CIty Council Minutes 08-25-1986MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, August 25, 1986 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Jack Maxwell,
Dan Blonigen.
Members Absent: None.
The August 25, 1986, regular meeting of the Monticello City Council
was duly held at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Monticello
City Hall. The meeting was called to order by the Mayor.
2. Approval of Minutes.
Motion by Maxwell, second by Blonigen, to approve the minutes of
August 11, 1986. Voting in favor: Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Jack
Maxwell, Dan Blonigen. Abstention: Bill Fair.
3. Citizen Comments/Petitions, Requests and Complaints.
During Citizen Comments, Mr. Ken Catton requested an indication from
the City Council as to whether or not they would be amenable to amending
the City's Zoning Ordinance to allow day care centers in commercial
zones. Mr. Catton indicated that he has been involved in day care
development for the last several years. He noted that he was in
the past affiliated with the Learning Tree Day Care Program. He
also noted that in virtually all instances, the day care proposal
required zoning changes and conditional use permits to allow the
proposal to exist in commercial zones. He went on to say that he
would like to start a day care center in Monticello and his experience
indicates that it should be located in a commercial zone.
Mayor Grimsmo acknowledged that this was not on the agenda but that
Mr. Catton had come to him late in the previous week with his inquiry
and that Mayor Grimsmo invited him to attend the meeting tonight.
Councilmember Maxwell asked if the proposed site was along Highway 25
south of I-94. Mr. Catton stated that there were a number of sites
under consideration at present, but all were commercially highway
zoned. Mayor Grimsmo asked the Council whether or not there was
any obvious objections to such a potential rezoning. He noted that
it would be difficult for Mr. Catton to assume all of the financial
responsibility to go through the entire rezoning process and then
meet with stiff opposition at the Council level. All Council members
indicated that there seemed to be no apparent objection, and that
the process prescribed in the Zoning Ordinance be followed.
Council Minutes - 8/25/86
4. Consideration of Executing a Contract with PSG for the Operation
of the Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Mayor Grimsmo acknowledged receipt of the report on the contract
negotiations with Professional Services Grotip and receipt of the
final statement from the City Attorney. Mr. Mike Robbins and
Mr. Steve Sunt of PSG were present. Mayor Grimsmo asked the Council
if they had any questions, this item having been discussed by the
Council for several months. Councilmember Fran Fair asked Mr. Robbins
if PSG was aware of the City Attorney's recommended language changes
in Article VI. Mr. Robbins indicated yes, they were aware of the
suggested changes and they had already been agreed upon between PSG
and the City. Mayor Grimsmo noted that the process had gone on for
a long time and that the discovery and review of the entire process
seemed to indicate satisfaction from all parties. Mayor Grimsmo
asked if the City Engineer had any conclusory comments. John Badalich
of OSM indicated that everything seemed to be in order and that they
were satisfied that the process was complete.
Motion by Fran Fair, second by Jack Maxwell, and carried unanimously
to enter a contract with Professional Services Group, commencing
September 1, 1986, for the operation and maintenance of the Monticello
Wastewater Treatment Plant facility.
5. Consideration of Granting an Advance Guarantee that a Non -Conforming
Use may be Rebuilt if it is ever Destroyed to more than 500 of its
Value.
Mr. Mike Lundquist, a realtor, spoke to the Council on behalf of
Mike Olson, also present, a potential buyer of property at 106 East 4th
Street. Mr. Lundquist noted that Mr. Olson had been having some
difficulty securing a mortgage since the property in question is
a non -conforming use under the terms of the Zoning Ordinance being
located in a B-4 zone. Apparently, the lending institution was reluctant
to provide the mortgage if the residence could not be rebuilt in
the event of damage to greater than 500 of the value. Mr. Lundquist
noted that their first response was to seek assurances from the City
Council that if there were destruction by fire or some other catastrophic
cause, there would be provisions to allow rebuilding. Mr. Lundquist
noted that they had now found a financing resource that did not require
such a statement and that such a letter was not a necessity. He
did go on to note that a letter indicating the possibility of rebuilding
would be considered an asset to the lending institution.
Administrator Eidem explained that such a letter should not be provided
since one Council cannot bind a future Council and further, such
a letter, guaranteeing a specific type of land use, would essentially
be rezoning the parcel in conflict with the procedures outlined in
the Zoning Ordinance. Mayor Grimsmo and the Council concurred that
advance assurances could not be given by this Council, but Monticello's
Councils had always been receptive to reviewing case by case requests.
