Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
cp06-09-1997 c
JUNE SUNDAY MONDAY 1997 -g- -9- 1:00 p.m. -IIATS Joint Powers HUTCHINSON Board Meeting at IIATS CITY Facility CALENDAR 5:30 p.m. - City Council Meeting in WEEK OF Council Chambers June S to June 14 5:30 p.m. - Light Traffic Advisory Board Meeting in Main Conference Room TUESDAY -10- 10:00 a.m. - Directors Meeting in StaffConlercncc Room ANNUAL LEAGUE OF CITIES CONFERENCE IN ST. CLOUD JUNE 10 -13 WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY ::1 -11- - 12- - - 14- CONFERENCE /SEMINAR/ VACATION 6/9 - 6/13 - Ken Merrill (V) C = Conference S = Seminar V — Vacation AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL • MONDAY, JUNE 9, 1997 1. CALL TO ORDER - 5:30 P.M. 2. INVOCATION - Rev. Jim Hall, Word of Life Church • ► D .:� • ► • u11►1 1. MINUTES OF MAY 27, 1997 AND BID OPENING OF MAY 29, 1997 Action - approve as presented - approve as amended 4. CONSENT AGEND A (a) REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS BUILDING OFFICIAL'S REPORT - MAY 1997 2. CIVIL SERVICE POLICE COMMISSION MINU'T'ES OF MAY 29, 1997 HUTCHINSON LIGHT TRAFFIC ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF JUNE 2, 1997 (b) RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES • 1. RESOLUTION NO. 10852 - RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE 2. RESOLUTION NO. 10853 - RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 9612 ESTABLISHING INCOME GUIDELINES AND ASSET LIMITATIONS FOR SENIOR CITIZENS DEFERRED ASSESSMENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS REDUCED REFUSE RATE (c) REQUESTS BY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR ARTS & CRAFTS FESTIVAL • USE OF LIBRARY SQUARE PARK • CLOSING OF FIRST AVENUE SE BETWEEN MAIN STREET AND HASSAN STREET FOR "TASTE OF HUTCHINSON" • CLOSING OF HASSAN STREET BETWEEN WASHINGTON AVENUE EAST TO CITY CENTER ENTRY ON HASSAN STREET SE FOR EXHIBITORS • CLOSING OF MUNICIPAL PARKING LOTS SEPTEMBER 12-13,1997: • CORNER OF HASSAN STREET & FIRST AVENUE SE • WEST SIDE OF HASSAN STREET BETWEEN WASHINGTON AVENUE E. AND FIRST AVENUE NE FOR EXHIBITOR PARKING (d) CIGARETTE LICENSE FOR JONNY'S RESTAURANT & LOUNGE (e) 24 -MONTH LEASE BETWEEN MINNESOTA TECHNOLOGY AND CITY OF HUTCHINSON FOR CITY CENTER OFFICE SPACE Action - Motion to approve consent agenda is CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 9, 1997 5. PUBLIC HE RIN , -- 6:00 P.M. • (a) FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH HARDEE'S FOR USE OF CITY PROPERTY LOCATED ALONG GLEN STREET FOR PARKING PURPOSES Action - Motion to close hearing - Motion to reject - Motion to approve franchise agreement and adopt Ordinance No. 97 -196 (b) LETTING NO. 6, PROJECT NO. 97 -02, 97 -14, 97 -15, 97 -18, 97 -19, 97 -21, 97 -22, 97 -23, 97 -24 (ASSESSMENT ROLL NO. 5007) Action - Motion to close hearing - Motion to reject - Motion to approve assessment roll and adopt Resolutions No. 10848 & No. 10849 (a) DISCUSSION OF REINSTATING HUTCHINSON CANINE UNIT BY TERRI GEISLER Action - 7. (b) DISCUSSION OF WATER CARNIVAL PARADE ROUTE IN RESIDENTIAL AREA BY MARY EVANS Action - • (a) CONSIDERATION OF TERMINATING LEASE AGREEMENT WITH CROW RIVER ARTS, INC. (DEFERRED MAY 13, 1997) Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve termination 91001MINA T AX -0 -DITITZI - W (a) CONSIDERATION OF CITY COUNCIL DIRECTIVE REGARDING SIGN CLUTTERING Action - (b) CONSIDERATION OF CHANGING LOAN TERMS FOR 1988 SMALL CITIES HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve (c) CONSIDERATION OF AWARDING CONTRACT FOR LETTING NO. 9, PROJECT NO. 97 -20, MAIN STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and adopt Resolution No. 10850 2 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 9, 1997 • (d) CONSIDERATION OF REJECTING BIDS AND READVERTISING FOR LETTING NO. 8, PROJECT NO. 97 -17, CROW RIVER PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve - Motion to adopt Resolution No. 10851 (e) CONSIDERATION OF 1997 BIKE LANE STRIPING RECOMMENDATION Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve (f) CONSIDERATION OF CONSULTING AGREEMENT WITH SRF CONSULTING GROUP FOR BIKE TRAIL ROUTING Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve (g) CONSIDERATION OF PLAZA HEIGHTS RE- ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve (h) CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION FOR REDUCED AVIATION FUEL PRICE TO CITY'S AIRPORT FIXED BASE OPERATOR Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve 9. INUSCELLANEOUS • (a) COMMUNICATIONS 10. CLAIMS, APPROPRIATIONS AND CONTRACT PAYMENTS (a) VERIFIED CLAIMS Action - Motion to approve and authorize payment from appropriate funds 3 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL • TUESDAY, MAY 27, 1997 1. The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor Torgerson. Present: Mayor Marlin Torgerson, Council Members Bill Craig, John Mlinar, Kay Peterson and Don Erickson. Also present: City Administrator Gary D. Plotz, City Engineer John Rodeberg and City Attorney G. Barry Anderson. 2. The invocation was given by the Reverend Tim Caspers. 3. MINUTES The minutes of May 13, 1997 and bid openings of May 19, 1997 and May 20, 1997 were approved as presented. 4. CONSENT AGENDA (a) REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 1. FINANCIAL /INVESTMENT REPORT - APRIL 1997 ►�;7r1 _►I�� ►1�.CK�Zi u1u1 Y.�(i ► �d]�i� ►141Yx.Y�77��:�II)fF�Llld 3. HUTCHINSON LIGHT TRAFFIC ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF • MAY 12, 1997 4. HUTCHINSON AREA HEALTH CARE BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 1997 (b) RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 1. ORDINANCE NO. 97-196 - AN ORDINANCE ISSUING FRANCHISE TO HARDEE'S FOR USE OF CITY PARKING LOT (SECOND READING AND ADOPT) 2. RESOLUTION NO. 10843 - RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE 3. RESOLUTION NO. 10844 - RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING $35,735.00 FROM 1997 GENERAL FUND TO HUTCHINSON HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 4. LETTING NO. &PROJECT NO. 97-02,97-14, 97 -15, 97 -I8, 97 -19, 97 -21, 97 -22, 97 -23, 97 -24 ► RESOLUTION NO. 10845 - RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ► RESOLUTION NO. 10846 - RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT, ASSESSMENT ROLL NO. 5007 (c) DELINQUENT WATER AND SEWER ACCOUNTS • (d) UPDATE AND PRESENTATION ON TAX INCREMENT FINANCING MODIFICATIONS TO DISTRICT NO.S 4, 5, AND 6 AND ESTABLISHING TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 12 WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION 4 0 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 27, 1997 C] OF PLANNING COMMISSION (e) CONSIDERATION OF 1997 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION Motion was made by Mlinar, seconded by Erickson, to approve the consent agenda with the exception of items 4-b(1) and 4-d. Motion unanimously carried. Item 4- b(1) - -It was noted that a public hearing is required prior to adoption of the ordinance for a franchise agreement with Hardee's. Motion was made by Mlinar, seconded by Peterson, to hold a public hearing on June 9, 1997 at 6:00 p.m. Motion unanimously carried. Item 4-(d)- -The City Administrator commented on the presentation he made to the Planning Commission on May 20, 1997. No action was needed. LIRI I►I .1 • : I► • (a) CONSIDERATION OF PURCHASING EASEMENT ACROSS AVEYRON HOME • PROPERTY LOCATED AT 851 DALE STREET The City Engineer reported that the Light Traffic Advisory Board recommended approval of the City purchasing an easement across the Aveyron property located at 851 Dale Street for a potential bicycle/pedestrian crossing to connect Dale Street to Craig Avenue. Since there have been complaints received from residents , the Light Traffic Task Force will meet with them to discuss the trail. Motion was made by Erickson, seconded by Mlinar, to continue this item to the June 24, 1997 meeting. Motion unanimously carried. (b) CONSIDERATION OF AWARDING BID FOR RECREATION CENTER ROOF REPLACEMENT It was reported that two bids were received for roof replacement at the Recreation Center and that Schwickert Company was low bidder in the amount of $27,225.00. Following discussion, motion was made by Mlinar, seconded by Peterson, to award bid to Schwickert Company. Motion unanimously carried. (c) CONSIDERATION OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FOR NEW DICTATION SYSTEM FOR HUTCHINSON COMMUNITY HOSPITAL Motion was made by Erickson, seconded by Craig, to award bid to Dictaphone Corporation in the amount of $76,000.00. Motion unanimously carried. • CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 27, 1997 • (d) CONSIDERATION OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FOR BEDSIDE MONITORING SYSTEM FOR HUTCHINSON COMMUNITY HOSPITAL Motion was made by Erickson, seconded by Craig, to award bid to Space Labs in the amount of $95,942.00. Motion unanimously carried. 9. MISCELLANEOUS (a) COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITY ATTORNEY The City Attorney reported that a tentative meeting with Dakota Rail authorities will be held in Minneapolis within the next two weeks. He also commented on local cable reception problems and lack of response from Triax. The counsel attorney who worked on the City's cable franchise documents will be present at the June 24, 1997 City Council meeting to address some of the issues. (b) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COUNCIL MEMBER BILL CRAIG Craig inquired about the bus stop located where there is a bike trail. Rodeberg informed him that the bus can stop to pick up people on a bike line since the bus has the right -of -way. (c) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COUNCIL MEMBER JOHN MLINAR Mlinar commented on the memo received from the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities. The Mayor replied that the CGMC wants to meet with the City Council to discuss membership. (d) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COUNCIL MEMBER KAY PETERSON Peterson stated that the striping on South Grade Road is safer and easier to understand. (e) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COUNCIL MEMBER DON ERICKSON Erickson acknowledged the quality work that went into the Comprehensive Plan. (f) COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITY ADMINISTRATOR Plotz commented on the Finance Director's memo which reported on two State reimbursements. The first advance check for $1,173,391.00 covered one -half of the LGA and HACA payments, and the second check for $25,634.57 was for the City's share of the 1996 snow removal reimbursement authorized by the State Legislature. The City Administrator noted a letter received from Jack Sandberg pertaining to a personnel issue. (g) COMMUNICATIONS FROM DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING Rodeberg reported he had received a petition from residents just outside the City limits on Camden Road for the City to provide sanitary sewer service. He requested • authorization to prepare a cost report. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 27, 1997 C] Motion was made by Mlinar, seconded by Erickson, to approve a feasibility study. Motion unanimously carried. 1 1 mo 1&11111131 (a) VERIFIED CLAIMS Motion was made by Peterson, seconded by Erickson, to approve the claims and authorize payment from appropriate funds. Motion unanimously carried. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:05 p.m. 9 4 • MINUTES BID OPENING MAY 29, 1997 City Administrator Gary D. Plotz called the bid opening to order at 10:00 a.m. Also present were City Engineer John Rodeberg and Administrative Secretary Marilyn J. Swanson. Administrator Plotz dispensed with the reading of Advertisement for Bids, Three Revise Traffic Control Signal Systems, City Project No. 97 -20, Letting No. 9; State Project No. 4304 -47, S.A.P. 133 - 010 -05, SEH No. A- HUTCH9701.00. The following bids were opened and read: Water Street Electrical, Inc. Hutchinson, MN $52,400.00 Electrical Installation & Maintenance Co. Independence, MN 69,000.00 • The bids were referred to the Engineering Department for review and a recommendation. The meeting adjourned at 10:05 a.m. n , MINUTES • BID OPENING MAY 29, 1997 City Administrator Gary D. Plotz called the bid opening to order at 10:15 a.m. Also present were City Engineer John Rodeberg and Administrative Secretary Marilyn J. Swanson. Administrator Plotz dispensed with the reading of Publication No. 5030, Advertisement for Bids, Letting No. 8, Project No. 97 -17. The following bids were opened and read: Michael Watercott Const. $128,535.00 $149,957.00 Pierz, MN Structural Specialties, Inc. 117,977.00 131,394.00 Hutchinson, MN The bids were referred to the Engineering Department for review and a recommendation. The meeting adjourned at 10:20 a.m. • of , C� CITY OF HUTCHINSON • • BUILDING / PLANNING / ZONING DEPARTMENT 1 I I HASSAN STREET S.E., HUTCHINSON, MN 55350 PHONE: 612. 234.4216 FAX: 612.234.4240 Month-of-May 1997 - NEW RESIDENTIAL PRIVATELY OWNED PUBLICLY OWNED HOUSEKEEPING ham Number d Valuation of Number of Vahsdm of BUILDINGS No. Budry Huusiq aommrttlm &ulldtrgs Hornig mns"Im units Opef area Unit On* carve a c o S ngls -lemiy Muses. deached EmAds cowls rsnrs 101 Sugk-lamly Mures, ansched Sava ran icy eram m ras a•s. lm urb aoarro bsmw. end w+u a mMna 103 Tara OuIWI 103 Thee- w d lour-4 Dui 104 Flvacrinore tarrOy buldings 103 TOTAL: Sum of 101-105 � 109 NEW RESIDENTIAL PRIVATELY WNED I PUBLICLYOWNED NONHOUSEKEEPING hem Numbs d Vtltadm d Number of Vahrdon a BUILDINGS No. &A&gs Room canmalm &vl&gs Roma oonstrucdm I Crr* cares CYrvf taus c Hotels, motels, and tourist cabin trwnnt accomn ods6one 213 Offer renhousekeedng der 214 NEW PRIVATELY OWNED PUBLICLY OWNED NONRESIDENTIAL kern Number V•luadm Of Number d Valuation of BUILDINGS No. of crosmiebn Buildings oomtructbn Budd LYnil area CVrdr coos e c a Anusemartt, social, and recreational 316 Churches and other re4gous 319 Induetriel 320 Parking garages (bukMp 6 open decked) 321 Service stations and repair garegp 333 koep"s and bvslftu nal 3T3 Offlcp, banks. end professional 324 Pudic works and udlties 325 Schools and other educerk l 326 Stores and customer services 327 Ot nareesiderNd bulldirgs 328 6 7,880 Sbuct res other Nan buildrgs 329 ADDITIONS, PRIVA ELY OWNED PUBLICLYOWNED ALTERATIONS, tern Number Veluaton of Nu bw of ValLebw of AND CONVERSIONS No, of croswctlm Bultllrgs construction Bulldinge Omit cants QNr and (N (b) (c) (d) (e) ReWendal - CWss*addtibrn of 434 gsrsgm and mporta in fbn 199 1 6 11.637 Nmeadeneol and nonhouseksopbg 431 Addhims of resdenynt garages and arports 436 (sneched end detached) 1 14,500 DEMOLITIONS A LY OWNED PUBLICLY OW NED AND RAZING lem Number Number Of Number of Number of OF BUILDINGS No. d Hcuskg unb BuNdIgs HouNng units Bula gs a c tl o Single family houses (anadwd and detad,ed) 645 Two-family build" 646 Thee. end four -temly bulklings 647 Fcve rm etemgr buddsge 646 All other buidings and structures 649 Sian -1, RRR -14, RESIDE -5, FENCE 5, RWR -3, DEMO -1, CURB - CUT -1, MHI -1 Total Valuation ;9,443,541 INDIVIDUAL PERMITS AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION VALUED AT 35MODO OR MORE Please provide the IoDowlrq Information for each penNl auEwrlArg corutructlon valued at SAO,ODD or more entered in arW of the above aecOOna Item No Imm above aeNons cal Dwcdptfon (b) Name and address of ovmworbuildw (c) Omership Mark oM (d) Valuation of canatnrctlon Omv cents fel Number of Housig units (O Nlildugs col Krid of buildlrg ❑ Prvate Ck Public s 2,705,506 1 Si te address 1200 Roberts RD SW H,itrhInqnn- MN 437 c hoo n0 School Dist 423 ❑ Private Q Public s 2,976,127 1 M!J Ste address 1365 South Grade Rd 10 rlpn St NW 437 - SChcor School Dist 423 ❑ Private n Pubic s 922,654 1 Site eddreas 875 School Rd S 0 Glen t Hutchinson, MN IOrld d brV ❑ Private ❑I Pubic s 1,945,497 1 • address 100 Glen St SW St NW Hi,trhinqnn MN Commenu Are you aware of wry new penriNssuln0 ludsd cdons7 ❑ No ❑ Yea - Please &, mddillarullnlarmaaan In GLVr fa. Name of pwson to contact regarding tltle report James Marka Telephone Area code Number Edenabn Title NO POSTAGE NECESSARY IF MAILED IN THE UNITED STATES BUSINESS REPLY MAIL H rGYayr MnMi NO. WIO mcaroft eGMbfiia POSTAGE Y K PAD DY �SSEE F.W. Dodge A DM1ilbe dTYAeR:r�!lalG�peie Building Statistics PO Bar 609 Lcringrom MA 021739536 11111 1e 1ldN11 lies IItoIII11Le3IN III d sell er6d1 • • 7 HUTCHINSON POLICE COMMISSION MINUTES is The Hutchinson Police Commission held a meeting on May 29, 1997, at the Hutchinson Police Department. Present at the meeting were John Decker, Cheryl Dooley, Rick Nass, Chief Steve Madson, and Lt. John Gregor. The meeting was called to order at 7:15 a.m. Chief Madson stated that there were two employees who had completed there probationary periods. The first employee is Rosa Dostal who completed a 6 month probation period as well as a 30 day extension. The second employee is Steve Paschke who completed his 12 month probation. A motion with was made by Cheryl Dooley, seconded by Rick Nass, to change both employees status to permanent. Motion carried. Lt. John Gregor then informed the Commission that a Community Service Officer / Park Patrol position had been advertised. He stated that this position is being partially funded by the parks department and that 90% of the time this position will be patrolling the Luce Line Trail and the parks system. The hours that will be worked are Wednesday through Sunday, 3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. and will go through mid - September. This individual will be on bicycle however a vehicle will be provided by the parks debarment for inclement weather. They will be checking to make sure that camping fees have been paid, provide some security and will be able to write citations for petty misdemeanor violations. If there a further problems a uniformed officer will be contacted. There were two applicants that were interviewed by Lt. Gregor and Sgt. Mueller and Jason Mathwig was selected. A motion was made by Cheryl Dooley, seconded by Rick Nass, to hire Jason Mathwig for the Community Service Officer/ Park Patrol. Motion carried. Chief Madson provided the Commission with a copy of the new organizational chart which was changed due to the retirement of Lt. Scott Schwartz. This chart has two lieutenant positions and three sergeant positions. Chief Madson stated that there are three retirements that will be anticipated: Lt. Ron Kirchoff in January 1998, Officer Mike Kirchoff in July 1998, and Investigator Dick Waage in August 1998. He stated that within the next 3 - 6 months promotional exams will meet to be conducted due to these retirements. Chief Madson stated that there would be four officers who would be eligible to apply for the lieutenants position due to the requirements. Madson requested permission to conduct the exam under the same procedure as before, that being the Commission to panel the lieutenant interview and chiefs and captains of other departments to panel the sergeant interview. With there being no further business to discuss, a motion was made by Cheryl Dooley, seconded 6y John Decker, to adjourn. Motion carried. Time of adjournment was 7:35 a.m. 0 .2-1 -A, 62) • HUTCHINSON LIGHT TRAFFIC ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES Monday, Jane 2, 1997 5:30 p.m. Hutchinson City Center Members present: Rick Larson, Lucille Smith, Archie Woodworth, Richard Paxton, Brian Bonte and Ed Doring Members absent: Dave Conrad, Leslie Smith and Dave Radloff Staff present: John Rodeberg, Dave Mueller and Bonnie Baumetz Chairman Rick Larson opened the meeting at 5:30 p.m. I. REVIEW COMMENTS FROM RESIDENTS ON THE STRIPING PROJECT FOR JEFFERSON ST., LINDEN AVE. AND DALE ST. John Rodeberg reported staff will take another look at the striping proposed for Jefferson St. but do propose the Linden Ave. and Dale St. striping. Ed Doring made a motion to recommend support for the striping on Linden Ave. and Dale St. and review the Jefferson St. proposal in July, seconded by Brian Bonte the motion carried unanimously. G II. UPDATE ON THE PRESENTATION BY MR. TOM GOTTFRIED Bonnie Baumetz reported that Brenda Ewing will contact Mr. Gottfried for a presentation on July 21, 1997. M. OTHER ITEMS Dave Mueller stated he will research policy and standards for the City to set regarding in- line skating. The following Craig Ave. residents were present to discuss the possible bike /ped path to be proposed on Aveyron Home property: Mary and Bill Carlson 774 Craig Ave Kirk Larson 804 Craig Ave. Becky Jo Schmidt 824 Craig Ave. Mike and Karen Shaw 754 Craig Ave. Bruce Precht 775 Craig Ave. Jennifer and Eugene Speiser 814 Craig Ave. Deanna Puchalski 914 Craig Ave. Don Lickfelt 745 Craig Ave. Curt and Lois Asche 764 Craig Ave. Dean and Ruth Gauer 755 Craig Ave. Scott Powers 765 Craig Ave. G.F. and Olive Goldschmidt 904 Craig Ave. Terry Ruble 805 Craig Ave. Mary Carlson was the spokesperson for the residents on Craig Ave. She presented a number of concerns they have regarding the proposal of a bike path down their street. She also presented a letter from Ms. Vicki Powers, a resident who was unable to attend the meeting. John Rodeberg explained the route is being looked at because of access, safety issues and background given by MnDot and the origin destination study. He stated the City has not yet made a determination if this will actually be the route but at this time there is an opportunity • to purchase an easement on the Aveyron Home property which may not be available in the future. John again stated there are no plans at this time to construct the path, only to purchase the easement for the possibility in the future. Lois Asche, 764 Craig Ave., voiced her concern with having no input by the residents in the event the path would be constructed. Another resident is concerned their property values will decrease. Ms. Carlson stated the residents want this stopped and will work toward that goal. John Rodeberg explained he is looking at the city as a whole for the best and safest routes to connect the school property to the Recreation Center property. Ed Doring commented that city staff are trying to find the best way to get bicycle and pedestrian traffic through the city. He stated we do not know at this time if the easement will ever be used. Ed also noted the safety of individuals crossing streets at controlled intersections. John stated there is a possiblity of hiring a 3rd party consultant to give recommendation and direction as to the best routes to consider. Richard Paxton and Rick Larson both made traffic counts in the area and reported their findings. Discussion followed on the possibility of hiring an outside consultant to determine a safe route connecting the schools with the recreation center. It would be important to include the residents in the meetings. The consensus of the Light Traffic Advisory Board is to work with the residents and not to construct a trail without input of the Craig Ave. residents but to purchase an easement across the Aveyron property located at 851 Dale St., to protect the property for potential trail crossing to connect Dale St. to Craig Ave. IV. NEXT MEETING The next meeting will be held July 21, 1997, 5:30 p.m. in the Main Conference room at the City Center. Agenda items for the meeting will be 1) presentation by Tom Gottfried, 2) review Jefferson St. striping, 3) begin reviewing the standard and policy regarding in -line skating. V. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 10852 CITY OF HUTCHINSON • RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE The Hutchinson City Council authorizes the purchase of the following: ITEM COST PURPOSE DEPT. BUDGET VENDOR 1997 Ford Pickup $18,953.CD Replacement Water Yes Plowman Ford The following items were authorized due to an emergency need: ITEM I COST I PURPOSE I DEPT. I BUDGET I VENDOR Date Approved: June 9, 1997 • Motion made by: Seconded by: Resolution submitted for Council action by: -// i'(?) CITY OF HUTCHINSON RESOLUTION NO. 10853 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 9612 ESTABLISHING INCOME GUIDELINES AND ASSET LIMITATIONS FOR SENIOR CITIZENS DEFERRED ASSESSMENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS REDUCED REFUSE RATE WHEREAS, the Minnesota Statutes provide tax deferral for senior citizens, 65 years of age or older, or a person(s) on disability as defined by the Social Security Administration, for whom it would be a hardship to make payments, and WHEREAS, the home owner can make application for deferred payment of special assessments on forms which can be obtained from the City Administrator's office, and WHEREAS, the home owner /renter can make application for reduced refuse rate on forms which can be obtained from the City Administrator's office; NOW THEREFORE, the City Council has established the following income guidelines, asset limitations, and verification requirement for applications of deferred assessments and /or reduced refuse rates: 1. To be granted to person(s) with a low income of $14,750.00 per year for one person and $16,850.00 per year for a married couple. 2. To be granted to person(s) with an asset limitation of not to exceed $30,000, excluding the homestead and automobile. 3. Deferred assessment and /or reduced refuse requests may only be applied for if the following documentation is submitted at the time of said application: • A 1040EZ; or Federal Income Tax Form 1040, 1040A, Page 2, Resolution 10853 • Senior Citizens Reduced Refuse Rate B. Minnesota Property Tax Refund Form M -1PR Every two years the city can request said information to continue reduced refuse charges; existing reduced refuse accounts shall submit the same documentation to continue the reduced charges. Adopted by the City Council this 9th day of June 1997. ATTEST: Gary D. Plotz, City Admin 91 \UWLV \=Dffi .WM Marlin Torgerson, Mayor A HUTCHINSON AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE May 22, 1997 The Honorable Marlin Torgerson City of Hutchinson 111 Hassan Street Southeast Hutchinson, MN 55350 Dear Mayor Torgerson, MAY 2 71991 rC HUTLj- The 23rd Annual Arts & Crafts Festival of the Hutchinson Area Chamber of Commerce will be held Friday, September 12, 9 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., and Saturday, September 13, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Our Arts & Crafts Task Force would like to request the following: • Use of Library Square Park • Closing of 1st Avenue Southeast between Main Street and Hassan Street for Taste of Hutchinson. For emergency purposes the alley behind 101 Park Place will be • continued to the south side of the park. No obstructions will be allowed in this area. • Closing of Hassan Street between Washington Avenue East to City Center entry on Hassan Street Southeast for arts & craft exhibitors. • Closing of the following municipal parking lots Friday morning, September 12 through Saturday, September 13. 1) Comer of Hassan Street and 1st Avenue Southeas for restrooms, garbage, recycling, and Taste of Hutchinson parking. 2) West side of Hassan Street between Washington Ave East and 1st Avenue Northeast for exhibitor parking. All exhibitors receive a packing autltorization card. This card identifies vehicles parked in the restricted lots and allows exhibitors to replenish their inventory during the event. If you would like additional information, please contact the Chamber at 587 -5252. Thank you for your help in making the Festival an event of which our community can be proud. Sincerely, Christine Haefner HACC Arts & Crafts Task Force Member 0 206 Maln Street North • Hutchinson, MN 55350 (320) 587 -5252 te— HUTCHINSON AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 206 Main Street North • Hutchinson, MN 55350 (320) 587 -5252 MAY 2 71997 May 22, 1997 Mr. Gary Plotz City Administrator City of Hutchinson 111 Hassan Street Southeast Hutchinson, MN 55350 Dear Mr. Plotz, )F HUTCHI '0N The 23rd Annual Arts & Crafts Festival of the Hutchinson Area Chamber of Commerce will be held Friday, September 12, 9 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., and Saturday, September 13, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. We have contacted Mayor Torgerson, the Hutchinson Police Department, the Park and Recreation Department and the Street Department for their assistance. If you have any questions, please call the Chamber at 587 -5252. The Hutchinson Ambassadors also wish to reserve all concession rights in the downtown area as well as the control of any and all food exhibitors for the Taste of Hutchinson. The Ambassadors have an agreement with MainStreet- Hutchinson regarding the operation of the Popcorn Wagon during the event. Thank you for your cooperation and for all the help you've provided in the past. Sincerely, Christine Haefner HACC Arts & Crafts Task Force Member ACCREDITED .......... . C. Y ......................of....... .... of .......... Application for License to Sell Cigarettes at Retail The undersigned resident...... of the ...... ........_.... CitY...................... ........ ... ....... ...of........ Hutchinson ....... _ ............... ........., in the county of .... .... ,., ... Mq L99d ......... .... ._............... ............ _, State of Xinnesota, HEREBY all.4KE ... ✓IPPLIC.1- TION FOR LICENSE to be issued to.. ........................J Qnny.'. s...$ eS. t. au raa t....&.... L. RUimp'.....-.-... .J.axi...Qvad.(�..............._ to sett cigarettes and cigarette papers and wrappers at retail at ........................ ....... .............. ...... ......._...... ............................... 101 Park Place - Suite 105 _ _ _._ ........ _._...__ ..........................................................................................._......._..,......._............._........._..........._.._........................... ..._..................._.._.... in the... .......... .. UtY .................................. of .............. x. 4? tehinson .......................... .In said county and state for the term of ... .......... six_, months .... ,.. I ... ._......,.......... beff inninj with the....... 11-t.h .............. day of Tune................ 19:.97 , subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances and regulations of said ............. Rmt..h 11SS7.n ................... .....................pertaining thereto, and herewith deposit $ 25-00 .... .......................in payment of the fee Dated.....................' June. ... 5. ............................... 19...9.7.... PAID Jon H. Quade JUN S 1997 City of Hutchinson 0 COMMERCIAL LEASE �J LANDLORD: TENANT: Minnesota Technology, Inc. Southwest MN Region Redwood Falls MN, 56283 IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants and conditions herein contained, Landlord leases to Te nant, and Tenant leases from Landlord the space and services described by the following terms and conditions: 1. PREMISES. This premises is the Hutchinson City center,I l l Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, Minnesota, and consists of space for two offices aproximately 162 sq. ft., and certain services as described herein below. 2. TERM. The term of this lease shall be for a period of 25 months commencing June 1, 1997 ending June 30,1999 3. RENEWAL. Providing that Tenant is not in default under any term of this lease, Tenant has an option to renew this Lease for a term of 24 months, from July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2000. 4. SERVICES PROVIDED BY LANDLORD In return for rent paid, the landlord will provide access to internet lines for each office, allow casual use of copier machine, meeting room, and provide heat, light and electricty. All other office expenses will be the tenants responsibility. RENT 5 1500 annually, paid in quarterly payments of $375 each. 6. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR. The Landlord shall provide all maintenan for office infrastructure; Tenant will be responsible for all equipment owned by Minnesota Technology, Inc. 7. ALTERATIONS. Tenant shall make no alterations or improvements to the premises without the written consent of the Landlord. 8. USE. The premises shall be used only as business offices. 9. PARKING AREAS. Tenant shall have the use of two parking spaces during the lease period. 10. FIXTURES. All fixtures are the property of the Landlord. • 11. CANCELLATION Page 2 Landlord agrees that in the event the Tenant's funding from the State of Minnesota is reduced to the degree that partial or complete closing of these offices is required, or if Tenant's growth or other changes require relocation, the Tenant may vacate without penalty by notifying the Landlord at least sixty (60) days in advance of date that Tenant intends to vacate, . 12. SURRENDER OF PREMISES. At the expiration of the term of this lease, unless renewed in accordance to these terms above, the Tenant shall immediately surrender the premises in as good condition as at the start of this lease, except for normal wear and tear. 13. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This lease constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and may not be moMed except in writing signed by both parties. 14. SEVERABILITY. In the event any section of the Agreement shall be held to be invalid, all remaining provisions shall remain in full force and cffect. 15. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed or construed by the parties hereto, nor by any third party, as creating the relationship of principal and agent or of partnership or of joint venture between the parties hereto, it being understood and agreed that neither the method of computation of rent nor any other provision • contained herein, nor any acts of the parties herein, shall be deemed to create any relationship between the parties hereto other than the relationship of Landlord and Tenant. Landlord: Tenant: James H. Marshall - Regional Director Date: Date: Jacques Koppel - President Date: 0 • ARNOLD, ANDERSON & DOVE PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW DAVID B. ARNOLD STEVEN A. ANDERSON G. BARRY ANDERSON LAURA K. FRETLAND PAUL D. DOVE - JANE VAN VALKENBURG RICHARD G. MCGEE CATHRYN D. REHER WALTER P- MICHELS, III IAL80 ADMITTED IN TEXAS AND NEW YORK 101 PARK PLACE HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350-2563 (320) 557 -7575 FAX (320) 5874096 RESIDENT ATTORNEY G. BARRY ANDERSON June 9, 1997 OF COUNSEL ARTHUR L. DOTEN TERRI A. BLOMFELT 5881 CEDAR LAKE ROAD MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416 (612) 545 -9000 FAX (612) 545.1793 FAX (612) S42 -9210 501 SOUTH FOURTH STREET PRINCETON, MINNESOTA 55371 (612) 3892214 FAX (612) 389 -5506 Mr. Gary D. Plotz City Administrator Hutchinson City Center 111 Hassan Street S.E. Hutchinson, Mn. 55350 Re: Commercial Lease - Minnesota Technology, Inc. Our File No. 3188 -87001 Dear Gary: JUN 9 -1997 I write to you today regarding the commercial lease between Minnesota Technology, Inc. and the City of Hutchinson. First, the lease does not identify the "two offices" that are to be leased to Mmnesota Technology, Inc. Is this of concern? Are we discussing cubicle space or actually office space? Does the City have the option to move Mmnesota Technology, Inc. to other space within the building if needed? I note that the term of the lease is for 25 months and runs until June 30, 1999 and there is an absolutely completely incoherent renewal clause that provides that the tenant "has an option to renew this lease for a term of 24 months from July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2000." Unless my arithmetic is seriously deficient, I presume the renewal period is through the year 2001. I would note in paragraph 11 that while the City is obligated to lease the property to Nfinnesota Technology through 2001, Minnesota Technology does not have any similar parallel obligation. Thus, the City has a longer obligation than the tenant which frankly makes no sense. • I would suggest that the lease run for one or two years, whatever the Council may feel comfortable with based on recommendations from stag and that thereafter the lease roll over on six month terms. It certainly seems to me that either party ought to be able to give six months notice to terminate the lease without any serious inconvenience to the other party. I would then recommend deleting paragraph 11 which essentially converts this lease to a 60 day lease at any time from the // , E CERTIFIED AS A CIVIL TRIAL SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION DE CERTIFIED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION Mr. Gary D. Plotz June 9, 1997 Page 2 of Mnnesota Technology, Inc. If this clause is essential to Minnesota Technology, Inc., then, in that event, I suggest that we throw out all together the term of the lease and simply make it a 60 day lease terminable by either party upon notice. I have no idea what "all maintenance for office infrastructure" means, but I note that the City is suppose to supply it. Does the City have the right to specify the two parking spaces that are to be available to Minnesota Technology? I recognize that this lease arrangement is an outgrowth of an informal relationship and it is unlikely to the point of improbability that the lease is even necessary in terms of the working relationship between the parties. However, should the identity of the parties change, problems could be encountered and in light of the close proximity of Minnesota Technology to City personnel and City facilities, including the possible disclosure of confidential information, it does seem to me that this lease requires a little more formal structure. I trust I have not complicated your life unduly. Thank you. Best regards. • Very truly yours, ARN D, ANDERSON & D�VE, PLLP Barry Anderson GBA:hn is PUBLICATION NO. 5035 • PUBLISHED IN THE HUTCHINSON LEADER: TUESDAY, JUNE 3, 1997 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on Monday, June 9, 1997 during the course of their regular meeting which starts at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall for the • purpose of: entering into a franchise agreement with Hardee's to use City property located along Glen Street for parking purposes. This hearing will be held by theCit Council of the City of Hutchinson. At suc hearing, all persons interested may be heard. City Administrate • May 30, 1997 Date ,-, ' • ORDINANCE NO. 97-196 , 2` SERIES PUBLICATION NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA, GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO NORTH CENTRAL FOOD SYSTEMS, INC. AND ADOPTING, BY REFERENCE, CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 2.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON ORDAINS: Section 1. North Central Food Systems, Inc.. is the owner in fee simple of certain real estate located within the City of Hutchinson. Section 2. The owner of the above described property desires to secure from the City of Hutchinson an easement for access purposes and the City of Hutchinson is willing to grant said easement. Section 3. Notice of hearing was duly given and publication of said hearing was duly made and was made to appear to the satisfaction of the City Council that it would be in the best interest of the City to grant a franchise for said easement covering the following described real estate: That portion of Glen Street North in the North Half City of Hutchinson, McLeod County, Minnesota, lying easterly of a line described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the centerlines of Third Avenue Northwest and said Glen Street North; thence northerly along the centerline of said Glen Street North, 80 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence continuing northerly along said centerline 224 feet and there te rminatin g. Except the westerly 17 feet thereof. • Section 4. This franchise is subject to the requirements of the Hutchinson City Charter and the franchise and associated easement shall expire twenty (20) years from the date of publication hereof. Franchisee shall not acquire, at any time, rights as against the City by way of prescriptive easement, adverse possession or in any other manner. . Section 5. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and section 2.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 6. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the City Council this 9th day of June 1997. Marlin Torgerson, Mayor Attest: Gary D. Plotz City Administrator • Published in the Hutchinson Leader: First reading: May 13, 1997 Secondreading: June 9, 1997 PUBLICATION NO. 5033 NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ROLL NO. 5007 • LETTING NO. 6 /PROJECT NO. 97 -02, 97 -19, 97 -21, 97 -22, 97 -23, 97 -24 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that the City Council will meet at 6:00 P.M. on the 9th day of June, 1997, in the Council Chambers at City Hall at Hutchinson, Minnesota, to pass upon the proposed assessment for the improvement of: Project No. 97 -02 South Grade Road SW East of Otter Lake by construction of shoulder widening, grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -13 Sidewalk Improvements - City Wide Project No. 97 -14 Municipal Parking Lot °E" in Block 50, North 1 k City between Washington Ave W and 1st Ave NW; and Project No. 97 -15 Century Avenue SE by construction of turn lane; and Project No. 97 -18 Ontario Street SE between 4th Ave SE and 5th Ave SE by construction of watermain, storm sewer and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -19 Kouba Parkway from T.H. 7 to Luce Line Trail by construction of storm sewer, grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances, and Project No. 97 -21 4th Avenue SE from Main Street to Adams Street by reconstruction of watermain, construction of grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -22 Alley Improvements in Block 50 South 1 k City between Hassan Street SE and Main Street S, and Fourth Avenue SE and Fifth Avenue SE and also in Block 4 of Bonniwell's First Addition between Division Avenue SW and Milwaukee Ave SW and Brown Street SW and Grove Street SW by construction of grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -23 Hidden Circle SW, south of Roberts Road by construction of bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -24 Morningside Drive NE north of Hilltop Drive NE by construction of bituminous wear course and appurtenances. You may at anytime prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the entire assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Administrator. No interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid by November 15th, 1997. You may, at anytime thereafter, pay to the City Administrator the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31st of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15th or interest will be charged through December 31st of the succeeding year. If you decide not to prepay the assessment before the date given above, the rate of interest that will apply is 10 percent (plus or minus) per year. The right to partially prepay the assessment shall be until November 15th, 1997. hr ✓ 1 PUBLICATION NO. 5033 PAGE The proposed assessment is on file for public inspection at the City Administrator's Office. The • total amount of the proposed assessment is $90,150.86. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the City Administrator prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The Council may, upon such notice, consider any objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. If an assessment is contested or there is an adjourned hearing, the following procedure will be followed: 1. The City will present its case first by calling witnesses who may testify by narratives or by examin ation, and by the introduction of exhibits. After each witness has testified, the contesting party will be allowed to ask questions. This procedure will be repeated with each witness until neither side has further questions. 2. After the City has presented all its evidence, the objector may call witnesses or present such testimony as the objector desires. The same procedure for questioning of the City's witnesses will be followed with the objector's witnesses. 3. The objector may be represented by counsel. 4. Minnesota rules of evidence will not be strictly applied, however, they may be considered and argued to the Council as to the weight of items of evidence or testimony presented to the Council. 5. The entire proceedings will be tape recorded. 6. At the close of presentation of evidence, the objector may make a final presentation to the Council based on the evidence and the law. No new evidence may be presented at this point. An owner may appeal an assessment to District Court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Administrator within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or City Administrator. Under Minnesota Statutes, Section 435.193 to 435.195, the Council may, in its discretion, defer the payment of this special assessment for any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older for whom it would be a hardship to matte the payments. When deferment of the special assessment has been granted and is terminated for any reason provided in that law, all amounts accumulated, plus applicable interest, become due. Any assessed property owner meeting the requirements of the law and the resolution adopted under it, may within 30 days of the confirmation of the assessment, apply to the City Clerk, for the prescribed form for such deferral of payment of this special assessment on his property. Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator City of Hutchinson, Minnesota PUBLISHED IN THE HUTCHINSON LEADER ON TUESDAY, MAY 27TH, 1997 AND TUESDAY, JUNE 3RD, 1997. Final p 97-02 'Construction $18066.06 $24:677.90 $31,608.25' $29,752.95, $46,407.44 $128,513.65 $8,707.95 $6,791.001 $6730.85 $30f 256,06E� ost Estimates rzxpqnsev-v, $4,335.85 $5,922.70 $7,585.98 $7, 140 . 71 $11 ' ' $30,843.28 $2,089.67 $1,629.76 $1,615.3 T'll otal I li ft $22,401.91 $30,600.60 $39,194.23 $36,893.66 $57,545.23 $159,356.93 $10,797.62 $8,420.76 $8,346.24 [�:,D73 $11,200.95 $35,479.05 $14,652.16 $10,797.62 $8,420.76 $8,346.24 9 $11,200.96, $39,194.23 $22,066.18 $144,704.77' Cost Split as te P ark[ n $30,600.60 $36,893.66 6 600.60 TotaF 7 psi 22'401:91_ $39,19423 $36 $57,545.23 $159, ,$10,797.62 $8,420.76 46.24 '$373;557.17 9T-1C 97-16 97A VI 97-19 97-21 97-22 97-23 ,,' F74�-24 [TOTAL City of Hutchinson 19971LETTING NO. 6 Estimate PUBLICATION NO. 5033 NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ROLL NO. 8007 LETTING NO. 6 PROJECT NO. 97-02,97-19, 97.21, 97. 22,97.23, 97.24 • TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice Is hereby given that the City Council will meet at 6:00 P.M. on the 9th day of June, 1997, In the Council Chambers at City Hall at Hutchinson, Minnesota, to pass upon the proposed assessmen for the Improveme of: Project No. 97.02 South Grreda Road SW East of Otter Lake by construction of shoulder widening, grading, gravel base, curt and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurte- nances:and Project No. 97 -13 Sidewalk Improve- ments - City Wile Project No. 97.14 Municipal Perking Lot 'E' in Block 50, North 12 City bet- ween Washington Ave W and 1st Ave NW: and Project No. 97.15 Century Avenue SE by construction of turn lane; and Project No. 97 -18 Ontario Street SE ' between 4th Aye SE and 5th Ave SE by construction of watemein, storm sewer and appurtenances: and Project No. 97 -19 Kouba Parkway from T.H. 7 to Luce Line Trail by con - struction of storm sewer, grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bitu- minous'base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances, and Project No. 97.21 4th Avenue SE from Main Street to Adams Street by recon- struction ofwatennain, construction of grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, • bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and "act No. 97.22 Alley Improvements in Block 50 South 12 City between Has- san Street SE and Main Street S. and Fourth Avenue SE and Fifth Avenue SE and also In Block 4 of Bomiwell's First Addition between Division Avenue SW and Milwaukee Ave SW and Brown Street SW and Grove Street SW by con- struction of grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bitu- minous wear course and appurte- nances;and Project No. 97.23 Hidden Circle SW, south of Roberts Road by construction of bituminous wear course and appur- tenances; and Project No. 97 -24 Mofitri 'gl6 Drive NE north of Hilltop Drive NE by con- struction of bituminous wear course and appurtenances. You may at anytime prior to certifica- tion of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the entire assessment on such property, with Interest accrued to the data of paymen to the City AdnNn- Istrator. No Interest shall be charged If the entire assessment is paid by No- vember 15th, 1997. You may, at any- time thereafter, pay to the City Admin- istrator the entire amount of the as- sessment remaining unpaid, with (mer- est accrued to December 31st of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before No- venhber 15th or interest will be charged • through December 31 at of the succeed - Ing year. If you decide not to prepay the assessment before the date given above, the rate of Interest that will apply is 10 percent (plus or minus) per year. The right to partially prepay the as- sessment shell be until November 15th, 1997. The proposed assessment is on file for Public inspection at the City Adminis- trator's Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $90,150.86. Written or oral objections will be con- sidered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection to Bled with the City Administrator prior to the hearing or Presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The Council may, upon such notice. consider any objection to the amount of a proposed Individual as. easement at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected prop Orly owners as 8 deems advisable. 11 an assessment is contested or there Is an adjourned hearing, the following Procedure will be followed: 1. The City will present fts case first by calling witnesses who may testify by narratives or by examination, and by the Introduction Of exhibits. After each witness has testified, the contesting party will be allowed 10 ask questions. This procedure will be repeated with each witness until neither side has fur- ther questions. 2. After the City has presented an Its evidence, the objector may call wit- nesses or present such testimony as the objector desires. The same proce- dure for questioning of the Clty's wit- nesses will be followed with the objec- tor's witnesses. 3. The objector may be represented by counsel. 4. Minnesota rules of evidence will not be strictly applied, however, they may be considered and argued to the Coun- cil as to the weight of hems of evidence or testimony presented to the Council. S. The entire proceedings will be tape recorded. 6. At the dose of presentation of evi- dence. the objector may make a final presentation to the Cbuncll based on the evidence Ord the law. No new evi- dence may be presented at this point. An owner may appeal as assessment to District Court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving no- tice of the appeal upon the Mayor or City Administrator within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and fil- ing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or City Administrator. Under Minnesota Statutes, Section 435,193 to 435,195, the Council may, In Its discretion, defer the payment of this special assessment for any homestead pr operty ow by a person 65 years of age or older for whom it would be a hard- ship to make the payments. When de- ferment of-the special assessment has been granted and Is terminated for arhy reason provided in that law, all amounts accumulated, plus applicable Interest, become due. Any assessed property owner meeting the requirements of the law and the resolution adopted under ti, may within 30 days of the confirmation of the assessment, apply to the City Clerk, for the prescribed form for such deferral of payment of this special as- sessment on his property. Gary D. Plotz City Administrator City of Hutchinson, MN PUBLISHED IN THE HUTCHINSON LEADER ON TUESDAY, MAY 27TH, 1997 AND TUESDAY, JUNE 3RD, 1997, 42, 44 �r Petition To The City Of Hutchinson Concerning Project 97 -22 It has been proposed that the alley through block 50, south 1/2 city ( between Main St. S and Hassen St. S running north /south between 4th and 5th Ave. SE ) be paved. Those own- ing property affected by this proposal and signed below believe that paving this alley would create a hazard to the children living along this alley by increasing the speed and frequency of traffic through the alley, that the project is an unnecessary expense and have indicated that they do not want the alley paved by signing. Z7Z /6 0 I -7 � m k -,- ' • MAY 3 01991 Cir, 7F HUTCHI:- !SON��, RECEIVED JUN 0 V 1991 • cay OF HUTCHRO N Hutchinson City Council C/O John Rodeberg, City Engineer City Center, 111 Hassan St. SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 Dear John & Council Members; June 2, 1997 Randy & Renee Chrissis 441 S. Main St. PO Box 7423 Hutchinson, MN 55350 This letter is concerning the proposed pavement of the alley behind my house and my lack of drive way access to that alley. My wife and I are not in favor of paving the alley. Please be aware that we will suffer the largest cost of the project (taxed for 99 feet of pavement) and have no driveway access to that alley. Our drive way runs parallel with and is separated from that alley by three trees, cablettelephone boxes and a drop of two feet from my side lawn to the alley. We don't feel that it is fair to pay for a change not available to our property, let alone paying the largest share. We are not in favor of paving the alley. But, if the decision is made to pave the alley, we would like an exemption from such taxes, because we lack access to that improvement. We do not plan to alter our driveway for as long as we own the house. Thank you for your prompt consideration, suggestions, and reply. lY, _ Randy 'ssis 0 May 30, 1997 n U 0 • Mr. John P. Robeberg Director of Engineering/Public Works City of Hutchinson City Center 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 Dear John, Please forward this letter to the City Council for the June 8, 1997, Assessment Hearing regarding proposed Project No. 97 -22, alley improvements for Block 50 South 1/2 City. I am a resident at 426 Hassan Street Se, within Block 50 South 1/2 City, directly effected by this proposal. I would like to cast my vote of support for this important project to proceed as planned. This project would greatly benefit the residents of this block by improving water drainage thus eliminating problems associated with mud and potholes in this alley. Thank you for your help in finding a solution to this persistent problem. Sincerely, Brenda Benson 426 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 (320)234 -5616 �e � z A 0 • • juN 9 -1997 C T )F HUTCHb .SON June 6, 1997 RE: Alley Improvements Project 97 -22 (Letting No. 6) This is to advise you that we are in favor of improving the alley in Block 4 of Bonniwell's First Addition between Division and Milwaukee Avenue and Brown and Grove Street We feel that improving the alley would be beneficial, especially in the spring, and would improve the value of our property.. Michael and Linda Field 569 Grove Street Hutchinson, MN 55350 �1 U C May 22, 1997 Hutchinson Coop (Cenex) Steve Wadsworth (All - Seasons) RE: Les Kouba Parkway Improvements Project 97 -19 (Letting No. 6) Gentlemen: Attached please find the Assessment Hearing notice for the above referenced project. The assessment costs were calculated based on actual bids received. The cost estimate noted at the Public Hearing was $73 - 86 per front foot. The actual rate was $73.55 per front foot. The actual cost to each property was based on a cost per foot, with the City paying for the first 150 feet of the street, as per our policy. Please attend the Assessment Hearing if you would like to voice your opinion on the project. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments prior to the meeting. t Ji P. Rodeberg, P.E. � Director of Engineering/Public Works • cc: Cal Rice - Assistant to City Engineer file: 97/L6 City Center Parks & Recreation 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350.2522 (320) 587 -5151 Fax(320)234 -4240 900 Harrington Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -3097 (320) 587 -2975 Fax(320)234.4240 Printed on recycled paper - Police Services 10 Franklin Street SIV �7 Hutchinson, 61N 55350 -2464 (320) 587 -2242 n ' Fax (320) 587.6427 C May 22, 1997 Fourth Avenue SE Residents and Property Owners RE: 4th Avenue SE Improvements Project 97 -21 (Letting No. 6) Dear Property Owner/Resident: Attached please find the Assessment Hearing notice for the above referenced project. The assessment costs were calculated based on actual bids received. The cost estimate noted at the Public Hearing was $35 - 42 per front foot for the street assessment. The actual rate was $37.22 per front foot. The cost estimate noted at the Public Hearing was $775 - 850 per water service. The actual rate was $1,206.52 per service, plus restoration costs. Due to the high cost for the water service work, it was recommended that the City pay for the restoration portion of the assessment. The actual assessment to each property was based on a cost per foot, with properties credited for previous street assessments. The City pays for all over sizing (width and depth) of the street to serve the Central Business District. Properties on Adams Street will be assessed when that project is done (currently proposed for reconstruction in 1999 or later). Water service locations were determined, based on our records and review, and properties served from lines being abandoned were proposed for new services. If the water service does not need to be replaced, or is not located within this street, that portion of the assessment will be credited prior to the final assessments being recorded. Please attend the Assessment Hearing if you would like to voice your opinion on the project. Please contact Assistant City Engineer Cal Rice at 234 -4212 if you have any questions on the project prior to the Assessment Hearing. P. Rodeberg, P. for of Engineering/Public Works cc: Cal Rice - Assistant to City Engineer file: 97/L6 City Center 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350.2511 (320)587.5151 Fax (320) 234 -4240 Parks & Recreation 900 Harrington Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -3097 (320) 587.2975 Fax (320) 234.4240 Printed on recycled paper - Police Services 10 Franklin Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2464 (320) 587 -2242 � Fax (320) 587 -6427 C; May 22, 1997 Block 4Bonniwell's Addition Block 50 /South %: City RE: Alley Improvements Project 97 -22 (Letting No. 6) Dear Property Owner/Resident: Attached please find the Assessment Hearing notice for the above referenced project. The assessment costs were calculated based on actual bids received. The cost estimate noted at the Public Hearing was $9.00 - 10.75 per front foot. The actual rate was $8.84 for Block 50 and $7.19 for Block 4 (per front foot). The cost was higher on Block 50 due to additional storm sewer costs. . Please note that these projects were initiated based on input received from property owners in the area. These are completely elective projects. and will not be completed unless the residents request that the City proceed. In order for the City Council to make the appropriate decision, it is imperative that you let them know how you feel. Comments must be in writing, or made at the Assessment Hearing. Please contact Assistant City Engineer Cal Rice at 234 -4212 if you have any questions on the project prior to the Assessment Hearing. nel , Jq# n P. Rodeberg, P.E. Director of Engineering/Public Works cc: Cal Rice - Assistant to City Engineer file: 9711-6 • City Center I II Hassan Street SE Parks & Recreation Police Services Hutchinson—UN 55350 -2522 (320)587.5151 Fax(320)234 -7240 900 Harrington Street SW 10 Franklin Street S tY Hutchinson, MN 55350 -3 09 7 Hutchinson, MN 55350.2464 (320) 587 -2975 _ Oj (320)587.2242 Fax(320)234.4240 % Fax(320)587.6427 Printed on recycled paper - C May 22, 1997 Hidden Circle (Betker's 2nd Addition) Residents RE: Wear Course Paving Improvements Project 97 -23 (Letting No. 6) Dear Property Owner/Resident: Attached please find the Assessment Hearing notice for the above referenced project. The assessment costs were calculated based on actual bids received. The cost estimate noted at the Public Hearing was $685 - 760 per parcel. The actual calculated rate was $701.73, which is near the low of the expected range. This improvement is required in order to protect the previously placed bituminous base course. Please contact Assistant City Engineer Cal Rice at 234 -4212 if you have any • questions on the project prior to the Assessment Hearing. Sinc e , John P. Rodeberg, P.E./ Director of Engineerigg/Public Works cc: Cal Rice - Assistant to City Engineer file: 97/L6 City Center Parks & Recreation Police Services • 111 Hassan Street SE 900 Harrington Street SW 10 Franklin Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -1522 Hutchinson, h1N 55350 -3097 Hutchinson, MN 55350 (320) 587 -5151 (320) 587 -2975 �� h (320) 587.2242 Fax (320) 2344240 Fax (320) 2344240 /^ Fax (320) 587 -6427 - Printed on receded paper - 0 May 22, 1997 C; Morningside Court (Santleman's 3rd Addition) Residents RE: Wear Course Paving Improvements Project 97 -24 (Letting No. 6) Dear Property Owner/Resident: Attached please find the Assessment Hearing notice for the above referenced project. The assessment costs were calculated based on actual bids received. The cost estimate noted at the Public Hearing was $685 - 760 per parcel. The actual calculated rate was $695.52, which is at the low end of the expected range. Assessments were spread based on the Subdivision Agreement, which calls for assessments • to be split per platted `original" lot. If 6 condominium units therefore occupy 2 lots, these units would pay for 2/6 of a lot/each. If 3 condominium units occupy 2 lots, the units would pay 2/3 of a lot/each. The two 6 -unit townhomes on the comer of Morningside Drive and Hilltop Drive are special cases. Because 3 of the 6 units of each of these townhomes have a "home lot" that is assessed as part of this project, they will pay the wear course assessment now. The other 3 units in each townhome will be assessed when Hilltop Drive is completed. This improvement is required in order to protect the previously placed bituminous base course. Please contact Assistant City Engineer Cal Rice at 234 -4212 if you have any questions on the project prior to the Assessment Hearing. P. Rodeberg, P.E. Director of Engineering/Public Works 0 cc: Cal Rice - Assistant to City Engineer file: 971L6 City Center II I Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 553501522 (320) 587 -5151 Fax (320) 2344240 Parks & Recreation 900 Harrington Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -3097 (320)587.2975 Fax (320) 234-4240 Police Services 10 Franklin Street SW ~ Hutchinson, AIN 55350.2464 5 (320) 587 -1242 G i Fax(320)587 -6427 Printed on recycled paper - RESOLUTION NO. 10848 • RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ROLL NO. 5007 LETTING NO. 6 /PROJECT NO. 97 -02, 97 -19, 97 -21, 97 -22, 97 -23, 97 -24 WHEREAS, pursuant to receipt of petition and waiver of hearing the Council has met and reviewed the proposed assessment for the improvement of: Project No. 97-02 South Grade Road SW East of Otter Lake by construction of shoulder widening, grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -13 Sidewalk Improvements -City Wide Project No. 97 -14 Municipal Parking Lot "E" in Block 50, North 'h City between Washington Ave W and 1st Ave NW: and Project No. 97 -15 Century Avenue SE by construction of turn lane; and Project No. 97 -18 Ontario Street SE between 4th Ave SE and 5th Ave SE by construction of watermain, storm sewer and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -19 Kouba Parkway from T.H. 7 to Luce Line Trail by construction of storm sewer, grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances, and • Project No. 97 -21 4th Avenue SE from Main Street to Adams Street by reconstruction of watermain, construction of grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -22 Alley Improvements in Block 50 South 'h City between Hassan Street SE and Main Street S, and Fourth Avenue SE and Fifth Avenue SE and also in Block 4 of Bonniwell's First Addition between Division Avenue SW and Milwaukee Ave SW and Brown Street SW and Grove Street SW by construction of grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -23 Hidden Circle SW, south of Roberts Road by construction of bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -24 Morningside Drive NE north of Hilltop Drive NE by construction of bituminous wear course and appurtenances. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA: 1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted, and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefitted by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. • RESOLUTION NO. 10848 • ASSESSMENT ROLL NO. 5007 PAGE 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten (10) years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1998, and shall bear interest at the rate of _ percent per annum as set down by the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from November 15th, 1997, until the 31st day of December, 1998. To each subsequent installment when due, shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid by the 15th day of November, 1997; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to the 31st day of December, of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15, or interest will be charged through December 31, of the next succeeding year. 4. The Administrator shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County, and such assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted by the Council this 9th day of June, 1997 is City Administrator Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 10849 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT LETTING NO. 6 /PROJECT NO. 97 -02, 97 -19, 97 -21, 97 -22, 97 -23, 97 -24 Whereas, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Project No. 97 -02 South Grade Road SW East of Otter Lake by construction of shoulder widening, grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -13 Sidewalk Improvements - City Wide Project No. 97 -14 Municipal Parking Lot "E" in Block 50, North 'k City between Washington Ave W and 1st Ave NW; and Project No. 97 -15 Century Avenue SE by construction of turn lane; and Project No. 97 -18 Ontario Street SE between 4th Ave SE and 5th Ave SE by construction of watermain, storm sewer and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -19 Kouba Parkway from T.H. 7 to Luce Line Trail by construction of storm sewer, grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances, and • Project No. 97 -21 4th Avenue SE from Main Street to Adams Street by reconstruction of watermain, construction of grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -22 Alley Improvements in Block 50 South 1 h City between Hassan Street SE and Main Street S, and Fourth Avenue SE and Fifth Avenue SE and also in Block 4 of Bonniwell's First Addition between Division Avenue SW and Milwaukee Ave SW and Brown Street SW and Grove Street SW by construction of grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, bituminous base, bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -23 Hidden Circle SW, south of Roberts Road by construction of bituminous wear course and appurtenances; and Project No. 97 -24 Morningside Drive NE north of Hilltop Drive NE by construction of bituminous wear course and appurtenances. and bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement. Bidder Amount Bid Wm. Mueller & Sons, Inc. of Hamburg MN $295,532.55 Duininck Bros., Inc. of Prinsburg MN $321,856.75 and whereas, it appears that Wm. Mueller & Sons, Inc. of Hamburg, MN is the lowest responsible bidder. RESOLUTION NO. 10849 LETTING NO. 6/ PROJECT NO. 97-02,97-19,97-21,97-22,97-23,97-24 PAGE NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA: 1. The mayor and city administrator are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Wm. Mueller & Sons, Inc. of Hamburg, MN, in the name of the City of Hutchinson, for the improvement contained herein, according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the Director of Engineering. 2. The Director of Engineering is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed, and the deposit of the successful bidder shall be retained until satisfactory completion of the contract. Adopted by the Hutchinson City Council this 9th day of June, 1997. City Administrator • Mayor 0 CITY OF HUTCHINSON MEMO Finance Department June 6, 1997 SUBJECT REOUESTED INFORMATION FOR TERRI GEISLER As you requested the following information has been gathered: Dare Program /Intervention (school liaison program) Expenses for one officer and operations through April 1997 • Program expense $17,208 (In addition to DARE and Intervention department also Family Group conferencing Counteract and other youth program, we are estimating M of department expenses in above number.) City receives reimbursement for part of expense from School district) Bike Patrol No specific budget cost of bike repairs Mark Shoutz Gross year to date (thru 5/31/97) $16,278 Benefit cost are not added (We have paid 60.5 hours of overtime) C.C. Mayor and City Council Gary Plotz, City Administrator Steve Madson, Chief of Police • d« \c 13 �-A I We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. we feel it is needed and cost effective. • ?3q ME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS � c- NAME n � N E r \) J 31'l • NAME ADDRESS Jet 6L'-W NAME �� l 51 T4 c NAME ADRESS Nz.ME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS I 0 ADRESS NAME ADDRESS / ' � NAMEI ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME J ADRESS " ;-ME ADDRESS 4a7 i i rcn� NAME SS iu? ?E ADDRESS �AM T RESS NAME ADDRESS .1' � � �"1 � �`�..� n ✓r -..nom �� l 51 T4 c NAME ADRESS Nz.ME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS I 0 We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed and cost effective. NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS Td J- A'tl. NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS VA„ ADRESS 700 trace 5f NAME ADDRESS LLtIM c�i l&4rl,:n50 o- NAME ll ADRES pp � � + h NAME ADDRESS I 1ll✓� �l, l (� -t _iC Si v E AD ESS ADRESS NAME - ADDRESS ADDRESS )' ME APRESS NAME ADDRESS r W'\ 1� �L` ADDRESS NAME � ADRESS I NAME annnFCc 0 9 0 —, _ 5 ( o �� s•i [dAME ADRESS_, '� /NAME -ADDRESS CNA'ME AD ESS '� NAME ADDRESS NA(!E ADRESS NA.41E ADDRESS NAME'S /' ADRESS NAME ADDRESS J , 0 9 0 —, _ 5 ( o �� s•i We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best Ar1R=CS r1E ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS L�z �,,,YW/L...! NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS i�LG/�. ° in i ✓/Y' Oif.i err �L. i /ii1) r U interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed • and cost effective. NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS -i!soan �' F l {-dutch NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS T � v NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAM — AD R ESS NAME ADDRESS (/ '/ / 1 76 AME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS ADRESS NAME ADDRESS x ADRESS QcJ NAME ADDRESS 'ME ADRESS NAME ADCRESS f d2L,, I `7AME _ ADRESS NAME ADDRESS Ar1R=CS r1E ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS L�z �,,,YW/L...! NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS i�LG/�. ° in i ✓/Y' Oif.i err �L. i /ii1) r U we the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed and cost effective. • NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS 'NA� ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAI�A RES NAME ADDRESS / �/ r ✓,�yr' � � /LA's' /� �7J (XiOh1� _ MME ADRE NAME ADDRESS 5 LV 0 NAME ✓ADRESS NAME ADDRES5 NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS r We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best • interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed and cost effective. ME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS - _y.. /! z6 ferg PlSO -� a-1 NAME DRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADDRESS �Y ,r I r /,U ( e fT I7 Ir(p NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS ADRESS NAME ADDRESS • NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAMME ADDRESS NAME FU]2 *X7 NAME S NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME NAME ADRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME NAME ADRESS NAME C i We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best r� interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed and cost effective. ,l NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS :AME ADRESS P NAME ADDRESS ADRESS _ NAME I/ NAME ADDRESS NAME ADDRESS KS /V NAME ADDRESS �2 c� NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS >4?Nd Kr 1' C>1 NA� ADRESS NAME ADDRESS N... E ADRESS NAME ADDRESS. L NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS • u u We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best • interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is and cost effective. :TAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS ADRESS NAME ADRESS NAME 0 ADRESS ADRESS �Z,� / 0 DRESS T ADRESS ADRESS NAME NAME NAME NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS ADDRESS AUUKL : S ` lIN NIli AURZbb NAC7L AUUKLbb N]AZi ADRESS NAME ADDRESS `LA1l1E A RESS NAME ADDRESS We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed and cost effective. NAME ADDRESS NAMME ADRESS ADDRESS NAME ADDRESS n E. ADRESS AME ADIFSS NAME ADDRESS rr rr r , ADRESS NAME NAME ADDRESS L �NAM — — / NAME ADDRESS T� NAME ADDRESS r �� . " 1 E ADRESS NAME ADDRESS ADRESS J 9-,6 ����scr�� s� �/��/ ADDRESS 4� ME ADRESS ' ?akul;n. NAME ADDRESS 'NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS l ADDRESS n E. ADRESS AME ADIFSS NAME ADDRESS rr rr r , N E ADRESS-,Y NAME ADDRESS NAME �/ ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME" ADRESS NAME ADDRESS r �� . " 1 `7 ADRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS . , 5w ?akul;n. NAME ADDRESS NM4E V NAME ADDRESS � / ADRESS 0 i y ADRESS NAME ADDRESS • 0 • 'NAM / / ADRESS NAME ADDRESS // �Z Z 5 i n AME ADIFSS NAME ADDRESS N E ADRESS-,Y NAME ADDRESS NAME" ADRESS NAME ADDRESS r �� . " 1 `7 NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS i • 0 • We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program, we feel it is needed • and cost effective. NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS f NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS LVAME L9DRESS MVAME ADDRESS ML AdL ?7-5 R r NAMES /� ( ADRESS NAME ADDRESS ry}�L / ADRESS NAME ADDRESS N ` A I ME ADR9SS U ( 1 NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS 0 ,t:; G, NAME ADRESS NAME ADRESS NAUME ADDRESS N�ME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME' V.i ADRWS bTAME ADDRESS NApfE '^ ADR SL NAME ADDRESS I � NAM F ADRESS NAME ADDRESS • We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed and cost effective. . � ` NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS , /x'" ra) Kie 0 Orr ha 4-- 1 1 �1 Ebb h aA KL M- , NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NANV ADRESS NW ADDRESS / 1 AME ADRESS PAME AD RES NAME ADRESS NA E( RESS N�.ME ADRESS NME ADRESS _ run,+n�. ' nnwFCc I • NTE ADRESS NAME ADDRESS [SAME V ADRESS NAME ADDRESS • h-n .Ci1 , , 111 ,4 ADRESS NAME ADDRESS ADRESS NAME ADDRESS ItAME I ADRESS NAME ADDRESS -rL 11.l.L NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NTE ADRESS NAME ADDRESS [SAME V ADRESS NAME ADDRESS • h-n .Ci1 , , 111 ,4 We the below.signed residents feel that it is to our best • interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed and cost effective. i NAME < A ADRESS 4� • NAME ADDRESS ,AME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. we feel it is needed and cost effective. M a Mr .. 1TIAT,a C Ia s -X c I.TT IJ L. NAME Zk ADRESS ` NAME NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS / AME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADR39S NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS e /' 1 1 1 1 1 NAME AD LESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS • 0 We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed • and cost effective. NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS • NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ! ADRESS NAME ADDRESS 0 NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS we the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. we feel it is needed and cost effective. . NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS 5 %q 4E N IM £ NAME �) DRESS 11' J N ADDRESS Lid. Ou ? Sf A DRESS L D ESS rr ADDRESS 1 {.L - y-y�O ADDRESS FAT r- ADDRESS ADDRESS ADDRESS ADDRESS csLu' ,?: �� n ADDRESS AD SS ADDRESS ✓ NAME 1 NAME �ADRESS NAME ADDRESS We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed . and cost effective. NAME ADRESS Q NAME ADDRESS • �NAME �l ADRESS �._A, ' I NAME ADDRESS - NAME AD ESS ADDRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME NAME ADRESS ADRESS NAME ADDRESS ��JU YL�Q Q C NAME L7y7J �C S f17o N�AIE ADRESS ADDRESS NAME ADD Q J� l7c /r ,Ltd ME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS N M ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS V NAME ADDRESS 1 \1�;,�—�—� \� & ,Y , - 3 -� Ire u k . NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS • We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed and cost effective. NAME GAS ADRESS ) NAME ADDRESS 'C� �� :XGftYI a'�tt �AME ADRES$� ` S NAME ADDRESS 7151# NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS � VL �- t- ,i-u.; {�u,� ^.� 3XC C.cn.+.�cuc��t �+- I- !•ek.4c.htr�so�, NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS A n f i is 0 NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS We the below signed residents feel that it is to our beat interest to bring back the canine program. We feel its needed • and cost effective. N AME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS 1 IA ,nne �n A_._ - - - T _ NAME f N E r 1 8 ADRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADRESS h NAME n AEr SS NAME ADRESS NAME NAME ADRESS IAV m NAME ADRESS NAME y NAME ADRESS ' NAME MMES ADRESS NAME NIE A NAME ' A�IE ADRESS NAME I I' NAMSF —; ADRESS - NAME KI r CC r 11LJ S We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed and cost effective. is NAME If" NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS We the below signed residents feel that it is to our best interest to bring back the canine program. We feel it is needed and cost effective. NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS or— NAME ADRESS NAM ADDRESS �, / -7 2'uk , t�- At±'5 7 ,>NV-6 NA ADRESS NAME ADDRESS J1 AD ESS � ti ME ADDRESS AC�R y SS ADDR t ns NAME A.Dr4ESS ILI NA ADRESS NAME ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME REES NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS A . NARk ADR!ESS NAME ADDRESS Kc NAME AD SS NAME ADDRESS " A I LI, NAME ADRESS - -W E �M ADDRESS NAME ADRESS NAME ADDRESS A& L 1. /117 • April 23, 1997 HUTCHINSON PET HOSPITAL CURTIS REITER, DVM & JANE ZUBAY, DVM 146 MAIN STREET NORTH HUTCHINSON, MN 55350 (320) 587 -3161 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Hutchinson Pet Hospital is willing to provide the following veterinary services in order to facilitate the return of the Canine Unit to Hutchinson: Free annual and sick dog physical examinations. Annual preventative care such as vaccinations, worming, stool test, heartworm test and heartworm preventative, as well as any prescription drugs would be provided for the canine at cost. Any diagnostic work (lab, x -rays, ECG) and surgeries would be �rovided at a 508 discount. Assuming a well dog, this would amount to an annual cost of approximately $30.00 - $35.00 a dog for preventative care. Sincerely, H TCHINSON PET HOSPITAL Curtis E. Reiter, D.V.M. CER /BJJ • �_A' 1 •r 1020 Hwy, 15 S., Hutchinson, MN 55350 . (614)587 -7655 ��SNGv1SL G(JILL O0 N A , �- U - LAO Lv3 s or- �u,T�Z.t O s11vdac x` 97 r_0 CL 0 A Division of Cobom's, Inc. W -A Marquette Bank �•� Hutchinson Office of Marquette Bank. N.A. 308 South Main Hutchinson. MN 55350 (320) 587 -4959 Memorandum DATE: April 21, 1997 TO: City Council 1 FROM: Wendi C. Kru arciuette Bank RE: Canine Program CC: Teri Giesler I learned through personal experience how valuable our Canine Unit is to Hutchinson. Let me share with you what took place over a year ago. At 2 a.m. in the morning I received a call from Jean at the Police Station stating • the Marquette Bank alarm had gone off. The only way the alarm is triggered is typically by the internal motion detectors, tampering with vault/roof doors or malfunction. In any event I was asked to meet the police at the building. Upon my arrival, the police asked for keys to the facility, asked me to park a distance away, lock my doors, and then proceeded to the front entrance with a dog. The door was unlocked and the police dog was allowed in. No physical person had to enter the facility, the dog performed the search. Ina few minutes the dog returned, evidently, giving the "all clear" message. The police officers then entered to search the premises again. After being confident the facility was clear, they allowed me to enter to disengage the alarm. It was interesting to watch and see how they used a dog to investigate a building and clear an area for entrance. From this experience, 1 have come to believe that the Canine Unit is a an important asset to the Community. True, this was a false alarm, but in the event there was an intruder, I believe he /she would have been discovered and personal injury/tragedy prevented. The Canine Unit has my ongoing support. I encourage all of you to seriously consider reinstatement of the Canine Unit to the Hutchinson Police Department. • M Hutchinson Area Health Care Burns Manor Nursing Home Hulchrnson CommuorryHospital • Dassel Medical Center • Wirtsled FamrlyPractice Clinic 135 North High Drive Hutchinson. MN 51350 (320) 234 -019 April 25, 1997 Hutchinson City Council 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 Dear City Council Members: I was approached by an advocate for keeping the K -9 Unit at the Hutchinson Police Department and asked if I would be willing to write a letter if I felt the K -9 Unit was a benefit when locating residents who have wandered out of our facility On the occasions we have called the Hutchinson Police Department to assist us in locating a missing resident, it has been very reassuring to know the K -9 Unit would be a part of the search parry because they bring the added dimension of helping us determine whether or not the resident may be outdoors and if so, what direction the person may have wandered in. This is especially important in winter months when the frail (and usually confused) elderly can succumb to the elements very quickly. I believe the K -9 Unit is a real asset to the Hutchinson Police Department and a benefit to the residents at Burns Manor Nursing home Sincerely, Barb Gerdes, RN,C Hutchinson Area Health Care Sr. Care Manager Hutchinson, Minnesota 0 • 40 Sirs, • I feel the canine program is a very valuable asset to the community. To me this is a program needed to assure additional safety in our community, not to have one would be a great loss. My belief is stemmed from an incident in my neighborhood. A neighbor woman had wondered off and her husband contacted the police who searched all night long for her and were unable to locate her. The canine unit was not called in for the search. She was located later the next morning two blocks down from her house. It is my firm belief that if the canine unit had been available that she would have been found shortly after being reported missing, saving worry on the husband and the officers time. While the officers did the best they could they don't • have the senses dogs have to track people. Even though the woman was returned to her home unharmed this case could have been a lot worse if the circumstances had been changed in even the slightest. Bringing the canine unit back would be the best investment the community has ever made. Thank you for your consideration. S� is To Whom It May Concern, I am writing this in regards to possibly bringing the K9 unit back to Hutchinson. Police officers seem to be put in more dangerous situations on a regular basis than in past days. There is obviously not enough funding to provide each car with 2 police officers either, so bringing the K9 unit back would at least provide additional safety to a few officers at considerably less cost. These highly trained dogs can also help to keep the area drug problems to lower levels. Hutchinson is a highly trafficked, booming community and if we don't take precautionary measures to keep ahead of this growth, will turn into another "suburb" with all of it's problems. With the help of the K9 unit we have to build a reputation so that it will be known that Hutchinson does not and will not tolerate drug and drug related problems. Communities both larger and smaller than Hutchinson in the area are taking advantage of K9 units in some form or another, and I think adding a K9 unit to Hutchinson would benefit both the community and the police force itself. Thank You! • 0 0 Hutchinson City Council: When I was asked to write a letter in support of the K -9 unit, I readily agreed, since I feel it is a valuable tool that our local Police Dept. should have at its disposal. Hutchinson is big enough to handle its own K -9, in addition to having the county unit available. As a resident, businessman, and father, I encourage you to find a way to reasonablrfund this worthwhile service. Thank you for considering this issue. It can keep Hutchinson a safe place to live, work and do business. Sincerely, John Schutt • Anderson's Decorating Center 0 i aZ L Lt Ax_ G��T�Lv� - 1s-Q 112 ,tvzw Cb U-Lf " 't) 4 ,4 ) r�6 c aQ JO QL U /3 .,o" . ct o� a-n c� �- cammLu1LL L CL +�u x � 0 e • Parties PCus 120 Main Street North • Hutchinson, MN 55350 612 -234 -7878 9 AIX D le; gla lO . )Cevi - nia/ 6 A 7 wn,4 To r ��s'awQ- �.