Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.20.90 Council Packet AGENDA COUNCIL MEETING REGULAR AUGUST 20, 1990 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVE AGENDA 3. APPROVE MINUTES a. August 6, 1990 4. CITIZENS COMMENTS 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. 7:15 P.M. - Excavating/Grading permit Application - Jack Benedict b. Set Public Hearing - Excavating/Grading permit application - Jim Reisinger 6. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. Tax Increment Financing 7. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Fire Cataract Pension Benefits b. County Fair Parking Restrictions c. Delinquent Municipal Services d. Project 90-1 Industrial Park, Change Order No. 1 e. Project 89-3 First Street Utility Project, Change Order No. 1 9. NEW BUSINESS a. 1991 Squad Car Purchase 10. MISCELLANEOUS a. Review 1991 Operating Budget b. Project 89-3, First and Walnut Street and Utility Project c. Project 87-7, Utility Improvement, Dakota County Fairgrounds 11. CONSENT AGENDA a. Schools and Conference Request - Senior Center b. Approve modification to MHFA First Time Homebuyers Program c. Resolution declaring support for VRWMC Cleanwater Partnership Study d. Schools and Conference Request - Fire Dept e. Schools and Conference Request - Fire Dept f. Capital Outlay Request - Public Works g. Approve payment of bills 12. ADJOURN AGENDA REQUEST FORM ITEM NO. NAME: Gerald Henricks DEPARTMENT: HRA DATE: August 13, 1990 /A MEETING DATE: August 20, 1990 a- I /\1 CATEGORY: Petitions, Requests, and Communications SUBJECT: Tax Increment Financing EXPLANATION: Presentation by HRA as to the impact of the 1990 Tax Increment Financing Law and possible ways to mitigate it. REFERENCE MATERIAL/RESPONSIBILITY: REFERRED TO: (NAME) DEPARTMENT: Larry Thompson Administration feeftidd- SIGNATURE / "'� b I MEMO TO: HRA MEMBERS SUBJECT: TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DATE: JUNE 8, 1990 This is an overview of changes in the 1990 Tax Increment laws and the basic impact upon Cities that establish new tax increment districts. First, the new tax increment legislation contains ambiguities. The information provided is based upon legal counsel (Briggs and Morgan) presentation and discussion with John Kirby (Dorsey and Whitney law firm) . The state will impose for the first time a direct cost on the City and it's taxpayers for the establishment of new tax increment districts. This is in the form of lost Local Government Aid relating to the school aid formula. This will be illustrated later. Secondly, the purpose of the changes was to recover the lost state costs associated with higher state aid payment to school districts when TIF is used. The rationale behind this is that all development would have occurred without assistance. Also, supporters of the changes felt that cities should have direct cost associated with the use of TIF. Thirdly, the State wanted to reduce the use of TIF and the establishment of new districts. Calculating the amount of State Aid reduction for Farmington for a new tax increment district is relatively complex. The formation of the actual amount of aid reduction will be determined by the joint efforts of the Department of Revenue and Education. The Department of Revenue has stated there will be memos forthcoming clarifying its position on new tax increment districts. The Department of Education will provide a calculated "hypothetical" amount of school aid for each new tax increment district. During the interim, tax increment is to be calculated using the "penalty tax rate" estimates based upon the Minnesota School