Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06.20.05 Council Packet City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. AGENDA PRE-CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 20, 2005 6:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVE AGENDA 3. CITIZEN COMMENTS a) Interview Heritage Preservation Commission Applicant COUNCIL REVIEW OF AGENDA 5. STAFF COMMENTS a) Cable Commission Audit Review 6. ADJOURN PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT ,ouncil workshops are conducted as an informal work session, all discussions shall be considered fact-finding, hypothetical and unofficial critical thinking exercises, which do not reflect an official public position. Council work session outcomes should not be construed by the attending public and/or reporting media as the articulation of a formal City policy position. Only official Council action normally taken at a regularly scheduled Council meeting should be considered as aformal expression of the City's position on any given matter. 5~ 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 Administrator ~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Franchise Fee Audit Review - Charter Communications DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The Apple Valley, Farmington, Rosemount Cable Commission,(AFRCC),and the City of Lakeville have retained the services of HLB Tautges Redpath, Ltd. to perform a joint audit review of franchise fee payments from Charter Communications for 2001,2002 and 2003. DISCUSSION Charter Communications currently holds a cable franchise with the City of Farmington. According to the terms and conditions of the franchise, the City has the right to inspect any records that relate to the franchise or system operations including Charter's accounting and financial records. The consultant, HLB Tautges Redpath, Ltd., has completed the audit review on behalf of the City. The final Franchise Fee Review is included in the Council packet. The review illustrates procedures used in the audit, results found and a summary of recommendations. The Franchise Fee Review has been forwarded to Charter Communications. Upon completion of Charter's review of the audit, the AFRCC will work with Charter concerning the results of the audit and bring recommendations to Council for approval at a future Council meeting. BUDGET IMPACT The cost associated with this audit is within the AFRCC budget. A CTIONREOUESTED For Council information only. Respectfully submitted, ~d.~~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promisingfuture. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 20, 2005 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS a) Introduce Promoted Employees - Police Department 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (6/6/05 Regular) (6/1/05 Special) b) Appointment Recommendation - Police Department c) Appointment Recommendation - Police Department d) Curbside Clean-up Day Report - Parks and Recreation e) Approve Solid Waste Exemptions - Parks and Recreation f) Acknowledge Resignation - Human Resources g) School and Conference - Human Resources h) Approve Appointment Heritage Preservation Commission - Administration i) May 2005 Financial Report - Finance j) Consider Shooting Range Agreement - Police k) License for Utility to Cross Protected Waters - Engineering 1) Approve Conservation Easement for Wetland Bank - Charleswood Development- Engineering m) Adopt Resolution - Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition Development Contract- Engineering n) Adopt Resolution - Bristol Square 5th Addition Development Contract - Engineering .. 0) Adopt Joint Resolution - Approve Bauer Property Annexation - Community Development p) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS Action Taken Introduced Approved Approved Approved Information Received Approved Acknowledged Information Received Pulled Information Received Approved Approved Approved R77-05 R78-05 R 79-05 Approved 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) 2004 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report - Finance b) Spruce Street Project Update -Administration 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Approve Bond Sale - Finance (Supplemental) 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Adopt Ordinance - Industrial Park Rezone - Community Development b) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning Christiansen Property - Community Development 13. COUNCILROUNDTABLE a) County-Wide High Performance Partnerships - Administration 14. ADJOURN Accepted Delayed to 2006 R80-05, R81-05, R82-05 Ord 005-535, Ord 005-536 Tabled to 7/18/05 Information Received City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promisingfuture. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 20, 2005 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVEAGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS a) Introduce Promoted Employees - Police Department o. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (6/6/05 Regular) (6/1/05 Special) b) Appointment Recommendation - Police Department c) Appointment Recommendation - Police Department d) Curbside Clean-up Day Report - Parks and Recreation e) Approve Solid Waste Exemptions - Parks and Recreation f) Acknowledge Resignation - Human Resources g) School and Conference - Human Resources h) Approve Appointment Heritage Preservation Commission - Administration i) May 2005 Financial Report - Finance j) Consider Shooting Range Agreement - Police k) License for Utility to Cross Protected Waters - Engineering 1) Approve Conservation Easement for Wetland Bank - Charleswood Development- Engineering m) Adopt Resolution - Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition Development Contract - Engineering n) Adopt Resolution - Bristol Square 5th Addition Development Contract - Engineering 0) Adopt Joint Resolution - Approve Bauer Property Annexation - Community Development p) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS Action Taken Pages 1-30 Page 31 Page 32 Pages 33-34 Pages 35-36 Page 37 Page 38 Pages 39-40 Pages 41-42 Pages 43-49 Pages 50-53 Pages 54-64 Pages 65-82 Pages 83-99 Pages 100-108 Page 109 9. A WARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) 2004 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report - Finance b) Spruce Street Project Update - Administration 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Approve Bond Sale - Finance (Supplemental) 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Adopt Ordinance - Industrial Park Rezone - Community Development b) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning Christiansen Property - Community Development 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE a) County-Wide High Performance Partnerships - Administration 14. ADJOURN Page 110 Pages 111-114 Pages 115-127 Page 128 Page 129 7a.... COUNCIL MINUTES PRE-MEETING June 6, 2005 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Soderberg at 6:30 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson None Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; David Urbia, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Dan Siebenaler, Police Chief; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Lee Smick, City Planner; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant 2. APPROVE AGENDA MOTION by Wilson, second by Pritzlaffto approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. CITIZEN COMMENTS 4. COUNCIL REVIEW OF AGENDA Councilmember Fogarty had a question regarding the software for the new liquor store. Staff will be able to check the inventory in both stores on the computer once the fiber optic is in. Regarding the applicant for the Heritage Preservation Commission, Councilmember McKnight does want to interview her at the next Pre-Council meeting. Regarding Mystic Meadows, Councilmember Wilson took note of comments from Robin Hanson. He felt we are moving backwards if we do not put in a sidewalk on the east side of Denali Way to allow families to walk down the street safely. To build a road in 2005 without a sidewalk does not seem right to him. He would prefer to have a sidewalk in front and a trail in back. If that is not possible, he would prefer the sidewalk over the trail. Parks and Recreation Director Distad stated the sidewalk would be in the boulevard, not on private property. They asked the developer to put in a sidewalk in this location, and he was opposed to it. To reach a compromise, they agreed to his recommendations to having a trail on the west side of Denali Way and then coming behind the lots and no sidewalk on the boulevard. Councilmember McKnight asked if this is a storm water pond or a recreation pond. If it is a storm water pond he does not want to give access to it. If it is a recreation pond, he wants to give people access to it. If the resolution agreed to with the developer is the two areas with trails in the back, he can live with it. Council Minutes (Pre-Meeting) June 6, 2005 Page 2 Councilmember Pritzlaffhad a question regarding the item for the Hometown Addition. There are two cul-de-sacs to the right and he would like to see those two lots made into a road to connect the two cul-de-sacs. There was a discussion at the Planning Commission meeting that there would be a road to the south to give emergency vehicles access. Right now, the buses will not go into a cul-de-sac because they cannot turn around. With the road right-of-way 60 ft. is needed. This would be better for emergency vehicles and buses. City Planner Smick stated it is possible to remove the two lots and connect the cul-de-sacs. At some point in the future as development continues it could continue south and connect with the railroad right-of-way and continue to 210th Street. Community Development Director Carroll stated there is also the possibility of extending the north-south road. If the bus garage property were redeveloped, that could also be an access to Willow Street. Councilmember McKnight asked about the comment that buses will not go into cul-de-sacs. City Engineer Mann stated buses will not go in cul-de-sacs at all. They are not willing to try to turn around if there are cars parked there and they will not back up for safety purposes. Their issue in this development had to do with the number of pick up points. They were more concerned about having all ofthe children at one intersection and having too many people at one pick-up than going into the cul-de- sac. There have been discussions for another pick-up point. City Planner Smick noted the two lots that would have to be removed are not the most ideal lots. Councilmember Pritzlaffwas looking at more of a safety issue rather than the bus issue. Police Chief Siebenaler agreed. He felt the loop is a more desirable feature and it creates three or four bigger lots and you lose two small, less desirable lots in the process. 5. STAFF COMMENTS City Administrator Urbia recommended moving item 9b) Sanitary Sewer Televising Services to the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Pritzlaff stated he was not happy at the last meeting when they pushed several items to the Consent Agenda without having staff speak about them. He would like to have Engineering speak briefly on it without moving it. The item remained at 9b). City Administrator Urbia stated regarding the supplemental item for extension of MUS A to Mattson Farms the plat is already approved. The request for MUSA is an administrative request. Regarding the Cedar Corridor Transportation Infrastructure Group is suggesting appointing an elected official, the City Administrator, and a business community member. There is a Technical Advisory Group meeting on June 9, 2005. City Administrator will recommend Lee Mann and Kevin Carroll for this group. The next meeting for those appointed would be June 29,2005. City Administrator Urbia sent an e-mail to Council and staff to see who was available June 17 and June 24 for a meeting with the school district. Councilmembers Fogarty and McKnight are available for both meetings. Councilmember Wilson was not convinced they would see any positive direction on the June 24 meeting. Councilmember Pritzlaff Council Minutes (Pre-Meeting) June 6, 2005 Page 3 will be available for the June 24 meeting and would like to attend the June 17, but they only want two Councilmembers. He does not like having just two Councilmembers attend the meeting. He feels out ofthe loop and would rather have it be the full Council. City Administrator Urbia noted the next Leadership Breakfast is July 1, 2005. This may have to be rescheduled due to the July 4 weekend. Regarding the Cedar Corridor Group, Councilmember Wilson suggested checking with the residents who attended the transit station workshop to see ifthey would be interested in attending the meetings. City Administrator Urbia will contact them. Mayor Soderberg received a letter from Senator Coleman on the grant program solicitation for the firefighter hiring program. The Fire Department is looking at this. The deadline is June 28, 2005. 6. ADJOURN MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 6:53 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~., 4/./ , ~cL.. fr7~<J ynthia Muller Executive Assistant COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR June 6, 2005 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Soderberg at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Soderberg led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Audience: Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson None Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; David Urbia, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Dan Siebenaler, Police Chief; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Lee Smick, City Planner; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Randy Oswald, Karen Neal, Greg Feely, Fred Melo, John Anderson, Mike Cox 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember McKnight pulled item 71) Appointment to Heritage Preservation Commission for discussion. City Administrator Urbia added a supplemental item 7u) Adopt Resolution - Extension of MUS A to the Mattson Farms Property. Regarding item 12b) Cedar Corridor Transportation Infrastructure Group, more information was provided to Council. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Wilson to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Introduce New Employee -Solid Waste Mr. Joe Hince was introduced as the new Solid Waste Operator. b) Swearing-In Police Officer - Administration Officer Matt Hendricksen was sworn in as a new Police Officer. His father, Corporal Barry Hendrickson pinned on his badge. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by McKnight, second by Wilson to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (5/16/05 Regular) Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 2 b) Approve Temporary 3.2 Beer License - Administration c) Approved Name of Park in Parkview Ponds Development -Parks and Recreation d) Approved Request to Waive Fees for Rambling River Days - Parks and Recreation e) Approved School and Conference - Parks and Recreation f) Received Information Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation g) Approved Capital Outlay - Liquor Operations h) Authorized Appointment Recommendation Detective Sergeant - Police Department i) Authorized Appointment Recommendations Patrol Sergeant - Police Department j) Acknowledged Retirement Police Department - Human Resources k) Received Information Capital Outlay - Information Technology m) Adopted RESOLUTION R69-05 Approving Gambling Premises Permit - Administration n) Received Information Downtown Traffic Study and TH3 Concept Update - Engineering 0) Adopted RESOLUTION R70-05 Middle Creek East 3rd Addition Development Contract - Engineering p) Adopted RESOLUTION R71-05 Mattson Farm Development Contract- Engineering q) Approved 2006 ALF Budget - Administration r) Approved DNR 50/50 Matching Grant - Fire Department s) Approved City Administrator Goals and Employment Agreement- Administration t) Approved Bills u) Adopted RESOLUTION R72-05 Extension of MUS A to the Mattson Farms Property - Community Development APIF, MOTION CARRIED. I) Appointment to Heritage Preservation Commission - Administration Staffhas received an application for a vacant seat on the Heritage Preservation Commission. Councilmember McKnight wanted to interview the applicant at the next Pre-Council Meeting just to be consistent. Staffwill contact the applicant. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT a) Adopt Resolution - Accept Bids Fire Station - Administration Mr. Mike Cox, Wold Architects, stated bids were received for the Fire Station No. 2 to be located on the north Municipal Campus. Eleven bids were received. The low bid was from Lund Martin for $1,706,700. The budget was $1,755,331. The remaining amount will be used for contingencies. MOTION by Wilson, second by Pritzlaffto adopt RESOLUTION R73-05 accepting the total base bid and both alternates of Lund Martin Construction in the amount of $1,706,700 and Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 3 awarding the project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Cox stated they will prepare a contract and schedule a ground breaking. b) Sanitary Sewer Televising Services - Engineering Quotations were received for sanitary sewer televising services. Hydro-Vac Inc. submitted the low quote of$26,175. The service is for a three-year period. Through this process, staff can find problem areas. The City is divided into 5-7 areas and they are done on a cycle. MOTION by McKnight, second by Wilson to approve entering into a contract for sanitary sewer televising services by Hydro-Vac Inc. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Consider Request to Rename the Farmington Civic Arena - Parks and Recreation Staff has received a request from Mr. Keith Kramer to rename the Farmington Civic Arena to the Schmitz - Maki Arena. This is to honor two community members who were instrumental in starting and fostering the growth of hockey in Farmington. During the discussion with the Park and Rec Commission members, two questions came up. One was if the Farmington Civic Arena was renamed to the Schmitz-Maki Arena would it make it difficult to demolish the existing ice facility later if a new ice facility were built. The second question was if a new facility were built does this mean the new facility should carry the name Schmitz- Maki Arena. Mr. Kramer and others addressed these questions with the Park and Rec Commission and there are no strings attached to this. They just want to rename the facility in honor of both of these gentlemen. The park/facility naming policy states that a facility can be named after someone if one or more of the following is met: 1. A long-time City employee, volunteer or supporter. 2. A citizen or family of the community. 3. An individual, family or organization supported the project financially. The policy also stated that the Park and Rec facilities should be named carefully and with permanent intent. The signage was not discussed at the Park and Rec Commission meeting. In 2004 the Park and Rec Department installed a new sign at the arena at a cost of $2,100. This issue should be addressed. Mr. Kramer has indicated that ifthe facility is renamed they are willing to pay for the cost of a new sign. Mr. Keith Kramer stated the request was approved unanimously by the Park and Rec Commission. They would like to have the arena renamed the Schmitz-Maki Arena to honor Louie Schmitz and Al Maki. Mr. Schmitz started the hockey program and made a huge commitment to the program. He did everything necessary to see the program succeed. These gentlemen are in the state hockey hall of fame. He and others will commit to paying for the cost of the sign. These two gentlemen put a lot of time into the program. Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 4 Mr. John Barger, stated he is a high school hockey coach in Bumsville and grew up in Farmington. He was also swayed by Mr. Schmitz to become a hockey player. These gentlemen are the icons of Farmington hockey and that tradition goes back a long ways. Mr. Schmitz was a community person and had the idea to give kids an opportunity at no cost, make them feel good about what they are doing, and send them on their way happy to have them come back again. Every kid got an equal opportunity to play no matter how good they were. Their family runs deep in the hockey tradition. Mr. Schmitz was one of the state leaders in developing girl's hockey. You would have to go a long way to match the record that Mr. Maki produced in Farmington. He was one of the first inductees into the high school hall of fame. They supported people on and off the rink. He felt this was an opportunity for the Mayor and Council to put their name on something that they can take a lot of pride in. Councilmember Wilson stated what is so neat about this opportunity is you can name something after a great hometown hero. He thought this was a phenomenal idea. He did not see the two questions being an issue. Councilmember Pritzlaff also thought it was a great idea. Councilmember Fogarty stated the fact these people put their money where their mouth is speaks volumes to their dedication. She finds this honorable. Councilmember McKnight stated he also played for Mr. MaId in high school and played for one of Mr. Schmitz's sons. MOTION by McKnight, second by Fogarty to rename the Farmington Civic Arena to the Schmitz-Maki Arena and work with the volunteer group to raise money for the signage. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Soderberg stated it is fitting to honor two gentlemen that have made a difference to the Farmington youth. b) Dakota County 2006-2010 CIP - Engineering Dakota County is in the process of preparing their CIP for 2006-2010. They have solicited comments as to what the City would like to see in the draft CIP. Staff has met with the county to discuss which projects the City is interested in seeing. Projects include: 195th Street from Autumn Glen to TH3 - 2006 CSAH 31, CSAH 50 to CSAH 74 - 2007 CSAH 74, Denmark to CSAH 31 - 2007 CSAH 50, Division Street to TH3 - 200S 195th Street, Flagstaff to Cedar - 2009 Traffic Signals along Pilot Knob Road 20Sth Street - Cost Participation Policy Staff asked Council for any projects they wanted added or deleted. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked about the cost participation for 20Sth Street. This would be from the Middle School to TH3. City Engineer Mann stated a time frame has not been set in stone. The feasibility report was done to identify some costs that related to potential development in the area. Some ofthe issues related to the powerline. There is no set date for the project. Councilmember Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 5 Pritzlaff asked if the project would be moved up to allow for the cost participation rather than waiting and possibly lose the county's participation. City Engineer Mann stated if the county decided they were willing to participate and they had some funds to spend on the project that would be a factor in the decision. Councilmember Wilson noted the future Diamond Path is not on the list, which is a county road. He asked if that is because it will be a developer built road. He thought by 2010 some segments of the road would be in. City Engineer Mann stated there have been some discussions as to whether Diamond Path or a portion of it should be a county road. The projects requested to be in the CIP are severely under-funded. Staff feels the section of Diamond Path north of 19Sth maybe a county road someday. The portion south of 19Sth is another question. If that would become a county road, then the county would take back a portion of Akin Road which was turned back to the City several years ago. This is a unique potential staff is not sure the county is interested in following up on. To connect to 19Sth Street with Diamond Path as a county road and have it terminate as a county road at 19Sth Street will continue to be discussed. Councilmember Wilson hoped staff would let the Council know what is needed from the Council to see these projects become a partnership with the county. Once the county receives all the cities letters for the draft they will create their draft CIP. It will be sent out for review and in October they will want a resolution from the Council specifically asking for certain projects to be in the CIP. Councilmember McKnight asked staffto explain the reasoning in including 19Sth Street from Flagstaffto Cedar. City Engineer Mann explained a couple years ago the Council asked that be included as a request. With the large amount of traffic from Farmington moving to the west and to the north, that was an important connection. The county agrees. Councilmember Fogarty stated when she started on the Council they were completing an east-west corridor study. She was surprised they have not started a north-south corridor study. City Engineer Mann replied right now they are still working with the east-west corridors. He has heard them talk about the potential for the next step to look at north-south. They are not as dire an issue as the east- west corridors. He felt eventually there will be a north-south corridor study. Mayor Soderberg asked if these were to get on the county's CIP in the timeline identified, would we be able to afford to do these? City Engineer Mann replied that would depend on the combination of developer and county funding. If they occurred in areas where development is occurring, then the developer's would end up paying the City portion. It depends on the timing. Staff does not anticipate all these projects will go on the CIP. However, it is important to keep the county informed as to when they will be needed. There are a lot of things that are needed that do not get done until the funding shows up. Finance Director Roland noted there are a number of the projects that are identified on the City's CIP. Moving them ahead or behind a year would have an impact on the City's CIP. However, Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 6 the numbers in the City's CIP also take into consideration the total commitment of the developer to pay their portion ofthe assessments for those particular projects. Mayor Soderberg noted there are a lot of things on the CIP that mayor may not get done. We need to do some prioritizing. He wondered if it would be better to focus on one project that we really want or are we putting out our Christmas wish list in hoping they will pick the right one. City Engineer Mann stated he asked the county a similar question. The project for CSAH 74 on the south edge of the Spruce Street project had not been discussed with the county and he asked if it would look bad to include it in the letter. The county wanted it included in the letter. They want to know what the needs are and to have them identified. If they are not identified and the costs are not forwarded, then the funding will not be reviewed. c) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Hometown Addition Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezone and Preliminary Plat - Community Development The requested action is to approve the comprehensive plan amendment, approve the rezone and also approve the preliminary plat. There are three contingencies. 1. The property is approved for annexation into the City of Farmington by the Municipal Boundary Adjustment Office. 2. MUSA is granted by the City and the Met Council upon annexation. 3. The Met Council approves the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. The property is located to the east ofTH3, 209th Street is to the north, the Farmington Townhome development is in the area with Tamarack Ridge Park located in the comer and Tamarack Ridge to the north as well as some single family residences. The American Legion is on the west side, with Zarbach Construction and Farmington Plumbing and Heating. The bus garage is currently at the Municipal Boundary Board awaiting approval of annexation. The area consists of7.64 acres. There are two properties, the American Legion and the Frandrup property. The owners of Hometown Inc., Ms. Kim Friedrich and Mr. Terry Mahoney plan to purchase the property. There are opportunities with potential intersections with 209th Street. However, the Corinthian Cemetery is on the east side. The curve causes a problem with trying to get an intersection there. The Planning Commission approved the Preliminary Plat on May 10, 2005. On May 24,2005 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Comp Plan Amendment and the rezone. They are proposing 28 single-family lots with two outlots. Outlot A would be a storm water pond. Outlot B was not an approved lot size for a home. There is existing sanitary sewer and water. The developer is looking at lots of6,000 sq. ft. with a minimum lot width of60 ft. This would be low/medium density. The comp plan amendment would be from non-designated to low/medium density residential to meet the land use proposed. The rezone would be from A-I to R-2. Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 7 Regarding transportation, the traffic engineer felt the curve by the Corinthian Cemetery was too difficult of a curve and sight lines were not good enough to allow an access in that area. The major access is from 209th Street through the center of the property and will connect with a cul-de-sac on the north and the south. One cul-de-sac is 660 ft. in length and they received a variance for that. There is a 60 ft. right-of-way for the cul-de-sac and the north-south road. There is a 28 ft. width for the roadway. For this width of street, the code requires parking on one side and sidewalk on the other. A trail is recommended on the east side and leads to the south cul-de-sac. A sidewalk would be located on the north cul- de-sac. There is an existing trail on the south side of Tamarack Park which provides for a connection. Because ofthe American Legion volleyball courts and the higher construction use buildings in the area, the developer proposed the pond to buffer three lots and the roadway to buffer the bus garage. Some Councilmembers are interested in seeing two ofthe lots removed. Council proposed turning the lots and to allow for a loop between the cul-de-sacs. The lots could be 63 ft. wide by 150 ft. in depth. There are three lots that comply with the 20 ft side-yard setback. With comer lots you are supposed to have 20 ft. on both streets. Staffwill have to review the front yards. This would mean the developer would lose two lots and possibly just one. Councilmember Fogarty stated the developer was encouraged to keep working on this project. This is leaps and bounds better. However, she would like to see if the end with the cul-de-sacs can be reconfigured for some circulation. Councilmember McKnight agreed. He felt the looping issue is important. Councilmember Fogarty asked if the volleyball courts are lit at night in the summer. There are no lights. Councilmember Wilson agreed with the looping. He was not sure ifhe liked the properties adjoining at a T on the east side as opposed to being all north-south. Ifthere is a way to make the lots wider, he thought the value of the lots would increase and that would mitigate the loss of any lots. Council and staff discussed how the development could be designed to not lose the two lots. Councilmember Pritzlaff noted the comprehensive plan is being amended from non-designated to low/medium density. It is not being amended from not having any development on the property. City Planner Smick stated it is non-designated because the property was not in the City. Mayor Soderberg asked what prevents the comer at 209th Street from becoming a T intersection. City Planner Smick explained there is a driveway coming from the cemetery and another driveway from another property. Both come out onto the curve. City Engineer Mann explained the property that is available through the Hometown plat does not line up with the north-south roadway. It is offset. Either the home to the west would have to be acquired or property from the Corinthian Cemetery to make that type of a connection. The connection would have to curve into the curve. Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 8 Councilmember Pritzlaff asked to hear what the developer would like to do with the loop. Ms. Kim Friedrich, Hometown Inc., stated they would entertain putting the lots further out. She would like to see the school buses be able to come in and did not understand why they can't. It is a 60-ft. circle. They did not intend for the buses to pick up the kids on 209th Street. She has lost lots beyond belief in this development and she cannot afford to lose one more. It becomes unfeasible. With putting in the loop, three lots will fit, so she is looking at losing one lot. She agreed it makes the lot a nicer size. At the time of final plat, Councilmember Wilson would like to see pictures of what the houses will look like. Ms. Friedrich replied the basements can only be so deep so they would all be split entries, no walkouts. Councilmember Wilson stated that is why the possibility oflarge lots may provide a diversity of housing styles. On the other hand, the most important thing is to have the loop. Ms. Friedrich replied getting bigger lots and more expensive homes would be a great idea if it were a better location and if you could have different style homes. They have done their best to buffer between the homes and the bus garage and the commercial. They will have to be really creative on housing so they do not all look the same. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Wilson to adopt RESOLUTION R74-05 approving the Comprehensive Plan Amendment from non-designated to low/medium density residential, adopt ORDINANCE 005-533 rezoning the property from A-I to R-2 and adopt RESOLUTION 77-05 approving the Hometown Addition Preliminary Plat adding a fourth contingency that the street on the east side be redesigned. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Approve Final AUAR - GileslMurphy Property - Community Development The property consists ofQ1, 8 and Q2 on the MUSA map. 195th Street is to the north, TH3 is along the east, and Akin Road to the west. The area is 350 acres. Property 8 was annexed into the City on November 10, 2004. No comments were received on the AUAR during the 1 O-day review period from the agencies. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Fogarty to approve the Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan for the GileslMurphy property. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Adopt Ordinance and Resolution - Mystic Meadows Rezone, Preliminary and Final Plat - Community Development This item is regarding Q 1 and 8 on the MUSA map. The developer is proposing 243 single-family lots and 40 multi-family units on 152 acres. Most of the area is single-family with the multi-family in the northeast comer. The Comp Plan for the area to the north, the Seed-Genstar property shows medium density across from the multi-family in this development. The lots will be 75 ft. wide and 10,000 sq. ft. and over. This would be an R-1 zoning. In the northeast comer there would be medium density. As far as the rezoning, staff is proposing going Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 9 from A-I to R-l and in the northeast comer it would be from A-I to R-3. There are a number of outlots for ponds. The 100-year floodplain boundary comes onto the property and then swings out. It is allowed to mitigate the flood plain if it is below 1 ft. The developer is proposing to mitigate in another area. Outlot J is deeper than 1 ft, therefore two lots had to be removed. A roadway also had to be deleted because of the flood plain. This is a massive flood plain because there are culverts under the railroad tracks. The flood plain line will be altered once the mitigation is done and the lots will be outside of the flood plain. The townhome development has a private road 28 ft. wide. According to code a sidewalk is required on a 28 ft.-wide road, however this is a private road and there will be a number of driveways. Engineering is interested in seeing a sidewalk. Other streets are 32 ft. wide with a 60-ft. right-of-way. The developer will be constructing the two easterly lanes of Diamond Path. In the future Diamond Path may need to be four lanes. As far as Deerbrooke Path, it has a 70-foot right-of- way and is a minor collector, 38 ft. wide. Engineering is working on the alignment for 19Sth Street. The goal is that if Deerbrooke is brought straight through, there would be an intersection at a super elevation. The county will not allow this. The intersection would have to be further east. There would be a contingency to the plat on this re-alignment. There is a parking lot for the townhome development that will also have to be relocated. Another contingency is in the area of Deerbrooke Path and Delwood Avenue. They dead end with no hammerhead. They are ISO ft. in width and therefore do not meet the fire standards. A hammerhead is needed for the garbage trucks. Landscaping is required on double-frontage lots. There has to be 100% screening. Staffis looking for more shrubbery to provide this. Staffwill meet with the developer to resubmit a landscape plan. Parks and Recreation Director Distad stated there were some differences of opinion as to where sidewalks and trails should be located. The Parks and Recreation Commission met with the developer and came up with a compromise for the location of trails and sidewalks. Originally the Commission wanted a trail around the larger pond. The developer did not agree so they came up with a compromise. He presented a map showing the trails in orange, and yellow shows the trails to be constructed in the future. The developer has agreed to put in the short connection that comes out ofthe Parkview Ponds trail system which will provide a connection to the trails in this system. A future trail will be along Diamond Path and 19Sth Street. The map also showed locations of sidewalks. The trail plain also calls for trails along North Creek in the greenway. The policy is to have 8-ft. wide trails in boulevards and in greenways or along open space or park space there would be 10- ft. wide trails. The developer also agreed to show 10-ft. wide trails along Diamond Path and 19Sth Street. Councilmember Wilson noted a Park and Rec Commission member was concerned about no sidewalk along Denali Way. He also felt a sidewalk should Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 10 be located there. He asked why that was not proposed. Staff proposed a sidewalk, but the developer felt it was redundant with the trail along the back of the homes. Councilmember Wilson felt it seemed like we are not going very far with the trail on the west side of Diamond Path. Staff replied that is because they are unsure of the alignment of the westerly two lanes. There are also powerlines through that area. Councilmember Pritzlafftalked with the developer and agreed some of the lots are expensive and felt there should be more privacy. Staff stated they agreed some of the lots would have trails behind them and some would not. Councilmember Fogarty commented this is a storm water pond and it is not going to be stocked with fish and no one can canoe on it. She did not want any misunderstandings about what this is. She wanted it made clear they cannot put docks out there. City Engineer Mann stated this is a storm water pond and the policy for storm water ponds is they are not for recreational use. Councilmember Fogarty wanted to make sure the buyers understand this. Mr. John Anderson, Giles Properties, stated they are aware this is a storm water pond and there will be no docks. It will be an outlot owned by the City, it will not be private ownership. They are not marketing them as lake lots. Counci1member Fogarty did not want a communication breakdown between the developer and the builders and the people that sit at the model homes. Mr. Anderson understood. Having a trail in the backyard does affect the value ofthe homes, but he understood the City wanted trails around the ponds. They came up with this compromise. There are a lot of trails in front yards. As far as the sidewalk along Denali Way, they would be more in favor of the sidewalk than the trail. Parks and Recreation Director Distad stated the goal is to get the trails in before the building permits are issued. Councilmember Fogarty asked about the number of acres for parkland and realized it is being diverted to another section of the development for an adult sports complex. She asked if they will be getting the number of acres they would normally get. Staff noted that is the goal. The future park area will serve this neighborhood. Counci1member McKnight stated he is not a big fan of trails in backyards, but he will accept this compromise. He asked about sidewalks along Dawson Lane in the townhomes. Staff noted that is the policy, but it is a private street. Councilmember McKnight noted with townhomes the setbacks are usually short. The setback is 25 ft. from the curb. He felt there are a number of safety issues with having a sidewalk there and cars parked in the driveways. City Engineer Mann stated the typical setback is 20 ft. from the right-of-way. This is 25 ft. from the curb, so it is closer. Councilmember Wilson stated he does want to see the trail on Denali Way moved to the street. He wants it to be in the front as opposed to the back. It does not Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 11 have to do with a trail behind the homes. Option one is to leave as is and add a sidewalk or option two is to eliminate the trail in back and put the trail in front. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked how it is enforced if someone puts a canoe in the pond. He suggested placing signs that it is not allowed. Police Chief Siebenaler stated City ordinance prohibits the use of motorized water craft on any ponding facility in the City. It does not prevent the use of non-motorized water craft. It would be perfectly acceptable for someone to put a canoe on a storm water pond. From a recreational use of a storm water pond, we have that all over the City now. To preclude the possibility of a recreational use simply because it is a storm water facility, he felt is an under-use of that facility. There will be fish in this pond, it will happen naturally. It is a public body of water, owned by the City as an outlot. Right now, under City ordinance, it can be used for recreational use. Councilmember Fogarty disagreed with Councilmember Wilson and said that trail needs to stay behind Denali Way. At Denali Way and 19Sth Street, there is a small piece of trail and asked if there was any purpose to it. She felt that lot should not have a trail on two sides when it does not connect to anything else. Staff noted it brings the trail through a three-way intersection. Staff is researching whether that will be marked as a crossing. Staff did not feel it was a big issue if it goes away. Mayor Soderberg liked the trail behind the homes on Denali Way and it creates a safe walkway. Councilmember McKnight stated he agrees with the compromise staff and the developer have worked out. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked if at the intersection of Deerbrooke Path and Denali Way ifthere could be a stop sign with a crosswalk so people could cross safely. City Engineer Mann replied they would not make it a three-way stop until warrants are met. They would not put in a crosswalk without it being a controlled intersection. Where there is a trail crossing away from a controlled intersection, Police Chief Siebenaler suggested controlling it with signage. The stop sign would be for pedestrians and bikes on the trail to stop. The developer agreed with this. Mr. Randy Oswald, Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission, stated regarding the small section of trail north of 199th Street, part of the purpose for that is from the center lot going either way the most distance you have to go to reach a trail is five lots. If you eliminate this you would have to cross 199th Street. Mr. John Anderson pointed out that the areas being filled in the flood plain are being filled substantially. Regarding the Deerbrooke right-of way going north they have looked at changing the curve and have a drawing that should make it work. They also talked about the hammerheads and can work on that. As far as the landscaping for the double frontage lots, that is not a problem. There will be no docks on the pond from their standpoint. They looked at other cities that have proj ects similar to this. Both cities allow recreational use on the ponds. They Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 12 have another 200 acres to the south which will include park dedication. He is not in favor of having a sidewalk in front ofthe townhomes because ofthe number of driveways. Regarding the trail crossing, they can make that work. As far as Denali Way, the developer is in favor of more sidewalks than trail. However, putting a trail in back and a sidewalk in front is redundant. Councilmember Wilson asked if it would be unreasonable to look at a sidewalk on the east side of Denali Way from 199th Street to the end ofthe road. Ifnot all the way to Deerbrooke, have it stop around lots 13-15. He thought the sidewalk could go in the right-of-way area. A lengthy discussion followed regarding the location of a sidewalk or trail along Denali Way. It was decided to put in a trail between lots 11 and 12 and along the back of the homes along the east side of Denali Way to 199th Street instead of a sidewalk in front. The L-shape on the trail along 199th Street on the west side of Denali Way will be removed. Councilmember McKnight stated they asked staff and the developer to work this out and they did. That is why he has a reservation about changing this. Weare now adding a backyard trail to 11 lots and he has stated previously he is not a big fan of trails in the backyard. The developer will put in a temporary cul-de-sac on Deerbrooke Path at 195th Street until the alignment is worked out. The developer agreed to the proposed changes. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Wilson to adopt RESOLUTION R76-05 approving the Mystic Meadows 1 st Addition Preliminary and Final Plat with contingencies and adopt ORDINANCE 005-534 approving the rezoning ofthe property from A-I to R-l. Councilmember McKnight stated he supports the development, but he does not support the changes so he will be voting against it. Voting for: Soderberg, Fogarty, Pritzlaff, Wilson. Voting against: McKnight. MOTION CARRIED. b) Cedar Corridor Transportation Infrastructure Group - Administration Dakota County Commissioner Will Branning has sent an invitation to the City for active participation in the work ofthe Cedar Corridor Transportation Group. The group would recommend a comprehensive transportation plan for the Cedar corridor that would include a plan for the Cedar Avenue Bus Rapid Transit. The regional rail authority will serve as the lead agency and the Cedar Group would serve as an advisory group. There are several cities and agencies involved in this project. Council was requested to appoint three members and one alternate. There is also a technical advisory committee which should be comprised of two staff members. The Cedar Group should be comprised of the Mayor or a Councilmember and an alternate, the City Administrator, and a business or community representative. City Administrator Urbia will check with the residents who attended the transportation workshop to see if they would be interested. For the Technical Advisory Group, he recommended City Engineer Mann and Community Development Director Carroll. For the Cedar Group he agreed with appointing City Administrator Urbia. Councilmember Pritzlaffwas interested in the Cedar Group and Councilmember Wilson volunteered to be an alternate. Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 13 MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to appoint Councilmember Pritzlaff as a member to the Cedar Group and Councilmember Wilson as an alternate. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Consider Revision Downtown Liquor Store Lease - Finance Mr. Tom Wartman, City Center Development LLC is constructing a building in the City Center. The downtown liquor store will be leasing a 5,000-sq. ft. space in this building. The Pilot Knob liquor store space has been expanded. Mr. Wartman has come back to staff and proposed a larger downtown store. He is so certain this will be a profitable expansion, he proposed the additional square footage be leased at a lesser rate for the first 24 months. If at the end of the 24 months staff and Council deemed it inappropriate to maintain the larger space, he would move the wall and modify the space back to the 5,000 sq ft. from 6,250 sq. ft. If the City wished to continue to lease the 6,250 sq. ft., the lease rate for the third year would be $19.00 per square foot. A financial analysis showed the downtown store should be able to generate $2 million in business. Finance Director Roland showed the two different layouts of the store. Council needed to decide whether to expand the downtown liquor store space to 6,250 sq. ft. at the reduced lease rate. This would require a budget revision, but this is an enterprise fund. Staff anticipates a growth in sales along with the expanded space. If staff sees this will not pay the City back, with 90 days notice staff can ask Mr. Wartman to move the wall and the coolers at his expense back to the smaller space. MOTION by Wilson, second by Pritzlaffto authorize revision ofthe lease with City Center LLC to reflect 6,250 sq. ft. of rental space for the downtown Liquor Store at a cost of$18.00 per square foot for the first 5,000 sq. ft. and $16.00 per sq. ft for the additional 1,250 sq. ft. for the first 24 months ofthe lease. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Fogarty: Regarding the school district issue and the school district site, she was aware an e-mail went out from Dr. Brad Meeks to several people in the community regarding the upcoming Planning Commission meeting and City Council meeting and looking at the Comp Plan amendment and rezoning. She feels it is the right time to let people know what her opinions are with this issue and her concerns with this site. She has prepared a lengthy letter to release to residents and will have Council review it first. It will be posted on her personal website. She wanted to comment on two issues. One is she is hearing a comment that the school district does not tell you where to build fire stations, don't tell us where to build a school. This is not relevant. It is not a comparison. The school is in the business of educating children and they are very good at it. The City is in the business of constructing cities. To say we should not have any opinion on where the largest building ever built in the history of Farmington is going to go is a silly comment. Council absolutely should have an opinion about this and we should have concerns about this issue. The other thing she hears is that the Comp Plan is not a big issue to deal with and the City amends it's Comp Plan all the time. Those are minor amendments. This is major. It is not to be taken lightly. This will have a huge Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 14 impact on the City. She gave examples of Comp Plan amendments. They did not change the design of where the City was going to go. The road is a symptom ofthis Comp Plan amendment change and it is important the Council look at this seriously. The second issue is that Councilmember Wilson talked about doing a dodgeball team and suggested Council make him team manager. The Council will be part of a dodgeball team for Rambling River Days. Councilmember McKnight: Reminded everyone Rambling River Days is coming up June 24-26, 2005 and urged people to buy a button and support this event. Councilmember Wilson: there is another big event with Rambling River Days. Mr. John Kapustka put together a bike tour called Tour de Farmington. This will be a bike tour throughout the City. He congratulated the Farmington seniors on their graduation. Regarding the school site it is a tremendous issue and consumes a lot of thought and deliberation. He invited any resident to call or send him an e-mal with their thoughts. It is a larger issue than Flagstaff Avenue. Councilmember Pritz/aft: He submitted a letter to the editor on his issues with the school site. He will let the letter speak for itself. He felt the Tour de Fannington is a good idea. There will be ajoint Council/Park and Rec Commission meeting on Wednesday. He will try to be back in time to attend. Councilmember Wilson mentioned setting a workshop to discuss several topics and he would like an update on the Spruce Street area and the powerline issue and wondered if that could be done at a workshop. Finance Director Roland commented that Council will have before them on June 20, 2005 a variety of information regarding the Spruce Street project as well as the bridge project. Staffis currently in discussions with the developer as well as the City's financial advisor. The Final Plat will be brought to Council in 2-4 weeks. Community Development Director Carroll stated there have been several e-mails regarding this project and he can copy Council on them. The City Attorney is working on the powerline appeal. A meeting is scheduled for later in the week with the 21 oth Street residents that have also appealed. City Administrator Urbia: Coffee with Council will be June 16,2005 at 7:30 a.m. Mayor Soderberg will be out of town. Councilmembers McKnight and Fogarty will be attending. Mayor Soderberg: Regarding the high school site, he had a good discussion with Superintendent Meeks and the school board chair and a board member. It resulted in scheduling more meetings to have more discussions. At the meeting he asked them if my neighbor decides to build a sprinkler system for their yard and they expend a great deal of time and energy to design and build this, but one ofthe caveats is that they have to hook into his well to make it work and they fail to talk to him about that before they spend the time and the money, is it his problem. Does he have some obligation to let them hook into his well? Is he being arrogant or an obstructionist to say wait I want to Council Minutes (Regular) June 6, 2005 Page 15 know what the implications are of you hooking into my well? Wouldn't it have been more prudent of you to talk to me before spending this money or designing the sprinkler system? Especially if along the way he asked what they are doing and the neighbor says, it is a secret and can't tell him. When he finds out they need to hook into his well, he says wait, we should talk about this, there are some problems, and the neighbor continues to spend money, it seems that is a foolish approach to things. When the system is built and he still wants to talk about hooking into his well, it is only prudent and reasonable. The City does have a role in site selections. The State ofMN Board of Education has a document on their website entitled, Guide for Planning School Construction Projects in Minnesota. The guide talks about involving local officials, parks board, planning, etc. and having them on the site selection team. Unfortunately, this did not occur. Hopefully this will be corrected in future circumstances. The City does have a role in site selection. At this point in the game, he wants to know what the implications are. He wasn't asked if they could hook into his well. At the budget workshop, they talked about the CIP and the financial implications to the City and what it could mean as far as other projects, parks projects, street projects, etc. 19Sth Street is a major project we need to be prepared for and also the Spruce Street corridor. A lot ofthese projects could be placed in jeopardy. Or we might have to raise taxes substantially. It is only right for him as the Mayor and as a representative of the people to say he will take the time, whatever time it is, to make sure those implications are addressed. There are other implications beyond financial. There are policy implications and implications with the ordinance and what direction we are developing in. Every member of this Council has deliberated on this for months and spent many hours and unknown quantities of energy weighing this situation. It would have been nice to have done this two years ago when we should have been invited to the party. He enjoyed the Trinity Golf Classic today. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Fogarty, second by McKnight to adjourn at 10:17 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~~fr7~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant CITY COUNCIL 2006 BUDGET/CIP WORKSHOP MINUTES JUNE 1, 2005 Present: Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson (arrived 5:18 p.m.) David Urbia, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Dan Siebenaler, Police Chief; Lee Mann, City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Rosemary Swedin, Accountant; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant 1. Call to Order Mayor Soderberg called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. 2. Approve Agenda MOTION by Fogarty, second by Pritzlaffto approve the agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. Discuss 2006 Budget Goals City Administrator Urbia reviewed the 2005 budget goals. Some items which should be addressed as 2006 goals are considered are: 1. Elimination of the deficit fund "1991 Annexation" as prescribed by the City's audit firm. The amount is $118,000. 2. Review the HRA capital projects fund to address TIF project deficits due to tax. compression over the last few years. 3. Discuss options for Capital Outlay funding (levy versus capital equipment certificates). 4. Discuss strategies for replenishment of the general fund balance. 5. Identify a budgetary contingency plan. 6. Discuss a revenue philosophy shifting from reliance from non-levy sources to levy sources. Mayor Soderberg noted the goal for the general fund balance is 35%-40% and asked where we are today. Finance Director Roland replied as of the end of2004 we are at 24%. Finance Director Roland outlined the budget process and what management uses to come up with the budget and how they determine expenditures and revenues that are put forth in the budget document. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked about the franchise fee. Finance Director Roland explained the franchise fees are the 5% the City collects from Charter Communications based on their sales of cable within the City. This has been in place since 1998. Some people refer to a franchise fee as an additional tax.. $35,000 has historically gone into the general fund to help offset the cost of communications within the City, such as cable casting and producing documents. It helps to supplement the communications budget. The balance over $35,000 goes into a separate capital projects fund which staff is retaining for future upgrades to cameras, video and audio equipment, etc. This fund has Council Budget/CIP Workshop June 1, 2005 Page 2 also paid for fiber optics. Last year the total amount received from franchise fees was in excess of$138,000. Next Finance Director Roland discussed revenue sources, primarily taxes. She presented a worksheet showing the required tax levies that have to be certified to pay the debt. The City has different bonds for different types of payments. There are refunding bonds, lease revenue bonds, wastewater bond, certificates of indebtedness and the Main Street bonds. In 2005 the debt levy is $1,099,009. The Ash Street and Fire Station bonds will be sold on June 20,2005. The debt levy for 2006 will be $1.5 million. Finance Director Roland presented a spreadsheet showing what the taxable market value and tax capacity values are for 2006. Between 2006 and 2005 the tax base will grow by 14.5%. The number of housing units in 2005 was not the same as it was in 2004. The tax rate is determined by the amount of levy the City requests divided by the tax base. The next spreadsheet showed the computation of tax capacity rate. If staff assumes a 10% levy increase the tax rate would be 42.37% as opposed to a tax rate in 2005 of 43.7%. Councilmember McKnight asked about the 14.5% increase and if it is broken down between new construction and value increase. Finance Director Roland replied it is and explained what the worksheet shows. The valuation of new homes is less than half of the growth in the tax base, which means existing homes are being valued higher. The computation worksheet flows into the property tax levy worksheet. This shows how it is split and what goes into the general fund, what is required for debt, and what is required for the fire levy. The City pays a contribution to the Fire Department for their pensions. That number has increased steadily over the last nine years. It started out at $45,000-$50,000 a year and it has gone up by $5,000 every three years. We are in the second year of a $60,000 contribution to the fire pension. In 2004 the City paid $55,000. That contribution is statutorily mandated. The City has for the last four years exceeded the amount that is statutorily mandated sometimes by almost 100%. The Fire Department also receives state aid for their pension which has grown. Last year it was well in excess of $130,000. Their benefits once they have achieved the required years of service and age, the proposal comes to Council the first meeting in August as a request for a certain dollar amount per number of years of service. It is invested along with the annual contributions. For a long time they were not equal to what they received in pension benefits to surrounding communities. Finance Director Roland next presented the financial performa showing actual figures through 2004 as far as the requested levy, the actual expenditures, the computation of valuation, population growth and per capita spending. The 2006 proposed percentage of total levy is 24.2%. Councilmember Wilson noted we have 25% ceiling policy. Mayor Soderberg stated the levy for 2006 would be over $6 million. The performa reflects a 10% levy growth. The next sheet of information was the computation of legal debt margin. The state law is the legal debt margin is 2% of the total market value ofthe properties in the community. The market value currently is $1,291,198,400. 2% of this is $25.8 million, which means that if every bond the City issued were paid for out oflevy dollars, the City could only have $25.8 million worth of bonds. If a referendum market value bond were done on the $21 million Community Center, how would this affect the debt margin? The City only has $19 million of legal debt margin left today. $21 million market value referendum debt does not fit under $19 million. This does not include the issuance on June 20,2005 of $2.28 million worth of fire hall bonds. You would need to Council Budget/ClP Workshop June 1,2005 Page 3 deduct that from the $19 million to get what our legal debt margin is at this point, which is $16.7 million. Other types of debt which would be included would be if we were to issue bonds to pay for a City Hall. Ifwe were to issue bonds which are totally funded by taxpayer dollars that is how much is left. Ash Street will not be considered in this because it is paid for with other sources of revenue. The Fire Hall bonds and certificate of indebtedness are paid for by levy dollars and are included in the debt limit. Staff will be reviewing all ofthe capital equipment and determining the less durable goods versus more durable goods. Less durable would include computers, video equipment, pickup trucks, etc. They have a shorter life span. Large pieces of equipment such as fire trucks, snow plows, graters, things of $100,000 - $200,000 each that have a greater life span of 10 years would be bought with capital equipment certificates. Less durable goods should be part of the general fund. The levy represents the type of increase staff is looking at to fund things within the City. The performas assume a 10% increase to expenditures. The expenditure budget for 2005 is $7.1 million. This would put expenditures in 2006 at $7.8 million, of which 71 % would be paid for by taxpayer dollars. 