Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 12-11-1995AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, December 11, 1988 - 7 p.m. Mayor. Brad Fyle Council Members: Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held November 27, 1995, and the special meeting held December 6, 1995. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. 4. Citizens commentstpetitions, requests, and complaints. 5. Consent agenda. L �+ 4 l 4" = A. Consideration of a request for a carnival license--Montioello Mall Merchants Association. B. Consideration of approving the 1996/1997 contract for police protection with the Wright County Sheriffs Department. C. Consideration of fund transfers for 1995. Consideration to review Greater Monticello Enterprise Fund (GMEF) Loan No. 011 (Tapper's Inc.) for compliance of the GMEF Guidelines. 6. Public Hearing—Adoption of 1996 Budget and consideration of a resolution setting the 1996 tax levy. 7. Consideration of renewing Joint Fire Agreement with Monticello Township and adopting a policy on charging for false alarm responses. 8. Consideration of renewing an option agreement with H -Window Company concerning future acquisition of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition. 9. Consideration of adopting escrow policy allowing final occupancy prior to completion of grading and tree planting. 10. Consideration of granting a variance which would allow filling of a .10 -acre wetland in the scenic river shoreland district. Agenda Monticello City Council December 11, 1995 Page 2 11. Consideration of conditional use permit which would allow expansion of the wastewater treatment plant in a PZM zone. 12. Consideration of salary schedule adjustments for 1996. 13. Consideration of adopting revised job evaluation results. 14. Consideration of establishing full-time secretarial position for the public works department. 15. Consideration of authorizing the hiring of an additional public works department employee. 16. Consideration of renewing contract with Hoglund Coach Lines for providing Heartland Express bus service. 17. Consideration of bills for the month of December to date. 18. Adjournment. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, November 27, 1898 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Brad Fyle, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault Members Absent: None Approval of minutes of thp Flpeeial meeting held November 8. nnd the reinfla_r meetinyht--Id November 3, 1995, It was noted that the potential industrial area discussed under item 6C of the November 13 minutes is located to the southwest rather than the northwest of the community. Councilmember Perrault requested that the title City Engineer be deleted from items #7 and #8 when referring to engineer Bret Weiss. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD NOVEM13ER 8, 1995, A3 WRITTEN. Motion carried unanimously. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 13, 1995, AS CORRECTED. Motion carried unanimously. A. City Administrator Rick Wolfateller reported that the Willi Hahn Corporation has presented a purchase agreement offering $66,000 for Lots 6 and 6 of the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition. The current asking price is $32,815 for Lot B and $31,560 for Lot 6, for a total of $64,475. He noted that in October the Council made a counteroffer of $30,000 for Lot 6 to a potential buyer, which was an 8.8% reduction in price. Council was asked to consider the offer of $66,000 or propose a counteroffer. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND SECONDED BY SHULLEY ANDERSON TO PROPOSE A COUNTEROFFER OF $30,000 FOR LOT 5 AND $31,580 FOR LOT 6, FOR A TOTAL OF $61,560. Motion carried unanimously. Page 1 O Council Minutes - 11/27/95 B. Update on School Bo l v rd traffic study. Public Works Director John Simola reported that the School Boulevard traffic study was ordered from MN/DOT as proposed at the previous Council meeting. He noted that he recently received calls from school officials regarding the amount of traffic on School Boulevard and the stop sign that was removed at Fallon Avenue; however, Simola noted that School Boulevard was built as a collector road, and it's unlikely that the Fallon AvenuvEchool Boulevard intersection would qualify for installing a 4 -way stop. In preparation for discussion of this subject, John Simola asked Bret Weiss of WSB to reviow this item with the Council. No changes were reonmmended by the Consulting Engineer, and Sheriff Hozempa agreed to have deputies patrol the area for speed. No action was taken by Council. C. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported a favorable response to the Theresa Washburn visit regarding downtown redevelopment. A second follow-up meeting was scheduled for November 28. Rick Smith, HIV/AIDS Coordinator for the Wright County Red Cross requested that the Mayor proclaim December 1, 1995, as World Aids Day, as education regarding the disease is very important. After discussion, Mayor Fyle agreed to proclaim December 1, 1996, as World Aids Day. rnngentatronfln. Developer Tom Holthaus requested that item 6B be removed from the consent agenda for discussion. A. rnnaidnrafinn of tinn adn9ting aaseasment roll for Klein Farms- EMject 96-02C. Recommendation: Adopt resolution adopting assessment roil as presented. SEE RESOLUTION 96.86. B. Cn aidera ion of a regointinn adppting aaaps m nt roll for G rdinal Hills B h Ad iio _ Pr ipet 96-06C. Removed Brom consent agenda for discussion (see next page). Page 2 O Council Minutes - 11/27/95 C. Co sideration of a r sol +tion adpp 'ting thp City . nP oral Record a Rot++ntion hem ,la for records maintenance and d s ruction, Recommendation: Adopt resolution adopting entire City General Records Retention Schedule as proposed. SEE RESOLUTION 95-67. A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBSP AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO APPROVE ITEMS 6A AND 6C OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AS RECOMMENDED. Motion carried unanimously. Tom Holthaus of Value Plus Homes stated that the Cardinal Hills 6th Addition project wasn't complete at this time, and it was his view that the amount of the assessment was too high. He requested that the project be assessed neat year as has been done with past projects. In addition, if the Council adopted the assessment roll at this time, Holthaus requested that the amount be final and that they not be re- assessed at a later date for additional costs incurred during completion of the project. City Administrator Wolfsteller reported that because the improvement was part of the $3.9 million bond issue sold earlier this year, staff anticipated assessing the project prior to December 1 for collection on 1996 taxes in order to meet the debt service requirements of the bond issue. The final project coat was estimated at $356,552, of which $46,750 would be paid directly by the developers for site grading, leaving $309,802 as special assessments against 32 residential lots. Wolfsteller noted that he was comfortable with the proposed assessment amount and that if the final project cost was less than the amount certified, it could be credited to the Cardinal Hills 6th Addition. After reviewing with the developer the engineering and administration fees yet to be incurred in tho project, Wolfstellor proposed a $4,500 decrease in the assessment roll to $305,276. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR CARDINAL HILLS 8TH ADDITION IN THE AMOUNT OF $308,276. Motion carried unanimously. SEE RESOLUTION 95-66. Page 3 Z Council Minutes - 11/27/95 1 1 • M :II . 1VWF ■ .. r. .a. t Ate Assistant Administrator ONeill reviewed the history of the Sixth Street Annex mall, noting that in 1994, the applicant failed to obtain sufficient votes necessary to rezone a portion of Lot 4, Block 1, Lauring Hillside Terrace, from R-3 to PZM for additional parking to accommodate expansion of a restaurant within the mall; however, they did obtain an amendment to the conditional use permit which allowed expansion of the restaurant in the mall subject to a number of stipulations and conditions. One of the conditions required that 9,100 aq R of the available space in the mall be left vacant in order to maintain sufficient parking for the restaurant and current uses at the aite. After two years of operating the mall under the restricted use of the facility, the developer has again requested rezoning so that land is available for future parking demands and the building can be fully occupied. O'Neill noted that a buffer area would have to be established between the parking area and the neighboring residential area, and it was the recommendation of the Planning Commission that Council approve the requests. He also reported that the owner of the neighboring R-3 property would not support expansion of the restaurant or additional after-hours activity but was satisfied with the current use of the property. Councilmember Herbst expressed opposition to rezoning the proposed area for parking because it is adjacent to a residential area. Councilmembers suggested that perhaps rear entrances for customers should be required as retail spaces are leased to new tenants. It was their view that customers would not use the rear parking spaces if there were no entrances in the back c,f the building. The Assistant Administrator noted that Council could require additional rear entrances as a condition of the conditional use permit. Page 4 2 Council Minutes - 11/27/95 AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REZONING A PORTION OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, LAURING HILLSIDE TERRACE, FROM R-3 TO PZM TO ACCOMMODATE 66 ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES. Motion is based on the finding that the expansion proposed and associated rezoning is consistent with the character of the area and is consistent with the comprehensive plan for the city. Voting in favor. Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault, Shirley Anderson, Brad Fyle. Opposed: Clint Herbst. Motion passed. SEE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 276. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHICH WOULD ALLOW FULL USE OF THE SIXTH STREET ANNEX MALL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE PARKING, GRADING, AND DRAINAGE PLANS SUPPORTING DEVELOPMENT OF AN ADDITIONAL 66 STALLS. PRIOR TO THE CITY GRANTING AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT TO ANY OF THE RETAIL AREA PREVIOUSLY OFF LIMITS, THE DEVELOPER SHALL OBTAIN WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE PARKING, GRADING, AND DRAINAGE PLANS FROM THE CITY ENGINEER. 2. THE DEVELOPER SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL THE PARKING AREA PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OF THE NEW RETAIL AREA; HOWEVER, A FINANCIAL GUARANTEE AND ASSOCIATED AGREEMENT SHALL BE ESTABLISHED THAT WOULD ALLOW THE PARKING LOT AND ASSOCIATED REQUIRED LANDSCAPING TO BE INSTALLED AT THE FULL DISCRETION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE FULL COST OF THE DEVELOPER 3. THE PORTION OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, LAURING HILLSIDE TERRACE, NEEDED FOR PARKING SHALL BE SPLIT AWAY FROM LOT 4, BLOCK 1, AND ADDED TO THE SIXTH STREET ANNEX MALL PROPERTY. 4. PRIOR TO THE CITY GRANTING OCCUPANCY OF THE UNUSED RETAIL AREA, THE DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE A LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING PLAN THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY AS APPROVED BY CITY STAFF. 6. ALL OTHER CONDITIONS AS NOTED BY ORDINANCE AND INCLUDED IN PREVIOUS CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS ISSUED. 6. PARKING ALONG THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE LIMITED TO 16 -MINUTE PARKING ONLY AND SIGNED ACCORDINGLY. Pago 5 0 Council Minutes - 11/27/95 ADDITIONAL LIGHTING SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE REAR OF THE FACILITY TO IMPROVE SECURITY. REAR PUBLIC ENTRANCES MUST BE INSTALLED AS NEW TENANTS LEASE RETAIL SPACE. Motion carried unanimously. Motion is based on the finding that the conditional use permit with conditions as noted will result in a land use that is consistent with the character of the area, will not result in a depreciation of adjoining land values, and is consistent with the comprehensive plan. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO APPROVE THE SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, LAURING HILLSIDE TERRACE. Voting in favor. Brian Stumpf, Shirley Anderson, Tom Perrault, Brad Fyle. Opposed: Clint Herbst. Motion passed. onaiderntion of fiin ;ng a portion of the Chamber of CnmmPrce community Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that the Monticello Chamber of Commerce is requesting that Council contribute $2,500 toward funding of the community sign to be placed near the Chamber office and $1,100 for installation of electricity to the sign. The reason for the request is that the sign will feature a third side showing a map of the city. Council granted approval of the placement of the sign at a previous meeting; however, O'Neill noted that at the time the sign placement was brought before Council, staff was not aware of the request for funding due to a misunderstanding. Council expressed their disappointment in being asked to pay a portion of the sign coat but not being included in the discussion of the layout and design of the sign. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO PAY $2,600 TOWARD THE COST OF THE SIGN. THE ELECTRICAL EXPENSE OF $1,100 WOULD NOT BE FUNDED BY THE CITY AND WOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CHAMBER. Voting in favor. Brian Stumpf, Shirley Anderson, Tom Perrault, Clint Herbst, Opposed: Brad Fyle. It was Fyle's view that the City should not be responsiblo for paying for a portion of the sign since it is was designed and ordered prior to the request. Motion passed. , , , ' I , 1 �1fT1, 1 ' , •,1 '� „1 I,y/:Il , '.l , 1:� , M r 1 r;1 � ,4 '1 •� • 1 , ,y1 Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that on July 24, 1995, Council adopted on a preliminary basis an escrow policy allowing final occupancy Page 6 (P Council Minutes - 17/27/95 prior to completion of required home site grading and directed staff to mail the proposed policy to builders for input at an upcoming meeting. As a result of staff's discussion with builders, a modified policy was presented for Council adoption. The purpose of the policy is to provide the City with assurance that site improvements will be made after the City has allowed final occupancy of a home. The proposed policy would require deposits from builders that seek final occupancy prior to completion of grading and tree planting. The deposit amounts were proposed at $2,000 for 1.5 times the cost (whichever is greater) for grading and $125 for trees during the summer months, and $750 or an amount equal to the cost (whichever is greater) for grading and $125 for trees during the winter months. A $35 reinspection fee would also be required under both fee structures. Assistant Administrator O'Neill noted that the two fee structures were proposed in order to discourage the use of the escrow option during the summer months since, for the most part, work should be completed prior to final occupancy during the construction season. Tom Holthaus of Value Plus Homes noted his objection to the proposed escrow policy stating that there were too many regulations and that the deposit amount for a builder working on 10 or more homes during the winter months would be substantial. Holthaus suggested that' -ha City require one deposit for each builder rather than for each home. Other builders expressed concern about having to escrow funds with the City and the mortgage companies. Staff explained that mortgage companies would most likely release or not require an escrow if the City required a deposit. Consulting Engineer Bret Weiss noted that it would be possible to identity which lots in each project would be critical for drainage, and the developers and builders could then be informed of which lots would be subject to the escrow policy. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO TABLE ADOPTION OF THE ESCROW POLICY, AND STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO RESEARCH WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES REQUIRE AND AGAIN MEET WITH INTERESTED BUILDERS TO DISCUSS AND ESTABLISH AN ACCEPTABLE POLICY. Motion carred unanimously. 11. Review of clnas'A' sludge alterna iv s and w n owa er Lreatmont plant ma es imntes. — Bob Peplin of HDR Engineering was present to review estimated project costs and to present three different processes to achieve class `A' sludge, Pago 7 0 Council Minutes - 11/27/95 specifically an exceptional quality class "A" sludge. Peplin noted that they had originally proposed the heat pasteurization process as a final step after digestion, which would be a total pathogen kill, at an estimated construction cost of $666,000; however, HDR recently learned that it would be best to perform the heat pasteurization process ahead of digestion, which would kill all of the bad pathogens and leave only minute amounts of good pathogens. This process would produce an exceptional quality class "A" sludge at an estimated cost of $798,000, with a yearly operational cost of $10,500. The second process presented was the Aerobic Thermophilic Pretreatment (ATP), which is a European pretreatment process similar to the pre -digestion heat pasteurization but at lower temperatures. This process is licensed and manufactured by CBI Walker in the United States with an estimated construction cost of $984,000 and a yearly operational cost of $7,000. Peplin noted that one of the advantages of the ATP process is that CBI Walker is a large equipment manufacturer and offers a process guarantee. Peplin also presented a third option of Thermophilic Anaerobic Digestion, which is an experimental process developed within the last year. It is currently being tested in a laboratory and at three treatment plants in Iowa and would offer a relatively low-cost option for class "A' sludge; however, due to the limited experience with this process, a laboratory teat using Monticello's waste activated sludge was recommended at an estimated cost of $8,000. The construction cost of this process is estimated at $762,000 with a yearly operational cost of $29,200. Kelsie McGuire of PSG noted that the ATP process appears to be the most reliable from an operability standpoint. It was his view that it may be better to spend the additional funds for construction of this process. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO CONTINUE WITH THE HEAT PASTEURIZATION PROCESS BUT CHANGE TO PREDIGESTION HEAT PASTEURIZATION AT A COST OF $798,000. MOTION INCLUDES AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL TESTING AT A COST OF $8,000 AS REQUESTED BY BOB PEPLIN OF HDR. Voting in favor: Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Brad Fyle. Opposed: Shirley Anderson and Tom Perrault. Anderson and Perrault prefer: ed the ATP process because it included a process guarantee and would not require additional testing. Motion passed. 12. Connide do of aidownIWnthwn)e mAintennnea on Rim Street nd Wanhineton R rent. Public Works Director John Simola reported that with the pathway project, a significant amount of 8 -ft bituminous pathway was established, and 3 ft in Page 8 ?, Council Minutes - 11/27/95 width was added to some existing 5 -ft concrete sidewalks to make them a combination sidewalk/pathway. In addition, some new 8 -ft sections of concrete sidewalk/pathway were also constructed. Simola noted that the 8 -ft bituminous pathway recently constructed was not originally proposed to be cleared of snow in the winter, and the Parke Commission suggested that pathway snow removal be considered only if there appears to be a large amount of support from the public. In regard to the existing concrete sidewalk located along Broadway at the High School which was increased in width by 3 ft, the High School has been performing snow and ice removal of the 64 sidewalk and have continued to do so on the additional sidewalk width. An additional 3 R of width was also added to the existing 5 -ft concrete sidewalk from Elm Street to the Pinewood School property. Since the City is already performing winter maintenance on this area as part of the City's original sidewalk improvement project several years ago, staff has continued to maintain the extra width. Simola noted that it is unclear at this time whether two new sidewalks/ pathways should be maintained by the City or by the private homeowner. The first is located on the east side of Washington Street from Broadway to 7th Street. The School has been maintaining the sidewalk adjacent to their property up to Territorial Road near the railroad tracks; however, south of the railroad tracks, property owners have not been informed that, according to ordinance, they must remove snow and ice from the 8 -ft sidewalk/pathway. The second new sidewalk/pathway is located on the west side of Elm Street from Broadway to Golf Course Road. This area consists of single family residential, multi -family residential, and commercial buildings. Simola noted that no cost for installation of the sidewalk/pathway was assessed to adjoining property owners; therefore, no public hearing notices were sent to individual property owners. If the combination sidewalks/ pathways are considered part of the sidewalk grid system, the adjoining property owners would be responsible for winter maintenance; however, since most of the city's sidewalks are only 6 ft wide, Simola recommended that, if that option is chosen, the property owners be required to clear snow and ice from only 5 ft of the 8 -ft sidewalk/pathway. Councilmembers discussed the possibility of the City maintaining all residential sidewalks on the grid system, as it was their view that the coat for maintenance to these sidewalks should be bome by everyone. It was also noted by Council that perhaps the pathway should be cleared of snow to allow use in the winter. Page 9 Z Council Minutes - 11/27/96 The Assistant Administrator noted that a letter had been received from Louise Bodem, a resident on Elm Street, questioning where the snow will be stored when cleared from the pathway abutting her property. In addition, James Fuller, also a resident of Elm Street, stated that the sidewalks on the grid system should be maintained by everyone, not only the adjoining property owner. Councilmember Herbst suggested that the Public Works Director propose a contract to have the School maintain the rest of the sidewalk on Washington Street to 7th Street. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO AUTHORIZE CITY MAINTENANCE OF THE NEW SECTIONS OF SIDEWAL"ATHWAY ON WASHINGTON STREET NOT ALREADY MAINTAINED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ON ELM STREET. THE SIDEWALK GRID SYSTEM AND ORDINANCE WILL BE REVIEWED FOR CHANGES IN THE FUTURE. Motion carried unanimously. 13. (`nn;Idernfinn of hill; for the month of November. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BRIAN STUMPF AND SECONDED BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON TO APPROVE THE BILIS FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER AS PRESENTED. Motion carried unanimously. 14. Other w tars. A. Representative Mark Olson was present to update the Council on the current legislative session. No action taken by Council. B. Councilmomber Herbst requested that the City Assessor, Jerry Kramber, and the appraiser of the Kruse property be contacted to review the Kruse property located on Hart Boulevard for 1996 taxes. It was the consensus of Council to direct staff to contact Kramber and the appraiser to discuss the market value of the Kruse property which is adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant. C. Assistant Administrator O'Neill updated the Council regarding completion of the comprehensive plan by Northwest Associated Consultants. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Karen Doty Office Manager Page 10 ?/ MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Wednesday, December 6, 1898.6 p.m. Members Present: Brad Pyle, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault Members Absent: None A special meeting of the City Council was held for the purpose of discussing the proposed 1996 budget and resulting tax levy and receiving public comment. Mayor Fyle opened the public hearing. City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller reported that at the first workshop, Council proposed a maximum 1996 levy increase of 6.5%, which resulted in a tax levy increase of $2,997,460. At the second budget workshop, Council reviewed the capital outlay items in more detail and further reduced the budget and resulting tax levy by an additional $74,660. This resulted in a proposed maximum levy increase of $2,922,800, which is a 1.31% increase over the 1996 tax levy. Wolfsteller also noted that the portion of individual property taxes that is payable to the City amounts to approximately 16% of the total tax amount. A local resident questioned if the recycling program was a revenue source for the City. Mayor Fyle explained that expenses for the recycling program are greater than the revenue received. There being no further comment from the public, the public hearing was closed. It was the consensus of Council to leave the proposed tax levy at the 1.31% increase, and final adoption of the budget will take place at the regular Council meeting scheduled for December 11, 1996. Other matters. Council and staff discussed the current market value of the Kruse property located adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant. It was noted by the City Administrator that after further review of the property by the City Assessor and appraiser, he will report back to the Council at a future meeting. A MOTION WAS MADE BY CLINT HERBST AND SECONDED BY TOM PERRAULT TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. Motion carried unanimously. Karen Doty Office Manager Council Agenda - 12/11/96 sA. Conaideration of a request for carnival lice se --Monticello Mall Merchants Association. (R.W.) Ms. Marilyn Gartner, representing the Monticello Mall Merchants Association, has applied for a license to have Chuck's Amusements operate a carnival at the Monticello Mall parking lot for 6 days, May 29 through June 2, 1996. As you may recall, the Monticello Mall has been sponsoring the carnival for the past few years around this same time period. City ordinance requires that the City Council must approve the license for carnivals, circuses, and traveling shows. In order to schedule future bookings of the carnival, the Mall Association needs to know earlier than usual whether the dates are acceptable to the City. Last year the Mall had proposed to operate the carnival over a 13 -day period, and the City Council ultimately reduced the number of days to 9 days, excluding setup time. This year the Mall is only proposing a 6 -day event, Wednesday through Sunday. As in the past, the Merchants Association is also requesting that the fee established within our ordinance for a carnival at $100 for the first day and $60 per day thereafter be waived. The Merchants Association conaiders themselves a non-profit organization established for the promotion of the mall tenants and, therefore, should be exempt. The Merchants Association has provided a certificate of insurance document indicating that the carnival operator would have a $1 million liability policy in effect naming both the mall owner and the City as additional insureds. Enclosed with the agenda you will find a listing of the days and hours of operation that the amusement park will be run during the 6 -day event. Approve the issuance of a 6 -day carnival license to the Monticello Mall Merchants Association for the dates May 29 through June 2, 1996, and waive the daily fees by recognizing the Association as a non-profit group. Do not approve the license application. Council Agenda - 12/11/95 C, %TAFF RErOMMi NnATION: The staff is not aware of this carnival operation causing any problems as far as the City regulations are concerned over the past three years. Since the Council has determined in the past that the Mall Association was a non-- profit group, you may want to continue with this understanding and waive the daily license fees as you have done in the past. Copy of application and letter from Merchants Association. CITY OF MONTICELLO TRAVELING SHOW APPLICATION ` Fee: $100 - let day, $ 50 - thereafter Applicant Name: Nnv)-� Q P H n Nall A swe in-I,on Address: MAI(/r 55.31,2. ar\/ C PhoneN'mhI �'nn4-nn MArlI11{1 -AV'+11F.Ir Business Name: ekiIP W. Ah\Lt5NWFI)i-5 Address: 14330 Q ) I�; F- '7Sf EIK , 0e -Y' Mk! 5!i,:�7.n Phone Humbert 44 1 - 1--12 7 . Name of organisation Sponsoring Amusement (if any): Location where Show will be Held: 1 �rnr* Date (a) of Carnival or Show: 5-1Q +k ruk- , rt 11%e- 2 - Name of InsuranceCpmpany 1proof of insurance shall be provided with application) : Il: r -I C� pada leu T� 'rrt- nP P . Minimum requirements are: $100,000 - injury, liability $300,000 - each occurrence $ 50,000 - property damage BURSTY BOND RB9UIRBMBNTSt A surety bond in the amount of $5,000 shall accompany application to ensure that all federal, state, and local regulations are adhered to. Applicand Signature (For City Use Only) Receipt • Approved Denied City Signature TRAVBLINO.APPI 9/16/92 !�� 208 West Swenth SUM c�lonticel '"°�°°� �" �Ma Date: December S. 1995 To: City of Monticello From Marilyn Gartner Promotions Director Re: Chuck's Amusements In regards to Chuck's Amusement at the Monticello mall we are requesting the following for approval: 1. Fee to be waived (as has been done in the past) 2. Approval of Carnival to run May 29-June2, 1995 with the following hours: Wed-Thurs: 3-9:30 PM Fri 2-10:30 PM Sat l lam -10:30 PM Sun noon -6 PM Chuck's Amusements will out cleaning and clearing anytime after 6 PM on Sunday, June 2. They all supply two portable sanitation units and garbage removal. 