Loading...
cp12-28-1989 c. AGENDA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, DECEMBER 28, 1989 1. Call to Order - 9:00 A.M. 2. Improvement Projects No. 90 -01 - No. 90 -18 Action - Motion to close hearings on Project No. 90 -01 & 90 -17 - Motion to reject - Motion to approve - Motion to waive readings and adopt Resolutions 3. Consideration of Request By Junker Sanitation for Tax Increase On Municipal Solid Waste (Tabled December 12, 1989) Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve 4. Consideration of Renewing Lease Agreement with Tom Dolder for Dry Dock for A One -Year Period with Same Terms (Tabled December 12, 1989) Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and enter into agreement 5. Consideration of Request By Hutchinson Public Schools Regarding Tax Increment District Funds Action - 6. Consideration of Snow Removal Permits Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and issue permit(s) 7. Consideration of Approval of Resolution Supporting McLeod County Regional Rail Authority Plan Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and adopt Resolution 8. Adjournment. • PUBLISHED IN THE HUTCHINSON LEADER ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 30TH, 1989 ON THURSDAT, DECEMBER 7TH, 1989. 1 �1. NOTICE OF HEARING PROJECT NO. 90 -01 Publication No. 4052 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that the City Council of Hutchinson, Minnesota, will meet in the Hutchinson City Hall Council Chambers at 8 :00 P.M. on the 12th day of December, 1989, to consider the making of an improvement of T.H.7 Service Road from Third Avenue N.W. to the East End of the Present Service Road by the Construction of Watermain, Storm Sewer, Grading, Gravel Base, Curb and Gutter, Surfacing and Appurtenances, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 429.011 to 429.111. The area proposed to be assessed for such improvement is the benefitted property, for which property owners shall receive mailed notice. The estimated City Cost of said improvement is =80,000.00, with and estimated $80,000.00 Assessable Cost, for the total estimated cost of =160,000.00. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. SDated: November 27th, 1989 City Ad nistra or 0 PLBASE ROTE: IT IS IHPORTABT THAT TOO ATTEND THIS B73ARING, WHETHER You ARE FOR OR AGAINST THE PROJECT, Li ORDER THAT YOUR COUNCIL. CAN BE BETTER INFORMED OF A TRUE REPRESENTATION OF OPYNION. 7 OL. ENGINEER'S - REPORT CITY OF HUTCHINSON DATE: October 19th, 1989 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director of Engineering SUBJECT: Project No. 90 -01 I have studied the following areas and find that the proposed project is feasible and recommend it be constructed. If acceptable, I recommend a hearing be held on the 12th day of December, 1989. PROJECT NO. 90 -01: T.H. 7 Service Road from Third Avenue N.W. to East end of present service road by the construction of watermain, storm sewer, grading, gravel base, curb and gutter, surfacing and appurtenances. Appurtenances: Construction Cost $ 110,000.00 Engineering E 10,000.00 Fiscal and Miscellaneous $ _ 10.000.00 Land Acquisition E� 20,000.00 Capitalized Interest $— ESTIMATED TOTAL-- -- ---- ------ --- --- ----- - - ---E 160,000.00 Assessable Cost Deferred Assessable Cost City Cost 80,000.00 i 0.00 # 0,000.00 ESTIMATED TOTAL -- ---- ----- ---- ------ -- -- ---- -a 160.000.00 W� 0. Marlow V. Priebe Conaulting Engineer MVP /bb 9 BRADFORD Cl PROC Now MAILING ADDRESS P O BOX 430 ATTORNEYS AT LAW HL7CHINSON, ALC 55350 LBRARY SQUARE FAST TELtPHO.YE {LR tT M. BRADFORD 75 HASSAN STREET SOUTH (61A 567-2720 bAN K. . PROCFI�'OT hLY NUSIBER LECORE L. FUNN HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350 1612) 567.7927 December 12, 1989 Hutchinson City Council \ City Hall \ 37 Washington Avenue West Hutchinson, MN 55350 ` � y Re: Project # 90 -01 `�� r Gentlemen: Please be advised that the undersigned represents Hutchinson Manufacturing & Sales, Inc. After consultation with the City Administrator concerning the above captioned matter, it has been agreed to continue the hearing scheduled for December 12th. It is my understanding that the City will be gathering further information and will contact me regarding further . • proceedings. Very truly yours, DKP:cap is BRADFORD & PRO HNOW D K. Pr`ochnow ,N PUBLISHED IN THE HUTCHINSON LEADER ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 30TH, 1989 ON THURSDAY, DECEMBER 7TH9 1989. NOTICE OF HEARING PROJECT NO. 90 -17 Publication No. 4068 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is h=reby given that the City Council of Hutchinson, Minnesota, will meet in the Hutchinson City Hall Council Chambers at 8 :00 P.M. on the 12th day of December, 1989, to consider the making of an improvement of Woodridge Addition by the Extension of Storm Sewer Line and Appurtenances, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 429.011 to 429.111. The area Proposed to be assessed for such improvement is the benefitted property, for which property owners shall receive mailed notice. The estimated City Coat of said improvement is $0.002 with an estimated =3,600.00 Assessable Cost, for the total estimated coat of $3,600.00. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. Dated: November 27th, 1989 v City Admini rator • PLEASE NOTE IT IS IMPORTANT THAT 700 ATMD THIS BEARING, WHETyEE TOU ARE FOR OR AGAINST THE PROJECT, IN ORDER THAT YOUR COUNCIL CAN BE BETTER IMRMRD OF A TRUE REPRESERTATION OF OPMO#. 0�'. ENGINEER'S - REPORT CITY OF HUTCHINSON DATE: October 19th, 1989 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director of Engineering SUBJECT: Project No. 90 -17 I have studied the following areas and find that the proposed project is feasible and recommend it be constructed. If acceptable, I recommend a hearing be held on the 12th day of December, 1989. PROJECT NO. 90 -17: Woodridge Addition by the extension of the Storm Sewer line and and Appurtenances. Appurtenances: Construction Cost Engineering Fiscal and Miscellaneous Land Acquisition Capitalized Interest ESTIMATED TOTAL---------- - - - - -- Assessable Cost Deferred Assessable Cost City Cost 3,000.00 200.00 200.00 = 0.00 4 200.00 --- - ----E 3,600.00 3,600.00 E 0.00 0.00 ESTIMATED TOTAL ------------------------------ $ 3 600.00 W40,4w gv- {Ifs Marlow V. Priebe Consulting Engineer MVP /bb 9 0 December 14, 1939 Mayor Paul Ackland City of Hutchinson Hutchinson, MIQ 55350 FOR YO'1-1R 11VFORMATIO[v RE: Project Number 90 -10 - Dale Street Improvements Dear Mayor Ackland: Thanks for the opportunity to express my opinion on the proposed