Loading...
cp02-28-1984 cHUTCHINSON CITY CALENDAR WEEK OF February 26T O March 3 1984 it WEDNESDAY -29- LEAP YEAR SUNDAY -26- 1 THURSDAY -1- 5:30 P.M. - Council & Community Develope- ant - Fire Hall - ix increment financ- ig workshop MONDAY -27- TUESDAY -28- 1:00 P.M. - Utilities Commission 2:00 P.M. - Open Bids at City Meeting at Utilities Hall for Project Office 84 -01, Part II 7:30 P.M. - City Council Meet - ing at City Hall FRIDAY -2- VACATION: MARLOW PRIEBE - Gone Until April 2 SATURDAY -3- 0 0 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1984 ✓1. Call to Order - 7:30 P.M. y2. Invocation - Reverend Darrel Thalmann 3. Consideration of Minutes - Regular Mceting of Feiroary 14, 1984 Action - Motion to approve - Motion to approve as amended 4. Routine Items J(a) Reports of Officers, Boards and Commissions 1. Fire Department Minutes dated January 31, 1984 2. Monthly Financial Report - January, 1984 3. Airport Zoning Board Minutes dated January 12, 1984 4. Park & Recreation Board Minutes dated January 4, 1984 5. Planning Commission Minutes dated January 17, 1984 ,;r(b) Consideration of Request for Reduced Trash and Refuse Rate by Anne M. Groehler Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve /(c) Resolution No. 7664 - Resolution for Purchase Action - Motion to reject - Motion to waive reading and adopt 5. Public Hearing - 8:00 P.M. ,/(a) Proposed Reconstruction of T.H. 7 from Fifth Avenue NE to East City - Limits I t Action - Motion to close hearing - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and adopt Resolution 6. Communications. Reauests and Petitions ,,Aa) Consideration of Expanding the Parking Assessment District in Lieu of Providing Off Street Parking under the City's Zoning Ordinance for a New Development Action - COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRUARY 28, 1984 7. Resolutions and Ordinances r✓R�(a) Consideration of Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding Contract for Project No. 84 -03 Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 7660 „/(b) Consideration of Resolution of Appreciation on Retirement of Finley Mix Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and adopt Resolution,No. 7662 ,Kc) Consideration of Resolution of Appreciation for Mark Kaping (Requested by Alderman Mikulecky) Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and adopt Resolution No. 7663 8. Unfinished Business ,/(a) Consideration of Planning Commission Recommendation for-Street Name in Helland's Fifth Addition Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve i(b) Consideration of Recommendation of Public Facilities Task Force Action - /(c) Consideration of Refunding 1981 Parking Bonds and Refunding 1980 Tax Increment Bond Issue (Evergreen Apts. & Misc.) and Refunding S &L Tax Increment Bonds Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and waive reading and adopt Resolution 9. New Business (a) Consideration of Delinquent Slater & Sewer Accounts Action - Motion to authorize extension of payment period - Motion to authorize discontinuation of service g /(b) C onsideration of Remodeling Exterior of Municipal Luqior Store and Purchasing Cooler Action - 2 0 0 COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRUARY 28, 1984 if(c) Consideration of Phvsical Fitness Program for Police Department Action - y(d) Consideration of Repealing Ordinance No. 518 Relating to Transportation Board Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and waive first reading of Ordinance 01/84 and set second reading for March 13, 1984 v(e) Consideration of Request for Conditional Use Permit Submitted by Hutch Agri -Tech with Favorable Recommendation of the Planning Commission with Contingencies Action - Motion to reject - Motion to approve and waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 7661 ✓(f) Consideration of Sketch Plan Submitted to McLeod County by Gerald Gassman with Favorable Recommendation of Planning Commission Action - Motion to reject - Motion to recommend approval to McLeod County /(g) Consideration of Conditional Use Permit Submitted to McLeod County by Sue Callier with Favorable Recommendation of Planning Commission Action - Motion to reject - Motion to recommend approval to McLeod County L h) Consideration of Establishing Semi - Annual Payments for On Sale Liquor Licenses (Requested by Alderman Mikulecky) Action - 10. Miscellaneous j(a) Communications from City Administrator %ill. Verified Claims `J - Action - Motion to approve and authorize payment from appropriate funds J2. Adjournment M11 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1984 1. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Stearns at 7:30 P.M., with the following present: Alderman Mike Carls, Alderman John Mlinar, Alderman Marlin Torgerson, Alderman Pat Mikulecky, and Mayor Robert H. Stearns. Also present: City Administrator Gary D. P1otz and City Attorney James Schaefer. 2. INVOCATION In the absence of a minister, there was no invocation. 3. MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting of January 24, 1984, were approved unanimously. 4. ROUTINE ITEMS (a) REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 1. Building Official's Monthly Report - January 1984 2. Planning Commission Minutes dated January 17, 1984 3. Library Board Minutes dated January 30, 1984 4. Nursing Home Board Minutes dated December 22, 1983 5. Fire Department Minutes dated January 16, 1984 There being no discussion, the minutes were ordered by the Mayor to be received for filing. (b) CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR REDUCED TRASH AND REFUSE RATE BY FRED GAUGER It was moved by Alderman Mlinar, seconded 'by Alderman Carls, carried unanimously, to approve the request for reduced trash and refuse rate. (c) RESOLUTION NO. 6755 - RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE It was moved by Alderman Mikulecky, seconded by Alderman Mlinar and carried unanimously, to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 6755. 5. PUBLIC HEARING - 8:00 P.M. Mayor Stearns called the hearing to order at 8:00 P.M. and read publication No. 3205for assessment roll No. 190 - Lipke Addition. There was no one present to be heard. COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 1984 City Administrator Plotz noted that this is the first time the council is activating a deferred assessment and that several alternatives can be considered in making the assessment. Questions should be discussed with City Engineer Priebe before adopting the assessment roll. City Attorney Schaefer suggested the public hearing can be adjourned now and reconvened later with the engineer present. Alderman Mlinar made a motion to continue the public hearing to a later date. Motion was seconded by Alderman Torgerson and carried unanimously. 6. COMMUNICATIONS, REQUESTS AND PETITIONS None 7. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES None 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (a) Consideration of Adoption of Minnesota Uniform Fire Code by City of Hutchinson (DEFERRED JANUARY 24, 1984) After discussion, a motion was made by Alderman Torgerson to approve the adoption of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and set public hearing for March 13, 1984, at 8:00 P.M. Motion was seconded by Alderman Carls and carried unanimously. (b) DESIGNATION OF COUNCIL'S REPRESENTATIVE TO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD (JOHN MLINAR) AND REPORT BY CITY ATTORNEY (DEFERRED JANUARH 24, 1984) City Attorney Schaefer reported that the Downtown Development District Advisory Board can be disbanded, since the Community Development Corporation has assumed its duties. He has drafted a resolution which would dissolve the board. A motion was made by Alderman Torgerson to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 7656 Dissolving the Downtown Development District Advisory Board. Motion seconded by Alderman Mlinar and carried unanimously. (c) CONSIDERATION OF IMPROVING ONE BLOCK OF FRANKLIN STREET, PROJECT 84 -05 (DEFERRED JANUARY 24, 1984) Discussion on this project reviewed the fact that it is not included in the 1984 project total for bonds and that it can be done by interim financing and included in a later bond issue either in 1984 or in 1985. Residents have requested the improvement due to the condition of the street; improvements on the adjacent section of Franklin Street are not scheduled for immediate consideration. -2- . COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 1984 Alderman Torgerson made a motion to approve the improvement and set public hearing for April 10, 1984 at 8:00 P.M. Motion was seconded by Alderman Mikulecky and carried unanimously. Alderman Torgerson made a motion to waive reading and adopt Resolutions No. 7645 and 7646. Motion was seconded by Alderman Mikulecky and carried unanimously. (d) CONSIDERATION OF ADVANCE REFUNDING OF 1981 PARKING BONDS (DEFERRED JANUARY 24, 1984) City Administrator Plotz advised that the city is awaiting reports which are needed to study this question. The council requests that bonding consultant Bill Fahey be present when the matter is discussed. On a motion by Alderman Carls, seconded by Alderman Mlinar and carried unanimously, the matter was tabled indefinitely. City Administrator Plotz stated that, in the opinion of the Dorsey law firm, this matter would have no effect on any pending litigation. (6) CONSIDERATION OF PROJECT 84 -06 FOR LYNDALE AVENUE AND HANSON DRIVE (DEFERRED JANUARY 10, 1984) After discussion, a motion was made by Alderman Mlinar to approve the project including both Lyndale Avenue and Hanson Drive and to set public hearing for April 10, 1984, at 8:00 P.M. Motion was seconded by Alderman Mikulecky. Motion was made by Alderman Carls to waive reading and adopt Resolutions No. 7657 and 7658. Motion seconded by Alderman Mlinar and carried unanimously. (f) CONSIDERATION OF PROJECT 83 -10, ASSESSMENT ROLL NO. 186 The owner of the only affected property, Lorraine Meyer, wants to do the watermain improvement herself. There was discussion of whether a franchise is necessary in such an instance and whether a number of such private installations would have an adverse effect on the city's long range plan. The City Engineer is working on a plan to make water service for sprinkling systems more accessible to all affected properties. Alderman Torgerson made a motion to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 7659 Rescinding a Portion of Resolution No. 7633 Entitled "Resolution Adopting Assessment ". Motion was seconded by Alderman Mlinar and carried unanimously. (g) CONSIDERATION OF PURCHASING WESELOH PROPERTY, 228 MAIN ST. N. (FORMERLY SUNNY'S ANTIQUES LOCATION) (REQUESTED BY ALDERMAN MIKULECKY) It was the consensus of the council that the city is not interested in purchasing this property and that no formal action is necessary. (3) J COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 1984 (h) CONSIDERATION OF PURCHASING ALLEN PROPERTY FOR LIQUOR STORE EXPANSION (REQUESTED BY ALDERMAN MIKULECKY) It was the consensus of the council that the city is not interested in purchasing this property and that no formal action is necessary. 9. NEW BUSINESS (a) CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED CLOSING OF HUTCHINSON COURT Police Chief Dean O'Borsky requested that this item be dropped from the agenda since he and Clerk of Court Lloyd Lipke are discussing it privately. (b) CONSIDERATION OF AWARDING CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES TO KORNGIEBEL ARCHITECTS, WITH INCLUSION OF CONSULTANT SERVICES OF DAVID R. SMITH, FOR LIBRARY PROJECT (SEE ITEM 4 -a (3)) The library board recommends approval of an amended contract which includes the consultant services of David R. Smith. Additional services will be at no extra charge. Alderman Mlinar made a motion to approve and enter into contract for architectural services with Korngiebel Architects, with inclusion of consultant services of David R. Smith. Motion was seconded by Alderman Carls and carried unanimously. (c) CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTING THREE YEAR PLAN FOR SPRINKLING Fire Marshall George Field submitted a sample letter which could be sent to affected property owners informing them of a three year time frame for complying with the fire code sprinkling requirements. Mayor Stearns commented he wishes it could be held off longer while means of helping merchants financially could be investigated. The Community Development Corp. could perhaps help develop a "package" combined with the alley beautification which would help soften the impact of the required improvements. Alderman Torgerson commented he knows as a fireman that many basements are bad, but we can't spring it on people too fast. State Fire Marshal says as long as the city is starting on the problem, this is acceptable. City Attorney Schaefer advised that if we don't send the letter now, it should not be tabled for too long a time. City Administrator Plotz stated he is trying for tax increment financing assistance. No formal action was taken. (d) CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION OF PLOWMAN BUILDING AND ADVERTISING FOR BIDS After discussion, Alderman Carls made a motion to approve specifications and advertise for bids for March 6, 1984 at 2:00 P.M. Motion was seconded by Alderman Mlinar and carried. Alderman Mikulecky abstained from voting because of pending litigation. (4) 0 • COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 1984 (e) CONSIDERATION OF AWARDING CONTRACTS FOR 1984 IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS After discussion, a motion was made by Alderman Torgerson to award contracts and waive reading and adopt Resolutions 7645, 7646, 7647, 7648, 7649, 7650, 7651, 7652, 7653 and 7654. Motion was seconded by Alderman Mlinar and carried unanimously. (f) CONSIDERATION OF SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT FOR HELLAND'S FIFTH ADDITION City Administrator Plotz noted that past subdivision agreements have not been formally approved by the council. It is felt that it is better procedure to have such agreements approved for the record. Alderman Torgerson made a motion to approve and authorize signing the agreement. Motion was seconded by Alderman Mikulecky and carried unanimously. (g) CONSIDERATION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT MODIFICATIONS Maintenance Director Ralph Neumann informed the council that Hutchinson Technology is installing pretreatment facilities which will help reduce our present overload. Other industries are also involved in modifying their output of waste materials. The modifications suggested for the new plant would help make it more efficient. It was noted that the new facility is projected to have a 20 year life. Alderman Mlinar made a motion to approve the treatment plant modifications recommended by Maintenance Director Neumann. Motion was seconded by Alderman Carls and carried unanimously. (h) CONSIDERATION OF TRANSFERRING $59,000 OF THE PROCEEDS FROM THE SALE OF THE OLD ARMORY INTO A SEPARATE INTEREST BEARING ACCOUNT. (REQUESTED BY ALDERMAN MIKULECKY) Alderman Mikulecky's opinion is that the annual $7000 payment to retire the incurred debt on the new armory shall be made from a separate interest bearing account per city charter. City Attorney Schaefer's opinion is that the old armory and new armory are independent actions and are not linked. The city agreed to assist the National Guard in building a new facility and in a separate action bought their old facility for use as a community facilities /senior activity building. City Administrator Plotz and Mayor Stearns stated their similar understanding of the situation. When the old armory was sold, proceeds of the sale were designated for similar community facility use. Alderman Mikulecky made a motion to transfer $59,000 of the proceeds from the sale of the old armory into a separate account. There was no second to the motion and it failed. No further action was taken. (5) COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 14, 1984 (i) CONSIDERATION OF FIRE DEPARTMENT PURCHASE OF MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS Alderman Torgerson reviewed the fact that there are funds remaining in the construction bond fund to finish the parking lot and purchase these additional needed items. Any surplus remaining in the bond fund after December 31, 1984, must be returned. After discussion, Alderman Mlinar made a motion to authorize expenditure of $10,747.82 for the items listed. Motion was seconded by Alderman Torgerson. Motion was then amended by Alderman Carls to authorize expenditure of $10,500 for the purchase of the miscellaneous items listed. Seconded by Alderman Torgerson. The expenditure of $10,500 was carried unanimously. 10. MISCELLANEOUS (a) COPTNNICATIONS FROM CITY ADMINISTRATOR City Administrator Plotz discussed the key system for the gas pumps used by the city and the school district. It is recommended that an alternative method be used on an experimental basis due to the high maintenance costs and security Problems associated with the aging present system. The city would experiment with a card system which would record vehicle, driver and usage. Casoline could be purchased for 4 3/4C /gal above cost and no additional maintenance cost. The city would do this with 10 vehicles for about 2 months. Alderman Torgerson made a motion to authorize this trial method for two months. Motion was seconded by Alderman Mlinar and carried unanimously. Future workshop times were established. held Thursday, February 16, 1984, from at City Hall. Crow River Cable will be On Thusday, March 1, 1984, at 5:30 P.M. with the Community Development Corp. at tax increment financing. (b) COMMUNICATIONS FROM ALDERMAN MIKULECKY Council 5:15 P.M. included the coun the Fire workshop will be to 7:55 P.M. in the agenda. ,il will meet Hall to discuss Alderman Mikulecky inquired as to the status of the pending litigation against the city. City Attorney Schaefer responded he has not yet been advised by our insurance company as to the name of the attorney who has been assigned to the case. The Dorsey law firm must also provide an opinion on whether we can proceed with tax increment projects at this time. 11. CLAIMS, APPROPRIATIONS AND CONTRACT PAYMENTS Alderman Carls made a motion to approve claims except for two, and authorize payment from appropriate funds. Motion seconded by Alderman Mlinar and carried. Alderman Mikulecky abstained from voting on parking bond funds. 12. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adj ed at 9:55 P.M. o f (6) 0 Minutes Fire Department - Centennial Tuesday, January 31, 46 Committee 1984 The meeting of the Centennial Committee was called to order on Tuesday, January 31, 1984 at 7:00 P.M. Members present: Chairman, Larry Thomp- son, Lloyd Schlueter, Ford Rolfe, Chief Orlin Henke, Dale McLain - Sec. Treasurer, Ray Fitzloff, Ray Plath, Mike Monge, Mark Christenson, Judy Helgemo. Larry said Dale McLain was treasurer as well as secretary for this committee. Some ideas that were discussed were: 1. Old equipment and where it is located 2. Ideas for display and what to do with it in the event of bad weather 3. Bell in lobby of Fire Hall should have sign made to identify its use in the past. 4. Mike Monge reported he had just started with putting ideas together for the parade. 5. Mark Christenson and Eric Smith will make story for the Fire Chiefs' magazine and also are reading past history in the minutes. Mark quoted a piece from the Leader written about the Fireman's Dance and the proper position to hold your partner, 6. Butch Henke asked for date when information should be put into the smoke eater. It was decided this should be done about June 15, 1984. Butch would like to plan a round table discussion on KDUZ in the end of August, 1984, so this can be promoted then. 7. Eric Smith and Mark Christenson have talked to Cathy Nevanen and they will be starting with a monthly article on the Fire Department to be written by the Leader. 8. Mike Monge suggested that the Department put a video tape together along with the cable TV, both as a record of history and a way to promote the 100th celebration. 9. Historian Ray Plath will be responsible for information to be recorded as to the events that take place during the 100th year. Lloyd Schlueter and Ford Rolfe - Old Equipment - said that a) Lida Rolander - old uniforms, b) St. Lawrence, S.D., - old pumper, c) Brownton - hose cart 10. Open house committee - Butch Henke, Clint Gruett - No report. 11. Food Committee - Jeff Wegner - No report, but it was decided that the regular food committee would be used to help. 12. Relief Committee - Ray Fitzloff, Earl Fitzloff - Ray said they had talked briefly but no idea came out of their discussion. 13. Ladies Auxillary - will look into having t- shirts, buttons - Monge - 911 give away stickers. 14. Butch Henke showed new fire department badge and it was suggested we order 320. Secretary, Dale A. McLain JANUARY CITY OF HUTCHINSON FINANCIAL REPORT - 1984 JANUARY REVENUE REPORT - GENERAL FUND JANUARY YEAR TO ADOPTED BALANCE PERCENTAGE 108808.00 MONTH DATE ACTUAL BUDGET REMAINING USED TAXES 0.00 0.00 1103339.00 1103339.00 0.00 LICENSES 74.00 74.00 15050.00 14976.00 0.00 PERMITS AND FEES 5845.95 5845.95 38800.00 32954.05 0.15 INTER - GOVERNMENT REVENUE 0.00 0.00 905083.00 905083.00 0.00 CHARGES FOR SERVICES 15509.76 15509.76 349111.00 333601.24 0.04 FINES & FORFEITS 889.64 889.64 23000.00 22110.36 0.04 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 18867.48 18867.48 176915.00 158047.52 0.11 CONTRIBUTIONS FROM OTHER FUNDS 0.00 0.00 423000.00 423000.00 0.00 REVENUE FOR OTHER AGENCIES 343.19 343.19 200.00 - 143.19 1.72 TOTAL 41530.02 41530.02 3034498.00 2992967.98 0.01 EXPENSE REPORT GENERAL FUND MAYOR & COUNCIL 370.78 370.78 28366.00 27995.22 0.01 CITY ADM. /CITY CLERK 2577.82 2577.82 108808.00 106230.18 0.02 ELECTIONS 19.01 19.01 13950.00 13930.99 0.00 FINANCE 8381.53 8381.53 165188.00 156806.47 0.05 MOTOR VEHICLE 1521.31 1521.31 62301.00 60779.69 0.02 ASSESSING 0.00 0.00 18164.00 18164.00 0.00 LEGAL 3424.67 3424.67 30033.00 26608.33 0.11 PLANNING 0.00 0.00 3275.00 3275.00 0.00 CITY HALL 2268.85 2268.85 44279.00 42010.15 0.05 OLD ARMORY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ERROR POLICE DEPARTMENT 14065.21 14065.21 591254.00 577188.79 0.02 FIRE DEPARTMENT 2082.43 2082.43 69205.00 67122.57 0.03 COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER 477.12 477.12 32359.00 31881.88 0.01 PROTECTIVE INSPECTIONS 642.56 642.56 57238.00 56595.44 0.01 CIVIL DEFENSE 15.00 15.00 1075.00 1060.00 0.01 SAFETY COUNCIL 0.00 0.00 150.00 150.00 0.00 FIRE MARSHALL 457,35 457.35 43035.00 42577.65 0.01 ENGINEERING 3810.69 3810.69 153064.00 149253.31 0.02 STREETS & ALLEYS 8573.82 8573.82 324850.00 316276.18 0.03 STREET MAINTENANCE A/C 6485.04 6485.04 69700.00 6321.4.96 0.09 LIBRARY 12606.95 12606.95 56494.00 43887.05 0.22 SENIOR CITIZEN CENTER 2025.33 2025.33 29732.00 27706.67 0.07 PARK /REC. ADMIN. 