City Council Agenda Packet 10-26-1987AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
r Monday, October 26, 1987 - 7:30 p.m.
Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo
Council Menbers: Fran Pair, Bill Pair, Dan Blonigen, warren Smith
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held October 13, 1987.
3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests and C=*laints.
4. Consideration of Simple Subdivision Request to Subdivide an Existing
Unplatted Lot into Two Unplatted Lots. Applicant, Debbie Kramer.
S. Consideration of Granting an Increase in the Individual Pension for the
volunteer Firefighters Relief Association.
6. Consideration of Renewing the Contract for Animal Control Officer - Dave
Stromberg.
7. Consideration of Proposal for Replatting Lots 9 and 10, Block 2, Oakwood
Industrial Park.
B. Consideration of Service Road Construction for Fast County Road 39.
9. Consideration of Water Tower Cleaning and Inspection Contract.
10. Consideration of Bills for the Month of October.
11. Adjournment.
C
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, October 13, 1987 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Arve Grimsmo, Bill Fair, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen
Members Absent: Fran Fair
Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Bill Fair, and
unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the special meeting held
September 28 and the regular meeting held September 28, 1987.
4. Annexation Update with City Attorney.
City Attorney, Tom Hayes, was present at the meeting to update the
City Council on two recent meetings that had been held with the
Executive Director and Assistant Director of the Municipal Board,
along with himself and Monticello Township Attorney, Bill Radzwill.
The primary purpose of the meetings was to discuss whether there were
any types of solutions that could be arrived at, including partial
annexation, that could be agreed upon between the two parties, the
City of Monticello and Monticello Township. Mr. Hayes noted that the
Municipal Board basically had three options to consider in regards to
-• the City's annexation petition. The first option would be to annex
the entire OAA area as petitioned, or deny the petition entirely. The
third option available to the Board is to allow annexation to occur in
an area less than petitioned for, but Mr. Hayes noted that typically
the Municipal Board members do not feel they have adequate information
to decide exactly where new boundaries or what portions of the
petitioned area should be annexed into a city. Therefore, that's the
prime reason why the Executive Director was seeking a local solution
to the problem, that being a compromise agreement between both
parties.
After discussions by Council members on the likelihood of a compromise
settlement being reached, Mayor Grimsmo noted that realistically it
did not appear that the Municipal Board may be in favor of total OAA
annexation but that possibly they would consider a reduced area for
annexation and felt that an agreement between the Township and the
City would be most beneficial if it was very close to the City's
latest offer presented to the Township prior to the hearings.
Councilmembers Bill Fair and Dan Blonigen noted that continued
negotiations appeared to be a waste of time unless the 'township is
willing to consider immediate annexation of a specific area.
I
Council Minutes - 10/13/87
At Council consensus, Attorney Tom Hayes was instructed to request a
formal reply from Monticello Township officials on the City's latest
offer of annexation of a reduced area supplied prior to the Municipal
Board hearings and instructed that if the Township did not appear
agreeable to such a compromise, notification to the Municipal Board of
our offer and attempted compromise settlement be noted and that the
Municipal Board should be directed to decide the issue.
5. Consideration of Adopting Assessment Roll for 86-1 Project - Sohn
Meier Property.
Mr. John Meier appeared at the last Council meeting during a public
hearing on the proposed assessment to his property consisting of
sewer, nater, street, storm sewer, curb and gutter improvements
proposed in the amount of $5,559.03 for the north half of Lot 1,
Block 12. Mr. Meier at the public hearing objected to the total
amount proposed to be assessed based on his contention that the value
of the property did not increase by the amount of the proposed
assessment. The Council allowed Mr. Meier to obtain an appraisal of
the property before and after the improvements and to supply any
information in regards to his contention for the Council review.
Although Mr. Meier did not supply a certified appraisal of the
property before and after the improvements, he did submit a letter
from a local real estate agent who felt the value of the property with
the improvements intact would be approximately $12,000. Mr. Meier
indicated that the property had a market value for tax purposes of
$6,800 before improvements and that he had a purchase agreement on the
property for $12,000.
After reviewing the information supplied, motion was made by Bill
Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously carried to adjust the
proposed assessment for the north half of Lot 1, Block 12, to $5,200
based on the figures supplied that the market value for tax purposes
before the improvements was S6,800, and with the additional $5,200 in
improvements under the assessment process would equal the $12,000 sale
price quoted by Mr. Meier. Also as part of the motion, the City will
establish a future sanitary sewer hookup charge to any parcel that
uses a Type A Drop connection or Type B Drop connection that were
installed in various locations along the interceptor sewer line as
part of the 86-1 Project. The Type A cost is $2,000, and a Type B
Drop will be $1,506.79. In addition, these drop charges will be
adjusted based on inflation factors until used by a property owner.
Consideration of Authorizing Preparation of Specifications for New
Fire Truck.
Representatives of the Monticello Fire Department were in attendance
to present their information gathered in researching what typo of
truck should be purchased to replace the present 1962 Chevrolet
O
Council Minutes - 10/13/87
ii pumper. During their research, fire department members reviewed with
a number of manufacturers and other communities the type of pumper
with a ladder attachment that would meet the needs for the City.
Based on their findings, they requested approval to prepare
specifications for a new pumper that would contain a 75 -foot ladder
attachment which was estimated to cost in the neighborhood of $250,000
to $275,000.
After reviewing the specifications, motion was made by Bili Fair,
seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to authorize the
fire department to prepare specifications for a pumper truck with a
75 -foot ladder attachment and to advertise for bids with the option of
trading in the 1962 pumper. The advertisement for bids will also
request financing alternatives and options available to the City.
Consideration of Establishing Minimum Requirements on Food Service for
Sunday Liquor Licenses.
Currently, the City of Monticello is allowed to issue Sunday liquor
licenses to establishments that serve food that have seating capacity
for at least 30 people. The City of Monticello has never established
what the definition of food service should be available to qualify for
a Sunday liquor license, and the Council discussed whether minimum
requirements were necessary.
Dan Blonigen made a motion to require establishments to have full
service menus available before a Sunday liquor license can be issued.
This motion died for a lack of a second. Motion was then entered by
Bill Fair to require an establishment to qualify for a Sunday liquor
license to serve a 3 -course meal such as soup, salad, and sandwich.
This motion also died for a lack of a second.
After further discussion, it was noted that during the past the City
has not experienced a problem with Sunday liquor licenses; and it was
the consensus of the Council to leave the definition undefined at this
time.
Consideration of Executing the 1988 Law Enforcement Contract with
Wright County Shvriff's Department.
During the last four years, the City of Monticello has contracted with
the Sheriff's Department for a total of 6,905 hours of patrol
coverage. The Wright County Board of Commissioners has allowed the
City of Monticello to add an additional 416 hours of coverage during
1988 to combat its cruising and loitering problem along Broadway. As
a result, the maximum number of hours in 1988 could be 7,321 at a rate
of $19.50 per hour.
t
Council Minutes - 10/13/87
Motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and
unanimously carried to approve ratifying the contract at a maximum
coverage of 7,321 hours at the rate of $19.50 per hour for the year
1988.
Rick WolstelYeC
City Administrator
0
C
Council Agenda - 10/26/87
a. Consideration of Simple Subdivision Request to Subdivide an Existing
Unplatted Lot into Two Unplatted Lots. Applicant, Debbie Kramer. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE ACID BACKG 40E=:
Debbie Kramer is proposing to subdivide off the northerly 108 feet of
their unplatted lot. The simple subdivision of unplatted property is
allowed by an owner once. A proposed simple subdivision of this land
which Mrs. Kramer is proposing does meet the minimum requirements of our
ordinance for land area to be subdivided. This is allowed since part of
the interceptor sever line project, water and sewer facilities, were run
up the street to service this property.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Approve the staple subdivision of an existing unplatted lot into two
unplatted lots .
2. Deny the simple subdivision request to subdivide an existing
unplatted lot into two unplatted lots.
C. STAFF RECOl49NIDATION:
Having reviewed the applicant's request, City staff recommends approval
of the simple subdivision request to subdivide this unplatted lot of
record into two residential lots under the ownership of Debbie Kramer.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the location of the proposed simple subdivision requeet7 Copy of
the proposed simple subdivision.
ME
A simple subdivision request to subdivide '
•. �� - .� an existing unplatted lot into two
unplattlots.
.
ebbia
`�«•. �� �a7 ./+�j%"f����y'�' / . /fir �'. % f. '�. r r' \ry .
f, I^ '`�/ I! �f�fJ�/✓� f: C .II Q �t j ,�I/ �f-� 11 ;i f• .s' I� �.\���,y \ �` �.
W4Y94a _-� �•i
NUO
4 /f'
PT.fiT PtAI,�Z —
�AODRa. AVtt+7' 'P11� G�At S7i'tPERMIT WAOMa
I
a.` :1;;:71..1 I.• i...,,..
