Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 03-14-1983AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITX COUNCIL March 14, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo Council Members: Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Dan Blonigen, and Jack Maxwell. 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting Hold on February 28, 1983. 3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests, and Complaints. Public Hearing 4. Public Improvement Hearing - Meadow Oak (Continued), Old Business 5. Consideration of Meadow Oak Final Plat. b. Consideration of a Resolution Ordering Public Improvements and Awaraing Contract - Mcaaow uak. 7. Consideration of Ratification of Revised Contract with owl, Consulting Ergincers. S. Considoration of Adoption of a Pro -treatment ordinance (Public reading) . Now Business 9. Consideration of 1982 Liquor Store Financial Statement. 10. Consideration of a Proposod Job Description - Zoning/Building. 11. Adjournment. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL February 28, 1983 - 7:30 P. M. Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Jack Maxwell, Nen Maus, Dan Blonigen. Members A Dscnt: Fran Fair. 1. Approval of the Minutes. A motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen and unani- mously carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held February 14, 1983, and the special meeting held on February 15th, 1983, as presented. 2. Citizen's Comments/Petitions, Requests, and Complaints. Mr. Don Smith, editor and publisher of the Monticello Times, expressed concern over the Council's intention to publish a summary of the minutes of each Council meeting rather than the entire context of the official minutes. Mr. Smith felt L; ­L L.Ln i:umL aaviuys iuvv1va3 ur aVpiuximaLvly 61,2oO annually would do a dis-service to the public in that they -< would not have the complete text available to read in the paper as in the past. Aftor weighing the cost savings from publication versus the extra man hours involved in preparing a summary for publica- tion, it was the consensus of the Council to continue to publish the entire context of the minutes. Ma, Peggy Stencol inquired whether the City of Monticello had considered the possibility of hiring its own assessor rather than continua to have the County do the assessing. no. 6tencel Indicated that she presently, on a part time basis, does assess- ing for Silver Crack Township and she will become a certified assessor in the near future and would be interested in working for the City of Monticello if the Council should decide to hire its own auseasor. The Council noted that it would con- sider this possibility in the near future. 4. Consideration of Renegotiatinh Garbavo Refuse Contract. Recently, the City Staff has been discussing possible rene- gotiation of the existing garbage contract with the present hauler, Al Corrow. Mr. Corrow, has indicated a desire to extend the contract, if possible,due to major purchases of syuipsmant that he is anticipating. CouncfI'Minutes =-2/28%83 An agreement in priocip t had-4.6en reached with'Ar. Corrov regarding a possible extension .for an additional three years, resulting in a m avaragc increase of approximately 38i over_ the olid contract rate. The contract which is tentatively scheduled to expire August 1, 1983, would-be extended until August 1, 1986. since some of the Council members felt that renegotiatingthe pro - sent contract might result In a loss of compatitivenees, a motion was made by Maus, seconded by Blonigen and unani- mously carried to continue with the present contract for garingc service as is and authorize the City Miministrator to advertise for bids for the contract which is expected to expire August 1, 1983,with bids receivable within the next 60 .lay:: (May 1, 1983). S. Cuusideratiun of change Order 088 and 189 with the Paul A. lourence Company on Wastewater Treatment Plant Construction " Contract. A motion was made by Maus, seconded by Maxwell end unani- measly carried to approve change order 188 for an addi tional cost -of $1,150 for, a change :in theoauotion line on the influent sampler and change^order 089 for a flood - 1+revention alarm system in tho dry well for.an.additional $10;628.00.- . '6:, '.Coneideration-of 'Additional F.ngincering400a- eh 7th Street lmpruvement Proiect. Consalting_Myincer, John Badulich,.requested conoiderdtion of an additional $1,186 in engineering fees over the normal 75i foo,tho•ongineor receives on tlw cost of the project. Mr.. Bndal'ieh explained that duo to the additional prol=lminary plane and [ho additional alternatives that were presented ro- garding,tho road alignment and tiha differont typo of retain- ing walls specified, tHor cost incurred by the engineer wae� opproximately doubled over normal engineering foes for this - vizu.of a project. Mr. Oarlallch noted that the coot over run for his firm was over 54,000 above the 7S% fee, but ra yuosted thnt an additional $1,188 be approved. Although sumo Council members. felt tlw City should have Leon informed earlier that an over run might occur, the Public Works Oiractor agreed that extra coats were incurred by the engineer duo to the numerous altornativun presented. As n result, a motion was made by Maus, soeunded by Maxwell to approve the additional request of 51,188 for the basic engineering foes regarding tlw 7th Street improvement pro- joct. voting in favor wore Maus. Maxwell, and Crlmsmo. Opposed was Blonigon as he felt the anginoer should charge accordirgh to the Current contract at 7%%. 2 Council Minutes - 2/28/83 7. Consideration of Bids Received for Proposed ImptOva:ments to Meadow Oak Subdivision. The bids for sewer and water and street improvements to the Meadow Oak Subdivision were received February 22, 1983. Approximately 18 bids were received ranging in price from a _ low of $731,095 to a high of $896,500. Consulting engineer recommended that the low bid of $731,095 _ from Richard Knutson, Inc. of Burnsville be awarded the _ contract. + The developers of the Meadow Oak Subdivision intend to have ` the final land closing and ownership problem resolved on Friday, March 4th, and as a result, it was recommended that ' the awarding of the contract for improvements be tabled until the March 14th regular Council meeting at which time the final plat will also be submitted for approval and C9 recording. 8. Consideration of Purchasinu Air Comoresaor for Street Depart- , ment. i The Council reviewed with the Public works Director, John Simola, a recommendation for purchasing a now air compressor and jack hammer. Mr. Simola presented three quotos lie recently received with the lowest quote being $6,215.00 from llayden-Murphy, Inc. of j Bloomington. 