloo except as follows:
1. The adjacent area where the fire may spread to such
City or Town;
2. To assist neighboring fire departments as may be mutually
agreed upon under a reciprocal agreement with such
Eire departments;
3. In any adjacent area to the City and to the Town
with which a contract for protection may be negotiated.
(B) It shall be the duty of the Joint Advisory Board to provide volunteers
in sufficient number to maintain a staff of fire fighters to answer
fire calls and to command available equipment in such a manner so as
not to fall below the minimum standard set forth by the Bureau of Fire
Underwriters.
(C) Dispatching the operation of the fire -fighting equipment shall be the
duty of the Chief of the Fire Department, and in the Chiefs absence
shall be the duty of the Assistant Chief. If neither is available,
the person previously appointed for this purpose shall be in charge.
[D) The Volw tear Fire Department shall answor all calla under tho direct
oupervieion of the Fire Chief without regard to the authority of any
other person giving the alarm or order.
ARTICLE %: Public Employees' Retirement Asoociation
(A) Requirements of the Public Employees- Retirement Association may be
paid by transferring from tho Joint Oporating Fire Account as dotorminod
by the Joint Advisory Board.
ARTICLE %I: Liability -Governmental Functiono-Protective Clauses
(A) in all of the provisions of this Agreement, the City and the Town shall
be deemed to be exercising their governmental functions so that each
shall not be liable for the other for any negligence of its officers,
eaployeoe, fire fighters, or agents.
(B) Specifically, without limiting the effect of the language in the preceding
-6-
paragraph, the City and its officers, employees, and fire fighters shall
not be liable for any of the following acts or omissions: failure to
answer a call
promptly or at all; for any trespass or damage to persons
or property whether necessary or unnecessary in connection with going
to, returning from any fire call or in serving at any fire or fire call.
[C] In the event of any fire call to which the Fire Department will respond,
sufficient personnel and equipment shall remain at the City Fire Ball
in order to respond to any subsequent call for fire protection, whether
ouch call in or is not located within the same jurisdiction of the first
call.
ARTICLE XII: Life of This Agreement
[A] This Agreement shall expire December 31, 1995, or at an earlier date
when, for sufficient cause, the City or Town shall notify the other
in writing at least 180 days of the desire to terminate the Agreement
herein.
[8] On any termination, "a remaining capital equipment jointly acquired
shall bo cold at a reasonable price on competitive bids and the proceeds
divided among the owners as their interest appears. Non -capital equipment,
such as miacellanocuo supplies, office supplies, and perishables, shall
be considarad the property of the Fire Department and shall be considered
to be convoyed, without further compensation, to the jurisdiction which
assumes the authority and responsibility for the Fire Department. A
schedule for all fixed assets purchased shall be maintained, and proceeds
from their sale shall be distributed on the basis of the original contribution
percentage for the fixed asset in question. The City and the Town,
respectively, may be the bidder at any ouch vele.
(C) On any termination, the balance of any remaining monies in the Joint
operating Account shall be distributed based on the percentage contribution
for that year.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties of the Agreement have hereunto set
their hands and seals this day of , 19
TOWN OF MONTICELLO CITY OF MONTICELLO
Chair
Mayor
Town Clerk City Administrator
SEAL
SEAL
APPENDIX •A•
Total Costs: The total annual costs of Fire Department operation, in
dollars, including fixed costs, operating costs, manhour
costa, and capital costs amortized over expected life
of equipment, vehicles and buildings.
Total Use: The use of the Fire Department services by each party
expressed as a percentage (t) of the total use of Fire
Department services by all parties. The percentage (t)
is based on manhours spent in each area averaged over
the past five (5) years.
Total Value: The Market Valuation of each party expressed as a percentage
(t) of the sum of the valuations of all parties using
Fire Department services.
Fair Share: Each party's share of total annual coats expressed in
dollars.
I X
J
EXHIBIT "A"
Fired Asset Schedule
CITY OF MONTICELLO
1946 Chev. Fire Truck
1962 Chev. Fire Truck
Fire Hoses and Nozzles
Smoke Inhalator
Fire Boots and Helmets
Air Survival Equipment
Resuscitator
Tire Generator
Fire Clothes
Smoke Effector - 1971
Centrifugal Fumy - 1971
2 May Radio System - 1975
Alarm Syotem - 1975
City Hall and Firo Hall - 1962
(40% of apace used for Fire Hall)
TOWN OF MONTICELLO
1977 Fire Truck
1965 Chay. Water Tanker
J:r
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Policy Establishing Billing Procedures for Fire Department Responses to False
Alarms
This policy is intended to outline the conditions under which the Monticello Fire
Department will charge property owners for responding to false alarms. With the
fire department erperiencing an increase in the number of false alarms because of
the increased popularity of home and business security systems, the Joint Fire
Board has recommended a policy be established to allow for reimbursement of
expenses associated with responding to these false alarm calls. The Joint Fire
Board does not feel it's appropriate for the taxpayers of the jurisdictions supporting
the department's services be responsible for the added costs these false alarms
generate and therefore, proposed to implement the following policy effective
January 1, 1996 as it relates to charges for responding to repeated false alarms:
1. All property owners within the Monticello Fire Department coverage areas
will receive up to (2) two fire responses to false alarms within each 12 month
calendar year at no additional charge.
2. Any property owner within the jurisdiction responsible for (3) three or more
false alarms within the 12 month period shall be billed a response fee of $260
for each false alarm above (2) two.
3. All property owners responsible for a false alarms will be notified in writing
of this billing procedure policy.
4. All false alarm charges remaining unpaid at the end of a calendar year may
be levied as a special assessment against the responsible property to tho
extent allowed by State Statutes.
FALSEYOU 19 050
�K
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
tents
ots 1-
(R.WJ
For the past year, the City has had an option contract with H -Window
Company allowing them to purchase Lots 1, 2 and 3 of the Oakwood
Industrial Park Second Addition that provided for an annual fee to be paid to
the City of $3,200 based on 5% of the eventual selling price of $64,000, plus
H -Window would be responsible for $1,150 of estimated real estate taxes for
this property. This option contract agreement was arrived at after four years
of various agreements that the City had provided to H -Window at no cost, in
which we agreed to hold the property for future expansion needs. Because of
the increasing demand for industrial sites, the Council chose last year to
require that in order to continue holding the lots, there would have to be
some type of compensation.
The one-year agreement officially expired November 29, 1995, and H -
Window representatives had initially indicated they were ready to complete
the purchase for $64,000. On November 18, 1 received a letter from Knut
Flakk, President, indicating they have changed their minds and now are
requesting that the City Council again hold the three lots exclusively for the
H -Window Company until December 1, 2000. In addition, the request is to
grant them an exclusive option to purchase at the stated $64,000 price
without any additional cost for the option agreement.
This request brings us back to where we started in June of 1991, when the
City Council adopted the first resolution agreeing to hold all six of the lots in
the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition at no cost. When this
agreement expired on December 31, 1992, the Council continued to hold the
property fbr six additional months waiting for a decision by H -Window on
whether they wanted to purchase the lots. One of the concerns that was
expressed by the Council previously was whether the City would be setting a
precedent in agreeing to hold lots for expansion potential of a business at no
option cost, and whether we would do this for all other industrial park
tenants. I believe this was the primary reason why the Council felt the need
to establish a nominal holding cost charge if we were going to continue
holding lots exclusively for a business. This would eliminate the potential
accusation of special treatment for one business over another.
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
I believe Knut will be in attendance at the meeting to present his request in
person, outlining the reasons why he would like to see City assistance in
their future growth plans. I've also enclosed some copies of past agenda
items and minutes that pertain to this subject for your review.
& ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Council could agree to enter into an exclusive option agreement with
H -Window Company on Lots 1, 2 and 3 at the firm price of $64,000
until December 1, 2000, with no annual option fee or real estate tax
reimbursement.
2. Council could agree to continue an option agreement with H -Window
Company on the three lots at an agreed upon price for the land and
any option fee or charges you would like to incorporate into the
agreement.
3. Council could offer to sell the property to H -Window Company with
attractive terms such as no down payment, 20 -year contract for deed at
a low interest rate, etc.
4. If an option agreement is no longer suitable, the Council could provide
H -Window with the right of first refusal on all three lots but direct
staff to continue marketing efforts to sell the property at the going
market rate per acre.
Based on the pricing of adjacent lots, the 1995 asking price would be
$85,600 for the three lots.
While I believe it is important to encourage availability of land for future
expansion by current industries, I do have concerns on continuing to hold
property for one industry when we may not be able to do the same for others.
I assumed the option agreement we entered last year would solve the
controversy over holding these lots; but H -Window representatives
apparently feel it's necessary to again ask for additional consideration from
the Council.
It should also be noted that last year the Industrial Development Committee
encouraged the City and H -Window Company to work out a suitable
agreement that was favorable to both parties, but they did not support the
continued holding of property at no cost. This could be construed as
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
favoritism of one industry over the other. As a result, I believe any exclusive
option agreement to hold land for another five years should provide for some
form of compensation to cover our carrying costs.
Copy of November 18 letter from H -Window; Copy of option contract; Copies
of previous agenda summaries and minutes relating to same issue.
FU'
WINDOW
S,rvtr REvoLunoNARY-
November 18, 1995
Mr. Rick Wolfsteller
City of Monticello
250 East Broadway, Box 1147
Monticello, MN 55362-9245
Dear Rick,
The H Window Company currently carries an option contract to purchase
additional land, namely lots 1,2 and 3, block 1 in the Oakwood Industrial Park
second addition. This option contract is due to expire on November 29, 1995.
Earlier this month we had acknowledged to your office our Intent to exercise this
option and purchase these land parcels. In hind site, and after further review, I
have decided that to purchase this land now would not be in our best interests.
These parcels of land are still needed and are an important part of our future
expansion plans, however, our steady growth requires that I focus our present
available capital resources on providing for more short term and urgent capital
needs.
As I stated, this land still figures prominently Into our future growth plans. The H
Window Company and its shareholders have demonstrated an ongoing
commitment to the community of Monticello. We have continued to grow and
expand our facilities since our start up in 1987. For 1996 we anticipate sales
growth again of over 25%. Indications are that the same growth patterns will
continue and remain steady over the next three to five year time frame. It is this
three to five year time frame that I envision the need for the optioned land.
I am asking that Instead of requiring the H Window Company to exercise its
option now, that the city of Monticello hold this land exclusively for the H Window
Company until December 1, 2000. We are content with continuing our
expansion in Monticello and I feel that the city should play a bigger part and
participate more In facilitating our growth. This exclusive option to purchase the
land would be at no cost to the H Window Company and the option price would
hold constant at $84,000.
H wnaow CampaM • 1324 EaJ Oakwood D' ro • MonW-cao, Mtnn00Ma 5.%= rhe
(G12)205-5305 - Fox(812)205.4m • (880) T. -H ww
ILJ
W1MDaN/
Smmy Revouuraw w
I respectfully ask that you seriously consider this proposal and respond back to
me the city's position as soon as practical. There is mutual benefit from our
growth, and I would prefer that this growth continue In the Monticello community
exclusively.
Sincerely,
Knut Flakk
President and Chairman
H WDM" cwrp&N 1324 E= Oakwood O"m • Wfte 0. MkvmmM 55302 � 6
Phom: (012) :fls•5305 F'aa. (012) 205-4650 • (600) UG Mev
OPTION CONTRACT
H•Window Company
This agreement is dated November 29, 1994.
For and in consideration of the sum of Three Thousand Two Hundred and
00/100 Dollars ($3,200.00), in hand paid to the CITY OF MONTICELLO, the receipt
whereof is hereby acknowledged, said CITY OF MONTICELLO does hereby grant
unto H ININDCW COMPANY, a Minnesota Corporation, ar exclusive option for a
period of one (1) year from and after the date hereof, to purchase, for the sum of
Sixty-four Thousand 00/100 Dollars ($64,000.00) the following -described lands
situated in the city of Monticello, County of Wright, State of Minnesota, to wit:
Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition, City of Monticello
Lot 2, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition, City of Monticello
Lot 3, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition, City of Monticello
Upon the following terns and conditions:
That if this option is exercised, the said City shall convey said premises free
and clear of any liens and encumbrances and shall furnish an Abstract of Title
continued to date, showing the same. The H -WINDOW COMPANY shall, in addition
to the Option Contract payment, be responsible for payment to the CITY OF
MONTICELLO the annual sum of One Thousand One Hundred Fifty and 00/100
Dollars ($1,150.00) to cover real estate taxes that would be payable on this property
just as if the H -WINDOW COMPANY owned it during the option period. One-half
(1/2) of the real estate tax payment ($575) shall be payable to the CITY OF
H-WINDOW.CON: ID29/94 p �/
Page 1
on or before November 15, 1995.
The H -WINDOW COMPANY may exercise its option at any time during the
—time specified above by providing written notice to said CITY OF MONTICELLO,
4
provided all terms and conditions of this option agreement have been complied with,
including payment of all real estate tax installments due, and failure to provide such
notice within the time specified shall terminate this option without further action.
Time being the essence of this Agreement.
In case such notice shall be provided with said time, then thirty (30) days shall
be given in which to examine the abstract, make deeds, and close the sale.
If this option is exercised before the end of option time period specified, the
price paid for this option shall not be applied to the purchase price except that
$266.00 per month for each frill month remaining on the option term shall be applied
against the purchase price, and all real estate tax payments paid or due for the year
in which the option is exercised shall be prorated to the date of closing.
H•WINDO CITY OF MONTICELLOO
By: B1rG
mad"Fyle, M or
Its �'" ✓� � ' ��
By:
Rick Wolfsteller, Oity Administrator
H•WINDOW.CON: ID29/94
Page 2
Sv
Council Agenda - 1 V14/94
Consideration of entering into an agreement with H -Window
Comnanv concerning future acauisition of Lots 1.2 and 3. Block
1. Oakwood Industrial Parks Second Addition (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
In June of 1991, the Council adopted a resolution agreeing to hold all six
(6) lots of the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition for the H -
Window Company's future expansion potential. This agreement expired
December 31, 1992, and in February of 1993, it appeared that the H -
Window Company would be making a decision on whether to purchase
the property by June 1 of 1993. In light of this time table, the Council
then adopted a resolution agreeing to hold lots 1, 2, and 3 (the lots
closest to H -Window Company) until May 31, 1993, and to also provide
a first right of refusal for Lots 4, 5, and 6 for the same time period.
Lots 4, 5 and 6 were those lots on the east side of the cul-de-sac. When
the June deadline came and went without H -Window Company
purchasing any of the property, the City Council again agreed in August
of 1993 to hold Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, for an additional time period
expiring January 31, 1994, and to again provide a first right of refusal
for the other three (3) lots until January, 1994.
No further extensions were requested by H -Window Company, nor did
the Council review this subject until the City staff' had received an offer
for the purchase of Lot 4:'n the amount of $36,000 from Miley Gjertsen
for his underground sprinkler irrigation business facility. At that time
it came to our attention that the previous right of first refusal
agreements with H -Window Company had expired in January, but the
staff felt that we owed H -Window Company the opportunity to exercise
their right of first refusal anyway. The City Council agreed with this
assumption and allowed H -Window Company the opportunity to match
the offer if they so desired.
After considering the feasibility of matching the purchase offer, Mr.
Steve Lemme, President of H -Window Company, indicated that the
company would not be in a position to purchase Lot 4 at this time.
However, Mr. Lemmo did note that H -Window Company executives were
very concerned about being able to ensure the availability of Lots 1, 2,
and 3 on the west side of the cul-de-sac for their future expansion needs.
Mr. Lemme noted that if these three lots were not available in the
future, it could have an effect on their future expansion plans for H -
Window Company at that site. When I indicated that I was confident
that the City of Monticello would make every attempt to allow these lots
to be purchased at reasonable terms by H -Window Company,
'In
Council Agenda - 11/14/94
Mr. Lemme did not want to commit to an immediate purchase of the
property but would like to see the City continuing to hold the property
in some manner for H -Window Company expansion potential.
When the City Council accepted the offer for the sale of Lot 4 to Mr.
Gjertsen, the Council asked that some options be presented at a future
Council meeting and what the Council would consider regarding H -
Window Company's interest in Lots 1, 2, and 3. The previous Council
discussion centered on whether the City could continue to provide H -
Window Company with a no cost option agreement when there were
other industrial business that would like the same treatment. As a
matter of fact, the City was recently contacted by another existing small
industrial company that sees the need for expansian in the next couple
of years and is interested in purchasing one of these lots from the City.
Likewise, they would prefer to have the City hold the property until
they are ready to expand, as they do have cash flow problems.
Continuing to hold the property for one business may be a precedent
that the Council will have to deal with in the future concerning other
businesses.
I recently informed H -Window Company of four possible alternatives the
Council would be considering. The options are as follows:
The Council could enter into an option agreement with H -Window
Company on the sale of Lots 1, 2, and 3 at the current asking
price of $17,500 per acre or $79,360 with the annual option fee to
be calculated at 6% per year, or at whatever percentage rate the
Council was agreeable with. A 6% fee would amount to an
annual option charge of $4,761 per year, which would hold the
three lots in question at the established price of $79,350 until
such time as H -Window Company would desire to complete the
purchase.
The Council could establish an option agreement with the annual
fee noted in Item 1 above, and also request an additional annual
fee to cover the estimated property taxes that would he lost until
the sale occurred. Based on current county assessed market
values for these three (3) lots, the annual real estate taxes
payable would be estimated at $1,150, which would increase the
total operation cost to H -Window Company to approximately
$5,911.
17 9F
Council Agenda - 11/14/94
The Council could offer to sell the property to H -Window
Company at attractive terms such as no down payment, 20 year
contract for deed at 6% interest, etc. This type of low cost
arrangement would probably be more favorable than the City
would consider for selling the property to other interested
properties, but would allow H -Window Company the ability to
minimize their cash investment at this time. The favorable terms
would certainly be appropriate in this case, as we would be
providing the terms to a business for potential expansion and
would not likely offer the same as no down payment, long-term
contract if we were just selling the property to a speculative
buyer.
Council could decide to continue with the right of first refusal on
all three lots and direct the staff to continue marketing efforts to
sell the property to other industrial users. Under this option, H -
Window Company would still have the right of first refusal but
they could very well be faced with making a decision on the
purchase of one or all of the lots in a very short period of time.
I presented the four options that I thought the Council may want to
consider to Mr. Lemme for his review and response. At this time, I have
not received any firm preference from H -Window Company concerning
the options other than their desire to work out something with the City
to continue to make these lots available, nor was it indicated that if they
were not available when needed, they may have to look at other sites.
One of the possible disadvantages for H -Window Company in an
outright purchase of the property at this time concerns the use of tax
increment financing in the future. If H -Window Company owns the
property now, it would not be eligible for tax increment financing when
it did expand in the future. That is not to say that tax increment
financing will even be available years down the road, but it would
probably eliminate this incentive from being usable at that time.
From the City's standpoint, I would think that either the establishment
of an option fee or the outright sale under favorable long-term contract
for deed terms should be acceptable to us. Continuing to hold the
property without any option fee will likely be construed by other
industrial businesses as playing favoritism to one business and others
may ask for the same treatment. As I noted earlier, another small
company looking for expansion in the next couple years has already
requested the same treatment for one of these lots. No matter what the
option fee is, I believe the past history of providing the option guarantee
at no additional cost should be eliminated and some other method of
,s M
Council Agenda - I V14/94
assuring H -Window Company's ability to acquire these lots be
established.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTION
1) Council could agree to enter into an option agreement with H -
Window Company on Lots 1, 2, and 3 at the current asking price
of $79,350 with the annual option fee to be established at
whatever percentage rate the Council is comfortable with.
2) Enter into an option agreement similar to that proposed in
Option 1, but also require an additional $1,150 to cover the
estimated real estate taxes that would be lost by not being owned
by H -Window Company.
3) Council could offer to sell the property to H -Window Company at
attractive terms such as no down payment, 20 -year contract for
deed at a low interest rate, etc.
4) Council could continue with the right of first refusal agreement
on all three (3) lots but direct the staff to continue marketing
efforts to sell the property in the meantime.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
While the staff believes it is important to encourage availability of land
for future expansion by current industries, the staff does have concerns
on continuing to hold property for one industry when we may not be
able to do the same for others. I do feel if H -Window Company is
concerned about having enough land available for their future needs,
they do need to make some effort themselves to protect their interest;
and as a result, I feel they should enter into an option agreement and
pay an annual fee or accept the purchase at favorable terms provided by
the City. I had previously asked Mr. Steve Lemme to present any other
ideas he had for Council consideration regarding these lots, and it is
possible he may have some other suggestions at the Council meeting for
your review. It was noted by the Industrial Development Committeo
that they hoped the City and H -Window Company could work out an
agreement that was favorable to both parties, but they did not support
the continued holding of the property at no cost.
