The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06.04.07 Council Packet City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. AGENDA PRE-CITY COUNCIL MEETING J uoe 4, 2007 6:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS VIEW AMBULANCE AT CITY HALL PRIOR TO MEETING. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVE AGENDA '1 CITIZEN COMMENTS 4. COUNCIL REVIEW OF AGENDA 5. ST AFF COMMENTS 6. ADJOURN PUBLIC INFORMA TJON STA TEMENT -:ouncil workshops are conducted as an informal work session, all discussions shall be considered fact-finding. hypothetical and unofficial critical thinking exercises, which do not reflect an official public position. Council work session outcomes should not be construed by the attending public and/or reporting media as the articulation of a formal City policy position, Only official Council action normally taken at a regularly scheduled Council meeting should be considered as a formal expression of the City's position on any given matter. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 4, 2007 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS a) ALF Ambulance Annual Report - Tom Kelley . CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) a) Response to Mr. Doug Bonar 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (5/21/07 Regular) b) City Administrator Evaluation Summary - City Attorney c) Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation d) Appointment Recommendation Public Works - Human Resources e) Adopt Resolution - Schedule Assessment Hearing Mill and Overlay Project- Engineering f) Adopt Resolution - Approve Gambling Premises Permit - Administration g) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Approve Therapeutic Massage License - Administration 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT a) Award City Hall Bid and 1 st Street Garage - Wold Architects (Supplemental) 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Laserfiche Update - Human Resources b) Engineering Project Updates - Engineering 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Boulevard Tree Policy - Engineering Action Taken Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 b) Approve City Hall and 1 st Street Garage Bond Sale - Finance (Supplemental) Page 14 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 4, 2007 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS a) ALF Ambulance Annual Report - Tom Kelley ~ CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) a) Response to Mr. Doug Bonar 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (5/21/07 Regular) b) City Administrator Evaluation Summary - City Attorney c) Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation d) Appointment Recommendation Public Works - Human Resources e) Adopt Resolution - Schedule Assessment Hearing Mill and Overlay Project- Engineering f) Adopt Resolution - Approve Gambling Premises Permit - Administration g) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Approve Therapeutic Massage License - Administration 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT a) Award City Hall Bid and 1 st Street Garage - Wold Architects (Supplemental) 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Laserfiche Update - Human Resources b) Engineering Project Updates - Engineering 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Boulevard Tree Policy - Engineering Action Taken Information Received Information Received Approved Information Received Approved Approved R48-07 R49-07 Approved Approved June 18 Meeting Information Received Information Received Update Ordinance b) Approve City Hall and 1 st Street Garage Bond Sale - Finance (Supplemental) 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN R50-07 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Peter J. Herlofsky City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: June 4,2007 It is requested the June 4,2007 agenda be amended as follows: CITIZEN COMMENTS 6a) Response to Mr. Doug Bonar Attached are copies of additional minutes requested by Mr. Bonar regarding the new City Hall proj ect. AWARD OF CONTRACT 9a) Award City Hall Bid and 1 st Street Garage - Wold Architects Merrimac Construction has requested their bid be withdrawn. Wold recommends awarding the contract to the second low bidder, Lund Martin Construction. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 11 b) Approve City Hall and 1 st Street Garage Bond Sale - Finance Award the sale of$9,990,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds of2007A to Morgan Keegan. r;;J:)ed4 Peter J. Herlofs){y, Jr. City Administrator 4/ ~'1 / / ~ 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 Engineer/Public 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 staffto put together costs associated with the various sites. Each option shows the estimated costs of the 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 parking which would be an additional 56 parking spaces. There are also 43 spaces at the 2nd 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 of that 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 Vlorkshcp 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 ofthe 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. utilities along 4th Street that would have to be relocated. ~1-~_..-. .....___ _...... _......;............ 1.11"1,, a.l" UU lUa.JUl 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, ifthey 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 of the 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 'IV orkshop 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 of the 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 V2 years ago, it was built for a population of 27,000 estimated for 2020. Today, estimates are submitted to the Met Council for a population of27,000 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 a jarking ramp might be advantageous for downtown. Councilmember Fitch stated the comer of 3r 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 ~t~fl''h~rl 'hru.."orl ~l""\.lH"\f';l u7AHlri O;'iTP C'tl),f'.fr1;rA,..,.t~("'\1t"'II 1"'\1""\ nTh~f"h C'.jt~ thA" chf""\l1lrl hp l{",\r\1r~ncr '::It 1o..J"".L..L ~.L"\o.a. .L.I..'-'1"_"'-'" -.-V'-'l...l.L_.1...i. 1'''''-'\A-J..~ 0.1.,."" U"~.J...L '-"-.1..l._V\...l.V..L..L V..l...L ,.,...l.l...LV..l...L U.LI.\o.' ".l-.L'=-'J U..L.l......-...L~ lJ_ .l.<oJ_..L~.L"'l:> -.... 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, staffwould 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 of the 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 T1 lines 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 3r 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 fmancing 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 ofthe 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 ofthe landowners have been blind to this until today. The owners have not been contacted as to their own estimate of the value ofthe 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 staffto 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 Minutes (Regular) January 5,2004 Page 10 7. Create trail construction and an ongoing maintenance funding mechanism to ensure the trail system is a long term investment. 8. Provide trails of alternative surface types when traditional surfacing is not feasible. 9. Create trail connections and not trail dead ends. 10. Develop specifications for trail design standards. 11. The city should plan for and create a limited number of alternative use trails. 12. Provide signage that informs and directs users to destinations and provides proper warning to potential hazardous conditions. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Cordes adopting RESOLUTION R4-04 approving the Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update Amendment regarding walkinglbiking trails. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) City Hall Site Selection - Administration Staff requested Council make a decision on a site for City Hall. Based on that selection, there will be other decisions to be made such as the life expectancy or a service length of a City Hall building. As with the other municipal buildings identify a target year or target population. It would not be out ofthe question to say we want a new City Hall to serve a population of 40,000 people or the year 2030. Based on that information, in cooperation with an architect, we can design a City Hall based on projected needs. It would also be beneficial to identify a target date - when does Council want a new City Hall to be occupied. This will allow staffto establish timelines and project priority goals. It is important to understand that by naming a site and giving direction as to the life expectancy of a building, Council is not authorizing the project. Council is authorizing the acquisition of more information. Council would be expending some financial resources such as contracting with a consulting firm specializing in acquisition and relocation of existing businesses if necessary. Staff asked Council to authorizing staff to begin work with an architect, to submit requests for proposals and begin a design process. Once the building is designed, a cost can be established. Only then can financial decisions be made whether or not to build it. Councilmember Cordes asked if it would be premature to do all this if it was decided to have a City Hall issue on a referendum. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler replied personally, you do not ask a question you cannot afford to hear no as an answer. If a problem exists and requires and answer from Council, you are bound by your job descriptions to act in the best interest of the city. The voters have put you in your positions to make those very difficult decisions in their interest. From the position of an Interim City Administrator, a referendum on any municipal construction would put this process back at least another year. We would look at a referendum with the General Election in November 2004, which would begin the process we are in now one year from now. In fact, it would be further, because we would not have a dollar amount estimate. In order for us to get to the dollar amount it would put us out 2 years. It is not premature. A site needs to be identified so staff can provide Council with the financial information they need to make a final decision or to refer it to a referendum. Council Minutes (Regular) January 5,2004 Page 11 Finance Director Roland stated since the financing was initially discussed in February 2003, the state legislature has allowed cities to construct needed public facilities utilizing G.O. bonds that were normally under referendum prior to 2003. At the time staff suggested lease revenue bonds because the cost would be spread evenly across conunercial, industrial and residential properties. We now have the option without the referendum requirement at this time. Financing could be done with lease revenue bonds, the bonds with a referendum or the bonds without a referendum. Mayor Ristow stated even if you did a referendum you would have to identify the bonding source. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated you would have to identify a dollar amount. Authorize the construction of a City Hall within a specific dollar amount. Finance Director Roland stated whether the bonds are adopted with or without a referendum. They would be market value bonds, meaning the heaviest burden would be shifted to the residential properties and not to the commercial/industrial properties. Lease revenue bonds are done on a tax capacity value which spreads the burden equally across commercial/industrial and residential properties. Market value referenda would shift the tax burden more to residential properties than the lease revenue bonds. Mayor Ristow stated he has heard comments that when the budget was done, staff stated the coming years could be difficult. He asked what adding this would do to the budget? Finance Director Roland stated at this point, because debt service levies are outside oflevy limits, it would have no impact on our budget. We would be required to levy for the debt service consistent with the way we levy for all other debt service and those debt service levies are outside of levy limits. Consequently, they would not be affected by the same items for the 2005 budget. What we are most concerned with the 2005 budget is the general levy which would have a limit on it as to the amount of money we would be able to levy for general services such as police, fire, park and rec, streets and snow plowing as well as general administrative functions. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated what Council does tonight will not trigger a $7 millfon expense. Long before we get to that point, which could be a year away, the legislature will make its intentions clear for 2005. Councilmember Soderberg stated we are basically identifying a location. We have a rough idea of what it will cost. Based on how things change with the state legislature or other things, we can set a path but if things do not work out we can always discontinue it. Staff is looking for direction on this path. Are we going to move toward a new City Hall facility, and if we get to a point where we need a voter referendum, we need to go to the voters with enough information which is going to take some time. We cannot get to that point until we make a decision tonight. Mayor Ristow stated once you start the path you need to be fully prepared. How much money will this cost to have staff research this? If we acquire additional land, how far are we going to do? Ifwe pick a site that is fine, and then go into more discussion from there, but staff is asking for more than that. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated picking a site is a starting point, after that staff would ask for additional direction and authorization to move forward. If Council chooses not to do that, if Council wants to wait and see, then staff will sit and wait until Council tells us to move. Council Minutes (Regular) January 5,2004 Page 12 ~"'I1......,,~l...,.....o,.......ho.,.. O~t"l" "lC'llrorl ;f'''.10 C"~llOl.ro.t ~ ,.....,c...rt~;,.., C'1tp u.!{"'\111r1 it ~f'-rPf't ("'pri~1n \.....-vUJ.J.vJ..l.lJ.J.""".l.llU"'J. .1. J.r.......J.1. UO.l'\..1v'U.1.1. ,"TV ~V.l.V,",L U. \"'/V"'\.",.I..1..1. ~.I.L'" ,.,.....,y..........I.'-' """.L.l""",,,,,,,, __4.....-............... negotiations that are going on with the price of a particular property that we have an option on at this time, or is that price firm as long as we exercise the option. Community Development Director Kevin Carroll replied the benefit of the Option Agreement is that we have locked in a price. We have the option of buying it at that price, but we are not obligated to. Mayor Ristow asked if we are loosing any money if we do not fulfill the agreement. Staff replied we had to put some money down in order to exercise the Option Agreement, so if we choose not to exercise the option the money we paid to get the option will be lost. This is HRA money. The HRA has several ideas in mind for the site, and they are determined to pursue whatever alternative is determined to be in the city's best interest. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated there are two sites. The first is the current City Hall site at the comer of 4th and Oak. The other site is the site recommended by the Task Force at the intersection of 3rd and Spruce. Mayor Ristow stated he has made his comments before. With the heritage and the 130 years of City Hall at the present location. There are adequate site, noise, and dust differences. He stated this at the Task Force meetings all along. He would like to see City Hall stay at the current site. He heard more comments was informed by the Library there were a lot of furnace and duct systems that due to the dust and noise when the train goes through, that have to be halted. If during a Council Meeting and there was a loud train whistle the meeting could be stopped. There are numerous meetings with staff and developers, etc. As far as the timeline frame, the financial people recommended a 50 year site and 3rd and Spruce was a 20 year site. Finance Director Roland stated the bonds would be 25 or 30 year bonds and that is how far the building would go out. Mayor Ristow stated he was referring to the life expectancy of the building. We need the space so that we are not dead at 20 years. Councilmember Fogarty stated the current site is too expensive. It is a great deal more money to stay here. This might be the original site, but it is not the original building. As far as taking the building out 50 years, she would rather build at 3rd and Spruce and expand vertically. To keep it here, some options were $1 million. If we are going to spend $1 million she would rather see that go toward a parking ramp at 3rd and Spruce with a 3-story City Hall, than to use it to buyout businesses and move them. Mayor Ristow stated the $1 million was the higher option. Councilmember Soderberg stated there was a wide range in cost between the two sites. They went from $200,000 to $1 million to put the facility here. While 3rd and Spruce may have some obstacles, he did not believe that any of them cannot be overcome. He felt 3rd and Spruce is an excellent site. There would be minimal disruption to city services during construction. It was the site the Task Force recommended, and felt they came to some excellent conclusions. Councilmember Cordes stated she would like to see City Hall stay on the current site. She did not know if the city would have to acquire all businesses at this point. The current building could be demolished and expand vertically. We the Council Minutes (Regular) January 5, 2004 Page 13 maintenance facility and police facility were built we were told that area was big enough for a City Hall, Maintenance Facility, Police Facility, satellite Fire Station, a water treatment building. Now were are down to two of them. She assumed that would be our city campus. That was a hard pill to swallow. If she does not have to move City Hall from the current location, she does not want to. Mayor Ristow stated when we upgraded from the Community Library that was in this building, and when the Fire Station and then the Police moved out, our next step was to expand and we would have as much room there as we currently have. If you look at it conservatively for the constituents that we represent sometimes you have to add onto your home instead of building a new home. Councilmember Fitch stated his initial reaction was that he did not like 3rd and Spruce. The reason is that is the beginning of the Spruce Street Corridor, and felt it would be better to have commercial start the Spruce Street Corridor than a City Hall. However, we have a lot oflimitations on expanding on the current site. Even though this site would be preferable, from a logistics standpoint, not just the city has the problem, but all of downtown in that we are landlocked. Unless we pick something outside of downtown, we are going to be landlocked. At this point, if we are going to build a building for a life expectancy of 50 years, we are only fooling ourselves. He did not think we could look at a building for more than 30-35 years. It would be nice to be able to plan a building to go vertical, but no one wants to go vertical anymore. He stated 3rd and Spruce would be better served with commercial, but also understood the landlocked problem we have no matter where we build the building. If the library comes up for sale, perhaps the HRA would buy that and hold onto it for redevelopment for a future City Hall after 30 years. Ifwe don't think now about that site and where we will go and how we will get there, in 30 years we will have done a disservice to the taxpayers. This is not a cheap undertaking. He stated he could live with the 3rd and Spruce site and go along with the recommendation of the Task Force. He stated they did a good job. We looked at a lot of options and unfortunately it comes down to dollars and cents and he could not see spending $1 million. At this time, even though it was not his favorite site, he could live with 3rd and Spruce. Mayor Ristow stated if we expanded across to the library, what would we do with the Spruce Street Corridor. Councilmember Fitch stated in the future, other things may happen and other properties could come into the city that could change that. Maybe split off Administration from Engineering, and Engineering goes into another building, just like we did with the Maintenance and Police facilities. No matter where we put City Hall, we have a landlock problem. Unless the city decides they will acquire more property for expansion no matter what we do, we will be able to envision what that will be beyond 30 years. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler stated in subsequent discussions Council may want to consider a strategic plan for the acquisition of additional property, either surrounding this site or 3rd and Spruce and formulate a strategic plan for the long-term acquisition of property for 20-30 years out. Mayor Ristow stated he understood what he was saying, but disagreed with the way he said it. You are taking out commercial and retail business where here you are just taking out housing to the east. Commercial land is more expensive right now than housing. Council Minutes (Regular) January 5, 2004 Page 14 MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to approve the 3rd and Spruce Street site as the preferred site for the City Hall. Mayor Ristow stated he will not support it, but he will support whatever site is chosen down the road to continue on with it. Councilmember Soderberg stated this is the end of a long road that a lot of people were involved in and the Task Force did a lot of work on it and appreciate their efforts. Voting for: Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg. Against: Ristow, Cordes. MOTION CARRIED. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler asked for further direction. Councilmember Soderberg stated to look out 50 years or a population of 40- 50,000 is very reasonable. Mayor Ristow stated we have to be open-minded and do what we think is right. We can do what the architects and other professionals recommend. Interim City Administrator Siebenaler requested Council authorization for request for proposals for architectural services so we can begin a design phase of City Hall. Once that is in place, staff can provide design cost estimates and the amount of land necessary for that design. The current building is 35 years old. When it was initially constructed it was serving a population of 3,600. It has served well for a lot of departments for 35 years. Based on the current information we can make a reasonable population estimate for 30 years from now. 50 years from now is pushing the limits of anyone's ability of projection. He recommended obtaining an estimate for 30 years and designing a building to serve that population. Councilmember Fogarty stated staff would recommend to continue with the Task Force's recommendations. Staff replied that is correct. Council agreed. 77 Q.. June 4, 2007 UJQLD City Council City of Farnrington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 Re: City of Farmington New City Hall Commission No. 062047/062048 MINNESOTA OFFICE 305 ST. PETER STREET ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 651.227.7773 FAX 651.223.5646 WWW.WOLDAE.COM MAIL@WOLDAE.COM ST. PAUL, MN ELGIN, IL TROY, MI DENVER, CO Dear Council Members: At 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 31, 2007 12 bids were received for the construction of the New City Hall and First Street Garage. The bids were of an acceptable range and the low bid is within your project budget. On June 1, 2007, we were made aware of a mathematical error in the apparent low bid from Merrimac Construction. Due to this bid error, Merrimac has requested that their bid be withdrawn and their bid bond be returned (see enclosed letter). We recommend you allow Merrimac Construction to withdraw their bid and award the bid to the second apparent low bidder. A copy of the bid tabulation is enclosed for your review. Selection of the alternate will not affect determination of the second low bidder. The following is our recommendation: Base Bid - New City Hall and First Street Garage $7,569,000 The base bid includes a 42,000 S.F. City Hall at the 3rd and Spruce site and a 5,500 S.F. building at the existing 1st street site. Existing building demolition is included. Alternate #1 $136,000 This alternate includes finishes and toilets for the expansion space. Recommendation: Accept the Alternate We recommend the City of Farrnington enter into a contract with Lund Martin Construction for a total amount of $7,705,000, which breaks down as follows: Base Bid Alternate #1 TOTAL CONTRACT $7,569,000 $ 136.000 $7,705,000 Sincerely, WO~~~~ JOM McNamara, AIA Associate Enclosure cc: Peter Herlofsky, City of Farmington Michael Cox, Wold Chris Ziemer, Wold D R/C 1_ Fannington/06204 7/crsp/j un07 WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS . z o ~ ..I :) Ie <( l- e in .. z o w I- ~ C)e~ ~~<( :E..JC) D::<i!1- <(:cttl u. 0=: u.~1- 0-0 o ~~t; _Wo=: OZU:: ti Gl .~ e D.. t , I ClII a . J!!l!! UGl SGl .iiiio C .c: .- e~ <(W "CS"CS -C OelS ~ ..... o o N ~:E .....C")D.. "'It :>.0 oelSO ~:EN .: ~: CD O~ E Z eelS ._ . l- E E o "CS ~ C/) in ~ == ..J I- ~ CI) e "CS"CS c"CS :liE "CS 0'- W ~ uaI ~ - Gl ;: 0 'C .-:sfl OUIll ZCDQ. Q) 0 l!) 0 0 0 C/)C/) W"''C 0> 0 L() 0 0 0 ....OCD "0 I!) "00 "OV "00 "00 "00 <c= "0 - "0 - "0 . "C . "0 . "0 - ZOCD <(~ <(~ <(~ <(~ <(g <(~ o::-.c .... .... .... .... .... .... w~C/) ~ EI7 ~ EI7 EI7 EI7 I-Q.... -lEg <Co- (,)u.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... 0 0 0 0 0 as 00 0 .... 0 0 o;t w .... (j) LO 00 I"- r-: ! LO co 00 (j) I"- .... ('t) LO LC) LO. I"- (j) r--. . ~ l"- I'- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LO LO LC) It) It') ~ -( -( ~ o~ LO I!) o;t o . M ('t) I ('t) I ~ <CO C'{ C'{ .... N .... Z "!. .... .... .... .... 0(,) )( )( )( )( )( )( -w COC/) CD E c Cl) III 0 C C") 0 Z cw.... :;::: CX) 0 .2 C") CD.... .2 z....,... uw....Cl) .... t)'C..r-,... .'C III 2z~ee c'Crn~ ::J:8o UIll 0 .... .... . 0 It') ::J1ll1t),... co ,... CD gU):8~CX) Ui..iIt)N,... 01llC")CX).... ...01t)CX) czo -:,O::N8N 'C .; C Z I ~ cC/)z~~ .- 0 It) ,... It) Ui~Z'1~ s~:IiE~~ UiCD......;.i 'C IIlIll ..r- 8-a:IiE~~ t)~It)c/)Cl) c~:IiE..,1t) ._<C -,...~ .- U It) It) ,... m cC:i~~ ::J >- Z Cl) Cl) 0>.CX).... ft;~'5~. 6- .~ It) '1' ..;. o III _ . c- ui'i"N ~~:IiE'1'~ (,) ._ III ,... ..;. (,).cQiC")C") ._O'_NCX) C~:2MCX) S.a~~~ ~c7!~:g~ uU.cee"'f i~1~~ s5c~"'f oUiQ.eet;- e-C..i~t;- 1ll::J....,...C") (,)(,)l!!':':~ Ill- III Ill"" C") ::J....,: .... ECOCD..ee :i&!Ill...... cw~..ee OCDC/)...... .J3:;::J..1t) ....coGl,... Gl Gl ee 1::004>,... Gl c~,... (,)(,).cGl~ cvGlee '': It) .... 5 .. 'CC")cs" It') Us" tIl It) 0 0 .. ~1t)1::s" ~""a.s" ~:gYd.c~ CNC >< .8~s.c~ s~o.c~ Gl~O.c~ .c~..i.c~ ....wa.u.. '::~:sf.f WNOa..U. -'Cl)oa..u. ONZa..U. C/)NC/)a..U. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 '0 0 "C 0 '00 '00 "0 0 ~ cO ~ ct$ ~ ~ "0 - "0 - "0 ci N N CO <(~ <(~ <( I.() T"" C'\I T"" T"" ...... T"" fI7 fI7 fI7 fI7 fI7 fI7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .:f ci I.() 0 ci ci <.0 CO m C'\I 0 0 m Q') m. 0 T"" to ,..:- I'- I'- CO ct$ CO ~ ~ fI7 ~ fI7 ~ I.() to to ~ ~ I.() -q-- -q- ('I) ('I) (\') ('I) "!. "!. N C'\I T"" ...... T"" T"" >< >< >< >< >- C I'G a. Eco o CD 0_ c'S .2U) t; u-aOCD.... =I'G::;qo J:;01t)...."It ~O::It)~q ,~f!~t; ....0~1t).... 1Il'c _CD~ s::.I'G'S"1t) u..JI'GCDCD 'COo.S" f:g..:s::.= u..C')(/)o.u.. CD It) .... CD - .:; (/) 21.... .~ ~It) c<tlt)~ .2czC')co us::.:E~~ 2 ~ ?:"It CO2 -1Il-lt)v ~Cij~~~ O"Cl>CD, o;c~r2 ~:E ~ g ~ ,:,:o'Os::.>< <~C)o.af c o CD ~~N~N 2cgco:&"It 1ii'iiIt)~t; C'c:ZC')N 01ii:E~C') (,)=_0C') C"Cl:!:!It)~ Oc="o (,)-~:!!It) ~.....-o>< CD ~ :u s::. I'G :EC')u..o.u.. en 4i S~ ~l! 2'0 1ii .~ cz o It) (J.... :EN (,)~ ....C') C')N ~NC") It)~co z:g~ :E~.b .i~~ :: O)~. >..it) ~:!!~ S,g ~ lno.u.. I.() I ...... >< o o "It CD - 'Sit) C(/)N o . "It ;:~:g~ u- ~ 2oz~~ -3::E"lt0) ~ l!! c~ ~ O'cSNIt) (,) CD Cl It) co C=CO)' ~~EQj~ .....05.. ~g.2s::.= lnNalo.u.. I.() ~ -q-. ('I) C'{ T"" >< o .... ..... CD - .:; 0) (/)0 uf:ti I'Glt)g CDZC') ~:E~~ C .0 C") CD'S....1t) .>I'Gto;-o u<tO'........ .5.c..:~to;- .-U)...... :;....s::.CD~ ,C....t::S.. ~~o.c= >NZo.u.. 1215/1211/21211217 15:1214 7534345558 MERRIMAC ~.:;.~.".,v~!~t .. ..~.d/ 01 JUN 01 2007 ~ .186!<t...."'_n,.......' 'j . . .CBstSethel, UN .55011 · . .. ... p~: (T6.'}}.~'7 .Pk (763}434-e5BB .'GENERAL~RS.. . June 7, 2007 Chris Zeimer Wold Arcbitect!\ 305 St. Peter Street St. Paul, MN 55102 (651 )-223-5646 Re: New City Hall and First Street Garage Project Dear Chris; This letter is to notify you that due to a Mathematical error ill our spread sheet Merrimac Construction, Inc. must withdraw the bid submitted yesterday for the New City Hall and First Street Garage Project. Therefore, we respectively l'equest that oUr bid be withdrawn and our Bid Bond be renlrned. If you should have allY questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. ~ /) / J JUS Dixon reject Managcr/EsUmator lib City of Farmington 325 Oak Street. Farminf!ton. MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrato(j; Robin Roland, Finance Director FROM: SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution -Sale of $9.990,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds Series 2007 A - Finance DATE: June 4, 2007 INTRODUCTION The City Council, at their meeting April 16, 2007 authorized the sale of $9,990,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds of 2007 A to finance construction of the New City Hall and First Street Garage. DISCUSSION Competitive bids for the bonds were received today in the offices of Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Preliminary estimates anticipated an interest rate of 4.413% with an anticipated $5,358,493 interest cost over the twenty year term of the debt. The City received eleven bids. Morgan Keegan (Memphis TN) was the low bidder at a net interest rate of 4.1866% and a total interest cost of$ 5,187,124 or $171,368 less than estimated. BUDGET IMP ACT Analysis of the bids will be presented at the meeting. ACTION REQUIRED Approve the attached resolution awarding the sale of the $9,990,000 G.O. Capital Improvement Plan Bonds of 2007 A to Morgan Keegan. Respectfully submitted, ktI;fL/ , Robin RolaZ--c/ Finance Director City of Farmington, MN Results of Bond Sale June 4, 2007 $9,990,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007 A Low Bidder True Interest Rate Number of Bids Morgan Keegan & Co. (Memphis, TN) 4.1866% 11 Rating "AAA" Insured (Moody's underlying rating A2) 4.1866% - 4.2561 % Range of Bids Total Debt Service Estimated * Results of Sale Principal Amount Available Project Funds City Project Contribution True Interest Rate Bond Buyers Index Closing Date $9,990,000 $9,812,000 $274,350 4.413% 4.29% $9,990,000 $9,812,000 $178,690 4.1866% 4.41% June 28, 2007 Council Action Accept the bid of Morgan Keegan & Co. and Adopt "Resolution Authorizing The Issuance, Awarding The Sale, Prescribing The Form And Details And Providing For The Payment Of $9,990,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007 A." *Based on the April 16, 2007 estimates, the low bid is $95,659 less than estimated in various costs and capitalized interest, allowing the City contribution to be lower. Attachments . Bid Tabulation . Revised Debt Schedule . Bond Buyers Chart Prepared by: BID TABULATION $9,990,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007 A CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA SALE: June 4, 2007 AWARD: MORGAN KEEGAN & CO., INC. RATING: CIFG Insured (Moody's Investors Service, Inc. "Aaa")* UNDERLYING RATING: Moody's Investors Service, Inc. "A2" BBI: 4.41% PRICE NET TRUE INTEREST INTEREST COST RATE NAME OF BIDDER MATURITY (February 1) $9,919,439.40 $5,187,124.45 4.1866% MORGAN KEEGAN & CO., INC. Memphis, Tennessee 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES, INC. New York, New York 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 G insurance purchased by Morgan Keegan & Co., Inc. e EHLERS &. ASSOClf.,T:S N:" RATE REOFFERING YIELD 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.050% 4.100% 4.100% 4.150% 4.150% 4.150% 4.200% 4.200% 4.200% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.125% 4.125% 4.125% 4.125% 4.125% 4.125% 4.125% 3.710% 3.760% 3.770% 3.800% 3.830% 3.850% 3.875% 3.900% 3.950% 4.000% 4.050% 4.080% 4.125% 4.140% 4.170% 4.190% 4.200% 4.210% 4.220% 4.240% $9,884,813.95 $5,175,214.61 4.1889% LEADERS I,',J Pl..fll C l'INil,'lei:. 3060 Certl'e f'ointe Drive Rose~i:lc, MN 55: J 3.11 OJ 6~,1,G97.8500 t:3X 651 697.BS55 \'\..".."....._etller~-Inc Cf)~n Cf(I(:{.;s :rl l~l()s{!v:i,je, ,f1,'iN. BrO~H:jle,'d, V'i,l and (..,'apervi,lic. I'L $9,990,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007A City of Farmington, Minnesota Page 2 IIIE OF BIDDER MATURITY (February 1) RATE PRICE NET INTEREST COST TRUE INTEREST RATE REOFFERING YIELD STIFEL, NICOLAUS & CO., INC. Minneapolis, Minnesota 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.050% 4.100% 4.100% 4.125% 4.125% 4.150% 4.200% 4.200% 4.200% 4.200% STERNE, AGEE & LEACH, INC. Birmingham, Alabama 2009 4.000% 2010 4.000% 2011 4.000% 2012 4.000% 2013 4.000% 2014 4.000% 2015 4.000% 2016 4.000% 2017 4.000% 2018 4.000% 2019 4.050% 2020 4.100% 2021 4.125% 2022 4.125% 2023 4.125% 2024 4.125% 2025 4.125% 2026 4.125% 2027 4.125% 2028 4.125% 2009 4.000% 2010 4.000% 2011 4.000% 2012 4.000% 2013 4.000% 2014 4.000% 2015 4.000% 2016 4.000% 2017 4.000% 2018 4.000% 2019 4.000% 2020 4.050% 2021 4.125% 2022 4.125% 2023 4.150% 2024 4.200% 2025 4.200% 2026 4.200% 2027 4.200% 2028 4.200% PNC CAPITAL MARKETS LLC Philadelphia, Pennsylvania $9,922,782.75 $5,195,240.15 4.1923% $9,891,429.18 $5,187.042.59 4.1971% $9,917,334.60 $5,203,735.92 4.2003% $9,990,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007 A City of Farmington, Minnesota Page 3 .E OF BIDDER RATE MA TU RITY (February 1) REOFFERING YIELD PRICE NET INTEREST COST TRUE INTEREST RATE SUNTRUST CAPITAL MARKETS, INC. Atlanta, Georgia STEPHENS INC. Little Rock, Arkansas RBC CAPITAL MARKETS St. Petersburg, Florida FIRST TRUST PORTFOLIOS L.P. Lisle, Illinois 2009 4.000% 2010 4.000% 2011 4.000% 2012 4.000% 2013 4.000% 2014 4.000% 2015 4.000% 2016 4.000% 2017 4.000% 2018 4.000% 2019 4.000% 2020 4.000% 2021 4.000% 2022 4.125% 2023 4.125% 2024 4.125% 2025 4.125% 2026 4.125% 2027 4.250% 2028 4.250% 2009 4.000% 2010 4.000% 2011 4.000% 2012 4.000% 2013 4.000% 2014 4.000% 2015 4.000% 2016 4.000% 2017 4.000% 2018 4.000% 2019 4.050% 2020 4.100% 2021 4.125% 2022 4.150% 2023 4.150% 2024 4.150% 2025 4.200% 2026 4.250% 2027 4.250% 2028 4.250% ROSS, SINCLAIRE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Nashville, Tennessee . . $9,880,554.40 $5,214,904.47 4.2195% $9,908,090.61 $5,236,380.95 4.2283% $9,990,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007A City of Farmington, Minnesota Page 4 ME OF BIDDER PRICE NET TRUE INTEREST INTEREST COST RATE MATURITY (February 1) RATE REOFFERING YIELD HARRIS N.A. Chicago, Illinois FTN Financial Capital Markets Isaak Bond Investments Inc. The Bankers Bank GRIFFIN, KUBIK, STEPHENS & THOMPSON, INC. Chicago, Illinois WELLS FARGO BROKERAGE SERVICES, LLC Minneapolis, Minnesota 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.125% 4.125% 4.125% 4.250% 4.250% 4.250% 4.250% 4.250% 4.250% 2009 4.000% 2010 4.000% 2011 4.000% 2012 4.000% 2013 4.000% 2014 4.000% 2015 4.000% 2016 4.000% 2017 4.000% 2018 4.000% 2019 4.000% 2020 4.000% 2021 4.050% 2022 4.050% 2023 4.150% 2024 4.150% 2025 4.250% 2026 4.250% 2027 4.250% 2028 4.250% 2009 4.000% 2010 4.000% 2011 4.000% 2012 4.000% 2013 4.000% 2014 4.000% 2015 4.000% 2016 4.000% 2017 4.000% 2018 4.050% 2019 4.125% 2020 4.125% 2021 4.250% 2022 4.250% 2023 4.250% 2024 4.250% 2025 4.250% 2026 4.400% 2027 4.400% 2028 4.400% $9,909,363.25 $5,256,645.24 4.2435% $9,878,173.55 $5,248,904.60 4.2463% $9,968,757.05 $5,287,165.00 4.2476% $9,990,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007 A City of Farmington, Minnesota Page 5 ME OF BIDDER PRICE NET TRUE INTEREST INTEREST COST RATE MATURITY (February 1) RATE REOFFERING YIELD CRONIN & COMPANY, INC. Minneapolis, Minnesota CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS, INC. Chicago, Illinois UBS INVESTMENT BANK Dallas, Texas 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.000% 4.100% 4.150% 4.200% 4.250% 4.250% 4.250% 4.250% 4.300% $9,893,459.95 $5,267,519.78 4.2561% Farmington, MN $9,990,000 G.O. CIP Bonds, 2007A 20 Year Term FINAL Table of Contents Report Sources & Uses Debt Service Schedule 2 Net Debt Service Schedule 3 Ser 07 $9.850M Net Cost C I SINGLE PURPOSE I 6/4/2007 I 10:23 AM Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Leaders in Public Finance . Farmington, MN $9,990,000 G.O. CIP Bonds, 2007A 20 Year Term FINAL Sources & Uses Dated 06/2812007 I Delivered 06/2812007 Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds Reoffering Premium Planned Issuer Equity contribution $9,990,000.00 1,846.00 178,690.70 Total Sources $10,170,536.70 Uses Of Funds Total Underwriter's Discount (0.541 %) Costs of Issuance Gross Bond Insurance Premium ( 12.2 bp) Deposit to Capitalized Interest (CIF) Fund Deposit to Project Construction Fund 54,006.60 44,826.25 18,400.00 241,303.85 9,812,000.00 Total Uses $10,170,536.70 . . Ser 07 $9 850M Net Cost C I SINGLE PURPOSE I 6/4/2007 I 10.23 AM Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Leaders in Public Finance Page 1 . Farmington, MN $9.990,000 G.O. CIP Bonds, 2007A 20 Year Term FINAL Debt Service Schedule Date Principal 06/28/2007 02/01/2008 08/01/2008 02/01/2009 330,000.00 08/01/2009 02/01/2010 ~45,00000 - -~- 08/01/2010 02/01/2011 360,000.00 08/01/2011 02/01/2012 370,000.00 08/01/2012 02/01/2013 _390,000.00 -~.- 08/01/2013 02101/2014 405,000.00 08/01/2014 02/01/2015 420,000.00 08/01/2015 02101/2016 435,000~ -_..----_.-- 08/01/2016 02/01/2017 455,000.00 08/01/2017 02/01/2018 475,000.00 08/01/2018 02/01/2019 ~5,000.00 --"--.- . 08/01/2019 02/01/2020 515,000.00 08/01/2020 02/01/2021 535,000.00 08/01/2021 02/01/2022 560,0000~ -_..- 08/01/2022 02/01/2023 585,000.00 08/01/2023 02/01/2024 610,000.00 08/01/2024 02101/2025 _~5,000.00 ----."-- 08/01/2025 02/01/2026 660,000 00 08/01/2026 02/01/2027 690,000.00 08/01/2027 02/01/2028 720,000.00 Total $9,990,000.00 Yield Statistics Bond Yea r Dolla rs Average Life Average Coupon Net Interest Cost (NIC) True Interest Cost (TIC) Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes All Inclusive Cost (AIC) Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 241,303.85 241,303.85 241,303.85 203,918.75 203,918.75 4.000% 203,918.75 533,918.75 737,837.50 197,318.75 197,318.75 4.000% ~97,318c~ _ __ 542,3~~_ 739,637.50 190,418.75 190,418.75 4.000% 190,418.75 550,418.75 740,837.50 183,218.75 183,218.75 4.000% 183,218.75 553,218.75 736,437.50 175,818.75 175,818.75 4.000% ..!Z5~818.75 _ ~5,818.75 B.1,637.5Q 168,018.75 168,018.75 4.000% 168,018.75 573,018.75 741.037.50 159,918.75 159,918.75 4.000% 159,918.75 579,918.75 739,837.50 151,518.75 151,518.75 4.000% __~1,5187~__ _~,518.7(;__ .E?"03750 142,818.75 142,818.75 4.000% 142,818.75 597,818.75 740,637.50 133,718.75 133,718.75 4.000% 133,718.75 608,718.75 742,437.50 124,218.75 124,218.75 4.000% 124,218''7'5 619,2.~'7'5 743,437.50 114,318.75 114,318.75 4.050% 114,318.75 629,318.75 743,637.50 103,890.00 103,890.00 4.100% 103,890.00 638,890.00 742,780.00 92,922.50 92,922.50 4.100% 92,922.50 __ 652,922~(;()__ ..245,845.0.<>. 81,442.50 81,442.50 4.150% 81,442.50 666,442.50 747,885.00 69,303.75 69,303.75 4.150% 69,303.75 679,303.75 748,607.50 56,646.25 56,646.25 4.150% 56,646c25 691 ,6~6.25 748,29250 43,4 70.00 43,470.00 4.200% 43,4 70.00 703,470.00 746,940.00 29,610.00 29,610.00 4.200% 29,610.00 719,610.00 749,220.00 15,120.00 15,12000 4.200% 15,12000 735,120.00 750,240.00 $5,116,563.85 $15,106,563.85 $124,275.75 12.440 Years 4.1171056% 4.1738830% 4.1866580% 4.1280034% _ 4.2356906% IRS Form 8038 Net Interest Cost ----..--- Weighted Average Maturity __ S 07 $9 850M Nee I SINGLE PURPOSE I 6/4/2007 I 1023 AM 4.1232725% 12.415 Years ----- . Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Leaders in Public Finance Page 2 Farmington, MN $9,990,000 G.O. CIP Bonds, 2007A 20 Year Term FINAL Net Debt Service Schedule Principal Coupon Date 06/28/2007 02/01/2008 08/01/2008 02/01/2009 08/01/2009 02/01/2010 08/01/2010 02/01/2011 08/01/2011 02/01/2012 08/01/2012 ~2/01/2Q!l_ ~90,000.00__ 4.000~ 08/01/2013 02/01/2014 08/01/2014 02/01/2015 08/01/2015 02/01/2016 08/01/2016 02/01/2017 08/01/2017 02/01/2018 08/01/2018 02/01/2019__495,000:~ _ ~OOO% 08/01/2019 02/01/2020 08/01/2020 02/01/2021 08/01/2021 02/01/2022 --...-........-.-. -...--- 08/01/2022 02/01/2023 08/01/2023 02/01/2024 08/01/2024 02/01/2025 "..------- - --- . --- 08/01/2025 02/01/2026 08/01/2026 02/01/2027 08/01/2027 02/01/2028 330,000.00 4.000% 345,000.00 4.000% 360,000.00 4.000% 370,000.00 4.000% 405,000.00 4.000% 420,000.00 4.000% ~5,000.00 _ 4.000% 455,000.00 4.000% 475,000.00 4.000% 515,000.00 4.050% 535,000.00 4.100% 560,ClOO.00 4.100% 585,000.00 4.150% 610,000.00 4.150% 635,000.00 4.150% 660,000.00 4.200% 690,000.00 4.200% Total 720,000.00 $9,990,000.00 4.200% 750,240.00 Ser 07 $9.850M Net Cost C I SINGLE PURPOSE I 6/4/2007 I 1023 AM Interest 241,303.85 203,918.75 203,918.75 197,318.75 197,318.75 190,418.75 190,418.75 183,218.75 183,218.75 175,818.75 !!5&l8.~ 168,018.75 168,018.75 159,918.75 159,918.75 151,518.75 __1~5~75 142,818.75 142,818.75 133,718.75 133,718.75 124,218.75 ~24,21~5__ 114,318.75 114,318.75 103,890.00 103,890.00 92,922.50 92,922.50 81,442.50 81,442.50 69,303.75 69,303.75 56,646.25 56,646.25 43,470.00 43,470.00 29,610.00 29,610.00 15,120.00 15,120.00 $5,116,563.85 Total P+I CIF Net New D/S Fiscal Total 737,837.50 739,637.50 740,837.50 736,437.50 741,6~7.50 741,037.50 739,837.50 738,037,50 740,637.50 742,437.50 743,437.50 743,637.50 742,780.00 745,845.00 747,885.00 748,607.50 748,292.50 746,940.00 749,220.00 Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Leaders in Public Finance Page 3 241,303.85 203,918.75 533,918.75 197,318.75 542,318.75 190,418.75 550,418.75 183,218.75 553,218.75 175,818.75 . 565,818J5_ 168,018.75 573,018.75 159,918.75 579,918.75 151,518.75 586,S18.7~ 142,818.75 597,818.75 133,718.75 608,718.75 124,218.75 619,218.75 -..--........- 114,318.75 629,318.75 103,890.00 638,890.00 92,922.50 652,922.50 81,442.50 666,442.50 69,303.75 679,303.75 56,646.25 691,646.25 43,4 70.00 703,470.00 29,610.00 719,610.00 15,120.00 735,120.00 $15,106,563.85 (241,303.85) (241,303.85) 203,918.75 533,918.75 197,318.75 542,318.75 190,418.75 550,418.75 183,218.75 553,218.75 175,818.75 565,818.75 168,018.75 573,018.75 159,918.75 579,918.75 151,518.75 _Ji86,518.75 142,818.75 597,818.75 133,718.75 608,718.75 124,218.75 619,218.75 --.-.--.....- 114,318.75 629,318.75 103,890.00 638,890.00 92,922.50 652,922.50 81,442.50 666,442.50 69,303.75 679,303.75 56,646.25 691,646.25 43,470.00 703,470.00 29,610.00 719,610.00 15,120.00 735,120.00 $14,865,260.00 . ~ "' ~ Q C'? 'ti' c:: 0 IXI It) ~ ~ oS b GS c:: 0 IXI CIl a ::s c:: :2: ~ . CIl - a:: a ~ :2: "' 0 ~ Q co C'Il 'ti' c:: 0 IXI Q ~ ~ oS ... ~ ::s IXI b c:: 0 IXI . - " - ............... ............... - , ') - t - ..... ( ~ 0 0 - N (\) , "" ~ c - ::J , ........... - ..., I~ or; / - C) ::J I " - 0 C\ ~ "- or; - It) 0 "- - 0 ~ N ~\ "- - (\) - .0 I ........... 0 ./ ~ - - CJ 0 I( - - ~ \ t.. J " .., ---- / S '" ~ - / ! / ( iXi Q: C ""llIo,;; - in co ~ ~ ) -...> ~~ , I , ~l , - ?f2.?f2. "- '" - """"'- ............. - r--...... l!)'d" ) ~ - .,,;.,,; - "'- ""'" r-- / > o : / o : - N : C ( .:f: - G) ~ ....... ....... - c: "0 X r ) ::::l e Q) "'-"0 ) _"Oe - oe- I - III 0 Q; { <( co >. Q) ::l ::lCO e"O - Q) e > 0 ." - &CO ( I i '--- :d2. o "<l: L!) ?f. o o wi :d2. o o <C> 'l" ?f. o CCl 'l" ?f. o "<l: 'l" :d2. o "! 'l" :d2. o "! L!) -0 - z' -< : ~ I ?f. o C> 'l" CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $9,990,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2007 A Issuer: City of Farmington, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held June 4, 2007, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., at the municipal offices in Farmington, Minnesota. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (including): RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $9,990,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2007 A 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 4th day of June, 2007. City Administrator It was reported that _ sealed proposals for the purchase of$9,990,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2007A were received prior to 10:00 o'clock a.m., pursuant to the Official Statement distributed to potential purchasers of the Bonds by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., independent financial advisor to the City. The proposals have been publicly opened, read and tabulated and were found to be as follows: (See Attached) Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Councilmember RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE, AWARDING SALE, PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF $9,990,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2007 A BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota (the City), as follows: SECTION 1. PURPOSE. On April 16, 2007, this City Council held a public hearing on the question of issuing general obligation capital improvement plan bonds, after notice duly published in the official newspaper of the City as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521. By resolution duly adopted on April 16, 2007, this City Council approved the issuance of up to $9,990,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007A (the Bonds) of the City to finance, along with other available City funds, the costs of constructing the City Hall and 1 sl Street Garage projects (together, the Project), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521 and Chapter 475. No petition was filed requesting a vote on the issuance of the general obligation capital improvement plan bonds within thirty (30) days following the public hearing. The maximum debt service payments on all outstanding capital improvement plan bonds is less than .16% of the taxable market value of the property within the City. This City Council hereby finds that the general obligation capital improvement plan bonds may be issued without an election pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521, subdivision 2. SECTION 2. SALE. Pursuant to the Sale Details and the Official Statement prepared on behalf of the City by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., sealed proposals for the purchase 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 ,ill , (the Purchaser), to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest on all Bonds to the day of delivery and payment, on the further terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. SECTION 3. AWARD. The sale of the Bonds is hereby awarded to the Purchaser and the Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on behalf 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 4. BOND TERMS; REGISTRATION; EXECUTION AND DELIVERY. 4.01. Issuance of Bonds. All acts, conditions and things which are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed precedent to and in the valid issuance of the Bonds having been done, now existing, having happened and having been performed, it is now necessary for the City Council to establish the form and terms of the Bonds, to provide security therefor and to issue the Bonds forthwith. 4.02. Maturities; Interest Rates; Denominations and Payment. The Bonds shall be originally dated as of June 28, 2007, 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 2009 $ % 2019 $ % 2010 2020 2011 2021 2012 2022 2013 2023 2014 2024 2015 2025 2016 2026 2017 2027 2018 2028 [REVISE MATURITY SCHEDULE FOR ANY TERM BONDS] The Bonds shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year composed of twelve 30-day months. The interest on and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein; provided that, so long as the Bonds are registered in the name of a securities depository, or a nominee thereof, in accordance with Section 4.08 hereof, principal and interest shall be payable in accordance with the operational arrangements of the securities depository. 4.03. Dates and Interest Payment Dates. Upon initial delivery of the Bonds pursuant to Section 4.07 and upon any subsequent transfer or exchange pursuant to Section 4.06, the date of authentication shall be noted on each Bond so delivered, exchanged or transferred. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1, 2008, each such date being referred to herein as an Interest Payment Date, to the persons in whose names the Bonds are registered on the Bond Register, as hereinafter defined, at the Registrar's close of business on the fifteenth day of the calendar month next preceding such Interest Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day. 4.04. Redemption. Bonds maturing in 2018 and later years shall be subject to redemption and prepayment at the option ofthe City, in whole or in part, in such order of maturity dates as the City may select and, within a maturity, by lot as selected by the Registrar (or, if applicable, by the bond depository in accordance with its customary procedures) in multiples of$5,000, on February 1, 2017, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof and accrued interest to the date of redemption. The City Administrator shall cause notice of the call for redemption thereof to be published as required by law, and at least thirty days prior to the designated redemption date, shall cause notice of call for redemption to be mailed, by first class mail, to the registered holders of any Bonds to be redeemed at their addresses as they appear on the bond register described in Section 2.06 hereof, but no defect in or failure to give such mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of proceedings for the redemption of any Bond not affected by such defect or failure. Official notice of redemption having been given as aforesaid, the Bonds or portions of Bonds so to be redeemed shall, on the redemption date, become due and payable at the redemption price therein specified and from and after such date (unless the City shall default in the payment of the redemption price) such Bonds or portions of Bonds shall cease to bear interest. Upon partial redemption of any Bond, a new Bond or Bonds will be delivered to the owner without charge, representing the remaining principal amount outstanding. 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 4.04 at a redemption price equal to the stated principal amount thereof plus interest accrued thereon to the redemption date, without premium. The Registrar shall select for redemption, by lot or other manner deemed fair, on February 1 in each of the following years the following stated principal amounts of such Bonds: Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1, 20_. Year Principal Amount The remaining $ stated principal amount of such Bonds shall be paid at maturity on February 1, 20_. Notice of redemption shall be given as provided in the preceding paragraph.] 3 4.05. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City hereby appoints u.s. Bank National Association in St. Paul, Minnesota, as the initial bond registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the Registrar). The Mayor and City Administrator are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf 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 ofthe 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. 4.06. Registration. The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its principal corporate trust office a register (the Bond Register) in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. The term Holder or Bondholder as used herein shall mean the person (whether a natural person, corporation, association, partnership, trust, governmental unit, or other legal entity) in whose name a Bond is registered in the Bond Register. (b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until such interest payment date. (c) Exchange of Bonds. Whenever any Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing. (d) Cancellation. All Bonds surrendered for payment, transfer or exchange shall be promptly canceled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of The Registrar shall furnish the City at least once each year a certificate setting forth the principal amounts and numbers of Bonds canceled and destroyed. (e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name any Bond is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes; and all payments made to any registered owner or upon the owner's order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. 4 (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 indenmity 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. 4.07. 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, 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. 4.08. Securities Depository. (a) For purposes of this section the following terms shall have the following meanings: "Beneficial Owner" shall mean, whenever used with respect to a Bond, the person in whose name such Bond is recorded as the beneficial owner of such Bond by a Participant on the records of such Participant, or such person's subrogee. "Cede & Co." shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee ofDTC, and any successor nominee ofDTC with respect to the Bonds. 5 "DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company of New York, New York. "Participant" shall mean any broker-dealer, bank or other financial institution for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository. "Representation Letter" shall mean the Representation Letter pursuant to which the City agrees to comply with DTC's Operational Arrangements. (b) The Bonds shall be initially issued as separately authenticated fully registered bonds, and one Bond shall be issued in the principal amount of each stated maturity of the Bonds. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of such Bonds shall be registered in the bond register in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee ofDTC. The Registrar and the City may treat DTC (or its nominee) as the sole and exclusive owner of the Bonds registered in its name for the purposes of payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds, selecting the Bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, if any, giving any notice permitted or required to be given to registered owners of Bonds under this resolution, registering the transfer of Bonds, and for all other purposes whatsoever; and neither the Registrar nor the City shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Neither the Registrar nor the City shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant, any person claiming a beneficial ownership interest in the Bonds under or through DTC or any Participant, or any other person which is not shown on the bond register as being a registered owner of any Bonds, with respect to the accuracy of any records maintained by DTC or any Participant, with respect to the payment by DTC or any Participant of any amount with respect to the principal of or interest on the Bonds, with respect to any notice which is permitted or required to be given to owners of Bonds under this resolution, with respect to the selection by DTC or any Participant of any person to receive payment in the event of a partial redemption of the Bonds, or with respect to any consent given or other action taken by DTC as registered owner of the Bonds. So long as any Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee ofDTC, the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on such Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to such Bond, only to Cede & Co. in accordance with DTC's Operational Arrangements, and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the City's 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 ofthe 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. 6 (d) The execution and delivery of the Representation Letter to DTC by the Mayor or City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed. ( e) In the event that any transfer or exchange of Bonds is permitted under paragraph (b) or (c) hereof, such transfer or exchange shall be accomplished upon receipt by the Registrar of the Bonds to be transferred or exchanged and appropriate instruments of transfer to the permitted transferee in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. In the event Bonds in the form of certificates are issued to owners other than Cede & Co., its successor as nominee for DTC as owner of all the Bonds, or another securities depository as owner of all the Bonds, the provisions of this resolution shall also apply to all matters relating thereto, including, without limitation, the printing of such Bonds in the form of bond certificates and the method of payment of principal of and interest on such Bonds in the form of bond certificates. 4.09. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be prepared in substantially the following form: 7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF FARMINGTON GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BOND, SERIES 2007A R- $ Interest Rate Maturity Date Date of Original Issue CUSIP No. % February 1, 20_ June 28, 2007 311297 REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: THOUSAND DOLLARS THE CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA (the City), acknowledges itself to be indebted and hereby promises to pay to the registered owner named above, or registered assigns, the principal amount specified above on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above, payable on February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1, 2008, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) ofthe immediately preceding month, all subject to the provisions referred to herein with respect to the redemption of the principal of this Bond before maturity. Interest hereon shall be computed on the basis of a 360-day year composed of twelve 30-day months. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof at the principal office 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, in St.Paul, Minnesota, 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 $9,990,000, issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on June 4,2007 (the Resolution) to finance, along with other available City funds, the costs of constructing a new fire station, and is issued pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota thereunto enabling, including Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521 and Chapter 475. The Bonds are issuable only in fully registered form, in denominations of$5,000 or any integral multiple thereof, of single maturities. Bonds maturing in 2018 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 I, 2017, and on any date thereafter, at a price equal to the principal amount thereof plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. The City will cause notice of the call for redemption to be 8 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 [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 I 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 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 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 9 other nominee of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository, the Registrar shall pay all principal of and interest on this Bond, and shall give all notices with respect to this Bond, only to Cede & Co. or other nominee in accordance with the operational arrangements of The Depository Trust Company or other securities depository as agreed to by the City. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance 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, prior to the issuance hereof, the City has levied ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City, which taxes will be collectible for the years and in amounts sufficient to produce sums not less than five percent in excess of the principal of and interest on the Bonds when due, and has appropriated the taxes to its General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007 A Bond Fund for the payment of principal and interest; that if necessary for payment of principal and interest, additional ad valorem taxes are required to be levied upon all taxable property in the City, without limitation as to rate or amount; and that the issuance of this Bond, together with all other indebtedness of the City outstanding on the date hereof and on the date of its actual issuance and delivery, does not cause the indebtedness ofthe City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation of indebtedness. This Bond shall not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been executed by the Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Farmington, State of Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile signatures of the Mayor and City Administrator. CITY OF FARMINGTON, MINNESOTA (facsimile signature - City Administrator) (facsimile signature - Mavor) 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 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: 10 TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties UTMA ................... as Custodian for...... ............... (Cust) (Minor) under Uniform Transfers to Minors Act...... . ....... (State) TEN COM - as tenants in common IT 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. PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE: [end of bond form] SECTION 5. GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2007 A CONSTRUCTION FUND. There is hereby established on the official books and records of the City a General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007 A Construction Fund (the Construction Fund). The City Finance Director shall continue to maintain the Construction Fund until payment of all costs and expenses incurred in connection with the construction of the Project have been paid. To the Construction Fund there shall be credited $ from the proceeds of the Bonds being an amount which, with other available funds of the City, will be equal to the estimated cost of the Project and from the Construction Fund there shall be paid all construction costs and expenses incurred by the City in construction of the Project. After payment of all costs incurred with respect to the Project, the Construction Fund shall be discontinued and any proceeds of the Bonds remaining therein shall be credited to the Bond Fund described in Section 6 hereof. SECTION 6. GENERAL OBLIGATION CAP IT AL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2007 A BOND FUND. So long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and any principal of or interest thereon unpaid, the City Finance Director shall maintain a separate debt service fund on the official books and records of the City to be known as the General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2007 A Bond Fund (the Bond Fund), and the principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable from the Bond Fund. The City irrevocably appropriates to 11 the Bond Fund (a) any funds received from the Purchaser upon delivery of the Bonds in excess of the amount required by Section 5 to be credited to the Construction Fund and amounts for payment of the costs of issuance of the Bonds described in Section 10.04; (b) the amounts specified in Section 5 above, after payment of all costs of the Project; (c) all taxes and levied and collected in accordance with this resolution; and (d) all other moneys as shall be appropriated by the City Council to the Bond Fund from time to time. SECTION 7. PLEDGE OF TAXING POWERS. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as such payments respectively become due, the full faith, credit and unlimited taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. In order to produce aggregate amounts which will produce amounts not less than 5% in excess of the amounts needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds, ad valorem taxes are hereby levied on all taxable property in the City. The taxes will be levied and collected in the following years and amounts: Levy Years Collection Years Amount 2007-2026 2008-2027 See attached Levy Computation The taxes shall be irrepealable as long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the City reserves the right and power to reduce tax levies from other legally available funds, in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61. SECTION 8. BOND FUND BALANCE RESTRICTION. In order to ensure compliance with the Code, and applicable Treasury Regulations (the Regulations), upon allocation of any funds to the Bond Fund, the balance then on hand in the Fund shall be ascertained. If it exceeds the amount of principal and interest on the Bonds to become due and payable through February 1 next following, plus a reasonable carryover equal to 1112th of the debt service due in the following bond year, the excess shall (unless an opinion is otherwise received from bond counsel) be used to prepay or purchase Bonds, or invested at a yield which does not exceed the yield on the Bonds calculated in accordance with Section 148 of the Code. 12 SECTION 9. 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 discharge its obligations with respect to any prepayable Bonds called for redemption on any date when they are prepayable according to their terms, by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date an amount equal to the principal, interest and redemption premium, if any, which are then due, provided that notice of such redemption has been duly given as provided herein. The City may also at any time discharge its obligations with respect to any Bonds, subject to the provisions of law now or hereafter authorizing and regulating such action, by depositing irrevocably in escrow, with a bank qualified by law as an escrow agent for this purpose, cash or securities which are authorized by law to be so deposited, bearing interest payable at such time and at such rates and maturing or callable at the holder's option on such dates as shall be required to pay all principal and interest to become due thereon to maturity or earlier designated redemption date. Provided, however, that if such deposit is made more than ninety days before the maturity date or specified redemption date of the Bonds to be discharged, the City shall have received a written opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that such deposit does not adversely affect the exemption of interest on any Bonds from federal income taxation and a written report of an accountant or investment banking firm verifying that the deposit is sufficient to pay when due all of the principal and interest on the Bonds to be discharged on and before their maturity dates or earlier designated redemption date. SECTION 10. CERTIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGS. 10.01. Registration of Certificates and Levy of Taxes. The Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the County Treasurer-Auditor of Dakota County and obtain a certificate that the Bonds have been duly entered upon the Treasurer-Auditor's bond register and the tax required by law has been levied. 