927.67 927.67 57617.00 56689.33 0.02 RECREATION 3089.17 3089.17 82085.00 78995.83 0.04 CIVIC ARENA 7097.16 7097.16 120730.00 113632.84 0.06 PARK DEPARTMENT 7096.66 7096.66 280551.00 273454.34 0.03 CEMETERY 498.24 498.24 37859.00 37360.76 0.01 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1600.00 1600.00 14650.00 13050.00 0.11 LAWCON 15500.00 15500.00 67124.00 51624.00 0.23 DEBT SERVICE 27200.00 27200.00 101643.00 74443.00 0.27 AIRPORT 963.76 963.76 61425.00 60461.24 0.02 TRANSIT 1667.84 1667.84 72394.00 70726.16 0.02 UNALLOCATED 684.41 684.41 235900.00 235215.59 0.00 TOTAL 136130.38 136130.38 3034498.00 2898367.62 0.04 W_ �� �J JANUARY CITY OF HUTCHINSON FINANCIAL REPORT - 1984 JANUARY 117918.00 ENTERPRISE FUNDS SUPPLIES, REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 0.00 0.00 REVENUE REPORT - LIQUOR FUND CURRENT YEAR TO ADOPTED BALANCE PERCENTAGE 28550.00 JANUARY DATE ACTUAL BUDGET REMAINING USED LIQUOR SALES 27277.17 27277.17 476100.00 448822.83 0.06 WINE.SALES 7875.50 7875.50 121900.00 114024.50 0.06 BEER SALES 33036.94 33036.94 552000.00 518963.06 0.06 BEER DEPOSITS - 186.47 - 186.47 0.00 186.47 28328.27 MISC. SALES 836.01 836.01 0.00 - 836.01 0.00 CASH DISCOUNTS - 129.16 - 129.16 0.00 129.16 28435.84 TOTAL 68709.99 68709.99 1150000.00 1081290.01 0.06 EXPENSE REPORT LIQUOR FUND PERSONEL SERVICES 47.57 47.57 117918.00 117870.43 0.00 SUPPLIES, REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 0.00 0.00 4100.00 4100.00 0.00 OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 60.00 60.00 28550.00 28490.00 0.00 MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0.00 6650.00 6650.00 0.00 CAPITAL OUTLAY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEBT SERVICE 0.00 0.00 5110.00 5110.00 0.00 TRANSFERS 0.00 0.00 110000.00 110000.00 0.00 COST OF SALES 28328.27 28328.27 883450.00 855121.73 0.03 OTHER 0.00 0.00 11487.00 11487.00 0.00 TOTAL 28435.84 28435.84 1167265.00 1138829.16 0.02 REVENUE REPORT - WATER SEWER /FUND FEDERAL GRANTS 2251.O0 2251.00 0.00 - 2251.00 0.00 WATER SALES 37006.17 37006.17 424600.00 387593.83 0.09 WATER METER SALES 0.00 0.00 5000.00 5000.00 0.00 REFUSE SERVICES 16800.34 16800.34 222000.00 205199.66 0.08 SEWER SERVICES 61121.07 61121.07 523000.00 461878.93 0.12 PENALTY CHARGES 526.34 526.34 0.00 - 526.34 0.00 INTEREST EARNED 1706.25 31442.28 40000.00 8557.72 0.79 REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER 0.00 0.00 5000.00 5000.00 0.00 TOTAL 119411.17 149147.20 1219600.00 4 1070452.80 0.12 EXPENSE REPORT - WATER SEWER /FUND OPERATIONS 18408.00 18408.00 1043253.00 1024845.00 0.02 WATER 35885.85 35885.85 123206.00 87320.15 0.29 SEWER 37356.07 37356.07 167318.00 129961.93 0.22 TOTAL 91649.92 91649.92 1333777.00 1242127.08 0.07 0 1. Call to Order MINUTES AIRPORT ZONING BOARD THURSDAY, JANUARY 12, 1984 The meeting of the City of Hutchinson, McLeod County, Hassen Palley and Lynn Townships Joint Airport Zoning Board was called to order by Chairman Robert Carney at 8:10 P.M. with the following members present: Don Pankake, Doug Hedin, Norbert Shimek, Mel Sprengler, Jerry "'right, David Huser, LeRoy Olson (8:30 P.M.) and Chai= an Carney. 2. Minutes Chairman Carney noted that the minutes will considered as a complete set, which will be presented at the next meeting of the Airport Zoning Board. 3. Public Hearin Chairman Carney reconvened the public hearing on the proposed Airport Zoning Ordinance. He explained that in talking with property owner Mr. Phil Plaisance, he and Mr. Plaisance had come up with questions they felt _ needed to be answered. Mr. Carney had then sent a letter to City Attorney Schaefer asking for a response to those questions. City Attorney Schaefer had answered the questions in a memo dated January 9, 1984. Chairman Carney handed out a copy of that memo to each of the Board Members. He then read each question and response, calling for any discussion after each question. In the discussion, it was brought out that condemnation proceedings are necessary only when the property owner and the City can't reach an agreement after sufficient negotiations. It was the opinion of the Mayor that the City had no "appetite" for condemnation proceedings. Mr. Shimek raised a question about the location of small area spoken of in Question 05. Mr. Carney responded that it was 400' or 500' South -- 200' or 300' off to the side of the runway. Discussion followed. Mr. Shimek contended that there is a misplaced outer boundary of the primary zone of the Airport that actually belongs on City property. The beginning of the A Zone, he stated, is below grade. Mr. Carney responded that the 40:1 slope begins at the end of the runway and goes up. Mr. Hedin commented that the question of whether or not Mr. Plaisance will be able to grow corn on that spot may be a question for the Board of Adjustment. It was his opinion that no one would object to corn being planted there, as it has always been there and has not caused any problems. Mr. Shimek raised a question about why the building on the Renner property had been listed for removal in the Airport Study. Mr. Hedin responded that the Airport Study was a 20 year plan for development of the Hutchinson Airport. The possibility of removal of the building in question was based on substantial growth of the airport, which at this point had not happened. It was his opinion that due to the present state of the economy and the improbability of a substantial amount of growth at the airport, it was unlikely that this would ever come about. He suspects that the Airport Study will be revised. �(C-) 3 Airport Zoning Board - Minutes January 12, 1984 Page 2 Mr. Wright raised a question about land on the north end owned by Mr. Christensen. He stated that a small corner of Mr. Christensen's property is in Zone B. Would all of his property be subject to Zone B or just that small corner. Chairman Carney responded that it is his understanding that only that small corner would be affected. Discussion followed. There being no further discussion, Mr. Wright made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Olsen, the motion carried unanimously. The hearing was closed at 8:50 P.M. Mr. Shimek asked about the consideration of the minutes. He read from the minutes (December 11 1983, pg. 3, paragraph 6) and then stated that he had gone on to ask, 'But is it legal?" "What would it take to make it an official survey ?" Mr. Shimek wondered if a legal survey could not be an'- auxillary part of the Ordinance. Chairman Carney responded that the Ordinance describes the points. A survey would only be necessary in the event of easement or purchase and then an official survey could be done. Until that time, it would not be necessary. Chairman Carney read the resolution to be voted on for final adoption of the Zoning Ordinance and accompanying maps. Mr. Wright made a motion to approve the resolution for final adoption of the Airport Zoning Ordinance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Pankake. A roll call vote was taken. Voting aye: Mr. Huser, Mr. Sprengler, Mr. Wright, Mr. Pankake, Mr. Hedin, Mr. Olson and Chairman Carney. Voting Nay: Mr. Shimek. The resolution- was declared passed by Chairman Carney. Discussion followed about the appointment of a Board of Adjustment. Mr. Shimek questioned where the 5th member of the Board would come from? Must he represent a specific governmental area? He also wondered how the chairman of such Board would be chosen and how would his function be determined. Chairman Carney responded that he assumed the fifth member of the $card of Adjustment would be appointed by the Airport Zoning Board, as were the others. That Board could determine the duties of their Chairman. After dicussion, a motion was made by Mr. Hedin to meet on February 16, 1984, at 8 :00 P.M., to consider appointments to the Board of Adjustment. Seconded by Mr. Pankake, the motion carried unanimously. After discussion, a motion was made.by Mr. Hedin to make the effective date of the Ordinance January 12, 1984. Seconded by Mr. Sprengler, the motion carried unanimously. There being no further business,.Mr, Wright made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Hedin, the motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. • MINUTES 40 Parks 6 Recreation Board January 4, 1984 Members Present: Lyle Block, Pat Mikulecky, Don Falconer, Roy Johnsen and Kathy McGraw and Rollie Jensen. Also present were Bob Stearns, Bruce Ericson, John McRaith, Mark Schnobrich and Karen McKay. The Minutes The minutes dated December 7, 1983 were approved by a motion made by Lyle Block and seconded by Don Falconer. T"ne board unanimously agreed. Winter Program Participation John gave the board a summary of the participation in the winter season. There are four Men's Power Volleyball teams and eight recreational teams. There are two less teams in the recreational league than last year. Co -Rec Volleyball has 19 teams-playing; down two from last year. There are 26 Women's Volleyball teams playing half of the games at.Maplewood Academy and half at the Armory. The two youth programs, gymnastics and Figure Skating are filled to capacity. 1984 Softball Tournament Bids Bruce told the board which tournaments were bid on for the 1984 season. The decision on where the tournaments will be held is expected later this month. Storm Damage A more efficient method of picking up storm damage on boulevards was discussed. The present policy is too time-consuming for the Parks and Forestry Divisions. Rollie Jensen made the following motion; Mark Schnobrich, City Forester, will designate when there is a storm, and homeowners of Hutchinson will have three days, including the day of the storm, to call the Parks & Recreation Department for pick up. Lyle Block seconded the motion and the board unanimously agreed. Mark will be publicizing the new policy on the radio program, in the newspaper and with a stuffer in the Utility bills. Man Hour Report 1983 The board looked at a summary of the number of hours the Parks, Forestry and Civic Arena personnel worked at various jobs during 1983. Miscellaneous The Figure Skating Exhibition will be Sunday, January 8th at 7:00 p.m. There will be no charge for watching it, the participants pay a fee to be in it. Bruce told the board that if they knew of any groups or individuals interested in being on the radio program Saturday mornings, they should contact Bruce. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 p.m. by a motion made by Lyle Block and seconded by Rollie Jensen. klm 0 1. CALL TO ORDER MINUTES HUTCHINSON PLANNING COIVISSION Tuesday, January 17, 1984 The regular meeting of the Hutchinson Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Larry Romo at 7:32 P.M., with the following members present: Marlin Torgerson, Elsa Young, Roland Ebent, Shu -Mei Hwang and Chairman Romo. N.enbers absent: Don Erickson and Thor =_s Ly':e. Also present: Director of Engineering Earlcw V. Priebe and City Attorney Jayes H. Schaefer. 2. MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting dated December 20, 1983, were approved as presented upon motion by Mr. Ebent, seconded by Mrs. Young and unanimously approved. 3. PUBLIC HEARING (a) CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT AS SUBMITTED BY WILLIAM HELLAND Chairman Romo opened the public hearing at 7:32 P.M. with the reading of Publication No. 3202 as published in Hutchinson Leader. Director Priebe explained the request which is for a preliminary and final plat approval of Helland's Fifth Addition, described as part of Lot 1, Block 2, Helland's First Addition block 2... It was Director Priebe's understanding that Mr. Helland plans to build twin homes on the lots. Mr. Ebent asked if the proposed "FUTURE STREET" is an easement. Director Priebe responded that it is an actual platted street, but it hasn't been given a name. Director Priebe also noted that the Parks and Playground Contribution has been stipulated in the Subdivision Agreement. Following discussion, Mr. Torgerson made a motion to close the public hearing. Seconded by Mr. Ebent, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Torgerson made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of the plat as presented, with the parks and playground contribution as stipulated in the Subdivision Agreement and with the condition tt,at City Council give a name (as opposed to a number) to the unnamed platted street as per staff recommendation. Seconded by Mrs. Young, the motion carried unanimously. It was also the consensus of the Planning Commission that Mr. Helland update his overall plan for that area and present the revised plan to the Planning Commission. Planning rom mission Minutes January 17, 1984 Page 2 4. Old Business None. 5. New Business (a) REVIEW OF SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTED BY JIM REID TO MCLEOD COUNTY Director of Engineering Priebe reported that he had received from the County a Sketch Plan for an area located within the two (2) mile radius of the City of Hutchinson. As the plan is for property adjoining the City limits, it was the reco:raendation of Director Priebe that a public hearing on the sketch plan be held and that those property owners affected that live within the City limits be notified, Discussion followed. Mr. Ebent made a motion to hold a hearing on the proposed sketch plan and to notify adjoining property owners on the parcel. Seconded by Mr. Torgerson, the motion carried unanimously. The hearing will be held at the regular meeting of the Planning A. Commission, February 21, 1984. 6. Adjournment There being no further business, Mr. Torgerson made a motion to adjourn the meeting at.8:30 P.M. Seconded by Mrs. Young, the motion carried unanimously and the meeting was adjourned. 0 0 EFFECTI \'E JULY 1, 1930 AFFIDAVIT THE STANDARD CHARGE OF $6.15 FOR TRASH AND REFUSE. SERVICE WOULD IMPOSE A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP ON ME AND I THEREFORE ASK REDUCTION OF THE CHARGE TO $1.50 SIGNATURE �✓rrL Y'i���� STREET ADDRESS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY TO: WATER DEPARTMENT Date Data Change TO: CITY COUNCIL Council Action: Account Number Approved DATE Disapproved 4) -1- lZA, AM OVER 65 YEARS OF AGE, OR I AM ON DISABILITY AS DEFINED BY THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, AND MY INCOME IS LESS THAN $5,000 PER TEAR. THE STANDARD CHARGE OF $6.15 FOR TRASH AND REFUSE. SERVICE WOULD IMPOSE A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP ON ME AND I THEREFORE ASK REDUCTION OF THE CHARGE TO $1.50 SIGNATURE �✓rrL Y'i���� STREET ADDRESS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY TO: WATER DEPARTMENT Date Data Change TO: CITY COUNCIL Council Action: Account Number Approved DATE Disapproved 4) -1- RFSOLUTION NO. 7664- ' Ci'LY OF HUTCHINSON RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE The Hutchinson City Council authorizes the purchase of the following: ITEM I COST PURPOSE I DEPT. Park BUDGET Yes VENDOR Cametime Outdoor Grills 1500.00 replacement Video recorder, camera, stereo component system 1775.00 Senior Center useage Sr. Ctr. Yes - Wally Pikal grant Music Store The following items were authorized due to an emergency need: ITEM I COST I PURPOSE I DEPT. I BUDGET I VENDOR Date Approved: Motion made by: Seconded by: Resolution submitted for Council action i i i s M i � N f � I 132 .00 I` I � j!-/ Rs -r f}VEMGCE i i 6 AND it i AND THE SOUTH HALF OF LOT 8, EXCEPT THE NORTH 28.47 FEET OF SAID SOUTH HALF OF LOT 8, ALL IN BLOCK 7, IN THE SOUTH HALF OF HUTCHINSON. I V I I I I � I I L__! 5`ouTH T V { C LOTS 6 AND 7, AND THE SOUTH HALF OF LOT 8, EXCEPT THE NORTH 28.47 FEET OF SAID SOUTH HALF OF LOT 8, ALL IN BLOCK 7, IN THE SOUTH HALF OF HUTCHINSON. VCITY - 612) 587 -5151 � OF HUT C.L INSON 37 WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST HUTCHINSON, MINN. 55350 M E M 0 DATE: January 27th, 1984 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director of Engineering RE: Project 84 -03 I recommend awarding a contract to Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. in the amount of $18,442.S0 for Project 84 -03. >W Marlow V. Priebe Director of Engineering MVP /pv I -- Qi RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT PROJECT NO. 84 -03 Resolution No. 7660 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Boulder Street and Boulder Circle in Stoney Point Addition by the construction of Grading, Bituminous Base, Bituminous Wear Course and Appurtenances, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. $18,442.50 Wm. Mueller & Sons $19,575.50 AND WHEREAS, it appears that Buffalo Bituminous,Ine. of Buffalo, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF HUTCHNSON, MINNESOTA: 1. The mayor and clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. of Buffalo, Minnesota in the name of the City of Hutchinson, for the improvement of Boulder Street and Boulder Circle in Stoney Point Addition by the construction of Grading, Bituminous Base, Bituminous Wear Course and Appurtenances, according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the city council and on file in the office of the city clerk. 2. The city clerk 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. Adopted by the city council this 28th day of February, 1984. Mayor City Clerk 587 -5157 F CITY OF HUTCHINSON 37 WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST HUTCHINSON, MINN. 55350 February 28, 1984 M E M O R A N D U M TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: PERSONNEL COORDINATOR HAZEL SITZ 0 - RE: RETIREMENT OF FINLEY MIX Attached is communication from Finley Mix advising that he will be retiring in May. It would be appropriate to issue a Resolution of Appreciation. In discussions with Ralph Neumann, it has been determined that we will have to fill this vacancy. We will be advertising within the next month or so. 4 f' � (612) 587 -5151 CITY OF hFU/ C,141rdSON 37 WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST HUTCHINSON, MINN. 55350 February 13, 1984 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: FINLEY MIX, CHIEF WASTEWATER PLANT OPERATOR RE: RETIREMENT I have decided to take early retirement. My last work day will be May 18, 1984. It has been a pleasure working for this and other cities for the past 26 years. 0 0 In recognition of fis service to tfje resibents of Uutcginson, f6e Cs£y of Uu£c6insou is pleaseb to present to LARK KAVIN9 £fjis Resolution of Appreciation for Qis contribution to our community in provibing a better imberstanbing of City government bg coverage t6rou,36 CROW RIVER CARLk TELEVISION of: CI`i COUNCIL MT EUINGS Vresen£eb by tfje Mayor anb City Council of UutcQinsou, Minnesota Gary D. Plo£z City Clerk FERRUARIf 28, 1984 s Robert U. Stearns Mayor k1 37 VdASl *7w GN AVEIJUE NEST NUTC,' ;1 vS0A' LGIPJN. 55350 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: February 22, 1984 TO: Hutchinson City Council FROM: Hutchinson Planning Commission SUBJECT: STREET NAME FOR "FUTURE STREET" IN HELLAND'S FIFTH ADDITION The Planning Commission recommends that the aforementioned street be narked CAROLINA AVENUE, to be consistent with state names beginning with "C ". 40 49 � z�11 ?_) SS7.5151 • /37W,4SHINGrONAVI-N t'✓�ST HUTCHINSON, MANN. 55350 N. E M 0 R A N D U M DATE: January 18, 1984 TO: Hutchinson City Council FROM: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Preliminary and Final Plat for Helland's Fifth Addition Pursuant to Section 3.20 of Zoning Ordinance No. 464, the Hutchinson Planning Commission is hereby submitting its findings of fact and recommendation with respect to the aforeEentioned request for preliminary and final plat. I-T..q nav On December 30, 1983, an application was submitted by W. A. Helland for a preliminary and final plat to be known as Helland's Fifth Addition. A public hearing was held at the regular meeting of the Planning Commission on January 17, 1984, at which time there was no one present who objected to the request. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The required application and plat maps were submitted and the appropriate fee paid. 2. Notices were mailed to the surrounding property owners as well as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, January 5, 1984• 3• City Engineer Priebe explained the request and stated that he felt it met all the necessary requirements. 4. It was the concensus of the Planning Commission that Mr. Helland update his plan for the entire area for review by the Planning Commission. RECONNENDATION is the re nemoe the of the Planning Commission that the preliminary and pU� final plat be approved as presented, with the Parks and Playground b ro»cI C S 13 V_8V �Centrthe City as stimulated in the Subdivision = —�m end and w�_th the cc- ,_'10: I- t the City Council name the proposed street as par staff recom_endation- / RespectfulY�si�bm±L ted , �arry Ro, o, Chairman Hutchinson Planning Commission J TO: HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL FROM: RICHARD H. BURGART CHAIRMAN, PUBLIC FACILITIES TASK FORCE SUBJECT: FINAL REPORT From the beginning, the objectives of this task force were known but it became apparent rather quickly that our final report would probably be less than what was originally intended. There are several reasons: 1. With a committee of approximately 30 people who were further divided into two separate sub - committees, unanimity or even a majority opinion was virtually impossible. 2. Our initial meeting determined that the seperate sub - committee structure would best serve our purposes, as a result, the general feeling -that developed was "the items that our sub - committee are reviewing are of the greater priority ". 