-2-
Council Minutes - 8/25/86
The Mayor noted that if the block were predominantly residential
and a structure was destroyed to more than 50% of its value, a
Council might evaluate the merits of allowing reconstruction. He
went on to note that the future development of the neighborhood would
have to be evaluated at the time a request for reconstruction came
in.
Mr. Lundquist then indicated a desire to have an assurance that a
building permit would be issued to allow the expansion. Again, being
that the ordinance prohibits the expansion of a non -conforming use,
the Council indicated that they could not guarantee the granting
of a building permit, but would indicate that they would review any
request as it comes up. Mr. Lundquist asked about other owners who
might face the same problem with mortgages and/or building permits.
Councilmember Fair indicated that it seemed that the problem was
predominantly caused by lending institutions, and that the City should
not be changing its ordinance to accommodate lending institution
policy. Upon consensus that the City Council could riot grant advance
guarantees or assurances, this issue was closed without formal action.
6. Consideration of Granting an Increase in the Individual Pension for
the Volunteer Fire Fighters Relief Association.
Mayor Grimsmo made an opening statement that he had attended the
last meeting of the Firemen's Relief Association and that they had
voted to increase their pension amount from $10,000.00 to $16,000.00
lump sum payment. The Mayor noted that that lump sum reflects a
20 -year term of $800.00 per year of service. The Mayor noted that
he had received information from the Finance Director that the increase
can occur without the need for tax levy. He noted that the last
increase occurred in the early 80's when the Relief Association increased
from $300.00 to $500.00. As side notes, the Mayor indicated that
the City is looking at engaging a cleaning/custodial service for
the new Fire Hall so that the fire fighters won't have to take care
of the building, and that service should be provided soon. The Mayor
also noted that the City had investigated installing remote switches
in the fire trucks that would give them control over traffic signals.
He noted that the cost of installing the remote light control would
be approximately $33,000.00, and thus felt these control switches
would not be considered further. Returning the conversation to the
Relief Association, the Mayor asked the Council their position.
Councilmember Blonigen indicated he was totally opposed to putting
the City at risk to potentially have to levy taxes to fund the Association.
Blonigen noted that the Association had the ability to raise their
pension amount to $575.00 without Council approval and that the cash
on hand would fully fund such a pension. Administrator Eidem indicated
that the financial worksheets indicated that the pension amount could
be increased to $16,000.00 without levy based solely on the revenue
generated, by the State Fire Aid and interest income. The question
was raised by the Mayor with regard to if a number of members retired
at once, would the funding be depleted. Dave Kranz, member of the
-3-
Council Minutes - 8/25/86
Fire Department and Relief Association, responded that only two members
could retire this year. He noted that the Association required a
minimum of 20 years of service to retire and that the retiree must
be at age 50 before receiving any benefits. The Mayor asked what
would happen to the fund if the two qualified people retired plus
there were some injuries such that there was early retirement and
payment of immediate benefit. Eidem noted that the Relief Association
was funded on an accrual basis and that there was a certain historical
pattern built into keeping the Association funded. Eidem noted that
it was not uncommon to create a deficit in the accrued liability
when projections of state aids and investment income would cover
those deficits without tax levy.
Motion by Bill Fair, second by Fran Fair, to increase the Relief
Association pension from $10,000.00 to $16,000.00. Under discussion,
Jack Maxwell asked if it was true that the City would not ever levy
taxes to support this fund. Blonigen responded that the City must
levy if the fund should hit severe financial straights such that
it could not pay the benefits. The Mayor noted that it was projected
that the fund would not require levy; and if there was a drastic
event, the City and the Relief Association would have to get together
to work out a solution. Voting in favor of the motion: Jack Maxwell,
Arve Grimsmo, Bill Fair, Fran Fair. Voting in the opposition: Dan
Blonigen.
7. Consideration of Awarding the Acquisition of a Loader.
John Simola, Public Works Director, reported that the City received
two bids, one from Carlson's Lake Equipment and the other from Ziegler.
The gross bids as submitted were $89,034.00 for a Caterpillar 936
submitted from Ziegler, Inc., and $79,000.00 for a John Deere 644D
submitted from Carlson's Lake State Equipment Company. Simola reviewed
with the Council the various alternatives that were included in the
bid proposal, including guaranteed maintenance expenses, minimum
repurchase in five years, and guaranteed buy back and/or trade-in
value of the City's existing 1981 Caterpillar loader. Councilmember
Blonigan asked what the actual cash outlay would be if the City were
to buy the Caterpillar at this offer. Simola responded that the
cash would be $19,634.00. Simola then reviewed the 5 -year depreciation
schedule for both the Caterpillar and the John Deere and indicated
that over the five year projections, the Caterpillar equipment came
in at $2,279.17 less than the John Deere.