improvements on Dale Street at the City Council meeting on December 12, 1989. I especially appreciated your open- mindedness and your willingness to hear all sides of the issues that were discussed; not only on this proposed project, but all others as well. Specifically, regarding Project 90 -10, I understand your • desire /need for a sidewalk to facilitate traffic for students at the new elementary school. In fact, I agree with your intentions; especially when_ the welfare of the children is involved. However, the partnership which owns the Southdale Apartments will be burdened with the additional pending assessment costs, if levied. With over 400 feet of frontage on Dale Street, I am sure that the assessment will be significant to our property. Unfortunately, this assessment is proposed at a time when we already face an overwhelming real estate tax burden on rental property. (As you may know, Minnesota has, by far, the highest rate of tax on residential rental property in the nation.) Further compounding our immediate problem is the over - building residential rental property which was permitted in the City of Hutchinson during 1988 and 1989. This over - building has led to significant over - supply of rental apartments resulting in significant (20 % +) vacancies. Needless to say, it is difficult meet any kind of realistic operating budget under these circumstances. Adding additional tax burden to this particular property would be very detrimental. wii a to At the Council meeting on December 12, you also indicated that the county may be willing to pay for some (if not all) of the proposed assessments, regarding street improvement. You also indicated that no action would be taken until final resolution regarding the county's co- payment was determined on this project. And this approach, makes perfect sense. 0 Page 2 However, due to our particular economic circumstances, currently, unless the county payment is significant, I must still urge you to defer making the assessments on our property until such time as the rental market in Hu *_chinson recovers tD "normal" occupancy an.; r_ntal rate levels. Once again, thank you for your time and your willingness to hear all sides of the story. Very truly yours, HUTCHINSON SOUTHDALE APARTMENTS Patrick L. Weber, Manager PW /kt • 0 • 0 December 27, 1989 Hutchinson City Council C/o City of Hutchinson 37 Washington Avenue West Hutchinson, MN. 55350 RE: Campbell Court Dear Sirs: ff We are property owners on Campbell Court, and are planning on building in the next year or two. For this reason we request that the City do the proposed work on our street which includes curb and gutter and a tar street. If the work on the street was put off until 1991 it could delay work on our homes that we hope to start in the early spring of 1991. David K. Westlund XBral Lueneburg Dan Prochpe�+ 'X' Mr. Rex E. & Mrs. Sue E. Fuller Boerhaaveweg 27 2202 AA Noordwijk Holland, Netherlands �d 1 st. December 1989, Friday Mr. Gary Plotz, City Administrator CITY OF HUTCHINSON 37 Washington Avenue West Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 USA Dear Mr. Plotz: 4 i1 1OUR11«n , T11 This letter is being sent in reference to the coming hearing scheduled for, I believe the 12 th. of December 1989 concerning the completing of the "road" called CAMPBELL COURT which is located within the city limits of Hutchinson! In view of the fact that my wife and I will be unable to attend that hearing, I would appreciate it if this letter could be submitted as a "substitute" for our personally being unable to appear on this scheduled hearing date! My wife and I and our family of four are currently residents of Holland, Netherlands. However, I am employed by Hutchinson • Technology Inc. and have been on an extended oversea's job assignment here in Europe for the past six years, three and a half of them with HTI. Last year we purchased two (2) lots in the Second Addition to the McClures subdivision, Lots # 5 & # 6. Our intention was to begin building this fall, but recent changes in plans at HTI will keep us here in Europe a bit longer than planned. However, we eventually hope to move to Hutchinson and likely will build on one of the two lots mentioned. Thus we would like it to be noted in the course of the coming hearing on the 12 th. of December that we are-in favor of the City of Hutchinson taking all steps necessary to couplets the curb, clutters and Paving of Campbell Court in the coming year, 1220! `n'ith0lat this x-crk ball =y completed in ' '.s nea future the 'road base' will continue-to deteriorate (as it is beginning to now) and for anyone trying to build and live along this road it will quickly become a "mud hole" and very difficult to travel. Additionally, of the eight lots that are tangent to Campbell Court, our owning two lots indicates that we have a 258 interest in this project being completed in a timely fashion! We appreciate your assistance in this matter and ask that if necessary this letter be considered in our behalf as one of the interested property owners of this subdivision who are desirous of seeing the completion of this work which was started in the fall of 19881 Please thank the committee for taking our views • under advisement during this hearing! Respectfully, a -I 1 i or. V Ile fee, 0 p "1 L. r.; 4• 1 {( r. 2 41 �.5 •i i i i J br . I e S89'40 00 w 231_ BLOCK 5 4 6 i n� �,' a• o 'r- 0 rp "0r ° o° "' Y 7 ti�ti V i *7a ee i .. •'S• }1 zl' v v 4e w e 14 V 60 Is_1 ^n] oM1 ,i �00 co 22 �•D° pp s ] . 9 c�� cl + 8 jo oa CAMPBELL LANE n •-590! — 4 nNllnl. :11 D.. n4 i L.. •,p•n ys omr•.•v nynP••i. ' la •n...n' L.r bnry 10 •<el •n .yln py n4 e,l ,•rr ...r. 1• I n, nn rr.r IILII •. a•:a•rry r nm•r, er,/•nt r• -np In (612) 587.5151 HvrcH CITY OF HUTCHINSON 37 WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST HUTCHINSON, MINN. 55350 January 27, 1989 M E M O R A N D U M TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: GARY PLOTZ SUBJECT: JUNKER SANITATION INCREASE REQUEST - LANDFILL ADJUSTMENT_ BACKGROUND - FORMULA Attached is a good summary from the Leader, dated June 6, 1986, regarding previous council practice. Please note the underlined portions. The councilmembers' detail for 1986 that supported that $1.20 landfill adjustment is also attached. ECOP31ENDED INCREASE (landfill) For "consistency," Ken Merrill and I have calculated the impact of a a $2.00 landfill increase on residential rates using the same formula and assumptions as June, 1986. The adjustment amount is $.94 /mo /account. See the attached breakdown. _ RE- CHECKED RECOMMENDED INCREASE - COUNTY