Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 03-02-1998 Special -. .----..-- 5. -. --=-- AGEN A SPECIAL MEETING. MON ICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, March , 1998 . 7 p.m. Mayor: Bill Fair Council Members: Clint Herbst, Brian Stu pf, Roger Carlson, Bruce Thielen 1. Call to order. 2. Consideration of requesting HRA par icipation in construction financing of the community and training center. 3. Consideration of a resolution regardi g Superior Landfill project. 4. Consideration of a resolution adoptin annexation agreement with Monticello Township. Adjournment. Special Council Agenda - 3/2/98 . fin n 2. r (J.O.) A City Council is asked to review varios options discussed by the small group and other information, and consider aking a formal request to the HRA for participation in the project. As you m y know, the small group charged with establishing a common concept for de ign and financing of the project agreed on many points but did not come to a agreement on finance program design. Therefore, the issue must be brought 0 the full bodies of the City Council and HRA for consideration. The folIo 'ng are important areas of agreement: AREAS OF AGREEMENT 1. The basic design and mix of us s as recommended by the task force was supported by the small gro p. A great opportunity exists at this point in the history of the co unity to meet important current and future needs with one project. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Seniors - space for curre t and expanding needs. Youth services - space fo needed services and activities. Family activities - place 'n town to share leisure time with family. Activity generator for do ntown - helps support local businesses. Meeting spaces for busi esses and organizations - a significant need. Clean up and recycle un er-utilized portion of town - a major goal of Council. City Hall - a major goal f the City Council. National Guard - activit generator and proven community partner. 2. The basic design recommende leisure pool and light fitness successful community center. by the task force is excellent. The eas are important ingredients to a 3. Downtown redevelopment an i the comprehensive plan are well supported by the proposed loc tion. . -~ 4. Other funding sources such as liquor store revenue and available TIF dollars should be used to defr y the tax impact. The concept of establishing a sales tax shoul be shelved. The finance plans include use ofliquor and TIF funds. Special Council Agenda - 3/2/98 . 5. The small group felt that $500, 00 in reductions could be accomplished without negatively affecting the design. There is a large design contingency and some opportu ties to reduce space. This reduction is in finance plans. 6. The latest finance plan alterna 'ves have been modified to include estimated operation expenses n t covered by operation revenue. The following is information that may have a bearing on your decision making: . Delays in acquisition of the Wa nut Street portion of the total site could jeopardize the goal of dev lopment of civic uses as noted in the comprehensive plan or could si ificantly drive up the cost of future land acquisition for civic uses. . The tax impact of the new scho 1 and one-half the debt of the wastewater treatment plan wa largely off-set by state aids to schools and growth in tax base. . . The current state budget surpl s ($2 billion) could, as it did in 1998, result in property tax reliefth t will buffer the cost of the facility. Current legislation in the Sen te would result in property tax relief. Of course, it is not known how thi will affect Monticello; however, it is safe to say that taxpayers will enefit from the good economic times through some kind of tax reba e. . Interest rates are at record 10 s. Economic conditions are good. Action needs to be taken soon to direc the architect to develop plans in order to bid the project during a fav rable bidding period. . The Youth Initiative Bill is ge ting excellent support in both the House and the Senate according to t e bill sponsor (Minnesota Recreation and Parks Association). If the ill passes, $40,000,000 will be available for facilities targeted toward y uth. The Monticello project would be a good candidate for this grant rogram. . . MCP support of the full facilit using lease revenue bonds is strong. . No changes to current laws go erning personal property tax on utilities are projected to pass i 1998 according to bill sponsor Loren Jennings. . No civic or community organi ations have formally expressed opposition. 2 Special Council Agenda - 3/2/98 . B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: The alternatives below represent cone pts discussed by the small group and are a starting point for Council discus ion. Both of the concepts could be construed as being consistent with Co ' ncil action on September 22, 1997. 1. Build core using lease revenue onds; vote on water. Motion to request HRA participation by construct'on and funding of core facility and vote on G.O. bond financing necessa to construct the leisure pool. Motion to include use of liquor store a d TIF funds as described in finance worksheet. Under this altemative, the core facility would be designed to accommodate the water; howev r, the construction of the pool area would occur only if a positive v te on a G.O. bond occurred. The cost per year of this alternative, inc uding operations, on a $120,000 home is $51.42. The cost under this ption if the pool is built two years later is $60.55. 2. Build core and water using lea e revenue bonds. Motion to request HRA funding on the core facilit plus leisure pool. Motion to include use of liquor store and TIF fun s as described in finance worksheet. . Under this altemative, the pro'ect would be constructed and financed in its entirety. The cost of this ltemative to a $120,000 home is $44.08. It would not provide a opportunity to vote on the project. Please note that the information pro ded in the tax impact table on the front page of the newspaper was wrong an grossly overstated the cost of the project. The table included the projec ed tax impact of the wastewater treatment plant and the cost of opera ions of the community center. None of this was spelled out in the table pro 'ded by the Monticello Times. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: . The City Administrator understands hat the question of whether to vote or not to vote on any portion of the proj ct is the major issue. Yes, there were people that signed the petition reque ting a vote; however, the signatures were obtained without benefit of com lete information on the project regarding costs and design. For man of those that want to vote after having all of the facts, it is doubtful that vot ng on water only will be satisfactory. On the other hand, Council may feel t important to allow people to vote on what could be construed as an ameni y within the project. 3 Special Council Agenda - 3/2/98 . The City Administrator agrees that th aquatic center is a very important aspect of the project. Due to the fact t at water is so vital to development of an active community center and becau e it adds a small percent to the cost of the project after taking operation cost expenses into account, it would seem from a business and community devel pment sense that the best option is to build the entire project under the leas revenue option. However, Council may wish to conduct a vote on a portio of the project for legitimate public policy reasons. The timing of this project relative to e onomic conditions and community needs is excellent. The project design nd financing options stem from years of input starting with the early stages of development of the MCP plan. This is a huge opportunity to realize the vi ion described in our downtown redevelopment plan for the city. D. SUPPORTING DATA: . Information from Steve Andrews and rad Barger; News article; Finance worksheet; Summary of comments fro various individuals and organizations on this project; Comme ts taken from surveys, comment cards, letters to the editor, etc. . 4 Community Centers vs. Health Clubs .'Tom Redman, Director, and Wendy Beltrand, Arts & Special Events Coordinator, Chaska Parks, Recreation & Arts Department In Chaska we are very proud of our community center and many consider it the cornerstone of our community. The Chaska Community Center is a gathering place for families, young and old alike as well as a place to engage bodies and minds in healthy activities. Staff has the responsibility of providing a little something for everybody. This is a significant task when considering that a community is made up of people who vary in age, cultural background, economic resources and interests. . . aspect of the center and put on family, taken off exclusiveness and put on inclusiveness. How does a community center go about the task of being something to everyone? The answer is through programming. Programs are what draws families to a community center. In Chaska a focus is put on offering a variety of programs including athletics, arts, and inter-generational programs. Athletics are generally considered an essential part of most park and recreation departments. The Chaska Community Center offers a multitude of structured competitive sports and hosts a number of state and regional athletic tourna- ments in the gym and ice arena. Open and more informal times that cater to the more casual sports enthusiast are available and emphasized as an impor- tant part of serving the community. The Chaska Community Center also provides a wide range of programs in the arts. These programs cater to both the accomplished artist and the beginner. A small sample of arts programs offered include dance, pottery, painting, litera- ture, drama, and music lessons. Special times are assigned for preschool age children and their parents to make art projects. A community fam i1y theater program provides QPportunities for all ages of actors. Well over 100 area women belong to the Chaska Area Quilt Club and utilize the Chaska Community Center each month. These are the types of activities that make a building truly a community center. By offering all kinds of different programs in one building, a family can come to the community center together as a unit, each individual can participate in activities that interest them yet still be together as a family. Finally, a community center is different because of its inclusion. A person need not be a member, nor pay a daily fee to participate in many activities offered at the Chaska Community Center. The main level of the building and the walking track are available at no charge to the public. A person need not be a member or even a resident ofChaska to sign up for any of the programs offered at the center. Low income families can participate in a scholarship program that gives them reduced rates on membership as well as programs. The Chaska Community Hockey Association operates the arena concession stand as a fund raiser for their kids. Each holiday Community Cen ers continued from page The question is, ca provide something for the main goal ofa com unity center versus a health club. A health club's focus is 9!!...athletics, exercise and body buildinrLfertainly no ne could argue with the fact that healtl clubs are also places to socialize, rela with friends, and contribute to wellness. orne area clubs are even catering more 0 families with child care services and rograms, but the similarities to a cOllll.Vu ity center generally end therW Several years ago, t e Chaska City Council set out to mak Chaska the best small town in Minneso a. They decided, and the citizens agreed the reason people liked living in t e community so much was the fact that haska has a real sense of community. T ey looked for-- ways to build on that s nse of commu- nity. One of those way was to create a place for eo Ie to con I' ~ to ether with their fam lies and frimds.. A perfect solution see ed to be building a community center, a fi '{lily gathering place. Prior to building he Chaska Community Center, at sk force was formed, made up of res dents with a diverse range of intere ts. The task force spent weeks meeting with various community members W 0 were all asked what features their ideal facility would possess. Through neg tiation and compromise Chaska en ed up with a 100,000 square foot facility housing an ice arena, gymnasium, 001, racquetball courts, dance studio, tr ck, exercise and weight lifting areas, co munity room, craft rooms, lounge an child care. After the first five years of 0 eration, the Chaska Community Ce tel' underwent a 20,000 square foot add tion and renova- tion adding a communi y theater with support spaces, an art allery, a cafe, virtual reality golf, and an indoor playground. The comp etion of the addition/renovation w s not an attempt at one-upmanship; rather it attempted to make the Chaska Com unity Center a more well rounded faci ity by providing more extensive arts pro ramm ing and components for young I' visitors not previously available in he original design of the building. The cafe is important because it c eates a better spot for family gathering as well as catering services for large grou s. All the while the emphasis is taken ffthe health club z. -- I n . ~ an UI F.. in B( co fre B'. TL sc. re! Dt Iik no ph 8:1 op stt inl ev yo se. sh. th. ex' ge cei sh; cel dil of sei ph up Iti all' fc( co: ch: op co. co: an. kn th. bu mr in / . I J ltor""'r';j , ...Il r 1.."'1 Sp ak Your Mind ".':{" ~ ,-. r-; t\, t~) if@, ,,~~~~ " ~u~7€t ",\@ [2;gII':t@? " ~;j~?'lr@liil .....''''"'''''" ~ ~~'~JH~ The topic: The propo ed Monticello Community Center n ~~ti:lft.~,\l~R&:J " 11"'~~ Do you favor building a onticello Community Center? What feature: you like to see in a com unity center? How should it be funded? How important is it to you th t there be public vote on the matter? Where c think the best location w uld be for a community center? What questi you have about the prop sed Monticello plan? r:vil~b'='i )-;:-,llt=V; 7' ~ t. ._i t3 I f1 ,. \0~l:tJ.~' t!! r..~ ." '~F,ll1n1!l ~:i'~1i~ffil.~ .. (';r li~~ !i!d9'ii1 " H @i~ '~'@liil~ ;~"~ " '\'!@J~~ ~~ -:::J ''1';1,:;;:) ~ - =ti tl" 1:3 I For further informat on, refer to and click on Commu . of Monticello's,' Share your opinion Oi line by filling out the form below an( sure to click the sub it button. Check back to' see what othl saying. . Building a Communi y Center in Monticello is not some maverick, far out i< More and more progessive communities our size are realizing this is an investment they want to make in the future of their community and its citizens. Those of us who live outside the city limits realize we cannot simply say to 1 residents--do it--pay or it---and we would like to use it! Isn't there some reasonable way to spread the co t across the broader community that calls Monticello home? I had thought the Sal s Tax was a good idea that would spread the cost eveI1 across all of us who shop re ularly in the retail stores here. The retailing communit however apparently i intimidated by this 1 % additional tax and is rejecting 1 concept. 1,'2.-- . If there is some way t spread the cost across the schood district, that in my judgment represents t e fairest way for all of us to pay. I hope the leadership an find some creative/innovative ways to proceed wit: the program while not pu ting an unreasonable burden on the city residents. Bob Esse As both a tax payer a d a parent I am in favor of the Community Center. I fc that the increase in m property taxes is a great investment in the communit~ and the return to Moo, icello families far outweighs the financial impact on u taxes. When you 100 at the make up of our community, the large school ag population, the need or increased space for the Senior Center, the problem~ with the lack of spac at City Hall this seems to be a responsible solution. - The concerns of NSP and their input into this question makes me uneasy. Whether tax reductio occurs for our large neighbor is questionable, and at what level is unclear. It seems that when we as a community put the potenti< interests of a very pr itable Utility Corporation above the needs of our children and Senior itizens something is not right. If the Community Centc is postive for the co munity as a whole, we should go forward. On 1/24/98 at 8:41 PM, . I like the idea of a co munity center. However, I am concerned about the cc and its impact on tax ayers in Monticello. The taxes in this community havl be growing faster tha the population. The community are paying for a lot 0 new infra-structure t for this growth. My concern on growth of taxes inclu the effect of NSP get ing the repeal of the personnel property tax on their power plant on this c mmunities taxes. The repeal is not a done deal but wit utility de-regulation ming in the future I believe that the tax will be repeal( What is this going to 0 to taxes in Monticello if we go ahead with spending money on a new com unity center, a new high school, and all the other infra-structure projec s on the drawing boards. Are we going to end up like Cambridge and have uge tax increases to pay for all of these projects? You say the growth will h Ip pay for these improvements. But if taxes skyrocket will that growth confnue? I think lots of people will choose to build new homes and businesse in communities down the road that don't have high taxes. On 1/24/98 at 2:31 PM, I think that the mem ers of the community should have a vote on this projec even if the vote carri s no weight. I feel just because the National Guard is giving the communit $1.5 million dollars that it doesn't need to spend five six times that much t build an armory. The guard has built armories in othe communites and has upply a greater share of the cost for the armory. Why Monticello willing to accept less than other communities have? On 1/23/98 at 4:14 PM, Lao a McCarten wrote: . The idea of a new co munity center is appealing. However, it is important 1 remember that the cit zens and businesses of Monticello will be ultimately responsible for. the c st of this project. Z--3 . Under the proposed ond payment plan, Monticello's residents and busines would have to come p with an additional $600,000 a year. Over 70 percen1 this cost, or about $ 00,000, would be borne by NSP alone. It is important to rem mber that big changes are coming in the electric utility industry and continu d operation of power plants will depend on cost-effectiveness, F r this reason, NSP is seeking changes in Minnesota's property tax law so t at NSP is taxed like any other business in the state. N has always advocate for replacement revenues for personal property tax however there are ot ers who would like to see those revenues eliminated completely. We believe in the ne d for strong, vital communities, and we're proud of ou contributions to Mon icello. We understand that the city council is working' the long-term strengt of this community. But let's look carefully at the risk this commitment wh n a significant portion of the project's financial foundation -- NSP's roperty taxes -- could change in the near future. It's a big enough risk hat the citizens of Monticello should decide in a publi vote if a community enter is a wise investment. . As I have followed t e Community Center story, it seems to me that most people in favor f it remark on how we need to give our teens/ young people a place to go. What happened to parents being responsible for their children's entert inment and activities? Why is it now the responsibil'ty of all taxpayers? On 1121198 at 2:45 PM, I attended last nights nformational meeting and just now returned from tour the proposed constru tion site. I think the commitee hould proceed to the next step of final design. With then need for sp ce at city hall and the senior center, along with the 1.5 million t' e Nationial Guard has offered, now is the time to act ( this proj ect. Of the finance option presented, I belive the lease revenue bond with no sa: tax would be the easi st and best. On 1120/98 at 8:54 PM, Daw Witschen wrote: . There are several reas ns why a community center is important in Monticello. The reas ns start with more room for the senior citizens, which we can't deny ill be a growing concern in this growing community. Next, ou children need more alternatives to keep them off the streets and to revent the problems other areas are having. like Elk River for exa pie. Also, it is important to keep tax dollars in Monticello. Yes, I m sure there will be an increase in taxes. I would think that the ommunity center would be an attraction to come to Monticello, nd spend money here. Isn't that what we want? z...tJ . On 1/20/98 at 11 :45 AM, wrote: I live out in the the jellberg Park so I dont know if my vote counts on this subject. However I d all my business in town and plan to for years to com think the community center would be a great assest. I have been to the one i Becker and think it i wonderful. I have not seen all the drawing to see what planned for the Mon icello one. I am currently looking for a center where an spend time with my hildren and family. I know I would rather spend the funds supporting the comminty as a whole. I feel Monticello nee s a community center. The National Guard has shown vested interest in hel ing us out. Our city hall is cramped and it's likely the seniors will out gro their center within the next 5 years. The aquatic/work{ center will be a greataltemative and more accessible than what the high sch< can now offer. I also feel we should consider the hockey rink if the hockey association is willin to help with that expense. It's ridiculous what a youn~ hockey player/famil has to go through to get a practice in. The National Gu has given us an oppo unity to be gifted with a creative solution to some of these problems throu h shared space. I would rather build the city hall and senior center NOW t an lose the opportunity the National Guard is giving u wait a year or 2, buil separate buildings and pay more. I look forward to hearing more on this at Tues. meeting. . On 1/18/98 at 10:25 PM, The Community Cen er Task Force will be presenting the latest information Community Center t atures, design, cost, funding options, tax impact, vote options, etc at a com unity meeting at 7:00 PM on Tuesday, January 20, 1! at Little Mountain EI mentary School. Please attend this meeting for obtainiJ full information on hich to base your views. Information on the Communi Center coming soon the City web page. On behalf of the Community Ceo Task Force, thank y for your comments. On 1/17/98 at 10:16 PM, Tr wrote: I think the Civic Cen er is a good idea, and should be a public vote. Although if they'er g ing to build one they should build a ice arena too. The reason is becaus that is what will get and make most money, which in fact will pay the C vic Center off faster. . Tell us what you think: Your Name: Required z. ... ~ . . . Letters to the editor from the Monticell Times (against building or portions of proposal). Robert Harwarth 1210 W River St Monticello MN 55326 Gilbert Stickfort 1213 Sandy Lane Monticello MN 55362 Dr. Douglas Franks 212 Cedar St Monticello MN 55362 Kevin Tracy 2603 Meadow Lane Monticello MN 55362 Craig and Sue Weber 1440 Oak Ridge Circle Monticello MN 55362 NSP Laura McCarten 414 Nicollet Mall Mpls MN 55402 z~~ . To the Editor: As one of severn I persons who wnlked theJ)etilion (for n referendum vote) IIroun Monticello City for si~lla. tures, I wish to tlmnk nil of the 653 sign- ers so far. Time hilS been short and we are sorry we were not able to get to . everyone that may have liked to have been included. There is still an opportu-' nity to have a voice in what is happening in our city. :'r':" , Tuesday, Jan. 20, 7 p.m., at Little Mountain Elementary, a presentation of the pro\>osed'''Civic, Centcr'f'O)mmunity Center' ('Training and Community Cen- ter" will take place. Your support and opinions will be of great importance. to us and will be greatly ap,preciated as well. We need a "public' vote of this issue",lk -Robert A., Harwarth, 1210 West River St., Monticello . ..... . To the Editor: As a taxpayer living in the City of Monticello, I for one want to know how our city council and administration will be able to maintain reasonable control on our taxes. With the school facilities expansion including building a new high school (total of $35 mil. ion-plus), a new waste water treat. . ment facility-still under construci- ton (starting at $9 million, already up to $14 million plus) and now, added onto this-plans for a $6 mil- . lion plus civic center in the works-alii can see is $, $, $. A severe tax increase is inevitable, brought on by these unbelievably costly projects! How are we goin~ to keep people in Monticello WIth our taxes continu- ally increasing? In driving around the city, I'm already seeing many houses for sale. Why should we have to spend so much of Monticello's tax money on a new civic ccnter when we already arc paying into the $1.5 million (slated to be paid by the National Guard) as federal taxpay- , ers? \ \ Also, aft r the $1.5 milion, it's my unclerst nding that the Nat. ional Guard ill not be required to pay further or upkeep or mainte- nallce wllicl the Monticello tax- f)llyers will eed to endure for a ifetime., .. Our city administrators are being too ea er to "keep up" with the surroun ing cities' civic cen- ters, when we' have expansion ' room for the city hall at its present location. City coun il members, please, at least allo our city residents a referendum ote in order to find out what is f It by the majority of the people b fore many more of them get ti ed of all the tax increases an move out of this town. -Robert . Harwarth, 1210 West River S " Monticello. 