Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 07-26-1993AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Monday, July 26, 1993 - 7 p.m. Mayor: Ken Maus Council Members: Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle, Clint Herhsl, Patty Olsen 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held .July 12, 19.93. 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. 4. Consideration of allowing temporary display of a United Way sign on the exterior wall of the Chamber of Commerce huilding. 5. Consideration of renewing 1994 contract for City Assessor. 6. Consideration of adopting resolution approving plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids --Hart Boulevard Sturm Sewer. 7. Review of hills for refurhishment or replacement of second stage digester cover at the wastewater treatment Aland end consideration of award of contract. S. Cunsiderat.iun of approval of annual evaluation and planning survey for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regarding the sanitary sewer collection system nod wastewater treatment facility. 9. Consideration of advertising in Fall Parade of Homes hooklet--Suburban Northwest Ituilders Assn. 10. Approval of hills. H. Adjournment. PETITION FOR FEASIBILITY AND COST ANALYSIS FOR ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS We, the undersigned owners of property in Block if , city of Monticello, hereby petition the City Council to conduct an in-house feasibility and cost analysis for the purpose of improving the driving surfaces within the alley and to have the City consider performing the patching immediately adjacent to the existing alley. It is our understanding that additional easements will have W be granted to the City for the proposed improvements and that a simple majority of the land footage fronting on the alley shall be sufficient to implement the feasibility study and cost analysis. It is understood that after the feasibility study and cost analysis have been performed that the City will hold a public hearing to determine whether there is sufficient support to continue with the project. Date Owner Lots Footage L) it rt 23 i 7/-11 -91Of 0 .J ALLEYTET: 71V93 PETITION FOR FEASIBILITY AND COST ANALYSIS FOR ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS We, the undersigned owners of property in Block Z, city of Monticello, hereby petition the City Council to conduct an in-house feasibility and cost analysis for the purpose of improving the driving surfaces and drainage within the alley and to have the City consider performing the patching immediately adjacent to the existing alley. It is our understanding that additional easements will have to be granted to the City for the proposed improvements and that a simple majority of the land footage fronting on the alley shall be sufi'icient to implement the feasibility study and cost analysis. It is understood that after the feasibility study and cost analysis have been performed that the City will hold a public hearing to determine whether there is sufficient support to continue with the project. Date Owner 7-f -9;, 7-z3-95':g�" ALLEY.PET: 7/2193 Lots Footage 3,4-5.9.10. 11,1s 248 b1 7 SO 1-1,2 (D g .s6) PETITION FOR FEASIBILITY AND COST ANALYSIS FOR ALLEY IMPROVEM MTS We, the undersigned owners of property in Block 31 , city of Monticello, hereby petition the City Council to conduct an in-house feasibility and cost analysis for the purpose of improving the driving surfaces and drainage within the alley and to have the City consider performing the patching immediately adjacent to the existing alley. It is our understanding that addi Lional casements will have to be granted to the City for the proposed improvements and that a simple majority of the land footage fronting on the alley shall be sufficient to implement the feasibility study and cost analysis. It is understood that after the feasibility study and cost analysis have been performed that the City will hold a public hearing to determine whether there is sufficient support to continue with the project. DateOwne Lots Footage r 7 1 % ?'1 �a kW° T io+l/ ALLETPET: 7/2/93 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, July 12, 1993 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, hint Herbst, Brad Nyle, Putty Olsen 2. Cunsideral,ion of auuruval of minutes of the reLular mectinP_ held .June 28, 199:1. Brad Fyle requested that paragraph fi of Item 7 he changed to read as follows: "Brad Fyle indicated that we need to keep the West Bridge Park huilding open to the area residents and he agreed with the concept of charging a higher hose rent. Council reviewed the new policy for reserving the West Bridge Park building. ('lint. Herbst suggested that the policy be updated to require I,hatdeposits confirming reservations should he made within 2 husiness days of the date that the reservution is made. He wits concerned that under the present policy individuals could reserve the park building for future use and then hock out of actual use of the facility at. the Inst minute. After discussion, notion wits node by Clint, Herhst and seconded by Brad Nyle to umend the policy for reserving use of the city park huildings by requiring that reservations he cunfrrmed through payment of the fee :tad deposit within 2 business days of the date of the reservation. Motion carried unaninwuslv." There heing no further discussion, motion wits made by Brad F,vle and seconded by Clint Herbst to approve the meeting minutes as amended. :I. Citizens conlments/uotitions, roauesls, and complaints. None forthcoming. Cunsidoralion of it conrlilional use reuuesl to allow on auto lodv shuts repair huildinc in it B-3 (hrt!Ilwav husi cess) zone. kocalion is Block 2, fart, of Lot 4, Sandhere South Addilion in the city of Monticello. Aunlicanl, .luhn .lohnson. ,lvfl'0'Nci1l indicated that this request is Suhntitletl by the sante agtplicanl and is nearly identical lit the conditional use permit request considered by Cily Council on April 24, 1989, ul which lime Council approved the request. O'Neill nuked that due lit the fact that the applicant did not complete construction allowed under the conditional use permit within one year, it is necessary to bring this item hick before Cil,y Council. Unless the present City Council disagrees with the finding made by the Council in 1989, it is recommended that Council lake I,he same action that wits Laken then. Page I Council Minutes- 7/)2/93 After discussion, the motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Patti Olsen to grant a conditional use permit to Lite Monticello Auto Body Shop winch would ailow the operation of an auto hody shop in it if -3 zone. Applicant must comply with the all conditions included in the zoning ordinance amendment. Motion hased on the finding that awarding of the conditional use permit is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Operation of an auto body shop under condi tions set forth by ordinance provides sufficient assurance that auto Ixldy shop activity will he compatihle with the character of the surrounding area. Motion carried unanimously. 5. Consideration (if it reuuest for installation of an ahove-around fuel tank-- Hoalund Trlmsnorlat.ion. Kick Wolfstcller indicated current State Fire Marshal regrulation limits tanks to it capacity of 6,000 gallons, and it specific site cannot have more than 18,000 gallons total. Hoglund Transportation wants to install It dual-purpose 10,000 gallon tank that would he split into 7,500 for diesel and 2,500 gallons for unleaded gasoline. Since this tank is larger than allowed, it variance must Ile requested from the Slate Fire Marshal. Wolfstcller noted that I he ahove ground tanks will not inlensify the use at the site. They are used for the existing transportation operation and are simply replacing helow ground tanks and therefore do not represent suhsta retial change to the operation of the site. The reason the Cily Council is asked (u review this request is )hal the Stale Fire Marshal will Idlow local jurisdictions to rule on the variance request if thev so desire, or the local jurisdiction cauu recommend that it variance request, Ile denied by the State Fire Marshal, or the local jurisdiction can refer till decisions to the Slate hire Marshal. Since the State hire Marshal deals with these tY1es ofsituations more often than l(Wal jurisdictions and ulsosince they should have more expertise in reviewing these I;vpes of rettucsts, it is recommended Thal we not take over that resp onsihility but refer till variance requests to the State. Along this line, if lite Cily did not like to particular variance roquosl fur whatever reason, the City would have the option of still referring the decision to the Slate hut, it, send it let ler disallowing the variance. Shirley Anderson asked if the ahove ground hanks could he damaged by floods or wind storms. Gary Anderson noted Lhal the ahove ground tanks, with their added weight, and design, are very secure and overall pose less of it threat to the environment Than helow ground Links. After discussion it motion was Horde by Brad kyle and seconded by Clint Herhslto refer this vuu•iince request to the Slate Fire Marshal for their exlwi-lice in reviewing this applical,ion. Motion carried unanimously. Page 2 Council Minutes - 7/12/0:3 6. Consideration of adopting 1994 Monticello Heardand Express Management Man and adopting a resolution entering into a contract with the State of Minnesota DeuarUnent of Iransmi-t:uiun to urovide public transportation. Assistant Administrator O'Neill requested the Council review the summary of the Heartland Express operation. review Management flan and consider adopting a resolution entering into a contract with the Minnesota State Department. of Transportation. O'Neill went on to describe the 199:3 budget projections liar actual costs. He stated Chat alter six months of ofocration it appears that the cost to operate the bus in 1993 will be under budget by approximately $51600. Fare revenues for 1993 are projected to he slightly higher than expected. In terms of system use ellicienv, the system improved in 1193 over 1992. For instance, total ridership in 1993 is increased (over 1992 despite a reduction in service hours. This factor has a positive impact, in the cost per ride. Fare revenue has become a larger share of the revenue needed to operate the system. In 1:19'2, 14.1755 of the necessary fare revenue came from the farehox versus 1 T4 for 1993. O'Neill went on to describe the proposed budget which prgject_a a total operation cost of $70,546. Revenue sources include $42,92+1 from the State of Minnesota. $11,416 from fare revenue, and $17,20:1 from the City. After discussion, n notion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Patti Olsen to adopt the 1494 Heartland Express Management Plan and adopt a resolution entering into a contract. with the tittle of Minnesota Department (if' Transportation to provide public Iransportalion. Motion carried unanimously. Review the Oak Ridt_e subdivision rnulint! and drainage plan. Assistant Administr•alor ('Neill informed Council Ilint. Monticello 'Township ollicials had requested the op1Mo•lunil.y to discuss issues rehliug to Che O)ak Ridge subdivision and Ditch:1 3. Ted Milker reviewed the situation aluug Ditch :3:3. Ile noted that there lure certain homes that were allowed 10 he constructed by Ino county that should never have been allowed in the first place. Hulkcr noted that due to 1he proximity of the ditch t(o Some Ili' these residences, Ihey have had to devalue homes two limes in the last five yearn. Hulker expre'sse'd concern that I,he development of the Oak Ifidge sulvdivision could negatively impact some of Ihese properties. Ken Maus noted that the cit ;v has been careful to require that the grading and druinage plan of the Oak Ridge subdivistnta he designed so that it docs not increase the rale (if flow to Ilse adjoining proloorty. He asked Hunker ifau engineer representing the township has reviewed I he grading and drainage pian. Hulkcr responded by Haying "no". Ilrad Pyle noted that the development of the Oak Ridge subdivision as proposed is not, going to make Lite current Situation any worse. Ken Moms emphasized that the city lilts been au•eful tuttvuid inrpacling Ditch :3:3. la fact., Page 3 Council Minutes -7/1'1193 the storm sewer outlet from Meadow Oakes pond was actual ly hlocked so that it would not discharge water into Ditch 33. Jon Bogart from .John Oliver and Associates reviewed the grading and drainage plan. He noted that bath Lhe Soil Conservation Service and the DNR hydrologist have concurred with the drainage study which indicated that the rate of discharge onto the adjoining property from the Oak Ridge subdivision will not he increased with this project. Bud Henneker from the Monticello Township recommended that the city require the developer to construct a storm sewer system that would divert water from its natural path to the Meadow Oaks storm sewer system. Pat Sawatzke, Wright County Commissioner, was present to update the council un the status of the Oak Ridge suhdivision in terms of the hoard's review process. Sawatzke noted that, although the rate of discharge will not increase and Lherefore not result in a greater degree of flooding, the grading will result in peak discharge of a greater duration which will result in u larger volume of water discharging onto the adjoining property. Sawalzke was concerned that a larger volume of water over a longer period will lengthen the period of problems faced by residents downstream. Ken Maus noted