Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
02.23.15 EDA Packet
AGENDA REGULAR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING February 23, 2015 6:30 PM Room 170 Todd Larson, Chair; Geraldine Jolley, Vice -Chair Douglas Bonar, Steve Wilson, Kirk Zeaman 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA Annual Organizational Items 5. CITIZENS COMMENTS 6. CONSENT AGENDA (a) Meeting Minutes (1/26/15 Regular Meeting) (b) Monthly Statements 7, PUBLIC HEARINGS 8. DISCUSSION ITEMS (a) 2015 Community Development Block Grant Application (b) Organizational Meeting - EDA Fundamentals 9. DIRECTOR'S REPORT (a) Director's Report 10. ADJOURN City of Farmington 430 Third Street Farmington, Minnesota 651.280.6800 - Fax 651.280.6899 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Economic Development Authority FROM: Adam Kienberger, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Annual Organizational Items DATE: February 23, 2015 INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION Attached are the proposed 2015 Economic Development Authority (EDA) By -Laws. Section 1, subdivision 3 of the by -laws requires direction from the EDA regarding the following: a. Election of Officers The EDA By -Laws provides that each year, the EDA shall choose a Chairperson and Vice - Chairperson. A Secretary and Treasurer must also be appointed which typically is assigned to the Executive Director, as neither needs to be a commissioner. b. Meeting Schedule The EDA shall establish a meeting schedule for the year. Attached is the City's Board and Commission meeting calendar which identifies the date of each EDA meeting. EDA meetings are held the fourth Monday of each month at 6:30 p.m. If that Monday is a holiday, the EDA meeting would be held the next day. EDA members should confirm that this meeting schedule works for all members. Please provide action for the above listed items. A copy of the revised by -laws is enclosed. ACTION REQUESTED Elect officers and approve the 2015 Economic Development Authority By -laws. ATTACHMENTS: Type Description o Exhibit EDA 2015 By -Laws o Exhibit EDA Meeting Calendar 2015 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY -LAWS These By -Laws, when adopted, are intended to deal with matters not otherwise covered by State Law, City Ordinance or elsewhere. Section I — Meetings SUBD. 1— Regular meetings of the Economic Development Authority shall be held on the fourth (4th) Monday of each month at 6:30 p.m. Any regular meeting falling upon a holiday shall be held on the next following business day at the same time and place. All meetings, including special and adjourned meetings, shall be held in the City Hall unless otherwise designated. SUBD. 2 — Special meetings of the Authority may be called by the Chairperson or in written form by any other two (2) members of the Authority, filed with the Executive Director. The Executive Director may also call a special meeting. At least three (3) days before the meeting, the Executive Director shall notify each member of the time, place and purpose of the meeting by causing written notice thereof to be delivered to him/her by e -mail. At least three (3) days prior to the meeting, the Executive Director shall also post notice of the meeting and if applicable, notify each person who has filed an applicable written request for notice, or may, if necessary, provide such other more restricted notice, including but not limited to (as allowed by Statute, such as) M.S. 471.705, subd. IC, paragraph g, " if a person receives actual notice of a meeting of a public body at least 24 hours before the meeting, all notice requirements of this subdivision are satisfied with respect to that person, regardless of the method of receipt of notice." Emergency meetings may be held because of circumstances that, in the judgment of the Authority require immediate attention. The notice of special meeting shall state the item(s) to be discussed and acted upon. Items not stated in the notice may be discussed, but no action may be taken if any member objects. Any special meeting attended by a majority of the Authority members shall be a valid meeting for the transaction of business that may come before the meeting. SUBD. 3 — At the regular Authority meeting in February of each year, the Authority shall (1) acknowledge City Council's designation of the official newspaper; (2) establish meeting schedule for the year; (3) choose a Chairperson and a Vice - Chairperson, who shall perform the duties of the Chairperson during the Chairpersons disability or absence, and in case of a vacancy in the office of Chairperson, and until a successor has been appointed and qualifies to fulfill the duties of Chairperson, and; (4) appoint a Secretary and Treasurer, which need not be a commissioner. SUBD. 4 — All Authority meetings, as defined by State Law, including special and adjourned meetings shall be open to the public. The Authority Attorney shall advise the Authority in writing as to their interpretation of the state "Open Meeting Law" and all new members shall be provided such written interpretation. Section II Presiding Officer; Rules of Order SUBD. 1 — The Chairperson shall preside at all meetings of the Authority. In the absence of the Chairperson, the Vice - Chairperson shall preside. In the absence of both, the Executive Director shall call the meeting to order and shall preside until the Authority members present at the meeting choose one of their members to act temporarily as presiding officer. SUBD. 2 -- The presiding officer shall preserve order, enforce the rule of procedure herein prescribed, and determine all questions of procedure and order. Except as otherwise provided by statute or by these rules, the proceedings of the Authority shall be conducted in accordance with the following rules of order: A. A motion must be seconded before being considered by the Authority and the presiding officer must recognize mover, as well as the seconder. B. Any motion may be withdrawn by its mover with the consent of his /her second. But a motion, once debated, cannot be withdrawn except by a majority vote of the Authority. C. A motion will not be subject to debate until it has been stated by the presiding officer and he /she has opened it to debate. D. Each member, while speaking, shall confine himself/herself to the question at hand and avoid all personal, indecorous or sarcastic language. E. Whenever any member of the Authority desires to speak on any question, which affects him/her personally, he /she shall first vacate his /her chair and shall not resume his /her seat until the matter under consideration has been acted upon. He /she shall be allowed to make comments on the question as a private citizen only and while a member of the audience. F. Whenever public hearings are held, the presiding officer shall allow any member of the public, the privilege of speaking. A reasonable time shall be allowed to anyone as long as they are not repeating points already made. The presiding officer shall maintain order and may rule anyone out of order. G. At any meeting, the presiding officer will allow the public to participate as long as there is reason to believe the input is beneficial. SUBD. 3 — Any member may appeal to the Authority from a ruling of the presiding officer. If the appeal is seconded, the appealing member may speak first on the reason for his /her appeal. General discussion can then take place on the appeal before a vote. The appeal shall be sustained if it is approved by a majority of the members present. Section III --- Agendas SUBD. 1 — The agenda shall be prepared by the EDA Executive Director and shall be closed at noon on the Wednesday preceding the meeting for publication purposes. SUBD. 2 — Any member may place an item on the agenda by so instructing the Executive Director. SUBD. 3 — No item shall be placed on the agenda unless the item is expressed in such a way as to clearly show the subject matter involved. SUBD. 4 — The agenda add -ons are subject to approval by a majority vote of the members present and further such add-on items may be discussed, but no action may be taken if any member objects. Section IV — Order of Business SUBD. 1— Each meeting of the Authority shall convene at the time and place appointed therefore. Authority business shall be conducted in the following order: 1) Call to Order 2) Pledge of Allegiance 3) Roll Call 4) Approve Agenda 5) Citizen Comments 6) Approve Consent Agenda a. Minutes b. Monthly Statements c. Additional Consent Agenda items 7) Public Hearings 8) Discussion Items 9) Director's Report 10) Adj ourn SUBD, 2 — The order of business may be varied by the presiding officer, except that all public hearings shall be held at the time specified in the notice of hearing. Section V — Minutes SUBD. 1 — Minutes of each Authority meeting shall be kept by the Executive Director or, in his/her absence, his/her designee. In the absence of both, the presiding officer shall appoint a secretary pro tem. Resolutions need not be recorded in full in