HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 [04] Apr 15 {Book 1}
Fí/~
Mayor
Donald "Bud" Reber
Councilors
Ken Hiemenz
Ross Rieke
21 First Avenue NW Bob Loso
P.O. Box 668 Stephanie Hazen
St. Joseph, Minnesota 56374
(612) 363-7201 City Clerk/Adm
FAX # 363-0342 CITY OF ST. JOSEPH Rachel Stapleton
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
April IS, 1992
7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
1. 7:00 p.m. - Ca 11 to Order
2. Approve Agenda
3. Bills Payable
4. Treasurer's Report
5. Approve Minutes - March 30 & April 1
6. Mayor Reports
7. Council Reports
. 8. Police Chief Reports
9. OLD BUSINESS:
a) Personnel Policy Manual
b) Star City Program
c) Snow Removal - Business District
d) Truck Purchase
e) APO Joint Powers Agreement
f) Truck Purchase
10. 7:45 p.m. Outdoor Liquor Permit - Mark Zimmer
1l. 8:00 p.m. OPEN TO PUBLIC
12. 8:15 p.m. Recess
13. 8:30 p.m. East Minnesota st. Sewer - Jane Reber
14. 9:00 p.m. West Minnesota Street Improvement - City
Engineer
15. 9:20 p.m. Special Use Permit - Ron Philippi
16. 9:30 p.m. - Pat Schneider - Baseball
17. 9:40 p.m. Variance from Building Code - Mark Lambert
. 18. Clerk/Administrator Reports
a) Pay Equity Response
b) Blighted city lot
c) city Office Improvement Project
d) Clinton Village lots.
19. Adjourn
.. ..' ....
Page 2201
March 30, 1993
.
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Connci 1 for
the City of St. Joseph met jointly.. in Sped a 1 Sessi.on with
the Town Board for St. Joseph Township, on Tuesday, March 30,
1993 at 8:00 p.m. in the Township Hall.
MEMBERS PRESENT: CITY COUNCIL - Mayor Donald Bud Reber;
Members of the Council Ross Rieke, Bob Loso, Stephanie Hazen,
Ken Hiemenz. Clerk/Administrator Rachel Stapleton.
TOWN BOARD SUPERVTSORS - Jerome Salzer, Bernie Schloemer.. ."JOf!
Bechtold. Town Clerk Anna Reischl .
Pl.ANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: CITY PLANNING COMMTSSION
MEMBERS -Chair Hub Klein, S. Kathleen Kalinowski: Linda
Sniezek.. tvIa rge Lesnick.
TOWN PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS - Fred Reber, Ralph Eiynck,
John Schroeder.. David Thralow.
OTHERS PRESENT: City Engineer Joe Bettendorf, Stuart
Goldschen.
Town Board Chair ."Jerome Salzer called the meeting t.o ord f!r at.
8:05 wit.h self introductions by all individuals present.
.Joe Bettendorf, City Engineer, presented the comprehensive
. sanit;:¡ry sewer, water, and drainage study for the undf'!veloped
portions of Sections 1, 2 .. .... 10.. 11, 12.. 13, 14, and 15 in
.) ..
St. .Joseph Township.
'He di.scussed
l. Background for tne study
rI. Transportat.ion and the importance of corridor
preservation.
b. Land lJse and requirements of wetland areas and
cont.roll ing agencies are includf'!d in the study.
? . Sanitary Sewer - areas for sewer service and capacity
and impact of growth.
3 . Water - need for new well and replacement of the watp-r
treat.ment syst.em in fut.ure.
4. Drain;::¡ge - areas fo, d·(ai.nage and local ponding: also
maintenance of sediment pond.
The Roards addressed the transportation issue and
preservation of cor-ridors in gen era 1 and specifically het.ween
East tviinnesota st ref!t. and CRAH 75.
Also discussed werp. annexation requests from Whispering
Pines. Township Board stated t.nat persons wishing annexation
t.o the City should approach t.he Township Board to provi.dp.
. their needs. Tnen if the Township cannot provide services..
the property owner would approach the City. This is also the
appropriat.e protocol. The Cit.y Council and Township Board
both felt th;:¡t surrounding areas should be looked at. during
.... requests so that. middle propert.ies are not
annexa Ll.on
J . ... r-""
Page 220?
March 30, 1993
. skipped.
Township Board members spoke of the next step for-
consideration of merger. Loso stated he felt orderly
annexation is the method of preference, and t.he nort.herly and
eastern sections of the Township should be considered first.
Scnloemer suggested th,Ü wit.h a merger, service dist.ricts
could be set up which would pyovide various levels of
service. Hi emen 7. stated he suppo,t.s t.he; mer-gel concept.
Annexation could 1 e8ve the least desir;:¡blF! are;:¡s left. for the
7ownship.. whi.ch would be difficult fnr t.he Township t.o
govern.
Mayor Reber sugges t.ed seth ng up a committee with delegat.es
from both groups, to work toget.her on t.his issue. The group
will consider setting up a committee aft.er they h;:¡ve met with
officials who worked with the Sartel1 - LeSauk ;::¡g,eement. M
1"1.
Schloemer agreed to cont;:¡ct Bob Heim to come to att.end a
meeting on MAY , .., ;::¡t 8:00 p.m. to discuss t 1ì~ issues involved
I I
in the T.eSauk - S;::¡rtell negotiations: and respond to
questions from the group.
The next meeting will he on 1viay . . ;:¡t 8:00 p.m. in ci ty Ha 11 :
L I
for the Citv Council and Township Board.
. .. -
7he meet.ing was ad journed at. JO:?O p.m.
q~~r.
Clerk/Administrator
.
.
< ,
. , Page 2203
...
. April 1, 1993
.
. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of
st. Joseph met in regular session on Thursday, April 1, 1993 at 7 :00 p.m.
in City Hall .
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Donald Bud Reber; Members of the Council Ross
Rieke (arrived at 7:15 p.m.), Bob Loso, stephanie Hazen, Ken Hiemenz.
OTHERS PRESENT: Elmer Rakotz, Jane Rakotz, Mike and Sheri Thill, Mario
Mariani, Keven Davis, Stuart Goldschen, Judy Weyrens, Joe Bettendorf,
John Scherer.
Mayor Reber call ed the meeting to order and presented Elmer Rakotz a
plaque to honor him for his service to the city as a volunteer
firefighter and a reserve police officer.
AGENDA: Loso ma.de a motion to approve the agenda as presented; seconded
by Hiemen.z~ .
Ayes: Reber, Loso, Hazen, Hiemenz.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
BILLS PAYABLE: Deputy Clerk Judy Weyrens presented the bills payable.
After discussion, Hazen ma.de a motion to approve the bills as presented;
seconded by Hiemenz.
Ayes: Reber, Loso; Hazen, Hiemenz.
. Nayes: None. Motion carried.
MINUTES: Hazen ma.de a motion to approve the minutes of the March 16 and
18 meetings as presented; seconded by Hiemenz.
Ayes: Reber, Loso, Hazen, Hi emenz .
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
MAYOR REPORTS: Mayor reported that 1) he had Judy draft a letter of
congratulations to the Blazers on their winning season. 2) He has
received calls on the placement of a home being built by Ash street East
and First Avenue Northeast. It is placed far back into the lot. It
appears that the plans are in compliance with our ordinance. A building
permi t has been issued for this bui 1 ding. He will have the attorney
draft wording regulating the placement of homes on residential lots to
prevent this from happening again. 3) The Mayor thanked Judy Weyrens and
Mary Generous for excellent work while Rachel was at a conference and on
vacation. 4) The Mayor congratulated Rachel Stapleton on her election to
Region III Assistant vice President, for the MCFOA, and on her earning
Minnesota Certified Municipal Clerk designation. 4) The Downtown
Beautification Project was discussed at a joint meeting of the Chamber of
Corrmerce and the Lions Club. The Mayor and several Counci 1 members
attended. The Mayor stated he feels the City should take a leadership
role in seeking funding for this project, and he has agreed to be on the
conmittee. The group has looked at gambl ing revenue to finance the
project but feel that this source is not adequate and are looking for
. other sources also, including bonding. Mayor stated that the City must
be careful not to overbond and damage our bonding capacity. The project
has' expanded from one block to two and one half blocks. Upgrading North
and South on College Avenue in a like manner, has also been considered by
the group. St. Bens's has shown interest in this project and upgrading
.