INPUT v I telephoned Ed Homan from the County Waste Management Board. Based on his 1 method of computation, the landfill increase would amount to $.96 /mo /account. His assumptions and formula were based on information -from MPCA - Marshall Office; namely, a family of four has approximately 1.75 tons of refuse a year; one ton is equal to 3.3 cubic yards. ' (3.3 cubic yards R 1.75 tons = 5.78 cubic yards /yr R $2.00 increase = $11.56/yr l divided by 12 mo. _ $.96 /mo.) FEB. 1: 1989 DATE CITED AS SOME SORT OF DEADLINE Based on information from Ed Homan, MPCA took action on Nov. 14, 1988 that requires a "plan "for the new and additional reserve account be prepared by May 15, 1989. Payments would not start until Nov. 15, 1989. I am currently checking out the above information further through Mr. Bob McCaron of MPCA. SURVEY OF SURROUNDING LANDFILLS • Ed Homan will be submitting to me a listing of surrounding landfills, adjacent to McLeod County. I will be checking the cost and use - availability of the landfills; also any subsidies that may affect rates. Ed Homan indicated that a refuse truck and driver would cost $1.50 per additional mile. We will attempt to find out how many trips Dunker Sanitation made to the McLeod landfill in 1988 and calculate the additional transportation costs vs. potential landfill savings. A F (612)587.5151 CITY OF HUTCHINSON 37 WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST HUTCHINSON, MiNN 55350 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: December 8, 1989 TO: Mayor and City Council -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — FROM: _ SzaLY— P.10SZ. -Ci-tY— AdPurii5.tr-at9r— — — — — — — — — — — — — — SUBJECT• JUNKER SANITATION REQUEST ------------------------ - - -- -- Attached is a letter requesting a $2.00 increase per month /customer in response to a $2.00 per cubic foot landfill increase. Using the "guideline formula" used previously by the city council, the per month increase to the customer would be approximately .95- $1.00/ month increase /customer. See attached. cc: Allison Lutterman Barry Anderson Jim Junker GP /bb "-�f • • City c 37 Wasnington Avenue West Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council of Hutchinson: The 1989 Minnesota Legislature has passed legislation imposing a $2.00 per cubic yard tax onall mixed municipal solid waste. As per my contract with the City of Hutchinson I shall need an increase of $2.00 per month on each household and commercial account effective January 1, 1990. I urge your prompt consideration to the above subject and await your • response to the matter. 0 Sincerely, JUNKER SANITATION- - SERVICE, INC. James L. Junker President JLJ /mat "Your Garbologist " , James Junker. P.O. Box 246 . Stillwater, MN 55082 . 614 - 439 -7135 r oew a MCLEOO COUNTY Zoning Administrator 830 11 th Street East - Court House GLENCOE, MINNESOTA 5533 15,2270 Phone 864 -5551 EM. 259 EDWIN E. HOMAN ,J Administrator N• / MEMORANDUM TO: All McLeod �unty City Administrators 'e FOR YOUR INFORMATION FROM: Ed Homan McLeod County Solid Waste Officer DATE: December 15, 1989 SUBJECT: SCORE and The Greater Minnesota Landfill Cleanup Fee As you are probably aware, the 1989 Minnesota Legislature passed two significant pieces of legislation that will be affecting your waste hauler and constituents. Effective January 1, 1990, a.6 percent sales tax is extended to all mixed municipal solid waste collection and disposal. The waste hauler who provides waste collection service to your city must collect and remit the sales tax to the state of Minnesota. The money will then be distributed by the Office of Waste Management to counties according to a formula based on population. It has been estimated that McLeod County will receive $45,318 in FY 1990 and $107,071 in FY 1991. The members of the McLeod County Solid Waste Advisory Committee are of the opinion that each municipality shall be responsible for their own solid waste management (waste reduction, recycling, yard waste composting) and the County Board will establish a mechanism to provide adequate funding for the responsibility delegated. In the interim, each municipality should prepare a plan and budget, indicating how you intend to use the money the County will receive under the SCORE legislation for FY 1990. _Also, effective January 1, 1990, ebe assessed to McLeod Landfill, McLeod Landfill, Inc. shall be Revenue and deposited in Maintenance Fund for closure, maintenance for all Minnesota between $150 - 175,000 of the fe from January 1, 1990 to Jul received considerable criticism a $2.00 per cubic yard Yee will Inc. The t re fee collected by remitted to the Commission of the Greater Minnesota Landfill post closure, and long term landfills. It is estimated that e will be paid to McLeod County y 1, 1990. This legislation has and may be subject to change. oS' I have enclosed a SCORE Fact Sheet and correspondence from the Department of Revenue and the Association of Minnesota Counties regarding the Greater Minnesota Landfill Cleanup Fee for your information. If you have any questions regarding the legislation, please call me or any of the authors of the enclosed correspondence. EEH /las Enclosure cc: McLeod McLeod Landfill, Inc. County Commissioners 2 ye.xcq;� • STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE September 26. 1989 TO: All Minnesota Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Outside of the Metropolitan Area SUBJECT: Greater Minnesota Landfill Cleanup Fee The 1989 Minnesota Legislature has passed certain legislation affecting all mixed municipal solid waste landfills located in Minnesota. Effective January 1. 