✓���' �c� es dohe 7 L-- f� a(� aHd `t �eG�� fr a me, -,47/ cf e Si- u vl S G4jl- -e i - e - 1 re 4 2 I I e e- 15 i ,z e,� cl, 4e 2 54j-Kv�6 LA. vt� 1 z -q ` c. ' va �' �Sio� � •��/'I �rn� /rG�k s� �in� �e� 'IS d�✓' via u 5 � V`t✓'1� ��m� �O �? la "ZI. s c j 7 —So Y Pet Hutch 1015 Plaza 15 Hutchinson, MN 55350 320 587 4458 �J c3 orensen .7arm c3uppfy .Inc. SALES & RENTAL 305 Bluff Street P.O. Box 489 Phone: (612) 587 -2162 Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 Sell, Buy, Trade or Consign Also 250 Rental Items for Now and Used Farm Equipment antl / pp / lies Costruct` n. Home F m U GL O UDC G A �7 / A �Po e �l / / r - 1" L - 2 .9. o Wpl 0 ,e � •L�o i • .J • 11 n ot, Jrom X075 �e . Zoe , L,4--"; - 1 May 28, 1997 Hutchinson Fireplace Inc. 218 S Main St Hutchinson, MN 55350 Hutchinson City Council 111 Hassan St SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 It has come to my attention that the City of Hutchinson no longer has a K -9 corps. As a new community member, and having been a resident of a larger metropolitan area, I firmly believe that a K -9 corps is of substantial value in a wide variety of respects, officer safety and drug detection being just two. 1 0 As this beautiful city experiences the pains necessarily associated with growth, costs will be incurred and tax dollars must be carefully allocated. Yet, there is a very high value in sustaining a professional police force with all of the tools necessary to Insure the existing high quality of public safety which we now enjoy. Tom Whelan • U 0 • ZeT Ccsr . «i� fYJS ��L Ct/ K•liG6 -. /LGGdI�o� L�'�""""YJ�YV /V �/. /LLB /'_• "�' " '' • 7 w zz� --e- I 7 c 0 K -9 UNIT DEPLOYMENT YEARLY SUNI -TRY 11 K -9 HANDLER MARK SHOUTZ K -9 DON -VOM 1993 Summary Dlassificat_cn: AIarm calls e- 3uiiding Searches 12_ Apprehensions /A11 Areas 2D Article Searches 18 Mutual Aid/ Assist Another Department 17 Open Doors 35 *Narc Sniffs 29 Tracks 31 Demo's 31 • *Estimates of street value of drugs K -9 Unit involved with for arrest /confiscations in :993 had a reported value of 2.5 million. 4 S /mat cq 1 City of Hutchinson K -9 Unit Est Cost Cost of special training and dog cost not included Dedcated Use • • 1995 Wages 38,198.00 Reitirement 4,354.57 Health Insur 5,450.00 Dog Food 540.00 Car - specail Purpose 5,000.00 replace every 4 years Fuel 1,654.00 Repairs 1,634.00 TOTAL 56,830.57 Cost of special training and dog cost not included Dedcated Use • • • JUSTIFICATION FOR K -9 UNITS 1. OFFICER SAFETY , The deterrence factor of a K -9 at large parties and other disturbances is well documented. Many people have an unnatural fear of dogs and tend to be more compliant to officers with a K -9 present. At large disturbances, K -9s can supplement officers so fewer officers are needed. 2. TRACKING '% Burglaries, auto thefts, and vehicle pursuits are on the increase. The K -9s ability to track is a special tool that no other piece of police equipment can replace. Their tracking ability can also be used to locate lost children and disoriented adults. 3. BUILDING AND AREA SEARCHES Officers inside a building are always at a tactical disadvantage. The suspect • knows where the officer is, the officer does not know where the suspect is located in the building. The K -9s scenting ability enhances the safety of the officers searching a building 4. DRUG & BOMB SEARCH The effectiveness of K -9s to detect drugs, especially marijuana, cannot be duplicated by officers or other equipment. Also, ifyour K -9 is used in drug • + arrest, your department is entitled to a share of any forfeiturd. 5. USE OF FORCE CONTINUUM K -9s are considered non - lethal force. It allows the officer to disarm a suspect without having to expose him /herself or their weapon to direct contact with the suspect. K -9s are another option for the officer to use before considering deadly force. This is especially important when dealing with suspects and with weapons like clubs or knives, that some people would see as more defensive weapons until it is used against the officer. l� U 6. PUBLIC RELATIONS • Commercial Areas K -9 handlers tend to concentrate their attention in the business areas where other officers tend to avoid doing building security. Public Relations can be increased with business door stickers. Residential Areas Demo's at schools, scout activities, crime watch groups, and church groups promote community relations while also being an effective tool to educate the public about public safety issues. The department can capitalize on the K -9s popularity and bond between people and animals. 7. OFFICER MORALE For a young, smart, aggressive officer, an assignment to the K -9 Unit would allow the officer to develop other skills such as tactical planning, decision making, and interpersonal communications. By making it a rotational assignment (4 years or the life of one dog) it would be an incentive for other officers. This is especially important in a department where upcoming promotions are not likely. A • 0 C1 To: Terri Geisler From: Sgt. Ken Harrell Subject: K9 Budget June 3, 1997 Sherburne County SHERIFF BRUCE M. ANDERSON Per our conversation yesterday, our K9 budget for 1997 is 54,895. This budget includes the costs for food, veterinary bills, equipment, and training. We do not allocate any salary costs or vehicle costs to K9 as the deputy works performs all the duties of any other deputy. Also, until this year, all deputies had take home squads so no additional squad was needed exclusively for K9. I hope this information assists you. If I can be of further assistance, please call. i 0 0 #0 1A SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 13880 Highway 10 Elk River, MN 55330 -4608 Area Toll Free Numbers: .... t. Elk River- 241 -2500 Fax - 441.7303 Other - 1- 800.433 -5246 - • TDTRL P.02 At -97 12 =3 1 ,je-yl IUt 14:11 GRSHW15t HUUDS HU1Cii�r'ti5n 0 cost of canine Unit for Sauk Rapida � A Dog Food - 3c�1•Wi 1,0,V4-0 1,0,V4-0 i3f �O oa i lc�AG SJIF£ s � _ s/� t,d"tl � ..�r�n y T ✓Jal_ cow ✓1f �j r� ,i 7u�'ylE Vnt Hili9 - overtime T1n1n ny +nd Recejtlficftl�f x,+ Refer 19.S ��✓ lYXE /I N OW <° ✓c L �7 Equipment - .300 "0 f M160. J:P 00 yo'li Lno'lude the car in the 'blIdg0t, if not why noL, if so how much? gEY STD 7 ua ✓r d r3£ /SUV1teF /�bJ F� µhat are the benefits of the canine unit? 97 sm1 r ,:7o ST Me 10T 1°/Y (f W.517 / A" 7 IA)r� C Vj /� -J r-44 , /'' `�sT /S ,�W_4pX/1 y 11 -97 12:36 AM Sauk Ra ids F.11ce De►�. 320 251 9451 - P.03 My of Sauk Raplds • I5 Norm 2nd Ave.. Sauk Rapids. MN 5b379-1660 At (612 ) 251 1022 Fax 25 1-04 22 TO: Chief Welsh FROM: LD Carr 209 REF: 4th Quarter /Year End K -9 Report Sauk Rapids TRAINING DISCIPLINE Obedience • Tracking Agility Criminal Apprehenaiort Building Search Narcotics TOTAL • APPLICATION ASSIST CALLS Benton County 6 St Cloud 4 Stearns county I Sartell 1 Cold Spring 1 TASK track /evidence /area building /track /area track narc narc YEAR 9hr 15min 6hr 05min 4hr 05mir. 4hr 35min 9hr 05min lhr 15min 33hrs 20min RESULT 1 felony Imiad nag 1 felony nag nag • SUMMARY: During the fourth quarter of 1996 the Sauk Rapids K -9 unit has trained for 5hrs. The unit responded to 13 calls for service, making one gross misdemeanor arrest and two felony arrest. For the year of 1996 the Sauk Rapids K -9 unit has trained for 33hrs 20mins. The unit has given 7 public demos and was called into service 3B times. The unit was responsible for 5 misdemeanor arrests and 4 felony arrest, of which two were for the murder of a police officer. The unit also recovered evidence taken in an armed robbery. • During the first two years of service the Sauk Rapids K -9 unit has trained for 445hre 40mins. The unit has given 21 public demon and responded to 71 calls for service. TIME SPENT TRAINING OOhrs OOmin 40min OOhrs OOmin 7.0min 31irs 45min 15min 5hrs OOmin City of Sauk Rapids 115 North 2nd AVC.. Sauk Rapujs MN 56379-166C) 1612) 251.1022 Fax 251 -0 Sauk Rapids As a result of these calls the unit is responsible for 6 felony arrests, and 10 ecovery of $2.200 misdemeanor arrests. The K -9 unit is also responsible for the r • dollars in drug money and the seizure of $81,000.00 dollars worth of narcotics- ecovery of 1 ` The unit has been used to recover $1,DDO.00 in lost property and the r evidence taken in an armed robbery. The K -9 unit is also responsible far [racking a, suicidal persom who was, found. unconscious in the snow,, saving her life. Co Gu • J 0 A Gary Torfin, Captain Jail Administrator • April 22, 1997 WRIGHT COUNTY UOJ NT Y 0 A 1 SHERIFF'S OFFICE _Z rn DON HOZEMPA Mesa SHERIFF Non— Emergency 682 -1162 Administration 682 -7620 Records 682 -7622 10 2nd St. NW, RM 170 Civil 682 -7645 Buffalo, Minnesota 55313 -1197 Warrants 682 -7688 1 -800- 362 -3667 Investigation 682 -7630 Jail Admin. 682 -7662 , ,To Whom it may concern: The Wright County Sheriff's Office has one K -9 in its program for the Patrol Division at this time. The annual cost to maintain the program is approximately $4,000. This includes the monthly maintenance cost for the dog (food, medical care, etc.), 1 /, hour per day of additional pay for the handler for the usual care of the dog at his residence, and the occasional call out pay for the handler. This amount also includes the special equipment the handler requires (Leashes, bite sleeve for training, etc.). Sincerely, Don Lindell, Chief Deputy Sheriff 40 Don Lindell Chief Deputy Gary Miller, Captain Administration "G9 - .9 i T HU 13 Jd MOZR CONY Y f NuS i:U `JL' i 43 1 27.^,40 r uc Austin POLICE DEPARTMENT • LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTER 201 1st STREET NE AUSTIN. MINNESOTA 55912 (W7)437-94W FAX- (507) 437 -9546 May 29, 1997 Terry Geisler Hutchinson, NiN 55350 Terry Attached is a copy of our canine budget for 1997. You will notice the column at the far left has the total expenditures for 1995, and the column next to it totals for 1996. As I mentioned during our telephone conversation, we will run canine items under another budget line if the canine budget is exhausted during any given fiscal year Thu costs reflected on the budget sheets do not include the K -9 car or its associated expenditures. That particular expense is deducted from our general car fund- Pm sorry 1 cannot break it down for you. Alw, the K -9 handlers wages and benefits are not • reflected in the K -9 budget as they volunteer their time. They are each given two hours of compensatory time each week for the care and handling of the dogs, as well as overtime pay or compensatory time for Rtnetioos not directly related to their regular patrol duties. As I mentioned on the phone, the K -9 program is very important to the Austin Police Department and we will continue to do everything we can to keep it going. If you have further questions, please don't hesitate to call. Sincerely, �i Judy �nckson Administrative Assistant attachment • M Eq" OPPWTxLry EMPIOra rn c5 W C) CJ O ct� cn rn C SUPPI I es 6100 M General * SUB DEPARTMENT TOTALS - 1,365 1,997 1.000 1,366 1.000 I,D00 1.000 1.000 ........... .......... ........... ----------- --------- - ----------- ------ --------- 1.365 1.997 1.000 1.366 1,000 1.000 1.000 1.000 ........... ----------- --------- - .......... ----------- --------- I . ....... .......... 2.771 3,447 1,550 1,853 2.050 2.050 2,050 2.050 Citi of Aurst�fi *LlVt* F I N A H C I A L 5 Y S T E M PAGE 19 DA) I212Dt96 FISCAL YEAR: 1997 9 f T A I 10'0251 TIME 10:08:07 EXPENSE BUDGET WORKSHEET WYE FUND: 31 GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT: 4210 Police SI1B REPARIMIti: 2015 Canine Program 2 YRS AGO LAST YEAR z MENDED CARR YR DEPARTMENT F I HAKE ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION EXPEIISE EXPENSE , MUT EXPENSE HUD MAYOR --- ---------------------------- MANAGER COVICIL ............... .......•................................ Persorial Se".. Salirles ...... --- -- ---••-•- -----•--•- - - ---- 1100 MW Regular 0 0 0 0 0 ----- ......... 0 ........... 0 ----------- 0 ----------- 0 ----------- 0 ---------- 0 Personal Serv.. Benefits ?IDO 0002 Life 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2200 0001 F I C A 0 0 - 0 0 U 0 0 2200 0002 Medicare r I C A 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 2300 0031 P E R A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2900 DD03 Workers Compensati 0 0 0 0 0 0 a ........... 0 ........... 0 I ---------- 0 ----------- 0 ----- ----- 0 -, ---- -- Q ----- ------ 0 Professiona /Tech. Serv, 32" QDDD Profess iona I -Profe 0 0 350 0 350 360 350 350 340 OW Professional Tech 382 349 200 431 200 200 200 200 ----------- ....... 382 ----------- 349 -- --------- 550 ........... 437 ----------- 550 - -- ---- 55Q ........... 559 550 Other Services 58D0 0000 Travel. Conference 1.030 1.101 0 50 Soo S" 500 500 ----------- ----------- 1.030 --- ..... 1,101 ----------- 0 ----------- so •.......... 600 ........... 500 ........... 500 500 SUPPI I es 6100 M General * SUB DEPARTMENT TOTALS - 1,365 1,997 1.000 1,366 1.000 I,D00 1.000 1.000 ........... .......... ........... ----------- --------- - ----------- ------ --------- 1.365 1.997 1.000 1.366 1,000 1.000 1.000 1.000 ........... ----------- --------- - .......... ----------- --------- I . ....... .......... 2.771 3,447 1,550 1,853 2.050 2.050 2,050 2.050 06/02/1997 12:36 6122570695 June 2, 1997 Terri Giesler Hutchinson, Mn Terri, CITY IF CHISAGO PAGE 01 This letter is in reference to our conversation this morning which pertained to the 1997 K -9 Budget. I will include a line item of our budgeted expenses for the A -9 Unit. 1. Training /Instructions /seminars $600 2. Operating supplies /Dog food $800 3. Medical fees $300 4. Capital outlay $600 5,. Miscellaneous $300 6. officer Overtime /call out $700 $3300 I do not include the cost of a squad car due to the fact that each officer has his own squad. If I can be of any other assistance please feel free to call me @ (612)257 -4163 Sincerely, Chuck Bouley Chief of Police A 10825 RAILROAD AVF— CHISAGO CITY. MN 55013 (812)237 -4163 ! FAX:(612)257 -0696 ?G ►' l 1!; ❑FOn uB:Gr CO s -Ee:Fr - c - esa^is. F.oz Wabasha County Sheriff's Department 619 Bramb"y Wabaahc MN 53991 Rod Adams Sheriff Phmr. 16141 %&-W1 Fu: 16121 565-4697 May 30, 1997 VIA FACSMULE Teri Gesler 320.597 -7165 _ 313 Lynn, Road Hutchinson, MN 55350 RE: WABASHA COUNTY SHERIFF "S DEPT. CANM UNIT Dear Ms. Geskr. I am writing to you PR your request regarding the Wabasha county Sheriff's Department 1996 Canine Unit budget. As I mentioned to you on the telephone on May 30. 1997, these ftgmes do not include the handler's salary. Enclosed you will find a copy of the Wabasha County Sheriffs Dept's Policy and Proce(h= Manual.regarding the Canine Umt and the Canine budget for 1996- Deputy Nick Ratiswpoulos has been employed with the Wabash' Canty Sheriffs Depatmam for [early 20 years and has been certified as a canine handler for approx®ately 15 years. During his years as a can Candler, he has purchased and trained three dogs • for which he was not nor did not expect to be reimbursed for. Deputy Roassopwlos Paid for their veterinarian costs, food, grooming, and etc. up =111 each dog was certified which was aroun th age of two. I do not have a figure for these costs . In 1996, the Wabasha County Sheriffs Department employed one canine handler and canine and had a budget of S1,432 for can expenses. The canine handler is reimbursed for veterinarian costs, food, training devices, certifications, metirmlom, and other miscellaneous co sts approved by the Chief Deputy . In December of 19% the total of these coats was 5831.64. Due to the dedication of our handle, he volunteers nuncroas hours for school searches. mining competitions parades, and other various events. I do not have a total of the hours the handlers volunteer a year. If you have say further questions, Please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Tina Kuhlemeier Emlosures An Equal oppoMmny EnWloyar 1 o 'er n 00 • � I mmlmo°.o;����a 'e d� fn PIP R PIN � 0I- 201 -p00 -0000 -6455 CANINE E % PEG9E'S R'IX155OPOULOS /NICK 511 1/96 960103 - 333 6140 1/03/96 ST.33 DOG FOOD 6 VITAMINS 12/14/95 A ROUSSOPOULOS /NICK 511 1/96 960103 - 3 33 6140 1/03/96______145 TRAINING SL 12114/95 A R�USP� SO 9 /NTfK ------ 511 4/96 960403 - 333 72 9 - 4/O3 - / f6 - --- 30.89 _ _ _ VITAMINS 03/28/96 ROUSSOPOULOS /NICH 511 4/96 960403 -333 7239 4/03/96 73.50 DOB FOOD 03/28/96 RO USSOPOULOS / NIC K 511 5/96 960522-333 78 5/22/96 187.07 ANIMAL H OSPITAL_ _ 05/04/96 _. RaU55OPOULOS /NICH 511 5/96 960522 -333 T919 5/22/96 24.50 ODG FOOD 05%04/96 RrIU5SOPOULDS /NICK 511 8/96 960821 -333 8928 B/21/96 100.42 VET CHARGES CASCADE ROUSSOP /NICH 8/9 960821 -333 8928 8/21 _ 49.00 _ DOG FOOD - IN THE W_ ROL1560PUULOS /NICK _511 511 11/96 961120-333 10026 11/20/96 49.00 OOG FOOD 11/09/96 ROUSSOPOULOS/NICK 511 11/96 961120 -333 - 10026 11/20/96 84.23 VETS EXPENSES 11/00/96 . O1- 201-000 -0000 -6955 CANINE EXPENSES TO TAL... 831.64 ' l 1 1 2 , I � �•F � _, f Y - 1 bC J:.+ • i � _i 41 a���' i. Y 0 May 30, 1997 Terri Geisler 313 Lynn Rd. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Dear Ms. Geisler: It is my understanding that the Hutchinson Police Department is considering the implementation of a police dog unit. I am always pleased to Team of a department considering the use of police dogs. I believe that police dogs properly implemented • and used can be highly effective. The Anoka Police Department has been using police dogs since 1967. In fact, it was the success of our dogs which resulted in canine units being re- established in Minneapolis and started up in St. Paul and other communities. One of the most important things that should be done when beginning a police dog program is to make sure you select the right handler. Of course, the program must have the support of the Chief or Sheriff. In addition to the start up costs of training the dog, the department usually has to provide a special squad car for the dog. It is unfair and bad for morale to have other officers who are not dog handlers use the same car. The squad car used will get full of dog hair and acquire a special odor. Providing a squad car for the dog handler also allows the officer to be on call. The officer may then respond from home if the dog is housed at the handlers home. 41 AN INTE9NAT10NALLY ACCREDITED L4'N ENFORCEMENT AGENCY MMmw.PCam � Eaa Cbw+u�n E�rob,w • POLICE DEPARTMENT �- 2015 1st AVE. NO.. ANOI(A, MINNESOTA 55303 31 _� 1E 12<21L 2 low Fu Numtw: - $d12J22-2M2 A. C. "ANDY" REVERING Clwl of PO4CO May 30, 1997 Terri Geisler 313 Lynn Rd. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Dear Ms. Geisler: It is my understanding that the Hutchinson Police Department is considering the implementation of a police dog unit. I am always pleased to Team of a department considering the use of police dogs. I believe that police dogs properly implemented • and used can be highly effective. The Anoka Police Department has been using police dogs since 1967. In fact, it was the success of our dogs which resulted in canine units being re- established in Minneapolis and started up in St. Paul and other communities. One of the most important things that should be done when beginning a police dog program is to make sure you select the right handler. Of course, the program must have the support of the Chief or Sheriff. In addition to the start up costs of training the dog, the department usually has to provide a special squad car for the dog. It is unfair and bad for morale to have other officers who are not dog handlers use the same car. The squad car used will get full of dog hair and acquire a special odor. Providing a squad car for the dog handler also allows the officer to be on call. The officer may then respond from home if the dog is housed at the handlers home. 41 AN INTE9NAT10NALLY ACCREDITED L4'N ENFORCEMENT AGENCY MMmw.PCam � Eaa Cbw+u�n E�rob,w • 0 Canine Page Two The Anoka Police department will be running a class for dogs and handlers in the spring of 1997. We will accept no more than 6 handlers so there will be a lot of hands on attention. We can thus shorten our class to 9 weeks. The cost is $2000. Minneapolis and St. Paul also run training classes. Their classes are usually 12 -14 weeks with larger class numbers. There are many aspects to beginning a program that you need to explore. Some of them are: I. Canine acquisition cost I Training costs 3. Selection of handler 4. Vehicle cost 5. Ongoing training costs and training equipment costs 6. Ongoing kennel and board fees 7. Veterinarian costs 8. Liability considerations (usually no addition to present policy) 9. Salary of handlers, in light of Department of Labor rules • 10. Etc. When you are evaluating the costs of a police dog unit, you must weigh it, obviously, against the benefits. The primary purpose of a police dog is to make sure the officer to whom he is assigned doesn't get injured. The secondary mission of the police dog is to make sure the other officers he works with on a given shift don't get hurt. The dog does that by searching buildings which have been broken into and by being present at unruly crowd scenes to support to back up other officers. Thirdly, the dogs have the ability to track by scent either suspects or lost persons. Lastly, they can be trained also to detect illicit drugs and bombs. The use of police dogs has a definite psychological impact on a community. The impact is all positive on the law abiding citizens as they view the dogs as friends and protectors. Our dogs visit the elementary schools each year and are always in demand to show their abilities. They have a calming effect on the citizen who reported a prowler when the citizen knows the dogs have searched and cleared the area. The lawless have been known to go elsewhere to commit their nefarious deeds when they know that police dogs are being used. A lot of law violators have also surrendered rather than be apprehended by a police dog. So the dogs have a great deal of impact assisting the police as they go about the performance of their duties. • E • Canine Page Three I have enclosed some articles related to the topic which may help you as you go about gathering data to support your attempts to begin a police dog program. I hope this letter and the material enclosed have been helpful. If we can be of further assistance, please call on us. Sincerely, Andrew C. Revering Chief of Police enclosure: Justification of K -9 Unit K -9 Procedure Are Police Dogs Reasonable Force Police Dogs: Their Use of Reasonable Force Tribute to a Police.Dog The Dog as a Legal Witness Police Dogs - Training Key 238 Region 12 Police Dog Trials (1998) • M=Y -29 -199'! :4 :49 COOD -1.E CC 9ERIFF 1 612 385 31e5 P.02/02 OFFICE OF Sheriff of Goodhue County FOREST M. WIPPERLING 312 Weal 6th St. • Red Wing, MN 55066.2637 JiR'i,FR.'VVIbtl VVn- LnbllrnT Nuorn i,�S NUIMY, YJI 611 -M &310; 613 -Jas 3185 Teri Giesler Hutchinson, Mn 55350 re-VA r Re: K -9 Budgets Giesler, This letter is in regards to our recent telephone conversation concerning the K -9 budget for the Goodhue County Shwffa Department The 1997 budget amount is $2,000.00. Once the K-9 program is.upa id nining and the initial InvesMwt is made, the budget has never been an isstm of concern. If you have any further- questions-feel free to give me a.eall (612 -385-3179) V lpeCtfUI IY, °7 /e4..z;r Capt Ooug Klatt Uvon 11h.,l �, 1(1111 1 ( - i" Ip ..{�I., M.L, Sinn!, Chix11)—m P,rM C.1JU111 1'1.11 P,p — )56 1161 51]387 -01' 612 385 3166 fill - 1115.1:35 - AYFQ1,'A(' M RTL Q)'FA- *% �nkJ t „1 K, M P.lhpr or wh,, .i, 1 -111Y 1,Pna,'-- L,. [.M MIr4Npr1 Gim nal U11-lm 613- 165.115; TCTPL P.02 C] 0 0 0 0 - Cj 411.40.1 SHEET NO. �_ - ACCOUNT NO. R ATIN G NAME General Fund — CRED LI ADDRESS Ice �f3F€�PY071 - -- �ai,iznu ot7lefeXgenSesJ ' �I .. 0 .. TWO � it �I � � . .. • I� .I ■II■ �[RJ , i II �I��il I ��� ■ ��� a ■� ° i r ■ii�ii � i� ii a i i ■� �■I .1 TUE 2:53 FM CITY "? SARTELL .NQUIRY REPORT Report Date: 04/29/97 - Page 1 Account 101- 42 - 431 X -9 UNIT Budget 3000.00 CurreAt Balance 2960.51 11997 January April 1997 FAX PTO, 3202533337 Eat Amount 0.00 MTO Amount 0.00 YID Amount 39.49 AP 02/05/97 INVI 1997 REGION 12 MEMBERSHIP AP 02/06197 INVI 29397 EXT CORD 1L996 December AP 01/06/97 INVI 63763 K9 EQUIPMENT AP _ 01 /09/97 INV# I SALES TAX - PURCHASES Reel 200984 12/02/96 GALLS-K9 EQUIP RETURNED 11996 November AP 12/04/96 INVI 7055 DOG SHAMPOO a1996',October AP 11107/96 INVI 702676 RADIO (K9) 119% August AP 09/04/96 INVI 3271 K9 7RIALS- STRUFFERT 11996 July ' AP 08/06/96 INVI 50642390 JUNPSUIT-K9 UNIT AP 08/06/96 INVI 60174 RADAR EQUIPMENT-0 UNIT AP 08/08/96 INVI S0816817 K-9 EQUIPMENT 11996 June AP 07102196 INVI 25396 CANINE ASSN NEMBERSHIP AP 07/08/96 INVI 5081681701 K-9 EQUIP,793'S UNIFORMS 1t996 May AP 06/04/96 INVI 57731 K-9 EQUIPMENT AP 06/OS/96 INVI IN347326.8 r,I IPBOARD -K -9 UNIT AP 06/06/96 INVI 2 RABIES,HFARTWORM,DIST,ETC 11996 April AP 05110/96 INVI 25054 PLEXIGLASS 11996 Maich AP 04/02/96 INVI 54915D BAIL OUT DOOR K -9 UNIT AP 04/02/96 INVI 195309 MEGA DUFFEL K-9 UNIT AP 04/02/96 INVI IN.47326,4 K -9 VECHICLE EQUIPMENT AP 04/02/96 INVI IN.47326.3 K -9 VECHICLE EQUIPMENT AP 04/02/96 INVI IN.47326.1 K -9 VECHICLE EQUIPMENT AP 04/42/96 INVI TH.47326.6 K -9 VECHICLE EQUIPMENT AP 04/02/96 INVI IN.47326.5 K-9 VECHICLE EQUIPMENT AP 04/02/96 INVI 201269 ANGLES,METAL K -9 UNIT AP 04/08/96 INVI 55365 BITE SLEEVE K-9 AP 04/08/96 1NV1 IN.47326.7 SQUAD SHIELD K -9 UNIT AP 04100/96 INVI IN.48484.1 SQUAD SHIELD X-9 UNIT 11996 February AP 03/05/96 INVI IN.47326.2 K9 EQUIPMENT FOR SQUAD AP 03/07/96 INVI 51051 VET SERVICES -MEEKO 35,00 09-2 BADE, BE14NITT H 4.49 OP-4 SARTELL ACE HARDWARE P. 2 88,45 OP -1 RAY ALLEN MANUFACTURING CO INC 144.98 OP -6 MN DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 268.87 12-06 OP-4 GALLS, INC. 4.24 OP-1 COBORM'S, INC. BADE, BENNITT H 1083.63 DP -3 GRANITE ELECTRONICS INC GALLS, INC. 62.30 OP-3 COMFORT INN- NORTHTOWN 7p' 59.99 OP -1 GALLS, INC. 134.64 1788.00 OP -1 DECATUR ELECTRONICS INC 208.88 OP-4 GALLS, INC. STREICHER'S 35.00 OP -1 BADE, BENNITT H 340.80 192.95 OP-3 GALLS, INC. OP -2 294.37 OP-1 RAY ALLEN MANUFACTURING CO INC 16.51 OP-2 STRETCHER'S 112.80 OP -4 NDRTH OAKS PET HOSPITAL 12.68 OP-3 SARTELL ACE HARDWARE 579.95 OP-2 RAY ALLEN MANUFACTURING CO INC 134.64 OP -2 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PROOUCTS,INC 308.85 OP-2 STRETCHER'S 79,77 OP -2 STREICHER'S 579.73 OP-2 STRETCHER'S 340.80 OP -2 STRETCHER'S 717.34 OP -2 STREICHER'S 43.91 09-3 MIDWAY IRON F METAL 112.31 OP-5 RAY ALLEN MANUFACTURING CO INC 170.35 OP -5 STRETCHER'S 177.83 OP-5 STREICHER'S 74.50 OP -2 STREICHER'S 54,35 OP-4 NORTH OAKS PET HOSPITAL �_l • 0 07 08:16 Z 612 348 7433 Minneapolis Police Canine Unit #16 37th Avenue NE Downtown Command Metropolitan Division Minneapolis, MN 66421 Ueutenanl Jody Nelson, Supervisor MPLS K9 UNIT TSD P.02 polls of lakes Phone: 612 370 -3680 FAX : 612 3703606 a-man: mpiscaninecops(MJuno.com The Minneapolis K -9 Unit is a very important part of police work within the City of Minneapolis. Each of the areas listed below can be achieved with one officer and one K-9. If you were not using the K -9 It would be difficult to say how many more officers would be needed , even though your not guaranteed results with the K-9 they are 100 times more effective. The K -9 unit is utilized in searching for narcotics this includes vehicles and buildings, we have also been requested by school officials to search student lockers. The K -9 unit is utilized in searching for articles, this means they can search for guns, small articles and other articles that may be needed for evidentlary purposes. The K- 9.unit is utilized in searching buildings for missing persons, suspects, and possible victims. The K -9 unit is utilized in tracking for humans. This includes finding lost children and unfortunately dead bodies. The Minneapolis K -9 unit is also utilized to work In high crime areas. This task becomes very functional with a K -9 because it gives us more support without adding additional officers. This has been very effective in the Phillips Neighborhood of Minneapolis where we have done intense saturation with the K -9 officer team. It is amazing how many drug dealers leave when they see the K -9 on the street walking a beat. IS 03/29/97 08 :18 E 612 348 7433 MPLS K9 UNIT TSD P.01 The benefits of having a K -9 unit, as for involvement with the community, is the K -9 is one of the best public relation tools for a police department . The requests to have K -9 demonstrations, makes the community no matter how diverse see police officers In a non - threatening situation. This also gives people and children who are afraid of dogs for whatever reason, a chance to see how a K -9 functions . They learn that even though these dogs are friendly that the can also become serious and could be harmful. This is a lesson that is better learned in a controlled setting then out on the street. One of the other assets a K -9 unit has to a department, where it counts, is financially. Seizures that are achieved by K -9's can become very lucrative for a department. The seizures usually pay for the K -9 in the long run in this day and age of drug trafficking, no matter the size of the agency. Last but not least, the look on a parent's face when a lost child is retumed after being found by a K -9 is one of the most treasured memories anyone can hold. K -9's do save lives and isn't that what law enforcement is all about, to Protect and Serve. i Lt. Jody Nelson Minneapolis Police K -9 Unit • The development of effective police canine pro- grams in this country has been a slow process. Ex- perimental use of dogs in police work began as long ago as 1906 and continued through World War 11; however, these attempts failed largely because it was not then known how to properly train or use the canines. In the 1950's, the Baltimore Police De- partment established a successful all- purpose canine unit that continues to operate. The slow development of police department K -9 corps can also be partially attributed to widespread misconceptions about the purpose and behavior of police dogs. Despite the exemplary record of police canines, many persons still believe that the use of dogs is unnecessary and indeed barbaric. They view the dogs as ferocious animals whose actions are un- predictable and largely uncontrollable. Such a view has no basis in reality for police canines when they are properly trained. Contrary to popular iinder- standing, police canines are not "attack" dogs. On command, the police dog will come to the defense of his handler but will not bite or menace indis- criminately as will a trained attack dog. Today, hundreds of police agencies maintain K -9 units to ferret out illegal drugs, search buildings for suspects, locate bombs and incendiary devices, and control crime on the streets. And scores of other police departments borrow canine teams from these agencies for specialized use, such as during a drug investigation or searches for missing children. Patrol Police dogs serve a varietv of functions, but their dut with foot and vehicle police officers is perhaps the most visible and well- known. Canines on patrol act primarily as a deterrent against street crime through the psychological impact of their presence. Ironically, the popular misconception of the dog's -4- true nature increases its effectiveness in controlling crime and disorder. Nothing "cools" a potentially violent situation more quickly than the sight of a police canine. Canine patrol units are usually deployed to areas where muggings, purse snatchings, burglaries. armed robberies, sexual assaults, and other street crimes occur frequently. K -9 units may be given permanent patrol areas or assigned to locations as needed. In either case, patrol officers assigned to areas adjacent to canine beats must patrol aggres- sively for it has been shown that K -9 units tend to displace street crime. Certain physical capabilities of the police dog can greatly assist patrol officers in the apprehension of street criminals. Most obvious is the dog's ability to outrun virtually any human. Once sighted by the police dog, a criminal fleeing on foot has little chance of escaping the speedy canine. The police dog also has extraordinary senses of hearing and smell. The fleeing criminal who chooses to hide grossly underestimates the canine's powers of detec- tion. Police dogs are trained to stop and immobilize suspects. They are not trained to inflict numerous bites on a suspect or to "go for his throat." Police dogs are trained to make contact with a suspect's limb and to hold on to the suspect until commanded to release him. Patrol dogs will protect their masters under the most perilous of conditions. To prepare for confrontations with armed suspects, many dogs are taught to disarm persons holding weapons. Building Search The police dog can be of invaluable assistance in searching large buildings for hidden suspects. However, the dog's effectiveness depends greatly on the actions of the patrol officers who respond first to a suspected burglary in progress or illegal entry. When burglars or other criminals are thought to be trapped inside a building, patrol officers should guard the building's exit points, request K -9 assistance, and try to contact the owner or manager for information about the building's layout. In searching a limited area such as a building, the police dog uses its keen sense of smell and unusual ability to hear the slightest sound. Although the canine is able to detect sounds that are impercepti- ble to the human ear, suspects make little if any noise once they are aware of the police presence. Hence the dog depends primarily on its ability to smell. Therefore, when an officer anticipates use of a K -9 team, he should limit his movement within the building to avoid spreading his odor and ad- ding to the dog's work. Ideally, the officer should not enter the building before the arrival of the K -9 team. At the discretion of the canine officer, a patrol of- ficer may accompany the dog team during the build- ing search. Exits that could be used by escaping burglars should be covered by officers surrounding the building. The patrol officer accompanying the K -9 unit basically acts as a back -up unit in a build- ing search, following the directions of the K -9 of- ficer who in turn make some decisions based on his . 'reading" of the police dog. Just as police officers who work as a team learn to anticipate each other's thoughts and actions, the canine officer learns to in- terpret the behavior of his dog. The patrol officer should remain with the canine officer at all times when the police dog is unleashed. He should walk quietly, and when the dog ap- proaches he should stand motionless. When the police dog finds a suspect, the handler directs the actual arrest since he alone has control of the canine. The patrol officer should serve as a cover officer and take the suspect to officers outside of the building. He then rejoins the canine unit and con- tinues to search for other suspects. Drug Search Police canines can be trained to detect almost any - drug including marijuana, hashish, opium, heroin, and cocaine. The ease with which a police dog can detect a narcotic varies with the size of the area to be searched, amount of the drug, and how long it has been hidden. As an example of the canine's ef- fectiveness, it takes a police dog about 1 /2 minutes to search an automobile for drugs. It is widely recognized that dogs are used at air- ports where there is suspected drug smuggling. The dogs help to screen luggage, parcels, and mail for illegal drugs. Police canines have also been success- ful in screening public areas to identify users, sel- lers, or locations where drug traffic is known to occur. What is not popularly known is the ease with which police dogs can be used in cases where a search and seizure warrant is being executed for the arrest of a drug dealer or user. The police canine can be used effectively to search the suspect's premises for illicit drugs. The dog can search an area more quickly than a team of officers, and it is more likely to succeed in finding hidden drugs. Throughout the country, this capability of the police dog is under- utilized within agencies that maintain canine pro- grams and neighboring departments that could easily borrow the services of a K -9 unit for such specialized operations. Bomb Search The problem of bomb threats and bombing at- tempts has been met in part by the use of police dogs trained to detect explosives. Bomb scares can — and do — occur anywhere including at schools, public and go%'ernment buildings, airports, embas- sies, and banks. Canine teams on bomb calls depend on the patrol officer to identify the area to be searched. Before the arrival of a K -9 unit at the scene of a bomb threat, the officer should gather all relevant information about the incident. The person receiving the bomb threat should be interviewed, and the caller's state- ments analy_ zed in an effort to determine where the bomb may have been placed. The officer should also question employees, visitors, and bystanders about any suspicious or unusual activity in the building. Those places in the building that are accessible to the public should be noted. The officer should de- termine the likely locations, such as the generator room, where the bomb may be placed. 6 Is Tracking Police dogs are trained to follow human scent from clothing worn or objects touched by a person. -5- 0 • In some cases, the canine is able to follo�. the movement of an individual without being given a pre -scent article. The dog merely tracks the strongest scent left by the individual. Officers encounter many situations where the canine's ability to track can aid ari investigation, in- cluding the Following: • bbery — At the scene of a robbery where use of a police dog is anticipated, the officer should determine what the suspect touched or handled and his direction of flight. The critical factur+ here is the time element. The patrol officer must call for the canine unit immediately so that the trail will not be cold. • Abandoned etawav vehicle — Where an es- cape car is foun a andoned shortly after a crime, use of a police canine to track the crimi- nal should be considered. If tracking is plan- ned, police officers should not enter the vehicle and should keep - all persons away from the area This will enable the dog to identif% the suspect's scent. • Missinv person - - Police dogs are used e�ten- si%elv to track missing persons, especially chil- dren who wander away in wooded areas- If it is decided that a canine will be used, the police officer should obtain a piece of clothing re- cently r.orn by the missing person- The article should be handled as little as possible so as not to confuse the police dog. The officer should also determine where the missing person was last seen as a starting point for the dog. • Evidence — When a search for evidence is necessary, the police officer should determine the parameters of the area to be covered by the dog. The police canine will hunt for anything with a scent on it including weapons- If any evidence handled by the suspect is found. such as a gun or clothing- the dog may be able to track him from the scented object. `tarty factors affect a dog's ability to pick up and follow a scent. Adverse weather conditions such as heavy rains, snow, and strong winds occasionally interfere with the canine's effectiveness. A down- pour will wash out some scents; however, after the rain subsides the scent may come back. Freezing weather and heavy snow have no effect on the dog's powerful sense of smell. Strong winds will cause a scent to spread and make tracking a large area dif- ficult. Areas where there is a heavv concentration of industrial odors also pose a problem for the police dog. Crowd Control Use of police dogs to control crowds varies with department policy and generally is authorized in specific instances only by command personnel. A few events in the recent past where police dogs were improperly used to control potential disorders has made crowd control by K -9 units a delicate un- dertaking. One controversial incident can jeapor- dize or destroy a police department's crime pro- gram. police dogs may be called to the periphery of a potential disorder. but thev are usually not of ploved unless violence breaks out or a police officer is threatened by a crowd Officer Awareness The public has a strong curiosity about police dogs, particularly where canine use is highly visi- ble. Often citizens will direct their questions to the patrol officer about the use of police dogs. The fol- lowing are some of the basic points about police dogs which the police officer should know and pass on to interested citizens: i Most working police dogs are male German shepherds between 2 and 8 years of age. • police dogs usually undergo a minimum train- ing period of 14 weeks. During this period, they are taught basic obedience such as heel- ing, retrieving, jumping, and climbing. This training establishes whether the dog is fit for police duty. After control training, the dog is taught to search for lost articles, track human scent, search for drugs and explosives, and protect their handlers. Most dogs are cross - trained in all areas, although thev may be used in only one or two capacities. Handlers receive training on the abilities of police dogs, how to use them in the prevention and detection of crime feeding, and grooming Underutilization of Canines Despite the capabilities of the police dog, many departments have found that their canine programs are underutilized. One reason for this is the indif- ferent attitude of some police officers toward the canine. Although they are aware of the police dog's true value, some officers have trouble admitting that the canine can do some things better. They look upon the police canine as a competitor and therefore do not fully use its capabilities. They will search buildings for suspects or try to locate hidden narcotics instead of calling for K -9 unit assistance. The police dog is not a competitor. It provides in- creased safety for officers and, if used properly, in- creased chances for the apprehension of criminals. The police dog is a tool — like binoculars or a radar unit — that enhances the capabilities of all police officers. To den the dog's usefulness only makes the police officer's job more difficult than it could be with the assistance of a K -9 team. J , and proper hygiene. procedures. Summary Both handlers and dogs continually re- fresher training. Such training ensures tharihe canine's abilities are kept at a high level and provides an opportunitv to improve basic skills. The police dog is not vicious: however, citizens should not approach the canine unless the handler is present and has indicated his per- mission. The value of law• enforcement canine programs is gaining widespread recognition. By virtue of certain physical talents, the trained lice dog can perform su ort tasks such as searching and trac to more etticiently t an can o tce!15._. "hen utilized properly, the po i� ice dog is an important asset that should not be overlooked by the patrol officer. Where circum- stances indicate that a K -9 unit can be used to police advantage, the patrol officer should not hesitate to request canine assistance. -7- Animate Technology 1 0 Tribute to a Police Dog By ANDREW C. REVERING r L_ ..