HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 09-23 CCP Regular Session • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
September 23, 1996
7 p.m.
I. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Moment of Silence
4. Council Report
5. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda
-The following items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted
by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember
so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and
considered at the end of Council Consideration Items.
a. Approval of Minutes
- Councilmembers not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from the vote
• on the minutes.
1. August 19, 1996 - Special Work Session
2. September 11, 1996 - Special Session
b. Proclamation Declaring the Week of October 6 -12, 1996, to be Minnesota Cities
Week
C. Proclamation Declaring October 14 through 18, 1996, to be Manufacturers Week
d. Approval of Applications for Authorization to Conduct Excluded Bingo from the
Orchard Lane PTA
e. Resolution Establishing Project and Awarding a Contract for Professional Services,
Improvement Project No. 1997 -07, Replacement of Underground Storage Tanks and
Fuel System, Central Garage
f. Resolution Approving Change Order No. 2, Accepting Work Performed and
Authorizing Final Payment, Improvement Project Nos. 1995 -07, 08, and 09, Contract
1995 -B, Woodbine Neighborhood Street, Storm Drainage, and Utility Improvements
g. Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1, Accepting Work Performed and
Authorizing Final Payment, Improvement Project Nos. 1994 -05 and 06, Contract
1995 -D, Humboldt Avenue, 69th to 73rd Avenues North, Street and Utility
Improvements
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- September 23, 1996
•
h. Resolution Receiving Insurance Proceeds, Amending the 1996 Central Garage
Internal Service Fund Budget, and Authorizing the Purchase of a Dump Box and
Hydraulics
i. An Ordinance Vacating a Utility Easement
-This ordinance is offered for a first reading.
j. Recognizing City Clerk's Certified Municipal Clerk Designation from International
Institute of Municipal Clerks
k. Licenses
6. Open Forum
7. Public Hearing
a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 25 of the City Ordinances Relating to Closure of
Streets for Block Parties; Adding New Sections 25 -901 Through 25 -908
-This ordinance was offered for first reading on August 26, 1996, published in the
City's official newspaper on September 4, 1996, and is offered this evening for a
public hearing and second reading.
- Requested Council Action:
.
-Open the public hearing.
p p g
-Take public input.
-Close the public hearing.
- Motion to adopt ordinance.
8. Planning Commission Items
a. Planning Commission Application No. 96014 submitted by Iten Chevrolet. Request
for site and building plan approval and a special use permit to construct an
approximate 3,200 sq. ft. expansion for an auto service write -up area at Iten Chevrolet,
6701 Brooklyn Boulevard. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this
application at its September 12, 1996, meeting.
- Requested Council Action:
- Motion to approve Planning Commission Application No. 96014 submitted by
Iten Chevrolet subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning
Commission.
9. Council Consideration Items
a. Appointment of Council Member to Serve as Council Liaison on Park and Recreation
Commission and Crime Prevention Program
- Requested Council Action:
• - Motion to appoint Councilmember Nichols to serve as Council liaison on Park
and Recreation Commission and Crime Prevention Program.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- September 23, 1996
•
b. Resolution Amending City Council Handbook Regarding Citizen g y Han egard g C zen Input at Council
Work Sessions
- Requested Council Action:
- Motion to adopt resolution.
C. Set Date for Joint Meeting of City Council and Planning Commission for Discussion
of Comprehensive Planning Process
- Requested Council Action:
- Motion to set date.
d. Councilmember Carmody: Suggestion to Schedule a Joint Meeting with Park and
Recreation Commission on November 18 or 19, 1996
- Requested Council Action:
- Motion to set date.
e. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 12 of the City Ordinances Relating to the Licensing
of Rental Dwelling Units
-This ordinance is offered for a first reading.
- Requested Council Action:
- Council discuss.
. - Motion to approve first reading of ordinance and set date for public hearing.
f. Resolution Awarding the Sale of $1,440,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds,
Series 1996A; Fixing Their Form and Specification; Directing Their Execution and
Delivery; and Providing for Their Payment
- Requested Council Action:
- Motion to adopt resolution.
Motion to Recess
Reconvene in Conference Room B
g. Discussion of Potential 1997 Neighborhood Street Projects
- Requested Council Action:
Council discuss.
10. Adjournment
•
■I tg a
September 23, 1996
Council Members
City Manager
City Attorney
RE: "THE COUNCIL SHALL HAVE FULL POWER BY ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION
TO MAKE INTERFUND LOANS "- (EARL BROWN FARM)
For the last 6 years I have been questioning the funding, and management philosophy of the
farm. As you are aware I have addressed the council repeatedly on the questionable
operations. While no one questions the farm is an amenity does that justify the possible
misappropriation of funds? I have attempted to understand this issue, attending meetings
when possible, council work sessions, council meetings, financial meetings, commission
meetings, and Tif meetings in other communities. Previous councils seemed concerned; nothing
changed. Presently, council members Mann and Hilstrom have been receptive to my questions
and concerns and have been forthright and honest in answering when possible.
One of my questions I have asked is who is paying the bills if the farm continues to operate even
though the city council authorized zero in tax dollar subsidy. I remind my fellow citizens the
farm had a deficit of about $206,000 for 1995? I was finally told they received a loan from other
funds. I am not aware of a meeting at which the city council passed a resolution or ordinance to
authorize this loan. I now am in doubt that the authorization required by the city charter in
Chapter 7; Section 7.11 "FUNDS TO BE KEPT" was given. If I am correct, this may be a
serious violation of the charter and symptomatic of the larger picture "How long can we
continue to fund the farm" which I call "the grey area in budgeting ". It is your duty to the
citizens to investigate and communicate your finding, so we may understand this loan transfer
and not think the worse, mis- appropriation of funds, I would expect an answer at next council
meeting.
Nancy Carlson
6024 Aldrich Ave No
Brooklyn Center, Mn 55430
Section 6,04, SJJBQRPI,JSAJE QFEICERS. There shall be a City Clerk, City Treasurer, and
such other officers subordinate to the City Manager as the Council may create by ordinance.
The City Clerk shall be subject to the direction of the City Manager, and shall have duties in
connection with the keeping of the public records and such other duties as may be assigned
by the City Manager or by the provisions of this charter. The City Treasurer shall have such
duties in connection with the receipt, disbursement and custody of public funds as may be
assigned by the City Manager and other provisions of this charter. The provisions of this
charter shall not be construed so as to prevent the combining of the offices of City Clerk and
City Treasurer. The Council may by ordinance abolish offices which have been created by
ordinance, and may combine the duties of various offices as it may see fit.
Section 6.05. PURCHASES AND CONTRACTS. The City Council shall by resolution
establish and maintain a purchasing policy for the City of Brooklyn Center. All contracts,
bonds, and instruments of any kind to which the City is a party shall be signed by the Mayor
and the City Manager on behalf of the City and shall be executed in the name of the City.
Section 6,06, CONTRACTS: HOW LET. Every contract for the purchase of supplies,
materials, equipment or the rental thereof, the construction, alteration, repair or maintenance
of real or personal property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Municipal Contracting
Law, M.S.A. Section 471.345. Subject to the provisions of this charter, the Council may by
resolution adopt further regulations for the making of bids and the letting of contracts.
CHAPTER 7
TAXATION AND FINANCES '
Section 7.01. COUNCIL TO CONTROL FINANCES The Council shall have full authority
over the financial affairs of the City, and shall provide for the collection of all revenues and
other assets, the auditing and settlement of accounts, and the safekeeping and disbursement
of public monies, and in the exercise of sound discretion shall make appropriations for the
payment of all liabilities and expenses.
Section 7.02. FISCAL YEAR. The fiscal year of the City shall be the calendar year.
Section 7.03. SYSTEM OF TAXATION. Subject to the State constitution, and except as
forbidden by it or by State legislation, the Council shall have full power to provide by
ordinance for a system of local taxation. In the taxation of real and personal property as such,
the City shall conform as fully as possible to the general State law as to the assessment of such
property and the collection of such taxes. -
-16-
Section 7.01 SING OR ADJUSTING THE BUDGET After the budget shall have
been duly adopted, the Council shall have no power to increase the amounts fixed in the
budget resolution, by the insertion of new items or otherwise, beyond the estimated revenues,
unless the actual receipts exceed the estimates and then not beyond the actual receipts. This
provision shall in no way be construed as limiting the discretion of the Council to appropriate
monies from accumulated surplus in an amount equal to a previous appropriation if not, in
fact, expended or encumbered for that purpose in the previous fiscal year. The Council may
at any time, by resolution approved by a four - fifths (4/5) majority of its members, reduce the
sums appropriated for any purpose by the budget resolution. The Council may, by a majority
vote of its members, transfer unencumbered appropriation balances from one office,
department or agency to another within the same fund. All appropriations shall lapse at the
end of the budget year to the extent that they shall not have been expended or lawfully
encumbered.
Section 7.09, CONTINGENCY APPROPRIATION IN BUDGET The Council may include
a contingency appropriation as a part of the budget but not to exceed five per cent (5 %) of
the total appropriation of the general fund made in the budget for that year. A transfer from
the contingency appropriation to any other appropriation shall be made only by a majority vote
of the members of the Council. The funds thus appropriated shall be used only for the
purposes designated by the Council.
Section 7.10. DISBURSEMENTS., _HOW MADE. No disbursements of City funds shall be
made except by check bearing the actual or facsimile signature of the City Manager and the
Treasurer.'' Such checks shall bear a statement specifying the purposes for which the
disbursement is made and the fund from which it is drawn, or a check register shall be
prepared and maintained which shall contain the aforementioned information. No such check
shall be issued until there is money to the credit of the fund from which it is to be paid,
sufficient to pay it together with all outstanding encumbrances upon the fund. No such check
shall be issued until the claim to which it relates has been supported by an itemized bill,
payroll or time sheet approved and signed by the responsible City officer who vouches for its
correctness and reasonableness. The City Manager shall note on each contract requiring the
payment of money by the City the particular fund out of which it is to be paid. The Council
may by ordinance make further regulations for the safekeeping and disbursement of the funds
of the City.
Section 7.11. FUNDS TO BE KEPT. There shall be maintained in the City Treasury a
classification of funds which shall provide for a general fund for the payment of such expenses
of the City as the Council may deem proper, and such other funds as may be required by
statute, ordinance or resolution. The Council shall have full power by ordinance or resolution
to make interfund loans, except from trust and agency funds, as may be deemed necessary and
appropriate from time to time. The Council shall have full authority by ordinance or
resolution to make permanent transfers between all funds which may be created, provided that
such transfers are not inconsistent with the provisions of relevant covenants, the provisions of
this charter or State statute.
-18-
1 .
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY
• OF HENNEPN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
SPECIAL WORK SESSION
AUGUST 19, 1996
CONFERENCE ROOM B
The City Manager notified the Council of a pre - demolition gathering for the Brookdale Motel to be
held on Monday, August 26, 1996, at 6 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor
Myrna Kragness at 7:03 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, Kristen Mann, and
Charles F. Nichols, Sr. Also present were City Manager Michael J. McCauley, Finance Director
Charlie Hansen, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman.
AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA
Councilmembers agreed to add the following items to the August 19, 1996, Special Work Session
• agenda: Invocation; Substation; Gas Station at 69th Avenue & Brooklyn Blvd.; Garage on 63rd
Avenue.
IN VOCATION
Councilmembers viewed a video tape of a Cable Channel 12 newscast regarding the invocation
performed at regular Council meetings. The video highlighted a specific invocation given by the
Rev. Steve Loopstra which Council maintains contained inappropriate material. During the
newscast, it was stated the Brooklyn Center's Council is the only one in the northwest suburbs which
has v
an invocation.
After discussion, Council directed staff to prepare an amendment to the City Council Handbook
which would amend the Order of Business replacing Opening Ceremonies with Moment of Silence.
Council asked that this item be placed on the August 26, 1996, agenda. An opportunity to offer
input will be afforded to the public.
FORMAL ADOPTION OF GOALS FROM RETREAT
Councilmember Hilstrom indicated she has received inquiries about the results of goals Council
formulated at its retreat. She would like to see Council officially adopt those goals. The City
Manager responded there will be a special issue newsletter sent to City residents addressing taxes,
budget issues, etc. He suggested goals information be included in this newsletter edition. As for
• formal adoption of Council goals, this will be added to an upcoming regular Council meeting
agenda.
08/19/96 -1-
COMMUNICATIONS TASK FORCE DISBANDIN •
A letter was received from Bernie Gaffney, Chair of the Communications Task Force, in response
to a June 4, 1996, memo sent from the City Manager. The letter from Mr. Gaffney indicated the
Communications Task Force has "decided to discontinue further meetings as a task force for the
City." An item will be added to the August 26, 1996, agenda regarding the Communications Task
Force.
GENERAL FUND BUDGET PRELIMINARY TAX LEVY AND TRUTH IN TAXATION
HEARING DATE DISCUSSION
Truth in Taxation
After discussion, the Council elected hearing dates relating to Truth in Taxation as follows:
December 4, 1996, for initial hearing; December 11, 1996, for continuation of hearing.
Fiscal Disparities
The City Manager has been in contact with the North Metro Mayors Association. Joseph Strauss
is working on information to present to area communities regarding fiscal disparities disbursement.
Development of such information should take place in mid - September with a subsequent
presentation for North Metro Councils..
General Fund Budget/Preliminary Tax Lew
Dollar figures on the General Fund Budget draft reflect a four percent levy increase for •
consideration. Council needs to establish a levy which could be lowered after September 9, 1996,
but not raised.
The City Manager presented a format change for how -- visually - -the budget could be represented to
residents. This format change would contain "contra charges" which are reflective of salaries paid
out based on actual time /percentages of time of certain City staff whose responsibilities are not
exclusive to one department. Councilmember Hilstrom questioned visual implications, especially
how they relate to Enterprise Funds. She wondered if residents would perceive more money is
available for use than actually is.
The City Manager talked about the advantages /disadvantages of a salary versus salary transfer
(contra charges). The Director of Finance agreed contra charges could be wrongfully perceived and,
therefore, a transfer of monies would have to be carefully labeled. Councilmember Carmody
questioned controls in existence to ensure correct amounts are charged to respective accounts for
certain services. The City Manager clarified that some amounts are exact (hours) while other
amounts are based on percentages.
In order to implement the contra charge format change it will appear as if more has been added to
the operating budget when indeed there has been no increase.
Councilmember Carmody left the meeting at 7:69 p.m. •
08/19/96 -2-
Councilmember Carmody returned to the meeting at 3:02 p.m. M
Discussion ensued regarding perception concerns and how thev migl t ` e l (Ilminishe &avoided.
•
The City Manager g
, g r distributed a draft of bud comparisons to Council and provided clarification
where needed. The City Manager highlighted an attempt to make the budget more user friendly and
easy to understand by all. Councilmember Carmody inquired how benchmarks will be used. The
City Manager responded use of benchmarks is a main reason to have a methodology development
in order to do comparisons. Councilmember Nichols expressed concerns about perceptions the
media may communicate to citizens using examples provided. The Director of Finance indicated
examples can be given using the 1996 budget while applying the benchmarks methodology.
Councilmember Carmody encouraged the ian g a er and Finance Director Ct , ty i [ rector to clarify where
money is coming from, etc. when providing the media/residents with examples. Mayor Kragness
agreed. She also indicated there is bound to be at least a few people who do not understand and will
respond negatively.
Councilmember Hilstrom commented a bar graph chart done during last year's budget preparation
was helpful in providing a good visual explanation of budgeted money related issues. She inquired
how many dollars -worth of street improvement projects have been done in the past. Dollar amounts
are as follows: 1994 -95, 51 million; 1996, just over S2 million.
Councilmember Hilstrom indicated residents want to know what they are getting for their money
in relation to a tax increase. The City Manager indicated half of the proposed tax increase, of
approximately 52=17,000, would be for salaries and the balance would be for street improvements.
. The City Manager also talked about scenarios of potential monies in the Contingency Fund.
General, but yet specific information will be provided for review and will include debt service. The
work on the budget is neared toward shifting from the use of bonds for street improvements to a cash
basis.
A four percent preliminary levy was decided upon for now.
Council
Auditing and costs associated with Commissions will be placed under Council.