D. SUPPORTING DUA
Copy of an option agreement; Copy of a right of first refiisal agreement.
19 1#
Council Minutes - 11/14/94
11. Consideratign of entering into an aereemeut with H-Wunauw t.uuw.u„
concernine future acquisition of Lots 1. 2. and 3. Block 1. Oakwood
industrial Park Second Addition.
City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller reported that the right of first refusal
agreement between H -Window Company and the City for Lots 1, 2, and 3,
Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition, expired in January
1994. Although no further extensions have been requested by H -Window, at
the time the sale of Lot 4 to Miley Gjertsen was considered by Council, H -
Window indicated a continued interest in ensuring the availability of Lots 1,
2, and 3 for future expansion of their company but did not want to commit
to an immediate purchase of these three lots.
Wolfsteller went on to report that he informed Mr. Steve Lemma of H -
Window Company that the following four alternatives, and any suggestions
presented by Ii -Window, would be considered by Council on November 14:
1. Council could enter into an option agreement with the H -Window
Company on the sale of Lots 1, 2, and 3 at the current asking price of
$17,600 per acre, with the annual option fee to be calculated at a
percentage rate agreed to by Council.
2. Council could establish an option agreement with an annual fee noted
in option 01 but also request an additional annual fee to cover the
estimated property taxes that would be lost until the sale occurred.
3. Council could offer to sell the property to H -Window with terms such
as no down payment, 20 -year contract for deed at 6% interest, etc.
4. Council could decide to continuo with the right of first refusal on all
three lots and direct staff to continuo marketing efforts to sell the
property to other industrial users.
Wolfst.ellor noted that no comments or offers have been received from H -
Window at this time.
After discussion, it was the consensus of Council that since City staff has
notified H -Window that Council would consider options for securing the
availability of Lots 1, 2, and 3 as requested by H -Window but no response
has been received from them, the lots should be placed on the open market.
Staff was also directed to notify H -Window that if a purchase offer is
received from another company for any of these lots, H -Window will no
longer be notified and given first chance to purchase the property.
s1.s
OV -28-94 M O N 1 2 E 0 T T H E H WINDOW C O P 0 1
WAAWMAV Y-',
�•�. _:err^ :x��•ik..:. x�vtl�c-"•� `1
nrrtimorar r P.O. Box 206.1324 East Oakwood OM • Montego, MN 55382
Phone: (612) 2955305 • Fac (612) 295.4658
November 23, 1994
Rick Wolfeteller
City 1kdminietrator
City of Monticello
2$0 Hast Broadway
P.O. Box 1147
Monticello, Mti 55362-9245
RB1 Lots 1, 2 and 3
Bloek 1
Oakwood Second Addition
Deer Rickf
In regard to your letter dated November 15 and per our discussion on the
phone today, I am writing to confirm the following.
1). The H Window Company is very interested in purchasing the
threo (3) late adjacent to our existing land.
2). we will make a proposal on Honday, November 29th for
consideration at the City Council Meeting.
3). The proposal will likely be based on OPTION 1 and OPTION 2
identified in your letter of November 15, 1994.
• An option agreement between the H Window Company and
the City of Monticello with an annual option too
(based on an agreed upon purchase price and e
reasonable annual interest rate) and an additional
annual payment for estimated property taxes.
4). we would obviously desire to have you agree that these lots
be protected f ram any othor potential buyer until we can
finalise a purchase option that is mutually agreeable to both
parties involved.
S)• Please use this letter as a firm letter of intent to finalise a
forthcoming purchase agreement.
Binc sly '
Steven Lomme cat Xnut Plakk (Chairman)
Prom idont/General Nana-jer Brad Pyle (Mayor)
1
Council Agenda - 11/28/94
3A. Consideration of entering into an agreement with H -Window
Comnanv concerning future acouisitiou of Lots 1. 2. and 9. Block 1.
Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the previous meeting, this item was on the Council's agenda for
consideration; and since no one from H -Window was in attendance at the
meeting, it was decided that the lots in question would be put on the
market and become available to anyone. After informing Mr. Steve Lemme
of H -Window of the Council's action, Mr. Lemme indicated that the reason
no one was attending the Council meeting was that they thought there were
going to be additional discussions and options considered before the Council
considered this subject.
Although I believe I was fairly clear in my letters to Mr. Lemme and
through phone conversations with him that the Council was going to
consider the future status of these lots at our Council meeting November 14,
Mr. Lemme did request that this item again be placed on the agenda at our
next Council meeting in that he or a representative of the company will he
in attendance to discuss this with the Council. Based on my recent
conversation with Mr. Lemme, it appears they are not happy with the
options that are available, as in their mind, there is really only one option
being presented, and that is to purchase the property. I again indicated
that if H -Window had any type of proposal they wish to submit concerning
these lots, they should do so at this meeting, as I did not have any other
ideas other than the four that have been previously presented.
In an effort to avoid further duplication, we are enclosing the agenda item
from the last meeting outlining the four options that I could think of for
Council consideration. Unless additional information or background is
provided by a representative of H -Window, I know of no other options for
the Council to consider at this time.
Copy of previous Council agenda item.
Council Minutes - 11/28/94
Consideration of addine items to the aeenda.
A. Consideration of enterine into an aereement with H -Window
Comoan•; concernine future acquisition of Lots 1. 2. and 3. Block
Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition.
It was the consensus of Council to add this item to the agenda.
City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller explained that at the previous
meeting, Council discussed entering into an option agreement with H -
Window for Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park
Second Addition; however, since no one from H -Window was in
attendance at the meeting, Council decided that these lots would be
put on the market for sale. Wolfsteller noted that after informing
Mr. Steve Lemme of H -Window of the Councirs action, Lemme
requested that.this item again be placed on the agenda and that
either he or a representative of the company would be in attendance
to discuss entering into an option agreement with the City.
Wolfsteller went on to explain that a purchase proposal has been
received from H -Window proposing that the price of the three lots be
revalued at $70,000 rather than staffs proposed $79,350 due to a gas
line main that runs through one of the lots. In addition, H -Window
proposes that the City offer a 30% discount from the $70,000, which
results in a $39,000 purchase price as the base for an annual option
fee. It is also proposed that the annual option fee be figured using a
fixed 5% annual interest rate for 10 years, and H -Window would
include a $1,150 annual payment for the estimated real estate taxes
for the three lots.
Wolfsteller also noted that tax increment financing would not be
available to write down the land cost if H -Window purchased the land
at this time; however, if the City enters into an option agreement for
the lots, tax increment financing could be used in the future since H -
Window would not be considered the owner of the property.
Wolfsteller added that if the price of the land is lowered now, Council
may not want to use TIF later when H -Window purchases the
property, as that would lower the price even further.
Councilmember Smith suggested that perhaps a compromise could be
reached if Council agreed to a price in the range of $64,000.
After discussion, a motion was made by Warren Smith and seconded
by Shirley Anderson to approve entering into an option agreement
with Ii -Window for Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial
Park Second Addition, with a base purchase price of $64,000, a 5%
annual interest rate to determine the annual option fee for 10 years,
and H -Window to include a $1,160 annual payment for the estimated O�
real estate taxes. Motion carried unanimously. b
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
9ADAI
. (J.O.)
At the previous meeting of the City Council, Council reviewed a staff
proposal which required a cash deposit ($400 - winter, $700 - summer) for
builders that wanted final occupancy prior to final completion of site grading.
After discussion with builders, the item was tabled for further review with
staff being directed to work with the developers on possible revisions to the
policy. At the previous meeting, the builders were concerned about the
"across the board" application of the policy. They noted that it did not make
sense to require a grading deposit for a lot that has already been graded as
part of the overall development of the subdivision. They noted that the
individual home site grading that is done as part of the home construction
process and subsequent to the subdivision grading rarely impacts the
subdivision grading pattern. The escrow policy should not apply to such lots.
Also at the previous meeting, there was concern that the policy did not have
a provision enabling the City to enter the property to complete grading in the
event the work was not done privately.
In response to the concerns above, staff met with the Value Plus builders and
Paul Becker to discuss the matter in detail. Staff' has revised the policy
based on our discussions with Value Plus and Paul Becker. We have also
developed a form which requires a builder/homeowner to allow the City to
enter the property to complete necessary site grading or tree planting. A
response to the policy from the builders/developers is not available at this
time. We expect they will attend the meeting to express their views.
According to the revised policy, the City escrow requirement will not apply to
any lots that are located in developments that have been completely graded
in a manner consistent with the development plan for the site. In other
words, if a builder requests a building permit on a lot that has been certified
by the City as already being properly graded, then no escrow deposit will be
required at the time of occupancy. Under this scenerio, the City has
completed its obligation to make sure that the development has been
properly graded. Tho responsibility for correcting any subsequent drainage
problems created by development of individual homes then falls squarely on
the shoulders of the builder or homeowner, thereby making such cases civil
matters. This does not mean that the City will not be drawn in on future
cases; however, the City will be in a better position to stay out of the fray if
Council Agenda - 12111/95
we can demonstrate that at some point the site was certified as being
properly graded. It also does not mean that the City will look the other way
if it appears that improper changes to approved grading are being made
during the home construction process. If the Building Inspector notices that
the grading pattern is being improperly changed or interrupted as the result
of individual home site development, then the escrow requirement would
apply prior to allowing final occupancy.
With regard to installation of trees, according to ordinance, on bare lots, two
trees are required. They must be placed on private property at least 4 ft
outside of the 60 -ft right -of --way. Under the proposed policy, a cash deposit is
required securing planting of trees required by ordinance. Staff supports
this measure because experience has shown that if trees are not in at the
time of closing, they are not always put in later. In our discussion with the
builders, the seed of an interesting new idea for tree planting was discussed.
Currently, the two trees for each lot are placed on private property with or
without the support of the property owner. There have been some complaints
from builders and homeowners about the City requiring tree planting on lots
where the homeowner simply does not want a tree. Why "force" trees on
homeowners that simply do not want any. Also, requiring trees at occupancy
sometimes forces planting of trees prior to the date that they can be
adequately cared for. For instance, there is no one to adequately care for a
tree planted at a spec home site. By the time the spec home sells, the tree
may have died due to lack of rare. Coincidentally, the Parks Commission
believes that the City should be doing more to encourage prograrnmatic
boulevard tree planting. They feel that the City would benefit by
encouraging or coordinating placement of trees within the boulevard areas to
help create a "canopy" over our streets. If trees are planted 4 ft from the
property line as is the current requirement, it places them 68 ft apart when
measured across a street. Requiring such a wide separation will not allow
development of a street canopy and limits our ability to use trees as a tool to
improve the quality of our now neighborhoods. As noted in a previous
Council update, the Parks Commission is currently working on a shade tree
inventory and will be presenting ideas to the Council sometime in 1996.
Staff and the builders/developers discussed another option for tree planting
in developments that Council may be interested in pursuing. It was
suggested that instead of placing two tines on each lot at the time of
occupancy, perhaps it would make more sense for the developer to simply
provide the City with a "tree dedication" or an amount equal to the cost of
two trees for each bare lot. The funds would be provided to the City for use
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
in a tree planting program for the development to be conducted at the point
when the development is built up. Under this scenerio, trees would be
planted in selected boulevard locations by a contractor selected by the City in
accordance with a shade tree plan for the City. Under the plan, individual
homeowners could have the option of accepting or rejecting planting of trees,
with the surplus trees then planted at other locations. This idea is desirable
because it would provide the City with control over tree type, size, and
location. Control of tree type guarantees a variety of trees and species
suitable for boulevards. Control of size and quality helps to assure the
viability of the tree. Control over location will allow us to minimize conflicts
between trees and utility locations. Please let staff know if you like this idea
and we will explore it further.
Motion to adopt or amend and adopt the escrow policy allowing final
occupancy prior to completion of grading and tree planting.
Under this alternative, the policy as attached will be followed or
followed as amended by Council at the meeting. It is important that a
policy be adopted as soon as possible because there will soon be a
number of homes that will need occupancy permits.
Motion to deny adoption of the escrow policy.
C. STAFF 1iFCOMMFNDATION:
We like the revised policy. Limiting the use of the deposit to lots that have
not been certified as being graded in a manner consistent with the plan for
the development area will greatly reduce the number of lots affected by the
policy without an increase in City liability. In terms of the deposit to assure
tree planting, it is our view that the only way to make sure that trees are
planted is to to require the deposit. if Council likes the idea of developing a
"tree dedication" policy as noted above, please lot us and the Parks
Commission know.
Escrow Policy Statement.
18
CITY OF MONTICELLO
ESCROW POLICY STATEMENT
RESIDENTIAL FINAL OCCUPANCY/BPTE IpROvEmENT8
It is the general policy of the City to grant occupancy permits prior to completion of
non-structural items on homes started in developments that have recieved certification
from the City Engineer that grading has been completed and is consistent with the
development plan for the subdivision.
Information from the survey provided at the time of building permit application will be
used to evaluate consistency with the grading plan and eligibility for final occupancy
without further City review.
For homes being built on certified lots, if it is determined by the Building Official that
in the process of building the grading pattern has been altered, then a cash deposit
guaranteeing restoration of the proper grades will be required as noted below.
For homes where construction begins prior to completion of the development grading,
or when home construction has altered an approved and established grading/drainage
pattern, the City will grant final occupancy under the condition that a cash deposit is
made to the City for each incomplete site improvement in accordance with the
following tables. In addition, the builder/homeowner must agree in writing to allow,
the City to enter the property to complete necessary grading and tree planting utilizing
the cash deposit.
June 16 to October 16
Grading $ 600 deposit or 1.6 times the cost (whichever is greater)
Trees $ 126 (per tree)
Other $ As necessary
October 14 to Jnne 14
Grading $ 300
Trees $ 125(per tree)
Other $ As necessary
The Building Inspector will not be inspecting each unfinished site improvement item
as it is completed. One inspection should be scheduled when all of the items aro
completed and the deposit will then be refihndod within 21 days without interest.
HSCROW2.130L:12098 9r 1
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
City Council is asked to consider granting a variance to the zoning code
which would allow filling of a small wetland in conjunction with the
expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. The wetland appears to be the
result of a spring that flows out of the valley wall. It is located along the
eastern boundary of the property line. According to Public Works Director
John Simola, it is not possible to avoid impacting the wetland even though
most of it is located within the required setback area.
Development or filling of wetland is regulated by both the zoning ordinance
and via the 1991 State Wetland Act. Under the zoning ordinance, a variance
is needed to allow filling of the wetland to occur. Under the State Wetland
Act, this particular wetland is exempted from the strict rules limiting filling
due to the fact that it is leas than .5 acres and the filling is needed to
accommodate a public utility project; however, the rules do require that the
impact be limited as much as possible. Given the constraints of the site,
according to John Simola, it is impossible to build the necessary
improvements on the site without impacting the wetland.
There is land available within the existing site to store storm water run-off,
thus creating a wetland area that is not present today. Creation of this pond
is not a requirement of the Wetland Act but could serve to meet the spirit of
the 'no net loss' goals of the Wetland Act and serve as an additional
justification for the variance.
The Planning Commission recommended alternative 01 below.
Motion to approve the variance request which would allow filling of a
small wetland in conjunction with expansion of the wastewater
treatment plant. Motion is based on the finding that use of the
property for the intended purpose is not possible without a variance. A
wetland will be created at a new location, and the variance is
justifiablo based on the fact that it is exempted from the State Wetland
Act regulations limiting the filling of wetlands.
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
Under this alternative, the precedent set by granting the variance is
limited by the fact that in future cases, the Wetland Act will apply.
For instance, the wetland in question is also located on Floyd Kruse's
property. When Kruse requests to develop his site for residential
purposes, he will likely say that his property is not developable
without a variance to the zoning code. His arguments for the variance
will be moot because the Wetland Act will not allow filling of the
wetland for residential purposes without a mitigation plan.
Motion to deny the variance request which would allow filling of a
small wetland in conjunction with expansion of the wastewater
treatment plant. Motion is based on a finding that a hardship has not
been demonstrated.
The wetland is located along the boundary of the property and much of
it is within the required setback area. Perhaps efforts could be made
to preserve as much of the wetland as possible. This is not likely to be
possible given the limited area provided on site for development of the
facility. More detail regarding the feasibility of this option will be
provided by John Simola.
C_ STAFF RF.COMMFNDATION:
Staff recommends alternative #1 for reasons identified above.
n. SUPPORTING DATA:
Wetland Act exemption information; Excerpt from zoning code; Map showing
location of wetland --identified on the site plan with the next agenda item.
20
06/09/91 [REVISOR ) PER/JC AR2120
1 is not required for:
2 (10) activities in a wetland created solely as a result of:
3 (1) beavct dam construction;
6 (ii) blockage of culverts through roadways maintained -by a
5 public or private entity:
6 (iii) actions by public entities that were taken for a
7 purpose other than creating the wetland; or
a (iv) any combination of (i) to (iii).
9 Wetland areas created by beaver activities may be drained
4L'
-fV 10 by removing those materials placed by beaver. Drainage is
11 permitted by removing or moving materials blocking installed
�.1
tN 12 roadway culverts and drainage structures. Additional excavation
4��
k 13 or removal of ocher materials is not permitted unless it can be
t� (' 10 shown by aerial photographs that the proposed activity will not
15 drain or fill wetland that was there before the beaver dam was
!-v 16 built or the culvert became plugged.
17 Wetlands may be drained or filled if the landowner can show
18 that the wetland was created solely by actions the purpose o!
19 which was not to create the wetland and were approved,
20 permitted, funded, or overseen by a public entity.
21 Impoundments or excavations constructed in nonwetlands
22 solely for the purpose of effluent treatment, storm water
23 retention, soil and water conservation practices, and water
24 quality improvements, and not as part of a compensatory wetland
25 mitigation process that may. Over time, take on wetland
? 26 characteristics, are also axemmttrd.
27 �'ouop. 11. Fseskption (11). A replacement plan for wetlands
28 is not required tort
29 (11) placement, maintenance, repair, enhancement, or
30 replacesent of utility or utilLty-type service, including the
31 transmission, distribution, or furnishing, at wholesale or
\ 32 retail, o! natural or manufactured gas, electricity, telephone,
33 or radio service or communications itt
' 34 (1) the impacts of the proposed project on the hydrologic
IS and biological characteristics of the wetland have been avoided
36 and miaLmised to the extent possibler and
19 IA
ti eevua
06/09/91 (REVISOR 1 PEA/JC AR2120
1
(11) the proposed project significantly modifies or alters
" 2
less than one-half acre of wetlands.
7
For new replacement placement and enhancement of existing
a
facilities, the utility must demonstrate that the character and
5
extent of the impacts of the proposed project on the wetlands
I 6
have been minimized and that the entire project will,
7
cumulatively, drain or fill leas than one-half acre of wetland.
e
For maintenance, repair, and replacement, the local
9
\
government unit may issue a seasonal or annual exemption
%
10
certification or the utility may proceed without local
11
government unit certification if it is carrying out the work
12
according to best management practices. Work of an emergency
13
nature may proceed as necessary and any drain or fill activities
la
shall be addressed with the local government unit atter the
15
emergency work has been completed.
16
Subp. 12. Exemption (12). A replacement plan for wetlands
17
is not required fon
10
112) activitioa associated with routine maintenance of
19
utility and pipeline rights-of-way, provided the activities do
20
not result in additional intrusion Into the wetland.
21
This exemption is tar maintenance, but not expansion, of
22
the rights-of-way in which utilities are located. Spill
23
remediation is not routine maintenance.
24
The local government unit may Issue a seasonal or annual
25
exemption certification or the utility may proceed if it is
26
carrying out the work according to best management practices.
27
Mork of an emergency nature may proceed as necessary and any
28
drain or till activities shall be addressed with the local
29
government unit after the emergency work has been completed.
30
Subp. 17. Exemption 117). A replacement plan for wetlands
31
is mot required fort
32
(131 alteration of a wetland associated with the operation,
33
maintenance, or repair at an interstate pipeline within all
34
existina or acquired interstate oinaline rlahts-or-way.
35
This exemption includes construction activities.
36
Subp. 14. Exemption (16). A replacement plan for wetlands
' O
19 Aapwee
by ft -Mat
06/09/97 (REVISOR ( PER/JC AR2120
1 lost at an impacted wetland.
r 2 Subp. 49T 41. Restoration. 'Restoration" means
3 reestablishment of an area that was historically wetlands but
4 currently provides no or minimal wetland functions due
5 to manmade alteration such as filling or drainage.
