HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 [05] May 20 {Book 30}
CIT¥ OF ST. JOSEPH
. www.cityofstjoseph.com
St. Joseph City Council
May 20,2004
7:00 PM
1. 7:00 PM - Call to Order
Administrãtor
ludy Weyrens 2. Approve Agenda
3. Consent Agenda
Mdyor a. Bills Payable - Requested Action: Approve check numbers 34241-34292
Lõrry I. Hosch b. Minutes - Requested Action: April 6, 2004
c. Safety Manual- Requested Action: Approve the cost for a new safety manual.
Councilors d. Fire Fighter Appointment - Requested Action: Accept the recommendation of the
Fire Board and appoint Shirley Brill, Amanda Cherne, Ken Jacobson and Jon
AI Rõssier Prom to the St. Joseph Volunteer Fire Department.
Ross Rieke e. Meeting Fees -Requested Action: Increase Planning Commission meeting fees to
Gõry Utsch $35.00 per meeting effective January 1, 2004.
f. Intoxicating Liquor Licenses, Wine Licenses, and Club Licenses - Requested Action:
Dõle Wick Approve licenses as stated in the attachment, pending receipt of the applicable
fees, insurance certificates, and application forms.
4. 7:00 PM - Public Comments
.- 5. 7:05 PM - KDV, Jennifer Thienes - 2003 Audit
6. 7:20 PM - Why USA - Rezoning Request - Birch Street East
, -
7. 7:30 PM - Foxmore Hollow
a. Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan
b. Re-zone
c. PUD & Special Use Permit
d. Preliminary Plat
8. 7:50 PM - Ordinance Amendment 54.18, Park Dedication Fees
9. Building Official Report
a. Rental Inspection Forms
10. City Engineer Reports
a. Feasibility Report - 16th Avenue
b. Update Utility Extension 295th
c. Other matters
11. Department Head Reports
12. Mayor Reports
13. Council Reports
14. Administrator Reports
. a. Downtown Lighting Project
15. Adjourn
2.) College Avenue North· PO ßox 668 . Sõint. Joseph. Minncsotõ )6,74
Phone ,2.0,,6,,72.01 ¡:d x ,2.0,,6,,0,42.
CITY OFST JOSEPH 05/17/04 3:02 PM
Page 1
Bills Payable
.
;heck # Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ
134241 POSTMASTER postage $5.83 601 49420 322
)34242 A-1 TOILET RENTAL satelite rental-memorial park $63.90 490 45203 531
134243 ACCLAIM BENEFITS administration expenses $11.11 101 41530 137
134243 ACCLAIM BENEFITS administration expenses $22.22 101 41430 137
134243 . ACCLAIM BENEFITS administration expenses $3.70 603 43230 137
134243 ACCLAIM BENEFITS administration expenses $3.70 602 49490 137
)34243 ACCLAIM BENEFITS administration expenses $14.81 601 49440 137
134243 ACCLAIM BENEFITS administration expenses $11.11 101 45202 137
\34243 / ACCLAIM BENEFITS administration expenses $33.35 101 ' 42120 137
)34244 AUTO VALUE PARTS STORES - WES water pump return -$2.36 101 45202 220
134244 AUTO VALUE PARTS STORES - WES water pump return -$2.37 101 43120 220
'34244 AUTO VALUE PARTS STORES - WES plugs, filters, anti-freeze $645.23 105 42220 220
134245 BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES refuse-fire hall $53.73 105 42220 384
134245 BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES refuse-maint shop $53.73 101 45201 384
134245 BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES refuse-water plant $53.73 602 49490 384
)34245 BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES refuse-residential $9,556.80 603 43230 384
)34245 BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES refuse-parks $188.19 101 45202 384,
)34246 CELLULAR 2000 april cell phone service $108.77 101 42151 321
134246 CELLULAR 2000 april cell phone service $27.20 101 43120 321
)34246 CELLULAR 2000 april cell phone service $27.19 101 41430 321
)34246 . CELLULAR 2000 april cell phone service $27.19 101 45202 321
134246 CELLULAR 2000 april cell phone service $27.19 602 49490 321
). CITY OF ST. CLOUD apr sewer rental $14,065.25 602 49480 419
~34 9 COLD SPRING VETERINARY CLINIC kennel fees $44.00 101 42700 300
FIRST STATE BANK apr ach fees $30.00 101 41530 200
)34249 FIRST STATE BANK ch~ck charge per stmt $22.75 101 41530 200
)34250 GOODIN COMPANY rain guard control (3) $66.44 101 41942 220
)34250 GOODIN COMPANY rain guard control (3) $132.89 101 45202 220
)34250 GOODIN COMPANY credit balance -$30.73 101 41942 210
)34251 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GRO water chemicals $251.94 601 49420 210
)34252 HULS NURSERY tree replacement $15.98 101 45203 532
)34253 I. T. L. PATCH COMPANY shoulder emblems (50) $112.89 101 42120 171
)34254 J & M OIL CO. ups service $29.28 601 49440 322
)34254 J & M OIL CO. ' #2 dyed fuel $365.72 101 45202 220
)34254 J & M OIL CO. ups service $19.53 101 42120 322
)34255 LEEF BROS clothing service/floor runner $53.59 601 49440 171
134255 LEEF BROS clothing servicelfloor runner $53.59 602 49490 171
)34255 LEEF BROS clothing service/floor runner $53.59 101 45202 171
)34255 LEEF BROS clothing service/floor runner $53.59 101 43120 171
)34255 LEEF BROS ' clothing service/floor runner $106.46 101 41942 220
)34255 LEEF BROS clothing servicelfloor runner $41.04 101 42120 220
)34256 MCDOWALL COMFORT MANAGEMEN service contract, HVAC , $5,725.00 101 41942 220
)34257 MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT CORP apr EDA services $2,206.89 150 46500 300 .
)34258 SEH engineering-momingside acres $2,727.00 101 43131 303
)34258 SEH engineering-foxmore hollow $1,002.00 101 43131 303
)34259 ST. JOE TOUCHLESS CAR WASH car washes-police $17.04 101 42152 220
)34260 STEARNS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 2004 SCML dues $25.00 101 41110 433
)34261 SUPER AMERICA aprilgas $200.31 101 45202 210
)34261 SUPER AMERICA aprilgas $120.19 105 42220 210
)34261 SUPER AMERICA aprilgas $200.31 101 43120 210
)34261 SUPER AMERICA april gas $200.31 602 49480 210
)34261 SUPER AMERICA april gas $200.31 601 49440 210
)34262 THE RECORD subscription renewal $25.00 101 42120 433
~. TORFINO ENTERPRISES metal-tee $166.50 101 42120 240
UNUM LIFE INSURANCE disability insurance $397.46 101
)34265 US CABLE internet service $50.55 101 41430 321
)34265 US CABLE internet service $40.55 105 42250 321
)34266 US LINK april phone service $42.16 602 49490 321
)34266 US LINK april phone service $32.84 150 46500 321
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/17/043:02 PM
Page 2
Bills Payable
.
Check # Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ
034266 US LINK april phone service $71.25 602 49470 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $175.69 101 45201 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $44.51 601 49440 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $89.02 105 42250 321
034266 US LINK april phone service ' $71:24 602 49471 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $257.70 101 42151 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $46.96 602 49472 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $46.96 602 49473 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $45.90 602 49490 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $44.51 101 41941 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $45046 101 41430 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $143.50 101 41430 321
034266 US LINK april phone service $44.51 101 41946 321
034267 US TREASURY-IRS 4th Quarter 2003 penalty $337.22 101 41430 210
034267 US TREASURY-IRS 4th Quarter 2003 penalty $337.22 602 49480 210
034267 US TREASURY-IRS 4th Quarter 2003 penalty $337.22 601 49440 210
034267 US TREASURY-IRS 4th Quarter 2003 penalty $337.22 101 43120 210
034267 US TREASURY-IRS 4th Quarter 2003 penalty $337.22 101 42120 210
034268 XCELENERGY utilities $122.40 101 43160 386
034269 ZEP MANUFACTURING degreaser, toilet paper, towels $76.70 101 45201 210
034269 ZEP MANUFACTURING toilet tissue, deodorizer, fiy spray, weed spray $2,845.29 101 45202 210
034269 ZEP MANUFACTURING toilet tissue, towels $24.14 101 41942 220
034270 ST. JOSEPH CHAMBER OF COMMER city contribution $25,000.00 230 45202 530 .
034271 ACCOUNTEMPS acctg-4/30 $975.00 101 41530 300
034272 AFSCME COUNCIL 65 dues $184.20 101
034273 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE 5/12 cc state $71.32 101
034273 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE 5/12 pay state $1,137.29 101
034274 EFTPS 5/12 pay fed $2,536.48 101
034274 EFTPS 5/12 pay fica $2,630.08 101
034274 EFTPS 5/12 cc fed $99.55 101
034274 EFTPS 5/12 cc fica $475.88 101
034275 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GRO tests $109.00 601 49420 210
034275 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GRO water tests $109.00 601 49420 312
034276 ING LIFE INS & ANNUITY COMPANY 5/12 pay deferred comp $75.00 101
034277 KEEPRS, INC/CY'S UNIFORMS stinger battery-meyer $29.77 101 42120 171
034277 KEEPRS, INC/CY'S UNIFORMS shirt, patches & application-gustin $38.27 101 42120 171
034277 KEEPRS, INC/CY'S UNIFORMS collar brass-klein $18.05 101 42120 171
034278 LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVIC dues $185.00 101
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE repair supplies $24.79 602 49450 220
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE repair supplies $15.95 105 42210 220
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE repair supplies $62.20 105 42280 220
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE repair supplies $249.45 101 45202 220
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE repair supplies $79.75 101 45201 220
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE repair supplies $49.81 101 43220 220
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE repair supplies $128.01 101 43120 220
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE repair supplies $36.92 101 42120 220
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE repair supplies $45.46 601 49440 220
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE storage bins -$540.00 490 43120 520
034279 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE repair supplies $34.30 101 41942 220
034280 MINNESOTA ELEVATOR, INC may service $74.56 101 41942 220
034281 MINNESOTA TRAVEL MANAGEMENT gas/lease unit #4783 $839.10 101 42152 414
034281 MINNESOTA TRAVEL MANAGEMENT gas/lease unit #4448 $781.50 101 42152 414
034281 MINNESOTA TRAVEL MANAGEMENT gas/lease unit #4182 $673.33 101 42152 414
034282 MN DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH state water surcharge $1,318.00 601 49440 444 .
034283 ONE CALL CONCEPTS, INC apr notification fees $106.95 602 49490 319
034283 ONE CALL CONCEPTS, INC apr notification fees $106.95 601 49440 319
034284 PERA 5/12 pay retire $3,510.80 101
034285 PERA - CC 5/12 cc retire $174.00 101
034286 RAJKOWSKI HANSMEIER L TO legal fees-police $2,787.50 101 42120 304
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/17/043:02 PM
Page :3
Bills Payable
.
;heck # Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ
134286 RAJKOWSKI HANSMEIER L TD legal fees-northland 8 $493.00 430 43120 530
134286 RAJKOWSKI HANSMEIER LTD legal fees-area" $660.00 101 41610 304
)34286 RAJKOWSKI HANSMEIER L TD legal fees-stonehouse $60.00 101 41610 304
)34286 RAJKOWSKI HANSMEIER L TD legal fees-allspec $24.00 101 42401 304
)34286 RAJKOWSKI HANSMEIER L TD legal fees-general $3,997.50 101 41610 304
134287 ST. CLOUD HOSPITAL hepatitis b vaccine (2) $140.00 105 42210 305
134288 ST. JOSEPH FIRE DEPARTMENT postcards $37.50 105 42210 322
134289 STEARNS COUNTY RECORDER recording fee-indian hills $30.00 101 41910 431
134290 TIREMAXX SERVICE CENTERS tire repair $14.95 101 42152 220
34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER 2003 go bonds $30,378.83 328 47100 611
34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER 1997 fire hall-interest $26,935.00 317 47100 611
,34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER 2003 go imp crossover-interest $8,127.50 332 47100 611
134291 US BANK TRUST CENTER '00 public project revenue-interest $25,912.50 322 47100 611
,34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER 1998 go improve-interest $9,620.00 319 47100 611
34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER 1999 improvement-interest $26,450.64 321 47100 611
34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER 2001 go sewer rev-interest $13,693.75 602 47100 611
34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER 2001 go improvement-interest $9,028.75 324 47100 611
34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER 2002 go cert-interest $3,615.00 327 47100 611
34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER 2002 go water rev-interest $13,946.25 601 47100 611
34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER 03 EDA revenue-interest $13,871.25 329 47100 611
34291 US BANK TRUST CENTER '02 go improvement-interest $73,218.75 325 47100 611
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $16.77 101 45123 383
iI XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $6.28 101 42500 326
XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $536.41 105 42280 383
XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $354.99 105 42280 381
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $33.25 602 49471 383
34292 XCELENERGY gas/electric- $21.27 101 42610 386
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $1,795.86 101 43160 386
34292 XCELENERGY gas/electric $66.40 101 45201 383
34292 XCELENERGY gas/electric $116.34 602 49480 383
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $281.07 602 49480 381
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $76.36 601 49410 383
34292 XCELENERGY gas/electric $821.61 601 49410 381
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $295.23 601 49420 381
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $91.44 601 49420 383
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $173.19 601 49435 381
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $42.79 101 45202 381
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $99.59 101 43120 383
34292 XCELENERGY gas/electric $9.36 101 45123 381
34292 XCELENERGY gas/electric $34.24 101 43120 381
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $22.82 101 45201 381
4292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $188.97 101 41942 383
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $478.96 101 41942 381
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $274.31 101 41941, 383
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric $253.05 101 ,41941 381
4292 XCELENERGY gas/electric $70.15 602 49470 381
34292 XCEL ENERGY gas/electric, $42.07 101 41946 381
$356,374.18
.
DRAFT
April 6, 2004
Page 1 of 2
. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in joint session with
St. Wendel Township on April 6, 2004 at 8:30PM at the St. Wendel Township Hall.
St. Joseph City Council Members Present: Mayor Larry Hosch. Members of the City Council Gary Utsch,
AI Rassier, Dale Wick, Ross Rieke. Administrator Judy Weyrens.
St. Wendel Township Supervisors Present: St. Wendel Township Chair Çarl Stich, Supervisors Greg
Salk, Ron Douvier. Township Clerk Renee Salzer.
Others Present: City Engineer Joe Bettendorf, Boys and Girls Club Director Tom Wicks.
Mayor Hosch stated that the purpose of joint meeting is to discuss the potential sewer expansion to the
southern portion of St. Wendel Township. The City of St. Cloud is in the process of designing a new
treatment plant and St. Joseph needs to determine the amount of space that will be needed in the new
plant.
City Engineer Joe Bettendorf stated that St. Joseph has committed to the City of St. Cloud that when the
south em portion of St. Wendel Township requests services, St. Joseph would provide such. The City has
determined the amount of treatment space that is need for St. Joseph, including growth from St. Joseph
Township, but is unaware of the desire of St. Wendel Township. It is anticipated that the City must plan
for a 15 to 20 year time period.
Carl Stich stated that they have been waiting for information from the City before they made any
decisions. At this time they have not had a response to the questions that were asked. Hosch stated that
the work had been stopped when the invoice for services was not paid. It was agreed by all present that
the City will review the invoices to assure that they occurred after St. Wendel agreed to pay the costs of
the study and re-submit a bill.
. Rassier stated that the City at this time needs to know what the 20 year plan is for St. Wendel. Is the plan
to request St. Joseph to annex Pleasant Acres and if so what time frame. Those present agreed that if
St. Joseph is to expand to said area, then both Boards should be meeting to discuss orderly annexation.
Stich stated that the first proposal of the City included St. Wendel installing the services. He stated that
they do not have the capacity to do such. Bettendorf stated that the City can review the process that was
outlined and determinè if that is feasible. Weyrens clarified that the City proposal limited the risk to the
City, as St. Wendel was financing the project and the City would manage the utilities and assume the
planning process for the same area. The area was then to be phased into the City as it is not feasible for
the City to immediately provide services to the entire southern portion of St. Wendel Township. The City
needs to begin planning for service extension as well as St. Wendel Township.
Berg stated it is his opinion that the annexation of St. Wendel to the City of St. Joseph is realistic, it is just
a matter of time and determining the best way to approach the detachment. To move the matter forward,
Bettendorf will provide St. Wendel Township with the information they were seeking and once that
information is available, Weyrens will contact Salzer to arrange another meeting. In addition, the City will
forward a copy of the annexation agreement between St. Joseph Township and the City of St. Joseph to
Salzer for distribution to the Board members of St. Wendel Township. It is anticipated that the City of St.
Joseph and St. Wendel Township will begin the process of completing and Orderly Annexation
Agreement.
Summer Recreation Participation: Hosch stated that the City once again is requesting financial support
from St. Wendel Township for summer recreation. Hosch stated that the City of St. Joseph has requested
that the St. Cloud Boys and Girls Club provide summer recreation activities for the City of St. Joseph.
While they are willing to do so, they are requesting that the City cover the program shortfall. St. Joseph
Township has already committed to reimbursing a proportionate share of the shortfall based on the
number of participants from St. Joseph Towhsip.
.
DRAFT
April 6, 2004
Page 2 of 2
Tom Wicks, Director the S1. Cloud Boys and Girls Club presented a brief overview of the program. Wicks ·
stated that the goal of the program is to make it a community program offering sports as well as other
activities. The director for the summer program will be Geri Bechtold who already works with most of the
children in the area. Wicks clarified that the Boys and Girls Club is anxious to expand the program, but is
not in a position to fund a deficit. Therefore, if the deficit is not covered then the program cannot move
forward.
Stich and Salk both stated that St. Wendel has an evening summer recreation program that is funded with
gambling funds and volunteer labor. If the residents of Pleasant Acres want to participate in the St.
Joseph program then they should pay their fair share. Stick and Salk stated that it is their opinion if they
contribute towards the S1. Joseph program, other communities may approach them as well. Stich stated
that any funds contributed from 81. Wendel would have to be expended from the gambling funds,
controlled by the recreation association. If they wish to contribute, they have the power to do so.
Compost Stickers: Hosch reported that the City compost area operated at a deficit in 2003 and the City is
requesting a contribution from S1. Joseph Township and St. Wendel Township. The deficit for 2003 was
approximately $ 2,1 DO, creating a $ 700 deficit for S1. Wendel and St. Joseph Township. Rassier
reported that in the future the fee will be increased to offset the cost, but for the current time, the City is
requesting to reimbursed. Stich stated that upon receiving an invoice they would contribute $ 700 for the
compost deficit.
Adjournment: The Council left the meeting at 10:00 PM.
Judy Weyrens ·
Administrator
·
DRAFT
April 6, 2004
Page 1 of 2
· Pursuant to due call and notice, the St. Joseph City Council meet as the Board of Equalization and
Review on Tuesday, April 6, 2004 at 6:30 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall.
Members Present: Mayor LarryHosch. Members of the Council Gary Utsch, AI Rassier, Dale Wick.
Administrator Judy Weyrens. City Assessor Ollie Lesnick. County Assessor Bob Lindval.
Others Present: Dick Taufen.
Mayor Hosch opened the meeting and stated the purpose of the Board of Equalization and Review is to
provide an opportunity for residents to contest their market value for tax year 2004, Collectable in 2005.
At this time Hosch turned the floor over to City Assessor, Ollie Lesnick.
Lesnick stated in reviewing the changes in market value, residential property was adjusted an average
increase of ten percent, while commercial and industrial increased an average between 12 and 15
percent. Lesnick further stated that the increased market values are purely a result of the booming
housing industry. At this time the floor was opened for questions/comments.
Dick Taufen - 84-53841-000 Taufen questioned the increase of his property located at 32 - 2nd
Avenue NW. The notice includes two different values and Taufen
questioned which number indicates the actual value. County Assessor
Bob Lindvall stated that the two numbers indicate the limited market
value and then the assessed market value. The limited valuation is a
cap that limits the maximum the market value can be increased.
Therefore, on the statement in question, the value that will be used for
taxation is the market valuation. Lindval verified that Taufen was not
questioning his valuation, rather the illustration on his statement, to
which Taufen concurred.
· As their was no one else present to present their objection, Lesnick reported that the following residents
have submitted a written request for consideration.
84-53733-176 & 175 Joe Miller is requesting reconsideration of the storage sheds located
behind Cedar Street, located adjacent to the Wobegon Trail. The
proposed valuation represents a 23% increase and Miller is contending
that the area is wet and without drainage. Therefore it is his opinion that
the assessed value is too high. Lesnick stated that he concurred with
Miller and is recommending the valuation be decreased from the
proposed $ 63,500 to $ 59,400. This adjustment would be for the land
only.
84-53475-054 Aleta Kvatum requested review of her property. Lindval stated that the
property was reviewed and it was discovered that some data entry errors
were made and he recommends reducing the value from proposed $
127,700 to $ 123,400.
84-53533-067 Lindval reported that he was contacted by a property owner of the
84-53533-068 Graceview Estates Townhome Association, who indicated that the
84-53533-069 property values are assessed higher than the selling price. Lindval
84-53533-070 reported that after review, the property owner was correct and Lindval
recommends the following adjustments:
PID Number Proposed Adiusted
84-53533-067 $ 156,700 $ 150,600
84-53533-068 158,000 151,800
84-53533-069 157,600 151,400
· 84-53533-070 157,600 151,400
DRAFT
April 6, 2004
Page 2 of 2
84-53790-200 Chad Hess requested review of his property as the statement indicated
he had new improvements of $ 17,400 and in fact he has done nothing to .
his property. After reviewing the property, it was noted the property
owner is correct. Therefore, Lindval recommends reducing the proposed
value from $ 145,200 to $ 127,800.
84-53474-068 Deb and Scott Schmidt have requested a review of their property as the
value has increased from $ 107,500 to $ 115,000. After discussion
Lindval and Lesnick concurred that the proposed valuation is justified
and do not recommend amending such.
84-53440-010 Catholic Charities has requested review of the Senior Apartments
located on West Minnesota Street. Lindval stated that he received this
request earlier this same day and has not had an opportunity to review
the property. He requested that the Board of Review not be closed at
this meeting so that the final review of this property may be completed.
Utsch made a motion to accept the recommendations of the City and County Assessor making the
following adjustments for the 2004 Assessment, payable 2005:
NAME PID NUMBER Proposed Adjusted Increase
Assessment Assessment (Decrease)
J. Miller 84-53733-175 175,000 0
J. Miller 84-53733-176 73,200 63,500 -9,700
A Kvatum 84-53475-057 127,700 123,400 -4,300
R. DeSmet 84-53533-067 156,700 150,600 -6,100
Heid Construction 84-53533-068 158,000 151,800 -6,200 .
Heid Construction 84-53533-069 157,600 151,400 -6,200
M. Mitra 84-53533-070 157,600 151,400 -6,200
Scott Schmidt 84-53474-068 115,800 0
Chad Hess 84-53790-200 145,200 127,800 -17,400
This motion further leaves open the Board of Reivew Hearing until the City and County Assessor
have an opportunity to review and submit a report on the objection of Catholic Charities. The
motion was seconded by Rassier.
~iscussion: Rassier questioned the proposed reduction for J. Míller as he believes the proposed
assessment is reasonable and is not convinced the area is low thereby creating an adjustment.
The motion carried unanimously by those present.
Assessor Appoint - Tax year 2005, Collectible 2006: Lindval reported that Lesnick has indicated that he
would like to retire has City Assessor. The City currently assesses over 1600 parcels which is a
considerable workload. The County is requesting that Lesnick provide services for one more year so that
the County may plan for the additional work load. The Council by consensus agreed to provide assessing
services for the year 2005 and then negotiate with the County to assume the services after that
assessment year.
Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 7:40 PM.
Judy Weyrens .
Administrator
I Attachment: Yes or No I
· Consent Agenda 3 ( c )
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: Mav 17~ 2004
Safety Training
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Safety Manual
PREVIOUS ACTION
None
· RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION
Approve the cost for a new Safety Manual.
FISCAL IMPACT
$1495.00
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
Each year, a new safety manual is needed to stay updated with the new OSHA compliance and training
requirements.
·
SAFE'¡Y TRAIN, INC. .
<safetytrainsue@earthlink.net>
Susan Pearson wk: 763-428-2297
Cell-612-306-6646 13005 Main Street
Fx: 763-428-2298 Rogers, MN 55374
April 20, 2004
Mr. Dick Taufen
P. W. Director
POBox 668
St. Joseph, MN 56374
Re: Safety Training
Dear Dick:
I am taking the liberty of sending my quote for your safety manual.
You mentioned in class that you may be needing a new manual. Indeed .
if you have not updated your manual, there are quite a few changes in
the last few years that should be reflected-in that manual.
If you have any questions of would like to talk further, please call.
THANKYOU.
Sincerely,
r,
/' ,f)
/~
,")1A/.)~ i ~,.
Susan Pearson
SAFETY TRAIN, INC.
.
. SAFETY TRAIN, INC.
<safetytrainsue@earthlink.net>
Susan Pearson wk: 763-428-2297
Cell-612-306-6646 13005 Main Street
Fx: 763-428-2298 Rogers, MN 55374
April 20, 2004
Mr. Dick Taufen
P. W. Director
POBox 668
St. Joseph, MN 56374
Re: Safety Manual Quote
Safety Manual............. u. ........... .. ...$1495.00
This is comprehensive Safety Manual including all chapters required
by Minnesota and Federal OSHA. I make every attempt to keep the
. Manual as short as possible and tailored it specifically to your city. I
also use clear language in the Manual setting forth the responsibilities of
management, supervisors and employees; OSHA compliance and
training requirements. I also include forms and letter samples for your
convenience.
Included with the Manual is a FREE pre-OSHA walkthrough in your
facilities and FREE consulation as needed.
ALSO included in a guarantee that if OSHA fines for any deficiency
in the Manual itself, I will pay the first $1000.00 of that fine as long as
the fine occurs within one year of the delivery of the Manual.
According to OSHA regulations, your manual must be updated yearly.
As long as I do these updates, my guarantee extends for another year. I
have written over 100 Manuals, and OSHA has not found a problem
with any of the manuals to date.
THANKYOU for your consideration. /7 /j
{~ ~~~A-e-'
/J
// ~/~_-þv--
<-/ ¡:;y
.
· I Attachment: Yes or No I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Consent 3 (d)
Firefighter Applicants
DATE: May 20,2004
Fire
ORIGlNATlNG DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Fire Fighter Appointment - Accept the recommendation of the Fire Board and appoint Shirley Brill,
Amanda Cherne, Ken Jacboson and John Prom to the St. Joseph Volunteer Fire Department
PREVIOUS ACTION
The St. Joseph Volunteer Fire Department had four open positions and received authorization to fill the
vacancies. The positions were advertised and the City received 10 applicants. The personnel committee
· for the Fire Department is responsible for screening and testing and bringing the final candidates to the
Fire Board. The Fire Board then reviews the process and makes a recommendation to the City Council
and St.]oseph Township Board.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Accept the recommendation of the Fire Board and confirm the appointments to the Fire Department.
FISCAL IMPACT
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
For your convenience a copy of the Fire Board minutes are included in the back of your packet.
·
. I Attachment: Yes or No I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Consent 3 (e)
Planning Commission Meeting Fees
DATE: May 20, 2004
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Planning Commission Meeting Fees - Requested Action: Increase the meeting fee to $ 35.00 effective
January 1, 2004.
PREVIOUS ACTION
During the budget process the Council had numerous discussions on meeting fees for subsidiary boards
and commission. As you are aware the Council cannot increase their wages (including meeting fees) until
. after an election. By consensus the Council agreed to increase the Planning Commission fee due to the
large amount of activity. It was also agreed to review all the fees during the 2005 budget process and
establish a fee that will be increase at the same rate employee~ wages are increased.
However, the fees for the Planning Commission were not increased as their was no fonnal action to do so.
The Council must by motion increase a fee.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Increase the meeting fees for the Planning Commission from $ 20.00 per meeting to $ 35.00 effective
January 1, 2004.
FISCAL IMPACT
$ 1,080 increased fees, which is included in the budget
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
.
. I Attachment: ~ or No I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: May 20, 2004
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
_Administration
AGENDA ITEM
Approval of Intoxicating Liquor Licenses, Wine Licenses and Club Licenses
PREVIOUS ACTION
N/A
.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION
Approval of licenses as stated in the attachment, pending receipt of the applicable fees, insurance
certificates, and application forms.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
.
2004- 2005 LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATIONS
INTOXICATING LICENSES ·
EFFECTIVE 07-01-04 TO 06-30-05
Off· On- Sunday Wine Club
NAME Sale Sale
Nickels Entertainment, inc.
The Liç¡hthouse, 213 20TH Ave SE X X
Loso's Inc. X X X
Loso;s Main Street Pub, 21 Minnesota St W
P & L of St. Joseph, Inc. X X X
La Playette, 16 Colleç¡e Ave N
EI Paso Club & Lanes, Inc. X X X
EI Paso Club & Lanes, 200 - 2nd Ave NW
BIP, Inc. X X X
Sal's Bar & Grill, 109 Minnesota St W
St. Joe Amoco Liquor, Inc. X
St. Joe Amoco Liquor, 21 Birch St W
Hollander's of St. Joseph, Inc. X
St. Joseph Liquor Shoppe, 225 Cedar St E
American Legion Post 328 X X
John Kuebelbeck Post 328,101 Minnesota
St W
College of St. Benedict X
V.P. Business Office, 37 Colleqe Ave S
Bo Diddley's, Inc. X
Bo Diddley's, 19 Colleqe Ave N
·
·
· I Attachment: Yes or No I
REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Rezoning - Birch Street East
DATE: May 3,2004
AGENDA ITEM
Public Hearing - Rezoning of property abutting Birch Street from the current RI, Residential to B2,
Highway Business
PREVIOUS ACTION
Previously the Planning Commission enacted a resolution calling for a public hearing to rezone the
property abutting CR 75 from RI, Single Family to B2, Highway Business. At the time of that hearing,
the majority of residents objected to the rezoning. The property retained the Rl Single Family Zoning
Classification.
· When the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2003, the future land use map for this area guides this
same area for B2 uses. Therefore, rezoning the property is consistent with the future land use plan.
With regard to the neighborhood. The neighborhood in question has experienced turnover in property
owners, and this time 50% of the property owners petitioned the Planning Commission to rezone the
property to B2, Highway Business.
RECOMMENDED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Recommend the Council rezone the property identified from the current RI, Single Family to B2,
Highway Business.
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
As a reminder, spot zoning is not a good zoning practice and if the entire area is not zoned B2 then the
following should happen:
1. The request should be denied in the entirety with the property remaining Rl
2. The B2 Zoning district could be extended for contiguous property. For example, the
zoning classification could be extended form the eastern edge of the district to 1st Avenue
or just one house.
As I mentioned earlier the remaining option is to rezone the entire district.
·
CIT¥ OF ST. JOSEPH
WW1o:'.cityofstjosep h .com
.
Public Hearing
City of St. Joseph
The St. Joseph Planning Commission will be conducting a public hearing on Monday, May
Administrðtor 3,2004 at 7:0 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the
Judy Weyrens rezoning of all property north of the east/west alley abutting Birch Street East between the
north/south alley between College A venue North and 1 st A venue NE and the north/south
Mðyor alley between 1 sl Avenue NE and 2nd Avenue NE. The property is currently zoned R-l.
Lc:my J. Hosch All persons wishing to be heard will be heard with oral testimony limited to 5 minutes.
Councilors Written testimony may be submitted to the City Administrator, City of St. Joseph, PO Box
668, St. JosephMN 56374.
AJ R.õssier
R.oss R.ieke Judy Weyrens
Gðry Utsch Administrator
Ddc Wick
6!f3ffif
rnæ EL .
DJJ§ CD .~.- ~
.~"-._"....
.'-...
~ Œ~
> c::=? . L..-.J rnq \J I J '
~ái~1I;~R~[}j
~~.~æl~5
l ~ ~~IJQ ~~
Publish: April 23, 2004
.
2.)' Co II e g e A v c n u e Nor t h . P 0 ß 0 x 6 6 ß . S ð i nt, J 0 s e ph. M inn c sot õ 'í 6 ., 7 4
Phone ,2.°'16,.72.01 ¡:ô x ,2.0,,6j,O,42.
Please circle one of the options and return to me in the enclosed envelope no
~ later then Wed Feb 18th. Thank you again for your time.
.--- ------.
YES CIAMINFAVOROF RE-ZONING )
. . -,.~,...-~,....-.- -------
. NO I DO NOT WISH TO HAVE THIS RE-ZONED AT THIS TIME
SIGNATIJRE c{X. ,rh",-17'<.o .U..M'Ì'
ADDRESS mC"" ' cz!, ~' /\ ' '
~ 'J ~~ I'C\~ '-~~~
-
.
::ach Office Independently Owned and Operated 1EJ: [B
I<fAI.lœ
£OlIlolMOt.lSl>lG MAI.e:
.
.
·
Please circle one of the options and return to me in the enclosed envelope no later then
Wed Feb 18th. Thank you again for your time.
-'--- -..
~-
'-__ YES I AM INF A VOR OF RE-ZONING ~-.....
~___r_~__""_ _._..r_
- - -._---,_.~--_. . - - . . - . ~ - - - .. ·
- --.- .-.--.-.,------. -'
NO I DO NOT WISH TO HA VE TI-IIS AREA RE-ZONED AT THIS TIME
SIGNATURE 0-t~ (]5,u1:titL
ADDRESS ) / 7 11/:- /, s+ fl1/1Æ ~ ./Î
. Ie. (¡ 7\ 0d,~
/ ~ r::-: ' J --"
·
~ach Office Independently Owned and Operated (Ë:r rn
;£.t..!.jQ=:
ED.J-I.!.~ Ul.c:;.
RECEIVED fl ~I ;. 0 ¡) 4-
} APR 2 9 ZO~ ' ' ~ " , .
" ,'J/ rt ¿~ .¿ LV j, 0 h(jv ¿ 5/:'}1 ¿J 'e /, tv qr -é:. 7//5' c:: êJ Ie) -tJ-e.
.N~~,,~ " - '
_ 0 n ì'lJ 01 l' h.¿ r f-c / N tt c ri r;-od ( y 720 I?éc! fl· , h;5 is Q If
,cfer-Ti n....fA d 1'),. etl,dlde,r" (hI ahití't¿! f,!61, S'1reef
as? ktUJe-e1'1 -tk¿ }1o¡..rA/6ÓQ-r", a/lel peftvê¿;^ {/J/lêç,l¿ !It/¿/løe,
(0 ¡-IA otl cI I ~ flve. nd-e tJ Þ ct he! ,-¡-J,e, øo/'t hi StJCI t'> q/ /¿ y
e -r to e of, 11-.: I~ II ire. ¡!.¿ if N ¡;. 0/' cI ill J 1[$ f) ve fl tl e. )J Ii JI
'at .¿ .. ~- fI 0/11 .¿ ûddf-e65 ¡?jtð~
1.h:1 '~. ~ie/Ÿ!l~ '33 ~,f1~/¡ Sf. -;'b:-~t3
p-zJ1 .,., Ì1~ L ~1~'/0Í _~G.:,-7S-lf:{..
I 1',_!1t-».(, Í11-M./ ~ ' , " Ii -J: -- 7 3~3~~7
1 , '~~ ~Cf!~ //~~,.4t/e, 3C3-751'2
, , r '.1/ ¡ - .:gG..3-
I ,"If 0 if It{ fr: )/ 'Y/~¿r:t· '--"' d,ó E, ~30r
." . Jt'~ d-J,' ir ¡v./'èJ¿¡'5t¡ .-:XI £, ~ 3C3-'6>"7
II ~ ---- ~jJ~ i Ú~' , /ð$¿¡ckJ{~
} . ;,y~ -) {,_'jUð~ ~/ Ú< ·,c., _~/Õ7V>?pJ3.3-13§;~',
\, ..'../l~;~~pw'~. )07{, //5/! S.f., /..".
1\ '--7r2' ' ¡;f;.w'1 ~~~~3-
/_y;;;, ., . .,... I I . ...' , . 7(,,;5
'~ . ,;d-.~- , ' .' , ' , ' ¡;, a5-. _, -' c
~ß'¡' ~6. ¡: tf~ /b& ¥ ~ø tf/P~¿
Ifl .,. !)f;r;!c¡---~. . /tJ:> k:A' }1ve.. /!IE 3[;,3-,/172-
;æ~ ~C~, ..~ftJ.
'r;\ J~ :,j¿/I-€e' kv!e/e.r- j 35 ¡¿Þ"f}ve .¡¿IE C:¡t'O-SIO'J..
~'0l .. ~1f~ 34 !liE ¡st-ctv-e, '. '3GS-lf/fS-
--2í rJútW/0b, mÞen 3fE'..,fHfSf 2ïl-COI'-:!
\- ~\ fYC'~~ fìJ~ ¿:f(-dE:fÞ~ st· 253-2Z(o
~J J. JJJ.ey·~Jc;:.d~ ;)..9 /: Áh.SJ. J& J - 7'-/5<1
'.?-1-4 '-~ 30-¡d-Ave-¡.('i, ,3&.¿-,/3S.5
¿ ~ ~ a 1- -- /:>r/lVE ¡()§' - é).:l1- ð14~
t(ag a ì lS):~ (\JL aa l{ 'Û3 ~q
t/ð<¡ cJJ6 14 t{N~ 11 t 3f;- 3 -' 'l~'i''I
r"':"'" fè '") ( '1 '" ' y:
/'1 ~ I ~o/'LCAR~~~iV~; C I'
/f.,' '- /, &1'-"_, ,
, '. /, è" "'/()!J.1 .
l .Y-&Y.L/J! riJ1'~,' "--'
~'~" ' "/~ c ÁPR 2 {; 2004 .
./ -+~'(_/ .; _ (·-~~c·-.~--r~<~1O~~~'L....-7
j ''--~':''-';'L~4 '-. - .. í et:r1"OF STf JOS!iPlï(~
ij r::.) f ~/ i _.' ....f ~ -..;;¡~. /L-- ;..'-_f/ .J,,' ..
- (,,\ ,;:. - "..../ ~.:_((,/.......,-....,... -n / !o..
f, _) -----! { . /í ;,/
<; ì}
v'1 '"'-t-(!, I ~
ÇLJJ/¡Ll" ;Æ·j'l'L<1."ì. (í.) . , \ " " . t I ,'" 0.) ,
I .- ---L I ~ -#",.. L ¿VL\
.c'- " ,f '" "'":~' C-L-~ "
, 7..;;.,v LtL· '10, \! '/ '-/L/~k~C <'-'..-:-,'7 vL. :' "~ ¡ .', ..
f::-; %dc,'iliz.' .. ~'-.' i<.JL~¿¡i "-i!G-~
,/ " . ,J. ¿, "'-¡fT7 ~?t- _ý , " /
01/ /.-. ít: .) &.. , 7JI/' / ~ 0c. J;-d~"¡G
. ~- n..~,.. .."<.-\:..~.¿... . (, .' <.-- / /
~,/
t..~ ' " .. ¡'. ~. . -
( .r.r(Þ(:µ~~~~~/~~
¡/" ,/ / f 1//"" ~ ;:l-¿ 7 ¡-
a¡:U~~~~i' '~_, j
vÆ.171j~ 11/ ~1A/ 2f) 7-I:U¿ ..J:U-ër~4 ,~
Þf~ 'Y e<M~ -j,¿~ eJ!-~
Jl # I I \.' /, Z I i
" . . ,'...,.,;; / ' , / ¡ ,
~ t <-'" P _¿,;?[ 4¿, ì. j.è,v" ~M¿r
.... ' ' " '!, 'fl~' . Cc- / .. 'L-
'. . , ;". ,." ',1) r //-~ ,;; .-; > ", /
/, (L- C(.'-té..U ~z:- Jl.Ctl/¡á-~!!../::. ?-"¿¿/~ê.'-';/L'~d.... //¡:
~ .. I'" ," , /V ~,~ ~ " ._ ,''- ,""/ '-?..::.-.
...,., 'J .;; /1" /'. //, /' . /'//,: r . ''7-/ ,,/",/ ,
c...,--:,-<-¡...y"---C..~./<_"~,, _(¡.--l.;¡'t:.,fL ~LLc....(""^,,":r-4 ¿(..:u.. Ie L.,:--C,..::., ;<.-/
P..~kY:z-~~.., ¡:> ,,/>{ 7./)/, /_~. ',- {' ,~. ,"' /- .
! '-~ . L.. .--<-..- <.-ç.Lhf'-¿"~ t- r.n_~~f..-.-/~.......-7~í ",¿.JL ~.<..-,.-
Jj""" "~ /'" " . .','-;" / /' ,> ~-::. . It
- d---, ,.¿(...~...e;..~L--' L.c:;7L.~ ( "
1~" , ,,~ - .~..
./ .' ¡ , ~ , ,:~
W-Y ~_ .-Lt.---' _~. ,;; -" ,_ . _. .j
--'A 4 - / ' ..- .... _,of .; /'J '\ , ,..
1 c~ I ~¿'¿/G 7 ~~, 7j .~r..æ. /~ , J¿'J<L,
~~-:;ZX~~~~?
-i' < "~ ¿<
~'-~ ¡.tjI / , ' ',~~ ; r/'K~
.. / /.,
i' ~
(::... ,,( ," ,""/ -,. /, '
v .ft~d~4' >~rMøfL ib:C'tI¿l;/-:";fÞ¿-, '
~. '£.,r {oJ¡ J.. (f'Q.~ {f
/)'" , . '''? . . / '
~~ ' L 7~. Á<Lt <i-/QrL- iF _...""
/¿Irt.¿ .. ,..~
. . . ;,L.-/ / . . . /¢.--/ .-
J ~ ~;
[' /
../ ÞKU" t' / .. /
.' ~~.~___ _/1 _¡~ ./,.r - / '~.' if
~ ' ' --zL /(j.. ú~d'?ÞPG I
?~ "r/I' l~~
PG ' ," /1 >á'(.¿ ; ~i
þ<4' ¿.- " "
¿ZXDtu/¿.2t< ìf~&£¡
/ C' úd / ..
, ~ 3 C,'" L.-" .~,
.
Resolution of Findings
Birch Street East Rezoning, WHY USA
.
LO$o made a motion to recommend the City Council adopt the following findings, approving the
rezoning of certain property from R1, Single Family to B2, Highway Business. The motion was
seconded by Lesnick.
