Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 01-14-1991AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Monday, January 14, 1991 - 7:00 p.m. Mayor: Ken Maus Council Members: Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen, Brad Fyle, Clint Herbst 1. Call to order. 2. Oath of office. 3. Approval of minutes of the special meetings held November 30, 1990, December 3, 1990, December 10, 1990, December 17, 1990, and the regular meeting held December 10, 1990. 4. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. 5. Consideration of an ordinance amendment to Section 3-9 [C]4 to include: (j) A permit for a public sign in the form of a decorative banner to be displayed on public property for a period of one (1) year. A permit shall be issued for each year that the decorative banners are displayed. Applicant, City of Monticello. 6. Consideration of approving public banner system proposal. Applicant, Monticello Chamber of Commerce. 7. Consideration of an ordinance amendment to Section 2-2 [HB) of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance by adding "beautician" to the list of home occupations allowed by ordinance. Amendment to also include additional conditions associated with the operation of a home occupation and establishment of a home occupation permitting process. Applicant, City of Monticello. 8. Consideration of a resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation of proposed assessment roll and setting a public hearing for Project 90-4 (Sandberg East Improvement). 9. Consideration of resolution releasing conditional use restriction--Outlot A of Sandberg East plat. 10. Consideration of accepting petition for annexation and agreeing to enter into a joint resolution with Monticello Township for annexation of West Kjollborgs Mobile Homo Park. 11. Consideration of accepting partial payment of delinquent assessments from Farm Credit Services to allow sale of 49 -acro parcel to school district. City Council Agenda January 14, 1991 Page 2 12. Consideration of an Interim ordinance imposing a moratorium on adult oriented land uses on certain property located within the city of Monticello. Applicant, City of Monticello. 13. Consideration of purchasing additional scanner and software for the recycling program. 14. Consideration of amendment to contract with Professional Services Group for change in scope of services, i.e., laboratory certification requirements. 15. Consideration of making annual appointments. 16. Consideration of approving 1991 contract for police protection with Wright County Sheriff. 17. Ratification of salary adjustments for 1991. 18. Consideration of authorizing the purchase of a vehicle for the Building Inspection Department. 19. Consideration of bills for the last half of December. 20. Adjournment. OBJECTION TO ASSESSMENT FOR JEFF AND COLLEEN NELSON BOX 6EE. GILLARD AVENUE HISTORICAL REFERENCE: - We built and moved into our home in October of 1987. Al that time we were in the OAA and there were no plans for annexation of Sandberg East or extension of city services. Services at that time only extended out to Mississippi Drive. - We were annexed into the city along with Sandberg East in mid 1988. We were never notified of the annexation proceedings until after it happened. We believe that the city did not realize that anyone lived in Sandberg East. - In fall of 1988, city services were extended out up to the Halliger property with the East County Rd. 39 project. These services were installed at the request of the property owners. In fall of 1989, a building permit for a lot in Sandberg East was denied since the home would be built with private well and septic. BENEFITS FROM THE PROJECT: - We have Ctie own well and septic system, only 3 years old. - We I1dVe talked to realtors and an appraiser. Their opinion is, from a mdrket alir38point, thut there is no benefit from city services. In addiliiih to the assessment costs, we will be forced to hookup to sewer aviihin 3 years, at an estimated cost of 11200 to $1500. In (fie piellctiditry discussions for this project, the "target" for deterdiini6g if the project was feasible seemed to be (6000/lot. How does the ciiy ri'tionalize that we have "benefited" by $9225 when we already have adequate private services? - We challenge the idea that we*automatically "benefit" more because we have more front footage, simply because the costs are allocated that way. We still only have one building site. LOSS OF VALUE TO OUR PROPERTY: We feel that due to this project, we have actually had a loss of property value due to the loss of approximately 30 mature trees in front of our house. In addition to aesthetic value, the trees provided a barrier for privacy, noise, mind and sun. In addition, this winter we found that they provided a barrier for snowmobiles. SUMMARY: We did not request city services since we have nothing to gain by them. We just happened to be in the way. We do not believe that city services provide any tangible benefit to our property. We feel that we have actually lost property value due to the loss of a majority of the trees in front of our house. Slate lav requires that assessments against property must be consistent with the benefit to the property owner. We believe there is no way that the assessment against our property meets this criteria. 5-1 C/_31 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Friday, November 30, 1990 - 9:00 a.m. Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: None Consideration of aut horizinq purchase of equipment and services associated with replacement of wastewater treatment plant control center. Public Works Director, John Simola, reported the City staff, along with OSM, has reviewed the proposals submitted by Dynamic Systems and by Bentec, Inc. Simola reported that both proposals were reviewed on a step-by-step basis taking into account both performance and cost considerations. Simola reported that staff Is recommending that the City Council select the proposal submitted by Dynamic Systems in the amount of $79,875. Simola based the recommendation on the fact that Dynamic Systems will completely remove and install a new control center, whereas the proposal submitted by Bentec called for utilization of a portion of the existing system. The system offered by Dynamic Systems will also provide 20 control screens, providing information regarding the operation of the system and its various parts to the operator, whereas the Bentec system utilizes a PC system that may not be able to provide the same level of reliability. The companies utilizing equipment furnished by Dynamic Systems have been pleased with the work and equipment provided by Dynamic Systems; and in summary, Dynamic Systems provides the best product for an industrial application. Ken Maus asked if Bentec has the right to challenge the City's decision in light of the fact that Bentec' s proposal was less expensive. Simola responded by saying that duo to the emergency situation, the request for proposals process provides the City with the flexibility to make a selection on factors other than cost factor. Warren Smith noted that he's well satisfied with the staff recommendation and noted that price is not the sole consideration when purchasing such an important piece of equipment. Page I Special Council Minutes - 11/30/90 After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, to purchase the wastewater treatment control center and associated services from Dynamic Systems at a cost of $79,875, including the performanco bond. Motion carried unanimously. Other matters. John Simola reviewed a proposal to install street lights along Gillard Avenue in front of lots created with the development of the Sandberg East Second Addition. Dan Blonigen noted that we may be jumping the gun in installing the lights at this time, as there are no residences established on the city side of Gillard. Ken Maus concurred and suggested that we wait until the housing density in the area is increased. In the meantime, it may make sense to place one light at the intersection of Gillard and County Road 39. After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to direct Wright Hennepin County Electric to place one light at the intersection of Gillard and County Road 39 and consider adding additional street lights at such time that the residential development along Gillard justifies additional street lights. Motion carried unanimously. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator Pago 2 38 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, December 3, 1990 - 4:00 p.m. Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen Members Absent : None City Council reviewed the proposed budget submitted by City Administrator, Rick Wolfsteller. Wolfsteller reported that the proposed budget results in a tax levy of $2,752,778, which amounts to a 7.28 increase over last year's tax levy. This increase in the tax levy, when combined with the effect of the increase in property valuation, will result in an actual property tax increase of less than 69, which is fairly close to the cost of living adjustments projected. It was the consensus of Council to support the adoption of the proposed budget as it now stands with any subsequent changes to be made as a result of input from the public at the upcoming public hearing. Dan Blonigen noted that he can support the budget and the increases projected with the understanding that major items purchased in 1991 would again be considered by the Council before purchases are made. There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Dan Blonigen, to present the budget and proposed tax levy of $2,752,778 to the public at the public hearing on adoption of the 1991 budget and tax levy scheduled for December 10, 1990. Motion carried unanimously. Ken Maus requested an itemized list of the bond issues now currently being paid by the City, the list to include the expiration data of each bond issue. There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator 0 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, December 10, 1990 - 6:30 p.m. Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Warren Smith, Dar, Blonigen Members Absent: None Administrator Wolfsteller discussed the potential of establishing a policy for establishing annual pay adjustments. He noted that there are many different methods used by various communities for establishing annual pay adjustments. The policy, if implemented, would relate employee performance to cost of living increases and merit increases and also establish position pay ranges. In addition, the policy would be integrated with a comparable worth program that must be developed by December 31, 1991, as mandated by state law. Shirley Anderson remarked that a "step" system for adjusting pay based on degrees or credits earned, seniority, or other criteria can work in some situations but may not be as easy to implement in a city setting. Dan Blonigen noted that it is important to establish a range of pay for each position and make sure that position ranges are comparable. Blonigen also remarked that cost of living increases noted by the Kiplinger report include increases in the cost of insurance; therefore, cost of living increases granted to employees should be adjusted downward to reflect increases in City payments to employee insurance programs. Blonigen also noted that individuals not performing to expectations should not receive a cost of living increase. Rick Wolfsteller responded by saying that employees should be considered for termination if they are not performing up to expectations. Ken Maus suggested the concept of establishing a pool to be used for merit increases and to be used to make comparable worth adjustments. Warren Smith responded by saying that it was his understanding that we were moving away from the merit pay concept. Wolfstellor emphasized that we may need a pool to be used to adjust for comparable worth adjustments. Warren Smith suggested adjusting pay as done the previous year with a bonus for people who should got recognition. Page 1 C13) Special Council Minutes - 12/10/90 At this point in the meeting, Council discussed establishment of a pay increase pool to be distributed by the City Administrator. Fra P it noted that the cost of living increase for the past year therefore, the pool should consist of an amount equal to S 5.6 of the current payroll. After discussion, a motion was made by Fran Fair and seconded by Warren Smith to establish a pay adjustment pool of $26,000 to be distributed as pay increases to employees as deemed appropriate by the City Administrator, with the City Administrator's pay adjustment to be considered later. Voting in favor of the motion: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley Anderson, Ken Maus. Opposed: Dan Blonigen. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator Pago 2 D3 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - CITY COUNCIL Monday, December 10, 1990 - 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley Anderson, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: None 2. Approval of minutes. After discussion, a motion was made by Warren Smith and seconded by Shirley Anderson to approve the minutes of the meeting held November 26, 1990. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. None forthcoming. 4. Public hearinq on adoption of 1991 budqet and consideration of resolution settinq 1491 tax levv. Mayor Maus opened the public hearing for citizens, comments. There being no comments forthcoming, Mayor Maus closed the public hearing. Mayor Maus noted that the City Council had conducted a special meeting for the purpose of reviewing the proposed budget and that no changes to the budget had resulted from that meeting. There being no further discussion, a motion was made by Fran Fair, and seconded by Shirley Anderson, to adopt a resolution adopting the 1991 budget and setting the total tax levy at $2,752,778. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 90-55. 5. Consideration of final plat request to replat portions of the Sandberg East residential subdivision. Applicant, John Sandberg. Assistant Administrator, Jeff O'Neill, reported to the Council that John Sandberg had completed two of the throe conditions required by Council prior to City approval of the final plat of the Sandberg Eaet Second Addition. He went on to state that is likely that the third condition will be met in the near future and that staff fools comfortable in withholding the actual signing of the plat until the third requirement is completed. Brat Woiss of OSM reported that the third condition included the requirement that the grading and drainage plan be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Pago 1 4 Council Minutes - 12/10/90 It appears at this time that there are no major issues to contend with regarding the drainage plan; therefore, it appears appropriate at this time to approve the plat with final signing of the plat to be withheld until the drainage is entirely complete. Ken Maus asked John Sandberg if he was aware that the drainage plan is not quite complete. John Sandberg stated that there did not appear to be any problems in making the requested changes to the drainage plan as requested by the City Engineer. Fran Fair asked if a park dedication fee would be required with this plat. Assistant Administrator, Jeff O'Neill, responded by saying that the plat park dedication requirement did not apply because the original land was platted prior to being annexed by the City, and a park dedication had been paid with the platting of the land while it was in the township. After discuss ion, a motion was made by Fran Fair, and seconded by Dan Blonigen, to approve the final plat of the Sandberg East Second Addition but withhold signing of the plat until such time that the City Engineer grants final approval of grading and drainage plans and subject to acquisition of necessary storm water drainage easements. Monumentation associated with new plat must be in place, and monumentation associated with the previous plat must be replaced prior to issuance of a building permit on any of the new lots created with the Sanciberg East Second Addition. At this point in the meeting, John Sandberg asked if Council would consider assessing the lots created with the plat now being approved at the same rate as was previously planned with an earlier version of the Sandberg East plat. Sandberg noted at the time the earlier plat was considered, Council was willing to fix the assessment at $92,000 to be assessed against the entire length of the lots along Gillard Avenue. Sandberg requested that Council consider applying the same cost per lot to the now plat. Rick Wolfsteller noted that the City at this time has not compiled all the costs associated with construction of the sewer and water line. In addition, a fair and consistent strategy for assessing all benefiting property owners has not boon developed. It would appear at this time, given the situation, it is premature to guarantee an assessment amount. woifateilor went on to report that staff will have the accurate project totals and a proposed assessment roll ready for Council within one weak. It was the consensus of Council to discuss this matter at a spacial meeting of the City Council scheduled for 3:00 p.m., Monday, December 17, 1990. Pago 2 0 Council Minutes - 12/10140 Consideration of renewinq Joint fire aqreement with Monticello Township. Administrator Wolfsteller reviewed the method by which the contribution made by Monticello Township for operation of the fire department is established. Wolfsteller noted that the existing contract calls for utilization of the assessed value as part of the calculation used in determining the Township contribution. Wolfsteller went on by saying that due to changes in the method by which the property taxes are collected, it now appears that utilization of market value in lieu of assessed value in the fair share formula will make more sense and result in more fair allocation of costs. Dan Blonigen reviewed the potential increase in charges to the Township resulting from change in the method of calculating the Township contribution and noted that the added charge of 48 is not excessive, is more understandable, and is a fair method by which the Township's share can be calculated. Shirley Anderson agreed with the potential change because it appears that the City taxpayer is subsidizing a portion of the cost to provide service to the township. After discussion, a motion was made by Dan Blonigen, and seconded by Warren Smith, to agree to renew the contract and adjust the formula for cost sharing by establishing market value in lieu of formerly used assessed value in the fair share formula. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of a resolution establishinq an additional deferred compensation plan for municipal employees. Rick Wolfsteller requested that the City Council consider allowing IDS Financial Services to establish a deferred compensation program for City employees. There is no cost to the City for this service, and this service would be in place along side the existing International City Management Association Deferred Compensation Pian now in place. Wolfstellor also noted there is another plan in place offered by the Safoco Insurance plan. Up to this date, no City employees have utilized the Safeco plan. After discussion, a motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, to adopt the IDS deferred compensation pian and eliminate the Safeco deferred compensation plan. Voting in favor: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson. Opposed: Dan Blonigon. SEE RESOLUTION 90-56. Pago 3 Council Minutes - 12/10/90 Consideration of replacement of tractor mower/ snowblower for the parks department. John Simola reported that approximately three years ago the City purchased a tractor mower/blower combination unit for a front mounted Toro mower unit. It was decided at that time that we could install a snowblower on the cab of our 650 John Deere and use that as our primary snowblowing piece of equipment for sidewalks and miscellaneous cleanup. This combination has not been successful, as the John Deere does not have sufficient horsepower and, coupled with a non - hydrostatic drive, has made it impractical for blowing snow from areas with any significant accumulation of snow. The underpower problems continue, and we, therefore, felt it was time to replace the 650 John Deere with something more suited to blowing snow. In addition, the parks department has been considering acquisition of an additional mower, as at times it has been dlfficult to keep up with the mowing on city properties. In preparation for this, it was felt that we could purchase heavy duty snowblower/mower unit with various attachments for sidewalk maintenance and keep the John Deere 650 but limit it to mowing only with occasional backup as a snowblower. An amount of $55,000 was requested and placed in the 1991 budget. We have further investigated our needs, and with Councilmember Blonlgen's assistance, we have determined that the cost of such a heavy duty piece of equipment for snowblowing with its limited suitability for mowing operations limits its practicality for the City of Monticello. We, therefore, have reassessed the needs for 1991 and feel they would be better met replacing the 650 John Deere with a larger, more powerful tractor which could handle our snowblowing and mowing needs. Simola reported that the City could purchase a 955 John Deere 4 -wheel drive tractor with 27 horsepower in the area of $20,000. With this purchase, the trade-in value of the John Deere would be about $5,000; therefore, we could expect the cost of the roplac emont unit to be under $15,000. The City prefers the John Deere 955 due to experience with past units, and parts and service are available in Monticello and nearby Rogers. Another option would be to rent tho unit at $1,032 per month or $6,192 for a six-month period should wo choose to rent it that long . During the time we are using the now tractor and chocking it out, the City staff could furthor evaluate the need for additional mowing oquipmont. Page 4 D Council Minutes - 12/10/90 Ken Maus asked if the unit proposed for purchase is limited in terms of maneuverability. Simola responded by saying that the unit, though larger, is not so large as to have problems in maneuvering in areas where the unit is needed most. Dan Blonigen stated that he is not ready to vote for this. He would like to study it further. fie suggested that this unit may not be used enough and may not be designed to fit our needs, as utilization of a plow may be better. After discussion, Council concluded that the unit could be rented for a short term on a trial basis. After the unit has been used in operation, the City could determine whether or not to purchase it. After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to authorize City staff to rent the John Deere 955 for a period of one month starting after the first snowfall and consider purchase of the unit only after its effectiveness is well understood. Motion carried unanimously. 9. Consideration of adoot-a-street program terms and conditions. Public Works Director, John Simola, reported that he has spoken with the City Attorney and obtained information from MN/DOT regarding a cleanup program similar to the adopt -a - highway program operated by the State of Minnesota. Simola noted that the Minnesota Department of Transportation has done most of the legwork and has a number of terms and conditions already identified that could be applied to the Monticello program. Simola suggested that the City obtain certificates of insurance when possible from organized groups. Kon Maus asked if tho adopt -a -street program could apply to a Park. John Simola noted that the program could be modified to apply to a park. Warren Smith remarked that the terms and conditions require that an organization pick up materials at least three times a year. It may be in certain areas that cleanup should occur at a greater frequency. Shirley Anderson concurred that in curtain areas it may make sense to require the cleanup to occur at the discretion of the Public Works Director. Pago 5 n Council Minutes - 1.^./10 /90 After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson, seconded by Fran Fair, to adopt the terms and conditions as presented with the addition that the program could be applied to cleanup of cemetery and park property, placement of signs indicating the organization responsible for cleanup is optional, and in order to receive recognition through placement of an adapt -a -street sign, organizations interested in the program must be willing to be involved for two years at a minimum. City staff will be responsible for administering the program with update on citizen participation provided to Council. 10. Consideration of a curb -side recvclino program for plastics. John Simola reported that as authorized by the City Council, a pilot recycling program for plastics was conducted from July to October. As a result of the pilot program, it appeared that the best method for collecting plastics would be to utilize curb -side collection. Ken Maus asked if the City is being premature regarding collection of plastic and should be getting better participation on the other items first. Fran Fair suggested that the City move forward and that the citizens of the community are ready to recycle plastics. Shirley Anderson concurred. People want to recycle plastics. Maus noted that he is not against the idea of recycling plastics; however, it may make sense to take a slow approach. After discusa ion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson, seconded by Fran Fair, to authorize an amendment to the existing contract with Polka Dot Recycling to include curb- side recycling of plastics at a cost of $.30 per household per month for single family and $,20 per unit per month for apartment units at an estimated yearly cost of $6,000. In addition, this alternative would pay for one-half of the cost of the 90 -gallon containers for plastic at the apartment sites with the program to begin January 3, 1991. Motion carried unanimously. 11. Consideration of bills for the first half of December. Ken Maus asked if some of the chocks being approved by Council have already been processed prior to Council approval. Rick Wolfstollor noted that some chocks aro mailed previous to final Council approval. These chocks are for financial commitments that the City has made previously or chocks that Pago 6 0 ( Council Minutes - 12/10/90 will result in the City not paying finance charges. Many of the checks, however, are withheld until such time that Council approves the check register. Ken Maus asked if the report could somehow be structured to place the items that are pre -approved in one category and those not already approved in another category. Rick Wolfsteller noted that he would look into this possibility. Motion was then made by Warren Smith, seconded by Shirley Anderson, to approve the payment of bills for the first half of December. Motion carried unanimously. 12. Other matters. A special meeting of the City Council was scheduled for 3:00 p.m., December 17, 1990, for the purpose of consideration of awarding the 1991/1992 transportation service contract and for the purpose of reviewing the public improvement cost and proposed assessment roll associated with the City project extending utilities to the Sandberg East Second Addition. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator Pago 7 RE MINUTES l CONTINUATION OF SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, December 10, 1990 - 10:10 P.M. Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: None The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ken Maus. A discussion was held on the strengths and weaknesses of the City Administrator, Rick Wolfsteller. The Council agreed that Rick by and large was doing a fine job but needed to work in certain areas such as public relations. Council further discussed the relationship of Administrator to Assistant Administrator and all agreed Assistant Administrator should receive a merit increase. Motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair, to grant a 5.4% salary increase to the City Administrator and further to direct the Administrator to grant a 5.4% increase to Assistant 1 Administrator, Jeff O'Neill, along with a $1,000 merit increase. (The merit increase was to be added to the package increase already authorized by Council . ) Voting in favor: Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Ken Maus. Opposed: Dan Blonigen. Abstaining: Shirley Anderson. Ken Maus Mayor I C MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, December 17, 1990 - 3:30 p.m. Members Present: Ken Maus, Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Shirley Anderson, Dan Slonigen Members Absent: None 2. Consideration of awarding the Monticello Heartland Express dial -a -ride bus system contract for 1991 and 1992. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the staff and Monticello Transportation Advisory Committee analysis of the two bids submitted to the City of Monticello. O'Neill summarized the analysis by saying that the bid submitted by Hoglund Coach Lines and the bid submitted by Medavan over a four-year time period would result in approximately the same cost. In terms of performance, Hoglund Coach Lines has shown throughout the first year of service that the organization is capable of providing excellent transportation service. It is not likely that Medavan will be able to improve upon the service provided by Hoglund Coach Lines; therefore, given the fact that the costs are relatively equal, the Monticello Transportation Advisory Committee, along with staff, recommends that the City select Hoglund Coach Lines as the transportation service provider for 1991 and 1992. Warren Smith remarked that he is happy with the way the transportation system has operated. He stated that the system is still relatively new and building its ridership. Fran Fair agreed that the transportation system is good for the city. After discussion, motion was made by Fran Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, to award the 1991/1992 Monticello Heartland Express contract to Hoglund Coach Lines of Monticello. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Consideration of establishina an assessment formula for the Sandbera East, 90-4 orolect. City Administrator, Rick Wolfstoller, reported that the 1990-4 improvement project servicing the Sandberg East development is nearing completion with primarily restoration work left to do in the spring. Staff has boon accumulating costs involved in Page 1 Special Council Minutes - 12/17/90 this project and has compiled a total project cost, including change orders and al l indirect casts. Total project cost for construction only will total $172,230. To this figure we must add indirect costs such as engineering, legal fees, bonding costs, etc., to arrive at total project cost. With indirect costs, the total project cost has amounted to $123,400. wolfsteller then reviewed two methods by which the costs could be allocated to benefiting property owners. t:olfsteller reviewed Option A which essentially called for the entire project cost to be assessed to benefiting property owners except for the City assuming 285 feet of side frontage along Gillard and also would include the City paying for the oversizing expenses associated with future extension of the utilities. wolfsteller noted that utilizing this option may result in a proposed assessed amount for each lot that might be excessive. The reason why it is excessive is because only one side of the roadway can be developed, and there are not enough property owners to spread the total cost to. wolfsteller remarked that under Exhibit B the City would assume 258 of the lateral sewer and water cost, with the remaining amount to be assessed to benefiting property owners 011 a front footage basis plus service connections. Woifsteller noted that under this option, the individual assessment amounts will not be excessive. In this situation, a precedent for the City paying 251 of the cost of the lateral sewer and water cost is not being set because the City is, to some extent, forced to provide sewer and water to the area that was annexed as platted land. In addition, the only path available to get to the annexed property had limited access to the sewer and water lines from one side of the improvement. Finally, wolfsteller noted that although the City will be paying for a portion of the lateral sewer and war -or costs associated with this project, in the long run, the City will be able to recover a major portion of that expense through the application of an area assessment to be applied against those properties that utilize this wator and sewer service line at some point in the future. Ken Maus noted that Council decided to go ahead with this project for environmental reasons. Extending the utilities to Sandberg East was the right way to do it but not the least expensive_ Page 2 Special Council Minutes - 12/17/90 Fran Fair asked if staff feels costs can be picked up with area assessments associated with future projects in the area. Rick Wolfsteller responded by saying that the area assessment could be applied to pick up a major portion of the City's contribution to the project. Ken Maus asked if the cost per foot being charged to the benefiting property owners under Option B is similar to that charged to properties improved as part of other City projects. John Simola reported that the cost per foot under Option B is nearly the same as that which was charged to property owners that received benefit from the Highway 39 project done a few years earlier; therefore, the cost per foot being charged is consistent with what other property owners have paid. Under Option B, the cost per foot is quite higher than what the normal improvement cost per foot would be, essentially because only one side of the roadway is being assessed. Dan Blonigen remarked that City payment of 25% of the project cost amounts to a City subsidy. He asked why we are dipping into the taxpayers bag. Ken Maus responded by saying that this is a unique situation where it was important to the City future considerations that utilities be extended to this area. At the same time, however, the project costs have to be at a level that the property owners can live with. At some point, the assessments become too large which could result in the City ultimately obtaining the property. Motion was made by Fran Fair to select Exhibit B as a program for assessing benefiting property owners, which includes City absorbing 25% of the lateral sewer and water expenses due to the unique situation whereby only one side of the improvement can be assessed. This alternative was chosen with the understanding that a portion of all of the amount absorbed by the City may be recapturod in the future through area assessments when additional properties are developed or annexed. Dan Blonigen noted that he might support a compromise between Option A and Option B. Shirley Anderson was concerned that a precedent might be set here. Wolfstoller reiterated that the precedent is diminished because of the unique situation. Ken Maus seconded the motion and expressed support for moving ahead with Option B. voting in favor of the motion: Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Warren Smith. Opposed: Dan Blonigen. Pago 3 IN Special Council Minutes - 12/11/40 Rick Wolfsteller noted that John Sandberg requested that the assessment be placed against four lots. Council did not oppose placing assessments against 4 of the 13 lots owned by Sandberg so long as there is sufficient security that in the event the assessments are not paid, the City will be able to obtain a property without going through the tax forfeiture process. 4. Ratification of salary adjustments for 1991. City Administrator Wolfsteller presented Council with an outline of proposed salary adjustments for all non-union employees . Ken Maus reviewed previous Council action which called for providing the City Administrator with the flexibility to provide staff increases utilizing a $26,000 pool. Marlene Heilman expressed her concern that the method by which the overall employee increases were distributed was not fair. She complained that the evaluation system was not consistent, and the method by which the money was distributed was not fair. Rick Wolfsteller noted that he would be happy to sit down with Marlene and discuss the specific reasons behind her salary adjustment. Shirley Anderson noted that if Rick can support the increase proposed for each employee, she can support the overall plan. Rick Wolfsteller described instances where individual salary adjustments could be readjusted in a manner that would improve comparable worth relationships. Ken Maus noted that he would not be against providing the City Administrator an additional sum to provide latitude to increase certain individuals as deemed appropriate by the City Administrator. After discussion, motion was made by Shirley Anderson, seconded by Warren Smith, to adopt the salary schedule as proposed with the addition of $500 to be used to correct inequities in the proposed schedule as deemed appropriate by the City Administrator. voting in favor of the motion: Ken Maus, warren Smith, Fran Fair, Shirley Anderson. Absent: Dan Blonigen. Page 4 Special Council Minutes - 12/17/90 Rick Wolfsteller stated that it is certainly a good idea to begin implementation of a formal evaluation system. We have the forms already, and we should be evaluating each person at their anniversary date. Jeff O'Neill Assistant Administrator Page 5 0 Council Agenda 1/14/91 5. Consideration of an ordinance amendment to Section 3-9 1C14 to include: (1) A permit for a public sign in the form of a decorative banner to be displayed on public property for a period of one (1) year. A permit shall be issued for each year that the decorative banners are displayed. Applicant„ City of Monticello. (J.O.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the December meeting of the Planning Commission, the Commission continued the public hearing and directed staff to work with Councilmember Blonigen toward development of language that would establish standards and requirements associated with display of public banners. Staff met with Dan Blonigen, along with Shirley Anderson, and also received input from Barb Schwientek and has prepared a proposed ordinance amendment governing public banners, which was presented to the Planning Commission last Tuesday. Also included is a definition of a public banner, which can be inserted into the definition section of the zoning ordinance. The Planning Commission acted to approve the ordinance amendment based on the finding noted under alernative A1. I will review the ordinance amendment and rationale for the standards noted in more detail at the meeting. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to recommend approval of the zoning ordinance amendment with any modifications that City Council may wish to make as a result of discussion . This motion could be based on the finding that allowing development of a public banner system will servo to beautify the community and enhance our environment and should not result in negative side effects that will depreciate property or result in visual obstructions to private or traffic signs. Based on the potential finding above, Council could approve the proposed zoning ordinance amendment. Motion to recommend donial of the proposed zoning ordinance amendment. If the City Council does not agree with the potential finding under alternative #I, then the Commission should select this alternative. C Council Agenda 1/14/91 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff appreciates the assistance that Shirley Anderson, Barb Schwientek, and Dan Blonigen have provided in development of language that I feel is an improvement over the language that was presented to the Planning Commission at the previous meeting in December. The ordinance amendment as proposed will allow development of a banner system that will accomplish the goal of beautifying the city and promoting a sense of place. It does not severely restrict the development of banners; however, it does impose some limitations and standards that will, in the long run, assure the City that the banners are installed in a thoughtful manner that complements existing sign regulation. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the proposed ordinance amendment. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAT SECTION 2-2 AND SECTION 3-9 [C)4 OF THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE BE AMENDED BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING: 2-2: DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this ordinance, shall be interpreted as herein defined: [PM) PUBLIC BANNER: Decorative banners are City -owned banners hung primarily from City light fixtures in ccnjunction with a City Council approved public banner system. Public banners are intended to serve a public purpose through beautification of the city or by advertising of a community event or special occasion. 3-9: SIGNS: [C) GENERAL PROVISIONS 4.(j ) Public banners may be hung from City street light fixtures for a period of up to one (1) year. Design and placement of the public banners shall be consistent with the following standards: Design and placement of public sign/decorative banners must first be approved by the City Council and annually therea fter. Prior to Council consideration, applicant shall submit a banner placement plan which shows propos ed banner design, size, pole locati on/elevation, duration, and proposed manner by which the banners shall be hung. Banner placement plan shall also describe financing sources for purchasing and installing public banners. Public banners may be hung from parking lot light fixtures or from other structures on private property only in conjunction with a City Council approved public banner system. Except for roquirements outlined in section 4 . (j) of this ordinance, said banners are exempt from sign regulations. The City shall not pa rticipato in financing any portion of the cost of public banners placed on private property. City crows may assist with t ho installation of public banners placocl on private property if compensated at actual cost to install banners. 0 Ordinance Amendment No. Page 2 3. Except for Christmas banners, all banners shall contain an element of the City colors and/or City logo. No private advertising may be allowed on any banner hung in conjunction with a public banner system. 4. Public banners hung from streetscape fixtures shall be no larger than 14" by 45". Banners hung from standard street lights shall be no larger than 28" by 80". 5. Public banners shall be not hung in a position that will cause a substantial obstruction of visibility from the street to advertising, traffic, and directional signs and shall not be hung in a position so as to interrupt corner sight lines. 6. Public banners may be hung only on alternate streetscape fixtures unless otherwise approved by Council. 7. Banners placed on City fixtures shall become the property of the City. If damaged or in need of repair, banners may be removed by City staff. The public banner system may be discontinued, and all banners, including those on private property, may be ordered removed at the discretion of the City Council. 8. The bracket system used to hang banners shall be of sufficient strength to withstand strong winds and shall be designed in a manner that allows easy installation and removal of banners. Adopted this day of , 1991. Mayor City Administrator 0 Council Agenda - I/14/91 6. Consideration of approving public banner system proposal. Applicant, Monticello Chamber of Connnerce. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: if the amendment to the zoning ordinance allowing development of public banner systems is approved, Council is asked to consider approving a plan resubmitted by the Chamber of Commerce. In accordance with the new ordinance, the Chamber submits the attached banner placement plan. The following is a review of the plan in terms of the proposed ordinance. Please review the plan before reading staff remarks below. Information Requirements The information regarding the plan is sufficient and consistent with the information requirements noted by ordinance. Banner Design The banner design does contain the City logo. No specific advertising is proposed for any of the banners. The design appears to be consistent with the intent of the ordinance; however, Council has the latitude to deny approval if the design is not acceptable. Please note that three finished banners have been hung on Broadway in front of Johnson's Clothing for your roferenco per the Chamber of Commerce banner proposal. Color pictures of what tho same block would look like with six banners are included in your packet. Banner Size Streotscapo banners will be 14" by 45" . Standard light pole banners will be 28" by 80". The size proposed is consistent with the ordinance. Pole Location/Elovation The proposal does not identify all individual light poles that will be used and asks that City staff or Council members assist with idontlfying banner locations. This plan is acceptable, as it provides the City with flexibility in d otermining which polos should be used given nearby signs, traffic sight lines, otc. 3 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 Public�Iner System Duration The proposal to kee he anner system place a minimum f 'one 4ear lis cons tent ith the a al eview r ement out ined y ord ance. Council ea ha a the tit de to re ova in ivid 1 banner or th entire yste t an time. A ording to a manufact er he banner a uld be a le to w thstand years of use. TheChamber of Commerce has indicated that some time in the future the City may receive a request to allow placement of seasonal banners on streetscape lights notused with the present program. Although the ordinance limits use of every other streetscape light for hanging banners, the option to use every light is possible with special permission from Council. Banner Bracket Desiqn The bracket system proposed appears to be consistent with the ordinance, as it is being used successfully by other communities. On the other hand, although the drawing of the bracket design is useful, it is difficult to determine how good the bracket system actually is. Prior to installation of all the brackets, staff will evaluate them and determine if another system is appropriate. Banner Budqet According to previous Council action, the City has committed to financing 754 of the cost to purchase banners and brackets, which according to the original budget amounted to $5,400. The budget proposed is consistent with this arrangement. Under this proposal, City staff will be installing brackets and banners. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to approve or modify and approve the public banner system as proposed by the Chamber of Commerce. If Council is comfortable that tho proposal moots the requirements as outlined by the ordinance, then this option should be selected. If there aro any concerns regarding design, they should be addressed at this point. Council Agenda - 1/14/91 If the banner system becomes unpopular over time, the City Council has the latitude to remove the banners at any time. If Council feels that more than three banners per block is acceptable, then special permission to hang more than three banners could be granted. In addition, a Council member or members may wish to volunteer to help staff with establishing proper placements of banners in terms of location and elevation. 2. Motion to deny approval of the public banner system as proposed by the Chamber of Commerce. If Council determines that the proposal does not meet the standards as outlined by ordinance, then this option should be selected. If Council denies approval of the plan because of design or other factor, Council still may be morally obligated to pay 75% of the Chamber banner expenses to date. At this time, it is not known what that amount is. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: i Staff recommends that Council approve the plan as proposod. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Public banner systom proposal. 5 PUBLIC BANNER SYSTEM PROPOSAL MONTICELLO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE JANUARY 14, 1991 General Description/Purpose The promotion committee of the Monticello Chamber of Commerce has been developing a comprehensive image enhancing program. The central thrust of this initiative revolves around expressing what Monticello has to offer. We have found that the perceptions of the general public have been less than accurate in terms of what businesses and services actually can be found in the Monticello area. The main theme that we hope to emphasize is "Monticello, Your Hind of Place." This line was chosen as a result of extensive consumer research In our specific area. It can be easily modified to include a reference for any type of business or service. We will, through this program, emphasize that the Monticello businesses and professional community are part of their community and life. We must implant this image in the minds of the public If we are to keep pace with the Increasing competitions from surrounding regional commercial centers. We have much to offer, but that message has not been presented as effectively as we could have in the past. We must meet this / challenge in the future to remain viable in an increasingly \ competitive environment. Displaying banners throughout the city is one element of this image enhancement program. Banner Desiqn The banners will be constructed of weather resistant vinyl Impregnated poly canvas, which includes a yellow background color, the City logo, and the words "Monticello, Your Rind of Place." The design Is consistent with the design reviewed by City Council In November of 1990. Banner Size Strootscape banners will be 14" by 45". Standard light pole banners will be 28" by 80". BANNER PLAN: 1/11/91 Pago 1 0 Pole Location/ Elevation It is proposed that the large banners start at the freeway exit by Hawk's Bar. There are light poles on alternate sides of the street until over the hill then the light poles are on every block through Monticello. Banners would alternate sides of street at the beginning and then on alternate poles except for the downtown area. In the down�own area, the small banners would be located on alternate sides of the street on every other decorative light pole. One or two small banners would go on Walnut Street on decorative poles. On Highway 25 from the bridge to the freeway, the large banners would go on all light poles except for those at the semaphores. Options based on the number of banners could be placing two to four large banners on Walnut Street. Barb Schwientek will work with City Council members and/or staff when the banners are to be put up to specifically mark each pole that a banner will go on. No banners are planned for private property with this order. It remains likely that banners will be placed on prlvato commercial property. Exact locations aro not known at this time. i Public Banner System Duration At this time, no termination date has been contemplated. It Is requested that the banners be displayed for a period of at least one year.. At some point in the future, the Chamber of Commerce may be requesting display of seasonal banners on streetscapo lights not being used In conjunction with this baunor proposal. Banner Bracket Doslgn Ban nors placed on standard light poles aro designed as described in the attached drawing. BANNER PLAN: 1/11/91 Pago 2 Banner Budqet C40 14" x 45" @ $.44 each . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,760 40 28" x 80" @ $.68 each . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,720 Design of screens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 500 2 Setup screens @ $325 each . . . . . . . . . . $ 650 80 Brackets for large banners @ $25 each . . . . $2,000 $7,630 The City Council approved a request for funding of the banners at $5,400 in November 1990. All banners placed on public property become the property of the City. The full cost to place banners on private property shall be paid by the Chamber or the benefiting property owner. Purchasing of banners for private property will be done separate from the original order noted above. The Chamber of Commerce requests that the City of Monticello install brackets and banners. 1 BANNER PLAN: 1/11/91 Page 3 9 Brackets: T. iota has developed a unique Ba..cs -c;w n'" bracket that is spring tensioned, protecting your banners from wind damage by tipping in approximately 25 MPH winds, allowing a "spilling" of the wind. k Council Agenda - 1/14/91 Consideration of an ordinance amendment to Section 2-2 [HBI of the Monticello Zoninq Ordinance by adding "beautician" to the list of home occupations allowed by ordinance. Amendment to also include additional conditions associated with the operation of a home occupation and establishment of a home occupation permittinq process. Applicant, City of Monticello. (J.O.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: A request to allow a beautician to conduct a home occupation as an accessory use in a residential zone has been presented to City staff. Staff seeks assistance from Planning Commission and City Council in determining if this type of home occupation qualifies as an allowable home occupation. In addition, staff requests that the Planning Commission and City Council establish a simple process for licensing home occupation use of residential property. This process will enable City staff to determine if the operation of the proposed home occupation is consistent with the standards outlined by ordinance. At present, the City becomes aware of a home occupation when there is a problem or violation of the home occupation operating standards. A simple, inexpensive permitting process would enable the City to get a good description of the proposed home occupation operation before it starts, thereby providing us with the opportunity to head off potential problems. The location of the proposed beautician home occupation is 115 Kevin Longley Drive in the Par West development. The request has been submitted by Karla Dicky, who is a potential buyer of the property. This party received a conditional use permit in 1988 to operate a beauty shop as a conditional use in a residential zone in another neighborhood in the community. Actually, the matter of allowing a beauty shop to operate in a residential zone transcends this particular request. Council should be reviewing this as a city-wide matter and not a neighborhood Issue. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this matter and received verbal testimony from a number of citizens along with a petition that requests that the City allow a "beautician" to operate in a residential zone with conditions. The Planning Commission also was informed by the applicant that she is comfortable with the conditions prescribed by ordinance. In response to the information presented, Planning Commission acted to recommend Including beautician as a home occupation and also recommended establishment of a home occupation permit process. Council Agenda - 1/14/91 "Beautician" as a Home Occupation Past history shows that the City is supportive of allowing a beautician to operate out of a residence. On two occasions in the past few years, the City has allowed a beautician to operate out of a residence as a conditional use. Technically, the City erred by requiring that the applicant obtain a conditional use permit, as "beautician" is not listed as a conditional use in any residential zoning district. In terms of the two previous beautician applications, the City should have reviewed the applications in terms of the regulations governing home occupations and then determined if "beautician" fits the home occupation definition. If the Planning Commission and City Council had then interpreted the ordinance so as to include beautician as an allowable home occupation, then no special permission to operate is required. The only requirement is that the beautician must operate in a manner consistent with home occupation operation standards. Following is the definition of a home occupation. As you will note in the bold print below, beautician is not specifically noted as an allowable home occupation. At the same time, the ordinance does not limit allowable home occupations to the vocations listed. (HB) HOME OCCUPATION: Any gainful occupation engaged in by the occupants of a dwelling at or from the dwelling. Such activity shall be clearly incidental and secondary to the residential use of the premises. Permissible home occupations shall not include the conducting of a retail business other than by mail, manufacturing business, or a repair shop of any kind on the premises, and no stock in trade shall be kept or sold. No other than persons residing on the premises shall be employed, no mechanical equipment shall be employed that is not customarily found in the home, and no more than one ( 1) room may be dovoted to home occupation use. Such home occupation shall not require internal or external alterations or involve construction features not customarily found in dwellings. The entrance to the space devoted to such occupations shall be within the dwelling. There shall be no exterior display, no exterior signs except as allowed in the sign regulations for the zoning district in which such homo occupation Is located. There shall bo no extortor storage of equipment or materials used in the home occupation. Council Agenda - 1/14/91 No home occupation shall be permitted which results in or generates more traffic than one (1) car for off-street parking at any given point in time. Permissible home occupations include, but are not limited to, the following: art studio, dressmaking, special offices of a clergyman, lawyer, architect, engineer, accountant, or real estate agent or appraiser, when located in a dwelling unit occupied by the same; and teaching, with musical, dancing, and other instruction limited to one (1) pupil at one time. Arouments in Support of "Beautician" as an Allowable Home Occupation: According to City Planner, John Uban, a beautician operating out of a home in a residential district will not cause the adjoining properties to depreciate in value as long as relatively strict regulations governing the operation of the home occupation are maintained. The restrictions noted by Uban are consistent with most of the restrictions that are already in place under the home occupation definition. At this time, there is no formal method for monitoring the operation of home occupations. Following are restrictions emphasized by John Uban that will serve to minimize the negative Impact of a beautician operating in a residential area. Ono parking stall must be provided off-street. No customer parking on the street, with total vehicles parked outside at any one time limited to two vehicles. The home should not have a "parked up" appearance. No signs allowed indicating the presence of commercial use of the property. This is consistent with the ordinance in place; however, the City has in the past mistakenly allowed home occupation identification/ advertising signs to be displayed in residential areas. According to the City Planner, display of Identification signs clearly indicating a commercial use of residential property is not consistent with existing ordinance and is adverse to maintaining the purely rosidontal character of the areas in which the home occupation signs aro located. The presence of a home occupation should be transparent if adjoining land values are to be Council Agenda - 1/14/91 unaffected. Home occupation identification signs have a clear commercial purpose and as such tend to diminish the value of adjoining property. if Council agrees with this point, a number of home occupation identification signs would need to be removed. The applicant that initiated this proposal does have a sign that reads Karla's Klips. Shp has indicated that she does not object to removing her, sign. It is proposed that the residence be allowed to have a simple sign that states the name of the property owner and address only with no reference to a commercial identification. This restriction has implications for other home occupation sites already operating in town. There are a handful of sites in town that would be required to remove their signs in accordance with existing ordinance. Home occupation sites that have non -conforming signs include The Puppy Parlor, Joann's Hairstyling, Dahlgren Jewelers, and Berrlgan s Licensed Daycare. There may be others. Home occupation use of the property limited t o normal 9 - 5 business hours. The Planning Commission did not specifically recommend that the hours of operation be restricted to 9 - 5. Rather, the Commission recommended that the home occupation be limitea to "normal business hours," thereby providing some flexibility. Arguments Aciains t Includi nq Beautician in the List o f Allowable Home Occupations: Almost all of the home occupations listed involve occupations that do not require each customer to visit the alto of the home occupation. For instance, lawyers, real estate agents , and accountants may conduct much of their business off site or over the phone. An argument could be made that a beautician does not belong In the home occupation category because the nature of the business is almost a retail service, as it requires each customer to visit the residence. In other words, as compared to other allowable home occupations, a beautician may result in a higher and unacceptable rate of commercial traffic in a residential area. Council Agenda - 1/14/91 This particular home occupation is not a hobby. It is a full- time job with as many as eight to ten customers served on any one day. An argument could be made that this level of business activity is better suited to a commercial area. Commercial space is available, and it has been demonstrated by others that such an enterprise with one beautician or barber can thrive in the commercial zone. To some extent, the presence of beautician as a home occupation presents an unfair advantage over beauty shops operating in commercial districts, as home occupations have no overhead and have flexibility in scheduling appointments. An argument could be made that allowing proliferation of retail oriented services such as beautician, barber, or the like as home occupations could undermine commercial land values by reducing demand, while decreasing residential land values through the negative impact of commercial use. The fact that the City has allowed beauticians to operate as a conditional use in the past does not necessarily dictate that Council must automatically allow a beautician to operate in a residential zone as an accessory use. Adoption of a Home Occupation Permit Process: City Planner, John Uban, has noted that certain home occupations such as beautician will not tend to depreciate adjoining properties if the use is transparent. In order to achieve this goal, it is important that the requirements and restrictions be monitored and enforced. In order to enforce home occupation regulations, Uban recommends that the City adopt a process for administering regulations governing home occupations. He has suggested that each home occupation request be reviewed at an administrative level for consistency with the home occupation requirements. Those home occupations that comply with the minimum requirements would then be granted a permit that would be subject to an annual review. Staff is concerned that without a simple home occupation permit process, the City will often be placed in the position where the City is reacting to home occupation problems after the fact. In order to head off problem situations, it may be prudent to require property owners to obtain a permit prior to initiating the home occupation. The permit process would clearly identify the nature and manner of operation and provide the City with the opportunity to outline ordinance requirements and, thereby, shape the manner in which the home occupation is conducted. Annual review of the home occupation provides the City with the opportunity to withhold renewal of the permit in the event of continued violations of the permit. 10 I� L Council Agenda - 1/14/91 If the City adopts the permit requirement, those residences that have established a home occupation after the inception of the original zoning ordinance would be required to obtain a permi t. It is suggested that the permit consist of a two-page form as outlined below. As you will note, many of the questions on the form pertain to various requirements noted by ordinance. The Planning Commission has suggested that annual renewal of home occupation permits include a "short form" for those home occupations that have no record of violation during the year. This will streamline the review process after the first year. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Planning Commission is asked to make two decisions. Decision one pertains to whether or not to include beautician among the list of allowable home occupations. Decision two pertains to whether or not to establish a home occupation permit process. Ia. Motion to amend the ordinance by including beautician among the list of home occupations allowed by ordinance. Under this alternative, the City would make the finding that beautician activity in a residential area is consistent with the definition of allowable home occupations and when properly regulated should not negatively impact the value of adjoining residential areas and should not create an unreasonable increase In traffic. A 4/5 vote of the Council is required for this amendment to be ratified. If a 4/5 vote is not obtained, a beautician could be allowed to operate with a simple majority of Council making the interpretation that "beautician" is allowable under the existing language. Ib. Motion to deny adoption of an ordinance amendment and deny permission to allow a beautician to operate as a home occupation In a residential zone. Under this alternative, Planning Commission/Council could find that beautician activities are not consistent with residential use of proporty, and the rules governing home occupations will not sufficiently protect the residential character of the neighborhood in which a beautician home occupation is located. To allow a beautician to oporate in a residontia 1 zone would create an unreasonable di Council Agenda - 1/14/91 increase in residential traffic and cause adjoining properties to depreciate in value, which is adverse to the requirements of the City zoning ordinance. 2a. Motion to adopt permit process for the purpose of monitoring and enforcing home occupation operation standards. Under this alternative, the City could make a finding that a home occupation permitting process is necessary in order to properly enforce the home occupation operaticn requirements. Consistent enforcement provides assurances that home occupations remain incidental and secondary to residential uses, thereby protecting the value of adjoining residential properties. This ordinance amendment requires a 4/5 vote; however, a permitting process could be established without amending the ordinance. If a permit process is established, staff would contact residences that operate a home occupation and ask them to complete the appropriate forms. Permits would be issued to all home occupations that operate in a manner consistent with the home occupation requirements. Council should be aware that there are a few home occupations that are operating in violation of the zoning ordinance. It Is likely that enforcement of this ordinance will result in some conflicts. 2b. Motion to deny adoption of a home occupation permit process. Council could take the position that public complaints regarding home occupations are infrequent; therefore, there does not appear to be a great need at this time to establish a home occupation permit process. Under this alternative, enforcement of the home occupation requirements would occur as problems arise or on an "as needed" basis. The ability to enforce the ordinance is diminished under this option. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the ordinance be amended to include beautician as an allowable home occupation only if Council also establishes a formal process for monitoring and regulating the operation of home occupations. It does not appear that a beautician, when operating a home occupation in a manner consistent with the requirements of the ordinance, will negatively impact the adjoining residential properties or 12 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 diminish the residential character of the area. On the other hand, if the beautician violates the requirements, the operation could have a significant detrimental effect on the adjoining property. It should be remembered that individuals that purchased land zoned as residential for the purpose of enjoying residential uses have rights that rise above the rights of a neighbor to utilize residential land for commercial purposes. It is, therefore, important to establish a permit process that will allow home occupations to exist while protecting the residential character and residential value of neighborhoods. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of proposed amendment to zoning ordinance; Copy of proposed Home Occupation Permit Form; Pertinent sign ordinance excerpts. 1 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAI' THE SECTION 2-2 [HB) OF THE MONTICELLO ZONI14G ORDINANCE BE AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: (IIB) HOME OCCUPATION: Any gainful occupation engaged in by the occupants of a dwelling at or from the dwelling. Such activity shall be clearly Incidental and secondary to the residential use of the premises. Permissible home occupations shall not include the conducting of a retail business other than by mail, manufacturing business, or a repair shop of any kind on the premises, and no stock in trade shall be kept or sold. No other than persons residing on the premises shall be employed, no mechanical equipment shall be employed that is not customarily found Ln the home, and no more than one (1) room may be devoted to home occupation use. Such home occupation shall not require internal or external alterations or involve construction features not customarily found in dwellings. The entrance to the space devoted to such occupations shall be within the dwelling. There shall be no exterior display, no exterior signs except as allowed in the sign regulations for the zoning district in which such home occupation is located. There shall be no exterior storage of equipment or materials used in the home occupation. No home occupation shall be permitted which results in or generates more traffic than one (1) car for off-street parking at any given point in time. Permissible home occupations include, but are not limited to, the following: art studio, dressmaking, special offices of a clergyman, lawyer, architect, engineer, accountant, beautician, or real estate agent or appraiser, when located in a dwelling unit occupied by the same; and teaching, with musical, dancing, and other instruction limited to one (1) pupil at one time. Operation of n home occupation as an accessory use of residential property first. requires issuance of n home occupation permit from the City of Monticello. Ilome occupation permits shall be reviewed and renewed on an annual basis. Failure to operate home occupaLloils In n manner consistent with the standards slated hor.nln or. fallure Lo comply with bulldinq code or public nuisance requlaLlnus will result In withdrawal or non-renowal of home occupation permlLs. Tho cost of the permit shall be established by the City and subiect to change from time to time. Adopted this day of , 1991. City Administrator Mayor 0 / ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT APPLICATION HOME OCCUPATION C A home occupation administrative permit allows certain commercial use of residential land that is clearly incidental or secondary to the principal residential use of the property. The purpose of the permit process is to protect the value of residential property by assuring that commercial use of residential land is properly regulated and conducted in a manner consistent with rules governing the operation of home occupations. The information required with this application will assist the City in determining if the proposed home occupation and its manner of operation are consistent with rules governing operation of home occupations. APPLICANT INFORMATION Name: Phone-Home/Business:-/ Address: Business Name: Location: Application Date: Zoning District: 1. Please describe the proposed home occupation activity in general terms. 2. Describe retail sales activity, if any. 3. Describe manufacturing or repair activity proposed, if any. 4. Describe inventory to be kept on the premises, if any. 5. Will any person other than those residing on the promises be employed in the home occupation? if so, please describe. 6. will any mechanical equipment be used in conjunction with the home occupation not customarily found in tho home? If so, please describe. 7 r 7. How many rooms will be devoted to the home occupation use? C 8. Will the home occupation require internal or external alterations or involve construction? If so, please describe. 9. Where will the entrance to the space devoted to the home occupation be located? 10. Please describe signage proposed. Please note that home occupations in residential districts prohibit signage. 11. Will the home occupation result in outside storage of equipment or materials used in conjunction with the home occupation? If so, please describe. 12. Is there sufficient hard surface off-street parking available for one car? Will the home occupation result in more than one customer's car being parked on the premises at any given point in time? CITY STAFF COMMENTS Building Inspector; Public Works Director; Assistant City Administrator: It has been determined by staff that an administrative permit should be approved/denied with the following conditions: RENEWAL: Providing that the use for which the permit is granted remains In conformance with the terms and intent of the ordinance, the permit shall be automatically renewed each year during the month of January. 0 APPLICABLE SIGN REGULATIONS [E] DISTRICT REGULATIONS: The following sections concern signs which require application and permit. 1. Within the A-0, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, and PZR districts, signs are subject to the following size and type regulations : (a) Institutional or area identification signs provided that the gross square footage of sign area does not exceed eighteen (18) square feet, and if the sign Is freestanding, the height does not exceed eight ( 8) feet. [AI] AREA IDENTIFICATION SIGN: A freestanding sign which identifies the name of a neighborhood, a residential subdivision, a multiple residential complex consisting of three (3) or more structures, a shopping center consisting of five (5) or more separate business concerns, an industrial area, an office complex cons Seting of three (3) or more structures, or any combination of the above, located on contiguous property. [IF) INSTITUTIONAL SIGN: A sign or bulletin board which identifies the name and other characteristics of a public, semi-public, or private institution on the site whore the sign is located. Institutions shall include churches, hospitals, nursing home, schools, and other non-profit and charitable organizations. [ D ] NON -CONFORMING SIGNS: 1. The following are nonconforming signs: (c) All other signs not expressly prohibited but which do not conform to the provisions of this subdivision. NON -APPLICABLE SIGN REGULATIONS [B] PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS: 1. PERMITTED SIGNS: The following signs aro allowed without a permit but shall comply with all other aoplicable provisions of this subdivision: (b) Identification signs: There may be one (1) per promise, not to exceed two (2) square feet in area. If the sign isfreo-standing, the total hoight may not exceed five (5) foot. 0 C- C [IAJ IDENTIFICATION SIGNS: Signs in all districts which identify the business or owner, or manager, or resident and set forth the address of the premises where the sign is located and which contain no other material. 0 I PETITI ON CITY OF MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 8, 1990 Having made major investments in property properly zoned for residential use, we are concerned about a potential depreciation in residential property values due to encroachment of commercial use of land into residential neighborhoods. At the same time, it is our view that certain home occupations, when properly regulated, can operate within residential areas without conflict and should be a l lowed. Furthermore, in order to fully retain the residential character of neighborhoods, "beautician" along with other home occupations identified by the zoning ordinance should be allowed only under the following circumstances: 1. A permit process should be established that would include an annual renewal of each home occupation permit. Property owners conducting home occupations must be required to comply with all existing provisions of the home occupation rules, building code, and public nuisance ordinances. More than three violations per year should result in termination or non- renewal of the home occupation permit. A permit process will enable the City to properly enforce city home occupation regulations. 2. Home occupations that require customer vlsits should be allowed to operate during normal working hours only. 3. The presence of a home business in a residential district should be transparent, there foro no sign identifying residential property as a commercial site should he allowed. Thank you for considering our views on this important matter. Signed. Name Address 14 b'C t 0 PETITION CITY OF MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 8, 1990 Having made major investments in property properly zoned for residential use, we are concerned about a potential depreciation in residential property values due to encroachment of commercial use of land into residential neighborhoods. At the same time, it is our view that certain home occupations, when properly regulated, can operate within residential areas without conflict and should be allowed. Furthermore, in order to fully retain the residential character of neighborhoods, "beautician" along with other home occupations identified by the zoning ordinance should be allowed only under the following circumstances: A permit process should be established that would include an annual renewal of each home occupation permit. Property owners conducting home occupations must be required to comply with all existing provisions of the home occupation rules, building code, and public nuisance ordinances. More than three violations per year should result in termination or non- renewal of the home occupation permit. A permit process will enable the City to properly enforce city home occupation regulations. 2. Home occupations that require customer visits should be allowed to operate during normal working hours only. 3. The presence of a home business in a residential district should be transparent, therefore no sign identifying residential proporty as a commercial site should be allowed. Thank you for considering our views on this important matter. Signed. Name Address r 0 PETITION CITY OF MONTICELLO PLAN14ING COMMISSION/CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 8, 1990 Having made major investments in property properly zoned for residential use, we are concerned about a potential depreciation in residential property values due to encroachment of commercial use of land into res Iden tial neighborhoods. At the same time, it is our view that certain home occupations, when properly regulated, can operate within residential areas without conflict and should be allowed. Furthermore, in order to fully retain the residential character of neighborhoods, "beautician" along with other home occupations identified by the zoning ordinance should be allowed only under the following circumstances: A permit process should be established that would include an annual renewal of each home occupation permit. Property owners conducting home occupations must be required to comply with all existing provisions of the home occupation rules, building code, and public nuisance ordinances. More than three violations per year should result in termination or non- renewal of the home occupation permit. A permit process will enable the City to properly enforce city home occupation regulations . Home occupations that require customer visits should be allowed to operate during normal working hours only. The presence of a home business in a residential district should be transparent, therefore no sign identifying residential property as a commercial site should be allowed. Thank you for considering our views on this important matter. Signed. Name a� i �Jzt Address r.0 v Council Agenda - 1/14/91 s. Consideration of a resolution declaring costs to be assessed and orderinq preparation of proposed assessment roll and settinq a public hearing for Proiect 90-4 (Sandberg East Improvement). (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the December 17 special Council meeting, the Council was supplied with a proposed assessment breakdown for the 90-4 improvement project that serviced the Sandberg East development. Total project costs were estimated at $223,387.49 at completion. Primarily, only restoration work is left to be done in the spring; and as a result, it is recommended that the Council schedule the assessment hearing for this project at its next regular Council meeting January 28, 1991. At the December meeting, the Council approved the method of the City assuming 258 of the lateral sewer and water cost with the remaining amount being assessed to benefiting property owners on a front foot basis. The rationale used by the Council for this assessment method was because of the unique situation created by this improvement whereby only one side of the improvement received benefit. In addition, this project was unique in that the City annexed a platted parcel (Sandberg East) a few years ago and as part of the annexation agreed that it was able to provide utility services when needed. The amount proposed to be absorbed by the City at this time may be able to be recaptured in the future through an area assessment when additional properties are developed or annexed that can utilize the sewer and water trunk lines. Based on the Council's decision, the total proposed assessment would amount to $173,530.30. The City's share of the project would amount to $49,857.19. At the time this project was commenced, the Council indicated that property owners involved in this improvement that had unplatted, unsubdivided properties involved in this improvement would be eligible for up to a three-year deterral of interest charges on the proposed assessment. The interest would be deferred for either three years or until the property was subdivided. After the three-year deferral, interest would start to accumulate, and the assessmont would be payable over the remaining seven years of the original ton-yoar assessmont. Parcels Involved at this point would include property owned by Mr.. Robert Krautbauor and Ms. Joanne Halliger. The balance of the property proposed for assessment currently are platted residential properties. Council Agenda - 1/14/91 While a decision does not have to be made at this Council meeting, Mr. John Sandberg, owner of 13 lots in the Sandberg East development, has requested that the City consider assessing the $70,632.40 only against four lots in his plat. This would amount to an assessment of $17,658.01 against each lot. If the City were to agree to this arrangement, we would have to have added protection that would allow the City to acquire title to these four lots immediately upon default of any payment installment that was due, and we should also restrict building permit issuance to any of the remaining nine lots until such time as these four are paid in full. If the assessment installments are not kept current, the City could be faced with the assessments increasing with interest and penalties to a point where the assessments would exceed the value of the property. Actually, there is no real benefit to the City in agreeing to assess only four lots, and I'm not sure if we would not be setting a precedent in allowing a property owner to assess only certain lots for the benefits that actually covered a larger area. I would suggest that if the City considered assessing only a small number of lots in the development, an additional down payment of $3,000 per lot be obtained in order to provide us with more protection to insure that the value of the property will exceed the assessments in the future. As I noted, this decision does not have to be made tonight and can be addressed at the public hearing; but if the Council has any direction on what would be acceptable, this information can be provided to the property owner prior to the assessment hearing. Naturally, the easiest method for the Council to take is that each lot should be assessed for the benefit received, and any arrangements by the property owner to prepay assessments should be handled on their and. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Adopt the resolution declaring the costs to be assessed and set the public hearing for January 28, 1991. If the Council is in agreemont with assessing the Krautbauer and Halligor properties on a deferred interest basis for the first three years because the property is unplatted, the resolutions will be prepared accordingly. 