the minutes if they appear in other permanent records of the Executive Director and can be accurately identified from the description given in the minutes. SUBD. 2 — Minutes of each meeting shall be reduced to typewritten form and shall be signed by the taker. At the next regular Authority meeting, approval of the minutes shall be considered by the Authority. The minutes need not be read aloud, but the presiding officer shall call for any additions or corrections. If there is an objection, the Authority shall vote upon the addition or correction. If there are no additions or corrections, the minutes shall stand approved by motion. If there is an objection, the Authority shall vote upon the addition or correction and approve the minutes by motion as amended. Section VI — Quorum and Voting SUBD. 1— At all meetings a majority of all members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. SUED. 2 — The votes of members on any question pending before the EDA shall be by voice votes. Roll call vote can be requested by any member, except for the following agenda items; approval of the agenda; approval of the consent agenda; and the adjournment. The names of those voting for and against the question shall be recorded in the minutes. If any member present does not vote, the minutes shall state: "Abstain: Name ". SUBD. 3 — Except as otherwise provided by statute, a majority vote of the quorum shall prevail. Section VII — Executive Director The Authority may appoint and provide for annual performance reviews of an Executive Director. Section VIII — Suspension or Amendment of the By -Laws SUBD. 1 — These by-laws may be temporarily suspended by a unanimous vote of the members present. SUBD. 2 -- These by -laws shall not be repealed or amended except by a majority vote of the whole Authority after notice has been given at some preceding meeting. Section IX — Effective Date SUBD. 1 — These by -laws have been adopted by the Economic Development Authority on the 231-d day of February, 2015 and become effective immediately. Attest: EDA Executive Director EDA Chairperson Date: Date: JANUARY 2015 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5, 6 7 8 9 10 11 `14 4t■ 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ®27 28 29 30 31 FEBRUARY 2015 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9% "01213 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 p 24 25 26 27 28 MARCH 2015 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (9) <> 12 13 14 15 '16 17 18 19 20 21 22 123 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 APRIL 2015 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 `:6 7 $ 9 10 11 12(13 >t 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 261271 28 29 30 MAY 2015 S M T W T F S 1 2 3. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ®14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 242 27 28 29 30 31 JUNE 2015 S T W T F S 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ♦ ®11 1213 14.16 17 18 19 20 21 1221 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 JULY 2015 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5.7 ®91011 12 .15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 26 ®28 29 30 31 AUGUST 2015 S M T W I F S 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ® ®13 14 15 16 •18 19 20 21 22 23 f 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 SEPTEMBER 2015 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 *22 23 24 25 26 271281 29 30 OCTOBER 2015 S M I WT F 5 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 910 11 1 •10• 15 16 17 18 *20 21 22 23 24 25 27 28 29 30 31 NOVEMBER 2015 S TWTFS 1 t 3 4 5 6 7 8 ♦ (11 ®13 14 15.17 18 19 20 21 22 123 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 DECEMBER 2015 S M T W T FS 1 2 3 4 5 6 *•49101112 13 1 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 tea 24 25 26 27 ®29 30 31 www.ci.f armington.mn.us 2015 PHONE NUMBERS CITY HOLIDAYS PLANNING COMMISSION COUNCIL MEETINGS PAYDAYS ❑ WATER BOARD & EDA PARK & REC. COMMISSION (`) RRC ADVISORY BOARD HPC MEETINGS Stantec 851-636-4600 FAX 651 -636 -1311 www.etantec.com R:1 cllontl Inu nlclpalllarrn Ington_clJn n11410E N1C©d1141eaL2015 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City of Farmington 430 Third Street Farmington, Minnesota 651.280.6800 - Fax 651.280.6899 www.ci.farmington.mn.us Economic Development Authority Adam Kienberger, Community Development Director Meeting Minutes (1/26/15 Regular Meeting) February 23, 2015 INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION Please find attached the EDA meeting minutes from the January 26, 2015 Regular Meeting. ACTION REQUESTED ATTACHMENTS: Type o Exhibit Description 1/26/15 Regular Meeting Minutes MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Regular January 26, 2015 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair Larson at 6:30 p.m. Members Present: Larson, Jolley, Wilson, Zeaman, Bonar Members Absent: None Also Present: Adam Kienberger, Community Development Director; Tom Whelan, Nemer Fieger; Andy Rogers, Sun This Week 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA MOTION by Wilson, second by Bonar to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. CITIZEN COMMENTS/PRESENTATIONS Carole Kroc —18067 Everglade Court— Ms. Kroc noted she is a land developer and was inquiring about the proposed hotel in the Vermillion River Crossings (VRC) development. She was asking what the status was. She has a client that may be,interested if the hotel doesn't go. Director Kienberger informed Ms. Kroc that the hotel is optimistic about breaking ground this spring. She stated that she was working with someone at the City, last year regarding HyVee and that they were interested in coming here. Chair Larson noted that when the City contacted HyVee they were not interested. Is the City offering any money (incentives)? Larson indicated that the City has committed $50,000 towards payoff on the assessments for the proposed hotel project in VRC. She also asked about the Bongard property on Akin Road. She will stay in touch with Adam and Tony. 6. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Jolley second by Wilson to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Meeting Minutes (11/24/14 Regular meeting and 11/24/14 Special Meeting) b) Monthly Statements APIF, Motion Carried. 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS a) Marketing Plan Update — Director Kienberger introduced Tom Whelan with Nemer Fieger who assisted with the marketing plan. We had good key messages, and he tested them within the economic development community. The one that stood out was "Farmington Cares ". Don't change the key messages. He believes the EDA is on target. Member Jolley asked what we do next. Larson suggested business visits and send thank you's after. Give them something to remember you by. Signs with "Farmington hometown feel, willing to work with you" — don't over think it. Look for input from the businesses about what we can do for them. Wilson suggested getting the council behind the EDA and get out messages on what we have done and how we are here to assist current and future businesses. He also suggested inviting businesses /sports groups, etc. in to celebrate their achievements. Mr. Whelan indicated that we need to move forward. The website needs updating, EDA Minutes (Regular) January 26, 2015 Page 2 give the Director the ammunition he needs to be effective in the community. Demonstrate to the EDA what is being accomplished. b) Open to Business Joint Powers Agreement -- Director Kienberger explained that Laurie Crow, with the Open to Business program offers free technical assistance, financial management, loan information, etc., once a month in Farmington. The Dakota County CDA has provided a one to one match for the services. Farmington is one of several communities in Dakota County offering this service. Farmington's cost share is $5,000. Motion by Zeaman second by Wilson to approve the Joint Powers Agreement. APIF, Motion Carried. 8. DIRECTOR'S REPORT January Director's Report — Reviewed building permit report for 2014. Downtown Redevelopment Guide Grant application -- Council approved a grant application to the Dakota County CDA for a Redevelopment Incentive Planning Grant in the amount of $15,000. Mayor Larson attended the Dakota County Board of Commissioners meeting on December 18''' in Hastings. He was joined by Lakeville and Burnsville's Mayors. The Commissioners were discussing the proposed changes to the TIF policy. The Mayors spoke and shared their concerns. The Board was receptive to the comments and indicated that they will have a study completed. 