RESOLUTION OF FINDING
The request of WHY USA to rezone of all property north of the east/west alley abutting Birch Street East between
the north/south alley between College Avenue North and 1st Avenue NE and the north/south alley between 1st
Avenue NE and 2nd Avenue NE from the current R-1, Single Family to B2, Highway Business came before the
Planning Commission at a Public Hearing held on May 3, 2004. The hearing was requested by 50% of the
property owners in the subject area.
In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the Comprehensive
Plan and Ordinances of the City of S1. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the following [mdings:
Finding: The rezoning of the above described area is consistent with the S1. Joseph Comprehensive Plan,
and the City received a petition requesting the rezoning from over 50% of the property owners affected.
Ayes: Utsch, Lesnick, Deutz, Loso, Schneider
Nays: Graeve
.
.
Extract of May 3, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting
Birch Street East Rezoning, WHY USA
Public Hearing - Rezoning Request , Birch Street East: Chair Utsch called the public hearing to order and stated
that the purpose of the hearing is to consider the rezoning of all property north of the east/west alley abutting Birch .
Street East between the north/south alley between College Avenue North and 15t Avenue NE and the north/south
alley between 15t A venue NE and 2nd A venue NE. The property is currently zoned R-l.
The request has been submitted by Why USA Realty, 1511 E Minnesota Street, St. Joseph, MN 56374.
Deutz stepped down from his seat on the Planning Commission because of a conflict of interest with the possible
rezoning of Birch Street.
Kay Lemke of 3 3 Ash Street E spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. Lemke questioned the members of the
Planning Commission about her desire to not have St. Joseph look like Division Street in Waite Park and St. Cloud.
She also stated that she has some concerns about increased traffic and the effect on property values/taxes if the area
is rezoned. Lemke also made the Planning Commission members aware of the fact that she did go arOlmd the
neighborhood and asked everyone to sign a petition against the rezoning. She feels that St. Joseph should be a more
íìiendly and welcoming City and there is already a lot of rental property and office space available in the City.
Delyte Andreas of 29 E Ash Street spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. She stated that when she bought
her house it was zoned R1 so he had the expectation that the neighborhood would remain residential. With the
possibility of this area being rezoned from Rl, Single Family Residential to B2, Highway Business, she is concerned
about the possibility of increased traffic, noise, trash (if a fast food restaurant is brought to the area) and increased
insurance rates.
Mike Deutz spoke in support of the proposed rezoning. When the Comprehensive Plan was amended the long tenD
plan indicated this area would be expanded for corrunercial growth. He is in favor of the rezoning because he feels
that the lots are too small to develop without purchasing at least two lots. Deutz stated that in his opinion this is a
step in the right direction for the City of St. Joseph. In regards to the residents being opposed to this rezoning, Deutz
commented that when the City conducted the public hearing for the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, not one of .
these neighbors spoke against the future land use plan, which converted the area in discussion to corrunercial.
Andrew Berger of 2 6 E Birch Street spoke in support of the proposed rezoning. Berger stated that he owns property
in the area being disused and believes the èonversion to B2, Highway Business is appropriate. Rezoning the area is
a risk to him as a property owner, but he is willing to accept that. If the area is rezoned corrunercial and they can't
sell their home for commercial use, they are stuck with a house that they cannot sell. However, if it is rezoned and
they can sell their property, they can move on and it would be a step forward for them as well as the City.
Janel Weisen spoke on behalf of Why USA Realty. Weisen stated that she presented the initial petition requesting
rezoning of this area. She stated that she represents the property owner at 38 Birch Street East who is in the process
of selling her home for a corrunercial use. The proposed buyer intends to convert the home to office space which
will not result in excess traffic or noise. In addition the business hours for the office space will be Monday through
Friday from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM.
Jerry Hasse/brink spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. He stated that he represents the property owner of
103 Ash Street East whose property abuts to the south the area being discussed. Hasselbrink stated that he has many
concerns with the negative affects the proposed rezoning will have on abutting property or the City itself.
Hasse1brink stated that in his opinion, rezoning this property would conflict with affordable housing in three ways.
1. The future abutting homes will most likely become corrunercial; removing some of the most affordable
housing stock.
2. Would make other affordable houses less livable.
3. Failure to protect neighboring housing values.
Hasselbrink also stated that he feels that all those in favor of the rezoning arc out there to make a profit. In his
opinion St. Joseph accorrunodates a lot of corrunercial business and not enough affordable housing. The St. Joseph e
Comprehensive Plan indicates that the City offers a wide variety of housing options. The possible rezoning of Birch
Page 1 of2
Extract of May 3, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting
Birch Street East Rezoning, WHY USA
Street would eliminate a lot of possibilities for residents who are looking at affordable housing. As a City, St.
. Joseph should be trying to preserve our existing neighborhoods not remove them.
In response to the comments made by Hasselbrink, Deutz stated that he doesn't agree with the petition because he
feels if those signing the petition did not agree with the Comprehensive Plan, they should have been at the public
hearing or meetings discussing the future land use plan.
Again, in response to the comments made by Deutz, Lemke stated that when circulating the petition against the
rezoning, she had with her the hearing notice. The petition is an indication of residents not supporting the
conversion of the neighborhood. With regard to residents attending the public hearing for the Comprehensive Plan,
she thought some residents did appear. Andreas stated that the meetings are not at times that are accessible for all
residents to attend. In her case, she had to take a day of vacation to be at this meeting as she works nights.
Tara Berger of 29 Ash Street East stated that the area in discussion is not a place where you will want to raise
children. Traffic and noise from County Road 75 make this area not conducive for children.
The Public Hearing was closed at 7:28PM.
Utsch stated that previously the Planning Commission considered this matter and the rezoning was denied. At that
time the Planning Commission initiated the petition. The denial included a motion that indicated the Commission
would consider rezoning petitions on a per lot basis. Utsch agreed that area being discussed contains small lots and
unless developers were to buy multiple lots, a large development could not occur along Birch Street East. Loso
agreed that the lots aren't very big and developers can be required to provide landscaping to buffer the adjacent area.
Utsch acknowledged that the City did receive a petition in opposition to the rezoning and it will be come part of the
file. However, at this time more than 50% of the property owners in the affected area have requested rezoning and
the Ordinance allows for rezoning when such occurs.
. Lesnick stated that just like the other side of County Road 75, development along Birch Street would most likely be
a small business that would not generate more traffic for that area. Lesnick concurred that because of the size of the
lots, development would most likely be small offices.
Utsch commented that there is not an overabundance of industrial or commercial lots in the City and it is his opinion
that the property being discussed is more sellable as commercial than residential.
Graeve stated that it is his opinion that the area in question is a nice place for homes and he has concerns about the
houses behind the property in question. Further, he stated that he doesn't see a need for developing both sides of
Highway 75 as commercial and is opposed to the proposed rezoning.
.
Page 2 of2
. I Attaclunent: Yes or No I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Foxmore Hollow - Development Matters
DATE: May 20, 2004
Planning
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Foxmore Hollow - Development Concerns
PREVIOUS ACTION
Bob Herges and Rick Heid are requesting approval of the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan,
Rezoning, Special Use and Preliminary Plat. In your packet you will find the minutes from March 24
and May 3, at which the Planning Commission discussed in great length the plan. Included in your
packet are the minutes and resolutions of finding. The Planning Commission is recommending approval
. of all therequests with the exception of the Special Use Permit for the R3 portion of the project. The
Planning Commission acted in the same manner as they did for Sand Companies and informed them that
they would waive the hearing fee for the special use permit, but would not consider s]lch until a detailed
plan is submitted.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Accept the recommendations of the Planning Commission and adopt the resolutions of finding
FISCAL IMPACT
COMMENTSIRECOMMENDATIONS
There is one outstanding factor in the preliminary plat and that is the drainage. SEH is trying to locate a
central holding pond in that area. If that is the case then Heid/Herges will not have to create a holding
pond on the comer of their lot. If a central pond is not created then the Developers will be required to
receive County approval to drain to the ditch along CR 121. Joe Bettendorf will have additional
information. If it is available in advance of Thursday, we will have it delivered to you.
.
Resolution of Finding
Foxmore Hollow, Rezoning - Outlot A
.
Loso made a motion to recommend the Council accept the findings of the Planning Commission
and rezone Out Lot A of Foxmore Hollow from the current R1 to R3, Multiple Family. The motion
was seconded by Schneider.
RESOLUTION OF FINDING
The request of Bob Herges and Rick Heid to rezone Outlot A of Foxmore Hollow from the current R1, Single
Family to R3, Multiple Family.
In consideration of the infonnation presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the Comprehensive
Plan and Ordinances of the City of St. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the following [mdings:
Finding: The rezoning of the above described area is consistent with the St. Joseph Comprehensive
Plan.
Finding: St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.29, requires the Developer to complete the PUD
process and secure a Special Use Pennit for R3 structures with more than 12 units.
Therefore, the Planning Commission will have an opportunity to review the detailed
plans before construction is approved.
Ayes: Utsch, Lesnick, Deutz, Loso, Schneider
Nays: Graeve
.
-
.
Extract of May 3, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting
Foxmore Hollow, Rezoning Request
Re-zoning. Foxmore Hollow: Utsch stated that the Planning Commission has previously considered the preliminary .
plat of Foxmore Hollow. The plat as presented included a mix of single family homes and multiple family. The
original plan that was submitted for Foxmore Hollow included a 23 unit apartment complex. The neighbors objected
to the height and size of the building. It was requested that the developers meet with the neighbors to discuss
development alternatives and come back to the Planning Commission within 60 days.
Since the public hearing, the Developers have submitted a revised concept plan. The plan is not detailed as it is
costly to design a building and until the Developers are provided direction as to what is acceptable, they are
submitting a general schematic As requested by the Planning Commission, the developers meet with the
neighborhood on April 22,2004.
According to Herges, the neighborhood meeting went like any other neighborhood meeting in which a developer
would request to construct and apartment complex. The neighbors in the proposed area do not want apartment
buildings. Herges stated that they aren't trying to ruin the neighborhood. Foxmore Hollow will be well managed
and they will be better than the existing rental units already in the area. Herges stated in his opinion, the City needs
to provide a place for multiple family and it makes sense to put them near other apartments.
Linda Brown of Surveying & Engineering Professionals Inc, addressed the Planning Commission. She stated that
she is the Engineer for the proposed Foxmore Hollow Addition and clarified that the plan before the Planning
Commission is a compromise from the first plan. It was her understanding that the neighbors didn't like the height
or length of the proposed building, so it was re-designed. Utsch responded that in his opinion the revised plan is
100% better that the previous plan, but additional detail is needed. Utsch further stated that Herges/Heid are simply
asking the Planning Commission to give them the same pennission that was given to Sand Companies. Sand
Companies presented a concept plan and the Planning Commission accepted the concept plan and denied the Special
Use Permit until a detailed plan can be provided. Utsch stated that the Planning Commission needs to be consistent
with their decision making process.
Weyrens stated that the Planning Commission must decide if the area in question should be developed as R3. If so, .
then the Planning Commission should approve the rezoning request, but deny the Special Use Pennit until the
detailed plan is submitted. If the area should not be developed with R3, then both applications should be denied.
-
Loso made a motion to recommend the Council deny the Special Use Request for Foxmore Hollow as the
Planning Commission does not have sufficient information to approve a Special Use Permit. This Developer
can re-apply for the Special Use Permit when the design plans are complete and the City will waive the
hearing fee. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously.
The Commission continued to discuss the proposed rezoning of the outlot of the property known as
Foxmore Hollow. Deutz stated that it is not his intent to approve a concept plan at this meeting. He
agrees that the property should be developed as R3, but R3 does not have to mean apartment
complexes. Townhomes are another form of multiple family developments. Deutz questioned if the
zoning can be approved upon contingencies.
Weyrens responded that zoning cannot be contingent as either it is suitable for multiple family or it isn't.
The Planning Commission revised the R3 Ordinance to require R3 developments over 12 units to utilize
the PUD process and make application for a Special Use Permit. This process allow the Planning
Commission to enter into a development agreement that specifically identifies a project. The agreement
would also specify a period of time for which the development must occur.
Loso made a motion to recommend the City Council rezone Outlot A of Foxmore Hollow to R3,
Multiple Family. The motion died for a lack of a second.
Utsch again stated that the Planning Commission must be consistent with their decision making process
and decide if the property being discussed, should in fact be developed with multiple family. He stated he
is not stating that the Planning Commission must rezone the property, rather decide what is the best use
for the property. .
Page 1 of 2
Extract of May 3, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting
Foxmore Hollow, Rezoning Request
. Graeve questioned Herges as to what market the apartments are being constructed for and if they will be
a form of student housing. Herges responded that the housing would be market rate and anyone call live
in the units. The units will consist of a mix of two and three bedroom units. They will be similar to the
existing buildings on CR 121.
Deutz questioned the location of the holding pond and if it is feasible to construct two (2) twelve unit
apartment buildings. Weyrens stated that the City Engineer is reviewing the drainage. The City is
working towards regional ponds and it is anticipated that the projects for 2004 will drain to a central pond.
If the central pond is not possible then the developer must receive approval from the County Engineer to
drain to the ditch along CR 121. Weyrens stated that before the developer submits the application for the
Special Use Permit, the drainage must be resolved. At this time the Planning Commission is considering
whether or not the concept of two (2) twelve plexes is acceptable. Deutz reiterated that he is not
opposed to the R3, but would like a more detailed plan.
Loso made a motion to recommend the Council accept the findings of the Planning Commission
and rezone Out Lot A of Foxmore Hollow from the current R1 to R3,Multiple Family. The motion
was seconded by Schneider.
-.
-
.
Page 2 of 2
Ila, U... U lU. U..... ...."u. v'-~ .. ~fllþ to I' U I .
,- ......U .......... ....U1U F·~
~;.ro-:'::;¡-='-t1:;¡.1':J (",1:1 H£R6E.5 1"'1-\1:11:. o:¡;,
V' /L.i .tei ¿t:JOIi J.,: J.J.
..t.f'~
."-
~; .
,?
. APPLICATION FOR PLANNI~G CON ICERA TION
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
25 College AvenueNW
P.O~Box868 II
St. Joseph, MN 56374
(320)363..7201 or Fax (320)363-0 ' 2
STAT!; O¥ MINNESOTA ) Bob¡.j€A'~'7 0
)IS ~\c~. Htid
COUNTY OF STEARNS)
NAME: ' FOìl more., o ~ 433
ADDRESS: d- tfh 5 ~303
WI., fIe~, he!*i IIIIq Ihe ~ IIþpicIItianjQtIe Oily Ccu1cIlIIKI ~ Comaúscîl!n Of Il\cI
"'"'-*- (AppIicI\I1tt.w"~CllChec:lcìngd~~,*,1iIIing II) Iheif ~
~): ..
1. /l,ppUca1ion is henlbymøde tor. (ÞA:IIìcant muf4 check lIrf/aII ~ 1\eIm}
v';ezonIng _ ZoringORWnce An'tendment _ ome 0ccupa1i0n Permit
- smeceWaterManagement Plan (GreQng PeImit) _ POD Bulklnø MovÐr'a Permit
- ......'_-OWnoI'a_t t/ C=Pton"","""
.' ?fdjmll\o..f~ Plat)
z. I..egat~onoflandtot:l8&ft'ectÐdbv.ce· jncludr¡g acrøage or $quam . of land invoIwd, ønd am!
. address, if any: "
3. Pruent m'IIng of the 8ÈX7o'Ð cIe8crIi:Ieå p¡operty is: -
4.-
¡
5. PtI1ohe. filmt, CO!1XIFatione crt)thel' 1tIwt WlC8l't8l1c:1 pf8$8nt owner vmo mcrt or will
déscribedllnd IX'propoaed~wI1Hn one year after issuanœ of pItIftnIt
&. Maabed 10 thit ~ and bite a pattlhereofare lIfditIanat malllñatsabnt
h1dk:M.
Applicant SipaIImr. Ðate:
0II/IIer SIg~ Dåe:
FOR OfRCE USE ONLY
fESIJØM\TTQ_ D4TE COMPLeTE: DATe OF PUBCJC HEAR1IIIG_ PtJBLICATIC)N DATE: _
Ccmr.iIIaIiì.\Acaan: _ RilçQjrlltlJd~ _ RecÞn)nund~ Date AI:tion:
oI\p IIJcIII.w..,-~ 0IMIør no!If*I of PIMw1inO CaI"'~1 Acl!an:
CounciI~: _ ~ _ ~ DetøofActon;
~ OwnIII'ftOIIDed ofcttyCrnlnd! Acfton:
'.
SURVEYING AND ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS, INC.
100 Second Avenue South, Suite 104 .
Sauk Rapids, MN 56379
(320)-259-8888
fax: (320)-259-9010
Foxmore Hollow
Foxmore Hollow is a 32 lot subdivision located in the City of St. Joseph. The project is
presently located within the City limits, and the land is presently zone R-1. The developer
is proposing to rezone lot 19 Block 2, to R-3, for Multiple Unit Housing. The developer
is requesting a variance on the R-llots from the 125 feet lots depth requirement, to 120
feet. The width of the lots are widened to meet the 11,000 square feet minimum lot size.
.
~oJ
,:\0 \~\
\' \
,"" .
/\j)J",
~'--
/1'
~ ... - - .a.,... .L
-.. .-- --' '-' '-'
- ~
- SEH MEMORANDUM
TO: Judy Weyrcns
City of St. Joseph, MN
FROM: Tracy Ekola, PE
Sr. Professional Engineer
DATE: March 19, 2004
RE: Foxmore Honow
St_ J osepb. Minnesota
SEH No. A-STJOE 0401 14
The following are my review comments for Foxmore Hollow's Preliminary Plat:
General
1) Consideration should be given to annexing Reichl's Hillside Estates and 29Sth street- A porion
of 295th Street right-of-way is located within the Foxmore Hollow plat_ Dedication of half SIT·;:ets
is not allowed per the City's subdivision ordinancE:. Furthermore, 295th street is the only access
to Foxmore Hollow.
'. 2) Consideration should also be give to upgrading 295th Street to meet City standards for street
width (36-fcct), curb and gutter and extending utilities along 295th Street to wcst edge of plat.
SanitaIy sewcr and water main should be locàled in roadway if improvements arc considered on
295th Street. Provide proper drainage to adjàcent properties from the 295th Street improveme:nts.
The drainage plan shoo'ld accommodate 295th Street improvements and dr.ainage from adja.::ent
property .
3) Pond location and discharge outlet shall be approved by Stearns County Highway DepaTtment.
Pond grading encroaches on CSAH 121 right-of-way_ Per the City's subdivision ordinance, the
pond area should be planed as outlet. Vehicular access should be provided to the pond,
3) Plat should be submitted to Stearns County Environmental Service Department (wetlands), Sauk.
River Watershed District, and Steams County Highway DeparnuenHor review.
4) Will sidewalk be considered along the north side of 295th Street?
Streets
5) Provide access to 295th Street at all times durirlg construction. Provide temporary bypass road
from CSAH 121 to 295th Street if Dormal access is blocked. during construction.
6) Modify exist;J1g driveway for Lot 7, Block 1. Elim.inate the split driveway and island and TI~place
with one driveway to 295tb or Foxhollow Drive with a maximum width of I8-feet. An other lots
shall have only one access on to Foxhollow Drive and no driveway access to 295tb Street.
.
snon Elliott Hendrickson Int" 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, $,. Cloud. MN 56302'1717
SEH is an equal opponunity employer I www.sehinc:.c:orn I 320.229.4300 I 800.5n.0617 I 320.229.4201 iax
---- ". ..._u__. ..-... --.. --- _ù~___ .............. -t ':'1 JU,::,hPli ~UUJ
Foxmore Hollow
March 19, 2004
Page. 2 -
~
7) Revise typical road section to provide 2Minch bituminous base instead of 1 ~ bimminous ba.~e.
8) Streets shall be named in accordance with City standards.
Sanitary Sewer
9) Provide wyes on sewer main on 29Sth Street for future services to existing homes located south
of 295th Street.
10) Sanitary sewer on 295th Street shall be. dcsignoo to accommodate gravity flow from adjacen,t
properties and propertieg Joeated to the west along 295m Street and 103rd Avenue.
11) If sanitary sewer is installed in the north boulevard of 29SLh Street, consider widening the
easement ~o 25'wide along the entire length of the plat (along 29Sth Street.)
c: Joe Bettendorf, sm
Dick Taufen, City of Se Joseph
jmw
"'\>\>Ij(¡¢"'O',",M\m·.~ 031!>Q4,tI<>o .
e
)-',
~Sl
. . '!
,^'"" "" " ¡¡ , - ¡I'!
.:'!_' ",,«' _'.' , i, i! ¡ I! ,II
¡ ~ 'V5; <\ - ,= - - co" ~ I;; 0 . ~ IQI
¡ : : ",g f _ J! ~ '" w æ ~ · ::¡ m ~ ¡ ~ ~
,~,~ iii' .~þ~~g.8~~~ <j~ F 0 ~ 'i¡::Im -; ~::! ~ ~
-'0'0 '0, . _ ;¡~~lfug·'" 0 51;! ~ ..e :;¡
.f'-' ,,,..~~ @ WWp., " ! o! H" i I _!, II! ·
. ' " 1".o"!;: '! ,; , ~, i' '" ¡" !,II g
. .! e" :"~,,¡,,, ,,! ,. I' ,!.,~ II: II< g;::! ~~§
. , 0 .-.. . -,. " " · ., '. ·
~ ",(] ' '" ~o...Ii!~"':;vg >,~<t ~ .~ . ~ ~:;¡,,- 1i! II ¡;¡ ~BZ ;~~.
.'.. " . _. . '._ _ ".. 0 0' ' ' - '"
Z ~ j!l!'ð~:ii5 g"8~ ~~-: w ~-~~ e: ~ ;r ::I ¡Sw I<~
_ "'0""""' .. , ' . -. ,
!.1 çJ O!!!~1í",b~H~ ~:s~ ,>, ~¡¡; ~ ~ eo. I !~
> . -',. '" .... .- 0 .. · " ·
iii~""""£~ ~~'ö 1I);.Ei ~oz3wa' ~~~ 1: ~ _.~~ !
i~ 5 ;¡~~. 0 ~5 0 >-¡:¡O~~ffi "':'0" fu 0
~~f~ßfÕ~5^~ ~~~§~~ ~~~~ ~ 0
,=Z?£g~t;o.",~~ ~~~¿70 goõ~::S ;j ~ v v
"£i-'ënH~~ ~>;, ~¡¡; ;\,,~5..;~ 888;\1
i ~ ~o .u " !!J"!!!~wlI' ~w>-~,~. NNNiõ
"'''~1ifðt~~V' ~:S~~Fo <F~o~~ ii1 ~~;o.o
c,;.~. ~-g;o.8 => 0 ~~ ~ _~ow ~ NNO
§~~~~~g~N~. ~~~Q~~ 8g~I:!~~ S ~8~
~ ,":..o~ ~E wo;¡,:!\ ~ ~o ~Sffi zoo
~:~~J~!~~~~ ;~ß~~~~8Ë~!(;j5~ ~ ~
, 0.0 >cO ~¡:¡ .o~-" 0
/' ~£g.i'i!'= £O~Õ'= ~1ß~~<g,,~wh ~~ w ~ ' ~
I -"..¿ ,.-, ,0",0." ",' · '
, o~i1;z",,;io;] oowÕZF ~i5goo~ ;j :J '" ~
_o¡2:Z~ I3'L ~ ß~~ 1¡i ~ow¡:''''''þJÌÌI 3' 9 ~
.z5c,gdÜ~oj; æii1~iIi"'lño~~~-!ii" ~ ",;Ii ~ 5
_ '" _~" c z. 0 ~=>- GJ ~
~e;~,,5""8'Š8.~ iliw~g~~iliiH~;ß~~ 0ªzz6 t3~ ~
ö- ,2c'" ~5 >00 ~oj¡;:~ ~~. !!:::o- Iii w <5
. .z~ -;8 ~~,,'ô;;'ô" ~ª8~~~ffi~~~~~~Çtí ~ ~ 4(0"1. Q. ~ £: "'t ~
btJ. --.-".'t'..~ o¡;j W~N~'~ <!¡! ¡¡¡ wW ~õ Z
dJa !;~g~~~g ;i'g' @~~g~~~~~~:~¡j~g~ ffi ~~g:: !l ê ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.~c~~~;OO¿¡-g ~o!!Jìj"'~2'w 9~~~ ¡ -Uo ~ j <0" Ii ~ oj ~
~ôi£~~~¡¡~1í.; <.>:~§5~~~~~~:~5~ 0 ~¡qlña S I I":;¡ 8 ì? ~ ~ ~
õl_~j!~:lall .. ww8¡w.ð!!J~I~:~E· XI ~
1í 2 0 ,g8~~h~~ ê FF~"F'3<U<'3'3<8~ e: Q · ):( r.\ ß\ ~
,~~_ _. 0 ' ~ ~ e
h~~~!1h~~ Z ~"..; ~ ~"''',; ,,~ \ f
~l~~:~j~:~~:~
~ ~!,~ .s. 81; j ~ t
~ðiH~H~8l~ ../ I
t ÕEJI~t~£I,g1
~ ~]¡¡£æZ~g~;"
!--- --- - !~!!!i!m~ - '\-- - . "
~ <:; "b"¡¡~Õ'".~~~:: ", '"'"
ð ¡¡.1;::¡;o.¡¡¡¡~~"l! + \' .
t;: ž g~.'j~'~. <'"N;o.o Ii!
\::) ~ ~ ~ &~ ~~~:~2"'~;¿ \- - - ¡;
, t - ~<o~'I_o-1ig wZ.
!X ~ N,j!"ii-.gg'_N ",W~
'-J ª Ii! ~ ~..~è:'f"~~: :s:~, I Z I ~: ~
", ' .,'~!:!~ "I ':' ' ¡., ,, 'I'
...... I _0:15 I \ 'j <O_N'O'~-~" =>,I;! ~ '" æ ",j gg~1
_......... I~O ~zo~o~~~,=o~ I;;-~ I I " ~.:;'=t
'" ° 0 ," ."
.'-...J ~g\:i ~ ~:s \ !2 _",___.J ~~
:t j;¡ I Ii' ¡! --r,¡ ¡¡;¡i¡
I , , I'; I I ' ' ,- - -,! .!: 1,lil,
~ o~o í 0 ~
CI:: :'1 I I . .,: i
\::)?/w ~ oj / ~
¡;¡ 0 w~. 0 I 0
o , I I '~';' ,ë - !
~ '" t ",Ol;;z'; ffi òL
~ . , "~,' " \ ~
ü At;: w~vF": æ :sg 'i'
~ 9 " I I "',, ,.'- , ."
~ '" 'Z' ~5~~§ F;;¿ Iii¡¡; ~
ex; o~ ooo-~ w:sz.- I 0
LC ,( ~ go", I I z~z~o F WN I F
b I ,;¿ ~I;;F~ - - -
en ~ ~ Ol:'~ . I
w W all}
~ X Z z:¡¡ - 0, ~
Ii< ~ vd 0 ~
W ~ ;;!; 15 ~ ';o.;:¡ " Ñ
I, & ~.. 0 M '!-- . · "
':-<- f ~ ~~ ~ g · 00 ' !
'" Z J .
'-...J t....::>~ ~'" ¡--
'08:; ð,; ~,
Iii ~ en 0 ' "N
f---- ~oz 05 ' · ,¡;
~ . J ,'.
~ " o· ' ""
;J ,~ ·r-=~
Q:: ., 7 "
-.. ~
I "' ~~
a: .. I ~~
, ö ~ ' !~
->-- ~~ f--~
r\- N N I ','.
" ~. ,,~!i
;::3: ~ ~ ' '" ¡;
a: 0 oz
::> a: ' r ~<
~ o. I'" --,
~ W~~~, ,'- !!)
"'OZ~ :", ~
~I;;W": I.... I ' Ow
'" ;;i; !:i " ~~:
ì:J ",,¡¡ F~ ~0 ~i
'::l.J .,_" / w " 0.
f\.: ,"0 "n- ~ ;, -!
~Q:: 0" < (1) Iw~<i og
~~ '" FZ'; ",¡¡5
oª ~w~ 0<
~OF>' 0<:;
o ~:s~ U
~ .zo - w
'> 5-;:¡ ~ II'~ w
x I~~~ oª ~~ ~II'II'~
. ~J I ~~ ~9~1n
I : () I I ~(I) N
: ._u ~s: QN I,{)NNN
I- ~~ ~.../ 3~ . 3~ß¡á¡~
o , - - .. 1 ",..,'
i . / - 'C ,,,!!!,
; , ., ,¡ 1 ¡¡"I'I
. ' 0' ' ,,¡hi,
~ L "~~ I ~~~~H~
! ' .1 " ..1""
. " _ _ ~ 000,
: ' ,,!ï~~¡
o . vv_N~~~
~ I 0
~ <;., \ ~! ~
00 ~ ~
o
. I ----
I ~ .
/ ð I ~ ~
I / ¡ I I: I i
~.' 1. .'" 0;, - - - - - - Î
.,....~ 0<'> '0 q I 13:e::--:-
!"!":ï¡ ~w -N g Z ,z ~ I
::\>'" 'i:d w~~ N ' iw~~ "
~iJ 1;1" Fwt \ I F~ó ~ I
"; .. 'c' :~, , ·
0' I:' "''' . I
~~ ¡;;;o.§ I I ~~:S~ ~ I
,~ '" ' 'l/ g
I ~w " ," \
¥ ' 11/
_ <~~..'_ _ _,__- ,,__- _~,"- __ __ _ _ J-- - _J..~ - - - I
I "_ . . (0) M .9£,Lt.oo N
..- (w) !.\ .LO,£t.lO N
~ c;s"Lçg<: M .lO.£T.~O N"
....
'"
.,
o
~
Õ
'"
.
'~
~ ex)
0)
$:; ,....
I~ II')
0
IA
-
lIS
$:;
t¡
....
IA ~
~:a-tQ
~=MtQ
at¡~tQ
-'tß'ctl'ltQ
tQ
trI . $:; I
'f ~~ ~
tot ~ ~:Q
tot 'f
.5 :a- lIS .-
trlt:¡ ~ =
$:; - rIJ
~ ~M
= .... '-"
~ Z ~ 'ON 'H'V'S':) ~~IIS
.
9Z'8ZZ trI
M LO ~z-~o N $:;
....
~
!:o
¡.,
=
0 rß\
0 ~l ~ 'ON 'H"v"S'O '"
'"
0
It)
----------------, .....
I - I
I I Þ: 010
I
I /
I - I 8
I I I ....
I I I ~ ~
I I I
3: I I ~
0 I I ~
--.J '% I I f5
--.J ~ I
0 % I I
:r: I I
~ I
W . I
I') \
0::: ""
c I
0 0 I
d, 0
0:>
~ (f) I
X 1:2 I
0 ('
l.J... -
:.1. ~ °
~
0
l&.... Þ:
Z 1'/ :&W¡P:;;bt ~ I
:s :m~'iJ.: /0
I dikBv ~ ,*
I lililtt1t¡ ~
0... I
~ I f/..:"«....@..ú.·:·::::.. ~ oð I
0... il I
w
() I
Z I 1 oð I
0 !I I
z ° oð I
() T I
I
I
I nnml",t", I
il I
I
I
I 010
------ 'Î I
~6
I I
I ~----.J
I I
JJt,:-~~
... I __ .....--.ot-- I
V>
I
(() ..... §\ I
+
~ 0
:g I I
;: w
I -! .
0:>'"
I')~
I ':.t<ó
O't
d,0
I o:>~
z
1_- -
____I:ß-___ I")
I")
5 00-47'35" E
84.04
2 6 ' \ 0 .
\ 1 _
300.00 I")
'" I")
I'- 9 \ . 3 0
'"
I") l-
I")
\
. .
-
::t
G) r. r: ¡¡:: I \fJ= f\ PETITION
ü ~I~U~- _ .;.- ..-.J!?
r,¡;r- $'t' ?[J' 3 March 2004
(...~ '-\r\ !J _ ... Jn~ . .¡'f-fib lihcièPslfgiied are opposed to the Foxmore Hollow Pr~ject, which includes 23 units in
an apartment complex and 32 single lots. There is already a section of 4 isolated 8-unit
apartments along CR12l. The rest of the surrounding area is R-l. The 23-unit apartment
will change the character of the neighborhood and will increase the traffic to an unsafe
status. We feel R-I is the best zoning for this parcel of property. We oppose rezoning this
parcel from R-I to R-3.
SIGNATURE
16/'1'
. ?Oq
'?O
0,
.
h1EGE!\r~n PETITION
,.<\R Z 70fP March 2004
..... --.!~
""jTffi~ ''&1a.~is1~ed are opposed to the Foxmore Hollow Project, which includes 23 units in ·
an apartment complex and 32 single lots. There is already a section of 4 isolated 8-unit
apartments along CRI2l. The rest of the surrounding area is R-l. The 23-unit apartment
will change the character of the neighborhood and will increase the traffic to an unsafe
status. We feel R-I is the best zoning for this parcel of property. We oppose rezoning this
parcel from R-l to R-3.
DDRESS
(ane¡ a-9 S-Y-R h- ðfJ
2. 95~
.
;1
·
Sr;- ~-
s'ì't\ S't. .51. :r CW' of)
105";4 54. :T..$ /.-
~ .s 7'.~ 1-1-
jr. ÞMP,
·
K~:ed-,.d b'i +h~ i'\My)I~ Î CâYYYl'Y1/ s'~I,M C
C)
4IÞ ' "¡
CD
C
(J
.-
...
CO
¡ _ _, \ E
I -~~~~~~. ) ~
---'-'-=r -- .,', -
,--'- ,--= Il--- ....
, ~ (J
s= _, i en
I ,~ " iJ'§,'," C
---, I' 'H
I ¡'I
" _'~ IL I i!
! !,~ :p.'<i ¡~: I
¡ ¡ \ ¡.r '-'--- \ -, - 'I ;~-J I
, ! :: \- !'it?fF /
I I I.' ...~::~...:: ~J
! . "",
__ .~ 1 ~'~ ~
¡ '''"',ref I' 1"--- ,"
¡ ¡ 8". ~ m!!I¡
! - , \1 '~ \
J~: i~ fJiWl
1 ! en tJJ ~
c: .... ¡;¡
í 0 ~ m
. i:;::¡ E §
~ 1::!
Q III ~
jjj Q.I~
... « S
o .... ~
._ c: II)
... Q "
S "C ~
>< ::s II)
W .... oS
tJ) on
~
I
!
, z
, 0
i -
l-
I <
i ~
, ...I
I W
I x
I ~
__ 0
z
4IÞ
I
I¡!!! I
Z - " j"
II· -1,1
e: ,
I
Z
z K':J-eded~. '+h~ f»anY1JM i CrmM:lðS~
: III
, : II
,,! ; II
Iii II : Z
II!I"
,¡II , .
' I
I
, j ¡I I
I 1'1 i.,..' ~:
',. '.
¡I! iI (:,C':\\ 0-
r CII 'I' ,,,,...
f::¡ I ¡: oeHI~""" \ ~ _ __...,
-; m : I; ......, I l - ~.>.-.- _ - - -
~ "C i ¡II ( ~ ..-1..-.- -r'·- ".,'.."'",,, i! ~
, ç , ¡ ~~Û:;
z _ --1 'I! ! '';\\.; 1,1
' I ' , '''J~,'
I Iii / '~t,';;!' ¡~
i ,': ! ;a~i' .~
¡ ".¡{,j. I
¡I W~!:
, '¡ I 1\ r L- I L- ~
I '1;<'-"" 'tc- - --
_ --{ ¡ 1, ~~ I _..J
,,1 I .:1li'~': .
I ¡I, !I /~; , . '--'~,
, " II"'·" , ,
¡,t, I:",Æ,""',' I
¡ ¡IC ~II ~~~.~; ! :
i lll~ ,\ " ;$tf! !
I ¡¡ I' ;":';' '
, '¡ ',:,,,, I
, Ii I ",¡;-c I :
'Iii ):[1'-;'
- ~ Ii; : 1&1~! :
I'; t ;1,
!I I 'i
.,' I I I,
Ii I,
Ii .. ,I-
i " I ~ "
1 ¡ D I'
¡ Ii H ;! I
, ,¡ I ~ ""
~ -~ 1: :,¡:" " i 1 ¡¡rL, -----
VI (JJ . I ~t: J! 1 ¡i ,C <-- I~! ,~
~ c n ,iµi ~ - ~ . I (DEY l ¡
ã c. :. /I",!! Q7¡ !' :
Ê ~ ~ -;¡ ( ! ~+ ----:---I-~~, ¡ j
g¡> en ,I; :) , i : :!):~ .
.g "'C '! I' I! 'J
~ ". ""C r; 'tJ)if I j; ¡ ,',---
Fs: WoI - ;1 I 1 1 I Ill: It,.
s- ~ þ.) : I I I !, J : ~
g 3 :3 . I¡ \ H J \ ! \. \: :"
g ('t) ¡ ¡¡;:: I ¡ 1 I!! n~ I
~ ::J ¡ ¡I!!! IŒ)! ! I J¡::~!
c:n j ¡ I ¡ I ~ I IIi!
w ~ I . I." ¡ ".,' - --
;: '" ... . .1 ¡ I' ;! 1.1 I:
: !! I i :111 I ! I:¡ II
{, \' ", L~n&-",_---1 'I "
I Ii I ¡ :ffi)\' . ~ ~ J i Ji
I ¡ I ,: [l : ~ ::
! )i,~\þ':111 III!
I I ,II .__n__·__~m__--··-·--··J ¡ J.
- -\ \! \J"'--:'. ::ö:-=- ~- -=-- ~=---=/:
EBz ,! ,
, , ,
\ ! ! Cß-A..R.};-0-121 ! f
---'t- - - - Î - _ --
I .tl~:{jY''I'iZ!~
I
CliAB.l;O.121
i
¡
CIJ
n ,....'jl' ¡1/î¡¡'!!¡m'¡¡¡'1 >¡, '1'1'--1""
¡ ; ¡ ii 11 ì f .- ~~ <2" \ ~ I t t~~H} ~ );.
~ f FHä ~ ~ ~ .;.I.!,¡. I¡i ¡¡! ,Ii Ii' i! !HI II' ! ¡¡ il ¡ ,i 1m!! ·,1 ¡ iiI'ª',1
(t) ~ J ~ ~ f "~æ ~ I ¡, " ¡ I, " ¡i'l . ; " ,llwi J ¡ "1 ):1
3 ~ ~ ! i ii ,. ~ P,rn ' ¡! h ¡ H! I¡i¡ ¡ I¡! II I¡¡¡j! ! ¡ Hi ;¡¡I
f ~ ~~ ~ ¡j¡hi!:! !i ¡i ¡ ¡ '1 ¡¡II ¡ ¡ II ¡ ¡ , H¡¡:! ¡I ¡ !!II~I
Q,) tl ..~.II ~ª ~ U1il,iI,ill' Ii ¡! " i ¡ ¡iii ¡ ! ¡¡ Ii I H!¡,il! II ¡ ¡HI'~,
...... f" ~ - g If!j!!!!\, ¡¡ ï ¡ 1 ! Hi!! ! ¡ ¡ J ¡ 11 ¡¡î/¡¡;! Ii I H ~II
-. D P:-<Þ ~' ' J.il t. ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ 1- ~ r \ I I h .. .. ~ ~.
,... ~~¡;~ i! ~~8 ¡It '¡HI 11 ¡ 11 ¡ ¡'IL ¡ ¡ ¡ Ii ¡ ¡¡¡¡,I'ill! 111 I
\" .S"8 i". II' "r!! !j , " . "'I "'. .' ¡'.,! Irj 'I '
Ii 11 ??" I ¡Ii J:il II j ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡i! ¡ !1 ¡ q II ¡In¡ ¡i ¡¡ I !
i: !li i :l¡ E: I ~ ! I¡ ! ~ , s lr ~ H ~i !
o . ~.¡;;¡j = ,',I,!,"'" 'I' I" ¡' ¡'.!t 11,\ ¡;!i"1 !II, .
"" § §~¡¡§¡¡. ,¡f, ¡ ",I, '1' ¡¡, ',. ¡ I
'III ~ ~ I,:,',!;:; ¡ ¡ \ '1.1 i ¡ i ¡ ¡ j ¡i ¡ !I !
. ~ F:;~~;i:i i . ~ ~ !~ l I \ I ~ ~ "p 1
fJ) ; o. ~.~: ¡.:,¡;:: I I! ! hi, ¡ I I ¡ ¡ I ¡ .i r
,^" ¡¡ ~n,~ ¡: ,¡ ¡ I' ¡ ¡ ì ¡ ili! ¡¡ ¡J / I ¡ 11! I
~ .~~ !; II ' I! . h! ,j ¡.. ¡ 1!/'
" _ h~ !, , ¡ :!i.! ¡! II '
::::J . - ~ " Q , , I ' I ¡ ! "I ¡ .,,, I
.~ ~_:~'" ¡¡ii t ~~ .. s~ ¡
. I Attachment@No I
REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Rezoning / Special Use Request - Foxmore Hollow
DATE: May 3, 2004
AGENDA ITEM
Foxmore Hollow - Rezoning and Special Use Permit request to allow the construction of two (2) twelve
unit apartment buildings
PREVIOUS ACTION
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on March 22, 2004 for the Development Plan for
Foxmore Hollow. The Development Plan required the following:
1. Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan
2. Rezoning of the Leonard WaIz property to a mix of R1 and R3
3. Use of the PUD process, providing relief to the depth of the lot.
4. Issuance of a Special Use Permit to allow the construction ofthe R3
5. Preliminary Plat Design
. The minutes for the March 22 meeting are included in your packet for approval. As you can see, the
Planning Commission conducted the public hearing and closed the same. The result of the public hearing
was the recommended approval of the following: 1) Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan; Rezoning
the R1 portion of the plat; Use of the PUD process; and approval of the preliminary plat for the R1
portion only (with contingencies).
The Planning Commission requested the developers reconsider the 23 unit apartment complex. The
neighbors objected to the height and size of the building. It was requested the Developer's meet with the
neighbors to discuss development alternatives.
At the April 4, 2005 Planning Commission meeting Herges and Heid appeared before the Council again
with a revised site plan that changed the one building to two (2) twelve unit buildings. The new proposal
would be similar to the existing multiple family on CR 121 and would only be two stories in height. The
plan presented was only a concept to receive feedback from the Planning Commission. The Commission
requested that before the developer's appeared before the Commission again they should provide
additional detail such as a typical floor plan.
RECOMMENDED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
e
COMMENTSIRECOMMENDATIONS
Points of clarification - .
