HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.11.19 Work Session Packet City of Farrington Mission Statement
430 Third Street Through teamwork and
Farmington,MN 55024 cooperation, the City of
Farmington provides quality
services that preserve our proud
past and foster a promising
future.
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
February 11, 2019
6:00 PM
Farmington City Hall
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVE AGENDA
3. DISCUSSION ITEMS
(a) Park Land Donation
(b) Encroachment Discussion- Part 1
(c) Financial Plan/Gaps Review
4. CITY ADMINISTRATOR UPDATE
(a) Fire Department Paid Administrative Events
5. ADJOURN
� City of Farmington
:7 p 430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.280.6800 -Fax 651.280.6899
i•A IAO www.cifarmington.mn.us
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator
FROM: Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director
SUBJECT: Park Land Donation
DATE: February 11, 2019
INTRODUCTION
City staff members are currently working with Bart Winkler(Developer) on the Sapphire Lake development.
A map showing the location of the development is included with this memo.
DISCUSSION
The developer approached the Parks and Recreation Director about the city purchasing approximately 6.27
acres of land in the Sapphire Lake development for$130,000.00. Originally the developer was planning on
having this parcel designated for wetland banking.
Staff then provided this information to the Park and Recreation Commission during its January 9, 2019
meeting. The commission decided not to accept the offer because the current fund balance in the Park
Improvement Fund was not high enough to support both this land purchase and the continuation of funding
the improvements in existing and new parks. Instead the commission directed staff to make a counteroffer
to the developer. The counter offer was as follows:
• Donate the park land to the city
• The city would accept the donated land by city council resolution
• Have the developer seek to receive a tax write off from the donated land
• In exchange for donating the land, the commission would consider naming the park after the developer
(this is allowed in the park naming policy the commission adopted)
Staff then contacted the developer and the developer expressed an interest in donating the land, but
countered with the following if the land was donated to the city as a park:
• wanted to have the land appraised first to make sure the tax write off would be financially beneficial
• place a restriction in the deed that would keep the land as a park in perpetuity
• if donated would like to have the park named Winkler Park
• would like to donate additional acreage of 14.96 acres that is floodplain and wetland to the city, which
abuts the other parkland in the development and would result in a total of 21.23 acres being donated
Staff then followed up and contacted City Attorney Joel Jamnik to see if there would be any legal issues with
the conditions the developer countered with. City Attorney Jamnik shared that he would recommend not
placing a restriction on the deed to keep it park land in perpetuity, but instead would favor putting the term at
40 years, which fits better with state statute. He also shared the city could accept the park land but wouldn't
place a value on it because it would be up to the developer to prove the value of the land for tax purposes.
Finally, he felt that if the land was worth taking as a park, then naming it after the developer seemed
reasonable.
Staff conveyed the information received from City Attorney Jamnik to the developer and the developer was
in agreement with City Attorney Jamnik's recommendations.
Staff is currently waiting to hear back from the developer if the appraisal came back favorably for the
developer to allow him to donate the land as a park.
The benefit of accepting the land donation is that it allows the city to have a larger park in this area of the
community. It also provides an opportunity in the future to acquire park land adjacent to the park when the
land to the south of this development is developed. This would allow a community park to be created in the
southeast area of Farmington, which it currently does not have.
I have attached a map that illustrates the locations of the land that is being discussed as a possible donation
to the city. The hashed areas on the map show where the required park dedication is being given. The red
outlined area is the upland useable park land the developer is interested in donating. The black outlined area
is the wetland and floodplain area that would be considered open space that the developer would like to
donate. Within the black outlined area is a 10 foot wide corridor where a trail will be constructed. The 10
foot wide corridor is in an upland area of the black outlined area. As result, the developer will receive park
dedication credit for the 10 foot wide corridor where the trail will be constructed.
BUDGET IMPACT
NA
ACTION REQUESTED
Staff will be attending the February 11, 2019 work session to discuss the donation of land for a park as
identified in the attached map. Staff is seeking direction from the city council about moving forward with
completing the donation of land from the developer for a park. Should the parkland donation eventually
occur, it will likely be accepted at the same time the Sapphire Lake development agreement is approved
ATTACHMENTS:
Type Description
D Backup Material Sapphire Lake Development Location Map
D Backup Material Sapphire Lake Development Park Land
Donation Location Map
o 0,
.I `) u)
}
tyl , J`
I
NI
iLL
cL
td
4
A4
L� � I�i�� � co 80
o
1141 M o
■
CU
+ )` 777
4.
UCO 0 '-' 11,------‘,, _ IIII 70
o
it s,, 1 .!!!r:41'1`■*err■ ipirtnl — Ms d
iil1tu11i iiEc ti{llyif�lis4�' 4&07111111. 0
6i4iCi 111111 ill.!.. 77;;;T 11A111 11 111 IIIS11 ;,�' -� • -
• ff a1.r. c
�1 v ii1ii 11111111114 •tltlr.1111..I.111■111111 r�' ms h.t...1:',4,f,tg'.;:.-:
iatl�` #rss� .`�a�rrr; oir■��4 :■VI'1■ 1�# 111�� 4
' 1 *.`sem° :: QIII ire slr ! 0
I
�� it oxw r us, seas� or-ioff.1-1 1g Via
0
...� ist
i <} 141 ., Irl : I.� rr® iy���1■
. pa 0 i.1 i fail_
.5
moi' s ■ i ri 1 ae :ti ai
pi
:-'1.1;11:"1:',:41.111;11,
i�s►� o .• ,i.�7.
'',:.72.,
�,..�4 (ii ln3s r, '41 -$ f� .. ESS.:.$.c_.....1 " i rl o
W ofAI
7a• - 11 lir
'i
1 IL
, - it- "au *" ' ' '6%.--4.11.,;,-:,,-,i '-' ''''''''—i''' 4 ':1****"*****.aup___.,... MA i lir
15,
... - "ate ! __ER 111 garitli> 444..1..: °" ....--.L.... =.7,=.1. a
,,,
,4p
10. N -:‘ii.: ...t ""f..*.,:'- , ;,....tif—i----------i . -,..• I - -
rjj,...*.. - ' , *.t.' '''.14 ISE7t
...=E;.:....,==,4.111.1....;.==_1 ir...t....1......zi hilli.; ft I
1.1.a ii,i.:„:
.�,. _:1114.
,; �. �aM 7— tiEo
qq
,,,z)
t.
, ,
r R� '+b G
r ri , ..io
,r-
4,,,,e,patit: .
i ,. II , _ _,..2..,..
-10.
..,..)
Ai
y
hili s ... e ion fgail . _ a; f° ....,.. 0,.
0.
4 .
, ,
..„ ,, , S.,
--;1101416*
i?
irt
�,., iriI .
., {E m
•
It 1':
a i •-•
-c...,-• CL.= 1 1 1'..... .'
A 1
5
i
-
• 4....'% ...F.-,;i ', ' 2-------- vrvrAs 4 / i frAvvrAi
- • • s 1. - \•:\' _`, • • . ' 4 4 a• ‘ AT '''''t 11
1,1 • • •.4 \N">\:--. ---, • iv/ 1 1#V+ /A,4 v.vAie ‘vAS A i
, '\ 6•40st.,4:*. ,,,..„._\,-, ../.1,--,: , ti, #/0 • . i V * . AV . r t .1
• • '' • 1 ' -i---.*--- \ : ‘ \ #.044, A # / 4.4 . • $ g% 0, ,,.
--A, I'D.•.` `.s4i i lag \ .-:;‘))\#.fa #ve i . f • 44 • •YA*4
N ,,,,, ... .,. .. • A Ai
1 ' 'se,e,_/ ,' '' ----. i'''' X''''A\ # #/ . ' A • ' •
-4 \ 4wit ' --:N.•;-,:',":•, • , ( V.' —sl.)
, •,..,.. ,.... 44.„..6. A ,!....,
---44106 / t 7 ""--,
;, i , 41* -NS-Ai so,. ,„ , oil
c
- ...a ,_
_......
4/ \\
_...s ---.47ittii ie N
..i. .v \ 444,,
xi ity„,ii. _ .44, ., ._
(4,. ' ,_,
, .. ., \ ,
ilri ( glaw 4•' \\ \ \ \ .
11111 •1./4i. ,,...\ 14k,"\\
c)) "--t-. —
‘
VIA 10 \\
A.. 4.-...p
-- i
„.../...p *11„1:' \\ 0 i 1 Aw,_3 \ is
, , •
ro —cs'
vii ----, ' '''rd4' \
, -AI Ti '.::--r
c' Ilifk‘i \ tit ori
A — ! \'\\.,.‘, : ..) — - -
1 -- ,in:, 1 6.1a. I_ Ni
ill
iiiiin 4, 1.1 {11 ( -- i: Li.j:: i - ,\ _
.2,)' I
ilk' / a
---. ) in, _____,-4'.1:: 1 -31, _c_!
/
ro 1 14vi
---J : Atij iiitit gym, , ...,
:---ti 0 . s, -........, <,,,., 1 ..„„
IL ?, \ .„,..*---:,,,,, \ , —1z-3- -)
/ it.
_Am -,,
0. .
-4 '‘ \ /4• 4\.\\-- -- 1 I
.3,
11 • :'•N 1\c,.\.. fill
(; I
I
El
*0- .-A- _- -----,- - --
---72E1Anaal---7: 4; 1/2 416-;':
it is to to Ili a el ti Lt. ki ilk! 1 Pill
II Homo -
--7,-- In" i fill
"1 jilt
.10.1 113I
I 1
N's. illi
1
i
L., 1-1 it i Vqi!
.R •E,13
CI- j I .E.1
<a- ------- g a>-
:Tot_ r4 i
- '148/.1-wf''. 41 I
gX' .0 i
———— R 290110 11
(r)
, ,„„_,
I 1------- -----7.------------1 - r-------17: Ygg W§9k154iP 1 N1 il I
r-
v,....,41 I ..,.... „ „
. v) e!
1 1 5011004 a""I 1""""
'
il E z . 0-4gPi :
I 1 """'" lAi I III I /1 I I ,
b�CCr% City of Farmington
4170 "
430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.280.6800 - Fax 651.280.6899
►ao ' www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator
FROM: Adam Kienberger, Tony Wippler, and Katy Gehler
SUBJECT: Encroachment Discussion- Part 1
DATE: February 11, 2019
INTRODUCTION
The city has an opportunity to acquire properties (outlots)that were part of the Mystic Meadows
subdivision and intended for storm water management. These outlots were anticipated to be deeded to the
city upon project completion, but due to the economic instability of the time, are now in the tax forfeiture
process.
DISCUSSION
The city currently has an administrative hold on the nine outots within Mystic Meadows and will have until
April 3, 2019 to acquire them without them going to public sale at auction for the highest bid. The
acquisition options, under the administrative hold, that are available to the city are as follows:
Conditional Use Deed— This is a restrictive covenant on the deed for up to 30 years. The city must
identify one authorized public purpose from Minn. Stat. 282.01 and utilize the parcel(s) for that purpose.
Failure to do so would lead to reconveyance of the parcel(s)back to the State in trust for the taxing district.
There would be no purchase price, but a$250 application fee plus itemized deed fees.
Conservation Purchase—Restrictive covenant for 30 years. Specific to the creation/preservation of
wetlands, drainage/storage of storm water, or preservation of land in its natural state. At any time, the city
may re-convey the property to the State in trust for the taxing district. The properties can be purchased for
less than market value plus itemized deed fees.
Outright Purchase—No restrictive covenant on the deed. The parcels can be purchased for market value
and used for public or private sale/purpose. The cost would be the determined purchase price (market
value)plus itemized deed fees.
Prior to the outlots being in tax forfeiture, varying levels of encroachments were occurring on the outlots but
the city has little recourse in correcting the encroachments as they are happening upon private property not
owned by the city. During the time the outlots have been in the tax forfeiture process the number of
property owners that have encroached, again at varying levels, has continued to increase. Once the city has
acquired these outlots, decisions will have to be made regarding how to address the encroachments.
BUDGET IMPACT
TBD
ACTION REQUESTED
Staff will present information on the current status of encroachments and potential avenues to pursue. The
city council should identify questions or additional information needed for a discussion to occur at the
March work session.
ATTACHMENTS:
Type Description
0 Exhibit Mystic Meadows Outlots
196TH ST W
O
198TH ST W
'a
w
1\61 6111'11111111111.111‘
Iw
'0 H
N
0,//://,/
m 4
9
U
w
0
0
co
w
w
w
O
DESMOND CT
199TH ST W
w
0
0
w
II
)
Aak
, ot City of Farmington
/ 4:7 430 Third Strcct
Farmington, Minnesota
\tr. 651.280.6800 -Fax 651.280.6899
•4, www ci.farmington.mn.us
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator
FROM: David McKnight, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Financial Plan/Gaps Review
DATE: February 11, 2019
INTRODUCTION
I want to take the time to review a DRAFT of the current financial plan with the city council and spend time
talking about gaps that exist in the plan. The plan takes into account many of the projects that are planned
over the next 10 years. I will also highlight where financial gaps exist and discuss what is not currently
included.
DISCUSSION
Over the past few years city staff has been trying to consolidate all of the financial plans and capital
improvement plans discussed with the city council. The current draft of the plan, and I must emphasize it is
a draft that has not been approved by the city council, is attached for your review.