Police
Discussion ensued around promotions and status of union employees.
Fire
Issues relating to maintaining a competitive compensation for staff in comparison to surrounding
communities were discussed. The City Manager will provide further information to Council prior
to their decision on a final budget.
Central Garage
Clarification about "mobile equipment' listed on page 13 was provided. A budgeted amount of
• S7.560 was broken down as follows: five ergonomically correct seats for squad cars; and light bars.
08/19/96 _;_
MDT units and their respective status were discussed. i �� / F
Councilmember Nichols questioned if the City has explored utilizing the GSA (government surplus) •
as a resource for future vehicle equipment purchases. The City Manager and/or Finance Director
will explore this as a future option.
Status of the City's smart trailer was questioned: whether it has been rented out. If so. how much
revenue has this generated?
Other Cateaories
The following budget categories were briefly reviewed: Parks, Recreation: Communitv Center;
Pool, and Youth.
Social Service Requests
The City Manager distributed three -ring binders titled, "Social Service Requests 1997" to Council
members.
The meeting was recessed of 9:30 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:43 p.m.
Youth Pro;rams
The youth hockey program was discussed. Concern was expressed about equal funding treatment
as compared to programs "typical of participation by girls.
Project Peace •
It appears Brooklyn Center paid a large portion of fees last year compared to other communities.
Non -Profit Status
Councilmember Mann questioned the current status on each entity classified as such. It appears
some of the programs have lapsed on their non -profit status.
Decisions on Social Service Funding
The Ciry Manager asked the Council how they wished to review requests. The Council determined
for social services funding each program will be asked to appear before Council regarding requested
monies. Fifteen v
minutes will be aIlotte Q
d to each program p � for a question/answer session on one of
two dates: - -
Ionday, September _.,rd at a:30 p.m.; Monday, September 30th at x:30 p.m. at City Hall.
Questions posed by Council will relate to description overviews already submitted by each program.
General Fund BudQetin; - Contra Char?es nterprise Funds
The City Manager gave examples of enterprise funds and how the revised budgeting process
including contra charges might be presented for better explanation/description (i.e. Earie's). It was
the Council's consensus that revision of the budget presentation should continue to :pore clearly state
the sources of revenue and cost in o
each
of the funds, includin the enterp ri
� se funds.
•
08/19/96
Co N
uncilmember Carmody questioned how sick leave and vacation are accounted for in tine budget.
The Finance Director and City Manager advised that the full salary was shown in the budget and
i then sick leave or vacation used would be charged during the year.
Substation
There have been difficulties /problems with volunteers quitting because of the program's changing
status. Part of this has been due in part to personnel changes.
69th & Brooklyn Boulevard
Councilmembers expressed concern about recent passage of a special use permit for the Phillips 66
gas station, and that this type of business is not in line with proposed redevelopment plans in the area
as well as creation of safety issues. The City Manager suggested approaching this type of issue in
the updating of the Comprehensive Plan would be an appropriate way and would provide for a
proactive approach.
Miscellaneous
Ramifications of paying off the liquor fund loan were discussed.
Mayor Kragness questioned status of the license for occupancy at Minnesota Muscle. This will be
investigated.
Mayor Kragness inquired about future plans for the City -owned garage on 63rd. The City Manager
indicated this will be addressed when plans for the Fire Station are developed.
•
ADJOURNMENT
A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to adjourn the
meeting at 10:58 p.m. passed unanimously.
City Clerk Mayor
Recorded and transcribed by:
Connie Beckman
Timesaver Off Site Secretarial
•
08/19/96 -5-
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY
OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
• SPECIAL SESSION
SEPTEMBER 11, 1996
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special session as an election canvass board and was called
to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 5 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Debra Hilstrom, Kristen Mann, and Charles F. Nichols,
Sr. Councilmember Kathleen Carmody was excused from the meeting. Also present were City
Manager Michael McCauley and City Clerk Sharon Knutson.
CANVASS OF ELECTION RETURNS
The Brooklyn Center City Council proceeded to canvass the City election returns from the various
City precincts, reporting ballots cast in the City of Brooklyn Center contest as follows:
Office of City Council Member Ballot Count
Charles F. Nichols, Sr. 1,594
Kay Lasman 1,325
• Robert Peppe 974
Jerry Blarney 842
Shawn Taylor 341
RESOLUTION NO. 96 -194
Upon completing the election canvass, member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION REGARDING CANVASS OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1996, PRIMARY ELECTION
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen
Mann, and the motion passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Councilmember Kristen Mann and seconded by Councilmember Debra
Hilstrom to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City
Council meeting adjourned at 5:03 p.m.
City Clerk Mayor
9/11/96 -1-
�6
• PROCLAMATION
DECLARING THE WEEK OF OCTOBER 6-12,1996, TO BE
MINNESOTA CITIES WEEK
WHEREAS, the daily accomplishments of cities, their officials, and volunteers provide the
cornerstone for creating, supporting, and building the well -being of our
communities; and
WHEREAS, most Minnesotans now live in cities, and it is there that the democratic process is
most closely seen and understood; and
WHEREAS, decisions made by Congress and the Minnesota State Legislature impact our
municipal governments and the quality of life in our cities and neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, constructive discussion of the impact of these national and state issues will educate
both political candidates and citizens and may lead to a sense of common
community purpose; and
WHEREAS, the Cities Week 1996 theme of Making Cities Count - Preserving Our Quality of
Life offers an important opportunity to educate citizens about the important work
that cities do and to discuss the impact of national and state decisions on cities'
quality of life.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of
Minnesota, do hereby proclaim October 6 -12, 1996, to be Minnesota Cities Week.
Date Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
•
• PROCLAMATION
DECLARING OCTOBER 14 THROUGH 18, 1996
AS MANUFACTURERS WEEK
WHEREAS, Manufacturing has the largest total payroll of any business sector in Minnesota,
providing $14.3 billion in wages; and
WHEREAS, Manufacturing produces $22.9 billion for the state economy and is the largest
single share (21 percent) of our gross product; and
WHEREAS, Manufactured exports brought $8.2 billion into the Minnesota economy in 1995;
and
WHEREAS, Manufacturing provides high skill, high wage jobs which significantly contribute
to Minnesota's high standard of living and economic vitality; and
WHEREAS, Manufacturing contributed nearly $145 million in corporate income taxes in
Minnesota, more than any other sector and almost 30 percent of total corporate
income taxes.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of
• Minnesota, do hereby proclaim the week of October 14 through 18, 1996, to be Manufacturers
Week in the City of Brooklyn Center.
Date Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
O �ppKllf N CEpr
BROOKLYN CENTER
POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager
FROM: Scott Kline, Chief of Police
DATE: September 9, 1996
SUBJECT: Application (Excluded Bingo) - Orchard Lane Elementary School
On September 6, 1996, the Brooklyn Center Police Department received an Application for
Authorization to Conduct Excluded Bingo from the Orchard Lane PTA. This application is for
an event to be held at the Orchard Lane Elementary School on November 15, 1996. This
application has been approved and returned to the Orchard Lane PTA who will forward it to the
State Gambling Control Board.
If you or any member of the City Council objects to issuing this license, you must notify me
within 30 days according to Minnesota State Statute.
Scott Kline
Chief of Police
SK:kh
•
eQ ppKIYN CFpr�
i
BROOKLYN CENTER
POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager
FROM: Scott Kline, Chief of Police
DATE: September 9, 1996
SUBJECT: Application (Excluded Bingo) - Orchard Lane Elementary School
On September 6, 1996, the Brooklyn Center Police Department received an Application for
Authorization to Conduct Excluded Bingo from the Orchard Lane PTA. This application is for
i an event to be held at the Orchard Lane Elementary School on February 22, 1997. This
application has been approved and returned to the Orchard Lane PTA who will forward it to the
State Gambling Control Board.
If you or any member of the City Council objects to issuing this license, you must notify me
within 30 days according to Minnesota State Statute.
Scott Kline
Chief of Police
SK:kh
•
��OpKLYN CFIyT
BROOKLYN CENTER -
r
POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager
FROM: Scott Kline, Chief of Police
DATE: September 9, 1996
SUBJECT: Application (Excluded Bingo) - Orchard Lane Elementary School
On September 6, 1996, the Brooklyn Center Police Department received an Application for
Authorization to Conduct Excluded Bingo from the Orchard Lane PTA. This application is for
• an event to be held at the Orchard Lane Elementary School on April 4, 1997. This application
has been approved and returned to the Orchard Lane PTA who will forward it to the State
Gambling Control Board.
If you or any member of the City Council objects to issuing this license, you must notify me
within 30 days according to Minnesota State Statute.
Scott Kline
Chief of Police
SK:kh
•
• MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 16, 1996
TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager
FROM: Scott Brink, City Engineers ?_
SUBJECT: Resolution Establishing Project and Awarding a Contract for Professional Services,
Improvement Project No. 1997 -07, Replacement of Underground Storage Tanks and
Fuel System, Central Garage
The City of Brooklyn Center currently utilizes three (3) underground storage tanks at the Public
Works Garage facility. The tanks are used by the City's maintenance fleet: In order to comply with
recently established requirements of the EPA and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, these tanks
must be removed and replaced by January 1, 1998. Replacement/relocation of the pumps and re-
fueling system will also be necessary. It is estimated that the cost of this replacement will be about
$175,000, financed from the Capital Improvements Fund and the Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities.
The 1996 CIP had included this improvement as a part of a potential 1997 project called "Site
Improvements," and estimated at $325,000. That project also included such improvements as a ring
road, enhancement of berming, improvements in the storage yard and cold storage building. We
don't anticipate a need to construct those other improvements now for several years.
Because of the unique environmental and technical issues involved, four local firms were contacted
who either specialize or have experience in this type of work. The City received responsive
quotations from two firms. It should be noted that quotations were somewhat difficult to obtain due
to the unique nature of the work, and the fact that many other agencies and institutions are
scrambling to get this work completed before the deadline as well; thus availability for these services
is scarce. The request for services included the following tasks: data review and field surveys,
preparation of bid plans and specifications, bid solicitation and recommendation, contractor
oversight and inspection, and environmental testing services. The responses received, and their
estimated fees are as follows:
Braun Intertec Corporation $10,500.00
Nova Environmental Services, Inc. $ 5,545.00
The quotations have been reviewed by the City Engineer and the Public Works Superintendent.
References provided indicates that both firms are proven, competent and capable of providing these
services.
Because of the tight time constraints, it is important that the consultant begin work as soon as
possible. It is anticipated that the work can be completed before the summer of 1997, when many of
the contractors will likely be busy performing the same work at schools and for other agencies and
institutions. An early start on this project will hopefully enable the City to receive competitive bids
for the work.
• Based upon the difference in cost, we are therefore recommending that a contract for services be
awarded to Nova Environmental Services, Inc. in the amount of $5,545.00.
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROJECT AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1997 -07, REPLACEMENT OF
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS AND FUEL SYSTEM, CENTRAL GARAGE
WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council recognizes the obligation and
necessity of adhering to federal and state environmental requirements; and
WHEREAS, three underground petroleum storage tanks at the City Garage must be
removed and replaced to meet these regulations by January 1, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the City desires the services of a professional consultant with experience
and expertise relating to said removal and replacement of underground storage tanks, including the
fleet re- fueling system; and
WHEREAS, the following quotations have been received from two consultants
providing expertise in this type of work:
Nova Environmental Services, Inc. $ 5,545.00
Braun Intertec $10,500.00
• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that:
1. Improvement Project No. 1997 -07, Replacement of Underground Storage Tanks and Fuel
System, Central Garage is hereby established.
2. The quotation in the amount of $5,545.00 from Nova Environmental Services Inc., is hereby
accepted. The City Manager is authorized to execute a contract with Nova Environmental
Services, Inc.
3. All costs for professional services shall be financed from the Capital Improvements Fund.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
• and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
r
• MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 17, 1996
TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager
FROM: Scott Brink, City Engineer�e
SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Change Order No. 2, Accepting Work Performed and
Authorizing Final Payment, Improvement Project Nos. 1995 -07, 08 and 09,
Contract 1995 -B, Woodbine Neighborhood Street, Storm Drainage, and Utility
Improvements
The following is a summary of the change order items as shown on the attached sheet: Change
orders of this nature are typical of these types of improvement projects and were considered as a
contingency in the original project feasibility estimates.
Item No. 1 (Street Improvement - Removal of additional trees.) Two dying ash trees on
Woodbine Lane were required to be removed early this summer. These were severely
stressed during installation of sanitary sewer and water services in 1995. It was requested
i at the time of construction that the trees be left in hopes they could survive. The trees
were removed by a licensed tree contractor as ordered by the Engineering Department.
Item No. 2 (Insulation of water services from existing main on 71 st Avenue to protect
from freezing.) It was not known at the time of plan preparation that the existing water
services to 4406, 4407 and 4413 71 st Avenue North were less than the required 7 feet of
cover. It was therefore less expensive to insulate these services than to completely
reinstall them.
Item No. 3 (Construct retaining wall at 4100 Woodbine Lane.) The homeowner was
insistent that the four large green spruce trees on the Halifax Avenue side of this lot be
saved and that something be done to protect the roots. The cost of this wall was $858.00
versus the cost of removal of $920.00 plus replacement trees which could exceed
$1,000.00.
Total amount of this change order is $3,070.47 With the previously approved addition of
Change Order No. 1, the estimated project total amount of $1,493,224.94 remains seven percent,
or about $111,000, less than the approved contract plus contingencies.
•
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 2, ACCEPTING WORK
PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NOS. 1995 -07, 08 AND 09, CONTRACT 1995 -B, WOODBINE NEIGHBORHOOD
STREET, STORM DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, due to conditions unknown at the time of plan preparation, the items
shown on attached Change Order #2 have been completed by Thomas & Sons Construction.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that:
1. Change Order #2 is hereby approved.
2. Thomas & Sons has completed the specified work under said contract and
contract is accepted and final payment is approved according to the
following schedule:
As Amended
Estimated Project Costs Per Low Bid As Final
Contract $1,454,565.57 $1,461,379.00
Contingency (10 %) 145,456.56
Change Order #1 28,775.35
Change Order #2 3.070.47
Subtotal Construction $1,600,022.13 $1,493,224.82
Admin, Engr. & Legal (13 %) 208,002.88 151,474.49
Street Lights $ 25,468.20
Assessment Stabilization $ 56.617.00
Est. Total Project Costs $1,808,025.01 $1,726,784.51
As Amended
Estimated Project Costs Per Low Bid As Final
Special Assessments $ 589,500.00 $ 509,858.00
G.O. Bonds 744,813.96 770,640.00
MSA (State Aid) 75,740.05 83,221.69
Local State Aid 0.00 ( 70,144.10)
Storm Drainage Utility Fund 202,618.00 217,792.64
Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund 145,300.00 145,111.30
Water Utility Fund 60,053.00 70,304.98
Total Est. Project Revenue $1,808,025.01 $1,726,784.51
RESOLUTION NO.