3. Personal feelings came into the picture. As a result, there are a few overall recommendations that we have arrived at but the bulk of our report will be submitted to you under separate cover by Donn Hoffman, Chairman, Recreation Sub- Committee, and Chad Piehl, Chairman, Public Buildings Sub - Committee. Although these reports are probably not as detailed as you would like, we feel that for the time being, they are adequate. It is virtually impossible for any committee to explore all alternatives and options and then to prioritize those items. We felt that the decision making process still has to rest with the City Council and perhaps ultimately with the voters in terms of a referendum. Detailed cost and architectural projections and drawings do not appear to be feasible at this time either. Some prelimenary cost and drawings have been done, to establish a bench mark, but if action is taken this items will need to be refined, defined and dealt with in considerably more detail. Initially we were asked to look 1. The library 2. The old fire hall 3. City hall 4. Recreation facilities 5. The police station 6. City property at six items and how they interrelate: The following comments relate to the topics listed above: 1. The library issue, at least from the cost standpoint has been resolved. We decided to take no particular position on this issue because of the work that had been previously done by the Library Board. We did make a public statement showing our unanimous support of the bond referendum. 2. The old fire hall is being addressed in the report from Mr. Piehl. One item to note that we had difficulty dealing with was the appraised value of $135,000. Although the appraisal was properly done, it was our unanimous opinion that if the building were sold, the o selling price would be considerably less than the appraisal. The building is a limited purpose building and would require considerable expenditure to renovate. As a result, one of our premises was the use of the building for other purposes. 3. City Hall. There are definite needs for space and improvements at City Hall and these are also dealt with in the separate report. 4. Recreation facilities. The report of Mr. Hoffman will address the recreation issue. 5. The police station is addressed in Chad's report. 6. The overall feeling of the entire committee is that in order to accomplish any of the recommendations that you will receive, additional monies will be needed. We felt that the sale of city property would provide some of the funding needed. In addition, the two committees worked on the premise that Revenue Sharing monies would be used by the Public Facilities portion and money from the sale of the old armory would be used by the Recreation portion. We hope that the information submitted to you will be of benefit. We have realized through the several months of work that this is not an easy task. We also came to the conclusion that any priorities of projects should be made by you and not our committee. We investigated several options in each instance but in no way was it an exhaustive search. We sincerely hope that our efforts will not have been in vain and that some concrete plans will result. At this point in time, we feel that our job has been completed and consider the task force to be disbanded. 0 �I PUBLIC FACILITIES TASK FORCE Recreation Subcommittee The Recreation Subcommittee of the Public Facilities Task Force held its initial meeting in April of 1983. Members included the following: Buzz Burich Dr. John Gillard Wayne Kasich Donn Hoffman Bud Daggett Roger Denton Ronald Jonas Greg Pearce Rev. Darrel Thalman Dr. George Gordon Bruce Ericson Jeff Hoeft Ted Beatty Kathy F' c! raw Jay Williams The recreation subcommittee at its initial meeting of April 25, 1983, determined that it would like information concerning the following: - The demand for facilities for recreation - The availability of facilities - Voids where availability does not meet demand - The discontinuation of any activities because of a lack of or loss of facilities. - The regulation court sizes for the various indoor activities - The categories of needs, i.e., strictly recreational, recreational or social, meeting rooms, etc. - Previous swimming pool bond issues, plans and drawings - Previous recreation and gymnasium bond issues, plans and drawings - Information on recreation facilities in similar size communities from the League of Municipalities - The availability of armory sale money and other sources of funds - The possibility of a private venture that could accomplish all or part of the recreation facilities' needs, in conjunction with the city or separate from the city. Subsequent meetings were held in May, June, August, September and October 1983, and January, 1984. Discussion at those meetings centered on the items listed above. Certain motions were adopted that should be of interest to the members of the City Council; The recreation subcommittee agreed that the facility should embrace as many recreational activities as possible and should provide for such things as meeting rooms -, food prepa- ration area, as well as more traditional recreational concepts such as a gymnasium, swimming pool. A motion was made and seconded at the May 23, 1983, meeting to refer to recreational needs in the broadest sense so that the term community center would apply. - 2 - At its June 29 meeting it was determined to have a preliminary plan drawn by Korngiebel Architects to develop some costs. At its August 18 meeting Jim Haugen of Korngiebel Architects presented preliminary plans for a recreational facility located at the civic arena site. A motion was made at that meeting to revise the plan to include racquetball, jogging and tennis spaces. In addition, Mr. Huagen was asked to give some rough cost estimates for a facility. (— At the September 1, 1983, meeting a motion was made and seconded to recommend to the City Council that segments A and B of the recreationanal facility as laid out in the enclosed plan (see Exhibit 1), and located at the arena site at a cost from approximately $1,000,000 to $1,300,000, less available armory funds and other available city funds, be presented to the public as a bond issue. At its October 5 meeting a motion was made to recommend' to the City Council the possibility of a lease back arrangement for a recreational facility with future option to purchase as an alternative to a public bond issue. At its January 11, 1984, meeting the subcommittee received a report from Trucker - Sheehy on a proposed gymnasium with a smaller locker room and less the racquetball courts, with a projected cost of approximately $700,000 (see Exhibit 2). At that time the recreation subcommittee reaffirmed its number one priority was the fieldhouse and that the pool was too expensive to be included initially and that the site should be the civic arena, and the original plan from Korngiebel Architects was still the number one choise of the committee. In addition to the plans, an estimate of revenue and budget for the rec- reational facility has been prepared by Bruce Ericson and that is enclosed (see Exhibit 3). ft _ HARRINGTON I I J l I i ■ _ f rr .��-, II - � if ! PARKING rua. co Korr,yiebel Architects CREATION FACILITY PROGRAM BREAKDOWN FIELDHOUSE (96' X 150') 14,400 S.F. l 2 Full size 501X85' Basketball Courts Y 4 3 —'X60' Volleyball Courts 2 Full Tennis Courts with 30' head room. RACKETBALL — (3) 20'X40' Courts WEIGHT ROOM — 221X20' = 440 S.F. LOCKER ROOM — Men & Women (R 30'X60' each MEETING ROOM — With kitchen and storage (28'X60' = 16BO S.F.) PARK & RECREATION OFFICES — (241X46' = 1104 S.F.) 3 Private offices (10X12) 1 Conference (16X24) ((1 Reception .(12X30) PARK & RECREATIONAL GENERAL STORAGE -= 700 S.F. PUBLIC LOBBY — (321X46' = 1472 S.F.) FUTURE POOL — (100'X132' = 13,200 S.F.) l PROPOSED COST BREAKDOWN AD —FIELDHOUSE. — 141400 S.F.. (S35- 540 /5.F.) — OFFICES, RACKETBALL, LOCKERS, ETC._ 131602 -S.F. (S35- 545/5.F.) FUTURE POOL STRUCTURE 133200 S.F. (S30- 540 /5.F.) POOL & EQUIPMENT LOW $432,000 $476,070 5396,000 FINISH FLOORING ® FIELDHOUSE — S3.50 /S.F. = 55014DO.00 RACKETBALL COURT — S10,000 per Court = $301000.00 HIGH $576,000 $612,090 5528,000_ r .. ) l' '1• 1' �.,,I:I ,i,. ,'ll l:r �';,I „l r..� Y .jr,�r,1'I,'It I.W 4t M1 1 r .•q 11 "L•''jI II Yi �(I' 11; 1, 1'.' {,1 I ! II '7 I d,i�f �Jr ,111'111 .i 1 .1 '1't, t1, q.Y�114111 r� ;''ol /�,a1 S(. f. 1.,' . ' Yi,r rl nl;l,1 It r1111!..1 rJ• frl . n,hl 1•� rl / {p.rlr ry,V �'`t V llr y 11 Ili r 1 i �..-. ,,,- :.+•.,. ...p�.r.l- ..w..,r•� f'.I �I r rn nla 111111 I Ir I I � r 1 p j .'. '' 11 "rl i n 1 Ir.......� •r•,•= f.'. r. , L( a 'I r Lq cr I I 'iY r. YI ,1' \ 1 ' �d '•JI '1 IlIO.,.ra Il dl'1 C Y 4;�1i L 9l rl r ��a r,J +I Ill 1; r 111', I r� f'�I I . 5 , ii 1 It1 'h'1 I 1 �! !„r /rll,'+ nl:' y1,1 1 {I�v h �' 'xfin rr r r rl rl;'• I ! I � P }V L1,!' I r1III I r }llr ISI , ye ^I y!. I l i15 11 .. r L 1 I J 5 r i t , . /Y.Y',. .I 7 •`, lti 5 r 11.11 r,l rl r° t 'i'1`1i.rl {,.}I YV, Il I.i.r r/, 1/rl�'r!1 1't. {i };ill �1'•.'i y I+li t,. 'i ,'.'•� �• r �.r J r'`. 1'! fli �. F- I. /; ' _''JI 17 �,• I' r 'p,,I, I! I; it 1 �1rY��. ;�1J ;II A If I. II Y f� li r! '� A 1 I r i ' 1 _ r ; /': �:� i. 1.� d':.'1 1 711) n.,'f;' I "I•r, e I �' f. I { ,. I ' I J !', rIU r 1,. I Ir i'!,!,, "' .i `f r •tx DO r. Ir •A. r I •111111 l II ,. ,I r IIYi r. I' '.I (� /! iyrP I-A 1 I i I r• 1 .`11,11• I •1. tit, 1 fl,i I t ! I I { 'I hl �' I I 11'i r .. 1 xl r, I III' Il �I (..I Il irl' I�r4�1 {'['� 1l' /' 1 "� Ryl✓y (1,1. I I ', 1� I ' f tIAC Ir f Y f l I 5 it )tl I�rl:•; YYI1lJ �.�h. ,; rl +I `II 'I I,) �1 ;', iJ'I i a1,1', r I1t,I 1.11'r,�< /,f . l+ r i !r I It r l.,rll 5I II 1111 Ir V'7'C rl I h ` wll!:Ii.. r' 1' I I'll I1 Ii� 1 { 1 1. I �I r 1I 1111 r' iII �'r Ij h r r J[1 •� 1',' , � ., '•I wr .1. '1 f 'I li1J IYV'r L i..il Y I r1I -0I�IM1 N. 111!11 I L -li '17 1111 .,1jjq r r � 1 I 114 h l I rib > r� {'ll .:ti [.I 1LI'I. 4" II II 1'• /rJ.' t w r' ` rt, ll I p I •' I. 1 1 el 'r r IL. V1 }' I 'GI .� .I 1 i I (_ LI'lllrl!•.�L1I! �''1 I ✓,� I Ylr{ ,• IV4h; ' if f •i1S I Y,Lr.. ilil!'I • �: 1�51�1'.,• ll., ' l 1, ll, }.r l'. 1. 1.I A 111, ' •T. ,.� •, I, r' I l lrl;� /'!y 1• 1).. J 1 I�r 1 '. A ,.1 'r• r ,l ",I IL. ,�. I1 r.I ` 1 Y'1 5; 1•ry 1 I� W �� f !9.. f IA li / cj •. ! •1., r 1 'Il,i� y,I 111JIAI,I•v% Ir - Ir'plll F /4'1 '1 ., 41 \• , � y IJ (1 Ij�ll r:1'I, i,,• , 11 1i rl, rr 1: i1 r17w IfV; r (1r Qjrf' ^Y .J ?rc. .,r a, y•,1 ?1 Syr'., ,i .11., '..H i�it I,I, 1.1 l III1 i'1 ' • } 1 'r 1 r I. �' A,,. .rl r.. `�, 1 �p :I, /. N .1. ll 1. .r!': R IY ,, 11 S; I Y r ul. i .. r !'.N it It. A.t" •I I. !. c (11,114�1.1 ! .r„ { ) .1 br ,al ':i Tr5 ,.. 12 { 1 II'M {I J t .� '�,;7 . 11 1..LI I .1 \(I Virl� I�S(I)n�l r1fl Plr, 1.f 111', -. It�u;l�l �11 .111.,.1:f,f�11�1 „PY •'1 11 111 0.J'' 1' I l I ILp A !'. Ii ,.II 1, li IIIJP •, I� IAA ', ��i, I' . r,�” ^ «` w -r •. I'r n, 1 r14 iI w,li �fx r 1' I Irr '7 �r''17:'.a I' i 5 1. Ir 1,11 .,r51 ,..L.I r: %rl Ir I , i A'r jr,l r',. I /'. d'I RUNNING,TRAC r 11 •'.1 i:l,r .f l ,' r, ! ��'. ('11�11;r/� la! 1': { f l Y 1 l i r I I '. ' 1111 1 111 I'j5 1 1 A r' I r of r1r II .• I 1 r r i �;1 x ! / +lrl 1 i l•l is l _.rll 1' �W�II I. i w.��x+•1.�'w '. 1' I'�'r ,,:1 'I III ', I r', Ir 11 , �r 'I ' � �r �•. . { 471 Gf I 1 „jr �'1 f1 It 11 Ir••��i..�� 1 1h,��y ,( i'd; 1'ry1)11 1!' t �IL'l' r Lt II J} r l , ! 1r b t ', �t 1 7 1 1rAN ✓K/7 �V I I, I t I 11 1 1 ,'�.� I I 1 1 1'' I S r I S. i r S, i J;, • 1 }, r �'i I r `•rl It ' 1' 1 � i I' rli. '^� �.-. , � luil!'.•5.I! I I I'��'yi ' ll l I ..' t 11 I i,;l rl r LII�' 1, - �II:I:� r t� , ��.. II. 1' I '..�1 r 1 .4.I a Ir I')Io 1 �l V '. 11 11 III Il. i..tl I.I,- I.r. 1 r r.l r„ I1 1 't •;II ( 1 yl ^, , III r R � Il�.e, ( d I) I.i' I ,1::11 r1r11 I'�I��•P(✓'/ .4” ��7' 1' II 711a 1, ,YI, ' III til IIJ 1 �I'' I'IY:Jrl S I I. �. III r III I r�I. ,'II 1' 1 IY, .n.r t, ,„T ��-�"•"�I,'1 rr1l I'I II '�..YII IY ?.I, I' YI %I 1V 1Ji 7 �I r ., _, .. I A — -- ��� r ti �•'•� V' r I 'J 11 ISe i , 1 l .:I'• � 1 r i(Ily 4- +:',.�'.." ^ . I r + r 1 11, i, I I � -.1' I J 1 1 '.I , � r}I�„I It. ; . d.a �. 1.�- I:w" j 1 I I ' . �'�.� —•�� r rrl {. {i'llhril l -'IY �Ii I 1 'w ,111'1 I,:. -r II II! I,�IIII'll��ll I. I,II I r I YI Il..r 11 t /l,.j,}; II'.I „tiL I1 {r)'r•1 , Nl r!Yr. 111; 1.,. }1 1 11 "'17114 IIi Ff' JF nlll •I' 1 - 1 I i,I , 1 I I ! r 1:, � 1_ 5� Irr•. I _�.i 41'II1 L1,r11 15 {,Ff,llhy'1111 ,I��MI II'lil fir.l: I ilrl J.�r III Sl yl p r I.I I r rl. 11 'jl li r j "'.L.' I .I I �/ ' III,. .il Y I >' �'`�1r1 ii r 1 ''• � I' 1 'I!. I I. -' .,,fe' d I ,, Irr 4K I!I n 4 ,:1.115 LI, • .1r.1� I �� I I {v 111 71 11.11 I r '1 1�'II. j SI;.I 11.. I ,• i 'I is I 7 1 !!! '. I r 1,11 Jr !r I al , }.I 7r 11 it',I,III L II:i r I 1 - r YI 1r1 "r„ I ,1. ,r r'. ly.'1' ! •'Y..t ,.11.,1 I" i .I'• +4, rei r.. fit li ✓I� JI' �i!'.I 1 I °II' {�14rF�1 '�11'I r�l ll�.lfl 7 1111 ..1 a�r� , 1., r!',I ,1,1 •,', r'l l''s 115 li q 11 III' �> l \Ir{ It rI • n ry yj Y,. lil 14'1 Ir k+ yy//++���� IPP Sect! o�,E7,hA ough;,En ',Entry r ),Ir 2 ���er.' �V� V� �ool'� ' 1 I r 1 r•i.l 999 , 1 r I 1 I• 1 x 1 I • , V I >fl I I I Y r•I , r •JJ l . ' I I r r 1 r I r 1 `•'' I I i 1' 1 r•r. ,r 1. �,r I n ' ' 4 � 1 !r • \ fliK .t'u i11,h- u � `��`�4D'�r�.a';Sl' •i PAr;� fir,: r YI A I n ' 1 !r A qf'r i11,h- s. r YI r 1,1'�I I I I tlt, lull '�II I II itAillq\ ll III ;In A I i�t{ r11 it ly1 p111 i ' . I i I 1 I ' I. I i1' 114 I 1 v� ^rl'F11r 1'I at IIV I tll 'l l'r +flll tl 1 � 11 Irl r 'i I li `III } I Li i yy �l li4, AI 11 If�I +LI �•,(I 11 li li I it 1'I it .in .. 1 11 1, I I I i'I I � i t 4 I I I' I ' ;11 ' ' I I 1 ICI "i I ,i 1 1.11 I I'I; 171 I. I 11 11'1' ,. I V! I' 11 11111, �II tlyll f1l 1 tlYl If ( ', i, II � I1 �1''li, IIr li•�At '� : {� 1 1111 'I',I nl I i I .r ..� u II I L, I .I III t it l;Aw 11 .I 5 11 I'll till ' I N s \, i1! r,n '11y I,,. - I'I 6I II lo.. ., Ir \ I I' I f P A; , I 1 y I r a II 1 l e i I r 7 1 1 1 I II 'NI•, 1 r L1 r f'•, r 1: 1.p 1 I',II II I I Iil II '•' , {i ,t. 1 il'.' 7' 1 fA I it IJ 1111 I I v I I rl I J, t Ir.rl , 1 ilf 'I .1't� 11: i I 1 'I I rl rr't L%'`if( II •,1r •111.. I 1 .111, 11,'ll�'1,'{ ,fit II L} NIIIFI1H Af,N {II 1 I a A r A I 1 1{ Ar 1} ', J, 1 ',y 111, l ! 1'r . G ,I N rill11 l 1 I 1111 II II 111 A4 1IA/ II,. II� 1111 Ali I, 1 rllR A {`11 +•I , ! "' ---1 J1..I 19 "f1, /11q�•A 1'11. '1 ,Vi41 of L.. ,I�i Lq II \ry Ill 1111 YI Ir�1 1111 I. 1 � ar.i lA (a1 �, r11j 1A ., A �, 1�i1�1'I I;U f�I. ' 1,.�)`'I Irk l,rl l I r .II; Ilil a �.Ijj•r /III: n Ait-kr1 I "n��nl .lCfnnrn r►; 1. !1llt, e.r.l'I�i9 .11e Iyl IA;••r�} y QLl .illr'i II 161!',�I f'r 1111 i1.111,Y1 Ills ��' I I .,• � I , ` ' I +. 't I I I llL. ii, I, 11 II'I 1 I, Ji' i 1 "I ,1,11 1� I II I• I {�• �I� 1 t'. Abu }I I ly r r ! 1 i r•I I ,J��11111 it +I�h.II�i1�11 I1. '.'�I �� 11{ I' �."tA1 rl �I III IIII "1111 1/ 4i�IrV 111 L,I �1.1y ♦ I 1'�I I, t + it rI III'r Y'1 b1 IUJJ,y1 1 I I.If lli �r ,j li rl/ _ �. Y�'' I IgII'•. �, Itl il,i,. , . II. 1 11 Y ': : I .i ul EXHIBIT 3 HUTC!1"A'SON, M AN 53350 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Bruce Ericson, Parks & Recreation Director DATE: February 22, 1984 SUBJECT: Proposed Revenue and Budget for Recreational Facility The following information includes examples of facilities similar to the proposed recreational facility , proposed budget and projected revenue for only the field house portion of the facility. I feel that the hours of supervision necessary could be covered by part -time per- sonnel and the actual maintenance could be done with existing personnel. The addition of a full -time person would not be necessary- until the pool would be included in the facility. Also, the projected revenue is based on our current user fee which is $5 per player per season. This fee is charged fora 12 -13 game season which could be increased to a 18 -20 game season and would then Justify an adjustment in the user fee. Proposed Budget [gages Part -time personnel 2,460 hrs. @ $5 /hr. _ $12,300 Note: 2,460 hrs, is based on 40 weeks @ 54 hrs/ week and 12 weeks @ 25 hrs /week, The lower hours per week is during the summer season. Supplies Operating supplies $1,000 Repair & Maintenance Supplies 1,000 Cleaning Supplies 500 Building Repairs & Tools 500 Total $3,000 Heat & Utilities Heating Utilities Total $12,00 (Estimate) 'a ^or 6 Citv Council February 22, 1484 Page two ected Revenue (Based on the current $5 user fee) Proarams Basketball 16 tca-is @ S50 = $300 Basketball (3 on 3) 8 teams @ $20 = $160 Floor Hockey 12 teams @ $50 = $600 Gymnastics 120 students @ $3.50 = $420 Indoor Soccer 4 teams @ $50 = $200 Open Gym 50 participants /Wk 75C /participant 52 wks $1,950 Open Tennis $6 /court 8 courts /night 20 nights $960 Volleyball (Women's) 32 teams @ $100 = $3,200 (Co -Rec) 24 teams @ $100 = $2,400 (Men's ) 16 tears @ $75 = $1,200 (3M ) 8 teams @ $100 = $800 High School Basketball 280 hours Golf 80 hours Volleyball 75 hours Total 435 hours @ $6.50 = $2,827.50 Other Revenue Concessions = $3,000 Rentals = $1,000 Tournaments (Gate receipts) = $500 TOTAL PROJECTED REVENTUE $20,017.50 ft Mayor & City Council February 22, 1984 Page three Other Facilities (Heat & Electric) Location - Owatonna Facility - M erran Gym Heat - $3,889 (natural Sas) $1,094.49 (fuel oil) Electricity - $2,182.44 TOTAL - $7,165.93 Location Staples (13,747 sq. ft.) Facility - Coununity Center Heat - $12,0773.14 Electricity - $3,144.99 TOTAL - $15,218.13 Location - Hutchinson Facility - Maplewood Academy (14,000 sq. ft.) Heat - $4,686.77 Electricity - $2,140.77 TOTAL - $6,827.54 Location - Hutchinson Facility - Old Armory 1981 Utilities (Heat & Electric) $6,378 0 TO: HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL 0 FROM: CHAD B. PIEHL CHAIRM14N, PUBLIC BUILDINGS SUB- COMMITTEE PUBLIC FACILITIES TASK FORCE SUBJECT: FINAL REPORT r. - • 0 I. Properties Assigned A. The Library B. Police Hall C. City Hall D. Old Fire Hall E. City Held Property II. Library A. Conclusion was Reached that Existing Committee had done Work B. Let Referendum Decide III. Police Hall A. Possibilities 1. New Facility a. 7,000 Square Feet b. Currently Owned or Acquired Property c. Cost Estimated $ 400,000. - $ 500,000. 2. Central District Offices a. Cost Estimated to Possibly Exceed $ 600,000. b. Renovation Required C. Not Currently Available 3. Utilize Old Fire Hall a. Acquire Land to Southeast Street b. Cost Estimated $ 250,000. - $ 600,000. 4. Expand Current Facility a. Build Second Floor b. Acquire Property to North C. Cost Estimated to Possibly Exceed $ 500,000. d. Current Availability is Unknown e. Affect on Current City Hall Needs B. Objectives of Committee 1. Keep Police Downtown 2. Utilize Current Fire Hall if Possible 3. Spend Least Amount Possible 4. Make Finished Products Safe and Efficient 5. Serve Hutchinson for Many Generations C. Conclusion 1. Utilitize Old Fire Hall a. 3,000 Square Feet 2. Build on to Street Unless Cost of Land can be Resolved 3. Use Current City Revenue Sharing or Private Funding with 20 Year Lease and Gift to City IV. City Hall A. Analysis of Needs 1. Current Space Adequate 2. Poorly Designed 3. Growth Need Limited B. Objectives 1. Avoid New Building Program 2. Renovate Current Facility 3. Use a Multi -Year Phase Renovation C. Conclusion 1. Prepare Police Vacated Space for Motor Vehicle and City Hall Functions 2. Start with Ventilation System and Roof Repair 3.. Move Chamber Upstairs with Elevator to Access 4. Energy Upgrade a. Windows, Doors, Etc. 5. Reclaim Downstairs Chamber Area for a more Efficient Set Up 6. Outside Repairs D. Final Topic 1. Maintenance Program Developed 2. Consultant to Aid in Plan V. Old Fire Hall A. Use with Police B. Sell VI. Other Property A. Determine Actual Need B. Sell All To: 1. Benefit From Cash Flow 2. Return to Tax Roles EHLEM AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS FIRST NATIONAL-SOO LINE CONCOURSE 507 MARQUETTE AVE. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 339 -8291 (AREA CODE 6921 February 24, 1984 Mayor and City Council City of Hutchinson Hutchinson, Minnesota RE: 1984 Financing Program Attached is a resolution rescinding the resolution of January 24, 1984 calling for the sale of Library Bonds and Improvement Bonds and Calling for the Sale of Library Bonds, Improvement Bonds, and Advance Refunding Parking Improvement Bonds on April 10, 1984. A second resolution is attached Calling for the Sale of Advance Refunding Tax Increment Bonds (bought in 1980) on April 10, 1984. Advance Refunding Parking Improvement Bonds form an extremely complicated financing which will reduce the amount of outstanding debt from $1,175,000 to $765,000. Interest costs will drop from $975,725 to $525,210 representing $450,515 in savings. The City will deposit approximately $473,000 for investment in long -term government securities ranging from 9.75% to 10.44% to 11.75 %. The majority of the interest savings occurs after the 'call date' in 1991. Interest rates on the old issue range from 10.2% to 10.5% from 1992 through 1997 (Exhibit 1). We project interest rates to range from 8.25% to 9.00% for the same period for the advance refunding bonds (Exhibit 2). Exhibit 3 reflects the gross savings while Exhibit 4 reflects the net savings of $386,000. Attached is a copy of an opinion from Dorsey & Whitney that indicates the city may proceed with the Advance Refunding of the Parking Improvement Bonds. We recommend the City Council proceed to refund the Tax Increment Bonds of 1980 and adjust the maturity schedule as part of the financing transaction. It is our view that the City can experience a gross savings in interest expense of $31,900, and a net savings of $27,774. It is our opinion, based on financial projections of leading economists, that the City should proceed now to obtain the savings. Our calculations are based on current interest rates and projected trends. Yours truly, ►'!'fir j� � ., � , William E. Fahey fit ll'C:H:I.NSON MN -- PARKING BONDS REFUNDED ISSUE SE.MIANN {UAL.. DEBT SERVICE FROM 02/01/84 DATE. PRINCIPAL RATE 08/01./Bit 02/01./85 50,000 8.600 08/01/85 02/01/86 50,000 81800 08/01/86 02/01/87 50,000 91000 118 /01/87 02/01./88 75,000 9.200 08/01/88 02/01/89 75,000 9.400 08/01./89 02/01/90 75,000 9.600 08/01/90 02/01/91 100,000 91800 08/01./91 02/01592 100,000 10.200 08/01./92 02/01/93 100,000 10.250 08/01/93 02 /01/94 125,000 10.250 08/01 /914 02/01/95 125,000 10.500 08/01/95 02/01/96 125,000 10.500 08/01./96 02/01/97 125,000 10.500 TOTAL. 1,175,000 ACCRUED THRU 02 /01/84 NET COST AVERAGE COUPON 10,190 BOND YEARS 9,575.000 AVERAGE LIFF. 81149 PREPARED - 01/24/84 INTEREST 58, 393.75 58,393.75 56,243.75 56,243.75 54,043.75 54,043.75 51,793.75 51,793.75 48,343.75 48,343.75 44,818.75 44,818.'75 41,218.75 41,218.75 36,318.75 36,318.75 31,218.75 31,218.75 26,093.75 26,093.75 19,687.50 19,687.50 13,125.00 13,125.00 6,562.50 6,562.50 975,725.00 0.00 975,725,00 LE TOTAL 58,393.75 1.08, 393.75 56,243,75 106,243.75 54,043.75 104,043.75 51.,793.'75 126,793,75 48,343.75 123,343.75 44,818.75 119,818.75 41,218.75 141,218.75 36,318.75 136,318.75 31,218.75 131,218.75 26,093.75 151,093.75 19,687.50 144,687.50 13,125.00 138,125.00 6,562.50 131,562.50 2,150,725.00 0.00 2,150,725.00 EXHIBIT 1 ANNUAL 166,787.50 162,487.50 158,087.50 178,587.50 1.71 .687 .50 164,637.50 182,437.50 172,637.50 162,437.50 177,187,50 164,375.00 151,250.00 138,125,00 AVERA(3E COUPON 8.4.66 BONO YEARS 6,185.875 AVE::RA6F I..:I:FE 8.086 PRE.PARf "D - 02/21/84 EXHIBIT 2 HUTCHINSON MN - REFUNDING ISSUE_' ; SEM:CANNUAI_. LIEBT SERVICE FROM 04/01/84 BATE PRINCIPAL RATE INTEREST TOTAL. ANNUAL 10/01/811. 