HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 [06] Jun 03 {Book 30}
CIT¥ Of ST. JOSEPH
· www,cityofstjoseph.com
St. Joseph City Council
June 3, 2004
7:00 PM
1. 7:00 PM - Call to Order
Administrõtor
ludy Weyrens 2. Approve Agenda
Môyor 3. Consent Agenda
a. Bills Payable - Requested Action: Approve check numbers 34293-34353
Lôrry , Hosch b. Minutes - Requested Action: May 6,20,26,2004.
c. Street Closure - Requested Action: Authorize the closure of College Avenue
Councilors South on July 3,2004 between the hours of 6:00 PM and 9:00 PM for the Annual
AI Rôssier St. Joseph Fire Department Waterball Event.
Ross Rieke 4. Public Comments
Gôry Utsch 5. 7:05 PM - Why USA - Rezoning Request
Dôlc Wick
6. 7:15 PM - 2004 Bond Issue
a. Negotiated Bond Sale - 2004 Improvement Projects
b. Equipment Certificates
· 7. Public Works Director Reports
a. Street Name Change - Constitution Drive
8. Mayor Reports
9. Council Reports
10. City Administrator Reports
a. Annexation Update
b. Fund Transfer
c. Park Dedication Fees
d. Other Matters
11. Adjourn
File
·
2.)' College Avenue North' PO )ox 66ß . Sdint, Joseph, Minncsotd )'6)74
Phone ,2.0,,63,72.01 I:õ x ,2.0,,6,,0,42.
CITY OF Sf JOSEPH 06/01/044:37 PM
Page 1
Bills Payable
.
Check # Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEþART OBJ
034293 POSTMASTER utility bill postage $86.34 602 49490 322
034293 POSTMASTER utility bill postage $86.34 601 49440 322
034293 POSTMASTER utility bill postage $86.34 603 43230 322
034294 ACCOUNTEMPS acctg-5/14 $1,000.00 101 41530 300
034295 AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES police car modem $147.00 101 42151 321
034296 BERGHORST, BRUCE remainder 1 st Q mtgs $60.00 101 41120 103
034296 BERGHORST, BRUCE void check -$60.00 101 41120 103
034297 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD MN medical ins-6/15-7/15/04 $7,820.00 101
034298 CELLULAR 2000 cell phone $1.51 105 42250 321
034299 COLD SPRING CO-OP CREAMERY fertilizer-northland park $104.80 490 45203 531
034299 COLD SPRING CO-OP CREAMERY fertilizer-maint shop $104.79 101 45201 220
034300 DEUHS,DEEDRA void check -$60.00 101 41120 103
034300 DEUHS,DEEDRA remainder 1st Q mtgs $60.00 101 41120 103
034301 GRAEVE, JAMES remainder 1st Q mtgs $60.00 101 41120 103
034302 HENRY & ASSOCIATES water meter & parts $426.68 601 47100 600
034303 I. T. L. PATCH COMPANY badges $273.18 101 42120 171
034304 INSPECTRON INC april inspection services $6,500.00 101 42401 311
034305 JOEL SCHNEIDER SERVICE fuel/water separator element-84 chev pickup $213.03 101 42152 220
034306 KALINOWSKI, KATHLEEN S. remainder 1st Q mtgs $60.00 101 41120 103
034307 KEEPRS, INC/CY'S UNIFORMS shirt-feldewerd $32.95 101 42120 171
034307 KEEPRS, INC/CY'S UNIFORMS jacket return -$245.95 101 42120 171
034307 KEEPRS, INC/CY'S UNIFORMS jacket, flag patch & application $248.27 101 42120 171
IE KEEPRS, INC/CY'S UNIFORMS handcuff key $7.40 101 42120 171
LESNICK, MARGE remainder 1st Q mtgs $105.00 101 41120 103
03 08 LESNICK, MARGE void check -$105.00 101 41120 103
034309 LOSO,BOB remainder 1st Q mtgs $45.00 101 41120 103
034310 MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS class 5-7 loads $268.79 101 43120 220
034311 MENARDS return socket holder -$9.55 101 45201 220
034311 MENARDS expansion joint $3.80 101 41942 220
034311 MENARDS saw blades, bit, matting $57.04 101 45201 220
034312 MID AMERICA METER, INC 2" meter, parts & clean $275.91 601 49430 220
034313 MUSKE,CHUCK void check -$45.00 101 41120 103
034313 MUSKE,CHUCK remainder 1sy Q mtgs $45.00 101 41120 103
034314 OFFICE DEPOT printer/copier/scanner $317.84 1'01 41430 240
034314 OFFICE DEPOT toner cartridge $26.60 105 42210 200
034314 OFFICE DEPOT markers, pens, tape $50.59 101 42120 200
034314 OFFICE DEPOT printer cartridges, cable, adapter, folders $97.25 101 41430 200
034315 PHILIPPI PLUMBING/HEATING LLC urinal repair-millstream $95.00 101 45202 220
034316 QPR 1.5 ton cold patch $108.00 101 43120 220
034317 R. L. LARSON EXCAVATING, INC liberty pointe pay #7 $17,551.25 428 43124 530
034318 SEH engineering-liberty pointe $3,491.32 428 43124 530
034318 SEH engineering-storm water uti! $332.50 428 49900 530
034318 SEH engineering-st joe trans plan $1,058.39 101 43131 303
034318 SEH engineering-general $2,386.24 101 43131 303
034318 SEH engineering-EDA industrial park $159.00 150 46500 303
034318 SEH engineering-graceview $429.25 101 43131 303
034318 SEH engineering-municipal state aid $1,032.39 101 43131 303
034318 SEH engineering-capital imp plan $128.14 101 43131 303
034318 SEH engineering-cloverdale $245.50 431 43120 530
034318 SEH engineering-2003 trunk water $302.58 428 49430 530
034318 SEH engineering-water treatment plant $12,035.53 601 49420 303
034318 SEH engineering-st wendel sewer neg $488.25 101 43131 303
034318 SEH engineering-callaway st $2,671.50 101 43131 303
.~ SEH engineering-arcon $1,563.00 101 43131 303
SEH engineering-northland 7 $505.90 428 43123 530
034318 SEH engineering-gateway commons $216.50 101 43131 303
034318 SEH engineering-graceview 2 $2,775.00 101 43131 303
034318 SEH engineering-northland 8 $3,868.50 430 43120 530
034318 SEH engineering-pond view 7 $159.00 101 43131 303
CITY OF ST JOSEPH 06/01/044:37 PM
Page 2
Bills Payable
·
Check # Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ
034318 SEH engineering-dist model & tower sizing $2,888.99 601 49410 530
034318 SEH engineering-foxmore hollow $1,245.51 101 43131 303
034318 SEH engineering-morningside acres $7,951.06 101 43131 303
034318 SEH engineering·storm water mgmt $4,261.87 428 49900 530
034318 SEH engineering·northland 8 $3,536.39 430 43120 530
034319 SERVOCAL INSTRUMENTS, INC water meter repair $397.00 601 49410 220
034320 STAMP FULFILLMENT SERVICES stamped envelopes $1,034.85 101 41430 322
034321 TIREMAXX SERVICE CENTERS tractor tire repair $23.45 101 45202 220
034322 TRAUT WELLS water test $35.00 601 49420 312
034322 TRAUT WELLS water test $105.00 601 49420 312
034323 ACCLAIM BENEFITS·REIMB reim, flex-medical $180.00 101
034324 AMCOR PRECAST fuel tank $7,465.21 490 43120 520
034325 BANYaN DATA SYSTEM aub support $234.68 602 49490 215
034325 BANYaN DATA SYSTEM aub support $234.68 601 49440 215
034325 BANYaN DATA SYSTEM aub support $234.67 603 43230 215
034325 BANYaN DATA SYSTEM fund acct support $704.04 101 41530 215
034326 BATTERIES PLUS battery $74.54 105 42220 220
034327 BATTERIES PLUS pager batteries $32.04 105 42220 220
034328 BROCK WHITE COMPANY tubing-city hall $70.62 101 41942 220
034329 BROMENSCHENKEL,MARTY security-seven dust concert $120.00 101 42120 102
034330 COLD SPRING ELECTRIC SERVICES rec assoc-repair cross brace $927.74 101 45125 530
034331 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE 5/26 pay state $1,115.96 101
034332 COMPLETE ELECTRONICS microphone $223.65 101 41950 580 ·
034332 COMPLETE ELECTRONICS plug assembly, jack assembly, wire, power sup $192.77 101 41950 230
034333 EFTPS 5/26 pay fica $2,538.16 101
034333 EFTPS 5/26 pay fed $2,611.26 101
034334 HARD RIVES blacktop $47.33 101 45202 220
034335 HONER PUMPING rec assoc-flag pole $1,597.00 101 45125 530
034336 ING LIFE INS & ANNUITY COMPANY 5/26 pay deferred comp $75.00 101
034337 JANSKY, CASEY security·seven dust concert $120.00 101 42120 102
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE couplers, nipples $40.18 601 49440 220
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE nipples $28.65 601 49440 220
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE smoke detector $9.57 101 41942 220
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE caulk gun, silicone, rust stop $17.27 602 49472 230
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE cap $4.78 101 45202 220
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE sod cutter rental $47.93 101 43120 410
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE screws, nails, casing $6.60 101 41942 220
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE fertilizer $5.74 101 45202 220
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE sprinkler $5.75 101 45202 220
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE metric nuts $0.69 101 45202 220
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE maint supplies $10.52 101 43120 220
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE rakes $17.24 101 45202 220
034338 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE conduit elbows, couplers $5.04 101 41942 220
034339 LEEF BROS clothing service/floor runner $60.75 101 41942 220
034339 LEEF BROS clothing service/floor runner $20.52 101 42120 220
034340 LESNICK, MARGE remainder 1 st Q plan mtgs $60.00 101 41120 103
034341 LlNGL, GREG & JULIE reim vacuum bags $21.35 101 41942 220
034341 LlNGL, GREG & JULIE cleaning service, May $275.00 101 41942 300
034342 MCFOA dues,2004 $40.00 101 41430 433
034343 MECHANICAL ENERGY SYSTEMS reim overpayment $77.50 101 00000
034344 METRO PLUMBING & HEATING rec assoc-millstream bathroom repair $30.00 101 45125 530
034345 NAHAN, TOM video tapes $8.56 101 41950 210
034346 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INSURANCE life insurance $9.00 101 ·
034347 OFFICE MAX binders $8.54 101 41430 200
034347 OFFICE MAX paper, folders, stapler, file box $60.70 105 42210 200
034347 OFFICE MAX tabs $37.20 101 41430 200
034347 OFFICE MAX credit return -$10.87 101 41430 200
034347 OFFICE MAX mailing labels $12.83 105 42210 200
034348 PERA 5/26 pay retire $3,646.08 101
CITY OF ST JOSEPH ' 06/01/044:37 PM
Page 3
Bills Payable
.
Check # Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ
034349 SAMS CLUB chlorinate $106.82 601 49440 220
034350 SCHRODEN'S INC. seeding-maint facility $603.40 429 43120 580
034351 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS utilities-maintfac $376.73 101 45201 381
034351 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS utilities-dbllabs $42.05 602 49471 381
034351 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS utilities-willenbring $550.25 101 43160 386
034351 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS utilities-northland $49.51 602 49472 381
034351 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS utilities-h&h $33.00 602 49472 381
034351 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASS utilities-co rd 121 $46.45 602 49473 381
034352 THOMSEN'S GREENHOUSE plants $104.40 490 45203 531
034353 XCELENERGY electric utilities $10.11 101 45202 381
034353 XCEL ENERGY gas utilities $36.00 101 45201 383
034353 XCELENERGY electric utilities $93.40 101 43160 386
$116,636.40
.
-
.
DRAFT
April 28, 2004
Page 1 of 2
. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the St. Joseph City Council and the EDA for the City of St.
Joseph met in joint session on Wednesday, April 28, 2004 at 4:30 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall.
City Council Members Present: Mayor Larry Hosch. Councilors Gary Utsch, AI Rassier, Ross Rieke,
Dale Wick. Administrator Judy Weyrens.
EDA Members Present: Chair Ross Rieke. Members Tom Skahen, Larry Hosch, Bruce Gohman,
Michael Deutz. EDA Director Cynthia Smith-Strack.
Alternative Transportation routes: Hosch stated the City is beginning to discuss future transportation
corridors in anticipation of the realignment of County Road 2. The City Engineer has prepared four (4)
scenarios for discussion purposes only. The Council has already discounted one option as the proposed
design routed traffic away from the downtown area. Weyrens clarified that at this time the City is only
seeking feedback on general traffic patterns. The transportation study will facilitate and determine the
exact location of the road. Hosch stated that Stearns County has scheduled the re-alignment of County
Road 2 for 2007.
Deutz questioned how traffic will be encouraged to continue to the downtown area instead of by-passing
the City to County Road 75. Hosch stated that whatever transportation route is selected, the design
should not make it difficult or an effort to go to the downtown area. The main purpose of the by-pass is
to route truck traffic away from the residential district. Discussion also included the following:
· Rassier stated that he would like to see an intersection at Highway 75 and County Road 2.
· Signalization at County Road 2 will create a viable commercial intersection and in the planning
process, consideration should be given to assure that the intersections parcels are developable.
· The proposed alignments have been forwarded to the developers of Gateway Commons for
comment.
· The current Orderly Annexation Agreement does not extend to all property being discussed at
. this time. The City should consider approaching St. Joseph Township to discuss the potential
expansion of the Orderly Annexation area.
· At the present time there is a disadvantage to the City if property abutting County Road 2 is
annexed. If the property is in St. Joseph Township~ Stearns County will pay for the right-of-way
cost of the realignment.
· Gohman suggested the City hire a master planner to determine the optimal lot size for
commercial development. This should be done before the location of the road is determined so
that the intersection can provide for prime commercial development.
· Wick questioned why we would put residential developments near commercial developments.
Gohman and Hosch agreed that different land uses should be able to co-exist with one another.
They believe that business can merge with residential developments if the business serves the
neighborhood. Rieke believes that we want to harvest on commercial developments but we also
need to help residential developments.
Discussion on proposed Industrial Park: Strack stated that the EDA has been researching alternative
Industrial Property as there is very little property left for Industrial Development. She further stated that
she has contacted the owner representative for the St. Joseph Business Park and he has indicated that
only two lots have not been sold. Strack stated that she has had numerous discussions with
representatives from Borgert, who have approximately 7.32 Acres of Industrial property adjacent to Elm
Street. This area has municipal services and improved roadways.
Deutz questioned the zoning of the two parcels of the Buettner Plat that are designated as Highway
Business. He stated it is his opinion that these properties could be developed commercially as they are
not visible for County Road 75. Gohman stated that when the property was platted the EDA allowed the
property owner to retain the frontage lots for commercial.
. Strack stated that she has also been in contact with the owners of the Feld Property and will be meeting
with a potential developer on April 30, 2004 to discuss a possible public/private partnership in conjunction
DRAFT
April 28, 2004
Page 2 of 2
with an Industrial Park. She questioned those present as to what assistance, if any, the City would be .
willing to provide to help the creation of a new industrial park. The Council agreed that the City should
not be taking a risk on development and would be willing to work with the developer and possibly issue
improvement bonds.
Strack stated that the City/EDA could develop a portion of the Feld property, perhaps starting with 40
acres, creating lots with a 3 acre minimum. In order for the Feld property to be developed, utilities and
streets would have to be extended. The estimate to extend services as provided by SEH is
approximately $ 2.6 Million. At that rate, the lots would have to sell for approximately $ 60 - $ 75 per
acre, which is greater than the market will bear. The current industrial property is selling for
approximately $ 40 per acre.
The members came to a conclusion stating that for a new industrial development to prosper, it must be in
a good location and be accessible. Right now, we are a growing metropolitan area and accessibility is not
that great.
Other Matters
Buildinq Official: Skahen stated he has received some feedback regarding the new Building Official and
questioned the Council if the City has expanded the service or received the service that was promised.
Hosch stated that in his opinion the services provided have exceeded the past service as the City has a
Building Official working 40 hours per week. Some contractors have experienced difficulty adjusting to
the new process, but the concerns of the contractors are declining. Inspectron is working on providing
an Inspector for St. Joseph but has yet to find a qualified individual. It is anticipated that by early summer
an Inspector will be in place.
Next Meetinq: The members of the EDA and of the City Council have decided that they would like to meet
3-4 times per year to discuss items of mutual concern. The meetings will be scheduled as issues arise. .
WobeQon Trailhead Center: Skahen stated that on Friday, April 30, 2004, the St. Joseph Chamber of
Commerce will be turning the keys for the Wobegon Trailhead Center over to the-City. Skahen
commended Deutz for his time and commitment to the project.
Landscapinq: The Sentence to Serve crew will be at the City offices the week of May 17,2004 to work
on the landscaping around City Hall. Rassier stated that he received quotes for the landscaping material
and will have the matter placed on the May 6, 2004 Council agenda.
The meeting was adjourned by consensus.
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
.
DRAFT
May 6, 2004
Page 1 of 3
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session
. on Thursday, May 6, 2004 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall.
Members Present: Mayor Larry Hosch. Councilors Gary Utsch, AI Rassier, Dale Wick, Ross Rieke.
Administrator Judy Weyrens.
City RepresentativesPresent: City Engineer Tracy Ekola
Approve AQenda: Wick made a motion to approve the agenda with the following changes;
seconded by Utsch and passed unanimously.
Addition 7 (a) Park Board Appointment
Addition 9 (c) Software Purchase - Point of Sale
Consent Aaenda: Rassier made a motion to approve the consent agenda as follows:
a. Bills Payable - Approve check numbers 34150 - 34240
b. Application for Payment - Authorize the Mayor to execute Pay Application No. 7 for the
2003 Liberty Pointe Improvements and authorize payment in the amount to R. L. Larson
Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $ 17,551.25
c. Liability Insurance - Authorize the administrator to execute the LMCIT Liability Coverage
Waiver Form, verifying the City does not waive the monetary limits on tort liability.
d. Assessor Appointment - Appoint Ollie Lesnick as the Assessor for the 2005 Assessment.
e. Premise Permit - Accept the premise permit for Lawful Gambling for the American
Legion Post # 328.
f. Antenna Location - Deny the request of Clearwire to collocate an antenna on the water
tower facility.
g. City Hall Landscaping - Accept the quote of Scenic Specialties in the amount of $
. 1,284.61 for landscaping materials to be placed around the City Office Building.
h. Gambling License - Accept the application of the St. Joseph Recreation Association for a
premise permit Gambling License for pull tabs to be sold at the St. Joseph Millstream
Park Concession Stand.
The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
Public Comments - No one present wished to speak.
CITY ENGINEER REPORTS
MNdot AQency AQreement: Ekola presented the Council with Agency Agreement between the City of St.
Joseph and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The agreement is a requirement for federal
funding and outlines the terms and conditions of accepting Federal Funding. Ekola stated that she has
reviewed the agreement and recommends the Council authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute
the Agency Agreement.
Rassier made a motion adopting resolution 2004-17, Agency Agreement for South Bypass
Corridor Study and authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute the same. The motion was
seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously.
16th Avenue SE Utility Extension: Ekola reported that the City has received a request from Thomas
Schleper and Urban Schriefels to extend utilities services to their property located on 16th Avenue SE.
Both properties are in need of sewer service as their septic systems are failing and they have been
notified by Stearns County Environmental Services that the systems need to be replaced. If municipal
services cannot be extended, the property owners will be required to replace their existing systems at a
cost estimate of $ 12,000 each.