10.02. Authentication of Transcript. The officers of the City and the County Treasurer- Auditor are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Bond Counsel, certified copies of all proceedings and records relating to the Bonds and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds, as the same appear from the books and records in their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, affidavits and certificates, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the correctness of all statements contained therein. 10.03. Official Statement. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds, dated May 24, 2007, relating to the Bonds prepared and distributed by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. is hereby approved. Ehlers & Associates, Inc., is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to prepare and distribute to the Purchaser within seven business days from the date hereof, a supplement to the Official Statement listing the offering price, the interest rates, selling compensation, delivery date, the underwriters and such other information relating to the Bonds required to be included in the Official Statement by Rule 15c2-12 adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The officers of the City are hereby authorized 13 and directed to execute such certificates as may be appropriate concerning the accuracy, completeness and sufficiency of the Official Statement. 10.04. Authorization ofPavment of Certain Costs ofIssuance of the Bonds. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to u.s. Trust Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota, on the closing date for further distribution as directed by the City's financial advisor, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. SECTION 11. TAX COVENANTS; ARBITRAGE MATTERS; REIMBURSEMENT AND CONTINUING DISCLOSURE. 11.0 I. 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. In particular, the City covenants and agrees that all proceeds of the Bonds deposited in the Construction Fund will be expended solely for the payment of the costs of the Project. All improvements so financed will be owned and maintained by the City as part of the public infrastructure of the City and available for use by members of the general public on a substantially equal basis. The City shall not enter into any lease, management, use or other agreement or contract with any non-governmental person relating to the use of the Project or security for the payment of the Bonds which might cause the Bonds to be considered "private activity bonds" or "private loan bonds" pursuant to Section 141 of the Code. 11.02. Arbitrage Certification. The Mayor and Clerk being the officers of the City charged with the responsibility for issuing the Certificates pursuant to this resolution, are authorized and directed to execute and deliver to the Purchaser a certificate in accordance with the provisions of Section 148 of the Code, and Section 1. 148-2(b ) of the Regulations, stating the facts, estimates and circumstances in existence on the date of issue and delivery of the Certificates which make it reasonable to expect that the proceeds of the Certificates will not be used in a manner that would cause the Certificates to be arbitrage bonds within the meaning of the Code and Regulations. 11.03. Arbitrage Rebate. The City acknowledges that the Bonds are subject to the rebate requirements of Section 148( f) of the Code. The City covenants and agrees to retain such records, make such determinations, file such reports and documents and pay such amounts at such times as are required under said Section 148(f) and applicable Regulations to preserve the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from gross income for federal income tax purposes, unless the Bonds qualify for an exception from the rebate requirement pursuant to one of the spending exceptions set forth in Section 1.148-7 of the Regulations and no "gross proceeds" of the Bonds (other than amounts constituting a "bona fide debt service fund") arise during or after the expenditure of the original proceeds thereof. 14 11.04. Not Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. The Council has not designated 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. 11.05. Reimbursement. The City certifies that the proceeds of the Bonds will not be used by the City to reimburse itself for any expenditure with respect to the Project which the City paid or will have paid more than 60 days prior to the issuance of the Bonds unless, with respect to such prior expenditures, the City shall have made a declaration of official intent which complies with the provisions of Section 1.150-2 of the Regulations; provided that this certification shall not apply (i) with respect to certain de minimis expenditures, if any, with respect to the Project meeting the requirements of Section 1. 150-2(f)(1) of the Regulations, or (ii) with respect to "preliminary expenditures" for the Project as defined in Section 1. 150-2(f)(2) of the Regulations, including engineering or architectural expenses and similar preparatory expenses, which in the aggregate do not exceed 20% of the "issue price" of the Bonds. 11.06. Continuing Disclosure. (a) Purpose and Beneficiaries. To provide for the public availability of certain infonnation relating to the Bonds and the security therefor and to permit the Purchaser and other participating underwriters in the primary offering of the Bonds to comply with amendments to Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 C.F.R. S 240.l5c2-12), 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 perfonnance and observance of any agreement or covenant contained in this section, including an action for a writ of mandamus or specific perfonnance. 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) Infonnation 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 infonnation 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, 2006, the following fmancial infonnation and operating data in respect of the City (the Disclosure Infonnation): (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 15 the extent such [mancial 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 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 SEe. If the document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must be available from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. The City shall clearly identify in the Disclosure Information each document so incorporated by reference. If any part of the Disclosure Information can no longer be generated because the operations of the City have materially changed or been discontinued, such Disclosure Information need no longer be provided if the City includes in the Disclosure Information a statement to such effect; provided, however, if such operations have been replaced by other City operations in respect of which data is not included in the Disclosure Information and the City determines that certain specified data regarding such replacement operations would be a Material Fact (as defined in paragraph (2) hereof), then, from and after such determination, the Disclosure Information shall include such additional specified data regarding the replacement operations. If the Disclosure Information is changed or this section is amended as permitted by this paragraph (b)( 1) or subsection (d), then the City shall include in the next Disclosure Information to be delivered hereunder, to the extent necessary, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect of any change in the type of [mancial information or operating data provided. (2) In a timely manner, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events which is a Material Fact (as hereinafter defined): (A) Principal and interest payment delinquencies; (B) Non-payment related defaults; (C) Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (D) Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties; (E) Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (F) Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax-exempt status of the security; (G) Modifications to rights of security holders; (H) Bond calls; (I) Defeasances; (J) Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment 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; 16 (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 tennination 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: (I) 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 underwriters in the primary offering of the 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 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 of the Bonds, giving effect to any change in circumstances applicable under clause (i)(a) and assuming that the Rule as in effect and interpreted at the time of the amendment or supplement was in effect at the time of the primary offering; and (iii) such amendment or supplement does not materially impair the interests of the Bondowners under the Rule. If the Disclosure Information is so amended, the City agrees to provide, contemporaneously with the effectiveness of such amendment, an explanation of the reasons for the amendment and the effect, if any, of the change in the type of financial information or operating data being provided hereunder. 17 (3) This section is entered into to comply with the continuing disclosure provisions of the Rule and should be construed so as to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (b)( 5) of the Rule. Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 18 ALF AMBULANCE B\RAMEDIC 2005-2006 BI-ANNUAL REPORT ALF Ambulance PARAMEDIC Lt; MISSION STATEMENT "To Provide and Promote the Highest Quality Compassionate Emergency Care" ALF Ambulance Ambulance Operating Board The Board operates under direction of the Joint Powers Agreement and is required to rotate officers in January of each year. The Board must formally approve operational activities including hiring, firing, budget approval, resolutions and contractual agreements. 2005 Board Officers Chair, Mark Bellows lakeville City Council Vice Chair, Steve Wilson Farmington City Council Secretary, Bob Erickson Apple Valley City Council 2006 Board Officers Chair, Steve Wilson Farmington City Council Vice Chair, Bob Erickson Apple Valley City Council Secretary, Mark Bellows lakeville City Council ALF Ambulance Executive Management Committee 2005 - 2006 Chair - Tom Lawell, Apple Valley City Administrator Vice Chair - Steve Mielke, Lakeville City Administrator Peter Herlofsky, Farmington City Administrator Scott Johnson, Police Chief, Apple Valley Dennis Feller, Finance Director, Lakeville Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director, Farmington . Population of Service Area 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 c:: ~ .. . -= Co 0 Q. 60,000 . 40,000 20,000 o 1986 2000 2002 2005 2006 2003 2004 2001 1995 Year . Total Billable Calls Ambulance Service Calls By Year 4500 . 4000 3500 3000 2500 .!!! 93 ;;; U 2000 '>6'S 1500 1000 500 o 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Year I-+- TOTAl NUMBER OF CALLS -+-BILLABLE RUNS I . . . . Farmington . Percentage of Calls by City Out of PSA 4% Tow nships 3% Farmington 16% Lakeville 32% . Out of PSA 5% Tow nships 2% Farmington 14% . Total Calls 4,270 2006 Apple Valley 45% Total Calls 4,153 2005 Apple Valley 48% 2006 · Response Times 6 Minutes 30 Seconds · Total Call Times 59 Minutes 25 Seconds · Type of Calls Traumatic Injury 220/0 Chest Pain 60/0 Respiratory Distress 50h> ~~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Peter J. Herlofsky, Jr. City Administrator SUBJECT: Request for Information - Mr. Doug Bonar DATE: June 4, 2007 Attached for review are the following items: 1. A City of Farmington New City Hall Flyer This outlines the general information regarding the structure and the back shows the proposed timetable. 2. Minutes from the May 2, 2006 Council Workshop This describes the efforts of the architect and the Council to build a facility of sufficient size to address the needs of the City over a 50-year period rather than a 20-year period. 3. Minutes from August 15, 2006 Council Workshop Wold Architects provided further information regarding the facility and updated the estimated cost from 2004 estimates to 2007-2008 costs. 4. Minutes from August 21, 2006 Council Meeting Council approved the schematic design submittal and directed staffto proceed. I hope this answers Mr. Bonar's questions. Ifnot, I will be happy to provide additional information. Respectfully / CMuller/Herlofsky/Council Memos/Bonar ~ingb;"'" · ~'.. ~~It ~ ~~ IruIl "a CITY HALL TASK FORCE In 2002, a City Hall Task Force was formed including Council Members, City Staff, City Board members, residents and business owners to identify the short-term and long-term needs of the City Hall facility. Wold Architects and Engineers worked with the City Hall Task Force to study the needs and issues related to the City Hall facility including a site analysis. The recommendation of the Task Force was to build a new City Hall on the site located at Third and Spruce Streets. Some of the guiding principles used in the site determination were: · City Hall shall be located downtown · City Hall would serve as an anchor to the existing downtown and the new Spruce Street Corridor . The building shall allow for future growth of at least 20 years and be expandable . The building shall be complimentary and/or set a new standard for downtown · City Hall would strengthen the downtown neighborhood ":IIJ '''~~I 'L-....... .__".. ~'fIIlT . ~ COUNCIL SITE SELECTION At a City Council workshop on December 3, 2003, the City Council was presented with numerous options to construct a new City Hall facility. The alternatives presented included renovating and expanding the existing City Hall building, demolishing the existing building to rebuild on the current site or construct a New City Hall on the corner of Third and Spruce Streets. At the January 5, 2004 City Council Meeting, the City Council determined that the recommendation of the City Hall Task Force was the best option financially; and therefor, approved the site at Third and Spruce Streets for the construction of the new City Hall. BUILDING DETAILS · The New City Hall will be a two-story building with a total of 42,200 square feet. (The existing City Hall building is 12,628 square feet.) · The new facility is designed to accommodate a 2030 staffing level of 72 employees. (The existing 2007 City Hall staff consists of 33 employees.) BUDGET FACTS The budget for the construction of the New City Hall including equipment and furniture is $9.1 million. It will be financed with a 20 year Capital Improvement Plan Bond with an estimated annual debt service cost of $750K. This equates to approximately a 9% increase to the current City tax levy or $81 a year on an average market value home of $226,000. PROPOSED TIMELINE lUDLD 2006 2007 2008 J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0 J FMAMJ J A SON 0 J FMAMJ J Schematic Design II - City Council Approval ~ August 21, 2006 o..lgn Development II - City Council Approval + December Contract Documents - City Council Appro",,' 1+ April 2007 Bidding II - City Council Approval + May 2007 (Award Bids) of bids Construction Substantial Completion . ~ _ o.slgn I Construction Documents _Construction I Bidding * Occupancy CONTACT INFORMATION If you have questions on the new City Hall project, contact City Administrator, Peter Herlofsky at 651-463-1801 or pherlofsky@ci.farmington.mn.us. Check the City of Farmington's web site for updates at www.ci.farmington.mn.us. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 651-463-7111 www.ciJarmington.mn.us ~ COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES May 2, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Soderberg called the meeting to order at 5 :00 p.m. Present: Soderberg, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson Absent: Fogarty 2. APPROVE AGENDA Council approved the agenda. 3. EXECUTIVE SESSION - Discuss ISD 192 Litigation Council went into closed session to discuss ISD 192 litigation. 4. CITY HALL PLANNING Council reconvened into open session at 5:54 p.m. Mr. Mike Cox, Wold Architects, requested approval of the guiding principles and reviewed the list of goals. They included that City Hall should be located in the downtown area, it should serve as an anchor to the downtown and the Spruce Street corridor, there should be enough room for future growth for 20 years, it should be a multi-level building, it should preserve the Farmington image and be complimentary to downtown or set a new standard for downtown, the building should be a model, and it should strengthen the downtown. Staffwanted to make sure this Council was on board with these values and principles especially that City Hall should be located in the downtown area. The entire Council agreed it should be downtown. City Administrator Herlofsky felt the process that should take place based on those principles is have the City employees look at what they think the growth will be. You want to design the internal structure first and then design the outside. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked about City Hall being complimentary to the downtown or set a new standard. Mayor Soderberg noted Vermillion River Crossing is trying to compliment the downtown through architectural features and he would be disappointed if we did not do the same thing with City Hall. Use the prominent features, such as the arched windows and some of the facades on the older buildings. City Administrator Herlofsky stated in previous projects Wold has taken courthouses that have an interesting look and added to that campus with structures that complimented or blended with the currentJacility and still somehow provided direction of how things should be in the future. He suggested the idea of a green building that is energy efficient meaning lights go on and offwhen you walk in, things that make it less expensive to operate. Mr. Cox noted it is Wold's challenge to make it fit. Councilmember Wilson wanted it to be a foundation piece to re-vitalizing downtown. Councilmember Pritzlaffwould like to be involved in the layout and suggested touring other City Hall's. Mr. John McNamara, Wold Architects, noted they will be setting up a tour in the next couple months. Mr. Cox noted the library is close to the proposed Council Workshop May 2, 2006 Page 2 location. Councilmember Wilson stated a green building would have a lot of windows and natural lighting. Councilmember McKnight was on board with the guiding principles and was ready to move forward. Mayor Soderberg would like to see prominent architectural features in the downtown incorporated. Mr. McNamara distributed a new budget for the City Hall project. The cost would be $170 per sq. ft. which amounts to $6.6 million for the construction budget. There would also be the demolition of the Blaha building at 3rd and Spruce Street, fees, furniture, equipment, moving equals a total project cost of$8.6 million. There would also be revenue from the sale of the current City Hall building. Finance Director Roland stated the site was purchased by the former HRA. It was discussed to reimburse them from the proceeds of any bonding. The project could be financed through lease revenue bonds and lease the property from the EDA and the City would not need to pay them back for the land. City Administrator Herlofsky noticed the date on the estimate was April 11, 2006 and asked how long this is good. Mr. McNamara estimated out to the point of construction. Construction was scheduled for the spring of 2007. City Administrator Herlofsky suggested writing things down that people want to see in City Hall. The key is to look at the relationship between departments from a customer standpoint and make sure things are easily found by the public and accessible. The customer friendly items should be on the first floor. He suggested letting staff work with the architect on where things will be and Council will be kept informed. 5. CASTLE ROCK UPDATE In October 2004 meetings began with Castle Rock Township to improve the relationship. The Farmington Business Park was covered by an Orderly Annexation Agreement. Another piece of property to the south was annexed at the same time that was not covered by the annexation agreement. After that a Castle Rock Discussion Group was formed which included three township representatives and three City representatives. There was a road needed to access the business park and after discussions the road was annexed into the City. Also a couple properties have been annexed as a result of the Ash Street Orderly Annexation Agreement. The Castle Rock Discussion Group has been discussing a long term Orderly Annexation Agreement. There are a couple of basic provisions: 1. Owners have already approached the City about annexation. 