1986-03-17 CC Agenda/PacketCITY OF ALBERTVILLE
_ ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301
PHONE: 497-3384
COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
3/17/86
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
III. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
IV. DEPARTMENT BUSINESS
a. Legal
- Selection of City Administrator.
b. Administration
—Liquor Licenses Applications:
4 Floyd Woods for the 152 Club--Off-Sale and On -Sale
Sylvester and Elroy Barthel for the Albertville Bar --
Off -Sale and On -Sale
Hackenmueller's--Off-Sale
Approval of Building Permit for Barthel Construction
for new hone--$SQL.30 (pd)
c. Maintenance
Stabilization Pond Seminar --April 21-24
Holiday Inn in Willmar (Fees--$50.00 plus 3 nights
lodging)
"Need to attend in order to upgrade Class D Operator's
license to a Class C. Cost to take test is $15.00.
- Sewer Line Dig -In Procedures
- New Clutch needed in the Snow Plow
- Sewer Line Cleaning
- Need for NO PARKING signs on 54th and Barthel Industrial
Drive. Need to order 4 signs and post.
d. Engineering
- Tentative Date on Bid Opening and Assessment Hearing
for construction project for Barthel's Residential --
Phase II and Beaudry's 2nd Addition.
e. Planning
- Barthel Construction's Public Hearing has been cancelled.
- LeRoy Berning--Possibility of developing more Residential
Lots in the Barthel Industrial Park.
• - Valerius' Annexation Hearing has been set for April 11, 1986.
Make our City........ Your City
We invite Home, Industry, Business
Page 2
AGENDA
VI.
OTHER
BUSINESS
% a..
Joint Powers
w b.
Income Recieved, Bills to be Paid
c.
Letters from:
-
Senator Rudy Boschwitz
-
Representative Martin Sabo
- -
Representative Vin Weber
• -
Indepentent School District 728
d.
Consideration of having Garbage Collection Service
contracted out for the whole City--Donatus Vetsch
e'.
"HERE.'S WHERE YOUR MONEY GOES --Information Report.
•f.
ALERT --Request for Assistance in Preventing Occupational
Fatalities in Confined Spaces.
g.
Annual Report of Outstanding Indebtedness
VII.
ADJOURNMENT
10
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301
PHONE: 497-3384
COUNCIL MINUTES
3/17/86
The regular meeting of the Albertville City Council was called to order
by Mayor Jim Walsh. Members that were present include Gary Schwenzfeier,
Donatus Vetsch, and Bob Braun; Don Corneluis was absent. Others present
included Maureen Andrews, Barry Johnson, Gary Meyer; Don Berning was
also absent.
There was a motion to accept the minutes as read. The motion was made by
Gary Schwenzfeier and seconded by Donatus Vetsch. All were in favor.
The first issue taken yp by the Council was the City Administrator's position.
The miutes are to reflect the following:
There were 43 applicants for the position, from which five
were selected to be interviewed. Two of the five finalist
chose not to interview so just the following person inter-
viewed:
Donald Levens
Diane Wells
Maureen Andrews
There was a motion that Maureen Andrews be hired as the Albertville
City Administrator. Again the minutes are to reflect the following
items:
Resignation from the position should include at least a 30
day Notice of Resignation so that the Council has an opportunity
to conduct a replacement search.
Salary for the position will be reviewed at budget time.
Maureen Andrews has made a committment to stay 4 years, if
"all things remain equal".
The position will be reaffirmed each year, but not the person
holding the position.
The motion to approve Maureen Andrews' hiring was made by Gary Schwenzfeier
amd seconded by Bob Braun. All were in favor.
Gary Meyer than took a couple minutes to discuss the hiring process
and how the final choice was made.
Maureen was asked to contact the other two final canidates by letter to
inform them that they wre not selected as the City Administrator.
The Council approved the On -Sale and Off -Sale Liquor licenses for the
Make ouf City........ Your City
We invite Home, Industry, Business
following:
Floyd Woods for the 152 Club--Off-Sale and On -Sale Licenses
Sylvester and Elroy Barthel for the Albertville Bar--Off-Sale
and On -Sale Licenses
Hackenmueller's--Off-Sale License
These licenses were approved pending the reciept of Insurance Certification.
The motion to approve these licenses was made by Bob Braun and Seconded
by Gary Schwenzfeier. All were in favor.
The Council discussed the meeting to be held with Frankfort Township on
Apirl 1st at Frankfort Hall. The meeting is to discuss the Frankfort
Lawsuit.
In a related area there were some question about the Joint Powers'
Audit Repost. Jim will look into them and get back to the Council
at a later meeting.
Ken Lindsay was present to discuss the following items:
Upcoming Stabilization Pond Seminar to be held April 21-24.
There was a motion by Donatus Vetsch and a second by Bob Braun
to send Ken to the Seminar. All were in favor. Ken will also
be taking the Class C Operator Leicense Exam at the same
time.
There was also discussion of when is the best time to do
crack filling. Ken will wait until the frost is our of the ground
and will then do the crack filling.
The Council was shown the new application for sewer dig -in.
The only:differecne between the old and new application is that
the procedures are no on the document. No action was required
on the change.
Ken informed the Council that the clutch on the truck is being
replaced. The Council will get a report fron Don's at the
next Council meeting.
Continued the discussion on the Sewer Line Cleaning. Ken has
gooten quotes from several different companies who do this type
of work. The low quote came in from Roto-Rooter. Both Ken
Lindsay and Barry Johnson made the following recommendations:
1. That the entire system should be cleaned before the new
plant goes on line.
2. The City should set up a maintenance program for sewer
cleaning similiar to that for the street department.
The Council discussed these recommendations and asked that Ken and
Barry run down the known trouble spots throughout the system. Ken
was also asked to check with the school to see what the are doing
with grease removal. Ken will repost his findings back to
the Council.
MINUTES
Ken Lindsay also discussed the need for "NO -PARKING" signs
for Barthel Industrial Drive. The issue was tabled until
prepared a map showing were the signs are needed.
Ken Barthel, LeRoy Berning and Bob Rohlin were preset to discuss a
proposal they are working on. They were trying to get the Council's
feelings on the following issues:
1. Prosed Zoning Changes for 3 lots
2. Exchange of designated Park Land.
Some of the thisngs that were discussed include the following
I. One proposal exchanges the current park land for the
land across Barthel Industrial Drive (this land is
really low).
2. Any exchange for Park land would be for a smaller lot.
3. The Council would not want to see driveways out onto
Barthel Industrial Drive, so there would be a need to
use Cal -de -sacs.
4. If the park exchange would be for the property east of
Barthel Industrial Drive there is some concern about childern
crossing a heavily used road.
Barthel Construction was asked to work up some of their ideas and bring
them back to the Council for more discussion.
Vern Hackenmueller was present to discuss the possibility of blacktopping
the road in front of his store. There was some discussion that this
work could be included with the Barthel Phase II and the Beaudry 2nd
Addition work in an effor to lower the cost of the project.
Barry Johnson was asked to update the Feasibility Study that had been
done on the projct in August of 1983, on a motion made by Gary
Schwenzfeier and a second by Donatus Vetsch. All were in favor.
Owners of the old Albertville Antiques store were present to let the
Council know that they felt that the Franklin Outdoor Advertising sign
was non -conforming according to the City's sign Ordinance for the
following reasons:
I. The Ordinance suggest that no advertising device should be
within 2,000 feet of antoher sign along the Interstate.
2. New billboards can not be erected on a tract of land which
contains an existing building.
3. The loss of visual contact of the building will reduce
the calue of the reastate because the building is blocked
by the size of the sign.
4. They believed that the billboard is too large.
5. They believed that the billboard is unsightly,
MINUILb
as well as non -conforming.
Keith Franklin of Franklin Outdoor Advertising made some rebuttal
statements to the Old Albertville Antiques charges:
1. Sign increased the value of the property on which the
sign is located because of the revenue that it brings in.
2. Billboard must be located in a commercial or industrial
zoned area.
3. Must meet State and Federal permit standards which are
enforced by the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
4. Antique sign is not readable from Freeway.
5. City recieved taxes from the Permit Fees.
6. Each sign must be reviewed by the Planning Commission and
the City Council on an individual basis.
7. Size of Billboard is regulated by the State.
B. The State does not regulate the height of the billboard.
The minutes should reflect that the billboard in question was approved at
the June 17, 1985 Council meeting. In addition, Mr. Franklin also
meet withMrs. Deihn about working something out between the 2 parties.
The issue was tabled until the April 21st meeting so the Council would
have and opportunity to review the situtition. (Please find attached
a list of the people present who were involved in the discussion.)
Other items discussed by the Council were:
Contacting property owners about posting "NO -DUMPING" signs on their
property, where people are dumping unclean fill.
Checking into a recycling grant.
Looking into Citywide Garbage Collection. There was a motion by Donatus
Vetsch and a second by Gary Schwenzfeier to take bids on the issue. All
were in favor.
Approved a Limited Liquor License for St. Albert's for an April 4th Fund
Raiser.
Maureen Andrews was asked to contact the City of Hanover to get a copy
of their fee schedule for variances and Public Hearings.
There was a motion by Bob Braun and a second by seconded by Gary
Schwenzfeier to approve the bills. All were in favor.
Maureen was asked to contact the Sheriff's Office about slowing the traffic
down on Main Avenue.
There was a motion to adjourn. All were in favor.
REGISTRATION FORM
Stabilization Pond Seminars
April 21-24, 1986
May 19-22, 1986
September 16-19, 1986
September 29-October 2, 1986
Holiday Inn
Quadna Mountain
Holiday Inn
Holiday Inn
Willmar, MN
Resort
Bemidji, MN
New Ulm, MN
--4612) 235-.6060
Hill City, MN
(218) 751-9500
(507) 359-2941
1-800-662-5798
NAME
PHONE
ADDRESS
City State Zip Code
EMPLOYER POSITION
PLEASE CIRCLE ONF: Willmar Hill City Bemidji New Ulm
Enclose $50.00 (check or money order) payable to Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and mail
to: Emily Armistead, Assistant Training Coordinator, Operations/Training Unit, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, 1935 West County Road B-2, Roseville, Minnesota 55113
40
^ K M
►�� W O
N fD
�o n ►t
o� 0
N W M
t.+ n o
13 r♦
� p
9:J
f+ rt
m :r
rt M
M W
M
. f D
C
M
0
r 3
Ab
1.0
00
Ch
POZx
M £OW 19
M 1-4 O'
K o �
CT u+
µ M �V
M CL0
0 WQ 00
O M a%
rt
W
w=cn
rn0rn
0 o rn
C.a
-�
M03 r n
p Rai N a
M `C 01
W
M W 00 ry�
O ON
rt
O
_ 6O
r. C
r v <
0-0 zOA
� N
�aa�
z-10
rrn a
oz
-q =
v�
r•xxcn
LA M O M
O rb
W0tr
Ln M
N
07 n
0 rt
rt 0
Cr
M
M
Z]
'-,Cd=W
f'J gOg F0 M
00 F+ ►+ rt
v� w 0
V F+ `< Cr
In � fD
tA M
O yN
O
r^`t
00
O+
00 ►~-�CL
ON F4
ON rt , N
N 1.4 0 N
t.n d
V rt
Oo p p �
M
M PO
O N
rt fA
ro 0
H
rt
a ram. o b
W � r
LI = O N
ON F-4 0 4-
0 M
co %-0
O 00
r< O\
03
9N
bi
M
r
H
H
z
ro
O
N
q��)
1
O A H
0 =
"d
?r b
M
O
w
M v'd
rt od
rt 19 w rt m H
v m W e
H
!d
If
m&
ti
`E
►i
V C
a
O & O
:r M
O W p rI r► :r
110 M
0 0
M
m d
H a
<
w
H p
n a
10 O
OQ
d a w w m
O m
w
rt m
w H
d
O o
m H
m W F+. of
d p El d
n n
H
m W m
O m
m
rt
rt m
A
Po C O
PO
'd
W rA
m W w H. m
�' W p m
C tt, w n m
O
ti7
N
A m W
z
00 W
::r
O am
H
m m
m
G N W d W
H W" O o
m
H H
rt rt d
O
O O
W
Ol
a
H H m
n
►i W d 00 N W
m m m d rt
H
w
rt
Od
0
w m H
W rt
an rt w d
CL p°'d
n
z
H
m
m
rtaw
o
w o
� '
rt rt wa
w
t n ►d
w<m
-
O
< m
H W O
m o m
" O
CW -
d
m
m p H
d n
m
D' o p
r• r
H
IW,,
m
►i rt
w
�
w tr
O~o
w
A
OQrmt � d 'L1 F+
� A rtr.0
r
a
H
H
rt w
r►
a. V
m w
:r m m o
`C
ro rt
H
rt w
.
rt N
rr o ig
<
W m d►+
.o H a a
a cr W
M w W 0
H
w
y
Q
�4 m
F+ W
O d
m W
O
O 0 W
O m
O H O
H rt F• p
W
ir,9aOQ
d m
'po
N
a w
rt a p
d' m a
m
cr
w m M rt o m
F-A 'd w O 10 H
O m 1+
0 N 0
`J
H
N p
a m
m r t
H.
rt m
W w n m ^d
at
rt w o
W
p
m
w
d
9
a W
rt m
:rm
rt W W 'd H
w rt d
oQ
03
O
a -0
m
p
O
w d
p' rt
m
to
H I- H w v
O d 1+ rt
y
a. n
m
Q'd
d w 3
mm
m W o rt H
m
M a O H
o
Pi
m
a V
d a rt
rt m
rtb0O
M w W m ry <
pod
rt H t-
W
r7
w
H
0
o w m
w r
M d m H m W
zr O ty
rt
o
►y rt-
o•d
C rrti
cr
I-Aa.m a
W n o a
O
d 0
r ►i
w
m a
0
W F-' W
n m w
W n
C I kQ $ m
m w 0 00
0
C
1-+ rt
m O' 1 W
rt a m
M
►-�
Wm
d m rt O tt
W d
"Z
ppm
'C! O
A rt
m
W H M rt
O)
m
0 d
m
fs
a p F-+
W 1�,
N
M ,
0 Q
00 r r m
M
m W 0 H
W
m
w
rt
A E
p w
v' O m A
d
00
m
m
d•
m w
w 0 p w
W
(n
H
H
'd
m :r
H M -0
m
H m
W a m H
m
m
O
0
m
F3 m O W
m I-+ < H
tY rt
d 'C! rf
Fr
p
A
H
't7 F-+ d
d W m m 0
rt
cr
1-+
W m
rt rt m W
a
W
w
m
w
m Csl O n
w N a 0 00
w
H
w
M Ic
m H n n
d
F-A
m
rt
H M 00 W
d w p H
m
W
d
m
W w
d 0 rt W
'H
m
w
m
m
H.
w M W Tl
A rt W m
rt
n rt
w r W
m
H
m
0
rt m n ►-+
m W 0 rt
m
OQ
w m
p cr O w
m
p'
(7
0
r.n w m
O a-
m
a"
H
A I-r 0 0
m
C
O
O
t1 rt F-• m
d w W O'
m
w
w
W
m m m rt
W
W
o
0
w
m m
I• d w
m
1.4
O O
m- m
0
F-+
rt
rt
d
9 O
H -0 F-• OQ m
'V
W
n
`•y 'd
10 W
d
F.