that when the city installs the Meadow Oaks storm sewer system, it is possible to drain a portion of the watershed now entering Ditch 13. Perhaps we can balance the additional volume created by Oak Ridge by installing the Meadow Oak storm sewer designing it in a manner to take in it portion of Ditch 33 watershed. .Ion Bogart of John Oliver and Associates indicated that the additional volume of water created by the development is approximately 4.5 acre feet, the duration of time required to duan this additional volume is estimated at approximately 4 hours. The group went on to review the stratus of the review process. It was noted that the County Ikaard will he reviewing the item at their mectingon the following day. There tieing no further discussion, the meeting wits. adjourned. JeIT O'Neill Assistant Administrator Page 4 CITY COUNCIL UPDATE July 26, 1893 Easlhound Countv Road 75 Imurorvement, Proiect. (.1. Simola) As you probahly already know, the County Road 75 improvement project was awarded lu Ilauerly Brothers (,(instruction of Sauk Rapids, Minnesota. A letter was sent (in July H. 1993, to all the downtown business people telling them of the impending start (if the project and the expected rerouting of traffic. In addition, notices were putinto the paper telling residents of the impending start ofthe project.. The preconslruct.ion meeting was held on July 12, 199:1, at City Hall with the general contractor. the county, and City of Monticello representatives. Traffic control wits placed on .)illy IH. 1943, and the project began unJuly 19. At this Lime, all of the bituminous milling and the concrete curl) and gutter removal have been completed. Ily Friday evcning..)ul), 2:1, it is expected that the storm sewer leading from Ernie's Buil, to Cedar Street will also he complete. Hauerly Brothers proposed schedule is quite vigorous. They will he working 12 t(i 1:1 hours it day. (i days it week to complete tile, prujcct. They have 21 working days and expect to complete the project entirely between August 9 and I:1. well ahead of Labor Day. For the most part., the project has gone as expected. 'There was, however, a personal injury to it young lady who crossed in Lhc 7(H) block of East Broadway and was struck by ;lit easthound vehicle. In addition, it few motorists found themselves hung up on the milling operations with their cars. Garbage services and recycling services have continued :as planned. I've been approached by Steve Johnson in regard to the upcoming Crazy Days :idiviLien scheduled 611-4111 y 30 and :11. We have discussed the possibility of closing off the south half of Ilruadwav between Walnut Street. and Highway 25 fur use during the Iwo -day event. This area is currently open for parking liar tile businesses and parking in not generally allowed during (:ritzy hays. The Wright Countv project engineer dues not, have a problem Willi un closing off thin nectiun of the parking arca for the two dnyn if we would discourage 1>Ldeslrian crossing during Crazy Da,vs from the south side of Broadway to the north nide of liroadway. This will he accomplished 1)v instilling construction snow fence the entire block from Walnut to Highway 25 (in the south side (11, lit(- aucdian. The fencing will he placed early Friday morning and tion renuaved after the Crazy Days event. If anv of the eouncil memhers need additional information, please feel free to ask tat Monday evening's moeling or cunlacl me ahead of time. CI'T'Y COUNCIL UPDATE July 26, 1993 St,oraee shed buildines heine built at the Allan and Jeanie Marie Poach residence. 912 W River Street. (G.A.) On April 26. 1993, the Monticello Planning Commission special meeting, and the Monticello City Council at its regular meeting, considered a variance request W allow a detached accessory building to he placed in the front yard setback requirement. The Monticello Planning Commission and the City Council, at their respective meetings, untminously approved the construction of a detached accessory building within the front yard setback requirement. On April 28, 1993,a building permit was issued to Allan and Jeanie Marie Poach for the construclion of it 28 ft. X 30 R detached accessory building, which Mr. Poach stopped in, picked up, dated, signed. and paid for on April :10, 1993. On the building permit, there was a notation near the bottom which noted the following: "The use of this accessory building is not for storage of more than one commercial vehicle over 9000 pounds or for the commercial use of this detached acces,itry building to huild fish houses and sell them from this property " As of this date, .luly 21, 1993, Mr. Poach has constructed three storage buildings at his residence and transpxrrted twit of them, one to a private residential property and the other one out to it commercial property, tend placed fur sale signs on them with his phone number. lie also has it storage building at, his residence will it for stile on it with his phone nunaher on the for stile sign. Attached you will find a copy of the letter which was sent to Mr. Poach on July 21, 1193. We tire updating the City Council its the activity which has occurred tet this resideuce, and if you would like its to pursue any further legal action, please advise city staff at the .July 26, 1993 city council nu,et,ing. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of letter to Mr. Allan Poach: Copy of Council minutes from 4%2M.M. Mille praper'tvsite cleanup. (G.A.) ()it Tuesday morning, .July 20, 1993, 1 met with the Wright County Board of Cummissiunerw at 1 -heir regular meeting. I updated the county commissioners on the Iwo expendilures that have leen authorized stud paid for lit date. Those would have been liar the dean upand disposal of brush and debris by (duality I,awn Maintenance for it total of $A05 and clean up of the tires, the old van and truck body, and rrrrscellaneous auto pxtrt.s by Ruff Auto for it total of $Iblltl. 1 also informed them of the Iaboralory results of the lorings at the Cille AuW site. Resulla indicated u petroleum release has occurred on the site and the MI'C'A has leen codifier!. I also explained the hill I had had leen received frvnn Agussiz Environmental, but not yet City Council Ulxlate Julv 26, 199:3 Page 2 paid, liar the soil analysis which was completed on .lune 26, 1993. The hill was for a total of $6,Hfi l.tt0 of which the original estimate wits $3,828.70. Reason for the cost. overrun was that each of the seven initial hurings that were hid were to he drilled at 10 ft each. Borings that were completed amounted to 119 total feet drilled which amounted to 49 fl of additional drilling that was dune for the borings. Also not figured in Kits soil sampling for metals. Scone metals were found in the soil boring samples which amounted to additional sampling being dune. The soil analysis that has been dune qualifies for 901/ reimbursement from the petro fund. I also updated the proposed preliminary plan as outlined by Agassiz Environmental. The preliminary plan would include: 1. To demolish Che building and all concrete over the hunks and the former gas islands. 2. Excavate the two tanks as per AlF`CA guidelines and dispose of them. 3. Remove approXinlatCly 400 cubic yards tifl)et.i-(Plctiiii-e(llltltnlillited Soils. 4. Install 3 monitoring wells and sample 2 rounds. Costs associated with the ahnve-described work will he approximately as follows: Demolition work $ 6,000-H,500 Reprove and dispose of tanks 4,000-6,000 Rennuve and dispose of soils 38,0011.42,0011 (apm•oxinaalely 400 cu yds( Installation of wells and sampling 1 1,001)-1:1,000 As noted above. of (hese cusLs associated with the project, 9WA, of the following will he eligihle liar reinnhursenient.: Contaminated soil removal Investigation of wells and sampling Nile investigalion (previously conducted) The costs associated with demolition and tank removal will not he eligible for reinnhurseinuni. Wright County Board of Contnnissiuners unanimously approved to continue with the preliminary plan as outlined and come hack to them with the prolwsed hid costs fear Lite demolition work, the tank and soil removal, and installation of wells and sampling its the bids nre completed. City Council Update July 26, 1993 Page 3 the Public Works I epartmenL conducted well samples of the subject property and the two adjoining properties to the cast and to the west. The samples all came out negative and the results will be explained in further detail if requested by council members at the Monday night meeting. The total costs asso6ated to date and upcoming total expenditures will also be explained in further detail tit the Monday night council meeting. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of letter and bill from Agassiz Environmental; Copy of bills from Quality Lawn and Ruff Auto. 250 East Broadway P. O. Box 1147 Monricello, MN 55362.9245 Phone: (612) 295-2711 Metro: (612) 333.5739 Fax: (612) 2954404 Allan and Jeannie Marie Poach 912 W. River St. Monticello, MN 55362 RE: Storage shed building at your residence Dear Mr. and Mrs. Poach: July 21, 1993 Copy On April 28, 1993, a building permit was issued to you for the construction of a 28'x 30' detached accessory building which you stopped in, picked up, dated, signed and paid for on April 30, 1993. On the building permit there was a notation near the bottom which noted the following: The use of this accessory building is not for storage of more than one commercial vehicle over 9.000 lbs. or for the commercial use of this detached building to build fish houses in and sell them from this property. This also applies to the storage shed buildings that you have already built and transported to other private property in the City of Monticello and also the one that exists with a For Sale sign at your residence today. The use of your property is for residential uses and their accessory uses only. The use of storage shed buildings at your property for commercial purposes is not an allowable use in the district your residence is in R-2 (single and two family residential) zoning. You are hereby requested to discontinue the building of the storage shed buildings at your residence immediately. The storage building which currently exists at your residence and has a For Sale sign on it must also be removed from your residence and from the City of Monticello immediately. The two other storage sheds which you have built and placed one at another residential private property owners site and the other which is at a commercial private property owners site will also have to be picked up and removed from the Monticello Citv Limita. These owners are also being notified by letter that the selling of storage buildings which do not belong to them is not an allowable use of their residential and commercial properties respectively. Mr. and Mrs. Poach 7/21/92 Page 2 There also exists some fish houses which are stored and have For Sale signs on some of them in other parts of the City of Monticello which is zoned R•3 (multiple family residential) which has a legal nonconforming use on it for his business use only. That owner is also being notified that this is an illegal use of his property to sell someone else's fish houses from his private property. These fish houses are also to be removed from the Monticello City Limits immediately. The Montioello City Council at its next regularly scheduled meeting Monday, July 26, 1993, beginning at 7:00 pm will also be updated on the existing storage shed building taking place at your residence and also on the storage sheds being placed at two locations, one residential and on private commercial property owners and also on the storage and For Sale of fish houses at another residential private property in the City of Monticello. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF MONTICELLO 4��y,�-� Gary Anderson Zoning Administrator GA/pk a: File y3-0/ac Council Minutes - 4/26/93 4. Consideration of a variance request to allow a detached accessory building to be alaced within the front Yard setback requirement. Aaolicant, Allan Poach. Assistant Administrator O'Neill informed Council that Poach would like to construct an attached garage that is set back 30 ft from the right-of-way. Under normal circumstances, 30 ft meets the minimum setback; however, in this case, the homes on the east and west sides of the Poach property are set back 20 ft and 80 ft apart respectively. Under our current city ordinance, the setback for the Poach property splits the difference between the 20 -ft and 80 -ft setback, which creates a required setback of 50 ft. O'Neill went on to note that the garage as proposed will be placed on the side of the property closer to the building with a 20 -ft setback, which will reduce the impact of the variance. In addition, moving the garage farther back to meet the setback requirement would create drainage problems for the property. O'Neill noted that the Planning Commission recommended that the variance be granted. O'Neill also reported that the property had recently been used as a site for construction of fish houses, which is not allowed in a residential zone. Poach indicated that once he was informed that this activity was not allowable, he discontinued construction of fish houses, and he plans to use his garage for residential uses only. After discussion, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Brad Fyle to grant a 204 variance to the front yard setback requirement based on the finding that requiring the applicant to meet the setback would create a hardship, as it would result in drainage problems on the site. Also, the variance is mitigated by the placement of the structure on the east side of the property. Motion carried unanimously. AGASSIZ ENVIRONMENTAL ahem nt co and the environment come togg ether 1-800.362-7087 July 18, 1993 City of Monticello '57'�6tevc Anderson P.O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362 Dear Mr. Anderson, The laboratory results from the bur ings advanced at the former Gilley's Auto were received today. These results indicate a petroleum release has occunrxl on the site and the MPGA has been notified. Dave Shumate ofour o0ice is reviewing the results and compiling your report for the MPCA, he will be in contact with you. A pieliminary plan will be as follows: -Demolish the building and all concrete over tanks and former gas islands. •Gxcavale the two (2) ranks as per MPCA guidelines and dispose of. -Remove approximately 400 cubic yards of petroleum contaminated soils. dnstall Ihrce (3) monitoring wells and sample two (2) rounds. Costs associated will Ix; appy uximately as fullms: -Demolish work 56,000.48,500. •Remove& dispose of tanks 54,000.46,000. •Remove& dispose ofsoils $38,000.