cp09-08-1992 cI fIJTCH IN'30l ]
CITY
VIEE O
-6-
Sept. 6 7 0 Sept. 12 9
1992
-9-
10:00 A.M. - Directors Meetin
at City Hall
THURSDAY
-10-
5:15 P.M. - Parks & Recreati
Board - Bus Tour
from Recreation
Center
C
V1 U DA
-7-
19-1 �111 X4
City Offices Closed
11CR!
oQ
6:30 P.M. - Closed Special
City Council
Meeting (Junker)
7:30 P.M. - Regular City
Council Meeting
FRIDAY
-11-
10:00 A.M. - Open Bids at City
Hall for Letting
No. 6
�°
SATURDAY
-12-
VACATION /SEMINAR
KEN MERRILL - Sept. 8
GEORGE FIELD - Sept. 8 & 9
CHUCK NELSON - Sept. 8 -15
TUESD ^Y
AGENDA
• REGULAR MEETING - HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1992
1. Call to Order - 7:30 P.M.
2. Invocation - Rev. Thor Skeie, Faith Lutheran Church
3. Consideration of Minutes
Regular Meeting of August 25, 1992; Bid Openings of August 25,
1992 and August 28, 1992
Action - Approve as distributed - Approve as amended
4. Routine Items
(a) Reports of Officers, Boards and Commissions
1. Building Official's Report - August 1992
2. Police Commission Minutes of June 29 & August 5, 1992
3. Library Board Minutes of July 6, 1992
• 4. Hutchinson Housing & Redevelopment Authority Minutes
of July 14, 1992
5. Parks & Recreation Board Minutes of July 29, 1992
Action - Motion to order report and minutes filed
5. Public Hearing - 8:00 P.M.
(a) Letting No. 3, Project 92 -05 - Adams Street (T.H. 22)
And Fair Avenue
Action - Motion to close hearing - Motion to reject -
Motion to approve
6. Communications, Requests and Petitions
(a) Consideration of Request for Out -of -State Travel By
Marion Graham
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve
(b) Update On Old Wastewater Treatment Facility
Action -
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 8, 1992
(c) Discussion of Hutchinson City Hall /Municipal Center
Request for Proposals
Action -
(a) Resolution No. 9790 - Resolution For Purchase
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to waive reading and
adopt
(b) Resolution No. 9791 - Resolution Establishing Location
for Traffic Control Device
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to waive reading and
adopt
(c) Resolution No. 9795 - Resolution Setting Interest Rate
for 1992 Adopted Assessment Rolls
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to waive reading and
adopt
0
(d) Ordinance No. 92 -66 - (Amendments To Zoning Ordinance •
No. 464)
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to waive second
reading and adopt
(e) Ordinance No. 92 -67 - An Ordinance Of The City Of
Hutchinson, Minnesota, Changing The Boundaries Of
Election Precincts And Adopting By Reference City Code
Chapter 1 And Section 2.99 Which, Among Other Things,
Contain Penalty Provisions
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to waive first reading
and set second reading for September 22, 1992
8. Unfinished Business
None
9. New Business
(a) Consideration of Establishing Time, Date, And Location
for Public Hearing On City's 1993 Budget And Tax Levy
Action -
K
is
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 8, 1992
(b) Consideration of Cross Easement Agreement Between Shopko
Stores, Inc. And City of Hutchinson (Phase I - Hutchinson
Downtown Redevelopment Project) (DEFERRED AUG. 25, 1992)
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and enter
into agreement
(c) Consideration of Sanitary Sewer Cleaning And Flushing
Contract with City of Litchfield
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and enter
into contract
(d) Consideration of Awarding Bid for Letting No. 11, Project
No. 92 -17 (Crow River Pedestrian Bridge)
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve - Motion to
waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 9793
(e) Consideration of Awarding Bid for Letting No. 14, Project
No. 92 -20 (Downtown Life Safety Improvement)
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve - Motion to
waive reading and adopt Resolution no. 9794
• (f) Consideration of Revised Disadvantaged Business
Enterprise Program for Hutchinson Municipal Airport
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve - Motion to
waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 9792
(g) Consideration of Franchise for 101 Park Place Dumpster
Location
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve - Motion to
waive first reading of Ordinance and set second reading
for September 22, 1992
(h) Consideration of MN /DOT Program to Realign T.H. 22
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve - Motion to
waive reading and adopt Resolution
(i) Consideration of Plaza Heights Assessment Agreement with
Frank Fay /Norwest Bank
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and enter
into agreement
0 3
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - SEPTEMBER 8, 1992
(j) Consideration of Mac's Bluff Assessment Agreement with
Gary Hasse
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and enter
into agreement
(k) Consideration of Revised Police Department Policies
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve
(1) Consideration of Health And Dental Insurance Renewals
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve
(m) Consideration of Sidewalk on City Property Along South
Edge of Girl Scout Park
Action -
(n) Consideration of Establishing Preliminary 1993 Tax Levy
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve - Motion to
waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 9796
(o) Consideration of Payment for Building, Relocation And •
Other Expenses for Simonson's Lumber Option, Phase II
Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve
10. Miscellaneous
(a) Communications from City Administrator
11. Claims. Appropriations and Contract Payments
(a) Verified Claims
Action - Motion to approve and authorize payment from
appropriate funds
12. Adjournment
4 0
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL
• TUESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1992
1. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Mayor Ackland.
The following were present: Mayor Paul L. Ackland, Councilmen
Craig Lenz, John Mlinar, Marlin Torgerson and Don Erickson.
Also present: City Administrator Gary D. Plotz, City Engineer
John Rodeberg, and City Attorney G. Barry Anderson (7:50 P.M) .
2. INVOCATION
The invocation was given by the Reverend Richard Gross.
3. MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting of August 11, 1992, special
meetings of August 4, 7 & 17, 1992 and bid openings of August
17, 1992 were approved as distributed.
LZMER;1@1 1 110ozon .9
(a) REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
1. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 21, 1992
• 2. AIRPORT COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 27, 1992
3. HOSPITAL /NURSING HOME BOARD MINUTES OF MAY 19, 1992;
JUNE 16, 1992; JULY 28, 1992
(b) REPORT OF CITY INVESTMENTS
(c) APPOINTMENTS
1. POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION - JOHN DECKER
2. PARKS & RECREATION BOARD - MICHAEL SCHALL
3. UTILITIES COMMISSION - ROGER GILMER
4. AIRPORT COMMISSION - TIM MILLER
The motion was made by Councilman Erickson, seconded by
Councilman Lenz and unanimously carried, to order the
report and minutes filed and to ratify appointments.
5. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
•
N
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992
6. COMMUNICATIONS. REQUESTS AND PETITIONS •
(a) REPORT ON OLD WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY BY GENE
JESERITZ (AQUA FOODS)
Gene Jeseritz reported a feasibility study was conducted
on finding alternative uses for the facility. Two areas
researched were raising fish or mushrooms in the old
wastewater building. Since the one -year option to lease
the facility had expired and no definite use for the
facility had been determined, he would not be exercising
the option to lease the building.
(b) COMMUNICATION FROM EARL FITZLOFF CONCERNING SOUTH GRADE
ROAD /LYNN ROAD STREET PROJECT
Earl Fitzloff expressed concern about the Lynn Road traf-
fic flow design and the difficulty of access to his busi-
ness. He had contacted the Willmar MN /DOT office, and
they were willing to work with the City to resolve the
problem. Mr. Fitzloff thought the present intersection
layout should be reviewed and altered at the same time
the South Grade Road project was done.
7. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES •
(a) ORDINANCE NO. 92 -63 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 8.09,
SUBD. 2(H) AND ADDING THERETO ADDITIONAL SUBDIVISION AND
BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION
2.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAINED PENALTY
PROVISIONS (SNOWMOBILE)
The motion was made by Councilman Mlinar, seconded by
Councilman Lenz and unanimously carried, to table for
amendments.
(b) ORDINANCE NO. 92 -64 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA, AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF
MUNICIPALLY OWNED REAL ESTATE AND ADOPTING, BY REFERENCE,
CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 2.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER
THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
The motion was made by Councilman Erickson, seconded by
Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried, to table for
legal description.
(c) ORDINANCE NO. 92 -65 - AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE UTILITY
EASEMENT IN HUTCHINSON MALL PLAT 2
2 0
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992
• The motion was made by Councilman Lenz, seconded by Coun-
cilman Torgerson and unanimously carried, to waive second
reading and adopt.
(d) RESOLUTION NO. 9776 - RESOLUTION SETTING ELECTION,
LOCATION OF ALL PRECINCTS (ONE, TWO & THREE) AND
APPOINTING OF JUDGES FOR THE STATE PRIMARY AND GENERAL
ELECTIONS
The motion was made by Councilman Erickson, seconded by
Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried, to waive read-
ing and adopt.
(e) RESOLUTION NO. 9778 - RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE
The motion was made by Councilman Mlinar, seconded by
Councilman Lenz and unanimously carried, to waive reading
and adopt.
(f) RESOLUTION NO. 9779 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND
AWARDING CONTRACT, LETTING NO. 9, PROJECT NO. 92 -14
The motion was made by Councilman Mlinar, seconded by
Councilman Lenz and unanimously carried, to waive reading
• and adopt.
(g) RESOLUTION NO. 9780 - RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS,
LETTING NO. 13, PROJECT NO. 92 -19
The motion was made by Councilman Torgerson, seconded by
Councilman Lenz and unanimously carried, to waive reading
and adopt.
(h) RESOLUTION NO. 9788 - RESOLUTION RELEASING PLEDGED
SECURITIES TO CITIZENS BANK & TRUST CO.
The motion was made by Councilman Lenz, seconded by Coun-
cilman Torgerson and unanimously carried, to waive read-
ing and adopt.
8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
9. NEW BUSINESS
(a) CONSIDERATION OF DELINQUENT WATER AND SEWER ACCOUNTS
• 3
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992
Councilman Torgerson moved to recommend service be dis- •
continued on August 31 at noon unless other arrangements
had been made. Motion seconded by Councilman Erickson
and unanimously carried.
(b) CONSIDERATION OF CROSS EASEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN SHOPKO
STORES, INC. AND CITY OF HUTCHINSON (PHASE I - HUTCHINSON
DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT)
The motion was made by Councilman Torgerson, seconded by
Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried, to defer.
(c) CONSIDERATION OF AWARDING BID FOR MOTOR GRADER WITH
ATTACHMENTS
The motion was made by Councilman Mlinar, seconded by
Councilman Erickson and unanimously carried, to approve
and award contract to Road Machinery & Supplies Co. for
a total price after trade -in of $108,093.
(d) CONSIDERATION OF AWARDING BID FOR LETTING NO. 6, PROJECT
NO. 92 -10
Following discussion, Councilman Lenz moved to defer.
Motion seconded by Councilman Torgerson and unanimously •
carried.
(e) CONSIDERATION OF AWARDING BID FOR LETTING NO. 11, PROJECT
NO. 92 -17 (CROW RIVER PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE)
Following discussion, Councilman Lenz moved to defer.
Motion seconded by Councilman Torgerson and unanimously
carried.
(f) CONSIDERATION OF HRA PARTICIPATION IN HOME RENTAL
REHABILITATION PROGRAM
Following discussion, Councilman Mlinar moved to approve
and to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 9777. Mo-
tion seconded by Councilman Torgerson and unanimously
carried.
(g) CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZING COMMITTEE OF CITY COUNCIL
AND STAFF TO NEGOTIATE WITH VARIOUS LANDFILLS IN AREA
Following discussion, Councilman Mlinar moved to approve
the appointment of John Mlinar and Marlin Torgerson to
4 0
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992
• negotiation committee. Motion seconded by Councilman
Erickson and unanimously carried.
(h) CONSIDERATION OF LEASE AGREEMENT WITH MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; DRIVER AND VEHICLE SERVICES
Following discussion, Councilman Erickson moved to
approve and to enter into agreement. Motion seconded by
Councilman Lenz and unanimously carried.
(i) CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 464
REQUESTED BY STAFF WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION OF
PLANNING COMMISSION
Following discussion, Councilman Lenz moved to approve
and to waive first reading of Ordinance No. 92 -66 and to
set second reading for September 8, 1992. Motion sec-
onded by Councilman Torgerson and unanimously carried.
(j) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY
BARRY BARTON FOR STORAGE UNITS ON TEXAS AVENUE WITH
FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION
Following discussion, Councilman Torgerson moved to
• approve Planning Commission recommendation and to waive
reading and adopt Resolution No. 9781. Motion seconded
by Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried.
(k) CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF HASSE
HILLS FIRST ADDITION SUBMITTED BY GARY HASSE WITH
FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION
Following discussion, Councilman Torgerson moved to
approve Planning Commission recommendation and to waive
reading and adopt Resolution No. 9782. Motion seconded
by Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried.
(1) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY
ALLIED MECHANICAL TO MOVE TEMPORARY OFFICE SPACE ONTO
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 340 MICHIGAN STREET WITH FAVORABLE
RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION
Following discussion, Councilman Torgerson moved to
approve Planning Commission recommendation and to waive
reading and adopt Resolution No. 9783. Motion seconded
by Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried.
0 5
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992
(m) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY
MCLEOD COUNTY AGRICULTURE ASSOCIATION TO CONSTRUCT AND
MOVE BUILDINGS ON FAIRGROUNDS PLAT WITH FAVORABLE
RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION
Following discussion, Councilman Torgerson moved to
approve Planning Commission recommendation and to waive
reading and adopt Resolution No. 9784. Motion seconded
by Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried.
(n) CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF CITY OF
HUTCHINSON STREET RIGHT -OF -WAY PLAT NO. 1 SUBMITTED BY
CITY STAFF WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION
Following discussion, Councilman Torgerson moved to
approve Planning Commission recommendation and to waive
reading and adopt Resolution No. 9785. Motion seconded
by Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried.
(o) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY
CRAIG EMERY TO MOVE MOBILE HOME INTO COUNTRY CLUB TERRACE
WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION
Following discussion, Councilman Torgerson moved to •
approve Planning Commission recommendation and to waive
reading and adopt Resolution No. 9786. Motion seconded
by Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried.
(p) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY
ALLEN BROWN TO MOVE GARAGE WITH FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION
OF PLANNING COMMISSION
Following discussion, Councilman Torgerson moved to
approve Planning Commission recommendation and to waive
reading and adopt Resolution No. 9787. Motion seconded
by Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried.
(q) CONSIDERATION OF AWARDING 1992 IMPROVEMENT BONDS
Dave Maroney of Ehlers & Associates reported on the bids
received and recommended award to low bidder, First Bank
System (FBS). He stated the City was assigned a Baa 1
rating by Moody's Investors Service to the 1992 bonds.
Following discussion, Councilman Mlinar moved to approve
First Bank System and to waive reading and adopt Resolu-
tion No. 9789. Motion seconded by Councilman Torgerson
and unanimously carried.
6 46
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992
C �
J
(r) CONSIDERATION OF ESTABLISHING A TAX LEVY GUIDELINE
Finance Director Kenneth B. Merrill requested the Council
establish a 1993 tax levy as a guide for preparation of
the 1993 budget. Following discussion, the Council left
it to City staff expertise to prepare a proposed 1993
budget.
10. MISCELLANEOUS
(a) COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITY ADMINISTRATOR
Administrator Plotz reported on the status of the refuse
hauling. He also commented on a joint meeting with the
County regarding a joint County /City /State public works
and highway facility. It was noted the Lenneman building
was available for purchase.
(b) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COUNCILMAN JOHN MLINAR
Councilman Mlinar inquired about continued City pickup of
branches after a storm. He commented on the quantitative
use of the West River camp site this season.
•
(c) COMMUNICATIONS FROM MAYOR PAUL L. ACKLAND
Mayor Ackland mentioned a September 22 meeting of the
Joint Maintenance Facility Committee and the County Com-
missioners to determine the location of the building.
(d) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COUNCILMAN CRAIG LENZ
Councilman Lenz commented on the denial of the applica-
tion for well protection funding and suggested the City
Engineer reapply next year.
(e) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COUNCILMAN MARLIN TORGERSON
Councilman Torgerson remarked that a no parking sign was
needed on Pishney Lane between Second Avenue SW and Third
Avenue SW. Engineer Rodeberg stated a Resolution would
be adopted at the next meeting.
(f) COMMUNICATIONS FROM DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING
Engineer Rodeberg made reference to a proposed agreement
for the Cash Wise project in the Hutchinson Mall Plat 2.
It was the City Engineer's recommendation to wait until
1993 to complete the street project on South Grade Road
• 7
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 25, 1992
since Cash Wise would have access from Hwy. 15. •
It was pointed out that although Northland Beverage had
received a permit to spread contaminated soil, the prop-
erty no longer belonged to them.
Engineer Rodeberg commented on street striping and paint-
ing the downtown street lights.
(g) COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITY ATTORNEY
Attorney Anderson commented on the telephone line reloca-
tion for the Festival Foods /Liquor Store project. The
Mayor and City Administrator had met with the telephone
company President and were assured the work would be
done.
The City Attorney stated the Phase II Downtown Redevelop-
ment project closing was held last week, and all the
documents were recorded.
Upon the City Attorney's recommendation, Councilman
Mlinar moved to set a special closed meeting at 6:30 P.M.
on September 8, 1992, to discuss Junker litigation.
Motion seconded and unanimously carried.
11. CLAIMS, APPROPRIATIONS AND CONTRACT PAYMENTS •
(a) VERIFIED CLAIMS
The motion was made by Councilman Torgerson, seconded by
Councilman Mlinar and unanimously carried, to approve the
claims and authorize payment from appropriate funds.
12.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:55
P.M.
8 •
•
0
MINUTES
BID OPENING
TUESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1992
City Administrator Gary D. Plotz called the bid opening to order at
3:30 P.M. Also present were Finance Director Kenneth B. Merrill,
President Steve Apfelbacher and Dave Maroney of Ehlers & Associ-
ates, and Administrative Secretary Marilyn J. Swanson.
The following bids were opened for a $1,955,000 General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 1992:
Cronin & Company, Inc.
FBS Investment Services, Inc.
Norwest Investment Services, Inc.
INTEREST
RATE
$660,317.71 5.4416
637,080.62 5.2501
644,525.68 5.3114
The bids were referred to the Bond Consultant for review and a
recommendation at the August 25, 1992 City Council meeting.
The bid opening adjourned at 3:35 P.M.
W
MINUTES
BID OPENING •
FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 1992
Finance Director Kenneth B. Merrill called the bid opening to order
at 10:00 A.M. Also present were City Engineer John Rodeberg,
Director Dolf Moon, and Administrative Secretary Marilyn J.
Swanson.
Director Merrill read Publication No. 4420, Advertisement for Bids,
Letting No. 11, Project No. 92 -17. The following bids were opened
and read:
Structural Specialties, Inc. $31,584.35
Hutchinson, MN
Stonefield Construction 57,963.00
Willmar, MN
Professional Construction Services 34,000.00
Hutchinson, MN
Myron Miller Construction 38,422.00
Waterville, MN
Jay Brothers 39,000.00 •
Hugo, MN
The bids were referred to the Engineering Department for review and
a recommendation at the September 8, 1992 City Council meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 10:05 A.M.
0
0
MINUTES
BID OPENING
FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 1992
Finance Director Kenneth B. Merrill called the bid opening to order
at 2:00 P.M. Also present were Small Cities Project Coordinator
Connie Mangan and Administrative Secretary Marilyn J. Swanson.
Director Merrill read Publication No. 4421, Advertisement for Bids,
Letting No. 14, Project No. 92 -20, Hutchinson Downtown Life Safety
Improvements. The following bids were opened and read:
Quade Electric
Hutchinson, MN
A & B Electric
Hutchinson, MN
Muller - Pribyl Utilities
Hamel, MN
H & S Drywall, Inc.
Cokato, MN
Professional Const. Services
Hutchinson, MN
L & S Electric
Springfield, MN
$ 71,026.50
85,923.00
112,947.40
100,408.00
83,132.00
9,200.00 ( #6)
18,500.00 ( #5)
The bids were referred to the Engineering Department for review and
a recommendation at the September 8, 1992 City Council meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 2:10 P.M.
C�l
1 n
u
•
I 1
�J
- _, .x, w .x crosus
Period In which Permite laewd
IPbas. con.cl arw wron n IWM M wursar x,cival ZIP Coda)
REPORT OF BUILDING OR
553
ZONING PERMITS ISSUED
AND LOCAL PUBLIC
CONSTRUCTION
357400 27 4 91+99 065 1 0
:5 9191 02730
JAMEi H%IXA iLOG OFFICIAL
F'^ CITY OF HUTCHINSON
If your budding permit a ysrem has changed.
mark IX) appropriate box below and explelw
CITY HALL 37 WASHINGTON AVE WEST
M comments.
HUTCHINSON RN 55350
❑ Discontinued issuing permits
❑ Merged with another system
❑ Split into two or more aystemn
❑ Annexed land areas
PLEASE
COMPLETE AND MAIL
❑
Had other changes
THIS
FORM ON OR BEFORE SEPTERBER
4. 1952
H no permits were issued dmmg
Bureau of the Canine
Instructions ere included. For
Ills anod, mark IX) in the box . ❑
1201 East 1Oth 8uea
further assistance, call collect
andrerurn this form
JeHanpne0le, IN 47132-0001
13011763 -7244.
NEW RESIDENTIAL
PRIVATELY OWNED
PUBLICLYOWNED
HOUSEKEEPING
Item
Number of
Num ,pf
BUILDINGS
Valuation of
VNuatbn of
No.
Buildings
Homing coin r
Nomin construction
Build'egs g
unit. caw
units Omit cent,
al
(b) (c) Id)
bl III 1 I
Single-0amily houses, detached
Exclude mob,tc homes
101
Single - family houses, attached
- Separated by ground to roof well,
-Np units -bole or below, and
- Separate hea ling system, and unlit, maters.
ICouni each unit as a separate building)
102
Two - family buildings
103
Three and lour family buildings
104
Five -or more family buildings
105
TOTAL — Sum of 101 -1034
106
6
7
673,637
NEW RESIDENTIAL
PRIVATELY OWNED
PUBLICLY OWNED
NONHOUSEKEEPING
Item
Number of
Number of
BUILDINGS
Valuation of
Valuation of
No
Buildings
Rooms
Buildings
Rooms
cpnsuuctw
Omit items
construction
Onet cents
1.1
lb)
lot
Idl
1.1
Ifl
1g1
Hotels, motels. and tourist cabins
l transient accommodations only)
213
Other nonnousekeeping shelter
214
NEW
PRIVATELY OWNED
PUBLICLYOWNED
NONRESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS
IN
Number
Valuation of
Number
ru"lion of
No.
of
construcuan
of
construction
ugdu,gs
Omit cents
buildings
Omit cents
Ibl
10
lo)
la)
Amusement, social, and recreational
318
1
Churches and other net ions
315
ndusmal
320
Parking garages (buildings and open deckedl
321
Service stations and rape; garages
322
Hospitals and Institutional
323
Offices, banks, and professional
324
Public w c,ks and utilities
325
Schools and other educational
326
Stores and customer servi7es
327
Other nonresidential buildings
328
1
672
Structures other than buildings
328
ADDITIONS,
PRIVATELY OWNED
PUBLICLY
OWNED
ALTERATIONS, AND
Item
CONVERSIONS
Number
Valuation of
Number
Valustbn of
No
of
constr.iw
of
construction
bui Wlrga
Omrt cents
hunldings
Omit earls
Is)
lei
Id
(dl
I.)