30% would need to come from other sources such as building permit revenues, investment revenues, other governmental revenues, etc. In the past staff has looked at other sources of revenue to fill in the gaps. Staffwill focus more on levy sources and less on other revenue sources. As far as replenishing the fund balance, the years we added large quantities to the fund balance were not planned. They were additional revenues that came in. Staffwould like to be able to plan for replenishing the fund balance. Currently the City is at 25% of budgeted building permit revenues and we are at almost 50% of the year. Staff budgeted for 350 building permits, and we are at 53 at the end of May. There are two large tracks of land waiting to build houses. Staff is always looking for other sources of revenue to the general fund to help reduce the property tax. That was the old philosophy. In 2005 the philosophy is that the majority of revenue comes from the property tax. If there were to be levy limits, staff recommended Council not pursue a strategy of levying under the limit. Regarding recapturing the growth the City saw in the last year, Councilmember McKnight would like to look at the number 14. He asked about the new construction because it is important in the fact it is over 50%. He would also like to see a lower number. He liked working some ofthe capital equipment under the levy even over a number of years. He would like to see a plan to replenish the fund balance. Ifwe buy cars or computers, he would like to pay for them rather than issue certificates. Councilmember McKnight asked staffto explain the $118,000 Annexation fund and if we have to come up with $118,000. Finance Director Roland stated we could solve this right now with the transfer out of a reasonable fund acknowledged by Council. In the early 1990's there was an annexation battle where Farmington looked to acquire Castle Rock and Empire. The City borrowed cash from other funds without setting it up as a loan. The 1991 Annexation Fund has $118,000 of negative cash balance which is not assignable to any fund, but was basically over spent. They did not have the revenues and did not account for it. It has not been a priority in the years where we added to the fund balance to transfer it out of the general fund, nor has it been able to be fixed with a transfer in years we have eaten general fund balance. Staffwould like to put together a plan to pay it back. Staff would need to identify a place to take it out of. The auditor's office will want justification for taking it out of a certain fund. If Council gives staff direction, they will put it in the 2006 proposed budget. Ifwe don't spend the expenditure Council Budget/CIP Workshop June 1,2005 Page 4 budget and have some extra money in the fund balance, part of it could be taken care of in 2005 when adopting the budget at the end ofthe year and some if it in 2006. Council agreed for staff to develop a plan. Staff would like to develop a contingency plan for 2006. Whatever money does not get spent would go into the fund balance. This would be part of the general fund. It would not increase over the years, but would be used for emergencies. A set amount would roll over every year for a contingency fund. Mayor Soderberg asked if it was realistic to create such a fund, eliminate the $118,000 annexation fund and still remain within the 10- 14% increase in the levy. Finance Director Roland replied staffwill come up with a budget and those will be our goals. The contingency plan may get $50,000 and the annexation fund gets $50,000 but it would be a start. Councilmember Pritzlaffnoted the issue ofthe number of building permits keeps coming up. We are looking at 350 and only have 53. He asked what more the building permits fund. Staff replied they go into the general fund and fund the cost of the building inspections department, the cost of the planning department, etc. The money goes into one big account. It is kept track of in separate line items. 70% of the money that comes into the general fund is from property taxes. 30% is from other places like building permits. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked how much money do we not collect if we are short building permits. Staff replied we currently anticipate a building permit averages $2,597. That is the cost of abase building permit and plan review. Councilmember Fogarty felt 350 building permits will be under every year for the next few years. Police Chief Siebenaler stated building permit revenue only reflects housing, it does not reflect commercial construction. That is not budgeted. It is extra revenue. Council is comfortable with 14.5%, but would like to see 8%, 10%, 14.5%. Mayor Soderberg stated he has asked some questions about population projections. He noted staff is planning on hiring three officers a year for the next five years. He asked if it would be prudent to establish a policy to have a certain number of officers per thousand residents so we do not under or over hire. Police Chief Siebenaler replied that is what his recommendations are based on. In order to catch up with the minimum number we needed to hire, two years worth at the same rate at zero growth, anything beyond that was in anticipation of growth. This year if we do not have the number of building permits come in we would still need to hire people to catch up, but the following years it may not be quite as many. The rates he recommends are based on comparably sized cities with comparable services. He would agree to formalize it with a policy, but the numbers would changed based on services offered, crime rate, etc. The same policy applies to every department. 4. Discuss 2006-2010 CIP Projects a) Levy Impacts of Bonds The Fire Station project will be done in 2005. All ofthe 2005 projects come to $10.4 million, including Ash Street, the extension of Spruce Street and utility street extension. This is the only project that has not been bonded for yet this year. Staffwill bring the status of the Spruce Street bridge project to Council on June 20, 2005. Staff is in the process of dealing with the developer and financial advisors in order to make the decision as to when is the best time to build this project. All ofthe 2005 projects except for the Council Budget/CIP Workshop June 1,2005 Page 5 Spruce Street bridge project are proceeding as planned. The traffic signal at Elk River Trail and Pilot Knob does not meet warrants. For the 2006-2010 draft CIP staffhas moved the Spruce Street project to 2006 to show how it would fold in with the other projects. The reason for this is staffwill have to identify as part ofthe budget process where these projects should continue to fall. We can probably not do $15 million worth ofprojects in 2006. We will have to prioritize which projects go and which do not. Finance Director Roland presented a worksheet showing the annual levies required if the $3 million Spruce Street bonding project were done in 2006. Spruce Street would be 100% assessed to the developer in excess ofthe amount ofthe grant. In residential developments, the roads and infrastructure go in as part of the development contract. The developer is responsible for the costs and they spread them over their development. If Spruce Street were a residential development, the cost ofthe bridge in excess of the grant money would be spread over the properties in that development. If the City pays and does not assess for these projects, the City quickly runs out of bonding money. Staff requested help in prioritizing what Council sees as essential projects in 2006-2010. Some are driven by development. City Hall is included in the CIP as a 2007 project. There are no special assessments. It will be totally borne by the taxpayers. The project for Spruce Street is $3 million. We have a grant for $955,000. Ifwe issue bonds it would be $2 million in bonds. This was used to determine the amount oflevy assuming there would be no special assessments. Ifwe could special assess the project, there would be no levy requirement and it would not count under the debt limit. If it is a 429 project the City is supposed to assess 20% of the project. Spruce Street is a road and a bridge built to benefit the developer so they should pay for part of it, but it also is a cost to the City because the City will actually be constructing it. It is somewhat like Flagstaff and the potential for the high school. When Lakeville built the high school they did it under a development contract with the City. They came to an agreement who would build the road, the school district, to the City's standards and the school district paid for the road that adjoins the school building. As part of that development contract it outlined the amount of credit for sewer, or water, because they are helping the City out by building a larger facility. In the end, the road gets turned back to the City. It is a question of who pays for it or how it gets paid for. Mayor Soderberg asked what the impact would be to move City Hall to 2006. Finance Director Roland replied ifthe construction process were to begin in 2006, if bids were taken in March, bonds would be issued in March or April, the first payment would be in 2007 or 2008 depending on the amount of capitalized interest. It would add a half million dollars to the debt levy. Mayor Soderberg stated realistically we could not move it up to 2006 because of the timing to get everything in place. Councilmember Fogarty stated she talked to City Administrator Urbia and he said Wold could get it done in 9 months so it could go out to bid in March. A decision would have to be made now. Finance Director Roland stated we could use CIP bonds, and since it is an administrative building it qualifies. You also have the option of using lease revenue bonds as well. The CIP bonds have a quarter of a percentage rate better interest. A lease revenue bond is seen as a more risky bond because at any point the Council could say they will not pay the lease. The HRA would own the land and the building and the City would rent the City Hall building from the HRA. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked ifthere is a figure for repairs to the current building beyond normal maintenance. Staff noted the repairs come out ofthe general fund balance. Council Budget/ClP Workshop June 1,2005 Page 6 Flagstaff Avenue is not on the CIF. This is a cost that would be borne by developing properties around Flagstaff and that is not on the CIF because it was not scheduled until 2020. City Administrator Urbia stated the Comp Plan should not be amended until this is resolved. This would bump other projects out. That is not appropriate. Mayor Soderberg noted the worst case is $10 million and there is not a project on the CIF that approaches that. Finance Director Roland stated because it is not ready for development according to the Comp Plan, we could not assess the property owners until that property develops. The property in ag preserve cannot be assessed. So the $10 million or any portion thereof, which is the City's responsibility would be borne by levy dollars, not to mention the amount oftime. With the amount of staff we have, we are fortunate we can rely on consulting engineers to expand the amount of work we can do, but that comes at a cost. Those costs are paid by developers or by projects. We do have a limited staff to be able to throw at projects. If there is a major reconstruction taking place, such as Ash Street, and a new construction of a road such as Spruce Street or 20Sth Street that is a strain on human resources. Councilmember Fogarty asked if we have staff to oversee a high school project, which is the largest project we have ever seen in the history ofthe City and a City Hall and the miscellaneous projects. Can we accomplish this in one year? City Engineer Mann replied yes. Police Chief Siebenaler stated school projects in the past as far as inspections have been done by a state inspector. As far as engineering, in- house staff could not take care of it all. These would be additional contract people. City Engineer Mann added this is what has been done in the past. We bring on the staff we need and that staff is paid for by the developer or the school. Finance Director Roland stated it could be done, but it comes at a cost. It is whether or not we are willing to pay that cost. And ultimately, whether the taxpayers are willing to pay that cost. 60% ofthe school districts debt is in Farmington. 40% is in areas outside of Farmington. Ifthe school pays 100% for Flagstaff, for example $10 million, 60% of that $10 million is the debt and levy that will fall on the citizens of Farmington. 40% will fall on areas outside of Farmington. If the City is responsible for the road purely for the school, then the City will bear 100% ofthe cost of that road, not 60% ifit is paid for by the school district. Councilmember Fogarty felt it would be wise to move City Hall to 2006. Mayor Soderberg did not think we could do it and stay within our goals of having only 25% of our levy be debt service. Weare at $1.5 million with what has been proposed with the bonds we are letting. Ifwe had another $5S3,000 that bumps us to over $2 million. Ifwe stay at 25% the levy would have to be $S.5 million. Finance Director Roland stated that is assuming the first payment is due in 2006. Even if construction starts in 2006, it will not be done until 2007. Ifwe start construction in 2007, and it is not done in 200S, the earliest we would have to pay debt on it would be 200S. But something will have to give. City Administrator Urbia suggested asking Wold for a set timeline so Council will have that to make a decision. Councilmember Wilson stated he would support looking at a City Hall in 2006. Finance Director Roland stated if Council has a different priority for the projects, they should advise the City Administrator. City Administrator Urbia stated the County is looking at doing an RFP for the design part of Elm Street. He asked if that would push the reconstruction to 2007. City Engineer Mann replied the reconstruction is shown in the county's CIF as being split between 2007 and 200S, which probably means 200S to do the work. The preliminary and design engineering is scheduled for 2005 and 2006. That $1.5 million would probably be shifted to 200S. Finance Director Roland stated the difference between a reconstruction project Council Budget/CIP Workshop June 1,2005 Page 7 and a new construction project is that on a reconstruction the most we can assess is 35% of the reconstruction costs. If that is not enough, then the City will bear part of that on a levy. Councilmember Pritzlaff stated if we assume in 2006 there is a referendum for a Community Center and then shortly thereafter we assess for a new City Hall, we have put a tax burden on the residents by not giving them a choice. Ifwe did the City Hall first and they know they are being taxed for that and they know they are being taxed for the school, it is the resident's option whether they want to pay that much more for a Community Center. Mayor Soderberg stated the best guess is $21 million for a Community Center and we only have $16 million of debt availability. Finance Director Roland noted a lesser price tag on a facility might fit under that amount. b) Impacts of Projects Not Currently Identified in 2005-2009 CIP Mayor Soderberg noted the Community Center and the school are two big projects. City Administrator Urbia stated they have discussed how Flagstaff could affect the CIP. We need to decide if it is a site issue or a road issue. Community Development Director Carroll stated there will be a public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting. Staff wanted to know what issues Council felt should be addressed at the hearing and the CIP is a component ofthat. Staff is planning on addressing three topics. The first one is the comp plan amendment and the rezoning. They will explain the change that will be needed to accommodate the school and the issues related to the change. He asked how far Council wanted staff to go as far as making a recommendation or not regarding the comp plan and rezoning. The second issue is alternatives. If the EQB had decided they needed a public hearing, the issue for the EQB would have been, are there feasible and prudent alternatives to taking the property out ofthe ag preserve program. That did not happen. The same concept applies here. Are there feasible and prudent alternatives to amending the comp plan in the way that has been suggested? The third topic is less pressing but has the greatest long-term impact and that is the issue of site selection. What is the type of site selection process that can reduce or eliminate problems that everyone is facing regarding this issue? Staff is prepared to make constructive, productive and positive recommendations as to how the process can be fine tuned for the future. Staffs approach will be factual, objective, informative and maintain a positive tone, but get issues out on the table that need to be considered by the public. What happens at the Planning Commission sets the tone for what happens at the Council meeting. Councilmember Pritzlaff agreed with all the items. He wants staffs recommendations. He did not realize how it would bump the numbers. He wants all the information available from staff. Councilmember Fogarty stated usually staff has a recommendation. She asked if there was disagreement among staff as to what the recommendation would be. Staff replied no. Councilmember Fogarty wanted to have a recommendation. The only item she is concerned about is site selection. She is not sure no matter how objectively it is presented it will be taken by some people as criticism of past performance. She wondered if that should be discussed at a later date, separate from this issue. Councilmember McKnight agreed with Councilmember Fogarty, but he did not want to lose this lesson. He suggested opening the door a little on site selection. He left it up to Council Budget/CIP Workshop June 1,2005 Page 8 staff about the recommendation. If they have one bring it, if not, don't. He does not support the City getting involved in alternative sites. Councilmember Wilson felt it should be noted this project is not included in the CIP. Community Development Director Carroll stated he will give it a passing reference. Councilmember Fogarty asked what the impact would be on the CIP ifthe school district agreed to pay for the road. City Administrator Urbia replied it would lessen it, but the segment north of 19Sth will have to be addressed. We also have 20gth Street and the oversizing ofthe sewer. Community Development Director Carroll stated even ifthe school agrees to pay 100% of the cost, there are still people that need to do the work such as review plans, inspections, questions from residents regarding hooking up other properties to City services. It is hard to put a dollar value on those. Police Chief Siebenaler stated part ofthe discussion is the financial aspect. Council has to ask themselves is this a political or philosophical decision. Is this about money or is it philosophical in the form of planned growth. If it is money, then Councilmember Fogarty's question is valid. Where will Council stand? Ifthis is a philosophical discussion, nothing to do with the money, how strongly should this be pursued? Councilmember McKnight asked will the MUSA process and the ag preserve issue be addressed. Community Development Director Carroll felt they needed to. Councilmember Fogarty felt we should also address the issue of review and comment. Community Development Director Carroll stated they will give them information on the MUSA process and noted there were two Planning Commission members on the MUSA Committee and they can explain that process. Councilmember Wilson wanted staff to be factual and reasonable. He suggested they point out the financial implications of the CIP. Staff should follow what they normally do. He felt it would help the audience to present the pro's and con's. Councilmember Pritzlaff stated his viewpoint on the site selection process is that anyone that builds anything in the City should come to City Hall first. He felt the school failed to come here first. He wants a recommendation, but he does not want options. The issue is not money. His issue is the ag preserve and changing the comp plan. He spoke with City Administrator Urbia regarding a state statute about hooking up to a City utility. The City ordinance says when a City service runs past their home a resident must hook up to that utility within 24 months. City Engineer Mann noted if it is purely a City ordinance, Council can choose not to enforce it. Staff will have to research the state statutes. Mayor Soderberg stated all of the questions that have been asked and the problems identified could have been addressed had the City been involved in the site selection from the beginning. The state provides guidelines to the school district that includes the City being on the site selection team, including traffic engineers, parks, community development to identify potential problems with sites. If the City had been included early on a lot of these questions could have been answered and this site could have been identified as being problematic. So much so that it might have changed the ultimate selection of a site. The City does have a role in selecting a site for the school. State guidelines provide for it. There is a 170-page document that the school district seemed to ignore in this process. This document is prescribed by the Department of Education that says this is what school districts should do in construction projects. We tried to be included and were repeatedly turned away. Regarding a recommendation, he believed Council Budget/CIP Workshop June 1,2005 Page 9 planning should not give a recommendation. He has changed his position. Whatever recommendation staff gives, Council will back their decision. Councilmember Pritzlaff stated with the mini-meetings of the Council and school board, he feels left out of the loop. He wanted Council to work as a group. Councilmember Wilson agreed. The problem is that we cannot all get in a room and talk about the issue because of the open meeting law. He has received updates, but not including everyone precludes all from making comments. He suggested giving highlights of the Department of Education requirements for building a school. Council will receive the same information given to the Planning Commission. Councilmember Fogarty stated she does not want the high school project to affect the CIP, nor will she allow it. The City should not pay for infrastructure costs for the high school. Oversizing is another issue. 5. Adjourn MOTION by Fogarty, second by McKnight to adjourn at 8:42 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~~ /v?~~ 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 /6 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, and City Administrato~ V-- FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation - Police Department DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of a full-time Police Detective to fill a vacant position in the Police Department has been completed. DISCUSSION The City has completed an internal recruitment, testing, and interview process for a Police Detective. After a thorough review by the Police Department and the Human Resources Office, an offer has been made to Mr. Mark Sundgren, subject to ratification by the City Council. Mr. Sundgren has been with the Police Department since January 2000 and has provided assistance to the Investigations Division over the past year. His knowledge, skills and qualifications meet the minimum qualifications for the position. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this position is authorized in the 2005 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the appointment of Mr. Mark Sundgren to Detective in the Police Department effective on or about June 21, 2005. Respectfully submitted, A.' ? ,~.I/l /J / .h'- \....r:yd~lX/~~C Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: file City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7c:., TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, and City AdministratorP/\"",,--- FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation - Police Department DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The recruitment and selection process for the appointment of a full-time Police Officer to fill a vacant position in the Police Department has been completed. DISCUSSION The City has completed the recruitment, testing, and interview process for a Police Officer. After a thorough review by the Police Department and the Human Resources Office, an offer of employment has been made to Mr. Gary Tipton, subject to ratification by the City Council. Mr. Tipton is currently a Police Officer for the City of Cannon Falls, MN where he has been employed as a full-time police officer for four years and has served as a trainer and mentor to junior officers. He comes highly recommended and meets the qualifications for the position. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this position is authorized in the 2005 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the appointment of Mr. Gary Tipton as a police officer in the Police Department, effective July 5, 2005. Respectfully Submitted, liw~l<~~-;~tl~~J-t / Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: Personnel file City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7d TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator ~ FROM: Lena Larson, Public Works Administrative ASSistan~ SUBJECT: 2005 Curbside Cleanup Summary DATE: June 20,2005 INTRODUCTION The 2005 Curbside Cleanup program is complete and participation continues to be excellent. DISCUSSION The total amounts of materials collected from Farmington homes are as follows: Total Cost Garbage 389.75 tons $20,243.62 Electronics 73,065 pounds $29,226.00 Tires 2091 $13,068.75 Appliances 1239 $39,648.00 Scrap Metal 15.6 $0 The total bill for all five Cleanup Days is $135,191.32 (the above totals plus the base charge for trucks and labor). When you divide the overall cost of Curbside Cleanup Days by the approximate number of residential properties that were eligible to participate, the average cost per household is around $21.50. The convenience and easy accessibility of the curbside program continues to bring in much larger quantities of materials than past drop off Cleanup Days. A comparison of the Cleanup Days follows: II II II II II 389.75 376.31 333.76 272.89 264.06 2091 2038 2071 1766 2017 73065 lbs. 62697 lbs. 60446 lbs. 47,780Ibs. 44,960 lbs. 1239 998 916 795 820 2005 Curbside Cleanup Summary page 2 BUDGET IMPACT The total bill is within the budgeted amount of$152,000.00. ACTION REQUESTED No action is requested, this memo is for information only. ~esp (fully ~ L Larson Public Works Administrative Assistant cc: Randy Distad, Parks & Recreation Director Benno Klotz, Solid Waste Supervisor 7~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ciJarmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councihnembers and City Admioistrator Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Approving Solid Waste Exemptions DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION , City ordinance allows property owners to request from the City Council an exemption from City garbage service. DISCUSSION The City Council had previously approved Solid Waste exemptions for 24 customers at its May 16, 2005 City Council meeting. Since then staff have received requests from four additional customers to be exempted from City solid waste service. Attached with this memo is Exhibit A, which identifies the customers who have made the exemption request and the reason for their request. As stated previously in the May 16th memo to the City Council, City ordinance allows exemptions if the property owner is able to dispose of the garbage in an environmentally safe manner. After reviewing these additional requests, City staff is recommending that the additional exemptions in Exhibit A be approved by the City Council. 'BUDGET IMPACT: While not significant, exempting these 4 customers will affect the revenue generated. The exact amount of revenue lost is hard to gauge because of not knowing the size of the container that these customers may have ordered as the cost for garbage service is dependent on the size of the container. ACTION REQUESTED To approve by motion the exemptions identified in Exhibit A. ~ectfullYff~~' ~~s~ Parks and Recreation Director cc: Benno Klotz, Solid Waste Supervisor Robin Roland, Finance Director Lena Larson, Public Works Administrative Assistant Deb Richter, Accounting Clerk ~ 4- ,1.. ...:...0 U) t- - ~ c - LL LL~ <C8 WN C) <C m ~ <C C) - '.~ ~ l.W C/) ~ W I- ~ C) Z is ....I en ~ ~ ~ >- ~ :::! ,~ W ~ C/) 0 => a. Z ~ o W Z I- Z o h: ! ~ <( W X ~ Z 0 - X W W ~ ~ ~ ::s O!O I- I- w :E 01 0' ....! ::) I o .. .. i::i o olw W W I- ~~I<( 010 0 I- I- t= :> :> > ~ ~I~ u.. U::.U::Iu.. u..u..iu.. u.. <(!<(!<( <( It) o o !:::! ..... ..... i?; .... .... .... .... 8 0 8 8 !:::! 0 N o C:!;~ ~ C2 :!::IN N :: LO :;;r in I- I- <.> C/) t;~~ 00 ~ ~ <.> <.> :c :c (DIN I..... C') Z W W C/) ~ WZlzC/) <( I- 0 u.. x~C/)o ::so....l~ CD ~I~ Iii C/) a. (3 ~ ffi >- Z ZI> 0 1<( W'.W Z ~ XII- ~ 1 u.. C/) !~ II) o Q =It NO I.... ~ ::; IZ <3 I::) Z O=> 10!0 0'<'> 1<(le N o o City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7.(. TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, and City Administrator Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director FROM: SUBJECT: Acknowledge Resignation - Human Resources DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The City has received notification from Mr. Joe Fischbach of his resignation from his position as HRJPayroll Specialist in the HR/IT Department. DISCUSSION Mr. Fischbach has been employed in either a part-time or full-time capacity with the City since 1997. His resignation is effective July 8, 2005. He has been an excellent employee and the City has appreciated his commitment to the organization and wishes him well in his future endeavors. ACTION REQUESTED Acknowledge the resignation of Mr. Joe Fischbach effective Friday, July 8, 2005. Respectfully Submitted, 'I 1 .....- ," h""'" ,f .. "",', ",_:f '. ......":J{i f / ~~. ~...,,7"'/,/:Lb--/..tlr ~c:.,..(,,4..~-(r-...."~"~1 v Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: file City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 13 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, and City Administrat~ FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: School and Conference - Human Resources DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The Minnesota Public Employer Labor Relations Association (MPELRA) Summer Conference will be attended Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, August 17 - 19,2005 in Deerwood, MN. DISCUSSION The MPELRA Summer Conference provides Human Resource professionals the opportunity to attend seminars on the latest developments in Labor Relations. The conference is designed to increase the skills and knowledge of the participants through continuing education. It is also an opportunity for attendees to participate in peer discussions about the challenges public employers face regarding labor relations. BUDGET IMPACT The cost of the conference is $273.00 and is provided for in the 2005 budget. ACTION REQUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, ,./"l ," t '&UUI6~~~~~~ . Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: file City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /h TO: Mayor, CounCilmembers, City Administrator FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Approve Appointment Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION A vacancy exists on the Heritage Preservation Commission. The term for this appointment is from February 1,2005 through January 31,2008. DISCUSSION Attached is the application received for the vacant HPC seat from Ms. Danielle Stuckle. At the June 6, 2005 City Council meeting, Council had agreed to interview her at the June 20, 2005 Pre-City Council meeting. Upon completion of Ms. Stuckle's interview, if Council agrees to make the appointment it will be ratified by approving this item on the consent agenda. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the appointment of Ms. Danielle Stuckle to the Heritage Preservation Commission to complete the term from 2/1/05 through 1/31/08. Respectfully submitted, ~Il Jicaddc Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director ~' CITY OF FARMINGTON SUMMARY OF REVENUES MAY 31,2005 41.67 % Year Complete .... ...... . . .... .... ..... ... .. ........ .... ............ ',' .... . .. ..- ... ':. : .::...-:::::':: ':::":"': ..... ITEMS>':':: ': :>\):,:,:::::' : .', , ,: : : ' '::/::::::)/,aQQ$:):::::</<<:"'=:':', 'PE~CENlL, :;:::,: 2004:- ,Y :"PERCENT:: . , : H::::eUbGaU/ HCUAAISNT: H:::U:UftO/\:n: :\\\:dOQ5:::{: H/UVllt::H: UC'2QQ~/H $ $ $ % $ % GENERAL FUND Property Taxes 4,750,293 - 11,383 0.24 0.00 Licenses 28,655 385 15,179 52.97 11,361 51.52 Permits 1,096,250 72,326 221,870 20.24 330,066 35.28 Fines 78,100 6,795 18,077 23.15 16,522 20.91 Intergovernment Revenue 310,000 969 81,951 26.44 71,772 22.36 Charges for Service 386,000 49,688 102,027 26.43 52,125 10.74 Investment Interest 225,000 18,750 93,750 41.67 80,000 25.00 Miscellaneous 10,000 579 13,957 139.57 46,600 131.27 Transfers 236 000 19,666 98 333 41.67 103 333 33.33 Total General Fund 7120298 169158 656 527 9.22 711 779 11.76 SPECIAL REVENUE HRA Operating Fund 20,500 321 203,121 990.83 299,452 95.01 Police Forfeitures Fund 8,050 1,491 2,773 34.45 4,975 61.80 Park Improvement Fund 292,000 66,344 192,628 65.97 61,666 40.65 Recreation Operating Fund 301,500 9,317 72,299 23.98 56,963 21.28 Ice Arena 247,500 4 109,395 44.20 - 0.00 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Ice Arena - - 0.00 111,447 39.13 Liquor Operations 3,715,746 283,748 1,205,557 32.44 819,036 26.36 Sewer 1,533,857 99,574 469,706 30.62 361,447 26.52 Solid Waste 1,748,077 133,614 610,224 34.91 457,027 30.54 Storm Water 235,000 29,548 128,623 54.73 85,591 32.97 Water 1 695 000 225,883 607 129 35.82 388.910 24.50 Total Revenues 16917528 1 019002 4.257,982 25.17 3 358.293 22.55 CITY OF FARMINGTON SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES MAY 31, 2005 41.67 %Yearco~ 1::II':.:':llllt~~III':'I:I:I'.,I:I,I::IIII:11111 :::'$VP.$~t:: ::~~:~~II~~~~m:: :11:::I::~I'::I:::lllrn~:ImT:: GENERAL FUND $ $ $ % $ % Legislative 67,162 9,732 38,381 57.15 18,682 29.07 Administration 455,528 43,191 184,045 40.40 130,687 30.34 Elections 10,875 - - 0.00 - 0.00 Communications 70,882 6,237 26,568 37.48 17,463 24.93 Human Resources 195,206 15,151 73,987 37.90 58,726 32.14 Information Technology 107,783 14,831 39,050 36.23 15,862 28.91 Finance 413,638 33,064 181,879 43.97 135,605 34.67 Planning 174,080 14,989 63,751 36.62 57,063 33.54 Building Inspection 406,738 29,977 147,960 36.38 120,478 34.41 Community Development 158,997 7,012 35,300 22.20 27,820 29.80 Police Administration 603,905 43,909 250,313 41.45 205,249 39.22 Patrol Services 1,518,203 114,164 589,117 38.80 413,151 35.79 Investigation Services 277,602 48,346 130,088 46.86 78,765 30.46 Emergency Management 5,200 17 1,109 21.33 51 3.19 Fire 425,849 18,243 102,532 24.08 84,069 21.41 Rescue 43,110 1,431 11,307 26.23 13,607 34.86 Engineering 284,465 22,954 118,304 41.59 90,652 33.62 G.I.S. 9,798 20 98 1.00 4,213 45.14 Streets 472,632 42,309 162,696 34.42 119,586 28.56 Snow Removal 102,935 1,295 73,509 71.41 49,560 50.64 Signal Maint 105,600 9,215 34,361 32.54 24,866 25.37 Natural Resources 56,285 1,942 14,629 25.99 - 0.00 Park Maint 407,186 43,757 145,239 35.67 90,740 34.77 Forestry 0 - - 0.00 21,436 20.82 Building Maint 157,995 8,023 45,018 28.49 27,572 22.52 Recreation Programs 375,644 28,848 128,821 34.29 97,134 31,55 Outdoor Ice 0 - 0.00 3,201 83.14 Transfers Out 213000 - 53 250 25.00 43 250 25,00 Total General Fund 7120,298 558 657 2651,312 37.24 1,949488 32.21 SPECIAL REVENUE HRA Operating 42,100 2,569 10,653 25.30 265,075 91.66 Police Forfeitures Fund 8,050 1,609 3,789 47.07 3,889 34.56 Park Improvement Fund 528,000 23,699 102,659 19.44 64,739 29.48 Senior Center 148,444 14,334 56,158 37.83 45,346 35.80 Swimming Pool 142,533 30,419 37,149 26.06 9,018 6.72 Ice Arena 247159 (3 979' 112.073 45.34 0 0.00 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Ice Arena 0 - 0 0.00 99,763 38.00 Liquor Operations 3,561,633 272,215 1,179,255 33.11 804,423 26.02 Sewer 1,541,497 90,079 472,729 30.67 325,158 9.07 Solid Waste 1,770,599 137,702 579,725 32.74 383,751 25.37 Storm Water 400,884 28,881 115,875 28.90 79,323 20.95 Water Utility 1 140,558 46 953 240 939 21.12 180.427 7.33 Total Exoenditures 16,651,755 1,203,138 5,562,316 33.40 4,210,400 23.23 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ~' tJ TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator 1.0-----, Robin Roland, Finance Director FROM: SUBJECT: Consider Shooting Range Agreement - Police DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The property owners of the site the police department uses for fire arms qualification have requested a formalized agreement. DISCUSSION Fire arms qualification is a professional standard for police officers. Fire arms ranges are increasingly difficult to find and moreover, very expensive to use. For several years, the police department has used private property outside the City as their range. The owners of the property have graciously allowed this use for no fee to the City. Of late, the property owners have asked for a 'hold harmless' agreement which simply formalizes this arrangement. The attached agreement outlines the current arrangement and acknowledges a formal understanding. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the attached Shooting Range Agreement between the City and John and Sally Siebenaler. ;?;;J;/ Robin Roland Finance Director AGREEMENT FOR USE OF PROPERTY FOR A POLICE SHOOTING RANGE THIS AGREEMENT is made, executed and entered into this 20th day of June, 2005, by and between the CITY OF FARMINGTON, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota ("City"), and John and Sally Siebenaler ("Owner"). SECTION 1. Recitals. City and Owner agree that this Agreement is made in accordance with the following recitals: A. Owner is the owner of certain land ("Property") and is in agreement with City to allow the City to use a portion of the Property for the purpose of a Shooting Range ("Range") for its Police Department in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. B. City and Owner agree that it is mutually advantageous for them to set forth their respective obligations and agreements in their entirety in this Agreement. C. F or and in consideration of the parties adhering to their respective obligations, covenants, and undertakings hereinafter contained, as well as for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration being provided by City to Owner, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, City and Owner agree to enter into this Agreement as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2. Exhibits. The following exhibits are attached to and by reference made a part of this Agreement: Exhibit "A" - Depiction of Range and location of targets Exhibit "B" - Legal description of Property SECTION 3. Premises to be Used. Owner agrees to allow City to place its targets and use a portion of the Property for the Range as depicted in Exhibit "A". The location of the Range and targets may be modified by mutual agreement of the City and Owner at any time for safety reasons or to accommodate other uses. The legal description of the Property is attached as Exhibit "B". docs-# 118 806- v I-Police _ Shooting_Range _Use_Agreement (2) SECTION 4. Conditions. Owner and City agree that the City's Police Department will use the Range subject to the following conditions: A. City acknowledges that it has inspected the Range and is fully satisfied with its physical condition and agrees to accept the Range in its present "as is" condition. Neither Owner nor any representative of Owner has made any warranties or representations upon which the City relies with respect to the physical condition of the Range. B. City accepts the Range subject to such conditions, restrictions, and limitations, if any, that presently appear of record in regard to the Range. C. City accepts the Range subject to any applicable health, life, safety, fire, or zoning ordinances, codes, regulations or statutes which may hereinafter exist by reason of any legal authority during the term of this Agreement. SECTION 5. Term. The term of this Agreement will begin on the 1st day of July, 2005, and will end on the 30th day of June, 2010, both dates inclusive, unless sooner terminated as hereinafter provided. ("Initial Term".) Thereafter, this Agreement shall renew automatically, for one year periods ("Renewal Terms"), until either party terminates the Agreement by giving the other party thirty (30) days advance written notice. SECTION 6. Termination. Either City or Owner may terminate this Agreement by giving the other party thirty (30) days advance written notice. SECTION 7. Repair and Maintenance. Owner and City agree that City will be responsible for any and all repair and maintenance of the Range during the term of this Agreement. Maintenance shall include, but not be limited to, keeping the Range clean of litter or trash, shell casings, targets, and related Range materials. SECTION 8. Indemnification. City agrees to indemnify and save harmless Owners from and against all liability, damages, penalties, judgments, or claims of whatever nature arising from injury to person or property sustained by anyone arising out of City's use and occupancy of the Range and will at City's own cost and expense defend any and all suits or actions (just or unjust) which may be brought against Owner or in which Owner may be impleaded with others upon any such above-mentioned matter, claim, or claims. This indemnity and hold harmless agreement will include indemnity against all costs, expenses, and liabilities incurred in or in connection with any such claims or proceedings brought thereon and the defense thereof. SECTION 9. Liability and Property Dama2e Insurance. City will, at City's sole cost and expense, provide and maintain during the term of this Agreement 2 general liability and property insurance policies or coverage against claims for personal injury, death, or property damage occurring in connection with the use and occupancy of the Range. SECTION 10. Assi!mment and Sublettin2. The City will not, by operation of law or otherwise assign or sublet or permit the Range as depicted and described in this Agreement to be used by others without the Owner's prior written consent in each instance. SECTION 11. Surrender of Possession. The City agrees that at the expiration or cancellation of this Agreement, City will yield up possession of the Range in as good of order and condition as when same were entered by City, reasonable wear, tear and damage by the elements alone expected. Upon surrendering possession of the Property, the City agrees to remove all personal property belonging to the City such as targets and stands. SECTION 12. Successors and Assi2ns. City and Owner agree that this Agreement will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and any statutes, regulations, ordinances, or city code provisions applicable thereto. SECTION 13. Written Notices or Other Correspondence. Any written notice or other correspondence to be provided by and between City and Owner in accordance with this Agreement will be either hand delivered or mailed by registered or certified mail to the following addresses: CITY: City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 OWNER: John and Sally Siebenaler 21489 Lewiston Blvd Hampton, Minnesota 55031 SECTION 14. Waiver of Default. Any waiver by either party of a default under the provisions of this Agreement by the other party will not operate or be construed as a waiver of a subsequent default. SECTION 15. Invalidity of Provisions. If any term or provision of this Agreement or any application hereof to any person or circumstance is to any extent found to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement or the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or 3 unenforceable will not be effected thereby and each term and provision of this Agreement will be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. SECTION 16. Entire Ae:reement. This instrument herein contains the entire and only agreement between the parties and no oral statements or representations or prior written matter not contained in this instrument will have any force and effect. This Agreement cannot be modified in any way except by writing executed by both parties. SECTION 17. Governine: Law. This Agreement will be governed exclusively by the provisions hereof and by the laws of the State of Minnesota, as the same from time to time exists. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF FARMINGTON OWNER By: Kevan A. Soderberg, Mayor And David M. Urbia, City Administrator THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (651) 452-5000 4 EXHIBIT "A" Depiction of Premises and Location of Targets Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 6/9/2005. ID Select option and click map: IZoom In ~ Whole County I Refresh Map I Big Map 1322 ,I , j ..' Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 6/9/2005. D Select option and click map: IZoom Out..:J Whole County I Refresh Map I Big Map 7.. ~ ' i~r .... .... , ~ Copyright @ 2005. Dak~a County Ale This application was developed by the Dakota County Q ;0 roop,rntioo w;lh "''''';00 S'~~d ",0" Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the . Copyright @ 2005. Dakota County This application was developed by the Da~ota County Qfflg~ of GIS in cooperation with 6-~ servi~?{urer - AlCdltor and PrQruillY~cord~ Departments ~~ I:. 0 U NT'" r.lir.k nn the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page This inset shows the northeast corner of the gravel pit described. The outlined area is an excavation. The portion designated "Pit" is approximately 40 feet deep. Adjacent, in the area marked by the rectangle is the shooting area. It is approximately 20 feet below grade and surrounded by steep sand walls. EXHIBIT "B " Le2al Descriution PROPERTY 10 NUMBER: 39-03500-011-02 FEE OWNER: JOHN B & SALLY A SIEBENALER 21489 LEWISTON BLVD HAMPTON MN 55031-9626 PROPERTY ADDRESS: PLAT NAME: SECTION 35 TWN 114 RANGE 18 TAX DESCRIPTION: W 60 A OF W 1/2 OF NE 1/4EX PT S & E OF LEWISTON RD EX W 150 FT OF S 550 FT 3511418 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7k TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: License for Utility to Cross Protected Waters DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION As part of the trunk sanitary sewer project that will serve Parkview Ponds and Mystic Meadows, a trunk sanitary sewer pipe will need to be installed across (beneath) North Creek. North Creek is classified a protected water by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) and a license to cross the protected water must be obtained by the City before utilities crossing this waterway can be constructed. DISCUSSION Attached to this memo is a copy of the license for execution by the City of Farmington. The term of the license is for a 50 year period commencing on June I, 2005. The license costs $237.00 for the lifetime ofthe license at which time the license must be renewed. BUDGET IMPACT The cost of the MNDNR license to cross a protected waterway is $237.00 which will be funded by the sewer fund. ACTION REQUESTED . . . . Approve by motion the attached License for Utility to Cross Protected Waters. Respectfully Submitted, ~YY1~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES LICENSE NUMBER #144-065-6194 APPLY NUMBER 76333 TRN 525 LS 09 COMPANY PROJECT NO: N/A LICENSE FOR UTILITY TO CROSS PROTECTED WATERS This license is issued by the commissioner of natural resources under authority and subject to the limitations in Minnesota Statutes, section 84.415, and Minnesota Rules Chapter 6135 and other applicable law to the Licensee as named and for the fee and term as specified below. Name and Address of Licensee: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 License Fee: Two Hundred Thirty-Seven Dollars ($237.00) Term (years): 50 years Effective Date: June 1,2005 Termination Date: May 31, 2055 Purpose of License: Construction, maintenance and operation of a solids in suspension pipeline under water under the covenants and agreements of the Licensee to use the following described waters: That part of the SE1I4SE1I4 in Section 19, Township 114 North, Range 19 West in Dakota County as shown on the attached application and map, all of which are made a part hereof by reference. This license is granted subject to the following provisions: 1. At the end of the license period if both parties wish to renew, the renewal fee and time period will be determined by such methods as are developed by the commissioner of natural resources. 2. This license shall be cancelable upon reasonable notice by the commissioner for violation of any of its terms, or if at any time its continuance will conflict with a public use of water over or upon which it is granted, or for any other reason. Licensee shall ensure that Licensee's employees, agents and contractors have received and thoroughly understand all conditions of this license. 3. Unless otherwise authorized by the commissioner, upon the surrender, termination or cancellation of this license, the Licensee shall remove from the above-described waters all the utility lines and related structures owned by it. If Licensee does not remove such lines or related structures, all such lines or structures remaining shall become the property of the State, to be used or disposed of as the commissioner elects. The Licensee agrees to pay the State for the costs of removing and disposing of such lines or structures. 4. The Licensee shall comply with all federal, state and local laws and regulations, including municipal ordinances, affecting said waters, and shall remove all refuse and debris that may accumulate therein. The project hereunder shall at all times during and after construction be subject to inspection by the commissioner and for that purpose the Licensee shall grant access to the premises at all reasonable times. 5. The use of these waters by the Licensee in constructing or maintaining the lines for which this license is granted shall be subject to the use, sale, or leasing for mineral or other legal purposes. 6. This license is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, section 84.415 and Minnesota Rules Chapter 6135. All standards of Chapter 6135 are incorporated as terms and conditions of this license, except such variations as are identified and approved by the commissioner in the license applications, plans and specifications which are attached and made part of the terms and conditions of this license. The Licensee is bound by the crossing location and installation method as detailed in the application and approved by the commissioner. The Licensee shall not deviate from the terms and conditions of this license or the application as approved by the commissioner unless it has first obtained written permission from the Regional Operations Supervisor. 7. This license is permissive only. No liability shall be imposed upon or incurred by the State of Minnesota or any of its officers, agents, or employees, officially or personally, on account of the granting hereof or on account of any damage to any person or property resulting from any act or omission of the Licensee or any of its agents, employees, or contractors relating to any matter hereunder. This license shall not be construed as estopping or limiting any legal claims or right of action of any person against the Licensee, its agents, employees, or contractors for any damage or injury resulting from any such act or omission, or as estopping or limiting any legal claim or right of action of the State against the Licensee, its agents, employees, or contractors, for violation of or failure to comply with the provisions ofthis license or applicable provisions oflaw. The Licensee shall indemnify and hold harmless the State from all claims arising out of the Licensee's use of the above described waters whether such claims are asserted by civil action or otherwise. 8. The Licensee shall not without the commissioner's prior written consent: a) assign, conveyor otherwise transfer this license or any interest under it; b) sublet the license corridor or any part thereof; or c) permit the use or occupancy of the license corridor or any part thereof by anyone other than the Licensee. This license shall extend to, and bind the successors, heirs, legal representatives and assigns of the Licensee, ifany. The commissioner may require a party who has requested to sublet, use or occupy the license corridor to obtain a separate license from the State prior to occupying or using the license corridor. 9. No delay by the State in enforcing any of the conditions of this license shall operate as a waiver of any of its rights. 10. Placement and Marking of Lines: A. In over crossings of public waters, lines shall have a minimum clearance of 25 feet above extreme high water, unless otherwise approved by the Regional Operations Supervisor. B. As directed by the Regional Operations Supervisor, marker spheres shall be placed on overhead utility lines directly above the protected water. C. Any cable or conduit located at a shoreline shall be sufficiently buried at the shoreline so as to prevent its becoming exposed during droughts or winter drawdowns. D. As directed by the Regional Operations Supervisor, underwater crossings shall be marked by permanent signs on the banks at points where the line enters and leaves the protected water. 11. Unless otherwise authorized by the Regional Operations Supervisor, shut-off valves shall be installed within a pipeline on each side of the water crossing to provide an effective means of halting the release of product or effluent from the line into the surface waters in the event of a line rupture. 12. To protect fish spawning activities, the commissioner may prohibit work in the stream or work within a specified distance of the protected water during the spawning season. 13. Licensee must minimize disturbance to natural streambed and shoreline vegetation, including trees and shrubs. Allowable clearing of banks, shorelines and land adjacent to them is restricted to the minimum necessary for equipment to complete the installation; banks, shorelines and land adjacent to them should not be cleared to the full right-of-way width. 14. The beds of the waters described above shall, upon completion of construction or maintenance operations therein, be restored as nearly as practicable to their original cross-section. Extreme care shall be exercised to assure that the contours and elevations of the streambed are not changed by this installation in any manner that would alter the runout elevation of any public waters basins located upstream of the crossing. 15. Erosion: A. Erosion control measures shall be employed to stabilize the banks. Where necessary to prevent erosion, streambeds shall be permanently riprapped with natural rock having an average diameter of 12 inches. B. Erosion control measures shall be adequately designed for site characteristics. They may include staked hay bales, sediment fences or contouring and shaping. They shall be installed prior to commencement and maintained throughout the project. All erosion control fences next to a water body shall run parallel to the contours. C. Under low flow conditions, the work, as approved by the commissioner, shall be done to minimize erosion and siltation caused by construction. D. If downstream bank erosion commences, immediate erosion control measures shall be taken and the Regional Operations Supervisor notified immediately. E. Any work below water level shall be encircled by a flotation sediment curtain or other suitable sediment containment device to prevent sediment from being transported beyond the excavation area. F. All disturbed areas shall be stabilized as soon as possible following construction. Topsoil shall be used to re- dress disturbed soil areas, and indigenous plant species should be used, whenever possible, to revegetate disturbed areas. This revegetation should occur as early in the season as possible to permit adequate regrowth. G. Excavated materials shall not be deposited or stored alongside a protected water in a manner where the materials can be redeposited into the protected water by reasonably expected high water or storm run-off. 16. Unless otherwise authorized by the Regional Operations Supervisor, the Licensee shall not apply herbicides or pesticides to the water in the course of construction or maintenance of the utility line. 17. Emergency repairs and replacements may be made without prior notification to the Regional Operations Supervisor by the Licensee according to conditions and standards prescribed by Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6135 and the method of installation identified in this license. The Licensee shall notify the Regional Operations Supervisor of this activity as soon as practicable. 18. The Licensee shall contact the Regional Operations Supervisor 10 days prior to installation and within 10 days following completion oflicensed work for compliance inspection. 19. This license is subject to the SPECIAL PROVISIONS attached hereto (if none, state none). None. 20. The Regional Operations Supervisor is Paul Purman at DNR Lands and Minerals; 1200 Warner Road; St. Paul, MN 55106. Phone (651) 772-7942. Any questions about this license shall be directed to the Regional Operations Supervisor. ACCEPTED AND ACKNOWLEDGED STATE OF MINNESOTA COMMISSIONER OF NATURAL RESOURCES CITY OF FARMINGTON Licensee( s) GENE MERRIAM Commissioner of Natural Resources By By Title Regional Operations Supervisor Title By Title Form approved by the Office of the Attorney General 01/02 7L 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 Administrator f)v'-' FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Approve Conservation Easement for Wetland Bank - Charleswood Development DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION Attached for Council's review and consideration is a conservation easement for wetland bank for the additional wetland that the developer of Charles wood created as part of their development project. DISCUSSION It is necessary for the City to grant the attached easement to the Board of Soil and Water Resources to allow the developer to bank wetland credits for the additional wetland that was intentionally created for banking credits as part of the Charleswood development. Approval of this easement is recommended contingent on the developer being responsible for and staff verification of completion ofthe approved bank plan. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the attached conservation easement for wetland bank, contingent on verification that the developer has met the requirements of the approved bank plan. Respectfully Submitted, ~>>1~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file (Above Space is Reserved for Recording Information) PERPETUAL CONSERVATION EASEMENT FOR WETLAND BANK Grantor: City of Farmington BWSR Easement #19-02-04-05 Location: within Section 26, Township 114, Range 26, Dakota County This Perpetual Conservation Easement for Wetland Bank ("Easement") is made on ( date) by the undersigned, hereinafter referred to collectively as the "Grantor": RECITALS A. This Easement is made pursuant to and in furtherance of the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991, as amended, Minn. Stat. ~103G.222, et. seq. ("WCA") and the rules implementing WCA, Minn. R. ch. 8420 ("WCA Ru1es"). B. This Easement pertains to all or part of the real property in Dakota County, Minnesota, which is legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof ("Real Property"). C. The Real Property is the subject of a wetland bank plan pursuant to Minn. R.8420.0740. D. The Grantors include all of the following (1) all the fee owners of the Real Property and (2) the applicants under the bank plan if different from the fee owners. The term "Grantor" includes all of the Grantors if there is more than one. The Grantors are jointly and severally responsible for complying with the terms of this instrument. This Easement and the duties and restrictions contained in it shall also run with the land. E. WCA is administered by the State of Minnesota through its Board of Water and Soil Resources ("State"). F. The local government unit ("LGU") charged under WCA with approval of the subject wetland bank plan ("bank plan") is City of Fannington. The subject bank plan includes all fully executed forms provided by the State, all supporting maps, engineering plans, drawings, monitoring Page 2 of7 plan, vegetation establishment plan and management plan and facilities maintenance plan. A complete copy of the bank plan is on file at the LGU. The address of the LGU is: 325 Oak Street, Farmington, :MN 55024-2374. The State is responsible for the acceptance of this Easement. G. The bank plan requires the restoration or creation of a wetland on the portion of the Real Property designated in Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof ("Bank Easement Area"). The bank plan may also require the establishment of upland buffer within the Bank Easement Area. This Easement pertains to both wetlands and uplands within the Bank Easement Area. H. The Bank Easement Area is subject to WCA, WCA Rules and all other provisions of law that apply to wetlands, except that the exemptions in Minn. Stat. ~ I 03G.2241 and Minn. R. 8420.0122 do not apply to the Bank Easement Area, pursuant to Minn. Stat. ~ 103G.222, subd. l(h) and Minn. R. 8420.0115. I. All references in this Easement to Minnesota Statutes and to Minnesota Rules are to the statutes and rules currently in effect and as amended or renumbered in the future. J. The purposes of this Easement are to maintain and improve the ecological values of the Bank Easement Area through the means identified in the bank plan and to preserve the Bank Easement Area in a natural condition in perpetuity. IN ADDmON, THE GRANTORS, FOR THEMSELVES, THEIR HEIRS, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS COVENANT THAT THEY: 1. Shall establish and maintain wetlands and upland buffers within the Bank Easement Area as specified in the bank plan approved by the LGU and on file at the offices of the LGU. The wetland and any upland buffer area shall be the size and type specified in the bank plan. Grantor shall not make any use of the Bank Easement Area that would adversely affect any of the functions or values of the area. Those functions and values are identified in Minn. R. 8420.0540, subp. 10, or specified in the approved bank plan. 2. Shall pay the costs of establishment, maintenance, repairs and reconstruction of the wetlands and upland buffers within the Bank Easement Area, which the LGU or the State may deem necessary to comply with the specifications for the Bank Easement Area in the approved bank plan. The Grantor's obligations under this paragraph include the payment of any lawful taxes or assessments, on the Real Property. 3. Shall establish and maintain visible monuments such as signs, numbered fence posts or survey posts at prominent locations along the boundary of the Bank Easement Area in accordance with the approved bank plan. If numbered fence posts are used, Grantor's Bank Plan must contain a survey or scaled drawing of the property that corresponds to the fence post numbering. Posts must be at least 4 feet high and notably visible on the landscape. If signs are used, such signs must be have a surface area of at least one quarter (~) square feet, mounted on a fence post at least 4 feet above ground, and minimally contain the words "Boundary of Wetland Bank Easement Area - Subject to Perpetual Conservation Easement Restrictions - Contact:MN Board of Water and Soil Resources or Local Soil and Water Conservation District for Further Information." Said monuments must be made of non- degradable material and shall be at least four feet in height. Page 3 of7 4. Grants to the LGU, the State, and the agents and employees ofthe LGU and the State, reasonable access to the Bank Easement Area for inspection, monitoring and enforcement purposes. The LGU, the State, and the agents and employees of the State are hereby granted a perpetual ingress and egress easement ("Access Easement") for access to and from the Bank Easement Area. The Access Easement shall be over and across the area ("Easement Access Area") that is specified on Exhibit A and or Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof or, ifnot specified on Exhibit A and or Exhibit B, the most reasonably direct and convenient route between the Bank Easement Area and a public road. If all or any part of the Easement Access Area is owned by a person or entity other than Grantor, then the owner has joined in this Easement for purposes of granting the Access Easement by signing below. The signed written consent and subordination of all other holders of interests in the Easement Access Area has been or will be obtained by Grantor and recorded in the same manner as specified in paragraph 5 below. This Easement grants no access to or entry to the Real Property, the Bank Easement Area, or the Easement Access Area to the general public. 5. Represents that Grantor is (a) the fee owner ofthe Real Property and (b) the applicant under the replacement plan or bank plan, if differerit from the fee owner. Grantor represents that all other parties who may have an interest in the Real Property (e.g., mortgagees, contract for deed vendees, holders of easements, etc.) have consented and subordinated their interests to this Easement by signing below. If it is determined at any time that there is any other party who may have an interest in the Real Property that is prior to this Easement, then Grantor shall immediately obtain and record a consent and subordination agreement signed by such other party. Acceptance of this Easement does not release Grantor from the obligation to obtain and record a consent and subordination agreement signed by any party who may have an interest in the Real Property that is prior to this Easement, even if such interest was of record at the time of acceptance. 6. Will record this easement at Grantor's expense in the real property records of the county where the Real Property is located. Said recording shall take place within 30 days of the State's acceptance of this Easement. The Grantor shall provide the original copy of the recorded easement to the State prior to making any credits from this bank available for sale or use. 7. Acknowledge that this Easement shall be unlimited in duration, without being re- recorded. This Easement shall be deemed to be a perpetual conservation easement pursuant to Minn. Stat. ch. 84C. 8. Acknowledge that, unless expressly authorized in writing by the LGU in the approved bank plan, Grantor: (a) Shall not produce agricultural crops on the Bank Easement Area, except that this provision does not restrict the harvest of the seeds of native vegetation if only the seed- head is removed in the process of harvest and does not involve the use vehicular, motorized equipment; (b) Shall not cut hay, mow vegetation or cut timber on the Bank Easement Area except as allowed or prescribed in the Bank Plan; (c) Shall not make any vegetative alterations on the Bank EaSement Area that do not enhance or would degrade the ecological functions and values of the Bank Easement Area. Vegetative alterations shall be limited to those listed in the approved bank plan; (d) Shall not graze livestock on the Bank Easement Area; Page 4 of7 (e) Shall not place any materials, substances or other obj ects, nor erect or construct any type of structure, temporary or permanent, on the Bank Easement Area. (f) Shall not allow vehicular traffic on the Bank Easement Area except for the pmpose of implementing construction or maintenance activities specifically authorized in the bank plan. (g) Shall not alter the topography of the Bank Easement Area by any means including plowing, dredging, filling, mining or drilling. (h) Shall not modify the hydrology of the Bank Easement Area in any way or by any means including pumping, draining, ditching, diking, impounding or diverting surface or ground water into or out of the Bank Easement Area. 9. Acknowledge that the Grantor is responsible, at Grantor's cost, for weed control by complying with noxious weed control laws and emergency control of pests necessary to protect the public health on the Bank Easement Area. 10. Acknowledge that this Easement may be modified only by the joint written approval of the LGU and the State. If the Bank Easement Area has been used to mitigate wetland losses under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (or successor agency) must also agree to the modification in writing. 