-542,000. (400 cubic yids) -Installation of wells and sampling 511,000,413,000. Of (hese costs associated with This projcel, 90% of the following will be eligible for rcimbursemenC -Contaminated soil removal -installation of wells and sampling -Site investigation (previously conducted) The costs associated with demolition and tank removal will not be eligible for rcinthursement. Of o (612) 7952200 • FAX (612) 795.2798 Agassiz well send out requests for proposals upon your approval the week of July 26, 1993. The results of these bids will be discussed with you and then acted upon promptly. If you should have any further questions, I will be happy to answer them on Monday July26, for will be out of the office the week of July 19th. Thank you again Y.1. .artdwehr AGASSIZ ENVIRONMENTAL Where business and the environment come together 1-600-362-7087 COMPANY City of Monticello ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362 INVOICE SITE: 1310 W. Broadway, Monticello SERVICES: 7 borings drilled (10' included in each) 49' additional drilling for borings (I19'total 11 drilled) 119' split spoon sampling 9 additional stops for sampling 8.5 firs on site time for supervisor hr administrative personnel 5 firs mapping & reporting Travel Time: Drill Rig/Mileagc 120 Drill Rig/Crcw 2 Supervisor/Mileage 120 SupervisorflIme 2 Lab Samplcs: G Ito 6 DRO 6 "Total metals 6 VOC 6 18 samples shipping & handling 18 samples prep time ^^^^••^••�•lation of Dnll Rig DATE: 7/15/93 Unit Price 110.00 11.00 2.00 6.00 50.00 25.00 50.00 0.75 50.00 0.35 25.00 92.00 92.00 278.30 172.50 10.00 10.00 100.00 SUBTOTAL S REC. ON ACCOUNT INTEREST DUE TOTAL DUI;: S Omoe (612) 795-2200. FAX (612) 795-2799 Total 770.00 539.00 238.00 54.00 425.00 25.00 250.00 90.00 100.00 42.00 50.00 552.UU 552.00 1,669.80 1,035.00 80.00 180.00 100.00 6,851.80 6,851.80 Qwftj A &M, ( Maintenance co.) P.O. Boz 1123 Monticello. MN 55362 (612) e7e-2M STATt.��N_T DATE .1 NUMBER TERMS AMOUNT REMITTED $ PLEASE DETACH AHD -w Illpll r11H FEYII1aMC! DATE I INVOICE NO/DESCRIPTION I CHARGE I CREDIT BALANCE PREVIOUS BALANCE BROUGHT FORWARD L) PLEASE PAY THIS AMOUNT w- e",r%rJj THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS CQ60IT T1•411..S • all pampa•.• made aw Mp b —1%.1. au. — M. 101h pi HH Ia.—.9 a1anM. 11 -t p.lp pV IM ..Cl W M.11 '%- Ilyy "" b . "1•..♦1. • (1111 p..adea Ma . 1%1#% W Vka cp.Ip. rill .lap M .de7.p.ac.1 -h lll.rl.11.r Vplil p.b M lall CUSTOMER'S COPY ;ew AUTO PARTS, INC. 800 Elm Street • Monticello, MN 55362 (612) 295-5111 • Metro 333-8133 800-448-7833 • Fax (612) 295-3188 ti C1 1 Y 111= 141114T104.11,1i 0 H +p PIS* MI. aIK4R ' 1 MINIfIl:1:11A1, MI 'VA&1: 10 0 I TAX MIr VM P"U. 6(111• I flMll,,l' 1'111N111 IT ' , N 1 1 VT- 111 111.+1. 110 1 • ..11. w1 ' 1 A., i, \•.' 1:'1K1. VI. 1161E AW 41LU v1\IhI IA.LsW4 UN ii'*J CT//,e jr•/36�i' HN 1-641, ININIO1441 ( 1.1111 1.1 ' 41414" 111 110011 ,10 1 ' A 11'. IAIa1 \w1 11rI UI AI 11,01W. Vol Gash MN EA101 h N01 1 114111 V . Iq.1 1 « +r b 1 • 1 •IY1N. NN /_ 1'..•1� Ia11N. bl/ 1001 Council Agenda - 7/26/93 4. Consideration of allowin¢ temaorary diSDIAV of a United Way sittn on the exterior wall of the Chamber of Commerce building. 1.J.0. i A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The United Way campaign being conducted in Monticello is being organized by Larry Nolan of NSI'. Nolan is requesting that the City allow display of it United Wily sign on the exterior wall of lite Chamber building. The sign will he professionally dune and is designed to allow it to Iw updated to show the level of contributions toward the United Wily Fluid in Monticello. The sign will he up during the length of the campaign which is about. 30 days. The City has allowed a similar United Way sign to be placed at this location in years past.. According to our ordinance governing temporary signs, properties are allowed 40 days during the year for display of temporary signs, and hanners. The only provision limiting this sign would be the amount of time available through this annual permit. It is possible thin, another organization may request the use of this highly visible wall for signing associated with special event's. 'file Council needs to ask ibwlf as to whether or not it wants to allow this wall to become it place for advertising special events. Perhaps the Chamlxr of Commerce would like to utilize the wall for its events. If :SII days of the 40 days allowed is used for the United Way campaign, there will he only it) days left, for other types of advertising. It. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Mut ion to grauat permit allowing display of as temporary United Way sign along the exterior wall of the Chandaer office. Under this alternative, City Council is comfortable with the plans for displaying the sign for it period of K -months and is not, necessarily concerned about future requests. This may he the must logical decision because the United Way is the only organization that has ever even requested that this wall be used for displaying signs. As of the writing oft his memo, I have not. talked to the t ;hanalaer President Io see if they arc interested in using the wall for their temporary sign needs. 2. Mut ion lo deny permit allowing display of a temporary United Wan' sign along the exterior wall of the Chnmber olrace. Under this nhernative, the Council could take the position thatthe avrailahle days that are allowed fur tenatorury signs and banners should he reserved for City or Chanther use and that by allowing the United Way sign to he displayed, we reduce the City's ahifaty to use that sane sign space for advertising event's that have City purpose. Council Agenda - 7/26/93 C. S'rAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council grant the permit as requested. To the best of my knowledge, we have never had a request for use of the north wall of the Chamber ofTice building for signage. At this time, it may make the most sense to grant permission to use this wall on a first come first serve basis by non- profit organizations. Once the 40 days have been used up, then no other organizations would have access to the wall. As a modification to this alternative, perhaps Council could limit the number of days that any single organization could use the wall for sign display. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Larry Nolan will be present to provide further detail regarding his request U Council Agenda - 7/26/93 5. Consideration of renewing 1994 contract for Citv Assessor. (R.W. ) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND Lastsummer the city advertised for it certified assessor and entered into a contract. arrangement with Mr..lerry Kramlier of Montrose, MN to serve as the City of Mont.icellos assessor for the 1993 assessment period. Mr. Kramber, along with his wife, Peggy, completed their first year of assessing duties for the city and, 1 believe, performed the job in a very satisfactory manner. The city staff has enjoyed it good working relationship with .terry and Peggy and they have, I believe, performed the work to the city's and county's satisfaction. Doug Gruber, County Assessor, has also indicated in it recent conversation his satisfaction with their work performance. For the 1993 assessment, Mr. Kramler wits paid on a per parcel basis in the amount of $5.251 times tin estimated 1800 parcels. This compared to $5.75 that the county assessor's office would have charged if they would have performed the assessing duties for the city last year. For the 1994 assessment., the Kramlers are requesting their compensation as City Assessor Ix+ increased to $5.75 per parcel for the approximate 1870 parcels. This would increase the toad contract by approximately $900 to it total of $10,762 next year. As it reference, the Wright County Assessor's office has increased their rate to $ti.00 per parcel for any contracting work they do with larger communities such as Rockford and the City of Bufalo. As it result, the request for $5.75 does not seem out of line and appears reasonable. As is noted in their letter of July 19, 1993, Mr. Kriunber feels the recent changes in the assessing law will be creating more record-keeping responsibilities fur the assessor, and that they underestimated the amount of time it has taken to update It second set of records for Cho city. As it reminder, since Monticellos population is over 5000, the city is required to utilize only it certified assessor if we contract, with one independently. if we contract wilh the Wright County Assessor's office, Mr. Gruber is the certified assessor alt hough it differentstaffengloyce would probably be assigned Co the city. It. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Thr first. alternative would be to renplioint Mr. .terry Krandxr of Kramlxr and Associates as die City Assessor for the year 1114 ussossment, The city would enter intAi another one year contract. at the requested rate of $5.75 per parcel. Council Agenda - 7/26/93 2. The second alternative would he to advertise for hid proposals from independent contractors who are certified assessors. This would he similar to the process we went through last year when 4 qualified individuals did apply for the position. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: As I noted earlier, I believe Mr. Kramber and his wife, Peggy, did it very satisfactory job for the city this past year and would recommend the contract for assessing services he extended for an additional year. I also believe the requested per parcel 4)f$!-).75 is not unreasonable in comparison to what other independent contractors would prohahly charge and in comparison to what the county currently charges. Unless the Council is aware of any problems they have experienced with the Kramhers, 1 would suggest continuing this arrangement at this time. D. sui,miITINC, DATA: Copy of proposed amlract and hid prolxosal from Mr. Kramher. CITY ASSESSOR DUTIES & REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES This agreement, made this 26th day of .July, 199:3, by and between the City of Monticello, a municipal corporation (hereafter referred to as "City-), and Jerry Kramher, an individual (hereafter referred to as "Kramber'), sets out the terms and conditions for the general purpose of providing assessing services for the City. WHEREAS, the City desires and is required to perform assessing functions for determining appropriate market values for all properties located within city limits: WHEREAS, the City desires to provide these assessment duties through the services of a qualified private party which will he able to respond as needed under the general guidelines established by the City, County of Wright, and State of Minnesota. NOW, THEREFORE, in and for consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows: la. The City in and for consideration of the sum of Ten Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Two 1)ullars and Fifl.y Cents ($111,752.50), pavahle in six (6) monthly installnlcn4y beginning Scptemher 311, 1992, through February 28, 1993, hereby contracts with Kraunher for the period of 12 months from the date of execution of this agreement for the services of Krandxvr as City Assessor. Ib. The contract.:unuuat is hosed on a contract fee of $5.75 per parcel tittles an estimated 1,870 parcels of record within the city. lc. The City agrees to adjust the final payment to reflect. the actual number of parcel assessment functions performed by the Assessor. Kramlwr hereby agrees to perform substantially the following services as Assessor: a. Complete all necessary calculations and market values for tax parcels within the city by prescribed date for year 1994 as determined by Wright. (County Assessor. h. Record individual parcel infornmtiun in "field" books supplied by the County Assessor, including sketch plain of till buildings and dimensions. C. Provide it duplicate copy of new parcel information from field (woks and update annually till parcel information on City duplicate records. O 5 ASS ESS11WAG R: 7/23/93 Page d. 'hys�cal review of appruximulely 25/, of lax parcels annually,��j�� C. Provide timely response w inquiries of residents regarding� � , marketvaloocions i;nd hacis Pw s;ime f. Represent City at annual Board of Review established by City Council and provide documentation for values assigned when necessary. g. All (other duties and responsibilities necessary to complete // Xtisessing function for ye�ar 1994. 