Residential - Classify additrons of
garages and carports in rte. 038.
434
1 1
92
Nonresidential and nonhousekeeping
437
Additions of residential garages and carports
lauached and detached)
438
29,862
+ nnrc, LAS -c, rum -c, ml -J. PLEASE CONTINUE ON REVERSE SIDE
TOTAL PERMITS 62 TOTAL VALUATION $1,510,564
// — �e (2
DEMOLI I'D NS AND
PRIVATELY OWNED
PUBLICLY OWNED
RAZING OF
Item
Number of
Numbsi of
BUILDINGS
No,
Buildings
Mousing
Buildin sI
g
Housing
units
units
In
bbl
Icl
101
W
Single -family houses lattached and detachedl
605
Two family buildings
6e8
Three and four family buildings
Ba]
Five of more family buildings
608
All other buildings and siuctures
609
INDIVIDUAL PERMITS AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION VALUED AT 0600,000 OR MORE
Please pros ide the following Information far each permit authorising construction valued at $500.000 or more
entered in sections I through IV.
Item
Number of
Na.
Descri
Name end address of
Owns,
ship
Valuation of
S ec
o or builder
MW* INI
construction
Omit
Housing
Buildings
I —IV
one
cents
units
fn
nor
1.1
fell
ter
IN
I 1
Kind of building
___ ________ __ --- _____-------------
❑hiv rte
Sire address
$
Kind of buildirg
- - - - - --
op".r.
Site rmdress
S
Kurd of buiM ing
--------- _-------------------------
❑hwem
Ste atld ass
3
Kmtl of buiMirq
- _.--- __------ ___----
OPrivar.
Sim adorev
S
Kind of brirldinp
_-------- _----- _-----------------
❑Prune
__ ______ _ _ ____
Sim eddr.0
3
KvM al buildng
Sre address
---
S
Kmtl al buildirq
.-- -__ - - _.- ________-
❑Prone
Sits atldreae
_________ __________
]Poe"
S
K.q of MwMurp
__ ------- -----------------
❑Fount
Ste addrua
3
iM of i ono
________________________
OPrrvete
Sit. atld ma
7
Comments
Are Y. awes of enY new tarmkbuYp
e 0 No 0 Yee — Please rm
additional information in
g ive comments,
luda a7 e
Name of person to contact regarding this report
Telephone
Are. cone
Number
Exnimo.n
Title
......�_._.__..
61 2
587-
210
•
•
•
0
HUTCHINSON POLICE DEPARTMENT
COMMISSION MEETING
The Hutchinson Police Commission held a meeting on August 5, 1992,
at 11,30 a.m. via telephone conference call. Present on the
telephone line were Kathleen Skarvan, Kevin Compton and Chief Steve
Madson.
Chief Madson informed the commission that Chris Dellwo had
contacted him and stated that he had accepted a position with
another agency. Due to this occurrence the eligibility list needed
to be updated to three names.
A motion was made by Kathleen Skarvan, seconded by Kevin Compton,
to remove Chris Dellwo from the list and add the name of David
Mueller. Motion carried.
A motion was then made by Kathleen Skarvan, seconded by Kevin
Compton, to add the name of Christopher Salvanti to the eligibility
• list after the selection process for the new officer was complete
in order to have an updated list. Motion carried.
With there being no further business to discuss a motion was made
by Kevin Compton, seconded by Kathleen Skarvan, to adjourn the
conference call meeting. Motion carried.
Time of adjournment 11:35 p.m.
in Compti6rA, Secretary
F- I L
HUTCHINSON POLICE DEPARTMENT
COMMISSION MEETING •
The Hutchinson Police Commission met on June 29, 1992, at 12 noon
at the Hutchinson Police Department. Present at the meeting were
Kathleen Skarvan and Kevin Compton.
The purpose of the meeting was to finalize the eligibility list for
the police patrol position.
A motion was made by Kevin Compton, seconded by Kathleen Skarvan,
to submit the following names to the Chief of Police for with the
remaining eleven names to be eliminated from further consideration.
The eligibility list is as follows
Hark Belisle
Chris Dellwo
Troy Weigold
David Mueller
Christopher Salvanti
Gregory Reese
David Bentzen
Paul Wayne
With there being no further business to discuss a motion was made
by Kathleen Skarvan, seconded by Kevin Compton, to adjourn the •
meeting. Notion carried.
Time of adjournment 12,15 p.m.
C
Kevin Coulfta Secretary
•
Hutchinson Library Board - Special Meeting Notes: July 6, 1992
• Library Board members present -
Joyce Beytien
Paul Berg
Dolores Brunner - Secretary
Larry Ladd
Sharon Opatz
Roy Thompson
Audrey Topp
Mary Henke - Librarian
Board Members absent -
Kristin McGraw
Bill Scherer- President
Craig Lenz - Council liason
John Houlihan requested the meeting to explain to the Board some of the financial
problems facing the PIONEERLAND Library System and also some of the long term
goals of the System.
Beginning with the 1993 budget, PIONEERLAND will be complying with state
regulations by not contributing to the local library operating revenues. Since the
• library system started it incorporated more libraries into its system, and there was no
actual individual budget followed for local libraries. Consequently there was also no
consistent method of evaluating or budgeting each local library. In revamping the
PIONEERLAND Budget, fictional figures will be used for this year and starting in 1993
actual dollar amounts will be used to budget local libraries. Subsidies for local
libraries have caused a serious drein on the reserve budget and if left in that position
there would be no reserve fund.
Mr. Houlihan also presented an overall view of the future work of the local library
board, asking the board to meet more often and work closely with the PIONEERLAND
Library Board members and the Hutchinson Librarian, Mary Henke to meet the goals
of the local library.
Dolores Brunner, Sec'y
Hutchinson Library Board
r 1
LJ
74
HUTCHINSON HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR BOARD MEETING
• JULY 14, 1992
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER: 2:00 P.M. BOARD ROOM PARK TOWERS
Chairman John Paulsen called the meeting to order.
Members present - Don Erickson and Shirley Wass.
Members absent - Tammy Wendlandt and Lyle Van Hale.
II. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF REGULAR BOARD MEETING
JUNE 16, 1992
There being no additions or corrections, Don Erickson
moved that the minutes be approved as mailed. Shirley
Wass seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
III. CONSIDERATION OF STATUS OF ACCOUNT FOR PARK TOWERS
PROJECT AND GENERAL FUND
Budget status and monthly disbursements were reviewed.
Don Erickson moved that the financial statements be
approved as submitted. Shirley Wass seconded and the
motion carried unanimousy. The $20,000 CD matures on
• July 14, 1992; rates were reviewed. Don Erickson
moved that the CD be renewed for six months at 4.0% at
Firstate Federal
IV. SECTION 23 /PARK TOWERS PROJECT
As of July 14, 1992 there are no rent receivables
and there is one apartment to be filled.
A new proposed lease and grievance policy was
distributed to Board members who were asked to
review prior to our August meeting. These policies
were developed by HUD staff. The new lease will
state Security Deposits will be refunded according
to State law reflecting change in interest from 5.5%
to 4.01 effectivel/a// grievance procedure is changed
to accomodate the selection of a hearing officer who
is to be approved by a majority of tenants voting in a
meeting held for that purpose.
3. The position description and proposed salary range for
the new On -Site Coordinator was distributed. We were
chosen as one of three new sites in Minnesota for the
On -Site Coordinator grant and have received funding of
$15,621. After review, Shirley Wass moved to approve
• the submitted position decription and salary range of
$7.50 -$9.00 per hour. Don Erickson seconded and the
motion carried unanimously.
� - A, (�-)
Page 2
HRA Regular Board Meeting, July 14, 1992
V. OTHER BUSINESS
1. There was discussion concerning implementation of
our Housing Program 5 Year Plan. Don Erickson
moved that John Paulsen and Jean Ward meet with
Connie Mangan and Jim Bullard regarding the
Housing Program implementation.
2. John Korngiebel would like to meet with us at
11:00 A.M., Thursday July 16, concerning his
Farmers Home application and housing needs in
Hutchinson. John Paulsen will plan to attend
the meeting.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chairman Paulsen
declared the meeting adjourned.
Recorded by Jean Ward, Executive Director
Tammy Wendlandt, Secretary Treasurer
Cl
13
MINUTES
Parks & Recreation Board
July 29, 1992
• Members present were Lee Cox; Chairman, John Mlinar, Virgil Voigt and Mike Cannon. Also
present were Dolf Moon and Karen McKay.
The meeting was called to order at 5:22 p.m.
The Minutes dated May 27, 1992 were approved by a motion made by Virgil Voigt and
seconded by John Mlinar. The board unanimously agreed.
Old Business
High School Contrac - All items have been finalized with the exception of V.M.F. Field
rent. The city will receive a 24' X 24' garage from the school or $600 annually for a
five year period. A decision will be made by 12/31/92.
New Business
Grants
Dry Dock - The the City is eligible for a $5,000 grant through Community Education and
the State of Minnesota. It would provide funding for motivational speakers, in addition
to ongoing and new programing. Dolf will be meeting with the parties involved to review
how the grant is administered.
D.N.R. /S.W.C.D. - There is a grant available, and the City received a preliminary notice
the City is eligible for $40,000 to do some rip - rapping along the river, the project
would span over a two to three year period.
Re Leaf - The City presented a proposal to the Utilities Commission. They agreed to
provide $10,000 adding to the $4,000 budgeted for tree planting in 1993. The Commission
is required to expend a predetermined amount of dollars to the community for energy
conservation each year. The Foresty Division is applying for a matching grant of
$25,000 for energy and conservation tree planting.
Program Update
Tournaments - There are a total of six tournaments scheduled at this time for Roberts
Park this summer, it will involve a total of approximately 231 teams.
Rec Programs - The board reviewed the participant numbers for the summer programs. Most
of those numbers remain the same if not slightly higher than last year, along with the
addition of some new programs. A new game line has been added for the convenience of
participants. By dialing 234 -GAME callers will be given updated information on programs
regarding cancellations and rain locations.
Swimming - Despite the cool weather, there are 1,143 participants registered in the
swimming program this year, down slightly from last year at this time.
Bu4get 1993 - Dolf is compiling the 1993 budget. The requests will be presented to Gary
Plotz; City Administrator, and Ken Merrill; Finance Director, from there the budget will
be finalized by the City Council.
-,1-1` -I-C -5-X
Minutes
Parks & Recreation Board
July 29, 1992
Page two
New Business Cont.
Project Update
Elks Park - Restrooms were installed in the shelter, donated by the Elks Lodge of
Hutchinson.
Masonic Park - The Masons donated $3,400 for the installation of playground equipment in
the shelter area of the park. To date, the installation is complete with the exception
of a roof on the structure.
Oddfellows Park - A 38' X 20' sun shelter will be installed behind Super America in
Oddfellows Park. There is potential for a kitchenette, electricity, water and restrooms
in the shelter. It is a goal to further develop the archery range within the park.
A.F.S. Park - Additional trail was developed in the park behind Happy Chef Restaurant.
Jay Beytien donated two concrete benches that were installed around the memorial rock,
near the foot bridge.
Boy Scout Park - The signage should be installed by Labor Day. The Scouts have been
helping with the landscaping and sanding, staining and assembly of the sign.
Board Items
Storm Damage - The City will be replacing the scoreboards at Roberts Park due to storm •
damage in June. Dolf is investigating the possibility of remote controls that could be
used by team managers and umpires on the field.
Popcorn Wagon - The concession stand, which was located in Library Square has been
removed. The new popcorn wagon will be in place as soon as the electrical service is
updated and the site is prepared. The Ambassadors and Mainstreet came to an agreement
regarding the annual Arts & Crafts Show.
Ic _e R Schedu - The ice scheduling process has begun. The more advanced skating
participants scheduled on Wednesday evenings will have some options to skate on Saturday
in the 1992 -93 season. There are four "Rock on Ice" events scheduled through the Dry
Dock. Arena maintenance workers will be screened carefully at the Technical College.
The Parks & Recreation Department has the opportunity to provide jobs for some youth
through the Heartland Program. Jobs are provided for youth that may be either
economically disadvantaged or disabled. They are working for five weeks doing arena
maintenance and painting picnic tables for the Parks Department.
Adjournment - The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. by a motion made by J.P. Auer,
seconded by Virgil Voigt; the board unanimously agreed. The next meeting will be a tour
of the parks.
0
C
P USLSC H EAR=NG NOTICE
ADAMS STREET
Letting No. 3, Project No. 92 -05
There will be a Public Hearing at the City Hall Council Chambers at
8200 p.m. on Tuesday. September 8, 1992 to discuss the schedule and
design options for Adams Street (Trunk Highway 22) from Oakland
Avenue to Washington Avenue. Due to the narrow width of the
existing right -of -way, the prevalence of large trees directly
behind the existing curb and gutter, and the Department of
Transportation (HnDOT) request to construct center turn lanes,
parking can not be included in the design without removing trees
and purchasing additional right -of -way. The City will also need to
• acquire temporary easements for sidewalk reconstruction and
additional right -of -way at street intersections to meet HnDOT
design requirements. This will require the employment of an
appraiser, and negotiations with many of the property owners.
In addition, according to state rules, HnDOT can not pay for the
cost of parking lanes, therefore the City's share of the project
would increase substantially if parking lanes were included, which
would be reflected in higher assessment rates. Deleting the
parking would result in a decrease in the assessment rates
discussed at the earlier Public Hearing. The City Council would
like to receive your opinions regarding the direction to take on
the project. Due to these considerations, the project schedule has
been revised to allow for construction in 1993.
If you can not attend, or have questions you would like addressed
at the Hearing, please call the City Engineer (John Rodeberg) at
587 -5151.
• City Hall Parks & Recreation Police Department
37 Washington Avenue West 900 Harrington Street 10 Franklin Street South
(612) 587 -5151 (612) 587 -2975 (612) 587 -2242
Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350
-Printed on recycled paper -
1992 PUBLIC
AVERAGE
HEARINGS
/
City
of
Hutchinson
/FF
Letting No. 3 /Adams St
(TH
22) & Fair Ave 4D
/each
S
600
WATER SERVICE $600 -800
/each
TYPSCAZ. ASSESS! ANT RA TES
ITEM RANGE (1992 Rates)
AVERAGE
STREET IMPROVEMENTS with Parking $34 - 40
/FF
$
38
STREET IMPROVEMENTS without Parking $17 - 20
/FF
$
19
DRIVEWAY PANEL $500 -700
/each
S
600
WATER SERVICE $600 -800
/each
$
700
SANITARY SEWER SERVICE $600 -800
/each
S
700
TYPSCAZ. ASSESSJ��NTS
ITEM (66 front foot lot)
RANGE
STREET IMPROVEMENT ONLY with Parking
$2,240 -
$2,640
STREET IMPROVEMENT ONLY without Parking
$1,120 -
$1,820
UTILITY SERVICE REPLACEMENT ONLY
$1,100 -
$1,500
STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES
$3,340 -
$4,140
STREET, SERVICES, AND DRIVEWAY PANEL
$3,840 -
$4,940
GENERAL SNFORMA TSON •
► The street improvement assessment is based on the cost of a typical
residential street calculated on actual bid prices. A reduced rate
is proposed to be utilized if parking 1s deleted.
► The STATE will pay for center 24'.of highway, street oversizing and
a portion of storm sewer, curb and gutter, and restoration
P. The CITY will pay for sanitary sewer and watermain lateral
replacement, street parking lanes and a portion of the storm sewer
and sidewalk replacement.
• WILL DESIGN PROJECT AND GO OUT FOR BIDS IF APPROVED AT PUBLIC HEARING
• ASSESSMENT HEARING TO BE HELD AFTER BIDS, PRIOR TO AWARD OF CONTRACT
• ACTUAL ASSESSMENTS TO BE CALCULATED FOR ASSESSMENT HEARING
• PAYMENT OPTIONS,
Full payment without interest by October 1, 1993
Full payment with interest (from October Ist) by November 15, 1993
After November 15, 1993 the assessments are certified to tax rolls
Assessment on Tax Roll, 10 years with interest, Equal Principal •
Deferment available for property owners, meeting income
guidelines, who are either over 65 years old or disabled.
J--A
After measuring uD as to where the sidewalk would come...
No - family with small children would buy for fear that the excess speed
used now might send a car or a semi coming trhough the front porch..
_: LO-middle aged couple nor Senior would be interested as they couln't
probably stand the noise..We never open the windows to the East as
we wouldn't be able to stand it either..But after 20years we can
tolerate as we have gotten used to it... Would my taxes be LESS?
8.1 am sure All of ADAMS street residents wouldn't mind putting STOP &GO
lights at the above menti oned intersections and then share the expenses.
It would slow traffice down.
9.We all try to improve our property and everytime we do what we have
already paid for once or twice seems to have to be done over..
10.I that the hwy project now going on South of Hutch will reduce
the use of this hwy ... Has any person living on HWY 22 and Adams Street
• complained or written to DOT_MN4
September 6,1992 *9 o,,�
�`2,34513
0
s 1 y92
Mr. John Rodeberg i
City Engineer
N y t
A
Hutchinson °
Minnesota
2
•
55150 °2
Omer Mr. Rodeberg and Council members
REFERENCE to,Project 90- 05-- ConcerningDOT request to construct turn
lanes on Adams Street.
1. What was the Total figure you received from DOT MN.?
2.Center Turn lanes..If Stop and go lights would slow traffic -down on
Adams then maybe thats the way we should go.
Place them at Washington, 2nd at. and 5th street..
This would give the drivers plenty of exito on to Adams St.
plus exits off.
3. We have alley exits as NO WAY do my guests try to exit anyother way.
We put in the drivie throu��ecause when my four - nephews were small
we never let them play out front due to the fact that one never knew
when a car would land on our front yard ... Neither I nor my Aunt Burnett
have a car nor do we drive..
We'd be more than happy if you would move the Speed Limit Sign from
where it is now to right in front of the only two trees we have in front
of our house...But, for the way they drive it sure wouldn't make any
difference as those who use it are always in a hurry. Most of the drivers
who use it are most likely late for work.. Really,the shifts from HTI
and i -M might bottle it uD and this is only ^.certain times of the day.
4.I could count on both hands the number of cars who come to my house to
visit that have parked on the highway..They probably wouldn't have a
car left. Futhur more when the County plows come through inthe winter
They might have to slow down from there usual 70 -90 miles and hour and
we have enough problems when the snow now flies from past my existing
sidewalk...I don't feel I want my trees cut down,nor do I want the Highway
broken windows.
any closer to my front door as I really don't want porch
As one gentlemen said 'I am glad I moved from Adams at least I don't
have to pay for porch windows broken by flying Ice and snow from the plows
going through..
I am sure like he said..His insurance paid for it..and this would mean
most likely that mine would increase also...
5. Does the city pay for the appraiser?
6. Do I get a tax break? What kind of Rate can we expect?
7.Devaluation -- because of widening?FWhich I don't think we need) as I
am NOT in favor of the additional .'parking...
After measuring uD as to where the sidewalk would come...
No - family with small children would buy for fear that the excess speed
used now might send a car or a semi coming trhough the front porch..
_: LO-middle aged couple nor Senior would be interested as they couln't
probably stand the noise..We never open the windows to the East as
we wouldn't be able to stand it either..But after 20years we can
tolerate as we have gotten used to it... Would my taxes be LESS?
8.1 am sure All of ADAMS street residents wouldn't mind putting STOP &GO
lights at the above menti oned intersections and then share the expenses.
It would slow traffice down.
9.We all try to improve our property and everytime we do what we have
already paid for once or twice seems to have to be done over..
10.I that the hwy project now going on South of Hutch will reduce
the use of this hwy ... Has any person living on HWY 22 and Adams Street
• complained or written to DOT_MN4
11. Granted this statement isn'tconcerned with the previous topic
that being widening and parking --- BUT ?in my case to whom would
.- I go should my health and medicine get worse or higher..? I work
-• now just to cover my expenses.. Monthly bills -- regular ones and 4they
aren't seemily going down.... If I couldn't afford the taxes...
1 wouldn't have a house to live in...
12, dace STO° and GO L1 hts at washington,2nd and Adams and 5th
s sou s you eel that was enough then where do we go next..
1 am sure 1 am not the only one who feels the speed should be
reduced. This is up to the drivers... Those driving should know the
rules of right sways -and who goes first being they passed the
drivers test...
BUT--Everyone seems to think they are first....
'JE - -ALL I amsure don't want the HIGH'dAY ANY CLOSER TO OUR FRONT DOORS..
Thanks for taking time to consider the wishes of the Adams Street
residents....
Sincerely
Residents
'/ a. N'or e
`} IC: " -ze 'C' e {�� -� � S • Burnett Pierce
i, / F L' oCr• -C� -•r is .r.('1..,�,,- �L- �...Ls G
Copy taken to city hall fors
Mayor caul Ackland and Bounclimembers
Letter taken over AtA of Sept.8,1992
to city Hall for John Roeberg also.
A
I s
•
C
M E M O R A N D U M
September 3, 1992
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Randy DeVries, WWTP Director
SUBJECT: Out -of -State Travel for Marion Graham
Per City Council policy, I am requesting that Marion Graham attend
the laboratory analyst certification program at Howard Johnson's in
• Eau Claire, Wisconsin, on October 26, 1992. Travel will be for one
day, with registration at $30.00 plus meals.
I recommend approval of this travel.
/mjs
• City Hall Parks & Recreation Police Department
37 Washington Avenue West 900 Harrington Street 10 Franklin Street South
(612) 587 -5151 (612) 587 -2975 (612) 587 -2242
Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350
- Printed on recycled paper -
� 'A
I
M E M O R A N D U M
September 3, 1992
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Randy DeVries, WWTP Director
SUBJECT: Update On Old Wastewater Treatment Facility
•
At the August 25, 1992, City Council meeting Gene Jeseritz did not
renew the contract with the City for the old wastewater treatment
facility.
To reduce liability at the facility, City staff believes that
filling the tanks with fill will ensure this. It is hoped that in
the future after the tanks are filled, the forestry department may
grow trees in the tanks for City use. This appears to be the best
use for this facility.