11. Acknowledge that this Easement may be enforced, at law or in equity, by the LGU or the State. The LGU and the State shall be entitled to recover an award of reasonable attorney's fees from Grantor in any action to enforce this Easement. The right to enforce the terms of this Easement is not waived or forfeited by any forbearance or failure to act on the part of the State or LGU. If the subject Bank Easement Area is to be used partially or wholly to fulfill permit requirements under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act or a federal farm program, then the provisions of this Easement that run to the State or the LGU may also be enforced by the United States of America in a court of competent jurisdiction. 12. Acknowledge that this Easement is not valid, nor can an account for wetland credits be , established until the Easement has been accepted by the State, the Grantor has recorded this Easement and the State has received evidence of such recording. Page 5 of7 SIGNATURE OF GRANTOR IN TESTIMONY THEREOF, the municipal corporation has caused this instrument to be executed in its city name by Kevan A. Soderberg and David M. Urbia, its Mayor and its City Administrator on this_ day of , 2005. CITY OF FARMINGTON By Its Mayor And Its City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) - The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of , 20 _, by Kevan A. Soderberg and David M. Urbia, the Mayor and City Administrator of the City of Farmington, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the municipal corporation. (Notary Stamp or Seal) Notary Public My commission expires: SIGNATURE OF BANK APPLICANT (S), IF DIFFERENT FROM FEE OWNER: Brian Laidlaw, Partner COUNTY OF ) ) ) STATE OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this_ day of by Brian Laidlaw. Partner of Astra Genstar, a Partnership under the laws of on behalf of the Partnership (Notary Stamp or Seal) ,20_, Notary Signature Commission expires on Page 6 of7 ACCEPTANCE The State accepts the foregoing Easement. MINNESOTA BOARD OF WATER AND SOIL RESOURCES: By: Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of (name of person) as ,_by (title) of the Board of Water and Soil Resources. Notary Public Notarial Stamp or Seal This instrument was drafted by the Board of Water and Soil Resources One West Water Street, St. Paul, MN 55107 If there are additional holders of interest the subj ect real property CHECK HERE [ ] and attach their Consent and Subordination agreement [BWSR Form Number: wca-bank-03 (consent).doc]. Page 70f7 Easement Number 19-02-04-05 Exhibit' A' City of Farmington Wetland Bank LEGAL DESCRIPTION That part of the Outlots Band C of Charles wood 3rd Addition, located within the NE1I4 of Section 26, T. 114 N., R. 26 W., Dakota County shown as the "Bank Area" on Exhibit "B" attached to and made a part of this Conservation Easement, and described as follows: Tract 1: Commencing at the most southerly comer of said Outlot C and its intersection with the east line of Outlot B, CHARLESWOOD, according to the recorded plat thereof, said Dakota County; thence North 60 degrees 11 minutes 36 seconds West, assumed bearing along the southwesterly line of said Outlot C a distance of 700.00 feet, to the westerly line of said Outlot C; thence North 21 degrees 39 minutes 52 seconds West, a distance of66.41 feet, to the point of beginning of said easement to be described; thence North 67 degrees 37 minutes 55 seconds East, a distance of 102.32 feet; thence South 77 degrees 26 minutes 22 seconds East, a distance of23.84 feet; thence South 45 degrees 58,minutes 07 seconds East, a distance of 57.56 feet; thence South 59 degrees 24 minutes 56 seconds East, a distance of61.85 feet; thence South 82 degrees 59 minutes 28 seconds East, a distance of 43.96 feet; thence South 28 degrees 10 minutes 43 seconds East, a distance of 21.49 feet; thence South 33 degrees 39 minutes 31 seconds East, a distance of 54.41 feet; thence South 04 degrees 08 minutes 20 seconds East, a distance of 45.39 feet; thence South 22 degrees 54 minutes 31 seconds East, a distance of 66.93 feet; thence South 61 degrees 43 minutes 44 seconds East, a distance of 42.12 feet; thence South 50 degrees 43 minutes 47 seconds East, a distance of61.64 feet; thence South 53 degrees 18 minutes 45 seconds East, a distance of 70.09 feet; thence North 82 degrees 52 minutes 32 seconds East, a distance of 55.47 feet; thence North 76 degrees 59 minutes 33 seconds East, a distance of33.11 feet; thence North 06 degrees 14 minutes 36 seconds West, a distance of 51.42 feet; thence North 14 degrees 02 minutes 49 seconds West, a distance of 47.55 feet; thence North 33 degrees 56 minutes 27 seconds West, a distance of74.90 feet; thence North 23 degrees 49 minutes 11 seconds West, a distance of 46.27 feet; thence North 18 degrees 10 minutes 43 seconds West, a distance of 107.27 feet; thence North 30 degrees 48 minutes 31 seconds West, a distance of92.76 feet; thence North 25 degrees 45 minutes 28 seconds West, a distance of 84.89 feet; thence North 26 degrees 51 minutes 12 seconds West, a distance of 83.64 feet; thence North 42 degrees 04 minutes 17 seconds West, a distance of 43.30 feet; thence North 36 degrees 37 minutes 51 seconds, West, a distance of 54.29 feet; thence North 73 degrees 20 minutes 50 seconds West, a distance of38.48 feet; thence South 71 degrees 13 minutes 55 seconds West, a distance of 45.91 feet; Legal Page 1 of3 thence South 58 degrees 08 minutes 58 seconds West, a distance of 55.20 feet; thence South 05 degrees 15 minutes 04 seconds West, a distance of 57.63 feet; thence South 03 degrees 16 minutes 13 seconds East, a distance of99.93 feet; thence South 39 degrees 59 minutes 07 seconds West, a distance of37.41 feet; thence South 58 degrees 28 minutes 07 seconds West, a distance of 62.53 feet; thence South 80 degrees 11 minutes 44 seconds West, a distance of 61.93 feet; thence North 47 degrees 13 minutes 31 seconds West, a distance of 28 .17 feet, to said westerly line of Outlot C; thence South 21 degrees 39 minutes 52 seconds East, along said westerly line of Outlot C, a distance of71.58 feet, to the point of beginning. Tract 2: Commencing at the most southerly comer of said Outlot C and its intersection with the east line of Outlot B, CHARLESWOOD, according to the recorded plat thereof said Dakota County; thence North 60 degrees 11 minutes 36 seconds West, assumed bearing along the southwesterly line of said Outlot C a distance of 700.00 feet, to the westerly line of said Outlot C; thence North 21 degrees 39 minutes 52 seconds West, along said westerly line of Outlot C, a distance of 410.75 feet to the northwesterly line of said Outlot C; thence North 83 degrees 49 minutes 59 seconds East, a distance of 60.57 feet, to the point of beginning of said easement to be described; thence South 03 degrees 09 minutes 24 seconds West, a distance of 36.40 feet; thence South 19 degrees 16 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of95.27 feet; thence South 25 degrees 11 minutes 07 seconds East, a distance of 95.39 feet; thence South 86 degrees 23 minutes 26 seconds East, a distance of 53.37 feet; thence North 51 degrees 02 minutes 07 seconds East, a distance of36.58 feet; thence North 07 degrees 44 minutes 36 seconds West, a distance of 80.60 feet; thence North 08 degrees 23 minutes 56 seconds West, a distance of83.15 feet; thence North 30 degrees 00 minutes 39 seconds East, a distance of32.62 feet; thence North 60 degrees 09 minutes 50 seconds East, a distance of 54.54 feet; thence North 09 degrees 56 minutes 25 seconds East, a distance of35.95 feet; thence North 51 degrees 59 minutes 02 seconds West, a distance of76.79 feet; thence North 86 degrees 51 minutes 54 seconds West, a distance of37.81 feet; thence South 67 degrees 35 minutes 40 seconds West, a distance of71.87 feet; thence South 22 degrees 27 minutes 39 seconds West, a distance of 88.65 feet, to the point of beginning. Tract 3: Commencing at the most northerly comer of said Outlot B; , thence South 25 degrees 07 minutes 11 seconds West, assumed bearing along a westerly line of said Outlot B, a distance of 50.08 feet; thence South 64 degrees 52 minutes 49 seconds East, a distance of 47.35 feet, to the point of beginning of said easement to be described; . thence South 22 degrees 47 minutes 26 seconds West, a distance of28.12 feet; thence South 20 degrees 52 minutes 56 seconds East, a distance of98.22 feet; Legal Page 2 on thence South 04 degrees 25 minutes 13 seconds East, a distance of 57.20 feet; thence South 22 degrees 06 minutes 17 seconds West, a distance of25.62 feet; thence South 42 degrees 21 minutes 15 seconds West, a distance of 43.50 feet; thence South 04 degrees 18 minutes 25 seconds West, a distance of 82.60 feet; thence South 00 degrees 20 minutes 01 seconds East, a distance of 178.09 feet; thence South 49 degrees 41 minutes 50 seconds East, a distance of22.44 feet; thence North 73 degrees 30 minutes 07 seconds East, a distance of 20.89 feet; thence North 34 degrees 25 minutes 54 seconds East, a distance of 92.67 feet; thence North 16 degrees 35 minutes 30 seconds East, a distance of327.76 feet; thence North 27 degrees 17 minutes 34 seconds West, a distance of 40.21 feet; thence North 63 degrees 48 minutes 14 seconds West, a distance of 166.18 feet, to the point of beginning. AND ALSO, As noted in the easement, a twenty-foot wide access to this parcel is granted starting from the intersection of200th Street West and the east line of Charles wood 4th Addition; thence south along the east line of said Charleswood 4th Addition and the drainage and utility easement to Pond "B", as best shown on said Exhibit B. Legal Page 3 of3 City of Farmington Perpetual Conservation Easement for Wetland Bank EXHIBIT liB" (diagram of wetland bank easement) Easement No. 19-02-04-05 Map 1 of 1 This is not a legal survey and not intended for use as a survey plat. Section 26 T. 114 N., R. 26 W., Dakota County t o I 660 I Prepared By: LEGEND Lands Included In Bank Easement Access Area Lands Not Included in Bank Area Center of Section Section/Quarter/Sixteenth Line May 12, 2005 ~ =: ~ ?///////d rY////~ o Board of Water and Soil Resources Dated: 7m 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 Administrator ~' FROM: Tim Gross, P.E., Assistant City Engineer r SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition Development Contract DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The Development Contract for Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition is forwarded herewith for Council's consideration. DISCUSSION The final plat for Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition was approved by the Planning Commission on May 10,2005 and by the City Council on May 16, 2005. The contract has been drafted in accordance with the conditions placed on the approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat and has been reviewed by the City Attorney. Following are conditions of approval for the development contract: 1. the Developer enter into this Agreement; and 2. the Developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; and 3. the Developer record the plat with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 6 months after City Council approval of the final plat. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution approving the execution of the Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition Development Contract and authorize its signing contingent upon the above conditions and final approval by the Engineering Division. Respectfully Submitted, ~~ Tim Gross, P .E. Assistant City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -05 APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT TAMARACK RIDGE 4TH 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 in City Hall of said City on the 20th day of June, 2005 at 7:00 P.M. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preliminary plat on May 15,2000; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. R66-05, the City Council approved the Final Plat of Tamarack Ridge 4th Addition subject to the following conditions: 1. All engineering issues shall be addressed and approval of construction plans for grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division shall be required. 2. Execution of a Development Contract between the Developer and the City of Farmington and submission of security, payment of all fees and costs and submission of all other documents required under the Development Contract. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: The Development Contract for the aforementioned subdivision, a copy of which is on file in the Clerk's office is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a) the Developer enter into this Agreement; and b) the Developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; and c) the Developer record the plat with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 6 months after City Council approval of the final plat. The Mayor and City 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 20th day of June, 2005. Mayor Attested to this _ day of June, 2005. SEAL City Administrator DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AGREEMENT dated this 20th day of June, 2005, by, between, and among the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation (CITY) and Farmington-Severson Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership (DEVELOPER), Valley Mining, L.L.C, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company (DEVELOPER) and Round Bank, a Minnesota Corporation (DEVELOPER). 1. Request for Plat Aooroval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for TAMARACK RIDGE 4TH ADDITION (also referred to in this Development Contract [CONTRACT or AGREEMENT] as the PLAT). The land is situated in the City of Farmington, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota, and is legally described on the attached Exhibit "A": 2. Conditions of Aooroval. The City hereby approves the plat on the conditions that: a) the Developer enter into this Agreement; and b) the Developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; and c) the Developer record the plat with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 6 months after City Council approval of the fmal plat. 3. Develooment Plans and Rie:ht to Proceed. The Developer shall develop the plat in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Agreement. The plans may be prepared by the Developer, subject to City approval, after entering into this Agreement but before commencement of any work in the plat. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, subject to paragraphs 6 and 34G, the plans shall control. The required plans are: Plan A - Final Plat Plan B - Soil Erosion Control and Grading Plans Plan C - Landscape Plan Plan D - ZoninglDevelopment Map Plan E - Wetlands Mitigation as required by the City Plan F - Final Street and Utility Plans and Specifications The Developer shall use its best efforts to assure timely application to the utility companies for the following utilities: underground natural gas, electrical, cable television, and telephone. Within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not construct sewer lines, water lines, streets, utilities public or private improvements or any building until all of the following conditions have been satisfied: a) This agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, b) The necessary security has been received by the City, c) The plat has been recorded with the Dakota County Recorder's Office, and d) The City Clerk has issued a letter stating that all conditions have been satisfied and that the Developer may proceed. 1 4. Sales Office Requirements. At any location within the plat where lots and/or homes are sold which are part of this subdivision, the Developer agrees to install a sales board on which a copy of the approved plat, fInal utility plan and a zoning map or planned unit development plan are displayed, showing the relationship between this subdivision and the adjoining neighborhood. The zoning and land use classifIcation of all land and network of major streets within 350 feet of the plat shall be included. 5. Zonin2lDevelopment Map. The Developer shall provide an 8 1/2" x 14" scaled map of the plat and land within 350' of the plat containing the following information: a. platted property; b. existing and future roads; c. future phases; d. existing and proposed land uses; and e. future ponds. 6. Required Public Improvements. The Developer shall install and pay for the following: a. Sanitary Sewer Lateral System b. Water System (trunk and lateral) c. Storm Sewer d. Streets e. Concrete Curb and Gutter f. Street Signs g. Street Lights h. Sidewalks and Trails i. Erosion Control, Site Grading and Ponding j. Traffic Control Devices k. Setting of Lot & Block Monuments 1. Surveying and Staking In. Landscaping, Screening, Blvd. Trees The improvements shall be installed in accordance with Plans A through F, and in accordance with all laws, City Standards, Engineering Guidelines, Ordinances and plans and specifIcations which have been prepared by a competent registered professional engineer furnished to the City and approved by the City Engineer. Work done not in accordance with the approved plans and specifIcations, without prior authorization of the City Engineer, shall be considered a violation of this agreement and a Default of the Contract. The Developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the Metropolitan Council and other agencies before proceeding with construction. The Developer shall instruct its engineer to provide adequate fIeld inspection personnel to assure an acceptable level of quality control to the extent that the Developer's engineer will be able to certify that the construction work meets the approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City's discretion and at the Developer's expense, have one or more City inspector(s) and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or 'part time basis. The Developer or his engineer shall schedule a pre-construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Council chambers with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. Within sixty (60) days after the completion of the improvements and before the security is released, the Developer shall supply the City with a complete set of "As Built" plans as specifIed in the City's Engineering Guidelines. If the Developer does not provide such information, the City will produce the as-built drawings. All costs associated with producing the as-built drawings will be the responsibility of the Developer. Before the security for the completion of the utilities is released, iron monuments must be installed in accordance with M.S. 9505.02. The Developer's surveyor shall submit a written notice to the City certifying that the monuments have been installed. 7. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required public utilities, by November 30, 2006, in accordance with the requirements set forth in the City's Engineering Guidelines. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases. An extension of the security shall be considered an extension of this contract and the extension of the contract will coincide with the date of the extension of the security. 8. Ownership of Improvements. Upon the completion of the work and construction required to be done by this Agreement, and written acceptance by the City Engineer, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property, except for cable TV, electrical, gas, and telephone, without further notice or action. 2 9. Warranty. The Developer and the Developers Engineer represent and warrant to the City that the design for the project meets all laws, City Standards, Engineering Guidelines and Ordinances. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The warranty period for streets is one year. The warranty period for underground utilities is two years. The warranty period for the streets shall commence after the final wear course has been completed and the streets have been accepted by City Council resolution. The warranty period on underground utilities shall commence following their completion and acceptance by the City Engineer in writing. It is the responsibility of the Developer to complete the required testing of the underground utilities and request, in writing, City acceptance of the utilities. Failure of the Developer to complete the required testing or request acceptance of the utilities in a timely manner shall not in any way constitute cause for the warranty period to be modified from the stipulations set forth above. All trees shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free for twelve (12) months after the security for the trees is released. Any replacements shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer shall post maintenance bonds or other surety acceptable to the City to secure the warranties. The City shall retain ten percent (10%) of the security posted by the Developer until the bonds or other acceptable surety are furnished to the City or until the warranty period has been completed, whichever first occurs. The retainage may be used to pay for warranty work. The City's Engineering Guidelines identify the procedures for fmal acceptance of streets and utilities. 10. Gradin2 Plan. The plat shall be graded and drainage provided by the Developer in accordance with Plan B. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, the Developer may start rough grading the lots within the stockpile and easement areas in conformance with Plan B before the plat is filed if all fees have been paid, a MPCA Construction Storm Water Permit has been issued, and the City has been furnished the required security. Additional rough grading may be allowed upon obtaining written authorization from the City Engineer. If the developer needs to change grading affecting drainage after homeowners are on site, he must notifY all property ownerslresidents of this work prior to its initiation. This notification cannot take place until the City Engineer has approved the proposed grading changes. A MPCA Construction Storm Water Permit must be obtained before any grading can commence on the site. 11. Erosion Control and Fees. After the site is rough graded, but before any utility construction is commenced or building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented by the Developer and inspected and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if it is determined that the methods implemented are insufficient to properly control erosion. All areas disturbed by the excavation and back-filling operations shall be re- seeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule, or supplementary instructions received from the City, or in an emergency determined at the sole discretion of the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion immediately, without notice to the Developer. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and the City's rights or obligations hereunder. If the Developer does not reimburse the City for any costs of the City incurred for such work within thirty (30) days, the City may draw down the letter of credit to pay such costs. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the erosion control requirements. The Developer is responsible for Erosion Control inspection fees at the current rates. The Developer is also responsible for a Water Quality Management Fee of $ 653 based upon the number of acres in the plat. This fee is due and payable at the time of execution of this agreement. 12. Landscapin2. The Developer shall landscape the plat in accordance with Plan C. The landscaping shall be accomplished in accordance with a time schedule approved by the City. A. The Developer shall be solely responsible for the installation of all project landscaping including but not limited to the boulevard trees. The responsibility for the installation of boulevard trees will not be transferred to builders, homeowners, etc. B. All graded areas, including fmish grade on lots, will require a minimum of 6" of black dirt/topsoil. The responsibility for the installation of black dirt/topsoil shall not be transferred to homeowners. C. Retaining walls with 1) a height that exceeds four feet or 2) a combination of tiers that exceed four feet or 3) a three foot wall with a back slope greater than 4 to 1 shall be constructed in accordance with plans and specifications 3 prepared by a structural or geotechnical engineer licensed by the State of Minnesota. Following construction, a certification signed by the design engineer shall be filed with the City Engineer evidencing that the retaining will was constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. All retaining walls that are part of the development plans, or special conditions referred to in this Contract that are required to be constructed, shall be constructed and certified before any building permit is issued for a lot on which a retaining wall is required to be built. All landscaping features, including those constructed within public rights of way, remain the property and responsibility of the developer and subsequent property owners, subject to the City's or other governmental unit's rights to access and maintain their rights of way. 13. Phased Development. The plat shall be developed in one (1) phase in accordance with Plans A-F. No earth moving shall be done in any subsequent phase until the necessary security has been furnished to the City. No construction of public improvements or other development shall be done in any subsequent phase until a fmal plat for the phase has been filed in the County Recorder's office and the necessary security has been furnished to the City. The City may refuse to approve fmal plats of subsequent phases until public improvements for all prior phases have been satisfactorily completed. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, this Development Contract constitutes approval to develop the plat. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until development agreements for such phases are approved by the City. 14. Effect of Subdivision Approval. For two (2) years from the date of this Agreement, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current urban service area, or removing any part thereof which has not been final platted, or official controls, shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications or platting required or permitted by the approved preliminary plat unless required by State or Federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by State law, the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan (including removing unplatted property from the urban service area), official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Agreement and may require submission of a new plat. 15. Surface Water Mana2ement Fee. The Developer shall pay an area storm water management charge of $ 52,323 in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a 10 year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at five percent (5%) per annum. The assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA 429.081. Storm sewer charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into. 16. Wetland Conservation and Miti2ation. The Developer shall comply with the 1991 Wetlands Conservation Act, as amended, and the Wetlands Mitigation Plan. The Developer shall pay all costs associated with wetlands conservation and the Wetlands Mitigation Plan. 17. Water Main Trunk Area Cbar2e. The Developer shall pay a water main trunk area charge of$ 10,125 for the plat in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at five percent (5%) per annum. The assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA 429.081. Water area charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into. 18. Water Treatment Plant Fee. The water treatment plant fee shall become due upon the issuance of building permits. 19. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Cbar2e. The Developer shall pay a sanitary sewer trunk area charge of$ 7,873 for the plat in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. The charge shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at five percent (5%) per annum. The assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise 4 available pursuant to MSA 429.081. Sanitary Trunk Sewer charges for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into. 20. Park Dedication. The Developer shall be required to dedicate 0.21 acres ofland for park purposes. The Developer shall pay the City $ 17,422 as cash in lieu of land in satisfaction of the City's park dedication requirements for the plat. The park dedication fee shall be assessed against the lots (not outlots) in the plat over a ten (10) year period with interest on the unpaid balance calculated at five percent (5%) per annum. The assessment shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement is signed by the City. The assessments may be assumed or prepaid at any time. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the assessments including any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to MSA 429.081. The park dedication fees for subsequent phases shall be calculated and paid based upon requirements in effect at the time the Development Contracts for those phases are entered into. 21. Park Development Fee. The Developer shall pay a Park Development Fee of $ 3,501 that will be used to pay either for development of the park located in the development, or if no land is taken for park purposes, in the park closest to the development. The park to which the Park Development Fee for TAMARACK RIDGE 4TH ADDITION shall be credited/coded to is the Tamarack Park (2315-5046). The City shall allow the Developer to either pay the entire park development fee at the time of fmal plat filing or to pay the park development fee on a per unit basis at the time that the building permit is issued for each unit to be constructed in the development, provided that all park development fees shall be paid within five (5) years of approval of the fmal plat. 22. Sealcoatinl!. In lieu of assessing sealcoating three years from completion of the road construction, the Developer agrees to pay a fee of $ 1,284 for initial sealcoating of streets in and adjacent to the subdivision. This fee shall be deposited in the City Road and Bridge Fund upon execution of this Agreement. 23. GIS Fees. The Developer is responsible for a Government Information System fee of$ 358 based upon the number oflots within the subdivision. This fee shall be due and payable upon execution of this Agreement 24. Easements. The Developer shall furnish the City at the time of execution of this Agreement with the easements designated on the plat. 25. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors, a license to enter the plat to perform all necessary work and/or inspections deemed appropriate by the City during the installation of public improvements by the City. The license shall expire after the public improvements installed pursuant to the Development Contract have been installed and accepted by the City. 26. Clean UP. The Developer shall weekly, or more often if required by the City Engineer, clear from the public streets and property any soil, earth or debris resulting from construction work by the Developer or its agents or assigns. All debris, including brush, vegetation, trees and demolition materials, shall be disposed of off site. Burning of trees and structures shall be prohibited, except for fIre training only. The City has a contract for street cleaning services. The City will have the right to clean the streets as outlined in current City policy. The Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for street cleaning costs. 27. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Agreement, payment of real estate taxes including interest and penalties, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements in the plat and construction of all public improvements in the plat, the Developer shall furnish the City with a cash escrow, irrevocable letter of credit, or alternative security acceptable to the City Administrator, from a bank (security) for $ 387,995. The bank and form of the security shall be subject to the approval of the City Administrator. Letters of Credit shall be in the format and wording exactly as shown on the attached Letter of Credit form (Attachment "C"). The security shall be automatically renewing. The term of the security may be extended from time to time if the extension is furnished to the City Administrator at least forty-five (45) days prior to the stated expiration date of the security. If the required public improvements are not completed, or terms of the Agreement are not satisfied, at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of a letter of credit, the City may draw down the letter of credit. The City may draw down the security, without prior notice, for any violation of this Agreement or Default of the Contract. The amount of the security was calculated as follows: 5 Grading/Erosion Control Sanitary Sewer Water Main Storm Sewer Street Construction $ 14,840 $ 22,501 $ 23,244 $ 47,068 $ 212,589 Monuments St. Lights/Signs Blvd. Trees Blvd. Sodding Wetland Mitigation $500 $ 12,500 $ 28,378 $ 3,649 $N/A Two Years Principal and Interest on Assessments $ 22,726 This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. Upon receipt of proof satisfactory by the Developer's Engineer to the City Engineer that work has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, and terms of this Agreement, and that all fmancial obligations to the City, subcontractors, or other persons have been satisfied, the City Engineer may approve reductions in the security provided by the Developer under this paragraph from time to time by ninety percent (90%) of the fmancial obligations that have been satisfied. Ten percent (10%) of the amounts certified by the Developer's engineer shall be retained as security until all improvements have been completed, all fmancial obligations to the City satisfied, the required "as built" plans have been received by the City, a warranty security is provided, and the public improvements are accepted by the City Council. 28. Responsibilitv for Costs. A. The Developer shall pay all costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the development of the plat, including but not limited to, Soil and Water Conservation District charges, legal, planning, administrative, construction costs, engineering, easements, inspection and utility testing expenses incurred in connection with approval, acceptance and development of the plat, the preparation of this Agreement, and all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting the construction for the development of the plat. B. The Developer, except for City's willful misconduct, shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages or expenses which the City may payor incur in consequence of such claims, including attorney's fees. C. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Agreement, including engineering and attorney's fees. In the event that the City receives claims from labor, materialmen, or others that have performed work required by this Contract, that the sums due them have not been paid, and the laborers, materialmen, or others are seeking payment from the City, the Developer hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader action pursuant 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% of the claim( s) and deposit the funds in compliance with the Rule, and upon such deposit, the Developer shall release, discharge, and dismiss the City from any further proceedings 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 Contract. D. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work until the bills are paid in full. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of five percent (5%) per annum. If the bills are not paid within sixty (60) days, the City has the right to draw from the Developers security to pay the bills. 29. Trash Enclosures. The Developer is responsible to require each builder to provide on site trash enclosures to contain all construction debris, thereby preventing it from being blown off site, except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 30. Portable Toilets. The Developer is responsible to require each builder to provide an on site portable toilet, except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 31. Wetland Buffer and Natural Area Siens. The Developer is responsible for installing Wetland Buffer signs around all wetlands and wetland buffers, and City Natural Areas signs around all ponding areas, in accordance with the City's Engineering Guidelines and City detail plate GEN-13. Conservation Area signs will be installed as directed by the City 6 Engineer. Wetland Buffer line limits; and Wetland Buffer, Natural Area, and Conservation Area sign locations must be indicated on individual lot surveys prior to the issuance of a building permit for that lot. 32. Existine: Tree Preservation. The Developer will walk the site with the City Forester and identify all significant trees, which will be removed by on site grading. A dialogue between the Developer and City Forester regarding alternative grading options will take place before any disputed tree is removed. All trees, stumps, brush and other debris removed during clearing and grubbing operations shall be disposed of off site. 33. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer, except in an emergency as determined by the City or as otherwise provided for in this agreement, is first given written notice of the work in default, not less than 72 hours in advance. This Agreement is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 34. Miscellaneous. A. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors or assigns, as the case may be. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Agreement. B. Breach of the terms of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. C. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phrase of this Agreement is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement. D. Only construction of noncombustible materials shall be allowed until the water system is operational. Ifpermits are issued prior to the completion and acceptance of public improvements, the Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion of public improvements and damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, its contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, employees, agents or third parties. Normal procedure requires that streets needed for access to approved uses shall be paved with a bituminous surface before building permits may be issued. However, the City Engineer is authorized to waive this requirement when weather related circumstances prevent completion of street projects before the end of the construction season. The Developer is responsible for maintaining said streets in a condition that will assure the access of emergency vehicles at all times when such a waiver is granted. E. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. 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 waivers 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. F. The Developer represents to the City, to the best of its knowledge, that the plat is not of "metropolitan significance" and that an environmental impact statement is not required. However, if the City or another governmental entity or agency determines that such a review is needed, the Developer shall prepare it in compliance with legal requirements so issued from said agency. The Developer shall reimburse the City for all expenses, including staff time and attorney fees that the City incurs in assisting in the preparation of the review. G. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. The Developer represents to the City that the plat complies with all City, County, Metropolitan, State and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances and environmental regulations. If the City determines that the plat does not comply, the City may, at its option, 7 refuse to allow any construction or development work in the plat until the Developer does comply. Upon the City's demand, the Developer shall cease work until there is compliance. H. This Agreement shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. The Developer covenants with the City, its successors and assigns, that the Developer is well seized in fee title of the property being final platted and/or has obtained Consents to this Contract, in the form attached hereto, from all parties who have an interest in the property; that there are no unrecorded interests in the property being fmal platted; and that the Developer will indemnify and hold the City harmless for any breach of the of the foregoing covenants. After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Agreement, at the Developer's request the City will execute and deliver a release to the Developer. I. Developer shall take out and maintain until six months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of the Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury or death shall not be less than $500,000.00 for one person and $1,000,000.00 for each occurrence; limits for property damage shall not be less than $200,000.00 for each occurrence. The City shall be named as an additional named insured on said policy, the insurance certificate shall provide that the City must be given 10 days advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance and the Developer shall file a copy of the insurance coverage with the City prior to the City signing the plat. J. The Developer shall obtain a Wetlands Compliance Certificate from the City. K. Upon breach of the terms of this Agreement, the City may, without notice to the Developer, draw down the Developer's cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit as provided in paragraph 27 of this Agreement. The City may draw down this security in the amount of $500.00 per day that the Developer is in violation. The City, in its sole discretion, shall determine whether the Developer is in violation of the Agreement. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 33 hereof, this determination may be made without notice to the Developer. It is stipulated that the violation of any term will result in damages to the City in an amount, which will be impractical and extremely difficult to ascertain. It is agreed that the per day sum stipulated is a reasonable amount to compensate the City for its damages. L. The Developer will be required to conduct all major activities to construct Plans A-F during the following hours of operation: Monday - Friday Saturday Sunday and Holidays 7:00 A.M. until 7:00 P.M. 8:00 A.M. until 5:00 P.M. Not Allowed This does not apply to activities that are required on a 24-hour basis such as dewatering, etc. Any deviations from the above hours are subject to approval of the City Engineer. Violations of the working hours will result in a $500 fme per occurrence in accordance with paragraph K of this section. M. The Developer is responsible to require each builder within the development to provide a Class 5 aggregate entrance for every house that is to be constructed in the development. This entrance is required to be installed upon initial construction of the home. See City Standard Plate ERO-09 for construction requirements. N. The Developer shall be responsible for the control of weeds in excess of twelve inches (12") on vacant lots or boulevards within their development as per City Code 6-7-2. Failure to control weeds will be considered a Developer's Default as outlined in Paragraph 30 of this Agreement and the Developer will reimburse the City as defmed in said Paragraph 33. O. Third parties have no recourse against the City under this contract. 35. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified or registered mail at the following addresses: 8 Jim Ostenson James Development Company 7808 Creekridge Circle, Suite 310 Bloorrrington,~. 55439 Phone: 952-941-7805 Blaine Eggum Valley Mining, L.L.C. 17395 Kenwood Trail Suite 260 Lakeville, ~ 55044 Phone: 952-898-4303 Larry Thompson Round Bank P.O. Box 667 Waseca, ~ 56093 Phone: 507-837-4803 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either and delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by certified mail or registered mail in care of the City Administrator at the following address: David M. Urbia, City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, ~ 55024 9 CITY OF FARMINGTON By: By: DEVELOPER: Farmington-Severson Limited Partnership By: Valley Mining, L.L.C By: Round Bank By: Drafted by: City of Fanning ton 325 Oak: Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 (651) 463-7111 SIGNATURE PAGE Kevan A. Soderberg, Mayor David M. Urbia, City Administrator Its: Its: Its: 10 STATE OF MINNESOTA) (ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 by Kevan A. Soderberg, Mayor, and by David M. Urbia, City Administrator, of the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by the City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) (ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20 by , the of Farmington-Severson Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) (ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20 by , the of Valley Mining, L.L.C, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public 11 STATE OF MINNESOTA) (ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this , the day of laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public 12 ,20 by of Round Bank, a corporation under the EXHIBIT" A" Outlot A, TAMARACK RIDGE, accordiug to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota. 13 EXHIBIT "B" City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us LETTER OF EXEMPTION DAKOTA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS 1590 HIGHWAY 55 HASTINGS MN 55033-2392 To Whom It May Concern: Please find enclosed, deed(s) on the parcel(s) listed below. We are requesting the parcels be classified as Exempt Properties. PARCEL ID# LEGAL DESCRIPTION USE (wetland, storm water facility, park or well site) Please sign letter below and return to me at the address above verifying the exemption status. Thank you. Sincerely, Tracy Geise Accounting Technician/Special Assessments Enclosure( s) Signature Date 14 EXHIBIT "e" IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT No. Date: TO: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Dear Sir or Madam: We hereby issue, for the account of of Credit in the amount of $ undersigned bank. . and in your favor, our Irrevocable Letter , available to you by your draft drawn on sight on the The draft must: a} Bear the clause, "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. , dated (Name of Bank) "; b} Be signed by the Mayor or City Administrator of the City of Farmington. c) Be presented for payment at (Address of Bank) ,20_, of This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year terms from the date indicated above unless, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date, the Bank delivers written notice to the Farmington City Administrator that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: Farmington City Administrator, 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024, and is actually received by the City Administrator at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal date. This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which shall not in any way be modified, amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument, or agreement, whether or not referred to herein. This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This is not a Notation Letter of Credit. More than one draw may be made under this Letter of Credit. This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the most recent revision of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 400. We hereby agree that a draft drawn under and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly honored upon presentation. [NAME OF BANK] By: [name] Its: [identify official 15 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /17 TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator ~" FROM: Tim Gross, P.E., Assistant City Engineer ~ SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Bristol Square 5th Addition Development Contract DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The Development Contract for Bristol Square 5th Addition is forwarded herewith for Council's consideration. DISCUSSION The preliminary and final plat for Bristol Square 5th Addition was approved by the Planning Commission on May 10, 2005 and by the City Council on May 16, 2005. The contract has been drafted in accordance with the conditions placed on the approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat and has been reviewed by the City Attorney. Following are conditions of approval for the development contract: 1. the Developer enter into this Agreement; and 2. the Developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms ofthis Agreement; and 3. the Developer record the plat with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 6 months after City Council approval of the final plat. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution approving the execution of the Bristol Square 5th Addition Development Contract and authorize its signing contingent upon the above conditions and final approval by the Engineering Division. Respectfully Submitted, ~ Tim Gross, P .E. Assistant City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -05 APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT BRISTOL SQUARE 5TH 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 in City Hall of said City on the 20th day of June, 2005 at 7:00 P.M. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. R63-05, the City Council approved the Preliminary and Final Plat of Bristol Square 5th Addition subject to the following conditions: 1. All engineering issues shall be addressed and approval of construction plans for grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division shall be required. 2. Execution of a Development Contract between the Developer and the City of Farmington and submission of security, payment of all fees and costs and submission of all other documents required under the Development Contract. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: The Development Contract for the aforementioned subdivision, a copy of which is on file in the Clerk's office is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: a) the Developer enter into this Agreement; and b) the Developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; and c) the Developer record the plat with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 6 months after City Council approval of the final plat. The Mayor and City 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 20th day of June, 2005. Mayor Attested to this _ day of June, 2005. SEAL City Administrator DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AGREEMENT dated this 20th day of June, 2005, by, between, and among the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation (CITY) and SAS Development L.L.C., a Minnesota limited liability company (DEVELOPER), and Associated Bank National Association, a national banking association (DEVELOPER). 1. Request for Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for BRISTOL SQUARE 5TH ADDITION (also referred to in this Development Contract [CONTRACT or AGREEMENT] as the PLAT). The land is situated in the City of Farmington, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota, and is legally described on the attached Exhibit "A": 2. Conditions of Approval. The City hereby approves the plat on the conditions that: a) the Developer enter into this Agreement; and b) the Developer provide the necessary security in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; and c) the Developer record the plat with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles within 6 months after City Council approval of the fmal plat. 3. Development Plans and Rie:ht to Proceed. The Developer shall develop the plat in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Agreement. The plans may be prepared by the Developer, subject to City approval, after entering into this Agreement but before connnencement of any work in the plat. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, subject to paragraphs 6 and 34G, the plans shall control. The required plans are: Plan A - Final Plat Plan B - Soil Erosion Control and Grading Plans Plan C - Landscape Plan Plan D - Zoning/Development Map Plan E - Wetlands Mitigation as required by the City Plan F - Final Street and Utility Plans and Specifications The Developer shall use its best efforts to assure timely application to the utility companies for the following utilities: underground natural gas, electrical, cable television, and telephone. Within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not construct sewer lines, water lines, streets, utilities public or private improvements or any building until all of the following conditions have been satisfied: a) This agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, b) The necessary security has been received by the City, c) The plat has been recorded with the Dakota County Recorder's Office, and d) The City Clerk has issued a letter stating that all conditions have been satisfied and that the Developer may proceed. 1 4. Sales Office Reauirements. At any location within the plat where lots and/or homes are sold which are part of this subdivision, the Developer agrees to install a sales board on which a copy of the approved plat, fmal utility plan and a zoning map or planned unit development plan are displayed, showing the relationship between this subdivision and the adjoining neighborhood. The zoning and land use classification of all land and network of major streets within 350 feet of the plat shall be included. 5. Zonin2lDevelopment Map. The Developer shall provide an 8 1/2" x 14" scaled map of the plat and land within 350' of the plat containing the following information: a. platted property; b. existing and future roads; c. future phases; d. existing and proposed land uses; and e. future ponds. 6. Reauired Public Improvements and County Road 72 Assessments. The Developer shall install and pay for the following: a. Sanitary Sewer Lateral System b. Water System (trunk and lateral) c. Storm Sewer d. Streets e. Concrete Curb and Gutter f. Street Signs g. Street Lights h. Sidewalks and Trails i. Erosion Control, Site Grading and Ponding j. Traffic Control Devices k. Setting of Lot & Block Monuments 1. Surveying and Staking m Landscaping, Screening, Blvd. Trees The improvements shall be installed in accordance with Plans A through F, and in accordance with all laws, City Standards, Engineering Guidelines, Ordinances and plans and specifications which have been prepared by a competent registered professional engineer furnished to the City and approved by the City Engineer. Work done not in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, without prior authorization of the City Engineer, shall be considered a violation of this agreement and a Default of the Contract. The Developer shall obtain all necessary permits from the Metropolitan Council and other agencies before proceeding with construction. The Developer shall instruct its engineer to provide adequate field inspection personnel to assure an acceptable level of quality control to the extent that the Developer's engineer will be able to certifY that the construction work meets the approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City's discretion and at the Developer's expense, have one or more City inspector(s) and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part time basis. The Developer or his engineer shall schedule a pre-construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at the City Council chambers with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. Within sixty (60) days after the completion of the improvements and before the security is released, the Developer shall supply the City with a complete set of "As Built" plans as specified in the City's Engineering Guidelines. If the Developer does not provide such information, the City will produce the as-built drawings. All costs associated with producing the as-built drawings will be the responsibility of the Developer. All bike trails and sidewalks to be constructed as part of the development must be completed before building permits will be issued. Before the security for the completion of the utilities is released, iron monuments must be installed in accordance with M.S. ~505.02. The Developer's surveyor shall submit a written notice to the City certifYing that the monuments have been installed. County Road 72 Assessments The parent parcels of BRISTOL SQUARE 5TH ADDITION have been assessed for improvements to County Road 72. The total levied assessment amount for the parcels is: 2 Parcel Nos. 14-15300-120-00 Total amount levied: Deferred interest: Principal: Total due through 12/31/05: $ 3,036.22 $ 8,903.19 $ 11,939.41 A portion of the levied assessment plus interest becomes due with the fmal platting of BRISTOL SQUARE 5TH ADDITION. The amount due with BRISTOL SQUARE 5TH ADDITION will be calculated proportionally based on the area of BRISTOL SQUARE 5TH ADDITION being developed in relation to the entire area of the property. The remaining balance of the levied assessment shall remain levied against the unplatted portion of the parent parcel. The Developer may elect to pay the assessment in cash at the time of fmal plat approval or have it prorated and reassessed to the lots and blocks of BRISTOL SQUARE 5TH ADDITION. If assessed, the assessments shall be spread over a 10-year period with 6.5% interest on the unpaid balance from the time of the initial adoption of the assessment to the parent parcel. The reassessments shall be deemed adopted on the date this Contract is signed by the City. The Developer waives any and all procedural and substantive objections to the special assessments, including but not limited to, hearing requirements and any claim that the assessments exceed the benefit to the property. The Developer waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to M.S.A. 429.081. 7. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required public utilities, by November 30, 2005, in accordance with the requirements set forth in the City's Engineering Guidelines. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases. An extension of the security shall be considered an extension of this contract and the extension of the contract will coincide with the date of the extension ofthe security. Ownership of Improvements. Upon the completion of the work and construction required to be done by this Agreement, and written acceptance by the City Engineer, the improvements lying within public easements shall become City property, except for cable TV, electrical, gas, and telephone, without further notice or action. 8. Warranty. The Developer and the Developers Engineer represent and warrant to the City that the design for the project meets all laws, City Standards, Engineering Guidelines and Ordinances. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The warranty period for streets is one year. The warranty period for underground utilities is two years. The warranty period for the streets shall commence after the fmal wear course has been completed and the streets have been accepted by City Council resolution. The warranty period on underground utilities shall commence following their completion and acceptance by the City Engineer in writing. It is the responsibility of the Developer to complete the required testing of the underground utilities and request, in writing, City acceptance of the utilities. Failure of the Developer to complete the required testing or request acceptance of the utilities in a timely manner shall not in any way constitute cause for the warranty period to be modified from the stipulations set forth above. All trees shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality, and disease free for twelve (12) months after the security for the trees is released. Any replacements shall be warranted for twelve (12) months from the time of planting. The Developer shall post maintenance bonds or other surety acceptable to the City to secure the warranties. The City shall retain ten percent (10%) of the security posted by the Developer until the bonds or other acceptable surety are furnished to the City or until the warranty period has been completed, whichever first occurs. The retainage may be used to pay for warranty work. The City's Engineering Guidelines identify the procedures for fmal acceptance of streets and utilities. 9. Gradine: Plan. The plat shall be graded and drainage provided by the Developer in accordance with Plan B. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, the Developer may start rough grading the lots within the stockpile and easement areas in conformance with Plan B before the plat is filed if all fees have been paid, a MPCA Construction Storm Water Permit has been issued, and the City has been furnished the required security. Additional rough grading may be allowed upon obtaining written authorization from the City Engineer. If the developer needs to change grading affecting drainage after homeowners are on site, he must notifY all property owners/residents of this work prior to its initiation. This notification cannot take place until the City Engineer has approved the proposed grading changes. A MPCA Construction Storm Water Permit must be obtained before any grading can commence on the site. 3 11. Erosion Control and Fees. After the site is rough graded, but before any utility construction is commenced or building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented by the Developer and inspected and approved by the City. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if it is determined that the methods implemented are insufficient to properly control erosion. All areas disturbed by the excavation and back-filling operations shall be re- seeded forthwith after the completion of the work in that area. All seeded areas shall be fertilized, mulched and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If the Developer does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule, or supplementary instructions received from the City, or in an emergency determined at the sole discretion of the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion immediately, without notice to the Developer. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's and the City's rights or obligations hereunder. If the Developer does not reimburse the City for any costs of the City incurred for such work within thirty (30) days, the City may draw down the letter of credit to pay such costs. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the erosion control requirements. The Developer is responsible for Erosion Control inspection fees at the current rates. The Developer is also responsible for a Water Quality Management Fee of $ 335 based upon the number of acres in the plat. This fee is due and payable at the time of execution of this agreement. 12. Landscapine:. The Developer shall landscape the plat in accordance with Plan C. The landscaping shall be accomplished in accordance with a time schedule approved by the City. A. The Developer shall be solely responsible for the installation of all project landscaping including but not limited to the boulevard trees. The responsibility for the installation of boulevard trees will not be transferred to builders, homeowners, etc. B. All graded areas, including finish grade on lots, will require a minimum of 6" of black dirt/topsoil. The responsibility for the installation of black dirt/topsoil shall not be transferred to homeowners. C. Retaining walls with 1) a height that exceeds four feet or 2) a combination of tiers that exceed four feet or 3) a three foot wall with a back slope greater than 4 to 1 shall be constructed in accordance with plans and specifications prepared by a structural or geotechnical engineer licensed by the State of Minnesota. Following construction, a certification signed by the design engineer shall be filed with the City Engineer evidencing that the retaining will was constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. All retaining walls that are part of the development plans, or special conditions referred to in this Contract that are required to be constructed, shall be constructed and certified before any building permit is issued for a lot on which a retaining wall is required to be built. All landscaping features, including those constructed within public rights of way, remain the property and responsibility of the developer and subsequent property owners, subject to the City's or other governmental unit's rights to access and maintain their rights of way. 13. Phased Development. The plat shall be developed in one (1) phase in accordance with Plans A-F. No earth moving shall be done in any subsequent phase until the necessary security has been furnished to the City. No construction of public improvements or other development shall be done in any subsequent phase until a final plat for the phase has been filed in the County Recorder's office and the necessary security has been furnished to the City. The City may refuse to approve fmal plats of subsequent phases until public improvements for all prior phases have been satisfactorily completed. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, this Development Contract constitutes approval to develop the plat. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until development agreements for such phases are approved by the City. 14. Effect of Subdivision Approval. For two (2) years from the date of this Agreement, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current urban service area, or removing any part thereof which has not been fmal platted, or official controls, shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications or platting required or permitted by the approved preliminary plat unless required by State or Federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by State law, the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan (including removing unplatted property from the urban service area), official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Agreement and may require submission of a new plat. 15. Surface Water Manae:ement Fee. The Developer shall pay an area storm water management charge of $ 25,992 in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. This fee is due and payable at the time of execution of this agreement. 4 16. Wetland Conservation and Mitie:ation. The Developer shall comply with the 1991 Wetlands Conservation Act, as amended, and the Wetlands Mitigation Plan. The Developer shall pay all costs associated with wetlands conservation and the Wetlands Mitigation Plan. 17. Water Main Trunk Area Chare:e. The Developer shall pay a water main trunk area charge of$ 10,736 for the plat in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. This fee shall be paid upon execution of this contract. 18. Water Treatment Plant Fee. The Developer shall pay a water treatment plant fee of$ 31,800 for the plat in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. This fee is due and payable at the time of execution of this agreement. 19. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Chare:e. The Developer shall pay a sanitary sewer trunk area charge of$ 8,348 for the plat in lieu of the property paying a like assessment at a later date. This fee is due and payable at the time of execution of this agreement. 20. Park Dedication. The Developer shall be required to dedicate .6696 acres of land for park purposes. The Developer shall pay the City $ 43,870 as cash in lieu of land in satisfaction of the City's park dedication requirements for the plat. This fee is due and payable at the time of execution of this agreement. The developer will be credited for a portion of. 6147 acres of private park dedication within the plat. Per ordinance, only ~ of the public park dedication may be satisfied by private park dedication. As a result, a credit of.1674 acres will be given to the Developer for private park dedication within the plat. The net result is that the Park Dedication cash-in-lieu to be paid with this plat is $ 32,902. 21. Park Development Fee. The Developer shall pay a Park Development Fee of$11,137 that will be used to pay either for development of the park located in the development, or if no land is taken for park purposes, in the park closest to the development. The park to which the Park Development Fee for BRISTOL SQUARE 5TH ADDITION shall be credited/coded to is the Tamarack Park (2315-5046). This fee is due and payable at the time of execution of this agreement. A credit of $ 10,069 will be given to the Developer for trail improvements within the plat. The net result is that the Park Development Fee to be paid with this plat is $ 1,069. 22. Sealcoatine:. In lieu of assessing sealcoating three years from completion of the road construction, the Developer agrees to pay a fee of $ 3,286 for initial sea1coating of streets in or adjacent to the subdivision. This fee shall be deposited in the City Road and Bridge Fund upon execution of this Agreement. 23. GIS Fees. The Developer is responsible for a Government Information System fee of $ 2,650 based upon the number of lots within the subdivision. This fee shall be due and payable upon execution of this Agreement 24. Easements. The Developer shall furnish the City at the time of execution of this Agreement with the easements designated on the plat. 25. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors, a license to enter the plat to perform all necessary work and/or inspections deemed appropriate by the City during the installation of public improvements by the City. The license shall expire after the public improvements installed pursuant to the Development Contract have been installed and accepted by the City. 26. Clean Up~ The Developer shall weekly, or more often if required by the City Engineer, clear from the public streets and property any soil, earth or debris resulting from construction work by the Developer or its agents or assigns. All debris, including brush, vegetation, trees and demolition materials, shall be disposed of off site. Burning of trees and structures shall be prohibited, except for fIre training only. The City has a contract for street cleaning services. The City will have the right to clean the streets as outlined in current City policy. The Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for street cleaning costs. 27. Security. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Agreement, payment of real estate taxes including interest and penalties, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements in the plat and construction of all public improvements in the plat, the Developer shall furnish the City with a cash escrow, irrevocable letter of credit, or alternative security acceptable to the City Administrator, from a bank (security) for $ 463,391. The bank and form of the security shall be subject to the approval of the City Administrator. Letters of Credit shall be in the format and wording 5 exactly as shown on the attached Letter of Credit form (Attachment "C"). The security shall be automatically renewing. The term of the security may be extended from time to time if the extension is furnished to the City Administrator at least forty-five (45) days prior to the stated expiration date of the security. If the required public improvements are not completed, or terms of the Agreement are not satisfied, at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of a letter of credit, the City may draw down the letter of credit. The City may draw down the security, without prior notice, for any violation of this Agreement or Default of the Contract. The amount of the security was calculated as follows: GradinglErosion Control Sanitary Sewer Water Main Storm Sewer Street Construction $ 48,925 $ 93,245 $ 81,171 $ 45,255 $ 137,129 Monuments St. Lights/Signs Blvd. Trees Blvd. Sodding Wetland Mitigation $ 14,250 $ 18,125 $ 22,188 $ 3,104 $N/A This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. Upon receipt of proof satisfactory by the Developer's Engineer to the City Engineer that work has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications, and terms of this Agreement, and that all fmancial obligations to the City, subcontractors, or other persons have been satisfied, the City Engineer may approve reductions in the security provided by the Developer under this paragraph from time to time by ninety percent (90%) of the fmancial obligations that have been satisfied. Ten percent (10%) of the amounts certified by the Developer's engineer shall be retained as security until all improvements have been completed, all fmancial obligations to the City satisfied, the required "as built" plans have been received by the City, a warranty security is provided, and the public improvements are accepted by the City Council. 28. Responsibilitv for Costs. A. The Developer shall pay all costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the development of the plat, including but not limited to, Soil and Water Conservation District charges, legal, planning, administrative, construction costs, engineering, easements, inspection and utility testing expenses incurred in connection with approval, acceptance and development of the plat, the preparation of this Agreement, and all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting the construction for the development of the plat. B. The Developer, except for City's willful misconduct, shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages or expenses which the City may payor incur in consequence of such claims, including attorney's fees. C. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Agreement, including engineering and attorney's fees. In the event that the City receives claims from labor, materialmen, or others that have performed work required by this Contract, that the sums due them have not been paid, and the laborers, materialmen, or others are seeking payment from the City, the Developer hereby authorizes the City to commence an Interpleader action pursuant 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% of the claim( s) and deposit the funds in compliance with the Rule, and upon such deposit, the Developer shall release, discharge, and dismiss the City from any further proceedings 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 Contract. D. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt all plat development work until the bills are paid in full. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of five percent (5%) per annum. If the bills are not paid within sixty (60) days, the City has the right to draw from the Developers security to pay the bills. 29. Trash Enclosures. The Developer is responsible to require each builder to provide on site trash enclosures to contain all construction debris, thereby preventing it from being blown off site, except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 30. Portable Toilets. The Developer is responsible to require each builder to provide an on site portable toilet, except as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 6 31. Wetland Buffer and Natural Area Sif!ns. The Developer is responsible for installing Wetland Buffer signs around all wetlands and wetland buffers, and City Natural Areas signs around all ponding areas, in accordance with the City's Engineering Guidelines and City detail plate GEN-13. Conservation Area signs will be installed as directed by the City Engineer. Wetland Buffer line limits; and Wetland Buffer, Natural Area, and Conservation Area sign locations must be indicated on individual lot surveys prior to the issuance of a building permit for that lot. 32. Existinf! Tree Preservation. The Developer will walk the site with the City Forester and identify all significant trees, which will be removed by on site grading. A dialogue between the Developer and City Forester regarding alternative grading options will take place before any disputed tree is removed. All trees, stumps, brush and other debris removed during clearing and grubbing operations shall be disposed of off site. 33. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer, except in an emergency as determined by the City or as otherwise provided for in this agreement, is first given written notice of the work in default, not less than 72 hours in advance. This Agreement is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a Court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 34. Miscellaneous. A. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs, successors or assigns, as the case may be. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Agreement. B. Breach of the terms of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. C. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phrase of this Agreement is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement. D. Building permits shall not be issued prior to completion of site grading, submittal of as-built grading plan, public and private utility installation, curb and gutter, installation of erosion control devices, installation of permanent street signs and wetland buffer and natural area signs, paving with a bituminous surface, retaining walls if any, site seeding, mulching, disk anchoring and submittal of a surveyor's certificate denoting all appropriate monuments have been installed. Only construction of noncombustible materials shall be allowed until the water system is operational. If permits are issued prior to the completion and acceptance of public improvements, the Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion of public improvements and damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, its contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, employees, agents or third parties. Normal procedure requires that streets needed for access to approved uses shall be paved with a bituminous surface before building permits may be issued. However, the City Engineer is authorized to waive this requirement when weather related circumstances prevent completion of street projects before the end of the construction season. The Developer is responsible for maintaining said streets in a condition that will assure the access of emergency vehicles at all times when such a waiver is granted. E. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or ' remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. 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 waivers 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. F. The Developer represents to the City, to the best of its knowledge, that the plat is not of "metropolitan significance" and that an environmental impact statement is not required. However, if the City or another governmental entity or agency determines that such a review is needed, the Developer shall prepare it in compliance with legal requirements so issued 7 from said agency. The Developer shall reimburse the City for all expenses, including staff time and attorney fees that the City incurs in assisting in the preparation of the review. G. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. The Developer represents to the City that the plat complies with all City, County, Metropolitan, State and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances and environmental regulations. If the City determines that the plat does not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow any construction or development work in the plat until the Developer does comply. Upon the City's demand, the Developer shall cease work until there is compliance. H. This Agreement shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. The Developer covenants with the City, its successors and assigns, that the Developer is well seized in fee title of the property being ftnal platted and/or has obtained Consents to this Contract, in the form attached hereto, from all parties who have an interest in the property; that there are no unrecorded interests in the property being ftnal platted; and that the Developer will indemnify and hold the City harmless for any breach of the of the foregoing covenants. After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Agreement, at the Developer's request the City will execute and deliver a release to the Developer. I. Developer shall take out and maintain until six months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of the Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury or death shall not be less than $500,000.00 for one person and $1,000,000.00 for each occurrence; limits for property damage shall not be less than $200,000.00 for each occurrence. The City shall be named as an additional named insured on said policy, the insurance certiftcate shall provide that the City must be given 10 days advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance and the Developer shall me a copy of the insurance coverage with the City prior to the City signing the plat. J. The Developer shall obtain a Wetlands Compliance Certiftcate from the City. K. Upon breach of the terms of this Agreement, the City may, without notice to the Developer, draw down the Developer's cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit as provided in paragraph 27 of this Agreement. The City may draw down this security in the amount of $500.00 per day that the Developer is in violation. The City, in its sole discretion, shall determine whether the Developer is in violation of the Agreement. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 33 hereof, this determination may be made without notice to the Developer. It is stipulated that the violation of any term will result in damages to the City in an amount, which will be impractical and extremely difficult to ascertain. It is agreed that the per day sum stipulated is a reasonable amount to compensate the City for its damages. L. The Developer will be required to conduct all major activities to construct Plans A-F during the following hours of operation: Monday - Friday Saturday Sunday and Holidays 7:00 A.M. until 7:00 P.M. 8:00 A.M. until 5:00 P.M. Not Allowed This does not apply to activities that are required on a 24-hour basis such as dewatering, etc. Any deviations from the above hours are subject to approval of the City Engineer. Violations of the working hours will result in a $500 fine per occurrence in accordance with paragraph K of this section. M. The Developer is responsible to require each builder within the development to provide a Class 5 aggregate entrance for every house that is to be constructed in the development. This entrance is required to be installed upon initial construction of the home. See City Standard Plate ERO-09 for construction requirements. N. The Developer shall be responsible for the control of weeds in excess of twelve inches (12") on vacant lots or boulevards within their development as per City Code 6-7-2. Failure to control weeds will be considered a Developer's Default as outlined in Paragraph 30 of this Agreement and the Developer will reimburse the City as defmed in said Paragraph 33. O. Third parties have no recourse against the City under this contract. 8 35. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified or registered mail at the following addresses: Sharon Allen SAS Development, L.L.C. 12433 Princeton Avenue Savage, MN 55378 Phone: 952-894-1890 Fax: 952-894-4543 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either and delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by certified mail or registered mail in care of the City Administrator at the following address: David M. Urbia, City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 9 CITY OF FARMINGTON By: By: DEVELOPER: SAS Development L.L.C. By: DEVELOPER: Associated Bank National Association By: Dra~ed by: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 (651) 463-7111 SIGNATURE PAGE Kevan A. Soderberg, Mayor David M. Urbia, City Administrator Its: Its: 10 STATE OF MINNESOTA) (ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 by Kevan A. Soderberg, Mayor, and by David M. Urbia, City Administrator, of the City of Farmington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by the City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) (ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20 by , the ofSAS Development L.L.C., a limited liability company under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) (ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,20 by , the of Associated Bank National Association a national banking association under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public 11 EXHIBIT" A" Outlot L, BRISTOL SQUARE FIRST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof and Outlots A, B, and D, BRISTOL SQUARE FOURTH ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota. 12 EXHIBIT "B" City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us LETTER OF EXEMPTION DAKOTA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS 1590 HIGHWAY 55 HASTINGS MN 55033-2392 To Whom It May Concern: Please find enclosed, deed(s) on the parcel(s) listed below. We are requesting the parcels be classified as Exempt Properties. PARCEL ID# LEGAL DESCRIPTION USE (wetland, storm water facility, park or well site) Please sign letter below and return to me at the address above verifying the exemption status. Thank you. Sincerely, Tracy Geise Accounting Technician/Special Assessments Enclosure(s) Signature Date 13 EXHIBIT "C" IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT No. Date: TO: City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Dear Sir or Madam: We hereby issue, for the account of of Credit in the amount of $ undersigned bank. . and in your favor, our Irrevocable Letter , available to you by your draft drawn on sight on the The draft must: a) Bear the clause, "Drawn under Letter of Credit No. , dated (Name of Bank) "; b) Be signed by the Mayor or City Administrator of the City of Farmington. c) Be presented for payment at (Address of Bank) , 20_, of This Letter of Credit shall automatically renew for successive one-year terms from the date indicated above unless, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date, the Bank delivers written notice to the Farmington City Administrator that it intends to modify the terms of, or cancel, this Letter of Credit. Written notice is effective if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, at least forty-five (45) days prior to the next annual renewal date addressed as follows: Farmington City Administrator, 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024, and is actually received by the City Administrator at least thirty (30) days prior to the renewal date. This Letter of Credit sets forth in full our understanding which shall not in any way be modified, amended, amplified, or limited by reference to any document, instrument, or agreement, whether or not referred to herein. This Letter of Credit is not assignable. This is not a Notation Letter of Credit. More than one draw may be made under this Letter of Credit. This Letter of Credit shall be governed by the most recent revision of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, International Chamber of Commerce Publication No. 400. We hereby agree that a draft drawn under and in compliance with this Letter of Credit shall be duly honored upon presentation. [NAME OF BANK] By: [name] Its: [identify official 14 70 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator fin l/'-- FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Joint Resolution for the Annexation of the Bauer Property, currently located in Castle Rock Township DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION Tracy and Jackie Bauer have petitioned for the annexation of a 2.34-acre parcel of property that they own in Castle Rock Township. DISCUSSION Annexation In August of 2003, the City of Farmington and Castle Rock Township entered into a Joint Powers/Orderly Annexation Agreement related to the Ash Street Reconstruction and Utility Improvements Project. One of the stated purposes of the Agreement was to "...facilitate the orderly annexation of identified properties receiving urban services." Section 8.0(B) of the Agreement provides that "Castle Rock Township hereby agrees to the annexation of those properties within the orderly annexation area that petition for...city provided sanitary sewer and water services." A 2.34- acre parcel owned by Tracy and Jackie Bauer is included within this orderly annexation area. A map depicting the location of the lot is appended to the attached Joint Resolution as Exhibit B. The owners of the subject parcel have, through their annexation petition, requested that the City provide the property with sanitary sewer and water services. With regard to any properties that lie within the "Joint Powers area," the Joint Powers/Orderly Annexation Agreement provides that "Castle Rock Township and Farmington agree to adopt the necessary orderly annexation agreement amendments to this agreement to accomplish the annexation of the properties." The City Attorney has indicated that the proper mechanism for effectuating the required amendment of the Joint Powers/Orderly Annexation Agreement in this instance is a Joint Resolution. A proposed Joint Resolution has been attached for your review. Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) A property cannot be connected to City Sewer unless it lies within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area [MUSA]. Subject to subsequent approval by the Metropolitan Council, the Farmington City Council decides which parcels ofland in Farmington will or will not be included within Farmington's portion of the Met Council's Metropolitan Urban Service Area. The City Council adopted a MUSA policy on November 3, 2003 that allows properties consisting of less than five (5) acres to be granted MUSA administratively. Administrative MUSA still requires approval by the City Council, so staff is asking that the Council's action on this annexation matter include an administrative approval of MUSA for the Bauer property. RECOMMENDATION (1) Motion to adopt the attached Joint Resolution regarding the annexation of approximately 2.34 acres currently located in Castle Rock Township. (2) Motion to approve the extension of MUS A to the subject property. PETITION FOR ANNEXATION In the Matter ofthe Petition by ~ 6'2..~c''1 i ~ ~c..klc.. ~ A-U t:-R Property Owner(s) for annexation ofland to the City of Farmington pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 414 To: The City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota Copies to: Dakota County Board of Commissioners 1590 West Highway 55 Hastings, MN 55033 Minnesota Planning Municipal Boundary Adjustments 658 Cedar Street, Suite 300 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Town Board of CA~+lL Rat:..k Township By signat e hereunder, petitioner(s) affirm that he/she (they) is (are): --'-- the sole property owner(s) ofthe area proposed for annexation; or _ all ofthe property owners ofthe area proposed for annexation; or a majority of the property owners ofthe area proposed for annexation. It is hereby requested that the City of Farmington annex the property herein described and now located in the Town of ~t'~S+lL 1<.0 c k , Dakota County, Minnesota: (provide the legal description of the property, parcels of property of area proposed for annexation; provide attachments containing the legal description if it is too long for inclusion in this space. . 5ec.,1t 5 \~N \ r~ ftY\W~ r'l .s )"S F+ 0 F rJ.<().S F+ 0 [f: 400 F+ o-F ...Ht 'il{. "~.I\l. w \t~ Where petition is filed by fesidents or property owner(s): 1) list the number of petitioners required by statute to commence this annexation proceeding: 2) list the number of petitioners who have signed the petition: ~ K:\Petition for Annexation form.DOC Where the petition is filed by a municipality or town, identify the action taken by the governing body: Resolution Number: Date: Ordinance Number: Date: Notice of Intent Date: The area of the property proposed for annexation: (Note: The size ofthe property will determine the manner and timing ofthe process for considering this Petition.) Aess than 40 acres _ More than 40 acres but less than or equal to 60 acres More than 60 acres More than 200 acres Less than 200 acres As to the property proposed for annexation, annexation is sought because the property is: 1. 2. 7 3. 4. Owned by the City ofParmington Completely surrounded by land within the Farmington City limits. Abutting the City of Farmington on the N@W E (circle one) boundary. The area to be annexed is 60 acres or less, AND the area to be annexed is not now served by public sewer facilities and public sewer facilities are not otherwise available. (Applicable only if all property owners join in the petition) 5. After August 1, 1995, it has been approved by preliminary or final plat for residential development lots averaging 21,780 square feet or less in area and is land within two miles of the boundary of the City of Farmington 6. Not abutting the City ofParmington, but is within an existing orderly annexation area and all property owners join in the petition. 7. 40 acres in size or less and at least sixty percent (60%) of the property abuts the City ofParmington. 8. The property is not located within an area presently under consideration by the City ofParmington or the Municipal Board for boundary adjustment. 9. The property is platted. K:\Petition for Annexation form.DOC Note: Before your property can be annexed, Minnesota Law requires that a public hearing be held preceded by at least 30 days written notice by certified mail to the Town or Towns in which the property is located and to all landowners within and contiguous to the area proposed for annexation. The costs incurred by the City in identifying the persons to whom this notice is to be mailed and the mailing list itself will be charged to the petitioners and must be paid before the mailing goes out. The following documents/items must be attached with the Petition: 1. Verification of ownership by a current commitment for title insurance, owners' and encumbrancers' report, etc; 2. Certificate verifying the Petition was served on all parties required under Minn. Stat. Ch. 414; 3. Filing fee required under Minn. R. 6000.3400; 4. Map of the annexation area required pursuant to 6000.0800 (c); 5. City application fee. Dated: 5 -l g , 20 05' Signature( s) of Petitioner( s) K:\Petition for Annexation form.DOC TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK CITY OF FARMINGTON IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK AND THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, DESIGNATING AN UNINCORPORATED AREA AS IN NEED OF ORDERLY ANNEXATION AND CONFERRING JURISDICTION OVER SAID AREA TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT OFFICE, PURSUANT TO M.S. ~414.0325 JOINT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, by previous joint resolution and agreement entered into between the City and Township in August 2002, the property legally described below, currently owned by Tracy G. Bauer, was included in the designated orderly annexation area but was not made subject to immediate annexation; and WHEREAS, the previous joint resolution and agreement provided that the property owners could petition for or otherwise connect to city provided sanitary sewer and water services; and WHEREAS, the owner ofthe property legally described on the attached Exhibit A has petitioned the City for connection to City-provided sanitary sewer and water services; NOW, THEREFORE, the Township of Castle Rock and the City of Farmington jointly agree to the following: I. That the Township and City hereby establish an Orderly Annexation Area ("OAA") as authorized by Minnesota Statute ~414.0325, Subdivision I, as shown on the attached Exhibit B and legally described on Exhibit A, and have determined that the area ofthe property involved in this annexation is approximately 2.34 acres and the population ofthe area is currently zero. 2. That the purpose ofthe annexation ofthe property involved in this annexation is to facilitate the provision of urban services, including city sewer and water services. 3. That in order to facilitate the efficient delivery of governmental services, the property should be immediately annexed to and made part ofthe City of Farmington. 4. That upon approval by the respective governing bodies ofthe City and the Township, this joint resolution and agreement shall confer jurisdiction upon the Director of the Office of Strategic and Long-range Planning (or his or her successor designee responsible for administering Minnesota Statutes Chapter 414) so as to immediately annex the lands described in the attached Exhibit A in accordance with the terms ofthis joint resolution and agreement without need for any subsequent resolution(s) of the parties. 5. That the City and Township agree that upon annexation all planning, official controls, and governmental services for the annexed area shall become the responsibility of the City, and that the provisions of Minn. Stat. ~~414.035 and 414.036 authorizing differential taxation and municipal reimbursement for the annexed property will not be applied in this proceeding . 6. That the City and the Township mutually state that no alteration by the director to the OAA boundaries, as illustrated on Exhibit B and described in Exhibit A, is appropriate or permitted. 7. That the annexation ofthe property will not result in any change of electrical servIce. 8. That having designated the area illustrated on Exhibit B and described in Exhibit A as in need of orderly annexation, and having provided for all of the conditions of its annexation within this document, the parties to this agreement agree that no consideration by the director is necessary. The director may review and comment but shall within thirty (30) days order the annexation in accordance with the terms ofthis Resolution. Approved and Adopted this _ day of , 2005. Approved and Adopted this _ day of , 2005. TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK CITY OF FARMINGTON BY: BY: Its Town Board Chair Its Mayor AND AND Its Town Board Clerk Its City Administrator (h) P /20 VLc,~ .. -'7vw rJ r;, /if/a 5 ) :;"{ " /Y- C-f~ /?f cA:s--7 I- ~ ~c/L l5~~~ vr/ /lwth -T( fV6 ~ Py ) ICfJ C- <> 113970 EXHIBIT A PIN of parcel subject to this joint resolution: 07-00500-041-35 Legal description of property subject to immediate annexation: The South 275.00 feet of the North 825.00 feet of the East 400.00 feet of the NE X of the NW X of Section 5, Township 113, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota 113970 -TATr. Y-r, '.... :';II\I~ Ir'VI'" JEyJ/1/511 B I'.CRThEAST COkNER OF ThE t,OHrMnl~T -:'uAkTli-< OF SEC. 5-Tl13-R19 OAt\OTA COUNn cu.. N 89--4-5126. W .. -- - --,- '_.'. 933.66 i i; ~ ,( 1','1' ,:, ~ I 1 q I' ......1 _' \J 40001 ~ JNK 533.65 HIGHWAY NO. 50 ~ 503.90 S 89.~5' 26' E -. ----SOUTH klG;1T-Ci-l'lAl' u,,"E Of HWr 1 (3.tD ACRES) _ 89-45' 26' E -, -Ti I" , II- ,I a:: I 3' u\ ~.: ~i r") l- II ~ () ~ II , - .-- II z [1" ~ ~~ U . O' tr "" ~ 0 .... .... -n .... - C7l r [ ~ If) 8~ Ir ,..... 8 ~~ z II ~b 0( <or w....... II o.-J - ~ s z 011 e.-- ~, ~ ,r) z ~Ii I- :: e " a:= r- l/1 ~ II 506,38 1 2 (4 23 ACkl~) 509 10 11 ~ .- 11~ ~ .1 () V J / j 367 (j 2 ,., 00'" 1 b . b e 4-<i ~ I III . 11 ' 10 I II 01, "\" 011 ,I ' ,j' ,1:': ..., ..., r- -- I 370,01 S 89-45'26' E I -1 CONS muc T INFIL TRA nON Sw'lALE -I I ~ o Ill) !r--- "" I \ l r-- - . o I~ ('oj g o ir2 "" (2 34 ACRlS) SOU TH LINE OF TME NORTH 30801 FEET S 89.4~' 26' E 37001 ~ ,0 ,..n r--- r-.. . 1;, d . .. I 8 . - a U.H AC.Kl~) .n ,..... /.~ ('oj SOVTM ~,ri E. 0f Tt-1 E. . I NOR Tri ~e3 01 tEET 5 8~-4~ :.'b' . ~ -:1 . ''\ ~~ 6fudL' g~ 7 0 z ..n ..:J) \\ r--- C"I " SOU fH L,rit: OF Tt1( NOR TH 8:'8 01 tEE T . ! ~~ (I ~ J S 89-4~'2ti' E .3 70 01 " 1 lOa... City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council members, City Administrator~ FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: 2004 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The independent audit of the December 31, 2004 financial records was completed on March 25, 2005. Subsequently, the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report has been completed and the City's auditors, Eide Bailly LLP have issued their opinion on that report. In addition, they have issued a Management Report on the City of Farmington for year-end 2004. Both documents will be presented. DISCUSSION The City's General Fund final audited numbers for 12/31/04 indicate a decrease to the fund balance of $534,828; bringing the fund balance total to $1,494,664. As noted in the auditor's management letter, this represents 24% of the 2004 annual expenditures of the City's General Fund with a preferred fund balance target of 35% to 40% of annual expenditures. In 2004, actual General Fund revenues were less than budgeted revenues by $121,772 and actual expenditures were $413,056 more than budgeted, resulting in the decline of the fund balance by 26%. Further information and graphical representation will be presented at the meeting. ACTION REQUIRED Dan Etling from Eide Bailly LLP will be at the meeting with a presentation and to answer any questions Council may have. After the presentation, Council should accept the 12/31/04 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. ;;f;?jOO, Robin Roland Finance Director 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: David M. Urbia, City Administrator SUBJECT: Spruce Street Project Update DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The Spruce Street Extension project is scheduled for construction in 2005. This is an update on the project which includes a recommendation to delay the construction of the road extension and bridge project until 2006. DISCUSSION Recav The Spruce Street Road Extension and Bridge project was conceived as a connection from the existing downtown area to the Spruce Street Commercial area. Grant funding was awarded to the project in late 2003 from the Met Council in the amount of$955,000. Construction of the road connection and bridge has followed the (Statute) 429 process with the following steps: Council ordered feasibility study Council accepted feasibility study Council held improvement project public hearing Council ordered the project January 5, 2004 September 7, 2004 October 18, 2004 October 18, 2004 In order for the Spruce Street Extension and Bridge project to be completed in 2005, then construction would need to begin on or about August 1st. Bids would be taken and the contract awarded by July 18th which would have required Council to accept plans and specifications and authorize advertisement for bids at the June 20th meeting. The (Statute) 429 process is the process by which the City constructs the infrastructure improvements and assesses the project costs back to benefited properties according to prescribed City policy. For new construction, project costs are assessable at 100% to the benefiting properties, hence the adage "Development pays for itself." Numerous conversations have taken place with the developer (Pederson Ventures) on the standard practice of assessing the benefited properties for the improvement. The feasibility study identified the project cost at $3,046,000. After deduction of the Met Council grant ($955,000) the remaining costs to be assessed would be $2,091,000. The developer insists that the project (Vermillion River Crossing) cannot bear the costs of these assessments. The staff enlisted the help of Sid Inman of Ehlers & Associates (the City's financial advisors) to do the analysis required when any party seeks assistance from a local government entity. This analysis is required by the City's Business Subsidy Policy before any assistance (TIP, abatement, adjustment of fees) is granted to any developer. Mr. Inman worked with the Dick Allendorf (the project manager for Pedersen Ventures) to understand the project Performa and cash flow scenanos. After review, Mr. Inman and staff concur, that based on the information provided, Vermillion River Crossing (VRC) can't afford to pay for the public improvements. However, if the City were to use abatement on the project, the costs for the road extension and bridge construction could be covered. Abatement would work like this: The City would issue improvement bonds to finance the up front costs of the construction and assess the annual debt service ofthe bonds to the VRC project. At the same time, the City would abate the City's portion of the taxes from the VRC project and use the abatement to pay the annual assessments. If VRC is built as proposed, the development would pay no assessments. However, In the event that the project does not produce the market values as proposed, or is built on a slower schedule, there may be insufficient tax abatement annually to pay the assessments. To insure that no property tax levy would be needed to cover the shortfall, the assessments would still need to be paid by the developer. Staff has not met with the developer yet to share this option. But this funding scenario needs to be confirmed before the development contract is finalized. Without assessing the project costs to the developer as is consistent with past practice, the City would need to fund the project with tax levy dollars. Summary Staff believes that delaying the construction project until 2006 is the best option at this time. The road connection to the VRC development is currently shown in phase two of the plat, which according to the Pedersen Ventures will be constructed in 2006 - 2007. The delay also gives the developer time to construct phase one and show the City that their Performa expectations are valid. That information is important to a decision on the use of abatement. The grant funding would still be available even with the delay. ACTION REQUESTED Council concurrence that the Spruce Street Extension and Bridge Project construction be delayed until 2006. Respectfully submitted, ~~ 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 Councilmembers FROM: David Urbia City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: June 20, 2005 . It is requested the June 20,2005 agenda be amended as follows: UNFINISHED BUSINESS Ha) Adopt Resolutions - Approve Bond Sale - Finance Adopt the attached resolutions awarding the sale of bonds for Ash Street, Fire Station #2, and equipment purchases. David Urbia City Administrator //~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us Mayor, Council Members, City Administrato~ TO: FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution -Sale of $2,635,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2005B - Finance DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The City Council, at their meeting May 16, 2005 authorized the sale of $2,635,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 2005B to finance reconstruction of Ash Street. DISCUSSION Competitive bids for the bonds were received today in the offices of Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Preliminary estimates anticipated an interest rate of 4.70% with an anticipated $1,114,354 interest cost over the fifteen year term ofthe debt. The City received three bids. Wells Fargo brokerage was the low bidder at a net interest rate of 3.49% and a total interest cost of$936,730 or $177,624 less than estimated. BUDGET IMPACT Analysis of the bids will be presented at the meeting. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the attached resolution awarding the sale of the $2,635,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds of 2005B to Wells Fargo. Respectfully submitted, ~#J Robin Roland Finance Director City of Farmington, MN Results of Bond Sale June 20, 2005 $2,635,000 General Obligation Improvements Bonds, Series 2005B Low Bidder True Interest Rate Number of Bids Rating Range of Bids Total Debt Service Estimated* Principal Amount Discount Allowance Total Interest Costs Available Project Funds True Interest Rate Bond Buyers Index Closing Date $2,635,000 $31,620 $1,114,354 $2,510,894 4.7021 % 4.38% Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC 3.9389% 3 AM Insured (A2 underlying) 3.9389% - 4.0246% Results of Sale $2,635,000 $31,620 $936,730 $2,527,318 3.4914% 4.31% July 14, 2005 Accept the bid of Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC and Adopt "Resolution Authorizing The Issuance, Awarding The Sale, Prescribing The Form And Details and Providing For The Payment Of $2,635,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005B." Council Action *Based on the May 16, 2005 estimates, the low bid is $177,624 less than estimated interest costs and $11,622 less in cost of issuance costs. The funds available for the projects is increased by $16,424. Attachments . Bid Tabulation . Revised Debt and Levy Schedule . Bond Buyer Index Chart BID TABULATION $2,635,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005B CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA SALE: June 20, 2005 AWARD: WELLS FARGO BROKERAGE SERVICES, LLC RATING: FSA Insured (Moody's Investors Service, Inc. "Aaa")* UNDERLYING RATING: Moody's Investors Service, Inc. "A2" BBI: 4.31% PRICE NET TRUE INTEREST INTEREST COST RATE NAME OF BIDDER MATURITY (February 1) $2,603,380.00 $968,350.42 3.9389% WELLS FARGO BROKERAGE SERVICES, LLC Minneapolis, Minnesota 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 PIPER JAFFRAY & CO. Minneapolis, Minnesota 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 *FSA Insurance purchased by Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC e EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC RATE REOFFERING YIELD 3.250% 3.250% 3.250% 3.250% 3.250% 3.350% 3.450% 3.550% 3.650% 3.750% 3.850% 3.950% 4.000% 4.050% 4.100% 3.000% 3.000% 3.250% 3.250% 3.250% 3.500% 3.500% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 2.750% 2.850% 3.000% 3.100% 3.250% 3.350% 3.450% 3.550% 3.650% 3.750% 3.850% 3.950% 4.000% 4.050% 4.100% $2,609,721.75 $979,630.33 3.9816% LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville. MN 55113-1105 651.697.8500 fax 651.697.8555 www.ehlers-inc.com Offices in Roseville. MN, Brookfield, WI and Naperv;/Ie, IL ,635,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005B City of Farmington, Minnesota Page 2 NAME OF BIDDER PRICE NET TRUE INTEREST INTEREST COST RATE MATURITY RATE REOFFERING (February 1) YIELD CRONIN & COMPANY, INC. Minneapolis, Minnesota NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC. Minneapolis, Minnesota 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 3.500% 3.500% 3.500% 3.500% 3.500% 3.750% 3.750% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.150% $2,617,483.50 $990,957.54 4.0246% cn~ ~: w; ..Iu ::1:= w: . iO Z e ::E ii: c" o .. '5>l c _ .~ ~ ftl iii u.. .c ... .. o <t .i:'''' (3 ~ .. :::I e .. > .. a:: C .. e .. .. .. .. .. <t 0)~~lC) ""OO~ .......~C!: N "'<D '" '" ** <D'" eN'" (f~m ii'i :::I C1' W '2 "#. :fi -g"E~ ~ ~ ~~ai : ~ ::;: ~ ~ Q) ~ IS ~ ~ ~ ~ E~~ 5l.l!l"'Eil.~]i ~~c;$~(3~~ OLOCO..... 00000':1 OLt)CO"t"'" ari"":cOM C").....COM com,........ N....:NCO~ '" o o N .. .. ." .. t/) <Ii " e aJ d ci " .. .. o ... e 0.. Ul " e C/) o W a:l U '0 a:: c: 5 5 C/) ~~~<l t\i52b a..UI-I- ~ie~~ en COM CO loO "":MNU-> ri MNLt)C\.l C"') <D ,... (0- cD " e 'i: ~"C g ~5 C"! ULL ::::.. -s::::: 1: ~:B 8 ~~ c5 ~a Ul NU $ll~l1~ .cr::c.'-o ~~(3~~~ ~~.s.9Cf)~ 5'0::::::::.5-1 m~8.8.g~ OOQ)Q)OO ....uooa::.... o e '" "CD CbOo ~;~~ -m = ~ -.. 0:'" <t s~ o .. ....... M.....m.......Mo.....cn.....VLO.......N......."'l:t M<.OM"IfMNIt)lt)lt)O'>MMCONO) N.......LO_ML()CONIl)..........................NN ~s-~~~g@~~~~~~~-~ ,.. > .. ... cn......lt)C")OCO......lOMO.....MClOMO c:o.....mom.......O..........LOme>>.....COLt) 0<0 M 0..... M.............,. co Il)Il) 0 0..... g ~ flffifif gig ~ {i s ~ s g ~ NNNNN ~~~3:3:~~~~~!!~!! arill'i..o Lti..o Ilill'illi u-i t6 ariU;lt')-ll'itti ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .. s E o .. .... :; a:: --------------- co ..... co ..... co .....- co ..... <0 ..... ....... N ....... ('II ....... 0....... MO co ('I') 0) co NO'> Lt) C\I co LO..... CO"lfMNOO':l.....COlC)C")N.....moo....... ~~g~~~~~~~~!~~a E S :: o .. .... .. .. <t CO;=-CD;=-(D~<O;::-CO;::-;:::N;:::Nr::- O.......MO<OM(J)CONmlC)C'\ICOl,()..... COvMNom,....COLOMN.....cnCO...... r--: an M-.....-ai r.t:S-.:iN' ci ai cD~"': ai"": ~~~~~~~~~::!..::!..~:!..a.a. W l!! ,$ .5 ~5)~S~S~s~sG'Sit)Sit) ~~::eU;~~Nb-a;~~~~~~ Nai"": Lt'i ri "':air--- oq: N ceDeD ~N a.~~~~~~~~~~---- iO ... 'u e ;t NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN rororororocococororococorororo Ll')Ll')It)I.OIt)Ll')It)It)Ll')Ll')Ll')Ll')Ll')1.01.O Lt'ilO-Lt'iLt'iLt'iLri'Lri'Lri'Lri'Lri'Lri'Lri'Lri'Lri'Lri' eeea.eeeeeeeeeee _1!- ",g 0.."; + ~~~~~~~~~~!~8~~ ~ ~ ~~-ct g;~ ~ ~ ~fi ~ ~ g NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN '&;~ Zo.. lOroOOCOlOrolOOOOC"')QJCOlO ......COOLOC"')NC>>O......OlOvvvC"') NCOLl')C>>NIl')C>>C"')N......C>>v_......CO ~<<i....:....:ria5NN<<iai....:Lt'i....:ri-.;f C"')NNNNC"')C"')C"')C"')NC"')VC"')VV NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN w ..... co ~ U,$ .5 S <D .0 e W l!! ,$ .5 OLOOOOOCOLOCOLOOOOC"')COCOlO ~~~~~~~~~~~~;;!;:!~ <<i<<i~"":Na5ri"":NcOa)NLt'i"":r.Oai lOC>>C>>COCOr-r-COCOli)vvC"')C"\I_ ,$ co a:: *************** Il')ll')lOlOlO Ii)lOlO It) It) It) It) 0 LOO NNNNNC"')vlOcor--comoo_ C"iMMMM~MMMC"iMM~-.i-"; 'ii ... 'u e ." 0.. 000000000000000 888888888888888 Lt'iLri'cariarillfLticooariciciLri'Lri' C"')C"')vvvcocor--cocom__NC"') ___________NNNN - e .. .. e- ~~ 0.. Ii)cor--comO_NC"')vLl')cor-oomo_ ooooO______'f"'"___NN 00000000000000000 S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN " ~ :! : 8> co......romo_NC"')vlt)co......como oooO_-------_-N 000000000000000 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN ,..~ > co ~~ lOCOr--COC>>O_NC"')vlt)cor--com 0.0000__________ 000000000000000 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN '" ;! ,.: '" '" cO 0; '" ai ;1;. co '" .... u; "! '" 0; ai co ,... 0> 0; ai co ,... o '" .0 '" N '" N ,... cO '" '" '" ;:1;. 0; <D cO o ,... '" on u; cO o ~ .0 '" o '" ,... .0 '" '" o o o on '" <D N G5 a :2: - a <: o co - ~ - 0 N F - s... Cll Ql ~ _ .c c E CO) Ql -g- - ~ o Z !Xl - It) ~ >< - {l .:: "0 c: o !Xl CIl ::3 c: CIl ::. CIl Q:: ~ Cll ~ C N "t:J- c: o !Xl c N ....... ~ .:: ~ CIl ~ !Xl "0 c: o !Xl - - It) o - 0 N - Ql _ C ::I - """') ..s::::: _ Cl - ::I o ... - .; ~-- <ft. o .... lli ~ ~v , ~ ~ ~ I{ ~ ~ J' ....~ .......... ~~ -> I " /' ~. ..::::::::::: <== \ ---/ ....... ~ J~ " J ___v '\. ,...--- < ~ '--- !"lIIo... ""I ............... ___ ....... r--.......... --. ~ ~ !(~ ~IJ ...~ J"'~ ) /' ............. I <ft. o N lli >R o o o lli <ft. o cq .... <" _LJ ~ l> iii co ~...... ........... >R o o to -.i ~ <ft. o .... -.i cf.?f? C").,- COC") ~~ to : o : o : N = 0= N X C1l Q) C -g ~ ::1--0 ""')-oC 'Os:: Ulcn~ <C Q) :J :Jcn C-o Q) C > 0 ~cn >R o o "! .... -:> - '" -:> -0 -:> -0 Ul C1l - III 'u o Ul Ul <C ~ Ul ... ~ ~ w >- .c -0 C1l ... III Q, C1l ... a.. >R o o C> .... CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $2,635,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2005B Issuer: City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held June 20, 2005, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., at the municipal offices in Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $2,635,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2005B 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 20th day of June, 2005. City Administrator It was reported that _ sealed proposals for the purchase of $2,635,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005B were received prior to 11 :00 o'clock a.m., pursuant to the Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers ofthe Bonds by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., independent financial advisor to the City. 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 AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $2,635,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2005B BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Farmington, Minnesota (the City), as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND SALE. 1.01. Authorization. The City Council hereby determines that it is in the best interest of the City to issue its General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005B (the Bonds), in the principal amount of$2,635,000 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475. The proceeds of the Bonds will be used to finance various public improvements including street reconstruction and utility improvements. 1.02. Sale. Pursuant to the Sale Details and the Official Statement prepared on behalf of the City by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., sealed proposals for the purchase of the Bonds were received at or before the time specified for receipt of proposals. The proposals have been opened, publicly read and considered and the purchase price, interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each proposal have been determined. The most favorable proposal received is that of III , and associates (the Purchaser), to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest on all Bonds to the day of delivery and payment, on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 1.03. Award. The sale of the Bonds is hereby awarded to the Purchaser and the Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on behalf ofthe City for the sale of the Bonds in accordance with the terms ofthe proposal. The good faith deposit of the Purchaser shall be retained and deposited by the City until the Bonds have been delivered, and shall be deducted from the purchase price paid at settlement. SECTION 2. BOND TERMS; REGISTRATION; EXECUTION AND DELIVERY. 2.01. Issuance of Bonds. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws ofthe State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid issuance ofthe 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 ofthe Bonds, to provide security therefor and to issue the Bonds forthwith. 2.02. Maturities; Interest Rates; Denominations and Payment. The Bonds shall be originally dated as of July 1, 2005, shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each, 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 Rate Year Amount Rate 2007 $135,000 % 2015 $180,000 % 2008 135,000 2016 180,000 2009 140,000 2017 195,000 2010 145,000 2018 210,000 2011 145,000 2019 210,000 2012 165,000 2020 225,000 2013 165,000 2021 535,000 2014 170,000 [REVISE MATURITY SCHEDULE FOR ANY TERM BONDS] The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360 day year composed of twelve 30 day months. The interest on 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 2.08 hereof, principal and interest shall be payable in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities depository. 2.03. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon initial delivery ofthe Bonds pursuant to Section 2.07 and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 2.06, the date of authentication shall be noted on each Bond so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1, 2006, 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. 2.04. Redemption. Bonds maturing in 2015 and later years shall be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot 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, 2014, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. The City Administrator shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereofto be published as required by law, and at least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the registered holders of any Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the bond register described in Section 2.06 hereof, but no defect in 2 or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment ofthe redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing on February 1, 20_ and 20_ (the Term Bonds) shall be subject to mandatory redemption prior to maturity pursuant to the sinking fund requirements of this Section 2.04 at a redemption price equal to the stated principal amount thereof plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium. The Registrar shall select for redemption, by lot or other manner deemed fair, on February 1 in each ofthe following years the following stated principal amounts of such Bonds: Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1, 20_. Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1, 20_. Notice of redemption shall be given as provided in the preceding paragraph.] 2.05. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City hereby appoints U.S. Bank National Association in St. Paul, 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 City, 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 ofthe states of the United States and authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as successor Registrar. The 3 City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar, effective upon not less than thirty 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. 2.06. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City 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 registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner 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. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. (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 City 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 City 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 4 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 interest on the Bond and for all other purposes; and all payments made to any registered owner or upon the owner's order 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. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds (except for an exchange upon a partial redemption of a Bond), the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated. Lost. Stolen or Destroyed 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 ofthe 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 City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar shall be canceled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the City. 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 City, evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the same benefits under this Resolution as the Bonds surrendered upon such transfer or exchange. 2.07. Execution. Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction of the City Administrator and shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Administrator, provided that the signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles ofthe originals. In case any officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as ifhe had remained in office until delivery. 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 has been duly 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 5 certificate of authentication on each Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution. When the Bonds have been prepared, executed and authenticated, the City 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. 2.08. 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 ofDTC with respect to the Bonds. "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 Bonds as securities depository. "Representation Letter" shall mean the Representation Letter pursuant to which the City 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 ofDTC. The Registrar and the City 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 City shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Neither the Registrar nor the City 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 ofDTC, 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 City's 6 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 City 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 City determines that it is in the best interest ofthe Beneficial Owners that they be able to obtain Bonds in the form of bond certificates, the City may notify DTC and the Registrar, whereupon DTC shall notify the Participants ofthe 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 City 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. (d) The execution and delivery of the Representation Letter to DTC by the Mayor or City Administrator 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. 2.09. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the following form: 7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF FARMINGTON GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BOND, SERIES 2005B Interest Rate Maturitv Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP No. % February 1, 20_ July 1, 2005 311297 REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRlNCIP AL AMOUNT: THOUSAND DOLLARS THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, STATE OF MINNESOTA (the City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and hereby promises to pay to the registered owner named above, or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1,2006, 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 immediately preceding month, all subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of this Bond before maturity. 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 at the principal office ofthe agent of the Registrar described below, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft drawn on U.S. Bank National Association, as bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent, or its successor designated under the Resolution described herein (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 City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. This Bond is one of an issue (the Bonds) in the aggregate principal amount of $2,635,000, issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on June 20, 2005 (the Resolution) to finance the costs of various public 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 maturing in 2015 and later years are each subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot 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, 2014, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. The City will cause notice of the call for redemption to be published as required by law and, at least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, will 8 cause notice of the call thereof to be mailed by first class mail 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 mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified, and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment ofthe redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the registered owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing in the year 20_ and 20_ shall be subject to mandatory redemption, at a redemption price equal to their principal amount plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium, on February 1 in each ofthe years shown below, in an amount equal to the following principal amounts: Term Bonds Maturing in 20-- Term Bonds Maturing in 20-- Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount $ $ Notice of redemption shall be given as provided in the preceding paragraph.] As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books ofthe City at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereoftogether 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 City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The Bonds have been designated by the City as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" pursuant to Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The City 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 9 receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Notwithstanding any other provisions ofthis 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 City. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws ofthe State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance ofthis Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation ofthe City 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 has levied or agreed to levy special assessments on property specially benefited by the improvements financed by the Bonds and ad valorem taxes on all taxable property within the City, collectible in the years and amounts required to produce sums not less than five percent in excess of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as such principal and interest respectively become due, and has appropriated such special assessments and ad valorem taxes to its General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005B Bond Fund for the payment of principal and interest; that if necessary for payment of principal and interest, additional ad valorem taxes are required to be levied upon all taxable property in the City, without limitation as to rate or amount; and that the issuance ofthis Bond, together with all other indebtedness of the City outstanding on the date hereof and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness ofthe City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness. 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 Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Farmington, State of Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalfby the facsimile signatures ofthe Mayor and City Administrator. CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA (facsimile signature - City Administrator) (facsimile signature - Mayor) 10 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one ofthe Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. u.s. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Registrar Date of Authentication: By Authorized Representative 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 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. 