3. Kramher herehy agrees to utilize his/her own vehicle to perform the aforementioned tasks and, further, to provide proper insurance coverage to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any claims or violations arising from the operation of said vehicle. The City herehy agrees to provide space, use of equipment, and access to Building Official and/or other City records within City Hall when necessary for Assessor to fulfill hisfherdu ties and responsibilities herein stated. 5. This contract arrangement may Im Lerminaled by either party, with or without cause, provided the party wishing to terminate this agreement shall provide written notice to the other party at, least sixty (60) days prior to the efrective date of termination. IN WITNESS WHEI*',OF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to he executed in their Iwhulf by themselves and/or their proper officers by their signatures the day and year firm written shove. t1 TY OF Ml1NTICEL LO Witness City Administrator Date Dale .IRItRY KRAMBER Witness Dow bate ASSESSOICACR: 7/2:4/93 Page 2 ✓ l.L am,6er UG 2ssociales) -qn C. REAL ESTATE APPRAMM/ASSESSORS July 19, 1993 Rick Wolfsteller City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Dear Mr. Wolfsteller, P.O. ami 36 ftnt x M4 53363 (612)6753748 Kramber d Associates, Inc. would like to submit a bid of $5.75 per parcel for the 1994 Assessment Year. The rate increase is due to changes in the law which creates more recording keeping for the assessor and to compensate for the additional time and labor required to update the field cards and CRV's for the City files. According to the Wright County Assessor's Office, there are approximately 1870 total parcels in the City of Monticello. I hope this bid is accepted as we have enjoyed working for the City. RespeG ully, De ry Kramber Accredited Minnesota Assessor HE Council Agenda - 7/26/93 6. Consiitleration of adoptina resolution approving plans and specifications and author izinuadvertisement forbids -Hart Boulevard Storm Sewer, 1.1.0.1 A. RRNERENCF: AND BACKGROUND: As you recall, on June 2R, 1993, City Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications in anticipation of completing the Hart. Boulevard Sturm Sewer project in conjunction with expansion of the clinic facility. In keeping with the schedule. Council is now asked to review the plans and specifications and consider authorizing advertisement for bids. Bret Weiss will he in attendance to review aspects of the plans and specifications that Council is interested in. Between now and August 2:1, 1993, city staff will he investigating options for financing this improvement with an eye toward development a policy that could he applied city wide to address future slonn water projects that are likely to he completed in the next two to five years. Other Sturm sewer project, include the Meadow Oaks Storm sewer oullel and a variety of improvemonis that can convey water from the Chelsea corridor area to the Mississippi Ifiver. Il. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to adopt resolution approving plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement fur hids for the Hart Boulevard Storm Sewer prujecl. 2. Motion to deny resolution approving plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids for the Hart Boulevard Sturm Sewer project. This alternative should he selected if the plans aro not acceptable or if Council is no longer interested in completing the prokject in conjunction with the clinic expansion. Under this allernative, the city would he required to pay for the cost of the plans as prepared. C. STAFF RI;t'1MINIENDATION: Stali'recommends alternative #1. 11. SUPPORTING DATA: (Plans to he provided at meeting --see .June 28, 199:1 agenda item for more detail.) Council Agenda - 7/2(V4:1 Review of bids for refurbishment or replacement of second staire digester cover at the waste water treatment_ plant and consideration of award of contract. O.S. ) A. HEFEI(ENCh, AND RACKGHOUND The hids for the replacement or refurhishment of the second slate digester cover are due at 10:00 Ant Friday .luly 2:1. 149:1. The specifications allow for two manufacturers to hid the replacement cover: one is Envirex, Inc. and the other is Walker Process Equipment. Rids for the new cover centered around completion dates ranging from December 31, 1993 to .lune 1, 1994. The hids for the refurbishment of 1he existing cover are scheduled in such a way as to provide almost complete replacement of all portions of the cover itself, as necessary. Prior to the hid opening, we had approximately eight. prospective coutracton who requested plans and specifications. The following is it summary of the hids received on July Zi, 199:1. CON'I'I(AC'fOl( NEW COVKH RID I*"FU lilt ISH fill) Moorhead Const $228,432 no hid Holed. L. Carr $184,300 no hid l.ysne Const. $210,000 no hid (;ridor (.'ons( $168,600 $1119,4110 Rased upon the above infirrmation, the low hid for replacement of the cover was received from Cridor Construction in the amount of $168,0)0. The low hid fur the refurbishment of 1he existing cover wits received from Crider Construction for $169,4110. Because the proposal firr the refurbishment includes almost the entire replacement of the cover, some evaluation will have to be done of this hid as well its the replacement. hid. Consequently, no rec onnuvulal,ions from the city engineer or staffare available at, this time. We will have this recommendation available at Monday evenings meeting. 11. SI11'I'lll('I'IN( IATA: Copy of hid tabulation form. BID TABULATION FOR REPLACEMENT OF SECOND STAGE ANAEROBIC DIGESTER CODER FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGI4T COUNTY, MINNESOTA CITY PROJECT NO. 93-07C • COMMISSION NO. 5098.00 BIDS OPENED: July 23, 1993 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 10:00 A.M. & ASSOCIATES, INC. BID SCHEDULE IT'EN1 ITEM SCHEDULE CONTRACTOR BOND A A•1 A•2 B MOORHEAD CONST, MOORHEAD MN x $228,432.00 + 37,500 -0- no bid ROBERT L. CARR, MARSHALL MN x $196,800.00 + 22,500 - 7,500 no bid LYSNE CONST, BLOOMING PRAIRIE MN x $220,000.00 + 18,000 -10,000 no bid GRIDOR CONST, PLYMOUTH MN x 5173,600.00 +100,000 - 5,000 $169,400 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT TAIIIJLATION OF THE BIDS AS RECEIVED ON: DATE: July 2-3,1993 BY: Jon D. Peterson, P.E. , P.E. City Engineer 1 jSM Project No. 5098.00 *Denotes Corrected Figure Orr s6eten 300 Park Place Center July 26, 1993 5775 Wayzata Emlevard 6llnneapolis..NIN 55416-1228 612-595.5775 1-600-;53.5775 FAX 595-5774 Engineers Mr. John Simola Architects Planners Public Works Director surveyors City of Monticello P.O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Replacement of Second Stage Anaerobic Digester Cover City Project No. 93-07C OSM Commission No. 5098.00 Dear John: We have reviewed the bids received for the replacement of the second stage anaerobic digester cover. Four bids were received for the replacement of the cover, with bid prices ranging from S173,600.00 to S228,432.00. The low bidder was Gridor Construction, Inc. of Plymouth, Minnesota. Bids were also received on two add/deduct items. Item A-1 required that cover replacement be accomplished by December 31, 1993, two months earlier than the base bid completion date of March 1, 1994. Bids for this item ranged from plus $18,000 to plus S100,000. Item A-2 allowed a completion date of June 1, 1994, three months later than the base bid award. Bids for this item ranged from 0 to minus $10,000. In addition, one bid was received for the rehabilitation of the existing cover. This bid was received from Gridor Construction Inc., in the amount of 5169,400. The bid for the rehabilitation of the existing cover was for full replacement of the cover. If the contractor were able to salvage and re -use the side skirt, the cost of the rehabilitation of the cover would be S130,700.00. Gridor Construction, Inc. has excellent experience in the construction of wastewater treatment facilities. Recently, they have completed the $1.3 million Stage II facilities for the City of Pierre, SD, and the 5950,000 wastewater treatment improvement for the City of Orr, MN. The painting subcontractor which Gridor intends to utilize on this contract is Swanson and Youngdahl. Swanson and Youngdahl have extensive experience in the painting of wastewater facilities. Gridor has indicated that they will be supplying a cover as manufactured by Envirex. Inc. of Waukesha, Wisconsin. Representatives of Envirex met with us at the wastewater facility prior to preparation of plans and specifications, and they are familiar with the work that must be accomplished. Gridor Construction, Inc. has indicated that the $5,000 deduct for bid item A-2 in their proposal is the cost savings which would be realized by not painting the cover during the colder winter months. In addition, Gridor Construction has indicated that they would intend eau nW--r uro:", Mr. John Simola City of Monticello July 26, 1993 Page 2 to complete the project prior to the June 1, 1994 completion date for Bid item A-2. Gridor Construction has also indicated that they would work with the City and PSG staff to make the digester tank available for storage of solids should the need arise prior to full completion of the project. The cost of rehabilitation of the existing cover, assuming that the side skirt can be salvaged will be approximately 75% of the cost of the total replacement of the cover. Taking this into account, and realizing that the new cover will have a longer design life than the rehabilitated cover, we recommend that the City award the contract to Gridor Construction for replacement of the cover (Bid Schedule A) in the amount of $173,600 and accept the $5,000 deduct for bid item A-2. Sincerely, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. �onD. Peterson, P.E. Project Manager Bret A. Weiss, OSM Ed DeUl=orest, OSM /run l;\Sa9 AC1VIL\LL' rL'RS1REL'0MMLN-WD Per, I of 3 Extension of Bids REPLACEMENT OF SECOND STAGE ANAEROBIC ER DIG :STER COVER CITU OF MONTICELLO CITY PROJECT NO. 93-07C OSKI PROJECT NO.5098.00 I LOW BIDDER 2ND BIDDER 3RD BIDDER 4TH BIDDER _ _ GAIDOR CONST. INC. ROBEnT L. ;Ann CO._ LYSNE COCST., INC._ MOORHEAD C'TNST. CO. INC. _ 6— D— pb n ou.-Kity I" U,,0 Pd,. o;; Tall UMI PAp Mn TOW Uri PAC. ft— TOW IAN Ill- ftw Total BID SCHEDULE •A'—_ - I IURHIWI 6 WSTALL oNE.o.root(NOMINAL)-- - -- ---_—_- _ --_ _ — DIAMrICnoAS-HOLOEROIOF:STERCO n 1 LUMPSl1M 1143.00000 il.3,txgro 1194,3DD 00 1164,30000 t190,00000 11100.00000 f16D,437.00 _11180,A32 00 7 rURMS1/ A INSTALL MODIFICATION TO otOCSlrn -- _ — - - _ - -- ---_---- _ _t pff4wSYSTEMS LIILO'SW 1],10000 113,10000 !7,60000 17,600,00 116,000,00 16,00000 94,00000 94.00000 3PILEPAM110N6PAINTWO,UNLL"3mrUr0AS10N0 OrAILNr.CE89AnY MATERIALS AND TOOLS, Of--- — _1 ❑1UCSII:R LlOA'51.1161 921,00000 {71,000 OD 1110,00000 110,00000 110,000.00 {10,00000 pO,ODo 00 {35,00000 4 PREPAnAT10NAPAMTING, INCLLICINOrURMSI6N0 Or ALL NF.CESSA11V MAIERIALB I TOOLS OF ME_ _— DIOEBIrn WALL5,P6'INn,b OVERrLoW110R 1 LUMP SUM 65.60000 16.000 DD 16.00000 (6.000.00 16,00000 16,00000 {6.000 OD {6.00000 TOTAL 6CHEOIIL!•A' X17],60000 {106,100.00 --- [770.00000 _---. {W",4"W At AUrAlDFOIICI (.))TOn COtAPIElINOOIGElITF"_— - - _ .-- _—.. —_—_—{]7.60000 W9I,LLUIIONOVDCCF.MUFR31,100] 11100.000OD 627.600.00 111.00000 A7 AOOIDr.DMC1(./jFORCONPIElIN01„LIESICR WBIALIATx7NOY-JU .1.lOW Per, I of 3 Extension of Bids REPLACEMENT OF SECOND STAGE ANAEROBIC DIG ESTER COVER CITY OF_MONTICELLO CITY PROJECT NO. 93-07C OSM PROJECT NO. 5098.00— tns _ 400D LOS _%a Eo 00.45 {78.40000 f 1.800 M ROF COVER PLATE 7 FURMSII A INSTALL 114'O — _ __ — A (0105.000LDS) -- -- 5000 _ L89_ - LOW BID )ER 2ND BIDDER 3RD BIDDER 4TH BIDDER 1045 /4.500 CD ORIOOR_CON_ST. INC. _ ROBERT L. :A_Rn CO. LYSNE CONST., INC. MOORHEAO CONST. CO, I_NC. Otrn Owcrlplbn CA4m81', UN LwA Pr1a Imm Total Urd Prbm Nan TdO URE Pel. RAm TMAI LAII PAn It— T w 810 SCHEDULE W.ti00o0 NO 010 No BIO NO BID I FURMSII/ WWALL TRUSS IUPPORT_!XMRER3 A (0-4W0LRS) — - -___- ----4000 8. 14.001 10 8,000 LOS) -- — - - tns _ 400D LOS _%a Eo 00.45 {78.40000 f 1.800 M ROF COVER PLATE 7 FURMSII A INSTALL 114'O — _ __ — A (0105.000LDS) -- -- 5000 _ L89_ - UGl _{3].00000 --- 8. (5.001 TO ISAW LOS)--- MOO LDS 1045 /4.500 CD 3 FMMS14l NSTALL Ip• - STFEL SIURT PLATE-____ - -- - _.__ __— -- -_-, _----- — - — - - A. 40T06,00o L8B)_ _ _ . - {000 L85 - _ _ _L5.30 ",rwoom 0 (5,0001 7015,000 I, 117) 10000 L85 1045 W.ti00o0 4 1URMSl1 { WSIALL LtUMAYS CENTER WELL— MSCFIIANFOUSCOVCR AIMRIRTf.NANCF.s. NEW STOPS ILIFIW(1 MILS t LLDAWSUM 17.10000 1/.MW S FURMSHA INSTALL WSL/LAt10N AND ROOFING I LLAW SUM $7,000,00 f7,o0000 8PRCPMIATIONl PA0"WO,WCLUINNO /URNI51010 OF ALL NCCCSSARV MAIEMALO ANT) TOOLS. OF TICo1REITCR COVER I LWW CUM 177.400.00 11".4am 0 Pop- 2 of 3 7 PREPAnATIGN A PAI/TWO, IICLUDM _ f URMSHWO OF ALL NECESSAnY MATERIALS O TOCK B OF THE. DIGESTER WALLS. PFPM AND OVERFLOW BOX Extension of Bids REPLACEMENT OF SECOND _STAG ANAEROBIC DIG STER COVER _E CITU OF MONTICELLO 0RF.INSTALLATKIN OF COVER ON ANAEROBIC _ —_--- — - — -- CITY PROJECT NO.—93-07C I--- UN1 Plb Qa01 Tad OSM PROJECT NO. 5098.00 DX1EsIFR LIAAPSl1M LOW BID )ER _ OnIDOn CONST. INC._ Dam DaaclYXla11 0—d" Ii11 UrA Prks Mm Tad 7 PREPAnATIGN A PAI/TWO, IICLUDM _ f URMSHWO OF ALL NECESSAnY MATERIALS O TOCK B OF THE. DIGESTER WALLS. PFPM AND OVERFLOW BOX 1 LLXW SUM SS,]0000 {5.]0000 0RF.INSTALLATKIN OF COVER ON ANAEROBIC _ —_--- — - — -- —_—I UN1 Plb Qa01 Tad Ui Prim Mm Total DX1EsIFR LIAAPSl1M !10.50000 1110,50000 0 I Ur"S/I AMSALL CONCRETEBALLAST Rm — — -12 CUYD Sm" /10.60000 10 MOnlIVATIONIDFM001LVATI4ON _ --- -- 1 LUMP SUM SO.