/mjs
• City Hall Parks & Recreation
37 Washington Avenue West 900 Harrington S tree t
(612) 587 -5151 (612) 587 -2975
Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350
- Printed on recycled paper -
Police Department
10 Franklin Street South
(612) 587 -2242
C
0
•
•
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John P. Rodeberg, Director of Engineering
RE: Discussion of Hutchinson City Hall /Municipal Center
Request for Proposals (RFP)
Attached is a copy of the Request for Proposals for Architectural and Engineering
Services Related to Construction of the Proposed City Hall facility. The Proposal
has been reviewed by the Mayor, City Administrator, and the Directors included
in the building. Revisions have been made to address their concerns or
recommendations.
Following approval of the Request for Proposals by the City Council, we plan on
sending the Proposals out to the following consulting firms:
CONTACT
► The Alliance, Inc.
► Ankeny Kell Richter & Assoc.
► Armstrong Torseth Skold and Rydeen
► Bernard Jacob Architects Ltd.
. Boarman Kroos Pfister & Associates
► Bonestroo Rosene Anderlick & Assoc.
► BRW
► KKE Architects
• Korngiebel Architecture
• Hiller - Dunwiddie Associates
• SEH /Pauly Olsen Architectual
• TKDA Architects - Engineers
► WOLD Architects
Services Group
SUBCONSULTANTS - Audio /Visual, Acoustics and Lighting
• Electronic Interiors
• Michaud, Cooley, Erickson & Associates
• Orfield Associates
<Jj>
City Hall
37 Washington Avenue West
(612) 587 -5151
Parks &Recreation
900 Harrington Street
(612) 587 -2975
Fred Richter
James Rydeen
Bernard Jacobs
Jack Boarman
Bob Rosene
Mark Swenson
Ron Erickson
John Korngiebel
Craig Lau
Darwin Lindahl
Wes Hendrickson
Michael Cox
Kate O'Reilly
Steve Orfield
Police Department
10 Franklin Street South
(612) 587 -2242
Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 / / d
. Prime f 0,1 mewled pape - 1(� — V 0
H L N U K A A L U N
September 3, 1992
I
0
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
ARCH2TECTURAL AND ENG =NEER2NG
S ERvxcEs RELATED TO C ONSTRUCT =ON
OF THE
HUTCHINSON CITY HALL/
MUNICIPAL CENTER
SUBMISSION DEADLINE: FRIDAY, OCTOBER 2, 1992
SUBMIT TOx John P. Rodeberg, Director of Engineering
at Hutchinson City Hall
Phone Number (612) 234 -4208
JPRIA2rC17779ALL.RFP
• City Hall Parks &Recreation Police Department
37 Washington Avenue West 900 Harrington Street 10 Franklin Street South
(612) 587 -5151 (612) 587 -2975 (612) 587 -2242
Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350
Prin ltd on mcuc led paper-
C STY OF H UTCH=NSOri
37 WASIMUION AVENUE WEST / NUTCNINSON, MTXWMTA 55350
REQ[IEST FOR PROPOSAL.�S
ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO
CONSTRUCTION OF THE
C=TY H T.T• /MUri = C =P AT. C E;mmFj
I NT120DUCTION
The City of Hutchinson has purchased the More 4 Grocery store in
downtown Hutchinson in order to facilitate construction of a City
Hall /Municipal Center. It is proposed to remodel the building
following relocation of the grocery store in the spring of 1993.
The City is requesting that consulting firms interested in
completing the design and construction services for the new City
Hall submit a proposal stating their experience, abilities and
estimated cost for these services, as outlined in this Request for
Proposals (RFP).
The existing grocery store building has had a preliminary •
structural review by a structural engineer and appears to be in
very good condition. The roof and HVAC system both appear to be
inadequate and will require replacement. The City has documentation
and conceptual drawings related to the building which will be
available to consultants at City Hall.
The City of Hutchinson is located approximately 50 miles west of
the Twin Cities in McLeod County. The South Fork Crow River runs
through the core of the City. The population within the city is
approximately 12,000, with an area population of around 18,000. The
city has almost doubled in population over the last 20 years.
The following Scope of Services was generated based on the needs of
the community, as determined by the City Administrator, Director of
Engineering, Finance Director, Building /Zoning Official and other
City staff.
Page 2 •
SCOPE OF S ERV =CEO
• The scope of the professional architecture and engineering services
will be to complete the design of the proposed new facility based
on existing and future space needs, building security, ergonomics,
lighting and sound requirements, video presentation needs,
technology transfer /computer interaction, and other applicable
factors. The consultant would also complete the bidding process and
construction review of the project to allow utilization of the
facility by January 1, 1994.
The City Planning Staff has completed a proposed floor plan layout
for the building which encompasses the needs and desires of the
City (attached). The consultant will be expected to work with the
proposed floor plan, the Hutchinson City Hall Feasibility Study
completed by SEH in 1989, and the City Planning Staff to review and
revise the floor plan to meet the City's requirements.
Specifically, the Scope of Services is expected to include the
following items:
. Coordinate with the City Planning Staff to review and revise
the proposed floor plan layout. Review the Feasibility Report
to reference recommendations and requests of each of the
departments.
► Review and propose HVAC requirements. The City requests that
• the building have separate zones for each of the building
department areas, as well as special ventilation for the Copy
Room. The City would favor sliding windows with screens in
office areas.
► Verify the structural functionality of the building.
► Review and propose office and cubicle designs as well as
furniture and fixture recommendations.
► Provide professional services for sound proofing /design and
lighting design. The consultant shall be required to either
provide these services themselves, or coordinate with a
consultant specializing in these areas. The lighting
consultant shall consider needs related to computer screen
visibility, aesthetics, safety, working conditions, etc. The
sound consultant shall review issues related to privacy and
interaction.
► Provide professional services for video /audio presentation
facilities in the Council Chambers. The services shall include
review, recommendation and construction of a presentation
system and public television system. The system shall be
compatible with the proposed GIS system, and shall include the
ability to provide permanent cameras, and screens for the
Council members, staff and audience. Coordination with
• Hutchinson Community Video Network (HCVN) will be required.
Page 3
Review and address security issues related to staff safety
and access. Some areas of the building will have limited
access. It is presumed that a card control access system will
be included in the final design.
► Review and address the potential for obtaining state .
financing for an energy audit for the facility.
► Complete a landscaping plan that addresses energy
conservation plantings and aesthetics on the City Hall lot.
► Provide plans and specifications covering the complete
construction of City Hall, including the building remodeling,
furniture and all other items noted in this proposal, or as
requested by the City.
► Complete the bidding process and construction management of
the facility. Provide the City with certification of building
completion.
► All design work completed by the consultant shall be
transferable to AutoCAD Release 11. The City shall be provided
a copy of the final building floor layout and building plans
in AutoCAD.
A VA=L.AS DA-r,&, AND I wiram4AT =ON
The City has data on file to assist in the development of the plan.
The following is a list of some of the available information: •
• Floor plans and related drawings of the existing More 4
• Feasibility Report for City Hall dated October 1989
• Proposed floor plan by the City Planning Staff
• Report by structural engineer, review of grocery store
• Building review material and preliminary cost estimates
collected by Building Official
S CIiElD T.F
The tentative project schedule is as follows:
RFP submittal deadline
October
2,
1992
Proposal review by Planning Staff
October
9,
1992
Selection of 3 finalists by City
October
9,
1992
Interviews of finalists
October
23,
1992
Planning Staff sends
recommendation to City Council
October
27,
1992
Contract Approval /Award
November
10,
1992
Plan and Specification completion
February
1,
1993
Open Bids
March
1,
1993
Begin Construction
April
1,
1993
Complete Construction
November
1,
1993
•
Page 4
S UBM=TTAL R EQU=
The consultant shall submit ten (10) copies of the Proposal for
Architectural and Engineering Services by the submission date noted
on the cover. All information listed below must be included and
submitted in the order requested belowt
1. Consultant's name , address, telephone number, brief
history, organizational structure and primary
professional disciplines.
2. Description of consultant's previous related work
experience. The previous experience shall include work
completed in the last two years and should emphasize
services directly related to the work noted in the Scope
of Services.
3. Names and resumes of personnel who will be assigned to
the project. Resumes shall indicate qualifications,
experience and role in previous projects, and what
capacity they will serve on this project.
4. A brief description (maximum of one page) of the
consultant's general approach to the project and the
completion of the Scope of Services.
5. A list of the subconsultants or associates to be
utilized. Indicate the role the subconsultant will play
and the approximate percentage of the total services they
will provide. Also include information detailing the
• subconsultant's experience and personnel.
6. The estimated proposed total fees, including the type of
contract for reimbursement of the preparation of the
Plan. Please note the requirements for addressing
deletions and additions to the Contract.
7. A maximum of one page of additional information at the
consultants discretion, which may be useful in
consideration of consultant selection.
All information shall be submitted in a professional format. It is
requested that extraneous information be excluded from the
submittal. Any loose pamphlets must be attached to the submittal
or located in an attached pocket.
•
Page 5
S ELECTION C R2TERIA
The final selection of a consultant will be made by the City
Council, based on the recommendation of a Planning Staff following
submission of material and an interview. The evaluation criteria
is proposed to be based on a point system as follows:
ITEM POINTS
Previous related experience
Consultant 20
Specialized subconsultants 15
Proposed approach to Project 10
Capacity to perform work
including staff assignment and experience 15
Location and accessibility of personnel 5
Client references 15
Estimated cost of services 20
TOTAL POINTS
100
The City reserves the right to modify the selection criteria prior
to the submission deadline.
If additional information is requested by the consultants prior to
the submission date, the information provided will be supplied to
all consultants.
GENERA
This Request for Proposal may be amended or modified prior to the
submission deadline. The final Scope of Services, fees, and method
of payment will be determined by negotiations prior to the
execution of a contract for consulting engineering services.
0
Page 6 •
RESOLUTION N0. 9790
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE
•
The Hutchinson City Council authorizes the purchase of the following:
ITEM I COST I PURPOSE I DEPT.I BUDGET I VENDOR
• The following items were authorized due to an emergency need:
ITEM
COST
PURPOSE
DEPT.
BUDGET
VENDOR
8,000 Gallons Aviation
Fuel
9,803.2
Resale
Airport
Yes
Jayco Aviation
Date Approved: September 8. 1992
Resolution submitted for Council action
Motion made by:
• Seconded by:
by:
7 A
RESOLUTION N0. 9791
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING LOCATION
• FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE
WHEREAS, the Director of Engineering and the Chief of Police
have observed areas of traffic control concern which warrant
traffic control devices, and;
AND WHEREAS, the Hutchinson City Council has the authority to
establish certain locations as points were traffic control devices
shall be erected, pursuant to Section 7.04, Subdivision 1 of the
Hutchinson City Code;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA:
1. That the Council hereby establishes that a traffic
control device known as a "No Parking" sign shall be
erected on the east side of Pishney Lane between 2nd
• Avenue SW and 3rd Avenue SW.
2. That the Council hereby establishes that a traffic
control device known as a "Stop Sign" shall be erected at
the following locations:
On Church Street at Clinton Avenue (2 signs)
On Clinton Avenue at Harrington Street (1 sign)
On Hiller Avenue at Merrill Street (2 signs)
On Milwaukee Avenue at Merrill Street (2 signs)
Adopted this 8th day of September, 1992, by the City Council
of Hutchinson, Minnesota.
Mayor
•
City Administrator
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
• RESOLUTION NO. 9795
RESOLUTION SETTING INTEREST PATE
FOR 1992 ADOPTED ASSESSMENT ROLLS
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON,
MINNESOTA:
THAT all assessment rolls which have been adopted and will be
adopted relating to 1992 improvement bonds are hereby changed to
read an interest rate of 5.25 %. This rate is the net interest rate
of the 1992 Improvement bonds.
Adopted by the City Council this 8th day of September 1992
Paul L. Ackland
Mayor
ATTEST:
•
Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
•
7
• ORDINANCE NO. 92 -66
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 464,
SECTIONS 6.07, 8.03, 8.04, 8.05 AND 8.12
THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. That notice of hearing was duly given and
publication of said hearing was duly made and it was made to appear
to the satisfaction of the City Council that it would be in the
best interest of the City to amend Zoning Ordinance No. 464.
SECTION 2. That Sections 6.07, 8.03, 8.04, 8.05 and 8.12 are
amended as follows:
Section 6.07 - Conditional Uses
B,1,(c)(4) Relocation of any structure larger than 10' x 12'
Section 8.03 - Rules for Structures In Districts
(3) All principal dwellings and principal structures shall be
• placed on a permanent continuous Perimeter foundation in
compliance with the Uniform Building Code....
Section 8.04 - Conditional Uses
Move structures larger than 10' x 12'
Section 8.04 - R -1 Dimensional Regulations
(3) Single family house rear yards corner lots 15'
Section 8.05 - Special Provision District
As in R -1 district
Section 8.05 - R -2 Dimensional Regulations
(3) Single family house rear yards corner lots 15'
Section 8.12 - C -4 Conditional Permitted Uses
Storage Units
Section 8.12 - C -4 Dimensional Reguirements
• A. Setbacks: Accessory building setback interior lot line 6'
/7-7)
ORDINANCE NO. 92 -66
Page 2
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect from and after
its passage and publication.
Adopted by the City Council this 8th day of September, 1992.
Paul L. Ackland
Mayor
ATTEST:
Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
L
•
•
ARNOLD & MCDOWELL
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
101 PARE PLACE
HUTcHi NEON, MINNESOTA 55350-2563
(612) 587 -7575
FAS (612) 569 -4096
RESIDENT ATTORNEY
O. BARRY ANDERSON
August 27, 1992
Mr. Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
37 Washington Avenue West
Hutchinson, Mn. 55350
Re: Precinct Boundary Ordinance
Our File No. 3188 -87031
Dear Gary:
OF C01W.ZL
WIT.T.TAM W. CAMERON
RAYMOND C. I.ALLIER
PAUL M. BEOICH
CHARLES R.CARMICHAEL"
5681 CEDAR LAKE ROAD
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416
(612) 545 -9000
MN TOLL "HE 800 -343 -4545
FAX(612) 545 -1793
501 SOUTH FOITRTH STREET
PRINCETON, MINNESOTA 55371
(612) 389 -2214
FAX (612) 389-5506
234 S6 )
SFD Ig99
nFrF,VED w
O
Now that the precinct worksheets have been completed and the
official map has been drawn, I have reviewed our Ordinance to
provide a more detailed description of our new precincts. I have
attempted to track exactly the drawing provided to me by Bonnie.
• You will note that the division between Precincts 2 and 3, along
the westerly edge, gets somewhat difficult to describe because the
description set forth in the ordinance follows the Crow River bank,
while the line itself appears to leave the bank of the river and
intersection with the westerly boundaries of the city. Since there
are no homes on any islands, I don't believe the difference in the
description is particularly significant.
I have also included a provision that in the event of a discrepancy
or conflict, the worksheets prepared by Bonnie shall control.
This ordinance does not effect any changes in our boundaries and
is not intended to make any changes. You might want to have Bonnie
check the description as I have provided it carefully against the
map and also run through the precinct worksheets again one more
time to make certain there are no obvious glitches or errors.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you should have any
questions. Best regards.
Very truly yours,
O & M ) OWE
;ar Anderson
• GBA:lm Enclosure
'CERTIFIED AS A CML T8 1AI , SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
"CERTIFIED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA SLATE HAH ASSOCIATION
DAVID B. ARNOLD
BABY D. Mc DOWELL
•
STEVEN A. ANDERSON
O. BARRY ANDERSON
STEVEN S. EOOE
LAURA E. FRET D
DAVID A. HRITEOOEMANN
PAUL D. BOVE"
JOSEPH M. PAIEMENT
JAMES UTLEY
BICRAHD B -MCOEE
CATHRYN D, REBER
ARNOLD & MCDOWELL
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
101 PARE PLACE
HUTcHi NEON, MINNESOTA 55350-2563
(612) 587 -7575
FAS (612) 569 -4096
RESIDENT ATTORNEY
O. BARRY ANDERSON
August 27, 1992
Mr. Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
37 Washington Avenue West
Hutchinson, Mn. 55350
Re: Precinct Boundary Ordinance
Our File No. 3188 -87031
Dear Gary:
OF C01W.ZL
WIT.T.TAM W. CAMERON
RAYMOND C. I.ALLIER
PAUL M. BEOICH
CHARLES R.CARMICHAEL"
5681 CEDAR LAKE ROAD
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416
(612) 545 -9000
MN TOLL "HE 800 -343 -4545
FAX(612) 545 -1793
501 SOUTH FOITRTH STREET
PRINCETON, MINNESOTA 55371
(612) 389 -2214
FAX (612) 389-5506
234 S6 )
SFD Ig99
nFrF,VED w
O
Now that the precinct worksheets have been completed and the
official map has been drawn, I have reviewed our Ordinance to
provide a more detailed description of our new precincts. I have
attempted to track exactly the drawing provided to me by Bonnie.
• You will note that the division between Precincts 2 and 3, along
the westerly edge, gets somewhat difficult to describe because the
description set forth in the ordinance follows the Crow River bank,
while the line itself appears to leave the bank of the river and
intersection with the westerly boundaries of the city. Since there
are no homes on any islands, I don't believe the difference in the
description is particularly significant.
I have also included a provision that in the event of a discrepancy
or conflict, the worksheets prepared by Bonnie shall control.
This ordinance does not effect any changes in our boundaries and
is not intended to make any changes. You might want to have Bonnie
check the description as I have provided it carefully against the
map and also run through the precinct worksheets again one more
time to make certain there are no obvious glitches or errors.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you should have any
questions. Best regards.
Very truly yours,
O & M ) OWE
;ar Anderson
• GBA:lm Enclosure
'CERTIFIED AS A CML T8 1AI , SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
"CERTIFIED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA SLATE HAH ASSOCIATION
ORDINANCE NO. 92 -67 , 2ND SERIES
PUBLICATION NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA, CHANGING
THE BOUNDARIES OF ELECTION PRECINCTS AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY
CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 2.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN
PENALTY PROVISIONS.
RECITALS:
1. The City of Hutchinson adopted Ordinance No. 92 -51, 2nd
Series, Publication No. 4344 effective February 25, 1992, which
ordinance adopted new election precincts in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes §204B.14;
2. A formal map of the new election precincts has now been
prepared and precinct street address range worksheets have also
been prepared setting out in greater detail the new precincts;
3. The City of Hutchinson desires to more fully set out the
reorganized precincts of the City of Hutchinson without changing
the precinct boundaries as established by City Ordinance No. 92 -51
and accordingly,
THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON ORDAINS:
Section 1. Precinct 1 of the City of Hutchinson shall include
• all that territory of the City of Hutchinson lying east of the
centerline of Highway 15 to the intersection of Lynn Road, extended
north to the intersection Lynn Road with Second Avenue S.W., thence
easterly along the centerline of Second Avenue S.W. to the
intersection of Second Avenue S.W. and Main Street, thence
northerly along the centerline of Main Street to the intersection
of Main Street and Fourth Avenue N.E., thence in a generally
southeasterly direction along the centerline of Fourth Avenue N.E.
to the intersection of Bluff Street and thence northeasterly along
the centerline of Bluff Street to the City boundary, with all lands
hereafter annexed lying east and south of the above designated ward
boundary shall be included in Precinct 1.
Section 2. The Second Precinct shall include all that
territory of the City of Hutchinson lying north and west of the
following described lines: Beginning at the intersection of Bluff
Street and the city limits and continuing along the centerline of
Bluff Street in a southwesterly direction to the intersection of
Bluff Street and Fourth Avenue N.E. and continuing in a
northwesterly direction along the centerline of Fourth Avenue N.E.
to the intersection of Fourth Avenue N.E. and Main Street, thence
south along the centerline of Main Street to the intersection of
Main Street and Second Avenue S.W., thence west along the
centerline of Second Avenue S.W. to the intersection of Second
Avenue S.W. and Dale Street, thence proceeding at a 90 degree angle
to the south bank of the Crow River and thence along the south bank
• of the Crow River to a point intersecting with the westerly
/—'et
boundary of the City of Hutchinson; lands hereinafter annexed lying
north and west of the above described precinct boundary shall be
included in Precinct 2.
Section 3. The Third Precinct shall include all that
territory of the City of Hutchinson lying west and south of the
following described lines: Beginning at the intersection of
Highway 15 South and the city limits of the City of Hutchinson,
thence along the centerline of said Highway in a northerly
direction to Lynn Road and continuing along the centerline of Lynn
Road to the intersection of Lynn Road and Second Avenue S.W.,
thence west along Second Avenue S.W. to the intersection of Second
Avenue S.W. and Dale Street, thence proceeding at a 90 degree angle
to the south bank of the CRow River and thence along the south bank
of the Crow River to a point intersecting with the westerly
boundary of the City of Hutchinson; lands hereinafter annexed lying
south and west of the above described precinct boundary shall be
included in Precinct 3.
Section 4. Adopted and incorporated by reference herein are
the precinct street address range worksheets for Precincts 1, 2,
and 3 and in the event of a conflict between the descriptions set
out above and the precincts as set forth in the worksheets, the
worksheets shall control.
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 _ day of September, 1992.
Mayor
Attest:
City Administrator
Published in the Hutchinson Leader on
First reading:
Second reading:
•
C
September 3, 1992
MEMO
TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FROM: K MER FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJEC P UBLIC HEARING B UDGE T & TA X LEVY 1993 _
We have received the attached hearing schedule from Ed Ide, McLeod
County Auditor. We must schedule the hearing between November 29
and December 20. The meeting may not conflict with McLeod County,
December 8 nor School District 423, December 1.
The tax levy must be certified within 5 business days of December
20, 1992.
•
• City Hall Parks &Recreation
37 Washington Avenue West 900 Harrington Street
(612) 587 -5151 (612) 587 -2975
Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350
- printed on recycled paper
Police Department
10 Franklin Street South
(612) 587 -2242
9 -A-
/2l?8 P3?�3
�I ^15G9 A
ILISCEIVED
Date August 26, 1992
To: All City Clerks
Re: Truth in Taxation Provisions for Payable 1993 Taxes
In accordance with guidelines established by the Minnesota Depar,ment
of Revenue, I hereby certify to your city the times and , dates for the
COUNTY AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS LEVY PUBLIC HEARINGS to be as follows:
Please note that if the cite council anticipates not adopting final
lev amounts at the hearing, the council will have to recess the meeting
and announce the time, and date for the recessed hearing at the initial
meeting.
Respectfully,
Edward 1de, McLeod County .Auditor
•
q h�
INITIAL HEARING
RECONVENED
HEARING
TAXING
ENTITY
DATE
TIME
DATE
TIME
McLeod
County
Dec
8
7:00
P.M.
School
District
121
Dec
2
8:00
P.M.
Dec 16
8:00
P.M.