The attached plan shows a summary of the next five budget years, 2020-2024, for the city. This plan, which
only includes the General Fund at this point, takes a big picture look at the financial needs of the community
over the next five years.
The plan includes a summary page look at our needs and assumes among other items inflation, additional
staffing needs, transition to paying for our street reconstruction with a combination of cash/debt, etc. The
plan is broken into different elements including:
1. New Positions CIP
2. Existing Debt Repayments
3. Street Projects CIP
4. Street Maintenance CIP
5. Vehicle CIP
6. Transfers CIP
7. Park Improvement CIP
8. Trail Maintenance CIP
9. Fire Equipment CIP
10. Police Equipment CIP
11. Building Maintenance CIP
12. Liquor Store Financial Donations CIP
I have also included with the plan a ten year look back on new tax capacity growth in Farmington, tax rates
by city in Dakota County and the tax levy changes by year in Farmington.
This plan was developed for many reasons. Among the most important reasons is to give you a view five
years into the future so you can set priorities and to raise questions with you so city staff can have guidance
on a number of issues.
I will be going over this plan in detail at the work session. I will also be pointing out a number of financial
gaps that exist in the plan today. If you are confused by the plan, please do not be. You will understand it
better once I have had a chance to review it with you. This plan is a roadmap to continued financial health
while addressing the needs of a growing community. It will never be set in stone and the city council has
total control of these issues.
BUDGET IMPACT
The budget impact of the financial plan will set the course for city budgets over the next five years.
ACTION REQUESTED
Review the draft fmancial plan, hear the presentation on gaps that exist in the plan and provide any direction
you feel is appropriate to city staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
Type Description
D Backup Material Draft Financial Plan
D Backup Material Bonding Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
SUMMARY
2019 r,r
ANNUAL HUMAN RESOURCES COSTS $8,822,205 $9,555,130 $9,937,335 $10,334,828 $10,748,221 $11,178,150
BASE NON-HR COSTS $3,054,451 $3,146,085 $3,240,467 $3,337,681 $3,371,058 $3,438,479
NEW HR COSTS $0 $220,000 $105,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
EXISTING DEBT $3,261,460 $2,575,500 $2,513,080_ $1,766,250 $1,374,250 $1,297,250
FUTURE STREET CIP DEBT $191,000 $250,000 $250,000 $410,000 $536,000 $396,000
FUTURE STREET CIP CASH $0 $0 $0 $475,000 $700,000 $653,000
FUTURE VEHICLE CIP DEBT $0 $0 $285,000 $285,000 $285,000 $628,413
FUTURE VEHICLE CIP CASH $90,000 $800,000 $480,000 $660,000 $570,000 $630,000
TRANSFER PROJECT-TAX LEVY $726,413 $663,567 $763,567 $837,567 $777,567 $728,292
TRANSFER PROJECT-LGA $339,725 $314,725 $314,725 $314,745 $314,725 $314,725
PARK IMPROVEMENT FUND CIP $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 •
TOTAL OPERATING/DEBT EXPENDITURES $16,485,254 $17,525,006 $17,889,174 $18,521,071 $18,776,821 $19,364,309
OTHER REVENUES(1%INCREASE ANNUALLY) $3,199,486 $3,231,481 $3,263,796 $3,296,434 $3,329,398 $3,362,692
FISCAL DISPARITIES $2,225,003 $2,225,003 $2,225,003 $2,225,003 $2,225,003 $2,225,003
TOTAL REVENUES $5,424,489 $5,456,484 $5,488,799 $5,521,437 $5,554,401 $5,587,695
SUMMARY
BASE BUDGET LEVY $11,876,656 $12,921,214 $13,282,802 $13,772,509 $14,219,279 $14,716,629
CIP/TRANSFER/LGA LEVY $1,156,138 $978,292 $1,078,292 $1,152,312 $1,092,292 $1,043,017
EXISTING DEBT LEVY $3,261,460 $2,575,500 $2,513,080 $1,766,250 $1,374,250 $1,297,250
FUTURE DEBT LEVY $191,000 $250,000 $535,000 $695,000 $821,000 $1,024,413
PAY AS WE GO LEVY $0 $800,000 $480,000 $1,135,000 $1,270,000 $1,283,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $16,485,254 $17,525,006 $17,889,174 $18,521,071 $18,776,821 $19,364,309
OTHER REVENUES $3,199,486 $3,231,481 $3,263,796 $3,296,434 $3,329,398 $3,362,692
FISCAL DISPARITIES $2,225,003 $2,225,003 $2,225,003 $2,225,003 $2,225,003 $2,225,003
USE OF FUND BALANCE $240,000 $0 $0 $0 •$0 $0
TOTAL REVENUES $5,664,489 $5,456,484 $5,488,799 $5,521,437 $5,554,401 $5,587,695
i
TOTAL*. $10,820,765 $12,068,522 $12,400,375 $12,999,635 $13,222,420 $13,776,614
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
NEW POSITIONS CIP
POTENTIAL NEW POSITIONS
2019 „ .
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTATVIE SERVICES DIRECTOR $100,000
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNER 1 X
PUBLIC WORKS
MAINTENANCE WORKER $80,000
FINANCE
UTILITY BILLING $25,000
FIRE
DEPUTY CHIEF X
ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
DUTY CREWS $50,000
HR/IT
HR GENERALIST
COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST $50,000
IT MANAGER
PARKS/RECREATION
BUILDING MAINTENANCE X
PARK MAINTENANCE $100,000
POLICE __ _
CAPTAIN $20,000
PATROL OFFICER $100,000 $100,000
CSO
TOTAL $220,000 $105,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
EXISTING DEBT
ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND 2019
2013A(ASH/SPRUCE/HILL DEE) $684,000 $669,000 $443,000
2016A(ELM/195T1-I/WALNUT) $351,000 $352,000 $574,327 $624,750 $276,750 $271,750
TOTAL ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND DEBT $1,035,000 $1,021,000 $1,017,327 $624,750 $276,750 $271,750
NON ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
2013B(AKIN PARK ESTATES) $372,000
2016C(CITY HALL) $530,283
20100(ARENA IMPROVEMENTS) $240,000 $16,500
2010A(POLICE STATION) $495,677 $400,000 $292,253
2005C(FIRE STATION 2) $166,000 $166,000 $275,000 $166,000 $166,000 $96,000
20168(CITY HALL) $125,000 $665,000 $635,000 $640,000 $638,000 $636,000
2015A(195TH ST) $297,500 $307,000 $293,500 $335,500 $293,500 $293,500
TOTAL NON ROAD AND BRIDGE DEBT $2,226,460 $1,554,500 $1,495,753 $1,141,500 $1,097,500 $1,025,500
I
TOTAL EXISTING DEBT $3,261,460 $2,575,500 $2,513,080 $1,766,250 $1,374,250 $1,297,250
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
STREET PROJECTS CIP
STREETS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT 2019 r:di)';,, W,1 t...,,, ;)',,
WESTVIEW ACRES $4,151,724
TURN LANES AT 225TH STREET $144,240
CARVER LANE/BACKADGE ROAD $768,511
SPRUCE STREET(RR TRACKS TO DENMARK) $1,616,657
WILLOW/LINDON STREETS $1,823,784
SECOND STREET/HONEYSUCKLE LANE '^ $2,420,829
FIRST/OAK STREET S $3,424,314
SIXTH STREET
PINE STREET
TOTAL STREET CIP EXPENDITURES $4,151,724 $0 $0 $4,353,192 $2,420,829 $3,424,314
STREET CIP FUNDING/FUND BALANCE 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
STARTING BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,153 $120,257
TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES $4,151,724 $0 $0 $4,353,192 $2,420,829 $3,424,314
TOTAL ANNUAL TAX LEVY(CASH) $0 $0 _ $0 $475,000 $700,000 $653,000
BONDED DEBT REVENUE $1,050,000 $0 $0 $1,850,000 $500,000 $1,200,000
WATER FUND CONTRIBUTION $928,608 $0 $0 $783,400 $507,431 $493,595
STORM WATER FUND CONTRIBUTION $258,508 $0 $0 $628,762 $339,685 $493,585
SANITARY SEWER FUND CONTRIBUTION $996,608 $0 $0 $659,183 $450,817 $586,144
TRANSFERS FROM R/B FUND _ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
MSA CONTRIBUTIONS $618,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
OTHER SOURCES $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
YEAR ENDING BALANCE $0 $0 $0 $43,153 $120,257 $122,267
FUTURE CIP DEBT REPAYMENTS 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
WESTVIEW ACRES _ _ $191,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000
2022 PROJECTS $160,000 $160,000 $160,000
SECOND STREET/HONEYSUCKLE LANE $126,000 $126,000
FIRST/OAK STREETS $110,000
SIXTH STREET
TOTAL FUTURE STREET CIP DEBT $191,000 $250,000 $250,000 $410,000 $536,000 $396,000
ASSUMPTIONS _
BONDED DEBT PAID BACK AT 120%OF BOND
BONDED DEBT PAID BACK OVER 15 YEARS s'
ANNUAL PAYMENT AT 105%
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
STREET MAINTENANCE FUND
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
STREET MAINTENANCE CIP
2019 „tP..
STARTING CASH BALANCE $790,111 $597,111 $404,024 $592,992 $625,685 _ $486,238
REVENUES $400,000 $542,033 $681,208 $632,053 $567,033 $552,033
TAX LEVY _ $400,000 $425,000 $600,000 $575,000 $500,000 $525,000
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID $0 $117,033 $81,208 $57,053 $67,033 $27,033
EXPENSES $593,000 $735,120 $492,240 $599,360 $706,480 $563,600
CRACK SEALING $33,000 $34,320 $35,640 $36,960 $38,280 $39,600
SEAL COATING $145,000 $150,800 $156,600 $162,400 $168,200 $174,000
MILL AND OVERLAY $415,000 $550,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $350,000
ENDING BALANCE $597,111 $404,024 $592,992 $625,685 $486,238 $474,671
IDEAL MAINTENANCE FUNDING ^
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT $810,000
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
t
t
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
VEHICLE CIP SUMMARY
2019
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $0 $64,660 $0 $47,600 $0 $0
ENGINEERING - $0 $37,100 $34,880 $0 $37,950 $0
FIRE $0 $37,100 $964,650 $0 $1,489,250 $531,000
MUNICIPAL SERVICES $0 $89,040 $264,870J $534,240 $258,750 $401,200
NATURAL RESOURCES $0 $0 $0 $39,200 $0 $0
PARKS $0 $225,780 $207,100 $133,280 $31,050 $0
POLICE $157,590 $92,980 $174,920 $208,320 $101,200 $189,390
r
TOTAL $157,590 $546,660 $1,646,420 $962,640 $1,918,200 $1,121,590
VEHICLE CIP FUNDING/FUND BALANCE 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
STARTING BALANCE $162,702 $95,112 $348,452 $310,182 $7,542 $22,092
TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES $157,590 $546,660 $1,646,420 $962,640 $1,918,200 $1,121,590
TAX LEVY REVENUE(CASH) $90,000 $800,000 $480,000 $660,000 $570,000 $630,000
BONDED DEBT REVENUE $0 I $0 $1,128,150 $0 $1,362,750 $0
YEAR ENDING BALANCE $95,112 $348,452 $310,182 $7,542 $22,092 -$469,498
FUTURE CIP DEBT REPAYMENTS 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
ENGINE 1 BOND PAYMENTS $285,000 $285,000 $285,000 $285,000
ENGINE 2 BOND PAYMENTS $343,413
TOTAL FUTURE CIP DEBT $0 $0 $285,000 $285,000 $285,000 $628,413
CITY COUNCIL MUST HAVE DISCUSSION ON DEBT APPROACH TO FIRE ENGINES
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
TRANSFERS CIP
TAX LEVY PROJECTS 2019 11.tf) ?<;'` ;;' , '_I ,'
EDA TRANSFER $25,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
FIRE CAPITAL EQUIPMENT(2019) $72,568 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
ARENA CAPITAL PROJECTS $0 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
GENERAL CAPITAL EQUIPMENT(PD) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
POLICE EQUIPMENT CIP $51,000 $51,000 $51,000 $110,000 $55,000 $30,725
FIRE EQUIPMENT CIP $91,545 $91,545 $91,545 $91,545 $111,545 $111,545
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT $400,000 $425,000 $500,000 $575,000 $500,000 $525,000
TRAIL MAINTENANCE CIP $60,278 $50,000 $60,000 $0 $50,000 $0
BUILDING MAINTENANCE CIP $0 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000
TOWNSHIP ROAD MAINTENANCE $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000
EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND $13,022 $13,022 $13,022 $13,022 $13,022 $13,022
PROPERTY/CASUALTY DEDUCTABLE $10,000 $10,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
TOTAL TAX LEVY PROJECTS $726,413 $663,567 $763,567 $837,567 $777,567 $728,292
LGA PROJECTS 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
FIRE CAPITAL EQUIPMENT(2019) $177,432 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1
GENERAL CAPITAL FUND(VEHICLES) $90,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
BUILDING MAINTENANCE $21,208 $86,607 $151,607 $156,607 $136,607 $186,607
EDA TRANSFER $25,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 $40,000