.
DRAFT
May 6, 2004
Page 2 of 3
SEH reviewed the possibility of extending sewer along 9151 Avenue in December of 2003. At that time the
estimated cost of improvement was $ 39,328 per lot. The estimate was not cost effective or feasible. .
In reviewing alternatives, it was determined that the existing water/sewer lines on Pond View Lane could
be extended along the side and rear yard property lines to service the two properties mentioned above
and one lot owned by Pond View Ridge LLP. Ekola requested authorization to extend an offer of services
to the properties mentioned above, and if they are willing to pay the cost of extension the matter will be
brought back to the City Council. The Council agreed by consensus to extend the services if the affected
property owners agree to bare the cost.
MAYOR REPORTS
Park Board Appointment: Mayor Hosch reported that the City only received one application for the two
open Park Board seats. Wick reported that the Park Board has reviewed the application of Bob loso for
appointment to the Park Board and have requested the Council affirm his appointment. Therefore, Wick
made a motion to appoint Bob Loso to the Park Board to fill the vacant seat of Kyle Schneider,
whose term ends in January 2007. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously.
Fire Board MeetinQ: Hosch reported that the he attended the Fire Board Meeting where the following
items were discussed:
1. FEMA Grant - The Fire Department has applied for FEMA funding for the purchase of
new pagers, turnout gear and an extrication tool.
2. New Fire Firefighters - The Fire Department is in the process of recommending four new
firefighters.
School Committee: Hosch reported that the School Committee has been meeting twice a month and are
requesting the Council establish a budget for the Committee. It is the opinion of the Committee that a
professional survey should be conducted to assist with determining the needs of the community. The .
survey area would consist of the Fire District boundaries including the City of St. Joseph, St. Joseph
Township and St. Wendel Township. The cost of the survey is based on the number of questions, with a
15 question survey estimated at $ 9,000. The survey has a 4% accuracy rate and a guaranteed response
number of 350.
Hosch stated that if the City would like to add questions, it could be done so at this time. Wick stated that
the disadvantage to lengthening the survey is that people may not want to take time to complete a long
survey. It may be easiér to conduct a survey that is relatively short, but concise. The Council concurred
with Wick. Hosch stated that the Committee has begun formulating the questions and welcomes any
suggestions from the City Council.
Rassier questioned how the survey will be funded. Weyrens stated that the refuse fund has a balance
that could support a transfer of $ 15,000 which could be used for the survey. Hosch stated that the
Committee will try and reimburse the funds expended for the survey. Hosch requested the Council
establish a total budget for the School Committee which will be used for postage, supplies and the
survey.
Utsch made a motion authorizing the transfer of $ 15,000 from the Refuse Fund to the General
Fund, for the purpose of establishing a budget for the School Committee. In addition, this motion
authorizes the Mayor to execute the agreement between the City of St. Joseph and St. Cloud State
Survey, to conduct a survey to determine the area needs for education at a cost not to exceed $
12,000.00. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
Land Donation: Hosch reported that the City has received a donation of land from Mark Lambert. The
land is located adjacent to the Water Storage Facility and will be used for additional parking for the
Wobegon Welcoming Center. The Council expressed their gratitude to Lambert for his generous
donation. Utsch made a motion to accept the donation of a land from Mark Lambert and authorize .
DRAFT
May 6, 2004
Page 3 of 3
the City Attorney to prepare the necessary documents to transfer property ownership to the City
· of St. Joseph. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously.
COUNCIL REPORTS
UTSCH
Plannina Commission Update: The Planning Commission met on May 3, 2004 and conducted a public
hearing for the rezoning of certain property on Birch Street East and to finalize the rezoning request for
Foxmore Hollow. Both matters will come before the Council on May 20, 2004.
WICK - No Report
RASSIER - No Report
RIEKE - No Report
ADMINISTRATOR REPORTS
Point of Sale Software: Weyrens requested authorization to purchase Point of Sale Software. The Point
of Sale Software is used as an electronic receipt book and to track daily funds. The Software integrates
with the existing Utility Billing and Accounting Software. Rieke made a motion authorizing the
purchase of the Point of Sale Software at a cost of $ 2,400.00. The motion was seconded by Wick
and passed unanimously.
Adjourn: Utsch made a motion to adjourn at 7:45 PM; seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.-
·
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
·
Draft
May 20,2004
Page 1 of 8
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session
· on Thursday, May 20, 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, Rental Housing Inspector Tom Wigfield
Approve Aqenda: Wick made a motion to approve the agenda with the following changes:
Move 5 Discuss Audit after Park Dedication fees
Move 9 Discuss Building Official Report before Why USA Rezoning Request
Delete 7 (a) Council previously acted on this matter
Delete 7 (d) Table this topic until further information is available
Add 10 (d) Advertisement for bids for 16th Avenue
Add 14 (b) Liquor license - La Playette
Add 14 (c) Employee Health Insurance Renewal
Add 14 (d) Hiring of Consultant for Building Services
The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously.
Consent Aqenda: Utsch made a motion to approve consent agenda as follows. A motion was
seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously.
a. Bills Payable - Approve check numbers 34241-34292
b. Minutes - Approve the City Council minutes of April 6 and April 15, 2004
c. Safety Manual - Authorize the expenditure to update the safety manual
d. Fire Fighter Appointment - Accept the recommendation of the Fire Board and appoint Shirley
· Brill, Amanda Cherne, Ken Jacobson and John Prom to the St. Joseph Volunteer Fire
Department
e. Meeting Fees - Increase Planning Commission meeting fees to $35.00 per meeting effective
January 1, 2004. -
f. Intoxicating Liquor Licenses, Wine Licenses, and Club Licenses - Approve Liquor licenses
for the period July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005, pending receipt of the applicable fees,
insurance certificates, and application forms.
Public Comments to the Aqenda:
Jerry Hasselbrink, court appointed attorney for Arthur Klein, addressed the Council regarding the
rezoning of Birch Street East. He stated that the residential houses in the affected area should be
maintained as single family homes. He also addressed the topic of affordable housing and stated that the
St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan refers to affordable housing and the area in discussion contains
affordable housing, meeting one of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Hasselbrink also discussed the
following:
· People who are interested in living in that area would like this to remain a residential
neighborhood.
· If a person stands at the corner of Birch Street and 1 sl Ave, and they look west, they will see
commercial, but if they look east, there is a lot of green area that protects those homes and
makes it a livable area.
· He feels there is no need for commercial development in the City of St. Joseph
· Hasselbrink stated that there is a need for the City to maintain affordable housing.
· If the re-zoning takes place, this will incorporate a "fly-over" mentality in which the
neighborhood will not be treated with respect.
· This will either interfere with neighborhoods or it will continue to provide affordable housing.
Andrew Berger, 26 E Birch Street, stated that he sees this as a benefit to himself and his wife as well as
· the City. He stated that this is a risk that they are taking, but they are in favor of the re-zoning.
1
Draft
May 20, 2004
Page 2 of 8
Hasselbrink addressed the Council again and stated that he feels the Council should be representing ·
those who are not going to profit from the re-zoning and that the Council should take a closer look at the
original petition and the legality of the number of signers needed.
Buildinq Official Report: Tom Wigfield spoke on behalf of Inspectron as he is the City's Rental Housing
Inspector. He addressed the Council with a Rental Inspection Checklist that he would like approval from
the Council so that they can be incorporated into the rental housing inspection program. The first intended
use of the forms is to inform the rental property owners of the content and extend of the inspection for
licensure. The second purpose is to encourage and allow the property owner to do his/her own rental
inspection prior to the scheduled inspection. This should result in better informed owners and higher
compliance rates with fewer re-inspections.
The Council had some questions for Wigfield regarding the checklist. Hosch questioned if all the criteria
needs to be met for all properties. Wigfield responded by stating that not everything will apply to all
properties. Fences, for example, are not required, but if they already have an existing one, it would apply
to them. Wick stated that if a certain item does not apply, there should be an un/a" field. Rassier
questioned whether they would get this before the inspection or the day of. According to Wigfield, they will
get a copy in advance and they can use it as a checklist as they get ready for the inspection. He also
stated that after the inspection, they should know exactly what needs to be taken care of. A rental
housing meeting is going to be held on June 14th to discuss the revised rental license process. A mailing
will be sent to all the effected parties with the checklist as well as an agenda as to what will be discussed.
During the discussion of the Council, Rassier asked if this was our new in-house Building Official.
Weyrens replied that he is not the new Building Official, but he is the Rental Inspector for the City.
Rassier also questioned whether or not he has ever worked in a college atmosphere. Wigfield stated that
he has worked in a college atmosphere in the past.
Why USA - Rezoninq Request - Birch Street East: Janel Weisen of Why USA addressed the council ·
representing the buyer of 38 Birch Street East. She stated that the petition for reaoning was submitted so
that the house located at 38 Birch Street East could be converted to office space. The office will not be
disruptive to the neighborhood as the hours will be Monday through Friday, 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM.
Hosch stated that approval of a rezoning requires a super majority (4/5 vote) of the Council to pass. Wick
questioned how many properties are involved in the rezoning petition. Weyrens stated that there were six
(6) properties initially but the Planning Commission expanded the area including the two properties east
of 1 st Avenue NE and abutting Birch Street East. It was the opinion of the Planning Commission that the
entire area should be included at this time as it is consistent with the future land use plan of the
Comprehensive Plan. Rieke asked for some background on the issue.
Utsch spoke on behalf of the Planning Commission. He stated that a Public Hearing conducted by the
Planning Commission to rezone the property abutting Birch Street from the current R1, Residential to B2,
Highway Business. The finding from the Planning Commission is that the rezoning of the area in question
is consistent with the St. Joseph Comprehensive Plan. The City also received a petition requesting the
rezoning from over 50% of the property owners affected. The Planning Commission took a lot of issues
into consideration before recommending the Council rezone the property from the current R1, Single
Family to B2, Highway Business. Some of the issues discussed include the fact that it will be hard to sell
that property as residential in the future and not too many people want to live along County Road 75.
Rassier stated that when he and Hosch were elected, one of the first things they looked at was where
businesses should be located and Birch Street was seemed like an obvious location. At that time, a
Public Hearing was conducted to rezone the same property being discussed at this meeting. The
Planning Commission and Council agreed to wait to rezone the property until a time when it was ready for
development. Now, we have slow interest moving businesses into that area.
Wick stated that he has a couple of concerns with this rezoning. ·
1. We don't know how the property will be used once it has been rezoned.
2
Draft
May 20,2004
Page 3 of 8
2. We don't know how they will use the alley and side street.
. Utsch spoke again and stated that by rezoning this area, we would be following the Comprehensive Plan.
He also says that the Council should look at the request as though it were initiated by the Planning
Commission, as they added to the area and authorized the public hearing. Utsch again stated that the
proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Wick stated that the findings of the
Planning Commission indicate the request has been submitted by WHY USA, therefore, a boundary
survey and development plan should have submitted. Weyrens stated that she has discussed the matter
with the City Attorney, and there are two ways the issue can be resolved:
1. The Council can by motion acknowledge that the City Council initiated the petition for rezoning
and after the motion is voted and passed they can then discuss the results of a public hearing
conducted by the Planning Commission.
2. The Council can deny the request of Why USA and have the Council or Planning Commission
motion to initiate the process and conduct a new public hearing.
Hosch stated that he does believe the Planning Commission initiated the process in part by adding the
remaining two houses. However, his concern with the rezoning is some of the permitted uses within the
B2 Zoning Ordinance. Hosch clarified that he is not opposed to the rezoning, but would like to discuss
further what uses should be allowed abutting Birch Street. For example, a strip mall would be detrimental
to the abutting residential district and that use is permitted in the B2 Zoning District. Hosch stated that in
reviewing the Zoning Ordinances he would prefer to rezone the area in discuss to B1, General Business.
Weyrens stated that before that could be considered, the Comprehensive Plan must be amended.
Rassier made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission to rezone the
property abutting Birch Street from R1 to B2. The resolution of findings include that the rezoning
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The motion was seconded by Utsch.
. Ayes: Utsch, Rieke, Rassier
Nays: Hosch, Wick Motion Carried 3:2:0 (Motion fails due to 4/5 requirement)
Hosch stated that he is not opposed to the rezoning or the conversion of the property at 38 Birch Stree!
East to an office building. He doesn't want to rezone the whole area forfear of making a rezoning
mistake. Utsch stated that as a result of the request being denied, it must go through the process again
and go back to the Planning Commission. Utsch questioned Hosch and asked if he would rather rezone
one piece of property at a time. Hosch says he would like to see a plan lot being developed. With that
being said, Utsch asked him if he wanted to see a plan every time even though it is in accordance with
the Ordinance. According to the way the Ordinance(s) are written, Rieke said that is not part of the
process and to require such would require an Ordinance(s) change. Hosch stated that he is concerned
about the permitted uses under B2. He would like to have a moratorium put on that area for future uses
until this matter is resolved.
Weyrens asked the Council if it would be acceptable to rezone the area and look at requesting a Special
Use Permit for property abutting a residential area. Hosch is concerned about certain businesses such
as retail strip malls or grocery stores. Utsch stated that he would rather rezone the area property by
property rather than rezoning the whole area and then having to go through the Special Use process after
the area has been rezoned.
Hosch made a motion to table action on the rezoning request and instruct the Planning
Commission to consider amending the B2 Zoning Ordinance requiring a Special Use Permit for
development abutting a residential neighborhood. The motion was seconded by Rieke.
Ayes: Rieke, Hosch
Nays: Utsch, Wick, Rassier Motion Failed 2:3
. Rieke stated that it is his opinion that the neighborhood in question is ready to convert to business uses.
Hosch stated he would like to amend the Ordinance to require any new business within 100 feet of a
3
Draft
May 20,2004
Page 4 of 8
residential area, apply for a Special Use Permit. Utsch stated that issuance of a Special Use Permit would ·
require the Planning Commission to draft a new Ordinance. Utsch further stated that the Council can not
take parts of B1, B2, and B3 and put them together without going through a public hearing process.
Rassier stated that the City needs to decide what type of business fits a certain area and the Council
needs to follow the guidelines established in the Comprehensive Plan that was just adopted in 2003.
Hosch stated that it was not his intent to deny the rezoning request, but cannot vote on the amendment to
the Zoning Map in the present format. Utsch again stated that if a new zoning classification is desired,
that hearing process requires approximately two months. After the Ordinance is amended, WHY USA
would need to re-apply to have the property rezoned and a new public hearing would be required. Hosch
stated that he would support waiving the application fee for WHY USA.
Rieke made a motion to clarify where the petition came from, acknowledging that the petition
before the Council to rezone certain property on Birch Street East from R1, Single Family to B2,
Highway Business was initiated by the City Council. The motion was seconded by Rassier.
Ayes: Utsch, Rassier, Rieke, Hosch
Nays: Wick
Rassier questioned the Council as to where this is going? Rieke stated that Hosch wants to change the
Ordinance and he is trying to determine a method whereby the property could be rezonedB2 and the
neighborhood could be protected as well. Rassier stated that the Planning Commission considered the
matter before the Council and it is his opinion that the Council should not micro-manage the actions of the
Planning Commission.
Hosch made a motion to table the rezoning request to review the Zoning Ordinance and determine
a method in which the abutting neighborhood is protected from development. Motion dies for
lack of a second. ·
2003 Audit: Jennifer Thienes of KDV approached the City Council. She stated that KDV is the City's
Independent Auditor and presented the Council with the 2003 Annual Audit. Included in the audit is an
opinion, management letter and detailed financial report.
Thienes presented the Council with the following information:
· The City transferred $430,000 from the General Fund to the General Capital Improvement
Fund. This transfer represents budgeted capital funds which have been accumulated for
more than one budget period and will be used for capital equipment purchases. Without the
transfer, the General Fund would have shown an increase.
· The City received a reduction in Local Government Aid in 2003 as a result of legislative
actions. However, despite this loss the City still showed an increase in revenues over
expenditures. This increase is due in part to the increase in building permits.
· The General Fund Revenues remained fairly steady from 2002 to 2003.
· General Fund Expenditures decreased from 2002 to 2003. This is a result in the purchase of
a new Fire Truck, decrease in wages and professional services.
· Refuse and Water funds have shown operating incomes, however the sewer fund has shown
an operating loss as a result of depreciation.
· As a result of such a small staff, there is a lack of segregation of Accounting duties.
· The City authorized the imposition of administrative fines as a result of the loss of aid.
However, during 2003 the Attorney General issued an opinion that Cities do not have the
authority to charge Administrative Fines for traffic related offenses. Even though the City did
not issue any Administrative Fines, the adoption of the Ordinance is considered a finding of
fact. The Council must rescind the portion of the Ordinance relating to traffic citations.
Minnesota State Statute 169.022 states that cities are to refrain from issuing Administrative
Fines. ·
· The City is in the process of implementing GASB 34.
4
Draft
May 20,2004
Page 5 of 8
. Foxmore Hollow: Bob Herges and Rick Heid are requesting approval to amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan, Rezoning of Foxmore Hollow to a mix of R1, Single Family and R3 Multiple Family,
a Special Use Permit to construct an apartment complex, and the Preliminary Plat of Foxmore Hollow.
Weyrens stated that the Planning Commission and City Council have already approved the amendment
to the Comprehensive Plan that will allow R3 development along County Road 121. Since the property is
now consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the Council can act on the rezoning request, which requires
a petition of the property owner, boundary survey and concept plan. Both the boundary survey and
concept plan have been submitted. Weyrens stated that at this time the Council cannot act on the
Preliminary Plat of Foxmore Hollow as the City Engineer is still reviewing the drainage requirements.
Utsch made a motion to accept the findings of the Planning Commission and rezone Outlot A of
Foxmore Hollow from R1, Single Family to R3, Multiple Family. The motion was seconded by
Rassier and passed unanimously.
As a result of having incomplete plans at this time, it is recommended by the Planning Commission that
the Council deny the request for Special Use Permit. As with Sand Companies, it was the
recommendation of the Planning Commission that the hearing fee be waived for the Special Use Permit
after the detailed plans have been submitted. Rassier stated that it is his opinion the concept plan
submitted will be a nice addition to the neighborhood along County Road 121.
Rieke made a motion to deny the Special Use Request of Foxmore Hollow as sufficient
information was not available. The motion was seconded by Utsch and passed unanimously.
Ordinance Amendment. Park Dedication Fees: The Park Board has requested an amendment to the
Ordinance entitled, Public Land Dedication. The proposed amendment would change the method of
calculation for parkland from a percentage of land value to a per lot fee. Wick spoke on behalf of the Park
. Board and stated that a joint meeting was held between the Park Board and the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission has approved the new method of calculation to a per lot fee which includes
trails. The proposed fees would be based on 0.78 cents of the land value. The new fee would establish
the following per lot par~ dedication fees:
For single-family homes $ 914
Multi-family $ 975
Commercial/I ndustrial 2% of the land value
Rieke questioned if the fees will change when the City completes an annual review of fees and what
would create a need to increase the per lot fee. Wick stated the Park Board is in the process of
establishing a Capital Improvement Plan. The fees collected should defray the cost to expand and
enhance the park system.
Rassier stated that he thinks this is going to be a huge increase for developers and stated his
disappointment that park dedication fees cannot be used to maintain existing parks.
Rassier made a motion to Amend Ordinance 54.18 to adopt a per lot park dedication fee for Single
Family and Multiple Family Developments. The motion was seconded by Utsch and passed
unanimously.
