The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06.21.99 Council Packet COUNCIL MEETING REGULAR June 21, 1999 6:10 P.M. CHAMBER/COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVEAGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Federal Railroad Administration - Presentation 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (6/7/99) (Regular) b) Capital Outlay - Fire Department c) Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation Department d) Capital Outlay - Liquor Operations e) Adopt Resolution - Accepting Donation - Dakota Electric Association f) Prairie Waterway Phase II Project Closeout g) Approve Joint Powers Agreement - Fit Testing Equipment Contribution h) Approve Minnesota Historical Society Grant Agreement i) Approve Contract Amendment RLK - Comprehensive Plan j) Approve Audio Visual Consultant Proposal k) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Resolution - Approving Amendments TIF Districts 4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT a) Adopt Resolution - 1999 Downtown Streetscape and Sliplining (Supplemental) 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Request to Revise Comprehensive Plan - Wenzel Property b) Castle Rock Board Communication - Ash Street Sub-Committee Meeting c) Sewer Utility Connection Request - Malinski Property d) Adopt Resolution - Cameron Woods Development Contract e) Adopt Resolution - Nelsen Hills 7th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat f) Adopt Resolution - Nelsen Hills 7th Addition Development Contract g) Adopt Ordinance - Lampert Lumber Rezoning h) Water Board Communication - Proposed Water Use Restrictions i) Resident Alley Paving Request Action Taken 2. NEW BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution - Bond Sale - G. O. Improvement Bonds of 1999 (Supplemental) b) Adopt Resolution - Bond Sale - G.O. Equipment Certificates of 1999 (Supplemental) 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) Citizen Request - Stop Sign Placement 14. ADJOURN City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor & Councilmembers FROM: John. F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: June 21, 1999 It is requested that the June 21, 1999 agenda be amended as follows: CONSENT AGENDA Table 7j Approve Audio Visual Consultant Proposal It has been requested by the vendor that this item be pulled for further review due to concerns by his employer, the City of Lakeville. AWARD OF CONTRACT 9a Adopt Resolution - 1999 Downtown Streetscape and Sliplining Two bids were received for the Downtown Streetscape and Sliplining Project. NEW BUSINESS 12a Adopt Resolution - Bond Sale - G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1999 The City Council authorized the sale of General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1999 to fund the County Road 72 and Downtown Streetscape improvements. 12b Adopt Resolution - Bond Sale - G.O. Equipment Certificates of 1999 The City Council authorized the sale of General Obligation Equipment Certificates of 1999 to fund the purchase of several budgeted Capital Equipment items. Respectfully submitted, ..li" To whom it may concern: ~~ ~7~Y' 71~~ ~-7J0~ 6/17/99 This letter is being submitted on behalf of the concerned citizens residing on block 2 of The Nelson Hills Farm sub-division, fifth edition, (Everest Path). The people in our neighborhood have a growing concern for the safety and well-being of their children. The problem is people excessively speeding on Everest Path. It is our belief as a neighborhood that if some measures are not taken soon someone will end up hurt. The street itself is rather wide and has long stretches without any stop signs. It is our belief that most people end up speeding unconsciously. The fact remails that if people are driving in excess of 40 mph and up on residential streets people are bound to get hurt. As concerned citizens living in a newer neighborhood we feel it is our job to bring this danger to a halt. One other issue to consider is that there is a woman in this neighborhood who is permanently in a wheelchair. People such as her deserve the common 'courtesy of using the streets just like anyone else. It seems some people are taking this freedom away from not only her but from our kids as well. Below is a list of people who could not come to the meeting but are concerned and are hoping some measures can be taken to stop this before someone gets hurt or even worse killed. ~ 7' JG~J t4.I.~, VI /'t538Evu:J;>~ l:\(,'}(-\\E? -{- ~'-''-\ D2?L\1~lb ) ~~--j \ 'L 'v \Wt"'--~ \- ~-~:::A:\-\tl J ~/~ q.. ~cvJ ~ 1~~;'~e~~~~~ I '1571 :i!~d 'PA'flI ~_~ /: kt;.rJuko g~ 16J~ 8 ~ Cv-r~~'.!.T Pt17!i t./ldC( f&u1A~~ / Y I; 00 E{/t~..J ~ /4 t.t/<-l Ab 6tuA-C//)L1 1~{)1.J ?r/LrC-S I /a.t/-p 5rw {~ V()MWIn!b.- 111(;)1 SVifls,f p~ Sincerely Jeff Huber 18538 Everest Path f)Je-' fLl/'t !..(M~ t~ Its 7 Y t: t/~/i?$i fe;' I ~~~ At\~NU\. ,hc),J\Q\V) ~q8~r6 ~#-'1 ,'.1..,-"",, ~ I / '7 - ...).:> ;:;; <fOI;r,~" . From the comer of 18300 51. w to 190m 51. w is 7/10 of a mile without a stop sign. . Intersection of Explorer Way and Everest Path currently has one stop sign. . Intersection of Esquire Way and Everest Path currently has one stop sign. . Trail crossing on Esquire Way is on a blind curve and does not have any crossing signs. . . MapQuest Map Results wysiwyg://73/http://mapquest.comlcgi-bin. ..3d&mouse_mode=center&map.x=372&map.y=3 10f2 - Print this map - E-mail this map - Save map on MyMapQuest Quick Places of Interest Click on buttons to show / remove the location(s) on the map. Places of Interest (USlEurope 0 Select a category and click on Update 6/21/99 3:41 PM 7a.- COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR June 7,1999 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg, Strachan, Verch None City Administrator Erar, Attorney Joel Jarnnik, City Management Team 4. APPROVE A GENDA Item 7 d was pulled as Councilmember Soderberg wanted to abstain from voting. Item 7h was pulled as Councilmember Verch wanted to vote no. City Attorney Jarnnik added item 13c under Council Roundtable - Litigation Issue. MOTION by Strachan, second by Soderberg to approve the Agenda with changes. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS 7. CONSENT AGENDA 7d) Mt. Dew Days Fee Waiver Request MOTION by Cordes, second by Verch to approve the fee waiver request. Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Strachan, Verch. Abstain: Soderberg. 7h) Retroactive Approval Temporary 3.2 Beer License - Farmington Independent Fastpitch Team MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to approve the temporary 3.2 beer license. Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg, Strachan. Voting against: Verch. MOTION by Cordes, second by Strachan to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (5/17/99) (Regular) b) Approved release of Development Contract - lot 1, block 1, Dakota County Estates 9th Addition Council Minutes (Regular) June 7, 1999 Page 2 c) Approved school and conference - Fire Department e) Received information Year 2000 Compliance Report - Update f) Adopted RESOLUTION R57-99 approving gambling permit - American Legion g) Approved capital outlay - Parks and Recreation i) Approved bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Hwy 3 Frontage Road and Willow Street Improvements Information is still being obtained on this item. Staff recommended continuing the Public Hearing to July 6, 1999. MOTION by Strachan, second by Cordes to continue the Public Hearing to July 6, 1999. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Adopt Ordinance - Interim Use Zoning Code Amendment JDS Properties has made application for an interim use within the B-4 (Neighborhood Business) zoning district. The process of the Interim Use permit requires a text amendment be approved by the City Council for that particular zoning district. Once the text amendment is approved, other applications can be made for the same use within other B-4 zoned properties. The text amendment requested is for "Automobile Repair: Minor" within the B-4 zoning district. The subject property is 821 Third Street. At the May 17, 1999 Council Meeting, Council suggested placing a "sunset" date on any text amendment to coincide with the period of time approved for the Interim Use. In this case, the Planning Commission approved the Interim Use for Airlake Ford to 3 years. Mr. Don Hunter, 613 Heritage Way, owner of the building located at 821 Third Street, stated he would like a 5-year term for the interim use. Staff replied the Planning Commission sets the terms for the interim use permits. Originally, staff did recommend a 5-year term for the interim use, however, the Planning Commission was uncomfortable with 5 years and therefore, agreed to 3 years. Mr. Hunter can appeal the decision at a future Council Meeting. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Strachan to adopt ORDINANCE 099-432 amending the B-4 (Neighborhood Business) district adding "Automobile Repair: Minor" as an Interim use. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Adopt Resolution - Approval of Final Plat Cameron Woods Subdivision Cameron Woods consists of an 84-unit senior cooperative housing facility. The final plat was recently approved by the Planning Commission on May 25, 1999 contingent on engineering requirements and the resolution of the connection of Euclid Street on the north and south in the Development Contract. The proposed development consists of two, 3-story, 42-unit buildings on 13.7 acres. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg adopting RESOLUTION R58-99 approving the Council Minutes (Regular) June 7, 1999 Page 3 Cameron Woods Final Plat/Final PUD Plan contingent upon the above requirements. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Adopt Ordinance - Amend Existing Wetland Ordinance The City Council authorized retaining the firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates to assist the City in the preparation of an update to the City's Wetland Ordinance as well as completing a field inventory and classification of all existing wetlands. The primary motivations in updating the ordinance were the need to update the setback and buffer yard requirements for areas adjacent to wetlands and the need to classify existing wetlands by floral diversity and storm water susceptibility. The previous ordinance treated all wetlands the same regardless of these factors. Ms. Sherri Buss ofBRAA gave a brief overview of the proposed ordinance amendments. All amendments pertain to future developments. MOTION by Strachan, second by Verch to adopt ORDINANCE 099-433 amending the existing wetland ordinance. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. d) 1998 Annual Financial Report - Presentation The independent audit of the December 31, 1998 financial records was completed on March 31, 1999. In 1998, actual General Fund revenues exceeded budgeted revenues by $38,733 and actual expenditures were $8,772 more than budgeted. The difference in budgeted to actual expenditures is due to an accounting adjustment of$12,673 for compensated absences in the General Fund in response to a management suggestion made by the auditors after the 1997 audit. The Water Utility, Sewer Operations, Solid Waste and Liquor and Arena Funds all showed increases to their 1998 retained earnings. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) State Building Code Chapter 1306 - Review and Disposition The issue deals with the optional building code provision that was adopted by the City Council in 1996 dealing with fire protection (sprinkler) systems. It was the consensus at the May 11, 1999 workshop that the Council had three options relative to this previously adopted optional building code provision which requires the installation of sprinkler systems in certain new, expanded, or remodeled commercial buildings containing 2000 square feet or more. These options include 1) retaining the current requirements; 2) repealing the current requirements entirely; 3) adopting 8a of Chapter 1306 which triggers the need for sprinkler systems at 5000 square feet rather than the current 2000 square feet. Option 1 - Retaining Chapter 1306 - The City has received a letter from the Minnesota Fire Chiefs Association that Chapter 1306 is proposed to be re-written to allow more flexibility and choices at the local level as to the level of built-in fire protection needed in individual communities. Option 2 - Repealing Chapter 1306 - This option would result in the City enforcing the more standard building code and fire code provisions as they pertain to commercial new construction as well as additions and remodeling. Council Minutes (Regular) June 7, 1999 Page 4 Option 3 - Adopting Chapter 1306 8a - This option represents a compromise between Options 1 and 2 in that it does not repeal this requirement altogether, but raises the threshold to 5000 square feet before it would be triggered. Mr. Scott Wollmering, 14030 Delta Avenue, Rosemount, co-owner ofLiI Rascals Daycare Center, asked if option 8a eliminates child care centers. Staff replied no because the code is based on occupant load. Mr. Wollmering stated the daycare center has expanded to make more room for the children already there, not to add more children. This code makes it physically and financially difficult to expand. Mr. Phil Carison, 17482 Eventide, representing Farmington Mall and Lil Rascals Daycare Center, felt there is another issue to look at. He stated Council needs to look at if the footprint is being expanded or if there is remodeling within the building, which is what Lil Rascals has done. Mr. Dave Adelman, owner of Farmington Mall, stated he would like to see 1306 repealed. They currently have 2 spaces that are not rentable. Even option 8a would not make the spaces rentable. MOTION by Strachan, second by Verch to adopt Chapter 1306 8a. MOTION by Soderberg suggesting to amend the previous motion by adding that this ordinance should be reviewed in one year. Councilmembers Strachan and Verch accepted this as a friendly amendment and added to the previous motion. MOTION by Cordes, second by Ristow to amend the original motion by substituting the repeal of 1306 instead of amending 1306 8a option. Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg. Voting against: Strachan, Verch. MOTION by Cordes, second by Ristow adopting the motion as amended, ORDINANCE 099- 434, repealing Chapter 1306. Voting for: Ristow, Cordes, Soderberg. Voting against: Strachan, Verch. b) Authorize Public Facilities Task Force Council directed staff to pursue the creation of a City Task Force to study and formulate recommendations to the City Council on the need for new public facilities. The composition of the task force was discussed. The Mayor felt that more than one citizen should be appointed and Council suggested 5 representatives between the citizens and business representatives. Council also suggested a student in addition to the school board representative. The composition was agreed on as follows: Citizen-at-Iarge and Business Representative (5) Council (1) City Commissions (HRA - 1, Planning - 1, Parks and Recreation - 1) School District Board or Staff Representative (1) and (1) student City Administrator (1) Council Minutes (Regular) June 7, 1999 Page 5 Ex-Officio staff members comprised of department directors from Community Development - 1, Finance - 1, Police - 1, Fire - 1, Parks and Recreation - 1, Public Works - 1 The task force will review facility space needs for the following public facilities: Central Maintenance Facility Police Facility Fire Satellite Station Ballfield Complex City Hall Offices MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes authorizing the creation of the Task Force, approving the composition of the Task Force, approving the scope of the Task Force, and approving the Task Force objectives. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Review Comments - Southern Dakota County Cities and Townships Comprehensive Plan Update The City recently received a final draft of the composite comprehensive plan update for 18 townships and cities in southern Dakota County. The areas of greatest concern include the three townships of Castle Rock, Empire and Eureka. The primary change for Castle Rock is the issue that was addressed by the City Council last year. This change involved the expansion of the commercial land use designation from TH3 and Fountain Valley Golf Course approximately 1/4 mile further south. This has resulted in the development of the Castle Rock Industrial Park. There are virtually no changes proposed for Eureka Township and the entire township is proposed to remain designated as Agriculture with a permitted density of 1 unit per 40 acres. Empire Township identifies an additional area of approximately 300 acres designated as "Sewered Area." Empire Township has scheduled a public hearing on their more detailed Comprehensive Plan update for June 15, 1999. Staffwill bring this information to the City Council once it is received. 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) TH3 MediaD Issues - Update At the May 3, 1999 City Council meeting, the issue of motorists driving over the easterly median from the easterly frontage road north of Budget Mart to access Trunk Highway 3 was brought to staff for review. Representatives from MnDOT have indicated that,. as a temporary measure, they are willing to install additional posts along the median to help prevent motorists from driving over the median. MnDOT has indicated a willingness to explore more permanent solutions to this problem. Council Minutes (Regular) June 7, 1999 Page 6 b) State Legislative Delegation Meeting - Set Date Council instructed staff to set up a meeting with state legislators to discuss various issues. Council confirmed to have a meeting with all three legislators Sept 14, 15, or 22. A tentative agenda will be sent to Council. c) Litigation Issues The City Attorney updated the Council on the Progress Land litigation. He received a notice of a hearing scheduled for July 19, 1999. Councilmember Soderberg: He received a letter from Property Management Company regarding Y2K. The letter has been forwarded to staff for a response. A response was received from Castle Rock Township regarding a sub-committee meeting. This item will be placed on the June 21, 1999 Council agenda. Councilmember Cordes: She has received a request for a stop sign at the intersection ofPairview and Heritage Way. Staff will respond. City Administrator Erar: E-mail addresses for Council and staff are on the web site. Publications to be put on the web site include the Park and Recreation brochure, the City Newsletter, sections of the City Code, licenses and permits. Televising of Council meetings is on track. Two proposals have been received and will be brought to the next Council meeting. Staff is looking at televising meetings late August or early September. Community Development Director Olson: Correspondence has been received from Castle Rock Township regarding a communications tower on the Henderson property. Staffhas requested additional information. This will go before the Town Board on June 8, 1999. City Engineer Mann: Construction of the new water reservoir has been completed. Prairie Creek storm sewer and County Road 72 projects will be started next week. Mayor Ristow: He received a brochure on a presentation, Keys to Success, from Dakota Electric. The Star Spangled Banner celebration will be held at the Fairgrounds Sunday. A representative from the Federal Railroad Administration will be at the next Council meeting. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Strachan to adjourn at 10:30 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, Z~/~ 7-7-?~-J ../ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ?~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrato~ Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief FROM: SUBJECT: Capital Outlay Purchase - Fire Department DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION The Fire Department is requesting to purchase a Knox Box Master Key Retention System - Sentralok I. DISCUSSION The Fire Department strongly encourages the schools, apartments, elderly care centers and businesses to install Knox Security Boxes. Building keys are placed in the security box to provide the Fire Department access in emergency situations. The Fire Department has the master key to open all the Knox Boxes. All Knox Boxes are keyed the same. Presently we have approximately 40 Knox Box locations. The Sentralok System secures our entry keys. The encoder signal from Police dispatch will release the entrance to the vehicle mounted decoder box. This enhanced security system will provide maximum master key security. BUDGET IMP ACT Approved in the 1999 Capital Outlay Budget. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, K&- LJ\1~f' Ken Kuchera Fire Chief City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farmington.mn.us /c TO: Mayor, Cooncilmembers, CRy Adminmrator1J.; James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation Department DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION The Parks and Recreation Commission ( P ARAC ) has reviewed the playground equipment needs for Dakota Estates park in the Dakota County Estates Addition. DISCUSSION The P ARAC has determined the play equipment at Dakota Estates Park needs replacing. The Commission is recommending that a new park structure be purchased. The following quotations were received: Comoanv 1. St. Croix Recreation 2. Reese Recreation Plav Structure 1 Related Eauioment $24,064.54 $27,396.05 In review of the quotations received, the City will purchase the play equipment from St. Croix Recreation. BUDGET IMPACT The budgeted dollars for the play equipment will come from Liquor Store operations and Park Improvement Funds as outlined in the 1999 Budget and C.I.P. ACTION REQUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, ,-'~ts~. James Bell Parks and Recreation Director equipde "",,------------ '" ;' ;' ;' ;' I I I I I I I I I I I I I ) ;' ;' ;' I I I , I I I i CARGO NET ) ;' I I I I I I I I I \ \ \ \ \ .... .... ........ "'I \ \ \ \ \ ^ .... ;' .... .... ;' .... ........ /.... .... '" ...........-_____f" BALCONY Playcountllr IlaIow Balcony Copyright~KOMPAN, Inc. Scale Plan Views BigToys. January 1999 BUOYS' BT-5518 LEGACY Scale plan views with safety zones 1/8" = 1".0" TRIPLE SLIDE -.... .... .... .... .... \\\\~ ~ PLAYCOUNTER L______..... .... .... .... '--- --- -..... .... .... .... ..... .... .... .... \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I , l .... \ \ \ \ I I I I I / I I I I I / I / ;' ;' /' ;' '" ;" ....'" .....-----...",," 18' MOUNTAIN CLIMB SLIDEPOLE CURLY CUMBER 60" SPIRAL SLIDE BANISTER BARS /........ ;' / ;' '" .... /" ------" KOMPAN~ BigToyse IKOMPAN, Inc. n17 New Market Street, 1-800-426-97&_. Specifications for: Structure Dimensions: Child Capacity: Installation Time: 37'-0" X 31'-6" 70 Children 135 Hours Estimated Concrete to Install Deep Column (28") Standard Column (16") Pipe (16") Slide (16") Chain Anchor Platforms - Height* 18" 42" 54" 60" 66" 78" 64 Cubic Feet 2 30 18 4 3 Activities - (See General Specifications) Balcony, 78" Banister Bars, 42" Platform Cargo Net Curly Climber (End wI Side Rails), 8'-6" Mountain Climb Mountain Climb Attachment Wall · Play Counterl Bench Playshell Traverse, 11 Piece- Ring Maze, 10 Rings Slidepole 10'-6" Slidepole for Playshell Traverse Spiral Slide Triple Plastic Slide Vertical Access Climber, 2 Rung Vertical Hoop Climber Wave Panel with Mirror Bubble Olympia, W A 98501 BT -5518 Legacy Resilient Surface Play area: Age Range: Highest Point of Structure: 49'-0" X 44'-6" 5 -12 Years 12'-6" 3 1 2 1 1 2 Enclosures: Medium Wood Enclosure Narrow Wood Enclosure Extra Narrow Wood Enclosure Extra Narrow Step Platform Enclosure 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 Attachments - (See General Specifications) Access Handrails Accessible Stairs, 36" Climbing Cleat Ground - to - Deck Stairs Handgrip Pipe Entry Playhouse Roof, 58" Soft Edge 2 1 8 1 13 1 1 2 . Heights Calculated based upon 12" of resilient surface above sub-grade. Play equipment must be installed over resilient safety surface. Shock absorbency must yield a peak deceleration of less than 200 G's and an HIC of less than 1000 at Critical Height. Review U.S.C.P.S.C. Playground Surfacing Technical Information Guide for further information. · Mountain Climb Attachment Wall does not include a climbing rope. KOMPAN1:- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /d TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ FROM: Paul Asher, Liquor Operations Manager SUBJECT: Capital Outlay Purchase - Liquor Operations DATE: June 21,1999 INTRODUCTION The 1999 Liquor Operation's Budget provides for an upgrade of the operation's "point of sale" computer hardware, and software. DISCUSSION The City Administrator and I have discussed the different possible computer systems that would be applicable to our operation, and the different vendors. Our present computer system is over 5 years old, and the four computers are not Y2K compliant. In review of customer service needs, staff will also be adding a second computerized cash register lane to the Pilot Knob Store. The City received two bids for the upgrade, and it was decided to go with the lowest proposal. A thorough review of the proposal was completed. The proposal also includes cash register auxiliary equipment, installation, training, and hardware/software support for one year. BUDGET IMP ACT The quoted price of$18,200 is within the 1999 Liquor Operation's Capital Outlay Budget. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. Respectfully Submitted, QJ? a~J v-J Paul Asher Liquor Operations Manager --~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us k TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ FROM: James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Accepting Donations - Safety Camp DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION A donation has been received from Dakota Electric. DISCUSSION Dakota Electric has donated $500 to the Safety Camp. Staff will communicate the City's appreciation on behalf of the Council to Dakota Electric for their generous donation. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution accepting the donation of $500 from Dakota Electric to the Safety Camp. Respectfully submitted, ~~~~ James Bell Parks and Recreation Director PROPOSED RESOLUTION No. ACCEPTING GRANT OF $500 FROM DAKOTA ELECTRIC Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 21st day of June, 1999 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City has received a grant for $500 to be used for the Safety Camp; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to accept such grants. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington hereby accepts the grant of $500 from Dakota Electric to be used to fund the Safety Camp. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 21 st day of June, 1999. Mayor Attested to the day of June, 1999. City Administrator SEAL ~ ~~ u ~ < ~>: ~~ <E~ cd ~ r/'J o Z I-< ~ 01) .S .i=: ~ (1) ] ~ ~ - I-< ..9 o c.> g ~ <:Ii 01) ~ ~ o ] ] t/) "0 ~ Q) (1) I-< 01) ~ 01) ;::l o:l 01) .~ (1) .a ;.J ~ - .~ ;::l o ....:l ] ~ c.> ~ i:i o .~ t;l ..... 01) ~ a = lI'l ~ .. ClCi a c=. = = "1 lI'l ~ f'f'l a c=. lI'l ~ .. f'f'l I = = .. f'f'l a c=. = ~ ~ lI'l ;I: ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~! ~ . ~ ~] t/) 0] g. '" t/) t/) I ~~~fj o - a..... ~ ;::l 0 ~ (1)0~~ ';> ] -a (1) ~~U~ ..n (1) > o ..s::::ent/) .-~ - ~ 0 ~ 0 ;;.-..~..c ~,.!::l"O ~ ~ a ] ~ (1) l ~.~ ~i' (1) ~ ;::l. 0.. (1) 0 ~.s ~. I I Cd Cd Cd (1) (1) (1) I 01) 0.. (1)-c2 ;> ~ . ~~~~2~cl3.g~ ~ ~ ~ o...s ~ ~'- ~ g ] ] ~ ~.g ~ ~ ..g ~ (1) ~ >. "0 E ~ (1) ..... u.S (1).i=: c..... o..s:::: rr.J. N 0.. c.> Cd t/) I-< . Cd ~ ~ "O~ ~ E-- . ..c . ~]~~ f'f'lCdI-<_ I ~ ..c t/) ~ ~ g ~ ~rr.J.801) a c=. lI'l ;I: ~ I = ~ ~ ~ a c=. = ~ ~ ~ I = '? ~ ~ c.> ..... t:J I-< c.> ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~'.o 0 Cd .;S ~ '0 g.S ~t/)> d t/) (1) o<~ - Cd c.> ..... >. ~- c.>~ ~ Cd ~rr.J. .S t/) ..8 g. ~~ t/) (1) "0 (1) ~.s ~ .?f ..8 ~ "0 01) ~ (1) Cd t+=l .~ c..-. ~ 'g .e Os I-< ;::l ~Ot/) ~ ~~ "0 .?f a . ~ ~ p. (1) e'g. ....:l _ cD ~ >. I-< (1) (1) I~>~ .s ~ Cd_ ._ I-< ~ "'..s:::: ~ c.> Cd (1) ~.~sgtd)~. .> :::> 01) ;::l ;> 0 S PZ :;:l.o 'fil..s:::: oS ~ "0 Cd c2 0.. _ . '-J "0 ~ 01) t:J Cd ;::l 0.. ..n 0.. ~ '"3 "d .S ~ rr.J. _ 0 (1) 0 ~ 0 ~ ;:0 0 Cd ~ 00 t!:l 8.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ..c~t/) .... 0 I-< ()-~ ~.S .~ (1) ..g ~ ~::E ~ <0:::> t/) s .~ ~ p.. >'.E o:l~- c<:l~2 o:l (1) (1) ~ (1) t/) ~~o (1) .!= ~ ~ - ~ ~ 0..9 o:lU .~ (1) i>- ~o:: rr.J. <Ii' (1) a .!= - ~o.. t/) fj e (1) E-- ;g ~..8 ..... (1) ~~ ~8 ~rr.J. .0 ~ rr.J. (1) .!= ~ "0 a ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ I-< ~~ s ~ .~ 0.. ..s:::: ~~ ....:lo:l a = = '? ~ ~ I = '? = ~ "0 (1) - sc<:l'"5 0~t:J 8 t: ~ (1) ~ 0 -B(1).g ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 8 """ 0.. c.> i~ o~ U"O Cd (1) o~ 8~ a = = = .. = ~ I = = .. Cl'I "0 ~ ;::l o >. _::::l ~~..o .~ (1) dins Zrr.J.....:l I t/) s 01) ;::l I-< "0 ~~ ~ ~ Cd 6 ~ ~ ..s:::: (1) ~] >. ~ Q) (1) 1;:! ..c I-< M r--..8~ .S ~ o o ;.; ...... (1) a 0.. c.> 8 ~= ~~ >- .~ ..... - ~ :-;:::l .1; g. rr.J. 1 a Q) ] ~ 01) ><: 01) o Cd ~- ~ct:: Cd Cd I-< I-< o c.> ~ ~ ~ ('\ ~ < ;;>.>: ~.; ,(1) ~ ~ := c\SE-t rfJ S 0.. o o '<:t I o M M I Q) I-< <) s::~ o to] .S e\j S ~ s:: I-< I-; 0 e\j C\3..... ~p..d s:: ~ ] ..8 rIl 0.. I-< "t:j rIl ;:j .g<li~~"::::: ~ rIl ....t:l <) ~B-<p..P:: 4-< o ~ 'g <Ii -CdQ) Cd ~.t:::l <) ~ I-< :E 0 e 1::..... Q) 8~-B Q) 0.. 0 .2: ~ S o <) Cd e =- = ~ f? = ~ M ~ ~ >. ~~ ~rn - I-< f~ u:::> ~ o:l ~ ~ rIl >. ..... g.~ Om 5b,::: C'l Q) . S o:l =ld :p Q) rnrn o ~ rn rIl ;:j o:l rIl "t:j ..... ..... :.;;;! ::::l~ rIl S! r-- ..s::= Q) t:= I c.J........ rIllr)e\j~ 04-<Q)e\j ~ 0 Q) l=1 .:::l rIl ;> t:: ~ g.~t.8 ~ 0 "t:j~ I-< ,.,., I-< Q) ""'"' 00 0.. - S~ . s:: ... 0 Q) "t:j 00] "t:j ~Cd"3 5 .~ .8 ~ ~ ~ s:: ..... ~ 0..... ..... rIl ..... ~ ~ I-< .Q o u e =- = ~ .. M I = <? ..... ~ <) Q)!:S ~o o _y a p..'"Qo s:: rIl bo~13 ~u~ i .f ::c:J5 ~ I t] 0<)1-< ."'2 d 0 :::l ~ oS % g~~ rn ....:lrnrn ~ .D ~ Jj j -< ~ ~ rn d ~ o ~-tl rIl~ cB <) ~ d) ~ S::.Q 8....5 ";l O.D Cd Q) e rIl I-< o...t:: o~~I-<"t:j 00 ;:J <) Q) e\j ~ .~ "Ei g. 0.. p.. 0...0 0... S ~ =S ~ ta I-< rIl 00.= ..... e\j ~ <) d e+::I d) ~.:::l <) .. ~ S d) Q) 0.. ..... Q) ~ 0 o:l~.Dti e =- = = ..... I In '<t' .. ..... ..... t ~ ....:l ~ ~ d) 00 d ~ 01-<00 Q) Q) 00 ~ta~.8 ~~ ~ 2 0 ~ ;:j e\j.......~ ~;:jC'l,.s:::; ~O........... rIl ~ ~ cr' ....r,.8] o rIl <) 8,'02 .S ~ ~ ..... 5h <) Q) Q) rIl o;Ej~ I-< ..9 o <) rIl rIl o I-< . u~ "t:j 0 ~.8 ~ ~ .D e o o ..El d o:l C'l r-- ...... r-- I M \0 '<:t I-< Q) "t:j I-< o ..s::= g ...... :€ ~ 00 ~ ~ 00 ~ o:l ~ u e ~ = = .. =" e =- In '? M ..... I In '? ..... ..... ] rIl ~ ~ p.. s:: <) ~~ ~ o:l S ~ 1 ....:l ~ s:: S 0 o ~ ] o:~ taQ)o o:l ~ 5b ....f"t:jE ~~o.. e =- = = .. ..... ..... I = = = ..... ~ ~ Q) o'd ~ ~] ...... ...... 0\ o'd "t:j < ti .!::l ~ I ~ ~~ ] ~ .D.B~ Q) 00 ~ :>.s ~ ..... rIl rIl ..... ;:j t:! g ~~ ~.~ @< ~ o o o:l o ~ rn e ~ = = .. = ..... I = = .. =" s ~ s .Wo 'ta..9 ~OO\ rn~z ~~~ ~ I ~!3 ~E5 rn <Ii' I-< 0 ~ ,s"t:jE e\j e ~ ~ 0 I-< ~~.g d ~ "t:j B B ~ .S .S rIl].g Q) rIl 0.. .;;: rIl ] g' ;:s~ I-< rIl rIl rIl .g 00...cl'O o..~ .;;: ~'i s g ~ ..... ..El 0 I-< ..... 0..... ooooti >> .;::: .~ ..... ~ ~ ..... I-< .Q o u City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 1F TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administratorf/L FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Prairie Waterway Phase II Project Closeout DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION The Southeast Area Storm Sewer - Prairie Waterway Phase II project is ready to be closed out. DISCUSSION The Southeast Area Storm Sewer - Prairie Waterway Phase II project was constructed and substantially completed in the fall of 1996. In the spring of 1997, as staff was preparing the final payment voucher for the project, staff determined that based on the final quantity measurements for the project, the contractor for the project had been previously overpaid for excavation work. Negotiations with the contractor regarding this issue have been completed. Attached is the final pay voucher for the project. Included is the change order showing a deduct in earthwork quantities and a credit to the City in the amount of $60,526.72. The City had been retaining $20,526.72 and therefore, the net reimbursement, as shown on the first page of the final pay voucher, is $40,000. The City has received a check from the Contractor in that amount. BUDGET IMPACT The Southeast Area Storm Sewer Fund showed a deficit balance as of December 31, 1998, of $82,401. After application of the project retainage and the Contractor's payment, a deficit of $21,874 remains. A transfer from the Storm Water Trunk fund to the project fund in this amount would eliminate the project deficit. As the Prairie Waterway is a Trunk Storm Water facility, use of these funds to eliminate the project deficit balance is appropriate. Elimination of this deficit fund balance also fulfills one of the management suggestions made by the City's auditors in their 1998 Management Letter. ACTION REOUESTED 1. Acknowledge closeout of the Southeast Area Storm Sewer - Prairie Waterway Phase II project. 2. Authorize a fund transfer in the amount of$21,874 from the Storm Water Trunk Fund to eliminate the project deficit. Respectfully submitted, (j{:)n~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file V' Date: ntract Number: Contractors Name: Contractors Address: PAYMENT VOUCHER 4/9/99 93-14b Voucher Number: FINAL SE Area Storm Sewer - Prairie Waterway Description: Enebak Construction P.O. Box 458 Northfield, MN 55057 Amount of Contract $ 450,629.24 Increases to Contract -$ (60,526.72) Total of Contract "$ 390,102.52 Percent of Contract Completed 90.0% Total Value of Work Completed $ 350,007.59 Retained Percentage 0% $ Total Previous Payments $ 390,007.59 Net Payment this Voucher $ (40,000.00) I hereby recommend payment of the above net amount Name Invoice VoucbJu: P.O. No.: Rec'd By: Price OK: Acct. No.: Posted By: Paid By: Date: Chk. No.: Title Director of Public Works/City Engineer Date 4/9/99 Starting Date Total Time Allowed* Time Used to Date ** Percent of Time Used 7/22/96 11/1/96 102.00 100.0% *If not in work days, project to completion date. day of ,1999. Approved for payment by the City Council this Distribution: Clerk/Administrator Contractor Auth. Officer Contract File This final payment voucher approved by: q::~~/ 4/2199 Lee M. Mann, P .E. Enebak Construction Administrator, City of Farmington Mayor, City of Farmington By: LMM 0....:_ DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT: PROJECT NO.: CONTRACTOR: CHANGE ORDER NO. DESCRIPTION OF WORK CHANGE ORDER 4/9/99 Farmington, MN SE Area Storm Sewer - Prairie Waterway Phase II 93-14b Enebak Construction P.O. Box 458, Northlleld, MN 55057 This change order provides for the following (1) The elimination of 71250 Cf of pond excavation and 8600 Cf of topsoil salvage. Change Order Item Deduct (1) Pond excavation Salvage topsoil None Total Deduct Add (1) Total Add SummalY 1lnIt Quantl4' SlUo.Il Imal 71,250 $ 0.758 $ 54,007.87 8,600 $ 0.758 $ 6,518.85 $ 60,526.72 Quantl4' SlUo.Il Imal $ $ CY CY 1lnIt Deduct $ 60,526.72 Add $ Original Contract $ 450,629.24 Previous Change Order $ Revised Contract Amount $ 390,102.52 This Change Order Approved by: Lee M. Mann, P.E., City Engineer y(~ _c-bu'- Mayor, City of Fannlngton City Administrator, City of Fannlngton N i II;l ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~;< ~oi ~z:z: ~~B E~~ {/l8B ~ ~ ~ s -< Ail ! I B "a ~ ~HHHHHHH~ :: ~H~ ~ ~ ~ ....i ~~~~~~c:ic:i~c:io~~o ~~ ~~~~~~. ,&:l. .~l!!l. No.. "'on ~~~~;~ on g:~ !II"': ~~ .... :.t "I.. ~~ -~;Z2:::1::l - -- ~o N ""~ ~~ ~fIjI)M""M"""'M""""M""MM ..... N I I . , . . I . . . I I . . '" !II ~i i "" MMMMMM""M"'M""MMM .. 888888 8 88 ~ ~~~..2~~ I '~I 'N~ I Q ~;Z ~ ~i I . I , . . I , . I , . I I ~~~~~l~;!j;';~S:~~~ ~&:: ~~~~2l ~~~~~~~~ '" . q~ -"':zO;s.COf\'O.....-Mr---OI- !~ ~~ '" NN- N ""VIM"""" "'M""""""""""" ..... ~~~liil~~I;j;!j~~~~~:f.l ii ~--s~~l!l::.:q5:;;~~- . . .... "l. . - --... - M"'MM"M"MMMMMMM -~~~~"'~~~N"N~~ ~~ ~t & i :1~~BB~~~~~:i:i~~ << 8'... I i1 .......", t Ii ~ 11 88alll ..."': ~~ ~il~~~111 ~~ !fliM~hUI I! jBtfil~~~~~~z~ J~ !;! ~~~N~~N~"~ ~ = = ~ ~ ~ ~ i u I Ii50t o S ~ I i 1!.1 ~ ~ ~ .' .... . '. :ENEBAK CONSTRUCTION" COMPANY P.O.' BOX 458 ". '. . "\. .' . NORTHF.U;LD. MN 55057 ',i .' .... .' '.' , .' . 544833 " TheSl...LmO-f"$40 ,.OOOan d OOc:-t..'5SHECKNo. " ". ,.' ': ,': ,j',~,' "':', ',' '; ,. :'<:; , ' : ":, ',':,,' . . . '. '.:,: AN EQUAL oppoRTuNITY ,,' . . EMPLOYER 7&-53 '919 , ',". 544833 ....,.. .............. " : '" ." . . ' .., ", . .':. ','. .:, '. ~,;',' .. . ..',': ..",,':: :::'...........'.. ." ::c,'..:.: .:" ..:,,". NORWEST BANK NQRTHFIEI.D P.o. 80)(,139 . ,..' . NO . ElD, MN 5505-7 CHECK DATE' I AMOUNT 06109/1999 $ 40,000..00*' PAY TOTHE ORDER OF: CITY'. OF.,FARtt:rNGTON 325 ,OAK' .STR~ET FARMINGTON,MN55024 11-51.1.83311- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 3 TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrat0l1~ SUBJECT: Approve Joint Powers Agreement - Fit Testing Equipment Contribution DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION At the December 7, 1998 Council meeting, Council approved a Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Apple Valley to allow the Farmington Fire Department to jointly utilize Apple Valley's fit testing respirator equipment. This use of this equipment is mandated under Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements to "fit test" firefighters with the same make, model, style and size of respirator that will be used during fire department operations. The joint utilization of this equipment is highly desirable, as it will significantly reduce the City's costs associated with the singular purchase of this testing equipment to meet federal safety requirements. DISCUSSION Discussions with the Apple Valley City Administrator since that time has resulted in the need to amend the existing joint powers agreement currently in place between Apple Valley, Eagan and Rosemount. In addition, Farmington, as a new participant in the existing joint powers agreement, will need to financially contribute for its use of the fit testing equipment as an equal municipal member. The City Attorney's Office has drafted the attached Amendment to Agreement to Acquire TSI Portacount which has been tentatively approved by the Apple Valley City Attorney. Fire Chief Kuchera and this office has also reviewed the agreement. BUDGET IMPACT The City's financial contribution of $2,215.04 is equal to the other cities in the agreement and will be used to underwrite the original purchase of the TSI Portacount and for the establishment of a fund to maintain the equipment. Funding for the Fire Department's contribution to the TSI Portacount was not included in the 1999 Budget as the OSHA requirements were either not known or recognized by the Fire Department during the 1999 Budget process. Funding is available for the City's contribution due to off-setting expenditure reductions in other areas of the Fire Department budget and will be formally submitted to Council as a 1999 Budget Reappropriation in November of this year. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the attached Amendment to Agreement to Acquire a TSI Portacount to fulfill OSHA requirements associated with fit testing of respirators. Respectfully Submitted, j!!:;~b Cc: Andrea Poehler, Assistant City Attorney, Campbell Knutson P.A. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT TO ACQUIRE A TSI PORTACOUNT THIS AGREEMENT is made this day of , 1999, by and between the CITY OF APPLE VALLEY ("Apple Valley"), the CITY OF EAGAN ("Eagan"), the CITY OF FARMINGTON ("Farmington") and the CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ("Rosemount") (collectively referred to as the "Cities"). 1. The cities of Apple V alley, Eagan, and Rosemount previously entered into an Agreement to Acquire a TSI Portacount ("Agreement") dated July 7, 1999, which provided for the sharing of costs and use of the TSI Portacount. 2. Except as specifically amended by this Amendment, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 3. The Agreement is amended to include the City of Farmington as a party to the Agreement and the term "Cities" as referred to in the Agreement is amended to include the cities of Apple V alley, Eagan, Farmington, and Rosemount. 4. Paragraph 4 of the Agreement is amended to provide: FINANCIAL RESPONSffiILITY. Apple Valley, Eagan, Farmington, and Rosemount have all made equal contributions in the amount of Two Thousand Two Hundred Fifteen and Four/100th Dollars ($2,215.04) for the purchase of the TSI Portacount and for the establishment of a fund for maintenance and any necessary replacements of the TSI Portacount. Unless otherwise agreed by the Cities or unless Apple Valley withdraws from this Agreement, Apple Valley will maintain the TSI Portacount and invoice all Cities in equal shares for the cost thereof. The Cities shall promptly remit the amount due to Apple Valley. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have subscribed their names as of the day and year frrst above written. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY CITY OF EAGAN BY: BY: Thomas A. Egan, Mayor Gary L. Humphrey, Mayor AND Mary E. Mueller, City Clerk AND Gene VanOverbeke, City Clerk CITY OF FARMINGTON CITY OF ROSEMOUNT BY: BY: Gerald Ristow, Mayor Cathy Busho, Mayor AND AND Susan Walsh, City Clerk John F. Erar, City Administrator 73068 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 74 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administratorfi.- FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Services Manager SUBJECT: Minnesota Historical Society Grant Agreement DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION The Heritage Preservation Commission has applied for and been approved to receive a Grant in the amount of $5000. DISCUSSION Farmington is a Certified Local Government which qualifies the City for federal dollars relating to costs associated with Historic Preservation Projects. The project is to complete local designation forms for five buildings - Farmington State Bank Building, Masonic Temple, Fletcher Block building, Lyric Theater Building and the Hamilton Clay House. Designation documents must conform to the Secretary of the Interior standards and Minnesota State Historic Preservation guidelines for Architecture/History projects. BUDGET IMPACT This is a matching federal grant with the City's match authorized in the 1999 budget. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the Grant Agreement and authorize the Mayor, City Administrator and HPC Chairperson to sign the agreement. Respectfully submitted, ~@:~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Services Manager Attachment A : City of Farmington Federal Grant No: 27-99-14256.006 PROJECT DESCRIPTION City (CLG): City of Farmington Federal Grant No: 27-99-14256.006 Grant Time Period: October 1, 1999 to July 31, 2000 Work Summary: The purpose of this project is to complete local designation forms for five buildings- Farmington State Bank Building, Masonic Temple, Fletcher Block, Lyric Theater Building, and the Hamilton Clay House. Designation documents will conform to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Registration as outlined in the Federal Register Volume 48 pages 44726-44728 and the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office's Guidelines for Architecture/History Projects. The project will be accomplished under the supervision of personnel meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards. Consultations and Pr02ress ReDorts: 1. The CITY will inform the SOCIETY'S Grants Office of the name and qualifications of the historian, architectural historian, or historical architect with whom it has contracted within fifteen (15) days of the contract's execution. The CITY will at the same time provide a copy of the contract and a complete report on the procurement process demonstrating compliance with Federal competitive procurement requirements. (See II. ASSURANCES, item B, CLG Agreement, and Part VI of 1999 CLG Grants Manual.) 2. The CITY will submit a brief Monthly Progress Report (See 1999 CLG Grants Manual - Attachment F.) to the SOCIETY'S Grants Office by the 15th of each month for the duration of the project period. Product submittals will accompany the monthly reports as specified below. 3. By January, 2000, the CITY will submit the local designation form to be used to the SOCIETY'S Grants Office for SHPO staff review. 4. By May, 2000, the CITY will submit a draft of the five designation forms to the SOCIETY'S Grants Office for SHPO staff review. 5. The SOCIETY may request other written progress reports and on-site reviews of project progress, as necessary. Final Products: The Final Products to be submitted with the Request for Reimbursement (see Part III of the CLG Agreement) and the Project Director's Report will be three hard copies and one computer disk copy of the local designation forms. Project Director's ReDort: The report will include a brief description of the administration of the project. Two copies of this report will be submitted to the SOCIETY'S Grants Office with the Final Products and Attachment A : City of Farmington Federal Grant No: 27-99-14256.006 the Request for Reimbursement Form (see Part III of the Grant Agreement). Proiect Bude:et: GRANT RECIPIENT MATCH Cash In-Kind Other TOTAL BUDGET ITEMS Preservation Planner (175 hrs.@ 5000 2000 7000 $40/hr.) Staff Technical Support (80 2000 2000 hours @ $25/hr.) TOTALS $5,000 $2,000 $3,500 $10,500 Reimbursement Schedule: The CITY will be reimbursed, in total amount not to exceed $5,000, for the actual amounts expended under the federal (HPF) portion of the budget. The CITY must submit a Request for Reimbursement Form along with appropriate fiscal documentation, Final Products, and Project Director's Report to the SOCIETY'S Grants Office no later than August 15,2000. All project work must be completed no later than July 31, 2000. II MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY June 3, 1999 Ms. Karen Finstuen City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Famington, MN 55024 RE: F.Y. 1999 Certified Local Government Award Federal Grant Number: 27-99-14256.006 Dear Ms. Finstuen: Britta Bloomberg recently informed you that your Certified Local Government grant in the amount of $5,000 for the completion of local registration forms was recently approved. Enclosed are three blue-bound and one unbound copy of your Certified Local Government Agreement. The Agreement outlines the federal requirements necessary for the implementation of the grant. Carefully review Attachment A which outlines your project in detail. Your Agreement also includes the U.S. Department oflnterior Civil Rights Assurance (page seven) and Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion (pages eight and nine). If the Agreement is acceptable, please have the three blue bound copies signed on pages six, seven, and eight. These copies should be returned to Mandy Skypala in the Grants Office. The remaining unbound copy is an extra copy for your files until a fully executed copy is returned to you. Please note the requirements for contracting (see Item B. 2.a. on page two) which allows for at least two weeks for potential bidders to respond, and Public Law 101-517 (see Item B. 3. on page two) which outlines specific information regarding public notice of federal funding. Please also note the wording for the HPF support statement and the HPF nondiscrimination policy. Lastly, please note that a brief monthly report is due in the Grants Office by the 15th of each month for the duration of the project period (see Attachment A and 1999 CLG Grants Manual Appendix F). This brief form should take no longer than a few minutes to complete each month. It greatly facilitates the tracking of the progress of the projects. Should you have any questions or concerns about the award or the agreement, please do not hesitate to call me at (651) 296-5478. Thank you. s~CereIY' <-- ~~ala Administrative/Grants Associate enclosures cc: Mr. George Flynn, HPC Chair :l15 KELLOGG BOULEVARD WEST / SAI'\T PAUL. MINNESOTA S:;102-190() / TELEPHONE: 651-296-6126 II MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY June 14, 1999 Ms. Karen Finstuen City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Famington, MN 55024 RE: F.Y. 1999 Certified Local Government Award Federal Grant Number: 27-99-14256.006 Dear Ms. Finstuen: Enclosed are the replacement Attachment A pages for your set of Certified Local Government grant agreements. I apologize for the error. Please replace these revised pages in your set of agreements. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call me at (651) 296- 5478. Thank you. SrA'r- Mandy Skypala Administrative/Grants Associate enclosures 345 KELLOGG BOULEVARD WEST / SAI~T PAUL, !\1E\l\ESOTA 55102-1906/ TELEPHO:\E: 651-296-6126 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ~' TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrator~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Consultant Contract - RLK Kuusisto Ltd. - Comprehensive Plan Update DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION With the completion of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update, the City has also completed its contract for services with RLK Kuusisto for the portion of the project in which they were involved. In addition to the original scope of services included in the original with RLK, additional services, at the request of the City, were provided by RLK during the process. The following is a summary of the additional services and the cost associated with these services. DISCUSSION The original contract for services with RLK called for a total fee of $19,800. After the approval of this contract, there were additional services requested from RLK. These included their participation in the neighborhood meetings, participation in discussions and meetings on the Orderly Annexation Agreement with Empire Township, and time spent re-calculating existing land use inventory numbers. The original proposal with RLK did not envision these types of activities as the scope of services was dependent on changing City needs and circumstances. The City and RLK has agreed to an additional fee amount of $2,000 for these additional services. While RLK's normal hourly billing rates would have resulted in fees in excess of this amount, RLK has agreed to the additional fee amount of $2,000. This would increase the total contract amount to $21,800. BUDGET IMP ACT The City recently received notice that it will be receiving approximately $4,950 in 1993 Small Cities Block Grant Program Income. It is recommended that the additional contract amount be funded from these proceeds. ACTION REOUESTED Approval of an amendment to the original contract with RLK Kuusisto to increase the total final contract amount to $21,800 subject to a written acceptance and waiver of this contract amendment from RLK. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ L-/~~.~~ David L. Olson Community Development Director cc: Steve Schwanke, RLK Kuusisto Ltd. 06/17/99 12:01 FAX 6129331153 RLK-KUUSISTO 1aI002 "" ~ Engineering. Planning. Surveying. Landscape Architecture LKUUSISTO LTDJ ~ June 17, 1999 Mr. Dave Olson Community Development Director City of Farmington 325 Oak: Street Farmington, MN 55024-1374 Dear Dave: Thank you for your letter of June 16, 1999 regarding settlement ofRLK-Kuusisto~s contract with the City of Farmington. W'e have reviewed your proposal and agree to the terms of your letter. On behalf of our fIrm, please accept my apology for the problems that came up during the planning process_ We are reviewing the project internally to assure this type of situation does not reoccur. Agai~ thank you for working with me to reach a resolution to this matter. I hope we will be able to work together again at some point in the future. Sincerely, RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. J~~~3~a~ ~~ Steven B. Schwanke President Offices: Hibbing . Minneronka . St. Paul . Twin Ports (612) 933-0972 . 6110 Blue Circle Drive - Suite 100 . Minnetonk.~. MN 55343 . FAX (612) 933-1153 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ?, J TO: Mayor, City Councilmembers, City AdministratorfJl-- Karen Finstuen, Administrative Services Manager FROM: SUBJECT: Audio Visual Consultant Proposal DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION Proposals have been received from AudioNisual Consultants. DISCUSSION On April 19, 1999, the City Council authorized staff to seek a consultant to design an audio visual system for the broadcasting of City Council meetings from the City Council Chambers. A Request for Proposal (RFP) was prepared and sent to six bidders. Two proposals were submitted in response to the RFP. lP.L. & Associates $10,000 $12,000 Erickson, Ellison & Associates, Inc. Both proposals indicated the project could be completed by November or December of this year. Given the variables on the project which include site work that needs to be done such as building walls and adding electricity, availability and delivery time for equipment ordered, and availability of installers, the project schedule will most likely be extended to November or early December, 1999. BUDGET IMPACT The costs associated with the consultant phase of this project are eligible expenditures of the $60,000 grant received as a result of the Cable Franchise Agreement. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the appointment of the lowest bidder, J.P.L. & Associates as Audio Visual Consultant for the design of an audio visual system as required for cable broadcasting. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Services Manager City of Farmington Cable TV Communications Center Project Proposal By: JefILueders JPL & Associates 16708 Hutchinson Drive Lakeville, MN 55044 (612) 431-9095 May 25,1999 The information in this report is confidential and is the sole property of the City of Farmington. Distribution of this report by any means without the express written permission of the City of Farmington is strictly prohibited. CITY OF FARMINGTON PROPOSAL 1. Company Background Information . JPL & Associates . 16708 Hutchinson Drive, Lakeville, MN 55044 (612) 431-9095 . In business since 1995. . My name is Jeff Lueders and I am the sole proprietor of JPL & Associates. I have been working and volunteering in broadcast and cable television since 1979. 2. Personnel and Project Staffing . I will be fully responsible for this project. I have worked in the field of Broadcast & Cable Television since 1979. From 1985 to 1997 I worked for the Rochester Public Schools as the District Television Coordinator. During that time I planned and coordinated the purchase and installation of a wide variety of telecommunications installations which included a five camera School Board room as well as assisting in the planning, purchasing, and coordination of installation of five secondary TV studios and transmission centers, the wiring of 18 elementary buildings for cable TV and data, and two-way interactive classrooms at each high school. While in Rochester I also was involved, as chair of the Mayor's Cable TV Advisory Committee, in the planning of the A/V - TV -Presentation system installation for the Olmsted County/City of Rochester Community Room. I started this consulting business in 1995 and was hired by the Minnetonka Public Schools to assist in the planning, bid specification preparation, and equipment installation coordination for a new School Board/Community Room in a newly constructed School District Central Office Building. I was hired in July of 1998 and I am in the final stages of a project as a consultant for ISD #194 Lakeville Public Schools on a new school board room A/V-TV-Presentation system. Jeff is the Cable Coordinator for the City ofLakeville. He and his wife of 9 years and their two children are residents ofLakeville. . I utilize the talents of an experienced CAD (Computer Assisted Drafting) person to enter the plans into the computer and because he is an experienced installer he also reviews the plans that the client and I create to make sure that they are technically sound and will accomplish the goals set forth by the client. 3. Experience Minnetonka Proiect a) Minnetonka Public Schools School Board/Community Room b) 1995 c) Planning, CAD, Bid Specifications, Award Bid, Coordinate Installation of NV-TV-Presentation System in Newly constructed administration building. d) Approximately $ 230,00 (The chose a two-phase approach $ 160,000 in 1995 and $ 70,000 in 1996) e) Contact: Tom Berge, Business Manager & Amy Parnell, Communications Coordinator Phone (612) 906-2506 Lakeville Public Schools Proiect a) Lakeville Public Schools School Board Room b) 1998-presently preparing CAD and Bid Specifications c) Planning, CAD, Bid Specifications, Award Bid, Coordinate Installation of NV-TV-Presentation System in Newly constructed administration building. d) Approximately $ 230,000 (The chose a two-phase approach $ 160,000 in 1995 and $ 70,000 in 1996) e) Contact: Linda Swanson, Communications Coordinator Phone: (612) 469-7125 Rochester Public Schools As the District TV Coordinator for 12 years with the Rochester Public Schools I designed, planned, created the bid specifications, awarded bids, and coordinated the installation of projects which ranged in size from two- camera TV studios and transmission areas at the four Middle Schools, a five-camera School Board room, two-way interactive classrooms at two Senior High Schools, to equipping an entire newly constructed Senior High School. Contact: Art Pavlish (507) 285-8727 4. Fees . Consulting fee is $ 75.00 per hour. . CAD and Bid Specification Fee is $ 75.00 per hour. . Copy of Blue Prints of the Farmington City Hall is $ 20.00. . Equipment costs will depend on the clients desired outcome and can range on projects of your size from $ 40,000 to $ 250,000 based on the decisions the client makes on what level of service you wish to provide. The consultant will develop a number of different plans and educate the client on those plans so that the client can make an educated decision and one that fits within their budget and provides a level of service that will satisfy the community. . An estimate of the amount not to exceed for consulting services, CAD, and Bid Specification for the system is $ 10,000. 5. Approach a) Brainstorming and Initial Plan Development Formalize Plan Development Plan Decision CAD and Bid Specification preparation Send out and Accept Bids Installation First "LIVE" Broadcast First "Tape-Delayed" Broadcast b) My approach is simple: I will listen to your needs. Develop a number of plans that meet those needs. Educate all involved on the differences in the plans. Listen to your concerns. Answer your questions. Work with you to select the system that is within your budget guidelines that meets your needs now and for as long as possible. 6. Schedule The approach that I have laid out for you in section 5 a) and 5 b) can be completed in as quickly as 4 months or it can take over a year. I believe, after touring your facility with Karen on May 26, that we could complete this project in 4 to 7 months. The variables on the project include: decision making ability of client on appropriate plan, site work that needs to be accomplished such as building of walls and adding electricity, availability of equipment, and availability of installers. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 150- TO: Mayor and Councilmembers City Administrat01~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Amendments for TIF Districts No(s). 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION This public hearing is to consider amending Tax Increment Districts (TIF) Districts No.(s) 4,5,6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 to add up to one additional year of captured tax increment in each of these existing TIF districts. DISCUSSION The proposed amendments to the above listed TIF Districts would add one additional year to the maximum number of years for which tax increment can be captured by the City. The change will allow for nine (9) years of captured increment rather than the presently approved eight (8) years. This recommended change will allow either the HRA or the developer, depending on the terms of the Development Contract, to receive reimbursement in an amount closer to the original amount estimated in the TIF Plan Budget for each district. The financial justification for these proposed amendments was presented to the HRA Board in March and a copy is attached. The actual amounts of captured tax increment have been reduced as a result of reduction of property tax class rates for commercial and industrial properties approved by the State Legislature in the last three legislative sessions. The HRA Board conducted a public hearing on these proposed amendments on May 10, 1999 and adopted the attached resolution requesting that the City Council also act to approve the proposed amendments. BUDGET IMPACT The budget impact of these proposed changes is addressed in the financial analysis included with the February 8, 1999 memo to the HRA Board. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution approving the proposed amendments to nF Districts No.(s) 4,5,6,7,8, 9,10,11. Respectfully submitted, ~'~ .--, /' /" //:.. / ,/ ,.I' /" , '" "'-:::--:7,,, ~'" / ",/ / ./ ' / /" / ~-c././ / /"' "'"'TV L- _ ' David L. Olson Community Development Director cc: John Kirby, Dorsey Whitney RESOLUTION NO. R -99 APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS NO.4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 910 AND 11 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of F armington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 21 sl day of June, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the Farmington Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") and the City of Farmington (the "City") propose to amend the tax increment financing plans (the "Plans") heretofore approved for the above tax increment financing districts (the "Districts"), pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, subdivision 4(a), to extend the duration of the Districts to the maximum permitted by law at the time the Districts were originally created and approved; and, WHEREAS, drafts of the proposed amendments (the "Amendments") have been prepared and approved by the Authority and furnished to the City for review; and, WHEREAS, the Authority has submitted copies of the proposed Amendments to the County Board of Commissioners and the school board of the local school district not less than 30 days prior to the date hereof; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City (the "Council"), on the date hereof, held a public hearing regarding approval of the Amendments, for which hearing notice was published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City not less than 10 or more than 30 days prior to the date hereof, including a map of the Project Area and the Districts; and, WHEREAS, the City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the consideration of the Amendments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA, as follows: 1. On the basis of the information presented to the Council by the Authority, information included in the Amendments, information provided at the public hearing and at other Council meetings, the Council hereby finds and determines that it is necessary to amend the Plans to extend the duration of the respective Districts to the maximum permitted by law for the reasons set forth in the respective Amendments, said reasons being (i) to correct the mistake of law made -1- by the original drafter of the Plans and (ii) to mitigate the cash flow shortfalls in the respective Districts resulting from reductions in tax capacity value of improvements from the amounts originally estimated in the Plans and from legislative changes in the tax rates affecting commercial and industrial property. 2. The Amendments are hereby approved and adopted by the City in substantially the form on file with the City on this date. 3. Except as amended by the Amendments, the Plans, and resolutions adopting and approving the Plans, and the findings originally contained therein, are confirmed. 4. The City Administrator and Community Development Director are authorized and directed to take all action on behalf of the City, subject to such approval of the Council as is required by law, to implement the Plans, as amended by the Amendments. 5. The City Administrator and Community Development Director are also authorized and directed to file a copy of the Amendments with the Commissioner of Revenue. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 2pt day of June, 1999. Mayor Attested to the day of 1999. City Administrator SEAL -2- Draft 5/7/99 THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA 1999 AMENDMENT TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for HRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.4 (Austin Products) Approved and Adopted by HRA: May 10, 1999 Approved and Adopted by City: June 21, 1999 1999 Amendment to Tax Increment Financing Plan for HRA Economic Development District No.4 (Austin Products) I. Background A. Formation of District. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174-469.179 (the "Act"), HRA Economic Development District No.4 (the "TIF District") was duly created and the original Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Original TIF Plan") for the TIF District was duly approved by resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), adopted January 5, 1994, and resolution of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the "City"), adopted January 18, 1994. The original tax capacity ofthe TIF District was certified by the County Auditor on August 16, 1994. B. Development Activities. The development activities described in the Original TIF Plan have been completed and the HRA has incurred costs not less than the amount of project cost estimates included in the Original TIF Plan. II. Amendment A. Duration of TIF District. The Original TIF Plan, in Section M, stated that the TIF District would exist for eight (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier, or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the TIF District would be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs. Pursuant to this 1999 Amendment, Section M would be amended to read as follows: "The tax increment financing district is an economic development district. The district shall exist for nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the district shall be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs." B. Reasons for Change. It was the intention of the HRA and City to provide a maximum duration for the TIF District equal to the maximum duration provided under the Act. F or districts certified prior to May 31, 1993, the maximum duration allowed under the Act was the lesser of (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. Effective for districts certified after May 31, 1993, the maximum duration was changed to the lesser of nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. See Section 469.176, subd. Ib(4) of the Act. The drafter of the Original TIF Plan mistakenly used the pre-May, 1993 maximum durationallimits in the Original TIF Plan, rather than the maximum durationallimits permitted by the Act as of the date of certification of the TIF District. The amendment will correct this mistake. As noted in the following section, correction of the mistake will permit the HRA to receive a distribution of tax increment in 2004 in the estimated amount of$II,249. Because of recent changes in tax class rates, and because the tax capacity value of the improvements constructed in the TIF District was less than originally estimated, estimated increments receivable by the HRA through 2003 (the year of expiration of the TIF District if the duration mistake is not corrected) total approximately $86,299, compared with the original projected amount receivable of$104,640. By correction of the duration mistake, the aggregate increments estimated to be receivable by the HRA increases to approximately $97,548, still less than the original projected amount and still less than the project costs incurred by the HRA in accordance with the Original TIF Plan. Hence, correction of the mistake will mitigate, but will not fully cure, the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the TIF District. C. Increments To Be Received; Impact on Taxing Districts The HRA is presently receiving tax increment payments from the TIF District of approximately $11,249 per year. Adoption of the amendment will permit the HRA to receive an additional payment of approximately $11,249 in the year 2004. If the amendment were not adopted the TIF District would terminate in 2003 and, in 2004, the taxes otherwise receivable as tax increment would be distributed to the taxing districts (approximately 22% to the City, 45% to the school district, 17% to the County and 16% to fiscal disparity). However, as previously noted, adoption of the amendment will not extend the duration of the TIF District beyond the limitation set forth in the Act and is necessary to correctly evidence the original intentions of the HRA and City and mitigate the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the TIF District. D. Other Changes. Other than as set forth above, no other changes are made to the TIF Plan. Draft 5/10/99 THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA 1999 AMENDMENT TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for HRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.5 (Performance Industrial Coatings) Approved and Adopted by HRA: May 10, 1999 Approved and Adopted by City: June 21, 1999 1999 Amendment to Tax Increment Financing Plan for HRA Economic Development District No.5 (Performance Industrial Coatings) I. Background A. Formation of District. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174-469.179 (the "Act"), HRA Economic Development District No.5 (the "TIF District") was duly created and the original Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Original TIF Plan") for the TIF District was duly approved by resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), adopted March 7, 1994, and resolution of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the "City"), adopted March 7, 1994. The original tax capacity of the TIF District was certified by the County Auditor on August 16, 1994. B. Development Activities. The development activities described in the Original TIF Plan have been completed and the HRA and the Developer have incurred costs not less than the amount of project cost estimates included in the Original TIF Plan. II. Amendments. A. Duration of TIF District. The Original TIF Plan, in Section N, stated that the TIF District would exist for eight (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier, or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the TIF District would be dissolved as ofthe date of repayment of such costs. Pursuant to this 1999 Amendment, Section N would be amended to read as follows: "The tax increment financing district is an economic development district. The district shall exist for nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the district shall be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs." B. Reasons for Change in Duration. It was the intention of the HRA and City to provide a maximum duration for the TIF District equal to the maximum duration provided under the Act. For districts certified prior to May 31, 1993, the maximum duration allowed under the Act was the lesser of (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. Effective for districts certified after May 31, 1993, the maximum duration was changed to the lesser of nine (9) years from the date ofthe receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. See Section 469.176, subd. 1 b( 4) of the Act. The drafter of the Original TIF Plan mistakenly used the pre-May, 1993 maximum durationallimits in the Original TIF Plan, rather than the maximum durationallimits permitted by the Act as of the date of certification of the TIF District. The amendment will correct this mistake. As noted in the following section, correction of the mistake will permit the HRA to receive a distribution oftax increment in 2004 in the estimated amount of$25,804. Because of recent changes in tax class rates, and because the tax capacity value of the improvements constructed in the TIF District was less than originally estimated, estimated increments receivable by the HRA through 2003 (the year of expiration ofthe TIF District ifthe duration mistake is not corrected) total approximately $223,170, compared with the original projected amount receivable of$423,936. By correction of the duration mistake, the aggregate increments estimated to be receivable by the HRA increases to approximately $248,974, still less than the original projected amount and still less than the project costs incurred by the HRA and the Developer in accordance with the Original TIF Plan. Hence, correction of the mistake will mitigate, but will not fully cure, the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the TIF District. C. Increments To Be Received; Impact on Taxing Districts The HRA is presently receiving tax increment payments from the TIF District of approximately $25,~03 per year. Adoption of the amendment will permit the HRA to receive an additional payment of$25,803 in the year 2004. If the amendment extending the duration were not adopted, the TIF District would terminate in the year 2003 and, in 2004, the taxes otherwise receivable as tax increment would be distributed to the taxing districts (approximately 22% to the City, 45% to the school district, 17% to the County and 16% to fiscal disparity). However, as previously noted, adoption of the amendment will not extend the duration of the TIF District beyond the limitation set forth in the Act and is necessary to correctly evidence the original intentions of the HRA and City and mitigate the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the TIF District. D. Other Changes. Other than as set forth above, no other changes are made to the TIF Plan. Draft 5/1 0/99 THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA 1999 AMENDMENT TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for HRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.6 (nT Powder Coating Inc.) Approved and Adopted by HRA: May 10, 1999 Approved and Adopted by City: June 21, 1999 1999 Amendment to Tax Increment Financing Plan for HRA Economic Development District No.6 (JIT Powder Coating Inc.) I. Background A. Formation of District. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174-469.179 (the "Act"), HRA Economic Development District No.6 (the "TIF District") was duly created and the original Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Original TIF Plan") for the TIF District was duly approved by resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), adopted July 5, 1994, and resolution of the City Council ofthe City of Farmington, Minnesota (the "City"), adopted July 18, 1994. The original tax capacity of the TIF District was certified by the County Auditor on June 6, 1996. B. Development Activities. The development activities described in the Original TIF Plan have been completed and the HRA and the Developer have incurred costs not less than the amount of project cost estimates included in the Original TIF Plan. II. Amendments. A. Duration ofTIF District. The Original TIF Plan, in Section N, stated that the TIF District would exist for eight (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier, or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the TIF District would be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs. Pursuant to this 1999 Amendment, Section N would be amended to read as follows: "The tax increment financing district is an economic development district. The district shall exist for nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the district shall be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs." B. Reasons for Change in Duration. It was the intention of the HRA and City to provide a maximum duration for the TIF District equal to the maximum duration provided under the Act. For districts certified prior to May 31, 1993, the maximum duration allowed under the Act was the lesser of (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. Effective for districts certified after May 31, 1993, the maximum duration was changed to the lesser of nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. See Section 469.176, subd. Ib(4) of the Act. The drafter of the Original nF Plan mistakenly used the pre-May, 1993 maximum durationallimits in the Original TIF Plan, rather than the maximum durationallimits permitted by the Act as of the date of certification of the nF District. The amendment will correct this mistake. As noted in the following section, correction of the mistake will permit the HRA to receive a distribution of tax increment in 2004 and 2005 in an aggregate amount up to $60,400. Because of recent changes in tax class rates, and because the tax capacity value of the improvements constructed in the TIF District was less than originally estimated, estimated increments receivable by the HRA through 2003 (the year of expiration of the nF District if the duration mistake is not corrected) total approximately $221,986, compared with the original projected amount receivable of$419,696. By correction of the duration mistake, the aggregate increments estimated to be receivable by the HRA increases to an estimated maximum of approximately $282,386, still less than the original projected amount and still less than the project costs incurred by the HRA and the Developer in accordance with the Original nF Plan. Hence, correction of the mistake will mitigate, but will not fully cure, the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the nF District. C. Increments To Be Received; Impact on Taxing Districts The HRA is presently receiving tax increment payments from the TIF District of approximately $30,200 per year. Adoption ofthe amendment will permit the HRA to receive additional payments of approximately $30,200 in each of the years 2004 and 2005. If the amendment were not adopted, the TIF District would terminate in 2003, and, in 2004 and 2005, the taxes otherwise receivable as tax increment would be distributed to the taxing districts (approximately 22% to the City, 45% to the school district, 17% to the County and 16% to fiscal disparity). However, as previously noted, adoption of the amendment will not extend the duration of the TIF District beyond the limitation set forth in the Act and is necessary to correctly evidence the original intentions of the HRA and City and mitigate the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the TIF District. D. Other Changes. Other than as set forth above, no other changes are made to the nF Plan. Draft 5/1 0/99 THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA 1999 AMENDMENT TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for HRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.7 (Minnesota Pipe) Approved and Adopted by HRA: May 10, 1999 Approved and Adopted by City: June 21, 1999 1999 Amendment to Tax Increment Financing Plan for HRA Economic Development District No.7 (Minnesota Pipe) I. Background A. Formation of District. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174-469.179 (the "Act"), HRA Economic Development District No.7 (the "TIF District") was duly created and the original Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Original TIF Plan") for the TIF District was duly approved by resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), adopted July 5, 1994, and resolution of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the "City"), adopted July 18, 1994. The original tax capacity of the TIF District was certified by the County Auditor on June 6, 1996. B. Development Activities. The development activities described in the Original TIF Plan have been completed and the HRA has incurred costs not less than the amount of project cost estimates included in the Original TIF Plan. II. Amendment A. Duration ofTIF District. The Original TIF Plan, in Section N, stated that the TIF District would exist for eight (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier, or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the TIF District would be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs. Pursuant to this 1999 Amendment, Section N would be amended to read as follows: "The tax increment financing district is an economic development district. The district shall exist for nine (9) years from the date ofthe receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the district shall be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs." B. Reasons for Change. It was the intention of the HRA and City to provide a maximum duration for the TIF District equal to the maximum duration provided under the Act. For districts certified prior to May 31, 1993, the maximum duration allowed under the Act was the lesser of (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. Effective for districts certified after May 31, 1993, the maximum duration was changed to the lesser of nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. See Section 469.176, subd. Ib(4) of the Act. The drafter ofthe Original TIF Plan mistakenly used the pre-May, 1993 maximum durationallimits in the Original TIF Plan, rather than the maximum durationallimits permitted by the Act as of the date of certification of the TIF District. The amendment will correct this mistake. As noted in the following section, correction of the mistake will permit the HRA to receive a distribution of tax increment in 2004 and 2005 in a maximum aggregate estimated amount of $27,270. Because of recent changes in tax class rates, and because the tax capacity value of the improvements constructed in the TIF District was less than originally estimated, estimated increments receivable by the HRA through 2003 (the year of expiration of the TIF District if the duration mistake is not corrected) total approximately $100,615, compared with the original projected amount receivable of$189,360. By correction ofthe duration mistake, the aggregate increments estimated to be receivable by the HRA increases to a maximum of approximately $127,885, still less than the original projected amount and still less than the project costs incurred by the HRA in accordance with the Original TIF Plan. Hence, correction of the mistake will mitigate, but will not fully cure, the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the TIF District. C. Increments To Be Received; Impact on Taxing Districts The HRA is presently receiving tax increment payments from the TIF District of approximately $13,635 per year. Adoption of the amendment will permit the HRA to receive an additional payments of approximately $13,635 in the years 2004 and 2005. If the amendment were not adopted the TIF District would terminate in 2003 and, in 2004 and 2005, the taxes otherwise receivable as tax increment would be distributed to the taxing districts (approximately 22% to the City, 45% to the school district, 17% to the County and 16% to fiscal disparity). However, as previously noted, adoption of the amendment will not extend the duration of the TIF District beyond the limitation set forth in the Act and is necessary to correctly evidence the original intentions of the HRA and City. D. Other Changes. Other than as set forth above, no other changes are made to the TIF Plan. Draft 5/10/99 THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA 1999 AMENDMENT TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for HRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.8 (Controlled Air) Approved and Adopted by HRA: May 10, 1999 Approved and Adopted by City: June 21, 1999 1999 Amendment to Tax Increment Financing Plan for HRA Economic Development District No.8 (Controlled Air) I. Background A. Formation of District. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174-469.179 (the "Act"), HRA Economic Development District No.8 (the "TIF District") was duly created and the original Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Original TIF Plan") for the TIF District was duly approved by resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), adopted March 6, 1995, and resolution of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the "City"), adopted March 6, 1995. The original tax capacity of the TIF District was certified by the County Auditor on June 6, 1996. B. Development Activities. The development activities described in the Original TIF Plan have been completed and the HRA and Developer have incurred costs not less than the aggregate amount of project cost estimates included in the Original TIF Plan. II. Amendment A. Duration of TIF District. The Original TIF Plan, in Section N, stated that the TIF District would exist for eight (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier, or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the TIF District would be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs. Pursuant to this 1999 Amendment, Section N would be amended to read as follows: "The tax increment financing district is an economic development district. The district shall exist for nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier or, ifthe public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the district shall be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs." B. Reasons for Change. It was the intention of the HRA and City to provide a maximum duration for the TIF District equal to the maximum duration provided under the Act. For districts certified prior to May 31, 1993, the maximum duration allowed under the Act was the lesser of (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. Effective for districts certified after May 31, 1993, the maximum duration was changed to the lesser of nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. See Section 469.176, subd. Ib(4) of the Act. The drafter of the Original TIF Plan mistakenly used the pre-May, 1993 maximum durationallimits in the Original TIF Plan, rather than the maximum durationallimits permitted by the Act as of the date of certification of the nF District. The amendment will correct this mistake. As noted in the following section, correction of the mistake will permit the HRA to receive a distribution of tax increment in 2005 in the estimated amount of$1O,876. Because of recent changes in tax class rates, and because the tax capacity value of the improvements constructed in the TIF District was less than originally estimated, estimated increments receivable by the HRA through 2004 (the year of expiration of the TIF District if the duration mistake is not corrected) total approximately $90,718, compared with the original projected amount receivable of$153,600. By correction of the duration mistake, the aggregate increments estimated to be receivable by the HRA increases to approximately $101,594, still less than the original projected amount and still less than the project costs incurred by the HRA and the Developer in accordance with the Original TIF Plan. Hence, correction of the mistake will mitigate, but will not fully cure, the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the TIF District. C. Increments To Be Received; Impact on Taxing Districts The HRA is presently receiving tax increment payments from the TIF District of approximately $10,876 per year. Adoption of the amendment will permit the HRA to receive an additional payment of approximately $10,876 in the year 2005. If the amendment were not adopted the TIF District would terminate in 2004 and, in 2005, the taxes otherwise receivable as tax increment would be distributed to the taxing districts (approximately 22% to the City, 45% to the school district, 17% to the County and 16% to fiscal disparity). However, as previously noted, adoption of the amendment will not extend the duration of the TIF District beyond the limitation set forth in the Act and is necessary to correctly evidence the original intentions of the HRA and City. D. Other Changes. Other than as set forth above, no other changes are made to the nF Plan. Draft 5/10/99 THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA 1999 AMENDMENT TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for HRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.9 (Crop Characteristics) Approved and Adopted by HRA: May 10, 1999 Approved and Adopted by City: June 21, 1999 1999 Amendment to Tax Increment Financing Plan for HRA Economic Development District No.9 (Crop Characteristics) I. Background A. Formation of District. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174-469.179 (the "Act"), HRA Economic Development District No.9 (the "TIF District") was duly created and the original Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Original TIF Plan") for the TIF District was duly approved by resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), adopted June 12, 1995, and resolution of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the "City"), adopted July 5, 1995. The original tax capacity of the TIF District was certified by the County Auditor on June 24, 1996. B. Development Activities; Clarification of Project Costs. The development activities described in the Original TIF Plan have been completed and the HRA and the Developer have incurred aggregate costs not less than the amount of project cost estimates included in the Original TIF Plan. II. Amendment A. Duration ofTIF District. The Original TIF Plan, in Section N, stated that the TIF District would exist for eight (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier, or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the TIF District would be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs. Pursuant to this 1999 Amendment, Section N would be amended to read as follows: "The tax increment financing district is an economic development district. The district shall exist for nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier or, ifthe public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the district shall be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs." B. Reasons for Change. It was the intention of the HRA and City to provide a maximum duration for the TIF District equal to the maximum duration provided under the Act. F or districts certified prior to May 31, 1993, the maximum duration allowed under the Act was the lesser of (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. Effective for districts certified after May 31, 1993, the maximum duration was changed to the lesser of nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval ofthe tax increment financing plan. See Section 469.176, subd. 1 b(4) of the Act. The drafter of the Original TIF Plan mistakenly used the pre-May, 1993 maximum durationallimits in the Original TIF Plan, rather than the maximum durationallimits permitted by the Act as of the date of certification of the TIF District. The amendment will correct this mistake. As noted in the following section, correction of the mistake will permit the HRA to receive a distribution of tax increment in 2005 and 2006 in a maximum estimated aggregate amount of $8,232. Because of recent changes in tax class rates, and because the tax capacity value of the improvements constructed in the TIF District was less than originally estimated, estimated increments receivable by the HRA through 2004 (the year of expiration of the TIF District if the duration mistake is not corrected) total approximately $29,193, compared with the original projected amount receivable of $81,472. By correction of the duration mistake, the aggregate increments estimated to be receivable by the HRA increases to a maximum of approximately $37,425, still less than the original projected amount and still less than the project costs incurred by the HRA and the Developer in accordance with the Original TIF Plan. Hence, correction of the mistake will mitigate, but will not fully cure, the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the TIF District. C. Increments To Be Received; Impact on Taxing Districts The HRA is presently receiving tax increment payments from the TIF District of approximately $4,116 per year. Adoption of the amendment will permit the HRA to receive an additional payment of approximately $4,116 in the years 2005 and 2006. If the amendment were not adopted the TIF District would terminate in 2004 and, in 2005 and 2006, the taxes otherwise receivable as tax increment would be distributed to the taxing districts (approximately 22% to the City, 45% to the school district, 17% to the County and 16% to fiscal disparity). However, as previously noted, adoption of the amendment will not extend the duration of the TIF District beyond the limitation set forth in the Act and is necessary to correctly evidence the original intentions of the HRA and City. D. Other Changes. Other than as set forth above, no other changes are made to the TIF Plan. Draft 5/10/99 THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA 1999 AMENDMENT TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for HRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.1 0 (CG Construction) Approved and Adopted by HRA: May 10, 1999 Approved and Adopted by City: June 21, 1999 1999 Amendment to Tax Increment Financing Plan for HRA Economic Development District No. 10 (CG Construction) I. Background A. Formation of District. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174-469.179 (the "Act"), HRA Economic Development District No. 10 (the "TIF District") was duly created and the original Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Original TIF Plan") for the TIF District was duly approved by resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), adopted October 9, 1995, and resolution of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the "City"), adopted October 16, 1995. The original tax capacity of the TIF District was certified by the County Auditor on June 24, 1996. B. Development Activities. The development activities described in the Original TIF Plan have been completed and the HRA and Developer have incurred costs not less than the amount of project cost estimates included in the Original TIF Plan. II. Amendment A. Duration of TIF District. The Original TIF Plan, in Section 0, stated that the TIF District would exist for eight (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier, or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the TIF District would be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs. Pursuant to this 1999 Amendment, Section 0 would be amended to read as follows: "The tax increment financing district is an economic development district. The district shall exist for nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the district shall be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs." B. Reasons for Change. It was the intention of the HRA and City to provide a maximum duration for the TIF District equal to the maximum duration provided under the Act. F or districts certified prior to May 31, 1993, the maximum duration allowed under the Act was the lesser of (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. Effective for districts certified after May 31, 1993, the maximum duration was changed to the lesser of nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. See Section 469.176, subd. Ib(4) of the Act. The drafter of the Original TIF Plan mistakenly used the pre-May, 1993 maximum durationallimits in the Original TIF Plan, rather than the maximum durationallimits permitted by the Act as of the date of certification of the TIF District. The amendment will correct this mistake. As noted in the following section, correction of the mistake will permit the HRA to receive a distribution of tax increment in 2006 in the estimated maximum amount of$1O,265. Because of recent changes in tax class rates, and because the tax capacity value of the improvements constructed in the TIF District was less than originally estimated, estimated increments receivable by the HRA through 2005 (the year of expiration of the TIF District if the duration mistake is not corrected) total approximately $82,988, compared with the original projected amount receivable of$142,784. By correction of the duration mistake, the aggregate increments estimated to be receivable by the HRA increases to a maximum of approximately $93,253, still less than the original projected amount and still less than the project costs incurred by the HRA and the Developer in accordance with the Original TIF Plan. Hence, correction of the mistake will mitigate, but will not fully cure, the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the TIF District. C. Increments To Be Received; Impact on Taxing Districts The HRA is presently receiving tax increment payments from the TIF District of approximately $10,265 per year. Adoption of the amendment will permit the HRA to receive an additional payment of approximately $10,265 in the year 2006. If the amendment were not adopted the TIF District would terminate in 2005 and, in 2006, the taxes otherwise receivable as tax increment would be distributed to the taxing districts (approximately 22% to the City, 45% to the school district, 17% to the County and 16% to fiscal disparity). However, as previously noted, adoption of the amendment will not extend the duration of the TIF District beyond the limitation set forth in the Act and is necessary to correctly evidence the original intentions ofthe HRA and City. D. Other Changes. Other than as set forth above, no other changes are made to the TIF Plan. Draft 5/10/99 THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA 1999 AMENDMENT TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for HRA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.11 (Lexington Standard Phase II) Approved and Adopted by HRA: May 10, 1999 Approved and Adopted by City: June 21, 1999 1999 Amendment to Tax Increment Financing Plan for HRA Economic Development District No. 11 (Lexington Standard Phase II) I. Background A. Formation of District. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174-469.179 (the "Act"), HRA Economic Development District No. 11 (the "TIF District") was duly created and the original Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Original TIF Plan") for the TIF District was duly approved by resolution of the Board of Commissioners of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"), adopted August 5, 1996, and resolution of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the "City"), adopted August 5, 1996. The original tax capacity of the TIF District was certified by the County Auditor on August 6, 1996. B. Development Activities. Clarification of Project Costs. The development activities described in the Original TIF Plan have been completed and the HRA and Developer have incurred aggregate costs not less than the amount of project cost estimates included in the Original TIF Plan. II. Amendment A. Duration of TIF District. The Original TIF Plan, in Section P, stated that the TIF District would exist for eight (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier, or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the TIF District would be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs. Pursuant to this 1999 Amendment, Section P would be amended to read as follows: "The tax increment financing district is an economic development district. The district shall exist for nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the district shall be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs." B. Reasons for Change. It was the intention of the HRA and City to provide a maximum duration for the TIF District equal to the maximum duration provided under the Act. For districts certified prior to May 31, 1993, the maximum duration allowed under the Act was the lesser of (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. Effective for districts certified after May 31, 1993, the maximum duration was changed to the lesser of nine (9) years from the date of the receipt ofthe first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. See Section 469.176, subd. 1 b( 4) of the Act. The drafter of the Original TIF Plan mistakenly used the pre-May, 1993 maximum durationallimits in the Original TIF Plan, rather than the maximum durationallimits permitted by the Act as of the date of certification of the TIF District. The amendment will correct this mistake. As noted in the following section, correction of the mistake will permit the HRA to receive a distribution of tax increment in 2006 in the estimated amount of $91,185. Because of recent changes in tax class rates, and because the tax capacity value of the improvements constructed in the TIF District was less than originally estimated, estimated increments receivable by the HRA through 2005 (the year of expiration of the TIF District if the duration mistake is not corrected) total approximately $704,846, compared with the original projected amount receivable of$793,712. By correction ofthe duration mistake, the aggregate increments estimated to be receivable by the HRA increases to approximately $796,031, approximately equal to the original projected amount but still less than the project costs incurred by the HRA and the Developer in accordance with the Original TIF Plan. Hence, correction of the mistake will mitigate, but will not fully cure, the tax increment shortfall likely to be experienced by the TIF District. C. Increments To Be Received; Impact on Taxing Districts The HRA is presently receiving tax increment payments from the TIF District of approximately $91,185 per year. Adoption of the amendment will permit the HRA to receive an additional payment of approximately $91,185 in the year 2006. If the amendment were not adopted the TIF District would terminate in 2005 and, in 2006, the taxes otherwise receivable as tax increment would be distributed to the taxing districts (approximately 22% to the City, 45% to the school district, 17% to the County and 16% to fiscal disparity). However, as previously noted, adoption of the amendment will not extend the duration of the TIF District beyond the limitation set forth in the Act and is necessary to correctly evidence the original intentions of the HRA and City. D. Other Changes. Other than as set forth above, no other changes are made to the TIF Plan. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.c:i.farmington.mn.us TO: HRA Chairman and Board City AdministratorfY FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Proposed Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Plan Amendment of Economic Development TIF Districts No. 4,5,6,7,8,9,10, and 11 DATE: May 10, 1999 INTRODUCTION The Board authorized the retention of the law firm of Dorsey Whitney to prepare the necessary documents to amend the TIF Plans for the above Districts at the March 8, 1999 Board meeting. DISCUSSION The financial justification for amending the TIF Districts No.4, 5,6,7,8,9,10, and 11 was presented at the March meeting and a copy of which is attached. The proposed amendment simply adds one additional year to the maximum number of years for which tax increment can be captured by the City. The change will allow for nine (9) years of captured increment rather than the presently allowed eight (8) years. This recommended change will allow either the HRA or the developer, depending on the terms of the Development Contract, to receive reimbursement in an amount closer to the original amount estimated in the TIF Plan Budget. The actual amounts of captured tax increment have been reduced as a result of reduction of property tax class rates for commercial and industrial property approved by the State Legislature in the last two years. The HRA Board should make a recommendation to City Council which will consider these proposed amendments at a public hearing scheduled for June 21, 1999. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the attached resolution recommending to the City Council approval of the proposed amendments to Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No. 4,5,6,7,8,9,10, and 11. RespectfullY~~ David L. Olson Community Development Director cc: John Kirby, Dorsey Whitney CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES Governmental Unit: Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: Board of Commissioners Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held May 10, 1999, at o'clock P.M., at the City Hall, Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS NO.4, 5, 6, 7, 8,9 10 AND 11 I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this _ day of May, 1999. Secretary Commissioner adoption: introduced the following resolution and moved its RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS NO.4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 AND 11 BE IT RESO.L VED by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the "Authority") as follows: 1. Background. The Authority has heretofore prepared and approved Tax Increment Financing Plans (the "Original TIF Plans") for Tax Increment Financing Districts No.4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 in the City of Farmington (the ''TIF Districts"), all pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174-469.179 (the "Act"). Each of the Original TIF Plans stated that the applicable TIF District would exist for eight (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is earlier, or, if the public costs are repaid within a shorter period, the TIF District would be dissolved as of the date of repayment of such costs. It was the intention of the HRA and City to provide a maximum duration for each of the TIF Districts equal to the maximum duration provided under the Act. For districts certified prior to May 31, 1993, the maximum duration allowed under the Act was the lesser of (8) years from the date of receipt of the first tax increment payment or ten (10) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. Effective for districts certified after May 31,1993, the maximum duration was changed to the lesser of nine (9) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment payment or eleven (11) years from approval of the tax increment financing plan. Investigation by the Authority has determined that the drafter of each of the Original TIF Plans mistakenly used the pre-May, 1993 maximum durationallimits in the Original TIF Plans, rather than the maximum durationallimits permitted by the Act as of the date of certification of each of the TlF Districts. 2. Proposed Amendments to Original TIF Plans. The Authority has reviewed a draft of amendments to the Original TIF Plans which, in each case, would extend the durationallimit of the respective TIF Districts to the maximum permitted under the Act as of the date of certification of the TIF Districts. Said amendments will correct the drafting mistake made at the time the Original TIF Plans were prepared. 3. Approval. The Authority hereby approves and adopts the proposed amendments to the Original TIP Plans and, except as to duration of the TIF Districts, confirms the findings made at the time of approval of the Original TIP Plans. 4. Transmittal. The Authority does hereby transmit the amendments to the Original TIP Plans to the Farmington City Council for approval after the same has been considered by the City -2- Council subsequent to a public hearing to be held in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Commissioner and up"", voting being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following were absent: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. -3- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: HRA Chairman and Board City Administrator fJf- FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Proposed TIF Plan Amendments of Existing TIF Districts DATE: March 8,1999 INTRODUCTION This issue was discussed by the Board at their February 8, 1999 meeting and a copy of the memo that provided background on this issue is attached. DISCUSSION It was the consensus of the Board to instruct staff to prepare detailed tax increment revenue projections for existing TIF Districts to determine whether additional captured increment is required to meet the original budget projections contained in the TIF Plan. The following is a summary of each of the Economic Development TIF Districts created since 1994 that would be eligible for amending to provide for nine (9) years of captured increment rather than the eight (8) years of captured increment identified in the original TIF Plans Economic Development TIF District No.4 - Austin Products This TIF District was created in 1994. The amount of captured tax increment that was estimated to be captured in this district was $13,080 a year for 8 years for a total of $104,640. The actual amount of captured increment has averaged between $10-$11,000 a year over the first 4 years of the district and is projected to amount to $86,300 over 8 years. This project involved HRA selling the land for $1.00. The additional year of captured increment will result in the HRA being reimbursed approximately $97,548 rather than the current projected amount of $86,300. This would be considerably closer to the original budgeted reimbursement of $1 04,640. Based on these projections, staff recommends amendment of the TIF Plan for Economic Development District No.4 to extend its duration to 9 years of captured increment. Economic Development TIF District No.5 - Performance Industrial Coatines (PIC) This TIF District was also created in 1994. The amount of captured increment that was estimated to be captured in this district was $52,992 a year for 8 years for a total of $423,936. The actual amount of captured increment has averaged approximately $30,000 a year for the first 4 years of the district and is projected to total $223,170 over 8 years. This project involved the HRA selling the land for the actual improved cost of $82,600. Seventy percent of the captured increment is being reimbursed to the developer to reimburse him the land cost and an estimated $123,550 in site improvements. The additional year of captured increment will result in the developer being reimbursed approximately $174,282 rather than the current projected amount of $156,219, which is $122,000 less than projected in 1994" In addition, the developer has indicated a planned 15,000-20,000 square foot expansion of their present facility. While this expansion will involve the purchase of the adjacent lot, the majority of the improvements for this expansion will be constructed on their present lot within the current TIF District boundaries. Extending the duration of this TIF district will be the only mechanism available to the HRA to assist in this expansion. Based on these projections and the proposed facility expansion to occur within this TIF District, staff recommends amendment of the TIF Plan for TIF District No 5 to extend its duration to 9 years of captured increment. Economic Development TIF District No.6 - JIT Powder Coatin~Inc. This TIF District was also created in 1994. The amount of captured increment that was originally estimated to be captured in this district was $52,462 a year for 8 years for a total of $419,697. The actual amount of captured increment has averaged approximately $33,700 a year for the first 3 years of the district and is projected to total $252,185 over 8 years, a difference of more than $160,000 less than originally projected. This project involved the HRA selling the land at its actual improved cost of $76,300. Seventy percent of the captured increment is being reimbursed to the developer to reimburse the land cost and an estimated $126,550 in site improvements. The actual site improvement costs for this site were considerably higher than originally estimated. The additional year of captured increment will result in the developer being reimbursed approximately $197,670 rather than the current projected amount of $176,529.79 which is still $96,000 less than originally projected in 1994. In addition, the developer of this project has also indicated a desire to expand their present facility. While this expansion will also involve the purchase of the adjacent lot, the majority of the improvements for this expansion will be constructed within the current TIF District boundaries. Extending the duration of this TIF district will be the only mechanism by available for the HRA to assist in this expansion. Based on these projections and the proposed facility expansion to occur within this TIF District, staff recommends amendment of the TIF Plan for TIF District No 6 to extend its duration to 9 years of captured increment. Economic Development TIF District No.7 - Minnesota Pine This TIF District was also created in 1994. The amount of captured increment that was estimated to be captured in this district was $23,670 a year for 8 years for a total of $189,360. The actual amount of captured increment has averaged approximately $15,400 a year for the first 3 years of the district and is projected to total $114,250 over 8 years a difference of $75,000 less than originally projected. This project involved the HRA selling the land for $1. The captured increment is being used to reimburse the HRA the cost of raw land and improvements. The additional year of captured increment will result in the HRA being reimbursed approximately $127,885 rather than the current projected amount of $114,249 which would be closer to the original budgeted reimbursement to the HRA. Based on these projections staff recommends amendment of the TIF Plan for TIF District No 7 to extend its duration to 9 years of captured increment. Economic Development TIF District No.8 - Controlled Air This TIF District was created in 1995. The amount of captured increment that was originally estimated to be captured in this district was $19,200 a year for 8 years for a total of $153,200. The actual amount of captured increment has averaged approximately $12,100 a year for the first 3 years of the district and is projected to total $90,717 over 8 years or $63,000 less than originally projected. This project involved the HRA selling the land for $1. In addition to reimbursing the HRA for the improved land price, the TIF Plan budget also provided a partial reimbursement to the Developer for site improvement costs. The total amount of this reimbursement was estimated to be $38,424. Since the actual increment amount has dropped below the minimum amount required to reimburse the HRA for the land costs, the developer did not receive reimbursement in 1998 and is not scheduled to receive reimbursement in 1999. The proposed additional year of captured increment will result in a total of $101,594 of captured increment rather than the current projected amount of $90,717. This would allow for reimbursements to the HRA and the Developer to be closer to the original budgeted amount. Based on these projections staff recommends amendment of the TIF Plan for TIF District No 8 to extend its duration to 9 years of captured increment. Economic Development TIF District No.9 - Crop Characteristics This TIF District was also created in 1995. The amount of captured increment that was estimated to be captured in this district was $10,184 a year for 8 years for a total of $81,472. The actual amount of captured increment has averaged approximately $4,300 a year for the first 2 years of the district and is projected to total $33,309 over 8 years, or $48,000 less than originally projected. This project involved the HRA selling the land its actual improved cost of $54,800. Approximately 74% percent of the captured increment is being reimbursed to the developer to reimburse the land cost and an estimated $44,450 in site improvements. The additional year of captured increment will result in the developer being reimbursed approximately $27,514 rather than the current projected amount of $24,515, which is still $33,000 less than originally projected. Based on these projections staff recommends amendment of the TIF Plan for TIF District No 9 to extend its duration to 9 years of captured increment. Economic Development TIF District No. 10 - CG Construction This TIF District was also created in 1996. The amount of captured increment that was estimated to be captured in this district was $17,849 a year for 8 years for a total of $142,790. The actual amount of captured increment has averaged approximately $10,700 a year for the first 2 years of the district and is projected to total $82,988 over 8 years or $59,000 less than originally projected. This project involved the HRA selling the land for $1. In addition to reimbursing the HRA for the improved