1990, all mixed municipal solid waste disposal facilities located outside of the Metropolitan area shall pay a state fee on solid waste accepted and disposed of at the facility. • If a facility measures the waste that it accepts, the state fee is $2.00 per cubic yard. If a facility weighs the waste that it accepts, the fee is 42.00 per 600 pounds. • From January 1, 1990 until July 1, 1990, the entire amount of the state fee shall be paid by the operator of the facility to-the county where the facility is located. As of July 1, 1990, the fee collected shall be paid to the Commissioner of Revenue. This fee will be due on or before the 20th day of each month, for the previous month. This office will be advising you in the near future as to the type of records that you will be required to keep, as well as certain types of waste that may be exempt from the fee. Please feel free to contact either Marilyn Sheffield or Keith Nelson at 612 -297 -1882 if you have any questions. // � le Ii� Keith R. Nelson, Revenue Auditor Department of Revenue Special Taxes Division 10 River Park Plaza Mail Station 3331 St. Paul, MN 55146 -3331 (612) 297 -1882 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 1 n U ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA COUNTIES 525 Park Street Suite 404 St. Paul, Minnesota 55103 612/224 -3344 Date: March 31, 1989 To: Physical Development Po icy Committee From: Dave Weire s Policy Analys Re: Landfill Tip Fee Surcharge for Closure, Postclosure and Long -Term Maintenance AMC has been involved in the development of a landfill tip fee surcharge that would be assessed in non -metro landfills and used for closure, postclosure and long -term maintenance for landfills that are currently operating as well as closed facilities. The concerns that have been raised are regarding the financial assurance rules that were approved last fall. The attached language has been amended into the Waste Management Act • Amendments (S.F. 530) by Senator LeRoy Stumpf. As the legislation reads, this would be a $2.00 per cubic yard tip fee surcharge. It is estimated that approximately $8 million could be raised from this tax. Seventy -five percent ($6 million) of the proceeds would be deposited in the Greater Minnesota Landfill Maintenance Fund. The entire $6 million would be distributed back to counties as follows: • Fifty percent based on population and 50% based on a county's share of landfills. Money goes to counties that have open and /or closed landfills. Counties that'do not have any open landfills would receive these funds. These funds are to be used for closure, postclosure activities on landfills through the 20 year monitoring period. Twenty -five percent of the money, $2 million, would go to the Greater Minnesota Landfill Contingency Action Fund to be used by the PCA for the following: Closure and postclosure expenses for facilities where the PCA determines the operator /owner will not take necessary actions, and 2. Response and postclosure costs for landfills that have been closed for more than 20 years. H Page 2 Physical Development Policy Committee Landfill Tip Fee Surcharge There are several reporting requirements, but is the guts of the legislation. Be prepared on Thursday, April 6, at the Policy Committee Paul Radisson Hotel. Attachment dw:jg the above summary to talk about this Meeting at the St. • • C� J SHEET Legislation establishing a statewide waste reduction and recycling program was passed by the Minnesota Legislature on September 29 and enacted into law October 3, 1989. Based on recommendations developed by Governor Perpich's Select Committee on Recycling and the Environment (SCORE), the legislation requires that counties in Greater Minnesota recycle at least 25 percent of their solid waste by the end of 1993. Counties in the Twin Cities metropolitan area must recycle at least 35 percent, and state agencies in the metropolitan area must recycle at least 40 percent. To fund programs needed to meet these goals, the SCORE legislation will raise an estimated S30 million during the remainder of the biennium (about S20 million per year) by making garbage collection services subject to the state's six percent sales tax, effective January 1, 1990. About 75 percent of the revenue will be distributed to counties, and 25 percent will go to state agencies. Some of the state agency funding will be available to counties and private companies as grants and loans. How much money will each county receive? The Legislature has appropriated 522,281,000 to counties and 57,687,000 to state agencies for fiscal years 1990 -91. The Office of Waste Management (OWM) will distribute the funds to counties according to a formula based on population. Each county will receive a minimum of S82,500 (527,500 the first year and S55,000 the second year). If revenue from the tax exceeds the projected total of $29,968,000, the excess, up to 55 million, will be distributed to county/state recipients using the same 75 percent/25 percent ratio. Excess revenue must be distributed so l October 1988 SCORE Waste Reduction and Recycling Legislation Impact on Counties that each county receives at least 50 percent of the revenue generated in that county by the tax. If revenue falls short of the projected amount, 75 percent of the deficiency will be withheld from counties (although counties would still receive the 582,500 minimum). Each county must provide matching funds of 25 percent the amount received from the OWM. The SCORE legislation grants counties authority to use a special levy to raise matching funds. How will the money be collected? All public and private solid waste collection services are subject to the six percent sales tax. The collection of source - separated recyclable materials and the collection of waste from recycling facilities and surcharges are exempt. A county or other political subdivision must pay the tax if it provides or contracts for collection or disposal services. If the actual cost for providing services exceeds the direct cost to residents, the tax must be applied to the actual cost. For citizens or businesses that haul their own waste to a solid waste disposal facility, the tax will apply to the disposal charge or tipping fee. For what purposes can the money be used? The money a county receives under the SCORE legislation may be spent only on solid waste management programs that: ' reduce waste, ' recycle the maximum amount of solid waste technically feasible, • develop markets for recycled materials, ' remove problem materials from the waste stream and develop proper disposal options, ' inform and educate the public about proper solid waste management practices, (continued on other side) �t Printed on Recvcled Pap- provide technical assistance to public and private entities to ensure proper solid waste management, and provide educational, technical, and financial assistance to prevent litter. - Each city in Greater Minnesota with a population of 20,000 or more and each city in the Twin Cities metropolitan area'with a population of 5,000 or& more must have at least monthly curbside picku What must a county do to receive SCORE ' By June 30, 1992, each county in the metropolitan area must establish a household hazardous waste legislation funding? management program that includes at least quarterly collection. Prior to receiving funds, a county must create a separate account in its general fund to credit the money provided Forking either alone or with other counties, each by the SCORE legislation and set up accounting