Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 07-12-1976REGULAR MEETING OF TIIE MONTIC ELLO CITY COUNCIL July 12, 1976 - 7:30 P.M. City Hall AGENDA 1. Public Hearing - Assessments - 1975-2 Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project. 2. Consideration of Monthly Salary for Fire Chief. 3. Consideration of Dog Pound. 4. Consi.derat .ion of Off Sale Non -Intoxicating Malt Liquor L.iecnse- Montice.lto Liquors,IJ Inc. 5. Consideration of 401 Struct Park Improvements. 6. Report on Lignasan I3LP and .its use :i.n PrLvention of Dutch Elm Disease. ;J 7. Crins.i.dera tion of Deputy Registrar Appointment �4 $. Approval of Minutes - June 28 and 29. 1976.. 9. Ilnfinishecl b,is.i.ness. 10. New business. G Mal. I.i.ng to: John Eadal.l.ch Don Smi th / , Don Woltenl us John Sandberg Red Mlchacl.l.s Gwen Ilntcmnn Mike Rajala s k 4 KAI AGENDA SUPPLEMENT Will 1. PubJic Hearine - Assessments 1975-2 Sanitary Sewer Improvement. Project. A public hearing is necessary to prescnL and review the assess- menL. on Lhe I9i5-2 San! Lary Sewer improvement Project. As you may recall, this project was for tho exLension of sanitary sewer to the liquor store and three other parcels. Iii LuLal scvcnLecn sixty-six foot lot's were serviced by this imprnvemcnt and below arc the proposed asscssment.s. Parcel No. Owner No. of LoLs Assessment. 191335 Robert Amer.ick 5 $2305.60 19607 Ruff Auto Parts 4 1544.4S 19604 Lawrence Kren•r. 4 IS44.4S IIiMay Liquors -City �_ 1544.46 17 S7S39.04 In effect this .is 5461.12 per Lot. Or.ig.inaby the esLi,maLed project cost was S9280.00 or 5545.88 per lot. A.ILhough the assessments are for sewer only, 1 would recommend they be spread over 20 years s.i.nce this ateaw.i11 also be assessed on Lhe 1976-1 .Improvement: Project for wnLcr. In terms of interest. rate., 1. would suggest a rate of 71 per cent with equal insLall - mcnLs of principal. This would pat all the 1975 projects on 011 same. pay off program. Since, binds were not: floated to Finance Lhis issue, nll assess - menus will be gnWg directly .i.nto Lhe sewer fund. POSSIBLE ACTION: After close of hanr.iog cnnsideraWon of resn- lut.Kin adopci.ng assessment, roll and spreading of nssessment.s. Rlil'I:RENCES: .lune 23, 1976 letter frnm Jnhn Dndnl.ieh (handed out Inn L met:L.ing. Proposed Resolution adopting assessment pull. 7t.cm 2. CnnsidupaLion of MnnLhIV Mary for P,irn Chlef. Ronald (Red) M.ichae..11.s, Monticello Pare Ch.icf, has regnesLed a m,mchly salary of $100. Reasoning For Lhe request is Lhat, he fuels the job has become tun time consuming for Lhe present rn Le of pay, 55.00 per fire call, fur Lhe first hMW and S3.tll.) lint, hour ror each add,i,ti non 1 hour nr pgr(.Lon ChercoP. C U sJ This matter was taken up by the newly created Joint Fire !bard and their recommendation was not to place any fire department personnel on a monthly salary. They felt it was a volunteer organization and other fire department members would probably be willing to help Red with any extra cluti.es such as inspec- tinns, paperwork or giving tours of the fire trucks Since this is an .item outside of the budget for the fire depart- menL, it will be necessary to bring this matter to the Monticello Township Board also for approval. According to our contract., both the City and Township have to approve expenditures over the budget. POSSIBLE ACT] ON: Approval or denial of request. Item 3. Considerat.fnn of Doe Pound. Otu• present dog pound Ls in very poor condition from a structural and health standpoint. Gwen Bateman, Montice.l.lo's dogeatcherr, will be here Monday might, to review the si.tuatJon with the council. However, it. may he we.l.l for each councilman to visit the dog pound to do -L n first: hand i.mpress.ion. POSSIBLE ACTION: If cotinc.iI concurs,, deve'Iopmcnt of plans and sperificat'inns and firm cost estimate on new dog pound fur final council approval. It. Ls estimated that. a dog pound will cost approsimately $S,000 - $10,000. Item q. Cons iderat-inn of Off Salr. Nun-Jnl:nzLcnLinq !fall. I.Itptor Lir.ewso - Mont.icea.ln L.ignors ]ne. Mr. liar! Lindenfea.ncr, president; of Mont.i.ce.l:lo Li(Iuors, Inc. , has regncstcd a tion -intoxicating Malt Liquor (1.2 hoer) License. License foe i.s $15 nnnually and folltowing .is a List of present, holders of, l i rensr_r: 1'srn i e' s Wilt Shop ?Intim hoods Wayno's Red Owl ,lnhn's DisconnL 110rlCls Wayside :Inn It i.ver '1'ervar.4,, Tral I er Court; Molmieelto Recreati.0a POSSIIII.1; Afl"TON: Approval nr denial of rcgncAt.. C Item j. Consideration of 4th Street Park Improvements. CWork on the 4th Street Park is scheduled to resume this week. To be completed are the walkpaths, playground areas, ball. field and grading for the hockey rink and parking areas Two items, installation of a water source for flooding and a warming house, were discussed but decision was to implement improvement of the Bridge Parks and E.Ilison Park for the Bi- centennial and then review the 4th Street Park. By Monday's meeting an estimate should be available for running water to the site. It- would seem the best Location would be between the" two ranks for easy flooding of ei.ther r!nk. Estimates for a warming house by Howard Dahlgren and Associates ranged from $4320 (720 sq. ft. wood frame plywood, city built) to 511,200 (prefabrVated 32' diameter building ready for in- sta.l.lat.ion). The old warming house was 24' x 18' or 432 sq. ft. POSS.LBLE ACTION: I. Consideration of extension of water to Win park. 2. Consideration of warm%g house. .Item G. Report an Lignnsan RLP and .its use in Prevention of Deitch C: Elm Disr_asc. r� L Mike Rajala has researched the use of the chemical Lignasan BLP and his Findings are included in the enclosed report;. It would appear that the results and effectiveness of the chemical are somewhat. .in dispute, specifically .in Light of the cost For application. It, may be well for the city to consider implementation of the chemical on a eontro.11ed basis on 20-2.5 trees in the parks or on Ixw1ovards and 1110nLain a log of the results. This could he done this year and if the results are successful an cxt,:nsion tjf the program could be considered next year. POSSIRLR ACTION: Considerat.inn of .implementing t;ho use. of Lignasan HLP on n cunLr0.1.1ed WSiS. If approved this would require purchase of equipment ranging from $100 to $200. REFOUNCES: ?like's report; on Lignasan RLP. -3- o• Item '7: Consideration of Deputy R'esistear.Appoin'tment. Enclosedyou iaill find _correspondence from 'the Wright County -Auditor' s. office.relative to the,eppoiritment_ ,of the City of Monticelio as Deputy. Registrar., 'In their decision to recommend Cho appointment of vai4ou6, deputy:regi"strays, in Wright; County, to, the Motor Vehicle, .Ser- Vices, er-vices. Division,j the'.Board of Commissioners unanimously 'p;greed that cities.