'their main supply trucks all be parked in the back of the Mao so as not to interfere with prime frontal parking spaces. A Certificate of insurance will be faced to the City of Monticello from Chuck's Amusement's carrier. If you have questions, please call me at (612)682.5061. Council Agenda - 12/11/95 A F. .RF.N .. ND BACKGROUND: Wright County has recently prepared a new two-year law enforcement contract for police protection that the City Council was asked to ratify. Currently, the City is receiving 9,176 hours of coverage for the 1995 year, which breaks down into 24 hours per day with an additional 416 hours annually that is used on Fridays and Saturdays for six months of the year. The present hourly rate for 1995 is $32 per hour, for a total annual contract fee of $293,632. For the year 1996, the proposed contract fee has been increased by 3% to $33 per hour for an estimated total annual contract amount of $302,808. The second year of the two-year contract (1997) is proposed at $34.50 per hour, which is a 4.5% increase for a total annual contract of $316,672 if the total hours remain the same. As part of the 1996 preliminary budget, I was aware of the proposed $33 per hour charge and $302,808 has been included in the preliminary budget figures. The Police Advisory Commission also has previously met to review the contract renewal and did not feel there was any additional need for more hours of coverage at this time and recommended the Council continue with the contract as proposed. Although the contract is technically a two-year agreement, the agreement does allow the City to request an increase in coverage if we should desire. The only stipulation would be that enough advance notice be given to allow the Sheriffs Department to incorporate a new deputy in their budget if we would want to see an increase in coverage during 1997. B. ALTERNATM ACTIONS: Ratify the contract as proposed for the years 1096 and 1997 at the hourly rates of $33 per hour for 1996 and $34.60 per hour for 1997. Ratify the contract as proposed but set a different level of hours of coverage. As noted earlier, the Police Advisory Commission did not feel that any additional hours of coverage were needed at this time, but the Commission will continue to monitor the growth of the community and the level of citizen Council Agenda - 12tlll95 complaints to determine if and when additional coverage hours are warranted. STAFF P. O NDATION: The staff and Police Advisory Commission recommend that the contract be ratified for two additional years at the hourly rates proposed. The County Commissioners have actually set the rates in advance and there is very little negotiating room available for the City other than to accept the contract agreement as presented. The City's only option would be to reduce the level of coverage, which would not seem feasible with our continued growth. It should also be noted that the Police Advisory Commission recently, completed a study comparing the costs of operating our own police department versus contracting, and the conclusion was that it still seemed more feasible to utilize the Sheriffs Department under a contract arrangement at this time. Copy of proposed contract and letter from County noting increase in fees. a a TY JN � vp ma A COUNTY OF WRIGHT COMMISSIONERS KENJUDE 10 2nd Street NW, RM 135Bu alo. Minnesota 55313.1188 Fnn AIZ it PATSAWATZKE t S r.d thm—r �i Tel: (612) 682.7378 JACK RUSSEK d 1-800.362.3667 7h,,d [harm 7 dy Fax: 612.682.6178 JUDIEROSE 7850 R—rh Div—, DICK MATTSOIV RICHARD W. NORMAN Cowry Cmrdiiwor August 1, 1995 Mr. Rick Wolfsteller City Administrator City of Monticello 250 E. Broadway, Box 1147 Monticello MN 55362 Dear Mr. Wolfsteller: Please be advised that the County Board of Commissioners, in cooperation with the County Sheriff and County Attorney, has ectahlished rates for contract patrol services for 1996 and 1997. The rate for 1996 shall be $33.00/hour. The rate for 1997 shall be 534.50/hour. As you're aware, the current contract states that municipalities must notify the County in writing prior to August 15 regarding any change in the number of hours to be contracted for in the coming year. Please provide this information if you anticipate an increase or decrease from current contract hours. Once again, it is felt that by setting the rate for two years, jurisdictions will be able to consider rates in their budget discussions and analyze their particular contract needs. Sincerely, /1 4-w- Richard W. Norman County Coordinator RN/sib cc: Don Hozempa, Sheriff Wyman Nelson, Attorney County Board Earml OAportuwiiy / Affirmative Action Smpla)w �v LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTRACT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 1995, by and between the COUNTY OF WRIGHT and the WRIGHT COUNTY SHERIFF, hereinafter referred to as "County" and the CITY OF MONTICELLO hereinafter referred to as the "Municipality% WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Municipality is desirous of entering into a contract with the County for the performance of the hereinafter described taw enforcement protection within the corporate limits of said municipality through the County Sheriff; and WHEREAS, the County is agreeable to rendering such services, and protection on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, such contracts are authorized and provided for by the provision of Minnesota Statutes 471.59 and Minnesota Statutes 436.05; NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to the terms of the aforesaid statutes, and in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed as follows: I . That the County by way of the Sheriff agrees to provide police protection within the corporate limits of the Municipality to the extent and in the manner as hereinafter set forth: a. Except as otherwise hereinafter specifically set forth, such set -vices shall encompass only duties and functions of the type coming within the jurisdiction of the Wright County Sheriff pursuant to Minnesota Laws and Statutes. b. Except as otherwise hereinafter provided for, the standard level of service provided shall be the same basic level of service which is provided for the unincorporated areas of the County of Wright, State of Minnesota. C. The rendition of services, the standard of performance, the discipline of the officers, and other matters incident to the performance of such services and control of personnel so employed shall remain in and under the control of the Sheriff. 1 seg d. Services purchased pursuant to this contract shall include the enforcement of Minnesota State Statutes, including but not limited to the Traffic Code and the Criminal Code, as well as all local ordinances enacted in conformance therewith. Statutes and ordinances which prescribe enforcement by a different authority; i.e., the State Electrical Code, the Uniform Building Code, etc., shall be excluded from this agreement. Ordinances pertaining exclusively to purely local city management matters; i.e., sewer and water collection, etc., shall be excluded from this agreement. The Municipality shall be responsible for enforcement of the Municipal Zoning Code, except that the Sheriff will enforce nuisance ordinances conforming to State law; i.e., junk cars, etc. and traffic ordinances; i.e., parking and erratic driving. That it is agreed that the Sheriff shall have full cooperation and assistance from the Municipality, its officers, agents and employees so as to facilitate the performance of this agreement. That the County shall furnish and supply all necessary labor, supervision, equipment, communication facilities for dispatching, cost of jail detention, and all supplies necessary to maintain the level of service to be rendered herein. 4. The Municipality shall not be liable for the direct payment of any salaries, wages, or other compensation to any personnel performing services herein for said County. The Municipality shall not be liable for compensation or indemnity to any of the Sheriffs employees for injuries or sickness arising out of its employment, and the County hereby agrees to hold harmless the Municipality against any such claims. The County, Sheriff, his officers, and employees shall not be deemed to assume any liability for intentional or negligent acts of said Municipality or any officer, agent, or employee thereof. This agreement shall be effective from January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1997. The Municipality agrees to pay to the County the sum of $33.00 per hour for law enforcement protection during the calendar year 1996 and not to exceed $34.50 per hour during the calendar year 1997. Jf salaries of Deputy Sheriffs are increased at any time during the term of this contract, the hourly rate of this contract shall not be increased. 58CJ 9. This contract shall be extended automatically for successive one year periods at a rate to be established by the County, unless the County or Municipality shall notify the other of termination, in writing, prior to August 15 of each year. 10. The number of hours of service to be provided pursuant to this contract are as follows: 2.4 hours oer day: 416 additional hours on Fridays/Saturdays - 9.176 hours annually and shall provide 24-hour call and general service. The Municipality shall notify the County in writing prior to August 15 regarding any change in the number of hours for the subsequent year. 11. The County shall provide for all costs and prosecution efforts with respect to violations charged by the Sheriff in the performance of this agreement. All fines arising from such prosecutions shall accrue to the County. Violations of municipal ordinances excluded from enforcement by this agreement shall be prosecuted by the Municipality at its expense. All fines arising from city prosecutions shall accrue to the Municipality unless otherwise provided by law. 12. Pursuant to law, the County Auditor/Treasurer shall remit to the Municipality its share of all fines collected. The Municipality shall return to the County within 30 days all fine money attributable to prosecutions initiated by the Sheriff in accord with Paragraph 11 of this contract. The Municipality shall keep and retain any fine money submitted by the Auditor/Treasurer attributable to prosecutions initiated by the Municipality. 13. For the purpose of maintaining cooperation, local control and general information on existing complaints and problems in said Municipality, one member of the Municipal Council, the Mayor or other person or persons shall be appointed by said Council to act as police cornmissioner(s) for said Municipality and shall make periodic contacts with and attend meetings with the Sheriff or his office in relation to the contract herein. 3 58D 14. The County shall save, hold harmless and defend the City from any and all claims arising from the acts or omissions, including intentional acts and negligence, committed by employees or agents of the County or Sheriff while in the performance of duties in furtherance of this contract. IN WTINFSS WHEREOF, The Municipality, by resolution duly adopted by it governing body, caused this agreement to be signed by its Mayor and attested by its Clerk; and the County of Wright, by the County Board of Commissioners, has caused this agreement to be signed by the Chairman and Clerk of said Board, and by the Wright County Sheriff, effective on the day and year fast above written. Dated: Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Dated: WRIGHT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS: Ken Jude, Chairperson ATTEST: Richard W. Norman County Coordinator Dated: Donald Hozempa Wright County Sheriff Approved as to form and execution: Wyman A. Nelson, Wright County Attorney ssE Council Agenda - 1211L95 With the end of the year approaching, a few housekeeping items should be approved by the Council concerning fund transfers to close out unneeded construction funds and/or other transfers to correspond with our budget. In addition to closing out completed construction fund balances, some of the transfers recommended will cover deficiencies in specific construction funds that have occurred during the projects. In most of the deficiency cases, funds were anticipated to be used from the capital outlay fund but have not yet been transferred. For the wastewater treatment plant expansion project, we are simply borrowing the funds from capital outlay until we can be reimbursed from the PFA loan for the new plant next spring. Rather than specifically listing a brief explanation for each transfer recommended, you are asked to review the enclosed supplement summary that outlines each proposed transfer, dollar amount, and purpose for the transfer. 1. Approve the transfers as recommended. C. RTAFF RRCOMM_F.NDATION: I recommend for accounting purposes that the above transfers be approved prior to the end of 1998. Technically, without official action, some of the construction fiords would show deficit cash balances while other construction fiords will be kept open unnecessarily. The transfers are basically housekeeping items to more accurately reflect current year-end financial statements. List of proposed transfers. SLThUdARY OF TRANSFERS PROPOSED December 1998 Fmm To Amount Huss '84 TIF (FSI) Bond '88 TIF (Raindance) $ 899.71 To close out bond fund that has been paid off 93-02C, Card. Hills 3rd 98.060, Card. Hills $ 2,872.78 To close out completed Addn. Const. Fund Addn. Const. Fund cont. prgject balance to similar fund 84-1 O.O. Bond '92 O.O. Refunding Bond $ 6,482.66 To close out bond fund balance to bond fund that refinanced the debt Liquor Fund 93-04C public works $432,298.71 To cover deficiencies in Phase II Const. Fund const. prgject fund to date Capital Outlay 93-13C, Monticello Ford $ 238.73 To cover deficiency in Fund Storm Sewer Project completed const. Hind Capital Outlay 93-08C, Pathway Prgject $ 59,669.91 To cover deficiencies in Fund const. fund to date Capital Outlay 93-14C, WWTP $176,182.43 To cover deficiencies in Fund Expansion Prgject const. fund to date Capital Outlay 98.090, Maplewood $ 7,077.88 To cover deficiencies in Fund Circle Prgject completed const. prgject HRA (7) Various TIF Debt $237,400.00 To transfer TIF reserve Service Funds from HRA to debt service finds for bond payments General Fund Debt Service Fund $ 91,260.00 To transfer Kmart TIF reserve to bond fund 7'RANSFER.LIS: lWIN SCA Council Agenda - 12/11/96 The EDA requests that City Council review GMEF Loan No. 011 for compliance of the GMEF Guidelines. The GMEF Guidelines state: "The EDA shall have authority to approve or deny loans; however, within 21 days of EDA approval, the City Council may reverse a decision by the EDA to approve a loan if it is determined by Council that such loan was issued in violation of the GMEF Guidelines." On November 28, 1995, the EDA approved GMEF Loan No. 011 for Tappers, Inc. dba Genereux Fine Wood Products, Inc. and Westlund Distributing. Current financial statements were submitted and analyzed as acceptable by Public Resource Group, Inc. For your review, enclosed as supporting data is the approved outline used by the EDA for determination of GMEF public purpose and policy compliance. The real estate/equipment loan was approved for $100,000 at a 6.75% fixed interest rate amortized over 20 years, ballooned in 5 years. Loan fee was set at not to -exceed $1,600 and the GMEF legal fees the responsibility of the applicant. The GMEF Loan No. 001 and 011 will be in fifth and sixth position, respectively, behind the two SBA 504 loans of third and fourth position and the two bank loans. Collateral, guarantees, and other condition requirements to be determined and prepared by the GMEF attorney. Per the Marquette Bank's appraisal of the real estate property and machinery & equipment, the total appraised value indicated a collateral shortfall of approximately $53,000. The general agreement among the EDA members was the appraisal was very conservative. The EDA viewed the loan request as a definite compliance of the "gap financing" requirement while still encouraging an existing industrial business to expand in Monticello. The GMEF loan approval is subject to SBA and Bank commitment and approval. As of November 27, 1995, the annual GMEF Appropriation balanco according to disbursement records is $150,000 and according to approval records is $100,000. The EDA approved the loan size of $100,000 because, in either case, the loan disbursement would occur in 19% for compliance of the GMEF Guidelines. Itis suggested the approved Loan No. 011($100,000) be transferred fiom the UDAG account. Council Agenda - 12/11/95 After review of the approved EDA outline for GMEF public purpose and policy compliance, the EDA requests the City Council consider the following actions. A motion stating that City Council has determined the EDA approval of GMEF Loan No. 011 for Tappers, Inc was approved without violation of the GMEF Guidelines; therefore, Council supports the decision by the EDA for loan approval. A motion stating that City Council has determined the EDA approval of GMEF Loan No. 011 for Tapper's Inc. was issued in violation of the GMEF Guidelines; therefore, the Council reverses the decision by the EDA for loan approval. A motion to table action until the January 8, 1996, Council meeting would violate the within 21 -day guideline for City Council to review the EDA's decision of loan approval. C STAFF F .O F.NDATION- Staf supports alternative #1. n SUPPORTING DATA - Copy of the GMEF criteria used by the EDA; Copy of the preliminary loan application; Copy of the GMEF Approval Form. SDA AGENDA NOVEMBER 28, 1995 Consideration to review for approval the preliminary GMEF application from applicant. Tappers. Inc. Bill Tapper, Tappers, Inc., dba Genereux Fine wood Products and westlund Distributing, will be present at the EDA meeting. GMEP LOAN REQUEST: $100,000 real estate and MSE, 6% interest rate, amortization over 20 years, balloon in 5 years. PROJECT SUMMARY: ORIOINAL PROJECT Genereux Fine wood Products and westlund Distributing relocated to Monticello in 1990 from a leased facility in the St. Michael area. They constructed a 27,000 sq ft office/manufacturing/ warehouse facility at 212 Chelsea Road. Genereux is a cabinet manufacturer and westlund distributes cabinet hardware. The company currently employs 45-50 full-time people. Average wage per hour is $8.30. The original TIP assistance was $74,000 of land write-down and $15,500 of site improvements. The current property tax for payable 1995 is $37,238.10 with a tax increment of $24,288.18. The difference between the tax and tax increment results from the 1990 tax rate of 81.843% which is froze upon TIF District certification and the 1995 tax rate is 113.028%. Also, the commercial/industrial classification rates have been reduced somewhat. GMEF Loan No. 001 was awarded in 1990 for $88,000 at 8% fixed interest rate amortized over 20 years. The balloon payment of $70,989.14 is due August 13, 1997. The loan was for real estate and M/S. The loan payback is current and as of November 13, 1995, the outstanding loan balance is $76,176.80 per Marquette Bank who services this loan. EIPANSION PROJECT Bill and Barb Tapper propose to construct an 18,000 sq ft manufacturing addition and estimate an increase of employment by 15 for a total employment of 65. Construction to begin April, 1996, and completed by December, 1996. On November 1, 1995, the HRA approved additional TIP aoeiotance in the amount of $25,000 (upfront) for site improvements relating to the proposed expansion. Disbursement .;O p SDA AGENDA NOVEMBER 28, 1995 upon 904 completion of the proposed minimum improvements. The proposed expansion project is estimated to generate $22,000 of additional annual taxes or an annual tax increment of $16,500. The additional $33,000 of tax increment over two years (District decertifies in February of 2000) is sufficient to cover the $25,000 assistance. At the time of the approval, the NRA was unaware of the collateral shortfall. The proposed uses/sources of funds for this expansion project are estimated as follows: Uses of Funds Building Construction $710,000 Equipment Purchase 190,000 Soft Coats 75.000 SUBTOTAL $975,000 SBA Debenture Fees 13.000 TOTAL USES OF FUNDS Funds $988,000 Sources of Marquette Bank $460,000 SBA 504 403,000 GMEF 100,000 TIF 25.000 TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS $988,000 The company currently has an SBA 504 loan on its existing facility. The outstanding balances on those loans are as follows: Marquette Bank $300,554 SBA 338,236 The company received its first SBA loan in 1990 and has therefore exceeded the three-year limitation regarding seasoned loans. The existing SBA 504 mortgages complicate the proposed financing. Existing mortgages must be subordinated to MBNA to achieve the proper torm collateral positioning covering the building. The following outlines the final mortgage positiona: Page 2 SDA AGENDA NOVEMBER 28, 1995 Marquette Bank (first lien) $300,554 Marquette Bank (second lien) $460,000 (Prime + 1.25%, 20 year amortization, 10 year maturity) SBA 504 (third lien) 338,236 SBA 504 (fourth lien) 403,000 GMEF (fifth lien) 76,576 GMEF (sixth lien) 100.000 TOTAL OVERALL SOURCES OF FUNDS OR TOTAL LOANS $1,678,365 This expansion project would be structured as a participation between Marquette Bank, SBA, GMEF, and TIF. The partnere would document their expenses associated with construction of the facility and "draw -down" funds accordingly through a title company. AS originally noted by Bill Endres, Marquette Bank, the total collateral available of $1,625,000 less the total loans of $1,678,365 creates a shortfall of $53,365. Bill suggests the RDA disburse the GMEP loan at 50t completion of the building expansion. GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE EMM (GMEF) GUIDELINES PUBLIC PURPOSE CRITERIA: Must comply with four or more of the criteria listed below, criteria #1 being mandatory. Creates new jobs: 15 immediate new (37.5 hpw) jobs within two years. Average wage, $8.30 ph. Increases the community tax base: Annual Estimated Market value of expansion, $475,000 or Annual Estimated Taxes, $22,000. Factors: Assiet existing industrial business to expand their operations. The company's business environment meets the City,s industrial objectives: nature of business, service and product, no adverse environmental effects, the comprehensive plan and zoning policy. Page 3 z RDA AGENDA NOVEMBER 28, 1995 4. Used as a secondary source to supplement conventional financing: Approximately 894 of the total (Phase I and II) financial package is financed by a lending institution (Marquette Bank) and SBA. The GMEF and TIF makeup the other 11%. 5. Used as gap financing: Used as gap financing (see item # 6 below) and as an incentive to encourage business retention and expansion. 6. Used to assist other funds: Other sources of funds used in addition to the GMEF are SEA, TIF, and the bank. GREATER MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUND POLICIES I. BUSINESS ELIGIBILITY: Industrial business: Yes. Located within city limits: Yes, Zoned I-2. Credit worthy existing business: Yes, per Public Resource Group, Inc. $10,000 loan per each job created, or $5,000 per every $20,000 in property market valuation, whichever highest: $150,000 or $118,750, respectively. Compliances 0100,000 II. FINANCING METHOD: Companion Direct Loan: All such loans may be subordinated to the primary lenders) if requested by the primary lender(o). The GMEF is leveraged and the lower interest rate of the GMRF lowers the effective interest rate on the entire project. Approvedc G=V Loan No. 001 in 5th position and QWV Loan No. 011 in 6th position. III. USE OF PROCEEDS: Real property development and machinery and equipment. Page 4 SDD HDA AGENDA NOVEMBER 28, 1995 IV. TERMS AND CONDITIONS: Loan Size: Maximum not to exceed 504 of the remaining GMEF balance. Remaining annual GMEF Appropriation Balance based on disbursements, November 22, 1995, $150,000. ($75,000) Remaining annual GMEF Appropriation Balance based on approvals, November 22, 1995, $100,000. The H -window loan has not been disbursed. ($50,000) Approved: $100,000. The RDA determined 0X➢ Loan No. 011 would be disbursed in 1996, therebye, meeting compliance of the loan size policy. Leveraging: Minimum 606 private/public non-GMEF. Maximum 306 GMHF. Minimum 104 equity of GMEF loan. Marquette $760,554 (456) SBA 741,236 (446) GMEF 176,576 (106) TIF 25,000 ( 16) (146) (1006) Loan Term: Real estate property maximum of- 5 -year maturity amortized up to 30 years. Balloon payment at 5 years. Approved and compliance for real estate/Kass Amortisation of 20 years, balloon payment in 5 years. Interest Rate: Fixed rate not less than 26 below Minncapolio primo rate. Prime rate per National Bank (First Bank) of Minneapolis on date of HDA loan approval. (Prime 11- 22-95, 8.7560 Approved and compliance: 6.75% fixed interest rate. Loan Fee: Minimum fee of $200 but not to exceed 1.56 of the total loan project. Fees are to be documented and no duplication of foes between the lending institution and the GMEF. Pago 5 SDE BDA AGENDA NOVEMBER 28, 1995 Approved and compliance: $100,000 E .015 . not -to -exceed $1,500. Prepayment Policy: No penalty for prepayment. Deferral of Payments: 1. Approval of the EDA membership by majority vote. 2. Extend the balloon if unable to refinance, verification letter from two lending institutions subject to Board approval. What is Tappers' Inc, plan for the balloon payment of 070,989.14 due August 13, 1997 relating to 03W Loan No. 001? The Tappers indicated they plan to honor the loan agreement. Interest limitation on guaranteed loans: Subject to security and/or reviewal by EDA and Attorney. Aesumability of Loan: None. e Business Equity Requirements: Subject to type of loan; Board of Directors will determine case by case, analysis under normal lending guidelines. No actual business equity, equity is 825,000 of TIP. Collateral: Mortgage deeds, securities, and/or guarantees as per the GMEF attorney. Non -Performance: This approved GMEF loan shall become null and void if funds aro not drawn upon or disbursed within 180 days from the date of BDA approval (November 28, 1995). Approved and compliances Null and void Nay 28, 1996. GMEF Legal Fees: Responsibility of the GMEF applicant. r l Page 6 SDI HDA AGENDA NOVEMBER 28, 1995 B. Recommendation is to review this information prior to the HDA meeting for discussion and potential questions. The financial analysis and annual debt service requirement will be submitted at the meeting. Consideration to approve or disapprove GMEF Loan No. 011 is the next agenda item. Items for discussion: Amount of loan size, collateral shortfall, term length and rate, non-performance date, and cashflow to debt service. C. Sunnorting Data: 1. Copy of the preliminary application for GMEF. 2. Copy of the financial proposals of September, 1994 and October, 1995. Construction costs increased. 3. Copy of the information provided by Bill Endres, Marquette Bank. Forthcomming: 1. Copy of the Financial Credit Analysis by PRG and annual debt service payments. 2. Copy of the current financial statements. Page 7 r s GREAT`' -.R MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE 250 EAST BROADWAY MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA PRELIMINARY APPLICATION FOR LOAN APPLICANT: Tappers, Inc. FIRM OR ?RADE NAME: Genereux Fine Wqod Prodggts 3 Westlund Distributing BUSINESS ADDRESS: 21% Ctlelsea Road, Monticellq, M 55362 (# & Street) (City 5 State) (Zip Code) TELEPHONE: BUSINESS 1 )612-245-4222 HOME ( )612-473-7919 DATE ESTABLISHED: business purchased 1984 EMPLOYER I.D. i:41-1470393 SOLE PROPRIETOR X CORPORATION PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT NAME TITLE OWNERSHIP % William R. Tapper ?resident 50% Barbarg R, Tapper gecretpry 508 Lance rartkoof General Manager (Genereux) 09 John Gammel General Manager (Westlund) 09 PROJECT LOCATION: Lot 4. Block 2 Oakwood Industrial Park NEW BUSINESS x EXISTING BUSINESS, p TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE: i�'ftn D. Q 0 c7 PROPOSED USES: RECUEST: 5 j U0.06 LAND S AMOUNT OF IRAN fAOM4„nn EXISTING BUILDING MATURITY i TERM'S CONSTRUCTION 1te'210 Tl\6.coo REQUESTED 5/69 MACHINERY CAPITAL -1-66TQOO % 40 . c 0 o APPLICANT'S -25.000 WORKING CAPITAL EQUITY 39-rs6A (TIF) OTHER A+,O" Woo o LOAN PURPOSE Ruildinct & Equip. TOTAL USES $ R ilk . Omo PROPOSED BEGINNING DATE: Anri1 1944-- \Qq IG ESTIMATED COMPLETION WE: 5 g.0 .s.,.-Qa+^ \ 4 V U TITLE TO PROJECT ASSETS TO BE HELD BY: OPERATING ENTITY ALTER EGO PARTICIPATING LENDER: M„r„ynrrn R 7 rein t l 1 _ oncacc ernon ITelap ona PRESENT + OF EMPLOYEES: _50 PROJECTED 1 OF FMPLOlEES 65 ADDITIONAL PROJECT IHFORMATIO �✓Sgni�ficnnt potnntial for productivity growth. 1 APPLICANT S103A. DATE SIGiED, 00 SDS APPROVAL OF GREATER MONTIC,ELLO ENTERPRISE FUNDS BY ECONOMIC DEVELPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA Preliminary Loan Application Approval. JANUARY 20. 1995 Loan terms negotiated and agreed upon TAPPERS, EDA, AND MARQUETTE BANK betweeen the developer, the lending institution, and the EDA Executive Director. Formal Loan Application and Financial PRG, INC. - RATIOS WITHIN Statements analyzed by the lending INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS. NOTED institution, BDS, Inc. or city staff. CGLLATERAl SHGRTI•A66 'ENDER PRESUMES APPROVAL AND COMMITMENT Building and Site Plan Preliminary and/or THROUGH HPLS HEADQUARTERS. 11-28-95 Final Review. Building Permit approval or construction commitment. Loan documents reviewed and/or prepared TO BE PREPARED BY KENNEDY 6 by the City Attorney. C AVFN- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL: LOAN NUMBER GMEF LOAN NO. 011 LOAN APPROVED YFS BORROWER WILLIAM R. AND BARBARA R. TAPPER ADDRESS 212 CHELSEA ROAD, MN 55362 LOAN DISAPPROVED LOAN AMOUNT 1100,000 REAL ESTATE AND M6E RATE 6.752 FIRED INTEREST RATE DATE Nomm a A_ 1905 TERMS AMORTIZED OVER 2n YEARS. B,LLOONF.D IN 5 YEARS. FEE NOT TO EXCEED 11,590 AND PAID AT TIME OF GMEF DISBURSEMENT. GMEF LEGAL FEES RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT. OTHER* A motion was made by EDA Commissioner BARB SCHWIFNTFR to (approve - a`19FiAPPOM) Greater Monticello Enterprise Funds in the amount of ONE. HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO CENTS (31n0.000.001 dollars and cents to developer WILLIAM 9. AND BARBARA R. TAPPER (TAPPER'.;. TNr—a this 28TH day of NO4..MRF.R . 1995 Seconded by EDA Commissioner HARVEY KENDALL YEAS: BARB SCHWIENTEK, HARVEY KENDALL. NAYS: NONE CLINT HERBST. TOM PERRAULT. RON HOGLUND, AL LARSON, AND BILI. DEMEULES. GMEF dioburoed 19 _ by Check No. EDA Treasurer DISBURSE FUNDS FROM THE IIDAG Fund CITY COUNCIL 14AY REVERSE AN EDA LOAN DECISION WITHIN TWENTY-ONE DAYS OF EDA APPROVAL. SCHEDULED FOR COUNCIL REVIEW ON DECEMBER I1, 1995. 5bs i GMEF Approval Page 2 ACCEPTANCE OF TERMS NX (We) hereby accept the terms stated above as approved by the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Monticello. DATED: * OTHER IF APPROVED GMEF LOAN NO. 011 DOLLARS OF ;100,000 ARE NOT DISBURSED BY MAY 28, 1996, THE APPROVED LOAN BECOMES NULL AND VOID. GMEF LOAN NO. 010 WILL TAKE. A SIXTH POSITION AND GMEF LOAN NO. 001 WILL TAKE A FIFTH POSITION ON REAL ESTATE AND MACHTNERY 6 EQUIPMENT BEHIND THE LENDER (FIRST AND SECOND) AND SBA (THIRD AND FOURTH). APPROVED GN£F LOAN NO. 011 SUBJECT TU LENDER AND SBA COMMITMENT AND APPROVAL. COLLATERAL, GUARANTEES, AND OTHER CONDITION REQUIREMENTS TO BE DETERMINED AND PREPARED BY THE GMEF ATTORNEY. SD r Council Agenda - 12/11/96 atdget e . (R.W.) As part of the truth in taxation requirements, the City Council is required to hold a second public hearing on the adoption of the 1996 budget and the resulting tax levy. While this second meeting will technically be another public hearing, the purpose of the new requirement delaying the actual adoption of the budget and tax levy is to provide the Council and the public with more time to digest the budget requirements proposed at our Wednesday night meeting in case additional changes were warranted. At Wednesday's official truth in taxation hearing, the Council's decision at that time was to keep the proposed tax levy at the revised $2,922,800 amount, which would result in a 1..3196 increase over the 1996 tax levy. This 1.31% increase compares to the original preliminary levy that had proposed a 3% increase for the public hearing purposes. To again briefly summarize, the original proposed tax levy that was adopted in August proposed a maximum dollar amount of $2,997,460. The preliminary tax levy would have amounted to an increase in our dollars collected by $166,266. The Council's action at the second workshop and also at Wednesday night's public hearing was to reduce the total tax levy requirements to $2,922,800, which will provide $81,616 more in dollars collected but will only result in a 1.31% increase. At Monday night's meeting, the Council would have one final time to consider any changes that you may want to make to this budget and tax levy before adoption. You would not be allowed to increase the budget more than the preliminary amount that was established in August, but you would still have the latitude to lower it if you so choose. The resolution enclosed for adoption is prepared under the assumption that the 1.31% increase will be acceptable, and the total levy would be the $2,922,800. B. Ai TERNATIVE ACTIONQ: After the close of the public hearing, the Council should adopt the resolution setting the tax levy requirements for next year at $2,922,800, a 1.31% increase over the 1996 tax levy. Council could adopt a final tax levy that is leas than the amount proposed but in no case can it be higher than the $2,997,460 amount established in August. Council Agenda - 12/11/95 C. STAFF REMMMENDATION: It is recommended that the resolution be adopted as proposed. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Tax levy summary sheet; Resolution for adoption. Please refer to the agenda package summary provided for Wednesday nights public hearing for additional details in the proposed budget. M TAE LEW SUMMARY 1996 BUDGET ALL FUNDS Net Payable** 1996 Adjusted Levy After Dpdurtino HACA $1,966,209 31,095 15,590 12,038 1,196 17,497 597,270 291.905 $2,922,800• Payable Adjusted Levy Before Fund Levy Payable 1995 HACA Adj. PAXAMP 1996 General $1,696,139 $2,143,730 Library 30,735 31,095 Transportation 15,178 17,000 Shade Tree 23,425 13,135 OAA 26,544 1,300 HRA 16,088 19,090 Debt Service 637,098 651,187 Capital Imp. Revolving 195.978 307.362 TOTAL $2,841,185 $3,183,899 Net Certified Levy Increase - $81,615 (+2.87$) Net Payable** 1996 Adjusted Levy After Dpdurtino HACA $1,966,209 31,095 15,590 12,038 1,196 17,497 597,270 291.905 $2,922,800• Payable 1989 Tax Capacity Rate . . . . 14.283 Payable 1990 Tax Capacity Rate . . . . 16.187 Payable 1991 Tax Capacity Rate . . . . 15.511 Payable 1992 Tax Capacity Rate . . . . 16.492 Payable 1993 Tax Capacity Rate . . . . 16.313 Payable 1994 Tax Capacity Rate . . . . 17.527 Payable 1995 Tax Capacity Rate . . . . 18.228 Est. Payable 1996 Tax Capacity Rate. . 