9. ADJOURN MOTION by Jolley, second by Bonar to adjourn at 8 :04 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, Sue Miller Administrative Assistant 44:A City of Farmington 430 Third Street Farmington, Minnesota 651.280.6800 - Fax 651.280.6899 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Economic Development Authority Adam Kienberger, Community Development Director Monthly Statements February 23, 2015 INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION Please find attached the monthly EDA financial statements. ACTION REQUESTED ATTACHMENTS: Type o Exhibit Description Monthly Statements 3 0 CV P I N Or , W M Mr4 -• M 1. Vi S 210,199 $ 213,111 $ 216,042 $ 219,005 $ 222,299 $ 225,240 CO 0 W O 0 CO' V $187,452 5185,742 5 188880 $177,258 M g p M N M P2 Y g O r N 3 M t0 m M ee twee se e ow gq X8 0w Omr gri! O V IO N h r N N O NMS ".n a 2 228 r r W 00 a N R II) 69 a VI fh Z n a p tS M • of M 07 M � 30 4 to W M M • .$ M LL 8 M N N W r MN,1 V 'P f4N- 0070 N g N W T VOCO VONM • N N 00 0 NNE O IO M H 821,0 8 Yi S NN 49 3N 49 4 Vt ✓ 0 CO O N C9 co oj N V) V M N 49 Fund Balance N O 4 28R88§§2 82 $N ,N44 aav N W 0 N CO 0 m N • t 0 CO Fund Balance O a G 1 s I.E. E V oo 0 zw e e 0 c g au e g m • m $ g 1 Ell • zo M N 8 g Iti EC 9 O 8 fA p 0 4 g2 Pp• o; ,ate oL z°.Sw <ww 2/18/2015 11:25:01 CITY OF FARMINGTON 0 0 (Q to 0 0 coJ N U K Council Check Summary Note: Check Amount may not reflect actaul check total due to sequence of data 1/17/2015 - 2/13/2015 Co Dept Div Subledger Account Description .0 0 D m Z0 z Z0 O 3 C O HRA/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 02000 03 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 2000 6485 134942 JAN'15 EXP 3232 JAN'15 MILEAGE, REIMBRSMNT HRA/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 0200D 03 TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE O HRA/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 02000 03 .PROFESSIONAL SERVICES O O N N 9.42 JAN'15 CHMBR MTG ti 133810 2014 EDA 131085 2/9/2016 MTG- WILSON 0 O 102160 CARDMEMBER SERVICES 10 N N 0 b 0 N HRA/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 02000 03 TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 2000 6470 134872 4798....1668 VISA -DUN BROS COFFEE 10 N JAN'15 VISA HRA/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 02000 03 SUBSCRIPTIONS & DUES 134872 4796....1668 VISA- XCELIGENT 0 O1 JAN'15 VISA HRA/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 02000 03 SUBSCRIPTIONS & DUES 134872 4798....1888 385.00 VISA -IEDC ONLINE JAN'15 VISA to 0 m Ol 0 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City of Farmington 430 Third Street Farmington, Minnesota 651.280.6800 - Fax 651.280.6899 www.ci.farmington.mn.us Economic Development Authority Adam Kienberger, Community Development Director 2015 Community Development Block Grant Application February 23, 2015 INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION The City has been informed by the Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) that it will be receiving an estimated $42,717 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for Program Year 2015 (July 1, 2015 — June 30, 2016). To secure the grant money that is available, the City must prepare and submit an application that specifies eligible activities or projects (see attached Eligible Activities) to which the City intends to allocate the available funding. A completed application is due to the CDA by February 27, 2015 accompanied by an approved City Council Resolution. Annually, the City receives [federal] Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds which are distributed by the Dakota County CDA. In 2014, the allocation amount was $42,717. The CDA anticipates a similar amount in the 2015 HUD budget for CDBG funds. Farmington's 2015 CDBG allotment is estimated to be $42,717. However, this amount may change as HUD finalizes its budget in 2015. Proposed Activity City staff is proposing that the estimated $42,717 be allocated to the Commercial Rehabilitation program because this fund has proven successful and leverages significant reinvestment by the benefitting businesses. The most recent project to receive funding was Dakota County Lumber ($19,000) for a new fire suppression system. The basic program outline is as follows: Grant funds may be available to assist local businesses and /or property owners who are making qualified improvements to eligible commercial properties that eliminate conditions that are detrimental to public health and safety. The following are examples of qualified improvements: correcting code violations, code improvements, and the correction of handicap accessibility issues. The intent of the grant program is to prevent the deterioration of commercial structures and discourage blight, encourage projects that correct code violations and to eliminate accessibility restrictions. Requirements of the program include, but are not limited to the following: • Applicant providing a 1:1 dollar match • Competitive bidding • Davis -Bacon Wage Act (payment of prevailing wages to contractors) Staff is currently reviewing ways to improve the program application materials to increase its usability, and is actively working with a business on an application for 2015. ACTION REQUESTED Recommend the City Council approve a resolution to allocate a total of $42,717 CDBG funds for FY2015 to the Commercial Rehabilitation Grant funding category. ATTACHMENTS: Type o Exhibit Description CDBG Program Requirements & Activity Report CDBG ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES DEFINITIONS The following are summary definitions of Community Development Block Grant Eligible Activities: Please Note: Although an activity may be deemed eligible for CDBG funding, it does not guarantee funding. The Community Development Needs for the CDBG Program in the Comprehensive Plan sets forth the priority of needs and as such, dictates which types of eligible activities may be funded in a given year. CDBG funds may NOT be used for costs attributable to a building used for the general conduct of government or used for political activities. Acquisition /Disposition: The use of CDBG funds to acquire real property, in whole or in part, by purchase, Tong -term lease, donation, or otherwise, for any public purpose. Real property to be acquired may include: land, air rights, easements, water rights, right -of -ways, buildings and other property improvements, or other interests in real property. Demolition /Clearance: Clearance, demolition, and removal of buildings and improvements including movement of structures to other sites. Economic Development Activities: Economic development activities may include, but are not limited to: (1) Construction by the grantee or subrecipient of a business incubator designed to provide inexpensive space and assistance to new firms to help them become viable businesses, (2) Loans to pay for the expansion of a factory or commercial business, and (3) Providing training needed by persons on welfare to enable them to qualify for jobs created by CDBG- assisted special economic development activities. The level of public benefit to be derived from the economic development activity must be appropriate given the amount of CDBG assistance. Rehabilitation: Rehabilitation related activities may include single- family rehabilitation, multi - family rehabilitation, energy efficiency improvements, public housing modernization, and rehabilitation of commercial properties. General Administration: CDBG funds may be used for the general administration costs incurred by a Subrecipient to administer their CDBG program. Administration costs directly associated with a CDBG activity should be part of the activity as project administration: Relocation: CDBG funds may be used for relocation payments and assistance to displaced persons, including individuals, families, businesses, non - profits, and farms, where required under section 570.606 of the regulations (pursuant to the Uniform Relocation Act). Public Facilities /Improvements: CDBG funds may be used by the grantee or other public or private nonprofit entities for the acquisition (including long term leases for periods of 15 years or more), construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation (including removal of architectural barriers to accessibility), or installation, of public improvements or facilities. Buildings for the general conduct of government cannot be acquired or improved with CDBG funds. This includes neighborhood facilities, firehouses, public schools, and libraries, as well as water and/or sewer treatment plants. The regulations further specify that facilities that are designed for use in providing shelter for persons having special needs are considered to be public facilities. Public Services: CDBG funds may be used to provide public services (including labor, supplies, and materials), provided that each of the following criteria is met: 1) The public service must be either a new service or a quantifiable increase in the level of service; and 2) The amount of CDBG funds obligated within a program year to support public service activities under this category may not exceed 40% of the City's allocation and the total public services of all Subrecipients may not exceed 15% of the total grant awarded to Dakota County for that year. Planning: Includes studies, analysis, data gathering, preparation of plans, and identification of actions that will