City Council Agenda Packet 08-25-1975~. .
MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
August 25, 1975 - 7:30 P. M. - City Hall
Mayor: Con Johnson
Councilmen: Denton Erickson, Stanley Hall, Gene Walters,
Dick Martie.
Meeting to be typed.
Citizens comments.
Hearing - Sanitary sewer and watermain extensions
from Chestnut Ave. and Broadway to Public Road
(Cemetery Road) and Broadway.
Hearing - Community Development Block Grants.
Cons i.deration of bids on sidewalk project.
,/1~ HRA~s recommendation on purchase of land through
tax increment financing.
/5. Unfinished business.
/6. New business .
GbQO~I.A~
NAP ~ ND ~.N N`~~-
y„,~ Gee eK .o~•C •~^!
1~,.-1~-
/C~ o~- --
MAILING T0:
John Badalich
Don Smith
Mike Holm
/~~; a..n,A r i or+/ ~~Yl~s.~IC- .c~ ~~as~r~
,G~.~~ c/D ~~
AGENDA SUPPLEMENT
Agenda Item 1. Hearing - Sanitary sewer and watermain
extensions from Chestnut Ave. & Broadwa
to Public Road (Cemetery road)& Brdwy.
As spelled out in the f easibility report,
the project cost of extending sewer and
water to this area will be approximately
$61554• Anticipated are 13 services
which would be assessed $3842 or $49946
and the balance is to be picked up by
general property taxes which is a result
of oversized watermain. Assessment is
high because only one side street can be
assessed since the school is on one side and
is already serviced by sewer and water.
Affected property owners are:
R. Marsolek, Wayside Inn, Rev. J. Farina,
R. Lauring, G. Yager, Thrilva Birch,
E. Hartwig, C. Lundquist, Ed Lusti.
ACTION REQUIRED: Provided hearing runs
smoothly, adoption of a resolution to
execute change order with Hood, Inc. of
X49244 (construction costs). This would
leave approximately $20,000 of change
orders that can be negotiated with Hood,
Inc. on their contract unit prices, after
that it will be necessary to take bids on
further projects. There is a possibility
of averaging all improvements on 1975-1
project.
Agenda Item 2. Hearing - Community Development Block Grants.
Department of Housing & Urban Development
regulations require 2 public hearings on
communities application for the block grant
program to gain citizen input. While
citizen input was received at two meetings
in January, these were not legally public
M~ ~d~ hearings, meeting all publication re-
d Vn quirements. Therefore, public hearings
~ ~~ ~~ were scheduled for August 25 and August 26.
~b
-1-
As you are aware, the City of Monticello
ranked 9th out of 43 cities in the Twin
Cities Metro area on its preliminary
application and received a cautious
letter regarding filing final application.
The letter indicated only the senior
citizens center should be pursued further
with recommended request for $100,000.
ACTION REQUIRED: Since our preliminary
application indicated that our senior
citizens center should be pursued I think
we should file the application on that
basis. However, the hearing can serve the
purpose of getting further citizen input
on the center. This will give the council
some sense of direction even though we
may not receive any grant. Additionally,
citizen input may serve as valuable in-
sight on other proposed projects.
Agenda Item 3. Consideration of bids on sidewalk project.
Friday, August 22, 1975 at 2 P. M., bids
will be opened on the project. Revised
extimates by our engineering firm indicate
a construction cost of approximately
$25,000 - $26,000.
ACTION REQUIRED: Provided bids are within
estimate, motion would be in order to
award bid to lowest responsible bidder.
Agenda Item 4. HRAts recommendation on purchase of land
through tax increment financing.
At the councils June 23, 1975 meeting, it
was council consensus to have the HRA
(Housing & Redevelopment Authority) com-
mittee explore avenues of purchasing sub-
standard housing.
HRA met August 19, 1975 with Howard Dahlgres~
and came up with recommendation to pur-
chase two parcels occupied currently by
Monticello Gas and the Little Mountain Inn,
for redevelopment. Admittedly, these parcels
are not substandard housing but the com-
mittee felt the structures themselves were
substandard and although they are businesses,
the area they occupy would be a good site
for a redevelopment project.
-2-
It was HRA~s contention that these
parcels should be financed through a pro-
gram called Tax Increment Financing.
Essentially, tax increment financing means
the difference between .property taxes
before and after redevelopment are pledged
to cover the cost of developing property.
As an example: HRA could acquire a parcel
of land for $10, 000 and incur $4, 000 in
land clearing and demolition costs. If
this parcel were then sold to a private
developer for $8,000 the $6,000 net
cost to HRA could be financed by the
increase in property taxes as a result
of redevelopment. In this example lets
say the property taxes were $500 annually
before redevelopment and $1,100 after;
the increase of $600 would be dedicated
until the $6,000 difference was made up.
Normally, the $6,000 would come from a
bond issue and the increase in taxes
would be dedicated to pay off principal
and interest on the bonds.
There are other steps involved in the
process -- hearings at the HRA level,
review by Planning Commission, review
by City Council along with another public
hearing.
ACTION REQUIRED: HRA wants to get pre-
liminary council approval on the tax
increment approach and also the advisability
of pursuing the purchase of these two
parcels. The parcels would not be pur-
chased immediately until final approval,
but negotiations regarding options, etc.
would commence.
-3-
I-
PETITION FOR LOCAL IMPROVF.MERT
o M 7` r t f L t D ,. Minnesota. 1 uL y IO 14 hS'
----~
To the Village Council of ~l 0 N T ! C ~`L t D , Minnesota:
fie, the undersigned, owners of not less than 35.per cent in frcntabe
of the real property abutting on,SRaAD 0-J14`,~ ~~~' Nu'Y 7S Street,
bete;een the ~~ n"f"E`l~ line of G I~fEST' /V ~t ? Street
ana the ~ !~"N~~"T~',. line of b t 1 ~ oA
t
rereby petition that such street be improved by ~~'f'e r ~ - v N o F .~e w e. r ~ W AT
puxsuant to Minnesota Stat.~ Seca. 1t29.O11 to l~29.111.
1.
2.
~•
Z1.
i•
6.
Si nature of G:vner Description of Property
,-~ j/
_ I _
:.xa,:ir:ed, ereeked, and found to be in proper form and to be signed
by the required ntmber of owners of property affected by the making of
the improvement petitioned for.
~~
Vi211age C erk
;~