= 00 {0,000.00 TOTAL OCNEOULE'O' $140,511000 PBr' 9 of 3 2ND BIDDER 3RD BIDDER 4TH BIDDER ROBERT L. CARR CO. LYSNE CONST., INC. MOORHEAD CONST. CO. INC. UN1 Plb Qa01 Tad Ui Prim Mm Total I" P11ca I b I" ND 80 NO BID NO BW Council Agenda - 7/26/43 A. Consideration of approval of annual evaluation and planning Purvey, for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regarding the sanitary sewer collection system and wastewater treatment facility. IR.W.1 A. REFERENCE AND BA(XGR IUND The city of Monticello, along with PSG, recently took part in the MPCA's Planning process for an annual evaluation and planning survey. The city and PSG were one of the participants i n the program developing tui evaluation and planning survey that will become it requirement of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency next year. The primary purpose of the evaluation and survey is to have cities take a good look at their sanitary sewer collection and treatment systems and to open the line of communication hetween first line operators, city administrators, and city mayors and council members in regard to the status and needs of these systems. As part. of the planning for this su rvey, it preliminary survey form was drafted and all purl icipant.s were asked to complete the survey as will he required in the future. '['his includes the appl icahle city council review and adoption of the survey by resolution and sending it In the IVA this year. We have enclosed a copy of the completed documentwith the agenda item for your review. Any changes requested by the 01y Council can he made a1 Monday evenings nmeling prior to final approval of the document. Next year's document, will be slightly different than tehone included in (.his year's survey haled upon the results from part icipating cities and the information provided un the survvvs themselves. It, ALTERNATIVE M71'It1NS 'I'be firstalternative is to adopt, the annual evaluation and planning survey by resolution as drafted: affix the necessary signatures of the nupvo•, w'astewate'r treatment plant operator, and city adininislralor; nod forward the survey to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, The second alt,crnative is tAI make tiny changes as requested by the City Council prior to approval, then affix the necessary signatures, and fiorward it to the Minnesota hillution Cuntrul Agency. Council Agenda - 7/2619:3 The third alternative would be to not approve the annual evaluation and planning survey at this time, how out of the planning participant program, and wait until the final survey comes out next year. This does not appear to he in the best interest of the city at this time as it's better for us to he part of the overall planning program. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director and Kelsie McGuire of Professional Services Group that City Council approve the report as drafted as outlined in alternative #l. This is, in reality, step #I of our process toward expansion of the Wastewater Treatment. Plan in the future. Step #2 is PSG's facility evaluation report and step #3 would be a facility planning report by a consulting engineer. D. SUI'I'()RTING DATA: Copy of MI'CA'S annual evaluation and planning survey; Cope of resolution for adoption of the survey. A, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Kelsey McGuire Wastewater Treatment Operator City of Monticello P.O. Bo: 1147 Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Dear Kelsey: RE: Annual Evaluation and Planning Survey We contacted you recently concerning your municipality's participation in the Annual Evaluation and Planning Survey pilot project. Enclosed is the survey form for completion. Although the form is several pages in length, most of the questions can be answered by checking yes, no or not applicable. As we indicated in our previous letter, the survey was developed in accordance with a lav passed in 1992 by the Minnesota legislature. The committee which developed the form was composed of wastewater treatment facility operators and managers, city clerks, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission staff, consulting engineers, Minnesota Public Facilities Authority staff, and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff. The purpose of the form is twofold. First, the committee believes completion of the form will help facilitate planning and communication between wastewater operators, municipal officials, and the MPCA. Second, we believe the form will provide a more accurate assessment of the wastewater needs in the State of Minnesota. The survey process will take place over several months. After the form is completed and returned to the Agency, the responses will be compiled and a response letter describing any findings will be sent to your municipality. The letter may contain information about maintenance of your system, where you may locate more information on a specific subject, or it may suggest you contact MPCA staff concerning a problem, etc. We are asking for your assistance during the survey process. As you and/or municipal officials complete the form, please make note of questions which are unclear, invalid, not useful, missing, etc., and of how much time was required to complete it. We want your input to help make the process effective and efficient for all of us. We are providing two copies of the form for your use. one form should be accurately filled out, attested to by municipal officials and submitted to me by August 1, 1993. The second form is for your use in making notes and suggestions to improve the form and survey process. Please bring this second copy to the meeting you will be attending in June. Pi toted on racycl ed pis pet conte intnp at leo at 10 percent popes to eye Iad by cone ueet e. 520 Lotayeno Rd, St Poul MN 55155.4 t84, (012) 288-0300. RoWtonal otttcos Duluth • Brainard • Detroit Lakos a Mar0reli - Rocnoatot® Eo" eppaoenty Enwwrr. P,e,bo m pe P Ytlld Po Kelsey McGuire Page 2 Also included with this letter is a summary of some your monitoring report information for 1992. Please review the information and, if errors are found, return the report to us with corrected information along with the survey form. Thank you for your participation in the pilot project. Ve believe the final outcome of the process will be a more cooperative effort to address wastewater treatment concerns. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the survey, please contact me at (612) 296-8766 or 1-800-657-3864 or Telecommunications Device for the Deaf at (612) 297-5353. Sincerely, Deb Lindlief Operations/Training Unit Municipal Section Vater Quality Division DL/jmg Enclosures cc: Mr. John Simola, Public Vorks Director Mr. Rick Volfsteller, Administrator 0 ANNUAL EVALUATION AND PLANNING SURVEY REVIEY MEETING AGENDA 12:00 Velcome and Introduction 12:30 Lunch 1:00 Form Reviev and Discussion 2:00 Questions (D ANNUAL EVALUATION AND PLANNING SURVEY :: • ' ,I:1401u AGENDA 12:00 Welcome and Introduction 12:30 Lunch 1:00 Form Reviev and Discussion 2:00 Ouestions I The Annual Evaluation And Planning Survey Minnesota Pollution Control Agency MuNcoc fly Name PemNt Number City of Monticello MN0020567 9-1001 • • ? •il • hl:11� Ilfa1►11 1 PAGE 1 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM LOADINGS AND PERFORMANCE ©Em c -i Treatmerd Systems (Spray ire dior% rtq)id irl lira m dmWWds) 1. The indudent design flaw for your soil treatment sytem is: '11tc irifliaw design hiachr--x,-al rxygw demand (BOD) for your tre=e ryr= is: a. How many months did the following exceed 90% of the design values listed above? Flow BOD b. How many months did de following exceed design values? Flow BOD 2 Were the design hydraulic application rates exceeded an any sites? ❑ ❑ 3. Were there any discitmges to sttface wamrs? ❑ ❑ d. Does the system have enough site acreage to accept all of the water received? ❑ ❑ 3. Do lea sees ever refuse to aaeept water per dt it lease agmements? ❑ ❑ ❑ 6. Did any monitoring well sample msuls exceed ❑ a. 250 mg/L chlorides? ❑ b. 10 mg/L nitrate -nitrogen? ❑ ❑ t►1f���J\�r�4�l�Jl TREATMENT SYSTEM PHYSICAL CONDITION now AO systems 1. Age of the facility: 11 y r e (may is defined as the number of years since the last const action to incase the organic or hydraulic capacity of the facility.) 1aoe,ne 2 Are theft any valves piping ptanps etc that will require major re csff?la ion t within the ensu 20 five years? ❑ Identify items needing m7a r or mplaoernent Digester covers, WAS pumps, scum pumps, aeration flow split, T.F. distributors & Block, digester Ras handling system, manholes at the WWTF M Lm f processes For the pmcesses listed below, indicate whedw egndpn=L etuctt m ere., wiU require major repair err replacement within the next five years Activated Sludge x , "1 0 PAGE 2 .L:1.1y11�1ur ryeci c 1 Lff* FII c._%4cI w O®p�®1 Chemical Fad Fquipmatt (including phosphorous removal. pli adjustment. ar.) ❑ pl L Clarifiers (including primary, secondary. Imhoff tanks, etc.) ❑ ® ❑ iialtif2GTiiiB (llii.itiltla '.r.G.`::.�iS}-Lu be added ®U ❑ Fluent Firs I Inanaaaon i ❑ ® ❑ Intermittent Sand Filters ❑ ® ❑ Preliminary Treannent (mch)4grit removal conuninimir . screening. etc.) ❑ ® ❑ Rotating Biological Contactors ❑ ® ❑ Sequencing Batch iieactors 1:150 ❑ Sludge Composting ❑9 ❑ Sludge Dewa=ing - maybe ®❑ ❑ SludgeDignm - covers, piping, gas handling system ©❑❑ Sludge'Ilddoening ❑ ❑ TricklingFilterr -maybe (listed previously) ®❑❑ Pond unR processes (such as , cw ted, washing, etc.) [�- 1. Is there any dap rooted vegetation (e.g., catmtls, etc.) in ponds or dtflms? ❑ ❑ 2 Are there any burtowing rodents living in the ponds a dke3? ❑ ❑ 3. Will any of the following rwed major repair or teplaocment within the not five years? a) Lina or seal ❑ ❑ b) Lift statists ❑ ❑ c) Rip -rap ❑ ❑ d) Dik- ike) e)Control sauataes ❑ ❑ f) All-weather mad ❑ ❑ 4. Will any other eghhipmew mgtme major mpav or replranew within the neat five yew? ❑ ❑ Identify tow of mUg repair Q Rpla=ient i off x IVI Ili ►■\U LOA PAGE 3 W treatment systems (s>ich as qyay mpid b1ftafim ©®m %cdi d etds, eta.) z 1. During dry weather conditions, are there soft spots. seepage or pooling of water on the gourd surface? ❑ ❑ 2 Is there an unusual growth of vegetation in or new the soil nsatmem system arra (e.g., carrails plush green areas, etc.)? ❑ ❑ 3. Is there established vegetative cover on the soil treatment system and is it mowed regularly) ❑ ❑ 4. If present, we the ground water monitoring wells up to %nnesota Department of Health codes? ❑ ❑ S. Will any other equipment require major repair or replacement within the next five years? ❑ ❑ Identify items needing repair cr replaarnent C %Ctkm system ❑ 1. How many times in the last year did bypasses or overflows occur (Sanitarydistricts ars not required to answer part a of this question.) a in any part of the sewer collection system? a ❑ b. at the treatrtrent system? a c. Of the number listed in a and b., how many were due to: Rain or Snow Melt (Infiltration/Inflow) Equipment Failure _ 2 Does a plan exist to remove any infiltration or inflow? ® ❑ 3. How many rainfalls in the last year caused basement backups? a ❑ (Sanitary districts are not mquired to enswa this questiorm.) tlf� it�i►�t�lYaatl�it� TREATMENT SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE a®® System Opereffim 1. How many days per week is the wastewater tr eat em system tt dbV 7 1 How many hours per day is the wastewa= treatment system staffed? 3a-veekdayn; 6 -weekend dayo 6 hol ldayo List this as a total per day G.e., hours), not a total per person per day. Total daily flow measurement: a. Has the influent (err effluent) flow mete that treasures total daily flow been calibrated within the last yeae ® ❑ MAI I M :tfrl.mQpl PAGE G b. If total daily flow is detcrn fined by ruining time metQs on lift station pumps, was the pumps MMM calibrated widdm the last year.) ❑ ❑ c If flow is not tntamu ed using a flow mete or turning 6= meters, bow we total daily flows measured? 4. Have any operational problems been experienced within the last yeaft ® ❑ ❑ Pk 4w describe: 1) Odors - sulfides 2) Influent line to the plant plugged with debris If yes, were any of the problems attributable to commercial cr indusarial discharges? �( 5. Where is the labonmory worst conducted (excluding dissolved oxygen, pH and chlorine residoml): Facility Laboratory Ce tiScarim Number Contract Laboratory 1 CzTf1fcafi mNumber tiidweet Analytical Labe "em Mdrdwance 1. Does a scheduled preventive maintenance program exist for- a. the reamxni system? ® ❑ b. the collection system? ®❑ L 2. Is the preventive maintemrtce schedule being adheed to and are accurate records being maintained? ®❑ ❑ 3. Docs a routine inspection prtogtarn for the collecdoo system exist? ®❑ ❑ 4. Describe any major repairs or equipment replacement that were trade in the last year. Do not include if the system is las than ore yew old (as indicated in Swam Two, All systems). Operator CeffcciHm rid ft&ft 1. What is the treatment 6ytent't rinadfirntion? (Ckk one) A B C D 2. Is the operator in responsible charge of the system certified W a class equal to or greeter than the sytrorn's classification? ® ❑ 3. Has the above ope aw attended any training within the last year's ® ❑ 4• How Many Other epMMdoes ftSyT=employ? 4 0 YVTP; 3 Yater b Colloction oystom S. How many of them ate certified at some level? 