The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12.15.03 Council Packet City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promisingfuture. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 15,2003 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (12/1/03 Regular) (12/3/03 Special) b) Appointment Recommendation - Police c) Adopt Resolution - Approve 2004 Tax Levy and Budget - Finance d) Heritage Preservation Commission 2003 Annual Report - Administration e) Adopt Resolution - 2004 Non-Bargaining COLA Agreement - Human Resources f) Adopt Resolution - Approve Clerical, Technical, Professional Contract - Human Resources g) Adopt Resolution - Approve Maintenance Contract - Human Resources h) Adopt Resolution - Approve LELS Contract - Human Resources i) Approve Agreement County Hauler Financial Incentive PaYment and State Processing PaYment - Parks and Recreation j) Adopt Resolution - Approve Heritage Preservation Commission Consultant Contract - Administration k) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Ordinance - Approving 2004 Fee Schedule - Administration 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Sale of $2,205,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds Series 2003B and $605,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds Series 2003C - Finance (Supplemental) b) Seed/Genstar AUAR Responses to Comments - Community Development Action Taken Approved Approved R90-03; R91.0J Information Received R92.0J R9J-OJ R94-0J R95.0J Approved R96-0J Approved Ord 003.504 R97.0J,' R98-0J Accepted 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Approve Meadowview Park Master Plan - Parks and Recreation b) Approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Trail Master Plan - Parks and Recreation c) City Administrator Search Selection 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN City ofFannington 325 Oak Street Fannington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation. the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 15,2003 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) I. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (12/1/03 Regular) (12/3/03 Special) b) Appointment Recommendation - Police c) Adopt Resolution - Approve 2004 Tax Levy and Budget - Finance d) Heritage Preservation Commission 2003 Annual Report - Administration e) Adopt Resolution - 2004 Non-Bargaining COLA Agreement - Human Resources f) Adopt Resolution - Approve Clerical, Technical, Professional Contract - Human Resources g) Adopt Resolution - Approve Maintenance Contract - Human Resources h) Adopt Resolution - Approve LELS Contract - Human Resources i) Approve Agreement County Hauler Financial Incentive PaYment and State Processing PaYment - Parks and Recreation j) Adopt Resolution - Approve Heritage Preservation Commission Consultant Contract - Administration k) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Ordinance - Approving 2004 Fee Schedule - Administration . AWARDOFCONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Sale of $2,205,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds Series 2003B and $605,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds Series 2003C - Finance (Supplemental) b) Seed/Genstar AUAR Responses to Comments - Community Development Action Taken Pages 1-14 Page 15 Pages 16..19 Pages 20-23 Pages 24-27 Pages 28-29 Pages 30-31 Pages 32-33 Pages 34-45 Pa~es 46-49 Page 50 Pages 51-72 Page 73 Pages 74-124 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Approve Meadowview Park Master Plan - Parks and Recreation b) Approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Trail Master Plan - Parks and Recreation c) City Administrator Search Selection 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN 7~ COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR December 1, 2003 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7 :00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Audience: Ristow, Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg Cordes Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Dan Siebenaler, Interim City AdministratorlPolice Chief; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant David McKnight, Randy Oswald 4. APPROVE AGENDA Due to the absence of Councilmember Cordes item lOa) Approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Trail Master Plan and item Ila) Approve Meadowview Park Master Plan were deleted from this agenda. Mayor Ristow also wanted to do more research on the Issue. An additional page to item 7h) Approve bills was added as a supplemental item. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Mr. Charlie Weber - Rambling River Center - Parks and Recreation Rambling River Center Coordinator Missie Kohlbeck recognized Mr. Charlie Weber for his work on the remodeling project ofthe Rambling River Center. Mr. Weber took charge of the project, did research, prepared a floor plan, called suppliers and obtained materials. He worked on weekends and at home. He spent approximately 640 hours on the project over 4 months with no pay. Park and Recreation staff assisted with painting and hauling debris, but Mr. Weber did all the sheetrocking, taping, mudding, etc. He did a beautiful job. He was presented with a certificate of appreciation and a gift certificate. Mayor Ristow added it is people like Mr. Weber that make up such a good community. His work is very much appreciated. Council Minutes (Regular) December 1,2003 Page 2 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (11/17/03 Regular) (11/12/03 and 11/13/03 Special) b) Received Information Park and Recreation Commission Minutes c) Approved Park Name - Parks and Recreation d) Approved Traffic Control- Various Locations - Engineering e) Approved Amendment ALF Joint Powers Agreement - Human Resources f) Adopted RESOLUTION R88-03 Supporting DARTS Section 5310 Grant- Parks and Recreation g) Adopted RESOLUTION R89-03 Authorizing Grant Application North American Wetland Conservation Act - Engineering h) Approved Bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Truth in Taxation Hearing - Finance The city is required to have this hearing every year to discuss what the city's plans are for the levy and the budget for the following year. The 2004 Budget and Levy will be on the December 15, 2003 Council agenda for approval. Council approved the preliminary levy on September 2. 2003. There have not been any changes to the levy or the budget since that time. The proposed levy is $4.6 million, $408.736 or 9.6% over the 2003 levy of$4.2 million. This proposed levy is at the state imposed levy limit for 2004, which is the actual 2003 levy plus 60% of lost LGA. General fund revenues are estimated at $6,157,000 with 58% of that general fund revenue coming from property taxes. Estimated revenues do not include local governmental aid, or state budgetary shortfalls. The state eliminated local governmental aid in the 2003 legislature. The city saw a cut in aid in 2003 and a total elimination in 2004 of9.6% of annual revenue or $593,986. The city has counted on this money over the years to provide general services. The city made up the shortfall by increasing property taxes in an amount equal to 60% of lost Local Government Aid. General fund revenues for 2004 are only 1.5% greater than the 2003 adopted budget. A 6.7% increase in general fund operating expenditures is proposed. This is due to normal operational cost increases. The 6.7% increase is significantly less than projected in the annual financial performa. All capital equipment for 2004 will be funded by certificates of indebtedness outside of the general fund. Staff reductions were not required to meet budgetary guidelines. however additions to staff are minimal. The additions to staff amount to a division reorganization in the police department, a police officer at mid-year, and two interns in the Community Development area, which are part-time positions and do not receive benefits but will help to offset the large load. Enterprise funds will Council Minutes (Regular) December I, 2003 Page 3 pick up an additional staff person in the maintenance area for water and sewer. The city's tax base increased by 23%. Market value of existing homes increased and we added enough new homes so that our total market value increase was 23%. Population increased by another 10%. Given this growth, the status quo staffing which is necessary under the budget constraints will leave the city short several positions compared to other cities our size. By this time next year, as we are not adding staff, we will be approximately 6 police officers short of what is normally expected of a city of 18,000. We will also be short 3 maintenance works and 2 parks workers. As a result city services will need to be prioritized as never before. Residents will see the results of this in the form of longer complaint response times, more reactive enforcement and less proactive prevention. Problems on Ash Street were discussed at a previous Council meeting such as speed and stop signs. It was requested to place police officers out there for a higher rate of enforcement. Under the budget constraints, because we are not adding staff, we are not going to have those extra officers to put out there to do that kind of enforcement. We can try, but if an emergency occurs, the enforcement drops off. Staffwill be working smarter and harder. Overtime has been reduced in some areas. The residents are used to a particular level of service and employees are very proud of that. This will be done as long as we can, but as time goes, we may run out of options. Looking at revenues for 2003 and 2004 proposed, taxes have increased for 2004 proposed to $3.5 million which goes to the general fund. This is up from $3.188 million in 2003. Intergovernmental revenues in 2003 called for the entire amount of LGA or $876,000. In 2004 this has dropped to $322,000 this is a 63% drop. We made up the difference in the area of permits by budgeting for 440 new houses. The amount of interest has also been increased to $350,000. Transfers In has also been increased. Expenditures overall increased 6.7%. The Transfers Out was the most significant increase which supports the pool and the Rambling River Center. For 2003 adopted additional funding was levied to offset the LGA loss. We hope to break even in 2003 and 2004. If this happens, the fund balance will stay at 39-40%. Property tax statements were shown for an older and newer home in the city comparing 2003 and 2004 taxes. Statements showed an increase in market value, and a decrease in city taxes for the older home and an increase in city taxes for the newer home due to completion of construction in 2004. County, school, and other district taxes went up. The effect is an increase in total taxes. City services are a huge value for the money that is paid. There is police, fire, snow plowing, cleaning streets, crack sealing, etc. Councilmember Soderberg noted the limitations are imposed on the city by the state. With those limitations staff did a great job putting together a balanced budget. Mayor Ristow stated Interim City Administrator Siebenaler asked everyone to come together and no one had to be laid off. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated that was one of two goals set with the budget, that Council Minutes (Regular) December I, 2003 Page 4 no one loses their job. Weare proud ofthe proposed budget and we will do our best to maintain those numbers. We will need Council to help us in that and recognize we may not be able to respond as quickly or efficiently as we have in the past to lower priority issues. Councilmember Soderberg stated he met with State Representative Strachan who said he would not support any changes that did not include growth factors. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated there is a new movement at the legislature that would limit all cities to a growth in the budget equal to growth in tax base and growth in valuation. If that goes through, it will keep us at a 30% deficient police force, a 25% deficient public works department and a 20% deficient parks and recreation department because it does not allow for additional growth outside of valuation or increase in housing. A referendum would be required to increase services the city is required to provide or do without. Councilmember Fitch noted some of this is set by policy as far as response times, and asked if that should be addressed the first part of the year. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler suggested during the annual goal setting, Council discuss what is a reasonable expectation and develop a real strategic planning process as far as what level of service should be provided. Finance Director Roland stated in the long run that will mean Council might also have to decide what is less important and does not have to be staffed as much. It will be important for Council to hear from residents as to what their goals are. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler asked Council to remember when they receive calls from residents to remind them of staff limitations and ask them to be patient. Staff is asking for Council's support and that means speaking up and letting them know what our limitations are. Mayor Ristow stated this has been brought up in the past but the employees always keep moving. The maintenance crews have always done their job. Customer Service responses have not dropped. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. The final budget and levy will be adopted at the December 15,2003 Council meeting. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Trail Master Plan - Parks and Recreation This item was deleted and will be placed on the December 15,2003 Council agenda. b) Approve MAAG Joint Powers Agreement - Police This is for the Mutual Aid Assistance Group. Farmington has participated in this unit since 1976. This is to update the agreement to comply with any new laws. It combines the Dakota County Sheriffs Swat team with other mutual aid groups in Dakota County. A total of nine agencies are involved in the agreement. Council Minutes (Regular) December 1, 2003 Page 5 MOTION by Fitch, second by Soderberg to approve the Mutual Aid Assistance Group 2003 Joint Powers Agreement. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Approve Meadowview Park Master Plan - Parks and Recreation This item was deleted and will be placed on the December 15, 2003 Council agenda. b) Discuss Pre-Council Meeting Work Sessions - Administration MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to table this item to a Council meeting in February. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Fogarty: Thanked Parks and Recreation Director Distad and the members ofthe Park and Recreation Task Force for their work on the Open House. There were approximately 80 people in attendance and 100 surveys were sent out. The consultant is tabulating the surveys. Councilmember Fitch: Thanked the street crew for their work during the first snowfall. He commented there are several stop sign intersections that have been terribly icy. Mayor Ristow added there are also some icy shaded areas that could use some sand. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler: on December 3, 2003 at 6:00 p.m. Reminded Council of the Council Workshop Community Development Director Carroll: He and Interim City Administrator Siebenaler attended a meeting with the Met Council regarding the pending grant application. It is a five step process and we are at step 4. The grant application was to obtain funding for the Spruce Street Commercial area. Staff applied for funding to cover the cost of the bridge across the Vermillion River and to pay for the cost of extending Spruce Street from Denmark into the Spruce Street area. There were 34 applications approved, and Farmington made the first cut of 17. The recommendations from the Livable Communities Advisory Committee to the Met Council have been made and Farmington was one of the ten selected for funding. They recommended Ramsey receive $2.2 million, St. Paul receive $1.2 million, and Farmington receive $955,000. The meeting today was the Community Development Committee of the Met Council. They look at the Advisory Committee's recommendations and decide what to do. They will make a recommendation to the Met Council and the Met Council will make a final decision in late December or early January. The Met Council could choose to eliminate Farmington from consideration and shift the funding to a project that has a higher point rating, or keep Farmington's grant application partially funded and shift money away to fund other projects that did not get Council Minutes (Regular) December I, 2003 Page 6 funded, or they could give us the amount of the grant. Councilmember Soderberg stated Community Development Director Carroll's presentation and the work done by staff played a large part in getting us this far along. He commended staff for a job well done. Mayor Ristow: He received some information regarding the Meadowview Park Master Plan. He contacted Mr. Brian Watson of Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation and distributed this information to Council. Mayor Ristow asked about the Chamber Breakfast meeting. Councilmember Fogarty stated they discussed the Spruce Street area and there were some very good questions. It was good to set some of the misconceptions straight. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated the next one will be December 18 and Councilmembers Soderberg and Cordes will be attending. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to adjourn at 8:05 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, 1". ~ .~ {L,~~,Z>C;~ )"1/7 ~6 tJ ./ ~;../' Cynthia Muller$Executive Assistant 70- COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES December 3, 2003 Mayor Ristow called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Members Present: Ristow, Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg Members Absent: Cordes Also Present: Dan Siebenaler, Interim City AdministratorlPolice Chief; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, City EngineerIPublic Works Director; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief; Jim Atkinson, Assistant City Planner; Tim Gross, Assistant City Engineer; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Interim City Administrator Siebenaler added two items to the agenda, Office Hours for City Hall for December 26, and Pre-Meeting Workshop with Mr. Harry Brull on December 15. MOTION by Fitch, second by Soderberg to approve the agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. New City Hall Council had asked staff to put together costs associated with the various sites. Each option shows the estimated costs ofthe various sites and the acquisition of various businesses. There will be acquisition costs, relocation costs, and demolition costs. Option A is 3rd and Spruce Street, the Blaha site. City Hall would be a two-story new structure. Adjacent space would provide for 49 parking spaces. Staffhas contacted Dakota County about using the library parking lot for overflow farking which would be an additional 56 parking spaces. There are also 43 spaces at the 2n Street parking lot. An option agreement has been provided to Mr. Blaha and he is on the verge of signing it. The acquisition cost is $257,500. There would be no relocation expenses as there are no existing businesses there. The demolition cost would be $34,620. Moving costs are estimated at $14,792. The total cost for the Blaha site would be $306,912. If this option is used, the existing City Hall site becomes available for purchase. The estimated sale value of City Hall is $533,000. Community Development Director Carroll stated this is $92,000 less than anticipated because of the well. There is state legislation that requires the city maintain a 50 foot radius around a well. This could be done through an easement. There are two bathrooms located in Engineering that are within the 50 foot radius and it may be necessary to close them as there is potential contamination within the 50 foot radius. The $92,000 is a partial reduction in the value of the building and the land, and they added $25,000 for an estimated cost of relocating the bathrooms to another location in the building. A separate parcel would have to be carved off for the city to maintain ownership ofthat 50 foot radius. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated this is a conservative estimate of the value of City Hall. It is comprised of 4 lots and does not include the two lots west of the building that are the City Hall parking lot. Staff felt it would be important to maintain the municipal parking area. Other options would be compared against this option. The net total cost would be $226,088, making it the least expensive option. (Councilmember Fogarty arrived at 6: 14 p.m.). Council Workshop December 3, 2003 Page 2 Mayor Ristow noted on the demolition estimate it is stated no street or walk restoration, no hazardous abatement. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated that is a disclaimer for all of the buildings. Mayor Ristow then noted the Blaha building is located in historical downtown and asked if it would need to be run past the HPC. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated the HPC has asked to be advised of the process. As a courtesy that would be done, but the Blaha building has not been identified as having any historical significance. Mayor Ristow stated the building has a lot of heritage and started out as a machinery building which built Farmington. It was International Harvester that was owned by the Fischer brothers. Farmington Printing was the initial Centel office. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated those things would have to be explored before anything could happen. Option B is the same as Option A except it adds on the potential for future expansion at the Feely site. Mr. Feely has stated he is not immediately interested in selling his property and plans on being in business for at least ten years. Option C looks at the existing City Hall site. This describes an expansion of the existing City Hall to the north. This option slightly reduces the parking on the west side and would therefore require additional parking spaces. An expansion to the north would add 40 spaces and would require the acquisition of Farmington Printing and their parking lot and the residential lot. Mayor Ristow asked what it would do to the well as it is within the corridor for the expansion to the west. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated the well site would have to be preserved. We would have to build around it. We would be faced with preserving the well site and the 50 foot radius or abandon the well site and relocate it to a different area of the city. Each option contains roughly the same amount of square footage. The acquisition of Farmington Printing would be two lots and the residential property. The appraised value is not the amount we would be able to purchase it for. For Farmington Printing the appraised value is $350,000. Based on previous discussions that is not an acceptable number to the current owner and she is not anxious to sell. It could be a much larger expense to acquire that property. As far as the residential property, the same family has owned it for a very long time and the same party has always rented it. The owner is not a motivated seller. Relocation costs would be involved for the business and the resident. State laws mandate how you do relocation expenses. Since relocation is a very technical procedure, we would have to contract with a consulting firm to do the relocation services. Relocation for Farmington Printing is estimated at $61,000, for the residential property $9,800, and for relocation services $12,000. Demolition costs for Farmington Printing are estimated at $30,800 and residential property at $7,400. The total net cost would be $517,792. This is $743,880 more than 3rd and Spruce Street. The cost of the building is not included in any of these estimates. Councilmember Fitch stated the difference of building a two-story building versus a single story may be considerably different. Finance Director Roland stated the task force looked at an addition to the existing building, or a new building on the existing site, or a new building at 3rd and Spruce, the cost for renovation and addition, Option C would be $5.492 million, Options E & F were $5.589 million, and 3rd and Spruce Street was $5.589 million. Option D would involve abandoning a portion of 4th Street between City Hall and the businesses to the east. The existing City Hall would expand to the north and east, building out into 4th Street. It would have the existing 36 parking spaces on the west side and the acquisition and demolition of the Motor Parts building would add 51 spaces. The owner of the building has been Council Workshop December 3, 2003 Page 3 contacted and was not opposed to the idea, but wanted time to think about it. There are no major utilities along 4th Street that would have to be relocated. Acquisition cost is $345,000. Four businesses would have to be relocated. The Motor Parts, Chamber of Commerce, the chiropractor, and the dance studio. Regardless of the current use, they are the tenants and are entitled to relocation costs, even if on a month-by-month rental. As the Blaha tenant did, if they move out prior to acquisition there is no cost, but if they are in the building at the time negotiations begin they are entitled to relocation expenses. Mayor Ristow asked why we did not have to do that with Blaha. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated Blaha's tenant was gone before negotiations started. Community Development Director Carroll stated the City Attorney was concerned that if we got into negotiations with them at any time the tenant was there, we would be obligated to pay. Mayor Ristow stated the tenant never left and was told he could stay there until next September. Community Development Director Carroll stated they may be using the space but he had a conversation with the tenant a couple months ago and he said he found space near the intersection ofHwy 50 and 3 that he had moved into. Mayor Ristow stated Castle Rock would not approve it, so the tenant rented space from Mayor Ristow for two months and he is back in the Blaha building until September. Councilmember Fitch stated he has more cars there now than he ever had. This was news to staff as they were told he was out. Staffwill research the situation. Given the case ofthe residential property, the city would be required to pay any difference in rent between the current house and a comparable size rental unit for a period of time. The owners could take that as a cash upfront paYment and use it as a down payment on property of their own. The total net cost is $488,592 or $714,680 in excess of the 3rd and Spruce Street site. Mayor Ristow wanted to offer his thoughts on the present location. It brings back a historical site that has been here 130 years and the heritage is what you want to look at in a city. The city was built on the fire hall, the city hall, and the jail. That means more than relocating to another spot. We have the time capsule and the old fire bell. That would be his major concern of taking City Hall off a landmark that has been here for 130 years and built by our forefathers. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated staff is not making any recommendations. Option E is the most expansive of all options. It would include acquisition of all properties around City Hall to the north and east. There would be an estimated 82 parking spaces over what is available now. Acquisition cost, relocation cost, and demolition cost would be a combination of Options C and D. This is a very expensive option at $994,592. These costs do not include construction, only acquisition, demolition, and relocation. The values are appraised values, not actual values. Option F involves demolition of the existing City Hall and acquiring the properties to the north. This would be a new 2-story City Hall on the existing location, maintaining the 47 parking spaces to the west and 40 spaces to the north. This would also require a relocation of City Hall to an alternate site, and then a second relocation back to the new building. The acquisition, relocation, and demolition costs for the properties to the north would be the same. The net total cost would be $591,193 which includes demolition of City Hall. Option G includes a 2-story City Hall and acquiring the property to the east and abandoning 4th Street between the existing City Hall and the Motor Parts building. The costs for acquisition, demolition and relocation remain the same plus the cost of demolishing City Hall and moving expenses for moving twice. The net total cost is $531,993. Council Workshop December 3, 2003 Page 4 Option H is acquiring all the properties to the north and east, abandoning 4th Street, demolishing City Hall and building a new 2-story structure on the existing site. Costs for acquisition, relocation, demolition and moving for City Hall remain the same. This is the most expensive at $1,067,993. This does preserve the most expansion capability for the future. There is the possibility if there is an unwilling seller, the city would have to look at a condemnation procedure. Staff has presented as many options as possible and this has involved a tremendous amount of staff time. Councilmember Fitch stated our ace in the hole is that we own property and if businesses want to relocate we could assist them in ways that could reduce the cost of acquiring their properties. Regarding future expansion, we have to preserve as much as we can for future expansion. Unless the city stops growing within its borders we are going to have to continue to expand City Hall to provide the necessary services. He would not be in favor ofthe 3rd and Spruce Street site unless the Feely property is acquired right away. He was referring to Option B. Councilmember Fogarty stated she was thinking along the same lines. The cost for acquiring the Feely lot was minimal for parking space compared to buying parking space on the existing site. Councilmember Fitch stated if we decide on that option, we have to be prepared to condemn it if they will not sell it. Mayor Ristow noted on Option B Feely does have a building that holds trucks and asked if that would be included in the relocation. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated that is part of his own business and included in the $13,500. Mayor Ristow asked where that would be relocated. Mr. Feely would want that close by. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated that would have to be negotiated. Councilmember Fogarty asked if we could acquire the property and lease it back to him until it is needed. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated that is always an option. Councilmember Soderberg stated he agreed with Councilmember Fitch that the acquisition of the Feely parcel is important to do right away. As far as expansion, the Met Council has identified that vertical is better than horizontal. While a parking ramp is expensive, it is still an option. In one of the presentations by Wold Architects a parking ramp was included. Councilmember Fitch stated the building would have to be designed to go up. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated the architect talked about building in extra space. Finance Director Roland stated the downtown liquor store is cramped. More floor space could be good and it might increase sales and would help offset the cost of the building. The option of adding 4,000 sq. ft. was presented to the Task Force for a liquor store. When that space is needed, a new liquor store would be built in the downtown area. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated when the Maintenance Facility and Police department were completed 1 Y2 years ago, it was built for a population of27,000 estimated for 2020. Today, estimates are submitted to the Met Council for a population of 27,000 to 2010. Any option for City Hall needs to be kept open for future expansion or build in expansion space into the existing structure. Councilmember Fogarty felt a ramp and a 3-story City Hall should be considered. This would answer the space question. Councilmember Soderberg added with footings substantial enough to go higher. Councilmember Fogarty stated ~arking ramp might be advantageous for downtown. Councilmember Fitch stated the corner of 3 and Spruce could be used for a parking ramp as a connection to the Spruce Street corridor and expand the current City Hall location. Council Workshop December 3, 2003 Page 5 Staff had hoped Council would give staff direction on which site they should be looking at. Once a site is identified, staff would have to prepare an RFP for architectural services and begin the design of the building. That will be a 6-8 month process. At the same time, staff would contract with an acquisition firm and begin condemnation procedures if necessary. If a decision can be made soon staff has looked at one alternate location for the relocation of City Hall services. Staffhas contacted the owners ofthe hospital regarding temporarily relocating City Hall to that location at a very favorable rent. All of these things need to begin, but they cannot begin until a decision is made. Mayor Ristow stated with Option D, adding onto City Hall you would not need to relocate. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated certain parts of the operation might be disrupted at certain times. The whole building would need to be revamped for HV AC and a sprinkler system. Any modification to the hospital would be at the city's expense. The Tllines for connecting computers to various sites would not be available as there are no fiber optic lines running from the school to the hospital. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler asked Council to please make a decision or give staff further direction. Councilmember Soderberg favored 3f and Spruce Street. That is the most fiscally responsible site. Councilmember Fogarty supported Option B. She would very much like to look at a parking ramp and a 3-story City Hall at 3rd and Spruce Street. This would address expansion and parking concerns. Councilmember Fitch stated he had questions on financing and what it will cost taxpayers, each individual household. Finance Director Roland stated it is spread evenly between residential and commercial. Ifit goes to referendum the G.O. Revenue Bond is based on market value and leans more toward residential properties. Councilmember Fitch stated we took a lot of heat for a $60,000-$70,000 expense, and by the time you put in a parking ramp and a 3-story building you are talking $10 - $11 million. The school's recent referendum was turned down. Taxpayers are very aware of how schools and cities are spending their money. He would work with this, but would want substantial public input. Mayor Ristow stated we need to make a decision, but not tonight. Once we have the site, we need to decide how to pay for it. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated there are some steps in between that. We need to figure out the actual cost and preliminary design. Then include acquisitions, look at bonding and financing costs. Mayor Ristow stated if we decide on Options A, C, or D can we get more concrete figures, including the cost of the land on Option A, a cost for the ramp, and a cost for the Motor Parts building. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated we can put together a contract with an appraisal company. All of the landowners have been blind to this until today. The owners have not been contacted as to their own estimate of the value of the buildings and no walkthroughs have been done. Staff could hire a consultant to contact the owners or staff could contact them. The owners have only been informed this is being considered as an option. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler suggested contracting with a consultant to obtain the estimates. Finance Director Roland stated the Task Force had asked staff to contact Farmington Printing to find out her willingness to sell. At that time, she was not a willing seller and her value of the property was significantly different than the appraised value. Mayor Ristow stated Option D does not include Farmington Printing. If future expansion is necessary, that could be reviewed plus the Park and Rec building and the Frontier building. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated at this point, Council is looking at comparing actual acquisition costs for Options Band D. Councilmember Fogarty stated she is not interested in hiring a consultant. It would not change $714,000 to O. That is a huge gap to pay for parking. Existing City Hall options are terribly expensive. Mayor Ristow suggested putting this to a vote on the January 5,2004 Council meeting, either the current location or 3rd and Spruce Street. Council agreed. Council Workshop December 3, 2003 Page 6 Pavement Manaeement During the past two years Engineering staffhas been reviewing the pavement condition and giving it a condition rating. All the streets are given an OCI (Overall Condition Index) from 0 to 100, with 0 being impassible. Category 1 contained streets from 0-35 and were classified as failing pavement, Category 2 was ratings 35-55 and were poor to moderate pavement, Category 3 was 55-95, streets that would need crack sealing, patching or sealcoat, and Category 4 was rated 95 and above. 5% of the streets were in Category 1,4% in Category 2,52% in Category 3, and 39% in Category 4. A typical pavement section will last 30 years. Sewer and water lines should last in excess of 50 years. The life of pavement can be extended 3 times by doing lower cost maintenance over a period of time than doing a major reconstruct once or twice. The average maintenance cost is $4,960/year/mile on streets. Staff presented a reconstruction timeframe estimate showing the amount of streets that are deteriorating. Staff developed a chart to see if there was a way to come up with additional funding that would make maintenance costs easier to handle. The chart showed keeping up with deteriorating streets is much less costly with additional funding. This does not take into consideration special assessments. The $250,000/year would come from the permanent revolving fund. There is also additional money coming back to the city as MSA money from the Pilot Knob project. City Engineer Mann stated the city needs to find funding sources. Staff asked for Council direction to put together a CIF. Staff proposed the CIP process be completed in June of each year. Council agreed with staff's recommendation. Policv on Filline Vacant Council Seats According to the City Attorney, the Council can enact a policy on filling vacant Council seats, but it is not binding on any future Councils. The Attorney recommended the Council enact a policy that says it will abide by state law, which is a matter of accepting applications and making a selection. Staff asked Council for direction on where they want to go with this policy. If Council does nothing, the city reverts to state law and assumes it will be done on a case by case basis. If Council decides it would like staff to develop a policy, staff will prepare a policy and present it for Council action. State law allows for applications, as well as other options, such as offering it to someone with a majority vote. Councilmember Fogarty stated she does not have a problem with applications but sitting as this Council sits, ifthis were to come up again, she would like to see the city's policy state the appointment needs to be a majority vote of Council so it cannot be gridlocked again. If a majority cannot agree she would vote for a Special Election. She stated what happened last year was inappropriate, it was deliberately gridlocked so a decision could be made without part ofthe Council's opinion. She felt they could have come to a decision. Councilmember Fitch stated it could have been resolved very simply if when Councilmember Strachan decided to run for State Representative he turned in his resignation to the Council effective the beginning of the following year. Ifwe ask our own Councilmembers that if you decide and you have the faith and confidence to run for another office, that you will relinquish the one office at the end of the year. That way the people can speak and they could have voted for 3 Councilmembers. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated regarding a policy where the appointment would be done by majority, you can agree to do that among yourselves, but it does not supercede state law that authorizes the Mayor to make a final appointment. It does not bind a future Council from Council Workshop December 3, 2003 Page 7 making any changes. Regarding the request for a resignation upon seeking higher office, state law says when you are elected, you are elected for the entire term. It does not prohibit anyone from running for a higher office while in an existing one. If one member of Council decided to run for Mayor during an existing term, you could do that without being required to resign your seat. You can ask for it, but you may not require it. Mayor Ristow stated it sounds like no matter what you do, state law overrides it. Ifwe say if you are running for a higher seat at this time, majority says you have to give up your seat, state law does not allow it. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated it allows you to ask, it does not allow you to require. Councilmember Fogarty stated you can design a policy that says if you cannot come to a majority vote, then you can go to special election. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated the City Attorney recommended not going that direction in that way. Mayor Ristow stated last time it was the cost of$II,OOO for one year. Councilmember Fogarty stated $11,000 for two years and a lot less controversy in the city and lot of bad feelings on the Council. Mayor Ristow addressed Councilmember Fogarty saying you met with me and there was more to this than what you said. There were people that you did not want on the Council either. Do you want me to bring out the tape and remind you of that? You sat in my office one day and said if you put so and so on there. . . Are you going to deny you told me that? Councilmember Fogarty stated she does not recall that, it is not her nature to threaten people. Mayor Ristow replied that one particular one, you don't recall that? How quick you forget. Now all of a sudden it was wrong. He did everything by state statute. We went by experience that is the way it was. Councilmember Fogarty stated we also could have taken the third highest vote getter, but you chose your way. Mayor Ristow replied I could go back to that again, and you and I discussed that. Mayor Ristow felt it should be left as is, it is under state statute and that is what will hold water. Councilmember Fogarty stated as this Council sits, it will be irrelevant anyway. Because we will have a whole new Council before we need to make any kind of decision like that again. Mayor Ristow asked what that is based on. Councilmember Fogarty stated Councilmembers Cordes and Fitch have told her they are not running again. Councilmember Fitch stated it is problematic because you can only make requests and not enforce anything. Councilmember Soderberg stated in the last process he thought we had an agreement to come to a consensus, but a gridlock was forced, and the proposal that was made was tossed out the window. Staff is looking for some sort of agreement where we have a process in place if we do have applications and interviews. Out of the nine candidates we had there was more than one person all of us could have worked with, just like we did with the City Administrator process. Two candidates clearly came to the top. If there is a policy it makes it more difficult to go against it. Councilmember Fogarty stated a policy puts a little more weight to it. She would like to see a Special Election. If Council feels they can make a selection without it, they can always repeal it. Put the decision back in the proper decision making hands. Councilmember Soderberg stated in talking with the City Attorney about Special Elections, that is something that needs to be changed by voter referendum. In order for us to do a Special Election, we have to have authorization from the voters to do a Special Election. It would have to be on the ballot next year. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler asked if Council wanted it left status quo and follow state law or are you interested in a specific policy. Councilmember Fogarty would like to look into a Special Election. Mayor Ristow wanted to stay with state statute. Councilmember Fitch stated state statute does provide for that. Councilmember Soderberg wanted to see what the City Council Workshop December 3, 2003 Page 8 Attorney had to say about a Special Election. Staffwill check with Attorney Jamnik regarding a referendum. Office Hours for City Hall December 26. 2003 The typical holidays for Christmas are December 24 and 25. This year it falls on a Wednesday and Thursday. The office would reopen on Friday with a skeleton staff. Staff proposed also closing December 26 and asking employees to take paid leave for that day. The building would not need heat, lights, computers for five days in a row. It is a budget consideration. If employees take paid leave, it is not a holiday or an additional benefit. Everyone would have to use leave that would sit on the books at the end of the year and is required to be expensed out. Liquor stores and the arena would be open. Police would be working as well as solid waste, as the garbage schedule has been distributed. This would be a mandatory leave. For areas in City Hall that need to have coverage, this would allow both people to be gone. Employees will have the opportunity between now and the end of the year to accrue comp time if needed. Part-time employees would be allowed to work a flex schedule to make up the time. Council agreed to close City Hall December 26. Pre-Meetine: Workshop with Mr. Harry Brull December 15. 2003 Mr. Brull has asked for some time to meet with Council prior to the Council Meeting to discuss the candidate background packets. Packets will be sent to Council at the beginning of next week. Staff recommended starting at 6:00 p.m. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to adjourn at 8: 19 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, r;}-v,-,~L-~ )Y7~ G Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant 7b City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us FROM: Mayor and councilmem:rbers , Daniel M. Siebenaler, Interim City Administrat TO: SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation Detective Sergeant DATE: December 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION The 2004 Budget authorizes the promotion of a Detective Sergeant in the Police Department. DISCUSSION Staff has reviewed the applications and resumes of four candidates for the position of Detective Sergeant. While each of them has unique qualifications demonstrating a variety of technical and leadership training and skills one candidate demonstrates a broad spectrum of all of these characteristics. Staff has recommended that Detective Jerome Wacker be promoted to the rank of Detective Sergeant for the Farmington Police Department. BUDGET IMPACT This promotion is included in the Draft 2004 Budget which will not take effect until January 1, 2004. ACTION REQUESTED Recognize the promotion of Jerome Wacker to the Rank of Detective Sergeant effective January 1, 2004. Respectfully submitted, Daniel M. Siebenaler Interim City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ~ TO: Mayor, Council Members, Interim City Administrat FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Approve 2004 Tax Levy and Budget - Finance DATE: December 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION The City Council adopted a proposed Tax Levy and budget for 2004 with Resolution R64-03 at the Council meeting on September 2,2003. The Tax Levy and Budget must now be finalized in order that it may be certified to the County Treasurer/Auditor before December 29, 2003. DISCUSSION & BUDGET IMPACT After the preliminary levy was adopted, a budget workshop was held on October 1, 2003 for the Council to ask questions and give input on the proposed budget. The required Truth in Taxation Hearing took place at the City Council meeting of December 1, 2003. Residents and other concerned citizens were able to attend and express their opinions on the proposed levy and budget. There being no testimony, the hearing was closed without continuation. Certification of the Tax Levy and adoption of the 2004 budget and 2003 revised budget must now take place in order that Tax revenues may be collected from all taxable property in Farmington. ACTION REQUIRED 1. Adopt the attached resolution setting the 2004 Collectible Property Tax Levy. 2. Adopt the attached resolution approving the 2004 Budget and Revising the 2003 Budget. Respectfully submitted, w#,,! Robin Roland Finance Director RESOLUTION NO. R -03 ADOPTING THE TAX LEVY FOR THE YEAR 2004 COLLECTIBLE Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 15th day of December, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City of Farmington is annually required by State Law to approve a resolution setting forth an annual tax levy to the Dakota County Auditor; and, WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes currently in force require certification of the tax levy to the Dakota County Auditor on or before December 29, 2003; and, WHEREAS, summary details of the proposed budgets are contained in the budget submitted to the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Farmington, that the following sums of money be levied in 2003, collectible in 2004, upon the taxable property in the City of Farmington for the following purposes: Tax Levy General Fund Debt Service (see attached schedule) Fire Levy Gross Levy Less: Fiscal Disparities Net Levy $3,489,462 1,104,840 55,000 $4,649,302 (696,738) $3,952,964 This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 15th day of December, 2003. Mayor City Administrator 2004 BUDGET Summary of Debt Service Levy to be Attached and Become part of Resolution Fund Title Improvement Bonds of 1992B Improvement Bonds of 1993A Improvement Bonds of 1994A Wastewater Treatment Bonds 1995 Public Project Revenue Bonds 2001A Certificates of Indebtedness 1999 Certificates of Indebtedness 2000 Total Levy Amount $55,496 94,178 78,322 60,000 456,844 100,000 260.000 $1,104,840 RESOLUTION NO. R -03 ADOPTING THE 2004 BUDGET AND REVISING THE 2003 BUDGET Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 15th day of December, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City of Farmington Ordinance Chapter 7, Section 1-7-3 requires that an annual budget be submitted to the City Council which accurately reflects the financial needs of the City organization; and, WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes require approval of a resolution setting forth an annual budget and tax levy to the Dakota County Auditor on or before December 29, 2003; and, WHEREAS, Resolution R106-02 adopted the 2003 operating budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Farmington, That the 2004 operating budget shall be adopted and the 2003 operating budget shall be revised as follows: 2003 Revised 2004 General Fund Revenues: Taxes 3,188,070 3,544,462 Licenses & Permits 1,260,110 1,156,976 Intergovernmental 485,686 322,000 Charges for Services 358,779 365,200 Fines & Forfeitures 80,100 78,100 Other Revenues 330,500 380,500 Transfers In 225.000 310.000 Total 5.928.245 6.157.238 Expenditures: Administration 856,500 815,528 Finance 372,730 391,837 Community Development 582,243 643,001 Police 1,863,360 1,950,692 Fire 418,690 439,988 Public Works 892,690 920,619 Parks & Recreation 776,032 822,573 Transfers Out 166.000 173.000 Total 5.928.245 6.157.238 2003 Revised 2004 Other Funds Revenues: HRA General Fund 27,500 27,500 Police Forfeitures Fund 10,050 8,050 Park Improvement Fund 147,500 147,500 Recreation Operating Fund 252.500 259.700 Total Special Revenue 437,550 442,750 Debt Service Funds 2.856.125 2.430.194 Total Debt Service 2,856,125 2,430,194 Sanitary Sewer Trunk Fund 370,000 395,000 Capital Acquisition Fund 970,000 1,210,000 Road Const. & Maint. Fund 4,736,64 7 1,279,492 Municipal Building Fund 222,500 Storm Sewer Trunk Fund 700.000 650.000 Total Capital Projects 6,999,147 3,534,492 Arena Fund 238,300 247,500 Liquor Fund 645,750 707,500 Sewer Fund 1,543,570 1,632,270 Solid Waste Fund 1,358,800 1,409,000 Storm Water Utility Fund 260,000 265,000 Water Fund 1.790.000 1.790.000 Total Enterprise Funds 5,836,420 6,051,270 Expenditures: HRA General Fund 76,540 43,180 Police Forfeitures Fund 8,050 8,050 Park Improvement Fund 134,500 134,500 Recreation Operating Fund 241.777 260.830 Total Special Revenue 339,817 446,560 Debt Service Funds 2.875.063 2.577.517 Total Debt Service 2,875,063 2,577,517 Sanitary Sewer Trunk Fund 516,570 444,488 Capital Acquisition Fund 889.698 1,128,279 Road Const. & Maint. Fund 2,361,750 3,451,150 Municipal Building Fund 159,527 Storm Sewer Trunk Fund 141.062 211.592 Total Capital Projects 4,068,607 5,235,509 Arena Fund 250,660 262,516 Liquor Fund 533,230 578,258 Sewer Fund 1,298,517 1,766,056 Solid Waste Fund 1,414,631 1,512,401 Storm Water Utility Fund 210,229 378,543 Water Fund 1.067 .073 1.330.661 Total Enterprise Funds 4,774,340 5,828,435 This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 15th day of December, 2003. Mayor City Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, futerim City Administra~ Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director FROM: SUBJECT: Heritage Preservation Commission 2003 Annual Report DATE: December 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION The Heritage Preservation Commission is required by ordinance to make an annual report to the City Council. DISCUSSION Attached is the annual report submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office for the purpose of documenting the City's performance as a Certified Local Government (CLG). The report contains information on the activities of the HPC during the Federal fiscal year which began October 1,2002 and ended September 30,2003. ACTION REQUIRED This is for your information only. Respectfully sub1.l1itted, ~.tl4Iz(J(~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director 7c! CITY OF FARMINGTON CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2003 ANNUAL REPORT This document summarizes historic preservation activities in the City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota, during Federal fiscal year 2003 (October 1, 2002, to September 30, 2003). The information presented in the annual report is required by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in partial fulf1llment of the city's obligations as a Certified Local Government (CLG) under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. 1. National Register Nominations No historic properties in Farmington were nominated to the National Register of Historic Places during the fiscal year ending September 30,2003. Three properties (D. F. Akin House, Episcopal Church of the Advent, and the Exchange Bank Building) are currently listed in the National Register. The former Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific railroad depot was placed on the National Register in 1979 but was removed after the building was demolished in 1982. 2. Farmington Heritage Landmark Designations Title 2, Chapter 11 of the City Code provides for the local registration of Farmington Heritage Landmarks, a form of overlay zoning. On February 18, 2003, the City Council designated the Middle Creek Cemetery as a heritage landmark. In September, 2003, three additional properties (the Exchange Bank Building, Episcopal Church of the Advent, and the D. F. Akin House) were nominated by the HPC for designation as heritage landmarks. 3. Permits Reviewed By ordinance, a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) is required before a city permit can be issued to demolish or move a registered heritage landmark; a COA is also required for new construction and excavation work that may effect the integrity of a heritage landmark. Under the amendment to the city zoning ordinance passed in 2002, the HPC also reviews and comments on applications for demolition permits in relation to properties designated or determined eligible for designation as heritage landmarks. No COAs were issued during the fiscal year ending September 30,2003. 4. Heritage Preservation Commission The HPC is a seven-member citizen advisory commission appointed by the City Council. The commission held regular meetings on: . November 21, 2002 . January 16, 2003 . March 20, 2003 . May 15, 2003 . July 17, 2003 . September 25, 2003 The following members resigned from the HPC or were not reappointed by the council during the reporting period: Tim Rice, Sue Strachan, and Jackie Dooley. Mr. Rice moved out of the city but was reappointed to the HPC as an ex-officio, non-voting member. Three new HPC members were appointed during the fiscal year: John Fortney, Patrick Garofalo, and Jonathan Robertson. Mr. Fortney replaced Ms. Strachan as the commission's chairperson in March, 2003. On September 30, 2003, the HPC membership was as follows: John Fortney, chairperson; Patrick Garofalo, vice chairperson; Jonathan Robertson, secretary; Bev Preece, voting member; George Flynn, voting member; and Tim Rice, ex-officio member. The HPC was staffed by Ms. Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director, and Mr. Robert C. Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant. 5. Historic Resources Survey The HPC maintains a comprehensive inventory of historic buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts within the city limits. In 1996, the HPC initiated a systematic survey of historic resources based on the recommendations of the 1995 Historic Context Study. In 2003, the City has received a CLG grant-in-aid to conduct a survey of rural historic properties. Work began in June and the project will be completed in July, 2004. 6. Public Participation & HPC Records All meetings of the HPC are open to the public in accordance with the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. HPC meeting agendas and notices are posted in public places and all minutes of meetings are placed on me for public examination. All of the HPC records are permanently archived at City Hall and treatment of commission records follows procedures established by state statute. 7. Minnesota Preservation Conference HPC member Beverly Preece attended the annual conference for Minnesota preservation commissions in New Ulm on September 18-19,2003. 8. Other Activities . The City Council approved an amendment to the zoning ordinance which would allow historic properties to be converted to bed and breakfasts · The HPC completed an adaptive use study of the historic Episcopal Church of the Advent · The HPC presented its annual Heritage Preservation Award to Karen Finstuen in recognition of her years of service as the HPC's city staff liaison (Ms. Finstuen retired in January, 2003) · For the second year, trolley tours of historic neighborhoods were offered as part of the city's annual Dew Day community celebration (June 21) · The HPC developed a landscape rehabilitation plan for the historic Middle Creek Cemetery · The city approved the first two conditional use permits for adapting historic buildings for use as bed and breakfasts This report was prepared by Robert C. Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant. For more information about historic preservation in the City of Farmington, contact Lisa Shadick, City Hall, 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024. 7e. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and Interim City AdminiSIratJJ~. Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director FROM: SUBJECT: Cost-of-Living Adjustment for Non-Represented Employees DATE: December 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION The City typically approves cost-of-living adjustments for non-represented employees. These adjustments would take place effective January 1, 2004. DISCUSSION Cost-of-living adjustments for non-bargaining employees have been reviewed and are proposed at two percent (2%) effective January 1,2004 and an additional one percent (1 %) effective July 1, 2004. Non-bargaining employees for purposes of this cost-of-living adjustment include confidential and non-represented employees, supervisory staff, and senior-level management personnel. Additionally, the City contribution for group insurance is proposed at $640.00 per month. This increase is appropriate based on the premium increase to the City. All other employees belong to collective bargaining units which require the City to formally negotiate changes in the terms and conditions of employment through the collective bargaining process. Negotiations with the organized bargaining units have been complete. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for the cost-of-living and insurance contribution increase is included in the 2004 City Budget ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the attached resolution approving the Cost of Living wage adjustment effective January 1, 2004 and July 1, 2004 for non-represented City employees. Respectfully submitted, ~~kdtadc- I I / Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director RESOLUTION No. R APPROVING COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENTS FOR ALL NON-REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2004 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 15th day of December, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: WHEREAS, cost-of-living adjustments for non-bargaining employees are in order to recognize annual inflationary increases in cost-of-living standards as measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI), and regional economic and market-based indicators; and, WHEREAS, the annual percentage adjustments of two percent (2%) effective January 1,2004 and one percent (1%) effective July 1, 2004 are within the expenditure guidelines established in the 2004 Budget; and, WHEREAS, the City shall contribute a flat rate amount for health, dental and life insurance. This rate will be $640.00 per month for 2004. WHEREAS, non-bargaining employees are defined as those public employees not formally represented by an exclusive bargaining group as defined under Minnesota Statute. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves cost-of-living adjustments of two percent (2%) effective January 1, 2004 and one percent (1 %) effective July 1, 2004 for all non-represented employees. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 15th day of December, 2003. Mayor Attested to the day of ,2003. Interim City Administrator SEAL 7-P City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, and Interim City AdministratrJr~ Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director FROM: SUBJECT: AFSCME Clerical, Technical, and Professional Unit Settlement - 2003 DATE: December 15,2003 INTRODUCTION This memorandum has been prepared to update Council on the status of the City's labor settlement with the AFSCMEClerical, Technical and Professional unit. DISCUSSION The City has reached a collective bargaining agreement with the AFSCME Clerical, Technical and Professional bargaining unit effective January 1, 2004. This agreement provides for a two percent (2%) wage adjustment effective January 1 and a one percent (1%) wage adjustment July 1 for both 2004 and 2005. The City will continue to contribute a flat rate amount for group insurance provided by the City. This contribution amount will be $640.00 per month for 2004 and $690.00 per month for 2005. BUDGET IMPACT Settlement costs negotiated with the AFSCME Clerical, Technical, and Professional bargaining unit are provided for in the 2004 City Budget. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the attached resolution ratifying collective bargaining agreement for the Clerical, Technical, and Professional Unit. Respectfully submitted, ;iJ2M~~2If2I/kdf-- / / Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING WAGE INCREASES BETWEEN THE CITY OF FARMINGTON AND AFSCME, COUNCIL 14, LOCAL UNIT 3815 CLERICAL, TECHNICAL, AND PROFESSIONAL BARGAINING UNIT FOR THE CONTRACT YEARS OF 2004 AND 2005. Pursuant to due call and notice, thereof, a regular meeting of the City council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 15th day of December, 2003 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: WHEREAS, the City of Farmington recognizes AFSCME as the exclusive bargaining representative under M. S. Chapter 1 79A, for the clerical, technical and professional classifications identified in the collective bargaining agreement; WHEREAS, the City has negotiated in good faith with representatives of AFSCME for the purpose of reaching a collective bargaining agreement for the contract years 2004 and 2005; and WHEREAS, the settlement terms have been successfully negotiated between the City and the membership of AFSCME, Council 14, Local Union 3815 Clerical, Technical and Professional bargaining unit in accordance with procedures established by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Farmington, Minnesota approves the following: 1) A two percent (2%) wage adjustment effective the 1 st day of January, 2004 and a one percent (1 %) wage adjustment effective the 1 st day of July, 2004. 2) A two percent (2%) wage adjustment effective the 1st day of January, 2005 and a one percent (1%) wage adjustment effective the 1st day ofJuly, 2005. 3) The City shall contribute a flat rate amount for health, dental and life insurance. This rate will be $640.00 per month for 2004 and $690.00 per month for 2005. Adopted by the Farmington City Council this 15th day of December, 2003. Gerald G. Ristow, Mayor Attested to the _ day of 2003. Daniel M. Siebenaler Interim City Administrator SEAL City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, and Interim City Administra* Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director FROM: SUBJECT: AFSCME Maintenance Unit Settlement - 2004 DATE: December 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION This memorandum has been prepared to update Council on the status of the City's labor settlement with the AFSCME Maintenance unit. DISCUSSION The City has reached a collective bargaining agreement with the AFSCME Maintenance bargaining unit effective January 1,2004. This agreement provides for a two percent (2%) wage adjustment effective January 1 and a one percent (1 %) July 1 for both 2004 and 2005. The City will continue to contribute a flat rate amount for group insurance provided by the City. This monthly contribution amount will be $640.00 per month for 2004 and $690.00 per month for 2005. BUDGET IMPACT Settlement costs negotiated with the AFSCME Maintenance bargaining unit are provided for in the 2004 City Budget. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution ratifying collective bargaining agreement for the Maintenance Unit. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ ; Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING WAGE INCREASES BETWEEN THE CITY OF FARMINGTON AND AFSCME, COUNCIL 14, LOCAL UNIT 3815 MAINTENANCE BARGAINING UNIT FOR THE CONTRACT YEARS OF 2004 AND 2005. Pursuant to due call and notice, thereof, a regular meeting of the City council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 15th day of December, 2003 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: WHEREAS, the City of Farmington recognizes AFSCME as the exclusive bargaining representative under M. S. Chapter 179A, for the maintenance classifications identified in the collective bargaining agreement; WHEREAS, the City has negotiated in good faith with representatives of AFSCME for the purpose of reaching a collective bargaining agreement for the contract years 2004 and 2005; and WHEREAS, the settlement terms have been successfully negotiated between the City and the membership of AFSCME, Council 14, Local Union 3815 Maintenance bargaining unit in accordance with procedures established by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Farmington, Minnesota approves the following: 1) A two percent (2%) wage adjustment effective the 1st day of January, 2004 and a one percent (1 %) wage adjustment effective the 1 st day of July, 2004. 2) A two percent (2%) wage adjustment effective the 1st day of January, 2005 and a one percent (1%) wage adjustment effective the 1st day of July, 2005 with a wage re- opener for possible adjustments pursuant to the compensation study. 3) The City shall contribute a flat rate amount for health, dental and life insurance. This rate will be $640.00 per month for 2004 and $690.00 per month for 2005. Adopted by the Farmington City Council this 15th day of December, 2003. Gerald G. Ristow, Mayor Attested to the day of 2003. Daniel M. Siebenaler Interim City Administrator SEAL 7~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, and Interim City Administrat~ FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Labor Negotiation Settlements - 2004 Police Officers DATE: December 15,2003 INTRODUCTION This memorandum has been prepared to update Council on the status of the City's labor settlement with the Police Officers. DISCUSSION The City has reached a collective bargaining agreement with the LELS bargaining unit effective January 1, 2004. This agreement provides for a two percent (2%) wage adjustment effective January 1 and a one percent (1 %) wage adjustment effective July 1 for both 2004 and 2005. The City will continue to contribute a flat rate amount for group insurance provided by the City. This monthly contribution amount will be $640.00 for 2004 and $690.00 for 2005. BUDGET IMPACT Settlement costs negotiated with the LELS bargaining unit are provided for in the 2004 City Budget. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution ratifying collective bargaining agreement for the Patrol Unit. Respectfully submitted, .~AJ~~~ 7~da Wendlandt, SPHR , Human Resources Director RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING WAGE INCREASES BETWEEN THE CITY OF FARMINGTON AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC, LOCAL 187 POUCE OFFICERS UNIT FOR THE CONTRACT YEARS 2004 AND 2005. Pursuant to due call and notice, thereof, a regular meeting of the City council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 15th day of December, 2003 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: WHEREAS, the City of Farmington recognizes LELS as the exclusive bargaining representative under M. S. Chapter 1 79A, for the public works and parks and recreation personnel classifications identified in the collective bargaining agreement; WHEREAS, the City has negotiated in good faith with representatives of LELS for the purpose of reaching a collective bargaining agreement for the contract years 2004 and 2005; and WHEREAS, the settlement terms have been successfully negotiated between the City and the membership of Law Enforcement Labor Services, Local 187 in accordance with procedures established by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Farmington, Minnesota approves the following: 1) A two percent (2%) wage adjustment effective the 1st day of January, 2004 and a one percent (1 %) wage adjustment effective the 1 st day of July, 2004. 2) A two percent (2%) wage adjustment effective the 1st day of January, 2005 and a one percent (1%) wage adjustment effective the 1st day ofJuly, 2005. 3) The City shall contribute a flat rate amount for health, dental and life insurance. This rate will be $640.00 per month for 2004 and $690.00 for 2005. Adopted by the Farmington City Council this 15th day of December, 2003. Gerald G. Ristow, Mayor Attested to the day of 2003. Daniel M. Siebenaler Interim City Administrator SEAL City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us ~. TO: Mayor, Councilmembcrs and Interim City AdministralOr# FROM: Randy Distad, Parks & Recreation Director SUBJECT: Approve Amended Hauler Financial Agreement with Dakota County DATE: December 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION The City entered into an agreement with Dakota County in 1997 to participate in the Hauler Financial Incentive Payment Program, which expires December 31,2003. DISCUSSION Public entity waste generated in the City of Farmington is currently hauled to NRG's Processing Facility in Newport as required per County ordinance. The City of Farmington, as a waste hauler, has participated in Dakota County's Hauler Financial Incentive Payment (HFIP) Program since its inception in 1997. It has also participated in the State Processing Payment since 2001, which is a $5.00 per ton payment that is paid by the State of Minnesota to Dakota County and passed through to the haulers for each ton of Municipal Solid Waste delivered to and processed at a resource recovery facility. The amended agreement makes the City eligible for future County HFIP and state processing payment incentives, contingent on available funding. The County's $12 per ton incentive will remain in effect until December 31, 2008 and the state processing payment is authorized through June of 2005. BUDGET IMPACT The incentive payment is prorated to reflect only the tons actually processed rather than the tons tipped, so for any tons delivered to and processed at the NRG Newport facility the City will receive a $12/ton and $5/ton rebate, contingent on available financing. RECOMMENDATION Approve the Agreement with Dakota County for County Hauler Financial Incentive Payment and State Processing Payment. /Dect~U;;P - ~tad Parks & Recreation Director 12/11/2003 THU 12:13 FAX 651 463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL I4J 001/012 AGREEMENT BETWEEN DAKOTA COUNTY AND FOR COUNTY HAULER FINANCIAL INCENTIVE PAYMENT AND STATE PROCESSING PAYMENT This Agreement is made by and between DaKota County (the County), a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, and (the Hauler), located at (address), which is a business licensed by Dakota County to haul mixed municipal solid waste (MSW) in the County and authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota. WHEREAS, the County promotes maximizing the Metropolitan Area's available municipal solid waste '(MSW) processing capacity, in accordance with the RegionaVDakota County Solid Waste Master Plan 1998-2017 (Master Plan); and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 97-361 (June 3. 1997), the Dakota County Board of Commissioners authorized the Hauler Financial Incentive Payment program (HFIP program), offering $12.00 per ton for MSW generated in Dakota County that was verifiably processed; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 98-482 (August 18,1998), the Oakota County Board of Commissioners extended the program through December 31, 2003; and WHEREAS~ Minn. Stat. ~ 115A 545 authonzes the Director of the Office of Environmental Assistance to pay counties a processing payment for each ton of MSW that is generated in the county and processed at a resource recovery facility in Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the County is entitled to a processing payment from the State of Minnesota as provided in Minn. Stat. .' 9 115A545 commencing July 1, 2001 (State Processing Payment program): and WHEREAS, to the extent the County receives a state processing payment from the State, the County wishes to pass through the state processing payment to the Hauler as provided herein, contingent upon State fund availability; and WHEREAS, by'Resolution No. 01-491 (August 28, 2001). the Dakota County Board of Commissioners maximized the County's HFIP program by increasing hauler payments by $5.00 per ton for MSW processed in accordance with the state processing payr,nent program through June, 2005 and contingent upon available funds: and -.. ,:.,..,.- . WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 03-515 (October 14. 2003), the Dakota County Board of CommissIoners extended both the HFIP and State Processing Payment programs through December 31, 2008, contingent upon available funds; and WHEREAS, the Dakota County Board of Commissioners recognizes that limited processing capacity Is currently available to Dakota County haulers; and WHEREAS, the County wants to encourage Haulers to deliver MSW generated in Dakota County to facilit!es that process MSW. consistent with the State policies expressed in the Waste Management Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 115A, for processing MSWand minimizing the landfilling of MSW; and WHEREAS, the CountY has been delegated the authority to enter into agreements with Haulers for the delivery of waste to a facility for processing, pursuant to Minn. Stat. ~473.813: and WHEREAS) the Hauler; de~ires to enter into this Agreement with the County to receive both the County HFIP for MSW verifiably processed at a Processing Facility and to receive the State Processing Payment for MSW verifiably processed at a Resource Recovery Facility. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that in consideration of the promises and mutual obligations hereinafter set forth. the parties agree as follows: ." ':'.. -~ 1 12/11/2003 THU 12:14 FAX 651 463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL ~ 002/012 ARTICLE I TERM This Agreement shall commence on January 1', 2004 or the date executed by the parties, whichever is later, for purposes of the County Hauler Financial Incentive Payment and the State Processing Payment programs and shall continue until December 31. 2008. unless earlier terminated pursuant to Article IXA ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS For the purposes of this Agreement, the following definitions shall apply: A. Commercial MSW. "Commercial MSW" means MSW from any permanent or temporary building used for other than residential purposes or the business portion of a building with both business and residential units. B. County Coordinator. .County Coordinator" means Barry C. Schade, Director, Dakota County Environmental Management Department, or his successor. c. County Hauler Financial Incentive Payment (County HFIP). "County Hauler Financial Incentive Payment (County HFIP)" means the incentive payment per ton paid by Dakota County to a Hauler for each ton of MSW generated in Dakota County that the Hauler delivers to a Processing Facility that is verifiably processed by the Processing Facility. D. Hauler. "Hauler' means the Dakota County licensed collector of MSW operating .within . Dakota County that has executed this Agreement. ..:~~ Hazardous Waste. "Hazardous Waste" has the definition given it in Minn. Stat. 9116.06, subd. 11, as amended from time to time. E. F. Mixed Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). "Mixed Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)" means waste as defined in Minn. Stat. ~115A.03. subd. 21 and as modified by Minn. Stat. ~473.848, subd. 5 that can be disposed in landfills under Minnesota law. For the purposes of this Agreement, the definition of MSW does not include yard waste. G. Processing. "Processing" means the treatment of MSW, after collection and before disposal, by incineration for energy production, production and use of refuse-derived fuel, co mposting , or any combination of these processes that may also include ferrous recycling or other recycling as approved by the County Coordinator. H. Processing Facility. "Processing Facility" means a facility that has been approved by the County Coordinator and at Which MSW is treated by incineration for energy production, production of refuse- derived fuel, composting, or a combination of these processes that may also include fel10us recycling or other recycling as approved by the County Coordinator. so that the weight of the MSW remaining that must be disposed of in a landfill is not more than 35 percent of the weight before processing, on an annual average. I . Residential MSW. "Residential MSW means MSW from a single-fa mily home. duplex, townhouse, mul~~.; family home, apartment building or the residential portion of a building with both business and residential units. J. Resource Recovery Facility. "Resource Recovery Facility" means a facility that has been approved by the County Coordinator and at which MSW is burned for energy recovery; or proqessed into usable compost or refuse derived fuel. .. - ,'~ '.. -....,.::;.... ~ State Processing Payment. MState Processing Payment" means the payment per ton paid by the State of Minnesota to the County, and passed through to the Hauler through the terms of this Agreement, for each ton of MSW generated in Dakota County that is delivered to a Resource Recovery Facility located in Minnesota and that is verifiably processed by the Resource Recovery Facility. Transfer Station. "Transter Station" means a facility that has been approved by the County Coordinator in which Dakota County generated MSW is temporarily stored, concentrated, or deposited to await 2 K. L. 12/11/2003 THU 12:14 FAX 651 463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL IaJ 003/012 subsequent transportation to a Processing Facility or Resource Recovery Facility. A Transfer Station can be fixed or mobile. M. Unacceptable Waste. .Unacceptable Waste" means MSW that is not accepted for Processing and is rejected at a Processing Facility or Resource Recovery Facility. ARTICLE III REPRESENTATIONS A. Hauler Representations 1. The Hauler is a business, duly organized, validly existing and properly qualified to do business under the Laws of Minnesota. and is licensed to collect and haul MSW in Dakota County. 2. The Hauler has full power and authority to execute this Agreement and this Agreement cOnstitutes a binding legal obligation of the Hauler Ulat is fully enforceable in accordance with its terms and conditions. 8. County Representations 1. The execution of this Agreement by the County's Physical Development Division Director has been duly authorized and approved by the Dakota County Board of Commissioners, and no other authorizations, approvals, or consents are required for this Agreement to constitute a binding and enforceable legal obligation of the County. 2. The execution of the Agreement does not conflict with any other agreement or indenture of any other Instrument to which the County is a party. ARTICLE IV COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND STANDARDS A. The Hauler shall, at all times, operate its business of collecting, transporting, and disposing of waste in compliance with all applicable local, State, and federal laws, rules, regulations, ordinances and licenses. This includes, but is not limited to, all Standard Assurances that are included and incorporated herein as Attachment 1. B. The Hauler shall obtain and maintain all necessary licenses, permits. and other authorizations required by each municipality or township in Dakota County within which it operates, the County. the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and other governmental entities having jurisdiction over its activities. ARTICLE V OELIVERY OF MSW TO A PROCESSING FACILITY OR RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY A. Deliveries 1. The Hauler shall only request payment for MSW that is delivered and verifiably processed at a Processi.ng Facility or Resource Recovery Facility that meets the requirements of thIs Agreement. The following is a list of a list of al/ Resource Recovery Facilities that meet the requirements of this Agreement . · NRG Newport . Hennepin Energy Resource Co. (direct haul or via Freeway Transfer Station) . Elk River Resource Recovery (direct haul or via Freeway Transfer Station) · Empire - NRG Processing Solutions · Red Wing Incinerator 3 12/11/2003 THU 12:14 FAX 651 463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL ~ 004/012 The following is a list of a list of all Processing Facilities that meet the requirements of this Agreement: · NRG Newport . Hennepin Energy Resource Co. (direct haul or via Freeway Transfer Station) . Elk River Resource Recovery (direct haul or via Freeway Transfer Station) . Empire - NRG Processing Solutions · Red Wing Incinerator Except for the Processing Facilities or Resource Recovery Facilities listed above, no County HFIP or State Processing Payment shall be paid to the Hauler, unless the County Coordinator agrees in writing that the Processing Facility or Resource Recovery Facility receiving the MSW meets the definitions in this Agreement and that all other terms and conditions for the County HFIP and the State Processing Payment have been met. The Hauler agrees that it will not request payment for the County HFIP or the State Processing Payment for any mixed load that contains both MSW generated outside the County and MSW generated inside the County, unless previously agreed to by the County in writing. The Hauler agrees to certify monthly to the County the tons of MSW collected in the County and delivered. including via a Transfer Station, to a Processing Facility or Resource Recovery Facility. 3. The Hauler agrees not to deliver MSW that does not meet the definition of MSW under the terms of this Agreement or Hazardous Waste to a Transfer Station, Processing Facility or a Resource Recovery Facility. 2. - '- B. Rejection of Deliveries by the Transfer Station, Processing Facility or Resource Recovery Facility If a Hauler's delivery of MSW is rejected at the Transfer Station, Processing Facility or the Resource Recovery Facility for whatever reason, no County HFIP or State Processing Payment shall be paid for such tans rejected, nor shall the County be liable for such deliveries or the facility's rejection decision. c. Ownership and ResponsIbility for Wasto Collected By entering into this Agreement with the Hauler, the County does not take any ownership interest in the waste that is collected and transported by the Hauler. The Hauler shall remain solely responsible for the collection, transportation and proper disposal of all waste, all at its own cost, with the exception of a County HFIP or State Processing Payment that is paid by the County pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. Furthermore, the County shall not be liable for any unacceptable waste collected by the Haul~r. ARTICLE VI COUNTY HAULER FINANCIAL INCENTIVE PAYMENT AND STATE PROCESSING PAYMENTS A. Fees at Transfer Station, Processing Facility or Resource Recovery Facility The tip fee and any other fees charged by a Transfer Station, ProcesSing. Facility or Resource Recovery Facility for the acceptance of waste at the facility shall be the sole responsibility of the H~~ler. B. County Hauler Financial Incentive Payment Program (HFIP program) ..... The County shall pay Hauler a County HF1P of $12.00 per ton for MSW generated in Dakota County that is verifiably processed by a Processing Facility, if all of the following conditions have been met: 1. For any deliveries for which a Hauler is requesting the County HFIP, th~ .Processing Facility -must meet the intent of processing waste as contained in Minn. Stat. ~473.848 and the d~finition of Processing and Processing Facility under this Agreement. .. .',. 2. The Hauler's monthly reporting obligations of Article VII.A have been met and are in a form approved by the County Coordinator. 3. The information required by Article VII.B has been submitted to the County by the Processing Facility. 4 12/11/2003 THU 12:15 FAX 651463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL [4J 005/012 4. The Hauler has met all other applicable requirements of this Agreement. 5. Payment of the County HF1P is contingent 01'1 there being an appropriate budget amount approved by the Dakota County Board of Commissioners. All of the reports and required information must be submitted to the County within 15 days of the end of the calendar month of delivery to receive the County' H FI P for that calendar month. The County is not obligated to pay the County HFIP for MSW for which the monthly report and other required information are received more than 15 days from the end of the calendar month of delivery. The County will determine tl1e method for calculating the payment and when the payment will be made; however, payment will be made at least every six months. c. State Processing Payment The County will pass through to the Hauler the State Processing Payment received by the County for MSW generated in Dakota County that the Hauler delivers to Resource Recovery Facility, including via a Transfer Station, and is processed at a Resource Recovery Facility located in Minnesota, if all of the following conditions have been met: 1. For any deliveries for which a Hauler is requesting the State Processing Payment the Resou rce Recovery Facility must meet the requirement of processed MSWas contained in Minn. Stat. ~ 115A.545 and the definition of "Resource Recovery Facility" under this Agreement. 2. The Hauler's reporting obligations of Article VItA have been met and are in a form approved by the County Coordinator. 3. The information required by Article VII.B has been submitted to the County by the Resource Recovery Facility. ' 4. The Hauler has met all other applicable requirements of this Agreement. 5. Payment of the State Processing Payment is contingent on State fund availability each quarter. 6. Payment of the State Processing Payment is contingent on the County receiving a processing payment from the State, If the payment amount requested by the County exceeds State fund availability, the payments that are paid to the County by the State will be passed through to the Hauler on a pro rata basis. The maximum State Processing Payment is $5.00 per ton of processed MSW. All of the reports and required information must be submitted to the County within 15 days of the end of the calendar month of delivery to receive the State Processing Payment for that calendar month. The County Is not obligated to pay the State Processing Payment for MSW for which the monthly report and other required information are received more than 1'0 days from the end of the calendar month of delivery. The County will determine the method for calculating the payment and when the payment will be made; however, payment will be made at least every six months. The,State Processing Payment to the County expires by operation of law on July 1,2005. Forwaste delivered to a resource recovery facility from April 1, 2005, to June 30, 2005, the County must submit payment claims by July 31. 2005. in order to be eligible for the final State Processing Payments that will be made by the State by August 15, 2005. Unless the Legislature extends the State Processing Payment to the County beyond July 1, 2005. the State Processing Payment under this Agreement will terminate on June 30, 2005. D. Changes In County HFIP or State Pro~es$ing Payment Program Amounts The amount and method of the County HFIP and the State Processing Payment may be subject to change during the term of this Agreement or eliminated completely at the sole discretion of the County. Changes in the amount or method of payment or elimination of the payments completely must be made by Resolution of the County Board of Commissioners. The Hauler will be notified in 'writing prior to implementation of such changes. ' 5 12/11/2003 THU 12:15 FAX 651463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL I4J 006/012 ARTICLE VII REPORTING REQUIREMENTS A. Hauler Reporting Requirements Within the time set forth in Article VI, the Hauler shall submit all information required by the County on a form pre-approved by the County to the County Coordinator. The Hauler monthly report shall include, but is not limited to, the following information: . Total weight in tons of Dakota County generated MSW delivered monthly to a Processing Facility or a Resource Recovery Facility; . Estimated % commercial MSW; . Estimated % residential MSW; . Place of origin (city, township, sohool or specified other source); . Name of transfer station that MSW was delivered to - jf applicable; and . The name or the Processing Facility or the Resource Recovery Facility the MSW was delivered to for processing. All information submitted by the Hauler, as a part of the reporting form provided by the County, that identifies the location of Hauler customer accounts or other information specifically identified by the Hauler to be trade secret information (provided the County agrees said data is trade secret information) shall be considered trade secret information and nonpublic data as defined in the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, and the County shall not disclose this information to competitors or the public except under oourt order. If a discrepancy occurs between the information reported by the Hauler and the information reported by the Transfer Station, Processing Facility or Resource Recovery Facility, regarding the amount or origin of MSW delivered by the Hauler to the facility, the County retains the right to withhold payment of the County HFIP and the State Processing Payment, during which time the discrepancy shall be remedied to the satisfaction of the County. The County will determine when a discrepancy is significant enough to warrant inquiry and will notify the Hauler that: such an inquiry is taking place, the reason for the inquiry, and inform the Hauler that payment of the County HF1P and State Processing Payment is being temporarily withheld. The County has the sole discretion in resolving the discrepancy and shall inform the Hauler of its decision within 60 days of the original discrepancy notice to the Hauler. B. Transfer Station, Processing Facility and Resource Recovery Facility Information For purposes of calculating the County HF1P and the State Processing Payment, the County will make good faith efforts to obtain the following information for each calendar month from the Transfer Stations, Processing Facilities and Resource Recovery Facilities that received MSW generated in Dakota County: 1. The total weight in tons of MSW deliv~red to the Transfer Station, Processing Facility ,or Resource Recovery Facility that was generated in Dakota County. The total weight in tons of all MSW delivered to the Transfer Station, Processing Facility or Resource Recovery Facility that was landfilled. broken out into the various residue and bypass waste str~ams for which the processing facility keeps records, 3. The total weight in tons of all MSW generated in Dakota County that is processed. 2. ARTICLE VIII DEFAULT "A. " ' Hio'rer Def41wt Each of the following shall constitute default of this Agreement by the Hauler: 1. The persistent or repeated failure to fulfill any of its material obligations. under this Agreement. -.,. 2. Failure to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances. rules. regulations, a nd licenses relating to waste hauling' in the County and the State of Minnesota. " ".: :'-:~'::. 6 12/11/2003 THU 12:16 FAX 651 463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL ~ 007/012 3. Failure to accurately certify and report information required by Dakota County. 4. Failure to submit the reports and information required by this Agreement within the required time. 5. Transfer of any interest under this Agreement. whether by subcontract, assignment, or novation, without the written approval of the County. in violation of Article XJ.C. B. County Default Each of the following shall constitute default of this Agreement by the County: 1. The persistent or repeated failure to fulfill any of its material obligations under this Agreement 2. The failure of the County to make payments required by Article VI, if all requirements for payment under this Agreement have been met. ARTICLE IX TERMINATION AND REMEDIES A. Tennination 1. Termination By Either Party. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon a default of the other party following five (5) days written notice to the defaulting party. Such termination shall not relieve the defaulting party of its obligations to pay damages or indemnify the other party pursuant to Article X. 2. Termination bv County - Lack of FundinQ. The County may immediately terminate this Agreement upon resolution of the Dakota County Board of Commissioners that funding is not available within the county's budget or if the County does not obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature, Minnesota Agencies or other funding source, or if its funding cannot be continued at a lev~1 sufficient to allow payment of the amounts due under this Agreement. Written notice of termination sent by the County to the Hauler by facsimile is sufficlent notIce under the terms of this Agreement. The County is not obligated to pay for any HFIP or State Processing Payments that incur after notice and effective date of termination. The Hauler will be entitled to HFIP or State Processing payments incurred prior to the date of termination to the extent that funds are available. The County will not be assessed any penalty or damages if this Agreement is terminated due to lack of funding. B. RemedIes 1. Termination of AQreement. In the event the County, due to Hauler event of.default, terminates this Agreement, the County shall have the right to seek damages for the Hauler's failure to perform in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, as well as all other civil or criminal remedies available, IncludIng license revocatIon. 