3 r A motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Maus and unanimously L carried to authorize the purchase of a now Sullair, 50 horse- power, gas air compressor with a 60 pound jack hammer loss �'• 1 the trade in for a not price of $6,215.00. Z' 9. Approval of Rills. t0 A motion was made by Maus, sucondod by Blonigun and unanimously carried to approve the bills for* the month of February as pro- 3 uenLod. Sara lixhibit N1. Q t d f MeoL' y Ai jouned. Rick wolfatoly# Assistant Adm1•nistrator a. - 3 - Council Agenda - 3/14/83 AGENDA SUPPLEMENT 4. Public Improvement Rearinq - Meadow Oak (Continued). (TE). Oh yes, Meadow Oak again. This is the continuation of the public hearing that was begun in September of 1982. This is the meeting when the public hearing should be totally concluded and formally closed. There are, however, a few additions that should be con- sidered during the hearing process rather than during the suc- ceeding items of business. The developers have requested that part of the project they originally intended to do under a private contract now be assumed under the City contract. The added por- tions would be to extend water main to the lift station from where we had originally planned to discontinue work, to install sanitary sewer from the lift station down to the man hole at the beginning of their manufactured housing plat, construct the park- ing lot that is located next to the lift station, and do the street and storm sewer construction from the beginning of the manufactured housing plat to Hwy 152. In addition, Mr. Boyle, concerning that part of the property that lice between Oakwood TndustriAl PArk And the MendOW Oak Suhdivision has requested that the hydrants and leads be deleted so that that land may continue to be farmed. If the figures estimated by the developers and in- cluded herewith are considered oven close to accurate, the increase on the City portion of the project is about $36,000. I should state that the developers fully intend that this is assessable works they are not asking that it be City costs, but only that it be incorporated as part of the City construction and then assessed back to the project. I talked with Rick W. and John S. about these proposals in our agenda meeting and we all agreed that in light of the petition to reassess the 78 project and the delinquencies on certain other projects, we per- haps should be leery in increasing this project size. Simply put, we are already putting many dollars out there based on the prin- cipal of recapturing through assessments. If those assessments become delinquent, we have a tough time paying our bonds. Liens upon land and interest and penalty on delinquent payments aro virtually meaningless to our cash flow situation. My concern harp is, however, that we not make judgements against now developers based upon the Poor performance of old developers. We agree we have had a bad experience with delinquencies with respect to a few dovol- opera involved in large speculative projects. Is it fair, though, to than say that those now speculative developers will not pay their assessments? Cash flow is a logitmato concern from our perspective. So is promoting growth and development. -i- V_ Council Agenda - 3/14/83 Regarding the overall construction project, both City and private, the private developer is projecting picking up of a share of 28%. This easily accommodates the 251 contribution on the developers side. We, of course, have the alternative of asking for a 1001 of the money up front, but part of the devolopment incentive is that certain expenses, major expenses, can be assessed making it easier to pay construction costs. I think it is important to note that neither John, nor Rick, nor I are recommending that the project not be done or even that a greater sum of money be paid in front, but rather we wanted you to be alert to the fact that we are faced with delinquencies on speculative projects and your decision should take this into consideration. Rick suggested to me that one alternative might be to get an assigned letter of credit for the first assessment that would be payable on the non -platted areas. This, of course, would have to come from Boyle and would guarantee payment for at least the first year. Regarding that matter, I guess I am still uncomfortable initiat- ing any special action against the developer lacking a formal written policy which will be applied across the board to all developers. In my conversations with the developers, and it is noted in one of the retorencos, we have leen operating under the assumption that the Council has fully agreed to granting a one year only deferment for the assessment for that water line that is crossing the open space between Oakwood and Meadow Oak. Your conversations with the developer at an earlier meeting stressed that you would not grant a deferment for a longer period of time. but since you had set the precedent for a one year deferment in a different project, you could see no difficulty with granting a similar one year deferment for this project. If your position has changed on this matter, I suggest that be stated clearly during the public hearing process. Finally, with respect to the land title, the closing was completed on Friday, March 4, 1983. I have attached as a reference a letter from Jim Metcalf stating that he and the party he represents no longer have any interest whatsoever in the land in question or the improvements. An a result of that closing, we oleo have in hand all of the signed casements and as of this writing aro being ro- viewed by Gary Pringle as to form and content. Having boon ro- viewed by Metcalf, I suspect that everything in in order. Mopa- fully, I will have Gary's response before Monday. RFFERF.NCF.S: A copy of letter from Jim Metcalf regarding Battle- mont and closing of lard title. - 2 - j#11 did & o"„Io" ATTORNEYS AI LAW P 0, Bo. 44. 313 Went Btoadwav Mo.-tlo. M,nnoso.o 55362 JAMES METCALF March i, 1983 TELEPHONE BRADS EYv LARSON 1872METRO231 METRO 161 2) 411.3393 Tom Eidem City Administrator City Hall Monticello, MN 55362 IN HE: Hoglund/Boyle Dear Tom: I am writing to confirm our conversation today concerning the Hoglund/Boyle property. The transaction was closed and Mr. Hoglund has been fully paid and deeded all property South of the Freeway to Mr. Boyle and Mr. linglund therefore has no further interest in this property. ( Sinccrcly , METCALF & LARSON 13y: JAMES G. METCALF JGM:sjc CC: Maurice Hoglund 0 C Council Agenda - 3/14/83 5. Consideration of Meadow Oak Final Plat. (TE) Prior to authorizing any improvements to be made, the plat will have to be approved and come into existence. You are actually being addressed with three plats: 1. The plat from open space into 16 outlots. 2. Outlot B replatted into Meadow Oak Estates. 3. Outlot F being replotting into Meadow Oak 2nd Addition. Included in the reference information are two outlines that, as far, as I can tell, address all of the concerns that have been raised up to this point. As you recall, the Planning Commission has already moved to recommend approval of the final plate. If the plats are approved, they would request that the actual signings are executed right during the meeting so that they may be recorded on Tuesday. Rick is currently assembling the figures for all preliminary work that has boon done by consultants, the sum of which is expected to be paid prior to the approval of the plat. That amount is $6,500. Sometime before Monday, we will be contacting them to let them know they should be bringing a check in that amount in order to got the plat signed. If, for 9-re reason, they 90 not hying the check by the Monday meeting, you may still approve the plat with the dir— ection that the Mayor not sign the final until the check is submit ted to the city treasury. REFERENCES: Copies of letters from Ultra-(tomes regarding proposed changes in construction and proposed aooessmont allocation, copies of two Meadow Oak Subdivision outline addroeeing agreed upon roquizo- monts and restrictions and marketing calendar, an estimated con- struction adjustment cost projection, copy of a map of Meadow Oak Subdivision as platted as outlots and high lighting those outlots to be replotted. MIC ULTRA HONES, Inc. 