W
H
a
O n M
O O
I�
O
0
w
O
m
H O -0 n
m
d
O
ttM rt 'd d w r" 0-
m
F-+
A
M
m H
x w
w O m 0
n rt H d
C
w
F-�
00
N
W It
1-4 a m O m
•
C
rt
to rt
rt M a
a
m
H
W
ca C O
p W d
n "a H m
m o m p
I
N
x
g 0
W o C:m
o
m
d
p rt a
v n O
m
H
10 �0ry1
- �
rt
d
m m p r►
m
M
rt
m
O
d H m m m
.A
m
d
H
m
0
rwt
m
0
w
w
rt O w w
P-h
i-�
O
W p
rt
G
A
a. w w
rt OQ
a 0 M O p
m
-rt
H
w
and
p F-•
m
^0 W
.m
H
Q
p OQ
..
OQ
Ill. a m
a o
m
.4
a
p
C n I.n qo 0 H 7rl
Vr m m O O H d
rt (A 'C7 w
O m H d
O H OQ
d O
n
m
rt ro rt
ct t7
p
m rt�
C) r'd � H rt H
w w Or rt hd
00 H r w d w m
W a
W
rt C
:rF+ :rm
O H
O
n V.
W
H a H rr O
A rt I.- R3. rt W m
rt
w 0
to m
H
rt
m m m 00
W
m
:r W m
pp O F� m 00 m 00
H m O m H
H W W H p
d'
H H m
rt v d
W
w W W
p m H m
H O
Pi
rt
m rt
H W W
w .0 n
M rT . W O W U
m
w m
:3 0
M
O m rt
m
n
C
a W i/!
G O lr
m rt F w m cn m
`C
d 0 W H `C
rt W 1 F-' d m
rt rt d
m F rt
W
rt O H
m rt
m
Fr d 0
m rt rt rt m rt
O W W H m
OQ w d m 0
m rt H OQ a
m n N OQ 00
a w 'jl - m
(n
m O a
14 O
A
m w w
W O
m-
rt Pt o O w W H
m m W H
,'>'
rt rt O 00 r~ H
rt
w
n rt W
m m
d M
w
rt
1-+ H d
. H rt
C
m
g
w
a O
w O d d rt d
m . m
W H 70 m d to
rt
O' m rt
n 0 h■
W
wpm
',>a
I
:r
a
m 0
1-+ rt
w m W w w
a. n 0 H rt
d m rt n
rt 'CI H o
w 0 O d W rt
m
m m
F+ H w
o
n
d 0
n
w m
m
0 d H
In o H d
m w N w d
rt d M m n rt m
C: m 'e
n
O m
0
m
OQ rt w
C7
d a m
In w d H
N- n 0 rt<
.'b
(=1
. a
H
7r cn d
m 0 rt
7d
m m H
o
M m
to
n %Q oQ
�- I rt to rt m
m ►-r. m
G�
H<- rT
O1 n rt W -
H m O
m M p
m d
a a
m
X
H
Fr m
C rt
rt
W WNM
W O ry w
;C rt O d
I-r
r- O :r I-+ r- W
w O W 1-+
m w
w
H
Ky
rt
O w
O
N w
H
F-+
m g m
O w
hi
W- O d " m
m w =' d W
to
N d m
m H d w
w X
H
m n m
C7
rt
m
rt
d rt H
t=f
Crl m rt
7d d 19 w
d w m
w a. rt M d
H
rt H m w d R7
O w rt
"0 w
W
f7
n m
>
H
w
m m w
(n
O 00 W m O
m O A
w - V+ m m
H �n H m
'Cl O
d
>
o v
H
m 0
m
H rt
.D
w OQ 1-+ an d
Pr 19 C m
H
N n W m H
�D rt da: 1C. O w
m r-+ v H
H In
F-• W M
p
w
H
a O
Fi
M M
rt
W W
m m 0 1.4 m
m m-
t1
ON M W m rt rt
E rt
O
W
n w rt
rt
W
H
O
W d
H O m
O
z
C
d rt
tJ
w 0
C7
C p d g
W n W ,a W >+
rt w
O F- 'l7 tv
O
z
I po O 0 m w W
tr p rt O
W zr
to rt O•
o
z
m a W
fn
a s
4-
w m
N `C rt W m
w w w m
'y
O rt w
rt W m
p
n w a
m
d M
F✓ . m
rt •C ry
N m m d
C) m m C� o m
p' p
Qi b
W 0
d
m
rt rt N
O•
n w m
m W
7r rt R'
n\
O rA
m
W m
O
(n
m
o
m d m
- m
10
�
to •
W�D p rt 0
m
O 0
7r MO <m
w d C
d
m 0
W
m
w rt 0
Vr d w H W
m
rt rt
rt cr M
W p
F-
W H
p
rt ::rC
m a O
rt g
rod
d d
m
m
m m
w
rt O
rmt r
tp
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301
PHONE: 497-3384
March 12, 1986
Mr. Terrence A. Merritt
Excutive Director
Municipal Board
165 Metro Square Building
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Dear Mr. Merritt:
This letter is in regards to the Valerius Petition for annexation to
the City of Albertville.
In a period when the value of agricultural land and improved land within
the city limits differ so greatly the petitioners, in this case
the Valerius family, believe that annexation into the City of Albertville
would increase the value of the property. The availablity of public
utilities is a major point of influence for increasing the value of
the land. In any case, the petitioners are interested in resolving
this annexation process as quickly as possible.
The City of Albertville's interest in the annexation process is to the
extent that we have made a commitment to development. Our interest in
this annexation petition revolves around the fact that we want to
show potential developers that we are interested in good development
and that will are willing to work with development rather than against
it.
Regardless to the outcome of the Annexation Hearing the City of
Albertville would like to strongly encourage that your Board consider
this petition as quickly as possible for the sake of the petitioners.
If you have any questions or would like to speak
City please feel free to contact me at 559-9197
Maureen Andrews at 497-3384. Thank you for your
hope to be hearing from you soon.
Sincerely,
James Walsh
Mayor
to someone from the
or the City Administrator,
attention and I
Make our City........ Your City
We invite Home, Industry, Business
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301
PHONE: 497-3384
INCOME RECIEVED
3/17/86
FRANCIS
SCHMIDT AND GARY ANDERSON
$ 605.50
BARTHEL
CONSTRUCTION
639.90
BARTHEL
CONSTRUCTION
668.30
LIFE IN
CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH
43.50
MEINY'S
DIGGERS, INC.
55.00
BUFFALO
MEMORIAL HOSPITAL (SEPT. BOND PAYMENT)
14,953.75
ST. ALBERT'S DINNER DANCE (LIQUOR LICENSE)
50.00
TOTAL
$17,015.95
BILLS TO BE PAID
3/17/86
HANOVER SAND AND GRAVEL
$ 43.55
BRIAN BEBEAU
17.50
HACKENMUELLER'S
18.57
KILIAN HARDWARE
72.40
ST. MICHAEL INSURANCE (AUDIT --COMP. GENERAL LIABILITY)
372.00
CHOUINARDS OFFICE MACHINES AND SUPPLIES
98.22
HARRY'S AUTO SUPPLY
10.25
NEW BRIGHTON LUMBER (BACK ROOM REMODELING)
224.28
ROBERT MINKEMA
200.00
CROW RIVER NEWS
13.50
BARCO
28.29
GARY MEYER
3,138.52
MAUREEN ANDREWS
444.64
KEN LINDSAY
592.91
KEN LINDSAY (INSURANCE-$50.00, MWOA MEETING-$4.75)
54.75
PETTY CASH (TO BRING PETTY CASH BACK UP TO $30.00)
24.92
TOTAL $5,154.30
Make our City........ Your City
We invite Home, Industry, Business
RUDY BOSCHWITZ
MINNESOTA
'? cnifeb zictiez. zenafe
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510
March 7, 1986
The Honorable James Walsh
Mayor of Albertville
Albertville, Minnesota 55301
Dear Mayor Walsh:
Thank you for your letter.
COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS:
AGRICULTURE
BUDGET
FOREIGN RELATIONS
SMALL BUSINESS
VETERANS AFFAIRS
You can be sure that I unders appreciate the
important role that tax-exempt f' ancin)an'd
as played in promoting
economic growth in Minnesota. or thaason, I will be
carefully studying the House t bill ell as any other
proposal affecting such financ'ng that be put forward as tax
reform progresses in the Senat As nroposals are made, I
hope to continue to hear your pecificughts and concerns.
For your information! I m enclosin a copy of my longer
letter about tax-exempt financi g.
Once again, thanks for getjing, n touch.
Sin 'erely,
UJI
Rudy'Boschwitz
United States Senator
RB/dsc
Enclosures
RUDY BOSCHWITZ
MINNESOTA
, cnif eb Zictiez 'Senate
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510
March 7, 1986
The Honorable ,lames Walsh
Mayor of Albertville
Albertville, Minnesota 55301
Dear Mayor Walsh:
COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS:
AGRICULTURE
BUDGET
FOREIGN RELATIONS
SMALL BUSINESS
VETERANS AFFAIRS
Thank you for getting in touch with me about proposals to
modify or repeal the tax exemption for certain state and local
bonds. It was thoughtful of you to share your concerns with me.
As you know, in November of 1984, the Treasury Department
announced a major tax reform proposal for the President to
consider. After reviewing Treasury's proposal, the President
made a number of changes and proposed a separate, comprehensive
package for tax reform. While the thrust of the President's plan
is to apply lower tax rates to a larger amount of taxable income,
one of the provisions of the President's package would make
interest on certain state or local government bonds taxable.
Under current law, interest paid on certain bonds issued by
state and local governments is exempt from tax. As a result,
state and local governments have used tax-exempt bonds to finance
a wide variety of government activities, quasi -government
activities, and essentially private enterprise activities.
Tax-exempt student loan bonds, mortgage subsidy bonds, veterans'
mortgage bonds, and industrial developments bonds (IDBs) are a
few examples of the types of bonds that have been used. The
Treasury Department believes these are "private purpose bonds"
because the money raised by issuing the bonds -- the
proceeds -- is used by private citizens or businesses instead of
by the issuer of the bonds -- the government.
The President's plan would have effectively eliminated all
"private purpose bonds." Bonds would not qualify as tax-exempt
unless at least 99 percent of the proceeds were actually used by
the government that issued the bonds. The Administration
believes that "private purpose bonds" provide an indirect federal
subsidy that erodes the tax base, lowers tax collections, and
results in higher tax rates on non-exempt income. In addition,
the Administration believes that the generally lower interest
rate on tax-exempt bonds gives people who use the bonds an unfair
or competitive advantage over those who cannot obtain tax-exempt
bond financing.
Advocates of retaining tax-exempt "private purpose bonds"
maintain that they are a necessary source of affordable,
long-term, fixed-rate financing. They also maintain that IDBs
are important tools for economic development and that tax-exempt
March 7, 1986
Page 2
bonds for student loans, mortgages, and other similar purposes
are really an investment that benefits the public. These and
other arguments were made in 1984 in opposition to legislation
that imposed a state-wide dollar limitation on tax-exempt bonds.
Unfortunately, that limitation was included by the House of
Representatives and was not voted on separately in the Senate
before becoming law. Even so, the 1984 tax bill made me very
aware of the extent to which tax-exempt bonds are used in
Minnesota and the effect of the dollar limitation in our state.
You can be sure I will keep this in mind.
The Constitution requires that tax bills originate in the
House of Representatives. Last November, the Ways and Means
Committee agreed on a comprehensive tax bill that contained many
of the President's proposals, and also contained many changes to
his plan. Under the committee bill, traditional municipal and
state bonds could continue to pay tax-free interest. However,
governments could issue fewer types of tax-exempt private purpose
and quasi -governmental bonds. Bonds used to build sports
stadiums, convention centers, and certain other projects would no
longer be exempt.