land cost of $66,800, the HRA was to reimburse the developer $80,000 in site improvement costs. The additional year of captured increment will result in the HRA capturing a total of $93,253 of increment rather the current projected $82,988 which is sti1lless than total original projections. This will allow for reimbursement to the HRA and Developer closer to the original budgeted amount. Based on these projections staff recommends amendment of the TIF Plan for TIF District No 10 to extend its duration to 9 years of captured increment. Economic Development TIF District No. 11- Lexinlfon Standard Phase n This TIF District was also created in 1996. The amount of captured increment that was estimated to be captured in this district was $99,214 a year for 8 years for a total of $793,712. The actual amount of captured increment has averaged approximately $78,900 a year for the first 2 years of the district and is projected to total $704,846 over 8 years, or $89,000 less than originally projected. This project involved the HRA selling the land its actual improved cost of $130,000. The TIF Plan calls for 90% percent of the captured increment is being reimbursed to the developer to reimburse the land cost and an estimated $663,714 in site improvements. The additional year of captured increment will result in the developer being reimbursed approximately $716,430 rather than the current projected amount of $634.361. This would be just slightly in excess of the original budgeted amount. Based on these projections. staff recommends amendment of the TIF Plan for TIF District No 11 to extend its duration to 9 years of captured increment. Economic Development TIF District No. 12- Precision Fitting and Valve This TIF District was also created in 1996. The amount of captured increment that was originally estimated to be captured in this district was $54,538 a year for 8 years for a total of $436,304. The actual amount of captured increment will be $57,234 in 1999 and is projected to total $424,133 over 8 years. This project involved the HRA selling the land at its actual improved cost. 80 percent of the captured increment is being reimbursed to the developer to reimburse the land cost and site improvement costs which totaled $509,024. The additional year of captured increment would result in the developer being reimbursed approximately $385,093 rather than the current projected amount of $339,093. This level of reimbursement would considerably exceed the original budgeted amount. Based on these projections staff does not recommend an amendment of the TIF Plan for TIP District No 12 at this time, but rather continue to monitor its financial status. BUDGET IMPACT The cost of preparing the necessary documents to facilitate the recommended TIF Plan Amendments was estimated at $5,000 by the Dorsey Whitney law firm. The expenses would be eligible to be reimbursed as administrative cost from the districts being amended. ACTION REOUESTED Authorize the preparation of the necessary documents and schedule a public hearing for consider amendments to the TIF Plans of Economic Development TIF Districts No.4, 5, 6,7,8,9,10 and 11. o2~ David L. Olson Community Development Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmin~on.mn.us TO: lIRA Chairman and Board City Administrator~ FROM: David L. Olson Community Development Director SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment to Economic Development TIF Districts DATE: February 8, 1999 INTRODUCTION In. response to requeSts from several. industries in the Industrial. Park to expand their existing. facilities, staff has been reviewing the possibility of extending the duration of existing TIF districts. John IGrby of Dorsey Whitney has prQvided an opinion on the possibility of extending the duration of these existing TIF districts. DISCUSSION Two existing industries in the Industrial Park have recently expressed interest in purchasing the adjacent lots to expand their existing facilities. In both instances, the majority of the proposed expansion will take place on their existing lot, which in both cases, is in an existing TIF District. In both cases, creationofa new TIF District would not be practical since little or no building improvements would be constructed outside of their presently existing TIF District. However in both cases the . additional. lot is needed for setback, parking, and future expansion purposes. In both of these cases, the original TIF Plans that were approved in 1994 included a maximum duration of 10 years with a maximum of 8 eight years of captured tax increment. The law at the time would have allowed for a TIF district to be created with II year maximum duration with 9 years of captured increment. As the attached memo from John Kirby indicates, the City BRA has the option to propose an amendment to the original TIF plan to extend the duration of these TIF Districts to the maximum duration of 9 years increment and II years duration to comport with original BRA intentions. This amendment process would require both a letter notice to Dakota County and ISD 192, published notice in the newspaper and a public hearing to approve this proposed additional one year extension of the TIF districts. In addition to the districts in which expansions are being proposed, the HRA may wish to consider extending the duration of the other Economic TIF Districts that were created in 1994 or later for the same reason. The following is a list of all districts created since 1994: · Economic Development District No.4 - Austin Products · Economic Development District No.5 - Performance Industrial Coatings · Economic Development District No.6 - JIT · Economic Development District No. 7 - Minnesota Pipe · Economic Development District No.8 - Controlled Air · Economic Development District No.9 - Crop Characteristics · Economic Development District No. 10 - CG Construction · Economic Development District No. 11 - Lexington Standard · Economic Development District No. 12 - Precision Fitting and Valve BUDGET IMPACT The Budget implications of these proposed amendments would vary from district to district and/or project to project. In almost every case. the amount of tax increment that was estimated in the original plan was higher than the actual amount of tax increment currently being captured. This is due in part to two factors. The first factor has been caused by the estimated market value of the improvements that the Dakota County Assessor has assigned to building. and iInprovements. which has Ilet'n le~s. .than.. the . amount ori~inally estimated in the TIF Plan. The second. factor has been caused by the reduction of commercial and industrial tax rates approved .I>Y the State Legislature in each of the last two legislative sessions. In effect, lowering the taxable value of the building improvements in the TIF District. The extension of the duration of each of these TIF districts would allow for additional reimbursement to the lIRA to come closer to equaling.the lIRA's costs, as identified in the TIF Plan; for sites.that were sold for a write-down price. In the .cases where companies are being reimbursed for eligible costs they incurred, one additional year of increment will allow the companies additional. reimbursement to COme closer to the amount intended in the original TIF Plan. ACTION REOUESTED The following actions are recommended for consideration by the Board: 1) Instruct staff to prepare detailed revenue projections for the TIF Districts to detennine whether an additional year of increment would be necessary to reimburse the developer and the lIRA for the original eligible costs and expenses identified in the TIF Plan; and 2) Obtain a proposal from legal and/or fiscal consultants to determine the costs associated with preparing the necessary notices and amendment documents. Respectfully submitted, Q~~ Community Development Director ,." MEMORANDUM TO: Dave Olson, Community Development Director, Farmington DATE: John Kirby, Dorsey & Whitney LLP (6]2-340-5665 January 13, 1999 FROM: RE: Amendmenl of TlF Plans Here are my thoughts on amending the Economic Development District TIP Plans which we discussed - I'll start with the argument against amendment and then rn discuss why, in these particular cases, I think we can undertake the amendments. 1. Section 469.176, subdivision l(a). provides thaL a municipality may specify in the TlF Plan a shorter maximum duration than the maximum permitted by law. According to the last sentence in sl1bdivision 1 (a): "The specified limit applies in place of the otherwise applicable limit:' Then, Section 469.176, subdi vision 1 d. states: "Moditlc3tion of a tax increment financing phm pursuant to section 469.175, subdivision 4, shull not extend lhe duration limitations of subdivisions 1 to 1 f," BWieu on these two provisions you can certainly make an argumenL that once you have specified a dunltional limit, you can not extend it by modification. If we proceed to modify the Farmington plans it is possible the State Auditor or odler party may raise this point, so T want to point it out at this time. 2. Notwithstanding the argument set forth ill paragraph I above. I believe there is a strong case to be made for modifying the Farmington TIF Plans. It is clear from Lhe language that the intent of the drafter was to specify a duration for the districLS equal to the maximum tenn permitted by law and not to ~pecify a ~pecitic shorter duration - hence the use of thl: a.lternative 8 and 10 year language. which was the maximum duration permilted for districts certified prior LO May 31, 1993 (at which time it changed to the current 9 and 11 year limitalions). The problem was the drafter was not aware, or forgot, that the durationallimits had changed. Hence, what we really have here is a mistake in the language used to specify Lhe maximum duration. Under the circumstances I believe we should be able Lo correct that mistake to make clear that the 9/11 limilf; apply. At the same time we should probably update lhe increment cash flow. update the budget if necessary and make any other changes you deem appropriate. As you indicaled we should go through the formal anlendment procedure with letter notice, published notice, etc. After you have had a chance to review 'this memo please give me a call and tel me know how you wi~h to proceed. DORSEY & WHITNEYLLP HRA Economic Development District No.4 County Project Number 0071 Type of district Economic "Common" Name Austin Products Development Original Est. Revised Est. Tax Increments projected: Year established 1994 1996 16,248.00 1l,098.12 1997 16,248.00 10,481.08 Final year of district 2003 1998 16,248.00 8,475.00 1999 16,248.00 11,248.98 Tax capacity (net) 2000 16,248.00 11,248.98 Original $ 1,022 2001 16,248.00 11,248.98 Current (collectible 1999) 9,447 2002 16,248.00 11,248.98 2003 16,248.00 11,248.98 Captured - retained 8,425 2004 I 11,248.98 I Total 129,984.00 97,548.06 Tax increment bonds issued Accreted value added payments to HRA Principal payments 1996 13,080.00 11,098.12 1997 13,080.00 10,481.08 Outstanding 12/31/98 $ 1998 13,080.00 8,475.00 1999 13,080.00 11,248.98 2000 13,080.00 11,248.98 2001 13,080.00 11,248.98 2002 13,080.00 1l,248.98 2003 13,080.00 11,248.98 2004 I 1l,248.98 I Total 104,640.00 97,548.06 HRA Economic Development District No.5 Type of district Economic Development Year established 1994 Final year of district 2003 Tax capacity (net) Original $ 1,240 Current (collectible 1999) 20,566 Captured - retained 19,326 Tax increment bonds issued Accreted value added Principal payments Outstanding 12/31/98 $ - County Project Number 0072 "Common" Name Perf Ind Coatng Original Est. Revised Est. Tax Increments projected: 1996 52,992.00 34,193.16 1997 52,992.00 32,292.16 1998 52,992.00 27,665.00 1999 52,992.00 25,803.88 2000 52,992.00 25,803.88 2001 52,992.00 25,803.88 2002 52,992.00 25,803.88 2003 52,992.00 25,803.88 2004 I 25,803.88 I 2005 2006 Total 423,936.00 248,973.61 payments to developers: 1996 37,094.00 23,935.21 1997 37,094.00 22,604.52 1998 37,094.00 19,365.50 1999 37,094.00 18,062.72 2000 37,094.00 18,062.72 2001 37,094.00 18,062.72 2002 37,094.00 18,062.72 2003 37,094.00 18,062.72 2004 I 18,062.72 I Total 296,752.00 174,281.54 Payments to HRA 1996 15,898.00 10,257.95 1997 15,898.00 9,687.64 1998 15,898.00 8,299.50 1999 15,898.00 7,741.16 2000 15,898.00 7,741.16 2001 15,898.00 7,741.16 2002 15,898.00 7,741.16 2003 15,898.00 7,741.16 2004 I 7,741.16 I Total 127,184.00 74,692.07 HRA Economic Development District No.6 Type of district Economic Development Year established 1994 Final year of district 2003 Tax capacity (net) Original $ 1,899 Current (collectible 1999) 24,518 Captured - retained 22,619 Tax increment bonds issued Accreted value added Principal payments Outstanding 12/31/98 $ - County Project Number 0081 "Common" Name nT Powder Original Est. Revised Est. Tax Increments projected: 1996 52,462.08 1997 52,462.08 38,287.74 1998 52,462.08 32,693.72 1999 52,462.08 30,200.66 2000 52,462.08 30,200.66 2001 52,462.08 30,200.66 2002 52,462.08 30,200.66 2003 52,462.08 30,200.66 2004 30,200.66 2005 30,200.66 I 2006 Total 419,696.64 282,386.09 payments to developers: 1996 36,723.45 1997 36,723.45 26,801.41 1998 36,723.45 22,885.60 1999 36,723.45 21,140.46 2000 36,723.45 21,140.46 2001 36,723.45 21,140.46 2002 36,723.45 21,140.46 2003 36,723.45 21,140.46 2004 21,140.46 2005 I 21,140.461 Total 293,787.60 197,670.25 Payments to HRA 1996 15,738.63 1997 15,738.63 11,486.33 1998 15,738.63 9,808.12 1999 15,738.63 9,060.20 2000 15,738.63 9,060.20 2001 15,738.63 9,060.20 2002 15,738.63 9,060.20 2003 15,738.63 9,060.20 2004 9,060.20 2005 I 9,060.20 I Total 125,909.04 84,715.84 HRA Economic Development District No.7 County Project Number 0082 Type of district Economic "Common" Name MN Pipe Development Original Est. Revised Est. Tax Increments projected: Year established 1994 1996 23,670.00 1997 23,670.00 17,426.24 Final year of district 2003 1998 23,670.00 15,013.84 1999 23,670.00 13,634.96 Tax capacity (net) 2000 23,670.00 13,634.96 Original $ 3,288 2001 23,670.00 13,634.96 Current (collectible 1999) 13,500 2002 23,670.00 13,634.96 2003 23,670.00 13,634.96 2004 13,634.96 Captured - retained 10,212 2005 I 13,634.96 I Total 189,360.00 127,884.80 Tax increment bonds issued Accreted value added payments to city & HRA Principal payments 1996 23,670.00 1997 23,670.00 17,426.24 Outstanding 12/31/98 $ 1998 23,670.00 15,013.84 1999 23,670.00 13,634.96 2000 23,670.00 13,634.96 2001 23,670.00 13,634.96 2002 23,670.00 13,634.96 2003 23,670.00 13,634.96 2004 13,634.96 2005 I 13,634.96 I Total 189,360.00 127,884.80 HRA Economic Development District No.8 Type of district Economic Development Year established 1995 Final year of district 2004 Tax capacity (net) Original $ 1,171 Current (collectible 1999) 9,317 Captured - retained 8,146 Tax increment bonds issued Accreted value added Principal payments Outstanding 12/31/98 $ - County Project Number 0083 "Common" Name Controlled Air Original Est. Revised Est. Tax Increments projected: 1996 1997 19,200.00 13,748.61 1998 19,200.00 11,709.86 1999 19,200.00 10,876.46 2000 19,200.00 10,876.46 2001 19,200.00 10,876.46 2002 19,200.00 10,876.46 2003 19,200.00 10,876.46 2004 19,200.00 10,876.46 2005 I 10,876.46 I 2006 Total 153,600.00 101,593.68 payments to developers: 1996 1997 4,803.00 1998 4,803.00 1999 4,803.00 2000 4,803.00 2001 4,803.00 2002 4,803.00 2003 4,803.00 2004 4,803.00 2005 2006 Total 38,424.00 payments to HRA 1996 1997 14,397.00 13,748.61 1998 14,397.00 11,709.86 1999 14,397.00 10,876.46 2000 14,397.00 10,876.46 2001 14,397.00 10,876.46 2002 14,397.00 10,876.46 2003 14,397.00 10,876.46 2004 14,397.00 10,876.46 2005 I 10,876.46 I 2006 Total 115,176.00 101,593.68 BRA Economic Development District No.9 Type of district Economic Development Year established 1995 Final year of district 2004 Tax capacity (net) Original $ 1,240 Current (collectible 1999) $ 4,323 Captured - retained $ 3,083 Tax increment bonds issued Accreted value added Principal payments Outstanding 12/31/98 $ - County Project Number 0085 "Common" Name Croo Charac. Original Est. Revised Est. Tax Increments projected: 1996 1997 10,184.00 1998 10,184.00 4,494.22 1999 10,184.00 4,116.39 2000 10,184.00 4,116.39 2001 10,184.00 4,116.39 2002 10,184.00 4,116.39 2003 10,184.00 4,116.39 2004 10,184.00 4,116.39 2005 4,116.39 2006 I 4,116.39 I Total 81,472.00 37,425.34 payments to developers: 1996 1997 7,500.00 1998 7,500.00 3,325.72 1999 7,500.00 3,046.13 2000 7,500.00 3,046.13 2001 7,500.00 3,046.13 2002 7,500.00 3,046.13 2003 7,500.00 3,046.13 2004 7,500.00 3,046.13 2005 3,046.13 2006 I 3,046.13 I Total 60,000.00 27,694.75 Payments to HRA 1996 1997 4,184.00 1998 4,184.00 1,168.50 1999 4,184.00 1,070.26 2000 4,184.00 1,070.26 2001 4,184.00 1,070.26 2002 4,184.00 1,070.26 2003 4,184.00 1,070.26 2004 4,184.00 1,070.26 2005 1,070.26 2006 I 1,070.26 I Total 33,472.00 9,730.59 HRA Economic Development District No. 10 County Project Number 0084 Type of district Economic "Common" Name C G Const Development Original Revised Est. Tax Increments projected: Year established 1996 1996 1997 Final year of district 2005 1998 17,848.00 11,133.62 1999 17,848.00 10,264.94 Tax capacity (net) 2000 17,848.00 10,264.94 Original $ 1,419 2001 17,848.00 10,264.94 Current (collectible 1999) $ 9,107 2002 17,848.00 10,264.94 2003 17,848.00 10,264.94 Captured - retained $ 7,688 2004 17,848.00 10,264.94 2005 17,848.00 10,264.94 Tax increment bonds issued 2006 I 10,264.94 I Accreted value added Total 142,784.00 93,253.14 Principal payments payments to developers: Outstanding 12/31/98 $ 1996 1997 1998 10,000.00 6,234.83 1999 10,000.00 5,748.37 2000 10,000.00 5,748.37 2001 10,000.00 5,748.37 2002 10,000.00 5,748.37 2003 10,000.00 5,748.37 2004 10,000.00 5,748.37 2005 10,000.00 5,748.37 2006 I 5,748.37 I Total 80,000.00 52,221.76 payments to HRA 1996 1997 1998 5,884.00 4,898.79 1999 5,884.00 4,516.57 2000 5,884.00 4,516.57 2001 5,884.00 4,516.57 2002 5,884.00 4,516.57 2003 5,884.00 4,516.57 2004 5,884.00 4,516.57 2005 5,884.00 4,516.57 2006 I 4,516.57 I Total 47,072.00 41,031.38 HRA Economic Development District No. 11 Type of district Economic Development Year established 1996 Final year of district 2005 Tax capacity (net) Original $ 2,683 Current (collectible 1999) $ 70,977 Captured - retained $ 68,294 Tax increment bonds issued Accreted value added Principal payments Outstanding 12/31/98 $ - County Project Number 0092 "Common" Name Lexinlrton Std Original Est. Revised Est. Tax Increments projected: 1996 1997 1998 99,214.00 66,547.47 1999 99,214.00 91,185.47 2000 99,214.00 91,185.47 2001 99,214.00 91,185.47 2002 99,214.00 91,185.47 2003 99,214.00 91,185.47 2004 99,214.00 91,185.47 2005 99,214.00 91,185.47 2006 I 91,185.47 I Total 793,712.00 796,031.20 payments to developers: 1996 1997 1998 89,293.00 59,892.72 1999 89,293.00 82,066.92 2000 89,293.00 82,066.92 2001 89,293.00 82,066.92 2002 89,293.00 82,066.92 2003 89,293.00 82,066.92 2004 89,293.00 82,066.92 2005 89,293.00 82,066.92 2006 I 82,066.92 I Total 714,344.00 716,428.08 payments to HRA 1996 1997 1998 9,921.00 6,654.75 1999 9,921.00 9,118.55 2000 9,921.00 9,118.55 2001 9,921.00 9,118.55 2002 9,921.00 9,118.55 2003 9,921.00 9,118.55 2004 9,921.00 9,118.55 2005 9,921.00 9,118.55 2006 I 9,118.55 I Total 79,368.00 79,603.12 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Award of Contract - Downtown Streetscape and Sliplining Project DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION Bids were received for the Downtown Streetscape and Sliplining Project on Thursday, June 17, 1999. DISCUSSION Two bids were received for the project (see attached bid tabulation). Arcon Construction Company Inc. has submitted the low bid for the project improvements excluding the street lights in the amount of $805,001.00. NSP has submitted a cost for installing the street lights in the amount of $166,770.00. The total construction cost for the project based on the bid and NSP's proposal is $971,771.00. The total estimated project cost including contingencies and engineering, legal and administrative costs is'$1,295,000. The bids came in significantly higher than anticipated. Discussions with contractors during the bidding process and the receipt of only two bids for the project suggest that there is little competitive interest in this type of project at this time. BUDGET IMPACT The estimated project cost in the feasibility report was $1,056,500. The estimated project cost at the completion of the design was $1,080,200, an increase of approximately $24,000 to the report estimate. The increase in the estimate was due to the addition of water main work, additional street lights required beyond the project limits and necessary additional mitigation of the poor soils below the existing sidewalk as recommended by the soils engineer. The estimated project cost based on the bids received is $1,295,000, approximately $215,000 above the design estimate. RECOMMENDATION Based on the fact that only two bids were received and said bids significantly exceed the engineering estimates, staff is recommending that Council reject all bids. It would be further recommended that this project be re-bid in January/February 2000. Respectfully submitted, ~/?1~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file ;:- c:;- C? it)' .... ClOO~ e.~e. ~e.1- WI-ill p:lLIlLl ~!Ye: Cl)i::CI) ~CI)Q 5:~$ ~5:i!: -Q~Q (,)2:QC:~ .~ ~ 2: q: 2 o ,.. q: I- v. '-wI-ILIILI D.p:1LI11J2: Q)~~e:~ fiCl)~CI)::e (,)~CI)~~ i~~~e ef!oc:~ U)ffi~oi c::e:i::~a:: ~~:t:i::Lf O-C) -O-~Ll. cQ:.....::::O ~!i~~~ a;ci::occ(j .....~i5 ~oa:: [ijfdp: QQ~ CI)~Gj ~e~ e~~ ~o~ oQ'l:t Q CI) i l ~ .~ ~ ~ .::1 .... :s ~ s ~ ~ ~ ..... ..... "" ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ .... .::1 ~ ll:: U .5 iii G) "i: G) f ::s Z 'tJ C III '1ii ~ j ~g88g8~888888888888g88888888888 ~ciciciciomodci~do~~~cidd~dcidcidciddcicid ~~~~~~~~~~S~~~~~~~8~~~~~~~~~~i~ ~~-N~Nrioi . triN~~~ai~Nrir',,:.n";......- .oN"': ~ ~ ~ r~ N~r ~N . ~ -.............................. ~ Q. ~ C ::;) ~8888~~888888888~~8~~8888888~88 ~OO~~NN~~O~Oo~~~N~m~~o~N~NN~~~m ~~~...M.~~~~~~~m..; .~~;.~.._.. ..;- . ~N~ .. ll'l ............ .... U .5 C o t; S I/) c o (,) c o ~ c( 8888888888888888888888888888888 OOOOOo~ooo~OOOOOOo~OOOOOOOOo~~~ 8~gg~~S~~8~~8~g88~~~8gg~g~~~~~. moio~";ri~ riri~~~~N~~~~ri .nmri~ ririri ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~r ~~ ... . ~ .........--.................... .. .g Q. ~ C ::;) 888gg88gg88gg8gg8~~8g888888g~~~ ciddM~~~Mdd~dcicicici~~mcicicidmd~~~~~~ g~~..._.~8~~~~8g ~~~~~~~:~~_. ~-~.. ..;- ....~~~ .... ~ .. :J o ~~~ooo~ov~~mo~~~ooooo~Ooooooooo v~o~o~m v ~ oo~~o~~~~~mm~~v ~m~o ~Nm~~ ~~~~ ONm N ~v ~~ ~ N ~M ~ c ::;) ..J ~~~>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~z>>>~>zz~~~~~ ..J~~~..J~~~~~~~~..J..J..J..J..J~000~0~~~~~~~ :E ~ ~ z ir ~ d o ~ c: ~~ 0 o ~~ ~ i:: a:o > ll'l o a: ~ a: ~g ~ 88 ~ ~~ ~ ~ o~ a: ~: p: I=c<( [jj z ~c( a: lD~ S2' ~ ::;)~z 0 ~ $~ 0 lDS QS2' CI) ~[jjo ~ z~ oc( ~ z ~~ ~Q ~ oga: z~~ 00 0 0 "'v ~~~ ~ z~Q.z-o-~ ~z ~ F ~w ~.~ o ~~a:c(o~Q.~w~~c( ~ c( ~~ Q:!:~S2' ~ ~~~~~~~lli5~..J~..J ~ >~ ~~~~~zQ a:: ~o~~a:~~~~~~~~~ ~>o~ ~~8~~~~ ~.... ~~~~8~~~~~~8~~~5~~~~~~~G~~~~ ~oc(ooo~~~a:~..Jc(~~~zFa:~c(Ooc(a:~>> ~ ::;)O~~~a:~c(c(lD~c(~::;)~OOc(lDS~OO~Q...J~c<(c<(~ ~ ~~www~~~~~~g~~a~~~~~~~a:5~~ [ij _za:a:a:Za:~~ZlD~~>~ll'l>ozo~~~~~[jj e~w ~~~~~~~oo~~~~~~cl~~~$~:~~o~~~ Cl)F~~~~888~~~~~gm~::;)~w~~ooffi::;)::;)a:~~~~ -~~a:~~ww~wwww~ww~ow~z~::;)~~oo~wwww I-~a:~>~~>>>~>>>>>~~a:~oa:~a:=~~~a:a:a:a: :E$~i5~~~~~~~~~~~~~5~~ci~~~~~~~~~~~~ w~~..Ja:wwwwww~www~w~cooo::;)o::;)~~~~oooo c~~ooa:a:a:a:a:a:wa:a:a:a:a:~lDO~O~Oc(~lDlDlDOOOO d ~N~~~~~mm~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~ Z J:> ~ i I C ~ C ~ :9 J!l C l .2 ~ CD "C .Q 7S :J 9- Cl c .C 3l C .61 C !J c. ~ ~ U .5 Ii CD 'E: CD I!! ~ Z 'a C IV Gi -" ~ 000000000000000 000000000000000 ...;c:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:iNc:i...; Nat)('l')NNCOU)U)CDOOO'-NN O)It).....CO.....Q)C')........IOOQ)CON('l') '" - - - - - - - - - - - - - _N..........Q)(I')....(f') "'CtU')(W)U)C"\rIID S ....(j) ....N ~ ............,.......................... ..000000000000000 U~~~~C!C!C!C!C!C!C!C!~C!~ ;t~~~~;~~~;~g!;~t; ~... on'" on C N ... ::I ... U .5 C o ;:I u 2 .. III C o o c o ~ < 000000000000000 000000000000000 ooodciddddddcidcilri g~~~~~g~~~8~8~~ ~NQ~~mm~~~~O~ON~ S ....(j) N .... ~ ..,..................................... ..000000000000000 uC!C!~C!C!~C!C!C!~~C!C!C!~ ;t~a~~!a~~~~g~g~t1 ~ ... ... ... - - c ~ ~ ::I ... ... f(f')OOOOONOCOO.-O..-OO ...........OCOC>N"IIltIl)...O N ..,.... ........."IIlt-v CD ........... ...(")..... N '" .... ::I a ~ C ::I<Cu.u.u.u.>-<cu.<Cu.lIJO::lIJu.>- uJ...JlIJlIJlIJlIJuJlIJuJ...J...JJ:...J...JlIJ 2 ~ :2' o ~ -~o vi=55: lIJ N.-I- lIJ uJ tq~J:_ I- Cl ctl(i)I-Oo lIJ CllJ CLO::~~O O~ ~!z...J !~~~~ ~~~ alI~g Z~~~~ ~~$ ~~~ $C<Cc(:::;!Cl ...J...J~ ~uJl- O::ZCLCL~~lIJ...J...J1- >O::u. ~c(~~lIJi5~~~Z...JCl~~O uJlllWWlIJl-l'-lIJlIJWOz...JC= CO::O::O::Oc(lIJ~~:i:O::ii:~w~ W::IOOO::CLlllCC~I-W>~1- CLOZZOllJO::ZZC(~I!,I>-O'SO ~~88~gac(c(CLO~0::~:> WW...J...JWZI-J:J:WOI-~Ill~ 0:: O::...J...J O::-lIJII)lIJt: u: wOo::- _OO~~O:i:::IZZ~u.WCLWC ""'ZZ'-'-Z~""O::O::S~O:::i:>C ~88~~8111~~~~I-~~~g O.N..,Vlt>fD...."'OIO....N..,Vlt>(j) Z(f')C")(f')(Il)('f)C')C")('l')........................ o 10 cO 0) .... ~ 10 co ~ ggggggggggo ~~2i~~~c:i~g~~ ...._...._"":.~"":.N_:&~"'-OI_~ ..........N('l')~C:O ('l')~"'CD ~' 10 ..............................~ 0000000000 0000000000 "':.no;mcOcOcOr--:cid &t:ln:!~~~&t;1;[;;~ ...~~ ~ ........ o o cO ..... 10 ~ ..... 10 ~ 00000000000 ~~~~~~~~~~~ It>lt>lt>0lt>00000 ._ o~..... "'":~~t'tco ...~co_...~ a ..... C')N~. N.....NCO cw) CW') ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ~ 0000000000 lOooooooooo Nviod""':dddcici __"an 0 ('I') O('l')l.l) 00 .".('I')..-"".".,,0('1')('\IN 0C'"iN' ... ......619 ... ... VN........l()(j)OfDvN ClO __ N N__ .., ..... ~ e ~ o j:: o ::) ~ ~ o ~ ~ ..... ~ e (I) - "- a:: ~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ..... ~ e ~ o j:: o ::) ~ ~ ~ I (I) I e (I) C'II "- a:: ~ 0:: ~ ~ j:: ~~ ~ 00 -.J ~~ ~ ~ Cl 0:: .z W ~ w$~ ~ .... ...JC_ 0 8 ~~g~ c YJ ii:~t;ffi ~ a:: O::E:=>> o::~ lIJ "" ~zo::o J: ~ (j)I-W I- ~ (I):i~5~ lIJ ~ iU :i:J:OJ:o ~ClCl (I)~~~~ciz~~~ffi :E (1)0011 O~(j)lIJc(c(- a:: ClClCl~fjj<c~oo~ o zzz. lIJlll~oIIo11i5 f.;. ~~~~~i5c;;E;;E1- (I) ---I-OI-u.o::O::z C'II ~~~g~;)g~~~ ,,-WWWj:CL= 0::8~- a:: ~~~lIJO~~"'o::ln ~ ::i:i::i:ZO:: I(lI..--lIJ C( ~~~8~~~~~B ~~~~:;;~:3~:gf8 00000000000 ~~~~~~~:;:~~o 01 (j) .., 0 v v 01 N N '" "'-. I'-- ~~......~"'It "'It "'.\0 __.CD:;: _N..- (") 00 c-.i ~ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ~ 0000000000 0000000000 00 00 00"';";"; oi...;oi"': ~~~~~~~~::.. "'~N' .. ... ... gggggggggg~ ddociddocidci""" :5~~il~~g~:&:gg ~N - - ~ N C'I c-.i .. ..............................~ gggg88gg88 ciddcidddNN&ri ~~~~~~~~~... ... __- N ... ... ... ... ... ____0....."....1000 N _00" .... II) ~~~~~~i5~~~ ..... ~ e :2: ~ o W 0 j:: 0 j:: g ~ffi g ~~...J ~8: ~ ~8 (I) ~ ~ ~x~;... :2:8 o 011 1-03::;;: o I- lIJlllCl> Z llllllZW ... I-c( o::o::-zw'" ~ ~o:: ::I::I~::JO ~ ~0::~wNOO)(w5 ~ :;Ii!CJ:>lt>wwuJOO:: :;Ii! Iti ~Cl~~~~~~~ Q: ~ ~~~~fufu;)o~~ ~ ~ 1=- :i:0::0:: 0::"" ~ ~ ~~!zo::cC;;:~3: ~ CW') ~WI-~~~~W~O:: CW') wc(cS:wwl->WlIJ "- >o>-S>>~o::CLCl "- a:: OOJ:CLOO<<~~ a:: :r. a5ul;;;j~a5a5~lb~E:r. _ 0:: 0:: u. 00 0::0:: uJO::;"u.. _ [;;~:BilU;&1l3~:g:B .Q ~ i I C ! ~ ~ ~ Q. o l! .. "0 U i5 ::I 9- go .C 31 C 061 C Jl 0. N 01 l.!! ~ U .5 . Gl .;: Gl t! ::I Z 'a C II J ~ U .5 C o :g 2 - II) c o (.) c o e c( :Ii! ~ ., ~ gg:5gggggggg C) cic:;..tNai~.,;r-:ciNci ~ ~m~~~ ~~~~~N r:ia;f";lri~ ......NN~~ ~ Q) .................................~ . u 'C Q. ~ c :l 00000000000 0011)00000000 ~~ui":aiN.,;aiciai::! ......~~~~~~:g~ ...,. "''''C\i'''' ... ., ~ OOOOOOOOOOOQ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~g~~~re~~~~g ~~~g_~ ~ ~:!:('l')ID""""" ......NT"'"....CO ~ Q) ...................(,9.......'619- . u 'C Q. ~ c :l 00000000000 00000000000 gg~~~ggggg~ ........_C'\IIl)ll)U)ll)C'\I.. ......C'i......N'.. ... ... ~ c '" '" a l.OOMNCON....('l')......O ......Q)lt)r') "'lit co"'''' ~ C :l ~~~U5U5U5U5U5~U5~ ~ ~ e :Ii! ~ o z I ~ ~ i: i: ~ m w ~ - z 0- :::! S z~ :> :::! [Q ow om ffi [Q S ~5i=G:l m S '"- z :drl m 0:: it ~ 8zm~ ~ Q:: w~::Ec>~[jj Q: o::moC>~zom Q: l!J o::~o::~~~~o~it~ ~ ~ ~[jji=wmm<wl- 1LI momxJ:Oc>mw CI) ~ Q.wC>W::E~~~~ CI) ~ f>Q.om~~~~~~~~~ ~ > COo:l.,Ji=om<O ~ b?o::w~Q.!!2wmo:> ~ _ ....cooO::ow~..Jc(oo::_ 2: O::oO::o~~O::~I-~~~~ 2: q: LLLL~:>:::OOzmzlEl q: (I) c>c>mffio~~~~~o:: (I) .... 3!:3!:cm..Jl-l-w<l-c.... ... zzzo::~mmoO::ocem... a: ::::i::::ic(~o~~:5:r~o a: ~ ~~~[jjG:l1rl1rllhG:l~6: ~ ... oOl-mO::O::O::O::l-w~'" ......ao CD 0.... N (I)'" Itlco...... "''''''',..,..,..,..,..,..,..,.. 0000_ <=! <=! <=! <=! CS ~cg~:g . II)_~~OI_ ~ ~~~'" in It) Q) ... ... ... ... ~ gggg u;;:t;~:8 C'\IID........ - ... ... :;; OOOOa ~~~~~ gg~rean ~~~N ~ ~ a ,... ... ... ... ... ~ gggg cdlrilri g-im~ :;; co co co...... .....v""".." U5U5U5~ W ..J 1 m w w 0:: I- .,J ~ ~ 1E::E e ~ a: I CI) z"" CI) !:!:! C5w III t-; 0::1- i::: ::;: <~ ::;: , !!:C> , ~ ~w ~ -= oWw-= == ~~o== q: :j:jffiq: III oceo:(LLIlI t:: ~~gt:: CI) 3!:3!:QCI) an m""""~ an ...~iJ5iJ5~... a: ozz~ a: : ~~~iE: Q)CJ)O...... ............CIDCI) 000000 10001000 criNI'-NNO moo~IOO ..-<oooOION ~"--NNU;"; 1010..-000000 <0 00 ~~~~~* 000000 ooooo<=! criarioariari.... I'-00l'-~0 IO<ONool'-O ~C"'iNN"--"; I'-M....ooOO 10 ..-00 ~~~~~* ...J ...J ~ ~ o 0 ...JI-...JI- ~ I c( I ~~bQ li=~~ ZOZI- 0::>0- -Q: ...J bl-i=ffi...J ::>~g~~ ~OQ:wol- CI.lOI-Q:1 ~~~tijf3 oQ:OS:-1- Wb!::!Ow!::rn Q:SZCI.lZO ~w<(~!;Mo ...JCI.l~Q:"::..J ~~Q:C(~ct >"",Wl-<(I- W""I--WO Qf2~~!::1- CI.lCl.l>CI.lCl.lZ 000000 ....;NC"i~arit= WWWWwQ ...J...J...J...J...J_ ::>::>::>::>::>0:: ooooo~ WWWWWZV# :I::I::I::I::I:o 00000 CI.lCl.lCl.lCl.lCl.l~ >- a: ~ ~ CI) t.i .E -.... 0,...... .:!! t~ ~J:f8 '" .z z~::E -g CD lo-- -mz~ .Jil: 0 = ~~;: g"t) -;; ~ .2 0:: PJ tlQ)o .E: <>lll) 0J!l1l) c::C::z 8~::E c:: ~.~ ~ ~ lD c(vJ: u; o l!! .., ~ .., c:: lD Q) E lD Z ~ g c:: o o ........c COlD:!! ~ J: ~~.., ........~Ic:: ",,,,m .8 00>- .., '" '" '" 0::'" ._- (t)(t) .c~ v,.. "'~E ~"''''- v.t~16-g 1919:2:2.& ~-iU!"t)N :g:8cQ.:C"': i!! ~ t~ ~i .2LL-gF;:!<>l Q. c:: ad! .2' m ~ m ~~ c( lD .., c:: Q) .., ~ D ~ i I I ~ ~ I o Gl i; .., .Sl :c '" 9- g> .C:: ! f c;, .... 01 S!! ~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /00- TO: Mayor and Council Members, City Administrator ~ Lee Smick, AICP ~ Planning Coordinator . FROM: SUBJECT: Request to revise the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update Larry & Doneene Wenzel Property DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION The City has received a request from Mr. Gary G. Fuchs, Attorney at Law, on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Larry & Doneene Wenzel to re-designate three acres of their property to business on the 2020 Land Use Plan (see attached letter). The Wenzel property lies south of 195th Street and east of the newly aligned Pilot Knob Road expansion. DISCUSSION In the February 1998 approval of the MUSA Expansion, this property showed approximately 11 acres of business along the west side of the newly aligned Pilot Knob Road expansion. At the time, the business area was perceived as a logical location for a business strip center in close proximity to dense neighborhoods and along a highly traveled traffic corridor. However, during the Comprehensive Plan visioning sessions held in June of 1998, it became apparent that maintaining the downtown area was a high priority and extensive commercial areas located outside of the downtown business district could detract from the downtown revitalization goals set at the visioning sessions. The Planning Commission and City Council examined this property in March and April of 1999 and determined that the business area shown on the Wenzel property was too large in scale and may detract from the downtown by drawing businesses to this new location. They also determined that since the Charleswood development to the west had already designated the southwest comer of 195th Street and Pilot Knob Road as a business/high density residential use, the location of an additional business use to the east on the Wenzel property may become too populated with businesses and further detract from the downtown revitalization goals. Therefore, the business strip was removed from the Wenzel property and relocated to the north at a smaller scale on the SeedlGenstar property in Neighborhood District 2. Throughout the Comprehensive Planning process, Mr. Wenzel did not comment on proposed changes to the land use designations for his property. However, with the prospects of development on his property, the developers have begun to formulate conceptual plans that include both residential and business land use designations. The attached conceptual site plan shows high, medium and low-density designations along with a three acre business designation directly to the south of the City's proposed general maintenance facility. The residential areas generally comply with the 2020 Land Use Plan shown on the Wenzel property with the exception of the business use proposal. With this new information showing a development concept for the property, City staff recommends that the City Council refer this matter back to the Planning Commission for their review so that the Planning Commission may forward their recommendations concerning this request to the City Council at a later meeting. ACTION REOUESTED Refer this request back to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. Respectfully Submitted, ~-~- Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Mr. and Mrs. Larry and Doneene Wenzel Mr. Gary G. Fuchs, London Anderson Antolak & Hoeft Mr. J. Michael Noonan, Rottlund Homes London Antolak Anderson oeft, Ltd. ATIORNEYS AT LAW 15 SOUTH AFTH STREET, SUITE 1200 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1063. U.S.A. TELEPHONE: 612-338-4400 . FACSIMILE: 612-338-4311 June 2, 1999 Mr. David Olson Community Development Director City of Farmington 326 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Re: 2020 Comprehensive Guide Plan Larry & Doneene Wenzel Property Dear Mr. Olson: Thank you for the time you took last week to visit with me regarding the City's ongoing efforts to revise its Comprehensive Guide Plan and how those efforts affect the land owned by Larry and Doneene Wenzel, my clients. On behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Wenzel, I request that they and their representatives be placed on the Council agenda for the June 21, 1999 Council meeting for the purpose of presenting a request that a portion of their property that lies south of 19Sth Street and east of Pilot Knob Road be designated on the 2020 Comprehensive Guide Plan for future Business uses. We are currently working on identifying the specific portion of the property to be guided for Business use. I will contact you as soon as we have a decision and will give you as much information ahead of time as I can. In the meantime, please place the matter on the Council agenda, and if you have any quesiions, please cali me. Very truly yours, LONDON ANDERSON ANTOLAK & HOEFT 6'1 I /'1 '] (t.t'1j C-;, Gary G. Fuchs k> itl CJL.4...-) GGF~) cc: Larry Wenzel D:\GGF\OLSON LTR 06-02-99.doc(lmlk) MINNEAPOLIS, MN · ApPLE VALLEY, MN · SPOONER, WI \ ~ l . 'f -, - .... .. 'Ii 110~ . ," ., 'i:'l:tt? :.I".(J.. . .f'u", ~ '"" ~I~ 10~ .. /i; ':~~ . . u,. '." ~1~ .Iti~~ ~ ~k5 ~ .. ~ - i" ~ ;\ l :t ~ - - . . . . : ~. l \ \. , \ I. \ \ \ \ .:--- . --"' \, ('II~\ ~~ '-- ..J \ ". .~ . .. . ',~~~i~ ~ ..&.. o/I~ ~ IP~' \r!/ \Mmuv. P~11 fa~;~. 11Y; fe1tfw,{ ~~'Ht 11.D ~.~ -. . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us lOb TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Castle Rock Board Communication - Ash Street Sub-Committee Meeting DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION The City has received a response from Castle Rock Township dated June 2, 1999 acknowledging Councilmembers' Cordes and Soderberg communication dated May 7, 1999. DISCUSSION In review of this most recent Township communication, staff has identified the following issues that continue to be raised by the township. It would appear that these issues remain either unresolved or unclear with the township as of this date. 1) Township issue of a "20 year commitment of no forcible annexation". Council has previously indicated that this issue is premature given the context of current discussions. However, Council has suggested no interest in forcibly annexing township properties. Similarly, Council has indicated that the substantive nature of these discussions could be raised at the next stage of project discussions. 2) Township issue of "a fair and equitable tax policy on voluntary or "hook-up" annexations. Council has taken the position of supporting State guidelines relative to declining tax payments to the township. I have included additional information from the Department of Revenue on annexation by ordinance levy procedures that could be incorporated in an orderly annexation agreement. Again, these discussions could be raised at the next stage of proj ect discussions. 3) Township issue of "maximum assessments and/or hook-up charges that Farmington agrees will not be exceeded under any circumstances." This point has been raised by the township in the past to suggest a ceiling for township property assessments regardless of actual project costs. In response, staff has indicated that feasibility study costs are estimates, and that the City could not guarantee or limit assessments based on feasibility estimates. Moreover, should the City take the position of "maximum assessments" as advocated by the Township, and actual project assessments exceed the "maximum", then Mayor and Council Members Castle Rock Board Communication - June 2, 1999 Page 2 of2 the City would effectively have to subsidize township charges with City taxpayer dollars. Again, this issue is also premature given the stage of project discussions. 