18.467 (+1.318) Tax Tax 188/Payable 1989 $ 15,405,139 189/Payable 1990 15,873,242 190/Payable 1991 16,161,043 191/Payable 1992 15,513,574 192/Payable 1993 15,490,500 193/Payable 1994 15,154,786 194/Payable 1995 15,586,930 195/Payable 1996 (est) 15,826,867 14.283 $2,198,008 16.187 2,568,106 15.511 2,506,132 16.492 2,558,554 16.308 2,526,216 17.527 2,652,527 18.228 2,841,185 18.467 2,922,800 • Actual levy collected from taxpayers --balance received from state in HACA aid payments ($261,099 is est. State Aid for 1996). •' Did not deduct HACA from library levy, but deducted library portion of HACA from general fund levy. 95BUDUM 2/2/95 V PC Page 17 RESOLUTION 96- RESt ELUTION ADOPTING THE 1996 BUDGET AND SETTING THE TAX LEVY WHEREAS, the City Administrator has prepared and submitted to the City Council a budget setl'ng forth therein his estimated needs of the City of Monticello for all operations and the debt service r the fiscal year commencing January 1, 1996; and WHEREAS, the City Council tas reviewed the same and has made such changes therein as appear to be in the best interest of the City of Monticello; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT R ESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO u at the budget so submitted by the City Administrator, together with the changes made therein by th• City Council, be and same hereby is adopted as a budget for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 19! and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Monticello that there be and hereby is levied for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 1996, and the following sums for the respective purposes indicated therein upon the taxable property of the City of Monticello, to wit: The above resolution was introduced by Councilmember �1 , was duly seconded by Councilmember n �% , with the following voting in favor thereof`. The following voting in the opposition: The City Admiulstrator is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the runty Auditor of Wright County, Minnesota. Adopted this 11th day of December, 1996. Mayor City Administrator �� NET CERTIFIED REVENUP um iiIACA LEVY General $2,143,730 $177,621 $1,966,209 Library 31,096 0 31,096 OAA 1,300 104 1,196 HRA 19,090 1,693 17,497 Tree 13,136 1,097 12,038 Transportation 17,000 1,410 16,690 DERTRETMEMENT Debt Service Fund $ 661,187 $ 63,917 $ 697,270 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Capital Improvement Revolving It 307AG2 A 25,467 1 281906 TOTAL TAX LEVY $3,183,899 $261,099 $2,922,800 The above resolution was introduced by Councilmember �1 , was duly seconded by Councilmember n �% , with the following voting in favor thereof`. The following voting in the opposition: The City Admiulstrator is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the runty Auditor of Wright County, Minnesota. Adopted this 11th day of December, 1996. Mayor City Administrator �� Council Agenda - 12/1 V95 ,. . .v.9 r7r. As part of the original annexation that took place in 1994 when the City annexed the NSP Power Plant, a joint advisory fire board was established creating a joint fire department between the city and township. From 1976 until 1985, the original agreement indicated that Monticello Township would reimburse the City for a portion of the fire department costs based primarily on their percentage of assessed valuation compared to the city's valuation. The Township's payment for services varied annually but was usually between $3,000 and $7,000 per year for the protection provided depending on the capital outlay purchases that were made by the department. In summary, during the first ten years of this joint arrangement, the Township probably covered lees than 10% of the actual cost of operating the department, but they were responsible for over half of the fire calls made. When the original agreement expired back in 1985, a revised joint agreement was established that contained primarily the some language but changed the method of the Township's contribution toward the operating coats. A formula was used that was established by the University of Minnesota called a fair - share formula, which primarily takes into account the valuations of each member of the joint agreement and the number of fires that occur at each location. These two components were averaged to determine each party's share of the costs, and Monticello Township then saw their annual contribution increased to approximately $30,000, or one-third of our normal annual operating costs. While this was a dramatic increase, the Township was now more in line with paying their share of the cost when considering the number of fire calls they were contributing annually. In 1990, the joint agreement was again renewed for another five years and, likewise, the agreement remained primarily the same except for some modifications to the formula. In the past, the one part of the formula concerning valuations of each jurisdiction was referring to assessed valuations, and we changed the wording to now use market valuations. The original term `assessed valuations' had changed over the years to now terms such as groes tax capacity and not tax capacity, and it was felt that market value was more easily understandable by both parties and would be a better indicator of comparisons between the communities. It shouldn't make any difference whether a home is homesteaded or non -homesteaded if the value is the same, and the change to market valuation in the formula made for a better comparison in spreading the cost equally. Council Agenda - 1211L95 Under the present arrangement, the Township has gradually seen their share of the overall budget decrease slightly due to the fact that the city of Monticello is growing faster in number of housing units and because of annexation. The percentage of man-hours spent fighting fires in the township has dropped from 57% ten years ago to around 40% today. Since this is half of the formula, and the other half pertains to market valuations, we are continuing to see the Township's share of the overall budget decrease a little bit each year to where they're at approximately 30% of the operating budget now. One thing to remember is that the Township has also used this percentage in paying for any large capital expenditure purchases such as new fire trucks in addition to the normal annual operating expenses. With the present joint agreement scheduled to expire December 31, 1995, the Joint Fire Board recently met to review the present joint agreement and to discuss whether any changes should be recommended. The Joint Board, along with fire department representatives, felt that the agreement has been working fairly well the past five years, and Township representatives did not see any need to make any changes at this time. As I noted earlier, the Township's share of the operating costa is continuing to decrease slightly each year, and this may be the reason for their satisfaction with the present arrangement. Overall, I believe our relationship with the Township has steadily improved over the years, and I also do not see any specific reasons why changes should be implemented into the agreement at this time. During the recent Joint Fire Board meeting, the Joint Board did want to propose to the Township Board and the City Council that both jurisdictions implement a new policy that would cover potential charges for the fire department responding to numerous false alarms. With the advent of security systems becoming more popular in businesses and residential properties, the fire department is seeing an increase in the number of false fire alarms that are occurring. Each fire call has to be responded to and costs the Joint Board money for salaries of firemen who respond. The .Joint Board felt that it would be appropriate to establish a policy that allows each property owner up to (2) two fire alarms responses annually, but after that each property owner would be charged $250 for each additional false alarm. Most false alarms occur when there may be a problem with their security alarm system that needs adjusting. In some cases, property owners do not make the effort to correct problems causing false alarms, and the potential of a steep charge may encourage more individuals to ensure that their systems are working properly. In all likelihood, there will be very few individuals that will actually end up being charged for a fire call, but the Joint Board felt it would be appropriate to adopt this policy giving us the opportunity to charge if we find obvious violators. Council Agenda - 12/11/95 Agree to renew the joint contract arrangement with Monticello Township as it currently exists for an additional five years. Agree to renew the joint arrangement but with modifications. It is the recommendation of the Joint Fire Board that the agreement seems to be working satisfactorily over the past number of years, and the Joint Board is not aware of any changes that need to be made. The use of market values, along with the number of fire calls in each jurisdiction, seems to be the appropriate method for sharing the costs at this time. The only alternative if the agreement is not renewed would be that one of the jurisdictions would have to buy out the other's interest, which doesn't seem to be an advantageous option for either party at this time. Council could consider approving adoption of the false alarm billing policy as recommended by the Monticello Joint Fire Board. Do not recommend implementation of this policy at this time. C. STAFF RFCOMMF.NDATION: Again, it's the Joint Fire Board's recommendation that the proposed policy is fair and reasonable when considering that numerous false alarms do provide not only a budget cost to respond to them, but it is also extremely inconvenient for the firemen. The policy is not intended to be a tool simply to recapture costs from property owners for fire calls, but to be available for use when the same individual is causing numerous false alarms by having a faulty security system. All potential billing individuals would be warned in advance allowing them sufficient time to make repairs to their systems. Therefore, it is the Joint Boards recommendation that the Council adopt this policy. Copy of existing contract; copy of proposed false alarm policy. 12 AN AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES 471.59 v_ CREATING A JOINT FIRE BOARD BETWEEN THE TOWN OF MONTICELLO AND THE CITY OF MONTICELLO By this instrument the CITY OF MONTICELLO, a mun'.cipal corporation of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the City, and the TOWN OF MONTICELLO, a corporate subdivision, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the Town, agree with each other as indicated by the following articles. ARTICLE I: Explanatory, Material (A] The City and the Town presently own fire fighting equipment both jointly and separately. The City owns a fire hall. The City operates an effective and efficient fire department with volunteer fire fighters including a chief. It io assumed that, collectively, the CITY and the TOWN are more financially able to provide fire fighting equipment and protection. (B] The respective City Council and Town Board hereby find it advisable to jointly asaume the coat, maintenance, and oporation of the fire department, and to jointly purchase now fire fighting equipment, as may be doomed noceacary. The purpooe of thio contract in to provide for a joint sharing of costa and purcha000 eaoential to the effective operation and maintenance of a voluntoor fire dopartmont. (C) Thin contract hoo boon authorirod by the City Council for the City of Monticello and the Town Board for the Town of Monticello pursuant to Minn000to statute Section 471.59 (Joint Exorcioo of Powero). ARTICLE II: Joint Advioory Board (A) A Joint Advioory Fire Board, croatod purouant to the faro contract between tho City of Monticollo and tho Townohip of Monticello dated April 26, 1976, and executed June 3, 1976, is hereby extended to facilitate the performance of this contract throughout its life. Such Board shall have the powers v specifically given to it in the articles of this Agreement, and shall have the power to make recommendations to the City Council and to the Town Board to improve cooperation and efficiency in carrying out the intent of this Agreement, and to make recommendations for amendments and supplements to this Agreement. [B] The membership of said Board shall consist of one member from the City, one member from the Town, and one member from the Volunteer Piro Department. The member from the City shall be appointed by the City Council; the member from the Town shall be appointed by the Town Board; and the member from the volunteer Fire Department shall be elected by the members of the Volunteer Piro Department. [C] Said Board shall have two regular meetings each year. The first quarterly meeting shall be hold on the first Tuesday in March of each year at 7:00 p.m. The second quarterly mooting shall be held on the first Tueaday of August of each year at 7:00 p.m., at the City Hall in the City of Monticello, unl000 such Board fixoa a different place for oaid meeting. (D) In every calendar year prior to the month of March, the City Council and the Town Board shall name the membero to the Joint Advisory Piro Board. In ovary calendar year prior to the month of March, the volunteer fire department shall elect ito member to the Joint Advisory Piro Board. IN Such momboro ohall hold office from the first Tucoday in March until the firot Tuesday in March of the following year. If the City and Town fail to make ouch appointment in a timoly manor or the Volunteer Piro Department failo to elect ito member, the proviouo incumbent ohall continua in office until ouch cuccoasor to named. (P) The Board may adopt rules and by -levo not inconoiotont with this Agreement for the purp000 of carrying out their dutiao hereunder. -2- Imy ARTICLE III: Duties of Joint Advisory Fire Board (A] The Joint Advisory Fire Board shall, with the aid and advice of the Monticello Volunteer Fire Department, prepare a budget prior to September 1 of each year for the maintenance, operation and purchase of equipment for the following year. Such recommendations shall be submitted to the City Council and Town Board on or before September 1 of each year. ARTICLE IV: Joint Operating Fire Department Account (A) The City and the Town agree to annually, prior to the commencement of each calendar year of this Contract, mutually approve the budget of the operating expenses for the ensuing calendar year as may be recommended by the Joint Advisory Fire Board. (B] Contribution of the City and the Town shall be paid to the City Treasurer of the City of Monticello who shall keep the came in a departmental account to be known so the "Joint Operating Piro Account." The City Council for the City of Monticello shall approve all axpenditurea at their regularly ochaduled Council mootingo. All other expendituroo for the purchaao of cupplion, maintenance, and equipment which were not part of the operating budget oholl be approved by both the City Council and the Town Board before paid expondituroo aro made. ARTICLE V: Contributiono to Joint Operating Piro Account ]A] The City and Town shall jointly contribute to the Joint Operating Piro Account for the maintenance, operation, and purch000 of equipment of the Volunteer Fire Department. The contribution by each party heroin to the Joint Operating Fire Account for each calendar year shall be calculated according to the following formula, known ao the "Fair Share Formula": Total Costo x (?A of Total Uco r % of Total Value) " Fair Shoro Costa Z Bos Appendix "A" for definition of itema used in Formula. DIM 7C -o [B) The City and Town shall deposit in advance to the Joint Operating Fire Account the quarterly contributions of the accepted budget for the Volunteer Fire Department. Said quarterly contributions shall be made on February 1, May 1, August 1, and November 1 in the year in which the budget was approved. All contributions shall be made in money, and not in material or equipment. [C] Credit towards the quarterly contribution requirements for the following years budget shall be granted on the basis of percentage contribution for any balance remaining in the Joint Operating Account as of December 31 of any year. ARTICLE VI: Revenue from Adjacent Areas [A] Revenue from contracts for fire protection to adjacent areas as mentioned in Article I% [A] 3 and revenue from fire calla to these &roan shall be deposited in the Joint Operating Fire Account. ARTICLE VII: Purchaneo (A) The City Council and the Town Board shall jointly agree upon any expendituroo made for the purchaao of additional fire -fighting capital equipment. They shall agree upon all opacifications for any and all joint purchasos of capitol equipment, pursuant to the recommendation of the Joint Advisory Piro Board. Purouant to oaid opacification, the City Adminiatrator and the Town Clark ahall jointly iosuo a call for ocalod bids to be prepared and published. Said call ohall rotor to the apocificationo and to thio Agreement as baoic data binding upon each and ovary bidder. The right to reject any and all bids oholl be rooervod by either the City Council or the Town Board. (B) At the time and place of opening bids, the City Adminictrator and the Town Clark shall tally the bido in the pr000nce of the Joint Advioory Fire Board. The Joint Advicory Fire Board shall make its recommsndatione to the City Council and to the Town Board as to either accepting or rejecting the bid or bids. The City and Town shall not be bound unless both the City Council and the Town Board accept the bid or bids. If either the City Council or Town Board rejects a bid or bide, and either Board desme the purchase of said capital equipment necessary, either party may accept the bid and purchase and pay for the capital equipment outside the agreement herein. Said property shall be the exclusive property of the respective governmental unit. (C) If both parties purchase the equipment jointly, the seller of such joint equipment shall execute duplicate bills of sale revealing the interest of the City and the Town so that each has a signed copy. ARTICLE VIII: Maintenance of Apparatus (A] The present fire -fighting equipment as set out in Exhibit "A" shall be that contribution of each respective governmental body. It shell remain the sole and exclusive property of each of the respective governmental unit. It shall be maintained and insured pursuant to thin agreement. (B) The jointly purchased equipment shall be maintained and inoured by the agreement herein. The control of the purchased equipment shall be retained by the City and the Town. (C) The coot of storage, maintenance, and insurance of the respective Lire -fighting equipment and the jointly purchased faro -fighting capital equipment shall be paid out of the Joint Operating Fire Account. (D) The coot of the maintenance and insurance of the City Fire Hall shall be paid out of the Joint Operating Piro Account. ARTICLE Ix: Use of Fire Equipment [A) The equipment so sot out in Exhibit "A" and the equipment jointly purchased shall be used within the jurisdictional area of the City and Sown and nowhere eloo except as follows: 1. The adjacent area where the fire may spread to such City or Town; 2. To assist neighboring fire departments as may be mutually agreed upon under a reciprocal agreement with such Eire departments; 3. In any adjacent area to the City and to the Town with which a contract for protection may be negotiated. (B) It shall be the duty of the Joint Advisory Board to provide volunteers in sufficient number to maintain a staff of fire fighters to answer fire calls and to command available equipment in such a manner so as not to fall below the minimum standard set forth by the Bureau of Fire Underwriters. (C) Dispatching the operation of the fire -fighting equipment shall be the duty of the Chief of the Fire Department, and in the Chiefs absence shall be the duty of the Assistant Chief. If neither is available, the person previously appointed for this purpose shall be in charge. [D) The Volw tear Fire Department shall answor all calla under tho direct oupervieion of the Fire Chief without regard to the authority of any other person giving the alarm or order. ARTICLE %: Public Employees' Retirement Asoociation (A) Requirements of the Public Employees- Retirement Association may be paid by transferring from tho Joint Oporating Fire Account as dotorminod by the Joint Advisory Board. ARTICLE %I: Liability -Governmental Functiono-Protective Clauses (A) in all of the provisions of this Agreement, the City and the Town shall be deemed to be exercising their governmental functions so that each shall not be liable for the other for any negligence of its officers, eaployeoe, fire fighters, or agents. (B) Specifically, without limiting the effect of the language in the preceding -6- paragraph, the City and its officers, employees, and fire fighters shall not be liable for any of the following acts or omissions: failure to answer a call promptly or at all; for any trespass or damage to persons or property whether necessary or unnecessary in connection with going to, returning from any fire call or in serving at any fire or fire call. [C] In the event of any fire call to which the Fire Department will respond, sufficient personnel and equipment shall remain at the City Fire Ball in order to respond to any subsequent call for fire protection, whether ouch call in or is not located within the same jurisdiction of the first call. ARTICLE XII: Life of This Agreement [A] This Agreement shall expire December 31, 1995, or at an earlier date when, for sufficient cause, the City or Town shall notify the other in writing at least 180 days of the desire to terminate the Agreement herein. [8] On any termination, "a remaining capital equipment jointly acquired shall bo cold at a reasonable price on competitive bids and the proceeds divided among the owners as their interest appears. Non -capital equipment, such as miacellanocuo supplies, office supplies, and perishables, shall be considarad the property of the Fire Department and shall be considered to be convoyed, without further compensation, to the jurisdiction which assumes the authority and responsibility for the Fire Department. A schedule for all fixed assets purchased shall be maintained, and proceeds from their sale shall be distributed on the basis of the original contribution percentage for the fixed asset in question. The City and the Town, respectively, may be the bidder at any ouch vele. (C) On any termination, the balance of any remaining monies in the Joint operating Account shall be distributed based on the percentage contribution for that year. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties of the Agreement have hereunto set their hands and seals this day of , 19 TOWN OF MONTICELLO CITY OF MONTICELLO Chair Mayor Town Clerk City Administrator SEAL SEAL APPENDIX •A• Total Costs: The total annual costs of Fire Department operation, in dollars, including fixed costs, operating costs, manhour costa, and capital costs amortized over expected life of equipment, vehicles and buildings. Total Use: The use of the Fire Department services by each party expressed as a percentage (t) of the total use of Fire Department services by all parties. The percentage (t) is based on manhours spent in each area averaged over the past five (5) years. Total Value: The Market Valuation of each party expressed as a percentage (t) of the sum of the valuations of all parties using Fire Department services. Fair Share: Each party's share of total annual coats expressed in dollars. I X J EXHIBIT "A" Fired Asset Schedule CITY OF MONTICELLO 1946 Chev. Fire Truck 1962 Chev. Fire Truck Fire Hoses and Nozzles Smoke Inhalator Fire Boots and Helmets Air Survival Equipment Resuscitator Tire Generator Fire Clothes Smoke Effector - 1971 Centrifugal Fumy - 1971 2 May Radio System - 1975 Alarm Syotem - 1975 City Hall and Firo Hall - 1962 (40% of apace used for Fire Hall) TOWN OF MONTICELLO 1977 Fire Truck 1965 Chay. Water Tanker J:r CITY OF MONTICELLO Policy Establishing Billing Procedures for Fire Department Responses to False Alarms This policy is intended to outline the conditions under which the Monticello Fire Department will charge property owners for responding to false alarms. With the fire department erperiencing an increase in the number of false alarms because of the increased popularity of home and business security systems, the Joint Fire Board has recommended a policy be established to allow for reimbursement of expenses associated with responding to these false alarm calls. The Joint Fire Board does not feel it's appropriate for the taxpayers of the jurisdictions supporting the department's services be responsible for the added costs these false alarms generate and therefore, proposed to implement the following policy effective January 1, 1996 as it relates to charges for responding to repeated false alarms: 1. All property owners within the Monticello Fire Department coverage areas will receive up to (2) two fire responses to false alarms within each 12 month calendar year at no additional charge. 2. Any property owner within the jurisdiction responsible for (3) three or more false alarms within the 12 month period shall be billed a response fee of $260 for each false alarm above (2) two. 3. All property owners responsible for a false alarms will be notified in writing of this billing procedure policy. 4. All false alarm charges remaining unpaid at the end of a calendar year may be levied as a special assessment against the responsible property to tho extent allowed by State Statutes. FALSEYOU 19 050 �K Council Agenda - 12/11/95 tents ots 1- (R.WJ For the past year, the City has had an option contract with H -Window Company allowing them to purchase Lots 1, 2 and 3 of the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition that provided for an annual fee to be paid to the City of $3,200 based on 5% of the eventual selling price of $64,000, plus H -Window would be responsible for $1,150 of estimated real estate taxes for this property. This option contract agreement was arrived at after four years of various agreements that the City had provided to H -Window at no cost, in which we agreed to hold the property for future expansion needs. Because of the increasing demand for industrial sites, the Council chose last year to require that in order to continue holding the lots, there would have to be some type of compensation. The one-year agreement officially expired November 29, 1995, and H - Window representatives had initially indicated they were ready to complete the purchase for $64,000. On November 18, 1 received a letter from Knut Flakk, President, indicating they have changed their minds and now are requesting that the City Council again hold the three lots exclusively for the H -Window Company until December 1, 2000. In addition, the request is to grant them an exclusive option to purchase at the stated $64,000 price without any additional cost for the option agreement. This request brings us back to where we started in June of 1991, when the City Council adopted the first resolution agreeing to hold all six of the lots in the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition at no cost. When this agreement expired on December 31, 1992, the Council continued to hold the property fbr six additional months waiting for a decision by H -Window on whether they wanted to purchase the lots. One of the concerns that was expressed by the Council previously was whether the City would be setting a precedent in agreeing to hold lots for expansion potential of a business at no option cost, and whether we would do this for all other industrial park tenants. I believe this was the primary reason why the Council felt the need to establish a nominal holding cost charge if we were going to continue holding lots exclusively for a business. This would eliminate the potential accusation of special treatment for one business over another. Council Agenda - 12/11/95 I believe Knut will be in attendance at the meeting to present his request in person, outlining the reasons why he would like to see City assistance in their future growth plans. I've also enclosed some copies of past agenda items and minutes that pertain to this subject for your review. & ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Council could agree to enter into an exclusive option agreement with H -Window Company on Lots 1, 2 and 3 at the firm price of $64,000 until December 1, 2000, with no annual option fee or real estate tax reimbursement. 2. Council could agree to continue an option agreement with H -Window Company on the three lots at an agreed upon price for the land and any option fee or charges you would like to incorporate into the agreement. 3. Council could offer to sell the property to H -Window Company with attractive terms such as no down payment, 20 -year contract for deed at a low interest rate, etc. 4. If an option agreement is no longer suitable, the Council could provide H -Window with the right of first refusal on all three lots but direct staff to continue marketing efforts to sell the property at the going market rate per acre. Based on the pricing of adjacent lots, the 1995 asking price would be $85,600 for the three lots. While I believe it is important to encourage availability of land for future expansion by current industries, I do have concerns on continuing to hold property for one industry when we may not be able to do the same for others. I assumed the option agreement we entered last year would solve the controversy over holding these lots; but H -Window representatives apparently feel it's necessary to again ask for additional consideration from the Council. It should also be noted that last year the Industrial Development Committee encouraged the City and H -Window Company to work out a suitable agreement that was favorable to both parties, but they did not support the continued holding of property at no cost. This could be construed as Council Agenda - 12/11/95 favoritism of one industry over the other. As a result, I believe any exclusive option agreement to hold land for another five years should provide for some form of compensation to cover our carrying costs. Copy of November 18 letter from H -Window; Copy of option contract; Copies of previous agenda summaries and minutes relating to same issue. FU' WINDOW S,rvtr REvoLunoNARY- November 18, 1995 Mr. Rick Wolfsteller City of Monticello 250 East Broadway, Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362-9245 Dear Rick, The H Window Company currently carries an option contract to purchase additional land, namely lots 1,2 and 3, block 1 in the Oakwood Industrial Park second addition. This option contract is due to expire on November 29, 1995. Earlier this month we had acknowledged to your office our Intent to exercise this option and purchase these land parcels. In hind site, and after further review, I have decided that to purchase this land now would not be in our best interests. These parcels of land are still needed and are an important part of our future expansion plans, however, our steady growth requires that I focus our present available capital resources on providing for more short term and urgent capital needs. As I stated, this land still figures prominently Into our future growth plans. The H Window Company and its shareholders have demonstrated an ongoing commitment to the community of Monticello. We have continued to grow and expand our facilities since our start up in 1987. For 1996 we anticipate sales growth again of over 25%. Indications are that the same growth patterns will continue and remain steady over the next three to five year time frame. It is this three to five year time frame that I envision the need for the optioned land. I am asking that Instead of requiring the H Window Company to exercise its option now, that the city of Monticello hold this land exclusively for the H Window Company until December 1, 2000. We are content with continuing our expansion in Monticello and I feel that the city should play a bigger part and participate more In facilitating our growth. This exclusive option to purchase the land would be at no cost to the H Window Company and the option price would hold constant at $84,000. H wnaow CampaM • 1324 EaJ Oakwood D' ro • MonW-cao, Mtnn00Ma 5.