OCSCRIPTION LOT T• It' ;I n 'Trle�/(/1V 4�0LOCX "•^ AOOtTtCSN,�/1.1 Jf IleC!q�.c–
SO. tTa of SITE ARCA I' 50. IT. Of AREA OCCLPIEO 0T OUILDINc
INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT
I"I a TOWN NCCO NoT O[ V3[D TMc. 1401 1LAM3 01 A+Ylla TO .AL. A►C rILCD uITN -1 IC -NIT .1:11CA11ON. �
+OP MSV OVILOIN03. ►ItOv 10C TM[ TOLt0.1" tM10-AYATIONI LOGATipN 01 -000 to CONITIUG TIOx AMO Cl13TING 1
INI MIOV[MCNT1. 3NOM PUILDIM 3/T[ ANO 1CTDACN OINCN3tONl. 3NOv CA3NENT3, fluilN CONT0UP3 OA OPAINACC. ,
•'IP_I' T 1400■ [ICVAT10M3. PT -[[T [LCVATION ANO M-1. CLCvAT/ON. SNOV LOCATION Of -1CY, SCK-, CA$,
IN0 CLCCTNICAL 3CAV/CC LIN[!. ONOV LOCATION! OI YVNvCy IIM3. 3►CC try TN[ WC Or Cwc. CU ILOINC
.N0 CAC- NAJOA POATION_TN[Kor-_—__'--
INOICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE / EACH GRAPN SCUARWI-01 By �,Q'.Ox I
..•"'t.% "'1• __.s-..—_- .__. _._.__ 350-^'-- E ECUALSr
�d
4
1
,
-
1{A� i,T R ;
i I �EilI _ ( I 7—1
:tWa t 101 that INA MPPmed -M fe.W. IOWA 4--.M AM — W-- WNW try INYI M t1YN[N —010r P0. �N-Pul
1--PIY,nIe1C AA1NPVAl, � .
•.1aa• ..................... PP00.tYaA1Y1Ya♦YAtata♦♦ata-•aYta•►sY...........Yf YiaaaaaYaM •YrAA�aYtaYY►1Ya YYYAtat
.NLD PZ 1 AFF14M iT DATE_
Council Agenda - 10/26/87
5. Consideration of Granting an Increase in the Individual Pension for the
Volunteer Firefighters Relief Association. tR.W.I
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Members of the volunteer fire department will be attending the meeting to
request that the City Council increase the retirement benefit from
$16,000 to $17,500. This benefit is Payable in a lump sum after 20 years
of service based on the requested increase of $800 per year of service to
$875. The Relief Association's plans are referred to on a per year basis
such as $800 per year of service, which is the current amount. ? point
this out to help avoid confusion, as during the discussion the terms may
be used interchangeably.
The Relief Association was granted an increase in retirement benefits to
the $16,000/$800 per year in 1986. Previous to that increase, the
Association received $10,000/5500 per year in 1979. In 1982, the Council
did not approve an increase requested to $14,000/5700 but indicated that
the Council would approve any increase the Relief Association requested
provided their fund was self sufficient, e.g., assets were greater than
their accrued liability: and any increase would not result in a
contribution from the City from general property taxes. State Statutes
allow the Association to increase their benefits by themselves only if
their assets are greater than their liabilities, otherwise they must come
before the City Council for approval of any increase in benefits.
The Relief Association held a meeting a few weeks ago which I attended,
and the fire department requested to be on the agenda seeking approval of
the increase to $875 per year of service. In going through their
financial schedules presented to the City, by increasing the annual
benefit to $875 per year, the computations indicate a total fund deficit
of $57,715. This results from the accrued liability being $223,620 with
total assets expected by the end of the year of $165,905. In going
through the formula required, a total amount of income necessary to
support this request would be $33,172 for 1988 and anticipated revenues
from state aid and interest income on their investments is expected to be
$39,270, resulting in a surplus of $6,098 next year. At this point, the
requested increase in benefits to $875 per year would not appear to
require any City support. The primary reason the Association to able to
increase its benefits and not require City support is because of the
increased amount of state aid being received, which by statutes has to be
paid to the Relief Association for benefits and cannot be used for other
fire department purposes.
In August of 1986 when the last increase was granted to $800 per year,
the Council questioned what would happen to the Relief Association if a
number of individuals were to retire or become disabled in one year.
Although the fire department has bylaws that indicate only retirement is
allowed with 20 years of service, members can receive benefits before the
-2-
Council Agenda - 10/26/87
age of 50 should they become disabled, etc. I ran through the formula
using a few examples to determine whether or not the fund would be able
to sustain a large number of individuals retiring in any given year in
the near future. In the first example, I assumed that the top six
individuals out of 26 members would retire or receive benefits in the
year 1988. Using the formula, the Association would be required to pay
out $124,125 in benefits; but the Association would still have assets of
$80,000. Of course with six individuals gone in one year, the liability
is also reduced, and the state aid income and interest earnings would
still be more than sufficient to cover the amount required each year to
fund the deficit. There actually would be a surplus of approximately
$5,000. In another example, I assumed that the top ten individuals were
retired or received pensions during 1988. This would amount to the
Association being required to pay out approximately $171,000; but by the
year end, the fund should still have a $31,000 balance. This is about
the maximum number of members that could be eliminated in one year before
a problem did arise in that the Association would not have enough money
to pay out its liabilities. I have only used these examples to show that
unless an unusual circumstance arose, the fund should be able to continue
on a normal basis and provide the $875 a year benefit. Even using the
assumption that the ten oldest members were to leave in one year, this
would have to be the result of disability or death amongst the members,
as you should remember that the Association does require 20 years of
service and be the age of 50 before receiving a normal retirement.
The only unknown in using the calculations from the formula is the annual
state aid payment made to the Relief Association. Naturally, if state
aids are reduced drastically or even eliminated in the future, all of my
assumptions go out the window and the fund could be in severe financial
problems without the approximate $30,000 a year state aid payment. The
fund needs approximately $30,000 or more each year even at the present
level of $800 per year to not require City support; and I only want to
point out that I do not have any control over the state aids in the
future. Although no one can predict what may happen to the state aid
payments in future years, I would have to believe that most volunteer
firemen's relief associations would be in trouble if the state should
suddenly eliminate or drastically reduce state aids, as all of the
pension benefits are based on receiving state aid to support their
associations.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Grant an increase to $875 per year/$17,500. This increase, according
to the Relief Association's schedule, would not require a City
contribution and could be entirely funded through state aids and
other interest earnings from the Association.
2. Do not ratify an increase in benefits requested.
3. Do not grant an increase in benefits, but allow the Association to
raise their benefits only if they have a surplus or an increase that
would not require City contributions.
-3-
C
Council Agenda - 10/26/87
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Again, in reviewing the computations supplied by the Relief Association,
it appears that the state aids received by the fire department will
continue to increase as the City expands; and their request for an
increase in the funding to $875 per year can be accomplished through
projected revenues without municipal support. Based on this information,
the City staff has no objection to the increase being granted as long as
a City tax levy is not required. I believe it's the Association's
intention to review the schedules annually and to in the future seek
increases in the neighborhood of $25 per year rather than waiting a
number of years before requesting an increase. The Council, of course,
can deny granting an increase at this time; but at their current level of
funding, in a few years they will be able to increase their benefits on
their own once their assets exceed their potential liability. Since the
City tax levy does not appear to be required, the City staff can support
the first alternative which would increase their benefits to $17,500
after 20 years of service.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Computation of benefits for each member at $875 per year.
.A_
I -a -la 1M U29 Slit F12M= KAM
SIA, FM Am E,AB L488
Fi -fintats Relief A—clattm of Monticello
Canty of
Wright
saau Ir I
Ca:Putl3tien of bmlefit of relief asaociattm $Pedal fund fat f 875
per 711- Of service) for ell mate --a bms�
on tdse4r years of service as active fire departrart aaabea.
i
2 s 4 J67
a
b
1988 7
F.D. To Erd of This Yesr
To
End of Next Tear
Easy
Yeah Active
ActruI,-A
Years ktive A=.se
Item
Age Date �
Service
Liability
Service
1.1abi.3.1ty
30
26,250
31
27,125
I 25
21,875
26
22,750
25
21 .875
26
22.750 1
I 4•
2118.375
22
19,250 1
1 5•
t8 {
,4.858
19
16.135 I
I 6•
18
14,858!
/9
16.135
7.
16
12.495 i
17
13.650
I 8•
15
11.410
16
12.495
9•13
9.363
14
10.360 I
10•
iI 13
9.363
14
10.360
i 11. I
I 13
9.363
14
10.360
I 12. ' ( 12
8.418
13
9.363
113. I n
8
12
1 14• ii
1
7 5
12
A.4tR
15. I 10
R. A90
11
7,4nR
.o !9
a 04P
a
t.
L1 I
I7
4,305
8
5,040
6
3,586
7
4,305
i9.
I
4
2,275
5
2,923
M 20.
( j
4
2, 275
5
2,923
21•13
j
3
1,663
4
2275
, X71.
1
2
1,085
3
1,,663
i 23.
2
1.085
31,
663
24•
2
1,065
3
1,663
4)•
1 '
525
2
1.085
! 25.
1 1
525
2
1.085
11.
I �
!'=ocrl of De;ermdPemlons, L Any
i
Tool of Urmsid Instal.L-rnts, Lf Arty
'oral. at Eariv vested Fensiau, If Any
A. A=ruei Liability Thru Next Year I988 (totem., coins, 7) .
_ ., _ _ _
_ _ .