Drainage - the City is looking to see if regional ponding is a possibility in this area. If that does
not come to fruition, the Developer may will have to change the R3 portion of the plat to
accommodate a holding pond. In addition, if a pond will be required, the Stearns County
Engineer will also need to approve the drainage plan.
Procedure -
The public hearing has been closed. It is up to the Planning Commission if they want to seek
additional testimony. The only remaining issue is the R3 portion of the plat. As you recall the
Ordinance has been amended for R3 zoning districts and all development with more than 12 units
will be required to obtain a special use permit. This permit allows the City to have a site specific
plan. If the plan is not under construction within 12 months, the Special Use Permit will expire.\\
Revised Plan -
The plan submitted is not the [mal plans. Before Bob and Rick spent considerable resources
fmalizing the details a concept had to be accepted. The plan has been submitted to the
neighborhood on April 22, 2004. The plan submitted to the Planning Commission is the same
plan presented to the neighborhood. Due to the 60 day land use rule the Planning Commission
should make a recommendation at this time. It may be wise to table or deny the special use
pennit until the detailed site plan can be submitted. The rezoning can be established at this time.
Please keep in mind that if the special use is denied a new public hearing would be required. The .
other option is to have the developer provide the City with a written statement waiving the 60 day
land use requirement and setting a specific date as to when they must be back with a final site
plan.
.
Apr 29 04 04:57p Surve~ & Eng'g ProTo 320-259-9010 p.2
.,
.',' _ i
I ,-- ~ ¡------ '~'-
I~
· tì
¡ .
I '
i:
f
II' II j
' ¡ j
- I
1 .j
, , ,
. !
i
¡
,
:
;
, '
¡ . ~,'
ì
I
''-. ,
". f
''"' ;
,
,
· .¡
,
i .' ~ .
1.
, -Ii ~
; I ¡ ~ ~
I! .
. ',....
, I A
~
I ;
¡ i~
, . .. E-
! j 'II"~:
I
j I . ¡ J
:
I
1
j , ,
i
j
I
h '_u_,. !'
.L - .f
;
¡
ì ...
I
j
· J
!
i
!
:
Ir ill .
!
~ ill
!,
-, r ~-
t
1ft '1'
, If t
?f'\
::I
. ... 1" - ,~
. .......... ~
,"
---
~'
'r 'rI
~~ .
f'
"
, .
; . , '
'.
, ,
, ., ,
: r tI'
f '
.,.'"
}
r
c?J
-
e
8·d 0106-652-028 ·~o~d ~i~U3 ~ ~e^~ns dB5:toO toO 62 ~dl:l
-.
- ..
, "
, t
. ' I_~~
, T-í
" ti\ J'"
..
.. - ". l
.,.
'. r
ø.~ "I
, , ¡
I
. ' , I
I
J I
I
I
.-a_, I
- - I
--~¿- !
I
!
I
.. 0. ..--.. I
~ -' !
i
I -
," - J
I
, , !
-~.l . - -,'
-- - , I
"
:tf
4 f
.- ,.. - ¢j
, .
. ¿II
( ~t1
(
J }I
, " ill -- ' I
, .. i-.- . "f . .
~ ' '
. I
..J
...L 11
~,i ..
.
.
v·d OI06-6S2-02E ·30~d ~,~U3 ~ ~a^~ns das:vo vo 62 ~dU
"..,-,.._'...,'~--,..._,-, ..,..,..... ""_.."'"----_.._'-_._~._'~..,.._,...-" .. ..'..".','--_..._..._~.._..,..__....-,_.....'...,.,--..-,_..-.:-,.._......_".,,~--;
rot"" ~ ....c:a~o~ -
~
I'" r . ..~ .-
- "." -. . - .' ~,..
,.: . ' '
.
;
I'
, '\ \
.0 t .
'0
.~. { ----
: 'g,. ~
;
.-. .
.
oj'
d
ð
.
--
S'd O'[06-6S2-02E: .jOJd ~(~u3 , h8AJns dSS:-vO -vO 62 Jd!;J
·... . .... .' ~_.' ..~_".._..~_Þ'_~·..._.n.~..~.. _....... . . ._....._....._..~_..____~___..
;.... ~ -:;'--a eII~ r
.~
"Þ:' -
[.r n '
I · ¡ ~ 1
f
- ~"
..
)
.
s.d 0106-6S~-O~E ·~O~d ~,~U3 ~ ~a^~ns dss=vO vO 6~ ~d8
DRAFT
March 22, 2004
~ Page 1 of6
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of S1. Joseph met in special
( se~sion on Wednesday, March 22,2004 at 7:00PM in the S1. Joseph City Hall.
. 'Commissioners Presents: Chair (Council Liaison) Gary Utsch. CommissionersS. Kathleen Kalinowski,
Marge Lesnick, Bob Loso, Michael Deutz, Jim Graeve. Administrator Judy Weyrens.
-
City Representatives Present: City Engineer Tracy Ekola, City Attorney Sue Dege, Building Official Ron
Wasmond.
Others Present: Galen Keyes, Randy Bunnell, Bernie Schloemer, Ann Reischl, Bob Reischl, Barb
Schloemer, Jim Sand, Bob Herges, Thomas Homan, Rose Ann Homan, Rick Schroeder, Tom Herkinoff,
March Schroden, Lon Nigen, Tom Lowell, Jane Lowell, Jody Terhaar, Richard Kuebelbeck, Helen
Kuebelbeck, Amanda Blom, Joan Breth, Marilyn Ruhr.
Approve Aaenda: Deutz made a motion to approve the agenda as presented; seconded by Lesnick
and passed unanimously.
Amendment to Ordinance 52.29: Utsch opened the public hearing at 7:00 PM and stated the purpose of
the hearing is to consider an amendment to Ordinance 52.29, R-3 Zoning District, that will require all
apartment complexes greater thar112 units to complete the PUD process and to make application for a
Special Use Permit. The following sections of the Ordinance are proposed to be amended: 52.29 Subd.
2(a); 52.29 Subd 4 (e); 52.29 Subd 15.
Utsch opened the floor to those wishing to speak. No one presented wished to speak and the public
hearing was closed at 7:03 PM.
Weyrens clarified that the Ordinance before the Commission at this time is similar to the provisions of the
R3 Zoning Ordinance before it was updated in 2003. The provision is being re-instated to allow the City
\ to manage R3 Developments. Requiring an applicant to complete the PUD process and make application
. for a Special Use Permit allows the City to enter into an agreement for a specific development-plan. If the
_plan is not constructed within a specified period of time, either the zoning can revert back to the original
zoning classification or the developer would be required to make application for a new special use permit.
Concern was expressed that if the City rezoned property, or amended the Comprehensive Plan to allow
for R3 Districts, the Planning Commission and Council would have little control over the type of R3 that
would be constructed. R3 developments can include Townhomes, Patio Homes, Condominiums or
apartment complexes. Deutzquestioned the impact of the revised Ordinance to existing R3 Zoned
property. Weyrens stated that the new Ordinance would apply equally to all R3 property where a
development plan has not been approved.
Kalinowski made a motion to recommend the Council authorize the Mayor and Administrator to
execute the Amendment to Ordinance 52.29 and cause1he same to published. The motion '!Ias
seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously by those present.
Sand Companies - Morninaside Acres Development Plan: Utsch opened the public hearing at 7:20 PM
and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider rezoning the property described below as R1, Single
Family and consider a special, use permit to allow the property to be developed with mixed density. The
property is legally described as: Outlot A of Morningside Acres.
The request for rezoning and special use has been submitted by Sand Companies; 366 - 10th Avenue;
PO Box 727, Waite Park MN 56387.
Jim Sand spoke on behalf of Sand Companies. Sand stated that Sand Companies is proposing to
develDp the area known as Morningside Acres as a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The PUD will
( include 23 single family homes, 32 townhomes (Work Force Housing) and 18 patio homes (Senior
. Housing).
, DRAFT
March 22, 2004
Page 2 of6
Prior to this meeting Sand stated that he along with company representatives, conducted a neighborhood It
meeting to present the proposed plan to the neighborhood before approaching the Planning Commission
for approval. Sand stated that at this time they are not ready to proceed with the Preliminary Plat, but are
seeking approval for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Rezoning of Morningside Acres.
Sand stated that he has received the comments from the City Engineer regarding the concept plan and
will incorporate the comments into the preliminary plat.
Utsch opened the floor to those wishing to speak. No one present wished to speak Utsch closed the
public hearing at 7:25.
Utsch stated that the Commission must make a recommendation on the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment and the rezoning. The Planning Commission at the beginning of the meeting amended the
R3 Zoning District regulations to require the completion of the PUD process and Special Use Permit
process for all R3 over 12 units. Rezoning the property at this time does not grant development rights as
the property owner would still need to receive a special use permit. While the hearing notice included the
issuance of the Special Use Permit, Utsch recommended the Planning Commission deny the Permit as
the detailed plans have not been submitted.
Loso stated that he is concerned that the additional developments will generate too much traffic for the
area and questioned if a traffic study has been completed. He stated it is his opinion that such a study
should be completed before the developments are approved. Ekola responded that traffic has been
considered when County Road 121 was designed. The County Engineer designed the road with a look at
the future growth of St. Joseph. The particular development before the Planning Commission at this time
did not meet the requirements to complete an Environmental Assessment review, which would include a
detail traffic analysis. However, the Arcon Developers used the AUAR process for their Environment
Assessment which is the most comprehensive review process. This document details traffic concerns in
the general area being discussed at this meeting. Ekola further stated that it is estimated that the
proposed developments will generate between 300 and 500 trips per day on County Road 121. .
Deutz questioned if the extension of sidewalk from 295th Avenue to the Morningside Development is a
City or County responsibility as he does not believe the property owner would be responsible for such.
Ekola responded that typically a developer is required to extend infrastructure or facilities when they
request development approval. The extension of sidewalk is a direct benefit to the Moringside Acres
addition. The City should review the sidewalk extension as part of the trail system. Weyrens responded
that the Park Board has required that all development extend sidewalk or pathway to the trail system, so
the extension of sidewalk from 295th would be consistent with what other developers have been required
to construct. Sand stated that they will review this requirement when the preliminary plat is designed.
Loso made a motion to recommend the Council Amend the Future Land Use Map for Planning
District 13to include R3, Multiple Family Use in the southern section of Morningside Acres. The
motion was seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously by those present.
Loso made a motion to recommend the Council rezone Morningside Acres as follows: All
property north of the inlet to Morningside Acres shall be R1, Single Family and property south
shall be R3, Multiple Family. The motion was seconded by Kalinowski and passed unanimously
by those present.
Deutz made a motion to delay action on the Special Use Permit request until a detailed plan has
been submitted. The motion was seconded by Loso.
Weyrens stated that since the property owner has not submitted a preliminary plat or detailed site
plan, the request for Special Use should be denied. The City is required to take action on a land
use requirement within 60 days of acceptance. While the Statute does allow a City or property
owner to extend the time frame, it may not be in the best interest of the City to extend time frame
when a plan is not available. Deutz and Loso withdrew the motion.
.
DRAFT
March 22, 2004
Page 3 of6
( Deutz made a motion to deny the Special Use Request of Sand Companies to construct R3,
· Multiple Family housing as detailed plans for the development are not available. The motion also
waives the hearing fee for the Special Use Permit when Sand Companies submits the required
plans. The motion was seconded by Loso and passed unanimously.
The Planning Commission recessed at 7:30 PM and reconvened at 7:40 PM.
Foxmore Hollow - Preliminary Plat and Development reauest: Utsch opened the public hearing at 7:40
PM and stated the purpose of the hearing is to consider rezoning a portion of the property described
below as R1, Single Family, a portion of the property R3, consider a special use permit to allow the
property to be developed with mixed density and consider a preliminary plat for a development to be
called Foxmore Hollow. The property is legally described as: \
Thè South 25.5 acres of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SW Y-. NW Y-. ) of Section Fifteen
(15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-Four (124) North, of Range Twenty-nine (29) West, in Stearns
County, Minnesota, LESS AND EXCEPT the Southerly 30 feet of the Northerly 1834 feet of the Easterly 660
feet of the West One-half of the Northwest Quarter (W Y2 NW Y-.) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One
Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, of Range Twenty-nine (29) West, ALSO LESS AND EXCEPT the Easterly
435 feet of the southerly 600 feet of the Northerly 1102.18 feet of the Southwest Corner of the Northwest
Quarter (SW Y-. NW Y-.) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, Range
Twenty-nine (29) West, ALSO LESS AND EXCEPT that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest
Quarter (SW Y-. NE Y-.) of Section Fifteen (15), in Township One Hundred Twenty-four (124) North, Range
Twenty-nine (29) West, in Stearns County, Minnesota, described as the follows. To-wit; Beginning at the
West Quarter corner of said Section 15; thence North 00 degrees 14' 36" West on an assumed bearing
along the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter )SW Y-. NW Y-.) a distance of 841.50
feet to its intersection with an existing fence line; thence North 89 degrees 01' 27" East along said fence line
a distance of 260.00 feet, thence South 00 degrees 47" 36" East a distance of 845.47 feet to its intersection
with the South line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SW Y-. NW Y-.); thence West along
said South Line a distance of 260.02 feet to the point of beginning, subject to township and right of way, all
· being in Stearns County, Minnesota.
The request for rezoning and ªpecial use has been submitted by Bob Herges and Rick Heid, 25 - 11th
Avenue North, St. Cloud MN 56303
Utsch stated that he will open the floor for questions or comments and reminded those present to limit
their comments to three minutes. After all those wishing to speak have been heard, the hearing will be
closed the Commission will discuss the proposed development.
Tom Homan of 10119 - 29Sth Street spoke in opposition to the proposed development. Homan stated
that the neighborhood has not seen the proposed development plan and it is his understanding that the
proposal includes a 23 unit apartment complex. Homan stated that a petition was circulated in the
neighborhood expressing õpposition to the R3 development as a large apartment building is not
consistent with the neighborhood. Homan stated it is his opinion that the addition of the apartment
complex combined with 23 single family lots will add 118 cars to 295th Street. Currently the road is used
by only 52 cars. While the development of Morningside Acrès includes a connection to 103rd Street,
providing an alternative to using 295th Street, the majority of the traffic will still use 295th Street. In
conclusion, Holman requested the Planning Commission deny the R3 request.
Ann Reisch/ of 10187 - 29f}h Street spoke in opposition to the proposed development. Reischl stated
that proposed apartment complex is three (3) stories and the height will destroy the characteristics of the
neighborhood.
Amanda B/om spoke in opposition to the proposed development. Blom stated that the proposed
development is not consistent with the existing neighborhood and will compromise the quality of the such.
She further stated that since the area is open it is conducive for wildlife and the proposed development
will take away that amenity from the residents. The development will be a detriment for the animal
· population.
DRAFT
March 22, 2004
Page 4 of6
Matt Breth questioned the target market for the proposed development and questioned if the development ·
is low income or students.
Bob Herges responded that the housing is market rate and is not targeted to a special interest
group. The plan includes R3, as it is his opinion that the portion of the plat that abuts Wilshire
Apartments is best suited for rental. Herges questioned those present if there is a type of R3
development that would be acceptable.
Reischl responded that she is opposed to the size and the height of the proposed
buílding and prefers something smaller.
Marilyn Ruhr questioned if the proposed R3 is targeted for college housing.
Herges responded that the housing is available to anyone. When they were developing
Graceview Estates they received a number of inquires as to rental options. This facility could fill that
need. Furthermore, the proximity of the property to the downtown area make the proposed site ideal for
multiple family development
Roseanne Holm expressed opposition to the proposed project. She stated the proposed apartment
complex will be located directly across from her property and she has not seen a plan.
Lon Negin stated that he has been retained by Heid/Herges to design the apartment complex for
Foxmore Hollow. The apartment building serves as a transition from the existing multiple family to
residential and the design of the proposed building complements the architectural design of the College
buildings.
Bernie Schloemer questioned the height of the building to which Negin stated 38 feet.
Jerry Schreifel of 728 College Avenue South questioned the need for additional rental and stated in his
opinion the neighborhood being discussed at this time already has enough rental.
Mary Schorden of 828 College A venue South stated that she is opposed to the density along CR 121. ·
She questioned if the apartments could be constructed in the northwest corner of the plat, abutting the
maintenance facili!y for the-College of St. Benedict
Their being no additional testimony, Utsch closed the public hearing at 8:05 PM.
Grave questioned if the Planning Commission could divide the plat approval in two sections, excluding
the R3 portion. By excluding the R3 portion of the project, the developers could conduct a neighborhood
meeting and discuss development alternatives. Utsch requested the Commission consider each item on
the agenda separately, beginning with the Comprehensive Plan. Utsch reminded the Council that the
Ordinance Amendment adopted by the Planning Commission provides the Planning Commission with a
second opportunity to approve a R3 development. Amending the Comprehensive Plan to include R3
does not give a developer the right to construct any type of R3 without first securing a Special Use
Permit.
Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council Amend the Future Land Use Map for Planning
District 8 to include R3, Multiple Family Use. The R3 Use shall be allowed on the outlot of the -
property being platted as Foxmore Hollow.
Discussion: Deutz questioned if the proposed apartment complex could be moved to the
north end of the outlot. Lon Negil stated that the original plan submitted to the City did have the
building on the north side of the lot, but the Zoning Ordinance requires parking to be located in
the rear yard. Therefore, the building had to be placed at the proposed location. Those present
clarified they are requesting the apartment complex to be located in the northwest corner of the
plat, not the outlot.
Herges responded that relocating the apartment complex to the northwest corner is not a viable
option for development. The reason that R3 is being requested in the illustrated location is that it
is adjacent to an existing R3 development. ·
DRAFT
March 22, 2004
Page 5 of6
( Graeve stated that he would prefer to not take action on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
· until the developer presents a revised sketch plan. If the City takes action at this time without a
plan, the City will be reacting, in the defense.
The motion was seconded by Loso.
Ayes: Utsch, Kalinowski, Loso, Lesnick, Deutz.
Nays: Graeve Motion Carried 5:1:0
Utsch stated that the Planning Commission must act on the plan before them at this time. Tom Herkinoff,
representing Bob Herges, requested the Planning Commission move forward with the R1 portion of the
development. Herkinoff stated that they can continue to work with the neighbors to see if a compromise
can be reached with the neighbors. City Attorney Sue Dege stated that the Planning Commission can
move forward in this fashion, with the understanding that the outlot where the proposed R3 development
will go, is excluded from approval. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to move forward
with the plan excluding the outlot, which has been designated for multiple family dwelling units.
Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council approve the R1, single family zoning for Foxmore
Hollow, excluding the outlot adjacent to 295th. The motion was seconded by Graeve and passed
unan imously by those present.
Deutz made a motion to table the rezoning of Outlot A, Foxmore Hollow (Lot 19 Blk 2) and extend
the 60 land use action requirement an additional 60 days. :rhemotion was seconded by Graeve
and passed unanimously by those present.
Weyrens stated that the developers for Foxmore Hollow have requested to develop the property as a
PUD to accommodate mixed density development. While the plat submitted meets the density
requirements of the R1, Single Family Zoning District, the minimum depth of 125 feet per lot has not been
meet. Developing property as a PUD allows for relief from the strict adherence to the Zoning regulations.
· The Planning Commission should specify what, if any zoning regulations- are being relieved if the PUD is
recommencjed for approval. Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council authorize Foxmore
Hollow to be developed as a PUD, providing relief from the depth of the lðt. The motion was
seconded by Lesnick and passed unanimously by those present.
Prelim inarv Plat - Foxmore Hollow: Utsch stated the Planning Commission must also consider the
Preliminary Plat for Foxmore Hollow. The City has received the required submittals which include the
following comments:
· Foxmore Hollow requires the use of 295th Street. Ideally, it would be upgraded with water,
sewer, streets curb and gutter. 295th will serve as the only ingress/egress for the proposed
development. Therefore, if the street is not upgraded at this time, the development will be
constructed using a substandard road that will need to be re-built due to the increased traffic. It
is anticipated that the proposed development will double the traffic on 295th Street.
· 295th Avenue is not constructed to City standards and is paved a width of 18' without shoulders.
A typical City is street is 36 feet wide with shoulders. Consideration should be given to
upgrading 295th Street and adding water and sewer.
· If 295th Street is not upgraded, the City will have to deal with a % street as the south side of the
street is in St. Joseph Township. While the City and Township have an agreement for snow
removal, an additional agreement would be needed for the maintenance of the road.
· There is a cost savings to reconstructing 295th Street while Foxmore Hollow is being developed.
The developers will be required to pay their fair share portion and will have the ability to spread
the costs over the entire development. If the improvements are done at a later time, then only
· those properties abutting 295th would be assessed.
DRAFT
March 22, 2004
Page 6 of6
· If the project is not completed in 2004 or 2005, the City will have the ability to do so in 2008. ·
However, the overall costs will be higher not only due to inflation, but the utilities will be extended
outside the road sections adding an additional cost.
· Drainage needs to be reviewed by the Steams County Engineer and any holding ponds should
be platted as an outlot with vehicular access.
· Consideration should be given as to whether or not sidewalk will be required on the north side of
295th Street and if so, will the cost be borne by the Developer?
Utsch questioned why there are existing buildings illustrated on the proposed plat. Herges responded
that the property is being purchased from Leonard Walz and he will be retaining four lots, two of which
have existing homes. One of the homes will be demolished and the other will be remodeled. The
, Planning Commission concurred that any buildings remaining must meet current setback requirements.
In addition, any debris must be removed and driveway access to the existing homes must be brought into
complian'ce with the Zoning Ordinance.
Richard Kuebelbeck questioned the location of the main gas line and if the easement has been included
in the proposed plat. Herges stated that he will double check the location of the easement and revise the
plat if needed.
Deutz made a motion to recommend the Council accept the Preliminary Plat for the R1 portion of
Foxmore Hollow contingent upon the following:
1. Approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney
2. The lots retained by the current property owner whereby structures or portions of
structures remain, must conform to all Zoning Requirements, including, but not
limited to setback, outdoor storage and driveway regulations.
The motion was seconded by Kalinowski. ·
Ayes: Utsch, Kalinowski, Lesnick, Deutz, Loso
Nayes: Graeve Motion Carried 5:1:0
Adjourn: Loso made a motion to adjourn at 9:10 PM; seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously.
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
·
Extract of the May 3, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting
Park Dedication Fees, Ordinance Amendment
· Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment. 54.18, Park Dedication Fees: Chair Utsch called the public hearing to
order and stated that the purpose of the hearing is to consider an Amendment to St. Joseph Code of Ordinances
54.18, Public Land Dedication. The proposed amendment would change the method of calculation for parkland from
a percentage of the land value to a per lot fee.
The request has been submitted by The Park Board.
Bruce Borghorst, Chair of the St. Joseph Park Board spoke on behalf of the Park Board. Berghorst stated that the
Park Board recently completed a survey with regard to methods for calculating Park Dedication Fees. Currently the
City charges 10% of the land value or purchase price. This method is not equitable as the need for park is not based
on the selling price of land, rather the population served. The area Cities charge a per lot fee using Census data and
parkland per person as a basis for calculating such. Using the same formula as other Cites, the park dedication fees
would increase and provide the Park Board with sustainable development fees. The proposed fees would not impact
commercial or industrial development.
Loso questioned whether or not this new method was addressed to the area builders. Weyrens stated that they have
not been notified individually. However, the Central Minnesota Builders Association (CMBA) receives copies of all
agendas and they did contact the City regarding the new fee. Weyrens stated that they indicated they were going to
attend the meeting, but are not present.
Their being no one present to speak the public hearing was closed.
Utsch stated that because of the differences in land values between developers, it would be more equitable to charge
a per lot fee rather than a percentage of the land value. Loso concurred with Utsch and stated that changing the
method would be consistent with the other area Cities.
Utsch questioned whether or not a per lot dedication fee would be more or less than the current fee charged.
· Berghorst replied that in most cases the fee would increase. The only case it wouldn't is if a developer paid a
inflated land price.
Deutz questioned why the Park Board is requesting to change the Ordinance and if the motivating factor is that we
have not reviewed or updated the fee. He further questioned what impact the new fee would have on current
developments. Berghorst said that the Park Board reviewed the fee as the City of Waite Park just changed their
methodology and completed an area analysis. The Park Board received a copy of the analysis and noticed that St.
Joseph was collecting far below what other Cities collect. With regard to current projects, Weyrens stated that this
would not affect any developments where a preliminary plat has been submitted.
Lesnick stated that she believes the proposed method for calculating Park Dedication fees is more equitable and
would assist the Park Board in developing and maintaining the existing and new Parks. Utsch concurred with
Lesnick, but would like an opportunity to review the total development fees to make sure that the additional Park
Dedication fee will not elevate the development price in St. Joseph. Weyrens recommended the Planning
Commission meet jointly with the Park Board to review the proposed fee. Loso and Deutz stated that the local
developers should be contacted for review and comment.
Deutz made a motion to table action on the amendment to Ordinance 54.18, Park Dedication Fee until a time
when the Planning Commission and Park Board can meet jointly. If members of the Building Community
attend the meeting they will allowed to present additional information. The motion was seconded by Graeve
and passed unanimously.
·
DRAFT
May 12, 2004
Page 1 of 2
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the 8t. Joseph Planning Commission and 8t. Joseph Park Board .
met in Joint session on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 at 6:00 PM in the 8t. Joseph City Hall.
Planninq Commission Members Present: Chair (Council Liaison) Gary Utsch. Commissioners Jim
Graeve, Mike Deutz, Bob Loso, Marge Lesnick.
8t. Joseph Park Board Members Present: Chair Bruce Berghorst. Board Members Chuck Muske, Dedra
Duehs, Marge Lesnick, Bob Loso. Council Liaison Dale Wick.
Others Present: AI Rassier.
Utsch opened the meeting and stated the purpose of the meeting is to discuss the proposed amendment
to Ordinance 54.18, Park Dedication. The Planning requested to meet jointly with the Park to discuss the
need for changing the fee and why the change is requested. Weyrens stated that at this meeting the
Planning Commission should focus on the methodology of determining the fee, not the rate that will be
charged. The City Council will review the request of the Park Board and establish the fee.
Berghorst stated that the Park Board was provided information from Waite Park, whereby they completed
an analysis of the area Park Dedication policies. This analysis indicated that 8t. Joseph charged below
what the other Cities are charging. In addition, the Cities reviewed all charge the Park Dedication Fee on
a per lot basis rather than a percentage of the land value. Wick stated that the Park Dedication fees are
the only revenue source for the Park Board and those funds must be able to provide recreational
opportunities.
Loso stated that he is concerned that the City does not budget for Park Development. Weyrens
responded that when the City was faced with $ 126,000 in LGA cuts, the Council reviewed the entire
budget and tried to determine how to maximize the revenue. The City is experiencing rapids growth and
the park dedication fees far exceed any monies the City could bUdget for Park Development. Therefore, .
the Council eliminated the 2003 Park Development Budget and stated that until development slows down,
they will not budget additional funds. Weyrens further stated that the City does provide financial support
to the Park as the Public Works budget includes maintenance and capital outlay.
Deutz and Utsch stated that they agree that the formula should be based on a per lot fee, but question
what the number should be. The City has implemented many new fees and they are concerned that
increasing the dedication fee substantially will have a negative effect on development. Utsch stated that
he is also concerned that the City requires connection or establishment of trails in addition to the Park
Dedication fees.
Lesnick stated it is her opinion that the City should be concerned with the profit the developers are
making, rather what impact a proposed development has on park requirements. Deutz took exception to
the comments of Lesnick and stated the discussion at this meeting should not be what the developer is
making, rather the need for the fee and how parks will be sustained.
Wick stated that the Park Board is working on a Capital Improvement Plan and some of the improvements
include bathrooms for Klinefelter and Northland. It is estimated that the bathrooms will cost
approximately $ 25,000 each. Park Development is expensive and the Park Board wants to assure that
park development is ongoing and equipment and facilities can be updated and expanded as necessary.
Weyrens stated that the fee should be related back to the Capital Improvement Plan and what funds are
needed to develop parks based on an established plan. Weyrens stated that the per lot fee is an
equitable method and she recommends implementing the new methodology. However, the City needs to
make sure that the fee charged is equitable to both the City and developer.
Loso made a motion to recommend the City Council adopt an amendment to Ordinance 54.18, .
Park Dedication fees and change the method for calculating dedication fees from the current
percentage of land value to a per lot fee. The per lot fee will apply to all residential zoning
DRAFT
May 12, 2004
Page 2 of 2
. districts, with R1 based on a per lot basis and R3 based on number of units. Commercial and
Industrial requirements will remain at 2% of the fair market value. The motion was seconded by
Lesnick.
Discussion: Utsch again stated thathe is concerned that the City is asking the Developer to
contribute a park dedication fee and a trail fee. Deutz concurred with Utsch and
questioned if charging the developer for both is equitable. Utsch stated he is not
opposed to the new methodology, just the proposed fee.
Deutz questioned if the Park Board surveyed the Cities such as Avon?
Berghorst stated that he did contact Cities with the same poplulation such as
Zimmerman and Baxter. Of all the Communities Berghorst contacted, Sf. Joseph
had the least expensive Park Dedication ,fee.
Loso amended the motion to include that the Cities of St. Cloud, Waite Park, Sauk Rapids, and
Sartell will be contacted to determine if their Park Dedication Fees include trails or if the
Developer is required to construct trails in addition to the dedication fee. The trail system can
include sidewalk andlor bituminous surfacing. If the majority of the Cities contacted include
trails, then that will carry forward to a recommendation to the Council. If they have a separate trail
requirement, that fee will be added to the dedication fee. Lesnick agreedto the amendment and
the motion carried unanimously.
Adjourn: Loso made a motion to adjourn at 6:55 pm; seconded by Lesnick and passed
unanimously.
. Judy Weyrens
Administrator
.
Page 1 of2
Judy Weyrens
en: "Matt Glaesman" <Matt.Glaesman@cï.stcloud.mn.us>
To: <jweyrens@cityofstjoseph.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 1 :38 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Park Dedication fees
udy,
i:ere are our responses to your questions. I also faxed the information you requested this morning. Please let me know
f you need anything else.
610 sq feet or $1,192 for each single-family detached dwelling
~. We have accepted trail construction upon a public access easement as part of the parkland dedication. No trail fee is
"equired.
;. We would use the parkland dedication requirement to make that connection and ask for additional dedication from
he developer if necessary. I dont recall a specific statement in our ordinance about requiring connection, but we would
10 that as part of the negotiation/concept plan review.
L Here is oúr parkland dedication language:
~.9 Public Sites and Open Spaces:
~.All residential subdivisions shall de~icate land for public use. such as
) , playgrounds, open spaces, natural sites, or other uses accordmg
o the following schedule except for plats thai create a maximum of two
ots and that have one existing single family home on the property, the
jark fee shall not be required for the lot with the single family home. The
)lans will be reviewed by the Park and Recreation Department.
F AMIL Y 2 OR MORE FAMILY
)EVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT
)10 SQ. FT/LOT 480 SQ. FT/UNIT
~.9-2 For subdivisions incorporating a mixture of uses and/or densities, the
)Ublic use areas shall be determined by applying the appropriate
ledication requirement for each use listed in this section.
~.9-3 Where a proposed public site or open space as shown on the Master
'Ian of the City is located in whole or in part in a subdivision, the Planning
:::ommission may require the dedication or reservation of such within the
;ubdivision in those cases in which the Planning Commission deems
'uch requirements to be reasonable.
~.9-4 Land reserved for public sites and open spaces shall be of a character
md location suitable for the intended use as determined by the Planning
.ssion. Public sites and open spaces shall have a total frontage on
) > ) or more streets of at least two hundred (200) feet, and no other
limension of the site shall be less than two hundred (200) feet in depth
5/1712004
Page 2 of2
unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission.
2.9-5 Under Minn. Statute Section 462.358 Subd 2.b guidelines, in the event .
the Planning Commission determines a subdivision is too small, and/or
does not include a park area as shown on the Master Plan, and/or the
need for funds to develop existing park land in the area is more important,
the owner or subdivider shall pay unto the City of St. Cloud such sum of
money as set out in Section 520:00 of City Ordinance Code.
2.9-6 The City Finance Director shall establish a separate fund into which all
cash contributions received from owners and developers in lieu of
conveyance of dedication of land for such public purposes shall be
deposited. The deposit shall be used by the City for acquisition of public
site/open space that will be available to and benefit the persons in the
subdivision for which payment was made.
2.9-7 Taxes. Property taxes due and payable on dedicated properties must be
paid by subdivider prior to recording of the subdivision according to MN
State Statute 272-02.
»> "Judy Weyrens" <jweYl'ens@cityofstioseph.com> 05/13/04 12:39PM »>
___n Original Message -----
From: Judy Weyrens
To: Jack Kahlhamer; Matt Glaesman; Todd Schultz .
Sent: Wednesday, May 12,20049:48 PM
Subject: Park Dedication fees
The St. Joseph Planning Commission and Park Board have reviewed the Park Dedication fees. The motion to amend
the fees is dependent upon the area Cities Ordinances. Therefore, I am looking for the following information:
1. What is your current park dedication fee for R1 Single Family residential?
2. Do you require developers to install trails in addition to the park dedication fee or can they
construct trails with the park dedication fees? If you have a separate trail fee what is that fee and is it
based on a per lot fee?
3. If you have a trail system is it mandatory to connect via sidewalk: or trail to the trail system and if so
IS this part of the park dedication fee or is that a requirement above and beyond?
4. Could you fax or email a copy of your Park Dedication Ordinance.
Thank you for assisting St. Joseph.
Judy Weyrens
City ofSt. Joseph
(320) 363-7201
.
5/17/2004
Page 1 of2
Judy Weyrens
a: "Anita Rasmussen" <Anita@sartellmn.com>
To: <jweyrens@cityofstjoseph.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 13,20048:20 AM
Attach: Chapter 4-Preliminary Plats1.21.doc
Subject: Re: Fw: Park Dedication fees
1. What is your current park dedication fee for Rl
Single Family residential?
';950 for single family
:700 for multi-family
2. Do you require developers to install trails in addition
to the park dedication fee or can they construct
rails with the park dedication fees?
N e require trails be dedicated to the city to ensure proper trail
:onnections (to the existing trails). Trails are typically constructed
Lt the time the improvements are going in. The trails are typically
¡aid with park dedication (or in our case, the developer usually
throws" that in).
r. have a separate trail fee what is that fee and is
t don a per lot fee?
ro - but that is a good idea!
3. If you have a trail system is it mandatory to connect
via sidewalk or trail to the trail system and if so is
lis part of the park dedication fee or is that a
~quirement above and beyond?
~rails and sidewalks must connect to our "multi-model" transportation
ystem. If the trail/sidewalk is within the ROW - it is not park land
,edicated.
4. Could you fax or email a copy of your Park
Dedication Ordinance.
have attached it for your review
udy - i cannot find the development fee sheet we were talking about
esterday - i will keep looking.
.
..nita M. Rasmussen AICP
5/17/2004
Page 1 of 1
Judy Weyrens .
From: "Todd Schultz" <Tschultz@cLsauk-rapids.mn.us>
To; <jweyrens@cityofstjoseph.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 20049:23 AM
Attach: CHAP12 revised 07-28-03.DOC
Subject: Re: Park Dedication fees
Judy,
1. What is your current park dedication fee for Rl Single Family residential? $1.25 per square foot
2. Do you require developers to install trails in addition to the park dedication fee or can they construct trails with
the park dedication fees? We give them credit out ofthe park dedication fees as long as it is a trail that we want. If you
have a separate trail fee what is that fee and is it based on a per lot fee? We do not have a separate trail fee (does statute
allow this?).
3. If you have a trail system is it mandatory to connect via sidewalk or trail to the trail system and if so is this part
of the park dedication fee or is that a requirement above and beyond? Ifwe want trails, we tell the developer where
they will go and what they will connect too. If they put in trails that we want we deduct that cost from their park
dedication fees,
4. Could you fax or email a copy of your Park Dedication Ordinance.
Our last two developments we told the developer that we did not want them to give us land to develop a park, but rather
we wanted the entire cash in lieu. In both cases the developer wanted a neighborhood park so bad, that they still put one
in, they paid for the equipment, their association must maintain it, and it was deeded to the City. We gave them partial
credit for this, but we still got a large cash in lieu check and a park. .
the park language in the attachment is located in Section 12.06, Subd.-l0
Todd Schultz
Community Development Director
City Of Sauk Rapids
115 Second A venue North
Sauk Rapids, MN 56379
Phone 320.258.5315
Fax 320.258.5359
.
5/1712004
. I Attachment: ~~ª or No I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Building Official Report - Rental Housing
DATE: May 20, 2004
Buildin{!: Official Ron Wasmund
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Rental Inspection Forms and Supporting Commentary
PREVIOUS ACTION
None
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION
. For review and approval for content.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
The first intended purpose of these forms is to inform the rental property owners of the content and
extent of the inspection for licensure. The second intended purpose is to encourage and allow the
property owner to perform his or her own inspection prior to the scheduled inspection with the
City Rental Inspector. The result should be better informed owners and higher compliance rates
with fewer re-inspections.
There is still some formatting to be completed with checklist forms allowing us to incorporate
comments that Council Members may have. If this approach to the rental inspection program is
supported by Mayor and Council the final formatting changes will be made and the forms will be
prepared for distribution to the property owners at a public meeting with all rental owners
scheduled for 6:30 p.m. June 14, 2004.
I am recommending approval of the forms and content for incorporation into the rental housing
inspection program.
.
OWNER NAME:
AP ARTMENT BillLDING
PROPERTY ADDRESS: INSPECTION CHECK LIST .
DATE OF INSPECTION:
INSPECTOR:
COMPLIANT COMMENTS
YES NO
EXTERIOR GROUNDS:
1. Fences, retaining walls
2. Dumpsters
3. Trash, building materials, junk cars,
Branches, clippings etc.
4. Fire wood storage
5. Sidewalks, stairs, handrails
6. Address numbers visible from street
7. Grills solid fuel burning devices on/or
under decks
8. Landscaping, weeds and grass height .
EXTERIOR STRUCTURAL:
9. Foundation, drainage, exterior walls,
siding and painted surfaces
10. Roofmg structural condition
11. Erosion due to drainage
12. Windows, frames, moldings, glass
13. Exit doors, stonn doors, screens
14. Stairs, handrails, guardrails, decks
15. Masonry chimney, liners, metal vents
16. Electrical service wire clearance from
grade, driveways, windows, decks, roofs
17. Fire lane signage "NO PARKING"
18. Condition of electrical lighting, outlets
and wiring
19. Access to and visibility of fire hydrants
GARAGES ACCESSORY BLDGS.
20. Condition of walls, roofs, soffit, fascia and
trim boards, siding, paint and doors .
21. Window and door glass
2
.. If dumpster is located in garage, is garage
stall one- hour fire rated walls and ceiling
23. Electrical wire secure, protected, junction,
switch and outlet boxes covered, proper
grounding and polarity,' approved wiring
methods
24. Attached or basement garages fire separation,
Openings in ceilings around plumbing pipes
and electrical conduit. Barrier in stairwell at
grade level to prevent entry down stairs into
garage in case of fire
INTERIOR COMMON AREAS:
25. Corridor and exit lighting, exiting signage,
emergency corridor lighting, smoke alarms,
fire extinguishers, un-obstructed exiting,
condition of floor and stair carpeting
Identification of boiler, storage locker
elevator motor, swimming pool heater and
materials storage rooms.
e. Corridor and stair well doors self-closing and
, Latching, one hour rating of corridor walls
and ceiling. One hour rated door assemblies
to boiler room and laundry, storage locker,
elevator motor and storage rooms
27. Exit stair handrails, exit door hardware,
security locks
28. Fire Department key box in front entrance
area at exterior of locked lobby
29. Security fence/barrier around swimming pool
with locked and self-latching gate properly
installed and maintained. Identification of
swimming pool heating and storage area
provided with one hour fire separation
BOILER ROOM:
30. Proper boiler operation, combustion air,
clearances rrom combustibles, proper
automatic boiler room ventilation, one
hour separation. Proper waste and vent on
plumbing fixtures, leaking pipes and faucets
e operational floor drain with cover grate and
cleanout plug in place.
3
·
Electrical wiring and
lighting secure with covers on all electrical
boxes.
If equipped with water heaters are
pressure and temperature relief valves
installed properly.
STORAGE LOCKER ROOM:
31. If storage locker is being used door must
be locked. Proper wiring and lighting fixtures
are required One-hour fire separation required
LAUNDRY ROOM:
32. Proper waste and vent on plumbing fixtures.
Condition of electrical outlets wiring and light
fixtures. Build-up oflint and debris behind
laundry appliances. Smooth metal vents for
laundry dryers, no metal screws heat resistive ·
tape on vent joints. Laundry room and
appliance venting to exterior.
One hour fire separation,
STORAGE~ ELEVATOR ROOMS:
33. Electrical wiring, outlets and lights
One hour fire separation
AP ARTMENT UNITS:
34.Doors;
Self-closing and latching at corridor
Operational dead bolts
Broken, holed doors in unit
Closet folding or sliding doors off
tract or broken
34. Windows:
Broken glass
Window locks (1 st floor)
Deck or patio doors
·
4
.
35. Screens required on all first and second
floor doors and windows
36. Moisture damage, mold: walls ceiling.
Holes in walls and ceiling
37. Condition of Carpet, floor tiles;
Carpet stains, odder from pets etc.
Damaged, worn floor coverings in
bathroom and kitchen, that cannot be
kept in a clean and sanitary condition.
38. Bathroom;
Damaged, leaking bathtub enclosure
Anti-siphon ballcock and faucets
Leaking drainpipes, faucets, toilet
and valves
Proper waste and vent of fixtures
Cracked, broken, damaged plumbing
fixtures
Operational G.F.I. (ground-fault- interrupter)
type electrical outlet. Light fixtures operational
from wall mounted switch. Grounding and
. polarity correct.
. Operational mechanical ventilation
39. Deck;
Structural condition of deck and guardrail
Sliding door and screen
No solid fuel burning grills etc.
No Christmas tree on deck or firewood storage
40. Heating and Gas Piping, Water Heater;
If heating unit located in apartment living unit
Clearance from combustibles from heating unit
Clearance of furnace vent connector
Open gas lines/valves.
Condition of gas shut off valves-must be operable
or replace with approved ball type gas shut off
valves.
Flexible (brass) gas line - replace with copper tube
with flared fittings, stainless steel flex gas line or
black iron pipe.
Water heater Pressure and Temperature relief valve,
% inch drop leg to with 18 inches from floor.