EMERALD ASH BORER $0 $10,000 $10,825 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
TRAIL MAINTENANCE $1,085 $60,000 $30,000 $50,000 $60,000 $50,000
PARK IMPROVEMENT FUND $25,000 $1,085 $1,085 $1,085 $1,085 $1,085
IT FUNDING $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT $0 $117,033 $81,208 $57,053 $67,033 $27,033
TOTAL LGA PROJECTS $339,725 $314,725 $314,725 $314,745 $314,725 $314,725
I
TOTAL TRANSFERS PROJECTS $1,066,138 $978,292 $1,078,292 $1,152,312 $1,092,292 $1,043,017
FUNDING TARGETS
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
EMERALD ASH BORER '
TRAIL MAINTENANCE $510,000
PARK IMPROVEMENT FUND
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT $810,000
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
PARK IMPROVEMENT CIP
PROJECT 2019
DAKOTA ESTATES PARK
DAISY KNOLL PARK
DEPOT WAY ARTS PARK
EVERGREEN KNOLL PARK
FAIR HILLS PARK _
FARMINGTON PRESERVE PARK $5,000
FLAGSTAFF MEADOW $7,500 $125,000
HILL DEE PARK
HILLVIEW PARK
JIM BELL PARK AND PRESERVE $250,000
LAKE JULIA PARK
MARIGOLD PARK $70,000
MEADOWVIEW PARK $125,000
MIDDLE CREEK PARK
NORTH CREEK PARK
PINE KNOLL PARK $5,000
PRAIRIE PINES PARK $195,000
PRAIRIE VIEW PARK $3,000_
RAMBLING RIVER PARK $30,000 �� $20,000 $40,000 $25,000
SILVER SPRINGS PARK
TAMARACK PARK $110,000
TROY HILL PARK
VERMILLION GROVE PARK $125,000
VRC TOWN SQUARE
WESTVIEW ACRES PARK vv $5,000
TOTAL $303,000 $5,000 $0 $20,000 $427,500 $385,000
FUNDING/FUND BALANCE I 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
STARTING BALANCE $454,859 $256,859 $356,859 $461,859 $546,859 $219,359
ANNUAL PROJECT COSTS $303,000 $5,000 $0 $20,000 $427,500 $385,000
FARM LEASE $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0
PARK DEDICATION/PARK DEV FEES $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
LIQUOR STORE FUNDING $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000
YEAR END BALANCE $256,859 $356,859 $461,859 $546,859 $219,359 -$65,641
FUNDING TARGETS
PARK IMPROVEMENT FUND
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
TRAIL MAINTENANCE CIP
REVENUES ---2019 d.' !; 1 I
TAX LEVY $60,278 $50,000 $60,000 $0 $50,000 $0
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID $1,085 $60,000 $30,000 $50,000 $60,000 $50,000
OTHER $120,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL $181,363 $110,000 $90,000 $50,000 $110,000 $50,000
EXPENDITURES 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
BEGINNING BALALNCE $153,803 $28,166 $25,286 $16,526 $11,886 $36,366
FOG SEALING $15,000 $15,600 $16,200 $16,800 $17,400 $15,375
CRACK SEALING $7,000 $7,280 $7,560 $7,840 $8,120 $14,185
PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT $285,000 $90,000 $75,000 $30,000 $60,000 $0
RECONSTRUCTION $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $307,000 $112,880 $98,760 $54,640 $85,520 $29,560
YEAR END BALANCE $28,166 $25,286 $16,526 $11,886 $36,366 $56,806
FUNDING TARGET
---
TRAIL
TRAIL MAINTENANCE $510,000
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
FIRE EQUIPMENT CIP
2019 10,11) {a;;i, '}s r,,n,s
SCBA $85,000 $64,800
PORTABLE RADIOS _ $45,000 $45,000 $45,000 $45,000
RADIO BATTERIES �Y $6,000 $8,000 $8,000
MOBILE RADIOS $9,750 $9,750 $9,750
EXTRACTION TOOLS $40,000
THERMAL IMAGING CAMERA $5,000 $7,500 $5,000
RAD 57 CO MONITOR $7,000
STATION COMPRESSOR $50,000
HOSE $7,500 $11,000 $7,500 $11,000 $7,500
GAS MONITORS $8,000 $9,000
TOTAL $90,000 $78,300 $71,500 $82,250 $114,750 $120,250
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
STARTING BALANCE $0 $1,545 $14,790 $34,835 $44,130 $40,925
EXPENDITURES $90,000 $78,300 $71,500 $82,250 $114,750 $120,250
TAX LEVY $91,545 $91,545 $91,545 $91,545 $111,545 $111,545
ENDING BALALNCE $1,545 $14,790 $34,835 $44,130 $40,925 $32,220
FUNDING FOR THIS PLAN IS INCLUDED IN THE TRANSFERS BUDGET.
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
POLICE EQUIPMENT CIP
2019 l,o.;a1 ;,,, "
PORTABLE RADIOS $71,715 $52,851 $14,366
MOBILE RADIOS $10,498 $61,710
BODY CAMERAS $13,452 $13,452 $13,452 $13,452 $13,452
SQUAD CAMERAS $8,424 $18,129 $18,129 $18,129 $18,129
THERMAL IMAGING $10,000
TOTAL $31,876 $103,296 $94,930 $107,657 $31,581 $0
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
STARTING BALANCE $79,152 $98,276 $45,980 $2,050 $4,393 $27,812
ANNUAL EXPENDITURES T $31,876 $103,296 $94,930 $107,657 $31,581 $0
TAX LEVY $51,000 $51,000 $51,000 $110,000 $55,000 $30,725
ENDING BALANCE $98,276 $45,980 $2,050 $4,393 $27,812 $58,537
FUNDING FOR THIS PLAN IS INCLUDED IN THE TRANSFERS BUDGET.
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
-
BUILDING CIP SCHEDULE
SUMMARY BY BUILDING
i
2019 ttttl 1.;.r •t,;-
CITY HALL $0 $24,700 $0 $0 $0 $217,950
FIRE STATION#1 $15,450 $475,800 $0 $0 $228,600 $0
FIRE STATION#2 i $500 $44,400 $0 $0 $110,000 $0
_
SCHMITZ-MAKI ARENA $126,300 $1,769,300 $0 $0 $438,400 $0
FIRST STREET GARAGE __ $30,400 $0 $0 $22,400 $0
MAINTENANCE FACILITY $13,400 $1,662,800 $0 $0 $866,000 $0
POLICE STATION $9,800 $574,000 $0 i $0 $300,000 $0
RAMBLING RIVER CENTER $26,825 $418,400 $0 $0 $182,500 $0
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $197,275 $4,999,800 $0 $0 $2,147,900 $217,950
2019 2020 2021 2022 20223 2024
STARTING BALANCE $201,435 $35,368 -$4,867,825 -$4,701,218 -$4,529,611 -$6,525,904
EXPENDITURES $197,275 $4,999,800 $0 $0 $2,147,900 $217,950
LGA FUNDING $21,208 $86,607 $151,607 $156,607 $136,607 $186,607
LIQUOR STORE FUNDING $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
TAX LEVY FUNDING $0 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000
ENDING BALANCE $35,368 -$4,867,825 -$4,701,218 -$4,529,611 -$6,525,904 -$6,542,247
FUNDING TARGET
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
2030 FINANCIAL PLAN
LIQUOR STORE FINANCIAL DONCATIONS R_ _
REVENUES 2019 ;t.fia� �Ca 'f C i:',�' t+4"?`
LIQUOR STORE DONATIONS $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000
TOTAL $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000
EXPENDITURES 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
BEGINNING BALALNCE $4,160 $4,160 $4,160 $4,160 $4,160 $4,160
PARK IMPROVEMENT FUND $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000
TBD $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
BUILDING FUND $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
SCHMITZ-MAKI ARENA $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000
I
YEAR END BALANCE $4,160 $4,160 $4,160 $4,160 $4,160 $4,160
•
1/30/2019 2030 Financial Plan Info
CITY OF FARMINGTON
NEW TAX CAPACITY GROWTH PERCENTAGE
1
I1 �
j
193q,; j 1 j
I 14
i
1
i
�: 1.4710
1.49%r) E
1
I
1{I'
d
1.30`!x;
1.21°/, 1.22;0 I
1.19:0
? 1.12,¢
a
1
0.974 t
i
0.87°0 `
.1
'kI 3
I
I
I
I j
I , !,..,,,,:,‘
a
1!!...iIi., ,
11 i
p,
., ,,, k il
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
i / / i
N4 N ON enqmN NV Om ""
: Mb trim w
en en N h in <
to n an
m -: b .w s: V 9 9 r
r• < Q A rg N N M A e e e
n Q m tD n 43 N ti W A C
A en n
n iAo Q < m kn go en c tn
to n N O f 31 N 1.0
I0C O. g
eV e C m N to Q Rif en Q el) to
N N n 8 C N ti A en Ap w < I
N O Y T b b O lAn O b On
A_____ i
... . . . ,.. ,,, ,..„, ,,, i.„ :,„ .„ ,..,.
n U
4,
its -- ___(
0 V
O n 01 N W N C
N-< f eenn ael ttoo < < en f b V
\ N H H N O O LI O < Qt <
r. , e m b . c en en < an —
m 11i to re ct ees+ r1 ii N 1AO VI P. 0
, Nry H en or; vii en eri ' v co vii
Q Q en an < en en < <
t
G •Q nN m• .4 NNg u AtQ
N e,4 to; m C N C A N Q c N
1M1 N =
O > 2 6 6
> � z z m t c o g
Hi !. I 1 I I I I
P.
8 4
• ~ O N
N..._
co
8 a w• t
O C On
O Q
Is
iI
40. a
mx
G $ m
MI M a
,i
N
b
a W X
NI C N
H n w
m
W
N g
...i vC
H N
O
_ K
Nra
8 8
w
• G.▪ x
'1 N N
o a <
N N
8
Gm a
o▪ m Co
N N N
m
I 2
25nx
C N O w 4
a >. — _._ _,
w _: _
r
y
C ♦e N N J
e
E S N m N.
LL y __.._..... n b6.
o
> _ o-
1Qx
m N
N 0 T
Yj fel
R ,• x
P
Of
m
N
M
S
8 k A
m
__.,..... i M.
ea
8▪ '°
m
N ON
tO'
AITp Q
mo
.
H i
N
b
g 2 N
m
N
M
Lal
Na
N
_
N
if
g
Awl x11e1
David McKnight
From: Joshua Ney <joshua.ney@senate.mn>
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 2:04 PM
To: David McKnight
Subject: RE: Bonding
Hi David,
Thanks for reaching out. Happy to provide some information about the bonding process. I am including a few links to
documents and other information that may be useful to you below. But, please let me know if you'd like to speak with
someone at MMB about this I would be happy to facilitate that conversation.
A couple of general points:
Bonding bills are usually considered in the even-numbered year.That has been different the last couple of years,but it
was the practice for a while. It's unclear if there will be a bonding bill in 2019.
Bonding tours(visits to projects that have had bills introduced) usually take place in the fall/early winter of the odd
number year.This provides the Capital Investment Committees in the House and Senate the opportunity to get a first-
hand understanding of the request.
A couple of points based on your questions:
There is usually a 50%non-state match,which can be waived but a very compelling reason has to be given or the project
will be passed over.
There is no limit to how much local units of government are eligible for.
This is a really good document that summarizes the process. It's a couple of years old, but still relevant:
https://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/stbonding.pdf.
And this slide presentation also does a thorough job in providing information for local units of government:
https://www.lmc.org/media/document/1/capitalinvestmentslides.pdf.
Minnesota Management and Budget also has some good information about the process for local units of government.
These are the 2018 instructions but shouldn't change much for the next biennium.Click on the link below and scroll
down to "2018 Capital Budget Instructions for Local Units of Government": https://mn.gov/mmb/budget/budget-
instructions/capbud/.
This is the request list from local units of government from the last year as an example of the asks.As a guess, I'd say
about 1/3 got included (either for the full ask or for partial) in the most recent bonding bill: https://mn.gov/mmb-
stat/documents/budget/capita I-budget/fins I-ca pita I-budget/2018/re lated-documents/Iota 1-gov-fins I-cap.pdf.
I hope you find this information helpful. But,again, please do let me know if I can connect you with staff at MMB to
discuss the process in greater detail.
Thanks!
-Josh
Office of Sen. Little
From:David McKnight<DMcKnight@farmingtonmn.gov>
Sent:Tuesday, December 18,2018 11:30 AM
1
To:Joshua Ney<joshua.ney@senate.mn>
Subject: Bonding
Josh-
Senator Little talked to one of the Farmington City Councilmembers about possible bonding projects. Can you please
send me some information on bonding,what information is required, how much are local projects eligible for,how
much of our own money would be required,etc. We are looking to educate the city council on this possibility.
If you have any questions please let me know. Thanks in advance for your help.
David it
City Administrator
City of Farmington 1430 Third Street I Farmington, MN 55024
651.280.6801
dmcknightafarmingtommn.gov
www.farm ingtommn.gov
2
MN HOUSE Capital Investment and
RESEARCH
State Bonding
January 2019
Executive Summary
One of the ways the state pays for capital improvement projects is to borrow money by issuing bonds,
which are promises to repay the money borrowed at a specified time and interest rate.General
obligation(G.O.) bonds are the primary type of bonds issued and they are backed by the full faith,
credit,and taxing powers of the state.The state constitution limits the purposes for which G.O.bonds
may be issued and requires certain procedures.The state also uses other types of debt financing for
capital projects as well as direct spending from the general fund.This publication describes the law
governing state bonding and also compares local bonding authority to state bonding authority.