11 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE: [end of bond form] SECTION 3. GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS. SERIES 2005B CONSTRUCTION FUND. There is hereby established on the official books and records ofthe City a General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005B Construction Fund (the Construction Fund). The Finance Director shall continue to maintain the Construction Fund until payment of all costs and expenses incurred in connection with the construction ofthe Projects have been paid. To the Construction Fund there shall be credited from the proceeds ofthe Bonds, an amount equal to the estimated cost ofthe Projects and from the Construction Fund there shall be paid all construction costs and expenses incurred by the City in construction of the Projects. There shall also be credited to the Construction Fund all special assessments collected with respect to the Projects until all costs ofthe 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, Series 2005B Bond Fund of the City. SECTION 4. GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS. SERIES 2005B 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 City to be known as the General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005B Bond Fund (the Bond Fund), and the principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable from the Bond Fund. The City irrevocably appropriates to the Bond Fund (a) any funds received from the Purchaser upon delivery ofthe Bonds in excess of the amount required by Section 3 to be credited to the Construction Fund and the amounts for payment of costs of issuance ofthe Bonds described in Section 8.04; (b) the amounts specified in Section 3 above, after payment of all costs of the Projects; (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. 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 ofthe Bonds the amount set forth in (a) above. Thereafter, during each Bond Year (i.e., each twelve month period commencing on February 2 and ending on the following February 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 12 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 City 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 5. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. The City hereby covenants and agrees that, for the payment of the cost of the Projects, the City 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% ofthe cost of each of the improvements financed by the Bonds. The City estimates it will levy special assessments in the aggregate principal amount of $ . 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 City or by the City Councilor by any of the officers or employees ofthe City, either in the making of such assessment or in the performance of any condition precedent thereto, the City 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 6. 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 City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. To provide moneys for the payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, subdivision 1, there is hereby levied on all of taxable property in the City a direct, annual ad valorem tax which shall be spread upon the tax rolls for collection in the years and amounts as follows, as a part of other general taxes of the City, as follows: Levy Years Collection Years Amount 2005-2019 2006-2020 See Attached Levy Computation SECTION 7. 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 registered owners ofthe Bonds shall cease. The City 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 City may 13 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 City may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions oflaw now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a bank qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited, bearing interest payable at such time 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 earlier designated redemption date. Provided, however, that if such deposit is made more than ninety days before the maturity date or specified redemption date of the Bonds to be discharged, the City 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 firm verifying that the deposit is sufficient to pay when due all ofthe principal and interest on the Bonds to be discharged on and before their maturity dates or earlier designated redemption date. SECTION 8. CERTIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGS. 8.01. Registration of Bonds. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Treasurer-Auditor of Dakota County and obtain a certificate that the Bonds have been duly entered upon the Auditor's bond register. 8.02. Authentication of Transcript. The officers of the City and the County Treasurer- Auditor 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 City as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 8.03. Official Statement. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds, dated June 9, 2005, relating to the Bonds prepared and distributed by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. is hereby approved. Ehlers & Associates, Inc., is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to prepare and distribute 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 15c2-12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The officers ofthe City are hereby authorized and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency ofthe Official Statement. 8.04. Authorization of Payment of Certain Costs ofIssuance of the Bonds. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of 14 issuance expenses to U.S. Trust Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, on the closing date for further distribution as directed by the City's financial advisor, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. SECTION 9. TAX COVENANTS: ARBITRAGE MATTERS: REIMBURSEMENT AND CONTINUING DISCLOSURE. 9.01. General Tax Covenant. The City covenants and agrees with the registered owners of the Bonds that it will not take, or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents, any actions that would cause interest on the Bonds to become includable in gross income ofthe recipient under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) and applicable Treasury Regulations (the Regulations), and covenants to take any and all actions within its powers to ensure that the interest on the Bonds will not become includable in gross income ofthe recipient under the Code and the Regulations. In particular, the City covenants and agrees that 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 Chapter 429). All improvements so financed will be owned and maintained by the City as part of the public infrastructure of the City and available for use by members of the general public on a substantially equal basis. The City shall not enter into any lease, management, use or other agreement or contract 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 ofthe Code. 9.02. Arbitrage Certification. The Mayor and City Administrator being the officers of the City 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 ofthe 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. 9.03. Arbitrage Rebate. The City acknowledges that the Bonds are subject to the rebate requirements of Section 148(f) of the Code. The City covenants and agrees to retain such records, make such determinations, file such reports and documents and pay such amounts at such times as are required under Section 148(f) and applicable Regulations to preserve the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from gross income for federal income tax purposes, unless the Bonds qualify for an exception from the rebate requirement pursuant to one of the spending exceptions set forth in Section 1.148-7 of the Regulations and no "gross proceeds" of the Bonds (other than amounts constituting a "bona fide debt service fund") arise during or after the expenditure of the original proceeds thereof. 9.04. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. The Council hereby designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b )(3) ofthe Code relating to the disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions, and hereby finds that the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations which are not private activity bonds (not treating qualified 50 1 (c)(3) bonds under Section 145 ofthe Code as private activity bonds for the purpose 15 of this representation) which will be issued by the City and all subordinate entities during calendar year 2005 does not exceed $10,000,000. 9.05. Reimbursement. The City certifies that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used by the City to reimburse itself for any expenditure with respect to the Projects which the City paid or will have paid more than 60 days prior to the issuance of the Bonds unless, with respect to such prior expenditures, the City shall have made a declaration of official intent which complies with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Regulations; provided that this certification shall not apply (i) with respect to certain de minimis expenditures, if any, with respect to the Projects meeting the requirements of Section 1.150-2(f)(1) 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" ofthe Bonds. 9.06. 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 SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.F.R. S 240.15c2-12), relating to continuing disclosure (as in effect and interpreted from time to time, the Rule), which will enhance the marketability ofthe Bonds, the City hereby makes the following covenants and agreements for the benefit ofthe Owners (as hereinafter defined) from time to time ofthe Outstanding Bonds. The City is the only obligated person in respect ofthe Bonds within the meaning of the Rule for purposes of identifying the entities in respect of which continuing disclosure must be made. The City has complied in all material respects with any undertaking previously entered into by it under the Rule. If the City 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 ofthis 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 (b) is treated as the owner of the Bond for federal income tax purposes. (b) Information To Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth in subsection (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City, the following information at the following times: 16 (1) on or before 365 days after the end of each fiscal year of the City, commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31, 2004, the following financial information and operating data in respect of the City (the Disclosure Information): (A) the audited financial statements of the City for such fiscal year, containing balance sheets as ofthe end of such fiscal year and a statement of 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 City, 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 City, noting the discrepancies therefrom and the effect thereof, and certified as to accuracy and completeness in all material respects by the fiscal officer ofthe City; 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 ofthe type contained in the Official Statement under the headings: Current Property Valuations; Direct Debt; Tax Levies and Collections; Population Trend and EmploymentlUnemployment, which information may be unaudited. Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, if the audited financial statements are not available by the date specified, the City 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 City shall provide the audited financial statements. Any or all ofthe 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 City 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 City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a statement to such effect; provided, however, if such operations have been replaced by other City operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City 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. If the Disclosure Information is changed or this section is amended as permitted by this paragraph (b)(1) or subsection (d), then the City shall 17 include in the next Disclosure Information to be delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation ofthe 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; (J) Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment ofthe 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 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 ofthe occurrence of any of the following events or conditions: (A) the failure ofthe City 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 City under subsection (d)(2); (C) the termination ofthe obligations ofthe City 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 City. 18 (c) Manner of Disclosure. The City 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 City 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 City in this section shall remain in effect so long as any Bonds are Outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations of the City under this section shall terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the City 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 City to comply with the requirements ofthis section will not cause participating underwriters in the primary offering ofthe Bonds to be in violation of the Rule or other applicable requirements ofthe 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 ofthe Disclosure Information) may be amended or supplemented by the City 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 ofthis Council filed in the office of the recording officer of the City accompanied by an opinion of Bond Counsel, who may rely on certificates ofthe City 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 ofthe City or the type of operations conducted by the City, 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 effect to any change in circumstances applicable under 19 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 ofthe Bondowners under the Rule. If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide, contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect, if any, ofthe 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. Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: 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.cLfarmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution -Sale of$2,280,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C - Finance DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The City Council, at their meeting May 16, 2005 authorized the sale of $2,280,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C to finance construction of Fire Station #2. DISCUSSION Competitive bids for the bonds were received today in the offices of Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Preliminary estimates anticipated an interest rate of 4.87% with an anticipated $1,351,287 interest cost over the twenty year term of the debt. The City received four bids. Wells Fargo brokerage was the low bidder at a net interest rate of 4.20% and a total interest cost of$1,169,134 or $182,153 less than estimated. BUDGET IMPACT Analysis ofthe bids will be presented at the meeting. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the attached resolution awarding the sale of the $2,280,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C to Wells Fargo. Respectfully submitted, g~d Robin Roland Finance Director City of Farmington, MN Results of Bond Sale June 20, 2005 $2,280,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C Low Bidder True Interest Rate Number of Bids Rating Range of Bids Total Debt Service Estimated* Principal Amount Discount Allowance Total Interest Costs Available Project Funds T rue Interest Rate Bond Buyers Index Closing Date $2,280,000 $27,360 $1,351,287 $2,178,584 4.8719% 4.38% Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC 4.2027% 4 AAA Insured (A2 underlying) 4.2027% - 4.3586% Results of Sale $2,280,000 $27,360 $1,169,134 2,181,221 4.2027% 4.31% July 14, 2005 Accept the bid of Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC and Adopt "Resolution Authorizing The Issuance, Awarding The Sale, Prescribing The Form And Details and Providing For The Payment Of $2,280,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C." Council Action *Based on the May 16, 2005 estimates, the low bid is $182,153 less than estimated interest costs. Attachments . Bid Tabulation . Revised Debt and Levy Schedule BID TABULATION $2,280,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA SALE: June 20, 2005 AWARD: WELLS FARGO BROKERAGE SERVICES, LLC RATING: FSA Insured (Moody's Investors Service, Inc. "Aaa")* UNDERLYING RATING: Moody's Investors Service, Inc. "A2" 881: 4.31% PRICE NET TRUE INTEREST INTEREST COST RATE NAME OF BIDDER MATURITY (February 1) $2,252,640.00 $1,196,494.17 4.2027% WELLS FARGO BROKERAGE SERVICES, LLC Minneapolis, Minnesota 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 CRONIN & COMPANY, INC. Minneapolis, Minnesota NORTHLAND SECURITIES, INC. Minneapolis, Minnesota BERNARDI SECURITIES, INC. Chicago, Illinois 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 *FSA Insurance purchased by Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC e EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC RATE REOFFERING YIELD 3.500% 3.500% 3.500% 3.500% 3.500% 3.500% 3.500% 3.875% 3.875% 3.875% 3.875% 4.000% 4.000% 4.050% 4.100% 4.150% 4.250% 4.300% 4.350% 4.400% 3.500% 3.500% 3.500% 3.750% 3.750% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.100% 4.100% 4.250% 4.250% 4.300% 4.300% 4.375% 4.375% 2.750% 2.850% 3.000% 3.100% 3.250% 3.350% 3.450% 3.550% 3.650% 3.750% 3.850% 3.950% 4.000% 4.050% 4.100% 4.150% 4.250% 4.300% 4.350% 4.400% $2,259,592.00 $1,212,802.17 4.2579% LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 3060 Centre Pointe Drive. Roseville. MN 55113-1105 651.697.8500 fax 651.697.8555 www.etllers-inc.com Offices in Rosevil/e. MN. Brookfield. WI and Naperville. IL ..- 280,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C , of Farmington, Minnesota Page 2 NAME OF BIDDER PRICE NET TRUE INTEREST INTEREST COST RATE MATURITY RATE REOFFERING (February 1) YIELD PIPER JAFFRAY & CO. Minneapolis, Minnesota 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 C DAIN RAUSCHER INC. Inneapolis, Minnesota 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 3.250% 3.250% 3.250% 3.500% 3.500% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.375% 4.375% 4.375% 4.375% 4.375% 4.375% 3.750% 3.750% 3.750% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.100% 4.200% 4.250% 4.250% 4.375% 4.375% 4.400% 4.400% 4.400% $2,256,365.70 $1,218,482.56 4.2774% $2,252,851.20 $1,238,573.18 4.3586% ll) o o ~ o '" (0 en:: a:::: LLI~ ...I~ x: .....: . z :l!!: C .s i CI '0' .5 D: E Oi afJ: _ l!! o Ii: l;-:g (3:;: u .., C> C> ... .. .! .. III .n ... c o III .. c .. E .. e CL .5 ]j 'Q. .. u ci ci ... .. .. o CL e II. o o o a CIO '" N .. "tl C o m '5 1:: ::J o E <( m a. o o o a CIO '" N Q(X)'l"""'l""" CO.,.....,C\1 MOMC\I "",-C'im-'l"""- C\IC\1vc:o N o o '0 a CIO '" N Ul UJ U Cl:: ::J o Ul -' ~ o I- "tl C ::J ~-g !:!:: ::J uu. ~ is c ~ ts 8 ~~ B -g5 NU ~8'ijjoc .!! c:R.~o::J '~~",eEUl .,..Ua.<(~ "C~.9.9CJ::::> 501i1i:6-..J (ij~ 8.8.5~ 00.,.,00 I-UCCCl::1- ~ o o "! ~ .. 1--' _o-e all 8 lI.oti + ..;0 ZII. .. .. CL., .. ~ u.s .5 c .. ., E'lii ~Q II. .. u ~ ~= 8> >.~ > .. ., ., ..J> ~~~~~~m~~~~~~~~~~~~~ vmo("')C\I("')C\lom'l"""'l"""m("'),.....~m("')m'l"""("') M~M~N~WOOM~WW~NN~w~Mm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~m~w~~~~~~~~~~~ vmO("')N("')NOm'l"""'l"""m("'),.....~m("')m'l"""("') M~M~N~~mM~~~~NN~~~M~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 'l"""COCOCO'l"""COCO'l"""CO'l"""("')OOO~OO~OO NmmmNvm,.....mN~mmmNm(X)ovc:o N~,.....mooco~coC:O,.....vC:OOCONV'l"""VV ~~~w~m~m~m~oom~riri~m~~ ~~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ m '" CD N !eo 1;; l!! .s .5 m'l"""COCOCO'l"""COCO'l"""CO'l"""("')oao~oo~oo NNmmmNVm,.....mN~mmmNmcoo.c:o CON~,.....mooco~coCO,......COOCONV'l"""VV No~~~mmNm~~~Mm~OOM~~~~ ~mcococo,.....,.....,.....cococo~~vv("')("')NN'l""" ~ It: ~~~~~~~~~*~~~~~~~~~~ ooooooo~~~~ooooooooo oooooao,.....,.....~~oo~o~~o~o ~~~~~~~~~~~OOO~~NMM. MMMMMM~MMMM~~~~~~~~~ Oi CL 'i3 c .t 00000000000000000000 00000000000000000000 00000000000000000000 ~oo~~o~oo~o~oo~oo~oo ~~~~~mm~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~m~~mO~NM.~m~~mO~NM.~m ooooo~~~~~~~~~~NNNNNNN 0000000000000000000000 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ m~mmO~NM.~m~mmo~NM.~ oooo~~~~~~~~~~NNNNNN 00000000000000000000 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN ~m~mmo~NM.~m~~mo~NM. ooooO~~~~~~~~~~NNNNN 00000000000000000000 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN o M M 18 ll) M o M M ~ CD ll) M In o In m m M M m '" CD N In ;:Ii ai CD ~ o o o a CIO '" N CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $2,280,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2005C Issuer: City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held June 20, 2005, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., at the municipal offices in Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $2,280,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2005C 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 20th day of June, 2005. City Administrator It was reported that _ sealed proposals for the purchase of $2,280,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005C were received prior to 11 :00 o'clock a.m., pursuant to the Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers ofthe Bonds by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., independent financial advisor to the City. 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 AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $2,280,000 GENERAL OBLIGA nON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2005C BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Farmington, Minnesota (the City), as follows: SECTION 1. PURPOSE. On May 16,2005, this City Council held a public hearing on the question of issuing general obligation capital improvement plan bonds, after notice duly published in the official newspaper of the City as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521. By resolution duly adopted on May 16, 2005, this City Council approved the issuance of up to $2,280,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C (the Bonds) of the City to finance, along with other available City funds, the costs of constructing a new fire station (the Project), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521 and Chapter 475. No petition was filed requesting a vote on the issuance ofthe general obligation capital improvement plan bonds within thirty (30) days following the public hearing. The maximum debt service payments on all outstanding capital improvement plan bonds is less than .16% of the taxable market value ofthe property within the City. This City Council hereby finds that the general obligation capital improvement plan bonds may be issued without an election pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521, subdivision 2. SECTION 2. SALE. Pursuant to the Sale Details and the Official Statement prepared on behalf of the City by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., sealed proposals for the purchase ofthe Bonds were received at or before the time specified for receipt of proposals. The proposals have been opened, publicly read and considered and the purchase price, interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each proposal have been determined. The most favorable proposal received is that of III , and associates (the Purchaser), to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest on all Bonds to the day of delivery and payment, on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. SECTION 3. AWARD. The sale ofthe Bonds is hereby awarded to the Purchaser and the Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on behalf ofthe City for the sale of the Bonds in accordance with the terms of the proposal. The good faith deposit of the Purchaser shall be retained and deposited by the City until the Bonds have been delivered, and shall be deducted from the purchase price paid at settlement. SECTION 4. BOND TERMS; REGISTRATION; EXECUTION AND DELIVERY. 4.01. 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. 4.02. Maturities: Interest Rates: Denominations and Payment. The Bonds shall be originally dated as of July 1, 2005, shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each, 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 Rate Year Amount Rate 2007 $75,000 % 2017 $100,000 % 2008 80,000 2018 115,000 2009 80,000 2019 120,000 2010 85,000 2020 130,000 2011 85,000 2021 135,000 2012 90,000 2022 140,000 2013 95,000 2023 150,000 2014 100,000 2024 155,000 2015 100,000 2025 160,000 2016 105,000 2026 170,000 [REVISE MATURITY SCHEDULE FOR ANY TERM BONDS] The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360 day year composed of twelve 30 day months. The interest on 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 4.08 hereof, principal and interest shall be payable in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities depository. 4.03. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon initial delivery ofthe Bonds pursuant to Section 4.07 and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 4.06, the date of authentication shall be noted on each Bond so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1, 2006, 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 ofthe calendar month next preceding such Interest Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day. 4.04. Redemption. Bonds maturing in 2017 and later years shall be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option ofthe City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot as selected by the Registrar 2 (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures) in multiples of$5,000, on February 1, 2016, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. The City Administrator shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published as required by law, and at least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the registered holders of any Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the bond register described in Section 2.06 hereof, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing on February 1, 20_ and 20_ (the Term Bonds) shall be subject to mandatory redemption prior to maturity pursuant to the sinking fund requirements of this Section 4.04 at a redemption price equal to the stated principal amount thereof plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium. The Registrar shall select for redemption, by lot or other manner deemed fair, on February 1 in each of the following years the following stated principal amounts of such Bonds: Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1, 20_. Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1, 20_. 3 Notice of redemption shall be given as provided in the preceding paragraph.] 4.05. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City hereby appoints U.S. Bank National Association in St. Paul, 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 ofthe City, 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 City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges ofthe Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar, effective upon not less than thirty 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. 4.06. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City 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 registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner 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. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. (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 City at least once each year a certificate setting forth the principal amounts and numbers of Bonds canceled and destroyed. 4 (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 City 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 interest on the Bond and for all other purposes; and all payments made to any registered owner or upon the owner's order 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. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds (except for an exchange upon a partial redemption of a Bond), the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such 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 oflike 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 ofthe 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 City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar shall be canceled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the City. Ifthe 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. G) Valid Obligations. All Bonds issued upon any transfer or exchange of Bonds shall be the valid obligations ofthe City, evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the same benefits under this Resolution as the Bonds surrendered upon such transfer or exchange. 4.07. Execution. Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction ofthe City Administrator and shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures 5 ofthe Mayor and the City Administrator, provided that the signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles ofthe originals. In case any officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as ifhe had remained in office until delivery. 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 has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative ofthe Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on each Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution. When the Bonds have been prepared, executed and authenticated, the City 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. 4.08. 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 ofDTC with respect to the Bonds. "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 Bonds as securities depository. "Representation Letter" shall mean the Representation Letter pursuant to which the City 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 City may treat DTC (or its nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner ofthe Bonds registered in its name for the purposes of payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds, selecting the Bonds or portions thereofto 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 City shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Neither the Registrar nor the City 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 6 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 ofDTC, 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 withDTC's Operational Arrangements, and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the City's obligations with respect to the principal of and interest on the Bonds to the extent ofthe 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 City 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 City 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 City may notify DTC and the Registrar, whereupon DTC shall notify the Participants ofthe 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 City 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. (d) The execution and delivery of the Representation Letter to DTC by the Mayor or City Administrator 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. 4.08. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the following form: 7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF FARMINGTON GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BOND, SERIES 2005C R- $ Interest Rate Maturitv Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP No. % February 1,20_ July 1, 2005 311297 REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIP AL AMOUNT: THOUSAND DOLLARS THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA (the City), acknowledges itselfto be indebted and hereby promises to pay to the registered owner named above, or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1,2006, 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) ofthe immediately preceding month, all subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal ofthis Bond before maturity. 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 at the principal office of the agent of the Registrar described below, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft drawn on U.S. Bank National Association, as bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent, or its successor designated under the Resolution described herein (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 City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. This Bond is one of an issue (the Bonds) in the aggregate principal amount of $2,280,000, issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on June 20, 2005 (the Resolution) to finance, along with other available City funds, the costs of constructing a new fire station, 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 475.521 and 8 Chapter 475. The Bonds are issuable only in fully registered form, in denominations of$5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities. Bonds maturing in 2017 and later years are each subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot 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, 2016, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereofplus interest accrued to the date of redemption. The City will cause notice of the call for redemption to be published as required by law and, at least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, will cause notice of the call thereofto be mailed by first class mail 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 mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified, and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the registered owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing in the year 20_ and 20_ shall be subject to mandatory redemption, at a redemption price equal to their principal amount plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium, on February 1 in each of the years shown below, in an amount equal to the following principal amounts: Term Bonds Maturing in 20-- Term Bonds Maturing in 20-- Sinking Fund Pavment Date Aggregate Principal Amount Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount $ $ Notice of redemption shall be given as provided in the preceding paragraph.] As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books ofthe City at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereoftogether 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 City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of 9 the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The Bonds have been designated by the City as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" pursuant to Section 265(b)(3) ofthe Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The City 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 and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Notwithstanding any other provisions ofthis 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 City. 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 ofthis Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City 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 has levied ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City, which taxes will be collectible for the years and in amounts sufficient to produce sums not less than five percent in excess ofthe principal of and interest on the Bonds when due, and has appropriated the taxes to its General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C Bond Fund for the payment of principal and interest; that if necessary for payment of principal and interest, additional ad valorem taxes are required to be levied upon all taxable property in the City, without limitation as to rate or amount; and that the issuance of this Bond, together with all other indebtedness of the City outstanding on the date hereof and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness ofthe City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness. 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 Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Farmington, State of Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalfby the facsimile signatures ofthe Mayor and City Administrator. CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA 10 (facsimile signature - City Administrator) (facsimile signature - Mavor) CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Registrar Date of Authentication: By Authorized Representative 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 ofthe 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 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. 11 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE: [end of bond form] SECTION 5. GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS. SERIES 2005C CONSTRUCTION FUND. There is hereby established on the official books and records of the City a General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C Construction Fund (the Construction Fund). The City Finance Director shall continue to maintain the Construction Fund until payment of all costs and expenses incurred in connection with the construction ofthe Project have been paid. To the Construction Fund there shall be credited $ from the proceeds ofthe Bonds, including $ of unused discount, exclusive of$ of unused discount and $ of accrued interest, an amount which, with other available funds of the City, will be equal to the estimated cost of the Project and from the Construction Fund there shall be paid all construction costs and expenses incurred by the City in construction ofthe Project. There shall also be credited to the Construction Fund all taxes collected with respect to the Project until all costs of the Project have been fully paid. After payment of all costs incurred with respect to the Project, Construction Fund shall be discontinued and any proceeds of the Bonds remaining therein shall be credited to the Bond Fund described in Section 6 hereof. SECTION 6. GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS. SERIES 2005C BOND FUND. So long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and any principal of or interest thereon unpaid, the City Recorder shall maintain a separate debt service fund on the official books and records of the City to be known as the General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2005C Bond Fund (the Bond Fund), and the principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable from the Bond Fund. The City irrevocably appropriates to the Bond Fund (a) any funds received from the Purchaser upon delivery of the Bonds in excess of the amount required by Section 5 to be credited to the Construction Fund and amounts for payment of the costs of issuance of the Bonds described in Section 9.04; (b) the amounts specified in Section 5 above, after payment of all costs ofthe Project; (c) all taxes and 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. 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 City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. In order to produce aggregate amounts which 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 valorem taxes are hereby levied on all taxable property in the City. The taxes will be levied and collected in the following years and amounts: Levy Years Collection Years Amount 12 2005-2024 2006-2025 See attached Levy Computation The taxes shall be irrepealable as long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the City reserves the right and power to reduce tax levies from other legally available funds, in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61. SECTION 8. DEFEASANCE. When all ofthe Bonds have been discharged as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the registered owners of the Bonds shall cease. The City 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 City 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 City 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 a bank qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited, bearing interest payable at such time 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 earlier designated redemption date. Provided, however, that if such deposit is made more than ninety days before the maturity date or specified redemption date of the Bonds to be discharged, the City 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 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. CERTIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGS. 9.01. Registration of Certificates and Levy of Taxes. The Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the County Treasurer-Auditor of Dakota County and obtain a certificate that the Bonds have been duly entered upon the Treasurer- Auditor's bond register and the tax required by law has been levied. 9.02. Authentication of Transcriot. The officers of the City and the County Treasurer- Auditor 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 City as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 13 9.03. Official Statement. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds, dated June 9, 2005, relating to the Bonds prepared and distributed by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. is hereby approved. Ehlers & Associates, Inc., is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to prepare and distribute 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 15c2-12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The officers ofthe City are hereby authorized and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of the Official Statement. 9.04. Authorization of Payment of Certain Costs oflssuance of the Bonds. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to U.S. Trust Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, on the closing date for further distribution as directed by the City's financial advisor, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. SECTION 10. TAX COVENANTS; ARBITRAGE MATTERS; REIMBURSEMENT AND CONTINUING DISCLOSURE. 10.01. General Tax Covenant. The City covenants and agrees with the registered owners of the Bonds that it will not take, or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents, any actions that would cause interest on the Bonds to become includable in gross income ofthe recipient under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) and applicable Treasury Regulations (the Regulations), and covenants 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. In particular, the City covenants and agrees that all proceeds of the Bonds deposited in the Construction Fund will be expended solely for the payment ofthe costs of the Project. All improvements so financed will be owned and maintained by the City as part ofthe public infrastructure of the City and available for use by members of the general public on a substantially equal basis. The City shall not enter into any lease, management, use or other agreement or contract with any non-governmental person relating to the use of the Project or security for the payment ofthe Bonds which might cause the Bonds to be considered "private activity bonds" or "private loan bonds" pursuant to Section 141 of the Code. 10.02. Arbitrage Certification. The Mayor and Clerk being the officers of the City charged with the responsibility for issuing the Certificates 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 Section 1. 148-2(b) of the Regulations, stating the facts, estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Certificates which make it reasonable to expect that the proceeds ofthe Certificates will not be used in a manner that would cause the Certificates to be arbitrage bonds within the meaning of the Code and Regulations. 10.03. Arbitrage Rebate. The City acknowledges that the Bonds are subject to the rebate requirements of Section 148(f) of the Code. The City covenants and agrees to retain such 14 records, make such determinations, file such reports and documents and pay such amounts at such times as are required under said Section 148(f) and applicable Regulations to preserve the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from gross income for federal income tax purposes, unless the Bonds qualify for an exception from the rebate requirement pursuant to one of the spending exceptions set forth in Section 1.148-7 of the Regulations and no "gross proceeds" of the Bonds (other than amounts constituting a "bona fide debt service fund") arise during or after the expenditure of the original proceeds thereof. 10.04. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. The Council 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 tax-exempt obligations which are not private activity bonds (not treating qualified 501(c)(3) bonds under Section 145 ofthe Code as private activity bonds for the purpose of this representation) which will be issued by the City and all subordinate entities during calendar year 2005 does not exceed $10,000,000. 10.05. Reimbursement. The City certifies that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used by the City to reimburse itself for any expenditure with respect to the Project which the City paid or will have paid more than 60 days prior to the issuance ofthe Bonds unless, with respect to such prior expenditures, the City shall have made a declaration of official intent which complies with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Regulations; provided that this certification shall not apply (i) with respect to certain de minimis expenditures, if any, with respect to the Project meeting the requirements of Section 1.150-2(f)(1) of the Regulations, or (ii) with respect to "preliminary expenditures" for the Project as defined in Section 1. 150-2(f)(2) ofthe 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. 10.06. 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 SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.F.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 City hereby makes the following covenants and agreements for the benefit of the Owners (as hereinafter defined) from time to time ofthe Outstanding Bonds. The City 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. The City has complied in all material respects with any undertaking previously entered into by it under the Rule. If the City fails to comply with any provisions ofthis 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 15 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 (b) is treated as the owner of the Bond for federal income tax purposes. (b) Information To Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth in subsection (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City, the following information at the following times: (1) on or before 365 days after the end of each fiscal year of the City, commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31, 2004, the following financial information and operating data in respect ofthe City (the Disclosure Information): (A) the audited financial statements ofthe City for such fiscal year, containing balance sheets as of the end of such fiscal year and a statement of 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 City, 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 City, noting the discrepancies therefrom and the effect thereof, and certified as to accuracy and completeness in all material respects by the fiscal officer ofthe City; 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 Official Statement under the headings: Current Property Valuations; Direct Debt; Tax Levies and Collections; Population Trend and EmploymentlUnemployment, which information may be unaudited. Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, ifthe audited financial statements are not available by the date specified, the City 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 City 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 16 to each of the repositories hereinafter referred to under subsection (c) or the SEe. If the document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must be available from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The City 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 City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a statement to such effect; provided, however, if such operations have been replaced by other City operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City 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. If the Disclosure Information is changed or this section is amended as permitted by this paragraph (b )(1) or subsection (d), then the City 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) Princi"l'al and interest payment delinquencies; (B) Non-p~yment 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 ofthe 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 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 ofthe occurrence of any of the following events or conditions: 17 (A) the failure of the City 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 City under subsection (d)(2); (C) the termination of the obligations ofthe City 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 City. (c) Manner of Disclosure. The City 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 ofthe Bonds at the request of the City 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 City in this section shall remain in effect so long as any Bonds are Outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations of the City under this section shall terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the City delivers to the Registrar an opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that, because oflegislative action or final judicial or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the City to comply with the requirements of this section will not cause participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to be in violation ofthe Rule or other applicable requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or any statutes or laws successory thereto or amendatory thereof. 18 (2) This section (and the form and requirements ofthe Disclosure Information) may be amended or supplemented by the City from time to time, without notice to (except as provided in paragraph (c )(3) hereof) or the consent ofthe Owners of any Bonds, by a resolution of this Council filed in the office of the recording officer ofthe City accompanied by an opinion of Bond Counsel, who may rely on certificates of the City 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 ofthe City or the type of operations conducted by the City, 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 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 City 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) ofthe Rule. Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 19 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution -Sale of $730,000 G.O. Equipment Certificates Series 2005D - Finance DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION The City Council, at their meeting May 16, 2005 authorized the sale of $730,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates of 2005D to finance budgeted 2005 equipment purchases. DISCUSSION Competitive bids for the bonds were received today in the offices of Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Preliminary estimates anticipated an interest rate of 3.92% with an anticipated $99,805 interest cost over the five year term of the debt. The City received four bids. Wells Fargo brokerage was the low bidder at a net interest rate of3.21 % and a total interest cost of$83,196 or $16,609 less than estimated. BUDGET IMPACT Analysis of the bids will be presented at the meeting. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the attached resolution awarding the sale of the $730,000 G.O. Equipment Certificates of 2005D to Wells Fargo. Respectfully submitted, /!!::4/ . Robin Roland Finance Director City of Farmington, MN Results of Bond Sale June 20, 2005 $730,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates, Series 20050 Low Bidder True Interest Rate Number of Bids Rating Range of Bids Total Debt Service Estimated* Principal Amount Discount Allowance Total Interest Costs Available Equip Funds True Interest Rate Bond Buyers Index Closing Date $730,000 $2,738 $99,805 $700,358 3.9269% 4.38% Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC 3.2166% 4 A2 3.2166% - 3.4887% Results of Sale $730,000 $2,738 $83,196 $701,867 3.2166% 4.31% July 14, 2005 Accept the bid of Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC and Adopt "Resolution Authorizing The Issuance, Awarding The Sale, Prescribing The Form And Details and Providing For The Payment Of $730,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates, Series 20050." Council Action *Based on the May 16, 2005 estimates, the low bid is $16,609 less than estimated interest costs. Attachments . Bid Tabulation . Revised Debt and Levy Schedule BID TABULATION $730,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates, Series 20050 CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA SALE: June 20, 2005 AWARD: WELLS FARGO BROKERAGE SERVICES, LLC RATING: Moody's Investors Service, Inc. "A2" 881: 4.31% NET TRUE NAME OF BIDDER MATURITY RATE REOFFERING PRICE INTEREST INTEREST (February 1) YIELD COST RATE WELLS FARGO BROKERAGE SERVICES, LLC 2007 3.000% 2.750% $727,263.00 $85,932.83 3.2166% Minneapolis, Minnesota 2008 3.000% 2.850% 2009 3.000% 3.000% 2010 3.100% 3.100% 2011 3.250% 3.250% CRONIN & COMPANY, INC. 2007 3.500% $730,892.25 $92,761.92 3.4630% Minneapolis, Minnesota 2008 3.500% 2009 3.500% 2010 3.500% 2011 3.500% RBG DAIN RAUSCHER INC. 2007 3.125% $728,056.60 $93,242.41 3.4873% Minneapolis, Minnesota 2008 3.250% 2009 3.375% 2010 3.500% 2011 3.500% UNITED BANKERS' BANK 2007 3.350% $727,270.50 $93,160.33 3.4887% Bloomington, Minnesota 2008 3.350% 2009 3.350% 2010 3.400% 2011 3.400% & ASSOCIATES INC LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 3060 Centre Pointe Drive. Roseville. MN 55113-1105 651.697.8500 fax 651.697.8555 www.ehlers-inc.com Offices in Rosevi/le, MN. Brookfield. W/ and Naperville. IL e EHLERS 1.0 o o ~ o ~ CI)~ g:: w~ ..Ju o ::c= c 1.&.1.. 41 iii Z c :::i u: - c CI) E Q, 'S C" w iii - 's. cu o It) Q Q N c o - en c E ... ClS u.. - o ~ o c It) Q Q N III CI) 't:; CI) en iii .s CU CJ ~ :e: CI) o - c CI) E Q, '5 C" w S 's. cu o o ci 'C CI) III o Q, e 0. o o o ci ('I) ...... CIl 'C C o CD '+- o 1:: ::l o E <C Co a.. o o o ci ('I) ...... ............1.0...... ('I)...... co (0 ............C\lCO N"riN"........ ............0 ...... o o , 0 ci ('I) ...... en w () c:: ::> o en ...J ~ o r- -c c :::l LL-c g-~ ()LL ........c Cii .2 1: ~ n :::l Q):::l o -... ~ .ECii (5 ~5 CIl .~ () ..,- ~ m 0 1:: 2 c:!:: Q)::l ... co c..'0' 0 .~ ::l 8 a: E ~ Q)~ <Cen -c-000)::> C\t-::::c: ::> 0 .- .- .- ...J _~~~-g<c ~ CIl c..c..:::lr- OOQ)Q)OO r-()OOC::r- --. ?fl. o o "! :s s~ o CI) r-...J ~ oa8 0."; + ~oa ZOo - III Q,CI) cu ... oS .5 - c ~! ~c 0. - CJ ... CI) cu = CI) 0> o >'''' > cu CI) CI) ...J> ('1)00('1)0 C\lC\I(O'<t(O I ('I)('I)......co'<t Lt'icO'r-:r-:ri (0(0(0(0...... T""" 'or- T""" T""" T""" ('1)00('1)0 C\lC\I(O'<t(O I ('I)('I)......co'<t Lt'icO'r-:r-:ri (0(0(0(0...... T""" T"'" T"'" T""" T""" 00000 1.0001.00 ''<t'<tC\lCOC\l r-:c:OalalLt'i 1.01.01.01.0(0 T""" T'"" T""'" T""" T""" <0 en o ri ...... ........ - III ! S .5 (000000 enl.C)ool.C)o O'<t'<tC\lCOC\l riN"c:O..talLt'i 'r'""NT"""T""" S cu 0:: '#.?ft?ft?ft.?ft 00001.0 000......C\I C<)C<)C<)C<)C<) iii Q, 'u c .t:; 0. 00000 00000 00000 Lt'iciLt'icici ('I)'<t'<tI.C)(O T""" T""" "II"""" T""" T""" 1.0(0""" co en 0...... 00000............ 0000000 ~~~~~~~ T""" 'or- T""" T""" T""" T""" 'or- -... ....... ........ ....... -... ........ -... (oC\IC\IC\IC\IC\IC\I (O......coeno 0000...... 00000 C\IC\IC\IC\IC\I 1.0 (0""" co en 00000 00000 C\IC\IC\IC\IC\I 1.0 o ...... ci '<t co 1.0 o ...... ci '<t co o o ...... ci o co (0 en ...... ('I) co o o o ci ('I) ...... CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $730,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005D Issuer: City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held June 20, 2005, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., at the municipal offices in Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $730,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005D I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the equipment certificates 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 equipment certificates; 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 20th day of June, 2005. City Administrator It was reported that _ sealed proposals for the purchase of $730,000 General Obligation Equipment Certificates, Series 2005D were received prior to 11 :00 o'clock a.m., pursuant to the Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers of the Certificates by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., independent financial advisor to the City. 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 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $730,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005D BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the City), as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND SALE. 1.01. Authorization. The City Council hereby determines that it is in the best interest of the City to issue its General Obligation Equipment Certificates, Series 200A (the Certificates), in the principal amount of $730,000, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.301 and Chapter 475. The proceeds ofthe Certificates will be used, together with any additional funds of the City which might be required, to finance the costs of acquiring various items of capital equipment. Said items of capital equipment have a useful life not less than the term of the Certificates. The principal amount of the Certificates does not exceed .25 percent of the market value of taxable property in the City. Accordingly, publication of this resolution in the City's official newspaper is not required and the Certificates are not subject to approval at an election. 1.02. Sale. Pursuant to the Sale Details and the Official Statement prepared on behalf of the City by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., sealed proposals for the purchase of the Certificates were received at or before the time specified for receipt of proposals. The proposals have been opened, publicly read and considered and the purchase price, interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each proposal have been determined. The most favorable proposal received is that of , III , and associates (the Purchaser), to purchase the Certificates at a price of $ plus accrued interest on all Certificates to the day of delivery and payment, on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 1.03. Award. The sale of the Certificates is hereby awarded to the Purchaser and the Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on behalf ofthe City for the sale ofthe Certificates in accordance with the terms of the proposal. The good faith deposit ofthe Purchaser shall be retained and deposited by the City until the Certificates have been delivered, and shall be deducted from the purchase price paid at settlement. SECTION 2. CERTIFICATE TERMS: REGISTRATION: EXECUTION AND DELIVERY. 2.01. Issuance of Certificates. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws ofthe State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid issuance of the Certificates 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 Certificates, to provide security therefor and to issue the Certificates forthwith. 2.02. Maturities: Interest Rates: Denominations and Pavment. The Certificates shall be originally dated as of July 1,2005, shall be in the denomination of$5,000 each, 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 original issue until paid at the annual rates set forth opposite such years and amounts, as follows: Year Amount Rate 2007 $135,000 % 2008 140,000 2009 145,000 2010 150,000 2011 160,000 The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Certificate, the principal amount thereof shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. [REVISE MATURITY SCHEDULE FOR ANY TERM CERTIFICATES] 2.03. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon initial delivery ofthe Certificates pursuant to Section 2.07 and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 2.06, the date of authentication shall be noted on each Certificate so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on the Certificates shall be payable on February 1 and August 1, commencing February 1, 2006, each such date being referred to herein as an Interest Payment Date, to the person in whose names the Certificates 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. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360 day year composed of twelve 30 day months. 2.04. Redemption. The Certificates shall not be subject to optional redemption prior to their stated maturities. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM CERTIFICATES] [Certificates maturing on February 1,200_ and 200_ (the Term Certificates) shall be subject to mandatory redemption prior to maturity pursuant to the sinking fund requirements of this Section 2.04 at a redemption price equal to the stated principal amount thereof plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium. The Registrar shall select for 2 redemption, by lot or other manner deemed fair, on February 1 in each ofthe following years the following stated principal amounts of such Certificates: Year Principal Amount The remaining $ maturity on February 1, 200_. stated principal amount of such Certificates shall be paid at Year Principal Amount The remaining $ maturity on February 1, 200_. stated principal amount of such Certificates shall be paid at The Finance Director shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published as required by law, and at least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the registered holders of any Certificates to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the bond register described in Section 2.06 hereof, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Certificate not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Certificates or portions of Certificates so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Certificates or portions of Certificates shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Certificate, a new Certificate or Certificates will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding.] 2.05. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City hereby appoints U.S. Bank National Association in St. Paul, 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 City, 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 City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar, effective upon not less than thirty days' written notice and upon the appointment and acceptance of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash and Certificates in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. 3 2.06. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep a bond register in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Certificates and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Certificates entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b) Transfer of Certificates. Upon surrender for transfer of any Certificate duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name ofthe designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Certificates of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Certificates. Whenever any Certificates are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Certificates of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. (d) Cancellation. All Certificates surrendered upon any transfer or exchange shall be promptly canceled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Certificate is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Certificate 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 City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Certificate is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Certificate, whether the Certificate shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Certificate and for all other purposes; and all payments made to any registered owner or upon the owner's order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon Certificate to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes. Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of Certificates (except for an exchange upon a partial redemption of a Certificate), the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. 4 (h) Mutilated. Lost. Stolen or Destroyed Certificates. In case any Certificate shall become mutilated or be destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar shall deliver a new Certificate of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Certificate or in lieu of and in substitution for any Certificate destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges ofthe Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Certificate destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Certificate was destroyed, stolen or lost, and ofthe 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 City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Certificates so surrendered to the Registrar shall be canceled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Certificate has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it shall not be necessary to issue a new Certificate prior to payment. (i) Authenticating Agent. The Registrar is hereby designated authenticating agent for the Certificates, within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55, Subdivision 1, as amended. G) Valid Obligations. All Certificates issued upon any transfer or exchange of Certificates shall be the valid obligations of the City, evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the same benefits under this Resolution as the Certificates surrendered upon such transfer or exchange. 2.07. Execution. Authentication and Delivery. The Certificates shall be prepared under the direction of the City Administrator and shall be executed on behalf ofthe City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Administrator, provided that the signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles ofthe originals. In case any officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on the Certificates shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Certificate, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as ifhe had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, no Certificate 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 Certificate has been duly executed by the manual signature ofthe Registrar. The executed certificate of authentication on each Certificate shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this Resolution. When the Certificates have been prepared, executed and authenticated, the City 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. 