2. Adopt the resolution as noted above and indicate how tho Council intends to consider assessments against the Sandberg East plat. 3. Do not adopt the resolution. At this point, with the project cost known and nearly completed except for restoration, there is no reason why we should not hold the assessment hearing and start accumulating intorost on the project. Council Agenda - 1/14/91 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Since the costs of the project have been determined, staff recommends that the assessment hearing be scheduled for January 28. Since we also informed the property owners that had unplatted properties affected by this improvement that we would also consider deferring the interest for the first three years if their property remained unplatted, I would recommend also that the assessments for Krautbauer and Halliger properties receive this option at the assessment hearing. I believe initially the Council was willing to consider assessing only three or four lots in the Sandberg East development per Mr. Sandberg's request, but the staff does have some reservations if this method is used. Under this method, the City must protect itself in being able to obtain title to the property immediately upon default of any installment payment and also insure that our assessment would not exceed the value of each lot. Any placement of assessments against only three or four lots, in my opinion, would require restrictions on the remaining lots clearly labeling those lots as unbuildable until such time as all assessments are paid. In order for the City to obtain title to the property that is in default, we would have to have either a first mortgage or some other legal document prepared by an attorney enabling us to foreclose immediately. The restriction on building permits for the balance of the lots would also need to be recorded as part of the plat. The Council also has to be aware that is there any valid reason for treating this property different than we normally do by only assessing a few lots rather than all the properties that benefit from the improvement. While this property can be considered unique in that the City did require the property to be served with sewer and water before building permits would be issued, I do not believe we are under any obligation to create a now assessment format that may sot precedence in the future that we'll have to deal with. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of resolution; Copy of proposed assessment schodulo previously approved by the Council in December. RESOLUTION 91 - RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED, ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT, AND SETTING A HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT WHEREAS, a contract has been let and the costs determined for Lite improvement of East County Road 39 and Gillard Avenue with sanitary sewer, water main, and appurtenant work, and the contract price for such improvements is $172,243.68, and the expenses incurred or to be Incurred in the making of such improvements amount to $51,143.81, so that the total cost of the improvement will be 4223, 387 . 49. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: 1. The portion of the cost of such improvement to be paid by the City is hereby estimated to be $49,857.19, and the portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is estimated to be $173,530.30. 2. The City Administrator shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel of land within Lhe district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and he shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection. 3. A hearing shall be held on the 28th day of January, 1991, In the City hall at 7:00 p.m. to pass upon such proposed assessment, and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such Improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 4. The City Administrator is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assossmont to be published once In the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. lie shall also cause mailed assessment roll not less Lhan two wooks prior to the hearings. Adopted by the Council this 14th day of January, 1991. Mayor CCity Administrator EXHIBIT B PROJECT 90-4 City assumes 25% of lateral sewor and water costs with remaining amount assessed to benelitting Property owners on a front loot basis, plus service connections. Latoral Water Lateral Sewer Properly Water Services Sewer Service Owner $23.24/LF $400.29/LF30$ 35 LF $250.49/LF Total John Sandberg 1160.14 LF $26,961.65 $5,203.77 $35,210.25 $3.256.37 $70,632.04 13 lols Jell Nelson 160 LF 1 lot Rod Norell 302.77 LF 2 Iota 2 stubs Joanne Halligor 895 LF 11 lots Peterson 100 LF water only Kraulbauer 530 LF water only 2 stubs City of Monticello 254 of sower 8 water lateral costs $3,718.40 $400.29 $4.856.00 $250.49 $9,225.18 $7,036.37 $000.58 $9,189.07 $500.98 $2,779.66 $790.35 $21,097.01 $20,799.80 $4,403.19 $27,163.25 $2,755.39 $55,121.63 $2.324.00 $400.29 $12,317.20 $2.412.95 $24,385.59 $25,471.60 $2,724.29 $14,730.15 $49,857.19 $223,387.49 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 9. Consideration of resolution releasing conditional use restriction--Outlot A of Sandberq East plat. (R.W.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: When the Sandberg East plat was approved in January 1987 by the Monticello Orderly Annexation Board, a conditional use permit was granted and recorded as part of the abstract that indicated that Outlot A of the plat would not be considered as a building site until it is approved for further development by the City or MOA.A Board. The original Sandberg East plat created nine 1 -acre lots that were further subdivided into 1/2 -acre lots to allow for an easier transition if the property was within the city limits. Outlot A was an unplatted parcel containing approximately 25 acres that has subsequently been sold to Mr. Rod Norell. I believe the original intent of having the restriction on Outlot A was to put on record the fact that Outlot A would require further approval by both the City and the Orderly Annexation Board before allowing that parcel to be considered for a building permit. Mr. Rod Norell has been purchasing Outlot A from Mr. John Sandberg on a contract for deed and is now in the process of obtaining conventional financing for this parcel. The finance institution has some concerns over the restriction that indicates Outlot A is not a buildable parcel in that they feel it may create a legal impediment to future development of this parcel. Since the property has boon annexed into the city, the Orderly Annexation Board no longer has control or jurisdiction over how the property is developed, which is entirely under our control. I indicated to the financial institution that this outlot is not meant to be subject to anymore controls or regulations than any other parcel in the city as far as development processes aro concerned; but the bank would fool mo=o comfortable with having this rostrictlon released by the City before financing. If a parcel of property, Including an outlet, has sufficient square footage according to City ordinances, it can be considered a building site provided it meets all our other building code regulations. I contacted the City Attorney regarding this restriction, and although he did not seem to feel it would be a problem for the financial institution, he did not have a problem with the City adopting a resolution as proposed. The resolution as proposed merely notes that the parcel is now considered under the regulations and requirements of the City of Monticello, not the OAA Board, and that the parcel would still be subject to all normal zoning, subdivision, and permitting procossos of the City. By adopting the resolution, the City will maintain its right to review and approve any future subdivision proposals, and tho property would be treated just like any other parcel of property in the city. c C Council Agenda - 1/14/91 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Adopt the resolution which releases the condition established at the time the original plat was approved by the OAA and clarifies that it is under the jurisdiction of the City of Monticello only. 2. Do not adopt the resolution. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: While I do not necessarily agree with the financial institution that the restriction is causing a legal impediment to development of the property, I do not see a problem with the City indicating that the OAA Board no longer controls the development of lands for this outlot. If the resolution satifies the lending institution, the City of Monticello Is still adequately protected, as the property is still subject to all our normal zoning and subdivision rules. As a result, I recommend Council adopt the resolution as proposed. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of original conditional use restriction; Copy of letter from Buffalo National Bank requesting release of restriction; Copy of proposed resolution. is ACTIVE"UATE -This Ordinance shall be 3n full forte and effect aftereta passagt and• ,oubiication.according co Vow. AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING RECULATIONS FOR THE SUBDIVISION AND PLATTING OVLAND WITHIN THc CITY OF MONTICELLO, .DEFiN1NG' CERTAIN TERMS USED Timm; PROVIDING FOR THE'2REPAQATION OF PLATS; PROVIDING: FOR THE INSTALLATION OF STREETS AND OTHER. IMPROVEME`ITS; PROVIDII;C FOR THE OEnicAttos OF CERTAIN LAND FOR' PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS; ESTABLISHING' PROCEDUT_E4, FOR APPROVAL AND THE RECORDING OF PLATS; PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR 'VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND REPEALING ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES 14CONSISTENT HEREVITH. ( A Copy of Chia instrument in its entirety is available at the Wright Councy Recorder's Office) 97. Order Granting Conditional Use Dated Jan. 7, 1987 Rec. July 27, 1987 at 12:10 ?`! Book 90 of Misc., page 939 Pile No. 429708 Wright County, Minnesota Signed by Chairman of Monticello Orderly Monticello Orderly Annexation Board Annexation Board In the Matter of John W. Sandberg REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit for a platted residential subdivision consisting of aims (9) lots as regulated in Section 605 of the Wright County Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations. John W. Sandberg. Owner { The mutter was heard on January 7. 1987, on a petition for a conditional use pursuant to tha Wright County Zoning Ordinance, for the following described property: All lots in j Sandberg East, plat of record on file in the Office of the Wright County Recorder Office In Section 18, Township 121, Range 24, Wright County, Minnesota. (Montitallo Township) IT IS ORDERED that a conditional use be granted as upoa the following conditions or '` reasons; t Preliminary plat be approved as subtitted subject to the following canditionsr I { 1. ,Park dedication fat as. required by County subdivision regulations ba i} tuh, and not applied to the area designated Outlot A. 2. Until annexed bp' the City', lot ownership must be grouped in pairs .as I designated on the; preliminary plat. 3. Prior to developing any 'lot 'i a'tha Township. the owner shall submit „ a survey and site plan of the entire property which shows both lots i, in this pair. and the ,location of tha proposed house, well arid; sever. All wells must be located on the east side of the lot, and all sever systems must be located on the vast side of tba lot. A11 veils -and' .structures trust fit within a single lot and maintain appropriate ast- 'backs from all individual lot lines. Wherever Outlot A borders e, numbered lot, 'the setback from the border will be as required frog ,a City street in Monticello City regulations. A. Outlot A will not be considered as a building sit# until. it is approved for furthar development by the City or M.O.A.A. board. S. The survey and site plans submitted for Lots 13 and 14. Block 2, and Lot 1 and 2. Block 3 -shall include specific and detailed pians for fill. including existing and proposed topography, driveway and structure location and plans to retain drainage from all hard sur- faces on sits. Copy certified July 27. 1987 by Wright County Zoning Adaintatrrtor Q CIIBLIffalo tional Bank December 21, 1990 Rick Wolfsteller City Administrator 250 East Broadway Monticello, MN 55362-9245 Re: Conditional use restrictions--Outloc A of Sandberg East Dear Mr. Wolfsteller: Thank you for your letter of December 18, 1990. Our concern about paragraph four on the Conditional Use Permit is that it creates a legal impediment to development over and above the normal platting and zoning requirements that would apply to any unplatted parcel pursuant to city ordinance. The language of that conditional use permit seems to indicate that the City must go through a step we might call "approval for further development" before it can approve any proposed plat on Outlet A. Otherwise, there would have been no need to put that provisions in the conditional use permit. It seems to us that by operation of the City ordinances, property can not be built upon unless the ordinances are complied with. Therefore, we are puzzled as to why this additional provision was included in the conditional use permit. It would seem that the appropriate thing to do would be to have the City Council, by resolution, remove paragraph four from the Conditional Use Permit. Then Outlet A would be a platted parcel, undeveloped, subject co the normal zoning, platting, and permitting processes applicable to any other parcel. Sincerely yours, P,� W, ohn M. Lundstan President ]b cc: Rod Norall P.O. Boa 10 Buffalo. Minnesota 35313 Telephone 612/682.2311 or Metro 473.7532 Member FDIC RESOLUTION 91 - WHEREAS, the Monticello Orderly Annexation Board granted a conditional use permit for a residential subdivision known as Sandberg East on January 7, 1987, and WHEREAS, the Sandberg East plat contained nine (9) lots and an Outlot A, and WHEREAS, as part of the preliminary plat approval, the following restriction was recorded in Book 90 of Misc., page 939, on July 27, 1987, at 12:10 p.m. in the Wright County Recorder's office: 4. Outlet A will not be considered as a building site until It is approved for further development by the City or Monticello Orderly Annexation Area Board. WHEREAS, the Sandberg East plat, including Outlet A, has since been annexed into the corporate limits of the city of Monticello and is now under the jurisdiction of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: 1. Outlot A of the Sandberg East plat is considered an undeveloped parcel subject to all normal zoning, subdivision, and permitting processes and regulations of the City of Monticello. 2. The condition outlined in paragraph (4) as recorded in Bk. 90 of Misc. , page 939, is hereby released. Adopted this 14th day of January, 1991. Mayor City Administrator N Council Agenda - 1/14/91 1o• Consideration of accepting petition for annexation and acreeinq to enter into a joint resolution with Monticello, Township for annexation of West Kjellbergs Mobile Home Park. (R.W.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: For the past several months, the City staff has been negotiating and discussing the possible annexation of the West Mobile Home Park with Mr. Kent Kjellberg. These discussions occurred because of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's determination that the mobile home park's on-site sewage disposal system was inadequate and needed to be upgraded if it was to continue its operation. As part of the annexation discussions with Mr. Kjellberg, he had many concerns, including the cost of connecting to the city system, the financing of the improvement, and the cost associated with our hookup charge. Since there did not seem to be any benefiting property owners that could help defray the cost of a sanitary sewer connection from the mobile home park, Mr. Kjellberg had planned on installing a force main at his own expense. In regard to the City's normal hookup fee for a sewer connection, the staff had proposed a financing plan that would allow Mr. Kjellberg five years to pay off the hookup charge at an interest rate of 6-1/28. These terms were similar to the terms in the developer's agreement concerning the East Mobile Home Park. These financing terms were recommended as an incentive to encourage Mr. Kjellberg to make the connection as soon as possible and also due to the large estimated hookup fee of $20,000. Mr. Kjellberg petitioned for annexation of approximately 120 acres of land and presented the petition to the City Council on November 13, 1990. The Council discussed the merits of the annexation and did not take any action on accepting the petition at that time but referred the petition to the Monticello Township Board for their comments and recommendations before official Council action. During the City Council's discussion on the annexation potition at the November meeting, concerns wore expressed over when Mr. Kjollberg would actually make the connection to our sanitary sewer system. It was the consensus of the Council that the City should be assured that the connection would take place soon and indicated that before annexation proceeded, Mr. Kjellborg should either guarantee through a performance bond or a letter of credit the installation of the sower connection or complete this sower connection first. The primary reason for acquiring a guarantee is that if annexation occurred first, the City would be incurring cost associatod 19 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 with garbage collection for the trailer park without any offsetting revenue from the sewer usage charges. In addition, the Township officials had expressed concerns over allowing annexation to occur without be ing guaranteed that the reason for the annexation was to eliminate an environmental problem. The Monticello Township Board discussed the annexation request at their December 17 board meeting and indicated to the City in writing that they would agree to a joint resolution in regard to the mobile home park's annexation provided the annexation encompassed only ti -ie acreage associated with the mobile home park and that Mr . Kjellberg either guaranteed funds to cover the cost of the sewer system connection or made the connection first. The original petition requested that 120 acres be annexed into the city, and we are currently in the process of trying to determine the approximate acreage involved in the mobile home park, including the acreage currently utilized for their on-site sewage disposal system. It is estimated by the ata ff that this will encompass approximately 80 acres, not the 120 acres petitioned for, but also more than the 40 or so that the Township Board recommended. Assuming both governing bodies can agree on the amount of acreage to annex, the next step would be for the City Council to accept the annexation petition with any conditions deemed appropriate . I believe the concerns the Township has concerning annexation are also the City's concerns in that we should not be submitting a joint resolution to the Municipal Board until we are assured of the sewer being connected or it's actually constructed first. By accepting the petition under the same conditions recommended by the Township, the annexation is assured if Mr. Kjellberg lives up to his end of the bargain. I also bolievo it will be important to establish a deadline by which Mr. Kjellberg has to either guarantee the cost of the sower construction or implement the actual construction. The reason for both governing bodies to agree to allow annexation to occur is to eliminate the defective sewage system; and without a deadline, there will be no incentive for Mr. Kjellberg to proceed with his plans. A deadline would also notify tho PCA that annexation can occur if Mr. Kjellberg is serious about connecting to the City's sower system. It is the staff's rocommondation that if we agree to the annexation with the conditions attached by the Township, a deadline of no later than Juno 15 be establis had for Mr. Kjollborg to either guarantee the project cost or commence construction. If the sower connection has not boon started by this time, it would allow sufficient time for the PCA to proceed with their action to have the on-sito system upgraded yet in 1991. 20 C Council Agenda - 1/14/91 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Council could agree to accept the petition for annexation and agree to enter into a joint resolution with the Monticello Township Board on the annexation of the West Mobile Home Park, with the acreage to be determined jointly with the Township. 2. Council could determine that it's not in the best interest of the City to annex the mobile home park with the conditions requested by the Township. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff feels that the conditions recommended by the Township are reasonable and are also in the best interest of the City before annexation occurs. By accepting the petition under these terms, Mr. Kjellberg should be comfortable that both the Township and the City will agree to jointly petition the Municipal Board for annexation upon his meeting the terms. In order to insure that the connection does take place as soon as possible, a June 15 deadline should be established as part of the motion so that if Mr. Kjellberg does not proceed as planned, the PCA still has sufficient time to proceed with their action. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of petition; Copy of Township's letter agreeing to annexation; Copy of resolution. 21 ,g10�22<t. Q� mss' �o PETITION FOR ANNEXATION To the Council of the City of rAonticello, Wright County, Minnesota: 1, the undersigned, the owner of the territory described below, hereby request the City Council of Monticello, Minnesota, to annex this territory to the City and to extend the City boundaries to include the same, and for that purpose respectfully state: I. The territory to be annexed consists of approximately 120 acres All of this land lies entirely within the County of Wright, Minnesota, and the description of such land is as follows: SECT -15 TWP-121 RANG -25 UNPLATTED LAND SE S OF A LINE BEG 100.20 RDS S OF SE POST W 19 ROADS N 28D E 14 RDS W 147 RDS TO 1-4 LINE EXC S 2 RDS W OF RD. 2. The territory described above abuts upon the City limits at the east boundary thereof and none of It is presently Included within the corporate limits of any incorporated city. 3. All of this territory Is or is about to become urban or suburban In character. Kent K,lellb g, AnPS �= K jellberg' s7ncorporated••�� c Monticello Township County Road 117 Monticello, Minnesota 55362 December 17, 1990 Mr. Rick Wolfsteller, Administrator City of Monticello Monticello, Mn. 55362 Re: Kjellberg's [vest Mobile Home Park Annexation. Dear Rick: The Board of Supervisors will agree on a joint --resolution in the above regard,ppro- f viding the annexation encompasses the 40 acres more or less that the court is situated on; and providing there is a guarantee of upfront money to cover the cost of the sewer system connection plus 25%; or if the sewer connection is con- structed by Mr. Kjellberg first. Y" erely, ,.,. it Yt{�E4/ �- anChaizman Monticello Township Board FD/d s C 0 RESOLUTION 91 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PETITION FOR ANNEXATION WHEREAS, Kent Kjellberg, owner of territory described below, requests that the City Council of Monticello, Minnesota, annex this territory to the city and to extend the city boundaries to include the same; and WHEREAS, the territory requested to be annexed consists of approximately 120 acres, all of which is entirely within the county of Wright, Minnesota, and the description of such land is as follows: Section 15, Township 121, Range 25, Unplatted Land SE S of a line beg 100.20 Rds S of SE post W 19 Roads r4 28D E 14 Rds W 147 Rds to I-4 Line exc S 2 Rds W of Rd. WHEREAS, the territory described above abuts directly upon the city limits at the southwest boundary thereof, and none of it is presently included within the corporate limits of any incorporated city; and WHEREAS, annexation of this parcel is consistent with the land use guide plan adopted by the Monticello Orderly Annexation area; and WHEREAS, the parcel is primarily developed as a mobile home park and has been directed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to either upgrade the on-site sewage disposal system or make connection to the City of Monticello sewer system; and WHEREAS, the City of Monticello is now capable of providing municipal sanitary sewer service to this area; and WHEREAS, the annexation petition hao been referred to the Monticello Township Board for their review and comments in accordance with the joint urbanization plan agreement; and WHEREAS, the Monticello Township Board has agreed to enter into a joint resolution with the City of Monticello to allow for the annexation of the mobile home park property (exact acreage to be determined) provided the property owner either constructs the sewer connection to the city system or provides a suitable guarantee of up -front funds to cover the cost of the sower system connection equal to 125% of the estimated cost. NOW, THEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY OF MONTICELLO accepts said petition for annexation and agrees to enter into a joint resolution for annexation with Monticello Township contingent upon the following: 0/0 Resolution 91 - Page 2 P ltione rovide a suitab a guarantee to the City e u 1 t 5% o the a ated se Gonne ion Crn tuc ion osts ap roval f 11 const uct on pl n by tie ty of mo ti ello, an all cmpor y an pe an r.t �, :em necessary to complete co t ction b ne 1 OW 1 91; or Q S/�� - Q1s,.t ��Ir'��o•ST07 Petitioner has either completed construction or���;/y� progressed with the actual construction of the sewer connection to the satisfaction of the City of Monticello 4 , �'1 y* u` . 31 14 c( / Adopted by theCity Council this 14th day of January, 1991. CCity Administrator Mayor N u f A-, A S, 4. G) Council Agenda - 1/14/91 lt. Consideration of acceptinq partial payment of delinquent assessments from Farm Credit Services to allow sale of 49 -acre parcel to school district. (R.W.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Farm Credit Services, the owner of the former Jim Boyle property along Chelsea Road, has entered into a purchase agreement with the school district to sell the school 49 acres of property adjacent to the present middle school site. The proposed land will be used by the school for expansion of their school facilities and would bring their total acreage to approximately 129 acres. In order for this sale to occur, all delinquent taxes and special assessments must be brought current before the parcel can be transferred. The 49 -acre parcel is a portion of a larger tax parcel containing 144.5 acres. Please refer to the enclosed map outlining the area being purchased by the school and the total parcel acreage that currently has special assessments outstanding. Since the school is only buying a portion of the original parcel, Farm Credit Services is requesting to be allowed to only pay a portion of the delinquent assessments that pertain to the parcel being sold. The 49 acres is approximately 348 of the total parcel; and as such, they would like to pay this amount of the assessments that are delinquent. I had the Wright County Auditor's office calculate the delinquent assessments that have occurred since 1985 with penalty and Interest that total $140,572.71. When including the 1991 payment that is due along with the remaining assessment balance, the total assessments for this original parcel would be $174,870.67. If Farm Credit was to pay 344 of the assessments based on acreage sold, they would owe $59,456.0 3. In addition, delinquent real estate taxes for the past five years total $16,565.82 for a total payment proposed of $76,021.85. Since special assessments are under the jurisdiction of the City, the City Council can reallocate the assessments in any manner it chooses and does not need approval from other taxing jurisdictions. If the City is not willing to reallocate the assessments, Farm Credit would be faced with two options, either pay the entire assessment balance in full to allow the sale to occur, or not B011 the 49 acres to the school as proposed. Based on acreage sold, the proposed payment by Farm Credit does seem reasonable, but the City always has the choice of requiring full payment according to State Statutes. The major drawback to reallocating the delinquent assessments at this point would be that the remaining balance of $115,414.64 no longer is considered delinquent, and the City may have to wait to collect this amount in the future. I believe the County Auditor's office is currently considering 22 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 a tax forfeiture sale this spring, which would include this parcel. If a tax forfeiture sale is commenced, Farm Credit will be faced with either paying the assessments in full, or the City could own the property in question. While I'm sure It's not the City's intent to acquire this property and we would rather have the assessments paid, removing the delinquencies would, in effect, buy Farm Credit additional time to pay off the assessments. Farm Credit representatives have indicated that if all their property is part of the tax forfeiture proceedings this year, they will probably be paying all assessments at that time, including the Meadow Oak Subdivision assessments. It should be noted that Farm Credit Services has cooperated with the City In the past in allowing the City to acquire a small parcel of land adjacent to Remmele Engineering last year. Farm Credit has indicated that if the City is too restrictive on the amount of delinquent assessments it expects to collect on this sale, they may be forced to void the potential sale to the school and continue efforts to sell the entire parcel as one tract. It doesn't appear that any future sales of the Boyle property by Farm Credit will require respreading of assessment balances, as the parcels are smaller and should be able to be sold without subdividing. It should be noted that the entire land now owned by Farm Credit, including the Meadow Oak Subdivision property, has outstanding delinquent taxes and assessments totaling over $600,000. I believe Farm Credit also has invested into this property about the same amount of money, and the Council could also propose that since both the City and Farm Credit are equally in debt on this property, maybe we should be getting half of any proceeds from sales to lower the special assessment debt. While I'm not advocating this action, the City does want to make sure that as the parcels aro sold by Farm Credit, we do receive our appropriate special assessment payments. Accepting 349 of the assessments in this case still does leave a substantial amount of property adjacent to Chelsea Road that should have sufficient value to cover our remaining assessments, but it does not insure that assessments will be paid soon. Reasons for agreeing to accept partial payment of delinquent assessments: Farm Credit was cooperative with the City when the City needed to acquire a few acres of property for the Rommele manufacturing deal. Payment of 34% of the assessments is a fair allocation when considering the total acreage the original assessment was levied against. 