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55441 March 7, 1983 MEADOW OAK SUBDIVISION OUTLINE I: Plats A. Meadow Oak - -riaL subdivision into 16 outiots. B. Meadow Oak Estates - Replat outlot B (executive). C. Meadow Oak 2nd Addition - Replat outlot F (manufactured). I1: Parkland A. Outlot -c dedicated to the City when the plats are recorded. B. Trailways dedicated as each plat is recorded throughout the project. C. Pathways will be installed at developers expense in outlot E and Trailways concurrently with the development of each plat. D. Oudot A to be dedicated by Jim Boyle when 50% of the lots in the entire project have houses on them. III: Covenants a. Restriction of storing boats, RV's, and similar vehicles in front yard. B. No out -buildings in front yard. C. Builder/Developer may Impose other restrictions as it deems necessary. IV: Improvements A. Public project to be assessed will include: 1) The water and sewer to the project. 2) All the Improvements (grading, utilities and streets) in the Meadow Oak Estates. B. Private work to be paid for by the Developer will be all the im- provements in the Meadow Oak 2nd Addition. V: Manufactured Homes To Be Used A. Dynamic Homes, Detroit Lakes, Minnesota. B. Homera, Tracy, Minnesota. VI: Construction A. Site plan showing location of the house, garage and plantings will be submitted for each manufactured home. B. Each house will have one of the following: 1) Basement. 2) Garage. 3),r.P)Storage shed matching t house and at least 96 square feet. VII: sodding A. Front and side yards will be sodded or seeded using the following rules: 1) If the house is occupied between May 1 and Octoberl, it will be completed within 60 days after occupancy. 2) If the house Is occupied between October 1 and May 1, it will be completed prior to July i following occupancy. B. Builder/Ueveloper will obtain a written agreement from the homebuyer that the back yard will be sodded or seeded within one year from occupancy. VIII: General Development Procedures, A. One tree per lot or two trees per corner lot to be located in the front yard not the boulevard. Existing trees will qualify. B. NSP will be allowed to have an overhead line within the existing UPA easement only. All other lines will be underground as per ordinance. C. Perimeter screening shall be installed along County Road 118 at developers expense at the time that the development and replatting of Outlots 1, M, N and P using berming and/or medium density planting techniques. 0. Jim Boyle will receive a one year deferrment from assessment for those puolic iap rova ants installed across the land tying between the Oakwood Industrial Park and Meadow Oak Subdivision. Interest during the deferred year will be added to the principal and the J assessment term will run concurrent with the Meadow Oak assessments. I J I--" LV A -R qfo m es. 1 --Ac. t_ C " TrJ11101—roLU s Hollies March 8, 1983 Thomas Eidem, City Manager City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN 55362 Subject: Monticello, MN Project 82-2 - Proposed Changes 96535 Dear Mr. Eidem: Dick Knutson and Jim Boyle met with John Badalich of OSM on Monday, Februa- ry 28, 1983 regarding the City Improvement Project 82-2. They discussed the need for the hydrants and leads proposed to be installed over the proposed in- dustrial and commercial property which Jim Boyle owns. Since Jim Boyle intends to continue to farm this Sand, he respectfully requests that the City consider deleting all the hydrants and leads over the property outside the proposed Mea- dow Oak residential subdivision. This would save money currently and allow farming to continue. Dick Knutson also talked to John Badalich today regarding an addition to the City project. The addition would be the watermain from where it ends in Meadow Oak Estates down the easement in Phases II and III of the Manufactured tome lots along Red Oak Lane and up Meadow Oak Drive to the lift station. This Is shown on the enclosed drawing. This would tie the City project together between the water Main and the Lift Station. we would still do the grading, other utilities and streets in the Manufactured Home Area under this plan. After additional review of the plans and specs for both the City project and our project, we are proposing an alternative. Due to the lift station construction, parking lot, entrance, etc., all being in the same area, a logical division of responsibility for the construction would be to add certain construction to the City project. Qf) 7641 Dallas Lane . liflo G it,vQ. :011, 553G9 I . LOOP the watermain to the lift station as discussed above. 2. Install sanitary sewer from the lift station to the manhole centerline of Red Oak Lane. 3. Parking lot located on the park land. 4. Street construction and storm sewer from the North right-of-way of Red Oak Lane to Highway No. 152 including the entrance. Based on the possibility of two different contractors doing the City pro- ject and our project, the above work should be added to the City project to a- void dual responsibilities. Having two contractors trying to work in the same location at the same time and attempting to determine who would be responsible for road performance guaranty, could cause some problems. we therefore propose the above changes. If we delete some items referred to in paragraph one and add the items re- ferred to in paragraph three (which supersedes paragraph two) the net addition to the City Project should be less than 10%. Also the amount still being in- stalled privately by us would be approximately 28% of the total project. Thank you for you continued cooperation. RJB:j Enclosure cc: John Badalich, OSM very truly yours, ULTRA HONES, Inc. % Robert J. Bemboom, Treasurer C ••1017107-10LUS 1101711.1 TU[1(1V•• March 7, 1983 Thomas Eidem, City Manager City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN 55362 Subject: allocation of Public Improvement Project 82-2 Dear Mr. Eiden: Dick Knutson and Jim Boyle met with John Badalich of OSM on Monday February 28, 1983. They discussed the allocation of the Public Improvement Project af- fecting Meadow Oak and Jim Boyle. It appears that there will be benefit to the following: 1. The 33 executive lots in Phase I. 2. The remaining 43 executive lots. 3. The chtire project ,^p ^x! tc!, `CC units). 4. That land outside Meadow Oak. we request that this allocation be reviewed and something similar would be used to allocate the costs. Enclosed is a copy of the proposed allocation. The other column represents the assessment to Jim Boyle's other property and the cost of the oversizing of the water line which would be paid for by the City. Please review this and let us know if this appears to be reasonable. Very truly yours, IATRA HOMES, Inc. 2ert J. Bemboom, Treasurer RJB:j Enclosure cc: John Badalich, OSM 7641 Dallas Lane . r .1 ' "', Aon. 55309 `o i i ,oP 9 •, opo E D A ba' Tav -9 9 r.o to 9b ' O�'ir+V. 95r�S E. ,NJ 491.0 SAV. 994rS ' r r V.945.0Ti Zc94i.OW 2 .o V. 99�•b TO 9bo-o( r i / '7 4N to �{ v 2y 4 •� 8 Imo•-' S /•'' �y _i ULTRA HOCS, Inc. 