4) The issue associated with jurisdictional cost-sharing for the feasibility study in the event that the project does not go forward has again been raised by the township. Castle Rock Township's most recent proposal suggests committing $2,500 to the City for feasibility study costs over and above their lower portion of feasibility study costs in the event the Township does not approve the project is unclear. As Council may recall, the joint powers agreement approved by Council on April 5, 1999 indicates that both jurisdictions will equally share costs unless the project is ordered. If the project is ordered, then the costs of the feasibility study would be allocated according to project construction costs. The latest proposal by the Township suggests that the City would have higher feasibility study costs, effectively negating the 50/50 cost share concept, and that should the Township decide not to approve the project, they would offer $2,500. This significantly alters the City's previous understanding of an equal cost-sharing arrangement in the absence of moving the project forward. It has been the City's understanding that should the project not be ordered, that both jurisdictions, regardless of which jurisdiction took the project disapproval action, would equally share in the costs of preparing a new feasibility study. Section 6. Right to Terminate, of the Joint Powers Agreement, establishes this understanding based on the cost sharing formula of an even split of feasibility report costs. ACTION REOUESTED This brief analysis of the Township's letter dated June 2, 1999 is presented for Council's review and discussion. The Township has indicated that they would be willing to attend another subcommittee meeting to further discuss these remaining issues. If Council desires to hold another sub-committee meeting, possible dates should be determined and forwarded to the Township. '. CASTLE ROCK TOWNSHIP- P.O. BOX 6 FARMINGTON MN 55024 Board of Supervisors Alyn Angus, Chair, 463-3182 Norbert Kuhn, Supervisor, 463-7813 Kenneth Betzold, Supervisor, 463-7334 William T. Neil, Supervisor, 507-645-4332 Jim Ozmun, Supervisor, 463-3623 Township Office, 460-2221 June 02, 1999 LaCelle Cordes & Kevan Soderberg Council Members City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Dear Council Members, We have reviewed your letter of May 7, 1999. We appreciate your timely correspondence and your candor and forthrightness in stating your position. Your positions are not unreasonable, but we feel that they need to be fine tuned and worked out for the mutual benefit of both communities. Of significant concern to the township is the issue of orderly annexation. a 20-year commitment for no forcible annexation and a fair and equitable tax policy on voluntary or "hook-up" annexations is absolutely critical to this process going-forward. The impact on the loss of these tax revenues to the township is not small. We have every intention of fulfilling our obligations to the taxpayers and residents of Castle Rock Township. We, like you, know that we all need a completed Feasibility Report to make good judgments on this project and its effect on our communities. The Feasibility Report must contain maximum assessments and/or hook-up charges that Farmington agrees will not be exceeded under any circumstances. The residents will then know how much the costs will be and will be able to advise us in a knowledgeable fashion of their desires and needs in this matter. Likewise you will have a clear picture of Farmington's cost in the matter. We realize that the City of Farmington, as the lead agency on this project, will incur engineering costs in excess of those of Castle Rock. In the event that Castle Rock does not approve the project, we would commit to advancing $2,500.00 to the City of ,. Farmington to help defray its additional engineering costs. We feel that is a gesture of good will towards our neighbor and hope that you will accept it as such. Ifwe can agree in principle, especially on the tax retainage by Castle Rock Township, we believe that an Orderly Annexation Agreement as outlined above and the Joint Powers Agreement can be reasonable and fair to both communitites. We will continue to meet and negotiate in good faith and out of respect and concern for our neighbors and .our neighboring community. We are looking forward to another subcommittee meeting and would be glad to meet at the Township Hall as reasonably soon as you are able to schedule a meeting. Thank you for your consideration and cooperation. Very truly yours, rI/ Alyn Angus Castle Rock To C{)~ ~ 9Ji/-fYLfl Norbert Kuhn Jr. . ip Board of Supervisors cc: Alyn Angus, Chairman Castle Rock Township Norbert Kuhn Jr., Supervisor, Castle Rock Township Gordon Wichterman, Castle Rock Township Representative Jim Czech, Castle Rock Township Representative Jerry Ristow, Mayor, City of Farmington LaCelle Cordes, Council Member, City of Farmington Kevan . Soderberg, Council Member, City of Farmington John Erar, Administrator, City of Farmington Darlene Grabowski, City of Farmington Representative Eugene Thurmes, City of Farmington Representative Ron Thelen, City of Farmington Representative John Conzemius, Metropolitan Council Linda O'Connor, Metropolitan Council Carl Schenk, Metropolitan Council Joe Harris, Dakota County Commissioner Gerald Stelzel, Dakota County Fair Board JUI'! 10';::1 . ';::1';::1 10';::1. .::l::>HI'1 LI:..H\:'Ut.: ur 1'11'1 ....J. I J.I:..::>- r- . J. , . ,. ~SOTA Department of Revenue Property Tax Division Mail Station 3340 Phone (651) 296-3155 St. Paul, MN 55146-3340 Fax (651) 297-2166 April 30. 1999 TO: c~~nty Auditors and Treas~ren po- RE: Re""ised Instructions Regarding Annexations By Ordinance . In a letter to you dated September 22, 1994, I provided instructions cOncerning how to administer the property tax provisions of the new taw governing 'annexations by . ordinance (M.S. 414.033). Recently one ofyoUt peers pointed out that the 1994 letter does not agree with the current law. This observation is correct, since Laws 1997, Chapter 31, Article 3, Section 15 made the following significant changes to the annexations by ordinance law: . If the annexation becomes effective after August 1. of the levy year. the town continues to levy on the annexed area for that le'V)' year, and the town tax~s ' collected in the following taxes payable year, are paid'to the town. In this situation, the city does not begin to receive taxes from the annexed 'area until the year following the first year that the city may levy on the arinexed area. Previously~ if the annexation became effective after August I of a levy year, the town taxes collected from property in the annexed area in the following taxes payable year were to be paid to the city. l . The basis for the required payments from the city to the town was, changed to the amount of property taxes that were distributed to the town in regard to the annexed area in the last year that the property taxes from the ~exed area were payable to the town. Previously the payments were based on the town portion of the property taxes collected from the annexed area in the year the land was annexed. . The city does not begin to make payments to the town until the year following the year that the city may levy on the annexed area. These changes are effective for annexations that became effective in 1996 and thereafter. continued... An t9ual oppo,/Imity employe, TTYffDD: (65J) 2JS~0069 JUN 1::1'::.1 ''::.1'::.1 1::1'::.1: ::IbHlvl Lt.H\:.Ut. UI" P'IN Lll1E.S The following example illustrates how the property tax provisions of the annexation by ordinance law, as amended, are to be administered: 1. The annexation by ordinance is effective 10/1/98. 2. The town levies on the annexed area for the taxes payable year 1999. 3. The county treasurer distributes the town share of the 1999 tax collections for the annexed area to the town. .~~. - 4. The- city begins to levy on the annexed area starting with levy year 1"999. taxes .. payable 2000. S. The county treasurer distributes the city portion of the 2000 tax proceeds for the annexed area to the city. 6. The county auditor determines the taxes distributed to the town in 1999 in regard to the annexed area. 7. In 2000, the city pays the town an amount equal to 90% of the taxes distributed to the town in 1999 in regard to the annexed area. 8. In 2001, the city pays the town an amount equal to 70% of the taxes distributed to the town in 1999 in regard to the annexed area. 9. In 2002, the city pays the town an amount equal to 50% of the taxes distributed to the town in 1999 in regard to the annexed area. 10. In 2003, the city pays the town an amount equal to 30% ofthe taxes distributed to the town in 1999 in regard to the annexed area. 11. In 2004, the city pays the town an amount equal to 10% of the taxes distributed to the town in 1999 in regard to the annexed area. 12. In 2005 and thereafter, no further payments are made by the city to the town. An exam.ple with numbers is enclosed to further illustrate these provisions. Note: If the annexation was effective August 1 or earlier in 1998, the city would begin to levy on the annexed area in 1998, taxes payable 1999 instead of waiting until levy year 1999, taxeS payable 2000. 2 r-.~ JUN 09 '99 09:36RM LERGUE OF MN CIT1~~ t-'..:l Again~ the provisions of M.S. 424.033, as amended~ apply only to new annexations by ordinance that became eftective in 1996 or thereafter. They do not apply to annexations by ordinance that became effective prior to 1996. nor do they apply to annexations ordered by the Municipal Board. The provisions for annexations by ordinance that became effective on or after August 1, 1994 but prior to 1996 are covered in my letter of September 22, 1994. If you have any questions conceming this letter, please contact me. w~-~ Richard B. Gardner Research Analyst Supervisor Senior . Enclosure 3 JUN 09 '99 09: 35RM LERGUCGFu MN Li Ilt..-S ......4 'Example of an Annexation by Ordinance Effective Beginning in 1996 or Thereafter (1) The city of Enterprise annexes a portion of Grow Township by a city ordinance effective 10/1/98. (2) GrO'\l\f:Townsnip levies on the annexed area for the taxes payable year 1999 in the amount (after HACA reduction) of; $ · 20,000 (3) The county treasurer distributes the town share of 1999 tax collections for the annexed area to Grow Township, in the amount of: $ 19,800 (4) The city of Enterprise levies on the annexed area for the taxes payable year 2000 in the amount (after HACA reduction) of: $ 30,000 (5) The county auditor determines the amount of taxes distributed in 1999 to Grow Township in regard to the armexed area and certifies that amount to the city of Enterprise: $ 19,800 (6) In 2000, the city pays the town 90% of the amount determined on line 5: S 17~820 (7) In 2001, the city pays the town 70% ofthe amount determined on line 5: $ 13,860 (8) In 2002, the city pays the town 50% ofthe amount determined on line 5: $ 9,900 (9) In 2003,"the city pays the town 30% of the amount determined on line 5~ $ 5,940 (10) In 2004, the city pays the town 10% of the amount determined on line 5: $ 1,980 (11) In 2005 and thereafter, no further payments are made by the city to the town. Prepared by: Minnesota Department of Revenue Property Tax Division April 30, 1999 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us //~ TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Approve Joint Powers Agreement - Castle Rock Township DATE: April 5, 1999 INTRODUCTION At the March 10, 1999 joint project sub-committee meeting with Castle Rock Township representatives, substantial agreement was reached concerning the approval of the draft Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) presented to Council on January 19, 1999. As Council is aware, the JP A will authorize the commission of a new feasibility study for the reconstruction of Ash Street and construction of Phase III of the Prairie Waterway. DISCUSSION The attached JP A represents final committee discussions and thoughts and, with the exception of one provisional change, does not materially affect the scope of the original draft of the agreement. The one issue that was discussed at length by committee members focused on feasibility cost allocations contained within Section 5 of the JPA. Essentially, this provision was changed to allocate the cost of the feasibility study on an equal percentage basis to each jurisdiction, unless the project is ordered. If the project is ordered, then feasibility study costs will be allocated according to project construction cost percentages. Committee members felt that this change represented the most equitable cost position for both jurisdictions. It is my understanding that Committee members Cordes and Soderberg support the JP A as amended and recommend full Council adoption at this time. The Joint Project Committee discussed the need for l:!<iditional information on cost estimates and time frame for the feasibility study. Committee members requested that City Engineer Mann and Township engineering consultant Foertsch, of Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc., meet to more fully discuss the scope of feasibility study. Attached, please find copies of correspondence from City Engineer Mann and Mr. Foertsch which will be discussed at this evening's meeting. Township representatives indicated their support for the JPA as amended and stated that they would bring the agreement back to their full Board on March 23, 1999 for approval. No other issues were discussed or raised by the Township representatives regarding lPA issues or any other concerns at that time. ACTION REOUESTED It is my understanding that the Castle Rock Township Board did not approve the JP A at their March 23, 1999 Board meeting, and that a certain issue remains unresolved from the Township Board's perspective regarding annexation of properties on the east side of Highway 3 along State Highway 50. This issue, however, was never raised or discussed with City representatives at the project committee meeting on March 10, 1999. Council may wish to discuss this issue at the April 5, 1999 Council meeting and identify potential options regarding an appropriate City response. In review of past documentation, Council did take a formal public position on requiring any non- municipal properties served with municipal services to be brought into the City. This position was one of several project principles discussed and, in my understanding, accepted by the Township in meetings last year regarding fundamental City project principles. Approve the attached JP A as presented. While Council action approving the JP A will not authorize the commissioning of a new joint project feasibility study until formally approved by Castle Rock Township, it will satisfy the terms and conditions the Council has publicly agreed to regarding the City's commitment to commission a new feasibility study. Council may wish to have a letter transmitted to the Castle Rock Township Board informing them of the Council action approving the JP A, and requesting information on the status of the anticipated Township Board action on the JPA. Respectfully Submitted, "iL;&.a~ ~:~~ e,-J John F. Erar Cc: Castle Rock Township Board JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE PREPARATION OF A PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING FEASIBILITY REPORT, AND POSSIBLE CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING OF IMPROVEMENTS TO ASH STREET/PHASE III OF PRAIRIE WATER WAY AND SURROUNDING AREAS IN THE SOUTHEAST AREA OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON AND PORTIONS OF CASTLE ROCK TOWNSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY OF FARMINGTON AND THE TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK THIS IS A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT entered into under Minnesota Statutes ~ 471.59, by and between the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Farmington") and the Town of Castle Rock ("Castle Rock") for the purpose of planning, constructing, and financing improvements to Ash Street and surrounding areas within the City and Town, including street, sanitary and storm sewers, and related improvements. RECITALS WHEREAS, Farmington is a statutory city of the State of Minnesota and can exercise all of the powers of a statutory city; and WHEREAS, Castle Rock is a town of the State of Minnesota and can exercise all of the powers of a town, and; WHEREAS, Farmington and Castle Rock have been actively involved in the study and review of certain potential public improvement projects including reconstructing Ash Street, the construction of Phase III of the Prairie Waterway, correcting or improving storm water management in the project area, providing sanitary sewer and water service to property owners within the benefiting area, and other related improvements; and WHEREAS, the public improvement projects involve areas within both jurisdictions to varying degrees and the construction of the necessary and beneficial public improvements may be best accomplished through the cooperation of Farmington and Castle Rock by studying, financing, constructing, operating, and maintaining the public improvement projects; and WHEREAS, Castle Rock and Farmington are entering into this joint powers agreement to study and provide a feasibility report addressing the financing, construction, operation, and maintenance of these public improvements in order to: (1) reduce, to the greatest practical extent, the public capital expenditures necessary for the identified improvements, (2) abate pollution, (3) control excessive rates and volume of runoff; (4) improve water quality; (5) prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows; (6) provide a reliable and safe source of drinking water; (7) enhance the public transportation and road system serving the area; and (8) secure all other benefits associated with the identified potential public improvements; and WHEREAS, Castle Rock Township and the City of Farmington agree to jointly share in the costs of preparing a new feasibility report with each jurisdiction agreeing to underwrite an equal share of the cost of preparing, reviewing and developing a new project feasibility report. AGREEMENTS OF THE PARTIES NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, Castle Rock and Farmington agree as follows: Section 1. Project Description. The Project to be studied includes the reconstruction of Ash Street and the construction of Phase III of the Prairie Waterway by the parties in cooperation with Dakota County, sanitary sewer improvements to properties in the immediate vicinity of Ash Street both within and outside the City as necessary, storm water improvements in the drainage area within the hydrogeologic boundaries of the area, the provision of publicly supplied drinking water to properties within the area, and other necessary or related improvements identified as part of the preparation of the feasibility report. Section 2. Feasibility Report. Castle Rock and Farmington shall cause to be prepared by their respective professional engineers registered in the State of Minnesota a feasibility report for the Project. The parties may approve, reject, or require amendments or modifications to the report as appropriate. Section 3. Response to Feasibility Report. After preparation of the Report, Castle Rock and Farmington hereby agree to hold such public hearings or meetings either jointly or separately to discuss the construction and financing of the improvements identified in the report, and jointly may order the preparation of Plans and Specifications or other documents prior to jointly ordering any improvements identified in the report. The execution of this agreement between the two parties does not commit either party at this time to the stated improvements. Section 4. Delegation of Authority and Further Assurances. Castle Rock and Farmington hereby delegate to their respective engineers all of the powers and authority available to the parties under this Joint Powers Agreement which are necessary for the engineers to carry out their obligations under this Agreement. The parties agree that they will in good faith execute the documents or take other actions as may reasonably be necessary for each party to carry out their respective obligations to cooperatively prepare the Feasibility Report. Section 5. Feasibility Report Cost Allocation. Both parties agree to coordinate preparation of the Feasibility Report through each jurisdiction's engineering representatives. Both parties agree to share equally in the cost of preparing an updated Feasibility Report to the most practical extent possible. It is the intent of this cost allocation approach to equitably distribute the costs of preparing the report between both jurisdictions. Upon completion and acceptance of the updated Feasibility Report by both jurisdictions, a total cost accounting shall be performed and shall be presented to each jurisdiction for review and final payment. Each party agrees to pay 50% of the cost of preparing the updated feasibility study, however, if the project is ordered, the cost of the feasibility report preparation will be allocated according to project construction allocations. Section 6. Right to Terminate. Either party may, at its sole discretion, elect to terminate this Agreement by providing written notice of termination to the other party. If a party terminates this Agreement as provided in this paragraph, the terminating party shall be obligated to reimburse the non-terminating party for any costs or liability it may have incurred pursuant to this Agreement up to the date of the termination notice. Failure to order the project does not subject either party to reimburse any loss to the other party Section 7. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement among the parties and supersedes all prior written and oral understandings. Section 8. Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement or waiver or modifications of its provisions must be in writing and signed by both parties. Section 9. Effective Date. This Agreement is effective when it has been executed by both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date(s) shown. CITY OF FARMINGTON TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK BY: BY: Its Its ATTEST: ATTEST: Its Its Date: Date: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: John Erar, City Administrator FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Prairie Waterway, Ash Street Utilities and Storm Sewer project DATE: March 31, 1999 Mr. Mike Foertsch, the engineer for Castle Rock Township and I met on March 16, 1999 to discuss the assignment of responsibilities in regards to the feasibility report for the Ash StreetlPrairie Waterway III project. At that meeting, we agreed on the following allocation of duties: Prairie Waterway III Castle Rock will complete the portion of the feasibility report for the Prairie Waterway III (PW III). All field work, design and generation of report text for PW III will be the responsibility of Castle Rock's engineer. Farmington's engineer will supply Castle Rock's engineer with the storm water flows coming from the storm sewer system in Ash Street from the west. Farmington's engineer will review Castle Rock's design of the PW III. Ash Street Utilities and Storm Sewer Farmington will complete the portion of the feasibility report for the utilities and storm sewer in Ash Street. All field work, design and generation of the report text for the sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer for Ash Street will be the responsibility of Farmington's Engineer. Castle Rock's engineer will supply Farmington's engineer with the land uses for areas in the Township that drain into the Ash Street storm sewer system. Castle Rock's engineer will review Farmington's design of the utilities and storm sewer in Ash Street. Ash Street Improvements Farmington will incorporate the County's design of Ash Street in the feasibility report. All coordination with Dakota County and generation of the report text for the improvements for Ash Street will be the responsibility of Farmington's Engineer. Feasibility Report Preparation Estimates It had been estimated in the past that the cost to produce a new feasibility report for the Ash Street project would cost between $30,000 and $40,000. I telephoned Mr. Foertsch on Monday, March 29, to find out what the estimated engineering costs are associated with completing the portion of the feasibility report for which Castle Rock is responsible. Mr. Foertsch indicated he had not yet received a request from Castle Rock Township to provide that information, however, he indicated he would forward his estimate as soon as possible. The estimated engineering costs for the City to complete it's portion of the feasibility report for which Farmington would be responsible is $29,500. It is estimated that the cost to review the Castle Rock's part of the feasibility report would not exceed $3,500, and could be less. It should be noted that the work and costs to complete the report are significantly greater for Farmington versus the duties that have been allocated to Castle Rock by mutual agreement. It is anticipated that the total cost to complete the report (not including Farmington's review of Castle Rock and vice versa) will not exceed $40,000. The Joint Powers Agreement stipulates that this cost would be split evenly between the City and the Township in the event that the project is not ordered. If the project is ordered, then feasibility study costs will be allocated the same as the construction costs for the project. Respectfully submitted, ;;tm~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file Mike Foertsch, SEH/RCM City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us IO~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer David L. Olson, Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Sewer Connection Request - Malinski Property DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION Arcon Development has submitted a letter to the City outlining alternatives for providing sanitary sewer service to the Malinski property and requesting discussion with the City Council regarding the identified alternatives (see attached). DISCUSSION The Malinski property is located east of Limerock Ridge and south of the future Prairie Creek Additions. The Malinski property is not currently developable because sewer is not available to the site. The alternatives identified by Arcon relating to the development of the Malinski property in regards to the sewer issue are as follows: 1) There is currently a City owned trunk sanitary sewer line running west to east approximately 150- feet north of the Malinski property through the property owned by Progress Land Company. In order to access this sewer line and allow for the development of the site, an easement will need to be obtained from Progress Land Company. The required easement could be obtained either through negotiations with Progress Land or through the City's powers of eminent domain. City position: Arcon Development is strongly encouraged to continue negotiations with Progress Land Company to obtain the necessary easement for the permanent connection to the trunk sanitary sewer to the north. In light of the City's relationship with Progress Land Company and the anticipated cost associated with the condemnation process, staff does not recommend that the City exercise its powers of eminent domain on behalf of the developer to obtain a sewer easement from Progress Land Company. Staff recommendation not withstanding, if the Council decides to move forward and utilize its powers of eminent domain to acquire the easement, all costs associated with the process would need to be borne by the developer. Furthermore, Council should be aware that the decision to use eminent domain on behalf of the developer would set a precedent for future development situations. 2) The second alternative is to allow Arcon to install a temporary lift station that would convey the flows to an existing accessible sewer line. The temporary lift station would be eliminated at such time the property to the north develops or Progress Land Company grants the necessary easement. All costs associated with the installation of the temporary lift station, removal of the temporary lift station and future permanent connection to the sewer line to the north would be the responsibility of Arcon Development. City position: From an engineering standpoint, the installation of a lift station that would allow the site to have sewer service is an acceptable temporary solution. A transfer switch to accommodate an auxiliary power source would be required equipment on the lift station. It is anticipated that the permanent connection would be available within five years. As stated above, all costs associated with the installation of the temporary lift station, removal of the temporary lift station and future permanent connection to the sewer line to the north would be the responsibility of Arcon Development. 3) The third alternative would be for the developer to wait until the property to the north develops before the Malinski property develops. City position: This alternative becomes the outcome if the developer is unsuccessful in acquiring the easement from Progress Land Company, the Council determines not to use eminent domain to acquire the easement and the Council prohibits the installation of a temporary lift station. Mr. Larry Frank of Arcon Development will be present at the meeting to discuss these issues with the Council. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Council consideration of the alternatives for providing sewer service to the Malinski property. Respectfully submitted, ~m~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer .CJ~La ~ David L. Olson Director of Community Development cc: file Larry Frank, Arcon Development ARCON 7625 METRO BLVD. . SUITE 350 · EDINA, MINNESOTA 55439 · PHONE 612/835-4981 · FAX 612/835-0069 June 2, 1999 Mr. John Erar, City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 RE: Jon Malinski Property, Farmington, MN Dear Mr. Erar, This letter is a follow-up to the meeting on May 10, 1999, to discuss the issue of sewer availability to the Jon Malinski property in Farmington. Scott Johnson, President of Arcon Development, Inc., and myself have visited with Warren Israelson, Progress Land Company, several times to discuss the possibility of connecting sanitary sewer from the Malinski property to the existing sanitary sewer line on his property. As of this date, no resolution has been reached, however, we do anticipate hearing from Mr. Israelson by the end of this week. As was discussed at the May 10fl1 meeting, the Malinski property cannot be developed at present because sewer is not available to the site, there are three alternatives relating to. the development of the Malinski property regarding this sewer issue; I. Connect directly to the existing line to the north, either by permission of Mr. Israelson, or through condemnation. 2. Install a temporary lift station within the Malinski property that would be removed when the Israelson property is developed and a permanent connection can be made. 3. No development on the Malinski property until the Israelson property is developed. Subject to not reaching a resolution with Mr. Israelson this week, Mr. Malinski and I would like to appear before the City Council on June 8, to discuss the above alternatives relating to the development of the Malinski property. I will be out of town the 3M and 4fl1 of June, but will call you Monday to confirm the City Council meeting agenda. We look forward to meeting with the City Council to discuss this issue. Sincerely, ~ ,(l. ~ Larry D. Frank Project Manager WE DO MORE THAN DEVELOP LAND.... WE CREATE NEIGHBORHOODS DEVELOPERS - PlANNERS - CONTRACTORS City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us lOci TO: Mayor and Council Members City Administratot1~ Lee Smick, AICP .^ {} Planning Coordinator rr FROM: SUBJECT: Cameron Woods Development Contract DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION The Development Contract for Cameron Woods has been drafted in accordance with the approval and conditions placed on the approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat. DISCUSSION The Cameron Woods Development Contract requires the following conditions to be agreed upon: · The Developer enters into the Development Contract; and · The Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of the Contract; and · Outlots A, B, C and D shall be deeded to the City. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Cameron Woods Final Plat on May 25, 1999. The City Council approved the Final Plat on June 7, 1999 subject to preparation and execution of a Development Contract and approval of the construction plans. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the Development Contract for Cameron Woods. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution authorizing its signing contingent upon the above conditions and approval by the Engineering Division. Respectfully SUb~d, n ~.~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Wensco, Inc. RESOLUTION NO. APPROVlNGDEVELOPMENTCONTRACT - CAMERON WOODS - Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 21 st day of June, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: introduced and Member _ seconded the following: Member WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. R58-99, the City Council approved the final plat of Cameron Woods. The Development Contract requires the following conditions to be agreed upon: I. The Developer enters into the Development Contract; and 2. The Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of the Contract; and 3. Outlots A, B, C and D shall be deeded to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. The aforementioned development contract, a copy of which is on file in the Clerk's office, is hereby approved. 2. The Mayor and Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to sign such contract. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 21 st day of June, 1999. Mayor Attested to the _ day of June, 1999. City Administrator SEAL City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us JOe TO: Mayor and Council Members, City Administrat01~ Lee Smick, AICP ff'? Planning Coordinator FROM: SUBJECT: Nelson Hills Farm 7th Addition Preliminary & Final Plat DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION Heritage Development proposes to develop 66 single-family lots on 23.03 acres for the 7th Addition of Nelson Hills Farm and provides a density of2.8 dwelling units per acre. This is the final phase of the Nelson Hills Farm.PUD Development. DISCUSSION Nelson Hills 7th Addition is located north of 190th Street, west of Everest Path, south of Nelson Hills Farm 5th Addition and east of the Devney property. The proposed plat consists of four east-west local streets connecting to Everest Path to the east. The streets will be constructed at 32 feet in width within a 60-foot right-of-way. Executive Avenue shows a temporary cul-de-sac along the west property line and Exceptional Trail will terminate as a stub street at the west property line. Sidewalks are not required on local streets and are not provided for in this plat. Outlot A is proposed as a storm water pond and is located in the central portion of the 7th Addition. The parkland requirement has been met with the land acquisition of Daisy Knoll Park located northeast of the Nelson Hills Farm 7th Addition. Construction of a play structure in this park will commence in the summer of 1999. An existing north-south trail is located to the east of Everest Path and continues south through the Troyhills development. Grading for the Nelson Hills Farm 7th Addition has recently begun and will continue during the summer months. A conditional use permit for grading the site was granted by the Planning Commission on September 8, 1998 and by the City Council on September 21, 1998. The Engineering Division has completed their review and has determined that minor engineering issues need to be addressed as discussed in the attached letter by Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer. The Planning Commission approved the Nelson Hills 7th Addition Preliminary & Final Plat on May 25, 1999 contingent on engineering requirements and the submittal of a landscape and street lighting plan. The landscape and street lighting plans have been received and approved by the Planning and Engineering Divisions. REQUESTED ACTION Council approval of the attached resolution for the Nelson Hills Farm 7th Addition Preliminary & Final Plat contingent on engineering requirements. /i.~IYSUbm~itted' ~ I .' . ! /' /./ L.........../. ~- . ". - Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Heritage Development File RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAT AND AUTHORIZING SIGNING OF FINAL PLAT NELSON HILLS 7TH ADDITION Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 21 Slday of June, 1999 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the preliminary and fmal plat of Nelson Hills 7th Addition is now before the Council for review and approval; and WHEREAS, a public hearing of the Planning Commission was held on the 25th day of May, 1999 after notice of the same was published in the official newspaper of the City and proper notice sent to surrounding property owners; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the preliminary and fmal plat; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the proposed plat can be feasibly served by municipal service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above final plat be approved and that the requisite signatures are authorized and directed to be affixed to the fmal plat with the following stipulations: 1. Outlot A and drainage and utility easements need to be dedicated to the City. 2. Final Plat approval at the City Council will be contingent on the preparation and execution of the Development Contract and approval of the construction plans. 3. Major engineering issues on the site have been resolved. 4. The Developer reimburses the City for all engineering, administrative, legal and SWCD costs. 5. The Developer agrees to furnish the City one (1) reproducible and one (1) eight and one-half inch by eleven inch (8 W' x 11") reproducible copy of the filed plat in accordance with Title 11, Chapter 3, Section 3 (E) of the City Code. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 2151 day of June, 1999. Mayor Attested to the _ day of June, 1999. City Administrator ~ B ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ . ] 10. l:j I ! i I ~ 0 I I I & 1.141 f) I f i! ~ ! ~ liS ! I I f 1 ; Jljl I f if! { J ' 81 I . ~ IS: I . ! ~i Ii J ~ 1 gl I J ~ h J i 1= ;~: j I JI i!i · Iii) i I . II ; it J l ~ III ~ . ~~ : Ii c I f~ j ~ s ~ JI' f I I .i !I ~ il J I i f 4 1& ;i 1'1 1"1 ~ .; II i if in! I} ~ifJ n i{J ; hI J ota I-I I I!~ 1 0 I ld ] J 'I: :~i f t I :I,)O: Ii I : Ii; I III ) ; I I ! ~h I f I J 0 IJlt t - f ~ II ,; I ~ I ~1I & & J I ~ I !:I ; i : I i 11 ~i!l I I I I · Ii lu I I; f II 1& HI: i f I~! ~ I '~jl f - ' 'I << Ii: ~c 0 1 J Jfl liP I' f I II 00 ! Jl . I~'o II 1 If h~ h U!I . ~ ! If II! !! 11;1~ ~~ 1461 Ii If II I. If IiI IJ I !I J f II t~ ~f t ' l'Jf ~I ! J& i l' Ji lin il~, t Ii l!! ,Iii ,if m If Ili\ If .~ 11 J ! ~ lil - _tl u I~ ~ I ~1 " I I I.. i :~~ i ;~~ ~ S~I ~ ~I~ Lie: -i .Ia & " ~ i ~4! ~ I~li 1::. n~ ~ ~~1I ~ i~" . id I "" ~ 0- m J!! hit, I ~9ii~ ~.. ~!II: "'~ j!h~l i~ !~@i~ d @!l!5! 5 00 li!b 9 d Iln~ ! ~ ~ I I-l~U ~ : J" I ~ .._ J ,- T=' ~ h~r-I : ~ ..~ I ~... 2 I bl ..ei ~j!1 llOOI "\!Ill .. ~I ~~i .. !\ : I .. IJ'._oIKJ8 · r --....----, I I I ------------- .ODIfIJ --" , ..u.!IO.IJ(JN \.. ..... (t' ':l:U~:U: lHl JO JNf1 '.) ...... KJS1lH '8 1011~ ~.. I" /il ; ~ e I 4 II! ~ i ~ ~ j ~ .. o. o ~ a b ~ ; ~ ~ E .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ --- --~---------~------- I I ; li!:~ C"I l5 .8 ~I 91~~ '0 C"I W8 iJ i~~llI ! l=~ I .. 1 ~ I ~I~!ll ~ ~ L_j _J :> r- ,--, ~ i ~i~ f" hllr-l ~i~~~ ~~ : II "II 1 ..~Ih I; ~ 2 ~ I Inw~ o ... ~~ ~~ o:~ - . ~ :: ::::E .-' ! t- O) .Ii ~ ~ ~; W~ ~X: .~ t-1lI .~~~f" i~ AS' aIEl ~ a iic~~l:l 41 u - i~ ~>- I!!~~ ~l;! Ul ." U ~ I~ i!