All drop legs are to be in the down position with
no obstructions Wiring to electric water heaters
e to be properly secured and protected
5 ·
41. Kitchen;
Waste and vent kitchen sink, proper "P" trap
Leaking drain lines, faucets and fixtures, no
taping or patching allowed, leaking dish sprayer
Grounded electrical outlets in kitchen, proper
lighting fixtures and no extension cords
Condition of floor and countertop coverings that
can be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition
Operational mechanical ventilation
41. LivinglDinning Room;
Walls, ceiling and windows
Condition of electrical outlets/switches light fixtures
42. Bedrooms;
Walls, ceilings and windows
Electrical outlets/switches and light fixtures
No electrical light fixtures allowed over shelf
in closet
Operational and properly installed smoke alann
43. Electrical;
If unit has circuit panel no openings allowed in panel ·
installation of knockout plugs required
Check for wiring under kitchen sink, exposed or
not secured
Damaged, burnt outlets and switches missing
cover plates
No extension cords allowed
44. Sanitation;
Pet droppings, soiled stained carpet, oders
Trash and garbage accumulations
Leaking, soiled or inoperable plumbing fixtures
Maintained, food preparation area, cooking facilities
45. Other;
·
Page 1 of 1
Judy Weyrens
a: <Campsite11 @aol.com>
To: <jweyrens@cityofstjoseph.com>
Cc: <rwasmund@inspectroninc.com>; <thomaswigfield@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, May 14,200411 :03 PM
Attach: City Council Agenda Item Rental Housing Forms.ZIP
Subject: Rental Inspection Forms
-Iello Judy,
-Iere are the forms for the 1 & 2 family inspection checklist, the 1 & 2 family commentary, the multi family inspection check list and
1e agenda cover sheet for th ecouncil packets. We are working on the multi family commentary, planning to get that to you on
~onday. As we discussed there is some formatting to do, primarily headings on the multi family inspection forms and lines on
oth inspection form sets under the compliance column. I am excited about the way they are turning out, Tom is doing a good job.
will be in the office all day on Monday. Call me if I can answer any questions.
.on
.
.
5/17/2004
. I Attachment: Yes or No I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: May 17.2004
ENGINEERING TRACY L. EKOLA. PE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Feasibility Study for 16th Avenue SE Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Improvements
PREVIOUS ACTION
. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Approve feasibility study and order design plans and specifications.
FISCAL IMPACT
$74,071. Project costs would be assessed to property owners.
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
This project provides sanitary sewer and water main improvements to the Pondview Ridge LLP, Schelper,
and Schriefels properties located on 16th Avenue SE. Information on this project was presented at the May
6,2004 St. Joseph Council meeting.
. X:\PT\stjoe\commonID39 Req Council Action\2004 16th Avenue Improvements. doc
UtJ¡.L4¡U4 .L I . U~ ~'AA ..""U """"~ 4.>U.L ...,....H ...:Iuu~
. ~
SEH
May 14, 2004 RE: St.Joseph,~ÚInesota
Feasibility Study for 16th Avenue SE
Sanitary Sewer and W ater ~ain
Improvements
SEH No. A-STJOE 0401 14
Honorable Mayor and City Council
c/o ~s. Judy Weyrens
Clerk! Administrator
City of Saint Joseph
25 College Ave North
PO Box 668
St. Joseph. MN 56374-0668
Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:
Tbe following ÍDfonnation is enclosed for the above referenced project:
. Proposed Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Site Map
Opinion of Probable Cost and Estimated Assessment Rate
. This project provides sanitary sewer and water-main improvements to the Pondview Ridge LLP, Schelper,
and Schriefels properties located on 16th Avenue SE. Infonnation on this project was presented at the ~ay
6, 2004 St. Joseph Council meeting.
Having investigated the facts relating to construction of the proposed improvements, it is my opinion,
from an engineering standpoint, that this project is feasible, cost-effective, and necessary.
àt;ø¿ .-
Tracy L. Ekola, PE
Sr. Professional Engineer
License No. 25216
JIDW
Enclosure
c: Dick Tauten, City of St. Joseph
Joseph Bettendorf, SEH
x:\s\sljoe\04OJOO\tcrrll-feas study 161h ave OSl404.doc
.
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302-1717
SEH is aft equal opportunity employer www.sehinc.com I 320.229.4300 I 800.572.0617 I 320.229.4301 fax
05/14/04 17: 10 FAX 320 229 4301 SEH 1m UUô
tottj \ "
_ __ .__. ... :. ~ i.
, , '
_ _ ':-': ,",. In ."- ,'" '~--.., ,:,:,~.., \
/ ..'".', " ~'"
... ~ ' . .
... . ." '
.. '
, . '
'-~'", ~." J I '
. .. .
... .. - ." ' ' .., ./ ,.. " :~,
:."~ u "~7~'- ~ ',': \ :,. I ;,
'~~ ~ " '.., -:.. -, " - ~.., --
." ~.
. - ..0
- ',. -"-',." "~
- :~ ,,:-:.'. ¡'~:~.~,~- ",\ "~:. '-~' ....,
~/.,-.. .-
"~~C"C-:f'''---c:'''==~P>'> - '-\ ,i: ~
. ,
i -
L ~ .,: _ ,,-.. ' , ~
,,' , : :: .,',.<~-,::. :. \ ç ;- . r 8 ..
~ I ' , .. - / ~ ~,~, . . L;¡-' -
~ ; I ,;.LA- --- ~ '-<>V" '-..,~\- ;""~ ~ .. <::-,-~_.!'-,.;;':;"-'
;, : ¡..::,.,_.."..._.,.,¡--....,' ' ','. " ' ,'- L.Ù I/}'··'· ,-
; :j.- ri. ~ . --~ " - "'------
: I.T' ,(.. ~ ^ D V r: 71\ '.' v) ì
. : : : '-.,- a\~' I ....I I : '. L
~ ' ", ,,~
, : ;\ ~~.
"7.. .' ~.,
¡ I: . ~, .
~: "r, -
~ :-;fj '* \;j~ ~ ~ ,,- c-- "
~ _ U,'" -"\\: 1:.. [JAU:,'f'.::>:, :;"'7<-"
- S \ t 1 ·1 ,.._~ -,' r':
0' . _ .-" ; I . - "- L-----\ ." .
. I r .' -. - .. -- - - '
3: .' ,.- '" ......,_--'-____ ~,-- ._____~..,-.A- ~ '
~ \.......-. .... _0 ,S~-C-------- ----:::_-~--n---..--..~., W ~ - -"=:::~~,,;-' .
,~ _---',. ~'Õ-~~ ;i....~ _n, i ,,+-l ~'!.
~ ~. v ¡I,T', T . ~ x '
v; ~ : V>
E ~
I ¡¡ 1
:s II Zw
f iT ¡ -~ ...................................u,
.- r A,-.' - '--'b""~ iì::::J' ,¡:- , /
11 H!>' '-,.. L VLt. 1\1 Ivt. ~;'.t· ! «
~ ;'¡;.., >A'3 ~. ....A..-. ~ ....J ~
g 'j " "l' if! ~ \ -::.~ <: ;:
c; :' .....ji l' :, .:::",'-~ RASSIER, A.
.... \. "i (D L1..i a-'-'
5! '.i <.) ,-'"1 ¡ >- ..?-~
Q} W ,- '-,\ I;;'~
.2, " \;k \.;J \:\,~ ~ i ()';/¡'
~ :.n :\ \ ,.... \ J2 ~
___ \ " '-" \ I ,Q-
~ . ~ 0 \\ - .t
.. \ W ~ , 0:::.,..; I / ,,0- n~
\ x \ ç A '-', f Ç'J!.; Q. - 4) W
\~" <ñ ' ,... 1\ if N::J
jG: '\ I,' l(~ ~ - ii' ...-?: z ^
i;r \ 0 ~! ¡,'-I W
iw \ -t- 4. /: Ii"' IV') >
VJ \ I 11 u.> ~ ¡¡ ~ <! J \
\ ~ Ii Q :! "" LJ
! _' ¡! .1 Á'~ (j) I-
: j ~ i Q.C>. ~':E/~6 d ~ t ~ RASSIER F
t-') I 0'> J
;.:, j
'" ;
cr. i I ~ -.. 0::
/ <~, --~-_. -,:;----:-~-;--==:::¿: ''{, 5
.... í ~ Uì
g i ¿
~ j r
~ I ~
" ,
II) I
! ....-_._ I
~~) , '" WO .
)~ 16TH AVENU5I91ST AVENUE
~SE~ PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER & WATERMAIN SITE MAP
H ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
U.../.l4/04 .l/:.lU ¥AA ð~U "U 4ðU.l ,.)hH Ig¡ 004
. 200416TIi AVENUEl91ST AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS 5/14/2004
ST. JOSEPH, MN
,A-sTJOE 0401
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST AND ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT RATE
WITH 1JTILmES THROUGH SlDElREAR PROPERTY UNES
ITEM UNIT OF
NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION MEASUREMENT QUANTITIES UNIT PRICE TOTAL
~~fa_(~1I(ll«~~~~liJ_rll_ii"111_ff_!lfl'
1 MOBIUZA11ON LUMP SUM 1.00 $5.000.00 $5,000.00
2 SAWClTT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT UNFT 72..00 $3.00 $216.00
3 REMOVE EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT save 200.00 $2.00 $400.00
4 PATCH BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT save 200.00 $12.00 $2,400.00
5 SODDING TYPE LAWN save 1,500.00 $3.00 $4,500.00
6 8" PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR35 UNFT 570.00 $20.00 $11,400.00
7 4' PVC SANITARY SEWER, SDR26 LINFT 100.00 $8.00 $800.00
8 CONNECT TO EXISTING PIPE EACH 1.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
9 SANITARY MANHOLE EACH 4.00 $1,700.00 $6,800.00
10 8" X 4" PVC WYE EACH 4.00 $50.00 $200.00
11 RElOCATE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LUMP SUM 1.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00
12 TELEVISE SANITARY SEWER UNFT 570.00 $1.50 $855.00
SANITARYSEWERSUBTOTAL-CONSTRUC~ON $37,071.00
. ¡;~]m_;~~rili_~ír.~rf~1_~lw~~~~~~~11~~~~~M~j~}~fil~~~~~t~lll~t~~~]~I~I~l¡¡~II~I!1
13 8" WATER MAIN - DUCT IRON CL 52 UNFT 370.00 $20.00 $7,400.00
14 6' WATER MAIN - DUCT IRON CL 52 UNFT 140.00 $18.00 $2.52.0.00
15 S" GAT.E VALVE AND BOX EACH 1.00 $900.00 $900.00
16 CONNECTTO EXISTING WATER MAIN EACH 1.00 $500.00 $500.00
17 1" CORPORA~ON STOP EACH 4.00 $55.00 $22.0.00
1S l' CURB STOP AND BOX EACH 4.00 $118.00 $472.00
19 1· TYPE K COPPER PIPE UN FT 100.00 $9.00 $900.00
20 WATER MAIN FITTINGS POUND 900.00 $3.25 $2.925.00
WATER MAIN SUBTOTAL - CONSTRUCTION $15.837.00
¡1¡lIiI1~!~is¡E~!f~~j(~~1~tt~~~!.~~~~~~~~~f_¥~~~~~1!I~1¡~~þ.i~~i~'Æ1j11¡'JiI!i1!~IJ~iI
TOTAlWATERANDSEWER-CONSTRUcnON $52.908.00
CONTINGENCY. ENGINEERING. LEGAL. ASCAl, AND ADMINISTRATIVE $21.163.20
GRAND TOTAL $74,071.20
FRONTAGE OR UNIT 4.0
ASSESSMENT RATE (PER UNIT) $18,517.80
.
s\sljoe\0401\91 stavenue\con\eslimate91 stave.xls 1 5/14/2004
. CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
CC RESOLUTION 2004-18
RESOLUTION DECLARING ADEQUACY OF PETITION AND
ORDERING PREPARATION OF REPORT
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA:
1. A certain petition requesting the improvement of 16th Avenue between the
property abutting 91st/16th Avenue and Pond View Ridge 7, filed with the
council on May 6, 2004, is hereby declared to be signed by the required
percentage of owners of property affected thereby. This declaration is
made in conformity to Minn. Stat. § 429.035.
2. The petition is hereby referred to SEH and that person is instructed to
report to the council will all convenient speed advising the council in a
preliminary was as to whether the proposed improvement is necessary
cost-effective, and feasible and as to whether is should best be made as
proposed or in connection with some other improvement, and the estimated
cost of the improvement as recommended.
. Adopted by the council 20th day of May,2004.
Mayor
City Administrator
.
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
CC RESOLUTION 2004-19 .
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF
PLANS
WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council adopted the 6th day of May, 2004, fixed a
date for a council hearin~ on the proposed improvement of 16th Avenue between the
property abutting 915t/16 Avenue and Pond View Ridge 7 by extending water and
sewer services.
AND WHEREAS, the property owners have waived their rights to a public hearing.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. JOSEPH,
MINNESOTA:
1. Such improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible as detailed in the
feasibility report.
2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the council resolution
adopted the 20th day of May, 2004.
3. SEH is here by designated as the engineer for this improvement. The engineer
shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. .
4. The city council declares its official intent to reimburse itself for the costs of the
improvement from the proceeds of the tax exempt bond.
Adopted by the council on this 20th day of May ,2004.
Mayor
City Administrator
.
. I Attachment: Yes or No I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: May 13,2004
Engineering Tracy L. Ekola. PE
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Advertisement for Bids for 2004 Callaway Street Improvements
PREVIOUS ACTION
Authorized Design of 2004 Callaway Street Improvements based on Feasibility Report dated April 8,
2004.
.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIl." ACTION
Authorize Advertisement for Bid and Approval of Design Plans.
FISCAL IMPACT
As outlined in Feasiblity Study presented at the April 15. 2004 City Council Meeting.
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
2004 Callaway Street Design to be reviewed at the Council Meeting.
X:\PThtjoe\common\D39 Req Council Action\0513Callaway St Ad for bid.doc
.
.
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION #2004-17
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS - CALLWAY STREET
WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution passed by the Council on April 14, 2004, the City
Engineer (consulting engineer retrained for the purpose) has prepared plans and
specifications for the Improvement of Callaway Street between CR 121 and 4th Avenue
NE and has presented such plans and specifications to the council for approval;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. JOSEPH,
MINNESOTA:
1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a
part hereof, are hereby approved.
2. The City Administrator shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper
an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such
approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for two
consecutive weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be
opened and that the responsibility of the bidders will be considered by the council
at 7:00PM on June 17, 2004, in the City Council chambers of City Hall. Any .
bidder whose responsibility is questioned during consideration of the bid will be
given an opportunity to address the_council on the issue of responsibility. No bids
will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Administrator and
accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check
payable to the City Administrator for five percent of the amount of such bid.
Mayor
City Administrator
.
DOCUMENT 00100
· ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
City of St. Joseph, Minnesota
2004 Callaway Street Improvements
SEH No. A-STJOE 0404
Notice is hereby given that sealed bids will be received by the City Administrator until 11 a.m. on Tuesday, June
15, 2004 at the office of City Administrator, at 25 College Avenue North, PO Box 668, St. Joseph, MN 56374-
0668, at which time they will be publicly opened and read aloud, for the furnishing of all labor and material for
the construction of: 2004 Callaway Street. Bids will be considered at a meeting of the City Council on June 17,
2004.
Approximate major quantities are as follows:
4,450 CY Common/Topsoil Excavation 4,800 SY Sodding
1,450 CY Aggregate Base Placed, CL 5 .75 AC Seeding
700 TON Type LV 4 Wear Course 115 LF 8" Sanitary Sewer, PVC
635 TON Type L V3 Base Course 90 LF 10" Water Main, Dl
2,800 LF Concrete Curb & Gutter, 75 LF 15" Storm Sewer, RCP
Des B618
Copies of the Construction Documents are on file for review at the following locations:
SEH, 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302-1717
Bids shall be on the forms provided for that purpose and according to the Contract Documents prepared by SEH.
· Bids will only be accepted from Contractors who purchase Contract Documents from the above-named Engineers.
Bid forms and Contract Documents may þe seen at the office of the City Administrator, and at the office of the
above-named Engineers.
Contractors desiring a copy of the Bid Forms and Contract Documents may obtain them from SEH, in accordance
with the Instructions to Bidders, upon payment of $45/set. Checks should be made out to SEH. No refunds will be
provided.
Bid security in the amount of 5 percent of the bid must accompany each bid in accordance with the Instructions to
Bidders.
Bids shall be directed to the City Administrator, securely sealed and endorsed upon the outside wrapper, "BID
FOR 2004 CALLA WAY STREET, ST. JOSEPH, MN A-STJOE 0404."
The Owner reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive irregularities and informalities therein, and to
award the Contract in the best interests of the Owner.
Judy Weyrens, City Administrator
St. Joseph, Minnesota
Publish: Construction Bulletin May 21 and 28,2004
St. Cloud Times May 21 and 28,2004
· END OF SECTION
2004 Callaway Street Improvements Advertisement for Bids
A-ST JOE 0404 00100-1
~
. SEH TRANSMITTAL
To: Ms Judy Weyrens Date: April 28, 2004
City of St. Joseph SEH File No.: A-STJOE 0401.00 14
Client No.:
Re: Downtown Lighting Project
We are:
181 Enclosing 0 Sending under separate cover 0 Sending as requested
Design Electric letter dated January 14,2004.
Cost summary for lighting project.
2002 Beautification Summary - from Greg Reinhart
. For your:
181 Information/Records 0 Review and comment 0 Approval
181 Action 0 Distribution 0 Revision and resubmittal
Remarks:
The cost summary for the lighting project reflects my understanding of the project costs and projected
revenues.
Design Electric has a total invoice of $135,508.50. To date they have been paid $109,250.00, leaving a
balance due of $26,258.50. I have verified the number of lighting fixtures installed, and Dick Taufen
agrees with the fact that one pole was replaced, and two other poles are in storage for use as future
replacements. Dick also agrees that the Christmas lighting circuits have been provided, along with the
additional service. The pole repair cost appears to be reasonable. I recommend payment of the remaining
balance to Design Electric.
I'm not sure how the "in kind" contribution from S1. Ben's is applied. I don't know whether there is truly
$30,000 in the revenue stream, or something short of that amount based on actual services provided.
The "Paid" portion of the 2002 Beautification summary is not up to date. You may want to contact Greg
Reinhart to get a more accurate picture of the cash flow. Pledges were over a 3-year period.
By: Joseph Bettendorf, PE
c: Design Electric
Greg Reinhart (w/enclosure)
Jmw
. x:\s\stjoe\common\Jighting transmittaldoc 1/04
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, SI. Cloud, MN 56302-1717
SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.com I 320.229.4300 I 800.572.0617 I 320.229.4301 fax
St. Joseph Minnesota Downtown Lighting Summary 4/27/2004
.
Design Electric Bid
Light poles orginial bid (60 poles @ $,1917.00) $115,000.00
Less conduit to be paid for by City (CR 121) -$16,170.00
Net cost for light poles (installed): $98,830.00
Project Budget (less conduit)
Light poles $98,830.00
Labor for paving stones $23,360.00
Labor and materials for paving stones $30,000.00
Paving stones $13,632.00
Total Volunteer Budget: $165,822.00
Design Electric Summary
Original Bid (60 poles @ $1,917.00) $115,000.00
Additional 6 poles (66 total poles) $11,502.00
Replace damaged pole $1,917.00
Additional service and X-mas lighting circuits $3,638.00
Repair pole near carwash $346.00
Provide 2 spare pies ($1,552.75 each) $3,105.50 .
Total Amount Due: $135,508.50
Overall Project Costs
Design Electric total cost $135,508.50
Conduit paid for by City $16,170.00
Paving stones installed $66,992.00
Total Project Cost: $218,670.50
Pledges Raised by Committee
College of St. Benedict (cash) $30,000.00
College of St. Benedict (in-kind) $30,000.00
Borgert Concrete $6,912.00
Sister of the Order of St. Benedict $24,000.00
Rod & Gun Club $600.00
St. Joseph Legion $7,500.00
St. Joseph Lions Club $45,000.00
St. Joseph Jaycees $10,000.00
St. Jospeh Chamber of Commerce $10,000.00
Total Pledged: $164,012.00
.
1
St. Joseph Minnesota Downtown Lighting Summary 4/27/2004
. Overall Project Revenue
Pledges raised by volunteers $164,012.00
Conduit funding by City $16,170.00
Unfunded balance $38,488.50
Total Project Cost: $218,670.50
Design Electric Final Payment
Total Amount Due to Design Electric $135,508.50
Less Payment 03/21/03 -$32,333.54 '
Less Payment 07/11/03 -$49,603.96
Less Payment 12/06/03 -$27,312.50
Remaining Amount Due: $26,258.50
X:ISIstjoelcommon\{Downtown Lighting Summary.xls]Sheet1
.
.
2
-
4211 ROOSEVELT ROAD
BOX 1252
z:;~ ST. CLOUD, MN 56302
ELECTJtICÂ.L CONTlU.CT.R.S !BC. PHONE: 320·252-1658
FAX: 320~252-4276
January 14, 2004
Short Elliott Hendrickson
1200-25th Avenue South
St. Cloud, MN 56301
~ttn: Joe Bettendorf
RE: St. Jose~h Street Lighting
Dear Mr. Bettendorf:
Breakdown as follows for complete lighting project.
Base Contract 60@ $1,917.00/ea = $115,000.00
Additional 7 @ $1,917.00/ea = 13,419.00 .
Additional service and Xmas lighting circuits = 3,638.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST: $132,057.00
Additional work for City of St. Joseph' on traffic
accident: Pole repair 346.00
2 spare poles 3,185.50
$3,451.50
Enclosed are copies -,f the original quote and/or estimates.
----.--..... ' ,--p,"_"_~'--¡
I~~@ U~7~~1
, 0 ¡-----------, D I
¡ ,,¡ ¡
i nl\ JAM 1 5 LUU4! I
¡~ . .
~ ì
; sHoRî:~Êi'L-iê;T::~-HÉ~~jDRlcKsON I
; S'\Ii'1i (., oun MM !
{ r 1,(' .....J.___ -'-<.
We Can Solve All CURRENT Problems
.. Equal Opportunity Employer ..
'0;,,' >~' JîAX' NO.: ':-;';3203634816 Apr. 27 2004 10:02AM Pi
T'f,FRot<¡;-,: ESBSUOSiEFH
. 2002 BEAUTiFICATION SUMMARY
Project Costs:
-Light poles (1) $ 98,830
-Labor for paving stones (2) $23,360,_
-Labor & materials for paving stones (3) $ 30,000
-Purchase paving stone (4) .$13.63~
(6,400 sq.ft. X $2.13
Total £165.824
Donations:
(5)
PLEDGE PAID PAID PAID PAID
-ColIe£!c of St. Benedictl cash donation) $ 30,000 3~Dðr;J ,lIb
-College of St. Benedict ("in kindll) $ 30.000 -- - - -
. -Borgert Concrete (6400 Sq.ft. x l,08/sa.ft:C6) $ 6,912 - - - -
-Sisters of the Order of St. Bonedict $ 24,000 " -
-Rod & Gun Club $ 600 bóO '~h.2
-St. Joseph LeRion $7,500
-St. Joseph Lions Club $ 45,000
-St. Joseph Jaycees $ 10,000
-81. Joseph Chamber of Commerce $ 10,000 I
Total $J64.012
Footnotes:
1) Design Electric $115,000 (Bid)
- 16.170 (Conduit paid by Cty. Rd. 121 Project)
$ 98,830
2) Heartland Landscaping $23.360 (Bid)
3) CSß "in kind II costs for paving stone $30,000
4) Borgert Concrete retail price for paving stone $13,632
5) An donations are on E! 3 year commitment except the Monastery wbich is a 4 year commitment
6) Borgert donated $1.08/sq. ft. costs of paving stone $6,912
.
04/27/04 TUB 09:59 [TX/RX NO 8068]
CIT¥ Of ST. JOSEPH
· www.cityofstjoseph.com
May 14, 2004
Dear Resident:
Administrõtor
Judy Weyrens
This letter is a follow-up letter in response to the informational meeting that was held on
Môyor April 28, 2004. The purpose of that meeting was to provide information regarding the
Lõrry , Hosch proposed improvements to 29Sth Street and 103rd Street. Please find below a summary of
questions asked at that meeting along with the response. This list is not a comprehensive list
Councilors of questions, only the common questions, and those requiring additional research.
AI Rõssier Why is the City considering installing water and sewer services?
Ross Rieke
Gõry Utsch The City has received a development request for property on the north and south of 29Sth
Dõle Wick Street. While the developers can proceed without the extension of utilities to the proposed
area, the City perceived this time as an opportunity to provide cost effective services to an
area without water and sewer services. The development of Morningside Acres and
Foxmore Hollow will proceed regardless if utilities are extended to 295111 and 103rd.
· If the utilities are not extended to 29Sth Street and 103rd Street the developers will design
and install services for their developments only. Therefore, the extension of utilities in the
future could not only be more costly but more difficult to design.
What is the time table for the City to construct the improvements?
If the proj ect is to be considered, the petitions for annexation must be received no later than
May 20, 2004. If the City receives the necessary petitions, a public improvement hearing
will be scheduled for August/September 2004. After this hearing the project will be
designedlbid and the assessment hearing is anticipated to be conducted in
November/December 2004.
When will proiect be constructed if it goes forward?
Morningside Acres and Foxmore Hollow will both be private developments and are
expected to go forward this summer. If the City elects to proceed with the 29Sth/l03rd
project, it is the recommendation of the City Engineer that it be constructed in 2005. This
would allow for construction of a road through Momingside acres this year that could be
used as a detour next year.
How was Foxmore Hollow Assessed?
Foxmore is putting in it's own sewer and water from CR 121 to the development, therefore
· no assessments for these items on the 29Sth project. Ifit turns out we can use the sewer and
2.)' College Avenue North, PO Box 66ß . Sõint. joseph. Minncsotõ ,,6'74
Phone ,2.0,,6"72.01 ¡:õ x ,2. 0 ' , 6 , . 0 , 4 2.
water lines serving Foxmore for some of the homes on 295th, we will coordinate this with the ·
development and work out a cost sharing arrangement. Foxmore will, however, be assessed for street.
Front footage was calculated by taking the entire length ofthe property along 295th, and subtracting 66
feet for each of two streets that will tie into 295th.
How were double lots assessed?
Where each of two lots has a separate Pill number, the extra lot can be sold. Where this appears to the
case, each lot was considered assessable. There are three locations in Reischl' s Hillside Estates where two
lots are combined under one Pill number; these were treated as follows
.:. Lots 4 and 5 - John Zipp. The house is on lot 5. It appears that lot 4 is not encumbered and could
be separated and sold. We assessed him 2 units.
.:. Lots 8 and 9 - David Viehauser. The house is on lot 9, and appears to be very close to the joint
property line with lot 8. The City may not allow him to separate the lot due to the possible non-
confonning sideyard on lot 9. We assessed him 1 unit. If we determine by survey (or by Council
action) that lot 8 could indeed be separated and sold, he would be assessed 2 units.
.:. Lots 18&19 of Reischl's Hillside Estates - Ervin & Joyce Eiynck. The house sits on both lots
which appears to preclude selling one lot off. We assessed them 1 unit.
This information is based on aerial photos and a field survey may provide information that causes a
change in the assessment formula.
Can a booster station be provided instead of individual pressure tanks? What about fire flow? ·
~ Individual pressure tanks were proposed for the area on and west of 103rd Street because of the limited
number of houses being served on the proj ect. The additional cost for the pressure tanks has been built
into the unit assessment numbers. As one of the citizens pointed out, this cost should probably be pulled
out of the unit assessment numbers and treated as a trunk water main cost.
If we consider additional development of the open space west of 103rd, combine it with the high elevation
portion of the ARC ON development, and add the potential development of the Hove and Bechtold
properties, it appears to be cost effective to construct a booster station. As with the pressure tanks, the
booster station should be treated as a trunk water main cost. The station itself is about the size of a small
garage. It can probably be a pre-fab unit that sits on a slab, containing one pump dedicated to maintaining
pressure, and two fire pumps. If the project is to move forward these design issues can be researched and
brought before the Council for consideration.
Can the proiect be designed so residents can have an actual cost before the proiect begins?
Many of the questions asked at the meeting were related to design issues which are resolved after the City
orders the improvement. Designing a project involves a considerable amount of engineering and
surveying. Cities do not move forward to this stage unless the project costs can passed on to affected
properties. The proposed assessments include the engineering and surveying work. It is during this phase
that specifics of the project will be reviewed. Before the project is competitively bid, the Council will
review the plans and specifications along with a revised cost estimate. Therefore, the City cannot move
forward until the City has received sufficient petitions for annexation.
·
Why is the proposed assessment higher than it was four years ago when the City proposed the same
. proiect?
The assessments are based on the actual cost of the project. Over the past years we have seen prices
increase and in the past 12 months oil has taken a substantial hike. The price is driven by the economy.
The City believes that constructing this project with the two adjacent development projects is an
opportunity for the residents to be part of a cost effective utility improvement.
WHAT NEXT
Enclosed you will find an annexation petition, the form also includes a box to indicate that you do not
want to be annexed to the City of 8t. Joseph and receive City utility services. To accurately determine the
desires of the residents we request that you return the form in the postage paid envelope no later than May
20, 2004. Each resident is receiving one petition and if multiple parcels are included they are all listed on
one form.
Please feel free to contact me at 320-363-720 I if you have any questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
(~t'YdJß~
Jud eyrens
ministrator
. cc: Mayor Hosch and Members of the City Council
City Engineer, Joe Bettendorf
City Attorney, Tom Jovanovich
St. Joseph Township Chair, Joe Bechtold
e
_ No, I do not want to be annexed
PETITION FOR ANNEXATION .
TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, IvIINNESOTA:
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF CERTAIN PERSONS FOR ANNEXATION OF
UNNCORPORATED ADJOINGING PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA:
We, the undersigned, all the owners of the territory described below, hereby petition the Council to annex
this territory to the City of St. Joseph, Minnesota, and to extend the City boundaries to include the same,
and for that purpose respectfully state:
1. The territory to be annexed consists entirely of platted lands, which have been duly and legally made
and certified to the laws of this state and file in the office of the recorder of Stearns County,
Minnesota and the description of such lands is as follows:
( LEGAL DESCRIPTION)
2. The territory described above abuts upon the City Limits at the southern boundary thereof and none
of it is presently included within the Corporate Limits of any Incorporated City.
3. The petitioners are in need of municipal utility services.
4. All of this territory is urban (or suburban) in character and occupied by single family homes or is
vacant land.
5. The residents in the area will increase the population by
6. All of the property within the 6 - 11 year zone of the Orderly Annexation Agreement between the .
Town of St. Joseph and City of St. Joseph of February 6, 1998.
7. All of the property owners of title exceed the required percentage to constitute a sufficient petition
under M.S. 414.033, Subd 5, and the percentage of parcels of property in the affected area according
to Section 7 B of the Orderly Annexation Agreement between the Town of St. Joseph and the City of
St. Joseph.
8. The acreage of the parcel requesting annexation is acres (include to .00 of acres).
ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS OF TITLE
Property Owner Signature Date
RECEIVED BY:
Judy Weyrens, Clerk/Administrator Date
.
co U NTY 0 F STEARN S
· Assessor's Office
Administration Center RM 37 · 705 Courthouse Square. S1. Cloud, MN 56303
320-656-3680 · FAX 320-656-3977
April 23, 2004
Judy Weyrens
St Joseph City Clerk
PO Box 668
St Joseph, MN 56374
RE: Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Dear Judy:
The enclosed changes were taken by the city council as a result ofthe recent local board of
appeal and equalization meeting held for the property owners of your city on April 6, 2004. The
· attached list is a compilation of finalized values and classifications for properties that were
reviewed and acted upon at the meeting. These locally certified values and classifications are for
the 2004 assessment, for taxes payable in 200S.
At this time, personnel rrom the Steams County Assessor's Office have informed all property
owners regarding the decision made on their particular grievance. It is advised that any further
discussion of these property assessment matters can be addressed by the aggrieved owner at the
County Board of Appeal and Equalization set for June 14,2004 at 9:00 a.m.
If you have any questions, you may feel ftee to contact me.
Sincerely, ,r
R~~,~~
Robert J Lindv 1, 'A
Senior Appraiser
Steams County Assessor's Office
enclosure
·
875-8898 "Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer"
Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Record .
Jurisdiction Name: St Joseph City Date Convened: 4/6/2004 Time Convened: 6:30 PM
Jurisdiction Total EMV: $201,175,800 Time Adjourned: 7:30 PM
Township/City Board Assessment Personnel
Larry Hosch Ollie Lesnick
Gary Utsch Robert J. Lindvall
Alan Rassier
Dale Wick
Record of Appeals
EMV Class Change
S No
Name Parcel # Comments From: To: Increase S Decrease From To Chg
J. Miller 84.53733.175 ° X
J. Miller 84.53733.176 73,200 63,500 -9,700
A. Kvatum 84.53475.057 clerical correction 127,700 123,400 -4,300
R. DeSmet 84.53533.067 156,700 150,600 -6,100
Held Construction 84.53533.068 158,000 151,800 -6,200
Heid Construction 84.53533.069 157,600 151,400 -6,200
M. Mitra 84.53533.070 157,600 151,400 -6,200
Chad Hess 84.53790.200 145,200 127,800 -17 ,400
Scott Schmidt 84.53474.068 0 X
St Joe Apts, Inc 84.53440.010 526,100 442,700 -83,400 .
0
0
0
0
Total Change in EMV -139,500
Percent of Total EMV -0.07%
# of Parcels Appealed 10
# of Parcels Reduced/Chngd 8
# of Parcels Increased 0
# of Parcels not changed 2
BOAE EMV Changes -139,500
.
DRAFT
May 3, 2004
Page 1 of 6
. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning Commission for the City of St. Joseph met in regular
session on Monday, May 3, 2004 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall.
Members Present: Chair (Council Liaison) Gary Utsch. Commissioners: Bob Loso, Marge Lesnick, Jim
Graeve, Mike Deutz, Kurt Schneider. Administrator Judy Weyrens.
Others Present: Delyte Andreas, Dorothy Court, Janel Weisen, Andrew Berger, Tara Berger, Galen
Keyes, Kevin Sura, Kay Lemke, Thomas Homan, Ann Reischl, Bob Reischl, Bruce Berghorst, Richard &
Audrey Schroeder, John & Ilene Schroeder, Randy Bonnell, Rick Heid, S. Kara Hennes, Jerry
Hasselbrink
Approve Aqenda: Lesnick made a motion to approve the agenda as presented; seconded by Loso
and passed unanimously.
Approve Minutes: Loso made a motion to approve the minutes of March 22, 2004 as presented;
seconded by Deutz and passed unanimously.
Public Hearinq - Rezoninq Reauest . Birch Street East: Chair Utsch called the public hearing to order
and stated that the purpose of the hearing is to consider the rezoning of all property north of the east/west
alley abutting Birch Street East between the north/south alley between College Avenue North and 1 st
Avenue NE and the north/south alley between 1 sl Avenue NE and 2nd Avenue NE. The property is
currently zoned R-1.
The request has been submitted by Why USA Realty, 1511 E Minnesota Street, St. Joseph, MN 56374.
Deutz stepped down from his seat on the Planning Commission because of a conflict of interest with the
. possible rezoning of Birch Street.
Kay Lemke of33 Ash Street E spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. Lemke questioned the
members of the Planning Commission about her desire to not have St. Joseph look like Division Street in
Waite Park and St. Cloud. She also stated that she has some concerns about increased traffic and the
effect on property values/taxes -if the area is rezoned. Lemke also made the Planning Commission
members aware of the fact that she did go around the neighborhood and asked everyone to sign a
petition against the rezoning. She feels that St. Joseph should be a more friendly and welcoming City
and there is already a lot of rental property and office space available in the City.
De/yte Andreas of 29 E Ash Street spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. She stated that when
she bought her house it was zoned R1 so he had the expectation that the neighborhood would remain
resfdential. With the possibility of this area being rezoned from R1, Single Family Residential to B2,
Highway Business, she is concerned about the possibility of increased traffic, noise, trash (if a fast food
restaurant is brought to the area) and increased insurance rates.
Mike Deutz spoke in support of the proposed rezoning. When the Comprehensive Plan was amended
the long term plan indicated this area would be expanded for commercial growth. He is in favor of the
rezoning because he feels that the lots are too small to develop without purchasing at least two lots.
Deutz stated that in his opinion this is a step in the right direction for the City of St. Joseph. In regards to
the residents being opposed to this rezoning, Deutz commented that when the City conducted the public
hearing for the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, not one of these neighbors spoke against the future
land use plan, which converted the area in discussion to commercial.
Andrew Berger of 26 E Birch Street spoke in support of the proposed rezoning. Berger stated that he
owns property in the area being disused and believes the conversion to B2, Highway Business is
appropriate. Rezoning the area is a risk to him as a property owner, but he is willing to accept that. If the
. area is rezoned commercial and they can't sell their home for commercial use, they are stuck with a
house that they cannot sell. However, if it is rezoned and they can sell their property, they can move on
and it would be a step forward for them as well as the City.
DRAFT
May 3,2004
Page 2 of 6
Janel Weísen spoke on behalf of Why USA Realty. Weisen stated that she presented the initial petition ·
requesting rezoning of this area. She stated that she represents the property owner at 38 Birch Street
East who is in the process of selling her home for a commercial use. The proposed buyer intends to
convert the home to office space which will not result in excess traffic or noise. In addition the business
hours for the office space will be Monday through Friday from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM.
Jerry Hasselbrink spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. He stated that he represents the
property owner of 103 Ash Street East whose property abuts to the south the area being discussed.
Hasselbrink stated that he has many concerns with the negative affects the proposed rezoning will have
on abutting property or the City itself.
Hasselbrink stated that in his opinion, rezoning this property would conflict with affordable housing in
three ways.
1 . The future abutting homes will most likely become commercial; removing some of the most
affordable housing stock.
2. Would make other affordable houses less livable.
3. Failure to protect neighboring housing values.
Hasselbrink also stated that he feels that all those in favor of the rezoning are out there to make a profit.
In his opinion St. Joseph accommodates a lot of commercial business and not enough affordable
housing. The St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan indicates that the City offers a wide variety of housing
options. The possible rezoning of Birch Street would eliminate a lot of possibilities for residents who are
looking at affordable housing. As a City, St. Joseph should be trying to preserve our existing
neighborhoods not remove them.
In response to the comments made by Hasselbrink, Deutz stated that he doesn't agree with the petition ·
because he feels if those signing the petition did not agree with the Comprehensive Plan, they should
have been at the public hearing or meetings discussing the future land use plan.
Again, in response to the comments made by Deutz, Lemke stated that when circulating the petition
against the rezoning, she had with her the hearing notice. The petition is an indication of residents not
supporting the conversion of the neighborhood. With regard to residents attending the public hearing for
the Comprehensive Plan, she thought some residents did appear. Andreas stated that the meetings are
not at times that are accessible for all residents to attend. In her case, she had to take a day of vacation
to be at this meeting as she works nights.
Tara Berger of 29 Ash Street East stated that the area in discussion is not a place where you will want to
raise children. Traffic and noise from County Road 75 make this area not conducive for children.
The Public Hearing was closed at 7:28PM.
Utsch stated that previously the Planning Commission considered this matter and the rezoning was
denied. At that time the Planning Commission initiated the petition. The denial included a motion that
indicated the Commission would consider rezoning petitions on a per lot basis. Utsch agreed that area
being discussed contains small lots and unless developers were to buy multiple lots, a large development
could not occur along Birch Street East. Loso agreed that the lots aren't very big and developers can be
required to provide landscaping to buffer the adjacent area.
Utsch acknowledged that the City did receive a petition in opposition to the rezoning and it will be come
part of the file. However, at this time more than 50% of the property owners in the affected area have
requested rezoning and the Ordinance allows for rezoning when such occurs.
Lesnick stated that just like the other side of County Road 75, development along Birch Street would most ·
DRAFT
May 3, 2004
Page 3 of 6
. likely be a small business that would not generate more traffic for that area. Lesnick concurred that
because of the size of the lots, development would most likely be small offices.
Utsch commented that there is not an overabundance of industrial or commercial lots in the City and it is
his opinion that the property being discussed is more sellable as commercial than residential.
Graeve stated that it is his opinion that the area in question is a nice place for homes and he has
concerns about the houses behind the property in question. Further, he stated that he doesn't see a
need for developing both sides of Highway 75 as commercial and is opposed to the proposed rezoning.
Loso made a motion to recommend the City Council adopt the following findings, approving the
rezoning of certain property from R1, Single Family to B2, Highway Business. The motion was
seconded by Lesni'ck.
RESOLUTION OF FINDING
The request of WHY USA to rezone of all property north of the easUwest alley abutting Birch Street East
between the north/south alley between College Avenue North and 1 st Avenue NE and the north/south
alley between 1st Avenue NE and 2nd Avenue NE from the current R-1, Single Family to B2, Highway
Business came before the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing held on May 3, 2004. The hearing
was requested by 50% of the property owners in the subject area.
In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the
Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances of the City of St. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the
following findings:
Finding: The rezoning of the above described area is consistent with the St. Joseph
. Comprehensive Plan, and the City received a petition requesting the rezoning from over 50% of
the property owners affected.
Ayes: Utsch, Lesnick, Deutz, Loso, Schneider
Nays: Graeve
Deutz resumed his chair.
Public Hearinq - Ordinance Amendment, 54.18. Park Dedication Fees: Chair Utsch called the public
hearing to order and stated that the purpose of the hearing is to consider an Amendment to St. Joseph
Code of Ordinances 54.18, Public Land Dedication. The proposed amendment would change the method
of calculation for parkland from a percentage of the land value to a per lot fee.
The request has been submitted by The Park Board.
Bruce Borghorst, Chair of the St. Joseph Park Board spoke on behalf of the Park Board. Berghorst
stated that the Park Board recently completed a survey with regard to methods for calculating Park
Dedication Fees. Currently the City charges 10% of the land value or purchase price. This method is not
equitable as the need for park is not based on the selling price of land, rather the population served. The
area Cities charge a per lot fee using Census data and parkland per person as a basis for calculating
such. Using the same formula as other Cites, the park dedication fees would increase and provide the
Park Board with sustainable development fees. The proposed fees would not impact commercial or
industrial development.
Loso questioned whether or not this new method was addressed to the area builders. Weyrens stated
that they have not been notified individually. However, the Central Minnesota Builders Association
. (CMBA) receives copies of all agendas and they did contact the City regarding the new fee. Weyrens
stated that they indicated they were going to attend the meeting, but are not present.