aids "equalization" formula. Simplified into 3 terms; revenue needed; local effort levy and state aids. State Aid = Revenue needed - local Effort Levy The size of the penalty for new tax increment districts to the city relates to the amount of "qualifying captured value" within a school district, the school district "penalty tax rate" and the school district "sales ratio". Recognizing the complexity of Minnesota school aid system and that the school aids formula does change and these changes do affect the "penalty tax rate", an estimation technique will be used to provide an approximation of the LGA penalty. Each new tax increment district's penalty will be determined after discussion with the Departments of Revenue and Education. Presently, Farmington School Districts penalty tax rate is approximately 30%. The method for estimating the penalty to the city for establishing a new tax increment district is as follows: 1. Determine the TIF captured value for the new TIF district. 2. Compute the qualifying TIF value based on the phase-in percentages. The percentages are based upon the form of district established. a. Tax Increment Economic Development districts have an immediate 100% impact. b. Renewal or Renovation districts have phase-in impact. YEAR IMPACT 0-5 0% 6 12.5% 7 25% 8 37.5% 9 50% 10 62.5% 11 75% 12 87.5% 13 100% In renewal districts the penalty starts the 6th year at 12.5%. Example: If TIF equals $100, the city LGA is reduced $ 3.75 in the 6th year. c. Redevelopment districts penalty have a phase-in impact: YEAR IMPACT 0-5 0% 6 6.25% 7 12.5% 8-20 increases 6.25% annually 21 100% 3. Divide the annual qualifying TIF value by the school district sales ratio to compute the adjusted TIF values. 4. Obtain from the Department of Education the penalty tax rate. Apply the penalty tax rate to the adjusted qualifying TIF value. 5. Compute the maximum penalty applicable to the City. The penalty cannot exceed 5% of the adjusted tax capacity plus 25% of the amount in excess of 5% of the adjusted tax capacity. Example: Penalty is $200. and the 5% adjusted tax capacity is $100. , the penalty cannot exceed $125. The final penalty amount cannot exceed the total amount of LGA and HACA. If the penalty affects the LGA, the City has an option of two courses of action: First, the City may reduce the budget by the penalty, or secondly, the City may increase taxes to cover the penalty. If the penalty affects both LGA and HACA, the amount of the HACA penalty is automatically a tax increase for property owners and the City's budget is not affected. Recognizing the possible adverse affect the establishing of new TIF districts will have upon the city's LGA revenues, adjustments must be made in the planning process to minimize the adverse affects. The adjustment factor will be determined for each new district prior to completion of negotiations with a prospective developer. This adjustment factor will have to meet all the guidelines of Minnesota Statutes 469. The HRA and the City will be informed of the adjustment factor for each project in advance of establishing a new tax increment district. Enforcement provisions for tax increment districts has been shifted to the Department of Revenue. However, the courts will ultimately determine the penalty. The penalty can not hinder the capturing of increments necessary to retire the debt service of a bond issue sold prior to a lawsuit beginning. Another change in the tax increment laws addresses the amount of increments to be captured for administrative expenses from all districts, newly established and pre- 1979 districts. The change allows