_ .. _ 245.530
B. Accrued Liability. Ttuu T7t2s Year 1987 (toms, cautmi S) # 223,620
_ _ „
_ - _ ; 223,620
O C. Subrz ,*t Linc g frog Lim A (mmol coot; enter hero sed on Litre 6 Sr—du M)
21,916
7tactionil years of service mat be mlculated to awrest full 7smr.
'o tn-- enter liability to aaluats 5 or 7 for 4aty pusmn Who will taeeive entire petnim
dwIM this yea.
.1r( mll mt liability, antes amount rlrieh will be payable aftw ettd of fts year
in both
omlum 5 ani mimm 7.
f 1'nmrrst is to be gold an utpsid pepsine», aid tatamt for 1 year
to Colum 7.
ospy of 1lrse mWulm asst be presented to the City ftmi.l before
ArrgLat 3 rich
poor.
SCELEDULZ 11 0 $875/year
Projection of Relief Association special fund assets to end of this year, (December 31, 1987)
Assets at January 1. 1987 (this year) S 154.505
Anticipated income to end of this year
a) Minnesota State Aid S 7q ann
b) Receipts from local taxes
c) Interest an investments 10,000
d) Other income
-Total of lines a -b -c -d 2. 1 39.500
Beginning assets plus estimated income for this year Ml + L2) 3. S 194.005
.,Estimated disbursements through end of this year
e) Pensions G• Link (33 x 800) S 26,400
f) Other benefits 1.700
g) MSTDA or VTBA dues, if any
h) Administrative and overhead 500
,Total of Lines a -f -g -h - - - - - - - - - - - • - - - - - - - - - 4• $ 28,100
:Projected assets at end of this year 12/31/87 (L3-L4) S• $ 165,905
Calculation of average special food income per member (other then interest or investment
-income)
State Aid Municipal Support 10Z of surplus (if any)
Suet
year
years ago
3 years ago
I o to 1 S
Total 3 year income S_ ♦ 3 (no. of members) - 6. S
CESTIPICATION OF SPECIAL TM &ZQUIU-VMS
;his
information must be certified to the governing body of the municipality or indepen-
-Vent nonprofit firefighting corporation by August 1. 1987.
.'e, the officers of the Firefighters Relief Association, state that
Lha accompanying schedules have teen preparea in accordance with the provisions of the
lolunteer Firefighters Relief Association Guidelines Act of 1971 (including M.S. 69.772) and
that the schedules are correct and complete to the best of our knowledge. The financial
requirements of the relief associations Special Fund for 1988 are S
Check here If no municipal support required
,he average nam -investment income per member of said special fund for the post 3 years vas•
)ignature of P . resident Data
ignature of Secretary Data
ignature or treasurer to
qWPrMZ M ® S675/Year
Caspuntiao d Tiatmdal laquirements for Rear Year - 1988
Cones d CoIttaa 8 Colum C
1 _ eta frm Lire 5, Sc2ad4a II - - _ . _ - _ - . _ - _ _ _ _ . _ S 165 , 905
Acceaed liability to end of this peat (fres Liao R. Sdm&ile I) - - - - - - - - - - 223,62
3. a) If Line 2 is onto them Lim 1, subtract Liao 1 frac Liao 2. Deficit - - - - - S7,715
b) If Lice 1 is cote then Lim 2, subtract Lim 2 frim Lisa 1. Surplus - - - - If srrplus exists, enter 102 of atplrs aaorat is
ColumnCand 1ptoLim6.-__
Acottiatlm of deficit (or deficits) ta=rred trier to err of last year (ass tote).
Colum 1 Colum 2 Onium 3
Year Ottginal Asara Retired hatuot Salt
Incurred Deficit Acormt In Prior Yours to Retire
1980. 64.684 - 45.976 " 19.708
19aL -0_.28_ - 3.929 • 35.356
19 - •
b. Totals 49,905 55,064
104,969 _____________________.-..__X102:•_.._- 10,497
5. Subtract Colun 3 total fro Lire 3(a). (If Colum 3 is eltttl to or- gates tan
Lim 3(a), m tar deficit edsts.) If Calnam 3 is lass etas Lith 3(a). dtffareax
isos+deliclt. Enter -_._.__._--_-_-____.__-..___- 2,651
-Ar 10% of iris tsar deficit Sa Oaluai B _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ - _ - 265
6. Iac.^eae (fracLim c, Srh&rle1) 21.910
7 . Anticipated openses Next Year, (atter Ess Penslas, or invntatnts) M eucimates - - - - 500
8. Anticipated nears Next Year 1988 eswates 29,500 5%
8)MirrxsomState Aid -__--__•_-..__--.- -- 30,975
b) 3% in tams t m avouat of Lim 1 shove - - - - - _ _ - • - - - • . - - _ - - 8.295
e) 0 d income (do cot irrluia 3=1 tsars or tavesMmt tress) - - - - - • -
Total 8Vtwo----_-___-.__-----_-.-__--.__------------- 39,270
9. Total.ColutuB------- ----•---- ---- --- --- ---- -- - --- -- 33,172
10. Total. CalumC--------------------------..«_.______-_____39,270
11. If Lire 9 is store riser Line 10, the difference is Era seam of anieital support
requited. Certify this assent m city encode before August i (boners put of
Srlrtdula rl - Special FLM Re;u temp its) - - - - - - _ - - - - • _ . _ - - - - - - -
12. if Lira 10 is more titer tie 9, to mrdeipal support Is mWited. Cestlly Est fust SURPLUS: 6.090
0 to oxmil before AuVot I. GXsril is pea¢itted to provide funds is scesu of
requitement.
NOW Deficits ata graate12Y retired to ins tem 10 fears. h+muss Of im=ftse is stats aid, Wino as gain ori an,oed
in -t greeter van 5%. If dratted, Est ■toant is Colum 2 any b in=aasd NO tat to meal Of Coluto 3 is aqutl
ta� . 3(a). Lf more Stan as dafteit L being atartired (Ea kw requires awth deficit to to tatited espamtelY).
adpst Colum 2 for Els oldest tlefidt first 18es Colum 2 equals Oalum b for ty deficit, Ent deficit tat toes
retired aryl my bs removed frm to ssarttntiao 81"dula. Vltrrner a Now Deficit appears to Litt 5, the aigiml
aro"t of such daficit mat be oW to to amn-d—tim ardWA to foUnwicS year. s„
Council Agenda - 10/26/87
6. Consideration of Renewing the Contract for Animal Control Officer - Dave
Stromberg. (R.W.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The City of Monticello last renewed its animal control contract with Dave
Stromberg in July of 1986, which established a monthly fee of $575 for
his services. John Simola and myself have been reviewing Mr. Stromberg's
performance and are recommending that the contract be renewed retroactive
to July 1, 1987, with a base monthly increase of 5 percent, or a $28.75
increase.
Mr. Stromberg has indicated that he has had to put in extra time and
mileage on his part in an effort to save as many animals as possible from
being euthanized and providing more animals to the Humane Society for
adoption purposes. In reviewing a 2 -year history of the animals at the
dog pound, it is very apparent that the number of animals being
euthanized over the past year has decreased substantially from previous
years, and more animals are being placed through the Humane Society or by
adoption through Dave's initiative. In an effort to reward Dave for his
extra work in trying to place the animals through the Humane Society or
direct adoption rather than euthanizing the animals, we are proposing
that an incentive method be included in the new agreement with Dave
whereby Dave would receive $4 for each animal placed through the Humane
Society rather than being euthanized, and $10 for each animal Dave adopts
out. Currently, it costs the City of Monticello approximately $14 to
have an animal euthanized, and the City has been contributing $10 per
animal to the Humane Society when they pick up an animal that is about to
be euthanized. This is the reason for considering paying the $4 the City
is currently saving by not having the animal euthanized to Dave. If it
wasn't for Dave's efforts in placing as many animals through the Humane
Society or individually adopting them out, the City's cost would probably
increase, as we would be responsible for the COSt of euthanization at
approximately 614 each. It should be pointed out that on all animals
received from outside contracts with cities such as Elk River, Buffalo,
Big Lake, etc., there would be no additional cost to the City of
Monticello, as we monthly bill each community for housing the animals and
our disposal cost. he a result, one way or the other, the City of
Monticello would be paying approximately $14 for disposal of the animal,
and this amount is reimbursed by the other communities using our
facility.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACrIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to approve renewal of the agreement
with Dave as Animal Control Officer effective July 1, 1987, at a base
monthly fee of $604. This monthly fee should be retroactive to
July 1, 19871 and starting January 1, 1988, the Animal Control
Officer would receive $4 for each animal placed through the Humane
Society and $10 for each animal adopted.
•5-
Council Agenda - 10/26/87
_J
2. The second alternative would be to ratify a base contract without any
incentive by the Animal Control Officer to find homes for animals.
C. STAFF REOMOUNMTION:
As I indicated previously, the staff feels that Dave is doing an
excellent job as the City's Dog Catcher and has been very conscientious
in his efforts to find homes for the animals rather than having them
euthanized. The staff realizes that it could probably be much easier for
Dave to have the animals euthanized rather than spending extra time and
expenses in his effort to find homes for the animals; and as a result, we
feel the incentive method in addition to the base contract be initiated.