Last December, the House passed the Ways and Means Committee
bill (H.R. 3838) and it has now been referred to the Senate
Finance Committee -- the tax -writing committee of the Senate --
for further consideration and "mark up." After consideration by
the Finance Committee, the bill must be approved by the full
Senate. If there are differences between the bill which is
ultimately passed by the Senate and that which was passed by the
House, the differences will have to be worked out by a joint
Senate -House conference committee.
Like you, I believe that H.R. 3838 -- or any other
legislation which would fundamentally change current tax law --
should not have a retroactive effective date. For that reason,
in December I supported Senate Resolution 281, which provides
that the effective date of any fundamental tax legislation
enacted by Congress should be January 1, 1987. While Sense of
the Senate resolutions do not carry the weight of law, they do
show how the Senate feels on various issues. I've also been
discussing with my colleagues the idea of making no tax
legislation effective until at least one year after enactment.
Because of the great concern which we both have regarding
proposals to change the rules for tax-exempt financing, I called
Bob Packwood, Chairman of the Finance Committee, in an effort to
get him to schedule hearings. Senator Packwood told me that
because the Finance Committee held hearings in 1985 on tax-exempt
financing, he will not schedule any more hearings on this subject
this year.
I recognize the important role that tax-exempt financing has
played in promoting our state's economy. With or without
hearings, you can be sure that I will closely follow any
proposals which are made to change the current law.
March 7, 1986
Page 3
Last October, I was invited to testify before the Senate
Finance Committee to give my views on tax reform. As I pointed
out to the committee, since 1981, Congress has been enacting
complex and significant changes to the tax code at a dizzying
pace virtually every year. As a result, taxpayers are reeling.
The ability to adequately plan is being taken away, creating
uncertainty and disruption. I also told the committee that I do
not believe we adequately understand and appreciate the impact
that recent tax legislation has had on our economy. Finally, I
told the committee that as we reduce budget deficits and thereby
reduce spending, it will have a dampening impact on the economy.
Reducing the incentives to save and invest, plus reducing
depreciation rates, will also slow economic activity, and between
budgetary discipline and tax reform, I am not anxious to give the
economy a one-two punch.
For these reasons and others, I believe that now is not the
time to attempt further tax reform. Instead, I believe Congress
would be prudent to give taxpayers a chance to catch their breath
from tax law changes and analyze the impact of past and proposed
tax changes on our economy. Also, Congress must, as a higher
priority, devote its attention to reducing budget deficits.
On the other hand, should the tax reform ball begin
gathering momentum in the Senate for enactment, you can be sure
that I will roll up my sleeves and do everything I can to make
sure that Minnesota's interests are looked after and that the
bill which is passed is the best one possible. Toward that end,
I want you to know that I am working to form a group of Senators
whose goal will be to insist that any tax bill that's passed
makes good tax and economic policy. To make sure, among other
things, that it promotes saving, capital formation, economic
growth, American international competitiveness, and a strong
industrial base.
I do not mean to imply that our present tax system does not
need to be improved. It does. We need to lower the marginal tax
rates and simplify the tax code. Lower rates will promote
compliance, saving, investing, and the incentive to work. Lower
rates will encourage decision -making based on economic, not tax
merits.
Incidentally, I think President Reagan goes too far when he
says the tax code is "un-American" (President Carter said our tax
code was a "disgrace"). One has to ask: compared to what? It's
not perfect but compared to other countries' tax codes, it's not
too bad. When you look to see how the income tax burden is
distributed it comes out surprisingly different than some would
have you believe. If you divide the 100-odd million taxpayers
into four income groups (lowest to highest), here's the
percentage of the total income taxes paid by each group:
Taxpayers Divided by Income
March 7, 1986
Page 4
Lowest
Lower -Middle
Upper -Middle
Highest
Quarter
Quarter
Quarter
Quarter
6/10th of 1%
6%
20%
73%
So the people in the highest brackets do indeed pay most of
the taxes -- and they should. Do some people avoid taxes -- in
whole or part? Sure. Should we fix that? Of course we should.
But it's not as easily done as it sounds.
Incidentally, I'm enclosing a Wall Street Journal article
about who pays the taxes. Note that the top 1.4 percent of the
taxpayers pay 22 percent of all the taxes.
The taxes that are regressive and really penalize the
working poor are Social Security and sales taxes. They go from
dollar number one of income -- there are no personal exemptions
or deductions like on the income tax.
We must particularly encourage saving. During the last
decade, saving in the United States has been nearly the lowest
percentage of any of the industrialized nations. Promoting
saving is essential to provide the capital pool for future
growth.
That's a long letter abo my vie on taxes but I consider
this issue most important bec use the h lth of the economy is
very much involved. A summa of my tes imony before the Finance
Committee is enclosed as well as the arti le about who pays the
taxes and also how lower rate effect pe le in the upper
brackets.
Thanks again for gettinglin touch
Sincer,,61y,
Ru y Boschwitz
United States Senator
RB/dsc
Enclosures
.FFICE OF
SENATOR RUDY BOSCHWITZ
MINNESOTA
STATEMENT OF SENATOR RUDY BOSCHWITZ
ON TAX REFORM PROPOSALS
BEFORE THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
October 10, 1985
Admittedly, our present tax system is complicated, and
sometimes inequitable and inefficient. However, I believe that
the President makes a mistake in calling the system unfair and
un-American. There are many positive things which can be said
about our present system:
1. The system's various incentives for capital formation
and investment have benefited our economy as a whole
-- in the past 10 years, 23 million new jobs have been
created in the United States versus none (01) in the
European Economic Community in that period.
2. As intended, our system is progressive. Currently,
the lowest quarter of all income earners pay only
6/10th of one percent of individual income taxes. The
next lowest quarter pays 6 percent of individual
income taxes, the upper middle quarter of income
earners pays 20 percent of individual income taxes,
and the highest quarter of income earners pays 73
percent of all individual income taxes collected.
I am in favor of making the tax system more simple, lowering
rates, providing incentives for capital formation, placing a
premium and not a penalty on savings, and decreasing not
increasing capital gains, perhaps by one-half.
While I thus acknowledge that our present tax system can be
improved, I do not believe that now is the proper time to
attempt tax reform. Additionally, I have several specific
concerns with the approach taken by the most frequently
discussed reform proposals.
With respect to whether now is the correct time for tax
reform, I would point out to this Committee that, since 1981,
Congress has been enacting complex and significant changes to
the tax code at a dizzying pace. In 1981, we enacted the
Economic Recovery Tax Act, which cut taxes. In 1982, we enacted
the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act, which raised
taxes. In 1983, we repealed part of the 1982 tax increase. In
1984, we enacted the Tax Reform Act of 1984, which increased
taxes. Later in 1984, we revised the complex imputed interest
rules added to the Code by the Tax Reform Act of 1984. In 1985,
we have acted twice. First, we repealed the provisions of the
Tax Reform Act of 1984 with respect to the requirement for
automobile logs. Second, we made permanent the imputed interest
rules of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 as modified by the
subsequent 1984 enactment. In addition, since 1982, Congress
has also enacted the Retirement Equity Act of 1984 and made
changes in laws for Chapter "S" corporations.
As a result of these changes to the tax code, taxpayers are
reeling. The ability to adequately plan is being taken away,
creating uncertainty and disruption. In addition, I do not
believe that we fully understand and appreciate the impact that
the pace of tax legislation has had on our economy. For
instance, it has been suggested that we have influenced
consumers to spend more and save less. At a minimum, we have
negatively impacted on the public's perception and acceptance of
our tax system.
- 2 -
It is with this in mind that we should analyze present
proposals for tax reform. I believe that a number of hard
questions must be asked about any proposal for tax reform --
what will be the impact of the proposal on our economy? on
capital formation? on savings?
While I support lower rates, it must be understood that as
rates are lowered, the value of "tax preferred" assets as well
as decisions and investments such as the purchase of real estate
and charitable giving will decrease. What will be the impact on
the economy?
We must also consider the magnitude of the redistribution of
capital which would be caused by the President's proposal. For
the period from Fiscal Year 1986 to Fiscal Year 1990 the
President's proposal would, it is estimated, result in $486
billion of individual tax cuts and $354 billion in individual
tax increases. On the corporate side, it is estimated that the
President's proposal would result in $195 billion of corporate
tax cuts and $313 billion of tax increases. Put another way, a
total of $1.3 trillion is involved ($486+$354+$195+$313), over
$800 billion on the individual side, $500 billion on the
corporate side. In relative terms, this is 5 percent of our
estimated Gross National Product for the same 5-year period, and
50 percent of estimated income tax collections over the same
5-year period.
Finally, we must also ask ourselves how any new tax proposal
will interact with the prior tax changes which we have enacted
and with trade, farm, and other legislation now pending.
Again, I am in favor of improving the tax system. However,
I believe that improvement must come slowly. Appropriate
questions must be answered in advance so that the economy is not
disrupted. We must give taxpayers a chance to catch their
breath.
Finally, and most importantly, our efforts must be directed
toward the deficit. In that regard, we must understand that as
the deficit is reduced, economic activity will be dampened. If,
in conjunction with reducing the deficit, we eliminate various
deductions, credits and exclusions which provide incentives to
our economy, we will further dampen economic activity.
As to the current proposals for tax reform, I agree
wholeheartedly with the concept that we need to lower marginal
rates and simplify the tax code. Lower rates will promote
compliance, saving, investing, and the incentive for working.
Lower rates will also encourage decision -making based on
economic merits, not tax merits. History has shown us that
lowering rates will raise collections from high income earners.
I am also in agreement with the concept contained in the
President's proposal that we should not tax those who are at or
below the poverty level. To do so forces a low income person
into deciding between earning a few more dollars, paying some of
the earnings to the federal government, and losing welfare
benefits, or, not earning more money and being allowed to retain
welfare benefits. We thus force low income earners to make the
unhappy decision of choosing between the dignity and self-esteem
of a paying job or accepting welfare benefits (which actually
leaves them with more money).
However, the current proposals do not allow sufficient
opportunity to plan and adjust for the changes they would
impose. Immediate imposition of rate reductions and immediate
loss of deductions, exclusions, and credits confiscates value,
penalizes those who have relied upon prior provisions, and is
disruptive. In that regard, I oppose any lengthening of
depreciation periods and predict that indexing of asset values
will not survive either the House or the Senate.
- 3 -
I would propose that, instead of an immediate reduction in
tax rates and an immediate elimination of certain deductions,
exclusions, and credits, we eliminate the indexing of brackets
for inflation and, instead, phase in any new system by indexing
tax rates downward by inflation or some other measure which
would provide graduated rate reductions. For example, assume
the following tax brackets and rates:
Tax Bracket Rate
$10,000-12,000 16%
12,000-14,000 18%
14,000-16,000 20%
16,000-18,000 22%
If the rate of inflation was 10 percent, then rates could be
adjusted as follows:
Tax Bracket Rate
10,000-12,000 15%
12,000-14,000 17%
14,000-16,000 19%
16,000-18,000 21%
This proposal would allow taxpayers to adjust to decreasing
tax rates. In addition, to simplify our tax code and "pay for"
lower rates, again in a manner which will give taxpayers time to
adjust, I would propose that we phase out pre -selected tax
preference items as the top marginal tax rate is reduced. For
instance, as the top marginal tax rate was reduced to 44 percent,
we could eliminate a pre -selected group of deductions,
exclusions, and credits. Another pre -selected group of credits,
exclusions and deductions would be eliminated when the top
marginal rate was 38 percent, and so on.
I have handed the Chairman and other members of the
Committee two articles: "The Redistributionist Tax Reduction"
and "Taxes, Inflation and the Rich." I would also recommend to
this Committee the article in the July 21, 1985 edition of the
New York Times regarding the "Tax -Standstill Act." While perhaps
written with tongue-in-cheek, the article's suggestion to limit
changes to the tax code merits consideration.
I want to emphasize that any new proposals should and must
encourage capital formation. Studies have consistently shown
that savings in the United States has been among, if not, the
lowest of all industrialized nations. We must develop incentives
in our tax code to encourage capital formation. We should
consider removing all taxes on savings.
In summary, I believe that, at the present time, the best
proposal for tax reform is to do nothing. The less we do with
the tax code, the better. Because, in the end Mr. Chairman, the
country that taxes the least taxes the most fairly; the country
that puts the greatest emphasis on capital formation will
contribute the most to its economy.
998
November 1985
z,
L+ c`ai A�� aEicr_
�
N?� �C°i
N O 0oy N y_
S<5 a��..
-ud EsR 22
�ym�� yuc�acilyo�c`���u �OQU�
>oNaCeE acoW
j7O t0C3��C7 CV-caNEC!VG����
c 'm c W C7 ca x �y u T- E c 'v � ••
Q0 °0'" -o,o mx a Eo u E-
3 cvo:5 no cF�•,� eu
-�p • E � E
uE•'4 Syv`c�oie$Sa� c°iE 3Sa
° o > = Q
�auV
o3v,y.,E�y3.�
�F�O5$3 S
.9 �r-p ap
tcu
KS3S'Lfdyc�� I•i
oNi�
O
y y O L - y
m_N . Ec C
Nu�NON��� V`�ai�L�oO
� Z
y L.G.. 7c pyaY 2CL�S
° � d y Ny > y�
0. 6, E
-5 LN..D
>,a$5a�>a`d o�'ovra
w yv �� y ro �j vL 3 _fs7'3 cq
y (A L J
a
cd v W m L v E 6v_i > u �<ddy U 'G_. ° C J V L= L
vrA E-Eb— > �EmL�.�p�HOK�`�
L Cpp a t" a u
a� L.' � N C °: 7 m G ..N. 7 v E y Oo �• C O
> pp
x
ca ww v rcco Ana - E m.