6 Subp. 4*? 42. Right-of-way acreage. 'Right-of-way acreage'
7 has the meaning given it in Minnesota Statutes, section
8 107E.2e5, subdivision 6.
9 Subp. 42T 43. Riverine wetland. 'Riverine wetland' means
10 a wetland contained within the banks of a channel that may
11 contain moving water or that forms a connecting link between two
12 bodies of standing water.
17 Subp. 43, 44. Set aside. 'Set aside" means the cropland
14 acreage annually retired as a condition to landowner
15 participation in United States Department of Agriculture
16 commodity programs.
17 Subp. 44T 4S. Silviculture. *Silviculture' means the
1S scientific management of forest trees.
19 Subp. 45T 46. Soil and water conservation district. 'Soil
20 and water conservation district' means a legal subdivision of
21 state government under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103C.
22 Subp. 46v 47. Soil Conservation Service. 'Soil
22 Conservation Service' means an agency of the United States
24 Department of Agriculture.
23 Subp. 47, 48. Tributary wetland. 'Tributary wetland'
26 means a wetland with a well defined outlet, including the
27 oy0tOma, ditches, or natural watercourses, but without a well
28 delloe.
2 Subp. 40T 49. Utility. "Utility' means a unitary sewer,
]0 storm sower, potable water distribution, and tranamisaion,
71 dlotributlon, or furnishing, at wholesale or retail, of natural
32 or manufactured gas. electricity, telephone, or radio service or
72 communications.
74 Subp. 49v 4�0. Watershed. 'Watershed' means the al major
35 watershed units delineated by the map *State of Minnesota I O
26 Watershed Boundaries - 1979• as produced by the Minnesota
B Approved
Ov Gomm
(d) Where feasible, all clear -cuts shall be
+ conducted between September 15 and May 15. If
natural regeneration will not result in
adequate vegetative cover, areas in which
clear -cutting is conducted shall be replanted
to prevent erosion and to maintal.n the
aesthetic quality of the area.. Where
feasible, replanting shall be performed in the
same spring or the following spring.
?. Grading and filling in of the natural topography
which is not accessory to a permitted or
conditional use shall not be permitted in the land
use district.
4. Grading and filling in of the natural tolography
which is accessory to a permitted or conditional
use shall be performed in a manner which minimizes
earth moving, erosion, tree -clearing, arl the
destruction of natural amenities and slil be
controlled by the local ordinance.
5. Grading and filling in of the topography shall also
meet the following standards:
(a) The smallest amount of baro ground is xposed
for as short a time as feasible.
(b) Temporary ground cover such as mulch is used
and permanent ground cover such as sod is
planted.
(c) Methods to prevent erosions and trap so, iment
are employed.
(d) Fill is stabilized to accepted engineering
standards.
6. Excavation of material from or fillinf, in a
recreational river or construction of any pe.manent
structures or navigational obstructions theroin !--
prohibited unless authorized by a permit from the
Commissioner pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 105.42.
7. No state or local authority shall author) o the
drainage or filling in of wetlands within the
�rC recreational river land use district.
lop
MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 27/9
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
City Council is asked to consider recommending approval of a conditional use
permit which would allow expansion of the wastewater treatment plant.
Following is a brief review of the site plan followed by a list of development
conditions.
The size of the site is approximately 4.1 acres of undisturbed river valley
upland and valley lowland. To the west of the site is the existing facility, to
the east is undeveloped river lowland and upland owned by Floyd Kruse, to
the north is the river, and to the south is Hart Boulevard/CSAH 75. The
Kruse property is zoned for PZM, uses which makes it eligible for housing or
commercial uses. It is likely that the high side of the Kruse property on the
CSAH 75 side will be used for multi -family or commercial purposes. It may
be possible but difficult to develop single family home sites on the lower aide
of the property. The plant site plan and associated buffer yard has been
designed with these adjacent land uses in mind. The eastern boundary of the
property will include development of a chain link fence and evergreen tree
plantings in an effort to buffer the impact of the SBR tanks that will rise up
34 R higher than the grade of the single family area to the east.
Dense vegetation along the western boundary of the existing site creates an
adequate buffer yard between the existing plant and the property owned by
John Bondhus.
The development of the site will have a significant inevitable impact on the
natural landscape. Complete clear -cutting will occur up to 60 R fi"om the
river's edge. Considerable grading will also be necessary due to steep grades
and difficult grade transitions between the Kruse property and the site. The
top of the SBR tanks will rise to an elevation equal to the top of the wall of
the existing sludge storage tank (clev. 940), which places the top of the tanks
34 ft above the adjacent property. Efforts to limit the visual impact will be
made via preservation of as many existing trees as possible and via planting
of new trees.
As viewed from the river, the tanks will rise 47 ft but will be set back about
275 ft. As noted above, trees will remain for the first 60 ft ftom the river.
The remaining trees between the 50 -ft line and the tanks will be lost in the
construction process. According to John Simola, this area (175 ft) is needed
for prgjoct staging, fill placement, etc.
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
The administration building will be an attractive masonry building. Fifteen
new parking spaces will also be added, which is adequate to handle current
staff (4) and visitors. The entire process facility will be fenced and secured.
The headworks building at the south end of the SBR tanks will be an
attractive gable -roofed concrete burnished block building, which will rise
above the SBR tanks and provide screening.
The expansion plans call for significant efforts to control odor problems. It is
expected that the new enlarged facility will result in a reduction in odor
problems. At the meeting, John Simola will outline specific design features
that will be employed to help control odors.
According to the City's pathway plan, there will be a pathway along the river
that will connect Mississippi Drive to the Hospital District/Ellison Park area.
The site plan as proposed accommodates the future extension of this
pathway.
The Planning Commission recommended alternative 01 below. One
couple Brom the Montissippi Drive neighborhood attended the public hearing.
They did not oppose the proposed expansion and expressed appreciation for
City efforts to design odor control measures into the facility.
B. Ai.T .RNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to approve a conditional use permit which would allow
expansion of the wastewater treatment plant in a PZM zone subject to
the following conditions: d u-
1. Items required by code: V, S
A. Conformity with the surrounding neighborhood is
maintained, and required setbacks and side yard
requirements are met.
B. Adequate screening from neighboring uses and
landscaping is provided in accordance with
Chapter 3, Section 2, of the zoning ordinance.
C. The provisions of Chapter 22 of the zoning
ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met.
D. The facility must have direct amens to county or
city state aid highway.
22
Council Agenda - 12tl1/95
Installation of odor control measures necessary to
maintain or reduce the current problem.
No tree clear -cutting to occur within 50 ft of the river's
edge.
City buffer yard requirements must be met on the Kruse
side of the property. Top side buffer yard to buffer
institutional/multi-family. Lower side to buffer
institutional use/single family.
This motion could be based on the finding that the facility is
consistent with the character of the area and the screening and
landscaping are designed to preserve to the extent possible the value of
the adjoining property. The proposal is consistent with the
comprehensive plan for the city. The expansion will not have an
appreciable effect on the property to the west (Bondhus). Screening
and buffer yard techniques will be employed to limit impact on the
Kruse property, and odor control efforts have been designed into the
plane. Although the natural features of the site will be severely
affected, the 60 -ft setback from the river will help to preserve the
natural quality of the shoreline.
Motion to deny approval of a conditional use permit which would allow
expansion of the wastewater treatment plant in a PZM zone.
Planning Commission should select this alternative based on a finding
that the facility as proposed is not consistent with the nature and
character of the area, will result in depreciation of adjoining land
values, or is not consistent with the comprehensive plan for the city.
r STAFF R .O MF.NDATION;
It is our view that the site plan as proposed, along with odor control
measures, will result in a land use that is compatible with adjoining
properties. The measures noted above will serve to mitigate new impacts
created by the expansion and reduce existing odor problems; therefore, staff
recommends approval.
Site plan; Comprehensive plan excerpts.
23
alyp of v a c eRP T (/9-P4)
UTILITY POLICIES
1. As urban development proceeds, adequate plane will be made for
the increased storm water run-off that can be expected; to the
extent feasible, such water will be impounded to help recharge
the area's ground water supply. Drainage plans will be
coordinated on a watershed basis.
2. where on-site sewer and water facilities are to be used, soil
percolation tests shall be required when considered necessary
and there is evidence to indicate that larger lot sizes may be
required or development should be permitted for reasons of
danger to the public and health.
3. Attempt to design and encourage the use of gravity flow for
sanitary sewer systems rather than using lift stations and force
mains for long-term sewage solutions. Lift stations and force
mains may be appropriate as interim solutions to sewage problems
that may be served by gravity flow at a later date.
4. Select routes for utilities, either above or below ground, with
careful regard for the preservation of natural resources, such
as wetlands, extreme slopes, water sources, and other wildlife
habitat.
5. Restore the 'nature' of the land which has been altered by
construction work to the extent possible as anon after
construction in completed.
6. Prohibit extension of sewer systems into areas where development
should not occur, such as flood plains and designated open
spaces. In certain instances, sewers may, of necessity, have to
traverse ouch areas in order to serve upland areas. However,
connection to the line should not be allowed in those areas.
7. Privately owned sanitary sewer systema should be prohibited.
B. Under certain circumotancea, surface water run-off may require
consideration of a treatment system to aosuro the quality of
effluent discharges into water bodies or waterways.
9. Municipal utilities should not be extended beyond the corporate
limits of the City.
10. The City shall actively participate in industrial and commercial
growth to ensure conformance with treatment and pro -treatment
requirements, in order to enhance maintenance and operation, and
to protect and prolong the life expectancy of the wastewater
Treatment Plan.
11. The extension of privately owned sewer and water lines beyond an
individual's property lino in order to tie into municipal mains
shall be prohibited.
-54-
11A.
COKMUNITY FACILITIES POLICY
1. Presently, the development of land for public facilities such as
parks and playgrounds is considered more important than the
acquisition of such land. However, with respect to acquisition,
land must be purchased before proper sites are usurped by
private developments or high land prices make acquisition
unfeasible. It is a desirable goal of the City to balance
acquisition and development efforts.
2. All public facilities are to be developed according to generally
accepted standards and the results of thorough study.
3. Where feasible, private developers will be required to set aside
a portion of their land for public use; where this is not
feasible or desirable, developers will be required to contribute
cash in lieu of land, with such money to be utilised for the
purchase and development of recreational facilities.
0. School facilities should be fully utilized by making building
and land available to the public for use when such does not
conflict with normal function of the school facilities.
5. Private developers will not be required to donate land for
school sites.
6. Churches should have an ample site for building, landscaping,
potential expansion, and off-street parking. Parking should be
provided on the maximum design capacity. Churches should be
located adjacent to a thoroughfare or collector street and have
easy access to the area served. They should not be located on
minor residential streets and in the midst of residential
neighborhoods.
7. The City should not accept substandard lands such as swamps,
power line casements, etc., for the development of park lands.
This shall include lands laid out in subdivision plane.
Open Space Policies
Before delineating open space policies, a definition of the term is
necessary. Traditionally, open apace has been primarily defined as
that area which is retained in or restored to a condition where
natural oystems predominate and which may be used for recreation, or
preservation purposes. Open apace woo often regarded as a ceparato
and contained entity usually under the ownership of a governmental
jurisdiction.
Recent trends indicate that open space, like the people it serves, is
becoming more directly integrated with its surroundings. Becoming
more o port of the total urban fabric, open apace is being more
closely integrated into the urban living and working environment.
BocauOe of this integrating phenomenon, many of the advantages and
rooponoibilltioa of open apace are equally applicable to public and
private lands.
1I
B
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
12. Consideration of s lazyhs edule ndJnAtments for 1998. (R.W.)
A tFFFRFNPFAND BA .K .RO 1ND:
As part of the ongoing maintenance of our current salary system in use for all
non-union employees, the City Council should annually review the salary
schedule and make adjustments in order to retain the City's pay relationship
to the market. With this being the last meeting before 1996, any
adjustments to the salary schedule should be adopted by the Council at this
meeting in order to allow for implementation of the new schedule by
January 1.
In preparation for the 1996 budget, I had included a 5% coat of living
adjustment to all salary categories to provide sufficient dollars within the
budget for possible increases. While the 6% amount should be more than
sufficient to cover any adjustments you may want to make, this does not
obligate the Council to use a 5% increase. As we have done the past few
years, it is recommended that the increase be reflective of the cost of living
increases that are occurring in our area in our attempt to keep our system
competitive with the market and surrounding communities.
For background information, the City Council originally adopted our new
comparable worth pay system in 1991 in order to comply with the new
comparable worth law in effect. Our program included 22 grades with 6
potential steps within each grade that all City employees could fall within.
Since the current system already allowed for step increases by employees
who may not have yet reached their maximum step of their grade, the
Council does not have to be concerned with individual merit/performance
adjustments per se, but only needs to address what percentage increase
should be considered for the entire salary schedule in general.
As a reference, the Minneapolis/St. Paul consumer price index indicates that
the current inflation rate for the metro area is 2.7'% on an annual basis. For
some reason, the Minneapolia/St. Paul index is only calculated twice a year
for annual purposes, and this 2.7% increase covers the time period from June
1994 through June 1995. The U.S. consumer price index for the period
October 1994 through October 1996 seems to correspond with the
Minneapolis consumer price index at 2.7%. In addition to the CPI
information, I also had a brief salary survey conducted from various
communities surrounding Monticello, including the cities of Big Lake,
Buffalo, Elk River, Maple drove, and Plymouth. These are the same
communities we have surveyed in the past and can be usef al for the Council
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
to see what is happening in other communities around us. At the time of the
survey, some communities had not yet established salary adjustments for
next year, and the survey may indicate proposed adjustments they will be
considering. As you will note, the proposals or actual adjustments range
from the 2% to 3'% areae. One other note the Council should consider is that
last year the salary schedules were adjusted by 2.5% while the Minneapolis/
St. Paul consumer price index had indicated a current inflation rate of
around 3%. The Council had chosen to adjust the schedules approximately
1/2% lower than the known consumer price index increase, and you may
want to keep this in mind when considering adjustments this year.
It is anticipated that with the two-year union contract up for renewal in April
of 1996, we may continue the same contract language that makes
adjustments to the union's pay scales based on the same percentage increases
that are granted to non-union employees. The usual argument by union
negotiators is that they feel they should be entitled to the some percentage
increases that non-union employees receive. With the City always being
faced with making sure the comparable worth law is complied with, any
increases being considered for union contracts almost have to fall in line with
percentage increases granted to non-union to avoid being out of compliance
with the comparable worth.
As I have noted in the past when the Council has been discussing cost of
living adjustments, the Council should keep in mind the following factors.
Our comparable worth study adopted in 1991 had originally
recommended that each grade consist of 7 steps from bottom to
top of the wage scale. The 7 -step system was recommended by
the League of Minnesota Cities personnel consultant and was
based on the average metro/rural steps used by other
communities with similar pay systems. At the time of the
adoption, the Council made the decision to drop off the 7th step,
which in effect reduced the potential salary structure of the City
by a little over 4%. Since the original recommended salary
schedule with 7 stops was intended to be consistent with the
market for our area, and by the elimination of the 7th step, the
Council in effect had immediately made a reduction in our
market study by 4%.
25
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
While the use of the Minneapolia/St. Paul consumer price index
may not be perfect, it is a basis that has been used by the City
Council in the past in an attempt to keep our pay structure in
line with inflation. With the Minneapolia and U.S. CPI at
around 2.7%, it seems appropriate for the City Council to use
this as a basis for their consideration.
With many of the employees having worked for the City for
more than five years, many of the positions are now at or
nearing the top of their step within their present grade. As a
result, many of our employees will be relying on cost of living
adjustments as the only increase in their salary unless their job
descriptions change sufficiently to have warranted a move to a
different step or grade. With performance or merit pay
adjustments being eliminated as part of this new comparable
worth pay system, it only means that more importance is placed
on providing an adequate cost of living adjustment to keep
employees in pace with inflation.
On a local level, the Council should also keep in mind that the
School District recently settled pay raises for the teaching staff
that amounted to increases of 4% for each of the next two years.
While the Council is certainly not tied to provide increases that
correspond with what the School District grants, it should be a
factor that is considered by the Council. Additionally, Wright
County also recently approved a 3% increase for all non-union
and elected County employees for 1998.
1. N, Council could establish a cost of living adjustment for the pay schedule
Y that would apply to the entire non-union pay system which equals the
\ current Minneapolis/St. Paul CPI. According to my current
information, this percentage increase is approximately 2.7% and is
very similar to the U.S. CPI at around 2.7% to 2.8% through October.
Council could adjust the COLA based on some other fhctor other than
the St. Paul or Minneapolis CPI index.
26
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
STAFF F..O NDATION:
With the 1898 budget including a 5% allowance for salary schedule
adjustments, the Council should have sufficient latitude to adjust the pay
scales if the CPI was used as an index. With the adjustments last year being
approximately 1/2% lower than the actual CPI, Council may want to consider
adding the 1/2% to a cost of living amount for this year to bring the
employees back in line with the two-year inflation index. It is estimated the
increase would then be 3.2%. Without making up for any shortfalls last year,
I would recommend the Council focus on the Minneapolis/St. Paul CPI index
of 2.7% as the minimum adjustment.
Salary survey of surrounding communities.
SURVEY OF SURROUNDING CITIES
1988 PROPOSED SALARY ADJUSTMENTS
Big Lake: 1886: Budgeted 4%, 2% historical
SALd1RY M: 1S/8W / Zig
1886: 2%
Buffalo:
18$6: Proposed 2.6% in September
1M: 2.6%
Elk River.
1886: 3%
1896: 3%
Maple
Grove:
1886: Probably 3%
1886: 3%
Plymouth:
1996: Proposed 3% --in negotiation
1886: 2.8%
SALd1RY M: 1S/8W / Zig
THE KIPLINGER WASHINGTON LETTER
Ciretd d , ,My le Eusl— Nmn .1— 1823-14d 72 Na 47
THE KrPUNcER WAStUNGTON ERRORS
1729 H St., KIN, Wuhf Wm, DC 20006.3938
Dear Client: Washington, Nov. 24, 1995
Budget 4 tax outlook, the stock market, interest rates, inflation,
politics and business planning for the new year are on many minds,
based on the questions we get. Here's a sampling and our replies:
Where are stocks headed in 1967 Up. but MUCH leap than in '95...
the 30% jump so far this year. Corporate earnings won't be as healthy.
Consumer debt threatens spending. And good values are harder to find.
But other things will keep stocks chugging ahead: Lower interest rates.
Further expansion in the economy. And more i more money from 401(k)s.
Stocks do well in presidential election years. They've gained
every time since 1940, no matter which party controls the White House.
I When's the outlook for inflation? Close to 3% again next year.
liw about interest rates the next few months? They'll edae down.
Assuming a budget agreement is he red out in Dec., look for a reduction
in short-term rates by the Federal Reserve, probably at its Jan. meeting.
Prime will slip to 841, 90 -day T-bills to 5k% and one-year CDs to 4.9%.
Long-term rates will follow the same course, 30 -year T -bonds down to 62.
How will a budget and tax compromise likely take shave?
Republicans will cut the President a little more slack on Medicare
and a few other things he wants, staying within their balanced-budget goal
by scaling back tax breaks. Tax credits of $500 per child, for example,
will be phased in more slowly. Other planned tax relief will be squeezed.
And if needed, assumptions on economic growth and inflation may be fudged.
Clinton will saran to the core of the COP plan ... a balanced budget
In seven years. shifting welfare and Medicaid to the states and tax relief
for investors, family-owned businesses and families with young children.
He doesn't want Lo oppose a balanced budget going into the '96 elections.
Any chance that the tax cute will be dropped? No, don't think so.
The Concord Coalition and some members of both parties want to delay them
until deficito are wiped out, but Clinton and COP leaders favor cute now.
Will deficits actually be eliminated by 20021 Don't count on it.
For one thing, estimates by Congress and White House assume no recension
over the seven years. Chances are we'll run into a slump along the way.
What are companies p2anninR for pay raises IS 19§1 Average is U
for the full range of employees at nonunion firms ... hourly and salaried.
Pay increases for union employees will average slightly lose than that.
Does Sen. Dole have a lock on the GOP nomination? Not Quite yet.