Utsch stated that he would like the Planning Commission to have some opinion on the Park Dedication
Fee. Hosch stated that the Planning Commission is not involved in fees, so he feels there is no need for
them to look at the fees. Wick stated that while this may be an increase for some developments, it is the
opinion of the Park Board that new development should pay for the additional park space that is needed.
.
5
Draft
May 20,2004
Page 6 of 8
CITY ENGINEER REPORTS
Feasibility Report - 16th Avenue: Bettendorf stated that all the property owners requesting service on 16th .
Avenue SE has signed a petition for annexation and haye agreed to pay the cost of the improvements.
Therefore, the Council must annex the property and accept the Feasibility report ordering the project.
Rassier made a motion authorizing the Mayor and Administrator to execute the Resolution for
annexation, annexing Thomas Schleper and Urban Schriefels. In addition, upon annexation, the
property will be zoned as R1, Single Family. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed
unanimously.
Rassier made a motion to accept Resolution 2004-18, Resolution Declaring Adequacy of Petition
and Ordering Preparation of Report. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
Utsch made a motion accepting Resolution 2004-19, Resolution Receiving Report and calling for
hearing on the Improvement for the Resolution to order improvements. The motion was seconded
by Rassier and passed unanimously.
Update 295th: Bettendorf reported that seven residents have not responded to the survey as of this date.
As soon as information is available it will be forwarded to the City Council for review and action.
Bettendorf stated that he has had the opportunity to review the construction of a booster station to provide
equal water pressure to those residents living on the top of 1 03rd Avenue. A booster station is similar to
that of a small garage with dimensions of approximately 9 x 15. There is a possibility that the station
could be located on property owned by the natural gas company. If the project on 295th is to move
forward this option will explored in greater depth.
Water System: Bettendorf stated that they have completed the analysis of the water system and are
working on the design for the new water filtration plant. The new plant will have enough capacity to
accommodate the growth of St. Joseph and hopefully a portion of St. Wendel Township. .
Storm Water Manaaement Plan: Bettendorf stated that he is working on the Storm Water Plan and it
should be ready for the Council shortly. The goal of the Storm Water Plan is to develop regional ponding
and strategically place the ponds to accommodate growth.
County Rd 121-Sanitarv Sewer Repairs: Bettendorf stated that he has had the opportunity to review the
tapes of the repaired sewer line on County Road 121. The contractor only did the repairs that were
necessary, not what they were asked to do. He has talked to the Stearns County Engineer who agreed
the utility installation is less than desirable. The work that was done was not what was contracted for.
Rassier asked if the City should seek legal assistance on this matter. Bettendorf stated that he has a
meeting with Dick and Jim to look at this and put something together.
Callaway Street: Bettendorf reported that the Plans for Callaway are almost complete and are ready to
be circulated for bidding. Therefore, the Council must authorize the solicitation of bids. Rassier made a
motion accepting Resolution 2004-17, Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering
Advertisement for Bids. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously.
MAYOR REPORTS - None
COUNCIL REPORTS
RIEKE
EDA Meetina: EDA met yesterday and they discussed the marketing of the Township Industrial Park.
The City has hired consultants to help facilitate development and the question has arisen as to what is the
policy of the City if the City does not have appropriate land for a developer? Does the City refer leads to
other agencies or jurisdictions. There was no conclusion made on what happens in this situation.
.
6
Draft
May 20,2004
Page 7 of 8
RASSIER
. Stearns County Municipal Leaque Meetinq: Rassier attended the Stearns County Municipal League
meeting which was held in Sauk Center. The Stearns County Attorney was present and discussed
Administrative Fines. It is the opinion of the Stearns County Attorney that Administrative Fees are
effective and Cities should have the ability to issue such. Hosch stated that the Attorney General has
rendered an opinion and Cities do not have the ability to issue Administrative fines.
WICK
Bicvcle Friendlv Community: Wick stated that St. Joseph was not accepted into the Bicycle Friendly
Program for 2004. The program was competitive and only one-half of the applicants were accepted.
Wick stated that City can re-apply next year. .
UTSCH
Birch S1. - Rezoninq: Utsch asked Weyrens to ask the City Attorney about the motions during the
discussion on the re-zoning of Birch Street. Utsch questioned whether or not a rezoning request did in
fact require a four-fifths vote.
ADMINISTRATOR REPORTS
Downtown Liqhtinq Project: Weyrens stated that the Council needs to look over the costs for the
Downtown Lighting Project. She suggested that they discuss this at the Finance/Budget meeting that is
scheduled for May 26, 2004 at 5:00 PM.
Liquor License for LaPlavette: The owners of the La Playette are requesting a license transfer from La
Playette Inc. to Aces' Inc. The transfer is being requested as two of the four owners no longer have
interest in the property and Dave and Sharon Aistrup are the owners. Since they were owners of the
former partnership, any violations will carry forward to the new license.
. Rassier made a motion to approve the Liquor License for Ace's Inc, d.b.a. LaPlayette pending
completion of the required fees and applications. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed
unanimously.
Health Insurance: The City received the renewal rate for the employee health insurance and the new
rates reflected a 53% increase in premiums. As a result, the City employees were asked to complete a
questionnaire to quote different insurance. We received quotes from Principal, Medica, and Blue Cross.
Compared with the renewal rates from Principal, Blue Cross would have a monthly savings of
approximately $7,000 a month for the City. The policy that Blue Cross quoted was very similar to the
existing policy whereas the policy that Principal quoted included large deductibles and was a significant
change from the current policy. The former plan of the City had a different rate for each person based on
age and number of dependants. The proposed plan establishes two rates, single and family and age no
longer is a factor in determining the rates. The proposed contract is for an eighteen-month period.
Rassier made a motion authorizing the Administrator to execute the contract documents between
the City of St. Joseph and Blue Cross Blue Shield to provide Health Insurance to qualified
employees. The contract period is June 15, 2004 through December 31, 2005. The motion was
seconded by Utsch and passed unanimously.
Buildinq Official - Maintenance Facilitv: It is the recommendation of City Staff to hire an outside
consultant to review the construction of the Maintenance Facility. The fee for the inspection will be
funded through the Building Inspection Services. Rieke made a motion to approve the hiring of an
outside contractor to Inspect the recently constructed Maintenance Facility. The motion was
seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously.
Funds Transfer: Weyrens stated that in finalizing the auditor for 2003, it was noticed that not all
. designated capital funds were placed in the Capital Projects fund. The majority of the transfers involve
7
Draft
May 20, 2004
Page 8 of 8
Park Dedication fees. The net effect of the transfers is a reduction to the General Fund in the amount of ·
$ 47,427.42 and in increase in the same amount to the Capital Project fund.
Wick made a motion to authorize the transfer $ 47,427.42 from the General fund to the Capital
Project Fund as requested. The motion was seconded by Utsch and passed unanimously.
Adjourn: Wick made a motion to adjourn; seconded by Utsch and passed unanimously.
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
·
·
8
DRAFT
May 26, 2004
Page 1 of 3
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in special session
. Wednesday, May 26, 2004 at 5:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall.
Members Present: Acting Mayor Gary Utsch. Councilors AI Rassier, Dale Wick, Ross Rieke.
Administrator Judy Weyrens.
City Representatives Present: Public Works Director Dick Taufen, Wastewater Operator Jim Marthaler,
Police Chief Pete Jansky.
Acting Mayor Utsch called the meeting to order and stated the purpose of the meeting is to review capital
purchases for the year 2004. Weyrens stated that when the budget was prepared for the tax year 2004,
the levy limits restricted the City from budgeting for capital equipment. Therefore, the Council agreed to
review annually capital equipment needs and purchase the same through equipment certificates. The re-
payment of the certificates are outside of levy limits and the City would have the ability to levy the annual
payment. With that in mind the Council agreed to discuss the needs of each department.
Maintenance Department
Dick Taufen, Public Works Director requested authorization to purchase a new % ton 4 door pick up at a
cost of $ 20,377. Taufen clarified that the estimate is based on the State Contract of which Cities are
allowed to participate. Since the State Contract prices are a result of competitive bidding, the trucks can
be purchased directly from the distributor without soliciting additional quotes. Taufen stated his truck is
ten years old and needs to be replaced. He is requesting to purchase an extended cab so that he has the
ability to carry maps and other documents as well as having the ability to transport more than one person.
Weyrens stated the truck would be financed through the water fund and capital rollover funds with each
paying one-half.
. Jim Marthaler, Wastewater Operator stated that he too is seeking authorization to purchase a truck,
however he is requesting a 1 ton duly, F350 at a cost of $ 21,625.00. Marthaler stated that the City does
not have a vehicle that can effectively transport the two generators, as a one-ton is needed. Marthaler
stated that he is also requesting authorization to purchase the following:
High pressure Sewer Flushing Machine $ 128,095.00
Trailer Mounted Air Conveyance Unit 67,143.00
Self Propelled Easement Machine 17,924.54
Tandem Axle Dump Trailer 7,998.80
Total $ 221,162.33
Marthaler stated that the one-ton vehicle would also be used for the dump trailer and conveyance unit.
Utsch questioned Marthaler if he could use the truck that is part of the flushing machine rather than
purchasing an additional truck. Utsch stated it is his understanding that trucks that are not utilized are
prone to mechanical problems and using the truck as a multi purpose truck would alleviate this concern.
Marthaler responded that the flushing machine will be a multi purpose truck as it will replace the tanker
and will be used year round.
Rassier questioned if Marthaler couldn't pass his truck to Taufen, thereby only purchasing one new truck.
Marthaler clarified that the two requests before the Council are from different departments and requested
the Council consider each as such. Marthaler stated that he is also requesting authorization to purchase
a snow plow blade that could be mounted to the front of the new truck. Weyrens stated that the truck
proposed by Marthaler would be funded half from the sewer fund and half from the capital rollover fund.
Rassier made a motion authorizing the purchase of a Chevrolet Siverado 2500 at a cost of $ 20,377
and a Ford F350 at a cost of $ 21,625.00. Both vehicles will be purchased through the State
Contract and the expenditure will be divided equally between the water, sewer and capital project
-- fund. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously.
DRAFT
May 26, 2004
Page 2 of 3
Before making a decision on the purchase of the Sewer Flushing Machine, the Council agreed to review ·
the other capital equipment requests.
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Police Chief Jansky presented the Council with the following requests for purchase:
Tasers (2) - The police department currently has two tasers which are non-lethal weapons and
Jansky is requesting to purchase an additional two (2). Total cost estimate: $ 2,000.00
Portable Radios (8) - The current portable radios that are being used are approximately 10 years
old and the parts are expensive if they need to be repaired. The current radios are not reliable
and could compromise police officer safety. Total cost estimate: $ 8,400.00
Trunk Vaults (3) - With the addition of the new weapons and equipment, it has become important
to make sure the police cars are secure at all times. The trunk vault would store the shotgun, M-
16, extra ammunition and other miscellaneous equipment. Locking the weapons in the trunk will
assure that they will not be stolen and end up in the wrong hands. Total cost estimate: $
3,200.00.
Hand Guns and Leather (10) - The current weapons that the officers carry were purchased in
approximately 1990. Currently the City does not have enough weapons for all the Officers, so
two carry their own weapon which is a .40 caliber. Jansky is requesting authorization to purchase
ten (10) .40 caliber weapons to update the department and provide consistency with area
departments. Totalcost estimate is $ 4,700.00, including trade-in.
Mobile Radios - The mobile radio is the main method of communicating with other departments.
Like the portable radios, the mobile radios are outdated and unreliable. Total cost estimate: $ ·
2,600.00.
- Radar - When the new squad car arrives in 2004, it would be ideal to update the radar with a
moving and stationary Doppler radar. The radar has a life expectancy of 10 years. Total Cost
Estimate: $ 2,000.00.
Video Camera - Jansky requested to purchase an additional camera for the new squad car that
is scheduled to arrive in 2004. The St. Joseph Lions donated one camera to the City and agreed
to purchase the third camera if the City purchased the second camera. Due to a decline in
gambling, the Lions are unable to contribute the third camera at this time. Jansky stated that he
will budget for that camera when the next squad car is ordered. Total cost estimate: $ 4,000.00.
The Council agreed that it is important to update equipment and provide adequate equipment to assure
Officer safety. After considerable discussion the Council agreed to wait on funding two trunk vaults and
the Tasers. The trunk vaults are fitted to a specific vehicle and it seems appropriate to fit the cars with
equipment as the cars are updated. Therefore, the trunk vaults can be added as the current squad cars
are replaced. With regard to the Tasers, it was the understanding of the Council that the current Tasers
have some mechanical issues and they agreed to wait until 2005.
ADMINISTRATION
Weyrens requested the Council consider converting the existing filing system from paper to an electronic
version. As the City grows so do the permanent records that the City is required to maintain. An
electronic filing system would allow the information to be cataloged and scanned. Once scanned, the
data can be retrieved by word search and documents can be retrieved with ease. The scanned files
would be cataloged, boxed and stored, freeing up the space where the filing cabinets sit. The estimated
cost to begin the process is $ 17,000.00 ·
DRAFT
May 26,2004
Page 3 of 3
. Rassier made a motion authorizing the purchase of the following equipment:
High pressure Sewer Flushing Machine $ 128,095.00
Trailer Mounted Air Conveyance Unit 67,143.00
The equipment will be financed with an equipment certificate with repayment of the bond to be a
combination of levy and rates.
Discussion: As the need to purchase the flushing machine at this time is created by the
expiration of the State Bid prices on May 31,2004, the Council requested that Marthaler received
competitive quotes for the equipment that is not under the State contract price. The Council will
then reconsider the equipment when the financing alternatives are presented on June 3, 2004.
After reviewing the needs of the Departments, the Council was in general agreement to move forward
with the following purchases and review the financial impact of such purchases on June 3, 2004..
QTY Item Description Estimate Total
8 Portable Radios $ 8,400.00
1 Trunk Vault $ 1,000.00
10 .40 Caliber Hand guns and Leather $ 4,700.00
1 Mobile Radio $ 2,600.00
1 ,- Radar $ 2,000.00
1 Video Camera $ 4,000.00
1 Electronic Filing $ 20,000.00
$ 42,700.00
. Adjourn: Wick made a motion to adjourn at 6:45 PM; seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously.
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
.
. I Attachment: Yes or No I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Street Closure
DATE: June 17,2004
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Street Closure - Authorize the closure of College A venue on July 3, 2004 between the hours of 6:00 PM
and 9:00 PM.
PREVIOUS ACTION
Each year the City is requested to close the street for the annual St. Joseph Fire Department Waterball
. fight. In the past the waterball fight was held on Minnesota Street East. This year they are requesting to
close College A venue as it is closer to the parish grounds and the other festivities held that evening.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Approve as requested
FISCAL IMPACT
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDA TIONS
The Fire Department has already approached Steams County and they have indicated that if the City
approves the request they will do the same, but will not do so without written verification.
.
I Attachment: Yes or No I
.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
WHY USA - Rezoning
DATE: June 3,2004
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Why USA - Request to conduct a public hearing for the rezoning of property on Birch Street East.
PREVIOUS ACTION
The City Council considered the request of WHY USA to rezone property along Birch Street East on May
20, 2004. The Council voted on a motion to approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission
and rezone certain property along Birch Street East from current Rl, Single Family to B2, Highway
Business. The motion was seconded and passed by a 3-2 vote. However, a change in land use requires a
. 4/5th vote of the Councilor 2/3rd. Therefore, the motion failed.
I have reviewed this matter with Tom Jovanovich who agrees that the vote required for rezoning is
Statutory and is included in the Ordinance Book ip. the same fashion. Once the Council acts on the
rezoning request, the decision is fmal and cannot be appealed. The Ordinance does allow for a petitioner
to resubmit the same application if the Council agrees with a 2/3rd vote
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Consider the request to conduct a new public hearing for the rezoning along Birch Street and waive the
public hearing fee
FISCAL IMPACT
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
.
19Joo~
.
June 1~ 2004
Dear City Council Members
This is a request to ask you to reconsider the re-zoning for Birch Street East in St Joseph. - .
I am representing both Dorothy Court who is currently residing at 38 Birch Street St. Joseph, -
and the buyer Superstar Sports who is currently leasing office space in 8t Joseph. This request is
on behalf of Superstar Sports.
I once again ask the a Public hearing would be granted and this matter would be reconsidered.
Thank you for you time. Feel :free to contact me any time at 266-2126.
Sincerely,
Janel Weísen
WHY USA EQUITY REALTY
Realtor.
.
@[B---
~~ PQU~ ",US
Each Offiœ Independently
O\'med and Operated
02001 WHY USA North America. Ine,
ORDINANCE 52 - ZONING ORDINANCE
-. appeal, adjustment, special use permit or variance shall pay a fee according to the
schedule established by the City Council.
b) Amount. Fees payable under this section for an amendment or rezoning, appeal,
special use permit, or variance shall be in an amount as established by resolution
of the City Council. The fee is payable at the time of filing a petition and is not
refundable. In addition to the above fees and in the event the City incurs
professional fees, either legal, engineering or professional planners, or any other
cost, including but not limited to, postage and publication expenses, the applicants
shall reimburse the City for those fees, and the City officials may require a
deposit for these fees prior to the fmal hearing on the application.
c) Contents of Petition. The petition shall give the street address of the land as to
which the petition is made, contain a legal description thereof, state the mailing
address of the owner, and clearly describe the structure to be built or altered if the
petition is granted, or if the petition is for a change in any regulations of this
Ordinance, it shall state the change and the reasons therefore. The petition shall
also contain any other information which is required by other Sections of this
Ordinance. The Planning Commission may require the petitioner to submit a
certificate by a registered land surveyor verifying the front, rear and side-yard
setbacks of all buildings and structures situated on or adjacent to the property
. described in the petition.
- d) Successive Applications. Whenever an application for an amendment has been
considered and denied by the City Council, a similar application for an
~ amendment affecting substantially the same property shall not be considered
again by the Planning Commission or City Council for at least six (6) months
from the date of its denial, unless a decision to reconsider such matter is made by
not less than four-fifths (4/5) vote òfthe full City Council."
.
52.07-11
. I Attachment: Yes or No I
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Bonding - 2004 Issuance
DATE: June 3, 2004
Administration
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
2004 Bonding - Monte Eastvold
PREVIOUS ACTION
The Council has previously authorized the issuance of public financing for Northland Plat 8. Since that
time the City has also agreed to add improvements to 4 lots on 16th A venue. In addition utility
improvements, the City has received authorization from Bond Counsel to issue bonds for the paving of
the north parking lot for the Wobegon Welcoming Center. In order to accomplish the parking lot
pavement or park development, the City needed to include the costs a part of the hearing notice for the
improvements. Therefore, the Council will be conducting a public hearing for the 16th A venue
. improvements as well as the park improvements on June 17,2004. The bonds for the improvements will
be over a five year period.
The second part of the bonding is to review the impact of the equipment certificates discussed on May 26,
2004. The City has already authorized the purchase of the sewer flushing machine.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION
Issue bonds for the 2004 Improvement Projects
FISCAL IMPACT
Monte Eastvold will provide at the meeting
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS
As the improvement issue is relatively small, the City will be conducting a negotiated bond sale at the
meeting on Thursday evening. This is the same procedure used for other bond issues of the same size as
issuance of public sale bonds are cost prohibitive at this level.
As FYI, the City's bond rating has increased from a Baa2to Baal. The next rating would take the City
. into an "A" rating. Monte Eastvold will explain how the rating was increased.
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE ·
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
HELD: JUNE 3, 2004
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular or special meeting of the City Council
of the City of St. Joseph, Stearns County, Minnesota, was duly held at the City Hall on June 3,
2004, at P.M., for the purpose, in part, of authorizing the issuance and awarding the sale
of $430,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 2004.