School
District
12.)
Dec
ld
7:30
P.K.
Dec 21
7:30
PJ ±.
School
District
423
Dec
1
5: OD
P.N.
School
District
424
No•:
30
7:30
P. M.
Dec 7
7: 0
P.M.
School
District
426
Dec
7
8:00
P.M.
School
District
1 26
Dec
14
7:30
P.'-I.
Dec 21
7:30
P.%1.
•
School
District
427
Dec
10
7:00
P.M.
Dec 17
7:00
P. )T.
School
District
166
Dec
11
7:00
P.M.
Dec 21
7:00
P.M.
School
District
736
Ncv
30
7:30
P.M.
Dec 7
7:30
P.M.
During
vour city:
council's next
meeting, the
council
shou_d
set
the
!� time, date, and
place
of your CITY'S
LEVY
PUBLIC
HEARING.
Your
cit,
shoe;ld
then certify this information
to m}
office as soon
as possiuie.
Please note that if the cite council anticipates not adopting final
lev amounts at the hearing, the council will have to recess the meeting
and announce the time, and date for the recessed hearing at the initial
meeting.
Respectfully,
Edward 1de, McLeod County .Auditor
•
q h�
C
M E M O R A N D U M
September 3, 1992
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Randy DeVries, WWTP Director
SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Cleaning Contract with City of Litchfield
I am requesting approval of sanitary sewer cleaning and flushing
• contract with the City of Litchfield. The purpose of this contract
is to make sure that the City of Hutchinson's liability is covered
in case our vac -tor truck is in for repair or it is inoperable.
I recommend approval of the contract.
/mjs
. City Hall Parks & Recreation
37 Washington Avenue West 900 Harrington Street
(612) 587 -5151 (6I2) 587 -2975
Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350
- printed on recycled paper -
Police Department
10 Franklin Street South
(612) 587 -2242
CITY OF LITCIMELD
SANITARY SEWER
CLEANING AND FLUSHING
• CONTRACT
Contract made this day of , 1992 , between the City of
Litchfield, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, party
of the first part and the City of Hutchinson a municipal corporation organized under the laws
of the State of Minnesota, party of the second pan.
The parties recite and declare that:
1. That the party of the second part desires to obtain sewer cleaning and
flushing service to its sanitary sewer lines at various locations within its
boundaries.
2. That party of the first part is willing to furnish such sewer flushing
service and cleaning to the extent and as provided by use of a Sewer Jet sanitary
sewer cleaning machine under the terms and conditions of this contract.
In consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants and agreements herein
• contained, and the performance thereof by the parties hereto, the parties agree as follows:
Section 1. The party of the second part shall furnish the water to be
used for flushing and cleaning services by either manually or
automatically operated sewer flushing and cleaning apparatus being in this instance
a Sewer Jet which is a high pressure sanitary sewer cleaning machine.
Section 2. The party of the first part hereby agrees to furnish the
Sewer Jet cleaning machine and its personnel to operate it in the
manner that their judgments and conditions dictate; it being understood
no warranties, express or implied are made or apply to restoring or
maintaining the flow of the second parties sanitary sewer lines.
Section 3. The rates for the service rendered for such sewer flushing
• and cleaning purposes by the Sewer Jet machine shall be $75.00 per
hour for each whole or fractional hour the machine is at the job site
with a minimum fee for $150.00 to apply.
Section 4. Partied of the second part do acknowledge and agree that their
sanitary sewer lines are in a condition satisfactory to withstand the use of the
sanitary Sewer Jet cleaning machine, and agree to save and hold harmless the
party of the first part from any claim or liability which may arise from or through •
the parry of the second part, and from persons, property and residences serviced
by the sanitary sewer lines of the parties of the second part.
Further the party of the second part agrees to indemnify the parties of the
first part and its officers, agents and employees thereof against all damages, costs
or expenses in law or equity, including attorney fees incurred, that may at anv
time arise or result from damages to property or from personal injury by reason
of or in the course of performing any work in connection with this contract. which
damages or injuries are occasioned by any negligent act or omission to act on the
part of the parties of the first part its servants, agents or employees in
consequence of use in or about the work of any machine, article, or material
supplied or installed under this contract.
Section 5. After completion or cessation of the work in furnishing said services
a bill will be rendered to the party of the second part showing the total for all
services rendered which shall be due and payable within thirty (30) days from its
date.
This Contract shall become effective on proper execution thereof by the parties with the
work to commence on or about the date upon which they may agree.
IN WITINESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this contract on the day and year
first above written.
CITY OF LITCIIFIELD
By:
Mayor
By:
City Clerk
CITY O FF j✓L ^ �� ErUTCaINSON /q
By: yl �(s e� — y
Mayor
By: A t.� , _ GT
City Clerk
•
•
0
•
•
CITY OF IRln m BID TABU) ATIOK Im 110. 11
37 WMM AVM OT P)W 1D. 92-17
IflR'( @15011, 1l 55350 EUM'S OI}4118: $
612-587-5151 C(kIPORK DATE: 11- 01-1992
BE OPFli11iG: 8 -28 -1992 AT 10:00 A.M.
jum
ADDRESS
CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE
TEiEPHOW
AMOUNT
SURM
START DATE
STRUCTURAL SPECIALTIES, INC.
P.O. BOX 502
$31,584.35
Bid Bond
HUTCMIINSON, MN 55350
612 -587 -6719
LEWIS ENGINEERING COMPANY
4201 NORE% DRIVE
CHASKA, MN 55318
612 - 368 -3000 FAX 448 -7000
STONEFIEI CONSTRUCTION
770 NORTH BUSINESS 71, P.O. BOX 1156
57,963.00
Bid Bond
WILLMAR, HN 56201
612- 235 -7530 FAX 35 -2871
RAINBOW, INC.
7324 -36TH AVE. NO.
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55427 -2087
12 -535 -4041
PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC.
1110 HWY. 7 EAST
34,000.00
Bid Bond
HIffCKMSON, MN 55350
612 -587 -0991
SHERYL'S CONSTRUCTION
1975 PARVEY LINE, P.O. BOX 207
FINLAYSON, MN 55735
612-233-6125
MYRON MILLER CONSTRUCTION
RT. 2, P.O. BOX 41
38,422.00
Bid bond
WATERVILLE, MN 56096
50 7-362-4402
JAY BROTHERS
2209 PHELPS ROAD
39,000.00
Bid Bond
HUGO, MN 55038
612 -429 -4363
9--T)
RESOLUTION 110. 9 7 9 3
RESOLUTION ACCEPTDE BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT
Lffrrm NO. 11
PROJECT 110. 92 -17
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Crow
River Pedestrian Bridge by complete construction of abutments and wing walls,
purchase of bridge, delivery of bridge, placement of bridge on abutments,
restoration, all other miscellaneious work shown on the plans and included in the
specifications, and bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law,
and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement:
BIDDER AMOUNT BID
Structural Specialties, Hutchinson, HN $ 31,584.35
Professional Const. Services, Hutchinson, MN S 34,000.00
Myron Hiller Construction, Waterville, HN S 38,422.00
Jay Brothers, Hugo, HN S 39,000.00
Stonefield Construction, Willmar, HN $ 57,963.00
AND WHEREAS, it appears that Structural Specialties of Hutchinson,
Minnesota 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 Structural Specialties of Hutchinson,
Minnesota, 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 City Administrator 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 8th day of September, 1992.
Mayor
City Administrator
•
M 1' ! 'A 11 C
612 -581 -5151
•
r�
U
IB1m 10. 14
PRW 10. 92 -20
55350 81i6DWS VDQ►!6: $ te _
WORN MITE: 12 -15 -1992
OM ADQNTIY_. Q- 'XL 1001 IT 9.m D Y
V 6V 4d
'a ,Y 6,VV •
Is,$
N}�
lfDDRE S
CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE
TELEPHONE
AMOUNT
SURETY
START DATE
QUADE ELECTRIC
35 -4TH AVE. NE
Certified
HUTCHINSON, HN 55350
$ 71,026.50
Check
612 -587 -3030
A & B ELECTRIC
755 HWY 7 NEST
HUTCHINSON, MI 55350
85,923.00
Bid Bond
612 -587 -6590
HULLER- PRIBYL UTILITIES
2402 HWY. 55
HAHEL, HN 55340
112,947.40
Bid Bond
612 - 478 -6223
H & S DRYWALL, INC.
P.O. BOX 417
COKATO, HN 55321
100,408.00
Bid Bond
612 - 286 -6401
HEXUH CONSTRUCTION
539 HURON ST.
HUTCHINSON, HN 55350
612 -587 -7393
PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC.
1110 HWY. 7 EAST
HUTCHINSON, HN 55350
84,132.00
Bid Bond
612 -587 -0991
L & S ELECTRIC
HWY. 14 WEST, P.O. BOX 18
SPRINGFIEID, HN 56087
9,200.00
Bid Bond
(#6- Emerg.
507- 723 -6737 FAX 723-6734
18 500.00
Bid Bond
05- Electri
NUESSHEIER ELECTRIC INC.
1427 NO. COMMERCE
LE SUEUR, HN 56058
612- 665 -3781
JACKSON ELECTRIC
515 SO. HAIN ST., P.O. 623
WINTHROP, HN 55396
5 07-647-5742
Exit Ltg
cal Work
9 -�
J �
RESOLUTION NO. 9794
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the "Downtown Life
Safety Improvements ", bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law,
and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement,
BIDDER AMOUNT BID
Quade Electric, Hutchinson, HN $ 71,026.50
Professional Const. Services, Hutchinson, HN $ 84,132.00
A & B Electric, Hutchinson, MN $ 85,923.00
H & S Drywall, Inc., Cokato, HN $ 100,408.00
Huller - Pribyl Utilities, Hamel, HN $ 112,947.40
AND WHEREAS, it appears that Quade Electric of Hutchinson, Minnesota is the
lowest responsible bidder.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUTCHINSON, HINNFSSOTAi
1. The Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to
enter into the attached contract with Quade Electric of Hutchinson, Minnesota,
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 City Administrator 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 8th day of September, 1992.
Mayor
City Administrator
•
RESOLUTION NO. 8792
•
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS
ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM FOR THE
HUTCHINSON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City of Hutchinson that
discrimination against any person because of race, color, sex, or
national origin will not be permitted, and;
WHEREAS, a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program is
required for Federal funding for the proposed improvements at the
Hutchinson Municipal Airport;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTAI
• That the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program for
the Hutchinson Municipal Airport, dated September B, 1992, is
hereby approved.
Adopted this day of 1992, by the City Council of Hutchinson,
Minnesota.
Mayor
City Administrator
C 1
/ F
C
E NTERPR =SE (DBE)
P ROCRAM
HUTCH2NSON MUNIC =PAL A IRPORT
L
J
D =SADVANTAGED Bus 2NESS
H UTCH=NSON f
Approved:
Hutchinson City Council
September 8, 1992
Mayor
Attestt
City Administrator
• City Hall Parks & Recreation Police Department
37 Washington Avenue West 900 Harrington Street 10 Franklin Street South
(612) 587 -5151 (612) 587 -2975 (612) 587 -2242
Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350
Printed on recycled paper -
M =NNESOTA
/ f,
DBE PROGRAM / City of Hutc�i aa^ i
P OL =CY STATEMENT
It is the policy of the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota to ensure that
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) programs, as defined in the requirements
of the 49 CFR Part 23, have the maximum opportunity to participate in the
performance of Hutchinson Municipal Airport contracts and subcontracts financed
in whole or in part by Federal funds.
The City's policies prohibit discrimination against any person because of race,
color, sex, or national origin. The City will require its employees, agents, and
contractors to adhere to the provisions of this program.
This policy statement is disseminated to all city departments to organizations
of disadvantaged, minority, and women businesses; and to non - minority business
and community organizations known to the City
D B E D =RECTORY
The City of Hutchinson has compiled and will maintain and update a DBE Directory,
which will supplement the current edition of the Minnesota Department of
Transportation Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Directory The DBE
Directory is available to bidders and others seeking to meet DBE requirements or
to locate DBE capabilities. Copies can be obtained from the Director of
Engineering at the Hutchinson City Hall.
The directory lists firms that are capable of performing general contracting and
particular solicitations. The directory is organized by type of work the
contractor desires to perform; i.e., general construction, lighting, marking,
engineering, etc.
The following information is shown for each firm,
1. Company Name
2. Type of Contractor
3. Address
4. Telephone Number
5. Owned by Woman, Minority,
6. Contact Person
7. Certification authority;
S. Bonding Capability
or other DBE
e.g., City, SBA, U. S. DOT
The directory will be updated periodically. In the event a bidder names other
DBE's it desires to use, these firms will be included in the Directory if they
can be certified. Other DBE's that desire to be listed will also be included
upon request.
is
K
The Directory will be made available to bidders and proposers in their efforts
to meet the DBE goals and made a part of bid specifications. The Directory is
a primary source for locating potential DBE contractors.
• Sources of Information
Listed below are sources of information that may be used to compile and update
the directory:
1. State and local directories.
2. Organizations funded by the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) of
the Department of Commerce (DOC).
3. Local and regional offices of the Small Business Administration.
4. National Minority Supplier Development Counsel DBE Data Bank.
P ROCEDURES TO A SCERTA =N Ti-m E L =G =S =L=TY
OF DBE 1 S AND J O =NT VENTURES I NVOLV=NG
DBE ' S
The City will certify the eligibility of DBE's and joint ventures involving DBE's
that are named by competitors for FAA- assisted contracts. Certifications made by
• other U.S. DOT recipients may also be accepted.
Prime contractors will be required to make good faith efforts to replace a DBE
subcontractor that is unable to perform the contract successfully with another
DBE. Substitutions of DBE subcontractors after bid opening and during contract
performance must be approved and the eligibility of the substitute firm verified
by the City.
Any business that desires to participate as a DBE will be required to complete
and submit Schedule A (Appendix 1) . Any business that desires to participate as
a joint venture DBE will, in addition, be required to complete Schedule B
(Appendix 2). The schedules must be signed and notarized by the authorized
representative of the business. The act of application for DBE certification does
not of and by itself constitute certification by the City of Hutchinson.
The required Schedule must accompany the DBE participation information submitted
to the City by competitors.
A firm seeking certification as a DBE will not be required to submit Schedule A
or B if either of the following applies:
3
•
1. The potential DBE contractor states in writing that the same information has
been submitted to or has been certified by the City, any U.S. DOT element, or
other Federal agency that uses essentially the same definition and ownership and
control criteria as the U.S. DOT. In this case, the potential DBE must obtain
the information and certification (if made) from the other agency and submit it •
to the City; or
2. The potential DBE contractor has been determined by the Small Business
Administration to be owned and controlled by socially and economically
disadvantaged individuals under Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act, as
amended. (See page 16 regarding information that 8(a) firms are required to
provide.)
tote 1: lo addition to the above circumstances, a Schedule A or B is not required if a
different cercificaciao process has been appro red by the U.S, Hf. In these instances, the
firm must submit the information required by that process.
tote 1. ?be Section 8(a) program provides disadvantaged businesses with opportunities to
participate in federal covernment contracting. The Part 13 regulations incorporate the
defiai ci of of a 'small business concern' contained In the Small Business Act, subject to the
statutory $14 milli on cap. The regulations also incorporate the definition of 'socially and
economically disadvantaged individuals* used in the Small Business Act, ercept that women are
included In the definition for purposes of Part 13.
UN =FORM C ERT =F =CATSON S TANDARI7S
The City will take at least the following steps in determining whether a firm may
be certified as a DBE: •
1. Perform an on -site visit to the offices of the firm and to any job sites on
which the firm is working at the time of the eligibility investigation.'
2. Obtain the resumes or work histories of the principal owners of the firm and
personally interview these individuals.
3. Analyze the ownership of stock in the firm, if it is a corporation.
4. Analyze the bonding and financial capacity of the firm.
5. Determine the work history of the firm, including contracts it has received
and work it has completed.
6. Obtain or compile a list of equipment owned or available to the firm and the
licenses of the firm and its key personnel to perform the work it seeks to do as
part of the DBE program.
7. Obtain a statement from the firm of the type of work it prefers to perform
as part of the DBE program.
4
•
On -site Certification Visits*
1. When the City, at its discretion, accepts the certification of another U.S.
DOT recipient, which included visits conforming to the regulations.
is 2. When the City obtains the report of a site visit completed by another U.S.
DOT recipient, which the City relies on. A firm applying for certification may
be required to supply such report or cause the other recipient to supply it. The
City will then draw its own conclusions regarding eligibility.
3. When the City recertifies a firm that it previously reviewed on -site and
eligibility issues (e.g., change in ownership) have not arisen that make a second
visit necessary. In the absence of such issues, an on -site visit need be
conducted only once.
' Per guidance from the FAA, office and lob -site visits may be omitted from the investigation
in any of the above situations.
Decertification Procedures
Whenever the City comes to believe that a firm with a current certification is
no longer eligible, the firm will be afforded the rudiments of due process prior
to revoking its eligibility. The steps to be used are:
1. A letter will be sent to the firm, stating that decertification is being
contemplated. A brief description of the reasons for the proposed action will
be included.
• 2. The firm will be given an opportunity to respond in person and in writing to
present information and arguments. An informal meeting or hearing may be part
of the process, but a formal adversary proceeding will not be used.
While these procedures are not a regulatory requirement, the U.S. DOT has
recommended them to make the process fair and to prevent unnecessary procedural
litigation.
late 1: Whea a sponsor denies certification or completes a decertification, it may advise
the firm that an appeal may be filed within 180 days of the decision with the office named
below. An appeal mast be in writing, dated and signed, and should be made after all appeal
procedures of the airport sponsor bare been exhausted. (Departmental Office of Civil Rights,
Department of Transportation, 400 1tb Street Soutbwest, Washington, D.C. 10590)
late 2: The IAA may disseminate to all recipients copies of the certification decisions
rendered by the Departmental Office of Civil Rights (DOCK). Often, the same firm applies for
Certification or is certified by more than one recipient. The decisions are in response to
appeals of certification denials or so- caned 'third -party complaints' brought under 19 CPR
13.55.
5
•
ybe DOCR decisions apply only tc the actions that were contested and do not bind other
recipients to mate the same judgement concerning a firs '5 eligibility. Other recipie::3, wbo
bare granted certification to a fin that is adversely affected by a DOCR decision, are
advised to reexamine their records to detersfoe if cbe decision raises a certification issue.
Bach recipient suit sate its own decision based on the record, since firms sometimes
reorganise or otherwise restructure their ownership and control. dt any time that the
recipient considers decertifying a firm, the 'Decertificatooa Procedures' outlined it this
plan should be followed.
Reference: Secticn 13.61
DBE D EF =N =T =ON
To qualify for certification, a firm must meet the definition of a Disadvantaged
Business Enterprise (DBE). DBE means a small business concern:
1. Which is at least 51 percent owned by one or more socially and economically
disadvantaged individuals, or, in the case of any publicly owned business, at
least 51 percent of the stock of which is owned by one or more socially and
economically disadvantaged individuals; and
2. Whose management and daily business operations are controlled by one or more
of the socially and economically disadvantaged individuals who own it.
D ETE:m4xNAT =ONS OF B US =NESS S =ZE
The first step in the certification process is to make a determination of
business size. If the applicant is not a "small business concern," as defined
below, it will not be certified even though it may be owned and controlled by •
socially and economically disadvantaged individuals and eligible in all other
respects. Even a firm certified by the Small Business Administration (SBA) under
the Section 8(a) program is not eligible if it is not small.*
'The O.S. DCf bas stated that the S11 million limit for small business concerns, wbicb is
discussed below, applies to Section 8(a) firms. Sponsors bare the autbon ty and obligation
to require a Section 8(a) firm applying for certification or recertification to submit
financial figures indicating its average annual gross receipts for the three years p:ior to
the date of the application. if a firm has earned gross receipts in excess of the $14
million standard, the fin must be denied certification or decertified by the sponsor, d
firm that refuses to supply information to enable the sponsor to make this determination may
be either denied certification or decertified by the sponsor. leitber the P.S. DOy nor a
sponsor may require a Section 8(a) firm to submit other eligibility information, including
any pertaining to ownership and control, or social and economic disadvantage. d sponsor who
believes that the Section 8(a) status of a firm is questionable should comsunica:e the
information to the Small Business ddmiaistration, which is solely empowered to grant or
revoke Section 8(a) certifications.
6
1. The size standards established by the SBA in 13 CFR, Part 121, as revised on
May 25, 1988, are used for making size determinations. (See Appendix 9.) These
standards supersede the ones shown in Appendix B of Subpart D.
2. However, no firm is considered small if, including its affiliates, it
averages annual gross receipts in excess of $14 million over the previous three
fiscal years (Section 505(d)(2), Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as
Amended). Thus, a general contractor must "graduate" from the program once its
receipts exceed the $14 million ceiling, even though the SBA standard for general
contractors is $17 million.
3. Contractors are still subject to applicable lower limits established by the
SBA. For example, the SBA size limit for electrical contractors is $7 million
(average of annual gross receipts for three -year period). The $7 million limit,
rather than the $14 million ceiling, governs in size determinations of these
contractors.
4. For AIP- funded subcontracts of $10,000 or less, a firm is small under the SBA
regulations if, including its affiliates, it has no more than 500 employees.
5. For AIP- funded subcontracts over $10,000 and prime contracts, a firm is small
under the SBA regulations if, including its affiliates, it meets the applicable
standard in terms of average gross receipts, number of employees, or other
measure.
While for many of the businesses used in AIP projects, the SBA standard is
measured in gross receipts, this may not always be so. For example, a
manufacturer of concrete products (SIC 3272) is small if it has no more than 500
employees. If one of these businesses earns gross receipts in excess of the $14
• million cap, it would not qualify as small and hence for eligibility as a DBE,
even though it may have less than 500 employees.
6. All affiliates of a firm, as well as the firm itself, are considered when
determining gross receipts earned or number of persons employed. Affiliation
exists if one firm controls or has the power to control the other, or a third
party or parties controls or has the power to control both firms.
7. Information on gross receipts earned by an applicant is obtained from its
submission of Schedule A (Appendix 1).
8. If a firm applies for certification in more than one category (e.g., general
construction and special trade subcontractor), the applicable SBA standard is the
one that describes the work the firm will perform under the AIP- funded contract.
9. Size determinations will be reviewed annually in connection with the
recertification process.
Reference: Section 23.61
7
•
S OC =AL.I.Y AND E CONOM=CAL.LY D =SADVANTAGED
I NnxV =DUA
1. Any person having a current Section B(a) certification from the Small
Business Administration is considered to be socially and economically
disadvantaged.