It is our intent to start the incentive method January 1, 1988, to allow
for proper notice to be given to each community that our disposal charges
will increase slightly to $16 per animal. The actual cost to the City
above the base contract should be minimal in that all costs relating to
animals outside of the City are reimbursed fully.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of new agreement for services.
-6-
This agreement, made this let day of July, 1987, by and between the City
of Monticello, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and
Dave Stromberg, an individual thereinafter referred to as Stromberg), sets out
terms and conditions for the general purpose of providing animal control to the
residents of the City.
WHEREAS, the City has a duly adopted ordinance regulating animal
control, and
WHEREAS, enforcement of said ordinance cannot be restricted to standard
employee scheduling procedures, and
WHEREAS, the City desires to provide such enforcement through the
services of a private party which will be able to respond as needed, under the
general guidelines provided by the City.
{ NOW, THEREFORE, in and for consideration of the mutual covenants and
conditions hereinafter contained, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
1. a. The City, in and for consideration of the sum of Six Hundred
Pour Dollars and 00/100 ($600.00) per month payable on the last
business day of each month, hereby contracts with Stromberg for
the period of twelve (12) months from the date of execution of
this agreement for the services of Stromberg as Animal Control
officer.
1. b. Effective January 1, 1988, the City agrees to corQ+ensate
Stromberg monthly an additional fee of $4.00 per animal disposed
of through the Humane Society and $10.00 per animal disposed of
through direct adoption procedures.
(P
Agreement for Services
Dave Stromberg
Page 2
2. Stromberg hereby agrees to perform substantially the following
services as Animal Control officer:
a. Provides prompt, timely response to animal calls (complaints,
reports of loose animals).
b. Maintains and enforces security measures as prescribed by City
Administrator, Public Works Director, and/or Superintendent of
Wastewater Treatment Facility.
c. Conducts random patrol runs at own discretion but within
prescribed limits set by City Administrator.
d. Monitors care of kennels and animals.
e. Conducts periodic observation of animals in impound for
sickness, injury, etc.
f. Promptly notifies an animal health professional when an animal
is determined to be distressed.
g. Serves as regular attendant of impound facility during "Public
Hours," said hours to be determined by City Administrator.
h. Provides timely response to requests to reclaim animals from
and/or impound animals at the facility other than during "Public
Hours." (It is considered reasonable to respond to routine
calla between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. daily. Emergency calls
can be expected to occur outside these hours.) Although timely
telephone response to pager calls are expected on Sunday, both
parties agree that patrol services on this day may be limited to
urgent and/or emergency calls.
i. Exercises care to ensure the humane treatment of animals both in
transport and during impoundment.
j. Ensures collection of fines and impound fees prior to release of
animals.
k. Maintains accurate, current records for each animal.
1. Maintains orderly records filing system for easy retrieval of
information.
m. Promptly transports unclaimed and/or severely distressed and
suffering animals to euthanization facility.
v
Agreement for Services
Dave Stromberg
Page 3
n. Makes timely submittal of logs and records to the City Finance
Director.
o. Provides animals with fresh food and water each afternoon.
p. Conducts cursory cleaning (waste removal, etc.) as needed, each
afternoon.
q. Maintains and submits on a monthly basis a complete record of
animals adopted which includes an approved "Release Form" signed
by the adopting party.
3. Stromberg hereby agrees to provide service seven (7) days per creek.
If Stromberg cannot be on call for any period of time, Stromberg
hereby agrees to provide and pay for an approved replacement during
such period.
4. Stromberg hereby agrees to utilize his/her own vehicle to perform
the aforementioned tasks, and further, to provide proper insurance
�• coverage to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any claims or
violations arising from the operation of said vehicle (Certificate
of Insurance to be provided to City.) The City agrees to pay
mileage to and from veterinary clinics outside the City of
Monticello when approved by the City Administrator. The payment
shall be at $0.25 per mile.
5. The City hereby agrees to provide and maintain appropriate insurance
coverage for all City owned facilities and for all claims arising
from charges of neglect or inhumane treatment of animals, provided
that Stromberg, as Animal Control Officer, observes and exercises
all proper means of fulfilling the duties herein stated.
C
Agreement for Services
Dave stromberg
Page d
6. The City hereby agrees to assume the cost of animal food and
incidental health supplies and pound maintenance supplies and
operating equipment.
7. The City hereby agrees to perform or have performed all essential
maintenance tasks that lie beyond the scope of the duties outlined
herein or as can be reasonably expected as routine custodial
maintenance.
8. It is hereby agreed by both parties that this agreement may be
tereinated at any time, by either party, with or without any reason,
provided that the party wiahing to terminate this agreement shall
provide written notice to the other party at least thirty (30) days
prior to the effective date of the termination.
This agreement shall run for the period first stipulated above, and
shall automatically renew itself for a like period unless a thirty (30) day
written notice is given that one of the parties hereto desires to engage in
discussion concerning the terms and conditions stated herein.
Agreement for Services
Dave Stromberg
( page 5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be
executed in their behalf by themselves and/or their proper officers by their
signatures the day and year first written above.
CITY OF monrceuo
Witness City Administrator
Witness
Date
INDIVIDUAL
Date
(00
Council Agenda - 10/26/87
7. Consideration of Proposal for Replatting Lots 9 and 10, Block 2, Oakwood
Industrial Park. (R.W.)
As you will recall, the City obtained ownership of Lots 9 and 10,
Block 2, and Lot 4 in Block 3 of Oakwood Industrial Park from the Oakwood
Partnership in exchange for the City assuming all assessments current and
delinquent. Although it's not the City's intention to be in direct
competition with other land developers in selling industrial property, it
is certainly our goal to sell this property as soon as possible. Our
initial investment in the 16.8 acres originally amounted to $109,287 or
approximately $6,500 per acre. Assuming we are interested in receiving a
reasonable return on our investment at 8 percent, today's value per acre
would be approximately $6,900.
The majority of the lots available in the industrial park are five acres
or more at the present time, and many times it has come to our attention
that there may be a market for industrial property containing smaller
parcels rather than five or six acres each. Recently, 011ie has been in
contact with a gentleman from Minneapolis who was interested in building
a smaller 2,400 aq ft building in Monticello for his design and
fabrication of plastic and dye cast molds but was only interested in a
smaller parcel of 1 to 1 1/2 acres. The gentleman's name is Mr. Tim
Moriarity, whose company's name is Certified :bol Corporation located
presently in north Minneapolis. During 011ie's contacts with
Mr. Moriarity, she indicated that the City owned some land in the
industrial park that the City staff had considered possibly subdividing
into smaller acreages. Because of Mr. Moriarity's interest in building a
structure yet this year, John Simola prepared a preliminary proposed
subdivision of Lots 9 and 10 into six individual lots consisting of 1 1/4
to 2 1/2 acre parcels. This would require a cul -0e -sac road to be
constructed along with extension of sewer and water utilities to provide
services to all of the parcels. John also then prepared an estimated
cost of constructing the water, sewer, and street improvements, and
estimated the additional coat to the City could approach $75,156. We
also obtained a cost estimate from Taylor Land Surveyors to prepare the
replotting at a not to exceed figure of $2,628. The two lots contain
approximately 10.8 acres, and if the Iota were subdivided and the
construction cost of $75,156 plus surveying cost of $2,628 was added to
our initial investment, we would have to be asking approximately $15,000
per acre to recapture our cost.
011ie has shown our proposed subdivision to Mr. Moriarity, and he has
expressed an interest in purchasing the corner lot consisting of
1.26 acres on John's sketch if the Council is agreeable to the
subdivision proposal. Although it will take approximately four to six
weeks to complete the actual subdivision through the Planning Commission
and City Council meetings, there are currently individual water services
.7-
Council Agenda - 10/26/87
and sewer services available to this corner lot from Dundas Road; and
Mr. Moriarity could start construction yet this year. Our initial plans
are to prepare the specifications for the sewer, water, and street
improvements in house and do the actual construction next spring. I
believe the City can be competitive in marketing the balance of the
property by having available smaller lots than currently exist in the
industrial park. Although our cost per acre does rise substantially by
doing the improvements, a party interested in building in the industrial
park now has to consider spending $60,000 or $70,000 for a lot rather
than possibly $20,000 which we could sell ours for.
Although the improvements would have to be paid for by the City totaling
approximately $78,000, these funds could be available from reserve funds
the City currently has which hopefully will be recaptured after all of
the property is sold. At this point, the staff is looking for Council
direction as to whether to proceed with our pians on subdividing these
two lots into smaller acreages. If the Council does not wish to expend
the additional money for street and utility improvements, but rather try
to sell the property as is, we need to know this at this time.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to approve the general concept of
subdividing Lots 9 and 10 into six individual parcels to be redefined
by Dennis Taylor and commit reserve funds to install the improvements
during the spring of 1988.