23 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 Reasons for requiring full delinquent assessments to be paid: 1. No payments have been made on this project in over seven years, and our bond rating has been subject to stricter review and criticism by Moody's, Inc., because of high delinquencies . All property owned by Farm Credit is likely to be subject to tax forfeiture procedures during 1991; and as a result, Farm Credit will most likely have to pay all delinquent assessments or lose title to the land. While the request before the Council at this time only concerns the allocation of special assessments, the sale of the 49 acres to the school will result in Council decisions in the future on utility and road extensions for this property. The 49 -acre parcel is the proposed location of the new elementary school, and the school district would like to service the new site by extending sewer and water from Dundas Road and Fallon Avenue to the northwest corner of this parcel. This short extension will then bring up the question of how will sewer and water be extended in the future to the south to service the balance of the Farm Credit property, and who will pay for these extensions in the future? The school expansion will also bring up the question as to whether the City will i assess the school property an area assessment equal to the $2,500 per acre for having City sewer and water trunk lines avai lablo. In addition, the school would like to see a road constructed along their southorn boundary between Fallon Avenue and County Road 118 with half the cost of the road being picked up by the school and the other half being assessed to Farm Credit. The question that will need to be answered is whether the City will be willing to assess Farm Credit for their share of this road construction, or will we be expecting full payment from both parties before construction. With over $600,000 in assessments outstanding against the Farm Credit property at this time, will the City consider assessing another $100,000 or more? It may not be prudent to construct a road along the southern boundary of the school property without having sower and water services available and still expect assessments to be paid if the property can't be developed immediately. A feasibility study by our engineer will have to be prepared in order to answer some or all of those questions when the school is ready to develop. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: I . Agree to pro-rato the assessments based on acreage and accept 34% of the special assossment balances and require that the entiro delinquent real estate taxes be paid as part of the sale to the school. C Council Agenda - 1/14/91 2. Do not agree to reallocate the assessments and require full payment of approximately $170,000 to allow the sale to occur. 3. Agree to reallocate assessments but at a different amount than proposed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: From the City's standpoint, there does not appear to be any immediate need to reallocate the delinquent assessments, as tax forfeiture procedures will more than likely be started in 1991, which should result in either the City obtaining all its assessment dollars soon or title to the land. On the other hand, Farm Credit has been cooperative in the past; and accepting 34% of the delinquent assessments is a fair allocation based on acreage involved. By accepting the partial payment, the City does lose the right to have this property subject to tax forfeiture, which could mean that the remaining balance of $115,000 in assessments could take a while to collect depending on how fast Farm Credit is able to sell the property. If the Council agrees to pro -rate the delinquent assessments for this 49 -acre parcel, I would suggest that the motion also inform Farm Credit that future sales will require full payment of delinquent assessments and taxes. Because this Is an unusually large parcel in that it contains over 144 acres, the remaining property after the sale should have sufficient value to cover the outstanding assessments that would be respread over the remaining two years of the assessment roll. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of map outlining area; Schedule of delinquent taxes and assessments for the parcel. 25 I 0 Q*, VIC or I 0 Q*, C PROPOSED ALLOCATION AND RE -ASSESSMENT OF DELINQUENT TAXES AND ASSESSME14TS THROUGH FEBRUARY 1, 1991 PARCEL #155-011-000171 (144.5 ACRES) Proposed Sale of 49 -acre parcel to school Special assessments (1985-1990) $100,934.00 Penalty 14,130.78 Interest 25,507.93 Subtotal $140,572.71 1991 assessment installment 13,392.53 Remaining assessment balance 20,905.43 $174,870.67 8 of property being sold X 348 Proposed assessment payment $ 59,456.03 Delinquent real estate taxes including penalty 6 interest (1985-1990) S 16,565.82 TOTAL TAX 6 ASSESSMENT PAYMENT PROPOSED S 76,021.85 Proposed assessment balance to be re -assessed to remaining 95.5 acres: $115,414.64 D11 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 12. Consideration of an interim ordinance imposing a moratorium on adult oriented land uses on certain property located within the city of Monticello. Applicant, City of Monticello. (J.O.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Sometime ago, the City Council acted to impose a moratorium on the establishment of adult book store and adult entertainment establishments. This moratorium was established in response to problems nearby communities have had with the establishment of this type of land use within t heir jurisdiction. The moratorium Council established at that time was not delineated by ordinance. It is the view of City staff that we should act to formally adopt an ordinance placing a moratorium on establishment of adult entertainment centers until such time that land use regulations can be drawn up that properly regulate this type of activity in our community. Formal adoption of a moratorium by ordinance gives the City improved footing for denial of any request for a building or occupancy permit associated with an adult oriented land use. The ordinance proposed is very similar to an ordinance recently adopted by the City of Elk River. It calls for a moratorium to last one year during which time City staff will be preparing a formal amendment to the zoning ordinance. At this time, I have compiled quite a bit of information regarding what other communities have done to regulate the establishmcnt of adult book stores. Suffice it to say that the U.S. Constitution does not allow us to completely eliminate the development of adult book stores; however, the City does have significant authority in defining where this type of land use may be conducted. The Planning Commission will be reviewing the zoning map and pinpointing areas where this type of land use should be allowed. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Motion to adopt an interim ordinance imposing a moratorium on adult oriented land uses on certain proporty located within the city of Monticello. Under this alternative, the moratorium would be In place for one year or until the City Council terminates the moratorium. Council may want to select this altornative based on the finding that it to nocossary to adopt the ordinance in order to protect tho planning process and the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of / Monticello. 26 t C. C Council Agenda - 1/14/91 Motion to deny adoption of an interim ordinance opposing a moratorium on adult oriented land uses on certain property located within the city of Monticello. This alternative should be selected if Council does not agree with the finding noted under alternative #I. Under this alternative, an adult oriented book store or entertainment center could be 1 -cared in any portion of a 6-3 or 8-4 zone, next to daycare centers, schools, etc. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of proposed ordinance amendment. 27 ORDINAINCE AMENDMENT NO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAT THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORD2NANCE BE AMENDED BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING CHAPTER: Chapter 29 AN INTERIM OREDINANCE IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON ADULT ORIENTED LAND USES ON CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED WIT HIN THE CITY OF MONTICELLO SECTION : 29-1: Purpose 29-2: Definitions 29-3: Moratorium 29-4: Effective Date 29-1: PURPOSE: The C Sty of Monticello is presently conducting a planning study identified as "A Study for the Location of Adult Oriented Land Uses" (the Study) for the purpose of considering adoption and/or amendment of official controls as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.352, Subdivision 15, including Chapters 3-16 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. In recognition of the documented secondary Impacts that "Adult Oriented Land Uses" pose to the property values, minors, and nearby sensitive land uses, the City Council of the City of Monticello does determine that prior to the completion and implemontation of the study, interim regulations are necessary. The official controls and amendments will consider, among other things, appropriate land use regulations relating to "Adult Oriented Land Uses" as defined below. The Study will consider regulations of zoning districts for tho property identified as "Zoning Districts A0, ER -1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R -PUD, PZR, PZ M, B-1, B-2, 0-3, B-4, I-1, and 1-2" as shown on the City of Monticello Zoning Map attached as Exhibit A to this ordinance. Therefore, in order to protect the planning process and the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the city of Monticello, it is necessary and desirable to impose the following moratorium pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355, Subdivision 4 . Ordinance Amendment No. j Page 2 29-2: DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this ordinance, shall be interpreted as herein defined: [AA] ADULT BOOK STORE: Any building or structure which contains or is used for the display or sale of books, magazines, movie films, still pictures, and any and all other written materials, photographic material, novelties, devices, and related sundry items, which are distinguished or characterized by their emphasis on matters depicting, describing, or relating to "Specified Sexual Activities" or "Specified Anatomical Areas," or an establishment with a segment or section devoted to the sale or display of such material. [AB] SPECIFIED SEXUAL ACTIVITIES: Specified Sexual Activities shall mean: I. Acts of human masturbation, sexual intercourse or sodomy, or any acts of bestiality. 2. Fondling or other erotic touching of human genitals, pubic region, buttock, or breast of either male or female. 3. Human genitals in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal. (AC) SPECIFIED ANATOMICAL AREAS: Specified Anatomical Areas shall mean: 1. Loss than completely and opaquely covered: (a) human genitals, pubic region; (b) buttock; and (c) female breast below a point immediately above the top of the areola; and 2. Human male genitals in a discernibly turgid state, oven if completely and opaquely covered. [AD) ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENT: Any building or structure which contains or is used for commercial entertainment where the patron directly or indiroctly is charged a fee to engage in personal contact with or to allow a personal contact by employees, devices or equipment, or by Cpersonnel provided by the establishment, or Ordinance Amendment No. Page 3 viewing of a series of dance routines, strip performances, or other gyrational choreography provided by the establishment which appeals to the prurient interest of the patron to include, but not to be limited to, bath houses, massage parlors, and related or similar activities. [AE] ADULT THEATER: Any building or structure which is used for the viewing of performances or activities by others, whether such performances or activities are by others, whether such performances are in the form of live shows, motion pictures, slide shows or other forms of photographic or visual display, which are distinguished or characterized by their emphasis on matters depicting, describing, or relating to "Specified Sexual Activities" or "Specified Anatomical Areas" as heretofore defined, or an establishment with a segment or section devoted to the sale or display of such material. 29-3: MORATORIUM: From the effective date of this ordinance to and including January 13, 1992, unless earlier terminated by resolution of the Monticello City Council, the City Council, Planning Commission, and the City of Monticello staff shall not accept any applications for or continue to process or act on any applications or requests for building permits, rezoning, conditional use permits, variances, plats, administrative subdivisions, or other land use approvals for land uses described in Section 29- 2 above within the area identified in Section 29-1 above. 29-4: EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication. Adopted this 14th day of January, 1991. City Administrator C Mayor Council Agenda - 1/14/91 13. Consideration of purchasinq additional scanner and software for the recyclinq program. (J.S.) REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: During the preparation of the 1990 budget, staff placed an amount of $1,650 in the budget for the purchase of one additional scanner and some additional computer programming for our recycling program. An additional scanner was needed as a backup unit during periods of wet weather in the summer and the extreme conditions encountered in the winter. When the scanners don't scan, the contractor has to enter the code numbers by hand, which causes delays and can result in some errors. The purchase of this equipment in 1990 was delayed, as we learned the City of St. Louis Park• was considering an alternate hand-held scanner which was not as susceptible to moisture and freezing conditions as the existing Telxon units we're now using. Thinking that we would have to do some additional programming to add a different scanner to our existing system, we placed another $300 in the 1991 budget. In November, we learned that the City of St. Louis Park had switched over to the MEQ 130 hand-held scanner from Mars Electronics. This unit can be used as a hand scanner or attached to the belt with a removable remote wand scanner. The unit is more weather resistant than the Tolxon units, and the scanner head uses a convex glass, which is self cleaning, rather than the concave glass of the Telxon unit, which catches bar code scrapings, frost, and moisture. We have replaced two tips on the Tolxon unit so far at a cost of $250 each. The self-cleaning tips for the Mars unit sell for $18 and rarely need replacement. The Mars units aro priced at $1,895 each versus the estimated replacement cost of the Telxon units of approximately $1,350. The only drawback with switching to the Mars MEQ 130 units is that the computer programming necessary to integrate these into our system is estimated to cost approximately $2,300••. Cathy Shuman, who is responsible for computer interfacing at City Hall, indicates that this computer programming provided by Vertical Systems, Inc., is a step forward from whore our existing recycling program is in that the new programming would also include the documentation and would adapt to a wide variety of scanners, whero our existing system is adaptable to tho Tolxon units only. It appears that the charge of $2,300 would bo a one-time charge and would allow us to use both the •NOTE: Our scanner system was originally sot up based upon the City of St. Louis Park's system. •• NOTE: Quoto available at Monday's meeting. 28 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 Telxon and the Mars systems concurrently. In future years, we would phase out the Telxon units should the Mars units prove to be more dependable and trouble free. The purchase of the MEQ 130 Mars scanner, one spare battery pack, and self-cleaning tip, as well as the programming, would come to $4,288. This is approximately $2,300 above the amount budgeted in 1990 and 1991 for this expenditure. For your information, the scanners have tracked and billed $11,381.76 in special processing fees from non-recyclers for the 12 -month period ending September 30, 1990. Incidentally, the cost of Polka Dot's recycling contract for the same period was approximately $11,900. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative would be to purchase the Mars scanner from Tursso Companies, Inc., St. Paul, Minnesota, with the Vertical Systems, Inc., programming at a cost of $4,288. 2. The second alternative would be to purchase an additional Telxon scanner at an es timated cost of $1,350 with one spare scanner head at $250 for a total of $1,600. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the staff's recommendation (Rick, John, and Cathy) that the City Council authorize the purchase of the Mare MEQ scanner and the Vertical Systema programming as outlined in alternative Y1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the data on existing scanners; Copy of the product Information shoot on the MEQ 130. 29 rELK(/////PM Portable Tele -Transaction Computer Operator's Guide c 0 BARS .ELECT nonics." Porlable Dote Terminal Prod' ctInforMation Ti,et',,IEQ QQPOroole,Datj , 'T&ifthat P is ifes(g6odtVabich 0 q tn?w I;ra fin ns qol 'WO, I Ll- Full -Function Data Terminal The MARS ELECTRONICS' MEO" 130 displays. teles and stores bar- coded or manually -entered data. Up to a tial'-megadyte of memory can be supplied. Battery back-up protects all data and the program stored in RAM A standard communication pan allows the MEO 130 to communicate with other RS -232C compatible products. Available with an alphanumeric or numeric keypad. Optical Communications The MEO­ 130 features an optical communications poi Mat provides convenient cableless transfer of data from the MEO '130 to the Mars Electronics'" MEO'-1260 Communications Node. SPECIFICATIONS Terminal Oaplay Memory Clock Communications Pon indicators Keypad Options Software Autodiscnminate and Decode LLD: 2lines by 16 cnaracters 128E to 5124 byte RAM: 32k bye PONT Real time clock calendar: automatic leap year RS -232C interlace-XOMYOFF. MRTS Programmable baud rate. 300-19,200 bdslsec. Good read LED: audible beeper Alpna•numenc: numeric: custom overlays Programmable in BASIC Code 11 UPC Code 39 Codabar Coae 128 EAN 1.2015 Plessey Optical Communications Optical Intrafed (960nm) Communicabods Pon RS -232C Type optical Imk Optical Range - 12 Inches Hall duplex Principal Focal Point 300 to 91300 bds XON XOFF Power Source and projection of scanner axis parallel to bar Power Source Rechargeable NlckeliCadmium usage Minimum 12 hours Charge Cycles 730 minimum Charge Time 14 hours Power Save Mode Back -up battery preserves data & program in RAM Indicator La:: aanor; message Backup Battery Nick.ePCadmium: trickle charge from main battery: preserves RAM tot 7 days MARK'IT SYSTEMS 612-292-1055 223 E. PLATO BLVD. ST. PAUL, MN 55107 MARS ELECTRonics ,%" tram A, 19 No us+ ti(i Ian 113!:'/MU,1C w1: Na1:53l'171 FA, I: N.10 .V4 ,1Wr A111) Programmable in BASIC The t.l 0"Q0 is resigned to be programmed,n BASIC. the universal) - known, easy to use Diagramming language of business and lnaustry. Digital Contact Wand Optional contact wands are available from Mars Electronics to read low, medium and high density bar codes. Utilizing a modular lack. the wand Is easily attached to the fAEO'• 130. Digital Contact Wand (optional) vi,ive Rea Ugtit The visible red LED operates in the 660nm Sources range. peminhng the scanner to see colored inks which are invisible to infrared light sources. Principal Focal Point Set at 0.04" (1 mm) Preferred Oneniabon-rip in contact with target and projection of scanner axis parallel to bar code lines. Role angle..1, =30`. Depth of Field .075- (1.9mm) Depth of field is taken along the optical axis Output Charac;enY:cs TTL open collector Power Consumption Nominal Power Requirements: mA-Enable Law 15mA MA -Enable High 35mA Physical Characieas:ICs 7.6 inch I19.3cm) from the tip to the end of the strain relief. Reading Aperture Available wtin low. medium and nign resolution optics Cable 7'd- nominal coil length (stretches to 6') Connector 6 position modular plug Mechanical Specifications Weight 1,11Ds 1.77 kgs) Size IH - W . 0) 8 • 5 75 • 1.5-(20.4 • 14.7 . 4cm) Envirormental Specifications Operating Temperature 14° to - 12211-10° to - 50°C) Storage Temperature - t3' to -140-F 1- 25° to - 60`CI Humidity ovo to 90% )non -condensing) MEO -"130 Configuration Options t WKI V-0" ..ryp+a Pam %,M, ME01302i 8 A'N9191-300147147 MEO 130 - 256 AN 91.30-072.4 MEO 130 - 512 - AN 91.30.0734 MEO 130 128 N 91.30-074.4 MEO 130 256 N 91.30-075.4 MEG 130 - 512 N 91-30-076.4 Mmimnwn .lWi.fl •'J c'-.. .,W MIS. M4h$ELECTFia':iC$a+'ryol.�.! vo.w, of Mtn tic Mf 0'- a."..— f ... .IR— f... N_wa,"fr W w,..r>Wn m.w. %;IT 5.4: w f, lLN1®r.IdO Tia. f'4tnln LWS d rU 1NI fill 11a r]WW;.OI O.iw. Crim• &.3.0 tp ri- ;+solve,. 9.'yjtYw L.n Its fnri •.7 tin 4_1`11 IFI i kir. E'61'9'r] rMMMI In i'm AawA im 10 191 1052 PiRSSO . , 1 -.QUOTATION - City of. no 12/14J90 - 'm . GATF 970 soot r,roadway C/0 t7unticallu , ?1N 55362-924'. " QUOTE: P ATTN:. Mo. Catlydrino OLnaao SUBJECTTO ACCEPTANCE: ouAArrrrr OESCRVTIOW proCE 1. eat Nars KBQ-1300 1299 with ILlphs//+wraric keypad; ����=•_., laaludeest'waad (10 NIL) with a s14-elleaaiea',tr.p /its.on/ta 1 ca, Additiumal buttery Pack S 95.00 /0a 04 Additional so]C-clearAin6 trip r lt.00/au Poets' brand fax lrarpmlttd memo Im I • Nelpsx . a rye �9 • r3ob1-�.5 . /�� F0.0 Prepoi0 4 add ®�llll$SO vuMpU:a6S. �y1tC. 223 P100 TERMO N r t 100 d n r a- atoB� EW- AAM66107.0!0) . , runuut Y.or•. O��r�, IY ,YIN a .. I,i,iIIM iNi Y lY k rt1,r lrvn-l.•• �Y�' .•moi: � /3 1 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 14. Consideration of amendment to contract with Professional Services Group for change in scope of services, i.e., laboratory certification requirements. (J. S. A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: In early 1990, the Minnesota Department of Health regulations required all public and private environmental testing laboratories to become certified by January 1991. The tests covered by the new rules include those performed at the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant by Professional Services Group and reported to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency under our current discharge permit. The certification procedures for all laboratories are quite extensive, requiring additional manpower and equipment. During 1990, Professional Services Group, in preparation for the effective date of the new rules, began operating a certified lab at the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant to determine the estimated cost of such a program. PSG brought in additional equipment from other PSG laboratories and began performing the tests on a certified basis. The additional manpower required was approximately four man-hours per day for each of the three test days per week. After several months, PSG was able to determine that it would be less costly to send those samples requiring certification procedures to an outside certified laboratory rather than running them in-house. The outside analysis costs for PSG are estimated at approximately $11,000 per year. The estimated annual difference in cost between laboratory operations prior to certification and the cost of sending samples out for the permit required testa is $5,807. Currently, the most economical lab in the area is located in Cambridge. Since this change in Minnesota Department of Health rules took effect after the inception of our last contract, it is actually a change in scope of services provided by PSG; therefore, a contract increase is warranted. The proposed contract increase for 1991 is the actual cost of $5,807. This cost is open to negotiation should an additional change in scope of services occur or the cost of the quality control/ laboratory cortification program increase by over 10%. A copy of the contract amondmont is enclosed for your review. 30 C Council Agenda — 1/14/91 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative is to authorize a contract amendment with PSG for a change in scope of services, i.e., laboratory certification requirements by the Minnesota Department of Health in the amount of $5,807 annually. 2. The second alternative would be not to authorize a change in scope of services. This does not appear to be applicable, as this is well-defined in our contract as a change of scope of services, and both the City Administrator and myself have negotiated this item with PSG for several hours to arrive at the figure stated in alternative S1, which is believed to be a true and representative cost of the increase due to laboratory certification requirements. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the City Administrator and Public Works Director that the City Council approve a contract amendment for change of scope of services as outlined in alternative #1. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of memorandum and various data regarding the scope of sorvices, including proposed amendment to the contract. 