Still three months to go before the first delegates are chosen in Iowa
and N.H. It's POSSIBLE another candidate could catch fire and upper him,
but it seems unlikely. Dole has a hard core of support within the party,
good organizations in primary states and a bigger bankroll than the rest.
toRnnrt tM rtt 0MUM taarpt031 tt11f)l1.. ra /� 8
o=A,0 apl lta a,tm,oa=11"MY 013pinrKUN. rt • umr rororomn d 3DIImLa 3t0 wrra r rn r17,
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
13. Consideration of adopting revised job evaluation results. (R.W.)
A. REFRRFNCF AND BACKGROUND:
During the fall of 1991, the City used the personnel services of the League of
Minnesota Cities and contracted for a complete review of our compliance with
the comparable worth law, which included making suggested revisions to job
descriptions and recommendations for setting up a new pay system that
would comply with the comparable worth law. The underlying intent of the
comparable worth law is to ensure that female classes of employees with
comparable jobs and responsibilities are paid equal to male counterparts.
The study included development of job descriptions, evaluations of the 21
current positions, development of recommended salary ranges, and
comparing results to ensure compliance with the current comparable worth
law.
As part of the ongoing maintenance of the comparable worth system, the
positions and duties should be reviewed every 3-5 years and the job
descriptions modified to reflect any changes in the duties or responsibilities
that may have changed. In addition, the positions should also be evaluated
as part of the comparable worth rating system to see if any changes are
warranted in the ranking because of changes in the position over the years.
If duties or responsibilities of a position change enough to move that
individual into a higher grade, additional compensation for that position is
warranted.
With the initial review occurring over three years ago, I had planned to
review positions and job descriptions during 1995 and prepare a report on my
recommendations for Council consideration that would take effect January 1,
1998, if any grade or position adjustments resulted from my review. As part
of my evaluation process, I had asked all employees to review their current
job descriptions for accuracy and list any changes they felt were warranted
as a result of changes in their positions that may have occurred over the past
three years. Also, changes may have been made from one job to another
because of a reassignment of duties or tasks over the years, and this was also
asked to be noted by the employees. In addition, if any employee was
requesting an appeal of their comparable worth points, they were requested
to state in writing their reasons for why there should be an increase in their
point values and what specific areas of their evaluation they wanted me to
review.
Council Agenda - 1211 V95
Generally speaking, all employee job descriptions were originally evaluated
and points established based on the following five main categories.
Knowledge and experience
Accountability for actions
Responsibility for planning
Supervision
Working conditions
As part of my review this summer, I reviewed changes in individual job
descriptions that were proposed by the individual employees and their
reasons for requesting additional points. All of the appeals had to be
considered in relationship to the overall values that had been assigned to
other positions within the City. While an employee's request for additional
points may have seemed rational, it may have also looked inappropriate
when compared to other similar jobs and ranking within the organization.
Also, where a change in points may have been recommended for additional
tasks or duties that the position is now responsible for, it didn't necessarily
mean that it would result in any change in the pay structure by grades, as it
may have not put them into a different grade level. Initially, 22 grades were
established with points ranging from a low of 15 to over 330 at 15 -point
intervals. Some changes in job responsibilities over the past few years may
have warranted minor adjustments in the points, but the changes, if adopted,
would not necessarily move them into the next higher pay grade.
In reviewing the appeals, some decisions were pretty straight forward,
especially if they dealt with factors such as a change in points for supervising
more employees, etc. In most cases, it became a judgment call on my part,
and I tried to be as objective and consistent as possible. Some recommended
changes were, in fact, done to be consistent with ratings that may have been
granted other job positions in the past. Again, I'm sure some employees may
not agree with my evaluations and denials of their appeals.
Enclosed for the Council's review is a brief summary of my review and
comments pertaining to each specific appeal requested. A few changes may
also have been made to individual job descriptions because of a change in
duties or tasks amongst individuals. If an employee did not specifically
request or appeal for an increase in pointe, changes were not typically made
to a particular job description, nor were additional points granted to that
individual without them first appealing to me. This is why you may notice
that not all City positions have been listed in this summary, as it only covers
those that specifically requested my review of their jobs.
29
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
As the City continues to grow in the coming years, it is a good idea to review
the job descriptions and make modifications as necessary. Unless there are
obvious changes in a particular job that requires immediate modifications to
the descriptions, taking a look at all jobs and the entire comparable worth
program, including job evaluation appeals, every 3-5 years should be
adequate.
Council could accept the job evaluation recommendations as presented
for positions that requested a review.
Council could decide not to accept the recommendations as presented
by the Administrator and request additional review by an outside
consultant.
Council could decide to leave all job descriptions and job evaluations as
they were originally established by the League study.
V STAFF IZ_RCOMMFNDATION;
As part of the ongoing maintenance of our personnel system and comparable
worth program, a periodic review of each job, including any changes in
duties, responsibilities, and tasks, should be reflected in an updated job
description periodically. This was originally recommended by the League of
Minnesota Cities personnel as part of their original program developed for
us. This is even more important in a community like Monticello where
growth may be requiring the addition of more staff to handle duties and/or
tasks and responsibilities are being shifted amongst positions. While I admit
that the recommendations are the opinions of the City Administrator, I would
recommend that they be accepted as noted and any resulting adjustments in
the salary schedules because of the modifications be effective January 1,
1996.
My comments summarised by positon for individuals who appealed;
Summary of the recommended changes by position.
A number of job descriptions were revised as a result of this review but are
not included with the agenda in order to keep the volume of paper down. If
anybody would like to get a copy of the actual job descriptions that have been
revised, you can pick one up at city hall.
F]
CITY OF MONTICELLO
JOB DESCRIPTION REVIEW
RVNIOR DF.p 1'1'V REGISTRAR CLERK
Amo un chili .v
The current grading for this position is Blb, which indicates intermediate authority
with minor impact on overall city budget and indirect influence on city budget and
operations. I do not believe the request for a change to advanced would be
appropriate, as nothing has basically changed in this category even though the
duties of the position are now being done in a different location other than city hall.
The original determination was made with the knowledge of the duties and
requirements of the position and that the staff working with deputy registrar
functions were responsible for the entire process. Just because your physical
location of performing the duties has moved across the street, nothing has changed
from the *accountability standpoint. The move to a new location did recognize that
more direct supervision of part-time employees would be the responsibility of the
Senior Clerk, and this has been acknowledged in the revised Senior Clerk position.
Possibly the confusion may arise in only focusing on Nn charge occasionally in the
definition of intermediate where the real intent is to indicate that the deputy
registrar function does not have the latitude to make severe independent decisions
in that this function cannot set its own hours, change procedures without City or
State approval, etc. Occasionally in charge is an example to use for determining
the appropriateness of the intermediate category, which I feel is still an appropriate
category for this position.
Decision: No change
Planning
As far as planning is concerned, the position is already at 2b, which already covers
for periods of up to one month.
Decision: No change necessary
Supervision
The normal type of supervision and training required for the part-time deputy
registrar staff is usually routine after initial instructions and requires minimal
directing thereafter. The level of supervision given doesn't necessarily relate to
your own level of responsibility. As a result, I believe routine supervision of three
part-time employees seems correct and no change is necessary.
Decision: No change
/v#+
JOBDESCAREV: IN17/95 Page 1
SENIOR DEPUTY REGISTRAR CLERK CONTINUED...
Wor i g .on itio s
Heavy Lifting: I realize there is some lifting required in this position, but I
JOBDESC.REV: HY17/95
/38
Page 2
don't believe the license plate boxes would fall under heavy
lifting. Normally, all jobs require some type of lifting, and I
don't think there's anything unusual in this department or
description.
Decision: No change
Abnormal
Hours:
Having a work schedule which may require working shifts other
than days or a schedule that may require many hours at
evening meetings is the intent of this category. Realizing that
the current schedule requires one later operating shift each
week (until 6 p.m.), I am comfortable with adding one point for
this.
Decision: Add 1 point to working conditions for abnormal
hours MD.
Dust & Dirt:
Daily exposure to normal dust and dirt within the office work
place is not what this condition is meant to cover. Generally
speaking, an office environment is a relatively clean work place.
Decision: No change
Rain/Snow/
Wind:
This subfactor is intended to cover situations that may require
prolonged or extensive exposure to these elements. I do not
believe the type of exposure you noted to rain, snow, or wind
would be out of the ordinary and would be considered normal for
living in Minnesota.
Decision: No change
Machinery &
Power Tools:
Occasional vacuuming or use of hand tools such as screwdrivers
and hammers would not be considered use of power tools and
machinery in the work place. This factor is intended for usage
of tools and equipment outside of normal household items.
Decision: No change
JOBDESC.REV: HY17/95
/38
Page 2
SENIOR DEPUTY REGISTRAR CLERK CONTINUED...
TOTAL CHANGE: +1 point
NEW POINT TOTAL: 83 points
GRADE: Same
STIUMT AND PARK SXn?MM?rEND1FNT
Knowledge and EzUerienee
The current category for knowledge and experience is B2, which indicates high
school education plus some additional formal training. I do not believe that
technical school or some college is necessary or should be a requirement. I believe
the specialized and technical knowledge required to understand and perform the
duties of this position can be accomplished with a high school education and some
additional formal training, provided there is 3-5 years of experience.
Decision: No change
Supervision
Current points granted for supervision are C—complete--18 points. This category
recognizes complete supervision over 46 employees, and I agree there may be
e additional points needed to cover part-time or temporary employee supervision. By
adding credit for approximately 8 part-time or seasonal employees under the partial
category for routine supervision, I would agree with a change to add 3 points for
supervision.
Decision: Add 3 points for partial supervision--8 part-time and seasonal
employees (B--partial--6).
Acco un ahilk
Currently the position is C3b for advanced--major--indirect. I do not feel a change
is warranted and that this categorization is appropriate and is very similar to other
superintendent type positions within the city such as Liquor Store Manager and
Water Superintendent.
Decision: No change
TOTAL CHANGE: + 3 points
NEW POINT TOTAL: 168 points
GRADE: Same
JOBDESC REV: ta17/95
Page 3
Currently knowledge and experience is at B2 (40 pointe), which requires a high
school education plus additional formal training and 3-5 years experience.
Although it would certainly be acceptable to have someone with college or trade
school education, I don't believe it is absolutely necessary or that it should be a
minimum requirement, which is what we're concerned with here. I believe overall
this factor is currently appropriate for the position as it is today.
Decision: No change
TOTAL CHANGE: 0 points
NEW POINT TOTAL: 149
GRADE: Same
NOTE: Modifications were made to the job description adding or deleting
references to specific duties, but changes did not warrant any other
changes in the point categories for comparable worth.
Accoun ah'li .v
Currently credited for Blb (34 pointe). The fact noted that this position will be
assisting in decisions made by the recycling committee is already taken into account
in the current rating of Blb. Indirect means joining with others in arriving at
specific actions, which seems to be appropriate for this position.
Decision: No change
Current position is at 2A1, which relates to relatively routine matters, with most
planning for immediate application. Most of the duties for the utility billing
position are routine tasks requiring immediate attention that is reflected in the
current point category established previously. Being on the recycling committee
which may establish a policy that is in effect for a period of time is not considered
major planning for extended time periods, and the key factor here is that most
planning is what this factor is to cover.
Decision: No change
JOBDESC.REV: 10/17/86
/3ib
Page 4
UTILITY BILLING CLERK/RECEPTIONIST CONTINUED...
Manipulating
Objects: Currently points are established at 6D3, which indicates
frequent. I think frequent is adequate in that some time is
required to perform duties of filing and customer contact and
that the position is not always required to manipulate a
typewriter or computer keyboard, but I will agree to a change to
6E4 to be consistent with the Bookkeeper and Deputy Registrar
positions.
Decision: Add 1 point for manipulating objects (04)
Excessive
Sitting: Currently the position has been given 5C2 (occasionally). I
agree that 5D3 may be more appropriate (frequent) and also
would be then consistent with the bookkeeping position.
Decision: Add 1 point to 5D3
Abnormal
Hours: Currently the position has been given points for this under rare
at 3B1. Although there may be pressure in this position to
complete a billing cycle by a certain deadline, the position does
not require night or weekend work to meet any schedules. I do
not agree that points should be given for abnormal hours for
this position, as it does have a regular schedule without odd
hours being required and does not qualify in my opinion for any
pointe for this subfactor, even if there is some occasional
overtime that is put in.
Decision: Deduct 1 point
TOTAL CHANGE: + 1 point
NEW POINT TOTAL: 74 points
GRADE: Same
NOTE: Additional changes were made in the job description under typical
duties, but the additions and/or changes did not warrant any
additional changes in the comparable worth grading for this position.
/31F
dORDESC.REV: HYMN Page 5
WATERISEWER C01LLIFCTION QP1FRATOR
On the issue of your concerns over the current job description not having a section
covering or defining on-call language, typically this language is not found in a job
description. Hours of work, work scheduling, or other employment related factors
are actually labor/management issues and are not part of the actual job description
but possibly covered in a labor contract. Your specific concerns on this are more
appropriate for labor contract renewal discussions.
KnnwlpdffA_ and Fzmerie=
Currently at B2 (40 points). Poeition now requires specialized/technical skill with
high school education and additional formal training. I believe this requirement
seems appropriate at the present level, and I don't think it would be reasonable to
increase the minimum qualifications above the high school education plus formal
training and 3-5 years experience. While candidates for positions may have higher
qualification than what's required in our job descriptions, it only makes them more
desirable candidates and doesn't mean we need to increase our minimum standards
and isn't necessarily essential to do the job that's required.
Decision: No change
Accom ahili .v
Currently at B2A (40 points). Only supervisors/department heads usually have
accountability factors at the C level or above. Evaluation for this position measures
normal job, and level B (intermediate) authority seems more than sufficient.
Decision: No change
Plaaning
Currently at 2AL Typically, routine and current matters are what the job normally
requires. It should be noted that the job measures most situations, and this job
requires only relatively routine planning for immediate action.
Decision: No change
Sipendainn
Currently 2 pointe for B—partial supervision. Partial credit covers the fact that an
Operator/Mechanic may step in in the absence of the superintendent and perform
some of the duties of supervision. Credit is not usually given here for just
occasional work direction because of the absence of a supervisor for a few days but
is meant to cover more normal day-to-day operation supervision. With partial
credit already being given, no additional supervision credit appears warranted.
Decision: No change
13F
JOBDESC.REV: taa17198 Page 6
WATER/SEWER COLLECTION OPERATOR CONTINUED...
TOTAL CHANGE: 0 points
NEW POINT TOTAL: 111 points
GRADE: Same
(Tom Moores)
Your initial concerns noted in regard to the job description for an Operator/
Mechanic seemed to be more directed toward the creation of a new position, i.e. a
lead person/foreman. While I tmderstand your concerns and do agree that we may
need to further investigate the creation of such a position, the balance of my review
will relate to the current Operator/Mechanic position as currently described in the
job description. Future discussion will occur regarding your suggestion of creating
a new job description.
Currently rated at B2 (40 pointe). Again, the fact that we actually get better
educated or qualified applicants when job openings occur doesn't mean that the job
requires this amount of background or experience to perform duties. The current
requirement of a high school education and additional formal training with 3-5
years of comparable experience seems more than sufficient as a minimum
requirement for this current job classification.
Decision: No change
Currently classified as B--partial--2 points. Partial supervision is already being
granted for covering the occasional summer help that may receive direction from an
Operator/Mecha -dc, but I would agree that an increase in the pointe may be
warranted to cover the average number of summer employees that may be affected
by an individual Operator/Mechanic to 3. When an Operator/Mechanic is asked to
cover for the supervisor while on vacation, sick, or occasional weekends, this is not
the normal job requirement for this position, and additional credit for Hill
supervision is usually not given for occasional work direction.
Decision: Add 2 points for additional partial supervision (B—partial--4)
1.3,g
JOBD69C.REV: 10117/95 Page 7
OPERATOR(MECHANIC (TOM MOORES) CONTINUED...
Currently established at Blb (34 points). Occasional questions on operations or city
budgets are typically covered in the current rating of Blb. A rating of moderate
would fit positions that have responsibility for recommending part of budgets to
supervisors or department heads or for those positions that actually are responsible
for department budgets. The current classification seems appropriate.
Decision: No change
Heavy Lifting: Currently at 1D3. For this position, the weight factor of 50 lbs.
Decision: Add 1 point for excessive sitting (5111)
Heat & Cold: Currently at 8C2. This credit already seems sufficient at
sometimes, as the position does not always require an individual
to be out in the cold or extreme heat that often. While it
certainly can be argued there are days that are extremely cold
or extremely hot, the key again is normal conditions, and I
believe that occasional already covers the points given.
Decision: No change
Abnormal
Behavior. This job is not normally subject to what is meant by abnormal
behavior. This classification was originally meant to cover
positions that may be involved in stressful situations dealing
/30
JOBDESC.REV: IW17195 Page 8
didn't change the frequency that heavy lifting is done and,
therefore, frequent credit has already been given in the above
point value.
Decision: No change
Excessive
Travel/Sitdng:
Snowplowing for long periods of time only occurs occasionally in
the winter and is not an every day occurrence in cold weather.
Regardless, I would be agreeable to adding 1 point for this to
cover those situations of snowplowing, even though it's rare in
\Q
the overall scheme of things. If anymore than 1 point were to be
added for excessive sitting, a reduction would probably have to
occur for points already given for excessive standing.
Decision: Add 1 point for excessive sitting (5111)
Heat & Cold: Currently at 8C2. This credit already seems sufficient at
sometimes, as the position does not always require an individual
to be out in the cold or extreme heat that often. While it
certainly can be argued there are days that are extremely cold
or extremely hot, the key again is normal conditions, and I
believe that occasional already covers the points given.
Decision: No change
Abnormal
Behavior. This job is not normally subject to what is meant by abnormal
behavior. This classification was originally meant to cover
positions that may be involved in stressful situations dealing
/30
JOBDESC.REV: IW17195 Page 8
OPERATOR/MECHANIC (TOM MOORE) CONTINUED...
with situations police officers might encounter; the fact that an
occasional citizen may comment on the City's work performance
b does not qualify for points in this situation.
Decision: No change
Machinery &
Power Tools: Credit has already been given for frequent use of power tools,
and I do not believe that upgrading to continuous is appropriate,
as the job does not 100% require use of tools and machinery.
Decision: No change
TOTAL CHANGE: + 3 points
NEW POINT TOTAL: 110 points
GRADE: Same
Currently the position is granted a credit of C --complete (13 points). If the
Computer Support Analyst position continues to be partially supervised by the
Assistant Administrator position, and with the addition of a newly -created
Development Services Technician position added to the supervision responsibilities,
I would have to recommend an increase in the supervision category to cover 4-6
employees.
Decision: Add 3 points for supervision to a new total of C--complete--16
Wnrk'pg Conditions
Chemical/Fumes: Currently this position has been awarded 1 point under 118 for
chemical and filmes. I question whether this category really
applies to this position, even in rare instances. How many
chemiml/gas plants would this position require to be visited,
and the important thing to note is it is meant to cover normal
requirements of the position, not the fact that you may be
exposed once or twice a year to gas or filmes. In addition, to be
consistent with the Economic Development position, which may
also have frequent contact with potential industrial clients, I
feel that credit for this subfactor should be deloted.
Decision: Deduct 1 point for chemical/fames
13s
JOBDESC.REV: 1417/98 Page 9
OPERATOR/MECHANIC (TOM MOORE) CONTINUED...
with situations police officers might encounter; the fact that an
occasional citizen may comment on the City's work performance
b does not qualify for points in this situation.
Decision: No change
Machinery &
Power Tools: Credit has already been given for frequent use of power tools,
and I do not believe that upgrading to continuous is appropriate,
as the job does not 100% require use of tools and machinery.
Decision: No change
TOTAL CHANGE: + 3 points
NEW POINT TOTAL: 110 points
GRADE: Same
Currently the position is granted a credit of C --complete (13 points). If the
Computer Support Analyst position continues to be partially supervised by the
Assistant Administrator position, and with the addition of a newly -created
Development Services Technician position added to the supervision responsibilities,
I would have to recommend an increase in the supervision category to cover 4-6
employees.
Decision: Add 3 points for supervision to a new total of C--complete--16
Wnrk'pg Conditions
Chemical/Fumes: Currently this position has been awarded 1 point under 118 for
chemical and filmes. I question whether this category really
applies to this position, even in rare instances. How many
chemiml/gas plants would this position require to be visited,
and the important thing to note is it is meant to cover normal
requirements of the position, not the fact that you may be
exposed once or twice a year to gas or filmes. In addition, to be
consistent with the Economic Development position, which may
also have frequent contact with potential industrial clients, I
feel that credit for this subfactor should be deloted.