%= rhe (G12)205-5305 - Fox(812)205.4m • (880) T. -H ww ILJ W1MDaN/ Smmy Revouuraw w I respectfully ask that you seriously consider this proposal and respond back to me the city's position as soon as practical. There is mutual benefit from our growth, and I would prefer that this growth continue In the Monticello community exclusively. Sincerely, Knut Flakk President and Chairman H WDM" cwrp&N 1324 E= Oakwood O"m • Wfte 0. MkvmmM 55302 � 6 Phom: (012) :fls•5305 F'aa. (012) 205-4650 • (600) UG Mev OPTION CONTRACT H•Window Company This agreement is dated November 29, 1994. For and in consideration of the sum of Three Thousand Two Hundred and 00/100 Dollars ($3,200.00), in hand paid to the CITY OF MONTICELLO, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, said CITY OF MONTICELLO does hereby grant unto H ININDCW COMPANY, a Minnesota Corporation, ar exclusive option for a period of one (1) year from and after the date hereof, to purchase, for the sum of Sixty-four Thousand 00/100 Dollars ($64,000.00) the following -described lands situated in the city of Monticello, County of Wright, State of Minnesota, to wit: Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition, City of Monticello Lot 2, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition, City of Monticello Lot 3, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition, City of Monticello Upon the following terns and conditions: That if this option is exercised, the said City shall convey said premises free and clear of any liens and encumbrances and shall furnish an Abstract of Title continued to date, showing the same. The H -WINDOW COMPANY shall, in addition to the Option Contract payment, be responsible for payment to the CITY OF MONTICELLO the annual sum of One Thousand One Hundred Fifty and 00/100 Dollars ($1,150.00) to cover real estate taxes that would be payable on this property just as if the H -WINDOW COMPANY owned it during the option period. One-half (1/2) of the real estate tax payment ($575) shall be payable to the CITY OF H-WINDOW.CON: ID29/94 p �/ Page 1 on or before November 15, 1995. The H -WINDOW COMPANY may exercise its option at any time during the —time specified above by providing written notice to said CITY OF MONTICELLO, 4 provided all terms and conditions of this option agreement have been complied with, including payment of all real estate tax installments due, and failure to provide such notice within the time specified shall terminate this option without further action. Time being the essence of this Agreement. In case such notice shall be provided with said time, then thirty (30) days shall be given in which to examine the abstract, make deeds, and close the sale. If this option is exercised before the end of option time period specified, the price paid for this option shall not be applied to the purchase price except that $266.00 per month for each frill month remaining on the option term shall be applied against the purchase price, and all real estate tax payments paid or due for the year in which the option is exercised shall be prorated to the date of closing. H•WINDO CITY OF MONTICELLOO By: B1rG mad"Fyle, M or Its �'" ✓� � ' �� By: Rick Wolfsteller, Oity Administrator H•WINDOW.CON: ID29/94 Page 2 Sv Council Agenda - 1 V14/94 Consideration of entering into an agreement with H -Window Comnanv concerning future acauisition of Lots 1.2 and 3. Block 1. Oakwood Industrial Parks Second Addition (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND In June of 1991, the Council adopted a resolution agreeing to hold all six (6) lots of the Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition for the H - Window Company's future expansion potential. This agreement expired December 31, 1992, and in February of 1993, it appeared that the H - Window Company would be making a decision on whether to purchase the property by June 1 of 1993. In light of this time table, the Council then adopted a resolution agreeing to hold lots 1, 2, and 3 (the lots closest to H -Window Company) until May 31, 1993, and to also provide a first right of refusal for Lots 4, 5, and 6 for the same time period. Lots 4, 5 and 6 were those lots on the east side of the cul-de-sac. When the June deadline came and went without H -Window Company purchasing any of the property, the City Council again agreed in August of 1993 to hold Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, for an additional time period expiring January 31, 1994, and to again provide a first right of refusal for the other three (3) lots until January, 1994. No further extensions were requested by H -Window Company, nor did the Council review this subject until the City staff' had received an offer for the purchase of Lot 4:'n the amount of $36,000 from Miley Gjertsen for his underground sprinkler irrigation business facility. At that time it came to our attention that the previous right of first refusal agreements with H -Window Company had expired in January, but the staff felt that we owed H -Window Company the opportunity to exercise their right of first refusal anyway. The City Council agreed with this assumption and allowed H -Window Company the opportunity to match the offer if they so desired. After considering the feasibility of matching the purchase offer, Mr. Steve Lemme, President of H -Window Company, indicated that the company would not be in a position to purchase Lot 4 at this time. However, Mr. Lemmo did note that H -Window Company executives were very concerned about being able to ensure the availability of Lots 1, 2, and 3 on the west side of the cul-de-sac for their future expansion needs. Mr. Lemme noted that if these three lots were not available in the future, it could have an effect on their future expansion plans for H - Window Company at that site. When I indicated that I was confident that the City of Monticello would make every attempt to allow these lots to be purchased at reasonable terms by H -Window Company, 'In Council Agenda - 11/14/94 Mr. Lemme did not want to commit to an immediate purchase of the property but would like to see the City continuing to hold the property in some manner for H -Window Company expansion potential. When the City Council accepted the offer for the sale of Lot 4 to Mr. Gjertsen, the Council asked that some options be presented at a future Council meeting and what the Council would consider regarding H - Window Company's interest in Lots 1, 2, and 3. The previous Council discussion centered on whether the City could continue to provide H - Window Company with a no cost option agreement when there were other industrial business that would like the same treatment. As a matter of fact, the City was recently contacted by another existing small industrial company that sees the need for expansian in the next couple of years and is interested in purchasing one of these lots from the City. Likewise, they would prefer to have the City hold the property until they are ready to expand, as they do have cash flow problems. Continuing to hold the property for one business may be a precedent that the Council will have to deal with in the future concerning other businesses. I recently informed H -Window Company of four possible alternatives the Council would be considering. The options are as follows: The Council could enter into an option agreement with H -Window Company on the sale of Lots 1, 2, and 3 at the current asking price of $17,500 per acre or $79,360 with the annual option fee to be calculated at 6% per year, or at whatever percentage rate the Council was agreeable with. A 6% fee would amount to an annual option charge of $4,761 per year, which would hold the three lots in question at the established price of $79,350 until such time as H -Window Company would desire to complete the purchase. The Council could establish an option agreement with the annual fee noted in Item 1 above, and also request an additional annual fee to cover the estimated property taxes that would he lost until the sale occurred. Based on current county assessed market values for these three (3) lots, the annual real estate taxes payable would be estimated at $1,150, which would increase the total operation cost to H -Window Company to approximately $5,911. 17 9F Council Agenda - 11/14/94 The Council could offer to sell the property to H -Window Company at attractive terms such as no down payment, 20 year contract for deed at 6% interest, etc. This type of low cost arrangement would probably be more favorable than the City would consider for selling the property to other interested properties, but would allow H -Window Company the ability to minimize their cash investment at this time. The favorable terms would certainly be appropriate in this case, as we would be providing the terms to a business for potential expansion and would not likely offer the same as no down payment, long-term contract if we were just selling the property to a speculative buyer. Council could decide to continue with the right of first refusal on all three lots and direct the staff to continue marketing efforts to sell the property to other industrial users. Under this option, H - Window Company would still have the right of first refusal but they could very well be faced with making a decision on the purchase of one or all of the lots in a very short period of time. I presented the four options that I thought the Council may want to consider to Mr. Lemme for his review and response. At this time, I have not received any firm preference from H -Window Company concerning the options other than their desire to work out something with the City to continue to make these lots available, nor was it indicated that if they were not available when needed, they may have to look at other sites. One of the possible disadvantages for H -Window Company in an outright purchase of the property at this time concerns the use of tax increment financing in the future. If H -Window Company owns the property now, it would not be eligible for tax increment financing when it did expand in the future. That is not to say that tax increment financing will even be available years down the road, but it would probably eliminate this incentive from being usable at that time. From the City's standpoint, I would think that either the establishment of an option fee or the outright sale under favorable long-term contract for deed terms should be acceptable to us. Continuing to hold the property without any option fee will likely be construed by other industrial businesses as playing favoritism to one business and others may ask for the same treatment. As I noted earlier, another small company looking for expansion in the next couple years has already requested the same treatment for one of these lots. No matter what the option fee is, I believe the past history of providing the option guarantee at no additional cost should be eliminated and some other method of ,s M Council Agenda - I V14/94 assuring H -Window Company's ability to acquire these lots be established. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTION 1) Council could agree to enter into an option agreement with H - Window Company on Lots 1, 2, and 3 at the current asking price of $79,350 with the annual option fee to be established at whatever percentage rate the Council is comfortable with. 2) Enter into an option agreement similar to that proposed in Option 1, but also require an additional $1,150 to cover the estimated real estate taxes that would be lost by not being owned by H -Window Company. 3) Council could offer to sell the property to H -Window Company at attractive terms such as no down payment, 20 -year contract for deed at a low interest rate, etc. 4) Council could continue with the right of first refusal agreement on all three (3) lots but direct the staff to continue marketing efforts to sell the property in the meantime. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION While the staff believes it is important to encourage availability of land for future expansion by current industries, the staff does have concerns on continuing to hold property for one industry when we may not be able to do the same for others. I do feel if H -Window Company is concerned about having enough land available for their future needs, they do need to make some effort themselves to protect their interest; and as a result, I feel they should enter into an option agreement and pay an annual fee or accept the purchase at favorable terms provided by the City. I had previously asked Mr. Steve Lemme to present any other ideas he had for Council consideration regarding these lots, and it is possible he may have some other suggestions at the Council meeting for your review. It was noted by the Industrial Development Committeo that they hoped the City and H -Window Company could work out an agreement that was favorable to both parties, but they did not support the continued holding of the property at no cost. D. SUPPORTING DUA Copy of an option agreement; Copy of a right of first refiisal agreement. 19 1# Council Minutes - 11/14/94 11. Consideratign of entering into an aereemeut with H-Wunauw t.uuw.u„ concernine future acquisition of Lots 1. 2. and 3. Block 1. Oakwood industrial Park Second Addition. City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller reported that the right of first refusal agreement between H -Window Company and the City for Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition, expired in January 1994. Although no further extensions have been requested by H -Window, at the time the sale of Lot 4 to Miley Gjertsen was considered by Council, H - Window indicated a continued interest in ensuring the availability of Lots 1, 2, and 3 for future expansion of their company but did not want to commit to an immediate purchase of these three lots. Wolfsteller went on to report that he informed Mr. Steve Lemma of H - Window Company that the following four alternatives, and any suggestions presented by Ii -Window, would be considered by Council on November 14: 1. Council could enter into an option agreement with the H -Window Company on the sale of Lots 1, 2, and 3 at the current asking price of $17,600 per acre, with the annual option fee to be calculated at a percentage rate agreed to by Council. 2. Council could establish an option agreement with an annual fee noted in option 01 but also request an additional annual fee to cover the estimated property taxes that would be lost until the sale occurred. 3. Council could offer to sell the property to H -Window with terms such as no down payment, 20 -year contract for deed at 6% interest, etc. 4. Council could decide to continuo with the right of first refusal on all three lots and direct staff to continuo marketing efforts to sell the property to other industrial users. Wolfst.ellor noted that no comments or offers have been received from H - Window at this time. After discussion, it was the consensus of Council that since City staff has notified H -Window that Council would consider options for securing the availability of Lots 1, 2, and 3 as requested by H -Window but no response has been received from them, the lots should be placed on the open market. Staff was also directed to notify H -Window that if a purchase offer is received from another company for any of these lots, H -Window will no longer be notified and given first chance to purchase the property. s1.s OV -28-94 M O N 1 2 E 0 T T H E H WINDOW C O P 0 1 WAAWMAV Y-', �•�. _:err^ :x��•ik..:. x�vtl�c-"•� `1 nrrtimorar r P.O. Box 206.1324 East Oakwood OM • Montego, MN 55382 Phone: (612) 2955305 • Fac (612) 295.4658 November 23, 1994 Rick Wolfeteller City 1kdminietrator City of Monticello 2$0 Hast Broadway P.O. Box 1147 Monticello, Mti 55362-9245 RB1 Lots 1, 2 and 3 Bloek 1 Oakwood Second Addition Deer Rickf In regard to your letter dated November 15 and per our discussion on the phone today, I am writing to confirm the following. 1). The H Window Company is very interested in purchasing the threo (3) late adjacent to our existing land. 2). we will make a proposal on Honday, November 29th for consideration at the City Council Meeting. 3). The proposal will likely be based on OPTION 1 and OPTION 2 identified in your letter of November 15, 1994. • An option agreement between the H Window Company and the City of Monticello with an annual option too (based on an agreed upon purchase price and e reasonable annual interest rate) and an additional annual payment for estimated property taxes. 4). we would obviously desire to have you agree that these lots be protected f ram any othor potential buyer until we can finalise a purchase option that is mutually agreeable to both parties involved. S)• Please use this letter as a firm letter of intent to finalise a forthcoming purchase agreement. Binc sly ' Steven Lomme cat Xnut Plakk (Chairman) Prom idont/General Nana-jer Brad Pyle (Mayor) 1 Council Agenda - 11/28/94 3A. Consideration of entering into an agreement with H -Window Comnanv concerning future acouisitiou of Lots 1. 2. and 9. Block 1. Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the previous meeting, this item was on the Council's agenda for consideration; and since no one from H -Window was in attendance at the meeting, it was decided that the lots in question would be put on the market and become available to anyone. After informing Mr. Steve Lemme of H -Window of the Council's action, Mr. Lemme indicated that the reason no one was attending the Council meeting was that they thought there were going to be additional discussions and options considered before the Council considered this subject. Although I believe I was fairly clear in my letters to Mr. Lemme and through phone conversations with him that the Council was going to consider the future status of these lots at our Council meeting November 14, Mr. Lemme did request that this item again be placed on the agenda at our next Council meeting in that he or a representative of the company will he in attendance to discuss this with the Council. Based on my recent conversation with Mr. Lemme, it appears they are not happy with the options that are available, as in their mind, there is really only one option being presented, and that is to purchase the property. I again indicated that if H -Window had any type of proposal they wish to submit concerning these lots, they should do so at this meeting, as I did not have any other ideas other than the four that have been previously presented. In an effort to avoid further duplication, we are enclosing the agenda item from the last meeting outlining the four options that I could think of for Council consideration. Unless additional information or background is provided by a representative of H -Window, I know of no other options for the Council to consider at this time. Copy of previous Council agenda item. Council Minutes - 11/28/94 Consideration of addine items to the aeenda. A. Consideration of enterine into an aereement with H -Window Comoan•; concernine future acquisition of Lots 1. 2. and 3. Block Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition. It was the consensus of Council to add this item to the agenda. City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller explained that at the previous meeting, Council discussed entering into an option agreement with H - Window for Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition; however, since no one from H -Window was in attendance at the meeting, Council decided that these lots would be put on the market for sale. Wolfsteller noted that after informing Mr. Steve Lemme of H -Window of the Councirs action, Lemme requested that.this item again be placed on the agenda and that either he or a representative of the company would be in attendance to discuss entering into an option agreement with the City. Wolfsteller went on to explain that a purchase proposal has been received from H -Window proposing that the price of the three lots be revalued at $70,000 rather than staffs proposed $79,350 due to a gas line main that runs through one of the lots. In addition, H -Window proposes that the City offer a 30% discount from the $70,000, which results in a $39,000 purchase price as the base for an annual option fee. It is also proposed that the annual option fee be figured using a fixed 5% annual interest rate for 10 years, and H -Window would include a $1,150 annual payment for the estimated real estate taxes for the three lots. Wolfsteller also noted that tax increment financing would not be available to write down the land cost if H -Window purchased the land at this time; however, if the City enters into an option agreement for the lots, tax increment financing could be used in the future since H - Window would not be considered the owner of the property. Wolfsteller added that if the price of the land is lowered now, Council may not want to use TIF later when H -Window purchases the property, as that would lower the price even further. Councilmember Smith suggested that perhaps a compromise could be reached if Council agreed to a price in the range of $64,000. After discussion, a motion was made by Warren Smith and seconded by Shirley Anderson to approve entering into an option agreement with Ii -Window for Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Oakwood Industrial Park Second Addition, with a base purchase price of $64,000, a 5% annual interest rate to determine the annual option fee for 10 years, and H -Window to include a $1,160 annual payment for the estimated O� real estate taxes. Motion carried unanimously. b Council Agenda - 12/11/95 9ADAI . (J.O.) At the previous meeting of the City Council, Council reviewed a staff proposal which required a cash deposit ($400 - winter, $700 - summer) for builders that wanted final occupancy prior to final completion of site grading. After discussion with builders, the item was tabled for further review with staff being directed to work with the developers on possible revisions to the policy. At the previous meeting, the builders were concerned about the "across the board" application of the policy. They noted that it did not make sense to require a grading deposit for a lot that has already been graded as part of the overall development of the subdivision. They noted that the individual home site grading that is done as part of the home construction process and subsequent to the subdivision grading rarely impacts the subdivision grading pattern. The escrow policy should not apply to such lots. Also at the previous meeting, there was concern that the policy did not have a provision enabling the City to enter the property to complete grading in the event the work was not done privately. In response to the concerns above, staff met with the Value Plus builders and Paul Becker to discuss the matter in detail. Staff' has revised the policy based on our discussions with Value Plus and Paul Becker. We have also developed a form which requires a builder/homeowner to allow the City to enter the property to complete necessary site grading or tree planting. A response to the policy from the builders/developers is not available at this time. We expect they will attend the meeting to express their views. According to the revised policy, the City escrow requirement will not apply to any lots that are located in developments that have been completely graded in a manner consistent with the development plan for the site. In other words, if a builder requests a building permit on a lot that has been certified by the City as already being properly graded, then no escrow deposit will be required at the time of occupancy. Under this scenerio, the City has completed its obligation to make sure that the development has been properly graded. Tho responsibility for correcting any subsequent drainage problems created by development of individual homes then falls squarely on the shoulders of the builder or homeowner, thereby making such cases civil matters. This does not mean that the City will not be drawn in on future cases; however, the City will be in a better position to stay out of the fray if Council Agenda - 12111/95 we can demonstrate that at some point the site was certified as being properly graded. It also does not mean that the City will look the other way if it appears that improper changes to approved grading are being made during the home construction process. If the Building Inspector notices that the grading pattern is being improperly changed or interrupted as the result of individual home site development, then the escrow requirement would apply prior to allowing final occupancy. With regard to installation of trees, according to ordinance, on bare lots, two trees are required. They must be placed on private property at least 4 ft outside of the 60 -ft right -of --way. Under the proposed policy, a cash deposit is required securing planting of trees required by ordinance. Staff supports this measure because experience has shown that if trees are not in at the time of closing, they are not always put in later. In our discussion with the builders, the seed of an interesting new idea for tree planting was discussed. Currently, the two trees for each lot are placed on private property with or without the support of the property owner. There have been some complaints from builders and homeowners about the City requiring tree planting on lots where the homeowner simply does not want a tree. Why "force" trees on homeowners that simply do not want any. Also, requiring trees at occupancy sometimes forces planting of trees prior to the date that they can be adequately cared for. For instance, there is no one to adequately care for a tree planted at a spec home site. By the time the spec home sells, the tree may have died due to lack of rare. Coincidentally, the Parks Commission believes that the City should be doing more to encourage prograrnmatic boulevard tree planting. They feel that the City would benefit by encouraging or coordinating placement of trees within the boulevard areas to help create a "canopy" over our streets. If trees are planted 4 ft from the property line as is the current requirement, it places them 68 ft apart when measured across a street. Requiring such a wide separation will not allow development of a street canopy and limits our ability to use trees as a tool to improve the quality of our now neighborhoods. As noted in a previous Council update, the Parks Commission is currently working on a shade tree inventory and will be presenting ideas to the Council sometime in 1996. Staff and the builders/developers discussed another option for tree planting in developments that Council may be interested in pursuing. It was suggested that instead of placing two tines on each lot at the time of occupancy, perhaps it would make more sense for the developer to simply provide the City with a "tree dedication" or an amount equal to the cost of two trees for each bare lot. The funds would be provided to the City for use Council Agenda - 12/11/95 in a tree planting program for the development to be conducted at the point when the development is built up. Under this scenerio, trees would be planted in selected boulevard locations by a contractor selected by the City in accordance with a shade tree plan for the City. Under the plan, individual homeowners could have the option of accepting or rejecting planting of trees, with the surplus trees then planted at other locations. This idea is desirable because it would provide the City with control over tree type, size, and location. Control of tree type guarantees a variety of trees and species suitable for boulevards. Control of size and quality helps to assure the viability of the tree. Control over location will allow us to minimize conflicts between trees and utility locations. Please let staff know if you like this idea and we will explore it further. Motion to adopt or amend and adopt the escrow policy allowing final occupancy prior to completion of grading and tree planting. Under this alternative, the policy as attached will be followed or followed as amended by Council at the meeting. It is important that a policy be adopted as soon as possible because there will soon be a number of homes that will need occupancy permits. Motion to deny adoption of the escrow policy. C. STAFF 1iFCOMMFNDATION: We like the revised policy. Limiting the use of the deposit to lots that have not been certified as being graded in a manner consistent with the plan for the development area will greatly reduce the number of lots affected by the policy without an increase in City liability. In terms of the deposit to assure tree planting, it is our view that the only way to make sure that trees are planted is to to require the deposit. if Council likes the idea of developing a "tree dedication" policy as noted above, please lot us and the Parks Commission know. Escrow Policy Statement. 18 CITY OF MONTICELLO ESCROW POLICY STATEMENT RESIDENTIAL FINAL OCCUPANCY/BPTE IpROvEmENT8 It is the general policy of the City to grant occupancy permits prior to completion of non-structural items on homes started in developments that have recieved certification from the City Engineer that grading has been completed and is consistent with the development plan for the subdivision. Information from the survey provided at the time of building permit application will be used to evaluate consistency with the grading plan and eligibility for final occupancy without further City review. For homes being built on certified lots, if it is determined by the Building Official that in the process of building the grading pattern has been altered, then a cash deposit guaranteeing restoration of the proper grades will be required as noted below. For homes where construction begins prior to completion of the development grading, or when home construction has altered an approved and established grading/drainage pattern, the City will grant final occupancy under the condition that a cash deposit is made to the City for each incomplete site improvement in accordance with the following tables. In addition, the builder/homeowner must agree in writing to allow, the City to enter the property to complete necessary grading and tree planting utilizing the cash deposit. June 16 to October 16 Grading $ 600 deposit or 1.6 times the cost (whichever is greater) Trees $ 126 (per tree) Other $ As necessary October 14 to Jnne 14 Grading $ 300 Trees $ 125(per tree) Other $ As necessary The Building Inspector will not be inspecting each unfinished site improvement item as it is completed. One inspection should be scheduled when all of the items aro completed and the deposit will then be refihndod within 21 days without interest. HSCROW2.130L:12098 9r 1 Council Agenda - 12/11/95 City Council is asked to consider granting a variance to the zoning code which would allow filling of a small wetland in conjunction with the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. The wetland appears to be the result of a spring that flows out of the valley wall. It is located along the eastern boundary of the property line. According to Public Works Director John Simola, it is not possible to avoid impacting the wetland even though most of it is located within the required setback area. Development or filling of wetland is regulated by both the zoning ordinance and via the 1991 State Wetland Act. Under the zoning ordinance, a variance is needed to allow filling of the wetland to occur. Under the State Wetland Act, this particular wetland is exempted from the strict rules limiting filling due to the fact that it is leas than .5 acres and the filling is needed to accommodate a public utility project; however, the rules do require that the impact be limited as much as possible. Given the constraints of the site, according to John Simola, it is impossible to build the necessary improvements on the site without impacting the wetland. There is land available within the existing site to store storm water run-off, thus creating a wetland area that is not present today. Creation of this pond is not a requirement of the Wetland Act but could serve to meet the spirit of the 'no net loss' goals of the Wetland Act and serve as an additional justification for the variance. The Planning Commission recommended alternative 01 below. Motion to approve the variance request which would allow filling of a small wetland in conjunction with expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. Motion is based on the finding that use of the property for the intended purpose is not possible without a variance. A wetland will be created at a new location, and the variance is justifiablo based on the fact that it is exempted from the State Wetland Act regulations limiting the filling of wetlands. Council Agenda - 12/11/95 Under this alternative, the precedent set by granting the variance is limited by the fact that in future cases, the Wetland Act will apply. For instance, the wetland in question is also located on Floyd Kruse's property. When Kruse requests to develop his site for residential purposes, he will likely say that his property is not developable without a variance to the zoning code. His arguments for the variance will be moot because the Wetland Act will not allow filling of the wetland for residential purposes without a mitigation plan. Motion to deny the variance request which would allow filling of a small wetland in conjunction with expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. Motion is based on a finding that a hardship has not been demonstrated. The wetland is located along the boundary of the property and much of it is within the required setback area. Perhaps efforts could be made to preserve as much of the wetland as possible. This is not likely to be possible given the limited area provided on site for development of the facility. More detail regarding the feasibility of this option will be provided by John Simola. C_ STAFF RF.COMMFNDATION: Staff recommends alternative #1 for reasons identified above. n. SUPPORTING DATA: Wetland Act exemption information; Excerpt from zoning code; Map showing location of wetland --identified on the site plan with the next agenda item. 20 06/09/91 [REVISOR ) PER/JC AR2120 1 is not required for: 2 (10) activities in a wetland created solely as a result of: 3 (1) beavct dam construction; 6 (ii) blockage of culverts through roadways maintained -by a 5 public or private entity: 6 (iii) actions by public entities that were taken for a 7 purpose other than creating the wetland; or a (iv) any combination of (i) to (iii). 