2,,1 . . . -taL To the Editor: I feel that the proposed new civic center of this magnilude is not needed in the city of Monticello. It is far too costly, with already a new school and water treatment 1)lant in the construction process. If a new city lall is need- ed, build something simple in architecture and room for expansion. There would also be rooln for an addition just west of the prese,it cily hall. I have talked to a lot of people 011 this pro- posal and have not found anyone that is for this center. If the mayor and city council arc set on this, then please bring this up to a vote of the people. Don't spend this much mOlley without first asking the gelleral public. Remember it shoul be a government of the peopie, by the peopl and for the people. Let s not be another Cambridge. -G Ibert Stickfort, 1213 Sandy Lane, Monti ello. \ z ,~ . ~.~~tter~ .. .1 ....."'''"''....e, ~,.,:, '" .... _~^..., lures lu bring Ihis /lfojecllU a Jefer To the Editor: endum'J)lease Ie I me how man On Monday, Jan. 12, I presenled we nee? The mayur responded a pelilion 10 Ihe Mayor and cily Ihal he didn'l have 10 lellme any coundl. Thai pelilion had 653 sig- number, and Ihal any pelilion ask. nalures of cilrzens of Ihe Cily of ing for a referendum dldn'l have 10 Monlicello. The pelilion requesled be acled on anyway. Ihal the voters of Monticello be Aren't these officials cleeled 10 allowed to vote on the cily represent us, and if so when a hall---<:oITullunity cenler project. group of concerned citizens ask for When I presented tlus pelition, I a referendulll and arc refused Ihat asked if these aren'l enough signa- LETTERS-ContlIlIlPrl on age 3 . 'I . If P Isn reprc..'lenlallon. 50, 60, 70, or 80 percenl of Ihe cilizens Want Ihis referen. dum, it should mailer. I Ihink we arc lalking aboul laxalion withoul representalion. These are our elecled officials acling with indirference 10 Ihe public's concern aboul a $10.2 million project. The pelition is available 10 si~n by residenls of Ihe Cily of Monlicello IIJ my office at Monlicello Chiropractic, 212 Cedar Street. -Dr. Douglas A. Franks, 212 Cedar Sr., Monlicello. . . \ To the Editor: As a cilizen and business owner in Monlicello whal I would like 10 see from the cily council is a con- sislent plan which is Ihen fol7 lowed. II was only five or six years: ago that property on the block' adjacent to cily hall was pur-' chased. At Ihal time it was' removed from the -real eslale lax' rolls with the purpose to expand: city hall. I am not opposed 10: expanding city hall; however, the' plan proposed would place an: additional $4-5 million deb I on the: cily of Monticello tax payers' alone. Now I am asking you to' analyze the figures yourself. But it looks to me that an additional tax' burden on each home or business: owner would be something like: $2000 spread over several years.' Remember children don't directly: pay taxes so they can't be included: 111 the mathematical process. We are already in the process or' paying for the enlarged wastewater _ treatment plant. Once again that is: just for the Monticello city tax pay- , ers. There is a new high school. being built which will affecl the' amounl of real estate laxes in: 1998. I am concerned that at this poinl . too many projects causing high real estate laxes will discoura~e business and residential growth In our communily. We must plan carefully so we do not impair the: future of our community based on our high real eslate tax. -Douglas A Franks, D.C., Box' 1310, Monlicello \\ 4. .. 1-.,Pf . To the Editor: It iRn'1 right. It may be legal, bul il isn'l right. II isn'l righllhal a select few council memberR and cily slaff can continue to ignore our requeSI for a vole on Ihe proposed civic cenler. When we asked once again for a vole allhe informational meeling, we were quickly told Ihal whal Ihey are doing is perfectly legal-bul docs thaI make il righl? There is something very wrong here when a few elilists with Iheir own agenda are able to thwart the will of the people. As Americans, we know this is innately wrong. Thomas Jefferson beRt stated it in our Declaration of Independence with the following pas- sage: "We hold Ihese Irulhs to be self-evidenl, Ihal all men are crealed equal, that they are endowed by their Creator wilh certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,..Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to \" so,.;ure "theRc rights, Governments arc instiluted among I Men, deriving their just po~!=rs.r~om the consent of the governed, that whenever /lny Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Hight of the feopleto alter or to abolish it, and to institute' new Government, laying its foundation 011 such principles and organizing its powers ill such a form, as to them shall seem mosl likely to affect Iheir Safely and Happiness." I have 10 wOllder what our nexl move should be. -Kevin Tracy, 2603 Meadow Oak Ln., Monlicello. . .'.... -..1 To the Editor: All we wanted was 10 be heard. All we wanled was""a voice ill whether or not to spend $10.5 million of "our" hard earned lax dolJ.ars. What we got at Mon- day\nighl's council meeling was a cold sh~)Ulder Cro~ithc mayor-our represen- lallve. : .d~ , Thank YQ~t Councilman Herbst 1 Finally sOfJ]C9l;1e listened. Clint Ilerbst ." was the only council member to cut through the politics and speak Cor the people. To our weary ears, it Was like a voice from the wilderness. Mr. Ilerbst recognized that we cared enough to gel 653 names on a petition. lie was con- cerned at how a $1.5 million grant fcom the National Guard had ballooned into $ 10.5 million spending spree by our public officials. Thank you, Representative Mark Olsonl He too cared enough to listen. He staled plainly that he was there 10 repre- sent his constituents-thaI's usl lie ques- tioned the costs and the ever-changing ~ays we were supposed to pay' Cor-them . w;:ilh?u,t vOling ~s to w!lelher we wanted~., the CIVIC center mthe fust place. .. All we wanl is the.right to vote on this project-plain and simple. -Kevin It Tracy, 2603 Meadow Oak Lane, Monticello \ - - -. ...... viding the basic services we can't provide as individuals. Our streets are plowed, our refuse is picked up, our fires are put out, our drinking water is safe and our county police provide us protection-we have the things we need. -Kevin Tracy, 2603 Meadow Oak Lane, Monticello. - . - III -- To the Edito : Every wee when I read the Monticello TImes, I shake my hemJ in disbelief at tI e incredible amount of spending hat the city, the schools alll.lthe hospital arc propos- ing. In a time hen even our feder- al government acknowledges it's time to cut bac , our local govern- ing bodies arc doing everything they can to take a bigger bite out of our paychecks. know I will be per- ceived as selfi h when I say this but: It's not you money! In the privat sector, we have to sit down periodi ally and determine the things we ne d versus the things we want. Eve y dollar we are forced to spend'u taxes is one less dollar we can a ply towards food, home improver ents, college for our children and ~etirement. , We don't nee a civiC center; we need lower tax ; We don't need a bigger city hall r more staffing; we need smaller go ermnent. We don 'I need to tear do n perfectly good homes removing them from the tax roles to expand p<hks and build public facilitie; we need less spending. The city does a great job at pro- Z.,,/O To the Editor: We like the idea of a community. center. We would like to see it built .hases as Ihe funding is available Ihe community grows. We are concerned about Ihe cost and i1s impact on lax payers in Monticello. We do nol wanl to pay a large mem- bership fee in addilion to laxes. The laxes in this communily havc bccn growing faster than Ihe populalion. The community is paying laxcs for many new infrastructure projects because of Ihc population growth. If NSP gels the power planl lax repealed, il will affect our laxes. The repeal has nol been passed inlo ; Il\w, .- bUl. .Wilh Ulility .IlCfegul,a.til.lJ1 ; comlllg III the fUlure, we believe . lhallhis lax will be repcaled. ! What is going to happen to taxes in Monticello if we go ahead with the communily ccnter? Monticello will also be paying for a new high school, a new sewage treatment plant and many other infrastructun: projecls. Wc don't want Monticello 10 end up like Cambridge and have hugc tax increases 10 pay for all 01 these projects, the operalion 01 these projects and Ihe operation of LETTERS-continued on page ~ . . LE ER continued lrom page 2 ~jh ~~j~~:iel~~l~ Pcci~~I~~~~~e ro~lh of the communily laxes skyrockel, lhal growlh ~ Improvcfl!ents. BUI if will choose 10 build new home y ~o~ C~lIIll11ue.. People communities where taxes arc I an USlllesses 1/1 olher M wer. . en!bers of lhe communil should h . lhls proJecl, even if lhe vole i' . ave a vole on eily council should raise 1111' s I I re~lulred !Jy law. The b ' . s uesllOn Ie. a vol J I ecause Ihe NallOna/ Guard' .. . C. ~IS $.1 .5. million, Monlicello does:llg~vIIIJ Ihe cornn,lUnlly SIX tllnes Ihal amounlto build ee 10. spend five or Guard has b '11 a cOrnmulllly cenler, The UI armory/cornn unit 'I . communilies and supplied a gre t YI cen er In olher those faei/ilies. In Rosemount ih:r s lare 0 th.e cosl of lh~ ~unding for a $12 mil/ior, f~c'lil GWrd f?rovldc~ ,half wllhng 10 accepl less funding f IJ'lhe ~ I~ Monllcello lhan olh.el communilies have re eived? allOnal Guard -c;ralg and Sue Weber, 14 0 Oak Rid . MontIcello. (vIa e.mall) ge Cucle, \ To the Editor: As a membet 0 the Monticello community, NSP is concerned about th proposal to build a community cen- ter. The idea of a n w center is appealing for many rea- sons. However, be ause the citizens and businesses of Monticello will be directly responsible for the cost of this project, we stro gly urge the city council to take this proposal to a publi vote. The cost of a n w community center is significant. Under the propose bond payment plan, Monticello's residents and busin sses would have to come up with an additional $6q<l,O a year. NSP's property tax would increase '$400,000 year. In addition, It is conceivable the center might ncur operating losses that would increase the financi I burden. NSP, like every ther company that wants to stay in business, is maklll great efforts to reduce operating costs. Big change are coming in the electric utility industry-the power supply part of our business will be open to competiti n. Continued operation of power plants will depend n cost-effectiveness. For this reason, we are seeking cha ges in Minnesota's property tax law so that NSP is taxe like any other business in the state. While NSP has al ays advocated replacing personal property tax you c rrently get, there are proposals out there that would eli inate it without replacement. We believe in th need for strong, vital communities, and we're proud of our contributions to Monticello. We understand that the city council is working for the long- term strength of th community. But let's look careful. Iy at the risk of this commitment when a significant por. tlOn of the project' financial foundation-NSP's proper- ty taxes-<:ould ch nge in .the near future. It's a big enough risk that th citizens of Monticello should decide in a public vote if community center is ~ wise invest- ment. .... . . -Laura McCart n, Director of Community Services, NSP, 414 Nicollet all, .Minneapolis, Minn..:SS492. ! Z ,I' . . . Letters to the editor from the Monticel Times (in favor of building). Harvey Kendall 108 Hillcrest Rd Monticello MN 55362 Virgil Hawkins 10 11 West Broadway Monticello MN 55362 Stan Dick 207 Kevin Longley Dr Monticello MN 55362 Jeffrey Burns 1517 W River ST Monticello MN 55362 Robert Esse 3502 134th St Monticello MN 55362 Donald Blower 7524 Aladdin Ave NW Buffalo MN 55313 Ben Smith 806 W River ST Monticello MN 55362 Eric and Katie Bondhus 114 Marvin Bondhus Monticello MN 55362 Robbie Smith 1101 Club View Drive Monticello MN 55362 Tracey Leckelt 15951 Evans Ave NW Clearwater, MN 55320 ~ ", z...- . . . T Oll~: ,;,m~~~i'iS \eller ill regards 10 . \ellersub- -L- .' I I t:. ti ~ I u I.t ,.~,. I mitted by Gilbert Stickfort (Nov. 13, 1997, Times). 'Many of you think they are,a\wals',;,;.tb The civic center would be a ~ood investment for continue from page 3 in your way. Like at the bank; or mot.tt our community. And I think If all these smaller about. No only will it be benefi- parking lots, I'm sure you hav~'.'~'rr towns neaT us can afford arenas, then we can too. cial to th civic center, but also seen ramps up. Wouldn't it be easl- '. S' For example, Richmond (which has a population local hot Is and restaurants will er for the businesses in Monticello u of only around 1,000 pcople) put in a ncw civic make m ney for people need to set up a place for them to go v arena less than a year ago amI they're not in debt. places to tay and eat. For those of instead of calling the cops to get a Nor arc they another Cambridge. And with you who have never been to a them off your property? This Monticello gro,wing, it will have plenty more hockey t urn ament, this .is how would be another, thing for all the money than theH town had. they war : they charge like $15 people in Monllcello that have' , A civic center (used for numerous things) will per fami! for a two- or three-day kids of an)' age not just teenagers. cost slightly more than a civic arena (that is main- watching of the tournament. ~lus Wouldn't It be nice ifJOU knew for Iy used just for hockey). A civic center will be used some to ns charge for parklO~. a fact that your chi! is safe and for much more than hockey; things such as 4-H Most tou naments have at least SIX knowing where they are? Even for shows, ice skating shows, concerts, skateboarders to 12 tea s consisting of approxi- people with small kids-th~se kids and rollerbladers would use the civic center' mately 15 players. In a two-day are soon to grow up and Will want because of the skate \lark that was proposed also. period f r the average IS-man to hang out with friends. Where Monticello can also lOld numerous conventions team, th civic center would make are they going to go? Face it, in for adults (RV shows, snowmobile shows, etc.). $2,250 f there is 10 teams on Monticello we don't have much of Also {leople could possibly rent out rooms to throw average not including conces- a place for teens to go ex.cept for wcddlllg receptions, anniversary parties, etc. If it's sions. otels would make lots of the movies or the roller r.lI1k; yo~ money the people in Monticello are worried about, money for people from ot~er can get kicked out for 100tenng If you'll see you'lImake money in return also. towns w uld have to stay.the mght you dpn't leave as soon as the Main idea is for hockey tournaments-these because of an early mornmg ~ame movie is over. make more money than you probably ever thought the next day. Some toWns ave So I think that if this comes to hockey tournaments every ~ee~- the ballot, I recommend you vote I LETTERS-continued on page 15 end, ju t different towns are mVlt. and make this proposal pass. You ed.,. don't want Monticello to turn into I The ther idea~ 1 had, like the a gan~ war, and if kids don't have : ice ska ng showS an~ concerts, are 'anythlOg better to do, what d? you obviou ones f~r whlc~ you ch~rge expect? The future' of Montlcell~ : people to get m on ticket pnces lies in our hands; come on, what s I and of course charge pe~ple for it going to be? conces ibns. Has anyone 111' town A future adult in Monticello. notic d that RV sales lot ne~ -Tracey Leckelt, 15951 Evans Hasty They could have an RAN W Clearwater Minn. show t ere and make it a weekend 5;;io . ., ' thing 0 people will need to sleep . in mot Is. More money!,' . . ", . As I mentioned before; they,'J' also roposed a skate parkJor " inside the civic center ,and I knoW ' the ci ic center would make ~Ienty " mone off 'of that because a lot of . teen gers wQuld go ;~,~,er,e. 1;'be., . skate park ,'also' is ,~~t a. waste o~: i.ifion y' becauSe. It gives the t, ttena ers in Monticello a place to go. I they put like an a~cade in there too, It would be a pnme spot for ids on Friday nights, instead of 0 street corners. Also I am sure you 11 have seen th~ skate~oard- ers nd rollerbladers m Monticello, \ . . .____1 t,13 . To the Editor: I am writing this leller in support of the proposed community center that is now under consideration for the citizens of Monticello and surrounding area. What a wonderful opportunity this is to take advantage of a $1.5 million contribution from the National Guard for a shared-use facility thaI' we all can benefit from. Who would have thought that all the hard work and effort of the many people that have worked together through the Monticello Community Partners would have the chance to become a reality so soon? Many in the Monticello area, myself included, trust that the city council will do all that they can to make this a reality for the benefit of all the families in our community. As for the design alternatives that my family would like to see, we offer the following observations. We recently had the opportunity to visit the newly con- structed Maple Grove Community Center for a birthday party. What an impressive facility! However, when we went swimming, the inevitable comparisons to the Becker Community Ccnter began. We found that the Maple Grove aquatics park did not corne close to the . . atmosphcre at',Decker; there was no whirlpotl n the locker-rooms were located very far frolll the . and the overall feeling was, given the choice,we WOll rather be at the Decker Community Center for swim-.. ming. We do visit the Becker facility several times each winter. This is not meant to take anything away from the Maple Grove community center, which also has a gym, a number of meeting room,s, a large childrcn's play area, an indoor ice sheet and a teen center, among other things. A resident of Maple Grove informed me that the Maple Grove community center was voted down by ,local voters in' a referendum, but was built any way at the direction of their city council. He said that. he had voted against building the facility, but was glad that it was built after seeing it and using it. In our opinion, we would like to see alternatives made a part of the Monticello Community Center that not onlr will bcnefit everyone here, like the library, which IS a good ic.f.!la, but alternatives that are also unique to the area. fIlere are presently almost 700 stu- dents in the area active in the Monticello Soccer Club each spring and fall. There are also a growin~ number of students, bars and girls, each year involved III ice hock- ey as part 0 the Monticello Youth Hockey Association. We would support, very strongly, an alternative for an indoor sheet of ice to be constructed as part of the, Monticelfo.Community\Center. The City of Plymouth al~o has i'&ently constructed a facility With an ice sheet that is very successful. Indoor soccer should be provid- ed for, by making the proposed gymnasium large enough to accommodate conversion to an indoor soccer acility. \What a unique combination and benefit this ould bring to the City of Monticello and our families, nd what an immense demand there is, for these types of acilities there isl We trust that this information will be helpful to the ity council members in making this important decision or present and future Monticello families. We trust that he council will make their decision (to build this facili- t ) based on what is in the best interest of our growing ommunity, a community that has approached growth in progressive and organized manner through the coun- ii's direction. With $1.5 million available from the ational Guard to contribute to this shared facility, we s ould not be asking ourselves if we should build the (; cility. Instead, we should be asking how we can best b i1d the facility to meet the present and future needs of o r community. , We appreciate the vision and hard work that the Mep a d our council members have invested in and endorsed, a Id support the construction of the proposed communi- t center that follows ihat vision. -Virgil Hawkins, 1101 West Broadway, Monticello. a a.mall) 2,.Iet o the Editor: It was a privilege to allend the community center information meeting Jan. 20. Many opinions and con- cerns were expressed and, I believe, Jllany qucstions answered. Monticello's growth is inevitable. Our ability to har- ness these changes and provide a focus for our commu- nity (both literally and figuratively), will help define MontIcello for the next generation. A community center will serve as a catalyst for downtown revitalization as well as fulfilling pressing ,needs for city government :; offices and senior citizens. Combine these activities .' with a family aquatic center, meeting space and fitness facilities and you can achieve a critical now of people that will provide vitality and pride in our community! Although the cost is significant, it is my opinion that these benefits transcend the "bollom line." Several finance options exist. Let's work togethcr so that a rea-, sonable decision can be made in order to minimize prop- erty taxes and risk. ", \i ~ -Stan Dick, 207 Kevin Longley Dr., Monticello. ,,1 . To the Editor: As a parent, Monticello resident, business owner and' co-chair of Monticello Community Partners' (MCP) Economic Restructuring Commillee, I am strongly in favor of the proposed civic center. . ' The new civic center addresses many of Monticello's challenges simultaneously. It provides constructive, activities for Monticello's youth outside of school. It makes productive land in the central part of the city that J otherwIse would sit empty for years. Our seniors will.! soon need to expand their facility, and the proposed cen- I ter would integrate senior activity with the rest of civic center functions.' Retail businesses throughOut. Monticello will benefit from the increased "draw" from the surrounding ,area. MCP:s ,and the ,city,'s. plan:.of. a. "bridge" from the Mall to the Mississippi would take a giant step closer to reality. Minnesota National Guard's offer of $1.5 million for , its part in the project. is fantastic, a.nd should ~~t. be"il passed up. But th~ Nal1o~al Guard will offer.a~~ltlonal, resources to our cIty-retail dollars from the vlsltJllg sol-; , diers for one. Much more significantly,' ,howeveril,thel.