2. The second alternative would be to leave the lots in the present
condition and try to market the property as is.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
During many of the contacts 011ie receives regarding available land in
Monticello for development, many people have noted that they do not
necessarily need five or six acres; and it appears that our property
would be more marketable in amailer parcels. The staff realizes that to
make these two lots into six, the City will have to commit additional
funds for street and road construction along with utility extensions; but
the staff believes the City will eventually be in a better position to
market the property to parties interested in smaller parcels. Although
we do not have a firm commitment, I believe that Mr. Moriarity is
extremely interested in the first parcel. As a result, it is the staff's
recommendation that the property will be more marketable in smaller
parcels and recommends that the Council approve the subdivision request
and expenditures needed.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of preliminary sketch for subdivision; Construction cost estimates;
Surveying cost estimate.
-0-
21
%00
•
�
� (o�o4)e,
��
�.53Ac 9�
I.to5Ac.
�•,�s
ao
1.49
DUAI
I Rc 0 r�`0
.i.
'Ja)
i
ESTIMATED COSTS
MOWICELLO INDUSTRIAL PARR
LOTS 9 6 10 SUBDIVISION
CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Water
460 tt 10" D.I.P. $20/:t =
5 9,200
1 - 10" valve 6 Box $450 ea =
5 450
1 - 8" Valve 6 Box $400 ea -
S 400
1 - 7.5 ft Bury Byd $900 ea =
S 900
4 - 6" Service valves 6 Box $300 ea
$ 1,200
120 ft 6" D.I.P. Water Service 515/ft =
5 11800
1 = 10"x10" Dry Tap $1,000 =
$ 1,000
TOTAL WATER =
S14,950
Sanitary Sever
440' 10" PVC SDR26 $25/ft
$11,000
1 STD Manhole $1,000 -
$ 11000
1 - Construct Drop at Manhole $2,500 =
$ 2,500
4 - 10" Wyes $90 ea =
$ 360
120 ft 6" SDP. 26 Service Pipe $15 ft =
5 11800
TOTAL SANITARY SEWER =
$I ,6�r
Street (40 ft 9T)
-
T70-00 cu yds Comnon Ex 52/cu yd =
S 4,000
550 Tons Class V (6") $5.50 ton =
$ 3,025
270 Tons Bit. Base (2") $23 ton =
$ 6,210
270 Tons Bit. Wear (2") $27 ton -
5 7,290
870 ft D Mod Curb $7/ft =
$ 61090
0.5 Acre Black Dirt 6 Seed $1,800/acre
$ 900
Culvert $1,000 ea
5 11000
TOTAL STREET
$2rM
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST =
$60,125
ENGR 6 ADMIN 25% ADD ON'S =
$15,031
$75,156
Estimated total of 10.17 acres after road construction:
$75,156 divided by 10.17 = 5 7,389.97 per acre
This does not include platting costs.
John E. Simola
Public Works Director
10/6/87
0
i
TAYLOR LAND SURVEYORS INC.
21901. BROADWAY. P.O. BOX 179. MONTICELLO. MINNESOTA 55392
PHONE 412> 295-3389
DENNIS Y. TAYLOR
•C PCTC C[P UMC CYlvl•OC
October 20, 1987
John Simola
CITY OF MONTICELLO
250 East Broadway,
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
Re: Proposal for replat of Lots 9 and 10, Block 2, OAKWOOD
INDUSTRIAL PARK, Wright County, Minnesota.
1
Dear John:
Our hourly rates are as follows:
i
Reg. Land Surveyor $35.00 pe r/hr
2 man survey crew 50.00 per/hr 1
draftsman 23.00 per/hr
The fallowing are not to exceed costs:
FIELD WORK:
boundary and topographic survey 11 hrsm $550.00
center line road grade stakes 5 hra- 250.00
lot corner staking 6 hra- 300.00
REG. LAND SURVEYOR:
design and preliminary plat work 6 hra- 210.00
final plat computation and documentation 14 hra- 490.00
DRAFTSMAN:
preliminary plat work 20 hra- 460.00
final plat work 16 hra- 368.00
Total $2628.00
we will prof oro all work on a hourly bases but would not exceed
the above price quotas. Other work such as engineering staking
and plana would be done on our normal hourly rates.
�Sincerely yours:
Dennie V. Ta✓✓yldr
8
Council Agenda - 10/26187
8. Consideration of Service Road Construction for East County
Road 39. (J.S.)
This item has been discussed at the last four Council meetings. At the
last meeting in September, the Council voted to build the service road at
an estimated construction cost of $20,000 and assess only some additional
curbing that may be needed on the north side to minimize encroachment.
This decision was contingent upon Curt and Anna Mae Hoglund giving up the
necessary property and/or trading right-of-way turnback for the service
road construction. We were to have an answer by the 13th of October from
the Hoglunds. They were delayed, however, in reaching a decision; and we
asked for a continuance of an additional two weeks.
After the Council approved the design of alternate number two, the County
began a more detailed design of that alternate. It was determined that
approximately 45 feet would be needed rather than 30 feet as originally
thought. The overall taking of land would be approximately 6,800 sq ft
with a turnback in the area of 2,000 sq ft (preliminary figures). in
order to limit encroachment and control drainage, it would be necessary
to put about 400 feet of curbing on the north side of the service road
and a similar amount on the south side. At $6 per foot, the curbing on
the north side could easily amount to $2,400.
Last week the Hoglunds decided to contact their attorney, Jim Metcalf, to
assist them in making a decision in regard to the service road. A
meeting was held on Wednesday, October 21, at Mr. Jim Metcalf's office.
Present at that meeting was myself, Rick Woifateller, Jim Maus, Anna Mae
Huglund, and Dick Marquette and Dave Montebello from Wright County. At
that meeting, Rick pointed out that the City felt our original
alternative I1 would satisfy the requirements for access and would be the
cheapest alternative for the City. The City, however, had agreed to go
the extra mile, so to speak, and build the remaining portion of the
service road assessing only for the curb and gutter on the north side if
the Hoglunds would give up the necessary property. The County again
reiterated the fact that the median was necessary and that if the
Hoglunds felt the alternate number two was unsatisfactory, they could
leave their access at its original location and utilize only right in's
and right out's.
After much discussion and not much movement, Have Montebello threw out
the idea of the City picking up the curbing costs to offset the
additional taking of land. In this instance, then there would be no
assessment at all for construction of the service road using alternate
number two if the Hoglunds would give up the necessary property.
Mr. Metcalf seemed to voice his approval; and it was decided that
Mr. Metcalf and the Hoglunds would meet and get back to the City prior to
Monday evening's meeting date.
.9-
Council Agenda - 10126187
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Alternative number one would be to let the decision of September 28
stand and that we would only build alternate number two if they would
give up the necessary right-of-way and pay for the curbing on the
north side.
2. The second alternative would be to have the City pick up the
additional $2,800 for the curbing on the north side, realizing the
Hoglunds would have to give a little bit more land than was
originally thought for the installation of the service road. You
would expect the construction cost of the service road to be in the
neighborhood of $23,000 to $25,000, depending on how much of the
curbing cost the County picks up for its share of drainage.
3. Alternative number three could mean returning to our original
alternate number one (only the back door of the store) at an
estimated cost in the neighborhood of $10,000.
4. The fourth alternative could be to reach another agreement with the
Hoglunds depending upon the outcome of their meetings with their
attorney.
C. STAFF RECOWXNDATION:
It is the recommendation of the City Administrator and Public Works
Director that we opt for alternate number two and that we absorb the cost
of the curbing for the north side and do not assess the property for the
service read construction, the rea:ron being that the Hogiunda are giving
up more land than was originally thought and the curbing would help
offset this. 'ibis also appears to be a solution that might be agreeable
with the Hoglund$ and allow us to get on with our project and avoid
future litigation.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of drawing showing alternate number two.
ADDITIONAL INPORMATION: (R.W.)
Priday afternoon A letter from attorney Jim Metcalf was delivered to City
Hall (copy enclosed) which indicates that the Hoglund$ basically agree
with donating their land for the frontage road and a new exit similar to
the staff's recommendation. As you will note, this is contingent upon
the City agreeing to pick up the cost of any curbing required and an
additional stipulation that the City pay the sum of $3,700 for the taking
of their land. Mr. Metcalf Is letter indicates that the Hoglunds would
accept the trading of the abandoned easement right-of-way in exchange for
any cash payment from the City assuming it contained at least
6,000 aq ft.
.10.
Council Agenda - 14126187
in reviewing the amount of land that Could possibly be turned back to the
Hoglunds, it appears that the square footage may be in the neighborhood
of 5,000 sq ft at the mosti and at this point, I certainly believe the
City has gone the extra mile if it decides to pick up the curbing cost
and should not consider any cash payment regardless of the square footage
of the land turned back. I tried to contact Mr. Metcalf on Friday
afternoon, but he was gone for the day and will be talking to him on
Monday to inform him of the staff's recommendation. Basically, the
second proposal offered by the Hoglunds is almost identical to our
recommended Council action except for the part of the turnback being at
least 6,000 sq ft.