4 ( 3 ) 6. Does an ongoing safay raining pn* m exist for the system? ® ❑® �C1R�lll� ►11111 [i1 PAGE 5 1. Please complete the following using information from the last fiscal year.. (1992 ) 0©m SLUDGE AND SEPTAGE ❑ 1. Does the system generate a sludge that is land applied? ©❑ ❑ If yes, does the system employ or contract with a certified Type IV waste system (sludge) upenatcd.' ❑ 2. If sludge is landspread, does the system have mom than six months of storage? ®❑ ❑ 3. Ate an adequate number of MPCA approved aces available w apply the system's sludge production forthenextyeat'? YES, if everything goes right. ®® ❑ 4. will any new landspmading sites be applied for in the next 12 months? ®❑ ❑ 5. Have any site complaints been received regarding sludge or wptage? ❑ ❑ 6. How marry individual sewage treatment systems exist in the service area and how many buildings de theysnw? 5+ 7. Have the individual system's septic ranks beta pumped in the last three yc=? ❑ ❑ 8. Does the municipality have a septage disposal plan? needs updating—very few tanks ❑ ❑ a Is the septage disposal plan in accmdanee with the pemnit? ❑ ❑ Pq b. Docs the septage disposal plan address buildings not connected to the collection system? ®❑ ❑ 9. Will any other equipment require major repair or replacement within the next five years? ❑ ❑ Identify items needing repay or replacement: digesters that were covered previously need additional lands for sludge application FINANCIAL AND ORDINANCE STATUS (yttrP 6 COLu TIt3B STST@r tJO usimm) 1. Please complete the following using information from the last fiscal year.. (1992 ) REVENUES EXPENDITURES User (urges $ 422,107 Opefation R Maintenance S 436.937 Taxes + S Training + S 2.000 Other + $ 11.177 Debt Service + S Total o S 433.284 Total o S 438.937 I Did expenditures for openuion St maintenance and aalaing exceed user dtaaga? 5 ❑ Dom the municipality have an equipment replacement account? © ❑ r. Does the municipality have a capital replacement exeunt? ❑ C 5. Are revenues and expetditum for the wastewater neammt system kept in ammo separate from PAGE 6 Y N NA tots -waver ac owu (e.g, water utilities, public works, cot.)? a ❑ 6. Who.* wM the &T of rhe ILct v ser jm Charge system review? Dec 14. 1992 Date of the last rat adjusauem Jan 1. 1993 7. Monthly Residential User Rare (excluding debt service) a Base RateS10/avarter (first 500 cubic feet) b. If you use a per unit dtarge: per 1.000 gallons $_ x 5 =f_ orper100cubicfW(efter first 500)SL.6�bE6.68=S 11.02 c. Total Residential User Ram (based on an average 5.000 gallons per household per month) f 34.83 per qtr • 3 e $11.61 per month 8. Are all users dwged proportionately to their use? 19 ❑ 9. Does an industrial user rete schedule or suttherge rate exist? ® ❑ 10. Has the municipality adopted a sewer use ordinance? ® ❑ If yes, does the ardinante: L Control new connections © ❑ b. Prohibit clear water omumcdons ❑ c. Prohibit toxics 0 ❑ d. Allow the municipality to require pretreatment ® ❑ e. Require annual nodficadon of cost to all users 1121 f. Provide for enforcement of the ordinance X❑ ❑ 11. Does the municipality have pretreatment agreements/permits with significant industrial users? O ❑ ❑ If yes, do the agtxmenn have limits? © ❑ Have thea been any violations of limier? X❑ ❑ 12. For soil treatment systeau: ❑ a. If a sewer use ardinerroe exists, does it eddren routine maintenance for single homeDwrmer onsite sewagea�nent>y=�andp�d�of� ? o❑❑ b. Does time mmmicipality require single bomeowner systems be inspected std btm*a up to code at the time of kdWing permit epplicadon, point of sale or complaints? © ❑ ❑ c. Does die municipality restrict the discharge of nondorrtesoc warm to the municipal system or single soil treatment systems? ❑ ® ❑ d. Dow the mwidpaluy allow newly ontimu d homes o be saved by individual aeannes sysserns7 ❑ ® G U yea, does the municipality have adiamm and an inspections program to ennae that the new system is fly ►ocMd. designed and built? 1:113 6 REB I&LIMAIM PAGE 7 FUTURE NEEDS O©m 1 What is the expected increase in the average wet weather (matimum monthly) flow over the next five years? .24 (million gallons per day) ( 362 ) 2. What is the expected increase in the maximum monthly ioamngs for the folit»iing uver the next five years? BoichcrnicajoxygenDernand83,600 (pp month) 2750 //er0-4-t- Total Suspended Solids 62.624 (poux&month) 2060 //ea-ia- 1%z, Ammonia J n/a (potmds/matth) Phosphorus n/a (potmds/mortth) 3. Will the five year projected average wet weather flow rate exceed the system design capacity? ❑ O 4. Will the five year projected matimum monthly loadings exceed the system design capacity? ❑ 5. Are you planning any major treatment facility or collection system improvements cr etpansiwts in the nerd five years? ❑ Il If yes, please complete the following. Description of work Years of Construction Estimated Cost a Name. author and date of document than fisted the above cost estimate (erg., facilities plan. engineering zepmL engineer study, etc). Write "None" if estimate was not documcrosd. Facility plan is proposed to be done in 1994. 6. Do you have any plans to connect any of the unsmwed hones in year service arm to your municipal treatment system within the met fiver ycmrs? ©❑ ❑ L If ycs. how many? 2 b. Anddpatedyear(s)ofconsauctim: 1991 (main line) c. Total estimated cost n/a 7. If you identified future construction pmject(s) in 05, art you Qntetested in receiving infam ation regarding financial ne ieearm through the State Revolving Lout Program? ❑ ❑ G� Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Annual Evaluation and Planning Survey Form Instructions May 1993 The Annual Evaluation and Planning Survey is divided into six sections. Many sections contain portions which do not apply to your wastewater treatment system. Please review each section carefully to determine whether it is applicable. SECTION ONE: WASTEVATER TREATMENT SYSTEM LOADINGS AND PERFORMANCE (SOIL TREATMENT SYSTEMS ONLY) This section requests loading and performance information regarding soil treatment systems only. Please complete Section One if spray irrigation, rapid infiltration, or drainfields are included in your system. For treatment system types other than soil treatment, a separate summary report of your system's discharge monitoring reports for the previous calendar year is enclosed with this form. Please review this information for accuracy. If the summary contains errors, please correct them on the summary and return it to us with the completed form. SECTION TWO: TREATMENT SYSTEM PHYSICAL CONDITION This section is divided into five parts. Please complete the part(s) that apply to your treatment system. SECTION THREE: TREATMENT SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Yhen completing questions 1. and 2., please use an average estimate. It is not necessary to reviev timesheets for these questions. If a laboratory certification number is not listed in question S., it will be assumed that the laboratory used by your system is not certified. SECTION FOUR: SLUDGE AND SEPTAGE This section contains questions pertaining to both landspreading of sludge and individual sewage treatment systems (permitted on-site systems). Please complete the questions that pertain to your system. SECTION FIVE: FINANCIAL AND ORDINANCE STATUS Questions 4. and S. refer to specific dedicated funds. An equipment replacement account is money set aside for replacement of equipment such as pumps, tractors, etc. A capital replacement account is money sat aside for future upgrades to your system or replacement of mayor components in your system. SECTION SI%: FUTURE NEEDS Please use the beat information you have available when completing this portion. The information requested does not have to be obtained from an engineering study or facility plan. G? DATA CERTIFICATION AND FORM SUBMITTAL After the form is completed, the municipal authority (e.g., city council, sanitary district board, etc.) must certify by resolution that the information provided in *.ho Survey is correct. A sample certification is included for your use. Please attach a copy of the resolution to the certification. The Survey and certification must be submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency by August 1, 1993. Please submit them to: Deb Lindlief Vater Quality Division Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Thank you for your cooperation in the Annual Evaluation and Planning Survey. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Annual Evaluation and Planning Survey Sample Certification Form City of or Name of Sanitary District State of Minnesota We certify per the attached resolution that the information provided in the Annual Evaluation and Planning Survey is correct to the best of our knowledge. Mayor/Chair Date Wastewater Treatment Operator Date City Clerk/Administrator Date 101 RESOLUTION 93 - RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ANNUAL EVALUATION AND PLANNING SUR E : F CIL T HE i MIN-1-MSOTA POLLUTION COA'i110L AGENCY WHEREAS, the Minnesota Legislature has recently passed a law that will require municipalities to annually complete an evaluation and planning survey of their wastewater treatment facilities for MPCA review, and WHEREAS, the City of Monticello was requested to participate in an annual evaluation and planning survey pilot project by completing a draft copy of the survey report, and WHEREAS, the annual evaluation and planning survey report has been completed, presented, and reviewed by the City Council of Monticello; NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA that the annual evaluation and planning report as prepared is accurate to the best of our knowledge and is authorized to be submitted to the MPCA as part of the pilot project. Adopted by the City Council this 26th day of July, 1993. Mayor City Administrator Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator [a] Council Agenda - 7/26/93 9. Consideration of advertisine in Fall Parade of Homes booklet— Suhurhnn Northwest Builders A99n. lR.W.! A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND The city was recently contacted by the Elk River Star News which produces the Suburban Northwest Builders Assn I'arade of Humes magazine. This Parade of Homes magazine primarily services the Elk River area and Elk River huilders. The association used to he known as the Greater Elk River Area Builders Assn but they have recently changed the name to Suburban Northwest Builders Assn to get away from strictly Elk River area. A sales represeittaLive, I'eg %occoli, has requested to he un the agenda to ask the City Council for suptlort by considering placing an ad in the magazine. At first glance, it docs not appear that the placement of an ad by the City of Monticello would he of much Iteneftt to us as the majority if not till of the homes shown in the preview are in the Elk River and not in Monticello. questioned I'cg as to whether any Monticello huilders will Ix� in the Fall Parade of flumes and site was nol, aware of any at this lime. In reviewing the latest two ntagar.ines, the fall of 1112 and spring of 1993, no other city other (.hall Elk !fiver hits any advertisement or information in the magazine, and the Spring. UP..13 magazine did not have any other advertisers or home builders from the Monticello area. 1'reslige Hume, did place an advertisement and wits included un the Parade of Homes in the fall of 1992, but I'm not, aware if they will ho doing sit this fall. As you con see from the advertisement rule sheet, rales range from $186 fur it I/S page ad to $1035 for it full page advertisement.. As I mentioned earlier, unless there tire specific homes in the Monticello arca un the parade, I do not tree whtu lwnefit. there would he in advertising the City of Monticello when people are not likely to tour Monticello if there ore not any homes to look tit. 11. ALTERNATIVE At1f1ONS: 1. Authorize the placement of an ad, size to 1m determined. 2. Do not phrcc an ad at this time. C. STAT -'F RECOMMENDATION: Without further assurances that line lir more meal builders will have parade homes in the preview, I would notrecnnunend spending funds for tun advertisemeal Ihat primarily services the Elk River area. While I nnenliuned Council Agenda - 7/26/93 this to the sales representative, she still requested permission to appear before the Council to try and convince the city of the merits in advertising. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Fall home preview advertising rates; Copies of the Spring, 1993 and Fall, 1992 magazines. E'.kC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 07/02/03 09:51 :42 WAkkANT DATE VErJOGF.• GENERAL CHECK[NG 35066 06/30/93 SAEN1/MARTHA 35119 06/30/93 MIOWEST VISION DISTR 35179 06/30/93 MIDWEST VISION 35179 06/30/93 MIDWEST VISION OESTR 35179 06/30/93 MIDWEST VISION 01STF: 35295 06/30/93 INOUSTkIAL MAINT. SII 35301 06/30/93 MIDWESI V15:1014 DISTR 35301 06/30/93 MIDWEST VISION DISTR 35301 06/30/93 MIDWEST VI::ION DISIk 35301 06/30/93 MIDWEST VISION OISfR 35334 06/30/93 HAYES/WILMA 35334 06/30/93 HAVES/WIIMA, Oisbursemenr Jgtrnal DE SCF.J PTION AMOUNT 90299 CHECK VOIDED 9.I?CR 279 ADJUST COOING/GLASSES 14.00CR 279 ADJUST COOING/GLASSES ??.00 279 AOJUST COOING/GLASSES 2.00CR 279 ADJUST COOIrJG/GLASSES. 6.00Ck 0.00 514 CHECK VOIDED 242.67CR 279 ADJUST" CODING/GLASSES 85.00 279 ADJUST CODING/GLASSES 18.0008 279 ADJUST COOING/GLASSES 18 DOCK' 279 ADJUST CODING/GLASSES 49.00CR 0.00 285 INFO CENIER SALARY 91.38 785 INFO CENTER SALARY 26 88C 64.50 35335 06/30/93 AROPLAA CORPORATION 701 PFIMB/EOIJIPMF.Nf LO 16,996.18 35336 06/30/93 RED'S MO01L 374 REPAIR OLD INSP VAN 244.66 35 33 7 06/30/91 NENNEPIN TECHNICAL C .90175 REG FFE/MOGiRCS R MASK 80.00 35338 06/30/93 MARQUE11E e.ANK MON1I 22? FICA WH/K IkIPPE SICK 50.63 35338 06/30/93 MAROUE[ FE 1tANK NiOril [ ?:?2 ME -0 WH/K TRIPPE 5IC%r P 11.90 6?.S3 35339 06/30/93 511EARSOPJ LE11MAN f1ROf `,59 Co/ INVFSfMFN TS 72.546.00 0, 34 0 06/30/93 MN DEPAFI C)F NAI URAL 116 WAIERCRAFI 111LE 365.00 35141 U6/30/93 MN OFPAkf OF NAlUkAL 118 WATER/';N()W/ATV REG 516.00 ?'