.
. . Page 2204
April 1, 1993
. the appearance of the City.
Hiemenz made a motion to approve the City to take a leadership role in
seeking funding and assisting in grant applications, to make this
proposed Capital Improvement Project a reality. The motion was seconded
by Rieke. Discussion - Hazen requested to consider applying to the
Central Minnesota Initiative Fund for a grant. Hiemenz stated that DNR
has a program to consider also. Mayor has asked Rachel to check with the
grant writer who assisted the city in getting the Community Development
grant from the state.
Ayes: Reber, Rieke, Loso, Hazen, Hiemenz.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
COUNCIL REPORTS - RIEKE: Rieke reported that he was also at that meeting
and was impressed with the manner in which the supporters of the project
have pull ed together.
HAZEN : Personnel Policy Manual will come under old business.
LOSO: 1) Spring Cleanup week will began April 24. Joe Braun is
coordinating this with the local youth organizations. Instead of
dumpsters for spring cleanup this year, the proposal is for curbside
pickup for the residents on April 29 and on May 6th, where they can
dispose of any household trash and junk, which is not garbage or
hazardous waste. Also there will be a designated area by the maintenance
shop where residents may drop off appliances. Loso proposed that a flyer
. is sent out with this information along with a flyer on tornado
information to all city residents. Hazen questioned the need for this
mailing. Loso stated that he has budgeted for it. Rieke stated that the
newspaper does not reach all the residents. Rieke made a motion to
approve the spring cleanup plan and authorize a bulk mailing of
information to all residents; seconded by Reber.
Ayes: Reber, Rieke, Loso, Hazen, Hi emenz .
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
2) Motion by Loso to install two 24 x 24 sandboxes at a cost of $450 each
and two diggers at approximately $275 each, with the installation being
done by our maintenance personnel. A sandbox and digger is to be
installed in Millstream Park and Centennial Park. The cost of these will
come out of the park development fund. The motion was seconded by Rieke.
Ayes: Reber, Rieke, Loso, Hazen, Hiemenz.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
3) Monument park has received damage to the new trees and shrubs during
the winter. Jim Marthal er is doing an estimate of the damage. Loso made
a motion to approve installation of flower beds by the monument, at a
cost of about $400, for completion of the project. The planting of the
flower beds are a capital outlay item. The City ClerkjAdrrdnistrator is
requested to contact the stearns County Historical Society to request
approval of funding for this project fram this st. Joseph Historical
Fund. The cost of installation of flower beds will be fram the Park
. Development fund funds for this project are not available fram the
historical fund. The motion was seconded by Rieke. Discussion -Rieke
questioned if this is appropriate use of the preservation fund, but felt
that the Historical Board may deny the request if the project does not
meet their criteria.
.
.
..
Page 2205
April 1, 1993
.
Ayes: Reber, Rieke, Loso, Hazen, Hiemenz.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
3) Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements require handicap
accessibility of city serJices and facilities. Dick Taufen has stated
that Centennial Park will not meet the requirements. Hiemenz made a
motion to approval a study to be done by the City Engineer Joe
Bettendorf's firm of SEH to do an ADA assessment of all city faci Ii ties.
The motion was seconded by Rieke. Discussion - Clerk/Administrator will
present a report on ADA requirements at the next meeting.
Ayes: Reber~ Rieke, Loso, Hazen, Hiemenz.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
4) Loso requested the Council's approval to allow Judy Weyrens, St.ephanie
Hazen, Mary Generous and Bob Loso to meet and prepare information for a
community information packet to be given to new comers and persons
requesting community information. Council generally agreed and supported
this project.
5) Loso made a motion to approve the appointment of Irma Lanier to the
Park Board; seconded by Rieke.
Ayes: Reber, Rieke, Loso, Hazen, Hiemenz.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
. 6) Loso presented a Joint Powers Agreement for the st. Cloud Area
Planning ComrrQssion. Clerk Adrrrrnistrator is requested to contact APO for
information on the revisions.
HIEMENZ: 1) Hiemenz also got calls concerning the house being constructed
by Ash street and First Avenue NE, to the rear of the lot, with concerns
of devaluing of the properties in the area.
2) Senator Benson invited Council members to an area informational
meeting.
3) Hiemenz also participated in the chamber meeting on the Beautification
Project.
PERSONNEL POLICY MANUAL: The first draft of the Personnel Policy manual
was distributed to the Members of the Council. Hiemenz stated he had
wished to make notations prior to distribution of the draft to recap the
references for the specific state and federal laws. Hiemenz agreed to
prepare a cover letter to send out to the Council with information
pertinent to the manual. Hazen stated the comrrQttee of Hazen and Hiemenz
have spent a lot of time on this project and suggested the Council take
some time and look through the draft. A special meeting to go through
this manual will be necessary and may be set. up at the next regular
c(mnci 1 meeting.
ORD1NANCE At'vIENDMENT - GARAGE AND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS: The Cmmci I
discussed maximum allowable size, and allowances of accessory buildings
of less than 50 square feet. Loso made a motion to approve an amendment
. to ordinances number 51 and 52, clarifying and regulating garage and
accessory buildings, with a change to the combined area of accessory
buildings less than 50 square feet shall not excess 100 square feet;
seconded by Hiemen7.. Discussion -Hiemenz stated that it does not name
specifically the accessory buildings allowed, but Council generally felt
. .
. . Page 2206
. April 1, 1993
. that fish houses, dog houses, and the like should not be addressed
spedficall y. Ayes: Reber, Rieke, Loso, Haze~, HiemP~z.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
STAR CITY PROGRAM: Greg Reinhart of the Chamber is contacting
representatives to be on the Corrmission from a cross section of the
corrmunity.
SNCW REMOVAL: Council discussed methods or financing snow rem.~val from
t.he business district. They discussed the effectiveness of the past
policy, which was to bill the businesses a set amount per year for snow
remm¡al. That policy was abandoned. Council discussed calling other
cities to get some ideas on how other corrmunities handle this situation.
COUNCIL MINUTES: No further action needed, since city council set policy
at. the March 18, 1993 Council mf'!eting that a draft of t.he minutes will go
out prior to the meeting and council members will re-su1:roit it with
corrections.
TRUCK PURc;,":¡ASE: Mayor stated that he is not. convinced by the needs study
that a different truck is needed for snow removal. Loso and Rieke felt
th;:¡t if we need a truck we shoul d go wi th the state hi d to get one.
Hiemenz asked if an airport truck would have additional equi pmen t. on it.
which the city wmllò not. need. Loso made a mob on to approve the
. purchase of a used plow truck, from Lakeland Ford, at an amount up to
$20,000, and the Clerk/Administrator is dirF!cted to check on the statue
Þequi rements for procurement of equipment pr:i or to purchasing the truck.:
seconded by Rieke.
Ayes: Rieke, Loso: Hazen.
Nayes: Reber, Hi emoJlZ . Moti.on carried.
OPEN TO 'I""n"F PURL T C: There were no pub 1 i c COTTITte.nts or quest.i ODS.
CITY ENGINt';t<~t\ JOE BETTENDORF REPORTS 1) t-ŒST MINNESOTA STREE'J': ,"JOF!
Bettendorf discussed the reconstruction project for West Minnesota
street., and a corrnrittee meeting held yesterday on the project.. Proposed
w;:¡s to consider assessing curb and gutter, extra widening of t.he street,
which t.he business comnl1nit.y asked t.o h;:¡ve in the project., and possibly
driveway aprons. .Joe stated that the Publ ic Improvement hearing conI d be
, "A . , 29. The cost of st.reet widening, ; nclnding engi need ng and
h~!(j prl I
financing: of about $18,400 is the ci t.y cost.: and may be assessed to
benefi tting properti es. The Council . , 1 need to consider if t.he south
Wll.
side of Minnesota st.reet wi]] benefi t. from st. reet. widening. The counci 1
general] y agreed to an ow ,Joe to advertise for bids. Hi emenz moved to
adnpt. ;:¡ ResoJ uti on Ordering Preparation of Report on ImprmTement for West
Minnesota street; secondf'!d by Loso. Discnssion - HiF!mAnz asked if the
Sout.h side of Minnesota St.reet could have a prorated type assessment,
hAcause they would not have as much benefit. Joe Bett.endorf stnted that
j t is rF!asib1 e, however everyone should be treated equitably.