9 Wetland areas created by beaver activities may be drained 4L' -fV 10 by removing those materials placed by beaver. Drainage is 11 permitted by removing or moving materials blocking installed �.1 tN 12 roadway culverts and drainage structures. Additional excavation 4�� k 13 or removal of ocher materials is not permitted unless it can be t� (' 10 shown by aerial photographs that the proposed activity will not 15 drain or fill wetland that was there before the beaver dam was !-v 16 built or the culvert became plugged. 17 Wetlands may be drained or filled if the landowner can show 18 that the wetland was created solely by actions the purpose o! 19 which was not to create the wetland and were approved, 20 permitted, funded, or overseen by a public entity. 21 Impoundments or excavations constructed in nonwetlands 22 solely for the purpose of effluent treatment, storm water 23 retention, soil and water conservation practices, and water 24 quality improvements, and not as part of a compensatory wetland 25 mitigation process that may. Over time, take on wetland ? 26 characteristics, are also axemmttrd. 27 �'ouop. 11. Fseskption (11). A replacement plan for wetlands 28 is not required tort 29 (11) placement, maintenance, repair, enhancement, or 30 replacesent of utility or utilLty-type service, including the 31 transmission, distribution, or furnishing, at wholesale or \ 32 retail, o! natural or manufactured gas, electricity, telephone, 33 or radio service or communications itt ' 34 (1) the impacts of the proposed project on the hydrologic IS and biological characteristics of the wetland have been avoided 36 and miaLmised to the extent possibler and 19 IA ti eevua 06/09/91 (REVISOR 1 PEA/JC AR2120 1 (11) the proposed project significantly modifies or alters " 2 less than one-half acre of wetlands. 7 For new replacement placement and enhancement of existing a facilities, the utility must demonstrate that the character and 5 extent of the impacts of the proposed project on the wetlands I 6 have been minimized and that the entire project will, 7 cumulatively, drain or fill leas than one-half acre of wetland. e For maintenance, repair, and replacement, the local 9 \ government unit may issue a seasonal or annual exemption % 10 certification or the utility may proceed without local 11 government unit certification if it is carrying out the work 12 according to best management practices. Work of an emergency 13 nature may proceed as necessary and any drain or fill activities la shall be addressed with the local government unit atter the 15 emergency work has been completed. 16 Subp. 12. Exemption (12). A replacement plan for wetlands 17 is not required fon 10 112) activitioa associated with routine maintenance of 19 utility and pipeline rights-of-way, provided the activities do 20 not result in additional intrusion Into the wetland. 21 This exemption is tar maintenance, but not expansion, of 22 the rights-of-way in which utilities are located. Spill 23 remediation is not routine maintenance. 24 The local government unit may Issue a seasonal or annual 25 exemption certification or the utility may proceed if it is 26 carrying out the work according to best management practices. 27 Mork of an emergency nature may proceed as necessary and any 28 drain or till activities shall be addressed with the local 29 government unit after the emergency work has been completed. 30 Subp. 17. Exemption 117). A replacement plan for wetlands 31 is mot required fort 32 (131 alteration of a wetland associated with the operation, 33 maintenance, or repair at an interstate pipeline within all 34 existina or acquired interstate oinaline rlahts-or-way. 35 This exemption includes construction activities. 36 Subp. 14. Exemption (16). A replacement plan for wetlands ' O 19 Aapwee by ft -Mat 06/09/97 (REVISOR ( PER/JC AR2120 1 lost at an impacted wetland. r 2 Subp. 49T 41. Restoration. 'Restoration" means 3 reestablishment of an area that was historically wetlands but 4 currently provides no or minimal wetland functions due 5 to manmade alteration such as filling or drainage. 6 Subp. 4*? 42. Right-of-way acreage. 'Right-of-way acreage' 7 has the meaning given it in Minnesota Statutes, section 8 107E.2e5, subdivision 6. 9 Subp. 42T 43. Riverine wetland. 'Riverine wetland' means 10 a wetland contained within the banks of a channel that may 11 contain moving water or that forms a connecting link between two 12 bodies of standing water. 17 Subp. 43, 44. Set aside. 'Set aside" means the cropland 14 acreage annually retired as a condition to landowner 15 participation in United States Department of Agriculture 16 commodity programs. 17 Subp. 44T 4S. Silviculture. *Silviculture' means the 1S scientific management of forest trees. 19 Subp. 45T 46. Soil and water conservation district. 'Soil 20 and water conservation district' means a legal subdivision of 21 state government under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103C. 22 Subp. 46v 47. Soil Conservation Service. 'Soil 22 Conservation Service' means an agency of the United States 24 Department of Agriculture. 23 Subp. 47, 48. Tributary wetland. 'Tributary wetland' 26 means a wetland with a well defined outlet, including the 27 oy0tOma, ditches, or natural watercourses, but without a well 28 delloe. 2 Subp. 40T 49. Utility. "Utility' means a unitary sewer, ]0 storm sower, potable water distribution, and tranamisaion, 71 dlotributlon, or furnishing, at wholesale or retail, of natural 32 or manufactured gas. electricity, telephone, or radio service or 72 communications. 74 Subp. 49v 4�0. Watershed. 'Watershed' means the al major 35 watershed units delineated by the map *State of Minnesota I O 26 Watershed Boundaries - 1979• as produced by the Minnesota B Approved Ov Gomm (d) Where feasible, all clear -cuts shall be + conducted between September 15 and May 15. If natural regeneration will not result in adequate vegetative cover, areas in which clear -cutting is conducted shall be replanted to prevent erosion and to maintal.n the aesthetic quality of the area.. Where feasible, replanting shall be performed in the same spring or the following spring. ?. Grading and filling in of the natural topography which is not accessory to a permitted or conditional use shall not be permitted in the land use district. 4. Grading and filling in of the natural tolography which is accessory to a permitted or conditional use shall be performed in a manner which minimizes earth moving, erosion, tree -clearing, arl the destruction of natural amenities and sl­il be controlled by the local ordinance. 5. Grading and filling in of the topography shall also meet the following standards: (a) The smallest amount of baro ground is xposed for as short a time as feasible. (b) Temporary ground cover such as mulch is used and permanent ground cover such as sod is planted. (c) Methods to prevent erosions and trap so, iment are employed. (d) Fill is stabilized to accepted engineering standards. 6. Excavation of material from or fillinf, in a recreational river or construction of any pe.manent structures or navigational obstructions theroin !-- prohibited unless authorized by a permit from the Commissioner pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 105.42. 7. No state or local authority shall author) o the drainage or filling in of wetlands within the �rC recreational river land use district. lop MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE 27/9 Council Agenda - 12/11/95 City Council is asked to consider recommending approval of a conditional use permit which would allow expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. Following is a brief review of the site plan followed by a list of development conditions. The size of the site is approximately 4.1 acres of undisturbed river valley upland and valley lowland. To the west of the site is the existing facility, to the east is undeveloped river lowland and upland owned by Floyd Kruse, to the north is the river, and to the south is Hart Boulevard/CSAH 75. The Kruse property is zoned for PZM, uses which makes it eligible for housing or commercial uses. It is likely that the high side of the Kruse property on the CSAH 75 side will be used for multi -family or commercial purposes. It may be possible but difficult to develop single family home sites on the lower aide of the property. The plant site plan and associated buffer yard has been designed with these adjacent land uses in mind. The eastern boundary of the property will include development of a chain link fence and evergreen tree plantings in an effort to buffer the impact of the SBR tanks that will rise up 34 R higher than the grade of the single family area to the east. Dense vegetation along the western boundary of the existing site creates an adequate buffer yard between the existing plant and the property owned by John Bondhus. The development of the site will have a significant inevitable impact on the natural landscape. Complete clear -cutting will occur up to 60 R fi"om the river's edge. Considerable grading will also be necessary due to steep grades and difficult grade transitions between the Kruse property and the site. The top of the SBR tanks will rise to an elevation equal to the top of the wall of the existing sludge storage tank (clev. 940), which places the top of the tanks 34 ft above the adjacent property. Efforts to limit the visual impact will be made via preservation of as many existing trees as possible and via planting of new trees. As viewed from the river, the tanks will rise 47 ft but will be set back about 275 ft. As noted above, trees will remain for the first 60 ft ftom the river. The remaining trees between the 50 -ft line and the tanks will be lost in the construction process. According to John Simola, this area (175 ft) is needed for prgjoct staging, fill placement, etc. Council Agenda - 12/11/95 The administration building will be an attractive masonry building. Fifteen new parking spaces will also be added, which is adequate to handle current staff (4) and visitors. The entire process facility will be fenced and secured. The headworks building at the south end of the SBR tanks will be an attractive gable -roofed concrete burnished block building, which will rise above the SBR tanks and provide screening. The expansion plans call for significant efforts to control odor problems. It is expected that the new enlarged facility will result in a reduction in odor problems. At the meeting, John Simola will outline specific design features that will be employed to help control odors. According to the City's pathway plan, there will be a pathway along the river that will connect Mississippi Drive to the Hospital District/Ellison Park area. The site plan as proposed accommodates the future extension of this pathway. The Planning Commission recommended alternative 01 below. One couple Brom the Montissippi Drive neighborhood attended the public hearing. They did not oppose the proposed expansion and expressed appreciation for City efforts to design odor control measures into the facility. B. Ai.T .RNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve a conditional use permit which would allow expansion of the wastewater treatment plant in a PZM zone subject to the following conditions: d u- 1. Items required by code: V, S A. Conformity with the surrounding neighborhood is maintained, and required setbacks and side yard requirements are met. B. Adequate screening from neighboring uses and landscaping is provided in accordance with Chapter 3, Section 2, of the zoning ordinance. C. The provisions of Chapter 22 of the zoning ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. D. The facility must have direct amens to county or city state aid highway. 22 Council Agenda - 12tl1/95 Installation of odor control measures necessary to maintain or reduce the current problem. No tree clear -cutting to occur within 50 ft of the river's edge. City buffer yard requirements must be met on the Kruse side of the property. Top side buffer yard to buffer institutional/multi-family. Lower side to buffer institutional use/single family. This motion could be based on the finding that the facility is consistent with the character of the area and the screening and landscaping are designed to preserve to the extent possible the value of the adjoining property. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan for the city. The expansion will not have an appreciable effect on the property to the west (Bondhus). Screening and buffer yard techniques will be employed to limit impact on the Kruse property, and odor control efforts have been designed into the plane. Although the natural features of the site will be severely affected, the 60 -ft setback from the river will help to preserve the natural quality of the shoreline. Motion to deny approval of a conditional use permit which would allow expansion of the wastewater treatment plant in a PZM zone. Planning Commission should select this alternative based on a finding that the facility as proposed is not consistent with the nature and character of the area, will result in depreciation of adjoining land values, or is not consistent with the comprehensive plan for the city. r STAFF R .O MF.NDATION; It is our view that the site plan as proposed, along with odor control measures, will result in a land use that is compatible with adjoining properties. The measures noted above will serve to mitigate new impacts created by the expansion and reduce existing odor problems; therefore, staff recommends approval. Site plan; Comprehensive plan excerpts. 23 alyp of v a c eRP T (/9-P4) UTILITY POLICIES 1. As urban development proceeds, adequate plane will be made for the increased storm water run-off that can be expected; to the extent feasible, such water will be impounded to help recharge the area's ground water supply. Drainage plans will be coordinated on a watershed basis. 2. where on-site sewer and water facilities are to be used, soil percolation tests shall be required when considered necessary and there is evidence to indicate that larger lot sizes may be required or development should be permitted for reasons of danger to the public and health. 3. Attempt to design and encourage the use of gravity flow for sanitary sewer systems rather than using lift stations and force mains for long-term sewage solutions. Lift stations and force mains may be appropriate as interim solutions to sewage problems that may be served by gravity flow at a later date. 4. Select routes for utilities, either above or below ground, with careful regard for the preservation of natural resources, such as wetlands, extreme slopes, water sources, and other wildlife habitat. 5. Restore the 'nature' of the land which has been altered by construction work to the extent possible as anon after construction in completed. 6. Prohibit extension of sewer systems into areas where development should not occur, such as flood plains and designated open spaces. In certain instances, sewers may, of necessity, have to traverse ouch areas in order to serve upland areas. However, connection to the line should not be allowed in those areas. 7. Privately owned sanitary sewer systema should be prohibited. B. Under certain circumotancea, surface water run-off may require consideration of a treatment system to aosuro the quality of effluent discharges into water bodies or waterways. 9. Municipal utilities should not be extended beyond the corporate limits of the City. 10. The City shall actively participate in industrial and commercial growth to ensure conformance with treatment and pro -treatment requirements, in order to enhance maintenance and operation, and to protect and prolong the life expectancy of the wastewater Treatment Plan. 11. The extension of privately owned sewer and water lines beyond an individual's property lino in order to tie into municipal mains shall be prohibited. -54- 11A. COKMUNITY FACILITIES POLICY 1. Presently, the development of land for public facilities such as parks and playgrounds is considered more important than the acquisition of such land. However, with respect to acquisition, land must be purchased before proper sites are usurped by private developments or high land prices make acquisition unfeasible. It is a desirable goal of the City to balance acquisition and development efforts. 2. All public facilities are to be developed according to generally accepted standards and the results of thorough study. 3. Where feasible, private developers will be required to set aside a portion of their land for public use; where this is not feasible or desirable, developers will be required to contribute cash in lieu of land, with such money to be utilised for the purchase and development of recreational facilities. 0. School facilities should be fully utilized by making building and land available to the public for use when such does not conflict with normal function of the school facilities. 5. Private developers will not be required to donate land for school sites. 6. Churches should have an ample site for building, landscaping, potential expansion, and off-street parking. Parking should be provided on the maximum design capacity. Churches should be located adjacent to a thoroughfare or collector street and have easy access to the area served. They should not be located on minor residential streets and in the midst of residential neighborhoods. 7. The City should not accept substandard lands such as swamps, power line casements, etc., for the development of park lands. This shall include lands laid out in subdivision plane. Open Space Policies Before delineating open space policies, a definition of the term is necessary. Traditionally, open apace has been primarily defined as that area which is retained in or restored to a condition where natural oystems predominate and which may be used for recreation, or preservation purposes. Open apace woo often regarded as a ceparato and contained entity usually under the ownership of a governmental jurisdiction. Recent trends indicate that open space, like the people it serves, is becoming more directly integrated with its surroundings. Becoming more o port of the total urban fabric, open apace is being more closely integrated into the urban living and working environment. BocauOe of this integrating phenomenon, many of the advantages and rooponoibilltioa of open apace are equally applicable to public and private lands. 1I B Council Agenda - 12/11/95 12. Consideration of s lazyhs edule ndJnAtments for 1998. (R.W.) A tFFFRFNPFAND BA .K .RO 1ND: As part of the ongoing maintenance of our current salary system in use for all non-union employees, the City Council should annually review the salary schedule and make adjustments in order to retain the City's pay relationship to the market. With this being the last meeting before 1996, any adjustments to the salary schedule should be adopted by the Council at this meeting in order to allow for implementation of the new schedule by January 1. In preparation for the 1996 budget, I had included a 5% coat of living adjustment to all salary categories to provide sufficient dollars within the budget for possible increases. While the 6% amount should be more than sufficient to cover any adjustments you may want to make, this does not obligate the Council to use a 5% increase. As we have done the past few years, it is recommended that the increase be reflective of the cost of living increases that are occurring in our area in our attempt to keep our system competitive with the market and surrounding communities. For background information, the City Council originally adopted our new comparable worth pay system in 1991 in order to comply with the new comparable worth law in effect. Our program included 22 grades with 6 potential steps within each grade that all City employees could fall within. Since the current system already allowed for step increases by employees who may not have yet reached their maximum step of their grade, the Council does not have to be concerned with individual merit/performance adjustments per se, but only needs to address what percentage increase should be considered for the entire salary schedule in general. As a reference, the Minneapolis/St. Paul consumer price index indicates that the current inflation rate for the metro area is 2.7'% on an annual basis. For some reason, the Minneapolia/St. Paul index is only calculated twice a year for annual purposes, and this 2.7% increase covers the time period from June 1994 through June 1995. The U.S. consumer price index for the period October 1994 through October 1996 seems to correspond with the Minneapolis consumer price index at 2.7%. In addition to the CPI information, I also had a brief salary survey conducted from various communities surrounding Monticello, including the cities of Big Lake, Buffalo, Elk River, Maple drove, and Plymouth. These are the same communities we have surveyed in the past and can be usef al for the Council Council Agenda - 12/11/95 to see what is happening in other communities around us. At the time of the survey, some communities had not yet established salary adjustments for next year, and the survey may indicate proposed adjustments they will be considering. As you will note, the proposals or actual adjustments range from the 2% to 3'% areae. One other note the Council should consider is that last year the salary schedules were adjusted by 2.5% while the Minneapolis/ St. Paul consumer price index had indicated a current inflation rate of around 3%. The Council had chosen to adjust the schedules approximately 1/2% lower than the known consumer price index increase, and you may want to keep this in mind when considering adjustments this year. It is anticipated that with the two-year union contract up for renewal in April of 1996, we may continue the same contract language that makes adjustments to the union's pay scales based on the same percentage increases that are granted to non-union employees. The usual argument by union negotiators is that they feel they should be entitled to the some percentage increases that non-union employees receive. With the City always being faced with making sure the comparable worth law is complied with, any increases being considered for union contracts almost have to fall in line with percentage increases granted to non-union to avoid being out of compliance with the comparable worth. As I have noted in the past when the Council has been discussing cost of living adjustments, the Council should keep in mind the following factors. Our comparable worth study adopted in 1991 had originally recommended that each grade consist of 7 steps from bottom to top of the wage scale. The 7 -step system was recommended by the League of Minnesota Cities personnel consultant and was based on the average metro/rural steps used by other communities with similar pay systems. At the time of the adoption, the Council made the decision to drop off the 7th step, which in effect reduced the potential salary structure of the City by a little over 4%. Since the original recommended salary schedule with 7 stops was intended to be consistent with the market for our area, and by the elimination of the 7th step, the Council in effect had immediately made a reduction in our market study by 4%. 25 Council Agenda - 12/11/95 While the use of the Minneapolia/St. Paul consumer price index may not be perfect, it is a basis that has been used by the City Council in the past in an attempt to keep our pay structure in line with inflation. With the Minneapolia and U.S. CPI at around 2.7%, it seems appropriate for the City Council to use this as a basis for their consideration. With many of the employees having worked for the City for more than five years, many of the positions are now at or nearing the top of their step within their present grade. As a result, many of our employees will be relying on cost of living adjustments as the only increase in their salary unless their job descriptions change sufficiently to have warranted a move to a different step or grade. With performance or merit pay adjustments being eliminated as part of this new comparable worth pay system, it only means that more importance is placed on providing an adequate cost of living adjustment to keep employees in pace with inflation. On a local level, the Council should also keep in mind that the School District recently settled pay raises for the teaching staff that amounted to increases of 4% for each of the next two years. While the Council is certainly not tied to provide increases that correspond with what the School District grants, it should be a factor that is considered by the Council. Additionally, Wright County also recently approved a 3% increase for all non-union and elected County employees for 1998. 1. N, Council could establish a cost of living adjustment for the pay schedule Y that would apply to the entire non-union pay system which equals the \ current Minneapolis/St. Paul CPI. According to my current information, this percentage increase is approximately 2.7% and is very similar to the U.S. CPI at around 2.7% to 2.8% through October. Council could adjust the COLA based on some other fhctor other than the St. Paul or Minneapolis CPI index. 26 Council Agenda - 12/11/95 STAFF F..O NDATION: With the 1898 budget including a 5% allowance for salary schedule adjustments, the Council should have sufficient latitude to adjust the pay scales if the CPI was used as an index. With the adjustments last year being approximately 1/2% lower than the actual CPI, Council may want to consider adding the 1/2% to a cost of living amount for this year to bring the employees back in line with the two-year inflation index. It is estimated the increase would then be 3.2%. Without making up for any shortfalls last year, I would recommend the Council focus on the Minneapolis/St. Paul CPI index of 2.7% as the minimum adjustment. Salary survey of surrounding communities. SURVEY OF SURROUNDING CITIES 1988 PROPOSED SALARY ADJUSTMENTS Big Lake: 1886: Budgeted 4%, 2% historical SALd1RY M: 1S/8W / Zig 1886: 2% Buffalo: 18$6: Proposed 2.6% in September 1M: 2.6% Elk River. 1886: 3% 1896: 3% Maple Grove: 1886: Probably 3% 1886: 3% Plymouth: 1996: Proposed 3% --in negotiation 1886: 2.8% SALd1RY M: 1S/8W / Zig THE KIPLINGER WASHINGTON LETTER Ciretd d , ,My le Eusl— Nmn .1— 1823-14d 72 Na 47 THE KrPUNcER WAStUNGTON ERRORS 1729 H St., KIN, Wuhf Wm, DC 20006.3938 Dear Client: Washington, Nov. 24, 1995 Budget 4 tax outlook, the stock market, interest rates, inflation, politics and business planning for the new year are on many minds, based on the questions we get. Here's a sampling and our replies: Where are stocks headed in 1967 Up. but MUCH leap than in '95... the 30% jump so far this year. Corporate earnings won't be as healthy. Consumer debt threatens spending. And good values are harder to find. But other things will keep stocks chugging ahead: Lower interest rates. Further expansion in the economy. And more i more money from 401(k)s. Stocks do well in presidential election years. They've gained every time since 1940, no matter which party controls the White House. I When's the outlook for inflation? Close to 3% again next year. liw about interest rates the next few months? They'll edae down. Assuming a budget agreement is he red out in Dec., look for a reduction in short-term rates by the Federal Reserve, probably at its Jan. meeting. Prime will slip to 841, 90 -day T-bills to 5k% and one-year CDs to 4.9%. Long-term rates will follow the same course, 30 -year T -bonds down to 62. How will a budget and tax compromise likely take shave? Republicans will cut the President a little more slack on Medicare and a few other things he wants, staying within their balanced-budget goal by scaling back tax breaks. Tax credits of $500 per child, for example, will be phased in more slowly. Other planned tax relief will be squeezed. And if needed, assumptions on economic growth and inflation may be fudged. Clinton will saran to the core of the COP plan ... a balanced budget In seven years. shifting welfare and Medicaid to the states and tax relief for investors, family-owned businesses and families with young children. He doesn't want Lo oppose a balanced budget going into the '96 elections. Any chance that the tax cute will be dropped? No, don't think so. The Concord Coalition and some members of both parties want to delay them until deficito are wiped out, but Clinton and COP leaders favor cute now. Will deficits actually be eliminated by 20021 Don't count on it. For one thing, estimates by Congress and White House assume no recension over the seven years. Chances are we'll run into a slump along the way. What are companies p2anninR for pay raises IS 19§1 Average is U for the full range of employees at nonunion firms ... hourly and salaried. Pay increases for union employees will average slightly lose than that. Does Sen. Dole have a lock on the GOP nomination? Not Quite yet. Still three months to go before the first delegates are chosen in Iowa and N.H. It's POSSIBLE another candidate could catch fire and upper him, but it seems unlikely. Dole has a hard core of support within the party, good organizations in primary states and a bigger bankroll than the rest. toRnnrt tM rtt 0MUM taarpt031 tt11f)l1.. ra /� 8 o=A,0 apl lta a,tm,oa=11"MY 013pinrKUN. rt • umr rororomn d 3DIImLa 3t0 wrra r rn r17, Council Agenda - 12/11/95 13. Consideration of adopting revised job evaluation results. (R.W.) A. REFRRFNCF AND BACKGROUND: During the fall of 1991, the City used the personnel services of the League of Minnesota Cities and contracted for a complete review of our compliance with the comparable worth law, which included making suggested revisions to job descriptions and recommendations for setting up a new pay system that would comply with the comparable worth law. The underlying intent of the comparable worth law is to ensure that female classes of employees with comparable jobs and responsibilities are paid equal to male counterparts. The study included development of job descriptions, evaluations of the 21 current positions, development of recommended salary ranges, and comparing results to ensure compliance with the current comparable worth law. As part of the ongoing maintenance of the comparable worth system, the positions and duties should be reviewed every 3-5 years and the job descriptions modified to reflect any changes in the duties or responsibilities that may have changed. In addition, the positions should also be evaluated as part of the comparable worth rating system to see if any changes are warranted in the ranking because of changes in the position over the years. If duties or responsibilities of a position change enough to move that individual into a higher grade, additional compensation for that position is warranted. With the initial review occurring over three years ago, I had planned to review positions and job descriptions during 1995 and prepare a report on my recommendations for Council consideration that would take effect January 1, 1998, if any grade or position adjustments resulted from my review. As part of my evaluation process, I had asked all employees to review their current job descriptions for accuracy and list any changes they felt were warranted as a result of changes in their positions that may have occurred over the past three years. Also, changes may have been made from