31 i�j PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. M E M O R A N D U M TO J. SIMOLA FROM K. MCGUIRE DATE JANUARY 9, 1991 RE LABORATORY CERTIFICATION, CHANGE IN SCOPE OF SERVICES John, As discussed, attached are copies of letters sent to NPDES permit holders by the MPCA. The City should already have received copies addressed to the City, I didn't get a copy of the actual letters to Monticello but these contain the information. Also included with this memo is a draft amendment to the contract for your review. CPlease call if you have questions. Thank you. cc L. Breimhurst Ll Monticello Woetowator Treatment Plant 1401 Han Bled., Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Ph. (612) 295.2225 �� Minnesota Pollution Control Agency F"-� 520 Lafayette Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 Telephone (612) 296-6300 V Juni 21, '1990 The Honorable Alfred Collinge ITT Mayor, City of Monticello Permit Number MN0025330 . City Hall Zumbrota. Mr] 55992 Dear Sir/Mad am: Re: Laboratory Certification In January 1990. a letter from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (HPCA) was sent to all our permittees informing them of a Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) rule (Minn. Rule pt. 4740.2040) vhich requires that all environmental laboratories conducting tests for vastevater parameters must be certified th rough the Department of Health. In February 1990, three seminars were held to explain the rectification procedures and requirements. If your representative did not attend one of the seminars or if you are uncertain whether or not your laboratory must be certified, please direct questions you may have to Lonna Volfateller, MDH, (612) 623-5681. Knowing how and/or .whore to have your monitoring samples analyzed is important because by January .1, 1991, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency staff will accept only monitnring data that has been completed in a certified laboratory or a laboratory that has received provisional certification. One exception is the immediate testing for dissolved oxygen, pH and total residual chlorine. If your laborar.nry is not certified, but IF all your other samples are run in a certified lab, and TP npprnved methods are being used, you may submit your performance data for dissolved oxygen, pH and total residual chlorine on your monthly monitoring reports. If you have questions regarding this matter, please feel free to toll Lonna volEatollar as indicated shove or John Davenport of the HPCA at (612)5. Sincerely, LC Mnrgo of J. Valky Poll tion Control Sp cialist R tl atory Com a c Section va or Ouali ty D n MJV:Jne Regional Offices: Duluth • Brainard - Dotrod LAW • Marshall • Rocneetsr Equal Opponuney Ernpiayer PdmW on 111 vcled P— AINMinnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 P1- Telephone (612) 296.6300 ML44[ A1990 Dear: Re: Laboratory Certification As an agency responsible for regulating and controlling environmental pollutants, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), through the permit program, must rely on the self-monitoring data submitted by our parmittaos. The permits require the testing and reporting of certain parameters which are nocessary to ensure that Minnesota's air, land and voter is protected and preserved. Because we base our compliance tracking on the data we receive, accuracy and reliability are very important to us. To Januory 1990, Minnesota Department of Health Rules pro. 4740.2010 through 4740.2040, Cortification Procaduras for Environmental Testing Laboratories, will become effective. The rules establish procedures by which environmental testing laboratories may become rartif.ied by the the Department of Health to perform tests for certain spacitied parameters. The rule further establishes appllcotinn proepdures, standards and procedures for the granting of eartifiection, and procedures governing suspension and revocation of certification. Currently, rho above stated rule covers tooting for basic inorganic and bacteriological parameters. At some future time, laboratory certificatinn will be required of those laboratories performing analyses for organic substances and metals other than lend. Lead, which is already required under the Sate Drinking Vater Act, is included under Minn. Rules ch. 4740. Within one yanr follnving the affarrivp date of the rule, or, by .January 1991, all laboratories performing testing procedures for permittees holding NPDES or State Disposal System permits must have obtained interim approval for rertifiention. The submitted analytical data as required by the permits will be acceptable only if tasting is performed in a certified laboratory. Through a permit modification process, the Division of Vater Quality staff will modify all permits to require that the analytical tasting requtrod to moot permit conditions must be conducted in a laboratory mortified by the Ropionai oitkas: ouiuth - Brainerd • ostroh Lakos • Marshall • tioeheater T Equal Qpponunsv Empiovor Printed on Recycled Paps Page 2 Minnesota Department of Health. We helleve that the uniformity of procedures and the assurance that approved me chods are being used, will benefit both the permittees and the MPGA in developing a compliance picture reflective of the actual activity of your treatment facility. Three saminara aro being planned to explain the cartif icatton procedures. The seminars arc scheduled for Fahruary 20, 1990. in Borth Mankato. Februnry 22, 1990, in St. Cloud and February 23, 1990, in Shoreviev. Applications for certification will be available at each seminar or can be obtained by contacting the Department of Health. If you would like more information regarding the rule or the application, please contact Mr. Al Tupy, Minnesota Department of Health, (612) 629-5680. For additional information regarding your NPDES and State Disposal System permits. please contact Marge Velky at (612) 2905-724A, Sincerely, mothy K. Scherkanbach Director 11 Division of Voter Quality TKS t a is R OH t AGREEMENT FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE MONTICELLO WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY AMENDMENT 1 (EFFECTIVE 1/1/91) CHANGE IN SCOPE OF SERVICES; LABORATORY CERTIFICATION PSG shall provide for NPDES permit required analysis to be performed by a laboratory certified by the State of Minnesota, to conform with new laboratory certification requirements effective 1/1/91 by the State of Minnesota, and enforced by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. PSG's annual fee for the first year of this amendment (1991), additional to the base fee, shall be Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Seven Dollars ($5,807). The Annual Fee for these services shall be negotiated annually or when a significant change in the cost of these services occurs. A significant change in cost is defined as an increase in the cost of the program of 10% or more on an annual basis. Both parties indicate their approval of this Amendment to the Agreement for Operations and Maintenance Services for the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Facility by their signatures below: AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: Michael M. Stump President PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. CITY OF MONTICELLO DATE: DATE: WITNESS: C WITNESS: 0 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 15. Consideration of makinq annual appointments. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Minnesota Statutes require that at the first meeting of each new year, certain appointments be made. Attached you will find a list of the required appointments that may be approved in one single motion unless the Council chooses to consider some appointments separately. a. City Depositories. During the past year, three official depositories were named, including Wright County State Bank, Security Financial Savings b Loan, and First National Bank of Monticello. In addition, under Minnesota Statutes 239, the Chief Financial Officer has also been designated the authority to name other official depositories for the purpose of investments. Since financial institutions not within the city are depositories for investment purposes only, the official depositories are usually just the three mentioned above, and the motion includes the authorization for the Chief Financial Officer to designate other depositories when necessary for investment purposes only. b. Official Newspaper. Monticello Times. C. Health Officer. Historically, Dr. Maus has served as the City Health Officer, and it is suggested that this appointment simply be renewed annually. d. Acting Mayor. Annually, one person on the Council must be stipulated to act as Mayor in the absence of the elected Mayor. For the past number of years, Fran Fair has boon filling this role, but the Council will now have to select a different individual. No recommendation is made for this position. e. Representatives to Other Multi -Jurisdictional Bodies. Three appointments are necessary for selecting the City representative to serve on each of the following bodies: Community Education Advisory Board, Joint Fire Board, and the OAA Board. I have boon asked to servo in the past as the Fire Board representative, but the Council may also want to add one Council member to this board if it desires. Previously, the Mayor has boon the representative on the OAA Board, and there is still 32 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 a vacancy for the Community Education Advisory Board, which was previously filled by Councilmember Warren Smith. The Community Education position can be appointed from the Council or any other staff member the Council designates. Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Annually, one appointment is required for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. A current five-year term that is expiring has been filled by Mr. Ben Smith, who has agreed to continue in this capacity and has been approved by the HRA committee in general. The HRA appointments are made by the Mayor with formal ratification by the City Council. Plannlnq Commission. The Planning Commission is made up of five members serving one-year appointments. For the year 1991, all current members have indicated a willingness to accept reappointment for another year. Since these positions are appointed annually by the Council, the Council does have the latitude to open the positions up for applications if it desires. A number of years ago, Cindy Lemm was appointed to the Planning Commission who is a Monticello Township resident. At the time the appointment was made, the City was having difficulty in attracting applicants for the Planning Commission; but as some of you may recall , the City has had a number of interested applicants for past openings. Our City ordinances do not require that a member of the Planning Commission be a city resident; I am only pointing this out for your information if the Council would prefer to seek applicants from the city before considering residents from outside the city. h. Library Board. The Library Board by ordinance requires a Mayoral appointment with Council ratification. Currently, two members of the board have terms that expired December 31, 1990, one being Ed Solberg and the other Mary Jane Puncochar. Both of those individuals have indicated a willingness to serve and be reappointed by the Council. Rocvclinq Committee. Councilmember Dan Bionigen has served on the Recycling Committee; and if Mr. Slonigon does not object, it is recommended that he be reappointed to this committee. Council Agenda - 1/14/91 Economic Development Authority. The Economic Development Authority is composed of seven members appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. According to our ordinance that established the EDA, two members of the committee shall be members of the City Council. The terms of office of the two members of the City Council shall coincide with his/her remaining term of office as a member of the City Council. In the past, Warren Smith and Fran Fair were the representatives on the EDA; and as a result, two new Council members should be appointed to the EDA. Again, no recommendation is made on this appointment that Is necessary. The following appointments are not required to be made annually by statute, but each of them perform services on an as -needed basis for the City. In the past, the Council has made a practice of making these appointments along with the required appointments at the annual meeting. 1. City Attorney. Mr. Tom Hayes has resigned his position as City Attorney due to his election as Sherburne County Attorney. The City is currently in the process of soliciting applicants for this position, and we have received a number of qualified responses. It appears that we will have at least two individuals locally that are interested, and a number of firms/individuals from outside Monticello have also expressed interest. The deadline for submitting applications is January 22; and at that point, the staff will be reviewing the applicants and possibly scheduling an interview process with the City Council. At this point, no action is necessary by the Council until this process is completed. 2. Consultinq Planner. Dahlgren, Shardlow 6 Uban has been tho City's planning firm for a number of years; and while it is not necessary to make a formal appointment, such appointments can be made at such time to continue this arrangement on an as - needed basis. 3. City Auditor. This is also not required to be an annual appointment but can be done on an ae-needed basis or by specifications and through the bidding process. Historically, Cru ys Johnson 6 Associates has boon the City's auditor; and as a result, they 34 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 have become very familiar with the City's accounting practices, and I do not have any problem In reappointing them to this position. Consulting Enqineer. For the past several years, the Council has not made the annual appointment for Consulting Engineer within the context of this agenda item, but rather has analyzed and evaluated the contract services provided by OSM as a separate item. As the staff has done for the past few years, we will be meeting with representatives of OSM to discuss the proposed fee schedules for next year and our overall relationship with their firm. It is assumed that their engineering services will continue to be utilized on an as -needed basis; and, as I am sure the Council is aware, appointment of any additional engineering firms to work for the City can be made at any time the Council desires. The attached sheet as supporting data lists all of the members of the various commissions and the appropriate appointments, both required and discretionary, for this year's meeting. The underlined names are the ones needing appointment this year; and in those cases where a recommendation is not available, the space has been left blank. If recommendations are decided on by the Council for any of the vacant positions noted, a single motion is all that is needed, or each category can be considered separately. D. SUPPORTING DATA: List of appointments. 35 1991 ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS Official Depositories: Newspaper: Hous ing and Redevelopment Authority: (5 -year staggered terms) Planning Commission: Health Officer: ( 1 year) Acting Mayor: (1 year) Joint Commissions: Community Education: Fire Board OAA Library Board: (3 -year staggered) Attorney: ( Intorm Appointment) Planner: Auditor: Recycling Committee: Economic Development Authority: 3 - Wright County State Bank Security Financial Savings 6 Loan First National Bank of Monticello Chief Financial Officer - authorized to designate other depositories for investment purposes only. Monticello Times 1. Tom St. Hilaire 12/91 2. Ben Smith 12/95 3. Bud Schrupp 12/94 4. Al Larson 12/93 5. Everette Ellison 12/92 1. Richard Carlson 2. Jon Bogart 3. Cindy Lemm 4. Richard Martie 5. Dan McConnon Dr. Donald Maus Dan Bloniqen Shirley Anderson Rick Wolfsteller Ken Maus 1. Ed Solborq 12/93 2. Dr. Donald Maus 12/91 3. Mary Jane Punco char 12/93 4. Pat Schwarz 12/91 5. Rebecca Josins ki 12/92 Firm of Smith 6 Hayes Dahlqren, Shardlow 6 Uban Gruys, Johnson 6 Associates Dan Bloniqen 1. Brad Fylo, Councilmember 2. Clint Herbst, Counc ilmomber 3. Harvey Kendall 4. Al Larson 5. Barb Schwionto k 6. Bob Morford 7. Ron Hoglund 0 1991 ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS Official Depositories: Wright County State Bank Security Financial Savings & Loan First National Bank of Monticello Newspaper: Monticello Times Housing and Redevelopment Authority: 1. Tom St. Hilaire 12/91 (5 -year staggered terms) 2. Ben Smith 12/95 3. Bud Schrupp 12/94 4. Al Larson 12/93 5. Everette Ellison 12/92 Planning Commission: 1. Richard Carlson 2. Jon Bogart 3. Cindy Lemm 4. Richard Martie 5. Dan McConnon Health Officer: Dr. Donald Maus (I year) Acting Mayor: 0-4,cit4 (I year) Joint Commissions: Community Education: Fire Board Rick We fsteller gy, OAA Ken Maus Library Board: 1. Ed Solberq 12/93 (3 -year staggered) 2. Dr. Donald Maus 12/91 3. Mary Jane Puncochar 12/93 4. Pat Schwarz 12/91 5. Rebecca Jesinski 12/92 Attorney: -IkMa.cf- t4 4, Tr ? Planner: Dahlqron, Shardl-w & Ub.n Auditor: Gruys, Johnson & Associates Recycling Committoo: Dan Bloniqon Economic Development Authority: I. , , Councilmombor 2. Councilmombor 3. Harvey Kendall 4. Al Larson 5. Barb Schwiontok 6. Bob Moeford 7. Ron Hoglund 0 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 Consideration of aDZroving 1991 contract for police protection with Wriqht County Sheriff. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The City Council is asked to ratify renewing the law enforcement contract covering services for 1991 which will total $172,043.50 for 7,321 hours of coverage. The total hours again include the estimated 416 hours that will be used by the sheriff's department for providing additional patrolmen for Friday and Saturday evenings for continued enforcement of the cruising and loitering activities. It should be noted that if the Council feels these extra hours during Friday and Saturday evenings are no longer needed, the City could either cut back by 416 hours, saving approximately $9,776, or just have the sheriff's department redirect these hours to other time periods during the week. The 1991 contract rate has increased from $20.50 per hour c3f coverage to $23.50, or an approximate 14.6% increase. The County Board initiated a study on the contracting services provided by the shorif f's department and felt that an increase is warranted to keep in line with their cost when compared to other contracting arrangements through other counties. it appears at this point that the City of Monticello could still not provide its own police department for this cost. But we will have to continue to watch tho projected increases that may occur in the future; and if they continue in the 15% per year category, there will be a point where we will have to seriously look at our own police department. The contract agreement is basically the same as last year's except for an additional paragraph that has been added under #11D. This paragraph states that statutes and ordinances which prescribe enforcement by a different authority such as the state electrical code or the uniform building code are excluded from this agreement. In addition, the paragraph specifies that City ordinances that are exclusive to our municipality and enforcement of the municipal zoning code aro the responsibility of the City and not tho sheriff 's department. At first I had concorns over this paragraph, as It appeared the Intent may be to roduco the level of sorvice we were accustomed to. while the City has had to got the sheriff's department involvod in onforcomont of our public nuisance ordinances in the past, it doesn't appear that other zoning code violations should be expected to be handlod by tho sheriff's departmont. This was confirmed in my discussions with Sheriff Hozompa on the intent of this paragraph. Mr. Hozempa noted that the City of Monticello would not recoive a level of service less than what wo were accustomed to, and the intent was only to spocify that items such as 36 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 electrical code or building code violations are not the responsibility of the police department but should be handled by City staff through its own legal system. As far as enforcement of public nuisance ordinances, the sheriff's department will continue to handle these violations at our request. Based on my conversation with Sheriff Hozempa, I am comfortable that the contract language is similar to past agreements and recommend ratifying the contract for 1991. Paragraph 613 in the contract states that for the purpose of maintaining cooperation, local control, and general information on existing complaints and problems in said municipality, one member of the municipal Council, the Mayor, or other person or persons shall be appointed by the Council to act as police commissioners for the City. I point this paragraph out in that this language has been in our past contracts, and I believe there is interest in the City establishing a police commission during 1991. In conjunction with renewing our police contract, it may be an appropriate time to consider supporting the establishment of a police commission made up of one or more Council members along with citizens who could act as an advisory board to make recommendations on service levels and/or to receive complaints or resolve disputes concerning our police protection. If the Council is interested in this concept, I will check with other communities to see if separate bylaws are needed for the commission, and the Council may want to set specific duties and/or responsibilities they would like to see the commission accomplish. The actual appointment of members to the commission could take place at a later meeting once more information is available. B. ALTERNATIVE. ACTIONS 1. Ratify the contract certifying the number of hours of coverage at a maximum of 7,321 at a rate of $23.50 per hour. This is the same level of coverage we've had for the past two years. 2. Ratify the contract at the rate of $23.50 per hour but sot a different level of hours. While it appears that cruising and loitering are no longer the problem they were a few years ago, there may be justification for continuing the additional 416 hours of coverage to be used by the sheriff's department as needed. At this point, I believe the sheriff's department does distribute some of those hours to parts of the day that are not normally covered by our contract; but we would certainly have the right to cut back the hours if we dosirod. 37 C C Council Agenda — 1/14/91 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the contract be ratified for 1991 at the hourly rate of $23.50. While I believe we have to be concerned about future increases in the police contract, the City would still not be able to provide the level of service for the amount we pay on our own. If it appears that the additional manhours are not needed on Friday or Saturday nights, the sheriff's department does not have a problem with us redirecting those hours to other time periods. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of proposed contract with changes highlighted. 38 f)kEV100 Con17-Qgc-T% 64A�6[14ir�— StatutSuch services shall include the enforcement of Minnesota State s andLave and the municipal ordinances which are of the same type and nature of Minnesota State Statutes and Laws enforced by the Sheriff within the unincorporated territory of said County. 2. That it is agreed that the Sheriff shall have full cooperation and assistance from the municipality, its officers, agents and employees, so as to facilitate the performance of this agreement. 3. That the County anall furnish and supply all necessary labor, supervision, equipment, communication facilities for dispatching, cost of jail detention, and all supplies necessary to maintain the level of service to be rendered herein. 4. The municipality shall not be liable for the direct payment of any salaries, wages, or other compensation to any personnel performing services herein for said County. 5. The municipality shall not be liable for compensation or indemnity to any of the Sheriff's employees for injuries or sickness arising out of its employment, and the County hereby agrees to hold harmless the munic- ipality against any ouch claims. 6. The County. Sheriff, his officers. and employees shall not be deemed to asoume any liability for intentional or negligent acts of said municipality or any officer, agent, or employee thereof. 7. This agreement shall be effective from January 1. 1990 to December 31. 1990 8. The municipality hereby agrees to pay to the County the sum of $150,080.50 for low eniorcoment protection for SEE APPENDIX A hours per day/week OZ dally patrol service and 24 hours call and general services from said b-herill's Office during said term Of this agreement. 9. If the annual salaries of the Deputy Sheriffe are increased at any time during the term herein stated, this contract shall not be increased. /Io LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTRACT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 19 , by and between the County of Wright and the Wright County Sheriff, hereinafter referred to as "County", and the hereinafter referred to as the "Municipality"; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Municipality is desirous of entering into a contract with the County for the performance of the hereinafter described lav enforcement protection with the corporate limits of said Municipality through the County Sheriff; and WHEREAS, the County is agreeable to rendering such services and protection on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, such contracts are authorized and provided for by the provision of Minn. Stat. 1957, Sec. 471.59 and Laws 1959, Chap. 372, and Minn. Stat. Ann. 1961, Sec. 436.05: NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the terms of the aforesaid statutes, it is agreed as follows: 1. That the County by way of the Sheriff agrees to provide police protection within the corporate limits of the Municipality to the extent and in the manner as hereinafter set forth: a. Except as otherwise hereinafter specifically set forth, such services shall encompass only duties and functions of the typo coming within the jurisdiction of the Wright County Sheriff pursuant to Minnesota Laws and Statutes. b. Except as otherwise hereinafter provided for, the standard level of service provided shall be the same basic level of service which is provided for the unincorporated areas of the q County of Wright, State of Minnesota. C. The rendition of services, the standard of performance, the discipline of the officors and the other matters incident to the 0 performance of such services and control of personnel so employed shall remain in and under the control of the Sheriff. d Services purchased pursuant to this contract shall include he enforcement of Minnesota State Statutes, including but not limited to the Traffic Code and the Criminal Code, as well as all P� local ordinances enacted in conformance therewith. Statutes and a ordinances which prescribe enforcement by a different authority, i.e.: the State Electrical Code, the Uniform Building Code, �� etc., shall be excluded from this agreement. Ordinances pertaining exclusively to purely local city management matters, i.e.: sever and water collection, etc., shall be excluded from this agreement. The Municipality shall be responsible for enforcement of the Municipal Zoning Code, except that the Sheriff will enforce nuisance ordinances conforming to state lav, i.e.: junk cars, etc., and traffic ordinances, i.e.: parking and erratic driving. 2. That it is agreed that the Sheriff shall have full cooperation and assistance from the Municipality, its officers, agents and employees so as to facilitate the performance of this agreement. 3. That the County shall furnish and supply all necessary labor, supervision, equipment, communication facilities for dispatching, coat of jail detention and all supplies necessary to maintain the level of service to be rendered herein. a. The Municipality shall not be liable for the direct payment of any salaries, wages or other compensation to any personnel performing services herein for said County. 5. The Municipality shall not be liable for compensation or indemnity to any of the Sheriff's employees for injuries or sickness arising out of its employment, and the County hereby agrees to hold harmleaa the Municipality against any such claims. 6. The County, Sheriff, his officers and employees shall not be deemed to assume any liability for intentional or negligent acts of said Municipality or any officer, agent or employee thereof. 7. This agreement shall be effective from January 1, to December 31, /6 8. The Municipality hereby agrees to pay the County the sum of 5 per hour for lav enforcement protection for hours per week of daily patrol service and 24 hours call and general services from said Sheriff Ia office during said term of this agreement. 9. If the annual salaries of the Deputy Sheriffs are increased at any time during the term herein stated, this contract shall not be increased. 10. The Municipality shall have the option of renewing this agreement for an additional successive 12 -month period. To exercise this option, the Municipality shall notify the County Administrator not later than 60 days prior to the expiration date of this agreement. 