implement plans. The types of plans which may be paid for with CDBG funds include, but are not limited to: Comprehensive plans; Individual project plans; Community development plans, Capital improvement programs; Small area and neighborhood plans; Environmental and historic preservation studies; and Functional plans (such as plans for housing, land use, energy conservation, or economic development). Homeownership Assistance: Homeownership assistance activities may include financial assistance for downpayments, closing costs or other part of the purchase process and counseling for pre - purchase, post - purchase or foreclosure prevention. Attachment B Final Dakota County FY 2014 CDBG /HOME /ESG Activity Statement Final CDBG Budget with 1% ($18,439) decrease from 2013 Final HOME Budget with 6% ($30,816) increase from 2013 Final ESG Budget with 23% ($25,583) increase from 2013 Dakota County 2014 CDBG Small Cities and Townships: City /Township Project 2014 Budget Greenvale Township Township Buildable Site Inventory Plan $ 5,000 Hampton Capital Improvement Plan $ 10,000 Hampton Infrastructure Management Database $ 5,000 Miesville Park Improvement $ 6,859 Randolph Weather Siren Replacement $ 18,000 $ 236,014 Total $ 44,859 Large Cities: City Project 2014 Budget Apple Valley Public Services (Seniors) $ 12,000 Housing Rehabilitation $ 113,630 Public Services (Seniors) Total $ 125,630 City Project 2014 Budget Burnsville Public Services (The GARAGE) $ 45,000 Public Services (360 Communities) $ 9,000 Public Services (Seniors) $ 43,014 Housing Rehabilitation $ 101,000 Public Facility Rehabilitation - The GARAGE $ 27,000 Administration (City, for Public Services) $ 11,000 $ 193,927 Total $ 236,014 City Project 2014 Budget Eagan Public Services (Youth Program Dakota Woodland) $ 4,000 Public Services (Youth Program Dakota Hills Middle School) $ 14,000 Public Services (Seniors) $ 17,000 Weatherization Plus $ 5,000 Housing Rehabilitation $ 153,927 Total $ 193,927 City Project 2014 Budget Farmington Commerical Rehabilitation $ 42,717 Total $ 42,717 City Project 2014 Budget Hastings Assessment Abatement $ 68,927 Total $ 68,927 City Project 2014 Budget Inver Grove Heights Property Acquisition & Clearance (Doffing Floodplain) $ 56,704 Housing Rehabilitation $ 56,704 Total $ 113,408 City Project 2014 Budget Lakeville Spot Acquisition & Clearance $ 62,184 Housing Rehabilitation $ 52,186 Public Services (Seniors) $ 10,000 $ 69,809 Total $ 124,370 City Project 2014 Budget Mendota Heights Housing Rehabilitation $ 26,336 Total $ 26,336 City Project 2014 Budget Northfield Down Payment Assistance $ 20,000 Housing Rehabilitation $ 49,809 Public Housing Improvement (Nan McKay) Total $ 69,809 City Project 2014 Budget Rosemount Public Facilities - Street /sidewalk Improvements $ 51,554 Total $ 51,554 City Project 2014 Budget South St. Paul Property Acquisition (Rediscover SSP) $ 37,000 Housing Rehabilitation $ 26,267 Public Housing Improvement (Nan McKay) $ 17,000 Consolidated Plan Total $ 80,267 City Project 2014 Budget West St. Paul Housing Rehabilitation $ 81,906 County Wide Total $ 81,906 Dakota County 2014 HOME Project 2014 Budget Dakota County Housing Rehab, Est. Revolving Loan Income $ 300,000 Housing Rehabilitation $ 195,000 Well Sealing $ 20,000 Consolidated Plan $ 5,000 Fair Housing $ 3,250 CDA General Administration $ 197,139 FY14 CDBG, Total Final Grant $ 1,680,113 FY14 CDBG, Cities /Twps $ 1,259,724 FY14 CDBG, County -wide $ 420,389 Dakota County 2014 HOME Dakota County 2014 ESG Project 2014 Budget Dakota County (33.4% Share) Affordable Housing Development - Morgan Square Lakeville $ 429,447 Community Housing Development Organization (Undesignated) $ 85,889 CDA General Administration $ 57,260 FY14 HOME, Final Grant $ 572,596 Dakota County 2014 ESG Project 2014 Budget Dakota County Rapid Re- Housing Assistant Payments $ 100,639 Housing Relocation and Service Assistance $ 27,000 General Administration $ 10,349 FY14 ESG, Final Grant $ 137,988 44N °PPP Mark Ulfers, Executive Director Dakota County CDA 1228 Town Centre Drive Eagan, MN 55123 Dear Mr. Ulfers: U.8. Department of Housing and Urban Development Minneapolis Field Office 920 Second Avenue South, Suite 1300 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 -4012 DEC 1 5 2014 SUBJECT: Consolidated Plan End -of -Year Review — Program Year 2013 HUD is required to conduct an annual review of performance by grant recipients. This is to report to you the results of our review. Additionally, the Secretary must determine that the grant recipient complies with the statutes and has the continuing capacity to implement and administer the programs for which it receives assistance. We based this review upon the information we received concerning the County's 2013 program year July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014. We congratulate you on your many accomplishments during this past year and on the achievement of Departmental Objectives. We have enclosed reports showing the County's use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds during the 2013 program year, as reported in the Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS). These accomplishments during the year include: • Providing rehabilitation assistance to over ninety households; • Assisting over three thousand persons with a variety of public services; • Modernizing eight units of public housing; and • Generating nearly $10 million in match for the HOME program. • Administering an Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) for the first time. This required the County to make several first -time decisions regarding the design of a program and operation of the grant. • Serving 45 households with ESG funds with a rapid rehousing program providing a mix of rental assistance, security deposits, or application fees. This is in excess of the County's initial goal of serving 10 households. During this last year, we monitored portions of the County's HOME program. Although, there were four Findings of noncompliance, your staff appears to be able to successfully address them. In addition, we saw significant improvements in the administration of the HOME programs from the last review we completed. www.hud.gov espanol.hud.gov 2 Background Information HUD's Office of Community Planning and Development has sought to establish partnerships with State and local governments. The focus of our partnership has been to work with communities to ensure that our joint efforts result in housing and community development programs and policies that benefit and serve low and moderate - income persons. These efforts occur within the framework of the statutes we administer and the regulations and policies that are designed to improve program performance. The provisions of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, require the annual submission of performance reports by grant recipients receiving federal assistance through programs covered under these Acts. Additionally, these Acts require that the HUD Secretary make a determination that the grant recipient complies with the statutes and has the continuing capacity to implement and administer the programs for which it receives assistance. With the implementation of the Consolidated Planning Regulations of January 5, 1995, the Department began making comprehensive performance reviews of grantees overall progress at least annually, as required by the statues and section 91.525 of the regulations. The review consists of analyzing the consolidated planning process; reviewing management of funds; determining the progress made in carrying out policies and programs; determining the compliance of funded activities with statutory and regulatory requirements; determining the . accuracy of required performance reports; as well as evaluating accomplishments in meeting key Departmental objectives. This assessment not only meets the mandates of the statutes, but it also provides a basis for working together collaboratively to help grantees achieve housing and community development goals. One critical outcome of this collaboration should be the development of a more comprehensive, effective, and concise Consolidated Plan and improved performance in achieving specific goals that correspond to the activities outlined in your forthcoming Action Plan. Public Access This Report must be made readily available to the public within 30 days of receipt of your comments. There are several ways you can make the report available to the public. You can assist us in this regard by sharing HUD's report with the media; with a mailing list of interested persons; with members of your advisory committee; or with those who attended hearings or meetings. HUD will make this information available to the public upon request and may provide copies of future reports to interested citizens and groups. Conclusion As a result of our analysis, we have determined that the County's overall progress is satisfactory and that it has the continuing capacity to implement these programs. www.iud.gov espanol.hud.gov Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you have any questions on this matter, please contact me by phone at (612) 370 -3019 extension 2107, or by email at Michele.k.smith @hud.gov. Sincerely, 2nArA,:.ce_ Michele K. Smith, Director Office of Community Planning and Development Enclosures cc: Andrea Brennan, Director of Community and Economic Development Department www.hud gov espanol.hudgov 3 Program Year 2013 Funds IffillelirrfflePROWMPERler U.S. Departrnent of Housing Ja d Urban Development DATE: 12 -12 -14 Office of Community Planning and Development TIME: 16:46 Integrated Disbursement and Information System PAGE: 1 CDBG Community Development Block Grant Performance Profile PitS4 - DAKOTA COUNTY,MN Program Year From 07 -01 -2013 To 06-30 -2014 2013 CDBG Allocation Program Income Receipted During Program Year 2013 Total Available' $1.698,552.00 $507,842.66 $2,206,394.66 Expenditures' Type of Activity Expenditure Percentage Acquisition i $96,143.37 4.24% Economic Development $25,791.20 1.14% Housing .