WO
ClVol
J i
• a
..•".r.. r.r Ci'' .t
N t
« i 4 •� • .rY�:..�..-''- � wl.a" •�1::; Mei �. s•m'�0I at
•nr� t .� / i 1
1r {~
t SC
.... �` . � mit^.'}* •-.. .. � .! _ .. ane . .. , '., '� !� '.;
jo
/n`_✓ N,
t 1p� ye a. ava �hbty a • 1 4 t d . �, i ;
a{•� r _ t r c d �00 • a
n•••a'w'— —.��: io •r �p.w•r .•ms 4�e•n Fes-+: ...ar
• C QO'D•• ...Cho# IO`rd'OS'r �. w•:.•nNi�� .. r. ' -�' .. " o. �— I
is
}a
N/ "14o
VN 0�0 • a o
1{Ir� I � VI' •
...• .. .. • Mrs++r..r w..� 1 .
Aftfalf 4 Zarsalr
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
P.O. ao. 446
ii] Wen a oeft v
Mo.moro. M...Mow 55342-aue
JAMES O. METCALF TELEPHONE
BRADLEY V. LARSON October 21. 1987 16121295-J272
METRO
16121 421.319)
Mr. John Simola
City of Monticello
Monticello. MN 55362
Mr. Rick Wolfsteller
City Administrator
City of Monticello
Monticello. MN 55362
Dear Gentlemen:
I am writing to confirm the conversation we had in my office on
October 21. 1987 with each of you, representatives from Wright County and
Mr. James Maus and Mrs. Anna Hoglund.
I have reviewed the situation with Mrs. Hoglund and we believe
that relocating the access to center on Lots 1 and 3, which access would
accomodate both right and left turn access to and from the property, is
the most feasible solution for all parties. This would, when completed,
turn the existing county highway into a service road and if I understand
Mr. Maus' position, I believe that this solution can be tolerated as far
as he is concerned.
The proposition by the City was that Hoglunds would donate approxi-
mately 6,800 square feet of land and pay for a curb assessment, which was
estimated to be $2,800.00. The appraisals we have available indicate that
the value of the property is approximately $1.50 per square foot. Essontial-
ly you are asking Hoglunds to donate $10,200.00 worth of real estate and pay
a $2,800.00 assessment. which they do not believe increases the val.uu of the
property.
In an effort to resolve this situation. Hoglunds will accept either
of the following alternatives:
1. Hoglunds will provide 6,800 squat* feet of lard, the City will pay
for the curbing and agree that no other direct or indirect assessment be
placed against Lots 1, 3, b, 5 and 6, and the City pay Hoglunds the sum of
$3.700.00.
D
2. This proposition is identical co the one above except that
Hoglunds will accept conveyance of the abandoned easement once the project
has been completed, assuming that it is at least 6,000 square feet, in lieu
of receiving cash from the City.
Obviously,.the above proposals would have to be made more specific
and documented. if you require further information, please advise me at
your earliest convenience.
Since rely,
METCALF b LARSON
i
By:
J a Metcalf
tto ey at Lav
JCM:da
J
Council Agenda - 10/26/87
9. Consideration of Water Tower Cleaning and Inspection Contract. (J.S.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Our water tower cleaning and inspection contract with Water Tower Paint
and Repair Company, Inc., of Clear Lake, Iowa, has recently expired.
This old contract required the firm to annually clean and inspect the
tank and touch up interior wax coating. Every five years they were to
apply a complete new wax coating to the tank. This was done in 1985 with
our major repairs to the tank. The cost of this contract was $1,355 per
year.
Our new contract is for annual cleaning and inspection services only at a
rate of $575 per year. Due to the possibility of the tank coming down in
1988 or 1989, we decided to drop the maintenance and reapplication of the
wax coating. If during a given inspection the wax coating needs touch
up, we will have that work performed at an hourly rate.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to approve a 5 -year contract with
Water Tower Paint and Repair Co., Inc., at an annual cost of $975 per
year for cleaning and inspection of our tank.
2. The second alternative would be to again include annual touch up of
the wax coating and conplete recoating of the wax surface in five
years.
C. STAFF RECOM NDATION:
It is the staff recommendation that the City Council approve the proposed
contract for $575 per year as outlined in alternative number one. It is
the staff's opinion that with the new water improvements coming, the City
will take our old tank out of service and epoxy coat the interior or
demolish the tank and remove it.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copy of the proposed contract.
-12-
• .Dere. ,uNw+.nww.«. - u.. «.rwr«N».se.w.. r.wr.
elr�.x «rr...» ..�«...,�w..r<•..n, •awl
WATERTOWER PAINT & REPAIR CO., INC.
'y "thr tank wah he Red Reef' „• c.« 1n
, ••tlNe 101.1101 » Jf i.11ee
,
•-� •O. M,•, CL[es yN•. law• 10.00
CONTRACT
t»rt •eeaerlwi+w u•rn»a.. «.« am •6. r0..��P•ws•r...a'•+•r.rw.. •n+a -
? eNw« G. «e, s+grr ♦•, «, ».a «r.w«« eww CaxY e«eie•, as
Gtv of Monticello. Minnesota
'. w+r»telt»-+.eru.veu*wa.•we.«»o•a*wce».«!•.enrs«r«e.o «a •ouo«o '
Contractor hereby agrees to furnish labor, insurance and use of equipment
to drain, flush out and inspect the interior surfaces and to inspect the
exterior surfaces of the 75,000 gallon elevated nater tank and tower and
report the results to the Owner, once each year, based upon the following
schedule and rates,
Schedule Fate
1908 5 $75.00
1989 5 $75.00 ,
1990 5 $75.00
1991 5 575.00
1992 5 575.00 <
■
*• fco.n•n cowl e N eua..rc: •ea nm. to•,w ren. o n,r w•e», e.erlare «ra •eu arro..,.Ju• er». »anr •eoe we .e .u•
! enaa n•.r.eurq.ufe.•. enure cseruna•.rrn•os•wo-euru.•. wN•vc1•n.aea•n .oY uur•.•n»nr .; .
.w..eie•.erau.rwuu.ro•n uaeoN.•.c,eeow�uur,auno •waacetao e. cenuc.o.n wu•u•e. a•
u cpnucYo. rrrN,.n «rw..• rww ••Iw.. r.Irl. e,ee• w .
«rrr•....r�arww<I «rwerrr,rwr »w•.,r w. rwrw� 1
meYecroeNrr.rw+.�...«.«r..wl«..rwwww.wll..,«l.rw,aw.tw+wr «.. w..wltrr.rl«+r.er.•..r.
Qe1C•�wra♦w.r«wwrtr arWw»ta•G.�Mw.ww•wwrrNMNeO»..•f.YMllwi+.IwM nls w»w•rnlry Mrr '
r...ww»»rw«.rr»..+rl.l.ow«+•clr.w««...r w«..... ». «w�.wV.r•.r wwrr w«.! '
w CM+.•GtM q. M w«.r wu Mse •r s r.wa i w.wM s 4.uM«...1« Mnly�
�f` �y •IP.w +� •wrw r'wP •110 .r«• r sw r. »nM Neer ww • ».10 Iwr IAwY Y w wn•. » M Hwy Mw«r
..ew,er M w rcanuc*ww....»w.r•w al.ewro• r.r.»wwr.w..ra
I «rw�tr+••crerlwr.Mrrw.N.. rr.w»..r.w+N.wrr. r�r�w«r. uw eo..wcra. .w r,..r.r. •
Mrrrw w�.w.rw.wx '"»�
e».�u:r•.cra�w.�.+.::.trM..:.."°r.�`.�. «. r�.a.�arw«r.� :.•ero:.w awn•w.. wNrro.l.w.a r�a:�
Mrewxie •SFr•«« rmertm.r..+rrr NrNs ere.•r•rr MNN,we.M
(Rates as Stated ebovel
Iwr •wrrr w, r r •r�'inrrrr,••r 4Nre AN 1•INrr w� � •Ir r apre•p+Or w Ie1el« .w we r wl N w ytllrr . »I N�Ip
eight
`•cicr• r. wN.... rw.r r rr r M rr.IM
_ wwr..r.r«..•w..eM,rrw.ww.�...rw«»...w...r«r.»ww.r...wr. r...arr..
•w.+•e rctr,Mr,»rw•er«rw•rrNrrNrr ea.ruc•o. rrerM rr.. ewr,w tr.ew,c..«, w»..r '
ro-iu o'.•:r.Ir �r.»r�.lwr«..n.wrwrrw+rr..rr1..1�s«. Iwr+lw«tallwro.w.. tl.rw.r.rw ..
N wMrer•�r,rw, w•w �r«.wrr.r»...Na.a.w•.»rw.+s....e«e.�.nl..+.a Mlrrrlere wr lre
wrrr e,M ».•slrM ew r•rw rru•rawer.an•aea•s m.+c
' «r �wrw ••N�w
w
a.w crrlw Iw. t n•v nP rONTtCE �, M1NNE8 Tlt
Dere
*mr ,
r r oe•i•�.ere a«•ew mu »
GENERAL FUND -- OCTOBER
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
Thompson Insulation Service - Insulating Bland res.
380.00
24941
OSM - Engineering fees
19,696.79
24942
Gary Anderson - Mileage expense
82.15
24943
Corrov Sanitation - Sept. contract payment
6,859.80
24944
Haberman, Inc. - Container information
10.75
24945
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
123.04
24946
ICMA Corp. - Ret. cont.