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55441 March 8, 1983 MARY.EIING PLAN OUTLINE FOR MEADOd OAK 1: General Develooment A. Affordable housing. B. Country living. C. Fishing, hunting and recreational activities nearby. D. Planned Residential Development: 1) Public parks. 2) wooded. 3) Good living environment. E. Energy efficient homes. 11: liminq of Development A. March, 1983. v� 1) Final approvals. 2) Record plats. 3) Begin installation of improvements. 4) Select models. B. April, 1983. 1) Continued ecnstruction of improvements. 2) Start advertising campaign in local newspaper, etc. 3) Begin selling. C. May, 1983. 1) Models delivered. 2) Construct model center area. 3) Broaden advertising campaign. D. June, 1983. 1) Grand opening of models. 2) Completion of improvements by July 1. E. July, 1983. 1) First occupancy. L lIl: Model Center A. A model center containing 5 models (3 from Dynamic and 2 from Homera). B. Entrance and models to be landscaped. C. A sales office will be constructed containing brochures, samples, pictures, etc. 0. This will be a one stop model center where a buyer can select their: 1) Lot. 2) House style with respective colors, flooring, etc. 3) financing for the package. G MiAho(,) oh -IK ToTrL C+ry Paaj-Err 731 o JL f L £ Y D P- A -N /T 0 L fA (AfPPdX) — Li 0, OTi-U 691ro9L �iQDI-MDA) DF V44101(5 ITEMS (OMPROI) 76,vu--c 767,09 NEW -MTAL- Fop . Cary 767,096 �C(AbeWr << rY PRO JTC)' 73/1046 Snlc�4 ASS. �wepx� �6, on -a (5%). �u 111 c i 7-Y P Ro j-� e T '73 0? APr�I�a —o orNlz-'24 oUTsIbi ln4Dow qA-K -;4, 030 ycsro4 b '? NNJ --7r,, K (ApPp o �2 9a, -7 q -rUTJ) L V14 -CIA c --tr, 11114-&„ 06K '177 ,S3 o 9 P-rJ 5 f f k a 901764 - 7b,o0v 9o� C ITy w 012-K )IJ ; Pv-Tf Cr 14651 -all -rP_APJ 5 r -I Sb � ,obd �,,,9 PY) h 7-�Tfi L(o 7 '7 ? MEADOW OAKS RI t14 "T,0" 7.96 AC. OAK 4, OVILOT C=;Rp 12.00AC. 9.74 9 A; - I ---------- OUTLOT a +5.44 AC. wirLOT 13.32 AC. A -DO ilk 35.07AC. 9.39 AC. Vs 4.55 AC. I , ........ .. 6.64 AC, IF 4t 7 10.60 AC. 4.15 AC. 11.25 AC. 17 7.72 AC. Council Agenda - 3/14/83 6. Consideration of a Resolution Orderinq Public Improvements and Awardinq Contract - Meadow Oak. (TE) Most of the pertinent data relating to this item has been dis- cussed in one of the two previous items. If it is determined by the Council that the changes are to be made according to the re- quest of the developers and thus the contract and plans and specs Are adjusted accordingly, there should be a simple motion passed denoting the change in the scope of the project prior to the adoption of the resolution. The fact that this alteration in the scope of the project was addressed under the public hearing segment of the meeting will make the adjustment completely legal within M.S. 429. Whatever your decision on the adjustment, this resolution is the critical one in terms of the ordering of the improvements awarding the contract and allowing us to initiate the sale of bonds. We have begun communication with Springsted to prepare for the bond sale, and are assembling the data that they require to package a proposal. You will be confronted with several more resolutions when we got to the actual bond issue that relates specifically to the issue. This resolution is doing nothing more than ordering the improvement and awarding the contract. ALTUNATIVE ACTION: 1. Adopt a motion ordering an amendment to the contract and then adopting the resolution. 2. Take no action on the requested changes (thus, lotting the request die) but still adopt the resolution ordering the improvement. 3. Take no action on the resolution, thereby postponing all activity. RT-79RENCES: A copy of the resolution ordering the public improve- mont and awarding the contract. - 4 - C C RESOLUTION 01983 - RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENTS ACCEPTING THE BID AND AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 27th day of Sept- ember, 1982, fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed improve- ment of m ado:+ flak Subdivicion by installing sewer collection lines, water distribution lines, storm sewer lines, streets, curb and gutter and all appurtenant cork, and; WHEREAS, 10 days published notice of the hearing through two (2) weekly publications of the required notice was given and a hearing was held thereon on the 12th day of October, 1982 and continued through the 14th day of March, 1983, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon, and; WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Meadow Oak Subdivision by making the aforementioned improvements, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Richard Knutson, Inc. $731,095.55 Northdale Construction Company, Inc. $748,701.50 IaTour Construction $755,310.97 Arcon Construction Co., Inc. $764,730.90 Minn -Kota Excavating $765,797.00 Kenko, Inc. $769,287.00 Orfio 6 Sons, Inc. $781,431.21 Austin P. Keller Construction Co. $782,402.00 Lindwehr Heavy Moving, Inc. $796,138.25 G.M. Contracting Corp. $797,434.50 Sollin Brothers, Inc. $797,839.00 Encon Utilities, Inc. $854,393.00 Mueller Pipeline $856,831.80 Shocaley P s H $858,917.55 P.C.I. $871,766.85 A.R.J. Construction Company, Inc. $873,243.00 G.L. Contracting Company $894,875.00 Lamctti a Sona, Inc. $898,000.00 WIhERIiAS, it hao been determined that Richprd ^nutuon, Inc. of Burnovillu, is the lowest rcrponsiblo bidder, NOW THVREFORE, BE IT RLSOLVED BY THE City Council of the City of Monticello, M i nno nota : 1. Such improvement is hereby ordered as prop000d in the Council resolution adopted the 27th day of September, 1982. O RESOLUTION 41983 (Continued) 2. The Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Richard Knutson, Inc. of Burnsville in the name of the City of Monticello for the improvement of Meadow Oak Subdivision by installing sanitary sewer collection lines, water dis- tribution lines, storm sewer lines, streets, curb and gutter, and all appurtenant structures according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the CiLy Administrator. 3. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall tx retained until a contract han been signed. Adopted )ry the City Council this 14th day of March, 1983. ATTEST: Thomas A. Eidcm City Administrator Arve A. Grimsmo Mayor of Monticello (D Council Agenda - 3/14/83 7. Consideration of Ratification of Revised Contract with OSM, Consultinq Engineers. (TE) on Tuesday, March 8th, John Badalieh and I spent several hours going over the proposed contract for engineering services. Most of the questions that were raised in the evaluation session were addressed in addition to a few other points. I think the major points which would be of interest to each of you as opposed to simple language changes, are as follows: Basic fee - For projects $100,000 and under, the City will be charged an hourly fee but in no case will the fee exceed 11% of the project cost. For projects from $100,000 to $500,000, the engineer will charge 7.5%. This is the same fee as the existing contract. For projects $500,000 to $1,000,000, the fee will be 6.5%. This also is the same fee as in the existing contract. For projects over $1,000,000, the fee will be determined based upon the curve which is es- tablished by professional engineering societies. Essentially, it translates to $1,000,0001 would go at a rate of 6.220 and the percentage would decrease according to the increase in the project. i