:d�
> L V td y Y 0 0 % a L O E C
� (x o
`G� uS o v.+:o 3
fAm
5,0
tz
e�f o tt<d
Ed 'Efi=QaOtR
gdS '°yyaa
co 0
a
cu
�$.ax,tav3b`d=a��.c a
�U
r
�
04
v
Ln CO M V
-
Y
UN
M
s
a
h•• O V�
Op.
CCtij�
pOppp
mo
Na;
o
O
5
•.
C
Cui O
�
a�i •� � ,,,
�
E�oo�
t-
v�
o
�oon•r--OsLn
N w 6J 'D C A a o u T: a Ec
°OWED Cid c�.,w w _v �Ma=uE_
[ram > ,c>,v o o0"o o
l '1 �LV�o�3uFcT y _
t>d a' ^ � T y 61 N C O �
{y. z �•. �" y Ll. 6! � y Cy
Y f id L y G
c!!�� VE..3� c o'�-ame
v
Win' cd + p y. T
o E m 8 a E a � a a o
21
�o'p2uwYoo��G pa �5� �<
m�co.5 =5? 3 'Vco ,-n oca
>o�oai,Euc S W'oE -mSw
�v°Say.,oa
L5 v v o at E
rjxS�:9 H 3'voi.o
E `OFC 1 7 N Cy
� v V GC Obi G O OO E Dx 7 J
c 9 T x 7 c u
E E v d co y
e E 5 m u 'y
9�0Is E`3I$33E5
CD
by O >
c79cE
N E f
13 r 0 W ai
U CJ 6. L
a`� ac •pp 9 o z cy
> > y C C -
O �a .c .n.:°
E.2 �_ C c y:d x o• ° d ud 1?
�d L .�,. v 27 L O L
L U y 7 G O d 6,
c V7
FrJ'a��41c,c0i�.co
COi «r7 �p •$p7u 'J� M'O 5 L N t,. tDd C,C Lpp
C E^ �l r •p p V15 y vl "Z > a
-6n�LdEaX d��3�aua�=> a�
a
N-
E C L 0 C J v�
as iy.coo f c aL u c E cca ° ui E c~L
�G'd�,o,a�o,v=.3�Qk-, _o>iyN:oaxi�a�aE `oax.oF
0, 0 Ol y n u
F.J o, E--,U a,j Z'ao�Y�'zs
uo g e
u L
m.!2 a 9'�coE>L�a�`a=vEiM�E�3D
c.. nti u c c a E3D a L E
E1~clEE�F3cXVLvvEE$a-EF€�vo
o - o c a o 0 or, o gi
u $ 3
N t u o o O V Y p. N 7 C O t o C 6, td G D g z; dv E C ctl
�E Eu'.ti�a�o3cS:aE3�3c>d�oocc>=u �a
cc W
g a CF p
V cndavi, .p0
, .L�-. O ' cd 0 ° CO N cd 4+ E d N D C ` C
i rdEY Jva'�o�c°�d��J`
O 2'. y v H E N p> G cd ..+ id C C 6, C D G
E Eo,ausp4papSwa.�XUD`'3 0 �Ytd...WcUcc �y
fd '°- L 6! N O •O ,4 u9 C, !3 td E .�+ .G-i Q N O v L 3 O , X G C E
>>_> Ny�a 3cavo>'IN��Sywv o d c°d�i
av=Ea-133S$�ppu' acyN>>�3
eu c a s E E 3� vz�
(U 4,, a� E o o
.G 'OY�,-•0. xo °•ct�a T.>a �rL� .Nc a`,i�°:°vEm5
M� T�uwNaa- La �`dn�cE 3�°E. m�ac°�p
$$o$S�cLd�c3Yc°,c °u�3cAuad= 8c nL"
VIN WEBER
2D DISTRICT, MINNESOTA
318 CANNON BUILDING
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
(202) Box 279 31
P.O. Box 27
Collgre�� of tfje �liiteb *tatez
_ NEW ULM, MN 56073
(507) 354-6400
J4ouge of Atpregentattbeg
919 SOUTH 1ST STREET
WILLMAR. MN 56201
Wagbington, MSC 20515
(612) 235-6820
P.O. Box 1214
MARSHALL, MN 58258
(507) 532-9611
March 5, 1986
Honorable James Walsh
City of Albertville
Albertville, Minnesota 55301
Dear Mayor Walsh:
COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS
AND TRANSPORTATION
ION LEAVE)
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
SUBCOMMITTEE:
ANTITRUST AND RESTRAINT
OF TRADE
ASSISTANT REGIONAL WHIP
REPUBLICAN POLICY COMMITTEE
When the concept of tax reform was introduced by the President
approximately one year ago, I was delighted. The current tax code is
cumbersome, unfair and incredibly complex. Surely reform would be an
improvement. This has not proven to be the case. The House Ways and Means
Committee developed a tax plan which would have a negative impact on
our economic system. The President's Council of Economic Advisers has
forecast a recession in the event that Congress passes this measure.
A basic cornerstone of tax reform was to be a reduction of the tax rate
schedule from 16 categories to only three, with a top rate of 35% rather
than the current 50%. Pro -family measures that I felt needed to be
included in the proposal were an increase in the personal exemption to
$2000 and expansion of the IRA for non -working spouses. The Ways and Means
Committee settled on a top rate of 38%, it has restricted the personal
exemption increase and has refused to consider expanding the IRA for non-
working spouses.
Further, pro -economic growth aspects of tax reform in such areas as
depreciation, the corporate rate structure, and capital gains treatment
have been neglected. In fact, the majority members of the committee seem
to be more concerned with just redistributing income. The tax treatment of
pension plans seems geared to discouraging rather than encouraging people
to save for their retirement, serving as a disincentive to increasing job
creation and greater economic prosperity.
This legislation has many different facets and it is impossible to look at
any one provision in isolation. The entire bill must be judged as a whole.
Perhaps the legislation will be improved in the Senate. Genuine tax reform
is needed and I hope that the final version will be one that I can support.
Sincerely,
I
VIN j�EBER
Member of Congress
VW/pn
VIN WEBER
2D DISTIIICT, MINNESOTA
318 CANNON BUILDING
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
(202)Box 2731
P.O. Box
ton gre�� of the ttfteb �tate�
NEW ULM, MN 56073
56
(507) 354-6400
kouge of Repregentatibeg
919 SOUTH 1ST STREET
11VR, MN 56201
U40bington, MC 20515
(612)
46121235-88T0
P.O. Box 1214
MARSHALL, MN 56258
(507) 532-881 1
March 6, 1986
Mr. James Walsh
Mayor
City of Albertville
Albertville, Minnesota 55301
Dear Mr. Walsh:
COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS
AND TRANSPORTATION
ION LEAVE)
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
SUBCOMMITTEE
ANTITRUST AND RESTRAINT
OF TRADE
ASSISTANT REGIONAL WHIP
REPUBLICAN POLICY COMMITTEE
I appreciated hearing from you about provisions in the Gramm-Rudman
amendment to balance the budget by 1991.
Much has been written about Gramm-Rudman, but a lot of misunderstandings
still surround it. Briefly, the bill plots a course to a balanced budget,
reducing the deficit by $36 billion annually. Each year Congress would
have to pass a budget that met that year's deficit target. For 1987, the
target will be $144 billion; for 1988, $108 billion. At this rate,
Congress could balance the budget by 1991.
To meet those targets in its budget, Congress has a variety of options. It
can find ways to reduce waste, it can eliminate programs, it can cut back
spending on defense and domestic programs, it can adjust social security
COLAs, and it can increase taxes. I don't support several of these
measures, but I think it's important to start making some tough choices.
Congress has to take action now; it can't remain paralyzed as the
government continues to run up $200 billion deficits.
The part of this bill that has received the most attention is the across-
the-board cuts, which would go into effect only if Congress failed to reach
its deficit targets. Many people have written me to protest this approach,
because it doesn't force hard choices on which programs should be funded.
Actually, with the exception of the cuts taking effect on March 1, these
cuts will only be enacted each year if Congress fails to pass and follow a
responsible budget.
These cuts serve as an incentive for Congress to reduce the deficit. For
the past ten years, Congress has continually passed bloated budgets and
then has managed to outspend these limits. I hope the threat of these
automatic cuts will force Congress finally to pass a lean budget and then
stay within it.
Much of the debate with Gramm-Rudman centered on how much of the budget to
include in these cuts. Social security was excluded first. In my opinion,
far too many other programs were also exempted then. Several welfare
programs, totaling over $60 billion a year in spending, were excluded from
these cuts. By taking these programs out of the "pot," other programs had
Mr. James Walsh
PAGE 2
March 6, 1986
to take far deeper cuts to make the savings. For example, if these
programs had been included, reductions in farm programs scheduled for this
March would have been set at 2.8 percent rather than 4.3 percent. That's
quite a significant difference.
The challenge for Congress, I believe, is to respond to the threat of these
crude cuts in spending by setting spending priorities. That would remove
the need for automatic cuts. Along with many of my colleagues, I have
introduced a resolution in the House that would replace the March 1 cuts
with equal but far more intelligent reductions in spending. Gramm-Rudman
was meant to force Congress to make decisions on spending, so that it would
balance the budget by 1991. It was not meant to exempt Congress from
making decisions.
The automatic cuts of this bill have been challenged on constitutional
grounds, and a three -judge panel has already ruled the cuts
unconstitutional. The Supreme Court should be ruling on the appeal in the
next few months. If these automatic cuts are found to be unconstitutional,
the targets would remain, but the entire measure would lose much of its
clout. Congress would still be required to reduce the deficit, but little
could be done if it failed to follow through.
The deficit problem is so severe that a measure like this has become
necessary. I intend to push for a responsible implementation that will
reduce spending wisely and lead to a leaner government and a stronger
economy.
Thank you for indicating your
legislation. It's important
make some tough decisions on
Sipcirely,
V
VIN ER
Member of Congress
VW/ac
interest in this important piece of
for me to hear your opinion as we prepare to
spending priorities.
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
ADMINISTRATION OFFICES
400 School Street
Elk River, MN 55330
(612) 441-1003
GEORGEZABEE
Superintendent of Schools
March 12, 1986
Mr. James Walsh, Mayor
City of Albertville
Box 131
Albertville, MN 55301
Dear Mayor Walsh:
728
The City Clerk asked me to state in writing the amount of room that is
available in the schools, should a development proceed in Albertville.
Rogers Elementary School was designed for 840 students at 30 per class,
and we now have 600. An addition of 150 to 200 students would be a
reasonable number. The Junior Highs have a combined capacity of 1,600
students, and we have 1,285 students. The Senior High has a capacity of
1,600 students, and we have 1,314 students.
If you have further questions, please call.
Sincerel ,
George Zabe
Superintendent
jml
O. J. ARLIEN
Wright County Auditor / Treasurer
Wright County Courthouse Buffalo, Minnesota 55313
Phone: (612) 682-3900
Metro: 339-6881
(Possible News Item)
NET TAX REVENUE RAISED BY MAJOR TAXING CATEGORY
Here is the "Second Annual Report" on where the money comes from - so
far as the major taxing categories.
First, a disclaimer: The percentages in the accompanying breakdown will
not total100%. Personal property is not shown in the data but amounts to 3.0%
of the county -wide total. The remaining 1.1% is in vacant residential, vacant
other, and amounts so small that they did not equal even a tenth of one percent.
The data shown accounts for 95.9% of the net tax.
Since this is the second year of this report, some comparisons are in
nrdar-
FARM RESIDENTIAL
Percent
Taxes 16.2 31.9
Payable
1985
Percent
Taxes 13.7 30.9
Payable
1986
SEASONAL
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL UTILITY RECREATIONAL
10.2 1.8 29.7 6.1
12.1 1.8 31.3 6.1
This comparison could lead us to believe that a large percent of farm
land is being shifted to other classifications and that there has been a
lot of commercial building activity. While both of these factors did occur,
it was not to the extent that the figures indicate. The formula for comput-
ing taxes, which is imposed by the State of Minnesota, is constantly being
changed.
The current formula tended to shift some of the tax burden from farm to
residential and seasonal recreational. The State also imposed some increases
in commercial. Our Assessor tells me that six cities in Wright County had
some commercial property adjusted upward 10 to 20 percent from last year.
County -wide we have 9,038 farm, 15,609 residential, 4,197 seasonal rec-
reational, 1,279 commercial, 76 industrial, and 57 utility parcels.
In Wright County, there are 32,248.real estate parcels with a market
value of $1,721,222,800. The assessed value is $387,116,121, which results
in a net real estate tax of $24,856,453.
0. J. Arlien
March 13, 1986 WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITOR/TREASURER
1985 Taxes Payable in 1986 (Net)
Percent of Property
Taxes Raised
by Major Taxing Category
SEASONAL
CITIES
FARM
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
UTILITY
RECREATIONAL
Albertville
6.3
33.3
52.1
.5
-
.2
Annandale
2.9
45.6
40.5
1.6
1.0
1.8
Buffalo
2.6
54.0
37.8
.7
-
1.6
Clearwater
.4
37.5
47.6
8.3
-
-
Cokato
.5
52.9
29.2
10.1
.5
-
Dayton
-
93.8
-
-
-
-
Delano
.1
53.6
26.2
16.7
.2
-
Hanover
13.2
63.1
13.1
-
-
1.6
Howard Lake
.4
51.7
28.3
9.7
.9
-
Maple Lake
1.8
43.0
40.3
3.3
4.1
.1
Monticello
.6
7.0
5.9
1.3
83.4
-
Montrose
1.7
70.3
22.2.