DRAFT
May 3, 2004
Page 4 of 6
Their being no one present to speak the public hearing was closed. .
Utsch stated that because of the differences in land values between developers, it would be more
equitable to charge a per lot fee rather than a percentage of the land value. Loso concurred with Utsch
and stated that changing the method would be consistent with the other area Cities.
Utsch questioned whether or not a per lot dedication fee would be more or less than the current fee
charged. Berghorst replied that in most cases the fee would increase. The only case it wouldn't is if a
developer paid a inflated land price.
Deutz questioned why the Park Board is requesting to change the Ordinance and if the motivating factor
is that we have not reviewed or updated the fee. He further questioned what impact the new fee would
have on current developments. Berghorst said that the Park Board reviewed the fee as the City of Waite
Park just changed their methodology and completed an area analysis. The Park Board received a copy
of the analysis and noticed that St. Joseph was collecting far below what other Cities collect. With
regard to current projects, Weyrens stated that this would not affect any developments where a
preliminary plat has been submitted.
Lesnick stated that she believes the proposed method for calculating Park Dedication fees is more
equitable and would assist the Park Board in developing and maintaining the existing and new Parks.
Utsch concurred with Lesnick, but would like an opportunity to review the total development fees to make
sure that the additional Park Dedication fee will not elevate the development price in St. Joseph.
Weyrens recommended the Planning Commission meet jointly with the Park Board to review the
proposed fee. Loso and Deutz stated that the local developers should be contacted for review and
comment.
Deutz made a motion to table action on the amendment to Ordinance 54.18, Park Dedication Fee
until a time when the Planning Commission and Park Board can meet jointly. If members of the .
Building Community attend the meeting they will allowed to present additional information. The
motion was seconded by Graeve and passed unanimously.
Re-zoninq, Foxmore Hollow: Utsch stated that the Planning Commission has previously considered the
preliminary plat of Foxmore Hollow. The plat as presented included a mix of single family homes and
multiple family. The original plan that was submitted for Foxmore Hollow included a 23 unit apartment
complex. The neighbors objected to the height and size of the building. It was requested that the
developers meet with the neighbors to discuss development alternatives and come back to the Planning
Commission within 60 days.
Since the public hearing, the Developers have submitted a revised concept plan. The plan is not detailed
as it is costly to design a building and until the Developers are provided direction as to what is acceptable,
they are submitting a general schematic As requested by the Planning Commission, the developers
meet with the neighborhood on April 22,2004.
According to Herges, the neighborhood meeting went like any other neighborhood meeting in which a
developer would request to construct and apartment complex. The neighbors in the proposed area do
not want apartment buildings. Herges stated that they aren't trying to ruin the neighborhood. Foxmore
Hollow will be well managed and they will be better than the existing rental units already in the area.
Herges stated in his opinion, the City needs to provide a place for multiple family and it makes sense to
put them near other apartments.
Linda Brown of Surveying & Engineering Professionals Inc, addressed the Planning Commission. She
stated that she is the Engineer for the proposed Foxmore Hollow Addition and clarified that the plan
before the Planning Commission is a compromise from the first plan. It was her understanding that the
neighbors didn't like the height or length of the proposed building, so it was re-designed. Utsch
responded that in his opinion the revised plan is 100% better that the previous plan, but additional detail e
is needed. Utsch further stated that Herges/Heid are simply asking the Planning Commission to give them
DRAFT
May 3,2004
Page 5 of 6
· the same permission that was given to Sand Companies. Sand Companies presented a concept plan
and the Planning Commission accepted the concept plan and denied the Special Use Permit until a
detailed plan can be provided. Utsch stated that the Planning Commission needs to be consistent with
their decision making process.
Weyrens stated that the Planning Commission must decide if the area in question should be developed
as R3. If so, then the Planning Commission should approve the rezoning request, but deny the Special
Use Permit until the detailed plan is submitted. If the area should not be developed with R3, then both
applications should be denied.
Loso made a motion to recommend the Council deny the Special Use Request for Foxmore Hollow
as the Planning Commission does not have sufficient information to approve a Special Use
Permit. This Developer can re-apply for the Special Use Permit when the design plans are
complete and the City will waive the hearing fee. The motion was seconded by Deutz and passed
unanimously.
The Commission continued to discuss the proposed rezoning of the outlot of the property known as
Foxmore Hollow. Deutz stated that it is not his intent to approve a concept plan at this meeting. He
agrees that the property should be developed as R3, but R3 does not have to mean apartment
complexes. Townhomes are another form of multiple family developments. Deutz questioned if the
zoning can be approved upon contingencies.
Weyrens responded that zoning cannot be contingent as either it is suitable for multiple family or it isn't.
The Planning Commission revised the R3 Ordinance to require R3 developments over 12 units to utilize
the PUD process and make application for a Special Use Permit. This process allow the Planning
Commission to enter into a development agreement that specifically identifies a project. The agreement
would also specify a period of time for which the development must occur.
· Loso made a motion to recommend the City Council rezone Outlot A of Foxmore Hollow to R3,
Multiple Family. The motion died for a lack of a second.
Utsch again stated that the Planning Commission must be consistent with their decision making process
and decide if the property being discussed, should in fact be developed with multiple family. He stated he
is not stating that the Planning Commission must rezone the property, rather decide what is the best use
for the property.
Graeve questioned Herges as to what market the apartments are being constructed for and if they will be
a form of student housing. Herges responded that the housing would be market rate and anyone call live
in the units. The units will consist of a mix of two and three bedroom units. They will be similar to the
existing buildings on CR 121.
Deutz questioned the location of the holding pond and if it is feasible to construct two (2) twelve unit
apartment buildings. Weyrens stated that the City Engineer is reviewing the drainage. The City is
working towards regional ponds and it is anticipated that the projects for 2004 will drain to a central pond.
If the central pond is not possible then the developer must receive approval from the County Engineer to
drain to the ditch along CR 121. Weyrens stated that before the developer submits the application for the
Special Use Permit, the drainage must be resolved. At this time the Planning Commission is considering
whether or not the concept of two (2) twelve plexes is acceptable. Deutz reiterated that he is not
opposed to the R3, but would like a more detailed plan.
Loso made a motion to recommend the Council accept the findings of the Planning Commission
and rezone Out Lot A of Foxmore Hollow from the current R1 to R3, Multiple Family. The motion
was seconded by Schneider.
·
DRAFT
May 3, 2004
Page 6 of 6
.
RESOLUTION OF FINDING
The request of Bob Herges and Rick Heid to rezone Outlot A of Foxmore Hollow from the current R1,
Single Family to R3, Multiple Family.
In consideration of the information presented to the Planning Commission and its application to the
Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances of the City of St. Joseph, the Planning Commission makes the
following findings:
Finding: The rezoning of the above described area is consistent with the St. Joseph
Comprehensive Plan.
Finding: St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.29, requires the Developer to complete the
PUD process and secure a Special Use Permit for R3 structures with more than
12 units. Therefore, the Planning Commission will have an opportunity to
review the detailed plans before construction is approved.
Ayes: Utsch, Lesnick, Deutz, Loso, Schneider
Nays: Graeve
Transportation Planninq: Weyrens presented the Planning Commission with proposed transportation
illustrations for the re-alignment of CR 2. She further stated that the City is in the process of seeking
proposals for completing the transportation study for the location of Field Street.
Proposed Housinq Development: Weyrens reported that the Staff has meet with Rick Packer, the project
manager for Arcon Development. Arcon is proposing to develop the Heim/Bechtold property as a PUD .
with a mix of single and multiple family. The concept plan submitted by the Developer was extremely
dense and the Developer has been asked to change the concept to meet the requirements of t!1e
Ordinance.
R4 Zoninq District: Weyrens stated that while reviewing the zoning classifications for multiple family, it
appears as though St. Joseph does not have a district that pertains to townhome or patio home
development. Weyrens questioned if the Planning Commission would considering adding such. By
consensus, the Planning Commission agreed to review and discuss adding an R4 Zoning District for the
regulation of townhomes and patio homes.
Adjourn: Deutz made a motion to adjourn at 9:15 pm; seconded by Loso and passed unanimously.
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
.
DRAFT
May 5, 2004
Page 1 of 3
Pursuantto due call and notice thereof, the Fire Board for the City of St. Joseph and Townships of St.
. Joseph and St. Wendel met in regular session on Wednesday, May 5,2004 at 6:00 PM in the St. Joseph
Community Fire Hall.
Members Present: Fire Chief Randy Torborg, City of St. Joseph Representative Larry Hosch, St. Joseph
Township Representative Joe Bechtold, St. Wendel Township Representative Greg Salk. City
Administrator Judy Weyrens.
Others Present: Assistant Fire Chief Terry Loso.
Minutes: Weyrens reported the minutes are not available at this time and will be included for the next
meeting.
Financial Report: Weyrens presented the Council with the 1st Quarter Financial report for 2004.
Weyrens stated the report includes the audit adjustments for 2003. Adjustments include the addition of
interest and a deduction for accounts payable, ladder truck payment and administrative fees for
accounting and snow/lawn maintenance. Bechtold questioned the amount of revenue rolled forward from
2003. Typically the Fire Board has allocated excess revenue to a designated project. Weyrens stated
that she did not have that information readily available, but could provide the data for the August meeting.
At that time the Fire Board could allocate any excess revenue. Torborg reported that the Fire Department
offered CPR certification to residents with the course fee reimbursed by donations from local service
groups. Hosch made a motion to accept the 1st Quarter 2004 Financial Report as presented;
seconded by Bechtold and passed unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS
FEMA Grant: Torborg reported that the Fire Department has submitted an application for FEMA funding.
The grant application is in the amount of $ 46,000 and if successful, the Fire Department would have a
. matching requirement of 10% or $ 4,600.00. Torborg reported that the recent fundraiser conducted by
the Fire Department will cover the cost of the matching requirement or can be used for purchasing the
equipment if the grant is not awarded.
Weyrens and Torborg stated that the City is part of a Homeland Security Grant Application being
submitted by the City of St. Cloud. The grant is to convert the existing radio system to 800 mhz and
includes the five area Cities (St. Cloud, Sauk Rapids, Sartell, Waite Park and St. Joseph). Inclusion in
the grant does not obligate the City and the matching requirement is 50%. If St. Joseph did not
participate in the grant application we could not be added after the grant is received, but we can withdraw
if we are part of the application.
Tanker Repair: Torborg reported that the City has received a response from the Tanker manufacturer
regarding the spillage problem. The letter indicates that if the City can provide a resolution they would
consider fixing the tanker. Torborg stated that Engle Fabricating has indicated that an overflow needs to
be installed in the center of the tank to remedy the spillage. However, Torborg stated that he would be
hesitant to submit a design to Central States as the Fire Department did not design the tank. When the
Tank was constructed, the Fire Department provided what features they wanted in a tank, but they did not
design the actual tank. Central States constructed and designed the tank. The Fire Board was in general
agreement to turn this matter over to the City Attorney for resolution.
Ladder Truck Sale: Weyrens reported that the City did not receive any bids for the Tanker. The vehicle
was listed for sale in two publications. One party called and stated he would be interested in the vehicle
but did not wish to pay $ 5,000. He stated that if the Fire Board would reconsider he could be contacted.
The Fire Board discussed alternative methods of disposing of the truck and requested that Weytens
contact the City whose Fire Station exploded in January to see if they were interested in the truck. The
Board agreed that if a small department could use the vehicle it should be donated, if legally possible.
.
DRAFT
May 5, 2004
Page 2 of 3
NEW BUSINESS .
Parkinq Lot - Maintenance: Torborg reported that the parking lot for the Fire Facility is in dire need of
seal coating and presented the Board with the following quotes:
Universal $ 2,630.00
Parking Lot Maintenance $ 2,678.00
Torborg questioned if St. Joseph Township has a seal coating project this summer and if so, could it be
attached to that project for a cost savings. Bechtold stated that St. Joseph Township is not planning on
seal coating streets this year and suggested that Torborg contact ASTECH for an estimate. Greg Salk
stated that St. Wendel Township will be doing seal coating and he can check if this project could be
added. Hosch made a motion authorizing the seal coating of the parking lot for an amount not to
exceed $ 2,630.00. The motion was seconded by Bechtold and passed unanimously.
Concrete Apron: Torborg reported that the concrete apron is cracking at the seams and questioned if the
Fire Board would consider repairing such. Torborg stated it is his opinion that the crack is cosmetic and is
not in dire need of repair. The Fire Board agreed to wait on the repair until a time that it is more than
cosmetic.
Senior Farewell: Torborg reported that the Fire Department will be providing staffing on the evening of
Senior Farewell. If a minor fire is started, the Department will respond without lights and sirens so that it
is uneventful and not an attraction for students to start fires.
Keyless Entry: The Fire Department is requesting authorization to install keyless entry for the east
service door, at an estimated cost of $ 545.00. Torborg stated that the rear doors adjacent to the parking
area are already keyless and he does not see this expenditure as a priority. Parking in front of the
building is for convenience and in the event of a fire call the vehicles would have to be moved. Bechtold
stated that if the Firefighters should not be parking in the front, then the keyless entry should not be .
installed. Hosch concurred with Bechtold and stated he is not in favor of the keyless entry as
expenditures should be based on a need not a want. The Board agreed to not install the keyless entry to
deter parking in front of the building.
Air Bottle Replacement: Torborg requested authorization to begin replacing the existing air tanks. The
department currently has 15 tanks and with the ability to fill the tanks on site, only 6 spares would be
required. Therefore, Torborg is requesting authorization to replace 2 tanks a year for 3 years at a cost of
$ 700 per tank. Bechtold made a motion accepting the replacement program for tanks as outlined
above. The motion was seconded by Hosch and passed unanimously.
New Firefiqhters: Torborg reported that the Fire Department Committee has interviewed and tested all
the candidates applying to be a firefighter. The department received ten applications for four open
positions. Nine candidates appeared for the interview and eight appeared for the agility test. The Fire
Committee is recommending hiring the following applicants: Amanda Cherne; Shirley Brill, Ken
Jacobson, John Prom. In addition, Trent Merkling will be an alternative for the next six months should a
vacancy occur. Bechtold made a motion to accept the recommendation of the hiring committee
and hire the candidates as stated above. The motion was seconded by Hosch and passed
unanimously.
Torborg reported that it is customary to not purchase turnout gear for new hire's until they have passed
the probationary period. During that time they wear existing turnout gear. However, since the
department has not included females, appropriate gear is not available for use by the new firefighters.
Hosch made a motion to purchase two sets of turnout gear for the female firefighters as
requested; seconded by Bechtold and passed unanimously.
Hosch left at 7:30 PM .
DRAFT
May 5. 2004
Page 3 of 3
. Other Matters: Salk reported that St. Wendel is questioning the increased cost of fire protection. A
portion of St. Wendel Township is provided fire protection from St. Stephen and the cost of such
protection is less than what St. Joseph charges. Salk stated that St. Wendel is looking at placing a cap
on the amount that is paid, or contracting with St. Stephen. Salk stated that he is informing the Board at
this time as the Fire Service Agreement will need to be re-negotiated in two years.
Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 7:50 PM
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
.
e
. VO~OVV~W N~"~~~~ M~W~MØ~MM N~Ø ~V~~~~Ø ~~Ø~~~ V
~ ~W~O~NVO ~W~WN~ N~~cm~~ON ~W V~~WVWM WNOMNM 0
v~8 ~~~ci~~~~ ~~~~~ci ~~~ci~~~~~ ~N"., ~~~~~~~ ci~~~~~ ~
~E~ ~~~~~N~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~¡~~ ~~ ~mm~~rn~ ~~~B~~ w
~~~ ~~~~øÑ ~ ~ ÒÒM~ ~M~ÒÑœ~W~ N~ ~W~MÑ~Ò ~~ÑM~~ Ò
~wm ~~a ~ N8~~ ~~~-~m~ ~ ¡~ ~ma~~~~ ~~~~w~ ~
~ N ~ N ~
<.,~~:;f~~-;~ t;3L-±~\:;'-l'd~.f~:[~;?;;:Y'~:~->~\:;~-'~c¿'- ~":::?-':?~~~'Š.:~' -;;:c;-'i'~: -~.: - "-c,_o"~'i:-:j,( --. ;_~~'f_:_,,-_~Y"'o_--,:> ~>' ';-};::ßo.;;;:.}_\;'; '_",,0_'
~~ m~ mg~~ ~g~m~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ $~~ro~ ~
B'- ··II··-~ ...... ...~........ .....~. ..... .
~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~=~~~~~ ~~~~a ~
~~ W~ m~MV ~N~O ~ M~~ø~m~MW~N~ ø~møømm OmNNN ~
~æ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ß grnm~~~~ci~ci~~ ~~~~ciœ~ ~~~ro ~
~~ ø~ ~ - - ~ ~~~~ ~~ -~ - ~ -MN~ ~
~ ~~ ~$g~ro ~ ffl~~~ W~~~~~~~~~~~ ¡~ ~~ ~
~~ m~I~Ñg~$ gl~~~~ ~~*m~~~g~~~~ ~~I I ~~ ~
~5 ;~ ~~~MO M VO~~ ~m~mM~mVVm"~ 00 o~om~ 0
~~ ~~ ~~~~Ñ ~ Ò~0~ w~ò~~Ñœø~~M~ ~~ ~~M~N Ñ
~Œ ~~ ~"~~ è~ ~ ~M~m~~~~~~~~ ~d e~~~N ~
« - - - -
--..... -- ~
ON VNM m~ R~~ ~~NSMøN~Mm~~ VN ~øNm.....~ ~
~N Nvm ~~ ~NN ~""'~OVM__~NVMM N~ OO~""'NN 0
wm œm~ ~M ~~W WWM~Ñ~~~~~M~ ció ciø~~~~ N
~~ ~~ V~~ V~ "O~ .....ONmVOO~VwOO N~ N~mOOO m
Cu 00 NWV ~M ~ØO .....VV~V~.....MV~NO ~N ø~NMmO ~
~~ re~ Ñ g i ~~~ ~R~~~~~~~~~ffi ~~ ~~~~~~ ~
U~m ~v ø ~ ~ MN__ ~m ~ ~Vm MM ~O~N""'~ M
m _ _ __
M ..... N ro
=~ ~ *~ ~ ~~~~ ~ß~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ $~~~~~ ~
~ NM '~IM~ mfWM~~ mN~ci~~MNØOÑ~ m~~N~øN ~Ø~MM~ ø
~VO ~ ø~ C~..... m O..........M ~~..........N~V.....~~~W ..........VO~.....~ O~MmOm m
Eo ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~q ~ m~M ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~q q~q~N~ ~
N ~ m~ 0 ~ M~ 0 .....M N M N V~~~NNØ wv~~ M .....
E ~ OM ..... ~ ~ W ..... NO N W N~ØM N V
Ò u U) ~ N N NN
~~M ~
~(I) -
CU...L:
~C~
~~E~ ~~ m..... m..... m œmm~ mM~œ""'U)œ~~""'mN O~ Vm Oœ.....~øN m
. ~ roN ~M V~ m ~OMO vœvv.....~m~U)VMM V~ ~W .....vø~mm w
.~~ ~~'~~IM~ 0 ~~~m w~Mòci~~ciwNIDm ÑWI I m~ ~~ci~g~ ci
ØW ~~ ~M ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~.....~~~~U)~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~W~ ~
~~ B~ ~ø ~ ~ Ò~M~ mÑè ~t ø ~~Ò ~~ Ñ~ ~ID~~N~ ~
~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~..... NN~..... ~..... ~ øœ=u)N~ ~
Ö'ga-
~~
oC+'
IQ.£
V
~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ =~~ ~g~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ mm ~~~~;~ ~
~ Nai' '~Ittiu:i ui'\Ó1cirti ui~·~ ~cñWÑIO~~ ttit.Õ'cö1uiLri CÖ"":cñ.-iLriN N
~ ~N 0 ~~ ~ V ~N N ~ WM M O~~ ~~ œ M~ ~.....~NMID.....
~:a ~~ ~ r-..."l ~~... Ll'J N CON... "l "!.\D,........ cn~ V... f"..rY!, CO..."'!.~~......O.. "t
~ V~ V ~ ~ Ll'J N ..... ~,...... ~ CO ~ O~~N CO M
U~ ~ ro N N ...... N N~"'" ~ 0
" " M
~~ m~ ~ ~ ~ ~m ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~g ~ B~~~~= ~
~J!I ciu:i'ui"", I '..0 u:il~ ~CÓ u)mM'ci....:~có'r-.:cõm ÑCÕ I I 'g CÕ¢~W~CÕ ~
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~m~ ~~ ~ ~~q~qq ~
o 0.......... M .....N ~ .......... ~ ~...........M V \D......MVNØ m
MM ~ ..... N MM~NN~ ~
VO~ VV N~"""~~~ M~\DSMœ~MMV ~vSSSœ..... ~~ØLl'J~N \D
8 I""::«!~,~"! 1""::~Ll!«!r'\!l1! ,,!,,",,!,,""!q~J':l'I'!qr'\!"""! ~"""!O!~~C!~ ~~q",,!,,!-! '""!
~ ~~~ g~ ~~~~~m ~~~~~~~~.....~ ~~~~B;~ ~~~~~= ~
ro O~............N OMM,......~,...... \DON~MMON~cn N\D~m~U)"'" ~~MMV~ U)
m è~~ ~Ñ ~ òò~~ ~mÑ~~Ñ~~MM ~Ø~MÑ~~ ~NÑ~~Ø ø
~~= N~ ~~co~~~ ~ ~ ~m=~~~~ ~mm~co~ ~
~ ~ ~ Ñ ø
to v ...;. ~ I - UI v· _ ~ _:1.1. - u.. C 0'1 u.. f', - ..., I::: 0 ~
c~~Ð8 w 5 8~~ ~~~~SE~E~~~ E~æ~~~ £ ~~
"I: ~ ~~ 2'r, ~ u g'¥.9 ..£ ~"ê'>ti [ti~~ ~ t;å: 8~<~ ~"C"C.!!.f!
~ ~m~u~~ æ 5 ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~3~~æ~ ~ ~~~~~ð ~§§8~
~ ~§:<E~y ~ ~ ~~~ § ~f~~~~~~¿~u § ~~~~~- ~ ~~~Ð~
~ ~ ~~Ð~g............ C ~w mõ ~ ~~~I~NNMMMM ~ N~~~~~ C ~vv~E
5 ~ 5~~~8~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~co~~~gggggg g g~~5~~ æ Ë~~~B
~ æ ~~~uw~~ ~ ŒC~UŒ ~ ~~~UZNNNNNN B NZ~ZUU ~ ~3:~Œ~
~ ñj ~ Ë"C g
~ ~ ......~~øo~~ ~ O~ONO ~ ~~"Nv~~m~"""N ~ ~co~o"o B ..........NM...... ~
~ Ð oooo~~~ ~NM~~ ~ ...........NNNNNNNM~ 0 NNNMMm C aoco~ _
~ ~ ".........."~~..... ~ NNNNN C MMMMMMMMMMM U vvvvvv W ~wwU)~ ~
. f
"
~
City of St. Joseph
Combined Financial Statement
For the Period Ended April 30¡ 2004
Budget YTD Budget (To be collected) .
Balance % Expended
General Government
Revenue - Percentage of aids 48¡384.00 2¡317.39 (46¡066.61) -95.21%
::':::::::::t:::~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::¡:~:]:~:~::i~~:~::¡:¡:~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::I::::::~::I:::::::::~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~::¡:::::¡:i:~:r:;:;Ï'0~:/:::::::\:;:'t;;;;:;t:¡::::1:~:::}:;::::::;:::;~(f::l¡Jf:;;Ž::::);¡;;,':::;:'::::I::::i::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::;:¡:ì'~::::~:~:~Í1:':
........ __..... _. .... __.. u__ uu. __. __..... u_ ._.. _......... u...... __.. _.._. _ _ ."..... _.............. . _.... __........ .__...... __. u........... _... _. _".............. u........ u......·········..······· u...... -. .. -........ -............. -. -....
Administrative
Revenue
Licenses & Permits 117¡900.00 31¡756.58 (86,143.42)
Percentage of aids 242¡090.00 2,227.50 (239,862.50)
Charges for Services 23,550.00 9¡273.25 (14¡276.75)
383¡540.00 43¡257.33 (340¡282.67) -88.72%
::::::::::::::'::::::¡::::::::::::::::::¡i¡I:::::¡:~:::~:t,i'~:~¡r:S::::::::::::::::;;:;::::::':::::;:',:¡::;¡,:i:;,::::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::L:::::::::::::::::'r:~:0:¡:~:t:lli:~I:tm::::::::::m0:~:j;:~::~:~:¡:~:]::::::::::::::::~:t:0~:~:~:~:¡::~:~:::::::::::::'::::::::::::::::I:¡:::i:::::::::::::::::::¡:::i:::¡i:Ì:~:i:~:~~Í~:::
Police Administration
Revenue
Licenses & Permits 16,850.00 9,029.96 (7,820.04)
Aids 28¡000.00 834.90 (27¡165.10)
Percentage of aids 381¡785.00 - (381¡785.00)
Fines 85,100.00 19¡106.35 (65,993.65)
Miscellaneous - (4¡812.75) (4,812.75)
511J35.00 24¡158.46 (487¡576.54) -95.28%
::'¡:::::I::I::::::::¡::~¡::¡::¡:¡:::::::::::ill:0:t:~:0::i:~:j::r,;¡¡:::::¡:::::::::::::::::::::::::¡:¡j::t::::¡:¡:::¡:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::'::::::::t~:t:;:::Ì:]:;,;:t:{::::::t:0:ît;:i:!:~':0:G:::,,::::::::jj:t~:[:~,;::::j:jt::::::::(::::~::¡::;:::¡:::::::::::::::::::;:::::::;:::::Ì:t:i:;:Ì:¿j¡:;
Public Works
Revenue .
Franchise Fees 69¡435.00 1¡089.41 - (68,345.59)
Aids 11,500.00 - (11¡500.00)
Percentage of aids 280¡221.00 - (280¡221.00)
Charges for Services 1,800.00 373.88 (1¡426.12)
362¡956.00 1¡463.29 (361¡492.71) -99.60%
:::::::::::::t:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::¡:¡:i:~::i:~:~::¡:¡:::::::::::I:::::::::::::::::i:i:I::::¡:t::::::::I:¡:::i:::i:iIi:¡::::::::::::::::::::::~:~:~:;:~f,;:;~Ï:f::'t:::::::(:~::~;:f:~::t::':1:1;::::::::::¡:i:~::~:]:'::~¡~:t:¡::~¡~:I:::i:::::::::¡::::::::::m:::::::::I:::::::::::i~:J¡¡:;:~:;]~:::
Parks
Revenue
Charges for Services 5¡000.00 2,115.00 (2¡885.00)
Percentage of aids 116,035.00 5¡522.80 (110¡512.20)
121,035.00 7¡637.80 (113,397.20) -93.69%
:::¡::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::¡:~:;:~:i::i:;:~:~:¡::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Jt¡:¡:::;:::::,¡¡::E::¡::¡:¡::::;:::::::::;:;:::::::::::::~::i:~¡':;1~~~':l:ii::¡:::::::::::::::::~:t¡::~:~:~::¡::l:~::::::::::::::::::~:¡ill'~::~:f:;:~:~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::I::::::::~:::I::::t:::::ili:î:;~:jllii:::
Miscellaneous
Revenue
Assessments 5¡000.00 (400.14) (5¡400.14)
Percentage of aids 66¡520.00 - (66¡520.00)
71¡520.00 (400.14) (71¡920.14) -100.56%
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::",::::(;:i~:j,~::i:~:j:¡:¡::::::::::::::::::::':::::':Lj:r::::}{:I:::::::::::::::{::::::::::m:::::':::::::'~0::~:~:~:i:~:[:::,:::::::::::::::::j:t~::G:~l·;::§/·::·:::::0:~:;:~:i:1::::~j::::::::¡:,:,:"::::::::::::'::::i::::::::::::::::;::::~:~:;:~:]¡;;:¡
Economic Development
Revenue
Aids 72,868,00 - (72,868.00) .
Transfer In 34¡500.00 - (34¡500.00)
107,368.00 - (107,368.00) -100.00% Expenditures 107¡368.00 8J93.27 98¡574.73 8.19%
City of St. Joseph
Revenue Summary By Department
For the Period Ended April 30, 2004
Budget Percent
Budget YTD Balance of Budget
· Current Ad Valorem Taxes 360,068.00 16,176.97 343,891.03 4.49%
Local Government Aid 663,607.00 - 663,607.00 0.00%
Market Value Credit 90,000.00 90,000.00 0.00%
Low Income Housing Aid 2,664.00 - 2,664.00 0.00%
PERA Rate Increase Aid 1,541.00 - 1,541.00 0.00%
Interest Earnings 25,000.00 2,317.39 22,682.61 9.27%
Co-op Dividend-League MN aties 10,000.00 - 10,000.00 0.00%
(0) General Aids/Taxes 1,152,880.00 18,494.36 1,134,385.64 1.60%
State Sales Tax 100.00 45.79 54.21 45.79%
Contractors License 100.00 - 100.00 0.00%
Excavation Permit 3,500.00 50.00 3,450.00 1.43%
Franchise Fee 11,000.00 - 11,000.00 0.00%
Building Permits 90,000.00 31,378.79 58,621.21 34.87%
Animal License 1,200.00 282,00 918.00 23.50%
Rental Housing Registration 12,000.00 - 12,000.00 0.00%
State Grants and aids - 2,227.50 (2,227.50) 0.00%
Zoning and Subdivision 2,000.00 1,260.00 740.00 63.00%
Land Use Deposit Fee 5,000.00 5,835.50 (835.50) 116.71%
Sale of Maps and Publications 800.00 243.75 556.25 30.47%
Assessments and research 5,000.00 1,420.00 3,580.00 28.40%
Special Hearing 2,000.00 150.00 1,850.00 7.50%
Community Sign Rent 50.00 - 50.00 0.00%
Surplus Property - 364.00 (364.00) 0.00%
Fire Administration Reimb 5,500.00 - 5,500.00 0.00%
Fire Hall Maintenance 3,200.00 - 3,200.00 0.00%
(2) Administration 141,450.00 43,257.33 98,192.67 30.58%
Beer 1,500.00 419.96 1,080.04 28.00%
· Liquor 13,000.00 6,650.00 6,350.00 51.15%
Outdoor Liquor Permit 200.00 200.00 0.00%
Amusement 1,500.00 1,410.00 9Ó.00 94.00%
Cigarette License 650.00 550.º0 100.00 84.62%
Federal grants-Other - 834.90 (834.90) 0.00%
Police Training Reim 2,000.00 - 2,000.00 0.00%
State aid -- Police Fund 26,000.00 - 26,000.00 0.00%
County Fines 60,000.00 9,603.85 50,396.15 16.01%
Policy Fines 25,000.00 9,310.50 15,689.50 37.24%
Accident Report Fee 100.00 192.00 (92.00) 192.00%
Seized Property 1,087.00 (1,087.00) 0.00%
Contributions from Private Sou - (5,899.75) 5,899.75 0.00%
(3) Police Administration 129,950.00 24,158.46 105,791.54 18.59%
Gas Franchise 27,603.00 - 27,603.00 0.00%
Electric Franchise 41,832.00 1,089.41 40,742.59 2.60%
State Aid, Municipal Funds 4,500.00 - 4,500.00 0.00%
County Grants - Road Maintenan 7,000.00 - 7,000.00 0.00%
Kennel Fees 700.00 82.00 618.00 11.71%
Water Tower Antenna Lease 1,100.00 291.88 808.12 26.53%
(5) Public Works 82,735.00 1,463.29 81,271.71 1.77%
Park Fees 5,000.00 2,115,00 2,885.00 42.30%
Park Dedication Fees 5,474.50 (5,474.50) 0.00%
Contributions-Memorial Park - 48.30 (48.30) 0.00%
(6) Parks 5,000.00 7,637.80 (2,637.80) 152.76%
Special Assessments 5,000.00 (400.14) 5,400.14 -8.00%
(9) Miscellaneous 5,000.00 (400.14) 5,400.14 -8.00%
Tax Increment 72,868.00 72,868.00 0.00%
· Transfer In .34,500.00 - 34,500.00 0.00%
Interest (25.31) 25.31 0.00%
(8) Economic Development 107,368.00 (25.31) 107,393.31 -0.02%
General Fund Totals 1,624,383.00 94,585.79 1,529,797.21 5.82%
City of St. Joseph
Expenditure Summary by Department
For the Period Ended April 30, 2004
Budget Percent
Budget MTD YTD Balance of Budget .
Council 31/171.00 1/306.76 10/569.28 20/601.72 33.91 %
Legislative Committees 6/250.00 650.54 976.94 5/273.06 15.63%
Ordinance & Proceedings 1/900.00 1/041.83 1/558.26 341.74 82.01 %
Mayor 9,063.00 608.31 1,904.88 7 ,158.12 21.02%
(1) General Government 48/384.00 3/607.44 15/009.36 33/374.64 31.02%
Elections 7/300.00 - - 7/300.00 0.00%
Salaries & Administrative 135/725.00 10/092.17 39/984,05 95/740.95 29.46%
Accounting 58/225.00 4/903.49 13/115,82 45/109,18 22,53%
Audit Serivce 9/500.00 8/000.00 8,000.00 1/500.00 84.21%
Assessing 17,754.00 1,489.81 5,051.46 12/702.54 28.45%
City Attorney 20,000.00 3,476.86 12,852,84 7,147.16 64.26%
Planning and Zoning 17,900.00 10,335.50 13,578.50 4,321.50 75,86%
Community Center 13/136.00 1,779.82 6,177.71 6,958.29 47,03%
City Offices 20,650.00 1,037.31 5,146.65 15,503.35 24.92%
Community Sign 2/150.00 88.13 295.29 1,854,71 13,73%
Cable Access 8/700.00 475.51 1,383.90 7,316.10 15.91 %
Building Inpsection 69/500.00 7/982,93 24,310.86 45/189.14 34.98%
Emergency Siren 3,000.00 6.28 18.83 2,981.17 0.63%
(2) Adminstration 383,540,00 49,667.81 129,915.91 253,624,09 33,87%
Crime Control 495,785.00 37,232,74 152,928,67 342,856.33 30,85%
Police Training 4,500.00 - 370.86 4,129.14 8.24%
Communication Services 7,450,00 958.80 2,350.72 5/099.28 31.55% .
Automotive Services 4,000.00 3,216.23 8,748.72 (4,748.72) 218.72%
(3) Police Administration 511,735.00 41,407,77 164,398,97 ~ 347,336.03 32.13%
Signal Lights 500,00 22.39 168.58 331.42 33.72%
Animal Control 1,100.00 82.00 154,26 945.74 14.02%
Street Maintenance 195/739.00 9/331.57 50/063.98 145/675.02 25,58%
Ice & Snow Removal 88/137.00 316.84 20/746.99 67/390.01 23.54%
Engineering Fee 20/000.00 13/565.21 39/926.45 (19,926.45) 199.63%
Street Lighting 31/500.00 2/349.38 7,193.74 24/306.26 22.84%
Street Cleaning 14,080.00 3/871.90 5,333.38 8,746.62 37.88%
Maint Shop 11,900.00 1,562.32 9,374.39 2,525.61 78.78%
(5) Public Works 362/956.00 31,101.61 132,961.77 229/994.23 36.63%
Participant Recreation 17/340.00 - 600.00 16/740.00 3.46%
Ball Park & Skaíng 4/430.00 75.08 3/090.00 1/340.00 69.75%
Park Areas 99/090.00 5/516,26 13/332.62 85/757.38 13.46%
Shade Tree 175.00 - - 175.00 0.00%
(6) Parks 121/035,00 5,591.34 17/022.62 104/012,38 14.06%
Community Service 3/800.00 300.00 3,500.00 7.89%
Other Financing Uses 500,00 - - 500.00 0.00%
Fire Protection 62/000.00 18/896.04 37/792.08 24,207.92 60.95%
Transfer Out 5,220.00 - - 5,220.00 0.00%
(9) Miscellaneous 71/520.00 18,896,04 38/092.08 33/427.92 53,26%
Economic Development 107 ,368.00 4,397.47 8,793.27 98,574.73 8.19% .
(8) Economic Development 107,368.00 4/397.47 8,793,27 98,574.73 8.19%
General Fund Totals 1/606/538.00 154/669.48 506,193,98 1,100,344,02 31.51%
· Budget VS. Year-to-Date - Revenues
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$0
($100,000) ,c~,,¡~~1iL~'~¢~~~_~~~~~~~"~"
G~ "I~ A. A ,oq, ~~ ~cCh
OQee (¡¿w
&rq¡ ~1Í7.' ~cV¡,-. ~~ c&~
~~~qq "IO'IJ¡: O/)},.
%'1' ~~~ ~CQ
~ WJ. O~ t9£,
&/Oþ
III Budget . YTD I
·
Budget VS. Year-to-Date - Expenditures
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$0
G~ "I~ A. A ,oq, ~. ~CCh
~1Í7.' OQc& (¡66' ~~ ~~c&6
&rq¡ ~8trqq "IO'/)},. ~cV¡,-. ~ o/}}"
Go'1' ~IJ. o~ ~~ ~cQ
~ &v&h
Oþ
· ,- Budget . YTD I
CITY OF S1 JOSEPH 05/12/041:37 PM
Page 1
Council Revenue Monthly Report
. SOURCE 2004 %
SOURCE Descr Budget Rev YTD Amt Balance of Budget
FUND 101 General
31010 Current Ad Valore $360,068.00 $16,176.97 $343,891.03 4.49%
31320 State Sales Tax $100.00 $45.79 $54.21 45.79%
31820 Gas Franchise $27,603.00 $0.00 $27,603.00 0.00%
31830 Electric Franchise $41,832.00 $1,089.41 $40,742.59 2.60%
32111 Beer $1,500.00 ' $419.96 $1,080.04 28.00%
32112 Liquor $13,000.00 $6,650.00 $6,350.00 51.15%
32113 Outdoor Liquor Per $200.00 $0.00 $200.00 0.00%
32170 Amusement $1,500.00 $1,410.00 $90.00 94.00%
32181 Contractors Licens $100.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
32182 Excavation Permit $3,500.00 $50.00 $3,450.00 1.43%
32184 Cigarette License $650.00 $550.00 $100.00 84.62%
32186 Franchise Fee $11,000.00 $0.00 $11,000.00 0.00%
32210 Building Permits $90,000.00 $31,378.79 $58,621.21 34.87%
32240 Animal License $1,200.00 $282.00 $918.00 23.50%
32261 Rental Housing Re $12,000.00 $0.00 $12,000.00 0.00%
33160 Federal Grants - at $0.00 $834.90 -$834.90 0.00%
33400 State Grants and ai $0.00 $2,227.50 -$2,227.50 0.00%
33401 Local Government $663,607.00 $0.00 $663,607.00 0.00%
33404 Market Value Credi $90,000.00 $0.00 $90,000.00 0.00%
33408 Low Income Housi $2,664.00 $0.00 $2,664.00 0.00%
33409 PERA Rate Increas $1,541.00 $0.00 $1,541.00 0.00%
33416 Police Training Rei $2,000.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 0.00%
33421 State Aid, Municipa $4,500.00 $0.00 $4,500.00 0.00%
33422 State aid - Police $26,000.00 $0.00 $26,000.00 0.00%
33611 County Grants - Ro $7,000.00 $0.00 $7,000.00 0.00%
II Zoning and Subdivi $2,000.00 $1,260.00 $740.00 63.00%
Land Use Deposit $5,000.00 $5,835.50 -$835.50 116.71%
Sale of Maps and $800.00 $243.75 $556.25 30.47%
34107 Assessments and '=- $5,000.00 $1,420.00 $3,580.00 28.40%
34111 Special Hearing $2,000.00 $150.00 $1,850.00 7.50%
34112 Community Sign R $50.00 $0.00 $50.00 0.00%
34114 Park Dedication Fe $0.00 $5,474.50 -$5,474.50 0.00%
34118 Administration Rei $5,500.00 $0.00 $5,500.00 0.00%
34119 Fire Hall Maintenan $3,200.00 $0.00 $3,200.00 0.00%
34780 Park Fees $5,000.00 $2,115.00 $2,885.00 42.30%
34950 Kennel Fees $700.00 $82.00 $618.00 11.71%
35101 County Fines $60,000.00 $9,603.85 $50,396.15 16.01%
35102 Policy Fines $25,000.00 $9,310.50 $15,689.50 37.24%
35105 Accident Report Fe $100.00 $192.00 -$92.00 192.00%
35106 Siezed Property $0.00 $1,087.00 -$1,087.00 0.00%
36100 Special Assessme $5,000.00 -$400.14 $5,400.14 -8.00%
36210 Interest Earnings $25,000.00 $2,317.39 $22,682.61 9.27%
36215 Co-op Dividend-MN $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 0.00%
36221 Water Tower Anten $1,100.00 $291.88 $808.12 26.53%
36230 Contributions from $0.00 -$5,899.75 $5,899.75 0.00%
36236 Contributions - Me $0.00 $48.30 -$48.30 0.00%
36260 Surplus Property $0.00 $364.00 -$364.00 0.00%
39201 Transfers from Oth $14,000.00 $0.00 $14,000.00 0.00%
FUND 101 General $1,531,015.00 $94,611.10 $1,436,403.90 6.18%
FUND 105 Fire Fund
33400 State Grants and ai $35,500.00 $1,000.00 $34,500.00 2.82%
34202 Special Fire Servic $181,855.00 $88,941.14 $92,913.86 48.91 %
34203 Fire Fighting Reimb $1,100.00 $360.00 $740.00 32.73%
34781 Fire Hall Rental $3,000.00 $925.00 $2,075.00 30.83%
. Interest Earnings $12,000.00 $355.99 $11,644.01 2.97%
Contributions from $0.00 $1,198.45 -$1,198.45 0.00%
FUND 105 Fire Fund $233,455.00 $92,780.58 $140,674.42 39.74%
FUND 108 Cable Access Fee
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/041:37 PM
Page 2
Council Revenue Monthly Report
SOURCE 2004 % .