Decision: Deduct 1 point for chemical/fames
13s
JOBDESC.REV: 1417/98 Page 9
SUbn ABY
JOB EVALUATION APPEALS BY POSITION
v July 1896
• Job descriptions reviewed and modifled; no job evaluation appeal filed
JOBDESC.SUM: 7/24/96 '-3K
Total
New Point
dnh C1asa
change
TAW
tirade
Public Works Director
+11
242
16
Sr. Dep. Registrar Clerk
+1
83
Same
Street Supt.
+3
168
Same
Utility/Billing Recept.
+1
74
Same
Water/Sewer Coll. Operator
—
111
Same
Office Manager
—
149
Same
Operator/Mechanic
+3
110
Same
Asst. Administrator
+2
241
16
City Bookkeeper*
—
74
Same
Computer Support Analyst*
—
142
Same
• Job descriptions reviewed and modifled; no job evaluation appeal filed
JOBDESC.SUM: 7/24/96 '-3K
.�
CITY OF MONTICELLO PAY SCHEDULE JANUARY 1, 1995
STEPS
GRADE
I
i
3
4
S
6
BASE
PRCNT
BASE
105.00%
110.001
115.001
120.00%
125.001
1994
COLA
1995
HOURLY RATE
1 15-29
18.20
1.025
$0.40
18.82
19.21
59.66
$10.08
110.50
2 30-44
18.69
1.025
11.90
19.35
19.79
110.21
110.61
111.13
3 45-59
19.21
1.025
19.11
19.91
110.38
510.05
111.33
111.10
1 50-74
19.76
1.025
110.00
110.50
111.00
111.50
112.01
112.51
S 75-89
110.35
1.025
110.60
$11.13
111.67
112.20
112.13
113.26
5 90-104
110.91
1.025
111.19
111.75
112.31
112.87
113.13
113.98
7 105-119
111.51
1.025
111.16
112./5
113.05
113.64
111.23
114.12
8 120-134
112.26
1.025
112.57
113.20
113.13
114.16
115.09
115.71
9 135-149
113.00
1.025
113.32
113.99
114.66
115.32
115.99
116.66
10 150-161
113.78
1.025
114.12
114.81
115.51
$15.24
116.95
117.66
11 165-179
114.54
1.025
114.90
115.65
116.19
117.11
111.88
111.63
12 110-194
115.41
1.025
115.10
116.59
117.31
118.16
118.15
119.14
13 195-209
115.33
1.025
116.11
117.51
118.12
119.25
120.09
120.93
14 210-224
117.31
1.025
117.75
118.53
119.52
120.41
121.30
122.18
IS 2IS-239
111.35
1.025
111.11
119.75
120.69
121.63
122.51
123.52
16 240.251
119.36
1.025
119.85
120.14
121,13
122.82
123.12
121.81
it 255-269
120.52
1.025
121.04
122.09
123.11
124.19
125.21
126.30
IB 270-284
121.76
1.015
122.30
123.41
124.53
125.64
126.76
127.87
19 215-299
123.06
1.025
123.64
124.82
126.00
127.18
128.36
129.55
20 300-314
111.44
1.025
125.06
126.71
111.56
128.11
130.07
131.32
21 315-329
125.79
1.025
126.43
171.75
129.01
130.10
131.71
133.04
22 130.
127.33
1.025
121.02
129.42
130.12
132.22
133.1Z
135.02
/3L
3 r
Appendix B
Job Evaluation System - Modified Princeton System
INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATING
KNOG'LEDCE AND MERIE4CE FACTOR
In this factor consider the sum total of background knowledge and
experience required to understand and successfully perform the
duties and responsibilities of the position.
First Step
Consider the depth of background knowledge needed.
--- Knowledge represents both practical/tachaical'
skills and human -relations skills. It includes
the composite picture of education and training
gained through.formal and informal means.
--- Only the actual knowledge required to perform in
the position should be recognized and credited.
Choose Degree: A - F
Second Step
Conoider the relative degree of experience needed
to perform successfully in the position.
--- Determine the amount of previous related practical
work experience necessary to fill the requirements
of the position.
Consider how much experience would be required of an
applicant if the position was open.
--- Care must be taken not to over emphasize years
of experience of the present position -holder.
Choose : Limited, Moderate, Extensive or Cor:prehensiva
.r
Frequent comparison with other positions already evaluated ti to this
factor vill be helpful.
/314
- 55 -
amuttat •r/ tannrpct ruttx
ILLATIVE 1{Cata M ntvIM /a/1111•Ca inteip To n}(MII anlCl/}tt} '
pVT11 Of MtICOOM RNM IOCC 010111h\
I�Catt
tutus'
mwun
utc}ana too/ca}r/n
1 1
r
r.•f11
/•uM IMarH •M 1•r1•Ih rNflllr 1•MI.Ia•
-
•t • .r/a.. aM•r•1. p•trtw•• •M N/ltie.
t}iaA a:Art }twat•. •r to •yYH.iewtt
,
to
to
tarn l.I I1M N/ 1•IIY11r•1 A•wt•/a. 1ry+l r•1
1• wlsrYl •wt ••1 N•(•n {w WrA •IIY11{H.
I I
1
IwIyA •a\NI •trH11N ►IY• .•r
•iala+•w•f tIr•.t ti•{•fyt
�
'
M
u 10 Ip
CN.11.I•AI. TIN Wi t., NI I••Hlla Hw•
IIIA rlyrl.•1 1• \•MI• . ••y l.. ••1 r••1.1 -
WIa •f.Ya iN
Ihllh .1ANI (....I• }Ir. I y'• t111•ar, •r
1'
AY•!wn •. wh •.b•l }e •IYn. a •yYl.•fn/
M
/p to N
rwwi Nll •wt.•tat Ca . I.tha•r •} bprf
.ryri r.l Ih 11.11 •r •N•1.11.111r 1•r•Irlwa
..rqunw NI lNe.1w1 0.. •I Y•.a
p
,
t1
ap N
1N
f•W 1.111 •y.l Y•1... t• • 11••11.•. 1.....
wl.ea t• tt.11 H •NII •if+•1/. /wW1ah}
rli t•a.t 1.1 ..IN1 .•.• •f •N.1NIH
'
}Irl •IIIIINa A6-1.44.1.111 •1 rlAa HHI. •.wa
l
r
N
np I l p 11/
t. 1.}1.1 lrlf•A•h•I•r 1•.Y1.1a1 }} HNffl
"
1•w•I I•wl ••.•• •1 •I.IhI.1 a.11N ..yl a•♦
1441•
•.rli.ra.t }} a«1 w.++.} ahw/.µ• •t
r
H1,• aY1.•1•• IwalIM1 rN1111 {wM 11 1\•
arr I.1 Y Hl•hrhl 1•r.l.
, •
it6
trp i70 i+0
I
INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATING
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ACTION
.In this factor the relationship between responsibility and accountability is directly
paralleled. The more responsibilities one has the more accountable one is for results.
Results can be defined in terms of accomplishments or in terms of maintaining a
standard.
FIRST STEP ��:•�
Decide how much freedom there is to make decisions and"tak4jindependent action
impacts results achieved.
• To what extent has authority been delegated by a.higher level of management
• How much opportunity for independent action is there in this position?
Select: Restricted; Intermediate; Advanced; Extensive;. Principal.'
SECOND STEP -
Determine the degree and magnitude of the responsibilities assigned the position,
and the impact on the following: -
• Budget
• Operations
Select: Minor; Moderate; Major; Maximum.
THIRD STEP
Evaluate the amount of control this position allows.
• Advisory: Often provides information and suggestions which others use to make
major decisions
• Indirect: Joins with others in group decisions, committees. etc. leading to
specific actions
• 0lrect: Full responsibility for final results
-57- 130
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ACTION
oar.../ wla■q N 111. /+a.a rM ONr111N1
101.01119
1
t
1
/
Ib. -1.. 1• It11
aG1rr
sit"
ho".11
I11JOt
•ltlmol
"Tory t.611441
obal
w.larr Iwlrltl
ol.-tl Mrl/v1 Ir Ir441 •IrNI .a.lurl
Irlral
00,441
1. 6,
t.
t. ..
t.
•.
►.
t.
61St1111r0
W1161 s11K W .-•licit{
1tN.-tt1111/ IN IMINMttt tr
t
' '
al 111111 Mllr It IINI{ 1r►1111 16
-
(lttt t.M r.111N
10
If
11
t0 tl
p
10 11 U
10
11
1;.
I.11t■I011ll
'
fol its ror 11644.11.. 1w
IJ9Nr1.1 6111Mt1 11611.144//
1
1.111 KI 6.-111►11{ 111/I M 1111
'1. 1.1/11' Nt1619M 111
10
N
»
10 44
44
to N 11
It
11
1 1
(1.1144.1111 rIM IN6111.-11-1,
IJ /w161r1.1 1441111.1{ 1.t 1'tl
II 11.4411 I1N //1111. Iw 111 11111.
WI 10111111 .114.1 11111 16.1111
10
11
t0
60 tl
11
10 , 1/ 10
10,
1 1
1 1
11t111191
Irt11 1t/60.11►1111/ 0.1 Ir144ra1
.J 1.11M luMt. aM11.1.1 Irt1r 11.1
•
'
IIKIINI t1 1111 N.44..ru
'to
16
is
1/ a
u
to u u
(00
101
1o1
Palo( I'll
(x61111 a1M•11►11111 161 9'161101
I
'w N.1Itr 1.1 Nt1rN1 6M Nt11[11
1
11fIt 11.1 N11. 0111 tlrlrslN
•
`
tail
op ..tIN1
10
to
N
100 104
100
110 111 110
Ito
114
Ito
INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATING
v
RESPONSIBILITY FOR PLANNING
In this factor first consider the relative scope and significance of the
work planned. Second, consider the time span covered by most of the
planning done.
First Stec ,
Determine the degree of planning involved, whether it is
basically routine or complex and far-reaching.
To illustrate, planning involving new city services and
programs, land acquisitions, equipment purchases, etc.,
it is highly significant and can have effects extending
many years 1,nto the future.
Choose Degree: 1 - 7
Second Stec:
Consider the time span covered by most of the planning done.
Generally speaking, the more important or significant the
planning activities, the further in the future such planning
extends.
Choose -Degree: A - F
GO
-.y
•
w•a It...6.V•
, o{y wp 11•ulY YI! 1lrwlq blt •brlq w•. II•.
1� IN i1•:.
r-�
Ir.l•1• `J.•NII•Mr.• •r.1.• IIN••• Irr 1 .•IIMI 1.11 1.i •••• a
far
'
q• NrIM q 1 r• • s•IN u 1 /r.N IN 1 1\• I.aN••!
•1111. •I,r 1• ++. ra\ wa\• 1111 . 1 •• ._�_. •.,
r••IaiM N• u 11M11Y .•1M••1►Illllu
X.x x x
1
11•rlwt •11.111 11 NIN 1.111 rrtlN raa111
.I
1 I 1 1 • 11
►IIMtw/ 1111tH 11 1N 11n •1 11•IIN •Itlalr_.
•M Iwnlr•• aMIl1• •r+t fM1111f IItIn11111•
1 1 • 11 11 11
fl•riw/ i•••1•r1 pNr1111 1uw 1.111 Nlrn
Ir1••t1• •M N 11ar•a 111• rIn aNlu• 11
•11•rw•1Ir•• •.• •rale r1 x1111•
�
•,
1
• 11 If I/ I/ 11
(T II•rl•• x111111 1• •IIfIr1•t •It••IIMI 1r 11
� MIl\ •I• 111.111• •r1 •M) 1•N •t• lav IM
rrlrlrr Nr 11.1.w1a 1111
1
'
11 It 11 i1 11 7•
►11•+I •t r1111u 1• tl lfln•t ut 11.111•
� •
IIIr11IM1 Irplllw/ M1111I• t1ty 11. 111'11/IMI
..• (1.1.1 111 Nr •IIIIMIINI
•
• ,
11 11 If as )1 U
� II•rlY /r• 1111 x•11111 .. IN Ir•11 . •
'
.�:�:: �:. 1.1/x•1 In,1111 r• •w• w•rlq
!
is It 31 It H ./
GO
,!%Pff n I.t.t of tunas J
alM u M 1•IIwI I• rpt.IN hIH Cr Jlu /•r 6grrdNw
l•••1 •1 Mrt /r6.r .1 ty1gH.
IIH .1 C.•q i .1 tq..•1__
J
\
hl•a t.l.. i -)•\f \ 1 •• 1' 10 6.1-6 t0 11 tt
1l
1\ If
i
/
b../ tglMr• 1-1 a -I 6.11 11-1/ 11-0/ la•1/ N-61 1-1 a.1 I.it 1)-11
It -!1
16.11 16.11
j
I
•
1.1.6 t.IH, 1 It 11 it 16Il 16 1/ i/
w..l Capt"..• I!I 41-f1 11.11 66 -If 16.61 /1.100 lei -116 11f•I" 110•
hl.a t.lw \ 6 / 10 q le It
16
It it
I
C
b..l Igl•Nr• � 1 !•), \•f 6.1 /-t 1 t•f
6.1
6•t /-�
I
0`
bIH bl.• It 11 It t0 11 11 11 I1
N 11
IJ
1
/
•
b..f /y1M•. 10.11 16.11 1/-I1 !a -)p 11• 10.11 11.11 16.11
!6•w )1•
'
hl•a Illw 6 11 16 t0 14 !1 I1 16 10 11 16 t0
)a
)/ a1
t
b..f tapl".r. 1 1.1 6•f 6.1 6.0 10.11 I!• 1 1-1 6.1 6.1 6•I
t0.11
11-14 11.111
hl•a I.1.• M u40 46 a1 60 6t as
11
16
I
�
b. at Iy1.ryH bIH N 11.1100 101•If0 IN• IW. 16 11.11 11.100
0 11-
101•IN 116•
i
1
/
4H• .yl.►•H 1. �.. IY.• w 1.•.1 •r. ►.lap IIHH11 .ap.1.1../ IIIINI..IIwH CIH II.1 IH•1 .M M..yr..
1.•rll 1.11 r•HII (I .11wr6 Ir .YH /.wf .1 •t"H.. .► ft•• 101 Ylf►••I MIH r.Hl.i .161.1..1
`
rrH11 1. •11•N/ IH Iw •.►•. IrW •1 •yl•...., 6.ap1 •111 w 6 6H.1 4 .....Ila 111•w1 Ip I.I11.1 ••N.•iH.•
.rrH fly I. 1.••1 •1 M.\ I•NI•.1, •
4Hr .Ht••.16111" IH r.ylll. .y.1.1•Iw IIo11Hr1 14w.6Y HM.1 /.. M•. h1y.H1 a• .•M.II.H H, 14 a.a.1
•wAr. .1 •yl.rr.. rtwlH •Fw11 b ..1.1.•1 H 1•Ilrr. 1. IH H.IH I►• ....►•. •1 .yl•1•r• IH •h•. H.1.1 1• .•
b IHH
••- IH /•61. ••I .•N.•1•I•• ••• .•M,• �1.• .t.1.•• •1 1•x.1 r•.iln.•r. 4. Int 1. •1.1•• •. lY• • ��.•. •1
J
C'l
INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATING
RES?ONSISILITY FOR WORK OF OTHERS (SUPERVISION)
then considering this factor these areas are reviewed including the type
of work involved, how such supervision is required and the nu:ber of
people supervised.
First Sten
Date -mime the level of work involved
A. — No supervision required
8•--- Routine - work requires minimal directing, instructing,
training or planning
C•--- Skilled - work often requires instructing, training,
planning and directing. Supervises less than ten (10)
employees
D• -- Sama as the above except supervises more than ten (10)
employeas
f• — Managerial - work requires direction of highly technical,
skilled or specialized tasks, or complicated projects
F.--- Managerial - work requires coordination of varied groups
of administrative, technical sad clerical personnel.
Supervises large group of employees
Choose: Level of work and Size of group A - F
Second Sten
Data-3ino the degree of supervision, whether partial or complete.
Complato responsibility for -L -L -or more of the items below is
considered complete supervision. Anything less than S is considered
partial supervision (credit will usually not be given here for
occasional work direction, where no true supervision is involved).
(See chart on following pago to determine degree of supervision)
Partial Complete
1. Airing - Authority to recommend new employees
2. Methods - sets methods- of how work is to be
done, initiates changes in methods.
3. Delegates work - determines who does work and
gives instructions for doing it
4. Standards - sets up quality or quantity
requirements for the position -
S. Reviews Work - examines and appraises work to
see that standards have been maintained
6. Compensation - recommends salary adjustments
7. Transfers or Promotions - recommends, promotes,
an employee to another position within the
department; recommends the transfer or promotion
.to a position in -another department
S. Grievances - hears employee grievances and takes
.action on them
9. Discipline - takes action toward correcting
misconduct on the job.
10. Dismissal - has the authority to recommend or
to rtrinate the services of an employee
Choose: Partial or Complete
Third Sten
Datermine the number of employees supervised
Choose: Numbar
-62-
IInI,Lllll
I IillUl l IUII',
Alum-
_.
j
None
Rare
Sometimes
Freq.
Coni-Aously
City:
-
NONE
LIMITED
OCC.
FREQ.
EATEN.
Job Title:
A
8
C
D
E
Heavy Lifting
1
0
1
2
3
4
Awkward Working Position
2
0
1
2
3
4
PHYSICAL
'
Abnormal 1louro
3
0
1
2
3
4
EFFORT
Excessive Standing
4
O
1
2
3
4
Exc. Travel/Exe. Sitting
S
0_
1
2
3
4
Manipulating objoeto requiring
lino coordination/manual doxtority
6
0
1
2
3
4
Duet and Dirt
7
0
1
2
3
4
Extreme Cold and (lost
0
0
1
2
3
4
ENvIn00-
Raln, Snow. and Hind
9
0
1
2
3
4
nEI1T
Abnormal Human Behavior
10
0
1
2
3
4
Chemlcal and Pumoo
11
0
1
2
3
4
Machinery C Power Toole,
12
0
1
2
3
4
Climbing i Ilolghto
13
0
1
2
3
4
HAZARDS
Excavating
14
0
1
2
3
4
Ouns or Weapons
is
0
l
2
3
4
Electrical Shock
16
0
1
2
3
4
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
14. Consideration of eatoh is ing fUll.time Seeretarlal nosition for the
public works dena_rtment. (J.S.)
In 1992, City staff became aware of the need for a secretary and improved
communications in the public works department. The 1993 budget included
salaries for a full-time secretary. Additional study in early 1993 indicated
that we could postpone or delay the addition of a full-time secretary for up to
one to three years by improving the phone system. Enclosed is a copy of the
March 22, 1993, Council minutes.
On June 7, 1994, the City Council approved a city-wide staffing plan which
included the creation of a part-time Public Works Secretary position (see
enclosed minutes). Beth Green was hired for this position and started in late
September of 1994. The position averages 22 hours per week. Beth is
usually at the public works office during the morning hours only (7:30 a.m.-
11:30 a.m.) and then on Friday during agenda week a full day to assist with
the preparation.
Several major tasks have been completed at the public works department
since Beth started. After initial assistance from Karen Doty, the Office
Manager from city hall, Beth organized the document filing system for easy
retrieval of documents once they are filed. Due to the half-time nature of the
position and current workloads Fmm the Public Works Director and other
supervisors, however, the filing is usually a couple weeks behind.
Consequently, we are often hesitant to file something unless we are sure we
won't need it for a couple of weeks, as it is often difficult to retrieve it when
it's in limbo.
It is easy to say that the addition of the part-time Public Works Secretary has
increased the efficiency of the public works department; our response time in
obtaining and researching data and getting back to citizens is quicker. I
have enclosed a copy of the part-time Public Works Secretary job description.
I've also included a list of routine duties for the Public Works Secretary and
other duties that we may wish to incorporate into a job description for a full-
time secretary.
The current range in pay for the part-time secretarial position is from $6.66
an hour to $8.46 an hour. Both Green is currently being paid $7.85 an hour,
which is Stop 3 of the 4 -stop program. The pay steps for the part-time Public
Works Secretary are determined by the total number of hours worked. The
next step in pay grade would occur after 3,000 hours of work. Beth is
currently about half -way there. A quick look at the proposed duty of the fiill-
time Public Works Secretary and the comparable worth program indicates
Council Agenda - 12/1V95
the pay range may range from $8.40 and hour to $11.13 an hour. The actual
pay grade would only be determined after completion of the job description
and the rating of the job description with the comparable worth system.
City staff would like the Council to consider filling the position from within
the list of present part-time and frill -time employees with the City of
Monticello. Our current personnel policy requires that we post notice of
permanent job openings or vacancies in the City and accept applications from
present employees in the same manner as applications from outside
employees. A copy of section VI. 1. of the personnel policy is enclosed for your
review.