-
-
-
Rockford
1.2
69.9
20.8
.5
-
.1
St. Michael
2.6
65.9
26.1
-
-
-
South Haven
4.7
63.8
12.6
-
5.2
--
Waverly #1
3.0
70.5
18.3
-
1.5
.8
Waverly #2.
.4
34.1
25.0
-
-
40.4
SEASONAL
TOWNSHIP
FARM
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
UTILITY
RECREATIONAL
Albion
50.1
22.8
.6
-
-
11.8
Buffalo
32.4
48.5
2.6
.7
1.5
8.9
Chatham
36.6
53.9
2.3
-
-
.8
Clearwater
28.1
38.6
5.3
1.1
-
24.4
Cokato
57.0
17.5
15.9
4.3
-
3.7
Corinna
8.8
32.4
.5
-
-
56.8
Frankfort
30.6
53.4
6.6
.3
-
2.2.
Franklin
47.7
40.9
4.3
-
3.7
.1
French Lake
36.2
19.8
.7
-
1.2
32.5
Maple Lake
31.3
38.2
1.4
-
.1
26.2.
Marysville
51.9
36.5
2.0
-
-
3.3
Middleville
60.0
24.1
8.7
-
1.0
4.3
Monticello
28.7
50.3
5.7
-
.7
2.5
Otsego
23.3
65.1
4.0
-
1.5
.6
Rockford
9.5
18.3
.7
.2
66.2
.5
Silver Creek
34.3
41.0
3.3
1.7
1.1
16.0
Southside
10.1
23.5
2.4
2.8
-
60.0
Stockholm
71.8
12.3
3.6
4.3
.1
5.2
Victor
70.0
17.7
.7
-
1.7
7.7
Woodland
75.8
17.3
3.2
1.4
.6
.1
COUNTY
13.7
30.9
12.1
1.8
31.3
6.1
tivrutu'ttiiivi� n�rucci
COURTESY: 0. J. ARLIEN
WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITOR/TREASURER
MARCH 1986
HERE'S WHERE YOUR MONEY GOES
THE ABOVE SHOWS THE AVERAGE WAY
THAT WRIGHT COUNTY PROPERTY OWNERS
WILL HAVE THEIR CURRENT TAX DOLLAR
DIVIDED TO PAY FOR COUNTY, CITY,
TOWNSHIP, SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND
SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES.
AVERAGE 1986 TAX LEVY
*SPECIAL
MONTICELLO—BIG LAKE HOSPITAL
CLEARWATER—RIVER WATERSHED
AVERAGE MILL RATE:
COUNTY 20.308
CITY/TWP. 15.318
SCHOOL DIST 50.313
SPEC. DIST. 1.610
87.549
WRIGHT COUNTY 3-11-86
CITY 6 TOWNSHIP LEVIES - 1986 TAXES
CITIES VALUATION
ALBERTVILLE
3,417,425
- ANNANDALE
6,252,229
BUFFALO
21 ,284 ,079
CLEARWATER
2.,930,880
COKATO
7,824,827
DAYTON
177,721
DELANO
10,017,127
HANOVER
1,957,234
HOWARD LAKE
5,303,282
MAPLE LAKE
5,611,851
MONTICELLO
100,568,378
MONTROSE
2,038,309
ROCKFORD
4,530,358
ST. MICHAEL
7,249,917
SOUTH HAVEN
618,583
WAVERLY
1,331,464
@ANNEXED WAVERLY
1.372.439
TOTALS
182.486.103
ALBERTVILLE TIF #3
242,692
ALBERTVILLE TIF #13
107,607
ALBERTVILLE TIF #18
105,350
ALBERTVILLE TIF #19
310,123
ANNANDALE TIF #6
22,788
ANNANDALE TIF #9
1,413,908
BUFFALO TIF #8
4,026,166
COKATO TIF #1
220,197
COKATO TIF #5
237,222
DELANO TIF #4
513,204
DELANO TIF #14
130,358
MAPLE LAKE TIF #20
63,991
MONTICELLO TIF #2
72,229
MONTICELLO TIF #10
42.803
MONTICELLO TIF #11
442,778
MONTICELLO TIF #12
302,821
MONTROSE TIF #15
44.621
ROCKFORD TIF #17
105,736
TOTALS
8,404,594
TOWNSHIPS
VALUATION
ALBION
6,065,680
BUFFALO
10,134,194
CHATHAM
5,967,784
CLEARWATER
4,691,016
COKATO
6,001,602
CORINNA
16,506,447
FRANKFORT
12,467,160
FRANKLIN
14,390,738
FRENCH LAKE
6,486,475
MAPLE LAKE
9,402,633
MARYSVILLE
6,922,226
MIDDLEVILLE
6,009,483
MONTICELLO
13,410,111
OTSEGO
14,872,655
ROCKFORD
33,057,660
SILVER CREEK
8,157,363
SOUTHSIDE
12,1 35,239
STOCKHOLM
5,855,163
LEVY
120,829
248,789
603,732
79,820
211 ,562
*361 ,602
293,234
* 60,642
128,170
110,700
1,577,250
71,600
*214,710
156,250
8,800
86,424
LEVY
55,000
100,000
43,900
60,627
84,176
122,000
149,159
100,000
96,000
105,000
33,000
62.,500
77,000
255,000
295,000
120,000
50,000
73,500
MILL RATE
35. 362
39.797
28. 369
27.238
27.038
20.279
29.277
19.481
24.172
19.731
15.689
35.133
37.853
21.554
14.227
35.554
28.485
PROCEEDS
120,847.00
248,819.96
603,808.04
79,831.32
211,567.67
3,604.00
293,271.42
38,128. 87
128,190.93
110,727.45
1,577,817.30
71,611.91
171,487.64
156,264.71
8,800.58
47,338.87
39.093. 92.
3,911,211.59
*ANOTHER COUNTY INVOLVED
MILL RATE PROCEEDS
9.068
55,003.59
9.869
100,014.36
7.357
43,904.99
12.926
60,636.07
14.027
84,184.47
7.392
122,015.65
11. 966
149,182.04
6.951
100,030.02
14.802
96 ,012.. 81
11.169
105,018.00
4.769
33,012.10
10.403
62,516.64
5.743
77,014.27
17.147
255,021.41
8.926
295,072.68
14.712
120,011.13
4.121
50,009.32
12.555
73,511.57
CITY & TOWNSHIP LEVIES - 1986 TAXES (continued)
Page 2
TOWNSHIPS
VALUATION
LEVY MILL RATE PROCEEDS
VICTOR
5,863,484
65,000 11.087 65,008.44
WOODLAND
6,226,757
80,000 12.849 80,007.61
TOTALS
204,623,870
2,027,187.17
TOTALS
CITIES & TOWNS 387,109,973 5,938,398.76
COUNTY 387.109,973 7,860,799 20.308 7,861,429.33
SCHOOL LEVIES - 1986 TAXES
ASSESSED
SCHOOL DISTRICT
VALUATION
MILL RATE
PROCEEDS
111*
Watertown
4,197,203
54.863
203,271.15
425*
Silver Lake
16,200
52.148
. 844.79
427*
Winsted
548,737
52.314
28,706.63
466*
Dassel/Cokato
22,262,079
46.770
1,041,197.44
728*
Elk River
13,906,419
68.035
946,123.22
742*
St. Cloud
5,059,117
55.411
280,330.73
876*
Annandale
44,864,672
45.948
2,061,441.95
877*
Buffalo
78,380,347
54.907
4,303,629.70
879*
Delano
22,785,867
52.225
1,189,991.90
880
Howard Lake
23,500,220
73.030
1,716,221.06
881
Maple Lake
19,584,715
61.778
1,209,904.52
882*
Monticello
121,838,501
38.824
4,730,258.00
883*
Rockford
8,461,628
57.703
488,261.33
885
St. Michael/Albertville
21,704,268
57.577
1,249,666.64
TOTALS 387,109,973 19,449,849.06
WRIGHT COUNTY WATERSHED DISTRICT
REAL ESTATE
PERSONAL PROPERTY
TOTAL ASSESSED
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
VALUATION
VALUATION
VALUATION
Annandale City
5,936,575
315,654
6,252,229
Clearwater City
1,547,689
--
1,547.688
South Haven City
474,897
13,760
488,657
Albion Township
1,355,498
47,300
1,402,798
Clearwater Township
1,852,049
--
1,852,049
Corinna Township
10,389,193
33,841
10,423,034
French Lake Township
33,396
3,827
37,223
Southside Township
3,319,889
3,827
3,323,716
WRIGHT COUNTY TOTAL
24,909,185
418,209
25,327,394
MEEKER COUNTY
9,961,235
STEARNS COUNTY
12,037,314
GRAND TOTAL
47,325,943
MONTICELLO-BIG LAKE HOSPITAL DISTRICT
REAL ESTATE
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT VALUATION
Monticello City
Monticello Township
Otsego Township
Silver Creek Townshi
WRIGHT COUNTY TOTAL
SHERBURNE COUNTY
+ BECKER ANNEX for
' 64 BOND
GRAND TOTAL
PERSONAL PROPERTY TOTAL ASSESSED
VALUATION VALUATION
99,622,314 946,064 100,568,378
12,564,071 846,040 13,410,111
14,635,768 236,887 14,872,655
8,091,616 65,747 8,157,363
134,913,769 2,094,738 137,008,507
33,269,847
6,722,610
177,000,964
COUNTY
2.0. 308
20. 308
20. 308
20. 308
20.308
20. 308
20.308
20. 308
20.308
20.308
20. 308
20. 308
20.308
20.308
20. 308
20.308
20.308
20. 308
20. 308
20.308
@ = Annexed
OJA: gg
3-11-86
TOWNSHIP
Otsego
French Lake
Silver Creek
Cokato
Clearwater
Woodland
Stockholm
Frankfort
Maple Lake
Victor
Middleville
Buffalo
Albion
Rockford
Corinna
Chatham
Franklin
Monticello
Marysville
Southside
MILL RATE RANKING - 1986
By Taxing Jurisdiction
17.147
14.802
14.712
14.027
12.926
12.849
12.555
11.966
11.169
11.087
10.403
9.869
9.068
8.926
7.392
7.357
6.951
5.743
4.769
4.121
CITY
Annandale
Rockford
Waverly
Albertville
Montrose
Delano
Waverly @
Buffalo
Clearwater
Cokato
Howard Lake
St. Michael
Dayton
Maple Lake
Hanover
Monticello
South Haven
39.797
37.853
35.554
35.362
35.133
29.277
28.485
28. 369
27.238
27.038
24.172
21.554
20.279
19.731
19.481
15.689
14.227
SCHOOL DISTRICT
No. 880 73.030
No. 728 68.035
No. 881 61.778
No. 883 57.703
No. 885 57.577
No. 742 55.411
No. 877 54.907
No. 111 54.863
No. 427 52.314
No. 879 52.225
No. 425 52.148
No. 466 46.770
No. 876 45.948
No. 882 38.824
WRIGHI LUITTY MILL RATES - 198t, Aver. Co. Mill Rate - 87.549 -
School
School
County
Twp.
Dist.
TOTAL
County
Twp.
Dist.