. Ayes: Reber: RiekF!: r .050, Hazen, Hi emen z .
Nnyes: None. Mati on carried.
::ioe Ret. tenr10yf wi ì 1 check OD funding for Bp.<31JtifiŒtinn Projp.r.f., to be
.
.
. , Page 2207
,
~ April 1, 1993
. coordinatE'!d with the West Minnesot.a street. Impnwement.
J 992 WA'T'F.R SYS'J'Ð.1 IMPROVEMENTS: Ri E'!ke Tæde a mot.ion to apprmTe Change
order #2 of $49:500 for Contract II of CBI -NaCon, Inc. for the 500:000
ga 11 on El E'!vated storage Faci 1 i ty; seconded by Loso.
AyE'!s: Reber, Rieke, Loso, Hazen, Hiemenz.
NayE'!s: None. Moti on ca rri ed .
1992 UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS - DBL LABS: Applicat.ion for Payment Nlmmer 3
for Contract II: Control Building, to W. Gonman Const.nJCti on $1,808. 17
was approved wi th a mob on by Loso; seconded by Hi emenz .
Ayes: RE'!ber, Rieke, Loso, H8.7.E'!n: 'f:Tj eTlìenz .
Nayes: None. Moti on ca rri ed .
~he mE'!E'!ting was recessed at 8:20 p.m.
~he Mayor reconvenerl the meeting at 8:38 p.m.
CI'T'Y A'T"T\,)RNEY REPORTS: Mayor Reber discusse."1 wi.th t.hE'! at.t.orney methods
of preventing a home from being placed so far back in a ì ot as is
currently being constructE'!d by Ash StrE'!et anò Jst Avenue NF.. ~he
bui 1 di ng pE'!rm~ T. for this home has already been issuecJ and it. meet.s set
backs. Mayor Reber asked ."John to see if it. is possibl e t.o sT.op thi s
c;onstxllction at. this stage of the game: and t.o prepare a proposal for
. c;ontrolLing this t:ype of situat.ion in the future.
SPECIAL E\TE1\TTS LTcENSES: Loso made a mati on t.o approve an amendment. or
orrlimmcE'! Number 7J and 72 which would al10w for spec;;al eiTE'!nt.s 1 '
, ] Cf'!nses
for sa 1 e of i ntoxicat.ing and non-i ntoxicating rr.al t. 1 iquor and provides
-for fF'es. Sper."i a ] Event 1 i CF'nse fE'!e for intoxicating ] i qIJor sha II be
$2S0, and SlO for non-intoxicating mal t liquor. The late fee shall be
est.ablished at. S2S0. Speci rl 1 E\TE>..nt. 1 icenses sha 1 1 be 1 im; ted t.o
org;:mi7.?ti ons or enT.i t.ies wh;cn qu;:¡] i fy as non-b=ix8bl e organ; 7.;:¡t.ions 8S
nefinerl by Sec. SOl (c) (3-8) of the interna 1 Revenue CorlE'!, 3nò
org;:¡ni zati ons sh;:o 1 ] be limited to three sped;:ol event licenses pE'!r
c;8ìE'!nd;:or year. ThE'! motion WrlS secondE!d by Ha7.E>.D.
Ayes: RE'!ber, R; f'!kE'!: Loso; Ha7.en: H;F!1ien7..
NaYE>_<:; : NonE'!. Mot. ion C8 rri eñ .
C'¡ e¡-kjArìministxator wi 1] check wi th other Count; es ;:ond Ci t.i es for 1 iqum-
license fees ;:¡nd rE'!port at next. mE'!eting.
S'T' ."JOSEPH POLIeF. OFFICERS FEDERATION: Hi emen7. made ;:¡ mati on t.o rat.i fy
t.he ì gcn St. ~oseph Police OfficE'!rs Federat.ion c;ont.rac;t, with the
sti pu'¡;:¡tj on th;:¡t t.he=; ; nsnrance henefi ts i3re c;:¡pped at t.Ìîe current 1 f'!ve 1 ,:
se=;conòPc'Ì by H87.en. Dj SC1JSSj on - Loso wished to have rloc;1~nt.rltion thi3t
when the ; n",ur;:;nce benf'!fi t cost. increase.--1 in ,Jul y of 1991, the inCl~eMSf'!
w?-s p;:,; d by Federati on employees accordj ng to thei r contr;:¡ct, in ;:¡
, t· ~
wrl .r,en i01îT,.
Ayes: RE'!bF'r, Rieke; T ,oso; Ha 7. en : Hi E'>.Jl1E'!n7. .
. N8yes: None. Mob on c;:¡rri ed.
'POT. T Œ DF.PAR'J'MThT'T': 'T'he (;ounc; 1 di scussed the C]-¡j ef of Pol i ce 's schedu 1 E'!.
T.o",o fe) r. t.h;:¡r. tj'IP needs or t.he Ci ty are best senTp.d by thA Cn; pf wodd ng
. ,
.~
, P~gP. 2208
.
Apri 1 1, 1993
.
five, eight hour days a wp.ek, rathp.r t.han the current schP.Clule of four,
ten hour days per weE'.k. 'Reber st.ated that the Police Depart.ment is
operating so well currently, that he would not do anything to change
their operation. Rieke and HiE!!'T'M?.11z concurred and fel t the chief should
be allowed to operate his department the way it is currently. Loso
stated he would make a mot.ion to allow the other departJnent heads to work
four days a week, t.en hour days, if t.he Chief could. Hiemenz stated that
the needs of each departJl'\E".11t should be looked at ~nd managing of the
employees prior to any change. Hazen stated that the Federation should
bE! lp.ft as is, but she would like t.o see the Chief's schedule to nwip.w
it and t.hat she is rE'$ponding to complaints from people who havE"! called
her. She would like t.he reasons, advantagp.s and disadvantages for the
Chief working a four day week rather than a five day week, and how it
œ.11efi ts the City. Clerk/Administ.rator was directP.Cl t.o send a memo t.o
the Chief along with the information from the meeting, that the Council
is looking for more information, and a better explanat.ion of why he
should not be working 5 8 hour days.
LIQUOR LICENSE TRANSFER: .ìohn Scnerer stated that hp. saw no probl f'm in
the City allowing Dale SchneidE"!r to transfer the license from him to BTP,
Inc. for Sal's Bar and Grill. Chief of Police l.indgren also suhnit.ted a
recomnendation based on back ground check.
. TRUCK INSPECTION: HieJ'T1P.nz made a motion to amend a mot.ion from a
previoQs mf'!eting, to allow Richard Taufen as a city employee to be the
truck inspp.ctor of those tnlcks t.hat exceed 26,000 pounds; seconded by
'RebE"!r.
Ayes: Rf'..ber, Rieke, T.oso, Hazen, Hi emenz.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS: Reber recammf'-DdP.Cl that the Mayor and the City
Attorney's office eacn have a key to the file cabinet in the Council room
and confidf'.ntia 1 documE'.nt.s and personnel records wi 11 be containP.Cl there.
Hazen made a motion to establish the locked cahinet in the COlIDcil room
for confidf'.11tial records and the Mayor and City At.t.orney's office wi 11
each have the only keys to the locked cabinet. A log will be kept in the
fil P. that. t.he Mayor and a verifying individual wi 11 f!ach sign t.he log
with the date and timf'! of entry. The motion was secondP.Cl by Loso.
Ayes: Reber.. Rif'..ke, Loso, HazE'.11 , Hiemenz.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
WAGE FREEZE: Mayor stat.P.Cl that hE"! feel s that t.ne pay increasf'.-S as
E'$tablished should not. be changed to a pay freeze until such time as the
stat.e should mandate it. The Counci 1 has the ri.ght. t.o SE"!t the pay for
their employees as they feel is appropriate. Tnis was in re.c:;pon.c:;e t.o
HiP.menz report. from last meeting regarding wage free7.es as present.ed by
the Legislature.