30,890.00 30,890.00 04/01/85 25,000 5,950 30,890.00 55,890.00 86,780.00 111 /09. /f; 30, 1LF6.25 30, 146.25 04/01/86 40,000 6,200 30,146,25 '70,146.25 100,292.50 10/01./f36 28, 906.25 28, 906.25 04/01./FI7 50,000 6.800 28,906,25 78,906.25 107,81.2,50 111/01/137 27,206.2.5 27,206.25 04/01./88 50,000 7.200 27,206.25 '77,206.25 1.04,412.50 10/01./88 25, LE 06. 25 25,406.25 (14/)11/89 50,000 7.500 2`'5 ;406.25 75,406.25 100,812,50 10/01/89 23:531.25 23,531,25 (145(11/90 50,000 7.750 23,531.25 73,531.25 97,062.50 1()/()7./9O 21,593.75 2.1,593.75 Oil /01/91: 50,000 8.000 21,593.75 71,593.75 93,187,50 7.0 / (11. /91. 19,593.75 1.9 , 59:3 , '75 Oli /01/92 50,000 8.250 19,593,75 69,593.75 89,187.50 1(1/01/92 17,531,25 17,531.25 04 /81/93 75,000 8.500 17,531.25 92,531.25 - 110,062.50 1.0/0'1./93 14, 343.75 14, 3!-13.75 04/01/94 75,000 8,600 14,343.75 89,343.75 103,687.50 10/01/94 11,118.75 11,11.8.75 (14./01/95 '75,000 8.750 11,118.75 86,118.75 97,237,50 10/111/95 7,837.50 7,837.50 04/01/96 75,000 81900 7,837.50 82,837.50 90,675.00 10/01/96 4,500.00 4,500.00 04/01./97 100,000 911100 4,500.00 1.04,500.00 .109,000,00 TOTAL. 765,600 525,210.00 1,290,210.00 ACCJn.JEa1 T HRU 04/111/84 1,54-4.50 1 , 544.50 NET' COST 523,665.50 1,288,665.50 AVERA(3E COUPON 8.4.66 BONO YEARS 6,185.875 AVE::RA6F I..:I:FE 8.086 PRE.PARf "D - 02/21/84 HUTCHINSON MN - REFUNDING ISSUE:: PERIODIC 10EIT SERVICE. COMPARISON FROM 04/01/844 Doll PRINCIPAL RATE INTEREST TOTAL PKI 1.0/01/83 04/01./R4 10/01/84 30,890 04/01/85 25,000 5.950 30,890 86,780 10/01/85 30,146 04/01/86 40,000 6.200 30,146 100,292 10/01/86 28,906 04/01/87 50,000 6.800 28006 107,812 10/01/87 27,206 04/01/88 501000 7.200 27,206 104,412 10/01/88 2,406 04/01/89 50,000 7.500 25,406 100,812 10/01/81? 23,531 04/01/90 50,000 7.750 23,531 97,062 10/0:1/90 21,594 04/01/91. 50,000 81000 21,594 93,187 10/01/91 19,594 04/01/92 50,000 8,250 19,5944 89,187 10/01:/92 17,531 04/01./93 75,000 8.500 17,531 110,062 10/01/9:3 14.344} 04/01./94 75,000 8.600 14,344 103,687 10/0:1/94 11,119 04/01/95 75,000 8.750 11,119 97,237 10/01/95 7,8:37 044/01/96 75,000 81900 7,837 90,675 10/01/96 4,500 04 ✓01/97 100000 9,000 4,500 109,000 To rAL. 7651000 525,210 1,290,210 PREPARED - 02/21/84 EXHIBIT 3 PRIOR D/S DIFFERENCE 58,394 - 58,394 164,637 160,287 ( 155,837 175,137 168062 161,037 177,537 1.67,537 157,312 170,781 157,812 144,687 131,562 -••77, 857 -59,995 - 48,025 -70,725 -67,.350 63,9..75 - 84,350 - 78,350 - 47,250 - 67,094 - 60,575 -54,012 -22,562 - 860,51`, �-,mW� HUTTWINSON MN -- REFUND10b ISSUE DELIVERY DATE 84/10/84 DATE 04/1U/84 U8/U1/B4 18/01/84 k2/81/85 84/U1/85 UP/U1/85 18/81/85 02/81/B6 U4/81/86 O8/81/86 10/01/86 02/01/87 04/81/87 08/01/87 10/U1/87 U2/01/88 04/U1/88 08/U1/88 10/U1/S8 02/01/S9 04/01/89 U8/81/89 10/U1/89 02/01/Y8 04/81/90 88/01/90 1O/U1/9U U2/01/91 04/U1/Yt 08/01/91 10/V1/9{ 02/01/92 84/01/92 08/01/92 1U/81/92 02/U1/93 84/01/93 08/01/93 1O/81/93 02/01/94 04/0 1.194 08/81/94 1U/01/94 02/01/95 04/81/95 08/U1/95 lU/Ul/95 02/Ul/96 ULl-/81/96 0U/0]/96 10/U1/96 112/A1/97 84/01/97 HEFUN8INh 30,89U.00 55/890.U0 30,146.25 78,146.25 28/906.25 78/9U6.25 27/2U6.25 77^2U6,25 25,406.25 75/406.25 23,531.25 73.531^25 21/593.75 71`593,75 19^593.75 69/593.75 17`531.25 92,531.25 14/343,75 89/343.75 11,118.75 86/118.75 7/837^58 82/837.5U 4/500.00 104,5U0^8U REFUNDED 58/393.75 188/393.75 56,243.75 106/2H3.75 54/043.75 104/U43.75 51/793.75 126`793.75 48/343^75 123/343.75 44/818.75 119/818'75 41/218.75 14-1/218.75 36/318.75 136/318.75 31/218.75 131/218.75 26/093.75 151/093.75 19/687.50 144/687.58 13/125.U8 138/125.08 6/562.58 131/562.5U L EXHIBIT 4 DISCOUNT RATE 9.44080000 % DIFFERENCE 473/841.UU ~58/393.75 3U/890.O0 -108/393.75 55,890,00 -56/243.75 38/146.25 ^106/243.75 78/146.25 ~54/043.75 28/986.25 ~104`043.75 78/906.25 -51,793.75 27/2O6.25 -126,793.75 77/2U6.25 ~48/343.75 25/406.25 ~123/343,75 75/4U6.25 ^44/818.75 23,531.25 ~119/818.75 73/531.25 ~41/218^75 21/593.75 ~141/218.75 71,593^T5 ~36/318.75 19/593.75 ~136,318.75 69,593^75 ^31/218.75 17,531,25 -131,218,75 92/531^25 ~26/093.75 14/343.75 ^151/893.75 89/343.75 -19/687.5U 11/118^75 -144/687.58 86/118.75 ~13/125.00 7"837.50 ~138/125.80 82/837.5O -6,562^58 4/500,0U -131^562^50 104^5U0.UU TUTA� 1/29U/210.8U 2^150`725.00 ~386/674.88 PRES VALUE 473/841.8U -56,756.39 29,565^81 -188,605^80 51/882.99 ~49/W49,88 26,311.52 ~89/921.36 58/463.85 -43/679.27 23/U86.21 -88'300.13 59,970.14 -38,172.27 19/745.25 -89'235.73 53/587.77 -32/49U.15 16/814.17 ~79,158.73 47,655,44 ~27/467.84 14/281.05 ~70/12U.86 42/375.79 ~23,034.97 11/883^50 ~75/362.54 37/623.72 ~18/508^21 9/832^74 -66/337.56 33/358.13 -14/507^41 8,822.52 ^58/229^16 14.0/434.91 ~11/057.36 5,985.51 -61/148.9U 35/681.88 ~7,607.58 4/23U.92 ~53/389.65 31/293.00 -4,624.83 2,719.55 -46/477.11 27/448^41 -2`108.66 1/423.88 ~48,368.23 31/575.29 -42/544^78 510 NORTH CENTRAL UFE TOWER M5 MINNESOTASTREET ST. PAUL,MINNESOTA 55101 (612)227-8017 P. O. BO% 848 340 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA 55903 (507)286 -3158 312 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING WAT ATA, MINNESOTA 55391 (612)175-0373 DORSEY & WHITNEY A Partnership Includlnp P,cfess/ ] CorO fives 2200 FIRST BANK PLACE EAST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 (612) 340 -2600 TELFX:29-0503 TELECOMER: (612)340-2868 JEROME P. GILLIGAN (612) 340 -2952 February 17, 1984 Mayor Robert Stearns City of Hutchinson City Hall 37 Washington Avenue West Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 201 DAVIDSON BUILDING H THIRD STREET NORTH GREAT FALLS. MONTANA 59101 (406) 727 -3632 -\ SUITE 675 NORTH 1600 M $TR EEf N. W. WAS HINOTON,D. 0.20036 (202) 855 -1065 w _ �� 30 RUE I BOETIE F u V 96008 PARIS, FRAN [{1�1 331 562 32 50 0 E Hr.L' r E'I�B s i <r. Sti£Zi Re: Proposed Refunding of $1,250,000 Parking Improvement Bonds, dated as of August 1, 1981 City of Hutchinson, Minnesota Dear Mayor Stearns: We understand that the City of Hutchinson is considering issuing obligations under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67, to refund the Bonds referred to above. You have asked whether the pending litigation against the City, filed by its former Mayor, Mr. DeMeyer, prevents the City from issuing such refunding obligations. Based upon our review of the Summons and Complaint filed in connection with the litigation, dated December 28, 1983, it appears to us that the litigation does not prevent the City from issuing obligations to refund the Bonds and from delivering to the purchaser of such obligations the customary no- litigation certificate. Very truly yours, DORSEY & WHITNEY M JPG:cmn cc: Gary D. Plotz James Schaeffer ,�bcc: Bill Fahey •* 0 0 CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $2,565,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS Issuer: City of Hutchinson, Minnesota Governing body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: a regular meeting, held on February 28, 1984, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., at the City Hall in the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota Members present: Alderman Mike Carls, Torgerson, Alderman Members absent: None Documents attached: Alderman Sohn Mlinar, Alderman Marlin Pat Mikulecky, and Mayor Robert H. Stearns. Minutes of said meeting (pages): 1 through 9, including RESOLUTION NO. 7666 RESOLUTION RELATING TO $1,050,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1984, $750,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION LIBRARY BONDS OF 1984 AND $765,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION PARKING IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS OF 1984; PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLIC SALE THEREOF; AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 7644 I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the obligations referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all docu- ments approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said obligations; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this 29th day of February , 1984. Signature Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator (SEAL) Name and Title • 0 • • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO $1,050,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1984, $750,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION LIBRARY BONDS OF 1984, AND $765,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION PARKING IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS OF 1984; PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLIC SALE THEREOF; AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. _ BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota, as follows: 1. It is hereby determined that it is necessary for the City to issue and sell general obligation bonds of the City (the Bonds) comprised of $1,050,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds to finance local improvements, $20,000 of such amount representing interest as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.56, $750,000 General Obligation Library Bonds to finance a new library in the City, $13,000 of such amount representing interest as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.56, and $765,000 General Obligation Parking Improvement Refunding Bonds to refund the $1,250,000 Parking Improvement Bonds of 1981, $15,000 of such amount representing interest as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55. Provided, however, that the principal amount of Parking Improvement Refunding Bonds to be sold and issued may be increased or decreased by an amount up to, but not exceeding, $75,000, after bids for the purchase of the Bonds have been opened. 2. It is hereby determined that the City Administrator shall receive and open sealed bids for the purchase of the Bonds on April 10, 1984, at 11:30 o'clock A.M., Central Time, and this Council shall meet at 7:30 o'clock P.M. that same date to award the sale. 3. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of the time, place and purpose of said sale to be published at least ten days in advance of the bid opening in a legal newspaper having general circulation in the City, and in a periodical published in Minneapolis, Minnesota, giving financial news and of general circulation throughout the State, which notice shall be in substantially the following form: -1- •0 •• NOTICE OF SALE $2,565,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA Sealed bids for the above Bonds of the City o Hutchinson, Minnesota, will be opened at 11:30 o'clock A.M., Central Time, on Tuesday, April 10, 1984, at the City Hall in Hutchinson. The City Council will meet at 7:30 o'clock P.M. that same date to consider the bids and award the sale. The offering includes $1,050,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1984 to finance local improvements, $750,000 General Obligation Library Bonds of 1984 to finance a new library in the City and $765,000 General Obligation Parking Improvement Refunding Bonds of 1984, to be issued to refund the $1,250,000 Parking Improvement Bonds of 1981. Dated May 1, 1984, the Bonds will mature on May 1 in each year as follows: Interest will be payable on November 1, 1984, and semiannually on each May and November thereafter. No rate of interest nor the net effective rate of the issue may exceed 11% per annum. All Bonds of an issue maturing in 1992 and thereafter are subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City and in whole or in part, in inverse order of maturities of this issue and by lot within maturities of an issue, on May 1, 1991 and any interest -2- Improvement Parking Library Year Bonds Bonds Bonds Total 1985 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 1986 $ 100,000 40,000 $ 25,000 165,000 1987 75,000 50,000 25,000 150,000 1988 75,000 50,000 25,000 150,000 1989 75,000 50,000 25,000 150,000 1990 75,000 50,000 25,000 150,000 1991 125,000 50,000 25,000 200,000 1992 125,000 50,000 50,000 225,000 1993 125,000 75,000 50,000 250,000 1994 125,000 75,000 50,000 250,000 1995 150,000 75,000 50,000 275,000 1996 75,000 50,000 125,000 1997 100,000 50,000 150,000 1998 75,000 75,000 1999 75,000 75,000 2000 75,000 75,000 2001 75,000 75,000 $1,050,000 $765,000 $750,000 $2,565,000 Interest will be payable on November 1, 1984, and semiannually on each May and November thereafter. No rate of interest nor the net effective rate of the issue may exceed 11% per annum. All Bonds of an issue maturing in 1992 and thereafter are subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City and in whole or in part, in inverse order of maturities of this issue and by lot within maturities of an issue, on May 1, 1991 and any interest -2- 00 i • payment date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. A legal opinion will be furnished by Dorsey & Whitney, of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Copies of a statement of Terms and Conditions of Sale and additional information may be obtained from the undersigned or from Ehlers and Associates, Inc., Financial Specialists, Suite 120- Soo Line Building, 507 Marquette Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402; telephone: (612) 339 -8291, financial consultants to the City. Dated: February 28, 1984. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL s /Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator -3- 0 0 0 0 4. The following shall constitute the terms and con- ditions for the sale and issuance of the Bonds, and the City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to cause the following terms and conditions to be incorporated in material distributed to prospective bidders for the Bonds: -4- •0 •• TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE $2,565,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MCLEOD COUNTY, MINNESOTA Sealed bids will be received at the City Hall in the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota, until 11:30 o'clock A.M., Central Time, on Tuesday, April 10, 1984, for the purchase of general obligation bonds (the Bonds) of the City in the aggregate princi- pal amount of $2,565,000 to be issued by the City upon the following terms and conditions: PURPOSE The Bonds will comprise three issues: $1,050,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1984 to be issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, to finance local improsements in the City; $750,000 General Obligation Library Bonds of 1984 to be issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 to finance a new library in the City; and $765,0.00 General Obligation Parking Improvement Refund- ing Bonds of 1984 to be issued to refund the $1,250,000 Parking Improvement Bonds of 1981 (provided, however, the City reserves the right to increase or decrease the principal amount of Park- ing Improvement Refunding Bonds by an amount up to $75,000, as _ stated under the caption "Adjustment of Parking Bonds "), pursu- ant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475. DATE, TYPE AND DENOMINATION The Bonds, as originally issued, will be dated as of May 1, 1984. The Bonds will be issuable only as fully registered Bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any multiple thereof, of single maturities, with interest payable by check or draft mailed to the person in whose name each Bond is registered at the close of business on the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the month preceding each interest payment date, as shown by the register maintained by the Registrar, which will be a suitable bank or trust company selected by the City. Principal is payable upon surrender of each Bond at maturity or upon prior redemption at the office of the Registrar. The City will pay the charges of the Registrar with respect to registration of ownership, transfer and exchange and payment of principal and interest. MATURITIES The Bonds of each issue will mature on May 1 in the following years and amounts: -5- 00 00 * Subject to adjustment as stated under the caption "Adjust- ment of Parking Bonds." ADJUSTMENT OF PARKING BONDS The City reserves the right, after bids for the Bonds have been opened, to increase or decrease the principal amount of the Parking Bonds by an amount not exceeding $75,000, as necessary to provide funds sufficient to defease the outstanding Parking Bonds and comply with applicable arbitrage regulations under Section 103(c) of the Internal Revenue Code. Any additional amount of Parking Bonds will be added in inverse order of the maturities stated above, starting with 1997, in multiples of $5,000 and not exceeding an additional $25,000 in any one year. Any decrease in the principal amount of Parking Bonds will be subtracted in inverse order of maturities, starting with 1997, in multiples of $5,000 and not subtracting more than $25,000 in any one year. If the principal amount of Parking Bonds is increased or decreased, the purchase price of the successful bidder will be automatically increased or decreased so as to result in a purchase price, expressed in dollars, at the same percentage of principal as the purchase price stated in the bid. There will be no adjust- ment in the amount of the good faith check hereinafter referred to. The City will notify the successful bidder of any adjust- ment in the principal amount of the Parking Bonds as soon as Prac- tical following the award of sale. -6- Inprovement Parking Librarg Year Bonds fonds Bonder Total 1985 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 1986 $ 100,000 40,000 $ 25,000 165,000 1987 75,000 50,000 25,000 150,000 1988 75,000 50,000 25,000 150,000 1989 75,000 50,000 25,000 150,000 1990 75,000 50,000 25,000 150,000 1991 125,000 50,000 25,000 200,000 1992 125,000 50,000 50,000 225,000 1993 125,000 75,000 50,000 250,000 1994 125,000 75,000 50,000 250,000 1995 150,000 75,000* 50,000 275,000 1996 75,000* 50,000 125,000 1997 100,000* 50,000 150,000 1998 75,000 75,000 1999 75,000 75,000 2000 75,000 75,000 2001 75,000 75,000 $1,050,000 $765,000* $750,000 $2,565,000 * Subject to adjustment as stated under the caption "Adjust- ment of Parking Bonds." ADJUSTMENT OF PARKING BONDS The City reserves the right, after bids for the Bonds have been opened, to increase or decrease the principal amount of the Parking Bonds by an amount not exceeding $75,000, as necessary to provide funds sufficient to defease the outstanding Parking Bonds and comply with applicable arbitrage regulations under Section 103(c) of the Internal Revenue Code. Any additional amount of Parking Bonds will be added in inverse order of the maturities stated above, starting with 1997, in multiples of $5,000 and not exceeding an additional $25,000 in any one year. Any decrease in the principal amount of Parking Bonds will be subtracted in inverse order of maturities, starting with 1997, in multiples of $5,000 and not subtracting more than $25,000 in any one year. If the principal amount of Parking Bonds is increased or decreased, the purchase price of the successful bidder will be automatically increased or decreased so as to result in a purchase price, expressed in dollars, at the same percentage of principal as the purchase price stated in the bid. There will be no adjust- ment in the amount of the good faith check hereinafter referred to. The City will notify the successful bidder of any adjust- ment in the principal amount of the Parking Bonds as soon as Prac- tical following the award of sale. -6- go 0 0 REDEMPTION Bonds of each issue maturing in 1992 and subsequent years will each be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City in whole or in part, and if in part, in inverse order of maturities and by lot within maturities, on May 1, 1991, and any interest payment date thereafter at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. INTEREST Interest will be payable on November 1, 1984, and semi- annually thereafter on each May 1 and November 1. All Bonds of the same maturity must bear interest from date of issue until paid at a single, uniform rate, not exceeding the rate specified for Bonds of any subsequent maturity. Each rate must be in an integral multiple of 5 /100 of 1 %. No rate of interest may exceed 11% per annum. DELIVERY Within 40 days after the sale, the City will deliver to the Registrar the printed Bonds ready for completion and authenti- cation. The original purchaser of the Bonds must notify the Registrar, at least 5 business days before delivery of the Bonds, of the persons in whose names the Bonds will be initially regis- tered and the authorized denominations of the Bonds to be originally issued. If notification is not received by that date, the Bonds will be registered in the name of the original purchas- er and will be issued in denominations corresponding to the principal maturities of the Bonds. On the day of closing, the City will furnish to the purchaser the opinion of bond counsel hereinafter described, an arbitrage certification and a certifi- cate verifying that no litigation in any manner questioning the validity of the Bonds is then pending or, to the best knowledge of officers of the City, threatened. Payment for the Bonds must be received by the City at its designated depositary on the date of closing in immediately available funds. LEGAL OPINIONS A legal opinion or each issue of Bonds will be provided by Dorsey & Whitney, of Minneapolis, Minnesota. The legal opinion for each issue of Bonds will be printed on the appropriate Bonds at the request of the purchaser. The legal opinion will state that the Bonds are valid and binding general obligations of the City enforceable in accordance with their terms, except to the extent enforceability may be limited by State of Minnesota or United States laws relating to bankruptcy, reorganization, mora- torium or creditors' rights generally. -7- 00 00 CONSIDERATION OF BIDS Sealed bids for not less than $2,517,000 and accrued interest on the principal sum of $2,565,000 must be mailed or delivered to the undersigned and must be received prior to the time stated above. All bids will then be publicly opened and tabulated and submitted to the City Council at 7:30 o'clock P.M., Central Time, the same day for consideration and action. No bid may be altered or withdrawn by the bidder after the time speci- fied above for opening bids. Each bid must be unconditional and must be accompanied by a cashier's or certified check or bank draft in the amount of $51,300, payable to the City, to be re- tained as liquidated damages if the bid is accepted and the bidder fails to comply therewith. The bid offering the lowest net interest cost (total interest from date of Bonds to stated maturities, less any amount more than $2,565,000 or plus any amount less than $2,565,000 bid for principal) will be considered. In the event that two or more bids stated the lowest net cost, the sale of the Bonds will be awarded by lot. No oral bid and no bid of less than $2,517,000 for principal, plus accrued interest on all Bonds will be considered. The City reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive informalities in the bid, and to adjourn the sale. CUSIP NUMBERS The City will assume no obligation for the assignment or printing of CUSIP numbers on the Bonds or for the correctness of any numbers printed thereon, but will permit such numbers to be assigned and printed at the expense of the purchaser, if the purchaser waives any extension of the time of delivery caused thereby. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Gary D. Plotz City Administrator Further information may be obtained from and bids may be delivered to: Ehlers and Associates, Inc., First National - Soo Line Concourse, 507 Marquette Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, Telephone: (612) 339 -8291, Financial Consultants to the City. If bids are delivered to Ehlers and Associates, Inc., the bid security will be retained in the offices of Ehlers and Associates, Inc., with the same effect as if delivered to the City Administrator. -8- go 00 5. The City Administrator, in cooperation with Ehlers and Associates, Inc., financial consultants to the City, is hereby authorized and directed to prepare on behalf of the City an official statement to be distributed to potential purchasers of the Bonds. Such official statement shall contain the statement of Terms and Conditions of Sale set forth in paragraph 4 hereof and such other information as shall be deemed advisable and necessary to adequately describe the City and the security for, and terms and conditions of, the Bonds. 6. Resolution No. , adopted January 24, 1984, is hereby repealed. Mayor Attest: City Administrator The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Administrator. 00 0 0 CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $600,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS OF 1984 Issuer: City of Hutchinson, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting, held on February 28 , 1984, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., at the City Hall in the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota Members Present: Alderman Mike Carls, Alderman Sohn Mlinar, Alderman Marlin Torgerson, Alderman Pat Mikulecky, and Mayor Robert H. Stearns. Members Absent: None Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (pages): 1 through 7 RESOLUTION NO. 7667 RESOLUTION RELATING TO $600,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS OF 1984; PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLIC SALE THEREOF I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this 29th day of February, 1984. Signature (SEAL) Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator Name and Title •• •• Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO $600,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS OF 1984; PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLIC SALE THEREOF BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City has heretofore issued its General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds dated as of November 1, 1980 (the Series 1980 Bonds) which are now outstanding in the principal amount of $ 2. The City is authorized to issue its bonds to refund the Series 1980 Bonds. After consulting with the financial consultants to the City, it appears likely that the City could reduce its interest costs by refunding the Series 1980 Bonds. 3. Sealed bids for the purchase of $600,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds of 1984, to be issued for the purpose described above, shall be received and opened at 11:30 o'clock A.M. on April 10, 1984, and this Council shall meet at 7:30 o'clock P.M. that same date to award the sale. 4. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of the time, place and purpose of said sale to be published at least ten days in advance of the bid opening in a legal newspaper having general circulation in the City, and in a periodical published in Minneapolis, Minnesota, giving financial news and of general circulation throughout the State, which notice shall be in substantially the following form: 00 0 NOTICE OF SALE $600,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA Sealed bids for the above Bonds of the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota, will be opened at 11:30 o'clock A.M., Central Time, on Tuesday, April 10, 1984, at the City Hall in Hutchinson. The City Council will meet at 7:30 o'clock P.M. that same date to consider the bids and award the sale. The Bonds are being issued to refund an outstanding issue of General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds of 1980. Dated May 1, 1984, the obligations will mature on May 1 in each year as follows: Year Amount 1985 $25,000 1986 50,000 1987 50,000 1988 50,000 1989 50,000 1990 50,000 1991 50,000 1992 50,000 1993 75,000 1994 75,000 1995 75,000 Interest will be payable on November 1, 1984, and semiannually on each May 1 and November 1 thereafter. No rate of interest nor the net effective rate of the issue may exceed 118 per annum. Bonds maturing in 1992 and thereafter are subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City and in whole or in part, in inverse order of maturities and by lot within maturities, on May 1, 1991 and any interest payment date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. A legal opinion will be furnished by Dorsey & Whitney, of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Copies of a statement of Terms and Conditions of Sale and additional information may be obtained from the undersigned or from Ehlers and Associates, Inc., Financial Specialists, Suite 120 - Soo Line Building, 507 Marquette Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402; telephone: (612) 339 -8291, financial consultants to the City. Dated: February _, 1984. -2- BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL s /Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator of 0 0 5. The following shall constitute the terms and conditions for the sale and issuance of the bonds, and the City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to cause the following terms and conditions to be incorporated in material distributed to prospective bidders for the bonds: -3- • 0 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE $600,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MCLEOD COUNTY, MINNESOTA Sealed bids will be received at the City Hall in the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota, until 11:30 o'clock A.M Central Time, on Tuesday, April 10, 1984, for the purchase of General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of $600,000 to be issued by the City upon the following terms and conditions: PURPOSE The Bonds are being issued to refund the City's General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds of 1980. DATE, TYPE AND DENOMINATION The Bonds will be dated as originally issued, as of May 1, 1984. The Bonds will be issuable only as fully registered Bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any multiple thereof, of single maturities, with interest payable by check or draft to the person in whose name each Bond is registered 15 days prior to each interest payment date on the register maintained by the Registrar, which will be a suitable bank or trust company selected by the City. Principal is payable upon surrender of each Bond at maturity or upon prior redemption at the office of the Registrar. The City will pay the charges of the Registrar with respect to registration of ownership, transfer and exchange and payment of principal and interest. MATURITIES The Bonds will mature on May 1 in the following years and amounts: Year Amount- 1985 $25,000 1986 50,000 1987 50,000 1988 50,000 1989 50,000 1990 50,000 1991 50,000 1992 50,000 1993 75,000 1994 75,000 1995 75,000 -4- •• •i REDEMPTION Bonds maturing in 1992 and subsequent years will each be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City in whole or in part, and if in part in inverse order of maturities and by lot assigned in proportion to their principal amount, within maturities, on May 1, 1991, and any interest payment date thereafter at a price equal to the principal amount thereof to be redeemed plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. INTEREST Interest will be payable on November 1, 1984, and semiannually thereafter on each May 1 and November 1. All Bonds of the same maturity must bear interest from date of issue until paid at a single, uniform rate, not exceeding the rate specified for obligations of any subsequent maturity. Each rate must be in an integral multiple of 5 /100 of 1 %. No rate of interest, nor the net effective rate of the Bonds may exceed 11% per annum. DELIVERY Within 40 days after the sale, the City will deliver to the Registrar the printed Bonds ready for completion and authentication. The original purchaser of the Bonds must notify the Registrar, at least 5 business days before delivery of the Bonds, of the persons in whose names the Bonds will be initially registered and the authorized denominations of the Bonds to be originally issued. If notification is not received by that date, the Bonds will be registered in the name of the original purchaser and will be issued in denominations corresponding to the principal maturities of the Bonds. On the day of closing, the City will furnish to the purchaser the opinion of bond counsel hereinafter described, an arbitrage certification and a certificate verifying that no litigation in any manner questioning the validity of the Bonds is then pending or, to the best knowledge of officers of the City, threatened. Payment for the Bonds must be received by the City at its designated depositary on the date of closing in immediately available funds. LEGAL OPINIONS A legal opinion on the Bonds will be provided by Dorsey & Whitney, of Minneapolis, Minnesota. The legal opinion will be printed on the Bonds at the request of the purchaser. The legal opinion will state that the Bonds are valid and binding general obligations of the City enforceable in accordance with their terms, except to the extent enforceability may be limited by State of Minnesota or United States laws relating to bankruptcy, reorganization, moratorium or creditors' rights generally. -5- •• •0 CONSIDERATION OF BIDS Sealed bids for not less than $ and accrued interest on the principal sum of $600,000 must be mailed or delivered to the undersigned and must be received prior to the time stated above. All bids will then be publicly opened and tabulated and submitted to the City Council at 7:30 P.M., Central Time, the same day for consideration and action. Each bid must be unconditional and must be accompanied by a cashier's or certified check or bank draft in the amount of $12,000, payable to the City, to be retained by the City as liquidated damages if the bid is accepted and the bidder fails to comply therewith. The bid offering the lowest net interest cost (total interest from date of the Bonds to stated maturities, less any amount more than $600,000 or plus any amount less than $600,000 bid for principal) will be considered, and the City Council reserves the right to reject any and all bids and to waive any informality in any bid. In the event that two or more bids state the lowest net cost, the sale of the Bonds will be awarded by lot. No oral bid and no bid of less than $ for principal, plus accrued interest on all Bonds will be considered and the City reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive informalities in the bid, and to adjourn the sale. CUSIP NUMBERS The City will assume no Bonds for the assignment or printing of CUSIP numbers on the Bonds or for the correctness of any numbers printed thereon, but will permit such numbers to be assigned and printed at the expense of the purchaser, if the purchaser waives any extension of the time of delivery caused thereby. Further information may be obtained from and bids may be delivered to: Ehlers and Associates, Inc., Financial Specialists, Suite 120 - Soo Line Building, 507 Marquette Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402; telephone: (612) 339 -8291. -6- 6. The City Administrator, in cooperation with Ehlers and Associates, Inc., financial consultants to the City, is hereby authorized and directed to prepare on behalf of the City an official statement to be distributed to potential purchasers of the Bonds. Such official statement shall contain the statement of Terms and Conditions of Sale set forth in paragraph 4 hereof and such other information as shall be deemed advisable and necessary to adequately describe the City and the security for, and terms and conditions of, the Bonds. Mayor Attest: City Administrator The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Administrator. -7- e f ° '2) 87.9 -2,4i r , WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST 'TC,yINSON, MINN, 55350 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: February 28, 1984 TO. Mayor & City Council FROM. Water Billing Dept. SUBJECT: Delinquent Water Accounts Attached is a listing of the delinquent water accounts for the month of February. Recommend water service be discontinued on Monday, March 5, 1984 at Noon, b *Service Address s 0 0 Richard Sturges William Lueck 425 Third Ave. S.E. 346 Adams St. S. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Hutchinson, MN 55350 3 -045- 0425 -0 -81 3- 210- 0346 -0 -31 $70.76 $90.89 James Weis Calvin Lee 605 Third Ave. S.E. 416 Adams St. S. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Hutchinson, MN 55350 3 -045- 0605 -0 -01 3 -210- 0416 -0 -81 $64.46 $58.84 Sheldon Crouse Ted Weiby 229 Fifth Ave. N.E. 6 Ada St. S. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Hu nson, MN 55350 3- 075- 0229 -0 -91 3- 42426 -0 -61 $62.27 $ -0.09 Miles Willhite Randy Gunderson 136 11th Ave. N.E. 506 Adams St. S. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Hutchinson, MN 55350 3- 130 - 0136 -0 -41 3- 210 - 0506 -0 -91 $40.00 $38.33 Promise to pay 3/09/84 Promises to pay 3/02/84 Darol D. Wylie Ronnie Telecky 26 Adams St. S. 607 Bluff St. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Hutchinson, MN 55350 3- 210- 0026 -0 -01 3- 250 - 0607 -0 -81 $57.21 $91.63 Owner: V.F.W. Promises to pay 1/2 - 3/01 Promise to pay 3/03/84 Rodney Markgraf Kralein Investment 565 Clark St. Box 533 Hutchinson, MN 55350 *306 Adams St. 3- 320 - 0565 -0 -41 3- 210- 0306 -0 -11 $99.90 $102.27 David Freund Kim Meyer 405 Erie St. S. 325 Adams St. S. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Hutchinson, MN 55350 3- 380 - 0405 -0 -51 3- 210- 0325 -0 -81 $145.52 $55.50 Promises to pay$35.QO 2/28,$50.00 3/02, $60.52 3/16 Dennis Gregor 326 Adams St. S. Pat Smith Hutchinson, MN 55350 455 Glen St. N 3- 210 - 0326 -0 -71 Hutchinson, MN 55350 $89.41 3- 415- 0455 -0 -31 $91.17 Cheryl Schauer Country Club Terrace Hutchinson, MN 55350 *197 Third Ave. NW 3- 040 - 0197 -0 -91 $237.00 Owner: Dean Dietel Don Kramer Jon Wilke 215 Huron St. S. 814 Craig Hutchinson, MN 55350 Hutchinson, MN 55350 3 -535- 0215 -0 -91 *1303 Campbell Ln $52.97 3- 280 - 1303 -0 -71 $80.91 Sharon Sauter Owner: Jim McClure 877 Main St. N. Promises to pay in full 3/09 Hutchinson, MN 55350 3- 680- 0877 -0 -11 Joan M. Sheehan $53.85 455 High St., Apt. 20 Promises to pay 3/02 Hutchinson, MN 55350 Owner: Bruce Crosby *219 College Ave. 3- 330 - 0219 -0 -21 Browns Greenhouse $82,78 Box 36 *125 Michigan Gary Klatt Hutchinson, MN 55350 313 Stoney Pt Rd 3 -715- 0125 -0 -01 Hutchinson, MN 55350 $128.03 *820 Lewis Ave. 4- 209 - 0730 -1 -61 James Deragon $50.47 540 Monroe St. S. Owner: Glen Getzke Hutchinson, MN 55350 3- 735- 0540 -0 -31 Leland Turner $101.27 895 Dale St. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Gerald Elliott 4- 226- 0320 -4 -51 590 Monroe St. S. $29.91 Hutchinson, MN 55350 cc: Thomas Gutormson 3- 735 - 0590 -0 -21 $95.65 Refuse ONLY acct. Charles Anderson Becca Lynn 524 Prospect St. 116 Huron St. Upst. Hutchinson, MN 55350 Hutchinson, MN 55350 3- 815- 0524 -0 -61 3 -535- 0116 -1 -71 $41.45 $19.45 Owner: Richard K. Carlson Midwest Trailer Ct. Box 157 Winsted, MN 55395 *450 Water St. 3- 970- 0420 -0 -21 $685.59 i Cheryl Schauer Country Club Terrace Hutchinson, MN 55350 *197 Third Ave. NW 3- 040 - 0197 -0 -91 $237.00 Owner: Dean Dietel Coca -Cola BottlingApmpany • P. O. Box 69/Hutchinsow innesota 55350 February 15, 1984 Municipal Liquor Store Chuck Nelson, Mgr. Hutchinson, Minnesota Dear Chuck, our price quote on a. True Three -Door Visual Merchandiser Model CDM -69 is $2,222.50. This includes incoming freight from St. Louis to Hutchinson and installation services. The cooler ordered would be in a brown walnut vinyl finish, not in red as shown in the enclosed picture. Upon receipt of an order, deliveW takes between two to three weeks. Sincerely, Duane Buske, Mgr Coca -Cola Bottling Co. Hutchinson, Minnesota c , a - gpormer�ha[�disers for the bottlers of COCAIM G6M -69 ;. I NEW Ci?G SOLD MERCHANOISER A great way fo Increase Sales in Supermarkets, Convenience Stores, Service Stations, Delicatessens, Marinas, and Wherever Soft Drinks are Sold. 69 Cubic Feet of Display in Only 11 Square Feet of Floor Space THE PERFECT WAY TO INCREASE YOUR TAKE HOME MARKET SALES .XTERIOR High luster baked enamel applied to coated steel. Offers the ultimate resistance to adverse weather conditions, salt spray and humidity. INTERIOR Long lasting White Vinyl, Stainless and Alu- minum keeps its bright, sanitary appearance indefinitely. SLIDE DOORS Doors are self closing, have stainless steel bottom rollers. Doors have three thicknesses of glass fortwice the insulation. NO HEATER needed to prevent sweating. LIGHTING Two 40 watt bulbs illuminate the sign panel and two 40 watt bulbs (safety shielded) assures your product the highest shadow free illumination. INSULATION Energy saving foamed -in -place polyurethane foam, results in superior operating efficiency. ELECTRICAL 100 or 115 volts single phase. No special wir- ing required. Plug-in installation. No plumb- ing required. REFRIGERATION SYSTEM Heavy duty 112 H.P. Compressor for quick pull down. WARRANTY One Year Warranty on all parts and an addi- tional Four Year Warranty on the Compressor (U.S.A. Only). \M @ `° S• a two TRUE MANUFACTURING CO. • 5T. LOUIS j jo _... _ _— __ _. SIGN YGNEL 1 r Capacity Co. Ft. Is- III i I Depth 29.1121131 HEIGHT ^ H. P. I � I j DOOR WIDTH I Crated Weight —WI 2 INCLUDESDOOR HAND LE I e'4'D �L _..��L - -_ True Model No. GDM•69 Capacity Co. Ft. 69 Width 78111 Depth 29.1121131 Height 78.114f7 H. P. 1/2 Crated Weight 682 sales company A DIVISION OF TRUE MANUFACTURING CO., INC. PLANTS: O'Fallon. Mo. 3 harles Industrial Center • O'Fallon. 1drseouri ° St. Louis. Mo. 11WALES OFFICE —Area Code314- 272 -24W w. 4-WQQM I CUSTOM Hd*S LIGHT COMMERCIAL *ODELING Business Phone 587 -5555 A IC�tlr� �a1tott BUILDER HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA 55350 Home Phone 587 -5556 February 21, 1984 Hutchinson Municipal Liquor Store 117 Main Street North Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 Estimated costs for proposed new front on West 26' and South 62' walls of building include: Remove existing siding on West wall. Strip all walls with 2x2 Furring 16" on center. Install 5/8" rough sawn Cedar reverse board and batten siding 8' high. Glass block to be closed up from outside. Install a 7' high mansord roof with a 24" bottom projection as per sketch plan. 2" CDX roof sheathing with felt paper over. 3/4 To 5/4X24" hand split shakes. Roof cap as required. 3/8" R.S. soffit. Estimate includes building permit and clean — up. Estimate does not include removal or installation of sign or any electrical work. $ 5,950.00 If mansord roof would be eliminated and siding would continue to top, deduct $ 865.00 making estimate $ 5,085.00 . R ectf lly Submitted, Richard Larson RL/ah a � • 0 0 S i a c Qjo,(— O �� �,- 4 G EpAQ N � "cox �x 08ETKER CONSTRUCTION, IN# Gene Betker Mark Betker Clifton Heights Hutchinson, MN 55350 (612) 587.5089 - PROPOSAL SUEMITIED TO — _ -_ -_ -- - PHONE DATE _ -- February 15, 1984 City of - -___ 1 STREET JOB NAME CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE Hutchinson, Mn. 55350 --Illy JOB LOCATION Municipal Liquor Store — — _Hutchinson —— I JOB PHONE it ARCHITECT DATE Or PLANS iJ e hereby submit spedflcabon_ and xi Lh notes tor: Labor and material to install mansard roof across front 26' and down side 61' of liquor store. Includes aproximatley 2' overhang and I mansard tapering to top of roof edge. Install J" CDX plywood with felt paper and 3/4" to 5/4" handsplit cedar shakes. Install 3/8" rough sawn cedar plywood under soffits. Walls to be stripped with 2" x 2" and front recessed areas to be furred out to make front straight. 5/8" rough sawn reverse batton cedar plywood 9' high to be installed over stripping with 1" x 4" rough sawn cedar installed on corners and around doors. Permit included. Does not include any electrical work or lights, staining or painting. i Clear cedar plywood would be extra. Total $5,865.67 I i - i F propo5r hereby to furnish material and labor — complete in accordance with above specifications, for the sum of: _ dollars ($. :).8615,67 ). Payment to be made as follows: nal i d g to teed to e as specified. . Any alteration 11 w or be completed All m to -al 's guaranteed to be as - All work to be completes in a workmanlike manner from above workmanlike Authorized tions involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders and will beeome an Signature '- extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes. accidents Note: This proposal may be or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire tornado and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by Workmen's Compersaboa Insurance withdrawn by us if not accepted within Araptaurr of proposttl —The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized Signature to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. Signature Date of Acceptance: _ - -- FpRN 118 -3 cmr1RIGM1 i98o - - tirr.