B. We have inserted a phrase that will require the engineer to request in advance any additional fees due to excossive time or work required in project development. C. We have stipulated within the text of the contract that the "as constructed" plans shall be submitted to the City within 90 days of completion of the project. We have inserted a clause that states engineer's attendance at meetings shall be upon request of the City. It is also undaratood between John and I, although not inserted into the contract, that agenda review shall only be billed in the cases where the engineers are directed to prepare, thomr selves to address a particular issue. If they arc requested to attend for general information reasons, their review of the agenda will be considered as part of their own obligation and will not receive added compensation for said review. These are the major high light changes in the contract, and moot other provisions remain the same. There wore some provisions that each of us had queotions concerning, but because of the annual renewal date, we, determined that it would be boat to lot the proviaiono go and should they turn into a problem than prior to the automatic renewal in the next year, we, can diacucs those very issues. - 5 - Council Agenda - 3/14/83 ALTERNATIVE ACTION: 1. Ratify the enclosed contract. 2. Do not ratify the contract and request more negotiations. REFERENCES: A copy of the final contract document. I - Council Agenda - 3/14/83 8. Consideration of Adoption of a Pre -Treatment Ordinance (Public Reading (JS) . The pretreatment ordinance has been revised at the request of Wrightco Products. This ordinance should have been passed months ago to comply with EPA and MPCA regulations concerning our grant moneys. Changes in the ordinance were primarly in format, definition and clarity. The object of the review was to keep the intent of the ordinance, make it as clear as possible, yet soften it so that it would not deter industry from locating in Monticello. The review of these changes is being made this week and if any changes on these changes are necessary, we will discuss them at the Council meeting. REFERENCES: Council agenda. of December 13, 1982 regarding the pretreatment ordinance. GNOTE, Copies of pro -treatment ordinance are available at City Hall. - 7 - Council Agenda - 12/13/82 1 4. Sewer Discharqo and Pretreatment Ordinance. (J. 5.) C As part of the EPA regulations, the city is required to develop and enact an ordinance to control sewer discharges and industrial pretreatment. This regulation requires that the ordinance be drafted in rough form by the 90% payment level at the WWTP project. This requirement has been met. The ordinance is then required to be in final form and enacted into law by the and of the grant budget period, which is December 31, 1982. The ordinance would take affect January 1, 1983. The ordinance is designed to control pollutants which may cause problems with the WWrP, prohibit pollutants which we cannot treat and finally improve opportunitiesto reclaim and recycle wastewater and sludges. The ordinance affects all users, large and small, in that they may be asked to file periodical discharge reports. The ordinance requires all industries which are now, or propose to discharge into our sewer system, to obtain a discharge permit. Existing industrial users aro expected to apply for a permit within 60 days after this ordinance is in affect. New users shall apply 180 days prior to connecting or discharging. Each permit shall not exceed 5 years in length and shall be re- applied for 160 days in advance of expiration. The fees are pro- portional to use and are based on a point system. A typical industrial user discharging up to 50,000 gallons per day with a ono point discharge would pay a fee of $300 for the permit which may run an long as 5 years. In addition to the above, the ordinance also requires the industrial user to provide and operate monitoring facilities for each discharge point. Tho ordinance also imposes civil penalties for users found violating the ordinance from $100 to $1,000 for each day on which a violation occurs. Enclosed in tho agenda is a letter from Charles A. Lopak which also details the ordinance. A copy of the ordinance is available at city hall for your review. C, (2 17 - ' G Council Agenda - 3/14/83 9. Consideration of 1982 Year End Liquor Store Financial Statement. (R.W.) Mark Irmiter, Liquor Store Manager, will be at Monday night's meeting to review with the Council the year end liquor store financial statements for 1982. Enclosed with the agenda, you will find a revenue and expense comparison for 1981 and 1982. Although the statements have been prepared in early February, they are being presented to the Council at this meeting as Mark was on vacation during the last two meetings held in February. REFERENCES: Copy of year end financial statement for 1982 for Liquor Store. - 8 - MfIN'flf:EI..I..O MUNICIPAL. 1..I0IIOk BAL.ANrE SHEET MUNICIPAL. I..IOIIOR STORE. t DECEMBER 31, 1982 CURRENT ASSETS CASH CASH IN BANK -RESTRICTED INVESTMENTS IN VESTMENTS-RF_STRICTEO NSF CHECK-RECEIVABI..E INVENTORIES PREPAID INSURANCE. UNAMORTIZED BOND DISCOUNT TOTAL- CURRENT ASSETS PROPERTY AND EOIIIPMENT LAND BUILDINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS PARKING LOT FURNITURE AND FIXTURES ASSETS f 38r146.51 2+934.80 133+945.32 47.540.20 53.79 89,335.20 2,622_.17 1x060.57 ------------- 6 f C.'IJMIJL,ATED DEPRECIATION •( TOTAL PROPERTY AND FOIIIPMFNT TOTAL. ASSETS C $ 315,638.56 6+839.95 151x671.04 44.532.33 ------------- 2.11 r 5:iH.H2 53.683.11) 4 157+875.7.1 ---------- $ 473.514.27 11,1-. L 1A I RON At. I r'Rl.. L—IMUn BALANCE SHEET MONICIPAI. LIRUOR STORK DECEMBFR 31v 1982 LIABILITIES AND FRUITY CURRENT LIABILITIES ACCOUNTS PAYABLE $ 2BY440.26 ACCRUED EXPENSES 9t797.79 ------------- TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES f 38s238.05 LONG—TERM LIABILITIES BONDS PAYABLE (REVENUE) 6 -------------- 105#000.00 TOTAL LONG—TERM LIAPILTIES $ 105P000.00 TOTAL LIABILITIES 6 143#238.05 EQUITY RETAINED EARNINGS REVENIIES OVER EXPENDITURFS R6089.99 TOTAL EQUITY t 330v276.22 CTOTAL LIABILITES AND EP(JITY $ 473,514.27 r ra"X r L 1(OHIICE1.1,0 1.10110r, F:FVf--14#1E AND FXF'rN';r-S mimiciptij. LIMJOR STORE TOTAL EXPENDMIRES OPERATING INCOM IiOW43A.;'*l 12.10 s 24,235.07 9.37 S 102,428.91 11.24 77,759.18 6.49 84,567.07 9.29 oq FOR THF TWELVE' ItORTHS ENDED PEfFlWFR 31, 15-132 AND 1991 CURKHT-PERIOD ClJR--PP YEAR -TO -PATE Y -T -D FAMr-K1-LST-YR PI!-j.YR Y- T-D-1-ST-Yk YTD -1.Y AMOUNT RATIO AMOUNT RATIO AMOUNT kA.T 10 AMMINT RATIO OFF SALE LIDUOR SAI -ES 4 94v392.21 35.49 4 244,717.05 32.2;4 s 91,:131.47 35.41 S 29R,459.66 32.77 BEER SALES 106t893.36 44.96 471,590.77 51.61 114Y7507.71 44.30 467,078.78 lilk .28 WINE SAI -FS 30,130.88 16.04 IIIY262.83 12.18 41r892.9P 16.21 100,521.98 11.91 OTHER 52 36,199.'14 3.96 i0, 523. 30 4.07 36, F109. 21 4.04 TOTAL SALFS (OFF SALE) $ 237,777.37 100.01 s 913,70,9.79 100.00 4 250, 45S. 46 99.99 4 9101869.63 00.00 COST OF SALES (OFF SALE) COST OF SAI -ES s IR6tR20.48 78.57 $ 725,579.40 -725, 79.41 4 198s507.46 76.84 s 723,873.65 79.47 TOTAL. COST OF SAI -ES (OFF SALE)S I R6, F528. 48 78. 