R_ ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: -1 1 t F
1. The first alternative is to authorize the City Administrator and Public
Works Director to prepare a job description for a full-time Public
Works Secretary based upon the duties that he or she is expected to
perform, to rate that job with the comparable worth rating program,
and to post the job opening so that present part-time or frill -time
employees can apply for the position. We expect that this can be
completed and recommendations for the filling of the position can be
made at the City Council meeting on January 8, 1996.
The second alternative would be as outlined in alternative #1, but to
post the position in the local paper as well as within.
3. The third alternative would be not to create a full-time Public Works
Secretarial position.
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator and Public Works
Director that the City Council authorize drafting a job description, rating of
that job with the comparable worth system, and posting of the position for
application by current part-time or Rill -time City employees as outlined in
alternative #1.
D_ SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the current job description; List of possible additional duties; Copy of
the section of the personnel policy; Copies of Council minutes hem March 22,
1993, and June 27, 1994.
32
Part-time Public Works Secretar,r
City of Monticello
Title of Class: Part time Public Works Secretary
Effective Date: Jun(- 27, 1994
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
General Statement of Duties: Performs routine clerical work providing
information and assistance to the public, computer entry, and maintenance of
various filing systems; performs related duties as required.
§gi ,bion Received: Reports to Public Works Director; Receives direction from
Office Manager regarding records management.
Exercised: None.
TYPICAL DUTIES PERFORMED
The listed examples may not include all duties performed by all positions in this
class. Duties may vary somewhat fi-om position to position within a class.
Answers phones, provides information and assistance to callers, refers calls, pager
staff, and takes messages.
Greets visitors at the counter, determines the nature of their business, directs
them to appropriate person, answers questions, and provides assistance
as appropriate.
Enters data and maintains various spreadsheets and data on personal computer
as directed.
Performs routine filing and maintains filing system and inventory list.
Performs research by calling other cities as directed.
KNOWLEDGE. SKIT -TA AND ABILITIES
Working knowledge of standard office practices, including operation of a computer.
Working knowledge uf City programs, policies, operations, and procedures.
Working ability to communicate effectively with the public.
Working ability to typo and enter information with speed and accuracy and to
maintain records.
Working ability to operate transcription equipment.
Working ability to operate normal office equipment.
MD09UM QUALIFICATIONS
One year of clerical experience involving public contact, typing, recordlEceping,
transcription, and computer use.
iyR-
PUBLIC WORKS SECRETARY DUT ES
These dutieg are done on a Mgular basia af lzmwnt:
• Answer'operator' phone calls and all calls when the men are away from their
desks — take messages — sometimes radio or page for emergency purposes.
• Miscellaneous filing throughout the office (there is a huge amount of paperwork -
this is at least 75% of the job).
• Maintain inventory list of files.
• Enter and maintain garbage information on computer. Calculate monthly reports
from Vasko and give Marlene the okay to pay.
• Enter and maintain recycling data on computer. Calculate quarterly reports for
Wright County Recycling Incentive Funding and submit for reimbursement.
• Enter Hillside Cemetery information on computer and transcribe data from senior
citizens (this is an on going project — whenever there is any extra time to work on
this).
• Assist with compost site key distribution.
• Transcribe construction inspection notes.
• Research as needed --call other cities on policies, rates, eta
• General clerical duties such as photocopying, fazing, making coffee, dusting and
vacuuming, eta
• Word process daily correspondence for Public Works Director, Street
Superintendent, Water Superintendent and the Construction Inspector, make
copies and mail.
• Transcription of agenda items for Public Works Director.
• Maintain office supply inventory weekly.
• Quarterly Sunny Fresh Industrial Sewer use worksheets.
• Sort & distribute mail on daily basis.
• Key control.
10
These are duties that are not being done at present because of lack afime:
• Re -organize and maintain construction plans (file by year of project and index to
cross-reference by type or project name).
• Work on obtaining a full set of plats for public works and city hall.
• Enter and maintain vehicle gas usage and maint. records on computer.
• Enter and maintain sign inventory and maintenance on computer.
• Enter and maintain garbage cart inventory on computer.
• Enter tree chipping information on computer. Fax form to Cathy for billing.
• Enter and maintain fire hydrant data on computer.
• Enter and maintain water and sewer hookup permit spreadsheet on computer.
• Type and maintain public works policy manual.
• Type and collate job analysis (task—Safety Committee).
• Maintain Dutch Elm disease records --mail letters to residents.
• File Gopher State paperwork and return •NLR" calls.
• Update project cost spreadsheet.
These duties aro handled through eity hall of IzFeseng h .t should he done a_t public works*;
• Schedule outside sewer & water inspections.
• Schedule water meter installation.
• Track current insurancoUnds for excavators.
• Searching for data needed by Water Department (in conjunction w/Utility Billing
Clerk).
• Maintenance of list of properties without city sewer & water which use either a well
or septic or both.
• Would be mon efficient use of staff to have public works secretary handle the above
items rather than city hall staff (since city hall staff does not know the daily
schedule ojpublie works attyn.
/VC
V V. EMERGENCY CALL BACK
1. Emergency call back is not the same as call back from a
layoff. Emergency call back shall mean when a regular
employee must report to work during hours which he/she is
considered to be off duty. Whenever feasible, an employee
shall be notified five days in advance when he/she will be
placed at the head of the Emergency Call Back list. Non-
exempt employees called back in this situation shall be
compensated at the overtime rate to the extent this time
required them to work more than forty (40) hours per seven (7)
day work week. Travel time not to exceed ten (10) minutes per
call back incident shall be credited as time worked.
VI. APPOINTMENTS, PROMOTIONS, EVALUATIONS
1. In making appointments and promotions, the City will consider
such factors as the qualifications, merit, efficiency,
ability, skill, training, experience, past performance, and
seniority of the job applicant or promotional candidate.
Where the City deems appropriate, other factors may be
considered in making decisions regarding appointments,
promotions, and transfers. Notice of permanent job openings
or vacancies in the City service shall be posted in
appropriate places for at least three working days. Such
notice shall include the job title, duties, pay range, and the
date the position is intended to be filled. Any employee
desiring to apply for such job openings shall do so in writing
by the closing day. Applications from present employees shall
bo considered in the same manner as applications from new
applicants in applying for any such new job opening or vacancy
when such position is in another department or division.
2. Pay Lor all positions is determined by the City Council.
Employees shall be appointed initially as on probation.
Probation periods shall normally last for a period of six
months. The purpose of this period is to evaluate a new
FILES\PERSONN.POL: 7/11/91 Page 6
/fib
Council Minutes - 3/22/93
tyonsideration of ar000sal from Bridge Water Teleahone for new phone system
for the aublic works facility.
Public Works Director, John Simola, reviewed with the Council a new phone
system that had been proposed by Bridge Water Telephone Company for the
maintenance building facilities. The Norstar system is similar to the AT&T
Partner II system that was reviewed by the Council previously. The phones
have many of the same basic features, including direct extension dialing or
menu dialing, and also included voice mail capabilities. Simola noted that the
cost of the Norstar system with optional features recommended totaled
$6,878.25 compared to the previously -reviewed AT&T system at $5,280.
Councilmember Fyle noted that it was his opinion the maintenance building
facilities did not need an entirely new phone system for over $6,000, as he has
not experienced any problems in delays or reaching individuals in the public
works department. Bridge Water representative, Wayne Mayer, did confirm
that were inefficiencies in how the phone system was currently installed and
that the public works employees did not have direct access to each building but
would have to physically search for employees receiving phone calls.
John Simola also noted that Bridge Water Telephone Company will soon have
Centrex switching gear available that would allow the addition of many
features that the department is now seeking in a new phone system. The
availability of this new system would not be until later in 1993 and, as a
result, still recommended that the Council consider purchasing a new phone
system at this time. Any equipment purchased would be compatible to the
Centrex system in the future. Simola also noted that improving the
communications through the purchase of a new phone system should allow the
public works department to delay the addition of a full-time secretary for up
to possibly one to three years.
Based on eliminating the need for a public works department secretary at this
time, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint Herbst
to authorize the purchase of the Norstar system from Bridge Water Telephone
Company for the public works facilities in an amount totaling $6,600. Voting
in favor: Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst. Opposed: Brad Fyle,
Patricia Olsen.
14 000W
Council Minutes - 6/27/84
9. consideration of adontine a strateav for addressing workload demands
Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that a few weeks ago, the City
Council conducted a special meeting for the purpose of reviewing problems
associated with meeting increasing workload demands. As a result of the
discussion, it was the consensus of Council to authorize staff to hire
additional staff for the building inspection and motor vehicle departments.
Staff was also directed to prepare a plan for addressing other staffing needs
identified at the meeting. O'Neill noted that he has prepared a plan with
close assistance from the Office Manager and input from the City
Administrator and Public Works Director. He also noted tliat the plan was
,.resented to city hall staff, and no objections were noted.
O'Neill went on to note the underlying goals behind the plan, which
included 1) the goal of maintaining existing service levels in the face of
growing demands, 2) providing the opportunity for upward mobility for
existing employees where appropriate, 3) identifying new funding sources to
help pay for additional employees, 4) hiring additional employees only when
it has been demonstrated that improving elTiciency will not solve a problem.
O'Neill went on to detail eight steps that could be taken in response to the
increasing City workload. The eight steps include:
1. Move motor vehicle department off site.
2. Create a Development Services Technician position.
3. Office Manager completes meeting minutes.
4. Economic Development Director to participate in planning and zoning
activities.
6. Hiro a part-time receptionist working half days, primarily afternoons.
6. Hiro a pari Umo romptionist/secretary working half days at the
public works department.
7. Reorganize existing oMco spaces.
8: Continuo to contract for assistance with building inspection as
necessary.
Council discussion focused on relocation of the motor vehicle department.
After discussion, it was the consensus of Council to move the motor vehicle
department to the Help Center location due to the fact that the coat to
remodel an unused portion of the Help Center to equal or less than the cost
to rent apace for th oo years.
IAF
e'
Council Minutes - 6127/84
After discussion, a motion was made by Warren Smith and seconded by
Patty Olson to authorize implementation of the steps not d in the plan
submitted, including authorization to move deputy registrar to the Help
Center under the condition that the remodeling costs do not exceed $30,000.
Motion carried unanimously.
14 G
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
15. Consideration of anthorizina the hiring of skn ad itio nl nuhli . cvor o
(J.S.)
A- REFERFNCP AND RAP ROUND:
Looking back over the years, it's easy to see how much Monticello has grown. The
community has doubled in population since 1980. The last full-time position added
to the street and park department was in December of 1984, shortly after the
beginning of the Meadow Oak subdivision. The growth over the past ten years in
our additional roads, storm sewers, ponds, drainage ditches, parka, and buildings
has placed significant additional workloads on the street and park department. We
have kept up with the workload by having a well-trained work force and modern,
efficient equipment. However, with the additional tremendous growth over the past
years, additional manpower is needed in the form of an additional full-time
Operator Mechanic. Not only are we expanding the community rapidly, which
requires more maintenance time, the core city streets are beginning to show
significant signs of wear and tear. We are, therefore, requesting that the City
Council create an additional position in the streets and parks department to
supplement the four individuals currently in that position.
Enclosed is a copy of the job description. The rate of pay for the position is
bargained for by union contract and is currently a 6 -step program, which takes 64
months to go fiom the starting grade of $11.86 per hour to $14.82 per hour. City
staff is also currently investigating the possibility of modifying one of the job
description of one of the Operator Mechanic's to include limited supervision as a
working foreman. We will present additional information on this subject next
spring during contract negotiations with the union.
R. ALTRRNATrVE ACTIONS:
1. The fust alternative is to authorize the addition of another position as
Operator Mechanic and to post the opening with other City employees, as
well as in the area papers, with a hiring date sometime in January. -fib.
2. The second alternative would be not to hire an additional full-time Operator
Mechanic.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator, Public Works Director, and
Street and Park Superintendent that the City Council authorise the addition of
another position as Operator Mechanic as outlined in alternative 01.
D_ Sl7PPORTING DATA:
Copy of job description for Operator Mechanic.
33
Operator/Mechanic
City of Monticello
Title of Class: Operator/Mechanic
Effective Date: November 15, 1991
Revised: July 15, 1995
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
General Statement of n„ i a: Performs routine to skilled labor and maintenance
work in the public works department; and performs related duties as required.
Supervision Received- Works under the technical direction of the Street/Park
Superintendent and general direction of the Public Works Director.
SuRervigion Exercigpd- None; may provide technical work direction over summer
help.
TYPICAL DUTIES PERFORMED
The listed examples may not include all duties performed by all positions in this class.
Duties may vary somewhat from position to position within a class.
Maintains and repairs streets, including patching potholes with blacktop, sweeping
streets, removing debris, placing cones or barricades around hazards, etc.
Installs and repairs utilities as needed, including sewer lines, sprinkler lines, etc.
Straightens and replaces street signs that are damaged.
Paints crosswalks, turn arrows, handicapped parking identifier, parking lines, etc.
on city streets and parking lots.
Maintains shoulders and mows ditches for all non•sidewalked streets.
May perform sidewalk repair and patching; removes cement and prepares area for
sidewalk replacement by contracted firm.
Performs preventative maintenance and repair of department vehicles, including
repairing or adjusting hydraulic systems and motors, brakes, disc drives,
steering, electrical cooling systems, alternators, starters, etc.
Operates front-end loader and trucks to remove snow from city streets, municipal
parking lots, and alleys during winter, operates sander and applies salt to
roadways, sidewalks, and municipal parking lots; may be required to perform
these duties during hours not normally worked.
Assists with the installation and removal of holiday decorations.
(continued on next page)
Operator/Mechanic
City of Monticello
Installs and maintains playground facilities and equipment, including planning and
placement of equipment, repairing of swings, slides and other equipment,
building sand boxes and providing sand, etc.
Maintains skating rinks, including flooding rinks, clearing snow, banking snow or
gravel in order to flood rinks, etc.
Applies fertilizer and weed killer as needed to parks and other public lands.
Performs miscellaneous maintenance, construction, and repair work as needed on city
buildings and property, including construction, plumbing, pouring concrete and
concrete block work, welding, basic electrical, painting and staining, sheet -
rocking and taping, block work, etc.
Oversees and assists the work of summer employees including assigning work,
training, etc.
Performs miscellaneous cleaning, maintenance, and repair work as needed.
Recommends cost savings or performance improvement changes to supervisor.
Assists other city departments as needed.
KNOWLEDGE, SSILIB, AND ABILITIES
Considerable knowledge of the repair and maintenance of streets.
Considerable knowledge of equipment and vehicle maintenance and repair, including
procedures, methods, and tools.
Working knowledge of the traffic laws, ordinances, and regulations involved in
equipment operation.
Considerable skill in the operation of snow removal, street sweeping, heavy machinery,
and other public works and park equipment and vehicles.
Considerable skill in building and grounds maintenance, including carpentry,
plumbing, pouring concrete and concrete block work, welding, basic electrical,
painting and staining, sheetrocking and taping.
Considerable ability to perform heavy manual labor for long periods of time, sometimes
under adverse weather conditions.
Considerable ability to analyze repair and maintenance problems and determine
appropriate solutions.
Working ability to follow oral and written instructions.
Working ability to prioritize work and perform duties independently.
Working ability to work and communicate effectively with City staff and the general
public.
(continued on next page)
08
Operator/Mechanic
City of Monticello
MDMWM QUALIFICATIONS
Class B driver's license and three years of experience in light or heavy equipment
operation, truck driving, mechanical or engine repair, concrete or blacktop work, or a
related field. Experience in a specific area may be required depending on the
particular vacancy.
/SG
Council Agenda - 12/11/95
Con_cideration of reneavinng contract with Hoglund Coach Lines for
providing Heartland Empresa hug service. W.O.)
A REFERENCE AND BA .K .RO 1ND:
The current contract between the City and Hoglund Coach Lines needs to be
renewed for service in 1996. According to the contract, this is the last year
that the contract can simply be renewed. In the fall of 1996, it will be
necessary to conduct a formal bidding process in selecting a service provider
for 1997.
The State of Minnesota Transportation Funding Program under which the
Heartland Express operates has allowed for a small increase in the program
budget. Under the proposed contract, the cost per hour for transportation
service will rise from $22.88/hr to $23.43/hr, which is an increase of less
than 2.5%.
As an update, the bus system is operating well with solid and consistent
ridership numbers. Ridership will likely jump when the Mississippi Shores
housing project comes on line. In addition to the day-to-day demand for
service that the facility will generate, Presbyterian homes will be providing
free tickets to residents for a special weekly service to the grocery store. The
presence of the bus system appears to be very important to the success of
Mississippi Shores.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Motion to renew the transportation contract with Hoglund Coach
Lines by increasing the cost per hour to $23.43 for 1996 service. sa 6 s
Hoglund Transportation continues to do a good job; therefore, there is
no need to consider seeking another provider. The increase is small
and consistent with the increase in funds that the City will be getting
from the State of Minnesota to operate the system in 1996.
2. Motion to deny renowing the transportation contract with Hoglund
Coach Lines.
r_ STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative 01.
D. AUPPORTINO DATA:
A copy of the Rill contract is available upon request.
34
CITY OF MONIICELLO HEARTLAND EXPRESS TRANSIT
REVENUE, EXPENSE, AND STATISTICAL COMPARISON
_W9YEWW.;j ,eECEMlEI� ^ OTR Jg Oi
1511719 "77f S5J" Aml 1151114 13 53 "145
3111 A7
1167"ZI, 11111`7751 MOM, 5210m pra 041 1W17
IIMMIOMR 1 IQI, 1.M I In 1 tj? I.000 1111 t ayl1 a 1 941 14n'3111I a 1411l . O
D1���eI u 1! 111 9 ,m' ?!1 241 --id4
e.nbl� .N 1119 .Ifl LFI "I 000 710 i4!' ,-01 If
I Iw17, to] P3I io4! 14; nil ,Q 3St ap.. d-
I C/Wlr .1 t 1]a aM a9. 117 n1 243 M.I l0
I11111Nb Ibu� m0 IMe In � 1p6I� 1�0 I IMO O 14]01 001
lots. 11.0]1 n00t 707ao aa17. 71wi ant'I }aM' Palo.: 9na.71107rnu
ICa000rw/wM 7. 0 1.. 2 14101 M00 ERR Mal pM M01 F.RR M
�" .• Mtl tD tO Q1. 9Ao7 Boyo Mol so ERR t0% fPP
IPMraw�WN 0.7 0117 ON 007 Oq 000 ON E� 0w as. OO 0. 0'
',Pwwnw�Maw oat oQ tlo, t07 �S7 tta Im FRA 437 707 014 ERR 111171 e
.CON'16 Qq 11001 11 071 Hfl 11)11 QM tt MI FAR g.lNl�Q1111 i1I {Ip FRA p".1 Qi
30
F AM
131 py
IR0.+1111r[aswl.� II"IN 97 oN1 a ! tarn lotl\ lama\ 0117�%I FPR IQ70074 /II OOKI %olA F.RR II o7Ul
COMPARE. WKI 1tA7.00
c
J
] 119j 1177
11tp1
1 Da]
11' a
?9I
'm
14P!!P
1aa
D1
pptl au
Ip_.1
M70I IWD
—0
1Mj
.-I 7Q71
,1�1 7
:I.oai
1410! 401
14 741
Ow 007 _
oni 007
tl M' 1221
urir' u7.7 „
Nati tt 7177
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
11/21/95 08:59:56
�. WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
38734 11/20/95 NORWEST BANK MINNESO
38734 11/20/95 NORWEST BANK MINNESO
39391 11/20/95 BURSCH TRAVEL
39391 11/20/95 BURSCH TRAVEL
39539 11/20/95 GOVERNMENT TRAINING
39540 11/20/95 K MART STORE
39541 11/20/95 WASHBURN/THERESA
39542 11/20/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
39543 11/20/95 KOROPCHAK/OLIVE
39543 11/20/95 KOROPCHAK/OLIVE
39544 11/20/95 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS,
39545 11/20/95 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS.