.,342 06/30/93 MINNESOTA CITY MANAG 2 D 0 MEMBERSHIP DUES/JEFF U 60.00 35343 06/30/93 CFI I ULAk ONE 555 1:IV11 OFFENSE PHONF C 101.41 41,344 06/30/93 ADOPT A Pf 1 4 ANIMAL ADOPI LONE. 190.00 3'+345 06/30/93 MINNF.COTA HOMFWARD B 704 ANIMAL ADOPTION,, 100.00 35346 06/30/93 MONIICELLU ANIMAL (0 1E)5 ANIMAL ADOPI]ONE, 380.00 3'r 31.7 06/30/93 MONTII,FI 10 ANIMAI CO 105 kFIMO/ClI :ANING �;UPPI I ?36.00 V. RC, FINANCIAL SYSl EM 07/02/93 09:51:42 WARRANT PATE VENOOR GENERAL CHECKING 35348 06/30/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 35349 06/30/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 35350 06/30/93 VAUGHN/MAYNARD GENERAL CHECKING T r Disbursement •Journal DESCkIPTION AMOUNT 118 b'ATEP.CRAFT TITLE 166.00 118 WATER/SNOW/ATV REG 376.00 90305 RE1M6/DAMAGED WIND:.HI 1 17. 82 TOTAL 93,038.37 E:RC fIfJArJCIAL SVS1E r4 07/01/93 14:50:05 WARRANT DAT E VErJGOR GF. NE RAL CHECKING 35351 07/02/93 AMERI DATA 35352 07/02/93 ARA CORY REFRESHMENT 35353 07/02/93 ASAP SOFTWARE EXF•F,*ES 35354 01/02/93 BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT 35355 07/02/93 BUSINESS RECORDS COR 35355 07/02/93 BUSINESS RECORDS COR 35356 01/02/93 CHAMPION AMERICA INC 35357 07/02/93 COMMUNICATION AUDI10 35358 01/02/93 COMPRESS AIR 8 EQUIP 35359 07/02/93 0 & K REFUSE PA CYCAI 35360 07/02/93 FRONTLINE PLUS FIRE 35360 07/02/93 FRONTLINE PLUS FIRE 35361 07/02/93 HEkMES/.JEPRV 35362 01/02/93 HOLIDAY CREDIT OFFIC 35363 07/02/93 LUKACH/JOHN 35363 07/02/93 IJIKACH/.JOHN 35363 07/02/93 LUKACH/JOHN 35363 07/02/03 LUKACH/JOHN 3',364 01/02/93 MONTICELLO ANIMAL CO 35365 07/02/93 MONI I C E I L 0 SENIOR CI 35366 01/02/93 MOO RF. S/TOM -0',167 01/02/93 NOFTHWE 51 ASbOC Cl1N�, 3536H 07/02/93 O'NLII I./TEFF 3`360 07/02/93 U'NEILL/JIFf 31060 07/02/93 O'NEILI./JEFF 35169 07/0?/03 ft!L)N, Nti;E1,A(,AtJ A 35369 07/02/9.3 DL E.ON. U1.SE 1,AGAN A 35169 U1/02/93 01.:i Oto, USsE T,A(;AtJ A Oishursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 9 COMPUTER CLASS/C SHIJM 100.00 408 CITY HALL SUPPLIES 42.00 667 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 292.27 26 PROF SERV/ECON OEVE 1.725.00 27 SEWER/WAIER FORMS 388.85 27 SEWER/WATER FORMS 388.85 777.70 752 SIGNS/NEN WARMING HOU 102.65 38 REPAIR PAGERS/FIRE DEP 23.04 356 FIRE HALL EGU IPMEN I R 622.46 611 RECYCLING CONTRACT 2.340.90 510 CREDIT/MERCH RETURN 16.50CR 510 CLOIHING SUP/FIF:E DEF' )49.52 333.02 81 LIBRARY CLEANING SERV 727.50 85 GAS/FIRE DEPT 120.67 327 MILEAGE EXPENSE 65.87 127 MIL FADE F.XPEN';E I1.9G 327 MILEAGE EXPtNSC 21,95 327 MILFAC,F F.XPfNSE 21.96 131.74 185 ANIMAL CONTROL CONT 1 • 100.00 139 MON1HLY CON1klElU11O 2,833.33 303 MILEAGE EXPENjE/$FMINA 10.40 b50 PROF SERV/PLAN E 7C -N1 090.21 161 MILEAGE EXPF.N'1E 25.16 161 MILEAGE EXPErJ-.E 56.00 161 MILEAGE EXPENSE 10.60 92.36 292 MItiC IEGAL SERVICE 2,052.15 232 PROF SE kV/C HILLS 111 591.25 2F12 PR01• Sf:PV/KRAMEk PRUP 150.00 1 BKC, F INANCIAL SYSTEM 01/01/93 14:50:05 WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 35310 07/02/93 PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 35371 07/02/93 QUALITY LAWN MAINTEN 35372 07/02/93 REED'S SALES R SEPVI 35373 07/02/93 ROYCE ROLLS RINGER C 35374 07/02/93 SCHLUENOEP CONSTRUCT 35375 07/02/93 WOLFIST ELL ER/RICHARO 35316 07/02/93 WRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP GENERAL CHECKING Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 3.584.00 175 WW TP CONTRACT PYMT 30.421.58 319 GILLE PROP CLEAN UP C 695.00 306 BLADES/PARK SUPPLIES 162.16 754 T PAPER DISPENSERS/F-AR 86.86 187 DIGGING/NEM WARa1ING H 440.00 217 MISC MEETING EXPENSES 40.99 512 UTILIFIES 8.75 TOTAL 47.222.67 4 SkC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 07/09/93 09:14:47 WARRANT DATE VENDOR btNt NAL 1.HtCK1Nb 35372 07/09/93 REED'S SALES A SERVI 35312 07/09/93 REED' S SALES 8 SERVI 35377 07/09/93 SVOBOOA/ROMAN 35378 07/09/93 HAVES/WILMA 35378 01/09/93 NAVES/WILMA 35379 07/09/93 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES 35380 07/09/93 MN OE PART OF NATURAL 35381 07/09/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 35392 07/09/93 MARQUETTE BANK MONTI 35382 01/09/93 MAR9UETTE BANK MONTI 35393 07/09/93 AMCON BLOCK A PRECAS 35383 07/09/93 AMCON BLOCK 6 PRECAS 35384 07/09/93 AME GROUP 35385 07/09/93 ANNANDALE SOD SERVIC 35386 07/09/93 8 6 O PLUM61NO i MEA $5387 01/09/93 SIFfs. INC. 35369 U)/09/93 BIG LAKE LUMBER 35199 07/08/93 BRIOGEWATER TELEOMON 35389 07/08/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 35389 07/08/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 35389 01/09/93 BRIDGEWATER TELIPHON )5399 01/09/9) BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 35)99 07/09/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 19399 07/09/9) SRIOGEWATER TELEPHON 36)99 07/09/9) BRIDGEWATER TELEPMON )5399 01/09/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 15189 07/09/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON ( 39389 01/09/93 6RE06 EWATER TELEPHON 35390 07/08/93 CENTRAL MCGOWAN, INC Oisbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 306 CORECT CODING 162.16 306 CORECT COOING 162.16CR 0.00 << 90306 TREE REPLACEMENT 30.00 285 INFO CENTER SALARY 99.88 285 INFO CENTER SALARY 29.38CR 70.50 t 243 INS DUE/FIRE DEPT OED 500.00 118 WATERCRAFT TITLE 156.00 118 WATERCRAFT/SNOW/ATV R 588.00 221 C D'S/MIRE TO 4M 700.000.00 2? 1 WIRE CHARGE FOR C D'S 20.00 700.020.00 •� 738 CREDIT ON WARMING NOUS 61.07CR 738 SLO REPAIR SUP/PARKS 392.72 3)1.65 •1 B NEW WARMING HOUSE 9 13.4 1 $BS SOD/NEM WARMING MOUSE 335.46 600 PLUMBING/NEW WARMIN 2,940.00 396 LATRINE RENTAL/PARK-., 70.26 110 NEW WARMING MOUSE/PARK 24.09 24 PHONE CHARGES 722.06 24 PHONE CHARGES 62.69 24 PHONE CHARGES 62.99 24 PHONE CHARGES 31,21 24 PHONE CHARGES 93.99 24 PHONE CHARGE 171.01 24 PHONE CHARGES 20.75 24 PHONE CHARGES /35.75 24 PHONE CHARGES 45.19 24 PHONE (HARGIS 25.60 24 NEW PHONE Systems/R, 6.949.25 9.009.91 �! 30 SHOP A GARAGE SUPPL IES 49.67 0 E:RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 07/09/93 09:14:47 WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 35391 07/09/93 COPY DUPLCATING PROD 35391 07/09/93 DAVIS WATER EOUIPMEN 35393 07/09/93 EMED COMPANY INC 35394 07/09/91 FEEDRITE CONTROLS. I 35394 07/09/93 FEEORITE CONTROLS. I 35395 01/09/93 FOREST CITY POAO LAN 35396 07/09/93 GLASS MUT/THE 45397 07/09/93 GOPHER STATE ONE CAL 35398 07/09/93 HOGLUND COACH LINES 35399 07/09/93 J M OIL COMPANY 35399 07/09/93 J M OIL COMPANY 35400 07/09/93 M 6 P TRANSPORT. INC 315401 01/09/93 MACK/ROGER 35402 07/09/93 MARCO BUSINESS PROOU 35402 07/09/93 MARCO BUSINESS PROOU 35403 01/09/93 MARTIE'S FARM SERVIC 35404 07/09/93 MINN POLLUTION CONTR 35405 07/09/93 MINNESOTA STATE TREA 35406 01/09/93 PAGE LINK ?4406 07/09/93 PAGE LINK 15406 01/09/93 PAGE LINK 35406 07/09/93 PAGE LINK 35406 07/09/93 PAGE LINK 3540G 07/09/93 PAGE LINK 35406 01/00/93 PAGE LINK 35406 07/09/93 PAGE LINK Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C 41 COPY MCH MTC/LIBRARY 50.40 290 SUPPLIES/SEWER COLL 464.97 .90286 SIGNS/NEM WARMING HOUS 95.67 55 MISC PROF SERVICES/NAT 48.00 56 CHEMICALS/MATER DEP 1.134.40 1.192.40 503 LANDFILL CHGS/PARKS 127.50 66 NEW WINDOW/LIBRARY 133.00 69 PROF SERVICES/WATER 153.00 483 HEARTLAND EXPRESS C 5.166.14 95 GAS/STREET DEPT 1.735.93 95 OIL/FIRE DEPT 27.40 1.763.73 265 VEH REPAIR/FIRE DEPT 723.22 471 REIMS/NEM WARMING HOU 117.65 106 COPY MCH MTC AGREEM 2.377.68 106 COPY MCH SUPPLY AGR 1.105.47 3.463.15 101 SUPPLIES/PARKb/btEl7 46.90 127 HAZARDOUS WASTE GEN F 141.36 762 6L0 PEPMIT SURCHARGE 903.97 701 PAGER CHARGES 42.60 701 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 701 PAGER CHARGES 24.50 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 701 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 103 PAGER CHARGES 71.30 701 PAGER CHARGES 21.10 703 PAGER CHARGES 21.30 194.90 C15407 07/09/93 QUALITY LAWN MAINTEN 319 MOWING CHARGES 405.00 tC ar •C 04 8RC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 07/09/93 09:14:47 ♦ARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 35408 0)/09/93 RUFF AUTO PARTS 35408 07/09/93 RUFF AUTO PARTS 35409 07/09/93 RYAN CONTRACTING INC 35410 07/09/93 STMONS014 LUMBER COMP 35410 07/09/93 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP 35410 07/09/93 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP 35411 07/09/93 ST. CLOUD RFSTAUkANT 34412 07/09/93 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 35412 07/09/93 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 3 54 12 07/09/93 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 35412 07/09/93 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 35412 01/09/93 UNITDG RENTAL SERVIC 35412 07/09/93 UNITOG RENTAL SERVIC 35413 07/09/93 UNOCAL 35414 07/09/93 VASKO RUBBISH REMOVA 354+4 01/09/93 VASKO RUBBISH REMOVA Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C 268 VEHICLE REPAIRS/FIRE 431.33 288 CLEAN UP/GILLE PROP 1,500.00 11931.33 +C 750 CONST COSTS/C HIL 231.425.13 193 NEW WARMING HOUSE 7.775.95 193 BLD REP SUP/PARKS 10.75 193 PICNIC TABLES/PARKS 483.71 8.270.41 289 LIBRAkY SUPPLIES 26.52 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 21.24 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 21.24 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 12.80 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 12.80 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 51.71 211 UNIFORM RENTAL 51.71 171.50 213 GAS/FIRE DEPT 76.89 S?4 GARBAGE CONTRACT 8.183.80 574 SALES TAX/GAkBAGE CON 531.93 8.715.53 35415 07/09/93 WRIGHT WAY SHOPPER 711 ADVERTISING/HEARTLO 8 179.37 GENERAL i hiLCIII.FJW TOTAL 979.293.50 +L. oC .c SkC FINANCIAL SYSTEM '11/15/93 09:42:33 Oi3bursement Journal WARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMS?l1NT GENERAL CHECKING 35416 07/ 17/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES 8.23 35416 07/12/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES 0.35 35416 07/12/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES 11.98 35416 07/12/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY 115 UTILITIES 30.82 35416 07/12/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANY / 115 WARMING HOUSE HOOKUP 112.70 `i; 164.08 35417 07/12/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 148 WARMING MOUSE NOOKU 3.?25.33 35417 07/12/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 148 WARMING HOUSE HOOKUP 287.83 35417 07/12/93 NORTHERN STATES DOME 148 WARMING HOUSE HOOKU 4,564.86 35417 07/12/93 NORTHERN SrATES POWE 148 WARMING HOUSE HOOK!IP C 78.66 35417 07/12/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 148 WARMING HOUSE HOOKUP 744.30 35417 07/12/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 148 WARMING HOUSE HOOKUP C 14.65 35417 07/12/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 148 WAPMING HOUSE HOOKUP 400.81 35417 07/12/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 148 WARMING HOUSE HOOKUP 253.96 35417 07/12/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 148 WARMING HOUSE HOOKUP 636.88 35417 07/12/93 NORTHERN STATES POWE 148 WARMING HOUSE HOOKUP 849.02 11.056.30 35418 01/12/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 35419 07/12/93 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 35420 07/15/93 A T i T INFO SYSTEMS 35421 07/15/93 A.E. MICHAELS 35421 07/15/93 A.E. MICHAELS 35472 01/IS/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 35422 07/15/9) AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 35422 01/15/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 35472 07/15/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL BA )542? 