3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the
contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said
improvement under said contract shall be $1,493,224.94.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
i
• Shy •
CONTRAC I 1995'6 EAENOIPROJECIIMI SJNE�fimv
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1995 -07,08 8 09 -
THOMAS & SONS, INC RECEIVED INVOICES SERIES 952100 CHANGE ORDER NO.1
AMOUNTDUE RUNNING
ITEM NO. DATE INVOICE NO. AMOUNT DESCRIPTION AUTHORIZED Ci code DENIED THOMAS 6 SONS BALANCE
1 7114/95 952101 $229.79 Re -dig mislocated sewer line Dave A 1995 -09 $ 229.79 S 229.79
2 7/27/95 952102 $304.59 Repair leaking valve, Woodbine Mark H. Dave A 1995 -09 $ 304.59 $ 534.38
8 Halifax
3 7/27/95 952103 $685.35 Relocate CB 15A on Halifax Dave A., Gary 1995 -08 $ 685.35 S 1,21933
4 814195 952104 $437,92 Revise storm MHCB7A 8 MHCO10A Dave A. 1995 -08 $ 437.92 $ 1,657.65
5 814195 952105 $79.75 Rust knocked loose in toilet ballcock Dave A 1995 -09 $ 79.75 $ 1,737.40
6 8/4/95 952106 $809.36 Remove and replace gate valve 1995 -09
73rd 8 Grimes Mark H. Dave A. $ 809.36 S 2,546.76
7 8110/95 952107 $4,842.37 Reconfigure storm sewer, add 15" pipe 1995 -08 $ 4,842.37 $ 7,389.13
2- CB, 1 MH, Street grades had to change Dave A
Kyle 8 Woodbine
8 8/25/95 952108 $478.87 Relocate water service at 4406 71 sl in Dave A 1995 -09 $ 478.87 $ 7,868.00
acquired easement area to change
street alignment
9 917195 952109 $1,338.45 Installation of new 6" valve on existing Dave A 1995 -09 $ 1,338.45 $ 9,206.45
at Pond B
10 98195 952110 S11,926.75 Bill for Minnegasco non - performance Denied I
I
11 9115/95 952111 $1,914.56 Excavate sewer servic at 7200 Noble Dave A 1995 -09 $ 1,914.56 $ 11,121.01
12 9/15/95 952112 $ 5,828.83 Cable concrete for ponds A 8 B Dave A 1995 -08 $ 5,828.83 $ 16,949.84
13 926195 952113 $ 642.27 Rip rap storm sewer Dave A 1995 -08 S 642.27 $ 17,592.11
14 9/18/95 952114 $ 832.15 Set cable concrete and riprap at 8 Dave A 1995 -08 $ 832.15 $ 18,424.26
15 10095 952114(952115) S 262.22 Locate sanitary 7230 Lee Gary G. 1995 -09 $ 262.22 $ 18,686.48
16 10116!95 952115(952116) $ 444.62 Install Hydrant Extension Dave A 1995 -09 $ 44412 $ 19.131.10
17 10/20/95 Central Landscape $ 1,905.75 Install berm 8 fiber blanket (incl. 10 %) Dave A. 1995 -08 $ 1,905.75 $ 21,036.85
t8 11/1195 952117 $ 7,738.50 Install 21 gate valves at misc. locations Dave A, Mark H. 1995 -09 $ 7,738.50 $ 28,775.35
TOTAL PAID - CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 (1995 -08, $15,174.64) (1995 -09 (San. $2,486.32), (water $11,114.39) • $13,600.71) $ 28,775.35
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2
1 687196 952190 $ 505.87 Inv. for tree removal Dave A 1995 -07 $ 505.87 S 505.67
2 9117/95 Letter $ 1,706.60 Insulation for water services DaveA 1995 -09 $ 1,706.60 $ 2,212.47
3 627196. Letter S 858.00 Keystone wag at Woodbine Dave A 1995 -07 $ 858.00 $ 3,070.47
TOTAL PAID CHANGE ORDER NO. 2. (1995 -07, $1,363.87) (1995 -09, $1,706.60) $ 3,070.47
Page 1
r
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 16, 1996
TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager
FROM: Scott Brink, City Engineer 7��
SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1, Accepting Work Performed, and
Authorizing Final Payment, Improvement Project Nos. 1994 -05 and 06, Contract
1995 -1), Humboldt Avenue, 69th to 73rd Avenues North, Street and Utility
Improvements
This project was essentially completed in 1995, including Change Order No. 1. The Council had
not previously approved this Change Order. Final payment was withheld pending the
completion of miscellaneous work and repair items, including the adjustment of manhole covers,
and miscellaneous concrete and turf repairs.
Change Order N .
g o 1 covers those items listed herein that were added to the contract.
1. Poly Preformed pavement markings $13,251.44
2. Temporary Mailboxes $ 192.50
3. F & I R8 -3a signs $ 480.00
Total Change Order No. 1 $13,923.94
Items 1 and 3 are items that were inadvertently left out of the original plans and specifications.
These pavement markings and sign posts are City standards that are included within the scope of
all street reconstruction projects that require pavement markings and new signs. They have
replaced older outdated standards that are no longer utilized on new projects.
Item 2 was added as a requirement of the U.S. Post Office after construction commenced. The
Post Office would not deliver mail to residents door to door during construction, hence the
temporary mailboxes were needed.
The overall final project cost was less than the original bid, despite some higher engineering
costs. These additional costs incurred by the consulting engineer can be attributed to additional
requests by the City. These included the addition of sanitary sewer replacements, traffic counts,
and Mn/Dot State Aid design variance requests during the design process. As most people are
aware, the design process for Humboldt Avenue was unusually long compared to similar types of
projects.
The Contractor has completed these remaining work items. It is therefore recommended that the
• City Council approve the attached resolution approving Change Order No. 1 and releasing final
payment to Midwest Asphalt, Inc.
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
• its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, ACCEPTING WORK
PERFORMED, AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NOS. 1994 -05 and 06, CONTRACT 1995 -D, HUMBOLDT AVENUE NORTH, 69TH
TO 73RD AVENUES NORTH, STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, Midwest Asphalt has completed construction of the above project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that:
1. Change Order No.1 in the amount of $13,923.94 is hereby approved.
2. Midwest Asphalt has completed the specified work under said contract and
contract is accepted and final payment is approved according to the
following schedule:
As
Estimated Project Costs Per Low Bid As Final
Contract $399,714.52 $410,231.75
Contingency (10 %) $ 39,971.45
Change Order #1 $ 13,923.94
Subtotal Construction $439,685.97 $424,155.69
Engineering $ 73,397.76 $ 91,131.55
Admin. & Legal $ 13,190.58 $ 12,724.67
Utility Undergrounding $140,000.00 $137,000.00 ;
Est. Total Project Costs $666,274.31 $665,011.91
As Amended
Estimated Project Costs Per Low Bid As Final
Regular State Aid $419,854.80 $406,195.63
Local State Aid $106,899.24 $113,994.38
Sanitary Sewer Utility $ 91,024.14 $ 96,325.78
• Special Assessments $ 48.496.12 $ 48.496.12
Total Est. Project Revenue $666,274.31 $665,011.91
• RESOLUTION NO.
3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the
contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said
improvement under said contract shall be $424,155.59.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
,
• MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 13, 1996
TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager p
FROM: David Peterson, Public Works, Superintendent"
SUBJECT: Resolution Receiving Insurance Proceeds, Amending the 1996 Central Garage
Internal Service Fund Budget, and Authorizing the Purchase of a Dump Box and
Hydraulics
Truck #90, which was totaled by our insurance company, was authorized by Resolution No. 96-
126 to be replaced, financed from accumulated depreciation funds in the Central Garage Internal
Service Fund. At that time, the amount of the insurance settlement was known, but had not yet
been received. Also, at that time we had an estimate of the cost for replacing the dump box and
hydraulics, but did not then know the final cost. Therefore, Resolution No. 96 -126 authorized
the acquisition of the truck, and authorized the transfer of the $49,500 depreciation accumulated
on the vehicle to the capital outlay division of the Central Garage Internal Service Fund budget,
but did not authorize the expenditure of the $ 1 1,000 insurance proceeds.
•
The final cost of the truck is $46,432.93. The cost of the dump body and hydraulics installed is
'1
$ l� 2 G6 62.00. The truck, box and hydraulics are thru the Cooperative Purchasing Venture, State
of Minnesota" 1996 bid contract.
Truck $46,432 93
Hydraulics & Box $13,262.00
$59,694.93
Funding: Accum. Depr. Funds: $49,500.00
Insurance Proceeds: $11,000.00
$60,500.00
A resolution receiving the insurance proceeds, amending the Central Garage budget, and
authorizing the purchase of hydraulics and dump box is provided for Council consideration.
f: \garage \joannes \council\mem o #90
• its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION RECEIVING INSURANCE PROCEEDS, AMENDING THE 1996
CENTRAL GARAGE INTERNAL SERVICE FUND BUDGET, AND AUTHORIZING
THE PURCHASE OF A DUMP BOX AND HYDRAULICS
WHEREAS, vehicle #90, a heavy duty street maintenance truck, was damaged
earlier this year, causing the City's insurance carrier to declare the vehicle a total loss and to
provide the City with a cash settlement of $11,000, net of deductible; and
WHEREAS, City Council Resolution 96 -126 authorized the acquisition of the
replacement truck cab and chassis from the depreciation funds accumulated for that vehicle in the
Central Garage Internal Service Fund; and
WHEREAS, said resolution amended the 1996 Central Garage Internal Service
Fund budget to appropriate $49,500 from the replacement fund balance to the capital outlays
• division; and
WHEREAS, insurance proceeds have been received and are available to finance
the acquisition of a dump box and hydraulics through the Minnesota State Cooperative Program
contract; and
WHEREAS, the final costs and proposed funding for acquisition of the truck, box,
and hydraulics are:
Truck $46,432 93
Hydraulics & Box $11262.00
$59,694.93
Funding: Accum. Depr. Funds: $49,500.00
Insurance Proceeds: $11.000.00
$60,500.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that:
1. The insurance settlement of $11,000 is hereby received. The 1996 Central
Garage Internal Service Fund budget is hereby amended to appropriate
$11,000 for the purpose of acquiring a replacement dump box and
• hydraulics for vehicle #90.
• RESOLUTION NO.
2. The purchase and installation of a dump box and hydraulics in the amount
of $13,262 is hereby approved.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
•
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
•
S/
MEMORANDUM
•
DATE: September 18, 1996
TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager r'
FROM: Diane Spector, Director of Public Services
SUBJECT: An Ordinance Vacating A Utility Easement
Mr. Joe Lampe and Ms. Ernee McArthur, 2118 - 55th Avenue North, have requested that a utility
easement along the back line of their property be vacated to allow them to construct a new
garage.
This property is in a unique situation. As can be seen on the attached Map 1, a sixteen foot wide
strip of land, which apparently at one time was intended for an alley, abuts the back of their
property. This parcel has gone tax forfeit, and the couple have purchased it. They are in the
process of working with their neighbors to divide the property so the neighbors can have use of
this land.
• Although a utility easement was platted along the rear lot line of their property, the overhead
utilities are actually located on the north side of the "alley." Mr. Lampe and Ms. McArthur are
willing to dedicate a utility easement along the northerly 5 feet of the "alley" property in
exchange for vacation of the existing easement.
A letter has been sent to the rivate utilities requesting comment on the proposed vacation. The
p q g P P
item is presented to the Council this evening for a first reading.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
•
Notice is hereby given that.a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1996,
at _ p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle
Creek Parkway, to consider vacating a utility easement located at Lot 6, Block 1, John Ryden
Second Addition.
Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in
advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 569 -3300 to make arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE VACATING A UTILITY EASEMENT AT LOT 6.
BLOCK 1. JOHN RYDEN SECOND ADDITION
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That a utility easement in John Ryden Second Addition, according
to the plat on file and of record thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows
is hereby vacated:
• The north 10.00 feet of Lot 6, Block 1, John Ryden Second Addition.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days
following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of , 1996.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.)
�, ci 1 C •i r. y , ; f o £ .5; � � i l
� r <iI � • %.. .. __. - 141 ��, - ..
Co nl
(
• r / r , ' , •_' .,,1p .Z;.A OI(•-
�y is
T
1 Y.-
/ `', .. \ ., /• • A, IV 1 \I l_ ''I PI
oT
-. a� �, �� l am\ .../ � .•�� _._ ----- 'c:. - __-- _____.ii _.._.__ __. All - _._ - - �\ �,;,G ►. 5.
N , ,
'�/ / °• '�� �• � � �� � }'` .1 J am.,• ��� .-. .. __ ....
1
,
r, ' n � ♦ 195,E - � \' 1 i J _r� I f � _ '�<fil
of
ro is
in
Fil
n
•'
•� �,� " :n . t� , � n �, � / �,,, X77 ,�
r-
_.. _.
I
w � ., / � ti � � 771 .�.•
.° ; t; ., �, - - ,d �, • (T G( S/, GII'6tl fA C f' �.._..L
;Toil
' •..' / 6 "� - icy „}✓ fR 9C cr 73
_ r
i
_
•
UNIMPROVED ALLEY
FENCE NBS 57'ZO" E p
I MPOSED
o . o E:
o
/ ,,—UTILITY EASEMENT TO VA�CAT®
z r ��
o W
az
W J
z °
}
2.4
W
U
W ix , W
LL (1.
CL C
W C7
�
a
�o c
r- 0 c
• o N iD N N W
o,
33.3
r e _
IV
1-STORY FRAME
DWELLING
#2118 N a
_LJ
43.8 °
r 12.9 7 . 1 •:n'
Lu
X'
-° z
o
\` J1 M
-- - - -7 5.06 M EAS. - -- - -
7 S. 00 PLAT
N Bet 5
Ln
N
JOB NO. 96133
New Garage
t
• — - -- - - - - -- - - — — — — 3 -- --
74 - - -- - --
CONCRETE APRCN
40' -3" 11' -0"
�0 r -
0"
34'-6"
1. 3 -iprr
RETAIN
EXISTING
CCNC SLAB i
1.13.5'
• /r J
r. YIST_ING 3' CONCRETE APRON
2118 55th Ave N
scare. 1 inch = 12 feet
• J i
L� �1
5
International Institute o Munici al Clerks
. p
Los Angeles County. California 1206 N. San Dimas Canyon Rd. • San Dimas. California 91773
Phone 19091 592 -UNIC • Fax (9091592-1555
E -mail 74357.1567h'compuserve. com
BOARD OF DIRECTORS -1996 -1997 September 5, 1996
Executive Committee
J. W. (JACK) COPLAND, CMC /AAE
President
Municipal Clerk.
Delta. B.C.. Canada
LINDA S. MURPHY, CMCIAAE
1st Vice President
City Clerk Honorable Myrna Kragness
Seward. Alaska Mayor
VICKY MIEL. CMC /AAE
2nd Vi er k Present
City Clerk
City of Brooklyn Center
Phoenix. Arizona 3401 63rd Avenue North
TOM G. ROBERTS. CMC /AAE
Immediate Past President Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
City Clerk
Kansas City, Kansas
RRIICHARDSA.FA7N�irsti °° Dear Mayor Kragness,
Village Clerk - Port Chester. New York
JUNE H. BOGLIOLI, CMC/AAE
Deputy City Clerk -South Bay. Florida On behalf of the International Institute of Municipal Clerks, it gives
NANCY NICHOLS, CMC /AAE
City Clerk- Edmond. Oklahoma me great honor and pleasure to announce that Sharon Knutson, .
LINDA L. EGELS Council Cit Clerk of of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, has been
Admin. Clerk/Clerk of Council ty rk f the City y
M o nroe. Ohio awarded the designation of Certified Municipal Clerk.
BARRY J. srrrLOw, cMc
City Administrator / Clerk
St. Paul Park. Minnesota
WILLIAM J. GOERING. CMC This prestigious award fully recognizes the professional competency
City ClerkJAdminutrator
cPherson Kansas of Ms.. Knutson. fulfilling the responsibilities of her office. It is
ferkq he o ncil granted only after a person has met high educational, experience,
Santa li participatory and service standards established by IIMC. -
P. RY AN . CM C CM
DAMIA P.
City Clerk!Director of Admin. Services
Saint John's. Newfoundland. Canada
Directors - 1998 Expiration The International Institute of Municipal Clerks was founded in 1947,
D. DA CA
Town Cl erk - Gorham. Gorham, Maine and has a membership of 10,000 members throughout the United
Town Cl
SUSAN LAMBLACK. CMC / AAE States
City Secretary Treasurer Canada and 15 other countries. IIMC prepares and meets
OLNZAPARK WO ODS, es of the diverse role of the Municipal Clerk through its
OLlVIA PARKS WOODS. CMC / AAE g p 9
Municipal Clerk Atlanta. Georgia Certification and Advanced Academy educational service programs.
PATRICIA BURCH. CMC /AAE
City ClerkJTreasurer These programs are updated regularly to keep . pace with changing
Whitesville. Kentucky
GLORIA J. BERRETT. CMC /AAE local government needs.