TOTAL
TOWNSHIPS
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
To
Rate
Rate
Rate
Rate
Albion
Rockford
466
20.308
9.066
46.770
76.146
877
20.308
8.926
54.907
84.141
876
20.308
9.068
45.948
75.324
879
20.308
8.926
52.225
81.459
676*
20.306
9.068
45.948
76.348
883
20.308
8.926
57.703
86.937
880
20.308
9.068
73.030
102.406
Silver Creek**
881
20.308
9.068
61.778
91.154
876
20.306
14.712
45.948
85.328
881*
20.306
9.068
61.778
92.178
881
20.308
14.712
61.778
101.158
Buffalo
882
20.308
14.712
38.824
78.204
877
20.308
9.869
54.907
85.084
Southside
882
20.308
9.869
38.824
69.001
876
20.308
4.121
45.948
70.377
Chatham
876*
20.308
4.121
45.948
71.401
877
20.308
7.357
54.907
82.572
Stockholm
981
20.308
7.357
61.778
89.443
425
20.308
12.555
52.148
85.011
Clearwater
466
20.308
12.555
46.770
79.633
742
20.308
12.926
55.411
88.645
880
20.308
12.555
73.030
105.893
742*
20.308
12.926
55.411
89.669
Victor
876
20.308
12.926
45.948
79.182
427
20.308
11.087
52.314
83.709
876*
20.308
12.926
45.948
80.206
466
20.308
11.087
46.770
78.165
882
20.308
12.926
38.824
72.058
880
20.308
11.087
73.030
104.425
Cokato
Woodland
466
20.308
14.027
46.770
81.105
ill
20.308
12.849
54.863
68.020
Corinna
877
20.308
12.849
54.907
88.064
876
20.308
7.392
45.948
73.648
879
20.308
12.849
52.225
85.382
876*
20.308
7.392
45.948
74.672
880
20.308
12.849
73.030
106.187
881
20.308
7.392
61.778
89.478
CITIES
881*
20.308
7.392
61.778
90.502
Albertville
Frankfort
728
20.308
35.362
68.035
123.705
726
20.308
11.966
68.035
100.309
885
20.308
35.362
57.577
113.247
677
20.308
11.966
54.907
87.181
Annandale
885
20.308
11.966
57.577
89.851
876*
20.308
39.797
45.948
107.077
Franklin
Buffalo
ill
20.308
6.951
54.863
82.122
877
20.308
28.369
54.907
103.584
877
20.308
6.951
54.907
82.166
Clearwater
879
20.308
6.951
52.225
79.484
742
20.308
27.238
55.411
102.957
883
20.308
6.951
57.703
84.962
742*
20.308
27.238
55.411
103.981
French Lake
Cokato
466
20.308
14.802
46.770
81.880
466
20.306
27.036
46.770
94.116
876
20.308
14.802
45.948
81.058
Dayton
876*
20.308
14.802
45.948
82.082
728
20.308
20.279
68.035
108.622
Maple Lake
Delano
677
20.308
11.169
54.907
86.384
879
20.308
29.277
52.225
101.810
881
20.308
11.169
61.778
93.255
Hanover
882
20.308
11.169
38.824
70.301
877
20.308
19.481
54.907
9-696
Marysville
885
20.308
19.481
57.577
9/.3t6
877
20.308
4.769
54.907
79.984
Howard Lake
880
20.3U8
4.769
73.030
98.107
880
20.308
24.172
73.030
117.510
881
20.3U8
4.769
61.778
86.855
Maple Lake
Middleville
881
20.308
19.731
61.778
101.817
466
20.306
10.403
46.770
77.481
Monticello**
880
20.308
10.403
73.030
103.741
882
20.308
15.669
38.824
79.181
881
20.308
10.403
61.778
91.489
Montrose
Monticello**
877
20.308
35.133
54.907
110.348
877
20.308
5.743
54.907
85.318
Rockford
882
20.3uH
5.743
38.824
69.235
883
20.308
37.853
57.703
115.864
885
20.308
5.743
57.577
87.988
St. Michael
Otsego**
885
20.3U8
21.554
57.577
99.439
728
20.3os
17.147
68.035
109.850
South Haven
882
20.3U8
17.147
38.824
80.639
876
20.308
14.227
45.948
80.483
885
20.3o8
17.147
57.577
99.392
876*
20.308
14.227
45.948
81.507
*Watershed
Districti.
- 1.024
Waverlv
**Hospital
Districts
- 4.300
880
20.308
35.554
73.030
128.892
hAnnexed Arva
Wavorlvi.,
880
20.30H
28.4HS
73.030
121.8:3
JANUARY 1906
LE•T
Request for Assistance in Preventing
Occupational Fatalities in Confined Spaces
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
DISCLAIMER
Mention of the name of any company or product
does not constitute endorsement by the National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 867110
Copies of this and other NIOSH documents are available from
Publications Dissemination, DSDTT
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
4676 Columbia Parkway
Cincinnati, Ohio 45226
(513) 841-4287
REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE IN PREVENTING
OCCUPATIONAL FATALITIES IN CONFINED SPACES
SUl*WY
This Alert requests the assistance of managers, supervisors, and workers in
the prevention of deaths that occur in confined spaces. Confined spaces may
be encountered in virtually any occupation; therefore, their recognition is
the first step in preventing fatalities. Since deaths in confined spaces
often occur because the atmosphere is oxygen deficient or toxic, confined
spaces should be tested prior to entry and continually monitored. More than
60% of confined space fatalities occur among would-be rescuers; therefore, a
well -designed and properly executed rescue plan is a must. This Alert
describes 16 deaths that occurred in a variety of confined spaces. Had
these spaces been properly evaluated prior to entry and continuously
monitored while the work was being performed and had appropriate rescue
procedures been in effect, none of the 16 deaths would have occurred. There
are no specific OSHA rules that apply to all confined spaces.
Recommendations for Recognition, Testing, Evaluation, and Monitoring, and
Rescue of Workers are presented. Other National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH) publications on this subject as well as a source
for additional information and assistance are also presented.
January 1986
Page 2 - Request for Assistance in Preventing Occupational Fatalities in
Confined Spaces
The deaths of workers in confined spaces constitute a recurring occupational
tragedy; approximately 60% of these fatalities have involved would-be
rescuers. If you are required to work in a:
SEINER STORAGE TANK SHIP'S HOLD
SEPTIC TANK SILO REACTION VESSEL
SEWAGE DIGESTER VAT BOILER
PtWING/LIFT STATION DUCT PIPELINE
SEWAGE DISTRIBUTION UTILITY VAULT PIT
or HOLDING TANK
or similar type of structure or enclosure, you are working in a CONFINED
SPACE. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) defines a
confined space in 29 CFR 1926.21 as "any space having a limited means of
egress, which is subject to the accumulation of toxic or flammable
contaminants or has an oxygen deficient atmosphere." The NIOSH Criteria for
a Recommended Standard.... Working in Confined Spaces dated December, 1979,
defines a confined space as:
... a space which by design has I i m i t ed openings for entry and
exit; unfavorable natural ventilation which could contain or
- produce dangerous air contaminants, and which is not intended
for continuous employee occupancy. Confined spaces include
but are not limited to storage tanks, compartments of ships,
process vessels, pits, silos, vats, degreasers, reaction
vessels, boilers, ventilation and exhaust ducts, sewers,
tunnels, underground utility vaults, and pipelines.
CASE REPORTS OF FATAL INCIDENTS
Case #1 - RECOGNITION AND RESCUE (FATALITIES = 1 WORKER + 1
RESCUER)
On December 29, 1983, a 54-year-old worker died inside a floating
cover of a sewage digester while attempting to restart a propane
heater that was being used to warm the outside of the sewage
digester cover prior to painting it. Workers had wired the
safety valve open so that the flow of propane would be constant,
even if the flame went out. The heater was located near an
opening in the cover of the digester. When the worker attempted
to restart the heater, an explosion occurred that vented through
the opening. The worker crawled away from the heater into an
area that was oxygen deficient and died. A co-worker attempted a
rescue and also died.
Case #2 - RECOGNITION AND RESCUE (FATALITIES = 1 WORKER + 1
RESCUER)
On March 8, 1984, a 20-year-old construction worker died while
attempting to refuel a gasoline engine powered pump used to
Page - Request for Assistance in Preventing Occupational Fatalities in
Confined Spaces
remove waste water from a 66 inch diameter sewer line that was
under construction. The pump was approximately 3,000 feet from
where the worker had entered the line. The worker was overcome
by carbon monoxide. A co-worker, who had also entered the sewer
line, escaped. A 28-year-old state inspector entered from
another point along the sewer line and died in a rescue attempt.
Both deaths were due to carbon monoxide intoxication. In
addition to the fatalities, 30 firefighters and 8 construction
workers were treated for carbon monoxide exposure.
Case #3 - RECOGNITION AND RESCUE (FATALITIES = 2 RESCUERS)
On October 4, 1984, two workers (26 and 27 years old) were
overcome by gas vapors and drowned after rescuing a third worker
from a fracturing tank at a natural gas well. The tank contained
a mixture of mud, water, and natural gas. The first worker had
been attempting to move a hose from the tank to another tank.
The hose was secured by a chain and when the worker moved the
hose, the chain fell into the tank. The worker entered the tank
to retrieve the chain and was overcome.
Case #4 - RECOGNITION AND RESCUE (FATALITIES = 1 WORKER + 1
RESCUER)
On December 5, 1984, a 22-year-old worker died inside a toluene
storage tank that was 10 feet in diameter and 20 feet high whi le
attempting to clean the tank. The worker entered the tank
through the 16 inch diameter top opening using a 1/2 inch rope
for descent. Although a self-contained breathing apparatus was
present, the worker was not wearing it when he entered the tank.
The worker was overcome and collapsed onto the floor of the
tank. In an attempt to rescue the worker, fire department
personnel began cutting an opening into the side of the tank.
The tank exploded, killing a 32-year-old firefighter and injuring
15 others.
Case #5 - RECOGNITION AND RESCUE (FATALITIES = 1 WORKER + 1
RESCUER)
On May 13, 1985, a 21-year-old worker died inside a waste water
holding tank that was four feet in diameter and eight feet deep
while attempting to clean and repair a drain line. Sulfuric acid
was used to unclog a floor drain leading into the holding tank.
The worker collapsed and fell face down into six inches of water
in the bottom of the tank. A second 21-year-old worker attempted
a rescue and was also overcome and collapsed. The first worker
was pronounced dead at the scene and the second worker died two
weeks later. Cause of death was attributed to asphyxiation by
methane gas. Sulfuric acid vapors may have also contributed to
the cause of death.
Page 4 - Request for Assistance in Preventing Occupational Fatalities in
Confined Spaces
Case #6 - RECOGNITION AND RESCUE (FATALITY = 1 RESCUER)
On June 7, 1985, a 43-year-old father died while attempting to
rescue h i s 28-yea r-o l d son from a tank used to store spent acids
from a metal pickling process. The tank was out of service so
that sludge could be removed from the bottom. The son collapsed
in the tank. The father attempted a rescue and also collapsed.
The two were removed from the tank; the son was revived, but the
father died. The cause of death is unknown.
Case #7 - RECOGNITION (FATALITY = 1 WORKER)
On July 2, 1985, a crew foreman became ill and was hospitalized
after using an epoxy coating, which contained 2-nitropropane and
coal tar pitch, to coat a valve on an underground waterline. The
valve was located in an enclosed service vault (12' x 15' x
15'). The worker was released from the hospital on July 3, 1985,
but was readmitted on July 6, 1985; he lapsed into a coma and
died on July 12, 1985, as a result of acute liver failure induced
by inhalation of 2-nitropropane and coal tar pitch vapors. A
co-worker was also hospitalized, but did not die.
Case #8 - RECOGNITION AND RESCUE (FATALITIES = 1 WORKER + 3
RESCUERS)
On July 5, 1985, a 27-year-old sewer worker entered an
underground pumping station (8' x 8' x 71) via a fixed ladder
inside a three foot diameter shaft. Because the work crew was
unaware of procedures to isolate the work area and ensure that
the pump had been bypassed, the transfer line was still under
pressure. Therefore, when the workers removed the bolts from an
inspection plate that covered a check valve, the force of the
waste water blew the inspection plate off, allowing sewage to
flood the chamber, and trapping one of the workers. A co-worker,
a supervisor, and a policeman attempted a rescue and died. The
first two deaths appeared to be due to drowning and the latter
two appeared to be due to asphyxiation as a result of inhalation
of "sewer gas."
REGULATORY STATUS
As stated in the Regulatory Program of the United States Government
(Confined Spaces (29 CFR 19101, page 282 dated August, 1985), "there
are no specific OSHA rules directed toward all confined -space work,
forcing OSHA compliance personnel to cite other marginally
applicable standards or section 5(a)(1) in cases involving confined
spaces. For this reason, OSHA field personnel have frequently and
strongly recommended the promulgation of a specific standard on
confined spaces." In the document Criteria for a Recommended
Standard.... Working in Confined Spaces, the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has provided comprehensive
Page 5 - Request for Assistance in Preventing Occupational Fatalities in
Confined Spaces
recommendations for assuring the safety and well-being of persons
required to work in confined spaces including a proposed
classification system and checklist that may be applied to different
types of confined spaces.
CONCLUSIONS
The case studies described above are summarized in Table 1 (see
page 6):
Pago 6 - Request for Assistance In Preventing Occupational Fatalities in
Confined Spaces
I-
cm
I
n
o
O
•-�
•�
w-
Ommlo
00
•c
•c
�_�
ao
-0=gym
vx
W
m
Af
m
>�
:0-0
I
O
M m
N
&. > O
pOp
m
_
_
�M
NN
M
N
CCit
cc O
a
f•-
N
N
N
N
N
—
�t
F_
C4
O
ch
m
m�
m
m
m
•-m
C
-0
C
%_
t- y
►.
�.
�.
O
m%-
O
m
m
m
m
m
L �0
L •- •-
L W
L
L
N L
CL
rQa O
•v
apA m
�QQo sd
�Qn
ed cqa
Qw
— I
ww
m
O
OO0L
C
U
C
00
m
x�
x
x�
x
x
x
x
O
O x COO
o
O
a
o
H•we
a
I-
F•-
a +•+
YCW
�••
Y
m
>
W
W
C
+�
ld
C
a
m
••
�
d_
o
C
v>
n
4
�
t%
C +�
C
0
it W
O
WO
W
C
m C
7Y
C m
ed ,
(am
0
cc
V
LA.
F� 40
i
s0 aro
� 3 W
to
Go
Ln
Ln
LO
H
\
\
\
CO
OD
CD
\
er
LO
CV)
\
\
\
O
N
�
O
N
r
W)
(0
I a
-
014
N
J
a
0
F--
Page 7 Request for Assistance in Preventing Occupational Fatalities in
Confined Spaces
Based on the information derived from these case studies, NIOSH concludes
that these fatalities occurred as a result of encountering one or more of
the following potential hazards:
o lack of natural ventilation,
o oxygen deficient atmosphere,
o flammable/explosive atmosphere,
o unexpected release of hazardous energy,
o limited entry and exit,
o dangerous concentrations of air contaminants,
o physical barriers or limitations to movement, or
o instability of stored product.