county must ensure that materials separated for procedures to make sure the money is spent only for recycling are transported to markets for sale or to the purposes listed above. processing centers. In each following year, the county must: Licensing is required for collectors of mixed municipal solid waste. Volume- or weight -based ' have a solid waste management plan in place that pricing is required for licensing. Cities and towns includes a recycling implementation strategy and a have authority to issue licenses. Counties must household hazardous waste management plan, adopt the licensing authority of cities and towns ' submit a report to the OWM by August 1 of each that do not issue licenses. year detailing how the money was spent and what results were achieved, and A political subdivision that provides or pays for ' show that 25 percent in local matching funds will be solid waste collection or disposal must report the spent for purposes listed above. cost as a separate item on tax statements. What are counties required to do under Other provisions in the SCORE legislation the SCORE legislation? , Counties have authority to establish incentives too ' By October 4, 1990, each county must amend its recycle, for example, by requiring collectors to use solid waste management plan to include a recycling pricing provide incentives to plan that takes into account the new recycling goals. customers who to customers who separate their recyclable materials. Within one year following approval of its recycling plan by the OWM, the county must submit a local A county that delegates any of its responsibilities recycling implementation strategy. for solid waste management to another unit of government must establish a mechanism to provide ' By October 4, 1990, each county.must amend its adequate funding for the responsibility delegated. solid waste management plan to include a household hazardous waste management plan that • Counties, townships, and cities have authority to addresses public education, reduction of household prohibit the unlawful damping of solid waste and hazardous waste, and separation of household require landowners responsible for unlawful hazardous waste from mixed municipal solid waste. dumping to clean up or be charged for clean -up. The plans must be implemented by June 30, 1942. . The disposal of major appliances in solid waste ' By October 1, 1990, counties must ensure that processing facilities or landfills is illegal after . citizens have an opportunity to recycle: July 1, 1990. The OWM will submit a report on - Each county must have at least one recycling the management of major appliances to the center and provide for the recycling of problem legislative Commission on Waste Management-by_,:" materials and major appliances. Each county must July 15, 1990. inform its citizens on how, when, and where materials can recycled. • By 1991 in the Twin Cities metropolitan area and . Each city witth h a population of 5,000 or more 1993 in Greater Minnesota, state and local _ must have curbside pickup, centralized drop -off, or government buildings and schools must have containers to collect and transfer to recycling a local recycling center for at least four kinds or recyclable materials. centers at least three recyclable materials. . (oondnued on nW page) Political subdivisions, educational institutions, and other public agencies must aggressively pursue procurement practices that encourage solid waste reduction, recycling, and the development of markets for recyclable materials and compost. OWM assistance ... To assist counties in Greater Minnesota in meeting recycling goals, the OWM will establish interim goals and monitor progress. If a county has difficulty making progress, the OWM will assist in developing and implementing solid waste management techniques to help meet the goal. The Metropolitan Council will establish goals and monitor the progress of metropolitan - area counties. In addition to the OWM's existing technical and financial resources, the SCORE legislation provides the following resources: technical assistance to help counties implement recycling programs and develop informational materials for counties to use in promoting recycling; ' S2.4 million to provide technical and financial assistance for projects that develop markets or end uses for recyclable materials; 5750,000 to develop a statewide waste education campaign and school curricula, provide grants for developing and distributing waste education materials, and provide grants to educational institutions to help reduce and recycle their wastes; $525,000 to provide public education, technical assistance, and grants to support waste reduction; • $150,000 in grants for counties that have included in their solid waste management plans programs to prevent, control, or abate litter; and ' funding for the OWM's Solid Waste Reduction and Separation (LOW -TECH) Grants Program (funding had been exhausted). In addition, the OWN[ will: identify problem materials and develop a plan to separate, collect, and transport them for processing or disposal; work with other state agencies, local - governments, and industry representatives to develop household battery management programs that could include grants to counties, collection and transportation systems, public information, and market development; and conduct a study on plastics that includes current and future uses, impacts on waste processing technologies, composition, opportunities for reduction and recycling, and market development. Other state assistance .. •. ' The MPCA will expand its household hazardous waste management collection program statewide, establishing permanent collection sites and providing public information and technical assistance. • The MPCA will develop a safety and development guide for operating recycling and yard waste composting facilities. ' The State Planning Agency will develop model zoning criteria for siting recycling centers. ' The Department of Transportation will design, manufacture, and make available for purchase highway signs for placement at recycling centers designated by the MPCA. To be designated a recycling center, it must be open at least 12 hours a week year. round and accept at least four different materials. ' The Department of Administration will give preference to recycled and recyclable materials in purchasing, develop model waste reduction procurement programs, and establish a cooperative purchasing program that includes local units of government. For more Information ... This is not a comprehensive summary of the