__..151,567,841.73 14.111i Public Facilities and imprOviiments $144.181.29 i.>INf6 Pub Ic Services . _ I =144 5,435.47 t6.41 %' General Administration and : $289,061.09 12.74% Total $2,268.454.15 100.00% Timeliness Timeliness Ratio - unexpended funds as percent of 2013 allocation 1.36 Expenditures by Type of Activity ( %) Expenditures by Type of Activity ($) Housing 69% Public r.ciiili.. .nd Improvements 6% Public 6.rvk.. ax Wn.ral Adminhhailon and Panning ux Acqul.itlon .% Economic D.wlepm.nl 1% U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Developrnent Office of Community Planning and Development Integrated Disbursement and Information System CDBG Community Development Block Grant Performance Profile PR54 - DAKOTA COUNTY,MN Program Year From 07 -01 -2013 To 06 -30 -2014 Program Targeting 1 - Percentage of Expenditures Assisting Low - and Moderate - Income Persons and Households Either Directly or On an Area Basis3 2 - Percentage of Expenditures That Benefit Low /Mod Income Areas 3 - Percentage of Expenditures That Aid in The Prevention or Elimination of Slum or Blight 4 - Percentage of Expenditures Addressing Urgent Needs 5 -Funds Expended in Neighborhood (Community For State) Revitalization Strategy Areas and by Community Development Financial Institution. 6 - Percentage of Funds Expended in Neighborhood (Community For State) Revitalization Strategy Areas and by Community Development Financial Institution 92.67% 1.89% 7.33% 0.00% $0.00 0.00% DATE: TIME: PAGE: 12-12-14 16:46 2 GO% 40% 20% o% U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Community Planning and Development Integrated Disbursement and Information System CDBG Community Development Block Grant Performance Profile P1154 - DAKOTA COUNTY,MN Program Year From 07 -01 -2013 To 06-30 -2014 CMG BenNldade by ReciaUEqutic Category' Rao. Total Hispanic IDO NOT USE INVALID White 0.0096' 0.00% BladdAkican American 5.88% 0.00% 1.17 %' 0.00% Amstican Indian/Alaskan Native - .. 0.20 %. 0.00 %1 Native Hawaiian /Other Pacific Islander 0.00 %. 0.00% American Indian/Alaskan Native & Whits 0.18% 0.00% Asian & White 0.11% 0.00% Black/African American & While 1.37%; 0.00% Amer. Indian /Alaskan NNW & BMdlAfrican Amer. 0.0016 0.00% Other multi- racial _ ....- - 14.11316-1 --..- 14.tit5 %' 40.52% ... __.._.. 0.00% . 0.00 %. 78.24 %; 59.48% Asian Asian /Pacific Islander,(va9d until 03-31-04) Hispanic (valid until 03.31-04) ? 0.00%; 0.00% income of CDBG Beneficiaries !Income Level Percentage 'Extremely Low Income ( < =30 %) 7.88 %1 Low Income (30 -50 %) ) 40.18 Moderate Income (50 -80 %) 49.97 %1 Total Low and Moderate ktcorrte S<•00%) 98.03% Non Low and Moderate Income ('80%) 1.97% DATE: 12 -12 -14 TIME: 16:46 PAGE: 3 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development DATE: 12 -12 -19 Office of Community Planning and Development TIME: 16:46 Integrated Disbursement and Information System PAGE: 4 CDBG Community Development Block Grant Performance Profile PR54 - DAKOTA COUNTY,MN Program Year From 07 -01 -2013 To 06 -30 -2014 Program Year 2013 Accomplishments ;Accomplishment Actual Jobs Created or Retained ;Households Receiving Housing Assistance Persons Assisted Directly, Primarily By Public Services and Public FacNNs Persons for Whom Services and Facilities were Available Units Rehabilitated - Single Units j Units Rehabilitated -Multi Unit Housing Number 0 137 4p� to Funds Leveraged for Activities Completed $2,151,17141 Notes 1 Also, additional funds may have been available from prior years. 2 The return of grant funds Is not reflected In these expenditures. 3 Derived by dividing annual expenditures for low -and moderate - Income activities by the total expenditures for all activities (excluding planning and administration, except when State planning activities have a national objective) during the program year. 4 For entitlement communities, these data are only for those activities that directly benefit low- and moderate - Income persons or households. They do not Include data for activities that provide assistance to low- and moderate - Income persons on an area basis, activities that ald In the prevention and elimination of slums and blight, and activities that address urgent needs. For states, these data are reported for all activities that benefit low- and moderate- Income persons or households, aid in the prevention and elimination of slums and blight, and address urgent needs. 5 Thls number represents the total number of persons /households for whom services /fadlitles were available for (In many cases] multiple area benefit activities as reported by grantees. A service or facility meeting the national objective of benefiting low- and moderate - Income persons on an area basis Is available to all residents of the area served by the activity. If one or more activities had the same or overlapping service areas, the number of persons served by each activity was used to calculate the total number served; e.g., If two activities providing different services had the same service area, the number of persons In the service area would be counted twice; once for each activity. TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City of Farmington 430 Third Street Farmington, Minnesota 651.280.6800 - Fax 651.280.6899 www.ci.farmington.mn.us Economic Development Authority Adam Kienberger, Community Development Director Organizational Meeting - EDA Fundamentals February 23, 2015 INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION As a part of the annual organizational meeting, I would like to take the time to review some EDA fundamentals as we move forward together in 2015. Below is a list of resources that will be referenced during the meeting. Board Essentials — a two -page board member refresher document used with permission from Ewald Consulting (attached). Economic Authority Handbook — collaboration between the MN Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), the Minnesota Economic Development Foundation (MNEDF), and the Economic Development Association of MN (EDAM). Written and compiled by the City of Oakdale, and Briggs & Morgan PA — http: / /mn.gov/ deed /images /Authority_Handbook.pdf. Printed copies will be available by request. The Role of Local Elected Officials in Economic Development — a publication by the National League of Cities Center for Research & Innovation. An excerpt outlining the "10 Things You Should Know" is attached. Below is the EDA's current Mission and Vision Statements — we will be reviewing these later this year as we develop a 2016 -2018 Strategic Plan for Economic Development: Mission Statement Farmington is commerce friendly, responsive, and innovative in the realm of economic development. The Economic Development Authority's mission is to market Farmington as one of Minnesota's most desirable cities to open a business. Vision Statement The Economic Development Authority's vision is to improve the economic vitality of the city of Farmington and to enhance the overall quality of life by creating partnerships, fostering employment opportunities, promoting workforce housing, and expanding the tax base through development and redevelopment. ACTION REQUESTED Review the attached documents be prepared to discuss any questions. ATTACHMENTS: Type Description o Exhibit Board Essentials - Ewald Consulting © Exhibit NLC Role of Local Elected Officials "The board governs... ... the staff manages." Leadership: Volunteer leaders are respon- sible for the direction of the organization. The board governs, develops policy and sets a course for the future. The Board maintains focus on the mission and strategic goals — and should avoid micro - managing the organization and staff. Function(s): • Governance • Policy & Position Development • Visionary — Future Focus • Fiduciary Management: Paid staff and contractors are responsible for the administration of the organization. Staff act as partners to the board, advancing the goals and strategies, while taking care of the daily administrative needs unique to nonprofit organizations. Unique Terminology Not - for - Profit refers to the legal corporate status of the organization. (It does not im- ply an exemption from paying or collect- ing state sales tax.) Nonprofit is the casual reference to Not - for - Profit Exempt Organization is a reference to the IRS designation exempting the organiza- tion from paying most federal income tax (with exception of UBIT - Unrelated Busi- ness Income Tax.) IRS 501 (c)(3) designation most often refers to organizations with a religious, charitable, scientific or educational pur- pose. IRS 501 (c)(6) designation refers to trade associations, business leagues and profes- sioal societies. Board Responsibilities 1. Define the mission, vision, and goals of the organization. 