57 $ 579.40 79.41 76.84 S 723,871.65 79.47 GROSS PROFIT (OFF SALE) s 50,94R.R9 21.44 6 188,190.:(9 20. .;9 sF 59,8AR.00 23. V-1 s --------------- 186199`.1.98 20.53 EXPENDITURES -AUDIT FEES OMPUTFR COSTS $ .00 330.00 .00 $ 1,300.00 .14 i .00 .00 $ 1Y283.00 .14 .14 1f430.00 .16 3130.00 .13 1,761.50 .14 I katRANCE 3,133.99 1.32 12x595.30 1.38 IT116.20 .43 10T399.97 1.14 SALARIFS 14Y038.42 5.90 :i9,167.59 6.18 13r833.23 5.31; 54,247.73 5.96 PAYROI.t. TAXES 11263.76 .53 5,259.,is .58 978.04 .36 4,960.64 .54 GROUP IMMIRAMCE 824.74 .35 3r965.18 .43 410.50 .16 11990.60 -22 TELEPHONE 703.:17 .09 628.50 .07 16i.77 .06 640-20 .07 UTILITIES 2v134.46 .90 gr373.47 .92 2,040.94 .79 7rH13.48 .86 stippl. I FS 851.86 .36 21968. 36 .:(2 750. 69 .29 2, 751 .04 R I ft FRIlIPMENT 226.10 .10 507.23 .06 391.32 .15 1#456.99 .16 R 9 K BUILDIN(M .00 .00 27.92 .00 751.24 .14 2,:103.76 .27 ArA;EkTISING 1,077.00 .45 2,503.Al;.' 7 660.30 .116 1.x206.48 .24 MSF CHEM EXPENSE 57.71 .02 57.71 .01. .00 .00 .00 .00 UNEMPLOYMENT MAIMS EXPENSE .00 .00 1,01 V" .31 .11 33.143 .01 18R.86 .02 DEPR-ACRIIIRFD ASSETS 2,502.74 1.05 9,303.12 1.0:! 2t36i. 28 .91 8,721.77 .96 OMER 767.50 .11 1,328.36 irl ROf1.07 .31 2,002.89 .22 TOTAL EXPENDMIRES OPERATING INCOM IiOW43A.;'*l 12.10 s 24,235.07 9.37 S 102,428.91 11.24 77,759.18 6.49 84,567.07 9.29 oq MONYME1.1.0 MUNICIPAL LIRIJOR NEVENUF P.ND EXPENSE!; 1111NIC;IP(41. LIRUOR STORE 161 FOR THE TWELVE fiONTHS F--Hl,IFI) IJFCFMI:ER 31, 1987 AND 1981 ClJRRVNT-PrRI6D CUR -PD YVAk-TO-DATF Y -T -D SAME-Pr.1-l.ST--1'R PI)-LYR ST -YR YTD -LY AMOUNT RATIO AMOUNT RATIO AMOUNT RATIO AMOUNT RATIO OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE) 6 .00 .00 g 1,200.00 .46 $ 6,481.63 .71 CETA REIMBURSEMENTS f .00 4,699.86 .00 1.98 1:',,:544.20 1.70 ;•1!68'1..44 2.20 26r486.47 1.91 INTEREST INCOME OTHER 1MCOKE. 150.00 .0l, 307.65 .03 9'1.51 .04 95.51 .01 CASH OVER (SHORT) 96.97 .04 247. 88 .03 46.43) ( .02) '1.59. 80) .03) BOND PAYMENT -INTEREST < 1I839.63) .771 7,469.02) .82) 2f1675.13) ( .84) 8,741.77) .96) TRANSFERS 011T .00 .00 .00 .00 i 50, 279. 14) ( 50.1:',) < 150r279.14) 16.50) TOTAL OTHER INCOME (EXPENSC) 6 3,107.20 1.31 $ Bf630.71 5/4 t I A5 r 3 12. 75) ( 56.311 126017.0) 13-86) 14ET IMMME 27036.24 11.43 $ 86f3B9.89 943 . 1Y..3M 0987982) ( 425 41r650.03) 4.57) 161 It °ou,,ra-f.^ *uvIcIpm 1.10tm» mmns pxorIr p,^r,°cpT 12/,31/82 nv,"".t' pv,i"o Year - to ' onx° n.m°-pmo-�v,�-rr ,-o.*-r, :m"""' x o°""vx x «~"""^ x o=".* x Lxmmn wwI-sn v 8*,392.21 100.00 ^ ?94,717^05 100^00 91,531.47 100.00 * 29o,45+'66 100^00 COST OF SALES ^^,m".n^ 78.97 231,348,0 /n,*o ^v,o^o.nn r».»3 uxs,mw.nv r+.o/ GROSSpnnrIv ------------- * -_____Gwoan 171747. 35 21.03 * ^n~»^*'»' 2^'»* * ~~^~.. zr.°nn.rn 24 S7 * ^»,^o,_r/ »"_r» nccn pucs ~.~.-........ 1*6,e93.36 ~~~.. ...~..,...~~..~ 100.00 471,590,7' ..........'....... 100,00 114,,07^71 .~~..~ ~~~~.~.~~~~= 100.00 ^*,.orn.n* =�~== 100.00 cuor or SALES �---------`- 87,574.55 n^,rz nor,^xJ,nr 82.. Ili 92,921.24 o1.Ix 302172e.rn n^.v^ sR"SS '~vF`'r * ^9.31n.*i \0.07 $ 84,150,r0 J. R5 ^ 21,506^47 18. 85 ^ n^,xso.ox 18,06 wuwE mmcn 30,130,88 /w.= 111062,83 100.00 4»,n92.?8 00.00 108,521.98 100.00 cnnT OF mLpn 25,266.14 66,26 74,an1,+0 o/,nr 28.322,64 a/.^x zx,so,.rh 67.74 ,PnmSn pnnrxr '-------- w 12,864.74------- �p,n^*, ----' zz.,^ p 36,411.23 --- -------- ^n,rn ^ `z.x,".n^ ---- --------- 172'3 9 * 35,014.02 ----- 32.26 orxrR yvLcS n,360,p2 100,00 361199.m ^ov."" 10 no 100.00 36,v"v.21 100.00 COST OF soLpn ^,vxr."s rz,np 27,3/7.30 75,*6 7069.46 67.18 27,501.30 '^./` Gwnmo PROF u, * 2.291.07 o,'"^ * fl, ao1.ov 74.54 « 3,453^84 32.8? w p,xo,.rI 25.29 FREIGHT nmcs .w .w .00 .00 .ov 'm .00 ,00 oosr or nmss 1,273.oe .o^ *^ao.^n .00 ».xon.*o .vo *15*,75 ,00 snowm pnnrn .^ow/ *630.41)` 1,228.a0` ' ."o,*' _ roroI. ymzn 237,7n.37 ^nv,v^ 913.769^79 `oo.ov 258,455.46 iuo.00 9/0,869.63 100.00 rnrwI. rnSr OF SA^Fs , RA, oze."8 70,5/ rx:,n/v.^o 79,41 19u,x07.46 r^.n^ ,zn,nrx.^n r+.^, GROSS PROFIT ^ 50,948. (49 21.*3 1881190,J1/ 20. 59 59^868.00 m^1^ v 1 Be- ~m.98 20. 513 It Council Agenda - 3/14/83 r 10. Consideration of a Proposed Job Description - Zoning Administrator/ Building Official/etc. (TE) I have prepared a proposed job description to use to fill the va- cany that we currently have. To begin, I listed all of the various duties we would wish to have addressed in the City, even those that might be contracted or might be part time. I then tried to unite those which would be complementary to one another; I then addressed projected hours that might be demanded for each segment of a single position. Then by trimming away those that were the least related and their accompanying hours required, I arrived at this proposal. The projected hours on the attached sheet are very rough estimates. It is extremely difficult to some how divide the hours spent be- tween planning, zoning and building. These three positions are so closely related that the time spent on one is very much time spent on another and makes distinct separation virtually impossible. The Civil Defense segment of the description is really projected as a type of fill in. The Civil Defense Program is terribly important to the City, but at the same time there is considerable assistdnce from the Fads, the State and the County level. Actual time con- sumed by a City employee in active Civil Defense tasks is relative- :, .aroa.ly octaL:icrr s1Zd a fa*r:, accnd crgcr. c•; an and a fairlystableCivil Defense system. For any new employee, the major task would be maintenance and refinement of said programs. The assessor's position is the klinker. It may be extremely dif- ficult to find an applicant who is both a certified building official, which in a State requirement, and a certifiod Minnesota Aoeeasor, which in also a State requirement. These jobs aro not hold to be incompatible with one another by State law, so it is conceivable that one person hold both positions. It simply may be difficult to find a person with both certifications. with respect to the II.R.A. executive officer, I see this position as being complementary since it would land itself to the natural liaison.with the Planning Commission. 1, myself, would stay vary active in the H.R.A. since I find that to be a very appealing sogment of my job. 11owavar, because of the budgetary conflicts and the conflicts that can arise from making professional judge- ments from two sides of the fence, I think that a separate in- dividual would be more effective as the 11.R.A.'s executive officer. As you will note, the job description stipulates that the now Parson or the parson who fill this position must work on all II.R.A. developments with the City Administrator. 