Contents
General Obligation(G.O.)Bonds 2
All State G.O.Bonds 2
Bonds to Acquire and Better Public Land and Buildings 2
Other Constitutionally Authorized Uses of G.O.Bonds 3
Other Capital Project Funding Sources 4
Capital Investment Guidelines 6
State Debt Capacity Forecast 6
State Bond Ratings 6
Capital Appropriation Cancellations 7
Role of Bond Counsel 7
Origination Clause 7
Use of State Bond-Financed Property 8
Nonstate Match Requirements 8
Other Topics Relating to State Bond-Financed Projects 9
Comparison of State Bonding and Local Bonding 10
By Deborah A.Dyson,Deborah.Dyson@house.mn
Capital Investment and State Bonding
General Obligation (G.O.) Bonds
All State G.O. Bonds
All state G.O. bonds have certain common requirements.They must be for a public purpose,authorized
in the constitution,specified in law,and mature in not more than 20 years.
Public purpose. Under the state constitution,all expenditures of state funds,including bond
proceeds,must be for a public purpose.There is a public purpose if the expenditure can reasonably be
expected to achieve a legitimate public goal or benefit,even if private interests also benefit. In
determining whether the purpose is"public,"one must look at both historical and contemporary
standards.The legislature is given great deference in determining a purpose to be"public."Visina v.
Freeman,252 Minn. 177,184,89 N.W.2d 635,643(1958).
Authorized in the constitution. The state constitution lists the purposes for which G.O.bond
proceeds may be used,and G.O.bond proceeds cannot be used for purposes not included in the
constitution.Minn.Const.art.XI,§4.("The state may contract public debts for which its full faith,
credit,and taxing powers may be pledged at the times and in the manner authorized by law,but only for
the purposes and subject to the conditions stated in section 5.Public debt includes any obligation
payable directly in whole or in part from a tax of state wide application on any class of property,income,
transaction,or privilege,but does not include any obligation which is payable from revenues other than
taxes.")
Specified in law. "Each law authorizing the issuance of bonds shall distinctly specify the purposes
thereof and the maximum amount of the proceeds authorized to be expended for each purpose."Minn.
Const.art.XI,§7.This may be done by describing the project in some detail or by referring to a
governmental program established in statute.
Mature in no more than 20 years. The maximum term of state bonds is 20 years.Minn.Const.
art.XI,§7.However,bonds may mature in less than 20 years,consistent with the useful life of the
assets paid for with the bond proceeds and market conditions.
Bonds to Acquire and Better Public Land and Buildings
The principal purpose for which state G.O.bonds are issued is to acquire and better public land and
buildings and to make other public capital improvements. Minn.Const.art.Xi,§5, para. (a).The
authority to issue public debt to acquire and better public land and buildings and other public
improvements of a capital nature was added to the state constitution in 1962.When people refer to
"the bonding bill,"this is generally what they mean.
Capital project. A capital project,in general,is to acquire or improve fixed assets,such as land or
buildings.The fixed asset must be long-lived;bond counsel has suggested that the useful life be at least
ten years.The improvements must be substantial,extend the useful life or substantially increase the
value of the fixed asset,and not be predictable or recurring(as repairs would be). For example,a study
or planning is not capital in nature,but design work for a site-specific capital project is.An option to buy
real property is an intangible asset and not eligible for bonding.
Publicly owned. Bonds issued under the capital improvements provision may only be for publicly
owned projects,whether state or local."Publicly owned"includes projects of the Minnesota Historical
Minnesota House Research Department Page 2
Capital Investment and State Bonding
Society, but not projects owned by public radio,public TV,Indian tribes,the federal government,or
private sewage systems even if they will serve the public. Public ownership may be in fee or a long-term
lease or easement that is deemed to be the functional equivalent of fee ownership.1
Three-fifths vote.A law to authorize the issuance of state G.O. bonds for capital improvements
must be enacted with at least a three-fifths vote of the House and the Senate.Minn.Const.art.XI,§5,
para.(a).Absent any court decision to the contrary,a law to amend an authorization or appropriation of
bond proceeds requires the same super-majority vote.
Other Constitutionally Authorized Uses of G.O. Bonds
Under other provisions of the state constitution (included since the dates indicated),state G.O. bond
proceeds may also be used:
• to repel invasion or suppress insurrection(1857);
• to borrow temporarily through certificates of indebtedness(1962);
It to refund outstanding bonds of the state or its agencies(1962);
• to establish and maintain highways subject to constitutional limitations on highway bonds
(1924) (see"Trunk highway bonds" below);
• to promote forestation and prevent and abate forest fires(1924);
• to construct, improve,and operate airports and other air navigation facilities(1944);
• to develop the state's agricultural resources by extending credit on real estate(1922);
• to improve and rehabilitate public or private railroad rights-of-way and other rail facilities up
to$200 million par value(1982);and
• as otherwise authorized in the constitution.
Minn.Const.art.XI,§5, paras.(b)to(j).
Not all of these purposes are capital in nature,and the constitution does not require a three-fifths vote
to authorize issuance of bonds for these purposes.
Trunk highway bonds. Bonds issued for trunk highways are G.O. bonds, but payable from the
trunk highway fund(with a statewide property tax as backup).Trunk highway bond proceeds pay for
state-owned capital projects that are part of,or functionally related to,the construction, improvement,
or maintenance of the state trunk highway system.Trunk highway projects may not be paid for with
G.O. bond proceeds that are payable in the first instance from the general fund.Minn.Const.art.XIV, §
11;art.XI,§5,para. (e).2
1"A qualifying long term lease or easement must(i)create the functional equivalency of fee ownership for the
length of its term,and(ii)be for a term that is equal to or greater than 125%of the useful life of the property
that is the subject thereof,or such other period of time specifically authorized by a Minnesota statute,rule or
session law."Section 3.04 of the"Fourth Order Amending Order of Commissioner of Finance:Relating to Use and
Sale of State Bond Financed Property,"Minnesota Management and Budget,commissioner's order,July 30,2012.
This order implements Minnesota Statutes,section 16A.695.
2 See also"Minnesota Management and Budget Guidance Relating to Permitted Uses of State Trunk Highway Bond
Proceeds,"Minnesota Management and Budget,memo,December 8,2008.
Minnesota House Research Department Page 3
Capital Investment and State Bonding
No reimbursements.State G.O. bonds are generally tax exempt. Federal tax law severely limits
the use of tax-exempt bond proceeds to reimburse costs paid from other funds and failure to follow
federal law can result in jeopardizing the tax-exempt status of the bonds,adversely affecting the
bondholders. Before any bond fund recipient considers using the money for that purpose,it must
consult with Minnesota Management and Budget(MMB)to determine if it is possible.
Other Capital Project Funding Sources
General fund. Capital projects may be financed with a general fund appropriation and If they are,
they are not subject to many of the same limitations as projects funded with G.O. bond proceeds.
However,the law making the general fund appropriation may state that the provisions that apply to the
bond proceeds appropriations also apply to the general fund capital appropriation,such as the
cancellation law described below.
Revenue bonds. The constitution neither specifically authorizes nor prohibits issuance of revenue
bonds.As with any expenditure of public funds,revenue bond proceeds must be used for a public
purpose.A significant limitation on the issuance of revenue bonds is whether the revenue to repay the
bonds is sufficient to make the bonds marketable.An example of the use of state revenue bonds is the
tobacco revenue bonds issued to pay the debt service on G.O.debt due during the 2012-2013
biennium.3 Another example is the 2000 issue of Retirement System Building Revenue Bonds.
Various state agencies have authority to issue revenue bonds. For example,the Minnesota Housing
Finance Agency may issue mortgage revenue bonds,and the Minnesota Public Facilities Authority may
issue revenue bonds to finance municipal wastewater treatment and other public infrastructure
projects.
Agency appropriation bonds.In a few instances,the legislature has enacted a standing
(continuing)appropriation to pay to another public entity each year an amount sufficient to pay the
debt service due for the year on bonds issued by that other entity.For example,the legislature enacted
a standing appropriation of state general fund money for the University of Minnesota to pay off a
portion of the bonds issued by the university for the new Gopher football stadium and another standing
appropriation to pay for the biomedical science research facilities.Other examples are the standing
appropriations to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency from the state general fund to pay off bonds
the agency issued for nonprofit housing and housing infrastructure."Although each of these laws
creates a standing appropriation,they also specifically state that the standing appropriation may be
reduced or repealed entirely by a majority vote of the legislature and is subject to unallotment, in
whole or in part,under Minnesota Statutes,section 16A.152.
State appropriation bonds. Similar to agency appropriation bonds,the legislature has
authorized state appropriation bonds issued through MMB and payable from a standing appropriation.
In 2011,the legislature authorized issuing state appropriation bonds to refund tobacco revenue bonds
issued to pay the debt service on G.O.debt due during the bienniums The attorney general had
3 Laws 2011,1st spec.sess.,ch.7,art.11.
°Minn.Stat.§§137.50 to 137.60(stadium);Minn.Stat.§§137.61 to 137.65(biomedical science research
projects);Minn.Stat.§§462A.36,462A.37(nonprofit housing bonds,housing infrastructure bonds).
5 Minn.Stat.§§16A.97 to 16A.99;Laws 2011,1st spec.sess.,ch.7,art.11.
Minnesota House Research Department Page 4
Capital Investment and State Bonding
questioned the constitutionality of state appropriation bonds and so the law required the state to bring
a lawsuit to test their validity.The state supreme court held that appropriation bonds are not"public
debt"within the meaning of the constitution and the state's full faith,credit,and taxing powers are not
committed to their repayment.Therefore,the state may issue appropriation bonds,and those bonds
are not subject to the limitations in the state constitution that apply to general obligation bonds.
Schowalter v.State,822 N.W.2d 292(Minn.2012).MMB issued the bonds in November 2012 to refund
the tobacco revenue bonds.
The 2012 Legislature authorized state appropriation bonds to help pay for a new Vikings stadium and
the bonds were issued in 2014.State appropriation bonds have also been authorized for the Lewis and
Clark regional water system,issued in 2016 and 2017.6 As with the agency appropriation bonds,the
appropriations to pay debt service may be reduced or repealed entirely and are subject to unallotment.
In 2018,the legislature authorized state appropriation bonds payable from the environment and natural
resources trust fund.A lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of that law was brought and as of
December 2018,the bonds have not been sold.'
Real estate lease revenue, certificates of participation.The legislature has authorized
lease revenue bonds or certificates of participation—lease revenue bonds to acquire and improve real
estate.The glossary for the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board defines a certificate of participation
as follows:"An instrument evidencing a pro rata share in a specific pledged revenue stream,usually
lease payments by the issuer that are typically subject to annual appropriation.The certificate generally
entitles the holder to receive a share,or participation,in the payments from a particular project.The
payments are passed through the lessor to the certificate holders.The lessor typically assigns the lease
and the payments to a trustee,which then distributes the payments to the certificate holders."
In 1999,the legislature authorized a lease-purchase agreement with the city of Bemidji to build a Bureau
of Criminal Apprehension satellite office.9 In 2002,the legislature authorized the Commissioner of
Administration to enter into a long-term lease purchase agreement with the Saint Paul Port Authority to
develop office facilities for the departments of health,agriculture,and human services.10 In 2013,the
legislature authorized the state to issue certificates of participation-lease revenue bonds to pay for the
new Senate office building.'-
Master lease program. State statute authorized MMB to issue certificates of participation relative
to a master lease in order to acquire capital equipment for state agencies.Minn.Stat.§16A.85.The
statute states that the leases are not debt and payment is subject to appropriations for payment on the
leases.It is a way for the state to borrow for capital equipment. In addition,the state has issued
certificates of participation to finance new information technology systems.12
6 Minn.Stat.§16A.965;Minn.Stat.§16A.967
7 Minn.Stat.§16A.969,added by Laws 2018,ch.214,art.6.
8 http://www.msrb.org/glossary.aspx
9 Laws 1999,ch.216,art.2,§26.
1°Laws 2002,ch.393,§13,subds.7,8.
11 Laws 2013,ch.143,art.12,§21.
121n 2009,certificates of participation were issued under this statute to finance a new statewide accounting and
procurement system,and an integrated tax software project.Laws 2009,ch.101,art.2,§§50,51,71 and 104.
Minnesota House Research Department Page 5
Capital Investment and State Bonding
Capital Investment Guidelines
There is no constitutional or statutory limitation on how much debt the state may incur(with the
exception of debt for railroads), but since 1979 MMB has had guidelines for issuing debt. MMB adopted
guidelines December 22,2009,intended to be consistent with measures used by credit rating agencies
and allow for easier comparison with other states.They are also intended to recognize all tax-supported
debt obligations13 and continue the state's conservative financial management practices.'"Under these
new guidelines:
• total tax-supported principal outstanding shall be 3.25 percent or less of total state personal
income;
• total principal,both issued and authorized but unissued,for state general obligations,moral
obligations,u equipment capital leases,and real estate capital leases must not exceed 6
percent of state personal income;and
• 40 percent of G.O.debt must be due within five years and 70 percent within ten years,if
consistent with the useful life of the financed assets and market conditions.