- 3. of individuals) be appointed'. According tothe. County Auditor I w,let£er' it is .necessary ,to. deny or',accept 'the' appointment at, once, inorder to liave . the state confirm the appointment by July 30. I 'have talked' to the State Motor Vehicle Services, :Division, and they have some reservations regarding four deputy. registrars in Wright County. _ Addiiionally I attempted to have .a r,eprc= sentativc at Mondny'`s, meeting but their. 'schedule made it;' m - possible, however'; they, will'. be coming to'Monticel:lo on'. Tues- day or Wednesday to: give: mo more information on' duties, personnel' requirements, estimated roven'ue,,etc. POSSTHU ACTION:'if- 'oounci_.l concurs that, concept of 'providing this sm•Licer .is. a good idea, approval of ,acceptance "of- appoint- menti:,c6Ainge7it upon results''of meeting with, Deputy. '•Regiet"rar t representative. Thisposition wili requibo'tti©' hlri.ng_ of ,an individual, topei•forni the routine tasks however, 'possib'le con- si'deration could, be given to appointing Rick'Wolfsteller as Dep�%ty Registrar and havo'tho individual work under him, RGFGRENCGSp Correspondenco from. Dave-1.Doug.l'as: A tCJ cl` RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING IN'flikli5'I' RATE ON ASSIi55l11P5'I'S FOR 1975-2 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJf.C'I' AND SPREADING OF ASSESSMENT'S Be it resolved that the Ci.ty COUnC1.1 of MOoLiCl:l In hereby aclopts the assessment roll fur the 1975-2 Sanitary Sewer l.mprovement Project as presented July 12, 1976 at the Mont.i.celIn City Council meoting. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes .129.061 the assessment for the 1975-2 Sanitary Sewer l.mprove- ment Project shall be prorated over (.wcnt:y (20) years with equal installments of principal and interest accrued at: seven and one-half porcent. W ) per year to be paid annually. S—lotr* "., Mayor, C. 0. Johnson ,0, 4; --e, C1ft:y VII'llisl.rat:o-m•. Gary 1Piebcr /2 / 9 i� D. . Ite,.nlol;iKn Aclopted Hu-Solnt:lon # 13 C In the past few months several. improvements in the village have made Monticello one of the outstanding, and certainly to be envied, communities in the area, such as parking areas, information center, parks and a bandstand, which is all due to the outstanding leadership of our present village council. However, one facility that is sadly lacking, in view of the dog ordinances, is the local "dog pound". This antiquated structure is rat infested and fly and mosquito ridden. In addition, the wooden cages absorb strong odors because of the lack of proper draining and cleaning (the Jattor due to Lha - lack of water). Water must be hauled .in buckets, by hand, Iocat,ed some distance away from the kennel.. Because of this, cleaning consists of a maximum effort with minimal results. The kennel is in such a state of disrepair that the rusty wire on the cage doors .is chewed through by dogs. Recently 1. re- placed two window panes with glass due to jumping (lugs. In addition that,(, is always the possibil.i,ty of -'injury to dogs from broken glass and ]:have received many cuts from rusty cage door wire and glass. A good facility should offer ample protection against all types of weather. The Monticello pound has no protection for its occupants, either overhand or underfoot. po.11owi.ng as little. as a few drops of rain, the kennel becomes a large. mudhole. There Is no storage area fnr food, kitty Litt.ev, canned fond. ran openors, shovels, brooms, garbage bags, etc. At, present„ most of Chcso items me laying on the ground where the eats feast on food and tunnel under the kennel strucCuro. Tho lack of sanitary Paci.l..i.ttes accelerates the chance of disease transmission from one animal. to anol,her. Boratiso of primlt..ive t:nnd.itions of/in the kennel, metre tAme Is spent than necessary In carina for the animals. This will vary w•.ich the number of an.i.ma.la In the kennel. !tarry (log oMtevs, when claiming their pets, have complained aht)til. kcnncl centll.t.,ions, With odors being Chu main grip(., am aware of at: least, two council members who have, seen the kcnncl. 1 would .Like to extend an inv.i.tatlon to the cournr.il to visit, and vlcw existing cond.i,tlmiH. Gwen IlaCrman Dog I'atrolev 4nntirr,l In si,,P f atin't' 71 t/JG t / 1-) L]GNASAN BLP INFORMATION Lignasan BLP :is an RPA approved water soluble fungicide recommended for use as an iujecLi.on treatment in Elm trees as an aid in Lhc control of Dutch Elm Disease. It can -be used as a protective treatment, for uninfected trees and as a Lherapen Lic treatment at, first sign of disease. .in infected trees Anyone, including firms. applying Lignasan for hire is considered a commercial pesticide applicator. He is required to pass an examination conducted by the Minnesota Department or Agri.culturu, Agronomy Services Division, and .is licensed as such Homeowners applying Lignasan to their own trees are not. required to take Lhe examination. It should be used in conjunction with an extensive san,i Latlon and insect con Lrol program. Directions for ase: For protective treatment, dilute 1 quart. Lignasan DLP with S gallons of water; for therapeutic treatment, dilute I quart: Lignasan BLP w.i Lh 4 gallons of water. It is essentia to use acidic water (ph less than 7) and water with hardness oat. in excess of 10 grains per gallon. For these reasons, use of dis- tilled or bottled spring watts is advised. River or lake water may be snuisfacuopy. Inject S gallons of the diluted solution for each 4 inches of Men' diameter (or for each foot, of cLvcumfercncc) measured at breast. height.. Inject into root flare or trunk, using multiple Injection situs lu inch spacing) as close to ground level as pnssible. Maintain pressure until Lhe proper volume of solution has been InjneLed into cite tree. (10-30 psi.) 