City Council MInutes 05-24-1983MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
May 24, 1983 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Dan Blonigen,
Jack Maxwell.
Members Absent: None.
2. Approval of the Minutes.
A motion was made by Maus, seconded by Fair and unanimously
carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held
on May 9th, 1983, as presented.
4. Consideration of a Presentation by MN/DOT Relative to Con-
struction of a New Highway Bridge and Proposed Lighting of
the Existing Highw�ridge.
Recently, the City of Monticello requested that the Minnesota
Department of Transportation consider repairing or replacing
the Highway 25 bridge sidewalk lighting which has not worked
for a number of years.
Mr. James Weingartz, preliminary design engineer for MN/DOT
was present at the Council Meeting and explained the State's
proposal to light, not only the sidewalk, but the entire
bridge for both pedestrians and traffic. Mr. Weingartz
noted that the original estimate for the installation of
10 lighting fixtures to light the traffic lanes and 5
lights for the pedestrian sidewalk was estimated at $.17,100
and since the sidewalk lighting amounted to one-third of
the light fixtures, the State proposed that the City of
Monticello pickup one-third of the construction cost or
approximately $5,700. In addition, the City of Monticello
would be responsible after construction for all power con-
sumption for the sidewalk lighting thereafter. Prior to
the meeting, MN/DOT was notified that the City was not
necessarily interested in seeing the roadway lite, but
was only concerned about the sidewalk and felt that the
$5,700 was too costly. Mr. Weingartz also noted that
he reanalyzed the cost associated with installing the 5
light fixtures for the sidewalk and if just the cost for
the new fixtures and materials was used, the City would
be responsible for $4,200 or approximately 250 of the
total lighting project cost.
- 1 -
Council Minutes - 5/24/83
It was basically the Council's consensus that since a new
bridge is being proposed by the State within the next 4
to 6 years, they were not in favor of the State spending
$17,000 to light the existing bridge or for the City to
spend 4 to 6 thousand dollars to light just the sidewalk.
Public Works Director, John Simola, was directed by the
Council to investigate what it would cost to get the
existing lighting in operation, if possible, and to re-
port back to the Council within two weeks. No action
was taken by the Council regarding approving or dis-
approving of the lighting project at the present time,
but will be made at the next Council Meeting.
Mr. Weingartz also reviewed with the Council MN/DOT's
proposal for a new bridge that is now in the planning
stages. It was noted that approximately 10,000 cars
per day now use the Hwy 25 bridge and the preliminary
plans are to possibly upgrade Hwy 25 from the river to
the interstate by widening the roadway for four lane
traffic. A number of alternatives have been studied
in regard to the new bridge alignment which would
probably be located directly adjacent to the existing
structure.
It was also noted by Mr. Weingartz that since Hwy 25
is a State constitutional highway, the possibility was
remote that the highway could be relocated to a different
location outside of the City limits as it would take an
act of the State legislature to change the routing of the
present Highway 25. It was noted that the tentative plans
call for informational public hearings to be held within
the next few months regarding the proposed new bridge and
that if all went well, it would be at least 1985 or 1986
before construction could start on the bridge which would
take two years to complete.
5. Ed Reilly - Sewer Problems.
Mr. Ed Reilly, who resides at 612 East River Street, was
present at the meeting to request reimbursement from the
City for cost incurred in trying to locate his sewer
service stub at his home. City water and sewer depart-
ment personnel marked a location along the boulevard by
his home where they thought the sewer stub should be
located and Mr. Reilly's contractor, Schluender Plumbing,
excavated this location but could not find the sewer pipe.
The City then rechecked the sewer and water maps and found
an error and restaked at a new location within 212 to 3
feet of the actual sewer line pipe. Although the second
staking was within a few feet of the actual location,
Schluender Plumbing still was unable to find the service
Council Minutes - 5/24/83
and began digging a trench near the house in an effort to find
the sewer pipe to determine its actual location.
Mr. Reilly requested that the City reimburse him for all costs
associated with digging the first hole which also damaged two
Elm trees which will probably die in the near future. He
requested that the City remove the existing trees and pay for
the restoration of the first hole and also pay for the restora-
tion of the third excavation near the house that would not
have been necessary had the second staking been accurate.
Mr. Reilly noted that he was not able to have his contractors
at the meeting and since they would be more familiar with the
actual work they performed, he requested that possibly
the City Council table any action on his request until the
next meeting to enable all parties to bein attendance. It
was the Council consensus to table this item until the next
meeting.
7. Consideration of Overlay on Oakwood Drive (Gould Brothers
Service Road).
John Simola, Public Works Director, reviewed with the Council
the completed plans and specifications for the overlaying of
Gould Brother's Service Road with a two inch overlay and re -
graveling the shoulders. The estimated cost of this work
is $14,402. Mr. Simola noted that the plans and specifications
also included an option for using approximately 600 feet of
reinforcing fabric under the overlay in a test area to see if
this material helps prevent the roadway from deteriorating
due to cracks and water seepage. This additional fabric re-
inforcing material would add an additional $2,250 to the
total project cost bringing the total to $16,652.