759.34
24947
W. S. Darley Co. - Hose hoist, fire broom and gloves - Fire D.
260.94
24948
Firemen's Relief Assoc. - 1987 State Fire Aid
29,786.00
24949
Holiday Gas Station - Gas for Fire Dept.
9.00
24950
Beverly Johnson - Animal control contract
275.00
24951
Buffalo Bituminous - 87-1 and 87-2 Imp. Project payments
5,036.85
24952
Jerry Hermes - Janitorial at library
216.67
24953
David Stromberg - Animal control contract
287.50
24954
Corrov Sanitation - Add. landfill expense
1,109.20
24955
Commissioner of Revenue - SWT
2,251.00
24956
State Treasurer - PERA W/H
1,348.45
24957
Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT
5,904.82
24958
City of Fairmont - Purchase of snowblower
2,000.00
24959
James Preueee - Cleaning city hall
400.00
24960
YMCA of Mpls. - Monthly contract payment
583.33
24961
Mr. Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary
175.00
24962
Mr. Dan Blonigen - Council salary
125.00
24963
Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary
125.00
24964
Mr. William Fair - Council salary
125.00
24965
Mr. Warren Smith - Council salary
123.19
24966
Mrs. Cindy Lemm - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24967
Mrs. Joyce Dowling - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24968
Mr. Richard Carlson - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24969
Mr. Richard Martie - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24970
Mr. James Ridgeway - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24971
MN. Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees
21.00
24972
MN. Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees
18.00
24973
MN. Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees
18.00
24974
James Preueee - Cleaning fire hall
50.00
24975
MN. Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg.. fees
61.00
24976
MN. Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg, fees
48.00
24977
MN. Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees
18.00
24978
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone chargee
1,385.27
24979
Cyr Construction - Repairs at City Hall
261.00
24980
North Central Public Service - Utilities
6.35
24981
Northern States Power Co. - Utilities
6.635.18
24982
Norwest Investment Services - Computer payment
2,407.61
24983
Professional Services group - WWTP contract services
22,083.35
24984
Jerry Hermes - Janitorial services
216.67
24985
David Stromberg - Animal control services
287.50
24986
State Treasurer - PERA W/H
1,340.36
24987
Anoka County Social Services - Payroll dad.
204.00.
24988
Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT
4,519.66
24989
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll dad.
123.04
2090
Rick Wolfsteller - Mileage allowance
300.00
24991
ICMA Retirement Corp. - Payroll dad.
759.34
24992
PERA - Insurance premiums - dad.
27.00
24993
Principal Mutual Life Ins. - Group Ins.
5,186.27
24994
Holiday Gas Station - Fire Dept. gas
38.65
24995
MN. Dept. of Nat. Rea. - Dep. Reg. fees
24.00
24996
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
36.00
24997
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
36.00
24998
Monticello Fire Dept. - Wages
1,433.01
24999
Extension Special Program - Assessor seminar - Gary A.
55.00
25000
MN. Dept. of Jobs 6 Training - Unempl. benefits - Dave S.
210.00
25001
National Fire Protection Assoc. - Stickers for Fire Dept.
41.85
25002
Mobil Oil Corp. - Gas - Fire Dept. b Walt's van
141. 75
25003
Ted Farnum - Mileage reimb. for Fire Dept. seminar
234.54
25004
Int. Conf. of Bldg. Officials - Membership dues
20.00
25005
MacQueen Equip. - 3 gutter brooms for sweeper
256.47
25006
Adam's Pest Control - Library contract payment
42.00
25007
Buffalo Bituminous - Supplies for street repair
40.21
25008
Simonson Lumber - City Hall mdse.
499.61
25009
Sand Plains - Sand for parks
262.50
25010
Central Eyewear - Glasses
340.40
25011
ICMA - Book for Public Works Dept.
40.70
25012
Monticello Office Products - Office supplies- 3 files
448.49
25013
Harry's Auto Supply - 2 batteries, oil filters, etc.
338.25
25014
North Star Waterworks - Flipper shaft for Water Dept.
30.61
25015
Holmes b Graven - Tax increment information
144.00
25016
AT 6 T Inf. System - Fire phone charges
3.96
25017
National Bushing - Spark plugs, wrench, filters, etc.
77.32
25018
Earl F. Andersen - Msec. signs- Civil Def. 6 St.
1,282.82
25019
Monticello -Big Lake Pet Hospital - Animal control expense
229.50
25020
Wright County Auditor - Sheriff contract - October
10,645.21
25021
Unitog Rental - Uniform rental
102.40
25022
Unocal - Gas for Fire Dept.
18.16
25023
Servs Star Hardware - Misc. supplies
82.47
25024
Gruys, Johnson - Computer fees for Sept.
290.00
25025
Nelson 011 Co. - Gas for St. Dept.
2,201.28
25026
MacQueen Equip. - Repairs for St. Dept. equipment
270.03
25027
Monticello Ford - Warranty transfer for John Simola truck
100.00
25028
Coast to Coast - Supplies for all Depts.
309.52
25029
Local ®49 - Union dues
115.00
25030
Maus Foods - Supplies
80.56
25031
Olson 6 Sons - Services at Bland res. d lift station
275.25
25032
Audio Communications - Battery for St. Dept.
95.00
25033
Northern Oxygen Service - Fire Dept. supplies
11.70
25034
Martie's Farm Service - Lawn seed for Parks Dept.
84.50
25035
Mrs. Sylvia Cline - Cleaning services for Bland res.
125.00
25036
Ben Franklin - Shades for Bland res.
10.47
25037
Advanced Rescue Systems - Seat harness 6 rescue sling -Fire
130.00
25038
Vance's Service Center - Gas - Fire Dept.
9.00
25039
Loch Jewelers - Engraving plates for Fire Dept.
72.00
25040
Stephens -Pack - Dep. Reg. manual
29.00
25041
Monticello Printing - Verified acct. 6 fire call reports
73.95
25042
Duerr's Water Service - Water softener rental - Bland res.
24.50
25043
Moon Motors - Repairs
36.02
25044
Matt Theisen - Mileage - Water Dept.
5.00
25045
Rich Cline - Mileage - Water Dept.
5.00
25046
Hoglund Bus Co. - Parts
19.72
25047
Int. Institute of Mun. Clerks - Membership dues
40.00
25048
O'Connor 6 Hannan - Airport Comm. professional services
2,632.41
25049
Flicker's T V - Parts
5.95
25050
Maus Tire Service - Tire repair
6.50
25051
-2-
GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NO.
Elizabeth Wettestad - Mileage
30.00
25052
Willard Farnick - Travel expense for fire school
371.80
25053
Copy Duplicating Products - Toner for machine at library
143.96
25054
F b E Sales 6 Service - Repair check writing machine
676.25
25055
Humane Society of Wright County - Animal control expense
100.00
25056
Global Computer Supplies - 2 modems for computer at P. W.
260.96
25057
General Office Products - Ribbons for computer
36.00
25058
L 6 G Rehbein - Final payment /11 - 86-1 Inter. Sewer
24,338.74
25059
Northern States Power - Inst. street light - Walnut & 7th
380.00
25060
Olive Koropchak - Travel expense & recording fees reimb.
34.50
25061
Gary Anderson - Mileage 6 travel expense
168.54
25062
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
12.00
25063
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
84.00
25064
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
18.00
25065
Commissioner of Revenue - Water use sales tax - 3rd qtr.
545.93
25066
Payroll for September 30,966.85
TOTAL GENERAL DISBURSEMENTS - OCTOBER $206,657.54
LIQUOR FUND -- OCTOBER DISBURSEMENTS
OSM - Engineering fees for parking lot
Bellboy Corporation - Liquor
Griggs, Cooper - Liquor
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
Johnson Bros. - Liquor
Eagle Wine Co. - Liquor
Buffalo Bituminous - Sealcoating parking loc
Commissioner of Revenue - SWT - Sept.
State Treasurer - PERA W/H
Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT
Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor
Griggs, Cooper - Liquor
Quality Wine - Liquor
AHE Ready Mix - Concrete for parking lot
Kolles Sanitation - Garbage contract
Olson 6 Sons Electric - Mtce. on parking lot
Dick Beverage - Beer
Stromquist Diet. Co. - Misc. mdse.
St. Cloud Refrigeration - Repair ice machine
Liefert Trucking - Freight
Jude Candy 6 Tobacco -Misc. mdse.
MN. Sar Supply - Misc. mdse.
Viking Coca Cola - Misc. mdse.
Rubald Beverage - Wine purchase
Day Diet. Co. - Beer purchase
Coast to Coast - Supplies
Seven Up Bottling Co. - Pop purchase
Granite City Jobbing - Misc, mdse.
Century Labs - Cleaner
Bernick's Pepsi cola - Misc. mdse.
Maus Foods - Supplies
Dohlheimer Dist. - Beer
Grosslein Beverage - Beer
Thorpe Dist. Co. - Beer
Cruys. Johnson - Computer fees for Sept.
Cloudy Town Dist. - Supplies
Johnson Bros. - Liquor
Griggs, Cooper - Liquor
Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor
Cloudy Town Dist. - Misc. mdse.