'I'rcaLment may be made, anyt.i.me during the growing season IL pre- ferably .in the spring when trees reach half Ln full leaf and hefopi.. beet In feeding beg! nn ("sunLly the first week of .lune.) Par in- fectud trees. begin t.rentment:at. P!rat sign of disease. The sooner the treatment is administered, the bet.LcP Lhe nuLlook 1'ar cuntain.ing 017000 011 in the nren showing symptoms. '1•rcatment. after r.Powu damage, exceeds 5 percent may not be effective. As snon as injection .is completed, remove. .infected wood by pruning. Pruning cuts should be made when at nil possible, IO feet: Into vicar wood beyond brown staining caused by Dutch Elm Disease. A second treaLntcnt should he made within 30 days and repcatcd t.rentment should he made IP symptoms of diseases vonppenr nr eratt i nue to prngr •ss. C I Application is made using a pressure injector with 25T's and harness tubing. One T is required for every 6 inches of circumference as close to the ground as possible. The T's are inserted into 5/16 inch holes drilled 2 inches deep and 6 inches apart. With the tubing attached to the T's, pressure is applied until the tree has taken the prescribed dosage. After treatment, remove T's from the holes and fill with a grafting compound. Cost of the fungicide Lignasan BLP is $9 - $11 dollars per gallon. Equipment costs range from $100 - $200 dollars. This price in- cludes all components of the injector system, (T's, tank, tools, etc.) Average cost per tree per year for preventive measures is estimated at $2.50 for chemical and $5.00 for therapeutic measures, total cost would approximate $40 - 60 per tree per year. According to the Ag Extension's Plant Pest Control Newsletter, "this type of application does not protect Elm trees against root grafttransmission of the disease. These treatments must be made annually." While effective to a degree, the time required for injection and the cost of treating large numbers of trees make this a rather ineffective method of disease control. from a cost - benefit point of view and can only be used on Elms nF high value. Some research reports that• symptom development was only delayed by these treatments and did not prevent tree mortality. Data to conclusively support the use of Lignasan RLP is incomplete and limited. Sources other than the Minnesota Department of Agriculture - namel.y University of Minnesota personnel - feel that this chemical deserves consideration. Used in conjunction with efficient sanita- tion and control programs, results have been positive. R esu'Its have been particularly good when Lignasan has been used as a pre%ent-ive, program for the control of Dutch Elm Disease. llopkins Chemical Company representatives concur with this asseasment. -2- Michael Rajala Public, Works D1.r•ectur DAVID S. DOUGLAS WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITOR 10 N.W. 2 ST. BUFFALO, MINNESOTA 55313 PHONE: (612) - 602.1671 July 8, 1976 Gary Welber, Clerk-Treas. City of Monticello Monticello, MN 55362 Dear Gary: Enclosed is a copy of a letter sent to Mary Williams. The cutoff date for appointment as deputy tegistrar is July 30, this month, and if you wish to be appointed to operate C" this service for the people in your community'as a govern- mental sub -division, I need a request from you at once. I would also appreciate in your statement what hours you would Intend to be Open and where you would have your headquarters, so we would understand what kind of service you plan to have for your people. D.SD: Imf Enclosure Sincerely yours, 'A' {l?1 ?1 David S., Douglas Wright County Auditor q DAVID S. DOUGLAS V WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITOR 10 N.W. 2 Sr. BUFFALO. MINNESOTA 55313 L/ PMDNF.: 16121 • 682-1671 4 July 8, 1976 Mary M. Williams, Director Division of motor Vehicles Highway Building St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Ms. Williams: I received your letter containing many questions regarding possible target deadline for the closing of the county operation in Wright County. This was not our intention, nor did I state it in exactly this manner. I did intimate that the office in Buffalo might be closed, if the four cities in the previous letter be appointed deputy registrars; and if these cities would agree to operate a satisfactory office in each of them. If they fail to indicate that they would, indeed, as a city operate a deputy registrar office; then, accord- ing to my interpretation of the County Board's action, it would be necessary t�continue operating the Wright County Deputy Registrar Office. As of this time, the City of Buffalo has told me verbally that they do not wish to become a deputy registrar; and, therefore, regardless of what happens in the other three cities it would seem that the office in Buffalo would have to continue in the County Auditor's Office. I have not heard from the City of Monticello whether they wish to have a deputy registrar operated by the city for the service of the people, or not. I will write to them and ask them for a statement to this effect, if they wish to have a city operation in Monticello. It is my understanding that the City of Annandale has verbally agreed to a city operated deputy registrar, but I will write to them and ask if they intend to keep the office open sufficient hours to provide the best of service to their people. At this point I have a letter from the City of Delano indicating that they wish to have an individual appointed as deputy regiatrar, which would not be in line with the request of the Wright County Board, an they wish all deputy registrar offices to be operated by the governmental sub -division. The Wright County Board has requested, in my opinion, that you appoint the city clerks to ndmini- strato the deputy registrar offices in Monticello, Iluffalo, Delano, and Annandnla as a part of the city government. The Board has not indicated that private Individuals should be operating these offices. I, as County Auditor, certainly ay' -)pposed to having county branches .in these'cities with appointments made by tk. County Auditor; As this would seem to be mnking double the work by having it necessary to have it checked twice before reaching your office. I would much prefer that any other office becoming a deputy registrar be responsiblo directly Page 2 through the State of Minnesota. 