legislation. For a complete copy of the bill, contact the OWM at (612) 649 -5750, or call toll -free, 1- 800-652 -9747 Panted on Recycled Paper DAVID H. ARNOLD • CHARLES R. CARMICHAEL GARY D. McDOw ELL STEVEN A. ANDERSON G. BARRY ANDERSON STEVEN S. HOGE LAURA K. FRETLAND DAVID A. BRUEGGEMANN JOSEPH M. PAIEMENT JAMES UTLEY JULIA A. CHRISTIANS RICHARD G. MCGEE December 7, 1989 ARNOLD & MGDOWELL ATTORNEYS AT LAW 101 PARE PLACE HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350 (612) 587 -7575 TELECOPIER(612) 587.4090 Gary D. Plotz City Administrator 37 Washington Avenue West Hutchinson, Mn. 55350 RESIDENT ATTORNEY G. BARRY ANDERSON OF COUNSEL WILLIAM w. CAMERON PAUL D. DOVE 5881 CEDAR LAKE ROAD MINNEAPOLIS- MINNESOTA 55416 (612)545 -9000 MN TOLL FREE 800 -343 -4545 TELECOPIER (612) 545.1193 501 SOUTH FOURTH STREET PRINCETON, MINNESOTA 55377 (612) 389 -2214 TELECOPIER(612) 389 -5506 Re: Thomas B. Dolder and City of Hutchinson (Dry Dock) Our File No.: 3188 -89 -0114 Dear Gary: The above referenced matter the lease agreement for the • Dry Dock, expires on January pursuant to the lease. RECEi By—_ has come up for review. As you know, former Spanky's facility now known as 31, 1990 unless otherwise terminated I have been contacted by Jim Mills on behalf of Dry Dock and he advises me that the landlord is ready to enter into an additional one year committment on the same terms and conditions as set forth in the original lease of August 1, 1989. I have no reason to suggest that it would not be appropriate to so agree and accordingly, I would recommend that this matter be placed on the agenda for the December 12, 1989 meeting with the thought that the Council could authorize the extension of the lease agreement for one year. I have no information on how the program is progressing, but I assume since I have heard nothing to the contrary, that the results have generally been satisfactory and the City does desire to con- tinue with this arrangement. In any event, I would appreciate it if you would place this matter on the agenda and Mr. Dolder's attorney, Don Prochnow, and this office can put together the appropriate short form agreement with Council authorization. I would anticipate that all we would need to do is to have a letter agreement indicating that the lease would be extended on the same terms and conditions up to and in- 0 cluding December 31, 1989. Mr. Gary D. Plotz December 7, 1989 Page 2 Please call with any questions. Very truly yours, G. Barry Anderson GBA:mb December 26, 1989 Best personal regards. I talked to Attorney Barry Anderson late this afternoon. He stated there has been no change in the previous proposal with the owner of Dry Dock. Marilyn Swanson Administrative Secretary 11 CJ • • H U T C H I N S O N P U B L I C S C H O O L S GEGRI,E GORD011 —HARMAN JERRY JONES /ICE rHAgRMAN DONALD POPP_ CLERE DDUGLAS KE ^1V f,G CIR6STOR LCCILLE APL TRE4s: ROGER SEAR %S DIRECTOR December 13, 1989 ((zRE!tCVj, 19, Mr. Gary Plotz City Hall __Washington Ave. Hutchinson, MN 55350 £F�SZL2� RE: Tax Increment District Funds - Excess Loan Fund Dollars 858 Return to Taxing Districts from the Revolving Fund Dear Mr. Plotz: In reference to the above formula dollar amount, it is • requested that the school district funds be held until December 1990, or until the city and the school district are able to develop a plan for improved parking in the immediate area of Park Elementary School. It is my understanding that this area is in the current tax increment district. Hopefully, this can be discussed by us in early 1990 so that a decision can be reached. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 4�AV44 Glenn Mate? a Superintendent of Schools • INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 423 HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350 1• DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION 30 GLEN STREET NORTH (612) 587 2860 TECHNICAL INSTITUTE OF HUTCHINSON 200 CENTURY AVENUE (612) 567 -3636 4 1 _ 11 e P O a T u V T I 1 11 e 1 v 1, .. .1 To the ....... �Cjjy..COLNCIL 0/ the......_.. C.Ily .. . ...... . ........... . ...... . ..... . ..... �UTCHINSON ............................. . .. .......... .. . .. . . .......... . ............ i1w county of ........... I .. ........ 4FQQ .... .......... . .. ....... . ...... State of Jfinnesofa: • The undersigned Owner whose address i . ....... • 0 I — . . ........ — — - — ------- -------- ----------------- . ..... applies for a permit to— PLOW AND REMOVE SNOW WITH upon that certain tract of land described as follows: Lot . ............................... ­..­.­; Block ..._.....__...._._.._.__......_ plator addition.. .............. ....... . . .................................. . .......................... ; address............. I......_.._.. - -- which le Of the fOU01vinff size and area; width .................... . ............ ........ ...... feet; Zenith­..­­__­­ feet; area ­­WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS .................. and hereby agrees that, in Clue such Permit is granted, that all ; materials which shall be used shall comply with the plant and epecift work which OWE be done and all I cations therefor herewith submitted and with all the ordinances of 8aid..._._CITY OF HUTCHINSON applicable thereto. ...... ..... . ..... -- — ----- '4ppllcan' further agrees 10 pay fees or assessments at the time and in the amounts epwifled a; ,follows: 51.00 vo #-bJ-50 Owner ON, To the... '..CITY COLNCIL ..................................... of the .... . ... UTY of.. In the County of ................ .... MC ... LiM ................... ............ . ...... . ............ State of Minnesota: r—�hc undersigned owner whose address is ............. 77-/ IVI". - - — -------------------- hereby applies for a permit m PLOW AND REMOVE SNOW WITH it Upon that Certain tract of land described as follows: Lot ................ ......... .... ............... ; Block ........... plator addition .......................... ..... ............................ .. ................ ......... ; address .............._............_ . ....... wh'--h is of the following size and area; width ............. . ..... . .... ................_..... feet; length... ...._....__..___....._...._.... feet; area ....... WITIUN THE CITY LIMITS and hereby agrees that, in case such permit is granted, that all work which shall be done and all Materials which shall used shall oamply with the Plans and sPecifloationj therefor herewith submit j I uhmi and with all the ordinanau of said ....... CITY OF HUTCHINSON aWicable thereto. 