SOURCE Descr Budget Rev YTD Amt Balance of Budget
32186 Franchise Fee $7,600.00 $1,899.59 $5,700.41 24.99%
FUND 108 Cable Access Fee $7,600.00 $1,899.59 $5,700.41 24.99%
FUND 150 Economic Development
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 -$25.31 $25.31 0.00%
39201 Transfers from Oth $34,500.00 $0.00 $34,500.00 0.00%
FUND 150 Economic Development $34,500.00 -$25.31 $34,525.31 -0.07%
FUND 155 TIF 1-3 Borgert (SKN)
31050 Tax Increment $17,780.00 $0.00 $17,780.00 0.00%
FUND 155 TIF 1·3 Borgert (SKN) $17,780.00 $0.00 $17,780.00 0.00%
FUND 156 TIF 1-4 St. Joe Development
31050 Tax Increment $55,088.00 $0.00 $55,088.00 0.00%
FUND 156 TIF 1-4 St. Joe Development $55,088.00 $0.00 $55,088.00 0.00%
FUND 210 Recreation Center
36210 Interest Earnings SO.OO $57.94 -$57.94 0.00%
FUND 210 Recreation Center $0.00 557.94 -557.94 0.00%
FUND 230 Lake Wobegon Trail
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 -$102.69 $102.69 0.00%
36230 Contributions from $0.00 $10,100.00 -$10,100.00 0.00%
36230 Contributions from $0.00 ·$10,000.00 $10,000.00 0.00%
FUND 230 Lake Wobegon Trail $0.00 -$2.69 $2.69 0.00% .
FUND 232 City Beautification-College Av
36230 Contributions from $0.00 $1,000.00 -$1,000.00 0.00%
FUND 232 City Beautification-College A $0.00 $1,000.00 -$1,000.00 0.00%
FUND 250 Revolving Loan Fund
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $16.87 ·$16.87 0.00%
36212 CDAP Loan Interes $1,383.00 $500.23 $882.77 36.17%
39312 CDAP Loan Procee $7,899.00 $2,593.73 $5,305.27 32.84%
FUND 250 Revolving Loan Fund $9,282.00 $3,110.83 $6,171.17 33.51 %
FUND 317 Fire Facility, 1997
31013 Special Levy - FH, $0.00 $16,103.36 ·$16,103.36 0.00%
31014 Special Levy - FH, $0.00 $9,440.18 ·$9,440.18 0.00%
36210 Interest Earnings $10,000.00 $1,418.31 $8,581.69 14.18%
FUND 317 Fire Facility, 1997 $10,000.00 $26,961.85 -$16,961.85 269.62%
FUND 31998 Street Improvement
31010 Current Ad Valore $7,450.00 $0.00 $7,450.00 0.00%
36100 Special Assessme $51,567.00 $19,726.51 $31,840.49 38.25%
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $534.39 -$534.39 0.00%
FUND 319 98 Street Improvement $59,017.00 $20,260.90 $38,756.10 34,33%
FUND 321 Joseph Street Improvement
36100 Special Assessme $151,290.00 ·$0.02 $151,290.02 0.00%
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $363.97 -$363.97 0.00%
FUND 321 Joseph Street Improvement $151,290.00 $363.95 $150,926.05 0.24% .
FUND 322 City Hall Project, 2000
31010 Current Ad Valore $96,000.00 $0.00 $96,000.00 0.00%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/041:37 PM
Page 3
Council Revenue Monthly Report
. SOURCE 2004 %
SOURCE Descr Budget Rev YTD Amt Balance of Budget
FUND 322 City Hall Project, 2000 $96,000.00 $0.00 $96,000.00 0.00%
FUND 324 Northland V Improvement
36100 Special Assessme $188,730.00 $10,657.00 $178,073.00 5.65%
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $678.53 -$678.53 0.00%
FUND 324 Northland V Improvement $188,730.00 $11,335.53 $177,394.47 6.01%
FUND 325 2002 Street Improvement
31010 Current Ad Valore $45,000.00 $0.00 $45,000.00 0.00%
33421 State Aid, Municipa $140,000.00 $0.00 $140,000.00 0.00%
36100 Special Assessme $287,791.00 $32,850.27 $254,940.73 11.41 %
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $1,414.99 -$1,414.99 0.00%
39201 Transfers from Oth $64,651.00 $0.00 .00 0.00%
FUND 325 2002 Street Improvement $537,442.00 $34,265.26 $503,176.74 6.38%
FUND 327 2002 Equipment Certificates
31010 Current Ad Valore $69,000.00 $0.00 $69,000.00 0.00%
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $31.77 -$31.77 0.00%
FUND 327 2002 Equipment Certificates $69,000.00 $31.77 $68,968.23 0.05%
FUND 3282003 Street Improvements
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $742.29 -$742.29 0.00%
FUND 328 2003 Street Improvements $0.00 $742.29 -$742.29 0.00%
.329 2003 Maintenance Facility
Current Ad Valore - $55,500.00 $0.00 $55,500.00 0.00%
FUND 3292003 Maintenance Facility ~ $55,500.00 $0.00 $55,500.00 0.00%
FUND 331 2003 Refunding Fire Hall
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $4,522.35 -$4,522.35 0.00%
FUND 331 2003 Refunding Fire Hall $0.00 $4,522.35 -$4,522.35 0.00%
FUND 3322003 Cross Over (Streets)
31010 Current Ad Valore $107,000.00 $0.00 $107,000.00 0.00%
36100 Special Assessme $84,779.00 $1,554.05 $83,224.95 1.83%
36210 Interest Earnings $36,300.00 -$20.07 $36,320.07 -0.06%
FUND 3322003 Cross Over (Streets) $228,079.00 $1,533.98 $226,545.02 0.67%
FUND 425 2002 Street Improvement
33130 Federal Grants-Co $0:00 $1,052.40 -$1,052.40 0.00%
FUND 425 2002 Street Improvement $0.00 $1,052.40 -$1,052.40 0.00%
FUND 501 Utility Extension
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $443.48 -$443.48 0.00%
37170 Initial Hookup Char $0.00 $26,000.00 ·$26,000.00 0.00%
37251 Hook up $0.00 $28,089.00 -$28,089.00 0.00%
FUND 501 Utility Extension $0.00 $54,532.48 -$54,532.48 0.00%
FUND 601 Water Fund
36210 Interest Earnings $38,600.00 $1,661.93 $36,938.07 4.31%
36221 Water Tower Anten $19,000.00 $5,505.83 $13,494.17 28.98%
37110 Rate Class One $170,000.00 $25,743.39 $144,256.61 15.14%
. Initial Hookup Char $37,500.00 $0.00 $37,500.00 0.00%
water meters, mete $5,000.00 $1,495.00 $3,505.00 29.90%
37172 inspection fees $5,200.00 $1,200.00 $4,000.00 23.08%
37180 Water Surcharge - $18,900.00 $2,599.98 $16,300.02 13.76%
37181 State Water Surcha $7,000.00 $1,171.95 $5,828.05 16.74%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/04 1 :37 PM
Page 4
Council Revenue Monthly Report
SOURCE 2004 % .
SOURCE Oeser Budget Rev YTD Amt Balance of Budget
37182 Water Filtration Sur $0:00 $4,434.64 -$4,434.64 0.00%
FUND 601 Water Fund $301,200.00 $43,812.72 $257,387.28 14.55%
FUND 602 Sewer Fund
31010 Current Ad Valore $39,000.00 $0.00 $39,000.00 0.00%
36100 Special Assessme $30,176.00 $0.00 $30,176.00 0.00%
36210 Interest Earnings $43,500.00 $1,676.70 $41,823.30 3.85%
37210 Sanitary Sewer Ser $165,000.00 $23,573.20 $141,426.80 14.29%
37211 SI. Benedict Sewer $100,000.00 $0.00 $100,000.00 0.00%
37275 Industrial Sewer Pe $800.00 $0.00 $800.00 0.00%
37276 Sewer Inspection F $5,200.00 $1,200.00 $4,000.00 23.08%
39201 Transfers from Oth $23,400.00 $0.00 $23,400.00 0.00%
FUND 602 Sewer Fund $407,076.00 $26,449.90 $380,626.10 6.50%
FUND 603 Refuse Collection
32000 Licenses & Permits $0.00 $2,530.48 ·$2,530.48 0.00%
34403 Refuse Colleciton $145,000.00 $27,973.10 $117,026.90 19.29%
36210 Interest Earnings $7,500.00 $403.33 $7,096.67 5.38%
FUND 603 Refuse Collection $152,500.00 $30,906.91 $121,593.09 20.27%
FUND 651 Storm Water Utility
36210 Interest Earnings $0.00 $117.51 -$117.51 0.00%
38101 Development Fee $0.00 $21,927.80 -$21,927.80 0.00%
FUND 651 Storm Water Utility $0.00 $22,045.31 -$22,045.31 0.00%
$4,144,554.00 $472,249.64 $3,672,304.36 11.39% .
.
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/041:38 PM
Page 1
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
. Current Period: April 2004
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Exp Balance of Budget
FUND 101 General
DEPART 41110 Council
101 Salaries $14,000.00 $1,160.00 $3,160.00 $10,840.00 22.57%
104 Taxable Per Diem $2,000.00 $0.00 $320.00 $1,680.00 16.00%
121 PERA Contribution $700.00 $58.00 $174.00 $526.00 24.86%
122 FICA Contributions $868.00 $71.92 $215.76 $652.24 24.86%
125 Medicare Contributi $203.00 $16.84 $50.52 $152.48 24.89%
151 Workers Compo Ins $50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50.00 0.00%
200 Office Supplies $50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50.00 0.00%
331 Travel & Conferenc $2,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 0.00%
361 General Liability In $600:00 $0.00 $600.00 $0.00 100.00%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $10,200.00 $0.00 $6,049.00 $4,151.00 59.30%
DEPART 41110 Council $31,171.00 $1,306.76 $10,569.28 $20,601.72 33.91%
DEPART 41120 Legislative Committies
103 Legislative Bodies $4,000.00 $520.00 $580.00 $3,420.00 14.50%
151 Workers Comp. Ins $50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50.00 0.00%
200 Office Supplies $400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $400.00 0.00%
331 Travel & Conferenc $800.00 $0.00 $0.00 $800.00 0.00%
340 Advertising $1,000.00 $130.54 $396.94 $603.06 39.69%
DEPART 41120 Legislative Commit $6,250.00 $650.54 $976.94 $5,273.06 15.63%
DEPART 41130 Ordinance & Proceedings
210 Operating Supplies $0.00 $116.42 $116.42 -$116.42 0.00%
. 304 Legal Fees $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
322 Postage $200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $200.00 0.00%
340 Advertising $700.00 $132.09 $648.52 $51.48 92.65%
350 Printing $0.00 $793.32 $793.32 ·$793.32 0.00%
DEPART 41130 Ordinance & Proce $1,900.00 $1,041.83 $1,558.26 $341.74 82.01%
DEPART 41310 Mayor
101 Salaries $6,500.00 $540.00 $1,540.00 $4,960.00 23.69%
104 Taxable Per Diem $500.00 $0.00 $80.00 $420.00 16.00%
121 PERA Contribution $325.00 $27.00 $81.00 $244.00 24.92%
122 FICA Contributions $403.00 $33.48 $100.44 $302.56 24.92%
125 Medicare Contributi $100.00 $7.83 $23.49 $76.51 23.49%
151 Workers Compo Ins $35.00 $0.00 $0.00 $35.00 0.00%
230 Repair & Maint $0.00 $0.00 $29.95 -$29.95 0.00%
331 Travel & Conferenc $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
361 General Liability In $50.00 $0.00 $50.00 $0.00 100.00%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $150.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150.00 0.00%
DEPART 41310 Mayor $9,063.00 $608.31 $1,904.88 $7,158.12 21.02%
DEPART 41410 Elections
580 Other Equipment $7,300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $7,300.00 0.00%
DEPART 41410 Elections $7,300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $7,300.00 0.00%
DEPART 41430 Salaries & Adminstrative
101 Salaries $93,000.00 $6,820.20 $26,581.66 $66,418.34 28.58%
121 PERA Contribution $4,800.00 $377.15 $1,095.29 $3,704.71 22.82%
122 FICA Contributions $5,800.00 $414.46 $545.30 $5,254.70 9.40%
125 Medicare Contributi $1,400.00 $96.93 $386.22 $1,013.78 27.59%
131 Health Insurance $6,000.00 $802.29 $2,108.17 $3,891.83 35.14%
. 132 Dental Insurance $1,000.00 $60.36 $211.26 $788.74 21.13%
133 Life Insurance $225.00 $14.76 $51.66 $173.34 22.96%
134 Disabilty Insurance $650.00 $41.30 $165.20 $484.80 25.42%
137 Flex Plan Administr $0.00 $22.22 $188.87 -$188.87 0.00%
151 Workers Compo Ins $900.00 $0.00 $0.00 $900.00 0.00%
200 Office Supplies $3,800.00 $385.78 $903.31 $2,896.69 23.77%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/04 1 :38 PM
Page 2
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
Current Period: April 2004 .
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Exp Expense Expense Balance of Budget
210 Operating Supplies $0.00 $10.00 $599.16 -$599.16 0.00%
215 software support $0.00 $0.00 $47.50 ·$47.50 0.00%
220 Repair and Maint S $3,500.00 $371.50 $2,648.31 $851.69 75.67%
240 Small Tool & Minor $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
300 Professional Servic $700.00 $0.00 $544.00 $156.00 77.71%
321 Telephone $2,500.00 $272.60 $1,138.79 $1,361.21 45.55%
322 Postage $2,200.00 $171.85 $303.88 $1,896.12 13.81%
331 Travel & Conferenc $2,000.00 $60.00 $268.88 $1,731.12 13.44%
361 General Liability In $1,700.00 $0.00 $1,700.00 $0.00 100.00%
410 Rentals $100.00 $170.77 $373.99 -$273.99 373.99%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $400.00 $0.00 $122.60 $277 .40 30.65%
435 Books & Pamphlet $250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $250.00 0.00%
570 Office Equipment $1,300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,300.00 0.00%
581 Computer Hardwar $3,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 0.00%
DEPART 41430 Salaries & Adminst $135,725.00 $10,092.17 $39,984.05 $95,740.95 29.46%
DEPART 41530 Accounting
101 Salaries $40,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $40,000.00 0.00%
121 PERA Contribution $2,100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,100.00 0.00%
122 FICA Contributions $2,500.00 $0.00 SO.OO $2,500.00 0.00%
125 Medicare Contributi $600.00 $0.00 $0.00 5600.00 0.00%
131 Health Insurance $7,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $7,000.00 0.00%
132 Dental Insurance $900.00 $0.00 $0.00 $900.00 0.00%
133 Life Insurance $125.00 $0.00 SO.OO 5125.00 0.00%
134 Disabilty Insurance 5400.00 $0.00 50.00 $400.00 0.00%
137 Flex Plan Administr $0.00 511.11 $94.43 -$94.43 0.00% .
200 Office Supplies 5750.00 $129.88 $618.89 $131.11 82.52%
215 software support 51,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 0.00%
300 Professional Servic $0.00 54,762.50 512,362.50 ·$12,362.50 0.00%
331 Travel & Conferenc $1,000.00 $0.00 50.00 51,000.00 0.00%
340 Advertising 51,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
430 Miscellaneous 5250.00 50.00 $0.00 $250.00 0,00%
433 Dues & Subscriptio 5100.00 50.00 540.00 560.00 40.00%
DEPART 41530 Accounting $58,225.00 54,903.49 $13,115.82 $45,109.18 22.53%
DEPART 41540 Audit Service
301 Audit & Accounting $9,500.00 $8,000.00 58,000.00 $1,500.00 84.21%
DEPART 41540 Audit Service $9,500.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $1,500.00 84.21%
DEPART 41550 Assessing
101 Salaries $16,000.00 $1,370.00 $4,110.00 $11,890.00 25,69%
122 FICA Contributions 5992.00 $84.94 $254.82 5737.18 25.69%
125 Medicare Contributi $232.00 $19.87 559.61 $172.39 25.69%
200 Office Supplies $100.00 $15.00 $47.63 $52.37 47.63%
331 Travel & Conferenc 5100.00 50.00 5579.40 -$479.40 579.40%
433 Dues & Subscriptio 5330.00 $0.00 $0.00 $330.00 0.00%
DEPART 41550 Assessing 517,754.00 $1,489.81 55,051.46 $12,702.54 28.45%
DEPART 41610 City Attorney
304 Legal Fees $20,000.00 53,476.86 $12,852.84 $7,147.16 64.26%
DEPART 41610 City Attorney $20,000.00 $3,476.86 $12.852.84 57,147.16 64.26%
DEPART 41910 Planning and Zonning
300 Professional Servic $0.00 $5,640.50 $8,843.50 ·$8,843,50 0.00%
431 Annexation Fee $400.00 525.00 565.00 $335.00 16.25% .
449 Property Tax Shari $17,000.00 $4,670.00 $4,670.00 512,330.00 27.47%
452 St. Wendel Sewer $500.00 50.00 $0.00 5500.00 0.00%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/041:38 PM
Page 3
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
. Current Period: April 2004
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Expense Balance of Budget
DEPART 41910 Planning and Zonn $17,900.00 $10,335.50 $13,578.50 $4,321.50 75.86%
DEPART 41941 Community Center
101 Salaries $2,000.00 $703.21 $1,152.01 $847.99 57.60%
121 PERA Contribution $105.00 $38.88 $63.70 $41.30 60.67%
122 FICA Contributions $125.00 $39.86 $66.61 $58.39 53.29%
125 Medicare Contributi $30.00 $9.32 $15.58 $14.42 51.93%
131 Health Insurance $300.00 $171.97 $231.80 $68.20 77.27%
132 Dental Insurance $50.00 $23.19 $30.41 $19.59 60.82%
133 Life Insurance $10.00 $2.64 $3.09 $6.91 30.90%
134 Disabilty Insurance $16:00 $0.30 $1.47 $14.53 9.19%
210 Operating Supplies $200.00 $0.00 $175.64 $24.36 87.82%
220 Repair and Maint S $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 0.00%
300 Professional Servic $600.00 $0.00 $495.00 $105.00 82.50%
321 Telephone $500.00 $44.51 $178.04 $321.96 35.61 %
361 General Liability In $700.00 $0.00 $700.00 $0.00 100.00%
381 Electric Utilities $3,500.00 $234.01 $762.14 $2,737.86 21.78%
383 Gas Utilities $3,500.00 $511.93 $2,302.22 $1,197.78 65.78%
DEPART 41941 Community Center $13,136.00 $1,779.82 $6,177.71 $6,958.29 47.03%
DEPART 41942 City Offices
210 Operating Supplies $300.00 $0.00 $105.68 $194.32 35.23%
220 Repair and Maint S $7,000.00 $220.59 $518.00 $6,482.00 7.40%
300 Professional Servic $3,500.00 $0.00 $647.07 $2,852.93 18.49%
361 General Liability In $850.00 $0.00 $850.00 $0.00 100.00%
. 381 Electric Utilities $5,500.00 $524.93 $1,640.53 $3,859.47 29.83%
383 Gas Utilities $3,500.00 $291.79 $1,385.37 $2,114.63 39.58%
DEPART 41942 City Offices $20,650.00 $1,037.31 $5,146.65 ,$15,503.35 24.92%
DEPART 41946 Community Sign
230 Repair & Maint $1,300,00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,300.00 0.00%
321 Telephone $550.00 $44.51 $178.04 $371.96 32.37%
381 Electric Utilities $300.00 $43.62 $117.25 $182.75 39.08%
DEPART 41946 Community Sign $2,150.00 $88.13 $295.29 $1,854.71 13.73%
DEPART 41950 Cable Access
101 Salaries $4,800.00 $400.00 $1,228.57 $3,571.43 25.60%
103 Legislative Bodies $2,880.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,880.00 0.00%
122 FICA Contributions $300.00 $24.80 $76.17 $223.83 25.39%
125 Medicare Contributi $70.00 $5.80 $17.81 $52.19 25.44%
210 Operating Supplies $150.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150.00 0.00%
230 Repair & Maint $500.00 $44.91 $61.35 $438.65 12.27%
DEPART 41950 Cable Access $8,700.00 $475.51 $1,383.90 $7,316.10 15.91 %
DEPART 42120 Crime Control & Investigation
101 Salaries $341,000.00 $25,480.72 $96,902.19 $244,097.81 28.42%
102 Reservists $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
121 PERA Contribution $28,700.00 $2,314.30 $6,402.22 $22,297.78 22.31%
122 FICA Contributions $1,935.00 $91.08 $153.83 $1,781.17 7.95%
125 Medicare Contributi $4,800.00 $356.88 $1,391.40 $3,408.60 28.99%
131 Health Insurance $32,000.00 $3,286.22 $13,144.88 $18,855.12 41.08%
132 Dental Insurance $4,000:00 $366.00 $1,464.00 $2,536.00 36.60%
133 Life Insurance $700.00 $58.36 $233.44 $466.56 33.35%
134 Disabilty Insurance $2,200.00 $195.06 $780.24 $1,419.76 35.47%
. 136 Health Club Premiu $200.00 $24.75 $99.00 $101.00 49.50%
137 Flex Plan Administr $500.00 $33.35 $283.48 $216.52 56.70%
142 Unemploy. Benefit $0.00 $808.00 $808.00 -$808.00 0.00%
151 Workers Compo Ins $8,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8,000.00 0.00%
171 Clothing Allowance $4,500.00 $661.66 $2,397.30 $2,102.70 53.27%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/04 1 :38 PM
Page 4
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
Current Period: April 2004 .
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Exp Expense Expense Balance of Budget
200 Office Supplies $2,000.00 $195.44 $359.94 $1,640.06 18.00%
210 Operating Supplies $2,000.00 $126.91 $1,206.24 $793.76 60.31%
211 AWAIRE Supplies $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
215 software support $8,000.00 $0.00 $7,510.90 $489.10 93.89%
220 Repair and Maint S $2,500.00 $300.03 $1,378.26 $1,121.74 55.13%
240 Small Tool & Minor $500.00 $0.00 $2,532.64 -$2,032.64 506.53%
300 Professional Servic $1,000.00 $0.00 $787.00 $213.00 78.70%
304 Legal Fees $33,600.00 $2,800.00 $8,313.50 $25,286.50 24.74%
307 Community Policin $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
322 Postage $1,000.00 $133.98 $316.67 $683.33 31.67%
340 Advertising $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
350 Printing $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
361 General Liability In $5,300.00 $0.00 $5,390.00 -$90.00 101.70%
410 Rentals $0.00 SO.OO $36.00 ·$36.00 0.00%
430 Miscellaneous $100.00 SO.OO SO.OO $100.00 0.00%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $1,200.00 $0.00 $856.50 $343.50 71.38%
446 License $250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $250.00 0.00%
570 Office Equipment $600.00 50.00 $0.00 5600.00 0.00%
580 Other Equipment $2,000.00 $0.00 $181.04 $1,818.96 9.05%
581 Computer Hardwar $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 0,00%
DEPART 42120 Crime Control & In 5495,785.00 $37,232.74 $152,928.67 $342,856,33 30.85%
DEPART 42140 Police Training
210 Operating Supplies $2,000.00 $0.00 SO.OO $2,000.00 0.00%
300 Professional Servic $1,500.00 $0.00 $80.00 $1,420.00 5.33%
331 Travel & Conferenc 51,000.00 $0.00 $290.86 $709.14 29.09% .
DEPART 42140 Police Training $4,500.00 $0.00 $370.86 $4,129.14 8.24%
DEPART 42151 Communication Service
210 Operating Supplies $250.00 $124.15 $124.15 $125.85 49.66%
233 Telephone/Radio R $500.00 $294.84 $294.84 5205.16 58.97%
321 Telephone $6,300,00 $539.81 $1,931.73 $4,368.27 30.66%
580 Other Equipment $400.00 $0.00 SO.OO 5400.00 0.00%
DEPART 42151 Communication Se $7,450.00 $958.80 $2,350.72 $5,099.28 31.55%
DEPART 42152 Automotive Services
210 Operating Supplies $500.00 $15.90 $23.11 $476.89 4.62%
220 Repair and Maint S $3,500.00 $779.27 $1,485.77 $2,014.23 42.45%
414 Vehicle Lease $0.00 $2,421.06 $7,049.89 -$7,049.89 0.00%
550 Motor Vehicles $0.00 $0.00 $189.95 ·$189.95 0.00%
DEPART 42152 Automotive Servic $4,000.00 $3,216.23 $8,748.72 -$4,748.72 218,72%
DEPART 42401 Building Inspec. Admistration
200 Office Supplies $200.00 $0.00 SO.OO $200.00 0,00%
304 Legal Fees $200.00 $0.00 $720.00 -$520.00 360.00%
311 Inspection Fee $60,000.00 $7,117.40 $22,725.33 $37,274.67 37,88%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
438 State Sur Charge $9,000.00 $865.53 $865.53 $8,134.47 9.62%
DEPART 42401 Building Inspec. Ad $69,500.00 $7,982.93 $24,310.86 $45,189.14 34.98%
DEPART 42500 Emergency Siren
230 Repair & Maint $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500,00 0.00%
300 Professional Servic $600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $600.00 0.00%
326 Fire Siren $100.00 $6.28 $18.83 $81.17 18.83%
331 Travel & Conferenc $700.00 $0.00 $0.00 $700.00 0.00% .
340 Advertising $100.00 SO.OO $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
580 Other Equipment $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0,00%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/041:38 PM
Page 5
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
. Current Period: April 2004
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Balance of Budget
DEPART 42500 Emergency Siren $3,000.00 $6.28 $18.83 $2,981.17 0.63%
DEPART 42610 Signal Lights
386 Street Lighting $500.00 $22.39 $168.58 $331.42 33.72%
DEPART 42610 Signal Lights $500.00 $22.39 $168.58 ' $331.42 33.72%
DEPART 42700 Animal Control
210 Operating Supplies $100.00 $0.00 $56.26 $43.74 56.26%
300 Professional Servic $1,000.00 $82.00 $98.00 $902.00 9.80%
DEPART 42700 Animal Control $1,100.00 $82.00 $154.26 $945.74 14.02%
DEPART43120 Street Maintanence
101 Salaries $87,550.00 $5,954.72 $26,846.68 $60,703.32 30.66%
121 PERA Contribution $4,532.00 $329.30 $1,149.74 $3,382.26 25.37%
122 FICA Contributions $5,460.00 $340.61 $555.83 $4,904.17 10.18%
125 Medicare Contributi $1,272.00 $79.64 $372.45 $899.55 29.28%
131 Health Insurance $12,000.00 $1,264.50 $5,544.01 $6,455.99 46.20%
132 Dental Insurance $1,200.00 $139.61 $617.40 $582.60 51.45%
133 Life Insurance $200.00 $17.45 $64.01 $135.99 32.01%
134 Disabilty Insurance $575.00 $51.30 $175.74 $399.26 30.56%
151 Workers Compo Ins $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 0.00%
171 Clothing Allowance $650.00 $57.83 $157.60 $492.40 24.25%
200 Office Supplies $200.00 $0.00 $2.90 $197.10 1.45%
210 Operating Supplies $7,200.00 $614.60 $1,649.49 $5,550.51 22.91%
. 212 Safety Program $1,000.00 $0.00 $207.88 $792.12 20.79%
220 Repair and Maint S $7,500.00 $225.83 $3,565.18 . $3,934.82 47.54%
240 Small Tool & Minor $600.00 $0.00 $923.59 -$323.59 153.93%
321 Telephone $600.00 $26.57 $113.27 $486.73 18.88%
331 Travel & Conferenc $200.00 $0.00 $115.00 $85.00 57.50%
340 Advertising $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
361 General Liability In $6,500.00 $0.00 $6,500.00 $0.00 100.00%
381 Electric Utilities $1,400:00 $34.21 $155.21 $1,244.79 11.09%
383 Gas Utilities $4,000.00 $195.40 $978.69 $3,021.31 24.47%
384 Refuse Disposal $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
410 Rentals $1,600.00 $0.00 $280.00 $1,320.00 17.50%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
446 License $200.00 $0.00 $89.31 $110.69 44.66%
520 Buildings & Structu $20,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $20,000.00 0.00%
530 Improvements Oth $4,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,000.00 0.00%
580 Other Equipment $25,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $25,000.00 0.00%
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanenc $195,739.00 $9,331.57 $50,063.98 $145,675.02 25.58%
DEPART 43125 Ice & Snow Removal
101 Salaries $28,100.00 $70.95 $12,396.38 $15,703.62 44.12%
121 PERA Contribution $1,605.00 $3.93 $685.55 $919.45 42.71%
122 FICA Contributions $1,922.00 $4.14 $720.89 $1,201.11 37.51%
125 Medicare Contributi $450.00 $0.97 $168.54 $281.46 37.45%
131 Health Insurance $3,000.00 $20.79 $2,237.95 $762.05 74.60%
132 Dental Insurance $400.00 $2.87 $266.02 $133.98 66.51%
133 Life Insurance $60.00 $0.29 $26.65 $33.35 44.42%
134 Disabilty Insurance $100.00 $1.26 $63.62 $36.38 63.62%
210 Operating Supplies $8,000.00 $211.64 $2,324.29 $5,675.71 29.05%
220 Repair and Maint S $8,500:00 $0.00 $977.1 0 $7,522.90 11.50%
300 Professional Servic $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 0.00%
. 410 Rentals $4,500.00 $0.00 $880.00 $3,620.00 19.56%
580 Other Equipment $30,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $30,000.00 0.00%
DEPART 43125 Ice & Snow Remov $88,137.00 $316.84 $20,746.99 $67,390.01 23.54%
DEPART 43131 Engineering Fee
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/04 1 :38 PM
Page €
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
Current Period: April 2004 .
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Exp Expense Expense Balance of Budget
303 Engineering Fee $20,000.00 $13,565.21 $39,926.45 -$19,926.45 199.63%
DEPART 43131 Engineering Fee $20,000.00 $13,565.21 $39,926.45 -$19,926.45 199.63%
DEPART 43160 Street Lighting
230 Repair & Maint $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
386 Street Lighting $30,000.00 $2,349.38 $7,193.74 $22,806.26 23.98%
530 Improvements Oth $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
DEPART 43160 Street Lighting $31,500.00 $2,349.38 $7,193.74 $24,306.26 22.84%
DEPART 43220 Street Cleaning
101 Salaries $5,000.00 $2,465.51 $2,664.73 $2,335.27 53.29%
121 PERA Contribution $250.00 $136.33 $147.35 $102.65 58.94%
122 FICA Contributions $300.00 $145.72 $157.71 $142.29 52.57%
125 Medicare Contributi $100.00 $34.07 $36.87 $63.13 36.87%
131 Health Insurance $700.00 $583.65 $612.76 $87.24 87.54%
132 Dental Insurance $75.00 $62.92 $66.94 $8.06 89.25%
133 Life Insurance $15.00 $6.64 $6.91 $8.09 46.07%
134 Disabilty Insurance $40.00 $19.24 $19.24 $20.76 48.10%
136 Health Club Premiu $2,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 0.00%
210 Operating Supplies $2,000.00 $388.26 $1,591.31 $408.69 79.57%
220 Repair and Maint S $0.00 $29.56 S29.56 -$29.56 0.00%
331 Travel & Conferenc $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
580 Other Equipment $3,000.00 SO.OO $0.00 $3,000.00 0.00%
DEPART 43220 Street Cleaning $14,080.00 $3,871.90 $5,333.38 $8,746.62 37.88%
DEPART 45120 Participant Recreation .
101 Salaries $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 0.00%
122 FICA Contributions $620.00 $0.00 $0.00 $620.00 0.00%
125 Medicare Contributi $145.00 $0.00 $0.00 $145.00 0.00%
151 Workers Compo Ins $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0,00%
210 Operating Supplies $3,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 0.00%
240 Small Tool & Minor $400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $400.00 0.00%
300 Professional Servic $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 0.00%
330 Transportation $700.00 $0.00 $0.00 $700.00 0.00%
340 Advertising $200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $200.00 0.00%
361 General Liability In $600.00 $0.00 $600.00 $0.00 100.00%
410 Rentals $75.00 $0.00 $0.00 $75.00 0.00%
DEPART 45120 Participant Recreat $17,340.00 $0.00 $600.00 $16,740.00 3.46%
DEPART 45123 Ball Park and Skating Rink
101 Salaries $3,000,00 $0,00 S2,490.50 $509.50 83.02%
122 FICA Contributions S186,OO $0.00 $154.41 $31.59 83.02%
125 Medicare Contributi $44.00 $0.00 $36.11 $7.89 82.07%
142 Unemploy. Benefit SO.OO $49.06 S49.06 ·$49.06 0.00%
151 Workers Compo Ins S100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
210 Operating Supplies $200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $200,00 0.00%
220 Repair and Maint S S300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 0.00%
381 Electric Utilities $600.00 $9.25 $222.38 $377.62 37.06%
383 Gas Utilities SO.OO $16.77 $137.54 -$137.54 0.00%
DEPART 45123 Ball Park and Skati S4,430.00 $75.08 $3,090.00 $1,340.00 69.75%
DEPART 45201 Maint Shop
210 Operating Supplies $2,200.00 $240.93 $2,030.49 $169.51 92,30%
220 Repair and Maint S $1,100.00 $194.15 $342.50 $757.50 31.14%
240 Small Tool & Minor $600.00 $135.00 $165.75 $434.25 27,63% .
321 Telephone $1,400.00 $175.69 $649.85 $750.15 46.42%
361 General Liability In SO.OO SO.OO $1,400.00 ·$1,400.00 0.00%
381 Electric Utilities S800.00 S327.30 $1,101.77 ·$301.77 137,72%
383 Gas Utilities $2,600.00 $227.25 $2,463.60 $136.40 94.75%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/041 :38 PM
Page 7
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
. Current Period: April 2004
MTD YTD %
OBJ' OBJ Descr Expense Expense Balance of Budget
384 Refuse Disposal $0.00 $262.00 $685.19 ·$685.19 0.00%
410 Rentals $200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $200.00 0.00%
580 Other Equipment $3,000.00 $0.00 $535.24 $2,464.76 17.84%
DEPART 45201 Maint Shop $11,900.00 $1,562.32 $9,374.39- $2,525.61 78.78%
DEPART 45202 Park Areas
101 Salaries $50,000.00 $3,587.57 $6,343.63 $43,656.37 12.69%
121 PERA Contribution $2,575.00 $198.41 $350.82 $2,224; 18 13.62%
122 FICA Contributions $3,100.00 $202.13 $356.43 $2,743.57 11.50%
125 Medicare Contributi $725.00 $47.27 $83.33 $641.67 11.49%
131 Health Insurance $4,500.00 $835.60 $1,560.68 $2,939.32 34.68%
132 Dental Insurance $700.00 $108.31 $198.89 $501.11 28.41 %
133 Life Insurance $100.00 $12.46 $20.76 $79.24 20.76%
134 Disabilty Insurance $300.00 $15.14 $47.50 $252.50 15.83%
137 Flex Plan Administr $0.00 $11.11 $94.44 -$94.44 0.00%
151 Workers Compo Ins $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 0.00%
171 Clothing Allowance $600.00 $57.83 $157.60 $442.40 26.27%
210 Operating Supplies $9,000.00 $0.00 $117.82 $8,882.18 1.31%
212 Safety Program $750.00 $0.00 $187.50 $562.50 25.00%
220 Repair and Maint S $7,000.00 $312.54 $819.09 $6,180.91 11.70%
240 Small Tool & Minor $750.00 $0.00 $0.00 $750.00 0.00%
321 Telephone $400.00 $26.55 $113.25 $286.75 28.31%
340 Advertising $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
361 General Liability In $2,615.00 $0.00 $2,615.00 $0.00 100.00%
381 Electric Utilities $1,000.00 $101.34 $188.32 $811.68 18.83%
. 384 Refuse Disposal $1,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,200.00 0.00%
415 Other Equipment R $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
446 License $75.00 $0.00 $77.56 -$2.56 103.41%
530 Improvements Oth $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
580 Other Equipment $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 0.00%
DEPART 45202 Park Areas $99,090:00 $5,516.26 $13,332.62 $85,757.38 13.46%
DEPART 46102 Shade Tree Disease Control
210 Operating Supplies $75.00 $0.00 $0.00 $75.00 0.00%
331 Travel & Conferenc $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
DEPART 46102 Shade Tree Diseas $175.00 $0.00 $0.00 $175.00 0.00%
DEPART 49200 Communty Support
361 General Liability In $300.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 100.00%
430 Miscellaneous $3,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 0.00%
DEPART 49200 Communty Suppor $3,800.00 $0.00 $300.00 $3,500.00 7.89%
DEPART 49300 Other Financing Uses
432 Team Building $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
DEPART 49300 Other Financing U $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
DEPART 49301 Transfer to other Funds
700 Misc $5,220.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,220.00 0.00%
DEPART 49301 Transfer to other F $5,220.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,220.00 0.00%
DEPART 49305 Fire Protection
300 Professional Servic $62,000.00 $18,896.04 $37,792.08 $24,207.92 60.95%
eEPART 49305 Fire Protection $62,000.00 $18,896.04 $37,792.08 $24,207.92 60.95%
FUND 101 General $1,499,170.00 $150,272.01 $497,400.71 $1,001,769.29 33.18%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/04 1 :38 ptv
Page E
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
Current Period: April 2004 .
MTO YTO %
OBJ OBJ Oescr BudgetExp Expense Expense Balance of Budget
FUND 105 Fire Fund
DEPART 42210 Fire Administration
103 Legislative Bodies $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
151 Workers Camp. Ins $6,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 0.00%
200 Office Supplies $400.00 $0.00 $146.38 $253.62 36.60%
215 software support $600.00 $0.00 $211.96 $388.04 35.33%
220 Repair and Maint S $200.00 $0.00 $120.00 $80.00 60.00%
301 Audit & Accounting $6,300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $6,300.00 0.00%
304 Legal Fees $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0,00%
305 Medical & Dental $2,000.00 $672.00 $607.25 $1,392.75 30.36%
322 Postage $200.00 $74.00 $98.00 $102.00 49.00%
340 Advertising $80.00 $48.76 $92.72 -$12.72 115.90%
432 Team Building $800.00 $0.00 $0.00 $800.00 0.00%
446 License $100.00 $0.00 $60.00 $40.00 60.00%
581 Computer Hardwar $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
582 Computer Software $250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $250.00 0.00%
DEPART 42210 Fire Administration $18,530.00 $794.76 $ 1,336.31 $17,193.69 7.21%
DEPART 42220 Fire Fighting
101 Salaries $46,000.00 $0.00 $1,350.00 $44,650.00 2.93%
122 FICA Contributions $2,800.00 $0.00 $83.70 $2,716.30 2.99%
125 Medicare Contributi $655.00 $0.00 $19.57 $635.43 2.99%
210 Operating Supplies $1,800.00 $27.89 $129.59 $1,670.41 7.20%
211 AWAIRE Supplies $400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $400.00 0.00%
220 Repair and Maint S $2,000.00 $14.95 $78.13 $1,921.87 3.91%
240 Small Tool & Minor $1,000.00 $0.00 $1,031.12 -$31 .12 103.11% .
361 General Liability In $16,000.00 $0.00 $15,800.00 $200,00 98.75%
384 Refuse Disposal $700.00 $0.00 $161.19 $538.81 23.03%
447 State Aid Reimburs $20,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $20,000.00 0.00%
448 Pension Relief Fire $29,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $29,000.00 0.00%
580 Other Equipment $20,000.00 $118.18 $118.18 $19,881.82 0.59%
584 Equipment Reserv $ 1 0,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 0.00%
585 Firefighter Equipme $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,000.00 0.00%
DEPART 42220 Fire Fighting $160,355.00 $161.02 $18,771.48 $141,583.52 11.71%
DEPART 42240 Fire Training
104 Taxable Per Diem $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 0.00%
122 FICA Contributions $95.00 $0.00 $0.00 $95.00 0.00%
125 Medicare Contributi $25.00 $0.00 $0.00 $25.00 0.00%
331 Travel & Conferenc $3,750.00 $19.00 $1,092.33 $2,657.67 29,13%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $1,000.00 $30.00 $590.00 $410.00 59.00%
443 Personnel Training $6,000.00 $0.00 $3,465.00 $2,535.00 57.75%
DEPART 42240 Fire Training $12,370.00 $49.00 $5,147.33 $7,222.67 41.61 %
DEPART 42250 Fire Communications
230 Repair & Maint $500.00 $0.00 $148.24 $351.76 29.65%
321 Telephone $1,000.00 $136.87 $537.32 $462.68 53.73%
580 Other Equipment $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
DEPART 42250 Fire Communicatio $2,500.00 $136.87 $685.56 $1,814.44 27.42%
DEPART 42260 Fire Repair Service
220 Repair and Maint S $2,000.00 $0.00 $145.76 $1,854.24 7.29%
DEPART 42260 Fire Repair Service $2,000.00 $0.00 $145.76 $1,854,24 7.29%
DEPART 42270 Medical Services .
210 Operating Supplies $500.00 $158.77 $186.92 $313.08 37.38%
230 Repair & Maint $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
580 Other Equipment $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/04 1 :39 PM
Page 9
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
. Current Period: April 2004
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Balance of Budget
DEPART 42270 Medical Services $1,500.00 $158.77 $186.92 $1,313.08 12.46%
DEPART 42280 Fire Station and Building
220 Repair and Maint S $2,500.00 $1,313.19 $1,620.39 $879.61 64.82%
300 Professional Servic $600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $600.00 0.00%
381 Electric Utilities $4,500.00 $303.61 $1,048.75 $3,451.25 23.31 %
383 Gas Utilities $5,000.00 $553.68 $2,835.85 $2,164.15 56.72%
530 Improvements Oth $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
DEPART 42280 Fire Station and Bu $13,100.00 $2,170.48 $5,504.99 $7,595.01 42.02%
DEPART 42281 Community Room
210 Operating Supplies $500.00 $0.00 $87.01 $412.99 17.40%
220 Repair and Maint S $3,000.00 $0.00 $37.28 $2,962.72 1.24%
300 Professional Servic $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
DEPART 42281 Community Room $4,500.00 $0.00 $124.29 $4,375.71 2.76%
DEPART 49301 Transfer to other Funds
700 Misc $2,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 0.00%
DEPART 49301 Transfer to other F $2,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,500.00 0.00%
FUND 105 Fire Fund $217,355.00 $3,470.90 $31,902.64 $185,452.36 14.68%
. 150 Economic Development
EPART 46500 Economic Development Authority
103 Legislative Bodies $700.00 $0.00 $0.00 $700.00 0.00%
151 Workers Compo Ins $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
200 Office Suppiies $500.00 $67.62 $131.12 $368.88 26.22%
300 Professional Servic $27,000.00 $2,282.64 $6,550.53 $20,449.47 24.26%
303 Engineering Fee $2,000.00 $2,013.00 $2,013.00 -$13.00 100.65%
304 Legal Fees $1,000,00 $0.00 $0.00 '., $1,000.00 0.00%
321 Telephone $1,200.00 $32.21 $96.62 $1,103.38 8.05%
322 Postage $200.00 $2.00 $2.00 $198.00 1.00%
331 Travel & Conferenc $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
340 Advertising $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
582 Computer Software $300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 0.00%
DEPART 46500 Economic Develop $34,500.00 $4,397.47 $8,793.27 $25,706.73 25.49%
FUND 150 Economic Development $34,500.00 $4,397.47 $8,793.27 $25,706.73 25.49%
FUND 155 TIF 1-3 Borgert (SKN)
DEPART 46500 Economic Development Authority
300 Professional Servic $838.00 $0.00 $0.00 $838.00 0.00%
340 Advertising $50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50.00 0.00%
600 Debt Service - Prin $5,330.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,330.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $11,562.00 $0.00 $0.00 $11,562.00 0.00%
DEPART 46500 Economic Develop $17,780.00 $0.00 $0.00 $17,780.00 0.00%
FUND 155 TIF 1-3 Borgert (SKN) $17,780.00 $0.00 $0.00 $17,780.00 0.00%
FUND 156 TIF 1-481. Joe Development
DEPART 46500 Economic Development Authority
. 304 Legal Fees $5,409.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,409.00 0,00%
340 Advertising $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
600 Debt Service - Prin $28,198.00 $0.00 $0.00 $28,198.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $21,381.00 $0.00 $0.00 $21,381.00 0.00%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/041:39 PM
Page 10
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
Current Period: April 2004 .