. EASEMENT ON THE CITY MAINTENANCE PROPERTY: There is a rO<=ldway easement
across the City maintenance property for accE'.-Ss to l.yman Hull propert.y.
This i.s zoned Industxi.al and will require a special use for all
industxial uses. This method may give the city some control for that
property's use of the roadway easement.
.
.~.
. . PagE"! 2209
Apri 1 1, 1993
.
MAY BŒLE: The May BowIe will be held at st. Bens this year on May l.
Loso made a motion to approve the liquor license for that event. as
applied for by Holiday Inn, Inc. as the vendor for the event; seconded by
Hazen.
Ayes: Reber: Rieke: Loso, Hazen, Hiemf?..Dz.
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
COMPOST ARFA: Loso made a motion to open the compost area on April 24,
with the schedule as last year to be open on Fridays from 4 pm t.o 8 pm
and Saturdays from 8 am to noon. John Gulama will be the re.sponsibJe
person. The motion was seconded by Hiemenz.
Ayes: Reber.. Ri eke, Loso: Hazen, Hi emenz .
Nayes: None. Motion carried.
EASEMENT REQUEST: The Council considered the request of the County
Comrrri_ssions for any objections the City Council may have to the request
of Ross Rieke to plant. trees on the property line of property of a tax
forfeited lot, adjacent to an easement area, between Park Terrace and
Cl inton vi ì lage. Loso made a motion to table the matter until t.he
possible litigation of the easement issue with Ed Kacures is settled.
The mot.ion was seconded by Hazen.
Ayes: Reber, Loso, Hazen, Hiemenz.
Nave.s: None. Abst.ained: Rieke. Motion carried.
. STREET L~GHTS: Loso made a motion to approve the street light plans for
Cl oVE"!rdal e 5th and Pondview Ridge as presented ,: seconded by Rieke.
Ayes: Reber, Rieke: I.oso, Hazen, Hierrtenz.
Nay~s: None. Motion carried.
AMENDMEN'r TO THE JOINT RESOLUTION FOR ORDERLY ANNEXATION:
The following amendment. was presented approved to correct technical
errors on the legal description to the Terry and Kimberly Spanier
property from t.he <:nst Ave..Due annexation, with a motion by Rieke;
seconded by Loso.
Ayes: Reber: Rieke, Loso, Hazen: Hiemenz.
Nayes: None. Motion carriE"!d.
AMENDJvŒNT TO 'I'H"E JOINT RESOLUTION
FOR ORDERLY ANNEXATION RR'TWEEN
Tf·;'F, TŒNSHIP OF ST. .JOSEPH, MINNESOTA AND
THE CITY OF ST. .JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
Tne Township of st. ."Joseph and the City of st. Joseph hereby
jointly agree that the joint resolution subnitted to the Municipal Board
on May 28: 1992 contained a technical error on parcel number nine (9).
The said document: OA-118-18.. is enclosed.
. Parcel number nine (9), read as follows:
Parcel 9: " A Dart. of the Northeast OUarter of the Soutneast Quarter
_ .- _. Þw
mnnbered One Hundred Twe.nty-fi ve (125) Nort.h: of Rrmge mnnbered Thi rty
," -
...
. Page 2210
Apri 1 I, 1993
.
Range numbered Thi rty (30) We.c¡t, described as follows, t.o-wit: Beginning
at a point on the F...ast 1 ine of said quart.er quarter said point. being 230
feet due south of the Northeast Corner of said ~larter ~Jart.er, thence
due West 208.72 feet., t.hence due South 208.72 feet, theJ1ce due F,ast
208.72 feet to a point on said F.ast line, tnence along said F..ast 1 i nf! due
North 208.72 feet to t.he point of beginning subject t.o all easements."
Parcel number nine should be corrected to read:
Parcel .2.:. A part of the Southwest Quarter of the SouthWE'-st Quarter, in
SE"!ction Eleven (ll), Township One-hundred tWE'..nty four (134) North, Range
29 West, St.E'.arns County, Minnesota, de.Bcribed as follows, to-wit:
Beginning at a point on the e..8st line of said Quarter Quart.er said point
being 230 feet due sontn of the northeast corner of said Quarter Quarter;
thence due west 208.72 feet; thence due east 208.7? feet to a point on
said east 1 ine; t.nence along said east line due north 208.72 feet t.o t.he
point of beginning subject t.o all easements.
PAY PERIOD CHANGE: Loso made a mot.ion to approve a change to allow
weekly pay checks for f'!ffip10yeE"!s, to start with this week; seconded by
Rieke
Ayes: Reber, Rieke, Loso, Ha'7:en, Hiemen'7:.
Nayes: NonE"!. Moti on ca rri ed .
. ADL70URN: Hazen made a motion t.o adjourn at 9:45 p.m. seconded by Rieke.
Ayes: Reber, RiekE"!, Loso, Ha'7:E'!n, Hiemen'7:.
Nayes: NonE'!. Mob on carriE'!Ò.
Q
Racne 1 stap 1 et.on, MC1-ic
cl et'kjAdminist.rator
.
·
RESOLUTION RECEIVING REPORT AND CALLING HEARING ON
IMPROVEMENT
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the council
adopted April 1, 1993, a report has been prepared by
Joe Bettendorf of Short, Elliot, Hendrickson, Inc.
with reference to the improvement of Minnesota Street
between the west line of Fourth Avenue West and the east
line of First Avenue East, by a complete roadway
reconstruction with curb and gutter, sidewalk and utility
improvements of water main and storm sewer, and this
report was received by the council on April 15, 1993.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA:
1. The council will consider the improvment of such street
· in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting
property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated
total cost of the improvement of $ .
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed
improvement on the 29th day of April, 1993 in the council
chambers of the city hall at 7:00 p.m. and the clerk shall
give mailed and published notice of such hearing and
improvement as required by law.
Adopted by the council this 1st day of April, 1993.
Donald "Bud" Reber, Mayor
Rachel Stapleton
Clerk/Administrator
·
F R 1) til 1J I ~~ K E L "?: ; H L ~ ~ G H E F~ ~:14 I :: 1 . ~'~: ~ : : ~ ~:j :"J U J'~ : I -
. LAMBER T & ASSOCIATES
.IO....M£RICM "...nONIILaANK B1,J:I.~INO
~T. ?ACL. .'.tJNN. SSICrl-l¡.ya
MARK W, LAM81!RT Pt'.O¡'¡E
AT1'ORN£Y AT LAW (ó!1) 2z.1..4HI
PAX NO, (61~)~3·nll
April 9, 1993
Mr. Ron Euteneuer
Omni Building Services !~'':.".~, :_-:-_-..
110 S. Second Street '.', ~..,! ;:¡. '.,'~.. .'-7
Waite Park, MN 56387 '~J' '::-:..../'..:.:-::- "//
Mr. Richard Taufen
City of St. Joseph
21 N.W. 1st Avenue
St. Joseph MN 56374
Re; 131 and 133 EAst Cedar St. st. Joseph
Ap~rtment Project / Asphalt roof issue
Gentlemen:
41' Pursuant to our conversation earlier this week, please
consider my request for a special waiver of the Uniform Building
Code (the "Code II) req\.1irement that fiberglass shingles be used en
the above described project pursuant to Chapter 32 thereof¡ and
instead permit us to construct the building using asphalt shingles.
It is my understanding that fiberglass shingles seldom se~l down
properly in the northern winter climates and as a result frequently
peal-Off the roof in hard wind storms (asphalt shingles are not
prone to this prcble~). My contractor, Lumber One, Avon, Inc.,
has agreed to use non-flammable metal roof jacKs and roof vents on
the two buildings so as to minimize the chance of a fire
penetrating the proposed asphalt roef.
Your prompt attention to this matter is appreciated. If you
have any further questions, feel free to ccmtaçt me at your
convenience.
Very t~uly yours:
LA..~BERT & ASSOC~IATES ,....... '
/---Ø;~~' ..'