In each of these cases there was
EVALUATION, and MONITORING prior to
been attempted.
a lack of RECOGNITION and TESTING,
entry nor had a well -planned RESCUE
These incident reports suggest that RECOGNITION of what is a confined
space in conjunction with the proper TESTING, EVALUATION, and MONITORING
of the atmosphere and development of appropriate RESCUE procedures could
prevent such deaths. These three steps are discussed below.
NIOSH investigations indicate that workers usually do not RECOGNIZE that
they are working in a confined space and that they may encounter unforeseen
hazards. TESTING and EVALUATION of the atmosphere are typically not
initiated prior to entry and MONITORING is not performed during the
confined space work procedures. RESCUE is seldom planned and usually
consists of spontaneous reaction in an emergency situation.
RECOPMtENDAT I ONS
In light of findings to date regarding occupational deaths in confined
spaces, NIOSH recommends that managers, supervisors, and workers be made
familiar with the following three steps:
1. RECOGNITION
Worker training is essential to the RECOGNITION of what constitutes
a confined space and the hazards that may be encountered in them.
This training should stress that death to the worker is the likely
outcome if proper precautions are not taken before entry is made.
Page 8 - Request for Assistance in Preventing Occupational Fatalities in
Confined Spaces
2. TESTING, EVALUATION, AND MONITORING
All confined spaces should be TESTED by a qualified person before
entry to determine whether the confined space atmosphere is safe for
entry. Tests should be made for oxygen level, flammability, and
known or suspected toxic substances. EVALUATION of the confined
space should consider the following:
o methods for isolating the space by mechanical or electrical means
(i.e., double block and bleed, lockout, etc.),
o the institution of lockout-tagout procedures,
o ventilation of the space,
o cleaning and/or purging,
o work procedures, including use of safety lines attached to the
person working in the confined space and its use by a standby
person if trouble develops,
o personal protective equipment required (clothing, respirator,
boots, etc.),
o special tools required, and
o communications system to be used.
The confined space should be continuously MONITORED to determine
whether the atmosphere has changed due to the work being performed.
3. RESCUE
RESCUE procedures should be established before entry and should be
specific for each type of confined space. A standby person should be
assigned for each entry where warranted. The standby person should
be equipped with rescue equipment including a safety line attached to
the worker in the confined space, self-contained breathing apparatus,
protective clothing, boots, etc. The standby person should use this
attached safety line to help rescue the worker. The rescue
procedures should be practiced frequently enough to provide a level
of proficiency that eliminates life -threatening rescue attempts and
ensures an efficient and calm response to any emergency.
OTHER HELPFUL PUBLICATIONS BY NIOSH
NIOSH has published the following documents which contain further
information:
Criteria for a Recommended Standard.... Working in Confined Spaces, DREW
Publication No. 80-106.
Page 9 - Request for Assistance in Preventing Occupational Fatalities in
Confined Spaces
Guidelines for Controlling Hazardous Energy During Maintenance and
Servicing, DHHS Publication No. 83-125.
We ask that editors of appropriate trade journals and safety and health
officials (i.e., inspectors, managers, and hygienists, especially those
associated with work in confined spaces) bring these recommendations to the
attention of workers, supervisors, managers, and owners.
Requests for additional information on control practices or questions
related to this announcement should be directed to Mr. John Moran, Director,
Division of Safety Research, National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health, 944 Chestnut Ridge Road, Morgantown, West Virginia 26505, Telephone
(304) 291-4595.
We greatly appreciate your assist ce.
Dona it ar, M.D., D.T.P.H. Lo )
Assistant Surgeon General
Dire tor, National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health
Centers for Disease Control
O. J. ARLIEN
Wright County Auditor
Wright County Courthouse - Buffalo, Minnesota 55313
Phone: (612) 682-3900
Metro: 339.6881
December, 1985
IY 31v , : \IN JV
YLI
TO: All clerks and Finance Officers
Cities/Towns/School Districts/Special Taxing Districts
SUBJECT: Annual Report of Outstanding Indebtedness - December 31, 1985
Please complete the enclosed form, "Report of Outstanding Indebtedness," (FormD-1)
as of December 31, 1985, pursuant to Minn. Stat. #1+71.70. This statute requires
the report to be completed and returned to the County Auditor on or before
February 1, 1986.
This form should include all obligations, as defined in Minn. Stat. #475. All
units, including schools, should report outstanding debt as of December 31, 1985,
not the fiscal year-end. All bonded debt should be reported, as well as short
term state -aid and tax anticipation certificates, or other debt. Include a brief
description of any unusual items. Exclude from outstanding indebtedness, the
.ount of principal paid in the case of January 1, 1985 payments actually paid
during December 1985.
The outstanding balance of any industrial revenue bond should also be reported.
Please write these items in, together with their descriptions, dates of issues,
etc., in the margin of the form.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
0. J. Arlien
Wright County Auditor -Treasurer
OJA:pdn
Enc.
**P.S. These are the figures we certify to the bonding companies when you
are in the process if issuing a new bond. Please double-check**.
REPORT OF OUTSTANDING INDEBTEDNESS
At December 31, 19--&1_
To the County Auditor Albertville TIF 1
Reporting Governmental Unit -
Wright County, Minnesota
Bonded Indebtedness
Amount
1. Bonds outstanding Jan. 1, 19 8 5 , , , . 4 120, 000. Om
2. Issued during 19LL . . ............... -0-
8. Total ............................. 120,000.01
4. Paid during 19 8 5 ................ 10,000. 01
5. Bonds outstanding Dee. 81, 19—_.. $ 110,000. 01
Bonds Outstanding at December-=1 W 85
Type of Bonds = ,Amount
6. General Obligation ................ ............. =
7. Special Assessment .... .....
8. Revenue ..... . . ........� .........
9. Refunding ................_...... -
10. Other ..Tax Increment G; o:.... no,000.00
11. Total Bonds Outstanding........ n0,000 , 00
State aid and tax anticipation certificates .._ . $ - —0-
*If different amount than reported on December 31
of preceding year, explain difference.
F— No. 9012aub. Fa. Form DI) Mw. iirni
Balances in bond and interest.
fund or other funds which
have -been set aside for pay-
ment of bonds and interest $ see b e 1 o
The City's 4 T.I. Projects are
accounted for in one fund,
Balances in escrow accounts $
the"reforei the 'reserve for deb'
ret:ir'ement is- for all the proji
7, 53.30:
I tiiy y oeethat this statement is
Prineipal.Acxounting Officer
Dat;Ad_th-=-'s of 19_
REPORT OF OUTSTANDING INDEBTEDNESS
At December 31, 19_L.i_
To the County Auditor Albertville TIF II
Reporting Governmental Unit -
wrisIht County, Minnesota
Bonded Indebtedness
Amount
1. Bonds outstanding Jan. 1, 19B _.... .$ 138, 1 o 4
2. Issued during 19—LL _...............
8. Total ............................. 13 8 , 105
4. Paid during 19 8� ................
5. Bonds outstanding Dec. 31, 19_6. _, , $ 13 8 , 10 5
Bonds Outstanding at DecembW.J% 19115
Type of Bonds - Amount
6. General Obligation ...................
7. Special Assessment
8. Revenue .......
9. Refunding .................-......
10. Other Tax.lnr_remQut..G�Q.-........: 13$,105
11. Total Bonds Outstanding......... ,:, ; s -13*8 ,105 -
State aid and tax anticipation certificates .... ¢ _0_.
*If different amount than reported on December 31
of preceding year, explain difference.
Balances in bond and interest
fund or other funds which
have been set aside for pay
went of bonds and interest -$
See T.I. Project # 1.
Balances in escrow accounts $
I do hereby certify that this statement is
correct
Princlpal.Accounting Offices
Datsd_thi =any of 19
ram N0. w1wrtm, 1 L rmm L71) (1W. LY71) 7d YC YC kAn,c .«.�ncc
REPORT OF OUTBrANDING INDEBTEDNESS
At December 31, 19-"—
To the County Auditor Albertville TIF III
Reporting Governmental Unit
Wright County, Minnesota
Bonded Indebtedness Balances in bond and interest
Am mnt fund or other funds which
1. Bonds outstanding Jan. 1, 19 81 ..... 7 7 1 1 9 ' have been set aside for pay- :.
2. Issued during 19—U ................ ment of bonds and interest $
S. Total ............................. 7 7 , 1 1 -- - ----
4. Paid during 19_ 5 ................ S e e T.I. Project # 1.
5. Bonds outstanding Dec. 31, 19 R , _ $ 7 7 , 1 1 2 Balances In escrow accounts $
Bonds Outstanding at Deember.31, 19.85
Type of Bonds ,Asom�t
6. General Obligation ...................0_
7. Special Assessment .................
8. Revenue ..... ........ .......
9. Refunding ....
10. Other 77,112
11. Total Bonds Outstanding...........: 'i 7, 11 2
State aid and tax anticipation certificates ..... $ - 0 -
*If different amount than reported on December 31
of preceding year, explain difference.
I do hereby certify that this statement is
correct.
Principal Accounting Officer
Dated_thip day of 19 1
a.a/ leer. Ltl(Li '�• SL.ANK
REPORT OF OUIWANDING INDEBTEDNESS
At December 31, 19
To the County Auditor Albertville TIF IV
Wright Report Mg Governmental Unit
County, Minnesota
Bonded Indebtedness Balances in bond and interest
Amount fund or other funds which
1. Bonds outstanding Jan. 1, 19�_.... 54,783 • have _ been set aside for pay- -
2. Issued during 19--5-................
8. Total .... meut of bonds and interest -�
4. Paid during 19 85 ................ See T.I project # 1.
S. Bonds outstanding Dec. 81, 19_ E5 _.. $ 54,783
Balances in escrow accounts $
Bonds Outstanding at DecembW' Sk 19 8 5
Type of Bonds ,Amount
6. General Obligation ......................S
7. Special Assessment ........... .
8. Revenue .... _ ..
9. Refunding _
10. Other ..Tax.Increme4L..G:o:....,, 54,785
11. Total Bonds Outstanding............:` $ '54 , 785
State aid and tax anticipation certificates
*If different amount than reported on December 31
of preceding year, explain difference.
I do hereby certify that this statement is
correct.
Principal .Accounting Officer
Dated this Lday of 19
VaJ tnev. loll/
REPORT OF OUTSTANDING INDEBTEDNESS
At December 31, 19 85
To the County Auditor City of Albertville
Reporting Governmental Unit
Wright _ _ __County, Minnesota
Bonded Indebtedness
Amount
1. Bonds outstanding Jan. 1, 19__85_.... $ 3,517,Aon "
2. Issued during 19 2S. ............... L 17 -VC 0
3. Total ............................. / oc 0
4. Paid during 19_. ................ — - o o 0
5. Bonds outstanding Dec. 31, 19—.—.. sy'lA2.000
Bonds Outstanding at December 31, 19__ L
T`yW of Bonds Amount
6. General Obligation ................... $_ 9 7. -Don .
7. Special Assessment ..................,�G(,�
8. Revenue .......... C4e- v-%_—. _ o 000
--
9. Refunding--
10. Other .............................. — -
11. Total Bonds Outstanding............ $_%%-60
„ate aid and tax anticipation certificates .... $_- __
*If different amount than reported on December 31
of preceding year, explain difference.
Balances in bond and interest
fund or other funds which
have been set aside for pay-
ment of bonds and interest $
4fr.2 ;,a.1 /'79•I/V
Balances in escrow accounts $
I do hereby certify that this statement is
correct.
Principal Accounting Officer
Dated this day of 2j'Lk-z,, 19?,L
? O. J. ARLIEN
o
Wright County Auditor / Treasurer
Wright County Courthouse - Buffalo, Minnesota 55313
a Phone: (612) 682-3900
o ' Metro: 339-6881
(Possible News Item)
NET TAX REVENUE RAISED BY MAJOR TAXING CATEGORY
Here is the "Second Annual Report" on where the money comes from - so
far as the major taxing categories.
First, a disclaimer: The percentages in the accompanying breakdown will
not total100%. Personal property is not shown in the data but amounts to 3.0%
of the county -wide total. The remaining 1.1% is in vacant residential, vacant
other, and amounts so small that they did not equal even a tenth of one percent.
The data shown accounts for 95.9% of the net tax.
Since this is the second year of this report, some comparisons are in
order:
FARM RESIDENTIAL
Percent
Taxes 16.2
Payable
1985
Percent
31.9
SEASONAL
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL UTILITY RECREATIONAL
10.2 1.8 29.7 6.1
Taxes 13.7 30.9 12.1 1.8 31.3 6.1
Payable
1986
This comparison could lead us to believe that a large percent of farm
land is being shifted to other classifications and that there has been a
lot of commercial building activity. While both of these factors did occur,
it was not to the extent that the figures indicate. The formula for comput-
ing taxes, which is imposed by the State of Minnesota, is constantly being
changed.
The current formula tended to shift some of the tax burden from farm to
residential and seasonal recreational. The State also imposed some increases
in commercial. Our Assessor tells me that six cities in Wright County had
some commercial property adjusted upward 10 to 20 percent from last year.
County -wide we have 9,038 farm, 15,609 residential, 4,197 seasonal rec-
reational, 1,279 commercial, 76 industrial, and 57 utility parcels.
In Wright County, there are 32,248 real estate parcels with a market
value of $1,721,222,800. The assessed value is $387,116,121, which results
in a net real estate tax of $24,856,453.