City Recorder- Ogden City. Utah
ROLAND SIGNETT. CMC /AAE
T reasur er - Ferndale. Washington
GARM KOLH W are very pleased to have Ms. Knutson as a member of the
GARM
Town Manager International Institute of Municipal Clerks. .IIMC commends your
Renkum. Gelderland. The Netherlands
Direct - 1999 Expirati community for its continued support of her professional development
KATHLEEN A. THORPE. CMC /AAE
Township Clerk and growth. -
South Brunswick Township. New Jersey
L. RANETTE WOOD, CMC /AAE
City Secretary- Garland. Texas 'nCierely
JAMES R. VMLIESSE, CMC ,
Clerk- Treasurer
New London. Wisconsin
DONNA M. BARNES. CMC /AAE
City Clerk - Mexico. Missouri
ALICE LUCERO, CMC
Cit p nnola nola- . :Vew ,llexi co Clerk-
Espa nola- J.W. (Jack) Copland, CMC /AAE
bleri p
ERREPAGE - President IIMC
ty Clerk - On.".. Ontario. Canada +
JAN S. VAN ZYL C/S -
Director Traloga Transvaal Local
Government Association
Monument Park. South Africa
John R. Devine
Executive Director
Francis L. Adshead, Ph.D May 18 ... 51st IIMC Animal Conrerence ... Buffalo, New York (Academy May 17)
Director of Education
International Institute o al Clerks
f Munici p
1206 North San Dimas Canvon Road • San Dimas. California 91773 • Phone (909) 592 -IIMC • Fax (909) 592 -1555
DATE OF RELEASE: September 5, 1996 CONTACT: Sheri Burdick
SHARON KNUTSON, CIVIC
CITY CLERK of BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
HONORED BY iNTERNA T TONAL ASSOCIATION
1�
Sharon Knutson, CIVIC, City Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, has
1J been awarded the "
prestigious designation of CERTIFIED MUNICIPAL CLERK" (CIVIC)
9 9 � )
from the International Institute of Municipal Clerks (IIMC) for achieving its high
• educational, experience and service requirements.
Ms. Knutson has been employed with the City of Brooklyn Center since January
1986, serving as Receptionist, Licensing Clerk, Administration Secretary, Administrative
E Assistant, and Deputy City Clerk. She has served in her present position as City Clerk
since December 1995,
L She attained her designation as a Certified Municipal Clerk by attending the IiiviC
Municipal Clerks Institute Programs conducted by the Department of Professional
Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. This program provides 100 student/
instructor contact hours of in -depth courses in managerial and leadership skills, social
and interpersonal concerns, and technical training needed to deal with changes taking
C place in government today.
•IJ She holds an Associate Degree in Applied Science in Accounting from North
Hennepin Community College, Brooklyn Park, Minnesota.
MORE
Page 2, News Release Cont'd., Sharon Knutson, CIVIC
•
Active in her professional affiliations, she is a member of the Municipal Clerks and
Finance Officers Association of Minnesota.
Ms. Knutson has been a member of the International Institute of Municipal Clerks
since August 1992. She joins 99 other active Municipal Clerks from the State of
Minnesota who currently hold the designation of "Certified Municipal Clerk."
The unique Certification Prcgram of the IIMC was launched in 1970, climaxing a
decade of planning. The program aids municipal clerks and deputy clerks in improving
job performance and recognizes the professionalization of the Municipal Clerk's office.
Completion of a recognized career development institute or a baccalaureate degree in
public administration or related field, responsible experience in local government, and
in conferences meetings, participation eet gs, and educational seminars are required to earn
this prestigious Certified Municipal Clerk designation. Qualifications of applicants are
reviewed and approved by the IIMC Program Review and Certification Committee.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Founded in 1947, the International Institute of Municipal Clerks is a
professional association with more than 10,000 members throughout the United States,
Canada and 15 other countries. IIMC prepares its membership to meet the challenge
of the diverse role of the Municipal Clerk by providing educational seminars in 47
permanent college -and university -based learning centers. IIMC offers Municipal Clerks
a Certified Municipal Clerk Program (CMC), an Academy for Advanced Education (AAE),
and services and continuing professional development opportunities to benefit members
and the government entities they serve. It is governed by a 26- member Board of
Directors, four- person Executive Committee and 15 Standing Committees.
•
i
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager
FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk
DATE: September 23, 1996
SUBJECT: Licenses
The following companies /persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each company /person
has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective licenses and submitted
appropriate applications and paid proper fees.
Licenses to be approved by the City Council on September 23, 1996:
GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLES
A W Disposal P. O. Box 115, Norwood
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
Gallagher Heating and Air Conditioning 17209 Tungsten St NW, Ramsey
RENTAL DWELLINGS
Initial:
Martha Demetriou Humboldt Courts Apartments
John Rafter 6331, 6401, 6425 Beard Ave. N.
Morning Sun Investments, Inc. 6765 Humboldt Ave. N.
Richard and Elizabeth Becht 4718 Twin Lake Ave. N.
Gary Bistodeau 5337 70th Circle
Renewal:
Joseph Brauer 6315 Brooklyn Blvd.
Allan and Vicki Olson 7111 Riverdale Road
Allan Olson 7112 Riverdale Road
Duane Christiansen 5400 Sailor Lane
SIGN HANGER
Minnesota Sign Company, Inc. 1713 E. Highway 95
SignArt Co. Inc. 2170 Dodd Road
KENNEDY & GRAVEN 7a --
CHARTERED
AtImneys at Law JAMES J. THOMSON
470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 LARRY M. WERTHEIM
DERT A. AI sop (612) 337 -9300 DONNIE L. WILKINS
CE M. BAT7'ERSII,N JOE Y. YANG
1NALD H. BATTY Facsimile (612) 337.9310 —
STEPHEN J. 81 RUI.
DAVID L. GRAVEN (1929.1991)
JOHN B. DEAN
DANIEL J. GREENMVEIG -
DAVID J. KENNEDY OF COUNSEL
CHARLES L. LEFEVERE ROBERT C. CARLSON
JOHN M. LEFEVRF. JR. WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL - ROBERT L. DAVIDSON
ROBERT J. LINUALL 16121 337.9215 WELLINGTON Il. LAW
ROBERT C. LUNG FLOYD D. OLSON
,JAMES M. STROMMEN CURTIS A. PEARSON
CORRINE H. THOMSON T. JAY SALMEN
August 19, 1996
Mike McCauley
City Manager
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
• RE: Block Parry Ordinance
Dear Mike:
Attached is a revised draft Block Party Ordinance incorporating the changes outlined in your
letter of August 13, 1996.
Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.
Very truly yours,
Charles L. LeFevere
CLL:cmm
Enclosure
•
CLLIi1:
SR3:?L -4
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
• Notice is hereby given that a ublic hearing will be held on the 23rd day of Se tember 1996 at
P � R ,
7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek
Parkway. to consider an amendment to Chapter 25 of the City Ordinances Relating to Closure
of Streets for Block Parties; Adding New Sections 25 -901 through 25 -908.
Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in
advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 569 -3300 to make arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 25 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES
RELATING TO CLOSURE OF STREETS FOR BLOCK PARTIES: ADDING
NEW SECTIONS 25 -901 THROUGH 25 -908
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 25 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is
hereby amended by adding the following:
• PER V[ITS FOR BLOCK PARTY STREET CLOSURES
Section 25 -901. BLOCKING STREETS UNLAWFUL It shall be unlawful for
any person to erect barricades close block or restrict the flotiv of through traffic on anv public
street in the Citv for the purpose of conducting a block party without first securing a permit
pursuant to Sections 25 -902 through 25 -908 from the Brooklvn Center Chief of Police or the
designee of the Chief of Police
Section 25 -902. APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS Applicants for a permit
shall. no less than 14 days prior to the date of the proposed block party provide the following
information in a form determined by the Chief of Police:
1. Date. place, time. and location of the block party and a description of how
the applicants intend to close or restrict traffic to the street during the block
party.
Whether alcohol will be served at the block party.
I Whether live music or any amplification equipment will be present at the
proposed block pg
•
ORDINANCE NO.
4. The names. telephone numbers. and addresses of the individuals who will
be responsible for l� anning conducting and cleaning up after the block
party.
6. Signatures of residents of at least seventy -five percent (75 %) of the
addresses on the street to which traffic will be closed or restricted such
signatures indicating consent to the street closure or restriction
6. The name. telephone number and address of the individual responsible for
barricades required by Section 25 -904.
7. A description of provisions which will be made for sanitation which may
include providing portable facilities or access to restrooms in houses.
Upon receipt of a properly completed application the Chief of Police shall approve the
application if, after any necessary consultation with other City departments the Chief determines
that the closure or restriction will not unnecessarily interfere with public travel and will not
constitute a threat to the public health welfare or safety. No more than two closures of any
• street, or part thereof, shall be permitted in any one calendar vear
Section 25 -903. APPLICATION FEE The City Council may require the
payment of a ep rmit application fee the amount of which may be set by resolution of the
Council.
Section 25 -904. BARRICADES Onlv barricades approved by the City may be
used to block or restrict traffic to a street upon which a block p is being conducted The
barricades will be obtained from an approved source by the person designated on the permit
application The designated person shall be responsible for placing the barricades in the
appropriate positions. The designated person shall be responsible for the barricades
Section 25 -905 SUPERVISION Adequate adult supervision shall be present
at all times during the block ,party
Section 25 -906. GARBAGE AND CLEAN -UP The ep rmit applicants shall
provide adequate trash receptacles during the block party The permit applicants shall pick up
all trash and otherwise return the street on which the block party was held to the condition it was
in prior to the block party, and shall do so no more than eight (8) hours after the time at which
the permit expires.
Section 25 -907. HOURS No streets may be barricaded prior to 8 a.m. nor
later than 11:30 p.m. on the date of the block party
ORDINANCE NO.
•
Section 25 -908. ENERAL CODE PROVISIONS APPLICABLE. Except as
expressly provided for in Sections 25 -901 through 25 -907 any permit issued pursuant to these
Sections shall be subject to all other applicable provisions of this Code including without
limitations. the provisions of Chapter 19 and the noise restrictions contained therein
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days
s Y
following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of , 1996.
Mayor
ATTEST:
• City Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.)
•
Fol
• MEMO
To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager
From: Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Specialist
Subject: Council Consideration Items - Planning Commission Application No. 96014
Date: September 17, 1996
On the September 23, 1996 City Council agenda is Planning Commission Application No. 96014
submitted by Iten Chevrolet requesting site and building plan approval and special use permit to
construct an approximate 3,200 sq. ft. expansion for an auto service write -up area at Iten
Chevrolet, 6701 Brooklyn Boulevard.
Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning
Commission Application No. 96014 containing an area map showing the location of the property
under consideration and various other supporting documents. Also attached are the Planning
Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter.
This matter was considered by the Planning Commission at their September 12, 1996 meeting
and was recommended for approval.
It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the
application subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.
•
• Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 96014
Applicant: Iten Chevrolet
Location: 6701 Brooklyn Boulevard
Request: Special Use Permit/Site and Building Plan
The applicant, Stephen Binek on behalf of Iten Chevrolet, is seeking Site and Building Plan
approval and a Special Use Permit to construct a small addition to the Iten Chevrolet dealership
at 6701 Brooklyn Boulevard. The property in question is zoned C -2 and the sale of motor
vehicles at retail is a special use in that zoning district. The subject site is located at the
northwest quadrant of Brooklyn Boulevard and I -94. It is surrounded on the east by Brooklyn
Boulevard; on the south by Interstate 94; on the west by the Osseo - Brooklyn school bus garage;
and on the north by Lowell's Automotive Paints, Atlantis Pools, Porter - Cable, Inc., Iten Leasing
and 68th Avenue North.
The proposal calls for an approximate 40 ft. by 80 ft. addition that will fill in a notch at the
southeast corner of the service /showroom building on the site. The purpose of the addition is to
provide for a new service write -up area. The applicant also proposes a new entrance to the
existing showroom at the east end of the building.
Generally, the City takes the opportunity to assure compliance with current zoning and site
• requirements when additions are made to existing properties. Also, because this site is over five
acres, review by the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission and compliance with
their development regulations is normally required. The applicant has requested that certain
watershed and landscape improvements normally required by deferred. The reason for the
deferral is that the City is looking at the possibility of an area wide drainage pond that would
meet the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission requirements for control over the
rate and water quality of run off for this site and other sites in the area. The City Engineer has
contacted the Watershed Management Commission and has been advised that such a deferral to a
later date would appropriate.
The applicant is also requesting that they not be required to install required landscaping at this
time because of the Hennepin County plans to widen Brooklyn Boulevard in this area in 1998.
They would prefer to provide the landscaping in connection with that improvement primarily
because of the need to provide green strip and landscaping along Brooklyn Boulevard. Such
deferrals would be consistent with the recommendations made by the Planning Commission with
respect to a minor addition to the Ryan Olds property in the later part of 1993.
ACCESS/PARKING
Access to the site is unchanged and the addition will not generate a need for much additional
parking. The addition, as indicated previously, is for a service write -up area and also to provide
• 9 -12 -96
Page 1
• an enclosed area for receiving the delivery of new cars. The addition will require a need for four
additional parking stalls based on the ordinance parking requirements.
The applicant has provided a parking analysis and the site plan indicates parking on the site. The
showroom, office, storage, service, used car operation and new construction write -up service area
requires a total of 359 parking spaces. The applicant's site plan shows a total of 575 parking
stalls. This should adequately provide for the parking needs plus inventory required for this car
dealership operation.
GRADING/DRAINAGE/UTILITIES
No changes are proposed to this site with respect to grading, drainage, and utilities. As
previously mentioned, the City Engineer has contacted the Shingle Creek Watershed
Management Commission regarding compliance with watershed regulations. An area wide
drainage plan is a possibility for this area. This fact, and the fact that the proposed addition is
relatively small in comparison with the site, are reasons for the Watershed not requiring a formal
submittal.
LANDSCAPING
The applicant has not submitted a landscape plan for the site at this time. We have had some
discussion with the representative and have indicated that it may be appropriate to defer
• landscape improvements until such time as the Brooklyn Boulevard widening, comprehended for
1998, is completed. The architect has submitted a written memorandum evaluating the required
number of points based on the landscape point system (copy attached) utilized by the Planning
Commission for evaluating landscape plans. This 8.56 acre site requires a minimum of 553.6
points. It is my understanding that Mr. Marty Iten is preparing a letter indicating their intent to
participate in a landscape improvement program at the time the Brooklyn Boulevard project is
undertaken. It would be appropriate to provide a landscape plan at this time indicating the
location of future landscaping. One of the chief site deficiencies with respect to this property is
the lack of a 15 ft. green strip along Brooklyn Boulevard. Such an improvement is
recommended and it would be appropriate to provide this landscape area at the time of the
Brooklyn Boulevard project and various public improvements are made as well.
The Planning Commission should review this matter and determine to what extent a landscape
plan should be developed and to what extent a deferral of improvements should be
recommended. It should be noted that a similar deferral was given to Bob Ryan Olds in 1993,
however, that site did already meet or exceed the minimum number of landscape points for such
a facility. That site, however, did not have the proper distribution of landscaping and an
additional 174.5 points was needed to be provided.
BUILDING
• 9 -12 -96
Page 2
• The applicant has provided building elevations showing the addition to the site. Two overhead
doors would be located along the east wall of the new addition to provide a customer drive -up
and service write -up area. Two overhead doors are also provided on the south wall of the new
addition and would be for the purpose of bringing in new car inventory to the dealership. A new
entrance to the showroom portion of the dealership would be provided along the existing east
wall of the building. The exterior of the building addition would be E.I.F.S. fascia to match the
existing building exterior.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS
A public hearing is scheduled for this Special Use Permit and notices have been sent. Attached
for the Commission's review is a copy of Section 35 -220 of the Zoning Ordinance containing the
five standards for Special Use Permits. We do not find any conflicts with the standards for
Special Use Permits given a determination regarding the landscape plan for this property.
RECOMMENDATION
Altogether the plans and Special Use Permit appear to be in order. Approval is, therefore,
recommended subject to at least the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with
• respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits.
2. The building addition is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system
to meet all NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in
accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
3. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City
Ordinances.
4. A Special Use Permit is granted to the applicant for the addition as proposed by the
plans. Any expansion or alteration of these plans shall require an additional
amendment to this Special Use Permit.
5. This Special Use Permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations,
any violation thereof, could be grounds for revocation.