4pplicant .follows: further agrees 10 Pay fees or assessments at the time and In the amounts specified as $1.00 - 41 co to lk� � Owner 0 0 E (612) 587 -5151 ITY OF HUTCHINSON /ASHINGTON AVENUE WEST H NSON, MINN. 55350 MEMORANDUM i. TO: Mayor & City Council ------ ---------- -------- - - - - -- FROM: Marilyn Swanson. Administrative Secretary— SUBJECT: Resolution Supporti McLeod County Regional Rail Authority Plan Attorney Barry Anderson requested this item be placed on the agenda for the special Council meeting on December 28, 1989. Action, however, will be contingent upon the outcome of the court hearing on December 27. If the McLeod County Regional Rail Authority plan is approved by the court, Atty. Anderson will provide a Resolution for Council approval. If the plan is rejected, this item will be removed from the agenda. rl• C FOR YOUR INFORMATION. • MINUTES MCLEOD REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY DECEMBER 21, 1989 Members Present: Others Present: Sheldon Nies, Chairman Barry Anderson Ancher Nelsen Ron McGraw Larry Graf Cathy Nevanen, Leader Les Forman Steve Stenborg, KDUZ Milo Kubasch Members Absent: Tom Daggett Joe Gehlen Dean Dleson Chairman Sheldon Nies called the meeting to order at 12 noon at the Victorian Inn, Hutchinson. The minutes of the meeting of November 8 were approved as written. Chairman Nies reported on the status of the two reorganization plans which have been presented (Mills /Hughes and Regional Rail Authority). • Members of the Rail Authority should plan to appear at the hearing at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, December 27. Attorney Barry Anderson discussed the Rail Authority plan. Sale of the dinner train and the elimination of sinking funds are a part of the plan. Deferral of payment of the state loan until its final due date (2008) is also proposed. Further, a group of North Carolina investors have proposed buying into Dakota Rail, providing more capital. The Mills— Hughes group has proposed amendments to their plan to ensure long term rail service; they ask the Rail Authority to withdraw and support the Mills— Hughes plan. The State of MN has taken the position that rail property whose value is in question needs to be formally appraised prior to resolution of bankruptcy. MOTION was made by Les Forman, seconded by Larry Graf and carried unanimously to authorize a representative of the Rail Authority to express to the court the Rail Authority's desire to have rail property appraised. (A reinforcement of the State's position.) The meeting was recessed at 12:40 p.m. to be resumed the week of December 25. Recorded by Hazel Sitz • z 0 11 • To Mr. Gary D. Plotz City Administrator City of Hutchinson 37 Washington Ave. W. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Mr. G Barry Anderson City Attorney City of Hutchinson 37 Washington Ave. W. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Subject: Northern Pacific Railroad Car .. Mr. itoDert w. Moen 2345 Woodbridge St. Roseville, MN 55113 December 21, 1989 612 -482 -0664 CL g: •236 RE ._ Mr. Michael Ross Cf1q ntlQ ttr_r►nlggTlnn� Dakota Rail Inc FOR YTO lN7C, ....-, .vi 25 Adams St. N Hutchinson, MN 55350 Mr. Thomas G. Lovett, Jr. Lovett & Associates Ltd. 1400 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, MN 55402 Background- My partner (Loren Williams) and myself are students at the University of Minnesota. In 1958 we purchased the Northern Pacific "Lewis & Clark Travelers Rest" car in order to save this very rare piece of Minnesota history from the cutting torch and extinction. Our intention was to restore the car and then sell it. We worked on the restoration of the car in the Summer of 1988. We completely restored the interior and exterior of the car and have since been trying to sell it. We graduated from school in June and in this depressed employment market are still unemployed and looking for jobs. We had hoped to have sold the car by now and have every financial motivation to do so as soon as possible. We are not now in a financial position to incur large expenses on the car and are eager to recover the expenses we incurred in restoring it. I cannot fully describe how insulted and outraged my partner and I were at the insinuating and inaccurate letter which you sent regarding our railroad car! We put a lot of hard work into saving and restoring this historic car. I would like to correct the many assertions which were made. 1. The car is not now. nor has it ever been abandoned. I have been paying monthly rent for the track occupied by the car to Dakota Rail Inc. since August of 1985. I have checked on the car monthly since then. This is no small task since I live in the Twin Cities and have to travel 72 miles one way just to check on the car. 2 The car is not standing in the middle of a snowmobile trail: the snowmobile trail is standing in the middle of my car! I did not place the car in the middle of a snowmobile trail so that inattentive snowmobilers would hit it. The city chose to run its snowmobile trail through my car, rather than around it! The car is equipped with reflective tape on the sides. There is enough light and the car is large enough so that I doubt anyone is going to miss it. The car is low and there are rails in place which would prevent a snowmobiler from going under the car. We would be happy to erect a -snowfenceto further reduce this potential hazard. But the real issue here is that this potential hazard was entirely created by the city's actions. We do not understand why we should be responsible for the gty.'sdeclsloa to build a snowmobile trail wrough our;car. rower, than around it 3 When l eateredinto a lease agreement with Dakota Rail itwas:with the clear =, understanding that, as the car is difficult and expensive to move; it could remain, at this location indefinitely. There were no plans to build a trail through the location of my; car which I was made aware of. Had I known of any; I would never have located the car, in this spot! 4. Dakota Rail in making such a few has represented to that they have title to the property and the legal right to enter into track leases on the.property. If they never . had the right to do so then your dispute should be with them, ,notme. and they sbould bear the costs of moving the car. However, it is my understanding that this-land was given to the railroad 100- years ago for building a railroad into the City of Hutchinson. Since this land still hasrailsiand ties on Rand is still being used for railroad purposes it would appeardo me.that it is still railroad, property under the terms of the original. _ gift by the city. This is certainly something which lawyers representing the rwlroad and the city could discuss, but as a lessee I had no way of knowing that there was such a _, dispute, nor does the dispute involve me; it is a matter for the city and the railroad to resolve.: 5. Except for an initial phone call from the city in, September. I have had no further phone or written communication from the city regarding this matter, until this letter . of December 15, 1989. To say that the city has made "attempts to get parties to cooperate" has not included any communication with me, the owner, which I think is very add. 