ç;r .. /-
B .
lit Mark W. Lambert
. RESOLUTION APPOINTING A RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY
AND ASSIGNING DUTIES
Appointment of Responsible Authority
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 13.02, subdivision
16, as amended, requires that the City of st. Joseph appoint
one person as thè Responsible Authority to administer the
requirements for collection, storage, use and dissemination
of data on individuals, within the City and,
WHEREAS, the st. Joseph City Council shares concern
expressed by the legislature on the responsible use of all
City data and wishes to satisfy this concern by immediately
appointing an administratively qualified Responsible
Authority as required under the statute.
BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of st. Joseph appoints
Rachel Stapleton as the Responsible Authority for the
purposes of meeting all requirements of Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 13, as amended, and with rules as lawfully
promulgated by the Commissioner of Administration as
published in the State Register.
I FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, the Responsible Authority shall
require the requesting party to pay the actual cost of
making, certifying and compiling copies and of preparing
summary data.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH THIS
DAY OF , 1993.
ATTESTED:
Donald Bud Reber, Mayor
Rachel Stapleton
Clerk/Administrator
.
.
.-
J ~ 3490 Lexington Avenue North
. . St. Paul, MN 55126
.,---¡-
·r-~-----r--
League of Minnesota Cities (612) 490-5600
House Proposes $15 Million Increased
Funding for LGA in 1994
April 8, 1993
Dear City Official:
The House leadership today announced a major property tax relief package that includes
the restoration of the Governor's proposed HACA and LGA reductions and a $15 million increase
. in funding for LGA for 1994. The package also includes a significant reduction in K-12 education
property taxes. The property tax reductions would be paid for with an increase in the income
taxes for upper income Minnesotans.
Full details of the proposal are not expected until next week, and cities may have some
concerns about other elements of the proposal, such as the shift of HACA from cities to schools.
Our eventual position on the full tax bill will depend on how some of these issues are resolved.
Nevertheless, the League does strongly support the proposed increase in funding for LGA.
LGA is property tax relief, and growth in funding for LGA is needed for property tax
fairness. I urge you to contact your representative over the next few days to express your support
for growth in funding for LGA, and to thank the members of the House for including this in their
tax package.
ery truly yours,
) f1dß
;' .Þ'v,j . ¥- AJ
James F. Miller
Executive Director
.
,:4
~
. A REPORT ON THE
MUNICIPAL CLERKS AND FINANCE OFFICERS ANNUAL CONFERENCE
March 16-19, 1993
Humor as a stress manager - Hal Schippits presented a session
on humor. The difference between positive humor (fun and a
stress reliever), and negative humor (a power trip) . Use
humor in daily living.
Updating Job descriptions to meet ADA requirements - This
session was presented by Sherrie Le, of the League of
Minnesota Cities, who handles personnel issues. She
recommended the following for updating job descriptions.
Include in job descriptions knowledge, ski 11 s and abilities
needed for the job; typical duties performed, levels of
abilities, minimum qualifications. cities should review all
job descriptions according to specific qualifications, skills
and abilities for each duty. Also look at the physical
requirements of the jobs. The job description should include
Job Title, Department, Supervisor, and the Effective Date of
the job description. She presented forms and samples.
. Managing Employee Performance dealt with the need for good
employee evaluations. Evaluations should be based on the job
description, and provide positive feedback, through goal
setting.
Also discussed were - handling overload, use court service
workers, volunteers, and re-prioritize.
Council meeting tapes must be kept a minimum of one year.
Council minutes - corrections to the minutes, if Clerk does
not agree, it should be so noted in the minutes. Closed
meetings - notice must state why closed and Council may not
discuss anything beyond the items in the notice. Approval of
agenda is not necessary at special meetings, because nothing
more may be added. Council votes must all be public. Votes
of Council may be by ballot if the Council members sign the
ballots. Ballots become public record, and it must be
documented in the minutes how each member voted.
Requests for information should be in writing, and specific.
Each city needs to establish a Responsible Authority as
public information officer, to disseminate requested
information.
Chandler is a city of 316 population. They had most of their
city wiped out by a tornado. The Clerk was also on the Fire
I Department, was Water and Wastewater Superintendent. He told
us their experiences and gave the following recommendations
for preparing for a disaster.
Prepare now, with lists of priorities and duties.
j. " .J'
. Have backup of Fire Dept., Equipment, and documents.
maps Be
ready for large numbers of volunteers. Have a plan set up
for feeding people. Contact the State for help. Prepare for
informational meeting of the affected people. Have plenty
of DO NOT CROSS tape on hand. A canceled check from the
City of Chandler was found at Willmar which is 115 miles
away.
The final segment was on communication, and cultural
diversity. Communication and understanding are both effected
by cultural diversity. Everyone has a different set of
values and ideals. Therefore it takes communication to
understand one another.
This was a very good conference and I also found the most of
the sessióris very informative. Six of the area Clerks rode
together and I shared a room with the Clerk/Administrator
from Melrose.
Thank you for allowing me to go to
~
Rachel Stapleton, MCMC
. Clerk/Administrator
.
· ' y
· W DONOHUE RAJKOWSKI L T D .
Attorneys at Law Reply to: St. Cloud
ST. CLOUD April 5, 1993
11 Seventh Avenue ~orth
~O. Box 1433
Ms. Rachel Stapleton
St. Cloud, ~1N 56302-14,33 St. Joseph City Clerk Administrator
612'251'1055 City Hall
800·445'9617 P.O. Box 668
FAX 612'251'5896 St. Joseph, M:N 56374
MINNEAPOLIS Re: Miscellaneous Issues
Our File No. 15,692
2904 Plaza VII
45 South Seventh Street Dear Rachel:
Minneapolis, MN 33402-1620
612·339'9206 First of all, I have enclosed revised amendments to
800·445'9617 Ordinance 71, 72, 51 and 52. You may want to give them
FAX 612·339...17ï5 one more review, but assuming that they are consistent
· with the resolution passed by the City Council at the
FRANK J. RAIKOIVSKI last meeting, I would suggest that you go ahead and
have them executed and published. I will be preparing
GORDON H. HA.YSMEIER revision pages to be sent out in the near future.
FREDERICK L. GRUNKE
THOMAS G. JOVA~:OVICH I have had a chance to consider the issue of rear yard
JOHN H. SCHERER setback in a residential area which has come to the
PAUL A. RAIKOWSKI forefront because of a house currently under
construction within the City. As I indicated when I
KEVIN F. G,~AY spoke with you, it appears though the house meets
as
the setback requirements of Ordinance 52.16, but there
WILLIAM J. C-'SH.\1AN may have been some questions regarding the
DA\'lD T. SHAY appropriateness of the lot split and lot size. Due to
CAROL A. STARK the fact that the City has issued a building permit and
RICHARD W SOB.4LVARRO also due to the fact that the property owner has
incurred expense in reliance upon the issuance of the
MICHAEL c. RAIKOWSKI building permit, I believe that it would be very
A. CHAD McKENNEY difficult for the City to withdraw the permit and
MOLLY J. WINGATE require the property owner to restore the lot to its
prior condition. For that reason, I would not
<,,,IICHAEL H. DOVOHUE recommend incurring the expense of researching the
OF COU:-':SEL property history of that block.
JAMES H. KELLY, M.o., F.A.C.P. I would suggest that the City take a look at the rear
;\tEDICAL CO:-';SVLTA:XT yard depth requirements of Ordinance 52.16 Subdivision
GORDO"," H. HA:-:SMEIER IS AD~UTTED TO PRACTICE 6(c). This ordinance currently requires a rear lot
.N NORTH DAKOTA A"D WiSCO"S!". depth of not less than 20% of the depth of the lot. I
PAUL A. RAJKOWSKI IN WISCO:'~SI:-¡,
ROt A. STARK IS ILUXOJS A;";O ~1ISS0liRI would suggest that the City consider changing that
AND WILLIAM J. CASHMA;\: ¡:-¡ SOt:TH DAKOTA. requirement to one of 40% of the depth of the lot.
. .