2. Specific Performance. It is the intent of the County and the Hauler that each of the provisions of this Agreement be carried out to the fullest extent possible. In addition to damages, either party . may be entitled to specific performance of obligations owed by the other party, which is necessary to ensure that the terms and provisions of this Agreement are carried out as contemplated. 3. DutIes to Miti!Jate. Both parties agree to use their best efforts to mitigate any damages that they might suffer by reason of an event of default or ariy other event giving rise to remedy hereunder. ARTICLE X INDEMNIFICATION Each party shall be liable for its own acts to the extent provided by law and hereby agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the other. its officers and employees against any and all liability , loss. costs, damages, expenses, claims or actions. including attorney's fees, which the other, its officers and employees may hereafter sustain. incur or be required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any act or omission of the party, its agents, 7 12/11/2003 THU 12:16 FAX 651 463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL l4J 008/012 servants or employees, in the execution, performance, or failure to adequately perform its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. . It is understood and agreed that the provisions of Minn. Stat. Chapter 466 or other applicable law shalllimll the County's liability. ARTICLE XI MISCELLANEOUS A. Notice All written notices required pursuant to this Agreement shall be either hand-delivered or mailed to the Hauler and the County at the following addresses or such other addresses as may be provided in writing to the other party from time to time: To the Hauler: To the County: Print or type name of contact person Barry C. Schade (or successor), Director Environmental Management Department 14955 Gataxie Avenue Apple Valley, MN 55124 Telephone: 952-891-7004 Print or type Name of Business Print or type City Print or type State and Zip code Telephone: In addition, notification 10 the County regarding breach or termination 'shall be provided to the office of the Dakota County Attorney, 1560 Highway 55, Hastings, Minnesota 55033. B. Relationship of the Parties For the purposes of this Agreement. the Hauler shall be deemed to be an independent contractor and not an employee of the County. The Hauler shall maintain, at its own expense, a/1 equipment and personnel necessary to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. Any and all agents. servants, or employees of the Hauler or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required to be performed by the County under this Agreement, shall not be considered employees ofthe County, and any and all claims.that mayor might arise on behalf of the County, its agents, servants or employees as a con~equence of any act or omission on the part of the Hauler, its agents, servants, employees, or other persons shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the County. The Hauler, its agents, servants or employees ~h.aJl be entitled to none of the rights, privileges or benefits of county employees. C. Assignment or Subcontract The Hauler shall not subcontract or assign any interest in this Agreement without prior written consent of the County and subject to such cpnditions and provisions as ~re deemed by the County to be necessary, in which case Hauler shall be responsible fat the performance of its subcontractor(s) or assignee(s) unless otherwise agreed. . . . . ~ ..... . II " -.... '" ... D. Survival of Repre's1!n'tation and Warrantie~ .. '. " . ~. . ... .: ....:::...,~.~ .-' ..~ The representatives, warranties, co~enants...anctag~ements of the parties under this Agreement, and the remedies of either party for the breach of such representations. warranties, covenants, and agreements by the other pl:lrty shaU survive the execution and term of this Agreement. -,... 8 12/11/2003 THU 12:16 FAX 651 463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL ~ 009/012 E. Waiver The waiver of any of the rights and/or remedies arising under the terms of this Agreement, on anyone occasion by any party hereto, shall not constitute a waiver of any rights or remedies with respect to any subsequent breach or default of the terms of this Agreement. The rights and remedies provided or referred to under the terms of this Agreement are cumulative and not mutually exclusive. F. Entire Agreement This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties and shall supersede all prior oral and written negotiations and any previous agreements executed by the parties, upon the date this Agreement is fully executed by the parties. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement between the Hauler and the County, if any, related to HFIP or State Processing Payments prior to January 1,2004. G. Governing Law This Agreement shall be interpreted and construed according to the laws of the State of Minnesota and shall be venued in Dakota County. H. Alteration Clause Any alteration, modification, or waiver of the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only after it has been reduced to writing and duly signed by both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date or dates Indicated below. COUNTY OF DAKOTA 8y Gregory .4. K.,onat. Director Physical Development Division Date of Signature Approved by DaKota County Board Resolution No. 03-515 CONTRACTOR (I represent and warrant that I am authorized by law to execute this contract and legally bind the Contractor). rslgnature] rPrint name] By Title Date of Signature APPROVAL AS TO FORM '! ,,' .' ...:.., .... -: ....... .' ./:.;:,~.:~:~ .- ~'-: ..' . .J . ~ , , , , ":~;~2:'~:l):l:. ~- ~.....- Assistant County Attorney Date .- KlK03.:3B1 HFIP-SPP fo"," contract.doc .~~ 9 12111/2003 THU 12:17 FAX 651463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL I4J 010/012 SAG/CA Stanuurd.CA KeviSed: 11/15/02 EXJU.BIT 1 STANDARD ASSURANCES 1. NON-DISCRIMlNA TION. During thc performance of this Contract, thc ConO'actor shall not unlawfully discriminat2 againSl :my employee or npplicllnt for employment because of race.. color, creed, relision. sex. nlltionnl origin, disability, sexual orientation, age, marital SUlCUS or public assiswlce status. The Contractor will take: affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employee! and lhut employccs arc treated during employment without unlawful discrimination because of their race.. color. creed. religion. sex, national origin, disability, sexunl orientation, nge. marital SUltus or public assistance SUU\lS. Suoh action shall include, but not bc limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer: recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of payor other forms of compcnsat!on; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. 111.e Conrractor o.grees to pOSt in conSpicuous places. available to employees nnd nppliCllnts (or employment, nOliCd whieh set forth the: provision:; of this nondiscrimination clause. _ The Contractor will, in all solicitations or acJvenisemcnrs for employces placed by or on bebalf of Contractor, state that all qunlified applicants will receivc eon5idcration for employment without regard to race, cree.d, color, religion, sex, n;ltion,,1 origin, diS<lbility, scxual orientation, age, marital St:ltuS, or public Msisrnnce starus. No fund~ received under \his Contract shall be wcd to provide religious or sectarian training or services. The Contractor shall comply with a&lY applicable federal or state law regarding non-discrimination. The follow ins list incluu~, bul i~ not meant to limit, lawl1 which Ill.1Y be applicable: . . - . A. The Equal Employment OpportunitY Act of 1972. as amended, 42 U.S.C. ~ 2000e er seq. which pr~~ibits dUicrimina[ion in employment because ofrace, color, religion, sex or nationa.l origin. __. B. Executive Order 11246. as 31llended, which is incorporated herein by reference, and prohibits diseriminatI?n by U.S. Government contractors and subcontractors because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. C The RehnhililD.lion Act of 1973, ll$ o.me:ndcd. 29 U.S.C. ~ 70 I et s.q. !lnd 45 C.F.R. 84.3 (1) nnd (K) implementins Sec. 504 of the Act which prohibits dUicrimination against qualified handicapped persons in the access to or plll'tieipation in federally-funded services or cmployment D. Thc A~C Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. ~ 621 el seq. as amended, and Minn. Stat. ~ 181.81, which generally prohibit discrimination because of age. E. The: Equal Pay Acl or 1963. ~ lllllcntle:d. 29 U.S.C. 9 206(d). which provitlc::; thal un e:mplu)'er may nul t1i::;criminulc un the b~i~ oi' sex by paying employees of di.lTerent sexes diffetently for [he same work. . ~ F. Minn. Stat Cn. 363, as amended, which generally prohibits discrimination because of mee. color, creed, rct.igion, national origin, SCX, marital status, status with. regard to public assist3.llce, disability, sexual orientation or age. G. Minn. Stilt. ~ 11l1.59 which prohibitS discrimination o.g4insl any person by reason of race, cr~, or color in nny smie or political subdivision contract for mo.te:nals, supplies or construction. Violation of this section is a misdemCtinor and 1I1l! sc:cond or subsequc:nt violation ofthesc terms may be cause for forfeiture of all sums due under thc Contract. H. Amerie3l1s with Disabilitics Act of 1990J 42 U.S.C. ~~ 12101 through 12213, 47 U.S.C. 9i 22S, 61 J;"with regulations at 29 CF.R. 91630, which prohibits discrimination against qualified individualg on the basis of a disability in term, condition or privilege of employment. :.:. '< 2. DATA PRIVACY. For purposes ofrhis COnlJ'lCt all dara created, collected., received, stored, used, m:lintaiocd, or disseminat~d by Contractor in the performMce of this Contrl1ct is subject to the requirements of the MiMesotn Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Chapter 13 and the Minnesota Rules implementing the Act now in force or hercafter adopted as we:ll as the FedcnJ laws on data privllCY, and Contractor must comply with those requiremenu as if it were a governmental entity. The remedies in section 13.08 apply to the: Contractor. Contractor do~ not hnve a duty to provide nccess to public data to the public if the public data nre avoilable from the governmental agency (County). cxce:pt lIS required by the te:nns of this Contract. All subcontnlclS shall contain the same or similar data practioes compliance requirements. 3. HEALTH INSURANCE POR'IABILITY & ACCOUN1ABILITY ACT OF 1996. The Contractonigr,.:s to comply with the requh'ementS of the Health Illsurance Portability 311d Accountability Act (HIPAA) which are applic:ili1c to. the Contractor's ~411)ies under this Contract. In performing Its obIlgations under this Contract, Conlractor agrees to comply with the HIPAA Privacy requirementS as of April. 14,2003, the HIPAA Standards for Electronic Transactions as of October 16, 2003, and all other HIPAA requirements as tbey becotne law. 4. RECORDS DISCLOSUREJRETENTION. Contractor's bonds.. records. documents, pape:rs. accounting procedures nnd practices, and other evidences relevant to this <::ontract are subject to the examination, duplication, tran.scription :md audit by the County and either the Legislative or State Auditor. pursuo.nr to Minn. Stat. ~ 16C.OS, subd. 5. Such evidences are also subject to review by the Comptroller Genernl ofrhe: Unite:d StMes, or a duly l\\llhorizc<l rcprescntlltive, if federal funds nrc: used for any work under thiS Contract. Thc 1 12/ 11/2003 THU 12: 17 FAX 651 463 1644 FARMINGTON MAINT FACIL I4J 011/012 Contractor agrees to maintain such evidenCl:S for a period of six (6) years from the date services or payment were last provided or made or longer if any audit in progress requires a longer retention period. $. WORKER HEALTH, SAFETY AND TRAINING. Contmetor shall be solely responsible for the health and 39fery of its employees in connection with the work pcrfonned under this Contrnet. Contractor shall make ammgements to ensure the health and safety of all subcontractors and other persons who may perfonn work in connection with this Controct. Contractor shall ensure all personnel of Contractor lUld subcontractors are properly trained and supervised and, when applicable, duly licensed or ce"if/cd appropriate to the tasks engaged in under this Contract. Each Contrnctor shall comply with federal, state and local occupational ssic:ty and health st:md:lJ'ds, regulations and rules promulgated pumlant to the Occupational Health and Safety Act which are applicable to the work to be performccl by Conlnictor. 6. CONTRACTOR DEBARMENT, SUSPENSION AND RESPONSffilLITY CERTIFICATION. Federal Resulll1icm 4S CFR 92.35 prohibits the Statc:lAgcncy from purchasing goods or services with federal money from vendors who have been suspended or debnrred by the fedeml government. Similnrly, Minnesota Smnnes, Section 16C.03, subd. 2 provides the Commissioner of Adminlstr.lIion with the authority to debar and suspend vendors who Seck to eontnlct with the StatdAgency. Vendors may be suspended or debarred when it is determined, through a duly authorized hearing process, that they have ahu.~ed the puhlic tnlst in a serious mlUU1er. By Signing This Contract, The Contractor Certifies That It And Its Principals' And Employees: A. Are nOt pr~tly debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from Transacting business by or with any fcderal, slate or local govc:mmental dcpamncnt or agency; and B. Have not within II three-year period preceding this Controct: I) beal convicted of or had II civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or II criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain or perfonning a public (fedeml, gtate or local) transaction or contract; 2) violated any federal or state antitrust statutes; or 3) committed embezzlement, theft. forgery. bribery, falsification or destruction ofrecord.'\, making false statcments or receiving ~tolen property;.1nd C. An; not p~t1y indicted or otheswise criminally or civilly charged by a govcmment:1l entity for: 1) commission of fraud or II criminal offcnsc in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain or performing a public (federal, state or local) tran.54Ction; 2) Violating any federal or srate antitrust statutes; or 3) committing cmbezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsificalion or dc~tructiun ofr~rds, making false Statements or receiving Stolen property; and D. ~ not aware of any information and possess no knowledge that any subcontractor(s) that will perform work pursuant to this Contract are in violation of any of tile certifications set forth above. E. Shull immediately give written notice to the ContraCting Officer should Conlrllctor come under investigation for allegations of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, or performing: a public (federal, state or local government) transaction; violating any federal or state antitrust statUtes; or committing embezzlement, the:ft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records. making false 5tl1temenrs or receiving Stolen property. . ""Principals" for the puxpo.scs of this o:nmcation mca.n.s officCI'S; directo~; owners; parmers; and persons having primary management or supervisory responsibilities within a business entity (e.g. general manger; plant manager; /lead of a subsidiary. division, or business segment and similar positions). Directions for On Line Access to Excluded Providers To ensure compliance with this regulation, identification of excluded entities and individuals cnn be found on the Office ofInspector GeneroJ (OIG) web site at www.dhhs.gov/progorg/oigl. , . KfExh SA6- SWldard-CA :'-f~~:(o..:.". "....4.,.;.....- -. 2 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7, ~ L TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, Interim City Administrato~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Historic Preservation Consultant Services DATE: December 15,2003 INTRODUCTION Attached is a proposed contract for Historic Preservation Consultant Services with Robert Vogel, who has provided this service for the past seven years. The contract is for the period of January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004 and establishes an annual retainer fee and an hourly wage. DISCUSSION The Historic Preservation Commission has in the past applied to receive CLG (Certified Local Government) Grant Funds. This contract is required to establish an hourly wage, which will be used for in-kind services that Mr. Vogel will provide in conjunction with the grants. The grants are typically used to further our exploration of historic sites in Farmington. BUDGET IMPACT A retainer fee in the amount of $316.66 per month, ($3800.00 annually) is included in the 2004 budget. ACTION REOUIRED Adopt a resolution approving the contract for Historic Preservation Consultant Services. Respectfully submitted, ~/!flC?~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director RESOLUTION NO. R -03 APPROVING THE CONTRACT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONSULTANT SERVICES Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 15th day of December, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has applied for and been awarded a CLG (Certified Local Government) Grant; and, WHEREAS, this contract is required to establish an hourly wage which will be used for in-kind services provided by Mr. Vogel in conjunction with the grant; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Vogel will be paid $3,800 annually, $800 of which will be designated as the match requirement of the CLG grant for the historic study of rural Farmington; and, WHEREAS, the grant will be used to designate historic sites throughout the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington hereby approves the Contract for Historic Preservation Consultant Services. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 15th day of December 2003. Mayor Attested to the _ day of 2003. Interim City Administrator SEAL CONTRACT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONSULTANT SERVICES CITY OF FARMINGTON THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into as ofthis 15th day of December 2003, by and between the City of Farmington, Minnesota, herein referred to as the "City," and Robert C. Vogel and Associates, herein referred to as the "Consultant." WITNESSETH THAT WHEREAS, the City is desirous of retaining professional historic preservation services on an as-needed basis, and; WHEREAS, the Consultant is a qualified historic preservation professional. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter contained, it is agreed by and between the City and Consultant as follows: I. SCOPE OF SERVICES The Consultant will provide the following services on an as-needed basis as determined by the City Administrator: A. Provide historic preservation consulting services to the Farmington Heritage Preservation Commission and the Farmington City Council. B. Advise the City on matters relating to historic preservation planning and identification, evaluation, registration and treatment of historic resources in Farmington. C. Prepare applications for Certified Local Government and other grants for historic preservation purposes. D. Serve as principal investigator and project director for the City's ongoing historic resources survey. E. Serve as principal investigator for the City's historic study of rural Farmington. II. COMPENSATION A. The City will pay the Consultant to provide the services as outlined in A, B, C and above, a monthly fee of $316.66 ($3800.00 annually) to be paid upon completion of services, beginning January 1, 2004. Of the $3800.00, $800.00 will be "designated" by the parties as the "match" requirement of the CLG grant obtained in 2003 for the historic study of rural Farmington. B. The city may pay such additional Consultant compensation at the rate of forty dollars ($40.00) per hour for additional work which may be specifically authorized by the City Council. C. The Consultant shall invoice the City for all work authorized by the City on a monthly basis. III. COMMENCEMENT AND TERMINATION This contract shall run from January 1, 2004, until December 31,2004. The contract may be renewed upon a passing motion by the City Council. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, either party may terminate this contract on thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. N. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS The Contractor is an independent contractor and is not a City employee. IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties have set their hands on this 15th day of December 2003. CITY OF FARMINGTON BY: Gerald Ristow, Mayor BY: Daniel Siebenaler, Interim City Administrator BY: Robert Vogel, Consultant <i5CL.- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, Interim City AdminiSlrawrfr Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director FROM: SUBJECT: Adopt Ordinance Establishing Fees - 2004 DATE: December 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION The City Council of the City of Farmington, pursuant to statutory authority or directive, requires certain licenses, permits or other City approvals for certain regulated activities. As a condition of issuing these licenses and permits the City Council establishes fees, by ordinance, effective January 1,2004. DISCUSSION The attached proposed ordinance lists fees, which were in effect in 2003, along with recommended changes for 2004. All of the proposed changes to the Fee Schedule have been reviewed by the Management Team to ensure that City fees are equitable and comparable with other communities. BUDGET IMPACT Proposed changes in 2004 Fees were taken into consideration during the preparation of the 2004 City Budget. ACTION REOUESTED Consider adoption of the attached Ordinance Establishing 2004 Charges and Fees for Licenses and Permits effective January 1,2004. Respectfull~ sUbml.. tted, f!/ "' ~(t1 ~~{d~.. Lisa Shadick Administrative Service Director CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. , AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CHARGES AND FEES FOR LICENSES, PERMITS OR OTHER CITY APPROVALS AND SERVICES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2004 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, on December 15, 2003, Ordinance No. was adopted by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that, because of the lengthy nature of Ordinance No. , the following summary of the ordinance has been prepared for publication. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the fees for licenses, permits and services established by the ordinance include for example licenses regulating the keeping of animals, gambling, tobacco and liquor sales, zoning, development and building approvals and licenses, charges for staff and consultant services, and charges for use of public facilities A printed copy of the whole ordinance is available for inspection by any person during the City's regular office hours. APPROVED for publication by the City Council of the City of Farmington this 15th day of December, 2003. CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor ATTEST: By: Dan Siebenaler, Interim City Administrator SEAL Approved as to form the _ day of 2003. By: City Attorney Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of 2003. CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOT A COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CHARGES AND FEES FOR LICENSES, PERMITS OR OTHER CITY APPROVALS AND SERVICES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2004 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS: SECTION 1. FEES FOR LICENSES AND PERMITS. The City Council of the City of Farmington, pursuant to statutory authority or directive, requires certain licenses, permits or other City approvals for certain regulated activities, and as a condition of issuing these licenses and permits establishes the following fees, effective January 1,2004. LICENSE" GENERAL Animal License AMOUNT License Enforcement Service Charge Late Registration Fee $8/yr/dog neutered or spayed $15/yr/dog not neutered or spayed $25 per dog $2.00 Note: Pursuant to Ordinance 6-2-16 the owner shall pay an additional $25 as appropriate for 3rd dog and an additional $50 for 4th dog. Amusement Machines $15 per location and $15 per machine Bed and Breakfast $25 Billiard Parlor Annual - $50 1 st machine, $20 ea. additional $150 Initial Investigation Cigarette/Tobacco Sales Reinstatement after Revocation Application/Renewal - $1 OO/yr $100 plus Administrative Time per Fee Schedule Dog Kennel (3 or more dogs) Exception - New residents - see note under animal licensing above. $300/year Exhibition, Temp. Outdoor $15/occasion Explosives, Sale & Storage $1 O/year Fireworks - Community Event $-l-G$50 plus expenses Gambling License Premise Permit Investigation Fee Gambling Event $50 $50 $50 Sales: Permit Issuance Fee Peddler Solicitor Transient Merchant Saunas Taxi Driver Company Therapeutic Massage Business License Therapist Investigation Investigation (Therapist) Renewal Investigation LICENSE" LIQUOR Beer, Off Sale Beer, On Sale Beer, On Sale Temporary Display & Consumption Liquor, On Sale Investigation Fee Liquor, On Sale Club Liquor, On Sale Sunday Transfer Fee Wine, On Sale PERMITS" Special Annexation Petition Legal Costs Antennas & Towers Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Legal and Engineering Costs Conditional Use/Spec. Exception. Admin. Fee $25.00 plus itemized amount below: $25/month; $250/year $15/day; $75/month; $125/year $15/day; $50/quarter; $150/year Annual Business - $5,000 Orig. Investigation - $300 Renewal Investigation - $150 $25 each $25/unit/year $50 (Includes 1 therapist) $50 $300 $200 $0 AMOUNT 2004 Billio2 $50/year $175/year -0- $300/year $3,500/year Not to exceed $200 (Administrative Costs) $300/year $200/year $300 $300/year AMOUNT $220 + $20 per acre up to 10 acres, $5 per acre over 10 acres x 1.25 Uniform Building Code $350 x 1.25 $200 2 2005 Billio2 $50/year $1 75/year -0- $300/year $3,500/year Not to exceed $200 (Administrative Costs) Set by State Set by State $300 $300/year Excavation and Mining 0-1000 cu yd. 1000-25,000 25,001-50,000 50,001-250,000 250,000+ (Grading Plans required + Staff Review Time) $75 + staff time Filling* $50 $150 $300 $500 * $1,000 * Landfills, Sludge Ash, Incinerator Ash, etc. Initial - $150,000 Renewal - $60,000/yr + $30/ton Rezoning, Admin. Fee $300 Sign Permit, Review Plans 1. Estimated Value To $500 500.01-1000 1000.01-2500 Over 2500 80.00 2. Signs which need a conditional use permit must pay both the established sign permit fee, plus the conditional use permit fee. $20.00 30.00 60.00 Street/Curb Breaking Min. $350 surety + $65 inspection fee Subdivision Waiver, Adm. Fee Legal and Engineering Costs $100/stafftime xl.25 Telecommunications, Rc'.'icw Plans $65 $200 $150 $200 Variance Request Appeal of Zoning Decision Vacation of Public RlW Fee Utility Const. Permit Fee, Review Plans $65 (Telephone, gas, cable, electric, telecommunications, etc.) Wetland Alteration Permit * $250 + consultant review time Legal and Engineering Costs x1.25 Wetland Buffer, Conservation, and Natural Area Signs $-WActual Cost Future Through Street Sign $-lOOActual Cost Zoning Certificate, Verification of Zoning * - A Conditional Use Permit is Required $25 3 PERMITS - Buildin2 Buildin2 Permit As Built Certificate Of Survey, Turf Establishment As-builts and Silt Fence/Erosion Control Inspection Temporary Buildings on Construction Sites Miscellaneous Inspections Window Replacement Roof Siding Garage Addn Detached Garage All Basement Finish Roof/Siding Combo Permit Gazebos - Freestanding Bathroom Finish Building, Moving (Requires Special Exception in Addition to Fees Listed Below) - House - Garage - Surety Pools Building, Demolition Ind. On Site Sewage Treatment Reinspection (After 2 Fails) Plumbin2 Permits Residential New Construction Repair/Addition Reinspection Commercial Reinspection AMOUNT Current Uniform Building Code $2,000 Single Family Residential Lot surety for all buildings to be refunded after issuance of final C.O. work is complete Add $100 $150 $50 $60 (59.50 + .50 state surcharge) $60 (59.50 + .50 state surcharge) $60 (59.50 + .50 state surcharge) $16.50$22.11 sf $16.50$22.11 sf UBC (No plan + .50 per 1000 State Surcharge) (.0005 x value) $100 (99.50 + .50 state surcharge) $60 (59.50 + .50 State Surcharge) $50 (49.50 + .50 state surcharge) $150 + cost of utility locations $50 + cost of utility locations $10,000 Flat $100 (99.50 + .50 state surcharge) Uniform Building Code $260 - ($40 County + $220 City) $47 $85 (84.50 + .50 state surcharge) $47 (46.50 + .50 state surcharge) $47 I % of contract cost + state surcharge (contract valuation x .0005) INCLUDES SPRINKLING SYSTEMS (Minimum of $50.00) $47 4 Mechanical Permits Fireplace Residential Heating New Construction RepairlRep lace Reinspection Commercial Heating Reinspection PERMITS - Subdivisions/Developments Environmental Assessment Worksheet and Environmental Impact Statement, AUAR Legal and Engineering Costs GIS Fees (Geographic Information System) *** Note Fee Calculation Formula on Page 6 Parkland Contribution Parkland and Trail Fees - All Residential Zones Parkland and Trail Fees - Commercial/Industrial Zones Plat Fees Preliminary Plat Surety Provides security to cover staff time in case a plat does not proceed. Fee is refunded upon signing a Development Agreement. Preliminary Plat Fee Final Plat Fee P.U.D. (Planned Unit Development) P.U.D. Amendment Surface Water Mgmt. Fee (Development) *** The Surface Water Management Fee funds the trunk storm water improvements identified in the City's Surface Water Management Plan. *** Note fee calculation formula below. $47 (46.50 + .50 state surcharge) $85 (84.50 + .50 state surcharge) $47 (46.50 + .50 state surcharge) $47 1 % of contract cost + state surcharge (contract valuation x .0005) Minimum of $50.00 $47 AMOUNT Staff time, consultant review time xl.25 New and Redevelopment *** $4G$45110t or $-B-$80/ac minimum Land Money 12.5% Set ,^.nnually based on attached Appraisal InformationSee Parkland Dedication Ordinance 5% Total Land Value Set Annually based on ,^.ppraisal InformationSee Parkland Dedication Ordinance $200/acre $750 base + $IOl1ot $300 Schematic Plan - $500 + $22/ac $300 $0.1233$0.1273 Isq.ft. - Residential, low density $0.2185$0.2257 Isq.ft. - Residential, high density $0.2631$0.2717/sq.ft. - Comm.lIndustriall Institutional Surface Water Mgmt. Fee (RedevelopmentlUnplatted) - See Schedule A attached. *** 5 Water Main Trunk Fee The Watermain Trunk Fee funds the trunk improvements identified in the City's Water Supply and Distribution Plan. Area Charge (Development) Area lA IB lC ID IE IF 2Al 2A2 2Bl 2B2 2Cl 2C2 2Dl 2D2 Remaining Undeveloped Area Unplatted Land *** Area Charge (per acre) $1,152.00$1,190.00 $1,618.00$1,702.00 $1,879.00$1,941.00 $1,681.00$1,736.00 $2,019.00$2,085.00 $1,901.00$1,963.00 $1,282.00$1,324.00 $2,013.00$2,079.00 $1,799.00$1,858.00 $2,120.00$2,190.00 $1,918.00$1,981.00 $2,153.00$2,224.00 $2,132.00$2,202.00 $2,201.00$2,276.00 $2,216.00$2,289.00 See Schedule B attached Surface Water Quality Management The Surface Water Quality Management Fee is collected to fund future excavation of sediments deposited in sedimentation ponds. Residential (Single/Multi) Commercial/Indust/Schoo l/Other ~$70/acre $+49$145/acre Water Treatment Plant Fee ~$570 /REU All parcels being developed are charged 1 REU minimum. Commercial, Industrial, Institutional developments and redevelopments are charged multiple REUs based on 1 REO = 274 gpd. Established in 1997, this fee will help fimd the future Water Treatment Plant Note: RED = Residential Equivalency Unit Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge *** The Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge funds trunk improvements identified in the City's Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan. $1,720$1,780/acre ***Fee Calculation Formula *** Fees shall be based on the gross area of the development, less floodways, and delineated wetlands. Credit for Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charge See Schedule F MUNICIPAL SERVICES AMOUNT Deferred Assessment Roll Per assessment roll Sewer Metro Sewer A vail. Chg. (SAC) City Sewer Avail. Charge (CSAC) Benefit Charge Connection Permit $1,275/single unit ~$390 $1,720$1,780 $65 each 6 Lateral Equiv. Chg. Servo Connection Fee (Akin Road) Stub Out Charge User Rates - Residential (Based on Winter quarter) - Metered Commercial Reserve Capacity (SW 1/4 of Sec. 25) (See Asmt. Roll #144) Solid Waste Collection Storm Water Utility Sump Pump Ordinance Non Compliance Water Benefit Charge Connection Permit Reserve Capacity Connection (WAC) fee funds future construction of Water Towers. 3/4 or 1" 1 1/4" 1 1/2" 2" 2 1/2" 3" 4" 6" 8" Water connection charge will not apply to fire sprinkler lines Lateral Equiv. Chg. (Pine Knoll) Metered Rates Water Reconnection Fee Stub Out Charge Hydrant Usage Overhead Water Filling Station Meters Meter Testing Fee Penalties Late Payment Penalty Certification Fee Water Use Restriction Penalties 15t Offense 2nd Offense and subsequent during a calendar year 7 See assessment rolls $2,075$2,140 Construction Cost + Street Breaking Permit $26.50 15t 10,000 gallons $2.20/1 ,000 gallons thereafter $3.25/1 ,000 gallons (65.30/qtr min.) $1,155$1,190/acre See Schedule C attached ~$7.75/storm water unit/quarter $IOO/month added to sewer bill $1,181$1,220 each $ 65 each $661.00$683.00 $1,033.00$1,067.00 $1,190.00$ 1,539.00 $2,650.00$2,737.00 $3,565.00$3,682.00 $4,886.00$5,046.00 $10,602.00$10,950.00 $23,848.00$24,630.00 $12,103.00$43,794.00 See assessment roll #196 $10.80 + $1.00/1,000 under 25,000 $1.16/1 ,000 over 25,000 $65 Construction costs + Street Breaking Permit $2/1 ,000 gallons - $60 minimum $2/1 ,000 gallons - $29 minimum Actual Cost + (10% or $25, whichever is less) $75 10% of current delinquent charge 10% of delinquent balance + interest $25 $50 CURRENT SERVICES AMOUNT Personnel Hourly rates for staff time will be multiplied by a factor of 2.7, which includes salary, benefits, and organizational overhead charges. Specific rates available from Finance Department upon request. Consulting Engineeringfees will be charged at Actual Cost plus 25%for processing, accounting, and overhead administrative and facility use charges. Projects - Public The following engineering costs will be considered a part of the total project cost for public improvement projects: Feasibility Report Plans, Specs, Bidding Staking, Insp., Supr. With Assessment Roll Total 3% of Actual Construction Costs 6% of Actual Construction Costs 7% of Actual Construction Costs 1 % of Actual Construction Costs 17% of Actual Construction Costs* *For the purposes of bonding, engineering costs will be calculated based on the estimated construction costs. 5% of Actual Construction Costs 1 % of Actual Construction Costs Actual Cost + 25% Administration Fees Assessment Roll Legal Fees Projects - Private All other private developments will be charged for review and inspection based on stafftime using current hourly rates as described above. A summary of staff review time for a project will be forwarded upon written request of the developer. Erosion control inspection by the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District will be charged at the County's current rates. lfiJr~........................................................................................................................ FirelRescue Response (Non Contracted Services) $ 150/hour + Current Personnel rate per manhour Sprinkler System - New or Altered I % of Contract Cost (minimum of $50) Inspections: Day Cares Fire Alarm System - New or Alteration Reinspection Flammable Tank System 500 gallons or less 501-1000 gallons 1001 plus gallons Tank Removal $50 1 % of Contract Cost (minimum of $50) $47 $15 $25 $25 + $10 for each additional 500 gallons $65 per tank Hood and Duct Cleaning Commercial Cooking Vent Systems Reinspection Fire Permit Processing MPCA Permit - 30 days (limited to 2 per year) Recreational Fire Permit - Annual $47 $47 $20 $10 8 False Alarms (after 3, per ordinance) Residential Non Residential $75 $150 $15 Fire Report Fee Fire/Rescue Standby (Org. Request) Current hourly rate/person Fireworks Establishments with mixed sales (fireworks sales as accessory item) Establishments selling fireworks only $100 $350 p arks an d Recrea ti 0 n............... ......................... ............... .... ..... ......... ........ ........ Dedicated Tree Cost $150.00$250.00 Municipal Pool Rates Resident Season Pass Rates: $55.00 for each Individual Season Pass $130.00 for a Family Pass of 5 persons or less (immediate family members only) $10.00 for each additional immediate family member Not Available 10 punches - $25 ($2.50/punch) 20 punches - $40 ($2.00/punch) Unused punches are good through August June of the following year. Non-Resident Season Passes: Punch Cards Regular Session Admission: $3.00 per person large pool $2.00 per person small pool Evening Family Hours *Rate applies during daily p.m. open swim - A family is 5 or less people with at least 1 adult (18 years) Swim Rate $9.00* Swim Lessons (8 lessons/session 40 min. each) IP AP Lessons (8 lessons/session - 30 min. each) 30.00Fees are based on at least 22.00break even basis Private Pool Lessons I Person 5 sessions @ 30 minutes each 2 Persons 5 sessions @ 30 minutes each 50.00 80.00 7/1/03 - 6/30/04 7/1/04 - $6/30/05 $350/day + $80 $400/day + $100 set-up/day set-up/day $3.00/person $3.00/person $2.00/person $2.00/person $12.00/person each session non contract $6.00/person monthly rate contracted Ice Arena Rates Dry Floor Rental Open Skating (Prime Time Session) (Tues. & Thurs. Lunch) Open Patch 90 minute session Skating Lessons Fall $65.00/session Winter $70.00/session as of 7/1/03 6/30104 Summer $70.00 summer clinic (2 wks 1 times/week) Fees are based on at least break even basis 9 Ice Time Prime Time 6:00 A.M. 9:45 P.M. 10:00 P.M. 10:15 P.M. 10:30 P.M. 10:45 P.M. 11 :00 P.M. (Non Prime Time) 7/1/03 - 6/30/04 7/1/04 - 6/30/05 $145.00/hr $ 145.00/hr $110.00/hr $llO.OO/hr $ 140.00/hr $140.00/hr $135.00/hr $135.00/hr $ 13 O.OO/hr $ 130.00/hr $ 125.00/hr $125.00/hr $120.00/hr $120.00/hr $115.00/hr $115.00/hr Contracts over 100 hours deduct 3% Civic Arena Advertising Rates Full 4 x 8 Sheet One Year Three Years 10/1/03 - 9/30/04 10/1/04 - 9/30/05 $400.00/year $350.00/year $425.00/vear $375.00/vear 4 x 4 Sheet One Year Three Years $250.00/year $225.00/year $275.00/vear $250.00/vear Ice Resurfacer One Year Three Years $500.00/year $450.00/year No change until 2005 Fee Schedule $IOO.OO/performance $50.00/performance $100.00/performance Puppet Wagon Performances Resident Non Resident Senior Rambling River Center Annual Membership Fees Resident and Participating Townships Participating Townships are entitled to resident rates. ~$5.00/person - Individual ~$8.00/couple - Joint Spousal N on- Resident .$&00$ 1 O.OO/person - Individual $12.00$15.00/coup1e - Joint Spousal Senior Rambling River Center Rental Rates See Schedule G Senior Rambling River Center Key Deposit $25.00 Picnic Shelter Rates $20/half day (7:00 a.m.-2:45 p.m. or 3:15 p.m.-11:00 p.m.) $35 full day Public ~()Jrtcs......................................................................................................... Billed at equipment rate listed below plus personnel rate for staff time. Staff time is billed at a 2 hour minimum. Equipment rates during regular work hours are billed at a one hour minimum; call outs after regular hours are billed at a two hour minimum. Pick Up Truck 5 yd. Dump Truck Sewer Rodding Machine $23.00$25.00/hour $25.00$30.00/hour $73.00$75.00/hour 10 Road Patrol (Grader) Ind. Ford. Tractor (backhoe +/- loader) Street Sweeper Air Compressor, Hammer, Hose Compacting Tamper Trash Pump Paint Striper Mower Skidster Router Blower $63.00$65.00/hour $36.00$40.00/hour $60.00$65.00/hour $35.00/hour $13.00$15.00/hour $13.00$15.00/hour $28.00$30.00 /hour $58.00$60.00/hour $21.00$30.00/hour $27.00$30.00/hour $1l.00$12.00/hour NOTE: All City equipment must be operated by a City employee }l()li~~ ~~Jr~i~~s.................................................................................................. Billed at equipment rate listed below plus personnel rate for staff time. Staff time is billed at a 2 hour minimum. Equipment rates during regular work hours are billed at a one hour minimum; call outs after regular hours are billed at a two hour minimum. Subpoena Service $30 Barricades Residents - N/C if picked up and returned $5/day if delivered by Police Dept. False Alarms (after 3, per ordinance) Residential Non-Residential Non Resident Fingerprinting No charge for resident $75 $150 $15 Accident Reports for Insurance Purposes Copy of Driving Record $5 Resident - No Fee Non-Resident $5 Investigative Case Reports Research Fee Photographs Driver's License Report (non residents only) $1 per page $20/hr - 1 hour minimum $5 per copy $5 per copy (license holder only) Squad * 2 hour minimum ~$25/hour * All Police units must be operated by Police Department Personnel. Tapes - Copy Audio VHS CD/DVD $25 $35 $35 $10 Permit to Carry Concealed Firearms Public Data - Offenders List $20/week Pawn Shop Investigation $300 11 MISCELLANEOUS Ag Preserve Filing Assessment Roll Bonds - Surety Wetlands Excavation/Filling/Mining Subd. Devel. Impr. Candidate Filing Finance Charge (Interest Rate) Returned Checks Mandatory Information Requests Weed Notice - Adm & Inspec. Counter Sales Mylar Blue Line Copy Photo Copies Color Copies (8 1/2 x II) Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Maps Comprehensive Plan Document Redevelopment Plan 2' Contour Map (Spec. Order) Flood Plain Map Budget Comp Storm Water Plan. Surface Water Management Plan Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Water Supply & Dist. Plan Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan Engineering Guideline Manual Standard Detail Plates Assessment Roll Search (pending & levied) Individual Assessment Search FAX Machine Long Distance FAX Financial Audit VHS Tapes Photographs AMOUNT $75 $2.00/parcel x term of assessment, County fee Per est. costs of code compliance Per est. costs of code compliance 125% of project cost $5.00 - (10,000-100,000 population) Bond Rate + 1.5% $20 Min. $25/rcquest + hourlyActual cost plus $.25/page $30 (2nd notice same growing season) $5.00 per copy $3.00 per copy (exc. 2' contour) $.25 each $1.00 each GIS Fees (See Schedule E) $40 $10 GIS Fees (See Schedule E) $10 $30 ~$55 $40 ~$40 ~$40 $30 $50 ~$l 0 + .25/page $10 $.50/page Call costs ($5 min) + page chg. $30 $10 + actual costs $5/copy SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE AND CODIFICATION. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and shall govern all licenses, permits, and approvals for regulated activities occurring or undertaken in the 2004 calendar year. This ordinance need not be codified but may be attached to the City Code as an Appendix. ADOPTED this _ day of 20_, by the City Council of the City of Farmington. 12 Summary published in the Farmington Independent the Attest: SEAL Approved as to form the day of CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor Dan Siebenaler, Interim City Administrator ,20_ City Attorney day of 13 ,20_. 1!1!QJ04 SCHEDULE A COMPREHENSIVE STORM DRAINAGE PLAN POLICY FOR DEVELOPMENT/REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY BACKGROUND STATEMENT The Municipal Storm Sewer utilizes a fee structure for storm water improvements based on anticipated development. A parcel's contribution is determined by size and land use under the principal that a parcel should pay for past, present and future storm sewer improvements necessary to meet the needs of the parcel. The fees are set forth in the Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan dated September, 1985 as updated (Storm Water Area) and policy dated September, 1989 (Storm Water Utility). Storm water utility fees are based on size and land use on the basis that more intense land use pay a higher fee. Utility fees are paid by all developed property on a quarterly basis. Storm water area charges are paid at the time of development to help offset storm water improvements associated with the development of the property and are based by land use on a per acre rate. Presently, the Storm Water Area Charges only address developments associated with platting. Therefore, a policy is required which addresses development not associated with platting. When adopted, this policy will be incorporated as part of the Farmington Storm Water Drainage Plan. POLICY STATEMENT The purpose of this policy is to set forth the basis of fees and charges relating to past, present and future storm water improvements necessary to serve anticipated land use for development activities not related to the platting of property. AFFECTED DEVELOPMENTS A. A Storm Water Area Charge shall be paid before any building or development permits are approved, or before any improvements are made to a City owned park, which significantly affects stormwater runoff. B. Storm Water Area Charges are not required for the following activities: 1. Building permits on platted property. 2. Residential or agricultural accessory structures or additions. PROCEDURE A. It is the responsibility of the property owner or his agent to present to the City Engineer or his designee the following information: 1. Site plan showing location of all existing and proposed buildings and other developments relative to property lines. B. The City Engineer shall calculate the Storm Water Area Charge as follows: 1. Undeveloped Property a. The Engineer shall determine the area of development upon review of the site plan. The following minimum areas shall apply: 14 Residential Commercial Industrial C-l, F-l, F-2, F-3 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 40,000 square feet 80,000 square feet b. The Engineer shall multiply the estimated area by the rate set forth in Table 3 of the Farmington Storm Drainage Plan as amended. 2. Redevelopment a. The Engineer shall determine the area of development and change in land use upon review of the site plan. The following minimum areas shall apply: Residential Commercial Industrial C-I, F-l, F-2, F-3 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 40,000 square feet 80,000 square feet b. If it is determined there is no change in land use classification as described in Table 3 of the Farmington Storm Water Drainage Plan, and the property has previously been charged the storm water area charge, no fee is to be charged. c. If it is determined there is a change in land use, the fee shall be calculated as follows: Area x (Existing Land Use Rate - Proposed Land Use Rate) = Fee If the fee is less than $0.00, no fee will be charged. Revised 111100.04 15 SCHEDULE B WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION PLAN FOR UNPLATTED PROPERTY BACKGROUND STATEMENT The Municipal Water Utility utilizes a fee structure for water supply and distribution improvements based on anticipated development. A parcel's contribution is determined by the parcel's size and land use under the principal that a parcel should pay for past, present and future water system improvements necessary to meet the anticipated water needs of the parcel. The fee schedule set forth in the Farmington Water Supply and Distribution Plan dated June, 1988 as updated sets forth charges for water area and water hookups. The water connection fee is primarily used for present and future pumping and storage capacity and is based on type of land use. The water area charge is primarily used for past, present and future oversizing of mains and is set at a uniform per acre rate for future development. Also, the water area charge presently only addresses development associated with the platting of property. Therefore, a policy is required which sets forth fees for development not associated with platting. When adopted, this policy will be incorporated as part of the Farmington Water Distribution and Supply Plan. POLICY STATEMENT The purpose of this policy is to set forth the basis of fees and charges relating to past, present and future improvements necessary to serve anticipated land use for development activities not related to the development of property. AFFECTED DEVELOPMENTS A. A water area charge shall be paid before any building permit is approved, unless specifically exempted under Section B. B. Water Area Charges for the following activities are not required: 1. Any building permits on platted property, except buildings on parkland platted after Jan. 1, 1995. 