~ National Guard offers community input via' youth' pro~4!" ',' grams and other activities. To paraphrase 'General:! Andreolli of the National Guard, the Guard doesn't sim-' ply buy a building, it rather buys into the community Of: mto which the building is placed. Through its "Gu~rd,: our Youth" program, the National Guard,. offers at ex~s!- , ing centers both classroom space and tra!ners, for actlvl-, ties as diverse as basketball and computmg. Ille Guard - likes Monticello and wants to be here. We should wel-. come them! , The complex'will be expensiv~, but atth? salT!e. time will make Monticello more coheSIve, more Identlfl8ble, and more allractive to prospective businesses and fami- lies. Taxes will be higher (only slightly so for home owners under certain taxing options), but this increase will be more than dffset by the increased resourccs that the civic center will generate. -Jeffrey Burns, 1517 W. River St., Monticello. . To the Editor: , It's time for our leaders to stand up 'and make some tough decisions. We have studied and studied; we have talked and talked and talked; but now is the time to take action. . What have we done lately to improve the quality of I1fe for the people of MOIilicello? The walking path. Granted we have good streets, sewer and water services, and ~arbage pick-up. Ilere we have an opportunity to proVIde a state-of-the-~lft community center that will centralize many community services, add an aquatic center, and more. We're being handed $1.5 million on an olive drab plaUer-are we going to use it or lose it? Is tliere a cost for this? Absolutely. There's always a coslto make any improvement. Butlhere's also a cost to not doing it. Prices will increase as well as the needs. The longer we put this off, Ihe higher the cost. And if we don'l act now, we may lose the funding from the National Guard. Do w.e really ~eed this" Maybe not-we have gotten al~)IIg w!th~ut It III the past and we can probably live wlthoullt fight now. But why not have better facilities? Why shouldn't we have a better senior centcr, or city offices, community meeting facililies, an aquatic center wher~ familie~ can play together, a wheel park where Ihe kIds can roller blade and skateboard without the fear of being struck by a car or of striking a pedestrian? \ There will always be questions about the right loca. lion, is it too big or too small? Is the cost too great? Is !his the right lime to be making such a decision? But if We wait for all things to be perfect, nothing would ever get done. We could procrastinate unlilthe end of time. I think Ws time for ?ur leaders to step forward and make the tough deCIsions to keep Monticello a leader...a place that industries, businesses and families want to come to, to grow. Bitc the bullet and make it happen now! -Harvey Kendall, 108 lIillcrcst Rd., Monticello. z',~ , . To the Editor: It appears to this observer that the Monticello community is at a crossroads rela- tive to what their future will be. The Com- . munityffraininglAquatic Center/City Hall op- portunity will be debated and a "go", "no go" decision made during February. There has been much more emotion and rhetoric than logic and broad thinking in the public discussions among the elected and appointed leadw:hip who will be making the decision. Many of these individuals appear to have a personal agenda relative to who they are employed with or their specific family require- ments and ,needs. This leadership group must rise above their personal feelings and look more openly at the future of the community; its citizens and the business and commercial enti- ties. The easy decision is obviously to do noth- ing, to wait-whatever that means, to take one step at a time, or to say I support the concept but lets do at a future time. If this decision making group thinks about . the needs of the community such as servicing the families, the space requirements and activities for the seniors, the central location and its availability at this time, a meeting and activity gathering space for youth/teens etc., how this project specifically meets the Comprehensive Plan that the city. has endorsed, and on and on, they will vote to proceed. It is the right thing to do at this specific time. I am led to believe that many of the pcople who are calling for a vote on the Community Center project and signed the petition are really in favor of doing it now-they simply thought it was their "right" to vote on such a large expendi- ture. This is often true, but decisions and commitments must sometimes be made by strong leaders who simply state this is what we must do for the future of our family life and its citizens. Even the Star tribune in a 1/29/98 edi- torial stated, "...a referendum isn't an appropriate way for elected officials to resolve public issues." The leadership group will now have their opportunity to set the future of Monticello. This has been a debatcd and difficult decision in many of the communities that have faced a similar decision. Our decision makers can state they like the way it is today and not make any commitments or investments in the future. OR, they can start show- ing that this is a progressive communi- ty that is interested in the welfare of families in the area and endorse the rec- ommendation of the Task Force that was empowered to conduct a thorough investigation. ~Robert L. Esse, 3502 134th St., Monticello. To the Editor: lv!y son ,and I attended the Jan 20 ubl!c hear.m~ on the Monticello C~m- U~ltyrrralnlng Center, and came awa ~cll~,d about the possibilities for "oj,: Hy. . Though we live outside of , ontlcel!o'"we consider ourselves ,commumty members. Residents of he area for seven years our children tte~d the Ioc~1 public schools, and our amIly patromzes local businesses .for , ost of our. s~opping and dining needs. H?w thnlllng to consider a true com- ~n!ty center-~here all. citizens both llhm and outSIde the CIty limits w'lI eet to sh~re acquaintances, servic:s, ~ d recreatIOn. As more residents move I to the nearby countryside they will s pport the local infrastruct~re throu~h t '~Ir patronage and taxes. This fadllt " III pr~ve the ma~net that unites thes~ o~tIcel1? CitIzens", and makes .0nlIcello our home" too HI d Wish t " "yye 0 .0 pa:y our part," and sup ort fi anclng optIOns that include ever/one w 0 would use this facility. Let ~s support our community repre- scnla.lIves ,as they attempt to bring M ntlcello mto the larger world of the nty-first century. -Donald R. Blowers, 7524 Aladdin Ae. N.W., Buffalo, Minn. 55313. . I":~ r Z,/~ . " . frt Letters To the Editor: I think there is'a strong majority agreement that the proposed joint National Guard facility/community center would be a very good thing for Monticello. The questions are: Why the rush to go forward with it at this time, and can we afford it? Mayor Bill Fair's report on the his- tory of this project and the timing requested by the Guard answers the time question very well, If we can identify features of the proposed building to make it small- er or less expensive, the architect can probably sugge:'\t major cost- reducing changes. For example, a large .roQm. full of expensive. exer- . €ise mac"ines would seem to'dupli. cate- what is already available at the . Life Fitness Center. Also, do we need such a large swimming facili- ty considering that we already have _OOd ones at the present high chool and the healthc1ub? Hopefully, other cost reduction ideas can be found.' . I am strongly in favor of going ahead with the proposed. project at this time. , -Den Smith, 806 W. River St., Monticello. To the Editor: In re ards to the Monticello Community Center debate, e would like to speak in support of it. As M nticello homeowners and business owners, we agree w th most people that we doli't want our taxes raised. obody does. But when we look at what the cen- ter will ffer our community, we feel that it is justified to use!a money. We also have a right to expect that the cost Will be kept reasonable. However in looking at the property tax increase, we must realize that the Commu . ity Center itself is only roughly half the cost of this buil ing: ~here were alr~ady plans' to buy and remodel .bUlldmg for a new city hall and for a senior center, W Ich would have increased taxes on their own, This ay, all residents of Monticello can enjoy our invest me: t, from infants using ECFE to kids and adults u~i.ng the fitness and sports facilities, to the many mature citizens ho take part in the Senior Center activities. Of all the taxes we pay to state and local govern- ments, th s Community Center is one time that, no mat- ter who ou are or what you do, these tax dollars will give bac to you. -E.ric tld Katie Dondhus, 114 Marvin Elwood Rd" Montlcel 0, . Z --I 'I . ~ Letters '. . To the Editor: Our community of Monticello has . ~ tremendous opportunity awaltlllg us. We have a chance to bring our community closer together with thc Monticcllo ~ommunit,Y Gentcr. First, the lIItent of this lettcr is not to discuss the is~uc of financing. I realizc the cost IS a concern to somc more than others. This lettcr is not mcant to side step that issuc. It is my hopc that this Ictter will make us take a moment to think how the bencfits of a community ccnter can far outwcigh the costs. With the exccption of our churches and civie cvents, it is the t~ought of many that this commu- lllty lacks ~ central meeting place. A commulllty centcr would be that placc for mcmbers of our commu- ,nity, with .our families, to go daily to meet wllh and make ncw friends in this community and to socialize and intcract. This centcr would be a r,nulti-purpose facility and would bring together community mem- bers of all a~es. Programming would be both mtergcncrational as well as focusing on specific age groups and intercsts. . Picture yourself on a cold January evening going to thc com- , . munitr cente and meeting friends to SWim, w,lk, shoot baskcts or play cribbag . The activitics could also include ommunity peprallics for our sport teams competing at state, theme arties and seminars on hobbies r interests. The pro- gramming possibilitics are absolutely en less. Purposefu Iy, the word commu- nity has been used throughout this letter. The community center would more than ever make our city a community. It would actual- ly be an ex ension of our own homes in th t we would go and feel at home People who visited our city wou d have to say "now' there's a com unity." . So, pleasc all I ask for is an open mind.hink of the opportu- lllty availabl . to us all With this community enter. The communi- ty center w uld riot just be for some but for I. It is not only for the future but r now. -Robbie I . Smith, 1101 Club View Drive, onticello. J I... 7, .,/ f ~Obbie & Karen Smith TEL'1-612-295-4889 /0" / /" RE: LETTER TO THE EDITOR Dee 19,97 16:03 No.002 P.01 To The Editor: Our community of Monticello has a treme us opportunity awaiting us. We have a chance to bring our community closer toget r with the Monticello Community Center. First, the intent of this letter is not to diSCUSS issue of financing. I realize that cost is a concern and to some much more than othe . This letter is not meant to side step that issue. It Is my hope that this letter will h p us take a moment to think how the benefits of a community center can far outwel h the costs. With the exception of our churches and eM events, it is the thought of many that this community lacks a central meeting place. A mmunlty center would be that place for members of our community, with our familIeS. to go dally to meet with and make new friends In this community and to SOCialize an Interact. This center would be a multipurpose facility and would bring togethe community members of I!! ages. Programing would be both Intergeneratlonal s well as focusing on specific age groups and Interests. Picture yourself on a Id January evening going to the community center and meeting friends to swl . walk, shoOt baskets or play cribbage. The actlviti8$ could also include community p rallies for our sports teams competing at state, theme parties and seminars on hob les or Interests. The programming possibilities are absolutely endl8$S. Purposefully the word community has bee. used throughout this letter. The community center would more than ever mak our city a community. It would actually be an extension of our own homes in that we would go and feel at home. People who visited our City would have to say "now there' a community". So please all I ask for is an open mind. ink of the opportunity available to us sill with this community center. The community ter would not be just for some but for All. It Is not only for the future but for wm. . . ."'~~~"r."" Sincerely, k/~ Robbie R. Smith II z'I' ~ Monticello Area Chamber of Commerce 205 Pine Street P. O. Box 192 Monticello, Minnesota 553 2 Phone (612) 295-2700 . ~~ ~ MONTICELLO City Council City of Monticello PO Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362 Febru ry 4, 1998 Dear Council Members, . Enclosed is the Chamber of Commerce po ition on the proposed Community Center and specifically the proposed local option sales ta as voted on by our membership. Our membership count is 119 businesses. ecause the voting was done quickly, we were only able to poll the businesses who could b reached by fax. This ballot was sent out to 88 Chamber businesses. Of the 88 businesses r ached, we received 47 responses back for a 53% return rate. According to Chamber bylaws, a quorum of 25% of the membership is required when voting on Chamber policy. In our ase 30 businesses would be required to reach a quorum. Below is a record of the voting: Opposed to Local Option Sales Ta. ...................45 96% In favor of Local Option Sales Tax .....................2 -- 4% If you have any questions, please call Bob Grabinski, President of the Chamber of Commerce, or Steve Johnson, Chair of the Gover ment Affairs Committee for the Chamber. cc: Representative Mark Olson Senator Mark Ourada City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller Asst. City Administrator Jeff O'Neill Chamber President Bob Grabinski Chair Govt. Affairs Steve Johnson . z .-- 2,0 .I Monticello Area Chamber of Commerce 205 Pine Street P. O. Box 192 Monticello, Minnesota 553 Phone (612) 295~2700 . I - MONTICELLO Community Center and Local Option Sales Tax Incrc se - Position The Monticello Area Chamber of Commerce would like to tha k the members of the Community Center Task Force for their dedication to this project, especially under the acceler ted time line. The Chamber of Commerce is in favor of the Community Cent r for Monticello. However, we feel that the community center should be built to meet the community's nee s in relation to what the community can afford. A staged building approach might be a way to do this. The desire to have something available for everyone, at a 10.5 i1lion price tag, may be more than the business and residential community can bear at one time. If the residents t el that a community center is necessary, then the community should be willing to pay for it without putting und e burden on any sector of the community. The current plan to finance through lease revenue bonds and local option s les tax would do just that. The Chamber of Commerce is opposed to the proposed 1% La al Option Sales Tax for these reasons: *The increased tax will make Monticello businesses Ie. s competitive, possibly driving customers away. The specter of a sales tax increase could keep p tential customers away and new business from locating in Monticello. This could retard the growth 0 the business community and may force the closing of some smaller businesses, which would directly oppose the MCP revitalization plan. *The additional administrative costs of collection and ayment of this tax would put an undue financial burden on the businesses. *The businesses may have to collect this tax long after its intended purpose is paid for. This has been the case in other communities in Minnesota. *Lacal option sales taxes do nothing to increase the fai ness of our state/local revenue system, but create a whole new level of revenue equalization issues. It ma help justify the repeal of the personal property tax paid by utilities. We recommend that a plan be developed that will address the t ue needs of Monticello based on the dollars residents are willing to invest without trying to unfairly shift the tax bur ,en. . Z ,t,I e e. e .. ~/-I . L/.. . 1~~~~h~ ~J/j / OJ (). ~\JJ f-<lu~ December 22, 1997 / To: Task force Members",AKA Team From: Barbara Esse/./..~~/' ~\ / . <1-cl- ~ Subject: Community Organizations-Current Meet ngs & Attendance LaRae Lymer, Kitty Baltos, and I conducted a tele hone survey of all the organizations listed in the 1998 Community Guide. We were able to speak to and gather information rom 26 organizations out of a possible 65 listed. A summary is below. The act al survey sheets for each of these will be given to Jeff O'neill for reference. Summary Comments: . Meeting groups range in size from 4 peopl to 60 people. . Annual and Bi-annual meetings or special vents (including dinners) range from 25 people to 315 people. Fundraisin dinners and parties may be larger. A concentration of meetings occurs in the orning beginning at 7:30 a.m. and early evening beginning at 6:30 p.m. . \Nhen meetings overlap, it only involves tw organizations surveyed. . Needs include: Dedicated closets and cabinets Tables Chairs Kitchen facilities to prepare fund-raiser dinn rs and New Years Eve party Tablecloths Coffee Pots and ability to serve refreshmen s VCR Pay Phone Babysitting Access to Pool and Ice, gym, wheel park, wight training, mini golf, rock climbing, bumper boats, arcade, lase tag and other youth activities flags podium area for dance lessons up to 50 people wit acoustics meals office equipment z ,2-1...-- .. . . . ,.. . (1'\) \UJ @ ,'71 ~ q' 'llo....-~..__ """'.,..~'>~'!:~" ~'t~.~ ~~~~."(:.;1 ~~a~~:' ... Physical Educati n Instructor To Whom It May Concern, 12-9-97 This past summer I was in ited by Barb Esse to sit in on one of your task force meet ngs concerning the Community Center. I am pleased as a mem er of the Monticello community that the community enter has been approved and wait anxiously for its arrival The reason I am writing this letter is to make my opin on known in regards to the facilities that will be includ d in the community center and the impact I think it will hav on this community. Two years ago I completed my Masters Degree through Hamline University. As a part of my assignment I had to write a thesis paper. At that time I was a 2nd year physical education instructor t Pinewood Elementary school. My previous experience had bee at the high school level working with at-risk students. What I wanted to do with my thesis was to try and combine he ideas of physical education and also the ideas r lating to, and dealing with, at-risk students. The combina ion resulted in a paper written on ~esiliency. Resili ncy is the ability of an individual to adapt to a negat've atmosphere in a positive way. For example, many studen s will find the positive atmosphere of the school envir nment as a way to escape a negative home environment. In other words, the school now acts as a positive place for s udents to grow and excel. The student has adapted from a negative environment to find a positive way to deal with th t negativity by finding a way to excel in school. This may ccur through athletics, academics, and other extracurr"cular activities. How does this relate to the community enter? Throughout my research a reoccuring statistic came up. Those communities who provided positive alternatives for their youth were found to have a greater amount of stude ts who became positive members and contributors to their society no matter what type of situation they came fro . I believe that this community center is a positive step toward developing positive relationships for members of the Monticello community. Not only does the communit center address the needs of the adult population but, it also addresses the needs of Pinewood West Elementary School 1010 W. Bro dway Monticello, MN. 55362 Phone: 295-5164 z'~!