~ Ms. Rachel Stapleton
~ April 6, 1993
Page -2-
The ordinance currently requires lots to be of a depth of 125
feet. The ordinance also requires a front yard setback of at
least 30 feet. Assuming that we are dealing with a lot of 125
feet in depth (the minimum for newly platted lots) and assuming a
front yard setback of 35 feet (5 feet more than the minimum), a
house could be constructed on the lot with a depth of 40 feet. I
believe that this would be a fairly deep house by general
standards. Most newly constructed houses have a depth of 30 feet
or less. But assuming a 35 foot setback and a 40 foot depth in
the house, that still leaves you with a rear yard depth of 40% of
the entire lot.
Granted, not all existing lots are 125 feet in depth. Not all
existing lots meet the 75 foot width requirement which allows the
construction of a house having more width than depth. But in
those circumstances where a problem may exist, the owner of the
property could address those concerns by pursuit of a variance.
With consideration of a variance, the City would then have an
opportunity to look at all of the circumstances relating to the
lot, the house, and the surrounding properties. Where
appropriate, the City can relax their rear yard setbacks. But in
. situations such as that currently under construction, the City
could still require as much of a rear yard setback (even though
it may be less than 40%) as appropriate under all of the
circumstances.
I would suggest that the City Council refer this issue to the
Planning Commission with my comments for consideration. The
Planning Commission may want to solicit some input from local
builders and the building inspector to determine the
appropriateness of a change in the ordinance. I recognize that
40% for a rear yard setback may not be workable in all cases. It
should not be a problem for new lots. If it is a problem for old
lots, the variance procedure is available. If 40% is too large
of a requirement, then the Planning Commission can come back with
an alternative such as 30% or 35%. Currently, the ordinance
requires only 20%. That clearly opens the door for problems such
as the one now occurring. .
Finally, I would like to address the issue of a repairable car
lot proposed for industrial zoned property located to the north
and west of First Avenue Northwest. As you know, all industrial
uses are subject to special use permit. Section 52.21 Subd. 4
sets forth the industrial requirements for the issuance of a
special use permit. Among requirements which may become
applicable is the issue of the discharge of hazardous wastes.
52.21 Subd. 4 also refers the Planning Commission to the general
.
W
. .
· Ms. Rachel Stapleton
April 6, 1993
Page -3-
special use permit standards found at Section 52.8 Subd. 4. This
section has a number of other requirements which must be met
before the issuance of a special use permit. The Planning
Commission and the Council must find that the use, at the
proposed location:
a) will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, morals, comfort, convenience, or general welfare of
the neighborhood or the City;
b) will be harmonious with the general and applicable
specific objectives of the comprehensive plan of the City
and this ordinance;
c) will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained
so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with
the existing or intended character of the general vicinity
and will not change the essential character of that area;
d) will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future
neighboring uses;
· e) will be served adequately by essential public facilities
and services, including streets, police, fire protection,
drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer
systems, and schools;
f) will not create excessive additional requirements at
public cost for public facilities and services and will not
be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community;
g) will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials,
equipment, and conditions of operation that will be
detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare
because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke,
fumes, glare, or odors;
h) will have vehicular approaches to the property which are
so designed as not to create traffic, congestion, or an
interference with traffic or surrounding public
thoroughfares;
i) will have adequate facilities to provide sufficient off
street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use;
·
W
· ,
· Ms. Rachel Stapleton
April 6, 1993
Page -4-
j ) will not result in the destruction, damage of a natural,
scenic, or historic feature of major importance;
k) will conform to specific standards of this ordinance
applicable to the particular use.
In undertaking this review, the Planning Commission and City
Council should keep in mind that the property has already been
zoned for industrial use. Therefore, the mere fact that you are
dealing with a use which is light industrial should not in and of
itself be considered a factor which would justify denial of a
special use permit. In other words, the fact that there may be
an industrial use near park property or near a residential area
cannot be the basis for the denial in light of the fact that the
City previously zoned this property for industrial use with the
adjacent uses were in existence or arose after the industrial
zoning occurred.
What the Planning Commission and the City Council wants to
consider is whether or not this particular industrial use has
some unique quality or aspect which renders it unacceptable as
· far as the criteria discussed above are concerned.
Finally, I also wish to point out that Section 52.8 Subd.
6
allows the City to place conditions on the issuance of the
special use permit. In this particular case, if concerns arise
when the standards are analyzed, but the concerns may not be so
significant as to justify denial of the special use permit, the
Planning Commission and the City Council may then look at placing
conditions upon the issuance so as to address the concerns. For
instance, one condition to be considered may relate to the hours
of operation and an appropriate limitation. Another
consideration may have to do with screening of the activity, such
as requiring a large privacy type of fence to be constructed
around the operation. The statute also allows conditions to be
placed upon the use with regard to ingress and egress to the
property. That is something else that the Planning Commission
may want to consider.
All area properties should be notified of the request for a
special use permit and be provided with an opportunity to express
concerns at the hearing on the request. The City of St. Joseph,
as an adjacent property owner, also has a right to appear at the
hearing, through a representative, and voice its concerns with
the proposal.
·
T
,
"
. Ms. Rachel Stapleton
April 6, 1993
Page -5-
Rachel, if there are any other questions regarding this matter,
please let me know.
Very truly yours,
DONOHUE RAJKOWSKI LTD.
JHS/jck
--------- ----------
Enclosure
L: \gen\ 15692\af040593. 011
.
.
T
'.
.
tvHnnesota
Department of
Employee
Relations
Leadership and parmership in
human resource management
April 5, 1993
Judy Weyens, Deputy C1k/Accnt.
St. Joseph
P.O. Box 668
St. Joseph, MN 56374
Dear Judy Weyens:
Congratulations! I am very pleased to send you the enclosed notification of
compliance with the Local Government Pay Equity Act. Since the law was passed
in 1984, jurisdictions throughout Minnesota have been working diligently to
meet the requirements of the act, and I commend your hard work and commitment
to achieving compliance.
I As you know, our department adopted a rule specifying procedures and criteria
for measuring compliance, and information about your situation is enclosed.
If you have any questions about the materials or about pay equity in general,
please contact Pay Equity Coordinator, Faith Zwemke at 612-296-2653.
One of the things the rule requires is that our department notify each
jurisdiction when the next pay equity report is due. In your case, this date
is January 31, 1994, and we will be sending you forms and instructions at a
later time. Also, this notice and results of the compliance review are public
information and must be supplied upon request to any interested party.
Again, congratulations on a job well done!
Sincerely,
[/ /ì
'-¿·ì.·. J. I}". ./.. ,
/_Î-'{iA..tJ.¡;{ . _ (/(c'f(fl/,,---,
¡Linda Barton
Commissioner
Enclosures
I
200 C~ntenniaì Office Bìdg. · 658 Cedar St. · St. Paul, 1\!N 55155·1603 · TDO (612) 29ì ·2003 · All equal n[Jporlllnitv employer
.
.
February 9, 1993
, Pay Equity Statistical Analysis Report
for
City of St. Joseph
P.O. Box 668
St. Joseph MN 56374-0000
Pay Equity Contact Person: Judy Weyens
Phone: 612 363-7201
Female Male Balanced All
Jobs Jobs Jobs Jobs
------- ------- -------- -------
Number of Jobs 3 6 0 9
Number of Employees 3 14 17
-Ave. Pay per Employee 2,405.67_ 2,110.00 2,162.18
Predicted Pay Weighted
By Number of Employees Under
Payment
Jobs At/Above Predicted 2 2 Ratio
Jobs Below Predicted 1 4 -------
Percent Below Predicted 33.33 66.67 200.0
~,. D;ff,,,.,, In P'Y
rom pred. per Employee $ 88 $ -19 T-Test - 2.174
DF 15
Salary Range Test 97.62
Exceptional Service Pay Test 120.00
I
·
,
'°9193 Job Li st Page 1
Job Male Female Total Work Max Mo. Predicted Pay
Number Class Title Empl Empl Empl Sex Points Salary Pay Difference
------ ------------------------------ ------ ------ ------ ---- ------ --------- --------- ----------
1 Laborer 4 0 4 M 120 1,170.00 1176.05 -6.05
2 Secretary 0 1 1 F 139 1,877.00 1765.50 111.50
3 Maintenance Worker 1 0 1 M 152 2,279.00 2168.73 110.27
4 Waste Water/Maint Wkr 1 0 1 M 161 2,362.00 2448.06 -86.06
5 Patrol Officer 5 1 6 M 254 2,411.00 2464.14 - 53. 14
6 Deputy Clerk/Acct 0 1 1 F 267 2,411.00 2489.86 -78.86
7 City Clerk/Admin 0 1 1 F 305 2,929.00 2697.10 231.90
8 Director Public Works 1 0 1 M 305 2,788.00 2697.10 90.90
9 Police Chief 1 0 1 M 362 2,965.00 3007.93 -42.93
,
,
A
.