39546 11/20/95 U.S. POSTMASTER
39547 11/20/95 CHICAGO TITLE COMPAN
39549 11/21/95 BARBAROSSA & SONS, I
39549 11/21/95 CAREFREE LAWN SERVIC
39549 11/21/95 CAREFREE LAWN SERVIC
39549 11/21/95 CAREFREE LAWN SERVIC
39550 11/21/95 DAVE PERKINS CONTRAC
39550 11/21/95 DAVE PERKINS CONTRAC
39551 11/21/95 DAY STARTER
39552 11/21/95 FIREHOUSE MAGAZINE
90553 11/21/95 FRONTLINE PLUS FIRE
39554 11/21/95 K MART STORE
90555 11/21/95 LIEFERT/TOM
Disbursement Journal
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL
154 CORRECT CODING 200.00CR
154 CORRECT CODING 200.00
0.00 Oct
.90415 CORRECT PROJECT COD 4,535.81CR
.90415 CORRECT PROJECT COD 4,535.81
0.00
72 REG FEE/CATHY SHUMAN 50.00
460 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES 38.80
986 DOWNTOWN REOEVELOPMEN 640.00
118 MATER/ATV/SNOW REG 739.00
97 DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMEN 343.01
87 MILEAGE REIMS 29.40
372.41
25 PWORKS PKG LOT CONS 2,856.90
25 PWORKS PKG LOT CON 24,579.45
210 POSTAGE/DEP REG 164.00
699 GMEF LOAN/VECTOR T 50,000.00
942 SCHOOL BLVD CONST 192,570.74
940 MOWING CHG/LIBRARY 63.90
940 MOWING CHARGES/FIRE DE 63.90
940 MISC MOWING CHARGES 170.00
297.80
988 SUPPLIES/MAPLEW000 CI 252.00
998 PWORKS INSPECTION SUP 168.00
420.00
707 NEW BATTERY/FIRE DEPT 106.92
519 SUBSCRIPTION/FIRE DEPT 59.00
510 GLOVE£/FIRE DEPT 63.00
400 SUPPLIES/FIRE DEPT 12.07
304 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB 100.00
Oct
Oct
0
•Cr
•Ch
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
11/21/95 08:59:56
WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
39556 11/21/95 MOBIL
39556 11/21/95 MOBIL
39557 11/21/95 NATIONAL FIRE PROTEC
39558 11/21/95 SHINGOBEE BUILDERS
39SS9 11/21/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION
39559 11/21/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION
39559 11/21/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION
39558 11/21/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION
39559 11/21/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION
39560 11/21/95 WEIN/JERRY
GENERAL CHECKING
Disbursement Journal
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL.
131 GAS/STREET DEPT 23.84
131 GAS/PARKS DEPT 4.10
27.94 •CH
278 SUBSCRIPTION/FIRE DEPT 95.00
i
612 P WORKS BLD EXPAN 16,020.86
987 BOOTS/WATER DEPT 22.50
987 BOOTS/SEWER DEPT 22.50
987 BOOTS/STREET DEPT 106.50
887 OFFICE SUP/MATER DEPT 6.00
987 LOCKERS & TABLE/SHOP 90.00
247.50 *CH
385 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMS 264.60
TOTAL 229.798.81
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
11/30/95 13:04:41
L --WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
39449 11/30/95 OFFICE MAX
39449 11/30/95 OFFICE MAX
39561 11/30/95 GREEN/ELIZABETH
39562 11/30/95 LIQUOR STORE FUND
39563 11/30/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
49564 }1/30/95 BAUER/EUGENE & LOIS
39565 11/30/95 HELLMAN/VTCTOR G
39566 11/30/95 NORTHWEST MINNESOTA
39566 11/30/95 NORTHWEST MINNESOTA
39567 11/30/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL
GENERAL CHECKING
Disbursement Journal
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C.L1
90417 CORRECT CODING 95.74CR
90417 CORRECT CODING/OWN DEV 95.74
0.00 *CHI
889 REIMS/SUPPLIES/PWORKS 18.11
100 INTEREST TO LIQUOR 4,210.97
118 WATER/SNOW/ATV REG 443.00
903 TEMP EASMT/M 0 STM SE 225.00
906 TEMP EASMT/M 0 STM SE 225.00
156 REG FEE/GARY ANDERSON 10.00
156 MEMBERSHIP DUES/GARY A 15.00
25.00 *CH
118 WATER/ATV/SNOW REG 1.259.00 •
TOTAL 6,406.08
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
11/30/95 13,:29:52
�- WARRANT DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
39568 12/01/95 AGASSI2 ENVIRONMENTA
39569 12/01,/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M
39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M
39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M
39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M
39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M
39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M
39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M
39509 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M
39570 12/01/95 CENTRAL MINN INITIAT
39571 12/01/95 COMPRESS AIR & EQUIP
19572 12/01/95 COMPUTER PARTS & SER
39573 12/01/95 DOUBLE D ELECTRIC
(� 39574 17/01/95 FED E%
' 39575 12/UI/95 FEEORITE CONTROLS, I
:191,75 12/01/95 FEEDRITE CONTROLS, I
c
99576 12/01/05 HERMES/JERRY
39,577 12/01/95 HOLIDAY CREDIT OFFIC
30577 12/01/95 HOLIDAY CREDIT OFFIC
39670 12/01/95 J M OIL COMPANY
,10578 12/01/95 J M OIL COMPANY
39!%79 1?/01/05 K MART STORE
90600 12/01/95 MN PLANNING AG(,0CIAl
j')!101 12/01/95 MON110ELLU ANIMAI CO
050? 12/01/05 MON'•ICELLO GENIOR Cl
39y03 12/01/9'% MONTICE.'LLO Y0111H H(�t,
';f)L04 12/01/85 ORR [.CHELEN-MAYER(1N
j9!iO4 1?/09/95 ORk ';CHEL0J MAYLRON
:;9504 12101/05 ORR,f-CME1FN-MAYEkON
3 Y)) )4 12/01/95 OWN 3FHC1 FN MAYIRON
Disbursement Journal
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C
761 TESTING/FIRE DEPT 341.00
951
PAGER
CHARGES
16.78
951
PAGER
CHARGES
8.39
951
PAGER
CHARGES
24.50
951
PAGER
CHARGES
8.39
951
PAGER
CHARGES
8.39
951
PAGER
CHARGES
8.39
951
PAGER
CHARGES
8.39
951
PAGER
CHARGES
0.39
91.62
822 CMIF GRANT PYMT 1,100.21
356 EQUIPMENT REPAIR/FIRE 109.37
500 COMPUTER MTC/CITY HAL 187.05
805 INSTALL WELDER -COMP C 328.33
394 POSTAGE/RECYCLING SCAN 23.50
56 MISC PkOF SERVICES/WAT 24.00
56 CHEMICALS/WATER DEP 2,548.86
3,572.86
01 LIBRARY CLEANING CONT 227.50
O5 GAS/FIRE DEPT 11.48
05 KJELLBERG EAST SUPPLIES 4.78
16.2G
95 OIL/STREETS 220.00
95 GAS/OTREETO 705.00
1,005.00
460 MINI DLIND VSHOP LUNCH 31.92
360 1096 UUEb/GARY ANDERSO 35.00
105 ANIMAL CONTROL CONT 1.100.00
139 MONTHLY CONTRACT PY 7.OJ�.33
989 FENCE/4TH 3TR GKTNG k ?47.30
162 ENG FLED/M 0 TRK BY 4,662.00
1G2 MISC 01JILUING IOOUC5 631.00
162 FNG FEEr,/kIVER MILL 7,466.19
162 FNG FCI ')/E;uMMERCF I N 130.30
xl
BkC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
11/30/95 13:29:52
IARRAN T DATE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
39584 12/01/95 ORk-SCHELEN-MAYERON
39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
39584 1,2/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
39585 12/01/95 PLUMBERY-PURCELL'S P
39585 12/01/95 PLUMBERY-PURCEW S P
39588 12/01/95 RICHMAR INDUSTRIES
39587 12/01/95 SAFETY-KLEEN CORP.
39588 12/01/95 SCHILLEWAERT LANDSCA
39589 12/01/95 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP
-39689 1-2/01/95 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP
39590 12/01/95 SPECTRUM SUPPLY CO.
39580 17/01/95 SPECTRUM SUPPLY CO.
39590 12/01/95 SPECTRUM SUPPLY CO.
39891 12/01/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION
39597 12/01/95 TRUEMAN-WELTERS, INC
39593 12/01/95 U 9 LINK
39593 17/01/95 U S LINK
39593 12/01/95 U S LINK
39593 17/01/95 U S LINK
30583 12/01/95 U S LINK
89693 12/01/95 U S LINK
38593 12/01/95 U S LINK
39594 12/01/95 VIKING PIPE SERVICES
30594 17/01/05 VIKING PIPE SERVICES
39594 12/01/95 VIKING PIPE SERVICES
. i4 12!01/05 VIKING PIPE 6EPVICES
(� 39594 12/01/95 VIKING PIPE SERVICES
BtLO4 17/01/95 VIKING PIPE $ERVICE$
Disbursement •Journal
DESCkIPT36N AMOUNT C
162 ENG FEES/PATHWAY PR 3.548.58
162 ENG FEES/PW BLD EXP 1,146.88
162 ENG FEES/COUNCIL MTGS 147.00
162 ENG FEES/OAKRIDGE PROJ 41.00
162 ENG FEES/KLEIN FMS EST 82.00
162 ENG FEES/KJELLSERG EAS 41.00
162 ENG FEES/RIVER MIL 31,268.68
162 ENG FEES/C HILLS V PRO 41.00
162 ENG FEES/KLEIN FARMS P 41.00
44,075.34 r(
251 BLD MTC SUPPLIES/DARKS 2.53
251 BLD MTC SUP/SHOP & GA 292.22
794.75 *(
990 SUPPLIES/STREETS 101.36
184 MCH MTC AGRMT/SHOP 77.69
382 TREE REMOVAL SERVIC 6.177.00
193 $AND/SNOW & ICE 73.35
193 NAILS. ETC/STREET DEP 206.69
780.04
498 CLOTHES/STREET DEPT 31.33
408 SUPPLIES/SHOP & GAR 18.90
498 ICE MELT/SNOW 8 ICE 146.39
190.62 •
967 TOOLS/SHOP & GAR 55.00
207 MOTOR PARTS/STREETS 101.18
950 TELEPHONE C14ARGES 23.81
950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 47.14
650 TELEPHONE CHARGES 2.61
950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 0.70
950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 2.98
950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 40.16
950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 1.48
113.47
214 SEWER TELEVIS/RIVER M 300.00
714 $ELIER TELEVISING 1,075.00
214 SEWER TELEVIS/KLEIN 3,150.00
714 $EWER TELEVIS/EASTWD 950.00
214 SEWdP TELEVIS/C HILLS 750.00
214 E.EWER TELEVIS/KJELL 1.000.00
7.075.00
80505 17/01/05 WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITO 210 SCERG GRANT PYMT 2.760.51
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
12/07/913 11:28:04
Disbursement
Jdurnai
`UWARkANT
DATE
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
CL
GENERAL CHECKING
39575
12/07/95
HELLMAN/VICTOR G
906
RLIMS/ROAD COST/M 0 T
$41.90
36597
12/07/95
ORUCE PARSON
90419
DRAINAGE ESMT/D SHU 2,000..00
i 39598 t2/n7/g5
FAYMAR
.90398
kEIMB LANDSCAPING 10,000:.00
39599
12/07/95
MN DEPART OF NATURAL
118
WATER/SNOW/ATV REG 1,326.00
89G00
12/07/95
CEDAR ST. GARDEN CEN
948
SUPPLIES/CITY HALL/TRE
37.26
39601
12/07/85
A.E. MICHAELS
330
PAINT/MTC OF PARK 81.0
58.95
39602
12/07/95
AME GROUP
8
CHAMBER SIGN
371.70
39603
12/07/68
ANOERSONIGARY
11
GAS RELMB
5.25
39609
12/07/95
ANDERSON,/GARY
11
MEMBERSHIP FEES
5.00
10.25
VCI
30604
12/07/95
ARAMARK
848
CITY HALL SUPPLIES
114.00
39009
12/07/98
AUDIO COMMUNICATIONS
17
CIVIL DEF RADIO RCPAIR
60.31
-:0CGOG
12/07/05
AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOO
200
2 GARAGE ODOR£/P WO 2,708.00
3')607
12/07/85
OUS'SNESS RECORDS COR
27
W 2 FORMS & eNVEL9PGS
114.31
y0600
12/07/95
CELLULAR 2000 OF ST
794
GAR PHONE CHARGES
79.08
39600
12/07/911
CELLULAR 2000 OF ST
794
CAR PHONE CHARD&0
4.74
39000
12107/90
CELLULAR 2000 OF ST
794
CAR PHONE CHARGED
12.03
39600
12/0'7/00
CELLULAR 2000 OF ST
194
CAR PHONE CHARGES
123.36
710.15
*Cl
J9li0f)
1..$/07/90
DOWNTOWN STANDAWO
376
GA3/FIRE DEPT
t0.fl6
,30010
12/07/99
CIENERAL RENTAL CENTE
64
C;ANDFILA5TEk/OTREFT DE
110.1)6
31,3011
12/07/95
HOGLUND OUO COMPANY
05)
VCH RF,PAIR PART1iPJ R'hX
17.10
.1f1612
12/07/9'6
t(kN ANDERGON TRU1"KIN
007
PRW UERYIk E(./ANIMAL
U0.28
Iof, 1ft
1',)/07/00
LI(J1!fm )TORT: FUtju
100
INVIi9lmFNTl- t)1H, 36,9',0)")r)
v'3 ;1G
1?/O'%196
10:*!OR 4 14UNITOR f�A
4^,6
:1Af• NE;J1'Tlik/WklTt 1.75Et.si
>
1°331!)
1,)/07/91,
1A1XA4'H/J014N
)'?i
MIi i;A(4. WLIft'i)
;4.7`;
'!�C'!,
i^/117/91,
LUNA(fl/Jb1'N
J2J/
MILLAGE WIlMll
11.50
:')tj 1!y
:9Gic,
1'"`/1)//9'1
1 /1)7/oG>
t_t1:IA lilit?HN
! JKA611/Jlf4:td
).?1
3?!
ttIi•t:Ati!, RFINi'
MIl tAGF. REsW
i1.')0
11.1�U
"9.6"
*1
HRC FINANCIAL-SY.&TEM
12/07/95
11:28:04
Disbursement
Journal
AMOUNT
CL
WARRANT
DATE VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
GENERAL CHECKING
39616
12/07('95 MARTIE'S F.A.RM SERVIC
107 SEED/M 0 4TH/D SCH'ULTE
5.11
39611
1'2/07-/9S MAUS FOODS
108 SUPPLIES/SHOP & GAR
15.58
a�r.L7
12/07/9b MAUS FOODS
108 SUPPLIES/CITY HALL
3.50
39617
12/07/95 MAUS FOODS
108 CLEANING SUP/LIBRARY
70.71
39617
12/07/95 MAUS F006S
108 SUPPLIES/ANIMAL CONTR
3.2.50
39617
12/07/9S',MAUS FOODS
108 SUPPLIES/WATER DEPT
7..8,7
129.96
*CH
39G19
12/07/95 MINNEGASCO
772 UTILITIES
190.54
39618
12/07/95 MTNNEGA$CO
772 UTILITIES
141.38
39610
12/07/95 MINNEGA9'CO
712 UTILITIES
39.bli
39618
17/07/95 MINNEGASCO
772 UTILITIES
7735
39610
12/07/95 MINNEGA£CU
7-72 UTILITIES
43.55
39618
1?/07/95 MINNEGASCO
172 UTILITIES
2.62.74
39618
11/07/95 MINNEGASCO
712 UTILITIES 1.594.02
J9618
12/07/95 MINNEGASCO
772 UTILITIES
51.5J
2,400.94
*CF
39619
12/07/95 NORTHERN STATE^ POWE
140 UTILITIES 3.003.40
79619
12/07/95 NORTHi-RN STATES POWE
149 UTILITIES
201.11
r 396'19
12/07/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE
140 UTILITIES 4,035.00
39619
12(0)/95 NORTHERN STATED PUWE
148 UYILITIf,S
14.08
3'11,19
12/07/05 NORTHERN STATES POWE
140 UTILITIES
570.,25
39619
12/0.1/95 NORTHERN STA'T.E3 POWE
14'0 UTILIT14 3
14.14
391,19
11/07/08 NORTHERN STATEC POWE
140 UTILITIES
044.88
39G19
12(-0)/98 NORTHERN GTATEI� POWE
140 UTILITIL'G
3'33.31
39619
12/07/05 NORTHERN STATEG POWE
140 UIILITIEii
42$.40
39010
1?/07/96 NORTHERN t3YATE13 POWE
140 UTTLITICO
724.GG
99610
11/07/95 NORTHERN STATE4 POWE
140 2 POLES/RIVER MILL DR
42.20
10.600..62
*0
M20
12/07/95 PETEROEN"� MONT FORD
109 VL -H REPAIR PARTS/GTRE
144.02
3913?t
12/01/9:) PHOTO I
'149 PIt:TURK,)JWWTP 1APAN51
313.11
390?1
12107/05 PHOTO 3
749 DOWNTOWN REOEVELOPW NT
46.10
2u.2.1
fib,
,0612
1^/01/99 VVILLICTQN P'AVEME'NT M
00 L,YRLf7 ROAD PAINTIN 2,243.17
1/07/05 k'2DEl,
J?4 (IRL- 11 FltdM NUV OTLV.,
10.04)(M
J^E23
12/07/95 RLD'' 11d1Q11
Jae 'w t# IN,N VAN kEPAIRf,
YD/,G5
•
9' 1 . U,)
4.,
J+JG2G
1?/U7/9, ',HUMAN/(:Ati'HV
1')1 MILEAbE kE'IM'1/f:EMINAk
27.44
t?/ll7/7't'iMUF1AN/)At;1V
191 MLI.tA',f t,b1M}/').MiNA12
?4.!)',
91..I It
ca.
BRC FIN'ANCItAL SYSTEM
12/07/9'5 111:213-.,04
ZWARRANT DAIE VENDOR
GENERAL CHECKING
D,9625 12/07/95 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP
39626 12/07/95 UNOCAL
30626 1'2/07/95 UNOCAL
396.27 12/07/95 VASKO RUBBISH RE'MDVA
39627 12/07/93 VASKO RUBBISH REMOVA
39828 12/07/95 VOS13 ELECTRIC SUPPLY
:j9&78 12/07/95 WRIGHT HENNEPIN SECU
39629 12/07/95 WRIGHT HENNEPIN SECU
39630 12/0'7/95 WRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP
GENERAL CHECKING
Q
Disbursement Journal
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL
193 MAILBOX STAND/E KNOLL 600.00
213 GAS•/FIRE DEPT 22.48
213 GA'SJWATER DEPT 27.06
49.54 *CH
524 GARBAGE CONTRACT P '10,113.70
524 SALES TAX/GARBAG,E CON 656.08
10,769.78 BCH
409 LTGHT BULBS/STREET LI 170.48
675 ALARM SYSTEM MTC AGMT 19.12
875 ALARM SYSTEM MTC AGMT 15.98
35.10 *�k
512 UTILITIES 8.00
TOTAL 84,403..54
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
11/20/95 12:03:18 Disbursement Journal
'4 -WARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0
c
s�
t�
s,
LIQUOR CHECKING
18472
11/20/95
BELLBOY CORPORATION
800099
LIQUOR PURCHASE
1,151.05
1847.3
11/20/95
CAREFREE LAWN SERVIC
800193
MOWING CHARGES
63.90
18474
11/20/95
EAGLE WINE COMPANY
800012
WINE PURCHASE
886.08
18475
11/20/95
GRIGGS, COOPER & COM
800018
LIQUOR PURCHASE
1.688.38
18476
11/20/95
JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA
800022
LIQUOR PURCHASE
378.16
1.8476
11/20/95
JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA
600022
WINE PURCHASE
852.07
1,230.23
18477
11/20/95
MONTICELLO VACUUM CE
800050
VACUUM BAGS. ETC
22.90
18478
11/20/95
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR
800180
WINE PURCHASE
299.44
18478
11/20/95
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR
800180
LIQUOR PURCHASE
723.91
1,023.35
18479
11/20/95
QUALITY WINE & SPIRI
800040
WINE PURCHASE
178.05
19479
11/20/85
'QUALITY WINE & SPIRI
800040
LIQUOR PURCHASE
597.56
775.01
LIQUOR CHECKING
TOTAL
6.841.50
0
c
s�
t�
s,
SRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
0,9:49';
14
Disbursement Journal
(11/3,0/=95
`'AIRRANT
DATE
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT CL
LIQUOR CHECKING
U8480
11/29/95
CITY OF MONTICELLU
800003
GMEF LOAN/'VECTOR T
50,000..00
18481
11/29/95
JOHNSOti BROS WHOLESA
800022
WINE PURCHASE
1,,565.49
18482
11/29/95
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR
800180
WINE PURCHASE
600.55
18482
11/29/95
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR
800t,80
LIQUOR PURCHASE
880.80
1,561.35 *Cl-
Ch18483
18483
11/29/95
GRIGGS,, COOPER & COM
800018
LIQUOR PURCHASE
1,380.08
18484
11/29/95
EAGLE WINE COMPANY
800012
WINE PURCHASE
272.92
18484
11/29/95
EAGLE WINE COMPANY
800012
MIX FOR RESALE
77.67
18484
11/29/95
EAGLE WINE COMPANY
800012
FREIGHT CHARGES
6.40
356..99 INCE
LIQUOR CHECKING
TOTAL
54.863.91
L1
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
14:39:Og
Disbursement
Journal
`�t1.2101/95
49RANT
DATE
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
CLA
LIQUOR CHECKING
10485
12'/04/95
8'ERN.ICK'S PEPSI COLA
800 00 1
POP PURCHASE
411.25
18488
12/04/95
CITIZENS COMMUNICATI
.800183
ADVERTISING
9,7.20
18487
12/04/95
DAY DISTRIBUTING COM
800019
NON ALCOHOLIC BEER
57,.60
18487
12/04/95
DAY DISTR•IB'UTING COM
800010
BEER PURCHASE
1,087.60
1,145.20
*CHF
18488
12/04/95
DICK WHOLESALE CO..