> . . . fil\ ~LY A ~ ~ .tk ""'---.. -- :~W~1 Physical Educati n Instructor our youth. We as a community eed to provide positive places that our youth can go t in order to express themselves. We have a need in Monticello to provide this service to all members of our community. As a physical education i structor in the Monticello school district I work with about 550 kids/week. My goal is to try and teach kids the importance of physical fitness and to stay active outside of the school day. I believe the addition of the wheel park is an important part of the community center and offers a place for kids to stay physically fit. Kids are becoming very active and enthused using rollerblades and skateboa ds as a way to exercise. Currently, we do not have a pIa e where kids can go to get this kind of exercise. Places uch as parking lots, roads or streets, and the bike trail re not suitable places for this kind of exercise for obvio s reasons. The addition of the wheel park not only provide a safe and more appropriate place for these kids to go but, it also sends a message to them saying that we as a commun.ty value our youth and respect them and the activities that they do. This message is powerful and will not go unn ticed by the youth of our community. Monticello will become of your efforts. We need to pr youth. In turn our youth will wonderful place to grow and lea Sincerely, ~~f Brad Hanson P.E. Instructor Pinewood Elementary School tter community as a result vide positive places for our ook back on Monticello as a n. Pinewood West Elementary School 1010 W. Broa :way Monticello, MN. 55362 Phone: 295-5164 .. }FE,"@!mll ttTI:a\S z ,2,tf . . . On 1/24/98.at .8:41PM, Jim Van Mev.eren wrote: As both a tax payer and a parent I am in favor of the Community Center. I feel that the increase in my property.taxes is a great investmentinthe corom "ty.,.andtheseturn to Monticello families far outweighs the financial impact on our taxes. Whe you look at the make up of our community, the large ~.choalage -population, 1he..need for incr .spaceforlhe Senior Center, the problems with the lack of space at City Hall this seems to. be a esponsible solutian. The concems.ofN.SP_and theirlnputintoiliis " n m~h~~m.e_uneasy" Whether tax reductian occurs far our large neighbor is questionable, and at hat level is unclear. It seems that when we as a caJllIlllll1ityputthe potential interests. o.fa very Dfitable U1ility Co.s-poration .ahDV.e the needs af our children and Senior Citizens something is not ight. If the Community Center is postive for the community.as 11 w.ho1e, w.e .sho.uld go. iorw.ard \ ,.. Z.,25 . . . MEMO TO MONTICELLO COMMUNITY RAINING CENTER TASK FORCE December 24 1997 Dear Task Force Members: As you acquire information of potential uses for the ture Monticello Community and Training Center, a large number of Monticello families would like you to consider an indoor soccer/grass arena. Monticello's population is burgeoning, and most are ounger families with children. This is reflected in it's soccer program, which has exploded om 60 players during its 1994 inaugural season to over 600 participants in 1997! Much ofthi growth reflects the inclusiveness of the sport - anyone can play! Boys and girls of all ages, s es, and economic background, easily fmd a niche in soccer. Traditionally a spring - fall outdoor grass sport, it c easily become a winter sport too (during those 5 long "cabin-fever" months of winter, when tivities are quite limited for kids to "let off steam"). It is played on a field with corner boards s. 'lar to hockey, with an artificial turf ideal for many community athletic events (soccer, field ho key, flag football, whiffieball, walking- jogging, aerobics, tumbling) and would appeal to all es from preschoolers to seniors. Rolled back, the underlying surface becomes a floor for b etball, volleyball, shuffieboard, community banquets, home and garden shows, trade shows, con entions, animal shows, and, of course, drill routines for the National Guard trainees. We have s ken with Mark Wenzel of Ankeny-Kell architectural flnn and have been assured that the um size of 85 x 100 feet or larger can easily be incorporated into current designs. This community center will defme the physical and s cial structure of Monticello in the 21 st century. Overlooking the "Walnut Walking Mall" attracting the many new young families of our area, it will anchor a future mall busy with resid ts shopping at neighboring grocers, restaurants, shops and businesses while other family embers enjoy the community center. Sin~,_ /L#/~ F~erktv1. z....-z.(p . . . MEMO TO MONTICELLO COMMUNIT f1'RAINING CENTER TASK FORCE December 2 1997 Dear Task Force Members: As you acquire infonnation of potential uses for the future Monticello Community and Training Center, a large number of Monticello families woul like you to consider an indoor soccer/grass arena. Monticello's population is burgeoning, and most ar younger families with children. This is reflected in it's soccer program, which has explode from 60 players during its 1994 inaugural season to over 600 participants in 1997! Much of 's growth reflects the inclusiveness of the sport - anyone can play! Boys and girls of all ages, izes, and economic background, easily [md a niche in soccer. Traditionally a spring - fall outdoor grass sport, it c easily become a winter sport too (during those 5 long "cabin-fever" months of winter, when ctivities are quite limited for kids to "let off steam"). It is played on a field with comer boards s . ar to hockey, with an artificial turf ideal for many community atWetic events (soccer, field h ckey, flag football, whiffiebal1, walking- jogging, aerobics, tumbling) and would appeal to al ages from preschoolers to seniors. Rolled back, the underlying surface becomes a floor for b ketball, volleyball, shuffieboard, community banquets, home and garden shows, trade shows, co ventions, animal shows, and, of course, drill routines for the National Guard trainees. We have S oken with Mark Wenzel of Ankeny-Kell architectural firm and have been assured that the . 'mum size of85 x 100 feet or larger can easily be incorporated into current designs. This community center will defme the physical and ocial structure of Monticello in the 21 st century. Overlooking the "Walnut Walking Mall" d attracting the many new young families of our area, it will anchor a future mall busy with resid ts shopping at neighboring grocers, restaurants, shops and businesses while other famil members enjoy the community center. Sincerely, t~l,.~ . . . MEMO TO MONTICELLO COMMUNIT !fRAINING CENTER TASK FORCE December 4 1997 Dear Task Force Members: As you acquire information of potential uses for the future Monticello Community and Training Center, a large number of Monticello families woul like you to consider an indoor soccer/grass arena. Monticello's population is burgeoning, and most ar younger families with children. This is reflected in it's Soccer program, which has explode from 60 players during its 1994 inaugural season to over 600 participants in 1997! Much of .s growth reflects the inclusiveness of the sport - anyone can play! Boys and girls of all ages, izes, and economic background, easily frod a niche in soccer. Traditionally a spring - fall outdoor grass sport, it c easily become a winter sport too (during those 5 long "cabin-fever" months of winter, when tivities are quite limited for kids to "let off steam"). It is played on a field with comer boards s. ilar to hockey, with an artificial turf ideal for many community athletic events (soccer, field h ckey, flag football, whifileball, walking- jogging, aerobics, tumbling) and would appeal to all ages from preschoolers to seniors. Rolled back, the underlying surface becomes a floor for bas etball, volleyball, shuffleboard, community banquets, home and garden shows, trade shows, con entions, animal shows, and, of course, drill routines for the National Guard trainees. We have s oken with Mark Wenzel of Ankeny-Kell architectural firm and have been assured that the mi um size of 85 x 100 feet or larger can easily be incorporated into current designs. This community center will defme the physical and s cial structure of Monticello in the 21 st century. Overlooking the "Walnut Walking Mall" attracting the many new young families of our area, it will anchor a future mall busy with resid ts shopping at neighboring grocers, restaurants, shops and businesses while other family embers enjoy the community center. Sincerely, Friends of Monticello ~t?~ z. ' 2.8' . . . MEMO TO MONTICELLO COMMUNIT fI'RAINING CENTER TASK FORCE December 2' 1997 Dear Task Force Members: As you acquire information of potential uses for the future Monticello Community and Training Center, a large munber of Monticello families woul like you to consider an indoor soccer/grass arena. Monticello's population is burgeoning, and most ar younger families with children. This is reflected in it's soccer program, which has exploded from 60 players during its 1994 inaugural season to over 600 participants in 1997! Much of .s growth reflects the inclusiveness of the sport - anyone can play! Boys and girls of all ages, izes, and economic background, easily find a niche in soccer. Traditionally a spring - fall outdoor grass sport, it c easily become a winter sport too (during those 5 long "cabin-fever" months of winter, when a tivities are quite limited for kids to "let off steam"). It is played on a field with corner boards s. .lar to hockey, with an artificial turfideal for many community athletic events (soccer, field h key, flag football, whiffleball, walking- jogging, aerobics, tumbling) and would appeal to all ages from preschoolers to seniors. Rolled back, the underlying surface becomes a floor for bas etball, volleyball, shuffleboard, community banquets, home and garden shows, trade shows, con entions, animal shows, and, of course, drill routines for the National Guard trainees. We have s oken with Mark Wenzel of Ankeny.Kell architectural firm and have been assured that the mi urn size of 85 x 100 feet or larger can easily be incorporated into current designs. This community center will define the physical and s cial structure of Monticello in the 21 SI century. Overlooking the "Walnut Walking Mall" d attracting the many new young families of our area, it will anchor a future mall busy with resid ts shopping at neighboring grocers, restaurants, shops and businesses while other family embers enjoy the community center. Sincerely, ~~~Q z,,2.~ . . . MEMO TO MONTICELLO COMMUNIT !TRAINING CENTER TASK FORCE December 2 1997 Dear Task Force Members: As you acquire information of potential uses for the future Monticello Community and Training Center, a large number of Monticello families woul like you to consider an indoor soccer/grass arena. Monticello's population is burgeoning, and most ar younger families with children. This is reflected in it's soccer program, which has explode from 60 players during its 1994 inaugural season to over 600 participants in 19971 Much of 's growth reflects the inclusiveness of the sport - anyone can play! Boys and girls of all ages, izes, and economic background, easily find a niche in soccer. Traditionally a spring - fall outdoor grass sport, it c easily become a winter sport too (during those 5 long "cabin-fever" months of winter, when tivities are quite limited for kids to "let off steam"). It is played on a field with comer boards s' ilar to hockey, with an artificial turf ideal for many community athletic events (soccer, field h ckey, flag football, whiffleball, walking- jogging, aerobics, tumbling) and would appeal to all ages from preschoolers to seniors. Rolled back, the Wlderlying surface becomes a floor for bas etball, volleyball, shuffleboard, community banquets, home and garden shows, trade shows, con entions, animal shows, and, of course, drill routines for the National Guard trainees. We have s oken with Mark Wenzel of Ankeny-Kell architectural firm and have been assured that the '.' um size of85 x 100 feet or larger can easily be incorporated into current designs. This community center will define the physical and century. Overlooking the "Walnut Walking Mall" our area, it will anchor a future mall busy with resid restaurants, shops and businesses while other family cial structure of Monticello in the 21 st d attracting the many new young families of ts shopping at neighboring grocers, embers enjoy the community center. Sincerely, Friends of Monticello ~~~v:.> Z.,30 . . . ,i onticello COlnm nity Partners Po. Box 9 4 · Monticello, MN 55362 612-295-0999 February 5, 1998 [HRA and City Council members] Dear I am writing to you as Chairman of Monticello Com unity Partners. As you know, MCP is a broad based organization with a membership withi and outside the city limits of Monticello. We are all dedicated to the enhancement and revit Iization of downtown Monticello. During 1997, we grew our membership from 120 to a curm t 271 members. We are one of the largest community based organization in Monticello At our last Board of Directors meeting on February ,1998, we had an extended discussion about the Community Center and the issues surrou ding it. I can report to you that the board fully supported proceeding with a Community Cente that would include all the areas previously discussed such as the water park, climbi g wall, kitchen, city offices, walking track, wheel park, gym/rec/drill area, National Guard requi ements, aerobics area, concessions, Senior Center, youth/teen center, meeting rooms and child play area. We are also endorsing the Walnut location as the appropriate location for t is facility. This is consistent with the Task Force's recommendation for the fulfillment of comm nity needs. Nine out of ten board members (one member was n t present) were involved in this motion and its vote of support. Steve Andrews abstained b cause of his involvement in the joint HRA/Council committee to investigate the finance p ckage for the center. The consensus of our Board was that each compon nt of this Center is important and that it is critical that it proceed as recommended by the Task orce, or else not at all. In order to have a vibrant location with a significant activity level, it n eds to encompass a variety of events and happenings for different ages and requirements. W also discussed the annual operating costs and it will only be possible to sell daily or annu I memberships if you can offer a full package of activities that speaks to both families an individuals. The Board stated they did not want a National Guard Training Center and city offices built and then call it a Community Center. If we are going to incur debt for construction, they want the facility built in its entirety so that it meets the objectiv of bringing activity to the center of our city and creates a place where our citizens can gather for social, health and business or personal growth experiences. 2,31 . . . ~ ~ Thank you for participating in these deliberations hich most likely will not be available to us again for some time. We fully recognize the vario s sides of the debate but the timing is right and voting to proceed will provide for the needs 0 our growing community. Please feel free to call me at 878-2775 if you would like to further discuss our position. Sincerely, Barbara Esse Chairman, Monticello Community Partners cc: MCP Board Members Jeff O'Neill Rita Ulrich 2--:3 2--- , .:) d () (,/ III ~ l I C( I-I ~ ('. ~ \I L MO(}hC~llo NtvJ .55~to.) ___... . ;Dcfober,30J Iq97 . : r-l ~ or-will i tvm f:'et; r ; JOd q W.1( Iver 01-. . Mon-hc,elloJ JlvtN 5536;;) , ; Dea ( YV'ctj 0 r (:'0.; rJ , fvt~ nD-1YJe.. i:) --AI ;cJa. . "beck . I live j /r(1 ~16 :+OWrl sh ip c;~ ~toY1fjGeJ/c an d w; II soon be a ftLLaJ, Red :vofer. Itl/m wr1f'(}!t 01'1 re tU(rd 70 +he I.5S{.(C of ~ resfr 1 c.lec! Sk-a..+l r~. . . ., ,. .. :"[~ Q..(Y1 a.n ~~ re~S'IV(> .Y'oJ{er b/a..der an d I h nd : 1+ dl ffj cw-J- +0 ~,(ld place 10 slcc,(Je. ~ VC'I:! tvhe r-C :'1::_';to. there. a.re si~ns $+ -b(l~ ~ Sta.+e hoard I n~ J . .. ..12.0 Her bJetd I (),9 1 ~y ~.ojfcri ojt; .i c5 cr-et.t1-C's .11.- pro bJery/ .for bof-h bu.~'ne;)se.5 and <:Jl::a)-er:s p-/J/<e.. Ii I:) idiff;cl.tl+ ~C> ever1 s ka..le cJ wJ1 fhe --sidewct/ Ie. WI I/? {JUt- _ ; \:.elfl;! +0 lei +0 lea-lie,. L b lieve. ~ha.+ . a. preJ (,ld; a ,tljjC(.it18f :SKccfer5 has heehucl.J- up Jfl {)-U..f !OWflBh'p. ,.1- C-V0-5 Cllwa..}js t(;t.UA?l+ha.+ .fJleokaJer5 e-uerc fhc --_n__.....~~_ba...d.~~_.ck.lds_ _._a.YLdn.noL~.':L.J2 c-<:.,_~I~.a.f[}1-.or.1C.. 0 Flhclr7/_cu-rcL ; T. am cer+a,'n!!t. nofa..~(ba.d}J ki d.. We a..r:e Gf~ , ; loa 1:::1 n~ ~Ol .tL-P JCtcc 10.__.' 01. pro ve our 5/<-l lis. ~"/c'Ct /7'!j: : i'S not tt Cr irne arzd L hop.e +~lCL+ Sou see If +h~r "~~. iI. r-efftes+ -fi1~+ Fh nexf +ime lhj~ ISSUe, -. com eo" tL +0 P J~ I fh Cl ~ }j 0 tt. fu ke a.- /ooK Cl f If fr0771 :.al/5/~.e.s~.ru~. r.n" beca.L(..se .e.__a>re...s/ca.i1f}J ,1ha'{ does .:nDf mea.n cue. Ctr:eo-ut- f cause tr-oub/d.. Vore for . ::Sk.a.ferSJ not O"..~C(.,115+ ~}fm.j ~or we wi Jl Soon be a.. . 11JCt~+ of +Jte ~Ohfl~ pDpu/afiCJ(}J ttn.d we ,('un nZCi.l:e CL .; . d, ffer~e(lce... Iho..n k. }J 0 U__. or.}jQuY' fime; . SIrl are/;{) I J,. -c::> ? ... 2. 3 . >111 CA 0.... ~ 0) A\itiCL fo.b~c!: "'..I .. . . . The National Guard' Page 1 of 1 The National Guard's M ssions The National Guard's dual mission of service 0 nation and state is lmique among all branches of the United States armed forces. T e Guard is America's community based defense force, located in more than 2,700 citie and towns, some 60 of them right here in Minnesota. National Guard members are citizen-soldiers d airmen who are integral members of their communities. Guard members live, shop, work, worship, and go to school in Minnesota's cities and towns. This inexorable link between the community d its citizen soldiers is what makes the National Guard unique. The Minnesota National Guard takes its "co unity mission" very seriously, and is participating in several programs that reinforce this commitment. Minnesota's 61 Training and Community Cen rs, formerly called armories, located throughout the state provide shared meeting an recreational space for the local commlmity. Facility costs are met by a partner hip of federal, state and local governments. One recently built center was an ddition to an existing high school. The National Guard is also very involved in ed cation. One program which is sponsored by the Minnesota National Guard is STARBASE. STARBASE is a non-profit corporation funded in part, by the Minnesota National Guard. It conducts a number of educational pro s designed to increase youth awareness of mathmatics, science and technolo by using aviation and aerospace curriculums. Classroom instruction can be con ucted at the STARBASE facility at the 133rd Airlift Wing base in Minneapolis, or ST ASE can provide the curriculum to individual schools and school districts forinco oration into their own programs. The Minnesota National Guard is also very acti e in community based drug demand reduction education. This proEfam is discussed' more detail on page 16 of this report. z'~'I . . . Minnesota National Guard recognized by Page 1 of 1 Minnesota National Guard recognized by innesota Counties The Minnesota National Guard was recently r cognized by the Association of Minnesota -Counties for its efforts during the t1 ods of 1997. Maj. Gen. Eugene Andreotti, The Adjutant General, will accept. '~Friends of County Governments" award on behalf of the National. Guard during awards banquet Dec. 1, 1997 at the Radisson Hotel South, Bloomington. The Minnesota National Guard rescued more t an 6,300 citizens during the floods of 1997 sending more than 3,000 National Guard members to provide assistance to state and local officials. The Minnesota National Guard is under the co trol of the Governor and available to respond during times of state emergencies. The Minnesota National Guard is also a full p nation. Because of this role, the National Guar prepare to support our country during times of er with the armed forces of our participates in a variety of training to ar or national emergency. December 1997 z"s ;hip program will recognize high.._ Page 1 of 1 . rd scholarship program will r cognize high school leaders al Guard program will provide scholarships to 25 Minnesota high school seniors this lown as Leadership and Dedicated Service Scholarship, or LEAD , will be presented to niors who best demonstrate leadership potential, community servi e and academic ing to National Guard officials. s open to high school seniors eligible for military service as well a to high school I in the National Guard. To receive the award, the applicants, one selected by the 1ittee, must join the Minnesota National Guard and complete basi training. n process includes filling out a personal data sheet, having someo e submiting a letter ation, writing two essays and being interviewed by a National Gu rd representative. T way that we can help our young people, our most precious nat ral resource, achieve tiaIAid Adjutant General Maj. Gen. Eugene Andreotti. "And, t is program helps us renJ'P"and viability of the National Guard." >f the program are due on Mar. 1, 1998 and the awards will be m de by May 1, 1998. mati on on the program, students should contact their local Natio al Guard recruiter or :ver at 612-282-4508. '7 . I I I I I I i J ! I 1 f -, } - . .. ., - . . Z;3~ I L . 