2.08. Form of Certificates. The Certificates shall be prepared in substantially the following form: 5 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF FARMINGTON GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATE, SERIES 2005D Maturitv Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP No. Interest Rate % February 1,20_ July 1, 2005 11297 REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIP AL AMOUNT: THOUSAND DOLLARS THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA (the City), acknowledges itselfto be indebted and hereby promises to pay to the registered owner named above, or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above on the maturity date specified above, without option of prior payment, and promises to pay interest thereon from the date of original issue specified above or from the most recent interest payment date to which interest has been paid or duly provided for, at the annual rate specified above, payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing February 1,2006, to the person in whose name this Certificate is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month. 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 at the principal office ofthe agent ofthe Registrar described below, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft drawn on U.S. Bank National Association, as bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the Registrar), or its successor designated 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 ofthe City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. This Certificate is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $730,000 issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on June 20, 2005 (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. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM CERTIFICATES] [Certificates maturing in the year 200_ and 200_ shall be subject to mandatory redemption, at a redemption price equal to their principal amount plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium, on February 1 in each of the years shown below, in an amount equal to the following principal amounts: Term Certificates Maturing in 200- Term Certificates Maturing in 200- 6 Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount $ $ The Finance Director shall cause notice ofthe call for redemption thereofto be published as required by law, and at least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the registered holders of any Certificates to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the bond register described in Section 2.06 hereof, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Certificate not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Certificates or portions of Certificates so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Certificates or portions of Certificates shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Certificate, a new Certificate or Certificates will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding.] As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Certificate is transferable upon the books of the City at the office of the Registrar, 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 Certificates of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Certificate or Certificates to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The Certificates have been designated by the City as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" pursuant to Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The City and the Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Certificate is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Certificate is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. 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 Certificate in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City 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 levied ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City, 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 Certificates when due, and 7 has appropriated such taxes to its General Obligation Equipment Certificates, Series 2005D 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 City, without limitation as to rate or amount; and that the issuance of this Certificate, together with all other indebtedness of the City outstanding on the date hereof and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness. This Certificate 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 manual signature of the Registrar. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Farmington, Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Certificate to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile signatures of the Mayor and City Administrator. CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA (facsimile signature -- City Administrator) (facsimile signature -- Mayor) CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one ofthe Certificates delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. Date of Authentication: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Registrar By Authorized Representative The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Certificate, 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 8 For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Certificate and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said Certificate on the books kept for registration of the within Certificate, 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 ofthe within Certificate 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 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 certificate form] SECTION 3. GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES. SERIES 2005D BOND FUND. So long as any of the Certificates 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 City to be known as the General Obligation Equipment Certificates, Series 2005D Bond Fund (the Bond Fund), and the principal of and interest on the Certificates shall be payable from the Bond Fund. The City irrevocably appropriates to the Bond Fund (a) all taxes levied and collected in accordance with this Resolution and (b) all other moneys as shall be appropriated by the City Council to the Bond Fund from time to time. If the balance in the Bond Fund is at any time insufficient to pay all interest and principal then due on all Certificates . payable therefrom, the payment shall be made from any fund of the City which is available for that purpose, subj ect to reimbursement from 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 4. PLEDGE OF TAXING POWERS. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Certificates as such payments respectively become due, the full faith, credit and unlimited taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. In order to produce aggregate amounts not less than 5% in excess ofthe amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Certificates, ad valorem taxes are hereby levied on all taxable property in the City. The taxes are to be levied and collected in the following years and amounts: 9 Levy Years Collection Years Amount 2005-2009 2006-2010 See attached Levy Computation The taxes shall be irrepealable as long as any ofthe Certificates are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the City reserves the right and power to reduce the tax levies in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61. SECTION 5. DEFEASANCE. When all of the Certificates have been discharged as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this Resolution to the registered owners of the Certificates shall cease. The City may discharge its obligations with respect to any Certificates 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 Certificate 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 City may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Certificates, subject to the provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a bank qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited, bearing interest payable at such time 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. SECTION 6. CERTIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGS. 6.01. Registration of Certificates. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Treasurer-Auditor of Dakota County and obtain a certificate that the Certificates have been duly entered upon the County Treasurer-Auditor's bond register and that the tax for the payment of the Certificates has been levied as required by law. 6.02. Authentication of Transcript. The officers ofthe City and the County Treasurer- Auditor 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 Certificates and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability ofthe Certificates, 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 City as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 6.03. Official Statement. The Official Statement relating to the Certificates, dated June 9,2005, relating to the Certificates prepared and distributed by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. is hereby approved. Ehlers & Associates, Inc., is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to prepare and distribute 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 Certificates required to be 10 included in the Official Statement by Rule 15c2-12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of the Official Statement. 6.04. Authorization ofPavment of Certain Costs oflssuance of the Certificates. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Certificate proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to U.S. Trust Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, on the closing date for further distribution as directed by the City's financial advisor, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. SECTION 7. TAX COVENANTS; ARBITRAGE MATTERS AND CONTINUING DISCLOSURE. 7.01. General Tax Covenant. The City covenants and agrees with the registered owners from time to time ofthe Certificates that it will not take, or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents, any actions that would cause interest on the Certificates to become includable in gross income of the recipient under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code) and applicable Treasury Regulations (the Regulations), and covenants to take any and all actions within its powers to ensure that the interest on the Certificates will not become includable in gross income of the recipient under the Code and the Regulations. In particular, the City covenants and agrees that all proceeds of the Certificates will be expended solely for the payment of the costs of acquisition of capital equipment to be owned and maintained by the City and used in the City's general governmental operations. The City shall not enter into any lease, use or other agreement with any non-governmental person relating to the use ofthe equipment or security for the payment of the Certificates which might cause the Certificates to be considered "private activity bonds" or "private loan bonds" pursuant to Section 141 of the Code. 7.02. Arbitrage Certification. The Mayor and City Administrator being the officers of the City charged with the responsibility for issuing the Certificates 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 Certificates which make it reasonable to expect that the proceeds of the Certificates will not be used in a manner that would cause the Certificates to be "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of the Code and Regulations. 7.03. Arbitrage Rebate. The City acknowledges that the Certificates are subject to the rebate requirements of Section 148(f) of the Code. The City covenants and agrees to retain such records, make such determinations, file such reports and documents and pay such amounts at such times as are required under said Section 148(f) and applicable Regulations to preserve the exclusion of interest on the Certificates from gross income for federal income tax purposes, unless the Certificates qualify for an exception from the rebate requirement pursuant to one of the spending exceptions set forth in Section 1.148-7 of the Regulations and no "gross proceeds" of the Certificates (other than amounts constituting a "bona fide debt service fund") arise during or after the expenditure of the original proceeds thereof. 11 7.04. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. The Council hereby designates the Certificates 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 oftax-exempt obligations which are not private activity bonds (not treating qualified 501(c)(3) bonds under Section 145 of the Code as private activity bonds for the purpose of this representation) which will be issued by the City and all subordinate entities during calendar year 2005 does not exceed $10,000,000. 7.05. Reimbursement. The City certifies that the proceeds ofthe Certificates will not be used by the City to reimburse itself for any expenditure with respect to the equipment which the City paid or will have paid more than 60 days prior to the issuance ofthe Certificates unless, with respect to such prior expenditures, the City shall have made a declaration of official intent which complies with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Regulations; provided that this certification shall not apply (i) with respect to certain de minimis expenditures, if any, with respect to the equipment meeting the requirements of Section 1. 150-2(f)(1 ) ofthe Regulations, or (ii) with respect to "preliminary expenditures" for the equipment as defined in Section 1.150- 2(f)(2) ofthe Regulations which in the aggregate do not exceed 20% ofthe "issue price" ofthe Certificates. 7.06. Continuing Disclosure. (a) Purpose and Beneficiaries. To provide for the public availability of certain information relating to the Certificates and the security therefor and to permit the Purchaser and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Certificates to comply with amendments to Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.F.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 Certificates, the City hereby makes the following covenants and agreements for the benefit of the Owners (as hereinafter defined) from time to time of the Outstanding Certificates. The City is the only obligated person in respect ofthe Certificates within the meaning ofthe Rule for purposes of identifying the entities in respect of which continuing disclosure must be made. The City has complied in all material respects with any undertaking previously entered into by it under the Rule. If the City fails to comply with any provisions of this section, any person aggrieved thereby, including the Owners of any Outstanding Certificates, 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 Certificates or under any other provision of this resolution. As used in this section, Owner or Certificateowner means, in respect of a Certificate, 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 Certificate, 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 Certificate (including persons or entities holding Certificates 12 through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or (b) is treated as the owner of the Certificate for federal income tax purposes. (b) Information To Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth in subsection (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City, the following information at the following times: (1) on or before 365 days after the end of each fiscal year of the City, commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31, 2004, the following financial information and operating data in respect ofthe City (the Disclosure Information): (A) the audited financial statements of the City for such fiscal year, containing balance sheets as ofthe end of such fiscal year and a statement of 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 City, 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 City, 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 City; 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 ofthe type contained in the Official Statement under the headings: Current Property Valuations; Direct Debt; Tax Levies and Collections; Population Trend and Employment/Unemployment, which information may be unaudited. Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, if the audited financial statements are not available by the date specified, the City 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 City 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 City 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 City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a statement to such effect; provided, however, if such 13 operations have been replaced by other City operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City 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. If the Disclosure Information is changed or this section is amended as permitted by this paragraph (b)(1) or subsection (d), then the City 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 ofthe 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; (J) 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 Certificate or, if not disclosed, would significantly alter the total information otherwise available to an investor from the 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 Certificate 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 ofthe occurrence of any of the following events or conditions: (A) the failure ofthe City 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 City under subsection (d)(2); (C) the termination ofthe obligations of the City under this section pursuant to subsection (d); (D) any change in the accounting principles pursuant to which the financial 14 statements constituting a portion of the Disclosure Information are prepared; and (E) any change in the fiscal year of the City. (c) Manner of Disclosure. The City 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 Certificates at the request of the City and, at the expense of such Certificateowner, to any Certificateowner who requests in writing such information, at the time of transmission under paragraphs (1) or (2) ofthis 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 ofthe City in this section shall remain in effect so long as any Certificates are Outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations ofthe City under this section shall terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the City 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 City to comply with the requirements ofthis section will not cause participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Certificates to be in violation ofthe 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 ofthe Disclosure Information) may be amended or supplemented by the City from time to time, without notice to (except as provided in paragraph (c )(3) hereof) or the consent of the Owners of any Certificates, by a resolution ofthis Council filed in the office ofthe recording officer of the City accompanied by an opinion of Bond Counsel, who may rely on certificates of the City 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 City or the type of operations conducted by the City, or (b) is required by, or better complies with, the 15 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 Certificates, giving 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 ofthe Certificateowners under the Rule. If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide, contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation ofthe 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. Upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 16 /od City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administator I~r FROM: Lee Smick, AICP City Planner SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Amend 2020 Comprehensive Plan from Industrial to Commercial for Property Generally Located at the Northeast Intersection ofCSAH 31 and CSAH 50 and Northeast of Duo Plastics DATE: July 18, 2005 INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION On June 20, 2005, the City Council approved a rezoning from IP (Industrial Park) to B-1 (Highway Business) for the properties shown in red on the attached Exhibit A. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment consistent with the approved rezoning is being requested by the applicants, John Devney, Airlake Development, Inc., and Pilot Knob Properties. The applicants request a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from industrial to commercial for the property in red as shown on Exhibit A. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment at its meeting on July 12, 2005. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan from industrial to commercial for the property shown in red on Exhibit A contingent upon the following: 1. The Metropolitan Council approves the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. ~~. ~ick, AICP City Planner cc: Airlake Development, Inc. John Devney Pilot Knob Properties RESOLUTION NO. AMENDING THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTIES OWNED BY JOHN DEVNEY, AIRLAKE DEVELOPMENT, INC., AND PILOT KNOB PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST INTERSECTION OF CSAH 31 AND NORTHEAST OF DUO PLASTICS IN THE FARMINGTON INDUSTRIAL PARK 3RD 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 18th day of July, 2005 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City has received a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the properties owned by John Devney, Airlake Development, Inc., and Pilot Knob Properties generally located at the Northeast Intersection of CSAH 31 and CSAH 50 and Northeast of Duo Plastics in the Farmington Industrial Park 3rd Addition within the City of Farmington, and that said request proposes that the land use designation be changed from Industrial to Commercial; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the 12th day of July, 2005 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 Planning Commission accepted public comments at the public hearing and recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the properties owned by John Devney, Airlake Development, Inc., and Pilot Knob Properties generally located at the Northeast Intersection of CSAH 31 and CSAH 50 and Northeast of Duo Plastics in the Farmington Industrial Park 3rd Addition within the City of Farmington, said amendment changing the land use designation from Industrial to Commercial; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Farmington hereby amends the 2020 Comprehensive Plan for the properties owned by John Devney, Airlake Development, Inc., and Pilot Knob Properties generally located at the Northeast Intersection ofCSAH 31 and CSAH 50 and Northeast of Duo Plastics in the Farmington Industrial Park 3rd Addition within the City of Farmington, to change the land use designation from Industrial to Commercial contingent, upon the following: 1. The Metropolitan Council approves the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 18th day of July, 2005. Mayor Attested to the _ day of July, 2005. City Administrator c:=J c:=J ~ ~ .~ 20STH STREET E ENS ION \i~ ~~ .~ o ~ << In o ~ g c: \. ~~ 'ii, ~1 ~~ ~~ \...~ t.~~ ....... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Proposed Commerdal Zoning Existing Industrial Zoning Potential Future Extensions Planned Future Extension CSAH 50 , 550 I Feet 20STH STREET w ~ z f2 z o ::E o w N + map created on May 20, 2005 ..; ~- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: 1. Consider Request by Independent School District 192 to Amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan from Urban Reserve to Public/Semi-Public for a 110-Acre Property Located West of Flagstaff Avenue and South of County Road 64 (alk/a 200th Street West). Consider Amending the Text of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan To Address Any Internal Inconsistencies That Would be Created by the Approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Referred to Above and/or by the Construction of a High School on the Property In Question. Consider Request by Independent School District 192 to Rezone the Property Referred to Above from A-I to R -1. 2. 3. DATE: . June 14, 2005 INTRODUCTION On May 20, 2005, legal counsel for Independent School District 192 [hereinafter "ISD 192"] delivered to City Hall a letter and various attachments (see Exhibit A) requesting that the City amend its 2020 Comprehensive Plan with regard to a 110-acre property located west of Flagstaff Avenue and south of County Road 64 (also known as 200th Street) in the City of Farmington. The property in question, which is depicted on page A-3 of Exhibit A and which was owned by the Christensen family before it was acquired by ISD 192 in 2004, currently has an "Urban Reserve" designation in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. ISD 192 has requested that this designation be amended to "Public/Semi-Public," to allow the construction of a high school on the property. On May 20, 2005, legai counsel for ISD 192 also delivered to City Hall a petition and VarlOUS attachments (see Exhibit B) requesting that the property referred to above be rezoned from "A-I" (Agricultural) to R-l (Low Density Residential). School facilities are a conditional use in any R-l zoning district. DISCUSSION The two requests referred to above will be addressed separately below. .P .. . 1. REQUEST FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT a. Comprehensive Plan Required. Every municipality in the seven-cou.nty metropolitan area is required by law to create and adopt a document known as a Comprehensive Plan. The decisions that a City Council makes and the actions that it takes are expected to be consistent with the provisions of its Comprehensive Plan. Among other things, a Comprehensive Plan indicates where and when specified types of development will occur within a city. A city's zoning provisions must be consistent with its Comprehensive Plan. b. Reasons for Requiring a Comprehensive Plan. Some of the reasons for the creation of Comprehensive Plans can be found in Section 473.851 of the Minnesota Statutes, which provides (in part) as follows: The legislature finds and declares that the local governmental units within the metropolitan area are interdependent, [and) that the growth and patterns of urbanization within the area create the need for additional state, metropolitan, and local public services and fadlities...Since problems of urbanization and development transcend local governmental boundaries, there is a need for the adoption of coordinated plans. programs and controls bv all local governmental units and school districts in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the residents...and to ensure coordinated, orderly and economic development. Therefore, it is the purpose of [these laws) to...establish requirements and procedures to accomplish comprehensive local planning with land use controls consistent with planned, orderly and staged development... c. Amending a Comprehensive Plan. Every city is required by law (see Minn. Stat. Sec. 473.864) to periodically review and, if necessary, amend its entire Comprehensive Plan. The City of Farmington's current 2020 Comprehensive Plan is the end result of a two-year review process that began in early 1998 and ended with the City Council's adoption of the Plan on May 15, 2000. The process included face-to-face interviews with 35 community leaders and City staff, visioning workshops, neighborhood meetings, joint City Council/Planning Commission meetings, community open houses, public hearings, consultations with representatives of nearby communities, and extensive contacts with Metropolitan Council staff members. The 2020 Comprehensive Plan consists of 144 pages of text and a dozens of tables, maps, figures, charts, drawings and exhibits. A copy of the "2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map" can be found immediately after this Memo and before the attached Exhibits. In additional to the City of Farmington's periodic "full scale" reviews and updates of its 2020 Comprehensive Plan, the City has the discretion to occasionally consider other possible modifications of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Section 462.355 of the Minnesota Statutes provides that a city's planning commission may "recommend amendments whenever necessary." It further provides that before adopting any amendment of a comprehensive pIlIp., the planning commission "shall hold at least one public hearing thereon" after publishing a notice of the time, place and purpose ofthe hearing at least ten days before the hearing. 2 ~! . d. "Supermajority" Vote Required. The weight and importance of the provisions that appear in any city's comprehensive plan are demonstrated by the fact that a "supermajority" vote is required to amend the comprehensive plan. That is, under Minnesota law (see Minn. Stat. Sec. 462.355, subd. 3), "...the governing body may ...by a two-thirds vote of all of its members...amend the comprehensive plan." Accordingly, although most of a city council's land use or planning decisions require only a simple majority (three of five council members) to pass, the approval of any proposed amendment of a city's comprehensive plan will require the affirmative vote of at least four members (of a five-person city council). e. Approval by Met Council Required. If or when a City Council. approves an amendment of its Comprehensive Plan, the proposed amendment must then be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council for its review. The Met Council can decline to approve a proposed amendment if it is determined to be too much of a departure from the City's previously-approved land use plan, and/or ifthe proposed amendment is inconsistent with the Met Council's own regional plans (which were adopted, in part, in reliance upon the type of land use planning reflected in comprehensive plans of all of the individual cities located in the metropolitan area). f. Reliance Upon the Comprehensive Plan. Farmington's 2020 Comprehensive Plan is referred to on a regular basis by parties who wish to learn about (and work in a manner consistent with) the City's land use objectives and development goals. Because it is intended to be a long-term planning document, many people and organizations rely heavily upon the 2020 Comprehensive Plan when making critical long-term decisions. Very careful consideration must therefore be given to any proposed amendment that represents a substantial departure from the City's previously-adopted development philosophy. Some of the parties that refer to and rely upon the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan include (but are not limited to) the following: Farmington City Council Farmington Planning Commission and other City advisory bodies Farmington City Staff and Consultants Farmington Residents, Businesses, Organizations and Property Owners Individuals and Companies that are interested in moving or relocating to the Farmington area City of Lakeville and other nearby cities Empire, Castle Rock, Eureka and other nearby townships Dakota County (elected officials, staff and related agencies such as DCSWCD, etc.) Metropolitan Council State of Minnesota and its various agencies and departments (DNR, MPCA, MnDOT, EQB, etc.) Federal agencies and departments (Army Corps of Engineers, FAA, etc.) g. The "Urban Reserve" Land Use Designation in the Comprehensive Plan. The 2020 Comprehensive Plan includes over 2000 acres ofland with an Urban Reserve designation. All of the land in question is located along or near the far western municipal boundary of 3 ,'# . Farmington. The former Christensen property is located within this Urban Reserve. The Metropolitan Council's "Local Planning Handbook" indicates that an Urban Reserve is an area with an overall density of 1 unit per 40 acres for any new development, and that "local staged plans for the years 2000 to 2020 should protect these areas for later urbanization" (with "later" meaning after 2020). The City of Farmington has been "protecting" this Urban Reserve area for years by not allowing any type of large-scale development (residential, commercial, industrial or institutional) to occur there. The City's attention has been, and will continue to be, focused on the development that the City has wanted and expected to occur in other portions of Farmington between 2000 and 2020. h. Future Development of Current Urban Reserve Areas. The City has always anticipated that as residential development began to "wind down" in the central, southern and eastern portions of the City by or around 2020, incremental residential development could begin to occur in the current Urban Reserve area if a substantial proportion of the agricultural property owners in that area wanted such development to occur. Currently, at least 900 acres of farm property in the Urban Reserve area is enrolled in the State of Minnesota's "Agricultural Preserves" program. Property cannot be developed while it in the Ag Preserves program, nor can it be assessed for any portion of the cost of installing infrastructure (streets, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water, etc.) nearby, even if the property will eventually benefit from such improvements. In addition, any property owner who initiates the removal of his or her property from the Ag Preserve program. must wait eight years for the property's Ag Preserve status to terminate. Accordingly, the City of Farmington's plan for the future development of the Urban Reserve area has always been premised upon (a) waiting until most of the owners have removed themselves from the Ag Preserve program and (b) most of the owners have also indicated an interest in ending their farming operations, at which time (c) residential development could begin to progress in a logical and orderly fashion from nearby developed areas into adjacent undeveloped areas, with the required incremental infrastructure extensions being funded directly by developers or by assessments against the developing properties, rather than by local taxpayers. i. Consequences of Allowing Premature Development Within Urban Reserve Areas. Amending the 2020 Comprehensive Plan to allow the development of the former Christensen property as a high school site in the center of the Urban Reserve area would represent a radical departure from development scenario outlined above. First, most or all of the financial burden of paying for the extensive and expensive infrastructure improvements needed for the high school would fall upon ISD 192 taxpayers and/or City taxpayers, rather than upon developers, because no other development would be occurring in the vicinity at the time. Second, agricultural and rural residential property owners would be forced to deal with construction activity, increased traffic and commotion, conflicting or incompatible land uses, development pressure and other consequences that the 2020 Comprehensive Plan had led them to believe would not be occurring for at least 15 years. Third, the desired goal of gradual and orderly extensions of City services would be abandoned in favor of a rapid and large-scale extension of such services. Miles of paved roads, sewer lines and water lines would be installed at one time, which would inevitably lead to requests to use those suddenly-available services anywhere and everywhere. In order to retain some vestige of the Urban Reserve area that was originally planned for, the City would be put in the awkward position of having to continually say "no" to property owners who wanted to subdivide and develop their properties to take advantage of the newly-available municipal services. Once those services 4 4 are in, people will want to use them. Allowing them to do so will hasten the demise of the desired Urban Reserve area, but refusing to allow them to do so will be seen as unreasonable and uncooperative. The City will be left in an untenable situation. j. Notice to ISD 192 of Existence of Conflict with 2020 Comprehensive Plan City staff members have been receiving an increasing number of public inquiries regarding the nature, extent and timing of any information that may have been given to representatives of ISD 192 regarding potential 2020 Comprehensive Plan problems or issues related to the Christensen site. The following summary provides information about some (but not all) of the contacts that occurred concerning this topic. April 2004: City staff members first became aware that the Christensen property was being considered as a potential high school site in April of 2004. City staff immediately informed ISD 192 staff that the Christensen property was designated as "Urban Reserve" in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan, that the construction of a high school on the property would be inconsistent with that designation, and that the 2020 Comprehensive Plan expressly prohibited the extension of infrastructure (water, sanitary sewer, etc.) into the Urban Reserve area until at least the year 2020. Other potential problems with the site were also identified at that time, including the fact that a portion of the Christensen property was bisected by the planned alignment of a future extension of 208th Street between Pilot Knob Road and Cedar Avenue. Nevertheless, the ISD 192 Board of Education proceeded to approve an Option to purchase the Christensen property at its meeting on April 26, 2004 (see Exhibit C). June 2004: The conflict between the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and the proposed use of the Christensen property as a high school site was discussed again at a meeting between City staff and ISD 192 staff on June 22, 2004. This discussion was alluded to in a letter from Superintendent Meeks to City Planning Commissioner Todd Larson dated November 3,2004 (see attached Exhibit D). ISD 192 staff members indicated (on 6/22/04) their belief that the 2020 Comprehensive Plan was not (or should not be) an issue for them; their reasons included claims that (a) the 2020 Comprehensive Plan acknowledged that student enrollment would increase over time, but the Plan failed to specifically indicate that more school buildings would be needed, and (b) the parties who were involved in the reviewing and updating of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan between 1998 and 2000 failed to "field a single school representative." With regard to "(a)" above, it would seem that the alleged omission was simply a conclusion that was so patently self-evident that it didn't need to be stated. With regard to "(b)" above, it was arguably the responsibility of ISD 192, and not other parties, to "field" school representatives to participate in the update process for the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the fact that no school representatives are identified in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan's "Executive Summary" (see attached Exhibit E) does not mean that no school representatives participated in the process. The list in question simply identified the City elected and appointed officials, City staff members and City consultants who spearheaded the process. City Planner Lee Smick has indicated that she had regular contact with Mark Beltz and other ISD 192 representatives during the time that the 2020 Comprehensive Plan was being reviewed and updated. No concerns were expressed at that time regarding the content of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan or the nature and extent of ISD 192's involvement in the process. In fact, no concerns of any kind related to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan were apparently expressed by any ISD 192 staff member until the Plan apparently began to be 5 .. perceived as a potential obstacle to the proposed use of the Christensen property as a high school location. July 2004: Continuing concerns regarding potential problems related to identified high school site options led City staff to put the topic on the agenda for a City Council workshop meeting that was held on July 26,2004. At that meeting, City staff distributed a table (also provided to ISD 192; see Exhibit F) that briefly outlined a preliminary staff assessment of the relative difficulty (on a scale of 0 to 3, with 3 being the most difficult) of various factors related to the three sites that appeared to be under consideration by ISD 192 at that time. The Christensen site was assigned a difficulty rating of 3 with regard to the Comprehensive Plan factor, and the table specifically stated that "Development of this property prior to 2020 would be contrary to Comprehensive Plan." October 2004: Farmington resident and Planning Commission member Todd Larson addressed the ISD 192 Board of Education at its meeting on October 25, 2004. He indicated his personal belief that the use of the Christensen property as a high school location would be contrary to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan (see attached Exhibit G). At that same meeting, the School Board approved a Purchase Agreement between ISD 192 and the Christensens, and approved the "Review and Comment" document that ISD 192 was required to file with the Department of Education in connection with various anticipated school construction projects, including the construction of a new high school. December 2004: After the City Council election in November of 2004, Mayor-elect Kevan Soderberg, Councilmember Christy Fogarty and others continued to make inquiries regarding the previously-identified 2020 Comprehensive Plan issue and other aspects of the two potential' high school sites that were still under consideration at that time. City staff members were asked to compile additional background information on the issue to help prepare for a joint City/ISD 192 meeting that was scheduled for December 3, 2004. A staff memo dated December 2, 2004 (see attached Exhibit H) was provided to the City Administrator and to elected officials prior to the joint meeting. Mayor-elect Soderberg gave a copy of the memo to Superintendent Meeks at or shortly after the meeting. With regard to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan issue, the aforementioned memo quoted a number of passages from the Plan that conflicted with the concept of constructing a high school on the Christensen site. More specifically, the memo indicated: The placement of a multi-million-dol/ar high school campus on the Christensen property, the construction of the infrastructure needed to support it, and the resulting development pressure that would inevitably and prematurely arise in its vicinity would be inconsistent with and contrary to most or all of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan provisions summarized above. At a meeting that was held on December 13, 2004, the ISD 192 Board of Education adopted a resolution authorizing a $111,800,000 bond referendum (including $76,800,000 for a new high school) and calling for a special election to be held on February 15,2005. January/February 2005: During January and February of 2005, ISD 192 extensively promoted its upcoming bond referendum. A substantial amount of promotional material was printed and distributed. The Christensen property ("a site just southwest of Meadowview Elementary School") 6 'ft---, j. was identified in some of this literature as the proposed high school location. None of the literature in question apparently indicated that the use of the proposed location as a high school site was contrary to the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan, or that the site could not be used for a high school unless or until the City approved an amendment to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan, or that no such application had yet been submitted. April. 2005: ISD 192 confirmed in early April of 2005 that it had closed on the purchase of the Christensen property. The sale price was in excess of $3.8 million. At that point, ISD 192 had still not applied for an amendment of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan, and had not yet sought or received any clear indication that the Planning Commission would recommend approval of the required amendment or that the City Council would grant it. Mav 2005: ISD 192 applied for an amendment of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan in May of 2005, approximately 13 months after entering into an Option Agreement regarding the Christensen property. 2. POTENTIAL TEXT AMENDMENTS Although most of this Memo has been devoted to the request that the Comprehensive Plan designation for the former Christensen property be amended from Urban Reserve to Public/Semi- Public, it should be emphasized that making such a change on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan map would represent only a small portion of the revisions that would actually be required. Significant changes would also have to be made in many portions of the text of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Examples of the areas that would have to be revised can be found on pages H-2 through H-5 of the attached Exhibit H. For example, if Flagstaff Avenue is paved and if sanitary sewer and water lines are installed through the heart of the Urban Reserve area, it will make little sense to retain 2020 Comprehensive Plan provisions such as "Policy #16," which states: 16. It is the policy of the City of Farmington to provide developable areas with major infrastructure improvements. The urban reserve areas should not receive these improvements. Accordingly, if the Planning Commission is inclined to recommend to the City Council that the Comprehensive Plan designation for the former Christensen property be amended from Urban Reserve to Public/Semi-Public, City staff should be directed to draft revisions to all of the portions of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan that would be directly or indirectly affected by such a change. 3. REQUEST FOR REZONING The Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council regarding the requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment will presumably dictate Commission's recommendation regarding the requested rezoning. If the Commission recommends denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, it will be because the Commission is opposed to the immediate development of the site in question, in which case it would be pointless to recommend that the property be rezoned to accommodate the same land use that the Commission rej ected. 7 ..., . , Conversely, if the Planning Commission recommends that the requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment be granted, it will be because the Commission is in favor of the immediate development of the site in question, in which case the rezoning that will be required to effectuate the development will presumably be recommended by the Commission. 4. POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVE SITES Various combinations of ISD 192 staff members, ISD 192 School Board members, City staff members, and City Council members have met periodically to discuss problems and controversies that have arisen during the course of the site selection and approval process for the future high school. Additional meetings have already been scheduled for later this month. The need for a new high school is clearly undisputed. There is much less agreement regarding the acceptability of the former Christensen property as the site for the high school. The position of City staff has been, and continues to be, that potential alternative sites exist that are: (a) more compatible with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan, (b) more consistent with the City's Zoning Code, (c) closer to where most families currently live, (d) closer to where most of the new homes will be built within the next 10-15 years, ( e) closer to existing improved (paved) major roadways, which could be used for earlier access to a construction site, thereby accelerating the construction schedule, (f) no more expensive (overall), and possibly less expensive, than the Christensen site, and (g) within or adjacent to areas where developers would pay all or most of the cost of the additional infrastructure improvements that would be required in connection with the construction of a new high school. City staff members and elected officials have indicated their willingness to consider constructing City athletic fields adjacent to or near a more centrally-located high school location, thereby reducing the school's acreage requirements and making higher-priced land more affordable. ISD 192 has inquired about the possibility of incorporating a Community Center into the high school project, and the City would be more interested in that possibility if the high school could be built in a more central or more convenient location. The City's staff, consultants, appointed officials and elected officials have experience, connections, expertise and potential incentives that they are prepared to use, for the School District's benefit, in connection with the pursuit, acquisition and development of any mutually-acceptable high school site. The duties of City staff members include (among other things) gathering information, analyzing options, making recommendations and offering opinions to the Planning Commission and the City Council. The collective opinion of City staff in this instance is that a joint and collaborative good- faith effort on the part of the City and ISD 192, along with some flexibility, common sense, creativity and hard work, will result in the identification of a high school site that will meet ISD 192's most important site parameters without necessitating controversial and potentially problematic modifications of the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. In effect, a vote by the Planning Commission to recommend that the City Council deny the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment regarding the former Christensen property could be seen, instead, as a vote to affirm the Planning Commission's belief that the School District and the City can do better --- together. 8 o. . ACTION REQUESTED 1. Recommend that the City Council deny the request by ISD 192 that the 2020 Comprehensive Plan be amended from Urban Reserve to Public/Semi-Public for the 110- acre property (the former Christensen property) located west of Flagstaff Avenue and south of County Road 64 (also known as 200th Street West). 2. Recommend that the City Council deny the request to rezone the property referred to above from A-I (Agricultural) to R-I (Low Density Residential). 9 ~ .r 2020 Comprehensive Plan /\/ City Boundary c==J Urban Reserve Cl Commercial o Industrial CJ Business Park D Low Density CJ Low Medium 1::=:J Medium Density l_.J High Density r-i Public/Semi-public r:~::j Park/OS r1 Env Sen Under D Restricted Development DRaW l r I I . I I I 1____ L~_~=-~ Downtown N w.' -- {=1'l t~. , -ZCS ~d-J I i Ii !!UQ {1:/- iJ i: i I :i~T ~~'~~ ~~ UU1~ =:L~..m []]]]JfJ . r--~ mJTlIJ r s Revised on February 19, 2004 1 . City of Farmington Zoning Districts ) I ~~ j !ffi!HIB'5) PUD \ I ffiEl Ord. #001-459 ~ A-1 '~. 0 c cP ~ ~ r-, Mrt. ,~ ~ OO!B ~ ~i! n R.' L-! ) rl ~ IL "~J ~ -1 II~U \\ d d \\ ~ \\ 111M:: Y ru ~R~~ IW LL ~1 ~ 13 c .............. - ~l ...., :.. .... c I ~ n~ l~ ~ ~r:<~ '~ " 'I .' \:1 1: JI- ~-~ ...., "~. ~ T'R ,--, - I 0 ~ 0 ~ ~\;I] 1 , I I ...., r -^'" i~ ~F'" 1 ~ 10. :i . ~ 3... ~ I' - R-' gEHlllffii~ Ji. I) J ~ I : .... ~ii ~ r .-- R-' ; , ~ ;;:.h ; 1-' ~ [l] '~ ---1 ,-, . ~I _.;,- ..I~, ..... !..' ., ~-. -. ... '), .1. -.J --' t1l .u ~ 'I~~ .. " \t 0') ~" , II, . ~ ...., ,. ,. ,~' I ". ---.-' l IJ.I!IlI !1111'i1ll ~ I ~ ~~ ~q:1; ., 1;.. ...., I '~ ~:- ,,~(( ~~" Wi I ~ ~ ~ .. [:~ ...., I '_11-- 1) n , ..;h..... I U- \ . (j) /' / MUSA Boundary TUrT .."'/ City Boundary - + Historic Properties - 8 D A-1 (Agriculture) .\ D P/OS (Park/Open Space) " If - D B-1 (Limited Business) -, n I lI'L~ - B-2 (Downtown Business) Downtown i!!3 B-3 (Heavy Business) ~ B-4 (Neighborhood Commerciai) .r,~ P om EEIJj ffLIJ trrn IT ~ Business Commercial Flex D Mixed-Use L 1! . m B3?dDIDJ ~_~ D iP (Industriai Park) N R iIDR _ ITDIJ D 1-1 (Light Industrial) W.E ~io, Ii -"rn ~ Spruce Street Cooridor . . allUmJIJ ~ iii BP (Business Park) D R-1 (Low Density Residential) ~ lITE ITOO EfJJE D R-2 (Low/Medium Density Residential) S li.~ ~~ ~~fIH!di~;rn D R-3 (Medium Density Residential) D R-4 (Medium/High Density Residential) D R-5 (High Density Residential) ~ I -' D R-T (Downtown Transitional) =ttHa: ggm~~~ D RD (Downtown Residential) D Water Revised on November 17, 2004 ~ } illJE RITh nmn III rmm m D ROW (Right-aI-Way) c:::l PUD District ...- Attorneys at Law ^ Limited Liability Partnership RB 33 South Sixth Street Suite 4900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone' 6] 2.340.8900 Fax. 612 . 340 . 7900 www.riderlawcom RIDERBENNETT Jeffrey D. Carpenter (612) 340-8935 jcarpenter@riderlaw.com May 20, 2005 BY HAND DELIVERY Ms. Lee Smick City Planner City of Farmington City Hall 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 .J-..i Re: Farmington School District/Christensen Property-- Application for Amendment to Farmington Comprehensive Plan Our File No.: 17461.000104 Dear Ms. Smick: Our office serves as legal counsel to Independent School District No. 192, otherwise known as the Farmington School District (the "District"). As you know, the District is continuing to work with the City of Farmington in connection with the various approval processes relating to the District's proposed development of a new high school facility on the former Christensen property (the "Property"). In connection with the foregoing, this correspondence serves as the District's letter application for an amendment of the Farmington Comprehensive Plan for the purpose of changing the City's existing land use designation for the Property from "Urban Reserve" to "Public/Semi Public". In connection with the foregoing, and on behalf of the District, please find enclosed and filed with the City of Farmington the following: I. Addendum to Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment; 2. $350.00 Filing Fee; 3. Legal Description for Property; 4. Rider Bennett, LLP Letter (providing summary description of change of land use); 5. Land Use Plan Map (depicting proposed change in land use designation); and ExIH /3Ir A J RIDER BENNETT, LLP Ms. Lee Smick May 20, 2005 Page 2 6. List of Names and Addresses (350-foot property owners), together with four (4) sets of address labels. Thank you, and please let me know if you have any questions whatsoever. Very truly yours, RIDER BENNETT, LLP BY~' JDC/rmm Enclosures cc: Dr. Brad Meeks (w/enc.) Mr. Doug Bonar (w/enc.) Mr. Troy Miller (w/enc.) 1259043-1 HE RIDER BENNETT ;1-2 -~'''' FARMINGTON HIGH SCHOOL REVISED LAND USE PLAN Legend .^./ City Boundary /' I MUSA 80undQry tnvironmentally Sensative- Flood Plain/M aior WeUands C:] Flood Plain Boundary within Developed Area :'..?R~ Flood PlalniW etland Boundary In Undeveloped Area Comprehensive Land Uses Urb an Res erve Business Industrial Business Park Low Density R esldenllal LowlMedlum Density Medium Density High Density Public/Semi Public CIty Park/Open Space Restricted Development Natural Open Space ROW New Hiah School Site Change Land Use from Urban Reserve to Public / Semi Public Revised 2020 Land Use Plan Note: Graphics and Legend taken from City of Farmington's 2020 Comprehensive Plan /1-3 " ADDENDUM TO APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 1. Introduction. Independent School District No. 192, otherwise known as the Farmington School District (the "District") hereby applies for an amendment to the Farmington Comprehensive Plan (the "Plan"), as more fully discussed below, in connection the planned development of the District's new Farmington High School (the "Project") on the former Christensen family farm property, located in west Farmington adjacent to Flagstaff Avenue (the "Property"). 2. Rezoninq Petition. Contemporaneous with the District's application for an amendment to the Plan, the District has also petitioned to rezone the Property from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). See District's Petition for Rezoning. 3. Proiect Summary. Although the Project currently remains in the design phase, such that a detailed design of the overall Project is not presently available, the concept plan for the Project includes the following features: (a) A new, approximately 423,485 square foot, three story, Farmington High School with an approximate capacity of 2,200 students, including the following features: classrooms, science labs, cafeteria, library/media center, theater/auditorium, gymnasium(s), locker rooms, and swimming pool. (b) Parking Areas, consisting of approximately 1,185 parking stalls, for administration, staff, teacher and student parking, together with driveways and bus-drop off and turnaround areas. (c) Recreational and playing fields, including approximately eight physical education fields, tennis courts, and softball fields, two baseball diamonds, and one football stadium. (d) Agricultural fields, including a possible greenhouse. (e) Creation of a wetland project area in conjunction with site water retention work. 1257635.3 1 A-t/ "" 4. Existinq Site. The Property was formally part of the Christensen family farm, and was actively farmed by, or on behalf of, the Christensen family. Under the terms of the Purchase Agreement, between the District and the Christensens, the Christensens are expected to continue to farm the Property for the 2005 growing year. 5. The Neiqhborhood. The Property is currently designated as Urban Reserve under the Plan, and is also zoned A-1 (Agriculture). Adjacent and much of the immediately surrounding property located within the Farmington city limits is similarly designated as Urban Reserve and zoned A-1 (Agriculture). Notwithstanding the above, adjacent to the Property, and located immediately to the west, two residential developments exist immediately inside the Lakeville city limits: (a) Ardmoor, an established mobile home community; and (b) Spyglass, a new and expanding multi-unit residential community. Furthermore, located immediately to the north, east (across Flagstaff Avenue), southeast (across Flagstaff Avenue), and south, there are ten individual residential properties, each ranging in lot size from approximately 2-12 acres. In light of the above, and notwithstanding the current Plan designation and zoning, the neighborhood surrounding the Property combines both agricultural and residential characteristics. See Exhibit A attached hereto. 6. Specialized Population. The District's future use of the Property contemplates principal use and occupation by high school students from Ninth to Twelfth Grade, with ages ranging from approximately 14 to 19 years old. The District has a public and legal responsibility for the care and safekeeping of all of its public school children, including its high school student population. The Property offers the District with a secure setting in that it affords the District with a completely self-contained school site without existing traffic lanes severing the property, and additionally allows the District the ability, based on the site configuration, to minimize frontage along Flagstaff Avenue, resulting in placement of recreational fields well away from vehicular danger. While other development may eventually cluster around the Property, such development would then need to take into account an existing school facility, offering the City the opportunity to control such development in a manner most conducive to ensuring the continuing safety and security of the District's student population. 