~ 5'8'0 000
The following members were present:
and the following were absent:
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF
$430,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF
2004, PLEDGING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE SECURITY
THEREOF AND LEVYING A TAX FOR THE PAYMENT THEREOF ·
A. - WHEREAS, the City Council of the City ofSt. Joseph, Minnesota (the "City"),
has heretofore detennined and declared that it is necessary and expedient to issue $430,000 5\;:0,000
General Obligation Improvement Bonds of2004 (the "Bonds") of the City, pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475, to finance the construction of various improvements
in the Northland 8th Addition Improvement Project within the City (the "Improvements"); and
B. WHEREAS, the Improvements and all their components have been ordered prior
to the date hereof, after a hearing thereon for which notice was given describing the
Improvements or all their components by general nature, estimated cost, and area to be assessed;
and
C. WHEREAS, no other obligations have been sold pursuant to a private sale within
the last twelve (12) calendar months of the date hereof which when combined with this issue
would exceed the $1,200,000 limitation on negotiated sales as required by Minnesota Statutes,
Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(2); and
D. WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City that the Bonds be issued in book-
entry form as hereinafter provided; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of St. Joseph,
Minnesota, as follows:
·
1. Acceptance of Offer. The offer of Northland Securities, Inc. (the "Purchaser"), to
· purchase the Bonds of the City (or individually, a "Bond"), in accordance with the terms and at
the rates of interest hereinafter set forth, and to pay therefor the sum of $ , plus
interest accrued to settlement, is hereby accepted.
2. Bond Terms.
(a) Title: Original Issue Date: Denominations: Maturities: Term Bond Option. The
Bonds shall be titled "General Obligation hnprovement Bonds of2004", shall be dated June 1,
2004, as the date of original issue and shall be issued forthwith on or after such date in fully
registered form. The Bonds shall be numbered from R-l upward in the denomination of $5,000
each or in any integral multiple thereof of a single maturity (the "Authorized Denominations").
The Bonds shall mature, without option of prepayment, on December I in the years and amounts
as follows:
Year Amount
2005-2008 $85,000
2009 90,000
All dates are inclusive.
As may be requested by the Purchaser, one or more term Bonds may be issued having
· mandatory sinking fund redemption and final maturity amounts conforming to the foregoing
principal repayment schedule, and corresponding additions may be made to the provisions of the
applicable Bond(s).
(b) Book Entry Only System. The Depository Trust Company, a limited purpose
trust company organized under the laws of the State of New York or any of its successors or its
successors to its functions hereunder (the "Depository") will act as securities depository for the
Bonds, and to this end:
(i) The Bonds shall be initially issued and, so long as they remain in book
entry form only (the "Book Entry Only Period"), shall at all times be in the form of a
separate single fully registered Bond for each maturity of the Bonds; and for purposes of
complying with this requirement under paragraphs 5 and 10 Authorized Denominations
for any Bond shall be deemed to be limited during the Book Entry Only Period to the
outstanding principal amount of that Bond.
(ii) Upon initial issuance, ownership of the Bonds shall be registered in a bond
register maintained by the Bond Registrar (as hereinafter defined) in the name 0 f CEDE
& CO., as the nominee (it or any nominee ofthe existing or a successor Depository, the
"Nominee").
(iii) With respect to the Bonds neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall
have any responsibility or obligation to any broker, dealer, bank:, or any other financial
· institution for which the Depository holds Bonds as securities depository (the
"Participant") or the person for which a Participant holds an interest in the Bonds shown
I 650374vl
on the books and records of the Participant (the "Beneficial Owner"). Without limiting .
the immediately preceding sentence, neither the City, nor the Bond Registrar, shall have
any such responsibility or obligation with respect to (A) the accuracy of the records of the
Depository, the Nominee or any Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the
Bonds, or (B) the delivery to any Participant, any Owner or any other person, other than
the Depository, of any notice with respect to the Bonds, including any notice of
redemption, or (C) the payment to any Participant, any Beneficial Owner or any other
person, other than the Depository, of any amount with respect to the principal of or
premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds, or (D) the consent given or other action taken
by the Depository as the Registered Holder of any Bonds (the "Holder"). For purposes of
securing the vote or consent of any Holder under this Resolution, the City may, however,
rely upon an omnibus proxy under which the Depository assigns its consenting or voting
rights to certain Participants to whose accounts the Bonds are credited on the record date
identified in a listing attached to the omnibus proxy.
(iv) The City and the Bond Registrar may treat as and deem the Depository to
be the absolute owner of the Bonds for the purpose of payment of the principal of and
premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds, for the purpose of giving notices of
redemption and other matters with respect to the Bonds, for the purpose of obtaining any
consent or other action to be taken by Holders for the purpose of registering transfers
with respect to such Bonds, and for all purpose whatsoever. The Bond Registrar, as
paying agent hereunder, shall pay all principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the
Bonds only to the Holder or the Holders of the Bonds as shown on the bond register, and
all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the City's .
obligations with respect to the principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds
to the extent-üfthe sum or sums so paid.
(v) Upon delivery by the Depository to the Bond Registrar of written notice to
the effect that the Depository has determined to substitute a new Nominee in place of the
existing Nominee, and subject to the transfer provisions in paragraph 10 hereof,
references to the Nominee hereunder shall refer to such new Nominee.
(vi) So long as any Bond is registered in the name of a Nominee, all payments
with respect to the principal of and premium, if any, and interest on such Bond and all
notices with respect to such Bond shall be made and given, respectively, by the Bond
Registrar or City, as the case may be, to the Depository as provided in the Letter of
Representations to the Depository required by the Depository as a condition to its acting
as book-entry Depository for the Bonds (said Letter of Representations, together with any
replacement thereof or amendment or substitute thereto, including any standard
procedures or policies referenced therein or applicable thereto respecting the procedures
and other matters relating to the Depository's role as book-entry Depository for the
Bonds, collectively hereinafter referred to as the "Letter of Representations").
(vii) All transfers of beneficial ownership interests in each Bond issued in
book-entry form shall be limited in principal amount to Authorized Denominations and
shall be effected by procedures by the Depository with the Participants for recording and .
transferring the ownership of beneficial interests in such Bonds.
1650374vl
. (viii) In connection with any notice or other communication to be provided to
the Holders pursuant to this Resolution by the City or Bond Registrar with respect to any
consent or other action to be taken by Holders, the Depository shall consider the date of
receipt of notice requesting such consent or other action as the record date for such
consent or other action; provided, that the City or the Bond Registrar may establish a
special record date for such consent or other action. The City or the Bond Registrar shall,
to the extent possible, give the Depository notice of such special record date not less than
15 calendar days in advance of such special record date to the extent possible.
(ix) Any successor Bond Registrar in its written acceptance of its duties under
this Resolution and any paying agency/bond registrar agreement, shall agree to take any
actions necessary ITom time to time to comply with the requirements of the Letter of
Representations.
(x) In the case of a partial prepayment of a Bond, the Holder may, in lieu of
surrendering the Bonds for a Bond of a lesser denomination as provided in paragraph 5
hereof, make a notation of the reduction in principal amount on the panel provided on the
Bond stating the amount so redeemed.
(c) Termination of Book-Entrv Only System. Discontinuance of a particular
Depository's services and termination of the book-entry only system maybe effected as follows:
(i) The Depository may determine to discontinue providing its services with
. respect to the Bonds at any time by giving written notice to the City and discharging its
responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. The City may terminate the
services of the Depository with respect to the Bond if it determines that the Depository is
~ no longer able to carry out its functions as securities depository or the continuation of the
system of book-entry transfers through the Depository is not in the best interests of the
City or the Beneficial Owners.
(ii) Upon termination of the services of the Depository as provided in the
preceding paragraph, and if no substitute securities depository is willing to undertake the
functions of the Depository hereunder can be found which, in the opinion of the City, is
willing and able to assume such functions upon reasonable or customary terms, or if the
City determines that it is in the best interests of the City or the Beneficial Owners of the
Bond that the Beneficial Owners be able to obtain certificates for the Bonds, the Bonds
shall no longer be registered as being registered in the bond register in the name of the
Nominee, but may be registered in whatever name or names the Holder of the Bonds
shall designate at that time, in accordance with paragraph 11. To the extent that the
Beneficial Owners are designated as the transferee by the Holders, in accordance with
paragraph 10 hereof, the Bonds will be delivered to the Beneficial Owners.
(iii) Nothing in this subparagraph (c) shall limit or restrict the provisions of
paragraph 10.
, (d) Letter of Representations. The provisions in the Letter of Representations are
. incorporated herein by reference and made a part of the resolution, and if and to the extent any
1650374vl
such provisions are inconsistent with the other provisions of this resolution, the provisions in the .
Letter of Representations shall control.
3. purpose. The Bonds shall provide funds to finance the Improvements. The total
cost of the Improvements, which shall include all costs enumerated in Minnesota Statutes,
Section 475,65, is estimated to be at least equal to the amount ofthe Bonds. Work on the
Improvements shall proceed with due diligence to completion. The City covenants that it shall
do all things and perform all acts required of it to assure that work on the Improvements
proceeds with due diligence to completion and that any and all permits and studies required
under law for the Improvements are obtained.
4. Interest. The Bonds shall bear interest payable semiannually on June 1 and
December 1 of each year (each, an "Interest Payment Date"), commencing December 1, 2004,
calculated on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months, at the respective rates per
annum set forth opposite the maturity years as follows:
Maturity Interest
Year Rate
2005 %
2006
2007
2008
2009 .
5. No Redemption. The Bonds shall not be subject to redemption and prepayment
prior to their maturity.
6. Bond Registrar. , In ,
Minnesota, is appointed to act as bond registrar and transfer agent with respect to the Bonds (the
"Bond Registrar"), and shall do so unless and until a successor Bond Registrar is duly appointed,
all pursuant to any contract the City and Bond Registrar shall execute which is consistent
herewith. The Bond Registrar shall also serve as paying agent unless and until a successor
paying agent is duly appointed. Principal and interest on the Bonds shall be paid to the
registered holders (or record holders) of the Bonds in the manner set forth in the form of Bond
and paragraph 12 oftms resolution.
7. Fonn of Bond. The Bonds, together with the Bond Registrar's Certificate of
Authentication, the fonn of Assignment and the registration infonnation thereon, shall be in
substantially the following form:
.
1650374vl
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
· STATE OF MINNESOTA
STEARNS COUNTY
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
R- $
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BOND OF 2004
Interest Rate Maturity Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP
% December 1, _ June 1, 2004
REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO.
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT:
THE CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, Steams County, Minnesota (the "Issuer"), certifies that it is
indebted and for value received promises to pay to the registered owner specified above, or
registered assigns, in the manner hereinafter set forth, the principal amount specified above,
· without option of prepayment, on the maturity date specified above, and to pay interest thereon
semiannually on June 1 and December 1 ol each year (each, an "Interest Payment Date"),
commencing December 1, 2004, at the rate per annum specified above (calculated on the basis of
a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months) until the principal sum is paid or has been provided for.
This Bond will bear interest from the most recent Interest Payment Date to which interest has
been paid or, if no interest has been paid, from the date of original issue hereof. The principal of
and premium, if any, on this Bond are payable upon presentation and surrender hereof at the
principal office of , In , Minnesota
(the "Bond Registrar"), acting as paying agent, or any successor paying agent duly appointed by
the Issuer. Interest on this Bond will be paid on each Interest Payment Date by check or draft
mailed to the person in whose name this Bond is registered (the "Holder" or "Bondholder") on
the registration books of the Issuer maintained by the Bond Registrar and at the address
appearing thereon at the close of business on the fifteenth day of the calendar month next
preceding such Interest Payment Date (the "Regular Record Date"). Any interest not so timely
paid shall cease to be payable to the person who is the Holder hereof as of the Regular Record
Date, and shall be payable to the person who is the Holder hereof at the close of business on a
date (the "Special Record Date") fixed by the Bond Registrar whenever money becomes
available for payment of the defaulted interest. Notice of the Special Record Date shall be given
to Bondholders not less than ten days prior to the Special Record Date. The principal of and
premium, if any, and interest on this Bond are payable in lawful money ofthe United States of
America.
No Redemption. The Bonds of this issue (the "Bonds") are not subject to redemption and
· prepayment prior to their maturity
1650374vl
Issuance; Purpose; General Obligation. This Bond is one of an issue in the total principal ·
amount of $430,000, all oflike date of original issue and tenor, except as to number, maturity,
interest rate and denomination, issued pursuant to and in full confonnity with the Constitution
and laws of the State of Minnesota and pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council of
the Issuer on June 3, 2004 (the "Resolution"), for the purpose of providing money to finance the
construction of various improvements within the jurisdiction of the Issuer. This Bond is payable
out of the General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 2004 Fund of the Issuer. This Bond
constitutes a general obligation of the Issuer, and to provide moneys for the prompt and full
payment of its principal, premium, if any, and interest when the same become due, the full faith
and credit and taxing powers ofthe Issuer have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged.
Denominations; Exchange; Resolution. The Bonds are issuable solely in fully registered
fonn in Authorized Denominations (as defined in the Resolution) and are exchangeable for fully
registered Bonds of other Authorized Denominations in equal aggregate principal amounts at the
principal office of the Bond Registrar, but only in the manner and subject to the limitations
provided in the Resolution, Reference is hereby made to the Resolution for a description of the
rights and duties of the Bond Registrar. Copies of the Resolution are on file in the principal
office of the Bond Registrar.
Transfer. This Bond is transferable by the Holder in person or by the Holder's attorney
duly authorized in writing at the principal office of the Bond Registrar upon presentation and
surrender hereof to the Bond Registrar, all subject to the tenns and conditions provided in the
Resolution and 'to reasonable regulations of the Issuer contained in any agreement with the Bond
Registrar. Thereupon the Issuer shall execute and the Bond Registrar shall authenticate and ·
deliver, in exchange for this Bond, one or more new fully registered Bonds in the name of the
transferee (but not registered in blank or to "bearer" or similar designation), of an Authorized
Denomination or Denominations, in aggregate principal amount equal to the principal amount of
this Bond, of the same maturity and bearing interest at the same rate.
Fees upon Transfer or Loss. The Bond Registrar may require payment of a sum
sufficient to cover any tax or other governmental charge payable in connection with the transfer
or exchange of this Bond and any legal or unusual costs regarding transfers and lost Bonds.
Treatment of Registered Owners. The Issuer and Bond Registrar may treat the person in
whose name this Bond is registered as the owner hereof for the purpose of receiving payment as
herein provided (except as otherwise provided herein with respect to the Record Date) and for all
other purposes, whether or not this Bond shall be overdue, and neither the Issuer nor the Bond
Registrar shall be affected by notice to the contrary.
Authentication. This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be
entitled to any security unless the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed
by the Bond Registrar.
Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligation. This Bond has been designated by the Issuer as a
"qualified tax-exempt obligation" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended.
·
1650374v1
. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFffiD AND RECITED that all acts, conditions and things
required by the Constitution and laws ofthe State of Minnesota to be done, to happen and to be
performed, precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond, have been done, have happened and
have been performed, in regular and due form, time and manner as required by law, and that this
Bond, together with all other debts of the Issuer outstanding on the date of original issue hereof
and the date of its issuance and delivery to the original purchaser, does not exceed any
constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City ofSt. Joseph, Stearns County, Minnesota, by its City
Council has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalfby the facsimile signatures of its
Mayor and its Administrator-Clerk, the corporate seal of the Issuer having been intentionally
omitted as permitted by law.
Date of Registration: Registrable by:
Payable at:
BOND REGISTRAR'S CITY OF ST. JOSEPH,
CERTIFICATE OF STEARNS COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AUTHENTICATION
. This Bond is one of the
Bonds described in the Isl Facsimile
Resolution mentioned Mayor
within.
Isl Facsimile
Administrator-Clerk
, Minnesota
Bond Registrar
By
Authorized Signature
.
1650374vl
ABBREVIA nONS ·
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall
be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations:
TEN COM - as tenants in common
TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties
JT TEN - as joint tenants with right of survivorship
and not as tenants in common
UTMA - as custodian for
(Cust) (Minor)
under the Uniform Transfers to Minors Act
(State)
Additional abbreviations may also be used
though not in the above list.
ASSIGNMENT
For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto
the within Bond and does
hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the Bond on
the books kept for the registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. ·
Dated:
Notice: The assignor's signature to tills assignment must
correspond with the name as it appears upon the
face of the within Bond in every particular, without
alteration or any change whatever.
Signature Guaranteed:
Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a national bank or trust company or by a brokerage firm
having a membership in one of the major stock exchanges or any other "Eligible Guarantor
Institution" as defined in 17 CFR240.17 Ad-15(a)(2).
The Bond Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information
concerning the transferee requested below is provided.
Name and Address:
(Include information for all joint owners if the Bond is held by joint account.)
·
1650374vj
8. Execution; Temporary Bonds. The Bonds shall be printed (or, at the request of
· the Purchaser, typewritten) and shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of its
Mayor and Administrator-Clerk and be sealed with the seal of the City; provided, however, that
the seal of the City maybe a printed (or, at the request of the Purchaser, photocopied) facsimile;
and provided further that both of such signatures may be printed (or, at the request ofthe
Purchaser, photocopied) facsimiles and the corporate seal may be omitted on the Bonds as
permitted by law. In the event of disability or resignation or other absence of either officer, the
Bonds may be signed by the manual or facsimile signature of an officer who may act on behalf
ofthe absent or disabled officer. In case either the officer whose signature or facsimile of whose
signature shall appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of the
Bonds, the signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the
same as if the officer had remained in office until delivery. The City may elect to deliver, in lieu
of printed definitive bonds, one or more typewritten temporary bonds in substantially the form
set forth above, with such changes as may be necessary to reflect more than one maturity in a
single temporary bond. Such temporary bonds may be executed with photocopied facsimile
signatures of the Mayor and Administrator-Clerk. Such temporary bonds shall, upon the printing
of the definitive bonds and the execution thereof, be exchanged therefor and canceled.
9. Authentication. No Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or be
entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution unless a Certificate of Authentication on
the Bond, substantially in the form hereinabove set forth, shall have been duly executed by an
authorized representative ofthe Bond Registrar. Certificates of Authentication on different
Bonds need not be signed by the same person. The Bond Registrar shall authenticate the
· signatures of officers of the City on each Bond by execution of the Certificate of Authentication
on the Bond and, by inserting as the date of registration in the space provided, the date on which
the Bond is authenticated, except that for purposes of delivçring the original Bonds to the
Purchaser, the Bond Registrar shall insert as a date of registration the date of original issue,
which date is June 1,2004. The Certificate of Authentication so executed on each Bond shall be
conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution.
10. Registration; Transfer; Exchange. The City will cause to be kept at the principal
office of the Bond Registrar a bond register in which, subject to such reasonable regulations as
the Bond Registrar may prescribe, the Bond Registrar shall provide for the registration of Bonds
and the registration of transfers of Bonds entitled to be registered or transferred as herein
provided.
Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, the
City shall execute (if necessary), and the Bond Registrar shall authenticate, insert the date of
registration (as provided in paragraph 9) of, and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee
or transferees, one or more new Bonds of any Authorized Denomination or Denominations of a
like aggregate principal amount, having the same stated maturity and interest rate, as requested
by the transferor; provided, however, that no Bond may be registered in blank or in the name of
"bearer" or similar designation.