State personal income is estimated by MMB for the forecasts.
State Debt Capacity Forecast
MMB prepares a debt capacity forecast each February and November.16 The forecast provides a point-
in-time status report on the state's debt in relation to the capital investment guidelines.The governor
and the legislature use the forecasts in the capital budget process.MMB forecasts the cost of debt
service at the same time.Minn.Stat.§16A.105.
State Bond Ratings
State bond ratings are a measure of the risk to investors who buy the bonds, reflecting the state's
capacity to pay interest and repay principal.A good rating reflects lower risk and therefore reduces the
interest rate the state has to pay.The rating agencies look at the overall economy and financial health of
the state and the state's financial management.As of 2018,Minnesota has the highest bond rating from
two of the three rating agencies.
13"Tax-supported debt obligations"includes all state G.O.bonds,appropriation bonds,and the standing
appropriations to pay debt service on the University of Minnesota bonds for the new stadium and biomedical
science research projects,the Housing Finance Agency's nonprofit housing bonds,certificates of participation,
and lease-purchase financing for equipment and real estate.It does not include revenue bonds.
14 See the explanation of the guidelines in the debt capacity forecast.https://mn.gov/mmb/debt-
management/bonding/capital-investment/debt-capacity-reports.jsp
15"A bond that,in addition to its primary source of security,is also secured by a non-binding covenant that any
amount necessary to make up any deficiency in debt service will be included in the budget recommendation
made to the governing body,which may appropriate funds to make up the shortfall.The governing body,
however,is not legally obligated to make such an appropriation."Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board,
glossary-http://www.msrb.org/Glossary/Definition/MORAL-OBLIGATION-BOND.aspx
16 https://mn.gov/mmb/debt-management/bonding/capital-investment/debt-capacity-reports.jsp
Minnesota House Research Department Page 6
Capital Investment and State Bonding
Through the 1980s and early 1990s,the state's bond ratings from the national rating agencies,Standard
&Poor's Ratings Group, Fitch Ratings,and Moody's Investors Services, Inc.,were high but not the
highest from all three.The state achieved the highest rating from all three national rating agencies in
August 1997 and maintained it until June 2003,when the state was dealing with a massive deficit. In
June 2003,Moody's Investors Services, Inc.downgraded the state's rating slightly to Aa1. In July and
September 2011,the other two rating agencies downgraded the state's rating from AAA to AA+. Both
rating agencies pointed to what they viewed as the state's failure to address the structural budget
imbalance and an ongoing reliance on nonrecurring measures to balance its budget.
Fitch Ratings upgraded Minnesota's bond rating to AAA in 2016 and for the August 2018 bond sale,
Standard&Poor's also upgraded Minnesota's bond rating to AAA.,
As each bond sale statement says,these ratings are subject to change or withdrawal by the rating
agencies at any time.
Capital Appropriation Cancellations
By January 1 each year,MMB must report to the chairs of the Senate Finance Committee,the House
Ways and Means Committee,and the House Capital Investment Committee on the cancellation of
capital projects authorized more than four years before January 1 and financed with general fund
money,appropriation bond proceeds,or general obligation bond proceeds.The unobligated,
unencumbered,or unspent project balances included in the report are canceled effective July 1 unless
specifically reauthorized by law. Minn.Stat.§16A.642.
Role of Bond Counsel
While there is some guidance from the courts on the constitutional requirements for and limitations on
state bonding, bond questions rarely reach the courts.In order for bonds to be sold,attorneys for the
state—called bond counsel—are asked to provide an unqualified legal opinion approving the issuance of
the bonds.Without a good opinion,no one will buy the bonds.Thus,the primary guidance the
legislature has on what is"bondable"and how the law must be written comes from bond counsel.The
state attorney general is bond counsel and also retains private legal counsel to serve as bond counsel.
Under state statute,bond counsel is paid based on time, knowledge,and experience but cannot be paid
a fee based primarily on a percentage of the amount of the bonds sold.Minn.Stat.§481.21.
Origination Clause
Among issues bond counsel considers is whether the law authorizing the issuance of the bonds was
properly enacted.Although there is no Minnesota court decision on point,because the state
constitution requires imposition of a statewide property tax in the amount needed to repay any state
general obligation bonds, bond counsel has advised that it would not be unreasonable for a court to
determine that a bill containing a bond sale authorization is a bill to raise revenue,which must originate
in the House of Representatives.Minn.Const.art.XI,§7;Minn.Stat. §16A.641,subds. 1, 10, 11,and 12.
Because appropriations of bond proceeds,and any changes to bond proceed appropriations,could be
viewed as directly related to the bond sale authorization, bond counsel has advised that all G.O.bond-
related provisions originate in the House of Representatives and pass by at least a three-fifths majority
in both bodies.
Minnesota House Research Department Page 7
Capital Investment and State Bonding
Use of State Bond-Financed Property
As explained above,state bond-financed property must be publicly owned and be used for a public
purpose.At times,the best way to provide the public purpose or program is through a nonpublic entity.
When that is so,the public owner of a state bond-financed project may enter into an agreement to have
a private entity manage the facility and operate its public program with oversight by the public owner.
That agreement is subject to approval by MMB.Minn.Stat. §16A.695.
A public entity that enters into a use agreement with a nonpublic organization for operation of a state
bond-financed facility is ultimately responsible for the operation of that facility. Even if the nonpublic
operator cancels or walks away from the use agreement,the public entity remains responsible for
operating the public program.The public entity is not a "fiscal agent"or pass-through agency for state
bond funding.The public entity must have the authority to provide the public program for which the
state bond-financed property is acquired or built.
State bond-financed property is subject to the laws governing state bond-financed property for a time
period equal to 125 percent of the useful life of the improvements paid for with the bond proceeds or
until the property is sold as provided in law.17 The useful life of the property is determined according to
generally accepted accounting principles.
Nonstate Match Requirements
In many cases,additional financing is needed to complete a project above and beyond the amount of
the state appropriation,plus matching requirements named in the appropriation bill or as required in
Minnesota Statutes,section 16A.86. In these cases,the grantee must demonstrate that all financing is
in place to complete the project.Minn.Stat.§16A.502.
A nonstate contribution may be cash,a federal funding commitment,a local commitment to issue bonds
or levy,or pledged payments that have been deposited into a segregated account or multiyear pledges
that are converted into cash or cash equivalent through a loan or irrevocable letter of credit from a
financial institution. Minn.Stat. §16A.695,subd.6.
Since 1992,state capital appropriations for the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota State
Colleges and Universities(Minnesota State)have required a nonstate contribution.This has not included
appropriations for Higher Education Asset Preservation and Replacement(HEAPR). For the University of
Minnesota,the appropriations are intended to cover approximately two-thirds of the cost of each
project and the remaining costs must be paid from university sources.For Minnesota State,the
legislature typically appropriates the full cost of a project and then the Minnesota State board of
trustees pays the debt service on one-third of the principal amount of state bonds issued to finance the
projects.
17 Section 3.04 of the"Fourth Order Amending Order of Commissioner of Finance:Relating to Use and Sale of State
Bond Financed Property,"Minnesota Management and Budget,commissioner's order,July 30,2012.This order
implements Minnesota Statutes,section 16A.695.
Minnesota House Research Department Page 8
Capital Investment and State Bonding
Other Topics Relating to State Bond-Financed
Projects
Predesign review and building requirements. The State Architect's Office(within the
Department of Administration)must review the predesign documents of most capital projects before
design work can begin. Minn.Stat.§16B.335. In addition,capital funding recipients must not go on to
prepare final plans and specifications for any construction,major remodeling,or land acquisition until
the agency that will use the project has submitted project information to the legislature for comment.18
Also,to ensure that all new state buildings and major renovations of state buildings initially exceed the
state energy code by at least 30 percent,all state building capital projects paid for with G.O. bond
proceeds must comply with sustainable building design guidelines developed by the Departments of
Administration and Commerce.19 Minn.Stat.§16B.325.
Percent for art. Up to 1 percent of the total appropriation for a state building project of$500,000
or more may be used to acquire works of art for the building.The art must be accessible to the public.
The program is administered by the Minnesota State Arts Board in cooperation with the Department of
Administration. If the amount available for art is not used for the state building project, it is available to
the board to acquire art for state buildings existing before 1983.The percent for art is not available for
landscaping,state correctional facilities,or projects through the Public Facilities Authority(drinking
water and wastewater treatment systems and facilities). Minn.Stat.§166.35.
Use of bond funds for state agency staff costs. MMB adopted a formal policy,developed
in consultation with bond counsel,governing use of state bond funds to pay staff costs directly
attributable to the capital project or projects funded with bond funds.20 MMB adopted the formal,
written policy in response to the December 2008 internal control and compliance audit of G.O.bond
expenditures by the Office of the Legislative Auditor.21 The policy requires specific authority in law
before bond proceeds may be used to pay agency staff costs and,even with authority granted,it still
strongly encourages state agencies to charge the time of state employees working on capital projects to
nonbond funding sources because of the undesirable practice of amortizing salary costs over the 20-year
life of state G.O. bonds. MMB"must report by January 15 of each year to the chairs and ranking
minority members of the house of representatives and senate committees with jurisdiction over capital
investment,finance,and ways and means on the amount and percentage of each agency's capital
appropriation that is used to pay for the costs of staff directly attributable to capital programs or
projects funded with state general obligation bond proceeds.The report must also include information
on agencies'compliance with the commissioner's policies governing the use of general obligation bond
proceeds to pay staff costs and any changes to the commissioner's policies."Minn.Stat.§16A.501(b).
18 There are exceptions to this requirement.Minn.Stat.§16B.335,subd.1(b).
18 The Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines(MSBG)are available online at
http://www.b3mn.org/guidelines/index.html.
20"Policy Regarding Use of General Obligation Bond Proceeds to Fund Staff Costs,"Minnesota Management and
Budget,policy statement,October 20,2009.
21 https://www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/fad/pdf/fad0834.pdf
Minnesota House Research Department Page 9
Capital Investment and State Bonding
Comparison of State Bonding and Local Bonding
There are four significant differences between state and local government with regard to issuing G.O.
bonds:whether voter approval is required,whether there is any limit on the amount of debt,whether
nongovernmental entities may own property acquired with the bond proceeds,and the purposes for
which the bonds may be issued.
Referendum requirement. One of the main differences between state G.O. bonding and local
G.O. bonding is the referendum requirement.In general, local G.O. bonding requires approval of the
voters.See Minn.Stat.§475.58.There are numerous exceptions to that rule both in statute and in
special laws.One is the exception for specific types of county,city,or urban town capital improvements
that are in the local government's adopted capital improvement plan.The capital improvement plan
elements are specified in statute. Issuance of these bonds is still subject to a reverse referendum.22
Minn.Stat.§§373.40,475.521.Another exception is that a home rule charter may specify that bonds
are not subject to referendum. Minn.Stat.§475.58.
Limit on net debt.The state has debt management guidelines but not a limit on how much G.O.
debt it may have outstanding. In contrast,state statute limits metropolitan government and local debt.
See generally Minn.Stat.§475.53.For metropolitan government,see various provisions of chapter 473.
In addition,the legislature may not authorize a city,county,or town to issue debt to aid railroads if the
debt is more than 5 percent of the value of the taxable property within that jurisdiction.Minn.Const.
art.XI,§12.
Public ownership. Under the state constitutional provision that the bulk of state G.O. bond
proceeds are appropriated(for improvements to land and buildings),the bond proceeds only may be
used for projects that are and remain publicly owned.' Local G.O. bonds are not similarly restricted.For
example, local G.O.tax increment financing(TIF)bonds may be used for privately owned projects.
Purposes.All public spending,state and local,must be for a public purpose.After that condition is
met,however,there are some differences between state and local bonding purposes.As described
above,the state constitution specifies the purposes for which state G.O.bonds may be issued. In
contrast,the constitution does not address local government bonding.24 Local governments are
"creatures of the state"and only have the authority granted to them by law or necessarily implied by an
express grant of authority.The legislature specifies whether local governments may issue bonds and for
what purposes,and the legislature has authorized local governments to issue G.O.bonds for some
22"Reverse referendum"is a short-hand way to refer to allowing a referendum if a petition is filed with the
appropriate authority asking that the matter be put to the electorate.
23 Under other,less-used provisions of the state constitution,such as appropriation of bond proceeds for Rural
Finance Authority programs and railroad improvements,bond proceeds may be appropriated for privately owned
projects.
24 Railroads are an exception.As a result of the fiascos of railroad loans soon after statehood,a local government's
aid for railroads is limited by the state constitution."The legislature shall not authorize any county,township,or
municipal corporation to become indebted to aid in the construction or equipment of railroads to any amount
that exceeds 5 percent of the value of the taxable property within that county,township or municipal
corporation.The amount of taxable property shall be determined by the last assessment previous to the
incurring of the indebtedness."Minn.Const.art.XI,§12.
Minnesota House Research Department Page 10
Capital Investment and State Bonding
things that would not be eligible for state G.O. bonding,including vehicles and information technology
infrastructure.See Minn.Stat.§412.301.