2. There is a natural boundary. The agreement says that if the annexation is approved by the City and the Township any annexations that are requested by property owners within that area would not be contested by the Township. The parcels would be annexed by joint resolution. In exchange for that the City would not process annexations from other properties outside of the line in Castle Rock Township for a period of 10 years. This would be through December 31, 2016. If half of the properties were annexed in the first five years and the remaining were annexed two or three years later, the 10 year period would remain in effect. There would be no agreement for anything beyond that time period. COUNCIL WORY~HOP MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Soderberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Also Present: Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Brian Lindquist, Interim Police Chief; Lee Mann, City EngineerIPublic Works Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Mike Cox, Chris Zemmer, John McNamara, Wold Architects Nancy Daubenberger, Ken Johnson, MnDOT Audience: Bart Winkler 2. APPROVE AGENDA MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Wilson to approve the agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. CITY HALL Wold architects presented the schematic design for the new City Hall to be located at the comer of Spruce and 3rd Street. There will be parking in back and at the 2nd Street parking lot. Overflow parking would be available at the library. A roundabout is proposed for the intersection of Spruce and 3rd Street. The main entrance would be off of 3 rd Street. The main level would consist of Parks and Recreation, Community Development, Engineering, Council Chambers, conference rooms and storage areas. In the Council Chambers, Councilmembers would like room for staff along both sides of the room near the Council table. The upper floor will consist of Administration, Finance, Human Resources, conference rooms and storage. City Administrator Herlofsky proposed to begin scanning files to minimize the storage requirements for paperwork. Councilmember McKnight noted the information gave projected staff for 2020 and 2030. He requested the numbers of current staffby department. Councilmember Fogarty recommended leasing the future expansion space. This could be used by a non-profit agency, Dakota County, etc. The outside of the building will consist of cornices and large windows that will fit in with the downtown architecture. The color of the brick will be similar to other downtown buildings. The building will be a vision of the future of the downtown yet connect with the historic features. Councilmember Pritzlaff suggested coordinating some design Council Workshop Minutes August 15, 2006 Page 2 elements with the Spruce Street bridge. Councilmember Wilson would like to have a public open house to receive comments from residents. The construction cost would be $7,000,000, project cost $2,143,000, for a total cost of $9,143,000. These costs are mid-2007. Mayor Soderberg liked the design with lots of space and room for expansion. The area around the outside will be consistent with the current downtown streetscape. The timeline is as follows: Council approval August 21, 2006 Design development October 30,2006 Call for bids April 2, 2007 Award the contract May 7,2007 Project completion May/June 2008 4. TH3 ROUNDABOUTS/FUNDING There is a potential funding opportunity for roundabouts on TH3. Roundabouts are a tool used to control crossing traffic. Circulating traffic has the right-of-way, entering traffic has to yield. All traffic goes in the same direction. A slower speed is required and there is no parking allowed. Advantages include: - Reduced delay as it takes less time to get through an intersection. - A roundabout is always better than all-way signal control. - A roundabout is usually better than two-way signal control. - A roundabout is usually better than a signal. - Increased safety for vehicles and pedestrians. - Reduced environmental impacts. Goals include: - Traffic calming. - Crash reduction. A railroad crossing could back traffic up into a roundabout. The grade of the road should be 5% or less. At 195th Street and TH3 the grade coming down does meet this requirement. MnDOT avoids placing a roundabout on any grade 3% or greater because of ice conditions. When determining if a roundabout is appropriate, pedestrian capacity is taken into account. On TH3 MnDOT recommended spacing roundabouts Yz mile or more apart. There is the potential to look at roundabouts on TH3 at Elm and Spruce when Spruce Street opens up. There are three roundabouts shown on the plan along the Newland property. According to MnDOT in a new installation a roundabout is cheaper than a signal. Councilmember McKnight asked when Council will have a presentation from MnDOT on signals and reduced speed on TH3 and what that would do for traffic safety. MnDOT noted within the last month they did a speed study on TH3 through Empire Township. The average speed is 55 mph in a 55 posted area. Reducing the speed to 45 mph causes Council Minutes (Regular) August 21,2006 Page 8 budget workshop. Staff will provide this at the September 5 Council meeting during the presentation of the 2007 tax levy and budget. The current proposal is to maintain the tax rate at the 43% level. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Approve City Hall Project - Administration Wold Architects presented the schematic design for the new City Hall to be located at the comer of 3rd and Spruce Street. The schedule is proposed for 2-3 months of design development, late October for Council approval of design development, this will allow for bids in spring 2007, start construction in spring 2007 and complete construction in late spring, early summer 2008. The building will be approximately 36,000 sq. ft. with a total project cost of$9.1 million. Regarding the expansion space on the second floor, Councilmember McKnight stated he is willing to spend the money now to put that into place for future use. Other Councilmembers agreed. MOTION by Fogarty, second by McKnight to approve the schematic design submittal and direct staffto proceed. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) GIS Presentation - Community Development Council has expressed a desire to improve the website and access to information. In order to manage information, City Planner Smick has done some research to improve the GIS system. Staff reviewed options from LOGIS, Bonestroo and Dakota County. Staff recommended using Dakota County. City Planner Smick gave a presentation showing what information would be available using Dakota County for GIS needs. Farmington would be part of a four-city consortium with Apple Valley, Bumsville, South St. Paul and West St. Paul. Benefits include weekly downloads, access to data, fiber connection, proximity to the county, training, scanning, web-based access, primary and secondary ArcMap user where staff can obtain extensions for mapping at a lower cost. A link would be provided through the City's website and staff would determine what would be available to the public. The cost is $17,000/year based on splitting up one full time person from four ways to five ways. The cost this year would be $6,000. Councilmember Wilson asked if there was a way to quantify the cost. City Administrator Herlofsky replied staff can list costs that would be avoided and it would allow staff time for other things besides answering phone calls. Council was impressed and felt it was great technology. c) Adopt Resolution - Seed/Genstaf AUAR Update - Community Development Comments have been received from various agencies. The AUAR update was needed for the extension of Diamond Path and a second bridge over North Creek. MOTION by McKnight, second by Pritzlaff adopting RESOLUTION R97-06 approving the final AUAR update and mitigation plan for the SeedlGenstar area. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 7~ COUNCIL MINUTES PRE-MEETING MAY 21,2007 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Soderberg at 6:30 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson None Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance 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 2. APPROVE AGENDA MOTION by Wilson, second by Pritzlaffto approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. CITIZEN COMMENTS 4. COUNCIL REVIEW OF AGENDA Councilmember McKnight asked about the location of the two City lots for the Elm Street project. One easement is for the entrance to Rambling River Park and the other is the Depot Way Park. Councilmember Wilson asked about the Fairhills slope project and if staff was confident the $474,000 cost was conservative. Staff felt this should cover the cost. The project was necessary because of the grading of the lots along the pond and concentrated discharges from sump pumps, etc. Councilmember Wilson then asked about the abatement for Vermillion River Crossings and what happens if the project falls apart. City Administrator Herlofsky explained the property would be tax forfeited and the property can be purchased for the amount of the special assessments plus interest. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked about the cost and number of people attending the conference for Parks and Recreation. Parks and Recreation Director Distad explained last year two people went to a national conference for $2500. For another $600 two more staff people could attend this year. This conference is within driving distance. Council Minutes (Pre-Meeting) May 21,2007 Page 2 Councilmember Pritzlaff then asked about the payment to Gerster Jewelers. Human Resources Director Wendlandt explained this was for employee recognition and also another recognition plaque was ordered. Employees receive a monetary recognition starting with 10 years of service. Mayor Soderberg felt a letter from Council acknowledging their service would be appropriate. Staff will compile a list of benchmark . . anmversanes. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked about the timeline for build out for Vermillion River Crossings. He asked how the developer can determine they will have a hotel within three years, etc. Finance Director Roland replied the developer provided that schedule. The Abatement Agreement addresses what happens if the developer defaults. If there is no build out, there is no money in taxes to be rebated to the developer. The special assessments are the City's biggest recourse. City Administrator Herlofsky explained all the properties have special assessments. Whoever owns the property is obligated to pay the special assessment. The abatement reimburses the developer only to the degree that development takes place. Their incentive is to get development in as quickly as possible. Councilmember McKnight stated if the development falls through, we cancel the abatement. Council suggested moving items lOa) and 10e) to the consent agenda. 5. STAFF COMMENTS City Administrator Herlofsky informed Council that Tuesday night is the last Rambling River Days meeting at 7:00 p.m. at the ice arena. Finance Director Roland advised Council that the attorney for the City will be providing revisions to the Abatement Agreement. 6. ADJOURN MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by McKnight to adjourn at 6:49 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, {/~~~ /r7~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MAY 21, 2007 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Soderberg at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Soderberg led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Audience: Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff, Wilson None Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance 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; Jen Collova, Natural Resources Specialist; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Douglas Bonar, Ed Samuelson, David McMillen, George & Sharon Flynn, Marianne Feely, Youth Development, Marlys Guildner, Betty Steege, Richard Ludwig, Martha Mena, Steve Frandrup 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember McKnight moved items lOa) Hometown Development Letter of Credit and 10e) Elm Street Project Update - Bids to the Consent Agenda. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by McKnight to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Homecoming Event Presentation - Marianne Feely Students from the Farmington High School Youth Development gave a presentation on the success of the 2006 Homecoming celebration. They also presented the schedule of events for 2007. b) Introduce New Employee - Public Works Kris Keller was introduced as the new Civil Engineer. c) Heritage Preservation Awards - Administration Ed Samuelson presented the Heritage Preservation Award to Marlys Guildner for her work in preserving Farmington's history. David McMillen presented the Heritage Preservation Award to Juan and Martha Mena for their work in restoring the State Bank building. Council Minutes (Regular) May 21,2007 Page 2 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Doug Bonar, 18120 Echo Drive, had some questions and comments regarding the new City Hall project. It was his understanding that the project is moving out of design development and into construction documents. He believed the history of the project was in 1999-2000 there was a facilities task force to review the condition of all City facilities. Some of the most recent additions to the area include the Police Station, the second Fire Station, and the Central Maintenance Facility which were a direct result of that task force, which concluded its work in April 2000. Several years later the Council, in a workshop in December, gave consideration to the remodeling of the current City Hall. There were also subsequent blind appraisals put together for the consideration of expanding the current facility to the north and east. Around July 2004, the project changed to a new construction at a budgeted amount of$7.6 million. He asked when it comes to the change in Council's direction, he assumed this was a direct result of some analysis that would be created to show the benefits and causes of remodeling and/or expansion of the current facility versus new construction. He could not find this in the public record. He wanted to gain a better understanding of how we moved from a simple remodeling to a full replacement. As time has passed, the project has grown in scope and has experienced inflation and grown to $9.1 million. In his reading he stated he lacks a clear understanding of the tax impact to an average home in Farmington. A credible job has been done in demonstrating the cost of the project, but it has not been broken down in a simple denomination for the taxpayers. He welcomed a staff response in writing. Councilmember Wilson stated regarding the second question, it is a very good question especially with the public facilities construction in the Farmington area. He did bring this up a couple weeks ago to the City Administrator and Finance Director to make information on the tax impact available to residents. 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by McKnight, second by Pritzlaffto approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (517/06 Regular) b) Adopted RESOLUTION R41-07 Revising City's Capitalization Policy - Finance c) Received Information April 2007 Financial Report - Finance d) Approved School and Conference - Parks and Recreation e) Adopted RESOLUTION R42-07 Accepting Donations Annual Ice Skating Competition - Parks and Recreation f) Approved Agreement with Premier POS, Inc for Providing Web Based Services - Parks and Recreation g) Approved Request to Waive Fees Rambling River Days - Parks and Recreation h) Approved Appointment Recommendation Fire Department - Human Resources i) Approved School and Conference - Fire Department j) Approved School and Conference - Fire Department k) Approved Rescue Squad Membership - Fire Department I) Approved Easement Acquisition - Hunter Lift Station Project - Engineering m) Adopted RESOLUTION R43-07 Authorizing Advertisement for Bids - Hunter Lift Station - Engineering n) Authorized Elm Street Project Temporary Easements - Engineering Council Minutes (Regular) May 21,2007 Page 3 0) Approved Bills p) Approved Drawing on Hometown Development Letter of Credit - Administration q) Received Information Elm Street Project Update - Bids - Engineering APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Resolution - Designate Farmington Heritage Landmarks - Administration Homes owned by George and Sharon Flynn, 320 Walnut Street, and Gary and Cynthia Raynor, 421 Oak Street were designated as Farmington Heritage Landmarks. George and Sharon Flynn gave a presentation on their home. They were very honored with the designation. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Fogarty to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Wilson to adopt RESOLUTION R44-07 designating the Flynn House, 320 Walnut Street, and the Raynor House, 421 Oak Street as Farmington Heritage Landmarks on the Official City Zoning Map. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Consider Tax Abatement Agreement Vermillion River Crossing - Finance In 2005 the City and the developer entered into a Development Agreement which agreed to the following. The City would assess the cost of the Spruce Street extension and bridge project against the properties of Vermillion River Crossings and in return the City would consider an Abatement Agreement which would reimburse the developers for up to $2 million plus interest with regard to the special assessments that they would have already paid, but they would be rebated the taxes in order to make the properties and the project more financially palatable to the developers. But for this assistance, the project would not work as well and development would not occur. During the course of developing this agreement, staff worked with Lynette Crandall from Dorsey and Whitney who is an expert in abatement and Sid Inman from Ehlers and Associates. The Abatement Agreement had some changes and Council was given a revised agreement prior to the meeting. The agreement says that the properties in the Vermillion River Crossings project will be given tax abatement over a 20-year period commencing with this agreement based on the tax base which was in place as of2005. An article in the agreement shows the tax base the project started with and anything above this amount will be subj ect to tax abatement to reimburse the developers for the assessments they are paying on the Spruce Street extension project. The agreement also states the tax base is exclusive of fiscal disparities. Commercial/retail properties in Minnesota pay into a fiscal disparities pool. Fiscal disparities means that a certain portion of the tax is paid into the state pool and the City receives money back. Ifwe have less commerciallretail than the rest of the metro area, we get more money back. Ifwe have more commercial/retail we pay in. At this point, it is not in the City's best interest to consider tax Council Minutes (Regular) May 21,2007 Page 4 abatement inclusive of fiscal disparities. The agreement says it is written out. However, there is a caveat in Section 3.2 under abatement. This is included in order that the developer be encouraged to meet the deadlines in Exhibit C. The developer expressed a desire from the beginning to have fiscal disparities completely abated. Staff did not feel they could do that, but they were given the consideration in this section which reads, in the event on the date that is three years from the date hereof, the targeted completion date set in Exhibit C, have been met by the developer and it is determined by an independent financial advisor that the projected aggregate payment for the abatement period will not equal $3,050,000 then for all payment dates, the tax capacity used to determine the semi-annual abatement amounts shall include tax capacity subject to the areawide tax rate. This means if in three years the developer has met their targeted goals and they still need additional help, according to an independent financial advisor, the City will include fiscal disparities. It is to the developer's benefit to build out quickly and to the greatest extent possible, so their abatement amount comes back to them. If this is not done, they will not be able to recoup the money they are paying out in special assessments. There is also a section on business subsidy, which is a policy Council adopted in 2002. Councilmember Fogarty noted in Section 2.2 e) language was added stating, while failure to construct in accordance with Exhibit C will negatively impact reimbursement of the Developer under this agreement, such failure shall not constitute default. She asked if that took the teeth out of the deadline. Ms. Lynette Crandall responded one option would be to make a failure to construct the project as contemplated an event of default. This means the City would have the opportunity to recoup the abatement that has been paid out. However, the way the agreement is structured, the abatement or the incentive the developer is getting to improve the property is somewhat limited by what they actually do on the land. In the event they do not meet the time line, they are hurting themselves because they are not getting the full value of the abatement. The timeframe is limited. Abatement can only be paid over a period of20 years. It does have teeth in that if they do not do what they say they will within the timeframe, they will not realize the economic benefit. Councilmember Fogarty stated the abatement agreement at first was for 10 years, then 15 years, and now 20 years. At the last meeting she asked for assurances from the developer to put the pressure on them to work really hard. Ms. Crandall stated to the extent the build out does not happen on schedule, the developer never has an opportunity to tap into the fiscal disparities pool contribution. Another safeguard is they do not have unlimited time to get the project moving. In the definition of abatement period, the clock starts no later than August 1, 2012 as to when the first payment must be made. A failure to meet the deadlines of December 31,2008,2009,2010, for construction in each of the phases is not a default. If those dates are not met there is not an opportunity for the developer to get the fiscal disparities contribution. 2012 is when the 20- year time period for the abatement ends. The time lines in Exhibit C are goals. Council Minutes (Regular) May 21,2007 Page 5 Mr. Sid Inman explained if a building is completed in 2010, it is assessed in 2011, and taxes are payable in 2012. Mayor Soderberg asked if a letter has been received from the school district and the county that they declined to participate. Finance Director Roland noted that process is not complete, so the agreement is contingent on receiving the denials. Both the school board and the county are requiring the City go before their individual boards. Staff anticipates they will be denied by both entities. The law requires only one entity needs to deny the request. Councilmember McKnight asked about the abatement period, and was told at the last meeting the clock started in 2005. Finance Director Roland replied that was the original date as far as the tax base. There are currently properties in Vermillion River Crossing where the clock is ticking. The discussion at the time of the development contract and the initial abatement agreement was whether to do the whole area for 20 years or as the parcels develop. In reality there are two parcels that have property on them that are generating property taxes and using 2005 as the base they would be subject to the 20-year period. However, there is also vacant land that has to be built on, assessed, and the clock starts ticking at the time of development. 