2. Hire, fire, determine compensa- tion and performance targets for the Executive Director. 3. Oversee the performance of the orga- nization's programs and services. 4. Secure funding toward the accom- plishment of organizational objec- tives. 5. Serve as a lead ambassador of the organization to the community. Insurance and Volunteer Immunity State and federal governments afford cer- tain protection to volunteer leaders. While the volunteer may have some protection, the organization is still open for legal suits. Insurance coverages add further pro- tection for volunteers and organization. Directors and Officers (D &O) Liability may cover legal defense for employ- ment, copyright, and antitrust claims, for instance. General Liability insurance covers prop- erty damage and injuries relating to the organization. Fidelity Bond covers losses resulting from fradulent or dishonest acts committed by an employee. Meeting Cancellation covers the loss of revenue due to a cancellation, curtail- ment, postponement because of weather, strikes, etc. (Contact legal and insurance counselors for assistance.) Ewald i Consulting Legal Principles Duty of Care requires leaders to use reasonable care and good judgement in making their decisions on behalf of the interest of the organization. Duty of Loyalty requires leaders to be faithful to the organization, avoiding con- flicts of interest. Duty of Obedience requires leaders to com- ply with governing documents (i.e. bylaws, articles of incorporation, policies, etc.) Governance Tool Kit Documents leaders need to be familiar with: • Statement of Purpose (Mission) • Articles of Incorporation • Bylaws • Budget • Policy Manual • Strategic Plan • Financial Statements • Meeting Minutes • Organizational Charts • IRS Forms Treat all governing documents with confidentiality. The Role of Committees "Committees recommend -• board approves -► staff and volunteers imple- ment." Standing - identified in the bylaws, ap- pointed annually, ongoing committee work. Ad Hoc - formed for specific or immedi- ate needs and disbanded upon completion of work (a.k.a. Task Force) Robert's Rules of Order Essentials Agenda ensures that important business is covered and discussions are on topic. Motions are proposals for action, begin- ning with, "I move we...:" A Second is required for the motion to be discussed. Discussion comes after a motion is intro- duced and seconded. Amendments may be made to most mo- tions if they improve the intent or clarify the original motion. Tabling lays the motion aside until a speci- fied later time. Calling the Question ends discussion and demands a vote on the motion. Voting is the official action after discussion to adopt, amend, kill or table the motion. Minutes protect the organization by recording the time and location of the meeting, participants, and the outcome of the motions. They are not a place to re- cord conversations, assignments, reports, etc. (Including reports and discussions can incriminate.) Quorum is number of directors required to conduct business. High Performing Boards "Mission Driven — Member Focused" • Accountable and follow through for your commitments. • Uphold governing douments and expectation. • Determine to be successful — ENVI- SION success. • Work as a team - no individual has an agenda more important than the whole. • Value and build relationships and respect diversity. • Focus on outcomes and the impact the organization can have. Common Sense 1. Prepare for meetings; read, read, read! 2. Respect the chairperson, agenda and rules of order. 3. Bring a calendar, start and end on time. 4. Know the mission and goals. 5. Listen more than you speak. 6. Check personal and political agendas at the door. 7. Respect confidentiality. 8. You don't speak for the organization without authority. 9. Support the board; don't bad -mouth any action or person. (Dissenting votes may be noted in the minutes — not outside the meeting.) Strategic Planning A strategic plan focuses the board on mis- sion goals for 3 to 5 years. It serves as a roadmap. Great board members can think beyond their term of office and outside their area of expertise. Data Gathering — survey members, review industry and organizational trends, assess fi- nancial performance of ongoing initiatives. Environmental Scan - review of external and internal influences on the organiza- tion, as well as strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT). Mission — statement about what the orga- nization is who it serves and the services it provides; short, with PR value. Vision — inspiring, Tong -term desired out- come; image of success. Values — guiding principles for board and staff. Goals — broad targets to advance the mis- sion. Objectives — S.M.A.R.T. Usually just 3 to 7 to remain focused. (S) Specific (M) Measurable (A) Attainable (R) Realistic (T) Time -bound Strategies — advance the objectives and goals; creative efforts to achieve the mis- sion and serve stakeholders /members. Action Steps — fit within the strategies (the actions, assignments, deadlines,'etc.) a.k.a. annual "operating plan" or "busi- ness plan." Plan Champion — the person (staff and/or volunteer) who keeps focus on the plan. Risk Management Protect the organization. Be aware of fidu- ciary responsibility, contracts, audit results, insurance, IRS requirements, values and ethics, apparent authority, antitrust, etc. Public Records requests for the organiza -, tion's annual federal tax return (Form 990, 990 -EZ) must be made available for the last 3 years. Significant fines occur for noncompliance. Antitrust Violations occur when two or more persons from the same industry or profession discuss suppliers, processes, prices or operations. Remove yourself from any conversation that would change how business is conducted because of an agreement among competitors. Apparent Authority arises when a board chair, though not granting actual authority, permits a committee or chapter to behave as if it had authority. Authority rests with the chairman and may not be assumed by others. Financial Audits annually to protect board and staff; relying on an audit committee to select, oversee and report on the process. Conflicts, of Interest disclosed at the start of the term and throughout the year. Ewald rz Consulting 1000 Westgate Drive, Ste 252 St. Paul, MN 55114 Phone: 651 - 290 -6260 www.ewald.com Services • Association Management • Government Relations/Public Relations • Strategic Planning • Board Development • Operations • Consulting • Finance • Publications & Seminars • Communication &Technology The Role of Local Elected Officials in Economic Development http : / /www.nlc.org /find -city- solutions /city- solutions- and - applied- res... NATIONAL LEAGUE of CITIES The Role of Local Elected Officials in Economic Development Leadership is consistently identified as a critical factor in effective economic development. Although leadership can come from many places within the community, local elected officials are particularly well- positioned to take on this role. The Role of Local Elected Officials in Economic Development: 10 Things You Should Know" identifies fundamental ways elected officials can become informed and strategic decision - makers who can connect the policy "dots," be effective communicators, and take a leadership role in economic development. The format of the guide is a "top 10 list" of things elected officials should know about economic development in order to be effective leaders. These include: Introduction 1. Your local economic strengths and weaknesses. A stronger understanding of your community's economic profile will help you create a realistic vision and strategies for economic development. 2. Your community's place in the broader regional economy. With a firmer grasp of how your community fits into the broader region, you're better prepared to work with other jurisdictions to share responsibility for regional economic success. 3. Your community's economic development vision and goals. Local elected officials can play a key role in building consensus for a vision and goals that provide clear direction for local economic development. 4. Your community's strategy to attain its goals. A strategic approach means linking economic development goals to specific activities, allocating a budget and staff to these activities, and evaluating performance based on measurable outcomes. 