Arl\IN HOUSE Minnesota House Research Department provides nonpartisan legislative,legal,and
information services to the Minnesota House of Representatives.This document
RESEARCH
can be made available in alternative formats.
www.house.mn/hrd 1651-296-6753 1600 State Office Building I St.Paul,MN 55155
Minnesota House Research Department Page 11
Minnesota's ,/"-
Capital IMI MANAGEMENT
AND BUDGET MANAGEMENT
Investment \ AND BUDGET
Process:
What Cities
Should Know — ------:,::.\\
..,-41%,
Capital Budget FAQ for Local Government,
Webinar for the ,
Chatfield I
League of MN Cities center lor the orts /
May 2,2017 /
2018 Timeline Overview
MANAGEMENT
_++AND BUDGET
Year Jimetrame Action
June 16 Deadline for local govt project submissions in CBS
2017 June- MMB staff review requests and conduct site visits as
Sept needed
July 17 Preliminary capital budget submission to legislature
How and When Do I Submit My Requests? 2018 January15 Final capital budget requests and Governor's
recommended capital budget submitted to legislature
Capital Budget Process Capital Budget System (CBS)
•The Governor's recommended capital budgets are presented for
consideration by the legislature in even numbered years. •All requests must be entered into the Capital Budget System(CBS)with adequate
•MMB's role is to collect and present capital budget information in information to allow for meaningful consideration of the project by the Governor
a standard format from state agencies and local governments in and Legislature.
order to evaluate projects and facilitate decision-making. •CBS is a web-based application,and all users must be authorized by MMB.CBS
will open for project submissions on May 1,2017.
•The capital budget process involves multiple audiences with
different roles
•The Governor
•The Legislature
•MMB
yy\q MANAGEMENT Agencies, Programs, and Procedures
■n■®AND NUDDET
Minnesota Management&Budget
•Review proposals for completeness and bondability
•Manage the process for the Governor and the Legislature collecting and
disseminating information and providing instructions and forms
•Calculate the cost of proposed bonding packages
•Forecast debt service costs of future bonding bills based on a ten year average of
Which State Agencies Will I Need to Work With? bond authorizations
•Assist with Implementation issues after enactment
Agencies, Programs, and Procedures m"i MANAG[M[HT
ANO[UDG[T
Department of Administration
•Predesign must be reviewed by the Department of Administration
before design begins
•Capital projects are expected to employ sustainable building
guidelines and high performance building practices(M.S.168.325).
Granting Agency What Do I Need to Submit& How Will Information Be Used?
•If a local government project is enacted in a bonding bill,the
appropriation must be made to a state agency for a grant to the local
unit of government
What Information Will Be Published? MMB's Evaluation of Capital Projects
Detailed project information submitted in CBS will be published in 3 reports: •Is the project eligible for general obligation bond funding?
•Projects Summary •Has all required Information been entered In CBS,including statutory
•A listing of all requests from each entity on one form. requirements?
•Projects are displayed according to priority ranking. •Do Funding Sources equal Project Costs(projects cannot be
•Funding requests are shown for 2018,2020,and 2022. submitted if totals do not match)?
•Project Narrative •What problem does the project address?
•Does the project serve a statewide or regionally-significant purpose?
•Includes a brief summary of each request,the amount,priority rank,detailed description and
rationale,and other background Information. •Can the project be completed in phases?
•Project Detail •Does the project have the required 50%nonstate match?
•includes all funding sources and project costs for each request(whkh must match),and lists
applicable statutory requirements.
Evaluating Capital Projects(continued) yy� MA NAGEM[Nf
■ ■1 AND/UDG[T
•Could the project be funded through an existing statutory grant
program(ex:Local Road Improvement Program,Wastewater
Infrastructure Funding Program,or Transportation Economic
Development(TED)Program)?
•Can the project be completed with nonstate funds?
•Will the project require additional state subsidies to operate?
•Does the project serve a public purpose,and will the project be owned
and operated by a public entity?
•Is there a resolution of support from the jurisdiction's governing body General Obligation Bonds: Can My Project Be Funded?
(uploaded to CBS)?
'Projects eligible fore[rant through an existing state program should not be submitted ata capital budget request.Such
projects shourd go through agency programs.
What Projects Are Eligible For State G.O.Bond Financing?
[rye :ANAG[M[NT
■�■ AND/YDG[T
•Article XI,Section 5,of the Minnesota Constitution contains the authority for
incurring public debt(G.O.bonds)
•Subdivision(al authorizes debt"to acquire and to better public lands and buildings and other
public Improvements of a capital nature,and to provide money to be appropriated or loaned to
any agency or political subdivision of the state for such purposes."
•In other words...
•The project must be for a public purpose
•The project must be publicly owned Are There Restrictions on Spending GO Bond Proceeds?
•The purpose of the bonds must be clearly set forth in the law
•Project activities must constitute capital expenditures
Allowable Capital Expenditures Ineligible Capital Expenditures
•Capital expenditures test:
•
1onglived: 50 years Examples include:
•Fixed asset land,building,capital equipment or other improvement to land
•Purchase of land,buildings,easements •Options to purchase land or buildings
•Predesign and design •Fixtures,furnishings and equipment that don't fit into categories above
•Construction(including environmental testing and site preparation) •General studies to evaluate the need for a capital project
•Major renovation,roof reconstruction and replacement,major window replacement(if •Educational,promotional or informational costs Incurred fora project not yet
add to value or life of building) p j
sited
•Fixtures,furnishings and equipment,only if installed:
•Upon Initial construction,or •Computer and financial modeling for a project not yet sited
•During major renovation to make the facility usable for the first time •Master planning
Ineligible Capital Expenditures * (continued) Restrictions on Use of GO Bond Financed Property
Examples include:
•All relocation and moving costs •Private use is any direct or indirect use by a nongovernmental person or entity
•Operating and maintenance costs •Certain IRS safe harbors may apply
•Betterments to leaseholds with less than a 10-year term •Involve MMB at earliest opportunity
•Software and data management systems •Bond-financed facilities used for private business threatens the tax-exempt
•Personal computers status of the state's bonds
•Marketing expenses
'This is not an exhaustive list
vnmr7
Use Contracts Examples of Private Use *
•Definition:a lease,management or other contract between the public owner of BFP •Rented skyboxes In sports facilities •Airport terminals
and another party operating or using it •Concessions •Parking garages
•Governed by M.S.§16A.695,Commissioner's Order and Use Contracts Checklist •Naming rights,broadcast rights, •Academic Institutions
•MMB approval required advertising,sponsorships •Stadiums
•Must carry out a government program •Leased space •Business incubators
•The term of the use agreement must be substantially less than the property's useful •Office buildings •Cell phone towers,solar panels,
life (s 50%is rule of thumb) •Convention center/arenas electric charging stations
•A portion of any revenue received goes to pay off state GO bonds,if more revenue is
received than Is needed to cover operating costs
'This is not on exhaustive list
Grant Agreements
11111 MADACDMEN
•Required when a state agency funds a grant to another public entity("local
projects")
•Not required if appropriation is made to a state agency for Its own capital
needs
•MMB has prepared generic forms for state agency use
•Forms are slightly different depending on funding source:
What Additional Requirements Apply to Local Projects? GO bond funds disbursed under an aen
g cyprogram
•Other GO bond-funded projects
•General fund(cash)
Statutory Authority& Program Operation Full Funding Requirement
•Grantee must have independent statutory authority to operate the project(for
example,via charter or statute) •All financing must be in place to complete the project before the grant will be
•The bonding legislation alone does not normally provide authority to operate the made available(M.S.§16A.502)
project or program
•Clarify what the"project"is;e.g.,if just predesign,funding for construction is
•Grant recipients must demonstrate to granting agency that they have an ability and not needed
plan to fund the program intended for the facility
•Capitol Grants Manual lists acceptable documentation for different funding
•If operated by a public entity:
sources
•Entity must submit to granting agency a budget item or resolution supporting operation
•If operated by a private party:
•Granting agency must approve Initial program implementation plan
•Annually,granting agency must review program evaluation report and budget
Cancellations(h.s.§16A.642)
■yyll MNACED61N7t
•Grantees should plan to have a grant agreement executed within 4 years of
the appropriation
•Commissioner of MMB issues cancellation report on January 1 of each odd-
numbered year
•Lists all bond and general fund capital appropriations enacted>4 years
previously with unspent and unencumbered balances
What Happens When My Project Is Complete?
•The 111/2023 report will show amounts from 2018 bonding bill and earlier
•Such balances are cancelled as of July 1 of the year of the report
•Cancelled balances go to repay state bonds.
fl MANAGEMENT "Bond Financed Property" (BFP)
■ ■�AND EUDGET
•Definition: property acquired or bettered wholly or partly with G.O.bond
proceeds
•BFP stays BFP until 125%of useful life elapses or it is sold pursuant to
§16A.695&Commissioner's Order
•A declaration must be recorded and provided to MMB to evidence restrictions
on use and sale
What If the Bond Financed Property Is No Longer Needed?
•Special rules apply to sales
Sale of Bond Financed Property µ1NAGEME NT
■ ■i AND EVDGET
•Sale must comply with statutory authority,M.S.416A.695 and Commissioner's
Order
•MMB approval of sale required
•No longer usable or needed for the government program
•Sale must be for fair market value(appraisal or public bidding)
•First dollar goes to state to repay the bond fund Where Can I Find a List of Statutory Requirements?
•See Sale of Bond Financed Property Checklist for all requirements
Statutory Requirements for State-Funded Projects Statutory Requirements for State-Funded Projects(continued)
•M.S.168.323:Solar Energy In State Buildings.Up to 5%of appropriation to be used •M.S.168.335,subd.3:Predesign submittal.Predesign packages must be
on Solar energy system-any new building that receiving bond funds,includes submitted to the Dept.of Administration for approval.Statute exempts certain
additions and major interior configuration or energy system. projects from this requirement,
•M.S.168.325:Apply Sustainable Guidelines(B3-MSBG)for new buildings&major
renovations(http://www.b3mn.org/guidelines/index.html) •M.S.168.335,subd.4:Energy Conservation Standards.Projects must comply
•M.S.2168 241 Sustainable Building SS 2030 requirements with standards in M.S.216C.19 to 216C.20 and
htto://www.doli.state.mn.us/CCW/Codes.asp
•Contact/support: http://w.envb3mn.erelauideiines/index.html
•M.S.168.326:Heating and Cooling Systems.Written plan w/predeslgn to consider •M.S.168.335,subd.3c:MINNCORR.Consider the use of MINNCOR products in
providing Geothermal&Solar Energy Heating&Cooling Systems on new or specifications.
replacement HVAC systems
•M.S.177.42-44:Prevailing Wage.Contractor must pay prevailing wages and hours
•M.S.168.335,subd.1:Notification to Legislature.Notification to select House& of labor.
Senate members prior to final plans.Legislative response is needed prior to
preparing final construction documents.
Statutory Requirements for State-Funded Projects(continued) yy\ MAHACEMrHT
■i•■�ANO f,t1tT
•M.S.16A.695:State Bond Financed Property Requirements.Various
requirements related to leases and management contracts,sale of property,
program funding,match requirements,ground leases,and grant agreements.
•M.S.16C.285:Responsible Contractor.Minimum requirements for contractors in
order to receive contracts for projects.
•M.S.16A.502:Nonstate Commitments.If an appropriation is less than the total
project cost,a sufficient contribution/match from nonstate sources is required.
•M.S.16A.86:State Share of Local Projects.State appropriation cannot exceed Where Can I Find a List of Bonding Resources?
half the total project cost.Certain types of jurisdictions and projects are exempt.
•Capital Investment bills:Requirement to use U.S.-made steel(only if included in
enacted legislation)
Capital Budget Preparation Bonding Bill Implementation
•Instructions,Policies,and Checklists
•Instructions and templates https://mn.gov/mmb/budget/budget•instructions/ •Capital grants manual for local governments
•Capital Budget System •Capital grant agreements,Instructions,and checklists
•Authorisation •Financial policies and procedures for capital projects
•Statewide Administrative Portal(system log In) •Legal Information
•System manual https://mn.gov/mmb/assets/2015-local-manual_tcm1059-125303.pdf •MN Constitution.Article Xl.section 5(bonding authority for public works)
•M.S.16A.695(GO bonding law)
•Fourth Amended Commissioner's Order(GO bonding Implementation)
•Bond counsel opinions
1711 MANAGEMENT
AND BUDGET
Questions?
Chatfield Center for the Arts
Process,Requests,Capital Budget System
Its Connor I Capital Budget Coordinator The Bonding Quest
eli2obethtonnorestate.nm.us
651201-a041
...................................
Grant Agreements.Bond Sales.Legal Information ,- ,
Jennifer Hassemer I Assistant Commissioner for Debt Management a
JenniJechassemer#srote.mn.us
651-201.8079
Chatfield's Challenge Step 1 : Identify the Project
How to deal with an old school complex that was to be . Assembled a citizen task force and hired an architect to facilitate
vacated by the school district discussions to develop thoughts relative to re-use of the property.
1916 School Buildings Met with key business and civic groups to test the conclusions of the
task force and further develop thoughts.
1936 Auditorium(The New Deal) Concluded that:
The City's history of valuing theatre,music,and fine arts should be basis of
1954 Classroom Building future use,
The property should stay a public asset
The 900 seat auditorium should host regional events
Prominently located on Main Street,on edge of downtown • An art center,In that location,could be a strong economic driver
•This project Is larger than what this community can afford and will benefit a
Had been in public use since 1865 broad geographic area.