At the option ofthe Holder, Bonds may be exchanged for Bonds of any Authorized
· Denomination or Denominations of a like aggregate principal amount and stated maturity, upon
surrender of the Bonds to be exchanged at the principal office of the Bond Registrar. Whenever
1 650374vl
any Bonds are so surrendered for exchange, the City shall execute (if necessary), and the Bond .
Registrar shall authenticate, insert the date of registration of, and deliver the Bonds which the
Holder making the exchange is entitled to receive.
All Bonds surrendered upon any exchange or transfer provided for in this resolution shall
be promptly canceled by the Bond Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City.
All Bonds delivered in exchange for or upon transfer of Bonds shall be valid general
obligations of the City evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the same benefits under this
resolution, as the Bonds surrendered for such exchange or transfer.
Every Bond presented or surrendered for transfer or exchange shall be duly endorsed or
be accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in fonn satisfactory to the Bond Registrar,
duly executed by the Holder thereof or his, her or its attorney duly authorized in writing.
The Bond Registrar may require payment of a sum sufficient to cover any tax or other
governmental charge payable in connection with the transfer or exchange of any Bond and any
legal or unusual costs regarding transfers and lost Bonds.
Transfers shall also be subject to reasonable regulations of the City contained in any
agreement with the Bond Registrar, including regulations which pennit the Bond Registrar to
close its transfer books between record dates and payment dates. The Administrator-Clerk is
hereby authorized to negotiate and execute the tenns of said agreement.
II. Rights Upon Transfer or Exchange. Each Bond delivered upon transfer of or in .
exchange for or in lieu of any other Bond shall carry all the rights to interest accrued and unpaid,
and to accrue, which were carried by such other Bond.
12. Interest Payment: Record Date. Interest on any Bond shall be paid on each
Interest Payment Date by check or draft mailed to the person in whose name the Bond is
registered (the "Holder") on the registration books of the City maintained by the Bond Registrar
and at the address appearing thereon at the close of business on the fifteenth day of the calendar
month next preceding such Interest Payment Date (the "Regular Record Date"). Any such
interest not so timely paid shall cease to be payable to the person who is the Holder thereof as of
the Regular Record Date, and shall be payable to the person who is the Holder thereof at the
close of business on a date (the "Special Record Date") fixed by the Bond Registrar whenever
money becomes available for payment of the defaulted interest. Notice of the Special Record
Date shall be given by the Bond Registrar to the Holders not less than ten days prior to the
Special Record Date.
13. Treatment of Registered Owner. The City and Bond Registrar may treat the
person in whose name any Bond is registered as the owner of such Bond for the purpose of
receiving payment of principal of and premium, if any, and interest (subj ect to the payment
provisions in paragraph 12) on, such Bond and for all other purposes whatsoever whether or not
such Bond shall be overdue, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall be affected by
notice to the contrary.
e
1650374vl
. 14. Delivery: Application of Proceeds. The Bonds when so prepared and executed
shall be delivered by the Administrator-Clerk to the Purchaser upon receipt of the purchase price,
and the Purchaser shall not be obliged to see to the proper application thereof.
15. Fund and Accounts. There is hereby created a special fund to be designated the
"General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 2004 Fund" (the "Fund") to be administered and
maintained by the Administrator-Clerk as a bookkeeping account separate and apart from all
other funds maintained in the official financial records of the City. The Fund shall be maintained
in the manner herein specified until all ofthe Bonds and the interest thereon have been fully
paid. There shall be maintained in the Fund the following separate accounts:
(a) Construction Account. To the Construction Account there shall be credited the
proceeds of the sale ofthe Bonds, less accrued interest received thereon, and less any amount
paid for the Bonds in excess of the minimum bid, and less capitalized interest in the amount of
$ (together with interest earnings thereon and subject to such other
adjustments as are appropriate to provide sufficient funds to pay interest due on the Bonds on or
before June 1, 2005), plus any special assessments levied with respect to the Improvements and
collected prior to completion of the Improvements and payment of the costs thereof. Prom the
Construction Account there shall be paid all costs and expenses of making the Improvements
listed in paragraph 16, including the cost of any construction contracts heretofore let and all other
costs incurred and to be incurred of the kind authorized in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.65.
Moneys in the Construction Account shall be used for no other purpose except as otherwise
provided by law; provided that the proceeds of the Bonds may also be used to the extent
. necessary to pay interest on the Bonds due prior to the anticipated date of commencement of the
collection of taxes or special assessments herein levied or covenanted to be levied; and provided
further that if upon completion of the Improvements there shall remain any unexpended balance
in the Construction Account, the balance (other than any special assessments) shall be transferred
by the City Council to the Debt Service Account or the fund of any other improvement instituted
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and provided further that any special assessments
credited to the Construction Account shall only be applied towards payment of the costs of the
Improvements upon adoption of a resolution by the City Council determining that the application
of the special assessments for such purpose will not cause the City to no longer be in compliance
with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, Subdivision 1.
(b) Debt Service Account. There are hereby irrevocably appropriated and pledged to,
and there shall be credited to, the Debt Service Account: (i) all collections of special
assessments herein covenanted to be levied with respect to the Improvements and either initially
credited to the Construction Account and not already spent as permitted above and required to
pay any principal and interest due on the Bonds or collected subsequent to the completion of the
Improvements and payment of the costs thereof; (ii) accrued interest received upon delivery of
the Bonds; (iii) all funds paid for the Bonds in excess of the minimum bid; (iv) capitalized
interest in the amount of $ (together with interest earnings thereon and subject to
such other adjustments as are appropriate to provide sufficient funds to pay interest due on the
Bonds on or before June 1, 2005); (v) any collections of all taxes herein or hereafter levied for
the payment of the Bonds and interest thereon; (vi) all funds remaining in the Construction
. Account after completion of the Improvements and payment of the costs thereof, not so
transferred to the account of another improvement; (vii) all investment earnings on funds held in
1650374vl
the Debt Service Account; and (viii) any and all other moneys which are properly available and ·
are appropriated by the governing body of the City to the Debt Service Account. The Debt
Service Account shall be used solely to pay the principal and interest of the Bonds and any other
general obligation bonds of the City hereafter issued by the City and made payable from said
account as provided by law.
No portion of the proceeds of the Bonds shall be used directly or indirectly to acquire
higher yielding investments or to replace funds which were used directly or indirectly to acquire
higher yielding investments, except (1) for a reasonable temporary period until such proceeds are
needed for the purpose for which the Bonds were issued and (2) in addition to the above in an
amount not greater than the lesser of five percent of the proceeds of the Bonds or $100,000. To
this effect, any proceeds of the Bonds and any sums from time to time held in the Construction
Account or Debt Service Account (or any other City account which will be used to pay principal
or interest to become due on the bonds payable therefrom) in excess of amounts which under
then-applicable federal arbitrage regulations may be invested without regard to yield shall not be
invested at a yield in excess of the applicable yield restrictions imposed by said arbitrage
regulations on such investments after taking into account any applicable "temporary periods" or
"minor portion" made available under the federal arbitrage regulations. Money in the Fund shall
not be invested in obligations or deposits issued by, guaranteed by or insured by the United
States or any agency or instrumentality thereof if and to the extent that such investment would
cause the Bonds to be "federally guaranteed" within the meaning of Section 149(b) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code").
16. Assessments. It is hereby determined that no less than 100% of the cost to the ·
City of each Improvement financed hereunder within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section
47S.S8,-Subdivision 1(3), shall be paid by special assessments to be levied against every
assessable lot, piece and parcel of land benefitted by any of the Improvements. The City hereby
covenants and agrees that it will let all construction contracts not heretofore let within one year
after ordering each Improvement financed hereunder unless the resolution ordering the
Improvement specifies a different time limit for the letting of construction contracts. The City
hereby further covenants and agrees that it will do and perform as soon as they may be done all
acts and things necessary for the fmal and valid levy of such special assessments, and in the
event that any such assessment be at any time held invalid with respect to any lot, piece or parcel
of land due to any error, defect, or irregularity in any action or proceedings taken or to be taken
by the City or the City Councilor any of the City officers or employees, either in the making of
the assessments or in the performance of any condition precedent thereto, the City and the City
Council will forthwith do all further acts and take all further proceedings as may be required by
law to make the assessments a valid and binding lien upon such property. The special
assessments have heretofore been authorized. Subject to such adjustments as are required by the
conditions in existence at the time the assessments are levied, it is hereby determined that the
assessments shall be payable in equal, consecutive, annual installments, with general taxes for
the years shown below and with interest on the declining balance of all such assessments at the
rates per annum not less than the rate per annum set forth opposite the collection years specified
below:
·
1650374vl
. Improvement Collection
Designation Amount Levv Years Years Rate
Northland 8th Addition Improvement $ 2004-2013 2005-2014
At the time the assessments are in fact levied the City Council shall, based on the then-
current estimated collections ofthe assessments, make any adjustments in any ad valorem taxes
required to be levied in order to assure that the City continues to be in compliance with
Minnesota Statutes, Sectiop.475.61, Subdivision 1.
Coverage Test. The special assessments are such that if collected in full they, together
with estimated collections of other revenues herein pledged for the payment of the Bonds, will
produce at least 5% in excess ofthe amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest
payments on the Bonds. Consequently, no tax levies are levied at the present time.
17. Defeasance. When all Bonds have been discharged as provided in this paragraph,
all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the registered holders of the
Bonds shall, to the extent permitted by law, cease. The City may discharge its obligations with
respect to any Bonds which are due on any date by irrevocably depositing with the Bond
Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full; or if any Bond
should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Bond
Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such
deposit. The City may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds,
. subject to the provisions oflaw now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by
depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a suitable banking institution qualified by law as an
escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities described in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67,
Subdivision 8, bearing interest payable at such times and at such rates and maturing on such
dates as shall be required, without regard to sale and/or reinvestment, to pay all amounts to
become due thereon to maturity.
18. Compliance With Reimbursement Bond Regulations. The provisions of this
paragraph are intended to establish and provide for the City's compliance with United States
Treasury Regulations Section 1.150-2 (the "Reimbursement Regulations") applicable to the
"reimbursement proceeds" of the Bonds, being those portions thereof which will be used by the
City to reimburse itself for any expenditure which the City paid or will have paid prior to the
Closing Date (a "Reimbursement Expenditure").
The City hereby certifies and/or covenants as follows:
(a) Not later than 60 days after the date of payment of a Reimbursement
Expenditure, the City (or person designated to do so on behalf of the City) has made or
will have made a written declaration of the City's official intent (a "Declaration") which
effectively (i) states the City's reasonable expectation to reimburse itself for the payment
of the Reimbursement Expenditure out of the proceeds of a subsequent borrowing; (ii)
gives a general and functional description of the property, project or program to which
. the Declaration relates and for which the Reimbursement Expenditure is paid, or
identifies a specific fund or account of the City and the general functional purpose thereof
1650374v1
from which the Reimbursement Expenditure was to be paid (collectively the "Project"); ·
and (iii) states the maximum principal amount of debt expected to be issued by the City
for the purpose of financing the Project; provided, however, that no such Declaration
shall necessarily have been made with respect to: (i) "preliminary expenditures" for the
Project, defined in the Reimbursement Regulations to include engineering or
architectural, surveying and soil testing expenses and similar prefatory costs, which in the
aggregate do not exceed 20% of the "issue price" of the Bonds, and (ii) a de minimis
amount of Reimbursement Expenditures not in excess of the lesser of$100,000 or 5% of
the proceeds of the Bonds.
(b) Each Reimbursement Expenditure is a capital expenditure or a cost of
issuance of the Bonds or any of the other types of expenditures described in Section
1.150-2(d)(3) of the Reimbursement Regulations,
(c) The "reimbursement allocation" described in the Reimbursement
Regulations for each Reimbursement Expenditure shall and will be made forthwith
following (but not prior to) the issuance of the Bonds and in all events within the period
ending on the date which is the later of three years after payment of the Reimbursement
Expenditure or one year after the date on which the Project to which the Reimbursement
Expenditure relates is first placed in service.
(d) Each such reimbursement allocation will be made in a writing that
evidences the City's use of Bond proceeds to reimburse the Reimbursement Expenditure
and, if made within 30 days after the Bonds are issued, shall be treated as made on the ·
day the Bonds are issued.
~
Provided, however, that the City may take action contrary to any of the foregoing covenants in
this paragraph upon receipt of an opinion of its Bond Counsel for the Bonds stating in effect that
such action will not impair the tax-exempt status of the Bonds.
19. General Obligation Pledge. For the prompt and full payment of the principal and
interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due, the full faith, credit and taxing
powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. If the balance in the Debt
Service Account is ever insufficient to pay all principal and interest then due on the Bonds and
any other bonds payable therefrom, the deficiency shall be promptly paid out of any other funds
of the City which are available for such purpose, and such other funds may be reimbursed with
or without interest from the Debt Service Account when a sufficient balance is available therein.
20. Certificate of Registration. The Administrator-Clerk is hereby directed to file a
certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Stearns County, Minnesota, together
with such other information as the Auditor shall require, and to obtain from the County Auditor
the certificate that the Bonds have been entered in the County Auditor's Bond Register, and that
the tax levy required by law has been made.
2I. Records and Certificates. The officers of the City are hereby authorized and
directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser, and to the attorneys approving the legality of the
issuance of the Bonds, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the ·
1650374v1
. Bonds and to the financial condition and affairs ofthe City, and such other affidavits, certificates
and information as are required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the
Bonds as the same appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as
otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any
heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations ofthe City as to the facts recited therein.
22. Negative Covenant as to Use of Bond Proceeds and Improvements. The City
hereby covenants not to use the proceeds of the Bonds or to use the Improvements, or to cause or
permit them to be used, or to enter into any deferred payment arrangements for the cost ofthe
Improvements, in such a manner as to cause the Bonds to be "private activity bonds" within the
meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the Code.
23. Tax-Exempt Status of the Bonds~ Rebate. The City shall comply with
requirements necessary under the Code to establish and maintain the exclusion from gross
income under Section 103 of the Code of the interest on the Bonds, including without limitation
(i) requirements relating to temporary periods for investments, (ii) limitations on amounts
invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Bonds, and (iii) the rebate of excess investment
earnings to the United States if the Bonds (together with other obligations reasonably expected to
be issued and outstanding at one time in this calendar year) exceed the small-issuer exception
amount of $5,000,000.
For purposes of qualifying for the small issuer exception to the federal arbitrage rebate
requirements for governmental units issuing $5,000,000 or less of bonds, the City hereby finds,
.- determines and declares that (i) the Bonds are issued by a governmental unit with general taxing
powers; (ii) no Bond is a private activity bond; (iii) ninety-five percent or more of the net
proceeds of the Bonds are to be used for local governmental activities of the City (or of a
governmental unit the jurisdiction of which is entirely within the jurisdiction of the City); and
(iv) the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt bonds (other than private activity bonds) issued
by the City (and all entities subordinate to, or treated as one issuer with the City) during the
calendar year in which the Bonds are issued and outstanding at one time is not reasonably
expected to exceed $5,000,000, all within the meaning of Section 148(f)(4)(D) ofthe Code.
24. Designation ofOualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. In order to qualify the Bonds
as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) ofthe Code, the
City hereby makes the following factual statements and representations:
(a) the Bonds are issued after August 7, 1986;
(b) the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as defined in Section 141 of the
Code;
(c) the City hereby designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt
obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code;
(d) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than
private activity bonds, treating qualified SOI(c)(3) bonds as not being private activity
. bonds) which will be issued by the City (and all entities treated as one issuer with the
1 650374vl
City, and all subordinate entities whose obligations are treated as issued by the City) ·
during this calendar year 2004 will not exceed $10,000,000; and
(e) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City during this
calendar year 2004 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b )(3) of the Code.
The City shall use its best efforts to comply with any federal procedural requirements which may
apply in order to effectuate the designation made by this paragraph.
25. Severability, If any section, paragraph or provision of this resolution shall be held
to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, the invalidity or unenforceability of such section,
paragraph or provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this resolution.
26. Headings, Headings in this resolution are included for convenience of reference
only and are not a part hereof, and shall not limit or define the meaning of any provision hereof.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and, after a full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
·
Whereupon the resølution was declared duly passed and adopted.
·
1650374\'1
· STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF STEARNS
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Administrator-Clerk of the City of
St. Joseph, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing
extract of minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a full, true
and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the City Council, duly called and held on
the date therein indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to authorizing the issuance and
awarding the sale of $430,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of2004.
WITNESS my hand on June _, 2004.
Administrator-Clerk
·
·
1 650374vl
I Attachment: Yes or No I
.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Public Works Director Reports
DATE: November 6, 2003
Public Works
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AGENDA ITEM
Street Name Change - Constitution Drive
PREVIOUS ACTION
None
. RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION
Change street name from Constitution Drive to 17th Avenue SE.
FISCAL IMPACT
COMMENTSIRECOMMENDATION
Right now, there is only one house that is occupied on Constitution Drive, so it would be nice to change
the name before any more homes are sold in that area. It would make more sense to have it named 17th
Avenue SE rather than Constitution Drive because it would be more consistent with the way the streets
are named in the City. This would be beneficial to both the Police and Fire Departments in emergency
situations.
.
Page 1 of 1
Juqy Weyrens
From: <tekola@sehinc.com> ·
To: <jweyrens@cityofstjoseph.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 2:29 PM
Subject: Morningside Acres addressing
Judy,
I called Randy Torberg today regarding addressing questions in Morningside Acres (I would have brought this to the staff meeting
last week - but I didn't get it until afterwards). Randy indicated he preferred Morningside Loop instead of Morningside Way (there
is at least one instance - Graceview Loop - where the city has used Loop already). The roadway fits the "loop" definition
according to the St. Cloud area addressing standards.
I will see if Sand Companies agrees to call it Morningside Loop. The suggestion I will give them for the east-west roadway is
Iverson St. W. Just let me know if you have any concerns or comments on this. If needed, we can review this again at the next
staff meeting which should be before the prelim plat hearing for Morningside (I think).
ALSO - Tyson tells me that we made a mistake when we named Constitution Drive. It should have been 17th Avenue. Can or
should this be changed now? According to Tyson there is only one home owner living on the N-S section of the street (the portion
of the street that would need to be renamed) but there are spec homes there also. I don't actually know how much work would be
involved to rename it - but I just wanted to check to see what you thought. If we are going to even consider renaming it - we
should probably do it before any more homes are sold.
Tracy L. Ekola, PE
Sr. Professional Engineer ·
SEH
1200 25th Avenue South
PO Box 1717
St Cloud, MN 56302-1717
320.229.4406
tekola@sehinc.com
www.sehinc.com
·
6/1/200
=W;, -J..J II ~M I ~ I' I I II II
./'..... FIFTH ¡ ~ NORfJI.AN) ÐRM:
flJ~ '\ :1 I
. ~ :AIW "4.."t. ,
f :j J.C ,~ S.£. I
Of /Y/\j~j e 1:1 I¡--
I 1.~ ,I ~. PI
(Q) ~
SEYEK1H AVE. s.E. I
- 1 ~ ~ W¡pEJCH1H VE.JM.E. '\
" I- ;j §I I I :=
l. EIGIITII AVE. s.E. -
1--,) 1'1 I LJ'r _r ·
, ~ ~ s.E. ~ J ~
- ¡~I ~ IfiJtI AVE r- :'
-"'~W= ===~.""
::= TÐm4 AVE. s.E. ~- .J ~-Itt...... ~ ,
§!ffi§1-- ,
t-- I-- ~ ,
t-- ~ ~ AYE. s.E.