1101 West Broadw y Street Monticello, MN 5362 Telephone 612-2 5-6410 ( \ ' "" ,~' p j l), /:,{)' ... or i" IT;, I" ~ -\;" \ tI 0/ Honorable Mayor & City Council Members City of Monticello 250 East Broadway Street Monticello, MN 55362 Re: Proposed Community Center Dear Mayor and City Council Members: I am writing this letter in support of the proposed community center that is now under consideration for the citizens of Monticello and ounding area. I would have liked to attend the Tuesday night meeting in person but out of town this week on business. We wanted you to know our opinion on this import t issue that will impact the future of our community. . What a wonderful time this is, that such an oppo unity has presented itself: in the form of National Guard participation in a project here in onticello that we all can benefit from. Who would have thought that all the hard work d effort of the many people that have worked together through the Monticello Corom . Partners would have the chance to become a reality so soon. Many here in the Mon icello area, myself included, trust that you will do all that you can to make this a reality for the benefit of all the families in our community. I am very much in favor of this proj ct proceeding, regardless of the final outcome of design alternatives, even if this an increase in my property taxes. As for what design alternatives my family would . e to see, we offer the following observations. We recently had the opportunity t visit the newly constructed Maple Grove community center for a birthday party. t an impressive facility! However, when we went swimming, the inevitable comp . ns to the Becker Community Center began. We found that the Maple Grove aquatics park did not come close to the atmosphere at Becker, there was no whirlpool, sauna, the locker-rooms were located very far from the pool, and the overall feeling w , given the choice, we would rather be at Becker, which we do visit several times each . ter. This is not meant to take anything away from the Maple Grove community center, hich also has a gym, a number of meeting rooms, a children's play area, and an in or sheet of ice for skating, among other things. A resident of Maple Grove informed me that the Maple Grove community center was voted down by local voters in a referend but was built anyway at the direction of . ~ ,:a~ 7 . . . Page 2 January 19,1998 ,City ofMontieello City Council. He said that he voted against it in the referendum, but is gladtbat it was built,. after.he has Yisited, it. In our opinion;. we would like tosee-altemati:V' made apart of the Monticello CommHnity Center that not.only will benefit.e neher~Jike the library, which is a good idea, butaltematives that are also unique t the area. There are presently almost 700 young students involved in something calle "soccer" in the Monticello- area as part of the Monticello Soccer Club. There are also a wing number of students each year. _ and girls, involved. in something called "ice hoc ey.'l You may see where this- is going. We wouIdsupport very strongly analtemative ranindooricesheet that possibly could have the capability to be converted to an indoo soccer filci1ity in the early tall andJate spring each year. What a unique combination' would bring to the City ()fMonticello, and what an immense demand for these facilities there is! We also like the idea of a, Teen Center, Senior Center, and gymnasiunL We trust that this information will be helpful. to present and future Monticello' fiuuilies.. Please best interest of our growing.co~unity,. a co progressive and organized way'througkyour consideration and your service to our c Virgil G.Hawkins \l in making this importantdecisionJor your decision based on wbatis in the . that bas approached growtltin a tion.. W~ thank you for your 2-,~r WRIGHT C SHERIFF'S Don Lindell Chief Deputy Gary Miller, Captain Administration Gary Torfin. Captain Jail Administrator ..)f'1TV Oil:- (p~ "i. ,.. Z I I.i.l m q 0 'IS- 0 ~ -d'Y UNTY FFICE 7656 Non-Emergency Administration Records Civil Warrants Investigation Jail Admin. DON HOZ MPA SHERI F 10 2nd St. NW, M 170 Buffalo, Minnesota 55313-1197 1-800-362-3 67 August 28, 1997 William Fair, Mayor City of Monticello 250 E. Broadway P.O. Box 1147 Monticello, MN 55362 Dear Mayor, With the growth that we are experiencing, we are alwa s concerned about space needed for employees to do office work that needs to be done on daily basis. Currently, the deputies assigned to Monticello do this work at a desk in the M nticello City Hall. While we appreciate the use of the telephone and office space, I am sure that it is becoming increasingly difficult for the city staff to accommodate the need for space for the de uties, due to the growth in the city staff over the years. . The cities that we contract for law enforcement service with generally provide this type of space in the city hall or fire stations for the deputies. For Mo ticello, the idea of space for this purpose in the proposed Community Center makes sense. It woul give the deputies access to the office space and telephone necessary to complete their work withou disturbing City Hall employees, and it would provide increased visibility of a squad car in the vicinity of the Community Center. . We have thought of having a satellite Sheriffs Office r the deputies assigned to Monticello and also to deputies working in the surrounding areas. Thi would require a larger office than if it were only dedicated for use by deputies assigned to work in he city of Monticello. However, this idea is still just an idea for some time in the future. We hav not discussed this with the Wright County Board of Commissioners, or anyone else at this point. e may not have the need for this type of satellite office for a number of years. However, for now I believe that the Community Cente would be an excellent location for an office for deputies working in the city of Monticello. . Sincerely, (j)~]lr ,,~h/A'7LIIA/ Sheriff D~:~;;;{ - 682-1162 682-7620 682-7622 682-7645 682-7688 682-7630 682-7662 2,'37 . . . MEMO TO: Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrat r FROM: Sherie Danner, Monticello Liones and Member of the Wright County Minnesota Kennel Club and Boar Member of the Humane Society of Wright County DATE: July 22, 1997 This is to inform you that I will not be able to att nd today's meeting of the Community Center Task Force however, I would like you to have my information from the civic organizations that I represent. Monticello Lioness Club: A Community C nter in Monticello would be a great place for our organization to hold various activiies. Every December we put on a Holiday Dance for the Handicapped. This is fo handicapped adults in several surrounding towns and every year it gets bigge . We have been putting this meal and dance on for several years - we started at the merican Legion Club and that got too small SO we moved to the VFW - last Decembe we were at capacity with approximately 275 people. This includes staff fr m all the group homes, the residents, and all the help needed to put this event on. e need a bigger space or we Will have to send out invitations and turn people away, w ich we would not like to do. Over the years we have put on style shows, prepared di ners for the Minnesota Orienteering Club, held joint meetings with other Lioness CI bs, etc. Our organization would use this facility for many varied activities and event . Wrlaht County Minnesota Kennel Club: Every summer the Kennel Club puts on a 2-day dog show at the fairgrounds in Howard Lake and hope for good weather. Judges and participants come from all over the United States and this year about 1100 dogs were entered. This event also bring many spectators and vendors. If the Kennel Club were to use this facility this is wha they would need for space: Paved parking lot for 200 cars, 100 vans, and 50 RV's with electrical plug-ins for the RVs and portable generators used f r grooming. 250' x 350' would be minimum space fo approximately 12 show rings, vendors, and grooming tables. 40' x 50' area for 6 obedience rings with a 20' aisle all the way around the rings. People come and go all day during the show - hey have a certain time that they show their dog and if they live close by they go home. This would be a very good event for the motels and restaurants in this area. The jud es for this years show were to stay at the Silver Fox but, because of the storm, the 0 Iy rooms available were by the Mpls. - St. Paul airport. ({f - \ "/)~1Jvt( ~1\e<1 z;/fO . . \ . Monticello COl11l11unit Partners September 22, 1997 To Jeff O'Neill, Assistant City Administrator From: Rita Ulrich, MCP Manager .~ Re: Community Center ME 0 PO Box 984 MOllliccllo MN 55362 295-0999 The MCP Board of Directors reviewed and disc ssed the latest proposal of the Community Center Task Force at its meeting on September 17th. It was the consensus of the Board that MCPsupports the overall concept of a communi y center and the direction of the work of the Task Force. MCP is pleased that the proposal i in keeping with the Downtown and Riverfront Revitalization Plan to create a civic/institutional ore in the downtown area. Members of the Board had a few questions, whi h they felt will require attention as the proposal is further developed. Members asked hat additional research address the extent to which the center will meet community needs. T ey asked the question, "What will the center mean to the average family in Monticello?" Rei ted to this is a concern over public perception of this use of tax dollars. They felt it was importa t that the center have programs or facilities that can appeal to a broad range of people. Board members also said they would like more i formation on the expected operating costs of the center and how those costs would be met. Finally, the Board would like to see information on the tax impact the center will have on residential, apartment, commercial and industrial properties in the city. MCP would like to thank the Task Force on its w rk to date and looks forward to working with the City and the Task Force in realizing a comm nity center that benefits the entire Monticello community. 1, , 41 JEFF O'NEILL CITY HALL -- ME 0 MONTICELLO TO: Community Center Task Force, H , City Council, Ankeny Kell Architects FROM: Jeff O'Neill, Assistant City Admin strator DATE: December 26, 1997 RE: Community Survey Results - Co unity Center Design Enclosed for your holiday reading pleasure is a summary of the results of the Resident Survey along with narrative responses provide by survey participants. . This survey was sent to all property owners in he city and intended primarily to help the task force and architects determine which proj ct amenities are more favored by the community. Two thousand eight hundred (2,800) surveys w re sent 353 responses were provided which results in a return rate of 13%. 3 - \ '5 tA fP 0 Q -\- 0 t C- <-. -\ {-e [2 E\ (. c vV1 .'1'\ ,J ,\ it,,) . Monticello City Hall, .250 E. Broadway, ~O Box 1147, Monticel 0, MN 55362-9245' (612) 295-2711' Fax; (612) 295-4404 11., Office of Pubhc Works, 909 Golf Course Rd., Monticell ,MN 55362. (612) 295-3170' Fax; (612) 271-3272 ~ fIIIIIT ~ ,',.~~, "'''''-'1 "'~""r-_"",:-,.,"'j~~ .,...., . '.'."'" .'.:.:~.:;~ ',~~~~:,~'~~_:~~!~ ~,~rr,n-:---~~::::,.~.~ ~~~~"W . . . Community Center Surv y Comment Summary Decembe 1997 1. Types of Amenities/Other Ideas: (1) Ice Sheet: definitely needed, Monticello needs ho (2) Anything BUT a hockey rink. (4) Forget it!!! 4 of the 7 already are available in the mmunity. (8) The schools already have a pool, gym, track. If yo build a community building with those items are we going to exclude the community from using sc 001 facilities? (10) Other: Outdoor wave pool with water slides. Ha e a 50's style "hang-out" & drive-in grille with dance area inside & soda fountain/malt shop. (17) Got it already. Leave it alone!! (18) #1, rooms suitable for families, anniversaries, we ding receptions, reunions, etc. (19) Offer classes in Tri Chi, Yoga, swimming, ete. (20) Consult cities who already have similar facilities. Let us learn by their experiences. (21) Skip the whole thing and tell us what our taxes e going to go up. (23) Kids climbing/play place - similar to Maple Grov 's Community Center. (25) Indoor playground, community nursery school. (28) Outdoor pool. (32) Outdoor pool. (33) Pool (school, athletic club, Becker); Ice (none); Re area (schools); Indoor walking Oet's open the school hall way in evenings if this is a need); Wheel P rk (if enough interest this should be included); Climbing Wall (Becker, my guess is this would have l'mited use). What happened to outdoor pool? (36) Meeting & conference rooms with large central ulti-purpose area (39) Room rentals for class reunions, weddings, anniv rsaries. (45) Provide a good manager. (51) One pool in the city is enough. Climbing wall? I corporate a Senior Center also. (52) Don't build anything. (55) I hope this includes a new home place for Senior itizens. (57) Outdoor pool? Will there be kitchen facilities an or snack bar? (65) Outdoor pool. (75) Wheel Park (7) we have the path system. Child are with reasonable fees so parents can use above. (76) I think a little something about the past and fut re of Monticello would be nice. (80) Party rooms, kids birthday party, company parti s etc. (85) Meeting rooms. (91) Sauna with pool. (107) This is a great idea!!! Other ideas: wally ball co ris & racquetball courts. (119) Other ideas: Indoor tennis courts (1). (120) Indoor children's play area - play structure. (122) Tennis courts!!! (127) Room that can be used for a gathering. (139) Taxes are tight now, have plenty of gyms, let's (144) Indoor archery range. (154) Ice area would bring $ in all year long - area to e rented out. (155) For the National Guard $1.5 is not a lot of man y for land and National Guard building. (158) Radio control car and truck track. (161) Include in rec. area a play area for small tots, sl ilar to some Mc Donalds. (165) Meeting rooms/social area, students can go and alk or do homework, etc. (166) Outdoors water pool/park area, rec area - have ne in each school now. (169) Art & music room. (172) Water slide and small pool. to keep taxes down. Z, "4 ~ C: \OFFICE\KAREN\CITY-SRV.CMT 1 . . . (175) Steam room/hot tub (176) Large exercise area, family gatherings for fami y reunions. (183) Teen Center. (186) We have enough pools. Hockey Association & chool could pay for ice time. Climbing wall - ridiculous, not needed. (187) Take your extra money and join a health club. (188) Food stand/eating area and party rooms. (189) There's one in St. Cloud with walking track ab ve and BBNB courts below. (196) Library/community center. (198) Day care center. (200) Meeting rooms. (203) Don't need it - scrap the idea. (211) Racquetball courts. (213) Convention space. (215) Racquetball courts. (218) Day care. (222) Please read attached letter...Listen, I started riting on the survey but realized I had a lot to say on this subject. I grew up in North Minneapolis and remember there was the Boys Club - mostly at that time only boys were allowed to join and partici ate. I think the kids had to pay .50 to enter. Then there was a YMCA opened that allowed teena ers in inexpensively to use the facilities. So I have wished for something like this for a long time. I have joined the gym here in Monticello twice in the nine years I have lived here. But I find the gym was inadequate for my needs. I do commute to the Twin Cities everyday and thought about joining one of the bigger multi-use gyms - but then it isn't convenient for my son and I to go. We have visited e Becker Community Center but again my son and I have to make special arrangements. I would I ke to see our own, Monticello's own place that allows our young people to hang-out. So us adults c keep an eye on them and I as a parent knows where the kids are. I remember the television com unity service ad that I think channel 9 used to put on at 10 PM "Parents do you know where your ids are?" I would like to be able to say yes. Wouldn't it be great if we built something with kids, teenagers, especially in mind. A casual place to hang out and meet. I noticed there are not a lot of aces or activities for teenagers in Monticello. I moved here from the cities to keep my kid from gett ng exposed to anything that could harm him. What I am finding out is that it is harmful for him have nothing to do. Yes he is involved with a sport every year but it turns out there isn't one part cular sport my son is gung-ho for. So maybe he isn't into structured sports. And maybe there are kids like him that would like to have something to do and some place to do it but keep it casual. Can t e Community Center be included in this somehow? I know over the years my son and I have participated in the community centers ongoing programs. But now we noticed there isn't anything or the young adults - teenagers. So to sum this up I am absolutely for the construction of a commu ity center built with young adults in mind. Since the help this summer from the National Guard my on.through against joining any military service said he wouldn't mind being a part of the National uard. So I think that it would be cool for the National Guard to be in this neighborhoodlcommun ty. (224) Outdoor pool and park at Falcon & School Blv . (227) Indoor water pool - school has one, so does he lth club. Ice sheet - voters already said no! Rec area - schools have, exercise area - schools have, in oor walking - schools available, wheel park - school parking lots or current lots or rinks, climbin wall - go to Becker just 10 miles away. (231) I am 86 years old, I drive very little so I'm at orne much. (234) Look at ways to lower our taxes not raise the (235) A room for parties or wedding receptions. Ice sheet: inside arena, we need this, it would make money, ice time $. (244) Ice sheet, I voted against this already. Other'deas: whirlpool in with water area. (245) Auditorium for concerts/plays. (250) Not interested. (252) Racquetball. (253) Hockey rink, ice sheet, exercise area, weights, track, pool. (256) Volunteer, story time for kids. (259) Have a rental area for wedding anniversaries etc. C:\OFFICE\ KAREN\CITY -SRV.CMT 2-4' . . . (261) A portion of it rented out for special events. (262) Outdoor pool would be better being we have 2 i door. (267) None. (268) Racquet ball. (271) Outdoor hockey rink, roller blades. (273) Don't want it enough to circle #7. (281) Outdoor pool access. (282) Outdoor pool/camping. (285) I oppose the building ofthis structure. (290) All of these are not necessary in this town. (292) Include an exercise area have some work out eq ipment. (295) Racquetball area. (296) Small party rooms that could be rented/reserve for birthdays or family get together. (297) Ice Arena (299) Regarding the "Ice sheet with multi-purpose ar a" please tell me that this is not an end around the often defeated hockey arena. (300) Teen center, area, dance, music, food. (301) Pool and hot tub area. (311) Non of the above are acceptable. (314) Study room/quiet rooms - community room. (318) Racquetball/handball courts/play area for youn children. (322) Youth Center/Sr. Citizen Center (329) Craft & meeting rooms (332) Indoor water pool. Becker; Ice sheet - we just v ted it down; Exercise area - Health Club already in town; Indoor walking-use school (335) Video arcade, short term day care for member/f: cility use. (337) Batting cages for baseball and softball. (339) Three side by side gym floors with elevated wal ing track around toplbig $ make, youth BB tourneys/great place for expos, etc. Whitney Center, t. Cloud good model. (343) It is important to consider all ages but especiall the young. (348) Don't need these items at City Hall. (350) Run a city not a health and rec center. (351) Table tennis, billiards, darts, party room, etc. C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY.SRV.CMT 1,," . . . 2. Pa,y a moderate annual membershiD? (2) Maybe (6) Yes, if it were a good place to take foster children om the ages 14 to 17. (8) Wife says "No", husband says "Maybe" (20) Not at my age. (23) Yes, or we could charge per use for those who do 't want a membership. (34) Probably, (48) Maybe, $20 per month seems high to me, I migh not use it enough to warrant that. (56) $20 for 12 months = $240/year - a bit much. (58) No, can't afford. (67) Moderate annual membership - yes; $20.00 per onth - no, not moderate. (78) $10.00 per month. (125) No, since I don't anticipate using it often, at thi point in time, and have no room in my budget. (130) No, don't know if I can afford $20.00 per month. (135) Not $20.00, maybe $5-10 per month. (143) Some fee but probably not this much. (144) Prefer a per/use fee. (146) $20/mo too expensive for us, but would pay less. (164) Yes, per family! (165) No, defeats the purpose, maybe a fee for non-re idents of the city but very small. (166) No, x12=$240.00 per year. (181) We can't afford that much/month. (186) No, lower income families would be unable to u e center! (195) $20 per month sounds a little high, maybe $12. (198) Yes, Would need family rate. (217) Would consider an annual fee of $100. (224) $ID/month (229) $20 per month, per family - yes. (261) Retired. (266) We would consider it depending on what the ce ter had. $20 seems a little high for our smaller family. (272) Modest Yes, $20 per month - too much! Per fam'ly? Per person? (279) Do have possibility of paying each day use. Lik Becker & free days. (281) Non Monticello residents should be subject to fel of some sort. (293) Not sure at this time. (300) No, We'd like to see it open to anyone regardles of ability to pay. Outside city could pay. (318) Yes, only willingly/not taken out of taxes. (331) No, If National Guard are contributing why ch e extra? Charge for physical workout pleasure? Forget it then! (335) Yes, per family. (336) Yes, $20 per family the most. (337) Possibly. (345) No, would rather pay per use or less of a monthl fee. $20 is like a health club fee. (353) Yes, as long as it were per family verses per me ber. C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY.SRV.CMT 4 z-- . . . .1. Why do you favor or oppose a center? (1) Favor, if ice arena is included. We favor this cente because having 2 children in hockey for over 10 years we have been to every ice arena/community cen I' in the area and have always been impressed with their communities dedication to families and you h activities. These facilities are always in use. (2) I oppose it if, it includes a hockey rink. (3) Favor, family activity center. (4) Strongly oppose. Looking at the upcoming sewer I' te increase due to the new WWTP, tax increases for the new school ($34 million), tax increase for a new City Hall, the average home owner will not be able to live in this community. Quit the sh 11 game! (6) It would be a good place to take our foster children have some fun. (8) Presently, I enjoy using the school facilities. I'm n sure that we need more. It would have to be something that we don't already have. (9) Oppose, higher taxes. (10) Favor, because Monticello needs something to do! Since it is illegal to cruise in your cars at night I know there are many classic & street rod clubs that auld love to get their cars out more often! (11) Favor, because I think its very important to have ctivities for our children. It keeps them "off' the streets & out of trouble. (12)Oppose, because property taxes would go up. (13) Favor, community enjoyment! Development perk or new residents. Community gathering "something to do" (15) Not sure, I do want the National Guard to come Monticello. (16) Oppose, TAXES, we have not seen the WWTP tax ill yet. One thing at a time. The high school tax is coming next. Due to valuation & tax rate chang s my taxes have gone from $1000 to $1500 in four years. That cannot continue or I am out of here. operty taxes should not have to support as much as is presently expected. (17) Oppose, taxed to much already. (18) Favor, I do favor the center but the fee should be oluntary, so that no one is denied use of facilities regardless of their ability to pay. I am only i favor of this center if it is available to all. Regardless of age or interests! (19) Favor, Our community needs a place for teens to o. (20) Favor, Our city needs this facility! Our young p pIe need a place for activities to help keep them entertained! It's