7. Conformity of Proiect with Existinq Plan. In connection with this Application, the District is requesting an amendment to the City's existing Plan. As proposed, the District seeks only a change in the land use designation from "Urban Reserve" to "Public/Semi 1257635-3 2 A-S- Public". While the Project is anticipated to include features compatible with agricultural property generally, such a change in land use designation would more accurately reflect the intended use of the Property by the District, and would be consistent with land use designations for the District's existing facilities. Excepting the specifics of the proposed amendment, both the Property and the Project remain in general conformity with the Plan. (a) Public school expansion is not express/v addressed in the Plan. The Plan does not expressly address comprehensive planning for public school development or expansion. For example, the Plan does designate certain areas in or adjacent to the City's urban centers as "Public/Semi Public", which areas include, among other things, the District's existing school facilities. See Plan at pp. 5-11; See also, Plan Map 3.1 (2020 Land Use Plan). Beyond that, however, the Plan does not appear to designate additional Public/Semi Public areas as expressly for future educational facility expansion. This is understandable in that it may be unrealistic for the City to incorporate within its comprehensive planning the District's unique facilities needs.1 It is therefore assumed that such facilities needs were, in part, outside the scope of the Plan. Consequently, the extent. of consistency between the Project and the Plan must be indirectly inferred from the content thereof. (b) Population arowth supports proiected need for additional school facilities. The Plan confirms that residential growth has increased at the rate of 194 housing units per year since 1990, resulting in a near doubling of the city's population from 1990 (5,940) to 1998 (10,641). Projections through 2020 indicate estimated growth to continue at a forecasted rate of 275 households per year, with a 2020 population estimated at 27,090 persons. See Plan at p. 4. In contrast, the City's website currently indicates population growth in excess of those projected in the Plan, with the City's 2004 population exceeding 18,000 persons, as compared to the a projected 2005 population of only 16,310. Thus, actual and projected population growth within the City, alone, indicates the probability of increased population pressure on existing educational facilities, and supports the District's own projected overcapacity problems. In fact, the City has noted the impact of such growth on the District, in commenting as follows: 1 It is important to note that the District's attendance boundaries extend well beyond the City, and additionally include a small portion of the City of Lakeville and Vermillion and Hampton Townships, as well as substantial portions of Empire, Castle Rock and Eureka Townships. Consequently, the District's facilities needs are dependent only in part on population changes within the City, and instead are a direct response to population growth on a larger regional basis as well. 1257635-3 3 A-C'o As documented in the School District's report in 1998, the continued need for single-family homes will also be strong because of the increase in kindergarten to elementary school aged children, signaling the growth of young families with the community. See Plan at 47. Consequently, and although not expressly provided for in the Plan, it can be assumed that the City has anticipated the District's need for additional public school development through 2020. (c) Expansion of some Public/Semi-Public areas is proiected in the Plan. The Plan does project an increase in unspecified Public/Semi-Public areas through 2020 in the amount approximately equal to 145 acres. See Plan at p. 6. Whether this increase contemplates school growth or some other Public/Semi- Public expansion is unclear. While the projected 2020 growth under this category is admittedly well below the District's actual acreage needs, taking into account the District's immediate overall K-12 growth needs, there is at least inferential support for the proposition that the Plan envisions some expansion of the District's facilities needs. (d) ExistinG zoninG desiGnation supports inference of continuinG school expansion. Consistent with the foregoing, and although the Plan does not specifically designate additional "Public/Semi Public" areas for future public school development, it is important to note that the City has included public schools as an allowed conditional use in the vast majority of all presently existing developed and undeveloped real property within the City limits (excluding only certain business, commercial and industrial districts). See Farming Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 5. Although zoned "A-1 (Agricultural District)", the Property, as now designated by the District for its new Farmington High School site, also retains this favorable zoning "designation. Consequently, and although the District believes an R-1 (Low Density Residential) zoning designation would be more appropriate for a public school facility, the Property remains eligible for public school development as an allowed conditional use under its existing zoning designation. See Farmington Zoning Ordinance 9 10-5-5 (C). (e) The Proiect is compatible with the City's established Goal of preservinG and maintaininG its workina farms. The Plan establishes a goal of preserving and maintaining working farms located along its western and southwestern sections. See Plan at 10. See also, Plan at 12. While admittedly the Project will remove existing agricultural acreage from production along the western section of the City, elements of compatibility will still exist and in some respects will be advanced. First, the District's current, and 1257635-3 4 A-7 projected future, high school curriculum encompass a significant focus on agricultural course work, including classes in animal science, agri-business management, and horticulture, as well as well as class work providing actual hands-on experience in livestock and crop production. This curriculum is enhanced by placement of the school within an active, vibrant agricultural setting. Moreover, the District's current vision for the Project also encompasses on-site agricultural features, including agricultural fields, a possible greenhouse, and a wetland retention area. Opportunities to enhance education in agricultural areas will have the effect of furthering support for the overall preservation of the City's, and surrounding communities', agricultural heritage. This can best be accomplished within a true agricultural setting. In fact, placement of the Project in a more urban, residential setting may have the effect of limiting certain of those functions. (f) The City's strateavof preservinG a natural edqe or buffer between the City and Lakeville is accomplished bv Project. The Plan establishes land use strategies of preserving a natural edge or open space buffer between the City and Lakeville. See Plan at 12 and 15. This strategy is effectively implemented by the Project's combined features of open, recreational fields, wetland areas, planned agricultural fields, etc. With virtually all of the Project's planned building structures located near or adjacent to Flagstaff Avenue, approximately 75 acres of open, recreational spaces will serve as a permanent buffer between the two municipalities. It is additionally important to note that the lifespan of the Project would substantially exceed the Plan's 2020 time horizon, and will likely additionally survive much, if not all, of the existing agricultural character of the City's western corridor, assuming uninterrupted and continuing urban expansion within the City, as suggested by historical and projected population trends within the City. (g) The City's strateqv of promotinG residential clusterinq of homes consistent with minimum lot requirements in aGricultural districts is not incompatible with Project. The City has established a strategy of promoting residential clustering of homes consistent with minimum lot requirements in agricultural districts. See Plan at 15. To the extent that the Project is deemed to encourage residential development within the western corridor, such would operate to facilitate this strategy in tandem with the continued preservation by the City of its minimum lot requirements. In fact, the precise location of the Project within, and adjacent to, an existing cluster of homes may have the effect of localizing further clustering in its immediate vicinity-rather than elsewhere in the western areas of the City. Suggestions that the Project may produce a contrary result in the erosion of the agricultural districts through higher density development pressures ignores two factors: (i) the City controls minimum lot requirements and would, itself, need to accommodate such residential growth for it to occur; and (ii) high school facilities are not necessarily residential development magnets. It is not 1257635-3 5 A-Z uncommon for new development in the vicinity of an existing high school to incorporate design features that buffer such development from the school. (h) The City's strateav of protectina workina farms and limitina infrastructure within Urban Reserve is not incompatible with Proiect. The City has established a strategy of protecting working farms in western areas of the City through the designation of such areas as Urban Reserve, and through the limitation of infrastructure in those areas. See Plan at 23. The Project is not incompatible with this strategy or its underlying goal. As previously discussed, agricultural elements of the District's curriculum, combined with agricultural components of the Project, should operate to enhance the protection of working farms-particularly among families residing within the District's attendance boundaries, whose students would presumably attend the District's high school. While infrastructure will be required to support the Project, such infrastructure will not detract from the agricultural character of the area. Moreover, road infrastructure in particular should operate to enhance the lives of the existing residents in that area. (i) The City's policv of maintainina and expandina existina aaricultural preserves is not materiallv incompatible with the Proiect. The Plan establishes a goal of maintaining the existing agricultural preserve and further expanding that preserve. See Plan at 23-24. While it is true that the Property has been removed from agricultural preserve by the District for the purpose of implementing the Project, this District's actions in this regard merely accelerated by only a few years a decision previously implemented by the prior owners-the Christensens, when they filed to remove all of their land, including the Property, from agricultural preserve. While the decision by the Christensens may have been incompatible with the goals established in the Plan, their actions should not be attributed to the District. Given the inevitability of the Property's removal from the preserve, the District's role in that process was no more than nominally incompatible with the Plan. Moreover, the agreement between the District and the Christensens ensures the continued use of the Property for agricultural purposes for the 2005 growing season, further minimizing any impact resulting from the District's actions. Finally, as indicated above, the Project itself conceptually incorporates essentially permanent agricultural and open space characteristics that are generally compatible with agricultural preserves. U) Restrictions aaainst allowance of infrastructure improvements in urban reserve areas not incompatible with Plan as amended. Absent an amendment of the Plan to change in the Property's land use designation from "Urban Reserve" to "Public/Semi Public", the District realizes that the provision of major infrastructure improvements to the Property might be incompatible with the Plan. A change in the land use designation to 1257635-3 6 A-'1 "Public/Semi Public", however, should operate to eliminate this possible inconsistency. As such no further amendment to the Plan should be necessary. Notwithstanding the above, it is also important to note that prior discussions among the City, District and City of Lakeville ("Lakeville") have indicated the possibility that sewer and water capacity and related infrastructure could be furnished by Lakeville, thereby at least temporarily limiting the installation of such infrastructure within urban reserve areas. As such, and assuming there is a concern by the City over possible Plan incompatibility resulting from installation of infrastructure within urban reserve areas, the District remains open to exploration with Lakeville of feasible alternatives. (k) The Proiect is not incompatible with the City's policy of staaed arowth based on availability of infrastructure. The City has established, as part of its development planning processes, a strategy of considering the desirability of extending services to an area before the area can develop. See Plan at 33. This is a laudable strategy and warrants consideration in this instance, as in all others. It is noteworthy, however, to observe that the Plan does not establish a prohibition against such extension of services. Rather, the Plan contemplates a thoughtful analysis by the City of the corresponding benefits and detriments. In this case, the District has budgeted for the extension of all, or substantially all, services to the Property. Consequently, the City will likely not incur any cost or expense for the extension of such services. Moreover, and while development on this basis may not be viewed as compatible in many other instances, such is not the case for a high school facility. The sheer size of the project, combined with traffic, stadium, noise, lighting and other issues, though individually applicable to various developments, are collectively unique to high schools, and pose location problems for both school districts and city planners as they endeavor to strike a balance among the programic and other needs of the school district, the city's desire to properly manage development within its jurisdiction, and the understandable interest of neighboring property owners to preserve the pre-existing sanctity of their homes and businesses. These problems are compounded exponentially when high school location is accomplished in the same manner as other staged development-as the proximate location of a high school to existing urban development is precisely the event that triggers many of the problems that are sought to be avoided. Conversely, placement of a high school more remotely, thereby allowing subsequent urban development to evolve around it on a planned basis, reduces or eliminates these problems. The reason for this is that commercial, retail and/or residential developers and property owners are then aware of the high school's location and site configuration, and can plan development in a manner to better take into account both the advantages and disadvantages posed by the high school site. All of this tends to enhance a more harmonious development relationship between both the school district and the municipality and their corresponding constituents. 1257635.3 7 11- 10 (I) The Proiect is compatible with the City's lona term vision for its West Rural district. The City identifies in its Plan a relationship between the agricultural character of the West Rural district and the City's twofold vision to maintain and enhance the existing rural character of the City, and to provide an open space buffer between the City and Lakeville. See Plan at 40-41. As more fully discussed above, the Project is compatible with this vision in that the curricular, recreational and agricultural characteristics of the Project should operate to indefinitely preserve elements of the City's rural character, and should provide a permanent open space buffer between the two municipalities. The Plan further identifies, among others, the following underlying reasons prompting this vision. In many respects, the Project is compatible with these reasons. (i) The propertv owners' desire to keep the district in aaricultural use. Ignoring for the moment the Project's retention of agricultural elements, the District does not dispute that a portion of the Property will be taken out of agricultural use as a result of the Project. This outcome, however, does not appear to be contrary to the existing desires of proximate property owners. In the case of the Christensen family, from whom the Property was acquired in an entirely voluntary transaction, it is clear that they did not oppose high school development on the site. In fact, the Christensens insisted on it, expressing a strong desire that the Property be used as the District's new high school site. That expression is reflected in the parties' written agreements-which actually require the development of a public school on the site within only six years. It is important to note that the Christensens will continue to reside on, and farm, land located adjacent to the Property, as well as other land located in the West Rural District. Similarly, the District has not been informed of any significant opposition among other property owners within that district, with many such owners openly supporting the Project. (ii) The need for sianificant infrastructure uparades to support development within the district. The District acknowledges the need for many such upgrades as a condition to development of the Project on the Property. Prior to the referendum that has provided funding for the Project, the District in fact worked closely with City staff to identify such infrastructure improvements so that the associated costs would be included in the referendum for 1257635-3 8 11-11 such purpose. As such, the District has agreed to step forward to undertake those identified infrastructure costs. (iii) The need for continued pondina alona the southeastern portion of the district. Such ponding is required under the Surface Water Management Plan. The Project will not interfere with the preseNation of such ponding, and in fact will include additional ponding on the Property in the form of a wetland retention area. (iv) The need for fulfillment of the City's vision for an aaricultural buffer. The Plan makes varying references to both "agricultural" and "open space" buffers in connection with this concept, and the precise distinction between these terms remains unclear. Nevertheless, for the reasons set forth above, the Project should operate to preseNe the City's vision for such a buffer. Moreover, the anticipated permanence of a high school facility within an active and growing community suggests that the buffer afforded by the Project may in fact dramatically outlast open space buffers comprised solely of agricultural property. (m) The Proiect is compatible with the City's surface water and wetland manaaement aoals. The Plan addresses goals for surface water management in conformity with the City's Surface Water Management Plan (the "SWMP"), and for ensuring the continuing protection of the wetlands in compliance with the City's Wetland Ordinance (the "Wetland Ordinance"). See Plan at 58-61. As discussed above, the Project contemplates ponding to address on-site storm water issues, as well as an expansion of the storm drainage system as part of the proposed infrastructure upgrades. Finally, and although no wetland is anticipated to be affected by the Project, it is additionally expected to include, as part of the ponding, a wetland retention area. It remains the District's intent to comply with the SWMP, Wetland Ordinance and other state and local laws and rules governing surface water management issues. (n) The Proiect is not incompatible with the City's 2020 Thorouahfare Plan. In the City's 2020 Thoroughfare Plan, 208th Street is designated as an east/west major collector from Cedar Avenue in Lakeville to Trunk Highway 3 in the City. See Plan at 90. Although the currently proposed alignment of 208th Street bisects a portion of the Property, a small southerly adjustment to the 1257635-3 9 11- J ;).. alignment of this collector street will operate to preserve 20ath Street's major collector status. The District's proposal for such realignment has received some preliminary support, and the District remains committed to working with the City, Dakota County and other interested parties to arrive at a mutually acceptable realignment plan. (0) The Proiect furthers the implementation of the City's proposed park and trail system. The Plan reflects a City vision for a comprehensive system of parks and trails, consisting in part of a combination of mini parks, neighborhood parks, community parks, community preserves, and lineal trails. See Plan at 116-119. In presumed implementation of the City's planning recommendations set forth in the Plan, th~City has compiled an Existing and Proposed Park, Trail and Open Space Plan. That plan identifies a proposed 25-acre park facility substantially on land comprising the Property. See City's Existing and Proposed Park, Trail and Open Space Plan Map (Revised as of September 10, 2004). Given many of the recreational features of the Project, and the fact that a public high school facility affords the general public with many park-like amenities (subject, of course, to the administration of a school district's educational and extracurricular curriculum), the Project is functionally in direct conformity with the City's future community park plans for the West Rural district. 1257635-3 10 A-I?> EXHIBIT A Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Exhibit A-1 Exhibit A-2 Exhibit A-3 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services, Treasurer. Auditor and Propertv Records Departments ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page t+- /4 http://207 .171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1&Left=527520. 776545066&Botto... 5/1 0/2005 EXHIBIT A-2 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/512005. & Select option and click map: Ildentify liIJ PIN: 14-02600-019-50 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $3:9,700 Owner: MARLO V & CONNIE A DAHL 2004 Taxable Val~e (Payable 2005). $269,800 Address' 20520 FLAGSTAFF AVE Payable 2005 Tax. $3,028.16 Qi!y;. FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eaae: 10.00 I . , Year BUilt: 1992 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services, Treasurer. Auditor and Prooertv Records Departments ~~ ~ I:OUNTT Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page A -IS- htto:/1207 . 171.98.200/scriots/esrimao.dll?Name=weba 1 &Left=529580.91 0799253&Botto... 5/10/2005 '. EXHIBIT A-3 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: I Identify Ui' PIN: 14-02600-021-50 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $356,300 Owner: DARCY A & PAMELA J ZEHNDER 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $272,000 Address: 20602 FLAGSTAFF AVE Payable 2005 Tax: $3,055.90 City: FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eage: 1_0.00 , Year BUilt: 1993 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services, Treasurer. Auditor and ProperlY Records Departments c;..j-<") / ~ ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page A-/~ http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq I &Left=530439.91534087 &Bottom... 5/10/2005 EXHIBIT A-4 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . [ill :. ....'l<.. ::::_.'~ ....'.. Select option and click map: I Identify PIN: 14-02600-023-50 2005 Est. Value (Pavable 2006): $517,200 Owner: RONALD L & DIANA J VALEK 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $481,000 Address' 20630 FLAGSTAFF AVE S Payable 2005 Tax: $5,629.64 Cit . FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eage: 11.84 ~ I Year BUilt: 1994 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with AssessinQ Services, Treasurer - Auditor and Prooertv Records Deparbnents ..,..cJ> ~~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page .' A-/7 http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1 &Left=530438.36436429&Bottom... 5/1 0/2005 EXHIBIT A-5 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: I Identify ~ PIN: 14-02600-021-51 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $38,600 Owner: JOHN S TSCHOHL 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $19,700 Address: Payable 2005 Tax: $221.22 City. Total Acreage: 4.83 . , Year Built: 0 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services, Treasurer - Auditor and Prooertv Records Departments ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page A -If http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1 &Left=530436.02522204&Bottom... 5/10/2005 EXHIBIT A-6 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . PIN: 14-02600-012-50 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $282,500 Owner: JOHN T & ALEXIS GLYNN 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $254,800 Address' 20850 FLAGSTAFF AVE W Payable 2005 Tax: $2,839.08 City: FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eaQe: 10.00 . Year BUilt: 1977 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services. Treasurer - Auditor and Prooertv Records Departments C..j-<) ./ ~ ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page it-1'1 http://207 .171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq I&Left=529767 .644073755&Botto... 5/10/2005 EXHIBIT A-7 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: Ildentify '~ PIN: 14-02600-015-50 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $242,200 Owner: GERALD C & TERESA A GREGORY 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $223,700 Address: 20940 FLAGSTAFF AVE Payable 2005 Tax: $2,447.10 City: FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eaQe: 3.00 , Year BUilt: 1987 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services, Treasurer. Auditor and fTI!Qertv Records Departments ..".cJ1' ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page jJ,-;p http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1 &Left=530625.31031 0888&Bptto... 5/10/2005 EXHIBIT A-8 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: I Identify If PIN: 14-02600-017-50 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $310,800 Owner' ALLEN J BRAUN 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $287,400 Addre~s' 20970 FLAGSTAFF AVE Payable 2005 Tax: $3,250.00 Cit : FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eage: 2.00 ~ , Year BUilt: 1991 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS . =pe..tion wllh """"00 S'''''if~d Property .oco"', Depa_oI, ~UNTY Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page A-dl http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1 &Left=530778.420759997 &Botto... 5/1 0/2005 EXHIBIT A-9 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: Ildentify, .II PIN: 14-02600-025-50 2005 Est. Value (Pavable 2006): $387,900 Owner: SHAWN LAUER AMES 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $361,200 Address: 20982 FLAGSTAFF AVE Payable 2005 Tax: $4,180.18 City: FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eaQe: 9.06 I Year BUilt: 1994 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services, Treasurer - Auditor and ProoerlY Records Departments ~~ ....: COUNTY Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page 11.~, :. {, v ," http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq1&Left=530532.311527681&Botto... 5/1012005 EXHIBIT A-tO Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: Ident; ~~~:!ij:llltal~~~'!,flI1811W;1 PIN: 14-02700-031-80 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $277,900 Owner: DAVID A & UTE S CHRISTOPHERSON 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $256,600 Address: 20993 FLAGSTAFF AVE W Payable 2005 Tax: $2,861.78 City. FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eaae: 2.00 ., Year BUilt: 1963 This application was developed by the Dakota County OffICe of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services, Treasurer - Auditor and Prooertv Records Departments ...<::..7> ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page A-')3 http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dl1?Name=webq 1&Left=530881.585400906&Botto... 5/1 0/2005 . .. LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PROPOSED NEW FARMINGTON HIGH SCHOOL SITE (FORMER CHRISTENSEN PROPERTY) The Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, all in Section 27, Township 114 North, Range 20 West, Dakota County, Minnesota. ALSO: That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, Township 114 North, Range 20 West, Dakota County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 27; thence South 00 degrees 19 minutes 57 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said Southeast Quarter, 990.29 feet; thence South 89 degrees 57 minutes 18 seconds West, parallel with the north line of said Southeast Quarter, 1320.15 feet to the west line of the Northeast Quarter of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 00 degrees 2fHminutes 16 seconds East, along said west line, 990.29 feet to the northwest corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 57 minutes 18 seconds East, along the north line of said Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, 1319.77 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 110.00 acres more or less. 1259052-1 /i-d~ HE RIDER BENNETT Attorneys at Law A Limited Liability Partnership ... . RB 33 South Sixth Street Suite 4900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone. 612 . 340 . 8900 Fax' 612.340.7900 www.riderlawcom RIDE R BENNETT Jeffrey D. Carpenter (612) 340-8935 jcarpenter@riderIaw.com May 20, 2005 BY HAND DELIVERY Ms. Lee Smick City Planner City of Farmington City Hall 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 Re: Farmington School District/Christensen Property-Summary Description of Proposed Change of Land Use Our File No.: 17461.000104 Dear Ms. Smick: Our office serves as legal counsel to Independent School District No. 192, otherwise known as the Farmington School District (the "District"). As you know, the District is continuing to work with the City of Farmington in connection with the various approval processes relating to the District's proposed development of a new high school facility on the former Christensen property (the "Property"). This correspondence is submitted in connection with the District's letter application for an amendment of the Farmington Comprehensive Plan for the purpose of changing the City's existing land use designation for the Property from "Urban Reserve" to "Public/Semi Public". A summary description of the District's proposed change of land use on the Property is set forth below. During all relevant periods prior to the date of this correspondence, the Property has been used, to the District's best knowledge and belief, exclusively for agricultural purposes. In particular, the District understands that, prior to its acquisition of the Property on March 30, 2005, the Property was used specifically for crop farming purposes. The District proposes to change the use of the Property such that the future use thereof would be for public school purposes and all other purposes ancillary thereto. Specifically, the proposed use future use of the Property would be for the development and operation of the District's new Farmington High School. In addition to a new high school building, inclusive of such features and amenities as classrooms, labs, administrative and other offices, a cafeteria, a theater/auditorium, and a gymnasium, the site is projected to include a baseball diamond, football stadium, various softball and recreational fields, possible agricultural fields and a possible green house. In addition to use of the Property for the District's normal high school educational A-~S- ~ RIDER BENNETT, LLP Ms. Lee Smick May 20, 2005 Page 2 curriculum, uses will also include various extracurricular uses such as providing playing and competition fields for the District's varsity and junior varsity football, baseball, soccer and other athletic teams, providing facilities to support student theatrical and musical performances, and such other public school or ancillary uses as the District may designate from time to time. As public school property, and subject to conflicting school uses (including the District's need to secure and maintain its various properties), it is expected that the Property will also serve various general community recreational needs. If for any reason you would like further information regarding any of the above, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Very truly yours, RIDER BENNETT, LLP BY~~ JDC/rmm Enclosures cc: Dr. Brad Meeks (w/enc.) Mr. Doug Bonar (w/enc.) Mr. Troy Miller (w/enc.) 1259055-1 j4- (}b RIDE~NETT Attorneys at Law A Limited Liability Partner:;hip RB 33 South Sixth Street Suite 4900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone. 612.340.8900 Fax' 6]2.340.7900 www.riderlawcom RIDER BENNETT Jeffrey D. Carpenter (612) 340-8935 j carpenter@rider1aw.com May 20, 2005 MAY 2 0 200S '~L)/ i "1/' I ...._.1 BY HAND DELIVERY Ms. Lee Smick City Planner City of Farmington City Hall 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 Re: Farmington School District/Christensen Property-- Petition for Rezoning Our File No.: 17461.000104 Dear Ms. Smick: Our office serves as legal counsel to Independent School District No. 192, otherwise -known as the Farmington School District (the "District"). As you kIlow, the District is continuing to work with the City of Farmington in connection with the various approval processes relating to the District's proposed development of a new high school facility on the former Christensen property (the "Property"). In connection with the foregoing, the District hereby petitions the for rezoning of the Property from A-I (Agriculture) to R-l (Low Density Residential). In connection with the foregoing, and on behalf of the District, please find enclosed and filed with the City of Farmington the following: 1. Petition for Rezoning; 2. Addendum to Petition for Rezoning: 3. $300.00 Filing Fee; and 4. Zoning Map (depicting proposed change in zoning designation). This petition has been submitted to the City simultaneous with the District's application for amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the required list of names and addresses for 350-foot property owners and mailing label sets, as required pursuant to Section 10-3-12 (A) ( 4) of the City's Zoning Ordinance, have been enclosed with that application and are incorporated herein by this reference. c-xNt /31 T t3 RIDER BENNETT, LLP Ms. Lee Smick May 20, 2005 Page 2 Thank you, and please let me know if you have any questions whatsoever. Very truly yours, RIDER BENNETT, LLP BY~~___ JDC/rmm Enclosures cc: Dr. Brad Meeks (w/enc.) Mr. Doug Bonar (w/enc.) Mr. Troy Miller (w/enc.) 1259095-1 B-~ . RB RIDER BENNETT FARMINGTON HIGH SCHOOL REVISED ZONING PLAN Legend Revised Zoning Plan /'1 ,"',.I fj r-- I I I I I I I i I t I I I r I I I I I I I I I I r I I -- Ii II t-'i I I I , , I ' \~'i 1 I ',) I i ,// , I, ------0-1 -.-Li R-1 I "-Ld ' 1--=--, I g r-.. ! QI MUSA Boundary City Boundary Historic Properties A-1 (Agricul1ure) _ PI OS (Park/Open Space) rn 8-1 (Limited Business) _ 6-2 (Downtown Business) _ 8-3 (Heavy Business) ill 6-4 (Neighborhood Commercial) _ Business Commercial Flex _ Mixed-Use _ IP (Industrial Park) Iii ~~r~~~~~~~s~:;idor _ BP (Business Park) R.1 (Low Density ResidentIal) R-2 (Low/Medium Density Residential) R-3 (Medium Density Residential) :'S R-4 (Medium/High Density Residential) ~ R-5 (High Density Residential) R- T (Downtown Transitional) L~ RD (Downtown Residential) e Water ROW (Right-of-Way) c::J pub District ,\.1 r I I ... i I I -r I "i I I I I , . -- I \ -----; i --I I Ir-/-~ ...._ ~ I I .. J- I 1 I-L-c.if-l I I I II rl~. Ii j~-;-;-' -fi-d-"-l.:,.' I . 1{1 I Jt_L l-----rr-- II ' ". II "'. . ! I I j I I"" l' , r----~ :--. .[----1 I rl' , ! . i : L-"----L ,~ New Hiqh School Site Change Zoning from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1 (Low Density Residential) / , .., ill' .....-\,,4 i I"i..\i...t fr---.1:--..J.-...... ...... '.".'.'.'. - I". ~1'.....~ I. ., . ',,' ,:'. ~l-' -'ccrff-.c<.} W-i' ! I ~ "1' I I I I I f-- U .., Note: Graphics and Legend taken from City of Farmington's 2020 Comprehensive Plan 8-3 ADDENDUM TO PETITION FOR REZONING 1. Introduction. Independent School District No. 192, otherwise known as the Farmington School District (the "District") hereby petitions the City of Farmington (the "City") for rezoning of former Christensen family farm property, located in west Farmington adjacent to Flagstaff Avenue (the "Property"), from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). 2. Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Contemporaneous with the District's petition for rezoning, the District has also applied for an amendment to the Farmington Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation for the Property from Urban Reserve to Public/Semi Public. See District's Application for Amendment to Comprehensive Plan. 3. Proiect Summary. Although the Project currently remains in the design phase, such that a detailed design of the overall Project is not presently available, the concept plan for the Project includes the following features: (a) A new, approximately 423,485 square foot, three story, Farmington High School with an approximate capacity of 2,200 students, including the following features: classrooms, science labs, cafeteria,. library/media center, theater/auditorium, gymnasium(s), locker rooms, and swimming pool. (b) Parking Areas, consisting of approximately 1,185 parking stalls, for administration, staff, teacher and student parking, together with driveways and bus-drop off and turnaround areas. (c) Recreational and playing fields, including approximately eight physical education fields, tennis courts, and softball fields, two baseball diamonds, and one football stadium. (d) Agricultural fields, including a possible greenhouse. (e) Creation of a wetland project area in conjunction with site water retention work. 1264136-2 1 15-'1 4. Existinq Site. The Property was formally part of the Christensen family farm, and was actively farmed by, or on behalf of, the Christensen family. Under the terms of the Purchase Agreement, between the District and the Christensens, the Christensens are expected to continue to farm the Property for the 2005 growing year. 5. Site Selection and Acquisition History. In anticipation of the District's growing need for new facilities to support its obligatory educational mission, the District commissioned in 1999 a Farmington School District Growth Planning Task Force (the "Task Force"). In addition to various District representatives, membership of the Task Force included, among others, various representatives from the Cities of Farmington and Lakeville, Castle Rock, Empire and Eureka Townships, and members of the general community. In January 2000, the Task Force issued a report recommending, among other things, a referendum to support a bond issuance to fund additional land acquisition for future school sites. In implementation of the Task Force recommendations, a bond referendum for property acquisition was successfully held by the District, after which the District has embarked for over the past two years in a search for viable sites. In furtherance of its land acquisition plan, the District established numerous criteria to guide it in its site selection and acquisition process. These criteria included, among numerous others, the following concepts: (a) The District needed sites that were of a size and quality to support large scale public school developments; (b) The District was committed to amicable land acquisition in lieu of forced property acquisition through eminent domain. In implementation of all of the District's site selection criteria, it embarked on a roughly two-year land search exercising various means at its disposal to identify qualifying properties, including frequent communications with City staff regarding potential sites identified by the City. By July 2003, the District additionally engaged the assistance of an experienced real estate broker to physically contact property owners to identify possible willing sellers and, if appropriate, to engage such owners in land negotiations. By late 2003, the District had identified approximately eight sites for consideration. Of those sites, five were deemed to warrant further consideration for various reasons, and the District commissioned a formal civil engineering analysis by McGhie & Betts, which in January 2004 produced a site evaluation report analyzing the sites. As a result of that report, the District commenced negotiations for property located in Castle Rock Township (the "Angus Property"), eventually culminating the acquisition of that property later in 2004. 1264136-2 2 B'-.5 Although the District had originally considered the Angus Property for a possible high school site, community opposition to locating a high school on that site remained strong. As a result of this opposition, and due in part to the practical realities indicating that annexation of the site by the City might be problematic, the District elected to hold the Angus Property for future school use, and to renew its land acquisition efforts for a high school location. At this time, the District once again approached the Christensen family to purchase the Property, which comprised a portion of their farm property. The Property was one of the properties identified in the McGhie & Betts 2004 site evaluation report. The Christensens, who had previously indicated a reluctance to sell, were urged by the District to reconsider. In the end, the Christensens did so, and by October 2004 the parties had reached agreement on the t~rms of sale. Those terms including an amicable acquisition by eminent domain due to the fact that the Property remained temporarily subject to a statutory agricultural preserve. By state law, the agricultural preserve could be terminated through eminent domain. Although the District had originally determined that it would not acquire land by eminent domain, it elected to do so in this instance due to the fact that the purchase would not be acrimonious. In short, the Christensens supported acquisition on this basis. Although "procedurally" inconsistent with the District's original acquisition guidelines, the use of eminent domain in this instance was actually "substantively" in conformity with those guidelines. By 2005, the Property had been acquired by the District. Throughout all of this process, the District has not abandoned other efforts to identify viable sites, including efforts to work closely with the City to consider alternate site options. Recent examples of this effort have included inclusion of a high school within a proposed residential development sponsored by Town & Country Homes, as within a proposed residential development sponsored by Astra/Genstar. The Town & Country proposal was eventually rejected after Town & Country indicated a need for the District to eliminate an existing agricultural preserve on more than the site needed by the District for its development. As this would have necessitated condemnation of property beyond that which was needed for the District's purposes, it was determined that the District lacked the necessary public purpose to lawfully sustain such an acquisition by eminent domain. In the case of the Astra/Genstar development, the developer did not favor co-location of a high school on the site, the acquisition costs, if favored, were deemed prohibitive, and in any event the District was advised by bond counsel that relocation of the proposed high school site at that time might necessitate a new referendum-effectively rendering any development on the Astra/Genstar site infeasible. 1264136-2 3 f3- fc 6. Compellinq Educational Needs. Based on the District's current enrollment projections, the District's existing high school will exceed student capacity by as early as the 2007-08 school year. By the 2008-09 school year, the projected completion date for the Project, and assuming the Project is not completed, the District would exceed student capacity at the existing high school by 3%. Moreover, projected over capacity would increase further to 38% by the 2013-14 school year. To compound matters, the District's capacity problems will be straining all of its facilities throughout this period, with projected over capacity at all existing facilities for grades 1-12 ranging, depending on the site, from 22% to 43%. For these reasons, in addition to the Project, the District will be simultaneously embarking on building expansion and renovation projects throughout many of its facilities (including additional site acquisition and construction for an additional elementary school) in an effort to provide adequate student space in response to the growing demands arising from continued population growth in the Farmington and greater community. In light of the above, the District has real and urgent space needs that will shortly overwhelm its capacity absent immediate action. The District has a legal obligation to provide educational services to all residents within its attendance boundaries-irrespective of ongoing population growth. Consequently, the District is legally compelled to respond to such changing circumstances by providing adequate educational facilities to service an ever- increasing student base. 7. The Neiqhborhood. The Property is currently zoned A-1 (Agriculture). Adjacent and much of the immediately surrounding property located within the Farmington city limits is similarly zoned A-1 (Agriculture). Notwithstanding the above, adjacent to the Property, and located immediately to the west, two residential developments exist immediately inside the Lakeville city limits: (a) Ardmoor, an established mobile home community; and (b) Spyglass, a new and expanding multi-unit residential community. Furthermore, located immediately to the north, east (across Flagstaff Avenue), southeast (across Flagstaff Avenue), and south, there are ten individual residential properties, each ranging in lot size from approximately 2-12 acres. In light of the above, and notwithstanding the current Plan designation and zoning, the neighborhood surrounding the Property combines both agricultural and residential characteristics. See Exhibit A attached hereto. 1264136-2 4 8-7 a secure setting in that it affords the District with a completely self-contained school site without existing traffic lanes severing the property, and additionally allows the District the ability, based on the site configuration, to minimize frontage along Flagstaff Avenue, resulting in placement of recreational fields well away from vehicular danger. While other development may eventually cluster around the Property, such development would then need to take into account an existing school facility, offering the City the opportunity to control such development in a manner most conducive to ensuring the continuing safety and security of the District's student population. 9. Public Necessity. Convenience and General Welfare. Pursuant to Section 10-3-12 of the Farmington City Code (the "Code"), the Zoning Code may be amended "whenever the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare require such an amendment." Code at 910-3-12(A). In this instance, the requirements of the Code are met. (a) Public Necessitv. The District has diligently engaged in a long-term acquisition effort. The process has been fraught with numerous complications and great difficulty. At this time, the District is on the cusp of student population growth demands that will overwhelm its facilities and seriously impair its ability to fulfill its educational mission. No other viable site has been identified that meets the acquisition criteria identified by the District. Moreover, in the wake of the District's 2004 construction and building improvement bond referendum, the District has been advised by bond counsel that location of the high school on any site other than the Christensen site may now require a new referendum. There is clear public necessity to support the requested rezoning for the Property. (b) Convenience. In this case, the requested rezoning is additionally supported by public convenience. There remains strong public support for the high school. on the Property, with very nominal opposition expressed for this site. The requested zoning change will not adversely affect other properties in the neighborhood- particularly in that the intended use of the entire Property would be for public school purposes. (c) General Welfare. The general welfare additionally requires rezoning of the Property in that the Property is particularly well suited for high school use. The land configuration allows for location student areas, including recreational fields, well away traffic areas. Moreover, placement of the high school on the Property additionally does not force existing development within the City, including existing residential areas, to accommodate a high school. Rather, the nominal 1264136-2 5 /3- 8 development in the vicinity of the Property will enable future development, when and if it occurs, to evolve around the Project on a planned basis-and future adjacent commercial, retail and/or residential neighbors would be able to develop property with full knowledge and acceptance of the then existing high school development. 10. Public Health, Safety and Welfare. The District's proposed rezoning does not fail to meet the standards and intent of the Code, and is not injurious to the public health, safety or welfare. As compared to most forms of development, a public school facility is perhaps one of the most benign uses for any property. Rather than be injurious to the public health, safety or welfare, the Project should operate to do just the opposite. It would, among other benefits, provide a first class platform for furthering the educational development of the District's students, many of which are residents of the City, it would offer numerous recreational and other amenities for the general welfare of the community. 1264136-2 6 B-1 EXHIBIT A Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: I C~nter " , " A ,VYhbig:<Ii8YQty,/S/llaIIM ~pl Exhibit A-1 Exhibit A-2 Exhibit A-3 Exhibit A-4 Exhibit A-5 Exhibit A-6 Exhibit A-7 Exhibit A-8 Exhibit A-9 Exhibit A-tO This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services. Treasurer - Auditor and Property Records Departments ~# Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page B-/D http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1 &Left=527520. 776545066&Botto... 5/1 0/2005 EXHIBIT A-I Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. Select option and click map: I Identify "2tJ :\t\!H:QI~QbYl1ty I .., 'B~freshMapil PIN: 14-02700-012-01 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $299,300 Owner: PATRICK M DONNELLY 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $258,600 Address: 20491 FLAGSTAFF AVE W Payable 2005 Tax: $2,369.44 Cit : FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eage: 5.01 ~ ' Year BUilt: 1938 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with AssessinQ Services, Treasurer - Auditor and Prooerty Records Departments C~~) /--.7- ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page 13-1/ http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1 &Left=527091.013919286&Botto... 5/1 0/2005 EXHIBIT A-2 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: Ild~ntify }J 'B;~fr.~$h:Mapl} PIN: 14-02600-019-50 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $329,700 Owner: MARLO V & CONNIE A DAHL 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $269,800 Address: 20520 FLAGSTAFF AVE Payable 2005 Tax: $3,028.16 City: FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eage: 10.00 . Year BUilt: 1992 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessino Services, Treasurer. Auditor and .E!:QQertv Records Departments ~~ COUNTY Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page J3-Id.- htto://207 . 171.98.200/scriots/esrimao.dll?Name=webq 1 &Left=529580.91 0799253&Botto... 5/1 0/2005 EXHIBIT A-3 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. ~ Select option and click map: I Identify "iJ PIN: 14-02600-021-50 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $356,300 Owner: DARCY A & PAMELA J ZEHNDER 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $272,000 Address: 20602 FLAGSTAFF AVE Payable 2005 Tax: $3,055.90 Cit : FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eage: 10.00 ~ . Year BUilt: 1993 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with AssessinQ Services. Treasurer - Auditor and Propertv Records Departments ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page /5-/ '3 http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1 &Left=530439 .91534087 &Bottom... 5/1 0/2005 EXHIBIT A-4 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: Ildentify}] \Nho,I~COUrityl, 'R$frElPt)rvt8pl :$h1aILNlClpi! PIN: 14-02600-023-50 2005 Est. Value (Pavable 2006): $517,200 Owner: RONALD L & DIANA J VALEK 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $481,000 Address: 20630 FLAGSTAFF AVE S Payable 2005 Tax: $5,629.64 City: FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eage: 11.84 , Year BUilt: 1994 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services, Treasurer - Auditor and Property Records Departments ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page B-Il{' http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1&Left=530438.36436429&Bottom... 5/1012005 EXHIBIT A-5 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Sel~ct option and click map: lld~~tiiy .....8] \,i\Ihpl'eCour'ify I :,8~n~~H Map! small Map J PIN: 14-02600-021-51 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $38,600 Owner: JOHN S TSCHOHL 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $19,700 Address: Payable 2005 Tax: $221.22 Cih,. Total Acreage: 4.83 ~ , Year Built: 0 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with AssessinQ Services, Treasurer - Auditor and Prooertv Records Departments ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page 8-(~ http://207 . 171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1&Left=530436.02522204&Bottom... 5/10/2005 EXHIBIT A-6 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: I Identify 3 :\Aihble.gptJhty " ; "8~ffe9hMC3P.il..:.SIllClIIMC3P"J PIN: 14-02600-012-50 2005 Est. Value (Pay-able 2006): $282,500 Owner: JOHN T & ALEXIS GLYNN 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $254,800 Address: 20850 FLAGSTAFF AVE W Payable 2005 Tax: $2,839.08 City: FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eage: 10.00 . Year BUilt: 1977 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services, Treasurer - Auditor and Property Records Departments ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page {3-'" http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=wehq I&Left=529767 .644073755&Botto... 5/10/2005 EXHIBIT A-7 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. ~" ~ Select option and click map: entify ,:<,:,YVb9!~;'~()Hqty :I"R~(@3h:M~P :'" :,$m~HNl~p :::1 PIN: 14-02600-015-50 2005 Est. Value (Pavable 2006): $242,200 Owner: GERALD C & TERESA A GREGORY 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $223,700 Address: 20940 FLAGSTAFF AVE Payable 2005 Tax: $2,447.10 City: FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eaqe: 3.00 , Year BUilt: 1987 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessinq servi:;:?Irer ;:;"d ProDertv Records Departments L~~ COUNTY Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page (3-/1 http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webql&Left=530625.310310888&Botto... 5/10/2005 ", EXHIBIT A-8 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . >VVhb1e'GoYhWI " I PIN: 14-02600-017-50 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $310,800 Owner: ALLEN J BRAUN 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $287,400 Address: 20970 FLAGSTAFF AVE EQyable 2005 Tax: $3,250.00 City: FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac:eage: 2.00 , Year BUilt: 1991 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with AssessinQ Services, Treasurer - Auditor and Property Records Departments ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page B-/~ http://207.171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1 &Left=530778.420759997 &Botto... 5/1 0/2005 .., EXHIBIT A-9 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. . Select option and click map: Ildentify B ':;Vvhqll3;Q()q~ty\ I. 'R~fr~~h;Map<1:1 i':iS PIN: 14-02600-025-50 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $387,900 Owner: SHAWN LAUER AMES 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $361,200 Address' 20982 FLAGSTAFF AVE Payable 2005 Tax: $4,180.18 Cit : FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eage: 9.06 ~ , Year BUilt: 1994 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina servi~...if~{Urer ;=;'d Property Records Departments L~~ COUNTY Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page B.. /; http://207 . 171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq I&Left=530532.311527681 &Botto... 5/10/2005 '. EXHIBIT A-10 Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry Data Updated 5/5/2005. ~ Seled option and click map: I Identify i]" . VV5()1~(j8Q'f1!y't? 'I: ,:'R~'fr~shM9P:;" I '9n1~IUMap PIN: 14-02700-031-80 2005 Est. Value (Payable 2006): $277,900 Owner: DAVID A & UTE S CHRISTOPHERSON 2004 Taxable Value (Payable 2005): $256,600 Address: 20993 FLAGSTAFF AVE W Payable 2005 Tax: $2,861.78 City: FARMINGTON MN 55024 Total Ac~eage: 2.00 , Year BUilt: 1963 This application was developed by the Dakota County Office of GIS in cooperation with Assessina Services, Treasurer - Auditor and Prooertv Records Departments ~~ Click on the Dakota County Logo above to return to the home page 13-dt) http://207 . 171.98.200/scripts/esrimap.dll?Name=webq 1&Left=530881.585400906&Botto... 5/10/2005 eX cG fl.p-r ~ 1f1 ,.H I K If -rL2-s of I S D 19 2- ~a~ PO/=- tl-Cj;) /.t c.4-r,~,.j ,MtEiE'~/N'- ~^' 11-/%.&./64 . ! sport with his recommendation. Mr. Dale Sundstrom, Finance Director, requested approval of the accounting firm ofKem, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd., to be the district's auditors for the 2003-04 fiscal year Motion by Weyandt, seconded by Davis, to approve the appointment of Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd., as the district's auditors for the 2003-04 fiscal year. All voted in favor. Mr. Sundstrom explained the district's health insurance program options and presented the consensus of the Insurance Committee to change to Blue Cross. He also requested permission to contract with Blue Cross for administration of the district's FLEX plan. Motion by Donnelly, seconded by Manthey, to approve the change of health insurance carrier from Health Partners to Blue Cross beginning July 1,2004 and to contract for MIl Life/Blue Cross FLEX administration services, per recommendation. All voted in favor. Motion by McKnight, seconded by Manthey, to designate the Level III Grievance to be heard by a sub-committee of the board consisting of members Donnelly and Privette. All voted in favor. Appointment of Auditor for 2003- 04 Fiscal Year Audit Insurance Contract Approval Level III Grievance /' I Mr. Doug Bonar, Director of Buildings and Grounds, presented an Option to Purchase Agreement for consideration. This is the second option for the district for a school site. This option guarantees the district exclusive rights to negotiate with the owner on the purchase ofthe property as outlined for a period of six- months. . " Motion by Weyandt, seconded by Privette, to approve the Option to Purchase Agreement between ISD 192 and Jay and Patricia Christensen, as presented. See Exhibit. Donnelly abstained; all others voted in favor. The following reports and communications were received: . Ms. Monica Kittock-Sargent reported on the Band Trip to New Orleans and introduced Deer, Blees and Sterniswka, staff leaders of the French, Gennan and Spanish trips. They gave a brief report of the benefits students received in this extended classroom setting and told of some of the experiences. . Dr. Brad Meeks asked that a special board working session be set for Monday, May 3,2004 to hear the administration's final recommendations for budget cuts and enhancements. . Mr. Steve Dibb, Curriculum Director, reported on the last IPR Committee meeting and the basic standard test results. He used graphs to show increases in all test scores, all of which exceed the Minnesota average. . Dr. Brad Meeks reported on the results of the kindergarten survey in which the information was sought on the interest level for offering an optional all- day, every day kindergarten. Since the survey showed a good amount of interest, the kindergarten staff will work on some implementation plans Purchase Option Agreement Reports and Communications 1 .Gxl/-I ~I 7" C!.- J .. Farmington Independent School District 192 BOAF.D OF EDVC~ TIOl" JI.lUE M:J::}.'1GHT Chair D....." PFJVETiE Va-Chair CRAIG D.~ \'15 Clm: TEFJtY DOl-.'NEU Y Tre25un:f .....,'" M...."TliEy T'l""~:e TIM WEYANDT Trust~ AlJ.4fL\'lSTIUTION SP~:..D MEEKS S1.lpc:;mend:rtt of S=ho:)1s STEVE PIBB C~-riculu..'"To Dire=tor ROS....LYJ>; PAw"TlJ;E Dire:tor of .-\drrUnist:'a:i\"e SC'\;.:::s A,"IOp=:bns C....RLA NOHR SCHl)LZ S;r.:ial $=;:", Di:eolor DOUGu.5 L SONAA Bllndrn~ &. Grounds Pireoor \,1LUtJvl PATTERSON Cor:-:nunr.)' EdLl:aIion Director DALE Sw'NDSTROM Di:-...c:or of Finan:e 4 Excellence, Integrity, In 11 ovation OFFICE OF THE SlJ"PERINTENl)El\TT 421 W.A.Ll\VT STREET FAR-\nNGTON. MThll',jESOTA 55024-1389 PHONE: (651) 463-5011 FAX: (651) 463-5010 web site: wl,>wIarmin.f!ton.J:J 2.mn.us November 3, 2004 Mr. Todd Larson City of Fannington Planning Commission 819 7'ui Street Farmington, :MN 55024 Dear Todd, Thank you for sharing concerns regarding the potential school sites that the District has acquired. The District certainly recognizes the impact that additional schools \....ill have on the City and its ability to provide services to those areas. You mayor may not be a\vare that for the past year, the District and City staff hold monthly meetings. The purpose of these meetings is to simply share infonnation regarding projects that affect the City and the School District. Obviously, \vith the amount of growth Farmington is experiencing this is a common theme at many of our monthly meetings. The City and School District should be partners in \,'orking to provide services and facilities to meet that gro\"'1h and provide services for the citizenry. At a June meeting, a similar comment to yours at Monday's board meeting regarding the Farmington School District's involvement in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan was made by City staff. The City officials quickly cited the Comprehensive Plan and assured me that schools were considered within the plan. Based on the executive summary provided in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update, I see no reference to potential impact of new schools in the District. Furthermore, I also note that the groups and individuals involved in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan process did not field a single school representative. Tbis is quite surprising in light of the fact that the schools are probably one of the largest employers in Farmington and one of the largest non- agricultural land owners. Further evaluation of the Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Plan notes references to the School District on pages 47 and 126 only. On page 47, the Fannington 2020 Comprehensive Plan simply denotes the increasing enrollment within the School District and how those increasing numbers will impact housing. There is no indication that increasing student enrollment \","ill also increase the number of scJlQ.ol buildings needed to educate those children moving into the community. The second citation found on page 126 is simply an mdicator that the Parks and Recreation department wants to improve their working relationship with the District.fThere is also an unreferenced appendix outlining the January 2000 Growth Planning Task Force '."-" EQt'AL OPPORTc-'l-<lTI' EMPLOYER' Gxtlt g, 7 :P ", .. Page Two Mr. Todd Larson November 3, 2004 Perhaps there was more school district involvement in the development of this plan, however, the information I've reviewed doesn't support that idea. The School District would be willing to assist you in any manner needed to revise the 2020 Comprehensive Plan to include further information regarding the impact that the growing School District will have on Farmington. One of the goals in ,,'orking with the City is to develop a strategic model that both the City and District can use to determine where future schools should be located. It is my hope that the District would be able to secure properties within those growth areas. This could be achieved by a collaborative effort between the City and the School District in concert with future developers. I certainly appreciate the need for systemic growth, however \vithout sufficient planning and exorbitant land costs, options for the School District are rather few. As a member of the Planning Commission, I applaud you for your willingness to serve in that capacity and the complexity of working in a rapid grow.th community. If you have further questions, please feel free to contact me. S!97relY, '..(7 Z I ' /.. /};' l .!/!7 ' J~f //; jJ~~~ Y Dr. Bfad Meeks' Superintendent of Schools Cc: D. Urbia - Farmington City Administrator Board of Education D. Bonar- ISD 192 Director of Buildings and Grounds . " ~ . ~ .. A:; ~ D-2- ~!fJ . .f I. " I Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update FARMINGTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following information reveals that the City of Farmington is at a strategic planning crossroads, desiring to retain the "small town" character of its past and standing on the precipice of becoming a full-fledged suburban city, almost tripling in population by the year 2020. The 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update explores a number of issues that require action in order to move the City forward into the next century. This plan will serve as a compass to guide its citizens and elected officials in achieving the strategic visions identified in the summer of 1998. Change is inevitable and may refocus original planning visions in the future. However, with continuous visitations back to this document in the upcoming years, the overall vision proposed in 1998 for this community should remain intact. As required by the Metropolitan Council, the City of Farmington has drafted the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update in accordance with the requirements of the Local Planning Handbook. As part of the requirements, plans are to be updated to forecast the impacts of growth on the community to the year 2020. The City of Farmington is located within Dakota County and is at the urban fringe of Minneapolis and St. Paul as shown on Map 1.1. One incorporated city and three separate townships surround Farmington. The City of Lakeville resides on the west and north of Farmington, while Empire Township is located to the east, Castle Rock Township is located to the south and Eureka Township lies to the southwest of the City. Three important traffic corridors traverse the City including Trunk Highway 3, County State Aid Highway 311Pilot Knob Road running north and south and County State Aid Highway 50 running east and west. These important corridors assist Farmington in connecting to the metropolitan areas to the north. The last revision of the Farmington Comprehensive Plan was in 1982, creating an apparent need to update the plan at this time. The process for updating the 2020 Comprehensive Plan included visioning workshops, neighborhood meetings and a community open house to allow citizens the opportunity to review the draft plan. The following illustrates the dates of these important meetings: June 11,12,15 & 16, 1998 - Interviews with 35 Community Leaders and City staff July 8, 1998 - Visioning Workshop July 29,1998 - Visioning Workshop October 21,1998 - Neighborhood Meeting at Akin Elementary School Library October 22, 1998 - Neighborhood Meeting at Farmington Public Library October 26, 1998 - Neighborhood Meeting at Christian Life Church September 9, 1998 - City Council/Planning Commission Workshop November 30, 1998- Community Open House March 17, 1999 - City Council/Planning Commission Workshop Executive Summary Gxl/tg// E Citv Council Jerry Ristow, Mayor Lacelle Cordes Kevan Soderberg (start 1999) Steve Strachan Terry Verch (start 1999) Don Gamer (end 1999) Bill Fitch (end 1999) Planning Commission Craig Schlawin, Chair (end 1999) Rob Schwing, Chair (start 1999) Todd Larson Ron Ley Dirk Rotty Chaz Johnson (start 1999) ,~ " .'~ \. n "I ] -I [I :1 l' il ;1 :1 I ,I I I I Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update March 23, 1999 - Public Hearing on Final Draft of2020 Comprehensive Plan Update April 5, 1999 - Approval of2020 Comprehensive Plan by City Council April 14, 1999 - Plan is sent to surrounding communities for 60-day review June 30, 1999 - Plan is submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review The visioning workshops included elected officials, business owners, citizens and City staff and provided the foundation for the creation of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update. Upon completion of the community leader interviews, common issues were brought to the visioning workshops for review by the attendees. The following is a list of the most common issues addressed by the attendees: . * Maintain a vibrant and viable Downtown * Maintain Small Town Character * Connect north and south areas of the community * Provide an east-west connector street * Annexation issues * Increase the size of the industrial park * Public/Semi-Public Uses * Environmental issues From the visioning workshops, policies and strategies were identified to attain the goals of the visions. The policies and strategies are addressed in the Land Use Element of this document. Finally, and most importantly, a number of individuals were involved with this process and are acknowledged below, including the Farmington residents who worked with this process to achieve a be~ter quality oflife for Farmington in the future. Parks & Recreation Commission Dawn Johnson, Chair Paul Gerten Keith Sperbeck Brian Feldt Randy Oswald (start 1999) John Richardson (end 1999) Heritage Preservation Commission George Flynn, Chair Bev Marben Cheryl Thelen Twylla Chant Harbee Tharaldson Patricia Johnson I I I 2 Executive Summary ,- -, L:::; - ~ n f.;J .- Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update , f Water Board Bob Shirley Marv Wier Jeff Krueger Consultants RLK-Kuusisto Ltd Steve Schwanke Richard Krier Kathleen O'Neill Mike Daniels Jim Brimeyer and Associates Jim Brimeyer Robert C. Vogel & Associates Robert C. Vogel Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Ci tv Staff John F. Erar, City Administrator David L. Olson, Community Development Director Lee Mann, Public Works Director/City Engineer Jim Bell, Parks & Recreation Director Robin Roland, Finance Director Dan Siebenaler, Chief of Police Karen Finstuen, Administrative Services Manager Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator Mike Schultz, Associate Planner Joy Lillejord, Recreation Program Supervisors Missie Kohlbeck, Senior Center Coordinator BRA Jerry Ristow Lacelle Cordes Sherry Lamb Todd Arey Michael Matheson (start 1999) 3 Executive Summary E-3 01 '-, r ~ r-l ~:a ~ ~ r-l = I ~ Z <:) o~ ~ ~ .= r-l a ~ r-l ~ .... -= ~ = 00 ~ ;;;J~ C..l:Ill Z y <~ ~ ';:l ~ cu U -B !=: .~ .8 rn :;:: g rn ::l o 00 2:..... o "E ~ ~8'"Cl ~.9 €g ....I!).o a g..o u 1-<..... l;::l p.. U .