for a 10% maximum administrative expense for all TIF districts, new and pre-1979. Administrative expenses "includes amounts paid for services provided by bond consultants, fiscal consultants and planning or economic development consultants. The amended TIF laws effective May 1, 1990 limits the administrative expenditure to 10% ofeach new district. This limitation will impact the present operating procedures for the HRA. In the past, administrative expenditures for a pre-1979 TIF districts were not restricted in the amount of money spent on administrative expenses. With this change, the pre-1979 TIF district (Farmington's downtown district) will not be able to expend more than 10% of their revenue for • administrative expenses. During the budgetary process the administrative expense items will have to reflect the changes in the TIF laws. An example: Project 1990 - Industrial Park - Bond Sale in the amount of $935,000 The amount of TIF used to finance the improvements for the Industrial Park will be $650,000, of this amount $65,000 can be dedicated to administrative expenses. Also, TIF funds were used to repay the City and acquire the CMC property in the amount of $285,000 with an administrative expense of $28,500. Therefore, administrative expenses total of the two projects is: Industrial Park (Administrative $65,000 Expenses 10% of project) Other Projects (Administrative Expenses 10% of project) $28,500 Total Administrative Expenses $93,500 Administrative expenses associated with the preparation of bond sale was approximately $23,500 leaving $70,000 for administrative expenses for 1990 if no other projects are completed. Additional TIF changes addressed requirements for qualifying a district as an Economic Development, Renovation and Renewal or as a Redevelopment district. Limitations were placed upon uses within an Economic Development district. Previously, TIF laws allowed commercial/office facilities to qualify for assistance under Economic Development district guidelines. New laws allow for manufacturing and warehousing/distributing activities limiting the size of the office area for these projects. Changes in the blighted conditions requirements have been modified with more restrictive qualifying guidelines. These changes include the structure condition of the building. Example: A building is not structurally substantial if the cost of upgrading to meet code requirements are less than 15% of constructing a new comparable structure. Another change in TIF laws address the possibility of county administrative costs incurred to be paid by the TIF project. Finally, new TIF laws require that 75% of increments for new districts must be expended within the district. In summary, three major areas of concern are 1) the penalty tax impact on the City's LGA revenue, 2) the enforcement procedures and 3) the administrative expense change. I feel that each concern, although they present a hurdle to overcome, does not eliminate the use of tax increment financing as a development tool. 1 • If the HRA agrees with the continued use of tax increment financing as a tool for developmental purposes, the City Council should be requested to authorize the continued use of tax increment financing by the HRA. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. Gerald Henricks ;4l HRA Executive Director cc: Ernie Darflinger HRA file file GAH/sm . ' . ELN PARK DOWNTOWN CENTER . CITY OF FARMINGTON HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T.I.F. WORKSHEET AUGUST 1, 1990 CAPTURED T.I.F. CAPACITY: $136,000 TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT: 2 1 = DEVELOPMENT 2 = REDEVELOPMENT SALES RATIO: 90.00% PENALTY RATE: 30.00% CITY L.G.A. $334,030 ADJUSTING FACTOR: $136,000 ANNUAL INVESTMENT RATE: 7.00% PENALTY IMPACT CAPTURED QUAL. SALES ADJ. T.I.F. PHASED T.I.F. TAX RATIO CITY YEAR CLOCK CAPACITY % CAPACITY ADJ. PENALTY L.G.A. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1990 1 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 334,030.00 1991 2 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 334,030.00 1992 3 136,000.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 334,030.00 1993 4 136,000.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 334,030.00 1994 5 136,000.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 334,030.00 1995 6 136,000.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00 334,030.00 1996 7 136,000.00 6.25% 8,500.00 9,444.44 (2,833.33) 331,196.67 1997 8 136,000.00 12.50% 17,000.00 18,888.89 (5,666.67> 328,363.33 1998 9 136,000.00 18.75% 25,500.00 28,333.33 (8,500.00) 325,530.00 1999 18 136,000.00 25.00% 34,000.00 37,777.78 (11,333.33) 322,696.67 2000 11 136,000.00 31.25% 42,500.00 47,222.22 (14,166.67) 319,863.33 2001 12 136,000.00 37.50% 51,000.00 56,666.67 (17,000.00) 317,030.00 2002 13 136,000.00 43.75% 59,500.00 66,111.11 (19,833.33) 314,196.67 2803 14 136,000.00 50.00% 68,000.00 75,555.56 (22,666.67) 311,363.33 2004 15 136,000.00 56.25% 76,500.00 85,000.00 (25,500.00) 308,530.00 2005 l6 136,000.00 62.50% 85,000.00 94,444.44 (28,333.33) 305,696.67 2006 17 136,000.00 68.75% 93,500.00 103,888.89 (31,166.67) 302,863.33 2007 18 136,000.00 75.00% 102,000.00 113,333.33 (34,000.00) 300,030.00 2008 19 136,000.00 81.25% 110,500.00 122,777.78 (36,833.33) 297,196.67 2009 20 136,000.00 87.50% 119,000.00 132,222.22 (39,666.67) 294,363.33 2010 21 136,000.00 93.75% 127,500.00 141,666.67 (42,500.00) 291,530.00 2011 22 136,000.00 100.00% 136,000.00 151,111.11 (45,333.33) 288,696.67 ADJUSTMENT FACTOR BEG, ADJ. ENDING ADJ . FACTOR FACTOR YEAR CLOCK BALANCE INTEREST PENALTY BALANCE 1990 i 1 136,000.00 9,520.00 0.00 145,520.00 1991 2 145,520.00 10,186.40 0.00 155,706.40 1992 3 155,706.40 10,899.45 0.00 166,605.85 1993 4 166,605.85 11,662.41 0.00 178,268.26 1994 5 178,268.26 12,478.78 0.00 190,747.04 1995 6 190,747.04 13,352.29 0.00 204,099.33 1996 7 204,099.33 14,286.95 (2,833.33) 215,552.95 1997 8 215,552.95 15,088.71 (5,666.67) 224,974.99 1998 9 224,974.99 15,748.25 (8,500.00) 232,223.24 1999 10 232,223.24 16,255.63 (11,333.33) 237,145.53 2000 11 237,145.53 16,600.19 (14,166.67) 239,579.05 2001 12 239,579.05 16,770.53 (17,000.00) 239,349.58 2002 13 239,349.58 16,754.47 (19,833.33) 236,270.72 2003 14 236,270.72 16,538.95 (22,666.67) 230,143.00 2004 15 230,143.00 16,110.01 (25,500.00) 220,753.01 2005 16 220,753.01 15,452.71 (28,333.33) 207,872.39 2006 17 207,872.39 14,551.07 (31,166.67) 191,256.79 2007 18 191,256.79 13,387.98 (34,000.00> 170,64 .77 2008 19 170,644.77 11,945.13 (36,833.33) 145,756.57 2009 20 145,756.57 10,202.96 (39,666.67) 116,292.86 2010 21 116,292.86 8,140.50 (42,500.000 81,933.36 2011 22 81,933.36 5,735.34 (45,333.33) 42,335.37 * . * ` . , , , � I 1° AGENDA REQUEST FORM ITEM NO. rea_, NAME: Larry Thompson DEPARTMENT: Administration DATE: August 13, 1990 MEETING DATE: August 20, 1990 CATEGORY: Unfinished Business SUBJECT: Fire Contract Pension Benefits EXPLANATION: Consider recommendation for firefighter benefits • REFERENCE MATERIAL/RESPONSIBILITY: Recommendation - Cataract REFERRED TO: (NAME) DEPARTMENT: Larry Thompson Administration Ken Kuchera Fire Ron Royce Fire Cataract SIGNATURE DATE: August 15 , 1990 TO: Larry Thompson FROM: Terry Thraen SUBJECT: Cataract Relief Pension Each year when it comes time to request a change in our yearly pension benefits we have taken a lot of time to try and find a way that would be easy to fit into a formula to present to Council . This is just not going to happen; as you know, there are too many variables that do not take to measuring "apples to apples" in doing a comparison with other communities our size. The Cataract has taken a look at where we are and where we would hope to be . With this in mind we feel a 3 year plan to take us to $1500 . 