— 1, nc lur ., Groton Mass o`65o AW BILL TO: National W ie Distri6urors .. . BEER Ea NT 8 PARTS BAR S. RES NT EQUIPMENT P.O. BOX 43177 ST. PAUL, MN 55164 Tel. 1612; 6364110 Nat'l: 800 328 9800 MN: 800672 -0924 ORDERED BY: PHONE I(I�I[w O�C�d�I�n VIII �LX SHIP TO: I'I o� ZIP REMITTANCE RECEIVED CUSTOMER ACCT. N SAjL tA� L— D'� r'v r CUSTOMER P.O. F7 TERMS: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS QUANTITY PART NUMBER DESCRIPTION STK S/D NET EACH TOTAL s N isSGZ 3 %� 2or5 or) 2orsw Quoted prices will be held until r L v . Orders received after that date are subject to review and change. Signature and check in the amount of $ shall constitute :ustomer acceptance of the above quotation, and shall become a bona fide order for shipment. TAX TOTAL races r.U.tS. Shipping romt, trelght collect, less applicable sales taxes, unless otherwise speanea. Vim" r k�— 54(CS Wcfk Authori"d Signatum Title J Date 2 -Y -134 Slide Doom ON HAND 2 -Y -114 Slide Doom 2-Y -121 Slide Doors � W, A': jf z ►Aerchandisers Designed o Pull Down Product emperatures to 340 Serchandise refrigerated products in modern, sleek merchandisers with ghted canopy and yourchoice of illuminated . signs at no extra cost Quality jlid steel construction with attractive Walnut woodgrain laminate exterior -Aish. Long lasting interiorfinish of vinyl plasticcombined with Stainless Steel ndAluminum assures bright, sanitary appearance, easy cleaning. Attractive, -djustable, no-rust anodized Aluminum shelves are reinforced with Stainless .-feel bars for permanent life. Bottom shelf height is designed for "no- stoop" 'asier removal of cartons, bottles or cans. Complete units are only 2992' ;eep— savesaisle space, permits easier product placement. Merchandisers _rclude these quality features: space-saving polyurethane foamed- in-place '- rsulation for greater operating efficiency, automatic self-closing doors with riple panes of double tempered glass for additional insulation — eliminates •.eed for heater wires on slide door models, cuts operational and service -asts; oversize %H.P. refrigeration systems for fast cooling. Units operate at 'eak performance even in locations with high ambient temperatures. Bottom mounted compressors are removable from front for easier cleaning and main - enance— factory sealed and lubricated for long life, quiet operation Top mounted evaporator blower assures greater air flow. Safety shielded interior fight provides shadow -free product highlight Illuminated sign panels a re ship- ped separately. Specify when ordering. f.o.b. MO. Cap. Cap. �;. 6 Pk 12 oz. Cu. Ft. W. Ht H.P. Doors cans bottles WL 2 -Y -121 41 47" 789." % 2 slide 200 118 500 $2640.00 2 -Y -118 47 54" 784." % 2 slide 246 133 550 2850.00 2 -Y -127 Same as 2• 7ii but ON HAND ........................ 3070.00 2•Y -743 49 54" " 78'/." 'h 2 swing 246 133 545 2850.00 2 -Y -114 69 78" 79'/4" 11, 3 slide 369 193 685 3750.00 2•Y -134 Same as 2 -Y -114, but ON HAND ........................ 4030.00 2 -Y -149 Extra shelves with clips for 47, 49. & 69 cu It models.... 45.00 `NOTE: Merchandisers may be shipped fdrom B other convenient f.o.b. points: PA, GA, CO. FL or MT. Use part No. 2 -Y -125, add 6% to cost of the mer- chandiser ordered. When shipped from AZ, WA or CA, add 9 %. Specify ship- ping point desired. SPECIFY CHOICE OF ILLUMINATED SIG yypATT NO EXTR ANESL 1. "COLD BEER" 2. "TAKE HOME A COLD CARTON" S. GREEN DIAMOND 3. "SELF- SERVICE" 7. 'COLD WINE" 4. PLAIN WHITE PANEL 8 WINE CELLAR r' .. . .. ;x sa F= 1 ON HAND 2.Y -127 43 PUBLISHED IN THE HUTCHINSON LEADER THURSDAY, MARCH 1, 1984 PUBLICATION NO. 3212 ORDINANCE NO. 01/84 ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 518 ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A TRANSPORTATION BOARD AND TO DEFINE ITS DUTIES AND MEMBERSHIP WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota, did on October 12, 1976, adopt Ordinance No. 518 establishing a transportation board for the City of Hutchinson, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota, has determined that it is no longer necessary to maintain the transportation board to review the adequate functioning of city transportation services, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA, That Ordinance No. 518 is hereby repealed. This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication. Passed this day of , 1984 Robert H. Stearns, Mayor ATTEST: Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator (612) 879-2-311 of/ y OF !E UYC If SON 37 WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST HUTCHINSON, 1✓11fVN. 55350 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: February 22. 1984 TO: _ Hutchinson City Council FROM: _ Hutchinson Planning Commission SUBJECT: _ Conditional Use Permit submitted by Hutch Agri -Tech Pursuant to Section 6.05, C5, of Zoning Ordinance No. 464, the Hutchinson Planning Commission is hereby submitting its findings of fact and recommend- ation with respect to the aforementioned request for a conditional use permit. HISTORY On January 26, 1984, an application was submitted by Hutch Agri -Tech for a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 48' by 112' addition to an existing structure in an IC -1 zone. A public hearing was held at the regular meeting of the Planning Commission on February 21, 1984. There was no one present who objected to the plan. Mr. Leo Getsfried of the DNR had communicated by telephone to City Administrator Plotz that the DNR had no objection so long as the building is used for storage only and that storage is secured or can be readily moved in anticipation of a flood. No manufactur- ing or production will be allowed in this area. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The required application was submitted and the appropriate fee paid. 2. Notices were mailed to the surrounding property owners as well as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, February 9, 1984. 3. The proposal is in conformance with the requirements of a conditional use permit. RECOMMENDATION It is the recommendation of the Planning Commission that the conditional use permit be granted contingent upon the plan providing at least 6 parking spaces to the rear, and that a sign be posted to indicate parking in the rear. Respectfully submitted, Larry Romo, Chairman Hutchinson.Planning Commission RESOLUTION NO. 7661 RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER SECTION 6.05, C5, OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 464 TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING STRUCTURE IN AN IC -1 ZONE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHLNSON, MINNESOTA: FT NDT N(:S 1. Hutch Agri -Tech has made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit under Section 6.05, C5, of Zoning Ordinance No. 464 to allow the construction of a 48' by 112' addition to an existing structure in an IC -1 zone, on property located at 15 Monroe Street, with the following legal description: Lot, 8, Block 4, South 1/2 of the City of Hutchinson r, 2. The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed use on health,` safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions,.and the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area and the effect of the use of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The Council has determined that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion or hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. CONCLUSION The application for Conditional Use Permit for the purpose designated is granted based upon the findings set forth above. Adopted by the City Council this 28th day of February, 1984. ATTEST: Robert H. Stearns, Mae or Gary D. Plotz, City Clerk •' Y I • • (612) 8 79-23 11 CITY OF HUTCHINSON 37 WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST HUTCHINSON, MINN. 55350 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: February 22, 1984 TO: Hutchinson City Council FROM: Hutchinson Planning Commission SUBJECT: SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTED BY GERALD GASSMAN T_O M_CLE_OD COUNTY_ (within two mile radius) The Planning Commission recommends approval of the afore- mentioned sketch plan as presented. q�l' jr ;mot MafOR.A DUM TO: FROM: DATE: Citg of Hutchinson Edwin E. Homan, McLeod County Zoning Administrator February 7, 1984 E SUBJECT: Gerald Gassman, Sketch Plan, Section 26, Acoma Township It is the administrative policy of this office to refer any sketch plan within two (2) miles of a municipality to the appropriate City Council and Planning Commission. The following lots contain the approximate acreage: Lot 1 - 1.5 acres Lot 2 - 4.00 acres Lot 3 - 1.5 acres The City of Hutchinson shall review the sketch plan and transmit written comments of that review to the Planning Commission. Failure to submit such a report shall constitute approval of the sketch plan. The Gassman sketch plan is tentatively scheduled for review by the Planning Commission on Wednesday, March' 28, 1984, at 1:30 p.m. in the County Commissioners` Room, Courthouse, Glencoe, Minnesota. san Enclosure offict of • A4cLEOD COUNTY Zoning Administrator 83011th Street East - Court House GLENCOE, MINNESOTA 55336 Phone 854 -5551 Ertl. 259 EDWIN E. HOMAN Atlminislolw Citg of Hutchinson Edwin E. Homan, McLeod County Zoning Administrator February 7, 1984 E SUBJECT: Gerald Gassman, Sketch Plan, Section 26, Acoma Township It is the administrative policy of this office to refer any sketch plan within two (2) miles of a municipality to the appropriate City Council and Planning Commission. The following lots contain the approximate acreage: Lot 1 - 1.5 acres Lot 2 - 4.00 acres Lot 3 - 1.5 acres The City of Hutchinson shall review the sketch plan and transmit written comments of that review to the Planning Commission. Failure to submit such a report shall constitute approval of the sketch plan. The Gassman sketch plan is tentatively scheduled for review by the Planning Commission on Wednesday, March' 28, 1984, at 1:30 p.m. in the County Commissioners` Room, Courthouse, Glencoe, Minnesota. san Enclosure y �. r� CIT h I ® ( S�FERRELL'S LAKE L`LORITTA OCR LHER- �� 120 •ul.,i%, fJ.50.4 1 I '1 ayj4ii e. 1 121.56 n•9Qi11 JOTTRMA90 ©I © RENLr'•x® J wd 40. 33 J $0.46-9 ED r. i L (j� w e off oMEL 'Lp19B RGIIAE, AVft IS ERt -Aai-0 N6� ' +II ES LINfi RD B FF ETALfI.to •I @^.li AGNES W. N• IRENE BA MAN ENDO• NE 0 MING ERICKSON r xg Y�R{ R J W] 311f3W3 MdFITIN 0 IJOEKS •W _I °° IQ K MaR 7 GET POPP \FRENCH Pdo.R q Np LANE /MARTHA ROERT GONNASpB•I JKOHLS E KRUEGEFY Q A NA M. B FYN LFID RC HARD -7-1534i-4 7 fyT KADELB :u RFF _ O I �� VI 5 7Eq 1,]z ® 1 e faafl. -E •1 CLAREK n 4 l mz GO. MERLIN Nw 0" ® 7E `� i Er W. 141H I n1a, N 01- PIATH RUESSS .ARIA ELSIE w Qin Ap J� I THEURII�GER EVANS G 1i ® j$�J� 105.40 e © IO2.59 OIUI lYO1NE ® ! + m �I 145 C �no G) f5.n0.Y 17. u0 Q FABAN m BU53 q St;% ^I �HMO FREOH., 7EWS 1 - - `_ F , n JA 1 2!.66! 4 AMES J B qO MARY L. CIFI I1 22 .... . A YDIA 1 (� CI ,n F 8 F M 2)5.60 rr�2� RICHARD To TEW� N © �1 VIARYEY B ` 11 17. � TTSF 0 I (DWENDELL HARLAR rFELHNGER �{ GLENN B 4 (FERN B. AN `_ IAN LD B ZUMMACH .•f' SFIE WOOO+� Q JOYCE TEWS x HOFF IARIE P(� ,,I „+ DUMMER s :® H ` ", , UEBER74� - `1(�2Bf LAMA MI' ], t DQ TEWS + "\I CJ —'AlW 4 rpq CHA'iYI ES RAOUNZ I VI RGIL 00011 MARVI AWE A 1 I �HOERNIEMANN VERNA EDNA " 1 ` IAN EUGEOMTZ WARNRE 0"oa72 BONG 33 ,•, a {w6 B BEST ..e% �.24L38 DONALD 4 T ado . A 0 MMING Q BERGHU19 1 © DELERT0 VICTOR EDWIN VICTOR SCHMIDT m x ' LEONA 1KARG MOLES I a JULIAN ' LRwJ1 I 'a WESLEY B. B ®Q WIN AA 14 \ LFROEMM- GREY BENJAMIN., j}$] ITJ (IL] OE �1 2 PRIEVE �� DELMER nT• , 1 VERNON STURGES f rl•NN ACH• i; S a 0 HAHN A W EO 20 MAN f• 1 \ ct N R ¢N 7! RV 5 ELL ^nIEVE "1 t LAP WAY ,45 I C., 'is ER7HA _, w., EDTKE _ p LYNN v (PAGE SI TWO V r r• z N i u s /I'i E • SMALL TRACT OWNERS !IC MCI OwMI •Prt Iet MC] OWW] Ktll N< "MCI Owyr Knf 51< MU D•vlKl •Cnl I A 4k D'411w f,N I A Lln rdn eurCM 114' 1 WnM ] +nrw.lr r,y, I,M 11 — •.IV•wYl wwry ).W {IrM INr Ivm I A Ono .... [ Wwnrr{ h••khtAlr 1 }v 1 Wlrx Ywr IJO rui,r mi,l C v wlllr„p wl hw w114A r.r11 1 ". ).m 1 . A ,In rkrn 111141 14N 1. fr..w LN ].(3 q ♦ C G."10 xJU 101. ,N.,y fm Inr ]I If 1•. IF ". CM. 4..r•r l4h V,q r r1.IM r 1 IwnRr {M..w11YM 1..]. . ixw, wrwlrD ]A! 11 A ,InRry lrlw r,M 11 • ;MIrr .Y I•wr rrwl I erF {Dw OwY4 IJV . ♦ Mnwlll•mYHrl.11wn 1n4r w1vr .•p \M -- -� O M.1•lek 1JV ID ♦ r4kwl lrw.ww I.Ip C Llr hI,; I.vv Il A 1.•l Vr•w.r,,..r I,M • x tlnw Lfa 1 nrN hr•r.,n r ... n k O.r I,; II rA] . frar♦rr lm I rl r v 1 ♦ x.e.l•wwn 4A.. La1 a L.u1w•W Owlyrr }e twit r.n lLm 11 . •.,r ywln ". 1 C4 rw.. rgl.n Oww4.rur In a 1 •wlwr D141r. OwMwr{n.w lrw.h. ••if [ n Iw•r ml e.. 'xnlha.n.x LM [ ;Yl.r rl 4•Il.rl .p 1 .n,. ♦,yr 1.ta D I1wM yr O.rn.w 11,M 1 IM wrW. II 1 A"A LweI Al1A 0.A• Lev 11 ♦ D.1•,..OrnA Lry 1 x• u w WrC.. U.N I C drNl b•. 1.M )] O•rw l.Ap IN le!w I "I NF w.N hrwWw o cr rxrl.w f•n 1 �.rl l.r.. I ++w I.m b A ..." o..Irwn fAe Iwr w.w � I wan w.alrr Lq ]I . ,1.•r,.. Ire. 1 D.ql. o•4w. rm I Dww111r,r4 It 1 IM { 1+w11 D,wIAr Iv.IE 1 enn \ Ub ♦rwww 6Ri C M1r.Or /. •r 4y.wl • M • r ] d.wdn6 C d•II].xpl ww4N •l.b f1 ♦11....1 Im Yrrx 1140 r• rr r. r. S IM1M4w 13 1 IlAlw•erM.r 1 dn4lolw Ow...1 /m C ��. C r llw /rw 1 {,DV { w111A.•. 11.M • 1, {.w ikr D 1A. A )ti16WUl N1 p " Iw.r llkxlry i.rww if Mw.Nw 11 A ' 11 • ew./1 { lln w111Y I.M 1 1ti 3 wn41A.,. )..1 w �r I r•rr • I •w.. ' /I'i E • (612) 879.2311 HarcH" CITY OF HUTCHINSON 37 WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST HUTCHINSON, MINN. 55350 M E M O R N D U M DATE: February 22, 1984 TO: Hutchinson City Council FROM: Hutchinson Planning Commission SUBJECT: Conditional — Permit sumbitted by Sue — C_allier to_Mc_Leo_d County (within two mile radius) The Planning Commission recomm end s.approvaI of the afore- mentioned conditional use permit as requested. C�_ c STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF MCLEOD \ NOIICE OF PPUUBLIC RRINC YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that a regular meeting of the McLeod County Planning Commission will be held on the 29th day of February , 1984 , at 1:30 p.m. in the County Commissioners' Room at the Courthouse, Glencoe, Minnesota. THE PURPOSE OF SAID MEETING is to consider the application for a Conditional Use Permit heretofore filed with the County Zoning Administrator by Susan M. Callier Said application for a Conditional Use Permit relates to a home occupation (beauty salon) employing more than one (1) non- resident employee on the premises. THE PREMISES UPON WHICH said Conditional Use is anticipated and situated in the County of McLeod and State of Minnesota is described as follows to wit: The South 16.5 feet of the NTA& of the N&'i of Section. 30, T117N of R29W: And that part of the North 15 acres of the S?%A4 of the NE4 of said Section 30, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest Corner of said SW'-£ of the NEh; thence South., along the West line of said SW'% of the NEtr, a distance of 245 feet; thence deflect 860 10' left a distance of 913.6 feet; thence deflect 900 right to the South line of said North 15 acres of the Shu; of NE34; thence Easterly, along said South line, to the East line of said SWk of NE,; thence Northerly, along said East line, to the North line of said SI•'Z of NE11z, thence Westerly, along said North line, to the point of beginning. THIS HEARING will be held by the McLeod County Planning Commission at which time you may appear if you desire, either in person or by agent or attorney, in opposition to or support of the proposed Conditional Use. Thereafter, the McLeod County Planning Commission shall forward its recommendation to the County Board of Conrnissioners. If you desire to appeal the Planning Commission's recommendation,, you can take your request to the County Board which has the pover to overrule the decision of the Planning Commission. DATED THIS 9th DAY OF February , 19 84_. Edwin E. Homan McLeod Cous Zoning Administrator HU) IJON TOWNSHIP: 117 N. RANGE- 29 W. CODE: HU MEEKER w1 1$ I y, .., r "a � J a lases ��.,a_�t •<oee u!a u 9 Jd L � N4 -I'a -^ c d: � _I � _ I rxe �s1nc:� r� �I �h _�. 1 dlr:cft .,,.rubcnl l l�.ncJ 02 1•_r <• -O�L? w n Y 1 Sy O , 5 11 ;L • r.o ..e le .,. _ �/- n..ce d •\ gE `G p} L,.n^I .z ! C Oloracel� .x 6v '7DOD rroemmmq �> eaox °nrc �,/ ): '`'4 .. `+ `•'1'a uc L s:4�.oa sr tss oidsna d I -ckX 9zsol � �^ C I .e.a �P�ahl LAKE �,� EA :aw -a of a. \ i •• V, :° -.e4! 1 n. i!'.ado j..f -11 at kli, Lf °J° ara. I�� p L: a.•Jc ••n :,�e1 1 7!•LcJ, d) .� �gj. .•cam azo "na•n <.. .mer'Ii. -.- -� t;e Z��T`•r4J .`e Ttra It 11 rdan -•.rm a:-' r:'; > y klzo°`z �. e r 1 ;c I Oti:ari: ek .n-.an �� 'n• `<i av_r e�O ••a <1 EMILY r ll, :HO 60 2r nr�� a i�on:a L.A _ kc uc °J • '• .KE ..A k. ♦�( '� Janes Klap°t • to _ u.a% Seer•,, c a^ Is) ♦e_.e�. �i L.•• \ zaO v z> •- 4'aH.� xxn r,seaa -. BEAR e S LAKE ROOK J F i` Irkd:na u•ar ( / O roam.n,M :ens U.KE I Be o I . 1CS -�-a tl..xc i is d. '�c.n67aon .•.L • es u j ✓a1Slc �•1. IO A]. \.nwl .caz is 'S. Ae 6x.: <: r''t • ,� . ,C�nc /jL 1'I..CA� - . knoll -1-, .. -L4 ' a..s O / 8 .� x'•54 L0- IsT Z5_ • y°• Ir ems' {.1C i °#r :aa<s� 1 • , B.n „f �' — �Z•<L5 _� 1 _ via` `t ___ ae� .loci, i+n 5a 1�'i•. Sif. •rankln.�aoada Gj .� Ff "S Jan t Y ^ '• 'L L -a �. ' alas -a < - �' :s. \ I vs2 a ere -.. neih t T �: _ ..<rt,enl Ir.5 a5. v �°asa • 1 /,i +°slal 4 LYUr9ar el rtnvr ,L O u'i :FS7 -. • ?: .'.�. rednc4son G I - O •' L G Lien.ena, ,• .a O 7 - : 3r:.+i [✓ 1L9, James t \:i < 5 + c �> °�' t i /-]� ' T•P:' © 'p`t , Jamcs ail` Fe [ D1aFlcnt ncn e°.SL Sselli I U • uc d sad ✓r1ai, ) ' 1' BO,�H°ll � #'sV•i OSt al _ �5'°c. __1v °-,La is eld \ 'rr P,ie J° ! %A•z O�i :<f1 v>z J' ■i 1:S _ °= ac rardd z>e , r- • �L_. . G Lw u, a 'n.ond - r:,-.• , h...a. a., dai{ !!oI:ennefl Laverny` } -y h'rnner dM] n i v:...,L} :J. a `n, >e 1f .o -al` C 5. tb<ca•- eo ®(l' L .o�si ra Ma4. A ' 2 • 0 2 :- t s Rr G I;u csT C,;,. •..x1 Beiiy J _5 'nod _ w S Its. er -> 4arold �' S�ella< �z Nelsen c °ei rn se rze q ... <--." 9_-.n vT/�aZ- � rt t !c •. i' L° ��� d\ mo J.�i'y Stytw • .aro 205 1 S/' •. sy Lr« ......`. �° • Se ms ... s, so O 2^ na WALKERS AKE a 9;Fr^h °r - ] A O �• _ ^� Scwtez `s wa �oau °.a Ed _ D r'.atn L t ♦♦ _ O �. ` 8 I•• JO Rdamek „ aaa_ ✓r zoo z` v L' .tins O S,maar -_ f __ oo ier. „ __•n, t Fa1ry' Sen t 5 c is • .v.as •`s' 6hcc �, - -r_ Ranc.a '?• L if .<t kac r7 •,•! rt +olz /�] rv�a/�aa 1R.....•(� I,n :rend .:0� ° \ L, f1 l era l�Jc. JZ Svolx: • d -_ F - L.e..e rer ♦ 2 Ce l ! \ ° �.. ^< cl : ,\ .�> �.n'as i.l :i• `t ''}} ' a '.n ; ,.- , �J,.: >a. � c •�� ✓4Lh ate - II 1 •�� yYl ji�.. s /s� 17 =.a 1c \ SJ� _n z r T v ac •^ 7: O `s i\ g TS GO ° - �.e.,. r .M,u ,a, .p.l,e.7..n. '[� K \ ,a. ° >S` K _ r .< =.a � � "_r . —.„. � .rr s _ •( 'P • 2 • /GGS AKr,sc�. ,�F �iI u c 1 �n ? I tOsra �J .7C5• 414 SO I r - © s- • \ ' � • ' _ •]A 1bm'ol rA >. yl Abby Ag xsao 15 C fZ+li.l.+ o J h°..aa }) �.ra `v�J_f:ar9 /-J _o°a 2.G3` i• 3ernr]a�4n ;.Ibz <+. ♦ n'az.n:.a I43 a '. K. 's 14 5q i _s _�! I: 1G Lfit i..E pro •9+. •rPD ✓. II' @. - rOj �<. !/ �. �-rc �. aTO � t N )`: J 1 .. UTCHINSON v \l .� a. .. I-. a.a rvin A ir naan�a{`o.�} G n va[T,ca J 4 D C a 33 �fJ 3 <O .1e Z d rC>.H Jns�Jl O \\ A � •, 163 60 A `a I NLSSAN VALLEY _ cuG Lai. ^v.r.c°c a REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING WATER & SEWER FUND *U.S. Postmaster *U.S. Postmaster *Commissioner of Revenue State Treasurer State Treasurer U.S. Postmaster` Viking Industrial Center Water Products Continental Safety Equipment Garratt Callahan Co. Wm. Holmquist No. Central Sec. AWWA GENERAL FUND *AADS Inc. *State Treasurer *Mn.State Treasurer *Kenneth Norton Jeff Bentz Dwight Dahlman Clint Gruett Robert K. Hicks Mark Jungclaus Robert Hicks Stan Hardt Pete Brugman Brian Field Tom Lemke Pete Marsnik Howard Manthei Chas.Bailly $ Co. Central Mn. Assn City Mgrs Dalco Form Ins. Co. Mn. Playground Inc. Ben Franklin Bernicks Pepsi Bernies Electric Civic Arena Citizens Bank Carneys F f, S Sales K Mart Midway Can Co. PETERSON Bus Service Contenental Safety Equip. Carols Cafe Kentucky Fried Chickens Midland Lines 40 February 28, 1984 13 cent stamps water billing postage sales tax for January PERA Sec. Security 13 cent stamps vests meter parts boots chemicals water bill refund registration fees tickets PERA snowmobile fees land acquistion typesetting broomball refund repairs $ postage replacement of check lost broomball refund basketball referee basketball referee basketball referee basketball referee basketball referee basketball referee basketball referee audit services dues cleaning supplies defense council fees equipment craft class sign refund repairs ice time rental deposit slips craft class fee signature plate supplies 24 pails 4 bus trips boots 1 case cups council workshop %freight charges $ 65.00 139.40 703.11 329.25 299.41 65.00 29.52 105.44 44.45 140.95 62.09 45.00 $ 2,028.62 $ 468.00 4092.73 158.00 8700.00 125.00 40.00 9.41 40.00 30.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 40.00 10.00 10.00 20.00 1000.00 10.00 104.30 260.88 54.00 22.54 125.00 18.55 210.00 2.50 12.50 117.50 23.31 37.21 710.00 44.45 25.42 42.93 643.65 /!-A e 0 -2- Amoco Albrecht Oil Co. Bjerke Oil Co. Borchert Ingersoll Inc. Chapin Pub. Co. CopyEquipment Inc. Co. Treasurer Don Streicher Guns Inc. Erickson Oil Products Great Plains Pamida Inc. Govt Training Service Govt Training Service Hutch Cenex Corp. Hutch Iron 4 Metal ICMA Retirement Ind. School Dist. 423 Ink Spots Inc. Jahnkes Red Owl Jerabek Machine Shop Mankato Mobile Radio Kenneth Merrill McGarvey Coffee Shopko Sewing Basket State Treasurer State Treasurer James Schaefer United Bldg. Centers U. of Mn. Xerox Corp. *Commissioner of Revenue L983 Expense Hutchinson Leader BOND FUNDS Fire Hall Const. Fund Hutch Fire Dept. 1981 Parking Bonds Bennie Carlson 0 gasoline 33.52 heating oil 411.60 aviation gas 11,440.00 parts 139.96 publication costs 73.08 supplies 13.65 dl fees for County 113.00 equipment supplies 237.00 gasoline 326.69 supplies 88.19 supplies 38.38 registration fees 90.00 reg. fees for council 166.00 LP gas 44.00 iron 34.50 contribution 166.41 lifeguard $ supervisor 290.30 300 books 50.00 supplies & soap 10.61 pipe f, labor 59.38 supplies 38.19 parking $ meals 18.00 coffee 52.00 supplies 40.35 sewing charges 44.00 PERA 3909.10 Soc. Sec. 2647.18 last half Feb. $ mileage $ forms 910.02 supplies 357.73 registration fees 20.00 transparencies $ paper 925.10 arena sales tax 82.51 $ 40,318.33 library ads 132.00 copy machine 1501.00 contract payment r 669.30 a 0 MUNICIPAL LIOUOR STORE Ed Phillips &,Sons liquor & wine 3455.57 Griggs Cooper $ Co. liquor $ wine 1620.89 Old Peoria Co. liquor F, wine 1205.66 Twin City Wine Co. liquor $ wine 2200.52 Charles G. Nelson liquor convention expenses 138.43 City of Hutchinson payroll 3888.98 Commissioner of Revenue sales tax for January 5819.45 $ 18,329.50 - c27�'82g o H • �ti c�2 3 ti _ TV DORSEY & WHITNEY C � m . N 6Y A Partnership Including Professional Cor ,ons !