I-- Ð.£VEHTK AYE. s.E. ,.- I" !--
r--- '- , _
-- -
I fk U\\ J ---j
TWa:n. AVE. SL --~ ~ 12TH A~ N.£.
~ - ~m iH IInæ~ - i ~
; ~ ~~\ \,l[[\' ~ ù1 ;, ~
I I--- ~~ H~' 7 r-- "
I r- I 7 I) j
lï1 v/ r--~~ I
TNRTœmI AYE. S.£. L.-¡ V J
¡-- -. s I I \ ~ FFTE9ITH AVE. H.£.
I -- \ I I;:¡
SÐCTEÐlTII AYE. s.E. SIXTEEHTII AVE. s.E. I I ~ ,
-. I I I I,
I R" I --¡ ¡ I,
~ ~ /'V'1" \ 1::;:::" ........ I / ::
¡ p~7-7 \ \, ...-1 I !. I
\ ~ :1
-, I I
'P
.1 _ ' ' ~ ~
....------- [7' ~
I ' ~
I ö ~ 1>\1
I") . §
- ~ I
I i.3 / /
.\ ! ~ / /1
V'
(t\
'Ñ
ZOO/ZOO~ HaS TOf:t 6ZZ OZf:·Xvd- a:n to/gz¡gO
CIT¥ OF ST. JOSEPH
. www.cityofstjoseph.com
May 28, 2004
Administrõtor
Judy \'V'eyrens Dear Property Owner:
Mõyor
Lõrry . Hosch The St. Joseph City Council and St. Joseph Township Board will be meeting in joint session
on Monday, June 14,2004 at 8:00 PM in the St. Joseph Township Hall. The purpose of the
Councilors hearing is to consider the annexation of 295th Street and 1 03rd Avenue.
AI Rõssier To help prepare for the meeting, and determine the feasibility of the project, I would ask that
Ross Rieke you take a couple of minutes to answer the questions on the attached form and return it in the
Gõry Utsch self addressed stamped envelope no later than June 9, 2004. We will make every attempt to
Dõlc Wick provide answers to the questions asked. Please keep in mind that some questions may not be
able to be answered until the design for the improvement is finished.
If you have any questions or need additional information please feel free to contact me at
320-363-7201.
. Sincerely,
CITY OF,ST, ~~ _ ,
((gr:/ Þ' v;µ-eu0'
" Jud Weytens
A inistrator
Enclosure
cc: Mayor Hosch and Members of the City Council
Chair Bechtold and Township Supervisors
Joe Bettendorf, City Engineer
Tom Jovanovich, City Attorney
.
2.)' College Avcnue North, PO ßox 6bß . Sdint. joseph, Minnesotd )'6'74
Phonc ,20,,6,,7201 rd x ,20.,6,,0,42
29Sth Street /103rd Avenue Survey .
Name:
Address:
How did you/or would have you voted on May 20,2004 for annexing to the City of St. Joseph
for the purpose of receiving water/sewer service.
Yes No
Where is your septic system located Front Back
How old is your septic system years How old is your well years
(If you do not know, an estimate is fine)
Assuming the proj ect moves forward, and the City bonds for the improvement, the City would
like some feedback as to what the financing needs of the area include. Therefore, the following
questions are needed to consider the financial viability of the project.
Are you anticipating paying your entire assessment upfront? Yes _No .
Are you anticipating paying part of your assessment up front? Yes _No
If the assessment is placed over time how many years do you prefer _ 10 yrs _ 15 yrs
Will you be asking the City to defer your assessment Yes No
Note: The deferred assessment policy is included)
Please list any other questions you mayhave:
.
CHAPTER ill - PUBLIC PROPERTY & IMPROVEMENTS
.
ORDINANCE 38 SENIOR AND DISABILITY ASSESS:MENT DEFERRAL
Section 38.01: PURPOSE. It is the purpose and intent of this Ordinance to establish a
policy and procedure for the deference of payment of special assessments for homestead
property owned by a person 65 years of age or older, or retired ITom gainful employment
because of a permanent disability, and for whom payment would constitute an unreasonable
hardship.
Section 38.02: AUTHORITY. This Ordinance is enacted in accordance with the
authority granted by Minnesota Statute Secs. 435.193 - 435.195
Section 38.03: DEFINITIONS. As used herein, the following terms have the following
meamng:
Subd. 1: Owner. Is any natural person with at least a 50 percent interest in the legal or
equitable title to a parcel of real property.
. Subd. 2: Homestead. Is the house occupied by an Owner and used by the Owner as his
or her principal dwelling place, together with the land upon which it is situated, not to exceeq
forty acres.
Subd. 3: Disabled Owner. Is an Owner who has been determined to have a disability for
purposes ofthe receipt of Social Security Benefits in accordance with the rules and procedures
set forth in 42 USC § 421.
Section 38.04: AUTHORIZATION TO DEFER. An assessment for a public
improvement of homestead property of which the Owner is age 65 or older or a Disabled Owner,
may be deferred by the City upon a finding that the payment of the assessment would impose an
unreasonable fmancial hardship on the Owner.
Section 38.05: DEFERRAL PROCESS. An Owner seeking deferral shall make
application on forms prescribed by the Stearns County Auditor. Upon application, the Owner
shall complete a fmancial disclosure form.. Based upon the information set forth therein, the City
Council shall make a finding as to financial hardship and grant or deny the deferment. The City
Administrator/Clerk shall advise the County Auditor of any deferments granted by the City. The
application for deferral shall be submitted no later than September 1 st of the year before which
the assessments are due.
Section 38.06: INTEREST, Interest shall accrue on the principal amount of any deferred
assessment at the same rate established for the assessment, as if no deferment was granted.
e¡
38-1
CHAPTER ill - PUBLIC PROPERTY & Th1PROVEMENTS
Section 38.07: ASSESSMENT NOT SUBJECT TO DEFERRAL. Assessments in a
) total principal amount of Three Thousand and nollOO ($3,000.00) Dollars or less shall not be .
subj ect to deferral.
Section 38.08: FINANCIAL HARDSHIP. The assessment shall be considered to cause
an unreasonable fmancial hardship if the City determines that any of the following circumstances
exist:
Subd. 1: The average annual principal and interest payment which will be due on the
assessment is in excess of three (3 %) percent of the combined annual income of the Owner and
all adults residing at the property with the Owner; or
Subd.2: Exceptional and unusual circumstances, which will force the Owner to make an
involuntary and unplanned expenditure of assets, including but not limited to, uninsured medical
expenses for a major illness or uninsured loss or destruction of the Owner's house, or the
accumulation of prior assessments currently payable.
Section 38.09: TERMINATION OF DEFERRAL. The deferral of assessments shall
terminate, and the mature assessment principal payments and accrued interest shall become due
and payable, upon the occurrence of any of the following events:
Subd. 1: The death of the Owner, provided that the Owner's spouse is not otherwise
eligible for deferment.
; .
Subd. 2: The sale, transfer or subdivision ofthe property, or any part thereof.
-
Subd.3: If the property no longer qualifies as the Owner's Homestead, or
Subd. 4: If the City determines that fmancia1 hardship no longer exists.
Section 38.10: ADOPTION OF STATUTES. The provisions oftrus Ordinance shall be
construed in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 435.191 - § 435.195. The provisions of these statutes
are adopted hereby, as iffully set forth herein, subject to any modification contained herein.
Updated 1115/97
.
38-2
REVISED
.', ' " '" ,'," " " m'm,,',' ',"'" "
~---'-'----'------'-, " " _ - '"" - " - - . ' ,_"__~=~_vx"_",,,,,__< , ili-~-""---,,',
!rr> '.>' ',',' ' " ' ", , ' , , ,,'~,',;"~'Ä : ~"':~îL
~_v,_ _ _,' _ - , ,. _ _ v _'- - - " _ . _ _ '
4,' _ _ u'_ ~-_.- .: ~:_ _-__~___ -~__:_-~ '-;~- _-- - -, _ ' _ _ v,' _ ___~-__ _ " -' _', " :'.: _ _ ,- _' __, -,', ,^' ~~:^A_ :~ -_^v--!_';__~,: - _ .: '-;l~,
____..' ,,'m'
'. . _ -.. _k ."" _ -- _. - A _ ~. - -_ , . ,
, _ __ _, _ __ y_,_ _ '_ _ _ ¡c;; - '.: -_ _ - - - . V _ _ - _ ~. . """_'
.'. "".', ,'.' " ," C'm " ;." 'mP "me', ' ". .~~' .",;:,
Elections Other Equipment 101-41410-580 39,723.50 - 39,723.50
City Office Office Equipment 101-41430-570 10,464.87 853.10 9,611.77
City Office Other Equipment 101-41430-580 - - -
City Office Computer Hardware 101-41430-581 - - -
General Gov't Building/Structures 101-41942-530 2,025.00 - 2,025.00
General Gov't Community Sign 101-41946-530 4,400.00 - 4,400.00
General Gov't Cable Access 101-41950-580 988.84 - 988.84
Police Office Equipment 101-42120-570 - - -
Police Other Equipment 101-42120-580 2,460.96 - 2,460.96 '
Police Computer Hardware 101-42120-581 10,865.40 - 10,865.40
Police - Comm Other Equipment 101-42151-580 (2,331.94) (4,000.00) 1,668.06
Police - Auto Motor Vehicles 101-42152-550 (4,335.92) - -
Emergency Siren Other Equipment 101-42500-580 12,400.00 - 12,400.00
Animal Control Other Equipment 101-42700-580 355.00 - 355.00
. Streets Building/Structures 101-43120-520 141,031.87 (540.00) 141,571.87
Streets Improv other building 101-43120-530 - 38,575.58 - 38,575.58
Streets Other Equipment 101-43120-580 76,721.61 - 76,721.61
Snow Removal Other Equipment 101-43125-580 65,556.29 - 65,556.29
Street Lighting Improv other building 101-43160-530 4,507.00 - 4,507.00
Sidewalks Improv other building 101-43220-580 10,361.00 - 10,361.00
Maint Shop Other Equipment 101-45201-580 3,000.00 - 3,000.00
Parks Improv other building 101-45202-530 13,072.33 - 13,072.33
Parks Other Equipment 101-45202-580 48,345.82 - 48,345.82
Parks Park Development 101-45203-531 20,162.03 8,876.38 11,285.65
Parks Tree Fund 101-45203-532 - - -
Parks Northland Addition 101-45203-533 - - -
498,349.24 5,189.48 497,495.68
Fund 490 YTD Balance per G/L 503,900.92
Transfer (6,405.24)
.
.
IÆMe#Æ]¡¡W:¡M::I~4.i.~~l::¡¡M: 1::æœmß.ftM~~IMøt~mt1í:J
2004-09
R 490- 00000 -39201 Transfer 6,405.24
G 490- -10100 Cash 6,405.24
G 101- -10100 Cash 6,405.24
E 101- 49301 -700 Transfer 6,405.24
Adjust previous transfer amount to actual balance in capital outlay
fund @ 5/25/04.
.
.
~RajkOWSki
!venth Avenue North ,~~~~~~~J lid.
P.O. Box 1433
St. Cloud, MN 56302-1433
320-251-1055
Toll Free 800-445-9617
May 14,2004
Fax 320-251-5896
rajhan@rajhan,com Ms. Judy Weyrens
City Administrator for the City of St. Joseph
www,rajhan,com 25 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 668
St. Joseph, MN 56374
RE: Data Practices Act
Our File No. 23426
Dear Judy:
. Thank: you for discussing the Data Practices Act issue with me today. Per' our discussion,
we advise the City to not release the tenants' names and addresses contained in-the
Frank J, Rajkowski .. documents submitted by licensees.
Gordon H, Hansmeier The Data Practices Act requires a government agency to release any data it has "created,
Frederick L. Grunke collected or maintained" to the public upon request, unless a specific exception applies
that would make certain data private or confidential. Minn. Stat. § 13.03.
Thomas G, Jovanovich'
Paul A. Rajkowski' The Act specifically refers to information maintained or created by the City regarding the
Kevin F. Gray issuance of licenses. Minn. Stat. § 13.41. Under that Section, the following infonnation
is considered private and cannot be released to the public: (1) data, other than their names
William J. Cashman and designated addresses, submitted by applicants for licenses; (2) identity of
Richard W, Sobalvarro complainants; (3) nature and content of unsubstantiated complaints; (4) identity of
patients whose medical records are received by a health licensing agency; (5) inactive
Susan M, Dege investigative data relating to violations of statutes; and (6) record of any disciplinary
LeAnne D. Bartishofski proceedings.
Sarah L. Smith-Larkin In this case, the first exception would apply. It prevents data submitted by an applicant
Troy A. Poetz for a license from being released to the public, except the name and address of the person
Joseph M, Bromeland applying for the license. In this case, the person applying for a rental license submits the
names and addresses of tenants with the rental license application. Therefore, such
.ry J, Haupert information would be included in the first exception as data submitted by an applicant for
el J, Pugh
Frank J. Raíkowski and Richard W Saba/yarra are admitted to practice in North DakotaJ Gordon H. Hansmeier in North Dakota and Wisconsin
Paul A. Rajkowski and Sarah L. Smith in Wisconsin and William j, Cashman in South Dakota,
IIMernber of American Board of Trial Advocates. "Qualified ADR Neutral.
V
May 14, 2004
Page 2 .
a license. However, the City would still have to release the name and address ofthe person seeking
the application because that information does not fall within the exception.
Judy, I hope this answers your question. Please call me if you have any additional questions or
would like to discuss this matter further.
Sincerely,
LJP /mai
.
e
League of Minnesota Cities
Insurance Trust
145 University Avenue West, St Paul, MN 55103-2044
. r-"ru. ø/ Mirrtuøofzz C'r6ø (651) 2~~:"~00 · (800) 925·1:l.22
cæ." p,.",.m;~ -1tm"" Fax: (651) 281~1298 · TDD: (651) 281·1290
www.lmnc.org
THE LA TEST WORD ON THE "60-DA Y RULE"
MINN. STAT. § 15.99, MlNNESOTA'S
AUTOMATIC APPROVAL STATUTE
In 1995. Minnesota joined about two-dozen states in adopting an "automatic approval" statute,
Minn. Stat. § 15.99. That statute provides that a ITlUnicipality must approve or deny a written
request relating to zoning within 60 days or it is deemed approved.
According to the Minnesota Court of Appeals, "~e underlying purpose of Minn. Stat. § 15.99 is
to keep governmental agencies from taking too longm deciding land use issues..." Manco of
Fainnont, Inc. v. Town Board of Rock Dell Township, 583 N.W.2d 293, 296 (Minn. Ct. App.
, - 1998). Courts have generally demanded strict compliance with the requirements of the law.
Accordingly, the law has resulted in numerous lawsuits against local governments. 'This memo
reviews basic requirement of the law and discusses some of the more common mistakes cities
have made in applying it. It also highlights the 2003 changes made by the Minnesota legislature
in an effort to clarify the law-these statutory changes govern all applications after June 1, 2003.
.
General Rule -
The general rule states that the "Failure of [a municipality] to deny a request within 60 øays is
approval of the request." Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 2. The statute also provides that "a
, [municipality's] response meets the 60 day time limit if the [municipality] can document that the
, response was sent within 60 days of receipt of the written request." Minn. Stat. § 15.99. subd.
3(c).
Statutory Exceptions
1. The 60-day time period does not begin to run if the city notifies the landowner in writing
within 15 business days that the application is incomplete. The city must also state what
information is missing. (The 2003 legislature increased the period from 10 to 15 days.)
2. The city may grant itse1f another 60 days (up to a total of 120 days), if before the end of
the initial 60-day period, it notifies the landowner in writing of its intent to take
additional time to consider the application, the reasons for the extension and the
anticipated length of the extension.
3. Time period is tolled while other necessary state or federal approvals are being sought.
. - I
This material is provided as general informati'on and is not a substitute for,legal advice.
Consult your attorney for advice concernJng speclflcsftuatlons.
Small Cities Track 2004
Land Use Regulation - 23
Elements of the Law
, What is a ".written request" faT purposes of starting the 60-d11:y period? .
\Vhat constitutes a "written request" has been the subject of several court decisions. For instance;
it has been argued that a request submitted on the back of a napkin was enough to start the clock.
The courts have also found that submission of a request in a letter or as part of a settlement
proposal may be enough to start the time running.
The 2003 legislature clarified the law in this regard by deftninga written request as a
submission on a city approved form, oru there is no form, submission of a writing with the
specifi.c governmental approval sought listed on the first page of the document. To summarize:
· The request must be submitted in writing on the city's application form.
· A request not on the city's form must clearly identify on the fIrst page the approval
sought.
· The city may reject as incomplete a request not on the city's form, if the applicant
does not include all required information.
What is considered "related to zoning?"
It might be useful here to quote the precise wording of the statute to see that the statute on its
face covers much more thanjust requests "related to zoning."
Except as otherwise provided in this section and notwithstanding any other law to .
the contrary, an agency must approve or deny within 60 days a written request
relating to zoning, septic systems, or expansion of the metropolitan urban service
area for a permj.t, license, or other governmental approval of an action. Minn.
Stat. § 15.99 subd. 2 (2002)
The courts have been rather expansive in Ùleir interpretation of the phrase "related to zoning."
While no one would likely argue that it includes requests for parcels specific to rezonings, and
requests for conditional use permits and variances; courts have also found the law applicable to
requests for sign pennits, wetlands determination review, subdivision approval, request for road
permit. In short, almost all requests affecting the use of land have been treated as subject to the
law.
The 2003 legislature clarified the law a bit when it held that the statute did not apply to
subdivision and plat approvals, since those processes are subject to their own timeframes. In.
addition, the Minnesota Court of Appeals has ruled that Minn. Stat § 15.99 does not apply to
building permits.
What constitu~es a denial under the law?
There have been a number of court decisions on the question of what constitutes denial of a
request. In most situations, Ùle courts have required the city council to actually pass a motion
This material is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal auvice.
Consult your attorney for advice c011cernlng specific situations. .
J2-
Small Cities Track'2004
Land Use Regulation - 24
denying the request. In fact, the Minnesota Supreme Court went so far as to find that an
unsuccessful motion to approve was not the equivalent of a denial. This decision was overturned
· by the 2003 legislature, which held that amotion to approve which fails is the equivalent of a
denial, so long as those voting against the motionstate on the record, the reasons for denying th~
request. The courts have also required a fannal motion to deny even when a city has a
moratorium in place that would otherwise prohibit the proposed application.
,
Along with the denial motion, the law requires that the city adopt written findings supporting
denial. The law states, "If the written statement is not adopted at the same time as the denial, it
must be adopted at the next meeting following the denial of the request but before the expiration
of the time allowed for making a decision under this section." The law also requires that the
"written statement must be consistent with the reasons stated in the record at the time of the
denial. The written statementmust be provided to the applicant upon adoption." ,
As indicated, the law and court decisions interpreting it, mandate that the findings be adopted
within the 60-day period. To sum:m.ariie:
· When a vote on a motion or resolution to approve fails for any reason, the failure
constitutes a denial of the request provided that those voting against the request state
on the record their reason(s) for opposing the request.
· When a multimember governing body denies a request, it must state the reasons for
denial on the record and provide the applicant, in writing, with a statement of the
reasons for denial.
· · If the written statement of the reasons for denial is not adopted at the same time as
the denial, it must be adopted at the next meeting following the denial of the request
but before the expiration of the 60-day period. -
· The written statement of the reasons for denial must be consistent with reasons stated
in the record at the time of denial.
· The written statement of reasons must be provided to the applicant upon adoption.