~ !i! ~1 I~ Wts ~ a Io!~ ; ~el~ h " . a n.. <( ~ ~ Z o > 1 I I 1 1 r- 1 1 1 1 1- _.J .~~~. . .' .-' ~~ iz ii3 f;!O . ~ ~ 0 ~~ i=C u III I I -.__I_~- - ...;;::;:. " ".:1;. . ...~.., '" ~ UJ~ Z& -'- ~i ~m ;/ ..~ So F!!l ail' b" I~ ~% .'tW6J Ctt ':)~ jO .,/_ lS lHl I) 3NIl ..) . NOllIOQW Hl. NW:t $"TWt ......-Nl$13.. '8 1011.00 JIJ 31111 . City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /0.( TO: Mayor and Council Members City Administrato~O'3L jJ Lee Smick, AICP P Planning Coordinator FROM: SUBJECT: Nelson Hills 7th Addition Development Contract DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION The Development Contract for the Nelson Hills 7th Addition has been drafted in accordance with the approval and conditions placed on the approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat. DISCUSSION The Nelson Hills 7th Addition Development Contract requires the following conditions to be agreed upon: · The Developer enters into the Development Contract; and · The Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of the Contract; and · Outlot A shall be dedicated to the City. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Nelson Hills 7th Addition Preliminary and Final Plat on May 25, 1999. The City Council approved the preliminary and final plat on June 21, 1999 subject to the preparation and execution of a Development Contract and approval of the construction plans. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the Development Contract for the Nelson Hills 7th Addition. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution authorizing its signing contingent upon the above conditions and approval by the Engineering Division. Respectfully submitted, -'"'\ . ..,,;7 J:7 (\ 1./ v~:cL. , ..~.. Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Heritage Development RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT - NELSON HILLS 7TH ADDITION - Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 21 st day of June, 1999 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. _, the City Council approved the preliminary and final plat. The Development Contract requires the following conditions to be agreed upon: 1. The Developer enters into the Development Contract; and 2. The Developer provides the necessary security in accordance with the terms of the Contract; and 3. Outlot A shall be dedicated to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. The aforementioned development contract, a copy of which is on file in the Clerk's office, is hereby approved. 2. The Mayor and Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to sign such contract. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 21 st day of June, 1999. Mayor Attested to the _ day of June, 1999. City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor and Council Members. City Administrator~ FROM: Lee Smick, AICP (j..!) Planning Coordinator' SUBJECT: Nelson Hills 7th Addition Development Contract DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION/ DISCUSSION Enclosed is the Development Contract for Nelson Hills 7th Addition. The contract was still being reviewed by Heritage Development at the time the City Council packets were being distributed. Therefore, please include this information in your Council packet under item I Of. ACTION REOUESTED Attach this information to item IOf in the June 21, 1999 City Council packet for review of the Nelson Hills 7th Addition Development Contract. Respectfully Submitted, _") cX~.~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Heritage Development City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 101 TO: Mayor and Council Members, City Administrator!J'V JJ Lee Smick, AICP (). Planning Coordinator Y FROM: SUBJECT: Application to Rezone Lot 3 in Block 16, Town of Farmington from R-2 (Medium-Density Residential) to B-2 (Heavy Business). DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION Lamperts Lumber is requesting to rezone Lot 3 in Block 16, Town of Farmington from R-2 Medium-Density Residential to B-2 General Business in Lot 3 (consisting of 10,235 square feet). The owner proposes to expand the supply yard to the northwest into Lot 3 and this requires the rezoning of the lot to allow a supply yard as a conditional use in a B-2 zoning district. DISCUSSION The property is located north of Lamperts Lumber along the south side of Oak Street. A townhome development is proposed to the north of Lot 3 Block 16, a rail line and grain elevator is located to the east, Lamperts Lumber retail and warehouse building is located to the south and a single-family home resides to the west. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning of Lot 3, Block 16, Town of Farmington on June 8, 1999. Lamperts Lumber originally sought a change to B-3 Heavy Business zoning for Lots I, 2 and 3 which currently exists on the Lamperts Lumber lot to the south. The owner requested the B-3 zone to alleviate the need for additional meetings such as the need for conditional use permits if the lumberyard were to expand in the future, since the B-3 zoning district permits supply yards. However, at a meeting with Mike Cordova, Manager of Lamperts Lumber on June 3, 1999, the Planning Division indicated to Mr. Cordova that staff would be recommending that the lots be rezoned to B-2 General Business. Staffs position on this deals with the need to control future expansion of Lamperts Lumber through conditional use permits because of the close proximity to residential uses on the west and north. With the conditional use process, certain conditions may be placed on a business when expansion or other construction is proposed such as screening or landscaping requirements. At the June 8, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, Lamperts Lumber agreed to the B-2 zoning designation on Lot 3 Block 16 and maintaining the B-2 zoning for Lots 1 and 2. Additional discussions at the June 8, 1999 meeting included discussions of previous requirements that were not met when the lumberyard expanded in approximately 1993. A site plan submitted in 1993 showed parking and landscaping improvements along Spruce Street in front of the retail portion of the lumberyard. The City approved the site plan, however, the improvements along Spruce Street were never installed. Currently, the parking lot along Spruce Street consists of gravel and no landscaping has been installed. As required by City Code 10-6-8 (A2), "any off- street parking lot and driveway area shall be graded for proper drainage and surfaced with concrete or bituminous materiaL" Therefore, the Planning Commission recommended that the parking lot be paved along Spruce Street and landscaping be installed to fulfill the requirements of that approval. In conclusion, the following issues were addressed and approved by the Planning Commission: 1. Rezone Lot 3 of Block 16, Town of Farmington from R-2 (Medium-Density residential) to B- 2 General Business and maintain the B-2 General Business zone for Lots 1 and 2, Block 16, Town of Farmington. 2. Pave the parking lot along Spruce Street and provide landscaping in order to fulfill the requirements of the 1993 approval. 3. Screening shall be provided within the expansion area requiring slats to be installed within the proposed chain link fence. 4. Installation of landscaping along Oak Street at the north side of the property is required. Lamperts Lumber was informed of the above requirements at the June 8, 1999 Planning Commission meeting and have agreed to comply upon approval of the rezoning. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the attached resolution to rezone Lot 3, Block 16, Town of Farmington from R-2 (Medium-Density Residential) to B-2 (General Business) contingent upon the approval of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update. Respectfully Submitted, ~.~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Lamperts Lumber CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. An Ordinance Rezoning Lot 3 Block 16, Town of Farmington/Lamperts Lumber property from R-2 to B-2. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the City Council approved a petition to rezone Lot 3 Block 16, Town of FarmingtonlLamperts Lumber property on the 21 st day of June, 1999 from R-2 to B-2; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a public hearing held on June 8, 1999, recommended approval of the rezoning: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Farmington hereby amends the City Zoning Ordinance rezoning Lot 3 Block 16, Town of FarmingtonlLamperts Lumber property from R-2 to B-2. Contingent on the following: 1. Rezone Lot 3 of Block 16, Town of Farmington from R-2 (Medium-Density residential) to B-2 General Business and maintain the B-2 General Business zone for Lots 1 and 2, Block 16, Town of Farmington. Enacted and ordained on the _ day of June, 1999. CITY OF FARMINGTON MAYOR ATTEST: CITY ADMINISTRATOR Approved as to form the _ day of , 1999. CITY ATTORNEY SEAL Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of ,1999. c o ....... C') c .- E L- eo LL \t- O C 3:0.. o eo I-.~ ~c o ~. Urn o U (CO -.J \t- O ('f) "'C C eo N ~ en ....... o -.J '-- I ~c..~ >.mm Q) ... -g::2 g- m::l_ ..... -go~a. ::l al ..... _ o<(~ g alCl)~:.o ~:J 0_ ::l U ::2 () CI) ">' iJ D <....."'J JJrillJJ] lS OMt r I .Ls ONt - peOJl!e~ 'd '0 I I 1- .... tIJ :E ...J W f- T - I I I lS lS ~ I J I I f- II-- f- ---l - - - f-- - I- - - - .... tIJ :.::: ~ J L rIl 1:: ~ e c.. I - u j I~ ~ - I - I- '" z.~ ?: l- t '-I ~I JII III I lr I r - ... - N .., I 1 If J I I - I- , ~ rn 1 I I--- - f- I - I 1 ---j I j I - ~ I J I L I---- I 1 ~ w - U :J _ a::: a.. tIJ -1 - I- J ~I I [ I I r - ~ I I '" '" in c: o .in :~ o '" c: ." c: II> 0: >- U >- .D "0 " ... " li - J I I r I -T I ~ ~ - - ---- I - - - - City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farmington.mn.us 104 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~-- FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Water Board Communication - Proposed Water Use Restrictions DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION The Water Board is considering adopting water use restrictions. DISCUSSION The purpose for adopting water use restrictions is two-fold. First, water use restrictions have the effect of reducing the peak water demand during the summer season when water usage is at its highest. By reducing the peak, the need for additional water supply wells and water reservoirs is reduced, which in turn reduces the capital costs for building those facilities. Second, water use restrictions can result in water conservation. Water conservation is a requirement of the City's Water Appropriation Permit that is granted by the DNR. As the City grows and needs to pump more water, the DNR has the authority to regulate the additional amount of water pumped from the aquifer. As part of the approval process, the City must have a water conservation plan in place. As the City grows and needs to appropriate more water, a watering ban would be looked on favorably by the DNR and help the City to obtain approval for increased water appropriations. Future studies of the Jordan aquifer (the aquifer from which Farmington's future wells will appropriate water) may indicate the. need for mandatory water use restrictions in the Cities that draw water from this aquifer. There are two possible means with which to enact water use restrictions. The first would entail the Water Board adopting water use restrictions as a policy. Enforcement of the policy would be through penalties included as a surcharge on the water bill. The Water Board has the statutory authority to enact this type of policy. As the Water Board does not have the statutory authority to pass ordinances, no criminal penalties would be possible under this approach. Alternatively or in addition, the City Council could adopt water use restrictions as an ordinance, which could be ultimately enforced by criminal citation. Attached is a preliminary draft ordinance for discussion purposes. The draft ordinance outlines odd- even water use restrictions, corresponding to property address, effective year round. There is also a clause addressing emergency situations. Nearby neighboring communities that currently have water use restrictions include Eagan, Rosemount and Hastings. It would be the Water Board's intent that, if water use restrictions are to be implemented, they become effective January 1,2000. BUDGET IMPACT None at this time. ACTION REQUESTED 1. Council discussion regarding the issue of water use restrictions; 2. Provide recommendations regarding water use restrictions to the Water Board. Respectfully submitted, ~Yn~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file City of Farmington Dakota County, Minnesota ~ ~4,(' ~ Proposed Ordinance No._ AN ORDINANCE AMENDIG TITLE 8, CHAPTER 3 OF THE FARMINGTON CITY WATER CODE CONCERNING WATER USE RESTRICTIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 8-3-21 of the Farmington City Code is amended in its entirety to read as follo~ ~: WATER USE RESTRICTIONS: Q<ti..) Odd-Even Restriction. Use of the city water supply system for lawn and garden sprinkling, irrigation, or other nonpotable uses shall be limited to an odd-even schedule corresponding to property address effective year round. This odd-even water use restriction shall not apply to the watering of new seed or sod for a period of three weeks from the date of seeding or sodding. (B) Emergency Restrictions. Whenever the Water Board determines it in the public interest, the Water Board may, by resolution, further limit the use, times and hours during which water may be used from the city water supply system, by giving notice by publication or by posting in the City Hall and at such public places as the Water Board may direct. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately up~ passage and publication. ~x '9 ADOPTED this _ day of _, 1999, by the City Council 0 Ity of Farmington. CITY OF FARMINGTON .", , ;~ ....." ..~ By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 10/' TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Resident Alley Paving Request DATE: June 21, 1999 INTRODUCTION Mr. Matt Fischer, 904 7th Street, has requested that he be allowed to pave a portion of the alley behind his home. DISCUSSION Mr. Fischer has approached City staff and requested that he be allowed to pave (concrete) the portion of the alley abutting his property, as well as to the north to Beech Street (approximately 200-feet), at his cost. Mr. Fischer proposes to do this in order to improve the aesthetics and drainage of the alley. As this project would be a public improvement, Council authorization is necessary before Mr. Fischer could proceed with the work. Attached is a draft agreement that would address the City's issues with the project. This agreement would need to be executed, the surety posted and the construction details approved by engineering staff prior to the commencement of the work. It is recommended that the City notify the other residents affected by the improvement prior to construction. At this time, assuming that the engineering details can be resolved, engineering staff does not see any reason to deny Mr. Fischer's request. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Council consideration whether to allow Mr. Fischer to pave the alley behind his residence subject to the requirements outlined in the attached draft agreement. Respectfully submitted, ~YJ1~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file Matt Fischer 06/16/99 U9:41 FAX 651 452 555U C.uU'J:U:;LL KNUTSON 19) 002 LICENSE AGREEMENT AGREEMENT dated ,1999, by, between, andamongMA'rl'llliW FISCHER, an individual, ("Fischer") and APPLE VALLEY REDI-MIX. INC., a Minnesota corporation, ("A VR") (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Licensees"), and the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"). WHEREAS, Fischer owns property in the City of Farmington, at ("Fischer Property"); WHEREAS, the City owns an alley which serves the Pischer Property. The alley is subject to drainage problems and is in need of paving, but the City has no immediate plans to improve the alley; WHEREAS, Fischer owns and operates A VR and. desires to have A VR pave a ~ortion of the alley, including the ponion abutting the Fischer Property, which portion is described as follows: The portion of the alley in the City of Faonington locared between 6th Street and 7th Street that lies South of Beech Street and abuts the properties in the City of Farmington identified by the following street addresses: 909 Sixth Street, Farmington, MN 917 Sixth S1reet, Farmington, MN 900 Seventh Street, Farmington, MN SS 904 Seventh Street, Farmington, MN (hereinafter "Subject Alley"). WHEREAS, the City is willing to allow Fischer and A VR to pave the Subject Alley. subject to the terms of this Agreement. 73417 06/16/99 09:42 FAX 651 452 5550 --- CAMPBELL KNUTSON 141 003 IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants and agreements herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. LICENSE. The City does hereby grant unto the Licensee a llccnse to enter upon the Subject Alley for the purpose of paving the Subject Alley. . 2. TERM. This Agreement sball commence upon execution of this Agreement by all parties and shall terminate the earlier of one week after Licensee's entry on the Subject Alley to pcrfonn the paving work under this Agreement or November I, 1999.3. CONDITIONS FOR PAVING. The paving of the alley shall be completed in accordance with the CitY standards, ordinances and any plans furnished to the City and approved by the City Englnccr. Licensee shall obtain all necessary permits from any applicable agencies before proceeding with construction. Licensees shalllnstruct its engineer to provide adequate field inspection personnel to assure an acceptable level of quality control to the extent that the Licensee's engineer will be able to certify thaI the constIuCtion work meets the approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City's discretion, have one or more City inspectors and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part-time basis. Licensees shall follow all instructions received from the City's inspectors. Ucensee's engineer shall provide for on-site project management. licensee shall notify the City of its intent to commence paving work not less than 24 bours prior to the scheduled time for commencement. 4. INDEMNIFICATION. licensee shall hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, and agents from claims made for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from Licensee's perfonnance of the work described herein. licensee shall indemnify the City, its 73417 2 ~6/16/~9 09:42 FAX 651 452 5550 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 141 004 officers, employees, and agents for all costs. damages. expenseS. or attorney's fees which City may payor incur in consequence of such claims. 5. CLEAN UP. Licensee shall clean dirt and debris from alleys or streets that has resulted from paving work by Licensee, their subcontractOrs, their agents or assigns. 6. OWNERSHIP OF IMPROVEMENTS. Upon completion of the work and constrUction performed under this Agreement, the improvements lying Within publU: casements shall become City property without further notice or action. 7. SECURITY. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this agreement, Licensee shall furnish the City with a letter of credit. in the form attaChed hereto, from a bank ("security") for $ . The bank shall be subject to the approval of the City Arlministrator. The security shall be for a term ending . The City may draw down the security, without notice, If or any violation of the terms of this Agreement or if the security is allowed to lapse prior to the end of the required term. 8.CLAIMS. In the event that the City receives claims from labor, materialmen, or others that work has been performed under this Agreement, the sums due them have not been paid, and the laborers, materialmen, or others are seeking payment from the City, Licensee hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader action pul'Suant to Rule 22, Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts, to draw upon the letters of credit in an amount up to 125 percent of the claim.(s) and deposit the funds in compliance with the Rule, and upon such deposit, licensee shall release, discharge, and dismiss the City from any further proc~ings as it pertains to the letters of credit deposited with the District Court, except that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to determine attorneys' fees pursuant to this Agreement. 73417 3 06/16/99 09:42 FAX 651 452 5550 CAMJ'tiJ:!;LL KNUTSON- I{!J 005 9. WARRANTY. Licensee warrants all improvements constlUcted by it pursuant to this Agreement against poor material and faulty wor~anship. The warranty period for is one year. commencing upon completion and acceptance by the City Council. licensee shall post maintenance bonds in the amount of twenty-rIVe percent (25 %) of fmal certified paving costs to secure the warranties. The City shall retain ten percent (10%) of the security posted by the Licensee until the maintenance bonds are furn1shcd the City or until the warranty per:iod expires. , whichever first occurs. The retainage may be used to pay for warranty work. The City standard specifications for street constrUCtion identify the procedures for final acceptance of streets, and shall apply to the final acceptance by the City of the pavina work performed by Licensee on the Subject Alley. 10. INSURANCE. Licensee shall take out and maintain or cause to be taken out and maintained until six (6) months after the City has accepted the public improvements, Public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury J includ~ death, and.claims for property damage which may arise out of Licensee's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury and death shall be not less than $500,000 for one person and $1,000,000 for each occurrence; limits for property damage shall be not less than $200,000 for each occurrence; or a combination single limit policy of $1,000,000 or more. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the policy, and the Licensee shall me with the City a certificate evidencing coveraae prior to the Licensee commencing paving work on the Subject Alley. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given ten (10) days advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance. 73417 4 06/16/99 09:43 FAX 651 452 5550 CAMPBELL KNt~SON I4J 006 11. RESPONSIDILITY FOR COSTS. A. Except as otherwise specified. herein, Licensee shall pay all costs incurred by it in conjunction with the paving work performed under this Agreement. B. Licensee shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of the terms of this Agreement, including engineering and attorneys' fees. 12. MISCELLANEOUS. A. Licensee represents to the City that the paving work authorized under this Agreement complies with all city, county. metropolitan. state. and federal laws and regulations. If the City determines that the paving of the Subject Alley does not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow paving work in the Subject Alley until the Licensee does comply. Upon the City's demand, Licensee shall cease work until there is compliance. B. If any portion. section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Agreement is for any reason hcldinvalid. such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreemem. C. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Agreement. To be binding. amendments or waivel'S shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City.s failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Agreement shall not be a waiver or release. D. Licensee may not assign this Agreement without the written pennlssion of the City Council. 73417 5 ~6/16/lJ~: 4J l''A.A. !H>! 452 555U CAMt'Ht;LL KNUTSUN IgJ 007 E. Licensee shall be reponsible for cOIDplying with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations in performing any work authorized under this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this License Agreement as of the day and year flI'st above-written. CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor AND John F. Em. City Adn1inistrator LICENSEE: APPLE VALLEY REDI-MlX, INC. BY: 1m: Matthew Fischer STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) )S8. The foregoing instnmlCI1t was acknowledged before me this _ day of , 1999. by Getald Ristow. Mayor, and by John F. &ar, City Administrator, of the City of Fannington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by the City Council. NotarY Public 73417 6 Uij/lij/~~ U~:4J rAA ijol 402 OOoU ------- (;AMt'J:SbLL KNlIT::;UN Il&J UU~ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF )S8. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of . 199_, by , the of Apple Valley Redi-Mix, Inc., a Minnesota cOrpOration, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this , 1999, by day of Notary Public DRAFfEn BY: Campbell Knutson Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 (612) 4S2~OOO amp 73417 7 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us / ~ Q..; FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator~ Robin Roland, Finance Director TO: SUBJECT: Bond Sale - General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1999 DATE: June21,1999 INTRODUCTION The City Council at their meeting of May 3, 1999 authorized the sale of General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1999 to fund the County Road 72 and Downtown Streetscape improvements. DISCUSSION Competitive bids for the bonds were received today in the offices of Juran & Moody. Preliminary analysis anticipated a net interest rate of 4.75 % with an anticipated total interest cost of $681,754. The City received 3 bids. US Banks I Piper Jaffray was the low bidder at a net interest rate of 5.00%, making the total interest cost $700,006. BUDGET IMPACT Analysis of the bids will be presented at the meeting. ACTION REQUIRED On the basis of the competitive bids received, the City Council should approve the resolution awarding the sale of the $1,775,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1999 to US Banks I Piper Jaffray at a net interest rate of 5.00%. li~7 Finance Director CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $1,775,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1999 Issuer: City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held June 21, 1999, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., at the City Hall, Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO $1,775,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1999; AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT AND SECURITY THEREOF I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer on June 21, 1999. City Administrator It was reported that _ sealed proposals for the purchase of $1,775,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1999 were received prior to 11:00 o'clock a.m., pursuant to the Preliminary Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers of the Bonds by Juran & Moody, a division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Incorporated, financial consultants to the Issuer. The proposals have been publicly opened, read and tabulated and were found to be as follows: See Attached Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Councilmember RESOLUTION RELATING TO $1,775,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1999; AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT AND SECURITY THEREOF BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the Issuer), as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND SALE. 1.1. Authorization. By resolution duly adopted on May 3,1999, this Council authorized the sale of $1,775,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1999 (the Bonds) to finance improvements to County Road 72 and the Downtown Streetscape Project (the Projects), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475. 1.2. Sale. The Issuer has retained Juran & Moody, a division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Incorporated (Juran & Moody) as independent financial advisers in connection with the sale of the Bonds. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph (9), the requirements as to public sale do not apply to the issuance of the Bonds. A proposal has been received from in and associates (the Purchaser), to purchase the Bonds, when, as and if issued on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, at a price of $ , plus accrued interest on all Bonds to the day of delivery and payment. 1.3. Award. The offer of the Purchaser to purchase the Bonds is hereby accepted, and the Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed on behalf of the Issuer to execute a contract for the sale of the Bonds with the Purchaser. 1.4. Supplemental Resolution for Term Bonds. Should the Purchaser determine that any Bonds be issued in the form of term bonds, the Council shall, by a separate and supplemental resolution, set forth further terms and provisions as necessary to provide for the issuance of the term bonds. Should the Purchaser determine that the Bonds be issued only in the form of serial bonds, no further resolution of the Council shall be required. SECTION 2. BOND TERMS; REGISTRATION; EXECUTION AND DELIVERY. 2.1. Issuance of Bonds. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid issuance of the Bonds having been done, now existing, having happened and having been performed, it is now necessary for the City Council to establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to provide security therefor and to issue the Bonds forthwith. 2.2. Maturities: Interest Rates: Denominations and Payment. The Bonds shall be dated originally as of July 1, 1999 shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities, shall mature on December 1 in the years and amounts stated below, and shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption at the annual rates set forth opposite such years and amounts, as follows: Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate 2000 $115,000 2008 $120,000 2001 115,000 2009 120,000 2002 115,000 2010 120,000 2003 115,000 2011 120,000 2004 115,000 2012 120,000 2005 120,000 2013 120,000 2006 120,000 2014 120,000 2007 120,000 The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein; provided that, so long as the Bonds are registered in the name of a securities depository, or a nominee thereof, in accordance with Section 2.8 hereof, principal and interest shall be payable in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities depository. 2.3. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon initial delivery of the Bonds pursuant to Section 2.7 and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 2.6, the date of authentication shall be noted on each Bond so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable on each June 1 and December I, commencing December 1, 1999, each such date being referred to herein as an Interest Payment Date, to the persons in whose names the Bonds are registered on the Bond Register, as hereinafter defined, at the Registrar's close of business on the fifteenth day of the calendar month next preceding such Interest Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day. 2.4. Optional Redemption. Bonds maturing in 2005 and later years shall be subject to redemption at the option of the Issuer, in whole or in part, in inverse order of maturity dates and, if less than all of the Bonds of a single maturity date are to be redeemed, by lot or other method as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures), in integral multiples of $5,000, on December I, 2004, and on any Interest Payment Date thereafter, at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. At least 30 days before the date specified for redemption of -2- any Bond the City Administrator shall cause notice of redemption to be published if and as required by law, and mailed by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the Registrar and to the Holders, as hereinafter defined, of all Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the Bond Register; provided that notice shall be given to any securities depository in accordance with its operational arrangements. No defect in or failure to give such notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. The notice of redemption shall state the redemption date, the redemption price, the place where the Bonds are to be surrendered for payment of the redemption price, which shall be an office of the Registrar, and that on the redemption date the redemption price will be due and payable and that interest thereon shall cease to accrue from and after such date. 2.5. Appointment of Registrar. The Issuer hereby appoints U.S. Bank Trust National Association, in St. Paul, Minnesota, Minnesota, as the initial bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the Registrar). The Mayor and City Administrator are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the Issuer, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company organized under the laws of the United States or one of the states of the United States and authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as successor Registrar. The Issuer agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The Issuer reserves the right to remove the Registrar, effective upon not less than thirty (30) days' written notice and upon the appointment and acceptance of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the Bond Register to the successor Registrar. 2.6. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the Issuer and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a register (the "Bond Register") in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. The term "Holder" or "Bondholder" as used herein shall mean the person (whether a natural person, corporation, association, partnership, trust, governmental unit, or other legal entity) in whose name a Bond is registered in the Bond Register. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the Holder thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the Holder thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the Holder in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. -3- (c) Exchange of Bonds. At the option of the Holder of any Bond in a denomination greater than $5,000, such Bond may be exchanged for other Bonds of authorized denominations, of the same maturity and a like aggregate principal amount, upon surrender of the Bond to be exchanged at the office of the Registrar. Whenever any Bonds are so surrendered for exchange the Issuer shall execute and the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver the Bonds which the Bondholder making the exchange is entitled to receive. (d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered for payment, transfer or exchange shall be promptly canceled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of. The Registrar shall furnish the Issuer at least once each year a certificate setting forth the principal amounts and numbers of Bonds canceled and destroyed. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The Issuer and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the Bond Register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of, the principal of and (subject to Section 2.3) interest on the Bond and for all other purposes; and all payments made to or upon the order of such Holder shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. No service charge shall be made for any transfer or exchange of Bonds, but the Registrar may require payment of a sum sufficient to pay any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to any transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated. Lost, Stolen or Destroved Bonds. In case any Bond shall become mutilated or be destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the Issuer and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to -4- the Registrar shall be canceled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the Issuer. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it shall not be necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. (i) Authenticating Agent. The Registrar is hereby designated authenticating agent for the Bonds, within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55, Subdivision 1, as amended. (j) Valid Obligations. All Bonds issued upon any transfer or exchange of Bonds shall be the valid obligations of the Issuer, evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the same benefits under this Resolution as the Bonds surrendered upon such transfer or exchange. 2.7. Execution, Authentication and Deliverv. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction of the Administrator and shall be executed on behalf of the Issuer by the signatures of the Mayor and the Administrator, provided that the signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. In case any officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on any Bond shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of such Bond, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until the date of delivery of such Bond. Notwithstanding such execution, no Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond, substantially in the form provided in Section 2.8, has been executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on any Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been duly authenticated and delivered under this Resolution. When the Bonds have been prepared, executed and authenticated, the Administrator shall deliver them to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore executed, and the Purchaser shall not be obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. 2.8. Securities Depository. (a) For purposes of this section the following terms shall have the following meanings: "Beneficial Owner" shall mean, whenever used with respect to a Bond, the person in whose name such Bond is recorded as the beneficial owner of such Bond by a Participant on the records of such Participant, or such person's subrogee. "Cede & Co." shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee ofDTC, and any successor nominee of DTC with respect to the Bonds. "DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company of New York, New York. -5- "Participant" shall mean any broker-dealer, bank or other financial institution for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository. "Representation Letter" shall mean the Representation Letter pursuant to which the Issuer agrees to comply with DTC's Operational Arrangements. (b) The Bonds shall be initially issued as separately authenticated fully registered bonds, and one Bond shall be issued in the principal amount of each stated maturity of the Bonds. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of such Bonds shall be registered in the bond register in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. The Registrar and the Issuer may treat DTC (or its nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner of the Bonds registered in its name for the purposes of payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds, selecting the Bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, if any, giving any notice permitted or required to be given to registered owners of Bonds under this resolution, registering the transfer of Bonds, and for all other purposes whatsoever; and neither the Registrar nor the Issuer shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Neither the Registrar nor the Issuer shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant, any person claiming a beneficial ownership interest in the Bonds under or through DTC or any Participant, or any other person which is not shown on the bond register as being a registered owner of any Bonds, with respect to the accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or any Participant, with respect to the payment by DTC or any Participant of any amount with respect to the principal of or interest on the Bonds, with respect to any notice which is permitted or required to be given to owners of Bonds under this resolution, with respect to the selection by DTC or any Participant of any person to receive payment in the event of a partial redemption of the Bonds, or with respect to any consent given or other action taken by DTC as registered owner of the Bonds. So long as any Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on such Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to such Bond, only to Cede & Co. in accordance with DTC's Operational Arrangements, and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the Issuer's obligations with respect to the principal of and interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than DTC shall receive an authenticated Bond for each separate stated maturity evidencing the obligation of the Issuer to make payments of principal and interest. Upon delivery by DTC to the Registrar of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the Bonds will be transferable to such new nominee in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. (c) In the event the Issuer determines that it is in the best interest of the Beneficial Owners that they be able to obtain Bonds in the form of bond certificates, the Issuer may notify DTC and the Registrar, whereupon DTC shall notify the Participants of the availability through DTC of Bonds in the form of certificates. In such event, the Bonds will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the Issuer and the Registrar and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event the Bonds will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof.. -6- (d) The execution and delivery of the Representation Letter to DTC by the Mayor or City Administrator, if not previously filed with DTC, is hereby authorized and directed. (e) In the event that any transfer or exchange of Bonds is permitted under paragraph (b) or (c) hereof, such transfer or exchange shall be accomplished upon receipt by the Registrar of the Bonds to be transferred or exchanged and appropriate instruments of transfer to the permitted transferee in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. In the event Bonds in the form of certificates are issued to owners other than Cede & Co., its successor as nominee for DTC as owner of all the Bonds, or another securities depository as owner of all the Bonds, the provisions of this resolution shall also apply to all matters relating thereto, including, without limitation, the printing of such Bonds in the form of bond certificates and the method of payment of principal of and interest on such Bonds in the form of bond certificates. SECTION 3. FORM OF BONDS. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the following form: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA CITY OF FARMINGTON GENERAL OBUGA nON IMPROVEMENT BOND OF 1999 Interest Rate Maturitv Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP No. July 1, 1999 REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: The City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota (the Issuer) acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the registered owner specified above, or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above on the maturity date specified above and promises to pay interest thereon from the date of original issue specified above or from the most recent Interest Payment Date (as hereinafter defined) to which interest has been paid or duly provided for, at the annual rate specified above, payable on June 1 and December 1 in each year, commencing December 1, 1999 (each such date, an Interest Payment Date), all subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of this Bond before maturity. The interest so payable on any Interest Payment Date shall be paid to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month next preceding such Interest Payment Date. Interest hereon shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year composed of twelve 30-day months. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof, are payable in -7- lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft by U.S. Bank Trust National Association, in St. Paul, Minnesota, as Bond Registrar and Paying Agent (the Registrar), or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the Issuer have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $1,775,000 issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on June 21, 1999 (the Resolution), to finance the costs of local improvements, and is issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475. The Bonds are issuable only in fully registered form, in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities. Bonds having stated maturity dates in the year 2005 and thereafter are each subject to redemption at the option of the Issuer, in whole or in part, in inverse order of maturity dates and, if less than all Bonds of a single maturity date are to be redeemed, by lot or other method as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures), in multiples of $5,000, on December 1,2004, and on any Interest Payment Date thereafter, at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount thereof plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. At least 30 days before to the date specified for the redemption of any Bond the Issuer will cause notice of redemption to be published if and to the extent required by law, and to be mailed by first class mail (or, if applicable, provided in accordance with the operational arrangements of the bond depository), to the registered owner of any Bond to be redeemed at the owner's address as it appears on the Bond Register maintained by the Registrar, but no defect in or failure to give such notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Upon surrender to the Registrar of any Bond which has been redeemed in part, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the unredeemed portion of the principal of the Bond so surrendered. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the Bond Register maintained by the Registrar at its principal office, upon surrender of this Bond for transfer at such office, duly endorsed by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner's attorney, and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the Issuer will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date. The Registrar may require payment of a sum sufficient to pay any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to any such transfer or exchange. -8- The Bonds have been designated by the Issuer as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" pursuant to Section 265(b )(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The Issuer and the Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment as herein provided and for all other purposes, and neither the Issuer nor the Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Bond, so long as this Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, or in the name of any other nominee of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository, the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on this Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to this Bond, only to Cede & Co. or other nominee in accordance with the operational arrangements of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository as agreed to by the Issuer. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the Issuer in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required; that, prior to the issuance hereof, the City Council has by the Resolution covenanted and agreed to levy special assessments upon property specially benefitted by the local improvements financed by the Bonds, and ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the Issuer, which will be collectible for the years and in amounts sufficient to produce sums not less than five percent in excess of the principal of and interest on the Bonds when due, and has appropriated such special assessments and taxes to its General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1999 Bond Fund for the payment of such principal and interest; that if necessary for payment of such principal and interest, additional ad valorem taxes are required to be levied upon all taxable property in the Issuer, without limitation as to rate or amount; that the issuance of this Bond, together with all other indebtedness of the Issuer outstanding on the date hereof and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness of the Issuer to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness; and that the opinion printed hereon is a full, true and correct copy of the legal opinion given by Bond Counsel with reference to the Bonds, dated as of the date of original issuance and delivery of the Bonds. This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Issuer has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the signatures of its Mayor and City Administrator. -9- CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA (Facsimile signature - City Administrator) (Facsimile signature - Mayor) CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds referred to in the Resolution mentioned within. Date: u.s. BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Bond Registrar By Authorized Representative [Insert legal opinion] The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to the applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM - as tenants in common UTMA ................... as Custodian for ................. (Cust) (Minor) under Uniform Transfers to Minors Act ...... (State) TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common Additional abbreviations may also be used. ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: NOTICE: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face -10- of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatsoever. Signature Guaranteed: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an "eligible guarantor institution" meeting the requirements of the Bond Registrar, which requirements include membership or participation in STAMP or such other "signature guaranty program" as may be determined by the Bond Registrar in addition to or in substitution for STAMP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE: [End of form of Bond] SECTION 4. GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1999 CONSTRUCTION FUND. There is hereby established on the official books and records of the Issuer a General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1999 Construction Fund (the Construction Fund), and the Finance Director shall continue to maintain the Construction Fund until payment of all costs and expenses incurred in connection with the construction of the Projects have been paid. To the Construction Fund there shall be credited from the proceeds of the Bonds, exclusive of unused discount and accrued and capitalized interest, an amount equal to the estimated cost of the Projects and from the Construction Fund there shall be paid all construction costs and expenses. There shall also be credited to the Construction Fund all special assessments collected with respect to the Projects, until all costs of the Projects have been fully paid. After payment of all construction costs, the Construction Fund shall be discontinued and any Bond proceeds remaining therein may be transferred to the other funds or accounts established for construction of other improvements instituted pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. All special assessments on hand in the Construction Fund when terminated or thereafter received, and any Bond proceeds not so transferred, shall be credited to the General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1999 Bond Fund of the Issuer. SECTION 5. GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1999 BOND FUND. So long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and any principal of or interest thereon unpaid, the Finance Director shall maintain a separate debt service fund on the official books and records of the Issuer to be known as the General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1999 Bond Fund (the Bond Fund), and the principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable from the Bond Fund. The Issuer irrevocably appropriates to the Bond Fund (a) any amount in excess of $1,748,375 received from the Purchaser; (b) capitalized interest in the amount of $ ; (c) all taxes and special assessments levied and collected in accordance with this resolution; and (d) all other moneys as shall be appropriated by the City Council to the Bond Fund from time to time. -11- There are hereby established two accounts in the Bond Fund, designated as the "Debt Service Account" and the "Surplus Account." There shall initially be deposited into the Debt Service Account upon the issuance of the Bonds the amount set forth in (a) above. Thereafter, during each Bond Year (i.e., each twelve month period commencing on December 2 and ending on the following December 1), as monies are received into the Bond Fund, the Finance Director shall first deposit such monies into the Debt Service Account until an amount has been appropriated thereto sufficient to pay all principal and interest due on the Bonds through the end of the Bond Year. All subsequent monies received in the Bond Fund during the Bond Year shall be appropriated to the Surplus Account. If at any time the amount on hand in the Debt Service Account is insufficient for the payment of principal and interest then due, the Finance Director shall transfer to the Debt Service Account amounts on hand in the Surplus Account to the extent necessary to cure such deficiency. Investment earnings (and losses) on amounts from time to time held in the Debt Service Account and Surplus Account shall be credited or charged to said accounts. If the aggregate balance in the Bond Fund is at any time insufficient to pay all interest and principal then due on all Bonds payable therefrom, the payment shall be made from any fund of the Issuer which is available for that purpose, subject to reimbursement from the Surplus Account in the Bond Fund when the balance therein is sufficient, and the City Council covenants and agrees that it will each year levy a sufficient amount of ad valorem taxes to take care of any accumulated or anticipated deficiency, which levy is not subject to any constitutional or statutory limitation. SECTION 6. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. The Issuer hereby covenants and agrees that, for the payment of the cost of the Projects, the Issuer has done or will do and perform all acts and things necessary for the final and valid levy of special assessments in an amount not less than 20% of the cost of each of the improvements financed by the Bonds. The Issuer estimates it will levy special assessments in the aggregate principal amount of $1,130,450. It is estimated that the principal and interest on such special assessments will be levied and collected in the years and amounts shown on Appendix I attached hereto. In the event any such assessment shall at any time be held invalid with respect to any lot or tract of land, due to any error, defect or irregularity in any action or proceeding taken or to be taken by the Issuer or by the City Councilor by any of the officers or employees of the Issuer, either in the making of such assessment or in the performance of any condition precedent thereto, the Issuer hereby covenants and agrees that it will forthwith do all such further things and take all such further proceedings as shall be required by law to make such assessment a valid and binding lien upon said property. SECTION 7. PLEDGE OF TAXING POWERS. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as such payments respectively become due, the full faith, credit and unlimited taxing powers of the Issuer shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. In order to produce aggregate amounts which, together with the collections of special assessments and other amounts as set forth in Section 5, will produce amounts not less than 5% in excess of the amounts needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds, ad -12- valorem taxes are hereby levied on all taxable property in the Issuer. The taxes will be levied and collected in the following years and amounts: Levy Years Collection Years Amount 1999-2013 2000-2014 See attached Levy Computation The taxes shall be irrepealable as long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the Issuer reserves the right and power to reduce the tax levies in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61. SECTION 8. DEFEASANCE. When all of the Bonds have been discharged as provided in this Section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this Resolution to the Holders of the Bonds shall cease. The Issuer may discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full, or, if any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued from the due date to the date of such deposit. The Issuer may also discharge its obligations with respect to any prepayable Bonds called for redemption on any date when they are prepayable according to their terms, by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date an amount equal to the principal, interest and redemption premium, if any, which are then due, provided that notice of such redemption has been duly given as provided herein. The Issuer may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with the Registrar or with a bank qualified by law to act as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited for such purpose, bearing interest payable at such times and at such rates and maturing or callable at the holder's option on such dates as shall be required to pay all principal and interest to become due thereon to maturity or an earlier designated redemption date. Provided, however, that if such deposit is made more than ninety days before the maturity date or earlier designated redemption date of the Bonds to be discharged, the Issuer shall have received a written opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that such deposit does not adversely affect the exemption of interest on any Bonds from federal income taxation and a written report of an accountant or investment banking or financial advisory firm verifying that the deposit is sufficient to pay when due all of the principal and interest on the Bonds to be discharged on and before their maturity dates or earlier designated redemption date. SECTION 9. TAX COVENANTS; ARBITRAGE MATTERS; AND CONTINUING DISCLOSURE. 9.1. General Tax Covenant. The Issuer agrees with the Holders from time to time of the Bonds that it will not take, or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents, any action that would cause interest on the Bonds to become includable in gross income of the -13- recipient under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) and applicable Treasury Regulations (the Regulations), and agrees to take any and all actions within its powers to ensure that the interest on the Bonds will not become includable in gross income of the recipient under the Code and the Regulations. All proceeds of the Bonds deposited in the Construction Fund will be expended solely for the payment of the costs of the Projects (or other improvements authorized pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429). All improvements so financed will be owned and maintained by the Issuer and available for use by members of the general public on a substantially equal basis. The Issuer shall not enter into any lease, management contract, use agreement, capacity agreement or other agreement with any non- governmental person relating to the use of the Projects or security for the payment of the Bonds which might cause the Bonds to be considered "private activity bonds" or "private loan bonds" pursuant to Section 141 of the Code. 9.2. Certification. The Mayor and City Administrator, being the officers of the Issuer charged with the responsibility for issuing the Bonds pursuant to this Resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the Purchaser a certificate in accordance with Section 148 of the Code, and applicable Regulations, stating the facts, estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Bonds which make it reasonable to expect that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used in a manner that would cause the Bonds to be "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of the Code and Regulations. 9.3. Arbitrage Rebate Exemption. It is hereby found that the Issuer has general taxing powers, that no Bond is a "private activity bond" within the meaning of Section 141 of the Code, that 95% or more of the net proceeds of the Bonds are to be used for local governmental activities of the Issuer, and that the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds) issued by the Issuer and all subordinate entities thereof during the year 1999 is not reasonably expected to exceed $5,000,000. Therefore, pursuant to Section 148(f)( 4 )(D) of the Code, the Issuer shall not be required to comply with the arbitrage rebate requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3) of Section 148(f) of the Code. 9.4. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. The Issuer hereby designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code relating to the disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions, and hereby finds that the reasonably anticipated amount of qualified tax-exempt obligations (within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code) which will be issued by the Issuer and all subordinate entities during calendar year 1999 does not exceed $10,000,000. 9.5. Reimbursement. The Issuer certifies that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used by the Issuer to reimburse itself for any expenditure with respect to the Projects which the Issuer paid or will have paid more than 60 days prior to the issuance of the Bonds unless, with respect to such prior expenditures, the Issuer shall have made a declaration of official intent which complies with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Regulations; provided that a declaration of official intent shall not be required (i) with respect to certain de minimis expenditures, if any, -14- with respect to the Projects meeting the requirements of Section 1.150-2(f)( I) of the Regulations, or (ii) with respect to "preliminary expenditures" for the Projects as defined in Section 1.150- 2(f)(2) of the Regulations, including engineering or architectural expenses and similar preparatory expenses, which in the aggregate do not exceed 20% of the "issue price" of the Bonds. 9.6. Continuing Disclosure. (a) Purpose and Beneficiaries. To provide for the public availability of certain information relating to the Bonds and the security therefor and to permit the Purchaser and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to comply with amendments to Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.P.R. ~ 240. 15c2-12), relating to continuing disclosure (as in effect and interpreted from time to time, the Rule), which will enhance the marketability of the Bonds, the Issuer hereby makes the following covenants and agreements for the benefit of the Owners (as hereinafter defined) from time to time of the Outstanding Bonds. The Issuer is the only obligated person in respect of the Bonds within the meaning of the Rule for purposes of identifying the entities in respect of which continuing disclosure must be made. If the Issuer fails to comply with any provisions of this section, any person aggrieved thereby, including the Owners of any Outstanding Bonds, may take whatever action at law or in equity may appear necessary or appropriate to enforce performance and observance of any agreement or covenant contained in this section, including an action for a writ of mandamus or specific performance. Direct, indirect, consequential and punitive damages shall not be recoverable for any default hereunder to the extent permitted by law. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in no event shall a default under this section constitute a default under the Bonds or under any other provision of this resolution. As used in this section, Owner or Bondowner means, in respect of a Bond, the registered owner or owners thereof appearing in the bond register maintained by the Registrar or any Beneficial Owner (as hereinafter defined) thereof, if such Beneficial Owner provides to the Registrar evidence of such beneficial ownership in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar. As used herein, Beneficial Owner means, in respect of a Bond, any person or entity which (i) has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, such Bond (including persons or entities holding Bonds through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or (ii) is treated as the owner of the Bond for federal income tax purposes. (b) Information To Be Disclosed. The Issuer will provide, in the manner set forth in subsection (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the Issuer, the following information at the following times: (1) on or before 365 days after the end of each fiscal year of the Issuer, commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31, 1999, the following financial information and operating data in respect of the Issuer (the Disclosure Information): (A) the audited financial statements of the Issuer for such fiscal year, containing balance sheets as of the end of such fiscal year and a statement of -15- operations, changes in fund balances and cash flows for the fiscal year then ended, showing in comparative form such figures for the preceding fiscal year of the Issuer, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board as modified in accordance with the governmental accounting standards promulgated by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board or as otherwise provided under Minnesota law, as in effect from time to time, or, if and to the extent such financial statements have not been prepared in accordance with such generally accepted accounting principles for reasons beyond the reasonable control of the Issuer, noting the discrepancies therefrom and the effect thereof, and certified as to accuracy and completeness in all material respects by the fiscal officer of the Issuer; and (B) To the extent not included in the financial statements referred to in paragraph (A) hereof, the information for such fiscal year or for the period most recently available of the type contained in the Preliminary Official Statement (i) under the headings "Tax Base," "Area," "Population," "Municipal Facilities," "City Government," "Employee Pension Program," "Residential Development," "Industrial Park(s)," "Commercial/Industrial Development," "Building Permits," "Financial Institutions," "Education," "Major Employers" and "Largest Taxpayers" in the Section entitled "The City of Farmington-General Information" and (ii) under all the headings in the Section entitled "The City of Farmington-Economic and Financial Information," which information may be unaudited. Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, if the audited financial statements are not available by the date specified, the Issuer shall provide on or before such date unaudited financial statements in the format required for the audited financial statements as part of the Disclosure Information and, within 10 days after the receipt thereof, the Issuer shall provide the audited financial statements. Any or all of the Disclosure Information may be incorporated by reference, if it is updated as required hereby, from other documents, including official statements, which have been submitted to each of the repositories hereinafter referred to under subsection (c) or the SEC. If the document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must be available from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The Issuer shall clearly identify in the Disclosure Information each document so incorporated by reference. If any part of the Disclosure Information can no longer be generated because the operations of the Issuer have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure Information need no longer be provided if the Issuer includes in the Disclosure Information a statement to such effect; provided, however, if such operations have been replaced by other Issuer operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the Issuer determines that certain specified data regarding such replacement operations would be a Material Fact (as defined in paragraph (2) hereof), then, from and after such determination, the Disclosure Information shall include such additional specified data regarding the replacement operations. -l6- If the Disclosure Information is changed or this section is amended as permitted by this paragraph (b)(1) or subsection (d), then the Issuer shall include in the next Disclosure Information to be delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect of any change in the type of financial information or operating data provided. (2) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events which is a Material Fact (as hereinafter defined): (A) Principal and interest payment delinquencies; (B) Non-payment related defaults; (C) Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (D) Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (E) Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (F) Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax-exempt status of the security; (G) Modifications to rights of security holders; (H) Bond calls; (I) Defeasances; (1) Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the securities; and (K) Rating changes. As used herein, a Material Fact is a fact as to which a substantial likelihood exists that a reasonably prudent investor would attach importance thereto in deciding to buy, hold or sell a Bond or, if not disclosed, would significantly alter the total information otherwise available to an investor from the Preliminary Official Statement, information disclosed hereunder or information generally available to the public. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, a Material Fact is also an event that would be deemed material for purposes of the purchase, holding or sale of a Bond within the meaning of applicable federal securities laws, as interpreted at the time of discovery of the occurrence of the event. (3) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events or conditions: (A) the failure of the Issuer to provide the Disclosure Information required under paragraph (b)( 1) at the time specified thereunder; (B) the amendment or supplementing of this section pursuant to subsection (d), together with a copy of such amendment or supplement and any explanation provided by the Issuer under subsection (d)(2); (C) the termination of the obligations of the Issuer under this section pursuant to subsection (d); (D) any change in the accounting principles pursuant to which the financial statements constituting a portion of the Disclosure Information are prepared; and (E) any change in the fiscal year of the Issuer. -17- (c) Manner of Disclosure. The Issuer agrees to make available the information described in subsection (b) to the following entities by telecopy, overnight delivery, mail or other means, as . appropriate: (1) the information described in paragraph (1) of subsection (b), to each then nationally recognized municipal securities information repository under the Rule and to any state information depository then designated or operated by the State of Minnesota as contemplated by the Rule (the State Depository), if any; (2) the information described in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (b), to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and to the State Depository, if any; and (3) the information described in subsection (b), to any rating agency then maintaining a rating of the Bonds at the request of the Issuer and, at the expense of such Bondowner, to any Bondowner who requests in writing such information, at the time of transmission under paragraphs (1) or (2) of this subsection (c), as the case may be, or, if such information is transmitted with a subsequent time of release, at the time such information is to be released. (d) Term; Amendments; Interpretation. (1) The covenants of the Issuer in this section shall remain in effect so long as any Bonds are Outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations of the Issuer under this section shall terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the Issuer delivers to the Registrar an opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that, because of legislative action or final judicial or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the Issuer to comply with the requirements of this section will not cause participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to be in violation of the Rule or other applicable requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or any statutes or laws successory thereto or amendatory thereof. (2) This section (and the form and requirements of the Disclosure Information) may be amended or supplemented by the Issuer from time to time, without notice to (except as provided in paragraph (c)(3) hereof) or the consent of the Owners of any Bonds, by a resolution of this Council filed in the office of the recording officer of the Issuer accompanied by an opinion of Bond Counsel, who may rely on certificates of the Issuer and others and the opinion may be subject to customary qualifications, to the effect that: (i) such amendment or supplement (a) is made in connection with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in law or regulation or a change in the identity, nature or status of the Issuer or the type of operations conducted by the Issuer, or (b) is required by, or better complies with, the provisions of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule; (ii) this section as so amended or supplemented would have complied with the requirements of paragraph (b)( 5) of the Rule at the time of the primary offering of the Bonds, giving -18- effect to any change in circumstances applicable under clause (i)(a) and assuming that the Rule as in effect and interpreted at the time of the amendment or supplement was in effect at the time of the primary offering; and (iii) such amendment or supplement does not materially impair the interests of the Bondowners under the Rule. If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the Issuer agrees to provide, contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect, if any, of the change in the type of financial information or operating data being provided hereunder. (3) This section is entered into to comply with the continuing disclosure provisions of the Rule and should be construed so as to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b )(5) of the Rule. SECTION 10. CERTIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGS. 10.1. Registration of Bonds. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Dakota County Public Service and Revenue Division Director and obtain a certificate that the Bonds have been duly entered upon the Director's bond register and the tax required by law has been levied. 10.2. Authentication of Transcript. The officers of the Issuer are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records relating to the Bonds and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds, as the same appear from the books and records in their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, affidavits and certificates, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the Issuer as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 10.3. Preliminary Official Statement. The Preliminary Official Statement relating to the Bonds, dated June 2, 1999, prepared and distributed by Juran & Moody is hereby approved. Juran & Moody is hereby authorized on behalf of the Issuer to prepare and deliver to the Purchaser within seven business days from the date hereof, a supplement to the Official Statement listing the offering price, the interest rates, selling compensation, delivery date, the underwriters and such other information relating to the Bonds required to be included in the Official Statement by Rule l5c2-12 adopted by the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The officers of the Issuer are hereby authorized and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of the Official Statement. -19- Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor of the foregoing resolution: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. -20- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /~/; TO: FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrato~ Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Bond Sale - General Obligation Equipment Certificates of 1999 DATE: June21,1999 INTRODUCTION The City Council at their meeting of May 3, 1999 authorized the sale of General Obligation Equipment Certificates of 1999 to fund the purchase of several budgeted Capital Equipment items. DISCUSSION Competitive bids for the bonds were received today in the offices of Juran & Moody. Preliminary analysis anticipated a net interest rate of 3.75 % with an anticipated total interest cost of $60,843.33. The City received 3 bids. Dain Rauscher was the low bidder at a net interest rate of 4.66%, making the total interest cost $67,943. BUDGET IMPACT Analysis of the bids will be presented at the meeting. ACTION REQUIRED On the basis of the competitive bids received, the City Council should approve the resolution awarding the sale of the $490,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates of 1999 to Dain Rauscher at a net interest rate of 4.66%. :l/lied Robin Roland Finance Director , CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $490,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES OF 1999 Issuer: City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held June 21, 1999, at 7:00 o'clock P.M., at the City Hall, Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO $490,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES OF 1999; AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT AND SECURITY THEREOF I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer on June 21, 1999. City Administrator It was reported that _ sealed proposals for the purchase of $490,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates of 1999 were received prior to 11 :00 o'clock a.m., pursuant to the Preliminary Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers of the Certificates by Juran & Moody, a division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Incorporated, financial consultants to the Issuer. The proposals have been publicly opened, read and tabulated and were found to be as follows: See Attached Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Councilmember RESOLUTION RELATING TO $490,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES OF 1999; AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT AND SECURITY THEREOF BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the Issuer), as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND SALE. 1.1. Authorization. By resolution duly adopted on May 3, 1999, this Council authorized the sale of $490,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates of 1999 (the Obligations) to finance the costs of acquiring items of capital equipment, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.301 and Chapter 475. It is hereby determined that the capital equipment to be acquired will have a useful life at least as long as the term of the Obligations and the principal amount of the Obligations does not exceed .25 percent of the market value of taxable property in the Issuer. l.2. Sale. The Issuer has retained Juran & Moody, a division of Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Incorporated (Juran & Moody) as independent financial advisers in connection with the sale of the Obligations. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph (9), the requirements as to public sale do not apply to the issuance of the Obligations. A proposal has been received from in and associates (the Purchaser), to purchase the Obligations, when, as and if issued on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, at a price of $ , plus accrued interest on all Obligations to the day of delivery and payment. 1.3. Award. The offer of the Purchaser to purchase the Obligations is hereby accepted, and the Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed on behalf of the Issuer to execute a contract for the sale of the Obligations with the Purchaser. SECTION 2. OBLIGATION TERMS; REGISTRATION: EXECUTION AND DELIVERY. 2.1. Issuance of Obligations. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid issuance of the Obligations having been done, now existing, having happened and having been performed, it is now necessary for the City Council to establish the form and terms of the Obligations, to provide security therefor and to issue the Obligations forthwith. 2.2. Maturities; Interest Rates: Denominations and Payment. The Obligations shall be originally dated as of July 1, 1999, shall be in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities, shall mature on February 1 in the years and amounts stated below, and shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption at the annual rates set forth opposite such years and amounts, as follows: Year Amount Interest Rate 2001 $110,000 2002 115,000 2003 125,000 2004 140,000 The Obligations shall be issuable only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Obligation, the principal amount thereof shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein; provided that, so long as the Obligations are registered in the name of a securities depository, or a nominee thereof, in accordance with Section 2.8 hereof, principal and interest shall be payable in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities depository. 2.3. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon initial delivery of the Obligations pursuant to Section 2.7 and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 2.6, the date of authentication shall be noted on each Obligation so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on the Obligations shall be payable on each February 1 and August l, commencing February 1, 2000, each such date being referred to herein as an Interest Payment Date, to the persons in whose names the Obligations are registered on the Bond Register, as hereinafter defined, at the Registrar's close of business on the fifteenth day of the calendar month next preceding such Interest Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day. 2.4. Optional Redemption. Obligations maturing in 2004 shall be subject to redemption at the option of the Issuer, in whole or in part and, if less than all of the Obligations maturing in 2004 are to be redeemed, by lot or other method as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures), in integral multiples of $5,000, on February 1, 2003 or August 1, 2003, at a price equal to lOO% of the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. At least 30 days before the date specified for redemption of any Obligation the City Administrator shall cause notice of redemption to be published if and as required by law, and mailed by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the Registrar and to the Holders, as hereinafter defined, of all Obligations to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the Bond Register; provided that notice shall be given to any securities depository in accordance with its operational arrangements. No defect in or failure to give such notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Obligation not affected by such defect or failure. The notice of redemption shall state the redemption date, the redemption price, the place where the Obligations are to be surrendered for payment of the redemption price, which shall be an office of the Registrar, and that on the -2- redemption date the redemption price will be due and payable and that interest thereon shall cease to accrue from and after such date. 2.5. Appointment of Registrar. The Issuer hereby appoints U.S. Bank Trust National Association, in St. Paul, Minnesota, as the initial bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the Registrar). The Mayor and Administrator are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the Issuer, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company organized under the laws of the United States or one of the states of the United States and authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as successor Registrar. The Issuer agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The Issuer reserves the right to remove the Registrar upon thirty days' notice and upon the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash and Obligations in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. 2.6. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the Issuer and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a register (the "Bond Register") in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Obligations and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Obligations entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. The term "Holder" or "Bondholder" as used herein shall mean the person (whether a natural person, corporation, association, partnership, trust, governmental unit, or other legal entity) in whose name an Obligation is registered in the Bond Register. (b) Transfer of Obligations. Upon surrender for transfer of any Obligation duly endorsed by the Holder thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the Holder thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the Holder in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Obligations of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. (c) Exchange of Obligations. At the option of the Holder of any Obligation in a denomination greater than $5,000, such Obligation may be exchanged for other Obligations of authorized denominations, of the same maturity and a like aggregate principal amount, upon surrender of the Obligation to be exchanged at the office of the Registrar. Whenever any Obligations are so surrendered for exchange the Issuer shall execute and the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver the Obligations which the Bondholder making the exchange is entitled to receive. -3- (d) Cancellation. All Obligations surrendered for payment, transfer or exchange shall be promptly canceled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of. The Registrar shall furnish the Issuer at least once each year a certificate setting forth the principal amounts and numbers of Obligations canceled and destroyed. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Obligation is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Obligation or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The Issuer and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Obligation is at any time registered in the Bond Register as the absolute owner of the Obligation, whether the Obligation shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of, the principal of and (subject to Section 2.3) interest on the Obligation and for all other purposes; and all payments made to or upon the order of such Holder shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon Obligation to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. No service charge shall be made for any transfer or exchange of Obligations, but the Registrar may require payment of a sum sufficient to pay any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to any transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Obligations. In case any Obligation shall become mutilated or be destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar shall deliver a new Obligation of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Obligation or in lieu of and in substitution for any Obligation destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of an Obligation destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Obligation was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the Issuer and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Obligations so surrendered to the Registrar shall be canceled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the Issuer. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Obligation has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it shall not be necessary to issue a new Obligation prior to payment. . (i) Authenticating: Agent. The Registrar is hereby designated authenticating agent for the Obligations, within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55, Subdivision 1, as amended. -4- U) Valid Obligations. All Obligations issued upon any transfer or exchange of Obligations shall be the valid obligations of the Issuer, evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the same benefits under this Resolution as the Obligations surrendered upon such transfer or exchange. 2.7. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Obligations shall be prepared under the direction of the Administrator and shall be executed on behalf of the Issuer by the signatures of the Mayor and the Administrator, provided that the signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. In case any officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on the Obligations shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Obligation, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if he had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, no Obligation shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Obligation has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Obligations need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on each Obligation shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this Resolution. When the Obligations have been prepared, executed and authenticated, the Administrator shall cause them to be delivered to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore executed, and the Purchaser shall not be obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. 2.8. Securities Depositorv. (a) For purposes of this section the following terms shall have the following meanings: "Beneficial Owner" shall mean, whenever used with respect to an Obligation, the person in whose name such Obligation is recorded as the beneficial owner of such Obligation by a Participant on the records of such Participant, or such person's subrogee. "Cede & Co." shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee of DTC, and any successor nominee of DTC with respect to the Obligations. "DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company of New York, New York. "Participant" shall mean any broker-dealer, bank or other financial institution for which DTC holds Obligations as securities depository. "Representation Letter" shall mean the Representation Letter pursuant to which the sender agrees to comply with DTC's Operational Arrangements. (b) The Obligations shall be initially issued as separately authenticated fully registered obligations, and one Obligation shall be issued in the principal amount of each stated maturity of -5- the Obligations. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of such Obligations shall be registered in the bond register in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. The Registrar and the Issuer may treat DTC (or its nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner of the Obligations registered in its name for the purposes of payment of the principal of or interest on the Obligations, selecting the Obligations or portions thereof to be redeemed, if any, giving any notice permitted or required to be given to registered owners of Obligations under this resolution, registering the transfer of Obligations, and for all other purposes whatsoever; and neither the Registrar nor the Issuer shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Neither the Registrar nor the Issuer shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant, any person claiming a beneficial ownership interest in the Obligations under or through DTC or any Participant, or any other person which is not shown on the bond register as being a registered owner of any Obligations, with respect to the accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or any Participant, with respect to the payment by DTC or any Participant of any amount with respect to the principal of or interest on the Obligations, with respect to any notice which is permitted or required to be given to owners of Obligations under this resolution, with respect to the selection by DTC or any Participant of any person to receive payment in the event of a partial redemption of the Obligations, or with respect to any consent given or other action taken by DTC as registered owner of the Obligations. So long as any Obligation is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on such Obligation, and shall give all notices with respect to such Obligation, only to Cede & Co. in accordance with DTC's Operational Arrangements, and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the Issuer's obligations with respect to the principal of and interest on the Obligations to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than DTC shall receive an authenticated Obligation for each separate stated maturity evidencing the obligation of the Issuer to make payments of principal and interest. Upon delivery by DTC to the Registrar of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the Obligations will be transferable to such new nominee in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. (c) In the event the Issuer determines that it is in the best interest of the Beneficial Owners that they be able to obtain Obligations in the form of bond certificates, the Issuer may notify DTC and the Registrar, whereupon DTC shall notify the Participants of the availability through DTC of Obligations in the form of certificates. In such event, the Obligations will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect to the Obligations at any time by giving notice to the Issuer and the Registrar and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event the Obligations will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. (d) The execution and delivery of the Representation Letter to DTC by the Mayor or Administrator, if not previously filed with DTC, is hereby authorized and directed. (e) In the event that any transfer or exchange of Obligations is permitted under paragraph (b) or (c) hereof, such transfer or exchange shall be accomplished upon receipt by the Registrar -6- of the Obligations to be transferred or exchanged and appropriate instruments of transfer to the permitted transferee in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. In the event Obligations in the form of certificates are issued to owners other than Cede & Co., its successor as nominee for DTC as owner of all the Obligations, or another securities depository as owner of all the Obligations, the provisions of this resolution shall also apply to all matters relating thereto, including, without limitation, the printing of such Obligations in the form of bond certificates and the method of payment of principal of and interest on such Obligations in the form of bond certificates. SECTION 3. FORM OF OBLIGATIONS. The Obligations shall be prepared in substantially the following form: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA CITY OF FARMINGTON GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATE OF 1999 Interest Rate Maturity Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP No. July 1, 1999 REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: The City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota (the Issuer) acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the registered owner specified above, or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above on the maturity date specified above and promises to pay interest thereon from the date of original issue specified above or from the most recent Interest Payment Date (as hereinafter defined) to which interest has been paid or duly provided for, at the annual rate specified above, payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1,2000 (each such date, an Interest Payment Date), all subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of this Obligation before maturity. The interest so payable on any Interest Payment Date shall be paid to the person in whose name this Obligation is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month next preceding such Interest Payment Date. Interest hereon shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year composed of twelve 30-day months. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof, are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft by U.S. Bank Trust National Association, in St. Paul, Minnesota, as Bond Registrar and Paying Agent (the Registrar), or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For the prompt and full payment of -7- such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the Issuer have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. This Obligation is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $490,000 issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on June 21, 1999 (the Resolution), to finance the costs of acquisition of capital equipment, and is issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.301 and Chapter 475. The Obligations are issuable only in fully registered form, in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities. Obligations having a stated maturity date in the year 2004 are each subject to redemption at the option of the Issuer, in whole or in part and, if less than all Obligations maturing in the year 2004 are to be redeemed, by lot or other method as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures), in multiples of $5,000, on February 1,2003 and August 1,2003, at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount thereof plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. At least 30 days before to the date specified for the redemption of any Obligation the Issuer will cause notice of redemption to be published if and to the extent required by law, and to be mailed by first class mail (or, if applicable, provided in accordance with the operational arrangements of the bond depository), to the registered owner of any Obligation to be redeemed at the owner's address as it appears on the Bond Register maintained by the Registrar, but no defect in or failure to give such notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Obligation not affected by such defect or failure. Upon surrender to the Registrar of any Obligation which has been redeemed in part, a new Obligation or Obligations will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the unredeemed portion of the principal of the Obligation so surrendered. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Obligation is transferable upon the Bond Register maintained by the Registrar at its principal office, upon surrender of this Obligation for transfer at such office, duly endorsed by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner's attorney, and may also be surrendered in exchange for Obligations of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the Issuer will cause a new Obligation or Obligations to be issued in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date. The Registrar may require payment of a sum sufficient to pay any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to any such transfer or exchange. The Obligations have been designated by the Issuer as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" pursuant to Section 265(b )(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. -8- The Issuer and the Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Obligation is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Obligation is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment as herein provided and for all other purposes, and neither the Issuer nor the Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Obligation, so long as this Obligation is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, or in the name of any other nominee of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository, the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on this Obligation, and shall give all notices with respect to this Obligation, only to Cede & Co. or other nominee in accordance with the operational arrangements of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository as agreed to by the Issuer. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Obligation in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the Issuer in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required; that, prior to the issuance hereof, the City Council has by the Resolution covenanted and agreed to levy ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the Issuer, which taxes will be collectible for the years and in amounts sufficient to produce sums not less than five percent in excess of the principal of and interest on the Obligations when due, and has appropriated such taxes to its General Obligation Equipment Certificates of 1999 Sinking Fund for the payment of such principal and interest; that if necessary for payment of such principal and interest, additional ad valorem taxes are required to be levied upon all taxable property in the Issuer, without limitation as to rate or amount; that the issuance of this Obligation, together with all other indebtedness of the Issuer outstanding on the date hereof and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness of the Issuer to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness; and that the opinion printed hereon is a full, true and correct copy of the legal opinion given by Bond Counsel with reference to the Obligations, dated as of the date of original delivery of the Obligations. This Obligation shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed by the Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Issuer has caused this Obligation to be executed on its behalf by the signatures of its Mayor and City Administrator. CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA (Facsimile signature - City Administrator) (Facsimile signature - Mayor) -9- CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Obligations referred to in the Resolution mentioned within. Date: u.s. BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Registrar By Authorized Representative [Insert legal opinion] The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Obligation, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to the applicable laws or regulations: TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties UTMA ................... as Custodian for ................. (Cust) (Minor) under Uniform Transfers to Minors Act ...... (State) TEN COM - as tenants in common JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common Additional abbreviations may also be used. ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Obligation and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said Obligation on the books kept for registration of the within Obligation, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: NOTICE: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Obligation in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatsoever. Signature Guaranteed: -10- Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an "eligible guarantor institution" meeting the requirements of the Registrar, which requirements include membership or participation in STAMP or such other "signature guaranty program" as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to or in substitution for STAMP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE: [End of Obligation form] SECTION 4. GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES OF 1999 SINKING FUND. So long as any of the Obligations are outstanding and any principal of or interest thereon unpaid, the Finance Director shall maintain a separate debt service fund on the official books and records of the Issuer to be known as the General Obligation Equipment Certificates of 1999 Sinking Fund (the Sinking Fund), and the principal of and interest on the Obligations shall be payable from the Sinking Fund. The Issuer irrevocably appropriates to the Sinking Fund (a) any amount in excess of $485,100 received from the Purchaser upon delivery of the Obligations; (b) all taxes levied and collected in accordance with this Resolution; and (c) all other moneys as shall be appropriated by the City Council to the Sinking Fund from time to time. If the balance in the Sinking Fund is at any time insufficient to pay all interest and principal then due on all Obligations payable therefrom, the payment shall be made from any fund of the Issuer which is available for that purpose, subject to reimbursement from the Sinking Fund when the balance therein is sufficient, and the City Council covenants and agrees that it will each year levy a sufficient amount of ad valorem taxes to take care of any accumulated or anticipated deficiency, which levy is not subject to any constitutional or statutory limitation. SECTION 5. PLEDGE OF TAXING POWERS. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Obligations as such payments respectively become due, the full faith, credit and unlimited taxing powers of the Issuer shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. In order to produce aggregate amounts not less than 5% in excess of the amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Obligations, ad valorem taxes are hereby levied on all taxable property in the Issuer. The taxes are to be levied and collected in the following years and amounts: Levy Years Collection Years Amount 1999- 2002 2000-2003 See attached Levy Computation -11- The taxes shall be irrepealable as long as any of the Obligations are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the Issuer reserves the right and power to reduce the tax levies in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61. SECTION 6. DEFEASANCE. When all of the Obligations have been discharged as provided in this Section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this Resolution to the Holders of the Obligations shall cease. The Issuer may discharge its obligations with respect to any Obligations which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full, or, if any Obligation should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued from the due date to the date of such deposit. The Issuer may also discharge its obligations with respect to any prepayable Obligations called for redemption on any date when they are prepayable according to their terms, by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date an amount equal to the principal, interest and redemption premium, if any, which are then due, provided that notice of such redemption has been duly given as provided herein. The Issuer may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Obligations, subject to the provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with the Registrar or with a bank qualified by law to act as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited for such purpose, bearing interest payable at such times and at such rates and maturing or callable at the holder's option on such dates as shall be required to pay all principal and interest to become due thereon to maturity or an earlier designated redemption date. Provided, however, that if such deposit is made more than ninety days before the maturity date or earlier designated redemption date of the Obligations to be discharged, the Issuer shall have received a written opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that such deposit does not adversely affect the exemption of interest on any Obligations from federal income taxation and a written report of an accountant or investment banking or financial advisory firm verifying that the deposit is sufficient to pay when due all of the principal and interest on the Obligations to be discharged on and before their maturity dates or earlier designated redemption date. SECTION 7. TAX COVENANTS; ARBITRAGE MATTERS AND CONTINUING DISCLOSURE. 7.1. General Tax Covenant. The Issuer agrees with the Holders from time to time of the Obligations that it will not take, or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents, any action that would cause interest on the Obligations to become includable in gross income of the recipient under the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations (the Regulations), and agrees to take any and all actions within its powers to ensure that the interest on the Obligations will not become includable in gross income of the recipient under the Code and the Regulations. All proceeds of the Obligations will be expended solely for the payment of the costs of acquisition and installation of capital equipment to be owned and maintained by the Issuer and used in the Issuer's general governmental operations. The Issuer shall not enter into any lease, management contract, use agreement or other agreement with any non-governmental person relating to the use -12- of the capital equipment or security for the payment of the Obligations which might cause the Obligations to be considered "private activity bonds" or "private loan bonds" pursuant to Section 141 of the Code. 7.2. Certification. The Mayor and Administrator being the officers of the Issuer charged with the responsibility for issuing the Obligations pursuant to this Resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the Purchaser a certificate in accordance with the provisions of Section 148 of the Code, and applicable Regulations, stating the facts, estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Obligations which make it reasonable to expect that the proceeds of the Obligations will not be used in a manner that would cause the Obligations to be "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of the Code and Regulations. 7.3. Arbitrage Rebate Exemption. It is hereby found that the Issuer has general taxing powers, that no Bond is a "private activity bond" within the meaning of Section 141 of the Code, that 95% or more of the net proceeds of the Bonds are to be used for local governmental activities of the Issuer, and that the aggregate face amount of all tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds) issued by the Issuer and all subordinate entities thereof during the year 1999 is not reasonably expected to exceed $5,000,000. Therefore, pursuant to the provisions of Section 148(f)( 4 )(D) of the Code, the Issuer shall not be required to comply with the arbitrage rebate requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3) of Section 148(f) of the Code. 7.4. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. The Issuer hereby designates the Obligations as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code relating to the disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions, and hereby finds that the reasonably anticipated amount of qualified tax-exempt obligations (within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code) which will be issued by the Issuer and all subordinate entities during calendar year 1999 does not exceed $10,000,000. 7.5. Reimbursement. The Issuer certifies that the proceeds of the Obligations will not be used by the Issuer to reimburse itself for any expenditure with respect to the capital equipment which the Issuer paid or will have paid more than 60 days prior to the issuance of the Obligations unless, with respect to such prior expenditures, the Issuer shall have made a declaration of official intent which complies with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Regulations; provided that a declaration of official intent shall not be required (i) with respect to certain de minimis expenditures, if any, with respect to the capital equipment meeting the requirements of Section 1. 150-2(f)(1) of the Regulations, or (ii) with respect to "preliminary expenditures" for the capital equipment as defined in Section 1.150-2(f)(2) of the Regulations, including engineering or architectural expenses and similar preparatory expenses, which in the aggregate do not exceed 20% of the "issue price" of the Obligations. 7.6. Continuing Disclosure. The SEC has promulgated certain amendments to Rule 15c2- 12 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.P.R. S 240.15c2-l2) (the Rule) that make it unlawful for an underwriter to participate in the primary offering of municipal securities in a -13- principal amount of $1,000,000 or more unless, before submitting a bid or entering into a purchase contract for the Obligations, it has reasonably determined that the Issuer or an obligated person has undertaken in writing for the benefit of the bondholders to provide certain disclosure information to prescribed information repositories on a continuing basis or unless and to the extent the offering is exempt from the requirements of the Rule. The principal amount of the Obligations is less than $1,000,000. The Issuer hereby represents that it has not issued within the six months before the date of issuance of the Obligations, and that it reasonably expects that it will not issue within six months after the date of issuance of the Obligations, other securities of the Issuer of substantially the same security and providing financing for the same general purpose or purposes as the Obligations. Consequently, this Council hereby finds that the Rule is inapplicable to the Obligations, because the aggregate principal amount of the Obligations and any other securities required to be integrated with the Obligations thereunder is less than $1,000,000. Therefore, the Issuer will not enter into any undertaking to provide continuing disclosure of any kind with respect to the Obligations. SECTION 8. CERTIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGS. 8.1. Registration of Obligations. The Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Dakota County Public Service and Revenue Division Director and obtain a certificate that the Obligations have been duly entered upon the Director's bond register and the tax required by law has been levied. 8.2. Authentication of Transcript. The officers of the Issuer are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records relating to the Obligations and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Obligations, as the same appear from the books and records in their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, affidavits and certificates, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the Issuer as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 8.3. Preliminary Official Statement. The Preliminary Official Statement relating to the Obligations, dated June 2, 1999, prepared and distributed by Juran & Moody is hereby approved. Juran & Moody is hereby authorized on behalf of the Issuer to prepare and deliver to the Purchaser within seven business days from the date hereof, a supplement to the Official Statement listing the offering price, the interest rates, selling compensation, delivery date, the underwriters and such other information relating to the Obligations required to be included in the Official Statement by Rule l5c2-12 adopted by the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The officers of the Issuer are hereby authorized and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of the Official Statement. -14- Upon vote being taken upon the foregoing resolution, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. -15- / 3a... City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrat~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM: SUBJECT: Citizen Request - Stop Sign Placement DATE: June 2l, 1999 INTRODUCTION At the May 17, 1999 City Council meeting, a resident request was forwarded regarding the placement of stop signs at the intersection of Fairview Lane and Heritage Way. DISCUSSION Staff is currently in the process of taking traffic counts at the subject intersection. Traffic counts are necessary to determine if the intersection warrants stop signs per the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The data from the traffic counts and a recommendation regarding the placement of stop signs at this intersection will be forwarded to Council at the next meeting. BUDGET IMPACT None at this time. ACTION REQUESTED F or information only. Respectfully submitted, ~ /11~ Lee M. Mann, P .E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file