past due!! (21) Oppose, Too much construction around town now hat nobody knows how much taxes are going to go up. What's the amount to operate and maintain su h a building? Becker costs them $200,000- 300,000 a year. Is the National Guard going to pay a ercentage ofthis building maintenance costs? (22) Favor, place where kids can go. You always see k ds out hanging around. This would be a good place for them to go. (23) Favor, it would keep these dollars in Monticello, i stead of spending them in Maple Grove or Becker for example. It shows a commitment of comm nity and it's fun! (24) Favor, The public school pool has very limited ho rs. Health Club costs too much. (25) Favor, We need an activity center for our commu ity. (26) Favor, Gives our children more activities in Mont'ce11o instead of Becker. (27) Not sure, It would depend what areas would be in the design. We have a pool at the high school as well as a walking area. Let's remember all of these areas proposed would have to be staffed. (28) Favor, a needed community resource. (29) Oppose, taxes are high enough & decisions alread made will keep them escalating. (30) Favor, We have a large family and it's difficult to md affordable entertainment in our area. (31) Favor, City Hall needs more space - National Gu d needs space. (32) Favor, Community Center would give our family place to exercise/stay healthy. Need a place six months of the year and the pool in the summer. (33) Not sure, We need ICE! We also have no outdoor wimming. We do have a wonderful athletic club and school which does facilitate gym needs, aerob'cs, indoor swimming, and our neighbors at Becker have a climbing wall with a pool etc. (34) Favor, A lot of use for this in our community. (36) Not Sure, Costs are too great for retirees. The cit debt is or will be to great with the new school and sewage plant. Remember a great portion of taxes omes from N.S.P. - consider what might C:\OFFICE \KAREN\CITY-SRV.CMT 5 'J ~~ . . . happen if the tax flow from N.P. was interrupted! (37) Oppose, I feel we already have most of the above at the health club. I think it's about time we think about building stuff "that is self supporting" in tead of always putting the burden on the tax payer. (3S) Oppose, Monticello does not need it & I don't bel eve it would be used to justify the cost. (39) Favor, Growth of our community needs it, but fi st let's get business into our city like Cub Foods, Menards, Target, etc. This will bring shoppers, even downtown. You can revitalize the downtown but that won't bring shoppers... look how busy Elk River s now. Buffalo also might get a Cub. (40) Oppose, We do not need a community center, W need property taxes we can afford. This town's administrator thinks money grows on trees. (41) Favor, It would be great to have some type of "0 en gym" for kids. (42) Favor, All of the above are needed for the long w'nter months. (43) Oppose, Taxes are high enough in the city. The ity would be competing against a taxpayer in the city. Life Fitness Center. (44) Oppose, Because I live across the street from we e they are going to build and this would be a lot of traffic and people running around. (45) Favor, The city population needs one badly for h alth and social things. (47) Favor, We need something like this in Monticell for everyone. (4S) Favor, It would be a place where families & me ds could come together to actively have fun. (SO) Not Sure, want more information. (Sl) Favor, I think its a good place for the people to 've off steam. (S2) Favor, Monticello needs more activities for famil'es; young people to participate in. (53) Oppose, Don't need or want. (55) Favor, The community needs a focus. (56) Not sure, Assuming what it is used for I would f VOl' it. (57) Favor, Ice for skaters, community attraction, me ting space. (5S) Favor, Our young people need a place to go. (59) Favor, It would be nice to have a place to go tha we could afford. (60) Favor, Community needs family center. Need a lace the community can gather. (62) Favor, Becker's Community Center is great - the whole family loves it. It would be great to have something similar in Monticello. (63) Favor, We need a Community Center like Becke for exercising and spending quality time with family. (65) Favor, Important for physical activity, recreatio (66) Favor, It will help keep kids in the community (67) Favor, We've needed this for sometime; other co opportunity to have one too. (69) Favor, I think it would keep a lot of teens out of rouble and give children a good place to play & spend family time together. (70) Favor, We really need an ice arena for hockey. e live in Minnesota and we have a large community with this arena we could have a very sue essful hockey program. Youths need sports in their lives, and when they love the sport enough to w'n 3 games in three years and practice 8-9 at night that's dedication. (71) I favor a center. This would give our community members a place to enjoy & also give kids something to do. (72) Favor, A need for 1st (lce sheet) & 2nd choices eel Park) and do not have adequate facilities. (73) Not Sure, I have heard of no details on how this ould effect our increasing tax base. (74) Favor, we need a community center for our youn people otherwise, they go elsewhere. (7S) Favor, It adds to the attractiveness of the comm nity, to prospective residents, and promotes community health & recreation. Gives families a pIa e to gather for fun & exercise in winter months. (76) I favor it because it might be a good way to brin the community together. (77) Oppose, Weare currently building a water treat ent facility. We have approved bonding for a new high school. As a taxpayer I don't feel I want to nd a facility, which truthfully, I will never use. (78) Favor, Good for the community to grow! (79) Favor, I feel that we need something for the kids to do here in our town. (SO) Favor, This is a growing community. We need ore activities to attract & keep our town a - would pay a daily rate to go. d have a local recreational area munities have them; now we have a wonderful C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY .SRV.CMT 6 . . . comfortable community. (81) Favor, It's good for the whole community! (82) Favor, This community needs a center that cater to families and children. we cannot expect our school district to meet all the needs of kids. Our com; unity has a responsibility to offer meaningful activities for youth and a center would enhance our ci y in the eyes of businesses & families looking for a place to locate. (83) Favor, Young teens don't have a place to hang to tay out of trouble. (84) Favor, I would favor a center because it would h e activities to keep our children busy rather than at home bored. (85) Favor, Our community is growing very quickly. e need to have a vision as to how we can provide for all our community members, children & s niors alike. (86) Favor, I have 5 small children - someday they wi] be 5 teenagers, we need places, close to home, for our children to be entertained. (87) Favor, Our business community discouraged sma I competitors for many years and finally settled on K.Mart that virtually destroyed them. We need ac ivities that will attract families to our trade center and perhaps attract new enterprises to the co munity and add to tax base. (88) Favor, growth is eminent it must be managed ... (89) Favor, Put it to a vote. Give the people a voice. (90) Favor, I like Becker's Community Center and wo Id like one like it! (91) Favor, presently drive to Becker to use the comm nity center. Have young children. (92) Favor, good for community. Good for me (If I exe cise). (93) Favor, Monticello needs something like this for t e kids to go near by instead of having to go to Becker or another town. (95) Favor, Definitely good for the community. (97) Oppose, We don't need the Guard in town and we don't need anymore taxes. We are paying for all these new people moving out here. I've paid my dues. NO MORE1 (98) Oppose, Not necessary for the community. Too many tax increases already. New high school will provide almost the same spaces (99) Favor, it would create jobs & revenue for the com unity and also the children (students) would not have to drive very far for home games (hockey) e . (100) Favor, Even though I am a senior citizen I think this would be an improvement to the community. (104) Favor, Monticello desperately needs a facility of this type to offer activities such as these to its growing community members. (105) Favor, I think a community center would be a eat asset to Monticello, its a place where the whole family can go to. (106) Favor, Our community is growing and a new ce ter will be needed. (107) Favor, Because we do not have enough facilities accommodate all our community activities and school activities. (108) Oppose, we are going to be taxes out of this city. (109) Oppose, too costly, wait and build later. (110) Not sure, Do not oppose the center - but the doll amount of it 3 to 4 million would be appropriate. (112) Favor, Ifit is put to the vote of the people. I do ot agree that 6 people should make this dollar amount decision for a community. Govt BY the peopl ,FOR the people. (113) Favor, Have seen the usage and effects of the Be ker center. Alternative to parks, winter use (114) We need something for these kids, teens, families to get involved around here. (115) Favor, interest in personal fitness & social oppo unity. (118) Favor, community adhesion. (119) Favor, community needs a large meeting area. (120) Favor, Promote community activity. Gives kids d parents opportunity to have time together in healthy activities. (121) Favor, It would give the community a place for t e teens, children & adults alike, to go to for healthy activities. (122) Favor, Children & families have nothing to do to ether not sponsored by school. (124) Oppose, do not want any higher property taxes. C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY -SRV.CMT " ~" . . . (127) Favor, community needs one!! (129) Favor, Our family has used the Becker Commu ity Center many times. Our community needs its own center - needs to be the "pride" of our commu ity. (130) Favor, look at what is going on at the Senior Ce ter we now have - it would be wonderful to have more room and additional parking. (132) Favor, It will be another area where kids and a ults can go for entertainment and exercise. (133) Oppose, Too costly, City Hall is ample, Senior C tizens are happy, 5 gyms in town now, don't need more, location is very stupid, maintaining cost w uld be to high (insurance, gas lights, etc), city taxes are too high now. City is too far in debt now. D n't need more. (134) Favor, the children of our community needs a pI ce for them to go. (136) Oppose, Monticello can't afford it. (137) Oppose, I oppose a center, very strongly. My t es are already too high. I moved to Monticello from Wayzata, where the taxes were high, because m property taxes would be lower, now instead my taxes are already higher than Wayzata, in just 5 year. I'm afraid I'd have to move again to a town with lower taxes if this center is built. (138) Favor, to create other activities in the city so th t we do not have to travel to other towns to participate. (139) Oppose, because ever since the building of the p wer plant the taxes have gone up, up, up! Stop spending tax money for a good change! (140) Oppose, taxes, we have a city hall to build on to. (141) Oppose, you spend too much money already. (142) Favor, because of community center. (143) Favor, a place for youth and their families to co e together. (146) Favor, kids need lots of activities to help them w and keep out oftrouble. The outdoor ice rinks are only open a couple months out of the year (t e coldest also). Community is growing so much that the activities currently offered seem to fill up qui kly Gibrary, comm. ed.) (147) Oppose, we are retired and on a fixed income! e would NEVER use any of these - we hunt, fish, & bowl! (151) Favor, Monticello is behind times in providing fa ilities for youth. It seems city government and senior citizens always comes first. (152) Not Sure, I want to be certain the center will be sed responsibly and enjoyed by all. (154) Favor, The citizens of Monticello & surrounding eas who help support Monticello need this "older" citizens already have something or can drive to whatever. Kids have nothing. (155) Oppose, National Guard will have 130-150 soldi rs in the Charlie Company. Not enough room to park 150 cars. Some times for three days when trai ing at Camp Ripley. Poor location because the fire station is there. Price of 1 million is too high. (156) Oppose, City has no business spending money 0 this! (159) Favor, I think it would be a great gathering plac for the community (young & old). I also think that our community needs it's own indoor ice center. (161) Favor, We need a recreational area especially to enefit our young people, hopefully to deter crime. (162) Favor, Need indoor skating ice. (163) Oppose, It will increase taxes. (165) Favor, We need a place for informal gatherings d a place with meeting rooms for Scouts, other community organizations, etc. A place for people to b - to hang out. (166) Favor, We definitely need some place for our sch 01 kids - there is nothing in town but, lets not duplicate what we already have! Also, need a buildin to draw people to our area and generate some revenue - dog shows, large craft shows. (167) Favor, growing town needs to expand facilities d match growth. (168) Favor, we need one for the kids and adults. (169) Favor, our youth need a place they can grow in! et the thing they need, and spend their free- time at. A wheel park would get them off the streets - nd out of the parking lots. (170) Favor, keep business in the community. (171) Oppose, you have the land now to expand the pre ent city hall. (172) Favor, it should help our economics. (175) Favor, for family activities that are healthy, affo able & convenient. C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY-SRV.CMT z,,,':) 8 . . . (176) Not Sure, not sure if sharing with National Guard and community will work. (177) Not Sure, what are the tax implications? (178) Not Sure, is the City of Monticello large enough to support a community center? Becker's gets a lot of business from Monticello & surrounding communi ies. (179) Oppose, we already have a pool at the school. we oted already on the ice arena and said no. This is another attempt to slide it thru anyway. I can b ely afford to live here with the high taxes now. We're paying enough with all these schools we ha e to slow down. If were expected to pay for this center by taxes I'm opposed. I'm not opposed to th National Guard having a training center but were tacking too much on to it when you plan on havin the tax payers to pay for it. A small amount of those tax payers will ever use the center yet we are I expected to pay for it. (180) Oppose, we don't need it. We have schools and h alth centers that offer many of the same amenities. (182) Oppose, no new taxes and center is expensive to (183) Favor, need places for people to go. (184) Favor, It would give minors a safe place to go an would be enjoyed by all age groups. (185) Favor, It would be nice to see a community gathe 'ng place and somewhere to exercise locally and reasonably. (186) Not sure, because not specific enough about fees nd taxes and purpose. (187) Oppose, this uses tax money for direct completio to private enterprise. (188) Favor, give families some where close to go to, to do things together. (189) Favor, Our community is growing and we need grow with it. (190) Not Sure, I think the city is moving too rapidly 0 this. I'm not a hockey fan but I think the hockey people deserve an ice arena and if a communit center is approved, they should have considerable input. (191) Oppose, Taxes - no more spending sit on it for 0 e year - ONCE. (193) Favor, Our community needs one. (195) Favor, I would like to have a place close by to go to swim, exercise (workout) play basketball etc. (196) Favor, That's what we need for the kids to hang ut, instead of on the streets and around public buildings and stores. (198) Favor, Beside's roller rink and bowling alley wh re else can a family go to have fun together beside's Becker Community center; I would rather ke p my money in Monticello. (199) Favor, this town needs something like that. (202) Oppose, taxes already too high. (203) Oppose, Why don't you answer a few questions. Such as what is the total cost to the community? Where does the money come from? Where will it be I cated? What is impact on traffic patterns? How will the Guard be involved with it once it is built? at is their motive for offering the support anyway? (204) Favor, We have young children - I'd love to see place that we could bring them and enjoy ourselves. (205) Opposed, Do not feel tax payers can afford it. (206) Favor, We feel some of these activity areas wo ld be beneficial to a number of people. (207) Favor, Need more opportunities for exercise d ring winter months. (210) Not Sure, will keep residents in this town for a tivities. (211) Favor, It would provide valuable physical cond tioning opportunities that don't currently exist. (212) It would offer much _ needed recreational oppo unities for young children and family activities. (213) Favor, essential to the growth of Monticello. (214) Favor, Our community needs more activities fi r children to go with their friends. (215) Favor, good for health of community, promotes community fellowship. (216) Oppose, I don't want our taxes to go up, and if here is a tax increase, the center should be free. (218) Favor, I think it would give young people mol' to do instead of getting into trouble. (219) Favor, A place the whole community would be able to use. (220) Favor, I have kids and they would love it. (221) Favor, I think the kids need outdoor wheel p k. (222) Favor, We have a gym that doesn't quite provi e all the needs. Also I see the roller blade kids using unsafe areas, would like to see someplace sat (out of regular traffic). The gym has a pool, a ree area, small gym. C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY.SRV.CMT z,,, 9 . . . (223) Favor, The City is in need of a multi-purpose facil ty to meet the needs of people of all ages. (224) Favor, We need to give our kids something to do keep their interests in healthy activities. Gives them less free time for drinking, drugs, etc. It gi es a community a type of unity to do these activities together. (225) Favor, It would be a nice addition to the communi y. (226) Favor, We need a multipurpose building to serve variety of needs in the community. (227) Oppose, not essential, too expensive, sounds like monument to the council and mayor to most of us. (229) Not sure, how much would our taxes raise? (231) Note sure, my fixed income only goes so far. (233) Favor, our community could use one!! (234) Oppose, I am getting tired of paying more taxes e ery year for building recreational facilities so parents can send their kids some place for free baby sit ing. (235) Favor, We need an area for our kids to have fun a d spend some time with each other not on the streets or at under age parties. (236) Favor, provide activities for many in town. (239) Favor, It would be a good family place to go but d n't want my properly taxes raised to help pay for it. (240) Favor, job opportunities, good for the community. (242) Oppose, Our taxes are high enough with the new school and sewer plant now. The city hall can add on to what they have if they need more room. The have a good location where they are. (243) Oppose, you have a nice building if you need mo e room ad on to existing building with the new sewer plant and high school now this our taxes will go p some more. Your chasing all the older people to move out. (244) Favor, I have nothing against a center, that is co venient for all, it would strengthen community spirit. (245) Favor, Provides a central location for multi-use a tivities/groups/individuals. (246) Favor, for free. For meetings, family counseling, meetings, church meetings. (247) Favor, the community is growing and we need it. (248) Favor, great resource for all ages. would bring c mmunity togetherness - more people would stay in Monticello for recreation/shopping. (249) Oppose, The City of Monticello needs to build th business community in downtown it's priority. (250) Oppose, too much taxes. (251) Oppose, I'm to old for any ofthese things and be ides I'm a widow, never went to any of them center. (252) Favor, I see this as a strong community need. (253) Favor, It's great for the whole community, Mont cello needs to open a local hockey arena for the program! ! (254) Oppose, 1.5 million. this is our taxes too. We h ve a health club in town already and a swimming pool at the high school. (255) Favor, I think this would be a great idea for this town. (256) Favor, I would really like to have an indoor plac for skating & hockey. (258) Favor, It would be a great community resource d the National Guard is an outstanding organization. (259) Favor, the kids in Monticello need something! (260) Favor, good for the community. (262) Not Sure, I think what you are offering isn't re ly necessary - need to redesign. (263) Oppose, It needs to be down to a vote!! (264) Oppose, How many times do you need to be told we the people do not want this. (266) Favor, we think this community needs a comm nity center. A place for kids and adults to use. We would not mind our tax dollars being used for thi . Our community needs to start planning for the future of our children. (267) Oppose, Like stated above they will put up 1.5 ward construction - not pay in full. No more tax money for these types of things! (270) Favor, Would provide great opportunity for win er time activities and family fun to break up the "cabin fever" during winter months. C;\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY .SRV.CMT . . . (271) Not sure, Favor Ice Arena, oppose facilities we al eady have or don't need. (273) Oppose, we don't need it. (274) Favor, because it would be a place for family to g . (276) Oppose, this town has a health club iflocal peop e would like to exercise. (277) Favor, I think it would be great to have somethi g like Becker has here, providing the membership fee could support most of it. (278) Favor, Because families could use it all year rou d. (279) Favor, good activities for families & children tha are safe and close to home. (280) Favor, a great place that would be close to home for the whole family to use. (282) Favor, Central focus to community. (283) Oppose, read the paper - listen to the taxpayers the burden is much to large now. (284) Favor, somewhere to play basketball, do aerobic, play tennis and racquetball. (285) Oppose, Weare in the process of paying for wat treatment expansion and