800011
BEER PURCHASE
2'.119.25
111488
12/04/95
DICK WHOLESALE CO..
800011
NON ALCOHGLIC BEER
54:40
18488
12/04/95
010 WHOLESALE CO,.
800011
LIQUOR STORE .SUPPLIES 17.87
18488
12/04/95
DICK WHOLESALE CO..
800011
SUPPLIES/BAGS
358:38
10468
12/04/95
DICK WHOLESALE. CO..
800011
CORRECT COOING
245'.SOCR
18468
12/04/95
DICK WHOLESALE CO..
800011
CORRECT CODING/APRIL
40.00
18488
12/04/95
DICK WHOLESALE CO.,
800011
CORRECT COOING/JUNE
110.40
18488
12/04/95
DICK WHOLESALE CO.,
800011
CORRECT 'COOING"/JULY
$5.20
13480
12/04/95
DICK WHOLESALE CO..
800011
CORRECT CODING/NOV
40.00
3,149.91
*CHE
10499
12/04/95
EAGLE WINE COMPANY
800012
WINE PURCHASE
680.88
9490
12/04/95
FLESCH'S PAPER SERVI
800l10'SUPPLIES/BAGS
26.16
10490
12/04/99
FLEGCH.'G PAPER OERVS
800116
LIQUOR STARE SUPPLIES 31.'72
57.88
*GHE
18491
12/04/96
G & K SERVICE
800129
MTC OF BLD/RUG MATS
120.27
10492
12/04/95
GROSOLEIN BEVERAGE 1800019
BEER PURCHAL'E
6.013.45
10499
12/04/05
HUME JUICE
000136
JUtC6 FOR RESALE
07.90
10494
12/0h/99
JOHNOON EROS WHOLESA
000022
LIQUOR PURCHASE
1.04.2.55
10404
1.3/04/99
JOHNSON ORAD FIHOLEDA
0000,R2
WINE. PURCHASE
2,'540.0,1
10494
12/04/95
JOHN50N RP05 WN61.60A
000022
FREIGHT CHARGES
57.08
4,44.00
*CHC
10496
12/94/95
JUDE CANDY & TOBACCO
000021
CIG & CIGARC FOR RE -GAL 61.75
10496
1?/04/98
LW01400 ACE HAROWAR
000104
()LD MTC SUPPLIL,1
52, 10
10497
12/04/05
MONTICELLO OFFICE Pk
000031
OFGTCF 14PPLIFu
00.9E
11)49'0
12/04/95
NORTHrRN 9TATF.9 PORI
000033
UTILITTEI;
793.04
10499
17/04/1)6
PHIILIPG MINE 8 LPIR
000100
110UOR PUNC HASE
57.07
18400
12/04/9'1
NFIILLIPO WINE 8 f,PIR
000100
WINE 1'UR(:`HA'(E
40.0(1
1(,,)9n
1r/04/D9
PHILLIPG WINE 8 SPIk
000100
FREIGHT CHAUGEO
".Y0
100. ) 1
♦(:111.
BPC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
12/'01/95
14:39':05
Disbursement
Journal
(�IAR'RANT
DATE
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT CL
LIQUOR' CHECKING
18500
12/04/95
PIONEER TRANSPORTATI
800185
SOBER CAB PROGRAM
DONA 25.00
18501
12/04/95
RELIABLE CORPORATION
179
CARPET CLEANING
266,.25
10507
12/04/9.5
RON'S ICE COMPANY
900041
ICE PURCHASE
12B.06
10503
12/04./95
ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT
800045
MISC ITEMS, FOR RESALE 248.35
10503
12/04/95
ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT
806045
CLEANING SUPPLIES
47.50
296.95 *CH
18504
12/04/95
THORPE 'DISTRIBUTING
800048
BEER PURCHASE
18,670.40
185b14
12/04/95
THORPE DISTRIBUTING
800048
MUGS FOR RESALE
246.00
10504
1?/04/95
THORPE DISTRIBUTING
800048
NON ALCOHOLIC BEER
1'66.40
19,092.90 *CH
18505
12/04/85
U S LINK
800195
PHONE' CHARGES
28.03
18506
12/04/95
VIKING COCA-COLA SOT
800'051
POP PURCHASE
365.70
10507
12/04/95
WRIGHT MAY SHOPPER
800106
ADVERTISING
310.00
Ll,
12/04/95
dEr MEDICAL SERVICr
_ 654
MEDICAL SUPPLIES
99.90
ITGUOR CHECKING
TOTAL
37.651.20
0
BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM
12/07/95
11*26:44
Disbursement journal
(ARRANT
OATS
VENDOR
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
CL
Ll(JUOR CHECKING
10509
12/07/95
CITIZENS COMMUNICATI
800193
ADVERTISING
97.20
19510
12/07/95
CONSOLIDATED COMM 01
800163
ADVERTISING
40.15
10511
12/07/95
DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT
000009
BEER PURCHASE
19.093.55
16511
12107/96
DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT
800069
DEER MIRRORS/FOR RESA 125.00
10511
17/07/95
DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT
800009
NON AJLCOHOL,IC BEER
190.80
13,409.35
*0
10517
12/0/95
()kIGU�,, COOPER & COM
800018
LIGUOk vVkCHASf:
7.630.09
141517
17/07/95
JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA
800022
LIQUOR PURCHASE
84.30
1051;
19/07/115
JOHNSON FJkO-, WHOLESA
000022
WINE PURCHASE
509.50
$03.80
10514
12/07/55
LIEPERT TRUCKING
000025
FREIGHT CHARGES
656.50
105I;
12/07/9y
METRO LFAGUL GIRLS U
Ll-�
800200
AUVCRTISING
35.00
1Gb1()
17/07/96
MINNEGASCO
——
000180
'UT7L
1 U!j I ;
12/07/95
MONTICELLU TIMES
000032
ADVERTISING
397.26
10510
17/07/A5
N0kTHWEST CARPET a U
000179
CARPET CLEANINGIMTC
S 266.25
10510
12/07/911
PHILLIPS WINO & SPIR
000100
WINE PURCHASE
710.37
ICS?O
12/09/05
QUALITY WINE @ .J,IkI
OD0040
WINE PURCHASE599.be
10f)2O
1?/01/95
QUALITY WINE SPIRI
000040
LIQUOR PURCHAOE
6,130.o
0,799.23
401
10101
1,?107/95
SERVICE 3ALC-4; COUPOR
000042
SIIPPIJI:4i
54.40
t TOPOR C.HECK-ING
TOTAL
30.060.28
COUNCitL UPDATE
December 6, 1996
(R.W.)
At the previous meeting, the Council authorized the purchase of 60 chairs for the
council chambers from Golden Valley Furniture in the amount of the quoted price of
$40 each. In reviewing the fabric selections that are available for this price, it
doesn't appear that any of the selections would be suitable without going to a
higher quality of material. This results in an increase of $6 per chair. Even with
the increased grade of fabric, we would be unable to get a match with the brown
fabric we currently have. Therefore, I am leaning toward going with a different
color, such as grey, for the individual chairs.
Scott Douglas of Golden Valley Furniture also pointed out that a better quality
chair with steel glides on the feet instead of plastic inserts and a thicker frame is
available for $68 a chair. It would appear that the $46 chair would be very similar
in quality to the existing chairs we now have, and I do not see any reason to change
at this time.
The only concern I have is that the price has increased $6 per chair; and unless the
Council would like to revisit this subject, I will just go ahead with the purchase at
the $46 amount rather than the quoted $40 price.
In addition, if anyone would like to see the fabric selections, I will have them
available at the meeting Monday night.
CHAIRS.UPD: 12/6/96
COUNCIL UPDATE
December 8, 1998
(J.S.)
In September of this year, the City Council authorized investigation of the Bohanon
Farm in the southeast corner of West County Road 39 and Briarwood Avenue for
use as a biosolids landspreading facility. Braun Intertec was commissioned to do
the soils work on the site; and due to the late harvest of the bean crop, we were
unable to complete the field work until the first week of November. The testing
indicates that topsoil on the site is generally 1-114 ft thickness, underlain by silty
sands and poorly -graded sands with silt to depths of 2-6 ft. Beneath the upper
horizons, poorly -graded sand was encountered to the depth of the investigation.
The depth of ground water ranged from 27-33 ft beneath the ground's surface in the
three soil borings in which the water level was detected. Based upon Braun
Intertec's report, 6 inches of water -holding capability is obtained 6-10 ft above the
depth to the seasonal high ground water table, which is adequate for the
application of `class B' biosolids.
Testing of the topsoil pH indicated the soils generally had a pH of 6.0 to 6.1. There
were a couple of exceptions in which a 6.6 and a 6.4 were found, but the 6.0 to 6.1 is
probably an average. A 6.6 is needed for the spreading of `class B' biosolids under
the current MPGA regulations. With the soil boring report, a map of the site, and
all available well data in hand, Kelsie McGuire and myself met with Pat Buford
and EuDale Mathiason of the MPCA to discuss the requirements for permitting a
land biosolids application facility at this site.
Prior to applying for an application of the site, we must own the property either by
deed or contract for deed, and we must install six monitoring wells at the site, two
upgradiant, two on the central portion of the site, and two downgradiant (the
direction of the ground water flow) wells. Tho estimated costs for these wells with
the first round of sampling is about $12,000. We would have to do a little
additional well investigation to make sure that we have no shallow wells less than
60 ft within 1,000 ft downgradiant from the property. Additionally, Pat indicated
that the new rules, which are in draft form, would reduce the amount of 'class B'
biosolids that can be applied to sites in the future. They also indicated that they
may request that we surface apply in the areas on this farm where the topsoils are
thinner. After surface applying, we could immediately drag or disc to incorporate it
into the immediate surface. We also discussed the soil pH requirements. The new
draft regulations will propose to drop the pH requirement down to 6.0 or less,
maybe even down to the Federal 603 Regulation limit of 6.6. In order to apply in
those areas that are currently 6.0 and 6. 1, we would have to do a tissue analysis of
the plants to dotermino any cadmium update, which is a heavy metal. Since our
sludge is very low in cadmium and the 603 reg's have already determined that a 6.6
pH would limit heavy metal update, we may be able to use the fields without
applying lime.
st,tmas.UFV. 1VM Page I
The 158 -acre farm of the Bohanon's sits in the southeast corner of northeast
Briarwood Avenue and West County Road 39. It was originally a 160 -acre farm,
but there is an individual homesite on the north central portion of the property on
County Road 39, which takes up about 2 acres; and the existing old farmhouse,
along with two storage buildings, takes up another 4 acres. Taking out
approximately 4 acres for road right-of-ways leaves around 160 acres of tillable
land. There are three wells included with the property, there is an agricultural
well near one of the storage buildings, there is a well for the farmhouse, and
another large 12 -inch agricultural well with a central pivot and irrigation system in
the center of the property.
We have asked our appraiser for a preliminary verbal opinion of the market value
of the property and also reviewed a market analysis done by Dan Goeman for
Kenny and Carol Bohanon. We met with the Bohanons on the evening of
December 11. They currently rent out the old farmhouse and both machine sheds,
as well as the land. A farmer in Big Lake rents the land and rotates potatoes and
beans. I believe his lease on the land goes through the neat cropping season, and
the rent on the large machinery shed goes through October of 1996. The Bohanons
indicated the rent from the farmhouse, buildings, and land comes to approximately
$30,000 per year. The Bohanons are in no hurry to sell their property; they have
indicated they have had other inquiries about selling it and have indicated they
would like to receive an amount above the market value if they needed to sell before
they are ready.
City staff has discussed this information with the Council Biosolids Site Committee,
made up of Mayor Brad Fyle and Tom Perrault, and we are currently trying to work
up a counteroffer to the Bohanon's asking price which, of course, will have to be
approved by City Council.
Rick has discussed the possible City acquisition of the site with Franklin Dean, the
Monticello Township Chairman. Although Mr. Denn would not speak for the rest of
the Board, he did say that, in his opinion, this site would be more acceptable to the
Township than the Hanford property. He would discuss it with the Board at their
next meeting.
BLUDos.uPn, 12AM Pegs 2
r
27
WEST MONTICELLC) T 121-i22N-F;215W.
SP "T
•°1�� J �`~�'� p'qJ ail �i • �3a'V Com••
j . C • y � n..J , ��� S+ie
•wete�l r«lJ • %7 a'
., 2•t' � : . 0 ��� � �s.r.«a... c Abp 7 S �. •
73
it
�Rs L .i
M NT L'
„i�;'l= •°� t. art.
'r:> L 9 .oma ,• t t. ,. .,to ir,/' � ,. 'poovo ki � "g•y ✓n r
" :�� 1 .%^'� .. ;irresl c"t�• � r,.. �''J k �Y -;VZ—
Rr~RPM
s,2('}p IY � t. n� � « . � t C� •^;^'' �}Ai1 — �,�',y:,��r` 4
.. , ./ - �� . I. � 1 ' *� 4 � � S � wilt �'�' i4 ) t aa�• ',' +at , `ff "er•..�
} i J4�' 9 1 'f La n `'�'•��M'•�•^
Bt � �a�aaaJ i �i i J • { � F ;r Jr_ a I
Ilk
! , '•% P.tY,,� c •,uVZ 1...1'VY• -7, , `• D• - ip?.�e.. � i
61" Ali
is
---------
CONSOLIDATION OF THE HRA AND EDA
Recommendation of the EDA
At the EDA meeting of November 28, 1995, the members discussed the potential
consolidation of the HRA and the EDA. Koropchak gave a background of the subject
matters origination and the IDC's request for the joint meeting of September 27. Jeff
O'Neill summarized the joint meeting relating to consolidation. Consolidation may be more
efficient, would eliminate redundancy for funding approval, most cities have either an HRA
or an EDA, and the powers of an EDA and an HRA are very similiar.
The makeup of an EDA has the option of a 3, 5, or 7 -member commission with
representation from the City Council and the Statutes do not contain a residency
requirement. An HRA has a 5 -member commission and the Statutes contain a residency
requirement. The commission makeup attracted the most discussion. A consolidation to
an EDA may provide a stronger linkage to the City Council. A consolidation to an HRA
would provide a checks and balance system.
EDA members discussed the residency criteria for EDA members as adopted by the City
Council. They felt until an ample number of candidates with qualifications applied for
EDA or HRA commission seats, the EDA residency criteria should be eliminated. Other
discussion: EDA agendas are well-prepared with adequate information for decision making
which drives time -efficient meetings. Additionally, EDA meetings occur only about four
times a year; therefore. EDA membership is not overly demanding or time consuming.
Although the IDC may be a branch of the Chamber of Commerce, the role of the IDC to
make industrial related suggestions or recommendations is important to the community and
complements the objectives of the HRA and the EDA. Consolidation of the EDA and the
HRA does not decrease the loadwork of the Executive Director.
Al Larson rade a motion recommending the EDA and the IIRA not consolidate and the
existing two -commission organizational structure continue, therebye, maintaining both a
linkage to the Council and a checks and balance system. Additionally, the motion
recommends the EDA residency requirement be eliminated until such time an ample
number of candidates apply for EUA commission seats. Non-resident commissioners shall
have a vested interest in the community. Harvey Kendall seconded the motion and with
no further discussion, the motion passed unanimously. Yens: Larson, Kendall, Hoglund.
Schwientck, Herbst, Perrault, and Demeules. Nays: None.
-
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
BA Mind—dt. P.E.
City of Monticello
350 Westwood Lake
Bm we u, P.E.
8441 Wayzata Boulevardevard
rnn R. ardimb—s. P.E-
.EMinneapolis,
WSJ8
Minneapolis,MN 55426
D—Jd W. S--, P.E.
Rmuld B. Bm, P.E
�t
612-541-4800
&Associates, Inc.
FAX 541-1700
COUNCIL UPDATE
To:
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
City of Monticello
From:
Bret A. Weiss, P.E.
WSB & Associates, Inc.
Date:
November 30, 1995
Re:
Briar Oakes Ponds
This memo is in response to a recent phone call from a resident of the Briar Oakes Addition with
regard to the existing detention pond located in the northeast comer of the Briar Oakes subdivision.
This pond has previously been defined as the long, narrow pond during the Briar Oakes development
phase and is located along the west property line of the recently -developed Meadow Oak 4th
Addition. This pond was identified initially in the development plans for the Meadow Oak area, but
was not developed until Briar Oakes was graded. At that time, the ponds were designed to hold the
majority of the runoff from the development of Briar Oakes and consequently, the ponds have held
storm water at a higher elevation than would normally occur if the downstream outlets were working
properly. Several years back, however, an outlet to the large Meadow Oak Pond was installed from
the long, narrow pond to allow for lowering of the water levels as necessary. This lowering of the
long pond has been controlled by city staff in an effort to release the water at a time that least
impacts the Meadow Oak Pond. The Briar Oakes area is still not operating at its finished condition
as the middle pond still does not have an outlet connecting it to the long, narrow pond and
consequently, the pond is at a much higher elevation than it will be in the future. This will most
likely spark future debate that the City has lowered the pond to an elevation which is not acceptable
to the local residents. It is very important that we set the record straight, as we have tried to on
numerous occasions when the situation has arisen, that these ponds are in a temporary state and will
be modified with future additions of the Briar Oakes plat.
r wrm'seme amn ao. ,t,u
10'astructure • Engimen • Planner;
LQukLom-mTUNrTv rmnmip
Council Update
City of Monticello
November 30. 1995
Page 2
The principal confusion stems from the fact that most people expect ponds to contain water and in
most instances in the City of Monticello, this is the case. We do, however, have several locations
in the city which utilize dry ponds (these are ponds that store water during the high frequency storm
and meter the stone water out at a lower rate until they are empty). Because of tight site restrictions
and the manner in which the lots were developed, the long, narrow Briar Oakes Pond needed to be
designed as a dry pond.
For your information, in order to have a pond that contains standing water, several items need to be
in place. These are as follows:
Acceptable soil types that have water -holding capability so that the storm water does not
percolate into the soil.
Adequate areatwidth to construct proper side slopes on the pond in order to construct the
pond to a depth of four feet or greater to maintain standing ower. Ponds with less than four
feet of depth below the normal water level tend to experience a significant amount of weed
growth, which is usually met with dissatisfaction by the adjoining residents.
Sufficient land arca to accommodate the required storage volumes within the ponding area
above the normal water level.
These criteria were examined for Briar Oakes, as well as all other ponds within the city, to ensure
that all three arc available before a pond is constructed. In the case of this Briar Oakes pond, only
criteria I was available and consequently, the pond was designed as a dry pond. In order to convert
the Briar Oakes Pond to a wet pond, the outlet would need to be raised significantly due to the
significant pond slope from the south to the north. If that was completed, it is very likely that the
detention storage volume would not be achieved. This would then endanger other structures
upstream from the ponding area adjacent to the ponding area. Additionally, if the discharge was
increased to the downstream pond, it is likely that downstream flooding would occur,
It would he my recommendation that a neighborhood meeting be called to discuss the item in greater
detail with participation by the city and developer. It may be worthwhile to explore options
available with the developer as he considers his next phase. In addition, I would suggest that we
provide some public information to Briar Oakes area, Klein Farms, River Mill and other locations
that will have dry ponds within their neighborhoods as well.
� rovu�rmaomu�a+ww