2. A "rebuttable presumption" will be made that individuals in the following
groups who are citizens of the United States (or lawfully permanent residents)
are socially and economically disadvantaged:
a. Women;
b. Black Americans, which includes persons having origins in any of the
Black racial groups of Africa;
C. Hispanic Americans, which includes persons of Mexican, Puerto Rican,
Cuban, Central or South American, or other Spanish or Portuguese culture or
origin, regardless of race;
d. Native Americans, which includes persons who are American Indians,
Eskimos, Aleuts, or Native Hawaiians;
e. Asian - Pacific Americans, which includes persons whose origins are from
Japan, China, Taiwan, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, the Philippines, Samoa,
Guam, the U. S. Trust Territories of the Pacific, the Northern Marianas, Burma,
Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Brunei, Republic of the Marshall •
Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Macao, Hong Kong, Fiji, Tonga, Kiribati,
Tuvalu and Nauru; and
f. Asian-Indian Americans, which includes persons whose origins are from
India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Maldives Islands and Nepal.
Business owners who fall into one of these groups will generally be assumed to
be socially and economically disadvantaged. Their disadvantaged status will not
generally be investigated, unless a third -party challenge is made.
3. Other individuals may be found to be socially and economically disadvantaged
on a case -by -case basis. For example, a disabled Vietnam veteran, an Appalachian
white male, or another person may claim to be disadvantaged. If such individual
requests that his or her firm be certified as a DBE under the certification
process, a determination will be made concerning whether the individual is
socially and economically disadvantaged under the criteria in Appendix C of
Subpart D. These owners must demonstrate that their disadvantaged status arose
from individual circumstances, rather than by virtue of membership in a group.
Reference, Section 23.69
8
C 14J%X a.F: N(1 — E P ROCEDURES
Any third party may present evidence challenging whether a firm's owners who are
presumed to be socially and economically disadvantaged are truly disadvantaged.
Individuals certified as Section 8(a), however, are not subject to these
challenges.'
When a written challenge to the disadvantaged status of a business owner that is
certified or seeking certification is received, a determination of social and
economic disadvantage will be made. The City itself may also initiate an
inquiry.
The guidelines in 49 CFR 23.69 and Appendix C will be used for these actions.
The procedures are informal; strict rules of evidence do not apply.
While a challenge is in progress, the presumption of social and economic
disadvantage continues; and if the firm has been certified, it will continue to
be eligible as a DBE.
'If a challenge is wade to tte owners of a Section Sfa) fin, the sponsor should refer the
information or question to the SBA for resolution, as indicated an page 16,
Reference; Section 23.53
E L =G =S =L =TY S TP mnP►RDS
• The City will use the following standards to determine whether a firm is owned
and controlled by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged
individuals.
1. Bona fide membership in a group of socially and economically disadvantaged
individuals must be established on the basis of the applicant's claim that he or
she is a member of such group and is so regarded by that particular disadvantaged
community. However, a claim is not required to be accepted if it is determined
to be invalid.
Proof of ancestry alone is not conclusive evidence of membership in a group of
socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. The fact that a person's
grandfather or other relative belonged to one of these groups does not
necessarily qualify the applicant as a member for purposes of DBE certification.
If the individual has not held himself or herself out to be a member of the
community of disadvantaged individuals, has not acted as a member of that
community, and would not be identified by persons in the population at large as
a member of the group, the individual is not considered as belonging to that
disadvantaged group for purposes of DBE certification.
• 9
2. An eligible DBE must be an independent business. The ownership and control
by disadvantaged persons must be real, substantial, and continuing and must go
beyond the pro forma ownership of the firm as reflected in its ownership
documents. The disadvantaged owners must enjoy the customary incidents of
ownership and must share in the risks and profits commensurate with their is
ownership interests, as demonstrated by an examination of the substance rather
than form of arrangements. Recognition of the business as a separate entity for
tax or corporate purposes is not necessarily sufficient for recognition as a DBE.
In determining whether a potential DBE is an independent business, all relevant
factors will be considered, including the date the business was established, the
adequacy of its resources for the work of the contract, and the degree to which
financial, equipment leasing, and other relationships with non -DBE firms vary
from industry practice.
3. The disadvantaged owners must also possess the power to direct or cause the
direction of the management and policies of the firm and to make the day -to -day
as well as major decisions on matters of management, policy, and operations. The
firm must not be subject to any formal or informal restrictions which limit the
customary discretion of the disadvantaged owners. There must not be restrictions
through, for example, bylaw provisions, partnership agreements, or charter
requirements for cumulative voting rights or otherwise that prevent the
disadvantaged owners, without the cooperation or vote of any owner who is not
socially and economically disadvantaged, from making a business decision of the
firm.
4. If the owners of the firm who are not socially and economically disadvantaged
individuals are disproportionately responsible for the operation of the firm,
then the firm is not controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged
individuals and is not eligible. Where the actual management of the firm is •
contracted out to individuals other than the owner, the persons having the
ultimate power to hire and fire the managers are considered as controlling the
business.
5. All securities which constitute ownership and /or control of a corporation for
purposes of establishing it as a DBE must be held directly by socially and
economically disadvantaged individuals. No securities held in trust, or by any
guardian for a minor, shall be considered as held by socially and economically
disadvantaged individuals in determining the ownership or control of a
corporation.
6. The contributions of capital or expertise by the socially and economically
disadvantaged individuals to acquire their interests in the firm shall be real
and substantial. Examples of insufficient contributions include a promise to
contribute capital, a note payable to the firm or its owners who are not socially
and economically disadvantaged, or the mere participation as an employee, rather
than as a manager.
7. In addition to the above standards, special consideration is given to the
following circumstances
10 0
a. Newly formed firms and firms whose ownership and /or control has changed
since the date of the advertisement of the U.S. DOT- assisted contract are closely
scrutinized to determine the reasons for the timing of the formation or change
in the firm.
b. A previous and /or continuing employer - employee relationship between or
among present owners is carefully reviewed to ensure that the employee -owner has
management responsibilities and capabilities, as referenced above.
c. Any relationship between a DBE and a non -DBE which has
an interest in the DBE is carefully reviewed to determine if the interest of the
non -DBE conflicts with the requirements for ownership and control.
8. A joint venture will be certified if the DBE partner of the joint venture
meets the eligibility standards, is responsible for a clearly defined portion of
the work to be performed, and shares in the ownership, control, management
responsibilities, risks, and profits of the joint venture.
9. A joint venture is eligible to compete in a DBE set -aside if the DBE partner
of the joint venture meets the eligibility standards; the DBE partner's share in
the ownership, control, management responsibilities, risks, and profits of the
joint venture is at least 51 percent; and the DBE partner is responsible for a
clearly defined portion of the work to be performed.
10. A business applying for certification as a DBE or as a joint venture DBE
must cooperate in supplying any additional information which may be requested in
order to make a determination. For example, the applicant nay be required to
provide income tax statements.
• 11. Safeguards will be taken to prevent disclosure to unauthorized persons about
information that reasonably may be regarded as confidential business information,
consistent with Federal, state, and local law.
12. Once certified, a DBE will be required to update its submission annually by
submitting a new Schedule A or certifying that the Schedule A on file is still
accurate. Firms are notified upon certification that a new Schedule A must be
submitted whenever there is a change in the firm's ownership or control.
13. The denial of certification is final for the particular contract and any
other contracts being let at the time of the denial (except when the U.S. DOT
reverses the denial, following an appeal). Firms denied certification may
correct deficiencies in their ownership and control and reapply for certification
only for future contracts.
Reference: Section 23.45(8)
Section 23.64
11
•
PERCENTAGE GOALS FOR THE DO T.T.AR y poL '
c F THE WORK TO BE AWARDED To DBE ' s
Establishing the Overall Goal
A single overall goal will be set for the use of DBE's in AIP- funded contracting,
together with a description of the methodology employed in establishing it.
The following guidelines apply when establishing the overall goal:
1. Make a projection of the wor to be accomplished during the goal period on
all AIP- funded contracts (excludi purchases of land) and estimate the cost of
the work items in each.
Whenever possible, an engineer's estimate of the costs will be provided.
The overall goal may cover a one -year period or may be set for a particular
grant, project, or group of grants and /or projects. Whichever method is used,
the goal shall be updated annually.
The overall goal and the base from which the goal is calculated shall reflect
both construction and nonconstruction contracts funded by the AIP. Eligible
nonconstruction includes funding for architectural, engineering, planning
consultants, and other professional services; purchase of vehicles and equipment
(e.g., snow plows, crash /fire /rescue vehicles); and supplies.
While contracts to purchase land are excluded from the goal- setting process, all •
other contracts let under land acquisition projects, such as for real estate
survey and appraisal, shall be included.
Funds received under the AIP for work that is accomplished by the City's own
employees or the employees of another public agency ( "force account ") shall be
excluded from consideration. Other costs that are not contracted (e.g., for
administration and advertising) will also be excluded.
2. Select the geographical area(s) to be used in seeking DBE's for the work to
be accomplished
Contractors shall, as a minimum, seek DBE's in the same geographical area in
which they seek contractors or subcontractors generally for a given solicitation.
The relevant geographical area may vary depending on the contract. For example,
if general contractors are solicited in a five- county area to do a construction
project, then the availability of DBE's for that project shall be based on this
search in the five - county area.
12
If a larger area is used, such as statewide, to advertise for professional
services, the DBE goal for these contracts shall be based on its search on a
statewide basis.
3. Consult the Directory and other sources to determine the availability of
DBE's in the relevant geographical areas.
In addition to our own DBE directory, the directories or lists of State and local
agencies, other U.S. DOT recipients, the Chamber of Commerce, the Small Business
Administration, the Minority Business Development Agency of the DOC, and other
listings will be used. These sources should provide a basis for determining the
availability of DBE's in the relevant areas capable of performing the work of the
contracts.
4. Identify potential for DBE participation
Based on a review of the directories and prior accomplishments, a determination
will be made of the potential for DBE participation as prime or subcontractors
on the AIP- funded projects during the goal period. The following factors should
be considered:
a. The number and types of contracts to be awarded and the number and types
of DBE's likely to be available to compete for those contracts; and
b. The past results of efforts to contract with DBE's and the reasons for
the high or low level of those results.
The above approach provides for practical goals that are related to the known
availability of qualified DBE's.
• 5. Calculate the Overall Goal
The overall goal will be determined by dividing the Federal share of potential
awards to DBE's (dollar value) by the Federal share of all prime contract awards
(dollar value) forecast for the goal period. Appendix 6 contains information on
the Federal share.
Overall DBE
Goal
Federal Share of Potential DBE Awards ($)
Federal Share of All Prime Contract Awards (S)
In the example in Appendix 4, the Federal share of all project costs is 90
percent and the calculation becomes:
Overall DBE
Goal
(90%) x $125,500 - $112,950
- 13.9%
(90 %) x $900,000 - $810,000
13
•
If the overall goal does not represent an increase over the previous year's
accomplishments, an explanation shall be provided why an increase cannot
reasonably be achieved."
Information will also be submitted for any additional AIP— funded work to be
undertaken during the goal period for which estimates are not available at the
time of program submission. Potential for DBE participation will be identified
for these projects. A revised overall DBE goal will be submitted to the FAA for
approval. Approval will be obtained from the FAA prior to soliciting bids for
these projects.
lute 1: There is Dc exact foraula that cat be readily used to establish overall percentage
goals. Sponsors who propose to use a fo:wUld should ensure that the availability of DBE's
and the other factors contained in the regulation have been considered. The population of
the iiDoricy community is only a very gene:al guide to availability. Goals adopted by other
D.S. DDT recipients or other state or local agencies in the sale geographical area lay be a
useful guide when coocraccitg requirewents are siu la:, Also, the history of 11A Regional
data as broken down by state and various airpo:ts can serve as an excellent reference,
Tote 1: Appendix i contains additional erawples illustrating the calculation of overall and
contract goals,
Explanation for Failing to Meet Overall DBE Goal
If the overall DBE goal is not achieved, an explanation will be submitted to the
FAA stating the reasons for failing to meet the goal.
Pe rcentage Goals for Dollar Value of Work Awarded to DBE's
Both overall program goals and individual project goals will be set
Goal determination will be based upon the number and nature of anticipated DOT
assisted projects, the availability of disadvantaged contractors in the area. An
overall goal of 123 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Participation is
established for the Hutchinson Municipal Airport DBE Program for the period of
May 12, 1992 through December 31, 1993. This goal will be reviewed and updated
periodically.
14
A Mmnws To EwstmE; THAT CoripET =TORS MAC
a Goon FAxrrH EFFORTS To MEET THE DBE GO
Whenever the City issues a solicitation for an FAA- assisted contract that has
subcontracting possibilities, the solicitation will contain the DBE contract
goal. This procedure will be followed for nonconstruction as well as
construction projects. Thus, the appropriate goal will be included in
Invitations for Bid (IFB) for construction work and in Requests for Proposals
(REP) for architectural, engineering, and other professional services.
The solicitation will include a statement that the apparent successful competitor
will be required to submit DBE participation information and that as a condition
of receiving the contract, the competitor must meet the DBE goal or demonstrate
to the City that good faith efforts were made. The actual clause to be used is:
The bidder /proposer shall make good faith efforts, as defined in Appendix
A of 49 CFR, Part 23, Regulations of the Office of the Secretary of
Transportation, to subcontract 12 percent of the dollar value of the
prime contract to small business concerns owned and controlled by socially
and economically disadvantaged individuals (DBE) . In the event that the
bidder for this solicitation qualifies as a DBE, the contract goal shall
be deemed to have been met. Individuals who are rebuttably presumed to be
socially and economically disadvantaged include women, Black Americans,
Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, Asian - Pacific Americans, and
Asian-Indian Americans. The apparent successful competitor will be
required to submit information concerning the DBE's that will participate
• in the contract. The information will include: (1) the name and address
of each DBE; (2) a description of the work to be performed by each named
firm; and (3) the dollar value of the work of the contract. If the bidder
fails to achieve the contract goal stated herein, the bidder will be
required to provide documentation demonstrating that it made good faith
efforts in attempting to do so. A bid that fails to meet these
requirements will be considered nonresponsive.
The DBE participation information will be required prior to committing the City
to award the contract to the apparent successful competitor.
Note 1: If a contract goal has not been established, the clause shown should not
be included in the solicitation.
Note 2: If a contract goal has been established, a bidder may not meet the
requirements of the bid specification by stating that all work will be
accomplished by using the bidder's own employees. The bidder, first, must
demonstrate to the sponsor's satisfaction that good faith efforts were made to
meet the goal, and, despite those efforts, the bidder was unable to subcontract
any of the work to DBE's.
15
If the contract goal specified in the solicitation is not met, the apparent
successful competitor will be required to submit documentation of the efforts
that were made. The City will then determine whether these were "good faith
efforts." The following criteria will be used:
1. whether the contractor attended any presolicitation or prebid meetings that
were scheduled by the recipient to inform DBE's of contracting and subcontracting
opportunities;
2. whether the contractor advertised in general circulation, trade association,
and minority -focus media concerning the subcontracting opportunities;
3. whether the contractor provided written notice to a reasonable number of
specific DBE's that their interest in the contract was being solicited, in
sufficient time to allow the DBE's to participate effectively;
4. Whether the contractor followed up initial solicitations of interest by
contracting DBE's to determine with certainty whether the DBE's were interested;
5. whether the contractor selected portions of the work to be performed by DBE's
in order to increase the likelihood of meeting the DBE goals (including, where
appropriate, breaking down contracts into economically feasible units to
facilitate DBE participation);
6. Whether the contractor provided interested DBE's with adequate information
about the plans, specifications, and requirements of the contract;
7. whether the contractor negotiated in good faith with interested DBE's, not
rejecting DBE's as unqualified without sound reasons based on a thorough •
investigation of their capabilities;
S. Whether the contractor made efforts to assist interested DBE's in obtaining
bonding, lines of credit, or insurance required by the City or contractor; and
9. whether the contractor effectively used the services of available minority
community organizations; minority contractors groups; local, state, and Federal
minority business assistance offices, and other organizations that provide
assistance in the recruitment and placement of DBE's.
The following points apply to good faith effort determinations:
1. Good faith efforts are those that could reasonably be expected to result in
goal attainment by a bidder who aggressively and actively seeks to obtain DBE
participation.
2. The above list of nine efforts are recommended by the U.S. DOT as ones that
bidders /proposers may make to obtain DBE participation. It does not represent
a mandatory checklist of required actions; no one or combination is required in
all cases.
3. The list above is not intended to be exhaustive; other factors or efforts may
be relevant in appropriate instances.
16
4. The quantity and intensity of the efforts will be examined as well as the
type of actions taken. Efforts that are merely pro forma are not sufficient,
even though they may be sincerely motivated.
0 Alternative Requirements
If other requirements of equal or.greater effectiveness are desired in lieu of
good faith efforts, the FAA will be notified by letter of the content of those
requirements prior to contract award.
In the event that FAA does not approve of the alternative requirements, the good
faith efforts may be required as described above.
Conclusive Presumption
When 49 CFR, Part 23, was published by the U.S. DOT in 1980 (45 Fed. Reg. 21172,
March 31, 1980), Sections 23.45(h) and (i) established a conclusive presumption
to be used in the award of U.S. DOT- assisted contracts. Under these provisions,
the recipient presumed conclusively that if one bidder met the MBE contract goals
and offered a reasonable price, bidders that did not meet the goals had not
exerted sufficient reasonable efforts and hence were ineligible to receive the
contract.
For example, if the low bidder failed to meet the goals, the recipient was
required to award the contract to another bidder that had, provided that the
price was reasonable.
An amendment to Part 23 published on April 27, 1981 (46 Fed. Reg. 23457),
replaced the conclusive presumption with the current provisions that are
• illustrated above which allow the low bidder to receive the contract if the goal
is met or satisfies the recipient that good faith efforts were made.
When the amendment was published, the U.S. DOT stated that recipients may use the
mechanism of the original Sections 23.45(h) and (i) or another system of their
choice, provided that it is as or more effective than the good faith efforts.
Thus, sponsors who wish to use the conclusive presumption approach may do so
without obtaining approval from the FAA. Appendix 8 contains the original
Sections 23.45(h) and (i).
17
0
• RESOLUTION NO. 9797
RESOLUTION REQUESTING PROMAW31G OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 22
BY THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
WHEREAS, the Hutchinson Area Task Force, which included representation
from the City of Hutchinson, McLeod County, Mid - Minnesota Development
Commission, and the Minnesota Department of Transportation, recommended
relocation of Trunk Highway 22 along the east side of Hutchinson, and;
WHEREAS, construction of County State Aid Highway 8 will be completed in
1993, providing a south fringe road for the City of Hutchinson, and;
WHEREAS, the realigned Trunk Highway 22 is proposed to connect to the
fringe road system and be the eastern leg of the route, and;
WHEREAS, existing vehicle traffic in downtown Hutchinson, both on Trunk
Highway 15 and Trunk Highway 22, is continuing to increase at a significant
pace, creating safety concerns and traffic impediments, and;
WHEREAS, existing large vehicle and truck traffic currently have no
reasonable alternative route to avoid utilizing congested routes through
downtown Hutchinson;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
•
HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA;
1. The City requests that the Minnesota Department of Transportation
program this section of highway reconstruction as soon as possible
to address concerns in downtown Hutchinson and northwestern McLeod
County.
2. Due to rapidly encroaching development in the City and County in
this area, the City requests that the platting process commence
immediately, prior to construction funding, to protect the
proposed route for future construction.
Adopted this Sth day of September, 1992, by the City Council of
Hutchinson, Minnesota.
Mayor
City Administrator
r1
LJ
0
•
THIS AGREEMENT, is made the day and year set forth in this
agreement, by and between the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota, State
of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the City, and Norwest Bank
Minnesota, National Association, State of Minnesota, hereinafter
referred to as the Owner.
In consideration of action by the City Council, at the owner's
request, to cause construction and reassessment of sanitary sewer
main and services, watermain and services, storm sewer, grading,
concrete curb and gutter, gravel base, bituminous base and
surfacing and appurtenances for the following parcel, the noted
assessments for the following assessment rolls shall be annulled
and reassessedc
SA -122 SA -240
PID (1981) (1988)
12- 116 -30 -02 -0040 $ 31,450.33 $ 48,964.97
The Owner hereby verifies that it is the sole owner of the parcel
referenced above. The Owner hereby agrees that all current
assessments to the above referenced parcel shall be annulled, and
that these assessments shall be reassessed based on the principal
amount of the original assessment adjusted to present day costs by
the ENR (Engineering News Record construction cost ratio), as noted
below. The assessments shall be deferred until the parcels are sold
or developed. At that time the principal amount for the prorated
share of the sold or developed property shall be adjusted to the
present day cost by the ENR and be due and payable. The Owner has
the option of assuming the new assessments for a seven year period
at an interest rate of 7 %.
1992 Cost Calculation
SA -122 ENR (1981 to 1992) - 5032/3533 - 1.424
1992 COST IS $ 31,450.33 x 1.424 - $ 44,785.27
SA -240 ENR (1988 to 1992) - 5032/4519 - 1.114
1992 COST IS $ 48,964.97 x 1.114 - $ 54,546.98
TOTAL $ 99,332.25
•
Owner expressly waives objection to any irregularity with regard to
said improvement assessments and any claim that the amount thereof
levied against owner's property is excessive, together with the
rights to appeal in the courts.
92
Page 2
In testimony, whereof,
the
National
and
has
of
hereunto
1992.
Norwest Bank Minnesota,
set his hand, on
0
•
Association,
SIGNATURES
In presence of
91
AGREEI�tEN7' OF ASSESSMEIV'l'
• AND WASVER OF Sl2l2EGUZ.ARSTY AND APPF..�a r.
OF 14EASSESSMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, is made the day and year set forth in this
agreement, by and between the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota, State
of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the City, and Norwest Bank
Minnesota, National Association, State of Minnesota, hereinafter
referred to as the Owner.
In consideration of action of the City Council, at the owner's
request, to cause construction and reassessment of sanitary sewer
main and services, watermain and services, storm sewer, grading,
concrete curb and gutter, gravel base, bituminous base and
surfacing and appurtenances for the following described parcels,
PID
Lot
Block
Subdivision
12- 116- 30 -02- 0220
1
3
Plaza Heights
0230
2
3
"
0240
3
3
"
0250
4
3
"
0260
1
4
"
0270
2
4
"
0280
3
4
"
0290
4
4
"
0300
5
4
"
0310
6
4
"
• 0320
7
4
0330
8
4
"
0340
9
4
"
0350
10
4
"
0360
1
5
"
0370
2
5
"
0380
3
5
"
0390
4
5
"
0400
1
6
"
0410
2
6
"
0420
3
6
"
0430
4
6
Plaza Heights
This agreement covers Assessment Roll numbers SA -228, SA -240, SA-
251, SA -243A, SA -272 and the assessment amounts noted on the
attachment.