- i n May of 1977. the city of Anoka, Minnesota, a northern suburb of Minneapolis, conducted a very unique ceremony. They dedicated a park in honor of the city's first trained police dog — "King." King was somewhat of a local hero in Anoka. His accomplistiments as a police doe had been compared to the motion pic- ture talents of none other than "Rin Tin Tin." He was the first trained police dog to be used effectively on a continuous basis in Elie Minneapolis -St. Paul metropolitan area, and was recognized in law enforce- ment as the dog responsible for bringing police dogs back into use in this area. Involved in numerous arrests in the Anoka area and surrounding communities. King had been cited as being responsible 1 for keeping police officers from becominiz ANDREW C. REVERING -is acaptain in the Anoka Porte Depart- ment, City Hall, 2015 First Avenue, Anoka, Minnesota 55303. A police officer for twelve years, he has held the positions of patrol sergeant, detective, and crime prevention officer, and has worked as police dog handler for over six years. Revering holds an A.S. degree from North Hennepin State College and a B.A_ degree in criminal justice studies from St. Cloud State University . He is a graduate of the 101 st session of the FBI National Aca- demy. Prior to appointment to the Anoka department, he worked 9 a U.S. Air Force police sentry dog handler and trainer. At left, Anoka Polka Chid Dave 0 losgim below lak ph" dedicating Khv tesrnwW Park to Aroka's first police dog; bekav rya, Mayor Charles Sell and former Mayor Don Scarborough at the unveiling oenrio y. Opposite page, City Commissioner Don slsN rose with children from his junior high class who read essays on the value of dogs at the dedication; and the last picture of King taken before his death. With him is Erie, Captain Revering's son, then six years old. seriously injured or killed on many occa- sions. He made apprehensions of suspects when they ordinarily would have zone un- detected. His quick and sure apprehen- sions eliminated the need to resort to deadly force when it ordinarily would have been necessitated. Kine was well known by all of the child- ren of Anoka. Every year he was brought to the schools. After displaying his abili- ties as a police dog, he walked among the school children accepting their caresses as if he were each child's family pet. King was bom in 1965. He came to work on the Anoka Police Department in 1967. The cost of orginally obtaining him was home by the Anoka Lions, Arcola Jay tees, and .Anoka American Legion Post 10'. He was retired from active duty in 1974 and died of natural causes the follow- ing winter of 1975. King received the Lassie Gold Award for Meritorious Action from the producers of the "Lassie" television show. He also received a Meritorious Service to the Community Award from the Nlinneapolis- St. Paul German Shepherd Club. A recipi- ent of the Special Citation for Distinguished Police Canux Service from the American Federation of Police, he was formally commended by the mayor and city com- mission for a job well done upon his retire- ment. 88 THE POLICE CHIEF /OCTOBER 1978 r of the Anoka community had on its ctuzerss j will not soon be forgotten. and he will be long remembered by the children of Anoka as a very special and devoted friend. On Nla} 13. 1977. a small children's park in the ca% of Anoka was named and dedicated "King Memorial Park." A life - size cement statue of King was purchased by the Anoka Police Federation. The city of Anoka built the brick base. and the onginal sponsoring civic groups —Anoka Lions. Anoka Jaycees. and Anoka Legion Post 102— furnished the bronze plaque. The Honorable Charles Sell. Anoka mayor. and Donald Scarborough. former mayor. performed the unveiling ceremony at the monument site. City Commissioner Don Melrose. who is also a teacher at the Sandberg Middle School. introduced three young people who recited essays on the value of dogs. Cndersheriff and former Minneapolis Police Chief Don Dwyer was the main speaker. The author addressed the crowd and narrated a police dog demonstration. Since the dedication. nothing but favor- able comments have been received con - ceming the park. Visitors have journeyed to Anoka to view the monument placed in honor of its first police dog. The park and the monument ha%e promoted most favor- able public relations for the city and the police department. . 0 A 0 WARNING THIS PROPERTY IS PATROLLED REGULARLY BY AN ANOKA POLICE DOG UNIT. IF YOU ARE DETECTED INSIDE THESE PREMISES DURING NON - BUSINESS HOURS, YOU ARE SUBJECT TO BEING APPREHENDED BY A POLICE DOG. SPONSORED BY THE ANOKA POLICE FEDERATION • -27- All items of value on these premises have been marked for ready identification by Law Enforcement Agencies ANOKA POLICE DEPT. POLICE DOG UNIT By Leon J. York. Associate District Judge THE DOG AS A LEGAL WITNESS CANINE vs 9NNABIS Can a dog give testimony in a court of law? If he can. is such testimony acceptable to the court? The answers to both questions are to be found in the case of Stire vs. IVarkins. The actions of a German Shepherd police dog had led to the arrest and search of the defendant. Clyde Watkins, who was found to have marijuana in his possession. He was indicted and his court appointed at:erney,Jim Dancer. filed a motion to su=nress the evidence on the grounds :hat defendant's legal rights had been violated. District Judge R.W. Kauve::aua h conducted a hearing and filed his wTirten opinion. 7 facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. District Judie Kauvenaugh: qtr. Dancer has slandered and maligned man's best friend. the dog, by filing a motion to suppress the evidence. The written instrument states that the dog in this case is a cur, a mongrel. and a not to be trusted - son of perdition' and he accuses the police of brutality by using the doe. We shall dispose these allegations later in this opinion. But first we must examine the evi- dence. The facts are undisputed. On the 13th of December, Ray Bennett, an off duty, out-of-uniform policeman went to the bus station to meet his daughter who was corning from Cali- fornia. He was accompanied by his constant companion and trusted friend, Boston, a five -year old German Shepherd police dog who had been trained to scent, sniff, detect and ferret out marijuana and other drugs in common use by our young people today. The daughter did not arrive. but the last passenger out of the bus was a furtive looking young man carry- ing a duffel bag. He is now the defendant in this case. On seeing the young man, the 175 pound dog perked up his ears, elevated his nose, broke ' loose from his master and in three leaps knocked the youth flat on the ground, seized the bag and brought it to Officer Bennett. Defendant, being outraged, sought to retrieve his prop- erty by grabbing the handle near the dog's mouth; a hassle ensued and in the end the dog won by slashing the defendant's left hand. Officer Bennett) knew from the dog's action that mari- juana was in the container so he proceeded to place defendant under arrest and conducted a search. He found ten pounds of the substance. ABOUT THE A UTHOR Judge York nus born at Tolar. Texas, and graduated from Okkhoma University and Cumberland Late College in 1929. He served as Assistant District Attorney for Pavne Count• in Oklahoma from 1933 to 1936; District Attorney of Payne Counry from 1936 to 1939; city attorney of Stillwater from 1940 to 1941; ph are lawyer from 1939 to 1 969; and Associate District Judge of Payne County up to the present time. The Judge %us admitted to practice law in Oklahoma in 1929 and has been admitted to practice in all federal courts of Oklahoma and in the United States Supreme Court. He has five children and nine grandchildren. Mr. Dancer claims t -e officer had no knowledge a crime was being com- mitted in his presence, and therefore. the arrest, search and seizure wer illegal. If this is true, the case must c. dismissed. On the other hard. Offl :e_ Bennett contends he ^ad 'pro ca.L cause' to believe the defendant marijuana in the bac an: :a: a feign was being comet tted . -. ais presenz- If the officer is cone,: :. :4e defend_r.' must be held for triai. PROBABLE CAUSE Before proceeding Ru :her. %ve cogs: deal with the term, probable cause. a: it is used in the Corti:-,: :ion. It slte_ :c not .muse any great ccr.sterra ::cn. i.. not a nasty legal re :m :i : :eail :: n:ear.t in plain English, reasonable g-our. and it was placed it-, the Ccnstitutic- to protect our citizens from unr :aszn- able searches and seizures. A warra can be issued by a judge upon a. affidavit being signed in his presenc_ showing probable cause. or reasonao:_ grounds, for believing that a arum being committed. Facts in the affida•• must not be hearsay, but must b: something the affiant — the pe so- signing the affidavit — sees or hears,_ information furnished by a reliabl: informant. But we are not dealing with search warrant here. There are ceri exceptions where a search warrant L 5'YaTiCNAL oCUCE :OUAUaL • not needed and this case is one of them. An officer may make an arrest without a warrant when he seas a crime being committed in his presence. or has probable cause to beiie:e a felony (a crime punishable by imoris- onment in tike penitentiary) has been perpetrated. I might even go further and explain that reasonable grounds really, means a 'strong suspicion' sun. ported by some facts. If time or circumstances permit, the police should always obtain a search warrant, or else the courts will rule the search illegal. It is quite apparent, and Officer Bennett readily admits, that he could neither see nor smell the drug, and this narrows the question down to this: Did the actions of the dot create reasonable grounds or suspicion in the mind of the officer that a crime was being committed in his presence And of course Bennett did not have time to obtain a search warrant; the arrest had to be made on the spot or else the defendant would have Fled, ta'.cag his illegal property with him. There has never been a case like this in the United States so far as I have been able to ascertain from my re- search. and neither the Disc: ct Attor- ney, nor the learned Mr. Dame:, has been able to sited any lit`:; or. the subieet. In these circumstances 1 shall arrive at my o%v-n conclusion based on the authorities 1 have read. A SIXTH SENSE I have read about does. History does not reveal who came upon the scene first, man or dot. Perhaps thev came simuitaneousi_c. But God andowed the dog with a sixih sense which man does not possess. He can detect sounds man cannot hear and he has an acuteness of smell that is a wonder to behold The most ancient of t e spTi ect`the mastiff, a huge. powerful dog weighing four or five hundred pounds. In early times he was used to hunt wild beasts and later was employed by the Romans for their pleasure and enjoyment, by matching them in a fight to the death with lions and tigers in the arena, while thou- sands of spectators watched from a safe distance in the stadium. Later in time there came the blood- hound and it is this wonderful animal. as we shall see, that furnishes the letal precedent in this case. This breed of dogs is remarkable for exquisite scent and for great sagacity and perseverance in tracking any object to the pursuit of which it has been trained. We are told that in early English lustory they were used for the pursuit of felons and deer slavers, and more recently in America for the capture of fugitive slaves. They were imported in Jamaica in 1796 to be used in suppressing the Maroon insurrection, but the terror occasioned by their arrival produced the effect without their actual employment. Then we are told that they were used in the Scottish Highlands in the clan feuds in the frequent wars be- tween England and Scotland; that they pursued Wallace and Bruce. Wallace is said to have put the hounds off the scent by killing a suspected follower; and of Bruce it is recorded that he baffled his dogged pursuers as effec- tively by wading down a stream some distance, and then ascending a tree by a branch which overhung the water, thus breaking the scent. Four hundred vears ago during the reign of Queen Eliubeth, her faithful servant, the Earl of Essex, had 500 of these animals in his armv to aid in the suppression of the Irish rebellion. If we nuv credit Sir Walt_; Scott, evidence furnished by bloodhounds in trials was used as ear 1% as the Twelfth CentUrv. In the Talisman it is related drat in the joint crusade of Richard I of England and Phillip II of France, Roswell, the hound, pulled from the saddle Conrade, Marquis of Mono- serrat, thus mutely accusing him of the theft of the banner of England. Phillip defended the Marquis with the re- mark: "Surely tl:e word of a Knight and a Prince should bear him out against the barking of a cur." To which Richard replied: "Royal brother, recollect that the Almighty who gave the dog to be companion of our pleasures and toils. both invested him with a nature noble and incapable of deceit. He forgets neither friend nor foe; remembers, and with accuracy, bout benefit and in- jury. He h ath a share of man's intelli- gence, but no share of man's false- hood. You may bribe a soldier to slay a man with a sword, or a witness to take life by false accusations; but you cannot make a hound tear his bene- factor; he is the friend of man save AUTUMN, 1973 - 7 God endowed the dog with a sixth sense that mcr does not posse when man incurs his enmity. Dress yonder Marquis in what peacock robes YOU will, alter his comoie.mon with drugs and washes, dis;aisc ds appear- ances, lude Itun amidst a hundred men: I will yet pawn my scepter that the hound detects him and expresses his resentment as you have this day be- held. This Is no new indicent, although a strange one. Murderers and robbers have been, ere note, convicted. and suffered death under such evidence, and men have said ;lie tinter of God was in it. In thine own land. royal brother, and upon such an occasion, the matter was tried by a solemn duel betwixt the man and the dog, as appellant and defendant in a challenge of murder. The dog was ticrorious, the man was punished. and the crime confessed. Credit me. loyal brother. that hidden crimes have often been brought to light by the testimom• even of inanimate substances. nc: to men- tion animals far inferior in instinctive sagacity to the dog, who is the friend and companion of our r_ce." For the past one hundred years it has been the custom of sheriffs. police, constables and other octcials entrust- ed with enforcement of the iaw to use bloodhounds in 1:2ccin ;'3 felons. burglars. murderers a- iaw via lators. Actions of :It,! s .%here it is shown drat they a.e we!i bred and trained have been re_eived by the courts as cirwntstant:ai evidence in Oklahoma, Alabama. Keatuckv, Mis- souri, Texas. Arkansas. Tennessee, Louisiana. North Carolina. Florida and Georgia. A CONI` ON TRAIT There are many breeds of does and many of them have been bred and trained for specific purposes. but all of them have one trait in common; an accurate sense of smell. In modern times man utilizes the bird dog to hunt out his quarry. I have accompanied Mr. Dancer with his bird doz. }lac. on his bird hunting expeditions _ «hen old Mac smells a covev of birds the stands still, tail extended stem^ ht out and points Iris nose in the direction of the birds. What does Mr. Dancer do? He has probable cause to believe birds are near, brings his gun to a firing posi- tion- ready for action. when the birds are flushed out and are airborne. That old dog never failed. Of course we are dealintr with a different breed of dogs here, and it can be argued with considerable force, but with little effect, that the bloodhound is not capable of setting a precedent for the German Shepherd police dog which came into being less than one hundred years ago. The testimony shows that this breed possesses a kind and gentle disposition, leads the blind with devotion, guards its master's premises with considerable zeal and has an accurate ability to discern between friend and Foe. He accom- panies the soldier in battle, always on the front line pointing out the hidden enemy and detecting buried land mines. From the time he was a little puppy, old Boston has been trained to detect marijuana_ and now seems to understand that it is not for human consumption: in other words he hates it. According to Officer Bennett, this is the first time it has been publicly revealed that he has been employed in this capacity. The police just used him to spot the drug and he has never been wrong. In response to Mr. Dancer's allega- tions that old Boston is a cur. a bitch, a moncrel. and never to be trusted 'son of perdition' let it be said the evidence shows the animal is a well bred. pedigreed, male dog. POLICE BRLTALITY This leads us to consider the most serious of Mr. Dancers accusations: police brutality. He is not alone. Many well meaning and sensitive people join in this hue and cry and thus accuse the police. But I ask - who is the real culprit? The vendor of illegal drugs and noxious weeds who set-ks to proof at the expense and misery of his victims, our young people, or the police who are trying to do their job'. What does it mean if there are a few slashed wrists or torn clothes? It may be that Sir Walter Scott was right when he wrote, "and men have said that the finger of God was in it" Dogs strike terror in the hearts of the guilty and the wicked, and I dare say that it all police departments thmu_zhout ou: country were equipped with police dogs, hard dru and marijuana would disappear from the American scene. 1 rule in favor of the dog. The defendant must stand vial for the • crime of felonious possession of marijuana. • .• t I Hounding Drug Traffickers The Use of Drug Detection Dogs ZA KIMBERLY A. KINGSTON. J.D. Special Agent Legal Counsel Division FBI Academy Ouandco, VA _ -'> •ere dim- of drue- relates _,> . In recogni- the evidentiary value of a well- _= _- shuttled lion of his mor.;:mental contribu- trained drug detection dog.= There "•7:aR home tion to the w_r "rugs. he has is no doubt that these dogs have a t`' - •- -;1 =. : - I2 official aommend.,no significant role in law enforce - nc _ He _ or ; �e.". H; name is ment, and that role can be -- - -- _.. _' .'l,I until he in,[on — an-, he i, no ordinary enhanced by law enforcement's ,tu" ' - - __r_er «i[h the policeman. In ;__c. he is nut aman awareness of fourth amendment Ora - �. Sheriff's a[ all- He is u " proscriptions concerning the use of Or.:_ =_r< that h e has e V' Dogs lik.in,n,n have be- detection dogs. be-,-. .. ;''< o i;i ce , he come very common µeapons in This article discusses recent ha _-t part in [he struggle a_'_;� drug traffick- Supreme Court and lower court con' :_ mi!iiun ine. The du. h:_h!c developed cases establishing fourth amend- %k 0 -- .Z million in oltactorc sen,e, proven in menu guidelines for the use of spe- ca - rug sales. valuable to la.% anrorcement of dally trained dogs in the following an" •_ _ _;!ars north ricer;, and cou-t ha%c recognized areas; (1) Public places, (2) third - party controlled areas. (3) private residences, and (4) motor vehi- cles. adherence to these guide- lines will help to ensure the ad- missibility of evidence discovered as a result of dog sniffs and the continued vitality of drug detec- tion doss in law enforcement. SUPREME COURT ENDORSES USE OF DOGS IN PUBLIC PLACES The role of detection dogs in law enforcement has been made more secure by the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of United States v. Place. ` In Place. law enforcement officers at New Yorks LaGuardia airport lawfully detained defendant on a reasonable suspicion that he was carrying a controlled substance.' When de- fendant refused to consent to a search of his luggage. the officers gave him the opportunity to ac- company his luggage to the office of a Federal judge where a search warrant would be sousht. Defend- ant declined the offer but re- quested and recei%ed a telephone number where the officers could be reached. After defendant left the premises, his luggage was taken to Kennedy Airport where. 90 minutes after the initial deten- tion—it was subjected to a "sniff test" by a trained narcotics detec- tion dog. In response to the dog's positi%e reaction to one of the bads, a search warrant was se- cured. The subsequent search of the bag revealed a substantial quantity of cocaine. The defendant was later arrested and indicted for possession of cocaine with intent to deliver. After the district court denied defendant's motion to suppress the evidence seized from his luggage.` defendant entered a plea of guilty Special Agent Kingston Drug detection dogs are extremely effective weapons to use in the war on drugs. but reserved the right to appeal the denial of his suppression motion. On review. the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed on the wounds that the lengthy detention of defendant's luggage exceeded permissible limits and consequently amounted to a seizure in violation of the fourth amendment." The U.S- Supreme Court affirmed. Althou__h unnecessary to the resolution of the dispute in Place. a majority of the Court took the opportunity to address the consti- tutionality of - 'dog sniffs.` Spe- cifically, the Court considered whether the use of a dog to detect odors emanating from defendant's luggage constituted a search re- quiring compliance with fourth amendment dictates." The Court engaged in a two -step analysis to determine whether the officer's actions violated any expectation of privacy that was both subjectively and objectively reasonable."' Finding first that the defend- ant had a subjective expectation of privacy in his luggage. the Court then considered the more impor- tant question of whether that ex- peciation of privacy was objec- tively reasonable. In other words. did the use of the dog violate any expectation of privacy that society as a whole was willing to recog- nize and protect? Of particular sig- nificance to the Court was the fact that the dog sniff did not require the opening of defendant's lug - Lil -le:' .. JTJhe 'due sniff does not expose noncontraband items that otherwise would remain hidden from public view. as does, for example. an officer's rummaging throu the con- tents of the luggage. Thus. the manner in which information is obtained through this investiga- tive technique is much less intrusive than a typical search. Moreover. the sniff discloses only the presence or absence of narcotics. a contraband item. Thus. despite the fact that the sniff tells authorities something about the contents of the lug - ease. the information obtained is limited. This limited dis- closure also ensures that the owner of the property is not subjected to the embarrassment • • A," IM; 27 • 0 i • and inconvenience entailed in less discriminate and more intrusive investigative methods. " 1 ' - In view of the limited intrusive- ness of this dog sniff which only revealed one thing (i.e. whether there was contraband in the item tested). the Court concluded that this single fact is something society is not willing to protect. Consequently. under the circum- stances present in Place. the use of a trained dog. although foiling defendant's subjective expectation of privacy. did not violate any objectively reasonable expectation of privacy and. therefore. was not a search under the fourth amend. ment. In Place. the Court did not go so far as to say that no dog sniff would ever be considered a search. Rather. the Court was careful to limit the impact of its decision by narrowly concluding that "the exposure of Idefend- ant'sl !u _a__e. «hick was located LOWER COURT CASES As a result of the limited application or the Court's pro- nouncement in Place, lower courts have had to consider anew the constitutionality of using specially trained dogs in other than public places. Some of these courts have continued to hold that the dag sniff is not a search." while other courts have held to the contrary." The distinguishing factor appears to be the degree of privacy the individual defendants have had in the "other than public places." For example. if the nonpublic place where the dog sniff occurs is controlled by a third party and the defendant has no reasonable ex- pectation of privacy in the area. then the sniff of defendant's prop- erty found at that location does not constitute a search. However. if the dog sniff takes place in an area where defendant has a reasonable expectation of privacy. such as his home or automobile. then the sniff dues amount to a search and it ... if the dog sniff takes place in an area where defendant has a reasonable expectation of privacy ... then the sniff does amount to a search.... J in a public place. to a trained canine — did not constitute a 'search' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. " 1 ' The ob- vious implication of the Court's narrow ruling is that if the location of the article subjected to the dog sniff was changed. then the con- clusion that the sniff was not a search could also change. must be reasonable under the fourth amendment. The following cases demonstrate this distinction and illustrate different courts' approaches to the legality of dog sniffs in various nonpublic places. 22 1 FBI Law ErJm *rrem auYW, Third -Party Controlled Areas In United States v. Lovell. 16 the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the legality of law enforce- ment officers subjecting a pas- senger's luggu_ge to a sniff test once it has been entrusted to the care of a third -party common car- rier. Bennv Lovell's nervous ap- pearance" piqued the interest of U.S. Border Patrol Agents at the E1 Paso International Airport. The agents observed Lovell for the brief time it took him to check his luLgage with a skycap and walk to the airline terminal and noted that he was visibly shaking and fre- quently glanced over his shoulder. The agents decided to remove Lovell's luggage from the airline conveyer belt and to subject the bags to a dog sniff." After a posi- tive alert from a trained narcotics detection doe, a search warrant was obtained Pursuant to the war rant. agents opened Lovell's lug- gage and found 68 pounds o: marijuana. Lovell was subse- quently arrested and charged with possession of a controlled sub- stance with intent to distribute. Prior to trial. Lovell mos e: nt suppress all the evidence obtained from his Iw__u__e on the wounds that the bags had beer. w seized and then searched in viola- tion of his fourth amendment rights.'" The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was asked to decide whether: 1) The removal of Lovell's bags from the airline conveyer belt was a seizure under the fourth amendment. an ?) whether the sttijj of the lug- gage was a seurch.= In response to the first query. the court distinguished between luggage taken from the custody of a traveler and luggage taken from the custody of a third party com- mon carrier. Finding the latter to be much less intrusive. the court • "Mnston" defects Me odor of dnga during a twi L- ing arafcise in a hotel foam. Had this been an actual search. both Probable cause and a search warrant would ncfrnaoy have been required. concluded- "... momentary delay occasioned by the bags' removal from the conveyer belt was insuf- ficient to constitute a meaningful interference with Lovell's pos- sessory interest in his bags. As a result. the .agents' actions did not constitute a seizure." The court also rejected de- fendant's contention that the sniff of his lug_iase was a search. The court began by recognizing that .. when airport security concerns are not implicated. every pas - senger has luggage checked with an airline enjoys a reasonable expectation of privacy that the cotrrerrrs of that luggage will not be exposed in the absence of con- sent or a legally obtained war - .rant."" Nonetheless. the court concluded that the passenger's rea- sonable expectation of privacy did not extend to the airspace sur- rounding the luggage: the use of a drug detection dog to sniff luggage in the custody of a common carrier is not a search and. therefore. nei- ther probable cause nor a reason- able suspicion is required to justify the action.!' Lovell is just one of many cases holding that the use of a dru__ detection dog to sniff items placed in the cure and cusody tr third parties is not a search under the fourth amendment. The ,ante result has been reached in cases where does have been used to detect the odor of drugs emanating from safe deposit boxes.!-' pack- ages shipped through Federal Express.:' cargo stored in the facilities of a private carrier.-' and parcels traveling in the L.S. mail.- The common thread run. nine through each one of these cases is that the particular defend- ants involved had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the area in which the drug detection do_ was used and. therefore. the dog sniff was not subject to fourth amendment constraints. Private Residences Law enforcement officers may desire to use a detection dog in areas where there is unques- tionably a reasonable expectation of privacy. such as sniffs of a per - ,on. "' a ornate home. or hotel room. L +in_ a under such cir- cumstances _aenerull% implicates a person's reasonable expectation of privacy " requiring prior judicial authorization or other appropriate justification under one of the exceptions to the warrant require- ment. For example. in United Srarrs v. Thomas." the Second Circuit Court or appeals held that simply using. a dog to detect odors em- anuting from defendant's apart- ment constituted a search. even though no entry into the premises was made. In Atimds. the defend- ant claimed that the warrantless use of a drub- trained dos outside his apartment to detect odors orig- inating from within was an illegal Av7u9 19" ' 29 • A 1 0 t 1 1 search [hat tainted the subse. quently issued warrant. The court acknowledged the precedent estab- lished in Pluce. but noted that the use of a dog to detect odors in a suitcase is quite different than [sing a dog to reveal the contents of an individual's home. Empha- sizing the fact that an individual has a heightened privacy interest in his dwelling place. the court made the following statement: "[AJ practice that is not intru. sive in a public airport may be intrusive when employed at a person's home. Although using a dog sniff for narcotics may be discriminating and unoffen- sive relative to other detection methods. and will disclose only the presence or absence of nar- cotics, it remains a way of detecting the contents of a pri- vate. enclosed space. With a trained dog police may obtain information about what is inside a dwelling that thev could nut derive from their own senses.... Here the defendant had a le 'I[Ima[e ex DeC[atlon that the contents of his closed apartment would remain pri- vate. [hat they could not be 'sensed' from outside his door. Use of the trained dog imper- missibly intruded on that legitimate expectation. 3= In keeping with this rationale. the court in Tkumas concluded that the use of a dog to detect the odor of drugs coming from defendant's apartment was a search which required both probable cause and a search warrant.' hlotor Vehicles The Lovell and Thomas cases illustrate two diametrically op- posed situations. In Lovell. the 30 ; Fee la. Enkneffrrn eun� defendant had no expectation of privacy in the area where the do_ sniff occurred. while in Thomas. the defendant "s privacy interest was extremely high. Dog sniffs may also occur in motor vehicles" or other areas where defendants are afforded a reduced expectation of privacy. 66 ... courts have recognized the evidentiary value of a well - trained drug detection dog. For example. in United Stares v. Whitehead." law enforcement officers noticed defendant as he arrived at the Miami. FL. Amtrak Station 10 minutes before the scheduled departure of the morn - ing train to New York City. De- fendant called attention to himself b% carefully scanning the front of the station before enterin_. The officers initiated an inyesti__atiun b% speaking to the taxi driver Abu drove defendant [o the station and the ticketing agent who sold de- fendant his ticket. The taxi driver advised that defendant had been picked up at a Miami hotel well known to the officers-as a com- mon meeting* place for drug traf- fickers. The ticketing agent in- formed the officers that defendant paid cash for a first -class sleeping car ticket to New York. the reser- vation for which had been made only a few hours before. With this knowledge. the officers approached defendant, and after identifying themselves, asked to speak with him. Although defend- ant agreed to talk to the officers. he immediately broke into a pro- fuse sweat. When asked to iden- tify himself. defendant produced a pair of military dog -tags. but claimed to have no other identi- fication. In response to further questioning. defendant advised that he had been in Miami for days to play tennis with friends. The officers then informed defend- ant that they were conducting a narcotics investigation and asked for consent to search defendant's bags. When defendant denied his consent. he was permitted to board the train with no further interrup- tions. After defendant's departure. the officers in Miami contacted Amtrak officers who boarded the train when it made a scheduled stop in Washington. DC. More officers boarded the train in Bal- timore and with them were two drug- trained dogs. One of the officers knocked on defendant's door. when the door was ooened. the officer identified him <elt and was given consent to enter. Once inside. the officer asked for per- mission to search defendant's bags. Defendant again broke into a profuse sweat and asked what would happen if he objected. The officer indicated he had doss available to sniff the luggage. At that point. defendant told the officer to "bring on y our dogs." The dugs were brough[ into the roomette. where they both alerted to one of defendant's bags. De- fendant and his luggage were detained while a warrant was obtained. The subsequent search of the suitcase revealed 3 kilo- grams of cocaine. Prior to trial. defendant moved to suppress the cocaine found in his luggage on the _rounds that the doe sniff of his luggage. which was located in his roomette. was an unlawful search under the fourth amendment. The trial court rejected this motion and found defendant guilty of posses- sing cocaine with intent to dis- tribute. On appeal. defendant renewed his fourth amendment claim. Recognizing that the roomette in question was not a "public place." the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit first consid- ered whether the roomette was the equivalent of def'endant's home or hotel room where his expectation of privacy is heightened. or in- stead more akin to a motor vehicle where the privacy interest is diminished. After pointing out that trains. like can. are subject to per- vasive government regulation and their mobility creates the same "law enforcement exieencv ... and ... porential for immediate rli, ht trom the _jurisdiction." the court made the following observa- tion: "Whitehead's roomette was moving swiftly in interstate transit. W'hitehead's status therein was that of a passenger. not a resident. Although White- head had no abilitv to direct the train's movement. its continu- ing journey imposed practical constraints on the ufficern' abil- ity to mount a full - fledged investigation within jurisdic- tional boundaries. Moreover. Whitehead could leave the train at any stop. and unlike a hotel guest. he had no authority to remain on the train once it reached its destination. Based on these observations. the court rejected defendant's conten- tion that the roomette was the functional equivalent of a hotel room or a temporary home that deserved the most scrupulous pro- tection under the fourth amend- ment. The court's review. however. did not end there. Defendant coun- tered with the argument that even though motor vehicles are given less protection under the fourth amendment. probable cause is still required to justify the warrantless search of such vehicles. Again. the court disagreed. Because the dog sniff is so much less intrusive than a traditional search. the court reasoned that a prior showing of probable cause was unnecessary. Instead. the court found that such a limited and discreet intrusion as is caused by a dog sniff could be justified on the basis of a reason- able suspicion. In light of the facts known to the investigating officers in Whitehead. the court found that not required is attributable in large part to the reduced expectation of privacy attached to motor vehi- cles. CONCLUSION Drug detection dogs are ex- tremely effective weapons to use in the war on drugs. Traffickers have attempted to thwart the ef- forts of these dogs by packaging drugs in containers filled with moth balls and garlic." When these attempts at concealment failed. drug cartels. acting out of fear. actually put contracts out on the lives of certain detection does." The fear exhibited by the drug traffickers is itself a reward to the law enforcement community because it means that a weapon that works has been found. To keep this weapon work - im±, law enforcement officers must be careful to use detection dogs within the boundaries set by the courts. Those boundaries can be summarized as follows: GG the use of a drug detection dog to sniff items placed in the care and custody of third parties is not a search under the fourth amendment. 99 a reasonable suspicion existed at the time the do_-, sniff was con- ducted. Many cases have adopted the rationale used in Whitehead and have upheld the use of dogs to detect drugs in motor vehicles when a reasonable suspicion can be articulated.ty The fact that a warrant based on probable cause is • If the dog is used to sniff an area "her_ the defendant has an extremely high expectation of privacy. then a warrant based on probable cause or an exception to the warrant requirement is a prerequisite: • If the sniff is to occur in an area of reduced expectation of Aupva r9E9. 31 r I i privacy. then a mere showinr of reasonable suspicion is all that is required; and • If the dog is used to sniff an item located in a public place or a place controlled by a third patty. then no search will occur and fourth amendment proscriptions regarding searches need not be a concern. Although other constitutional considerations may arise. such as the level of suspicion needed to seize lugga from a traveler'= or the amount of time an item may be detained prior to conducting a sniff test." law enforcement officers can help insure the legal- ity of the dog sniff itself by stav- ing Within these boundaries.?: Foolnotm 'Fleming. "Wirtwn's Last Chance." Rvudrr' + Diveir. Kuvcmtxv IYM. pp, 10(4 -4. :An alert by a well- trained timcc7ion dug I' norrrall' sufficient tit c iablish pnilrahle cuusc. .See. r. e.. L filed States s. Rate 524 F._d 12 I la Cir. 1 sir alas C li San Dwcu L Re, .I .l4 %6. III; 5 Ct.'h." I lYS: , hcr- nnarrer ai d a• P/au•1. - Reasonahlc susPlcaon had preuausl% been cotahh hed h', officer• oho had tilled w Place before he Neirded his plane tar Vow wk- 'Defendant's supr r , soon nation claimed that the warrantless scinnre of his luggage viot- ImeJ his liwnh amendment rights. "United Sturgis v. Plarr. ("I F.2d 44 1'd Co. 19811. For a review of the proper sc,pe 'If an inve >Ilealwe detention. xe Hall. - "Inycs- li,amc Detention. An Intermediate Rv "" F8l LIn• 6na.,; - nr (full......, ��n enter IY85. Deccmfwr 1485. and lanuan' 1486. - Because a nuiurits of the Supreme Court 61und thin the YO- minute tktenti n of defend - am's luggage was rests hung. and therefore, an unreasonable seizure under the fount amend- ment. there wa no need for the Coat to address the "dog sniff' question. See justice Br-nnanl concurring opinion in Plane 103 S.Ct. 26 ?7 m 2646 fBrenwn- 1., cunurringl. The concurring Justices chastised the fmajorir• for being "unahke to 'resist the pull to decide the constimisomd issues on a broader basis than the record beffre it impentiwly requires. "' Id. quoting Sirrri v. A'rn• ruvk. iW L.S. 576. 