'pope this clarifies any ambiguity in my previous letter and hope that if r '�,n be of an7 more help you will call or write me at once. DSD: Imf '1t Sincerely yours, David S. Douglas Wright County Auditor i.nq dntlb'i e , r Ito% REGULAR MEETING OF MONTICELLO CITY COL1NCll, June 28, 1976 - 7:30 P. M. Members present-: Con Johnson, Denton Erickson, Stanley Hall, Dick Martic, Gene Walters. Members absent: None. Citizens comments: Ed Schaffer commented on the local police proptcetion. tie felt that, the county patrolmen should be more strict in en- forcing the speeding, parking and yield viola tions. Lee Hatfield inquired as to a possible Dutch elm disease treatment he had heard would prevent the spreading of the disease. Preliminary investigation indicates that the cost of treating elm trees would be approximately $130.00 per tree annually, but council instructed the Pub]_ic Works Dir. to further check into such a program to see if it would be feasible for the city to undertake. 1. Consideration of awarding contracts an 1976-1 Improvement, Project. John Badalich, consul.ti.ng city engineer, reviewed with the council the bids received on the 76-1 Improvement Project. The low bidder on Section I of the improvement project (watermain, sewer, storm sewer and street Im- provements) was Orfoi & Sons. Inc. with a bid of $608,57-n0, Section 11 of the project (construction of ground water reservoir, pumphuuse and appurtenant work) had a low bid of $263,750.00 by Adolphson & Paterson, Inc. (See supple- ment. (3-28-76 #1). Denton Erickson made a motion, seconded by Dick Mart-io and unanimously carried to award the contract for Section I of the 7b-1 Improvement ProjSet to Orfei & Sons, Inc. for $698,578.60 and Section 11 of the Improvement Project to Adolphson A Peterson, Inc. for $263,750.00.. Dick Martic made a motion, second by G. Walters and un- animnnRly carried to adopt resolution suth "rizing O.S.M. to proceed w1th field staking and .i.nopectic►n in conjunction with the 7n-1 Improvement Project. Consttvaction is ex- loutt d to start within 2 weeks. 2. Consideration of resolution setting sale date for ` General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1976. lii.ng Porness, of Spri.ngsted, Inc., discussed with the council the options available to sel..l bonds to finance the 76-1 Improvement Project. Council consensus was to use the same method as previously used for assessments, i. c.p even principal pay-off spread over 20 years, with the city paying off the bonds over 15-16 years. The bonds are expected Lo sell at approximately tq%, with the individual assessment rate of approximately 7z%. On a motion by Martie, second by Hall and unanimously carried, a resolution was adopted setting July 11 1976 as the sale date fur bonds totaling $1,300.0110.00. (See resolution #1976-13). J. C.onsiderotinn of Condi-tionnl Use Permit - nutpnticnc pct clinic. Dr. Joel Erickson, veteri.naritm, was proposing a small animal pct clinic to be located nL the Monticello Mail. Since the current zoning ordinances did not: have pet. Lclinics classified as either a permitted or Candi Li Onal use in any zoning district, 1t: would havd to be added as some type of use. A letter signed by the Monticello Mall teuants indicates thnt none were opposed to this business being located in the Mall. (See supplement. 61546 #Q. A motion was made. by Hall, second by MarLiC and un- animnusly carried to amend the zoning ord.i.none.e to al low pet clinics no n cnnd.i.tUmnl use in a Il -3 zone with the fol lowi.ng condi.t:ions: A Annual inspection by city health nfficev at owners expense. 2. All pets must bo lrashed- 3. Treatmcnh to be limited Cn hmmtfl .yid pets. The motion also included npprovnl or grrntWng a cmirlitiunal use permit: to Dr. Joel, Cr.ickson for a put Clinic Ionated in the Monticello Mall. (Seo zon-ing ordinance amend- ment S -15-i5 #16). -2- 4. Consideration of rezoning approximately 9 acres south of I-94 between Hwy. #25 and Marvin Road from R-3 to B-3. Mr. John Sandberg requested that approximatrly o acres located south of I-94 and west of Highway 25 be re- zoned from R-3 (medium density res.ident:i.al.) to B-3 (highway business). The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this request on June 15, 1976 and recommended approval be granted on this rezoning; request. In a memo, Howard Dahlgren, city planner, also re- commended approval of this rezoning ,request due to i.t5 proximity to other commercial areas. (See supplement 6-28-76 ##3) On a motion by Erickson, second by Walters, it; was unanimously carried to rezone S.28 acres south of I-94 between Hwy. 25 and Marvin Road from R-3 to 13-3. (Sec zoning ordinance amendment 8-15-75 #15)• 5. Review of new off -sale 11ouor operation. Mark Irmiter, liquor store manager, updated the council on the first six weeks of operation in tho, new liquor is tore . A comparative sales analysis shows approxi- mately a X6'4 sales increase for the entire operation over Or game period last year. (See supplement 6-28-76 ##4). Reaction in general to the new store has been excellent and an Increase In trade from outside the local, arra has been noticed. 6. C,nnsider®tion of netting date frn• Public Ilearina for 1 oF5 Sanitary Sewer Improvement, Project-, assessments. John Iladalich, city eniri.neer, presented preli,minnry i'iguros on the proposed assessments for the 1975-2 Sant t ary Sewer Improveart-nt Project from I ocust. E 6th street to Pine and 6th Street. (See supplement 40-25-76 ##5) The project was complete --d during 1975 and serviced Sour pitucels (19 lo(ii) Including the now municipal 7lqurtr store. A mot ton was made by Martie, mec and by Hall and un- animously csrrlyd to at -,U July 12, 1976 as the dat n for a Public Hearing on the proposed 1975-2 8t+wev Prn,jeei .a.yse„wmcnI s. The consensus of 1.110. Council was to erect a play- ground arca in the 41.11 St. park similar to tilt, cnu:s 0onstrnctad it, lill,i.son rind West Bridge parks as scmin as the prl.per location can be detertn.iucd. The council directed the P. W. Director to rt, -paint IIIc crosswalk areas at I.he .i.ntersecti.on of Ilwy. 25 and Broadway and to check into t110, poss.ibilily of Ilavinp, it "Right 'Turn only,, bane off Ilwy. 25 on to IA•oadway Ace. A tentative elate of August 16, 1976 was se_t for n mecl.ing with the e.ity engineev, City coune.il, nffit,lals of Region 7W and the county to di-tiss t.hc Stop I Paci litics PLan being prepared by O.S•t•1. ?12r, it(1.1n•ne__d1,y� , , CL'J'.Ct7�eD R-i0k wolfst'll (� Adm. Asst. v I"w; 1 g -4- 7. Consideration of final payment request by Hood, Inc. u Oil 1975-1 Improvement Project. The 1975-1 l.mprovement Project has been completed, i.nspect;ed and approved for final- payment by our city engineers. The final payment amounts to $37,001.04, making a tut.al construction cost of $659,320.21 to flood, Inc. A motion was made_ by Hall, second by F,r.ickson and unanimously carried to approve the final payment to Ilond, Inc. on 1975-1 Improvement Project for $37.001.04, less expenses incurred by the city. Approval of bi lls. On it motion by Martie, second by liri.ckson, bills for the month of June were approved as presented. (See supplement; 6-25-76 #6). 