01/15/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 35427 07/15/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 35422 01/15/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 35422 07/15/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL BA 35422 07/15/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL 6A 33427 07/15/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL BA 35422 07/1S/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 35477 07/15/9) AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 3S422 07/IS/9) AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 35427 07/15/9) AMERICAN NATIONAL BA 35422 01/15/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL SA 35427 07/15/93 AMERICAN NATIONAL BA 116 BOATS/SNOW/ATV REG 455.00 119 BOATS/SNOW/ATV REG 113.00 15 FIRE PHONE CHARGES 23.tO 338 PAIN1/PARKS 19.99 336 PAIf.T/NEW WARMING NOUS 43.09 67.08 1 60 INTEREST/TIF (K 16.092.50 7 80 INTEREST/1969 •1 5,960.00 1 SO INTEREST/1990 B 19.132.50 7 80 INTEREST/TIF CON 9.502.50 1 80 INTEREST/92 FIR 11,110.89 7 BD INTEREST/TIF NAM 3,997.50 7 80 INTEREST/1991A 12.066.75 7 SO INTEREST/TIF VE 12.252.50 7 80 INTEREST/92A C 37.272.09 7 BD INTEREST/1999 6 10.347.50 7 SO INTEREST/SEW* 6 29.091.50 7 6D INTEREST/99 VAT 31.746.75 1 80 INTEREST/1998-1 41.192.50 7 80 INTEREST/TIF It 10.910.00 7 80 INTEREST/90C E S 1.540.00 7 60 INTEREST/TIF RE 12.107.50 270.691.99 35473 01/15/93 ANDERSON i ASSOCIATE 10 PAINT 6 SIGN POSTS/ST 770.00 si BRC FINANCIAL SV STEM 07/ 15/93 09 : 42: 33 WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 35424 07/15/93 BEN FRANKLIN 20 FILM/CARDINAL HILLS PR 15.99 35424 07/15/93 BEN FRANKLIN 20 FILM/ P M INSPECTIONS 10.19 26.37 35425 07/15/93 BEST BARRICADE 22 STREET DEPT VEHICLE M 177.78 35425 07/15/93 BEST BARRICADE 22 VEH REPAIR PARTS/PARKS 15.23 193.01 35426 07/15/93 BRAUN INTERTEC ENVIO 638 ENG FEES/C HILLS II 2.948.25 35426 07/15/93 BRAUN INTERTEC ENVIO 638 ENG FEES/WARMING HOUSE 27.00 35426 07/15/93 BRAUN INTERTEC ENVIO 638 ENG FEES/SCHOOL BLVD 450.00 3,425.25 35427 07/15/93 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS. 25 SAND i GRAVEL/STREETS 364.02 35428 07/15/9) CLARK BOARDMAN CALLA 604 ZONING E: PIAN LAW BOO 224.18 35429 07/15/93 COMMUNICATION AUDITO 39 PAGER REPAIR/FIkE DEPT 18.23 35430 07/15/93 CULLIGAN 75) MAT SOFTNER CHGS/RENTA 23.52 3'431 07/15/93 DEHMER FIRE PROTECTI 674 MTC OF EQUIPMENT/FIRE 30.00 35432 07/15/93 DOUBLE D ELECTRIC. I .90186 FLOOD LITES/WM HOUSE 780.00 35433 07/15/93 EMERGENCY APPARATUS 490 MTC OF FIRE EQUIPME 3.667.81 35434 07/15/93 FIRE ENGINEERING 51 INCIDENT REPORTS/FIRE 39.30 )5435 01/15/9) FIRST TRUST CENTER 58 BD INIEREST/TIF FSI 1.093.75 35436 07/IS/93 FRONTLINE PLUS FIRE 510 EQUIPMENT/FIRE DEPT 2 16.8 7 +5416 07/15/93 FRONTLINE PLUS FIRE 510 BUNKER 90OT5/FIRE DEP 126.35 343.22 35431 07/15/9) GRUYS BORDEN CARLS 74 AUDIT CHARGES 10,750.00 35436 01/15/93 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 16 SMALL TOOLS/SHOP • GAR 50.32 35438 07/15/93 HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY 7• MISC SUPPLIES/MATER 3.13 S3.6S 35439 07/15/93 HERMES/JERRY 01 LIBRARY CLEANING CONT 227.50 35440 01/1%/0) K MART STORE 460 PHONE FOR WARMING HODS 17.94 15441 01/15/9) KEN ANDERSON TRUCKIN 697 PROF SERVICES/ANIMAL 133.13 l/ )5442 01/IS /93 HAUS FOODS 106 MISC SUPPLIES/CITY HAL 43.51 35442 01/15/93 MAUS F0004 109 MISC SUPPLIES/LISRARY 19.94 35442 01/IS/93 MAUS FOODS 108 MSIC SUPPLIES/ANIMAL 25.02 BkC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 07/15/93 09:42:33 WARkANI DATE VENDOk GENERAL CHECKING 35442 07/15/93 MAUS FOODS 35443 07/15/93 MIDWAY INDUSTRIAL SU 35444 07/15/93 MINNESOTA COPY SYSTE 35445 07/15/93 MONIICELLO ANIMAL CO 35446 01/15/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 35446 07/15/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 35446 07/15/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 35446 07/15/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 35447 07/15/93 MONTICELLO ROTARY 35441 07/15/93 MONTICELLO ROTARY 35448 07/15/93 MONTICELLO TIMES 35448 07/15/93 MONTICELLO TIMES 35448 01/1S/93 MONTICELLO TIMES 35449 07/15/93 MOON MOTOR SALES. IN 35450 07/15/93 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 35450 07/15/93 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 35450 07/15/93 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 1S4S0 07/15/93 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 35450 07/15/93 NATIONAL BUSHING PAR 45451 07/15/93 NORWEST BANK MINNESO 35451 07/15/93 NORWEST BANK MINNESO 35452 07/1S/93 000 SCHELEN-MAVERON 15452 07/15/93 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 354S2 07/15/9) 011-SCHELEN-MAVERON 18452 07/15/93 ORR-SCH(LEN-MAVERON 35452 07/1S/93 ORI-SCHELEN-MAYERON 35452 07/15/93 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 3S4S2 07/15/93 04111-SCHELEN-MAYERON 3545) 07/1S/9) PETERSEN'S MONT FORD 35451 07/15/93 PETERSEN'S MONT FORD Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 108 SUPPLIES/NEWSLETTER 30.64 t 19.97 F 114 MTC OF EQUIP/STREETS 116.09 756 COPY MACHINE/FIRE DEP 905.25 165 ANIMAL CONTROL CONT 1,100.00 136 OFFICE SUPPLIES/PW INSP 4.17 136 OFFICE SUPPLIES/LIBRAk 38.57 136 OFFICE SUPPLIES/FIRE 0 21.49 136 OFFICE SUPPLIES/C HAL 376.47 440.65 138 ROTARY DUES/JEFF O 203.00 138 ROTARY DUES/OLLIE K 193.50 396.50 140 BLD PERMIT INFO 48.00 140 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 1.561.60 140 PUBLIC HEARING, NOTICES 83.84 1.693.44 142 VEHICLE REPAIR DARTS/P 38.34 144 VEHICLE REPAIR PARTS/ 181.00 144 VEHICLE MTC/BLD INSPECT 6.35 144 VEHICLE MTC/STREETS 65.06 144 EQUIP REPAIR DARTS/SEM 35.24 144 YEN MTC/FIRE DEPT 78.75 366.41 154 6D INTERES7/1877-1 10.247.50 1S4 AGENT FEES/1917-1 BO 200.00 10.447.50 162 ENG FEES/P WORKS 2.456.90 167 ENG FEES/CTV RD 7S 113.06 162 ENG FEES/86 WATER R 1.114.69 162 ENG F(ES/C HILL PRJ 6.143.77 162 ENG FEES/TIF 15 CUS C 489.94 182 ENG FEES/TIF 14 SUS M 113.06 162 ENG FEES/TIF 12 AROPL 113.06 14.145.83 165 VEH REPAIR PARTS/WATER ),I1 165 VEH REPAIR PARTE/STREE 23.87 27.S9 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 07115/93 09:42:33 nAk RANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 35454 07/15/93 PITNEY BOWES 35455 07/15/93 PREUSSE'S CLEANING S 35455 07/15/93 PREUSSE'S CLEANING S 35456 07/15/93 PRINCIPAI M11TUAL LIF 35457 07/15/93 QUALITY LAWN MAINTEN 35458 07/15/93 RED'S MOBIL 35459 07/15/93 ROYAL TIRE OF MONTIC 35460 07/15/93 TELEPRODUCTS CORPORA 35461 07/15/93 U SHIP INTERNATIONAL 35462 07/15/93 UNITED LABS 35462 07/15/93 UNITED LABS 35463 07/15/93 WATERPRO SUPPLIES CO 35464 07/15/93 WRIGHT COUNTY AUOITO 35464 07/15/93 WRIGHT COUNTY AUOITO 35465 07/15/93 WYBRITE INC. 35466 07/15/93 Y.M.C.A. OF MINNEAPO GENEkAL CHECKING A Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT f 168 POSTAGE MCH MTC/C HAL 114.00 173 FIRE DEPT CLEANING CON 50.00 173 CITY HALL CLEANING CO 400.00 450.00 174 INSURANCE PREMIUM 9.36 319 MOWING CHARGES 780.75 324 OIL/FIRE DEPT 3.6U 227 FIRE DEPT VEHICLE MTC 251.73 749 CONST COSTS/CARO HILI 418.52 757 POSTAGE/MATER SAMPLES 5.63 455 SOAP/SHOP R GARAGE 315.03 455 SOAP/PARKS DEPT 70.77 385.80 670 MATER METERS/WATER DE 494.66 219 SHERIFF'S CONTRACT 21.793.00 219 ADD'L LANDFILL CHO 13.167.55 34.960.55 755 COMPUTER/CITY HALL 7.970.74 224 JULY CONTRACT PYMT 625.00 TOTAL 375.674.64 to 12 rl BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 06/29/93 QUALITY WINE & SPIki 800040 WINE PURCHASE 07/01/93 11:16:44 16982 06/29/93 QUALITY Disbursement Journal 800040 WARRANT DATE VENDOR. OE SCRIPT I ON AIMO U N T CL LIQUOR FUND 16063 06/29/93 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 16974 06/29/93 PHILLIPS F SONS CO/E 800037 WINE PURCHASE 653.80 800022 16975 06/29/93 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 WINE PURCHASE 534.20 16976 06/29/93 GRIGGS. COOPER & CUM 600018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2.415.49 TOTAL 16976 06/29/93 GRIGGS. COOPER & COM 800018 CREDIT/DAMAGED BOTTLES 1.69CR 2.413.60 4CH 16977 06/29/93 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 WINE PURCHASE 1,652.22 16977 06/29/93 JOHNSON BkOs WHOLESA 800022 LIQUOR PURCHASE 4.059.17 51711.39 *CH 16978 06/29/93 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 LIQUOR PURCHASE 3.053.46 16978 06/29/93 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 WINE PURCHASE 44.32 16978 06/29/93 QUALITY WINE & SPIkI 800040 BEER PURCHASE 23.95 3,121.13 fC11 16979 OG/29/93 PHILLIPS & SONS CO/E 800037 WINE PURCHASE 376.90 16979 06/29/93 PHILLIPS & SONS CO/E 800037 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2,106.22 2.483.12 OCH 16980 06/29/93 GRIGGS, COOPER & COM 800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 51269.70 16981 00/29/93 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 WINE PURCHASE 443.02 16982 06/29/93 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 25.79 16982 06/29/93 QUALITY WINE & SPIki 800040 WINE PURCHASE 389.49 16982 06/29/93 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2.064.53 2.479.81 'CH 16063 06/29/93 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2,435.56 16983 06/29/93 JOHWSON BOD: WHOLEE.A 800022 WINE PURCHASE 143.05 2.518.61 *C1 LIQUOR FUND TOTAL 25.688.98 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 07/02/93 14:45:51 Disbursement Journal WARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT Cl LIQUOR FUND 16984 07/06/93 BECKER FURNITURE MOR 800144 CLEAN CARPET 53.75 1698S 07/06/93 BERNICK-S PEPSI COLA 800001 POP PURCHASE 124.20 16986 07/06/93 COAST TO COAST 800004 MISC SUPPLIES 37.26 16986 07/06/93 COAST TO COAST 800004 BLD REPAIR SUPPLIES 8.19 45.65 •Ct 16981 07/06/93 DAHLHEIMER OISTRIB UT 800009 BEER PURCHASE 23.183.45 16987 07/06/93 GAHLHEIMER DISTRIB UT 800009 JUICE FOR RESALE 75.00 23.208.45 *Cl 16988 07/06/93 DAVMOR HAMCO 800065 RECEIPT TAPE 76.54 16989 07/06/93 DAY DISTRIBUTING COM 800010 BEER PURCHASE 897.60 16990 07/06/93 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. 800011 BEER PURCHASE 2,580.30 16940 07/06/93 DICK WHOLESALF CO. , 800011 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 40.65 2.620.95 *CF 16991 07/05/93 DRAYNA PAINTING 800151 PAINT LIQUOR STORE SIG 10.00 16997 01/06/93 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800017 WINE PURCHASE 1.759.97 tb993 01/06/93 GRIGGS, COOPER 0 COM 800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 247.30 16994 07/06/ 93 GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE 1 800019 BEER PURCHASE 14.166.10 16995 01/06/93 HOME JUICE 800138 JUICE PURCHASE 90.10 16996 0//06/93 JUUt CANDY 6 10BALL0 800021 Lll.% 6 (.l(sAkD Fuk Ate, 71U.4b 16996 01/06/9) JUDE CANDY 6 TOBACCO 000021 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIE" 119.60 340.00 •Ct 16991 01/06/9) LIEFERT TRUCKING 000029 FREIGHT CHARGES 051.67 16996 07/06/93 MCDOWALL COMPANY 900065 kEPAIR COOLER 165.31 16999 07/06/9) MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY 000130 COOLERS FOR RESALE 200.88 16999 01/06/9) MINNESOTA BAR SUPPLY 900130 LEMONS/LIMES FOR RESAL 19.00 220.60 �fl 17000 07/06/ 93 MN MUNICIPAL BEVERAG 000029 MEMBERSHIP DUES 360.00 11001 01/06/93 MONTICELLO OFFICE PR 000031 OFFICE SUPPLIES 11.27 (17002 07/06/9) NORTHERN STATES POW( 000036 UTILITIES 1.14).00 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 01/02/93 14:45:51 WARRANT DALE VENDOR Disbursement .Journal OESCRIPIIOI AMOUNT LIQUOR FUND 17003 07/0G/93 PAUSIIS € SONS 800103 WINE PURCHASE 62.00 11004 07/06/93 PHILLIPS € SONS CONE 800037 LIQUOR PURCHASE 672.28 17005 07/06/93 QUALIIY WINE & SPIRI 800040 BEER PURCHASE 47.90 11005 07/06/93 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 WINE PURCHASE 47.45 17005 07/06/93 QUALIIY WINE € SPIRI 800040 LIQUOR PURCHASE 2.092.74 2,188.09 17006 07/06/93 RON'S ICE COMPANY 600041 ICE FOR RESALE 1,159.90 17007 07/06/93 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 800048 BEER PURCHASE 26,032.80 17006 07/06/93 TWIN CITIES FLAG SOU 800049 FLAG REPAIR 37.10 11009 07/06/03 VIKING COCA-COLA BOT 800051 POP PURCHASE 694.50 17010 07/06/93 WRIGHT WAY SHOPPER 800106 ADVERTISING 389.37 17011 07/06/93 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 600054 LIQUOR STORE SUPPLIES 24.60 LIQUOR FUND TOTAL 77,016.24 BRC FINANCIAL SvSTEM 07/09/93 09:13:57 Disbursement Journal ( `- WARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL LIQUOR F1JNO 17012 07/08/93 BRIDGEWATER TELEPHON 600002 TELEPHONE CHARGES 106.20 11013 07/08/93 FLESCH'S PAPER SERVI 800116 BAGS, ETC/SUPPLIES 102.88 11013 07/08/93 FLESCH'S PAPER SERVI 800116 LIWOR STORE SUPPLIES 51.09 153.97 RC1 17014 07/06/93 G & K SERVICE 800129 MTC OF BLD/RUG MATS 31.01 11015 07/08/93 GRUVS, BORDEN CARL ^O 800020 AUDIT FEES 2,500.00 17016 07/08/93 IDEAL ADVERTISING 800128 MISC SUPPLIES 89.71 11016 07/08/93 IDEAL ADVERTISING 800128 OFFICE SUPPLIES 197.91 287.62 -r< 11017 07/08/93 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 WINE PURCHASE 693.97 17018 07/08/93 MIDWEST GAS COMPANV 800028 UTILITIES 14.98 11019 07/08/93 MINN DEPARTMENT OF R 800006 SALES TAX/2ND HALF 5.210.20 • 17020 07/08/93 MONTICELLO TIMES 800032 ADVERTISING 201.45 l 17021 07/08/93 ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT 800045 MISC ITEMS FOR RESALE 295.22 17021 07/08/93 ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT 800045 JUICE FOR RESALE 30.20 17021 07/06/93 ST. CLOUD RESTAURANf 800045 CREDIT/RETURN SUPPLIES 16.6SCR 309.77 *CF LIQUOR FUND TOTAL 9.509.17 N BkC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 07/15/93 09:41:46 Disbursement Journal WARkANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CI LIQUOR FUND 17022 07/15/93 GROSSLEIN BFVERAGE 1 800019 BEER PURCHASE 7.687.20 17022 07/15/93 GROSSLEIN BEVERAGE I 800019 BEER PURCHASE 40.00 7.727.20 ■Ch 17023 07/15/93 GTE DIRECTORIES SERV 800126 ADVERTISING 32.00 17023 07/15/93 GTE DIRECTORIES SERV 800126 ADVERTISING 32.00 64.00 •C' 170?4 07/15/93 JOHNSON BkOS WHOLESA 800022 LIQUOR PURCHASE 876.95 17024 07/15/93 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 WINE PURCHASE 228.68 1.107.83 *U 17025 07/15/93 MINN DEPART OF PUBLI 800086 COOLER REPAIR 347.33 17076 07/15/93 OLSON & SONS ELECTRI 800036 INSTALL NEW LIGHT 152.98 17027 07/15/93 PHILLIPS & SONS CO/E 800037 LIQUOR BILL 413.73 17027 07/15/93 PHILLIPS & SONS CO/E 800037 WINE PURCHASE 639.55 1.113.28 •f,1 17U28 07/15/93 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 WINE PURCHASE 559.13 17078 07/1S/93 QUALITY WINE & 4PTRT 900040 MISC ITEMS FOR RFSAIF 36.73 17028 07/15/93 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 LIQUOR PURCHASE 754.91 1.350.77 •1'1 17079 07/115/93 U 5 WEST COMMUNICATI 800093 ADVERTISING 24.60 LIQ0OR FUND TOTAL 11.887.99 E N D I, the undersigned, an employee of Mid-America Business Systems hereby certify that the microfilm images ending with U_',� � ,� Q ��(� v fR ' ) T. are complete and accurate reproductions of the original records of (1 (I, _ 1 ) )(- -�,A i ('to D n as accumulated during the regular course of business, and that it is the established policy and practice of Mid-America Business Systems to microfilm records for permanent file. It is further certified that the photographic process used for microfilming the above records were accomplished in a manner and on microf i lm which meets the recommended requirements of the National Bureau of Standards of permanent micro- graphic reproduction. Name Date