What about an incomplete application?
If the city receives an application that does not include all the city required infonnation, the
clock does not begin to run, if within 15 days (increased from 10 to 15 days by the 2003
Legislature) of receipt of the application, the city infonTIS the applicant in writing that the
application is incomplete and what infonnation is missing. An application is incomplete if it does
not include the application fee.
This would suggest that the city give some thought to being clear about exactly what information
it requires for various types of land use applications. The city may want to consider developing a
checklist and reviewing its zoning ordinances to make explicit what items are required. This will
This material is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice.
Consult your attorney for advice concerning specific situations.
· -3- - ,
Small Cities Track 2004
Land Use Regulation - 25
not only help the applicant, but will act as a sort of fail safe mechanism for city staff who need to
thoroughly evaluate applicationš within the fITst 15 days.
What needs to be done for the city to extend the time period for an additional 60 days? .
The law allows a city the opportunity to give itself an additional 60 days to consider an
application, if the city follows specific statutory requirements. In order to avail itself of an
additional 60 days, the city must give:
1. Written notification to landowner before the end of the initial 60 day period;
2. The reasons for extension; and
3. The anticipated length of the extension.
The courts have been particularly demanding onlocal governments with regard to this
requirement. The courts have required local governments to meet each element of the Statute.
They have also been clear that oral notice or an oral agreement to extend is insufficient.
What is needed to e).;tend beyond 120 days?
A city can only go beyond 120 days if it gets the approval of the applicant. The city must either
initiate the request in writing and have the applicant agree to it in writing, or the applicant by
written request, may ask for an extension. Otherwise, the city must act on the request within the
designated timeframe. Again, the courts have demanded strict compliance with the statutory
requirements. Accordingly, oral representations or actions by the applicant should not be treated
as justification for delaying action on a pennit. .
This material is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice.
Consult your attorney for advice concerning specific situations. .
-
-4- !
Smal1 Cities Track 2004
Land Use Regulation - 26
League of Minnesota 'Cities
Insurance Trost
· 145 University Avenue West, St Paul, MN 55103-2044
L-g.æ of MinnesofD C'rfiu (651) 281·1200 · (800) 925-1122
Fax: (651) 281-1298 · TDD: (651) 281-1290
Ciüu prrnnoiirrg-1Jtmœ www.lmnc.org
THE NECESSITY OF ADEOUATE FINDINGS/ " "
REASONS TO SUPPORT MUNICIPAL LAND USE DECISIONS. ,
When a city's land use decision is challenged in court, the court's review is quite narrow. The
standard of review of a city's land use decision is limited to whether the city had a rational basis
for its decision. "Land use decisions are entitled to great deference and will be disturbed on
appeal only in instances'in which the city's decision has no rational basis." SuperAmerica
Group, Inc. v. City of Little Canada, 539 N.W.2d 264,266 (Minn. App. 1995). That is, courts
review a municipal body's decision to determine if it is unreasonably arbitrary or capricious.
Swanson v. ,City of Bloomington, 421 N.W.2d 307,313 (Minn. 1988). This narrow scope of
review accorded to the land use decisions of cities reflects judicial recognition that local
governing bodies are in the best position to assess what zoning classifications and decisions best
serve the public welfare. Larson v. Washington County, 387 N.W.2d 902,905 (Minn. App.
1986).
In land use cases, Minnesota courts are looking for a sufficient statement of the reasons given by
· the cÍty to grant or deny an application request. The role of the court is to examine the city's
reasons and ascertain whether the record before the city council supports them. The reasons
given by the city must be legally sufficient and have a factual basis.
Minnesota case law and statutory law demands that the reasons for a city's decision on a land use
case be articulated on the record. We recommend the city adopt writing findings of fact" or
"reasons," and conclusions oflaw when it makes land use decision. The city should approve a
document that contains all the relevant facts. The document should then apply those facts to the
relevant criteria.
When a city is presented with a land use application, the role of the city council/planning
commission is to apply the facts presented to the law and to articulate the reasons for its decision.
The role of the city council/planning commission is to ,determine and consider how the facts
presented to them compare with the city's articulated standards. The city council and/or
planning commission should base their decision on the facts presented at the hearing and then
apply those facts to the legal standards contained in city ordinances and relevant state law. City
staff reports should reference applicable city code provisions. (E.g. review standards in
ordinance granting a variance.)
ExamlJle of A Variance Consideration
Under Minnesota law, a municipality may grant a variance where unique circumstances of the
individual property create an undue hardship. Minn. Stat. Sec. 462.357, subd. 6. "Undue
· hardship" generally means:
- I
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
Small Cities Track 2004
Land Use Regulation - 27
The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under .
conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to
circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the
variance will not alter the essential character of the locality.
The "undue hardship" requirement does not mean a property owner must show that the land
cannot be put to any reasonable use without the variance. Instead, the undue hardship standard
requires a showing that the property owner would like to use their property in a reasonable
ma.I1I1er that is prohibited by ordinance. Minnesota courts have explained there are three
requirements for granting a variance under the "undue hardship" standard. The requirements are:
(1) reasonableness; (2) unique circumstances; and (3) the essential character of the locality.
Sample or City Code Variance Standards
Is the proposed variance in conformity with the established criteria contained in the City
Code:
(1) Because ofthe particular physical surrounding, shape or topographic conditions of
the specific parcel of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result,
as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were
to be carried out;
(2) The conditions upon which the petition for a variance is based are unique to the
parcel of land for which the variance is sought;
(3) The purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the
value or income potential Qf the parcel of land; .
(4) The grant of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other land -or improvements in the vicinity in which the parcel of land is located;
(5) The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, or substantially increase congestion of the public streets, or increase the
danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair
property values with the vicinity.
(6) The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent ofthis Code
and the City's Comprehensive Plan.
_ Consider standards #1 and #2 pertaining to the unique circumstances of the subject property.
An example of an adequate reason, or "finding" to support a denial:
The existing topography involves slope and floodplain issues that limit development in
some portions of this property. The property is located at the end of a cul-de-sac, has a
stand of trees and a significant grade change of 44 feet. The proposed building has been
placed to maximize the property despite the existing slope and floodplain issues.
VS.
An example of an unfounded reason:
- .
i
Small Cities Track 2004
Land Use Regulation - 28
. Unique circumstances exist because the applicant mistakenly believed he could develop
his property as proposed.
ConSider standard #5 pertaining to the issue of traffic.
An example of an adequate reason, or "finding":
The proposal will generate traffic that will have a significant negative impact on the
transportation system capacity and will result in diminution of the level of service and
safety of said system especially at the intersection of First Street and Main Street.
Numerous adjacent property owners testified at the public hearing about current
congestion and specifically that it currently takes "three to four light changes just to get
through the intersection."
VS.
An example of an unfounded reason:
The proposal will generate excess traffic.
In formulating adequate findings or reasons to support a land use decision, one of the key steps is
to apply the facts presented to the standards contained in the city ordinances. In other words, use
. the standards already set forth in the city ordinances as the template or guide to the city
council/planning commission consideration of a land use application.
-
. - I
Small Cities Track 2004
Land Use Regulation - 29
Overtime and Callouts
. May 7, 2004 through May 20,2004
,_""=00,_,,",.,'""..'"_,"''',,
')-"0%~- W::A-~·O . - ,. " > - - _ _ ____
..... __':--::__.··_''':,%;A.., _____n·___ '.. _. ____...__, . ,_,'. _ _. ...-.:-____.._ ,__..:__._-__._____.____ '
5/15/04 3.00 hrs Weekend Checks 5/7/04 8.00 hrs Senior Farewell
5/16/04 3.00 hrs Weekend Checks 5/11/04 3.00 hrs Handcuff Training
5/15/04 6.00 hrs Seven Dust Concert
~-"".""^'''"'-,''^. '.,,,...."" .,''',,''.''''', ,.,,'"
. ' .' - , '"' -" - _ __ v. .
~ffç;o;.>i",,( ,,"_". _'0 __'__:--~ -'<z >t. _ _~- _ :_ _ -__m --j~:_~__, ,'A_:___ '--':~A ~
5/18/04 1.25 hrs School Committee Mtg
5/7/04 2.00 hrs Senior Farewell
5/13/04 0.75 hrs Suicidal Call
ì-....._ 5/14/04 1.50 hrs OWl Arrest
5/15/04 0.50 hrs Agency Assist
5/8/04 3.00 hrs Weekend Checks
5/9/04 3.00 hrs Weekend Checks
"~Y__~___$!j__*~ 5/11/04 200 h C rt
Ai'iftiit!f?" 'kWK" "wf!@¡;, ,"n& ''''" ' ·,g;AL,>U,,· """¿'¥if'",,, " t!jM . rs au
':~'=. - =~"-,,,,,,,,~,,,- '''''_'''~lL··.' "_'i:ic;,:,,,,,,,,",,,;=-- .w..fu~',,":"'i'T*". -,___~"v _ ,;"""''''''':'~S ,~-;_-':';;x_--'-'Æ¿_'Ø. _ ."',_
5/16/04 2.00 hrs Standing Water-Northland Dr.
.
5/15/04 6.00 hrs Seven Dust Concert
5/7/04 8.50 hrs Safe & Sober
5/11/04 3.00 hrs Training
5/13/04 2.00 hrs Court
.
CIT¥ Of ST. JOSEPH
· www.cityofstjoseph.com
City of St. Joseph
Notice of Hearing on Improvement
Administrôtor
Judy Weyrens To Whom It May Concern:
Mõyor Notice is hereby given the City Council of St. Joseph will meet in the council chambers of
Lõrry I, Hosch the city hall at 7:15 p.m. on June 17,2004, to consider the making of an improvement on
16th Avenue SE affecting property owners abutting Pond View Ridge by installing water
Councilors and sewer improvements and to consider the making of a park improvement for the
Wobegon Park Area, pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 429.011 to 429.111. The area proposed to
AI Rõssicr be assessed for such improvements are those properties abutting 16th Avenue, receiving
Ross Rieke services. The estimated cost of the improvement is $150,000. Such persons as desire to
Gõry Utsch be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting.
Oôlc Wick
Judy Weyrens
Administrator
· Publish: May 28,2004
·
2.) College Avenue North' PO [)OX 66ß . Sõint, joseph, Minncsotô )6,74
Phone ,2.0.,6,,72.01 Oct X ,20,,6,,0,42.
Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc.
327 YORK AVENUE · ST. PAUL, MN 55101-4090
. (651) 293-4424 Fax (651) 293-0203
s~
May 28, 2004 ,/~
if /~ r-
James Cunningham ~ (fJ) !P)'~'?
Commissioner
Bureau of Mediation Services f./
1380 Energy Lane, Ste 2
S1. Paul, MN 55108-5253
RE: BMS Case No. 04-PN-862
LELS and the City ofSt. Joseph
Commissioner Cunningham:
This letter concerns the mediation between Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc., and
the City ofSt. Joseph (BMS Case No. 04-PN-862). Please certify this matter for
arbitration.
. Sincerely,
_J~¡!1~
Dean Mann
Business Agent
cc: Jeff Young, Steward
Judy Weyrens, Administration Clerk
Josh Tilsen, Mediator
-
-
AFFILIATE OF MINNESOTA POLICE AND PEACE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
CIT¥ OF ST. JOSEPH
. www.cityofstjoseph.com
May 24, 2004
Department of Administration
R. Thomas Gillaspy
Demography Division
, Administrãtor' 300 Centennial Office Building
Judy Wcyrens 658 Cedar Street
St. Paul MN 55155
Mõyor '
Ldrry I. Hosch Dear Mr. Gillaspy:
Councilors I am in receipt of the 2003 Population and Household Estimate for the City of St. Joseph. In
AI Rõssier reviewing the population estimate it appears as the estimate is too low for the growth the
City is experiencing. To detennine the increase in population, we complied a list of all new
Ross Rieke building pennits. The table below indicates what our records indicate the 2003 Population
GõfY Utsch Estimate should be.
Dõle Wick
2000
Building Census 2003
2002 Permits Household 2003 Adjusted
. Estimate 4/02 - 4/03 Multiplier Adjustment Population
Population 5,024 2.69 172.16 5,196
Estimate
Household 1,232 64 64 1,296
Estimate
Therefore, based on building permit data, I respectfully request that the 2003 Population
Estimate be reviewed and adjusted accordingly. Copies of the Building Pennits are
available for your review upon request.
If you need additional infonnation please feel free to contact me at 320~363-720 1.
Sincerely,
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
c¡;:.æy :J~
Ju Weyrens
!
Administrator
-
-
2)' College Avenue North, PO I) ox 6bs . Sðint. Joseph, Minnesotõ )'6,74
Phone ,20,,6,,7201 I:d x ,2.0,,6,0,42.
Department of Administration .
State Demograpbic Ceater
300 Ceateaaial Office Building
April 30, 2003 658 Cedar Street
St. Paul, MN 55155
TeleplloAe: 651-296-2571
Fax: 651-296-3698
TIY: 651-297-4357
Dear Clerk:
The State Demographer is required by law to produce annual population and household estimates for each
of Minnesota's cities. Enclosed you will find a sheet containing the April 1, 2002, population and household
estimates for your city. Please note that these estimates pertain to one year ago, not the present. These
estimates are being sent to you now for review and comment. A copy of your estimates has also been sent
to your county auditor for review. The estimates are subject to change and are not considered final until
they are released to the Minnesota Department of Revenue in July. Please do not release the estimates to
the public until July 15, 2003.
These estimates may be used as factors in a number of state aid programs. Questions about the impact of
these estimates on a given state aid program should be directed to the state agency that administers the
program.
The enclosed figures represent estimated population and household changes since the 2000 Census. The .
number of households corresponds to the number of occupied housing units. A household may be a single
family, one person living alone, or any other group of persons who share the same living quarters. While
we believe that our estimates are usually accurate, we realize there may be occasional problems. For this
reason, we value your comments. We may not be aware of such changes as housing demolitions, the gain
or loss of group quarters, construction of public housing and the gain or loss of mobile homes.
If you are satisfied with our estimates, it is not necessary to contact us or provide any further infonnation.
If you wish to challenge our estimates, please send us the appropriate documentation, as indicated in the
enclosed guide, by June 10, 2003. Please remember that we cannot correct Droblems with the 2000
Census. Questions or comments should be directed to James Hibbs at the address listed on the letterhead.
You may also contact us bye-mail at local.estimates@state.mn.us or by phone at (651) 296-2571. The
volume of phone calls is heavy at this time of year, so you may be asked to leave a message on our voice
mail system. We will try to respond promptly.
Thank: you for taking time to review these estimates.
Sincerely,
R<íÎ--I'Jt';) -
R Thomas Gillaspy -
State Demographer
Enclosures
.
April 30, 2004
TO: Judy Weyrens, Admr.
City of St. Joseph
FROM: R. Thomas Gillaspy
Minnesota State Demographer
SUBJECT: 2003 Population and Household Estimates
Your April 1, 2003 population estimate is 5,060.,
Your April 1, 2003 household estimate is 1,249.
If you have any questions or comments about these estimates, please contact the State
Demographic Center, 300 Centennial Office Building, 658 Cedar Street, St. Paul, MN
. 55155, phone (651) 297-5148 or send an e-mail to 10ca1.estimates@state.mn.us. All
chal1enges must be submitted in writing. Please refer to the enclosed sheet for details.
-
-
Jt..
. SEH
May 26, 2004 RE: Mr. Mark Lambert
Indian Hills Park
SEH No. A-STJOE 0401.00 14
Mr. Mark Lambert
President
Summit Management, LLC
101 East Fifth Street, Suite 910
St. Paul, MN55101
Dear Mark:
Over the past few weeks, there has been a considerable amount of erosion on your Indian Hills Park site
due to rainfall events of varying intensity. The south and east slopes of the apartment site have eroded.
The discharge pipe under the entrance driveway has washed out the west road ditch along Northland
Drive, and the sub grade for the future road/driveway serving the south lot has eroded. The eroded
material is creating a hazard on Northland Drive, not to mention a mess that needs to be cleaned up on a
regular basis. All of these slopes need to be stabilized with established turf as soon as possible.
In addition to stabilizing the slopes, the road/driveway subgrade needs to be reshaped so that the water
does not bypass the two catch basins that were designed to take this runoff. Currently, the water simply
bypasses these catch basins and floods Northland Drive. These two catch basins are covered with a
. perforated steel plate and rock, and the one at the low point of Northland Drive is covered with fabric to
prevent filling the pipes with silt. While covered, these catch basins will take very little water. Once the
slopes have been restored and growth is established, we can open up the catch basins and see how they
work. We may need to add a second catch basin at the low point.
In addition to the above erosion issues, a considerable amount of water appears to be coming off of the
south lot, adding to the problem on the road/driveway subgrade between the two lots. As you know, the
plan approved by the City called for the south lot to drain to the Outlots west of your site via the storm
sewer installed last summer. I have not walked the site, but it appears that this is not happening. I
understand that the north and east slopes of the south lot along with the road/driveway subgrade will drain
to Northland Drive, but the remainder of the lot should not. We need to look at this and determine that the
runoff is going west as it is supposed to, or make whatever changes are necessary to make this happen.
Please give me a call so we can arrange a time to go over the site and develop a plan to make the
necessary repairs. Time is of the essence as the growing season is just beginning. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Æ~
Jo ph R. Bettendorf, PE
St. Joseph City Engineer
Jmw
- &5~~~~jo~~t&~~f'~V~~~~~~Ó4~~isttatºr'·
-
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. 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
JUN-01-2004 TUE 10:24 AM LAW OFFICES FAX NO, 651 223 5318 p, 01/02
SUMMIT MANAGEMENT, LLC. .
101 East Fifth Street, Suite 910
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1808
(651) 224-4741
(651) 223--5318 (fax)
Martcw.1Amber1. PmS4Ñat
Dh'td DIal (651) 123-5493
June 1, 2004
BY TELECOPY (320)229-4301
Mr. Joseph R Bettendorf: PE
St. Joseph City Engineer
8EH
1200 25111 Ave. S.,
St. Coud, MN 56302
Re: Indian Hills Park / Nortlùand Drive
Dear Mr, Bettendorf:
I am in receipt of your May 26111 letter. Beginning on May 25~ until I received your letter
on May 281&, r made at least three attempts to contact you to discuss this matter, Each time, I tried
your office and your cell phone. In addition, my job superintendent made at least four calls to you
in the previous two weeks in hopes of correcting this matter - none ofwhích were returned. When
I attempted to contact you, 1 would leave a voice message only to get a call back from you after .
hours - and then be unable to reach you the next day. r also spoke with Ty at the City Offices on
May 251h and asked that he have you contact me. I not sure how many more ways I could send a
message to you that I was willing to talk to find a solution. I am very disappointed that you elected
instead to send a letter, outlining a problem already known to all parties, rather than putting more
effort into reaching either me or my job superintendent to find a solution. If you are billing my
account, I will not pay fur your time preparing this letter nor do I think the city should pay you.