00 annually is a start to get us parity, if that term can apply here , with other communities that are similar to us in the Metro area. Our first step in achieving this goal is to ask for an amendment to $1100 . 00 for this year. If this is accepted and approved by Council it will help us to start our way into our proposed 3 year plan. It will also be very helpful in retaining and enlisting firepersons for fire department service . I hope this short memo has explained what we are attempting to do and our reasons behind it . If I can be of any further assistance let me know. Sincerely, Terry T aen Cataract Relief Treasurer TT:pe MEMO TO : Mayor and Council SUBJECT : Farmington Fire Dept. Cataract Relief Association Pension. Request for 1991 DATE : August 15 , 1990 On August 9 , 1990 , the Farmington Fire Department Cataract Relief Association met to discuss a pension increase for it ' s members . After much discussion , a motion was passed to request a pension increase from $900. per year of service per member to $1100 . per year of service , effective January 1 , 1991 . The tax levy incurred with this increase would be $12 ,21i .00 , half of which would be picked up byy the townships . It was felt that a $200.00 increase should be requested for the following two years , 1992 and 1993 . Representatives from the Cataract will be present at the Council meeting on August 20 , 1990 , to discuss this subject and answer any questions. Respectfully submitted , D . L . Churchill, Secretary DLC/m cc : City Administrator dile . � SCHEDULES I-II-III FOR LUMP SUM PENSION PLANS STATE FIRE AID YEAR 1991 Firefighters Relief Association of pAtte,./iive.lot 1j County of J)4u/to r41-- . SCHEDULE -. - SCHEDULE I • Computation of benefit of relief association special fund(at$ /10 0 per year of service) for all member based on their years of service as active fire department members. 1990 1991 F.D. To End of This Year To End of Next Year • Entry Yrs.Active Accrued Yrs.Active Accrued Name Age Date Service Liability Service Uabiiity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 R. Rayer 41 '7 /A-//-61 79 31900 3o 33000 2 A. sge arI✓ SP. 5-/0-70, A./ 100 aa. a 44 ao 0 3 R. K/,/DscrN- , 417 a-8-71 ao ..000 a / x3100 4 j-, P6LA-Gtt 47 3-8-71 20 ,,000 a, 1 a3 /O O 5 b . Ct4,4RG1+SLL LIS IoZ.-1--7/ 19 ©a8 ,-f -,0 as 00 m 8 K. KuCE16RI- &/L4 1. -1-1 /9 o 084 a..o aa000 7 R. Guaris 38 1 .-to-13 17 1'7/bO IR 181078 8 b . nr>:i- 'J • 39 t--/o-7S • //p 1570 g /7 1711D o 9 4-, 4IJ&US 4-7 /1-g-75- 15- 14-34St / 1,3 15708' 10 ,T SAu 81✓C 3(Q 1- - -710 1 S 14344 I to l s7O g 11 D. pEpER/4- 'i-I 3- /a-'79 1a /o58„2. . 13 117'7? 12 L• w•sISBRicH 40 17-c1-74 I i 9438 la. , 1058 a , 13 3. sNY0st2 31 , 1-1f-8o 11 °Pt 3g /a. 10581 14 F. BLA-HA- 34 io-13-80 / 0 83100 i I 91-1.38 15 M µE./n1zs2LtN& 3l0- 3-a-g I 1 0 g 3(00 I I 9q-33 , 16 T. rNRA-6nj 3 8- r"/-/ -8A. 8 1D 33 (o 73a,(0 , 17 7, P16 7301-1- ?„q - 1�.-a?-8 a g 40334p '73 a(o , 18 R . BOLL 33 ID--0'7-52- 8 G33 (Q '73a(41. , 19 6, LA RENeq, /O-a-Lt-83 '7 5`{•1 P, 8 (�33 (o 20 g,spluss2. 314 /o-�`1-83 '7 54/ P. 8 1033(0 21 j . M6YERS 30 ID-.).4-e3 rii 5414l -. 