A motion was made by Maus, seconded by Fair and unanimously
carried to approve the plans and specifications as presented
for overlaying the service road and to authorize advertising
for bids with and without the option of the reinforcing
fabric.
8. Consideration of Proposed Reassessment of the 78 -Improvement
Project.
A few months ago, some property owners assessed under the
1978 Improvement Project for sewer and water and street
improvements requested the Council to consider reassessing
the original assessments over a longer period of time rather
than 5 years as initially assessed. A majority of the
property owners were having difficulty in meeting the large
payments and were becoming delinquent. The initial petition
- 3 -
Council Minutes - 5/24/83
by the property owners requested that the assessments be pro-
rated over a longer period of time such as 20 years.
The City Staff along with its fiscal consultants, Springsted,
Inc., have been reviewing the assessments and preparing alterna-
tive assessment rolls using various options. A new assessment
roll was prepared for the propertyown.er's review that amortized
the original assessment over a 20 year period of time but
would have a balloon at the end of 10 years.
The group of property owners affected by the 78-1 assessment
presented to the Council the following proposal for re-
assessment:
1. Change the assessment basis to a 20 year amortization
with a 10 year balloon.
2. The property owners would agree to pay all back
assessments under the 20 year schedule that were due
for the years 1980, 1981, 1982 and 1983 based on an
interest rate of 6-2%.
3. Agree to the remaining principal balance to be assessed
at 712% for the next six years.
4. Requested that the City waive all penalties of all de-
linquent assessments.
5. Agreement of all parties involved to pay assessments
in full as lots are sold and certificate of occupancy
is issued.
Discussion was held by the Council on whether the City should
consider waiving the existing penalties on delinquent payments
for the past three years and it was recommended that as an
alternative, the City would agree to add the delinquent
penalties to the unpaid principal balance that would be spread over
the remaining six years of the assessments. In addition, it
was recommended that the property owners be responsible for
all costs incurred in preparing new assessment rolls and con-
sulting fees incurred to date. These additional charges would
also be prorated amongst the property owners and added to their
assessment balances. In light of these compromises, the
interest rate on the assessments for the next six years would
remain at 61-2% interest as originally certified.
A majority of the property owners have indicated a willingness
to participate in the reassessment proposed, and as a result,
a motion was made by Maus, seconded by Fair and unanimously
carried to authorize the reassessment of the 78-1 Improvement
Project to all property owners affected under the following
conditions:
Council Minutes - 5/24/83
1. The assessment roll would be based on a 20 year
amortization schedule with a balloon after 10
years. Only the amount of the first 10 years
including interest will be certified to the
County Auditor for collection with the balloon
payment to be guaranteed to the City by execution
of individual contracts with the property owners.
2. The property owners must bring current all back
assessments that would be due under the 20 year
amortization schedule for the years 1980, 1981
1982 and 1983.
3. The interest rate on the future assessments will
be at the current 61-2% rate.
4. The current penalties on delinquencies will be
added to the principal balance owing for each
property owner and amortized over the remaining
6 years.
5. All expenses incurred by the City to accomplish
this readjustment shall be prorated and added to
remaining principal balance and amortized over the
next 6 years.
6. All current and future assessments will be paid in
full within 120 days of when lots are sold. Special
cases may be proposed to the City Council for their
review.
9. Approval of Bills for Month of May.
A motion was made by Maus, seconded by Maxwell and unani-
mously carried to approve the bills for the month of May
as presented. See Exhibit #1.
NOTE: From this time on, Council Member Maus was not in
attendance.
10. Nomination for League of Minnesota Cities Board of Directors.
City Administrator, Tom Eidem, informed the Council that he
has been nominated for the position on the Board of
Directors for the League of Minnesota Cities.
- 5 -
Council Minutes - 5/24/83
A motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maus and unanimously
carried to approve of the City Administrator's participation
en the Board of Directors for the League of Minnesota Cities
if Mr. Eidem should be elected.
11. Consideration of Wastewater Treatment Plant Superintendent
Position_
City Administrator noted that it was the Staff's recommendation
that Mr. Albert Meyer, present lead operator at the Waste-
water Treatment Plant, be promoted to Wastewater Treatment
Plant Superintendent to fill the position of Mr. Jim Miller,
who will be resigning effective June 3, 1983.
A motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen and
unanimously carried to promote Mr. Albert Meyer to the
position of Wastewater Treatment Plant Superintendent
effective June 16th, 1983, with Mr. Meyer being under a
6 month probation period for the position. It was noted
that prior to Mr. Meyer's starting date, the Council will
be reviewing and setting the salary for the position.
Meeting Adjourned.
Rick Wolfstelle
Assistant Administrator
- 6 -