. 0
0
I · ~
I I
I I
·
I
I
·
·
·
I
·
I
· en
·
· .c
I
·
· 0
0 -,
1.0 -æ
('t)
ca
I ~
·
·
..c: I
·
I
I 0
I 13
a. I
· · 0
('t) 0
CD -,
en E
0 Q)
0 .$ LL
J
· + · Os:::
.....; · 1.0 -- 0
·
· C\J 0
·
I
· a..
I
·
CJ) I en
I
·
· .c
I
· 0
I
I
'+- · -,
·
I
0 · Q)
·
· 0
· -æ
·
I 0
· ~
· C\J
~ I
I
.
-- +
0
·
of 0 ~
1.0
I .,-- a..
-0
~
a..
·
·
I
·
I 0
·
·
· 0
. 0 0 0 0 0 0"--
0 0 0 0 0 0
1.0 0 1.0 0 1.0 0
('t) ('t) C\J C\J .,-- .,--
Áed
c
.
.
-
v5 -
. >-
~ ~ .~
...... C c.. V"J
u ~ N ......
r'\., « '+- 0"1 §3
~ >-00"1 E
~, ...... ......
~ ._ _ -r- Q)
~ :J:J1o.. 10..
Ü V"J :J .-
w Q) 0 :J
~ ~Ñ >- ~ >- g-
. ~ ~ '+- 10.. .....
~ ~ c....~ 0 >- ¡g
...... V"J...... 0
~ C Q) C .-
"'-- ~~~ c,;, ~ ~ .g ~ ~ ~
~ ~ C C ~ >- 'E
'-J ~ 10.. Q) ~ 0
C 0 ~ ~.~~ c.. u
~ r "'.:; 0 r= Q) E ~~ c~
~'-' Q) . ü.~ Q) g
.Ñ ...... ~ - 0 0 E (i
........... c,-" ~ N - ~ co
~ ~ Q) _~ U", c.. 0: -;¡'"
. ~c...... ~ ~ .3 M cÉ ~ ~ ~
Ñ c.. ~ Q) Qj '+- 0 ~n --I
~ C -S ë.. 0 0.0 -.J~
~ '+-~...... ~
~ ~ O..c:C u
~ ~'.;:'3UE 0
.~ C V"J t Q)
Q Q) Q) ~ ..c:
~ E"Sc........
~..., Q) 10.. Q) ..c:
~ .:: ~ 0 .-::
~ :J ...... :>
~ ~o~ >
v V"J ......
. Q) Q) 0 0.0
10.. C V"J C
Q)cQ) >- I
..c: .- c:
...... -..::::: C c..
0.0 ~ .- E
C -0 ~ 0
..;: C ,." u
Q) ~ ""
Q)..c: c. f'.r.. Q)
E 0"1 ...... .- -0 ~" ) ......
0"1 >- C Q)>- (i
>- ~ ..a 0 ~ Jr P
- -r- 3: ·,;:·ü ~
..2 f'-... Q)'¿ r: Q) ~'
V"J "o:::t .- 0 Q) 10.. '-\.-
~ I ~ c.. c.. c..
u-r- 10.. Q) 09-
u 0"1 _ 10.. 0 'v
:J 0"1 ~ >- u >-
V"J .. ü.-:: 10........
10.. -r- .-:J :J ~
. _ o~::;:: ü 0 Q)
'+-"10 Q) >- 0.0
-
;
~
RESULTS OF TESTS FOR COMPLIANCE
. Date: ?/'~ ~/.. '7
/ "t f-{ /)
( I -;- / /) 10# 17 r--Y
I Sl,
Jurisdiction: .../¿;S ~~( L / /77
v
1. Completeness and Accuracy Test:
Passed. All required information was submitted accurately.
2. Statisti~lYSiS Test:
Passed. Jurisdiction had more than three male classes and an
underpayment ratio of 801 or more.
Passed. Jurisdiction had six or more male classes. at least
one class with a salary range. an underpayment ratio below 801.
but a T-test which was not statistically significant
3. Salary Range Test:
_ Passed. Too .few classes had an established number of years
. ~ove through a salary range.
~assed. Salary range test shows score of 801 or more.
4. Pay Test:
Too few classes receive exceptional service pay.
. Exceptional service pay test shows score of 801 or
The enclosed material describes compliance requirements in more detail. If
you have questions. contact Pay Equity Coordinator. Faith Zwemke. at-
612-296-2653.
'& -
.
<.
,
,. '--.
. W DONOHUE RAJKOWSKI L T D .
Attorneys at Law Reply to: St. Cloud
ST. CLOUD April 5, 1993
11 Seventh Avenue North
P. O. Box 1433
Ms. Rachel Stapleton
St. Cloud, ~IN 56302·1433 St. Joseph City Clerk Administrator
612'251'1055 City Hall
800'445·9617 P.O. Box 668
FAX 612'251'5896 St. Joseph, MN 56374
MINNEAPOLIS Re: Miscellaneous Issues
Our File No. 15,692
2904 Plaza VII
45 South Seventh Street Dear Rachel:
Minneapolis, ~v1N 55402-1620
612'339'9206 First of all, I have enclosed revised amendments to
800'445·9617 Ordinance 71, 72, 51 and 52. You may want to give them
FAX 612'339'4775 one more review, but assuming that they are consistent
. with the resolution passed by the City Council at the
FRANK J. RA/KOWSKI last meeting, I would suggest that you go ahead and
have them executed and published. I will be preparing
GORDON H. HANSMETER revision pages to be sent out in the near future.
FREDERICK L. GRUNKE
THOMAS G. JOVANOVICH I have had a chance to consider the issue of rear yard
JOHN H. 5CHERL~ setback in a residential area which has come to the
PAUL A. R.4/KOWSKI forefront because of a house currently under
construction within the City. As I indicated when I
KEVIN F. GRAY spoke with you, it though the house meets
appears as
the setback requirements of Ordinance 52.16, but there
WILLiAM J. C.4SH.HA-" may have been some questions regarding the
DAVID T. SHAY appropriateness of the lot split and lot size. Due to
CAROL A. STARK the fact that the City has issued a building permit and
RICHARD IV SOBAL,aRRO also due to the fact that the property owner has
,'vlICHAEL c. RATKOWSKI incurred expense in reliance upon the issuance of the
building permit, I believe that it would be very
A. CHAD McKE!':!':EY difficult for the City to withdraw the permit and
MOLLY J. WINGATE require the property owner to restore the lot to its
prior condition. For that reason, I would not
MICHAEL H. DONOHUE recommend incurring the expense of researching the
OF COUNSEl property history of that block.
J,.L\1ES H. KELÜ; M.D., F.A.c.P. I would suggest that the City take a look at the rear
~1EDICAL CO:-':SL:lTA;";T yard depth requirements of Ordinance 52.16 Subdivision
GORDO:-; H. H.~;-';S~U;IER IS AD:\flITED TO i"RACTICE 6(c). This ordinance currently requires a rear lot
. '" NORTH DAKOTA A"D WISCO"'I", depth of not less than 20% of the depth of the lot. I
PAUL A. RA]KO\....SKI IX WISCOXS¡;-..',
l\ROL A. STARK IS ilU,,:OIS AND ),[¡S50L:RI would suggest that the City consider changing that
AND WILLIAM J. C",SH~-{AN IN SOCTH DAKOTA. requirement to one of 40% of the depth of the lot.