new high school. (286) Not Sure, we have waste treatment plant upgra e, new high school, and possibility ofN.S.P. leaving tax rolls. I don't want to become another Carn ridge and I can't afford property taxes to go up, especially for something that is nice to have but not a solutely necessary. (287) Favor, I'd like a place to take my children on we kends, as a family, that is close to home. (288) Oppose, National Guard in city not an asset, thi proposal will be a financial drain on city for years to come, fees will not begin to pay for upkeep. (289) Favor, We need this in our city~!!! Something fo families to enjoy and a place to go together for healthy fun. (290) Oppose, We have high enough taxes. This is no necessary as it is another burden for the tax payer. (291) Favor, Kids need a place and so do the adults. (292) Favor, I think it is a great idea! Monticello nee s some place where adults and kids can do things together - that doesn't cost a fortune. I think e erything you have listed would be great. (293) Favor, It would be a nice place for both children and adults to use and would be a plus for the community to be able to offer this type of facility to th public. (295) Favor, would provide a place for our youth. (296) Favor, we use the Becker Community Center at times and would find a similar building useful and beneficial for the community as an activity cente . (297) Not Sure, I'm a renter and feel I shouldn't have pay for it, we pay enough now. (299) Not Sure, While the facility would be an asset the community, I question the need for it and am apprehensive about the liability the city would as ume long term (financial and civil). (301) Favor, We need a larger space for programs a place for people to go, city wide functions. (302) Oppose, We pay too much in taxes already with all the schools & sewer plant. We do need some thing for the youth. (303) Oppose, It's not needed. There is already a hea th club in town whose business will be hurt by such a facility. City and school district spending is al eady out of control. (304) Oppose, City taxes in Monticello are too high. ity spending is out of control. Compare the number of city employees with other cities the same s'ze. When N.S.P. tax base is reduced, the residents will be left with a high debt. (305) Favor, Becker is a good example, very popular, ell attended. (307) Favor, Kids need things to do or they will resor to drugs and alcohol for entertainment. (309) Favor, Monticello youth need a safe recreation · area. (310) Favor, Strongly favor - have kids in sports and ctivities, I'm involved in sports and activities, feel it can be a money maker for community. (311) I oppose a center, because I feel the Guard and ity should be separate. I feel the above ideas are offered through the school. (312) Favor, Community centers are a great asset to very city that has one. (314) Favor, place where families can go. (317) Favor, It's important that the youth in our com unity have places for them to go - also it would be an economic boost - drawing people in to the city - not out - families can do things together - varying ages could enjoy. (318) Favor, We need this not only to provide emplo ent but our health club isn't large enough. We need a better place also for kids to get off the street, kateboard, etc. C:\OFFICE \KAREN\CITY -SRV.CMT z" 1~ . . . (320) Oppose, I feel that with taxes on the rise with ew schools and sewer plants that an issue ofthis expense should be decided by the voters and not by e mayor and council. (322) Favor, I think it will be a good addition to the onticello community. (323) Oppose, Use the school and health club faciliti s. (326) Favor, We favor the community center, and in articular the ice sheet and wheel park, to provide fun, healthful activities for the families and youth of Monticello. (327) I oppose it because I truly believe spending is 0 t of control at our local level of government. (328) Favor, Place for family recreation, good "hang ut" place for youth. (329) Favor, The community needs something other an a crisis or catastrophe to draw itself together. (330) Favor, Benefit to the community. (331) Oppose, What do we need a center for when we have the space available (the schools) when we need it example: tornado rips thru, use schools & chu ches. (332) Oppose, Too expensive. many activities alread available in area - should we compete with private business (health club)? How many tax increa es can our city support? (334) Favor, Monticello needs a center to be a core fo the revitalization of the downtown. must be family friendly. (335) Favor, It will expand the capabilities of the tow toward self-sustaining and bring competition into the local recreation/exercise market. (336) Favor, would like lessons to go along with i.e. sk ting lessons, swimming lessons, gymnastics lessons. (337) Favor, The community needs a facility like this. It would be another option to keep kids busy and active. (338) Favor, The youth and families in our communit need a place to recreate together. (339) Oppose, 1.5 from National Guard. What is citie share? Guard would have built their own facility. This project can be a good project. I'm offend d by how it is being pushed thru and the manner. (342) Favor, Good anchor to growing city. Much need d facility. (343) Favor, Monticello needs to progress. It should h lp keep down town active and hopefully promote new business. (344) Oppose, I oppose it unless it's the only way we're going to get ice in this town. If we do get one and it has ice, pool and wheel park then we'd probably use it. (345) Favor, It would give families something and som where to be together that kids and adults are both welcome. (346) Favor, If the National Guard wants to pay for it _ fine. (347) Favor, I think an ice arena would be good for the mmunity. We have all the other amenities in town except that! (348) Oppose, Let the people vote! The cit owns plenty ofIand at current site. How many more taxes can we afford? (350) Oppose, Increase in taxes, negative impact on pri ate health club available land on current site for city hall expansion WHEN needed. (351) Favor, Have used Becker's Community Center an our family enjoyed it, but it is too far away to be a regular member. (353) Favor, strongly. I think it is a great idea - it pro 'des fun for the family - exercise, education in swimming, skating etc. It will provide jobs for numero s people of all ages! And exercise is important! C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY_SRV.CMT z" . . . 4. What level of property tax increase is appropriate support construction of a community center? (23) I don't know. Is it possible to be a combination 0 funding? Ifit was spelled out why it would be a tax increase and for how long, it would be better. (33) I will support at what ever it takes if we prioritiz the proper areas of need. (39) Remember getting big business into town will offi et our residential taxes. (62) None, if we pay membership fees. (82) Definitely 2-3%, maybe 4-6%. Think over 6% wo 't go, however I'd pay it. (84) If we have to pay a membership fee and extra es we pay twice every time we go. (135) Not sure, with all that Monticello has going no ,water treatment plant, schools, people are strapped. (137) I think only the homes in Monticello who will b raised with taxes, should have a vote on this issue. (143) None, already an increase for schools, schools, s hools! (144) Less than 2%. (154) Not sure, but am willing to pay what it takes. (158) None, reason being is because of the taxes we e paying for new high school. (165) Not sure what the percentages are in terms of d lIars. (175) Prefer annual 1 time flat fee less than $60.00 f: ily. (195) None, if possible. (234) None, I don't understand people - they move to e area because taxes are lower than where they were, but they work their butts off to get their es right back up where they were. (277) Not sure, minimal. (286) Not sure, would only support 2-3% increase incl ding new high school, treatment plant and this civic center. (287) Something like the Becker Community Center ould be nice as it provides activities for people of all ages. (318) Ask for donations, business to donate for advert sement. (331) Don't raise our taxes! We chose to live here (du to less expense) than the cities. (335) 2-3%, This with a family use plan should work f: irly well. 4-6% maybe. (345) 2-3%, with no fee to use. (353) Not sure, maybe a small amount but the other 0 tion is a initiation fee (like health clubs) along with a monthly fee. C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY-SRV.CMT . . . 5. Comments/Suggestions: (1) Ice in Monticello would be great. The high school youth association would also purchase ice and then Monticello. Plus all the dollars spent going to these (2) Kill the hockey rink plans. Lets pay for what we plant. (4) If there is any cost to the tax payer generated by is task force (Le. meeting with architects, mailing costs of questionnaires) the task force shoul be stopped. (8) Instead of drawing more residents to our commu ity and building more houses, what are we doing to attract more businesses which pay more tax reven e. More residents appear to be driving our taxes up...not down. (16) The National Guard money is our tax money too value in this project. I would like to hear about othe (18) See earlier comment. Make this center availabl oriented also. (20) Our town has needed such a facility for sometim . An adequate building would take care of many (all) age groups. (21) New schools, new treatment plant, more sewer d water...somewhere along the line someone has to pay! It's easy to go ahead and want everything, b t what's the bottom line? What about N.P. tax base going south? The Times hasn't printed much a out, but Sherburne Co. & Becker seem to be worried. The way things are going you guys are goi g to control growth with Edina, Maple Grove taxes. Sorry about being so negative, but the taxes i this town have gone up over double in the last 8 years, time to hold the line! (23) I would like to participate if possible. I hope th opportunities for community input continues to be available. (24) Make the center accessible to a variety of activi ies. (26) Keep the membership fee's down so that everyo e would be able to join the center. Have something for older generations too. (27) We need a government center for offices etc. W are going to be assessed enough now with WWTP and the new school and improvement of othe s. Let's keep taxes at a livable level. (28) Bad location currently being considered; too e ensive. (32) Find out reasons from opposition and address t e issues. Hold meetings and educate the community. This form doesn't state any financial fi res except the National Guard. What are the costs and what are the projected revenue figures fro activities? (33) I was sure I heard early comments at Chamber eeting that we are not going to compete with our athletic club? (36) Consider Cambridge and the difficulties they a e in because of their free spending! A "nest-egg" should be built up in advance to fund a project like is. (37) Don't build one. (38) Instead of concentrating on things that will in ease taxes (too high already) put some effort into ideas that will relieve the burden. (39) Don't make the mistake of buying inner city I Perhaps South of town, Hwy 25. (40) One more tax and I am selling my home and m ving to a town with more fiscal sense. (41) I believe we need a facility, other than the rolle rink, Joyner Lanes, and the theater, for children to have organized time, and not have them "hangin " in town. (43) Work with life fitness if the city wants to exp d recreation areas. (45) Make units sound proof. Have plenty of out sid lighting. (46) Consider funding with proceeds from Liquor S re or sales tax and user fees. (48) Please consider all ages who might use it (0-65 ). (51) NA, I'm a renter. (53) Why don't we not build anything more till we fi d out ifN.S.P. is going to continue paying taxes. (54) Favor, I am 18 and when I was a teen there wa nothing to do with friends. (58) [We] came here from Rochester. Real nice plac to live. (61) Why pay taxes & monthly fees for usage. char e the users that don't pay taxes for the construction. ould purchase hours for high school hockey and k River and St. Cloud will no longer be home to wns will stay in Monticello. ready are indebted for Le. schools, treatment I do not see much sense of economic benefit or finance options. to all ages needs, not only sports. Whole family d. Build out of town with much parking space. C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY-SRV.CMT ~" . . . (63) Offer exercise and health well being classes on a aily basis. (64) Any ice rink should have at least 2 areas for just un for little kids and hockey but should be walled in good. (75) We have wondered why Monticello doesn't have ne since we moved here. I'd be happy to serve on a committee or help somehow. (76) We really need something that tells us about ho Monticello came to be. A monument of some kind. It must be better then the one Big Lake has! onticello rules!! (77) I think we often confuse desires and needs and I eel this is certainly one of those times. Your question could have been more honestly posed if you ad indicated that the $1.5 million dollar contribution from the National Guard was only a po ion of the total cost. (80) A water park (slides) would be a nice addition to pool. Maybe life fitness center can join you so everything could be under one roof (example, Plymou h Life Center-Community Center). (82) Don't settle for the minimum - have vision in pI ning and make it a place that will meet our long range needs or can be expanded to do so. This town eeds somethinq!! (85) Please pursue this - it would be a great addition our community. (88) "Move Forward" (98) Needs to be put on a referendum. Needs to be V (99) I really think that this community center would enefit Monticello in many ways. Group events could be held, student games, more jobs & revenue, t e community would grow. (103) Ifwe do it, make it something our community c n be proud of. (106) We need to have a senior center included in the civic center. Our present center has inadequate parking. (107) This could also be a facility that serves a wide ariety of needs: "Jo" programs, athletic events/tournaments, community services, craft show, church events, training purposes & schooling. Also an extra place where kids can keep out of troubl & stay healthy. (110) City Hall does not need a new building. The co ld add on, they're in a good location and have the space (113) Don't use property tax money. Fund from recei ts or other sources. (114) Great idea. I just hope it happens. Our kids n ed recreational things to do instead of hanging and doing nothing to get real team spirit!! (119) Indoor tennis could pay for itself with tournam nts, lessons, etc. We need a large meeting area for weddings, family gatherings or community event. (122) Pay attention to roller bladers and skateboarde s...ifyou don't, they will get your attention in other ways you will not appreciate. (123) I would like the activities, pool etc., we could h st events. (125) You cannot ask for a property tax increase and ask for annual membership fees, in my opinion. (127) The family unit needs one!!! (130) A good plan for exercising would be wonderful or the senior people. (132) We feel if you want to increase property tax a s all amount fine, but don't increase taxes and charge a fee then the tax payers are paying twice. 0 e or the other, taxes or fee. (133) I think the city should try to get out of debt ins ead of going deeper in debt. (134) The youth of our community would really bene t by the community center. If one is to be built make sure it has the ice arena. (137) Don't build the center! We don't need it. (138) Build the attractions large enough to accommo ate both competitive and non competitive sports, Le. pool large enough to hold swim meets so as to be ble to rent the area to competitive clubs during slower hours. (139) Don't need a center. Where is this money comi (141) Not interested. (146) May be nice for ECFE to have a permanent pI ce for their office and classroom. They keep getting shuffled around! Monticello already has an xpensive athletic/health club so don't think we need a duplication. (151) If the community center is to be built, do it rig t and include all of the amenities. (152) The township population should also help payor the center because they will be using it as much or more than city people. (154) At least an ice arena will generate $ into the c mmunity by it's use year round. C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY -SRV.CMT t-' 157 . . . (155) Monticello has the Life Fitness Center and high school gyms, grade school gyms. Indoor walking and jogging track are obsolete for tread mills, stair cli bers, and bicycles. Wheel Park needs a better location by itself. Better location with more building rea and parking. National Guard and ice sheet with multi purpose area like Brooklyn Parks. Little ore money from National Guard or Monticello with a land deal. (156) You had better put it on a vote ballot, THIS IS OUTRAGE! (161) The facility should be geared to serve all age gr ups with the emphasis on our school children. A party room with small kitchen which could be rented ut for wedding etc. might be nice. (165) I would pay $100 or so for construction (throug taxes) and I would pay $100-150 per year to maintain it and staff it so city residents could use it ee. I also believe strongly we need a "friendly environment place for people to meet, visit, have a co e or a snack, and just hang out. It needs to be clean, well managed and safe. Therefore, it needs to e staffed and policed routinely. (166) We have 2 indoor pools in Monticello now. wh not an outside pool? (171) Stop spending money like water, or should I sa taxes. (172) Take a close look at Becker Community Center I feel they over built. This should be a lesson for us. (174) There's none that I can think ofl (175) I think the Becker Community Center is a fun lace. It would be nice to make a special slide attraction or underground slides, something fun. (178) Be careful about the taxes issue with the new igh school & now the sewer assessment, I'm not willing to pay the city more when in fact the reason e purchased a home in Monticello was because of the lower taxes! However, that is turning out to be non-correct statement! (180) The taxes are getting almost too high at this pint, I can't afford to pay for a community center that I would not use. (185) Make it big because you will get a lot of the EI River, etc. area that will stop going to Becker because this is closer. Thanks. (186) It is not necessary to build a state of the art co munity center. We feel it could be built economically and yet be functional and aesthetically pleasing. (187) Let the dead horse sleep. (190) I'm amazed as how the council and city staff c take it about themselves and precede with planning and design of this large project without a r ferendum. (195) Be sure to have a great weight room! (196) The Becker center would be a start for plannin . (198) In favor of center but not the location everyon would try to park in fire station parking spots. (203) Scrap this idea. If you want to talk about raisi g taxes, how about a community scholarship fund for academically qualified students from finan ially challenged families. (209) If we are paying a membership fee, I feel as th ugh taxes should not be increased. (210) More activities for senior citizens. (211) With the Monticello area growing rapidly, I th nk it would be necessary to plan a facility that can support an ever increasing membership. (215) Another activity: a shop for such things as: W odwork, bike repair, metal working, etc. (219) Focus on things the community of all ages can use. (227) If this is so outstanding give the voters a chan e, rather than taking a phoney survey. (231) It depends on the number of senior citizens th t are near the location. (234) If the task force is in the planning stages does 't that mean what I put on this fonn doesn't mean a thing to stop the construction and you again wast d the tax payers money by paying someone to make and send out these fonns. Where is the $150 oming from (prize money) maybe taxes? or merchants who have to charge a little more so they an donate. Length of residence: 33 years, have any of the people pushing for this been here this 10 g? Name: what difference does it make. Phone: don't want to be bothered. Address: Monticello, an am feeling less proud of it every time my taxes go up. (235) We've needed something like this for a long ti e without the old names controlling what is done in this town. We need to do this for our families. (242) This town doesn't need all you are proposing. (244) Hours should not be limited to InonnaI" busi ess hours. This should not be used as the high schools base (or elementary school either). C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY -SRV.CMT . . . (246) Let's go for it. Good for our young and old people, for our city & for all of us. Monticello and National Guard together for a strong caring communit . (249) The tax base in Monticello is sky rocketing towar s those of the metro area where most of the people are moving away from. (254) The question should be asked how much this cen r would be used by the Guard vs. the community? Why should I be forced to pay taxes for a ealth center when I can join the center in town already if want to? (258) This is a great idea and the Guard has a lot to 0 r this community besides a community center. (261) It would be wise to have the space available to re t out at times for events to attract the paying public from outside our area. (262) The health club offers most of what you listed on he front - people could join there - climbing wall, skate boarding & ice rink are limited to a certain number of people. Could use an outdoor pool being there isn't one in town. My family wouldn't use e facility. (264) DO NOT BUILD. (266) It's too bad that our community did not do somet ing like this a long time ago. Our children will not benefit from it, but we hope other young children ill! (267) I think your task force should be trying to come p with ways to save money and lower my taxes that keep going up. (270) This is a great idea for the community for those r sidents who live here year round. So get it done with an ice sheet and don't listen to the cry baby nowbirds who flee to Arizona or Florida during the winter months that will oppose this. (271) This area needs an ice arena. Why should are ki s have to drive to St. Cloud. An Ice Arena would be booked and would bring in its share of rev en e. (272) Finance through grants and donations/fund rais rs. (273) Don't