0. J. Arlien
March 13, 1986 WRIGHT COUNTY AUDITOR/TREASURER
CITIES
Albertville
^ennandale
Suf €alo
Clearwater
Cokato
Dayton
Delano
Hanover
Howard Lake
Maple Lake
Monticello
Montrose
Rockford
St. Michael
South Haven
Waverly #1
Waverly #2
1985 Taxes Payable in
1986 (Net)
Percent
of Property
Taxes Raised
by Major Taxing
Category
SEASONAL
FARM
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
UTILITY
RECREATIONAL
6.3
33.3
52.1
.5
-
.2
2.9
45.6
40.5
1.6
1.0
1.8
2.6
54.0
37.8
.7
-
1.6
.4
37.5
47.6
8.3
-
-
.5
52.9
29.2
10.1
.5
-
-
93.8
-
-
-
-
.1
53.6
26.2
16.7
.2
-
13.2
63.1
13.1
-
-
1.6
.4
51.7
28.3
9.7
.9
-
1.8
43.0
40.3
3.3
4.1
.1
.6
7.0
5.9
1.3
83.4
-
1.7
70.3
22.2
-
-
-
1.2
69.9
20.8
.5
-
.1
2.6
65.9
26.1
-
-
-
4.7
63.8
12.6
-
5.2
--
3.0
70.5
18.3
-
1.5
.8
.4
34.1
25.0
-
-
40.4
TOWNSHIP
FARM
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL
UTILITY
_bion
50.1
22.8
.6
-
-
Buffalo
32.4
48.5
2.6
.7
1.5
Chatham
36.6
53.9
2.3
-
-
Clearwater
28.1
38.6
5.3
1.1
-
Cokato
57.0
17.5
15.9
4.3
-
Corinna
8.8
32.4
.5
-
-
Frankfort
30.6
53.4
6.6
.3
-
Franklin
47.7
40.9
4.3
-
3.7
French Lake
36.2
19.8
.7
-
1.2
Maple Lake
31.3
38.2
1.4
-
.1
Marysville
51.9
36.5
2.0
-
-
Middleville
60.0
24.1
8.7
-
1.0
Monticello
28.7
50.3
5.7
-
.7
Otsego
23.3
65.1
4.0
-
1.5
Rockford
9.5
18.3
.7
.2
66.2
Silver Creek
34.3
41.0
3.3
1.7
1.1
Southside
10.1
23.5
2.4
2.8
-
)ckholm
71.8
12.3
3.6
4.3
.1
Victor
70.0
17.7
.7
-
1.7
Woodland
75.8
17.3
3.2
1.4
•6
COUNTY
13.7
30.9
12.1
1.8
31.3
SEASONAL
RECREATIONAL
11.8
8.9
.8
24.4
3.7
56.8
2.2
.1
32.5
26.2
3.3
4.3
2.5
.6
.5
16.0
60.0
5.2
7.7
.1
6.1
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
SEWER LINE DIGGING PERMITS
APPLICATION PROCEDURES
PERMITS WILL ONLY BE ISSUED WHEN:
BUSINESS NAME
NAME
PERMIT FEE
DATE PAID_
CHECK
LASH
1. APPLICANT HAS LICENSE FOR DIGGING.
2. APPLICANT HAS PERFORMANCE BOND ON FILE WITH THE CITY.
3. INSPECTOR IS AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION
A. MONDAY-FRIDAY 7:30 TO 4:00--INSPECTION FEE-$10.00
B. AFTER HOURS (WEEKENDS, VACATION AND HOLIDAYS)
1. AFTER HOURS INSPECTION FEE OF $25.00.
2. INSPECTION DONE ONLY WHEN PRIOR ARRANGEMENTS
HAVE BEEN MADE WITH THE INSPECTOR.
3. APPLICANT MUST HAVE PERMIT FROM JOINT POWERS.
4. NO LINE OR TRENCH SHALL BE DUG IN BEFORE LICENSE AND
PERMIT IS ISSUED.
5. NO LINE SHALL BE COVERED UP BEFORE THE INSPECTION TAKES
PLACE.
*6. REMINDER --FAILURE TO FOLLOW PROCEDURES WILL RESULT
IN A FINE OF $500.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALBERTVILLE
ORDINANCE 19B5-2.
TELEPHONE NUMBER
ADDRESS (OF DIG IN) CITY STATE ZIP CODE
DATE YOU WILL DIG TIME INSPECTION REQUESTED
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME ADDRESS OF SERVICE CONNECTION
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE TODAY'S DATE
INSPECTED BY DATE OF INSPECTION
ROTOoROOTER
Roto-Rooter Services Company
Now-
WROOTiR
March 7, 1986
14530 - 27th Avenue North
Minneapolis, MN 55441
612-544-9551
Albertville City Hall
5964 Main Avenue N.E.
Albertville, Minnesota 55301
Attention: Mr. Ken Lindsey
Dear Ken,
First let me take this opportunity to thank you for allowing Roto Rooter
to place a bid for the cleaning of your city Sanitary Sewer Line.
Following is a breakdown of the cost of this service:
$ .25 per foot to Jet clean and vacuum
sewer lines (approx. 27,000 feet)
City of Albertville to provide water and
access to manholes
Again, Ken, thank you for your consideration of Roto Rooter for your
needs.
Looking forward to hearing from you in the near future.
Since ely,
O
David L. Smith
Industrial/Municipal Manager
OL U r— rr. .
VISU-SEWED CLEAN & SEAL, iNC.
BBOO W. Highway 7, Suite 212. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55426
(61 2) 933-6006
February 6, 1986
Mr. Ken Lindsay
City of Albertville
Box 141
Albertville, Minnesota 55301
Dear Mr. Lindsay,
Visu-Sewer Clean & Seal, Inc. is pleased to submit a proposal for contract
sewer cleaning of the Albertville sanitary sewer system.
Based on our previous discussions and meetings, we understand that the
City desires to contract out the cleaning of five miles or approximately
26,E+00 lineal feet of sanitary sewer over a two year period.
Visu-Sewer's costs for preforming this service is on a day rate basis.
The costs and estimated time frame to complete the cleaning are as follows:
FIRST YEAR CLEANING (1986)
Cleaning at a rate of $520.00 per day (Estimated cleani.r-q.,
time at 7 days)
SECOND SEAR CLEANING (1987)
Cleaning at a rate of $550.00 per day (5% increase based on
agreement between owner and contractor. Estimated cleaning
tine at 7 days).
14-- will preform the cleaning utilizing a cc=' i-nation jet/vacs:nn unit. C:ur
cleaning is thorough, not one pass type cleaning. It is our i.nLention to
provide the City with a quality job that will eliminated the possiblilty
of basement backups and surcharging due to inadequate pipe capacity. Tl1e
estimated cleaning times listed above are maximum values ani tl-e work
should take Less tLne. However, until we have an opportunity to visually
inspect each line segment, the listed times would represent a worst case
basis. in addition, after the first two year cleaning program, the an3unt
of cleaning required will be significantly reduced in tive following years.
Visu-Sewer will also supply a type written cleaning report listing the
sewer segments cleaned, type of debris retwved, the amount of time rc.quire.i
to clean, ect. These reports will be used to structure further cleaning
and maintenance activities.
member of
Q
Serving -Municipalities, Utilities and Industry
In addition Visu-Sewer will provide emergency cleaning services at a rate
of $100.00 per hour portal to portal.
If you have any questions or need other information, please contact us.
We would be more than happy to appear before the City council to discuss
our proposal.
Sincerely,
VISU-SEWER CLEAN & SEAL, INC.
ohn F. Grove
District Manager
PIPE SERVICES CORPORATION
13708 Inverness Road
Minnetonka, MN 55343
(612) 938-9614
January 29, 1986
Ken Lindsay
City of Albertville
City Hall
Albertville, MN 55301
Dear Ken:
Andy Martin Roger Gottschalk
PIPE SERVICES CORPORATION
Municipal and Industrial Pipe
Cleaning, Testing and Ingwtion
13708 Inverness Road
Minnetonka, MN 55343 (612) 938-9614
As per your request we are submitting our proposal for providing sewer
maintenance for the City of Albertville. We have subdivided the sewer system
into two areas, A and B, as shown on the attached map. Assuming there is
approximately 26,000 feet in the system, Area A would consist of 14,455 feet
or 55% of the system, and Area B would contain 11,545 feet or 45%.
You will note that each area is independent of each other. Area A flows by
gravity to the existing treatment facility and Area B flows to an existing
lift station which discharges to a drain field until such time as a new force
main is installed to convey the flow to the new stabilization ponds. After
the force main has been installed, Area B should be cleaned and at this time
the wet well at the lift station should also be cleaned.
We propose to clean the sewer system using a combination jet/vacuum cleaner.
This machine jets (2000 psi) the debris to the manhole where it is vacuumed
up. Our crew consists of two men with each over ten years experience in
sewer work.
We propose to clean Area A in 1986 and Area B in 1987. The cost to clean and
vacuum the sewers is as follows:
Area A - 14,445 feet @ 400 per foot = $5,778.00
Area B 15,555 feet @ 400 per foot = $4,622.00
There is also a mobilization/demobilization charge of $225.00 per year.
The above costs are based on the assumption that the following items shall be
the responsibility of the City and no cost to the Contractor:
1) Provide access to hydrants for cleaning water
2) Expose any buried manholes
3) Provide a dump site for the debris
In response to your request to provide costs for emergency calls, the following
price shall apply; $125.00 per hour portal to portal. We should be able to
respond usually in two to three hours.
I hope this proposal meets with your satisfaction, and should you have any
questions please don't hesitate to call.
Sincerer
PIR� SFRVICF,� CO 27TI7,
C 1
r of s al
City of
Rockford
tN)II \hin tilikvl s r:oAloid, Ni's
(012) 4' 7 h0,6 �
October 17, 1985
Albertville, City Hall
Mayor and Councilmembers
Albertville, MN 55301
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
Recently we discussed with one of your wastewater operator, Ken Lindsay,
about the City of Rockford's interest in obtaining a "Jet Rodder" to provide
clean out services required to maintain an effective city sanitary
and storm sewer system. However, the City of Rockford is not unlike any
other city presently confronted with budget constraints. Therefore, the
city is presently exploring alternate means of financing and justifying
the acquisition of this equipment.
-� One promising method of financing this equipment to complement the budget
would be a lease arrangement with other interested municipalities requiring
this service. Presently, the details of any lease arrangement have not been
formulated. However, consultation of this business with the public works
department revealed that in order for the city to fiscally justify this
purchase then the following fee structure would be warranted; forty cents
( 44 per foot of opera ; out the city crew but with—tha „nder-
____R
standing the equipment w_ould_be operated by two (2) qualif ied_oper4tors,
forty-five cents (.45t) per foot of operation —with -an I e (1) qualified city -
crew member and fifty cents_ (.!iGtJ .}e_foot__af_-apera#--ion -with __tw __I2) qy_a_I ified
city crew members . Please be advised that operation of the said equipment
will minimally require preferrably two (2) qualified crew members or at least
(l; qualified operator and a capable assistant. Since the city's intention
are soley to cover expenses beyond budget capabilities, then this proposal
is based upon projected operatMg expenses which are general in nature and
subject to revisions. Nevertheless, in order fcr the city to consider further
research of this concept in terms of making the "numbers work", then general
commitment from interested municipalities would assist the city's analysis of
this business.
Mayor Iv,ur, WIK(•r
Councilmen k. , i \wwll. i ilwi.l fail Rt L� . 1 I lia t'll \iai� m 0,1hi
City Clerk/Treasurer Nwh I M� nl City Administrator R�wi k ti, hrkwder
Park and Recreation Director i;rurit LJtitI
Your expressed interest and cooperation concerning this matter is appreciated
Should you have any additional questions and/or advice don't hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
Mary Ray
City Administrator/Planner
MR/ne
�IAain�ine
Sewn evea"Ing SenVice MaIRVIRe
Hy -Power Flushing Machine
' us serve you before major sewer problems arise. 1 e a C e v 1 e e
JON TILLMANN `J
16799 Yale Street -Elk River, MN 55330-(612) 441.6629 a Street - Elk River, MN 55330
Home (612) 441-6629
MAINLINE SEWER CLEANING SERVICE will flush your sewer lines
using one or more of our sewer cleaning attachments, Proofer, Sand E
Grease Nozzle, Hydraulic Root Cutter, Nozzle Extension, Penetrator
Nozzle.
We will remove sand, silt, stubborn grease, roots S sticks from
your sewer line as we accumulate them in each manhole, the sides and
bottom of each manhole will be rinsed after use.
Manholes must be accessible and covers easily removeable.
If root cutter or other attachments get hung up in the sewer line
do to protruding sewer taps into main line or for any other unforseen
reason the client is responsible for freeing the attachment by what ever
means necessary.
Water supplied by client to fill tank on flushing machine.
Cost for cleaning sewer lines are based on the size of sewer pipe
and a minimum of 3, 000 feet of pipe to be cleaned.
6"
Line
454
per
linear
foot.
8"
Line
55(
per
linear
foot.
9"
Line
60(
per
linear
foot.
10"
Line
70C
per
linear
foot.
12"
Line
90G
per
linear
foot.
For this price I need a commitment of 30, 000 feet of sewer line to
be cleaned in 1986. 1 hope I can count on your town for a minimum of
only 3,000 feet.
"Please notify me before the MAY 1st 1986 deadline"
Sincerely,
JON TILLMANN
r
l� A-6l E-
16
0
A.D-OkL,s,-s --eha,J
L 4f=-
,2o/0/ /-2O
Q63-.3P3
7 7 7-3.74-5'
y
1173 -6z zg
71 f1 lylw-1/5
-:9;-37l- .1997
5'1 Z.0 �6" cx
44(A-i - "tcuit