. '~
· Ms. Rachel Stapleton
April 6, 1993
Page -2-
The ordinance currently requires lots to be of a depth of 125
feet. The ordinance also requires a front yard setback of at
least 30 feet. Assuming that we are dealing with a lot of 125
feet in depth (the minimum for newly platted lots) and assuming a
front yard setback of 35 feet (5 feet more than the minimum) , a
house could be constructed on the lot with a depth of 40 feet. I
believe that this would be a fairly deep house by general
standards. Most newly constructed houses have a depth of 30 feet
or less. But assuming a 35 foot setback and a 40 foot depth in
the house, that still leaves you with a rear yard depth of 40~ of
the entire lot.
Granted, not all existing lots are 125 feet in depth. Not all
existing lots meet the 75 foot width requirement which allows the
construction of a house having more width than depth. But in
those circumstances where a problem may exist, the owner of the
property could address those concerns by pursuit of a variance.
With consideration of a variance, the City would then have an
opportunity to look at all of the circumstances relating to the
lot, the house, and the surrounding properties. Where
appropriate, the City can relax their rear yard setbacks. But in
· situations such as that currently under construction, the City
could still require as much of a rear yard setback (even though
it may be less than 40~) as appropriate under all of the
circumstances.
I would suggest that the City Council refer this issue to the
Planning Commission with my comments for consideration. The
Planning Commission may want to solicit some input from local
builders and the building inspector to determine the
appropriateness of a change in the ordinance. I recognize that
40~ for a rear yard setback may not be workable in all cases. It
should not be a problem for new lots. If it is a problem for old
lots, the variance procedure is available. If 40~ is too large
of a requirement, then the Planning Commission can come back with
an alternative such as 30~ or 35~. Currently, the ordinance
requires only 20~. That clearly opens the door for problems such
as the one now occurring.
Finally, I would like to address the issue of a repairable car
lot proposed for industrial zoned property located to the north
and west of First Avenue Northwest. As you know, all industrial
uses are subject to special use permit. Section 52.21 Subd. 4
sets forth the industrial requirements for the issuance of a
special use permit. Among requirements which may become
applicable is the issue of the discharge of hazardous wastes.
52.21 Subd. 4 also refers the Planning Commission to the general
·
T
-.
· Ms. Rachel Stapleton
April 6, 1993
Page -3-
special use permit standards found at Section 52.8 Subd. 4. This
section has a number of other requirements which must be met
before the issuance of a special use permit. The Planning
Commission and the Council must find that the use, at the
proposed location:
a) will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, morals, comfort, convenience, or general welfare of
the neighborhood or the City;
b) will be harmonious with the general and applicable
specific objectives of the comprehensive plan of the City
and this ordinance;
c) will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained
so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with
the existing or intended character of the general vicinity
and will not change the essential character of that area;
d) will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future
neighboring uses;
· e) will be served adequately by essential public facilities
and services, including streets, police, fire protection,
drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer
systems, and schools;
f) will not create excessive additional requirements at
public cost for public facilities and services and will not
be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community;
g) will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials,
equipment, and conditions of operation that will be
detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare
because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke,
fumes, glare, or odors;
h) will have vehicular approaches to the property which are
so designed as not to create traffic, congestion, or an
interference with traffic or surrounding public
thoroughfares;
i) will have adequate facilities to provide sufficient off
street parking and loading space to serve the proposed use;
·
W
-
e Ms. Rachel Stapleton
April 6, 1993
Page -4-
j ) will not result in the destruction, damage of a natural,
scenic, or historic feature of major importance;
k) will conform to specific standards of this ordinance
applicable to the particular use.
In undertaking this review, the Planning Commission and City
Council should keep in mind that the property has already been
zoned for industrial use. Therefore, the mere fact that you are
dealing with a use which is light industrial should not in and of
itself be considered a factor which would justify denial of a
special use permit. In other words, the fact that there may be
an industrial use near park property or near a residential area
cannot be the basis for the denial in light of the fact that the
City previously zoned this property for industrial use with the
adjacent uses were in existence or arose after the industrial
zoning occurred.
What the Planning Commission and the City Council wants to
consider is whether or not this particular industrial use has
some unique quality or aspect which renders it unacceptable as
. far as the criteria discussed above are concerned.
Finally, I also wish to point out that Section 52.8 Subd. 6
allows the City to place conditions on the issuance of the
special use permit. In this particular case, if concerns arise
when the standards are analyzed, but the concerns may not be so
significant as to justify denial of the special use permit, the
Planning Commission and the City Council may then look at placing
conditions upon the issuance so as to address the concerns. For
instance, one condition to be considered may relate to the hours
of operation and an appropriate limitation. Another
consideration may have to do with screening of the activity, such
as requiring a large privacy type of fence to be constructed
around the operation. The statute also allows conditions to be
placed upon the use with regard to ingress and egress to the
property. That is something else that the Planning Commission
may want to consider.
All area properties should be notified of the request for a
special use permit and be provided with an opportunity to express
concerns at the hearing on the request. The City of St. Joseph,
as an adjacent property owner, also has a right to appear at the
hearing, through a representative, and voice its concerns with
the proposal.
.
V
\ -:
.. Ms. Rachel Stapleton
April 6, 1993
Page -5-
Rachel, if there are any other questions regarding this matter,
please let me know.
Very truly yours,
DONOHUE RAJKOWSKI LTD.
JHS/jck
Enclosure
L: \gen \15692\af040593. 011
.
.
'"
~ of ST. JOSEPH
21 FIRST AVENUE NW
PO BOX 668 INCORPORATED IN 1890
ST.. JOSEPH, MINNESaI'A 56374 MEMBER LEAGUE OF MUNICIPALITIES
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT
APPLICATION FORM
DATE DF EVENT: ¡íf~ /~, /9'1 ¿;.
APPLICANT/ORGANIZATION: J..c. pAf"¿'./e,
CONTACT PERSON: fit,vk 2 1'YJh7.....v'
PHONE NUMBER: <;~- 774--9
,
ADDRESS: éìñ .AJcrlh ~~('ë
TYPE OF ENTERTAINMENT: ¿/I/~ p?tft¡S,;;' Duk,cÍe.-
. BEGINNING/ENDING TIME FOR ENTERTAINMENT: 3.'óZ) - C¡.'tv ph---
APPROX I MA TE NUMBER OF PART I C I PANTS: ~-O 4.0 '-po' c;/
, .
WILL ALCOHOL BE CONSUMED: ~ YES ____ NO
"
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF EVENT: a~ cI~¿v /J?t(>IC~ e~vž;;:f'- ¿"-,,,.?4-.
!bel Vrv,Pd &-J~, d~. #t"n?/~ #Í'I ?-I he ~cu..,-d {.,..,
+c.Á./ù ðJ75 rkfL¡ Ç'C~ð o{"'¡;~w:-. f?cpeÿ'.Iy ~Y1.pV Uh~/
((?hkc+ crcl¡a~~" -/- fYe-,~ / 4- ð"2vn",vs.
dr·l /Y, /9fs $// t;Ø4~ '
DATE . Ä URE
For Office Use Only
Requirements/Remarks:
. Fee:
Date of Approval City Clerk/Admin.
.
(~f
'"
. ;:> ~ -rJ
-v- r ~ --\
4;r '\ t ¡-
'\ P
~ G '"f
~ -\- ""\ "1""
- ì- \.^
~ -
:~ _-'!<,......::.-,:O ? <>
~ :r...ujj;7 ~, "i- ~ ~
(\ ~ \)
g2~¿'~~;~;;q:/ r- t
~ -r-
I.J. . -\--::) !
.~-.. - F -;þ
~ r - -<
...... t/)..- -\
..- - ~ ';a-
-~- ~ -
,-<m- I' f\
,s. '" 'v ~ 11\
3B ". r (\ "" ~
_ u_. - ~
"G':. ~ r
-0..>:"""") 6 c ...,.- ~
OJ CD - G p. ~ J
r-+ ef) -, -4,.- LA
:::;-- UJ - F - '\ r
~ ô' '" f" ~
t-> ~ ;:-
0.. -:::::::: "-
~ --
.
.
.
,
·
·
·