11. The County shall provide for all costa and prosecution efforts with respect to violations charged by the Sheriff in the g performance of thio agreement. All fines arising from such prosecutions shall accrue to the County. Violations of municipal ordinances excluded from enforcement by this agreement shall be prosecuted by the Municipality at its expense. All fines arising from city prosecutions shall accrue to the 'Municipality unless otherwise provided by law. 12. Pursuant to lav, the County Auditor/Treasurer shall remit to the Municipality its share of all fines collocted. The Municipality shall return to the County within 30 days all fine money attributable to prosecutions initiated by the Sheriff in accord with paragraph 11 of this contract. The Municipality shall keep and retain any fine money submitted by the Auditor/Traaaurer attributable to prosecutions initiated by the Municipality. C13. For the purpose of maintaining cooperation, local control and general information on existing complaints and problems in said Municipality, one member of the municipal council, the mayor or other person or persons shall be appointed by said council to act as police commissioner(s) for said Muncipality and shall make periodic contacts with and attend meetings with the Sheriff or his office in relation to the contract herein. 14. The County shall save, hold harmless and defend the City from any and all claims arising from the acts or omissions, including intentional acts and negligence, committed by employees or agents of the County or Sheriff while in the performance of duties in futherance of this contract. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Municipality, by resolution duly adopted by its governing body, caused this agreement to be signed by its mayor and attested by its clerk: and the County of Wright, by the County Board of Commissioners, has caused this agreement to be signed by the Chairman and clerk of said board and by the Wright County Sheriff, effective on the day and year first above written. Dated: 1990 Mayor ATTEST: Clerk BOARD OF WRIGHT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Dated: , 1990 By: Chairperson ATTEST: Clerk, Board of County Commissioners Dated: , 1990 Wright County Sheriff Approved as to form and execution. William S. MacPhail Wright County Attorney 0)(4 L 1991 Hourly Rate - $23.50 APPENDIX A Annual Contract Fee - $172,043.50 Services provided by Wright County Sheriff: a) 16 hours per day, four days per week (3,328 total hours). b) 19 hours per day, three days per week, two of which shall be Friday and Saturday (2,964 total hours). c) 613 hours assigned at discretion of scheduling authority. d) Additional 8 hours per day, Friday and Saturday, not to exceed 416 total hours, assigned at discretion of scheduling authority. C 6) I. Council Agenda - 1/14/91 17. Ratification of salary adjustments for 1991. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At a special meeting in December, the Council established a salary adjustment pool of $26,000 to be used by the Administrator for establishing salaries for non-union employees. At the special meeting held December 17, the Council considered ratifying the proposed salaries recommended by the Administrator but also requested additional supporting data concerning justification for recommended increases. At that time, the City Council also allowed the Administrator to use an additional $500 for salary adjustments if he felt necessary. REVISED PROPOSED SALARY ADJUSTMENTS FOR 1991 Annual Approx. % 1991 Amount Increase Salary John Simola Public Works Director $2,650 6.5 $43,344 Jell O'Nelil Assistant Administrator $2,100 5.5 $41,321 011ie Koropchak Econ. Develop. Director $1.850 6.4 $30,557 Roger Mack Street/Park Supt. $1.725 5.4 $33,940 Gary Anderson Building Inspector $1.650 5.2 $33,555 Matt Thiesen Water/Sewer Supt. S1.600 5.4 $31,085 Joe Hartman Liquor Store Manager $1.580 5.2 $32,190 Karen Hanson Senior Citizen Director $1.150 5.3 $22,819 Tom Bose Utility Inspector $1,225 4.7 $27,225 Cathy Shuman Utility Billing Cooid. $1.275 5.9 $22,803 Wanda Kramer Utility Billing/Recept. $1.075 5.5 $20,523 Marlene Hellman Bookkeeper/Secretary $1.235 5.4 $24,219 Karen Doty Executive Secretary $1.250 5.5 $23,756 Diane Jacobson Deputy Registrar Clerk $1.250 5.4 $24,692 Pat Kovich Deputy Registrar Clerk $1,050 5.4 $20.498 Clndi Erickson Liquor Store Clerk $8860 5.2 $17,417 $23,525 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 18. Consideration of authorizing the purchase of a vehicle for the Buildinq Inspection Department. (R.W.} A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: For the past few years, Building Official, Gary Anderson, has requested the City budget for a vehicle to be used for building inspection purposes. During the preliminary budget review process, the Council has eliminated this item from the budget and continued with the $.25 per mile reimbursement. Again, in 1991, I did place $10,000 in the building inspection department budget. Since the funds will be available this year, the staff has been researching cost quotations for the purchase of a vehicle within the budget amount. Previous Councils have determined that it is not economically feasible for the City to provide a vehicle for the building inspection department, which was the reason for eliminating it from budget consideration. Based on $.25 per mile reimbursement, this will continue to be the case, in that it is cheaper for the City to reimburse $.25 per mile than it is to own a vehicle for the employees use. This can be somewhat mitigated if the vehicle was available for other employees to use during the work week; but having more than one individual use a vehicle is not always possible or feasible. The Building Official has indicated that his own vehicle is in need of replacement soon, and he does not feel it should be his requirement to provide a vehicle for building inspection purposes. It is Gary's opinion that at $.25 per mile reimbursement, it is not cost effective for him to supply a vehicle because of the number of short trips he makes. Using the $10,000 budget figure, Gary Anderson obtained five quotations for a used vehicle with varying mileage that ranged from $7,200 to $10,000. The reason used vehicles were quoted Is that a now, full-sized pickup would exceed the $10,000 budget amount. If the Council would consider a vehicle purchase, there does not seem to be a need for a full-sized pickup, and I believe a now, compact truck similar to a Ford Rangor or an S-10 Chevrolet can be purchased now for under $10,000. Typically, when the City does purchase vehicles for the public works department, we do not necessarily need air conditioning, power windows, steroo, radio, otc. John Simola, in discussions with Gould Brothers Chevrolet and also with the City purchasing under a state contract, indicated that a now subcompact pickup should be able to be purchased for approximately $10,000 or loss, including sales tax, otc. In the past, when the City 40 Council Agenda - 1/14/91 has needed a vehicle, it's been the Council consensus that purchasing a new vehicle may be more economical in the long run than choosing a used vehicle. Assuming a new vehicle that costs $10,000 that was driven 4,500 miles per year, I estimated the annual ownership cost at $2,050 per year. If the annual mileage was $6,000, the cost would Increase slightly to $2,150 per year. Both of these assumptions were based on a five-year life expectancy of the vehicle with a salvage value of $3,500 at the end of five years. While there is no way to know the exact cost of owning the vehicle, this should give the Council some comparison to the mileage we are currently reimbursing the Building Inspector. The Building Inspector for 1990 was reimbursed the equivalent of 4,500 miles, along with a car insurance allowance which totaled $1,350. If the Building Inspector was the only employee to use this vehicle, it is still cheaper to reimburse on a per mile basis. Assuming that a new vehicle was available at City Hall for other purposes besides just the Building Inspector, the cost of ownership gets a little closer to the cost of reimbursements. In 1990, all clerical staff and the Assistant Administrator were reimbursed approximately $1,500 for approximately 6,000 miles. If one was to assume that the vehicle would be available for 25% of the mileage currently used by other clerical employees, the City would save approximately $375 In mileage reimbursement with only an additional $100 cost added to the ownership factor. This would narrow the gap, but it would still cost approximately $500 per year more to have the City own the vehicle rather than pay through reimbursements. Another consideration the Council would have to establish Is would a vehicle used primarily by the Building Inspector remain at City Hall during non -work hours, or would the Building Inspector be allowed to take this vehicle home. Currently, only the Public Works Director has been authorized to take a City vehicle home, and that was for faster response to emergency calls, etc. If the vehicle is to remain at City Hall, the question becomes where do we store it, and is there a security problem. Whilo I believe there may be some merit in having a vehicle available for all City employees to use when necessary, even assuming 25% of the mileage incurred by staff members could be utilized through a City vehicle is just a guess In that it may not be available when needed, depending on the Building Inspector's schedule. While I do not have any cost figures for this typo of vehicle, an all-purpose vehicle at City Hall does not necessarily have to be a pickup, but maybe the City should be looking at a small van that would 41 j Council Agenda - 1/14/91 C meet all purposes. I believe the cost for this type of vehicle would be more than a small pickup but could serve more purposes. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Council could authorize staff to obtain firm quotes for the purchase of a new compact pickup or basic mini -van. Since the estimated cost is under $15,000, the City does not have to bid for the purchase and can use quotations. 2. Council could authorize the purchase of a used, full- sized pickup from the quotations received to date. 3. Council could determine to continue reimbursing mileage to the Building Inspector at the current S.25 per mile and not authorize purchase of a vehicle at this time. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: From a pure cost analysis, it will continue to be more economical for the City to reimburse employees on a mileage basis versus ownership of a vehicle. If the vehicle is used exclusively by the Building Inspector, I estimate that the City's additional cost would be about $700 per year. If the vehicle would be available for some use by other clerical employees, this cost difference is reduced to probably $500 per year. I believe the question the Council must decide is whether the Building Inspector's position Is required to provide his own vehicle at the reimbursement rate set by the Council and whether that is adequate compensation. If the decision is based on pure dollar cost, it still appears that the City will save money by requiring employees to use their own vehicles. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Five quotations on used pickups; Ownership cost summary. 42 NINETY-FOUR SERVICES, INC. IY Low.00D at • rORCF -Y / j , I�mra - tnio iO./mn .•r.. r.v. V .sr VpoOe Olen.00e D... Mss G•' N4 r' au.ec tNrca.n o>ots roe NYn us.n tN•.n .s.. _ _ --- rweNAicaY]ae QS�.�.L� noon orxw•saumano.� rauuroY can.a.tr.. Wa...� u.Y �MNlvr..Q raNArov[r•nr ......01... f lcglJr n IA1Mlt Yr1M1 � 61AL"WeOrO dwmAww �•• AR[\IeINlfpl Rt] _ _ _ S /fNrcnasrm RI w.tuArtla� yY.y;,MIM rrL vomtccmbrns MmKr[oYnuCt . 0601rYL rpµIRYYm1tm,m �.nv,:rsrv.'mncnauer,...�.r.pp..r. foto 00nwwn , .ay.sm;...� Hi.rw.•nrwwY•M•.p rrr •- � • �- .. ate- roto AYDUNT DUQ ON ORUMeRY /?moo sty I n.r•...p. rrcanucrnwY..p..wtmiuY tr.YYr.pe....ouu.rsr..�.•pn�N+ Yr..•v�+•• a ra�.rr..n,<awrsn-aw�rr snaWiYr w n r.wrY+.er r.aes.u• .r. s•As rew wtn..�o aYUY.rr•��Y�� M� �zrti rr...r rw cams[I.�. grry.•.rr CON.Yrct.YrYar s.rrY. BMPORTA1NTl THIS MAY BE A BINDING CONTRACT m.. w+.••..w• N W h~.•wt0. w r. r.rYr Y W AM VOU W LOSS ANY DBPWTB IF YW DO NOT ...war PENCIPI AACCORDINDromTERMS. ..nMl(r ru 1'JfM *rn NOI ...tY .M..rY.f.INrD -� M.e.+�. w.•.f �.w•fw..n Ymsmoklimmomm ButmNT ew Al9*M#ICNT Pisa Oval BYhpldd r.rrYlrra� rr nY••rrr�.Yr/.eY�y...YAdow.q rrrr Y[a�1.YYwM�.Yr rrlYOn.Y.wunrr.rrYlrpspnw. �n+l. - - --- -- --pww.W.w+.sr•a.rar w.. •YYI I...r...Y r.no w..w, �..•....«wwinw.�YF A p ��w~a,�4.6�iprrOYY _ _ - re.n.Ow YYYh YYr.g--Pm r„f1I��..N�.rY,rpMlfqr.Mpr...YiM�OM..h..V..'Y+�w...YrOYw.�•..O.Yf• �m�N...n�•..rp..rwr ..s..Dlr..u.r.p •MY.Yq - OD011[tee OACrN.L1'rrn1.. N•.+.W _ t A. M. Maus and Son A. J. Maus, Owner '•Service That Satisfies' Kimball, Minnecsta 55759 7.1. 79!.3710 67 c.. Cir I— O.Ip a p""th — sf"d" M — 1 Mhwr. C. V nh 0 P0.80%68 MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 55362 �„ tt��� ,� 4��+1✓ p6 Inj 6 i 2954056 METRO 421 6595 TOLL FREE 800 4504056 FORD • MERCURY December 12, 1990 City of Monticello Mont ices So, minoaeota 55162 Attn: Cary Anderson Thank you for the opportunity to serve your automotive need.. We highly value the business of our local patrons and businesses, in response to your call for bids on A nev or used F150 Pickup. We after the following options: 1) 1986 ford F150 4a2 300 6 cy1 Engine Aut .esti c Trm nsmisa ion Cloth Seat Amtib Steroo Sl Sding Rear Ufnd— Pibetgiess Tapper Mod Flaps Running Roard a Rm Nnu Power Stesrin q Povar snku Two Tona pnln t Platesgood until April 1991 55.J02 `f 11.a Fstr. Clean. above average truck Your Price: S %010 Plus any eppl las,le les and ifCenae fou. IL JOEL DIERS %3 Ouo>rAnOM GOULD BROS. CHEVROLET l� Ie+a ��i laron�e�e Mwv. 25 a 1.0e Mane lelz 5...11 ❑ ORDER ,0MTKM0, MD M CVA SSaa! 7r, C,t- 'k 01—A.(.l. De'. 1-1-911 Yodel iody Style Color Factory F.0.8. Lun Price ....................................................................... i s yU.R A O4141•A l i ss �hae1l ayF r--.. 4�7 in sI V-% 54fleai.t, W— 4 l '1.f301 M,%,o 1 A,aN+9 y?i,Ck tY r' -4r TOTAL Iaaa—Allwantr for Trade-in MaLr Madel &4" ver, NET CASH DELIVERED PRICIE OF VEHICLE (s�7 TDu fluetallan ozpm _ r,........ ..,.,. .. ,....... .. ,.. ..00.ems... 1...... •, r. • .,C.....,..... .. ...,. ,.. •..x _ _ .xw _ _-_ am e\..Vn 0 IL JOEL DIERS 0110TAVON GOULC BROS. CHEVROLET 1aen4b xwy, 75 a 694 E30IIOU aaou7tma. AUMN foTA 557162 U ait.. vn4 5s)tz Ph" 191A 2957911 moo IatA 47 Z Hone I81A 556EOOa Da.,„ "-)-1 1 An. GAAP fq-. Ai— ]Hada! 'rely Style Color ux ra.x r.. Factory F.O.B. IJrt Ria.............................................................. ..... { f sa..►a ga'A A 14 R1 cl,..r ei.t i y.... y.I 9LhsT i4 .i - FS+0. S-ky•, .rl. A. + w TOTAL Lwa—Alls.wwo Iv Tnda•■e Mali Me& {oiy NET CAM DELII'ERIC09RICE OF VEHICLE 'Au quatatlaa open r.,...... .. ...... ........ ... .. C ESTIMATED ANNUAL OWNERSHIP COST FOR A NEW $10,000 VEHICLE If 258 of the mileage reimbursed to other employees (1,500 miles annually) was added to the Building Inspoctor's vehicle, the City would save approximately $275. When added to the current reimbursement for Lhe Building Inspector of $1,350 = $1,625 versus $2,150 estimated cost of ownership. Annual Annual Mileage Mileage @ 4,500 @ 6,000 Fuel @ 18 mpg $ 325— $ 425 Oil & lubricants 125 125 Insurance 200 200 Misc. maintenance 100 100 Annual depreciation 1,300 1,300 (assuming 5 -yr life with salvage value of $3,500) TOTAL $2,050 $2,150 �A MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTS 1990 4 Building Inspector - 4,448 miles @ $•25 = $1,112 Car ins. allowance 240 TOTAL REIMBURSED $1,352% --- All Clerical Staff - 3,052 miles @ $.25 = $ 763 Asst. Administrator - 3,098 miles @ $.25 $ 775 If 258 of the mileage reimbursed to other employees (1,500 miles annually) was added to the Building Inspoctor's vehicle, the City would save approximately $275. When added to the current reimbursement for Lhe Building Inspector of $1,350 = $1,625 versus $2,150 estimated cost of ownership. I PRIMARY DEPT/ VEHICLE ANNUAL PURCHASE EMPLOYEE VEHICLE MILEAGE INS. AMT. PRICE (John Simola 1987 Ford Pickup 37,154 $184 $7,500 used Roger Mack 1988 Ford Pickup 22,700 $177 $9.960 used (Matt Theisen 1983 Chev. Ven 57,690 $184 $10,534 new Rich Cline 1989 Ford Pickup 14,928 $179 $10,532 new Tom Bose VVVVTP 1984 Dodge Pickup 46,560 $189 $10,053 new (Shared Vehicle 1983 Chev 1 Ton 61,840 $189 $7,200 used Shared Vehicle 1989 Ford 1 Ton 11,580 $207 $16,346 new ............................................................................... Gary Anderson 1979 Dodge Van' 151,658 $3601yr $900 used 'Gary Anderson's personally owned vehicle C J JOEL DIERS QUOTATION GOULD BROS. CHEVROLET Inrerstele Hwy. 25 6 1.94 ❑ ORDER MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 55262 \1 City of Monticello Monticello. MN 55362 Model CS10803 Body Style 7 1/3' Dox Color Factory F.O.B. List F rice.1991 Chevrolet s-10 4x2 Pickup ............... gAA6/15J, Tahoe Pkq Pko special discount VF6: Rear SteD Bumper TR9: Auxiliary Liqhtinq ZY4: Two-tone Deluxe Paint UM6: Am/Fm Stereo Cassette with Clock N40: Power Steering QSA: P205/75R-1r white letter .,It season tires Full Ciotti Bench Seat Full Carpet Fall Cloth lieadliner D44: Painted mirrors GQ1/GT4: 3./3 Standard Axle Ratio P06: Chrome Wheel Trim Rings ZJ7: Styled Steel Wheels M%0: Automatic with Overdrive L38: 2.51. Electronic Fuel Injection 4Cyl Rear Anti-lock Brakes 20 Gal. Fuel Tank Wheelbase 117.9" FPA RATINGS: city 21 moq highway 28 mpg Net Ilorsepower: tub Net Torque.: 1a5 Note: vehicle described was found on a dealer locate. Rebate of $1,000.00 was floured in discount.. Phone (912)295.2911 Metro (812) 427.2047 Home (612)559-6704 Dato 1-11-91 Att. Gary Anderson \1.. 110,320.OU 1,836.00 1,602.00 n/c n/c n/c n/c n/c n/c n/c n/c n/c n/c n/c n/c n/C tS/u.uu n/c std std TOTAL ........... ...... I I ...... . . ...........:11 , 424.00 1 [Asa—Allowance for Trade-in .................................................................................. I Mak- Model Bode Yee, NL -T CASH Il>1UM1tlG>scUO PHICE OF VF111CLE....�i!,���.1.!n�................ 19.690.00 quotation eapirer n 1. _ D. ►. ....1..4 .. 4.,• .r d•1...•r l... w.• ...•• (nJ,�. 1!<<'.'1 _ 1 /J x.w Muwn / oSj E_E•C: f -IN (,,-:IAL 'S •9.4E" 2'. 14 iq.O i$''',@;-^5 �ENLYII. .?C4 iN.�� 34171 1.'13•SQ nee7•Iec••.S pet ICEPoo ?C5;] 1.'/fI. ]'r. cap;.:••' 1/Niv 5"ATE 31,?C4 • OP NATUPAL 30965 12/13/90 aN DEPART OF NATURAL 30,-55'17!1±100 WAI TCEt LO F18E OEP9. 30086 1711./90 M•:Nf ICE -.'LO FIRE OEPA 30961 12/13/90 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO ?9859 .•111.90 1 1, 1 INFO 30AIS +71,11130 041P'S C•APDEN CEPIE4 3n•'S L7/�t/00 F41P'S nAP�Eu tFnTCP 30876-1,1111/0 FI(OPTTt CONTROLS. I 30077 13/U/OO FIRE it GMMANO 3oe1c1 +tn7/90 coDLER/c1.aR1A y0819 y,?/1T/9ti 400LEP/FJLO4IA nt1�;-1 '.,1v;g0 •joogl SIAM 111E CA, 5Use1 ••n.1y3 HELLM �N/Msell NE ?01'.' 7,.1•,;0 H('.L �At4/Marl ENE D1NjVFswM.n['.1.OVnn.51 ' .{, �r;C Tt'T rF.•1 C.a-]irtll' fL4Jr 317 CNECF: VOIOEO/PAID BY I' 02.4'OCR 30809 17/11190 ACLIC:FAFT. INC. 118 WATEFCRAFT/Sr1OV/ATV RE 58.00 3 i1c 7i ':/17/40 •:'iY''' pl/t�L f. Ar lra� PPOO t?5 fJPE 1!511'5 Ht.OE$ 7.704.00 135 F1RE"!Et;''S M301CARE'./H 10.72CR - 1.753.28 a ,,a•: .•0,] 01:15 1,�araP E9VIPMEd 15 FJPE PONE •:7+A P,iEi 4.40 3f111t . VJI;•J/S 1::JVL(rJ 4 1 COPY MrCMINE MTF,/LI6RA x3.00 a 1••. h47 PLF.4 P1'+TC .•,•73 .1TP•; v1• stay 790 MISC S9PPt TES/WAT(P 0 73).L7 sale!•, . FM1 IIJ•$TA'•: N/I.FPQ'F ?1A3 0t4 S.a At•v.k?L1I.1't5 65.00 293 OA.1 "M -%GE EOVIS? 09.50 30AIS +71,11130 041P'S C•APDEN CEPIE4 3n•'S L7/�t/00 F41P'S nAP�Eu tFnTCP 30876-1,1111/0 FI(OPTTt CONTROLS. I 30077 13/U/OO FIRE it GMMANO 3oe1c1 +tn7/90 coDLER/c1.aR1A y0819 y,?/1T/9ti 400LEP/FJLO4IA nt1�;-1 '.,1v;g0 •joogl SIAM 111E CA, 5Use1 ••n.1y3 HELLM �N/Msell NE ?01'.' 7,.1•,;0 H('.L �At4/Marl ENE D1NjVFswM.n['.1.OVnn.51 ' .{, �r;C Tt'T rF.•1 C.a-]irtll' fL4Jr 317 CNECF: VOIOEO/PAID BY I' 02.4'OCR 771 INv�STMEvrS 615.040:00 118 WATEFCRAFT/Sr1OV/ATV RE 58.00 • 118 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 513.00 t?5 fJPE 1!511'5 Ht.OE$ 7.704.00 135 F1RE"!Et;''S M301CARE'./H 10.72CR - 1.753.28 -CHECK 185 ADOPTIONS 105.00 15 FJPE PONE •:7+A P,iEi 4.40 392 MISC SHOP SUPPLIES 13.10 4 1 COPY MrCMINE MTF,/LI6RA x3.00 h47 PLF.4 P1'+TC .•,•73 790 MISC S9PPt TES/WAT(P 0 73).L7 295 C -AA SAtAVy/-EETTIuu$ A5.0C1 ?1A3 0t4 S.a At•v.k?L1I.1't5 65.00 293 OA.1 "M -%GE EOVIS? 09.50 95.50 AOMFCv. 55 MISC SUPPLIES/CIT'3 HAL 35.00 59 OE (!75.00 9 '0.00 [CHECK 50 MISC SUPPLIES/VATIR OE 17,.00 - • 644 SUBSCRIPT(011/PTRE 0107 10.00 .90106 Ptrv(:LIMd Ptftl 1'.0.04 294 OAA SALARY/IAEETIN99 • 85.00 794 OAA MILIAGE E7PI4SI 14.65 . 1 10.85 -CHM( 01 MisF 9101 5!:tYArt7(P 101.01] 00 MILE A61 EAP!Ntt/DATA P 11.00 , 00 MISC: Mit EAOt 11Ptrlst 11.50 55.50 -CHECK • gRt: „F'l e:urd7dt_ :.s g;TE-' • - , 17%+Av9p it5:-'.5':?G - .: 0l rperF'sem�nt='Jour,nal��LSf t, n u.T C! ':T oAT: VE PEECP1PTJt•H .AMOLIN 7 CLAIM 'im 30`:87 i1/17/90`HEr1•!S/•If RRY et LIBRARY, CLEANING SE RV 227.90.,;-. 3O9^•? 11/t7/9P 1•^!✓�o, ,w/r_n ab6 Ja.b•c:U.APV/—'r TTN.S 15.00 3GA96 +Ti 1,L/99, r.nc•}:OM'avIQL'•i VE '. . 97 MILEAGE EkPEIJSE 3088? tart 7190 RPASv?o/-aav .90109 TFgE REPLA eMENT 700.00.`, 1. T'u•. 669 ..T,: o: Fl-Qlp/5--!9c' s,. G 177.89 30?d7 1?. tJ h90 .90101 REC'/C011G DPIZE 30.00•..• -• ,1� . ?4'•f5. '?J•:r•;r L•a:e rPr;n1 :: ,.:e a1?�• Ace v6M3ERSHID Oqr S/.ia RV A 15.00 t. Tv •-x.'. ?90.7: ;G •.,,.. •; Ef, •.;t•. 109 OAA' $AL'ADV/MEET)tJGS 60.00 -. 3009' 17/17100 111 FURNACE REPAIR/CITY H 136.63 , )0S "/:"On .. •.:r:rEtL 91 OE Da 133 Cf TM! FIDE OEDT/M13; 380.Ot 0, 39907 +?/1)1911 .r.juJlrc L1.O 'IDE OEDA 135 M? -6E R5N IP$/G 1,E OED1 0' 30097 17/17190'-?`+TIrEL40 FIRE 0e DA 135 REIMe FIRE OE DT/DOSTAG 30.69 30997 1?/17/90 MONI ICELLO FTRE 0EDA 13S UPOATFO 60OKLETS/FIRED 6.00 `;•, .ti.;• 30397 17/17/SO MONT ICE LLO FIRE OEPA 135 MISC PRINTING/FIRE Of 195..16 •., '. • 765.16 ' •CHECr TOTI °Ol43 :1/'1190 11.0:1 rj:lOt; SALES. 111 167 EO9ID REee.1RS/Show 6 1 3t.OS 30693 1'7/17/00 MOO1J MOTOR SAM. IN 167 MISC SUPPLIES/TREE FUN 11.25' ' 67.30 •CHECr T j i 30096 1?l1?191) OvrMf PN STATE$•PO'lE 11.6 STREET 1.3GHT INSTAL 1.668.19 �"`•"' NT•:+!.SOrA 150 MS-3ERSHIo C1Vf!/OARV A 15.00 309-9 '?/I 100 O'NEILL/.rfFF 101 MILIAGI EXPENSE • e6.75 _ •'1 1ri;•;1r $.;••$ Ir,Er,TRI 160 BLO oroATO $Lta/CT iv H 789.+0' .,ir •J i 4C'+5 ELECTV. 160 -TSC OAT& DDOC INSTAL 132.4i ` ?3!':t ,-•' !•�'i.51: . •: S EL lCIII 160 'Door s0%v ICES/eaeu 1.736.76 •. 1.656.32 " 6CHECr IOTA 3485: :41 ISO oti0m. USIET.&eAf1 8 297 LEGAL SERVICES/OAA 1.950.21' ' • � :m,n� .:/np :+Sal -j )E AeTE ahS ^+i }ALAPV/-lE TiNd! 35.00 '' - +•+"t:n '' r n1) PLU%Wtv-►U7'CFtt-i D 791 MISt. SUPPLIES/PAPv OOP 06.06' 3pnn0 ,;,t 10 P0U-6EPY-0UVCtW S P 751 MISC SUPPLIES/WATER Of 93.30 c 99.56 -CHICK IOTA 12/11/99WAT- : : — MPA .-)% : - T F k . 2 C I t I 309D4 12/ 11: n0 1;. '-' a+ --Ok' IS ' i VF117 MIMI ?I Eit s C., . IN, I. CL ATM 301V ail OAA 200.00 25. 30 .(:HE4:v 218 METE RS, PARTS. ETI:/ 1.412. 2 2 217 MISC tYPENSE/ELECTIONS 34.03 275 IkAL'r { S.IIJC- -111STR 2.150.00 425 PARYSISTACET DEPT 204.73 TOTAL 692.331.57 J SPC FTI 1ANCIAL 'SYSTEM', '•, •)°, „ ' 12/2.1/90 13:n9s00` ,04 sDu roeme nt. Journal WARRANT 'DATE VENDOR' OE SC RI PT ION AMOUNT CLAIM;{ItP GENERAL CHECKING • 30934 17/19/90 TURNOUIST PAPER'COMP,,• 200, CORRECT COOING 99.25CR' 30931: t2/18/90 TURIJOUIST,• PAPER COMP 209 CORRECT CODING 99.26 - 0.00 -CHECK' TOT, ._30905, 1,2/,1.8/90 ZIEGLER. INC.., 4.25 CORRECT CODING 204.79 30905 11/18%90 ZIEGLER. INC. 625 CORRECT CODING 20,4 28CR 0.00 -CHECK' TOT. 30906 12/18/90 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO 185 REIMS FOR ANIMAL SUPP 88.15 30907 17/19/90, A,OEPSON/GARY 11 TRAVEL EXPENSE/CIVIL 0 15.91 30907 12/18/90 ANOERSON/GAOY 11 TRAVEL EIPENSE 67.00 62.61 *CHECK TOT. 30008 12/+0/90 E•ALOGH/JAMES A .00079 PAYPOLL DEDUCTIONS 769.55 30999 12/18/90 RE11n.ELE ENGINEERING. 379 REIMS/COSTS PER TI 95.000.00 30009 12/18/90 ROMELE ENGINEERING. 329 9LO PERMIT CHARGE h.189.37CR 30909 17/18/90 REMvEIE ENGINEERING. 329 WATER METER CHARGE 1.200.000R' " 30909 17/18/90 REMMiLE ENGINEERING. 329 SEVER A WATER HOOKU 1.500.000R 30909 12/19/90 REMMELE EUGINEERING. 329 SEWER 6 WATER MOOKUP 900.000R 30009 12/18/90 REMMELE ENGINEERING. 329 SEVER PERMITS 30.0008 57.160.03 -CHECK TOT. 30910 12/18/90 LEHMAN/SMERRSON 452 PURCHASE, 2 C.O'S 120.000.00 30911 1?/16/90 WRIGHT COUNTY STATE 222 FIREMENS MEDICARE W/M 10.77 30911 12/18/00 WRIGNT COUNTY STATE 222 FIREMENS MEDICARE W/M ' 10.12 " 21.6h -CHECK` TOT 30012 12/t8/90'MN'DEPART, OC' NATURAL 119, WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 035.00 30913 17/t6/90 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 110 WATERCRAFT TITLE A REO 60.00, 300,16 12/16/90 JACOBSON/DIANE 02 MILEAGE REIMB/TRAVEL E 72.33 30915' 12/16/90 U.S'. POSTMASTER 210 POSTAGE/RECYCLING LET 289.4h „ 3001612 /.2 +/00'4 AA STRIPING SERVICE 453 STRIPPING STREETS 2.906.70 ' 109117, 12/71790 ADOPT -A -PET 6 ANIMAL ADOPTIONS 3h 1.00 '300'fe +7/2,1/00 AEC ENOINEER9 a DISI 494 FLOAT INSP/WATER TA 1'.650.00 ' 30919 12'/?1/90 AP& COPY' REF-E5HMENT ,606 SUVOLIE4/CITY MALI 10.00 - `30970 12/21/00 AUDIO COMMUNICATIONS 17' RADIO REPAIRS/StREETS 1,73.50•- J BRC FINANCIALSYSTEM , 12/11/00 13:,5:00 WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 30921 12/?1/90 BERGSTROM'$ LAWN 8 G 30922 12/21/90 CENTRAL MCOOWAN. INC 30973 12/21/90 CENTVRV FENCE COMPAP; 30024 12/21/00 CONTINENTAL SIGN ! A 30925 12/21190 OAHLfiPSN SHAROLOV AM 30928 17/21/90 FEEORITE CONTROLS. I 30970 17/71/90 FEEORITE CONTROLS. I 30976 17/21/90 FEEORITE CONTROLS. I 30025 12/71/90 FEEOPTIE CONTROLS. I 30979 12/21/90 FEEORITE CON IROL S. I 30977 12/21/90 FIRST TRUST CENTER 30927 12/21/90 FIRST TRUST CENTER 30921 17/21/90 FLICKER'S T.V. 6 ADO 30929 12/21/90 MATCH -PETERSON SALES 30930 17/71/00 HOLIDAY CRIOIT OFFM 30931 12/21/90 MARTIE'S FARM SERVTC 30132 12/21/90 MCOOWALL COMPANY 30933 17/21/90 MID CENTRAL. Ir.C. 30934 12/21/90 MOSIL 30934 12/21/90 MOBIL 30934 17/71/90 M,)SIL 30934 12/21/00 MOBIL 30915 12/21/00 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO 30030 17/71/90 04ONTICELLO VACUUM CG 30037 17/21/00 ORR•SCHELEN-MAMION 30931 17/21/90 ORR•SCHELEN-MAVERON 30931 12/21/90 ORR-SCHF.LEN•MAYERON Oisbursement Journal' DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM I NV1. 441 EQUIP REPAIR PAPTS/STRE 0.45 30 SUPPLIES/STREET DEPT 15.95 407 FENCE FOR SHOP 8 DA 2.360.00 433 HANDICAPPED SIGNS 146.72 45 PROF SERVICES 38.00 56 PROF SERVICES/WATER DE 12.OD 56 CHEMICAL PR00/MATER O 122.50 58 MIS PROF SERVICES 171.00 50 9.51 56 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 3,40. 00 655.01 58 DESTRUCTION FEE/9ECURI 96.25 58 DESTRUCTION FEE/9ECURI 57.50 153.75 60 SMALL TOOLS/CITY HALL 74.95 94 GLOVES/WATER DEPT 11.40 05 OAS/FIRE DEPT 71.07 107 SUPPLIES/PARK DIRT 19.00 111 REPAIRI/CITY HALL FURN 98.01 113 HELMETS/FIFE DEPT 05.00 131 GAS/SEWER DEPT 103.04 131 OAS/WATER DEPT 103.63 191 OAS/FIRE DEPT 17.37 131 OAS/STREET DEPT 244.75 469.39 195 ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRA 813.25 141 REPAIR//u ORARV 12.58 187 PROF SER 0 ENGTNEERIN 738.97 107 ENO FEEO/SANOSER0 E 9.016.54 197 REPLACE CONTROL SYS 3.104.71 12.739.87 /CHECK T07AL *CHECK TOTAL *CHECK TOTAL 'CHECK TOTAL SRC .F:11+6,CIAI SYSTEM ` 0 0 12/21/90 13:45:00 - OtFbur'sement JoarnAY ^ WARRANT` DATE 'VENDOROESCRIP7I0M AMOUNT :Cl GENERAL CHECKING 30938 17/21/90 PACE PRODUCTS. INC 450 ICE PELLETS 235.98+ i 30939 12/21/90 PHILLIPS 68 COMPANY 167 GAS/STREET DEPT 17.75 30940 12/21/90 RELIABLE CORPORATION 179 OFFICE SUPPLIES/CITY M 15.71 30941 12/21/90 RHEAUME'S HOUSE OF L 451 PLASTIC DECALS/RECVCL 280.00 0 30942 17/21/90 SAFETY-KLEEN CORP. 164 MAINT OF EQUIP/STREET 130.45 30943 12/21/90 SCHILLEVAERT LANOSCA 302'STUMP,GRINDING 1.258.30 0 30944 12/21/90 SHUMAN/CATHY 191 TRAVEL EXPENSE 18.00 30045 12/21/00 TAYLOR LAND SURVEYOR 703 SURVEY GEES/CEMETERY 450.00 30940 12/21/90 TURNOUIST PAPER COMP ._206 PAPER _TOWELS/CITY HALL 37.85 30947 17/21/90 UNITED LABS 495 CLEANING $UP/SHOD • G 127.58 30948 120-1/90 WATER PRODUCTS COMPA 216 SUPPLIES/WATER DEPT 1?1.23 GENERAL CHECKING TOTAL 204.003.37 ry 1 . �J t BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM O1/03/91 15: 15:42 WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING' 29762 12/21/90 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO 29767 12/25/90 SYSrEMS SERVICE CC40 30014 12/26/90 AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 30074 12/26/90 AMERICAN'NA1l1_n Al SA 30147 1? /26/90 AUTO. ATEC 4ISTE`+S CO 301LI i2/26/90 SYSTEMS SERVICE COMP 30049 12/26/00 LATOUR CONSTRUCIICN 309$0 12 /20/90 WRIGHT COUNTY RECORD 30951 12/26/90 STATE OF MINNESOTA 30952 12 /26/90 TAYLER/TOM 30993 12/26/90 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 30054 12 /20/90 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 30093 12 /26/00 MCOUIRE/KELSIE 30950 12/20/90 COPPOW SANITATION 30956 12/15/90 CORRO'J 9ANITATI0N 30957 12/26/90 FIRST NAT BANK OF MO 30056 12/79/99 M?vT10ELLO PUBLIC LI 30058 12/25/00 MO-TICELLO PUBLIC LI 30959 12/20/90 MONTICRLO PUS LIC LI 30656 12/26/00 MONTTCELLO PUP, LIC LI 30956 17 /26/90 MONTICELLO PUS «IC LI 30940 12 /2$/90 MONTiCELLO PUS LIC LI 30056 12'/20/90 MONTICELLO PUS LIC LI 30959 12/31/90 AMC READY M27 30060 12/11/90 AMERI DATA 30001 17/11190 ANDERSON/GARY 30952 12/11/00 ANNANDALE CONTRACTIN Disbursement Journal OISCPIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM INV, ?TO CORRECT VENDOR a h.792.00CR. 202 COPRECT VENDOR A 4.792.00 0.00 -CHECK. IOTA 7 ADJUST COPING 15.662.50CR 7'AOJuS7 'COOINGr 15.692.50 0.00 $CHECK TOTAr 270 CORRECT" VENDOR 3 221.OSCR 202 CORRECT YE7IO0R 6 221.08 0.00 $CHECK IOTA - 685 FINAL PAVMT/CTY RD 2.380.00 254 FILING FEE/TAPPER PROJ 10.00 601 MISC EXPENSE/TAPPER RR 10.00 .90110 MISC EXPENSE/SNOW 0 ICE 6.74 110 WATERCRAFT REO 6 TITLE 37.00 110 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV 1.213.00 .90100 RECYCLXNGPRIZE 75.00 42 GARBAGE CONTPACT P 12.206.07 47 SALES TAI/GARSAGE CON 136.00 19.002.07 -CHECK TOTA 402 PURCHASE 3 C.019 125.000.00 404 MISC O0,E06TING SUP/LI SOS.07 464 POSTAGE/LISPAP,Y 20.00 466 CONFERENCE 6 SCHOOLS 53.37 666 VIDEO CAMERA 664.07 406 COOK$ Fn PAMPMLFTS 06.00 be4 14I1C REVENUE 1.001.47Ca 464 PETTV CASH/l TGRAPY 210.90CR 500.64 'CHECK TOTA1 0 USED BELT/SNOW 6 ICE 20.00 9 WOROPERPECT TRAINfNG 209.00 11 MILEAGE Eh PENBE 2h.hh 427 PROF SERVISANOBERG 02.103.09 'SRC _9 +_Alb:Iel SYSTEM. 