5. Connections between economic development and other city policies. When crafting economic development policies, it is essential to consider how other city policies (e.g., transportation or housing) affect your economic development goals. 6. Your regulatory environment. Your community's regulatory process should allow for timely, reliable and transparent resolution of issues facing businesses, while still remaining true to your long -term economic development vision. 7. Your local economic development stakeholders and partners. Local officials should think strategically on a project -by- project basis about who needs to be involved, the resources they bring to the table, and what it will take to get them engaged. 8. The needs of your local business community. Local officials can help create an environment that supports the growth and expansion of local businesses, primarily by opening lines of communication. 9. Your community's economic development message. You will want a clear, accurate and compelling message that reflects your local vision and that helps ensure broad support for economic development projects undertaken by the city and its partners. 10. Your economic development staff. Local elected officials will be more effective in leading economic development activities to the extent that they forge strong relationships with staff members who work on these issues on a daily basis. Conclusion 1 of 2 2/19/2015 9:41 AM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City of Farmington 430 Third Street Farmington, Minnesota 651.280.6800 - Fax 651.280.6899 www.ci.farmington.mn.us Economic Development Authority Adam Kienberger, Community Development Director Director's Report February 23, 2015 INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION Broadband Update The Dakota County CDA commissioned a study this past summer to look at ways Dakota County can enhance its broadband infrastructure and leverage assets the County and various cities have installed over the years. County and city staff are currently reviewing the findings of the study and will be recommending next steps in the coming months. Attached is a recent article that outlines some of the challenges Minnesota faces regarding existing broadband infrastructure. Building Permit Report A total of 6 permits (all single - family) have been issued as of February 13, 2015. There are 8 permits (all single - family) that have been submitted for review and /or are waiting on being issued. During 2014, we issued a total of 87 single- family building permits. State of the City State of the City will be on March 18th at 8:00 a.m. at City Hall. Everyone is invited to attend to hear the Mayor's update as well as how each of our roles encourages positive change in the community. Miscellaneous Articles Attached is a recent article outlining economic confidence across the country and noting Minnesota's high ranking. ACTION REQUESTED ATTACHMENTS: Type Description o Backup Material Related Articles Broadband is better as a public- private partnership 1 MinnPost http : / /www.minnpost.com /community- voices /2015 /02/broadband -be... MINNPOST Broadband is better as apublic- private partnership By Ben Franske 102/16/15 REUTERS/Daniel Munoz A simple solution is to encourage municipalities to build out this so- called 'last -mile connection to individual homes and businesses by installing publicly owned fiber. The critical infrastructure topic of broadband has once again come up for discussion at the Capitol. As with many issues in the divided political climate we've seen for the past several years, people seem to be either for or against broadband as a municipal service. Those who are against it state that what we have now is working — that the market for broadband is flourishing and competitive in providing most Minnesotans with access — and sometimes question its importance. Those supporting additional broadband development cite statistics about the slow connection speeds available outstate and the lack of choice and high costs everywhere. We must agree that, as a society, there are some good reasons for infrastructure such as the road network to be owned by the people it serves rather than by a private corporation. After all, we don't hear serious calls for the privatization of all roads, water distribution systems, sidewalks, or trails. In a truly competitive marketplace there is much innovation, pressure to keep costs low and service high, and a desire for continuous improvement because a large number of companies are competing for limited business. Unfortunately, the current market for broadband fails at these ideals. Costs seem to be continually rising, service is often poor, and there are typically only two choices: a cable monopoly or a telephone monopoly, and in some areas not even those. It would not be efficient, or even feasible, to have a large number of service providers all duplicating effort and stringing cable to each individual residence and business. 1 of 6 2/18/2015 11:12 AM Broadband is better as a public-private partnership } MinnPost http: / /www.minnpost.com/ community- voices/2015/02/broadband -be... Waiting isn't working We have also tried to spur network improvements by giving hundreds of millions of dollars in tax credits and incentives to existing private telecommunications companies through the National Information Infrastructure program. This broken promise by incumbent carriers for ultra -high speed connections throughout the country years ago has still not been seen. Clearly waiting for the incumbent providers to do something on their own or even providing substantial incentives to motivate them is not working. There must be a better way. Ben Franke A simple solution is to encourage municipalities to build out this so- called "last- mile" connection to individual homes and businesses by installing publicly owned fiber. This "dark fiber" would not necessarily have any service on it provided by the municipality. Instead, it would function as a "road" to one or more centralized publicly owned "meet -me" locations. At those locations you could have the fiber connected to a service provider of your choice, possibly even multiple service providers. Because it is much more cost effective for private service providers to wire to a few central locations than to run cables to many individual homes and businesses, there is a lower barrier to entry. The effect of this would be to dramatically increase market competition in the space. If community members were interested they could create a nonprofit cooperative to compete and provide service as well. This model addresses many of the concerns with municipal broadband — such as a lack of choice and poor customer service, or concerns about filtering, privacy and tracking — while retaining the true need and competitive advantage of offering very high -speed connections critical to future growth and prosperity. By separating the true infrastructure from the services that can ride on top of it we have, in effect, created something much more analogous to the road network that is provided publicly but utilized by many people and businesses in many different ways. A crisis in Minnesota If you don't think we have a broadband crisis in Minnesota think again. Wholesale bandwidth costs here are already substantially more than other parts of the country and the vast majority of our bandwidth flows through Chicago, which means we also have less bandwidth redundancy than other areas of the country. When thinking about where to locate businesses, this absolutely becomes an important issue. One commonly suggested method for increasing competition and broadband penetration is the use of cellular data connections, but this is totally unrealistic. In many outstate areas coverage remains low or nonexistent. There is also an underlying problem of limited bandwidth inherent to all wireless solutions that does not scale well to the many uses of broadband beyond simple web surfing. If we as a state are to remain one of the premier places to live, work, learn and do business it truly is imperative that we leverage the power of the state to improve our broadband problem. If countries such as Latvia, Romania and the Netherlands can achieve average Internet connections speeds of over 4o mbps, and at a much more reasonable price, so can we. A failure to address the growing broadband gap is a critical mistake. .Ben Franke, Ph.D., is a professor of Technology and Security at Inver Hills Community College. WANT TO ADD YOUR VOICE? If you're interested in joining the discussion, add your voice to the Comment section below — or consider writing a letter or a longer -form Community Voices commentary. (For more information about Community Voices, email Susan Albright at slbright@minnpost.com.) 2 of 6 2/18/2015 11:12 AM Economic Confidence Index Highest in Minn., Lowest in W. Va. http: / /www.gallup.com /pol1 /1 81514 /economic- confidence- index- hig... GALL 1 ECONOMY February 