8 (0334 22 -- )4 EN► ;s4+ a7 6-q-840 S 3(474 (c 'f5/ O , 23 ,T, 1-01-Go8S N a(o 10-9-8b S 3t? 1-f , Co 45"/ O 24 7'; A-uG E, vZ 5 0,-q-24:. , 5 3(o'7 `-1• G e-1-5-1 O , 25 M . KINssrH- a a- 4- -8(a 4- 9.8 (Do 5" 310'74-1- Total of Deferred Pensions Total of Unpaid Installments Total of Early Vested Pensions • A.Total Accrued liability To End of Next Yr. 1991 (Column 7) y B.Total Accrued Liability To End of This Yr. 1990(Column 5) ) C.Subtract line B.from Une A.(normal cost;enter here and on line 6,Schedule iii) ' ( $Cf, tttrxt P�st.) Fractional Years of service must be calculated to nearest full year. - ' Do not enter liability in Columns 8 or 7 for any person who will receive entire pension during this year. For Ins:• • gent liability,enter amount which will be'payable after end of this year In both col.5 and col.7. If inters::• +�be paid on unpaid pensions,add interest for 1 year in col.7. A copy or .� schedules must be presented to the City Council before Aug. 1 each year. . SCHEDULES I-II-III FOR LUMP SUM PENSION PLANS STATE FIRE AID,YEAR 1991• Firefighters Relief Association of p,4R net IA/-ro n! County of 14 Kb rA- SCHEDULE I Computation of benefit of relief association special fund(at$ 1/ n O per year of service) for all member based on their years of service as active fire department members. 1990 1991 F.D. To End of This Year To End of Next Year • Entry Yrs.Active Accrued Yrs.Active Accrued Name Age Date Service Liability Service Liability 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 M. F1se44mAc.H- sst 3-88 3 ao4 0 6.8Go 2 S r_t.._rNkscxeLSs .�a 4-X17-89 / 314,`4 3 '09 0 3 T. LA-esof4 S Y--IZ-89 2.. / 3(o4- 3 P09 4 t- 0_,0 /4/4 `d S `f-, -g 2., 7 9 1364 4 3 2,09 0 5 6 7 8 , ; 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Total of Deferred Pensions //O 43 /is-9s-(4 Total of Unpaid Installments Total of Early Vested Pensions 32 3 0 0 o O A.Total Accrued Liability To End of Next Yr. 1991 (Column 7) > '$g c (E.7 8.Total Accrued Liability To End of This Yr. 1990(Column 5) "/S/ 34H > +SI -t' C.Subtract line 8.from Une A.(normal cost;enter here and on line 6,Schedule Ill) Stap'7D 3 Fractional Years of service must be calculated to nearest full year. Do not enter liability in Columns 5 or 7 for any person who will receive entire pension during this year. For Ins!. rent liability,enter amount which will be-payable after end of this year in both col. 6 and col. 7. If intere:. be paid on unpaid pensions,add Interest for 1 year in col. 7. A copy of schedules must be presented to the City Council before Aug. 1 each year. SCHEDULE II ` Projection of Relief Association special fund assets to end of this year, (December 31, 1990) Assets at January 1, 1990 (this year) 1. $ i '-1-S / Anticipated income to end,of•this year a) Minnesota State Aid $ o olo b) Receipts from local taxes c) Interest on investments d) Other income Total of lines a,b-c-d 2. $ 50010 Beginning assets plus estimated income for this year (L1 + L2) 3. $ 21 Estimated disbursements through end of this'year e) Pensions $ f) Other benefits g) MSFDA or VFBA dues, if any h) Administrative and overhead 1 50 0 Total of Lines a-f-g-h , , � 4. $ /S'OO • Projected assets at end of this year 12/31/90 (13-14) 5. $ �'1 9 9 Calculation of average special fund income per member (other than interest or investment income) State Aid Municipal Support . 