one job to another because of a reassignment of duties or tasks over the years, and this was also asked to be noted by the employees. In addition, if any employee was requesting an appeal of their comparable worth points, they were requested to state in writing their reasons for why there should be an increase in their point values and what specific areas of their evaluation they wanted me to review. Council Agenda - 1211 V95 Generally speaking, all employee job descriptions were originally evaluated and points established based on the following five main categories. Knowledge and experience Accountability for actions Responsibility for planning Supervision Working conditions As part of my review this summer, I reviewed changes in individual job descriptions that were proposed by the individual employees and their reasons for requesting additional points. All of the appeals had to be considered in relationship to the overall values that had been assigned to other positions within the City. While an employee's request for additional points may have seemed rational, it may have also looked inappropriate when compared to other similar jobs and ranking within the organization. Also, where a change in points may have been recommended for additional tasks or duties that the position is now responsible for, it didn't necessarily mean that it would result in any change in the pay structure by grades, as it may have not put them into a different grade level. Initially, 22 grades were established with points ranging from a low of 15 to over 330 at 15 -point intervals. Some changes in job responsibilities over the past few years may have warranted minor adjustments in the points, but the changes, if adopted, would not necessarily move them into the next higher pay grade. In reviewing the appeals, some decisions were pretty straight forward, especially if they dealt with factors such as a change in points for supervising more employees, etc. In most cases, it became a judgment call on my part, and I tried to be as objective and consistent as possible. Some recommended changes were, in fact, done to be consistent with ratings that may have been granted other job positions in the past. Again, I'm sure some employees may not agree with my evaluations and denials of their appeals. Enclosed for the Council's review is a brief summary of my review and comments pertaining to each specific appeal requested. A few changes may also have been made to individual job descriptions because of a change in duties or tasks amongst individuals. If an employee did not specifically request or appeal for an increase in pointe, changes were not typically made to a particular job description, nor were additional points granted to that individual without them first appealing to me. This is why you may notice that not all City positions have been listed in this summary, as it only covers those that specifically requested my review of their jobs. 29 Council Agenda - 12/11/95 As the City continues to grow in the coming years, it is a good idea to review the job descriptions and make modifications as necessary. Unless there are obvious changes in a particular job that requires immediate modifications to the descriptions, taking a look at all jobs and the entire comparable worth program, including job evaluation appeals, every 3-5 years should be adequate. Council could accept the job evaluation recommendations as presented for positions that requested a review. Council could decide not to accept the recommendations as presented by the Administrator and request additional review by an outside consultant. Council could decide to leave all job descriptions and job evaluations as they were originally established by the League study. V STAFF IZ_RCOMMFNDATION; As part of the ongoing maintenance of our personnel system and comparable worth program, a periodic review of each job, including any changes in duties, responsibilities, and tasks, should be reflected in an updated job description periodically. This was originally recommended by the League of Minnesota Cities personnel as part of their original program developed for us. This is even more important in a community like Monticello where growth may be requiring the addition of more staff to handle duties and/or tasks and responsibilities are being shifted amongst positions. While I admit that the recommendations are the opinions of the City Administrator, I would recommend that they be accepted as noted and any resulting adjustments in the salary schedules because of the modifications be effective January 1, 1996. My comments summarised by positon for individuals who appealed; Summary of the recommended changes by position. A number of job descriptions were revised as a result of this review but are not included with the agenda in order to keep the volume of paper down. If anybody would like to get a copy of the actual job descriptions that have been revised, you can pick one up at city hall. F] CITY OF MONTICELLO JOB DESCRIPTION REVIEW RVNIOR DF.p 1'1'V REGISTRAR CLERK Amo un chili .v The current grading for this position is Blb, which indicates intermediate authority with minor impact on overall city budget and indirect influence on city budget and operations. I do not believe the request for a change to advanced would be appropriate, as nothing has basically changed in this category even though the duties of the position are now being done in a different location other than city hall. The original determination was made with the knowledge of the duties and requirements of the position and that the staff working with deputy registrar functions were responsible for the entire process. Just because your physical location of performing the duties has moved across the street, nothing has changed from the *accountability standpoint. The move to a new location did recognize that more direct supervision of part-time employees would be the responsibility of the Senior Clerk, and this has been acknowledged in the revised Senior Clerk position. Possibly the confusion may arise in only focusing on Nn charge occasionally in the definition of intermediate where the real intent is to indicate that the deputy registrar function does not have the latitude to make severe independent decisions in that this function cannot set its own hours, change procedures without City or State approval, etc. Occasionally in charge is an example to use for determining the appropriateness of the intermediate category, which I feel is still an appropriate category for this position. Decision: No change Planning As far as planning is concerned, the position is already at 2b, which already covers for periods of up to one month. Decision: No change necessary Supervision The normal type of supervision and training required for the part-time deputy registrar staff is usually routine after initial instructions and requires minimal directing thereafter. The level of supervision given doesn't necessarily relate to your own level of responsibility. As a result, I believe routine supervision of three part-time employees seems correct and no change is necessary. Decision: No change /v#+ JOBDESCAREV: IN17/95 Page 1 SENIOR DEPUTY REGISTRAR CLERK CONTINUED... Wor i g .on itio s Heavy Lifting: I realize there is some lifting required in this position, but I JOBDESC.REV: HY17/95 /38 Page 2 don't believe the license plate boxes would fall under heavy lifting. Normally, all jobs require some type of lifting, and I don't think there's anything unusual in this department or description. Decision: No change Abnormal Hours: Having a work schedule which may require working shifts other than days or a schedule that may require many hours at evening meetings is the intent of this category. Realizing that the current schedule requires one later operating shift each week (until 6 p.m.), I am comfortable with adding one point for this. Decision: Add 1 point to working conditions for abnormal hours MD. Dust & Dirt: Daily exposure to normal dust and dirt within the office work place is not what this condition is meant to cover. Generally speaking, an office environment is a relatively clean work place. Decision: No change Rain/Snow/ Wind: This subfactor is intended to cover situations that may require prolonged or extensive exposure to these elements. I do not believe the type of exposure you noted to rain, snow, or wind would be out of the ordinary and would be considered normal for living in Minnesota. Decision: No change Machinery & Power Tools: Occasional vacuuming or use of hand tools such as screwdrivers and hammers would not be considered use of power tools and machinery in the work place. This factor is intended for usage of tools and equipment outside of normal household items. Decision: No change JOBDESC.REV: HY17/95 /38 Page 2 SENIOR DEPUTY REGISTRAR CLERK CONTINUED... TOTAL CHANGE: +1 point NEW POINT TOTAL: 83 points GRADE: Same STIUMT AND PARK SXn?MM?rEND1FNT Knowledge and EzUerienee The current category for knowledge and experience is B2, which indicates high school education plus some additional formal training. I do not believe that technical school or some college is necessary or should be a requirement. I believe the specialized and technical knowledge required to understand and perform the duties of this position can be accomplished with a high school education and some additional formal training, provided there is 3-5 years of experience. Decision: No change Supervision Current points granted for supervision are C—complete--18 points. This category recognizes complete supervision over 46 employees, and I agree there may be e additional points needed to cover part-time or temporary employee supervision. By adding credit for approximately 8 part-time or seasonal employees under the partial category for routine supervision, I would agree with a change to add 3 points for supervision. Decision: Add 3 points for partial supervision--8 part-time and seasonal employees (B--partial--6). Acco un ahilk Currently the position is C3b for advanced--major--indirect. I do not feel a change is warranted and that this categorization is appropriate and is very similar to other superintendent type positions within the city such as Liquor Store Manager and Water Superintendent. Decision: No change TOTAL CHANGE: + 3 points NEW POINT TOTAL: 168 points GRADE: Same JOBDESC REV: ta17/95 Page 3 Currently knowledge and experience is at B2 (40 pointe), which requires a high school education plus additional formal training and 3-5 years experience. Although it would certainly be acceptable to have someone with college or trade school education, I don't believe it is absolutely necessary or that it should be a minimum requirement, which is what we're concerned with here. I believe overall this factor is currently appropriate for the position as it is today. Decision: No change TOTAL CHANGE: 0 points NEW POINT TOTAL: 149 GRADE: Same NOTE: Modifications were made to the job description adding or deleting references to specific duties, but changes did not warrant any other changes in the point categories for comparable worth. Accoun ah'li .v Currently credited for Blb (34 pointe). The fact noted that this position will be assisting in decisions made by the recycling committee is already taken into account in the current rating of Blb. Indirect means joining with others in arriving at specific actions, which seems to be appropriate for this position. Decision: No change Current position is at 2A1, which relates to relatively routine matters, with most planning for immediate application. Most of the duties for the utility billing position are routine tasks requiring immediate attention that is reflected in the current point category established previously. Being on the recycling committee which may establish a policy that is in effect for a period of time is not considered major planning for extended time periods, and the key factor here is that most planning is what this factor is to cover. Decision: No change JOBDESC.REV: 10/17/86 /3ib Page 4 UTILITY BILLING CLERK/RECEPTIONIST CONTINUED... Manipulating Objects: Currently points are established at 6D3, which indicates frequent. I think frequent is adequate in that some time is required to perform duties of filing and customer contact and that the position is not always required to manipulate a typewriter or computer keyboard, but I will agree to a change to 6E4 to be consistent with the Bookkeeper and Deputy Registrar positions. Decision: Add 1 point for manipulating objects (04) Excessive Sitting: Currently the position has been given 5C2 (occasionally). I agree that 5D3 may be more appropriate (frequent) and also would be then consistent with the bookkeeping position. Decision: Add 1 point to 5D3 Abnormal Hours: Currently the position has been given points for this under rare at 3B1. Although there may be pressure in this position to complete a billing cycle by a certain deadline, the position does not require night or weekend work to meet any schedules. I do not agree that points should be given for abnormal hours for this position, as it does have a regular schedule without odd hours being required and does not qualify in my opinion for any pointe for this subfactor, even if there is some occasional overtime that is put in. Decision: Deduct 1 point TOTAL CHANGE: + 1 point NEW POINT TOTAL: 74 points GRADE: Same NOTE: Additional changes were made in the job description under typical duties, but the additions and/or changes did not warrant any additional changes in the comparable worth grading for this position. /31F dORDESC.REV: HYMN Page 5 WATERISEWER C01LLIFCTION QP1FRATOR On the issue of your concerns over the current job description not having a section covering or defining on-call language, typically this language is not found in a job description. Hours of work, work scheduling, or other employment related factors are actually labor/management issues and are not part of the actual job description but possibly covered in a labor contract. Your specific concerns on this are more appropriate for labor contract renewal discussions. KnnwlpdffA_ and Fzmerie= Currently at B2 (40 points). Poeition now requires specialized/technical skill with high school education and additional formal training. I believe this requirement seems appropriate at the present level, and I don't think it would be reasonable to increase the minimum qualifications above the high school education plus formal training and 3-5 years experience. While candidates for positions may have higher qualification than what's required in our job descriptions, it only makes them more desirable candidates and doesn't mean we need to increase our minimum standards and isn't necessarily essential to do the job that's required. Decision: No change Accom ahili .v Currently at B2A (40 points). Only supervisors/department heads usually have accountability factors at the C level or above. Evaluation for this position measures normal job, and level B (intermediate) authority seems more than sufficient. Decision: No change Plaaning Currently at 2AL Typically, routine and current matters are what the job normally requires. It should be noted that the job measures most situations, and this job requires only relatively routine planning for immediate action. Decision: No change Sipendainn Currently 2 pointe for B—partial supervision. Partial credit covers the fact that an Operator/Mechanic may step in in the absence of the superintendent and perform some of the duties of supervision. Credit is not usually given here for just occasional work direction because of the absence of a supervisor for a few days but is meant to cover more normal day-to-day operation supervision. With partial credit already being given, no additional supervision credit appears warranted. Decision: No change 13F JOBDESC.REV: taa17198 Page 6 WATER/SEWER COLLECTION OPERATOR CONTINUED... TOTAL CHANGE: 0 points NEW POINT TOTAL: 111 points GRADE: Same (Tom Moores) Your initial concerns noted in regard to the job description for an Operator/ Mechanic seemed to be more directed toward the creation of a new position, i.e. a lead person/foreman. While I tmderstand your concerns and do agree that we may need to further investigate the creation of such a position, the balance of my review will relate to the current Operator/Mechanic position as currently described in the job description. Future discussion will occur regarding your suggestion of creating a new job description. Currently rated at B2 (40 pointe). Again, the fact that we actually get better educated or qualified applicants when job openings occur doesn't mean that the job requires this amount of background or experience to perform duties. The current requirement of a high school education and additional formal training with 3-5 years of comparable experience seems more than sufficient as a minimum requirement for this current job classification. Decision: No change Currently classified as B--partial--2 points. Partial supervision is already being granted for covering the occasional summer help that may receive direction from an Operator/Mecha -dc, but I would agree that an increase in the pointe may be warranted to cover the average number of summer employees that may be affected by an individual Operator/Mechanic to 3. When an Operator/Mechanic is asked to cover for the supervisor while on vacation, sick, or occasional weekends, this is not the normal job requirement for this position, and additional credit for Hill supervision is usually not given for occasional work direction. Decision: Add 2 points for additional partial supervision (B—partial--4) 1.3,g JOBD69C.REV: 10117/95 Page 7 OPERATOR(MECHANIC (TOM MOORES) CONTINUED... Currently established at Blb (34 points). Occasional questions on operations or city budgets are typically covered in the current rating of Blb. A rating of moderate would fit positions that have responsibility for recommending part of budgets to supervisors or department heads or for those positions that actually are responsible for department budgets. The current classification seems appropriate. Decision: No change Heavy Lifting: Currently at 1D3. For this position, the weight factor of 50 lbs. Decision: Add 1 point for excessive sitting (5111) Heat & Cold: Currently at 8C2. This credit already seems sufficient at sometimes, as the position does not always require an individual to be out in the cold or extreme heat that often. While it certainly can be argued there are days that are extremely cold or extremely hot, the key again is normal conditions, and I believe that occasional already covers the points given. Decision: No change Abnormal Behavior. This job is not normally subject to what is meant by abnormal behavior. This classification was originally meant to cover positions that may be involved in stressful situations dealing /30 JOBDESC.REV: IW17195 Page 8 didn't change the frequency that heavy lifting is done and, therefore, frequent credit has already been given in the above point value. Decision: No change Excessive Travel/Sitdng: Snowplowing for long periods of time only occurs occasionally in the winter and is not an every day occurrence in cold weather. Regardless, I would be agreeable to adding 1 point for this to cover those situations of snowplowing, even though it's rare in \Q the overall scheme of things. If anymore than 1 point were to be added for excessive sitting, a reduction would probably have to occur for points already given for excessive standing. Decision: Add 1 point for excessive sitting (5111) Heat & Cold: Currently at 8C2. This credit already seems sufficient at sometimes, as the position does not always require an individual to be out in the cold or extreme heat that often. While it certainly can be argued there are days that are extremely cold or extremely hot, the key again is normal conditions, and I believe that occasional already covers the points given. Decision: No change Abnormal Behavior. This job is not normally subject to what is meant by abnormal behavior. This classification was originally meant to cover positions that may be involved in stressful situations dealing /30 JOBDESC.REV: IW17195 Page 8 OPERATOR/MECHANIC (TOM MOORE) CONTINUED... with situations police officers might encounter; the fact that an occasional citizen may comment on the City's work performance b does not qualify for points in this situation. Decision: No change Machinery & Power Tools: Credit has already been given for frequent use of power tools, and I do not believe that upgrading to continuous is appropriate, as the job does not 100% require use of tools and machinery. Decision: No change TOTAL CHANGE: + 3 points NEW POINT TOTAL: 110 points GRADE: Same Currently the position is granted a credit of C --complete (13 points). If the Computer Support Analyst position continues to be partially supervised by the Assistant Administrator position, and with the addition of a newly -created Development Services Technician position added to the supervision responsibilities, I would have to recommend an increase in the supervision category to cover 4-6 employees. Decision: Add 3 points for supervision to a new total of C--complete--16 Wnrk'pg Conditions Chemical/Fumes: Currently this position has been awarded 1 point under 118 for chemical and filmes. I question whether this category really applies to this position, even in rare instances. How many chemiml/gas plants would this position require to be visited, and the important thing to note is it is meant to cover normal requirements of the position, not the fact that you may be exposed once or twice a year to gas or filmes. In addition, to be consistent with the Economic Development position, which may also have frequent contact with potential industrial clients, I feel that credit for this subfactor should be deloted. Decision: Deduct 1 point for chemical/fames 13s JOBDESC.REV: 1417/98 Page 9 OPERATOR/MECHANIC (TOM MOORE) CONTINUED... with situations police officers might encounter; the fact that an occasional citizen may comment on the City's work performance b does not qualify for points in this situation. Decision: No change Machinery & Power Tools: Credit has already been given for frequent use of power tools, and I do not believe that upgrading to continuous is appropriate, as the job does not 100% require use of tools and machinery. Decision: No change TOTAL CHANGE: + 3 points NEW POINT TOTAL: 110 points GRADE: Same Currently the position is granted a credit of C --complete (13 points). If the Computer Support Analyst position continues to be partially supervised by the Assistant Administrator position, and with the addition of a newly -created Development Services Technician position added to the supervision responsibilities, I would have to recommend an increase in the supervision category to cover 4-6 employees. Decision: Add 3 points for supervision to a new total of C--complete--16 Wnrk'pg Conditions Chemical/Fumes: Currently this position has been awarded 1 point under 118 for chemical and filmes. I question whether this category really applies to this position, even in rare instances. How many chemiml/gas plants would this position require to be visited, and the important thing to note is it is meant to cover normal requirements of the position, not the fact that you may be exposed once or twice a year to gas or filmes. In addition, to be consistent with the Economic Development position, which may also have frequent contact with potential industrial clients, I feel that credit for this subfactor should be deloted. Decision: Deduct 1 point for chemical/fames 13s JOBDESC.REV: 1417/98 Page 9 SUbn ABY JOB EVALUATION APPEALS BY POSITION v July 1896 • Job descriptions reviewed and modifled; no job evaluation appeal filed JOBDESC.SUM: 7/24/96 '-3K Total New Point dnh C1asa change TAW tirade Public Works Director +11 242 16 Sr. Dep. Registrar Clerk +1 83 Same Street Supt. +3 168 Same Utility/Billing Recept. +1 74 Same Water/Sewer Coll. Operator — 111 Same Office Manager — 149 Same Operator/Mechanic +3 110 Same Asst. Administrator +2 241 16 City Bookkeeper* — 74 Same Computer Support Analyst* — 142 Same • Job descriptions reviewed and modifled; no job evaluation appeal filed JOBDESC.SUM: 7/24/96 '-3K .� CITY OF MONTICELLO PAY SCHEDULE JANUARY 1, 1995 STEPS GRADE I i 3 4 S 6 BASE PRCNT BASE 105.00% 110.001 115.001 120.00% 125.001 1994 COLA 1995 HOURLY RATE 1 15-29 18.20 1.025 $0.40 18.82 19.21 59.66 $10.08 110.50 2 30-44 18.69 1.025 11.90 19.35 19.79 110.21 110.61 111.13 3 45-59 19.21 1.025 19.11 19.91 110.38 510.05 111.33 111.10 1 50-74 19.76 1.025 110.00 110.50 111.00 111.50 112.01 112.51 S 75-89 110.35 1.025 110.60 $11.13 111.67 112.20 112.13 113.26 5 90-104 110.91 1.025 111.19 111.75 112.31 112.87 113.13 113.98 7 105-119 111.51 1.025 111.16 112./5 113.05 113.64 111.23 114.12 8 120-134 112.26 1.025 112.57 113.20 113.13 114.16 115.09 115.71 9 135-149 113.00 1.025 113.32 113.99 114.66 115.32 115.99 116.66 10 150-161 113.78 1.025 114.12 114.81 115.51 $15.24 116.95 117.66 11 165-179 114.54 1.025 114.90 115.65 116.19 117.11 111.88 111.63 12 110-194 115.41 1.025 115.10 116.59 117.31 118.16 118.15 119.14 13 195-209 115.33 1.025 116.11 117.51 118.12 119.25 120.09 120.93 14 210-224 117.31 1.025 117.75 118.53 119.52 120.41 121.30 122.18 IS 2IS-239 111.35 1.025 111.11 119.75 120.69 121.63 122.51 123.52 16 240.251 119.36 1.025 119.85 120.14 121,13 122.82 123.12 121.81 it 255-269 120.52 1.025 121.04 122.09 123.11 124.19 125.21 126.30 IB 270-284 121.76 1.015 122.30 123.41 124.53 125.64 126.76 127.87 19 215-299 123.06 1.025 123.64 124.82 126.00 127.18 128.36 129.55 20 300-314 111.44 1.025 125.06 126.71 111.56 128.11 130.07 131.32 21 315-329 125.79 1.025 126.43 171.75 129.01 130.10 131.71 133.04 22 130. 127.33 1.025 121.02 129.42 130.12 132.22 133.1Z 135.02 /3L 3 r Appendix B Job Evaluation System - Modified Princeton System INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATING KNOG'LEDCE AND MERIE4CE FACTOR In this factor consider the sum total of background knowledge and experience required to understand and successfully perform the duties and responsibilities of the position. First Step Consider the depth of background knowledge needed. --- Knowledge represents both practical/tachaical' skills and human -relations skills. It includes the composite picture of education and training gained through.formal and informal means. --- Only the actual knowledge required to perform in the position should be recognized and credited. Choose Degree: A - F Second Step Conoider the relative degree of experience needed to perform successfully in the position. --- Determine the amount of previous related practical work experience necessary to fill the requirements of the position. Consider how much experience would be required of an applicant if the position was open. --- Care must be taken not to over emphasize years of experience of the present position -holder. Choose : Limited, Moderate, Extensive or Cor:prehensiva .r Frequent comparison with other positions already evaluated ti to this factor vill be helpful. /314 - 55 - amuttat •r/ tannrpct ruttx ILLATIVE 1{Cata M ntvIM /a/1111•Ca inteip To n}(MII anlCl/}tt} ' pVT11 Of MtICOOM RNM IOCC 010111h\ I�Catt tutus' mwun utc}ana too/ca}r/n 1 1 r r.•f11 /•uM IMarH •M 1•r1•Ih rNflllr 1•MI.Ia• - •t • .r/a.. aM•r•1. p•trtw•• •M N/ltie. t}iaA a:Art }twat•. •r to •yYH.iewtt , to to tarn l.I I1M N/ 1•IIY11r•1 A•wt•/a. 1ry+l r•1 1• wlsrYl •wt ••1 N•(•n {w WrA •IIY11{H. I I 1 IwIyA •a\NI •trH11N ►IY• .•r •iala+•w•f tIr•.t ti•{•fyt � ' M u 10 Ip CN.11.I•AI. TIN Wi t., NI I••Hlla Hw• IIIA rlyrl.•1 1• \•MI• . ••y l.. ••1 r••1.1 - WIa •f.Ya iN Ihllh .1ANI (....I• }Ir. I y'• t111•ar, •r 1' AY•!wn •. wh •.b•l }e •IYn. a •yYl.•fn/ M /p to N rwwi Nll •wt.•tat Ca . I.tha•r •} bprf .ryri r.l Ih 11.11 •r •N•1.11.111r 1•r•Irlwa ..rqunw NI lNe.1w1 0.. •I Y•.a p , t1 ap N 1N f•W 1.111 •y.l Y•1... t• • 11••11.•. 1..... wl.ea t• tt.11 H •NII •if+•1/. /wW1ah} rli t•a.t 1.1 ..IN1 .•.• •f •N.1NIH ' }Irl •IIIIINa A6-1.44.1.111 •1 rlAa HHI. •.wa l r N np I l p 11/ t. 1.}1.1 lrlf•A•h•I•r 1•.Y1.1a1 }} HNffl " 1•w•I I•wl ••.•• •1 •I.IhI.1 a.11N ..yl a•♦ 1441• •.rli.ra.t }} a«1 w.++.} ahw/.µ• •t r H1,• aY1.•1•• IwalIM1 rN1111 {wM 11 1\• arr I.1 Y Hl•hrhl 1•r.l. , • it6 trp i70 i+0 I INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATING ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ACTION .In this factor the relationship between responsibility and accountability is directly paralleled. The more responsibilities one has the more accountable one is for results. Results can be defined in terms of accomplishments or in terms of maintaining a standard. FIRST STEP ��:•� Decide how much freedom there is to make decisions and"tak4jindependent action impacts results achieved. • To what extent has authority been delegated by a.higher level of management • How much opportunity for independent action is there in this position? Select: Restricted; Intermediate; Advanced; Extensive;. Principal.' SECOND STEP - Determine the degree and magnitude of the responsibilities assigned the position, and the impact on the following: - • Budget • Operations Select: Minor; Moderate; Major; Maximum. THIRD STEP Evaluate the amount of control this position allows. • Advisory: Often provides information and suggestions which others use to make major decisions • Indirect: Joins with others in group decisions, committees. etc. leading to specific actions • 0lrect: Full responsibility for final results -57- 130 ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ACTION oar.../ wla■q N 111. /+a.a rM ONr111N1 101.01119 1 t 1 / Ib. -1.. 1• It11 aG1rr sit" ho".11 I11JOt •ltlmol "Tory t.611441 obal w.larr Iwlrltl ol.-tl Mrl/v1 Ir Ir441 •IrNI .a.lurl Irlral 00,441 1. 6, t. t. .. t. •. ►. t. 61St1111r0 W1161 s11K W .-•licit{ 1tN.-tt1111/ IN IMINMttt tr t ' ' al 111111 Mllr It IINI{ 1r►1111 16 - (lttt t.M r.111N 10 If 11 t0 tl p 10 11 U 10 11 1;. I.11t■I011ll ' fol its ror 11644.11.. 1w IJ9Nr1.1 6111Mt1 11611.144// 1 1.111 KI 6.-111►11{ 111/I M 1111 '1. 1.1/11' Nt1619M 111 10 N » 10 44 44 to N 11 It 11 1 1 (1.1144.1111 rIM IN6111.-11-1, IJ /w161r1.1 1441111.1{ 1.t 1'tl II 11.4411 I1N //1111. Iw 111 11111. WI 10111111 .114.1 11111 16.1111 10 11 t0 60 tl 11 10 , 1/ 10 10, 1 1 1 1 11t111191 Irt11 1t/60.11►1111/ 0.1 Ir144ra1 .J 1.11M luMt. aM11.1.1 Irt1r 11.1 • ' IIKIINI t1 1111 N.44..ru 'to 16 is 1/ a u to u u (00 101 1o1 Palo( I'll (x61111 a1M•11►11111 161 9'161101 I 'w N.1Itr 1.1 Nt1rN1 6M Nt11[11 1 11fIt 11.1 N11. 0111 tlrlrslN • ` tail op ..tIN1 10 to N 100 104 100 110 111 110 Ito 114 Ito INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATING v RESPONSIBILITY FOR PLANNING In this factor first consider the relative scope and significance of the work planned. Second, consider the time span covered by most of the planning done. First Stec , Determine the degree of planning involved, whether it is basically routine or complex and far-reaching. To illustrate, planning involving new city services and programs, land acquisitions, equipment purchases, etc., it is highly significant and can have effects extending many years 1,nto the future. Choose Degree: 1 - 7 Second Stec: Consider the time span covered by most of the planning done. Generally speaking, the more important or significant the planning activities, the further in the future such planning extends. Choose -Degree: A - F GO -.y • w•a It...6.V• , o{y wp 11•ulY YI! 1lrwlq blt •brlq w•. II•. 1� IN i1•:. r-� Ir.l•1• `J.•NII•Mr.• •r.1.• IIN••• Irr 1 .•IIMI 1.11 1.i •••• a far ' q• NrIM q 1 r• • s•IN u 1 /r.N IN 1 1\• I.aN••! •1111. •I,r 1• ++. ra\ wa\• 1111 . 1 •• ._�_. •., r••IaiM N• u 11M11Y .•1M••1►Illllu X.x x x 1 11•rlwt •11.111 11 NIN 1.111 rrtlN raa111 .I 1 I 1 1 • 11 ►IIMtw/ 1111tH 11 1N 11n •1 11•IIN •Itlalr_. •M Iwnlr•• aMIl1• •r+t fM1111f IItIn11111• 1 1 • 11 11 11 fl•riw/ i•••1•r1 pNr1111 1uw 1.111 Nlrn Ir1••t1• •M N 11ar•a 111• rIn aNlu• 11 •11•rw•1Ir•• •.• •rale r1 x1111• � •, 1 • 11 If I/ I/ 11 (T II•rl•• x111111 1• •IIfIr1•t •It••IIMI 1r 11 � MIl\ •I• 111.111• •r1 •M) 1•N •t• lav IM rrlrlrr Nr 11.1.w1a 1111 1 ' 11 It 11 i1 11 7• ►11•+I •t r1111u 1• tl lfln•t ut 11.111• � • IIIr11IM1 Irplllw/ M1111I• t1ty 11. 111'11/IMI ..• (1.1.1 111 Nr •IIIIMIINI • • , 11 11 If as )1 U � II•rlY /r• 1111 x•11111 .. IN Ir•11 . • ' .�:�:: �:. 1.1/x•1 In,1111 r• •w• w•rlq ! is It 31 It H ./ GO ,!%Pff n I.t.t of tunas J alM u M 1•IIwI I• rpt.IN hIH Cr Jlu /•r 6grrdNw l•••1 •1 Mrt /r6.r .1 ty1gH. IIH .1 C.•q i .1 tq..•1__ J \ hl•a t.l.. i -)•\f \ 1 •• 1' 10 6.1-6 t0 11 tt 1l 1\ If i / b../ tglMr• 1-1 a -I 6.11 11-1/ 11-0/ la•1/ N-61 1-1 a.1 I.it 1)-11 It -!1 16.11 16.11 j I • 1.1.6 t.IH, 1 It 11 it 16Il 16 1/ i/ w..l Capt"..