2012 is the latest time and all the properties start at 2012. Councilmember McKnight clarified the tax abatement period could run anywhere from 2005 to 2032. Exhibit C states in 2008 the development will start with 7500 sq. ft. of commercial/retail. The abatement could be triggered in 2009 if the 7500 sq. ft. does not develop in 2008. He does not like an out the next year after this is approved. In Article 3 Section 3.2 it states if we are not meeting the abatement terms financially, we would then consider fiscal disparities. This increases his concerns. Mr. Inman explained fiscal disparities are about 30% of all new commerciallindustrial value. This would be 30% times the total tax capacity times the tax rate. If the developer was to build out what they intend to it could be $40,000 - $50,000/year. Mayor Soderberg noted the fiscal disparities come into play if they meet the goals and get it built out and the projection shows they will not reach the $2 million. Councilmember McKnight stated at the last meeting, Council wanted some protection. He discussed the definition of abatement and if the agreement is suspended or terminated what happens to the tax abatement. Ms. Crandall noted if the developer does not perform as contemplated, noting that the build out dates are not defined dates, but goals, the abatement would not be payable. The City is only agreeing to abate the property taxes to the extent the developer complies with the agreement. If the developer is in default, they are given notice and an opportunity to cure the default within 90 days. Councilmember McKnight noted there are infrastructure deadlines so the bridge can open by August 1,2007. City Attorney J amnik stated the security for this is covered under the infrastructure improvements in the development agreement. This could be a default that could condition the payment of the abatement. Council Minutes (Regular) May 21,2007 Page 6 Councilmember Wilson was very concern about the short time frame Council had to review the abatement agreement and stated he would not support it. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked if Ms. Crandall was comfortable with the answers she was giving and if Council should be comfortable with receiving them. Ms. Crandall stated the original agreement gave away a lot more than Council would be willing to give. The developer was hoping Council would consider this tonight. She had made extensive revisions to the developer's version. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked if making a decision tonight makes or breaks a deal with their financing. Mr. Jim Holmes of Holmes and Associates, representing the developer, stated he was hired by the developer to convince a lender to come into the deal. The existing lender has grown very impatient and there is a new lender willing to come in and take the old lender out. The abatement agreement is needed to convince the new lender that the agreement will take care of a major portion of the assessments. The term of 15 years will not assure the full $2 million will be reimbursed through assessments. The agreement has to be for 20 years. Councilmember McKnight asked about the aggregate payment for the abatement period changing from $2.8 million to $3.0 million. Finance Director Roland replied the original proposal from staff was for the abatement for the special assessments to be rebated at the special assessment plus the bond rate of 4.3%. However, that is not what is assessed. According to the fee schedule, the City assesses at a rate of 1.5% above the bond rate. The City used the 5% rate as that is what is listed in the development agreement. The $2.8 million is at the 4.2% rate, the $3 million is at the 5% rate. Councilmember McKnight noted the new language in Section 2.2 e) takes the teeth out of Exhibit C. It states that if the dates in Exhibit C are not met, that is not a default. City Administrator Herlofsky noted the biggest issue is that the City is reimbursing the developer's requirement to pay the City for the special assessment. The Council has to determine if they are comfortable with the extension of time. Councilmember McKnight stated he was comfortable with the 20 years. The City has done TIF districts for many years. If the language in Section 2.2. e) was removed, he would support the agreement. Councilmember Fogarty was also uncomfortable with the language. She needed enforceable deadlines. This does not abate the taxes the county and the school district receives. This should relieve some of the residents' tax for those areas. Councilmember Pritzlaff asked how Council can be sure the developer will meet the deadlines and do they have businesses signed up? Mr. Art Dickinson, representing the developer, replied no because of the issue with the partners. Knutson's do not have control over Vermillion River Crossing so they cannot commit that area to anything until the Pederson's are out of the deal. The lender will not come in until there is an abatement agreement. Regarding having firm deadlines for the build out, the issue for the developer is it becomes a double penalty. Because of the date set that will start the clock, if the developer has not Council Minutes (Regular) May 21,2007 Page 7 met those, they will not get back the full $2 million. If it also becomes an issue in the abatement agreement, they will not get any abatement on the $2 million when it was an agreement between the City and the developer that those special assessments would be used for Spruce Street. The development would have to cover a $2 million cost that they will not be able to recoup. Finance Director Roland stated Council has agreed to consider an abatement agreement as part of the development agreement which was signed in 2005. Council has the version that was sent on Friday and the redlined version. It is a policy decision to be made by the Council. The agreement can be anything Council wants it to be. This is staff s suggestion. If there are parts Council does not agree to, then the agreement can be adopted with those changes, accepted as is, accept Friday's version, it is up to the Council. Staff has put forth a reasonable effort at a compromise with the developer for Council's consideration. Mayor Soderberg stated he did not realize Council was asking for the timelines to be default points. Council was asking for the developer's best guess as to how they can build this out. That is what they have provided in Exhibit C. He was comfortable with the timelines as goals. The teeth he is looking for is opening the road. If we clarify the connection to the development contract that gives us the teeth we are looking for. If the road is not open by the date set in the development contract that is a default. MOTION by Wilson, second by Pritzlaffto close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember McKnight asked what would happen if the first year's expectations of7500 sq. ft. of commercial/retail was not met by December 31, 2008. Finance Director Roland replied under Section 2.2. e) that would not be a default and consequently the defaults and remedies under Section 6 would not kick in. It would be a detriment to the developer because they would not have the tax base to generate taxes to be abated but they would have still paid the special assessments on the property. Mayor Soderberg noted if they do not meet the timelines, the penalty is that the developer does not have access to the fiscal disparities. Councilmember Pritzlaffrequested the language in Section 2.2 e) be left the same as it was in the previous version. Mr. Art Dickinson stated a large part of this is in the lender's hands. The more risk the lender takes, the less likely they will be able to make a deal with the lender. Mayor Soderberg called for a recess at 8:50 p.m. to allow the developer to discuss the agreement. The meeting reconvened at 9:05 p.m. The developer came back to the meeting with some proposed changes to the agreement. Mr. Jim Holmes stated the developer proposes: Council Minutes (Regular) May 21,2007 Page 8 1. Assuming the additional language in Section 2.2. e) comes out so that Exhibit C would be mandatory and would constitute an event of default if not complied with, then the developer asked the current three years in Exhibit C be expanded to five years. 2. Convert the type and the square footages to value in Exhibit C. 3. Propose leaving the 2008 performance as is in Exhibit C and take the balance ofthe development, now converted to value, and pro-rate it equally over four years. 4. This should be subject to unavoidable delay. City Attorney Jamnik stated converting three years to five years with a 2012 deadline rather than 2010 is understandable. Converting the type and square footage to value is not uncommon. The main concern is how tight are Councilmembers to particular aspects of the development. The provision for unavoidable delay would include significant changes in the market according to Mr. Holmes' comment which injects a level of uncertainty into the definition that Attorney J amnik was not comfortable with. Mr. Holmes clarified the definition of unavoidable delay would remain the same and he did not intend to expand on that definition. Councilmember Wilson stated he has never liked Exhibit C. He proposed striking Exhibit C and the attachment and put in a new clause that would require the developer to report to Council at set periods of time for a formal update. MOTION by Fogarty, second by McKnight to approve the version of the Abatement Agreement received tonight excepting the last sentence of Section 2.2. e) and adding a new Exhibit C as follows: I. Expanding the three years to five years. 2. Converting the type and square footage to value. 3. Leaving 2008 as is, but pro-rate the other four years. 4. Subject to unavoidable delay as defined in the contract. In addition to the technical and grammatical errors and adding the 1 %. Voting for: Soderberg, Fogarty, McKnight, Pritzlaff. Voting against: Wilson. MOTION CARRIED. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT Council Minutes (Regular) May 21,2007 Page 9 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS b) Adopt Resolution - Trinity Health Care 1 st Addition Preliminary and Final Plat - Planning Trinity Care Center is planning to add on to the southern portion of the care center. The addition will cross the property line, therefore the area has to be platted into one lot. The addition will be 22,000 square feet and will contain 30 units. This will allow the double rooms to be converted to single rooms. Staff recommended a sidewalk be added along Elm Street. The comprehensive plan shows a trail located in the area. Due to the drainage and the location of the proposed building the trail is not feasible. The Planning Commission reviewed the plat on May 8, 2007 and recommended approval. Contingencies include: 1. The submittal of a landscaping plan that is acceptable to the City Planner. 2. Additional drainage and utility easements must be provided for the proposed drainage systems as required by the Engineering Division prior to recording of the mylars. 3. Satisfaction of the Park and Recreation requirement regarding sidewalks along Elm Street. Councilmember Fogarty asked ifit was possible to narrow the trail and convert it to cement as it is an important connection for the trail system. Staff noted the issue will be the drainage and would be very difficult to place a sidewalk in that location. As no additional lots are being created, park dedication does not come into affect. MOTION by Wilson, second by Pritzlaffto adopt RESOLUTION R45-07 approving the preliminary and final plat for Trinity Health Care I st Addition with the above contingencies. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Adopt Resolution - Fairhills Pond Slope Feasibility Report - Engineering The Fairhills pond has experienced erosion over the last several years and the trails along the top of the slopes need to be reconstructed. This would include reconstructing the slopes and repaving the trail from 190th Street to 193rd Street and the trail north of 195th Street to Englewood Way. A rail would also be constructed along the trail in the areas of steep slopes. The total project cost is $474,000 and would be funded from the storm water utility fund. MOTION by Fogarty, second by McKnight to adopt RESOLUTION R46-07 accepting the feasibility report, order the project and authorize the advertisement for bids. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. d) Approve Federal Surface Transportation Program Application Proposal- TH3 - Engineering There is an opportunity to obtain funds for the project on TH3. $92 million will be awarded. The improvements would include a median along TH3 and frontage roads. Empire Township has agreed to assist in the funding of the application in the amount of$5,000. The Board will be considering a resolution to be a Council Minutes (Regular) May 21,2007 Page 10 participant in the mandatory local 20% match for the project. The amount available for each project is up to $5.5 million, but there would have to be a 20% match from the local agency which would be $1.1 million. The cost to prepare the funding application is $21,600. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Fogarty to approve completing the application to procure funding from the Federal Surface Transportation Program for improvements to TH3. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. f) Approve MCES/Farmington Lakeville Agreement - Flagstaff Interceptor Agreement - Engineering Staff presented a proposed agreement between the Met Council, Farmington and Lakeville for cost sharing and construction cooperation for the Flagstaff Avenue interceptor. This project would become a Met Council project and they would assume ownership, operation and maintenance responsibilities once the interceptor is completed. They will share in one third of the cost of the project. The cost to the school district will be reduced by $1 million. There will be Met Council review of the plans which will delay construction by one month. MOTION by McKnight, second by Fogarty to adopt RESOLUTION R47-07 approving the Cost Sharing and Construction Cooperation Agreement between the Met Council, Farmington and Lakeville for the Flagstaff Avenue Interceptor. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. g) MnDOT Cooperative Agreement Update - Engineering MnDOT will fund the roundabout project for TH3 in 2008. They have indicated an amount of $450,000, but it is possible they may be able to fund $594,000. As funding is available the project will have to be let by end of June 2008. The state is considering funding the PEER review required for this project. If this is done, the City will not have to go through a joint powers agreement with the state. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Wilson to direct staff to forward a letter to the Department of Transportation accepting the funding and project responsibilities as outlined in the attached letter for the TH3 roundabout project. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Boulevard Tree Policy - Engineering The current practice is for the City to remove and replace trees in the boulevard. Staff is recommending the City continue the removal and stump grinding of trees in the boulevard, but will no longer replace trees in the boulevard. This will be communicated to residents through the website, newsletter and cable. Staff has also drafted a letter for residents who call. MOTION by Pritzlaff, second by Wilson to approve the recommended boulevard tree replacement policy change. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Council Minutes (Regular) May 21,2007 Page 11 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Ice Arena Feasibility Report - Administration Staff updated the feasibility report for the ice arena. Councilmember McKnight stated he and Councilmember Fogarty spoke with the Farmington Youth Hockey Association about upgrading the current facility and a second sheet of ice. He wanted to know what the impact to the river would be before we go further. Phase one would cost $3700. MOTION by McKnight, second by Fogarty to authorize all three steps and leave it to staff whether to move on to steps two and three depending on the outcome of step one. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember McKnight: At the last three DCC meetings, they awarded bids for the radio consoles, furniture, and phone lines. The project is on budget and on schedule. The DCC will open November 9,2007. They took a tour of the facility last week and it is a very impressive building. Councilmember Pritzlaff: When Council was on the park tour, he noticed Sunnyside had the second lift on. He did not know that had occurred until the tour. A concern he had last year was to try to minimize the sections paved and suggested using a wider paver and have two sections rather than three. City Engineer Mann replied the second lift was done last year and the contractor did not have the equipment to allow them to pave it in two sections. Regarding the Ash Street sod, he asked when the areas that are dead would be replaced. City Engineer Mann replied the analysis will be done to determine a cost and it will be brought back to Council. City Attorney Jamnik: The summary for the City Administrator's evaluation is complete and will be on the next Council agenda. City Engineer Mann: Jen Collova updated Council on the Prairie Waterway monitoring proposal. At the next Vermillion River Joint Powers Board meeting on Thursday, they will be considering participating in the project up to $3,000 which is 25% of the project. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Fogarty, second by McKnight to adjourn at 10:18 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ,,//' - ? ~.-74~ .)?"'l L-L~~ .' / // . Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant /6 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: City Council FEl()M: Joel Jamnik SUBJECT: Administrator Evaluation Summary Report DATE: June 4, 2007 Pursuant to the state's open meeting law (Minnesota Statutes 13D.05, Subd. 3) the City Council conducted a closed meeting as part of its May 7, 2007 Regular Council Meeting to evaluate the performance of City Administrator Peter Herlofsky. The law requires that at its next open meeting, the public body shall summarize its conclusions regarding the evaluation. The review of Mr. Herlofsky was conducted pursuant to the terms of his employment agreement with the City. Under that agreement, a review is to be conducted after six months of employment and annually thereafter. This review constituted Mr. Herlofsky's first annual review, and was conducted using a performance evaluation survey that each Councilmember fills out anonymously. A tabulation summary of that review is attached and incorporated as part of this required summary report. Mr. Herlofsky's demonstrated leadership and communication skills were noted by all council members in their verbal comments. As part of its review, other areas of commendation were noted and the Administrator and Council respectively discussed their positive feelings about Mr. Herlofsky's first year of service with the City. The Council evaluations indicated that Mr. Herlofsky was fully meeting expectations of the Council in all graded areas. There were no identified areas of deficiency or non-performance. The Council indicated an interest in expanding and modifying the performance evaluation process to seek additional information from staff and outside sources as part of the review process consistent with the restrictions under which the evaluation of personnel must be conducted, and Mr. Herlofsky was asked to consider modifications to the process consistent with the Council's wishes. CITY ADMI~ISTRATOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Per the evaluation form, the numerical values assigned are as follows: Exceeds expectations = 3; Meets expectations = 2; Below expectations = 1 For each area of responsibility upon which the City Administrator was evaluated, the average numerical rating was as follows: 1. Organizational Management: 2+3+2+3+3 = 13 -;- 5 2.6 2. FiscallBusiness Management: 3+2+2-+3+2 = IT -;- 5 2.4- 3. Program Development: 2+2+2++3+3 = 12+ -;- 5 2.4+ 4. Relationship with Council: 3+3+3+3+2 = 14 -;- 5 2.8 5. Long-Range Planning: 2+2+2++2+3 = 11+ -;- 5 2.2+ 6. Relationship with Public/ Public Relations: 3+3+3+3+2 = 14 -;- 5 2.8 7. Interagency Relations: 2+3+3+2+3 = 13 -;- 5 2.6 8. Professional/ Personal Development: 3+3+2+2 = 10 -;- 4* 2.5 * One councilmember did not provide a rating for this area of responsibility. 7c. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrato@ Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: SUBJECT: Capital Outlay Trail and Basketball Court Projects DATE: June 4, 2007 ACTION REQUESTED In 2007, a full court basketball court and accessible trails were planned to be constructed in Dakota County Estates Park and construction of a paved accessible trail connection to a boardwalk was planned for Meadowview Park. The action requested is to approve the low quote submitted for this work. DISCUSSION/BUDGET IMPACT Quotes were received from five contractors for this work. Radloff & Webber Blacktopping, Inc. from Prior Lake, Minnesota submitted the low quote in the amount of $31,900. A tabulation of the five quotes received is attached. BUDGET IMP ACT These improvements were identified to be covered under the approved 2007 Park Improvement Fund budget. The following identifies the cost of these improvements: Parks Dakota County Estates Park & Meadowview Park Improvement full court basketball court & trail construction Bud2et $35,000 Quote $31,900 Difference (Quote-Est) ($3,100) ~ectfully(~u~ttl7 .' K~~ Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director 2007 Dakota County Estates Park Trail and Basketball Court and Meadowview Park Trail Construction Project Quotes Name of Contractor Quote Submitted Radloff & Webber Blacktopping, Inc. $31,900.00 McNamara Contracting, Inc. $43,600.00 Northwest Asphalt, Inc. $47,679.10 Northwest Bituminous, Inc. $48,400.00 Bituminous Roadways, Inc. $69,940.00 7d 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 City Administrat(} FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Appointment Recommendation - Maintenance Worker DATE: June 4, 2007 INTRODUCTION The recruitment and selection process to fill a vacant position as a full-time Maintenance Worker for the Public Works Department has been completed. DISCUSSION After a thorough review by the Public Works Department and the Human Resources Office, a contingent offer of employment has been made to Nicholas Berra, subject to ratification by the City Council. Mr. Berra has been employed as a Park Keeper/Facilities Maintenance Worker with the City of Farmington since February 28, 2006, and meets the qualifications for this position. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this position is authorized in the 2007 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Approve the appointment of Mr. Nicholas Berra as a Maintenance Worker in the Public Works Department effective on or about June 11,2007. Respectfully submitted, ---I / --:y}, , , c.,": iL { . /. Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director ;/~/ (- cc: Personnel File 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, City Administrator @ FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - 2006 Mill and Overlay Project DATE: June 4, 2007 INTRODUCTION IDISCUSSION The 2006 Mill and Overlay project is substantially complete. BUDGET IMPACT The proposed assessments for this project are as outlined at the project initiation. The proposed assessment roll will be available prior to the assessment hearing. The Council will consider adopting the final project assessment roll at the assessment hearing for the project. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution directing staff to prepare the final assessment roll and setting the assessment hearing for the 2006 Mill and Overlay project for July 16,2007. Respectfully submitted, ~1Y1~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -07 CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING - PROJECT NO. 06-01 - 2006 MILL & OVERLAY 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 of the 4th day of June, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution. WHEREAS, a contract has been let and costs have been determined for the following improvements: Pro]. No. 06-01 Description Mill & Overlay Location - Lower Heritage Way - Heritage Way - 6th Street from Heritage Way to the southerly terminus - Fairview Lane from Park Drive to Heritage Way - Fairview Circle - Centennial Drive from Sunnyside Drive to TH 3 - Centennial Drive from Heritage Way to TH 3 - Centennial Circle - Park Drive ; and, WHEREAS, the improvements for the project are substantially complete; and, WHEREAS, the Council determined at the September 5, 2006 meeting that the hearing scheduled for September 18, 2006 would have to be rescheduled. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. Staff is hereby directed to prepare the proposed final assessment roll for the project. 2. A hearing shall be held in the Council Chambers in City Hall on the 16th day of July, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. to act upon such proposed assessment at such time and place and all persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and the clerk shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. The clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearings. Notice shall be provided in accordance with the requirements provided under M.S. section 429.061 subdivision 1. This resolution adopted by recorded vote ofthe Farmington City Council in open session on the 4th day of June, 2007. Mayor Attested to this _ day of June, 2007. 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 City Administrat& FROM: Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Approve a Gambling Premises Permit - American Legion Post 189 DATE: June 4,2007 INTRODUCTION The American Legion is requesting a Gambling Premises Permit at 10 8th Street. DISCUSSION Pursuant to State Statute and pertinent City Code, an organization must first obtain a resolution from the City, granting permission for gambling to occur at a specific location. The American Legion is requesting approval to conduct gambling activity at 10 8th Street. The appropriate application and fees have been received and the application has been reviewed. BUDGET IMPACT Gambling permit fees are included in the revenue estimates of the 2007 budget. ACTION REQUESTED Consider the attached resolution approving a Gambling Premises Permit at 10 8th Street. Respectfully submitted, ? /) ( ~ . ~y;;~c /, ~Q~ Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director RESOLUTION NO. R -07 APPROVING A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISES PERMIT APPLICATION FOR AMERICAN LEGION POST 189 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 4th day of June 2007 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, pursuant to M.S. 349.166, the State of Minnesota Gambling Board may not issue or renew a Gambling Premises Permit unless the City Council adopts a Resolution approving said permit; and, WHEREAS, American Legion Post 189 has submitted an application for a Gambling Premises Permit to be conducted at 10 8th Street, for Council consideration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Farmington City Council that the Gambling Premises Permit for American Legion Post 189 to be conducted at 10 8th Street is hereby approved. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 4th day of June 2007. Mayor Attested to the day of June 2007. 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, City Administrat~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Approve Therapeutic Massage License DATE: June 4,2007 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to City Ordinance 3-15-8, a public hearing must be held to issue a Therapeutic Massage License. DISCUSSION Mr. Joel Ward has applied for a Therapeutic Massage License. Mr. Ward will be practicing therapeutic massage at Hadler Family Chiropractic, located at 625 8th Street. The required application, attachments and fees have been submitted and approved by the Farmington Police Department. BUDGET IMPACT The fees collected are included in the revenue estimates of the 2007 budget. ACTION REQUIRED Approve a Therapeutic Massage License for Joel Ward at 625 8th Street. Respectfully submitted, '\ ~...~ 1/A4<<dcce: L[~a Shadick Administrative Services Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Peter J. Herlofsky City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: June 4,2007 It is requested the June 4, 2007 agenda be amended as follows: AWARD OF CONTRACT 9a) Award City Hall Bid and 1 st Street Garage - Wold Architects Wold Architects recommends Council accept the low bid from Merrimac Construction in the amount of $7,476,409. 5?e<- June 1, 2007 UJ ~ LO City Council City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 MINNESOTA OFFICE 305 ST. PETER STREET ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 651.227.7773 FAX 651.223.5646 WWW.WOLDAE.COM MAIL@WOLDAE.COM ST. PAUL, MN ELGIN, Ii TROY, MI DENVER, CO Re: City of Farmington New City Hall Commission No. 062047/062048 Dear Council Members: At 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 31, 2007 12 bids were received for the construction of the New City Hall and First Street Garage. The bids were of an acceptable range and the low bid is within your project budget. A copy of the bid tabulation is enclosed for your review. Selection of the alternate will not affect determination of the low bidder. The following is our recommendation: Base Bid - New City Hall and First Street Garage $7,351,810 The base bid includes a 42,000 S.F. City Hall at the 3rd and Spruce site and a 5,500 S.F. building at the existing 151 street site. Existing building demolition is included. Alternate #1 $124,599 This alternate includes finishes and toilets for the expansion space. Recommendation: Accept the Alternate We recommend the City of Farmington enter into a contract with Merrimac Construction of East Bethel for a total amount of $7,476,409, which breaks down as follows: Base Bid Alternate #1 TOTAL CONTRACT $7,351,810 $ 124.599 $7,476,409 Sincerely, Wold Architects and Engineers JO~~~ Associate Enclosure cc: Peter Herlofsky. Citv of Farmington Michael Cox. Wold ChrIS Ziemer. W"ld \'\'1:("1. Fartlllllgtu\1;()h211-l. ll-..p i'. :117 WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS Z 1Il 1Il 0 t) ... CD ... i= CD CD tIJ CD ~I: ~ "C <C .c .- :E C)t>> 0:: ..J ...1: ~ /Xl :J <cW :a: == al "C"C W <( -s: 0:: 0 o CI:l ...J I- ~ c ai "C "":5~ ouftl ZClle.. tIJtIJ 0> 0 I{) 0 0 0 W"'''C 0> 0 I{) 0 0 0 1-041 "0 ~ "00 "O~ "00 "0 q "00 CCC= ~ ~ "0 . "0 . "0 - "0 0 "0 - ZOCll N <~ <~ <~ < C"') <~ 0:: .- .c ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... WaltIJ f:J7 f:J7 f:J7 f:J7 f:J7 f:J7 1-0..... ...JEg ~o- ou. z o W I- C) C)O<C ZZ~ -<c<c :!i...JC) ct::..J1- <c<cW u.,:J:W u.>e: O!:::cn o >-~t; !::W~ Ozi! t) CD '0' ... 0.. t t , ClII :3 ..... o o N ___:E .....(")0.. ..qo >.0 OctlO ~:EN .: Q) Q) 0_ E ZCI:l . C i= E E o c ii5 W ~ m Il'l c~ c. ~o z cO -w mtIJ CD E ca Z III .... 41 "C "C iii o ..... CO ...... I.() ('i) ..... f:J7 U') ~ ri C\I ...... >< cW .2 Z :: t-- o....OIl'l ::stIJ:gl8oo ';fijz~~ ~c:a:~~ O~...:.~ OuCll~.... ~::s.st--M EmCll..co ...mCllr-- '>:Il'l_g.. ~~:a.c~ ..::...wn.u. o o o 0> co I{) r-: f:J7 U') -.;f ri N ..... >< C o .. 00 gw;c>> ...zll'l<o iii....Il'l~r-- ctlJz.~ 8.g,:a:~r-:- c- ui'7'N ._O'_NOO i-g8.U;~ :a:~ca"", ....CIlCll<o "CMCCO" CNC >< ::so.-.cca ...JM:a:n.U. o o ..... LO co U') "'- f:J7 U') I ...... >< o ... c"Ct;; O~MOO... ..""Il'lr--Il'l u.... It) cbc>> ::s >-zc>>c>> ~c:a:~~ C ::s . M .... o 0 c:e . oo~..~ t:g8~~ ~~o,g~ WNOn.U. o o o <<i 0> ~ I"'- f:J7 U') ~ C"') C\I ...... >< C M o M ~"C;Xr-- 2~It)!;o iiiO::zC?~ cij:a:....1t) 0>_00";' 0'_ 1Ilr--.... cO:::5!M:e o-e..co. IIllllcat--M ccao::..co CIlwc~r-- t>>1l'l00" o~o.c~ "")Cll 0 n.u. o o q r-- I"'- "'-. I"'- f:J7 I.() I ...... >< Cll o 41~ ::Sit) 0 C 0 cCIlZCll.... O>:a:....Cll ..~ .~~ ftI ~ '5::::: ' o::sca,r-- e..-n....::::: ...c..:g, OClltIJ..... oO.cCll:g :=It)t:g.. 41~0.c~ CNZn.U. o o ~- "'- ...... 0> r-: f:J7 U') ~ ~ ri C\i ...... >< . "C 0 g~ .... -:o::~:gN iiiCll"'~~ .:; .!:! :g It) '7' l:r~z~;X -g~:a:~~ ::s ....: <0 ... ...J~;a;:g :=r--n.g.. ~:e.....c~ tlJNtlJn.U. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 -0 0 -0 0 "0 0 -0 0 "0 0 -0 cD -0 co -0 ~ ~ co "0 co "0 0 ~ C\l ~ C\l ~ CO (\') <( '<:t <( I.C) ...... C\l ...... ...... ...... ...... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ."f 0 I.C) 0 0 0 c.o 00 0> C\l 0 0 0> 0> 0'> 0 ...... LO I'- I'- I'- 00 00 CO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I.C) ~ C") C\l ...... >< >- C III Q. Eco 8.! c'S OU) .... ~'2~~"" .5o-":'~ Ul....IOCOO c...IO..... O~Z'!X; (J0:i:~"" Ul,Q _CD~ .r:.1ll"S..1O (J...I III CIlCD ;:~o..5x ~1O+=.c1ll u.CO)U)o..u. I.C) "<t cr) C\l LO "<t (\') C\l ...... ...... >< >< CD 10 - CIl - 'S U) z..... cD ~ c >:g_ 0 5<z"<t ~~ :;:;.E:iE~l8 20 2g>;~:::5'li)i; 'li)JI!~~~5:S CClll'llCO)"<t(JUl o'g>~~ c::l (J CIl c..CO) o'g >-:i: CIl ~~ (J- III "0....... .lIl:Oo.c><Gjo <~C)o..~:E~ CD -CD NNN ON"<t 10 . .... ION co z:::5N :E":'CO) _0 CO) ~1t)1 ::l .. ..... llIC1l~ .Qc.. 'i: 0 >< III .c III u.o..u. LO ."f C") C\l ...... >< uj....CO) ai:::5N >IONCO) 5<IO~CO ;...zlt)~ (J..!!!:E~~ ::l - I 10 .l:l.~.!~~ ~ z :: Cl) ..!.. > .. ~~ OIOUlClla; CJNE5x ~~~f~ I.C) I ...... >< o o "<t CIl - 'SIO c~~ OCllIO"<t :;:;>IO"<t go'i:z:o ... .., I .... -;="""<tCl) :gCllCIO~ o...o~"<t (J~Cl~:g c=CCl)' ,~S2'EQj~ "'f .... 0 c 9'! OOo,g>< m~iiio..~ LO ~ '<:t (\') C\l ...... >< o .... ..... CIl - 'S Cl) U)o ..r:;) :a 10 0 CIlZ~ ~:E~:g c -oCO) CIl"S....1O u~~~~ c.r:.+=~t;- ..:"U)Qj~ CIl......r:.C~ ~~S,g~ >NZa..U. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /Ocu TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, and City Administrat& FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Laserfiche Project Update DATE: June 4, 2007 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an update to the Council regarding the recent purchase of Laserfiche software and the implementation plan to convert our current documents into a digital system in order to effectively and efficiently manage and access City data. DISCUSSION Laserfiche is a document imaging system that provides for the digital storage and retrieval of governmental data. This system was purchased as part of the new City hall project and is being implemented now in order to more effectively manage our records, ensure business continuity, and provide better access to public records while maintaining a high level of security for data that is not public. With the data scanned and accessible in digital format, many paper records (without historical value) can be eliminated, thereby, minimizing the amount of files that will need to be moved to the new City hall. Attached is a project organizational chart and timeline. The organizational chart shows the project team responsible for working with the vendor and City staff to implement the software, archiving data and training others on using the software to retrieve data. Given the enormous amount of documents to be reviewed and either scanned or destroyed, the timeline only reflects the process for City hall. Once the records in City hall have been archived, the project team will implement a plan for the archiving of documents at other facilities including the storage facility located next to the arena. ACTION REQUESTED For information only. Respectfully Submitted, /1 ./'----- / /' '\'. ,." ..-/!--V,. .:/!, "/' I t'~ 'j[.cA..(. ,;~. "'L-<../'r. <>~ ." / Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Director cc: file 1:: co ..c () 0) s.... o 0) ..c u .- U- s.... 0) CJ) ro .....I ~ c m =Om c C) ~ ~ m ~~ c Q) cO - I r 0 Eg 0 <Jl o 'c ..c ._ ~ E f- - Q)-o ~<{ ..c E 0 Q) [((j) >- (f) - = -- - o m c <Jl .- .- -0 Ol~ ~ 0 m 0 00 C'il ~ <Jl Q) .- C ....J C C'il U (f) o cm o c <Jl .- ro~ ....J g C'il0 "Clio- ~ Q) o c Q) C l') C'il u (f) ~O =m 6:f- u Q) [(0 06m ~f- ro a.. Ol .!::: IDO Q)m .!::: f- Ol c W c ~ 0 Q) .- =SID~ '"<:c..... "'" C <Jl >- C'il 'c -g ~'E .- -0 o <( <Jl ~ ~a3 .~ I- :c ::l a.. .- - CD E .- I- ..... (.) CD . ..... o s- D- CD ~ (.) .- LL s- CD tn ca ...J CD c: ~ :t:: ro ii5a. en (J) (J)-O - ... ~ 'Q) b'6E ~~E ___0 :!:: c J:: <0 (J) ... E (J) (J)-O OlE ro (J) ~ E ~ (J) u c ro c u: c -g'o, I'-- ro ~ g~.8 ~ .Q Ol T-t)c -- (J)'- ~ a. c en C E ~ OlCf) C :2 =' co .f: Ol oof-~ 8-g.8 ~ ro Ol ~ c::: .f: ("I')IE ro u Cf) en-o _(J) C C (J) C E ~ a en I'-- 0 (J) 0-0-0 o ... 0 ~ 0- Ll)--o ......(J)(J) ---(J) ;::~c _:!-' .- C -00 ~-o ~- Cf)~ C .Q ro ... lQc .f: '0, E (J) 1'---0-0 8<(.9 N-oOl ;:: ~.f: I'-- Ol c .f: ~ ... u ffiCf) .f: Ol c L1J -0 ..!!:! ro - I'-- en o .f: o (J) ~~ ~ .~ Ll)!J.. ... (J) en ro ....J 00 0 0 N -- ..- r:::: 00 0 0 ~ ...... -- <0 00 0 0 -- ...... -- Ll) 00 0 0 N -- ...... -- '<t 00 0 0 ~ ...... -- ("I') 00 0 0 ~ ...... -- N 00 0 0 -- ...... -- ...... I'-- o o N -- ...... -- o I'-- o o ~ ...... -- (j) I'-- o o -- ...... -- 00 I'-- o o N -- ...... -- I'-- (J) ro o c o ~ ro =' 00 ro 8 > ~L1J ...... en __ en Ll) (J) ... Ol e a.. c ro u Cf) u (J) c::: -g .f: ro Ol ~(J) 00 ...-0 o ro 0 00..- ~-oOl ...... c.f: ;:: ro c > c (J) ro o~ E o () c o c:z:; ro ro I'-- u =' 0Cf)(ij ~-> __ .f: L1J ...... 0 en ;::0.. en ......-o~ ~Ol e a.. Ol c .f: I'-- ro 8~ N (J) -- (J) ...... >. OO.Q a. E L1J Ol C C I'-- ro 8~ ~ (J) ...... (J) ...... >. <D 0 Ci. E L1J Ol .f: .f: I'-- ro o~ o ... ~ 0 ......- N ro __ c Ll)-o ... o o () I'-- o o ~ ...... i:n /o.IJ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrat@ FROM: Kevin Schorzman, P.E., Assistant City Engineer~ SUBJECT: 2007 Projects Update DATE: June 4, 2007 INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION Staffwill give a brief update on the projects for 2007. BUDGET IMPACT Budget impacts for the projects have been/will be identified in their respective feasibility reports. ACTION REQUESTED This item is for informational purposes. R~spec~fi~,~lY ubmitted, ~ t..;/ "..-.......... " ~. - t. /14. .,-j I Kevin Schorzman, P.E., Assistant City Engineer cc: file )~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrat@ FROM: Jennifer Collova, Natural Resource Specialist ~ SUBJECT: Boulevard Tree Policy DATE: June 4,2007 INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION Currently the City Code requires boulevard trees to be planted approximately 40 feet apart in new developments. In 2006, approximately 1000 new trees were planted in the City's boulevards. These trees along with the other new trees that are planted every year will need trimming and a percentage, based on current practice, would need to be replaced if or when they do not survive. RECOMMENDATIONS Tree Replacement It is recommended that on residential streets the decision to replace the tree or not is left to the homeowners discretion. If a homeowner wanted to replace a tree, it would be placed on private property, not in the boulevard. New Development It is recommended to change the policy of requiring trees within the boulevard to locating trees in new developments on private property when they are planted along a residential street. The only exception would be if an agreement is made with a homeowners association or other such organization where the responsibility to maintain the trees is that of the named organization in perpetuity. By locating trees on private property, the City would eliminate damage to City vehicles, namely solid waste trucks. Many trees are damaged and vehicles need repair as a result of tree branches growing into the street. Sidewalk and curb damage from tree root growth would be reduced. Boulevard Tree Routes It is recommended that trees continue to be planted in the boulevard on designated City boulevard tree routes (see attached map). The majority of the proposed boulevard tree routes are designated as major collector streets on the City's Thoroughfare Plan. The impact to solid waste vehicles would be reduced as houses do not typically front major collector streets. It would also maintain some boulevard tree planting within the City in some new developments. The net effect would continue to increase the number of trees that the City would have to trim on an annual basis, but not as much as the current policy. Sidewalk and curb issues would remain on boulevard tree routes. On boulevard tree routes the City would continue to be responsible for replacing trees in the boulevard. BUDGET IMPACT If the City only replaced boulevard trees on major collector streets, based on current budget practices there would be an annual cost savings of$6,000.00. ACTION REQUESTED Council consideration of the recommended boulevard tree policy changes. Upon Council's direction the relevant ordinances will be updated to reflect the proposed changes and will be brought to the Planning Commission for consideration. Respectfully Submitted, ~IO~ Natural Resource Specialist cc: file NATURAL RESOURCES POLICY" x.x BOULEVARD TREE PLACEMENT Tree Replacement Replacement of boulevard trees on residential streets will be left to the property owners discretion. If a property owner replaces a tree, it will be placed on private property, not in the boulevard. New Development In new developments new trees will be placed on private property when they are planted along a residential street. The only exception would be if an agreement is made with a homeowners association or other such organization where the responsibility to maintain the trees is that of the named organization in perpetuity. Boulevard Tree Routes Boulevard tree routes will continue to have trees planted in the boulevard. On boulevard tree routes the City would continue to be responsible for replacing trees in the boulevard. - ern ~r F~~"J~GTON , I I \ \ \ \ \ \ , J ~- , , ..~-,~;""~I ~I n ii :s:s == I _______ 1__-." i '"""..... I ............. I ......___ C$AH50 a .. Ii ~~ ::t~J______ r- 1L i l' ~ : ~ i ~ ~ I BOULEVARD TREE ROUTES EXISTING ROUTES - - - - - - FUTURE ROUTES 500 I I I I 1000 2000 3000 SCALE MAP CURRENT AS OF 1-3-47 Values Statement Excellence and Quality in the Delivery of Services We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver quality services in a highly professional and cost-effective manner. Fiscal Responsibility We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for citizen confidence in government. Ethics and Integrity We believe that ethics and integrity are the foundation blocks of public trust and confidence and that all meaningful relationships are built on these values. Open and Honest Communication We believe that open and honest communication is essential for an informed and involved citizenry and to foster a positive working environment for employees. Cooperation and Teamwork We believe that the public is best served when departments and employees work cooperatively as a team rather than at cross purposes. Visionary Leadership and Planning We believe that the very essence of leadership is to be visionary and to plan for the future. Positive Relations with the Community We believe that positive relations with the community and public we serve leads to positive, involved, and active citizens. Professionalism We believe that continuous improvement is the mark of professionalism and are committed to applying this principle to the services we offer and the development of our employees. R55CKSUM LOG23000VO COUNCIL MEETING ON JUNE 4, 2007 Vendor 4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL LLC AFFINITY PLUS FEDERAL CREDIT U AFLAC AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES INC ALCORN BEVERAGE CO. INC. ALL STAR WIRELESS ALLlNA MEDICAL CLINIC AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF RETIRE ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER ANDERSENINC,EARLF ANNAN DALE TACTICAL TRAINING CE ANTENNA PLUS LLC APPLE VALLEY FORD Business Unit POLICE ADMINISTRATION EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND STREET MAINTENANCE DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP PILOT KNOB LIQUOR GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET PATROL SERVICES HUMAN RESOURCES SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS PATROL SERVICES STREET MAINTENANCE PARK MAINTENANCE DAISY KNOLL PARK PATROL SERVICES PATROL SERVICES PATROL SERVICES CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Council Check Summary Page .. OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Object PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Amount 1,597.50 1,597.50 CREDIT UNION PAYABLE 2,230.00 2,230.