9. The m.inutcs of the city counc.i..l for June 14, 1976 were approved as read. The Public Works Director will meet with the city connci.l on August 2, 1976 to discuss any r_.ity problems and procedures. A special counc.i,I meeting was also scheduled fur ittly 29, 1976 to meet with Jim Iloyle, city engineer, and city planner t.o further study Mr Boyle's annexation 1•t.clnest. The consensus of 1.110. Council was to erect a play- ground arca in the 41.11 St. park similar to tilt, cnu:s 0onstrnctad it, lill,i.son rind West Bridge parks as scmin as the prl.per location can be detertn.iucd. The council directed the P. W. Director to rt, -paint IIIc crosswalk areas at I.he .i.ntersecti.on of Ilwy. 25 and Broadway and to check into t110, poss.ibilily of Ilavinp, it "Right 'Turn only,, bane off Ilwy. 25 on to IA•oadway Ace. A tentative elate of August 16, 1976 was se_t for n mecl.ing with the e.ity engineev, City coune.il, nffit,lals of Region 7W and the county to di-tiss t.hc Stop I Paci litics PLan being prepared by O.S•t•1. ?12r, it(1.1n•ne__d1,y� , , CL'J'.Ct7�eD R-i0k wolfst'll (� Adm. Asst. v I"w; 1 g -4- SPECIAL MEETING MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL June 29, 1976 - 7:30 P. M. Joint meeting with the Monticello Civic Center Commission . Councu members present: C. Johnson, D. Martic. D. Erick— son, Gene Walters. Council member absent: S. Hall. Civic Center Commission members present: S. Johnson, Ruth Senness, Gary Wicber. Ilerb Ketcham, of' architectural firm of The Architect— ural Alliance, reviewed the fi.ndzngs and progress of the Civic Center Commission with the City Counci I. the site selected by the commission was the Monticello De%elopment, Corporation site; however, additional land should be purchased to tilt- vast to enable the building to be focused on Walnut Street. Reasoning for this was t o enhance tile, visual Image oil this site as it would be visible the entire .length of Walnut Street. Howard Dahlgren, city planner, felt by expanding the site to make Lt visible the length of Walnut Street. would make it a good site. llowever; lie recommended the Oakwood Clcmentavy school be the site, for the (:JvIc Cenl ep berause of its location te) Ilfghway 25 and the retail areas. Shelly Johnson, school superintendent, and chairman rif tilt- Civic Center Commission, indiraled the school Is c onsidevIng a bond issue for a new school , howo%t-r, the s/ 11()91 is not c ertai.n whether they should set I Oakwood t lementary school Mr. Johnson anald that, if Oakwood was ,old and a new school built, the school district would nul I e gaining ,,pace, t ou.rosus elf Connr%1 was to arratngn Mlo'Cia.l tnrrtJng with the slhool district Ward of Cduratlon to Ionsidvr the poc..ibi.Jity or the xehool mel ling Oakwood hlt-mt-ntary. 1 au-oting was tentatively not Por July 14 at S:OO P. M. >,dditilmaily, the vitt' mdminiatraloe was to contact Mr 1,111staf Non wllo oMIA the house east of the Mont it e to 114,%elopment Corporal Inn mite to elett-rmine if: he would Ill, intvVestt-ll -in $I.11111µ. Nrrt tot; ad,journvd. I,.ii . H�i�bvr 1 Itv ;tdmint,ar�ctur tiv 14 4 I J EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA HELD: JULY 13, 1976 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special, meeting of the City Council of the City of Monticello, Wright County, Minnesota, was duly held at the City Hall in said City on the 13th day of July, 1976, at 7:30 o'clock P.M. for the purpose of opening and considering bids for and awarding the sale of $1,300,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1976 of said City. The following members were present: Johnson, Martie and Walters and the following were absent: Erickson and Hall The Clerk presented affidavits showing publication of notice of call for bids on $1,300,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1976 of the City, for which bids were to be received at this meeting, in accordance with the resolution adopted by the City Council on June 28, 1976. Said affidavits were examined, found to comply with the provisions of Minne— sota Statutes, Chapter 1175, and were approved and ordered placed on file. The Council proceeded to receive and open bids for the sale of said bonds. The following bids were received: Bidder Interest Rate Net Interest Cost ATTAC11FD I Fig SPRHYC3STED INCORPORATED MUNICIPAL CONSULTAWS s—+a 1`3 ossa% eunoiva . 5-1 ..u1. ­111Sai• /1102 • (eq, 2271319 $1,300,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1976 CITY OF MONTICELLO. MINNESOTA AWARD: BANCNORTHWEST Minneapolis, Minnesota and Associate SALE: July 13, 1976 Moody's Rating: A Net Interest Bidder BANCNORTHWEST Cronin 6 Marcotte Inc. �— Both of Minneapolis, MN THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF SAINT PAUL Saint Paul, MN First National Bank of.M inneopolis White, Weld 6 Company Inc. Reynolds Securities Inc. Robert W. Baird 6, Co. Incorporated All of Minneapolis, MN DAIN, KALMAN 6 QUAIL, INC. Allison -Williams Co. Piper, Jaffray 6 Hopwood, Inc. All of Minneapolis, MN Bank of Oklahoma, N.A. Tulsa, OK E. J. PRESCOTT d COMPANY, o DIVISION OF CARLETON D. BFJI CO. Minneapolis, MN American National Bank Saint Paul, MN Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner 6 Smith Incorporated Pains, Webber, Jackson & Curtis Incorporated Both of Minneapolis, MN Coupons 5.00% 1978-80 5.25% 1981 5.50% 1982-87 5.60% 1988 5.75% 1989 5.90% 1990 6.002 1991-92 6.10% 1993 4.05% 1978 5.45% 1979-81 5.50% 1982-87 5.60% 1988 5.75% 1989 5.90% 1990 6.00% 1991 6.10% 1992 6.25% 1993 5.502 1978-86 5.75% 1987-89 5.80% 1990 6.00% 1991 6.10% 1992-93 5.25% 1978-82 5.502 1983-85 5.752 1986-87 6.00% 1988-91 6.10% 1992 6.20% 1993 Price Coat 6 Rate $1,300,026.31 $750,807.44 (5.744X) $1,300,000.00 $757,507.50 (5.795x) $1,300,006.55 $758,145.95 (5.800%) $1,300,000.00 $767,155.00 (5.8695%) REOFFERING SCHEDULE OF THE PURCHASER Rate Year Yield 5.002 1978 4.002 5.002 1979 4.205 5.002 1980 4.405 5.252 1981 4.502 5.502 1982 4.702 5.502 1983 4.902 5.502 1984 5.105 5.502 1985 5.205 5.502 1986 5.355 5.502 1987 5.502 5.605 1988 5.602 5.752 1989 5.755 5.902 1990 5.905 6.002 1991-92 6.002 6.102 1993 6.002 Average Maturity: 10.05 Years BBI: 6.78 The Council then proceeded to consider such bids. After the bids had been considered and discussed, member Wal+VrQ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID ON SALE OF $1,300,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVE(+FENT BONDS OF 1976 PROVIDING FOR THEIR ISSUANCE AND LEVYING A TAX FOR THE PAYIMNT THEREOF BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the bid ofBangNor hw a to purchase $1,300,000 General Obligation Improve men Bonds of 1976 of the City, in accordance with the notice of bond sale, at the rates of interest hereinafter set forth, . and to pay therefor the sum of $I 3, pp,app . (plus a premium of ?$„2�) is hereby found, determine -d and declared to be the most favorable bid received, and is hereby accepted and said bonds are hereby awarded to said bidder. The City Clerk is directed to retain the deposit of said bidder dnd to forthwith return the good faith checks or drafts to the unsuccessful bidders. Said bonds shall be payable as to principal and interest at Northwestern National Sank, Minneapolis. Minnesota or any successor paying agent duly appointed by the City. 2. The $1,300,000 negotiable coupon general obliga- tion bonds of the City shall be dated August 1, 1976 and shall be issued forthwith. Said bonds shall be 260 in number and numbered from 1 to 260, both inclusive, in the denomin- ation of $5,000 each. Said bonds shall mature serially, lowest numbers first, on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: $ 5,000 in the year 1978; $ 70,000 in each of the years 1979 and 1980; $ 75,000 in each of the years 1981 to 1983, both inclusive; $ 80,000 in each of the years 1984 and 1985; $ 85,000 in the year 1986; $ 90,000 in each of the years 1987 and 1988; $100,000 In the year 1989; $ 95,000 in the year 1990; $100,000 in the ycar 1991; $110,000 in the year 3.992; and $100,000 in the year 1993. -2- D 3. Said bonds shall provide funds for the construc- tion of various improvements in the City. The total cost of said improvements, which shall include all costs enumerated in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.65, is estimated to be at least equal to the amount of the bonds herein authorized. Work on the improvements shall proceed with due diligence to completion. 4. The bonds of said issue maturing in the years and bearing the serial numbers set forth below shall bear interest, payable August 1, 1977 and semiannually there- after on February I and August 1 of each year, at the respec- tive rates per annum set opposite said maturity years and serial numbers: Maturity Years Serial Numbers Interest Rate 1978-1980 1-29 5.00% 1981 30-44 5.25% 1982-1987 45-141 5.50% 1988 142-159 5.60% 1989 160-179 5.75% 1990 180-198 5.90% 1991-1992 199-240 6.00% 1993 241-260 6.10% R 5. All bonds of this issue maturing in the years 1988 to 1993, both inclusive (bonds numbered 142 to 260, both inclusive), shall be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City in inverse order of serial numbers, on February 1, 1987 and on any interest payment data there- after at par and accrued interest-. Published notice of redemption shall in each case be given in accordance with law, and at least thirty days prior mailed notice of redemption shall be given to the bank where said bonds are payable and to any registered holders, provided that• published notice alone shall be effective without mailed notice. holders desiring to receive mailed notice must register their names, addresses and bond numbers with the City Clerk. 6. The bonds and interest coupons to be Issued hereunder shall be in nubstant•ially the following form: -3- t_ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA WRIGHT COUNTY CITY OF MONTICELLO No. $5,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BOND or 1976 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that the City of Monticello, Wright County, Minnesota, certifies that it is indebted and for value received promises to pay to bearer the principal sum of FIVE THOUSA14D DOLLARS on the first day of February, 1.9_ and to pay interest thereon from the date hereof until the principal is paid at the rate of percent ( %) per annum, payable on the first day of August, 1977 and semiannually thereafter on the first day of February and the first day of August in each year, interest to maturity being represented by and payable in accordance with and upon presenLati.on and surrender or the interest coupons hereto attached, as the same severally become due. Both principal and interest are payable at , or any successor paying agent duly appointed by the City, in any coin or currency of the United States of America which at the time of payment is Legal tender for public and private debta. All bonds of this issue maturing in the years 1988 Lo 1993, both inc)us.Lve (bonds numbered 1112 to 260, both incluaive), are subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City in inverse order of aerial numbers, on February 1, 1987 and on any interest payment date thereafter at par and accrued interest. Published notice of redemption shall in each case be given in accordance with law, and at least thirty days prior mailed notice of redemption ahall be given to the bank where said bonds are payable and to any registered holders, provided that published notice alone shall be effective without mailed notice. holders desiring to receive mailed notice must register their names, addresses and bond numbers with the City Clerk. sm t- J This bond is one of an issue in the total principal amount of $1,300,000 all of like date and tenor, except as to serial number, maturity, interest rate and redemption privi- lege, which bond has been issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota for the purpose of providing money for various improvements, and is payable out of the Improvement Bonds Common Account of the City. This bond constitutes a general obligation of the City, and to provide moneys for the prompt and full