- f0 2200 FIRST BANK PLACE EAST o202l,2223ao-�lL9! Z` \��� MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 554 `b1' 4, Slb(il 510 NORTH CENTRAL LIFE TaW /� `sue 201 DAVIDSON BUILDING 445 MINNESOTA STREET ( 612 ) 340 -2500 p ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 TELEX: 29 -�5 ^O !� A 8 THIRD STREET NORTH (612)22) -BOA TELECOPIER: 612 340 -2868 C V 4JU T FALL6,MpryTANA 59101 ( ) N P. O. BOX 845 ^r �J v SURE 675 NORTH 340 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING O LO 1800 M STREET N.W. ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA 55903 N evV - -pW WASHINGTON, O. C -20038 (5071280 -3156 (202) 955 -IO65 32 NATIONAL T 1NG 00.AiRCWAYZATA MINNESOA �391 JEROME P. GILLIGAN Zy 5vz 758rAhS,AN E 612)475-0373 (612) 340 -2962 Oil 3-, 62 32 50 February 17, 1984 f Mayor Robert Stearns �� S` C��� City of Hutchinson City Hall �pleP�Mtf� �j) 37 Washington Avenue West Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 Dear Mayor Stearns: ' We understand that the City of Hutchinson is considering using tax increment financing to pay for all or a portion of the public redevelopment costs in connection with a redevelopment project to be undertaken by Mr. Richard Smith in the City. The project is to be located in Development District No. 4 previously created by the City. In order for the City to provide such tax increment financing it will be necessary to amend the development program and tax increment financing plan for Development District No. 4 in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 472A and Section 273.74, subdivision 4. You have asked whether the pending litigation against the City, filed by its former Mayor, Mr. DeMeyer, prevents the City from amending the development program and tax increment financing plan for Development District No. 4 and from issuing bonds payable out of the tax increments to finance the public redevelopment costs related to Mr. Smith's project paid for by the City. Based upon our review of the Summons and Complaint filed in connection with the litigation, dated December 28, 1983, it appears to us that the litigation does not prevent the City from amending the development program and tax increment financing plan to provide that tax increment revenues derived from Development District No. 4 may be expended by the City to pay public redevelopment costs related to Mr. Smith's project and does not prevent the City from expending tax increment revenues for such costs once th.e development program and tax increment financing plan have been properly amended. However, because the Complaint seeks a • • DORSEY & WHITNEY Page -2- Mayor Robert Stearns February 17, 1984 dissolution of Development District No. 4 the City will be unable to issue tax increment bonds to finance the public redevelopment costs while the litigation is pending. The reason for this is that the litigation challenges the validity of Development District No. 4 and the collection of tax increment revenues therefrom and seeks the dissolution of Development District No. 4, and conse- quently, the City will be unable to deliver to the purchaser of the bonds the customary no- litigation certificate certifying that no litigation is pending questioning the validity of the bonds or the collection of tax increments to pay the principal and interest thereof. You should also note that for the same reason, i.e., the inability to deliver to the purchaser the customary no- litigation certificate, the City will be unable to issue bonds to refund its previous issues of tax increment bonds for Development District No. 4 while the litigation is pending. Very truly yours, DORSEY & WHITNEY M JPG:cmn cc: Gary D. Plotz James Schaefer erome 510 NORTH CENTRAL UFETOWER 445 MINNESOTA STREET ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 (62) 2Z7 -601] P. O. BOX 648 340 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA 55903 (507) 268 -366 312 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING WAY ATA,MINNESOTA 55391 (6;2)475-0373 DORSEY & WHITNE ti A PaHneSh,p lnUudmp P`vl_S, val COTp�Sfi 2200 FIRST BANK PLACE EAST MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 0/ ���!( TELEX:29'0605 TELECOFIER: (612)340 -2868 JEROME P. GILLIGAN (612) 340 -2962 4 Ild (-jB Ly B HARD STREETUNORTH GREAT FALLS,MCNTANA 59401 (406) 727 -3632 SUITE 675 NORTH 1600 M STREET N. W. WASHINGTON,O, C. 20036 (202) 955 -1065 30 RUE LA 501;; 1 75006 PARIS, FAANCI6 ON 331 562 32< February 17, 1984 9� O Mayor Robert Stearns City of Hutchinson City Hall 37 Washington Avenue West Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350 C 6 (1, Lf- C`I� �s 7 01 0 oud Coo pay Re: Proposed Refunding of $1,250,000 Parking Improvement Bonds, dated as of August 1, 1981 City of Hutchinson, Minnesota Dear Mayor Stearns: We understand that the City of Hutchinson is considering issuing obligations under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67, to refund the Bonds referred to above. You have asked whether the pending litigation against the City, filed by its former Mayor, Mr. DeMeyer, prevents the City from issuing such refunding obligations. Based upon our review of the Summons and Complaint filed in connection with the litigation, dated December 28, 1983, it appears to us that the litigation does not prevent the City from issuing obligations to refund the Bonds and from delivering to the purchaser of such obligations the customary no- litigation certificate. Very truly yours, DORSEY & WHITNEY 99 JPG:cmn cc: vary D. Plotz James Schaeffer 587 -5151 CITY OF 144 C`VAlilSON 37 WASHINGTON AVENUE WEST HUTCHINSON, MINN. 55350 �O February 22, 1984 Pat Mikulecky and the Hutchinson City Councils Dear Councilmembers: I have been asked by Councilmen Pat Mikulecky to respond to several questions. Councilmen Mikulecky first inquires whether Hutchinson must adopt the Uniform Fire Code. Minnesota Statutes 299F.011 Subd. 4 states, "The Uniform Fire Code shall be applicable throughout the state and in all political subdivisions and municipalities therein." The Uniform Fire Code and all its provisions have by decree of the State Legislature been made applicable to the city of Hutchinson whether or not the city of Hutchinson chooses to specifically adopt the fire code as a part of its ordinances. Subdivision Four goes on to state, "Nothing in this subdivision shall prohibit a local unit of government otherwise authorized by law from adopting or enforcing any ordinance or regulation which specifies requirements equal to, in addition to, or more stringent than the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code." As in most state -wide ordinances, this provision allows the city to adopt additional rules or regulations concerning fire protection so long as they are not in conflict with the Uniform Fire Code or are equal to or more stringent than the minimum requirements of the Uniform Fire Code. The advantage to adopting the Uniform Fire Code would be the flex - ability that the city would obtain in being able to alter the code in areas in which it felt the code was not sufficient. Whether this advantage is sufficient to warrant the adoption of the Uniform Fire Code is a matter for the Council's discretion. I would point out that Ordinance Number 500 adopted by the City Council on March 9, 1976 adopted the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code which was approved by the Minnesota State Commissioner of Public Safety on October 3, 1975 so there is some precedent for the city's adoption of the Uniform Fire Code. Councilmen Mikulecky inquired whether it was a requirement that the city of Hutchinson have a fire marshal. I can find no specific requirements in either the Hutchinson City Charter, Hutchinson Ordinance or Minnesota State Statutes that require the city of Hutchinson to employ a fire marshal. The Hutchinson City Charter Section 2.05 indicates that the City Council has the Councilmembers February 22, 1984 Page Two power to appoint officers of the city. These officers shall consist of the City Clerk, Chief of Police, Chief of the Fire Department, City Assessor, City Attorney and such other officers as the Council shall from time to time deem necessary for the proper function of the municipality. These officers shall be appointed by a majority vote of the City Council and their duties shall be as prescribed by that body. Finally, I was asked whether the fee for a liquor license within the city of Hutchinson must be payable in one lump sum or whether the license fee could be made in two equal installments six months apart. Section 806:10 Subd. 1 of the Hutchinson Ordinances states, "The annual license fee for an 'on -sale' license to restaurants shall be the required license fee as duly set by the Council from time to time, which shall be tendered to the Clerk in full with the completed application." This ordinance would not permit installment payment of liquor license fees. I have examined the Minnesota Statutes and did not see anything that would specifically prohibit installment payments. I have contacted the Attorney General's Office in order to determine whether there are any opinions or administrative rulings that would prohibit such a practice. If there are none, it would be possible to amend the Hutchinson Ordinance to permit periodic installment payments for liquor license fees. The manner and method of such installment payments would be a matter of Council policy. JHS:dlp Hopefully this response answers the questions raised. Sincerely yours, SCHAEFER LAW OFFICE By/ (� James H. Schaefer Hutchinson City Attorney • 1. 2 3 0 0 Hutchinson Tuesday, CALL TO ORDER Minutes Planning Commission February 21, 1984 The regular meeting of the Hutchinson Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Larry Romo at 7:36 P.M., with the following members present: Marlin Torgerson, Don Erickson, Roland Ebent, Shu -Mei Hwang, Thomas Lyke and Chairman Romo. Members absent: Elsa Young. Also present: City Administrator Gary D. Plotz, Building Official Homer Pittman, City Attorney James H. Schaefer. MINUTES The minutes of the regular meeting dated January 17, 1984, were approved as corrected on a motion by Mr. Erickson. Seconded by Mr. Ebent, the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS (a) CONSIDERATION OF SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTED BY JIM REID TO MCLEOD COUNTY (WITHIN TWO MILE RADIUS) Chairman Romo opened the public hearing at 7:33 P.M. with the reading of Publication No. 3267 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, February 9, 1984. Chairman Romo noted the memo from staff recom- mending the request be rejected as well as the memo from Director of Engineering Marlow Priebe who also recommended the request be rejected. Mi. Jim Reid also handed out a letter in which he responded to Mr. Priebe's objections. Discussion followed regarding the various objections Director Priebe had indicated concerning a) the advantages or disadvantages to Boyle's addition,b) possible street improvements that might be required and who would be assessed for them,c) the possibility of annexation to the City, and d) inadequate storm water drainage. It was determined the proposed sketch plan would not surround the City but would abut it; that a 66' driveway would be built according to township specifications -- gravel surface; that Mr. Reid was planning to build a house on one lot and a warehousing building on another. Mr. Marvin Hoops, representing Boyle's Addition 14 T 9 O Minutes 2/26/84 was present to ask if Boyle's Addition would be assessed for the new street to be put in. They have access from County Road 76. It would be no advantage to them to have a thru street there. Another representative from Boyle's Addition noted that they were not against development but that they were concerned about what effect it might have on Boyle's Addition. Building Official Pittman noted that County Ditch 18 serves that area for storm sewer drainage. It was his opinion that the County tile is already overloaded, and the area had to "- be pumped out in previous seasons. He felt that a storm sewer would have to be put in to handle excess water. Mr. Reid felt there would be no increase in the amount of water due to his plans for development. After discussion, Mr. Reid stated that he would be willing to discuss with City staff various options, and to continue the hearing until April. The County had postponed their hearing on the matter until March 28. Mr. Torgerson made a motion to continue the hearing to the March meeting. Seconded by Mr. Erickson, the motion carried unanimously. The Planning Commission then reviewed the comprehensive plan for that area. (b) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBMITTED BY HUTCH AGRI -TECH Chairman Romo opened the public hearing at 8:00 P.M. with the reading of Publication No. 3209 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on February 9, 1984. The request is for a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 48' by 112' addition to an existing structure in an IC -1 zone. The conditional use permit is required because this is in an IC -1 zone. Mark Mortenson was present to explain the request. He stated parking could either be in the f ont or the back. Mr. Eric on noted that it w the recommendation of stE that a sign � :i C] Hutchinson Planning Commission be put up to ih'ai'cate pa*fkl "hg in the rear. After discussion, Mr. Torgerson made a motion to close the hearing at 8:05 P.M. Seconded by Mr. Erickson, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Torgerson made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of the Conditional Use Permit as requested, contingent upon adequate parking (six spaces) being provided to the rear and that a sign indicating parking in the rear be posted. Seconded by Mr. Erickson, the motion carried unanimously. 4. OLD BUSINESS (a) REVIEW STREET NAME FOR HELLAND'S FIFTH ADDITION Mr. Torgerson commented that after looking at the area and the street names that are already there, i.e, California, Colorado, Connecticut, and after considering the best system for emergency vehicles, it was his recommendation to name the street in Helland's Fifth Addition Carolina Avenue. After discussion, Mr. Torgerson made a motion to name the street in Helland's Fifth Addition Carolina Ave. Seconded by Mr. Ebent, the motion carried unanimously. 5. NEW BUSINESS (a) CONSIDERATION OF SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTED BY GERALD GASSMAN TO MCLEOD COUNTY (WITHIN 2 MILE RADIUS) City Administrator Plotz commented that this request was submitted to the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the McLeod County Planning Commission. After discussion, Mr. Erickson made a motion to recommend to the County Planning Commission approval of the sketch plan as presented. Seconded by Mr. Torgerson, the motion carried unanimously. (b) CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBMITTED BY SUE CALLIER TO MCLEOD COUNTY City Administrator Plotz explained that the request was referred to the City Planning Commission as the home is within the two mile Hutchinson Planning Commission radius of the City. The request is for a conditional use permit to allow a home occupation of a beauty shop employing more than one person. Following discussion, Mr. Erickson made a motion to recommend to the County Planning Commission approval of the conditional use permit as requested. Seconded by Mr. Hwang, the motion carried unanimously. (c) ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR 1984 Chairman Romo asked for nominations for the offices of Chairman, Vice - Chairman and Secretary. Mr. Hwang made a motion to nominate Mr. Romo as Chairman, Mr. Ebent as Vice- A. Chairman and Mrs. Young as Secretary, and that nominations be closed. Seconded by Mr. Erickson, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Hwang made a motion that the board cast a unanimous vote for the ballot as presented. The motion was seconded by Mr. Erickson and unanimously carried. 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mr. Ebent made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Lyke, the motion carried unanimously and the meeting _ was adjourned at 8:25 P.M. At- _h 0 0 4 0 1984 Legislative Conference Because the legislative session convenes later this year (March 6), the 1984 LMC Legislative Con- ference will take place on Tuesday and Wednesday, March 13 and 14, 1984. The LMC Board of Directors voted to hold a two -day conference, because many city officials felt the conference covered too much material for a one -day session and wanted more time for program and policy adoption. Registration will begin at 11 a.m. on Tuesday, March 13. The program will kick off with a luncheon speaker and panel discussion of pension policies with Gus Dunhow, Commissioner of Finance; Senator Donald Moe; and Representative John Sarna. The afternoon session will include LMC legislative policy adoption when cities can vote on LMC policies and priorities; a detailed review of the present and future process for adopting an LGA policy; and Ask the Lobbyist, a workshop where city officials can ask questions of LMC legislative lobbyists. That evening LMC will host the annual reception for city officials and state legislators. Wednesday's program will start early with a continental breakfast and an address from Governor Rudy Perpich (invited). The following session will deal with comparable worth (equal pay for comparable work) for local government employees. Proposals before the Legislature could mandate pay equity for city employees who have comparable jobs. LMC supports comparable worth. But, other factors such as merit systems, veterans preference, and binding arbitration also lead to pay inequities. Mandating comparable worth for cities without addressing the other issues could lead to escalating personnel costs. Although we aren't sure whether the Legislature will act on comparable worth )T,,�i Vff IBC'" FOR YOUR INFORMATION during the 1984 session, it will be a controversial issue that will affect all cities in the years to come. The morning session will also feature a legislative priority briefing, where LMC lobbyists will outline top - priority city issues for the 1984 session. The conference will conclude with a Lobbying Day on the Hill. LMC encourages you to make an appointment now to have lunch with or visit your area legislators. AGENDA Tuesday, March 13 11:00 am Registration Opens 12 Noon-1:30 pm Luncheon (Pensions) 1:45 -5:00 pm LMC Policy Adoption LGA Policy Process Ask the Lobbyist 5:30 -7:30 pm Reception for City Officials and State Legislators Wednesday, March 14 8:00 -9:00 am Continental Breakfast Governor Perpich (invited) 9:30 -11:00 am Workshop (Comparable Worth) 11 :00 -11:30 am Legislative Priority Briefing 11:30 am Lobbying Day on the Hill March 13 -14 Radisson St. Paul Hotel —11 Kellogg Blvd. E. — e�el�NCat1 °4�V �° el�t� City Plan now to attend League of Minnesota Cities Association of Metropolitan Municipalities 1984 Legislative Action Conference Tuesday and Wednesday, March 13 -14, 1984 Radisson St. Paul Hotel 11 E. Kellogg Boulevard Registration form (Please print or type) Name Title Name _ Title Name Title Name Title Name Title Registration fee: $50.00 advance $55.00 on -site Check enclosed -in the amount of Fee includes conference registration, Tuesday luncheon, Tuesday reception, and Wednesday continental breakfast. !Mail to: Gayle Brodt, League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Ave. E., St. Paul, MN 55101 RADISSON' — - - - -- 1 RADISSON ST PAUL HOTEL DON'T FORGET - MAKE CHECK OR MONEY ORDER PAYABLE TO RADISSON ST. PAUL ORGANIZATION LEAGUE OF_MDZ SOTA CITIES DO NOT SEND CURRENCY. FUNCTION LEGISLATIVE 00tWERENCE _DATES MATCH 12 -13, 1984 ALL REQUESTS FOR THE ABOVE GROUP MUST BE RECEIVED BY MARCH 1. 1 -964 Please reserve accommodations for Print or Type NAME COMPANY AST FIRST A fIn AF CC CITY STATE ZIP CODE SHARING ROOM WITH NO.OF PERSONS CHECK IN TIME 3:00 PM MONTH I CA I ARRIVAL TIME MONTH DAY YEAR CHECKOUTTIME 1:00 PM ARRIVAL DATE DEPARTURE DATE Accommodations will not be guaranteed without a check for the 1st night's deposit, or your major credit card number as requested below. Should you prefer not to guarantee your reservation, your room will be held only until 6:00 p m. of your arrival day. You will be charged for the 1st night if reservations are not cancelled 48 hours prior to arrival. CREDIT CARD A ❑ AMEX LI DINERS CLUB IT VISA ❑ MASTERCARD EXPIRATION DATE 'PI FASE CHECK ONE PLEASE CHECK PREFERRED ACCOMMODATIONS ( SPECIAL REDI RATE: $48.00 SENIGLE $58.00 DOUBLE I2 PERSONS) IF RATE REQUESTED IS NOT AVAILABLE. NEAREST AVAILABLE RATE WILL BE ASSIGNED. THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL 8 6.00 CHARGE FOR THE THIRD OR FOURTH OCCUPANT IN EACH ROOM. RATES ARE SUBJECT TO APPLICABLE TAXES. NO CHARGE FOR CHILDREN UN OE R�CCUPYING THE SAME ROOM AS PARENTS.• Mail to: Reservation Office. Radisson St, Paul Hotel. 11 East Kellogg Blvd., St. Paul, MN 55101 J..h�J Hurnh,,00 F.�1'!'] .....or �h! -� Jtll�t'_i. CI'z oo A C / '.Inn Ilulll.�.r� A-u Cn:.� \r.d Cmmmva r �,'7 121Z G." o. Plod. CIS ,.m, —Zn;or Ibri M, -5151 112>RD OF DIRECTORS Pro Ronaltl 1. KIc , w lr;ln Ilvn T—,, Chad B. PIrhL CPA P,rin -1. DuU:,�M T.4. IHo,' Burich Er.. V P C.,izem Hang and Trod Cn. Anhur L C.wper ProIidrn; Flrn N:I ,-I PanA ➢I+oald A. Gla. P— Fau¢ Fed. 1—,, d Lr— A,, n- j Hutchinson Community Development Corp. 218 Main Street North Hutchinson, Minnesota 50350' -r v �RMgT�oN February 13. 1984 sUBJECT' Board Meeting TO- Board of Directors and Others FROM' John J_ Bernhaaen There will not be a Board of Directors Meeting on February 16. 1984. Our next regular Board Meeting will be March 1.. 