6. Landscape improvements consistent with the landscape point system may be deferred
for installation to the time of the Brooklyn Boulevard widening project proposed for
1998. The applicant shall enter into an agreement acknowledging their responsibility
to provide said landscaping and assuring that it will be completed in conjunction with
other landscape improvements proposed for the 1998 project or as soon thereafter as
• 9 -12 -96
Page 3
possible should the project not go forward.
• 9 -12 -96
Page 4
Landscape Point System
1. Landscape Plantings shall be provided on the site based on the point system indicated below:
Maximum %
Planting Type Minimum Size Points /Planting of Points
Shade trees (Deciduous, Maple, 2 1/2" diameter 10 50
Linden, Ash, Oak, Locust, etc)
Coniferous Trees (Pine, Spruce, 5' height 6 40
Cedar)
Decorative Trees (Russian Olives, 1 " diameter 1.5 35
Radiant Crab, Canada Red Cherry, etc)
Shrubs (Dogwood, Spirea, 12" diameter .5 25
Mockorange, Juniper, Arborvitae, etc)
Points Required Per Acre
The following schedule shall be used to determine the required number of points for a given site. The schedule
is cumulative so that the first two acres of any site will require points on the basis of the column headed
"0 -2 " ; the next eight acres shall be computed on the basis of the column headed "2 -10 " ; and, area over ten
acres shall be computed on the basis of the column headed "'10 + " .
Land Area of Site (Acres)
Type of Development 0 -2 2 -10 10+
Office 100 80 60
Restaurant /Retail /Service /Entertainment /Hotels 80 60 40
fight Industrial 75 60 50
Heavy Industrial 60 50 40
Office /Industrial (Over 25% office) 90 70 50
Multi- Family Residential 90 75 60
Examples
Six acre office site = 2 acres @100 plus 4 acres @ 80 = 520 points
Fifteen acre retail /restaurant = 2 acres @ 80 plus 8 acres @ 60 plus 5 acres @ 40 840 points
2. The above point system in no way substitutes for the screening and buffer requirements set forth in the Zoning
Ordinance. Plantings used for screening purposes shall be accorded points, but fulfilling the point requirements
shall not obviate the requirements for screening.
3. Mature existing trees shall be accorded points on the basis of the above point schedule. A bonus equal up to
the full value of a given planting may be granted by the Commission for the preservation of large existing
plantings.
4. All green areas on a site shall be sodded except in areas where viable turf exists and is totally undisturbed by
construction. The burden shall be on the developer to prove at the time of a site inspection that such viable
turf, in fact, exists and has been properly maintained.
5. All greenstrips adjacent to an interior property line shall be a minimum of 5 ft. in width except in cases where
• special buffer provisions apply.
Landscape Point System
Revised 2 -95
hijiff ULVII-I'L--
SCOTT
-
j �� slop
r�_ > REGENT AVE N
'n 'JA I It )J a _ - - - - N 3AY ll - _ -I� t
,Tf I - 1
u — uu OUAII AVE N
'N
t _J tt�L{ /.:' ') AV AUl13 /DOOT AVE N
c�� R
--- --- - - -- -_ N ' OUy1gU0 �, - r yG`` •�. n 3f
1 I I - I -I I -' k <_i< `./ P ORCHARD AVE N
1_II '3AY OUYIgUOI_y._. ` r�
�OftU1 rG . • r
1 , - ____ _ 3AV 3'llON r'r- t-t -1`ir V 3 "LION N `
--- --------- - - NOILE AVE
N__ 3A 11 - 1700
1T HT --
L.��� 4EE A!j I� ` uJO
AR AVE N
1600
AYE Z
_ -- -- - ,--- ' 411, , fi _ lEE A VE N
3UM
4
O o > IMEE AVE N
_ Z O 3nv 3Hnr
- --- - - - - -- - Ylf I -
r .AR+E AVE N
A
_ _ - - - INDIAN 13u0
3AV VNYIONI z
- - - -- - - — / � - — `_ ` I LID I NU AVE N
3.Y 111T1 -- - _ _ _ --
; T�, _ 1200
F -f. r HALIFAX AVE N
T Y /loo
X
' SIrNo —— — -- 'I
Lr� / _ :' - ' i IS ` -- - - - - - -- - -- - �� (' GRTLES ME N
S111U0 N 3A
1 �
:r� NYU��� # r a w _ ��� - - - � 1 - -1 ` 1Lll_1 l�1TIlLL1�
jA 3 AY N m FRANCE AVE N
n / �q NY L . 380U ` ►� 1 _ L- N 6
EIIIG
AV ON1M �_ _ �. m ` EYING AVE N
55 " 3700
:`�' , I - �; - %• T� l_� -+-�L r - - - - DREW AVE 11
Y AV 1A3U0 - — �
_ _ -, _
3600
r1_ ;�C I z
�1 IT- I- U 11I � T �:.� �.:� P�� - 41ND4 AVE H
IG� �1� ;! � q 3500
--
I It JI ITl _< ;Y - \\``:`: T Z _ WARD A YE N
11 1 � 3 I 3100
, � �\ � AVE H
Y "`.\ `:�� .r O TT A
�� .. . . .
rOF eoh
m-t*d
. 9 September 1996
Memorandum
To: Ron Warren
P -&- Zoning
City of Brooklyn Center
By:--_ 5inek
Re: Iten Chevrolet
Ears -1407 96D70
Subj: Site Plan Submittal
nli lg.ntlr- teleptloi3e- ddayT6- Sepiemhett996fynu_ we- provide
you with the landscape point calculations and landscape plan for the referenced Project.
te:
Total Points Required: 2 acres x 80 points + 6.56 acres x 60 points - 553.6 points
Shade- Irees & aax-�—. 25 0 Oniat's PA _= 250 Qoints
Coniferous T T � rees , (37 max.): 35 6 points ea = 210.0 points
Shrubs (277 max.) � 1"�
t5`�— 22.S..0.oints
• 150 @ .5 points ea = 75.0 points
557-5..pnynts
The final composition of trees and shrubs will be dependent on the guidelines to be established
for-
Rn Pal gn.
Due the lack of guidelines for the Brooklyn Boulevard project, as we discussed, Marty Iten is
pr�9.- a- Lettet.tcL- yau- tiisciusiugihe intent_tn he
time the Brooklyn Boulevard project is undertaken.
Additionally,_ eprfo4zeej 1gith please fin x�1�° cies
of the full size plans previously submitted with the application.
cagy: Manx Iten
Jim Halek
F ile
•
• 2935 Everest Lane North • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 • SBINEK@AOL.COM •
• Voice - (612) 476 -4133 • Facsimile/Data - (612) 404 -9317 •
Project 0 8 u - --
�� ; tr •r•i of • ,�/!
od
1
, 1
1 ,
1 __,.. -_. . .
OL
-► �a�. i."- -.x._..i_.- ..__..._ "- .�.s_.i —.1 . +— r: —*-� —� Ite� Inn
1
to ;, !•V
ti � � i • l +_'� 4 1 �nyA+
i
}
0
r . `
+ V
i : . � l.lfi..yl.r.��_l,_.►+IJ � 1..1 1.x.;.1.
li r • La If M If n� 1
hi I
tj
1
.
w 4.. I iV
w (�
w
11' r
k Rd .. „r:K •.
t ^M w
1 4 1"n
RIN
L
I �••• t, a Z O Y
* `t W o
tur .A.n ns
In
F1ntsr pl�t�
i _ e
AA
LA 11
• •II,i �n�tl.
t 1
v. !
1
W
x
1 z
1
w
1 I
r N d
t TRI I " F
1
r+
F. ex
N 11 . ..tnr ii
L-4 : �t
m
1
W
1 . 5 T" �. � : .r ��.... _ 1•�a. - ��,.�.�i� � K.. .n
f R
ITEM CHEVROLET CO,
IT 11 5 "TIma P 4f *7mtt*
6701 BROOKLYN BLVD. - BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429
PHONE 561 -9220
GAO
SEPTEMBER 11, 1996
RONALD A WARREN
PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
DEAR RON,
• IN REFERENCE TO THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR ITEN CHEVROLET. AT THIS
TIME I DO BELIEVE WE ARE PREMATURE IN MAKING ANY DECISIONS TO LANDSCAPE
REQUIREMENTS. WITHOUT THE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FROM HENNIPEN COUNTY AND
THE KNOWLEDGE OF FUTURE EXPANSION OF BROOKLYN BLVD., IT IS DIFFICULT TO PUT
ANY DRAWING TOGETHER AT THIS TIME. HOWEVER, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THE
FUTURE, LOOKING AT LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR BROOKLYN BLVD. AND AT SEE WHAT
OPPORTUNITIES ITEN CHEVROLET MAY HAVE. I LOOK FORWARD TO TALKING TO YOU ON
THIS TOPIC IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS
MATTER PLEASE CALL ME AT 561 -9220.
SINCERELY,
MARTIN J. ITEN
•
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
•
REGULAR SESSION
SEPTEMBER 12, 1996
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chair Willson at 7:30
p.m.
ROLL CALL
Chair Tim Willson, Commissioners Donald Booth, Mark Holmes, and Dianne Reem were present.
Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning and Zoning Specialist Ronald
Warren and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Arlene Bergfalk. Commissioner Graydon
Boeck was excused.
ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE
Mr. Warren introduced the newly appointed Planning Commissioners. He administered Oaths of
Office to Mr. Brian Walker who fills the remainder of a term expiring December 31, 1996, and to
Mr. Rex Newman who fills the remainder of a term expiring December 31, 1997. Commissioners
Walker and Newman assumed their positions as Commissioners and began participation in the
meeting at this point. Both Commissioners are eligible for reappointment to the Commission when
their respective terms expire.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 29 1996
There was a motion by Commissioner Holmes, seconded by Chair Willson, to approve the minutes
of the August 29, 1996 meeting. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioners Booth, Newman,
Reem and Walker abstained.
CHAIRPERSONS EXPLANATION
Chair Willson explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the
Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the
Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final
decisions in these matters.
APPLICATION NO. 96014 (ITEN CHEVROLET)
Chair Willson introduced Application No. 96014, a request from Iten Chevrolet for site and building
plan approval and a special use permit to construct a 40'x 80' addition to the Iten dealership at 6701
Brooklyn Boulevard.
The Secretary presented the staff report using overhead transparencies to show the location and site
plans for the building addition. (See details in Planning Commission Information Sheet for
• Application No. 96014 dated 9- 12 -96.) A special use permit is required to construct this building
because the property is zoned C -2 and the sale of motor vehicles at retail is a special use in that
9 -12 -96 1
zoning district. The addition will house a new service write -up area for the dealership. A new
entrance to the showroom also will be constructed at the east end of the existing building.
• Because the City is considering an area -wide drainage pond that would meet the Shingle Creek
Watershed Management Commission's requirements, Mr. Warren explained that the applicant
requested deferment of certain required watershed improvements on the site. The City Engineer has
been informed by the watershed commission that such deferment is appropriate. The staff, therefore,
recommends deferral of the drainage- related improvements.
The applicant also requests deferment of required landscaping because of the plans to widen and
improve Brooklyn Boulevard in this area in 1998. Because of the need to provide green strip and
landscaping along Brooklyn Boulevard for that project, the applicant requests that all required
landscaping be completed in conjunction with the City /County improvement project. Mr. Warren
stated that the applicant did not submit a formal landscape plan, but submitted a memorandum
calculating the number of trees and shrubs required to meet the required points under the City's
landscape point system. However, a letter from Mr. Marty Iten is forthcoming to affirm Iten's intent
to participate in the Brooklyn Boulevard landscape improvement project.
The staff recommends approval of landscaping deferment because it would be appropriate given the
anticipated improvement plans and would be consistent with a similar deferment recommended by
the Planning Commission in 1993 related to an addition to the Ryan Olds property on Brooklyn
Boulevard.
The Secretary recommended approval of a special use permit and site and building plans for Iten
• Chevrolet subject to the conditions outlined in the staff memorandum.
Commissioner Reem inquired whether there was any new information from Hennepin County
regarding the 1998 improvement plans. Mr. Warren explained that to date an agreement between
the County and the City has not been finalized. He reviewed the coordination necessary for the
project between the County, the City, and MnDOT, each having specific responsibilities. The City
needs an appropriate one -year lead time to acquire the necessary property for widening of the
Boulevard, therefore final agreement should be reached this year. Some of the funding for the
project comes from Federal grants which are also time sensitive.
The Commissioners discussed the effect the 15' greenstrip would have on parking and it was
determined that although re- configuration of the parking areas would be necessary, the property
would still meet the City's parking ordinance. Mr. Warren noted that acquisition of land for
widening the Boulevard will come from the east side rather than from the Iten property (west side).
PUBLIC HEARING (APPLICATION NO 96014,)
There was a motion by Commissioner Booth, seconded by Commissioner Reem, to open the public
hearing on Application No. 96014 at 8:08 p.m. The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Steve Binek, architect representing Iten Chevrolet, reiterated that a deferral of landscaping is
• requested because of the Brooklyn Boulevard improvement project proposed for 1998. He explained
that without a design from the County /City for landscaping under that project it is difficult to provide
9 -12 -96 2
a formal plan for the Iten property at this time. Mr. Marty Iten said his letter of intent to comply
with the project landscape plan will be received by the City on September 13, 1996. Mr. Iten
believes that until a definitive plan for private /public landscaping is available, it is difficult to
. provide a specific plan for landscaping related to this application. Mr. Iten pointed out additional
shrubs were incorporated during installation of a new sign on the property this summer. He
supported the Brooklyn Boulevard improvement plan which would enhance and benefit the
dealership.
The Commissioners considered the possibility of deferring landscaping related to this application
and a reasonable time frame for completion of landscaping should the Brooklyn Boulevard
improvement project not come to fruition. The basic reasons for landscaping in urban areas were
reviewed. Messrs. Binek and Iten responded to questions from the Commissioners regarding
possible distribution and placement of the trees and shrubs required on the property under the point
system.
The Commissioners agreed that deferral of a landscape plan at this time was appropriate. The
Commission requested that before a building permit is issued to the applicant, an agreement be
signed stating that a landscaping plan will be submitted to the Planning Commission within 90 days
upon determination that the Brooklyn Boulevard project will not commence in 1998. In addition,
the Commissioners suggested that the applicant consider providing some landscaping on a volunteer
basis in connection with its current construction plans.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Chair Willson called for further comments from the public. There was a motion by Commissioner
• Booth, seconded by Commissioner Reem, to close the public hearing at 8:45 p.m. The motion
passed unanimously.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 96014
There was a motion by Commissioner Booth, seconded by Commissioner Holmes, to recommend
to the Council that it approve Application No. 96014, submitted by Iten Chevrolet, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with
respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits.
2. The building addition is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system
to meet all NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in
accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
3. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City
Ordinances.
4. A Special Use Permit is granted to the applicant for the addition as proposed by the
plans. Any expansion or alteration of these plans shall require an additional
amendment to this Special Use Permit.
•
9 -12 -96 3
5. This Special Use Permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and
regulations, any violation thereof, could be grounds for revocation.
6. Landscape improvements consistent with the landscape point system may be deferred
for installation to the time of the Brooklyn Boulevard widening project proposed for
1998. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall enter into an
agreement acknowledging their responsibility to provide said landscaping and
assuring that it will be completed in conjunction with other landscape improvements
proposed for the 1998 project or submit a formal landscape plan within 90 days of
a determination that the 1998 project will not go forward.
Voting in favor: Chair Willson, Commissioners Booth, Holmes, Newman, Reem and Walker. The
motion passed unanimously.
The Council will consider the recommendation at its September 23, 1996 meeting. The applicant
must be present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Commissioners will require
that the application be returned to the Commission for re- consideration.
OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Warren reviewed progress on various projects within the City.
The current geographic representation of the Commissioners was noted. Chair Willson pointed out
that Commissioners may wish to attend neighborhood meetings including those outside their specific
area of representation.
• The Commission's next meeting will be on September 26, 1996.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Holmes, seconded by Commissioner Booth, to adjourn the
Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:08
p.m.
Chair
Recorded and transcribed by:
Arlene Bergfalk
Timesaver Off Site Secretarial
9 -12 -96 4
. .................. - ------ - .................