2. Residential or agricultural accessory structures. PROCEDURE A. It is the responsibility of the property owner or his agent to present to the City Engineer or his designee the following information: 1. Site plan showing location of all existing and proposed buildings and other development relative to property lines. B. The City Engineer shall calculate the water area charge as follows: 1. The Engineer shall determine the area of development upon review of the site plan. The following minimum areas shall apply: Residential Commercial Industrial C-1, F-1, F-2, F-3 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet 80,000 square feet 2. The Engineer shall multiply the estimated area by the rate set forth in Table 14 of the Farmington Water Supply and Distribution Plan dated June, 1988 as amended. Revised 1/1/@04 16 SCHEDULE C APPENDIX A Solid Waste User Fee Schedule Solid Waste Rates 30 gallons............................... $39.50/quarter 60 gallons.. ............................. $48.50/ quarter 90 gallons............................... $57.50/quarter 120 gallons............................. $71.50/quarter 150 gallons............................. $80.50/quarter 180 gallons............................. $89.50/quarter 210 gallons............................. $103 .50/quarter 240 gallons............................. $112.50/quarter 270 gallons............................. $12l.50/quarter 300 gallons............................. $155.00/qtr x pickups/wk 600 gallons............................. $273.00/qtr x pickups/wk 900 gallons............................. $391.00/qtr x pickups/wk 1200 gallons........................... $509.00/qtr x pickups/wk 1500 gallons........................... $627.00/qtr x pickups/wk 1800 gallons........................... $745.00/qtr x pickups/wk Special Pickups Out of Cab Charge Staff Time Curbside Recycling Services Return Collection Trip Charge (90 gallons or less) Return Collection Trip Charge (300 gallons or more) EXTRA BAG CHARGE (lids that do not appear to be closed or additional garbage deposited by customers at the time of collection.) Private Hauler - Commercial Dumpster Annual Fee Wood Recycling Dumpster - 10 cy rolloff recycled Wood Recycling Dumpster - 15 cy rolloff recycled Wood Disposal Dumpster - 10 cy ro 110 ff disposed Wood Disposal Dumpster - 20 cy ro 110 ff disposed Mixed Municipal Waste - 10 cy rolloff disposed pass on charges from contractor per agreement $5.00/stop $40.00/hour - 1/2 hour minimum per contract $ 7. 50/tri p/ container $20. OO/trip/ container 1-2 bags per occur. -- no charge-residential 3+ bags per occur.--$3.00Ibag-$9.00 min. $6.00 per occurence-commercia1l300 gal. $100.00 $100.00/pull $125.00/pull $125.00/pull $225.00/pull $155.00/pull * Customers who overfill their containers more than 50% of the time during a quarter and do not request a level of service change will automatically be raised to the next level of service. Revised 1/1/00.04 17 Digital Data (DFX!Autocad Format) Hard Copy Map Sales 1/2 Sec. - Property Only 1/2 Sec. - Prop. & Planimetric 1/2 Sec. - Prop/Planimetric/Contour 1/8 Sec. - Prop/Planimetric/Contour 1/2 Sec. - Aerial Photo Old Section and 1/4 Section Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Maps Black and White, 11" x 17" Color, 11" x 17" Color, C size (17" x 22") Color, D size (22" x 34") Street Maps City Street Map, D size, Black and White City Street Map, Black and White 11" x 17" City Street Map, D size, color Special Requests Revised 1/1/GJ04 SCHEDULE E G.I.S. FEES County City Total $535/mega byte $20 $554 $ 10 50 150 40 6 5 $ 5 $ 15 5 55 20 170 5 45 o 6 o 5 $ 0 $ 0 o o $ 1 $ 1 4 4 8 8 15 15 o 2 o 1 o 4 See Engineering Department 2 1 4 18 Parcel #8 1 lA 1B lC 1D IE lEE Name Dak. Co. S. Broske Duo Plastics Duo Plastics FEl W. Berglund W&B Berglund B. Murphy No. Nat. Gas S. Hammer D&M Petersen SCHEDULE F TRUNK SANITARY CREDITS - SEWER DISTRICT 1 OCTOBER 27, 1994 SEE MAP" A" PROJECT 71-25(A) Assessment/Acre Trunk Sewer Fee w/Credit $ 498 198 244 198 202 76 76 $1,222$1,282 $1,522$1,582 $1,176$1,536 $1,522$1,582 $1,518$1,578 $1,644$1,704 $1,641$1,704 Formula: Trunk Sanitary Sewer Fee - Previous Trunk Assessment 2003 - Example (Area 1C) = $1,720$1,780 - $198 = $1,522$1,582 TRUNK SANITARY CREDITS - SEWER DISTRICT 3 OCTOBER 27, 1994 PROJECT 89-5 (A) Trunk Asmt Asmt/ Ac Sewer Fee w/Credit Pill 14-03600-012-05 14-03600-011-03 14-03600-012-29 14-03600-013-27 14-03600-016-29 14-03600-020-08 14-03600-015-29 14-03600-012-27 14-03600-019-08 14-03600-011-05 14-03600-010-33 $10,111 809 3,033 3,741 3,033 870 26,906 40,445 74,721 60,667 80,889 $ 2,022.20 1,011.25 1,011.11 1,011.08 3,033.00 859.94 859.94 1,011.13 1,906.15 2,022.23 1,011.11 $.00 708.75768.75 708.89768.89 708.92768.92 .00 860.06920.06 860.06920.06 708.87768.87 .00 .00 708.87768.87 Formula = Trunk Sanitary Sewer Fee minus Previous Assessment 2003 - Example (Petersen) = $1,720.00$1,780.00 - $1,011.11 = $708.89$768.89 NOTE: Trunk fees cannot be reduced below $0 - no refunds will be made on previous assessments. Revised 111100.04 19 SCHEDULE G FARMINGTON COMMUNITY SENIOR RAMBLING RIVER CENTER FEES AND PROCEDURES Fee Class Definition: Class 1: City of Farmington Sponsored Events and Dakota Valley Arts Council Class 2: Nonprofit, Community Service and Civic Groups Class 3: Residents of the City of Farmington and/or Senior Rambling River Center Members Class 4: Nonresidents and/or Commercial Groups Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Base Fees No base fees No base fees Main Room $35.00 Main Room $70.00 Large Activity Room $25.00 Large Activity Room $50.00 Kitchen $20.00 Kitchen $40.00 Small Activity Room $15.00 Small Activity Room $30.00 Hourlv Rate No Hourly Rate $10.00 per meeting* $15.00 per hour $15.00 per hour Deposit $100.00 refundable $100.00 refundable deposit $100.00 refundable deposit deposit **Reservations should be made 30 days in advance. ** *Class 2 users who volunteer their time to the Farmington Community Senior Rambling River Center may qualify for a discounted rental rate. The discount will be calculated as follows: $5.00 per hour, per person. Class 2 volunteer time will be governed by the Senior Rambling River Center Coordinator. . All rentals require a damage deposit that will be returned when all equipment and rooms have been found clean and damage free. . All reservations are made on a first come first served basis with priority given to Class 1 users. . All groups reserving space in the Farmington Community Senior Rambling River Center must have current signed contracts. On-going contracts must be re-signed annually. . The City of Farmington reserves the right to terminate any contract due to groups causing damage to the facility, complaints logged from the surrounding neighborhood and any other item deemed to necessitate termination. Fundraisers: Class 2 groups requesting to hold a fundraiser will pay Class 3 fees if (1) there will be more than 50 people in attendance OR (2) the fundraiser will last 3 or more hours. Revised 1/1/00.04 20 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.fal.J11il.\gton.mn.us TO: Mayor & Councilmembers FROM: Daniel M. Siebenaler, Interim City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: December 15,2003 It is requested that the December 15, 2003 agenda be amended as follows: PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 10 a) Sale of $2,205,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds Series 2003B and $605,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds Series 2003C - Finance Competitive bids for these bonds were received today. Results will be presented at the Council Meeting. Respectfully submitted, Daniel M. Siebenaler Interim City A~strator lOa.- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, Interim City Administrat FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution -Sale of $2, 150,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds Series 2004A - Finance DATE: December 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION The City Council; at their meeting November 17, 2003 authorized the sale of General Obligation Refunding Bonds of2004A to refinance three bond issues. DISCUSSION Competitive bids for the bonds were received today in the offices of Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Preliminary estimates anticipated an interest rate of 2.53% with an anticipated present value savings of$134,800. The City received seven bids. Legg, Mason, Wood, Walker was the low bidder at an interest rate of2.0541 %, making the present value savings $184,600. BUDGET IMPACT Analysis of the bids will be presented at the meeting. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the attached resolution awarding the sale of the $2,150,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds of2004A ~o Legg, Mason, Wood, Walker. Respectfully submitted, #J1t~ Robin Roland Finance Director CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $2,210,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004A Issuer: City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held on December 15,2003, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., at the municipal offices in Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $2,210,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004A I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this 15th day of December, 2003. Interim City Administrator It was reported that _ sealed proposals for the purchase of $2,21 0,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A were received prior to 10:00 o'clock a.m. on December 15, 2003, pursuant to the Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers of the Bonds by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., independent financial consultant to the City. The proposals have been publicly opened, read and tabulated and were found to be as follows: (See Attached) Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Councilmember RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $2,210,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004A BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Farmington, Minnesota (the City), as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND SALE. 1.01. Authorization. The City Council hereby determines that it is in the best interest of the City to issue its General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A (the Bonds), in the principal amount of $2,210,000, subject to adjustment in accordance with the Terms of Proposal, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429, 469 and 475. The proceeds of the Bonds shall be used, together with any additional funds of the City which might be required, to refund in advance of maturity, on February 1,2004 (the Redemption Date): (a) the 2005 through 2010 maturities, aggregating $700,000 in principal amount, of the City's $1,985,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1994A (the 1994 Refunded Bonds), originally dated August 1, 1994; and (b) the 2005 through 2007 maturities, aggregating $1,285,000 in principal amount, of the City's $2,660,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995, originally dated January 1, 1995 (the 1995A Refunded Bonds); and (c) the 2005 through 2007 maturities, with an accreted value on the Redemption Date of$512,605.73, of the City's $1,440,058.55 General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 1995B (Capital Appreciation Bonds), originally dated December 6, 1995 (the 1995B Refunded Bonds). The 1994 Refunded Bonds, the 1995A Refunded Bonds and the 1995B Refunded Bonds are referred to herein collectively as the Refunded Bonds. The Bonds are being issued for the purpose of effecting a current refunding of the Refunded Bonds to reduce debt service costs to the City. 1.02. Sale. Pursuant to the Terms of Proposal and the Official Statement prepared on behalf of the City by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., sealed proposals for the purchase of the Bonds were received at or before the time specified for receipt of proposals. The proposals have been opened, publicly read and considered and the purchase price, interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each proposal have been determined. The most favorable proposal received is that of , in , and associates (the Purchaser), to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest on all Bonds to the day of delivery and payment, on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 1.03. Award. The sale of the Bonds is hereby awarded to the Purchaser and the Mayor and Interim City Administrator (the City Administrator) are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on behalf of the City for the sale of the Bonds in accordance with the terms of the proposal. The good faith deposit of the Purchaser shall be retained and deposited by the City until the Bonds have been delivered, and shall be deducted from the purchase price paid at settlement. SECTION 2. BOND TERMS; REGISTRATION; EXECUTION AND DELNERY. 2.01. Issuance of Bonds. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid issuance ofthe Bonds having been done, now existing, having happened and having been performed, it is now necessary for the City Council to establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to provide security therefor and to issue the Bonds forthwith. 2.02. Maturities; Interest Rates; Denominations and Payment. The Bonds shall be originally dated as of January 15,2004, shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each, or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities, shall mature on February 1 in the years and amounts stated below, and shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption at the annual rates set forth opposite such years and amounts, as follows: Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate 2005 2006 2007 $750,000 720,000 595,000 % 2008 2009 2010 $50,000 50,000 45,000 % [REVISE MATURITY SCHEDULE FOR ANY TERM BONDS] The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360 day year composed of twelve 30 day months. The interest on and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein; provided that, so long as the Bonds are registered in the name of a securities depository, or a nominee thereof, in accordance with Section 2.08 hereof, principal and interest shall be payable in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities depository. 2.03. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon initial delivery of the Bonds pursuant to Section 2.07 and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 2.06, the date of authentication shall be noted on each Bond so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable on February 1 and August 1, commencing August 1,2004, to the owners of record thereof as ofthe close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. 2.04. Redemption. The Bonds shall not be subject to optional redemption prior to their stated maturity dates. 2 [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing on February 1,20_ and 20_ (the Term Bonds) shall be subject to mandatory redemption prior to maturity pursuant to the sinking fund requirements of this Section 2.04 at a redemption price equal to the stated principal amount thereof plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium. The Registrar shall select for redemption, by lot or other manner deemed fair, on February 1 in each of the following years the following stated principal amounts of such Bonds: Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1, 20_. Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1, 20_. The Finance Director shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published as required by law, and at least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the registered holders of any Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the bond register described in Section 2.06 hereof, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding.] 2.05. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City hereby appoints U.S. Bank National Association in St. Paul, Minnesota, as the initial bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the Registrar). The Mayor and City Administrator are authorized to execute and deliver, on 3 behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company organized under the laws of the United States or one of the states ofthe United States and authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar, effective upon not less than thirty days' written notice and upon the appointment and acceptance of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the Bond Register to the successor Registrar. 2.06. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a register (the Bond Register) in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. The term Holder or Bondholder as used herein shall mean the person (whether a natural person, corporation, association, partnership, trust, governmental unit, or other legal entity) in whose name a Bond is registered in the Bond Register. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name ofthe designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. (d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered for payment, transfer or exchange shall be promptly canceled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of. The Registrar shall furnish the City at least once each year a certificate setting forth the principal amounts and numbers of Bonds canceled and destroyed. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for 4 the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (t) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner ofthe Bond, whether the Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes; and all payments made to any registered owner or upon the owner's order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes. Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds (except for an exchange upon a partial redemption of a Bond), the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated. Lost. Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bond shall become mutilated or be destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar shall be canceled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it shall not be necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. (i) Authenticating Agent. The Registrar is hereby designated authenticating agent for the Bonds, within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55, Subdivision 1, as amended. (j) Valid Obligations. All Bonds issued upon any transfer or exchange of Bonds shall be the valid obligations of the City, evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the same benefits under this Resolution as the Bonds surrendered upon such transfer or exchange. 2.07. Execution. Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction of the City Administrator and shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Administrator, provided that the signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. In case any officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, 5 the same as ifhe had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, no Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on each Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution. When the Bonds have been prepared, executed and authenticated, the City Administrator shall deliver them to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore executed, and the Purchaser shall not be obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. 2.08. Securities Depositorv. (a) For purposes of this section the following terms shall have the following meanings: "Beneficial Owner" shall mean, whenever used with respect to a Bond, the person in whose name such Bond is recorded as the beneficial owner of such Bond by a Participant on the records of such Participant, or such person's subrogee. "Cede & Co." shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee ofDTC, and any successor nominee ofDTC with respect to the Bonds. "DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company of New York, New York. "Participant" shall mean any broker-dealer, bank or other financial institution for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository. "Representation Letter" shall mean the Representation Letter pursuant to which the City agrees to comply with DTC's Operational Arrangements. (b) The Bonds shall be initially issued as separately authenticated fully registered bonds, and one Bond shall be issued in the principal amount of each stated maturity of the Bonds. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of such Bonds shall be registered in the bond register in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee ofDTC. The Registrar and the City may treat DTC (or its nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner of the Bonds registered in its name for the purposes of payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds, selecting the Bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, if any, giving any notice permitted or required to be given to registered owners of Bonds under this resolution, registering the transfer of Bonds, and for all other purposes whatsoever; and neither the Registrar nor the City shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Neither the Registrar nor the City shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant, any person claiming a beneficial ownership interest in the Bonds under or through DTC or any Participant, or any other person which is not shown on the bond register as being a registered owner of any Bonds, with respect to the accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or any Participant, with respect to the payment by DTC or any Participant of any amount with respect to the principal of or interest on the Bonds, with respect to any notice which is permitted or required to be given to owners of Bonds under this resolution, with respect to the selection by DTC or any Participant of any person to receive payment in the event of a partial redemption of 6 the Bonds, or with respect to any consent given or other action taken by DTC as registered owner of the Bonds. So long as any Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee ofDTC, the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on such Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to such Bond, only to Cede & Co. in accordance with DTC's Operational Arrangements, and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the City's obligations with respect to the principal of and interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than DTC shall receive an authenticated Bond for each separate stated maturity evidencing the obligation of the City to make payments of principal and interest. Upon delivery by DTC to the Registrar of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the Bonds will be transferable to such new nominee in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. (c) In the event the City determines that it is in the best interest of the Beneficial Owners that they be able to obtain Bonds in the form of bond certificates, the City may notify DTC and the Registrar, whereupon DTC shall notify the Participants of the availability through DTC of Bonds in the form of certificates. In such event, the Bonds will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and the Registrar and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event the Bonds will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. (d) The execution and delivery of the Representation Letter to DTC by the Mayor or City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed. (e) In the event that any transfer or exchange of Bonds is permitted under paragraph (b) or (c) hereof, such transfer or exchange shall be accomplished upon receipt by the Registrar of the Bonds to be transferred or exchanged and appropriate instruments of transfer to the permitted transferee in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. In the event Bonds in the form of certificates are issued to owners other than Cede & Co., its successor as nominee for DTC as owner of all the Bonds, or another securities depository as owner of all the Bonds, the provisions of this resolution shall also apply to all matters relating thereto, including, without limitation, the printing of such Bonds in the form of bond certificates and the method of payment of principal of and interest on such Bonds in the form of bond certificates. 2.09. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the following form: [The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.] 7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA CITY OF FARMINGTON GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BOND, SERIES 2004A Interest Rate Maturity Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP No. % February 1,20_ January 15,2004 311297 REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: THOUSAND DOLLARS THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, COUNTY OF DAKOTA, STATE OF MINNESOTA (the City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and hereby promises to pay to the registered owner named above, or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing August 1,2004, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month. Interest hereon shall be computed on the basis ofa 360-day year composed of twelve 30-day months. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof at the principal office of the agent of the Registrar described below, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft drawn on U.S. Bank National Association, as bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent, or its successor designated under the Resolution described herein (the Registrar), or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. This Bond is one of an issue (the Bonds) in the aggregate principal amount of $2,210,000, issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on December 15,2003 (the Resolution) to finance the costs of various public improvements, and is issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429, 469 and 475. The Bonds are issuable only in fully registered form, in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing in the year 20_ and 20_ shallbe subject to mandatory redemption, at a redemption price equal to their principal amount plus interest accrued thereon to 8 the redemption date, without premium, on February 1 in each of the years shown below, in an amount equal to the following principal amounts: Term Bonds Maturing in 20-- Term Bonds Maturing in 20-- Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount $ $ The Finance Director shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published as required by law, and at least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the registered holders of any Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the bond register described in Section 2.06 hereof, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding.] As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner's attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The Bonds have been designated by the City as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" pursuant to Section 265(b )(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The City and the Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Bond, so long as this Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, or in the name of any other nominee of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository, the Registrar 9 shall pay all principal of and interest on this Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to this Bond, only to Cede & Co. or other nominee in accordance with the operational arrangements of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository as agreed to by the City. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required; that the City has established its General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A Bond Fund (the Bond Fund) and has appropriated thereto special assessments heretofore levied upon property specially benefited by local improvements financed by a portion of the bonds being refunded; ad valorem tax increments to be derived from Tax Increment Financing District No.1, located within the East Farmington Municipal Development District; ad valorem tax increments to be derived from the original Farmington Redevelopment Project, pledged to the City pursuant to an agreement with the Farmington Housing and Redevelopment Authority and ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City, which special assessments, tax increments and ad valorem taxes will be collectible for the years and in amounts sufficient to produce sums not less than five percent in excess of the principal of and interest on the Bonds when due, and has appropriated such special assessments, tax increments and taxes to its Bond Fund for the payment of such principal and interest; that if necessary for payment of principal and interest, additional ad valorem taxes are required to be levied upon all taxable property in the City, without limitation as to rate or amount; that the issuance of this Bond, together with all other indebtedness ofthe City outstanding on the date hereof and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness; and that the opinion printed hereon is a full, true and correct copy of the legal opinion given by Bond Counsel with reference to the Bonds, dated as of the date of original delivery of the Bonds. This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed by the Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Farmington, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalfby the facsimile signatures of the Mayor and City Administrator and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA (facsimile signature - City Administrator) (facsimile signature - Mayor) 10 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one ofthe Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. Date of Authentication: U.s. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Registrar By Authorized Representative [insert legal opinion] The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to the applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM - as tenants in common UTMA ................... as Custodian for....... .............. (Cust) (Minor) under Uniform Transfers to Minors Act ........... ... (State) TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common Additional abbreviations may also be used. ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: NOTICE: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatsoever. Signature Guaranteed: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an "eligible guarantor institution" meeting the requirements of the Registrar, which requirements include membership or participation in STAMP or such other "signature guaranty program" as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to or in substitution for STAMP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. 11 PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE: [end of bond form] SECTION 3. USE OF PROCEEDS. Upon payment for the Bonds by the Purchaser, the Finance Director shall deposit proceeds of the Bonds in the amount of $ in the sinking fund established for the Refunded Bonds to be applied to their payment on the Redemption Date; $ shall be used to pay costs of issuance of the Bonds; and $ shall be deposited in the Bond Fund created in Section 4.01 hereof. SECTION 4. GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS. SERIES 2004A BOND FUND AND PLEDGE OF TAXING POWERS. 4.01. General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds. Series 2004A Bond Fund. The Bonds shall be payable from a separate and special General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A Bond Fund (the Bond Fund) ofthe City, which Bond Fund the City agrees to maintain until the Bonds have been paid in full. If the money in the Bond Fund should at any time be insufficient to pay principal and interest due on the Bonds, such amounts shall be paid from other moneys on hand in other funds of the City, which other funds shall be reimbursed therefor when sufficient money becomes available in the Bond Fund. The moneys on hand in the Bond Fund from time to time shall be used only to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds. Into the Bond Fund shall be paid: (a) any amount appropriated thereto pursuant to Section 3 hereof; (b) all excess amounts on deposit in the debt service funds maintained for the payment of the Refunded Bonds upon the retirement of the Refunded Bonds on the Redemption Date; (c) all future collections of special assessments received with respect to the improvements financed by the Refunded Bonds; (d) ad valorem tax increments received from Tax Increment Financing District No.1, located within the East Farmington Municipal Development District; (e) ad valorem tax increments received from the original Farmington Redevelopment Project, pledged to the City by the Farmington Housing and Redevelopment Authority; (f) ad valorem taxes collected in accordance with the provisions of Section 4.02 hereof; and (g) any other funds appropriated by the City Council for the payment of the Bonds. 4.02. Pledge of Taxing Powers. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as such payments respectively become due, the full faith, credit and unlimited taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. In order to produce aggregate amounts not less than five percent in excess of amounts needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds, ad valorem taxes are hereby levied on all taxable property in the City, said taxes to be levied and collected in the following years and amounts: Levy Years Collection Years Amount 2003-2008 2004-2009 See attached levy computation 12 Said taxes shall be irrepealable as long as any ofthe Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the City reserves the right and power to reduce said levies in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61. SECTION 5. DEFEASANCE. When all of the Bonds have been discharged as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the registered owners of the Bonds shall cease. The City may discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full; or, if any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued from the due date to the date of such deposit. The City may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions oflaw now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a bank qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited, bearing interest payable at such time and at such rates and maturing or callable at the holder's option on such dates as shall be required to pay all principal and interest to become due thereon to maturity or earlier designated redemption date. Provided, however, that if such deposit is made more than ninety days before the maturity date or specified redemption date of the Bonds to be discharged, the City shall have received a written opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that such deposit does not adversely affect the exemption of interest on any Bonds from federal income taxation and a written report of an accountant or investment banking firm verifying that the deposit is sufficient to pay when due all ofthe principal and interest on the Bonds to be discharged on and before their maturity dates or earlier designated redemption date. SECTION 6. CERTIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGS. 6.01. Registration of Bonds. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the County Auditor of Dakota County and obtain a certificate that the Bonds have been duly entered upon the Auditor's bond register. 6.02. Authentication of Transcriot. The officers ofthe City and the County Auditor are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records relating to the Bonds and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds, as the same appear from the books and records in their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, affidavits and certificates, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 6.03. Official Statement. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds, dated December 5, 2003, and the supplement thereto, relating to the Bonds prepared and distributed by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. is hereby approved. Ehlers & Associates, Inc., is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to prepare and distribute to the Purchaser within seven business days from the date hereof, a supplement to the Official Statement listing the offering price, the interest rates, selling compensation, delivery date, the underwriters and such other information relating to the Bonds 13 required to be included in the Official Statement by Rule 15c2-12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of the Official Statement. 6.04. Authorization ofPavrnent of Certain Costs ofIssuance ofthe Certificates. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to U.S. Trust Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, on the closing date for further distribution as directed by the City's financial advisor, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. SECTION 7. TAX COVENANTS; ARBITRAGE MATTERS; AND CONTINUING DISCLOSURE. 7.01. General Tax Covenant. The City covenants and agrees with the registered owners of the Bonds that it will not take, or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents, any actions that would cause interest on the Bonds to become includable in gross income of the recipient under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) and applicable Treasury Regulations (the Regulations), and covenants to take any and all actions within its powers to ensure that the interest on the Bonds will not become includable in gross income of the recipient under the Code and the Regulations. It is hereby certified that the proceeds of the Refunded Bonds (or the bonds refunded thereby), were used for the acquisition and betterment of municipal improvements owned and maintained by the City and available for use by members of the general public on substantially equal terms. The City covenants and agrees that, so long as the Bonds are outstanding, the City shall not enter into any lease, management agreement, use agreement or other contract with any nongovernmental entity relating to the improvements so financed which would cause the Bonds to be considered "private activity bonds" or "private loan bonds" pursuant to Section 141 of the Code. 7.02. Arbitrage Certification. The Mayor and City Administrator being the officers of the City charged with the responsibility for issuing the Bonds pursuant to this resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the Purchaser a certificate in accordance with Section 148 of the Code, and applicable Regulations, stating the facts, estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Bonds which make it reasonable to expect that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used in a manner that would cause the Bonds to be "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of the Code and Regulations. 7.03. Arbitrage Rebate Exemption. (a) It is hereby determined that the City will qualify for the exception from arbitrage rebate for the Bonds provided by Section 148(f)(4)(D) of the Code, as modified by Section 148(f)(4)(D)(v) thereof, since: (i) the Refunded Bonds qualified for the exception from arbitrage rebate provided by Section 148(f)(4)(D) ofthe Code; (ii) the aggregate face amount of the Bonds does not exceed $5,000,000; (iii) the weighted average maturity ofthe Bonds does not exceed the remaining weighted average maturity ofthe Refunded Bonds; and 14 (iv) no Bond has a maturity date which is later than 30 years after the date the Refunded Bonds were issued. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this Section 7.03, if the arbitrage rebate provisions of Section 148(f) of the Code apply to the Bonds, the City hereby covenants and agrees to make the determinations, retain records and rebate to the United States the amounts at the times and in the manner required by said Section 148(f) and applicable Regulations. 7.04. Oualified Tax-Exemot Obligations. The City Council hereby designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code relating to the disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions, and hereby finds that the reasonably anticipated amount of qualified tax-exempt obligations (within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code) which will be issued by the City and all subordinate entities during calendar year 2004 does not exceed $10,000,000. 7.05. Continuing Disclosure. (a) Purpose and Beneficiaries. To provide for the public availability of certain information relating to the Bonds and the security therefor and to permit the Purchaser and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to comply with amendments to Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.F.R. ~ 240.15c2-12), relating to continuing disclosure (as in effect and interpreted from time to time, the Rule), which will enhance the marketability of the Bonds, the City hereby makes the following covenants and agreements for the benefit of the Owners (as hereinafter defined) from time to time of the Outstanding Bonds. The City is the only obligated person in respect of the Bonds within the meaning ofthe Rule for purposes of identifying the entities in respect of which continuing disclosure must be made. The City has complied in all material respects with any undertaking previously entered into by it under the Rule. If the City fails to comply with any provisions ofthis section, any person aggrieved thereby, including the Owners of any Outstanding Bonds, may take whatever action at law or in equity may appear necessary or appropriate to enforce performance and observance of any agreement or covenant contained in this section, including an action for a writ of mandamus or specific performance. Direct, indirect, consequential and punitive damages shall not be recoverable for any default hereunder to the extent permitted by law. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in no event shall a default under this section constitute a default under the Bonds or under any other provision of this resolution. As used in this section, Owner or Bondowner means, in respect of a Bond, the registered owner or owners thereof appearing in the bond register maintained by the Registrar or any Beneficial Owner (as hereinafter defined) thereof, if such Beneficial Owner provides to the Registrar evidence of such beneficial ownership in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar. As used herein, Beneficial Owner means, in respect of a Bond, any person or entity which (i) has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, such Bond (including persons or entities holding Bonds through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or (b) is treated as the owner of the Bond for federal income tax purposes. (b) Information To Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth in subsection (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City, the following information at the following times: 15 (1) on or before 365 days after the end of each fiscal year of the City, commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31,2003, the following financial information and operating data in respect ofthe City (the Disclosure Information): (A) the audited financial statements of the City for such fiscal year, containing balance sheets as of the end of such fiscal year and a statement of operations, changes in fund balances and cash flows for the fiscal year then ended, showing in comparative form such figures for the preceding fiscal year of the City, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board as modified in accordance with the governmental accounting standards promulgated by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board or as otherwise provided under Minnesota law, as in effect from time to time, or, if and to the extent such financial statements have not been prepared in accordance with such generally accepted accounting principles for reasons beyond the reasonable control of the City, noting the discrepancies therefrom and the effect thereof, and certified as to accuracy and completeness in all material respects by the fiscal officer of the City; and (B) to the extent not included in the financial statements referred to in paragraph (A) hereof, the information for such fiscal year or for the period most recently available of the type contained in the Official Statement under the headings: Current Property Valuations; Direct Debt; Tax Levies and Collections; Population Trend and EmploymentJUnemployment, which information may be unaudited. Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, if the audited financial statements are not available by the date specified, the City shall provide on or before such date unaudited financial statements in the format required for the audited financial statements as part of the Disclosure Information and, within 10 days after the receipt thereof, the City shall provide the audited financial statements. Any or all of the Disclosure Information may be incorporated by reference, if it is updated as required hereby, from other documents, including official statements, which have been submitted to each of the repositories hereinafter referred to under subsection (c) or the SEC. If the document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must be available from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The City shall clearly identify in the Disclosure Information each document so incorporated by reference. If any part of the Disclosure Information can no longer be generated because the operations of the City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a statement to such effect; provided, however, if such operations have been replaced by other City operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City determines that certain specified data regarding such replacement operations would be a Material Pact (as defined in paragraph (2) hereof), then, from and after such determination, the Disclosure Information shall include such additional specified data regarding the replacement operations. If the Disclosure Information is changed or this 16 section is amended as permitted by this paragraph (b)(1) or subsection (d), then the City shall include in the next Disclosure Information to be delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect of any change in the type of financial information or operating data provided. (2) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any ofthe following events which is a Material Fact (as hereinafter defined): (A) Principal and interest payment delinquencies; (B) Non-payment related defaults; (C) Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (D) Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (E) Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (F) Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax-exempt status of the security; (G) Modifications to rights of security holders; (H) Bond calls; (I) Defeasances; (J) Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the securities; and (K) Rating changes. As used herein, a Material Fact is a fact as to which a substantial likelihood exists that a reasonably prudent investor would attach importance thereto in deciding to buy, hold or sell a Bond or, ifnot disclosed, would significantly alter the total information otherwise available to an investor from the Official Statement, information disclosed hereunder or information generally available to the public. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, a Material Fact is also an event that would be deemed material for purposes of the purchase, holding or sale of a Bond within the meaning of applicable federal securities laws, as interpreted at the time of discovery of the occurrence of the event. (3) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events or conditions: (A) the failure of the City to provide the Disclosure Information required under paragraph (b)(1) at the time specified thereunder; (B) the amendment or supplementing ofthis section pursuant to subsection (d), together with a copy of such amendment or supplement and any explanation provided by the City under subsection (d)(2); (C) the termination ofthe obligations ofthe City under this section pursuant to subsection (d); (D) any change in the accounting principles pursuant to which the financial statements constituting a portion of the Disclosure Information are prepared; and (E) any change in the fiscal year of the City. 17 (c) Manner of Disclosure. The City agrees to make available the information described in subsection (b) to the following entities by telecopy, overnight delivery, mail or other means, as appropriate: (1) the information described in paragraph (1) of subsection (b), to each then nationally recognized municipal securities information repository under the Rule and to any state information depository then designated or operated by the State of Minnesota as contemplated by the Rule (the State Depository), if any; (2) the information described in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (b), to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and to the State Depository, if any; and (3) the information described in subsection (b), to any rating agency then maintaining a rating of the Bonds at the request of the City and, at the expense of such Bondowner, to any Bondowner who requests in writing such information, at the time of transmission under paragraphs (1) or (2) of this subsection (c), as the case may be, or, if such information is transmitted with a subsequent time of release, at the time such information is to be released. (d) Term; Amendments; Interpretation. (1) The covenants of the City in this section shall remain in effect so long as any Bonds are Outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations of the City under this section shall terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the City delivers to the Registrar an opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that, because of legislative action or final judicial or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the City to comply with the requirements of this section will not cause participating undeIWriters in the primary offering ofthe Bonds to be in violation of the Rule or other applicable requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or any statutes or laws successory thereto or amendatory thereof. (2) This section (and the form and requirements ofthe Disclosure Information) may be amended or supplemented by the City from time to time, without notice to (except as provided in paragraph (c )(3) hereof) or the consent of the Owners of any Bonds, by a resolution ofthis Council filed in the office ofthe recording officer of the City accompanied by an opinion of Bond Counsel, who may rely on certificates of the City and others and the opinion may be subject to customary qualifications, to the effect that: (i) such amendment or supplement (a) is made in connection with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in law or regulation or a change in the identity, nature or status of the City or the type of operations conducted by the City, or (b) is required by, or better complies with, the provisions of paragraph (b)(5) ofthe Rule; (ii) this section as so amended or supplemented would have complied with the requirements of paragraph (b)( 5) of the Rule at the time of the primary offering of the Bonds, giving effect to any change in circumstances applicable under 18 clause (i)(a) and assuming that the Rule as in effect and interpreted at the time of the amendment or supplement was in effect at the time of the primary offering; and (iii) such amendment or supplement does not materially impair the interests of the Bondowners under the Rule. If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide, contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect, if any, of the change in the type of financial information or operating data being provided hereunder. (3) This section is entered into to comply with the continuing disclosure provisions of the Rule and should be construed so as to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule. SECTION 8. REDEMPTION OF REFUNDED BONDS. The Finance Director is hereby directed to: (a) advise U.S. Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, successor to First Trust National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, as paying agent for the 1994A Refunded Bonds, to call the 1994A Refunded Bonds for redemption and prepayment on February 1,2004, and to give thirty day's mailed Notice of Redemption, substantially in the form attached hereto, all in accordance with the provisions of the resolution authorizing the issuance of the 1994A Refunded Bonds; (b) advise u.s. Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, successor to First Trust National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, as paying agent for the 1995A Refunded Bonds, to call the 1995A Refunded Bonds for redemption and prepayment on February 1,2004, and to give thirty day's mailed Notice of Redemption, substantially in the form attached hereto, all in accordance with the provisions of the resolution authorizing the issuance of the 1995A Refunded Bonds; and (c) advise U.S. Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, successor to First Trust National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, as paying agent for the 1995B Refunded Bonds, to call the 1995B Refunded Bonds for redemption and prepayment on February 1,2004, and to give thirty day's mailed Notice of Redemption, substantially in the form attached hereto, all in accordance with the provisions of the resolution authorizing the issuance of the 1995B Refunded Bonds. Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 19 NOTICE OF REDEMPTION $1,985,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1994A Dated August 1, 1994 City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota NOTICE IS HEREBY GWEN THAT there have been called for redemption and prepayment on February 1,2004, all outstanding Bonds of the above referenced issue, dated August 1, 1994, maturing February 1 in the following years and having the interest rates and CUSIP numbers listed below: Maturity Amount CUSIP No. Rate 2005 $150,000 311297 5.65% 2006 105,000 311297 5.75 2007 105,000 311297 5.90 2008 110,000 311297 6.00 2009 115,000 311297 6.05 2010 115,000 311297 6.10 The Bonds will be redeemed at a price of 100% of their principal amount plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. Holders of the Bonds should present them for payment to U.S. Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, successor to First Trust National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, on or before said date, when they will cease to bear interest, in the following manner: Relristered Bonds: Bearer Bonds: In Person. By Hand: U.S. Bank National Association Corporate Trust Services P.O. Box 64111 St. Paul, MN 55164-0011 U.s. Bank National Association Corporate Trust Services P.O. Box 64452 St. Paul, MN 55164-0452 U.S. Bank National Association First Floor Bond Drop Window 60 Livingston Avenue St. Paul, MN 55107 (800) 934-6802 Important Notice: In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, federal backup withholding tax will be withheld at the applicable backup withholding rate in effect at the time the payment by the redeeming institutions if they are not provided with your social security number or federal employer identification number, properly certified. This requirement is fulfilled by submitting a W-9 Form, which may be obtained at a bank or other financial institution. The Paying Agent shall not be responsible for the selection of or use of the CUSIP number, nor is any representation made as to its correctness indicated in this Notice of Redemption. It is included solely for the convenience of the Holders. Additional information may be obtained from the undersigned or from Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota (651-697-8500), financial consultant to the City. Dated: December 15,2003. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA Isl City Administrator NOTICE OF REDEMPTION $2,660,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995A Dated January 1, 1995 City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota NOTICE IS HEREBY GWEN THAT there have been called for redemption and prepayment on February 1,2004, all outstanding Bonds of the above referenced issue, dated January 1, 1995, maturing February 1 in the following years and having the interest rates and CUSIP numbers listed below: Maturitv Amount CUSIP No. Rate 2005 2006 2007 $400,000 430,000 455,000 311297 311297 311297 5.90% 6.00 6.10 The Bonds will be redeemed at a price of 100% of their principal amount plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. Holders of the Bonds should present them for payment to u.S. Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, successor to First Trust National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, on or before said date, when they will cease to bear interest, in the following manner: Registered Bonds: Bearer Bonds: In Person. By Hand: u.S. Bank National Association Corporate Trust Services P.O. Box 64111 St. Paul, MN 55164-0011 u.S. Bank National Association Corporate Trust Services P.O. Box 64452 St. Paul, MN 55164-0452 u.S. Bank National Association First Floor Bond Drop Window 60 Livingston Avenue St. Paul, MN 55107 (800) 934-6802 Important Notice: In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, federal backup withholding tax will be withheld at the applicable backup withholding rate in effect at the time the payment by the redeeming institutions if they are not provided with your social security number or federal employer identification number, properly certified. This requirement is fulfilled by submitting a W-9 Form, which may be obtained at a bank or other financial institution. The Paying Agent shall not be responsible for the selection of or use of the CUSIP number, nor is any representation made as to its correctness indicated in this Notice of Redemption. It is included solely for the convenience of the Holders. Additional information may be obtained from the undersigned or from Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota (651-697-8500), financial consultant to the City. Dated: December 15,2003. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF F ARMINGTON, MINNESOTA Isl City Administrator NOTICE OF REDEMPTION $1,440,058.55 General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 1995B (Capital Appreciation Bonds) Dated December 6, 1995 City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT there have been called for redemption and prepayment on February 1,2004, all outstanding Bonds of the above referenced issue, dated December 6, 1995, maturing February 1 in the following years and accreted amounts and having the CUSIP numbers listed below: Accreted Value Approximate Year as of 2/112004 Yield to Maturitv CUSIP Number 2005 $218,917.07 5.00% 311297 2006 207,962.20 5.10 311297 2007 85,726.46 5.20 311297 The Bonds will be redeemed at a price of 100% of their accreted amount to the date of redemption. Holders of the Bonds should present them for payment to U.S. Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, successor to First Trust National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, on or before said date, when they will cease to bear interest, in the following manner: Registered Bonds: Bearer Bonds: In Person. By Hand: U.S. Bank National Association Corporate Trust Services P.O. Box 64111 St. Paul, MN 55164-0011 U.S. Bank National Association Corporate Trust Services P.O. Box 64452 St. Paul, MN 55164-0452 U.s. Bank National Association First Floor Bond Drop Window 60 Livingston Avenue St. Paul, MN 55107 (800) 934-6802 Important Notice: In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, federal backup withholding tax will be withheld at the applicable backup withholding rate in effect at the time the payment by the redeeming institutions if they are not provided with your social security number or federal employer identification number, properly certified. This requirement is fulfilled by submitting a W -9 Form, which may be obtained at a bank or other financial institution. The Paying Agent shall not be responsible for the selection of or use of the CUSIP number, nor is any representation made as to its correctness indicated in this Notice of Redemption. It is included solely for the convenience of the Holders. Additional information may be obtained from the undersigned or from Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota (651-697-8500), financial consultant to the City. Dated: December 15,2003. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA Isl City Administrator DAKOTA COUNTY AUDITOR'S CERTIFICATE AS TO REGISTRATION AND TAX LEVY The undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting County Auditor of Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby certifies that there has been filed in my office a certified copy of a resolution duly adopted on December 15,2003, by the City Council ofthe City of Farmington, Minnesota, setting forth the form and details of an issue of $2,21 0,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A, dated as of January 15, 2004, and levying taxes for their payment. I further certify that the issue has been entered on my bond register and the tax required by law for their payment has been levied and filed as required by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 475.61 to 475.63. WITNESS my hand and official seal this _ day of December, 2004. Dakota County Auditor (SEAL) City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TQ: Mayor, Council Members, Interim City Administrat FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution -Sale of $600,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds Series 2004B - Finance DATE: December 15, 2003 INTRODUCTION The City Council, at their meeting November 17, 2003 authorized the sale of General Obligation Refunding Bonds of2004B to refinance the Taxable G.O. TIP Bonds of 1993. DISCUSSION Competitive bids for the bonds were received today in the office& of Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Preliminary estimates anticipated an interest rate of 4.84% with an anticipated present value savings of $42,850. The City received seven bids. Cronin & Company was the low bidder at an interest rate of 4.74%, securing the anticipated present value savings listed above. BUDGET IMPACT Analysis of the bids will be presented at the meeting. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the attached resolution awarding the sale of the $600,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds of2004B to Cro~n & Company. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Finance Director CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $605,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004B Issuer: City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held on December 15,2003, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., at the municipal offices in Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $605,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004B I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this 15th day of December, 2003. Interim City Administrator It was reported that sealed proposals for the purchase of $605,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2004B, were received prior to 10:00 o'clock a.m. on December 15, 2003, pursuant to the Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers of the Bonds by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., independent financial consultant to the City. The proposals have been publicly opened, read and tabulated and were found to be as follows: (See Attached) Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Councilmember RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $605,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004B BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the City), as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND SALE. 1.01. Authorization. The City Council hereby determines that it is in the best interest of the City to issue its Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2004B (the Bonds), in the principal amount of $605,000, subject to adjustment in accordance with the Terms of Proposal, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 469 and 475. The proceeds of the Bonds shall be used, together with any additional funds of the City which might be required, to refund in advance of maturity, on February 1,2004, the 2005 through 2015 maturities, aggregating $580,000 in principal amount, of the City's $815,000 General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1993B (the Refunded Bonds), originally dated October 1, 1993. The Bonds are being issued for the purpose of effecting a current refunding of the Refunded Bonds to reduce debt service costs to the City. 1.02. Sale. Pursuant to the Terms of Proposal and the Official Statement prepared on behalf ofthe City by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., sealed proposals for the purchase of the Bonds were received at or before the time specified for receipt of proposals. The proposals have been opened, publicly read and considered and the purchase price, interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each proposal have been determined. The most favorable proposal received is that of , in , and associates (the Purchaser), to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest on all Bonds to the day of delivery and payment, on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 1.03. Award. The sale of the Bonds is hereby awarded to the Purchaser and the Mayor and Interim City Administrator (the City Administrator) are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on behalf of the City for the sale of the Bonds in accordance with the terms of the proposal. The good faith deposit of the Purchaser shall be retained and deposited by the City until the Bonds have been delivered, and shall be deducted from the purchase price paid at settlement. SECTION 2. BOND TERMS: REGISTRATION: EXECUTION AND DELIVERY. 2.01. Issuance of Bonds. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid issuance of the Bonds having been done, now existing, having happened and having been performed, it is now necessary for the City Council to establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to provide security therefor and to issue the Bonds forthwith. 2.02. Maturities: Interest Rates: Denominations and Payment. The Bonds shall be originally dated as of January 15,2004, shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each, or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities, shall mature on February 1 in the years and amounts stated below, and shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption at the annual rates set forth opposite such years and amounts, as follows: Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate 2005 $40,000 % 2011 55,000 % 2006 40,000 2012 60,000 2007 45,000 2013 65,000 2008 50,000 2014 70,000 2009 55,000 2015 70,000 2010 55,000 [REVISE MATURITY SCHEDULE FOR ANY TERM BONDS] The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360 day year composed of twelve 30 day months. The interest on and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein; provided that, so long as the Bonds are registered in the name of a securities depository, or a nominee thereof, in accordance with Section 2.08 hereof, principal and interest shall be payable in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities depository. 2.03. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon the initial delivery ofthe Bonds pursuant to Section 2.07, and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 2.06, the date of authentication shall be noted on each Bond so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable on each February 1 and August 1, commencing August 1,2004, to the owners of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. 2.04. Redemution. Bonds maturing in 2013 and later years shall be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures) in multiples of $5,000, on February 1, 2012, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. The Finance Director shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published as required by law, and at 3 least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the registered holders of any Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the bond register described in Section 2.06 hereof, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond,. a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing on February 1,20_ and 20_ (the Term Bonds) shall be subject to mandatory redemption prior to maturity pursuant to the sinking fund requirements of this Section 2.04 at a redemption price equal to the stated principal amount thereofplus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium. The Registrar shall select for redemption, by lot or other manner deemed fair, on February 1 in each of the following years the following stated principal amounts of such Bonds: Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1,20_, Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1,20_. Notice of redemption shall be given as provided in the preceding paragraph.] 2.05. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City hereby appoints U.S. Bank National Association, in St. Paul, Minnesota, as the initial bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent 4 (the Registrar). The Mayor and City Administrator are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company organized under the laws of the United States or one of the states of the United States and authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges ofthe Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar, effective upon not less than thirty days' written notice and upon the appointment and acceptance of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the Bond Register to the successor Registrar. 2.06. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a register (the Bond Register) in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. The term Holder or Bondholder as used herein shall mean the person (whether a natural person, corporation, association, partnership, trust, governmental unit, or other legal entity) in whose name a Bond is registered in the Bond Register. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. (d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered for payment, transfer or exchange shall be promptly canceled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of. The Registrar shall furnish the City at least once each year a certificate setting forth the principal amounts and numbers of Bonds canceled and destroyed. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for 5 the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. 6 CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $605,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004B Issuer: City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held on December 15, 2003, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., at the municipal offices in Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $605,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004B I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this 15th day of December, 2003. Interim City Administrator It was reported that _ sealed proposals for the purchase of $605,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2004B, were received prior to 10:00 o'clock a.m. on December 15, 2003, pursuant to the Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers ofthe Bonds by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., independent financial consultant to the City. The proposals have been publicly opened, read and tabulated and were found to be as follows: (See Attached) Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Councilmember RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, AWARDING THE SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $605,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004B BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Farmington, Minnesota (the City), as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION AND SALE. 1.01. Authorization. The City Council hereby determines that it is in the best interest of the City to issue its Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2004B (the Bonds), in the principal amount of $605,000, subject to adjustment in accordance with the Terms of Proposal, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 469 and 475. The proceeds of the Bonds shall be used, together with any additional funds ofthe City which might be required, to refund in advance of maturity, on February 1, 2004, the 2005 through 2015 maturities, aggregating $580,000 in principal amount, of the City's $815,000 General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1993B (the Refunded Bonds), originally dated October 1, 1993. The Bonds are being issued for the purpose of effecting a current refunding of the Refunded Bonds to reduce debt service costs to the City. 1.02. Sale. Pursuant to the Terms of Proposal and the Official Statement prepared on behalf of the City by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., sealed proposals for the purchase of the Bonds were received at or before the time specified for receipt of proposals. The proposals have been opened, publicly read and considered and the purchase price, interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each proposal have been determined. The most favorable proposal received is that of , in , and associates (the Purchaser), to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest on all Bonds to the day of delivery and payment, on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 1.03. Award. The sale of the Bonds is hereby awarded to the Purchaser and the Mayor and Interim City Administrator (the City Administrator) are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on behalf of the City for the sale of the Bonds in accordance with the terms of the proposal. The good faith deposit of the Purchaser shall be retained and deposited by the City until the Bonds have been delivered, and shall be deducted from the purchase price paid at settlement. SECTION 2. BOND TERMS: REGISTRATION: EXECUTION AND DELNERY. 2.01. Issuance of Bonds. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid issuance ofthe Bonds having been done, now existing, having happened and having been performed, it is now necessary for the City Council to establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to provide security therefor and to issue the Bonds forthwith. 2.02. Maturities; Interest Rates; Denominations and Payment. The Bonds shall be originally dated as of January 15,2004, shall be in the denomination of $5,000 each, or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities, shall mature on February 1 in the years and amounts stated below, and shall bear interest from date of issue until paid or duly called for redemption at the annual rates set forth opposite such years and amounts, as follows: Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate 2005 $40,000 % 2011 55,000 % 2006 40,000 2012 60,000 2007 45,000 2013 65,000 2008 50,000 2014 70,000 2009 55,000 2015 70,000 2010 55,000 [REVISE MATURITY SCHEDULE FOR ANY TERM BONDS] The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360 day year composed of twelve 30 day months. The interest on and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein; provided that, so long as the Bonds are registered in the name of a securities depository, or a nominee thereof, in accordance with Section 2.08 hereof, principal and interest shall be payable in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities depository. 2.03. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon the initial delivery ofthe Bonds pursuant to Section 2.07, and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 2.06, the date of authentication shall be noted on each Bond so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable on each February 1 and August 1, commencing August 1,2004, to the owners of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. 2.04. Redemotion. Bonds maturing in 2013 and later years shall be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures) in multiples of $5,000, on February 1, 2012, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. The Finance Director shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published as required by law, and at 3 least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the registered holders of any Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the bond register described in Section 2.06 hereof, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing on February 1, 20_ and 20_ (the Term Bonds) shall be subject to mandatory redemption prior to maturity pursuant to the sinking fund requirements of this Section 2.04 at a redemption price equal to the stated principal amount thereof plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium. The Registrar shall select for redemption, by lot or other manner deemed fair, on February 1 in each of the following years the following stated principal amounts of such Bonds: Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1,20_. Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1,20_. Notice of redemption shall be given as provided in the preceding paragraph.] 2.05. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City hereby appoints U.S. Bank National Association, in St. Paul, Minnesota, as the initial bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent 4 (the Registrar). The Mayor and City Administrator are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf ofthe City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company organized under the laws ofthe United States or one of the states of the United States and authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation shall be authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges ofthe Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar, effective upon not less than thirty days' written notice and upon the appointment and acceptance of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar shall deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and shall deliver the Bond Register to the successor Registrar. 2.06. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a register (the Bond Register) in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. The term Holder or Bondholder as used herein shall mean the person (whether a natural person, corporation, association, partnership, trust, governmental unit, or other legal entity) in whose name a Bond is registered in the Bond Register. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name ofthe designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. (d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered for payment, transfer or exchange shall be promptly canceled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of. The Registrar shall furnish the City at least once each year a certificate setting forth the principal amounts and numbers of Bonds canceled and destroyed. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for 5 the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. 6 (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes; and all payments made to any registered owner or upon the owner's order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g) Taxes. Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of Bonds (except for an exchange upon a partial redemption of a Bond), the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (h) Mutilated. Lost. Stolen or Destroved Bonds. In case any Bond shall become mutilated or be destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar shall deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the City and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. All Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar shall be canceled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the City. Ifthe mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it shall not be necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. (i) Authenticating Agent. The Registrar is hereby designated authenticating agent for the Bonds, within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55, Subdivision 1, as amended. (j) Valid Obligations. All Bonds issued upon any transfer or exchange of Bonds shall be the valid obligations of the City, evidencing the same debt, and entitled to the same benefits under this Resolution as the Bonds surrendered upon such transfer or exchange. 2.07. Execution. Authentication and Deliverv. The Bonds shall be prepared under the direction of the City Administrator and shall be executed on behalf ofthe City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Administrator, provided that the signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. In case any officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature shall appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such signature or facsimile shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as ifhe had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, no Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has been duly executed by 7 the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on each Bond shall be conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution. When the Bonds have been prepared, executed and authenticated, the City Administrator shall deliver them to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore executed, and the Purchaser shall not be obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. 2.08. Securities Depository. (a) For purposes of this section the following terms shall have the following meanings: "Beneficial Owner" shall mean, whenever used with respect to a Bond, the person in whose name such Bond is recorded as the beneficial owner of such Bond by a Participant on the records of such Participant, or such person's subrogee. "Cede & Co." shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee of DTC, and any successor nominee ofDTC with respect to the Bonds. "DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company of New York, New York. "Participant" shall mean any broker-dealer, bank or other financial institution for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository. "Representation Letter" shall mean the Representation Letter pursuant to which the sender agrees to comply with DTC's Operational Arrangements. (b) The Bonds shall be initially issued as separately authenticated fully registered bonds, and one Bond shall be issued in the principal amount of each stated maturity of the Bonds. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of such Bonds shall be registered in the bond register in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee ofDTC. The Registrar and the City may treat DTC (or its nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner of the Bonds registered in its name for the purposes of payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds, selecting the Bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, if any, giving any notice permitted or required to be given to registered owners of Bonds under this resolution, registering the transfer of Bonds, and for all other purposes whatsoever; and neither the Registrar nor the City shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Neither the Registrar nor the City shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant, any person claiming a beneficial ownership interest in the Bonds under or through DTC or any Participant, or any other person which is not shown on the bond register as being a registered owner of any Bonds, with respect to the accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or any Participant, with respect to the payment by DTC or any Participant of any amount with respect to the principal of or interest on the Bonds, with respect to any notice which is permitted or required to be given to owners of Bonds under this resolution, with respect to the selection by DTC or any Participant of any person to receive payment in the event of a partial redemption of the Bonds, or with respect to any consent given or other action taken by DTC as registered owner of the Bonds. So long as any Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee ofDTC, 8 the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on such Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to such Bond, only to Cede & Co. in accordance with DTC's Operational Arrangements, and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the City's obligations with respect to the principal of and interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than DTC shall receive an authenticated Bond for each separate stated maturity evidencing the obligation of the City to make payments of principal and interest. Upon delivery by DTC to the Registrar of written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the Bonds will be transferable to such new nominee in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. (c) In the event the City determines that it is in the best interest of the Beneficial Owners that they be able to obtain Bonds in the form of bond certificates, the City may notify DTC and the Registrar, whereupon DTC shall notify the Participants ofthe availability through DTC of Bonds in the form of certificates. In such event, the Bonds will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and the Registrar and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event the Bonds will be transferable in accordance with paragraph (e) hereof. (d) The execution and delivery of the Representation Letter to DTC by the Mayor or City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed. (e) In the event that any transfer or exchange of Bonds is permitted under paragraph (b) or (c) hereof, such transfer or exchange shall be accomplished upon receipt by the Registrar of the Bonds to be transferred or exchanged and appropriate instruments of transfer to the permitted transferee in accordance with the provisions ofthis resolution. In the event Bonds in the form of certificates are issued to owners other than Cede & Co., its successor as nominee for DTC as owner of all the Bonds, or another securities depository as owner of all the Bonds, the provisions of this resolution shall also apply to all matters relating thereto, including, without limitation, the printing of such Bonds in the form of bond certificates and the method of payment of principal of and interest on such Bonds in the form of bond certificates. . 2.09. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the following form: [The remainder ofthis page is intentionally left blank.] 9 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA CITY OF FARMINGTON TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BOND, SERIES 2004B Interest Rate Maturity Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP No. % February 1, 20-- January 15,2004 311297 REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: THOUSAND DOLLARS THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, COUNTY OF DAKOTA, STATE OF MINNESOTA (the City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and hereby promises to pay to the registered owner named above, or registered assigns, the principal sum specified above on the maturity date specified above, without option of prior redemption, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing August 1,2004, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month. Interest hereon shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year composed of twelve 30-day months. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft on U.S. Bank National Association, in St. Paul, Minnesota, as bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent, or its successor designated under the Resolution described herein (the Registrar). For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers ofthe City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. This Bond is one of an issue (the Bonds) in the aggregate principal amount of$605,OOO issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on December 15, 2003 (the Resolution), to provide funds to refund certain outstanding Taxable General Obligation Tax increment bonds of the City, and is issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the charter of the City and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 469 and 475. The Bonds are issuable only in fully registered form, in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities. Bonds maturing in 2013 and later years are each subject to redemption and prepayment at the option of the City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures) in multiples of$5,000 on February 1, 2012, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof plus interest 10 accrued to the date of redemption. The City will cause notice of the call for redemption to be published as required by law and, at least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, will cause notice of the call thereof to be mailed by first class mail to the registered owner of any Bond to be redeemed at the owner's address as it appears on the bond register maintained by the Registrar, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified, and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the registered owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. [COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE TERM BONDS- ADD ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS IF THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO TERM BONDS] [Bonds maturing in the year 20_ and 20_ shall be subject to mandatory redemption, at a redemption price equal to their principal amount plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium, on February 1 in each of the years shown below, in an amount equal to the following principal amounts: Term Bonds Maturing in 20-- Term Bonds Maturing in 20-- Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount Sinking Fund Payment Date Aggregate Principal Amount $ $ Notice of redemption shall be given as provided in the preceding paragraph.] As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereoftogether with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner's attorney, and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The City and the Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. 11 Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Bond, so long as this Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, or in the name of any other nominee of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository, the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on this Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to this Bond, only to Cede & Co. or other nominee in accordance with the operational arrangements of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository as agreed to by the City. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the charter and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required; that the City has established its Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2004B Bond Fund and has appropriated thereto ad valorem tax increments to be derived from Tax Increment Financing District No.2, located within the Farmington Redevelopment Project Area, heretofore established by and located within the City, which tax increments are estimated to be receivable in years and amounts not less than the amounts required to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds when due; that if necessary for payment of such principal and interest, ad valorem taxes are required to be levied upon all taxable property in the City, without limitation as to rate or amount; that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any charter, constitutional or statutory limitation; and that the opinion printed hereon is a full, true and correct copy of the legal opinion given by Bond Counsel with reference to the Bonds, dated as of the date of original delivery of the Bonds. This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed by the Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Farmington, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile signatures of the Mayor and City Administrator and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA (facsimile signature - City Administrator) (facsimile signature - Mavor) 12 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. Date of Authentication: U.s. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Registrar By Authorized Representative [insert legal opinion] The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to the applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM - as tenants in common UTMA ................... as Custodian for....... .............. (Cust) (Minor) under Uniform Transfers to Minors Act.... . .. . .. .... (State) TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common Additional abbreviations may also be used. ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: NOTICE: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatsoever. Signature Guaranteed: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an "eligible guarantor institution" meeting the requirements of the Registrar, which requirements include membership or participation in STAMP or such other "signature guaranty program" as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to or in 13 substitution for STAMP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE: [end of bond form] SECTION 3. USE OF PROCEEDS. Upon payment for the Bonds by the Purchaser, the Finance Director shall deposit proceeds of the Bonds in the amount of $ in the sinking fund established for the Refunded Bonds to be applied to their payment on the Redemption Date; $ shall be used to pay costs of issuance of the Bonds; and $ shall be deposited in the Bond Fund created in Section 4.01 hereof. SECTION 4. TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS. SERIES 2004B BOND FUND AND PLEDGE OF TAXING POWERS. 4.01. Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds. Series 2004B Bond Fund. The Bonds shall be payable from a separate and special Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2004B Bond Fund (the Bond Fund) of the City, which Bond Fund the City agrees to maintain until the Bonds have been paid in full. If the money in the Bond Fund should at any time be insufficient to pay principal and interest due on the Bonds, such amounts shall be paid from other moneys on hand in other funds of the City, which other funds shall be reimbursed therefor when sufficient money becomes available in the Bond Fund. The moneys on hand in the Bond Fund from time to time shall be used only to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds. Into the Bond Fund shall be paid: (a) any accrued interest and unused discount received from the Purchaser upon delivery of the Bonds; (b) all excess amounts on deposit in the debt service fund maintained for the payment of the Refunded Bonds upon the retirement of the Refunded Bonds on the Redemption Date; (c) ad valorem tax increments derived from Tax Increment Financing District No.2, located within the Farmington Redevelopment Project Area, to the extent necessary to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds when due; (d) any taxes collected as specified in Section 4.02; and (e) any other funds appropriated by the City Council for the payment of the Bonds. 4.02. Pledge of Taxing Powers. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as such payments respectively become due, the full faith, credit and unlimited taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. It is hereby determined that the funds appropriated to the Bond Fund as set forth in Section 4.01 hereofwill produce amounts not less than five percent in excess of the amounts needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds, and therefore no ad valorem taxes are required to be levied at this time. Nevertheless, if the balance in the Bond Fund is at any time insufficient to pay all interest and principal then due on all Bonds payable therefrom, the payment shall be made from any fund ofthe City which is available for that purpose, subject to reimbursement from the Bond Fund when the balance therein is sufficient, and the City Council covenants and agrees that it will each year levy a sufficient amount of ad valorem taxes to take care of any 14 accumulated or anticipated deficiency, which levy is not subject to any constitutional or statutory limitation. 15 SECTION 5. DEFEASANCE. When all of the Bonds have been discharged as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this Resolution to the registered owners of the Bonds shall cease. The City may discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full; or, if any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued from the due date to the date of such deposit. The City may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a bank qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited, bearing interest payable at such time and at such rates and maturing or callable at the holder's option on such dates as shall be required to pay all principal, interest and redemption premiums to become due thereon to maturity or earlier designated redemption date. Provided, however, that if such deposit is made more than ninety days before the maturity date or specified redemption date ofthe Bonds to be discharged, the City shall have received a written opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that such deposit does not adversely affect the exemption of interest on any Bonds from federal income taxation and a written report of an accountant or investment banking firm verifying that the deposit is sufficient to pay when due all of the principal and interest on the Bonds to be discharged on and before their maturity dates or earlier designated redemption date. SECTION 6. CERTIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGS. 6.01. Registration of Bonds. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy ofthis resolution with the County Auditor of Dakota County and obtain a certificate that the Bonds have been duly entered upon the Auditor's bond register. 6.02. Authentication of Transcript. The officers of the City and the County Auditor are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records relating to the Bonds and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds, as the same appear from the books and records in their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, affidavits and certificates, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 6.03. Official Statement. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds, dated December 5, 2003, and the supplement thereto, relating to the Bonds prepared and distributed by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., the financial consultant for the City, is hereby approved. Ehlers & Associates, Inc., is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to prepare and distribute to the Purchaser within seven business days from the date hereof, a supplement to the Official Statement listing the offering price, the interest rates, selling compensation, delivery date, the underwriters and such other information relating to the Bonds required to be included in the Official Statement by Rule 15c2-12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed to execute 16 such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of the Official Statement. 6.04. Authorization of Payment of Certain Costs ofIssuance of the Certificates. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to U.S. Trust Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, on the closing date for further distribution as directed by the City's financial advisor, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. SECTION 7. CONTINUING DISCLOSURE. (a) Puroose and Beneficiaries. To provide for the public availability of certain information relating to the Bonds and the security therefor and to permit the Purchaser and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to comply with amendments to Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.F.R. ~ 240.15c2-12), relating to continuing disclosure (as in effect and interpreted from time to time, the Rule), which will enhance the marketability of the Bonds, the City hereby makes the following covenants and agreements for the benefit of the Owners (as hereinafter defined) from time to time of the Outstanding Bonds. The City is the only obligated person in respect of the Bonds within the meaning of the Rule for purposes of identifying the entities in respect of which continuing disclosure must be made. The City has complied in all material respects with any undertaking previously entered into by it under the Rule. If the City fails to comply with any provisions of this section, any person aggrieved thereby, including the Owners of any Outstanding Bonds, may take whatever action at law or in equity may appear necessary or appropriate to enforce performance and observance of any agreement or covenant contained in this section, including an action for a writ of mandamus or specific performance. Direct, indirect, consequential and punitive damages shall not be recoverable for any default hereunder to the extent permitted by law. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in no event shall a default under this section constitute a default under the Bonds or under any other provision of this resolution. As used in this section, Owner or Bondowner means, in respect of a Bond, the registered owner or owners thereof appearing in the bond register maintained by the Registrar or any Beneficial Owner (as hereinafter defined) thereof, if such Beneficial Owner provides to the Registrar evidence of such beneficial ownership in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar. As used herein, Beneficial Owner means, in respect of a Bond, any person or entity which (i) has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, such Bond (including persons or entities holding Bonds through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or (b) is treated as the owner of the Bond for federal income tax purposes. (b) Information To Be Disclosed. The City will provide, in the manner set forth in subsection (c) hereof, either directly or indirectly through an agent designated by the City, the following information at the following times: (1) on or before 365 days after the end of each fiscal year of the City, commencing with the fiscal year ending December 31,2003, the following financial information and operating data in respect of the City (the Disclosure Information): (A) the audited financial statements of the City for such fiscal year, containing balance sheets as of the end of such fiscal year and a statement of operations, 17 changes in fund balances and cash flows for the fiscal year then ended, showing in comparative form such figures for the preceding fiscal year of the City, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board as modified in accordance with the governmental accounting standards promulgated by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board or as otherwise provided under Minnesota law, as in effect from time to time, or, if and to the extent such financial statements have not been prepared in accordance with such generally accepted accounting principles for reasons beyond the reasonable control of the City, noting the discrepancies therefrom and the effect thereof, and certified as to accuracy and completeness in all material respects by the fiscal officer of the City; and (B) to the extent not included in the financial statements referred to in paragraph (A) hereof, the information for such fiscal year or for the period most recently available ofthe type contained in the Official Statement under headings: Current Property Valuations; Direct Debt; Tax Levies and Collections.; Population Trend and EmploymentlUnemployment, which information may be unaudited. Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, if the audited financial statements are not available by the date specified, the City shall provide on or before such date unaudited financial statements in the format required for the audited financial statements as part of the Disclosure Information and, within 10 days after the receipt thereof, the City shall provide the audited financial statements. Any or all of the Disclosure Information may be incorporated by reference, if it is updated as required hereby, from other documents, including official statements, which have been submitted to each of the repositories hereinafter referred to under subsection (c) or the SEC. If the document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must be available from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The City shall clearly identify in the Disclosure Information each document so incorporated by reference. If any part of the Disclosure Information can no longer be generated because the operations of the City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a statement to such effect; provided, however, if such operations have been replaced by other City operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City determines that certain specified data regarding such replacement operations would be a Material Fact (as defined in paragraph (2) hereof), then, from and after such determination, the Disclosure Information shall include such additional specified data regarding the replacement operations. If the Disclosure Information is changed or this section is amended as permitted by this paragraph (b)(1) or subsection (d), then the City shall include in the next Disclosure Information to be delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect of any change in the type of financial information or operating data provided. (2) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events which is a Material Fact (as hereinafter defined): 18 (A) Principal and interest payment delinquencies; (B) Non-payment related defaults; (C) Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (0) Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (E) Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (F) Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax-exempt status of the security; (G) Modifications to rights of security holders; (H) Bond calls; (I) Defeasances; (J) Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the securities; and (K) Rating changes. As used herein, a Material Fact is a fact as to which a substantial likelihood exists that a reasonably prudent investor would attach importance thereto in deciding to buy, hold or sell a Bond or, if not disclosed, would significantly alter the total information otherwise available to an investor from the Official Statement, information disclosed hereunder or information generally available to the public. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, a Material Fact is also an event that would be deemed material for purposes of the purchase, holding or sale of a Bond within the meaning of applicable federal securities laws, as interpreted at the time of discovery of the occurrence of the event. (3) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events or conditions: (A) the failure of the City to provide the Disclosure Information required under paragraph (b )( 1) at the time specified thereunder; (B) the amendment or supplementing of this section pursuant to subsection (d), together with a copy of such amendment or supplement and any explanation provided by the City under subsection (d)(2); (C) the termination of the obligations of the City under this section pursuant to subsection (d); (D) any change in the accounting principles pursuant to which the financial statements constituting a portion of the Disclosure Information are prepared; and (E) any change in the fiscal year of the City. (c) Manner of Disclosure. The City agrees to make available the information described in subsection (b) to the following entities by telecopy, overnight delivery, mail or other means, as appropriate: (1) the information described in paragraph (1) of subsection (b), to each then nationally recognized municipal securities information repository under the Rule and to any state information depository then designated or operated by the State of Minnesota as contemplated by the Rule (the State Depository), if any; 20 (2) the information described in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (b), to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and to the State Depository, if any; and (3) the information described in subsection (b), to any rating agency then maintaining a rating of the Bonds at the request of the City and, at the expense of such Bondowner, to any Bondowner who requests in writing such information, at the time of transmission under paragraphs (1) or (2) of this subsection (c), as the case maybe, or, if such information is transmitted with a subsequent time of release, at the time such information is to be released. (d) Term; Amendments; Intetpretation. (1) The covenants of the City in this section shall remain in effect so long as any Bonds are Outstanding. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, however, the obligations of the City under this section shall terminate and be without further effect as of any date on which the City delivers to the Registrar an opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that, because of legislative action or final judicial or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the City to comply with the requirements of this section will not cause participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to be in violation ofthe Rule or other applicable requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or any statutes or laws successory thereto or amendatory thereof. (2) This section (and the form and requirements of the Disclosure Information) may be amended or supplemented by the City from time to time, without notice to (except as provided in paragraph (c )(3) hereof) or the consent of the Owners of any Bonds, by a resolution of this Council filed in the office of the recording officer of the City accompanied by an opinion of Bond Counsel, who may rely on certificates of the City and others and the opinion may be subject to customary qualifications, to the effect that: (i) such amendment or supplement (a) is made in connection with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in law or regulation or a change in the identity, nature or status of the City or the type of operations conducted by the City, or (b) is required by, or better complies with, the provisions of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule; (ii) this section as so amended or supplemented would have complied with the requirements of paragraph (b)( 5) of the Rule at the time of the primary offering ofthe Bonds, giving effect to any change in circumstances applicable under clause (i)(a) and assuming that the Rule as in effect and interpreted at the time of the amendment or supplement was in effect at the time of the primary offering; and (iii) such amendment or supplement does not materially impair the interests ofthe Bondowners under the Rule. If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide, contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation of the 21 reasons for the amendment and the effect, if any, of the change in the type of financial information or operating data being provided hereunder. (3) This section is entered into to comply with the continuing disclosure provisions of the Rule and should be construed so as to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b)(5) of the Rule. SECTION 8. REDEMPTION OF REFUNDED BONDS. The Finance Director is hereby directed to advise U.S. Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, successor to First Trust National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, as paying agent for the Refunded Bonds, to call the Refunded Bonds for redemption and prepayment on February 1, 2004, and to give thirty day's mailed Notice of Redemption, substantially in the form attached hereto, all in accordance with the provisions of the resolution authorizing the issuance of the Refunded Bonds. Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 22 NOTICE OF REDEMPTION $815,000 General Obligation Taxable Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1993B Dated October 1, 1993 City of Farmington, Dakota County, Minnesota NOTICE IS HEREBY GWEN THAT there have been called for redemption and prepayment on February 1,2004, all outstanding Bonds of the above referenced issue, dated October 1, 1993, maturing February 1 in the following years and having the interest rates and CUSIP numbers listed below: Maturity Amount CUSIP # Rate Maturity Amount CUSIP # Rate 2005 $15,000 311297 6.25% 2011 $25,000 311297 6.90% 2006 15,000 311297 6.40 2012 30,000 311297 7.00 2007 15,000 311297 6.50 2013 30,000 311297 7.00 2008 10,000 311297 6.60 2014 25,000 311297 7.00 2009 10,000 311297 6.70 2015 25,000 311297 7.00 2010 20,000 311297 6.80 The Bonds will be redeemed at a price of 100% of their principal amount plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. Holders of the Bonds should present them for payment to U.S. Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, successor to First Trust National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, on or before said date, when they will cease to bear interest, in the following manner: Registered Bonds: Bearer Bonds: In Person. By Hand: U.S. Bank National Association Corporate Trust Services P.O. Box 64111 St. Paul, MN 55164-0011 U.S. Bank National Association Corporate Trust Services P.O. Box 64452 St. Paul, MN 55164-0452 U.S. Bank National Association First Floor Bond Drop Window 60 Livingston Avenue St. Paul, MN 55107 (800) 934-6802 Important Notice: In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, federal backup withholding tax will be withheld at the applicable backup withholding rate in effect at the time the payment by the redeeming institutions if they are not provided with your social security number or federal employer identification number, properly certified. This requirement is fulfilled by submitting a W-9 Form, which may be obtained at a bank or other financial institution. The Paying Agent shall not be responsible for the selection of or use of the CUSIP number, nor is any representation made as to its correctness indicated in this Notice of Redemption. It is included solely for the convenience of the Holders. Additional information may be obtained from the undersigned or from Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota (651-697-8500), financial consultant to the City. Dated: December 15,2003. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA /s/ City Administrator DAKOTA COUNTY AUDITOR'S CERTIFICATE AS TO REGISTRATION The undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting County Auditor of Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby certifies that there has been filed in my office a certified copy of a resolution duly adopted on December 15,2003, by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, setting forth the form and details of an issue of $605,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2004B, dated as of January 15,2004. I further certify that the issue has been entered on my bond register as required by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 475.62 and 475.63. WITNESS my hand and official seal this _ day of December, 2004. Dakota County Auditor (SEAL) City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us lOb TO: 15(0 Mayor, Council Members, (SL./ Interim City Administrator r "'!/ FROM: Lee Smick, AlCP City Planner SUBJECT: Seed/Genstar AUAR Responses to Comments DATE: December 15, 2003 INTRODUCTIONIDISCUSSION The City of Farmington and Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates have recently completed the response to comments phase of the Seed/Genstar AUAR process. The following agencies submitted comments to the City concerning the Seed/Genstar AUAR: Metropolitan Council Minnesota Department of Transportation Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District Dakota County City of Lakeville The responses to comments are attached for review. The Planning Commission reviewed the responses to comments at their December 9th meeting, and recommended forwarding the comments to the City Council for review. Staff requests that the City Council suggest any revisions to the comments, accept the comments and/or revisions, and direct staff to mail the responses to comments to the agencies for their 10-day review. Staff anticipates that the adoption of the Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan for the Seed/Genstar property will occur in January 2004. ACTION REQUESTED Accept responses to comments and direct staff to mail the comments to the agencies for their 10-day reVIew. Respectfully Submitted, M'~ Lee Smick, AlCP City Planner Farmington Seed/Genstar AUAR Final AUAR-Responses to Comments City of Farmington November, 2003 Bonestroo File No. 141-02-181 Farminton Seed/Genstar AUAR Table of Contents Question Number (corresponding to EAW Form) Page No. 1. Proj ect Title................................................................................... I 2. Proposer........................................................................................l 3. RGU ..............................................................................................1 4. Reason for EA U Preparation ........................................................2 5. Proj ect Location............................................................................2 6. Description.................................................................................... 8 7. Project Magnitude..................................................................... ..13 8. Permit and Approvals Required.................................................. 13 9. Land Use................................................................................... ..14 10. Cover Types.............................................................................. ..14 11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically-Sensitive Resources ................21 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources ........................................23 13 . Water Use................................................................................. ...24 14. Water-Related Land Use Management Districts ._.....................29 15. Water Surface Use.. .............................. ........... ...._.................. ...29 16. Erosion and Sedimentation.. ................................... ............. .......29 17. Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff ......................................32 18. Water Quality - Wastewaters ............ .................... ................... ..42 19. Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions.......................................44 20. Solid Waste; Hazardous Waste; Storage Tanks..........................53 21. Traffic....................................................................................... ..56 22. Vehicle-Related Air Emissions ..................... ..............................67 23. Stationary Source Air Emissions ................................................70 24. Dust, Odors, Noise ........ ................................... .......... ................. 70 25. Nearby Resources ................ ............. ...... ... ...... ...........................77 26. Visual Impacts ............................................................................76 27. Compatibility with Plans.. ............................. .......... ........... ......... 77 28. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services .............................79 29. Related Developments; Cumulative Impacts..............................80 30. Other Potential Environmental Impacts......................................80 31. Summary of Issues ................................ ............... ........... ............80 32. Mitigation Plan.......................................................................... 81 34. Appendices................................................................................. .95 Project Title Proposer Contact Person Address Phone Email address RGU Contact Person Address Phone Email address Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR Farmington Seed/Genstar AUAR City of Farmington Lee Smick, Planning Department 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-1829 Fax (651) 463-1611 lsmick@ci.farmington.mn.us City of Farmington Lee Smick, Planning Department 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-1829 Fax (651) 463-1611 lsmick@ci.farmington.mn.us 1 Table of Contents Introduction . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...3 Comment Letters Received Metropolitan Council. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . ... 6 Minnesota Department of Transportation... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ... ...... ... ... ...9 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources... ... ... ... ... ... .. .... ... ... ... ... ... .. . .12 Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Dakota County. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 7 City of Lakeville................................................................. ...22 Appendices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .23 Copies of Comment Letters Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 2 INTRODUCTION The Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review for the Farmington Seed/Genstar Area was prepared by the City of Farmington and submitted to the Environmental Quality Board and commenting agencies in accordance with EQB Rules on September 19,2003. The notice appeared in the EQB Monitor on September 29, 2003. The required 30-day comment period ended on October 29, 2003. The comment period was extended to November 14 for 2 agencies who indicated that they did not receive the first document mailing. Comments were received from various public agencies, and copies are included in the Appendices. This Final AUAR identifies the comment letters received, identifies the comments, and provides responses to the comments. The Final AUAR Mitigation Plan is also included in this document, with corrections to the Draft AUAR. The Final Mitigation Plan and changes to the Draft incorporate changes in language and content based on comments received. The Final Mitigation Plan is located in Appendix A. The Farmington City Council will formally adopt this Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan on , 2004. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 3 COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED Comment letters were received from the following agencies, organizations, and individuals. Responses to comments from each of these reviewers can be found starting on the indicated page number. All comment letters are included in Appendix C in the order shown here. Agency/Organization/Individual Date of Letter Metropolitan Council Minnesota Department of Transportation Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District Dakota County City of Lakeville 10/24/03 10/28/03 10/24/03 11/06/03 11/17/03 11/26/03 Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 4 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS Responses to comments are organized around each comment letter to insure that responses specifically address each reviewer's concerns. To clarifY what comment is being addressed, the page and item number are indicated. Comments relating to the Mitigation Plan are listed separately following comments relating to the AUAR text. If the comment is editorial or advisory, we have acknowledged the comment and any necessary correction(s) to be made. For comments that are substantive, we have replied and where necessary, referenced appropriate sections of the Draft AUAR. Revisions to Tables, Figures and in some cases text, are included in Appendix B. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 5 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL COMMENTS Page I-Item 10. Land Cover TVlJes & Fish. Wildlife and Ecologicallv Sensitive Resources. Council staff encourages the City to add the restoration of native vegetation buffers along North Creek to the Mitigation Plan. Response: The City will add this item to the Mitigation Plan: The City will support efforts to remove exotic species and restore native vegetation in the buffer areas along North Creek to improve water quality and habitat. Page I-Item 12. Phvsical Impacts on Water Resources Council staff encourages the classification of wetlands within the North Creek Corridor by the City from Manage 2 to Protect status. Response: The North Creek Corridor is outside the tributary areas designated as "trout waters" by the Minnesota DNR, so a change in status would not be consistent with the policies in the City's Surface Water Plan and Wetland Management Plan. The wetland classification will remain as indicated in the Wetland Management Plan and Ordinance. However, the existing vegetated buffer that is several hundred feet wide on either side of the creek will be protected because it is located in the floodplain area and City ordinances limit development within these areas. In most areas, the wetlands in this corridor will have buffers at least equal to those required for "trout stream" wetlands due to their location within the floodplain of North Creek. Council staff encourage the city to consider the utilization of directional boring techniques in the construction of water and sanitary sewer lines proposed to cross under North Creek. Response: The City will add this item to the Mitigation Plan: The City will consider the use of directional boring techniques in the construction of water distribution and sanitary sewer collection lines that are proposed to cross under North Creek. Page -Item 13. Water Use Council staff note that the Metropolitan Council also reviews water appropriation permit requests that are submitted to the DNR. Response: Thank you for this information. Page 2-Item 17. Surface Water Runoff The Council encourages the City and Developer to incorporate low-impact development (LID) storm water retention techniques and native vegetation within the site. Response: These techniques will be considered by the City and Developer as fmal plans and designs are completed for the site. Specific techniques that will be considered are listed in the Mitigation Plan under Item 17 -Goal 1. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 6 Council staff suggests the utilization of porous pavement for parking lot areas based on a current test at the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum; and suggests other options for parking lot drainage to encourage infiltration. Response: The porous pavement demonstration area at the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum was installed in the summer of 2003. The pavement will be monitored over the next several years to determine whether it is effective and reliable in Minnesota. The other design ideas described in the comments will be considered by the City and developer in developing final plans for the site. Page 2-Item 18. Water Quality/Wastewaters Council staff request that the projections of sewer flows provided to the Council for 2000-2005, 2005-2010, 2010-2015, and 2015-2020 be incorporated into the Final AUAR. Response: These projects were provided to the Council Staff, as requested. We will incorporate these projections into the final AUAR document. It should be noted that the projections are our best estimates for planning purposes; the housing market will determine the actual phasing of the development. Page 2-Item 25. Traffic The Draft A UAR appears complete and comprehensive from a transportation perspective. Given the significant traffic being generated by the development, MnDOT's and the County's access management standards need to be followed. An adequate internal road and trail system will be important to reduce traffic and conflicts on state and county roads that serve this poperty. No site plan was provided in the Draft AUAR laying out the internal road and trail system. Response: Comments are noted. All attempts to adhere to access management standards will be made. Should the traffic volumes require variance to standards, this will be discussed with MnDOT. It is true that the TH3 improvements and new east-west facilities are not programmed, at this time, by MnDOT or by Dakota County. The affected governmental units need to work on a plan to have these facilities programmed in conjunction with development opportunities. An internal road system and trail system will be an important component of a site plan. Of particular importance will be provision of a north-south collector within the development, one linking future east-west facilities. This will help to reduce reliance on TH3 for some of the vehicular trips. Page 3-Item 26. Nearbv Resources Council staff suggest that the City include development of a future public trail along the creek, that park dedication requirements could be utilized for greenway protection and trail development, and that the City contact Dakota County Parks to coordinate local and county trail efforts. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 7 Response: The City's Comprehensive Plan includes policies that recommend development of a public trail within the North Creek greenway corridor. The City is working with Dakota County Parks on coordination of local and county trail development. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 8 Minnesota Department of Transportation Page I-Item 2. Traffic TH3 is a "Preservation" status corridor. Nofunding has been identifiedfor expansion ofTH3 in the next 20 years. Response: The Draft AUAR recognized that TH3 is not presently programmed for expansion. The affected agencies are urged to reach agreement on when expansion can be programmed. Such plan should respond to a potential development timetable if at all possible. This planning needs to commence as soon as possible. The A UAR needs to address the following issues in order to be consistent with the Draft TH3 plan: Provide maps that show that needed right of way is secure, including primary intersection locations, and additional right of way for right and left turn lanes. Ensure proper right of way exists at the time of platting. Response: Upon submission of site plans and other development applications, the City will work with the developer to ensure that adequate right-of-way is procured along the west side ofTH3. The east side ofTH3 is under the jurisdiction of Empire Township. The provision of right-of-way for future roadway purposes will be discussed with Empire Township by the City. It is expected that the amount of needed right-of-way will be discussed at the time of application for development. These discussions will need to involve MnDOT, City of Farmington, and Empire Township. The City should work with the developer in requiring the major improvements that are needed at primary intersections. Any improvements are the responsibility of the City, the developer, or both. Response: The Draft AUAR analyzes the provisions of two major access points along TH3 to the development. A third major access point is proposed along the future 195th Street extension. Access proposals, when put forth on development site plans, will be reviewed with MnDOT and Dakota County. It should be noted that improvements on the west side of TH3 are the responsibility of the City of Farmington and the developer of the Seed/Genstar property; improvements on the east side of TH3 will be the responsibility of Empire Township and/or developers in that community. Lots should be configured so that new direct private access onto TH3 would not occur. A future minor arterial route along the northern edge of the Seed/Gens tar property (proposed in Dakota County East/West Arterial study) will need a signalized intersection at TH3. The site should be designed to provide for this connection. Response: It is expected that access improvement on the west side of the proposed intersection with TH3 will be at the expense of the developer. This includes right-of-way provisions, lane requirements, and traffic signalization. The City will work with the developer on these issues. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 9 Other than the future access roadways previously discussed, the City will strongly discourage any other access to TH3. The City always strives to minimize access to new collectors within a development plan. Since MnDOT has the power to approveldeny access to TH3, it is expected that private lot access will not be allowed. Proper site planning will eliminate that need. The provision of a future east-west arterial north of the subject property has been identified as a desire for the regional area. The location of this future arterial, as it intersects with TH3, will be considered in the property access design for which this Draft AUAR has been prepared. Page 2. Items 10. 12 and 17. Cover Tvpes and Surface WaterRunoff The project should allow for future TH needs with regard to additional water quality treatment ponds. Response: The Surface Water Analysis section indicates that the project proposes water quality treatment well-above the requirements of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Ponds and infiltration facilities to serve the future TH3 and other portions of the project will be part of the site design. The City will work with the developer and MnDOT to determine responsibilities for water quality improvements that are the result of new development. If direct impact from runoff will occur to wetland acreages include a table to show wetland impacts. Response: The City's Wetland Ordinance and Surface Water Plan prohibit direct surface water runoff to wetlands. No table is needed. Item 12, third paragraph ,should Figure 17.1 be Figure 12.1? Response: The reference in the draft AUAR is correct. City Wetland Classifications are shown on Figure 17.1. Please consider using the Cowardin and Circular 39 classification of any wetlands in the document. Response: The AUAR is required to show Circular 39 classifications under Item 10. These are shown on Figure 10.1. Please ensure that the degree of wetland protection as it affects MnDOT right of way meets Wetland Conservation Act and Federal Clean Water Act requirements. Response: The City's Wetland Ordinance requires all developers to meet the requirements of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act and Federal Clean Water Act. The Ordinance includes additional requirements for wetland buffers that go beyond these standards. The City's Ordinances will be enforced as development occurs. The development may require drainage permit applications. Farmington SeedlGenstar Final AUAR 10 Response: Applications will be made for drainage permits as needed as the development moves forward. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 11 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Page 1. Item 10. Cover TVTJes Please correct error in Table 10.1. Response: The Table has been revised to take out the typographic error and show the correct acreages;and will be included in the Final AUAR document: Table 10.1 Cover Types Types 1 to 7 Wetlands Floodplain W oodlandl conifers Cropland/Nursery Pasture/Grassland Acres Before 25 119 4 709 74 Acres Afier 25 119 4 o o Rural Residential Urban Residential Commercial Open Space/Parks RailroadlHwy ROW TOTALS Before 22 o o o 53 1006 Afier o 757 25 23 53 1006 Page 1. Item 11. Fish. Wildlife and Sensitive Resources Occurrences of 3 rare species and natural communities should be noted in the A UAR. Response: We will add the information regarding the three rare species and natural communities in the area around the site to the AUAR, and will add the fact sheet to the document. The City's Comprehensive Plan, Shoreland and Floodplain ordinances will protect the wooded corridor along North Creek, which is near open grassland areas along the railroad tracks. The woodland edges and grassland areas may continue to provide suitable habitat for shrikes after development occurs on the site. The remainder of the site does not have good shrike habitat currently. The large infiltration areas planned for the development (16 acres total) may be designed using native grass meadows with groups of trees and shrubs at the edges. These may also provide potential shrike habitat. The City's Wetland Ordinance requires that buffers be maintained or established around wetlands, based on the wetland classification. This policy will be implemented as development occurs. The recommendations regarding native plantings will be considered during site design. Required buffer widths are detailed on Table 12.1 of the Draft AUAR. Page 3. Item 17. Water Quality-Surface Water Runoff Does the developer plan to manage stormwater runoff in a manner that would protect North Creek to Trout Stream standards? Response: The AUAR document is very explicit in adopting the MPCA's standard for stormwater management to protect special waters (including trout streams), and in specifying mitigation measures that exceed the requirements of the MPCA standard. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 12 In August, 2003, the MPCA Board adopted the standard for stormwater management that will apply in the AUAR area. The standard applies to all special waters, including designated trout streams. The standard requires that "the water quality volume that must be treated by the project's permanent storm water management system shall be one (1) inch of runoff from the new impervious surfaces created by the project. The standard further required buffers, volume control, and the use of best management practices that will minimize the impact of increase in temperature, such as infiltration. The stormwater analysis for the AUAR was completed before the MPCA standard was adopted, while a higher draft standard for volume control was proposed for areas tributary to the Vermillion River. Storm water management methods included in the Mitigation Plan meet this higher standard: To keep the runoff volume under ultimate development conditions from exceeding the event runoff volume under pre-development (existing land cover) conditions for design rainfall events up to the 10-year, 24-hour event. The Mitigation Plan proposes the use of infiltration areas (16 acres) to control the volume of runoff to meet this standard, in addition to the use of ponds to manage water quality and runoff from larger storm events. The AUAR adopted the new (August 2003) standard for stormwater management, and includes measures in the AUAR Mitigation Plan that exceed the MPCA's requirements for storm water management to protect special waters, including trout streams. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 13 DAKOTA COUNTY SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (SWCD) Page 1. Item 10. Cover TVlJes The 100-foot wetland buffer width for trout streams should be applied to the North Creek corridor. Response: The portion of North Creek within the AUAR study area is not a designated Trout Stream by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. If we were to change our standards for this part of the City it would not be appropriate or consistent with how wetlands were classified in the remainder of the City. It should be noted that because the wetlands are located adjacent to North Creek and within a designated greenway corridor the wetlands cannot be classified below a Manage 2 even if vegetation and susceptibility would indicate a lower classification. Wetland buffers are measured from the delineated wetland edge and will be applied to both sides of the corridor. Efforts should be made to protect the high quality vegetation on the site. Plant communities such as sedge meadows have previously been identified on this site, and are sensitive to increased water level fluctuations. As noted, restoration and preservation of native habitats should be a priority for the North Creek corridor. Response: Bonestroo & Associates completed the wetland classifications and management plan for the City of Farmington. A Bonestroo & Associates botanist reviewed the wetlands identified by the SWCD in your comments, and we do not anticipate there was enough sedge present to move the wetland into a higher classification. As we did with the Lake Julia Corridor, the City will pay special attention to pockets of sedges when the area develops to insure they are protected. It should also be noted that the Farmington Wetland Ordinance goes beyond the Wetland Conservation Act by eliminating excavation in Type 1 and 2 wetlands unless it is a reed canary grass monotype. This will also help protect the sedge communities. North Creek Corridor wetland adjacent within the City were identified as "protect" and "manage1" in 1999. As the City began its annexation process, the North Creek corridor wetlands were delineated and then classified as a "Manage 2" resource per city ordinance. No information was provided in the AUAR about the wetland assessment completed, or the difference in wetland quality. Response: Section 12 and 13 within the City are the only areas that were not part of the inventory process that occurred with the Wetland Ordinance development in 1999. The reason was that at the time of the ordinance these two sections were going to be developed. It was thought that the ordinance process would not be done in time to protect these wetlands with buffers so the original classification provided under the Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) were utilized. The Storm Water Plan classification was based on wetland community type and not vegetative diversity. The SWMP protected wetlands from storm water but did Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 14 not provide for a buffer. Buffers were required as a part of the Wetland Ordinance. However, the SWMP and Wetland Ordinance recognized the need for classification based on vegetative diversity, and required that wetlands be classified when they were part of an area proposed for development. Sections 12 and 13 did not develop when proposed, and so the basins were later reviewed by a WCA TEP and the appropriate classifications based on the new ordinance language were provided. This was completed so that the classifications could be used for the Seed/Genstar proposal and AUAR. If the commenter wants details Brian Watson of the SWCD participated as a member of the WCA TEP and has documentation on how the wetlands were classified. Page 2. Item 11. Fish. Wildlife and Ecologicallv Sensitive Resources The opportunity to create an east-west greenway corridor that eventually would connect the North Creek corridor to UMore Park should be evaluated during the planning and plat approval process. There are opportunities to restore native habitats along existing drainage patterns and the Highway 3 barrier may be by- passed during future improvements. Response: Umore Park is in Empire Township, and the corridor identified is largely outside the City of Farmington. The City will discuss the suggestion with Empire Township. Page 2. Item 12. PhvsicalImoacts to Water Resources We encourage changing the designation of the wetlands associated with North Creek to "protect" classification; and stormwater management facilities should not be installed within wetlands or the floodplain. Response: The portion of North Creek within the AUAR study area is not a designated Trout Stream by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. If we were to change our standards for this part of the City it would not be appropriate or consistent with how wetlands were classified in the remainder of the City. It should be noted that because the wetlands are located adjacent to North Creek and within a designated greenway corridor the wetlands cannot be classified below a Manage 2 even if vegetation and susceptibility would indicate a lower classification. Wetland buffers are measured from the delineated wetland edge and will be applied to both sides of the corridor. The Dakota SWCD expects to work closely with the City during the WCA permitting process if adverse wetland impacts are proposed. Response: The City has worked closely with the SWCD for many years to implement the WCA process and develop its Wetland Management Plan. City ordinances incorporate the provision of WCA, and add additional requirements for wetland buffers and wetland management. The City will continue to work to enforce the WCA provisions and its Wetland Ordinances during development of the AUAR area, and will continue to work with the SWCD in these efforts. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 15 Page 2. Item 16. Erosion and Sedimentation SWCD anticipates reviewing the temporary and permanent erosion control plans prior to final plat approvals and will provide comments at that time. Response: The City understands that the SWCD will provide comments and will work with SWCD staff to address issues or concerns. The SWCD looks forward to working with the City and developer to minimize off-site erosion and sedimentation impacts associated with construction activities. Response: The City will work with the SWCD to address erosion and sedimentation impacts associated with construction activities on the site. Grading on the site's steep slopes should be avoided to minimize erosion and preserve the district's topography. Response: The City's Erosion Control and Turf Establishment Ordinances will be enforced as the area develops to minimize erosion and preserve steep slope areas. Protection of the proposed infiltration areas during construction will be critical to ensure their long-term success. Response: The City understands the need to protect infiltration areas from compaction and sedimentation during construction, and will work with the developer to ensure the success of the infiltration areas on the site. Page 2. Item 17. Water Qualtiv: Surface Water Runoff We suggest using distributed controls throughout the site to retain runoff rather an end- of-the pipe infiltration Response: The types of infiltration controls and their distribution on the site will be determined during site design. SWCD provides a list of design criteria that should be included in the infiltration basin design. Response: The criteria listed are widely available in the technical literature regarding infiltration practices, and the City's Engineer already applies these criteria in infiltration project design. These BMP's and other will he incorporated during site design. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 16 DAKOTA COUNTY Page 1- Section 5-Pro;ect Location: Roadwav Network We recommend that the draft AUAR be revised to include an internal street plan that shows how the development ties into nearby roads and adjacent property. We are concerned that providing access from the development only to TH3 and 195th Street will not be adequate to handle the number of trips that will be generated. We suggest that the City plan for access north to 17(jh Street, and that Diamond Path should be extended to North Creek. Response: The concept site plan has not been prepared, since the developer needs to know where the access points are to be located. The trips can be accommodated with access to TH 3 and future 195th as was indicated in the draft AUAR. Access from the development to the north will be provided on the subject property, as stated on page 65 of the traffic element mitigation plan. We suggest that the draft AUAR acknowledge the following: (a) coordination of local roads with identified routes for future East- West County Roads; (b) the right-of-way dedication needs for those road routes (c) access spacing requirements and right of way needs for access preservation, and (d) the need to expand A-Minor Arterial roads in the area (CSAH 31, CR 58, and CR 64). Response: Local road coordination for future East-West County routes will be achieved in the City of Farmington. The North-South collector suggested for this project site will connect future 1951\ then north to the City of Farmington boundary. Extension of that facility beyond Farmington boundaries and extending to a future East-West County facility will need to be accomplished by Empire Township and Lakeville. The right-of-way needs for East-West routes needs to be further discussed with the City and County. The City can obtain some right-of-way as part of the development agreement for this project. The access spacing requirements will be met, to the extent possible, to provide effective property access. The City acknowledges the potential need to expand other A-Minor Arterial roadways in the area. The City is committed to assisting the County in their planning effort in this regard. Volume projections in this report should provide some assistance for the County on this issue. We will include a reference to the need to expand A-minor arterial roads in the area in the final AUAR document. We suggest that the Draft AUAR explain the reasonsfor ending the proposed improvements ofTH3 at 16(jh Street. Unless the improvements are continued north to CSAH 42, it is not clear how TH 3 will accommodate the added trips and provide a good level of service up to and through the CSAH 42 intersection. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 17 Response: The draft AUAR provided analysis ofTH 3 approximately two miles from the project site. Beyond this area, volumes begin to dissipate. Part ofthe reason that the proposed improvements ended at I 60th Street was this coincided with the County East-West corridor study which also terminated at that point. We fully expect that improvements to TH 3, when Mn/DOT analyzes them, will probably extend to CSAH 42 and north of that location also. We wish to note that Mn/DOT has no plans for the expansion of TH3 until after 2025. We recommend that the draft AUAR emphasize coordination with MnDOT on the location and staging schedule of any road improvements on TH3 that the City would be willing to fund to serve the different stages of the proposed development. Response: The draft AUAR recognized the present status of TH 3. The mitigation plan provided a method for upgrading TH 3 based on daily volume projections. Improvement and funding of these improvements is an important element that needs to be addressed as the project plan proceeds through the site plan review process. This will need to involve the City, State, and Empire Township as well as property developers. We suggest that the draft AUAR address how a Park/Ride facility will accommodate enough riders to offset a meaningful portion of the 30,000+ trips that will be generated by this development. Response: We believe it is beyond the scope of the AUAR to analyze how many riders a ParklRide facility might attract in Farmington. The service area for this facility is likely to go beyond the proposed development. When and if a ParklRide facility is ready for consideration, it should be studied at that time. The AUAR statement was suggesting that any park and ride facility in Farmington would be advantageous for commuters. As to what is a "meaningful" trip reduction, addressing that issue could be part of the ParklRide facility study. Page 1- Section I3-Water Use Clarify whether the nine homes on the north side of I9lh Street West are inside the AUARproject area. Response: The nine homes are outside the AUAR project area. This will be clarified in the text. Two of the properties on the north side of 1 94th Street West have had wells sealed. If the other seven homes are in the project area, it is likely that they have wells that will need to be addressed. Response: The seven existing homes on the north side of 194th Street are not in the project area. However, the information regarding wells will be noted in the text. The draft AUAR does not discuss dewatering for the project area. Dewatering may be necessary for installation of utilities, and could affect shallow wells in or near the project area. Dewatering near North Creek may affect the water levels of the creek. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 18 Response: The City will add this item to the Mitigation Plan: The City will consider the use of directional boring techniques in the construction of water distribution and sanitary sewer collection lines that are proposed to cross under North Creek. Page 1 - Section 2o--Solid Wastes. Hazardous Wastes. Storage Tanks The City should try to encourage on-site composting, additional recycling, etc., in the project area Response: The City encourages on-site compo sting and recycling by all city residents through newsletters and other public information. The City will encourage these efforts with new residents in the Seed/Genstar project area as well. The draft AUAR does not acknowledge the presence of all waste disposal sites known to exist in the project area. We recommend that the City or its consultant access the County's data resource to update this section of the draft A UAR. Response: We have contacted the County for additional information from its database, as you recommended. Additional information obtained from the County's database regarding waste disposal sites will be added to the Final AUAR. The draft AUAR identified GEES, Inc. as a large quantity hazardous waste generator. GEES is a minimal waste generator. Godfrey Custom Signs is not a hazardous waste generator. Several years ago, they switched to using non-hazardous components for sign making. Response: Thank you for this information. The Draft AUAR will be updated to reflect this information. Page 2 - Section 21-Tra(fic We recommend that the draft AUAR be revised to acknowledge Alignment B from the East-West study in the analysis. Response: While the draft AUAR does not specifically identify Alignment B, it does indicate, on page 65 of the traffic mitigation plan, that the provision of the north-south collector in the Seed/Genstar site needs to proceed north to an ultimate connection with the potential East-West corridor in that vicinity. This will require that extension to be provided when development to the north of Seed/Genstar is being planned. The properties to the north are not in Farmington. We suggest that the City will need to closely coordinate with the Dakota County Transportation Department when developing the 195th/19dh Street alignment, as identified in the East- West Corridor Study. That proposed roadway will be a four-lane divided roadway, and will need to meet County standards for such a road, including the required dedicated right-ol-way and access spacing. At this time, it is unknown whether Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 19 the City will build the road and turn it over to the County in the future, or if the County will build it. The roadway is not in the County Capital Improvement Program at this time. These points should be addressed by the AUAR. Response: The City will closely coordinate with the County with regard to the provision of the 19Sth Street corridor. The County has previously agreed to participate in the funding of the 19Sth/190th Street connection to TH3. The City is open to either the City or the County delivering the project, with the timing ofthe construction being a factor. Provision of right-of-way and determination of access needs will be part of the design process. Page 2 - Appendix-Traffic Volume Data a. We suggest that the study area listed and analyzed in the report is not large enough to cover the road system that will have major traffic impacts from the proposed development. We recommend that the City use a more detailed traffic evaluation, with expanded study limits that will include TH3north to CSAH 42, and roadways to the west that will have intersections with the proposed East-West roadways, which the draft AUAR identified as key routes necessary to serve the area. Response: The City believes that the study area was large enough to analyze the anticipated impacts. The County East-West study is also utilized to anticipate future volume impacts on major roadways west of the SeedlGenstar property. The effect on TH 3, north of 160th Street, was discussed in an earlier response. The City expects that when the extension of 19Sth Street is programmed, the City and the County will further analyze roadway needs from Pilot Knob Road to TH 3. That will further detail roadway and public street access to that corridor. Given the volume projections from the East-West Corridor Study, the City believes that the 4-lane facility that was discussed will be adequate to accommodate 20-year needs that have been projected. b. We suggest that the development proposal relies very heavily on TH3 for access and is proposing access that is inconsistent with state and county roadway studies. We recommend that the City use these studies in their discussions with MnDOT about road access as the starting point for developing an access plan for the development area. Dakota County is willing to help facilitate discussions on funding the roadway infrastructure. . Response: Comments are noted. Access tolfrom TH 3 may not fit the 'l'2 mile spacing desired by Mn/DOT. The City has been in discussions with MnDOT on this issue. Such spacing may be excessive for this area, which will be more fully urbanized as time goes by. Access spacing is very important, as is the ability to accommodate new residential development. It has been previously stated that roadway systems access and provisions of roadway improvements will be necessary and needs to commence as a result of the AUAR. c. We suggest that the A UAR include an overview map to show how this development fits with the overall existing and planned system, and a detailed site plan identifying the internal roadway network and how it will provide necessary north/south connections to Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 20 serve as collector to the allowable connections along TH3 and other area North/South roadways. Response: A detailed site plan is not yet available, and is not required for the analysis included in an AUAR. The internal road system will be a component of the site plan. The north-south collector roadway will be an important part of the site plan, and will help to reduce reliance on TH3 for some vehicle trips. It would be Farmington's intent that the north-south collector roadway be stubbed to connect to the future Alignment B, however, that connection would be outside of Farmington's jurisdiction. d. We believe that the draft AUAR does not explain how all the improvements (in roadway systems) necessary to accommodate this development will occur. The proposed improvements focus on the need for a 4-lane divided highway on TH3, and the need to extend 195/h Street and 206/h Street. Neither the State or the County have projects planned for these roadways that would accommodate the traffic from the development- even in 2008. We recommend that the AUAR needs to define the timing and responsibility for road improvements-before development proceeds. Response: The AUAR does explain a process - one that presents improvements necessary when certain volume levels on TH 3 are attained. As previously mentioned, discussion with affected agencies need to be held to start the planning and funding for such improvements. e. This development will have major impacts to TH3 and the area network. To ensure access and continued safe and efficient operation of the road system as the development occurs, a more detailed evaluation of the road system with respect to the traffic that will be generated is needed. The development needs to be consistent with State and County plans. We believe that it will be difficult to build the connecting roadways and turn lanes if they are to be served by a highway system that needs improvements to fully accommodate the additional traffic. We suggest that a large study area with detailed traffic distribution and analysis for the site and connecting roadways would provide a better picture of the development's roadway impacts. As noted above, MnDOT has no plans for the expansion of TH3 until after 2025. We strongly suggest that the draft AUAR emphasize coordination with MnDOT on the schedule and local funding of any proposed road improvements to serve each state of development. Response: Comment noted. The timing and responsibility of improvements does need to be discussed. It is anticipated that the first phase of improvements will be accomplished by the City and/or Developer. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 21 CITY OF LAKEVILLE Page 1 - First Item The City of Lakeville requests that the City of Farmington work with Lakeville and the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) to plan for the potential of a new MCES interceptor sewer in the future 195th Street Corridor that would provide future sewer service to the Urban Reserve Areas of Farmington and Lakeville after 2020. The City of Farmington will be happy to work with Lakeville and the MCES on this issue. The City of Lakeville has been dealing with a number of well interference claims in recent years. The City would suggest that Farmington take into account well interference issues as you plan for future well locations in the AUAR area. Lakeville would also be willing to meet with Farmington and other communities in the area to discuss well interference issues. Thank you for this information. The City of Farmington will consider this issue as it plans for future well locations in the AUAR area. The City of Lakeville Parks and Open Space Plan identifies a greenway corridor to accommodate trails and public right of ways that would (provide) public access along the North Creek corridor. This plan also indicates that this greenway (is) potentially being extended through Farmington and Empire Township and east to Hastings. In addition, Dakota County is considering the development of a future Regional Park east of the Empire WWTP. The AUAR document references protection of the North Creek corridor wetlands, and buffers, along with the preservation of the 1 OO-year floodplain and other natural areas. However the document does not currently reference the development of trails in this greenway corridor and the interconnection of these trails beyond the City's borders. The City requests that this reference be incorporated into the document. This information will be added to the Draft AUAR document. Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 22 Appendices Farmington Seed/Genstar Final AUAR 23 ~ Metropoli tan Council Building communities that work OC129- October 24,2003 Lee Smick, City Planner City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 RE: Farmington - Seed/Genstar DAUAR (Draft Alternative Urban Area-wide Review) Review File No. 19037-1 Dear Ms. Smick: The DAUAR proposes to develop 1,006 acres in Empire Township with up to 3,896 housing units and 248,000 square feet of commercial space. The site is the subject of a City of Farmington / Empire Township Orderly Annexation Agreement. The site consists mostly of farmland with North Creek bisecting the property from northwest to southeast. Council staff review finds that the DAUAR is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Council policies. An EIS is not necessary for regional purposes. However, staff provides the following comments for your consideration. Item 10. - Land Cover Types and Item 11. - Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources. The document indicates that most of the. wetlands, flood plain and woodland areas on the site will be preserved when the area is developed. The document does state however, that invasive species are present and that much of the corridor is currently in a degraded condition. These areas and the adjacent areas proposed for development would benefit from some level of ecological restoration. Council staff encourages the City to add the restoration of native vegetated buffers along North Creek, to the Mitigation Plan. The restoration will help improve water quality and the habitat for fish, birds and wildlife. Item 12 - Physical Impacts on Water Resources Council staff encourages the reclassification of wetlands within the North Creek corridor by the City from 'Manage 2' to 'Protect' status. This reclassification will provide a more appropriate level of protection for a trout-supporting watercourse. The document indicates that both water distribution and sanitary sewer collection lines are proposed to cross under North Creek. Council staff encourages the city to consider (and incorporate into the Mitigation Plan), the utilization of directional boring techniques in the construction of these facilities to avoid the impacts and expense of restoration that result from the use of open cut construction methods. Item 13 Water Use The document states that development of the project area will require a revision in the City's water appropriation permit from the Department of Natural Resollrces (DNR): The Council also reviews water appropriation permit requests that are submitted to the DNR for consistency with applicant community's comprehensive plan population and water supply need projections. www.rnetrocouncll.org Metro Info Line 602-1888 230 East Fifth Street . St. Paul. Minnesota 55101-1626 . (651) 602-1000 . Fax 602-1550 . TIY 291-0904 An Eaual ODVOrtunitu EmDlouer Lee Smick Seed I Genstar DAUAR Page 2 Item 17 Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff The Council encourages the City and site developer(s) to incorporate low-impact development (LID) storm water retention techniques wherever possible on the site, up-gradient of the ultimate storm water treatment and infiltration areas, to maximize infiltration of storm water runoff across the entire site. Additionally, we encourage the use of native vegetation wherever possible to help reduce runoff and watering, and provide bird and wildlife habitat. LID and surface water best management practices information is available on the Council's website at: http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/Watershed/bmp/manual.htm. Staff suggests the City consider the utilization of porous pavement for parking lot areas, as is currently being tested quite successfully at the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum. Where asphalt paving is utilized, lots can be crowned, with a flush concrete edge, so that runoff can drain into appropriately designed adjacent bio-infiltration areas. If soils in areas immediately adjacent to the paved areas are unacceptable, runoff can be redirected via pipes or swales to nearby areas where soils are more suited for infiltration. Item 18 - Water Quality - Wastewaters Currently 250 acres of the 1,006-acre site are included within the Metropolitan Council's MUSA (Metropolitan Urban Service Area) boundary. The City of Farmington can allocate additional "floating MUSA" acres to the site, consistent with the MUSA phasing plan contained in Table 4.1 (page 42) of the Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update. Currently, 212.33 acres of the 2005 MUSA stage remain unallocated. The City has provided the Metropolitan Council with projections of sewer flows from the project for 2000 - 2005,2005 - 2010,2010 - 2015, 2015 - 2020, and ultimate build out. Those calculations should be presented in the Final AUAR. Sewage treatment capacity should not be a limiting factor for this project. An expansion of the Empire Wastewater Treatment Plant from 12 million gallons a day to 24 million gallons a day is under construction, and will be completed in late 2005. Item 25 - Traffic. The DAUAR appears complete and comprehensive from a transportation perspective. Thirty thousand (30,000) trips will be generated by the full development of this site. To accommodate this additional traffic, new east-west routes will be needed as well as the eventual upgrading of TH 3 from 2 to 4 lanes. Intersections at TH 3 will also need to be improved. Scheduling of the improvements to TH 3 is critical to the phasing of area development. The DAUAR includes a schedule of needed road improvements by stages of site development. It is the Council's understanding, however, that neither MnDOT nor the County has these facilities programmed. Given the significant traffic being generated by the development, MnDOT's and the County's access management standards need to be followed. In addition, an adequate internal road and trail system will be important to reduce traffic and conflicts on the more regionally important state and county roads that abut and/or serve this property. No site plan was provided in the DAUAR laying out the internal road and trail system. The report recommends that site planning should consider future transit service tolfrom this area. Currently, there is no regularly scheduled transit service to Farmington. Lee Smick Seed I Genstar DAUAR Page 3 Item 26 - Nearby Resources. The document states that North Creek is a tributary to the Vermillion River of which part is designated as a trout stream. It also states that efforts will be made to protect the corridor/greenway of North Creek. When protection efforts are being determined the city may also want to consider including enough adjacent upland protection to enable the future development of a public trail along both sides of the creek. Park dedication requirements could be utilized for greenway protection efforts as well as potential trail development. Council staff suggests that the city contact Dakota County Parks to coordinate local trails with future regional recreation open space. Conclusion This will conclude the Metropolitan Council's staff review ofthe DAUAR. The Council will take no formal action on the DAUR. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Bob Mazanec, Sector Representative, at 651-602-1330. Sincerely, I~~ Phylli anson, Manager Planning and Technical Assistance Cc: Council Member Brian McDaniel Lynn Moratzka, Director, Dakota County Office of Planning Steve Sullivan, Director, Dakota County Parks Michael King, Principal Reviewer Bob Mazanec, Sector Representative Cheryl Olson, Referrals Coordinator V:\REVIEWS\Communities\Farmington\Letters\Farmington 2003 DAUAR Seed _ Genstar 19037-1.doc 1[~tlNESoI?" 1> ~ fi -;, I ~OFTRP.~ Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road 82 Roseville, MN 55113 TI ~@~O"W~ ~~ OCT 3 0 .1\, ,\ "~ October 28, 2003 Mr. Lee Smick City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 Dear Mr. Smick: SUBJECT: Farmington Seed / Genstar 1 st Draft AUAR Minnesota Department of Transportation Review #AUAR03-008 W ofTH3 / N of 1 94th St W Farmington (Empire Twp), Dakota County Control Section 1921 The Minnesota Department of Transportation has reviewed the Farmington Seed / Genstar 1 st Draft AUAR.. Please address the following issues in the final AUAR: . . . . . The AUAR states that in order for this development to fun.ction as planned, TH3 needs to be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane divided highway from 160th Street south to the existing 4-lane section north of Elm Street. TH3 in this area is labeled a "Preservation" corridor in MnlDOT - Metro Division's Transportation System Plan (TSP). "Preservation" involves the repair and replacement of pavement and bridges, and repair of miscellaneous infrastructure only. No funding has been identified for expansion ofTH3 in the next 20 years. . As you ImO\v, Mn/DOT has been working closely with the City and County to develop the TH3 Access Management Plan. The AUAR needs to address the following issues in order to be consistent with the Draft TH3 plan: ./ Right of way necessary for the recommended future design of Highway 3 as an urban four-lane divided facility with curb and gutter is a minimum of 150' (75' from centerline). The AUAR should provide documentation (maps) that show this amount of right of way as secure. Also, at future primary intersection locations, additional right of way should be obtained for the inclusion of right and/or left turn lanes. The City and Township should ensure that proper dedication of needed right of way occurs at the time of platting. An equal opportunity employer City of Farmington October 28, 2003 Page 2 ./ TH3 in the Farmington/Empire Township area is categorized under Mn/DOT's Access Management guidelines as a 4B I Principal Arterial-UrbanlUrbanizing. Roads in this category are intended to serve regional mobility needs and therefore, access to the trunk highway should be limited to primary intersections with other arterials and community collectors. The draft TH3 Access Management Study provides for a primary intersection at the proposed 1 80th Street west connection (see Dakota County EastlWest Arterial Study), and the proposed 19Sth Street west connection. An additional primary intersection would be located half way between these proposed minor arterial routes. A secondary intersection could be located between I 80th Street and the middle primary access. The City should work with the developer in requiring the major improvements that are needed at these intersections, which are development driven. Any improvements will be the financial responsibility of the City, developer, or both. All lots in this development should be designed to take access from the internal street system to include continuous parallel north/south routes as well as continuous east/west routes. New direct private access onto TH3 should not occur. The Dakota County East/West Arterial Study identified a future minor arterial route along the northern edge of the Seed/Genstar property. This will likely result in a future signalized intersection at TH3, therefore the site should be designed to provide for this connection. · Following are MnlDOT - Metro Division's concerns and recommendations regarding Water Resource Engineering: ./ This project should allow for future TH needs with regard to additional water quality treatment ponds. ./ The AUAR states that anticipated impact will be increased storm water runoff. It is unclear whether or not there will be any direct impact on wetland acreages. If so, please consider including a table to show the acres impacted. ./ In the third paragraph, should figure 17.1 be figure 12.1 (question 12). ./ Please consider including the Cowardin and Circular 39 classifications of any wetlands referred to in this document as these classifications are more widely recognized. ./ Please ensure that the degree of wetland protection as it affects Mn/DOT right of way, meets Wetland Conservation Act, and Federal Clean Water Act Requirements. City of Farmington October 28, 2003 Page 3 ./ The development may require drainage permit applications. If you have any questions regarding these Water Resource concerns please contact Juanita Voigt in our Water Resource Engineering section at (651) 634-2083. If you have any additional questions regarding this review please call me at (651) 582-1468. Sincerely, ~C/Yl~ Sharon Anderson Transportation Planner Cc: Fred Johnson I Dakota County Surveyor Pete Sorenson / Dakota County Traffic Engineer Lynn Moratzka / Dakota County Planning Kristi Sebastian I Dakota County Traffic ~. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 500 Lafayette Road 51. Paul, Minnesota 55 I 55-40j8 October 24, 2003 rF ACSIMILEl rOrhdnal to follow bv U.S. Maill Lee Smick, Planning Department City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 .1....- J RE: Farmington Seed/Genstar, Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) Dear Mr. Smick: The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the Draft AUAR for the Farmington Seed/Genstar Project. In general, the DNR finds the document to be well done and we appreciate the effective process that the City of Farmington has adopted for early coordination with the reviewing agencies. We offer the following comments for your consideration. Item 10. Cover Types Table 10.1 indicates the acreages of the various cover types before and after the project. The total acreage of before and after should be equal. However, the sum of the acres in the "After" column is 1037, not 1006 as indicated. The acreages listed should be corrected or this discrepancy should be explained. Item 11. Fish. Wildlife and Sensitive Resources While it is true that no state-listed species or rare plant communities have been documented within the AUAR study area itself, question lib. asks whether any such features are known from or near the site, and typically a I-mile search radius is used to answer this question. As such, we have reviewed the Minnesota Natural Heritage database to determine if any rare plant or animal species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one-mile radius of the AUAR project area. Based on this review, there are 3 known occurrences of rare species and natural communities in the area searched (for details, see the attached database printouts). Following are specific comments for those elements. Loggerhead shrikes (Lanius ludovicianus), a Threatened species, have been documented in: the vicinity of the AUAR area and may utilize the project area ifthere is suitable habitat on the site. The DNR Information: 651-296-6157 · 1-888-646-6367 · TIY: 651-296-5484 · 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer Who Values Diversity o Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a Minimum of 10% Post-Consumer Waste Lee Smick, Planning Department October 24, 2003 Page 2 preferred habitat ofthis species is open country and dry upland prairie with hedgerows, shrubs, and small trees. Shrikes are also found around shelterbelts, old orchards, pastures, cemeteries, grassy roadsides, and farmsteads. The scattered trees, shrubs, and fencerows in these areas provide places shrikes need to hunt and nest. Red cedar, hawthorn, and plum trees are frequently used for nesting. Shrikes feed by perching on the trees, shrubs, fences, or powerlines, and flying out to catch their prey (large insects, small mammals, birds, frogs etc.) in surrounding open grassy areas. Therefore, areas that are too open and have no trees or shrubs for nesting and perching are unsuitable, as are forested areas or dense brushland, which have no open areas in which to spot prey. Please refer to the enclosed fact sheet for information regarding habitat use, life history, and reasons for the species' decline, as well as recommendations for protecting and enhancing habitat for this rare bird. The wetlands along North Creek in the NW1I4 of the SW1I4 of Section 18 are within an area identified by the Minnesota County Biological Survey as a "Site of Moderate Biodiversity Significance" and a Wet Meadow natural community was documented within this site further north along the creek (see the enclosed map for details). Weare aware that this site is dominated by cattail and that agricultural fields have been cultivated up to the wetland margin with no or little upland buffer. However, some good wet meadow areas remain at the edge ofthe fields. Weare supportive of the decision to maintain this area as open space and encourage you to incorporate large buffer areas and native plantings into the site design as a means of restoring the ecological integrity ofthe creek and its associated wetlands. If you would like any assistance in designing the open space area, please contact Regional Plant Ecologist, Hannah Dunevitz at 651-772-7570. The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Services, Department of Natural Resources. It is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, natural communities, and other natural features. Its purpose is to foster better understanding and protection of these features. Because our information is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there may be rare or otherwise significant natural features in the state that are not represented in the database. A county-by-county survey of rare natural features is now underway, and has been completed for Dakota County. Our information about natural communities is, therefore, quite thorough for that county. However, because survey work for rare plants and animals is less exhaustive, and because there has not been an on-site survey of all areas of the county, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist on the project area. Please note that the enclosed results of the database search are provided in two formats: index and full record. To control the release of locational information which might result in the damage or destruction of a rare element, both printout formats are copyrighted. The full-record printout includes more detailed locational information, and may not be reproduced without authorization from the DNR. Lee Smick, Planning Department October 24, 2003 Page 3 Item 17. Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff Although it is not stated explicitly in the AUAR, it is the DNR's understanding that the developer plans to manage stormwater runoff in a manner that would protect North Creek to trout stream standards. This would be a very positive action. The City should continue to be in contact with Jason Moeckel, DNR Stream Habitat Specialist, in this regard. Thank you for the opportunity to review this AUAR. We look forward to receiving the Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan at a later date. Please contact me at 651-296-1548 with any questions about this letter. Sincerely, '])/~J.~ Diane K. Anderson, Environmental Planner Environmental Policy & Review Unit Division of Ecological Services (651) 296-1548 Attachments: MN Natural Heritage Database search; Map c: Kathleen Wallace Wayne Barstad Sarah Hoffmann Jason Moeckel Hannah Dunevitz Dan P. Stinnett, USFWS Jon Larsen, EQB (#20040218) FarmingtonSG_DraftAUAR_dka.doc ,.... ~ '" III 0 u 0 0 N III Q) .n 2 .... .... :E ..: C<l.... ell 0 0 .... Q) U u o III u -00 >. III '" ~ '00 C<l III 0 ~ Q) N .au Cl Q) .<:: C<l :i: 01 Cl .... ~ ..... ~ .... .. 0- Lll 0 .... U e III ~ 01 o >< ~ ~: o tJ U ~ ~ ~ ~ :l .... III ~ 0 Q) ;;! ..: ~ Cl Q) .... e 00 . III Z '" 01 C<l .... a Cl 0 ....<llZ Cl C<l C<l 00 ...... I Q) III III ..Cl III u III Cl Q) III 01'0 III ~ u 0 .... tJ ~ Q) Q) ..: :>: Q) .... u III a ~ Q) ;l ~ u ~ III ;l Z tJ tJ III 0 u o u III a Q) Q) 2 a1 .... .... :EC<l '" ON "'.... ## <>: I ~Bl HH !Bl 0000 ~~ iiiiii C<lC<l 88 ...:l...:l C<l U Z ~ U o '0 a III ;; H H UUID HH'" >># 00 !3 !3 :i: ...:l...:l~ [g !B~ ~~~ ~ ~ C<l ...:l C<l :.: ~ 00 ~ ~CIl gjgj ........ 00 ~~ ~CIl ><Z ~8 HtJ <>:C<l 0.00 Lll.....'" 00.... ~ :i: :i: :i: "''''0 ........N ..:<>:<>: zzz ... ... ... .... .... .... .... .... .... ............ 0. ~ '" 00 '" Cl C<l ~ H ..: 0. 00 ~ o u C<l ..: > c..1- OZ uUJ 1-2 O=> zU og C e '" ~ 01 o >< ~ ~~ o u u ~ ~ ~ ~ ..; 0 ., ~ l>: ~ 0 ., E-< e CIl . '" Z '" 01 t.l .... C Cl 0 ......"'z o t.lCD'O t.l .... a CIl - '" r- Z ., o . 01 E-< U '" Cl t.l ~ Z CIl.... H ~ ~;~ t>.~.... '" Z ~ '" ;l .... JJ .... '" E-< Z ~~~ o~iS CIl CIl t.lZ ~i! o Ot>.CIl -J,U)~ ~N!:zl~ E-< ~1Il HO.... CIl zf@ g~~", i~:~ t:J6z>< ~~S~ 8~~~ .o:o~f:l JJ l:i~~H f:l ~ ~ 0 :0: !il ~ ~ O~CIlCll CIl 8 ~Hl~!@ '1jCJl(J)~H ~ ~01IlE-<!3 t.l 8g;0~0 i:i ~g;gj><z t.l :.: 0 0 ~~ ~ gg;i~~ ><_ ~ ~><CIl.o:!:: ~ ~ '" z .... ~~ 2 l~g;:: ~~f;l ~~f:l~~>< ~,........,z OEHHW~ ~~~ ~g~~~~ ~!lj E-< ",CIlE-< ~':'::':.!@s~ o ~ "' c ."'- Zo t! 0 S ~~~ gj~~~~~S '" ~i:i.!(1Il -2 ~ .. JJ :l;:.... 0 .... O'\J,.IUl(lJCIl..c:'Tj..~ en @ ~ QJ'~" e ~~;:g~ e JJ CIl ., ., '" ~ t.l .0: H ~~flo.~~~g~z!lj ....~CIl~CIlO:l;:CIlHOCll .... E-< .... ~ o ..., '" o JJ o 0 '" OJ ., . c "' c .... .... :l;: l>: ~..... III 0 o t; 1l o '" JJ - CIl >- '" ..., '00 OJ 0 ., '" .a ~ ., ..c: ~ 01 .... r- ~ .... >- .. 0. "' 0 .... U '" .... '" "' .. o ~ '" u .... .. ~ '" '" ~ ., OJ C !( is o .... ., >- 01..... ~ co .... .u ~.... OJ '0 ., ~ :;; ~ o ~ t>. o '" '" .... >- .... ;l ':> r- '" .. ., 01.... c.... _ .3 e .0: LS) r- '" .... = E-<OO - "' a CIl .... ",,,,..c: E-< '" JJ C5 '" .~ U '" .. C 0. ., 0 '" '0 .... :l;: ;l OJ JJ .... '1j .,-i u '" JJ ., ::J '" ~ 0..:1'" ., JJ '" o '0 ., ~ ., OJ .0 o JJ OJ '" ~ OJ ;l JJ '" JJ CIl '0 ., '0 C ., JJ C H I OJ ;l JJ '" JJ CIl o CD '*" ., OJ '" .0 '" JJ '" o ., OJ 01'0 '" ~ JJ 0 .... U ~ ., III ~ :I: ., .... u '" C ~ ., ;l ~ JJ ~ '" ;l z u u '" 0 JJ o JJ OJ a ., ., 2 ~ .... .... :l;: ~ '0 ., ~ e .... . ..... r- C o ..., u '" ~ E-<O ....z CIl ~.... 0'" ~~ ~ . ....~ ~.o: :~~ ~62 o CIl '" .... E-< 'OOIIlCll .~ g; Cl ~ ..... z ..... ~ 0 0 ~o~s > E-< gjiS~ c ~ 0 III o "'.... ..... U) r-t CI) JJ~ CIl "'..:I 0 u.... '" .... :l;: ..... .... ..., ~ ., CIl :>H t>. o :I: t;>< o~ CIl!3 Z~CIl O~ ~~f:l ~~i ..:l CIl ~~!@ iS~~ ~ .0: 0 .,~t>.~ ..c: '" 0 ~ U E-< giSgJt;l :>0'" '" t>. ....H:l;: Z t>. 0 >< OUal ..., '" .... '" "' .. o ~ '" U .... .. ~ '" '" JJ ., OJ c!(iS o .~~ C (lJ .ri JJ ~.... OJ '0 ., ~ :;; ~ O~t>. '" '" '" .... >- .... ;l ':> III III ...... r--- Ol.r-I .... C e E-< 0 ~~"' '" '0 ., ;., e '" .... ..... ;;, 5 u CIl ~f:lo 0......., ~Hl ~ ...... CIl ~ t>.CD 01 CIl 0 '" co ...... .rot ..:I P: 'D 'Ot:z;lH- .,.... .0: .,t>."'CIl ~ E-< .00 H ~"'CIl 'Of-lO'\H ., .0: '" :> ~ :> .... ~.... ~ ., E-< . '" .....~><:I: .~ U ~ ti ><!3", a..:lCll o H Z ::~f:l0 nsXI-lUl .~ ~ !il ~ ....."'CIl .... CIl ~0~5l :> l>: H .... a;!31I1 00 ~l>:z S ~ . i~~ .... t>. :l;: ~><ti IIlZ '" ~~~~ ..c:0"'1Il U E-< ;l Z ~ 0000 :>~ t>. ~~~ "'t>.u .o:fj;~ ~~CIl o E-< I o~ CIl ~ ~ ~~'" ~a;~ ~f@CIl CD o ~ 0 E-<'" !@ ~ t>. ..., '" a .... ",..c: '" JJ .... '" :- '" E-< CIl !@.;;gj 0'" ~~M ~5~ .... >< t>. ..:l~0 1::><!ii HIIl'" ..:I ~ .... '" t;~E-t .... CIl Z (jO!@iS ~Q""'o ~gjg;~ ui~CIlZ '0 ",zo ~ ~"''''.... o Cl u-z",z i:i ~~gj!:loo ~ OCll:I:CIl Z Cl 0 - 0 :l;:8 ~ a.f:l~~ . ~ '" ~ CIl ~ '" ><- ~ O:i~CIl~ ~CIl 0 'OOCllO ouSe ~ .,CIl CIl!;( :o! ~~.... ~ ~gf;l ~~!::C:;CIl~ O:>~ g ~g:f:lti ~Q!;( ~g ....~>< ~ S ~ ;l a .. .:I: E-< ~~ ~ClCll"" ~ .. . Z ..:l r--cn (lJ_~H H ~~~ ;~~a~%: ~ '" ~i:i.!(31I1~ ~"JJ":l;:.... Cl~O ~JJCIl .,~..c:'O ..~~~ ~~.,.~ ~~~l>:Cl~ e JJ CIl ., ., '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~flo.~~~g~~~ ....~CIl~CIlO:l;:CIl....'O:O .... E-< ., ~ '" Cl '0 ., ~ ., OJ .0 o .. a 0. ., 0 '" '0 .... :l;: ;l OJ JJ .... '0 ..... U '" JJ ., ;l '" ~ o~'" Ll OJ '" ~ OJ ;l Ll '" Ll CIl '0 ., '0 C ., Ll C .... CD '" .... '*" OJ ;l Ll '" Ll CIl f:l i CIl Ll a ., ~ ~ 8 '" .... '" "' .. o ~ '" U .... " ~ '" '" Ll ., OJ c!(iS o .~~ C Q.) -r-! J,.I ~.... OJ '0 ., ~:;; ~ O~t>. '" '" '" .... '0 ., a .... e ., Ll ., '0 C ., - ., .....0 '" ., > '" '" ..c: ..., '" OJ ., - ....... III 01 ~ r- a '" .... 0 '0 E-< ..:l a - ;l o Z = .0 0", E-< .... !@ 8 ~ : ~ t>. '" " a 0..,0 '" '0 .... :l;: ;l OJ ~ .... '0 .... U '" JJ ., 6:g~ ~ OJ 6, .a! CD o ., JJ '" o '0 ., ~ ., OJ 8 ~ OJ '" ~ OJ ;l ..., Ll'" '" Ll " CIl,*" '0 ., ., JJ '0 .... a CIl ., LlCll ,SEl OJ ;l ~ III Ll CIl ~ H :l;: CIl8 gj OE-< t>.o Z CIl !:l~ O~ ZCll ....~ ~g; Cl'" '0 CIlCll .~ ~ x ~ .....t>.~ .... ~ ~~Dg; > E-< ~ H . U agJ~>< .~ ~ ~ III .u I-f H Q ~ 0 5 t.l ;;jgju~ .... 0 0 0 ~~gj~ ClE-<CIl HH :I::l;:CIl Cl.... ~~~ ~ '" :3 ~uit;l ~....~ ~E~~ ~~~ ;lOCll~ o I ~ :>lIlgj E-< iJiO~ ~~~ ~jg; ~Cl~ !::~..:I 60(; ..:lCll :~z Q . ~ ~.o:Cl ~ ~ ;':j E-< ~ ~ t.l .... ~ ~Clt>. ~ o .... t>. '" :> 0 !;( ~ :I: ~ ; i ~Ei~ !lj >< ~ CIl'" Ll '" ~ f;l..:~ ~ ~ ~~~ O-OZt>. ON HO ""'0 III ~~E-<~gj ~ .l<: g><~~oo ~ ~~tJ~E-< 1:: ~ O!3~Ugj ~ 2 alCll~~~ o O1~-Z U l< a~8~~0 g~ [ ~~~~~~ ~~ fJ' ~g~ ~E-< ~O ::la .><~t.l ~ ~ ~ E-<~CIl~ ~~ ~~~~~.~~~ zE-< "'01ll..:l0"'''' o~...,~ei..~~o~~ ~ "CIl " !i:.~.o: :l;: 8 0 !ii OJJ ".,t.l..c:'O "Cl'" :::l~~.~..~~~..:I!S~ e III CIl ., ., '" ~ ~ ..:l !!l ~~l>:0.~~~g2~i$ ....~CIlt.lCllO::E:CIlCllH... .... E-< Rare Features Database Print-outs: An Explanation of Fields The Rare Features database is part of the Natural Heritage Information System, and is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Services, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). **Please note that the print-outs are copyrighted and may not be reproduced without permission** Field Name: [Full (non-abreviated) field name, if different]. Further explanation of field. -C- CBS Site: [County Biological Survey site number]. In each county, the numbering system begins with 1. CLASS: A code which classifies features by broad taxonomic group: NC = natural community; SA = special animal; SP = special plant; GP = geologic process; OT = geologic time; OT = other (e.g. colonial waterbird colonies, bat hibernacula). Qy: [County]. Minnesota counties (ordered alphabetically) are numbered from 1 (Aitkin) to 87 (Yellow Medicine). CURRENT STATUS: Present protection status, from 0 (owner is not aware of record) to 9 (dedicated as a Scientific and Natural Area). .D- DNR Region: I=NW, 2=NE, 3=E Central, 4=SW, 5=SE, 6= Minneapolis/St. Paul Metro. DNR Ouad: [DNR Quadrangle code]. DNR-assigned code of the U.S. Geologic Survey topographic map on which the rare feature occurs. -E- ELEMENT or Element: See "Element Name (Common Name)" Element Name (Common Name): The name of the rare feature. For plant and animal species records, this field holds the scientific name, followed by the common name in parentheses; for all other elements (such as plant communities, which have no scientific name) it is solely the element name. EO RANK: [Element Occurrence Rank]. An evaluation of the quality and condition of natural communities from A (highest) to D (lowest). EO Size: [Element Occurrence Size]. The size in acres (often estimated) of natural communities. -F- FED STATUS: [Federal Status]. Status of species under the Federal Endangered Species Law: LE=endangered, L T=threatened, C=species which have been proposed for federal listing. Federal Status: See "FED STATUS" Forestrv District: The Minnesota DNR's Division of Forestry district number. -G- GLOBAL RANK: The abundance of an element globally, from Gl (critically imperiled due to extreme rarity on a world-wide basis) to G5 (demonstrably secure, though perhaps rare in parts of its range). Global ranks are determined by the Conservation Science Division of The Nature Conservancy. -1- INTENDED STATUS: Desired protection status. See also "CURRENT STATUS." If a complete list of protection status codes is needed, please contact the Natural Heritage Program. -L- LAST OBSERVED or Last Observed Date or Last Observation: Date of the most recent record of the element at the location. Latitude: The location at which the occurrence is mapped on Natural Heritage Program maps. NOTE: There are various levels of precision in the original information, but this is not reflected in the latitude/longitude data. For some of the data, particularly historical records, it was not possible to determine exactly where the original observation was made (e.g. "Fort Snelling", or "the south shore of Lake Owasso"). Thus the latitude/longitude reflect the mapped location, and not necessarily the observation location. Legal: Township, range and section numbers. Long: [Longitude]. See NOTE under "Latitude" -M- MANAGED AREA or Managed Area(s): Name of the federally, state, locally, or privately managed park, forest, preserve, etc., containing the occurrence, if any. If this field is blank, the element probably occurs on private land. If "(STATUTORY BOUNDARY)" occurs after the name of a managed area, the location may be a private inholding within the statutory boundary of a state forest or park. Map Sym: [Map Symbol]. MN STATUS: [Minnesota Status]. Legal status of plant and animal species under the Minnesota endangered species law: END=endangered. THR=threatened. SPC=special concern. NON=no legal status. but tracked. This field is blank for natural communities and colonial waterbird nesting sites. which have no legal status in Minnesota. but are tracked by the database. -N. NC Rank: [Natural Community Rank]. -0- Occ #: [Occurrence Number]. The occurrence number. in combination with the element name. uniquely identifies each record. OCCURRENCE NUMBER: See "Occ #" # OF OCCURS: The number of records existent in the database for each element within the area searched. Ownership: Indicates whether the site is publicly or privately owned; for publicly owned land. the agency with management responsibility is listed. .p- Precision: Precision of locational information of occurrence: C (confirmed) = known within 1/4 mile radius. U (unconfirmed) = known within 1/2 mile. N (non-specific) = known within 1 mile. G (general) = occurs within the general region. X (unmappable)=location is unmappable on USGS topographic quadrangles (often known only to the nearest county). 