Motion by Maxwell, second by Blonigen, and carried unanimously for
the City to acquire a Caterpillar 936 loader.
8. The Mayor suspended the agenda at this time to make room for members
of the Monticello School District Administration and School Board.
The Mayor noted that the School Administration had approached him
with respect to the development of the selected middle school site,
Council Minutes - 8/25/86
80 acres south of the City lying west of County Road 118. Grimsmo
noted that the school had concerns because they hope to be ready
to accept students and start classes in the fall of 1988 and that
they had concerns with respect to the delay caused by the City/Township
conflict over annexation. The Mayor noted that the Minnesota Municipal
Board had scheduled an annexation hearing for September 10. Eidem
informed the Council that he had been notified by Pat Lundy of the
Minnesota Municipal Board that they had received a request to delay
the hearing. He noted that the request had not yet been acted upon
by the Municipal Board. The Mayor noted that it seemed that the
school district had two options. First, the school district could
wait for the annexation to be complete before taking any construction
action, or second, the school district could build in the Township
and request the City to provide public services beyond their corporate
limits. The Mayor noted that there is a third option that seems
unrealistic, and that is for the school to build in the Township
and construct their own sewer and water systems. Sheldon Johnson,
Superintendent of the school district, stated that the real concern
of the school district is over public utilities, namely, can the
school be served before annexation is complete. Councilmember Fran
Fair asked if there were any legal problems with extending services
beyond the City limits, providing there is full agreement on how
such extension would occur. Eidem indicated there were no legal
problems. The Mayor noted that there was no action required on this
issue, only that he wanted the Council to be fully aware of the school's
position as the City enters the annexation hearing procedure.
9. Consideration of Ratifying an Agreement with the Minnesota Department
of Transportation for the Maintenance of Traffic Signals.
A joint agreement between the Minnesota Department of Transportation
and the City of Monticello was presented for adoption. The agreement
calls for joint financial participation for the installation of traffic
signals at the intersection of County Road 75 and Highway 25, the
intersection of 7th Street and Highway 25, and the intersection of
Oakwood Drive and Highway 25. Financial participation required of
the City will be $13,300.00 for the City's share of the three brand
new signals, and an additional $8,842.00 for the City's share of
the temporary traffic signal which was installed at Oakwood Drive
and Highway 25, making the total local share of $22,142.00. Simola
noted that the City expects to enter an agreement with Wright County
to pay approximately one-half of the local share and consequently,
the City's liability would be $11,071.00.
Eidem noted that the formal documents had been signed by the Mayor
and the Administrator the previous week when a Council quorum could
not be assembled for formal action. Not wanting to delay construction
any further, Eidem indicated he sought the advice of the City Attorney
about signing the agreement with Council ratification to follow.
Eidem noted that the City Attorney had indicated the procedure seemed
acceptable since the lighting agreement was ancillary to the major
Highway 25 reconstruction project agreement which the City had already
executed.
-5-
Council Minutes - 8/25/86
Motion by Fran Fair, second by Jack Maxwell, and carried unanimously
to ratify the traffic signal agreement with the State of Minnesota.
See Resolution 86-20.
10. Consideration of Granting Final Approval to the First Phase of a
Planned Unit Development Known as Victoria Square.
Mike Reher was present to present a final plat for the Planned Unit
Development to be known as Victoria Square. Administrator Eidem
explained to the City Council that this PUD had already been given
final approval by the City Council, but due to the time lapse, it
required additional approval. He noted that the only significant
change from when the PUD was originally approved was with respect
to timing and phasing. Mr. Reher would like to go to final platting
and recording on Block 1, but leave Outlots A-E at the preliminary
approval stage with final recording to come in development stages.
Mayor Grimsmo asked if the PUD could still handle a commercial day
care center, and Mr. Reher responded that it could in Phase II.
Motion by Councilmember Bill Fair to grant preliminary approval to
the Planned Unit Development known as Victoria Square. Second by
Jack Maxwell. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Fran Fair,
second by Bill Fair, and carried unanimously to grant final approval
to Block 1, Lots 1-55, in the PUD, Victoria Square, contingent upon
final conformance with engineering design standards.
11. Consideration of Granting a Variance for a Reduction in Required
Parking Spaces for the Monticello VFW.