Bridgewater - Telephone charges
Seitz Hardware - Store supplies
General Rental Service - Rental of trencher
Northern States Power - Utilities
State Treasurer - PERA W/H
Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 PWT
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
Eagle Wine Co. - Liquor
Principal Mutual Life - Group Ins.
Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor
Service Sales Corp. - Misc. supplies
Commiseionor of Revenue - Sales tax - Sept.
lights
for irrigation
AMOUNT CHECK
NO.
2,872.83
1 3347
2,611.72
1 3348
1,920.77
1 3349
I70.00
13350
370.07
1 3351
241.64
13352
20,927.62
13353
253.00
13354
182.15
13355
859.02
1 3356
760.54
13357
3,382.19
13358
858.90
13359
112.57
13360
133.50
13361
3,325.29
13362
1,512.18.
13363
49.15
13364
50.63
13365-
3365"390.44
390.44
1 3366
1.033.00
13367
96.28
13368
472.40
13369
96.30
13370
622.40
13371
140.80
13372
164.60
13373
171.77
13374
39.68
13375
215.20
13376
7.16
13377
11,746.65
13378
12, 170.02
13379
7,206.45
1 3380
110.00
13381
184.80
13382
1.394.85
13393
3.248.80
13384
3, 152.62
13385
12.00
13386
71.80
13387
111.12
13388
145.22
13389
756.35
13390
198.68
13391
651.40
13392
170.00
13393
242.22
13394
404.50
13395
3,018.17
13396
49.57
13397
7,529.35
13398
Payroll for September 4,982.03
TOTAL LIQUOR DISBURSEKENTS - OCTOBER $107,931.18
LIQUOR FUND
AMOM
CHECK
NO.
Ron's Ice Co. -
Ice purchase
262.09
13399
Griggs.
Cooper
6 Co. - Liquor
3,572.51
13400
Quality
Wine &
Spirits - Liquor
1.816.99
13401
Sheryll
Stank -
Consultation fees for new sign at store
35.00
13402
Johnson
Bros.
- Liquor
808.79
13403
Payroll for September 4,982.03
TOTAL LIQUOR DISBURSEKENTS - OCTOBER $107,931.18
•�CITI
Of "NrICELJ.0
'
IIA,IWy.
Dulldbtg
D.R-L-L Rc3,ort
'
r00013 m,d USM
!Doth or •Bent. 19 87
I -t.
Ift.
9-",i"T61.T," •L.a n., 'ITil Yier _--• I
PEIUU13 15SULD
11m,th Au9aet
IinlLl, September Le.L icor To Oalo '1'o D.L.
ItE; I UQITI AL
Ilumb.r _
t0
15
12 103
82
V.1ueti-
986.800.00
1 460,100.00
1 1,126,790.00 f 6,384,130.00 3
4,170,100.00
• Feee
1,075.79
5,593.73
6,036.47 31,741.93
18,582.51
Surch.rge.
42.35
231.20
563.35 3,191.70
2,186.24 '
OOIOMIC:AL
.
Ilumber
1
1
.2 14
19
'
V.luntlon
6,000.00
10,000.00
458,330.00 2,547,410.00 -
703,130.00
Foca
81.00
117.00
2,613.46 12,362.17
.. 5,294.77
S-hvgee
3.00
5.00.,
229.15 ,.' 1,273.70
_ • 355.80
111WSiNAL
-
]lumber
12
3
2
V.1-ti..12,100.00.
475,000.00 575,500.00
764;100.00
F...
135.90
2,336.20 3054.77
4,748.47
Surehsrgee
6.05
237.50 287.75
382.05
•
FW1033110
Number
2
7
9 61
51
Feee
49.00
164.00
584.00 2,300.00
1,687.00
Sw•Oherge.
1.00
3.50
4.50 30.50
25.50
0111F215
•
Number
3
3
i1
Valu.lf 011
3,000.00
10,000.00
83,400.00
re..
60.00
100.50
742.50
Sur.h4rges
1.50
6.00
41.50
TOTAL 110. I'17UUTJ
16
24
•25 104
169
TOTAI, VAIIJATIUM
695,800.00
6486,500.00
62,060,160.00 89,517,060.00 35,920.730.00
•
TOTAI, FFJt9
61,265.19
66,010.63
111,570.11 149,559.37
151,055.25
7orw 6unCnAn,:1:e
647.89
6715.75
11,034.50. 14,789.65
12.991.09
NIUIPlrr IIltllll
PFIUIIT IIA1UIt1
U,we,rr
I'1•]UUT
SUIIL11A7IL_ V61u.1.16, •I1� d Yc_r
Ln el leer
Single F.mlly
6
11,699.11
1190.35 13801700.00 32
36
Ouple6
21
1WL!-,-d.ly
5
7
Comeercl el
1
1'17.00
5.00 10,000.00 3
3
Induell•111
- 1
7
Res: C- g..
7
308.70
t..15 28,300.00 0
9
Sl V.
0
0
•
P.blle eul !eine.
, 0
O
ALTiJIA71011 CII IIIJ•AIJI
'
7
505.60
26.70 1 65,400.00( 37
18 '
Comnnrcl el
16
11
b,du.lrl&1
1
135.90
6,05 12,100.00 .1
i
1
PWlmlao
1
All type.
7
101.00
3.50 51
61
Acct:6Oo07 6r0UC1UNS
'
' a1-1pq Pool.
I. .• 1
1
0.cb.
9
J
iL/IP01lAn1 1I:IU147
1 0
0
ODIOLIT1011
.• 1
11
TOT
24'
:6,010.61
52.5,75 5406;500.011 165
Igo
INDIVIDUAL PEP.MIT ACTIVITY REPORT
. MONTH OF SEPTEMBER. , 198 7
rERMiT
( *DESCRIPTION
iPr NAmE/LOCATION (VALUATION
4UMEER
II
87-1105
Nows L garage
Or SLH Buildara/2722 Oakvi- Ln.
S 49,000.00
87-5706
Howe g garage
Brmarcus Land 6 Oil./141 Riverview Dr.
71,700.00
87-1107
3 ..a... POrCh
AD•Lowell L As* Schrupp/1603 V, River
13.400.00
8T-7108
Garage i tg:exavey
RD Nayne YoxuR/751; Hilltop Dr.
23,000.00
g1-1109
a. se I. ri nl pn
AOI RiOn.rd Lumley/1900 W. River
1.500.00
87-11tO
Roof shingle replaCament
AD Virgil Michaelis/313 Riverview Dr.
1,500.00
87-1111
In tarlor L a.tarlor home
'
,.novation
AD Mnrrill Busch/514 Fallon Avo.
20,000.00
87-1112
CO1a az.g. hid.•
C. NN/DOT/712 Chale.. Road
10,000.00
87-1113
Ho -s i 9ara9.
8r Day la Y.Chaa Conn/210 Narvin EI-Od
Id, 51.800.00
87-1114
Nowe i 9.r.vo
Orr Dave Xleia/I 107 Club Viev Dr.
90,300.00
a7-1115
0t6ched garage
RG Ralph Maldinger/355 Prairie Rd.
5,300.00
a7-1116
Root shingle rsplacemant
AD Everett Wrvay/209 Rinn.sots at.
t,500.00
07-1117
Garage Addition, roof
shingle 6 aiding
AD Vernon Strand/501 Last River 8t.
t6,000.00
87-4118
Nowe'i garage
OF Cyr Conatructlan LW2745 Mapl.wood r1r.
65.800.00
87-1119
Nowe L gsrap.
8F BLN Builders/I942 akvlew Ln.
50,100:00
87-7120
Loading/wio.ding dock a66 AT Larwn Nig./201 Chsleea Rd.
12,100.00
87-1121
Rear porch replacement
AO Llvlro itradford/409 V, 3rd Ot.
1,500.00
TOTALS
..8b, 500.00
PLAN RY•V IEw
• 87-1105
Nouei L garage
OP ow Builders/2722 akviev Ln.
9 26$.20
87-7106
Nows L garage
OP Marcus to i Oil/34t Riverview CO.
332.89
97 -it 11
Nouaa L Oarage
SP Day]a V.ch;,,Ca one t/210 Marvin Elwood
Id. 280.54
87-111.
Nowe L garage
OP ave Xln n07 Club Via. Dr.
387.30
87-� 118
Now. L 9ars9a
Or Cyr Cc Ott Ltd/2745 Maplewood
m. 31S.64
87-1119
house L garage
it
O9 OLH But ld.rs/2842 akvl.w Ln.
269.71
TOTAL PLAN REVIEW 4 1,851.28
TOTAL AEVEMIX 4 6.156.38
. .11 t •-
PERMIT I SURCHARGE(tPLUMB ING ISUPCHARGO
4 408.00 5 20.50 a 23.00 5 .50
$12.15 35.85 29.00 .50
747.60 6.70
234.00 11.50 14.00 .50
15.00 .50
15.00 :50
207.00 1b.00
117.00 5.00•
431,60 26.90 23.00 .50
595.85 45.15 20.00 .50
74.70 2.65 ,
t5:g0 .50
771.00 8.00
485.60 32.90 24.00 .50
4Is.8, 25.05 21.00 .50
135.90 6.05
15.00 .50
53,995.35 82.2.25 9164.00 63.50