10% of surplus (if any) Last year iE ,Sa:.R o 2 years ago 0 o o 3 years ago i o a / o L '7 Totals 56345 + 12,45 + o 4oa,4:40 Total 3 year income $t0964o+ 3 is $2,o88o + _21(no. of members) ■ 6. $ '7Ao CERTIFICATION OF SPECIAL FUND REQUIREMENTS This information must be certified to the governing body of the municipality or indepen- dent nonprofit firefighting corporation by August 1, 1990. We, the officers of the F4-Rnv;n/&to A/ Firefighters Relief Association, state that the accompanying schedules have been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the Volunteer Firefighters Relief Association Guidelines-Act of 1971 (including M.S. 69.772) and that the schedules are correct and complete to the best of our knowledge. The financial requirements of the relief associations Special Fund for 1991 are $ . Check here if no municipal support required The average non-investment income per member of said special fund for the past 3 years was Signature of President Date Signature of Secretary Date ig�nary of Treasurer Date SCHEDULE III Computation of Financial Requirements for Next year-1991 • Column A Column B Column C 1 Assets from Une 5,Schedule II ; .yam:> �<,:,<:; >::;::<: . w;::;:; 4;ry;::; $ ��9 9 Cp 1 �.v��,:?�':�a a�,�ha xY^ 5 9,,,. 2 Accrued liability to end of this year(from Une B,Schedule I) L+ / 3 11-c� . `'' °' >` 3+,:ka, 3 a)If Une 2 is more than Une 1 subtract line 1 from line 2. Deficit '7 i 8 3 a i K b)If line 1 is more than Une 2,subtract Une 2 from Une 1. Surplus o , ,.}*,..y< } }f <.::•.••?a:i 1: } Enter 10%of surplus amount. Continue on Une 6. SISSICINIO< ry> •=s o Amortization of deficit(or deficits)incurred prior �y .. : { .,/:::gm, } i '� Tii .i Olsi•g },:: f..:;04 1C}t`i :}3 o:q.:r,.i, to end of last year(see note) 4.i.: » <; ,.a a }, °`< < tf xF } Column 1 Column 2 Column 30. y }° 1<...`Y ,:i, Year Original Amount Retired Amount Left .. . � ...a, : *. :..y:;: Incurred Amount in Prior Years to Retire > ' % ':4•7:4:- .,,'.i`err .��a f`� 19 ( S S E. #-'S'r'i-cn E� sc E.p.t c.'. ) >iti •; x' }r �i 19 ::::x'''',!':',.:..- �h N xa } ' % #, E f./�t as$ry c 19 4 Totals <: ,.< ,� 3 S`i'7 3 3'7at-a 7 :x. :? r^ °' �;� i k rk -7140o -x 1096 } }< .�w?} 7 3 ti.O ,.. 5 Subtract Column 3 total from Une 3(s)(If Column 3 is equal to or K , { greater than line 3(a),no new deficits exists.) If Column 3 is less lessiikaggnige.At .moi Y Vie} t4 K a }ti n i Mt., ;�i ;:}:.: than line 3(a),difference is a new deficit. Enter 339 5 �;>•,':'4• is`y:::S$y w ,+ Enter 10% of this new deficit in Column B 1 ;:N� ,£:;>A w h ?;. ;< :ini.; ::.,.};y>,. .: 6 increase from Une C.Schedule I ti ..}'°y5" s•,>< `. 7 Estimated Expenses 1991 (other than S 0 3 pe pensions,or investments) , `�}� ��$ � } ,: ,. 8 Estimated Income 1991 i I So O a)Minnesota State Aid a 1 3 a } f ` b)5% Interest on amount of Une 1 above g 9 9 grf :. c)Other income(do not include local taxes or investment income) Total 8(a+b+c) 40 S 19 9 Total, Column B .;: ........ `1-g 9'39 :..; 10 Total,Column C «:..... .: i,.:::.... :>::v>::»;.: 11 If line 9 is more than line 10,the difference is the amount of municipal supporti k` i required. Certify this amount to the City Council before August 1, `'< x (bottom part of Schedule II-Special Fund requirements). g Ga O . 12 If line 10 is more than line 9,no municipal support is required. Certify that fact to the City Council before August 1. The City Council Is permitted to provide funds in excess of requirement. Note: Deficits are generally retired in less than 10 years,because of increase in state aid,turnover gain and earned interest greater than 5%. If desired,the amount in column 2 may be increased so that the total of column 3 Is equal to line 3(a). If more than one deficit is being amortized(the law requires each deficit to be retired separately),adjust column 2 for the oldest deficit