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 3,664.10 3,664.10 STREET MATERIALS 73.95 73.95 COST OF GOODS SOLD COST OF GOODS SOLD 28,427.90 30,634.35 59,062.25 MN SALES TAX DUE CELLULAR PHONES .97- 15.96 14.99 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 215.00 215.00 PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 140.00 140.00 VEHICLE REPAIR SERVICE 51.60 51.60 SIGNS & STRIPPING MATERIALS OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS BUILDING & STRUCTURE 298.35 3,278.07 31,438.00 35,014.42 TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 900.00 900.00 VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 54.64 54.64 VEHICLE REPAIR SERVICE U) '-J 289.68 289.68 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO Vendor ASSURANT EMPLOYEE BENEFITS BACHMAN'S INC BELLBOY CORPORATION BELZER'S CHEV/DODGE/KIA, JEFF BERGSTROM, JAIME NICOLE BETTER BEDLlNERS BEXAR COUNTY FORENSIC SCIENCE BOER BOOM, ROB BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLlK INC CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Council Check Summary Page- 2 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Business Unit Object Amount EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 905.51 905.51 EVERGREEN KNOLL PARK OTHER CONSTRUCTION COSTS 1,513.37 1,513.37 DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,379.70 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,564.62 2,944.32 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 127.95 127.95 INVESTIGATION SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50.00 50.00 FLEET OPERATIONS VEHICLES 468.60 468.60 INVESTIGATION SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 35.00 35.00 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 70.53 70.53 ENGINEERING SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,218.60 STREET MAINTENANCE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 281.00 ANNUAL SEALCOATING PROJECT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 579.47 195TH ST EXTENSION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 20,557.57 SPRUCE ST EXTENSION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 416.23 ELM ST RECONSTRUCTION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 18,627.90 TH #3 IMP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,181.50 CITY HALL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,433.63 PRIVATE CAPITAL PROJECTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 25,733.30 FLAGSTAFF AVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 17,296.77 HILLDEE RECONSTRUCTION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,254.28 MIL & OVERLAY ANNUAL PRJ PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 54.00 SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,188.25 HUNTER LIFT STATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 14,192.45 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 20,570.04 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Council Check Summary Page - 3 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount NPDES Phase II PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 845.00 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,147.36 WELL #8 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,281.53 151,858.88 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION CITY HALL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,700.00 1,700.00 BRAUN, ALLEN & KATHY FLAGSTAFF AVE LAND 6,500.00 6,500.00 BRIESACHER, WAYNE SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 38.93 38.93 BUGBEE'S LOCKSMITH BUILDING MAl NT SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4.70 4.70 CAMPBELL KNUTSON LEGISLATIVE CONTROL LEGAL 1,778.00 ADMINISTRATION LEGAL 1,176.55 PLANNING & ZONING LEGAL 420.00 POLICE ADMINISTRATION LEGAL 4,846.19 ENGINEERING SERVICES LEGAL 1,607.25 PARK MAINTENANCE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 98.00 HRNECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LEGAL 1,142.50 POLICE FORFEITURES LEGAL 491.50 STREET CONSTRUCTION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 934.75 SPRUCE ST EXTENSION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 336.00 PRIVATE CAPITAL PROJECTS LEGAL 5,652.50 FLAGSTAFF AVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 350.00 210TH STREET EAST LEGAL 140.00 HUNTER LIFT STATION LEGAL 387.50 19,360.74 CANNON RIVER WINERY DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 276.00 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,020.00 1,296.00 CAP AGENCY SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 14.90 14.90 CARQUEST FLEET OPERATIONS VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 19.95 19.95 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Council Check Summary Page - 4 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount CERTIFIED APPLIANCE RECYCLING SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 321.16 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 9,850.60 10,171.76 CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT LLC DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP BUILDING RENTAL 10,794.85 10,794.85 CNH CAPITAL STREET MAINTENANCE VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 59.73 PARK MAINTENANCE OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 3.32 PARK MAINTENANCE RENTAL OF EQUIPMENT 417.05 480.10 COLLEGE CITY BEVERAGE INC DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 13,989.82 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 21,842.56 35,832.38 CONBOY, WENDY ENGINEERING SERVICES MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 6.50 SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 26.91 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 26.91 60.32 CORNERSTONEENERGYINC BUILDING MAINT SERVICES NATURAL GAS 128.90 SWIMMING POOL OPERATIONS NATURAL GAS .49 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR NATURAL GAS 210.18 339.57 CRABTREE COMPANIES INC CITY HALL MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 13,865.04 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 7,039.00 20,904.04 DAKOTA COMMUNICATIONS CENTER PATROL SERVICES CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 13,541.33 FIRE SERVICES CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,770.67 20,312.00 DAKOTA COUNTY LUMBER COMPANY STREET MAINTENANCE UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 5.84 PARK MAINTENANCE OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 417.46 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 40.19 463.49 DAKOTA ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION FIRE SERVICES ELECTRIC 820.04 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Council Check Summary Page- 5 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount BUILDING MAINT SERVICES ELECTRIC 17.20 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR ELECTRIC 862.12 SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE ELECTRIC 9.90 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE ELECTRIC 4,423.77 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE NATURAL GAS 11.46 6,144.49 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 2,499.82 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 4,922.20 7,422.02 DELEGARD TOOL CO FLEET OPERATIONS MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 647.36 647.36 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY CITY HALL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,070.00 FIRST STREET GARAGE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 540.00 1,610.00 DESIGNS INTERNATIONAL LLC HRAlECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BUILDING REPAIR SERVICE 375.38 375.38 DICK'S SANITATION INC SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 79,678.39 79,678.39 DIRECT SAFETY COMPANY STREET MAINTENANCE UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 8.0.09 SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 80.10 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 80.10 240.29 DISCOUNT STEEL INC SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 162.95 162.95 DUSTCOATING INC STREET MAINTENANCE STREET MATERIALS 4,076.95 4,076.95 ECM PUBLISHERS INC ELM ST RECONSTRUCTION ADVERTISING 420.00 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE ADVERTISING 123.75 543.75 EVERGREEN LAND SERVICES FLAGSTAFF AVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,717.50 7,717.50 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Council Check Summary Page - 6 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount FARMINGTON COMMUNITY EDUCATION RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 150.00 150.00 FARMINGTON EMPLOYEE CLUB EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND EMPLOYEE CLUB 49.00 49.00 FARMINGTON PRINTING INC BUILDING INSPECTIONS OFFICE SUPPLIES 55.91 RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 170.40 DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 14.91 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 14.91 SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE OUTSIDE PRINTING 485.00 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS OUTSIDE PRINTING 485.00 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS OUTSIDE PRINTING 485.00 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE OUTSIDE PRINTING 485.00 2,196.13 FASTENAL COMPANY FLEET OPERATIONS VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 5.47 5.47 FINKE, ROBERT RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 88.00 88.00 FIRE SAFETY USA INC FIRE SERVICES UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 118.00 FIRE SERVICES EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 92.00 210.00 FIRST CHOICE TOURS SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 660.00 660.00 FIRST SIGNS OF FIRE, THE FIRE SERVICES OUTSIDE PRINTING 130.50 130.50 FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS WATER UTILITY EXPENSE TELEPHONE 189.36 189.36 FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS OF AME COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 165.08 165.08 FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS-ACCESS POLICE ADMINISTRATION TELEPHONE 143.05 FIRE SERVICES TELEPHONE 143.06 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TELEPHONE 337.23 623.34 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Council Check Summary Page - 7 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount GERSTER JEWELERS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET MN SALES TAX DUE 4.55- BOARDS & COMMISSIONS OFFICE SUPPLIES 74.55 70.00 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 363.95 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 363.95 727.90 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE ADMINISTRATION TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 235.00 235.00 GRIGGS COOPER & CO DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 3,463.68 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 8,757.91 12,221.59 H&L MESABI SNOW REMOVAL SERVICES VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 782.78 782.78 HARPSTER, LUELLA GENERAL FUND REVENUES RENTAL INCOME 20.00 20.00 HAWKINS INC WATER UTILITY EXPENSE CHEMICALS 40.00 40.00 HEAL THPARTNERS EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 7,487.51 7,487.51 HENNAGER, MICHAEL & KATHLEEN FLAGSTAFF AVE LAND 1,200.00 1,200.00 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE FIRE SERVICES TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 758.00 758.00 HOHENSTEINS INC DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,052.45 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,555.75 2,608.20 HUGHES, RUSSELL RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 88.00 88.00 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Council Check Summary Page - 8 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND ICMA PAYABLE 5,351.00 5,351.00 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 5,382.91 5,382.91 INDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO INC PARK MAINTENANCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 36.74 36.74 INTOXIMETERS PATROL SERVICES EQUIP SUPPLIES & PARTS 95.85 95.85 JENKINS, DENNIS & LAURI SEWER OPERATIONS ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE UTILITIES 218.31 218.31 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR COM PAN DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 13,688.20 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 15,390.82 29,079.02 KEEPRSINC PATROL SERVICES UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 29.71 29.71 LAMETTRYS COLLISION LAKEVILLE PATROL SERVICES VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 390.00 390.00 LARSON, GEORGIA HUMAN RESOURCES MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 71.60 71.60 LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND LELS DUES PAYABLE 316.00 316.00 LOCAL GVMT INFO SYSTEMS ASSN. HUMAN RESOURCES DATA PROCESSING 1,318.00 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY OFFICE SUPPLIES 471.75 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DATA PROCESSING 2,317.00 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 606.52 GENERAL ACCOUNTING DATA PROCESSING 2,158.00 BUILDING INSPECTIONS DATA PROCESSING 1,706.00 POLICE ADMINISTRATION DATA PROCESSING 4,071.00 POLICE ADMINISTRATION TELEPHONE 360.00 CAPITAL ACQUISITION MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 6,405.98 CITY HALL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,674.00 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Council Check Summary Page - 9 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount CITY HALL MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT 3,247.19 SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE DATA PROCESSING 402.00 SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS DATA PROCESSING 402.00 STORM WATER UTILITY OPERATIONS DATA PROCESSING 402.00 WATER UTILITY EXPENSE DATA PROCESSING 402.00 25,943.44 M. AMUNDSON LLP PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 579.76 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 87.10 666.86 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 163.81 163.81 MADDEN & ASSOCIATES, FRANK HUMAN RESOURCES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 95.40 95.40 MARK VII DISTRIBUTORS INC DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 5,960.30 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 9,177.18 15,137.48 MATTAMY HOMES ESCROW FUND DEPOSITS PAYABLE 6,000.00 6,000.00 MAXIMUM VOLTAGE WATER UTILITY EXPENSE OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 21.29 21.29 MCNEILUS-DODGE CENTER SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 1,135.86 1,135.86 MEDICA EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 50,874.72 50,874.72 METROCALL INC INVESTIGATION SERVICES CELLULAR PHONES 13.42 13.42 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONME SEWER OPERATIONS EXPENSE MCES FEES 66,099.61 66,099.61 MINNESOTA AFSCME COUNCIL #5 EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND AFSCME UNION DUES PAYABLE 761.84 761.84 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Council Check Summary Page- 10 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount MINNESOTACPV PROGRAM, STATE 0 CAPITAL ACQUISITION SUBSCRIPTIONS & DUES 500.00 500.00 MINNESOTA RECREATION & PARK AS PARK MAINTENANCE TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 30.00 RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 60.00 SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 30.00 120.00 MINNESOTA ROADWAYS CO STREET MAINTENANCE STREET MATERIALS 431.33 431.33 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT SYS EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND HEALTH CARE SAVINGS PLAN 2,379.03 2,379.03 MN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTE EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND CHILD SUPPORT PAYABLE 1,341.00 1,341.00 MN DEPT OF REVENUE EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND GARNISHMENT PAYABLE 303.64 303.64 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND PERA LIFE INS PAYABLE 66.00 66.00 MN OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE TECHNO PATROL SERVICES TELEPHONE 74.00 74.00 MOODY COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND CHILD SUPPORT PAYABLE 175.00 175.00 MURPHY, JAMES PATROL SERVICES MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 208.54 208.54 MVTL LABORATORIES INC WATER UTILITY EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 143.25 143.25 OFFICE MAX FIRE SERVICES OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 141.32 141.32 OFFICEMAX - A BOISE COMPANY ADMINISTRATION OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,248.06 1,248.06 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/20079:42:36 Council Check Summary Page - 11 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount PAUSTIS WINE CO. DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 293.50 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,024.40 1,317.90 PEER ENGINEERING INC ELM ST RECONSTRUCTION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 605.80 605.80 PELLlCCI HARDWARE & RENTAL POLICE ADMINISTRATION OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 29.86 29.86 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,332.04 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 5,666.99 6,999.03 PIERCE, SANDY POLICE ADMINISTRATION MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 23.29 23.29 PINE BEND LANDFILL INC SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,059.21 6,059.21 PITNEY BOWES RESERVE ACCOUNT COMMUNICATIONS POSTAGE 2,000.00 2,000.00 PIZZA MAN LEGISLATIVE CONTROL OFFICE SUPPLIES 16.44 16.44 POLFUS IMPLEMENT INC. PARK MAINTENANCE EQUIP SUPPLIES & PARTS 383.58 383.58 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT AS EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND PERA PAYABLE 13,443.89 EMPLOYEE EXPENSE FUND PERA 16,613.67 30,057.56 QUALITY WINE AND SPIRITS CO DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 2,365.90 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 3,529.83 5,895.73 RAMYTURFPRODUCTS PARK MAINTENANCE OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 255.60 255.60 RDO EQUIPMENT STREET MAINTENANCE VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 32.16 32.16 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/20079:42:36 Council Check Summary Page - 12 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount REGINA MEDICAL GROUP FIRE SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,526.50 1,526.50 RESOURCE RECOVERY TECHNOLOGIES SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 21,611.34 21,611.34 ROC INC BUILDING MAINT SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 170.40 170.40 ROSEMOUNT PARK & RECREATION RECREATION PROGRAM SERVICES PROGRAMMING EXPENSE 172.99 172.99 RYLAND HOMES ESCROW FUND DEPOSITS PAYABLE 4,000.00 4,000.00 SAFETY SIGNS STREET MAINTENANCE SIGNS & STRIPPING MATERIALS 439.02 439.02 SAUBER PLUMBING & HEATING CO. WATER UTILITY EXPENSE EQUIP SUPPLIES & PARTS 300.00 300.00 SAVOIE SUPPLY CO. INC. SWIMMING POOL OPERATIONS CLEANING SUPPLIES 111.83 111.83 SCHWlNESS LLC PILOT KNOB LIQUOR BUILDING RENTAL 14,492.49 14,492.49 SCOVILL, SHAWN PATROL SERVICES TRAINING & SUBSISTANCE 52.08 52.08 SHIPSHOCK, LARRY SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS RECREATION FEES - SENIOR CTR 15.00 15.00 SIMPLEXGRINNELL LP POLICE ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 496.82 496.82 SMITH, DELOIS & WEN SENIOR CENTER PROGRAMS RECREATION FEES - SENIOR CTR 30.00 30.00 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL FLEET OPERATIONS OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 1,570.94 1,570.94 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO CITY OF FARMINGTON 05/31/20079:42:36 Council Check Summary Page - 13 OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Vendor Business Unit Object Amount SPECIALTY WINES AND BEVERAGES DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 745.99 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 122.00 867.99 ST PAUL OFFICE EQUIPMENT REPAI ADMINISTRATION EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICE 510.00 510.00 STREICHER'S PATROL SERVICES OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 532.50 PATROL SERVICES UNIFORMS & CLOTHING 23.92- 508.58 SUMMIT SUPPLY CORPORATION GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET MN SALES TAX DUE 43.49- PARK MAINTENANCE OTHER SUPPLIES & PARTS 712.49 669.00 T C CONSTRUCTION ESCROW FUND DEPOSITS PAYABLE 2,000.00 2,000.00 TERMINAL SUPPLY CO. FLEET OPERATIONS VEHICLE SUPPLIES & PARTS 440.21 440.21 VINOCOPIA DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 158.00 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 376.20 534.20 WASHINGTON MUTUAL HOME LOANS SEWER OPERATIONS ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE UTILITIES 79.30 79.30 WELLS FARGO BANK SEWER OPERATIONS ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE UTILITIES 36.10 36.10 WINE MERCHANTS DOWNTOWN LIQUOR REV & EXP COST OF GOODS SOLD 69.43 PILOT KNOB LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD 368.58 438.01 WlNGFOOT COMMERCIAL TIRE SOLID WASTE OPERATIONS VEHICLE TIRES 6.00 6.00 WOLD ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS IN PUBLIC FACILITIES 2001 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 35,575.55 35,575.55 R55CKSUM LOG23000VO Vendor Business Unit WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC SPRUCE ST EXTENSION YAHOO! INVESTIGATION SERVICES APPROVALS: SODERBERG m ~ FOGARTY MCKNIGHT PRITZLAFF WILSON CITY OF FARMINGTON Council Check Summary OS/21/2007 - 06/03/2007 Object OTHER CONSTRUCTION COSTS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Report Totals 05/31/2007 9:42:36 Page - 14 Amount 9,196.66 9,196.66 20.41 20.41 893,464.58