The Owner hereby verifies that it is the sole owner of all parcels
referenced above. The Owner hereby agrees that all current
assessments to the above referenced parcels shall be annulled, and
that these assessments shall be reassessed based on the principal
amount of the original assessment adjusted to present day costs by
the ENR (Engineering News Record construction cost ratio). This
amount is hereby agreed to be $ 253,301.97. It is agreed and
• understood that the assessments shall be reassessed at a rate of
$ 11,513.73 to each of the 22 lots for a 7 year period at an
interest rate of 7% starting in 1993.
91
Page 2
Agreement of Assessment Annulment and Waiver of Irregularity and Appeal
for Plaza Heights /Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.
owner expressly waives objection to any irregularity with regard to
said improvement assessments and any claim that the amount thereof
levied against owner's property is excessive, together with the
rights to appeal in the courts.
In testimony, whereof, _
the
National Association, has
SIGNATURE:
In presence of
and
of
hereunto
1992.
Norwest Bank Minnesota,
set his hand, on
•
0
•
91
AGAFF' 'NT OF ASSESSJ��NT AN217iJ1./'�NT RAID hrASVER OF
SRREGlJ1.�lRSTY AND APPEAL OF RF.A�4SESSMEIN4
for BANK MSNNESOTA N R
PM
SA -228
SA -240
SA -243
SA -251
SA -243A
SA -272
12- 116- 30 -02-
Lot
Block
(1987)
(1988)
(1988)
(1989)
(1989)
(1991)
TOTAL
0220
1
3
$ 773.85
$ 5,632.70
$
507.96
$
178.56
$
7,093.07
0230
2
3
$ 773.85
$ 5,632.70
S
507.96
$
178.56
S
7,093.07
0240
3
3
$ 773.85
$ 5,632.70
$
507.96
$
178.56
$
7,093.07
0250
4
3
$ 773.85
$ 5,632.70
$
507.96
$
178.56
$
7,093.07
0260
1
4
$ 6,465.67
S 5,496.75
$
507.96
$
603.43
$ 1,577.08
$
14,650.89
0270
2
4
$ 6,465.67
$ 5,496.75
$
507.96
$
603.43
$ 1,577.08
$
14,650.89
0280
3
4
$ 6,465.67
$ 5,496.75
$
507.96
$
603.43
$ 1,577.08
$
14,650.89
0290
4
4
$ 6,465.67
$ 5,496.75
S
507.96
$
603.43
$ 1,577.08
$
14,650.89
0300
5
4
$ 6,465.67
S 5,496.75
$
507.96
$
603.43
$ 1,577.08
$
14,650.89
0310
6
4
$ 773.85
$ 5,496.75
S
507.96
$
178.56
$
6,957.12
0320
7
4
$ 773.85
$ 5,496.75
$
507.96
$
178.56
$
6,957.12
0330
8
4
$ 773.85
$ 5,496.75
$
507.96
$
178.56
$
6,957.12
0340
9
4
$ 773.85
$ 5,496.75
$
507.96
$
178.56
$
6,957.12
0350
10
4
$ 773.85
$ 5,496.75
$
507.96
$
178.56
S
6,957.12
0360
1
5
S 773.85
$ 8,968.08
$
507.96.
$
178.56
$ 1,902.60
$
12,331.05
0370
2
5
$ 773.85
$ 8,968.08
$
507.96
$
178.56
$ 1,902.60
$
12,331.05
0380
3
5
S 773.85
$ 8,968.08
$
507.96
$
178.56
$ 1,902.60
$
12,331.05
0390
4
5
$ 773.85
$ 8,968.08
S
507.96
$
178.56
$ 1,902.60
S
12,331.05
0400
1
6
$ 773.85
$ 7,059.99
$
507.96
S
178.56
$ 1,902.60
$
10,422.96
0410
2
6
$ 773.85
$ 7,059.99
$
507.96
$
178.56
$ 1,902.60
$
10,422.96
0420
3
6
$ 773.85
$ 7,059.99
$
507.96
$
178.56
$ 1,902.60
$
10,422.96
0430
4
6
S 773.85
$ 7,059.99
$
507.96
$
178.56
$ 1,902.60
$
10,422.96
TOTAL
22
lots
$45,483.80
$141,610.58
$11,175.12
$
6,052.67
$ 7,885.40
$15,220.80
$227,428.37
TOTAL
(1992 Coat)
$51,033.47
$157,754.19
$12,449.08
$
6,609.52
$ 8,610.86
$15,844.85
$253,301.97
MM (Engineering
!News Record
Construction Cost) RATIOS:
1992
PER LOT COST
1987 to
1992
5032/4400 -
1.144
$ 253,301.97/22 lots
1988 to
1992
5032/4519 -
1.114
$ 11,513.73/lot
1989 to
1992
5032/4606 -
1.092
1991 to
1992
5032/4835 -
1.041
MEMORANDUM
• TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
•
•
Gary Plotz, City Administrat r
Steve Madson, Chief of Polic
September 3, 1992
Domestic Violence
W
Attached herewith please find a copy of Hutchinson Police
Department Directive P441. This directive has been developed in
response to legislative mandates as enacted during the last session
of the Minnesota State legislature. The directive incorporates the
purpose, policy, and procedural elements which addresses the police
departments response to domestic calls and domestic violence.
Please place this directive on the city council agenda for approval
by the city council so that final implementation may be effected.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this memorandum,
please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest convenience.
/lkg
92 -02 -0026
CC: G. Barry Anderson
9�'
• PROCEDURES
Subject: Dosestic Ca1110osestic Violence Directive: PAW
I �
I I I I
Date Issued 090112 Date Effective: 09/01/92 Supersedes: Ruder of Pages: 9
P441.O1 Purpose
The principal purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines and
procedures to be followed by peace officers in law enforcement's
response to domestic violence. Additionally this policy intends:
1. to prevent future incidents of domestic violence by establishing
arrest rather than mediation as the preferred means of law
enforcement response to domestic violence;
2. to afford maximum protection and support to victims of domestic
violence through a coordinated program of law enforcement and
victim assistance;
3. to oversee that the same law enforcement services are available
in domestic violence cases as they are in other criminal cases;
• 4. to reaffirm the peace officers' authority and responsibility to
make arrest decisions in accordance with established probable
cause standards;
5. to promote peace officer safety by providing information so that
they are as fully prepared as possible to respond to domestic
calls;
6. to complement and coordinate efforts undertaken with the
development of domestic abuse prosecution plans so that law
enforcement, prosecution and advocacy will be more efficient and
successful, and
7, to promote the accountability of law enforcement to the public
in responding to domestic violence.
8. to document allegations of domestic violence so there can be
meaningful prosecution and delivery of victim services.
P441.O2 Policy
The city of Hutchinson and its police department recognizes domestic
violence as those cases where there is conflict between people who have
a blood relationship, or have or had a dating relationship, or legal
family relationship. It is the policy of this agency to protect
•
victims of domestic violence by making an arrest whenever it is
authorized and for its peace officers to have complete understanding of
the law governing this area.
Peace officers will utilize this policy in response to calls where
there may be domestic violence. It is the intent of this policy to
prescribe courses of action which peace officers should take in
response to a domestic call. This agency will aggressively enforce
these laws without bias and prejudice based on race, sexual
orientation, social class, age, disability, gender, religion, creed, or
natural origin.
P441.03 Definitions
1. Domestic Abuse Intervention Program means a public or private
intervention project which provides support and assistance to the
victims of domestic violence.
2. Domestic Call means a request for assistance to a law enforcement
agency in response to conflict between people who have a blood
relation or who have or had a dating relationship or legal family
relationships between two household members and which may involve
domestic violence.
P441.04 Dispatching the Calls
•
1. Receiving the Domestic Call
Upon receiving a domestic call, the dispatcher will assign the •
call a high priority. Also, whenever possible the dispatcher
will assign at least two officers to a domestic call. In the
event that only one officer is available, reasonable efforts
should be made to assign a back -up unit.
2. Information to Obtain
The dispatcher receiving a domestic call should attempt to elicit
from the caller and should communicate to the responding peace
officer as much of the following information as possible.
a. The nature of the incident
b. The address of the incident, including apartment number,
etc.
C. A telephone number where the caller can be called back
d. Whether weapons are involved or present in the dwelling
e. Whether an ambulance is needed
f. Whether there is an order for protection
g. Whether children are present at the scene
h. Whether there are non - English speaking people, or people
with mobility impairments or hearing impairments
i. Whether there has been prior violence or prior calls
involving these individuals
40
j. Information about the suspect: including whether the
suspect is present, description, direction of flight, mode
• of travel, etc.
If the caller is the victim, the dispatcher should attempt to
keep the caller on the telephone as long as possible and should
tell the caller that help is on the way, and when the caller can
expect police to arrive.
If the caller is a witness to a domestic indicent in progress,
the dispatcher should keep the caller on the phone and should
relay ongoing information provided by the caller to the
responding peace officers.
If the responding peace officers are some distance away, and the
dispatcher cannot remain on the telephone with the caller /victim,
the dispatcher should call back every few minutes to check on the
progress of events, and call again when the officer arrives at
the scene. If the dispatcher finds that a victim /caller who was
recently available suddenly can't be reached by phone or there
is a persistent busy signal, the dispatcher should relay that
information to the officer.
P441.05 Responding to the Calls
1. Driving to the scene - The police officer should respond as soon
as possible and without unreasonable delay to the scene of a
• domestic violence.
2. Initial contact with occupants - The responding officer should
identify him /herself as a police officer, explain his /her
presence, and request entry into the home. The officer should
ask to see the person who is the subject of the call. If the
person who called the law enforcement agency is someone other
than the subject of the call, the officer should not reveal the
caller's name.
The officer should request permission to enter the premises and
conduct a search relevant to the incident if consent has been
given to do so. The officer should check the premises to make
sure all of the occupants are safe.
3. Refused Entry - If refused entry, the officer should be
persistent about seeing and speaking alone with the subject of
the call. If access to the subject is refused, the officer
should request the dispatcher to contact the caller if the caller
is the subject of the call.
If access is still refused and the officer has reason to believe
that someone is in eminent danger, the officer is permitted to
force entry.
If the officer is refused entry and has no reason to force entry,
• the officer should contact the supervisor and request a warrant.
If the officer is not able to obtain any entry, the supervisor
will designate an officer or the dispatcher to call back or go
back to the scene within an hour to check on the well -being of •
the persons at the scene of the domestic call.
4. First Aid - After gaining control of the scene, the responding
peace officers shall provide the necessary first aid.
P441.06 Arrests
1. Domestic Violence Arrest
When the peace officer has probable cause to believe that the
person within the preceding four hours has assaulted, threatened
with a dangerous weapon, or placed in fear of immediate bodily
harm the person's spouse, former spouse, or other person with
whom the person resides or has formerly resided. The peace
officer may arrest even though the assault did not take place in
the presence of the peace officer (Minn. Stat. Section 629.341).
Note: When determining probable cause, the peace officers should
consider their observations and any statements by parties
involved and any witnesses.
2. Probable Cause Felony Arrests
At a domestic call, peace officers shall also investigate for the
elements of assaults in the third degree, Minn. Stat. Section
609.223, second degree, Minn. Stat. Section 609.222, and first .
degree, Minn. Stat. Section 609.221, and the crime of terroristic
threats, Minn. Stat. Section 609.713, and any other felonious
crimes that may have occurred during the commission of domestic
call, and shall make a probable cause arrest when the elements
are present.
3. Primary Aggressor and Dual Arrests
Where there are allegations that each party assaulted the other,
officers shall not make a dual arrest unless the officers
conclude that neither party is the primary aggressor based on the
following criteria:
a. The comparative extent of any injuries inflicted.
b. Existence of fear of physical injury because of threats
that were made.
C. The reality of the feeling of fear because of physical
stature of the parties involved.
d. Who initiated first contact of a physical nature.
e. The history of domestic violence perpetrated by one party
against the other. •
c. Gross Misdemeanor Domestic Assault & Order for Protection
Arrests
is Minn. Stat. Section 609.224 Subd. 2, assault in the fifth
degree, provides for an enhanced gross misdemeanor
violation when the offense is against the same victim
within five years of a previous conviction. Minn. Stat.
518B.01 Subd. 2 provides for a gross misdemeanor offense
when the assault is perpetrated against a family or
household member.
Note: Peace officers should be aware of the definition of
"family or household members," pursuant to Minn. Stat
Section 518B.01, Subd. 1 (b). Pursuant to the same
statute, Subd. 14 provides that a person who violates an
Order for Protection within two years after a previous
conviction of the same offense is guilty of gross
misdemeanor.
P441.07 Weapons and the Collection of Evidence at the Scene
1. Weapons
Whenever possible and permissible by law, weapons at the scene
of a domestic call should be taken by the peace officer.
2. Evidence Collection
• An officer shall be designated to collect physical evidence, and
to take photographs and statements. Additionally, if the alleged
crime involves an assault, an officer will be designated to meet
with the victim within 48 hours following the domestic call in
order to obtain any additional evidence including photographs.
P441.08 Assistance, Staying at the Scene, Rights, Services
1. Staving at the Scene
If an arrest does not occur, the peace officer should remain at
the scene of the disturbance until they believe that the
likelihood of immediate and imminent violence has been
eliminated.
Note: Statutes provides that when a peace officer does not make
an arrest the peace officer must provide immediate assistance to
the victim including obtaining necessary medical treatment and
providing the victim with the notice of rights pursuant to Minn.
Stat. Section 629.341, Subd. 3. If a domestic abuse intervention
program is available, a peace officer should make contact for
immediate intervention.
2. Assistance to Non - English Speaking Victims or Victims with
Communication Disabilities
L ]
f. Existence or previous existence of orders for protection.
4. Misdemeanor Arrests
At a domestic call, the officer shall consider an arrest for •
misdemeanor or gross misdemeanors including but not limited to
trespassing, criminal damage to property, disorderly conduct or
assault.
Note: An officer may make these arrests if the offenses where
committed in the presence of the officer or a citizen may make
an arrest if the offense was committed in the presence of the
citizen.
5. Court Orders
a. Order for Protection
A peace officer shall arrest and take into custody without
a warrant, a person whom the peace officer has probable
cause to believe has violated an order granted pursuant to
Minn. Stat. Section 518B.01 restraining the person or
excluding the person from the residence, or the
petitioner's place of employment, even if the violation of
the order did not take place in the presence of the peace
officer. Peace officers must confirm the existence,
current validity, and provision of these orders prior to
enforcement action. A peace officer should exercise sound
judgements in developing probable cause, based on provable •
facts in support of an arrest for a violation allegedly
committed not in the peace officer's presence.
Note: State statute requires an arrest regardless of
whether or not the excluded party was invited back to the
residence. The four hour time limit in an arrest for
domestic assault pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 629.341
does not apply for a violation of an Order for Protection.
If there is evidence that an individual has violated
another provision of an Order for Protection, a police
report should be filed recommending that a criminal
complaint be issued.
b. Harassment Restraining Order
A peace officer shall arrest and take into custody a
person when the peace officer has probable cause to
believe the person has violated a harassment restraining
order pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 609.748. Note:
Peace officers must confirm the existence, current
validity, and provision of these orders prior to
enforcement action. A violation of this type of order is
a misdemeanor offense.
•
The peace officer shall use the resource list established by this
agency to contact a person to assist in those cases where the
• participants in the domestic call, including the witnesses, are
non - English speaking, is hearing- impaired, or has other
communication disabilities. The officer shall avoid the use of
friends, family or neighbors who shall serve as the primary
interpreter for the investigation.
3. Victims Rights
The peace officer shall tell the victim of the legal rights and
remedies available. The officer shall give the victim their
legal rights and services card as set forth in Minn. Stat.
Section 629.341, subd. 3. Note: These cards are available from
the Minnesota Department of Corrections.
4. Services
The peace officer shall contact the local Domestic Abuse
Intervention Program by phone as soon as possible on all arrest
situations.
P441.09 Children
1. Children at the Scene
If a child is present at the scene of a domestic violence, the
• officer should determine whether the child has been assaulted or
abused. In making this determination, the officer should
evaluate according to the following:
a. Any marks or injuries on the child; his /her physical
condition
b. The comfort level of the child with the parents or other
adults present, and the officer
C. The demeanor of the adults who are present
d. Talk to the child, if possible
e. Interview any other witnesses that can be identified
If the victim is a minor child, the officer shall arrest the
assailant upon probable cause to believe that a crime has been
committed and should make a report to child protective services,
as required by law. If the child has been physically injured,
the officer should escort the child to the nearest hospital for
treatment and contact child protective services.
2. Parents No Longer Providing Care
• If the legal parent or guardian of the child can no longer
provide care (as for example, when the victim is hospitalized),
the peace officer must establish who the legal parent or guardian
is. If possible, the officer should consult with the legal
guardian on determining the disposition of the child and should
follow the request for the child.
If the peace officer is unable to determine the legal parent or
guardian of the child or this person is unable to direct the
peace officer on the placement of the child the peace officer
should take the child to temporary custody in accordance with
Minn. Stat. Section 260.
P441.10 Reports and Forms
1. Incident Report
Peace officers shall file an incident report after responding to
all domestic calls.
a. Names, addresses, and phone numbers of the victim, the
accused, any witnesses, and the caller.
b. A second permanent address and telephone number for the
victim (such as a close family member or friend).
C. A statement of the relationship between the victim and the
accused.
d. Allegations of any previous convictions.
e. A narrative for the incident (including the date, time and
whether the accused appeared intoxicated or under the
influence of a controlled substance).
f. What, if any, weapons were used or threatened to be used.
g. A description of any injuries observed by the officer.
h. A description of any injuries described by the victim but
not observed by the officer and an indication that the
injury was not observed.
i. Documentation of any evidence that would tend to establish
that a crime was committed.
j. If the officer did not arrest or seek an arrest warrant
even though arrest was authorized, a detailed explanation
of the reasons for the officer's decision not to arrest.
k. The names and ages of any children present in the
household; their address and phone number if children were
relocated.
is
C]
1. Notation of previous incidents of which the officer is
personally aware. 0
M. If an officer was injured in the incident, the nature and
circumstances of the injury.
0 2. Arrest Report
In the case where an arrest is made, an arrest report should be
completed and included with incident report.
3. Services Department of Corrections Law Enforcement Data
Collection Form
A peace officer is require by Minn. Stat. Section 241.661 to
complete the Department of Corrections' Domestic Abuse Cases Law
Enforcement Data Collection Form.
4. Victim Resource Directory (HPD -62)
Whether or not an arrest is made deliver this form to the victim.
5. Crime Victim Reparations Board
If assailant is charged with a felony or gross misdemeanor,
deliver information and claim form to victim regarding crime
victims reparation.
is
E
r
September 3, 1992
MEMO
TO: MAYOR 8 CITY COUNCIL
FROM: KEN MERRILL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: HEALTH 8 DENTAL INSURANCE RENEWALS
Dennis Potter, Insurance Planner Agency, and Mark Flaten, American
Risk Services, will be on hand to discuss the renewal of our
health and dental insurance. Attached are copies of renewal quotes
prepared by Mark Flaten for our health and dental programs which
renew September 1.
The proposal show a 5% rate adjustment for dental insurance and 14%
rate increase for health insurance.
•
City Hall Parks &Recreation
37 Washington Avenue West 900 Harrington Street
(612) 587 -5151 (612) 587 -2975
Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350
- Prin led on recycled paper -
Police Department
10 Franklin Street South
(612) 587 -2242
f1-1--
American Risk Services, Inc.
August 31, 1992
VIA FAX 1434 -4240
Mr. Ken Merrill
Finance Director
City of Hutchinson
37 Washington Avenue West
Hutchinson, MN 55350
Re: 9- 1.92/93 Benefit Rates
Dear Ken:
�}E i T Ft
- I- �SJR/�Mck
Tel: (612) 559.7300
Fax: (612) 559.7640
Enclosed please find the revised recommended funding level for the period 9 -1 -92/93 based upon the changes
indicated in the Plan of Benefits schedule dated August 5, 1992.
Blue Cross/Blue Shield allowed a 5.5% reduction in the specific and the aggregate attachmentpoint rates based
upon the revised schedule. This includes PCs drug co -pay of $7.00 for formulary and $10.00 for non - formulary.
If you increase the PCs co-pay to $10.00 and $15.00 there would be an additional 13% reduction.
Based upon my calculations, the recommended funding level for the 9 -1 -92/93 should be:
Single $17531
Family $39234
I have enclosed a worksheet for your review.
Should you have any questions on this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Best Regards
Sincerely,
Mark T. Flaten
President
MTF /jaa/chbr
Enclosure
CC: Dennis Potter
Insurance Planners
VIA FAX 1. 587.0808 3a Y/ PO 9
X87, my
Cf =4 ,
Risk Management
Employee Benefits
Consultants
Northwest Business Campus
3033 Campus Drive, Suite A418
Minneapolls,MN 55441.2620
•
•
•
31- Aug-92
Total
Court
(A +D)
172
Annual Cosh
Single Family Total
3,072.00
City of Humhlaaan
16,128.00
I,f
/
0.00
0.00
Health Care Coat Projections
0.00
0.00
4,225.74
41,90246
46,128.40
9/1192 -93
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
272.363.58
Medical
Weighting
Weightod
$100 Ded. 90120 Next $2000
Single
Family
Factor
Family
•
Select Care
(BsC)
Inventor,
16
68
2.30
156
Single
Family
Annual
Rue for Expecred Louea
129.96
303.22
Rate for Aggregate Stop Lora
162.32
379.03
Expected Losses
24,932.76 247,430.82
272,363.58
Aggregate Stop Lou Attachment
31,165.95 309,288,52
340,454.47
Adrumistrarion Fee
16.00
16.00
16,128.00
Transplant Coverage
1.10
3.55
3,108.00
PROJECTED COSTS
FUNDING LEVEL ® EXPECTED
Monthly Factors
Monthly Coats
Single
Family
Single
Family
Administrat Fee
16.00
16.00
256.00
1,088.00
LifelAD&D Premium
0.00
0.00
0. DO
0.00
Medical Conversion
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.DD
Individual Stop Loss - S25,000
22.01
51.35
352.14
3,491.89
Transplant Coverage
1.10
3.55
17.60
241.40
Claim Dollars Available
129.86
303.22
2,077.73
20,619.23
•
Total Monthly Funding
168.97
374.13
2,703.47
25,440.52
FUNDING LEVEL ® AGG ATTACH
Monthly Factors
Monthly Costa
Single
Family
Single
Family
Ad miaistratian Fee
16.00
16.00
256.00
1,088.00
Life/AD&D Premium
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Medical Conversion
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Individual Slop Loss - $25,000
22.01
51.35
352.14
3,491.89
Transplant Coverage
1.10
3.55
17 -60
241.40
Claim Dollars AvaBabla
162.32
379.03
2,597.16
25,774.04
Total Monthly Funding
201 -43
449.93
3,222.91
30,595.33
Current Funding Level
154,46
345.67
Re mmrnded Increase (Decrease)
14%
14%
RECOMMENDED FUNDING LEVEL:
175.31
392.34
w/ PCs Drug Capay $7 /510
COBRA Monthly Rele
178.82
400.19
•
Claim Rate:
136.20
321.43
31- Aug-92
Total
Court
(A +D)
172
Annual Cosh
Single Family Total
3,072.00
13,056.00
16,128.00
0.OD
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4,225.74
41,90246
46,128.40
211.20
2,896.80
3,108.00
24,932.76
247,430.82
272.363.58
32,441.70 305,28618 337,727.97
Annual Coats
Single Family Total
3,072.00
13,056.00
16,128.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4,225.74
41.902.66
46,128.40
211.20
2,896.90
3,108.00
31,165.95
309,288.52
340,454.47
38.674.89 367,143.98 405,818.87
288,441.25
9 - /- t
w City of H utch;n..,.,
Health Care Cost Projections
Duval
Inventory
Rate for Expected Losses
Expected Losses
Ad ministrati on Fee
Commission
PROJECTED COSTS
FUNDING LEVEL @ EXPECTED LOSS
0GMTH 1--
eeV60 4
(A)
(B) (C)
(D)
Single
Weighting
Weighted Total
Single
Family Factor
Family Count
334.11
Co mmissio n
(B * C) (A +D) •
16
68 2.30
136 172
Single
Family
Annual
13.92
39.00
Total Monthly Funding
2,673.02
31,820.16
34,493.18
1.75
4.91
4,346.14
5.00%
5.00%
FUNDING LEVEL @ EXPECTED LOSS
Monthly Fa=n
Monthly Costa
336.80
Single
Family
Single
Family
Ad m;n:trat:n n Fee
1.75
4.91
28.07
334.11
Co mmissio n
0.70
1.95
11.14
132M
Claim Dollars Available
13.92
39.00
222.75
2,651.68
Total Monthly Funding
16.37
45.86
261.96
3,118.38
-- R31NT FUNDLING LEVEL:
15.64
43.79
Io ecrease
5.0%
5.0%
COMMENDED FUNDING LEVEL:
16.42
45.98
COBRA Monthly Rate
16.75
46.90
Claim Rue:
13.96
39.10
Annual Costs
Single
Family
Total
336.80
4,009.34
4,346.14
133.65
1,591.01
1,724.66
2,673.02
31,820.16
34,493.18
3,143.47
37,420.51
40,563.98
•
40,672.30
34.585.29
A
City of Hutchinson 08- Sep -92
Medics!