payment of said principal and interest when the same become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of said City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to happen and to be performed, precedent to and in the issuance of this bond, have been done, have happened and have been performed, in regular and due form, time and manner as required by law, and this bond, together with all other debts of the City outstanding on the date hereof and the date of its actual issuance and delivery does not exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Monticello, Wright County, Minnesota, by its City Council has caused this bond to be executed in its behalf by the facsimile signature of the Mayor and the manual signature of the City Administrator; the corporate seal having been intentionally omitted as permitted by law, and has caused the interest coupons to be executed and authenticated by the facsimile signatures of said officers, all as of August 1, 1976. City Administrator Mayor -5- C_ (Form of Coupon) No. On the first day of August (February), 19_, unless the bond described below is called for earlier redemption, the City of Monticello, Wright County, Minnesota, will pay to bearer at or any successor paying agent duly appointed by the City, the sum shown hereon for interest then due on its General Obli— gation Improvement Bond of 1976 No. dated August 2, 1976. /s/ Facsimile I /s/ Facsimile City Administrator C Mayor —6- 7. The bonds shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signature of its Mayor and the signature of its Clerk and be sealed with the seal of the City; provided, that the seal may be omitted and that one of such signatures and the seal of the City, if not omitted, may be printed facsimiles; and provided further that may act as agent of the City for pur- poses of authenticating the bonds by one or more persons authorized to sign the bonds on behalf of said bank in which event the signatures of both the Mayor and the City Clerk shall be facsimile signatures. The interest coupons pertaining thereto shall be executed by the printed, engraved or litho- graphed facsimile signatures of the Mayor and Clerk. 8. The said bonds when so prepared and executed shall be delivered by the Treasurer to the purchaser thereof upon receipt of the purchase price, and the said purchaser shall not be obliged to see to the proper application thereof. 9. There has heretofore been created a special account designated "Improvement Bonds Common Fund" hereafter renamed "Improvement Bonds Common Account" to be held and administered by the City Treasurer separate and apart from all other accounts of the City. Said Account shall be continued and maintained in the manner herein specified until all of the bonds herein authorized and the interest thereon have been fully paid. In said Account there shall be maintained a separate fund, to be designated as the "1976 Improvement Bonds Construction Fund" and the "Common Sinking Fund Account" hereafter renamed the "Common Debt Service Fund" shall be continued and maintained. The proceeds of the sale of the bonds herein authorized, less any premium and accrued interest received thereon, and less any amount paid for said bonds in excess of $1,300,000, and less capitalized interest in the amount of $ 54,880.00 (subject to such adjustments as are appropriate to provide sufficient funds to pay interest duo on the bonds on or beforeFebruaxv�19711_ ), plus any special assessments levied with respect &m��provements financed by the bonds and collected prior to completion of the improvements and payment of the costs thereof, shall be credited to the 1976 Improvement Bonds Construction Fund, from which there shall be paid all costa and expenses of making said improve - mcnts listed in paragraph 10, including the cost of construc- tion contracts heretofore let and all other costs incurred and to he incurred of the kind authorized in Minn000ta Statutes, Section 1175.65; and the moneys In said account n1m.1.1 be used for no other purpose except as otherwise provided by law, provided that the bond proceeds may also be used to the extent necessary to pay interest on said bonds duo prior to the anticipated date of commencement of the collection of taxes or special assossments herein levied or covenanted to be levied, -7- I and provided further that if upon completion of said improve- ments there shall remain any unexpended balance in said 1976 Improvement Bonds Construction Fund, said balance (other than any special assessments) may be transferred by the Council to the fund of any other improvement instituted pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and provided further that any special assessments credited to the 1976 Improvement Bonds Construction Fund are hereby pledged and shall be used only"' to pay principal and interest due on the bonds. There is hereby pledged and there shall be credited to the Common Debt Service Fund (a) all collections of special assessments herein covenanted to be levied and ei�her initially credited to the 1976 Improvement Bonds Construction Fund and required to pay any principal and interest due on the bonds or collected subsequent to the completion of said improvements and payment of the costs thereof; (b) all accrued interest and any premium received upon delivery of said bonds, all funds paid for said bonds in excess of $1,300,000, (c) capitalized interest in the amount of $ 54,880.00 (subject to such adjustments as are appropriate to provide sufficient funds to pay interest due on the bonds on or beforeFebruary 1,1978), (d) any collections of all taxes herein levied for the payment of said bonds; and (e) all funds remaining in said 1976 Improvement Bonds Construction Fund after completion of the improvements and payment of the costs thereof, not so transferred to the fund of another improvement. The Common Debt Service Fund heretofore created shall be used solely to pay principal and interest and any premiums for redemption on the bonds issued hereunder and any other general obligation bonds of the City hereafter issued by the City and made payable from said Fund. 10. It is hereby determined that no less than 20% of the coat of each improvement project to the City within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.58, Subdivision 1(3) shall be paid by special assessments to be levied against every assessable lot, piece and parcel of land benefited by said improvements. The City hereby covenants and agrees that it will do and perform as soon as they may be done, all acts and things necessary for the final. and valid levy of such special anse osments, and in the event that any such assessment be at any time held Invalid with respect to any lot, piece or parcel of land due to any error, defect, or irregularity, in any action or proceedings taken or to be taken by the City or this Council or any of the City officers or employees, either in the making of ruch aaseasmenta or• in the per•rormance of any catdation prrcedent thereto, the City and thio Council w.i:Ll forthwith do all such further acts and take all such further proceedings an may be required by laa to make such assessments -8- s.