Photo by Kirsten Zoellner
At the November 6 meeting, MnDOT’s Paul Zager notified the council that the department will be looking to modify the intersection of Highway 52, Third Street, and County Road 8. Currently, the city street and county road both intersect the highway at angles with limited visibility. MnDOT says safety is the primary concern.
The department is considering various options, but plans to redirect County Road 8 slightly north meeting Highway 52 in a safer location. Plans call for Third Street to end as a through street prior to the intersection. The draft options include a hammerhead turnaround north of the west end of Third Street, just west of 101 Third Street, or a cul-de-sac.
Impacted residents, as noted by Public Works Director John Hanson, include Ryan and May Aasum (101 Third Street), Joan Clement (102 Third Street), and Barry and Kristine Daugherty (106 Third Street). The choice between the turnaround or cul-de-sac will come down to what the council and the affected landowners would like.
MnDOT will be setting an evening open meeting with the residents at the community center sometime the second week of December. As it strongly impacts those residents, the city did not yet set the meeting date, to offer the best chance of attendance from them. The city will send the affected properties a letter as well and include the details on the upcoming utility billing. The meeting will be open to the public.
In the general election, Mayor Tammy Danielson chose not to run for re-election and there was one candidate for the mayoral seat – current councilor Ron Reisner. He received 131 votes, 65.5%. Write-in nominees for mayor received 69 votes, or 34.5%.
As for the remainder of the council, there were no candidates running on the ballot to fill the seats of outgoing Councilor Dave Gudmundson, who served for 32 years on the council, and Reisner. There were 133 votes cast for write-in candidates for the council seats. At this time, it’s unclear who the future councilors are.
In other news, the council discussed setting fees for ordinance violations. After speaking to Preston Police Department, with whom the city contracts its service, City Clerk Mary Tjepkes informed the council that the department does not issue fines on the city’s behalf.
“When we adopted the code of ordinances, it was under the understanding that fines and fees would go through our contracted police. It is not,” stated Tjepkes.
The fines could be applied to non-compliance of any city ordinance, which are termed either a petty misdemeanor or a misdemeanor depending on classification. According to Tjepkes, after a fine is given, law enforcement takes over and enforces it.
“It could be any ordinance. It’s difficult when you think about enforcing,” said Danielson. “If we would put a reasonable fee… if it’s high, maybe it really deters.”
The council approved setting the fines at $250 for a petty misdemeanor and $500 for a misdemeanor. Properties will have 30 days to rectify the non-compliance or additional fees, of the same amounts, will be applied every 30 days as needed.
“It has to be every 30 days otherwise it’ll slip through the cracks,” said Reisner.
The council also discussed burning within the city after receiving comments about the smoke and the smell from a concerned citizen. The city’s current ordinances prohibit burning in external, solid-fuel-fired heating devices on properties of less than four acres in size, which is every city property. In addition, ordinances state all stacks or chimneys must be a minimum of 25 feet above ground level, extend at least as high as the height of the roofs of other residences within 500 feet, and be of masonry or insulated metal with a minimum six-inch flue.
The council noted only two external wood stoves currently in the city. One was approved by the council many years prior, but were told the stipulations regarding the chimney. The stack was never adjusted to meet the requirements and will need to be. It is unknown if the other stove installation was ever brought before the council.
“Any future requests must need to be approved, with two in town considered approved with modifications until the property is sold?” asked Danielson. “We know any future requests won’t be approved. The two in town, what requirements do they need to meet and are we going to let them continue to be there with the requirements?”
The city will notify the two properties with external stoves about the ordinance and their responsibility to amend their units to meet codes. They will have 30 days to do so before fines start accruing.
Also discussed was the current township rent fee. At the last meeting, the council upped the long-time fee from $300 to $500. This was met with some resistance from the township, according to Gudmundson and Tjepkes. After further discussion, it was noted the township is maintaining a section of city streets, from West County Road 8 to the quarry entrance. It was estimated that the cost of this maintenance – plowing, gravel/grading, and mowing – was at least $200. The township requested a fee of $350. They approved amending the fee. It was noted by Tjepkes that there is no official agreement about this street maintenance and insisted the city put one in writing.
Lastly, two properties had their past due utility bills certified to Fillmore County for collection with property taxes. The amounts were $2,824 and $1,562, both with 5% interest to be applied.
Leave a Reply