•
Subsequent Year
Policy Period
Budgeted Claims
Actual Claims
Surplus(Deficit)
Rate Increase
9/1/88 -89
183,949
205,981
(22,032)
36.81%
9/1/89 -90
222,119
126,033
96,086
6.41%
9/1/90 -91
246,153
162,800
83,353
4.34%
9/1/91 -92
252,879
254,946
(2,066)
11.70%
Total
905,101
749,760
155,341
5.00%
Proposed Rates 9/1/91 -92 9/1/92 -93 *
Single 154.46 172.53 11.
Family 345.67 386.11 11.
Total Annual Costs 311,723 348,192
* Subject to minor Benefit Changes
•
Dientai
Subsequent Year
Policy Period
Budgeted Claims
Actual Claims
Surplus(Deficit)
Rate Increase
9/1/88 -89
37,432
26,644
10,788
0.00%
9/1/89 -90
33,895
24,520
9,375
0.00%
9/1/90 -91
34,549
25,564
8,985
0.00%
9/1/91 - 5/1/92
25,942
19,614
6
5.00%
Total
131,818
96,342
35,476
•
Proposed Rates 9/1/91 -92 9/1192 -93
Single 15.64 16.42 5.00%
Family 43.79 45.98 5.00%
Total Annual Costs 38,735 40,672
Prepared By: American Risk Services, Inc.
�AHEY SALES AGENCY. INC.
August 31, 1992
� 3y1234 % 6,
3
SEP1992
RECEIVED N
By
Mr. Gary Plotz, City Administrator
City Hall
37 Washington Ave. West
Hutchinson MN 55350
Dear Gary
Having visited earlier today with Dolf Moon, upon his request
I am writing you to inform you and the city council of my request.
As you know, our parking lot borders Girl Scout Park to the
south. Having viewed the current situation with the split rail
fence and shrubs, we see some problems.
The first problem is that we feel we are not getting full use
of our parking lot due to the split rail fence.
The second problem is that the fence is also serving as a
• barrier for people who wish to visit Girl Scout Park to view the
dam. They are parking in my parking lot and are finding it difficult
to get to the dam viewing area.
We have no problem with the general public using our parking lot
when they use the park. However, to solve these two problems and to
help with the beauty of the area, I would like to propose that our
company pay for the installation of a sidewalk on city property along
the south edge of Girl Scout Park. This would enable my customers
and employees to park their cars further to the north making it possi-
ble for me to get cars on both sides of my parking lot. This would
also open Girl Scout Park up to people that park in my parking lot to
visit the park.
I appreciate Mr. Moon's willingness to work with me on this
project and request at this time city council approval. Working
together, we can continue to en ance u c inson s eauty.
Respect
k
•
M
r
Inc.
When you're selling a lifetime. don't sell it short -Cali Fahey's"
5
M-
!_ REALTOR a AU
P.O.BOX 370 70 - - 218 NORTH ORTH MAIN
HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350
•
I 612 -873510
August 31, 1992
� 3y1234 % 6,
3
SEP1992
RECEIVED N
By
Mr. Gary Plotz, City Administrator
City Hall
37 Washington Ave. West
Hutchinson MN 55350
Dear Gary
Having visited earlier today with Dolf Moon, upon his request
I am writing you to inform you and the city council of my request.
As you know, our parking lot borders Girl Scout Park to the
south. Having viewed the current situation with the split rail
fence and shrubs, we see some problems.
The first problem is that we feel we are not getting full use
of our parking lot due to the split rail fence.
The second problem is that the fence is also serving as a
• barrier for people who wish to visit Girl Scout Park to view the
dam. They are parking in my parking lot and are finding it difficult
to get to the dam viewing area.
We have no problem with the general public using our parking lot
when they use the park. However, to solve these two problems and to
help with the beauty of the area, I would like to propose that our
company pay for the installation of a sidewalk on city property along
the south edge of Girl Scout Park. This would enable my customers
and employees to park their cars further to the north making it possi-
ble for me to get cars on both sides of my parking lot. This would
also open Girl Scout Park up to people that park in my parking lot to
visit the park.
I appreciate Mr. Moon's willingness to work with me on this
project and request at this time city council approval. Working
together, we can continue to en ance u c inson s eauty.
Respect
k
•
M
r
Inc.
When you're selling a lifetime. don't sell it short -Cali Fahey's"
5
M-
C
September 3, 1992
MEMO
TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FROM: KEN MERRILL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJ PRE TA LEV
We have presented last Tuesday a preliminary General Fund budget
for 1993 which had been cut back from the original requests. This
Preliminary budget did show a need for $160,237 in additional taxes
as presented. Needless to say the cuts were substantial and
additional dollars would be able to restore some of the funding
requests.
You asked for some comparisons of taxes based upon this departments
estimate. I would offer the following:
• 1992
Adopted
Tax
General Fund $1,789,470
Bond & Int 1,172,800
$2,962,270
1993
Proposed
Tax
$1,949,707
1,211,700
$3,161,407
Estimated Market Value)
Resident 60,000 70,000 100,000
1992 218 254 464
1993 239 278 509
Dollar Increase 21 24 45
If Additional $40,000 added to request General Fund = $1,989.707
1993
Increase
243 284 519
26 30 55
(continued)
• City Hall Parks Fr Recreation
37 Washington Avenue West 900 Harrington Street
(612) 587 -5151 (612) 587 -2975
Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350
- Printed on recycled paper -
Police Department
10 Franklin Street South
(612) 587 -2242
9- /✓
Page 2
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
(Estimated Market value)
$50,000 $100,000
1992 $562 $3,925
1993 596 1,531
Dollar Increase 34 107
If Additional $40,000 added to request For General Fund
1993 608 1,561
Dollar Increase 46 137
Assumptions
The tax capacity of the city used was the same as 1992.
Growth projected is offset by formula changes. In 1993 we are
scheduled to receive $1,166,381 in HACA and other aid reduction
dollars. This compares with $1,141,809 in 1992.
The numbers are estimated and will vary on the individual tax
statements once the tax capacity of the city has been computed.
We must set a preliminary levy by September 15 to the county.
This number will be used to compute individual tax statements for
the hearing in December. The number can also be reduced but
additional dollars may not be added to the preliminary levy.
E
We .)uld request once a dollar amount is established the •
attached resolution be acopted.l
n
U
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
• RESOLUTION NO. 9796
PRELIMINARY 1993 TAX LEVY FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY" OF HUTCHINSON,
MINNESOTA:
THAT a preliminary tax levy for the City of Hutchinson
for 1993 is hereby set in the amount of $
Adopted by the City Council this 8th day of September 1992
Paul L. Ackland
Mayor
ATTEST:
•
Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
0
9 -A/
September 2, 1992
ARsOLD & McDOWELL
ATTORNEYS AT LAw
5881 CEDAR LAKE ROAD
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416-1492
(612) 545 - 9000
MN TOLL FREE 800-343 -4545
FAx (612) 545 -1793
Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator
Hutchinson City Hall
37 Washington Avenue West
Hutchinson, MN 55350
Re: Phase II ( Simonson's Lumber option)
Our File No. 3244 -91046
Dear Gary:
Or cOr SEL
WILLIAM W. CAMERON
RAYMOND C. LALLIER
PAUL M.HEOICH
CHARLES R.CARMICHAEL"
501 SOUTH FOURTH STREET
PRINCETON, MINNESOTA 55371
(6121389 -2214
PAX (6121389-5506
101 PARK PLACE
HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350
(612) 587 -7575
YAM (6W) 587 -4096
S €P1952
02 618
I write to you today with a request that the above referenced
• matter be placed on the agenda for the next regularly scheduled
City Council meeting.
As you may recall, Simonson's voluntarily removed their materials
from the building located on the development site which they rented
from Dakota Rail, Inc. The fee interest in the property was
acquired by the city at the time it closed with the railroad. The
question of compensation for Simonson's was expressly left open at
that time.
As you also may recall, Ron McGraw has been handling the
negatlations with Simonscii's and has had some difficulty reaching
the individuals with authority to settle this matter. The original
estimate for Simonson's called for approximately $8,000.00 to be
paid to Simonson's. I am unclear as to whether or not that
estimate included relocation expense.
In any event, Mr. McGraw has asked me to secure City Council
approval for payment in the amount of $14,000.00 for the building
in question as well as all relocation and other expenses. I would
ask that this matter be placed on the City Council agenda for next
Tuesday evening.
•
'CERTIFIED AS A CIVIL TRIAL SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION / v
— CERTIFIED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
DAVID B.ARNOLD
GARY D. MCDOWELL
STEVEN A. ANDERSON
O.BARRY ANDERSON'
STEVEN S.HOGE
LAURA E. FRETLAND
DAVID A. BRUEOOEMANN
PAUL D. DOVE"
JOSEPH M_PAIEMENT
JAMES UTLEY
RICHARD O. XcGEE
CATHRYN D. REHER
September 2, 1992
ARsOLD & McDOWELL
ATTORNEYS AT LAw
5881 CEDAR LAKE ROAD
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416-1492
(612) 545 - 9000
MN TOLL FREE 800-343 -4545
FAx (612) 545 -1793
Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator
Hutchinson City Hall
37 Washington Avenue West
Hutchinson, MN 55350
Re: Phase II ( Simonson's Lumber option)
Our File No. 3244 -91046
Dear Gary:
Or cOr SEL
WILLIAM W. CAMERON
RAYMOND C. LALLIER
PAUL M.HEOICH
CHARLES R.CARMICHAEL"
501 SOUTH FOURTH STREET
PRINCETON, MINNESOTA 55371
(6121389 -2214
PAX (6121389-5506
101 PARK PLACE
HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350
(612) 587 -7575
YAM (6W) 587 -4096
S €P1952
02 618
I write to you today with a request that the above referenced
• matter be placed on the agenda for the next regularly scheduled
City Council meeting.
As you may recall, Simonson's voluntarily removed their materials
from the building located on the development site which they rented
from Dakota Rail, Inc. The fee interest in the property was
acquired by the city at the time it closed with the railroad. The
question of compensation for Simonson's was expressly left open at
that time.
As you also may recall, Ron McGraw has been handling the
negatlations with Simonscii's and has had some difficulty reaching
the individuals with authority to settle this matter. The original
estimate for Simonson's called for approximately $8,000.00 to be
paid to Simonson's. I am unclear as to whether or not that
estimate included relocation expense.
In any event, Mr. McGraw has asked me to secure City Council
approval for payment in the amount of $14,000.00 for the building
in question as well as all relocation and other expenses. I would
ask that this matter be placed on the City Council agenda for next
Tuesday evening.
•
'CERTIFIED AS A CIVIL TRIAL SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION / v
— CERTIFIED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
Gary D. Plotz
September 2, 1992
Page 2
Thank you. Best personal regards.
is
0
•
046 -1tr. 25
` OPEN -HOLD COUNCIL REPORT TUE. SEP 8, 199 2-, 1:50 PM
------------------------------------
1982 TIDS
• NATL CITY BANK OF MINNEAP INTEREST
1989 IMPROV. BDS
AM.NATIONAL BANK
AOM.FEES & EXPENSES
1991 IMPROV.BDS
ANNANDALE CONTRACTING
WM MUELLER & SONS
1992 IMPRO.BDS
OUININCK BROS, INC.
R &R SPECIALTIES INC
WM MUELLER & SONS
LET 6 EST 9
LET S EST B
LET 2 -EST 3
LET 4 -EST 2
LET I - EST 5
1992 TICB
COUNTY RECORDER
MCGRAW & WARD
PELLINEN. WILLARD
CENTRAL GARAGE
• BRANDON TIRE CO
CAMERA SHOP
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
CHAMPION AUTO
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
FORTIS BENEFITS
G & K SERVICES
HUTCH IRON & METAL
HUTCHINSON WHOLESALE
JERABEK MACHINE SERV
L & P SUPPLY CO
MACQUEEN EQUIP INC
MN.MUTUAL LIFE
PLOWMANS
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
SNAP ON TOOLS CORP
SORENSEN FARM SUPPLY
SWEENEY BROS TRACTOR
TOWN & COUNTRY TIRE
U S POSTMASTER
WITHHOLDING TAX ACCT
FIRE HALL DS
AM.NATIONAL BANK
JULY -AUG FILING FEES
LEGAL FEES
RESTAKE PLAT DOWNTOWN DEV
TIRE REPAIR
FILM & DEV
STARTER, BATTERIES
WASHER SOLVENT,HALOGEN,TI
SEPT MEDICAL INS
SEPT LTD INS
UNIFORMS
7' FLAT IRON
CLEANERS, BULBS,FLASHERS
24' FLAT
REPAIR TRACTOR
DOOR LATCH
SEPT LIFE INS
R &R PUMP,WARRANTY DEDUCTI
EMPLOYER CONTRIS 9 -4
WRENCH
COUPLER, BUSHINGS
ADJ ROD
ALIGNMENT
AUGUST POSTAGE
EMPLOYER CONTRIB 9 -4
ADM.FEES & EXPENSES
• GENERAL FUND
ALL SEASONS LANDSCAPE /DES MAPLE TREE
page 1
$3,30Z.S0
$3,302.60■
$179.64
$179.64+
$1,600.02
$4,549.35
$6,149.37*
$185 ,7S 1 .98
$30,903.21
$97,384.10
$314,039.29*
$134.00
$160.45
$150.00
$444.45*
$86.51
$14.62
$659.61
$320.73
$389.46
$14.14
$47.19
$5.07
$410.40
$4.70
$83.88
$533.35
$S.BB
$94.99
$61.91
$103.84
$20.90
$301.51
$32.95
$6.09
$105.72
$3,303.45*
$176.16
$176.16*
$53.25
/ / --AI
OPEN -HOLD COUNCIL REPORT
TUE, SEP 8, 1992, 1:50 PM
page 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALLEN BROWN & GREAT PLAIN
EST 10 HOUSING REHAB
$180.93
•
ALLEN OFFICE PROD
AUTOMATION SUPPLY CO
COPY STAMP
PRINTER PAPER
$16.12
$24.88
BARB THORUD & HOLTZ CONST
EST 43 HOUSING REHAB
$1,925.00
BENNETT OFFICE SUP.
FOLDERS
$2,906.28
BERGER PLBG & HTG
REPAIR TOILET
$36.69
BIG BEAR
BOOTS
$12.99
BRANDON TIRE CO
TIRE REPAIRS
$21.80
BREMIX CONCRETE CO
CONCRETE
$652.96
BRINKMAN STUDIO
DEVELOPING
$13.00
BROWNS FLORAL
ARLT- FLOWERS
$3.20
CAMERA SHOP
FILM & DEV
$22.63
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
1/4 X 28 ZERK
$1.62
CASH WISE
COFFEE
$1,170.11
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
POSTAGE,COM PROFILE
$493.89
CHAMPION AUTO
BATTERY
$53.25
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
SEPT MEDICAL INS
$24,526.77
COAST TO COAST
FLASHLIGHT, BATTERIES
$66,87
COMM TRANSPORTATION
HANGAR PAYMENT
$700.00
COUNTY TREASURER
COUNTY DL FEES
$121.50
CULLIGAN WATER COND
SERVICE CALL
$30.00
DOMINO'S PIZZA
PIZZAS 8 -15 TO 8 -23
$560.00
DONALD TODNEM &BERG -WAY CO
EST 43 HOUSING REHAB
$1,600.00
ERICKSON FREEDOM
SUPPLIES
$6.70
FEED RITE CONTROLS
CHLORINE,SODA CAUSTIC
$249.63
FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSN OF
NFPA 1002
$IS.36
FLOOR CARE SUPPLY
LINERS, LOOPS
$1,057.95
•
FORTIS BENEFITS
SEPT LTD INS
$975.31
FRANK JARMAN & MENARDS
EST #1 HOUSING REHAB
$1,043.32
FRITO LAY INC.
CHIPS
$50.82
FRONT LINE PLUS FIRE & RE
4 -50 FT HOSE
$1,103.72
G & N, SERVICES
UNIFORMS
$671.47
GRAY, JEAN
CASH ADVANCE SEMINAR
$200.00
GREAT PLAINS SUPPLY
SHEETROCK SCREWS
$619.10
GREEN13RIAR FLORAL
PLANT- H.SMITH
$15.95
GUARDIAN PEST CTL
AUG SERVICE
$20.50
HALER JEWELRY
BRASS DISH- D.SMITH
$27.40
HANSEN TRUCK SERVICE
R & R CLUTCH SLAVE
$65.07
HANSON & VASEK CONSTRUCTI
CURB & GUTTER WORK
$627.00
HENRYS FOODS INC
CANDY
$206.83
HOME BAKERY INC
2 DOZ ASST ROLLS
$6.00
HUHN, LARRY
SCHOOL REIMBURSMENT
$215.70
HUTCH COOP CENNEX
AUGUST GASOLINE
$3,433.56
HUTCH FIRE DEPT RELIEF AS
1992 CONTRIBUTION
$13,615.00
HUTCH IRON & METAL
37' FLAT IRON
$40.99
HUTCH PLBG & HTG CO
DELTA FAUCET
$507.90
HUTCH TECH COLLEGE
REGISTRATION- M.HENSEN
$371.90
HUTCHINSON WHOLESALE
VISE
$126.73
INK SPOTS
WHITE PAPER
$61.96
JOES SPORT SHOP
PLAQUE
$36.34
JOHNSON, MYRON
IST AID & CPR CLASS
$180.00
JUTTING, PATTY
TACKLE FOOTBALL REFUND
$16.00
•
K MART
BRAUN COFFEEMAKER,FILTERS
$33.20
KARG, LARRY
DUST & PAINT MASKS
$72.43
KENNEBECK, ROBERT
AUGUST COMPENSATION
$833.33
L & P SUPPLY CO
HANDLE, OIL
$115.87
OPEN -HOLD COUNCIL REPORT
TUE, SEP 8, 1992, 1:50 PM
page 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAR50N, MARK
SAFETY BOOTS
$30.00
LEE COLLINS LIMITED
LINDER BUS COMPANY
LETTERING TAPE
BUS TRIPS
$82.81
$2,218.00
MANGAN, CONNIE
MILEAGE JUNE TO AUGUST
$92.07
MARKA, JAMES
MILEAGE TO MEETING
$35.10
MCLEOD COUNTY PARKS
WAX WORMS, FIREWOOD
$12.00
MCLEOD CTY PORK PRODUCERS
COOK CHOPS FOR CITY PICNI
$99.50
HID -MN HOT MIX INC
AC FINES, TACK OIL
$462.21
MIKE'S MOBIL BAIT & TACKL
BUG SPRAY, BATTERY
$11.48
MINNESOTA DEPT OF PUBLIC
BIKE REGISTRATION FEES
$45.00
MIX, FINLEY
SAFETY BOOTS
$30.00
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
AUG. SALES TAX
$107.51
MN. PLAYGROUND INC
SEE SAW SNAKE
$2,396.25
MN.ELEVATOR INC
ELEVATOR SERVICE
$61.00
MN.MUTUAL LIFE
SEPT LIFE INS
$411.60
MOTOROLA MIDWEST PAGER RE
PAGER REPAIR
$50.00
MUELLER'S OFFICE SUPPLY
MORTGAGE FORMS,LIEN FORMS
$89.46
NO STATES SUPPLY INC
NUTS, CAPS, WASHERS
$77.09
OLSONS LOCKSMITH
REPAIR LOCK
$31.39
PERA- D.C.P.
EMPLOYER CONTRIB 9 -4
$28.71
PRO MAINTENANCE
CARPET CLEAN
$43.20
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYER CONTRIB 9 -4
$5,349.23
QUADE ELECTRIC
BULBS
$50.59
REINER LAWN IRRIGATION
HUNTER PGP HEADS
$98.00
SANTELMAN, BEN
UMPIRE 8 GAMES
$48.00
SHOPKO
PHOTOS
$15.10
SORENSEN FARM SUPPLY
RENT POST AUGER
$113.12
•
STANDARD PRINTING
REFILLS
$605.62
TEMPLETON INC
AUG EMPLOYER CONTRIB
$200.99
TRI CO WATER COND
SOFTENER RENTAL
$34.50
U S POSTMASTER
AUGUST POSTAGE
$806.83
UNITED BLDG CENTERS
2X4 - 12'
$115.97
VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS
COPY PAPER
$92.50
WADE MILLER &C.T.M.CONST
EST #4 HOUSING REHAB
$1,064.00
WENDLING, ROSS
9 HOURS
$38.25
WITHHOLDING TAX ACCT
EMPLOYER CONTRIB 9 -4
$5,742.26
WITTE SANITATION
AUGUST REFUSE CHARGES
$14.91
WITTE SOD
10 YOS
$7.50
XEROX CORP
5052 CONTRACT PAYMENT
$329.80
ZAHL EQUIPMENT CO
REPAIR LEAK IN HOSE REEL
$214.00
$83,374.37•
HOSPITAL BONDS
AM.NATIONAL BANK
INTEREST
$11,963.75
$11,963.75+
PAYROLL FUND
AETNA VARIABLE LIFE ASS.