~ -g~ ..... .... rn ro 0.8- Z.;:a ~ rn ~ g g ~ So ,......... .""", -t"""'C d U .... I;;qp !=:O Ot+-< <!:lOU~ !=: '"Cl C; '"Cl o 2 !=: !3 '';:: U 0 'm ~ €.o c-rI 0 I!) I!) 2: '"Cl g...... o a I-< U .... p.. J:j !=: ~ .~ +J ~ !=: '"Cl ..... u1!)2~ l;::l'"Clro .""",.""", ~ 51 ~ '0 .""", $.-I.""", t;I) .... a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !=: o .~ 0 .... rn a :>. p..'Q) ..... > .~ o.c ~ ro ~ - '"Cl p..~1!) ~ ~ -< ~ I!) t;I) S ~~ ~ -<"Q) t;l)00 ~;. ] ..... - ~ t;I) ~ "E I!) ~ U .S ~ I!) c-rI"gg .... I-< ~p.. '0 'f! ~ p.. .... o !=: {/) ~ ::c: I!) 1d +-r~ a- p..~ :~ .~ ~'Q) p..1-< {/)~ C'l {/) t;I) ~~ p...... ~~ t;I) 0 ~; ~ ..... - ~ ~ '-+-I ..... ~~ !=: 50 ~O:>. I-< 1-<- 2 p..~ I!) I!)..... b~-;;; ro I!) rn I!)~~ ~ t; S .....-I '-+-I 00..... ~ o ..... .t:: 0...... rn ~ d 0 O.;;;l p.. V)....p.. . 0 0 ~ !=: ~ o-'CI ~€~ <'& o I-< p.. ~ 50 o I-< p.. I!) ~ I!) {/) ~ p.. 000 -< !=: ..... .... o !=: i p.. o I-< p.. I!)~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 8- p.. !=: 000 -<'';:: !=: 'm ..... 0 c-rI i ~ p..~ OCl ~~ '-+-I g[ o 0 .....~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 U ~ !=:'= ..... '"Cl '"Cl ~ I!) .~ en .... I-< en ::l I!) ~.o"B '"Cl c:~ 0 ~ro.o c;p:; !=:I!)U €.~ 0 I!) ~ .... g.] I-< ~ p..p.. S o U .... o !=: .s.~ I-< '"Cl'"Cl~ I!) !=: 'I:: ~ ~ 0 I!) ~.o .a a '"Cl - ..... C'l ro p.. U C;~.s !=: 'm .... .o!=:5 ~] g p.. I!) .= ol-<'"Cl ~s-ro o U .s ~~ p...b !=: 8s~ p..up.. .~] I!) oS '"Cl .~ '-+-I _ rn c-rl0::l5 "E~~ sol-< g.g g _NU ~.8 I!) I-< A .g p.. ~ r;; ~ ~ ~~ c~ ~~ --g if !=: o.~ .8 I-< U en oo~ !=: !=: t+-< I!) ..;:: ~ ~ .~ I!) I!) ~.o fl) ~:>.~ o ro ~ I!) 1t::1 S ~:o ~ 0 6' i:i5 .~ ~V)oo ~ ~-;;; U ~ en ro..c= ~ :>'OOU ~'.... ~ ~::c: fl) ~ fl) !:l 'C 1d ~ AVi..E '-" '"Cl g ~ S ro..... ;.~ o ~ .... .... I!) ~ > ~ ro2 ..c= ..... {/) C'l'"Cl0 '3.... Orr) ~ :>. .... ~ I!) ~ I!)..c= .b 00 U) ..... .;; ::c: lI"l S N 0 N<!:l '"Cl I!) ~ '"Cl '€ p..ao I!) c: .00 I!) o lI"l U .... !=: ~ ~.~ c-rI..c=t;I)'"Cl '"ClUI!) -;::: 0 S ........ 0 o fl) en ~.t:: :>. ~en_ t+-<d.o ~ I"<'m rn 0 en 00 <!:l 0 ro p.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C'lC'l~~ C'l C'l ~ C'l c-rI C'l C'l ~ - a e.o .... .5 :: :: .... -::: :: ~ ~ _l::a a E::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ti ~~~ ~ ~ t> ~ ta ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~R~ 8~~~ N~8&S ~~~~ II) ~ 0'\ ~ .. rI2 ~ = rI2 rI2 .... """ o .e- .... ~ ~ -a e o c.J - .c~ -,.Q e ~ = c.J ==& "ClQ.c ~< ........ 5~ e . rI2 0 rI2 ~ ~ = rI2 0 ~z c; II -;;0 c.:i I::i 0 .5 ~ == II :;:,.-t ~ ., l:l.,e .... = = .... ~"Cl rI2 ~ ~~ fr II .M ~~ ~ ~ ,.Q .... e= = II z~ 0\ ~ E~Jft g/ 7 ;c. " G?Cc.L-~/ ~A1 of / ~ D /92- IE 1> "" c-4 -rt ~,..) M M I Nt-1-rc=-S 8t#-~ e-F C7E --r ~ "V"G::t ~ A./ lojZSja . . . RESOLUTION: motion by McKnight second by Privette to approve the Escrow Agreement by and among Jay P. and Patricia A. Christensen, husband and wife Goint1y and severally obligated hereunder and collectively referred to herein as "Seller"), Independent School District 192, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota ("Buyer"), and Dakota COllilty Abstract Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Dakota County Abstract & Title (the "Escrow Agent"). Roll call vote was as follows: McKnight-yes; Weyandt-yes; Manthey- yes; Privette - yes. Motion carried 4 to O. Member McKnight thanked the Christenseh's for working with the School District and coming to an agreement that worked for both parties. . Member Privette stated that we ended up with two good sites. The Christensen site is probably the best for the High School site. Strategically the district is in good shape with both properties. Member Manthey mentioned that the Christensen property is a centralized location for a high schoo~. . $pIl-rll c..eS) Mr. Todd Larson, Planning Commission Member for e City of Farmington, spoke in regards to the properties. He is in disa ement with putting the high school on the Christensen property. He' concerned about people avoiding the downtown area as well serVes eing brought to the Christensen property. Mr. Larson mentione the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and how this goes against what that plan is trying to accomplish. Mr. Griff Davenport, D.L.R., presented the Review and Comment document that will be submitted to the Minnesota Board of Education. He presented a timeline in order to open the new high school by the Fall of 2008. The State has 60 days to approve the Review and Comment once they receive it. Review and Comment RESOLUTION: motion by Privette second by Weyandt to approve the Farmington Independent School District 192 Review and Comment plan. The administration and its agents e.g. DLR are further directed to submit the Review and Comment to the Minnesota Department of Education. Member Davis arrived at 8:50 PM. Ms. Kittock-Sargent requested the approval for the FHS Choir to take a trip to Hawaii from March 20-27,2005. They will perform at B.Y.v., the Polynesian Culture Center, Pearl Harbor memorial and the Alamoana Center. FHS Extended Field Trip Request RESOLUTION: motion by McKnight second by Donnelly to approve the FHS Choir to take a trip to Hawaii from March 20-27,2005 to perform at B.Y.V., the Polynesian Culture Center, the Pearl Harbor Memorial and the Alamoano Center, as presented. 27 ex/h&/7 G City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: City Administrator David Urbia Mayor-Elect Kevan Soderberg City Councilmember Christy Fogarty FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Issues Related to Two Potential High School Sites (Angus and Christensen) DATE: December 2, 2004 INTRODUCTION City Administrator David Urbia has requested that background information be provided for the City Council regarding certain issues related to the two sites that ISD 192 has identified as potential locations for a new high schooL This information is needed in connection with an upcoming meeting on December 3,2004 involving two City Council members, two ISD 192 Board members, ISD 192 Superintendent Meeks and City Administrator Urbia. DISCUSSION As I understand it, it is anticipated that the issues to be discussed at the upcoming meeting may include (but will probably not be limited to) the following: 1. City of Farmington's 2020 Comprehensive Plan 2. Transportation 3. Commercial Development Each of these issues will be discussed below in connection with the Angus and Christensen sites. No other potential high school sites will be addressed in this Memo, although City staff members are prepared to do so upon request. I. Comprehensive Plan A. Angus Site The Angus property is located in Castle Rock Township. The City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address properties that are not within the City limits and/or that are not the subject of an Orderly Annexation Agreement. The 2020 Comprehensive Plan therefore does not include a land use designation for the Angus site. If the owner of the property petitioned for annexation, and if the Extt Jell H requested annexation was approved, the 2020 Comprehensive Plan would eventually have to be amended to designate a specific land use category for the annexed property. At that time, the existing and anticipated uses of adjoining properties would be taken into consideration. The property to the northwest ofthe Angus site (the former Empey property) was recently annexed, and the City has received a concept plan for a residential development on that site. The land to the immediate north ofthe Angus site (the existing golf course) has recently been discussed as a potential site for a new residential development. The land to the northeast of the Angus site is an existing residential development. In light of the evolving development pattern referred to above, it seems more likely than not that the 2020 Comprehensive Plan would be amended to give a residential land use designation (low, low- medium, medium or high density) to the Angus property in the event of an annexation of that property. A high school would be an acceptable use within an area that was designated for residential development, and the infrastructure (roads, sewer, water, etc.) necessary to support a high school would presumably be present as a result ofthe nearby residential construction activity. Giving the Angus property a "Public/Semi-Public" comprehensive plan designation would also be an option. In short, siting a high school on the Angus property would not be inconsistent with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan (because the Plan does not "cover" that property), and the Plan could be easily amended to designate a "high school compatible" land use for the Angus property that does not conflict with other portions ofthe Plan. It seems likely that the Metropolitan Council would approve such an amendment. B. Christensen Site The Christensen property is located within the Farmington city limits, so the 2020 Comprehensive Plan specifically addresses it. The land use designation for the Christensen property is "urban reserve." The Metropolitan Council's Local Planning Handbook defines "urban reserve" as a rural area "..with overall density of I unit per 40 acres (1/40) for any new development or 'cluster' development that does not preclude future development at urban densities between 2020 and 2040. Local staged plans for the years 2000 to 2020 should protect these areas for later urbanization." Farmington's 2020 Comprehensive Plan elaborates upon the urban reserve designation in several locations, including the following: Page 10: Maintain Working Farms 2,395 acres within the existing city limits are currently devoted to agriculture. Farmington wants to preserve and maintain its working farms along the western and southwestern sections of the City. This policy will reinforce Farmington's small town character and these agricultural areas will act as a natural boundary between Lakeville and Farmington. The City will designate 2,072 acres, of these agricultural areas as urban reserve areas, which will protect farms until at least 2020 and allows for very limited residential development of one unit per 40 acres. ********************************************************************************* Page 12 rirre1evant portions omittedl: 1'--1- ~ 1. It is the policy of the City of Farmington to provide for quality controlled growth in stages. Strategies * Concentrate and maintain the existing agricultural uses in the southwestern and western sections of the City. * Preserve the City's existing agricultural uses and character as a natural edge between Farmington and Lakeville and as a distinctive feature of Farmington's small town character. ********************************************************************************* Pages 12-15 firrelevant portions omittedl: 2. It is the policy of the City of Farmington to plan new neighborhoods and to enhance existing viable neighborhoods to maintain a small town character. Specific Neighborhood District Planning objectives: F. District 6-West Rural District 1) Maintain and preserve the existing agricultural uses along the western edge of the City, which also creates a natural open space buffer between the City ofLakeville and Farmington. 1) Promote residential clustering of homes that is consistent with minimum lot requirements in agricultural districts. ********************************************************************************* Pages 23-24 firrelevant portions omittedl: 14. It is the policy of the City of Farmington to maintain its working farms. Strategies * Designate the western areas of the City currently in agriculture use as urban reserve areas which will protect the community's working farms and allow them to continue until at least 2020 * Do not provide additional infrastructure in these urban reserve areas; maintain the development needs as they currently exist in agricultural uses. 15. It is the policy of the City of Farmington to maintain the existing agricultural preserve as an urban reserve of 1,275 acres and to expand this area in order to consolidate the agricultural preserve areas into more strategic areas and allow for new residential development in specified areas of the City. 797 acres of existing agricultural areas will be added to the urban reserve area for a total of 2,072 acres. These acres will be located along the western section of the City with a concentration in the southwestern quadrant of the City. Strategies * Unify and concentrate all agricultural uses, both agriculture preserve and other agricultural areas, into one large area sweeping through the western and southern western sections of the City and designate these areas as urban reserve areas. * Redevelop 102 acres of existing agricultural uses in the north western and central sections of the City for low- density residential development. 16. It is the policy of the City of Farmington to provide developable. areas with major infrastructure improvements. The urban reserve areas should not receive these improvements. H-3 Strategies * Do not allow additional infrastructure improvements into the urban reserve areas. ********************************************************************************* Page 33: STAGED DEVELOPMENT 33. It is the policy of the City of Farmington to stage its growth based on availability of infrastructure. Strategies * This relates to the idea of keeping the City in balance with nature while providing a variety of housing opportunities and high quality infrastructure. This will result in development planning that considers the desirability of extending services to an area before the area can develop. This policy results in cost-effective extension and repair of City infrastructure in a staged manner. ********************************************************************************* Pages 40-41 : District 6 - West Rural This district contains most of the agricultural lands within the community as illustrated on Map 3.8. The district relates to the vision to maintain and enhance the existing rural character of the City and provide a buffer of open space between the developed City of Farmington and the City of Lakeville. The district will be maintained as working farms and is designated as agriculturallurban reserve. The urban reserve areas will not be developed until after the 2020 time frame, however, the owners of property in this area wanted to have the opportunity to develop their property in densities of 1 unit per 10 acres if City infrastructure was available to the property. On page 51 of the Metropolitan Council's Regional Blueprint, it states the following: "provisions for residential densities greater than one unit per 40 acres is acceptable if the development will be clustered. Such clusters will be considered temporary until full urbanization occurs around them Local plans and ordinances will need to require that the temporary clusters be connected to central sewer and other city services when they become available and that the temporary clusters be designed and laid out in accordance with local subdivision regulations, including dedication of future utility and infrastructure easements." However, densities such as this will be limited in this urban reserve area. The vision statements for the City determined that this district would remain in agriculture and was unsuitable for gro\Vth at this time because of the following reasons: 1. The owners of property in this part of the City have indicated a desire to keep it as an agricultural use. 2. Flagstaff Avenue would require an extensive and costly upgrade to the City's transportation system considering the condition of the existing roadway and the need to upgrade the entire road (to CR 50) to a collector status as proposed in the Thoroughfare Plan. 3. A 15" sewer line is proposed for this area, however, the nearest connection for the trunk sanitary sewer facility would be at 195th Street at the northern edge of the Charleswood development. H-cf 4. The Water Distribution Plan proposes a 20" water line along with an underground water storage tank in this area. A 16" water line bas been constructed at the western edge of Pine Ridge Forest and provides a readily accessible connection for water services in this area. 5. The Surface Water Management Plan indicates ponding in the southeastern portion of the area. These areas are required to meet the Surface Water Management Plan. 6. The Wetland Map illustrates a wetland area on the east side of Flagstaff Avenue. The map also shows a greenway along the eastern portion of the area. A wetland boundary survey is required at the time of development. 7. The vision of providing an agricultural buffer on the western side of the City to the year 2020 would be fulfilled if the 753 acres of residential development is proposed elsewhere in the City. The strongest argument for maintaining this district as agricultural is illustrated by the property owners living in the district. Some of the landowners hold large acres of land and expressed their desire to continue farming in this area. An additional argument consists of the lack of adequate transportation routes and available sanitary sewer in this area. The fInal argument consists of the City's vision to maintain and preserve working farms within the City while providing a natural buffer to the west. ********************************************************************************* The placement of a multi-million-dollar high school campus on the Christensen property, the construction of the infrastructure needed to support it, and the resulting development pressure that would inevitably and prematurely arise in its vicinity would be inconsistent with and contrary to most or all of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan provisions summarized above. At this point, it is impossible to predict whether Metropolitan Council staff members would be concerned about the magnitude and potential impact of this type of departure from a Plan that was previously reviewed and approved by the Met Council. It is similarly difficult to predict whether the owners of other agricultural properties located within the urban reserve area will be concerned about their farming operations being adversely affected by what some might consider to be the premature conversion of the Christensen property to a non-agricultural use. II. Transportation A. Angus Site Inasmuch as the Angus site is not referred to in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan (due to its current location within Castle Rock Township), the "Transportation Element" of the Plan does not provide much useful guidance with regard to the potential transportation impact of a high school on that site. However, the use of the Angus property as a high school site is not inconsistent with any of the transportation routes that are identified on the 2020 Thoroughfare Plan (Map 9.1, which immediately follows page 110 of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan), nor is it inconsistent with any of the existing or planned transportation corridors that were identified in connection with Dakota County's East-West Corridor Preservation Study (see attached "Preferred System Plan" dated April 2003). B. Christensen Site The City has been provided with a conceptual layout for the construction of a high school on the Christensen property. It appears that this layout would be incompatible with the future 208th Street alignment shown on the City's 2020 Thoroughfare Plan. This alignment goes through the southern !f-b half of two of the three 40-acre sections that ISD 192 apparently intends to purchase from the Christensens. Several years after the adoption and approval of the 2020 Thoroughfare Plan referred to above, the future 208th Street alignment was revisited by Farmington, Lakeville, Dakota County and others as part of the Dakota County East-West Corridor Preservation Study. By that time, the original plan to connect 208th Street to Cedar Avenue just north of the existing Ardmore Village mobile home park in Lakeville was "blocked" by the platting of the South Creek (a/kIa Spyglass) residential development, which is now under construction to the immediate north of Ardmore Village. The revised 20gth Street alignment that resulted from the Dakota County East- West Corridor Preservation Study shifts 208th Street to the north to create a 4-way intersection at Cedar Avenue and 202nd Street. In several ways, this new alignment is superior to the route shown on the City's 2020 Thoroughfare Plan. Its main advantage is the fact that it lead directly into and through a portion of downtown Lakeville on its way to Interstate 35. The conceptual high school layout referred to above appears to be incompatible with the 20gth Street alignment that resulted from the Dakota County East- West Corridor Preservation Study. The City of Farmington approved the Dakota County East- West Corridor Preservation Study in a Resolution that was adopted by the City Council on April 7, 2003. The 20gth Street alignment appears to bisect one of the three 40-acre sections that ISD 192 intends to buy. Whether or not viable alternatives to the approved 20gth Street alignment exist is presently undetermined. Shifting the 20gth Street alignment to the north of the Christensen parcels would seem to necessitate crossing a wetland area located on the east side of Flagstaff Avenue (see attached map). Connecting 20gth Street to 200th Street at Cedar Avenue would put west-bound drivers on a route that does not lead directly into downtown Lakeville. A short distance west of Cedar Avenue, 200th Street takes a 90 degree turn to the left and heads south to 202nd Street, at which point drivers would have to make a 90 degree turn to the right to get to downtown Lakeville. In addition, the further that 208th Street is moved to the north, the less value it will have as an east-west route that is (or should be) approximately mid-way between the two nearest major east-west corridors (the existing Highway 50 and the future 195th Street corridor). III. Commercial Development A. Angus Site City staff members have recently heard comments from Farmington business owners (and others) regarding a belief that placing a new high school on the south, east or southeast side of downtown Farmington would help existing businesses and enhance economic development opportunities by ensuring a constant flow of high-school-related traffic (students who drive, parents, teachers, participants in sporting and artistic events, etc.) into and/or through the downtown and the planned Spruce Street commercial area. H-Lo B. Christensen Site City staff members have also recently heard comments from Farmington business owners (and others) to the effect that placing a new high school on the Christensen property would reduce the flow of traffic into and through the downtown business district and the Spruce Street area. There appears to be a concern that a high school located directly on the Lakeville border will result in high-school related traffic (i.e., customers) being more inclined to frequent Lakeville and Apple Valley businesses rather than Farmington businesses. ********************************************************************************* City staff members are available to provide the City Council with further research and/or analysis regarding any other aspect(s) ofISD 192's high school site selection process. Respectfully Submitted, Kevin Carroll Community Development Director \-1-, 2020 Comprehensive Plan <'" :Jl '6 ,l. /'v' City Boundary I .....1 Urban Reserve _ Commercial _ Industrial D Business Park D Low Density D Low Medium Medium Density High Density Public/Semi-public Park/OS _ Env Sen Under _ Restricted Development DRaW N W.E s Revised on February 19, 2004 H-8 MUSA Allocation Revised on 11/15/04 .. Existing MUSA c:::I MUSA Approved in 2004 c:::I MUSA Approved Contingent upon Annexation .. MUSA Allocated In 2006 .. MUSA Allocated in 2009 .. MUSA Allocated in 2012 ..... MUSA Allocated upon Removal from Ag Preserve .... School Use Oniy .. MUSA Allocated upon Plat Approval .. Not Recommended for MUSA at this time. 1:::1 MUSA Approved (Orderly Annexation Area) c:::IAg Preserve until 2012 - MUSA not Rec. at this time c:::IA9 Preserve until 2013 - MUSA not Rec. at his time "A9 Preserve - No current expiration date ~ _ _ _ Future 19Sth Street Extension WT E Detailed View of#14 10 Garvey Tollefson --- Future 208th Street Extension o s 0.5 Miles , 0.5 , 7 Empey [-t - '1 2020 Thoroughfare Plan City of Farmington .v II ~ L I I I I :=J --.... I I ~ I I It ----- ~l \ , \ \ <" ~ , I '\ ~ , ..... \ ~ f .... ........ - ... ..... ""1- I I , ~ , / J , ; V \ ~ -' -'" . t ; / I ~ h C I I ~ n...J l r' ---, , ----J \\\ lJJ. - L :~ , nA \ r U - ~ ..... -~-~. .... - ~ ~ r-- \ ~ r I '\ L..I ~ ~ I I -- I - ~ --.. -.~ ~ J J ) ~ ~ fo-- - --- f-j r1' .--. I. ~ ~ ~ ~ \ -.l I-- 1s-t ~ ,. .J I-' --' tl ~ J Vr J - f ~ L - ~ - C- ~ ~ n II Legend /J ~ I L ::=-. L~ ~Existing ~ inor Art~rial M r h 11111 r ZSl Future M mor Arterial i:'\l Ex isting Collector 1\.' Future Co Ilecto r "IS/. Ex isting M ino r Collector I ' ,,' Future Minor Co Ilacto r ,,'Future Roadway (,\,~ City Boundary City Pare el Map .+. :s -."',"" .., " ,;... "'.f"" 5O"E:THI5 \fA. 15 I'C<l .....~ ~I~Q .u~P0686 O~L'/ ^~ D6HouLD 50" BE u6ED I'Q~ EXID" \OEMu Iij;\oE ItT6 Scale 0.5 , o 0.5 1 Miles H-IO U,.lh........ .......l>t-t..Io... MI ,~ ~ 8t H s::: RS C::M E g 'or""Q)N Q) - ..,j '- II) _ ::::s>-o:: OJ en Il. .- 'tJ <( LLQ).... l:: 0 ~~ '- D.. >. -0 :J Ci5 L- a -0 "E a () - en Q) $: - en ctl W ~ C :J a () ctl - a .l<: ctl o i .d~ ~ ~ ~ ! ...J 8 ~] ~ i ~ ~ III ~ ~ .5 . " " !! Ii ~ ~ ! j ~ ~ ~~ ~ ,,", a} e (J) ~ j ~ ~~ h i ~I ~ 0.. t 15 t ~ Ii: z> .!! blll C H! ..~ .3 "l~ ~. .. ~ ~ ;..~ ~ ~ i ~ Q. ~ -1 3:w ~ 'qhlP a; ~ :;J ~g; &:;~ ~ IIIB I il ~. ~ ~~ 5 'ij~ .ll a go '~141 . i! ,., i HI iiil ~ ,III ~~~ H- i I . - . U') Q) ::J U') U') ........ c o .., ro .., 1- o a. U') c ro 1- I- Q) .., (f) o o ..c u (f) ..c Ol I "0 Q) U') o a. o 1- a. o 0" Farmington a lI!^a)\el N [? '6 1:1 o.~ OOD ()-, b' 1" 0.. ~' 0, . .... c v E c .2' .... <( C L- V 0 E I "0 a. 'C 0 L- Qj I 0 u > v .... Cl Ul V Ul 3: Ul I ~ .!!! Ul 01 III >- I v w a. .... "0 Ul I Ul v E 0 Ul e 0 I 0 a. .... .c e c u Ul D- o :p .c >- u .... v .2' c c :I: :J C 0 0 C "0 U U III "0 V Ul III ~ C. c [l 0 .... III 0 "0 ~ a. ~ :J 0 :;:; e III .... 0 V 'i) D :J 3: D- O u.. u:: 'a^,'r/ jj D I . I I . . I . . / ~ ~ -' vi "0 c: N o rlJrts ",. '" .. ~ , \inmU ';'''...fDlliiio' ,/~ gl:s~~y~!!~i ....,~-'"; ."",_Q . l.(f:T"(i'-\. ~"/"/('~1! Ill'''.. ff d '(((llOU i' ,~ ';P ....'nOml r Ii" ~ "'wynD 11111 .~, ,,11.m.) 111) I~ ~""..i(.imnL .;i ~,. "': ,\)~t! I ~;:: .....,~...:-;'d!~' 1:;: ,:: :::'( '~',anl (' -::::, :S)~: ~;' "~~['B _ F~~ ~ --::'"Olll,m Inl:: 1,'0, ~ '<t o o N o M '- Gl ..0 E Gl > o z c o "0 Gl ... '" ~ u Gl Co VI n[l:JCl H-/~ CITY OF LAKEVILLE AND CITY OF FARMINGTON RESOLUTION CITY OF LAKEVILLE DATE April 7, 2003 RESOLUTION NO. 03-60 MOTION BY Rieb SECONDED BY Wulff CITY OF FARMINGTON DATE April 7, 2001 RESOLUTION NO. "R:n-n~ MOTION BY Soderberg SECONDED BY Fogarty '- ) RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the City Councils and staff representatives of the cities of Lakeville and Farmington have reviewed the proposed Corridors B, C, D, E identified in the Dakota County East West Corridor Study located in the cities of Lakeville and Farmington during a joint meeting held on March 10, 2003; and WHEREAS, the cities of Lakeville and Farmington have concluded that the proposed' corridors 8, C, D, E are generally consistent with their respective Transportation or Thoroughfare Plans for the cities of Lakeville and Farmington; and WHEREAS, the cities of Lakeville and Farmington further support the following positions or clarifications regarding the proposed corridors: Corridor B The City of Lakeville does not support the extension of Corridor B east of the Lakeville City Limits until the mining activities in Lakeville and the adjacent areas in Empire Township have been completed. I - ! Based on the County's 2025 Traffic Forecasts, Corridor B would appear to be more appropriately classified as a Major Collector rather than a Minor Arterial and thus 100 feet of proposed right-of-way plus additional 1 0 foot trail easements from Cedar Avenue to Pilot Knob Road would be sufficient. r\-Y~ L I . , LJ , I H I I ;J The City of Lakeville would consider acceptance of the turn-back of Dodd Boulevard from Cedar Avenue to Pilot Knob Road contingent on it being upgraded to a three-lane roadway from Gerdine Avenue to Pilot Knob Road. The City of Farmington asserts the necessity of several future connections from developments in the City of Farmington through Lakeville to Corridor B. Corridor C The cities of Lakeville and Farmington support the potential designation of Corridor C as a Minor Arterial and with a four-lane divided roadway design and concur that the transition of the alignment of the Corridor C alignment at 18Sth Street on the east to 19Sth Street should occur in the area identified as the Study Area on the Lakeville / Farmington - Work Session - Planned Land Use Map. Corridor D The cities of Lakeville and Farmington support the potential future designation of Corridor D as a Collector and acknowledge that this corridor would remain a city street in both cities. Corridor E The cities of Lakeville and Farmington support the Corridor E (Ash Street) alignment to be constructed as a three-lane roadway between Denmark and TH 3 as an interim design until such time that traffic volumes indicate the necessity of four lanes and Dakota County programs further improvements to the roadway. Further the cities of Lakeville and Farmington support long-range consideration of the designation of Corridor E as an Arterial. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lakeville City Council and Farmington City Council support the Dakota County East-West Corridor Study as prepared subject to the positions and clarifications contained in this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day 7 th of April ,2003. CITY OF LAKEVILLE BY: Robert Johr:6 on, Mayor ~, H-l4 . . 1 I \J i -----') Li n ~,.==-- -i~ /J ,? APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day 7 of cl-;Z.H.~.L v ,2003. CITY OF FARMINGTON By: ~M(2~~ -'Mayor , -l~ ~i J Attested to the /0 day of ri~?_ / {/ STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( CITY OF LAKEVILLE ) I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 03-60 is a true and correct copy of the resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lakeville at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the 7th day of April / 2003, as shown by the ! minutes of said meeting in my possession. Charlene Friedges City Clerk (SEAL) STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( CITY OF FARMINGTON) I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution NO..rf ~3-.o3 is a true and correct copy of the resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of the City of Farmington at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the ~~ day of a-;I2A-~f? 2003, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. (/ --'~ ) City..l2ler (SEAL) H - \5 ~UN~20-2005 04:46 PM TIM SAYERS 315 729 6892 P.02 SAYERS P.O. Box 68 2368 Maple St. Rd. Lyons, NY 144ag 315/9<46-1383 June 20, 2005 C1 ty of Farm; ngton 325 Ook Street Farm1ngtonl MN 55024 Attn: The Honorable Kevan SOderberg, Moyor Sub j ect: 2020 Comprehens1 ve Pl an Amendment and Rezoni ng Deer Mr. Mayor; II John Sayers owner ond tax prJyer of property ec1j01n1ng 8nd 810ng thl3 West of Flegstoff end North of Hwy -50 support the amendment to chemge the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Allow1ng the location of 0 pubHe school and rezone from A-l to R-l for the property located WE~st of Flagstaff Avenue end South of CR 64 to Hwy -50. The approval by the Planning Commission only benefits the entire City of Farmingtonl Farmington Independent School D;str;ct 192 and melkes for 0 safer and more healthy 'environment for the entire populous of Farmington and Hs future. Response times for Fire, Police and Medi col emergenc1 es end access to the proposed Eest- WEist Corric1or ore just a few of the pluses the Amendment could satisfy. S11'lcere1 YI ~~<;;t/~~ J'Ohn Sayers JUN-20-2005 04:46 PM TIM SAYERS 315 729 6892 P.01 .,' ,~. FAX COVER SHEET 'YERS P.o. BOX 68 l YONS~ NY 14489 315/946-1383 FAX 315/946-1383 DATE: 06/20/05 TO: City of Farmington A TiN: Meijor Keven Soderberg FROM: John Seliers TIME: PHONE.: FAX .: 5:00 P.M. . 651-463-7111 651-463-2591 PAGE 1 of _2_ includes cover JBJECT: 2020 ComprehenSlye P18n (revised) nESSAGE: Enclosed is the following informatio!,: r 1. Let tar to C1 ty of Farmington (1 pg) NOTIFY THE SENDER OF ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS "aNFIDENTIALlT'1I~crrICE: The tMterials enclosed with this fClcsimile trensmission ant privale, con1;ClenUel and are the party of the sender. Thelnfonnel1on contelned In the melerlells pnyllegedend Is Intended only for the USi 01 the ".dlYidueHs) 01'" entl t\j(1es) nemed SboV8, If yOLl ere not the Intended recipient. be sdvlaed that any uneuthorlzed clisclosun3, copying, dlstrl bull on, or the lflklng or any ectl on In rel1snce on the contents of this telecopl ed information is 6\l"j ct 1 ~ pronlD1ted. 11 you 1eV8 l1!lCeil/9d thiS fec81m119 trensmlSS10n In error, plesse immed16tely notify by telephone to err"nge for return of the for'Y'Yelrded documents to us. TELEPHONE (315) 946 - 1383 f J;<b ~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: 1. Consider Request by Independent School District 192 to Amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan from Urban Reserve to Public/Semi-Public for a 1l0-Acre Property Located West of Flagstaff Avenue and South of County Road 64 (a/k/a 200th Street West). Consider Amending the Text of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan To Address Any Internal Inconsistencies That Would be Created by the Approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Referred to Above and/or by the Construction of a High School on the Property In Question. Consider Request by Independent School District 192 to Rezone the Property Referred to Above from A-I to R-1. 2. 3. DATE: June 20, 2005 INTRODUCTION Independent School District 192 [hereinafter "ISD 192"] has requested that the City amend its 2020 Comprehensive Plan with regard to a 11O-acre property located west of Flagstaff Avenue and south of County Road 64 (also known as 200th Street) in the City of Farmington. The property in question, which was owned by the Christensen family before it was acquired by ISD 192 in 2004, currently has an "Urban Reserve" designation in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. ISD 192 has requested that this designation be amended to "Public/Semi-Public," to allow the construction of a high school on the property. ISD 192 has also requested that the property in question be rezoned from "A-I" (Agricultural) to R-1 (Low Density Residential). School facilities are a conditional use in any R-i zoning district. . DISCUSSION I have attached a copy of the staff Memo on this subject that was provided to the Planning Commission in connection with the public hearing that it conducted on Tuesday, June 14,2005. The public hearing consisted of an initial presentation by City staff, followed by comments by various spokespersons for ISD 192, which was then followed by comments from various members of the public. After closing the public hearing and offering their own comments on the issues in question, the Planning Commission members voted (3 to 2) to recommend to the City , Council that the Council approve the three actions referred to above - that is, the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment from Urban Reserve to Low-Density Residential, any related amendments to the text of the Comprehensive Plan that may be necessitated by the aforementioned land use change, and the requested zoning. At this stage, there is no need or reason to restate all of the information that was included in the attached Planning Commission memo, or to restate the staff recommendation, which remains the same. This memo will therefore be limited to providing the City Council with supplemental information related to some of the comments that were made during the public hearing on June 14. 1. MUSA (Metropolitan Urban Service Area) "MUSA" is the acronym for Metropolitan Urban Service Area. A city cannot legally allow sanitary sewer services to be extended to a property unless or until the Metropolitan Council has formally agreed that the property in question can be included within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. A number of comments were made at the public hearing on June 14 to the effect that the former Christensen property "has MUSA," or that it "was granted MUSA" by the City Council in November of 2004, and that denying the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment (from Urban Reserve to Low-Density Residential) would be inconsistent with whatever past MUSA- related decision( s) may have been made by the City Council. The former Christensen property does not currently "have" MUSA. It will not be added to the Metropolitan Urban Service Area until the Metropolitan Council decides to do so. The Met Council will not be presented with that issue unless or until the City of Farmington asks the Met Council to include the former Christensen property within the MUSA. The City has not asked the Met Council to do so, because the City's own Comprehensive Plan (which was reviewed and approved by the Met Council) prohibits the extension of infrastructure (which includes sanitary sewer) into the portions of the City that have been designated as Urban Reserve. The former Christensen property is in the Urban Reserve. The Met Council would not approve a MUSA modification that was inconsistent with the City's own Comprehensive Plan. At its meeting on November 15, 2004, the City Council adopted a MUSA phasing map (see attached Exhibit A) that granted MUSA to certain properties "immediately" (subject to later approval by the Metropolitan Council). Other properties were identified as being potentially eligible to get MUSA in specified future years (subject to final approval by the City Council at that time and further subject to subsequent approval by the Met Council). Finally, a few properties were identified as being eligible for MUSA upon the fulfillment of certain conditions. For example, some properties would become eligible for MUSA immediately upon annexation. By way of illustration, the property identified as #10 on Exhibit A met that requirement when the City Council approved its annexation, after which the City applied for and received final Met Council approval ofthe MUSA extension. Similarly, the MUSA phasing plan adopted by the City Council envisioned that the Christensen property (PIon Exhibit A) would become eligible for MUSA upon the fulfillment of two conditions: removing the property from the Ag Preserve program, and receiving whatever approvals would be required to use the property as a school site. The first condition has been satisfied. The second has not. 2 The former Christensen property cannot be used a school site until the City Council approves, among other things, (a) the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment from Urban Reserve to Low-Density Residential, and (b) the related text amendments that would be required, especially with regard to the provisions that would currently prohibit the extension of infrastructure to or through the Urban Reserve properties near the Christensen property, and (c) the requested rezoning. If all required City approvals are obtained, and when it is therefore known for certain that the property will be actually used for a school (subject to Met Council approval), the City will then apply to the Met Council for final approval of the MUSA extension and final approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment from Urban Reserve to Low-Density Residential. Until the entire procedure outlined above has been followed though to a successful conclusion, the Christensen property will not "have" MUSA. The decision by the former City Council (in November of 2004) to make the Christensen property potentially eligible for MUSA upon the fulfillment of certain conditions was therefore inherently contingent upon the favorable resolution of a number of important land use changes (including a critical Comprehensive Plan amendment) that were not even requested until more than six months later. That is, the MUSA decision in November of 2004 did not mandate that a subsequent City Council automatically grant any and all land use approvals that might later be requested; rather, it indicated that the City Council should seek the Met Council's approval of a MUSA extension if all required land use approvals were eventually granted by the City. 2. Municipal State Aid At the public hearing on June 14, a spokesperson for ISD 192 presented information regarding the City of Farmington's Municipal State Aid [MSA] account. Attached hereto as Exhibit B you will find some Supplemental Information that has been compiled by City Administrator Dave Urbia, City Engineer Lee Mann, Finance Director Robin Roland and others regarding the current status and anticipated future uses ofthe City's MSA account. 3. Fla2staff Avenue -- Cost(s) and Extent of Improvements At the public hearing on June 14, and in certain documents that were circulated in the weeks prior thereto, it was stated or implied that by providing off-site infrastructure costs estimates that ISD 192 had requested, the City had (a) entered into some type of binding agreement with ISD 192 regarding the maximum portion of Flagstaff Avenue that would have to be improved in connection with the construction of a high school on the Christensen property and (b) indicated its intention to grant various land use approvals that had not yet been requested at that time. The attached Exhibit B provides additional background information regarding the chronology of various events and actions related to Flagstaff Avenue issues. 4. Results of Bond Referendum on Februarv 15. 2005 City staff members have received inquiries about statements that people have heard, or believed that they heard, to the effect that "62% of the people of Farmington supported the bond referendum" or "62% of the School District's voters voted "yes" in the bond referendum." The attached Exhibit B provides additional information about this issue. 3 5. Site Options Information was presented at the public hearing on June 14 regarding the attention that ISD 192 has devoted to its "site search" efforts. The fact that ISD 192 has looked at a number of potential high school sites has never been disputed. There seems to be disagreement, however, regarding whether any alternate sites still exist that would present fewer problems with regard to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan, and that would therefore be more likely to be approved by the City Council and the Metropolitan Council. In recent months, City representatives have spoken with ISD 192 representatives about two particular sites that could be considered potential high school locations. One such site, the current Fountain Valley Gold Course, is located adjacent to and directly north of a site (the Angus property) that was originally ISD 192's preferred location for a new high school. Attached hereto is a copy of a letter to Mayor Soderberg from Colin Garvey, who apparently has an option agreement or purchase agreement in effect regarding the property in question. A location map has also been attached. Another potential location is within the southern portion of the Seed/Genstar property. ISD 192 staff members have indicated that they consider this general area to be a suitable location for an elementary school. They have also indicated that finalizing a high school site is currently a higher priority than securing another elementary school site. A copy of a recent letter from Newland Communities has been attached. Newland Communities is the managing partner of the partnership that will be developing the property. A location map has also been attached (approximate acreages are shown for various sections of the property that are separated by existing and future features and improvements such as 195th Street, railroad tracks, etc.). ACTION REQUESTED Review the attached material, discuss any relevant issues, and determine whether to approve or deny the three proposed land use actions identified at the beginning of this Memorandum. 4 MUSA Allocation Adopted on November 15, 2004 II I ~I c \ \ L N ~,. "l!~ ~o"v o,~ R2 ~Q.v t ~I$UESTRST ",:~~;...",,~; ~ ~ )J '" L Rl '" ~ED lSSUB TRST,/ Jm - c: OOIf<Ell. -'" r-- ~'rr: L LJ \ ,< [';, N H ~ 8 ~ I \\ M>.t<. rr T MJ"'", ~ '~J ~*' I-f:RZFfl.D , ~ .;....~. .. ~ l 1 U Q2 ~ 1....- PAYNE - ~ ~ J' I~ IIMJ",", L OtRlSTEN~ Im~ .~"""'" II] ~- ?1 I c,"", t' I.oLD} - - ~rP - -'1' MJ"'", -- , tl i// ~ ~ 1-r ~ I '"'p ,. i " - , I.j - Currpston 11 I ~: ".' .. "1 I----C y ri - j EMPEY I--- ." I B C A ~ b "" PETERSON AtLEN 1J-L-L f-J II--l J f.I R - - ~ Existing MUSA I TOi fSON c::I MUSA Approved in 2004 - ~ MUSA Approved Contingent upon Annexation I-- . -= ~ MUSA Allocated in 2006 p .. MUSA Allocated in 2009 p ~ MUSA Allocated in 2012 Detailed View of #14 c::I MUSA Allocated upon Removal from Ag Preserve - --- 10 School Use Only Garvey ~ MUSA Allocated upon Plat Approval ! TOI~""" .. Not Recommended for MUSA at this time. ~ MUSA Approved (Orderly Annexation Area) 7 c::I AIJ Preserve until 2012 - MUSA not Rec. at this time ErTlley c::I Ag Preserve until 2013 - MUSA not Rec. at his time ~~k III ~'\"'t ~ AIJ Preserve - No current expiration date N W+E -- Future 195th Street Extension J 1111 -- Future 208th Street Extension s 0.5 0 0.5 Mles .- L?YI/1BI/7/ Supplemental Information ISD 192 High School Project June 20, 2005 Municipal State Aid Account 2005 Total Allocation - $501,573 2005 Construction Allocation - $376,180 Amount received for Ash Street 4/1212005 - $351,902.61 Current Unencumbered Construction Balance as of 6/15/2005 - $1,236,680.91 Final disbursement for Akin Road - $309,416.05 Final disbursement for Ash Street - $16,444.05 (preliminary, will be based on final construction costs) Balance after final disbursements on Akin Road and Ash Street - $910,820.81 Future ProjectsIPotential MSA Eligible Costs (current projections): 208th Street to Pilot Knob Road - $400,000 208th Street to Akin Road - $800,000 Elm Street Reconstruction - Unknown at this time 208th Street to TH 3 - $4,500,000 Flagstaff Issues/Timeline June 10,2004 - Staff memo outlining concerns with the costs for the infrastructure for the Christensen site identified in the McGhie-Betts report, subsequently forwarded to School District. October 22,2004 - At ajoint City staff/School District staff meeting, the School District , requests that the City provide an estimate for the off-site infrastructure for the Christensen site. October 26, 2004 - Dr. Meeks requests an estimate for the off-site infrastructure for the Angus site. October 28, 2004 - City staff forwards infrastructure cost estimate for Christensen site including Flagstaff to 195th to School District staff ($6,980,000). October 28, 2004 - Date of School District Review and Comment Document. Ex/rJ3l-r E Supplemental Information Page 2 November 2, 2004 - State receives Review and Comment Document. November 9,2004 - City staff forwards backup documentation for cost estimates for Christensen and Angus site to School District. December 20, 2004 - City/School District staff and other officials meet with Lakeville staff regarding Christensen site. Lakeville staff comments that they would like to see Flagstaff paved to Lakeville Border. January 3,2005 - Engineering staff is directed to estimate Flagstaff costs between 195th Street and Lakeville border. January 5, 2005 - City staff completes updated cost estimate to include Flagstaff costs to Lakeville. Bond Referendum on February 15,2005 Attached hereto is a copy of a page from the Dakota County Treasurer-Auditor Department's web site, which provides voting results from the bond referendum in question. Also attached hereto is a copy of a page from ISD 192's web site, which provides similar information in a more detailed format. The statistical information provided on these two attachments would seem to support the following conclusions: a. 62% of the registered voters in ISD 192 who voted on the bond referendum voted "yes" (2360 "yes" votes divided by 3802 actual voters = 62%). b. 22.9% of the registered voters in ISD on February 15, 2005 voted on the bond referendum (3802 actual voters divided by 16,626 registered voters = 22.9%). This figure is generally referred to as the "voter turnout" percentage. The total number of registered voters included 16,475 that were previously registered plus 151 who registered on the day ofthe election. c. 14% of the total registered voters in ISD 192 on the day of the election voted "yes" (2360 "yes" votes divided by 16,626 registered voters). There does not appear to be a way to determine exactly how many City of Farmington residents voted on the bond referendum, or what the relative proportions of "yes" and "no" votes were for City of Farmington residents. One precinct (#2) was limited to Farmington residents, and two precincts (#3 and #4) did not include any Farmington residents, but the remaining precinct (#1) included voters from Farmington, Lakeville and several townships. There is apparently no "breakdown" available for Precinct # 1 with regard to how many voters there were from each of the jurisdictions involved. /5-2- T\easurer- Auditor- Templete Page 10f1 1,,:.::~~.,)~~&E~~~;)~)~~~_~~~~;.J~~~~_~;il,~ In~~x~ I How do I find... ...:.f ~ I ~ OBpartm<J(lts E~~l~-~~~) I Where are... ...:.f a ~--/ C(}UIl'~ Treasurer-Auditor Home Contact Us Document Fees Elections Manufactured Homes Pay Taxes Plat Tracking Real Estate Inquiry Recorded Plats and Surveys Tax-Forfeited Parcels Taxation Vital Statistics Treasurer-Auditor Department Independent School District 192 (Farmington) Special Election Results February 15, 2005 Approval of School District Bond Issue: I YES II NO II VOTE TOTALS I I 2360 II 1441 II 3,802 I INumber of Registered Voters at 7:00 a.m. II 16,475 I INumber of Election Day Registrations II 151 I IPercent Voter Turnout II 22.9% I Home I News & Events I County Services I Employment I E-Government I Site Index I Departments I Elected Officials I Links I Contact I Privacy Policy & Disclaimer -~ ~${)4~ Department of Information Technology Copyright @ 2000 http://www.co.dakota.mn.us/treasurer/Elections/2005Results/ResultsISDI92Feb2005.htm 15-3 6/1 712005 ISp 192 Unofficial Referendum Election Results Page 1 of2 Independent School District 192 Farmington, Minnesota (651) 463 -500 1 ".-rm.. .: DISTR Curriculum .. UnofficiafdifOrfd Referendum Election Result MN Academic Standards The early election re~aff~1)~'i&'W are provided for your convenience and r represent the officiaIMe1~8f1Wn results, after the required audits are comp Iprecinct IIYes IINo IITotal Voters IIRegistered 1 (ISC, 5th- E:=J~11350 116237 Walnut) 12 (Akin) 111035 11389 111424 115735 13 (Empire) 11204 11184 11388 111443 14 (North Trail) 11470 11170 11640 113060 ITotals 112360 111441 113802 1116475 Numbers above include one "overvote" ballot in Precinct 1, explaining why the amounts do not "add up" as aniticipated fo Total Voters. An overvote ballot does not count as a Yes or No, but does add to the number of total voters. Total In Favor 2360 Total Against 1441 Referendum passes For more information on how the proposed referendum will affect your property taxE here ISO 192 thanks all community members who participated in the process. Contact Us I Site Map I Credits http://www.farmington.kI2.mn.us/facilities/UnofficiaIVote.htm 1?-4- 6/17/200/ II CASTLE ROCK DEVELOPMENT 22098 CANTON COURT FARMINGTON, MN 55024 PHONE (651) 463-4825 FAX (651) 463-4850 JUNE 17TH 2005 , CITY OF FARMINGTON 325 OAK STREET FARMINGTON, MN 5504 ATTN:MAYORKEVANSODERBERG DEAR KEVAN, OUR FIRM IS WILLING TO WORK WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND CITY TO RESOLVE THE PROBLEM OF THE LOCA nON OF SCHOOL. WITH OUR FIRM PUTTING IN THE ROAD SYSTEM IT WILL SAVE THE TAXP AYERS A MINIMUM OF 3.5 MILLION AND IF MORE LAND IS NEEDED WE WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK OUT A SHARED DEVELOPMENT ON THE THE GOLF COURSE PROPERTY. BY:GENSTAR MIDWEST 6-10- 5 ;10:07AM GENSTAR MIDWEST~ 651 463 1611;# 21 2 IftI Newland" ~. COMMUNITIES AT Till: III~\RT Of GIU:" 1 llVlNl.; June 1O~ 2005 Dave Urbia City ofFarrnington 325 Oak 5t Fanninglon, MN 55024 RE: Land Use Considerations for Empire Property Dear Mr. Urbia: Newland Communities is a company that truly loves creating incredible places to live. The Empire Property will be no exception. Throughout the next few months, we plan. to continue focusing on intemal1and planning eHorts and practices. processing an annexation requ.est, and working further with the city and county staff to understand development implications of the 19S1h Stred extension. As these processc,,> advance, we look forward to sharing ideas and gaining comments from the City Council, Planning Commission, and City Staff as to what may be necessary to lruly create a landmark community ill Farmington. The collaboration of your local expertise with our demonstrated nationwide planning and development success will be the project's toundation. During th.e past two months, there has been some discussion regarding particular land uses, namely a high school, on the Empire Property. We recognize the benefits of collabor'dting with stak.eholders to discuss potential land uses and site development options, and welcome these discll.'":isions. Please contact me if there are stakebolders with collaborative interest to explore specific land uses on the Empire Property. 1n the meantime, laud planning efforts are advancing, and we look forward to discussing more details in the near future. Sincerely, ~!~~ Proj ect Manager CC: Kevin Carroll - City of Farmington Brad Meeks, Doug HOllar - Farmington School District Brian Laidlaw - Newland Communities .' I / ----- ~ 0 ~ U II L UL j, U "\ I I 11 J i-----::::::::: 1 ~ r ] L \ L Rive 140 ~.~ t III 'HIi L, ,'___. Charleswood , Crossing \ ~. 151 Units . OIl -( i -;;:::;- ( ~n..J r 1 ~ - ~ Devney/Manley /.--4 J. 320 Units 'I';. JE .1 D ~.~ k! r I "1 if'"'.' ~ :1 % . 11 --j)' h r . ~~-l f.J I r.: , j '<T , ~a Tollefson !l:lll!:!l J= I Development !!:II I 66 Units f-- 1-1 ~r ~. ~ " II- ~ ro LF 'r- j 'fI...:. Jt - Tollefson >v l-n r b Development L 200 Units ~ V I--- V Empey/Garvey ./ - 96 Units I-' V '-- V b. / I II II c: - ~ ::J ./ ~ L tJ c C::: e- m ~ I1J UJ I I r- r r I TL: " l " City Boundary E::l Lakeville & Farmington Urban Reserve l1li Lakeville 2010 MUSA ~~ Pending or Anticipated Residential Development o IZZJ Proposed High School Site I [::J Township Property 0.5 1 I 2 Miles I N + I I ~J PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. PRINT A 'QW0 V\.se~ SIG~ 0~ 2. PRINT '7\ A va n UreA SIGN f)~~ 3. PRINT ,d J, 1 ) ^ D#?Jr- tr'Oh-$CF-y. SIGN ~~~ 4. PRINT Q ,I ,I ~(c11 HQ~~ SIGN ~t 5. PRIN~V\\~ 1'1"'>4r.g ArQJ:(lt"~ \ ~~ - ~(h -S"~~ r:-vn--( (".~-h..-. rh N )1 s-'Ii FIY)~f'b '-:;;q,'/ 9~ -9?/-StO ~/-~~3-/9- ~ ~SI"'4f,:S-:291?s '7" PIr0~ 01- -t-Gv~,~ (O~, L/ (P] c; (0 '1 (0 q /7 P.1.NC s., (p~J '-~G $ --9bCJb - )7) PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. Iq~ql 'nPJ &5f -L/-~3-Wc/)cr 2. 1>RINT . /17vr/<. tJ rU~e- SIGN ??l~/tJ~ !9~1 Ex -A~.,I z: b>/-Y~-~~ ~ S'l) E '-DtJ t4f7.:>cr W;!Pf ~..s-/- ~.3-733Z- IG\ W'\U~ 6. PRINT )~ L) 7~ rill ~ r=\ t=et( . q5d.L PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. II // '1('1Q F(reb(~ ~'1-~ ~I U ~ ~ t I}vt 10 . $'$"t)'Z- ~ /!7a I I R 'f.. ~\('{..D aTt-\' Hw-v\l\\ '""- cr~d-- cr<;3-Cfi3 mr/ J:)'L) 2-LI 7 J2-~ ;.0 ~ 05'> 7 PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. PRINVJ~V\~ Hu. r SIGN tJ~~ 2. PRINT Metl--a SIGN 'I3Cf ( dO 7'TfA.J+, uJ. ~ rVlJ\ IV\. ~ 5/-~fo 3-;;575 /rlC\y, ~ 00L 'ii( ~ (CJ 6. PRINT 9~ J--CJ91-19':> 1771) hJ2e BttZ 0 c:r Ft't,z {V, ~ f/I 1l>~ 'pi cr ~ :2 -tfJ( -3W3 1'12." y-;2-- 7/j'J 7. PRINT 51ftJ'€51 n ( PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 2. SIGN 3. PRINT SIGN 4. PRINT SIGN 5. PRINT SIGN 6. PRINT SIGN 7. PRINT SIGN PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL a ~ We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. PRINT rClch J I 65"/.... / 7 7/~ 9 s-.;; 997 PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. PRINT ~co1f fe:r-r CJ11f1U N '~7;3'Z- e.ti3-J ~-7o,.J .f:il-N~ 0)'-4-03->/ so ZZ.i -l~ 30 ~/'"1~ ."1G,J f1r-> 'i'50LJ!f roll' ~ .;.< ov T7-+ .J: 1- ~. b) J -<.t fa 0 - fi <.j r ~ t:: A"- .I'1r"" ..:.:> (---""fl)..-J ;~~--<i/.:2. D\2- 6 ~/- l/60- 6 ;)71 7. PRINT Ih SIGN vtn/ /!JtIl//0 (/5/ ~;3 {1Zf- PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. ~ )~7j7 /y/" Ii tv. (j/-ZJ()-ZOZO 1. / g/Ljo Echo br_ -,I-I/~o '~<Y at, lo::?\d- llS~ '3+ LU ar~- 43l- d\cs8 4. PRINT ('b Lv...n~ cp:;;-~_ 4 l - -,~O (PSI Lj{p3-930lQ ~J -<l6'3--93:J-1 PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. W ~r..eVl ~ 6. PRINT () -E r\Y\ M. ,,"-owe. s N rnV~ -"ICE I 6(()eraJd ((a.if I~;)'~"l> 6.~j,o br J1IDQ' ' ~~ &5/-'-IbJ- V~~ 9<;a qq7 7;;' ~ d.. Il/Dq ,qttLio Chi 01l& Aue,; &~I '-/lJ3 389/ I 1~() ell PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. I f}57i/ C ,f//d7 -el' &: ~3-312r IfS7f ~ Iorer tf Y6]-JI/ZY 1~5..,<o ~torer- Cf t.l~:S-7q ;)-.S \8 '5.~ b 4b3 -"1'\ J.. ~ (b r~3 l.:rl!t;u/ q 69 -y'r;f)6 ~(dq J cO WI'; j1@ML 1\~~J Z~ $& 7 -1-y:plorer 'iJC{L( .....-~1 q. ~\ 'Sf\ ~ . '\>r'IYl {- \0. ..". ~~l\ - v{\n} \\. S~Yl ~ . YriVl-l- c5r~ 'i) tt ry{\1\.-Y \') . ~''tr' ~~ \ ~~ \1\. -.. ~ ~I~ yhD~Dwut~ ft;5lvA/~!d19 - -- - ---- PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway SO. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. /1 :1g'1 E V e(\ -Sfl)'n 1J C 't 10 3~ ;2.)<f 19 ;:; Cl/J yY1. , A rh-r--. l6/- / C(3c2 D it-. C e C6~~ {.t, ~j (q '3~:? ~{Nst Pa>ftt ~D-d Io'iq 7. PRINT C J Br(.. ~~lL-r-tln~ \~3S3 Eu~:n.~t) o:.;t- SIGN . > Lj toe::>- -Z <0 Y PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway SO. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. PRINT _I~ t;1N SIGN 4. PRINT (1\<2., \C-of\\ (2.; \I,. (" c c5L e SIGN /9.2!"b EV€NS77JN O~ .If&,J.. 3d ~~ t I If 1t,o -"~'h ICZJ z 5q 14 ~~~t- V\/ L.j {,CJ- 202 <6' '1;;'7 - ~ 11 051 4(0 . PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway SO. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 19~ 6 blllj}:s!or; iJr. 61/1 '16/J-LJ ~ ~~ &1r. (A Al~-Lil{-?~ GX-~ ~ .../ ,~ . \Cf\S3 ver~~ \r \~ ~ - 9'/1- ,;?<<7</ ~ 19t(tE~ 1/6TJs:/z?A,lle, / / <::) SIGN 7. p Ct'el) s -1m Dr ~ -l./h3-d-1 PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. \9d--%d- ~$l L{fpO -glO5' I q~ J- Gv0r18~ 1d,~-1 V'~ (PS{ q(PO ~ 3/&3 ? h iJr-j ~57 -LJ60 - /); - , 6 ~-7"<0 ..;ds9'j "~. 7'/7, G 0.ro~o 5QQ'[ 19 8riJ S+ w 66' I '-/100 4010 \ Qu.cLor.fer /9355 kref2l11 rSt-aY-(ou.r i: ~5)) 1(pl) -cE.;la 651 - lib::>- .2 325 PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1. PRINT LibA- !\/OV~ Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 6VL/'ltJOYJ br 4LP3~9/P5 SIGN . a fJM.L1 )11."'Z Ev',1n~kw1 ~,- '7~.J~ g 910S 2. PRINT SIGN p", I.-{ I Not/4/C... SIGN KaldLl~/ *~' b/t hr ~~ 6SD88DCIYPk/ e/cI~ 4ldJ-&q/~ 202'20 ~i.LJ.. /4 it! t<A ~o- ro 9/2 SIGN 6. PRINT ~PY-A. . .y c:, d' -0.26~ \ 1221 L\Je-Y~S-f- fbO -zc4 PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. h~ ~() ~~ ~ f.hri t-J-. W~ 2. PRINT 3. PRINT ~\"""I -r~kt.c...&..,-~S" SIGN 0/- 4b.s - 71/<; ~o3-gd.... En Yl' kJ Wu-y <;;'5/-1(,,3, -71..(r: CA Z-03crCf ~I tS1~t.f60-q-rL6 vd.~ {iJCy~~~~C ~ , lp :r1~ E/_& ~~". ~:l-A \l135(P 8/1; ~ Tral -t em i @-f;-uY1-ti-erhe-r, n~t (P 5 I '- '-l G:."5 -...2 '1'1 PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. k 4. 1....038'1 E:n/~ ~- If -Fwvv. ~ /U,IU s'::>oz4 b~ I 46.6 - 46 t 1...6' 86 "L4- tos- ( -410 0- tt-2S-=t- , N/ QItt8cr(@VQk<rb.. . I:>~ S4. PelL, C (;/-1(6-C{'257 ~o-3 7"'7 -E.'r.c So-:>-,y'::>~t IRS) - Lf&~ ~9~ r::-a.A. I'?/'Y'.. ~ -inN ~-~illd 6. PRINT--r arC MJ.1b &7!-cf(p3 -:005 rt SIG~ t.5 /---t/b S .Qj3g PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. PRINT tV Roac.h 5'139 OJ I'd Si.Ke d . 463-76.3 ~avV\ \..\ II "... , I 31 l-d03ed. st Cas \ ) L( Coo-.:>~LB o 'COY\ttD r 5 Lf;}J a03~& s+ (;s 1- LJb6- 37 :1.o~ ~~. (g )f - Y bO ~ G j ) 1 "7 , 5. PRINT - 70b PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. 6. PRINT &S-I 4(,0 2~77 . . ,^'h~ b (!3 nu ~3~C\ ~n~\ \r\-\- WQ~ Fo... '( i'-' '\\''R__<0~\;:xs{, V\ ~ ~ \10\ nC(:), C.D IYJ '2-"" 3loct tn r.& J- Iv Y ~.")~'" Y\1;05}ocl ",'5' -~r~ 3-7 2.{o '6 ~ I\S(~!_>,\O--'n.c:o. ~ ;20 375' Enr/~kf Wh{Y qr,.", ,<" 10"1 $11 i )/-tj'b &;5/-l! (PC -3925 evi VI. () s+Ovv. 1. () vvtSuY> c. , C~ PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff A venue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. PRINT SIGN 2. PRINT SIGN (Z,-708-Q387 IwJ 0r-I-c/roo- f OSm\n: Y\ I M" ~S\ -~O-3Ll-~ PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff A venue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. 19~{P1 ~lJevI:SOIV.s five.- Lj{PJ-g]; s ) 2. P~T ~:::ha.UXICl. \"0"\ l 5,9 2.()D~ st. W. tp5l- .!\{QO-.L\8'LI \C\'1'1 q Pcd-11 /'-'-((03 -/) c::>Sf.--' .-- 4?- L 7 lC( ~4-D ~\/Gv,5.fm--.- Dv (os r r~ D-L(0 PETITION TO: MA YOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff A venue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 4. PRINT SIGN 5. PRINT SIGN 6. PRINT SIGN 7. PRINT SIGN 5F@ / - (YtJ 43- 7/~ ~\l PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff A venue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. )tJJ3:? UJtf[01dlL~ 07~ 7f ~c3 - "f/ 6 ~ r' ()~ 4. PRINT SIGN s. PRINT SIGN 6. PRINT SIGN 7. PRINT SIGN ,," " . PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. 1. PRINT SIGN SIGN "",V.s 3 \\~ :LsC\.Clc..5.:> "'- 4. PRINT f' ...L '"'.1:'-/ nlJi"hd't--. S r6/'t7=' ~Vt 5. PRINT Cc:~v '<;' n~n # 3 -;A ;;);AO 1= QIf"'r) )) 1~7J( ~cho fWlrnrn lf~ f I ~e;>D br2-1 v~ vYlN sf- ~lfs 400/ 3Cf r3 1-tlyt~ /uj -p, /1. IJi]S 2/Ju/~ lUc hVL bC/-~ 7" 7.5-- 7&;7. 6~J !II~ /bO -;;? 6? FS2 r 1D ev<!2E%,A ~ JI\Jfi'fbrJ '-Ib 3' ;l 5 3t /' 8 ..... .," '- .... PETITION TO: MAYOR OF FARMINGTON AND CITY COUNCIL We, the undersigned residents of Farmington and Lakeville (with children in School District 192), petition the Farmington City Council to: Approve the amendment to the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan and approve the requested rezoning, to allow the construction of a new Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue and Highway 50. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Please print clearly and sign under your printed name. (11 20 &'H() ~ L{ (PC) ~ z(p24 t~\'7---0 E C-~ b\I'J CL Y:lo 0 ~ z-& z'Lf ~ ~---., ~~\)' 1~~\ I SIGN & L\~\~ LuG ~k \<b \50 t:Lk -0 ~I( ~LPD.- L-/ <bb') 4. PRINT 5. PRINT ~ \ . ,,:;..)o\'\Y\ (J..\J \ SIGN h\ . _ ... jV'. \.. ~v----l 6. PRINT ,'5 . <'"'.. ~r 1\ ~ C S OJ - SI~ L. 11"\0 \) \" Lie:: - 4 J dS J [) 00 ~ck() D;~ L/{, J J CJ-d-o-0 I~ 40 L:~ ,. ROSEMOUNT /30- ADMINISTRATION June 8,2005 RE: COUNTY-WIDE HIGH PERFORMANCE PARTNERSHIPS Dear HiPP Partners: As we wrap up nearly two years of work on the High Performance Partnerships (HiPP) initiative, we wanted to take an opportunity to share the HiPP status report for this first phase of collaboration. The status report is scheduled to be presented to the HiPP leadership group on Friday, June 17. The presentation of this report affords us an opportunity to come together as elected officials, staff and consultants to celebrate an accomplishment that is truly a milestone in our efforts to continue delivering efficient, effective and responsive govenunent services to our constituents. On Thursday, June 30, the HiPP leadership will present a summary of the report. The meeting will be followed by dinner catered by Divine Swine, a Dakota County business operating out of Lakeville. The meeting agenda is below: Location: Dakota Lodge at Thompson County Park 360 Buder Avenue East West St. Paul Agenda: 4:00 - Gathering and Social Time 4:30 - Formal Program . Welcome and Introductions . HiPP Process and Status Report Overview . Committee Reports . Next Steps (2005 and Beyond!) . Discussion and Questions 5:15 - Dinner and Networking Please invite your elected officials and all staff or consultants who have been involved in this historic achievement. Please provide the number of individuals you expect to attend from your community to me no later than Wednesday, June 22, so we can finalize catering details. We are looking forward to celebrating this great demonstration of local govenunents working together. Sincerely, Jamie Verbrugge Rosemount City Administrator SPIRIT OF PRIDE AND PROGRESS Rosemount City Hall' 2875 145th Street West. Rosemount, MN 55068-4997 651-423-4411' TDD/TTY 651-423-6219' Fax 651-423-4424 www.ci.rosemount.m n . us Values Statement Excellence and Quality in the Delivery of Services We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver quality services in a highly professional and cost-effective manner. Fiscal Responsibility We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for citizen confidence in government. Ethics and Integrity We believe that ethics and integrity are the foundation blocks of public trust and confidence and that all meaningful relationships are built on these values. Open and Honest Communication We believe that open and honest communication is essential for an informed and involved citizenry and to foster a positive working environment for employees. Cooperation and Teamwork We believe that the public is best served when departments and employees work cooperatively as a team rather than at cross purposes. Visionary Leadership and Planning We believe that the very essence of leadership is to be visionary and to plan for the future. Positive Relations with the Community We believe that positive relations with the community and public we serve leads to positive, involved, and active citizens. Professionalism We believe that continuous improvement is the mark of professionalism and are committed to applying this principle to the services we offer and the development of our employees.