Quite fi"ankly, your letter was just a waste of time which could have been used more productively
finding a solution rather than trying to po~ fingers,
I'm Dot sure what is goíng on but I believe this is just another symptom ofSEH's negligent
design of Northland Drive, whích I have long maintained was designed too low to accommodate
reasonable development of the adjoining property. The absence of curbing down the hill doesn't
help either. My job superintendent told me that when Larson Excavating was installing the stonn
piping along Northland Drive last fall, you personally told Larson to hold the pipes even lower than
were designed in the plans you had previously approved, Even now, it is apparent to me that they
are not low enough to collect the runoff coming off of the low point ofNort.h1and Drive (you need
only drive by to see this for yourself). My suggestion to you, had we met privately, would be to
shoot the elevations of my storm piping and Northland Drive as you built it. I am beginning to
suspect that Northland Drive was built even lower than your records indicate. W1ùle there is some
sediment runoff: THE REAL PROBLEM IS THAT THE STORM WATER HAS NOWHERE TO
DRAIN. Either Larson instal1ed the stonn water pipes too high or your engineering finD built -
Nonhland Drive too lowl If Larson made a mistake, they will correct it. Will your firm do the
same ifit is determined that Northland Drive was built even lower than desígned? -
JUN-Ul-¿UU4 JUt lU:ë4 AM LAW O~rICES FAX NO. 651 223 5318 P. 02/02
.
The sedùnent can easily be stopped with additional silt blankets - which I will install although
I think we should get a "global" fix so that I don't have to instaUthem twice. If I owe the City for
any clean-up, I will certainly pay them for their time. The bigger question is how do we fix the
underlying problem. Somehow we have to get the water away from the low point of Northland
Drive. I had Larson review the situation on Friday. They recommended replacing the existing
driveway catch basin with a low profile catch basin. This will give us about 3"-4" more depth. I'm
not sure this is enough which is why we should reshoot the exiting improvements to see if this will
help. Perhaps that is where we/you should start.
You last paragraph references the water courses and questions whether I have made any
changes to the water courses. I have not. The site was graded to the drainage plan approved by
your office. I welcome you to review this and reach your own conclusions.
I will be in St. Joseph on Thursday afternoon,. June 3rd. ¡{you would like to meet then. I
have jury duty next week so I'm not sure of my schedule beyond June 3rd. If you have any
additional questions, please feeltTee to contact me at your convenience.
Very Truly Yours,
. SUMMIT MANAGEMENT, LLC.
~~~
-
Mark W. Lambert
cc: Judy Weyrens
By Telecopy (320) 363-0342
-
-
. 4.~
MUNICIPAL
DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC.
DATE: June 2, 2004
MEMO TO: Mayor Hosch, City Council Members, City Administrator Weyrens
~HI-- --
FROM: 'J - ~~
Joanne Foust & Cynthia mith-Strack, Municipal Development Group
RE: Economic Development Activity Report - May 2004
Municipal Development Group, Inc. has been interacting with a number of prospects throughout the past two
months. Following is a summary of activities that have transpired. If you have any questions on any of
these or other projects, please do not hesitate to contact us at952-758-7399. A project number has been
assigned to protect the confidentiality of the businesses prospects.
Project 01-E:
This project involves the expansion of a service within the community. MDG has been keeping in touch with
the project contact over the past two years. Interest in various sites has increased over the past two months.
Previous correspondence occurred on April 26th and June 2nd.
. Project 01-F:
This company has been in contact with the EDA regarding potential sites for a commercial business since
August, 2001. MDG has forwarded the contact information on a number of sites. MDG phoned the project
contact on May 15th and met briefly with the representative regarding this subject on May 26th.
Project 01-J:
The developer contacted the City in the fall of 2001 regarding the development of a commercial subdivision.
Since that time the company and EDA representatives have remained in contact. The developer has
constructed a commercial lease facility and has commercial lease space available. MDG last followed up
with the Developer on May 19th and May 26th and June 2nd.
Project 02-E:
- This company is looking for approximately 1 acre of land for an industrial use for an expansion. MDG
followed up with the company representative on May 5, 2004.
Project 02-Y:
This prospect contacted MDG on October 7,2002 regarding new construction in the Buettner Business Park.
MDG has had numerous follow-up conversations with the company and supplied information requested on
other sites. File closed on May 19th as prospect purchase a lot in the township.
Project 02-AA:
This business purchased land in Buettner Business Park earlier this year. They are starting building and site
plans for proposed construction in the summer/fall of 2004. MDG followed-up with the contact on May 3rd, 5th
and 19th. Possible site plan review in July.
Project 02-FF:
. This prospect contacted MDG in December of 2002 regarding available acreage within the Buettner
Business Park. The development prospect visited St. Joseph in mid-April to tour the remaining lots in
EDA Monthly Project Report - May 2004 Page 1
Buettner Business Park as well as the potential future industrial park area. MDG followed up on May 5th with
the contact indicating he was going to take a wait & see approach for the time being. ·
Project 02-R:
This business originally contacted the city in June, 2002. They have been researching an expansion project
and industrial site to accommodate their long-range needs. The company has purchased a lot in Buettner
Business Park and is researching financial assistance programs. Most recent interaction was via em ail on
June 2, 2004.
Project 03-A:
These developers are interested in a large highway commercial development in an area not yet annexed into
the City. MDG has been working with them over the past few years. Additional follow up contact occurred on
April 26th and 28th and May 6tli, 19th and 20th, The developers intend to request plat approval in 2004 with
construction in 2005.
Project 03-1:
This contact phoned the City last spring regarding 5,000 s.f. of retail lease s~ace. MDG has been following
up routinely with the contact. Contact occurred most recently on May 19t. The contact is interested in
finding a franchise owner locally.
Project 03-R:
This prospect contacted the City in the summer of 2003 inquiring about vacant industrial acreage. MDG
forwarded information and continues to remain in contact with the prospect. MDG, Inc. last followed up on via
phone on June 2nd.
Project 03-5:
This project involves the possible expansion of the industrial acreage in the community. MDG has been
working with the property owners on the project since August of 2003. MDG has been in contact with the
property owners and City Engineer. Project correspondence occurred on May 5th. 1 ih and 26th. ·
Project 03-U:
Inquiry forwarded to MDG on October 1, 2003 regarding a potential commercial development in St. Joseph.
MDG followed up last occurred on May 12'h and 26th.
Project 04-B:
This builder contacted the city on March 16th regarding availability of industrial lots in the city and financial
programs to assist with a project. On April 28, 2004 MDG was informed of the develofer's purchase of Lot
1, Block 1 Buettner Business Park 3. MDG last followed up with the contact on May 19t via phone.
Project 04-C:
The Stearns Co. HRA forwarded this solicitation to the city for a potential large scale commercial
development. The large scale commercial development is subject to legislative approval and currently
proposed for a site in the Twin Cities Metro Area and not Greater Minnesota. The project file has been
closed.
Project 04-D:
MDG contacted the owner of industrial acreage within the corporate limits regarding interest in re-subdividing
and marketing acreage. The property owner expressed an interest in possibly re-subdividing. MDG
continues to follow up with the woject representative and City Engineer regarding the project. Latest follow
up occurred on May 5th, 10th, 12 h, 19th and 26th and June 2nd.
Project 04-E:
This prospect contacted MDG on April 21 st regarding demographic and economic development data for St.
Joseph. The prospect is considering a leasing commercial retail space in the community. Information was
forwarded on April 22nd and follow up occurred on April 28th and May 5th.
·
EDA Monthly Project Report - May 2004 Page 2
Project 04-F: ,
.. This prospe'ct contacted MDG on May 3rd regarding commercial lease space in the downtown area. MDG
met with the prospect on May 5th, forwarded information to the contact on May 6th and correspondecj via
phone with the contact on May ih. A second meeting was scheduled and held May 1ih. Additional
discussion followed on May 13th, May 14th, May 19th and May 26th.
Project 04-H:
A representative of a downtown land owner phoned MDG' Inc. on May 24th regarding a meeting on May 26~h.
Staff met with the representative for an extended period of time on May 26th to discuss (1) CBD permitted
and conditional uses, (2)parking requirements, (3) parcel information, aerial photo of the property, (4)
redevelopment and renovation/renewal TIF and (5) the Comp Plan land use element for District 5.
Other:
The EDA at its regular meeting on May 19th approved previous meeting minutes, accounts payable and the
April financial report. The EDA received an update on the progress toward making additional industrial
acreage available within the community. Next the EDA reviewed a request to refer industrial leads to the
developers of an industrial park within the annexation area. The EDA Chair recused himself resulting in the
lack of a quorum. The item will again be addressed at the June meeting. The EDA discussed community
identity and making downtown a place Of destination. Following lengthy discussion the EDA recommended
other committees/commissions drive efforts to further define a Downtown identity at this time with the EDA
offering projects financial assistance (Le. redevelopment TIF) at an appropriate time.
Staff followed up with Jerry Hettwer of Hettwer Real Estate Services regarding the sign at the Buettner
Business Park which has fallen into a state of disrepair. Following discussion of the sign Mr. Hettwer
indicated prices for remaining two industrial parcels increased May 1st from $1/sf to $1.25/sf and from
$1.25/s.f. to $1.50/s.f.
Staff created & filed MIF report with DEED.
.- Staff hosted an hour long tour of development within the City with the Board of Directors of Stearns Electric
on Thursday, May 2ih.
.
EDA Monthly Project Report - May 2004 Page 3
vOOZlvZ/9
.'- vOOZ/6ZIv
vOOZlvlv
vOOZ/O~/£
>< vOOZlv ~/Z
W vOOZ/OZH
Q £OOZ/9Z/Z ~
,Z £OOZH/Z ~
-
UJ £OOZ/91 ~ ~
-
~' £OOZ/Z ~/O ~
W £OOZI L ~/6
>-
::) £OOZ/£Z/8
m £OOZ/6ZI L
Q £OOZlv/ L
Z £OOZ/6/9
0
£OOZ/9 ~/9
m
. ..J £OOZ/OZlv
<C £OOZ/9Z/£
Q.' £OOZI ~/£
-
(.) £OOZlvIZ
-
Z £OOZ/O ~H
::) ZOOZ/9 ~/Z ~
:E
ZOOZ/~Z/~ ~
..J
<C ZOOZI LZ/O ~
Z ZOOZ/Z/O ~
0 ZOOZILl6
-
I- ZOOZ/£ ~/8
<C
ZOOZ/6 ~I L
Z
ZOOZ/vZ/9
I ZOOZ/O£/9
(ft. (ft. (ft. ;::R (ft. ,(ft. ;::R (ft. (ft.
0 0
. 0 L() 0 L() 0 L() 0 L() 0
0 ¡...... L() C'\I 0 ¡...... L() C'\I a
(D LO LO LO LO V V V V
42904-5
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
. GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2004
:::,;:::,;;;::,i:;::::::¡::,:t\::!';:m mii\~!~:!:::illi,: ;':a~Q~(Iª""'m~õ~~m¡r¡¡: i:i,i¡mr~:i:m;; ::iii¡i:¡i,::i:i,iIDii;~mm:~"'"
Final Total Statutory Special Est. Annual
(12-1) Interest Debt 5.00% Cap. Other Assessment Tax Surplusl Cumulative
Year Princi al Rate Interest Payment Coverage Interest Revenues Income Levy Deficit Balance
2004 0 0.00% 8,804 8,804 '8,804 17,608 0 2,125 0 10,929 10,929
2005 115,000 2.15% 17,608 132,608 139,238 0 127,500 15,000 3,262 14,~91
2006 115,000 2.60% 15,135 130,135 136,642 0 122,400 16,000 1,758 15,949
2007 115,000 3.10% 12,145 127,145 133,502 0 117,300 17,000 798 16,747
2008 120,000 3.40% 8,580 128,580 135,009 0 112,200 17,000 -5,809 10,938'
2009 125,000 3.60% 4,500 129,500 135,975 0 107,100 18,000 -10,875 63
2010 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
590,000 66,771 656,771 689,170 17,608 0 588,625 83,000 63
iilpp,rtQI~(ºn!l~~'iº"~~æ!!I!I::'!!I!I:i;("i:;'!lr¡miii;m ¡ ::::::;',:,:::i:::::::: ::::::m::::mmmm::m:::mm::::: illl:;:::i:i:i: !1~~;~;I~~~!:ÎQQøm;~'miii:mm::mm:i;mm:mm;:I:m: :m:;;;m;; ;:;:;¡:;:¡¡;;;¡;;;:;¡;;¡:;¡;:¡¡;:;:;¡I;;lt
2004 Improvement Projects (A) 553,900 Est. Amount of Assessments: $510,000
Less: City Cash Contribution 0 Percentage of Issue Assessed: 86.44%
Total Hard Costs 553,900 Interest Rate on Assessments: 5.00%
Add: Issuance Expenses First Installment Collection: 2005
Underwriter's Discount @1.960% 11,564 Number of Annual Installments: 5
Capitalized Interest (12 Months) 17,608 Start Date of Assessments: 11/30/2004
Financial Advisory Fee 0
.ESt. Bond Counsel 4,875 ;~~~~;'ìmpraY~m~ñ~!i¡;),,ºièçtš:~!I:{~),ii:immmm:":mmm;::mm;:::::;:::;; ¡¡;;/I;
Rating Fee 0
Est. County Auditor Fee 200 Northland 8th Construction 311,600
Misc. ~ 0 Contingenci~s 31,200
Est. Registration (One-Time Fee) 2,425 Engineering, Plans/Specs 56,100
Total 590,572 Legal, Admin. 5,000
Less: Investment Income -205 Est. 16th Ave/Park Development 150,000
. Includes Contingencies &
Rounded'For Issuance II 590,00011 Engineering, Plans/Specs
Total Improvement Costs: 553,900
Bonds Dated: 6/1/2004
Bonds Mature: 12/1/05 Through 12/1/09
Interest Payments: 12/1/04 & Semiannually Each 6/1 & 12/1 Thereafter.
Call Option: All Bonds Are Without The Option Of Prepayment.
Registrar/Pay Agent: To Be Named.
Purchase Price: $578,436
Average Coupon: 3.1948%
Net Effective Rate: 3.7481%
Bond Sale Date: June 3, 2004
Bond Closing Date: Approximately 21 Business Days After Sale.
Bond Counsel: Briggs & Morgan, P.A.
.
Monte Eastvold,V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 6/3/2004
42904~5
, CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MINNESOTA
· GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 2004
,:'~::~~2-~::~~~~~!:1!~q~¡¡:¡¡;¡:¡¡¡::;;:::::¡¡,¡;i::.;,:::'!i!:::::::;r:}~:~:~:=~~::¡i::::..::r.:ii!',i;:;;;
Estimated Estimated
Assessment Interest Assessment Assessment Interest Assessment
Year Princi al ' 5.00% Income Principal 5.00% Income
2004 0 1,792 1,792 0 333 333
2005 86,000.00 21,500 107,500 16,000.00 4,000 20,000
2006 86,000.00 17,200 103,200 16,000.00 3,200 19,200
2007 86,000.00 12,900 98,900 16,000.00 2,400 18,400
2008 86,000.00 8,600 94,600 16,000.00 1,600 17,600
2009 86,000.00 4,300 90,300 16,0.00.00 800 16,800
2016 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
430,000.00 66,292 496,292 80,000.00 12,333 92,333
Annual Tax Residential Market Value
· Est. Tax Capacity Capacity $75,000 $150,000 $225,000
Tax Value Incr. Rate Net Tax Capacity
Year Levy 1.00% Increase $750 $1,500 $2,250
2004 0 1,862,341
2005 15,000 1,880,964 0.80% 5.98 11.96 17.94
2006 16,000 1,899,774 0.84% 6.32 12.63 18.95
2007 17,000 1,918,772 0.89% 6.64 13.29 19.93
2008 17,000 1,937,960 0.88% 6.58 13.16 19.74
2009 18,000 1,957,339 0.92% 6.90 13.79 20.69
2010 ° 1,976,912 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
83,000 Average Annuallncr: $2.70 $5.40 $8.10
Average Monthly Incr: $0.23 $0.45 $0.68
·
Monte Eastvold, V.P., Northland Securities, Inc. Dated: 6/3/2004
.. :<;.011 I .
. NORTHLAND'SECURITIES
Honorable City Council
City of St. Joseph, Minnesota
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
We understand that you desire to issue $590,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds. Accordingly, we propose as follows:
We agree to purchase '$590,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 2004, to be dated June I, 2004, and to mature
December 1, 2005~2009. We agree to. pay for the Bonds $578,436 and accrued interest to the date of settlement.
The Bonds are to be payable at U.S. Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, as paying agent and registrar. The bonds will
bear interest as follows:
2.15% - 2005 2.60%- 2006 3.10% - 2007 3.40% - 2008 3.60% - 2009
Interest is to be payable on December 1, 2004, and semiannually thereafter. The Bonds will mature or be subject to mandatoI)'
redemption on December I in the years and amounts as follows:
~
$115,000 in the years 2005 through 2007, inclusive,
$ 120,000 in the year 2008,and
$125,000in theye,ar 2009.<
-- .--.--- -,
All Bonds will be Book Entry and in multiples of $5,000. The avera.geinterestrate is calculated at 3.1948%. The net effective rate
is calculated at 3.7481%.
. All Bonds are noncallable.
This bid is made for prompt acceptance and subject to the approval of Briggs and' Morgan, Professional Association (Bond I
Counsel) of St. Paul, Minnesota, as to the legality and regularity of all proceedings taken in the issuance of the Bonds.
You agree to pay the expenses of registering the Bonds and the fee of Bond Counsel, recognized municipal bond attorneys, in
furnishing the necessary proceedings required to authorize the issuance of the Bonds.
Respectfully submitted this 3rd day of June, 2004.
::R¡JJJ~ -
The foregoing proposal is duly accepted bythe.City Council ofthe City ofSt. Joseph, Minnesota, this 3rd day ofJune, 2004.
By:
Mayor
Attest:
Administrator-Clerk
.
Northland Securities, Inc. 45 South 7th Street, Suite 2500, Minneapolis, MN 55402 Toll Fr..I-800-851-2920Main 612-851-5900 Fax 612-851-5987
www.northlaIldsecurities.com
Member NASD and SIPC
· NORTHLAND.SECURITIES
Honorable City Council
City ofSt. Joseph, Minnesota
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
We understand that you desire to issue $590,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds. Accordingly, we propose as follows:
We agree to purchase $590,000. General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 2004, to be dated June 1, 2004, and to mature
December 1,2005-2009. We agree to pay for the Bonds $578,436 and accrued interest to the date of settlement.
The Bonds are to be payable at U.S. Bank National Association, S1. Paul, Minnesota, as paying agent and registrar. The bonds will
bear interest as follows:
2.15% - 2005 2.60% - 2006 3.10% - 2007 3.40% - 2008 3.60% - 2009
Interest is to be payable on December 1, 2004, and semianñually thereafter. The Bonds will mature or be subject to mandatory
redemption on December 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
$ 115,000 in the years 2005 through 2007, inclusive,
$ 120,000 in the year 2008, and
$ 125,000 in the year 2009.
All Bonds will be Book Entry and in multiples of $5,000. The average interest rate is calculated at 3.1948%. The net effective rate
is calculated at 3.7481%.
All Bonds are noncallable.
· This bid is made for prompt acceptance and subject to the approval of Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association (Bond
Counsel) ofSt. Paul, Minnesota, as to the legality and regularity of all proceedings taken in the issuance of the Bonds.
You. agree to pay the expenses of registering the Bonds and the fee of Bond Counsel, recognized municipal bond attorneys, in
furnishing the necessary proceedings required to authorize the issuance ofthe Bonds.
Respectfully submitted this 3rd day of June, 2004.
::R?J)JO;;;: -
The foregoing proposal is duly accepted by the City Council of the City ofSt. Joseph, Minnesota, this 3rd day of June, 2004.
By: ~~A
Mayor
·
Northland Securities, Inc, 45 South 7th Street, Suite 2500, Minneapolis, MN 55402 Toll F,ee 1-800-851-2920 Main 612-851-5900 Fax 612-851-5987
www.northlandsecurities,com
Member NASD and SIPC