The VFW has submitted a request for a variance to allow a parking
lot providing 28 spaces less than is required. The VFW had not had
a public hearing before the Planning Commission. The VFW had presented
to City staff a statement signed by all adjacent property owners
within 350 feet waiving their right to a public hearing in front
of the Planning Commission. Councilmember Fair expressed some concern
that the statement of waiver did not address the variance in detail,
but rather talked about the proposal of the VFW to expand their building.
He stated that the property owners were asked to sign a statement
waiving objections to the VFW's building expansion. Mayor Grimsmo
asked the VFW representatives if the adjacent property owners knew,
in fact, what they were waiving. Sandy Tanner, representing the
VFW, indicated yes, she told them what the variance request was about.
She indicated that Gary Anderson, City zoning Administrator, had
instructed her on how to go through this process. City Administrator
Eidem indicated that the point raised by Councilmember Bill Fair
was significant. He noted that on one earlier occasion, in order
to facilitate the parking lot expansion for the Hospital District,
the City staff had attempted to streamline the process by utilizing
statements of waiver. He noted that the earlier attempt was, in
his estimation, reasonable since the majority of adjacent property
owners in the Hospital District issue were party to the construction
activity. Eidem admitted that it was a side stepping of the formal
procedure, and the process had now come back to haunt City staff.
Council Minutes - 8/25/86
Eidem noted that this was not meant to be an option for other property
owners, but simply a reaction to an emergency situation on behalf
of the Hospital District.
Motion by Blonigen, second by Bill Fair, to send the entire issue
back to the Planning Commission for a public hearing in accordance
with the terms and conditions of the Zoning Ordinance. Voting in
favor: Dan Blonigen, Bill Fair, Fran Fair, Jack Maxwell. Voting
in Opposition: Mayor Grimsmo.
12. Consideration of Bills for the Month of August.
Motion by Fran Fair, second by Dan Blonigen, and carried unanimously
to pay all bills except final payment to Fullerton Lumber for the
construction of the City Fire Hall.
13. Consideration of a Proposal to Extend Sewer and Water Utilities Down
Minnesota Street.
John Simola, Public Works Director, explained that the City anticipated
receiving a petition signed by 1000 of the affected property owners
requesting the installation of sewer and water on Minnesota Street.
Tom Holthaus, one of the affected property owners, indicated that
they had not yet received 100% of the signatures. Eidem informed
the Council that without 100% of signatures, the Council was not
in conformance with Minnesota Chapter 429 and no project decision
could be made at this time.
Simola did ask that the Council consider the design standard at this
time since a number of property owners in the Orderly Annexation
Area south of I-94 were present to hear discussion. Simola stated
that the question at hand was whether or not to install the sewer
line at a depth sufficient enough to allow the extension beyond I-94
and into the OAA in the future should annexation occur, or should
the line be installed at a much shallower depth for the exclusive
benefit of the property owners submitting the petition. John Badalich
indicated that the assessable portion of the sewer would cost approximately
$13,000.00, while the City cost could be substantial based on the
depth and the amount of dewatering required. The decision the Council
is faced with is whether or not to incur the added City cost for
future re -assessment to properties that may benefit after annexation.
Several OAA property owners indicated that before making any decision
or agreeing to anything, they would like to know the amount of the
assessment. Eidem indicated that there would be no assessment at
this time, but simply that City cost would be recovered in the form
of an assessment when the services actually were extended into the
OAA. No individual assessments had been computed or realistically
could be computed at this time. Stuart Hoglund and Mel Wolters felt
that the City Council should install the proposed sewer line at the
shallow depth thereby keeping it cheapest. Eidem noted that
such an action would necessitate a brand new sewer line in the event
there was an extension into the OAA. Eidem stressed that the only
ISM
Council Minutes - 8/25/86
question that really ought to be addressed at this point is whether
or not the property owners currently in the OAA would be receptive
to eventually being served in the future, or would they be opponents
to annexation for an extended period of years. Eidem noted that
the City ought not consider extending any lines if the City would
meet with substantial opposition to the eventual growth. John Michaelis,
a property owner in the OAA, indicated he had talked to some neighboring
property owners, and that their position differed from that of Hoglund
and Mel Wolters. He indicated that he hoped the City would install
the line at this time to accommodate eventual expansion, hopefully
in the near future.
The Mayor concluded the discussion by saying that perhaps the completed
petition would be available at the September 8 meeting, and that
perhaps additional information might be available after the annexation
hearing. He noted that since the Council could not take action,
he would close this issue.
14. John Simola provided a brief update on the softball field construction.
He noted that the construction goal was to begin the seeding as of
September 10.
15. There being no other business, the Mayor adjourned the meeting.
Thomas A. Eidem
City Administrator