9, 2015 Economic Confidence Index Highest in Minn., Lowest in W. Va. by Justin McCarthy Story Highlights • Minnesota has highest economic confidence score in 7 -year trend • Maryland, California, Hawaii, Colorado also sit atop the list • For fifth year in a row, W Virginia ranks at very bottom This story is part of Gallup 's annual "State of the States" series, which 'reveals state -by -state differences on political, economic, religion and well-being measures. WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Gallup's Economic Confidence Index scores in 2014 were highest in Minnesota -- the only state with a non - negative score -- followed by Maryland, California and Hawaii. Scores were lowest in West Virginia, Alabama, Kentucky and Mississippi. ?bp 10 States, Gallup Economic Confidence Index riiniieseta Maryland Galifu. ritiia Hawaii Colquido Washington Texas Massachusetts Wiiui ilmin North Dakota Gallup Daily trucking, Jamul ry-Deceinher 2014 -6 -8 -8 =9 -9 Bottom 11) States, Gallup Economic Confidence Index 'West Virginia Alabama Kentucky Mississippi SVyiiming Arkansas Louisiana_ Oklahoma New Mexion .' Tennessee Missouri Gallup Daily tricking, 2014 -33 -29 -a7 -27 -26 _26 1 of 4 2/10/2015 2:231 PM Economic Confidence Index Highest in Minn., Lowest in W. Va. http : / /www.gallup.com /po11/181514 /economic - confidence- index- hig... GALLUP' Januaii'- December 2011 GALLUP These results are based on Gallup Daily tracking interviews with 176,702 national adults conducted from January through December 2014, and represent averages for the year. Gallup conducted interviews with at least 450 residents in every state and interviewed 1,000 or more in 41 states. The Gallup Economic Confidence Index is a composite of Americans' ratings of current U.S. economic conditions and their perceptions of the economy's direction. The index has a theoretical maximum of +100 (if all respondents rate the economy "excellent" or "good" and say it is getting better) and a theoretical minimum of -100 (if all rate the economy "poor" and say it is getting worse). Nationally, the index averaged -15 for all of 2014. However, scores improved dramatically in the last part of the year, and have consistently been in positive territory so far this year. The ratings reported here, based on averages for all of 2014, do not necessarily reflect current confidence. However, given that there is a decent level of consistency in state rankings from year to year, the relative state rankings may still generally hold even if Americans overall, and in each of the 50 states, are currently more upbeat about the economy. Gallup has tracked economic confidence ratings at the state level since 2008, and prior to Minnesota's latest rating of zero, no state has had a non - negative annual score. The. District of Columbia, which had a score of +18 in 2014, has had positive scores since 2012 and has maintained a significant lead in confidence over residents in the 50 states since 2009. Though most of the states with the highest index scores are the same as in 2013, Hawaii ( -6) and Colorado ( -7) moved upward in 2014 after not having made the top of the previous year's list. Washington, Texas and Massachusetts, each with a score of -8, remained in the top 10 from the prior rankings. Wisconsin and North Dakota, both scoring -9, also returned to the top of the list. Scores in Iowa ( -11) and Nebraska ( -11) -- both of which have regularly been atop the list in recent years -- as well as Connecticut ( -14) each dipped slightly, and therefore, these states lost their spots among the top 10. Bottom 10 States Similar to 2013 Rankings Of the states where residents are least confident about the economy, West Virginia ( -42) remains at the bottom -- a distinction it holds for the fifth year in a row. Alabama ( -33) had also found itself among the bottom states in recent years, but its nine -point drop in 2014 sent it to the second -to -last spot after West Virginia. Like the upper tier of the list, the bottom tier in 2014 has many repeats from the previous year. Kentucky ( -29), Louisiana ( -27), Arkansas ( -27), Wyoming ( -27), Oklahoma ( -26) and Tennessee ( -25) all remain among the states where residents express the least confidence in the nation's economy. New additions to the list include Mississippi ( -29), New Mexico ( -26) and Missouri ( -25) -- each of which slipped several points in confidence in 2014. 2 of 4 2/10/2015 2:23 PM Economic Confidence Index Highest in Minn., Lowest in W. Va. http: / /www.galiup.com/ poll /181514/ economic - confidence- index- hig... Economic Confidence by State, 2014 • Above Average S Average I ! Below Average Vl' NIL MA RI NJ Dc MD GALLUP' Gallup has found in the past that there is a political nature to economic confidence, as states where residents have • higher confidence tend to be more approving of President Barack Obama, while those with lower confidence are least likely to approve of him. Presidential approval, however, isn't always an accurate barometer of economic confidence. North Dakotans, for example, are among the least approving of Obama but have far greater confidence than residents of most other states as they have enloyed an oil boom in recent years. Bottom Line Confidence in the economy varies significantly from state to state, though it generally tilted negative in 2014, as has been the case in recent years. Although the yearly average for the Economic Confidence Index was steady in 2014 compared with 2013, improvements seen in late December have carried over into the new year, suggesting the index could gain real ground in 2015. But increases in confidence aren't always felt evenly throughout the country. West Virginia has continually languished at the bottom of the list -- as it has on a variety of measures -- and many Southern states have too. Pockets of extreme discontent with the economy can hamper national progress, and state rankings such as this one provide an opportunity to see where improvement is most needed. Survey Methods Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Jan. 2 -Dec. 30, 2014, on the Gallup U.S. Daily survey, with a random sample of 176,702 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of 3 of 4 2/10/2015 2:23 PM Economic Confidence Index Highest in Minn., Lowest in W. Va. htlp : / /www.gallup.com /po1U181514/ economic- confidence- index- hig... Columbia. For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage point at the 95% confidence level. Margins of error for Individual states are no greater than ±6 percentage points, and are ±3 percentage points in most states. The margin of error for the District of Columbia is ±6 percentage points. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting. Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cellphone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random- digit -dial methods. Learn more about how Gallup Daily tracking works. RELEASE DATE: February 9, 2015 SOURCE: Gallup http : / /www.gallup.com /poll/181514 /economic- confidence - index - highest- minn- lowest.aspx CONTACT: Gallup World Headquarters, 901 F Street, Washington, D.C., 20001, U.S.A +1 202.715.3030 Copyright © 2015 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved. Gallup, Inc. maintains several registered and unregistered trademarks that include but may not be limited to: A8, Accountability Index, Business Impact Analysis, BE10, CE11, CE11 Accelerator, Clifton StrengthsExplorer, Clifton StrengthsFinder, Customer Engagement Index, Customer Engagement Management, Dr. Gallup Portrait, Employee Engagement Index, Enetrix, Engagement Creation Index, Follow This Path, Gallup, Gallup Brain, Gallup Business Journal, GBJ, Gallup Consulting, Gallup - Healthways Well -Being Index, Gallup Management Journal, GMJ, Gallup Panel, Gallup Press, Gallup Tuesday Briefing, Gallup University, Gallup World News, HumanSigma, HumanSigma Accelerator, ICE11, 110, L3, ME25, Nurselnsight, NurseStrengths, Patient Quality System, Performance Optimization, Power of 2, Principailnsight, Q12, Q12 Accelerator, Q12 Advantage, Selection Research, Inc., SE25, SF34, SRI, Soul of the City, Strengths Spotlight, Strengths -Based Selling, StatShot, StrengthsCoach, StrengthsExplorer, StrengthsFinder, Strengthslnsight, StrengthsQuest, Supportlnslght, TX(R+E+R)=P3, Teacherinsight, The Gallup Path, The Gallup Poll, The Gallup School, VantagePoint, Varsity Management, Wellbeing Finder, Achiever, Activator, Adaptability, Analytical, Arranger, Belief, Command, Communication, Competition, Connectedness, Consistency, Context, Deliberative, Developer, Discipline, Empathy, Fairness, Focus, Futuristic, Harmony, Ideation, Includer, Individualization, Input, Intellection , Learner, Maximizer, Positivity, Relator, Responsibility, Restorative, Self- Assurance, Significance, Strategic, and Woo. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. These materials are provided for noncommercial, personal use only. Reproduction prohibited without the express permission of Gallup, Inc. 4 of 4 2/10/2015 2:23 PM