• I!I 41-f1 11.11 66 -If 16.61 /1.100 lei -116 11f•I" 110• hl.a t.lw \ 6 / 10 q le It 16 It it I C b..l Igl•Nr• � 1 !•), \•f 6.1 /-t 1 t•f 6.1 6•t /-� I 0` bIH bl.• It 11 It t0 11 11 11 I1 N 11 IJ 1 / • b..f /y1M•. 10.11 16.11 1/-I1 !a -)p 11• 10.11 11.11 16.11 !6•w )1• ' hl•a Illw 6 11 16 t0 14 !1 I1 16 10 11 16 t0 )a )/ a1 t b..f tapl".r. 1 1.1 6•f 6.1 6.0 10.11 I!• 1 1-1 6.1 6.1 6•I t0.11 11-14 11.111 hl•a I.1.• M u40 46 a1 60 6t as 11 16 I � b. at Iy1.ryH bIH N 11.1100 101•If0 IN• IW. 16 11.11 11.100 0 11- 101•IN 116• i 1 / 4H• .yl.►•H 1. �.. IY.• w 1.•.1 •r. ►.lap IIHH11 .ap.1.1../ IIIINI..IIwH CIH II.1 IH•1 .M M..yr.. 1.•rll 1.11 r•HII (I .11wr6 Ir .YH /.wf .1 •t"H.. .► ft•• 101 Ylf►••I MIH r.Hl.i .161.1..1 ` rrH11 1. •11•N/ IH Iw •.►•. IrW •1 •yl•...., 6.ap1 •111 w 6 6H.1 4 .....Ila 111•w1 Ip I.I11.1 ••N.•iH.• .rrH fly I. 1.••1 •1 M.\ I•NI•.1, • 4Hr .Ht••.16111" IH r.ylll. .y.1.1•Iw IIo11Hr1 14w.6Y HM.1 /.. M•. h1y.H1 a• .•M.II.H H, 14 a.a.1 •wAr. .1 •yl.rr.. rtwlH •Fw11 b ..1.1.•1 H 1•Ilrr. 1. IH H.IH I►• ....►•. •1 .yl•1•r• IH •h•. H.1.1 1• .• b IHH ••- IH /•61. ••I .•N.•1•I•• ••• .•M,• �1.• .t.1.•• •1 1•x.1 r•.iln.•r. 4. Int 1. •1.1•• •. lY• • ��.•. •1 J C'l INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATING RES?ONSISILITY FOR WORK OF OTHERS (SUPERVISION) then considering this factor these areas are reviewed including the type of work involved, how such supervision is required and the nu:ber of people supervised. First Sten Date -mime the level of work involved A. — No supervision required 8•--- Routine - work requires minimal directing, instructing, training or planning C•--- Skilled - work often requires instructing, training, planning and directing. Supervises less than ten (10) employees D• -- Sama as the above except supervises more than ten (10) employeas f• — Managerial - work requires direction of highly technical, skilled or specialized tasks, or complicated projects F.--- Managerial - work requires coordination of varied groups of administrative, technical sad clerical personnel. Supervises large group of employees Choose: Level of work and Size of group A - F Second Sten Data-3ino the degree of supervision, whether partial or complete. Complato responsibility for -L -L -or more of the items below is considered complete supervision. Anything less than S is considered partial supervision (credit will usually not be given here for occasional work direction, where no true supervision is involved). (See chart on following pago to determine degree of supervision) Partial Complete 1. Airing - Authority to recommend new employees 2. Methods - sets methods- of how work is to be done, initiates changes in methods. 3. Delegates work - determines who does work and gives instructions for doing it 4. Standards - sets up quality or quantity requirements for the position - S. Reviews Work - examines and appraises work to see that standards have been maintained 6. Compensation - recommends salary adjustments 7. Transfers or Promotions - recommends, promotes, an employee to another position within the department; recommends the transfer or promotion .to a position in -another department S. Grievances - hears employee grievances and takes .action on them 9. Discipline - takes action toward correcting misconduct on the job. 10. Dismissal - has the authority to recommend or to rtrinate the services of an employee Choose: Partial or Complete Third Sten Datermine the number of employees supervised Choose: Numbar -62- IInI,Lllll I IillUl l IUII', Alum- _. j None Rare Sometimes Freq. Coni-Aously City: - NONE LIMITED OCC. FREQ. EATEN. Job Title: A 8 C D E Heavy Lifting 1 0 1 2 3 4 Awkward Working Position 2 0 1 2 3 4 PHYSICAL ' Abnormal 1louro 3 0 1 2 3 4 EFFORT Excessive Standing 4 O 1 2 3 4 Exc. Travel/Exe. Sitting S 0_ 1 2 3 4 Manipulating objoeto requiring lino coordination/manual doxtority 6 0 1 2 3 4 Duet and Dirt 7 0 1 2 3 4 Extreme Cold and (lost 0 0 1 2 3 4 ENvIn00- Raln, Snow. and Hind 9 0 1 2 3 4 nEI1T Abnormal Human Behavior 10 0 1 2 3 4 Chemlcal and Pumoo 11 0 1 2 3 4 Machinery C Power Toole, 12 0 1 2 3 4 Climbing i Ilolghto 13 0 1 2 3 4 HAZARDS Excavating 14 0 1 2 3 4 Ouns or Weapons is 0 l 2 3 4 Electrical Shock 16 0 1 2 3 4 Council Agenda - 12/11/95 14. Consideration of eatoh is ing fUll.time Seeretarlal nosition for the public works dena_rtment. (J.S.) In 1992, City staff became aware of the need for a secretary and improved communications in the public works department. The 1993 budget included salaries for a full-time secretary. Additional study in early 1993 indicated that we could postpone or delay the addition of a full-time secretary for up to one to three years by improving the phone system. Enclosed is a copy of the March 22, 1993, Council minutes. On June 7, 1994, the City Council approved a city-wide staffing plan which included the creation of a part-time Public Works Secretary position (see enclosed minutes). Beth Green was hired for this position and started in late September of 1994. The position averages 22 hours per week. Beth is usually at the public works office during the morning hours only (7:30 a.m.- 11:30 a.m.) and then on Friday during agenda week a full day to assist with the preparation. Several major tasks have been completed at the public works department since Beth started. After initial assistance from Karen Doty, the Office Manager from city hall, Beth organized the document filing system for easy retrieval of documents once they are filed. Due to the half-time nature of the position and current workloads Fmm the Public Works Director and other supervisors, however, the filing is usually a couple weeks behind. Consequently, we are often hesitant to file something unless we are sure we won't need it for a couple of weeks, as it is often difficult to retrieve it when it's in limbo. It is easy to say that the addition of the part-time Public Works Secretary has increased the efficiency of the public works department; our response time in obtaining and researching data and getting back to citizens is quicker. I have enclosed a copy of the part-time Public Works Secretary job description. I've also included a list of routine duties for the Public Works Secretary and other duties that we may wish to incorporate into a job description for a full- time secretary. The current range in pay for the part-time secretarial position is from $6.66 an hour to $8.46 an hour. Both Green is currently being paid $7.85 an hour, which is Stop 3 of the 4 -stop program. The pay steps for the part-time Public Works Secretary are determined by the total number of hours worked. The next step in pay grade would occur after 3,000 hours of work. Beth is currently about half -way there. A quick look at the proposed duty of the fiill- time Public Works Secretary and the comparable worth program indicates Council Agenda - 12/1V95 the pay range may range from $8.40 and hour to $11.13 an hour. The actual pay grade would only be determined after completion of the job description and the rating of the job description with the comparable worth system. City staff would like the Council to consider filling the position from within the list of present part-time and frill -time employees with the City of Monticello. Our current personnel policy requires that we post notice of permanent job openings or vacancies in the City and accept applications from present employees in the same manner as applications from outside employees. A copy of section VI. 1. of the personnel policy is enclosed for your review. R_ ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: -1 1 t F 1. The first alternative is to authorize the City Administrator and Public Works Director to prepare a job description for a full-time Public Works Secretary based upon the duties that he or she is expected to perform, to rate that job with the comparable worth rating program, and to post the job opening so that present part-time or frill -time employees can apply for the position. We expect that this can be completed and recommendations for the filling of the position can be made at the City Council meeting on January 8, 1996. The second alternative would be as outlined in alternative #1, but to post the position in the local paper as well as within. 3. The third alternative would be not to create a full-time Public Works Secretarial position. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the City Administrator and Public Works Director that the City Council authorize drafting a job description, rating of that job with the comparable worth system, and posting of the position for application by current part-time or Rill -time City employees as outlined in alternative #1. D_ SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the current job description; List of possible additional duties; Copy of the section of the personnel policy; Copies of Council minutes hem March 22, 1993, and June 27, 1994. 32 Part-time Public Works Secretar,r City of Monticello Title of Class: Part time Public Works Secretary Effective Date: Jun(- 27, 1994 DESCRIPTION OF WORK General Statement of Duties: Performs routine clerical work providing information and assistance to the public, computer entry, and maintenance of various filing systems; performs related duties as required. §gi ,bion Received: Reports to Public Works Director; Receives direction from Office Manager regarding records management. Exercised: None. TYPICAL DUTIES PERFORMED The listed examples may not include all duties performed by all positions in this class. Duties may vary somewhat fi-om position to position within a class. Answers phones, provides information and assistance to callers, refers calls, pager staff, and takes messages. Greets visitors at the counter, determines the nature of their business, directs them to appropriate person, answers questions, and provides assistance as appropriate. Enters data and maintains various spreadsheets and data on personal computer as directed. Performs routine filing and maintains filing system and inventory list. Performs research by calling other cities as directed. KNOWLEDGE. SKIT -TA AND ABILITIES Working knowledge of standard office practices, including operation of a computer. Working knowledge uf City programs, policies, operations, and procedures. Working ability to communicate effectively with the public. Working ability to typo and enter information with speed and accuracy and to maintain records. Working ability to operate transcription equipment. Working ability to operate normal office equipment. MD09UM QUALIFICATIONS One year of clerical experience involving public contact, typing, recordlEceping, transcription, and computer use. iyR- PUBLIC WORKS SECRETARY DUT ES These dutieg are done on a Mgular basia af lzmwnt: • Answer'operator' phone calls and all calls when the men are away from their desks — take messages — sometimes radio or page for emergency purposes. • Miscellaneous filing throughout the office (there is a huge amount of paperwork - this is at least 75% of the job). • Maintain inventory list of files. • Enter and maintain garbage information on computer. Calculate monthly reports from Vasko and give Marlene the okay to pay. • Enter and maintain recycling data on computer. Calculate quarterly reports for Wright County Recycling Incentive Funding and submit for reimbursement. • Enter Hillside Cemetery information on computer and transcribe data from senior citizens (this is an on going project — whenever there is any extra time to work on this). • Assist with compost site key distribution. • Transcribe construction inspection notes. • Research as needed --call other cities on policies, rates, eta • General clerical duties such as photocopying, fazing, making coffee, dusting and vacuuming, eta • Word process daily correspondence for Public Works Director, Street Superintendent, Water Superintendent and the Construction Inspector, make copies and mail. • Transcription of agenda items for Public Works Director. • Maintain office supply inventory weekly. • Quarterly Sunny Fresh Industrial Sewer use worksheets. • Sort & distribute mail on daily basis. • Key control. 10 These are duties that are not being done at present because of lack afime: • Re -organize and maintain construction plans (file by year of project and index to cross-reference by type or project name). • Work on obtaining a full set of plats for public works and city hall. • Enter and maintain vehicle gas usage and maint. records on computer. • Enter and maintain sign inventory and maintenance on computer. • Enter and maintain garbage cart inventory on computer. • Enter tree chipping information on computer. Fax form to Cathy for billing. • Enter and maintain fire hydrant data on computer. • Enter and maintain water and sewer hookup permit spreadsheet on computer. • Type and maintain public works policy manual. • Type and collate job analysis (task—Safety Committee). • Maintain Dutch Elm disease records --mail letters to residents. • File Gopher State paperwork and return •NLR" calls. • Update project cost spreadsheet. These duties aro handled through eity hall of IzFeseng h .t should he done a_t public works*; • Schedule outside sewer & water inspections. • Schedule water meter installation. • Track current insurancoUnds for excavators. • Searching for data needed by Water Department (in conjunction w/Utility Billing Clerk). • Maintenance of list of properties without city sewer & water which use either a well or septic or both. • Would be mon efficient use of staff to have public works secretary handle the above items rather than city hall staff (since city hall staff does not know the daily schedule ojpublie works attyn. /VC V V. EMERGENCY CALL BACK 1. Emergency call back is not the same as call back from a layoff. Emergency call back shall mean when a regular employee must report to work during hours which he/she is considered to be off duty. Whenever feasible, an employee shall be notified five days in advance when he/she will be placed at the head of the Emergency Call Back list. Non- exempt employees called back in this situation shall be compensated at the overtime rate to the extent this time required them to work more than forty (40) hours per seven (7) day work week. Travel time not to exceed ten (10) minutes per call back incident shall be credited as time worked. VI. APPOINTMENTS, PROMOTIONS, EVALUATIONS 1. In making appointments and promotions, the City will consider such factors as the qualifications, merit, efficiency, ability, skill, training, experience, past performance, and seniority of the job applicant or promotional candidate. Where the City deems appropriate, other factors may be considered in making decisions regarding appointments, promotions, and transfers. Notice of permanent job openings or vacancies in the City service shall be posted in appropriate places for at least three working days. Such notice shall include the job title, duties, pay range, and the date the position is intended to be filled. Any employee desiring to apply for such job openings shall do so in writing by the closing day. Applications from present employees shall bo considered in the same manner as applications from new applicants in applying for any such new job opening or vacancy when such position is in another department or division. 2. Pay Lor all positions is determined by the City Council. Employees shall be appointed initially as on probation. Probation periods shall normally last for a period of six months. The purpose of this period is to evaluate a new FILES\PERSONN.POL: 7/11/91 Page 6 /fib Council Minutes - 3/22/93 tyonsideration of ar000sal from Bridge Water Teleahone for new phone system for the aublic works facility. Public Works Director, John Simola, reviewed with the Council a new phone system that had been proposed by Bridge Water Telephone Company for the maintenance building facilities. The Norstar system is similar to the AT&T Partner II system that was reviewed by the Council previously. The phones have many of the same basic features, including direct extension dialing or menu dialing, and also included voice mail capabilities. Simola noted that the cost of the Norstar system with optional features recommended totaled $6,878.25 compared to the previously -reviewed AT&T system at $5,280. Councilmember Fyle noted that it was his opinion the maintenance building facilities did not need an entirely new phone system for over $6,000, as he has not experienced any problems in delays or reaching individuals in the public works department. Bridge Water representative, Wayne Mayer, did confirm that were inefficiencies in how the phone system was currently installed and that the public works employees did not have direct access to each building but would have to physically search for employees receiving phone calls. John Simola also noted that Bridge Water Telephone Company will soon have Centrex switching gear available that would allow the addition of many features that the department is now seeking in a new phone system. The availability of this new system would not be until later in 1993 and, as a result, still recommended that the Council consider purchasing a new phone system at this time. Any equipment purchased would be compatible to the Centrex system in the future. Simola also noted that improving the communications through the purchase of a new phone system should allow the public works department to delay the addition of a full-time secretary for up to possibly one to three years. Based on eliminating the need for a public works department secretary at this time, a motion was made by Shirley Anderson and seconded by Clint Herbst to authorize the purchase of the Norstar system from Bridge Water Telephone Company for the public works facilities in an amount totaling $6,600. Voting in favor: Ken Maus, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst. Opposed: Brad Fyle, Patricia Olsen. 14 000W Council Minutes - 6/27/84 9. consideration of adontine a strateav for addressing workload demands Assistant Administrator O'Neill reported that a few weeks ago, the City Council conducted a special meeting for the purpose of reviewing problems associated with meeting increasing workload demands. As a result of the discussion, it was the consensus of Council to authorize staff to hire additional staff for the building inspection and motor vehicle departments. Staff was also directed to prepare a plan for addressing other staffing needs identified at the meeting. O'Neill noted that he has prepared a plan with close assistance from the Office Manager and input from the City Administrator and Public Works Director. He also noted tliat the plan was ,.resented to city hall staff, and no objections were noted. O'Neill went on to note the underlying goals behind the plan, which included 1) the goal of maintaining existing service levels in the face of growing demands, 2) providing the opportunity for upward mobility for existing employees where appropriate, 3) identifying new funding sources to help pay for additional employees, 4) hiring additional employees only when it has been demonstrated that improving elTiciency will not solve a problem. O'Neill went on to detail eight steps that could be taken in response to the increasing City workload. The eight steps include: 1. Move motor vehicle department off site. 2. Create a Development Services Technician position. 3. Office Manager completes meeting minutes. 4. Economic Development Director to participate in planning and zoning activities. 6. Hiro a part-time receptionist working half days, primarily afternoons. 6. Hiro a pari Umo romptionist/secretary working half days at the public works department. 7. Reorganize existing oMco spaces. 8: Continuo to contract for assistance with building inspection as necessary. Council discussion focused on relocation of the motor vehicle department. After discussion, it was the consensus of Council to move the motor vehicle department to the Help Center location due to the fact that the coat to remodel an unused portion of the Help Center to equal or less than the cost to rent apace for th oo years. IAF e' Council Minutes - 6127/84 After discussion, a motion was made by Warren Smith and seconded by Patty Olson to authorize implementation of the steps not d in the plan submitted, including authorization to move deputy registrar to the Help Center under the condition that the remodeling costs do not exceed $30,000. Motion carried unanimously. 14 G Council Agenda - 12/11/95 15. Consideration of anthorizina the hiring of skn ad itio nl nuhli . cvor o (J.S.) A- REFERFNCP AND RAP ROUND: Looking back over the years, it's easy to see how much Monticello has grown. The community has doubled in population since 1980. The last full-time position added to the street and park department was in December of 1984, shortly after the beginning of the Meadow Oak subdivision. The growth over the past ten years in our additional roads, storm sewers, ponds, drainage ditches, parka, and buildings has placed significant additional workloads on the street and park department. We have kept up with the workload by having a well-trained work force and modern, efficient equipment. However, with the additional tremendous growth over the past years, additional manpower is needed in the form of an additional full-time Operator Mechanic. Not only are we expanding the community rapidly, which requires more maintenance time, the core city streets are beginning to show significant signs of wear and tear. We are, therefore, requesting that the City Council create an additional position in the streets and parks department to supplement the four individuals currently in that position. Enclosed is a copy of the job description. The rate of pay for the position is bargained for by union contract and is currently a 6 -step program, which takes 64 months to go fiom the starting grade of $11.86 per hour to $14.82 per hour. City staff is also currently investigating the possibility of modifying one of the job description of one of the Operator Mechanic's to include limited supervision as a working foreman. We will present additional information on this subject next spring during contract negotiations with the union. R. ALTRRNATrVE ACTIONS: 1. The fust alternative is to authorize the addition of another position as Operator Mechanic and to post the opening with other City employees, as well as in the area papers, with a hiring date sometime in January. -fib. 2. The second alternative would be not to hire an additional full-time Operator Mechanic. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the City Administrator, Public Works Director, and Street and Park Superintendent that the City Council authorise the addition of another position as Operator Mechanic as outlined in alternative 01. D_ Sl7PPORTING DATA: Copy of job description for Operator Mechanic. 33 Operator/Mechanic City of Monticello Title of Class: Operator/Mechanic Effective Date: November 15, 1991 Revised: July 15, 1995 DESCRIPTION OF WORK General Statement of n„ i a: Performs routine to skilled labor and maintenance work in the public works department; and performs related duties as required. Supervision Received- Works under the technical direction of the Street/Park Superintendent and general direction of the Public Works Director. SuRervigion Exercigpd- None; may provide technical work direction over summer help. TYPICAL DUTIES PERFORMED The listed examples may not include all duties performed by all positions in this class. Duties may vary somewhat from position to position within a class. Maintains and repairs streets, including patching potholes with blacktop, sweeping streets, removing debris, placing cones or barricades around hazards, etc. Installs and repairs utilities as needed, including sewer lines, sprinkler lines, etc. Straightens and replaces street signs that are damaged. Paints crosswalks, turn arrows, handicapped parking identifier, parking lines, etc. on city streets and parking lots. Maintains shoulders and mows ditches for all non•sidewalked streets. May perform sidewalk repair and patching; removes cement and prepares area for sidewalk replacement by contracted firm. Performs preventative maintenance and repair of department vehicles, including repairing or adjusting hydraulic systems and motors, brakes, disc drives, steering, electrical cooling systems, alternators, starters, etc. Operates front-end loader and trucks to remove snow from city streets, municipal parking lots, and alleys during winter, operates sander and applies salt to roadways, sidewalks, and municipal parking lots; may be required to perform these duties during hours not normally worked. Assists with the installation and removal of holiday decorations. (continued on next page) Operator/Mechanic City of Monticello Installs and maintains playground facilities and equipment, including planning and placement of equipment, repairing of swings, slides and other equipment, building sand boxes and providing sand, etc. Maintains skating rinks, including flooding rinks, clearing snow, banking snow or gravel in order to flood rinks, etc. Applies fertilizer and weed killer as needed to parks and other public lands. Performs miscellaneous maintenance, construction, and repair work as needed on city buildings and property, including construction, plumbing, pouring concrete and concrete block work, welding, basic electrical, painting and staining, sheet - rocking and taping, block work, etc. Oversees and assists the work of summer employees including assigning work, training, etc. Performs miscellaneous cleaning, maintenance, and repair work as needed. Recommends cost savings or performance improvement changes to supervisor. Assists other city departments as needed. KNOWLEDGE, SSILIB, AND ABILITIES Considerable knowledge of the repair and maintenance of streets. Considerable knowledge of equipment and vehicle maintenance and repair, including procedures, methods, and tools. Working knowledge of the traffic laws, ordinances, and regulations involved in equipment operation. Considerable skill in the operation of snow removal, street sweeping, heavy machinery, and other public works and park equipment and vehicles. Considerable skill in building and grounds maintenance, including carpentry, plumbing, pouring concrete and concrete block work, welding, basic electrical, painting and staining, sheetrocking and taping. Considerable ability to perform heavy manual labor for long periods of time, sometimes under adverse weather conditions. Considerable ability to analyze repair and maintenance problems and determine appropriate solutions. Working ability to follow oral and written instructions. Working ability to prioritize work and perform duties independently. Working ability to work and communicate effectively with City staff and the general public. (continued on next page) 08 Operator/Mechanic City of Monticello MDMWM QUALIFICATIONS Class B driver's license and three years of experience in light or heavy equipment operation, truck driving, mechanical or engine repair, concrete or blacktop work, or a related field. Experience in a specific area may be required depending on the particular vacancy. /SG Council Agenda - 12/11/95 Con_cideration of reneavinng contract with Hoglund Coach Lines for providing Heartland Empresa hug service. W.O.) A REFERENCE AND BA .K .RO 1ND: The current contract between the City and Hoglund Coach Lines needs to be renewed for service in 1996. According to the contract, this is the last year that the contract can simply be renewed. In the fall of 1996, it will be necessary to conduct a formal bidding process in selecting a service provider for 1997. The State of Minnesota Transportation Funding Program under which the Heartland Express operates has allowed for a small increase in the program budget. Under the proposed contract, the cost per hour for transportation service will rise from $22.88/hr to $23.43/hr, which is an increase of less than 2.5%. As an update, the bus system is operating well with solid and consistent ridership numbers. Ridership will likely jump when the Mississippi Shores housing project comes on line. In addition to the day-to-day demand for service that the facility will generate, Presbyterian homes will be providing free tickets to residents for a special weekly service to the grocery store. The presence of the bus system appears to be very important to the success of Mississippi Shores. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to renew the transportation contract with Hoglund Coach Lines by increasing the cost per hour to $23.43 for 1996 service. sa 6 s Hoglund Transportation continues to do a good job; therefore, there is no need to consider seeking another provider. The increase is small and consistent with the increase in funds that the City will be getting from the State of Minnesota to operate the system in 1996. 2. Motion to deny renowing the transportation contract with Hoglund Coach Lines. r_ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative 01. D. AUPPORTINO DATA: A copy of the Rill contract is available upon request. 34 CITY OF MONIICELLO HEARTLAND EXPRESS TRANSIT REVENUE, EXPENSE, AND STATISTICAL COMPARISON _W9YEWW.;j ,eECEMlEI� ^ OTR Jg Oi 1511719 "77f S5J" Aml 1151114 13 53 "145 3111 A7 1167"ZI, 11111`7751 MOM, 5210m pra 041 1W17 IIMMIOMR 1 IQI, 1.M I In 1 tj? I.000 1111 t ayl1 a 1 941 14n'3111I a 1411l . O D1���eI u 1! 111 9 ,m' ?!1 241 --id4 e.nbl� .N 1119 .Ifl LFI "I 000 710 i4!' ,-01 If I Iw17, to] P3I io4! 14; nil ,Q 3St ap.. d- I C/Wlr .1 t 1]a aM a9. 117 n1 243 M.I l0 I11111Nb Ibu� m0 IMe In � 1p6I� 1�0 I IMO O 14]01 001 lots. 11.0]1 n00t 707ao aa17. 71wi ant'I }aM' Palo.: 9na.71107rnu ICa000rw/wM 7. 0 1.. 2 14101 M00 ERR Mal pM M01 F.RR M �" .• Mtl tD tO Q1. 9Ao7 Boyo Mol so ERR t0% fPP IPMraw�WN 0.7 0117 ON 007 Oq 000 ON E� 0w as. OO 0. 0' ',Pwwnw�Maw oat oQ tlo, t07 �S7 tta Im FRA 437 707 014 ERR 111171 e .CON'16 Qq 11001 11 071 Hfl 11)11 QM tt MI FAR g.lNl�Q1111 i1I {Ip FRA p".1 Qi 30 F AM 131 py IR0.+1111r[aswl.� II"IN 97 oN1 a ! tarn lotl\ lama\ 0117�%I FPR IQ70074 /II OOKI %olA F.RR II o7Ul COMPARE. WKI 1tA7.00 c J ] 119j 1177 11tp1 1 Da] 11' a ?9I 'm 14P!!P 1aa D1 pptl au Ip_.1 M70I IWD —0 1Mj .-I 7Q71 ,1�1 7 :I.oai 1410! 401 14 741 Ow 007 _ oni 007 tl M' 1221 urir' u7.7 „ Nati tt 7177 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/21/95 08:59:56 �. WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 38734 11/20/95 NORWEST BANK MINNESO 38734 11/20/95 NORWEST BANK MINNESO 39391 11/20/95 BURSCH TRAVEL 39391 11/20/95 BURSCH TRAVEL 39539 11/20/95 GOVERNMENT TRAINING 39540 11/20/95 K MART STORE 39541 11/20/95 WASHBURN/THERESA 39542 11/20/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 39543 11/20/95 KOROPCHAK/OLIVE 39543 11/20/95 KOROPCHAK/OLIVE 39544 11/20/95 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS, 39545 11/20/95 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS. 39546 11/20/95 U.S. POSTMASTER 39547 11/20/95 CHICAGO TITLE COMPAN 39549 11/21/95 BARBAROSSA & SONS, I 39549 11/21/95 CAREFREE LAWN SERVIC 39549 11/21/95 CAREFREE LAWN SERVIC 39549 11/21/95 CAREFREE LAWN SERVIC 39550 11/21/95 DAVE PERKINS CONTRAC 39550 11/21/95 DAVE PERKINS CONTRAC 39551 11/21/95 DAY STARTER 39552 11/21/95 FIREHOUSE MAGAZINE 90553 11/21/95 FRONTLINE PLUS FIRE 39554 11/21/95 K MART STORE 90555 11/21/95 LIEFERT/TOM Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL 154 CORRECT CODING 200.00CR 154 CORRECT CODING 200.00 0.00 Oct .90415 CORRECT PROJECT COD 4,535.81CR .90415 CORRECT PROJECT COD 4,535.81 0.00 72 REG FEE/CATHY SHUMAN 50.00 460 PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES 38.80 986 DOWNTOWN REOEVELOPMEN 640.00 118 MATER/ATV/SNOW REG 739.00 97 DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMEN 343.01 87 MILEAGE REIMS 29.40 372.41 25 PWORKS PKG LOT CONS 2,856.90 25 PWORKS PKG LOT CON 24,579.45 210 POSTAGE/DEP REG 164.00 699 GMEF LOAN/VECTOR T 50,000.00 942 SCHOOL BLVD CONST 192,570.74 940 MOWING CHG/LIBRARY 63.90 940 MOWING CHARGES/FIRE DE 63.90 940 MISC MOWING CHARGES 170.00 297.80 988 SUPPLIES/MAPLEW000 CI 252.00 998 PWORKS INSPECTION SUP 168.00 420.00 707 NEW BATTERY/FIRE DEPT 106.92 519 SUBSCRIPTION/FIRE DEPT 59.00 510 GLOVE£/FIRE DEPT 63.00 400 SUPPLIES/FIRE DEPT 12.07 304 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMB 100.00 Oct Oct 0 •Cr •Ch BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/21/95 08:59:56 WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39556 11/21/95 MOBIL 39556 11/21/95 MOBIL 39557 11/21/95 NATIONAL FIRE PROTEC 39558 11/21/95 SHINGOBEE BUILDERS 39SS9 11/21/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION 39559 11/21/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION 39559 11/21/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION 39558 11/21/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION 39559 11/21/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION 39560 11/21/95 WEIN/JERRY GENERAL CHECKING Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL. 131 GAS/STREET DEPT 23.84 131 GAS/PARKS DEPT 4.10 27.94 •CH 278 SUBSCRIPTION/FIRE DEPT 95.00 i 612 P WORKS BLD EXPAN 16,020.86 987 BOOTS/WATER DEPT 22.50 987 BOOTS/SEWER DEPT 22.50 987 BOOTS/STREET DEPT 106.50 887 OFFICE SUP/MATER DEPT 6.00 987 LOCKERS & TABLE/SHOP 90.00 247.50 *CH 385 TRAVEL EXPENSE REIMS 264.60 TOTAL 229.798.81 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/30/95 13:04:41 L --WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39449 11/30/95 OFFICE MAX 39449 11/30/95 OFFICE MAX 39561 11/30/95 GREEN/ELIZABETH 39562 11/30/95 LIQUOR STORE FUND 39563 11/30/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 49564 }1/30/95 BAUER/EUGENE & LOIS 39565 11/30/95 HELLMAN/VTCTOR G 39566 11/30/95 NORTHWEST MINNESOTA 39566 11/30/95 NORTHWEST MINNESOTA 39567 11/30/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL GENERAL CHECKING Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C.L1 90417 CORRECT CODING 95.74CR 90417 CORRECT CODING/OWN DEV 95.74 0.00 *CHI 889 REIMS/SUPPLIES/PWORKS 18.11 100 INTEREST TO LIQUOR 4,210.97 118 WATER/SNOW/ATV REG 443.00 903 TEMP EASMT/M 0 STM SE 225.00 906 TEMP EASMT/M 0 STM SE 225.00 156 REG FEE/GARY ANDERSON 10.00 156 MEMBERSHIP DUES/GARY A 15.00 25.00 *CH 118 WATER/ATV/SNOW REG 1.259.00 • TOTAL 6,406.08 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/30/95 13,:29:52 �- WARRANT DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39568 12/01/95 AGASSI2 ENVIRONMENTA 39569 12/01,/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39569 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39509 12/01/95 AMERICAN PAGING OF M 39570 12/01/95 CENTRAL MINN INITIAT 39571 12/01/95 COMPRESS AIR & EQUIP 19572 12/01/95 COMPUTER PARTS & SER 39573 12/01/95 DOUBLE D ELECTRIC (� 39574 17/01/95 FED E% ' 39575 12/UI/95 FEEORITE CONTROLS, I :191,75 12/01/95 FEEDRITE CONTROLS, I c 99576 12/01/05 HERMES/JERRY 39,577 12/01/95 HOLIDAY CREDIT OFFIC 30577 12/01/95 HOLIDAY CREDIT OFFIC 39670 12/01/95 J M OIL COMPANY ,10578 12/01/95 J M OIL COMPANY 39!