0 (obscure/gone)=element no longer exists at the location. PS: [Primary Section]. The section containing all or the greatest part ofthe occurrence. .Q- Quad Map: See "DNR Quad" -R. Rec #: [Record number]. RNG or Rng: [Range number]. -s- SECTION or Section: [Section number(s)]. Some records are given only to the nearest section (s). but most are given to the nearest quarter-section or quarter-quarter-section (e.g.. SWNW32 denotes the SW1I4 of the NW1/4 of section 32). A "0" is used as a place holder when a half-section is specified (e.g.. ON03 refers to the north 1/2 of section 3). When a occurrence crosses section boundaries. both sections are listed. without punctuation (e.g.. the NEl/4 of section 19 and NW1/4 of section 20 is displayed as "NEI9NW20"). Site: A name which refers to the geographic area within which the occurrence lies. If no name for the area exists (a locally used name. for example). one is assigned by the County Biological Surveyor the Natural Heritage Program. Source: The collector or observer of the rare feature occurrence. S RANK: [State Rank]. A rank assigned to the natural community type which reflects the known extent and condition of that community in Minnesota. Ranks range from 1 (in greatest need of conservation action in the state) to 5 (secure under present conditions). A "?" following a rank indicates little information is available to rank the community. Communities for which information is especially scarce are given a "U". for "rank undetermined". The ranks do not represent a legal status. They are used by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to set priorities for research. inventory and conservation planning. The state ranks are updated as inventory information becomes available. State Status: See "MN STATUS" -T- TWP or Twp: [Township number]. -v- Verification: A reflection of the reliability of the information on which the record is based. The highest level of reliability is "verified." which usually indicates a collection was made or, in the case of bird records. nesting was observed. Plant records based on collections made before 1970 are unverified. Voucher: The museum or herbarium where specimens are maintained. and the accession number assigned by the repository. In the case of bald eagles. this is the breeding area number. -w- Wildlife Area: The Minnesota DNR's Division of Wildlife administrative number. Data Security Locations of some rare features must be treated as sensitive information because widespread knowledge of tbese locations could result in harm to the rare features. For example, wildflowers sucb as orchids and economically valuable plants sucb as ginseng are vulnerable to exploitation by coUectors; other species. sucb as bald eagles, are sensitive to disturbance by observers. For this reason. we prefer that publications not identify the precise locations of vulnerable species. We suggest describing the location only to the nearest section. If this is not acceptable for your purposes, please call and discuss this issue with the Environmental Review Specialist for tbe Natural Heritage and Nongame Researcb Program at 651/296-7863. Revised 912002 Landowners Guide for Maintaining and Encouraging Loggerhead Shrikes Loggerhead shrikes arein trouble - but you may be able to help. Throughout the United States, and particularly in the Midwest, loggerhead shrikes are disappearing at an alarming rate. So serious is the decline that the loggerhead shrike is one of six bird species considered threatened in Minnesota. What is a loggerhead shrike? Loggerhead shrikes are special birds - an interesting cross between songbird and hawk. They feed on large insects such as grasshoppers and beetles, mice, small birds, frogs and toads. Shrikes spend much of their time perched on powerlines, fences or the top-most branches of trees and shrubs, scouting for prey and then swooping down to catch it. Then the bird either eats its prey, impales it on a nearby thorn or barbed wire fence or wedges it into the fork of a branch. Because shrikes lack the strong, sharp claws and feet of hawks, impaling food holds it in place as the bird tears at it with its bill. Your first clue that loggerhead shrikes are on your property may, . . be finding an animal impaled. on a fence barb or a. thorn. This habit has earned. the loggerhead shrike the nickname "butcher bird." What do loggerhead shrikes look like? The robin-sized loggerhead shrike has a slate-gray back with a light breast. The most distinguishing markings of this bird are the black mask, which extends across the eye, and the black and white wing and tail patches which flash when the bird flies. Males and females are similar in size and color. In Minnesota, loggerhead shrikes are most easily confused with eastern kingbirds and northern shrikes. However, eastern kingbirds have no mask, their heads are entirely dark, and they do not have white patches on their wings. The northern shrike.looks very similar tothe loggerhead shrike, but occurs in Minnesota from October through April, whereas the loggerhead shrike is here from March to October. During the early spring and fall, when both shrikes are in the state, they can be told apart by the loggerhead shrike's completely black bill and its mask which extends across the top of the bill. Where do they live? Loggerhead shrikes were once found throughout much of the unforested region of the state. Today, their numbers are very low. Recent surveys have located fewer than 30 nests in the state (Fig. 1). It is very important that we try to maintain habitat for the few shrikes that still breed in Minnesota. Shrikes use grassy, open areas with scattered trees and shrubs such as pastures, prairie patches and grassy roadsides. A few trees and shrubs, along with fences and powerlines provide nesting sites and perches from continued on back Eastern Kingbird entirely dark gray above which to hunt. Red cedar, hawthorn and plum trees are often used for nesting. A pair may range over 2.5 - 3.0 acres. Loggerhead shrikes are early nesters, arriving in Minnesota from their wintering areas in the"southem U.S. and MeXico in early spring. Shrikes lay 4-6 eggs that hatch after about 16 days. The young birds remain with their parents for about 4 weeks after leaving the nest. It is at this time that the birds are most conspicuous. Shrikes tend to nest in the same general areas from year to year, although they may be absent for a year or two and then return again, as long as the habitat remains. Why is the loggerhead shrike population declining? The decline of the loggerhead shrike'is lil~ely the result a combination of factors, including loss of habitat resulting from the conversion of pasture and grasslands to houses or cropland and the encroachment of forest and brush on pastures and grasslands. In addition, changes in fanning Figure 1. Historical range of loggerhead shrikes (shaded) in Minnesota. (from Coffin and . Pfannmuller. 1988. Minnesota's Endangered Flora and Fauna). Dots are nests found between 1990 and 1996. practices have resulted in larger fields and fewer trees, shrubs and fences scattered about. The increasing use of pesticides may also playa role in the decline of shrikes because these chemicals affect many animals that shrikes eat. WHAT CAN YOU DO TO HELP LOGGERHEAD SHRIKES? If there are shrikes nesting on your property, . congratulations! You are one of a very few Minnesotans fortunate to share your property with such a unique bird. We hope you will want to help this bird continue its presence in your neighborhood. Obviously your land management practices and land use are already compatible if the birds have selected your land for nesting. While biologists continue to investigate the decline of the shrike there are things you can do on your property to encourage shrikes. 1. Leave fences standing for shrikes to use for perching and impaling food. If a fence must be removed, or if there are no fences near your grassland or pasture, you can create perch and impaling posts. To do this, wrap barbed wire near the top of a post. Place these posts along the edges of pastures and fields for shrikes to use. Your local nongame wildlife biologist can help you select the best locations for the posts. 2. Keep brush from encroaChing upon grasslands by removal or burning, but only to the extent that the shrubs and trees don't dominate the grassland. A few scattered shrubs and trees are necessary to maintain the best shrike habitat. 3. Maintain existing pastures and grasslands. Pastures and grasslands are more attractive to shrikes than are row crops. Investigate the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) which pays farmers to retire highly erodible farmlands from production and to establish permanent grassland. Contact your local Natural Resources Conservation Service office (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) for more information about this program. 4. Take advantage of financial incentives for maintaining compatible land uses. In many counties, the Agricultural Preserve Program and/or the Green Acres Program provide tax adjustments and/ordeferments to farmers to help them. . maintain their land for agricultural use. Contact your county assessor's office for more information about these programs. 5. Minimize use of pesticides. Pesticides can reduce the supply of large insects and other animals that shrikes need. Also, because shrikes feed on animals at which pesticides are directed, these chemicals can build up in the birds and impair their ability to reproduce and reduce the survival of their young. For more information about shrikes or to report loggerhead shrikes on your property please contact: Nongame Wildlife Program 500 Lafayette Rd. . St. Paul, MN 55155 or locally contact: (612) 297-3764 1-800766-6000 ~1996. State of Minnesota. Deoartment of Natural Resources . _____10l9~ 1.15 . Jfil }g lite o ! ~fifU ~ &.!Ii bl: - . I: - :a"., Ebz f~l2!=1 ! 1 i i z< ~.a[' -< '!lE III' ';11 lag i - :z: a 9 -li-Ul) J-c .-::>>S! 0 III = z,&o:z::I_ ..... OJ [][][][] .suus ~ Illlll1 == ~ ~ ;:c ~ ~ 00 == e iac J i .... ~ II! e == .. J-c e =~~ ~ rJ == ~ ~ = ,.clOOe ..... U 't .8 ~ = .. ,.clC\..... .....~~ .~ = = ~z~ rJ"Il:t . ==~ ci =~ ~~ .' .... == ~ .- .; .... , "'l 00 .. p ci .... ....;...~f .'.J ~ J-c ,.,j1 ..' ~ ~ ,:' ~ .... 0\ ,~ "CS e ., .... 0 = c.... e ~ ..... ... ....... .... 00 0 DAKOTA COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Dakota County Extension and Conservation Center 4100 220th Street West, Suite 1 02 Farmington, MN 55024 Phone: (651) 480-7777 FAX: (651) 480-7775 www.dakotacountyswcd.org November 4, 2003 Ref.: 02-FRM-083 Lee Smick Planning Department 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 RE: GENST AR/SEED AUAR Dear Lee: Thank you for submitting the Genstar/Seed EA W to our office. Our office received this document on October 20th and we appreciate the additional time you have provided to comment on this document. This multi-phase, mixed-use development entails 3,896 residential units, 248,000 square feet of commercial services, and associated parking/transportation facilities on 1,006 acres. The site is located in the northeast comer of Farmington, west of Highway 3 and within the North Creek sub-watershed of the Vermillion River. The AUAR is a tremendous opportunity to outline a conservation-minded approach to development within this portion of the VermiUion River Watershed. We look forward to continuing to work with the City and developer to protect our receiving waters. The following comments are submitted on behalf of the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) and Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Organization. Item 10: Cover Types The 100-foot wetland buffer width for trout streams should be applied to the North Creek corridor. A larger buffer is preferred where feasible. Preservation and establishment of native vegetation along the North Creek corridor is critical to enhancing water quality and habitat benefits. Established buffers should be measured from the wetland edge and apply to both sides of the corridor. Efforts need to be made to protect high quality vegetation on the site. We feel that the floral diversity and plant communities within the North Creek corridor wetlands may have been underestimated. Plant communities such as sedge meadows have previously been identified on this site and are sensitive to increased water level fluctuations. As noted, restoration and preservation of native habitats should be a priority for the North Creek corridor. North Creek corridor wetlands adjacent within the City were identified as "protect" and "manage 1" in 1999. As the City began its annexation process with Empire Township, the North Creek corridor wetlands were delineated and then classified as a "manage 2" resource per City ordinance. However, no information has been provided in the AUAR about the wetland assessment completed or the difference in wetland quality. We encourage the wetland designation of wetlands adjacent to North Creek be changed to "protect" status and avoiding these areas with stormwater management facilities. GENST AR/SEED AUAR 02-FRM-083 2 Item 11: Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources Much of the upland portion of the site does not involve high quality resources. However, the proximity to the North Creek corridor with wetland and floodplain soils makes this portion of the site a good candidate for habitat restoration. The opportunity to create an east-west green way corridor that eventually would connect the North Creek corridor to UMore Park should be evaluated through the planning and plat approval process. There are opportunities to restore native habitats along existing drainage patterns and the Highway 3 barrier may be bypassed during future improvements. Item 12: Physical Impacts to Water Resources North Creek comments: · As mentioned, we encourage changing the designation of the wetlands associated with North Creek to "protect", a minimum 100-foot wetland buffer width should be applied to the North Creek corridor, and stormwater management facilities should not be installed within wetlands or floodplain. Other wetlands: · See comments above regarding the east-west corridor restoration · Compliance with the City's wetland ordinance should ensure adequate protection of the wetlands on the site. The Dakota SWCD expects to work closely with the City during the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) permitting process if adverse wetland impacts are proposed. Item 16: Erosion and Sedimentation · We anticipate reviewing the temporary and permanent erosion control plans prior to final plat approvals and will provide appropriate comments at that time. · The SWCD looks forward to working with the City and developer to mini~ize off-site erosion and sedimentation impacts associated with construction activities. . Grading on the site's steep slopes should be avoided. This will minimize risks of erosion and maintain the goals of the Comprehensive Plan to "preserve the district's rolling topography." · Protection of the proposed infiltration areas during construction will be critical to ensure their long-term success. Item 17: Water Quality: Surface Water Runoff The SWCD is encouraged that the developer is planning "to keep the runoff volume under the ultimate development conditions from exceeding the event runoff volume under pre-development (existing land cover) conditions for design rainfall events up to the 10-year 24-hour event." Efforts should be made to capture at least the first 1-1.5" of rainfall and retain it on-site. Most of the developable portion of the site is suitable for these practices. The low infiltration soils on the site generally correspond to wetland, floodplain, and wet soils. Wetland and floodplain areas should not be used for stormwater treatment facilities so soils do not appear to be a limiting design factor on the site. Even in tighter soils, bioretention (with underdrain), filtering and other practices outlined in Appendix 17 are viable options. GENSTAR/SEED AUAR 02-FRM-083 3 We encourage the use of runoff volume reduction practices to protect receiving waters and maintain natural hydrology to the extent possible. To meet this end we suggest using distributed controls throughout the site to retain runoff rather than end-of-the-pipe infiltration. Open conveyance systems, bioretention, impervious area reduction, and impervious area disconnection are just a few of the potential practices that can be implemented to reduce runoff. The estimated areas needed to meet the infiltration goals (outlined in Appendix 17) imply end-of-the-pipe treatment. If landscape features are designed to be multi-functional, stormwater can be distributed throughout the site and not necessarily reduce developable land. To function properly, infiltration basins need to meet specific design criteria. The following are a few of the criteria that should be included in the design: · Vegetation is the key to the long-term viability and aesthetics of the proposed infiltration basins. Accordingly, the maximum depth of water within the basin should be no more than one to two feet (depending on the plant species) with duration of no longer than 72 hours. If greater depth/volume is needed to provide ratelflood control, incorporate a two-cell system. · The removal of suspended solids prior to discharge to the basins must be an integral component of the design. We strongly encourage the use of vegetated filter strips or swales to provide this pretreatment. In addition to providing presettlement, these biofilters will reduce runoff and remove other pollutants as well. · The infiltration system should be installed off-line to allow high flows to bypass the basins. · There should be at least a minimum of three feet of separation between the bottom of the basin and high groundwater table. · Other criteria as noted in the Met Council Urban Small Sites BMP Manual and other resources. Summary In summary, if all of the above issues are addressed adequately during the plat approval and WCA process, the proposed project does not appear to have the potential for severe environmental effects and most adverse impacts can be anticipated and controlled. Accordingly, if runoff volumes are controlled, the runoff reduction approach is implemented, and wetland impacts are adequately avoided to the extent practical, an EIS does not appear necessary. Thank you for the opportunity to review this AUAR. We look forward to working with the City to minimize the impacts of this development to the Vermillion River Watershed. You may reach Jay Riggs or myself at (651) 480-7777 if you have questions. Sincereiy, ~ tJJs~ Brian Watson, District Manager Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District Cc: Vermillion River Joint Powers Organization Lynn Moratzka, Dakota County Office of Planning Pat Lynch, MDNR Jason Moeckel, MDNR Office of Planning Lynn G. Moratzka,AICP Director Dakota County Western Service Center 14955 Galaxie Avenue Apple Valley, MN 55124 952.891.7030 Fax 952.891.7031 www.co.dakota.mn.us o Printed on recycled paper with 30% post-consumer waste. ,I>N EQUAL Of'PORTUNITY EMPlOYER. ~~ November 14, 2003 Lee Smick Planning Department City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 RE: Comments on the Farmington Seed/Genstar AUAR Dear Ms. Smick: Thank you for the additional time to review and comment on the Farmington Alternative Urban Area Review AUAR) for the Seed/Genstar annexation area. The Dakota County Office of Planning has coordinated the County's review by the Environmental Management Department, Transportation Department and Office of Planning. Our comments are noted in the attachment to this letter. We note and support the comments by the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District on the AUAR on behalf of the Vermillion River Watershed Joint Powers Board. We are encouraged by the potential for the City and the developers to take a conservation-minded approach to development in the project area. Overall, the proposed urban development in the AUAR project area works, as long as there is sufficient local-county-state roadway infrastructure in place to serve each phase of development. If you have questions about the County's review, please call me at (952) 891- 7033. We look forward to continuing to work with you as this project progresses. ;Y~'- -- mF~ ~~~~: Directo;~/~ Office of Planning Encl c: Joseph A. Harris, Dakota County Commissioner - District 1 Brandt Richardson, County Administrator Greg Konat, Director, Physical Development Division Phyllis Hanson, Metropolitan Council IDakota County Comments - Seed/Genstar Draft AUAR, 11-14-200~ Section 5 - Project Location Roadwav Network We recommend that the draft AUAR be revised to include an internal street plan that shows how the development ties into nearby roads and adjacent property. We are concerned that providing access from the development only to TH 3 and 195th Street will not be adequate to handle the number of trips that will be generated. We suggest that the City plan for access north to 170th Street, and that Diamond Path should be extended to North Creek. We suggest that the draft AUAR acknowledge the following: (a) coordination of local roads with identified routes for future East-West County roads, (b) the right-of-way dedication needs for those road routes, (c) access spacing requirements and right-of-way needs for access preservation, and (d) the need to expand A-Minor Arterial roads in the area (CSAH 31, CR 58, and CR 64). The first paragra,ph on page 11 states that 'TH 3 will need to be improved at some point in the future from a two-lane highway to a four-lane divided highway from the intersection with 16dh Street southerly to the existing 4-lane section north of Elm Street." We suggest that the draft AUAR explain the reason for ending the proposed improvements at 160th Street. Unless the improvements are continued north to CSAH 42, it is not clear how TH 3 will accommodate the added trips and provide a good level of service up to and through the CSAH 42 intersection. We wish to note that MnDOT has no plans for the expansion of TH 3 until after 2025. Therefore, we recommend that the draft AUAR emphasize coordination with MnDOT on the location and staging schedule of any road improvements on TH 3 that the City would be willing to fund to serve the different stages of the proposed development. The third paragraph on page 11 discusses transit service and a park and ride site. We suggest that the draft AUAR address how a Park/Ride facility will accommodate enough riders to offset a meaningful portion of the 30,000+ trips that will be generated by this development. Section 13 -- Water Use Part b. paoe 26. The third full paragraph indicates that the nine homes on the north side of 194th Street West are inside the project area. Figure 13-2 does not show these properties in the project area. This should be clarified in the draft AUAR. Two of the properties on the north side of 194 th Street West have had wells sealed: at 3561 194 th Street West (Dakota County Well Sealing Permit 98-H134068) and at 3531 194th Street West (Permit 94-9216). If the other seven homes are in the project area, it is likely that they have wells that will need to be addressed. The draft AUAR does not discuss dewatering for the project area. Dewatering may be necessary for installation of utilities (water and sewer), and could affect shallow wells in or near the project area. Dewatering near North Creek may affect the water levels of the creek. Section 20 -- Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, Storage Tanks ( Part a. Source Separation The City should try to encourage on-site composting, additional recycling, etc. in the project area. Part b. paoe 55. The draft AUAR does not acknowledge the presence of all waste disposal sites known to exist in the immediate vicinity (Le., outside of the boundaries of the project area). The City's consultant appears to have not accessed State and local governments' databases but rather only used a commercial, national database resource (EDR, Inc.). We recommend that the City or its consultant access the County's data resource to update this section of the draft AUAR. You may contact the Environmental Management Department at 952-891-7011. The draft AUAR identifies GEES, Inc. as a large quantity hazardous waste generator. This is incorrect; GEES Inc. is a minimal waste generator of small amounts of parts washer solvent (mineral spirits). used oil and oil filters. and occasional lead-acid batteries. Also for your information, Godfrey Custom Signs is not a hazardous waste generator. Several years ago. they switched to using non-hazardous components for sign making. Section 21 -Traffic Development Trip Assiqnment It appears that the draft AUAR does not acknowledge Alignment B from the East-West study in the analysis. This alignment is just north of the Seed property, and we recommend that the draft AUAR be revised to acknowledge it. We suggest that the City will need to closely coordinate with the Dakota County Transportation Department when developing the 195th/19Oth Street alignment, as identified in the East-West Corridor Study. That proposed roadway will be a four-lane divided roadway, and will need to meet County standards for such a road. including the required dedicated right-of-way and access spacing. At this time, it is unknown whether the City will build the road and turn it over to the County in the future, or if the County will build it. The roadway is not in the County Capital Improvement Program at this time. These points should be addressed by the AUAR. Appendix - Traffic Volume Data a. Studv Area This development will generate up to 30,100 trips by the time it is fully built-out in 2018. We suggest that the study area listed and analyzed in the report is not large enough to cover the road system that will have major traffic impacts from the proposed development. We recommend that the City use a more detailed traffic evaluation, with expanded study limits that will include TH 3 north to CSAH 42 and roadways to the west that will have intersections with the proposed East- West roadways. which the draft AUAR identified as key routes necessary to serve the area. b. Coordination and Consistency with State/County Studies We suggest that the development proposal relies very heavily on TH 3 for access and is proposing access that is inconsistent with state and county roadway studies. (1) The proposal to have two access points directly on TH 3 at approximately 1/3 mile spacing is not consistent with the planning studies. (2) Dakota County has an East-West route identified just north of the Seed/Genstar property that is not recognized in the AUAR. (3) Mn/DOT conducted a detailed access management study for TH 3 that identified an access plan and 1/2 mile spacing for signalized intersections. The study would permit one access between the two planned East-West routes (See enclosed copy of aerial from the TH 3 study). We recommend that the City use these studies in their discussions with Mn/DOT about road access as the starting point for developing an access plan for the development area. Dakota County is willing to help facilitate discussions on funding the roadway infrastructure. c. Site Plan We suggest that the AUAR include an overview map to show how this development fits with the overall existing and planned system and a detailed site plan identifying the internal roadway network and how it will provide necessary north/south connections to serve as collector to the allowable connections along TH 3 and other area North/South roadways. d. Roadwav/lmprovement Needs The draft AUAR proposed peak hour volumes generated by the development that are much greater than the volume along TH 3 today: Seed/Genstar (pg. 58 of AUAR) TH 3 Traffic @ 210 (5/2002 count) TH 3 traffic @ CSAH 46 AM peak 2170 1122 934 PM Peak 2710 1304 1185 AADT 30,100 11,875 13,069 We believe that the draft AUAR does not explain how all the improvements necessary to accommodate this development will occur. The proposed improvements focus on the need for a 4-lane divided highway on TH 3 and the need to extend 1951ti Street and 208th Street. Neither the State or the County have projects planned for these roadways that would accommodate the traffic from the development - even in 2008. We recommend that the AUAR needs to define the timing and responsibility for road improvements - before development proceeds. e. Summary This development will have major impacts to TH 3 and the area network. To ensure access and continued safe and efficient operation of the road system as the development occurs, a more detailed evaluation of the road system with respect to the traffic that will be generated is needed. The development proposal needs to be consistent with State and County plans. We believe that it will be difficult to build the connecting roadways and turn lanes if they are to be served by a highway system that needs improvements to fully accommodate the additional traffic. We suggest a larger study area with detailed traffic distribution and analysis for the site and connecting roadways would provide a better picture of the development's roadway impacts. [Trafficl Mitiaation Plan, page 63 As noted above, MnDOT has no plans for the expansion of TH 3 until after 2025. We strongly suggest that the draft AUAR emphasize coordination with MnDOT on the schedule and local funding of any proposed road improvements to serve each stage of development. November 19,2003 Lee Smick Planning Coordinator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55044 Dear Ms. Smick: The City of Lakeville offers the following comments on the Farmington Seed/Genstar Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR): · The City of Lakeville requests that the City of Farmington work with Lakeville and the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) to plan for the potential of a new MCES interceptor sewer in the future 195th Street Corridor that would provide future sewer service to the Urban Reserve Areas of Farmington and Lakeville after 2020. · The City of Lakeville has been dealing with a number of well interference claims in recent years including one in the vicinity of 190th Street and Cedar A venue. The City has subsequently installed an observation well to monitor aquifer levels in the Prairie du Chien acquifer. In the future, Lakeville wells will be drilled in the northeast portion of the City to minimize future well interference. The City would suggest that Farmington take into account well interference issues as you plan for future well locations in the AUAR area. Lakeville would also be willing to meet with Farmington and other communities in the area to discuss well interference issues. · The City of Lakeville Parks and Open Space System Plan identifies a greenway corridor to accommodate trails and public right-of-ways that would public access along the North Creek corridor. This plan also indicates that this greenway potentially being extended through Farmington and Empire Township and east all the way to Hastings. In addition, Dakota County is considering the development of a future Regional Park east of the Empire WWTP. The AUAR document references protection of the North Creek corridor wetlands, and buffers, along with the preservation of the 100- year floodplain and other natural areas. However the document does not currently reference the development of trails in this greenway corridor and the inter-connection of these trails beyond the City's borders. The City requests that this reference be incorporated into the document. If you have any questions, regarding any of these comments, please feel free to contact me. On behalf of the City of Lakeville, we appreciate the opportunity to comment on the AUAR ZIY, .. K~oflfiL- City Engineer cc: Robert Erickson, City Administrator" David L. Olson, COmIDunity and Economic Development Director Steve Michaud, Parks and Recreation Director City of Lakeville 20195 Holyoke Avenue. Lakeville, MN 55044 Phone (952) 985-4400. FAX (952) 985-4499. www.lakp'vjJ.lp.mnlJ.<:__ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ct.farmington.mn.us /I~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and Interim City Administrator ({If FROM: Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director RE: Meadowview Park Master Plan Approval DATE: December 15,2003 INTRODUCTION The City Council previously reviewed the Meadowview Park Master Plan at its November 17, 2003 meeting. At that meeting it was approved to table a decision until its December 1, 2003 meeting. At the December 1 stmeeting, it was approved to table a decision until the December 15th meeting as not all City Council members were in attendance to discuss and vote on the park master plan. DISCUSSION To review what information has been provided to the City Council to date: The City Council received a presentation at its November 17th meeting by the park planning consultant Paul Paige of Hoisington, Koegler Group, Inc. on the process followed to develop a park master plan for Meadowview Park. Mr. Paige outlined the public meetings that were held and the comments that were received. He also explained that a presentation was made to the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission at its September meeting. The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission at its October meeting recommended to the City Council that the park master plan that is before you be approved (Exhibit A). Previously you had also seen an email in the November 17th meeting packet from Pat Lynch who works for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, responding to some of the questions that residents had regarding building a boardwalk across the wetland. Information was provided in the December 1 st City Council meeting packet concerning an email that Tim Gross, Assistant City Engineer had previously sent to the Parks and Recreation Director and a copy of an email from Jennifer Collova, the City's Natural Resource Specialist. Both of these emails had a difference of opinion on whether or not the boardwalk should be allowed to be constructed across the wetland and what kind of impact it may have on the wetland. Other information that was provided to you regarding this project is a review of different impact . studies that were done on trails. This information was included in the December 1 st packet. I have included with this memo, an attachment with information that comes from John Smyth, a Wetland Scientist from Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates. Mr. Smyth does consulting work for the City of Farmington on projects involving wetlands. The information that he provided to me is from a boardwalk project that his company completed in the past year for the City of Stillwater. This proj ect involved crossing a DNR protected wetland. I have included an email that I received from Mr. Smyth that summarizes how this boardwalk project was completed in order to minimize the impact on the wetland and also have included some pictures of the completed boardwalk (Exhibit B). The photos are similar to the type of boardwalk that would be proposed for construction in Meadowview Park if the master plan is approved. I had hoped to meet with Brian Watson from the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District in regards to his questions/concerns that he had raised in the letter to Mayor Ristow that was received at the December 1 st City Council meeting. Due to an illness, we will not be able to meet until either the end ofthis week or until Monday, December 15th. I hope to share with you at the City Council meeting on December 15th the information that was discussed with Mr. Watson concerning the construction of a boardwalk through the wetland in Meadowview Park. ACTION REQUESTED It appears that the City Council has three options to consider when approving the Meadowview Park Master Plan. The first option is to approve the park master plan with the current trail alignment with the boardwalk remaining in the location shown on Exhibit A. The second option would be to approve the park master plan with a different trail alignment with the boardwalk being moved to a different location. The third option would be to approve the park master plan without a boardwalk connecting to the trail on 200th Street. rRectfullY ~ Ran~d, Parks and Recreation Director 195TH STREET WEST (COUNTY ROAD 64 ) TRAIL ~ co-- t :":,"..: , \ 'E~ 'E' ~C '<<, 'GiB '(2. '" ~,( 'e { PONDING MASTER PLAN CONCEPT MEADOWVIEW PARK Master Plan Review November 3, 2003 Farmington, Minnesota I r- oO:: "- f- (f) w 0:: w > w NOTE: THIS MAP IS CONCEPTUAL ONLY AND REPRESENTS ONLY APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF PROPERTIES AND FACILITIES. KEY existing paved trail ----- proposed paved trail proposed boardwalk approx. park property FUTURE DEVELOPMENT i---- ---, I --, open space mowed turf (")C h ~,b ~ 'f- A 1.........--1 prairie plantings r"- _0.-', L__ _ __.J wetland ~ new tree existing trees B bench FUTURE DEVELOPMENT P B picnic table G- grill [] interpretive sign ~ park sign 8 bird house.. exact location dependent on species/habitat (possible volunteer project) future I o , 250ft I 500ft NORTQ FUTURE DEVELOPMENT "II ;: o -4 ;III; Z o III :II o J> ~ n o c Z ~" :II o J> ~ w .: G)Lt;tb~(t B Randy Distad :rom: Jent: To: Subject: John Smyth (External) Monday, December 01,20032:18 PM Randy Distad Boardwalk in Wetlands at Charleswood Development Boardwalks typically do not have adverse impacts to wetlands, in fact they are promoted because they help get people out into the wetland and learn more about the wetland without the need of fill in the wetland. The only concern would be temporary impacts during the construction phase. These impacts can be minimized with proper Best Management Practices (BMPs) . This past year we were involved with a boardwalk in the City of Stillwater that was installed in a Department of Natural Resources (DNR) protected wetland that was adjacent to a Lake and the only concern from the DNR was maintaining canoe access to the lake because the wetland was up to 3-feet deep in areas and could provide navigation with a canoe. They also recommended placing the trail in the thicker vegetation to screen people from the wildlife using the wetland. There was no indication from the DNR that it would have adverse impacts to the wetland. In your case the wetland is not DNR protected and DNR approvals would not be necessary unless the boardwalk crosses Middle Creek which is DNR protected. We would go through the proper permitting with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Wetland Conservation Act for the boardwalk. These reviewers could provide feedback. Again due to the low impact of boardwalks it can go through a shorter and simpler permit process with both regulatory bodies. The lowest impact from construction would be during the winter when equipment would not disrupt the soil and vegetation as much as during the growing season. If needed we could also have myself or another wetland scientist review the alignment and construction techiques to insure that impacts are minimize. I hope this helps, Let me know if you have questions. John 1 .... -::a.- _ -- "",.' " .~,~~ ,~"~.:......_~.-- .. t,;,;:7" . ~ :;i,~ . --.. --- . .~ . ,- .. '.. -" .. -,...... '. .... r.... ...., _ . -- ~ _.,. __ . _, ".-.. t~ 5, ,~_ -: t : _ -, ~i r::: ~_T.'.- - ~~~J~,~.~~<r:q ;';i"-~.;A }~ "'"- ", R ~,~n~__ ~; ., >.,.~ ~~~~ -~~. ~~~>-~~ ~~~h" ~~~~-~ ~ i .'~ I ~, r.-,-,~'" - F-; . t.<.: ~~.~..~ . ;-D;~~::;~7~~i~~~,'l'g~ r~- ;;~_' : ~_ _ ~.....~ ;;;: ~..''''''' _....~..,. .. ..\:~,~, 'y ~ Boardwalk Long-Term Maintenance Estimates The superstructure is pressure treated wood with a composite decking material. The wood components will weather over time, and can be recoated to prolong their life, but it's somewhat discretionary. To maximize its life, a clear coating could be applied in 10 to 15 years - particularly to the horizontal surfaces that might collect water. At a rough cost of $2-$3/sf, the approximately 3,000 sf boardwalk could be done for a cost on the order of $6,000 to $10,000. If just the rails (the most vulnerable to weathering) were done, summer help could do it for a fraction of that. The composite decking shouldn't need any maintenance - if the claims of UV resistance are true. Depending upon the level of use, some deck boards could actually wear, but they can cheaply and easily be replaced or swapped with others on the boardwalk that aren't as worn. The steel helical piers and brackets of the substructure are hot-dipped galvanized and are expected to hold up in the wet environment for many (20-30?) years without touching them. They should outlast the wood or composite deck materials. The bolts will probably need replacing first - in 20-30 years. The only unknown is damage. McKusick Lake is decent-sized, and could have an ice pile-up at some time. The pier bents are stout, but ice can do surprising things. Straightening out a misaligned boardwalk could be costly. Apart from driven bridge piles, however, nothing else would hold up as well. Components of the wood boardwalk could be damaged, I suppose, but are easily replaced with materials found at any lumber yard. City personnel could likely do the work. Philip J. Caswell, P.E. Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2335 West Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 Phone: (651) 604-4766 Fax: (651) 636-1311 Email: pcaswell@bonestroo.com The drainage/submerged boardwalk issue can be overcome by providing a fixed boardwalk that can rise on floats if flooded. Pretty common situation. As far as maintenance, if we use a recycled decking, the Iifecycle should be easily 20 years if not longer. Maintenance will likely occur less than a typical bituminous trail (sealcoating), and would include some decking or railing replacement only if damaged. Paul Paige Hoisington Koegler Group inc. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.252.7125 direct 612.338.6838 fax visit us at www.hkgLcom Randy, Sorry, it took me longer to gather this information than I had expected. Obviously, this is an educated estimate and may vary depending on the exact configuration of the boardwalk and its support structure. My assumptions are that the boardwalk is 900' long, 8' wide and utilizes a galvanized u-channel post system of support {driven to supporting soil}. My best estimate, based on limited knowledge of the site and design, would be between 1,400 - 1,700 hours or $24,500 - $30,000. This cost would include limited site prep, installation of the support structure, construction of the boardwalk sections, and installation and detailing of these sections. We can chat more if you need more detail. Feel free to contact me with any questions. I have attached some photos of the boardwalk we installed recently at Camp Ihduhapi in Loretto, MN, and would feel more confidant in my estimate if this is this 'look' you are envisioning. FYI - the jog in photo B is a point in the boardwalk that is 'double-wide' and provides a convenient spot for small groups to gather close together without being strung along the length of the boardwalk. Good luck, and I look forward to working with you in the future. Adam Adam Robbins Central District Manager Minnesota Conservation Corps 1200 Warner Road St Paul, MN 55106 office {651} 772-7556 cell (612) 306-8657 fax {651} 793-3889 www.conservationcorps.org MEADOWVIEW PARK City of Farmington. Minnesota Prepared By: Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. 11.03.03 PRELIMINARY Conce t Cost Estimate * 2.00 3.00 4.00 8ft Boardwalk - materials only 6ft concrete walk Overlook 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 Play equipment, safety mulch, installation Playequipment conc. containor edger 1/2 BB court Backstop Picnic Tables Benches Grills Park signage Interpretive signs Bird Houses (volunteer project) Trees, 2.00 Prairie 3.00 Turf cost EA LS LF LS LS EA EA EA $ 35,000.00 $ 20.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 800.00 $ 500.00 $ 300.00 1.00 1.00 360.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 9.00 1.00 Totals $ 27,090.00 $ 3,450.00 $ 7,200.00 ;::~l!C'.":il11!~~:~ ~~~~ $ 15,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 7,200.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 2,400.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 300.00 $ 73,400.00 1ifI'.... $ 7,500.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 3,000.00 EA LS LS * Does not include the 1340 LF of bituminous trail link to Pilot Knob Rd assumed it will be developed as part offuture residential development. CostEst12/1/2003 I $ 149,724.00 I Page 1 Randy Distad :rom: Jent: To: Subject: Watson, Brian [Brian.Watson@CO.DAKOTAMN.US] Monday, December 15, 2003 1 :06 PM rdistad@cLcity.farmington.mn.us Boardwalk over wetland at Meadowview ~ Meadowview Trail Memo.DOC (99 ... Randy, I received your voice message this morning. What I decided to do was attach my original memo to Mayor Ristow with updated comments now that I have a clearer knowledge of this proposed trail project. Updated comments are in bold. These are the same comments verbally discussed with the Mayor and residents on Decemernber 4th. Brian Watson Dakota Soil and Water Conservation District 651-480-7778 <<Meadowview Trail Memo.DOC>> 1 DAKOTA COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Dakota County Extension and Conservation Center 4100 220th Street West, Suite 102 Farmington, MN 55024 Phone: (651) 480-7777 FAX: (651) 480-7775 MEMO To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Ristow & Randy Distad Brian Watson, Dakota SWCD December 1,2003 updated December 15,2003 Meadowview Trail As requested I took a quick look at the information provided concerning the Meadowview Trail issue. I also received a telephone call from Michele Meschke an area resident. These comments are provided for your information. . There is no such thing as having a "completely safe" situation when it comes to water or transportation issues. . The trail, if constructed at grade and through the wetland, would require authorization under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act administered by the City of Farmington. The SWCD and other State agencies review permit applications and would evaluate whether impacts were minimized. Not knowing the specifics or quality of the wetland, I would recommend avoiding the wetland or at least following the edge of the basin when possible and avoiding the middle of the basin. Maybe a boardwalk or trail to the wooded island but not through the wetland. I now understand that the project consists completely of a boardwalk and no grading or filling for concretelasphalt within the wetland. This reduces concerns about permits under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. We typically encourage trails, boardwalk, etc. to be placed on the edge of the wetlands rather than through the middle of the basin with the use of overlooks or platforms for viewing the central portion of wetland basins. This prevents segmenting the wetland basin in two and generally creates easier maintenance for future trail changes. . Is the construction of boardwalk to be on "stilts" or "pilings" to keep water of the trail? Ifnot permits would be required as noted above. Again, I now know that this trail system will be entirely built as an elevated boardwalk through all wetland areas. . The trail will have less of an impact to wildlife if it is located along the wetland edge. Yes, this is true that a trail along the wetland edge would have less of an impact to wildlife but with an elevated boardwalk overall impacts to flora and fauna will be minimal. . How will height of this trail be impacted if Farmington is successful in changing drainage under Pilot Knob Road and holding water back into this basin or future water issues ofthe City? (City of Inver Grove Heights built a recreational trail in a wetland 10 years ago and it now is completely covered with water because of additional runoff and landscape changes that have raised water levels in the basin). It is my understanding that engineering staff has considered the maximum future water elevations within this basin and taken this into consideration. Overall, my recommendation would be to avoid the wetland with the trail where possible and use Pilot Knob road and other higher elevations. Lookouts to the basin can be provided along the trail for wildlife observance, etc. Routing the trail down the center of the wetland basin does not seem to make good fiscal or ecological sense long-term. The boardwalk design as proposed would not have significant impacts to wetland quality or health. The issue appears to be more about human impact concerns rather than ecological health of the natural resource. It is of my opinion that water quality and wetland habitat issues would not be adversely impacted under any of the trail design scenarios as long as an elevated boardwalk is implemented and consideration is given to future high water levels anticipated in this basin.