...............
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR MYRNA KRAGNESS
FROM: COUNCILMEMBER KRISTEN MAN
SUBJECT: BROOKLYN CENTER PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 1996
CC: BROOKLYN CENTER PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION CHAIRPERSON ARVID
SORENSON
THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT MY SCHEDULE CONFLICTS WITH THE
BROOKLYN CENTER PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETINGS. I AM NO
LONGER AVAILABLE TO SERVE AS YOUR APPOINTED LIAISON TO THE PARKS
AND RECREATION COMMISSION. IT WAS A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH THE
COMMISSION MEMBERS. PLEASE ACCEPT MY RESIGNATION AS COUNCIL LIAISON
EFFECTIVE TODAY.
•
•
MEMORANDUM
1. a .... .............. ........... .. .. ..... ...
TO: MAYOR MYRNA KRAGNESS
FROM: COUNCILMEMBER KRISTEN MAN
SUBJECT: BROOKLYN CENTER CRIME PRE NTION PROGRAM
DATE: SEPTEMBER 9,1996
CC: $ROOKLYN CENTER CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM PRESIDENT BOBBYE MOYLAN
THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT MY SCHEDULE CONFLICTS WITH THE
BROOKLYN CENTER CIUME PREVENTION PROGRAM MEETINGS. I AM NO
LONGER AVAILABLE TO SERVE AS YOUR APPOINTED LIAISON TO THE CRIME
PREVENTION PROGRAM. IT WAS A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH THE PROGRAM
BOARDMEMBERS. PLEASE ACCEPT MY RESIGNATION AS COUNCIL LIAISON
EFFECTIVE TODAY.
•
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its
• adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY COUNCIL HANDBOOK REGARDING
CITIZEN INPUT AT COUNCIL WORK SESSIONS
WHEREAS the City t ty Counc conducts Council work sessions as deemed necessary;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council values citizen input; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it wishes to modify work sessions
as set forth in the City Council Handbook.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center that the City Council Handbook be and hereby is amended to add the following to
the section entitled Work Sessions as follows:
Public input regarding work session matters will be allowed at the end of the Council
work session. Public input will be limited to a maximum of five minutes per person.
• Any member of the public desiring to address the Council shall raise his/her hand,
be recognized by the presiding officer, then proceed with their discussion. All
remarks and questions shall be addressed to the presiding officer and not to any
individual Councilmember, staff member, or other person. During the public input
portion of the work session, all remarks shall be limited to the subject under
discussion. No person shall enter into any discussion without being recognized by
the presiding officer.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
•
31 City of Brooklyn Center
�c
A great place to start. A great place to stay.
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Myrna Kragness
Councilmember Kathleen Carmody
Councilmember Debra Hilstrom
Councilmember Kristen Mann
Councilmember Charles F. Nichols, Sr. r
:J
f '
FROM: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager
DATE: September 19, 1996
SUBJECT: Meeting With BRW and Planning Commission to Begin Comprehensive Plan
Process
Attached please find a memorandum from Mr. Warren suggesting certain dates for a possible joint
• meeting between the City Council, Planning Commission, and BRW regarding the Comprehensive
Plan Process. I would suggest Thursday, October 24, 1996, or Wednesday, October 30, 1996, as
possible meeting dates. Since the Council has either a work session or a regular session on October
7, 15, 21, and 28, the 24th or 30th would be the only days with a break between a Council meeting
and this meeting. October 9 is the day after the Discover the Center organizational summit, and
Thursday October 31 is Halloween, which may present conflicts.
The purpose of this meeting is to obtain City Council input at the beginning of the consultant's
(BRW) organization of the process and development of focus groups and an agenda for developing
the Comprehensive Plan update. This is a crucial meeting so that the Council can identify issues for
this important process.
Attachment
•
6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300
Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 9 FAX (612) 569 -3494
An Affirmative Action/ Equal Opportunities Employer
• MEMO
To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager
From: Ronald A. Warren, Planning and Zoning Specialist
Subject: Possible Dates for Joint City Council/Planning Commission Meeting
Date: September 19, 1996
The following is a list of potential meeting dates for a joint City Council/Planning
Commission meeting with BRW to `kick off the Comprehensive Plan update:
Date Day Location
October 3 Tuesday Council Chambers
October 9 Wednesday. Council Chambers
(Human Rights and Resource Commission
meets this night - Conference Room B)
October 16 Wednesday ??
(Crime Prevention Commission meets this
night in Council Chambers.)
October 22 Tuesday Council Chambers
October 24 Thursday Council Chambers
October 30 Wednesday Council Chambers
October 31 Thursday Council Chambers
(This is a Planning Commission Study
Session. No business items would be
scheduled.)
•
r
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Myrna Kragness
Councilmember Kathleen Carmody
Councilmember Debra Hilstrom
Councilmember Kristen Mann
Councilmember Charles F. Nichols, Sr.
FROM: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager ,
DATE: September 19, 1996
SUBJECT: City Council Agenda Item No. 9d
Councilmember Carmody: Suggestion to Schedule a Joint Meeting with Park and Recreation
Commission on November 18 or 19,1996.
•
•
9�
•
Memorandum
To: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager
From: Brad Hoffman, Community Development Director
Date: September 19, 1996
Subject: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 12 of the City Ordinances Relating to
the Licensing of Rental Dwellin g Units
On Monday evening, the City Council will have before them a proposed amendment to
Chapter 12 of the City Ordinances. Three changes to the current ordinance are offered for
a first reading. The first change requires that an inspection be scheduled within two
weeks of receipt of an application and fee for a rental license. Second, no application for
a license will be submitted to the Council until all life, health, and safety violations have
been corrected. Third, the license fee and application shall be due 90 days prior to the
expiration date.
The two -week requirement fof scheduling an inspection is necessary because all too often
• the applicant will submit the application and pay the fee but not schedule an inspection
until the period just before the expiration of the license. As a result, inspections that lead
to compliance orders are often not corrected by the time the license expires.
The health safety issue enforces the position of the City that rental units must be
maintained and fit for habitation. It also provides assurances to the Council that all
serious violations have been resolved prior to any Council consideration of the license.
The 90 days versus the 60 days again reflects the need to start the process early enough to
perform an inspection, issue correction orders if necessary, and do a compliance
inspection before the license expires. Currently, if the owner fails to schedule an
inspection in a timely manner (which is not all that unusual) and compliance orders are
issued, chances are the units will be unlicensed for a period of time.
The intent of the proposed changes are all directed at getting the buildings inspected, and
any violations are corrected without a lapse in the licensing of the property. It also
mandates that no license will be issued whenever a life safety issue is involved.
•
• CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1996, at
7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek
Parkway, to consider an amendment to Chapter 12 of the City Ordinances relating to the
licensing of rental dwelling units.
Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in
advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 569 -3300 to make arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES
RELATING TO THE LICENSING OF RENTAL DWELLING UNITS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 12 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is
hereby amended as follows:
Section 12 -901 LICENSING OF RENTAL UNITS. From and . er une '
447 -5 No person shall operate a rental dwelling without first having obtained a license
to do so from the City of Brooklyn Center as hereinafter provided. After expirettieft e€
an iltitia4 1i . b
� , e Each such operating license shall be issued biennially and shall expire on the
anniversary date of issuance. License renewals shall be filed at least 69 90 days prior to
license expiration date. Within two weeks of receipt of a complete application and of the
license fee required by Section 12 -902 the Compliance Official shall schedule an
inspection. No application for an initial or renewal license shall be submitted to the City
Council until the Compliance Official has determined that all life health safety violations
or discrepancies have been corrected.
Section 12 -902. LICENSE FEES. License fees, as set forth by city council
resolution, shall be due 69 90 days prior to the license expiration date; in the cases of
new unlicensed dwellings, license fees shall be due upon issuance of the certificate of
occupancy; in t1te eases of lieensing periods of less thwt two years, lieettse fees shd4l
}rorated -monfl-Ay.
ORDINANCE NO.
• o
A delinquency penalty of 5% of the license fee for each day of operation without
a valid license shall be charged operators of rental dwellings. Once issued a license is
nontransferable and the licensee shall not be entitled to a refund of any license fee upon
revocation or suspension; however, the licensee shall be entitled to a license fee refund,
prorated monthly, upon proof of transfer of legal control or ownership.
A fee, as set by city council resolution, shall be charged for all reinspections
necessary after the first reinspection. The reinspection fee(s) will be payable at the time
of license renewal for the property, in the case of rental housing and at the time of
recertification of occupancy for nonresidential properties.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty (30) days following
its legal publication.
Adopted this day of , 1996.
Mayor
•
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Strikeouts indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.)
•
s
• MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 19, 1996
TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager
FROM: Charlie Hansen, Finance Director C H
SUBJECT: Resolution Awarding the Sale of $1,440,000 General Obligation Improvement
Bonds, Series 1996A; Fixing Their Form and Specification; Directing Their
Execution and Delivery; and Providing for their Payment
This resolution awards the sale of improvement bonds to be supported by general property taxes
and special assessments on benefited property. Proposals will be opened on September 23, 1996
at 11:00 A.M. at the offices of Springsted Incorporated. The resolution to officially award the
sale of the bonds will be prepared by bond counsel after the opening and will be handed out at the
City Council meeting. A representative of the city's financial advisor, Springsted Inc. will be
present at the City Council meeting to answer any questions. Final approval will depend upon
City Council action. Proceeds of the bond sale should be received by the City in mid November.
Proceeds of this issue will be used to reimburse the city for the reconstruction of streets in the
Orchard Lane East area, the Logan /James /Knox area, and the 69th Avenue improvement. On
September 9, 1996, Resolutions 96 -175, 96 -178, and 96 -181 certified the special assessment of
benefited properties as provided by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. The special assessments are
paying about half of the total project costs and will be collected over a 10 year period. Property
taxes will be responsible for the remaining half of the costs.
Moody's Investors Service has confirmed a rating of Al on this bond issue and confirmed the Al
rating on the City's previous bond issues. A copy of the rating is attached. Also attached is a
copy of the Official Statement for this bond issue, prepared by Springsted Inc. and the City's staff.
•
Moody Municipal
L, •
Daily Rating Recap
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Rating date; September 17, 1996
Moody's rating: Al
General on Obli ati Improvement Bonds, Series 1996A
Obligation P
Sale: $1,440,000 This fully developed suburb borrows annually to finance
Date of Sale: September 23 various redevelopment and infrastructure improvements.
Type: Competitive Debt burden is slightly above average, but remains man-
Security: General obligation, unlimited tax. Addition- ageable as significant support for debt service require-
ally secured by a pledge from special assessments levied ments is derived from tax increments, special
against benefited property. assessments and enterprise revenues. An aggressive
Use of Proceeds: Proceeds will be used to finance retirement schedule is a favorable characteristic of the
street improvement projects within the city. city's debt management. The city's annually updated
Last Rating change: August 1980: Ato Al. 10 -year capital plan indicates that continued borrowing
Update of related ratings: for various improvements is likely to continue; however,
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota voter approval will be required to undertake several
• Moody's rating: Al previously identified facility improvements.
General Obligation State Road Bonds Mature Minneapolis Suburb Has Experienced Ero-
Credit Comment: The Al rating on the general obliga- sion in Taxable Valuation And Socioeconomic
tion bonds for the City of Brooklyn Center has been Profile
confirmed based upon the following credit factors: The economic base of this first tier suburb of Minneapo-
Healthy General Fund Position Alleviates Concern lis has experienced some erosion over the past several
Over Weaknesses Displayed by Other Operating years, as evidenced by a weakened socioeconomic pro -
Funds file and declines in taxable valuation. While the 1990
census revealed that city housing values and resident
Conservative budgeting has enabled the city to accumu- income levels were still above average, their growth
late a sizable general fund balance over the last three during the previous decade had lagged behind that of
years. Additionally, officials indicate that year -to -date both Hennepin County and the state. As is typical of
results are outperforming the original budget; copse- many mature communities, a decline in the city's popu-
quently, another operating surplus is expected. The lation is principally due to the smaller number of persons
maintenance of a healthy general fund balance remains a
key rating factor, given the weak condition of one of the per household. Property tax appeals by the city's sizable
commercial sector contributed to the drop in taxable
city's tax increment districts as well as the uncertainty values between 1991 and 1994. Although the tax base
regarding the outcome of property tax appeals filed by stabilized in 1995 and the overall number of outstanding
the city's largest taxpayer. appeals has declined from previous years, a claim by
Manageable Debt Position Characterized by Sig- Brooklyn Center's largest taxpayer, the Brookdale Shop-
nificant Support From Non -Levy Sources ping Mall, has not yet been resolved.
2 As of September 17, 1996 Moody`s Municipal D aily Rating Recap
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (continued)
• At this time, we have also reviewed and confirmed the bonds, which is secured by both the b city's general obli-
Al rating on the city's general obligation state aid road gation pledge and state aid road appropriations.
analyst: Steven J. Bocamazo
(212) 553 -7168
®Copyright 1996 by Moody's Investors Service, Inc, 99 Church Street, New York, New York 10007.
All rights reserved. ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS COPYRIGHTED IN THE NAME OF MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE, INC. ( "MOODY'S "),
AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED,
DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM
OR MANNER ORBY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY'S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT.
All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY'S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well
as other factors, however, such information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind and MOODY'S, in particular, makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, as
to the accuracy, timeliness, completeness, merchantability orfitness for any particular purpose of any such information. Under no circumstances shall MOODY'S have any liability to
any person or entity for (a) any loss or damage in whole or in part caused by, resulting from, or relating to, any error (negligent or otherwise) or other circumstance or contingency
S within or outside the control of MOODY'S or any of its directors, officers, employees or agents in connection with the procurement, collection, compilation, analysis, interpretation,
communication, publication or delivery of any such information, or (b) any direct, indirect special, consequential, compensatory or incidental damages whatsoever (including without
limitation, lostprofits), even if MOODY'S is advised in advance of the possibility of such damages, resulting from the use of or inability rouse, anv such information.
The credit ratings, if any, constituting part of the information contained herein are, and must be construed solely as, statements of opinion and not statements of fact or
recommendations to purchase, sell or hold any securities NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE
BY MOODY'S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER Each rating or other opinion must be weighed solely as one factor in any investment decision made by or on
behalf of any user of the information contained herein, and each such user must accordingly make its own study and evaluation of each security and of each issuer and guarantor of, and
each provider of credit support for, each security that it may consider purchasing, holding or selling. Pursuant to Section 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933, MOODY'S herebv
discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MOODY'S have, prior to
assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MOODY'S for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,000 to $350,000.
OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 9, 1996
0 Rating: Requested from Moody's
NEW ISSUE Investors Service
In the opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, Bond Counsel, under existing laws, regulations, rulings and decisions, assuming
compliance with the covenants set forth in the Resolutions, the interest on the Bonds is not includable in the gross income of the
owners thereof for federal income tax purposes or in taxable net income of individuals, estates or trusts for Minnesota income tax
purposes, and is not a preference item for purposes of the computation of the federal alternative minimum tax or the computation of
Minnesota alternative minimum tax imposed on individuals, trusts and estates. Interest on the Bonds is includable in the
calculation of certain federal and Minnesota taxes imposed on corporations. (For a description of related issues, see 'Tax
Exemption" herein.)
$1,440,000
City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota
General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1996A
(Book Entry Only)
Dated Date: November 1, 1996 Interest Due: Each February 1 and August 1,
commencing August 1, 1997
The Bonds will mature February 1 as follows:
1998 $115,000 2002 $145,000 2005 $155,000
1999 $135,000 2003 $145,000 2006 $155,000
2000 $140,000 2004 $150,000 2007 $160,000
2001 $140,000
The City may elect on February 1, 2005, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or
after February 1, 2006 at a price of par plus accrued interest.
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City pledges its full faith and
credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special
assessments against benefited property. The proceeds of the Bonds will be used to finance
various improvements within the City.
Proposals must be for not less than $1,422,720 and accrued interest on the total principal
amount of the Bonds. Proposals must be accompanied by a good faith deposit in the form of a
certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $14,400, payable to the
order of the City. Proposals shall specify rates in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1 %.