581 (1469). 32 FBI law Emoromam Sufi in 'U.S. Corsi, amend. IV reads: The right Ill the perPle to he a curc n their per ins. howvs. paper and effects. against unrcason- able searches and seizures. shall not be violated. and no Warrants shall i yue, but upon pnibahk cause. supported by path or afftmu- lion. and particularly describing the place to be searched. and the pert in or things lu be se sod. "'titles two -step test fur determining the cvis(erin of a rc mublc expectation of pri- vxc was first announced by the Supreme Gwn n Kor % LO riled Store,. 384 U. S. -L7 (1967 "Plate, suprr note ?. at 2644. 7d. 'Id. d 2645. ItSrr, e.g.. Gamble v. Swle. 477 So.Zd 18H (.Ala. App. 19851: Stair v. Snlikin. 681 P 2d 98U (Supt Cl. Hawaii 1966): and Arta v. Stair. 688 S.W.2d 188 (Tex. App. 19851, "Srr. r. al.. United Starer v. Tangcurn. 861 F 2 837 (D.C. Cir. 19691: Crash, r. •• Many cases ... have upheld the use of dogs to detect drugs in motor vehicles when a reasonable suspicion can be articulated. .Sloan. 44' Su.'tl 1152 IFla App. 148x: and (',imrnnrru rullfr c. Jtdulsf,m. 5 3II A_'d 74 Ilia. Sup. C;. 19871. ^849 F 2 4111 15th Cir. 1988) lhercinaf- [cr:ocJ as 4n'rfl�. Lovcllb mmousness was evidenced b his ahakinc. his fumbling. his erratic hand wrung and a "toothpick in his miwth ... %as gtiing 91) miles an hour." Id. at 911 . "Prior to the dog sniff. tow agents com- Pns.ed the sinks of the smlca_`e and both get a lant snw11 at talcum ponder and a strong idur tit nurlluana. The court hwrd m, fault with the accnt' action_ Id. ' the diono town ietuwd to sup• press the evidctwc. Lowell entered a conditional pica of guilts' and mied the right m appeal the dental of his supprcssitn motion. !d. at 912. s 'Because the agents sniffed the luggage pntw Its bringing in a dctmisn dog. the coon focused its allemian on the legality of the human sniff. ''Tow court ado emsidemd whether squeezing or - 'prepping" the bag -;ts a fourth amendment vioLvisn. On this i>_sue. the coon stated. " . while we could hvputhesim a 'prepping' process so vinkm. extreme and unrcasanuble in its executer as 1u cross the bounds ul el Utlil Utlunal prop.. tc, we are Mt controned be saIch a pntTas here.° = Laren supra now 16. of 916. /d. 917. - 'Id- =See. e. e.. 5mmi v. Sane. 688 S.W.2d 188 (Tex. App. 19851 and Stare v. 8,trre. 711 P.2d 28 r Wash. App. 19861. `Srr. e.g.. Gamble .,. State. 471 So.2d 11 K8 (.Ala. App. 19851. -Srr. r. e.. Stair v..S ... Am. "I P 2d 4ml (Sup. Cl- Hawaii 14841. `Srr. r. p.. Starr v. Realm. 196 V,N' 72Y ISup- Ct. N. D. 14861. Mn State v. Borer. 71 P.?d 28 (Wash. App. IYMI. the cwn held that a eanim sniff of a pers rl or of ubjeeu being carried by the pmon is "... offensive at Is" and hamming at wsty to the innocent sniffs" MW mquim a reasonable suspcion. Id. at 31 n. 4. "See note 10. stytra. "757 F.2d 054 (2d Cir. IY851. rer. denied- 474 U.S. 819 119891. ' :/d, at 1 366-7. I Allh(wgh the comet limrol that Ilic Itar- rantless use tit the delcti n Jim was a fttmh unwndmcnl viotanon. It mlhad to tlpprs, the csuknc. Rathct. the court found that un<c the ubwgwnth issued w'untam vas executed in Void faith, and pursuant Io 1k Supreme Ctwn's decisaal in Unard Stairs V. Lynn. if 14 S.CL 14115 (19841. the exclusionary rule nerd not apph'. 4 Fw casc, involving dog sniffs of motor chicle,. sr.. L ,ited States c Tarlac,.. Kh4 F.'d s 17 (D.C. Cir. 14841: t nerd Sot,., v. Stour. NM F.'d 154I Ilah Cir IYKY1: (.turd S,,rrrs s. Harsh'. K55 F. 2d -5 I I llh Cir I4K81. Untied States s'. Derr n:r. 765 F2d K91I IM Cir. 19851: and 0 Kerr �. Stec 37h S.E.'d An (Cl. of App. Ga. 14sm. "84 F.2J 844 141h Cir. IY881. !J. '•tits "Srr me .14, supra. "See rate I. .supra. "Id. ':Srr mile h. supra. 11 111. Law enforcement officers of other than Federal jurisdiction who are interested in any legal issue dis- cussed in this article should consuft their legal adviser. Some police pro- cedures ruled permissible under Federal constitutional law are of Questionable legality under State law or are not permitted at all. 0 Hutchinson Jaycee Water Carnival P.O. Box 624 Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 APR 2 81997 April 26, 1997 Gary Plotz, City Administrator City of Hutchinson 111 Hassan Street Hutchinson, MN 55350 Dear Gary, ( - )F HUTCHc ON The 55th Annual Hutchinson Jaycee Water Carnival, which will be held June 9 - 15th, 1997, Is fast approaching with the time to prepare for our annual community celebration. In this regard, the Jaycees would like to kindly request that permits be Issued for the 1997 Water Carnival as follows: 1.) Issue permit for the Carnival Udway Shoe; June 11th - 15th, at West River Park. The Park and Recreation Dept. has been asked to approve this location again for this year. An alternative site can be set for the Jaycee Park parking lot, as has been done previously in wet seasons, or another site agreeable with the Park & Rec. Dept 2.) Close Third Avenue NW for 10K and 1 Me Family Fun Run, Roll or Ride events, from Mein Street to Glen Street on June 14th, from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., for safety to the participants at the beginning • and end of the races. 3.) Close streets and Issue a parade permit for the Kiddle Day Parade on Saturday, June 14th, from 11:00 a.m. to 130 p.m. The same route will be used as has been done In the past, starting at the south side of Park Towers and continuing around South Park In a clockwise direction on Glen Street, Fourth Avenue SW, and Grove Street. • Close streets and Issue a parade permit for the Grande Day Parade on Sunday, June 15th, fr om 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. This year the parade route Is changing slightly due to street mprovemen projects. This years proposed parade route starts with the staging area being moved to Larson Street all the way down Roberts Road, Including the side streets of Graham and Hidden Circle Drive, to Dale Street. Parade Is to s tart at Roberts Road and Dale Street Intersection and head north on Dale Street u ntil turning east on Second Avenue and continuing until turning south onto Franklin Street, and ending on Linden Avenue. 5.) Issue a permit to operate a concession stand during the Sand Wlleyball Tournament on Saturday, June 14th, at West River Park and Les Kouba Park, and during the Grande Day Parade, Water Ski Show, and Mud Wlleyball Tournament on Sunday, June 15th, at South Park, West River Park, and Les Kouba Park. 6.) Issue a permit for the Water Carnival 'Outdoor Dance° on Saturday June 011, from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at Flyers / HI -Tops, Hutch Bowl parking lot The dance area will be fenced oft to enable Flyers / HI -Tops employees to monitor gate entry to dance area. The Hutchinson Police Dept. has been contacted about this event. ( 1v 0 June 5. 1997 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: CROW RIVER ARTS, INC. BOARD OF DIRECTORS TOPIC: EXTENSION OF LEASE FOR CROW RIVER ARTS CENTER CURRENT LOCATION AT 44 WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST We deeply appreciate the Hutchinson City Council's aenerous support of the Arts over the past number of years and for the current Art Center location which provides nearly 2000 square feet for the varied programs we offer. This facility has been key to the growth of Art Center activities over the past 3 plus years. Without your in -kind support of space and utilities, we could not have accomplished the growth in our programming. The attached program of activities provides you with a summary of our accomplishments. We recognize that a decision needs to be made regarding the current status �f our lease. Our first preference would be to remain in our current location. However, we realize this may not be possible. Therefore, we propose that Crow River Arts, Inc. be permitted continuation of the lease through June 30, 1998. If by July 1, 1998, you deem there are more paramount needs for the space, such as for the Police Department, we will be prepared to vacate the premises by December 31, 1998_ Our rationale for asking for this period of time is based on our desire to work cooperatively with the City and other interested parties to find a permanent home for the Art Center that will serve to support our activities and continue to energize our growth. With this in mind, we would like to ask the City's cooperation in forming a task force to investigate these options over the next several months with a recommendation to be presented to the City Council regarding all aspects of relocation by yearend 1997. In conclusion, we ask the City's continuing support to allow Crow River Arts, Inc, to pursue our ongoing mission of fostering education for the public in all art forms, by emphasizing the essential role of regional art in expressing community culture. Culture is the sum total of all things that shape the daily life in a community and the role of art is an indispens- able means of expressing human culture. Attachments: •Art Center Proaram of Activities Financial Information Artbeat Newsletter r l 7 ' n .-A CROW RIVER ARTS CENTER PROGRAM OF ACTIVITIES I. ART EXHIBITS Presently new exhibits are brought in every other month with an open house reception for each exhibit_ We look for artists within a 30 mile radius on average. Our photography exhibit in February 1997 had 87 attend the open house. We currently have 90 local /regional artists on file. A. SCHOOL ART EXHIBIT We have just completed our third consecutive year of school art displays. This year we invited all the private schools to participate in addition to the public schools. St. Anastasia and Our Saviors did display. 250 people attended this exhibit. All K - 12 levels were included. 11 classes from Park Elementary visited the Center to view peer artwork. The children bring a lot of enthusiasm with them. We received numerous positive comments from students, instructors and parents regarding the merit of this exhibit. B. ART TOUR 0 We began this tour in 1996 with approximately 26 artists participating. Planning is in progress for another tour in October 1997. This tour involves exhibits at the Art Center and tours of artists' studios. II. COMMUNITY CHOIR This choir was originated in April 1993. It meets in Lhe Art Center every Thursday evening from 7:00 - 9:00 P. M. September through May. There are cu -prently 27 people involved, including individuals from Glencoe and Dassel. The choir provides two concerts per year and guest appearances. The concerts on average have 200 plus people attend. III. THEATER A_ DESSERT THEATER PRODUCTIONS "Dessert Theater'' productions began in the Art Center November 1996 with the production of "Love Letters ''. This production was followed by pro- ductions of "A Perfect Match'' and ''Our Town' in the Art Center. Pro- ductions averaged 100 attendees. a. COMMUNITY THEATER PRODUCTIONS Community theater originated in May 1993 and has had six productions to date. The group meets in the Art Center 3 - 5 times per week over the 5 - 7 week show period. It involves on average 20 - 25 individuals per show for cast and crew. Some of the individuals involved have come from the surrounding communities of Stewart, Litchfield. Hector and Spring Park. The large scale productions average 200 plus attendees. Page Two - Crow River Arts Program of Activities • C. MINNEAPOLIS CHILDREN'S THEATER Productions were brought to Hutchinson in December 1994, September 1996 and December 1997. This year in December we will be hosting the very popular production of ''Strega Nona ". It is a delightful play by Tomie dePaola, a world renowned author and illustrator. These pro- ductions have had from 250 - 500 in attendance and are co- hosted by 3M. D. SUMMER CHILDREN'S THEATER - beginning summer 1997 IV. ART CLASSES *Summer 1996 - 19 children's art classes which involved 35 families *Fall 1996 - 8 children's art classes which involved 30 families *Winter /Spring 1997 - 6 children's art classes which involved 30 families and 3 adult classes which involved 13 families V. SPECIAL ACTIVITIES A. CONFERENCES Hosted Artist of Minnesota Conference in the spring of 1994. We also hosted the SMAHC (Southwestern Minnesota Arts and Humanities Council) annual meeting in the fall of 1996. Sixty representatives from south western Minnesota attended. Local artists, the McLeod County Heritage Center, Victorian Inn, Community Choir and Four Shadow Theater Company participated in this event. Hosted Woman's Art Caribbean Festival in the summer of 1994. Sponsored 'Marketing for Visual Artists'' in the spring of 1997. It was presented by Chris Osgood from Resources and Counseling Center in St. Paul, MN. C FEATURED ARTISTS We recruit the "Featured Artist" for the Chamber of Commerce's annual Arts and Crafts Festival. D. COOPERATIVE EFFORTS Park and Recreation Department - joint class registration *McLeod County Heritage Center - cooperative effort with regard to SMAHC annual meeting *Hutchinson Public and Private Schools - yearly children's art exhibit *Hutchinson Chamber of Commerce - yearly featured artist for Arts and Crafts Festival *Adaptive Recreation Program - provided meeting space and instructor for special art class *Maplewood Academy - cooperative efforts for concerts and choir • *Area Churches - perform choir concerts at various church services *3M Company - cooperative effort for Minneapolis Children's Theater *Artbeat - Art Center newsletter published quarterly *SMAHC (Southwestern Minnesota Arts & Humanities Council) - grant programs CROW RIVER ARTS, INC. FINANCIAL STATEMENT 06/01/95 - 05/31/96 AND 06/01/96 - 05/31/97 06/01/95 - 06/01/96 - NET 05/31/96 05/31/97 CHANGE BEGINNING BALANCE AS OF 06/01 $ 15,463.45 $ 19,301.83 $ 3,838.38 INCOME; • MEMBERSHIPS $ 4,641.56 $ 4,445.00 $ ( 196.56) DONATIONS (1995 - 1996 INCLUDES 1.129.74 5,453.23 2,470.35 CITY DONATION OF $5,000) 6,225.00 523.95 (5,701.05) GRANTS - SMAHC 7,989.36 334.04 298.64 THEATER 2,607.00 0.00 (2,607.00) CHOIR 1,351.00 1,954.00 603.00 CHOIR PERFORMANCE RECEIPTS 1,440.55 1,140.00 ( 300.55) THEATER PERFORMANCE RECEIPTS 3,918.11 2,000.00 (1,918.11) CLASS WORKSHOP FEES 1.749.73 2,279.93 530.20 MISCELLANEOUS INCOME (INTEREST, ART TOUR FEES, ETC.) 385.22 800.82 415.60 TOTAL INCOME $ 22,318.17 $ 13.143.70 $ (9,174.47) $ 37,781.62 $ 32,445.53 $ (5,336.09) • BALANCE BEFORE EXPENSES EXPENSES: ART CLASS EXP. /EXHIBITS /TOURS COMMUNITY CHOIR THEATER - COMMUNITY /DESSERT/ CHILDREN'S SPECIAL EVENTS - CONFERENCES/ WORKSHOPS /MEETINGS, ETC. GENERAL EXPENSES DIRECTOR'S PAY, STATE & FED. TAXES, WORKER'S & UNEMP.COMP TELEPHONE MISC. PRINTING & ADVERTISING GENERAL SUPPLIES & OPERATING POSTAGE BUILDING INSURANCE EQUIPMENT TOTAL EXPENSES ENDING BALANCE AS OF 05/31 $ 652.40 $ 1,626.99 $ 974.59 2,189.02 3,318.76 1.129.74 5,453.23 2,470.35 (2,982.88) 78.31 47.68 30.63) 7,655.32 7,989.36 334.04 298.64 431.89 133.25 812.21 1,532.05 719.84 782.26 616,84 ( 165,42) 308.40 444.00 135.60 250.00 300.00 50.00 0.00 1,000,00 1,000.00 $ 18.479.79 $ 19,777.92 $ 1,298.13 $ 19,301.83 $ 12,667.61 $ (6,634.22) CITY OF HUTCHINSON • POLICE SERVICES TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Steve Madson, Director of Police /Emergency Management Services DATE: May 7, 1997 RE: Old Fire Station This memorandum will serve as a request to allow the police services /emergency management function to occupy the area of the old fire station which is currently being used by the Crow River Arts. As you are aware, the Crow River Arts currently has a lease with the city for use of a portion of the building. This lease may be terminated by six (6) months written notice (copy attached). Police/Emergency Management services would like to utilize the space the Crow River Arts is occupying. The utilization of this area would serve a dual purpose. First, with the • expansion of our Family Conferencing project, it is becoming apparent we need more room. The space available in the police building is not adequate to handle the size of some of the groups we are bringing together. Secondly, we no longer have usable space for a training or emergency operations center. Also, the locker room and offices can be utilized for evidence preparation and storage of equipment. I request authority to notify the Crow River Arts, Inc. that the City of Hutchinson intends to terminate the existing lease six months hence from official written notification. If approved, I will assume responsibility for all the necessary notifications. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this memorandum, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest convenience. /Ikg 97 -01 -0001 • /'T7 • AMENDMENT TO LEASE THIS AMENDMENT TO LEASE is entered into this 1st day of August, 1996, by and between the City of Hutchinson ( "Hutchinson ") and Crow River Arts, Inc. ("CRA"). RECITALS: 1. Hutchinson and CRA are parties to a general Lease dated October 1, 1994 which Lease expires on December 31, 1996; 2. The parties hereto, for mutual advantage, desire to extend the Lease covering those certain premises located at 44 Washington Avenue West, Hutchinson, Mn. 55350; 3. The parties hereto have reduced their agreement to writing. FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION the receipt and • sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. TERM. The Lease shall be for a term- of one (1) year beginning January 1, 1997 and continuing until December 31, 1997. Unless notice of termination is given pursuant to the tee me and conditions hereof, the Lease shall automatically renew on an annual basis. The Lease will automatically terminate on December 31, 2006 regardless of whether notice has been given by any party and thereafter tenancy shall continue on a month to month basis. 3. NOTICE. Either party may terminate the Lease by giving six months written notice to the other party of the desire to terminate the Lease. Notice shall be given by the parties to the following addresses: -1- 7 17� 1 TO THE CITY: City Administrator • Hutchinson City Center 111 Hassan Street S.E. Hutchinson, Mn. 55350 With a copy to: G. Barry Anderson ARNOLD, ANDERSON & DOVE, PLLP 101 Park Place Hutchinson, Mn. 55350 TO CRA: Director Crow River Arts, Inc. 44 Washington Avenue West Hutchinson, Mn. 55350 4. INSURANCE. CRA has and shall continue to provide liability coverage in an amount and form satisfactory to the City for the space covered by the general Lease and this Amendment to Lease. 5. CONTINUATION. All other terms and conditions of the general Lease dated October 1, 1994 shall continue in full force and effect as if fully set out herein, including the provisions of • the general Lease regarding the payment of rent. IN WITNESS WKMEOF the parties hereto have set their hands and seals the year and date first above written. CITY OF HUTCHINSON CROW RIVER ARTS, INC. By By: �r M yor Its President Attest: 4- Gary D. ,Plotz City Administrator -2- -0 • JA MES MARKA From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: • LJ JAMES MARKA GARY D PLOTZ MARILYN J SWANSON Request for City Council directive regarding sign cluttering Wednesday, June 04, 1997 9:14AM Please place this matter on the next City Council agenda for discussion and directive. At the June Hutchinson Planning Staff meeting it was determined that City staff needed to actively pursue enforcement of Hutchinsons sign ordinance. The sign cluttering problem is primarily signage such as offpremise garage sale and real estate signs, offpremise portable signs, including signs on vehicles strategically parked, and product placed in the public right of way ranging from full scale plastic horses to tires, items for sale etc. The specific issues in need of discussion and review are 1) Request for Council support and directive authorizing city staff to pick up signs in violation and dispose of them. Staff is defined as ALL City employees. 2) Ordinance lanquage review 3) Process to deal with upset advertisers. Please note that the Planning, Zoning and Building Dept has historically taken a proactive positive approach to this matter as represented by the enclosed notification documents, and the memo to the Hutchinson Leader advertising dept. This has proven somewhat successful, but, the fact still remains that most people view this matter as insignificant and discard the notice. This is especially true after events such as garage sales. Signage remains on telephone poles, in the Dale St. /Roberts Rd garden plot median and other strategic advertising locations. The primary event that must take place tonight is the empowerment by the City Council to ALL city staff supporting our intentions to keep the community looking second to none. The notification is cumbersome and time consuming and most time impractical. We appreciate you consideration on this matter. Page 1 P - h C DATE: May 8, 1997 MEMORANDUM TO: Arlene, Hutchinson Leader Shopper FROM: Hutchinson Planning Staff RE: Garage Sale Signs In an effort to keep the community safe, clean, and uncluttered with portable signs, the City of Hutchinson is requesting your cooperation by advising your clients of the following: When placing garage sale signs, please do not place the signs in boulevards, garden plots, or locations where traffic site distance /visibilities may be obscured. Obtain permission from the property owner prior to placing off premise signs. Immediately remove garage sale signs when the sale is over. In no case shall the duration of the sign placement exceed three to five days. Please note City Staff has been authorized and directed to remove and discard off - premise signs as they are in violation with Hutchinson's sign ordinance. Thank you for your cooperation. cc: Mayor & Council Planning Staff /Commission Police Chief City Administrator Street Superintendent Park Superintendent City Center 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2522 (320)587.5151 Fax (320) 234 -4240 Parks & Recreation 900 Harrington Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -3097 (320) 587 -2975 Fax (320) 2344240 Police Services N 10 Franklin Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2464 (320) 587 -2242 Fax (320) 587 -6427 • A Printed on recycled paper A Date: In Our records indicate you have not received Planning Commission or City Council approval to E place a portable sign at (Copy of ordinance attached.) Please immediately remove the sign, complete the enclosed conditional use permit application and submit to the Hutchinson Planning Commission secretary Ms. Bonnie Baumetz. For your convenience, the Hutchinson Chamber of Commerce has the Reader Sign Board available free of charge for nonprofit organizations. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, HUTCHINSON PLANNING STAFF cc: Planning Staff/Commission City Attorney • City Center Ill Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2522 (320) 587 -5151 Far (320) 234 -4240 Parks & Recreation 900 Harrington Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -3097 (320) 587 -2975 Fax (320) 234-4240 Police Services 10 Franklin Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2464 (320) 587 -2242 Fax (320) 587.6427 - Printed on recycled paper - Date: MC63 The intent of this letter is to politely request your cooperation by removing your sign presently located at . The sign violates Hutchinson's sign ordinance because it is placed in the public right of way and/or not located on your private property. The City fully understands the needs of temporary signage for garage sales, auctions, and the like; however, to eliminate nuisance signage we are obligated to remove signs placed in the right of way and/or offsite premise signs. We hope that you are considerate and understanding of our attempt to regulate signage yet accommodate the community's signage needs. Signs that are picked up by City staff will be placed behind the Park and Recreation garage site located at 1100 Hwy 22 South. Signs that are not retrieved within seven days of confiscation will be discarded. Sincerely, HUTCHINSON PLANNING STAFF cc: Planning Staff/Commission City Administrator City Center 11I Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350.2522 (320) 587.5151 Fax (310) 2344240 Parks & Recreation 900 Harrington Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -3097 (320) 587 -2975 G „1 Fax (320) 234 -4240 - Printed on recycled paper - • Police Services • 10 Franklin Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2464 (320) 587 -2242 Fax (320) 587 -6427 Mr. Jim Marka Hutchinson City Center 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, Mn. 55350 Re: Planning Staff Meeting Dear Jim: We have discussed, on a few occasions, the possible amendment to • our sign ordinance governing signs located in city right of way. It is my view that the city probably already has the necessary authority to seize signs that are located within the city right of way but the question arises as to whether or not the comfort level of all concerned would increase if we amended our ordinance to make it clear that signs will be seized. Rick Olson recently brought to my attention, by way of photograph, several realtor and other types of signs, located within what is clearly municipal right of way. obviously, the city does not want to create conflict where none exists and I don't think we're really discussing here the small garage sale signs which tend to show up and then promptly disappear kfut rather signs of some significance that remains standing for an extended period of time. As I look at Section 10.14 which is our general sign ordinance, the thought occurs to me that we could add the following language as such that the section in question would read as follows: My thought is that we would seize signs, hold them for some period • of time following notification of the owner, and then dispose of the same. If we implement this policy I would recommend that we CERTIFIED AS A CIVIL TRIAL SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ^� "CERTIFIED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION No sign shall be placed in or extended over any public right of way in any district except the C -3 downtown business ARNOLD, ANDERSON & DOVE PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP • ATTORNEYS AT LAW 101 PARK PLACE DAVID B. ARNOLD' HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350-2563 OF COUNSEL STEVEN A. ANDERSON RAYMOND C. LALLIER G. BARRY ANDERSON (320) 587 -7575 ARTHUR L. DOTEN LAURA K. FRETLAND FAX (320) 587 -4096 — DAVID A. BRUEGGEMANN 5881 CEDAR LAKE ROAD PAUL D. DOVE— RESIDENT ATTORNEY MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416 JANE VAN VALKENBURG (612) 548 -9000 G. BARRY ANDERSON RICHARD G. McGEE FAX (61 2) 545 -1793 CATHRYN D. REHER WALTER P. MICHELS, 111 501 SOUTH FOURTH STREET PRINCETON, MINNESOTA 55371 �ALEO ADMITTED IN TE.VAL AND NEW YORK (612) 369 -2214 July 17, 1996 FAX (612) 3095506 Mr. Jim Marka Hutchinson City Center 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, Mn. 55350 Re: Planning Staff Meeting Dear Jim: We have discussed, on a few occasions, the possible amendment to • our sign ordinance governing signs located in city right of way. It is my view that the city probably already has the necessary authority to seize signs that are located within the city right of way but the question arises as to whether or not the comfort level of all concerned would increase if we amended our ordinance to make it clear that signs will be seized. Rick Olson recently brought to my attention, by way of photograph, several realtor and other types of signs, located within what is clearly municipal right of way. obviously, the city does not want to create conflict where none exists and I don't think we're really discussing here the small garage sale signs which tend to show up and then promptly disappear kfut rather signs of some significance that remains standing for an extended period of time. As I look at Section 10.14 which is our general sign ordinance, the thought occurs to me that we could add the following language as such that the section in question would read as follows: My thought is that we would seize signs, hold them for some period • of time following notification of the owner, and then dispose of the same. If we implement this policy I would recommend that we CERTIFIED AS A CIVIL TRIAL SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ^� "CERTIFIED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION No sign shall be placed in or extended over any public right of way in any district except the C -3 downtown business Jim Marka July 17, 1996 • page 2 notify all real estate and others who might conceivably have reason to believe that they have a sign not in conformity with the local ordinance. This may eliminate the concerns on the part of some that the city enforces ordinances only with respect to some and not with respect to others. However, this is a policy matter and I think its something that should be discussed at the next planning staff meeting. Thank you. Best regards. Very truly yours, ARNOLD, ANDERSON &�WVE, PLLP G. BarryA GBA iT� ) J • • Hwchiawn City Code Chapter I I Section 10 1 Special Provisions (1) Location: No sign shall be placed in or extended over any public right -of -way in an District except the C -3 Downtown Business Distric r Ic lolate required se acs an or encroachmen o rights -of -way shall be considered as non - conforming structures. Signs in street right -of -way shall be 8 feet above grade line. In no case shall signs create any traffic sight hazards. (a) (b) (c) (d) Preexisting signs which violate required setbacks and/or encroachment or rights -of -way shall be considered as non - conforming structures. No sign shall be erected to project above the roof or parapet wall line of any building except by conditional use permit. Wall signs integral with, painted on, or attached flat against the face of the building and /or structure shall not extend more than twentv -four (24) inches from such a structure. No temporary sign shall be attached to a light standard or the supporting pylon of a freestanding sign. (2) Measuring: For mufti-faced signs, each display face shall be measured except in the case of 2 -sided signs that are identical on both sides. (3) Traffic Hazard: No sign shall be erected near or at any intersection of any streets in such manner as to obstruct free and Gear vision, or at any location where by reason of position, shape, or color, it may interfere with, obstruct the view of, or be confused with any authorized traffic sign, signal, or device. I (4) Marquees, Canopies and Awnings: Signs attached to a marquee shall not extend beyond the fascia or vertical surface of such marquee. No sign or sign structure except as mentioned above shall be placed on the roof of a marquee. No advertising shall be placed on any awning or canopy except the name of the owner and/or business conducted on the premises. (5) Freestanding Signs: Freestanding signs shall not exceed 27 feet in height above the ground on which they rest. No part of any sign may be within 5 feet of any property line. (6) Roof Signs: Roof - mounted signs are not permitted. 10 -21 N Hutchinson City Code Chapoer 1 I • Section 10 Special Provisions resident professional offices, home occupations and boarding - lodging houses. (h) Directional and Private Traffic Control Signs: Directional and private traffic control signs indicating traffic movement onto a premise, or within a premise, not exceeding 6 square feet of surface area for each sign, are permitted. No advertising message may be incorporated on such signs. Such signs shall not be located in the public right -of -way unless approved by the City Council. (i) Temporary Signs: Temporary signs to direct traffic to businesses during road construction are allowed as permitted by City Council only. Q) Billboards: Billboards are not permitted. (k) Off - Promise Signs: Off- premise signs are not permitted except with special permission of the City Council (3) Signs Permitted in Residential Districts: Subject to the other conditions of this ordinance, the following signs shall be permitted in residential districts: (a) Subdivision Plat Signs: Temporary signs advertising a new subdivision plat provided such signs do not exceed 48 square feet in aggregate surface area per sign side, identifying only the plat in which they are located, are non - illuminated, and are erected only at dedicated street entrances to the plat. Such signs shall be removed if construction of subdivision improvements is not in progress on the plat within 60 days following the date of the sign erection or as soon as 80 percent of the lots are developed and sold. (b) Club, Lodge, Office Signs: One illuminated or non - illuminated identification sign not to exceed 40 square feet per sign side in area for the following uses: clubs, lodges, fraternities, and professional offices where permitted. (c) Civic, Religious Organizations, and Other Permitted Non - Residential Uses: One illuminated or non- illuminated identification sign or bulletin board not to exceed a total of 40 square feet in area for the following uses: public schools, parochial schools, colleges, public libraries, museums, social and 10-25 94 C; Memo To: Mayor & City Council Memo From: Ken Merrill �V ,- 9MEv"' Jean Ward 44 'r Date: June 5, 1997 Memo Re: 1988 Small Cities Housing Rehab Program The 1988 Small Cities Housing Rehab Program provided funding to 30 homeowners in the area adjacent to downtown for rehabilitation of their homes. The funding to homeowners was provided as a 0% deferred loan due on the sale of the property. Therefore, these loans could potentially remain on the books of the City for twenty to thirty years if the homeowner remains in their house for this time. These loans were made from 1991 to 1992. These terms were brought to the attention of the HRA Board and to our Community Development Representative at the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development. Both entities concurred with the following recommendation: Because rehabilitation work has a useful life period and additional repairs may be needed after that time, the loan terms for homeowners receiving funding from the 1988 rehabilitation loan program should be changed from due on the sale of the _property to a deferred loan forgiven after ten years. Therefore, we request authorization to forgive these loans at the end of ten years. City Center 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2522 (612) 587 -5151 Fax(612)234 -4240 Parks & Recreation 900 Harrington Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -3097 (612) 587 -2975 Fax(612)234 -4240 - Printed an recycled paper - Police Services 10 Franklin Street SW Hutchinson, MN55350 -2464 (612) 587 -2242 G��' Fax (612) 587 -6427 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF ......... .•, TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ,•�F' 'opom"n "��,�,• 500 Sletro Square . t= 1217th Place East ;� 3'• Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 -2146 USA • •, a 0 jredaG .� o s� ,• • May 22, 1997 Ms. Jean Ward Executive Director Hutchinson Housing and Redevelopment Authority 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 Dear Ms. Ward: This is in response to your telephone call and letter concerning rehabilitation loans that become due on the sale of the property. Rehabilitation work has a useful life period and additional repairs may be needed after that time. Most communities doing rehabilitation work under the Small Cities Development Program provide deferred loans to applicants. We would recommend that you change loan terms for homeowners receiving 1988 rehabilitation loans, from due on the sale of the property to a deferred loan after ten years. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (612) 296 -2102. Sincerely, William Atkins Business and Community Development Representative E • Z � An Equal Opportunity Employer (612) 297 -1291 (800) 657 -3858 TTY /TDD (612) 282 -6142 FAX (612) 296 -1290 RESOLUTION NO. 10850 • RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT LETTING NO. 9 /PROJECT NO. 97-20 SP 4304 -47 S.A.P. 133 -101 -05 Whereas, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the furnishing of all labor and material for the construction of Three (3) Revised Traffic Control Signal Systems and Three (3) Emergency Vehicle Preemption Systems at the intersections of TH 15 and 2nd Avenue SE, TH 15 & 22 and Washington Avenue, and TH 15 and 1st Avenue NE; and bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Bidder Amount Bid Water Street Electric, Inc. of fHutchinson MN $52,400.20 Electrical hm. & Maint. Co. Of Independence MN $69,000.00 and whereas, it appears that Water Street Electric, Inc. Of Hutchinson, MN is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA: 1. The mayor and city administrator are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Water Street Electirc, Inc. of Hutchinson, MN, in the name of the City of Hutchinson, for the improvement contained herein, according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the Director of Engineering. • 2. The Director of Engineering is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the neat lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed, and the deposit of the successful bidder shall be retained until satisfactory completion of the contract. Adopted by the Hutchinson City Council this 9th day of June, 1997. City Administrator Mayor Ll �_ (�! r C M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John P. Rodeberg, Director of Engineering/Public Works Dolf Moon, Director of Parks & Recreation/Community Education RE: Letting No. 8/Project No. 97 -17, Crow River Pedestrian Bridge Consideration of Rejecting Bids and Readvertising, or "Value Engineering" Proposal DATE: June 6, 1997 • The construction cost estimate for the above referenced project of $87,000 was greatly exceeded, with a low bid of $117,000. Although we may yet recommend rejecting bids and readvertising, based on review with the low bidder, Structural Specialties of Hutchinson, we believe that a "Value Engineering" project would be a better alternative. Under "Value Engineering ", the Contractor will work with us to review ways to reduce the cost of the project. We have met with Roger of Structural Specialties and have already found $30,000 of the work that can be completed by City staff, or removed from the project. Structural Specialties will now work with an Engineer to review design modifications to reduce the cost of the bridge structure. If we can reduce the cost of the project to the proposed budget level, we will recommend awarding the revised project at the next Council meeting. If the price can not be satisfactorily reduced, we will recommend rejecting the bids, redesigning, and readvertising for bids. • City Center Ill Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2522 (320) 587 -5151 Fax (320) 2344240 Parks & Recreation Police Services 900 Harrington Street SW 10 Franklin Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -3097 Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2464 (320) 587 -2975 (320) 587 -2242 Fax (320) 2344240 Fax (320) 587 -6427 Printed on recycled paper - RESOLUTION NO. 10851 • RESOLUTION REJECTING BID AND AUTHORIZING READVERTISEMENT LETTING NO. 8 /PROJECT NO. 97 -17 Whereas, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the furnishing of all labor and material for the construction of the Crow River Pedestrian Bridge and Appurtenances, and bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Bidder Amount Bid Alternate Bid Structural Specialties, Inc. of Hutchinson MN $117,977.00 S131,394.00 Michael Watercott Const. of Piera MN $128,535.00 5149,957.00 and whereas, it appears that Structural Specialties, Inc. of Hutchinson, MN is the lowest responsible bidder. Whereas, with both bids coming in well over the estimated cost of $87,000.00, the engineer requests the city reject said bids and readvertise for bids in an effort to obtain lower prices. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA: 1. The mayor and city administrator are hereby authorized and directed to reject the above - referenced bids and readvertise for bids. 2. The Director of Engineering is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits. Adopted by the Hutchinson City Council this 9th day of June, 1997. • City Administrator Mayor • /J) ' MEMO THE HUTCHINSON LIGHT TRAFFIC ADVISORY BOARD To: Mayor and Council From: Light Traffic Advisory Board Subject: RECOMMENDATION FROM THE BOARD REGARDING STRIPING PROJECT ON DALE STREET AND LINDEN AVENUE Date: June 3, 1997 • After review of the resident's comments regarding the striping of Dale Street and Linden Avenue for a bicycle /pedestrian lane, the recommendation of the Light Traffic Advisory Board is to proceed with the project. The Board will review the Jefferson Street proposal in July. cc: Dolf Moon John Rodeberg Dave Mueller Brenda Ewing 9 WLTIPICCMEMO -WPD ti 1 � ' 1 -J May 29,1997 MAY 3 01997 • T _jrHOTCHLISON RE: Jefferson Bicycle Path Dear City Council Members: I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed bicycle path, on the East side of Jefferson, for the following reasons. I own an 11 -plex and a 12 -plex at 435 and 325 Jefferson respectively. Both of these buildings have frontage on Jefferson, as do all of the other apartment buildings and businesses on this section of the street. This is in contrast to the bicycle path on Roberts Road in which only a minority have frontage on Roberts Road. Most of the houses along Roberts Road have frontage on a side street that is perpendicular to Roberts Road. The average age of the tenants in my two buildings is approximately 75 years, ranging 65 years to 90 years. Consequently, most of their guests or visitors are • also elderly people. This would require that these people park on the west side of Jefferson, walk to the comer and cross legally in the crosswalk and then walk back to the front entrance to the apartment building. This distance is quite demanding for many people of this age. We provide off -street parking which is usually filled with our own tenants vehicles. The normal procedure we have used for snow removal in the winter months is to have these tenants move these vehicles from the parking lots onto — Jefferson. Since no parking would be allowed on our side of the street, they once again would have to walk the additional distance to the comer to legally cross the street. This situation creates a serious hazard when roads are covered with snow or ice. Further, since parking would be banned on my side of the street, I have no special benefit over any motorist traveling in the lane of traffic. I would not expect to be assessed for any future street maintenance or street replacement. Sincerely, Ray Kamrath COMMENTS ON THE BIKE STRIPING PROPOSAL • JUNE 9, 1997, CITY COUNCIL MEETING Originally from Germany and is in favor of the bike lanes to improve safety. He is concerned with the poor lighting on South Jefferson. He has had many close calls and would like to see improved lighting in that area. She lives the second house from the comer of Oakland and Jefferson and is concerned with having a bike route on Jefferson Street since numerous times she has witnessed cars not stopping at the stop sign. She would not be as concerned with a bike route if the city would either put a 4 way stop at Oakland and Jefferson or at least provide better enforcement at that intersection. Concerned with having a bike lane on the busiest street in Hutchinson. He feels it does not make sense to promote kids riding bike on such a busy street. Supports the bike lane completely and would suggest the same stiping on Centruy Ave. Business owner on Jefferson St. is concerned with losing parking on his side of the street in front of his business. Apartment owner on Jefferson St. is concerned with no parking on the east side of the street. His apartments have elderly persons lining in them who frequently have the bus and other rides pick them up for appointments, etc. He stated it would not be easy for them to cross the street. Also maintenance workers with equipment to carry into the buildings appreciate parking in front of the building. Apartment resident is opposed to the bike lane with no parking on the east side of Jefferson St. Daytime parking for unloading groceries, etc. would be difficult for the residents. DALE STREET In favor of the bike lanes but was concerned about the mailboxes on the west side of the street. If cars are parked in front of the boxes the mailman can not deliver the mail. Not opposed to the bike lanes but would suggest a stop sign at Linden Ave. on Dale St. to slow down Dale St. traffic. Opposed to the bike lane. Parking is not a concern but the traffic on Dale St. is at high • speed. Concerned for the safety of the kids. IN Not opposed to the bike lanes but is concerned with were the cars will park when there are • events at the park. Opposed to the bike lanes is concerned with no parking along the park especially when there are events at the park. Also Linden is a truck route and biking should not be promoted on that street. 1: RI aUaf.`it9lru6] V RVIA9 BONNIE J BAUMETZ From: JAMES MARKA To: BONNIE J BAUMETZ Cc: BRAD EMANS; BRENDA EWING; CLARENCE KADRMAS; DICK NAGY; DON NELSON; GARY D PLOTZ; JIM POPP; JOHN RODEBERG; JOHN WEBSTER; LARRY HUHN; MARK HENSEN; RANDY DEVRIES Subject: Survey Results Date: Wednesday, May 14, 1997 8:57AM Bonnie, could you please have the customer service survey results tabulated for the June Planning Staff meeting. At last evenings City Council workshop, staff was encouraged to review -intertintragency services again. My thought at this point is to have each Supervisor of each area analyze their indivdual services with a task force of direct users and then summarize recommendations with the Planning Staff and present proposed changes to the City Council. • Cl Page 1 J 7 — z7 C C O N V E R S A T Z O N R E C co R D CONVERSATION WITHt F AO( I^Igq (Ey o! 7oS Me- I REGARDINGt k) b- Y0-4 OYl �_(/Y)dcy l 4-u PHONE NUHBER t OTttce ( )587 (o7a�( 'FAT ( ► / �� � 1 DATE t (a / 2 / 97 TINE, t `�S / vm STAFF t �-I." v\k D\0�0 (� �,, ate., „�� per,, ��Q� • FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONSt COPIES TOt Jon Qoj " _ , t_ ty�-!.j-�/-4 ca • FILE t C,l? C I T Y OF H U T C H I N S O N 37 Washington Avenue WINutchinson, 1linnesota 553501(612) $87 -5151 0 • • Record of Telephone Conversation CITY STAFF PERSON, CONVERATION WITHs K - , )lock - of Sa Zat S , SLJ PHONE NUHBERt e L 1 Sg7 -5 FAX 1 1 TIME AND DATE & 3 : 00 pm b - f `� - fi t 7 FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONSt PROJECT FILES COPIES T03 FILES I KJc12E> � 1 �4 w Q� f U SUMMARY OF CONVERSATION: C I T Y OF H U T C H I N S O N 37 Washington Avenue W /Hutchinson, Ninnesota 553501(612) 587 -5151 Record of Telephone Conversation 0 CITY STAFF PERSON: CONVERATION WITH: t�x\1 Kye- t `Ouj o! PHONE NUHBER: Oe PAX ! 1 TIME AND DATE: FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONSt PROJECT FILET COPIES TOs SOkn P6,o ,Cs.-�, C&Una( a %// krr,'4 j FILES ik4 • SUMMARY OF CONVERSATION: C I T Y OF H U T C 'H I N S O N 37 Maohington Avenue #1/Hutchinson, Minnesota 553501(612) 587 -5151 Record of Telephone Conversation CITY STAFF PERSONS Nm LkLynel— CONVERATION WITHe :3 ctuTPLU 0t PHONE NUHBER S G€ a fX 1 _!�;R 7- 9 yo?7 FAX ( ) TIME AND DATES 3 •JS om a SUMMARY OF CONVERSATIONS • FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONSS PROJECT FILES l COPIES T OS , �tiud��l*aJ • FILES Uj o C I T Y O F H U T C H I N S 0 N 37 Nashinyton Avenue N /Hutchinson, Nlnnesota 553501(612) 587 -5151 Record of Telephone Conversation 0 CITY STAFF PERSON: S ri,P &M P z_ CONVERATION WITHz Ti!1_ I_ PT of Loo Twie 4 � , S o PHONE NUNBERs Mre ( I 157 —���R� FAX ( 1 TIME AND DAM /I. YJ am 5 • FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONSt PROJECT FILES COPIES TOE !/ /J gl � )C� YIC�I ++ Tlllte 111 FILES �t u�� • SUHHARY OF CONVERSATION, I T Y OF H U T C H I N S O N 37 Washington Avenue WIMutchinson, Minnesota 553501(612) 587 -5151 Record of Telephone Conversation CITY STAFF PERSON: nniF i.{L'r P T, T CONVERATION WITH: EJ K14 4" t� of '26?� b Me S+ SO PHONE NUMBER: Oitwe ( 5 1 �2 7 - S FAY ( 1 TIME AND DATE s �hQn S - Cv - Q7 • FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONSt • PROJECT FILE: COPIES TO: FILE: SUMMARY OF CONVERSATION: C C O N V E R S A T Z O m R rs C O R D CONVERSATION WITH �uwin 1i�Q`4 pys of s35 �e "e4.oL s4. REGARDINGe bA ,C PS PHONE NUHBER: ' fLQQLe ( 1557 - SS S PAX ( ) DATE t S / PS'/9 TIM /O , M STAFF, C:& Pqk:J SUMMARY OF CONVERSATIONS FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONS: COPIES TOs Qn4e&_4 �u WAS CI �l Cow, e �.� • FILES i�? lil A `Cr S; OD-fa z> - C I T Y OF H U T C H I N S O N-` 37 Washington Avenue M /Hutchinson, Minnesota 553501(612) 587 -5151 0. Record of Telephone Conversation CITY STAFF PERSON: &rxni-e- I I aumdZ CONVERATION WITH: �a of Dwn� vq 3.T r•f PHONE NUMBER► 01 Yt I 1 4S2 7 -K 2> FAX } TIME AND DATEt y :'�O 6 • 11 FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONS► PROJECT FILBi COPIES TO t 7 SDr1h e bc t4 i C;h, 0awn cz� / eo-Le 4 a VD FILEt ti a► rumAn v nv rnv VVV9AVTAV. C I T Y OF H U T C H I N S O N 37 Washington Avenue W /Hutchinson, Ninnesoca 553501(612) 587 -5151 Record of Telephone Conversation CITY STAFF PERSONS //�� CONVERATION WITH: �PY` KIe.7YK n of T ' n d (Ln lO I St PHONE NUHBERS Office r ).40 - FAX f ) TINE AND DATES EMISSIONS 1 V , ISM FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONS: PROJECT FILE: ��11 COPIES TO: �)okm e� (.c)U.r dl / FILES 0 SUHHARY OF CONVERSATIONS C I T Y OF H U T C H I N S O N 37 Washington Avenue M/Mutchlnson, Minnesota 553501(612) $87 -5151 0 Record of Telephone Conversation CITY STAFF PERSON, CONVERATION MIT}Htt,�p�p "wL of /O PHONE NUHBERs Oise I )581 -yyZ7o FAX j ) TIRE AND DATE i lO ; s 4m S- r a - 97 • FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONS: • PROJECT FILE: COPIES TOt FILE, ti SUHHARY OF CONVERSATIONi C I T Y OF H U C H I N S O N 37 Washington Avenue W/Xutchinson, Xlnnesota 553501(612) 587 -5151 Record of Telephone Conversation 0 CITY STAFF PERSON, _L � � m corn, llz �0.nc�ex� q of /035 5c� PHONE NUHBER c Oft�tC FAI f 1 TIME AND DATEe o�: .1 —($ -2 F • FOLLOW —UP OBLIGATIONSt PROJECT FILES I ' COPIES TOo R )�1�, vl ccj A)( �Ccndct�lti[� . FILBo .h n • SUMMARY OF CONVERSATIONS 0 F i I N � 37 MashinQton Avenue M /Hutchinson, Minnesota 553501(612) 587 -5151 0 Record of Telephone Conversation CITY STAFF PERSON, t\n ?-)2-(. m P4L CONVERATION MITHs ,QiYYII :R a- U IS 411 Of 9/4 Te:�to Sr PHONE NUMBERiir� ) sS7 - 7y09 FAY ( ) TINE AND DATE, 11:15 PMT S -E -q'7 11 FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONSt SUMMARY OF CONVSRSATIONs PROJECT FILES �) R_l�n COPIES TO, $Ohn Rode �1Q Wu.n FILEt �i�G WaJ C I T Y OF H U T C H I N S O N 37 Washington Avenue WIRutchlnson, Minnesota 553501(612) 587 -5151 v v rT Record of Telephone Conversation 0 CITY STAFF PERSON, 11 _LYNN P . 11 V_ � CONVERATION WITH p 1^iltAl� E�Ofi� of 106g �e etiom PHONE NUHBER, fF�!•#•c= I 15V7— coq 7 FAE ( 1 TIME AND VATS, uro (1 e .� h �� /. I I L _f 1. ! /� ! AIL . _ FOLLOW -UP OBLIGATIONS, PROJECT FILE, COPIES TO, h P_ CiQ , Nw%,CLRd C J FILE, i ul 0 C M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John P. Rodeberg, Director of Engineering/Public Works Dolf Moon, Director of Parks & Recreation/Community Education RE: Consideration of Consulting Agreement with SRF Consulting Group for Bike Trail Routing DATE: June 5, 1997 After meeting with residents of Craig Avenue (cul -de -sac) for a second time regarding the • potential for extending a bike trail through Aveyron Homes property on Dale Street into the alley, it became evident that the residents have significant concerns regarding this route. Staff has reviewed the routing in this area several times, and has concluded that this appears to be the safest and most efficient route to connect the school campus, SW residential areas, and the Recreation Center /Civic Arena/pool. In order to verify the appropriate route for this trail, we are recommending that SRF C and the Minnesota Department of Transportation work together to develop both the appropriate route and the appropriate design/technical considerations (materials, striping, sidewalk, trail width, lighting requirements, etc.). We hope that having a third party review these issues will increase the credibility of the decision. We hope to have the contract by the meeting. We have asked for completion of the study within 4 weeks, so that we can continue our discussion on acquisition of easements through the Aveyron Homes property in a timely manner. cc: Light Traffic Advisory Board • City Center Ill Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2522 (320) 587 -5151 Fax (320) 2344240 Parks & Recreation Police Services 900 Harrington Street SW 10 Franklin Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 -3097 Hutchinson, MN 55350.2464 (320) 587 -2975 (320) 587 -2242 Fax (320) 2344240 ' Fax (320) 587.6427 Printed on recycled paper - C I \ • RKV33 *Sbl 0 1 N ► This agreement is made and entered into this 9th day of June, 1997, by and between the City of Hutchinson, State of Minnesota (City) and Curtis G. Newberg, (Owner). RECITAL• 1. The City, at the request of the then owners of the property, contracted for the construction of a variety of municipal improvements, including but not limited to, sanitary sewer stain and services, water main and services, storm sewer, grading, concrete curb and gutter, gravel base, bituminous base and surfacing and appurtenances for the following described real estate, all located within the City of Hutchinson and County of McLeod: Plaza Heights Lot 2, Block 4 County PID 23.389.0200 Cimm 12- 116 - 30-02 -0270 Lot 4, Block 4 23.389.0220 12- 116 - 30-02 -0290 Lot 8, Block 4 23.389.0260 12 -116 - 30-02 -0330 Lot 2, Block 5 23.389.0300 12- 116 - 30-02 -0370 Lot 1, Block 6 23.389.0330 12- 11630-02-0400 Lot 3, Block 6 23.389.0350 12- 116.30-02 -0420 2. In connection with those improvements, all of the property described above was subject to a series of assessments for the cost of the improvements as is more particularly set out in assessment rolls SA -228A, SA -240B, SA -243B, SA -251A, SA -272A and SA -292.. • 3. The City and Owner acknowledge and agree that the assessments now associated with the above - described property, whether levied, pending or deferred, represent an amount equal to at least the benefit received by the property owner for the services rendered by the City in constructing the improvements described above. 4. In an effort to promote the sale and development of the above described real estate, the parties hereto desire to enter into an agreement to annul and reassess the property for the benefit received. NOW THEREFORE FOR $1.00 AND OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, THE PARTIES DO HEREBY AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Areeement of Assessment Annulment and Waiver of Lrragwarily and Appeal of Reassessment The patties hereto have entered into an agreement of assessment annulment and waiver of irregularity and appeal of reassessment, a true and correct copy of said reassessment schedule is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "A" and incorporated as if fully set out herein. It is understood that the noted assessments will be updated prior to certification to the County. The following assessments, SA -228A, SA -240B, SA -243B, SA -251A, SA -272A and SA- 292 shall be assessed for five years at 7% interest, as per City Policy. In addition, the weed cutting bill for in the amount of $840.91 shall be paid in full. 2. Representations of Owner The Owner of the property, represents and acknowledges that the City has relied on the representations, that it is the sole owner of the above described parcels and that no party or parties have any prior interest in the real estate and further agrees to indemnify the City from any intervening claim that would impair the ability of the City to collect the reimposed assessments described herein. 3. Payment of Assessments It is understood and agreed that assessments contemplated under this agreement will be paid in connection with the property taxes associated with the above described property, or under is Asuu\Agree\Newberg.wpd\Page 1 V —C� such procedures as the County Auditor may determine are appropriate. In no event shall the failure of the County Auditor to collect the assessments in semi - annual payments with interest, beginning January 1, 1998, affect the • validity of this agreement. 4. Foreclosure by Action In the event the Owner or its successor, in interest to any of the described property, forfeits or fails to make payments either to the Auditor if the Auditor collects the same or to the City if for some reason payments are not made in connection with the property taxes, then, in that event, at the sole option of the City, the City may elect to collect the assessments either through the tax forfeiture process provided by Minnesota State Law or by foreclosure by action or both. 5. Licu. The City shall have alien on the property for the unpaid assessment amounts, as well as accrued interest, if any. 6. Waiver In addition to the waiver set forth in the attached Agreement of Assessment Annulment and Waiver of Irregularity and Appeal of Reassessment, the Owner hereby waives any right to petition for reassessment or to claim the assessments, either past or present, were not correctly imposed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Curtis G. Newberg, has hereunto set their hands this 9th day of June, 1997. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the City of Hutchinson has entered into this agreement. Curtis G. Newberg • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF ) On this 9th day of June, 1997, before me, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally appeared Curtis G. Newberg, who being duly sworn, did say that he is the owner as named in the foregoing instrument and acknowledged said instrument to be their free act and deed Notary Public CITY OF HUTCHINSON BY: Marlin Torgerson, Mayor As \Agree\Newber&wpd\Page 2 • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) • ) SS: COUNTY OF MCLEOD ) On this 9th day of June, 1997, before me, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally appeared Marlin Torgerson, to me personally known, who being duly sworn, did say that he is the Mayor of the City Council of the City of Hutchinson named in the foregoing instrument and that said instrument was signed in behalf of said City of Hutchinson by authority of its City Council and said Marlin Torgerson acknowledged said instrum to be the free as and deed of said City of Hutchinson. Notary Public Attest • I Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator • As \.Agree\Newberg.wpd \Page 3 0 ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT - NEWBERG - PLAZA HEIGHTS - EXHIBIT'A' - Page 1 CITY OF HUTCHINSON, 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON. MN 55350 (612) 234 -4209 0 0 DATE COMPUTER 0 TIW7 CITY PROPERTY ID NUMBER 12 -11 &30-02 -0270 COUNTY PROPERTY ID NUMBfiB: 23.389.0200 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 2 BLOCK 1, PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS; 870 CHICAGO AVE SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAID 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1987 FOLLOWING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS SHALL ORIGINAL BE ASSESSED INTEREST F OR FIVE YEAR ANNUAL - PRINCIPAL AT 7% INTEREST: YEARS BALANCE YEARS _ T F TO DEFERRED $ TOT ASSESS. YEAR PRIN RATE PAYMENT PAID TO PAY PRESENT INTEREST SA -228A - - - - 1992 $2.365.16 7.00% $473.03 _ _ 0 $2, - 5 $82781 SA -2108 _ 19 $_7,1]0. 7.0 _ f_ 7 X31.13 _ 0 $7,170. _ 5 - - - 5 $2. 508.7_7 SA -21313 1992 $95737 _ _ 7.00% _ $191A5 _ 0 $957.27 - $3.15 SA 251A 1882 $70043 - - 7.00% $80.09 0 f300A3 _ _5 $105.15 SA -272A 1992 $72032 7.00% 51/4,01 0 $720.22 5 $252.08 SUB -TOTAy 1 $11,513.731 1_ 52,302151 1 $11,513.731 _ _ - __$4,029.81 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1882 $43.92 8 1788 $90.99 - TO BE PAID W FIA-L- $134.81 TOTAL ASSESSMENTS ASSESSABLE FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% IN TEREST TOTAL WEEDCU9I ITG TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE $15,543.54 $131.81 515.678.15 PRINCIPAL ENGINEERING IM RECORI ST INDEX HTTEREST ENR _ ENRCI _ . IFI411M AMOUNT RATE AMOU?lrT YEARLY $3.192 -- WA _ _ $ 0.00 _ $0 _ fB.680 - -_ WA 50._00 5 $1$92.31 - - -- WA $0.00 50.00 _ 5105.58 NIA _ _ $0,00 _50.00 5972.30 WA $0.00 50.00 PAYOFF/ ENRCI REASSESSMENT TOTAL - — AMOUWT - -- $ 0.00 $3,1 $_0.890.38 _ $0.00 - - - $1,282.31 $0.00 $405 .58 _. $000 _. - _ $972,30 $15.543.51 e:lassesslaWeelnewberg\ 12020270 PAYOFF/ ENRCI REASSESSMENT TOTAL - — AMOUWT - -- $ 0.00 $3,1 $_0.890.38 _ $0.00 - - - $1,282.31 $0.00 $405 .58 _. $000 _. - _ $972,30 $15.543.51 e:lassesslaWeelnewberg\ 12020270 e:lassesslaWeelnewberg\ 12020270 ASSESSMEAREEMENT - NEWBERG - PLAZA HEIGHTS - EXHIBIT'A' - Page 2 CITY OF HUTCHINSON, 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON, MN 55350 (612) 2344209 • - • DATE COMPUTED: 06-3 -1997 CITY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 12- 11 6-30 -aZ-OM COUNTY PROPERTY ID NUMBPR: 23.389.0220 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 4 BLOCK 4, PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: B24 CHICAGO AVE SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXE$ NOT PAID 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1997 FOLLOWING ASSESSMENTS SHALL BE ASSESSED FOR FIVE YEARS AT 115 INTEREST: TOTAL A MEREST_ 'O PAY PRESENT (MEREST . ANNUAL 5 SPECIAL $3,192.9_ ORIGINAL INTEREST PRINCIPAL YEARS B ASSESS. YEAR PRINCIPAL RATE PAYMENT PAID _ _ f4 SA -228A 19 52,365.18 7.0D% $473.03 0 _ $405.58 SA -2406 1992 $7.170.65 7.00_% 5_1,434.13 0 SA -243B 1992 5957.27 7.00% S_191.45 0 SA-251A 1992 5300.43 7.00% $60.09 0 5A272A 1991 5720.22 7,00% 5144.01 0 INEENIN_O_ N YEARS TF DEFERFIFO PRINCIPAL MANDE TO TOTAL A MEREST_ 'O PAY PRESENT (MEREST AMOUNT $2.3 5 592761 $3,192.9_ 8 5 50.0_0 $ 9,680 .38 5957,27 _ 5 _52,509.7_3 _ _ S335.0_4 _ $_1181.31 5_300.43 _ 5 ._— $105.15 _ _ f4 $720.22 5 #5208 5972.30 INEENIN_O_ N RE CORD C TOTAL WEED CUTTING 5134.91 PAYOFF/ N _ ENRCI _ST _INDEX ENRC _EN_R_CI REASSESSMENT RATE AMOUNT YEARLY TOTAL AMOUNT WA_ $0.00 - $0.0_6 50.0_0 $3,192.97 W_A 50.00 50 .00 50.00 89.880.38 WA 50.00 50.00 80.00 51,292.31 WA _ 50.0_0 5_0-00 _ $0.00 _ $405.58 WA _ 30.00 _ 50.00 50.00 $97230 SUB-TOTALl $11,513.731 $2,302.75 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1902 $43.92 8 1998 $90.99 - TO BE PAID IN FULL - $11,513.731 1 S4.m.811 $15,54354 $134.91 TOTAL ASSES ASSESSAB FO R FIVE YEARS AT 7 % INTEREST _515,543.51 TOTAL WEED CUTTING 5134.91 TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE $15578 45 $15,543.54 hAassesslagreeVlewbeTg112020290 ASSESSMOGREEMENT - NEWBERG - PLAZA HEIGHTS - EXHIBIT'A' - Page 3 • • CITY OF HUTCHINSON, 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON, MN 55350 (812) 2344208 DATE COMPUTED: 08-11997 CITY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 12 -11 &30-02 -0330 COUNT' PROPERTY ID NUMAR 23.3890260 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOTS BLOCK 4, PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: 855 CLEVELAND AVE SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAID 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1987 FOLLOWING ASSESSMENTS SHALL BE ASSESSED FOR FIVE Y EARS AT 7% INTEREST: i INTEREST 13NRCI N91RCt ENRCI -' ' _ UITEREST _ ANOINT ANNUAL AMO UNT $0.00 YEARS TF SPE WA ORIGINAL INTEREST REWCRAL YEARS BALANCE TO A85E65. YEAR PRINCIPAL RATE PAYMENT PAID TO PAY _ PRESENT SA 228A 1992 $2.365.16 7.W% $473.03 0 $2,365.18 50.00 SA -2108 7992 $7.170.03 7.00% (_1,431.13 0 57,17065 _ E SA -2438 1%2 $957.27 7001: 5191.45 0 5957.27 5 SA 251A 1992 $30043 7.00% 38009 0 5300.43 E $A -272A 7992 5720.22 7.00% S144.01 0 5720.22 5 SU B-TOTAL{ 1 511,513.73( f __ $2,302.75 $11,51373 DEFERRED PRINCIPAL ENGINEERING M RECORD _ - T INDEX TTOTAL i INTEREST 13NRCI N91RCt ENRCI -' ' _ UITEREST _ ANOINT _ RATE - AMO UNT $0.00 $827.81 53.192.97 WA $0.00 $000 S9.68038 WA 50.00 50.00 _$2.507.73 $335.04 51,272.31 WA_ SOHO _ 50.00 $105.15 34 NA $0.00 _ $00 _ 5252.08 _ $9T2.30 __ WA _ _ _ - 50.00 50.00 $4.029.81 $15,513.54 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1772$43.9281996$70.77 -TO BE PAD IN FULL - $131.91 TOTAL ASSESSM ASSESSABLE FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST S1S.643S1 TOTAL WEED CURING $13 TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE _ 515.87815 hlassen\agree4lewberg\12020330 PAYOFF/ - __E_NRCI __ _REASSESSMENT_ TOTAL AMOUNT $0.00 $3,192.97 $0.00 $9.880.38 50.00 $1,292.31 50.00 $405 58 $0.00 $972.30 515.543.54 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1772$43.9281996$70.77 -TO BE PAD IN FULL - $131.91 TOTAL ASSESSM ASSESSABLE FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST S1S.643S1 TOTAL WEED CURING $13 TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE _ 515.87815 hlassen\agree4lewberg\12020330 ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT - NEWBERG -PLAZA HEIGHTS - D(HIBIT'A" -Page 4 • CITY OF HUTCHINSON, 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON, MN 55350 (812) 2344208 DATE COMPUTED: 0&3 -1997 CITY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 12- 115 -3002 -0370 COUNTY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 23.389.0300 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 2 BLOCK 5, PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1006 CHEYENNE ST SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAID 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU; OCTOBER 1997 FOLLO ASSESSMENTS SWILL B ASSESSED FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST: _ -- PAYO _ _ ENRCI _REASSESSMENT TOTAL AMOUNT $0.0) 33,041.58 -� $1,231.03 __ _5388.35 $926.19 $73697 515,5/353 SU &TOTAL✓ I 512,122801 _ 1 $2,124.561 _ $12.122.80 WEED CUTTING BILL- 1996 -TO BE PAID IN FULL - $166.38 YEARS TF DEFERRED PRINCIPAL EN GINEERING N AN DST INDEX TO PRINCIPAL ILL SPE EMROI IXtM,RML IN __ - - RATE S BANC N - - ASSESS. _ YEAR PRWCRAL YEARLY PAYMENT PAID TOPAY _ NIA SA -2 _.._-_. 19_92 1892 _ 3811_ $2,3 -- - 57,170.65 _ 7,00% 7,00% _ $473 .03 $ 1,434,13 0_ -� - 0 - -_ _ $2 37,17065 SA -2408 SA-243B - 1892 - - 5957.27 _3143 700% _ _ 100 _ 5191.15 _ 1111.- - -_ 0111_.- 1111 __ 0 f957.27 _____ SA -251A 1992 1883 51'$00.13 ___ - _ _ 7100% - _ -- 580.09 _0000 0 ___ f300A3 1100 _ SA -272A 1992 5720.22 ].00% 51N01 0 $720.22 SA -292 1994 i669 071 ZDA 512181 0 $609.07 SU &TOTAL✓ I 512,122801 _ 1 $2,124.561 _ $12.122.80 WEED CUTTING BILL- 1996 -TO BE PAID IN FULL - $166.38 YEARS TF DEFERRED PRINCIPAL EN GINEERING N =WS RECORD DST INDEX TO _ TOTAL _ 8 WTFFEST EMROI ENRCI _ ENrC1 AMOUNT ANOINT PRESENT INMRIEST RATE YEARLY 4 - - _$ 53 _ NIA __- .00 5 SODO 08 4.58 52,050.75 _ $9,221.40 _ i1 ,231 03 _ 5388.35 WA _ WA _._ 50.00 50. _ - 50.00 1100__ 4 0655 5 27378 $85.92 _ _ S0.D0 DD - 4.0855 1111 18855 1 __ $205.97 - _0000 5928.19 WA 50.00 50.00 3 $127.90 $73897 WA 50.00 50.00 53.420.73 515.513.53 TOTAL ASSESS ASSESSABLE FOR FrvE Y AT 7% INTER 15,61353 T OTAL WEED C 5186.36 TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE 0 h:\assess\agree\mwberg \12020370 NEWBERG PLAZA HEIGHTS EXHIBIT *A" Page 5 • TOTAL WEED CUTTING� -_� PAYOFF TO DATE TOTAL $ 8788 ' ASSESSME�GREEMENT - - - - CITY OF HUTCHINSON, 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON, MN 55350 (612) 2314208 DATE COMPUTED: 0 TI997 CITY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 12- 116 -30-02 -0100 COUNTY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 23.3890M PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 1 BLOCK B. PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1007 CHEYENNE ST SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAID 1998 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1997 FOLLOWING ASSESSMENTS SHALL BE ASSESSED FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST: _ ANNUAL YEARS TF DEFERRED PRINCdPAL ENGINEERING N RECORD ST INDEX PAYOFF/ SPECIAL ORIGINAL INTEREST PRINCIPAL YEARS BALANCE TO TOTAL 6 RlTEREST ENRG ENRp ENRd ENRCI REASSESSMENT ASSESS. YEAR PRINCIPAL RATE PAYMENT PAID TO PAY PRESENT pVTEREST AMOUNT RATE AMOUNT YEARLY TOTAL AMOUNT SA -228-0 1992 $2,365.18 1 00% 1173.07 0 $2,765.18 4 0B56 $878-02 $3.04 1,58 WA $000 $0.00 $0.00 $3.04158 SA -2400_ 1892 37, 770.85 100% 51-031.13 0 57,170_81 4.0858 52,05015 _ $9T21.10 -_ WA -- SOHO - 50.00 $0.00 _ _ $9,221-00 - _ _ _ _ _ SA -243B 1892 595727 7.00% 5191,45 0 5957.27 1.0855 SM.7878 51Z31.03 _ ___ WA 50.00 _ _5000 _ _10.00 $1,231.03 - _ _ -- - .... _ -882 - - - 700.13 -- 00% _ SA -251-0 1 5 100% S60.OB 0 $.700.13 _ 40855 S8592 - _ _ _ ..33865 WA - _ 50.00 _ 50.00 _ - $0 .00 _ 3388.35 0 3 1,0855 1 720. SA -272A 1_992 $720.22 00 % 5144.04 5928.19_ _ WA _ _ 5000 _ _5000 ___ 5000 _ 3928.18 _ _ _ _ _$205.97 SA -292 1891 $609.07 - - 7.00% 5121.81 0 5609.07 3 1127.90 _ _ 5738.97 WA $0.00 $000 00 _ 50._ $736.97 sue -TOMI_ 1 $12,122.80 _ _ 52A24.56 I_... 512.122.801 _ I__ 53,170731__ $15.543.531 __ _ I __ I I I. 515.51353 FOLLOWING ASSESSMENTS TO BE PAID UP (TOTAL TF PRW ANT. DUE) AND REMAINING BALANCE TO RUN AS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED): WEED CUTTING BILL - 1992 $43.92 A 1996 $90.99 - TO BE PAID IN FULL - $134.81 TOTAL ASSESSMENTS FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INT EREST TOTAL WEED CUTTING� -_� PAYOFF TO DATE TOTAL $ 8788 h:lassesslagree%newberg \12020400 ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT - NEN/BERO -PLAZA HEIGHTS - EXHIBIT'A' - Page 8 CITY OF HUTCHINSON, 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON. MN 55350 (612) 234-4209 DATE COMPUTED: 06-3-1997 GRV PROPERTY D NUMBER: 12 -11 6-30-02 -0420 COUNTY PROPERTY D NUMBER: 23.389.0350 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 3 BLOCK 6, PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1135 CHEYENNE ST SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAD INS TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1997 FOLLOWING ASSESSMENTS SHALL BE ASSESSED FOR FIVE YEARS .9911 AT 7% INTEREST: ANNUAL 1111 - - - YEARS TF DEFERRED 99..99 9911 PRINCIPAL - ENG N _- WS RECORD - 5_.111_ T INDEX _. - PAYOFF/ - SPECIAL ORIGINAL INTEREST PRINCIPAL YEARS BALANCE - _ T O TOTAL 1199 8 INTEREST .99 ENR o CI - .. -AMOUNT 99 ENR G _ ENRCI 1111 R E AS SESS M ENT S ENT 1111 _ ASSESS. ASSESS. _ YEA - _ PRINCIPAL RATE 9911- PAVMEIIT PAD TO PAY . _9911 PRESEM -. INT9tE9T AMOUNT RATE AMOUNT 99 Y EARL Y TOTAL AMOUN SA -228A ..1992 1992 1111 1111____ 52.385.18 11 7.00% $173.03 0 .1111- 52,386,18 11 99 1.0858 7611 $87612 ..9999- (3,011.58 $922 WA 9911_-_ SB00 _ 1111___.. - 50.00 _ . DO i0.00 1111 1111 __ (3,041. 11 9 2 _ . _ -'9999 SA -2106 ..1111 -- 1992 115 5 7 .0_0% 1111__ 51,131 1111 0 ._ _ . $7, 170,OB6B _ I 52,75 -__ (9,221.1 WA 9911_- 5199 (0.00 50. 00 50.00 50 _21.10 SA - -- 1992 _ 59 7. 00% $191.16 1111 0 _ 5967-27 4 _ $273.76 51231.03 9999 N/A - -� 10.00 1111 $0.00 _ 50.00 $1,231.03 SA- 251A 1 992 5.13 300 _ 7.00% 560 .j36643 8 0 _ S3/3 _ - 40855 $BS .B2 388 _ 99 99- WA 50.00 $6 _ (0.00 _ _ _ SA -272A _ 1882 (720. _ 7.00% _ $144 04 1111 0 (720.22 4,0855 520597 5928.18 WA $0.00 $ 0.00 $0.00 $926.19 SA-292 1984 _ $809.07 7.00% - _ - $121 .81 9999 0 9999_ $809.07 .1111-__ 3 $127.90 ..1199 $736.97 WA 50.00 $000 $0.00 $738.97 SUB -TOT 9999 - (12,122.80 9999 -- - - 52121.58 9999 512,122.80 $3.420.73 515,513.53 - -�- - 9999 - - 1199 _ -- -9999 $15,513.53 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1992 07.92 A 1996 $90.99 - TO BE PAID IN FULL - $134.91 TOTAL AS SESSMENTS ASSES FOR FINE YEARS A T 7% NTEREST _ 515,5/7.5 TOTAL WEED CUTTING 5131.91 TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE 0 hAassessVmyee4lexberg\12020420 This agreement is made and entered into this 9th day of June, 1997, by and between the City of Hutchinson, State of Minnesota (City) and Bradley Thomas, (Owner). RECITAL: 1. The City, at the request of the then owners of the property, contracted for the construction of a variety of municipal improvements, including but not limited to, sanitary sewer main and services, water main and services, storm sewer, grading, concrete curb and gutter, gravel base, bituminous base and surfacing and appurtenances for the following described real estate, all located within the City of Hutchinson and County of McLeod: Plaza Heights Lot 4, Block 3 County PID 23.389.0180 City PD) 12- 116-30-02 -0250 Lot 3, Block 4 23.389.0210 12- 116 -30-02 -0280 Lot 7, Block 4 23.389.0250 12- 116 - 30-02 -0320 Lot 9, Block 4 23.389.0270 12- 116 - 30-02 -0340 Lot 4, Block 5 23.389.0320 12- 116 -30 -02 -0390 Lot 2, Block 6 23.389.0340 12 -116- 30-02-0410 2. In connection with those improvements, all of the property described above was subject to a series of assessments for the cost of the improvements as is more particularly set out in assessment rolls SA -228A, SA -240B, SA -243B, SA -251A, SA -272A, and SA -292. • 3. The City and Owner acknowledge and agree that the assessments now associated with the above - described property, whether levied, pending or deferred, represent an amount equal to at least the benefit received by the property owner for the services rendered by the City in constructing the improvements described above. 4. In an effort to promote the sale and development of the above described real estate, the parties hereto desire to enter into an agreement to annul and reassess the property for the benefit received. NOW THEREFORE FOR $ 1.00 AND OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION. THE PARTIES DO HEREBY AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Areeement of Asses sment Annulment and Waiver of Irreeularity and ADoeal of Reassessment. The patties hereto have entered into an agreement of assessment annulment and waiver of irregularity and appeal of reassessment, a true and correct copy of said reassessment schedule is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "A" and incorporated as if fully set out herein. It is understood that the noted assessments will be updated prior to certification to the County. The following assessments SA -228A, SA -240B, SA -243B, SA -251A, SA -272A and SA -292 shall be assessed for five years at 7% interest, as per City Policy. In addition, the weed cutting bill in the amount of $809.46 shall be paid in full. 2. Representations of Owner The Owner of the property, represents and acknowledges that the City has relied on the representations, that it is the sole owner of the above described parcels and that no party or parties have any prior interest in the real estate and further agrees to indemnify the City from any intervening claim that would impair the ability of the City to collect the reimposed assessments described herein. 3. Payment of Assessments It is understood and agreed that assessments contemplated under this agreement will be paid in connection with the property taxes associated with the above described property, or under • h:\Ast \Agree \Thomu.wpd\Page 1 such procedures as the County Auditor may determine are appropriate. In no event shall the failure of the County Auditor to collect the assessments in semi - annual payments with interest, beginning January 1, 1998, affect the • validity of this agreement. 4. Foreclosure by Action In the event the Owner or its successor, in interest to any of the described property, forfeits or fails to make payments either to the Auditor if the Auditor collects the same or to the City if for some reason payments are not made in connection with the property taxes, then, in that event, at the sole option of the City, the City may elect to collect the assessments either through the tax forfeiture process provided by Minnesota State Law or by foreclosure by action or both. 5. Lien. The City shall have a lien on the property for the unpaid assessment amounts, as well as accrued interest, if any. 6. Waiver In addition to the waiver set forth in the attached Agreement of Assessment Annulment and Waiver of Irregularity and Appeal of Reassessment, the Owner hereby waives any right to petition for reassessment or to claim the assessments, either past or present, were not correctly imposed IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Bradley Thomas, has hereunto set their hands this 9th day of June, 1997. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the City of Hutchinson has entered into this agreement. Bradley Thomas • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF ) On this 9th day of June, 1997, before me, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally appeared Bradley Thomas, who being duly sworn, did say that he is the owner as named in the foregoing instrument and acknowledged said instrument to be their free act and deed Notary Public CITY OF HUTCHINSON BY: Marlin Torgerson, Mayor h: \Assess\Agm \Thomu.wpd\Page 2 • • STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF MCLEOD SS: On this 9th day of June, 1997, before me, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally appeared Marlin Torgerson, to me personally known, who being duly sworn, did say that he is the Mayor of the City Council of the City of Hutchinson named in the foregoing instrument and that said instrument was signed in behalf of said City of Hutchinson by authority of its City Council and said Marlin Torgerson acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said City of Hutchinson. Notary Public Fr9S� • ('nary D. Plotz, City Administrator i s h:\Amm\Agr \Thomu.wpd\Page 3 0 ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT - THOMAS - PLAZA HEIGHTS - EXHIBI7'A' - Page 1 CITY OF HUTCHINSON. 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON, MN 55350 (612) 234-4209 • & DATE COMPUTED: 06-3 -1997 CITY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 12- 11&30-02 -0250 COUNTY PROPERTY b NUMBER: 23 ]69.0180 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 4 BLOCK 3, PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: 905 CLEVELAND AVE SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAID 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1997 OLLOWING SP ASSESSM YEAR SHALL ORIGINAL PRINCIPAL BE ASSESS F OR INTEREST_ _ RATE FIVE YEAR ANNUAL P_RWC PAYMENT - AT 7% INTEREST: YEARS_ -- - PAID BAL _ TOPAY Y_ F ASSESS. _ENGBNEERINO P iA -228A 1992 $2,365.16 7. $473. - -- 0 $2,3 - !X2_4 _ 1992 1_7,170.5 _ 7.0_0% _$ 1,134.13 0 $7.1 5 5 iA -243B 1992 _ S957,27 7.00% _ 519145 _ 0 5957.27 _ W251A 1992 5300.43 _ 7.00% $6009 6666 0 5300.43 M -272A 1992 $72022 7.00% $14104 0 $720.22 .0 &TOTAL{ 1 $11,51373 S2,W2351 1 511,51373 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1982 $43.92 6 1988 $90.99 - TO BE PAID A FULL - $134.91 EARS TF D DEFERRE _ P N NNS R ECORD S ST YIOE)( _ TO _ TOTAL I INT EREST_ _ENGBNEERINO P BOO _ _ B _ _ _ T AMOUNT R AMOUNT Y YEARLY _ 5 $ 5 $ $2,509 - 73 _ 59.6 _ WA 5 5000 _ _ $0.00 5 5 5335.01 $ _ _ 5 _ _ W - $0-00 $ $0.00 TOTAL ASSESSMENTS ASSESSABLE FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST $15,54.754 TOTAL WEED CUTTAO - - - - -- -- - - - - -- — 5134.91 TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE 515,67845 _ PAYOF _ ENRCI _ REASSESSMENT - - TOTAL AMOUN — �- $ 0 DO $3 5_0.09 !_9.660.35 SO.W - $1,292.31 -_ - 50.00 $4 0 6 5.58 __- $000 - -- $972.30 $15,54154 hAassess\ag7eeWh nas \12020250 hAassess\ag7eeWh nas \12020250 �� • ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT - THOMAS -PLAZA HEIGHTS -EXHIBIT "A' -Papa 2 CITY OF HUTCHINSON, 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON, MN 55350 (612) 2344208 DATE COMPUTED: 06-3 -1887 TOTAL TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE $15,8 0,45 CRY PROPERTY D NUMBER: 12- 116-31102 -0280 COUNTY PROPERTY D NUMBER: 23 789.0210 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 3 BLOCK 4, PLA7A HEK:HTS PROPERTY ADDRESS'. BW CHICAGO AVE SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAKES NOT PAD 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU', OCTOBER 1997 FOLLOWING ASSESSMENTS SWILL BE ASSESSED FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTE REST: _. 5540._ ARNIIAL YEARS TF DEFERRED __ PRINCPAL ENONEERWON 55.. - 4040__.RG RECORD INDEX PAYOFF! _ SPECIAL ORIGINAL ORIOAL INTEREST PRINCIPAL Y'E/043 BALANCE TO -.. TOTAL i aT1ERE5T E5N5- RG - _ EN ENRCI ENRG -'_ REASSESSMENT ._ _ ASSESS. YEAR PRINCIPAL RATE PAYMENT PAID TO PAY PRESENT - INTEREST AMOUNT RATE AMOUNT YEARLY TOTAL AMOUNT SA -MBA 1992 $2.3 7.00% $473.03 0 $2.385.16 5 5927. $3.192.97 WA $0.00 $0.00 {0. $3,192.97 _ SA 2406 1992 37,170.85 7.0_016 $1,434.13 0 5_7.170.85 5 $_ $9.880.3_8 _ _ NIA - _ 50-00 00 $0.00 _ - 50.00 - $9,680.38 -_9231 _ _ _ _ _ SA -2438 1882 S95727 7.00% - _ $181.45 0 5957.27_ 5 $335,01 $1,28231 _ WA $0.00 $0.00 50.00 $1,282.31 _ - - '- __ ---' _ - - - - SA -251A 1882 $300,43 7.00% - 580.08 0 $;100.43 5 55 510575 - 40_58 5405.58 4055. WA _ -_ {0.00 .5.555 _$000 $0.00 ..$4 _5405.58 SA -272A 1992 $720.22 7.00% $144.01 0 5720.22 5 3282.06 _ $972.30 _. WA _.__. 50.00 50.00 $0,00 $972.30 SUB-TOTAI $11.513.73 _ $2,302.751 I S11,513.73) ___ $4.029,811 $15,543.54 ' 1_ _ _ _ $15,543.54 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1992 $43.92 8 1988 $90.99 - TO BE PAID IN FULL - $134,91 ITOTAL ASSESSMENTS ASSE SSABLE FOR FIV YEARS AT 7% INTE TOTAL TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE $15,8 0,45 h:\aswss\agmeWxxTias \12020280 ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT - THOMAS - PLAZA HEIGHTS - EXHIBIT "A' - Page 3 • CITY OF HUTCHINSON, 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON. MN 55350 (612)23442D9 DATE COMPUTED: 06-3 -1997 COY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 12 -11 6-3002-0320 COUNTY PROPERTY ID NUMBIW: 23.389.0250 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 7 BLOCK 4, PLA7A HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: 835 CLEVELAND AVE SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAID 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1997 FOLLOWING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS SHALL ORIGINAL BE ASSESSED INTEREST FOR FINE YEARS ANNUAL PRINCIP AT 7% INTEREST: YEARS • _Y TO DEFE RRED RtWGP I_LL & INTEREST TOTAL INTEREST -__- ASSESS. YEAR - PRINC --- -- - RATE __.___ ___ PAYMENT PAID TO PAY ._ PRESENT __..__ . AMOUNT SA 22M 1992 52.3&5.16 7N% 5173. a $2.365,18 5 $827.61 $3.192.97 SA -2108 1992 780% $_1,/3113 0 $7,170,65 5 $_2,509.73 $9,660.36 SA -243B 1992 _$7,170.65 $95717 7,00% $191.45 0 $957.27 5 5335.01 $_1192.31 SA -251A 1992 $300.43 7.00% $60.09 0 $300.43 5 $105.15 $405.58 SA -272A 1992 $720.22 7.00% $144.04 0 $720.22 5 $252.08 $972.30 SUBTOTAL] 1 $11,51373 j t _ $2,30235 $1151373 $102981 j 315,543.51 RATE WA_ WA WA WA WA ORD [JOST INDEX 7 � -ci Ttl Hr YEARLY $0.00 $080 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $000 $0.00 01 $15.543.51 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1992 $43.92 & 1996 $00.99 - TO BE PAID IN FULL - $134.91 TO TAL ASSE ASSE SSABLE FOR FINE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST $15,543.54 TOTAL WEED CUTTING - - _--- - - - - -- - - -- $131.91 TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE $15,676.45 h Aassess\agree\Ihamas \12020320 PAYOFF/ EN REASSESSMENT TOTAL AMOUNT $0.00 $3.192.97 $0.00 $9,680.38 $0.00 _$1,292.31 $0.00 $405.58 $0 00 $972 W $15.543.51 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1992 $43.92 & 1996 $00.99 - TO BE PAID IN FULL - $134.91 TO TAL ASSE ASSE SSABLE FOR FINE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST $15,543.54 TOTAL WEED CUTTING - - _--- - - - - -- - - -- $131.91 TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE $15,676.45 h Aassess\agree\Ihamas \12020320 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1992 $43,92 5 1996 $90.99 - TO BE PAD IN FULL - $13491 ITOTAL ASSESSMENTS FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7 % INTER PAYOFF/ ICI TOTAL WEE C UTTING�SESS ABLE 2727_- AL -AMOUNT ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT -THOMAS -PLAZA HEIGHTS - EXHIBIT 'A" -Page 4 $3,192_27 575,878,45 $9.800.38 50.00 - S7,29231 CITY OF HUTCHINSON. 