1984 at 7.30 a.m. in the Hutchinson_ Area Chamber of Commerce Board Room_ We will be meeting with the City Council at 5,30 p_m_ upstairs in the Fire Hall. also on March I. 1984. We will be first on their Agenda. Discussion will mainly be centered on the city's use of tax Bonds. increment financing and Industrial Revenue Hutchinson Community 2 -8 -84 Special Meeting: Minutes. Development Corp, a 218 Main Street North ,. Hulch nson, Minnesota 5 350 MEMBERS PRESENT: R. McGraw, D. Glas, A. Cooper, Exec. Director John Bernhagen, cL,,..A c,.,- G. Plotz, City Adm. , ( B. Burich and C. Coston joined ,1..1.x„ ,.. "•' " °' ° " " "° development presentation and reconvened session.) e, ssysS Meeting called to order at 6:45 by McGraw. Purpose of meeting was ca, A,,,,, 5a 1 Ih::I 1n7 - u to establish a procedure, guidelines and format for times when developers or other parties are seeking to establish an industry or business in 'Itown and may need guidance in financing the project. IARU OF UIHECTORS I P... F—Ad I SLG n+ A,Inr n.. n Lv .... CIA x. P.61 CPA P,o-, n C. TA INm,1un E.. \ G .P nxn. Ansm L. C.,, PrnW.n fires Snmvl Nan'. II, a10 A. (il P,,.. F­­, , E,J 1­1,, L Lv A,. - Moved by Cooper, seconded by Glas that these special sessions called for the purpose of listening to confidential discussion on preliminary plans for a venture in Hutchinson be considered a closed meeting. Unanimous. Motion carried. Fee structure for corporation involvement discussed. Next regular meeting will be Thursday, March 1, at 7:30 A.M. at Chamber Meeting Room. Members are then invited to attend "Council" workshop at 5:30 P.M. when John Bernhagen will present "History 6 Concept Tax Increment /ZDB Financing." Meeting recessed 7 P.M. to hear Richard Smith and Paul Johnson give their proposal for development of " Cenex" corner at Main & 2nd Ave. S. E. Schedules of tenative figures, bldg. size, etc. are on file and will not be summarized here. However, some highlights were: Smith has been developing property in Hutchinson since 1976. He owns "Red Owl" and several adjacent Mainstreet store buildings. Now interested in developing Cenex corner which he considers a blighted area with a proposed two story building and demolition of Plowman building for parking lot. Merit of public financing was presented and discussed. This method needed to make project viable. Smith presented letter from Briggs and Morgan indicating that he should pursue IRB's even though legislation for elimination is pending. Project to begin, early spring, 1984: complete by October 10, 1984. Meeting reconvened following presentation. Plotz suggested a Council workshop which was scheduled as shown earlier. Plotz will seek legal opinion from City Attorney regarding status and effect pending lacy suit by former iMayor will have on this project and future requests. 0 • Hutchinson Community Development Corp. - -- - 218 Main Street North � Hutchinson, Minnesota 55350: Council may question "gift" or subsidy to developer in form of $1 land sale. Policy for fee to corporation was discussed but there was no firm conclusion. CUI— A. C.,,. Ra.h....m Area McGraw indicated that we need to follow through with Council to determine their position on financing so that we don't mislead devel- opers or waste our time. On_ AJm ,vym 1"1:1 5").5151 Discussion continued. BOARD OF DIRECTORS Meeting adjorned at 8:45: Prc,. A­ Id J. AI Craw Am—, M Lam Respectfully submitted, Tre... CMJ PMJ. CPA P.n. r, paa C.. Paen.xr t Co. T . lft., .Iwh E. A.P. & "Ta..ITrn„C.. A. L. Cooper, AE "m E. C «Wr Acting Secretary. P iAkm fi.a 9M..rul Bm1 IN.-Id A. GU, ALC : ag. P",. Firau Rd. L.m(a i Lam AW: , On The Mator Of Franchise t=ees SOT# YOUN INFORMATION Anita Benda Stech A franchise fee paid by a cable communications company to the municipality in which it operates has long been accepted as part of the cost of doing business in a community. The right to collect a fee from a cable com- pany is rooted tot a company s use o mumctpa nghts- of -way or ris system. urt er, tmposmg a ranc tse ee is a reasonable method for a municipality to be reim- bursed for its costs of administering a franchise. Although the fee appears to be a matter between two parties —the company and the municipality —the fee is actually assumed by a third party —the cable sub- scriber. Type of Fee Not all Minnesota municipalities collect franchise fees from their operating cable companies. But for those that do, the type of fee and manner of collection vary. Franchises granted in recent years typically base the fee on a percentage of a company's gross revenues derived from operation of the system within the munici- pality. The Chaska franchise includes a definition of "gross receipt" which excludes "taxes collected by Grantee from subscribers on behalf of any governmental unit." The City of St. Cloud collects six - percent of its cable company's revenues from basic service only (monthly charges for primary and additional outlets). No percentage of revenue from pay or premium services such as HBO or Cinemax, or from installation fees is included in the franchise fee. Total fees received annually by the city are approximately $30,000. According to Jan Peterson, City Attorney, a change in the franchise fee may be part of the discussion in a pending franchise transfer and renewal process. If a fee is not based on a percentage of all receipts or revenues of a cable system, it is important to carefully define which types of revenues will be assessed. The Bloomington cable ordinance states that the revenue base for its five- percent franchise fee does not include the sale of pay TV on a "program -by- program basis When satellite - delivered pay TV services were intro- duced on the system, there was a dispute between the city and the company as to whether the revenues from pay TV subscriptions would be included in the fee base. The City's interpretation that revenues from services such as HBO were to be included in the revenue base for the fee prevailed. However, should the system someday deliver certain events or programs on a program -by- program basis, those revenues would be excluded from the fee base. A similar dispute resulted in a lawsuit in which the City of Duluth 10 the cable company because the com- pany claimed that pay TV revenues could not be part of the base of its five- percent franchise fee. (The 1968 Du- luth franchise did not contain a provision for pay TV revenues as part of the franchise fee.) The suit was settled in 1983; Duluth now collects three - percent of the company's revenues from both basic and pay cable, but not from installation fees. The settle- ment also states that the City may collect the highest fee allowed by law that does not require a special showing to a state or federal authority. Assistant City Attorney John Smedberg pointed out that pay -cable revenues are a substantial portion of a systems total revenues; in Duluth, pay revenues grew from $100,000 in 1976 to about $1,190,00 in 1982. Franchise Fee Regulations Retention of a maximum limit on the franchise fce that may be charged by a municipality is one of a few remaining Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules on cable. The rule states that a municipality may colLrct up to three - percent of gross revenues and may use the monies collected for any purpose. A city may charge up to five- percent of the com- pany s gross revenues, butte entire sum co ecte must_ be used for cable-related purposes only, such as adminis tratrve costs or support or non- commercta access. The allows cities to collect lees ase on revenues from of n pay service. Be lore a mumctpa i y may collect a fee higher than three - percent of the system's gross revenues, it must receive permission to do so from the FCC, by filing a petition for a franchise fee waiver. The petition ma } be submitted by either the cable company or the municipal- ity and should include the following types of information: I. a financial projection of the franchise fee for the next five years 2. a justification for the higher franchise fee sought (an outline of the costs of the cable- related regulatory, administrative or telecommunications uses to which the fee would be put) 3. a statement from the cable operator that the higher fee would not pose an unreasonable financial burden FCC staffer Pamela Pusey, who handles inquiries on the franchise fee, stresses that if a municipality wants to collect more than three - percent and up to five- percent of the gross revenues, it must justify use of the entire fee, not just the portion above three - percent. FCC staff receive and process petitions for fran- chise fee waivers daily. In December 1983 the Cm of Chaska received a favorable ruling on its petition sub- mitted in the spring of 1983. Columbia Heights recently received a favorable ruling on its petition. According to Posey, municipalities may expect a two -month turnaround from the date the petitions arc received, provided there are no complications and no extra information is needed from the petitioner. Uses of Franchise Fees Some franchise fee revenues become part of the municipality's general fund, as is the case in Bemidji. st, FEES. pare B c Minnesota's Approach to Cable Television Regulation Chris Donaldson Minnesota began comprehensive regulation of cable television in 1973 after a number of other states already had regulatory programs in operation. Reg- ulation came in a variety of forms and approaches. The early '70's was a time of considerable interest in cable. Officials in every level of government, community activ- ists and educational leaders looked to cable to provide channels for public expression, educational opportuni- ties, community interest development and intra and inter group communication. In short, cable represented a medium for accomp- lishing a broad range of social, educational and personal goals. Federal and state policies were developed to achieve these goals. After a succession of actions, the Federal Communications Commission issued its Cable Television Report and Order in 1972. This represented a high watermark of federal intervention in cable. The predominant reason for the FCC's action was to implement its national social policy relating local cable operations and programming to the 1934 Com- munications Act's public interest, convenience and neces- sity standards. In 1972, while there were already a number of cable systems operating in Minnesota, the Citizens League, the Metropolitan Council, St. Paul, Minneapolis and several suburban cities began studying cable. There was a darker side to the incentive for state cable regulation as a consequence of franchising scandals in certain parts of the county. There was genuine concern that these alleged improprieties necessitated strong reg- ulatory action to protect cities from corruption by com- panies seeking valuable cable franchises. MCCB Formed It was in this climate that the 1973 Minnesota leg- islature passed a Cable Communications Act and estab- lished the Minnesota Cable Communications Board (MCCB) to oversee cable development in the state. The MCCB's clear charge was to see to the establishment of a strong cable communications industry capable of pro- viding a broad range of useful services. Based in part on 1972 New York cable legislation, Minnesota's approach has been admired for its balancing of regulation, development and public service interest. In this respect Minnesota, along with New York, differ from most other states with comprehensive cable regula- tion, many of which focus largely on centralized rate setting and control. In contrast, Minnesota leaves rate setting, franchise decisions and systems oversight to local government. 110 Minnesota was one of the last of I 1 states to estab- lish comprehensive state cable regulation under a specific state agency. At the same time the FCC began asserting its au- thority, cable companies began discouraging compre- hensive state regulation, and the industry has been gen- erally successful in doing so. Yet, literally hundreds of cable bills have been introduced in state legislatures throughout the country in recent years. At least 35 states now have specific laws dealing with cable franchising and all states have at least some cable laws, even though they may be limited to theft of service penalties. Opponents to Regulation Since it was created in 1973, the MCCB has sur- vived repeated efforts by the cable industry to have it abolished. Meanwhile, the Board has won and lost sev- eral legal actions contesting its authority in a number of areas. While the Board's principle opponents have been members of the cable industry, a number of cities have also resisted the minimum franchising procedures and standards established by the Board. The opposition most often appears in proposed legislation to reduce the Board's authority, particularly for smaller communities. The Board's rules for franchising call for munici- palities to follow an open, competitive process. Mini- mum cable franchise standards include some 30 pro- visions to be incorporated into a franchise ordinance, In some instances cities have expressed interest in simply granting cable franchises to favored applicants without competitive bidding —a process obviously to the advan- tage of some applicants and not to others. The United States Supreme Court decision in the Boulder, Colorado case raised serious questions about cities acting in cable franchise matters without following established procedures. Paradoxically, the 1982 Minn- esota legislature allowed cities to remove systems with fewer than 1000 subscribers from state cable regulation. The main effort of the cable industry —or at least some of its members —has been to reduce competitive franchising requirements, eliminate minimum access pro- gram requirements for public, education, government and leased purposes, and reduce ratemaking and other municipal authority over cable systems. On its own initi- ative, however, over the past five years, the Board has undertaken to ease, speed and clarify franchising pro- cedures. Change in Laws At the same time, Board policy has been to retain community program access rights in quantities varying with the size and need of the community. This Minnesota requirement is unique. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1979 that the FCC lacked the authority to require these access provisions. Since Minnesota had placed these re- quirements in its rules pursuant to the 1973 legislation, Minnesota stands out as the only state with clearly man- dated access program requirements. Minnesota's cable industry was successful in re- moving state auth* to determine how rates for basic cable service would be established Oranchises in 1978. The Board now merely requires that franchises contain a provision setting forth how rates will be established. In another legal action against the state initiated by the cable industry, the Minnesota Supreme Court in -1980 struck down the section of the cable law directing the MCCB to collect a fee of up to one - percent on the gross annual revenues of a cable system on the grounds of un- equal application. This decision eliminated the state's plan for recapturing the cost of the state's regulatory process, and may have been part of the reason the state sales tax was extended to cable service in 1982. It may have also been behind the initiative to extend the per- sonal property tax to equipment owned by cable com- panies. Lest it be thought there is constant tension between the regulators and the cable industry, it should be made clear that on several occasions the two have found them- selves working together on legislation. In each case, the MCCB acted in accordance with the statuatory mandate to develop an economical and efficient cable service which benefits education, municipalities and the general public interest. A bill introduced during the 1980 legislative ses- sion would have removed the MCCB's authority to de- termine and establish utility pole attachment rates. The bill sought to transfer that authority to the Public Util- ity Commission. The Board argued that it had already determined that federal guidelines would guarantee lower costs to cable companies (and thus to subscribers), and that the proposed legislation would add an unnecessary state regulatory procedure. The bill was never acted upon. More recently, the Board initiated legislation in 1981 to forestall the anticipated obstructions by land- lords to the provision of cable service to residents of multiple dwelling units. Starting with rulemaking to establish mandatory access rules for multiple dwelling units, it soon became evident that further legislation would be needed. The process eventually pitted the MCCB, the major munici- palities, the cable industry and a number of tenant organ- izations against the landlords in creating 1983 legislation which, while imperfect, helps achieve the state's cable objectives. During this process, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the so- called Loretto case. This, along with the deep- ening impact of satellite master antenna systems oper- ating in multiple dwelling complexes in a manner con- strued by the Board as cable systems, combines to cre- ate an issue of major legal importance. ENDtPART1 The next issue will conclude this article with a greater dis- cussion of the non - regulatory activities of the MCCB. Chris Donaldson has been Executive Director of the Minnesota Cable Communications Board since 1978. This it an edited version of an article originally written for the William Mitchell Law Retiew, VoL X, 1984 and it reprinted here with permission. Mr5t3p- EOM -8- FEES lconlinuedl City Planner L oung states that the fees, which total about $19,00 VI annually, have no specified use; they may be used r liquor store operations, or the city's share of us system. Costs for administering the cable franchise, such as staff time, are assumed by the general fund. In contrast, the City of Columbia Heights places its funds from the franchise fee (about $45,000 annually) into a special fund. Some $20,000 is used to offset staff time spent on cable matters. According to City Manager Bob Bocwinski, this year's cable budget was reviewed by the city's cable com- mission prior to receiving council approval. The budget includes $19,000 for video equipment to allow for live cablecasts of city council meetings. Franchise fee monies are also used for attorney and consultant fees for special projects, travel and conference fees, and the costs of wiring city offices for cablecasts. The City of Bloomington allocates its $145,000 franchise fees to a special fund. Bloomington's cable expenses are prepared by staff, reviewed by the local cable commission and approved by the city council. Some of the money from the special fund is appropriated to the general fund. Current Franchise Fee Legislation Despite the deregulatory mood regarding cable on the federal level, it appears that the right of a munici- pality to collect a franchise fee will remain a part of fed- eral cable policy. However, the Telecommunications Act of 1983 (S.R.66), which passed the full Senate in June, and H.R. 4103, under discussion in the House of Repre- sentatives, would make changes in the type of fees to be charged and in the uses of franchise fee revenues. Both the Telecommunications Act and H.R. 410 would eliminate the need for a municipality to use a fee larger than three - percent of gross revenues for cable - related purposes. Although the maximum limit of five - nercent is part of both bills cities would be free to use the money received any way they wanted. Both bills consider any municipal assessments, taxes or fees on a cable system to be part of the franchise fee. Presumably, the total revenues from a franchise fee would be reduced by the amount of taxes the cable com- pany paid the city. Some cities have opposed including taxes as part of the franchise fee payments, claiming that this would be an improper federal intrusion on local tax- ing authority. Both bills allow a cable operator to show the fran- chise fee as a separate item on each subscriber's monthly billing. In an item important to those interested in access programming, both pieces of legislation would allow any franchise existing when the bills pass to continue pro- viding support for public, educational and government access. Anita Benda Stech, a former staffer to the Minnesota Cable Com- munications Board, is a cable consultant with Communications Projects in Iowa City. Iowa. MH3= r}L I ! ; ' A, workers' :., x ookln�g fit foo By Ellen Foley Staff Writer r Fit employees have put some muscle into Bloomington's workers' compensation record and prortipted officials this week to give their employees more incentives to stay healthy. ,l I i I .I A pilot exercise program for Bloomington park maintenance and forestry workers helped reduce the city's workers' compensation claims from $82,600 In 1982 to $600 in 1983. City council members said they liked that trend and approved the continuation of the program, extending It to the public works department. In addition, they endorsed a stop - smoking program for till city employees and a fitness incentive plan that will give each employee who joins a health club $50 toward the membership fee. Personnel Director Kent Michaelson said the programs are "just a start" for Bloomington. Officials are extremely pleased with the results of the exercise program; which wits designed to prevent back injuries, said Assistant City Manager Larry Lee. "The council perceived that Investing money in this employee program Is good for the employee and also good for the city. It pays back," Lee said. Nationally, back Injuries account for about 25 percent of workers' compensation claims, according to estimates by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In Bloomington back injuries accounted for about 20 percent of the city's on- the -job Injuries and about 50 percent of Its compensation costs In 1982. Bloomington officials designed an exercise program to strengthen workers' backs and targeted the park maintenance and forestry department because it had two - thirds of the city's back Injuries. Each morning 29 department workers, led by Dawn Kennedy,a Bloomington health specialist, spent the first half -hour of work stretching Kennedy said workers with flexible muscles are less susceptible to back injuries because they can withstand jerky movements. During six months of the exercise program, workers who had the weakest muscles increased their back fle>Ibihty 30 percent, she said For? Will Minneapolis E Friday February 17/1984 Staff Photo by Charles Bjorgen Dawn Kennedy, a Bloomington health specialist, led city workers in stretching exercises last July. "That's exactly what we wanted," Lee said. "We want to help those people who were a back injury ready to happen." The city reduced park maintenance and forestry department workers' compensation claims from $50,200 in 1982 to $190 in 1983. Work days lost because of back injuries in that department dropped from 209 days In 1982 to three days in 1983. Lee said the exercise program was the major factor but not the only one in the claim reduction. He said the city made the workers aware that It was concerned about their health and wanted the number of back injuries reduced. That awareness may have encouraged workers to be more careful, he said. Two other factors were the efforts of a safety worker who instructs employees on proper lifting methods and the city's "dumb tuck," Lee said. The pilot program was mandatory, but the new programs will be voluntary, Lee said, adding that enthusiasm for the fitness incentives appears high. A survey of park maintenance and• forestry workers showed that 64 percent thought they benefited from the program, 60 percent