Rates must be in ascending order. The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of True Interest
Cost (TIC).
The Bonds will be bank - qualified tax - exempt obligations pursuant to Section 265(b)(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and will not be subject to the alternative minimum
tax for individuals.
I
The Bonds will be issued as fully registered Bonds without coupons and, when issued, will be
registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ( "DTC ").
DTC will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases may be made in book -
entry form only, in the principal amount of $5,000 and integral multiples thereof. Purchasers will
not receive certificates representing their interest in the Bonds purchased. (See "Book Entry
System" herein.) The City will name the registrar and will pay for registration services. The
Bonds will be available for delivery at DTC within 40 days after award.
PROPOSALS RECEIVED: September 23, 1996 (Monday) until 12:00 Noon, Central Time
AWARD: September 23, 1996 (Monday) at 7:00 P.M., Central Time
Further information may be obtained from
SPRINGSTED SPRINGSTED Incorporated, Financial Advisor to
the Issuer, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100,
PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 (612) 223 -3000
For purposes of compliance with Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission,
this document, as the same may be supplemented or corrected by the Issuer from time to time
(collectively, the "Official Statement "), may be treated as an Official Statement with respect to
the Obligations described herein that is deemed final as of the date hereof (or of any such
supplement or correction) by the Issuer, except for the omission of certain information referred
to in the succeeding paragraph.
The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the
maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Obligations, together with any other
information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the Issuer with
respect to the Obligations, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. Any such addendum shall,
on and after the date thereof, be fully incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference.
By awarding the Obligations to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a Proposal
therefor, the Issuer agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such
award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which
the Obligations are awarded copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda
described in the preceding paragraph in the amount specified in the Terms of Proposal.
The Issuer designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the
Obligations are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official
Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a Proposal with
respect to the Obligations agrees thereby that if its bid is accepted by the Issuer (i) it shall
accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating
Underwriters of the Obligations for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating
Underwriter of the Final Official Statement.
No dealer, broker, salesman or other person has been authorized by the Issuer to give any
information or to make any representations with respect to the Obligations, other than as
contained in the Official Statement or the Final Official Statement, and if given or made, such
other information or representations must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the
Issuer. Certain information contained in the Official Statement and the Final Official Statement
may have been obtained from sources other than records of the Issuer and, while believed to
be reliable, is not guaranteed as to completeness or accuracy. THE INFORMATION AND
EXPRESSIONS OF OPINION IN THE OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND THE FINAL OFFICIAL
STATEMENT ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE, AND NEITHER THE DELIVERY OF THE
OFFICIAL STATEMENT OR THE FINAL OFFICIAL STATEMENT NOR ANY SALE MADE
UNDER EITHER SUCH DOCUMENT SHALL CREATE ANY IMPLICATION THAT THERE HAS
BEEN NO CHANGE IN THE AFFAIRS OF THE ISSUER SINCE THE DATE THEREOF.
References herein to laws, rules, regulations, resolutions, agreements, reports and other
documents do not purport to be comprehensive or definitive. All references to such documents
are qualified in their entirety by reference to the particular document, the full text of which may
contain qualifications of and exceptions to statements made herein. Where full texts have not
been included as appendices to the Official Statement or the Final Official Statement, they will
be furnished on request.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page(s
Termsof Proposal ............................................................................ ............................... i -iv
Schedule of Bond Years ................................................................... ............................... v
Introductory Statement ...................................................................... ............................... 1
ContinuingDisclosure ........................................................................ ............................... 1
TheBonds ......................................................................................... ............................... 2 -3
Authorityand Purpose ....................................................................... ............................... 4
Securityand Financing ..........................•........................................... ............................... 4
FutureFinancing ................................................................................ ............................... 4
Litigation............................................................................................ ............................... 4
Legality.............................................................................................. ............................... 4 -5
TaxExemption ................................................................................... ............................... 5
Bank - Qualified Tax - Exempt Obligations ............................................ ............................... 6
Rating................................................................................................ ............................... 6
FinancialAdvisor ............................................................................... ............................... 6
Certification........................................................................................ ............................... 6
CityProperty Values .......................................................................... ............................... 7 -8
CityIndebtedness .............................................................................. ............................... 8 -10
City Tax Rates, Levies and Collections .............................................. ............................... 11
Fundson Hand .................................................................................. ............................... 11
CityInvestments ................................................................................ ............................... 12
General Information Concerning the City ........................................... ............................... 12 -15
Governmental Organization and Services .......................................... ............................... 15 -16
Proposed Form of Legal Opinion ............................................. ............................... Appendix
Continuing Disclosure Certificate .............................................. ............................... Appendix II
Summary of Tax Levies, Payment Provisions, and
Minnesota Real Property Valuation ....................................... ............................... Appendix III
Annual Financial Statements ................................................... ............................... Appendix IV
ProposalForms ....................................................................... ............................... Inserted
THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS
ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS:
TERMS OF PROPOSAL
$1,440,000
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1996A
(BOOK ENTRY ONLY)
Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Monday, September 23, 1996, until 12:00 Noon,
Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint
Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award
of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day.
r
SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS
Proposals may be submitted in a sealed envelope or by fax (612) 223 -3002 to Springsted.
Signed Proposals, without final price or coupons, may be submitted to Springsted prior to the
time of sale. The bidder shall be responsible for submitting to Springsted the final Proposal
price and coupons, by telephone (612) 223 -3000 or fax (612) 223 -3002 for inclusion in the
submitted Proposal. Springsted will assume no liability for the inability of the bidder to reach
Springsted prior to the time of sale specified above. Proposals may also be filed electronically
via PARITY, in accordance with PARITY Rules of Participation and the Terms of Proposal,
within a one -hour period prior to the time of sale established above, but no Proposals will be
received after that time. If provisions in the Terms of Proposal conflict with the PARITY Rules
of Participation, the Terms of Proposal shall control. The normal fee for use of PARITY may be
obtained from PARITY and such fee shall be the responsibility of the bidder. For further
information about PARITY, potential bidders may contact PARITY at 100 116th Avenue SE,
Suite 100, Bellevue, Washington 98004, telephone (206) 635 -3545. Neither the City nor
Springsted Incorporated assumes any liability if there is a malfunction of PARITY. All bidders
are advised that each Proposal shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder
and the City to purchase the Bonds regardless of the manner of the Proposal submitted.
DETAILS OF THE BONDS
The Bonds will be dated November 1, 1996, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest
payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1997. Interest will
be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months.
The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
1998 $115,000 2002 $145,000 2005 $155,000
1999 $135,000 2003 $145,000 2006 $155,000
2000 $140,000 2004 $150,000 2007 $160,000
2001 $140,000
BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM
The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution of
Bonds made to the public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond,
-i-
representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be
registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ( "DTC "),
New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases
of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof of a single
maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its participants.
Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as registered owner of
the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of DTC will be the
responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners by
participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial
owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to deposit the
Bonds with DTC.
REGISTRAR
The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City
will pay for the services of the registrar.
OPTIONAL REDEMPTION
The City may elect on February 1, 2005, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or
after February 1, 2006. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part at the option of the
City and in such manner as the City shall determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are
called for redemption, the City will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be
prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to
be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in
such maturity to be redeemed. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
SECURITY AND PURPOSE 40
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and
credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special -
assessments against benefited property. The proceeds will be used for public improvements
within the City.
TYPE OF PROPOSALS
Proposals shall be for not less than $1,422,720 and accrued interest on the total principal
amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in
the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $14,400,
payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany each proposal. If a
Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a
bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to
Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must
identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the
Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is
required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's
check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central
Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that
time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement.
The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at
settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to
comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can
be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the
City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date
without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or
1/8 of 1 %. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single
-ii-
rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be
accepted. -
AWARD
The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true
interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in
accordance with customary practice, will be controlling.
The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of
matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals
without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply
with the terms herein.
BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION
If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment
therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the
issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of
the Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of
insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the City has requested and received a
rating on the Bonds from a rating agency, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating
agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser.
Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to the
purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on
the Bonds.
CUSIP NUMBERS
If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the
Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect
thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the
Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers
shall be paid by the purchaser.
SETTLEMENT
Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the
purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be
subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Kennedy & Graven,
Chartered of Minneapolis, Minnesota, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation
certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or
equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than
12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds shall
have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to
the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said
terms for payment.
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE
In accordance with SEC Rule 15c2- 12(b)(5), the City will undertake, pursuant to the resolution
awarding sale of the Bonds, to provide annual reports and notices of certain events. A
description of this undertaking is set forth in the Official Statement. The purchaser's obligation
to purchase the Bonds will be conditioned upon receiving evidence of this undertaking at or
prior to delivery of the Bonds.
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent
information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official
Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any
prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated,
85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (612) 223 -3000.
The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the
maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other
information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect
to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any
underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no
more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the
senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded up to 60 copies
of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates
the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent
for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating
Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby
that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall
enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes
of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement.
Dated August 26, 1996 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Sharon Knutson
Clerk
I
-iv-
SCHEDULE OF BOND YEARS
$1,440,000
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1996A
Cumulative
Year Principal Bond Years Bond Years
1998 $115,000 143.7500 143.7500
1999 $135,000 303.7500 447.5000
2000 $140 455.0000 902.5000
2001 $140,000 595.0000 1,497.5000
2002 $145,000 761.2500 2,258.7500
2003 $145,000 906.2500 3,165.0000
2004 $150 1,087.5000 4,252.5000
2005 $155,000 1,278.7500 5,531.2500
2006 $155 c 1,433.7500 6,965.0000
2007 $160 c 1 8,605.0000
Average Maturity: 5.98 Years
Bonds Dated: November 1, 1996
Interest Due: August 1, 1997 and each February 1 and August 1 to maturity.
Principal Due: February 1, 1998 -2007 inclusive.
Optional Call: Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 2006 are callable
commencing February 1, 2005 and any date thereafter at par.
(See Terms of Proposal.)
c: subject to optional call
-v-
i
I
(This page was left blank intentionally.)
40
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
i
$1,440,000
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1996A
(BOOK ENTRY ONLY)
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
This Official Statement contains certain information regarding the City of Brooklyn Center,
Minnesota (the "City ") and its issuance of $1,440,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds,
Series 1996A (the 'Bonds" or the "Issue "). The Bonds are general obligations of the City for
which the City pledges its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes
without limit as to rate or amount. In addition, the City pledges special assessments against
benefited property.
Inquiries may be directed to Mr. Charles R. Hansen, Finance Director, City of Brooklyn Center,
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430, or by telephoning
(612) 569 -3345. Information may also be obtained from Springsted Incorporated, 85 East
Seventh Place, Suite 100, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101, or by telephoning (612) 223 -3000. If
information of a specific legal matter is desired, requests may be directed to Mr. Stephen Bubul,
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, Bond Counsel, 470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota
55402, or by telephoning (612) 337 -9300.
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE
In order to assist the Underwriters in complying with SEC Rule 15c2 -12 promulgated by the
Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
'Rule "), pursuant to the Award Resolution, the City has entered into an undertaking (the
"Undertaking ") for the benefit of holders of the Bonds to provide certain financial information
and operating data relating to the City to certain information repositories annually, and to
provide notices of the occurrence of certain events enumerated in the Rule to certain
information repositories or the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and to any state
information depository. The specific nature of the Undertaking, as well as the information to be
contained in the annual report or the notices of material events is set forth in the Continuing
Disclosure Certificate to be executed and delivered by the City at the time the Bonds are
delivered in substantially the form attached hereto as Appendix II. The City has never failed to
comply in all material respects with any previous undertakings under the Rule to provide annual
reports or notices of material events. A failure by the City to comply with the Undertaking will
not constitute an event of default on the Bonds (although holders will have any available
remedy at law or in equity). Nevertheless, such a failure must be reported in accordance with
the Rule and must be considered by any broker, dealer or municipal securities dealer before
recommending the purchase or sale of the Bonds in the secondary market. Consequently,
such a failure may adversely affect the transferability and liquidity of the Bonds and their market
price.
-1-
THE BONDS
40
General Description
The Bonds are dated as of November 1, 1996 and will mature annually on February 1, as set
forth on the cover of this Official Statement. The Bonds are issued in book entry form. Interest
on the Bonds is payable August 1, 1997 and semi - annually thereafter on February 1 and
August 1. Interest will be payable to the holder (initially Cede & Co.) registered on the books of
the registrar on the fifteenth day of the calendar month next preceding such interest payment
date. Principal of and interest on the Bonds will be paid as described in the section herein
entitled "Book Entry System."
Optional Redemption
The City may elect on February 1 2005 and on an day thereafter, to prepay the Bonds due
Y Y rY � Y Y � p p Y
on or after February 1, 2006. Redemption may be in whole or in part, and if in part, at the
option of the City and in such order as the City shall determine. If a maturity is prepaid only in
part, prepayments will be in increments of $5,000 of principal. All optional prepayments shall
be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
Book -Entry System
The Depository Trust Company ( "DTC "), New York, New York, will act as securities depository
for the Bonds. The Bonds will be issued as fully- registered securities registered in the name of
Cede & Co. (DTC's partnership nominee). One fully- registered certificate per maturity will be
issued in the principal amount of the Bonds maturing in such year, and will be deposited with
DTC.
DTC is a limited - purpose trust company organized under the New York Banking Law, a
"banking organization" within the meaning of the New York Banking Law, a member of the
Federal Reserve System, a "clearing corporation" within the meaning of the New York Uniform
Commercial Code, and a "clearing agency" registered pursuant to the provisions of Section 17A
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. DTC holds securities that its participants
( "Participants ") deposit with DTC. DTC also facilitates the settlement among Participants of
securities transactions, such as transfers and pledges in deposited securities through electronic
computerized book entry changes in Participants' accounts, thereby eliminating the need for
physical movement of securities certificates. Direct Participants ( "Direct Participants ") include
securities brokers and dealers, banks, trust companies, clearing corporations and certain other
organizations. DTC is owned by a number of its Direct Participants and by the New York Stock
Exchange, Inc., the American Stock Exchange, Inc., and the National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc. Access to the DTC system is also available to others such as securities brokers
and dealers, banks and trust companies that clear through or maintain a custodial relationship
with a Direct Participant, either directly or indirectly ( "Indirect Participants "). The Rules
applicable to DTC and its Participants are on file with the Securities and Exchange
9
Commission.
Purchases of Bonds under the DTC system must be made by or through Direct Participants,
which will receive a credit for the Bonds on DTC's records. The ownership interest of each
actual purchaser of each Certificate ( "Beneficial Owner ") is in turn to be recorded on the Direct
and Indirect Participants' records. Beneficial Owners will not receive written confirmation from
DTC of their purchase, but Beneficial Owners are expected to receive written confirmations
providing details of the transaction, as well as periodic statements of their holdings, from the
Direct or Indirect Participant through which the Beneficial Owner entered into the transaction.
-2-
Transfers of ownership interest in the Bonds are to be accomplished by entries made on the
books of Participants acting on behalf of Beneficial Owners. Beneficial Owners will not receive
certificates representing their ownership interest in securities, except in the event that use of
the book entry system for the Bonds is discontinued.
To facilitate subsequent transfers, all Bonds deposited by Participants with DTC are registered
in the name of DTC's partnership nominee, Cede & Co. The deposit of Bonds with DTC and
their registration in the name of Cede & Co. effect no change in beneficial ownership. DTC has
no knowledge of the actual Beneficial Owners of the Bonds. DTC's records reflect only the
identity of the Direct Participants to whose accounts such Bonds are credited, which may or
may not be the Beneficial Owners. The Participants will remain responsible for keeping
account of their holdings on behalf of their customers.
Conveyance of notices and other communications by DTC to Direct Participants, by Direct
Participants to Indirect Participants, and by Direct Participants and Indirect Participants to
Beneficial Owners will be governed by arrangements among them, subject to any statutory or
regulatory requirements as may be in effect from time to time.
Redemption notices for the Bonds shall be sent to Cede & Co. If less than all of the Bonds
within an issue are being redeemed, DTC's practice is to determine by lot the amount of the
interest of each Direct Participant in such issue to be redeemed.