you think with the school and the waste tr atment plant that's enough taxes for a while? (275) This would be very nice, but taxes are already go"ng up because ofthe school. We need to keep costs down, there are many young families in Monticel 0 now. (279) Some in community cannot afford monthly mem erships. Have daily or per use costs and free days. Family locker rooms would be nice (for parents ith different sexed children). (280) Have classes for families to take for a small fee i.e. baking cookies, seasonal crafts, etc. (281) I won't pay with tax increase and membership fe - 1 or the other. (282) Go for it! (284) I would like a place to run indoors and play bask tball. Make sure you have something for the kids. Thanks. (285) Expand at present location or redesign the build ng city hall is in. Put this up for a referendum, where voters can decide up or down. (288) Don't shove this crazy idea down our throat, let he people vote on this. The proposed location is very bad, do not even consider surrounding the fire s tion with this. (289) Please do this!!!!! (290) We don't need to waste any more money or time ith a task force. This proposed community center and training center is unnecessary. Let the cit residents decide on a referendum vote. (294) I am receptive to a facility such as Becker. how ver, with a new high school and their projects in Monticello am not interested in increase in taxes. (297) I think a hockey rink would be in good taste giv s the kids and parents something to do in the winter. Other than that there isn't much to do in Mo ticello in the winter months. (299) Has this need, which is questionable, not alread been met privately? Would we, the city, not be hurting a Monticello business that has been in operat on for many years? Re: Health Club-which also offer special packages. (300) I think any community center or some form of e tertainment center needs to focus on two age groups, the young and the old... both have the time to use facility during the day. Everyone else may use it early "AM" or after supper! (301) Make one area big enough for concerts, commun'ty get together, craft shows, swimming and hot tub area good size - rooms like Becker for family rent 1 parties etc. (303) Put the community center on a ballet for voters decide if it's what they want. (304) Wasteful spending - the private sector would bu'ld this ifthere were people willing to spend money on a "health club". C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY-SRV. GMT . . . (305) Would there be a user fee if a tax increase was mplemented? (315) Privately funded only -let the market dictate t e need, not the bureaucrats!! (316) We really do not think it is fair to charge extra or a center when we have the same basic amenities in the public schools. (318) I work for Morton Building we have a great de for quality when it come to commercial/activity center construction. Good quality 50 year warranty. (319) Over extending budget. (320) A small but determined [group] has been worki g for years trying to convince the city to build an ice arena which would never be off the tax rolls. We on't need it. It would have to involve a larger tax area than just the city. (322) We have a nice "new" health club in town; so I fi el that we don't need some of the same stuff (also new high school will provide some more). (323) Taxes are already too high. (326) Be bold - our community needs this center! Als ,future business and community growth depends on it. The recreation needs of families and y uth need to be given the importance they deserve. (327) My suggestion is to abandon this project all tog ther. It's not YOUR money!! (330) This decision should be put to a vote/referendu (331) If the National Guard are contributing then pu their name on it and leave the peoples money out of it. (332) Wouldn't it be fair (Bill?) to let the voters decid since it is their money? (334) A community center needs to incorporate famil ,especially youth activities, activities not just an office building. (335) Aggressive advertizing of a well planned facilit could bring money into Monticello from all of the surrounding towns. This would go a long way to ard paying for itself, and helping out our town. (337) I am concerned with our hockey players at all Ie els having to drive out of town for ice time. I think this would be a great investment. (338) A community center benefits a town in many w ys: jobs for local youth, potential income production, a central focal point for members of the c mmunity, constructive activities for families, ete. (339) With some of the other city projects/sewage pI t coming on tax roles - maybe city should be working harder to build Monticello's tax base 1st. 0 is this task force/how were they picked? How many cities have tried for years/spent millions to revi ize their downtowns, St. Cloud, Elk River, etc. you want growth done right - South side of 94 and up and down 25, less expensive, can layout better roads, ete. that meet today's retailers needs, like Elk iver 169/St. CloudlMaple Grove. (343) Now is the time to go ahead with your plans no atter what the opposition - This is very much needed in Monticello otherwise how can Monticello k ep up and grow. (344) Frankly, it irritates me that an undertaking su as this can happen without the people voting on it. I think a wheel park is extremely important. I every place in town is going to ban those kids then there had better be an alternative provided. (346) There is no need for the community to pay for a enter that a select few will use. (348) The senior citizens like their current location - i s very nice. Why do we have to move - most I know want to stay. (349) Don't know how residents on fixed income can ord this and ifNSP gets their wish our taxes will surely go higher yet! (350) Give the people a chance to vote on this. The 0 ly reason you would not is because you know people don't support it. Mr. Fair and Council- take t e crowns off your head. (351) Talk to some people behind Becker's Communit Center and find out what works and what should have been changed. (353) I would love to help out in any way! I support t is idea and encourage you to seek out the positives and focus on the long range benefit this will ave to the city. C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY .SRV.CMT o . . . 6. Do you have a use for a meeting room on a regul (4) No, the organizations I belong to have their own (20) Senior Citizens. Various groups or clubs need (80) Yes. (85) Yes. (127) Yes, couple times per year. (154) Monticello Youth Groups and other organizatio s. (165) Boy Scouts. (200) Yes. (213) Yes, Chamber. (246) Yes, several. (257) Maybe, community education. (267) No, use churches & schools already here! (282) Yes. (326) Yes, Cub Scouts. (329) Yes. (332) No, I can use the library, school, motels, etc. (339) No, hotels provide our needs for meetings. (343) No, not now but can see where this would be us d by many. (350) No, plenty available. basis? eeting places. eeting place. ~...(Q( C:\OFFICE\KAREN\CITY_SRV.CMT 19 . . . ,S~,lI~" Ifndrews I tOfYlrneYl~ Community Center Talks between RA & Council Groups An agreement has not been reached between the mall groups representing the Council and HRA. Bruce and Brian are the Council dele ates and Brad and Steve represent the HRA. The council members want a referendum, which requires the issuance of general obligations (G.O.) bonds, on the aquatic portion fthe project but do not think the public should vote on whether or not a new city hall is uilt. From the Council members' perspective people ant a "say" in something. Putting the aquatic portion of the proposed project out for a eferendum would satisfy the public's need for input on the project. The HRA members want to build the same com unity center with an integrated aquatic component "up front" using lease revenue bond to finance the project. The issuance lease revenue bonds does not require a public re erendum and is less expensive than the G.O. route of financing. (See table comparing t cost) All participants of the group believe that the cit has run out of space at the present city hall. To this end, all agree that some form of ex ansion needs to happen in the very near future. The HRA members on the small group have co e to some conclusions and are sharing them with the rest of the HRA. We have not pre umed the rest of the HRA membership has deferred any portion of the community cent r decision to the members of the small group representing the HRA. We submit the fol owing analysis and recommendation to the whole HRA for consideration. The HRA members' rationale for using lease re enue financing on the whole project is as follows: HRA goals are economic development, redevel pment and removal of blight. This project's financing is consistent with the HRA' charge and vision for Monticello and its future. It is the aquatic component of the community enters we visited that created the draw or attraction of the public to use the center. Witho t the aquatic portion, the community center will in effect only be a government cente . Aquatic components generate revenue. Annual operational cost of the whole facility are reduced by over $25,000 annually by revenues enerated by the water portion. The aquatic portion revenue will subsidize the city all portion, decreasing the burden on taxpayers. (oL Z~. . Property values will be enhanced in the area of t e community center. Monticello area businesses benefit from a comm nity center including water by using the center as a way to entice prospective employees nto working in the Monticello area. The attraction and retention of good employees is a b g priority for local businesses. A complete project including an aquatic center giv s businesses an advantage over other communities. Corporate memberships could be ffered so employees of Monticello businesses, who do not live in Monticello, could benefit from a discounted membership. Here it is in a nutshell: A $120,000 home will pay $42.40 annually in in reased taxes for a core facility using lease revenue funds. (No public vote) A $120,000 home will pay $51.24 annually in in reased taxes for a core facility using lease revenue funs and general obligation (G.O.) bonds to cover the proposed aquatic portion to be built at the same time as the core f: cility is built. (Requires referendum) A $120,000 home will pay $60.55 annually in i creased taxes for a core facility using lease revenue funs and general obligation (G.O.) bonds to cover the proposed aquatic portion to be built in 2 years from now. (Requir s referendum) . A $120,000 home will pay $44.08 annually in i creased taxes for a facility that includes the aquatic component using lease revenue fund . (No public vote) Most members of the small group, including cit staff, think that the public supports the building of the aquatic portion ifthe issue is put out for a referendum so why don't we save the taxpayers the extra costs associated wit going the G.O. route? The bottom line is that the yearly tax impact dif erence on a $120,000 home between building a "core facility" or a "core facility with ~ aquatic portion" right now is $1.68. That $1.68 will be even lower if 20% of future IF revenues in the district are applied to the community center debt. There seems to sufficient support on the HRA for this revenue commitment. . (,3 Z~. ~ -. -i l -, ~; -=- ~N '-1 ~ ~ c.J co en en S; ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 23' ~~~:l\ll~ ___'~_...._...,.. ~~ ~ rr -d ;:s ~~ ~~ ;:s ~ ~ .~ ..Q ~ C ~ ;.... ~ ~ C ~ ~ ..Q ~ ~ ~ ~ e- ~ ~ C""J ~ ~ C .~ ~ Q .~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ fn ::I Q. -- ::I fn ca o +' Q. ::I 'OJJ c . -a ~ i .-:: "0"'; ... Q) ::; ~ , i:S: Q) ;:- .50 o .... li~ Cd<.> ........ O(] gp "'d I ._ Q) p:: 0 61= "'. . lH~~o~ .... <l)" 1::] "O,.o<l) 0 =~ ~~ ;:j. ;:j - - 0P::0[U'~ ~Cd"'.d~ "O]Of'o ]~~~': <.> . Cd =.:.:: .S 5 ~ ~ ~ uU'l<=ll"O,.o "01::>< O<l)i::' ..2::' b ~ Q)." ~ .... ~.~ ~ .g ] ~ ~ i::' ~ S,! g .~ <l) >-;:jo 0 lU ..0 ~.;;< .... 1; Q).....sp. <l)~:::gcd", ..0 -5iil...e ~Q)<l)="" "0 .","O..2:lp. 061l~g~ ;l'mCd..:i'O'" "OCdiil~... o ~ ,;; ~ 0 o~ "'... U'l ~._ "'" - y, - = <l)"O 0 <l) ;> ... ... ~ .... ,9 ~.ca ' .p 'iil ~"'~......... ",P:: ~ ~ ......~ ~ := >-, . .... <=l _.p y, 1"0 ..c Q) 0-' >- 0 = ..... ;:j 0 >-..0..0 Cd ~ Cd =~"Q)<'> =......<.>0 0.. ~"O'" .5 Cd ~ ~.:.:: iP = :=:: 1::' d Q So'" .~ ...... I1:i ..c<l).......Q) ",""Q)ooQ[U' .~ ;:j:> '" = b ..c .... .....0 ..c 0..Q)...11:i ...,.. "O<l)..... ~ Q)<l).3Eu5C'"'~Q)~= 0.. P::g\.I.;Q);j- Cd~~ & "000..<.>..0.... .... ~ ~ ~ ..... .,cUJ :t::<Il E l:: C/I::! ..t:> cu..... ~ <l) <l) ~ <l)b.o-B ~ u5 E o:S .S .p ~ .<:;: :c '5 ~ "OO....;>NU . <l)"O......to.:.::Vl->< :> .;!3 to =..0 ... ;>-, Cd 0,... -o~O--'l~ o ~ ~;;:; ~ ~ ~.S "0 "0 .......... 0 <l)..:.:: = 0 0 S e-.... = u to ...... .... ;:j"O Q) to ~"'"O....o"'to:>..o ...ea Q) '" g"O.d to <1.> g 'n .... ~ Vl- <1.> [U'~ .::: I"O~ ~ Q)"O u..c::: ~ ~ "'.......0.....0<1.>....0.... o ~ ><.8 to.o,...... = 0 .....1Q)<1.>Q)o...ib~"O -. ~ Q) ;:j 0 p.;::l 0 0 ~ll....c:~=o~<1.> g..c to ~ =.9 -B Vi ~ '" Q) = Q) Q):::l "'.50 0 s~o....<1.>..o:5Q).... .~ ..... ~ Q) '<: C"f) ..... ~ c: U'lU'l....~.c;;.tO 0 (d ..... a) r""""4 (j} ._ u ",..0 fA, ..... - ~~ o:>~ ~~ da8 ca - - Q) - III- - Q) ~Q. iI5 ~.s E ~ 5 tl c.~:t cr'~ <1.>:E~UJ<<lg ...... ~ 6~ co 12 F:: ..... ",p.~ (/) Q)'Vlro u .{::: a.. :;: ..... c .- '1- (/) 0 ..-I .2 E ~.c.':Jo ~VlN_c; Q) '"C -- ... Q. .c +' -i Q) Q) C ~ "'CS Q) "'CS C = ~ 'OJ c .- ... Q) ..Q E G) E Q) 0:: ""~ '. '.", -. ~- ~ -.".,._~.,~ ~ . . ::.::::::::::==== _.-' ~ .' ..,;; ..... Q) :s~ 1;: -- ~ '" .cCUC OCCI) "'Q(/) eLSC o -- ........(1) - .'0. Q) == (1)-- z~c,~ S 01""""4 ctI ~. U III cu u 'f ~ III it G.I ;z E o ~ It .- FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 27. 1998 - F~RECAST from A1 Rumors about the projected surplus add fuerto debate She said her plan would cut state income taxes by 13 to 18 per- cent for e;very family earning betWeen $35,000 and $75,000. OFL senators fought back, say- ing ttIe Republican proposal was an irresponsible risk. The Senate OFL plan would spend much of the surplus up-front for hundreds of millions iniplanned construc- tion projects, avoiding interest payments over the next 15 years. Carlson and Republicans are pro- posing a traditional capital proj- ects bill, financed mostly through borrowing. Senate Majority Leader Roger Moe said that the tax relief is sub- stantial and that the Senate plan is a "sound road map" to the long- term future. The state and its tax- payers would save $550 million over IS years by paying cash for long-delayed public works pro- jects, ranging from wastewater treatment to highway and bridge repair. Nevertheless, it's become very clear at the State Capitol this week that the larger surplus will bring intense pressure for larger tax cuts. Both the House OFL leader- ship and Gov. Arne Carlson favor larger reductions, through another year of one-time property tax rebates. . . Bigger rebate? As for the latest windfall, Carl- son plans to propose that 80 per- cent of the extra $500-plus million be returned in tax cuts, a Source in the governor's office said Thurs- day. Homeowners and renters are getting a 20 percent rebate from their property tax bills this year, and Carlson would increase it to 30 percent in 1999. And he will propose setting aside money for income tax reductions, said the source, who asked not to be named. However, those tax breaks would not go into effect unless the next budget forecast, in No- vember, confirms that the econo- .' .' 0'" .-.- 0.....-. .',.~ '.. '._"'.< _ .." .~:f_~"_"" ".,'. ~_~~'.... .. STAR TRIBUNE. PAGE Al9 Ongoingr te clIts.or .one-time rebates? .... Governor Projected 1998 property tax: . $1,800 ""0, my will not be adve elyaffected by the economic coli pse in Asia. Today's forecast ill be the fi_ nal estimate that th Legislature uses to reviSe its bud et. The cur. rent budget period wi I expire June 30,1999. Senate bill The bill approved y the Senate also would reduce income taxes slightly, y about $50 million a year. It woul expand the number of people ligible for working-family and c i1d-care t~ credits and exempt new farm machinery from the sa es tax. . But the bill also ould give more than a dozen cities new authority to raise sale taxes by a half-cent or a cent. ost of the cities are smaller regio al centers, and the most comm n purpose for the requests is conv ntion cen- ters or community cent rs. The Senate bill wo Id reduce taxes on a home of av age value in the Twin Cities (m rket value $117,000) by $88 in 199 . The rate reduction would conti ue in sub- sequent years. Under he rebate program pushed by C rison, the same homeowner wo Id get a 563 rebate in 1999 only Each side accused the other of inconsistency during t e Senate debate. Republicans noted that Tax Committee Chairman D ug John- son, DFL- Tower, a likely andidate for governor, has repea edly said he favors up to $1.3 bill on in tax cuts and yet he voted r peatedly against the Republican p oposals. Johnson said he favors different mechanisms for tax relie , such as the one-year property tax rebate. DFLers noted that de pite the Republican assault on th DFL tax bill, many Republicans v ted for it Percent of taxes rebated (in 1999) 30 percent Tax rebate: $540 Star Tribune graphic in the end and it passed by a 50- to-13 margin: There are 24 Repub- lican senators. That's because many of the sponsors of the local sales tax options in the tax bill are Repub- licans, including Minority Leader' Oay. He said giving local voters the choice W raise their own taxes is not inconsistent with Republican principles. However, OFLers also noted that Republicans have been voting for spending bills that would be impossible with the level of tax cuts they SUpport. Sen. Steve Kel- ley, OFL-Hopkins, accused Re- publicans of "stridency" that would lead to "public alienation." THE 19TH ANNUAL MINNESOTA tloMt&T' PATIO SHOW MARCH 12. 15 R I V ERe E NT R E~ ~ Formerly ~f1n~it1~1~~:~~' Th" Y"ar s Gf't1atest Expo of lm"rior, Extuior, Patio, Landscape and Home Improvement products and services! ..,.,..-.. :.,~...::",.,c~..~ K A In :: sen just too. for I on ti- ~AA ~.~ .~./.:...:. ,. i- .::....IM*''j'~ DAILY FEATURES & SEMINARS Visit TheRi,.er Centre Gardens & O"er 600 Exhibits 2 IAVI $1.00 IVlRYDAYf "" _01 c.,... ...110110 "'" ,..ddpaH.r 1flllrn T1unb & . l..ottoi.GU"'ICINI ..--- Sch 1180 E.: www,saabusa_com 'Subiact to credit approval Deli. transmission and sunroof based or Option to purchase at lease end for ') ~ ~ 0 ~ - g ." . '-=t> ... ...:. . - ") ..; ~ -t- r~ -' ~ -+ ./ - ...,... -.; ---- ..r ~ .,.. .- ~ '-P - .; ....... :J - ~ " --:; Cr-- ~ t :g ~ t .J! ~.l!! fl <.:>1i !i .2'.j' . .S ~ !g. is j ~.. ~J ~ "'~ ~ II i:~f!t 2'iSl!!>.i.! i aJii's i' 'Ii~!~! I ~rl"~J! i ]'e~ili i l!h......!:! ~ ..!;:r~O" ~ F~"a~~~ .9 !'t"~l"go "1 o;;:~~oa:~ i! J 1 ~I ~l~l! ~!'Q 51 ~aC!: ilJ~ !i~.j ~Jdl ~., '" ~~I]J .t! I Ii, ~i~ 's'Ed I!i ....~ ~:!.. ..8.2 .s..... ~jj "((51/) f lb. Ie:! ~ J.r !J ~I d.~ ~ ~ ~~ J ~ t l!~ j ~ $ ~ ~ ~ ~!~ i f i !iiH~1 [ .1 ~l~~G'!f I i i~W!1 ~ ~ )I~~f~j I l ~ ~ ~ J! 'ia ~ ! I 8 i a ~ o .s 12 9 a .~ ~ :i irl c; Il. co i ::lg~'" _o"'~ _. .":'vi $f!::'''' l8 ~ 0 ~ ii~ii ~~i!8 !!l ~ 8~g~8tg ~~~"j:g" ljl :. e ::._~t:!.:::. ~ - N ~ ;:!; ~ i .... .... ..- ~ \'J ~ ~ 0 ~~~~~ g ~~~!;! !~Oi! ':"j ci ..- - "=- - ~~i gJ ~ ~~cd' 'i ;; c\I;- IliI" gf\l;f.:g8~EI~:il:l8 q, gq ."tl'i.<"!."t.....o. eo ..:i~glll~~:!!I?:g ~ ~N.....C"t ....... - - N N "''''''''l cC1:_(\I aJnf.D_ :sg ~ M....~ ~ ... ., .. ~ U 'P.:g ~i~!~ 8~ c '" .. ... - tti .., ... Cl ~ ... "': III o ~~~~{~~ ~;~~8 i!~~l;! 5~t~3 ii g ~ 8i~< ~- 8 - ::.% .... =iO! "'-. aq :;;~ :€ "':;:' gCl;f.gCl 8~;!Eg . 8. . ."l. _ . !. =; ~~.~:t....~ ~ .!! ~ ~ z lz ~ · ~!4 t":!. 3 iC;~ 0) S "t ;; ... , ~ ~ 5" ~ ,.; ~.. ili ~ "! III Cl .. <> '" , i ~ ~ i ;] .. C In ~12 o ~ ....s=~ ~ d,!ilC!~~ i d!:'li,lfe; " ~!~8~E j i- ~~i~i~~ ~ ~ V.'l2;UlO:J~ i !i i ll,. It ...J tlt '" 'u - t: ... c .2 It 'ii II .!:! -= - II C U o 1:- :E 'i! '0 ~ 1: E <J 8 ~ I ~! ~ s.!_ ... ~~ a ~~~ !i!~~!8 g! c'l~~ i! ~ ~ ~ ~ ] l! l.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ] ~ S eo :9 ~ i !j~~iI31~!~] ~~ii ! ~ ] 3 ",3E lo(\ ;t z ~~ Li: i ;::;!:l13:::~::;;IIl!~;; ~=~ ~ ~~ ;)..-71 3 i 8: _ ];;- iil~ ~C:J~E .,3 -:; ~ j~~~ i .. ~l ~~~~j ll~jl~ el:i:c3a;,g ... :3 ~ ~ to j ~ ,. ;! . ~ = ~ t! ~ =~~=!! g ... f/III' "..""CI...... \ P/Z'd 3l~IJOSS~ ~ S~31H3 Wd~E:~0 86. vZ ~ . .~ ~ :i1 ::; w f[ . ~ c: o .~ ~ c!l <> u. ..... ij! ;.~ i! 0( ~ ""'. } Gl ~ ! = ~ c3d. i! ""'. ~ uw i~ ..... .f~o~~ ~ ~~ ~~ci~tf ~ Ore ......l~____ ~______._............._~_~ 20 lici,.... :~~,.... ~ ~# l~..:~ ~O_ ~~ ...!l~'<t . . ...c::~ ON -------_...~..Q --------------.-................. .2 t; II B .E ~ := o .... ~ I .i='0' U ,t IlO G) G) ..... .e ~ u II III o ~ .. Z ~i...t:: u ::J 1! ...... ::ic.60 !OU~ c31 lI't '" .~ I'" 0"2 +S ceo S (; ~ ~ a: w w :8 ...J ....l 'lij'lij g ZZ 0 ..... ## ,.... ~~ i ON W :J. ~ 'lijlll ~O III (;j ::!:I- , , alai 10ea ll::ll:: ~~ a: a: 1610 E E iiii UJ!!,l # Uli ~ N ... 1'.~2..... ~ Ie g ~ ~ li1 ~ ~ '. ,..;C\!ai~.,..:Ol$!~~~ i~~ :e ~ ill le ~l M. lD_ co_ "": ~ ........................N !M ~t::~~Uligq~ a~~~m:s;:~ ..... ..... I ~.~.....""'.....~lDg.~.m. l~lD~~~~~~~~ ~m '1I ."'" . - .OlDN,....M ~~.,..:oai~;1e ~k.d~,....co.~m~~~le~~ ~N""'lD,................... ,'lI't M~(lS ..... . m ..................NN . 1!i . ;____________________________.-___......-_......1................________-.---.------------------- ::.i ::; M "'" "<t I(ll" l:i l:i I'..'.... '$ N ~ U; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :::: .CO"<tNOO....M.. .S!'<t~"<t~ 'y ~~~~~~~~ &!~~~~~~~~"": * . I" ....................N lt~ ' "'il'l ~ ~~~~~~~~ I~~~~~~~~~g ~ a~~~~~~~ I~~~~~q~~~~ :)j ........................ N ;& .~ gggggggg Igggggggggg g2g~~~S!~ q~8~~~~S!~~~ ~ ...... ...... ~ N M ih'" ...... (;S ilS t- t3., No. ill 1'--.. ~.. ~ W ........................N .., l%€ U] I ii~ 'Ii h~ I 'I'~ ~& i@ m w M~ f~ III .ij:i- I:H! II 0- <D :z; i j ,E III . -~ " ~ ~ <D ~.t:: ~ii :Nil .. == c: ';i $? ij '5~ B~ t~ ~ III a ~ CfJ Q) ~:; i~ ~J .... z~ ~ ~ ~$ c - _ ~ 'm _~ ~ Ai "tl - > J: ~ ~ !;'~ ..'[i (,) co ~ '- 8. 11!!I! 'E B~ ~5 1;1 - s ~ - ., ~ ~~f z,tIfI 1! - I!! -lSJ-g 'l5.:l1=,f! 1l~Sm 'tii ~.g F <D '- :iI'-' = j ~! . i~ll?~ ~5i~8-~ .g8.'~~~ ij; a .t:: ~ S- F ~!~ ~ j!ii~ ~\;c.g2 Bi~:~! ~mll= ~ ~ ~ !5 5 ~ c.~~5!~ ~~~.8"1 ~i~-g1; 111 0:: ~ 'Iii ~ ~ ~ ;;; c: I-- 0 ........ 4D ..~U)-lll= ~ 8. ,,; III ~ "eJ~,El:; ,g'~g~~ ~~~ g.~ t.> '" ",- ~ <t- ;; <t :.: s: <( a:: :I: Q. ::!i 8 ., \'!! ..... ~ o " .E ui 1 0( o/! I!! <D :2 w -. . . Special Council Agenda - 3/2/98 3. This resolution may be provided at th 5 . . ~-. Special Council Agenda - 3/2/98 4. (J.G.) This information may be available at he meeting, or it will be delivered sooner if possible.