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Exp Expense Expense Balance of Budget
DEPART 46500 Economic Develop $55,088.00 SO.OO $0.00 $55,088.00 0.00%
FUND 156 TIF 1-4 St. Joe Development $55,088.00 SO.OO $0.00 $55,088.00 0.00%
FUND 225 DARE
DEPART 42155 DARE Program
210 Operating Supplies S250.00 SO.OO $0.00 S250.00 0.00%
DEPART 42155 DARE Program S250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $250.00 0.00%
FUND 225 DARE $250.00 SO.OO $0.00 $250.00 0.00%
FUND 230 Lake Wobegon Trail
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanence
520 Buildings & Structu $0.00 SO.OO $20,300.00 -S20,300.00 0.00%
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanenc SO.OO SO.OO $20,300.00 -S20,300.00 0.00%
DEPART 45202 Park Areas
530 Improvements Oth SO.OO S25,000.00 $43,043.10 -S43,043.10 0.00%
DEPART 45202 Park Areas $0.00 S25,000.00 $43,043.10 -$43,043.10 0.00%
FUND 230 Lake Wobegon Trail $0.00 $25,000.00 $63,343.10 -$63,343.10 0.00%
FUND 317 Fire Facility, 1997 .
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & I)
600 Debt Service - Prin S45,OOO·90 $0.00 SO.OO S45,OOO.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $55,985.00 $0.00 $0.00 555,985.00 0.00%
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P S100,985.00 $0.00 $0.00 5100,985.00 0,00%
FUND 317 Fire Facility, 1997 S100,985.00 $0.00 $0.00 S100,985.00 0.00%
FUND 31998 Street Improvement
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & I)
600 Debt Service - Prin $35,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 S35,000.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $19,240.00 $0.00 $0.00 S19,240.00 0.00%
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P $54,240.00 $0.00 $0.00 S54,240.00 0.00%
FUND 31998 Street Improvement $54,240.00 SO.OO $0.00 $54,240.00 0.00%
FUND 321 Joseph Street Improvement
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & I)
600 Debt Service - Prin $75,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 S75,000.00 0,00%
611 Bond Interest $52,901.00 $0.00 $0.00 $52,901.00 0.00%
640 Stearns Cooperativ $29,155.00 $0.00 $0.00 S29,155.00 0.00%
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P S157,056.00 SO.OO $0.00 S 157 ,056.00 0,00%
FUND 321 Joseph Street Improvement S157,056.00 $0.00 $0.00 S 157 ,056.00 0.00%
FUND 322 City Hall Project, 2000
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & I)
600 Debt Service - Prin S50,000.00 SO.OO SO.OO S50,OOO.00 0,00%
611 Bond Interest S51,825.00 $0,00 $0,00 S51,825.00 0.00% .
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P S101,825.00 $0.00 50.00 S101,825.00 0.00%
CITY OF S1 JOSEPH 05/12/041:39 PM
Page 11
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
. Current Period: April 2004
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Expense Expense Balance of Budget
FUND 322 City Hall Project, 2000 $101,825.00 $0.00 $0.00 $101,825.00 0.00%
FUND 324 Northland V Improvement
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & I)
600 Debt Service - Prin $160,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $160,000.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $18,058.00 $0.00 $0.00 $18,058.00 0.00%
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P $178,058.00 $0.00 $0.00 $178,058.00 0.00%
FUND 324 Northland V Improvement $178,058.00 $0.00 $0.00 $178,058.00 0.00%
FUND 325 2002 Street Improvement
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & I)
600 Debt Service - Prin $405,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405,000.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $146,438.00 $0.00 $0.00 $146,438.00 0.00%
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P $551,438.00 $0.00 $0.00 $551,438.00 0.00%
FUND 325 2002 Street Improvement $551,438.00 $0.00 $0.00 $551,438.00 0.00%
FUND 327 2002 Equipment Certificates
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & I)
600 Debt Service - Prin $60,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $60,000.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $7,230.00 $0.00 $0.00 $7,230.00 0.00%
.EPART 47100 Bond Payment (P $67,230.00 $0.00 $0.00 $67,230.00 0.00%
FUND 327 2002 Equipment Certificates $67,230.00 $0.00 $0.00 $67,230.00 0.00%
FÚND 329 2003 Maintenance Facility
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & I)
600 Debt Service - Prin $30,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $30,000.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $27,743:00 $0.00 $0.00 $27,743.00 0.00%
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P $57,743.00 $0.00 $0.00 $57,743.00 0.00%
FUND 329 2003 Maintenance Facility $57,743.00 $0.00 $0.00 $57,743.00 0.00%
FUND 332 2003 Cross Over (Streets)
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & i)
600 Debt Service - Prin $120,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $120,000.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $62,055.00 $0.00 $0.00 $62,055.00 0.00%
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P $182,055.00 $0.00 $0.00 $182,055.00 0.00%
FUND 332 2003 Cross Over (Streets) $182,055.00 $0.00 $0.00 $182,055.00 0.00%
,
FUND 425 2002 Street Improvement
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanence
530 Improvements Oth $0.00 $0.00 -$59,409.01 $59,409.01 0.00%
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanenc $0.00 $0.00 -$59,409.01 $59,409.01 0.00%
DEPART 43122 Street Maintenance-Co Rd 121
530 improvements Oth $O~OO $953.48 $2,992.61 -$2,992.61 0.00%
.EPART 43122 Street Maintenanc $0.00 $953.48 $2,992.61 -$2,992.61 0.00%
EPART 49490 Administration and general
530 Improvements Oth $0.00 $0.00 -$17,284.88 $17,284.88 0.00%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/041:39 PM
Page 12
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
Current Period: April 2004 .
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Exp Expense Expense Balance of Budget
DEPART 49490 Administration and $0.00 $0.00 -$17,284.88 $17,284.88 0.00%
FUND 425 2002 Street Improvement $0.00 $953.48 -$73,701.28 $73,701.28 0.00%
FUND 428 2003 Street Improvements
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanence
530 Improvements Oth $0.00 $0.00 $50.00 -$50.00 0.00%
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanenc $0.00 $0.00 S50.00 -$50.00 0.00%
DEPART 43123 Street Maintenance-Northland 7
530 Improvements Oth $0.00 $1,514.00 -$12,399.19 $12,399.19 0.00%
DEPART 43123 Street Maintenanc $0.00 $1,514.00 -$12,399.19 $12,399.19 0.00%
DEPART 43124 Street Maintenance-Liberty Pt
530 Improvements Oth $0.00 $3,003.47 -$78,894.21 $78,894.21 0.00%
DEPART 43124 Street Maintenanc $0.00 $3,003.47 -$78,894.21 $78,894.21 0.00%
DEPART 49430 Distribution
530 Improvements Oth $0.00 $448.50 $1,052.00 -$1,052.00 0.00%
DEPART 49430 Distribution $0.00 $448.50 $1,052.00 -S1,052.00 0.00%
DEPART 49900 Storm Water Administration
530 Improvements Oth $0.00 $6,643.00 $45,705.95 -$45,705.95 0.00%
DEPART 49900 Storm Water Admi $0.00 $6,643.00 S45,705.95 -$45,705.95 0.00% .
FUND 428 2003 Street ImproVements $0.00 $11,608.97 -$44,485.45 $44,485.45 0,00%
FUND 429 Maintenance Facility
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanence
580 Other Equipment $0.00 $0.00 $5,498.07 -$5,498.07 0,00%
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanenc $0.00 $0.00 $5,498.07 -$5,498.07 0.00%
FUND 429 Maintenance Facility SO.OO $0.00 $5,498.07 -$5,498.07 0.00%
FUND 430 Northland Phase eight
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanence
530 Improvements Oth $0.00 $8,488.14 $23,873.19 -$23,873,19 0.00%
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanenc $0.00 $8,488.14 $23,873.19 -$23,873.19 0,00%
FUND 430 Northland Phase eight $0.00 $8,488.14 $23,873.19 -$23,873.19 0.00%
FUND 431 Cloverdale Area
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanence
530 Improvements Oth SO.OO $0.00 $2,240.28 -$2,240.28 0.00%
DEPART 43120 Street Maintanenc $0.00 $0.00 $2,240.28 -$2,240.28 0.00%
FUND 431 Cloverdale Area SO.OO SO.OO $2,240.28 -$2,240.28 0.00%
FUND 490 Capital Outlay
DEPART 41430 Salaries & Adminstrative .
570 Office Equipment SO.OO SO.OO S853,10 -$853,10 0,00%
DEPART 41430 Salaries & Adminst $0.00 SO.OO $853.10 -$853.10 0.00%
DEPART 45203 Park Board
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/04 1 :39 PM
Page 13
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
. Current Period: April 2004
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Expense Balance of Budget
531 Park Development $58,260.83 $63.90 $191.70 $58,069.13 0.33%
532 Tree Fund $3,927.93 $0.00 $0.00 $3,927.93 0.00%
533 Northland Park Dev $3,915.67 $0.00 $0.00 $3,915.67 0.00%
DEPART 45203 Park Board $66,104.43 $63.90 $191.70 $65,912.73 0.29%
FUND 490 Capital Outlay $66,104.43 $63.90 $1,044.80 $65,059.63 1.58%
FUND 501 Utility Extension
DEPART 49470 Lift Station-Baker Street
530 Improvements Oth $0.00 $0.00 -$3,167.74 $3,167.74 0.00%
DEPART 49470 Lift Station-Baker $0.00 $0.00 -$3,167.74 $3,167.74 0.00%
FUND 501 Utility Extension $0.00 $0.00 -$3,167.74 $3,167.74 0.00%
FUND 601 Water Fund
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & I)
600 Debt Service - Prin $150,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150,000.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $73,727.50 $0.00 $0.00 $73,727.50 0.00%
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P $223,727.50 $0.00 $0.00 $223,727.50 0.00%
DEPART 49410 Power and Pumping
220 Repair and Maint S $6,500.00 $118.85 $157.36 $6,342.64 2.42%
381 Electric Utilities $12,000.00 $749.97 $2,404.31 $9,595.69 20.04%
. 383 Gas Utilities $2,500.00 $104.13 $385.60 $2,114.40 15.42%
530 Improvements Oth - $2,500.00 $833.50 $4,749.00 -$2,249.00 189.96%
DEPART 49410 Power and Pumpin $23,500.00 $1,806.45 $7,696.27 $15,803.73 32.75%
DEPART 49420 Purification
210 Operating Supplies $2,600.00 $0.00 $711.21 $1,888.79 27.35%
220 Repair and Maint S $700.00 $0.00 $165.93 $534.07 23.70%
303 Engineering Fee $0.00 $0.00 $4,267.09 -$4,267.09 0.00%
312 Tests $1,500.00 $249.00 $1,139.00 $361.00 75.93%
322 Postage $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 0.00%
381 Electric Utilities $4,600.00 $273.01 $889.16 $3,710.84 19.33%
383 Gas Utilities $1,500.00 $170.64 $767.40 $732.60 51.16%
DEPART 49420 Purification $11,900.00 $692.65 $7,939.79 $3,960.21 66.72%
DEPART 49430 Distribution
210 Operating Supplies $12,500.00 $1,831.05 $4,134.48 $8,365.52 33.08%
220 Repair and Maint S $6,000.00 $0.00 $181.93 $5,818.07 3.03%
340 Advertising $600.00 $333.00 $333.00 $267.00 55.50%
580 Other Equipment $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 0.00%
DEPART 49430 Distribution $20,600.00 $2,164.05 $4,649.41 $15,950.59 22.57%
DEPART 49435 Storage
381 Electric Utilities $0.00 $205.13 $756.59 -$756.59 0.00%
DEPART 49435 Storage $0.00 $205.13 $756.59 -$756.59 0.00%
DEPART 49440 Administration and General
101 Salaries $80,000.00 $4,877.97 $21,367.49 $58,632.51 26.71%
121 PERA Contribution $5,000~00 $269.74 $840.94 $4,159.06 16.82%
. 122 FICA Contributions $4,800.00 $279.03 $280.42 $4,519.58 5.84%
125 Medicare Contributi $1,000.00 $65.24 $297.35 $702.65 29.74%
131 Health Insurance $15,000.00 $1,164.96 $4,767.86 $10,232.14 31.79%
132 Dental Insurance $1,300.00 $107.48 $445.91 $854.09 34.30%
133 Life Insurance $250.00 $12.90 $50.46 $199.54 20.18%
134 Disabilty Insurance $600.00 $38.72 $144.73 $455.27 24.12%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/04 1 :39 P~
Page 14
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
Current Period: April 2004 ·
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Exp Expense Expense Balance of Budget
137 Flex Plan Administr $300.00 $14.81 $125.88 $174.12 41.96%
151 Workers Compo Ins $1,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $ 1,600.00 0.00%
171 Clothing Allowance $1,000.00 $57.82 $157.57 $842.43 15.76%
200 Office Supplies $500.00 $67.62 $210.28 $289.72 42.06%
210 Operating Supplies $2,000.00 $211.64 $976.31 $1,023.69 48.82%
212 Safety Program $700.00 $0.00 $210.25 $489.75 30.04%
215 software support $400.00 $0.00 $524.60 -$124.60 131.15%
220 Repair and Maint S $1,200.00 $75.15 $573.75 $626.25 47.81 %
319 Gopher State Notifi $1,200.00 $33.35 $63.83 $1,136.17 5.32%
321 Telephone $750.00 $44.51 $178.04 $571.96 23.74%
322 Postage $750.00 $26.02 $195.49 $554.51 26.07%
331 Travel & Conferenc $500.00 $0.00 $200.00 $300.00 40.00%
361 General Liability In $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00 $0.00 100,00%
410 Rentals $ 1,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,600.00 0,00%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $750.00 $0.00 $555.70 $194.30 74.09%
441 Sales Tax $0.00 $440.00 $440.00 -$440.00 0.00%
442 Water Permit $600.00 $0.00 $476.70 $123.30 79.45%
444 Annual Water Conn $5,600.00 $0.00 $1,318.00 $4,282.00 23,54%
446 License $0.00 $0.00 $14.52 -$14.52 0.00%
580 Other Equipment $0.00 $0.00 $526.53 ·$526.53 0.00%
DEPART 49440 Administration and $132,400.00 $7,786.96 $39,942.61 $92,457.39 30,17%
FUND 601 Water Fund $412,127.50 $12,655.24 $60,984.67 $351,142.83 14.80%
FUND 602 Sewer Fund ·
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P & I)
600 Debt SelVice - Prin $25,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $25,000.00 0.00%
611 Bond Interest $27,388.00 - $0.00 $0.00 $27,388.00 0.00%
DEPART 47100 Bond Payment (P $52,388.00 $0.00 $0.00 $52,388.00 0.00%
DEPART 49450 Sanitary Sewer Maintenance
101 Salaries $29,000.00 $1,086.34 $5,011.82 $23,988.18 17.28%
121 PERA Contribution $1,800.00 $60.12 $270.35 $1,529.65 15,02%
122 FICA Contributions $2,000.00 $63.82 $297.46 $1,702.54 14,87%
125 Medicare Contributi $500.00 814.94 $69.61 $430.39 13,92%
131 Health Insurance $5,000.00 $252.05 $1,186.51 $3,813.49 23.73%
132 Dental Insurance $600.00 $24.48 $121.19 $478.81 20.20%
133 Life Insurance $100.00 $2.65 $12.34 $87.66 12.34%
134 Disabilty Insurance $250.00 $10.73 $47.08 $202.92 18.83%
151 Workers Compo Ins $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 0.00%
210 Operating Supplies $2,000.00 $0.00 8323.00 $1,677.00 16.15%
220 Repair and Maint S $2,500.00 $0.00 8144.52 $2,355.48 5.78%
DEPART 49450 Sanitary Sewer Ma $45,250.00 $1,515.13 $7,483.88 837,766.12 16,54%
DEPART 49470 Lift Station· Baker Street
230 Repair & Maint $50.00 80.00 $0.00 $50.00 0.00%
321 Telephone $1,500.00 871.25 $285.00 $1,215.00 19,00%
361 General Liability In $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 $0.00 100.00%
381 Electric Utilities $1,500.00 $73.00 $280.67 $1,219.33 18,71%
530 Improvements Oth $0.00 80.00 $838.71 -$838.71 0.00%
DEPART 49470 Lift Station·Baker $3,550.00 $144.25 $1,904.38 $1,645.62 53,64%
DEPART 49471 Lift Station-DBL Labs Area
321 Telephone $1,000.00 $71.24 $284.96 8715.04 28.50%
361 General Liability In $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 $0.00 100.00% ·
381 Electric Utilities 8750.00 $39.33 $123.36 8626.64 16.45%
383 Gas Utilities $500.00 $46.09 8172,21 $327.79 34.44%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/04 1 :39 PM
Page 15
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
· Current Period: April 2004
MTD YTD %
OBJ OBJ Descr Budget Exp Balance of Budget
DEPART 49471 Lift Station-DBL La $2,750.00 $156.66 $1,080.53 $1,669.47 39.29%
DEPART 49472 Lift Station-Northland
230 Repair & Maint $1,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,200.00 0.00%
321 Telephone $700.00 $46.96 $187.84 $512.16 26.83%
361 General Liability In $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 $0.00 100.00%
381 Electric Utilities $750.00 $84.10 $255.62 $494.38 34.08%
DEPART 49472 Lift Station-Northla $3,150.00 $131.06 $943.46 $2,206.54 29.95%
DEPART 49473 Lift Station-CR 121
230 Repair & Maint $500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 0.00%
321 Telephone $500.00 $46.96 $187.84 $312.16 37.57%
361 General Liability In $500.00 $0.00 $500.00 $0.00 100.00%
381 Electric Utilities $750.00 $52.46 $162.68 $587.32 21.69%
DEPART 49473 Lift Station-CR 121 $2,250.00 $99.42 $850.52 $1,399.48 37.80%
DEPART 49480 Sewage Treatment Plant
101 Salaries $20,000.00 $829.48 $4,882.66 $15,117.34 24.41 %
121 PERA Contribution $900.00 $45.84 $263.19 $636.81 29.24%
122 FICA Contributions $1,200.00 $48.61 $287.50 $912.50 23.96%
125 Medicare Contributi $300.00 $11.39 $67.28 $232.72 22.43%
131 Health Insurance $4,500.00 $196.76 $1,183.71 $3,316.29 26.30%
132 Dental Insurance $400.00 $20.29 $121.93 $278.D7 30.48%
133 Life Insurance $50.00 $2.07 $12.35 $37.65 24.70%
· 134 Disabilty Insurance $150.00 $7.36 $37.91 $112.09 25.27%
210 Operating Supplies $1,000.00 $211.64 $818.99 $181.01 81.90%
220 Repair and Maint S $6,000.00 $0.00 $2,000.10 $3,999.90 33.34%
312 Tests $4,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 - $4,000.00 0.00%
361 General Liability In $7,000.00 $0.00 $7,383.00 -$383.00 105.47%
381 Electric Utilities $3,500.00 $277.63 $954.15 $2,545.85 27.26%
383 Gas Utilities $1,500.00 $176.03 $681.28 $818.72 45.42%
419 Sewer Use Rental $150,000.00 $11,803.68 $38,405.91 $111,594.09 25.60%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $45.00 $0.00 $0.00 $45.00 0.00%
530 Improvements Oth $4,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,000.00 0.00%
DEPART 49480 Sewage Treatment $204,545.00 $13,630.78 $57,099.96 $147,445.04 27.92%
DEPART 49490 Administration and general
101 Salaries $16,000.00 $1,149.70 $4,808.62 $11,191.38 30.05%
121 PERA Contribution $800.00 $63.58 $256.40 $543.60 32.05%
122 FICA Contributions $900.00 $65.90 $279.13 $620.87 31.01%
125 Medicare Contributi $200.00 $15.42 $65.29 $134.71 32.65%
131 Health Insurance $4,000.00 $300.14 $1,199.99 $2,800.01 30.00%
132 Dental Insurance $500.00 $30.64 $122.51 $377 .49 24.50%
133 Life Insurance $100.00 $3.10 $12.37 $87.63 12.37%
134 Disabilty Insurance $100.00 $8.35 $33.40 $66.60 33.40%
137 Flex Plan Administr $100.00 $3.70 $31 .45 $68.55 31.45%
171 Clothing Allowance $1,000.00 $57.83 $157.59 $842.41 15.76%
200 Office Supplies $700.00 $67.62 $198.41 $501.59 28.34%
210 Operating Supplies $1,500.00 $0.00 $117.81 $1,382.19 7.85%
212 Safety Program $700.00 $0.00 $187.50 $512.50 26.79%
215 software support $500.00 $0.00 $158.75 $341.25 31.75%
220 Repair and Maint S $750.00 $243.54 $243.54 $506.46 32.47%
319 Gopher State Notifi $1,000.00 $33.35 $63.82 $936.18 6.38%
321 Telephone $1,500.00 $114.61 $524.93 $975.07 35.00%
· 322 Postage $600.00 $0.00 $134.92 $465.08 22.49%
331 Travel & Conferenc $100.00 $0.00 $45.00 $55.00 45.00%
384 Refuse Disposal $750.00 $0.00 $161.19 $588.81 21.49%
410 Rentals $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 0.00%
433 Dues & Subscriptio $100.00 $23.00 $178.50 -$78.50 178.50%
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 05/12/04 1:39 PM
Page 16
Council Expenditure Monthly Report
Current Period: April 2004 ·
MTD YTO %
OBJ OBJ Oescr BudgetExp Expense Expense Balance of Budget
446 License $0.00 $0.00 $33.86 -$33.86 0.00%
DEPART 49490 Administration and $33.400.00 $2,180.48 $9,014.98 $24,385.02 26.99%
FUND 602 Sewer Fund $347,283.00 $17,857.78 $78,377.71 $268,905.29 22.57%
FUND 603 Refuse Collection
DEPART 43230 Waste Collection
101 Salaries $18,100.00 $1,290.71 $4,976.33 $13,123.67 27.49%
121 PERA Contribution $1,000.00 $67.45 $261.74 $738.26 26.17%
122 FICA Contributions $1,116.00 $74.53 $289.39 $826.61 25.93%
125 Medicare Contributi $263.00 $17.41 $67.65 $195.35 25,72%
131 Health Insurance $3,700.00 $309.90 $1,210.85 $2,489.15 32.73%
132 Dental Insurance $380.00 $31.97 $124.02 $255.98 32.64%
133 Life Insurance $40.00 $3.28 $12.58 $27.42 31.45%
134 Disabilty Insurance $110.00 $8.91 $34.21 $75.79 31.10%
137 Flex Plan Administr $0.00 $3.70 $31.45 ·$31.45 0.00%
151 Workers Camp. Ins $110.00 $0.00 $0.00 $110.00 0.00%
200 Office Supplies $750.00 $279.56 $410.36 $339.64 54.71%
215 software support $300.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 0.00%
230 Repair & Maint $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 0.00%
322 Postage $750.00 $0,00 $219.26 $530.74 29.23%
331 Travel & Conferenc $150.00 80.00 80.00 8150.00 0.00%
340 Advertising 8140,000.00 80.00 833.30 $139,966.70 0.02%
384 Refuse Disposal 80.00 $0.00 828,670.40 ·$28,670.40 0.00%
DEPART 43230 Waste Collection $166,869.00 $2,087.42 $36,341.54 $130,527.46 21.78% ·
FUND 603 Refuse Collection $ 166,869.00 $2,087.42 $36,341.54 $130,527.46 ~ 21.78%
$4,267,156.93 $236,855.31 $688,445.51 $3,578,711.42 16.13%
·
Overtime and Callouts
. April 23, 2004 through May 6, 2004
_ _õ1t_---tII
.rÆ,___> ,'____~_________.~ _ _ . ,. . ., _ _ _ n_ _________~._____""_-___<'" ______n__""_______".___·_____ .'n_ __ n_". ..._ .Æ"_. __._.m_ " __ _.... . .", _ ,____.=='^___,_'''~___,.. .__ >.. ¡,.,'KM.."%'&,,,",,_«__
4/24/04 3.00 hrs Weekend Checks 4/23/04 10.00 hrs Pinestock Weekend
4/25/04 3.00 hrs Weekend Checks 4/24/04 12.00 hrs Pinestock Weekend
5/6/04 1.00 hrs Department Meeting
1'- . '"",.,',' , .. "","P(;?:_.¡il""
_JII",<o,¡mm;@iæg.II'
5/1/04 3.00 hrs Weekend Checks
5/2/04 3.00 hrs Weekend Checks 5/6/04 2.00 hrs Department Meeting
f't11.t__'Ã1fIII __®J#*IlIi'J~~..
_iÆ: "~.."¡L.' , ,ilL_ ' , "".,.== ",., ,~""" "__""*",,,,,.. = M,", ",',',' "=,,,...è.=' =,=,,,pm¡, " , JI:.,%J..'
4/20/04 2.25 hrs School Committee Mtg 4/29/04 4.50 hrs Court
5/6/04 1.50 hrs Department Meeting
. 5/6/04 2.00 hrs Department Meeting
.
· VRajkowski
" '_m" ",00"' Nort" . ~~r;,~tIl~~ Ild, .
P.O. Box 1433 May 7, 2004
St, Cloud, MN 56302-1433
Mr. Dave Jorgenson
320-251-1055 W arranty/ Customer Service
Toll Free 800-445·9617 Rosenbauer Firefighting Technology
100 Third Street
Fax 320-251-5896 PO Box 57
Lyons, SD 57041
rajhan@rajhan.com Re: 3,000 Gallon Tanker Truck from Central States Fire Apparatus
www.rajhan.com City ofSt. Joseph
Our File No. 23426
Dear Mr. Jorgenson:
I am the attorney for the City of St. Joseph, Minnesota. Your letter of April 23, 2004,
regarding the St. Joseph tanker fire truck has been forwarded to me.
e The City of St. Joseph sought bids for a tanker fire truck. The bids generally described
the type of truck which the St. Joseph Fire Department needed to purchase. The request
for bids did not set forth a design of a truck, but rather requested bids for a tanker fire
Frank J. Rajkowski·· truck.
Gordon H, Hansmeier Your letter states that the City of St. Joseph accepted the construction design and type of
Frederick L. Grunke the truck. This is incorrect. The City of St. Joseph did not sign off on any design or
Thomas G. Jovanovich· drawings for the tanker truck. Rather, it was ordeling a tanker truck which would work
under normal conditions.
Paul A. Rajkowski'
Kevin F. Gray Since purchasing the truck, the City of St. Joseph has had problems with leakage from the
tank when the truck comes to a stop or starts moving. The City of St. Joseph has brought
William J, Cashman this to your attention a number of times, and the matter has not been corrected.
Richard W. Sobalvarro
Your letter states that you want the City of St. Joseph to provide you with a design which
Susan M, Dege will remedy the problem. The City of St. Joseph will not send you a design since it is
LeAnne D, Bartishofski your obligation to provide a truck with an appropriate design which does not leak under
Sarah L. 5mith-Larkin nonnal operating conditions.
Troy A, Poetz The City of St. Joseph does not object to you discussing the matter with the Fire
Joseph [ví, Bromeland Department to better learn why the truck leaks under nonnal operating conditions. Based
ery J. Haupert on this infOlmation, it is your obligation to come up with a design for the tanker truck
which does not leak when the truck comes to a stop or starts moving.
Laurel J. Pugh
Frank J. kajkowski and Richard Vi 50balvarro are admitted to practice in North DakotòJ Gordon H. Hansmeier in North Dakota and Vt/isconsin
Paul A. Rajkowski and Sarah L. Smith in Wisconsin and l/J/illiam J. Cashman in South Dakota.
C!Member of AmerÎcan Board of ïrial Advocates. t>Qualifíed ADR t~euual.
v
.
Mr. Dave Jorgenson
Page Tv,/o
May 7,2004
Please notify me \vithin the next two \veeks as to hO\v you intend on remedying tIlls condition. If it
is not remedied, the City of St. Joseph 'will tender the truck back to Rosenbauer and ask for
reimbursement for all costs spent to date.
Sincerely, \
I;
RAJKOWSKI HANSMEŒR LTD.
Z II !
/í ,/ [ /
) ". í j
/;i - i '
T ¿í- "/ /
By / /,~__
Thomas G. Ji>vanovich
I
TGJlbaz
cc: Randy Torborg .
~echtold
. udy \\1 eyrens
.
DRAFT
April 15, 2004
- Page 1 of 7
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session
· on Thursday, April 15, 2004 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall.
Members Present: Mayor Larry Hosch. Councilors Gary Utsch, AI Rassier, Ross Rieke, Dale Wick. City
Administrator Judy Weyrens.
City Representatives Present: City Engineer(s) Joe Bettendorf and Tracy Ekola, Building Official Ron
Wasmund
Approve Aqenda: Wick made a motion to approve the agenda with the following changes:
Remove 3(b) Minutes
Add 13(d) Amendment to developer's agreement for Northland Plat 7
Move 3(c) Discuss Investment Policy after MHI
The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously.
Consent Aqenda: Utsch made a motion to approve consent agenda as follows. A motion was
seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
a; Bills Payable - Approve check numbers 34058 - 34149 '
b. Removed
c. Investment Policy - Removed for discussion later in the meeting
d. Gambling License - Accept the Premise Permit for the St. Joseph Recreation for lawful
gambling to be conducted at the La Playette.
e. Business Associate Agreement - Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute and
Agreement between the City of St. Joseph and Holland & Frank to share protected
information (HIPPA).
f. Ordinance Adoption - Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute the adoption of
· Ordinance 44, Storm Water Utility.
g. Cigarette License - Authorize the Mayor and Admihistrator to execute the Cigarette License
for Coborn's Inc., for 304 College Avenue North.
Public Comments to the Aç¡enda: No one present wished to speak.
St. Joseph Park Board-Park Dedication Fee, calculation methods' Bruce Berghorst chair of the Park
Board appeared before the Council to present a proposed amendment to Ordinance 54.18, Park
Dedication. Berghorst stated that the Park Board has recently received an analysis of the area Cities
Park Dedication policies. In reviewing the analysis, it was noted that the fees in St. Joseph are less than
the surrounding Cities. In addition, the area Cities base the Park Dedication fee on a per lot basis,
determining the amount of parkland that is required per capita.
The current method of calculating park dedication fees, is based on the total per acre paid for the property
being developed. While the current method has worked well for the City, it is inconsistent when
comparing developments. For example, if Northland only paid $8,000 per acre and Graceview paid
$15,000 per acre, Graceview would have a much larger requirement with the need for parks being the
same. Therefore, changing the Parkland dedication fee to a per lot fee would be more consistent and
provide for equal contribution.
Rassier questioned whether or not trails would be included in these park dedication fees and was
informed that they are not. Hosch stated that he is supportive of the proposed change as the City needs
to continue providing and maintaining park areas. Rassier agreed with Hosch and stated that he wishes
the City is able to accept the cash in lieu so that the funds could be used for maintenance of existing
parks rather than adding additional parks that we have to fund the maintenance.
·
DRAFT
April 15, 2004
Page 2 of 7
Rassier made a motion authorizing the Planning Commission to conduct a public hearing for the
possible amendment to Ordinance 54.18, Park Dedication. The motion was seconded by Wick and ·
passed unanimously.
Honer Homes-Preliminary Plat. Braden & Benit Place Weyrens reported that the Planning Commission
conducted a public hearing on March 1, 2004 for a preliminary plat for the two duplexes owned by Honer
Homes on East Minnesota Street. The platting is requested to allow the existing duplexes to be sold as
separate housing units. The Planning Commission tabled action on March 1,2004 and requested the City
Attorney review if the rental licenses for the property are transferable and if the density could be reduced
after the platting is completed.
It was the opinion of the attorney that after the plat is completed; the property would be allowed to
continue as rental. However, upon issuance of a rental license, the property must meet the requirements
such as parking and room size. If the property meets the licensure requirements, each unit would be
allowed to rent to a maximum of five persons.
After reconsidering the matter at the Planning Commission on April 5, 2004, it was the recommendation
to approve the Preliminary and Final Plat of Braden and Benit Place. Weyrens clarified that the Plat
before the Council is more administrative, as the property is already developed. The proposed 'plat is
consistent with the Ordinance governing Common Interest Communities.
Rassier made a motion accepting the recommendation of the Planning Commission and
approving the preliminary and final plat for the following properties:
504 and 508 East Minnesota Street - Platted as Braden Place
606 and 608 East Minnesota Street - Platted as Benit Place
The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
Minnesota Home Improvement. Special Use Request: Tom Borresch of Minnesota Home Improvement ·
appeared before the Council requesting issuance of a Special Use Permit. Utsch stated that the Planning
Commission conducted a pubJic hearing on April 6,2004 to consider issuance of a Special Use Permit to
allow used trailer sales at the property located at 9 - 1 th Avenue NE. The property is zoned as B2,
Highway Business.
Utsch stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval with the contingency that the Special
Use Permit is only valid until May 1, 2005. The sunseting of the permit was included as Borresch
indicated the use was for a one-year period, and he did not wish to meet the Ordinance requirements
regarding the parking area. If the use would extend beyond one year he would be required to do so. The
Planning Commission also recommended approval contingent upon the property owner adhering to the
Temporary Sign regulations and the Outdoor Storage provisions.
Rassier stated that he is not opposed to the Special Use Request, but is concerned that the property
owner is not being required to meet all the provisions such as parking lot surface. Rassier stated it is his
opinion that the City should not be relieving requirements on a temporary basis and each use should be
viewed as a new business with adherence to the Ordinance.
Utsch made a motion to issue a Special Use Permit to Minnesota Home Improvement, 9 _17th
Avenue NE to sell used trailers with the following contingencies:
1. The Special Use Permit sunsets on May 1,2005.
2. Temporary signs will not be used for advertising the sales, unless application is made
in accordance with the Ordinance, including the maximum number of days allowed.
3. The property will meet all the outdoor standards for granting a special use permit in a
82 Business District. This includes screening of areas that abut residential districts.
·
DRAFT
April 15, 2004
Page 3 of 7
Ayes: Hosch, Utsch, Wick, Rieke
. Nays: Rassier Motion carried 4:1:0
Investment Policv: Weyrens stated that she has been approached by the Central Minnesota Federal
Credit Union to be considered as an official depository of the City as they are locating a branch in S1.
Joseph. While the Council has already added the Credit Union as an official depository, the City also
needs to amend the Investment policy to add the regulatory agency requirements for Credit Unions. In
addition, all references to Bank will need to be changed to financial institutions.
Wick made a motion to approve the Investment Policy as revised and corrected. The motion was
seconded by Utsch and passed unanimously.
CITY ENGINEER REPORTS
RFP for Field Street Corridor Stud v: Bettendorf presented the Council with a proposed Request for
Proposal (RFP) for the Field Street Corridor Study. The RFP includes a project overview,'project goal
and scope of work and deliverables. Rassier questioned where the RFP indicates that two alternatives
will be provided and if that is limiting the consultant to only provide two alternatives. Bettendorf stated
that the RFP indicated that two is the minimum but they could present more. Wick questioned if the
minimum should be increased to provide additional alternatives. Bettendorf stated that he has submitted
the RFP to the St. CloudAPO for review and comment and will report back to the Council when a final
RFP is ready for circulation.
Cellular 2000, Antenna Reauest: Bettendorf reported that he and the Public Works Director reviewed the
request of Cellular 2000 to install six (6) cabinets outside the water storage facility. Bettendorf stated that
the cabinets have been located so that they will not be a hindrance when the Wobegon Parking lot is
paved on adjacent property. The recommendation authorizing the additional cabinets should include a
provision that the area be fenced and maintained.
. Hosch questioned what happened to the proposal where the equipment would be installed inside of the
water tower. Bettendorf responded that the Public Works Director reviewed the request and is of the
opinion that th-e storage space mày be needed by the City at some point, and installing equipment in that
area would eliminate future City use. In addition. to be in compliance with the Homeland Security Act, the
City should limit the number of persons who have access to the public water supply.
Rassier questioned if the fencing could be expanded to include the existing cabinets already located at
the facility. Paul Vershure of Cellular 2000 stated that a competitor owns the equipment Rassier is
referring to and they do not have any authority to enclose their equipment. However, he stated that he
would be willing to contact the competitor to see if a joint fence would be feasible.
Rassier made a motion to accept the drawing and placement of equipment at the water tower site
as requested by Cellular 2000 and as recommended by the City Engineer and Public Works
Director. Approval is contingent upon the entire area being fenced. The motion was seconded by
Wick and passed unanimously.
New State Aid Routes: Bettendorf reported that the additional growth of the City has provided the City
with an opportunity to designate additional State Aid Roads. Tomaximize State Aid funding, Bettendorf is
requesting the Council consider including the following road segments as State Aid Roads:
1. 12th Avenue NE from Baker Street E to CSAH 75 (O.30miles)
2. 4th Avenue NE from Minnesota Street E (CR134) to CSAH 75 (0.11 miles)
3. Field Street from Minnesota Street W (CSAH 2) tò College Avenue S (CR121)
(0.90miles).
. Bettendorf requested that the Council adopt three (3) separate resolutions identifying each of the
segments stated above as State Aid Roads. Wick questioned if some of the existing State Aid Roads
DRAFT
April 15, 2004
Page 4 of 7
could be extended such as Field Street to 91 5t Avenue. Bettendorf stated that the City cannot designate ·
any roads that are not located in the corporate limits. If the boundaries change, the City can always
reallocate the roadways. Hosch questioned Bettendorf if State Aid Funding can be utilized for
Transportation Studies, to which Bettendorf stated he would check.
Utsch made a motion authorizing the Mayor and Administrator to execute the following
Resolutions adding road segments to the St. Joseph State Aid Road System:
2004-14 12th Avenue NE from Baker Str. E to CSAH 75 (0.30 miles)
2004-15 4th Avenue NE from MN Str E (CR 134) to CSAH 75 (0.11 miles)
2004-16 Field Street from MN St W (CSAH 2) to College Ave S (0.90 miles)
The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously.
Wobeqon Welcominq Center Parkinq Lots: Bettendorf presented the Council with two proposed layouts
for parking lots for the Wobegon Welcoming Center. The building plans for the facility did not include
paving the parking area. Bettendorf stated that the City is also in the process of securing excess ROW
from Mark Lambert on the south side of the facility. The estimate to construct both parking areas is
approximately $ 163,000, with the north lot being $ 63,000. The parking lots would be complete with
drainage, curb and gutter.
Michael Deutz of the Building Committee approached the Council and stated the Wobegon Committee
felt it was important to provide parking for vehicles with trailers hauling snowmobiles or bicycles. The
proposed parking lot on the south would accommodate such. Deutz stated that the Committee has not
raised funds for the parking lot therefore the request is un-funded.
Bettendorf stated it is his recommendation that the north parking lot be constructed this Spring as it is
anticipated that the trail will be well used. Bettendorf stated it is important to establish the parking
boundaries before people establish their own parking areas. Hosch stated the he concurs with Bettendorf ·
that the north parking lot needs to be constructed. However, he is concerned how the parking lot
construction will be funded. Weyrens stated that she will contact Bond Counsel to determine if the costs
could be added to the 2003 Bond Issue with the re-payment through tax levy. Bettendorf stated that he is
requesting that the Council approve the layout, so he can send it to the Stearns County Parks
Department for their concurrence and inclusion on their permit.
Utsch made a motion to accept the parking lot plans for both the north and south parking lot and
authorize the construction of the north parking lot. Construction of the north lot is dependent
upon the City securing financing. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
Transportation Concepts: Bettendorf presented the Council with four (4) different transportation
alternatives in concept form, to be used for discussion purposes only. Bettendorf stated that the Council
should start visioning transportation routes as the City begins planning for the County Road 2 bypass to
County Road 75. The illustrations presented at this time are for discussion only and should be shared
with members of the Community for input. Bettendorf further requested authorization to forward the
illustrations to the College and Monastery of St. Benedict, the Stearns County Engineer and the
developers for Gateway Commons, to which the Council agreed.
Feasibilitv Report-Morninqside Acres: Ekola presented the Council with the Feasibility Report for
Morningside Acres and the housing development abutting 29Sth Street and 1 03rd Avenue. The proposed
improvements will consist of constructin~ utilities and improving existing 29Sth Street from CR 121 to 103rd
Avenue, existing 1 03rd Avenue from 295 Street to the south end of Morningside Acres, and new street
and utility improvements in Morningside Acres. She stated that if Morningside Acres and the 29Sth
Street/103rd Avenue are to be done at the same time, they should be combined into one project and it
should be a public improvement project with City financing and managing the project.
·
DRAFT
April 15, 2004
Page 5 of 7
'Bettendorf stated that the feasibility report has been prepared for two reasons: 1) the developer of
. Morningside Acres has requested the City construct the improvements publicly; and 2) the City is
considering extending utilities to a rural area that will be surrounded on both sides by City.
Hosch clarified that the City is intending on conducting an informational meeting for the residents in the
rural section. The Council authorized the feasibility report so that costs estimates are available for the
informational meeting. Bettendorf stated that the feasibility report includes two alternatives for
construction, a rural section road and an urban section road. Since the improvements are being installed
in an already developed area, it may make sense to construct a rural section road, one with ditches. If
curb and gutter are installed the design will become difficult as the road will have to be lowered.
Bettendorf stated that the proposed assessment roll illustrates the significant cost difference of a rural
road versus an urban road.