Developing the Project The State Bonding Process
. A small steering committee was developed to flesh out the details needed to . MMB Application
re-purpose the property.
. Legislation
Architects were retained to assist with visioning and cost estimating.
• Develop Improvement plans,with drawings.
.Joint meetings of the City Council,School Board,and EDA were held,which
resulted in: Develop a general operating plan,which demonstrates the need for the project and the
• School District granting the property ability to sustain the protect.
The EDA taking ownership of the property • Develop a narratWe,along with hand-outs,that clearly demonstrates how the project will
•The City committing to maintaining the property benefit the region/state:
• A common bond between these governmental bodies • ono Page Summary
• Drawings
. A 501c3 non-profit corporation was developed to: • Budgets
Seek grants and donations, • Job Creation Report
= Produce events,and • Economic Impact Analysis
Begin operations.
The State Bonding Process The State Bonding Process
r Meet personally with local legislators to secure their support and
commitment to author legislation.
Retain a lobbyist to ensure understanding of how the process works,and > Sell your project based on its own merits-do not undermine any
gain contacts. other projects.
r Meet personally with every member of both the House&Senate Cap.Inv. , Bepersistent consistent Committee. ever-present
non-partisan accurate
r Meet personally with the staff of the Committee Chair and with
Committee Administrator.
r Don't worry about what you cannot control.
> Meet personally with Governor's staff.
._.— �s
Thank you for joining this webinar
For a recording of this webinar go to:
www.imc.org/bordingwebinarl 7
AMMANAGEMENT B D
N D U GET
Memo
Date: May 3,2017
To: Officials of Local Governments and Political Subdivisions
From: Myron Frans,Commissioner
RE: 2018 Capital Budget Instructions
I am pleased to present the 2018 capital budget instructions.Your preliminary requests are due to
Minnesota Management and Budget through the Capital Budget System(CBS)by June 16.Governor Dayton's
capital budget will continue to focus resources on the most critical projects and strategic investments across
the state,particularly projects that:
• Address life and safety issues
• Preserve the existing infrastructure and repair existing facilities before starting new projects
• Minimize construction tails and operating costs
Key dates
• June 16,2017--Complete preliminary requests are due to Minnesota Management and Budget through
the Capital Budget System(CBS).
• July 17,2017—MMB submits all local government requests to the Legislature(required by law).
• Oct.20,2017—Final bonding project requests are due in CBS for consideration by the Governor.
• Jan.15,2018—Governor Dayton presents the capital budget to the Legislature.
How to submit your 2018 capital budget
• Access and review the capital budget instructions on MMB's Capital Budget website.Here you will find
frequently asked questions(FAQs)on the capital budget timeline,process,and policies,as well as an
instruction document for entering requests into the Capital Budget System(CBS).These instructions
include the inflation schedule for the 2018 capital budget,information about allowable uses of general
obligation bond proceeds,and guidance on capital grants and use agreements.
• Get access to the Capital Budget System if you don't have it(see"System Access"section of the CBS
webpage).
• View CBS training materials(see"System Training Materials"section of the CBS webpage).
• Submit your requests in CBS by June 16.
2018 Capital Budget Instructions 1
Reminders
• Do not use the capital budget request process for requests for assistance that could be funded through a
state agency financial assistance program.If your request could be funded by an existing state grant
program(such as local bridge or road repair, infrastructure redevelopment,flood mitigation,
water/wastewater treatment systems,historic preservation,or trails),you should submit your request
directly to the state agency that administers the relevant grant program.
• Capital projects funded from state general obligation bonds must comply with the Minnesota
Constitution,which limits funding to projects that are publicly owned and provide a public purpose,and
applicable federal tax law.All project requests must come from a political subdivision.Private
individuals,businesses,and nonprofit organizations are not eligible to receive state general obligation
bond financing.
• Applicants should be aware that bond proceeds may only be used for qualified capital expenditures,
such as predesign/design expenses,construction,and acquisition or improvement of specific tangible
long-lived fixed assets.General operating expenses such as services,programs,strategic planning,
master planning,and moving and relocation costs are not bond-eligible expenses.Expenses that are not
bond-eligible can be submitted as part of your request,but if you desire state monies to pay for those
expenses,you will need to request cash appropriations from the general fund or other state fund.
• By law,state funding for local projects is limited to no more than 50%of total capital project costs.
Projects that are considered for state funding should come with substantial financial commitments from
local government. Because competition for limited state resources will be very strong,MMB encourages
local governments to be selective in their requests and propose only the most important project(s)with
clear regional or statewide significance.
• Given the uncertainty around a possible bonding bill during the 2017 legislative session,local units of
government may want to use new functionality in the CBS that allows project narratives to be copied
over from 2016 into 2018 requests.As with all 2018 requests,project costs must be in July 2017 dollars.
If a project from 2016 will be copied over into 2018,you may update project costs by:
1. Going back to the 2016 project costs before inflation is included,which are in July 2015 dollars,
and
2. Adding 4%to those project costs,which brings amounts to July 2017 dollars.
Questions?
If you have questions about the capital budget process,CBS,or requirements and due dates,please contact
MMB's capital budget coordinator,Liz Connor(Elizabeth.Connor@state.mn.us or 651-201-8041).
Governor Dayton and MMB appreciate your dedication in preparing timely and thoughtful requests.We look
forward to discussing your projects.
2018 Capital Budget Instructions 2
Table of Contents
Governor's 2018 Local Government Capital Budget Recommendations
S In Thousands
2018 2020 2022
Request Request Request Total Request 2018
Page Entity Project Title Priority Amount Amount Amount Amount Gov Rec
1 Albert Lea,City of Project Summary 6,897 16,000 0 21,897 0
2 Blazing Star Landing 1 4,000 16,000 0 20,000 0
7 Blazing Star Trail 2 1,897 0 0 1,897 0
11 Alexandria,City of Project Summary 4,400 0 0 4,400 0
12 Runestone Community Center Expansion 1 4,400 0 0 4,400 0
17 Anoka County Project Summary 22,547 71,792 82,910 177,249 0
18 Greater MN Gateway 1 22,547 71,792 82,910 177,249 0
23 Apple Valley,City of Project Summary 2,350 0 0 2,350 0
Red Line 147th Street Station Skyway
24 Project 1 2,350 0 0 2,350 0
Arrowhead Regional
29 Corrections Project Summary 2,967 0 0 2,967 0
NERCC Vocational Programming
30 Improvements 1 2,967 0 0 2,967 0
Association of Metro
34 Municipalities Project Summary 9,600 0 0 9,500 0
35 Inflow-Nitration Assistance 1 9,500 0 0 9,500 0
39 Aurora,City of Project Summary 8,600. 0 0 8,600 0
40 East Mesabi Joint Water System 1 8,600 0 0 8,600 0
46 Austin,City of Project Summary 4,500 0 0 4,500 0
Ramsey Scientific and Natural Area Site
46 Improvements 1 4,000 0 0 4,000 0
4th Avenue RiverviewlState Water Trail
51 Enhancement 2 500 0 0 500 0
65 Bloomington,City of Project Summary 86,476 0 0 86,476 0
56 1-35W11-494 Phase I interchange 1 67,600 0 0 67,600 0
1-494 Eastbound between France Ave and I-
60 35W 2 16,125 0 0 16,125 0
1-494 Eastbound Between East Bush Lake
64 Rd and TH-100 3 2,750 0 0 2,750 0
68 Brainerd,City of Project Summary 13,175 0 0 13,176 0
69 Three Bridges Trail 1 12,000 0 0 12,000 0
74 Cuyuna Lakes State Trail 2 1,175 0 0 1,175 0
79 Brooklyn Park,City of Project Summary 39,458 0 0 39,458 0
80 Highway 1691101st Ave interchange 1 21,458 0 0 21,458 0
Second Harvest Headland Headquarters and
85 Distribution Center 2 18,000 0 0 18,000 0
91 Carver County Project Summary 6,576 0 0 5,675 0
92 Lake Waconla Regional Park 1 5,575 0 0 5,575 0
98 Chanhassen,City of Project Summary 1,000 6,000 2,000 9,000 0
State Hwy 101 Reconstruction from Pioneer
99 Trail to Flying Cloud Drive 1 1,000 6,000 2,000 9,000 0
Chatfield Economic
104 Development Authority Project Summary 7,985 0 0 7,985 0
105 Chatfield Center for the Arts Phase II 1 7,985 0 0 7,985 0
110 Cohasset,City of Project Summary 1,000 0 0 1,000 0
111 Tioga Recreation Area 1 1,000 0 0 1,000 0
119 Cold Spring,City of Project Summary 4,660 0 0 4,660 0
120 2018 Water infrastructure Improvements 1 4,660 0 0 4,860 0
125 Cottage Grove,City of Project Summary 9,770 0 0 9,770 0
128 HERO Center 1 9,770 0 0 9,770 0
133 Crane Lake Township Project Summary 2,600 0 0 2,500 0
134 Voyageurs National Park Visitor Center 1 2,600 0 0 2,500 0
138 Dakota County Project Summary 11,474 0 0 11,474 0
139 METRO Orange Line Extension 1 1,050 0 0 1,050 0
143 Regional Pubic Safety Facility 1 6,600 0 0 6,600 0
Minnesota River Regional Trail,Fort Snelling
147 Segment 2 3,000 0 0 3,000 0
151 Big Rivers Regional Trail rraithead 3 824 0 0 824 0
155 Deer River,City of Project Summary 3,500 0 0 3,600 0
156 Sewer end Water System Improvements 1 3,500 0 0 3,500 0
160 Duluth,City of Project Summary 13,096 0 0 13,096 0
Duluth Energy Systems-Superior Street
steam to hot water conversion project-
161 Phase 11 1 7,000 0 0 7,000 0
166 Duluth Harbor Sea Wall Rehabiitation 1 6,096 0 0 8,096 0
State of Minnesota Final Capital Budget Requests
January 2018
$In Thousands
2018 2020 2022
Request Request Request Total Request 2018
Page Entity Project Title Priority -Amount Amount Amount Amount Gov Roc
171 Ely,City of Project Summary 2,305 1,500 0 3,805 0
17th Avenue East!Vermilion Community
172 College)Business Park infrastructure 1 1,005 0 0 1,005 0
West End Recreation Traitiead
Development!Community Hospital Access
177 knprovements 2 1,300 1,500 0 2,800 0
182 Foxhome,City of Project Summary 3,200 0 0 3,200 0
Foxhome Wastewater System improvements
183 and Regional Treatment Consolidation 1 3,200 0 0 3,200 0
187 Grand Marais,City of Project Summary 2,327 0 0 2,327 0
188 Parkside Pubic Water Access Project 1 2,327 0 0 2,327 0
193 Grand Rapids,City of Project Summary 8,000 0 0 8,000 0
194 IRA Civic Center ExpansioniRenovation 1 _ 8,000 0 0 8,000 0
199 Hastings,City of Project Summary 1,100 590 800 2,490 0
Pubic Square Courthouse and Police Station
200 Renovation 1 1,100 590 800 2,490 0
205 Hennepin County Project Summary 41,240 0 0 41,240 0
206 Regional Medical Examiners Facility 1 26,240 0 0 26,240 0
210 ArtSpace Hennepin Gender for the Arts 2 2,000 0 0 2,000 0
215 Cedar Cultural Center 3 3,000 0 0 3,000 0
219 Avivo(formerly Resource,Inc.) 4 10,000 0 0 10,000 0
224 Hibbing,City of Project Summary 10,000 0 0 10,000 0
225 Range Regional Health and Wetness Center 1 _ 10,000 0 0 10,000 0
229 Itasca County Project Summary 513 0 0 513 0
230 fiasco CountyiKAXE Transmission Plant 1 513 0' 0 513 0
235 Jackson,City of Project Summary 516 0 0 516 0
236 South Highway Utility Reconstruction Project 1 516 0 0 516 0
240 Kandiyohi County Project Summary 3,900 0 0 3,900 0
241 CSAR 55 Highway-rail Grade Separation 1 3,900 0 0 3,900 0
245 Koochlching County Project Summary 4,400 0 0 4,400 0
246 Namakan Basin Sanitary Sewer Initiative 1 2,400 0 0 2,400 0
250 Grand Mound 2 2,000 0 0 2,000 0
255 La Crescent,City of Project Summary 2,000 0 0 2,000 0