first. When column 2 equals column 1 for any deficit,that deficit has been retired and may be removed from the amortization schedule. Whenever a new deficit appears in line 5,the original amount of such deficit must be added to the amortization schedule the following year. - t • ,. Sc.N-c Il 4-A40k*/ZA-77 on! p,c p,Q!o R. DEF/c-,1 7"5 CDLUMN / Co Limn Al a. Cocci Ann IEA-(Z ORib-t A- L AA-10,44p- FL A"Ao ni7— LeF-r �nJGUR/Z D bEFldd- /G MounJl' /'J y c Ak S To 1981 787 (P '709 / 785 /48a. 51 '7 1o38 1483 SS 58 585A as04, )48q 14./ 8 / 8508 5G73 IC(glo 584-7 A140 1981 f g S" /5'99 ) 988 8�4 X458. 1459 30 `t 530 Lt.77 73 400 359 '7 3 g141-7 AGENDA REQUEST FORM n ITEM NO. i NAME: Tom Kaldunski DEPARTMENT: Public Works DATE: August 17, 1990 MEETING DATE: August 20, 1990 CATEGORY: Consent SUBJECT: Equipment Purchase - Public Works EXPLANATION: The Public Works Department needs to purchase an Electronic Distance Measuring Device (E.D.M.) . A Budget Adjustment from Engineering Fees is being requested to fund the purchase. REFERENCE MATERIAL/RESPONSIBILITY: Capital Outlay Purchases Request Form - Tom Budget Adjustment - Wayne REFERRED TO: (NAME) DEPARTMENT: Larry Thompson Administration Tom Kaldunski Public Works Wayne Henneke Finance .1:141///dialli SIGNATURE MEMO TO: Mayor and Council SUBJECT: Equipment Purchase for Public Works Dept. DATE: August 17, 1990 The Public Works Department, Engineering Division, needs to purchase an Electric Distance Measuring Device and other miscellaneous related items. This equipment is needed to provide accurate surveys in all construction projects that are being managed by the City. The cost of this equipment is $5,726.08. Attached is the Capital Outlay Request Form and Budget Adjustment. This purchase is being requested through Engineering Revenues. The 1990 Budget anticipated $130,000.00 in Engineering Fees. Based upon the current number of projects that have been ordered and that are under construction, the Engineering Fees will be in the vicinity of $200,000.00 in 1990. These critical pieces of equipment are needed at this time to ensure that the revenues are generated as projected. I here y request app ova of this Capital Outlay Request. Thomas . Kaldunski cc: File Larry Thompson Wayne Henneke TJK REQUEST FORM CAPITAL OUTLAY PURCHASES DEPARTMENT Public Works DATE OF REQUEST August 17, 1990 ITEM(S) TO BE PURCHASED Electronic Distance Measuring Device for Engineering Services. AMOUNT PROVIDED IN ORIGINAL/ADJUSTED 1990 BUDGET : $ -0- AMOUNT REMAINING AS OF DATE OF REQUEST : $ -0- QUOTATIONS RECEIVED : 1 . VENDOR Albinsons DATE June 27. 1990 AMOUNT $5,726.08 2 . VENDOR Copy Equipment, Inc. DATE June 26. 1990 AMOUNT $5,993.00 ATTACH QUOTATIONS, IF VERBAL QUOTES, EXPLAIN BELOW COMMENTS : Requested Budget Adjustment from Engineering Revenue A/-1V/d /9DARTHEAD SIGNATURE TE FINED ( FUKSIGNATURE DATE TO : THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL I RECOMMEND THE ABOVE REQUEST BE APPROVED. SIGNATURE OF CITY ADMINISTRATOR DATE ACTION TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL ON THE DAY OF 19 - (APPROVED) (NOT APPROVED) ♦ amu . _m...-<,. CC . • REQUEST FOR BUDGET ADJUSTMENT 1990 CURRENT CURRENT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION ORIGINAL ADJUSTED ;UNENCUMBERED; THIS NEW NUMBER BUDGET BALANCE BALANCE ; ADJUSTMENT BALANCE Engineering equipment -0- -0- ; +5726 . 5726 1Q1=41Q_499_Z5&-J Q4 Engineering Fees Eng Fees 130,000. 130 , 000. +5726. 135 , 726 101-000-000-434-1;13 I 1 7 I To fund the purchase of a electronic measuring• device 4'_A"-`41;‘) • ; ATURE 8/17/90 DATE ,PPROVED THIS ____DAY OF , 19__.