Wick questioned whether or not those residents who own two lots would be charged water and sewer on
both lots. Ekola stated that she did figure it that way because they each have separate parcel numbers
and they can sell one lot and then it would be available on that lot. The Council agreed to schedule an
informational meeting on April 22, 2004 for the affected residents.
Feasibility Report- Callawav Street: Ekola presented the Council with the Feasibility report for the
proposed improvements for Callaway Street. The proposed improvements will consist of extending
Callaway Street from Graceview Estates to County Road 121 at an estimated cost of $ 306,096.99. The
right-of-way for Callaway Street has already been secured from the College of St. Benedict and as part of
that agreement the City waived the opportunity to assess the College property unless the property is
developed. At the time of development, the City can negotiate an assessment. The same is true for
District 742.
The City also was required to purchase ROW from District 742 and as part of that acquisition, the City
. agreed to not assess the District for the improvements as it will not increase their property value. In
addition, the City is required to relocate some fencing and a trail.
Ekola stated that before Callaway Street can be constructed, the City must receive approval from the
Steams County Engineer for the access to County Road 121. The Stearns County Engineer has
indicated that he will not approve the access as proposed, as it is too close to an existing ingress/egress.
Ekola stated that she will submit a formal application to Stearns County for consideration, but is
requesting authorization to appeal the decision if needed. If the project is to be constructed this year,
timing will become important.
Rassier stated that it is his opinion that the construction of Callaway Street must be completed. The
residents adjacent to the area have been promised that the road will be constructed and the Council
should follow through. Weyrens stated that the project can be funded with proceeds from the 2002
Improvement fund.
Rassier made a motion adopting Resolution 2004"_, Accepting the Feasibility Report and
Ordering the Improvement and Preparation of Plans. In addition, this motion authorizes the City
Engineer to complete the appeals process with Stearns County if access is denied to County
Road 121. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
Buildinq Official Report: Building Official Ron Wasmund presented the Council with the first quarter 2004
Building Activity Report as well as information from December 2003. The following is a summary of
building activity:
MONTH No. Issued Project Value Revenue
December 22 3,518,494 21 ,268
e January 10 729,063 4,682
February 8 183,994 1,110
DRAFT
April 15, 2004
Page 6 of 7
March 15 850,115 5,502
HVAC 21 1,787 ·
Plumbing 25 2,323
Total 101 $ 5,281,666 $ 36,379
Wasmond stated that his firm is still in the process of establishing the forms and procedures, but it is his
opinion that everything is going well. Of the permits issued, 28 of the total permits are for new home
construction. He further stated that Inspectron has completed 200 inspections and 55 plan reviews. His
staff is in the process of receiving approval to load the Building Inspection software at the City Offices and
hopes to have that completed shortly. The software will allow the City to analyze the data in a wide
variety of ways.
The Council questioned Wasmond as to the status of an onsite Building Official. Wasmund reported that
he has been working on this, but is running into issues with wages and qualifications. He said he has two
interviews scheduled next week. He has hired a consultant to help him put wages and job descriptions
together to help make the process easier. Wasmund stated that he would like to hire someone local so
that people in the area will able to adjust easier.
As far as rental inspections, Wasmund reported that he is working on putting together a checklist for the
inspection guidelines that will be used for inspections. Once the checklist is completed, he will hold an
informational meeting with the landlords/property owners. The checklist would allow the property owners
to do their own pre-inspection before the rental inspector arrives on site.
MAYOR REPORTS - No Report
COUNCIL REPORTS
UTSCH - No Report ·
WICK
Park Board: Wick mentioned that there are two open spots on the Park Board and they are looking for
new members.
RIEKE
EDA Meetinq: Rieke reported that the EDA will be meeting in regular session April 21, 2004 and in joint
. session with the City Council on April 28, 2004.
RASSIER - No report
ADMINISTRATOR REPORTS
AIISpec Service Contract: Weyrens reported that the City has come to an agreement with AIISpec
Services regarding the outstanding building permits.
Northland 6 Developer's Aqreement: Weyrens reported that the Development Agreement for Northland
Plat 6 contained a typographical error in the legal description which has been discovered by a title search
company. The City Attorney has prepared an amendment to the Development Agreement to correct the
typographical error.
Rassier made a motion authorizing the Mayor and Administrator to execute an amendment to the
Northland Plat Six Development Agreement as requested, correcting a typographical error in the
legal description. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously.
·
DRAFT
April 15, 2004
Page 7 of 7
Adjourn: Wick made a motion to adjourn at 9:10 PM; seconded by Rassier and passed
· unanimously.
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Mayor Hosch reconvened the Board of Review and Equalization to consider the 2004 Assessment
payable 2005 for the Senior Apartments located at 410 West Minnesota Street. Catholic Charities
submitted a request for review for the April 6 meeting. However, since the request was received late in
the day on the 6th, the County and City Assessor did not have ample time to research the property.
At this time the City Assessor has provided the Council with a recommendation to reduce the value from
the current $ 526,100 to $ 442,700.
, Rassier made a motion to make the following 2004 Assessment adjustment, based on the
recommendation of the City Assessor: PID # 84-53440-010 Reduction of ($ 83,400) 2004 Value $
442,700. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
Adjourn: Utsch made a motion to close the Board of Review and Equalization at 9:11 PM;
seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously.
Judy Weyrens
Adm in ¡strator
·
·
Owner Name: ONE & TWO FAMILY HOUSING
Property Address: INSPECTION CHECK LIST
ee of Inspection:
Inspector:
AREA OF INSPECTION COMPLIANCE COMMENTS
YES NO
EXTERIOR YARD
1. Fences
2. Approved trash containers
3. Trash, building materials, automobiles,
branches and etc. in yard
4. Firewood storage
5. Sidewalks and driveways
6. Address numbers visible
EXTERIOR STRUCTURE:
7. Foundation, exterior walls, siding
painted surfaces
_oofing, structural condition
Condition of soffits, fascia, trim boards
10. Window rrames, moldings and glass
11. Stonn windows, doors and screens
12. Drainage, gutters, downspouts and leaders
13. Stairs, handrails, guardrails, porches
and balconies (decks)
14. Masonry chimney, chimney liners
"B" vents, class "A" solid fuel vents
15. Electrical service wire, clearance rrom
grade, decks, windows, roofs and
driveways and alleys
GARAGES AND ACCESSORY BLDGS.
16. Condition of walls, soffit, fascia, trim, siding,
paint and doors (overhead and service)
17. Window and door glazing
18. Excessive trash stored in garage or accessory building
19. Electrical wire secure and protected, junction and
switch box coverings, proper grounding and polarity,
approved wiring method
20.Attached garage one-hour fire separation
.
2
AREA OF INSPECTION COMPLIANCE COMMENTS
YES NO
.
INTERIOR STRUCTURAL:
21. Condition of basement, crawlspace foundation
Inspection of floor, beams, posts and joists for
deterioration and damage due to excessive
notching and boring or other improper alterations.
Interior foundation condition such as bulging,
settlement, deterioration, moisture damage and
separation, holes and open rractures to exterior
22 Check condition of sub-floor under toilets, sinks etc.
23 Stairways, handrails and lighting.
24 Bedrooms located in basements are required to
provide direct exiting rrom the basement
bedroom to the outside.
Installation of smoke and e.o. alanns.
25.0ther
MECHANICAL:
26.Furnace and Boiler Testing:
Gas furnaces older than 20 years require e.O. and .
heat exchanger tests perfonned by licensed heating'
contractor.
Gas boilers older than 20 years require C.O. testing only.
Oiled fired units older than 20 years require servicing
by a licensed heating contractor.
Ifin the opinion ofthe housing inspector the heating
appliance exhibits signs of deterioration or possible
hazard, the inspector may require testing even if
appliance is less than 20 years old. Written test
results on heating contractors letterhead or invoice
are required at time ofre-inspection.
27 .Furnace; check condition of wiring, on! off switch,
air filter, vent connector, draft diverter, clearance to
combustibles, combustion air, alterations and general
condition of furnace
28.Boiler; check condition of pressure relief valve and
drop leg, pressure and temperature gauges, circulation
pump wiring. Check for proper backflow protection,
combustion air, vent connectors, clearances to
combustibles and general condition of boiler.
29.Check vent connector for up-ward pitch to vertical
vent. All vent connectors require 3 screws per joint.
Check vent connectors for deterioration, clearance to .
combustibles and proper support.
30.Inspect for approved vertical vent/chimney materials,
and clearances to combustibles.
Transite type chimney/vents are not allowed, and must
be replaced with Class "B" vent to code.
3
WA OF INSPECTION COMPLIANCE COMMENTS
YES NO
31. Wood burning stove, listed, not listed, clearance from
combustibles
32.Heat provided for all habitable rooms and bathrooms
33.0pen, uncapped gas pipe and valves
34.Space heaters or furnaces in bedrooms or bathrooms
35. Water heater; pressure and temperature relief valve
with 3/4 inch drop leg to within 18 inches offloor.
Check for proper venting, gas valve, gas line dirt
leg, combustion air and clearance to combustibles. 3
'LUMBING:
36. Cross-connections; sill-cocks, ballcocks, fixture
faucets, sprinkler systems, boilers, etc.
37. Proper waste and vent on all fixtures including
stand pipes. Check for properly vented "P" traps.
No atmospheric, (cheater vents), allowed, all vents
must vent to the exterior, wet venting and flat venting
:4Ifre not allowed, all loop venting must be done to code.
loor drain cover grates and clean out plugs must be in·
place. The floor drain must be operational with the
clean out plug in place
39.Abandoned plumbing fixtures, open waste and vent
pipe must be removed, caped or sealed to prevent
sewer gas from entering house.
4-0.Cracked, broken and leaking plumbing fixtures, water
and drain pipes and faucets shall be replaced or
repaired.
~LECTRICAL:
4-1.Properly sized electrical service (over loaded).
n.Clearance of electrical wire from grade, decks,
landings, steps, doors, windows and roofs
B Properly sized fuses using type "S" fuses and
adaptors
-4. Damaged service panel, burned fuse sockets,
missing circuit breakers, dead front covers.
Broken or burned outlets, missing electrical box
cover plates.
5. Working clearances for electric service panel
.amaged, un-supported wire, open junction
oxes, wire connectors protecting wire through
knock-outs in junction boxes, exposed wire splices
4
AREAS OF INSPECTION COMPLIANCE COMMENTS
YES NO
.
Properly installed romex and BX wiring through
floor joists and wall studs.
47. Proper grounding, polarity of outlets, pendent lights
and receptacles.
48. Proper lighting in furnace and circuit panel areas
49. Grounded duplex receptacle in laundry area on
separate 20 AMP circuit
50. Grounded duplex electrical outlets on separate
20 AMP circuit for kitchen.
52. No light fixtures above shelves in closets
53. No appliances (water softeners, garage over head
door openers etc.) Utilization extension cord wiring
KITCHEN:
54. Windows, doors, walls and ceiling. Floor
. Covering, condition of countertop
55. Grounded electrical outlets, wiring to garbage
disposal, extension cords, light fixtures
condition of wiring or tennination of wire
for electric stove if not being used
56. Waste and vent kitchen sink, proper "P" trap, .
leaking water lines and faucet.
57. Mechanical ventilation operational and venting
directly to the exterior of house .
LIVING / DINNING ROOM:
58..Windows, doors, walls and ceiling
Fireplace condition, heat registers
Electrical outlets, extension cords, lighting
BATHROOM:
59. Condition of windows, walls and ceiling
60. G.F.I. (ground-fault-interrupter) outlet and
lighting operated from a properly mounted
ON/OFF wall switch.
61. Condition of plumbing fixture trap and
waste and vent piping. Toilet secured tightly
to floor, no leaking of faucets or water pipes.
62. Operational mechanical ventilation, venting
directly to the exterior of house.
63. Inside latch or lock on door for privacy. .
5
'\REA OF INSPECTION COMPLIANCE COMMENTS
YES NO
.ROOM:
4.Windows, doors, walls and ceiling
Heat
Electrical outlets, extension cords, lights
in closet light over shelf.
Operational smoke alann.
'ALLWAY:
5.Lighting
Operational smoke alann
)THER:
.
.
· 81. Joseph Multi-Family Housing Inspection Commentary
INTENT:
This document describes what is noted in the multi-family housing inspection checklist.
EXTERIOR GROUNDS;
1. The inspector will note the condition of fences for structural condition and paint.
2. Retaining walls will be inspected for structural integrity, damage due to erosion
and general deterioration.
3. Check dumpsters for over loading, lack of sanitation and proper screening
Inspections will include inspecting for junk cars (must be operational and licensed),
storage of trash and building materials out in the open.
4. Fire wood storage must be at least twelve (12) inches above grade and at least twenty
(20) feet :ITom any building or shed.
S. Check condition of sidewalks and stairs for cracks or uneven surfaces that can be
considered a trip hazard.
All steps with two or more stair risers are required to have a grip able handrail
Installed at least thirty four (34) inches above the nose ofthe stair tread, (30) thirty
inches for existing handrails.
6. To assist emergency personal (police, fire and medical), building address numbers
must be clearly visible from the street therefore at least (4) four inch numbers with at
least a Y2 inch stroke are required.
· 7. Based on State of Minnesota Fire Code requirements NO solid fuel cooking devices
~e allowed on decks, balconies or patios located under combustible decks. Placement
or storage of Christmas trees is not' allowed on decks or balconies.
8. Lawns and trees are required to be maintained under this program.
ERTERIOR STRUCTURAL;
9. The inspector will evaluate the structural condition of roofs, soffits, siding,
balconies and decks. Condition of windows and screens will be evaluated. Under
the housing inspection program the condition of exterior paint shall protect
structural surfaces and to provide an attractive appearance. All structures with
peeling and blistering paint will be required to be scraped, primed and painted.
All foundations will be in a structurally sound condition with no holes or
openings that would allow entry of rodents.
10. Roofs will be evaluated based on their condition at the time of the inspection.
Roofs that are leaking due to deterioration will be replaced to code under permit.
Roofs that exhibit signs of structural failure will be repaired, and braced to
prevent structural failure; this includes all soffits, facisa and dormers.
II.Correction of damage to foundations due to soil erosion caused by poor drainage is
required to be repaired.
12 & 13 Inspection and correction of deteriorated door, window frames and moldings
is required under this program. Storm windows and storm doors are required. All
windows will have screens, and all window glass is to be in good repair.
· All first floor windows are to be equipped with window locks, all exterior doors will
be equipped with properly installed dead bolt locks. ·
14. Stairs will be inspected for conditions such as excessive riser heights, damaged
and deteriorated stair treads that could cause a trip hazard All stairs located in a
public or common area will require a handrail if stairs have two (2) or more risers.
All platfoTI11s or decks located at least thirty (30) inches above grade or floor will
require a thirty-six (36) inch high guardrail with spaces between rails of guardrail
not greater than four (4) inches for new construction, six (6) inches spacing
between rails for existing guardrails.
15.Condition of masonry chimney and metal vents will inspected for deterioration
or damage that could block venting of combustion gases. All venting weather it
is a masonry or metal vent must meet UnifoTI11 Mechanical Code requirements.
All masonry chimneys venting gas fired furnaces or boilers are required to have a
metal chimney liner for proper venting.
16. & 18. Electrical wire clearances from windows, doors, decks, stairs and landings
must be provided;
a) Horizontal clearances from decks. balconies, stairs and landings is three (3) feet.
b)Vertical wire clearance from decks, balconies, stairs, landings and grade is ten (10)
feet.
c) NO wire over within ten (10) feet of a swimming pool.
d) NO electrical outlets within ten (10) feet of a swimming pool, but is required
within twenty (20) feet of a pool, and that outlet must be G.F.I. (ground-fault-
interrupter) type outlet.
e) Check all exterior electrical outlets for a water proof cover and safe condition.
All outlets must be checked for proper grounding and polarity. ·
17. & 19. Fire lane acéess signage marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" must be
provided. Access to and :visibility of fire hydrants is required, all shrubs must be
cut back to provide access and visibility.
GARAGES ACCESSORY BUILDINGS;
20. 21. 22. 23 Inspection of structural condition of garages and accessory building
walls, siding, paint and roofs is required. Structures found in disrepair will be
written up for repair. Door and window glass will be maintained.
Garages that are used for storage of building, grounds keeping materials and
dumpsters will require one (1) hour fire separation from other garages or structures.
24.Attached or basement garages require fire separation. In basement garages all
ceiling openings around pipes and conduit must be sealed. A barrier gate is required
at exit grade level in all stairwells to prevent occupants from descending into the
basement garage in the event of a fire.
INTERIOR AND COMMON AREAS:
25.26.27 Exit corridors will be checked for proper illumination (light fixtures at least
thirty (30) feet apart) and for emergency back-up lighting when present. No
obstructions are allowed in corridors and the condition of floor coverings will be
checked for trip hazards. Smoke detectors will be checked for operation. All
apartment buildings will require a one (1) hour fire rated corridors be maintained.
·
All doors opening into a corridor must be one (1 ) hour fIre rated assemblies that
. includes self-closing devices on each door.
Hold open devices on fIre doors (except where approved by the building offIcial)
are not allowed.
Exit doors cannot be locked so as to make them inoperable fÌom the interior of the
building. All doors off the corridor must be self-closing and self latching when closed.
Utility boiler, storage, laundry and electrical room doors must be identifIed with at
least two inch lettering.
28. In buildings larger than four (4) units a Fire Department key box is required at the
fÌont entrance area to allow entry in the case of an emergency. Building management
is required to have entrance building keys in the key box for fIre department personnel.
29. Security fence with locking and self-latching gates around outside swimming pools is
required.
BOILER ROOM:
30. Boiler room inspection shall include the following;
a) One hour fIre separation.
b) Combustion air for boiler and water heaters
c) Proper instillation and operation of all plumbing fIxtures including floor
drains
d) Electrical wiring and lighting.
e) Check for condition and operation of pressure and combination pressure
and temperature relief valves on boilers and water heaters.
. STORAGE LOCKER ROOM:
31. If storage Locker is being used the door must be locked. IdentifIcation of locker room
door is required. One (1) hour fIre separation for locker room must be maintained.
LAUNDRY ROOM:
32. Maintained and proper operation of plumbing fIxtures, drain and water pipes are
inspected for. Check electrical outlets for grounding, polarity and cover plates. Check
laundry dryer vents for plastic flexible ducts not allowed due to collection of lint and
possible fIre hazard. Smooth metal vents with heat resistive taped joints, (no metal
screws) venting directly to the exterior are required. The laundry room is required to
maintain a one hour fIre separation which includes a self closing fIre rated door.
STORAGE, ELEVATOR ROOMS:
33. One (1) hour fIre separation which includes fIre rated door with self closer with
proper identifIcation. An inspection of electrical wiring, wire connectors, insulators,
outlets and light fIxtures is required.
APARTMENT UNITS:
Items 34. through 45. are defIned in the check list.
.
· May 17,2004
I am a home owner in the R1 neighborhood that abuts the alley of the proposed rezoning
and have some concerns. Here are a few of them.
I thought there was a long range/term plan (from a previous councilor planning
commission) thatthe area along Hwy 75 was not to look like Waite Park. It was supposed
to remain more friendly & welcoming with the family homes along the Hwy. If not ideal
for young families with children there are middle aged or others who would not mind
living there. It is also an ideal location for anyone who wants to walk to the store, meat
market, church, post office etc.
There will be increased traffic on Ash St. and 1 st Ave because Birch St. is not a furu street
at College Ave.
There is currently a lot of rental property/space available for office, business and housing.
Plus there is other commercial property for sale that would not have to be REZONED.
What would rezoning do to my property value, taxes and insurance? I understand that my
Insurance will go up considerably and who but me has to pay for it. Would the city help?
One planning person said they have deep back yards - so they have a buffer zone. My
back yard is not a buffer zone but my yard that I enjoy now. Another said it would not
· increase traffic. Where is the logic there?
Also enclosed is a copy of the petition given to the planning people before their-May 3
meeting.
0; --/
-f(~ I-~
Kay Lemke
33 E Ash St.
81. Joseph, MN
320-363-8663
·
· I Attachment: Yes or No I
,REQUEST ,FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Employee Health Insurance
DATE: May 20, 2004
I+JI/VII V\( s;,~....-C{{(C~
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Administrator Reports -14 (b) Employee Health Insurance
PREVIOUS ACTION
The City received the renewal rate for the employee health insurance and the new rates reflected a 53%
increase. The premium went from $ 10,000 to $ 15,000 per month
· RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
FISCAL IMPACT
Monthly savings of approximately $ 7,000 per month.
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
In an effort to reduce health insurance costs, I asked the employees to complete the questionnaires to
quote different insurance. Through the insurance agent we received quotes from Principal (current
carrier), Medica and Blue Cross. We have received the new rates and Blue Cross came in at a monthly
rate of$ 7,850.00. Principal also quote a low rate in the $ 7,000's, but the plan included large
deductibles, a significant change from the current policy. This policy is very similar to the existing
policy. I have shared the plan with the union steward of AFSME but LELS one is out of the Country. At
this time I would request the Council authorize the execution of the new policy. The current policy
expires on June 15,2004. If the Council would like to discuss this further we certainly can do so.
The former plan of the City had a different rate for each person based on age and number of dependents.
The proposed plan established two rates, single and family. It does not matter how many dependents you
have or how young you are. Blue Cross has also agreed to honor the prices for 18 months.
·
"'0
~'~ .... U U"J.
,~ uu~ "
- ..
~ ,.. ""
It _ U.R..RU ,,,b
VI
~ ,04', P.OO,
i
~
~
....
00
~
en
S
, ~
~ ~
~n S
~ ~~
= ~ ~
= to<~
. 0 ~
~ ~ ~
~ I"Jl 0
= ~ ~
Q ~ ~
~ 0 ~
_ I"Jl 0
~. ==: t?=j ""'"'
5" = ~ n
Q~ 0 (þ == 0
È.!J~ð <::
:<> ~§- a. G
o~" ~
~ ~- ~
11 ;.. ~ '" · œ ~.. · p:¡
o .. .., ¡o r:IJ a ~ (TQ
5< !! :t ïJ: " ~
" - "-" -
- .. " --
~. g¡ ~.g,(þ - . ~
ö ~ P'~ I:: ~,. ~
~ 0 ¡:,'!!! I"'!' ~ ,,~
¡¡¡ ¡;; a ~ rn
~. ~ ~
Þ("'J ;:¡ ¡;;¡. .
~ ~ ~
n ~ ,~
o 5:
~ ~
.
A Minimum Premium Proposal
for
City of St. Joseph
from the
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota *
Family of Companies
May 18, 2004
.
This proposal and all attachments are confidential.
. AIl independent licensee of itla Slue Cross and Blue Shj~ d Association
.
SOO'¿ SSvO# 8NI ¡ I'd!'l'¿ 2GNfl ~tSLZ99tS9 aO:Ðt DOOZ.Rt·X~W
. Resource Training & Solutions City, County and Other
Governmental Agency Service Cooperative
Minimum Premium Funding
We charge Y01J a flat monthly rate for each employee. Other features of minimum premium fanding
inc1ude:
Features
1 ~ Claims in excess of $50,000 per member for a contract year are not charged to your account's
liistoric claims costs. TIris feature, called specific stop loss, helps stabilize future rate increases.
Tr'dDsplant claims are includ~d under the specific stop loss.
2. Rates quoted are valid for only ten (10) working days from the effective date of June 15, 2004 and
are contingent onthjs gro'up joining the Resource TI"'d:Ïr!ing & Solutions City, County, and Other
Governmental Agency Service Cooperative.
Services included in the rates quoted
. · No claims to me when using participating providers
· Enro1]m eI'!t on site by our representatives
· Claims processing arJd payment
· Customer service
· Membersbíp/eligibility records
.. ID cards
· Summary Plan Description
· Administrative manual for aCCOUIJt~s group coordinator
· Costcontain:rnentprograrns
· Reporting
· Provider 1Jetworks and the value of our provider savings net of the provider savings fee
.
04/09/03 2:57 PM' City of SL Joseph
vOO"¿¡ £00# ::JNI.LI~.M'ti::rmrn vvSLZ991S9 80:v1 vOOZ.81"XVW
Resource Training & Solutions City, County, and Other
Governmental Agency Service Cooperative .
Contingencies - Minimum Premium
1. This quote is based on the current Tates and enrollment. lf you request different benefits or if actuaJ
enrollment varies fi-om expected by more than 10%, the rates will change.
2. Rates quoted are valid for only ten (10) worldng days from the effective date of June 15,2004. Rates
are contingent on this group joining me Resource Training & Solutions City, County, and Other
Goverrunental Agency Service Cooperative
3. Rates include $19.00 p~'1' contract consulting/service fee.
4. If this group accepts the Service Cooperative bic1lproposal it is with the understanding that the
Service Coop"'Tative has accepted, on the behalf of all their member groups, the following:
. Implement behavioral health care benefit parity. Benefits for behavioral health care will include both
inpatient and olltpatient U"eatment and wi]] be provid~d at the same leve) of coverage; as medical
servicèS. Essentially rnalGng things equal.
. Binding decisions by the Administrative Revjew Committee (.ARC). The ARC is a three--mernbc.
committee eSiablished to revjew and make a determination whether to affrrrn or reserve a denial C1
coverage of benefits.
.
05118/04 1 :40 PM City of St. Jos¡;ph
S -0 0 . a £ t v 0 # :;NI ¿ :'d!·r~3aNn rrSLZ99TS9 ÓO:~: pOOZI81'À~~
. ";! . - - U';';J,.UV" ;.)..... U ~lJJ:.lC.Kll' lNl:r #0433 p.006
~
.0-3 > '::j
c:; -
~ ~. c ..
. :r ~ ~
::\ ....- g IT>
o CI) .g
:! 0 [
en ;;; ë
.., - en
~'< '<
~ t.Þ 0
e; ~ (þ ..,
Q.o '0 ~' ~
@ r.;
5'5. (')
rn II> "'"1
~=: ~ ~ ~
~~ :I ¡¡;
." (¡I [ ::r ('D
'" 0
r:I>~ '<. Q;".
oa' (þ ~
.... 2 0 c:>
¡ - -, i ~
:s 0 ~
'< ~ ~
'" on 0 c:>
Ei' !!1 '"" CO e:
n ;;coo.
~~ ::: ~ (j
t:I - ";I E.("þ
~ g- o III ~ Þ01 C/) ::1
..... ~ CO
-:I (i ~ < ~ CIl ::= 8 (JQ
tn,,,, ... (11 00
s':') o ..... ~ S'
r:1" ~'~ ~ ~
_!þ '< 0..5· §. ~ ~ ~
rn !jQ
~.~ .-.. ê- - P--'
00 ...- ~ ;>
0 - ~ ~
0 ~' ~~ ~ C'" 00-
~,o.. tIj U'J.
'.Ð . . t.'Þ OQ
~ g. 't>\~ ~ ~ '"1 0
'" - ~ ~ ~ - ~ CP
5"8- Q. , 0 ~ ~ ~ S"
c: ~. 0. t.õ = = .--
-::I ê-. K ""t ¡:s (') ö
~s:- 'E: :;t.: ('tI ,.- ~
::J '.... Cl "'< -.
n> f.!¡ I]: õ' ~ {l 0 0
0..""" ....
_. 0 ~ 0 "'< .. ,... '-'< """"',
;:¡ ;:: C;;' ~O\ ~ -&'7 ~ ~ = ~ r:n. ~
2~ õ' 0\ N 0 (D (P 00
(1 <"> .-- -..... J-t --J 0 0 '4
0. - :¡ (D ~ 0 '4,
_0 ~ o ¡....a. - 00 00 ~ n
o ..., :EfJI. ::: =' f.'t) ~ 0 -<
'< ,., g-..... -. 0 0 ....... ~ r.n ~. ~.
o !E .- ~
. c: .... 2!:N .- 0 c ~ ~ ~ a
- -. t:' - ,... ~
~ :=¡ ~ ,Ig Q ;;j C1 ~ . (þ
~ 0 õ - -- ~ '"
(} ~ e-O . . < ~
0 ~ n n
s. ~ '~ ~ - ('tI Q
g ~ ~ ~ - -C'of) 0 0 0
CX1,,<; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~
\}(') S -.J
~l .. -. (j' ~ ::s
~ 00 .....-. fJt ;; §. =-
,tþ N 0 ("D. ~
(þ~ 0
CJjΠ,~ 0 00 (j """'t'
E. -. 0 <: ~ v
", ~ = = (D t""'t-
If> - ;. 0 n n "r::! þ
::rJ~ S ~' _.
o~ 0 0 = -< .Þ
.gf¡Q ª"N ::> ::t' .~ Po:>
~ a ~w q ~ ~ (Jq CD p...
rn C r3 þooC
0';1 t.:)' ,., (þ 0
C! . -, ~ ---
- '^ ~-- (') (") ~ ~
~ 0 éif ~ ë. ~
-, 0 ;¡;N c;n = p.
~ ,t; ;:¡Q
. ~ g= = ~ ('P
s: f'-(..I1 e ~
== Cl
Po'>
~ 3: 0
'0 ~ <:
:J. (II ("p
= I:
&. c:r' ~
0
0 -<'!
'-" t!>
-- R
C'.\
ò (V (I:)
!"
Ä ~
t-.) S-
o r"t-
~ '< ~
----
-
aware go i d . +. BlueÇross BlueShield
t h l a n "~J of Minnesota
WI copa)' p . .
~_~-.-,ì -._ ~~1Ç~DBt5{(~WAlÐt)J~WÐR«'* æXT:ENDED JDllT-OF-NErWDRK'*'*
Annual deductible none $300/person..,. $900/family
Out-of-pocket maximum $2,SOO/person $5,00O/person
A separate out-of-pocket maximum
of $500 per person applies to
prescription drugs.
Lifetime maximum $3 million for services from all providers
Office visits
· Illness or injury 100% after $15 copay 80% after deductible
· Behavioral health care (mental health, 100% after $15 copay 80% after deductible
chemical dependency, eating disorders
and autism)
· Chiropractic manipulation 100% after $ 15 copay 80% after deductible; no benefits for
services from out-of-netvlork providers
· In-office surgery/allergy-related services 100% 80% after deductible
Preventive care
· Well-child services and immunizations 100% 80% after deductible
· Prenatal care 100% 80% after deductible
· Routine physicals and eye exams 100% 80% after deductible
· Cancer screenings 100% 80% after deductible
Lab and X-ray services 100% 80% after deductible
In- and outpatient hospital services
· Facility services (includes behavioral 100% 80% after deductible
health care)
· Professional services (includes behavioral 100% 80% after deductible
health care)
Emergency care
· Facility services 100% after $60 copay 100% after $60 copay .
· Professional services 100% 80% after deductible
Ambulance services 80% 80%
Medical supplies 80% 80%
Therapy services
· Chiropractic therapy 100% after $15 copay 80% after deductible; no benefits for
services from out-of-networkproviders
· Occupational and physical therapy 100% after $15 copay 80% after deductible
· Speech therapy 100% after $15 copay 80% after deductible
Prescription drugs
· 31-day supply; 3-cycle supply of oral 100% after $ 14 copay 100% after $14 copay; you pay the
contraceptives for 3 copays; formulary pharmacy and fiie a claim. In addition to
drugs only copays, members will be responsible for
amounts in excess of the allowed amount
· Mail-order drugs (90-day supply) 100% after $28 copay
How cost sharing is calculated
Co pays are flat fees you pay at the time you receive a service, Copaymentamounts are caiculated based on providers' average bilied charges.
The billed charge is the full amount that a provider bills for a service and does not include any discount that we negotiate with the provider.
Coinsurance is the percentage of charges you pay for a service, It's based on the allowed amount - the negotiated amoun, that networ< providers have agreed
to accept as full payment at the time your claim is processed, If you see a provider who doesn't participate with Biue Cross, the allowed amount is either the
provider's billed charge or a percentage of the network allowed amount, whichever is less,
Deductible charges are subtracted from the allowed amount
-
"* Fo: chemica] dependency, chiropracb.: care and mental health services use Seìect netv/o;k DfOvlders Tor the highest iF/e! of benefits.
Ú The Extended netv:ork oniy applies to the sef\~ces noted above, -
Tnis is only an outline of pJan benefits. The contract and certificate inc:ude complete details of v/hat is and isn't covered. Services not covered indude ~
g:asses, hearing aids, items primarily used for a non-medica! purpose, over-the-counter drugslnutritior;a! supplements, services that are cosmetic, expe
menta!, not med;caìiy neCEssary, or covered by workers' cocnpensation or no·fault auto insurance, Pre-existing cond,tions may not be covered for a Ii'"
period of time, This ¡imit is reduced by mio' continuous coverage and doesn't appiy to pregnancy. newborns, adopted children m handicapoed depen
dents, We feature a large network of health care providers, Each prov'der is an independent contraCior and is not our agent. Nonparcicipating provide
F5985R 19 (9/03) not have contracts \vith Biue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota. Blue Cross anò Blue Shield of ;v¡;nnesota Îs an independent licensee
(Pìan number 4) of the Blue Cross and Blue Shie!d Assc-:::iatior:. Benefits are effective Jò;'1. 1, 2004.
I Attachment: Yes or No I
.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: Mav 20~ 2004
Administation
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Transfers - Authorize the transfer of funds from the General fund to the Capital Outlay fund.
PREVIOUS ACTION
The-Council has established a Capital Projects fund that is funded through budget rollovers.
. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION
Approve attached transfers between General fund and Capital Outlay fund.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDA TIONS
The first four transfers allocate the park dedication fees to the designated Park Board account. The fifth
transfer takes out the budget rollover for Budget Year 2003 as the Council previously decided not to roll
over these funds. The sixth transfer moves 2003 expenses from the General fund that should have been
paid out of-the Capital Outlay fund. The seventh transfer covers a deficit amount in the police capital
expenditures budget for Council approved items. The final transfer moves the 2003 budget rollover
accounts and the 2004 budget amounts into the Capital Outlay fund.
-
-
It:i#.@#km¡ ¡..'.."'i····'·""'.."..·'....·..""!""" Ittn:$.kSmm:m¡¡::ttmø.maw:tt::¡ .
......·A........'..,.., Qð&..'........
}mt(..:~p~m{::::·,:~·, Ø?t?
2004-01
E 101- 49301 -700 Transfer 43,000.00
G 101- -10100 Cash 43,000.00
R 490- 00000 -34114 Park Dedication Fees 43,000,00
G 490- -10100 Cash 43,000.00
Reclassify Liberty Pointe park dedication fees from general fund to
capital outlay fund.
2004-02
E 101- 49301 -700 Transfer 5,474.50
G 101- -10100 Cash 5,474.50
R 490- 00000 -34114 Park Dedication Fees 5,474,50
G 490- -10100 Cash 5,474.50
Reclassify Northland Plat 8 park dedication fees from general fund to
capital outlay fund,
2004-03
E 101- 49301 -700 Transfer 555.00
G 101- -10100 Cash 555,00
R 490- 00000 -39201 Transfer 555.00
G 490- -10100 Cash 555.00
Reclassify Fundraiser money from 2003.
2004-04
E 101- 49301 -700 Transfer 5,474.50
G 101- -10100 Cash 5,474.50
R 490· 00000 -39201 Transfer 5,474.50 .
G 490- -10100 Cash 5,474,50
Reclassify Northland Plat 7 park dedication fees from general fund to
capital outlay fund,
2004-05
E 490- 49301 -700 Transfer 8,500.00
G 490· -10100 Cash 8,500,00
R 101- 00000 -39201 Transfer 8,500.00
G 101· -10100 Cash 8,500.00
Reclassify Rollover funds that were transferred in error.
2004-06
G 490- -10100 Cash 726.26
G 101- -10100 Cash 726.26
E 101- 42120 -581 Computer Hardware 698,57
R 490- 00000 -39201 Transfer 726.26
E 101- 45202 -530 Improv other building 27,69
Reclassify 2003 expenses from general fund to capital outlay fund.
2004-07 R 490- 00000 -39201 Transfer 4,335,92
G 490- -10100 Cash 4,335.92
G 101- -10100 Cash 4,335.92
E 101- 49301 -700 Transfer 4,335.92
Transfer to cover deficit amounts in police capital expenditures budget for Council
approved items. (See attached list)
2004-08
R 490- 00000 -39201 Transfer 47.427.42
G 490· -10100 Cash 47,427.42 -
G 101· -10100 Cash 47,427.42
E 101- 49301 -700 Transfer 47,427.42 ~
Transfer budget amounts from general fund to capital outlay fund,
.," " ,','" '., ' . ,', ","',.".,','..-,. ',,', ---,_.' ',,',,' ,
. ' ,..
'. . -- - - - -~
," . - - ~ -', -- - .- -. -- .. - -- - - - - - - -- - . --. - -- -- .. . - - -- - - -. - ,. - ------ -,- ."'- ,. -~ -- p- ."'<"'" ." .'" .....
101-42152-550 2003 Install equipment in squad car 857.01
2003 Squad car graphics 333.20
2003 Set-up kit 350.00
2002 Squad car graphics 333.20
2002 Bucket seat adapter plate 30.31
2002 Mobile phone mount 2,464.20
4,367.92
.
.
.
o~Œrooov~~O~NOO~ro~~OOOMN~~~ ~
~ONroooro~~~mmooro~~NoooMroMm~ N
~~~N~oro~~~~~0~~~~0~~ON~N~~ ~
N~~~NOro~~~M~O~~~N~O~O~~roN~ ~
~~moo~mN~ro~~~MO~~~~~OO~~~~ ~
mM~~~~ ~~Ö~~~ ~ro~W~ÖMMro~~W ro
~~__ ~--~ ~M~~ ~ ~V ~ m
~ ~
00 0 0000 0 000000000 0
00 0 0000 0 000000000 0
., . I I . . .. . ......... I I .
00 0 0000 0 000000000 0
00 0 0000 0 000000000 0
~~ 0 ~OO~ 0 000000000 ~
~~ ~ N~ ~ ò~~ò~riri~o ~
N N('I") ~ T"""
~
~O~O ~O~O~ 0 m~m N m
~o~o ro~~ON 0 ~~~ N ~
cO 0 to 0 I " Lri cO cO LO 0 I N I I I ~ 0 ~ I r....: ooi
~~~o ~~mro~ m NOro ~ ~
OmN~ Nm~N~ ~ ~O ~ ro
~~ÑÑ ~Ñ M~ ciÑ ro ci
~
~~ gg g gggggg g gggggg gg g
ϒ~~!!>1 00 '0 000000 '0 000000 00 I 0
0"'" , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~ ~
,~~~'ttC; r--- C"? T""" NLO """"" Ooc:tLOO-r-N ~O CD
,L~ "-"-.",'"¿ N N ('I") ~ :;:
N;;~-'_~~ 0 L[) ~ NO 0 <D~f"-. r--.. <D:;::-o 0 r- C() ~ 0'> 0 C> N <D N ('I') en ('t)
o~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ro
~~ ~~o~~o~ro~~~~o~~~~~~~ OID~~ro ~
~,~O,-"i NO mNO~mmID~mO~N~N~O~ O~IDNm 0 .
~,,=¡ ~ m ~ ID 0 N ~ ID ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ID ~ ro ~
~~ WM ~~~~~~~ ~Ö ~Ö~W~W Öro~~M W
N°!u..;~ N 'T""" - - 'T""" 0 ('I') N or- ('I') N 0
'I:"""" _c-", T""" C0
~~ gRgrogggRgrog~gg~ggggggggM~~
~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ 0006N~66oo~NOOOoo~66~NN~~~
~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~R~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~ T""" T""" "t"""" T""" T""" T""" ~ N N N N N C\J N ('I") ('I") ('I') (1') (1"') ('I") L() 1.0 1.0 L{) LO U?
~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~'J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I
~ 00000000000000000000000000
~~ T"""T"""T"""T"""T"""'T"""T"""T"""T"""'T"""T"""T"""'T"""T"""T"""'T"""T"""'T"""T"""'T"""T"""T"""T"""T"""T"""'T"""
¡¡î ~ (f) ~ (f) ,~ .~ .~ .~ ~ c: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ 'E C C 3: ~ c: C C ;: c ë c ~ ~ C C ;g ;g c ;g "E ~.Q ~ g ~ N ~ ~
!81fe1 W WE W 'E .2.2' EQ) W 'E Q) (f) Q) W .2 E W Q) E EwE Q) E:g ID 0 ~ m ~ ~
~~ E Erog~~ EroEÆEEü~EE~~E~E~ ~ W ~ ~ ö ro ~
~~\ .9- .9- ,9- J: .::: >, Q) .9-.9- J: .9- g .9-.9-.s Q) .9- .9- Q) Q) .9- W .9-.Q <C 0 ~ ~ m ~
~w ~~~~w~U~~~~~~~ø~~~~~~~~ID~~ ~ ~ ~
~~ 0" ill 0"2-- C:9 0"0"2 O"Q) O"O"--õ O"O"Õõ O"õ O"ã) c: c:
D~ W w~~~_ww~w>ww~>ww»w>wO~ro
m~~_---! ~ Q) ~ 0..- E Q) Q) L- C. "- L- "- "- .- 0 "- "- 0 0 "- 0 L- LL:ë
",gp1i Q) ü W E ~ E :ë ü Q) E Q) 0 Q) Q) ~ ~ Q) Q) ~ ~ W ~ Q) ~ Q) ~
~~ £E£o~oro~£o£õ££~~~£~~£a£ro~o
~~ OOOümüüOOüO~OOm£OO££O£O~~Z
i!l ~_ - g! g W ~
~~1 :-' :-' :-' E·- 0 ro 0) ~ 0 ro ü <C
~J »> ~OOO~ >.S ro 0 - ~
,,'t'@Ej 000 -~>,c: o~ ~ mC'"J N ro ro 0::
,~, Q)Q)Q)(9(9(9 o~üo E.c:(f)o 0 m - w
0I-V:~~ U) g ~ .~ _ _ _ () « c: ü ID .2> ~ .c. -g ;:: >- C; "0 ~ LL
,~~ §....___trororo Q)_(f)(f)(f)O::...Jro~ ~~ '0 ~ Q) ~
s~, ""OOO(¡¡(¡¡G3~~~~~~ro(¡)(¡)Q);¡;Q);¡;~(f)(f)(f)(f)(f) L.L..N ~ ~ û) ;g; z
~~~ ~>->-~c:cc~~~==mE.~Q)mQ)om~.5~~~~~ o~·~ c .~ - ~
_,~=:::~:; _ ~ :-=: .-=:: Q) m Q) 0 0 0 0 0 c Z .Þ ~ c: ~._ ro ro ro ro ro ro Ci>~,"O ~ "D ~ e:::
s~ wüüü(9(9(9~~~~~w<c~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ <c L.L.. <c ~ ~
.