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON, MN 55350 (612) 234 -4209 - 540558 50.00 $972.30 DATE COMPUTED: 0&3-1987 CITY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 12 11630 CWNTY PROPERTY ID NUMBE!i: 23.389.0270 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 9 BLOCK 4, PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: 875 CLEVELAND AVE SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAID 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1997 FOLLOWING ASSESSM 9999__ - SHALL BE ASSESSED F OR FIVE YEAR 9999 —. AT 7% INTEREST: _ _ ANNUW YEARS TF DEFFARED P RINGPAL EN OWEERWG N - RECORD ST INDEX - 9999 SPEC 2727 ORIGINAL IN_ PRNCP/1L 2711.. YEARS — 9999 B AL.AN E 91.27 TO __ TOTAL - i_ INTFiiEBT - _ F962C1 _ FNRG F ASSESS. YEA PRINGPAL RATE PAYMENT - PAD TO PAY _ PRE9EflT INTEREST AM _ ElIRCI _ RATE AMWNT YEARLY 1 SA -22BA 1892 $2,365.16 7 00% $473. 0 32.385.78 2727 - S_3,19287 MA $0.. $0.D0 SA-2406 1992 $7.170.85 700% $1,434.13 0 $7.170.65 5 _ _SB27,81 $2.509.73 __. - _ _ $9,680.38 _ WA $0.00 $0.00 - ____ SA-243B 1992 1BD2 _ _95_27 $937.27 _—_ 7.00% __ $79145 — - 0 0 $957.27 5 _ 53354 __29 __ 51,28237 WA __—_ 50.0_0 _ - __{0.0 0 -_ SA -251A __ 1992 5300.17 700% 7 OD% - -Nom _ 380108 _ _ D 36_43 $300A3 5 2727_ $105.13 9 999 2799 $40558 _ _ WA _ _ _ _ 50.00 -_ _ 50.00 _. SA-272A 1992 $720.22 7.00% $144.04 0 $720.22 5 5252.08 $972.30 WA $0.00 5000 9138 -TOT $11.51373 $2.302.75 511,513.73 $4.029.81 $15,543.54 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1992 $43,92 5 1996 $90.99 - TO BE PAD IN FULL - $13491 ITOTAL ASSESSMENTS FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7 % INTER PAYOFF/ ICI TOTAL WEE C UTTING�SESS ABLE 2727_- AL -AMOUNT TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE $3,192_27 575,878,45 • S15.543.54 h:lassas lagmeWxh as112020340 PAYOFF/ ICI REASSES 2727 AL -AMOUNT $0 $3,192_27 $0 .00 $9.800.38 50.00 - S7,29231 $0.00 - 540558 50.00 $972.30 S15.543.54 h:lassas lagmeWxh as112020340 SUB TOTAL] $12.122 WI 1 $2.424561 1 112.122.001 1 53,420]3 j 515.543.53 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1992 $43,92 8 1988 $90.99 - TO BE PAID IN FULL - 5134.91 TOTAL ASSESSMENT$ ASSESSABLE FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST TOTKWEED CUTTWG TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE $15.53.53 $13491 _515,678." 11 PAYOFF/ \SSESSME AMOUNT __ $3,041.58 $9 ,22110 _$1,231.03 5386.35 $928.19 $736.97 $15543.53 h:Wssess\agree\ff nas \72020390 • ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT - THOMAS - PLAZA HEIGHTS - EXHISIT'A" - Page 5 CITY OF HUTCHINSON. 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON. MN 55350 (612) 234 -4209 DATE COMPUTED: 063 -1997 CITY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 12- 116-30-02 -0390 COUNTY PROPERTY ID NUMBER 23.389.W20 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 4 BLOCK 5, PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1105 SUNSET ST SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAD) 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1997 FOLLOWING ASSESSMENTS SHALL BE ASSESSED F OR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST: ANNUAL YEARS TF DEFERRED _ - PRINCI ENGINEE N =WS RECORD C OW INDEX _ _ _ SPECIAL O RIGINAL INTEREST PRINCIPAL BALANCE TO TOTAL _ 8 1HTEREST ENRG ENRCI _ _ _ A89E38. YEAR PRWCIPAL RATE PAYMENT PAID TO PAY _ _ PRESENT INTEREST AMOUNT RATE _ AMOUNT _E YEARLY TOTENRG AL SA 22M 1992 {2,385.16 7.00% $473. 0 $2,365.16 4.00 $6 78.42 S3,04 1.SB WA 50 - -- SODD SO-00 _ SA - 2_408 19 V 170_65 ]. $ _1 434 .13 0 1_7.170.655 _ 4 SZO50. _ _ 59 .2 2 110 ... - N/A - -- _ _$0.00 _ S0. _ 50.00 _ _ _ SA -2438 1982 $957.27 7.00% $_19115 0 5957.27 _ 4.0855 - - S273,76 __ _ _ $1,231.03 - WA $0.00 _ SO.00 $0.00 _ SA -257A 1991 530043 ] 110X 580.09 _ 0 5700.43 4.0855 S85.9i 5388.35 _ NIA 1010 $0.00 50.00 SA 272A 1992 $720.22 7.00% Sl".134 0 $720.22 4.0855 $205,97 $920.18 NIA SOAO 50.00 50.00 SA N2 1994 $609 071 700% $121.81 0 $609.07 3 1127.90 $736.97 _ WA $0.00 50.00 $0.00 SUB TOTAL] $12.122 WI 1 $2.424561 1 112.122.001 1 53,420]3 j 515.543.53 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1992 $43,92 8 1988 $90.99 - TO BE PAID IN FULL - 5134.91 TOTAL ASSESSMENT$ ASSESSABLE FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST TOTKWEED CUTTWG TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE $15.53.53 $13491 _515,678." 11 PAYOFF/ \SSESSME AMOUNT __ $3,041.58 $9 ,22110 _$1,231.03 5386.35 $928.19 $736.97 $15543.53 h:Wssess\agree\ff nas \72020390 ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT -THOMAS -PLAZA HEIGHTS - EXHIBIT 'A' - Pepe 8 CITY OF HUTCHINSON, 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON. MN 55350 (312) 2344209 DATE COMPUTED: 06- 3-1997 CRY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 12- 116 - 30-02-0410 COUNTY PROPERTY a NUMBER: 23.389.0340 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 2 BLOCK 9, PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1125 CHEYENNE ST SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAID 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1997 FOLLOWING ASSESSMENTS SHALL BE ASSESSED FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST: ANNUAL YE_ MS TF D_ EFERAEO PRINCIPAL ENGINEERING N EWS RECORD INDEX SPECIAL ORIGINAL INTEREST PRINCIPAL YEARS BALANCE TO TOTAL 481TEREST ENRCI ENROL 6AtC1 ENRCI ASSESS, YEAR PRINCIPAL RATE PAYMENT PAD TO PAY PRESENT INTEREST AMOUNT RATE MIOIRIT YEARLY TOTAL SA -228A 1883 $2.388.18 - 7 .00% S473.03 - - - 0 52.785.18 _ 4 .6856 $676.42 $3,041.58 WA $000 SOAO 0.00 SA $7, 1 70 .8_5 - 1,00% $1,431 -- 0 $7,170.65 1.0858 52,060.75 $9,22 7.40 WA 80.00 50 00 50.00 $ SA -21 1992 5967 .27 _ SIN .45 0 $957.27 4.0955 5273.76 _ 5 WA SO. 50 $0.00 SA -251A_ -_- - 1992 _ _ 5300.13 _ _TOD% 7, _ 569.99 _ 0 5700.43 I.OB66 586.92 WA 50.00 50.00 SO-00 SA - 272A _ 1992_ 5120.22 7.00% 5114.04 _ 0 - 5720.72 4. 0885 5205.97 _$388.35 5828.18 WA Sa .00 5000 $0.00 SA-282 _ 19M 5608.07 700% $121,81 - 0 - - -- 5809,07 3 5127.80 S736.97 WA $000 50,00 50.00 SUB -TOTAy __ I_ 512.122.901 _ __ _ 132.421561 - -- _ I __512. 122.801 -_ .__ 5 3.420.73 L $ 15,543.53 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1892 $43.92 6 1896 590.99 - TO BE PAID IN FULL - $134.91 TOTAL ASSESSMENTS ASSESSAB FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% WTEREST 515.543.53 TOTAL WEED CUTTING _ _ _ _ _ $134.91 TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE _ S16.67SA1 • PAYOFFI R EASSESSM ENT AMOUNT _ 53.041.58 59,2!1. - -- 51,231.03 $386.35 5928.19 $736.97 $15,543.53 h:lassesslagree\tIxxnwI1202041 O i, n U This agreement is made and entered into this 9th day of June, 1997, by and between the City of Hutchinson, State of Minnesota (City) and Curtis G. Newberg and Bradley Thomas (Owners). RECITAL: 1. The City, at the request of the then owners of the property, contracted for the construction of a variety of municipal improvements, including but not limited to, sanitary sewer main and services, water main and services, storm sewer, grading, concrete curb and gutter, gravel base, bituminous base and surfacing and appurtenances for the following described real estate, all located within the City of Hutchinson and County of McLeod: Plaza Heights County PID City PID Lot 3, Block 3 23.389.0170 12- 116 -30-02 -0240 2. In connection with those improvements, all of the property described above was subject to a series of assessments for the cost of the improvements as is more particularly set out in assessment rolls SA -228A, SA -240B, SA -243B, SA -251A, and SA -272A. 3. The City and Owner acknowledge and agree that the assessments now associated with the above - described property, whether levied, pending or deferred, represent an amount equal to at least the benefit received by the property owner for the services rendered by the City in constructing the improvements described above. 4. In an effort to promote the sale and development of the above described real estate, the parties hereto desire to enter into an agreement to annul and reassess the property for the benefit received. • NOW THEREFORE FOR $1.00 AND OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, THE PARTIES DO HEREBY AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Agreement of A ssessme nt Annulment a nd W b r of Irr=larily. and Appal of Reassessment The parties hereto have entered into an agreement of assessment annulment and waiver of irregularity and appeal of reassessment, a true and correct copy of said reassessment schedule is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "A" and incorporated as if fully set out herein. It is understood that the noted assessments will be updated prior to certification to the County. The following assessments, SA -228A, SA -240B, SA -243B, SA -251A, and SA -272A shall be assessed for five years at 7% interest, as per City Policy. In addition, the weed cutting bill for in the amount of $134.91 shall be paid in full. 2. presentations of Owner The Owner of the property, represents and acknowledges that the City has relied on the representations, that it is the sole owner of the above described parcels and that no parry or parties have any prior interest in the real estate and further agrees to indemnify the City from any intervening claim that would impair the ability of the City to collect the reimposed assessments described herein. 3. Payment of Assessments It is understood and agreed that assessments contemplated under this agreement will be paid in connection with the property taxes associated with the above described property, or under such procedures as the County Auditor may determine are appropriate. In no event shall the failure of the County Auditor to collect the assessments in sem- annual payments with interest, beginning January 1, 1998, affect the validity of this agreement. 4. Foreclosure by Action In the event the Owner or its successor, in interest to any of the described property, forfeits or fails to make payments either to the Auditor if the Auditor collects the same or to the City if • for some reason payments are not made in connection with the property taxes, then, in that event, at the sole option Ass \Agree \New- Thom.w0\Page 1 1 9� r , of the City, the City may elect to collect the assessments either through the tax forfeiture process provided by Minnesota State Law or by foreclosure by action or both. 5. Lisa. The City shall have a lien on the property for the unpaid assessment amounts, as well as accrued • interest, if any. 6. Waiver In addition to the waiver set forth in the attached Agreement of Assessment Annulment and Waiver of Irregularity and Appeal of Reassessment, the Owner hereby waives any right to petition for reassessment . or to claim the assessments, either past or present, were not correctly imposed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Curtis G. Newberg and Bradley Thomas have hereunto set their hands this 9th day of June, 1997. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the City of Hutchinson has entered into this agreement. Curtis G. Newberg Bradley Thomas STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF ) On this 9th day of June, 1997, before me, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally appeared Curtis G. Newberg and Bradley Thomas, who being duly sworn, did say that he is the owner as named in the foregoing instrument and acknowledged said instrument to be their free act and deed. Notary Public • CITY OF HUTCHINSON BY Marlin Torgerson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF MCLEOD ) On this 9th day of June, 1997, before me, a Notary Public in and for said County, personally appeared Marlin Torgerson, to me personally known, who being duly sworn, did say that he is the Mayor of the City Council of the City of Hutchinson named in the foregoing instrument and that said instrument was signed in behalf of said City of Hutchinson by authority of its City Council and said Marlin Torgerson acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said City of Hutchinson. Attest Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator Notary Public • As¢ Agree \New- Thom.wpd\Page 2 ASSESSIA AGREEMENT - NEWBERG/THOMAS - PLAZA HEIGHTS - EXHIBIT'A' - Pepe 1 • CITY OF HUTCHINSON, 111 HASSAN STREET SE, HUTCHINSON, MN 55350 (612) 23442G9 DATE COMPUTED: 06-3 1997 CITY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 12- 116-30-02 -0240 COUNTY PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 23.388.0170 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOT 3 BLOCK 3, PLAZA HEIGHTS PROPERTY ADDRESS: 815 CLEVELAND AVE SW TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY - TAXES NOT PAID 1988 TO PRESENT TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON ASSESSMENTS ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY COMPUTED THRU: OCTOBER 1987 OLLOWING ASSESSME SHALL BE ASSESSED FOR FIVE YEARS AT 7% INTEREST: _ __ WCE TO _ PRESENT 5 TOTAL _ _� INTEREST _ AM OUNT 53,1 87 — ANNUAL ENRCI ENRCI SPEC_ -- ORIGINAL IN TEREST_ PRI _ YEARS 7,170.85 ASSESS. YEAR PRINCIPAL RATE PAYMENT PAID TO $957.27 iA 228A 1992 $2.365.16 - - - 7.00% $473.03 0 3 WN06 1992 $7.110.65 1A0% f1Aa1.13 _ a 7 3A -243B 1992 $957.27 Tom _$191.45 0 5000 {A -251A 1992 5300.43 700% $60.09 0 ;A 272A 1982 $720.22 7w% $144.04 0 UaTOTA14 j $11,513.n1 1 52302.75[ 1 $1 WEED CUTTING BILL - 1988 THROUGH 1990 -TO BE PAID IN FULL - YEARS TF DEFERRED PRPICN'AL ENGINEERING N RECORD T INDEX __ WCE TO _ PRESENT 5 TOTAL _ _� INTEREST _ AM OUNT 53,1 87 _ ENRCI RATE WA _ ENRCI ENRCI _ ENRCI TOTAL $0.00 PAY INTEREST $827. AMOUNT 50 YEARLY $0. 2,3&5.18_ 7,170.85 5 $_2.508.73 $9,680.38 WA $0.00 $0.00 $000 $957.27 5 1335.04 $1292.31 WA - $0.00 $0.00 $O.W $300.43 5 5105.15 $40558 WA $000 $000 30.00 $720.22 5 $252.08 $972.30 WA 5000 $0.00 $0.00 151373 54.029.81 $15.54154 $134.91 TOTAL ASSESSMENTS ASSESSABLE FOR FIVE YEAR_ S AT 7% INTEREST 515,54354 TOTALWEEDCUTTMG_ $131.81 TOTAL PAYOFF TO DATE __ 51567BA5 • PAYOFF/ RE AMOUNT $3.182.97 S9,685,38 _31,282.31 5405.58 $972 W $15.64] $4 hiassesslagreeViaw thom\ 12020240 0 CITY OF HUTCHINSON '4EM0 Finance Department June 5, 1997 4- 6 1W Uvke W.Mdp 1 MWMKG1 6 h SUBJECT: AVIATION FUEL CHARGES FOR FI %ED BASE OPERATOR Tom Parker, Airport Fixed Base Operator (FBO), has requested exclusive aviation fuel sales at the airport. Because such a • decision would impact the 1997 budget the final decision will need to be part of the budgeting process for next year. The city would retain ownership of the fueling system but would not purchase fuel nor administer the billing system. Monday night the airport commission met and recommend consideration of his request. Tom did request to have his current fuel cost (general sales covered under his current account with the city) reduced for the remainder of this year. Fuel would be billed to Tom at the city's cost plus an amount to cover the fueling system. This was agreeable with the airport.commission. Recommendation Staff would recommend the City Council fuel at the city's cost plus 10 cents cost effective June 1, 1997. � 1 LJ approve charging the FBO for per gallon for fuel system 81Wk1 -'chkh 45u.uu RETAIL "ON SALE" r1 LJ *tale of Af[innesiota, COUNTS OP McLeod ,City__ - _ plr Hutchinson - To the .... ._cicy- Council ....._....._........of the ..... cieY ............................ of ... Hutchinson................. .. ........... ... .................. __.. ........................................... . ...... State of Minnesota: _._—.--.--.-._— hereby appl.l.ea -for a iteense for the term f rom . ..._....__......._.__._..._.day of - -- JIIL^�._-- ...__._._. 18.4L, to asI! At Retail Ozkbr, Non - Intoxicating Malt Liquors, as the same are defined by law, for consumption "ON" these certain prsmteee in the_.__._.__..-- ...._.... described as follow, te-wit:_ Softball Tournament in Roberts Perk June 14 & 15, 1997 at whisk place said appltaant --- operate ......as Zmdnep of.__non_prnfii_arganiZn ri nn._. —__ • and to that end mpresust - -and state_.. as /thaw: That said applicant .___.___is. e.._.__ n...._..nf Ow United States; of food moral ohasmelo and repute; and ha, -attained the age of 21 yeah; that__._....._.___._. ___.__._._..__.._.proprietor —_of the setabl,shment for which the license will be land if this application is (ranted. That no manufacturer of such wartntasioottnl malt Liquors has any a marthl p, in whole er is part, in said bueineas of said applicnnt.._m any interest therein; That said applicaat.._..make.._ this application pursuant and sabfed to alt the law of the Stale of Xusnesota and the ordi"rwat and regulations of applicable thereto, which are hereby made apart hereof, and hereby agnw..-to obw and obey the same; (s e r nw+� a r . ■ I rfeflfarr Recommend approval with restrictions and requiremen in the past. Driver's License I.D. to be required for purrrha� r� Steve Madson, Police Chiet Each applicant further states that -he is not now the holder of, nor has ate made application for, nor does wee intend to make application for a Federal Retail Dealer's Special tax stamp for the sale of intoxicating liquor. 0 PAID JUN 9 W dNa►iui�„ Dated.._.- .._ -- 18 7L i5 llJ• dppUea" P. 0. dddrr__..._.— ..-..._. -. ._. 9 -A' CHANGE ORDER NO. 2- CITY OF HUTCHINSON - ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 111 HASSAN ST SE, HUTCHINSON MN 55350 (612) 587 -5151 Sheet _of CONTRACTOR: Quam Construction Co. I LETTING NO. 1 PRO CT NO. 97 -04 RESS: 415 Co. Rd. 5 SW, P O Box 42, Willmar MN 56201 PROJECT LOCATION: Intersection of School Rd & TH 7122 DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE: Addition of draimge structures. Item No Spec Ref Item Namc Unit Quwtity Unit Price Amount INCREASE ITEMS: 26 2506 Construct Catch Basins Design B Each 1 $785.00 $785.00 27 2506 Construct Catch Basins, Design C Each 1 $785.00 $785.00 28 2503 300 mm PE Pipe Smooth Bore Meter 10 $54.00 $540.00 TOTAL INCREASE ITEMS $2,110.00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 $2,100.00 NET INCREASE /BEER£4SE S2 100.00 In accordance with the Contract and Specifications, the contract amount shall he adjusted in the amount of S 2.100.00 add /deduct An extension of 0 days shall be allowed for completion. The original completion date was 10 -31 -1996 and now has been adjusted to — — — ' 19—. ORIGINAL CONTRACT PREVIOUS ADDITIONS /BEBUG446NIS THIS 1 ADDITIONADEDUC440?i TOTAL 581,601.53 $ 907.68 1 $2,100.00 $84,609.21 \ APPROVED: C— l�.� --� Contras r DATED: Z APPROVED: Mayor DATED: APPROVED: / i Fct r of ineermg DATED: 7 APPROVED: City Administrator DATED: Z CHANGE ORDER NO. _3 - CITY OF HUTCHINSON - ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 111 HASSAN ST SE, HUTCHINSON MN 55350 (612) 587 -5151 Sheet Hof - CONTRACTOR: Wm. Mueller & Sons, Inc LETTING NO. 7 1 PROJECT NO. 96 -09 RESS: 831 Park Ave, P O Box 247, Hambur MN 55339 PRO CT LOCATION: Main Street North DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE: Addition of unit price for slab jacking sidewak Agreed prim from Slabiaclting S tia (320 - 587.9433) Hutchinwn Item No Sp. Ref Item Name Unit Quantity Unit Prim Amount INCREASE ITEMS: Slabjacking Sidewalk Square Meter 50 $16.72 $836.00 Total Increase Items------- $836.00 DECREASE ITEMS: Remove Concrete Walk Square Meter 22 $7.00 $154.00 100 mm Concrete Walk Square Meter 22 $31.00 $682.00 Total Decrease Items---- - - - - -- $836.00 TOTAL INCREASE ITEMS $0.00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO.3 $0.00 NET INCREASE /DEC4kFASE $0.00 In accordance with the Contract and Specifications, the contract amount shall be adjusted in the amount of �— add /dedvet An extension of Q days shall be allowed for completion. The original completion date was October 1. 1996 and now has been adjusted to • - - -- . 19 –. ORIGINAL CONTRACT PREVIOUS ADDITIONS /DEDUCTIONS THIS A TOTAL $238,865.25 + $2,375.20 + $0.00 $241,240.45 APPRO VW. f DATED: APPROVED: Mayor DATED: *ROVED: f En ineering DATED: APPROVED: City Administrator DATED: Im WORKSHEET 1996 Letting No. 7, Project no. 96 -09 Change Order # 3 0 April 30 ,1997 Price from Slabjacking Specialties, Hutchinson, MN phone: 320-587-9433 Price quote for raising sidewalk @ $1.35 /square foot Add 15% _ $1.5525 /square ft $1.5525 x 10.76392 sq ft/sq meter = $16.711 square meter • n U OPEN -SIOLD COUNCIL REPORT MON, JUN 9, 1997, 2:24 PM page 1 _____________________________________________________________________ 1984 PARKING BDS JUUL CONTRACTING CO ____________________ L9/96 EST #8 _____ $1,635.42 _ __ ___ < *> $1,635.42* 0 6 IMPRO CONST HUTCHINSON UTILITIES STREET LIGHTS -BLUFF ST $806.80 OSM PROFESS SERV -BLUFF ST BRIDGE $7,121.04 WM MUELLER & SONS L7/96 EST #8 $2,175.60 < *> $10,103.44* 1997 IMPR. CONST BARR ENGINEERING CO PROFESS SERV- PEDESTRIAN BRDGE $576.35 JUUL CONTRACTING CO L2/97 EST #3 $1,334.64 OSM PROFESS SERV -5TH AVE BRIDGE $2,739.00 QUAM CONSTRUCTION L1/97 EST #4 ,55,535.57 SEH PROFESS SERV -MAIN SIGNALS $896.56 < *> $11,082.12* CAP.IMPRO.FUND CENTRAL LANDSCAPE SUPPLY PERENNIALS, HOLMSTRUP 4' $199.38 EARL ANDERSON ASSOC PLAYBOOSTER PLAYSYSTEM $10,795.36 SORENSEN FARM SUPPLY CONCRETE SAW RENTAL $76.68 UNITED BLDG CENTERS LUMBER, SINKERS $176.13 < *> $11,247.55* CENTRAL GARAGE ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO VALVE $280.58 BRANDON TIRE CO TIRES, MOUNT /DISMNT $444.48 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS FILTERS $553.39 CITY OF HUTCHINSON JUNE MED $432.09 CROW RIVER AUTO PARTS, LABOR $482.51 DOYLE INCORPORATED BEARING FLANGE $156.30 EARL ANDERSON ASSOC VALVE $82.78 FORTIS BENEFITS JUNE LTD $20.36 G & K SERVICES UNIFORMS $57.30 HART'S AUTO SUPPLY REAR PADS $349.08 HOLT MOTORS INC PARTS $1,747.95 HUTCHINSON WHOLESALE HOSE $430.08 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 4D -YHD $99.95 ' J CRAFT AIR SPRING KIT, LABOR $2,371.77 • L & P SUPPLY CO LONG LAKE TRACTOR & EQUIP ROLLER, PIN PULLEY $23.55 $90.49 MACQUEEN EQUIP INC BAFFLE STRIP DEFL $134.55 MID CON SYSTEMS INC INSTA GASKET $88.97 MN DEPT OF REVENUE STRAINER, SUPPORT, ETC $250.96 MN MUTUAL LIFE JUNE LIFE $7.14 PLOWMANS PARTS, LABOR $579.80 RUNNING'S SUPPLY BOLTS $1.68 SAFETY KLEEN MACHINE SERVICE $222.38 SORENSEN FARM SUPPLY ADAPTERS, PLUG $17.77 US POSTAL SERVICE MAY POSTAGE $12.71 < *> $8,938.62* CITY HALL CONST. BIG BEAR BRASS CONNECT $12.76 _ CENTRAL LANDSCAPE SUPPLY BROADMOOR #2 $147.77 RUNNING'S SUPPLY PIPE PARTS $41.56 < *> $202.09* GENERAL FUND A.T.O.M. REG -KEVIN S. WILSON $80.00 AAGARD WEST JUNE SERVICE $814.22 ACCU FINANCIAL SERVICES HELMETS $3,896.45 ADAMEK, MIKE REIMB- SAFETY BOOTS $60.00 AG SYSTEMS PARTS FOR SPRAYER $42.81 AMERICAN RED CROSS LGT VIDEO PACK #I $20.50 AMERICAN SWEDISH INSTITUTE SENIOR TOUR -35 GUESTS $70.00 AMERIDATA MICROSOFT SOFTWARE $727.04 ANDERSON'S DECORATING CENTER PAINT $125.58 ARNOLD & MCDOWELL MAY COMPENSATION $6,866.00 B &S INDUSTRIES INC EVIDENCE FILM $505.46 BAKER, LISA REFUND - CANCEL SWIM LESSON $39.00 BARGEN INC CRACKFILLING LABOR $9,682.00 BCA /TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT REG- DOUGLAS JOHNSON $240.00 BEST WESTERN MAPLEWOOD INN CHARGES -C JONES $344.08 BIG BEAR SNP HTCH PUMP ADP $31.94 BRAD'S BODY SHOP REPAIRS TO SQUAD #4 $698.07 r U /o -A, OPEN -AOLD COUNCIL REPORT MON, JUN 9, 1997, 2:24 PM a • BRAUN INTERTEC CORP BREMIX CONCRETE CO BRINKMAN STUDIO BUSINESSWARE SOLUTIONS CDI OFFICE PRODUCTS LTD CENTRAL GARAGE CENTRAL LANDSCAPE SUPPLY CHEMSEARCH CITY OF HUTCHINSON CLAREYS SAFETY EQUIP COAST TO COAST COMM TRANSPORTATION COMMUNITY EDUCATION CONCORD SINGERS COUNTRY KITCHEN COUNTY TREASURER CRAWFORD, CINDY CROSS, KARLA CROW RIVER AREA QUALITY COUNCI CROW RIVER VET CLINIC CULLIGAN WATER COND COATIS 1000 DAKOTA CTY TECHNICAL COLLEGE DARE AMERICA MERCHANDISE DECKER, CINDY DEMEYER, JAMES DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY DOMINO'S PIZZA ELECTRIC MOTOR CO ERLANDSON, DAVID FEED RITE CONTROLS FORBES AUTO FORTIS BENEFITS G & K SERVICES GALL'S INC GLIEDEN, RITA GRAFIX SHOPPE GRAY, JEAN GREAT PLAINS SUPPLY GREGOR, JOHN GRINA, LISA HARRIS CONTRACTING HCVN -TV HEILMAN, DEBORAH HEIM, MICHELLE HEMMAH, KATHY HENRYS FOODS INC HIGGINBOTHAM, RUTH HILLYARD FLOOR CARE / HUTCHINSON HRA HUTCH COMM HOSPITAL HUTCH COOP CENEX HUTCH PLBG & HTG CO HUTCHINSON LEADER HUTCHINSON TEL CO HUTCHINSON UTILITIES HUTCHINSON WHOLESALE INDIANHEAD SPECIALTY CO JACK'S UNIFORMS & EQUIPMENT JACKSON & GIBBENS JEFF'S ELECTRIC JENSEN, DELCIE JENSEN, RICHARD JERABEK MACHINE SERV JINDRICH, MORGAN JOES SPORT SHOP JOHNSON, DOUG L. JONES, CHARLES JUIIL CONTRACTING CO K MART KELLY, STACY KIRCHOFF, RONALD L & P SUPPLY CO LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES LEAGUE OF MN CITIES ----------------- -- ---- SHIRTS, NAMES EMB. PROFESS SERV -PVMT MGMT SYST REROD, MISC MATERIALS PHOTO FINISHING TRANSP FILM INK JET CARTRIDGE MAY REPAIRS CALGARY CARPET #2 BRILLIANCE EXTRA AERO MATTSFIELD MED WATER LEVEL GAUGE SCREWS, SANDPAPER PERMIT RENEWAL- CHAMBER SIGN APRIL REIMBURSEMENT ELKS CONTRIBUTION MEALS PRINTOUTS -CITY PARCELS REFUND - CANCELLED SWIM CLASS REFUND- CANCEL FROM CLASS MAY SESS -D LENNES, M SCHAUFLER MAY SERVICES SOLAR SALT ENVELOPES REG -DAVID MUELLER SPANISH WORKBOOKS REFUND- CANCEL FROM SWIM LESSON ELKS BASEBALL REFUND INSPECTIONS PIZZAS BEARINGS, INSTALL REIMB MEALS CHEMICALS FUEL PUMP, LABOR JUNE LTD UNIFORMS HOLDER, TROUSERS REFUND - CANCEL FROM BASEBALL GRAPHIC KIT, REMOVAL, APPLIC REIMS MEALS, MILEAGE CEDAR DECKING, ADHESIVE REIMB MEALS REIMB MEALS, MILEAGE MAY SERVICE MAINT COPPS PROGRAM COPIES REFUND - CANCEL SHELTER RESERV REFUND -SWIM LESSON CLASS FULL REIMB- MORTAR MIX CANDY, GUM BLDG SUPV FOR MAY LINERS, TOWELS, TISSUE TRANSFER OF FUNDS DEBRIEFING SERVICES CHEMICALS PARTS, LABOR MAY ADS JUNE SERVICE LAMPS, BULBS, PHOTO EYES BULB INK, STAMPER LIGHT KIT, LITH BATTERIES CLOTHING FOR BIKE PATROL ELEC SUPPLIES, LABOR CHARGE REFUND - CANCEL FROM SWIM LESSON CHILDREN'S THEATRE REFUND STEEL, CUTTING INDOOR SOCCER COACH PLATE -J CORNELL REIMB -MEALS REIMB - MEALS, MILEAGE DOZER WORK PRINTING CALCULATOR INDOOR SOCCER COACH REIMB- PHYSICAL DEDUCTIBLE GATOR, RENTAL CHARGE FLOOD RELIEF DONATION DEDUCTIBLE BILLINGS page 2 --------------- ------- $173.85 $5,579.00 $845.10 $44.28 $1,064.89 $112.06 $14,989.75 $338.32 $268.38 $30,704.77 $119.50 $2.55 $50.00 $3,097.00 $600.00 $13.50 $7.00 $26.00 $22.00 $25.00 $140.58 $28.12 $1,443.38 $85.00 $28.85 $26.00 18.00 10.00 140.00 $99.32 $184.78 $1,502.33 $91.37 $1,607.28 $971.54 $40.97 $28.00 $455.75 $29.32 $48.63 $11.44 $58.99 $981.51 122.78 13.00 15.00 $5.26 $440.93 $50.00 $422.27 $35,735.00 $250.00 $94.20 $296.85 $1,092.69 $5,813.54 $5,940.56 $116.41 $66.70 $1,007.65 $260.70 $239.93 $18.00 $8.00 $51.98 $142.50 $108.20 $6.12 $670.00 $2,621.00 $59.79 $156.00 $298.30 $2,333.41 $5,000.00 $10,102.56 ---------- -------- --------------- - - ---- GENERAL FUND BRANDT GARMET LETTERING OPEN -kOLD COUNCIL REPORT MON, JUN 9, 1997, 2:24 PM page 3 --------- --------- GENERAL FUND --- ------ - - -- -- LEE, DAVID _- _______ REFUND - OVERPYMT MENS SOFTBALL ___-- $100.00 _- ______ LENNES, RICHARD MAY COMPENSATION $2,407.42 LEWANDOWSKI, ANN RIBBON & DANCE REFUND $8.00 LIQUOR HUTCH ROOTBEER KEG $31.66 LOCKWOOD, CHRIS REFUND - CANCEL FROM GSA SOFTBAL $28.00 - LOFFLER BUSINESS SYSTEMS LOGGER LABOR CHARGE $175.36 MANKATO MOBILE RADIO WATERTIGHT FUSE KIT 740.66 MCCLURE, JASON REIMS -BIKE HELMET 294.16 MCGARVEY COFFEE INC COFFEE 143.89 1 128.45 MEEKER SAND & GRAVEL SAND MID -MN HOT MIX INC B WEAR, A WEAR $2,145.89 MINNCOMM PAGING JUNE SERVICE $120.46 MINNEAPOLIS COMMUNITY COLLEGE REG -J MCCLURE, S PASCHKE $500.00 MN DEPT OF REVENUE BATTERIES 70.19 MN ELEVATOR INC. ELEVATOR SERVICE ,67.90 MN MUTUAL LIFE MATTSFIELD -LIFE $566.37 MN PLAYGROUND INC GAMETIME PLAYSTRUCTURE $9,556.32 MN SPORTS FEDERATION SOFTBALL MEMBERSHIP $372.00 MODERN FARM HUMIDITY INDICATOR $41.00 MORE 4 OPERATING SUPPLIES $399.57 MPCA RENEWAL -LARRY KARG $225.00 MR. MOVIES VIDEO RENTAL $2.99 MRPA TEAM REGISTRATION $496.00 MUELLER, DAVE REIMB MILEAGE $63.90 MUSIC STORE, THE TAPES $862.63 NAGEL, KAREN REFUND NON RES PASS $80.00 NORTH STAR TURF GENERAL TURF MIXTURE $74.29 PAGEL, RON ELKS BASEBALL REFUND $18.00 PASCHKE, STEVE REIMB- SHIRTS FOR BIKE PATROL $390.51 PAULSEN, CURT REIMB -EYE WEAR $70.64 PAWPRINTS SCREENPRINTING BOWLING SHIRTS $152.85 PIONEER PAINT, CRETE PTCH KIT $166.25 PLOTZ, GARY D. BREAKROOM SUPPLIES $57.67 POLICE INSTITUTE REG -SCOTT SCHUETTE $375.00 QUADE ELECTRIC BULBS $195.38 RAMBOW INC. ASSORTED GARMENTS $1,702.57 RECREONICS RESCUE TUBE $306.20 REED, KARI SWIM LESSONS REFUND $13.00 ' RENNIX CORPORATION LIGHTER, INNER LENS $257.39 • RESPOND SYSTEMS RIDGEWATER COLLEGE SAFETY SUPPLIES 5 STUDENTS $89.25 $1,075.00 RUNNING'S SUPPLY STAR SNAPIN $799.07 SAMUELSON, DARLA REFUND - CANCEL FROM SWIM LESSON $13.00 SCHUETZ, SHERRY REFUND - CANCEL FROM VOLLEYBALL $48.00 SCHWARTZ, CARRIE INDOOR SOCCER COACH $228.00 SEWING BASKET MAY REPAIRS $10.65 SHOE INN, THE REPAIR $18.00 SHOPKO GIFTWRAP $90.90 SIMPLEX TIME RECORDER CO SERVICE CHARGE $187.50 SORLIE, DEBBIE REFUND - CANCEL FROM DISCOVERY $10.00 SPECTRUM SCREENPRINTING SHIRTS $362.69 STANDARD PRINTING TAGALONG CART $153.09 STATE OF MINNESOTA RENEWAL APPLICATION $15.00 STREICHERS BULB REPLACEMENT $68.32 TIDEMAN, TONI REFUND -CLASS FULL $25.00 TRAFFIC INSTITUTE TUITION- CHARLES JONES $2,850.00 TREADWAY GRAPHICS SHIRTS $47.50 TRI CO WATER COND SALT DELIVERY $132.59 TRIAX CA13LEVISION JUNE SERVICE $3.93 UHL CO. LABOR, MILEAGE, MATERIALS $253.83 ULRICH, TOM REFUND- CANCEL FROM BASKETBALL $35.00 UNITED BLDG CENTERS PLYWOOD, LUMBER, PREM STRIP $43.88 US POSTAL SERVICE MAY POSTAGE $1,072.17 VICTORIAN INN ROOM CHARGES, MEALS $65.45 WAL -MART TAPE $23.97 WEGNER, SARA REFUND- CANCEL FROM SWIM LESSON $40.00 WENDLING, ROSS BASEBALL INVENTORY $22.00 WEST PUBLISHING CO PUBLICATIONS $134.72 < > $195,042.671 HUTCH TRANS FAC. CENTRAL LANDSCAPE SUPPLY SAVIN #2 $59.11 - CURTIS 1000 ENVELOPES $112.12 G & K SERVICES UNIFORMS $218.96 HILLYARD FLOOR CARE /HUTCHINSON TOWELS $33.72 HUTCH COOP CENEX UNLEADED GASOLINE $13,196.00 r� �_J OPEN -FOLD COUNCIL REPORT MON, JUN 9, 1997, 2:24 PM page 4 _________________________________________________________ HUTCH TRANS FAC. HUTCHINSON TEL CO ___ __ ___________ _________ JUNE SERVICE _ _ ____ $301.52 HUTCHINSON UTILITIES MAY GAS & ELEC $2,199.89 MCGARVEY COFFEE INC COFFEE $35.63 . MN ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO ELEC SUPPLIES $194.65 US POSTAL SERVICE MAY POSTAGE $0.96 WITTE SANITATION MAY SERVICE $127.74 < *> $16,480.30* INSURANCE FUNDS AMERICAN HEART ASSC 1997 ANNUAL FEE $50.00 < *> $50.00* LIQUOR STORE AAGARD WEST JUNE GARBAGE PICKUP $45.20 AM.LINEN SUPPLY CO MAY DELIVERIES 123.42 BERNICKS PEPSI COLA MAY BEER PURCHASES 596.44 CDI OFFICE PRODUCTS LTD MAY PURCHASES $131.02 CITY OF HUTCHINSON JUNE MED $864.18 COAST TO COAST HARDWARE $2.85 COLLINS - BROTHERS MISC PURCHASE $487.30 CURTIS 1000 ENVELOPES $84.39 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO. MAY LIQUOR PURCHASE $4,797.80 FORTIS BENEFITS JUNE LTD $39.70 ' GRIGGS COOPER & CO MAY LIQUOR PURCHASE $12,393.43 HENRYS FOODS INC MAY MISC PURCHASES $2,519.98 HERMEL WHOLESALE MAY MISC PURCHASES $264.49 HUTCHINSON LEADER MAY ADS HUTCHINSON TEL CO ADVERTISING $ $796.59 132.35 HUTCHINSON UTILITIES MAY GAS & ELEC $759.09 INSURANCE PLANNERS PARTIAL PAYMENT - LIABILITY $14,144.00 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. MAY WINE PURCHASE $14,285.81 JORDON BEVERAGE INC. MAY BEER PURCHASE $120.40 KARP RADIO ADVERTISING -MAY 1997 $12.00 LENNEMAN BEVERAGE DIST. INC MAY BEER PURCHASE $5,738.80 LEO'S TRANSFER MAY 2ND HALF FREIGHT $556.28 LOCHER BROS INC MAY WINE PURCHASE $18,782.90 MMBA 1997 -98 DUES $530.00 MN MUTUAL LIFE JUNE LIFE $14.07 MORE 4 PICTURES $44.56 PEART & ASSOCIATES PRO MAINTENANCE WIDE ANGLE LENS, LABOR SCRUB & WAX $144.35 $218.33 QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO. MAY LIQUOR PURCHASE $4,357.71 SIMONSON LUMBER CO LUMBER $185.79 ST. CLOUD RESTAURANT SUPPLY MAY PURCHASES $356.38 STANDARD PRINTING CASSETTE TAPES $185.36 TRIPLE G DISTRIBUTING INC MAY BEER PURCHASE $18,238.00 US POSTAL SERVICE MAY POSTAGE $52.16 VIKING COCA COLA MAY POP PURCHASES $909.25 < *> $102,914.38* PAYROLL FUND AETNA VARIABLE LIFE ASS. CO. EE CONTRIB $790.00 GREAT WEST LIFE INS. CO. EE CONTRIB $100.00 H.R.L.A.P.R. EE CONTRIB $164.00 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST EE CONTRIB $2,765.37 PERA LIFE INS CO. EE CONTRIB $130.50 PERA- D.C.P. EE CONTRIB $52.02 PRUDENTIAL EE CONTRIB $180.00 PRUDENTIAL MUTUAL FUNDS EE CONTRIB $30.00 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES EE CONTRIB $15,250.67 TEMPLETON INC EE CONTRIB $458.46 WADELL & REED EE CONTRIB ,5150.00 < *> $20,071.02* RURAL F. D. HUTCH COOP CENEX FUEL $5.13 < *> $5.13* WATER /SEWER FUND AAGARD WEST MAY PICKUP $27,370.72 BRANDON TIRE CO REPAIRS TO SLUDGE TRUCK $75.17 BROWNS GREENHOUSE DOGWOOD, TREE, SHRUB $75.54 CENTRAL GARAGE MAY REPAIRS $2,191.58 CITY OF HUTCHINSON JUNE MED $4,266.71 CULLIGAN WATER COND JUNE RENTAL $14.00 ELECTRO WATCHMAN UPDATE ALARM, LABOR $1,183.62 r 1 J OPEN -BOLD COUNCIL REPORT MON, JUN 9, 1997, 2:24 PM page 5 ---- --- ---- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WATER /SEWER FUND FARMERS ELEVATOR ASSN WEIGHING $334.00 FEED RITE CONTROLS HYDROFLUOS ACID FORTIS BENEFITS JUNE LTD $ $846.82 214.16 G & K SERVICES UNIFORMS $314.29 HACH COMPANY CHLORINE $216.42 HENRY & ASSOCIATES CONNECTIONS, GASKETS $302.14 HUTCH COOP CENEX FERTILIZER $1,028.61 HUTCH MFG & SALES A26 ANGLE X 18" $73.80 HUTCH PLBG & HTG CO REPAIR LEAKING TOILET $80.79 HUTCHINSON TEL CO JUNE SERVICE $706.34 HUTCHINSON UTILITIES POSTAGE $19,039.41 HUTCHINSON WHOLESALE BATTERY $91.66 JEFF'S ELECTRIC PARTS, ELEC INSPECTION $842.73 JERABEK MACHINE SERV REPAIR & MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES $15.64 JUUL CONTRACTING CO REPAIR SEWER $443.00 L & P SUPPLY CO CURTIS CAB $1,469.00 MN DEPT OF REVENUE CLEANING SUPPLIES $50.78 MN MUTUAL LIFE JUNE LIFE $74.97 MN VALLEY TESTING LAB WATER TESTS $926.00 MORE 4 BLEACH $7.27 MPCA PERMIT FEE $4,500.00 RICKEMAN SEED CENTER 919 $400.00 RUNNING'S SUPPLY CAN, PLIERS, ETC $199.94 SCHRAMM IMPLEMENT SPRING /EXT $16.60 SORENSEN FARM SUPPLY 2 PLANK RENT $91.59 STANDARD PRINTING CLEAR BINDERS $29.69 TRI CO WATER COND SALT $10.65 TWO WAY COMM INC ADAPTER, CRIMP UHF $15.79 US FILTER /WATERPRO TOUCH PAD, REPAIR LID $391.61 US POSTAL SERVICE MAY POSTAGE $263.00 USA WASTE SERVICES INC LOADS 5/12 THRU 5/16 $4,226.12 <t> $72,400.16+ $450,172.90* 0 0 IMMEDIATE PAY COUNCIL REPORT MON, JUN 9, 1997, 2:24 PM page 1 ___________________ ECON. DEV. LOAN ______________________________ PLASTIC SPECIALITIES LLD _________ EQUIPMENT LOAN _______________ $100,000.00 < *> $100,000.00* GfORAL FUND CROW RIVER ARTS COURSE ENROLLMENTS $475.00 DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES DNR REG FEES $766.00 HUTCHINSON JAYCEES WATER CARNIVAL DONATION $415.00 LOTUS DEVELOPMENT CORP SMARTSUITE 97 $171.84 WHITE BEAR LAKE AREA HISTORICA MAY 30TH TOUR $276.00 < *> $2,103.84* HOUSING REDEV HRA ADMIN FEES $2,441.75 < *> ,52,441.75* LIQUOR STORE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL ETC REGISTRATION RENEWAL $250.00 HUTCHINSON JAYCEES ADVERTISING $100.00 QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO. WINE PURCHASE $1,086.79 TRI CO WATER COND BOTTLED WATER $67.72 < *> $1,504.51* WATER /SEWER FUND LOTUS DEVELOPMENT CORP SMARTSUITE 97 $171.83 < *> $171.83* $106,221.93* WIRE TRANSFERS MN DEPT OF REVENUE $6,706.48 WITHHOLDING TAX $33,272.23 0 Ll TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Brad Emans, Fire Chief HUTCHINSON FIRE DEPARTMENT 205 Third Avenue South East HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350 MAY, 1997 The fire department responded to 35 calls for service in May. f 3 - Residential 6 - Commercial /Industrial 4 - Multi Family 2 - Rescue 1 - Haz Mat 2 - Vehicle 5 Carbon Monoxide _ 3 • Grass Breakdown of the Rural calls: 5 - Rescue 1 - Medical 3 - Grass 1 - Carbon Monoxide • Truck pumping class • SCBA • Hose Testing • Quick Attack • McLeod County Chiefs Meeting /bb KTIRE\CCUPDATE. fir TR AX May 29, 1997 Mayor Marlin Torgerson City of Hutchinson 111 Hassan St. SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2522 Dear Mayor: FOR YOUR INFORMATION 1504 2nd St. S.E., P.O. Box 110, Waseca, MN 56093 507/835 -5975 FAX 507- 835 -4567 JUN 2 -1997 )F HUTCHI "'ON In accordance with the Federal Communication Commission's rules and regulations governing subscriber notification requirements, this letter and enclosed customer notice(s) is provided so that you can be informed about changes which will be occurring in the cable television service provided by Triax Cablevision to the residents of your community. We are communicating this information to our customers through bill inserts so that they receive • ample advance notification of these changes. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, 8jj�1 Paul R. Pecora Rggional Manager 40 n u Hutchinson IMPORTANT CUSTOMER NOTICE In order to provide you with the best service, we find it necessary from time to time to make changes to your channel line -up. Effective June 30, 1997, VISN will move to channel 27. WGN will then be available on charnel 13. Triax Cablevision is pleased to announce that for customers who would like to continue to receive VISN after June 30th, we are offering a free upgrade in service to our Expanded Basic Service package. We apologize for any inconvenience these changes may cause. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact a Customer Service Representatives at 1- 800 - 332 -0245. 0 Hutchinson IMPORTANT CUSTOMER NOTICE In order to provide you with the best service, we find it necessary from time to time to make changes to your channel line -up. Effective June 30, 1997, VISN will move to channel 27. WGN will then be available on channel 13. We apologize for any inconvenience these changes may cause. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact a Customer Service Representatives at 1- 800 - 332 -0245. 0 093 A. SUSSMAN NEAL J. SHA ►IRO SAUL A. ■ERNICK THOMAS D. CREIGHTON SCOTT A. LIFSON DAVIO K. NIOHTINOALET MAUL J. GUAM THERESA M. KOWALSKI REBECCA J. HELTZER ROBERT J. V. VOSE BERNICK AND LIFSON A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTOPINEYS AT LAW SUITE 1200, THE COLONNADE 1600 WAYZATA BOULEVARD MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 6641E -1270 TELEPHONE (612) 646 -1200 FACSIMILE (612) 646 -1003 May 29, 1997 1ALSO AOMITTCO IN WISCONSIN 'ALSO CERTIFIED ►UELIC ACCOUNTANT LEGAL ASSISTANTII JO DROWN JOAN M. SCHULKERS KATHRYN O. MASTERMAN MAY 3 01997 C— IF HUTCHI. 1'30N Ms. Jane E. Bremer Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd. 1500 Norwest Financial Center 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 Re: City of Hutchinson; Rebuild; Country Club Terrace FOR YOUR INFORMATION Dear Ms. Bremer: It has come to our attention that the City of Hutchinson ( "City") has received an increased volume of complaints from cable subscribers regarding Triax's recent performance, particularly with respect to customer service issues. For example, it appears that Triax may be routinely failing to answer and respond to telephone inquiries within the time periods mandated by applicable FCC regulations. Further, in a number of cases correspondence from City Attorney G. Barry Anderson has gone unanswered. Please be advised that the City intends to begin aggressively enforcing Triax's obligations pursuant to the franchise and applicable law and regulations. In addition, please be advised that the City is very concerned about Triax's apparent failure to begin the system rebuild required pursuant to the renewed franchise (Franchise, Section 4.1). While it is certainly not inconceivable that Triax could complete the required rebuild this summer within the allotted time, time is growing increasingly short and the City has seen no indication of planning or actual construction. The City requests that Triax respond to this concern by detailing the current status of the rebuild and indicating the proposed schedule for completion of the project. Please submit this status report to Attorney Anderson, copy to my office, within ten (10) days of your receipt of this letter. As you are well aware, failure to timely complete the rebuild of the system could subject Triax to numerous penalty provisions of the franchise, up to and including revocation proceedings. lJ Ms. Jane E. Bremer May 29, 1997 Page 2 Further, a number of the concerns raised by the City and subscribers relate to areas of the City that currently are not passed by cable plant and cannot receive service. For example, you will recall from our renewal negotiations sometime ago that the City was very concerned with issues relating to service to Country Club Terrace. It was my understanding that Triax had settled this issue, but I have been told that this issue has not been resolved. The City requests that Triax provide a response indicating the current status of discussions between Country Club Terrace and Triax. Other areas that currently cannot receive service have been identified in correspondence from Attorney Anderson. To the extent that Triax has failed to respond to any such correspondence, the City requests that Triax do so within the same ten (10) day period. We have been notified that Triax's previous regional manager is no longer with Triax. The City, however, does not view this as an excuse for past or future non - response or non - compliance on behalf of Triax. As I previously indicated, the City intends to diligently pursue these concerns. Your prompt attention will be appreciated. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions. Yours truly, BERNICK AND LIFSON, P.A. Thomas D. Creighton TDC:smp cc: Mr. G. Barry Anderson, Esq. M;./Paul R. Pecora Gary Plotz, Administrator C: \CA13LE\HUTCHINSSREMER. L03 • Summary of CGMC Annexation /Land Use Program The purpose of the CGMC Annexation/Land Use Committee is to advocate for legislation to improve the annexation process and prevent urban sprawl by promoting good land use planning. The CGMC chose to undertake a defensive strategy in 1997 and first and foremost, to stop bad township - sponsored legislation while advocating CGMC legislation and looking for an opportunity to make pro -active changes. This strategy proved to be a Winner. CGMC stopped township attempts to roll back the positive changes passed in 1992, including retaining the 60 -acre provision and stopping the reinstatement of an election requirement in annexation cases. Additionally, in a historic step, the CGMC was able to negotiate a first phase compromise between the townships and counties in a package of land use and annexation changes passed by the Legislature. Most notably, the Minnesota Municipal Board will sunset in 1999, cities will now be able to automatically annex township areas if required to service them by the MPCA, and a new alternative voluntary dispute resolution process using mediation and arbitration was instituted. • During the interim, the townships and CGMC have agreed to continue to work toward the final replacement for the Minnesota Municipal Board process. In addition to our progress on annexation issues, CGMC advocated for pro -city provisions to be included in the new voluntary land use planning process. These provisions will ensure city participation in the process and provide for urban growth areas around cities with a mechanism of staged boundary adjustment through orderly annexation. CGMC began its advocacy efforts early during the campaign by making annexation/land use issues a priority with Greater Minnesota legislators. CGMC sent out candidate surveys and met with legislators at candidate forums to educate them on the issues of annexation and land use. Flaherty & Koebele began the program early by requesting a meeting with the Township Association in October and seeking authors for CGMC- sponsored legislation early in the session. CGMC sponsored five pieces of legislation which were introduced in the 1997 legislative session and served as the basis for much of the negotiated compromise legislation. They included: Forced Services automatic annexation allowing cities to annex areas if ordered by the MPCA to provide services to township areas. S.F 600 (Hottinger)/HF.510 (Rest). • 2. Limitation of Future Urban Sprawl - limiting most nonfarm development outside municipal boundaries. S.F. 606 (Hollinger)IRE 516 (Goodno). Fair Annexation H Arm¢s elimination of the Minnesota Municipal Board. S.F. 602 (Hottinger)/H.R542 (Rest). Enforced Joint Pl uning allowing for joint planning in townships adjacent to cities. S.F. 605 (Hottinger)/HY..520 (Rest). Annexation Reform -a more automatic process of annexation modeled after North Carolina law. S.F. 604 (Hottinger)/HF.459 (Rest). In conjunction with the introduction of CGMC legislation, Flaherty & Koebele met with the majority of House and Senate Local Government Committee members to build support for the legislation. CGMC also participated in meetings with the townships convened by Senator Vickerman's office. Early in the session, CGMC representatives, including Dave Olson, Rochester, Kathy Sheran, Mankato, and Diane Koebele, presented testimony before the House and Senate Local Government Committees on the comprehensive land use proposals including H.F. 1000 /S.F. 738 (Long/Morse) and H.F. 217 /S.F. 820 (Opatz/Hottinger). CGMC advocated for a strong land use bill that limits urban growth outside cities and provides for city participation. As the land use legislation gained momentum in committee, Senator Hottinger seized on the • opportunity to bring the CGMC, Association of Minnesota Counties and Township Association together to see if a negotiated package of land use and annexation provisions could be agreed to by the parties. Jim Mulder, Association of Minnesota Counties, Dave Fricke, Association of Townships, and Diane Koebele, CGMC, agreed to a tentative package that was eventually passed by the Legislature with some modifications. The package combined the various individual pieces of land use and annexation into one piece of legislation carried by Senator Vickerman, Chair of the Senate Local Government Committee. The package included: • a funded voluntary land use program and land use pilots, including one in the St. Cloud area; • a sunset of the Minnesota Municipal Board in 1999; • automatic annexation of areas required to be served by MPCA order; • an alternative dispute resolution process of mediation and arbitration, and • repeal of 414.033, subd. 2a (annexation of areas within an orderly annexation area). Flaherty & Koebele took the lead in drafting the compromise. The counties, townships and CGMC met on several occasions to negotiate the final language. At one point, the Township Association backed out of their support of the original package -in particular they were concerned • about the immediate effect of the new dispute resolution process. They withdrew their support of the deal and Senator Vickennan reconvened the parties. After a heated debate, CGMC agreed to -2- make the alternative dispute resolution process voluntary in the beginning so that CGMC and the ` townships could finalize the replacement system in the upcoming session. Afterwards, the Senate Local Government Committee passed the final bill which was authored by Senator Vickerman, Senator Morse and Senator Hottinger. These three Senators were the key players in the Senate and all three Senators worked together to overwhelmingly pass the bill on the Senate floor. The House took a different approach to the land use and annexation debate. They separately passed Representative Long's and Representative Opatz's land use bills, and included them in the House Omnibus Government Operations bill. Representative Rukavina, Chair of the Committee, assisted Representative Opatz in his efforts to include much of the Senate compromise in the House bill, including the annexation provisions which were identical to those in the Senate bill. When the bill reached the House floor, CGMC had to lobby vigorously to keep the land use and annexation provisions in the House bill. The Township Association took the position that because the House language was somewhat different in its approach to the land use issue than the Senate agreed -upon language, that the language should not be accepted by the House. Efforts to remove the land use/annexation language from the Omnibus bill failed after Representative Rukavina assured House members that the final package would be something that the Township Association and Counties could support. During the Conference Committee, Representative Long took a strong position against accepting all the Senate Compromise language. She insisted on some small changes to the land use language. There were several long days of heightened emotion until Senators Viickerman, Morse, • and Hottinger and Representatives Long and Opatz were able to agree to a final package that was very similar to the Senate language. The legislators were then able to obtain the full support of the counties, townships and CGMC. CGMC's provisions remained the same in the final Conference Committee Report as originally passed on the House and Senate floors. The following is a section summary of the final language: Section 1. Community-Based Planning Goals. Section 1 sets out the 11 community-based planning goals. Section 2. Technical Assistance. Section 2 requires the Office of Strategic and Long -Range Planning (the "Office ") to provide technical and financial assistance to local governments in preparing community -based comprehensive plans. Section 3. Plan Review and Comment. Section 3 requires the Office to review and comment on community-based comprehensive plans ( "plans ") prepared by counties, cities and towns. Section 5. County Community-Based Planning. Section 5 sets out the community -based planning process for counties. Subdivision 1 provides that a county is encouraged to prepare a • community -based comprehensive plan consistent with the planning goals stated in section 1. Subdivision 2 provides notice requirements. Subdivision 3 requires coordination with constituent municipalities and towns. Subdivision 4 provides that counties, cities, and municipalities may -3- establish a joint planning district for purposes of adopting a single community-based plan. Subdivision 5 requires a county to submit its plan to the Office for review and comment and provides for a procedure to resolve disputes. Sections 7 and 8. Definition of Comprehensive Municipal Plan. Sections 7 and 8 amend the definition of comprehensive plan and land use plan to provide that a plan may include proposed densities for development. Section 9. Definition of Urban Growth Area. Section 9 defines urban growth area to mean the area identified around an urban area within which there is a sufficient supply of developable land for at least a prospective 20 -year period based on demographic forecasts, and the time reasonably required to effectively provide municipal services to the identified area. Section 10. Municipal Community-Based Planning. Section 10 establishes the procedures for municipal community-based planning. Subdivision 1 provides that each municipality is encouraged to prepare a community-based plan consistent with the goals in section 1. Subdivision 2 requires a municipality to coordinate its plan with the plans of counties and neighboring cities and towns. Subdivision 3 provides that a joint planning district, for purposes of community-based planning, may be established. Subdivision 4 requires a city preparing a community -based plan to address in its plan any urban growth area identified in a county plan and provides that a city may establish its own urban growth area for urbanizing areas outside existing corporate boundaries. The city's plan must . establish a staged process for boundary adjustment to include the urbanized or urbanizing area within its corporate limits and must also provide for the staged provision of urban services within the urban growth area. Subdivision 5 establishes a process for boundary adjustment in the identified urban growth area. It requires that after an urban growth area is identified, a city must negotiate as part of the planning process an orderly annexation agreement with any townships containing unincorporated land looted within the urban growth area. The orderly annexation agreement must contain a boundary adjustment staging plan over the subsequent 20 -year period and must be included in the city community-based plan. After a plan is approved, the orderly annexation agreement shall be filed with the Municipal Board or its successor. Thereafter, a city may annex, within 30 days, any designated area by submitting a resolution to the Municipal Board. Subdivisions 6 through 8 provide for review and comment by adjacent municipalities and the county, and for county approval under the circumstances that a city plan includes an urban growth area. In the event that the city plans for growth outside its boundaries, the county must approve the plan; otherwise, the county may only review and comment. In the event approval is necessary, the county has 60 days to review and approve a plan. A county must approve the plan if it is consistent with the community-based planning goals. In the event the county does not approve a plan, any dispute may be resolved through mediation and arbitration. • 10 Subdivisions 9 and 10 provide for plan adoption and a prohibition against mandamus proceedings 41 against a municipality if a municipal plan is not consistent with the community -based planning goals. Section 11. Official Controls. Section 11 deletes the language that zoning must supersede a comprehensive plan and inserts language that a plan must provide for the timing and sequence for the adoption of official controls. Section 13. Advisory Council. Section 13 establishes an advisory council on community-based planning to review and further develop the process of community-based planning in preparation for the 1999 legislative session. Sections 16-21. Community-Based Planning Pilot Projects. Sections 16 through 21 establish community-based planning pilot projects. It requires that a county or joint planning district participating in a pilot project prepare a community-based comprehensive plan. Section 1. Extension of a municipal service. Section 1 amends the Pollution Control Agency statute to provide an additional provision for the automatic annexation of an unincorporated area when a municipality is ordered to extend a service by the MPCA to an unincorporated area. Section 1 provides that in the event a city is ordered to extend a municipal service, during the . statutory period of time in which the city may enter into a service contract, the city may instead annex the area by ordinance. Sections 2 through 5 and 9. Repeal of subdivision 2a. Sections 2 through 5 and 9 effect the repealer of Section 414.033, subdivision 2a. This particular section of Chapter 414 previously provided that a municipality, upon the receipt of a land owner's petition, could annex the petitioned area by ordinance even though the land was included in an orderly annexation area. Section 6. Ordered service extension; annexation by ordinance. Section 6, like Section 1, provides for annexation by ordinance of an unincorporated area to which a municipality has been ordered to extend a service by the MPCA. During the statutory period for entering into a contract for service extension, a municipality may, in the alternative to a contract, declare the unincorporated area annexed by ordinance. The Municipal Board may review and comment on the ordinance but must approve the annexation within 30 days of receipt of the ordinance. No further proceedings to annex the area are necessary. Section 7. Alternative dispute resolution process. Section 7 provides for an alternative process of dispute resolution other than a Minnesota Municipal Board hearing under Chapter 414. Section 7 provides that by agreement of the parties to a filed proceeding, the parties may have their dispute resolved under the provisions of a new Chapter 572A providing for mediation and arbitration of annexation disputes. • Section S. Municipal Board sunset Section 8 provides for the termination of the Minnesota Municipal Board on December 31, 1999 and the transfer of its duties to the Office of Strategic -5- and Long -Range Planning. The effective date of Article 5 is following the day of enactment except that Section 9 repealing Subdivision 2a is not effective until July 1, 1997. Article 6 creates a new alternative dispute resolution process providing for mediation and arbitration of both community-based comprehensive planning disputes and annexation disputes. Section 1. Community-based comprehensive planning disputes; mediation. Section 1 provides for a 30 -day mediation process facilitated by the Bureau of Mediation Services in the event a dispute arises with respect to community-based planning. In the event the dispute remains unresolved after the mediation period, the issue must be submitted to binding arbitration. Section 2. Chapter 414 disputes; mediation. Section 2 provides a similar 30-day mediation process in the event of a Chapter 414 dispute. The mediation is to be facilitated by the Bureau of Mediation Services and in the event the dispute remains unresolved at the end of the 30 -day mediation period, the dispute must be submitted to binding arbitration. Section 3. Arbitration Process. Section 3 provides the new binding arbitration process. During the 60 -day period following the close of the mediation process, parties to the dispute are each required to select an arbitrator. The parties are required to appoint one arbitrator individually within 30 days of the close of mediation. If a party does not appoint an arbitrator during that 30- day period, the Bureau of Mediation Services shall appoint an arbitrator for the party. The fees of the arbitrator selected shall be borne by the selecting city, county or township. After each party has chosen its own arbitrator, the two arbitrators selected must appoint a third arbitrator. The third arbitrator shall act as the chair of the 3- person arbitration panel selected and shall conduct the proceedings. The fees of the third arbitrator are to be bome equally by the parties to the proceeding. Wi the 60 -day period following mediation, the matter must be brought on for hearing in accordance with the Uniform Arbitration Act, Sections 572.08 - 572.30. The arbitration panel, in the event of community-based planning disputes, must consider the factors stated in Section 3, subdivision 5 and the community-based planning goals stated in Section 4A.08. For Chapter 414 disputes, the arbitration panel must consider the factors established in Section 3, subdivision 5. The factors listed in Section 3, subdivision 5 are the same factors, with minor modifications, as were previously included in the annexation statute for the annexation of unincorporated areas, Section 414.031. The arbitrators must make a decision within 60 days of holding a hearing. Section 4. Arbitration panel decision standards. Section 4 provides the decision standards by which the arbitration panel must abide in deciding the various types of comprehensive planning and annexation disputes. These decision standards were taken from existing statute with the exception of the decision standard for community-based planning. 9 I" JUN 2 -1997 rl" JFt1UTCH1:!S0N Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities REPRESENTING OVER HALF A MILLION PEOPLE FOR YOUR %IFORMATIOR Mayor Marlin Torgerson 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2522 Dear Mayor Torgerson: On behalf of the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, I extend an invitation to you and the City Council to attend two coming events this summer to learn more about membership in our organization. The fast is a morning meeting held during the League of Minnesota Cities Annual Conference, 7:30 to 8:30 a.m., Thursday, June 12, at the Kelly Inn in St. Cloud. The meeting will focus on the highlights and successes of the 1997 legislative session (see enclosed agenda). If you are planning to attend the • League conference, I'd encourage you to stop by and meet many of our member city officials. The Coalition members, especially Detroit Lakes Mayor Lary Buboltz, also would like you and city officials to attend the summer conference planned for Wednesday through Friday, Aug. 6-8, in Detroit Lakes. Detroit Lakes is a spectacular summer vacation city and Mayor Buboltz is looking forward to showing you his city with pride. The summer conference is when members of the Coalition plan and shape policy positions on our issues, exchange ideas among city officials, and just have fun. As at every conference, we will review this year's legislative results in detail. The 1997 legislative session has been an active one and the Coalition has been in the fray. We'll have property tax reform to report about, as well as progress in the areas of environmental and land -use legislation. We also will plan for the 1998 legislative session, and consider a proposal to change the CGMC assessment structure. Please feel free to call me at 507.388.3645 if you have any questions about either event and please plan to attend both if your schedule permits. Sincerely, Ka Teen Sheran� is Mankato City Council member Chair of CGMC Membership Committee Enclosures May 30, 1997 Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities • REPRESENTING OVER HALF A MILLION PEOPLE MEETING NOTICE Kelly Inn, St. Cloud Room: University B Thursday, June 12, 1997 7:30 -8:30 a.m. A CGMC full membership meeting will be held during the League. of Minnesota Cities Annual Conference. Cost: $10.00 (includes continental breakfast and materials). AGENDA 7:30 a.m. Welcome, Mayor Jack Murray, President, CGMC Highlights of 1997 Legislative Session, Tim Flaherty Preview of Annual Conference, August 6-8, Mayor Larry Buboltz, Detroit Lakes CGMC Video (15 minutes) 8:30 a.m. Adjourn 0 Please invite people from non - member cities to attend. E —'- �, State Representative ,,,, B ob Ness 289 We Office Building, 100 Constitution Ave., St Paul, MN 55155 (612) 2964344 NEWS RELEASE For Immediate Release May 30, 1997 CAN WE AFFORD TO KEEP THE TWINS? CAN WE AFFORD TO LOSE THEM? Is Il ST. PAUL —State Representative Bob Ness (District 20A- Dassel) said this week that a special legislative committee will study the baseball stadium issue over the summer in hopes of creating a solid plan that balances keeping the Twins as a state resource with citizens' concerns about using public dollars for an estimated $500 million outdoor stadium. According to Ness, there has been a lot of focus recently on the merits of various proposals to keep the Twins in Minnesota. The stadium is a "hot topic" with people ranging from Governor Carlson to Sid Hartman to leadership in the state Legislature to people on the street. "I very much hope that we will be able to find resolution on this issue, and that the Twins will stay in Minnesota," said Ness. "But I am not willing to place the financial burden of building a new multi - million dollar stadium on the backs of the taxpayers." The stadium became a key issue in media and talk radio coverage during this year's legislative session. The owners of the baseball team, the Pohlad family, can exercise a "one- time -only" escape clause in their current lease this October, if they fail to reach 80 percent of league average attendance figures and fail to turn a profit large enough to offset losses in the last two years. If the Twins choose to take advantage of the escape clause, as the Pohlad family has indicated they will, the team would be free to leave the Metrodome and/or the state after the finish of the 1998 baseball season. "Last week, Carl Pohlad held a press conference and announced that unless the Legislature held a special session this summer or fall to fund a stadium, he will definitely utilize the escape clause," Ness said. "While I am willing to work hard to keep the Twins, I don't believe the best way to resolve the issue involves a billionaire team owner and million -dollar players threatening the state Legislature. We need to work together to come up with a solid plan, and that's the only way we'll be able to keep the Twins in Minnesota." While numerous plans for raising stadium money were offered at the Capitol this year, none of them MORE Page 2 of 2 • received enough support to move forward for a vote on either the House or Senate floor. Among the ideas put forth were a cigarette tax, a players' salary tax, a sports memorabilia tax, a ticket tax, a concessions tax, special taxing districts, a plan for a state -run casino near the Mall of America in Bloomington and a plan for state- operated video slots at Canterbury Park. One proposal would have held the Twins to their current lease until the year 2011 through a joint public /private ticket buyout plan—the idea being that, by purchasing enough tickets, the Twins would not be able to meet the criteria necessary to utilize their escape clause. However, that effort also failed in committee near the end of the legislative session. "Perhaps the idea receiving the most support so far is to expand state gambling in some fashion, and use that revenue to fund a stadium," Ness said. "What we need to ask ourselves, though, is whether we are willing to expand gambling, if it means keeping the Twins. Would the ends justify the means ?" "Given the October ultimatum by Carl Pohlad, I believe the legislative commission will search quickly for a workable solution to the baseball stadium issue," Ness added. "But we also must remember the current requests of the Vikings and the Timberwolves, and the cost of a potential NHL franchise. Where does it stop? We can't afford them all." "I am trying to keep an open mind on the stadium issue. Hopefully, we can find a solution that people can support. The Twins are an asset to Minnesota. On one hand, can we afford to let them go ?" Ness asked. "But on the other hand, can we afford to keep them ?" If you have questions or comments on this or any legislative issue, please contact Rep. Ness at 289 State Office Building, 100 Constitution Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55155 -1298; tel: (612) 296 -4344. • 0 0 0 5/27/97 HUTCHINSON UT A.ITIES COMMISSION PAGE HALAN SHEET AFRIL 0 , 1997 w w w w TOTAL w w w w ASSETS — — — UTILITY PLANT — AT COST LAND & LAND RIGHTS 891,734.75 DEPRECIABLE ILITY PLANT 53 049 070. ._ TOTAL UTILITY PLANT 53,9i0,804.88 '[jON (19 4B( 174.23 TOTAL ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION (19,481,174.23) CONSTRUCTION IN PRDGRE65 _ 187.114_31 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS 187,114.31 TOTAL UTILITY PLANT DEPREC YA _ 34 616,_744_96 ._ 16 RESTRICTED FUNDS 6 ACCOUNTS INVESTMENT — GAS RESERVE 675,454-69 MEDICAL INSURANCE 100,800.00 BOND 8 INTEREST PAYMENT 1993 717.874.75 BOND RESERVE — 1993 1-389,320.00 _ CATASTROPHIC FAILURE FUND 1,250,000.00 TOTAL RESTRICTED FUNDS 6 ACCOUNTS 4,132,649.44 a CURRENT 6 ACCRUED ASSETS CASH IN BAN( 2,459,540.04 INVESTMENTS 6 S ACI=NTS 69 893 '� ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 2,237,023.95 a INVENTORIES ' 759,414.82 n PREPAID INSURANCE 104 233 81 ACCRUED INTEREST RECEIVABLE 3,189.96 MISC — ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 5,000.00 TOTAL CURRENT 6 ACCRUED ASSETS 5 6'A 297 96 n DEFERRED CHARGE BOND DISCOUNT 1993 144,576,39 _ » TOTAL DEFERRED CHARGE 144,576.39 a TOTAL ASSETS _ 44.528.268.75 u b 1 • • 0 5/27/97 HUTCHINSON UTILITIES COMMISSION PAGE 2 BALANCE SHEET APRIL 30, 1997 w w w r TOTAL ■■ r r MUNICIPAL EQUITY 6 LIABILITIES - MUNICIPAL EQUITY MUNICIPAL EQUITY 29,722,477.20 A 688 593_Ri - TOTAL MUNICIPAL EQUITY e 30,411,071.01 LONG TERM LIABILITIES —NET OF CURRENT MATURITIES 1993 BONDS 12,250,000.00 �= TOTAL LONG �AB IT ES 12 250 000-00 CONSTR CONTRACTS & ACCTS PAY RETAIN ACCRUED EXPENSES — RETAINAGE 2 976-17 TOTAL CONSTRUCTIINI 6 ACCTS PAY 2,976.12 t CURRENT 6 ACCRUED LIABILIT ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 1,063,927.73 .n INTEREST ACCRUED 249,940.03 ACCTS PAYABLE TO CITY OF H UTCHINSON -= ACCRUED PAYROLL 105,629.83 ACCRUED VACATION PAYABLE k ` 152,755.52 ACCRUED MEDICAL F UND 96.501_71 _ ACCRUED REC PAYMENT 3,132.16 CUSTOMER DEPOSITS 90,710.00 0 .. 45-374-64 U+ TOTAL CURRENT 6 ACCRUED LIAB ¢ 1,864,221.62 TOTAL MUNICIPAL EQUITY 6 LIAR 44,529.269_75 m _ �n x i � _ • 5/27/97 HUTCHINESON *TIES COMMISSION STATEMENT OF INCOME 6 EXPENSES APRIL 30, 1997 PREVIOUS CURRENT 1 YEAR TO DATE EAR TO DATE INCOME STATEMENT SALES - ELECTRIC ENERGY SALES FOR RESALE SECURITY LIGHTS POLE RENTAL .I Q41 RQ - f_eS PRODUCTION OPERATION PRODUCTION MAINTENANCE TRANSMISSION OPERATION TRANSMISSION MAINTENANCE ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION MAINTENANCE MFG GAS PRODUCTION OPERATION PACE 1 • 3,647,824.40 686,613.06 3,713,100.00 (26,486.94) 11,300,000.00 209,993.00 1 1 241,389.00 228,000.00 13,369.00 570,000.00 4,326.50 4,236.50 4,420.OU (i83.50) 13,000.00 1,657.25 1 , 349.386.31 1,640.25 2,160.00 (519.75) 4,000.00 _� 50 087.° 84,000.00 2 505.400.00 843.986.31 6.000 ,AOO_�00_ 6,328,650.50 .311,254.09 6,467,350.00 843,904.09 17,941,000.00 89,365.00 305,367.65 170,100.00 627.04 1,155,395.00 330,927.52 367,577.00 62,209.35 188,897.55 '. 121,613.80 66,375.00 (33,238.80) 486,100.00 00 .00 .00 .00 3,400.00 9,809.29 3,068,695.39 7,428.48 1,100.00 (6,328.48) 84,000.00 70 569.77 70,359.67 95,807,64 86,993.50 (8 6(4.14) 709 43o_OO 93,894.97 93,847.34 89,365.00 (4,402.34) 170,100.00 627.04 881.22 440.00 (441.22) 1, 000. GO • PURCHASED GAS EXPENSE 3,068,695.39 ,819,477.50 3,019,737.00 (799,740.50) 8, 360,790.00 GAS DISTRIBUTION OPERATION 70,359.67 75,789.23 76,490.80 701.57 244,120.00 GAS DISTRIBUTION MAINTENANCE 25,058.48 _ 25.908.01 27.6 47,00 _— _ 1 738.99 54,90 0.08 ' CUSTOMER ACCOUNTING 6 COLLECTIONS 70,484.09 81,146.57 75,093.00 (6,053.57) 220,800.00 - ADMINISTRATIVE 6 GENERAL EXPENSES 444,873.11 705,184.74 557,475.02 (147,709.72) 1,425,116.20 _ DEPRECI 484,_140.00 486,240.00 514.260.00 28 020.00 156? AGO QA TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 6,_185,681.37 ',547,932.53 5,626,643.32 (921,209.21) 13,698,171.20 OPERATING INCOME 142 7 A 7 ,321.56 840.706.68 (77.383.12) ? 749 R ?R.RO OTHER INCOME h, OTHER - NET 6,883.15 _ 41.113. _8 .250. an 74,86 -------- 2G_QOQ_OQ _ INTEREST INCOME 65,744.61 83,388.82 65,100.00 18,288.82 210,000.00 MISC INCOME 75,129.85 82,758.97 55,800.00 26,958.97 60,000.00 GAIN O DISP OSAL - --- - _ .00 00 00- -_ 1 .5051_0fl_ MISC INCOME - GAS TOTAL 84,105.55 1 161,184.41 75,210.00 85,974.41 327,000.00 -1 OTHER INCOME 231,863.16 368,445.26 202,360.00 166,085.26 688,500.00 OTHER EXPENSES -- - DEPLETION - GAS WELLS .00 .00 .00 .00 105,000.00 - MISC EXPENSES _ 9 18,873.01 _. __ 7 _ _662_V0 _ _ (11.211.01) 71.300.00 INIERE5T EXPENSE TOTAL OTHER EXPENSES 213,125.00 199,300.00 222,608.14 218,173.01 TOTAL CONTRIBUTION TO CITY i NON- OF•EkATING INCOME N INCOME 225,000.00 225,000.00 (215,744.98) 225,000.00 225,000.00 (74,727.75) BUDGETED BUDGET ANNUAL YEAR TO DATE DEVIATION BUDGET 202,300.00 3,000.00 599,400.00 209,962.00 (8,211.01) 775,700.00 222,750.00 (2,250.00) 675,000.00 222,750.00 (2,250.00) 675,000.00 (230,352 00) 155,624.25 (762,200.00) _ -- (72, 775.65) — 681. 43.81_ __ -- _- - ,_d }4, 3,14. b@ -- _- _ -- _7 @., 239. 1 4 80_628.80. CITY OF HUTCHINSON LIQUOR STORE COMPARISON APRIL 1998 CITY OF HUTCHINSON LIQUOR STORE COMPARISON APRIL 1997 wj� UNCIL OPY' APRIL TOTAL APRIL TOTAL 1996 LIQUOR BEER WINE MISC. TOTAL BY WEEK LIQUOR BEER WINE MISC. TOTAL BY WEEK 1 1,499 2,362 499 193 4,553 1 1,509 2,013 484 148 4,154 2 1,385 2,364 515 144 4,408 2 1,415 1,567 457 267 3,706 3 1,408 2,324 882 168 4,782 3 1,870 2,982 563 391 5,806 4 1,992 3,260 968 175 6,395 4 2,929 4,947 1,077 344 9,297 5 3,481 5,890 1,617 402 11,390 5 2,977 4,959 1,283 577 9,796 6 3,683 6,917 2,782 395 13,777 45,305 7 1,287 1,873 398 95 3,653 8 840 1,812 330 120 3,102 8 1,599 2,038 420 217 4,274 9 1,490 1,814 481 159 3,944 9 1,601 2,019 624 102 4,346 10 1,320 2,729 596 161 4,806 10 2,298 2,700 800 135 5,933 11 1,688 3,252 847 214 6,001 11 3,217 5,051 1,752 311 10,331 12 2,881 5,189 974 400 9,444 12 3,381 6,139 1,361 437 11,318 13 3,422 5,526 1,897 389 11,234 38,531 14 1,523 2,314 584 1,306 5,727 15 1,209 1,791 357 227 3,584 15 1,368 2,028 537 109 4,042 16 1,339 2,023 441 146 3,949 16 1,174 2,190 385 110 3,859 17 1,386 2,778 520 188 4,872 17 2,212 3,345 614 277 6,448 18 1,953 2,977 628 207 5,765 18 3,180 5,711 1,138 412 10,441 19 3,696 5,947 952 422 11,017 19 3,309 6,496 1,098 453 11,356 20 2,811 5,580 1,031 365 9,787 38,974 21 1,270 1,834 404 112 3,620 22 1,314 2,204 416 131 4,065 22 1,185 2,255 311 205 3,956 23 1,464 2,205 461 162 4,292 23 1,383 2,438 685 190 4,696 24 1,386 2,794 449 204 4,833 24 1,636 3,114 514 289 5,553 25 1,844 3,289 573 201 5,707 25 2,824 6,801 1,012 471 11,108 26 3,003 6,145 1,003 357 10,508 26 3,541 5,742 976 532 10,791 27 2,671 5,138 1,380 358 9,547 38,952 28 1,792 2,883 353 227 5,255 29 1,233 2,179 421 138 3,971 29 1,457 2,293 843 149 4,742 30 1,232 2,333 316 118 3,999 30 1,476 2,396 553 384 4,809 7,970 TOTAL 53,413 88,128 19,226 8,250 TOTAL 51,430 90,822 21,336 6,144 169,732 96TOTALS 51,430 90,822 21,336 6,144 95 TOTALS 52,510 79,121 16,982 5,631 154,244 % OF SALE 32 52 11 5 % OF SALE 30 54 13 4 100 SALES INC OR DEC (715) (0)% SALES INC OR DEC 15,488 10% 32,759 39,855 41,873 39,724 14,806 189,017 169,732 100 w . • • • CITY OF HUTCHINSON CITY OF HUTCHINSON LIQUOR STORE COMPARISON LIQUOR STORE COMPARISON APRIL 1994 APRIL 1995 APRIL TOTAL APRIL TOTAL 1994 LIQUOR BEER WINE MISC. TOTAL BY WEEK 1995 LIQUOR BEER WINE MISC. TOTAL BY WEEK 1 2,634 5,133 1,232 304 9,303 1 2,751 4,627 806 338 8,522 2 4,293 4,908 2,185 221 11,607 8,522 20,910 3 1,589 1,676 323 156 3,744 4 1,034 1,368 206 109 2,717 4 1,285 1,712 243 131 3,371 5 1,025 1,485 218 90 2,818 5 1,360 1,931 296 151 3,738 6 871 1,717 238 102 2,928 6 1,798 2,796 271 130 4,995 7 1,402 1,776 415 141 3,734 7 2,774 4,853 858 276 8,761 8 2,408 3,821 577 214 7,020 8 3,232 4,906 1,098 351 9,587 9 2,547 4,192 757 206 7,702 34,196 26,919 10 1,383 1,743 355 133 3,614 11 1,252 1,868 280 127 3,527 11 1,150 1,651 427 138 3,366 12 1,014 1,339 279 90 2,722 12 1,680 1,966 697 132 4,475 13 1,251 1,991 427 155 3,824 13 2,156 3,134 730 202 6,222 14 1,446 2,419 447 159 4,471 14 3,288 5,734 1,569 421 11,012 15 2,241 4,570 942 265 8,018 15 3,701 6,181 2,261 306 12,449 16 3,076 4,590 1,288 411 9,365 41,138 31,927 17 1,251 1,587 279 156 3,273 18 989 2,380 315 158 3,842 18 1,041 1,354 240 117 2,752 19 1,245 1,738 390 84 3,457 19 2,709 1,968 385 168 5,230 20 1,507 1,825 477 113 3,922 20 1,719 2.372 368 169 4,628 21 1,133 1,288 207 139 2,767 21 2,701 4,716 673 291 8,381 22 1,630 1.600 269 75 3,574 22 3,165 5,223 1,119 421 9,928 23 1,080 1,616 355 142 3,193 34,192 20,755 24 1,021 1,815 307 114 3,257 25 2,563 3,663 761 224 7,211 25 1,263 1,951 223 119 3,556 26 2,347 3,725 884 220 7,176 26 1,379 2,119 584 123 4,205 27 1,274 1,626 268 85 3,253 27 1,956 2,659 610 158 5,383 28 1,292 2,140 345 142 3,919 28 3,087 5,349 1,190 542 10,168 29 2,545 4,374 964 252 8,135 29 3,071 5,098 1,070 388 9,627 30 2,580 5,221 1,076 334 9,211 36,196 38,905 TOTAL 46,679 72,373 15,802 4,562 139,416 TOTAL 52,510 79 16,982 5,631 154,244 93 TOTAL 39,775 69,314 13,255 4,845 127,189 94 TOTALS 46,679 72,373 15,802 4,562 139,416 % OF SALE 33 52 11 3 100 % OF SALE 34 51 11 4 100 SALES INC OR DEC 12,227 10 % SALES INC OR DEC 14,828 11 % 0 0 0 CITY OF HUTCHINSON CITY OF HUTCHINSON LIQUOR STORE COMPARISON LIQUOR STORE COMPARISON APRIL 1995 APRIL 1998 APRIL TOTAL APRIL TOTAL 1995 LIQUOR BEER WINE MISC. TOTAL BY WEEK 1996 LIQUOR BEER WINE MISC. TOTAL BY WEEK 1 2,751 4,627 806 338 8,522 1 1,499 2,362 --- - 499 - -_ 193 4,553 8,522 2 1,385 2,364 515 144 4,408 3 1,589 1,676 323 156 3,744 3 1,408 2,324 882 168 4,782 4 1,285 1,712 243 131 3,371 4 1,992 3,260 968 175 6,395 5 1,360 1,931 296 151 3,738 5 3,481 5,890 1,617 402 11,390 6 1,798 2,796 271 130 4,995 6 3,683 6,917 2,782 395 13,777 7 2,774 4,853 858 276 8,761 45,305 8 3,232 4,908 1,098 351 9,587 8 840 1,812 330 120 3,102 34 9 1,490 1,814 481 159 3,944 10 1,383 1,743 355 133 3,614 10 1,320 2,729 596 161 4,806 11 1,150 1,651 427 138 3,366 11 1,688 3,252 847 214 6,001 12 1,680 1,966 697 132 4,475 12 2,881 5189 974 400 9,444 13 2,156 3,134 730 202 6,222 13 3.422 5,526 1,897 389 11,234 14 3,288 5,734 1,569 421 11,012 38,531 15 3,701 6,181 2,261 306 12,449 15 1,209 1,791 357 227 3,584 41,138 16 1,339 2,023 441 146 3,949 17 1,251 1,587 279 156 3,273 17 1,386 2,778 520 188 4,872 18 1,041 1,354 240 117 2,752 18 1,953 2,977 628 207 5,765 19 2,709 1,968 385 168 5,230 19 3,696 5.947 952 422 11,017 20 1,719 2,372 368 169 4,628 20 2,811 5,580 1,031 365 9,787 21 2,701 4,716 673 291 8,381 38,974 22 3,165 5,223 1,119 421 9,928 22 1,314 2,204 416 131 4,085 34,192 23 1,464 2,205 461 162 4,292 24 1,021 1,815 307 114 3,257 24 1,386 2,794 449 204 4,833 25 1,263 1,951 223 119 3,556 25 1.644 3,289 573 201 5,707 26 1,379 2,119 584 123 4,205 26 3,003 ,8,145 1,003 357 10,508 27 1,956 2,659 610 158 5,383 27 2,671 5,138 1,380 358 9,547 28 3,087 5,349 1,190 542 10,168 38,952 29 3,071 5,098 1,070 388 9,627 29 1,233 2,179 421 138 3,971 36,196 30 1,232 2,333 316 118 3.999 7,970 TOTAL 52.510 79,121 16,982 5,631 154,244 TOTAL 51,430 90,822 21,336 6,144 169,732 94 TOTALS 46,679 72,373 15,802 4,562 139,416 95TOTAL 52,510 79,121 16,982 5,631 154,244 % OF SALE 34 51 11 4 100 % OF SAL 30 54 13 4 100 SALES INC OR DEC 14,828 11 % SALES INC OR DEC 15,488 10% R Date: 04/30!97 Time: 23:46:36 Page: 1 Item code Description DEPTHO -> 1 (LIQUOR) Count 1066 Subtotals -> DEPTNO - -) 2 (BEER) Count 546 Subtatals-) DEPTNO -> 3 (WINE) Count 1035 Subtotals -) DEPTNO -> 5 (ICE) count 2 Subtotals -> DEPTNO -) 9 (RENTAL) Count 2 Subtotals -) DEPTNO -} 10 (TOBACCO PRODUCTS) Count 326 Subtotals - -> DEPTNO - > 90 (MISC BEER) Count 1 Subtotals -) DEPTNO - -) 91 (MISC LIQUOR) Count 1 Subtotals -} DEPTKU - -> 92 (MISC WINE) Count I Subtotals -> DEPTNO - -) 93 (MISC 6.5 %) Count 261 Subtotals - -) DEPTNO --> 94 (MISC NO TAX) Count 59 Subtotals - -) count 3'.AO Totals - -> 'LIQUOR On Extended Cls ordr Q -O-H cost qty (TUES)4/l /97- ()VED)4/30/97 • - Month to date sales - - -- Cost Markdowns Sales Profits BP % 25658 182390.27 5425 41305.49 491.86 52922.57 11617.08 22.0 6929 42454.30 10593 68855.60 385.66 87734.72 18879.12 21.5 17627 76440.65 3091 12523.14 477.15 18748.47 6225.3.3 33.2 334 77.00 432.66 355.66 82.2 13 49.00 49.00 100.0 63.23 5379.15 1560.26 29.0 1618 3818.89 2618 6712.69 t�vvtt tra+rt 2BO 4706.33 1001 1330.95 24.27 1908.01 577.06 30.2 low 1915.45 139 265.11 2119 392.52 127.41 32.5 __ __ _ _ __ - ___________ ______ - ° -= == =° = = == ____ -- - ------- -- = = = = = =_ -- ___ :_____ _____ 56715 314619.69 22214 12B176.18 1444.36 167567.10 39390.92 23.5 • S Date. +)4 /30197 Time: 23:55:27 Page. 1 'LKQU /�ww O �� R �4n m Extended - -- Cls c-O-H cost qty (FRJ) IA67- (WED)4=/97 • - Year to Date Sales -- -- Cost Markdowns Sales Profits GP X Itew code Description DEFTNO -) 1 (LIWI Count 1066 Subtotals ) DEPIND - -) 2 (BEER) Count 546 Subtotals -) DEPTNO - -) 3 (WINE) Count 10 Subtotals -) DEPTNO -i 5 (ICE) Count 2 Subtotals -) DEPTNO -) 9 (RENTAL) Count 2 Subtotals - -) DEPTNO -) 10 (TOBACCO PRODUCTS) Count 326 Subtotals -) DEPTNO -) 90 (MISC BEER) Count 1 Subtotals -) DEPTNO -) 91 (MISC LIQUOR) Count 1 Subtotals -) DEPTNO -? 92 (MISC WINE) Count 1 Subtotals - -) DEPTNO - -) 93 (MISC 6.5%) Count 261 Subtotals - -) DEPTNO - -) 94 (MISC NO TAX) Count 59 Subtotals - -) 25658 182. 22618 168924.66 1916.62 216647.90 47923.24 2 6929 42454.30 40677 262587.38 1263.01 335074.74 72487.36 21.6 17627 76440.65 12697 50650.98 1459.94 76273.16 25622.16 33.6 940 186.15 1200.60 1014.45 84.5 48 156.00 156.00 100.0 2618 6712.69 5537 11813.61 180.55 16299.65 4486.04 27.5 r++rr urrrr 2883 4706.33 7149.51 2087.29 29.2 5062.22 81.24 3854 1000 1915.45 563 1122.06 14.69 1658.68 536.62 32.4 Count 3300 Totals --) - --- - -- ------ -- _________ ________�_ ___ :� - - - -- -------- -- -- - ------ ------ -- --- - - - - --- - - --- - - --- 56715 314619.69 66934 500347.06 4916.25 654660.24 154313.18 23.6 • Date: 04/30/97 Time; 23:59:00 Pa(p: 1 Item Code Description DEPTNO —) 1 (LIM) Count 1066 9uhtntals - -> DEPTNO —) 2 (BEER) Count 546 Suhtatals —} DEPTNO —) 3 (MINE) Count 1035 Suhtatals —) DEPTNO —) 5 (ICE) Count 2 Subtotals--} DEPTNO - -} 9 (RENTAL) Count 2 Suhtatals —) DEPTNO - -} 10 (TOBACCO PROD(1CTS) Count 326 Subtotals —} DEPTNO —) 90 (MISC BEER) Count 1 Suhtatals - -> DEPTNO - -} 91 (MISC LIMI Count 1 subtotals —} DEPTNO —) 92 (MISC MINE) Count 1 subtotals —) DEPTNO - -) 93 (MISE 6.5 %) Count 261 Subtotals - -> DEPTNO —) 94 (MISC NO TAXI Count 59 Subtotals - -} Count, 3300 Totals - -) f 'LIQUOR HUTCH' AS OF: t ©PM quantity On Hand Report (WED)43a9 • LI6)1IDR HUTCH CIS Ave. Cast Ext Av Cast Price 1 On Kit 7 Vendor Crass reference Last Cast Ext L Cost Ext Price 1 Sp % Min ordr q-0-H Trnsfr 182390.27 23.3 25658 181236.40 237848.12 42454.30 22.5 6929 42449.91 54780.81 76440.65 35.0 17627 76710.83 117588.11 t[�t* 6712.69 3018 2618 6735.71 9699.17 WON �3 4706.33 w.7 2883 4734.43 7098.59 1915.45 37.9 1000 1746.34 3064.60 314619.69 313617.62 26.6 56715 • 430099 .60 051; °tir6 11, =r ood� Description - -> 16LIu;ORi 1- '6 F?(btotals 2 IBEEF1 62 Subtotals-) I (WINE) °r� F91 Subtotals -- ) -; 5 (ICEI :!Pt i SUbtotals -) 9 (RENTAL) n ' t subtotal-.-- - 10 (TO=Wr,CO PRODLrTc) (MISC BEEF) n t '. Subtotals :.P-a0 -I 91 013C LIQJORI emt 1 subtotals - -i 92 (MISC WINEI )unt I subtotals - -? PI'4e - -? 43 (MISC 6.5Y.) ,nrt 29 5jbtotals --i n.t 2934 Totals -) 'LIOUOR HUTCH' On E::tended Cls ordr O--O-H cost (MON)4/01 /96- (TUES)4/',i M - -- - - - -- Month to date sales - - - - -- 0ty Cost Markdowns Sales Profits SP % 24499 153669.96 5104 39378.00 636.89 50792.82 10914.82 21.5 8254 49787.73 10862 70813.08 283.26 90537.02 19723.94 21.6 21226 66271.14 3745 13924.10 547.95 20515.14 6594.04 35,1 293 49.05 355.07 309.02 OLZ - -- - - - - -- ----- 3 - - - -- -- --- --� 30.00 -yam 30.00 _-.... 108.0 1381 2645.15 1232 2428.74 49.60 3251.95 523.21 25.3 alsMs 4500 7439.33 1155 1758.15 34.17 2419.20 661.05 27.3 ________ ___________ ________ ________ ___________ ________ __________ zzccaczcc __________ ccccccccza zszeccaza• ""r 558b) 279813.31 2«399 125851.12 1551.87 165207.20 39356.05 23,4 9 s Datat 03!01/96 Tina 07100142 Pap: 1 'LIQUOR HUTCH' Extended -- -- Cis Q-O-N cost Qty (WED)1103/96- (TUES)4130/96 - Year to Date Sales --------------- - -- Cast Markdams Sales PPQTit5 8P Itm coda Description DOW --) 1 (LIQUOR) Count 9 3 36 Subtotals -i BUM -) 2 (BEER) Count %2 Subtotals -i DEFM -) 3 (MIW) Count 891 Subtotals -) DEPTWO -) 5 (ICE) Coat 3 Subtotals -? DEPTNB -> 9 (RENTALI Cana 1 Subtotals - -> DEA'M -) 10 (TBBA= PRODUCTS) Coat 210 Subtotals--) DEPT10 -) 90 (MISC BEER) Coma 1 Subtotals-) O PM -) 91 (MISC LIM) Cga9a 1 Subtotals - -) DEPM 92 (MISC MINE) Cast 1 Subtotals -) QEtiTNO -) 93 (MISC 6.5 %) Cpat 378 Subtotals - -) Count 2934 Totals -) 20499 153669.96 21034 163660.(A 2349.54 208243.99 44583.95 21.4 8254 49787.73 4013 255768.22 1069.02 3280%.21 72327.99 22.V 21226' 66271.14 12594 47218.31 1695.82 32.9 70365.O0 23146.69 BB9 150.75 1112.11 961.36 66.4 16 167.w} 160.00 100.0 1381 2645.15 4543 8701.68 171.32 11568.25 2166.57 24.8 - - -- --- - - - - -- -- - - - -- - - - - -- - -- a ------- - - - - -- 45CA) 7439.w 4868 7031.84 117.30 9652.68 2820.84 28.t 55860 219613.31 K957 482530.84 5403.00 629398.:4 146667.46 23.'. A 1 Itl F" C - 9 (RENTA'_) r:r r- I btotals -:r - - - -- - --- -- -- DIF - ? bU (TOBVCO PRODUCTS) a. r.t 210 Subtotals—i --- --- - -- -- - - - --- - - -- 2645.15 30.2 1381 2692.84 3789.87 N FT40 —) 90 (MISC BEER) c;nnt 1 Subtotals -) ----- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- -- +++++ Of FTHO - -? 91 !MISC LIQUOR) 5 vt t Subtotals - -) - -- - -- - - -- - -- +a+++ DEF'TNO - -) a2 (MISC WINE) r! c 1 Subtotals - ------- --- - -- -- +t+++ 14FINO - -i 93 (MISC 6.5 %) J i , f,t 328 Subtotals - -` -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 7439.33 31.6 4000 7304.02 10875.07 s,rt 2934 Totals 279613.31 26.7 S 860 276017.78 381736.44 0 'LIQUOR HUTCH' a. 1 5 1 i95 AS OR 1 om ,n Q7: "1:22 I Quantity On Hand Report (TUESAMM CIS Ave. Cost Ext Av Cost Price I On kit It" Coda Description Vendor Cross reference Last Cost Ext L Cost Ext Price I 8p % Min ardr Q-O-R Tmfr i " - - "yj —. t (L'.QUOR) -- 153669.96 23.0 2049 15i i87.30 199574.0 [ 14 !'NO (DEER) 49787.73 22.8 8254 49893.19 64513.15 I+ I - 'M - t 3 (WINE) F,RL Subtotals--` -- -- - - - -- - -- 66271.14 35.6 21716 - 65290.43 102984.34 T F'40 -i 5 (ICE) - -- +++++ Itl F" C - 9 (RENTA'_) r:r r- I btotals -:r - - - -- - --- -- -- DIF - ? bU (TOBVCO PRODUCTS) a. r.t 210 Subtotals—i --- --- - -- -- - - - --- - - -- 2645.15 30.2 1381 2692.84 3789.87 N FT40 —) 90 (MISC BEER) c;nnt 1 Subtotals -) ----- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- -- +++++ Of FTHO - -? 91 !MISC LIQUOR) 5 vt t Subtotals - -) - -- - -- - - -- - -- +a+++ DEF'TNO - -) a2 (MISC WINE) r! c 1 Subtotals - ------- --- - -- -- +t+++ 14FINO - -i 93 (MISC 6.5 %) J i , f,t 328 Subtotals - -` -- -- - -- - -- - -- - -- 7439.33 31.6 4000 7304.02 10875.07 s,rt 2934 Totals 279613.31 26.7 S 860 276017.78 381736.44 0