%79 1?/01/05 K MART STORE 90600 12/01/95 MN PLANNING AG(,0CIAl j')!101 12/01/95 MON110ELLU ANIMAI CO 050? 12/01/05 MON'•ICELLO GENIOR Cl 39y03 12/01/9'% MONTICE.'LLO Y0111H H(�t, ';f)L04 12/01/85 ORR [.CHELEN-MAYER(1N j9!iO4 1?/09/95 ORk ';CHEL0J MAYLRON :;9504 12101/05 ORR,f-CME1FN-MAYEkON 3 Y)) )4 12/01/95 OWN 3FHC1 FN MAYIRON Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT C 761 TESTING/FIRE DEPT 341.00 951 PAGER CHARGES 16.78 951 PAGER CHARGES 8.39 951 PAGER CHARGES 24.50 951 PAGER CHARGES 8.39 951 PAGER CHARGES 8.39 951 PAGER CHARGES 8.39 951 PAGER CHARGES 8.39 951 PAGER CHARGES 0.39 91.62 822 CMIF GRANT PYMT 1,100.21 356 EQUIPMENT REPAIR/FIRE 109.37 500 COMPUTER MTC/CITY HAL 187.05 805 INSTALL WELDER -COMP C 328.33 394 POSTAGE/RECYCLING SCAN 23.50 56 MISC PkOF SERVICES/WAT 24.00 56 CHEMICALS/WATER DEP 2,548.86 3,572.86 01 LIBRARY CLEANING CONT 227.50 O5 GAS/FIRE DEPT 11.48 05 KJELLBERG EAST SUPPLIES 4.78 16.2G 95 OIL/STREETS 220.00 95 GAS/OTREETO 705.00 1,005.00 460 MINI DLIND VSHOP LUNCH 31.92 360 1096 UUEb/GARY ANDERSO 35.00 105 ANIMAL CONTROL CONT 1.100.00 139 MONTHLY CONTRACT PY 7.OJ�.33 989 FENCE/4TH 3TR GKTNG k ?47.30 162 ENG FLED/M 0 TRK BY 4,662.00 1G2 MISC 01JILUING IOOUC5 631.00 162 FNG FEEr,/kIVER MILL 7,466.19 162 FNG FCI ')/E;uMMERCF I N 130.30 xl BkC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/30/95 13:29:52 IARRAN T DATE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING 39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39584 12/01/95 ORk-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39584 1,2/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39584 12/01/95 ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON 39585 12/01/95 PLUMBERY-PURCELL'S P 39585 12/01/95 PLUMBERY-PURCEW S P 39588 12/01/95 RICHMAR INDUSTRIES 39587 12/01/95 SAFETY-KLEEN CORP. 39588 12/01/95 SCHILLEWAERT LANDSCA 39589 12/01/95 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP -39689 1-2/01/95 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP 39590 12/01/95 SPECTRUM SUPPLY CO. 39580 17/01/95 SPECTRUM SUPPLY CO. 39590 12/01/95 SPECTRUM SUPPLY CO. 39891 12/01/95 SURPLUS CORPORATION 39597 12/01/95 TRUEMAN-WELTERS, INC 39593 12/01/95 U 9 LINK 39593 17/01/95 U S LINK 39593 12/01/95 U S LINK 39593 17/01/95 U S LINK 30583 12/01/95 U S LINK 89693 12/01/95 U S LINK 38593 12/01/95 U S LINK 39594 12/01/95 VIKING PIPE SERVICES 30594 17/01/05 VIKING PIPE SERVICES 39594 12/01/95 VIKING PIPE SERVICES . i4 12!01/05 VIKING PIPE 6EPVICES (� 39594 12/01/95 VIKING PIPE SERVICES BtLO4 17/01/95 VIKING PIPE $ERVICE$ Disbursement •Journal DESCkIPT36N AMOUNT C 162 ENG FEES/PATHWAY PR 3.548.58 162 ENG FEES/PW BLD EXP 1,146.88 162 ENG FEES/COUNCIL MTGS 147.00 162 ENG FEES/OAKRIDGE PROJ 41.00 162 ENG FEES/KLEIN FMS EST 82.00 162 ENG FEES/KJELLSERG EAS 41.00 162 ENG FEES/RIVER MIL 31,268.68 162 ENG FEES/C HILLS V PRO 41.00 162 ENG FEES/KLEIN FARMS P 41.00 44,075.34 r( 251 BLD MTC SUPPLIES/DARKS 2.53 251 BLD MTC SUP/SHOP & GA 292.22 794.75 *( 990 SUPPLIES/STREETS 101.36 184 MCH MTC AGRMT/SHOP 77.69 382 TREE REMOVAL SERVIC 6.177.00 193 $AND/SNOW & ICE 73.35 193 NAILS. ETC/STREET DEP 206.69 780.04 498 CLOTHES/STREET DEPT 31.33 408 SUPPLIES/SHOP & GAR 18.90 498 ICE MELT/SNOW 8 ICE 146.39 190.62 • 967 TOOLS/SHOP & GAR 55.00 207 MOTOR PARTS/STREETS 101.18 950 TELEPHONE C14ARGES 23.81 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 47.14 650 TELEPHONE CHARGES 2.61 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 0.70 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 2.98 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 40.16 950 TELEPHONE CHARGES 1.48 113.47 214 SEWER TELEVIS/RIVER M 300.00 714 $ELIER TELEVISING 1,075.00 214 SEWER TELEVIS/KLEIN 3,150.00 714 $EWER TELEVIS/EASTWD 950.00 214 SEWdP TELEVIS/C HILLS 750.00 214 E.EWER TELEVIS/KJELL 1.000.00 7.075.00 80505 17/01/05 WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITO 210 SCERG GRANT PYMT 2.760.51 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 12/07/913 11:28:04 Disbursement Jdurnai `UWARkANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL GENERAL CHECKING 39575 12/07/95 HELLMAN/VICTOR G 906 RLIMS/ROAD COST/M 0 T $41.90 36597 12/07/95 ORUCE PARSON 90419 DRAINAGE ESMT/D SHU 2,000..00 i 39598 t2/n7/g5 FAYMAR .90398 kEIMB LANDSCAPING 10,000:.00 39599 12/07/95 MN DEPART OF NATURAL 118 WATER/SNOW/ATV REG 1,326.00 89G00 12/07/95 CEDAR ST. GARDEN CEN 948 SUPPLIES/CITY HALL/TRE 37.26 39601 12/07/85 A.E. MICHAELS 330 PAINT/MTC OF PARK 81.0 58.95 39602 12/07/95 AME GROUP 8 CHAMBER SIGN 371.70 39603 12/07/68 ANOERSONIGARY 11 GAS RELMB 5.25 39609 12/07/95 ANDERSON,/GARY 11 MEMBERSHIP FEES 5.00 10.25 VCI 30604 12/07/95 ARAMARK 848 CITY HALL SUPPLIES 114.00 39009 12/07/98 AUDIO COMMUNICATIONS 17 CIVIL DEF RADIO RCPAIR 60.31 -:0CGOG 12/07/05 AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOO 200 2 GARAGE ODOR£/P WO 2,708.00 3')607 12/07/85 OUS'SNESS RECORDS COR 27 W 2 FORMS & eNVEL9PGS 114.31 y0600 12/07/95 CELLULAR 2000 OF ST 794 GAR PHONE CHARGES 79.08 39600 12/07/911 CELLULAR 2000 OF ST 794 CAR PHONE CHARD&0 4.74 39000 12107/90 CELLULAR 2000 OF ST 794 CAR PHONE CHARGED 12.03 39600 12/0'7/00 CELLULAR 2000 OF ST 194 CAR PHONE CHARGES 123.36 710.15 *Cl J9li0f) 1..$/07/90 DOWNTOWN STANDAWO 376 GA3/FIRE DEPT t0.fl6 ,30010 12/07/99 CIENERAL RENTAL CENTE 64 C;ANDFILA5TEk/OTREFT DE 110.1)6 31,3011 12/07/95 HOGLUND OUO COMPANY 05) VCH RF,PAIR PART1iPJ R'hX 17.10 .1f1612 12/07/9'6 t(kN ANDERGON TRU1"KIN 007 PRW UERYIk E(./ANIMAL U0.28 Iof, 1ft 1',)/07/00 LI(J1!fm )TORT: FUtju 100 INVIi9lmFNTl- t)1H, 36,9',0)")r) v'3 ;1G 1?/O'%196 10:*!OR 4 14UNITOR f�A 4^,6 :1Af• NE;J1'Tlik/WklTt 1.75Et.si > 1°331!) 1,)/07/91, 1A1XA4'H/J014N )'?i MIi i;A(4. WLIft'i) ;4.7`; '!�C'!, i^/117/91, LUNA(fl/Jb1'N J2J/ MILLAGE WIlMll 11.50 :')tj 1!y :9Gic, 1'"`/1)//9'1 1 /1)7/oG> t_t1:IA lilit?HN ! JKA611/Jlf4:td ).?1 3?! ttIi•t:Ati!, RFINi' MIl tAGF. REsW i1.')0 11.1�U "9.6" *1 HRC FINANCIAL-SY.&TEM 12/07/95 11:28:04 Disbursement Journal AMOUNT CL WARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION GENERAL CHECKING 39616 12/07('95 MARTIE'S F.A.RM SERVIC 107 SEED/M 0 4TH/D SCH'ULTE 5.11 39611 1'2/07-/9S MAUS FOODS 108 SUPPLIES/SHOP & GAR 15.58 a�r.L7 12/07/9b MAUS FOODS 108 SUPPLIES/CITY HALL 3.50 39617 12/07/95 MAUS FOODS 108 CLEANING SUP/LIBRARY 70.71 39617 12/07/95 MAUS F006S 108 SUPPLIES/ANIMAL CONTR 3.2.50 39617 12/07/9S',MAUS FOODS 108 SUPPLIES/WATER DEPT 7..8,7 129.96 *CH 39G19 12/07/95 MINNEGASCO 772 UTILITIES 190.54 39618 12/07/95 MTNNEGA$CO 772 UTILITIES 141.38 39610 12/07/95 MINNEGA9'CO 712 UTILITIES 39.bli 39618 17/07/95 MINNEGASCO 772 UTILITIES 7735 39610 12/07/95 MINNEGA£CU 7-72 UTILITIES 43.55 39618 1?/07/95 MINNEGASCO 172 UTILITIES 2.62.74 39618 11/07/95 MINNEGASCO 712 UTILITIES 1.594.02 J9618 12/07/95 MINNEGASCO 772 UTILITIES 51.5J 2,400.94 *CF 39619 12/07/95 NORTHERN STATE^ POWE 140 UTILITIES 3.003.40 79619 12/07/95 NORTHi-RN STATES POWE 149 UTILITIES 201.11 r 396'19 12/07/95 NORTHERN STATES POWE 140 UTILITIES 4,035.00 39619 12(0)/95 NORTHERN STATED PUWE 148 UYILITIf,S 14.08 3'11,19 12/07/05 NORTHERN STATES POWE 140 UTILITIES 570.,25 39619 12/0.1/95 NORTHERN STA'T.E3 POWE 14'0 UTILIT14 3 14.14 391,19 11/07/08 NORTHERN STATEC POWE 140 UTILITIES 044.88 39G19 12(-0)/98 NORTHERN GTATEI� POWE 140 UTILITIL'G 3'33.31 39619 12/07/05 NORTHERN STATEG POWE 140 UIILITIEii 42$.40 39010 1?/07/96 NORTHERN t3YATE13 POWE 140 UTTLITICO 724.GG 99610 11/07/95 NORTHERN STATE4 POWE 140 2 POLES/RIVER MILL DR 42.20 10.600..62 *0 M20 12/07/95 PETEROEN"� MONT FORD 109 VL -H REPAIR PARTS/GTRE 144.02 3913?t 12/01/9:) PHOTO I '149 PIt:TURK,)JWWTP 1APAN51 313.11 390?1 12107/05 PHOTO 3 749 DOWNTOWN REOEVELOPW NT 46.10 2u.2.1 fib, ,0612 1^/01/99 VVILLICTQN P'AVEME'NT M 00 L,YRLf7 ROAD PAINTIN 2,243.17 1/07/05 k'2DEl, J?4 (IRL- 11 FltdM NUV OTLV., 10.04)(M J^E23 12/07/95 RLD'' 11d1Q11 Jae 'w t# IN,N VAN kEPAIRf, YD/,G5 • 9' 1 . U,) 4., J+JG2G 1?/U7/9, ',HUMAN/(:Ati'HV 1')1 MILEAbE kE'IM'1/f:EMINAk 27.44 t?/ll7/7't'iMUF1AN/)At;1V 191 MLI.tA',f t,b1M}/').MiNA12 ?4.!)', 91..I It ca. BRC FIN'ANCItAL SYSTEM 12/07/9'5 111:213-.,04 ZWARRANT DAIE VENDOR GENERAL CHECKING D,9625 12/07/95 SIMONSON LUMBER COMP 39626 12/07/95 UNOCAL 30626 1'2/07/95 UNOCAL 396.27 12/07/95 VASKO RUBBISH RE'MDVA 39627 12/07/93 VASKO RUBBISH REMOVA 39828 12/07/95 VOS13 ELECTRIC SUPPLY :j9&78 12/07/95 WRIGHT HENNEPIN SECU 39629 12/07/95 WRIGHT HENNEPIN SECU 39630 12/0'7/95 WRIGHT-HENNEPIN COOP GENERAL CHECKING Q Disbursement Journal DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL 193 MAILBOX STAND/E KNOLL 600.00 213 GAS•/FIRE DEPT 22.48 213 GA'SJWATER DEPT 27.06 49.54 *CH 524 GARBAGE CONTRACT P '10,113.70 524 SALES TAX/GARBAG,E CON 656.08 10,769.78 BCH 409 LTGHT BULBS/STREET LI 170.48 675 ALARM SYSTEM MTC AGMT 19.12 875 ALARM SYSTEM MTC AGMT 15.98 35.10 *�k 512 UTILITIES 8.00 TOTAL 84,403..54 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 11/20/95 12:03:18 Disbursement Journal '4 -WARRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 0 c s� t� s, LIQUOR CHECKING 18472 11/20/95 BELLBOY CORPORATION 800099 LIQUOR PURCHASE 1,151.05 1847.3 11/20/95 CAREFREE LAWN SERVIC 800193 MOWING CHARGES 63.90 18474 11/20/95 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 WINE PURCHASE 886.08 18475 11/20/95 GRIGGS, COOPER & COM 800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 1.688.38 18476 11/20/95 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 LIQUOR PURCHASE 378.16 1.8476 11/20/95 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 600022 WINE PURCHASE 852.07 1,230.23 18477 11/20/95 MONTICELLO VACUUM CE 800050 VACUUM BAGS. ETC 22.90 18478 11/20/95 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR 800180 WINE PURCHASE 299.44 18478 11/20/95 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR 800180 LIQUOR PURCHASE 723.91 1,023.35 18479 11/20/95 QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 WINE PURCHASE 178.05 19479 11/20/85 'QUALITY WINE & SPIRI 800040 LIQUOR PURCHASE 597.56 775.01 LIQUOR CHECKING TOTAL 6.841.50 0 c s� t� s, SRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 0,9:49'; 14 Disbursement Journal (11/3,0/=95 `'AIRRANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL LIQUOR CHECKING U8480 11/29/95 CITY OF MONTICELLU 800003 GMEF LOAN/'VECTOR T 50,000..00 18481 11/29/95 JOHNSOti BROS WHOLESA 800022 WINE PURCHASE 1,,565.49 18482 11/29/95 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR 800180 WINE PURCHASE 600.55 18482 11/29/95 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIR 800t,80 LIQUOR PURCHASE 880.80 1,561.35 *Cl- Ch18483 18483 11/29/95 GRIGGS,, COOPER & COM 800018 LIQUOR PURCHASE 1,380.08 18484 11/29/95 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 WINE PURCHASE 272.92 18484 11/29/95 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 MIX FOR RESALE 77.67 18484 11/29/95 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 FREIGHT CHARGES 6.40 356..99 INCE LIQUOR CHECKING TOTAL 54.863.91 L1 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 14:39:Og Disbursement Journal `�t1.2101/95 49RANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CLA LIQUOR CHECKING 10485 12'/04/95 8'ERN.ICK'S PEPSI COLA 800 00 1 POP PURCHASE 411.25 18488 12/04/95 CITIZENS COMMUNICATI .800183 ADVERTISING 9,7.20 18487 12/04/95 DAY DISTRIBUTING COM 800019 NON ALCOHOLIC BEER 57,.60 18487 12/04/95 DAY DISTR•IB'UTING COM 800010 BEER PURCHASE 1,087.60 1,145.20 *CHF 18488 12/04/95 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. 800011 BEER PURCHASE 2'.119.25 111488 12/04/95 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. 800011 NON ALCOHGLIC BEER 54:40 18488 12/04/95 010 WHOLESALE CO,. 800011 LIQUOR STORE .SUPPLIES 17.87 18488 12/04/95 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. 800011 SUPPLIES/BAGS 358:38 10468 12/04/95 DICK WHOLESALE. CO.. 800011 CORRECT COOING 245'.SOCR 18468 12/04/95 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. 800011 CORRECT CODING/APRIL 40.00 18488 12/04/95 DICK WHOLESALE CO., 800011 CORRECT COOING/JUNE 110.40 18488 12/04/95 DICK WHOLESALE CO., 800011 CORRECT 'COOING"/JULY $5.20 13480 12/04/95 DICK WHOLESALE CO.. 800011 CORRECT CODING/NOV 40.00 3,149.91 *CHE 10499 12/04/95 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 800012 WINE PURCHASE 680.88 9490 12/04/95 FLESCH'S PAPER SERVI 800l10'SUPPLIES/BAGS 26.16 10490 12/04/99 FLEGCH.'G PAPER OERVS 800116 LIQUOR STARE SUPPLIES 31.'72 57.88 *GHE 18491 12/04/96 G & K SERVICE 800129 MTC OF BLD/RUG MATS 120.27 10492 12/04/95 GROSOLEIN BEVERAGE 1800019 BEER PURCHAL'E 6.013.45 10499 12/04/05 HUME JUICE 000136 JUtC6 FOR RESALE 07.90 10494 12/0h/99 JOHNOON EROS WHOLESA 000022 LIQUOR PURCHASE 1.04.2.55 10404 1.3/04/99 JOHNSON ORAD FIHOLEDA 0000,R2 WINE. PURCHASE 2,'540.0,1 10494 12/04/95 JOHN50N RP05 WN61.60A 000022 FREIGHT CHARGES 57.08 4,44.00 *CHC 10496 12/94/95 JUDE CANDY & TOBACCO 000021 CIG & CIGARC FOR RE -GAL 61.75 10496 1?/04/98 LW01400 ACE HAROWAR 000104 ()LD MTC SUPPLIL,1 52, 10 10497 12/04/05 MONTICELLO OFFICE Pk 000031 OFGTCF 14PPLIFu 00.9E 11)49'0 12/04/95 NORTHrRN 9TATF.9 PORI 000033 UTILITTEI; 793.04 10499 17/04/1)6 PHIILIPG MINE 8 LPIR 000100 110UOR PUNC HASE 57.07 18400 12/04/9'1 NFIILLIPO WINE 8 f,PIR 000100 WINE 1'UR(:`HA'(E 40.0(1 1(,,)9n 1r/04/D9 PHILLIPG WINE 8 SPIk 000100 FREIGHT CHAUGEO ".Y0 100. ) 1 ♦(:111. BPC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 12/'01/95 14:39':05 Disbursement Journal (�IAR'RANT DATE VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL LIQUOR' CHECKING 18500 12/04/95 PIONEER TRANSPORTATI 800185 SOBER CAB PROGRAM DONA 25.00 18501 12/04/95 RELIABLE CORPORATION 179 CARPET CLEANING 266,.25 10507 12/04/9.5 RON'S ICE COMPANY 900041 ICE PURCHASE 12B.06 10503 12/04./95 ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT 800045 MISC ITEMS, FOR RESALE 248.35 10503 12/04/95 ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT 806045 CLEANING SUPPLIES 47.50 296.95 *CH 18504 12/04/95 THORPE 'DISTRIBUTING 800048 BEER PURCHASE 18,670.40 185b14 12/04/95 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 800048 MUGS FOR RESALE 246.00 10504 1?/04/95 THORPE DISTRIBUTING 800048 NON ALCOHOLIC BEER 1'66.40 19,092.90 *CH 18505 12/04/85 U S LINK 800195 PHONE' CHARGES 28.03 18506 12/04/95 VIKING COCA-COLA SOT 800'051 POP PURCHASE 365.70 10507 12/04/95 WRIGHT MAY SHOPPER 800106 ADVERTISING 310.00 Ll, 12/04/95 dEr MEDICAL SERVICr _ 654 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 99.90 ITGUOR CHECKING TOTAL 37.651.20 0 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 12/07/95 11*26:44 Disbursement journal (ARRANT OATS VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CL Ll(JUOR CHECKING 10509 12/07/95 CITIZENS COMMUNICATI 800193 ADVERTISING 97.20 19510 12/07/95 CONSOLIDATED COMM 01 800163 ADVERTISING 40.15 10511 12/07/95 DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT 000009 BEER PURCHASE 19.093.55 16511 12107/96 DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT 800069 DEER MIRRORS/FOR RESA 125.00 10511 17/07/95 DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUT 800009 NON AJLCOHOL,IC BEER 190.80 13,409.35 *0 10517 12/0/95 ()kIGU�,, COOPER & COM 800018 LIGUOk vVkCHASf: 7.630.09 141517 17/07/95 JOHNSON BROS WHOLESA 800022 LIQUOR PURCHASE 84.30 1051; 19/07/115 JOHNSON FJkO-, WHOLESA 000022 WINE PURCHASE 509.50 $03.80 10514 12/07/55 LIEPERT TRUCKING 000025 FREIGHT CHARGES 656.50 105I; 12/07/9y METRO LFAGUL GIRLS U Ll-� 800200 AUVCRTISING 35.00 1Gb1() 17/07/96 MINNEGASCO —— 000180 'UT7L 1 U!j I ; 12/07/95 MONTICELLU TIMES 000032 ADVERTISING 397.26 10510 17/07/A5 N0kTHWEST CARPET a U 000179 CARPET CLEANINGIMTC S 266.25 10510 12/07/911 PHILLIPS WINO & SPIR 000100 WINE PURCHASE 710.37 ICS?O 12/09/05 QUALITY WINE @ .J,IkI OD0040 WINE PURCHASE599.be 10f)2O 1?/01/95 QUALITY WINE SPIRI 000040 LIQUOR PURCHAOE 6,130.o 0,799.23 401 10101 1,?107/95 SERVICE 3ALC-4; COUPOR 000042 SIIPPIJI:4i 54.40 t TOPOR C.HECK-ING TOTAL 30.060.28 COUNCitL UPDATE December 6, 1996 (R.W.) At the previous meeting, the Council authorized the purchase of 60 chairs for the council chambers from Golden Valley Furniture in the amount of the quoted price of $40 each. In reviewing the fabric selections that are available for this price, it doesn't appear that any of the selections would be suitable without going to a higher quality of material. This results in an increase of $6 per chair. Even with the increased grade of fabric, we would be unable to get a match with the brown fabric we currently have. Therefore, I am leaning toward going with a different color, such as grey, for the individual chairs. Scott Douglas of Golden Valley Furniture also pointed out that a better quality chair with steel glides on the feet instead of plastic inserts and a thicker frame is available for $68 a chair. It would appear that the $46 chair would be very similar in quality to the existing chairs we now have, and I do not see any reason to change at this time. The only concern I have is that the price has increased $6 per chair; and unless the Council would like to revisit this subject, I will just go ahead with the purchase at the $46 amount rather than the quoted $40 price. In addition, if anyone would like to see the fabric selections, I will have them available at the meeting Monday night. CHAIRS.UPD: 12/6/96 COUNCIL UPDATE December 8, 1998 (J.S.) In September of this year, the City Council authorized investigation of the Bohanon Farm in the southeast corner of West County Road 39 and Briarwood Avenue for use as a biosolids landspreading facility. Braun Intertec was commissioned to do the soils work on the site; and due to the late harvest of the bean crop, we were unable to complete the field work until the first week of November. The testing indicates that topsoil on the site is generally 1-114 ft thickness, underlain by silty sands and poorly -graded sands with silt to depths of 2-6 ft. Beneath the upper horizons, poorly -graded sand was encountered to the depth of the investigation. The depth of ground water ranged from 27-33 ft beneath the ground's surface in the three soil borings in which the water level was detected. Based upon Braun Intertec's report, 6 inches of water -holding capability is obtained 6-10 ft above the depth to the seasonal high ground water table, which is adequate for the application of `class B' biosolids. Testing of the topsoil pH indicated the soils generally had a pH of 6.0 to 6.1. There were a couple of exceptions in which a 6.6 and a 6.4 were found, but the 6.0 to 6.1 is probably an average. A 6.6 is needed for the spreading of `class B' biosolids under the current MPGA regulations. With the soil boring report, a map of the site, and all available well data in hand, Kelsie McGuire and myself met with Pat Buford and EuDale Mathiason of the MPCA to discuss the requirements for permitting a land biosolids application facility at this site. Prior to applying for an application of the site, we must own the property either by deed or contract for deed, and we must install six monitoring wells at the site, two upgradiant, two on the central portion of the site, and two downgradiant (the direction of the ground water flow) wells. Tho estimated costs for these wells with the first round of sampling is about $12,000. We would have to do a little additional well investigation to make sure that we have no shallow wells less than 60 ft within 1,000 ft downgradiant from the property. Additionally, Pat indicated that the new rules, which are in draft form, would reduce the amount of 'class B' biosolids that can be applied to sites in the future. They also indicated that they may request that we surface apply in the areas on this farm where the topsoils are thinner. After surface applying, we could immediately drag or disc to incorporate it into the immediate surface. We also discussed the soil pH requirements. The new draft regulations will propose to drop the pH requirement down to 6.0 or less, maybe even down to the Federal 603 Regulation limit of 6.6. In order to apply in those areas that are currently 6.0 and 6. 1, we would have to do a tissue analysis of the plants to dotermino any cadmium update, which is a heavy metal. Since our sludge is very low in cadmium and the 603 reg's have already determined that a 6.6 pH would limit heavy metal update, we may be able to use the fields without applying lime. st,tmas.UFV. 1VM Page I The 158 -acre farm of the Bohanon's sits in the southeast corner of northeast Briarwood Avenue and West County Road 39. It was originally a 160 -acre farm, but there is an individual homesite on the north central portion of the property on County Road 39, which takes up about 2 acres; and the existing old farmhouse, along with two storage buildings, takes up another 4 acres. Taking out approximately 4 acres for road right-of-ways leaves around 160 acres of tillable land. There are three wells included with the property, there is an agricultural well near one of the storage buildings, there is a well for the farmhouse, and another large 12 -inch agricultural well with a central pivot and irrigation system in the center of the property. We have asked our appraiser for a preliminary verbal opinion of the market value of the property and also reviewed a market analysis done by Dan Goeman for Kenny and Carol Bohanon. We met with the Bohanons on the evening of December 11. They currently rent out the old farmhouse and both machine sheds, as well as the land. A farmer in Big Lake rents the land and rotates potatoes and beans. I believe his lease on the land goes through the neat cropping season, and the rent on the large machinery shed goes through October of 1996. The Bohanons indicated the rent from the farmhouse, buildings, and land comes to approximately $30,000 per year. The Bohanons are in no hurry to sell their property; they have indicated they have had other inquiries about selling it and have indicated they would like to receive an amount above the market value if they needed to sell before they are ready. City staff has discussed this information with the Council Biosolids Site Committee, made up of Mayor Brad Fyle and Tom Perrault, and we are currently trying to work up a counteroffer to the Bohanon's asking price which, of course, will have to be approved by City Council. Rick has discussed the possible City acquisition of the site with Franklin Dean, the Monticello Township Chairman. Although Mr. Denn would not speak for the rest of the Board, he did say that, in his opinion, this site would be more acceptable to the Township than the Hanford property. He would discuss it with the Board at their next meeting. BLUDos.uPn, 12AM Pegs 2 r 27 WEST MONTICELLC) T 121-i22N-F;215W. SP "T •°1�� J �`~�'� p'qJ ail �i • �3a'V Com•• j . C • y � n..J , ��� S+ie •wete�l r«lJ • %7 a' ., 2•t' � : . 0 ��� � �s.r.«a... c Abp 7 S �. • 73 it �Rs L .i M NT L' „i�;'l= •°� t. art. 'r:> L 9 .oma ,• t t. ,. .,to ir,/' � ,. 'poovo ki � "g•y ✓n r " :�� 1 .%^'� .. ;irresl c"t�• � r,.. �''J k �Y -;VZ— Rr~RPM s,2('}p IY � t. n� � « . � t C� •^;^'' �}Ai1 — �,�',y:,��r` 4 .. , ./ - �� . I. � 1 ' *� 4 � � S � wilt �'�' i4 ) t aa�• ',' +at , `ff "er•..� } i J4�' 9 1 'f La n `'�'•��M'•�•^ Bt � �a�aaaJ i �i i J • { � F ;r Jr_ a I Ilk ! , '•% P.tY,,� c •,uVZ 1...1'VY• -7, , `• D• - ip?.�e.. � i 61" Ali is --------- CONSOLIDATION OF THE HRA AND EDA Recommendation of the EDA At the EDA meeting of November 28, 1995, the members discussed the potential consolidation of the HRA and the EDA. Koropchak gave a background of the subject matters origination and the IDC's request for the joint meeting of September 27. Jeff O'Neill summarized the joint meeting relating to consolidation. Consolidation may be more efficient, would eliminate redundancy for funding approval, most cities have either an HRA or an EDA, and the powers of an EDA and an HRA are very similiar. The makeup of an EDA has the option of a 3, 5, or 7 -member commission with representation from the City Council and the Statutes do not contain a residency requirement. An HRA has a 5 -member commission and the Statutes contain a residency requirement. The commission makeup attracted the most discussion. A consolidation to an EDA may provide a stronger linkage to the City Council. A consolidation to an HRA would provide a checks and balance system. EDA members discussed the residency criteria for EDA members as adopted by the City Council. They felt until an ample number of candidates with qualifications applied for EDA or HRA commission seats, the EDA residency criteria should be eliminated. Other discussion: EDA agendas are well-prepared with adequate information for decision making which drives time -efficient meetings. Additionally, EDA meetings occur only about four times a year; therefore. EDA membership is not overly demanding or time consuming. Although the IDC may be a branch of the Chamber of Commerce, the role of the IDC to make industrial related suggestions or recommendations is important to the community and complements the objectives of the HRA and the EDA. Consolidation of the EDA and the HRA does not decrease the loadwork of the Executive Director. Al Larson rade a motion recommending the EDA and the IIRA not consolidate and the existing two -commission organizational structure continue, therebye, maintaining both a linkage to the Council and a checks and balance system. Additionally, the motion recommends the EDA residency requirement be eliminated until such time an ample number of candidates apply for EUA commission seats. Non-resident commissioners shall have a vested interest in the community. Harvey Kendall seconded the motion and with no further discussion, the motion passed unanimously. Yens: Larson, Kendall, Hoglund. Schwientck, Herbst, Perrault, and Demeules. Nays: None. - Honorable Mayor and City Council Members BA Mind—dt. P.E. City of Monticello 350 Westwood Lake Bm we u, P.E. 8441 Wayzata Boulevardevard rnn R. ardimb—s. P.E- .EMinneapolis, WSJ8 Minneapolis,MN 55426 D—Jd W. S--, P.E. Rmuld B. Bm, P.E �t 612-541-4800 &Associates, Inc. FAX 541-1700 COUNCIL UPDATE To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members City of Monticello From: Bret A. Weiss, P.E. WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: November 30, 1995 Re: Briar Oakes Ponds This memo is in response to a recent phone call from a resident of the Briar Oakes Addition with regard to the existing detention pond located in the northeast comer of the Briar Oakes subdivision. This pond has previously been defined as the long, narrow pond during the Briar Oakes development phase and is located along the west property line of the recently -developed Meadow Oak 4th Addition. This pond was identified initially in the development plans for the Meadow Oak area, but was not developed until Briar Oakes was graded. At that time, the ponds were designed to hold the majority of the runoff from the development of Briar Oakes and consequently, the ponds have held storm water at a higher elevation than would normally occur if the downstream outlets were working properly. Several years back, however, an outlet to the large Meadow Oak Pond was installed from the long, narrow pond to allow for lowering of the water levels as necessary. This lowering of the long pond has been controlled by city staff in an effort to release the water at a time that least impacts the Meadow Oak Pond. The Briar Oakes area is still not operating at its finished condition as the middle pond still does not have an outlet connecting it to the long, narrow pond and consequently, the pond is at a much higher elevation than it will be in the future. This will most likely spark future debate that the City has lowered the pond to an elevation which is not acceptable to the local residents. It is very important that we set the record straight, as we have tried to on numerous occasions when the situation has arisen, that these ponds are in a temporary state and will be modified with future additions of the Briar Oakes plat. r wrm'seme amn ao. ,t,u 10'astructure • Engimen • Planner; LQukLom-mTUNrTv rmnmip Council Update City of Monticello November 30. 1995 Page 2 The principal confusion stems from the fact that most people expect ponds to contain water and in most instances in the City of Monticello, this is the case. We do, however, have several locations in the city which utilize dry ponds (these are ponds that store water during the high frequency storm and meter the stone water out at a lower rate until they are empty). Because of tight site restrictions and the manner in which the lots were developed, the long, narrow Briar Oakes Pond needed to be designed as a dry pond. For your information, in order to have a pond that contains standing water, several items need to be in place. These are as follows: Acceptable soil types that have water -holding capability so that the storm water does not percolate into the soil. Adequate areatwidth to construct proper side slopes on the pond in order to construct the pond to a depth of four feet or greater to maintain standing ower. Ponds with less than four feet of depth below the normal water level tend to experience a significant amount of weed growth, which is usually met with dissatisfaction by the adjoining residents. Sufficient land arca to accommodate the required storage volumes within the ponding area above the normal water level. These criteria were examined for Briar Oakes, as well as all other ponds within the city, to ensure that all three arc available before a pond is constructed. In the case of this Briar Oakes pond, only criteria I was available and consequently, the pond was designed as a dry pond. In order to convert the Briar Oakes Pond to a wet pond, the outlet would need to be raised significantly due to the significant pond slope from the south to the north. If that was completed, it is very likely that the detention storage volume would not be achieved. This would then endanger other structures upstream from the ponding area adjacent to the ponding area. Additionally, if the discharge was increased to the downstream pond, it is likely that downstream flooding would occur, It would he my recommendation that a neighborhood meeting be called to discuss the item in greater detail with participation by the city and developer. It may be worthwhile to explore options available with the developer as he considers his next phase. In addition, I would suggest that we provide some public information to Briar Oakes area, Klein Farms, River Mill and other locations that will have dry ponds within their neighborhoods as well. � rovu�rmaomu�a+ww