256 Wagon Wheel Trail Project 1 2,000 0 0 2,000 0
261 Lake Crystal,City of Project Summary 185 0 0 185 0
282 Recreation Center Roofing and Pool Deck 1 185 0 0 185 0
266 Mahnomen County Project Summary 28,785 0 0 28,785 0
Mahnomen County Joint Public Safety
267 Facility 1 28,785 0 0 28,785 0
271 Mahnomen,City of Project Summary 5,519 0 0 5,519 0
272 2018 Water and Sewer Infrastructure Project 1 5,519 0 0 5,519 0
278 Mankato,City of Project Summary6,875 0 0 8,875 0
279 Water Quality Mitigation 1 6,875 0 0 6,875 0
283 Maple Grove,City of Project Summary 4,000 0 0 4,000 0
-
284 Maple Grove North Metro Range Expansion 1 4,000 0 0 4,000 0
288 Medford,City of Project Summary 2,090 0 0 2,090 0
289 City of Medford Municipal Building 1 2,090 0 0 2,090 0
294 Mendota Heights,City of Project Summary 1,481 0 0 1,481 0
295 MnDOT Legacy Frontage Roads 1 1,481 0 0 1,481 0
Minneapolis Park and
299 Recreation Board Project Summary 20,000 0 0 20,000 0
Mississippi River Habitat Restoration and
300 Public Water Access 1 12,000 0 0 12,000 0
26th Avenue North:Creating Connections in
305 North Minneapolis 2 3,000 0 0 3,000 0
309 Water Works Park 3 5,000 0 0 5,000 0
314 Minneapolis,City of Project Summary 37,000 0 0 37,000 0
315 Upper Harbor Terminal Redevelopment 1 14,000 0 0 14,000 0
Emergency Operations Training Facility
320 (EOTF)Enhancement 2 2,500 0 0 2,500 0
326 Central City Storm Tunnel 3 19,000 0 0 19,000 0
330 Upper St.Anthony Lock Redevelopment 4 1,500 0 0 1,500 0
State of Minnesota Final Capital Budget Requests
January 2018
$In Thousands
2018 2020 2022
Request Request Request Total Request 2018
Page Entity Project Title Priority Amount Amount; Amount Amount Gov Rec
Minnesota Valley Regional
336 Rail Authority Project Summary 25,000 30,000 29,000 84,000 0
337 Rall Rehabilitation and Bridge Replacement 1 25,000 30,000 29,000 84,000 0
343 Montevideo,City of Project Summary 8,600 0 0 8,600 0
344 Montevideo Regional Veterans Home 1 8,600 0 0 8,600 0
352 Moorhead,City of Project Summary 36,927 0 0 36,927 0
353 11th St Railroad Grade Separation 1 36,927 0 0 36,927 0
369 Moose Lake,City of Project Summary 600 0 0 600 0
360 Riverside Center Expansion 1 600 0 0 800 0
365 Olmsted County Project Summary 10,000 0 0 10,000 0
366 Graham Park Redevelopment 1 10,000 0 0 10,000 0
371 Oronoco,City of Project Summary 18,639 0 0 18,639 0
Oronoco Wastewater Cofecllon and
372 Treatment Facilities 1 18,639 0 0 18,639 0
380 Orr,City of Project Summary 1,000 0 0 1,000 0
381 Voyageur Country ATV Club Trail 1 1,000 0 0 1,000 0
385 Otter Tall County Project Summary 1,977 4,219 0 6,196 0
386 Perham to Pelican Rapids Recreational Trail 1 1,977 4,219 0 6,196 0
390 Plymouth,City of Project Summary 12,495 0 0 12,495 0
391 Rockford Road Bridge improvement Project 1 10,720 0 0 10,720 0
396 Plymouth Rail Crossing Improvements 2 475 0 0 475 0
400 Plymouth ice Center Renovations 3 1,300 0 0 1.300 0
406 Polk County Project Summary 3,000 0 0 3,000 0
407 North Country Food Bank 1 3,000 0 0 3,000 0
413 Proctor,City of Project Summary 1,600 0 0 1,500 0
414 Public Works Facility 1 1,500 0 0 1,500 0
418 Ramsey County Project Summary 2,476 0 0 2,478 0
419 Battle Creek Winter Recreation 1 2,126 0 0 2,126 0
Landmark Center Public Restroom
423 Renovation 2 350 0 0 350 0
Ramsey County Regional
428 Rail Authority Project Summary 6,000 0 0 8,000 0
429 Riverview Corridor 1 2,000 0 0 2,000 0
433 Rush Line Corridor 2 2,000 0 0 2,000 0
437 Union PacifICjBNSF Grade Separation 3 1,000 0 0 1,000 0
Twin Cities Milwaukee Chicago Passenger
442 Rail Study 4 1,000 0 0 1,000 0
Red Rock Rural Water
446 System Project Summary 5,670 0 0 5,570 0
447 Lakes Area Expansion Project 1 5,570 0 0 5,570 0
452 Red Wing,City of Project Summary 18,108 0 0 18,108 0
Mississippi Biufflands State Trail-Red Wing
453 Riverfront 1 9,490 0 0 9,490 0
Goodhue County Historical Society Museum
459 Preservation and Renewal 2 616 0 0 816 0
Old West Main Street-Upper Harbor
463 infrastructure Renewal and Redevelopment 3 8,000 0 0 8,000 0
468 Redwood Falls,City of Project Summary 10,214 0 0 10,214 0
Lake Redwood Reclamation and
469 Enhancement Project 1 10,100 0 0 10,100 0
Redwood Fats Municipal Airport 7-Bay
475 Hangar Project 2 114 0 0 114 0
480 Rice Lake,City of Project Summary 357 0 0 357 0
481 East Calvary Water Main Replacement 1 357 0 0 357 0
485 Rochester,City of Project Summary 6,000 0 0 8,000 0
Rochester Public Transit Bus Garage
486 Storage Expansion 1 5,000 0 0 5,000 0
490 Rockville,City of Project Summary 1,130 0 0 1,130 0
491 Rocori Trail Phase 3 1 1,130 0 0 1,130 0
498 Rogers,City of Project Summary 2,401 0 0 2,401 0
497 Rogers 1-94 Pedestrian Overpass 1 2,401 0 0 2,401 0
602 Scandia,City of Project Summary 114 272 0 388 0
Gateway Trail Design-Urban Connection
503 Predesign and Design for Trail Link 1 114 272 0 386 0
608 Shakopee,City of Project Summary 3,400 0 0 3,400 0
' 509 Fire Station#3 1 3,400 0 O 3,400 0
State of Minnesota Final Capital Budget Requests
January 2018
$in Thousands
2018 2020 2022
Request Request Request Total Request 2018
Page Entity Project Title Priority_ Amount Amount Amount Amount Gov Roc
614 Silver Bay,City of Project Summary 1,765 0 0 1,765 0
515 Silver Bay Black Beach Campground 1 1,765 0 0 1,765 0
521 Silver Creek,Town of Project Summary 9,040 0 0 9,040 0
Stewart River Subordinate Service District-
Wastewater Collection and Treatment
522 System 1 9,040 0 0 9,040 0
526 South St.Paul,City of Project Summary 19,221 0 0 19,221 0
527 Library and Learning Center 1 6,000 0 0 6,000 0
Concord Street-Wentworth Avenue to
531 Annapolis Street East 2 12,440 0 0 12,440 0
535 Seidrs Lake Storm Water Improvements 3 781 0 0 781 0
539 St.Joseph,City of Project Summary 3,800 500 0 4,300 0
540 County Road 75 Pedestrian Crossing 1 1,500 0 0 1,500 0
548 Jacob Wetterling Recreation Center 2 2,000 500 0 2,500 0
552 ' East Park 3 300 0 0 300 0
St.Louis&Lake Counties
667 RRA Project Summary 2,276 0 0 2,278 0
558 Mesabi Trail Extension 1 2,276 0 0 2,276 0
563 St.Louis County Project Summary 5,750 0 0 5,750 0
564 St.Louis County Heritage and Arts Center 1 6,750 0 0 5,750 0
568 St.Paul,City of Project Summary 108,004 0 0 108,004 0
569 RiverCentre Ramp 1 58,032 0 0 58,032 0
575 Keiloggl3rd Street Bridge 2 46,072. 0 0 46,072 0
581 East Side Freedom Library 1,200 0 0 1,200 0
587 Humanities Center 2,700 0 0 2,700 0
691 Stillwater,City of Project Summary 2,109 0 0 2,109 0
592 St.Croix Riverbank Restoration Project 1 2,109 0 0 2,109 0
596 Thief River Falls,City of Project Summary 418 0 0 418 0
Noper Property Phase Ill-Public
597 infrastructure improvements 1 418 0 0 418 0
602 Two Harbors,City of Project Summary 3,182 0 0 3,182 0
603 Phase 1 Waterfront Redevelopment Plan 1 3,182 0 0 3,182 0
607 Virginia,City of Project Summary 10,900 2,000 2,000 14,900 0
608 Highway 53 Utility Relocation 1 5,400 0 0 5,400 0
Regional Fire-Based Emergency Medical
612 Services and Public Safety Facility 2 2,000 2,000 2,000 6,000 0
Comprehensive Multi-Year Multi-Modal
817 Transportation Program 3 3,500 0 0 3,500 0
621 Wabasha,City of Project Summary 10,190 0 0 10,190 10,190
622 Wabasha Rivertown Resurgence 1 10,190 0 0 10,190 10,190
827 Waite Park,City of Project Summary 6,000 0 0 6,000 0
828 Waite Park Amphitheater Park Project 1 6,000 0 0 5,000 0
636 Warren,City of Project Summary 435 0 0 436 0
837 Community Recreation Center 1 435 0 0 435 0
Warroad Public School
641 District Project Summary 203 0 0 203 0
642 NW Angle Addition 1 203 0 0 203 0
646 Washington County Project Summary 7,000 0 0 7,000 0
Trunk Highway 36ICSAH 15(Manning
647 Avenue)Interchange Project 1 7,000 0 0 7,000 0
662 West St.Paul,City of Project Summary 1,525 2,312 0 3,887 0
653 III&Sewer Lift Station 1 and Forcemain 1 1,125 0 0 1,125 0
657 Ili&Sewer Lift Stations and Forcemains 2 400 2,312 0 2,712 0
Western Lake Superior
681 Sanitary Dist Project Summary 5,280 0 0 6,260 0
WLSSD Combined Heat and Power Energy
662 System:Engine Generators 1 5,280 0 0 5,280 0
868 Windom,City of Project Summary 6,800 0 0 6,800 0
669 Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade 1 6,800 0 0 6,800 0
674 Winnebago,City of Project Summary 6,705 0 0 6,705 0
Winnebago Northwest Area Utility
675 improvements 1 6,705 0 0 6,705 0
679 Yellow Medicine County Project Summary 709 0 0 709 0
680 Clarkfleld School 1 709 0 0 709 0
830,883 135,186 116,710 1,082,678 10,190
State of Minnesota Final Capital Budget Requests
January 2018
41N,,x City of Farmington
k: ��,p 430 Third Street
Farmington, Minnesota
651.280.6800 -Fax 651.280.6899
-.Am:046 www.ci.farmington.mn.us
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator
FROM: David McKnight, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Fire Department Paid Administrative Events
DATE: February 11, 2019
INTRODUCTION
The city compensates our on-call fire fighters for work they perform at a wide variety of calls, training and
community events. The departmental policy that establishes events that are paid and those that are not is
attached for your review.
DISCUSSION
The fire department operates on an almost entirely paid on-call status with our staff members. The fire
fighters are paid an hourly wage for events that quality under the department policy to be compensated.
Over the past few years I have asked the former and current fire chief to look at this issue, document via
department policy the departmental approach and discuss with the assistant chiefs. The attached department
policy is the result of this work.
I am bringing this issue forward to you as an informational item so you are aware of what work hours are
compensated and which are considered volunteer hours.
The city receives thousands of hours of work each year from our fire fighters. I know the city council is
very appreciative of this work and the commitment to our community.
BUDGET IMPACT
We do our best to estimate the amount of payroll necessary each year in the fire department. We are
typically a year behind with significant adjustments due to a variety of reasons.
ACTION REQUESTED
Review the department policy on paid events and ask any questions you may have. I bring this item forward
as an information item for the city council.
ATTACHMENTS:
Type Description
0 Cover Memo Fire Department Policy
,�y0(ON FIRg.RFSCG
45,
D.A.G. #2
;,; PAID EVENTS
MINNESOTA
ADMINISTRATIVE
PURPOSE
To give direction on events that are paid departments events,throughout the year there are many
events that firefighters volunteer their time to the community. This guideline outlines these paid vs.
volunteer events.
POLICY
The following events will be paid events and shall follow policy and procedures manual section 6.2.
Members shall receive percentage credit for call for their station
• Fire Officer I&II
• Fire Instructor I &II
• Public Life Safety Educator I&II
• ICS 300&400
• Fire Inspector I &II
• Officer Meetings
• Open House
• National Night Out
• Empire Days
• Public Education Events
• EMS Stand-By
• Dakota County Fair Contracted Events
• New Member Testing, Orientation and Open Houses
• Safety Camps
• Daycare visits
• Chiefs Conference
• Fire Marshal Conference
• Arson Conference
• FDIC
• Fire Officers School
• MBFTE Leadership Training
• Approved Fire Schools
• Truck Washing, Waxing and Equipment Maintenance
• Special Work Details
• Supplemental Department Trainings
• Fire Academy Instructors
* Members must receive prior approval to attend events.
Effective Date: 1
Revision Date: Approved by: J. Elvestad
15'44%G ON FIRER ,
4,4 D.A.G. #2
EST. PAID EVENTS
11173
MINNESOTA
ADMINISTRATIVE
The following events are department sponsored but are not compensated,members shall receive
percentage credit for the call which they missed while at these events.
• Firefighter I
• Firefighter II
• Haz-Mat Ops
• EMR or EMT
• Apparatus Operator
• Park and Pond clean up
• Parades
• Special Birthday Parties
• Blood Drive
• Relay for life
• Stair climb
• Polar Plunge
• Turkey Bingo
Effective Date: 2
Revision Date: Approved by:J.Elvestad