'I': have been indirectly informed via the mover(D and the railroad that the city desired that the car be moved; but have received no direct and therefore clear communication of the city's concerns until now. Since the expression of such concern by the city, I , < have been making every attempt possible to get the car sold as quickly as possible, but • it is simply notpossible to force someone to buy the car. 5. I have located a potential buyer (Kurt Stoebe of Humboldt, IA) and have been making every effort to reach a sales agreement with him as soon as possible. However, this ' .. . action (letter of December 15. 1989) by the city has now made this nearly impossible. The fair market value of this car is around $10,000 In a good faith effort to sell it to Mr: Stoebe as soon, as possible I have already dropped my price to 57,500 Just when i, thought we were close to agreement in early December, Mr Stoebe placed discussions on hold, stating that he would be in a better position to know whether he could purchase the car in late December It now appears that he was aware that the city was going to take this action. and decided to wait until I would be forced to sell at a distress price. 7. I would like to know how Mr;;Stoebe even became awareof this situation and how the city ended up in independent negotiations with my. potential buyer? By making Mr Stoebe fully aware of my need to move this car immediately, the city has given him an unfair advantage in these nogotiations,ahus depriving me of theSairmarket•value:of:.7 this rare and historical piece of equipment (There is only one other car like it left in r existence). It almost appears is if the city and Mr. Stoebe have been colluding is order . to force me into a position where I must sell the car to Mr Stoebe at a distress price. These actions by the Oty have. made it,very difficult for me to, quickly-conclude. negotiations:agd•get the car sold and moved._wbich would be to everyone s benefit, •r. >a _ __ They have also causod me a potential financial loss, 1. ., e. s .: r Y. & The clr *U cb6j$letef3fth -Abre4with ffish paint and a remodeled yticet b i in summer of 1988. The car was in excellent condition until the city council passed anew "` ordinance restricting kids from the main street in the evening. This resolution caused a wave of retallWr'yvandalism to hifthe city and my car h`as'been a significant victim` There w'4r6w4i4, taken w- indows before last May when I filed dry first pOlice report oa a window cr+3icked by -a rock. Shred -tfi6n I have had to file twa additional police reports on vandalism** thv­1nnoceht" rhildren'of Hutchinson. Vandalism which was=a direct result of the City Councils actions. Expensive vandalism which I have had to absorb id repairs and decreased value of the car. Up until November the kids only cracked the windows>©n>Hilloween =they threw large Chunks of concreftwbloAthrou -kh two of the windowspumbiing holes`in them? Contrary to your report, I swept`upi.heiglass and boarded up- the twawindows atthattime':In the current weatkerconditions'it is sibiply, Y not possible'to do more untilsppiag: 9. The only- waynsomeone could enter�the carwouid`bc through breaking a>id•dntryof "- the end doors.The -car is now and haialways been locked to prevent suelrehtry I resent your insinuation that the car has-been abandoned atfd fefr open for 4ildren to' playaadtet :hattin•sihatissimply.n&uue. The most frustrating part of this whole problem is that the entire situation has > '< been created by the city; from the broken windows, to the building of a snowmobile path, to involvement in my private sales negotiattons,'and now the city.. is claiming it is: x all my fault for the� city's actionsYP t Bdlirve me; I am more eager to sell the car and have it`offmy back than you can possibly imagiae,,-but the city'saactions:haveplaced mein &terrible position. I " tested ` ` the siding-from Dakota Rail.with the clear.understanding that the tar couldremain there indefinitely until I could restore and sell it. My position is that if Dakota Rail had - c. • no righttoiissue me a track:lease, then Dakota Rail should pay to have the car :moved If Dakota Rail does in fact own the propertysandhad the right to issue the track lease and the city now desires to clear the railroad tracks from this land, then the city should bear that,expense and a reasonable cost of moving my car'from this lodacion.lThecost would be 5300 according to Chuck Barrick at Structural Specialties): Ithink the simplest and cheapest solution is to build the path aroundthe ca'r since that is where the people are going to go anyway. People will make there own path around the car because they will be drawn to the old railroad bridge, rocks and waterfall that are located on the west end of the car. The path makes a hard left turn following the river after passing through my car, so why not make the left turn before passing through my car and reduce all this expense and hassle? q Another solution might be for the city to buy the car and use it as aTourist and Trail Information:Center. The trail could be renamed- tht>Lewis &-aCfark trail 46 follow - the theme of the mural inthe cars lounge section. c To sendyour letter with no previous communication is 'not whatI would call a; cooperative approach. To demand that tho'earbe removed in 10 days is absurd and unreasonable, especially during the Chritstmashblidayseasoa I would very much like to resolve this matter as quickly'avpossible. f would be happy to meet-with your representatives or discuss this issue'by phone at your earliest convenience. I contacted Kurt Stobe again today and he indicated that he is still • interested in the car and would know more as to whether he could buy it in one to two weets 1 certainly hope that ne does, so that tnls matter can De concluded quietly and without further dispute. Sincerely, CC: Mayor & City Council Dolf Moon Roger Haggenmiller Clarence Kadrmas Steve Madson George field Butch Henke • *'