0003_,91 WAPPA117 DATE: VEt:000 GENERAL- CHECKING 30903 1?/31/90 ANNANOALE VETER,INA21' )0964 12/31/90 BUCKEYE PEACTY COMPA 30901. 1?/31190 BUCKEYE REALTY ,COMPA 30995 12/31/90 CLINE/RICMARO 30988 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30988 17/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30966 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30906 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30988 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30906 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30066 12/31/00 COAST TO COAST 30966 17/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30966 12/31/00 COAST TO COAST - 30968 17/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30966 17/31/00, COAST TO COAST 30960 12/7,190 COAST TO 1:1)A4T 30988 12/31/90 CC -IST TO COAST 30966 12/31/90 COAST Try COAST 30068 12/31/00 COAST TO COAST 30960 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST 3096817/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30906 1?/11/91) COAST TO COAST 30065 12/91/90 COAST TO COAST 30960 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30908 12/31/90 COAST TO COAST 30967 12/31/00 COPY EOUIPMENT. INC. 30900 12/31/90 ENO FOUNDATION 30909' 12/31/00 ORIEFNOW SWEET METAL 30970 t7/3 V 90'HARRY'8 AUTO SUPPLY 30070 :?/,3,1/90 HARPY'S AUTO SUPPLY 30870 17/3+/90 NAPRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 30,070 17/9'1,100 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 30970 12/3!/90'1+ARRY'8 AUTO SUPPLY 3097,0 12/31/90 HARR'I'S AUTO SUPPLY, 30911 12/31/90 HOGLUND DUs COMOANV 3097.1'. ;:?/31/•9Q HnGL1AiD Gus :COMouiv 30011 12/31/00 WOa4vND DUs COMPANY t-DioourFomenT journal - AMOUNT CLAIM ;TNVI 982 VET FEES/ANIMAL CONTRO 48.00 459 REIMS/REFU3E COLLECTI 297.5,0 454 RE1M3/REFUSE COLLECTI 170.00 87 :so 458 MILEAGE- EYPENSE 98.25- 3S MISC SUPPLIES/WATER 75.11 35 MISC SUPPLIES/SEVER 8.27 35 CLOTHING SUPPLIES/SEWE 1.3.98 35 SMALL TOOLS/PARKS DEPT 5.00 35 SMALL TOOLS/SHOP 8 GAR 38.71 35 SLD'REPAIR SUP/PARKS 2.13 35 CLOTHING SUP/PARK DEPT 6.69 3% MISC SUPPLIES/SHOP 6 G 79.58 35 SHOP MATERTALS/WATER 108.94 35 MISC 911POl IES/CTTV HAIL 5.19 35 MISC REPAIRS/LTBDARY IS.85 3s SMALL TOOLS/STREETS 21.15 35 ?.1,0 REPAIR SUP/SHOP 19.45 39 BLD REPAID SUP/CITU Hal 5.39 35 BLD REPAIR SUP/ANIMAL 14.23 35 EQUIP REPAIR PARTS/STAT 4.78 35 MISC SUP/STREET LIGHTNG 5.99 35 CLEANING SVD/LT9PAPV 15.79 35 MISC SUDDIIES/PARKS 2.31 35 MISC SUPPLIES/FIPE OEP 10.49 15 MISC SUPPLIES/ANIMAL s1.1) 407.98 436 SMALL TOOLS/0 WORKS 730.13 483 SUBSCRIPTION 30.00 73 REPAIRS/WELL HOUSE 41 110.15 70 EOUIP REPAIR PARTS/SEW 10.84 78 LUORICANTS/STREETS 1.08 70 VEHICLE REP PARTS/STP 290.05 M EOU1P REP PARTS/STREET 53.03 16 REPAIRS/FIRE DEPT 10.35 70 MISC SUPPLIES/,WATER DEP 9.04 loo.19 62 EOUI0 REPAID PAOTS/ST 779.96 ,62 VEMTCLE,_REPAIR PARTS Ito' 76' 07 MISC 6U0PLLES/WATER 76.69 )73.02 -CHECK TOTA, *CHECK T'0"i -CHECK TOTAI -CHECIr TOTAI _411111> . . ERC, FINANCIAL -SYSTEM 1% .. 003/91 -14,17,9142' WARRANT OATS ven00R' -GENERAL CHECKING 30972 12/3.1/90 HOOLUND TRANSPOP,TATI 30913 17/31/90 HOLMES 8 GRAVEN' 30974 17/31/90 HVOPO SUPPLY COMPANY 30975 12/31/00 INOVSTPIAL OEYELOP C. 30974 17011^:O •J M AIL C,.NPAI11 30077 i2131/OI1-t MART STORE 30978'12/31/90 LUVACH/JOHN 30010 12/31/ 90 '. UV LCH/JOH1+ 30910 12/31/90 LUVACM/JOHN 30919 12/31/90 LUKACH/JDMN 30010 12/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 30979 12/31/90 mI0t+E4i GAS COMPANY 30079 12/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 30979 17/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 30979 12/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 30979 12/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPA7JV 30919 12/31/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 30979 12131/90 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 30900 17/31/90 MN DEPART OF NATURAL. 30080 12/31/90 MN DEPART OF NATURAL )0987 171)1140 mC+nrlt[CLOOFFICE PR 30001 17131/90 MC)NTICELLO OFFICE PR )0911 12/31/90 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR )0981 17/31/90 MONTICILLO OFFICE PR 30901 171)11 90 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 30911 OFFICE PO' 10997 121311 90 MONTICILLO PRINTING 30007 17/11/90 MONTICELLO PRINTING ?0902 17/11/90 A1/7NTICELL0 PRINTING 30912 17/31/ 00 MCr7TICELLO FRINTING 30993 17/11/90 NATIONAL GUSHING PAR 'Di7burs/n!nt Journal; OESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM IN' 84 TRANSPORTATION CONT:4.637.40 OB PROF :SERV/ECON DEMO 1,,50.00 407 10 GAL TANK/WATER DED 656.34 89 CITY'S CONTRIS TO : 5.650.00 99 GAS/STREET OEP1 2.630.50 400 Tv/SEWER COLL INSPECT 249.00 377 MILEAGE EXPENSE 11.63 377 MILEAGE ODENSE 11.63 327 MILEAGE EIPENSE 11.03 927 MILEAGE EXPOSE 11.64 46.53 115 UTILITIES 616.13 - 115 UTILITIES 226.30 115 UTILITIES 66.60 115 UTILITIES 506.60 175 UTILITIES S9. t0 115 UTILITIES 113.63 115 UTILITIES 37.20 115 UTILITIES 303.11 2.00e.e6 116 WATERCRAFT/TITLE 6 REG 00.00 116 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 706.00 632.00 135 OFFICE SUPPLIES/Cli'r 392.32 130 FILE CA8INET/R7C1;'1 0' 800.00 118 FILE CABINET/JEFR'1 0 300.00 130 OFFICE SUP/COUNCIL 10.11 1)6 OFFICE /UP/PUO WORKS 185.01 130 OFFICE 1UP/WATEP DEPT 71.00 1 .210.56 137 ENVELOPES/CITY MALL 2.252.50 197 MIOC PRINTING/REFUSE 361.55 111 SEWER 1 v.Tee eAROB 90.)0 t)7 OCWER 8 WAY CR CARO/ 90.3D 2.796.65 144 VEHICLE REPAIR PARTS/3 63.66 .CHECK TOT, -CHECK TOT, CHECK TOT, .CHECK TOT. -CHECK TOTr ORC•C,I t7 A11C IAL; S YSTE M.., - - ; F.- Oi'/03/Bt ,1h i4582, e01lDue!!sle nt - VOu rnet •4:AGRpIIT 04TE' :VE Ny+i4. - UESCPI'+.T I07J •A MOI:NT 'f.LAIMIW n GENE?AL CHECKING 30984 12%31/90 :oEL5014 Oil .'OMPA -JV 149 GAS/STREET 30095 i?/3+/90 NUTECM E NVIPC'NMENTAI. 157 CHE4ICALS/M9TP 1.199.50 30906 12'/3.1/90 O'NEILL'/JEFF 181 MILEAGE, EXPENSE - ?4.02 _ 30907 12/31/90 PALMER CHEMICAL 'e EO ASS SUPPLIES/ANIMAL CONTRO 08.70 30989 12/31/90 POLKA OCT RECVCLI-+G 110 RECYCLING CONTRACT 1.?10.57 30909 12/31/90 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE' 11S.PROF SER/P56I/SVNNV F 083.32 30990 1?/31/90 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC 227 MAINT OF VEHICLES/FIR 711.59 30091 12/31/00 PUP; AUTO PARTS -269 RAOTO/STREETS f ALLEYS 60.00 10992 12/31/90 SIMQNSON LUMefR COMP 193 BLD REPAIR SUP/SHOP 332.49 30002 12/31/90 SIMON501J LUMBER COMP -193 OLD REPAIR SUP/PARKS 5.00 30093 12/31/40 SMITH f NAVES 30993 12+31/90 SMITH 6 MAVIS 30993 12/31/90 SMITH f HAVES 30993 12/31/90 SMITH f HAVES 30083 12/31/00 S141TH f HAVES 30096 12/31/00 ST. CLOUD TIMES 30995 12/31/90 SYSTEMS SERVICE COMP 30096 12/3-1/90 TMEISEN/MATT 30097 12/31/90 TODD 6 CO.. INC./MIC 30007 12/31/00 TODD f CO.. THC./MIC 30998 1?/31/„90 UN,ITOG RENTAL SERVIC 30996 12/11/90 VN I TOO'RENTAL SERVIC 30990 12/31/00 UNITOG RENTAL,SERVEC 30998 12/31/90 UNITOO RENTAL SERVIC 30000 ??/31/00 VNITOG RENTAL SEpVIC 30900, 12/31/00 UNOCAL 11000'19/31/90 V05S 'ELECTRIC=SUPPLV GENERAL CHECKING 337.49 -CHECK TOT 104 PROF SERV/TRANSPGPTATI 24.00 104 PRO;'SEOV/SANC'OERG EAS 90.00 104 PROF"SERV/MISC 580.14 194 PROF SERV/OLD INSP 0.00 t06 PROF SEDWECON DEVELOP72.25 700.40 -CMECX TOT -340 AD FOR'CITY ATTORNE'J 77.12 202 PROF SERV/ -.'YTP 807.25 (/ 641 MILEAGE EX0eN9e 0e.25 ( J 393 EOUIP REPAIR PARTS 207.27 303 MISC SUPPLIE MEVER 442.17 710.04 -CHICK TOT- 211 U1JIf ORM RENTAL 32.00 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 102.07 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 10.83 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 10.08 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 30.00 248.37 • -[NECK TOT' 21V GAS/FIRe DEPT' 10.76 409 LIGNT'OULOS/SEN CIT CE`2h.01 TOTAL ` 295.101.13 'A c 31001 12%3 t/Bd M1i DEPART OF NATURAL 31002 12/31790 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 31003 12/91/90 ADAM'S PEST CON7a0L 31000 1T/?1l90 ANOEc,j0,l/OAP1 31005 17/31/90 AU01OCC15.711CA T IONS 31000 12/ 31/90 BOSE/TOM 31007 12/31/00 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHOU 31007 1?/31/90 BPIOrEWATEP. TELEPHON 31001 12/31/90 BPIOGEWATEP TELE PHON 31007 12/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON 31007 12/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON 31007 12/31/90 0RIDGEWATER TELE PHON 31067 12/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON 31007 17/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON 31007 12/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON 31007 17/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON 31007 12/ 31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON 31007 12/31/90 BRIDGEWATER TELE PHON 31007 12/31/90 OR IDGEWA TER TELE PHON 31007 12/31/90 BP IOGEWATER TELE PHON l,t6 WATEPCPAFT/TITLE/AIV R 66.00 11.6 WATEPCRAFT TITLE. & RE 766.00 3 PEST CONTROL/LIBRARV 44.00 11 INS1ipm:E =ICA REINS 26.30 17 RAIDO REPAIRS/CITY HAL 46.50 330 INSURANCE alta REIMS 7.70 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 642.49 24 TELEPHONE CHAPGES L6.95 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 71.21 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 15.94 ' 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 56.60 2& TELEPHONE CHAPGES 101.34 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 20.00 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 13.50 24 TELEPHONE• CHARGES 294.41 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES •20.00 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 37.11 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 44.97 24 TELEPHONE CHARGES 11.00 24 TELEPHONE CHAPGES 10.74 1.362.31 *CHECK TOT, BRCFI1:AnCIAI SYSTEM 01/09/91; 06:32,o8 � 010bVr0lmOnl JOufnAI WARRANT 'OATS 'VEN040 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM I GENERAL CHECKING�"�J ;J. 31008 12/31/90 BUSINESS R_ECOROS COR 27 VEHICLE RER/STREETS 127.27, 31009 12/31/90 CENTURY LABS 276 SNOW PLOY MI'r 651.53 31009 17/31/90 CENTURY 'CABS, 276 SUPPLIES%CARV.. DEPT 08.00 537..53, -CHECK ,TOS'. ' 31010 12/3,1/90 CLINE/RICMARO 438 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 31.51 31011 17/31/90 CQMMUNICATION AUOITO 36 PAGER REPAIPS/FIRE DEP 53.09 31012 12/31/90 COMPANION PETS 30 AOUARIUM MTC/LIBRARY 76,91 31013 12/31/90 OOTY/cAREN h0 INSURANCE 91CA REIMS 29.29 3101h 12/31/90 OUEPR'S WATER CAPE S h9 WATER CAPE/PENT%L MOUS 14.74 - 31015 12/?1/94 n%"A SYSTEMS SO MISC OPERATING SUO/ST 366.80 31016 12/31/90 GAPTUSK I/AL 400 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 31.50 31017 12/?1/94 GENERAL FIRE EOVIPME 443 FIRE COATS/FIRE OEP 3,705.00 31016 12/31/90 HANSON/KAREN 470 INSURANCE FICA REIM$ 6,11 31019 12/31/90 HELL MAN /MARLENF 00 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 29.32 31020 12/31/00 JACOBSON/DIANE 02 INSURANCE FICA REIMB 29.32 ' 31071 12/31/90 KOROPCMAK/OLIVE' 07 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 6.19 31022; 12/31/,90 KOVICH%RATRICA', _ 207.-INSURANCE: FICA_REIMB, 20.30= } 31023 12/31/90 -RAEMER/VANOA 356 I115LIRAf10E FICA REIMB 14.,55' ' 3102h 12/31/00 MACK/ROGER 471' INSURANCE FICA REIMS 20.30' I,f075'. 0!31/90 MANPOWER: ,INC, _ - 440 TEMP,SER410E9/CITY 'MA' 006.24 31070 12/31/00 MAUS FMOS 100 MISC SUPPLIES/LIBRARY 26.19 31070 1.2/31/90 MAUS FOSOS100 CL;AN 1i+0 SUP/ANIMAL CD 51.69 31028 1]131/00 MAUS FOODS 108 MISC SUPPL[E9/REFUSE 34.25 I1rj15 17/31/90 "US FOODS` 108 MISC Sup/R WORKS 17.92 c 31025 12/31690 m4US FOODIS 109 MISC SUR/CITY HALL 26.65 _ 153.70 •CHICK,TOT' ' 11027 12/31/90 MAUS lit ENNE Ty 100 TRAVEL E'IPENSE _ _ 10.50 ' 31026 17/11/90 MINNESOTA' STATE TREA' 207 OUILOINO PERMIT SURCM 642.05 11 CF INANCLAL SYSTEM 01/09/91 08:52128 KAP.PWIT DATE L'ET:O.?R GENERAL CHECKING 31029 17/3 1/90 MONTICELLO TIMES ?1029 12/31/00 M.CNTICELLO TIMES 31029 17/31/90 II�:L L•? TIMES 31029 +2/31/00 MCIITICELLO TIMES 31029 12/31/90 MOVT ICELLO TIMES 31029 12/31/00 MONT ICILLO TIMES 31029 12/31/90 MONT ICELLO TIMES 31030 12/31/90 MOORESITOM 31031 12/31/00 NORTHERN STATES POWE 31031 12/31/90 NORTMf PN STATES POWE 31031 12/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE 31031 17/31/90 NORTMERN STATES POWE 31031 12/31/00 NORTHERN STATES POWE 31031 12/31/90 NORTHERN STATES DOME 31031 12/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE 3103117/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE 31031 12/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE 3103112/31/90 NORTMERU STATES POWE 31031 12/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE 31031 17/31/90 NORTHERN STATES POWE 31037 17/31/90 O'HE ILL/JIF V 10 33 1 7/ 31/90 OLSCN 1 SOtA S ILECTRI 31033 12/31/90 OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI )t0 31 1 7/31/90 OLSON 1 SONS ELECTRI 31033 +^/31/90 OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI 31 ICI 31 1 2/31/90 OL "N 1 SONS ELECTRI 31031 17/?1/90 ^L SON 6 SONS ELECTPI 110 31 1 7/31/90 OLSCN F SON S ELECTRI 31033 17/31/90 OLSON 4 SONS ELECTRI 11031 12/31/90 OLSON A SON S ELICTRI 31033 17/31/90 OLSON 6 SONS ELECTRI 3 10 31 1 7/31/90 PLVM9IRV_PIE RCCI L' S P 310 35 1 2/ 31/00 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC 31038 17/31/90 SCHIIMACHfR/TOM 31031 17/31/00 SNUMAN/CATHY 31031 17/31190 SIMOLA/JON" E. C OLFDursement JoVrn4l, OESCRIDTIOr/ AMOUNT CLAIM I 140 BLD PERMIT INFORMATION 82.00 140 SNOWDLO'+ING INFORMATI 103.75 140 LEGAL PUO/CITU ATT AD 805.07 SAO 6VS TAANSPOPTATION IN 130.90 140 AO FOR PAP.✓. ATTENOANT 65.20 140 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES 70.55 140 PUB MEARINO/ECON OEVEL 43.25 1.380.07 303 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 31.50 140 UTILITIES 3.260.4& 146 UTILITIES 174.34 148 UTILITIES 4.g 19.91 140 UTILITIES 100.42 140 UTILITIES 470.97 148 UTILITIES 16.43 140 UTILITIES 181.93 166 UTILITIES 17.99 146 UTILITIES 352.3h 149 UTILITIES 71-7.75 the UTILITIES 4S4.06 IAO UTILITIES 637.01 10.798.60 101 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 79.30 100 fOUIV REPAIR PARTS/ST 207.30 100 OPERATING SUP/WATER 6.32 160 EOUIP RE*1AID PARTS/y4T 40.00 100 SUPPLIIS/STREET 6IGMTN 37.99 160 tOUTO REPAID PAPTS/5w 211.10 100 BLD REPAID SUP/L 79PAtY 7.09 180 REPAIRS 0 MIC/LI6RARY $4.10 160 EOUIP REPAIPS/WATER 314.05 160 EOUIP REPAIRS/SEWER C 139:00 160 VEHICLE REPAIRS/FIRE 0 34.00 1.060.6) 751 VAN PACKS/WATtR DEPT 113.00 227 MAINT OF EOU1P/F IAA D8 64.00 .90117 INSURANCE FICA REINS 37.70 101 INSURANCE PICA REIMS 70.30 300 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 29.1+ -CHECK T( -CHECK T( -CHECK Tl —„�,- --- cv — o BRC, F 1114h,:'14 'S95TEM 01/09/91 09:52:29 01 aDuraSmant. Journal; i HARAAAfll 'PATE YENU`OP OESCPIPTION AMOUNT ',CL'AIM 11. GENERAL CHECKING. 31039 12/31/90 SIMONSON LUM13ER COMP 193 REPAIRS/PARKS 236.29 ., 31040 12/31/90 STAR TRI9UNE 197 AD FOR CITY ATTORNEY 127.50 3106,1 12/31/90 STRANO/TONY .90111 INSURANCE FICA REIMa 18.90, 31042 12/31/90 THEISEN/MATT 457 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 29.31 31043 +2/31/,90 T1PPE.//KETTM 608 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 31.81 31066 12/31/90 VIKING PIPE SERVICES 216 CONST COSTS/SANOBERG 510.00 0 0 31046 12/31/90 VIKING PIPE SERVICES 21A TELEVISE SANITARY S 2.507.50 3.017.50 -CHECK TOT 31045 12/31/90 WIMSTELLEP/RICHARO 211 INSURANCE FICA REIMS 29.31 31048 12/31/90 YONAK LANOFILL. INC. 223 ADO'L LAND ,FILL CMA 9.072..30 310Ar, 1?/31/90 YONAK LANDFILL. INC. 223 LAND FILL CHG/STREETS 51.00 9.123.30 -CHECK TOT GENERAL CHECFP+9 TOTAL 30.392.90 V BPCFINANCIAL SYSTEM I Ot/1-1)D% OBt t9:DO 045Aur#tment .1durnal ! uAaRAat {ATE L£NOGt' UESCP.TPTIOtt 001jCtT CLAIM I,, ' [ GEN£PAL C'HECW IIJG 29017 17731/90 OI SON 0 5065 ELECr01 140 CORRECT COO INO a .909.67CP 29817 t2/31/90 OLSON P SONS ELECTRI 140 CORPECT CODING 2 .909.62 0.00 -CHECK TO f 30700 ,17/31/90, PROFESSIONAL SERVICE tis CORRECT COOING 1 .200.00CR 30700 17/31/90 PCOFESSIONAt SERVICE ITS CORRECT CODING 1 .700.00 0.00 -CHECK TO 31000 12/31/90 HOGL VNO AUS COMPAN7 42 CORRECT VENDOR 177.21 31000 17/31/00 BUSINESS RECORDS COR 71 CORRECT VENDOR 127.2 VCR 0.00 'CHECK TO 31067 17/31/90 SMITH/LUCILLE .00113 REISSUE PAYROLL CHECK 40.00 31047 17/11/90 SMITH/LUCILLE .90113 REISSUE PAYROLL CHECW 0. 70CR 47.30 tCHECY TC 3104B 17/31/90 WATER PR7QUCTS COMPA 718 WATER METER/WATER DEP 117.6D 31049 17/31/90 GOPHER STATE ONE CAL 49 PROF SERVICES/WATER DE 21.25 31090 1701/90 COPV OUPLCATINO PP00 61 COPY MACMINE MICIt ILel VA 65,00 31051 17/11/90 WRIGHT COUNTY RECORD IS4 SIMPLE SUBDIVISION FLRE 10.00 GE++EAAL CHECV INO TOTAL 400.95 C, c Ev�c -.vs,:sm oij:nurs-?*,jnt jovrn,%I 12/11,/90 15:?, 7 :'�7 "-:;'JC-T I r�:f T A I! c L A I Nn 1566? 1 lNE SS F 000073 mISC OPeP4,TjfjG SliPPLIS el,.PS I 'It 6c ri 160077 MIS..' OPF-ATIJI:G `j:; -.j 105.73 11".93 t566R 1? fj Pklz":rlA PLQMP;C-y 600092 mjS�.' OPiRATINC, SUDOL19 66.63 i 5t•6j- 1'/17190 r9iLIT1 Wlrje. a SOIkl SOOOLO 1.14)IjOP PlJc-(:HASS 1.3350.01 15670 , — iI,SCTPIC/ 300063 nc '14.0? 15471 1:,/ i7l?rj 1! S WEST COInMUMICATI 900093 AOVEPTISIMG 27.61 1.10VOO I:L'.'JD TOTA1. 4.690.58 _J BRC FINANCl/LLSVSTEM 01/09/91 OE :Sb: t7 O110urswent Journal WAPOAHT 0A"< VEC00p OESrpiPTTr.;1 AMOUNT C"TM LIOUOp 15432 17/3 1 /90 A L M PRQjUr,TS -900083 CHECV.. VOIDED 80.00CR 15437 12/31 /90 COnMISSIONEP OF RE'/E 800006 COPPECT COOING 8.484.53 15437 12/3 1/477 COMMISSIONER OF Rt vE 800005 CORRECT COOTNG 3.484.53CR 0.00 *CHECK 1 15472 12/31/90 JOHNSON EROS WHOLESA 800022 WINE PURCHASE 1.848.48 15472 12/3 1 /90 JOHNSON BROS WHOLE SA 800072 LIQUOR PUPCHASE 163.38 1.811.88 -CHECK T 15413 12/31/90 EAGLE WINE COMPANV 800017 WINE PURCHASE 244.13 15474 12/3 1/90 GRIGGS. COOPER S COM 800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2.578.05 15475 12/3 1/90 .HILLIPS !•. SONS CO/E 800037 LIQUOR PUPCHASE 732.94 15415 12/3 1/90 PHILLIPS 8 SONS CO/E 800037 WINE PURCHASE 1.134.82 1.387.70 -CHECK. 1 15478 12/3 1/00 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 MISC PUPCH ASES 76.98 15470 12/3 1/90 JOHNSON EPOS WHOLE$A 80002? LIOUOP PIiPCHA•SE 4.793.50 15418 12/3 1/00 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 Wt'JE PUPCHASE 1.093.87 6,.754.30 •cHECI! 1 15477 12/3 1/90 JOHNSON BROS WHOLE$A 800022 WINE PURCHASE 3.022.94 15470 1?/3 1/90 OVAL ITV WINE 6 SPIRI 800040 LTOUOP P3/P.CHASE' 453.44 15418 12/3 1190 OVAL ITV WINE 1 SPIRI 800040 WINE PURCHASE 017.89 15470 1?/3 1/90 CUAL LTV WINE & SPIRI 800040 MISC M1% PUPCHASES 50.10 1.131.23 •CHECK 15470 12/3 1/90 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 600012 WINE. PURCHASE 414.69 15480 12/3 1/00 GRIGGS. COOPER 6 COM 000018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 3.707.15 15441 12/3 1/00 JOHNSON EROS WHOLESA 800072 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2.413.89 15481 12/3 1/90 JOHNSON OROS WHOLESA 000022 WINE PURCHASE 807.00 3.220.89 *CHECK ' 15482 12%3 1/00 BERNICK'S PEPSI COLA 800001 POP PURCHASE 181.20 15483 12/3'1/00 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHOG 800002 TELEPHONE CHARGES 00.12 15404 12/3 1/00 CARLSON REFRIGERATIO 000004 MAINT OF EQUIPMENT 20.17 15485 17/3 1/90 COMMISSIONER OF REVE 000000 SALES TAY DUE DEC 12.937.14 15416 17/3 1/00 DAHLMEIMER OISTRTElUT 000000 MIN PURCHASE 106.70 15400 11/3 1/90 OAHLHITMER OISTRIGUT 000009 BEER PURCHASE 10.237.10 10.345.00 •CHECK _J y - BRC FINArICIAL, SySJEN 01/09/91 08:54:;17; 6isDursement Journal WARRANT DATE VENDOR 'DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLAIM LIQUOR FUND 15487 12/31'/90 DAY DISTRIBUTING COM 800010 MISC PURCHASES 253.95 15498 1?/31/90 DICK BEVERAGE COMPAN 800011 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIE 35:SO 15483 1?/3,1/90 OIrv. BEVERAGE COMPAN 800011 BEER PUP.CHaSE 1.204.30 1.239.80 #CHECK 15489 12/31/90 ftICVSON/CINOIE 800096 FICA INS. REIMS 29.30 15490 1?/31/110 PLAHEPTY-S HAPPY TYM 800091 MIR PUPCKASE 9?.60 15491 12/31/90 GPOSSLEM SEVFPAGE I 800019 BEEP PUPCHASE 12.696.00 15491 12/3/290 GPOSSLETN BEVERAGE I 900019 MISC PUPCHASES 61,40 15491 12/31/90 GrOSSLEIN BEVERAGE 1 300019 MISC OPEPATING SUPPLIE 65.55 t?.780.05 'CHECK 15492 12/31/90 HARTMAN/.l Oe 800097 FICA INS. REIMS 29.3+ 15403 12/31/90 JUDE CANOV R TOBACCO 900021 CIG. CIGAR. ETC 120.06 15693 1?/31/90 JUDE CANDY 6 TOBACCO 800021 BAGS 339.113 15493 12/31/90 JUDE CANDY 3 TOBACCO 800021 MISC OPERATING SUPPLIE 11.30 479.52 'CHECK 15494 12/31/90 KOLLES SANITATION 800023 GARBAGE CONTRACT 201.60 15695 12/31/90 KRMC RADIO STATION 800024 ADVERTISING 166.00 15488 12/31/90 LIEFERT TRUCKING 800025 FREIGHT CHARGES 518.28 15497 12/31/90 MAUS FOODS 800027 MISC OPERATING SUPPLI85 5.74 15498 12/31_/110 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 900028 UTILITIES 210.06 15699 12/31/90 M4NTICECLO OFFICE OR 900031 OFFICESUPPLIES 59.10 15500 12/91,(90 MONTICELLO'SHOPPING 800095 ADVERTISING 255.50 15501 12/31/90 MONTICELLO TIMES 900092 ADVERTISING 1E6.03 15602 1?731,/410 400T,NEON STATES POVE 900035 UTILIT'(ES 9Sl.07 15503 12/71/90 RON-S ICE COMPANY 400041 ICE PURCHASE 106.06 15504 12/31/90 SEVEN-UP 80TYLINO CO 600043 POP PURCHASE 110.10 19905 12/31/90 ST. CLO-JO RESTAUPANT 800065 CLEANING SUPPLIES 9.99 15505 1?/31/90 Sr. CLOUD RESTAURANT •00045 MISC PURCHASES 210.64 217.43 'CHEC6. PRC FIr/Ar1CIAl SV -STEM ) 01/09/0.1 08154:;17 0170urseinent journeti BAGP.40 GATE VEt100P OE SCRIPTIOr1, AMOUNT LIIOUOR FUND 15568 12/3'r/90 THORPE 01,57PI8UT1I1, 800048 BEER PURCHASE 13.884.25 15507 12/;1/90 Talr/ CITIES FLAG .SOU 800069 REPAIRS 133.86 II 15508 `12/31/90 MING COCA -'COLA BOT 800051 POP PURCHASE 4.17.10 15509 1?/31/00 VOSS ELECTRIC SuoPLV 800070 LIGHT BULBS 70.91 I LIOVOR'FUr:O TOTAL 87.964.89 WE COUNCIL UPDATE January 10, 1991 Council Update on Sewer and Water Rates. (J.S.) As discussed briefly at the special meeting on the budget, the City is expecting its major industrial user, Sunny Fresh Foods, to cut back significantly on sewer and water use in 1991 due to the transfer of their hard boiled egg cooking operation to Iowa. Their sewer and water usage is expected to be cut by 20% to 30%. In the sewer fund, this is a drop of about $25,000 per year. In the water fund, the effect is much less, being in the neighborhood of $2,200 to $2,500 per year. This is due to the extremely cheap water rate of $.20 per 100 cu ft at the top end of the sliding scale, at which the majority of the water usage by Sunny Fresh is billed. it appears that for 1990, however, the revenue from Sunny Fresh will exceed expectations by about $14,000. This will help smooth out the drop in revenue for next year in the sewer fund. Based upon projections of final costs for 1990, we expect a surplus in the operation and maintenance sewer fund of about $20,000. For 1991, costs of operating the wastewater treatment plant will increase slightly due to a CPI adjustment in our contract with PSG, increases In electric and natural gas rates, and the inclusion of the change of scope of services for testing by a certified laboratory. This, coupled with a shortfall in revenue expected from Sunny Fresh, indicates a shortfall of approximately $17,500 in the operation and maintenance sewer fund budget for 1991. There is $4,000 in the 1991 sewer collection fund budget for a chemical feed building for odor control chemicals to be built near the Sunny Fresh Foods site. If Sunny Fresh cuts back significantly as planned, this building may not be needed and would give us a $4,000 cushion for 1991. There are several things that could stabilize or increase rates in the future. The first, of course, is any further cutbacks or Increases by Sunny Fresh Foods. Since they are a significant portion of our use of the sower and water system, they have a great effect. The City has yet to see the effect on residential sewer use because of the water pressure increase. At the end of the first quarter of 1991, we will have some indication. Another item to consider is increased use by adding additional users. Residential sewer use would be the most beneficial to add to our system in that it is stable and does not have the negative effects on our system such as heavy industrial or commercial. It appears that there may be a remote possibility of adding the 200 to 300 mobilo homes in Kjollborgs Park to our sower system at some time in the future. The increased use in revenue from Kjellborgs could Council Update January 10, 1991 Page 2 have a stabilizing effect on sewer rates and make up for lost revenue from Sunny Fresh cutbacks. Unfortunately, it does not appear likely that Kjellberg will be hooking up in the immediate future. In summary, there does not appear to be the need to change sewer and water rates for 1991. However, if Sunny Fresh cuts back further and the City does not see additional use of our sewer system, a sewer rate increase may be likely in 1992. C' I CITY Or MONTICELLA) Monthly Building Ue NetLment Report Month of DECEMBER 19�Q PEBDITS MID USES PERMITS ISSUED L°e1 Thle - Oeme Month Leet Y- 'Thio Yeer Month November Xontll Do -bol Ili- Year To Date To De Le RESIDENTIAL Number 9 3 1 101 13`_ Veluetlon $ 121,800.00 5 16,900.00 5 5,000.00 9 2,923,400.00 S 2,722, 900.01 Pena 1,139.103 105.60 50.00 11,757.96 10,534.4( 5 ... he".. 59.90 6.20 1.50 1,452.25 1,065.4( COMMERCIAL Number 2 4 33 3: Veluetlon 295,000.00 23,000.00 1,316,900.00 3,062,300.01 pee° 2,193.97 244.00 10,059.77 18,542.7" Surcharge. 147.50 11.25 656.70 1,558.1. INOUSTR IAL Ilumbor 1 1 3 I value tion 2,000.00 200,000.00 10,700.00 3,060, 300.00 pae. 20.00 989.50 107.00 10,271.20 Surchelge. 1.00 100.00 5.10 1, 530. 11 PLUMDING Numher 2 2 42 4' pee- 63.00 62.00 1,685.00 1,201.0(' Ourcharge. 1.00 1.00 21.00 21.5( OTHMS Number 1 3 7 ve lua Llon 0.00 0.00 95,000.O( re°e 10.00 70.00 1,110.80 S-I-gls. .50 1.50 50.0( TOTAL NO. PF31MITS 14 10 2 197 727 TOTA1. VALUATION 410,000.00 239,900.00 5,000.00 6,170,100.00 8,440,500.0( TOTAL FEES 7,416.10 1,401.10 60.00 52,OSB.r,4 57,659.81 TOTAL SURCRARSr.O 209.40 110.45 3.00 3,097.15 4,225.20 CIIIIRF.IIT MUN1'II rrr.BNumllnr to Nnle 1'1.11 M11' NATDRE Mumbai PERMIT - Sl1NC11ARSE Value thin 71114 Yenl I..:L Yeel :I luDle remtly 9 8 8 27 26 uid ae 0 1 Nulll-1 nm11Y I f Coaanl r.lel 6 5 IIID ua 1.1 lel 42 Res. Celeye. 1 50.05 2.50 5,000.00 9 14 01u- 0 0 Puh110 nu11UInVa 1 7 ALTERATION "I REPAIR avail l null 2 135.60 5.70 II,g00:00 BO 60 C'oe.elalel 4 244.00 11.19 23,000.00 16 7fi Ind,1e 11 I Al 1 909.50 100.00 200,000.00 h 1 Pill XRIND All Type. 2 62.00 1.00 43 42 ACCE111001 STRUCTURES Ovlm ln9 Pao 11 7 0 bcke 17 9 TLMPURARY PERMIT 0 0 U13101.ITION 5 3 TOTAGII 10 1,481.10 170.45 239,900.00 227 197 111 TOTAL REVENUE 1 1.601.55 INDIVLDUAL PERMIT ACTIVITY REPORT Moth Of DFfFVRFR , 19SQ PURIST I NUMBERI I DEBCRI PTI0.4 TYPE NANE/LOCATION VALUATION � �F PERI IS SURCRARGE PLUMBItIG SVMCBMG! 90-1605 Intortor Reewdel AC Little Rountaln Blllte rd a/1180 Rvy. 25 S. $ 17,000.00 f 144.00 $ 6.30 1 25.00 f 90-1616 Detached Carege RC Anton and Caca lfe Benyal/217 Reeeey St. 5.000.00 50.00 2.50 .50 90-1617 Fireplace Insert AD Wilileo and Judy Bausch/205 Ifeefeslppl Dr 1,500.00 15.00 90-1618 Interior Rueodel Al Sunny Fteeh Fnode/206V. 4th St. 200,000.00 989.50 .50 100.00 77.00 90-1619 Interior Wall Partitions AC W. Video Plue/loo V. Bra dvey 1,500.00 15.00 .50 90-1620 Intortor Voll Par[lt lone AC Llber[y 9eving E. Bro.dvey, Ste. 2 7,500.00 75.00 .50 1.15 90-1621 Nouse end Ce re ge Ra •f ding AD Robert snd Naren Ronson/507 Maple St. 10.400.00 120.60 5.20 90-1622 Building Farads Facts AC Ilolldey Compeni-/107 V. 7th St. 5.000.00 50.00 2.50 TOTALS S 279,900.00 11,419.10 S 119.45 F 62.00 1 1.00 PLAN REVIEW TOTAL REVENUE 1 1.601.55