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$590.00
G.T. GROWTH
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$175.00
GLOBAL FUNDS INC
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$444.73
GREAT WEST LIFE INS. CO.
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$85.00
H.R.L.A.P.R.
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$90.09
•
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$1,301.00
PERA LIFE INS CO.
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$105.00
PERA- D.C.P.
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$28.71
PRUDENTIAL
EMPLOYEE CONTRI 9 -4
$130.00
OPEN -HOLD COUNCIL REPORT TUE, SEP 6, 1992, 1:50 PM
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$4,993.38
TEMPLETON INC
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$95.00
WADELL & REED
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$150.00
WITHHOLDING TAX ACCT
EMPLOYEE CONTRIB 9 -4
$18,638.66
$26,726.67+
RURAL F. 0.
COAST TO COAST
PLUG
$.91
GENERAL SAFETY EQUIP CORP
3.S GAUGE
$75.70
HUTCH COOP CENNEX
AUGUST GASOLINE
$119.96
HUTCH FIRE DEPT RELIEF AS
1992 CONTRIBUTION
$4,200.00
$4,396.57+
WATER /SEWER FUND
ALLEN OFFICE PROD
FOLDERS
$6.46
BENNETT OFFICE SUP.
WALLET EXP
$2.34
BIG BEAR
6 FT HYD
$42.59
BOUSTEAD.ELECTRIC & MFG
REPAIRED POWER BOARD
$821.27
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
SEPT MEDICAL INS
$3,066.42
CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIPM
EYE WASH
$188.71
COUNTY MARKET
ICE
$2.76
CURTIN SCIENTIFIC CO
THERMOMETER
$241.32
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP
SHIPPING
$161.25
FISCHER & PORTER
CHARTS & INK
$77.09
FLOOR CARE SUPPLY
TOWELS
$45.52
FORTIS BENEFITS
SEPT LTD INS
$124.24
• G & K SERVICES
UNIFORMS
$221.00
HACH COMPANY
LAB SUPPLIES
$156.43
HCI CONNECTING POINT
LABELS
$228.45
HUTCH COOP CENNEX
AUGUST GASOLINE
$710.81
HUTCH FIRE & SAFETY
INSPECTIONS & RECHARGES
$39.48
HUTCH IRON & METAL
50E STEEL
$28.12
JUUL CONTRACTING CO
REPAIR WATER LEAKS
$616.00
LTP ENTERPRISES
4' WELL SCREEN
$213.00
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
AUG. SALES TAX
$4,263.38
MN VALLEY TESTING LAB
TESTING
$1,269.75
MN.MUTUAL LIFE
SEPT LIFE INS
$50.82
NCL
BEAKER,GELMAN BROTH
$95.34
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYER CONTRIS 9 -4
$490.54
QUADE ELECTRIC
2000' WIRE
$74.56
SERCO LABORATORIES
TESTS
$75.00
SORENSEN FARM SUPPLY
ANCHOR BOLTS
$31.84
STANDARD PRINTING
PENS,LABELS,PADS
$99.36
TRI CO WATER COND
SALT
$17.60
U S POSTMASTER.
AUGUST POSTAGE
$804.05
UNITED BLDG CENTERS
LUMBER,NUTS,WASHERS
$25.79
WITHHOLDING TAX ACCT
EMPLOYER CONTRIB 3 -4
$1,005.03
WITTE SANITATION
AUGUST REFUSE
$46,231.50
ZEE MEDICAL SERV
ZEE STRIP,IBUTAB
$17.16
$61,546.98+
YOUTH CENTER
• CITY OF HUTCHINSON
SEPT MEDICAL INS
$170.10
FORTIS BENEFITS
SEPT LTD INS
$11.79
MARTIN, MATT
17 HRS 04.25
$72.25
MN.MUTUAL LIFE
SEPT LIFE INS
$5.04
page 4
OPEN -HOLD COUNCIL REPORT TUE, SEP B, 1992, 1:50 PM page 5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES EMPLOYER CONTRIS 9 -4 $39.86
PUTZ, STACY OTHER CONTRACTUAL $75.00
STAR CABLEVISION CABLEVISION $20.20
U S POSTMASTER AUGUST POSTAGE $2.03
VIKING COCA COLA FOOD PRODUCTS - DRINKS $145.00
WITHHOLDING TAX ACCT EMPLOYER CONTRIB 9 -4 $72.93
$614.20+
$516.217.40+
•
HANDWRITTEN CHECKS COUNCIL REPORT TUE, SEP 8, 1992
--------------------------- ------- ------- ------ ----- --- - --
LIQUOR FUND
City of Hutch
payroll 8 -21 & 9 -4
8,587.42
Locher Bros
beer
13,559.85
Triple G
beer
35,742.40
Lenneman Bev
beer
12,533.70
Friendly Bev
beer
260.40
Jordon Bev
beer
1,135.00
Am Linen
towel service
45.51
Daak Refrigeration
repair
28.00
Tri County Water
water cooler rental
25.55
Hutch Telephone
phone service
92.89
Bernicks Pepsi
pop
53.68
Henry's Foods
supplies
2,608.89
Ed Phillips
wine & liquor
11,544.73
Griggs, Cooper
wine & liquor
15,407.62
Quality Wines
wine & liquor
10,557.81
Johnson Brothers
wine & liquor
10,963.49
TOTAL
$123,146.94
•
Y -
IMMEDIATE PAY COUNCIL REPORT TUE, SEP 8, 1992, 1:56 PM
------------------------------------------------
CENTRAL GARAGE
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES EMPLOYER CONTRIB 8 -21
GENERAL FUND
DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ONR REGISTRATION FEES
ERICKSON, DON CONVENTION EXPENSES
M.I.A.M.A. REGISTRATION- M.HAUGEN
MN COMMERCE DEPARTMENT 2 NOTARY PUBLIC APPL
MN DEPT OF TRADE 8 ECONOM REGISTRATION- P.ACKLAND
PERA - Q.C.P. EMPLOYER CONTRIB 8 -21
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION 6-2
RADISSON HOTEL MINNETONKA RESERVATION- P.ACKLAND
TORGERSON, MARLIN CONVENTION EXPENSES
U S POSTMASTER POSTA6E-SEPT NEWSLETTER
WITHHOLDING TAX ACCT AUGUST EXCISE TAX
PAYROLL FUND
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
WATER /SEWER FUND
POSTAGE BY PHONE
• PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
U S POSTMASTER
YOUTH CENTER
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION 9 -4
POSTAGE FOR METER
EMPLOYER CONTRIB 8 -21
POSTAGE -WATER BILLS
EMPLOYER CONTRIB 8 -21
page 1
--------------- -- -- --
561.92
561.92+
$104.00
$120.97
$315.00
$80.00
$135.00
$28.71
$5,196.30
$68.00
$115.50
$214.94
$24.52
66,402.94+
$5,046.15
$5,048.15*
$800.00
$454.82
$250.00
$1,504.62*
639.85
$39.85*
$13.057.68*
DAVID B. ARNOLD
BABY D. McDOWELL
• ETEYEa A. ANDEBsax
D.BARRT ANDERSON
STEVEN 8. HOOF
LAURA E. +•o Err •N
DAVID A. DRDEOOEMANN
PAUL D. DOVE"
JOSEPH X. PAIEXZN
JAMES 0TI.8Y
RICHARD O. McOEE
CATHRYN D. REHER
September 8, 1992
AP.No & MCDOWELL
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
101 PARK PLACE
HIITcHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350 -2563
(612)587 -7575
FAX (611) 567 -4096
RESIDENT ATTORNEY
O. BARMY ANDERSON
Mr. Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
37 Washington Avenue West
Hutchinson, Mn. 55350
Re: Veterans Preference Act Issues
Our File No. 3188 -92226
Dear Gary:
Or COIOISeL
w11T W. CAMERON
RAYMOND C. LALLIER
PAUM M. BEOICH
C &RLES R.CAHMICHAEL"
5661 CEDAR LAEE ROAD
xIxNEAPOus I xINNESOTA 5516
(612) 545 -9000
MII TOLL FREE 800- 343-4545
FAX(612)545 -1793
MA SOUTH FOURTH STREET
PRINCETON, xINNE60TA 65371
(612) 369-2114
FAX (612)389-5506
FOR YOUR INFORMATION
At your request, I have reviewed Minnesota Statute §197.46, the
Minnesota Veterans Preference Act, as it relates to the proposed
reduction in hours for a position presently occupied by a veteran.
Under the principles established by the Minnesota Supreme Court in
Young vs. City of Duluth 386 N.W. 2d 732 (Minn. 1986), a city may
terminate a veteran for incompetency or misconduct, but also may
abolish the position so long as the city acts in good faith. It
has long been the law of the State of Minnesota that veterans
preference statutes are "not intended to take away the power given
such officials over the administrative and business affairs of
municipality and do not prevent them from terminating the
employment of an appointee by abolishing the office or position
which he held, if the action abolishing it be taken in good faith
for some legitimate purpose and is not a mere subterfuge to oust
him from his position." State Ex Rel. Boyd vs. Matson 155 Minn.
137, 193 N.W. 30 (1923).
Although Youn does not deal directly with the reduction in hours
contemplated by our situation, the concurring opinion in Young does
specifically recognize that such an outcome is a possibility.
Minnesota law will require a sixty day notice to be given to a
veteran even though the veteran will not have a right to a public
hearing or a civil service commission hearing. The employee would
have the right to notice the Arms Veterans Preference Act. In
other words, I would not recommend any change in the employee's
present employment situation until at least sixty days have passed.
'CERTIFIED AS A CIVIL TRIAL SPECIALS ST BY THE MIv SOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
" CERTIFED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAN SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
Mr. Gary D. Plotz
September 8, 1992
Page 2
I do want to bring to your attention the problem that can be
created by a reassignment of duties as opposed to the simple
abolition of the position. The Supreme Court has observed:
If the city merely reassigns Young's duties to non
veteran employees, less senior than he, his position was
not abolished in good faith and he is entitled to
reinstatement with back pay. The Veterans Preference Act
is applicable to cases in which public employers reassign
duties in times of revenue shortfalls and budget cuts.
No exception in the act exists for such situations.
Thus, veterans have a preference over non veteran
employees less senior than they to continue to perform
duties for which they are qualified if the public
employer continues to need such duties performed. Young,
386 N.W. 2d at 738 -739.
I hope this correspondence is helpful to you.
hesitate to contact me should you have questions.
Very
Please do not
G. 1
GBA:
Ken Merrill
Hutchinson City Hall
37 Washington Avenue West
Hutchinson, MN 55350
• Re: Insurance Claims Issues
Our File No. 3188 -87001
Dear Gary and Ken:
I would ask that you bring a copy of this letter to the attention
of the City Council for its review and consideration at the City
Council's next regularly scheduled meeting on a "for your
information" basis.
As you may recall, quite some time ago, I expressed concern over
the League Trust and its approach to the handling of claims. lost
recently, during the annual appearance of Mark Flaten and Dennis
Potter, I once again raised the concerns.
It is my view that the trust has taken a far too aggressive stance
on issues of coverage and certainly with respect to issues of
defense. In that regard, we have been successful in setting up a
meeting for September 23, 1992 at 1:30 p.m. at our Minneapolis
office with representatives of the League Trust, Mark Flaten and
Dennis Potter to meet and discuss some of these issues.
The purpose of this correspondence is to alert you to the meeting
and ask that representatives of the city, as well as members of the
City Council, forward to me specific claims where coverage has been
denied or where concern has been expressed over the response from
- 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
ARNOLD & MCDow
DAVID B.ARNOLD
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
07 COUNSEL
GARY D. MCIXWELL
5881 CEDA LAKE ROAD R
w LIJAM W, CAMERON
STEVEN A. ANDERSON
RAYMOND C. LIEA
G. BARRY ANDERSON'
ID
MINNEAPOLIS, M INNESOTA 53416 -1492
PALL M.BEGICH
STEVEN S. HOOK
(612) 545 -9000
CHARLES R.CARMICHAEL"
LAURA E. FRETLAND
DAVID A. BRLEOOEMANN
MN TOLL FREE 800- 343-4545
501 SOUTH FOURTH STREET
PAUL D. DOVE"
PAX (612) 545-1793
PRINCETON, MINNESOTA 55371
JOSEPH M. PAIEMEBT
(612) 089 -2214
JAMES =ET
FAX (612) 389 -5506
RICHARD O -NCOEE
CATHRYN D. SERER
101 PARK PLACE
HDTCBINSON, MINNESOTA ]5950
(612) 587-7575
FAX (614)]87 -4096
September 2, 1992
FOR YOUR INFORMATION
4 SE
Gary D. Plotz
�rp
> �
Hutchinson City
Administrator
ti
Hutchinson City
Hall
ry SEP10y 0
37 Washington Avenue West
N � N
Hutchinson, MN
55350
N 9Y
Ken Merrill
Hutchinson City Hall
37 Washington Avenue West
Hutchinson, MN 55350
• Re: Insurance Claims Issues
Our File No. 3188 -87001
Dear Gary and Ken:
I would ask that you bring a copy of this letter to the attention
of the City Council for its review and consideration at the City
Council's next regularly scheduled meeting on a "for your
information" basis.
As you may recall, quite some time ago, I expressed concern over
the League Trust and its approach to the handling of claims. lost
recently, during the annual appearance of Mark Flaten and Dennis
Potter, I once again raised the concerns.
It is my view that the trust has taken a far too aggressive stance
on issues of coverage and certainly with respect to issues of
defense. In that regard, we have been successful in setting up a
meeting for September 23, 1992 at 1:30 p.m. at our Minneapolis
office with representatives of the League Trust, Mark Flaten and
Dennis Potter to meet and discuss some of these issues.
The purpose of this correspondence is to alert you to the meeting
and ask that representatives of the city, as well as members of the
City Council, forward to me specific claims where coverage has been
denied or where concern has been expressed over the response from
- 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
Gary D. Plotz
Ken Merrill
September 2, 1992
Page 2
the League Trust. There are almost certainly claims that may be
involved that I know very little about and the additional input
would be helpful.
At this point, I don't know that either you or Ken need to plan to
be in attendance, although I will leave that call up to
representatives of the insurance carrier. If they would like to
have you there, I have no objection and your presence might
conceivably be helpful.
I look forward to hearing from you and the council on these issues.
0
Best regards.
September 3, 1992
ARNOLD & MCDOWELL
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
101 PARK PLACE
HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350 -2563
(612) 567 -7575
PAZ (612) ]s > - 40ss
RESIDENT ATTORNEY
O.BARRY ANDERSON
Gary D. Plotz
Hutchinson City Administrator
37 Washington Avenue West
Hutchinson, MN 55350
Re: Phase II (Construction Issues)
Our file: #3244 -91046
Dear Gary:
OP C IMSRL
WILLIAM W.CAYERON
RAYMOND C. LALLIEU
PAUL X.BEOICH
CHARLES R.0 "ICHAEL
]BSI CEDAR LAEE ROAD
IiINNEAPOLIS, YINN890TA ]]416
(612) 34] -9000
YN TOLL FREE BOO- 343
FAZ (6617) ]45 -1793
501 SOUTH EOLIRTH STREET
PRINCETON, YDVNESOTA 55311
(612) 389 -2214
PAZ (612)369-5506
FOR YOUR INFORMATION
+ass
SFF1332
By
I am writing to you with regard to our meeting of a couple of days
ago with representatives of Everest Construction on the subject of
• soil removal.
As you may recall, an examination of the site has revealed some
surprising soil conditions which are going to require more exten-
sive soil correction than originally anticipated. Under the
agreement, the City's liability in these situations is limited to
the removal of defective and unsuitable soils. It does not appear
that the City will have any liability for bringing in replacement
soil, compacting the soil or taking other extraordinary soil
correction efforts.
After our meeting with Bill Franke and others, I had a lengthy
discussion with Bill Franke regarding the dirt work anticipated
for this project.
He indicated that the contract for the dirt work had been awarded
to an excavating firm from the Savage area. The original estimated
contract for the dirt $50,000.00. Because of the need to remove
and compact the soil in the "boot pits" (the location of the former
elevators) and because of the need to remove top soil in the building
area, the total estimated cost to do all of this dirt work has risen
to 105,000.00. Fortunately, the City's responsiblity is probably in
the range of $20,000.00 - $25,000.00, although minor variations on
either side of the range would not be unexpected.
We did suggest at the meeting that the City Council would be willing
to make an advance $15,000.00 cash payment in exchange for limitation
of liability. At this time, although not rejecting that proposal,
'CERTIFIED AS A CIVIL TRL&L SPECIALIST BY THE XLWESOTA STATE BAE ASSOCIATION
"CERTIFIED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
N
DAVID B. ARNOLD
OABY D. XcDOWELL
srEVEx e.sxDEasox
O -LARRY ANDERSON'
STEVEN S. 800E
LAVRA E. TBETLAND
DAVID A. BRQEOOEYANN
PAU D. DOVE"
JOSEPH Y. PAIEN ENT
JAYEs IITLEY
RICHARD O. YCOEE
CATHRYN D. 9EBER
September 3, 1992
ARNOLD & MCDOWELL
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
101 PARK PLACE
HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350 -2563
(612) 567 -7575
PAZ (612) ]s > - 40ss
RESIDENT ATTORNEY
O.BARRY ANDERSON
Gary D. Plotz
Hutchinson City Administrator
37 Washington Avenue West
Hutchinson, MN 55350
Re: Phase II (Construction Issues)
Our file: #3244 -91046
Dear Gary:
OP C IMSRL
WILLIAM W.CAYERON
RAYMOND C. LALLIEU
PAUL X.BEOICH
CHARLES R.0 "ICHAEL
]BSI CEDAR LAEE ROAD
IiINNEAPOLIS, YINN890TA ]]416
(612) 34] -9000
YN TOLL FREE BOO- 343
FAZ (6617) ]45 -1793
501 SOUTH EOLIRTH STREET
PRINCETON, YDVNESOTA 55311
(612) 389 -2214
PAZ (612)369-5506
FOR YOUR INFORMATION
+ass
SFF1332
By
I am writing to you with regard to our meeting of a couple of days
ago with representatives of Everest Construction on the subject of
• soil removal.
As you may recall, an examination of the site has revealed some
surprising soil conditions which are going to require more exten-
sive soil correction than originally anticipated. Under the
agreement, the City's liability in these situations is limited to
the removal of defective and unsuitable soils. It does not appear
that the City will have any liability for bringing in replacement
soil, compacting the soil or taking other extraordinary soil
correction efforts.
After our meeting with Bill Franke and others, I had a lengthy
discussion with Bill Franke regarding the dirt work anticipated
for this project.
He indicated that the contract for the dirt work had been awarded
to an excavating firm from the Savage area. The original estimated
contract for the dirt $50,000.00. Because of the need to remove
and compact the soil in the "boot pits" (the location of the former
elevators) and because of the need to remove top soil in the building
area, the total estimated cost to do all of this dirt work has risen
to 105,000.00. Fortunately, the City's responsiblity is probably in
the range of $20,000.00 - $25,000.00, although minor variations on
either side of the range would not be unexpected.
We did suggest at the meeting that the City Council would be willing
to make an advance $15,000.00 cash payment in exchange for limitation
of liability. At this time, although not rejecting that proposal,
'CERTIFIED AS A CIVIL TRL&L SPECIALIST BY THE XLWESOTA STATE BAE ASSOCIATION
"CERTIFIED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
N
Page 2
Plotz
6
Erickson's has indicated that they just as soon allow the excavating
and corrective action to be completed and evaluate the financial
responsiblity of the various parties at the end of that process.
This would seem to be appropriate and I have no objection to so
proceeding.
None of this - requires Council action, but I am providing this
update for the benefit of-the Council so that all concerned are
fully advised as to the status of this matter.
Thank you.
G. h4Vry Anderson
•
r
is
Liquor Store Comparison June 1991
Liquor Store Comparison June 1991
HUTCHINSON SAFETY COUNCIL
JULY 27, 1992
r1
U
0
MINUTES
Eleven members were present at the July 27, 1992 Hutchinson Safety
Council meeting held at the Heritage Center.
The program was presented by Joe Neubauer, from the County Extension
Office who spoke on garden pesticide safety. Numerous informational
brochures were distributed.
President George Field called the meeting to order. The minutes were
approved as submitted.
John Rodeberg updated construction work progress; a new traffic light
installation by Shopko should be done in about three weeks.
Construction on Roberts Road will be completed this summer.
George Field reported that a three county area farm safety committee
will have a display at the McLeod County Fair. George Field also
reported that he has had several requests for groups to use the
PTO safety film.
June Wick reported a call from a Country Club Terrace resident who
felt that for safety purposes it would be difficult for the dispatcher
to dispatch emergency help because his address is California Street.
Resident will be instructed to give his exact lot number in addition
to his street address.
Duane Hoeschens reported that the City will receive $30,000 in
Federal and State disaster grant for debris clearance from the June
storm.
It was reported that at night it is difficult to see the curb on
Oakland Avenue on the south end of Legion Park; John Rodeberg will
check into it.
Duane Kopesky distributed a new official McLeod County Highway map.
The County will be involved with the City CIS computer system.
There will be no August Safety Council meeting
be on Monday, September 27th."
Treasurer's Report:
Checking: 388.37,
Savings: 194.47
The next meeting will
Hutchinson Community Development Corporation
Board of Directors
Friday, August 7, 1992
Chamber Meeting Room
Directors Present
James Bullard - Chairman
John Mlinar
Phil Graves
Larry Graf
Carol Haukos
Larry Fraser
Bill Craig
4 h rS Present
Bob Kennebeck -Exec Director
The meeting was called to'order by Chairman Bullard.
Motion was'made,seconded and carried to approve the minutes of July
3, 1992.
Motion was made,seconded and 'carried to approve the financial
report.
The work program for 1993 will be reviewed/ reworked by a committee
comprised of Bill Craig, Chair, Glenn Matejka, Sharon Adams and
DuWayne Peterson.
The Annual Meeting will be held September 19, 1992 at the Victorian
Inn. Duane Hoversten will be asked to be a guest speaker.
The Distinguished Service Award recipient has been chosen.
Larry Fraser will chair the nominating committee with one position
to be filled.
Jim Bullard presented a report on the Housing Task Force.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
•
0