1 think that it would be important that the administrator stay closely involved whore tax increment financing or other types of innovative financing is used and that the now position not be granted autonomy to exercise any of those duties. - 9 - Council Minutes - 3/14/83 At the last meeting when I discussed this potential job descrip- tion, I mentioned that the Business and Industry Committee was also very interested in looking for a person who could perform duties on their behalf. I attempted, in the early stages, to include some of those duties into this position. It simply did not work out effectively. I think that stretching the duties into Business and Industry Development and even though they an- ticipate that being part time, would still create too much of a demand on the person's time and his/her performance in all areas would eventually be comprised. The job description is adopted largely from existing job descrip- tions as well as the assessor's job description from the City of St. Cloud. Again, I know that it may be difficult to find an applicant suited to this type of job description. One possibility would be to advertise as is or slightly amended and see what kind of a response we get. Then if we find that candidates and their abilities are limited, we would have to make an alternate decision. One final note relating to the assessing. We did not choose to keep a City assessor back when the Minnesota Statute put in the Sunset Provision for city ausessment. We can now, however, sub— nit, n Fn..nHL . :_net �n tti.. of darn of Minnesota, that we be allowed to reinstitute a City asseasor'n position. We would have to be granted approval by the Commissioner of Revenue. Also, with respect to the City assessing position, we anticipate paying nearly $11,000 to the County for them to perform our assessing for us. If you view the above job description as worth being anywhere from $22,000 to $24,000, the $11,000 currently attributed to the County for assessing could be attributed to this position and as a result, we would be getting all of the other duties (Zoning, Building, Civil Defense, N.R.A., and Planning) for $11,000 to $13,000 plus benefits. This would mean a substantial savings to the City if, in fact, we can find a qualified applicanL. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Adopt the proposed job description and authorize an advertisement for applicants. 2. Reject the job doscription with direction to re -define the position. REFEREI.CES: A copy of the proposed job doscription. RELATED NOTE: Up to this point, we have been using the building official from the City of Elk River to got us through those tine. Because spring is rapidly approaching and construction starts aro anticipated to be up, he has indicated that hie time is axtramo ly limited and would like to be released from his obligation to the C City of Monticollo in order to devote his full time to the City of Elk River. That loavoe us with the problem of finding an interim inspector. In a conversation ono afternoon with Arve, he suggo etod that we hiro J.W. Miller in the interim or oven possibly as a full time person to take on this position. - 10 - U CII C. Council Agenda - 3/14/83 Since I do not know Mr. Miller other than by sight, I certainly have no position on this whatsover and feel that perhaps Arve can ex- pand more on how he would see this developing. At any rate, what- ever the decision concerning Mr. Miller turns ont to be, I would like some direction relative to what to do until the position is formally filled (whatever position it might finally turn out to be). Rick Breeze, the Elk River inspector, has introduced us to another building inspector who would work on a private contracts in addition, I have had several other people in the area contact me because they were aware of the vacancy. Again, I would hope that you can provide me with some direction this coming Monday so that we may take action quickly and be ready for early spring construction starts. r ZONING AS2MINISTRATOR projected hourly Breakdown 40 - 45 Hour week 6 months 6 months (building season) Zoning Administrator 12 12 Building Inspector 10 3 to 4 planner 6 6 ASBCSSor 3 to 4 10 H.R.A. 7 7 Civil. Defense Director 5 5 7*ota1 Hours 43 to 44 43 to 44 The above hours include attendance at 2 Council, 1 H.R.A, and one Planning coamission meeting per month. 'Cnat is pruixil,iy liw auyvi i—;Cuiucy 1n 'LaL ✓ the rest of us (salaried employees who regularly attend meetings) rarely cut back our work work to make up for time spent in meetings. Thus, approximately 2 to 25 hours par weak can be attributed to actual performance c,.f duties in one or more of the areas, thereby, generating groator produc- tivity. J M J ZONIM; ADMINISTRATOR NATURE, OF WORK, This is a responsible administrative position of a technical nature in- volving multi -faceted responsibilities in related departments. The de- partments combined within the single position are: a) Zoning Administration b) Building Inspection c) planning and Development d) Assessing e) Civil Defense Work involves responsibility for administering and enforcing State and Federal Statute:; and City policic:: and ordinances relative to zoning, building. assessing and Civil Defense. Work will involve attending mectittls of City Council (2 monthly), planning Commission (I per month) and Housing and Redevelopment Authority (1 Per month): inspections of City improvements including, hot not limited to, buildings, sanitary sewer, Storm sewer and water extensions, streets, curb and gutter. Work is perfurmud with latitude for independent action and judgement. This position will be responsible for development and maintenance of relevant departmental budget. Accountable to: 1. City Administrator 2. Finance Director Relative to inspections of public improvements other than buildings, the Zoning Administrator will be under the direction of the Public works Director. EXAM111 ,S OF WORK/TASK RESPONSIBILITIES (Any one position of this class may not include all duties listed, nor do listed examples include all duties which may be found in positions of this class). Zoning/Building - Maintain ordinances relating to zoning and subdiviaions, mnkeu professional recommendations to the City Administrator regarding amendments to said ordinances. Reviews all piano and sperificationa for building hermit applications to insure adherence to the Uniform Building Code and all other applicable Frderal, State and/or t.acai applicat.idnn. insueo all building p:rmito. processes all ruquouta related to building permit applications (o.g, variances, conditional uses, P.U.D.'o) including setting required public hearings and preparing and pubiiuhing required notieon. Zoning Administrator - Job Description March 7, 1987 Page q2 Prepares all reports and forms relating to building permits issued Prepares monthly building permit reports as required by U.S. Department of Commerce. Maintains current records on all permits issued and permits pending. Performs all building inspections required by UBC and other inspections which may be required by the City or other applicable regulatory agency. Responsible for the enforcement of all building related Statutes and ordinances and any other regulation which may be considered pertinent in any particular case. Attend: all Planning Commission meetings as an ex -officio member. Pre- pares Planning Commission agendas and agenda supplement packets. Records proceedings of Planning Commission. Attends all City Council meetings to address Council business relating to Zoning/land Use/Building. Attends other Council meetings as directed Dy the City Ariministrawr. Assists City Administrator in preparing Council agenda supplements Lhat relate to Zoning/land Use/Building. Conducts occupancy inspection and issues certificate of occupancy in accordance with City policy and other appropriate regulations. Planning and DOVelolxncnt - Major participation in davolopment and mmtintenance of Comprehensive Plan and Capital Improvement Plan. Assists Public Works Director in physical planning of public improvements. Preparon preliminary Bile/building plans for municipal development pro- jects (e.g. park layouts, floor Plans and elevations, street and parking lot designs, landscape plans). Attends all Planning Commission meetings. Attunda Council meetings to addreso maLtera relating to planning and development. Attends all meetings of (lousing and Redovolopment Authority as ox - at ficio member. Preparas MRA agendas and squads supplements. Assists City Adminiatrator, upon request, in URA project development. 