� a valid and binding lien upon such property. Subject to such adjustments as ,are required by conditions in existance at the time said assessments are levied, it is hereby determined that the assessments shall be payable in equal, consecutive, annual installments, with general taxes for the years shown below and with interest on the deferred balance of all such assessments at the rate of at least -7.50 % per annum: Improvement Designation Amount Levy Years 76-1 $640,265 1977-1996 At the time the assessments are in fact levied the City Council shall, based on the then current estimated col- lections of such assessments, make any adjustments in any ad valorem taxes required to be levied in order to assure that the City continues to be in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, Subdivision 1. 11. To provide moneys for the payment of said principal and interest there is hereby levied upon all of the taxable property in the City a direct annual ad valorem tax which shall be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of, other general property taxes in said City for the years and In the amounts as follows: For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on said bonds, as the some reapectively be- come due, the full faith, credit and taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. If the balance In the Common Debt Service Fund is ever insufficient to pay all principal and .interest then due on the bonds payable there- from, the deficiency shall be promptly paid out of any other funds of the City which are available for such purpose, and such other funds may be reimbursed without interest from the Common Debt Service Fund when a sufficient bnlnnce 1.3 available therein. 12. The City C1cc*:c Is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Wright County, Minnesota, together with such other infor- mation as fie shall require, and to obtain from said Auditor his certificate that oai.d bonds have been entered in the said Auditor'a Bond Register, and that the tax levy required by laid has been made, _10- Year of Tax Year of lax Levy Collection Amount 1976 1977 $65,279 1977 1978 $69,810 1978 1979 $68,536 1979 1980 $72,512 1980 1981 $70,778 1981 1982 $68,849 1982 1983 $72,168 1983 1984 $69,949 1984 1985 $72,979 1985 1986 $75,723 1986 1987 $72,926 1987 1988 $80,535 1988 1989 $71,648 1989 1990 $73,414 lad 1990 1991 $88,015 150, 1991 1992 $64,986 1, Said tax levies are such that if collected in full they, together with estimated collections of special assess- ments and other revenues pledged for the payment of said bonds, will produce at least five percent in excess of the amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the bonds. Said tax levies shall be irrepealable so long as any of said bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the City reserves the right and poncr to reduce the levies In the manner and to the extent permitted by Sec. 475.61(3) M.S.A. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on said bonds, as the some reapectively be- come due, the full faith, credit and taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. If the balance In the Common Debt Service Fund is ever insufficient to pay all principal and .interest then due on the bonds payable there- from, the deficiency shall be promptly paid out of any other funds of the City which are available for such purpose, and such other funds may be reimbursed without interest from the Common Debt Service Fund when a sufficient bnlnnce 1.3 available therein. 12. The City C1cc*:c Is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Wright County, Minnesota, together with such other infor- mation as fie shall require, and to obtain from said Auditor his certificate that oai.d bonds have been entered in the said Auditor'a Bond Register, and that the tax levy required by laid has been made, _10- 13• The officers of the City ar•e hereby author- ized and directed to prepare and furnish to the purchaser of said bonds, and to the attorneys approving the legality of the issuance thereof, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to said bonds and to the financial condition and affairs of the City, and such other. affidavits, certificates and information as are required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of said bonds as the same appear from the books an(; records under their custody and control or as otherwise kno:•rn to them, and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, in- cluding any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed represen- tations of the City as to the facts recited therein. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Martie - and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted In favor thereof: All members present and the following voted against the Same: None Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. -11- STATE OP MINNESOTA COUNTY OF WRf.GHT CITY OF MONTI:CELLO I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, UO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and forc- going extract of minutes with the original thereof on f11e in my (:)Mce, and that the same is a full, true and complete transcript of the minutca of a meeting of the City Council of aald City, duly called and held on the date thcreln indicated, insofar an such minutes relate to the opening and conaldering of bids for, and awarding, the gale of $1,300,000 Oenernl. Obl.igaLlon Improvement Bonds of 1976 of said City. WTTIJI?SS my hand and the seal of said My this 1321' day of' � , 1976. (SEAL) —A tty Clerk -1 2-