0 Zoning Administrator - Job DescripLion March 7, 1983 Page 03 Assessing - Examines areas of existing development for indications of increased or decreased valuations. Classifies real property according to categories of use; prepares personal and real property lists. Examines new construction; records dimensions and other pertinent information used to formulate valuations. Examines personal property declarations and visits sites to verify or develop personal property valuations. instructs subordinate appraisal personnel in the techniques and re- quirements of appraisal work. Performs related work as required. Civil Defense participates and cooperates with County, State and Federal agencies in implementing the overall Civil Defense Program. Maintains current inventory of all Civil Defense supplies. J Attends Local, State and Federal meetings relating to Civil Defense. Will also represent the, City at special interest meetings that may occur. Coordinates local Civil Defense Plan with plans of all other applicable agencies. Performa semi-annual maintenance review of all radiological equipment. Serves as Local Public Relations person with respect to Civil Defenao and nuclear programs. Organizes and maintains 1Oo81 operations center and emergency operations program. Organizes support system for opel'aLivo cantor utilizing appropriato outside agencies (telephone company, health sorvicus, otc.) Initiates and Conducts local weather watch rystem. Trains staff of operations canter. Devciopu and maintains Fallout and Congregate Caro facilities for dis- placed persons. Zoning Administrator - Job Description March 7, 1983 Page 44 coordinates emergency activities with appropriate law enforcement agencies. Develops and maintains community warning system. Develops and maintains a Block Warden system. Maintains close, open communications with schools, hospitals, nursing home a. Stays abreast of all pertinent information relative to NSP operations. Participates in a continuing education program for nuclear Power. Maintains close contact with City Administrator and City Council. Conducts public information/education meetings. Annually reviews and adjusts where necessary the emergency plan. Shall be "On Call" 24 hours per day for any Civil Defense emergency. Bhr,i 1 tti, r.ho r_hief Responsible Authority in the execution of the emergency pian, both in exercises (drills) and in an actual occurrence. DESIRABLE OUALIFICATIONVEDUCATION Must have Level 1 State Building Official Certification with ability to secure Level 2 certification within one year of employment. (Necessary special requirement) Proven akills in plana and specifications review, Proven ability to convmunicato effectivoly with the public. Minimum one year experience in local government zoning, planning or land uuc regulationa, either as an employee or as a consultant to a local government, tunic drafting skills. Fmowledye of or ability to quickly acquire knowledge of flouai.nq and He - development Authority processes. Must be a Certified Minnesota Aaseaaor. (Nccoaaary special roquirement) / Strong organizational skills. J MEMO TO; Arve A. Grimsmo, Mayor, and Council Members, Fran Fair, Dan Blonigen, Jack Maxwell, Ken Maus. FROM: Tom Eidem, City Administrator DATE: March 24, 1983 As a result of conversations with Roger Mack, who serves as our Park Superintendent, we have formulated and convened the first meeting of a Park Board. As I explained to the members at the first meeting, the' Park Board is really considered to be an administrative com- mission established by my office as opposed to a formal Park Board that has been created by ordinance. I noted to the members that they were to serve primarily as an advisory commission to me and indirectly then to the Council. I noted further that they have no budget, they have no power, they have no salary, they really have no official capacity, but rather a voluntary commission. Depending upon the success of the operations and how involved the persons be- come with park and recreation development and whether or not they become a genuine contributing factor to park development will have to no decided based upon their pertormance. it it appears that tney �. arc a valuablo resource to the City, I may at sometime in the future propose to the Council an ordinance officially creating a park board for the City of Monticello. I mainly wanted to advise you of the existence of this body so that if people should question you about the park board, you will not be totally surprised. The present members of the commission are Ron White, Diane Moores, Audrey Ellison, Roger Pribyl and Roger Mack. ONE FINAL NOTE: If anyone of you have ideas or wish to contribute time into the park commission or park development in general, please contact Roger or myself with your comments. We are encouraging as much participation in park development as we can. MEMO TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: Tom Eidem DATE. March 23, 1983 Al Corrow stopped in to see me today (23rd) and made an additional offer concerning contract re -negotiation. I had informed him after the meeting of the last discussion what the results were. He came in with yet another offer and asked if I would take it to the Council, and I said I would send it out by memo and not make it a formal agenda item. I also pointed out to Al that I had explained at length when we initially discussed the re -negotiation that there was a risk factor and that the Council simply elected to take the risk of going £ or bids rather than the risk of signing the re -negotiated contract. He came in with the price of $4,260.00 per month for the next three ye ars, no graduated increases (except for added households, of course) . This is an increase of $500 per month over what we are currently paying. He also noted that the existing contract would stand exactly as is, and would 1nr he retr-n�tiv,. to n higher priaA. H> did, hown_ver, L, request oome kind of assistance in the spring to help with yard cleaning pickups, and I will be working with John Simols on that aspect. The Corrow contract is not an agenda item and I am ati.11 putting together the now specifications for us to go to bids. I am simply presenting this because of Ken's eomnont that if he wanted to tomo in with still another price, he would always be willing to Iistan. I told Al that he should not expect a decision on the March 28th meeting, but that I would at least relay the information as of that night and that a decision may be forth coming on April 11th. It should also be noted, and this could be significant, one company has called and wanted to know if we were bidding our garbage contract this year. I indicated we anticipated that we would be but that opecs had not boon prepared. Mainly, I simply wanted to got this information to you so that you would have an opportunity to think about it and then perhaps make a decision that might differ from your earlier Jocislon. C