Neither DTC nor Cede & Co. will consent or vote with respect to Bonds. Under its usual
procedures, DTC mails an Omnibus Proxy to the Registrar as soon as possible after the record
date. The Omnibus Proxy assigns Cede & Co.'s consenting or voting rights to those Direct
Participants to whose accounts the Bonds are credited on the record date (identified in a listing
attached to the Omnibus Proxy).
Principal and interest payments on the Bonds will be made to DTC. DTC's practice is to credit
Direct Participants' accounts on the payable date in accordance with their respective holdings
shown on DTC's records unless DTC has reason to believe that it will not receive payment on
payable date. Payments by Participants to Beneficial Owners will be governed by standing
instructions and customary practices, as is the case with securities held for the accounts of
customers in bearer form or registered in "street name," and will be the responsibility of such
Participant and not of DTC, the Registrar, or the City, subject to any statutory or regulatory
requirements as may be in effect from time to time. Payment of principal and interest to DTC is
the responsibility of the Registrar, disbursement of such payments to Direct Participants shall
be the responsibility of DTC, and disbursement of such payments to the Beneficial Owners shall
be the responsibility of Direct and Indirect Participants.
DTC may discontinue providing its services as securities depository with respect to the Bonds
at any time by giving reasonable notice to the Registrar. Under such circumstances, in the
event that a successor securities depository is not obtained, certificates are required to be
printed and delivered.
= The City may decide to discontinue use of the system of book entry transfers through DTC (or a
successor securities depository). In that event, certificates will be printed and delivered.
The information in this section concerning DTC and DTC's book entry system has been
obtained from sources that the City believes to be reliable, but the City takes no responsibility
for the accuracy thereof.
-3-
AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE
The Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475. Proceeds
will be used to finance street improvement projects within the City. The composition of the
Bonds is as follows:
Project Costs* $1,907,186
Allowance for Discount Bidding 17,280
Costs of Issuance 20,050
Less: Investment Earnings (1,687)
Assessment Stabilization Funds
and Prepaid Assessments (502.829
Total Bond Issue $1.440.000
" Includes engineering, administration, and contingency.
SECURITY AND FINANCING
In addition to the City's general obligation pledge, the City also pledges special assessments
against benefited property for repayment of the Bonds. Special assessments totaling
approximately $539,601 of principal are expected to be filed on or before November 30, 1996
for first collection in 1997. All assessments will be spread over a term of ten years with equal
annual payments of principal and interest charged on the unpaid balance at a rate of
approximately 7.0 %. In addition, a tax levy will be required, averaging approximately $118,755
annually, for repayment of the Bonds. Each August 1 interest payment will be made from first-
.
half collections of special assessments and taxes levied the previous year. Each subsequent
February 1 payment of principal and interest will be made from second -half collections, together
with surplus first -half collections.
FUTURE FINANCING
The City has no additional borrowing plans for at least the next 90 days.
LITIGATION
The City is not aware of any threatened or pending litigation affecting the validity of the Bonds
or the City's ability to meet its financial obligations.
LEGALITY
The Bonds are subject to approval as to certain matters by Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, of
Minneapolis, Minnesota as Bond Counsel. Bond Counsel has not participated in the
preparation of this Official Statement, except for the following "Tax Exemption" section, and will
-4-
not pass upon its accuracy, completeness, or sufficiency. Bond Counsel has not examined nor
attempted to examine or verify, any of the financial or statistical statements, or data contained
S in this official Statement and will express no opinion with respect thereto. A legal opinion in
substantially the form set out as Appendix I to this Official Statement, will be delivered at
closing.
TAX EXEMPTION
In the opinion of Bond Counsel, under existing statutes, regulations, rulings and decisions,
interest on the Bonds is not includable in the "gross income" of the owners thereof for purposes
of federal income taxation and is not includable in taxable net income of individuals, estates or
trusts for purposes of State of Minnesota income taxation, but is subject to State of Minnesota
franchise taxes measured by income that are imposed upon corporations and financial
institutions.
Noncompliance following the issuance of the Bonds with certain requirements of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, (the "Code ") and covenants of the Bond resolutions may
result in the inclusion of interest on the Bonds in gross income (for federal tax purposes) and
taxable net income for State of Minnesota tax purposes of the owners thereof. No provision
has been made for redemption of the Bonds, or for an increase in the interest rate on the
Bonds, in the event that interest on the Bonds becomes subject to United States or State of
Minnesota income taxation.
The Code imposes an alternative minimum tax with respect to individuals and corporations on
alternative minimum taxable income. Interest on the Bonds will not be treated as a preference
item in calculating alternative minimum taxable income. The Code provides, however, that for
taxable years beginning after 1989, a portion of the adjusted current earnings of a corporation
not otherwise included in the minimum tax base would be included for purposes of calculating
the alternative minimum tax that may be imposed with respect to corporations. Adjusted
current earnings include income received that is otherwise exempt from taxation such as
interest on the Bonds.
The Code imposes an environmental tax with respect to corporations on the excess of a
corporation's modified alternative minimum taxable income over $2,000,000. The
environmental tax applies with respect to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1986 and
before January 1, 1996.
The Code provides that in the case of an insurance company subject to the tax imposed by
Section 831 of the Code, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1986 the amount
which otherwise would be taken into account as "losses incurred" under Section 832(b)(5) shall
be reduced by an amount equal to 15% of the interest on the Bonds that is received or accrued
during the taxable year.
Interest on the Bonds may be included in the income of a foreign corporation for purposes of
the branch profits tax imposed by Section 884 of the Code. Under certain circumstances,
interest on the Bonds may be subject to the tax on "excess net passive income" of
S corporations imposed by Section 1375 of the Code.
The above is not a comprehensive list of all Federal tax consequences which may arise from
the receipt of interest on the Bonds. The receipt of interest on the Bonds may otherwise affect
the Federal or State income tax liability of the recipient based on the particular taxes to which
the recipient is subject and the particular tax status of other items or deductions. Bond Counsel
expresses no opinion regarding any such consequences. All prospective purchasers of the
Bonds are advised to consult their own tax advisors as to the tax consequences of, or tax
considerations for, purchasing or holding the Bonds.
-5-
BANK - QUALIFIED TAX - EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS
The City will designate the Bonds as bank - qualified tax - exempt obligations for purposes of
Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, relating to the ability of
financial institutions to deduct from income for federal income tax purposes, interest expense
that is allocable to carrying and acquiring tax - exempt obligations.
RATING
I
An application for a rating of the Bonds has been made to Moody's Investors Service
( "Moody's "), 99 Church Street, New York, New York. If a rating is assigned, it will reflect only
the opinion of Moody's. Any explanation of the significance of the rating may be obtained only
from Moody's.
There is no assurance that a rating, if assigned, will continue for any given period of time, or
that such rating will not be revised or withdrawn, if in the judgment of Moody's, circumstances
so warrant. A revision or withdrawal of the rating may have an adverse effect on the market
price of the Bonds.
FINANCIAL ADVISOR
The City has retained Springsted Incorporated, Public Finance Advisors, of St. Paul, Minnesota,
as financial advisor (the "Financial Advisor ") in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. In
preparing the Official Statement, the Financial Advisor has relied upon governmental officials,
and other sources, who have access to relevant data to provide accurate information for the
Official Statement, and the Financial Advisor has not been engaged, nor has it undertaken, to
independently verify the accuracy of such information. The Financial Advisor is not a public
accounting firm and has not been engaged to compile, review, examine or audit any information
in the Official Statement in accordance with accounting standards. The Financial Advisor is an
independent advisory firm and is not engaged in the business of underwriting, trading or
distributing municipal securities or other public securities and therefore will not participate in the
underwriting of the Bonds.
CERTIFICATION i
V
The City has authorized the distribution of this Official Statement for use in connection with the
initial sale of the Bonds.
As of the date of the settlement of the Bonds, the Purchaser will be furnished with a certificate
signed by the appropriate officers of the City. The certificate will state that as of the date of the
Official Statement, the Official Statement did not and does not as of the date of the certificate
contain any untrue statement of material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in order
to make the statements made - therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were
made, not misleading.
-6-
CITY PROPERTY VALUES
1995 Indicated Market Value of Taxable Property: $1,075,867,538
Calculated by dividing the county assessor's estimated market value of $987,646,400 by the 1995
sales ratio of 91 -8% for the City as determined by the State Department of Revenue.
1995 Taxable Net Tax Capacity: $21,317,771
1995 Net Tax Capacity $23,235,121
Less: Captured Tax Increment Tax Capacity (1,230,055)
Contribution to Fiscal Disparities (4,297,186)
Plus: Distribution from Fiscal Disparities 3,609.891
1995 Taxable Net Tax Capacity $21,317,771
1995 Taxable Net Tax Capacity by Class of Property
Residential Homestead $ 6,577,487 30.9%
Commercial /Industrial, Public Utility,
and Personal Property 12,150,229 56.9
Residential Non - Homestead 2,580,917 12.1
Other 9.138 0.1
Total $21,317,771 100.0%
Reflects adjustments for fiscal disparities and captured tax increment tax capacity.
Trend of Values
Indicated Estimated Taxable Tax
Year Market Value Market Value Capacity
1995 $1,075,867,538 $ 987,646,400 $21,317,771
1994 1,018,184,211 986,620,500 21,277,190
1993 987,130, 049 1, 001, 937, 000 21, 563, 017
1992 1,008,608, 374 1, 023, 737, 500 22, 825,696
1991 1,037,630,969 1,038,668,600 23,875,227
(a) Calculated by dividing the county assessor's estimated market value by the sales ratio as certified for
the City each year by the State Department of Revenue.
(b) Residential property values have been fairly stable throughout this period. Apartments and
commerciallndustrial properties have declined in value which is typical of the larger market. These
values now appear to be stabilizing in 1995.
(c) For further discussion of taxable tax capacity and the Minnesota property tax system, see
Appendix Ill.
-7-
i
Ten of the Largest Taxpayers in the City
1995 Net
Taxpayer Type of Property Tax Capacity Is
General Growth Company, Inc. Brookdale Mall $1,668,264(a)
Dayton Hudson Corporation Retail 669,212
Bradley Real Estate, Inc. Commercial 423,900
Sears Roebuck and Company Retail 421,411
J C Penney Company Retail 331,200
Mervyn's of California Retail 298,448
Brookdale Limited Partners Office 294,142
Northwest Racquet Swim & Health Clubs Health Club 273,185
Hennepin County Hotel Association Hotel 242,880
TLN Lane Limited Partners Apartments 225,216
Total $4,847,858(b)
(a) General Growth Company successfully appealed their property valuation and as a result the valuation
of the Brookdale Mall declined in 1995 for taxes payable in 1996. Currently, Dayton Hudson
Corporation, Sears Roebuck and Company, J.C. Penney Company and Mervyn's of California have
pending appeals on their property tax valuation.
(b) Represents 22.7% of the City's 1995 taxable net tax capacity.
CITY INDEBTEDNESS
Legal Debt Limit 41
Legal Debt Limit (2% of Estimated Market Value) $19,752,928
Less: Outstanding Net Debt Subject to Limit (
Legal Debt Margin as of August 2, 1996 $19,752,928
General Obligation Debt Supported Primarily by Special Assessments
Principal
Date Original Final Outstanding
of Issue Amount Purpose Maturit y As of 8 -2 -96
3 -1 -87 $1,200,000 Refunding2 -1 -1997 $ 40,000
8 -1 -94 835,000 Improvement 2 -1 -2005 770,000
11 -1 -95 780,000 Improvement 2 -1 -2006 780,000
11 -1 -96 1,440,000 Improvement (this Issue) 2 -1 -2007 1.440.000 r
Total $3,030,000
General Obligation Debt Supported by Tax Increments
Principal
Date Original Final Outstanding
of Issue Amount Purpose Maturity As of 8 -2 -96
3 -1 -91 $6,050,000 Tax Increment 2 -1 -2003 $ 4,375,000
2 -1 -92 4,275,000 Refunding 2 -1 -2003 4,270,000
11 -1 -95 4,560,000 Tax Increment 2 -1 -2011 4,560.000
Total $13,205,000
-8-
General Obligation Debt Supported by Other Sources
41 (State Allocations and Enterprise Revenues)
Principal
Date Original Final Outstanding
of Issue Amount Purpose Ma_ turity As of 8 -2 -96
9 -1 -91 $3,000,000 State Aid Road 4 -1 -2006 $2,295000
8 -1 -94 1,830,000 Storm Sewer 2 -1 -2005 1.720.000
Total $4,015,000
Annual Calendar Year Debt Service Payments Including This Issue
G.O. Debt Supported Primarily G.O. Debt Supported
by Special Assessments(a) by Tax Increments
Principal Principal
Year Principal & Interest Principal & Interest
1996 (at 8 -2) (Paid) (Paid) (Paid) (Paid)
1997 $ 185,000 $ 306,916.60 $ 780,000 $ 1,535,892.50
1998 265,000 393,553.90 840,000 1,555,040.00
1999 290,000 405,968.90 1,165,000 1,827,232.50
2000 300,000 402, 339.90 1,280,000 1, 875, 553.75
2001 300,000 388,293.35 1,450, 000 1,969,408.75
2002 310,000 383, 879.25 1,540,000 1,973, 892.50
2003 315,000 373,942.60 1,645,000 1,985,412.50
2004 325,000 368,473.40 1,775,000 2,012,302.50
2005 335,000 362, 321.60 360,000 531,122.50
2006 245,000 258,253.50 360,000 507,362.50
2007 260,000 163,721.60 385,000 507,585.00
2008 385,000 481,693.75
2009 400,000 470,200.00
2010 415,000 457,693.75
2011 425,000 439.343.75
Total $3,130,000(b) $3,807,664.60 $13,205,000() $18,129,736.25
(a) Includes the Bonds at an assumed average annual interest rate of 4.65 %.
(b) 91.4% of this debt will be retired in ten years.
M 84.8% of this debt will be retired within ten years.
G.O. Debt Supported
by Other Sources
Principal
Year Principal & Interest
1996 (at 8 -2) (Paid) $ 71,716.25
1997 $ 325,000 546,182.50
1998 345,000 548,867.50
1999 360,000 545,117.50
2000 385,000 549,816.25
2001 410,000 552,690.00
2002 430,000 548,887.50
2003 455,000 548,361.25
2004 485,000 550,746.25
2005 515,000 550, 826.25
2006 305.000 315.141.25
Total $4,015,000* $5,328,352.50
100% of this debt will be retired within ten years.
-9-
Summary of General Obligation Direct Debt
Gross Less: Debt Net
Debt Service Funds Direct Debt
Supported Primarily by
Special Assessments $ 3,030,000 $(621,393) $2,408,607
Supported by Tax Increments 13,205,000 (782,817) 12,422,183
Supported by Other Sources(b) 4,015,000 (b) 4,015,000
(a) Debt service funds are as of July 31, 1996 and include money to pay both principal and interest.
(b) The State Aid Road Bonds are paid from allotments made by the State of Minnesota Municipal State
Aid Highway Fund; and the Storm Sewer Bonds are paid directly from net revenues of the Storm
Drainage Enterprise Fund.
Indirect General Obligation Debt
Debt Applicable to
1995 Taxable G.O. Debt Tax Capacity in City
Taxing Unit Net Tax Capacity As of 8- 2 -96 Percent Amount
Hennepin County $1,006,485,910 $ 51,360,000 2.12% $ 1,087,825
Hennepin Parks 723,669,485 13,955,000 2.95 411,085
ISD 11 (Anoka- Hennepin) 108,261,382 112,253,002 2.03 2,275,530
ISD 279 (Osseo) 73,287,476 118,500,000 6.98 8,272,861
ISD 286 (Brooklyn Center) 7,245,363 4,400,000 100.00 4,400,000
Metropolitan Council 2,011,186,977 23,465,000(x) 1.06 248,720
Metropolitan Transit District 1,812,692,235 67,560,000 1.18 794.525
Total $17,490,546
(a) Only those taxing units with debt outstanding are shown here.
(b) Excludes general obligation tax and aid anticipation debt and revenue supported debt
(c) Metropolitan Council has an additional $458,975,000 of general obligation sanitary sewer bonds and
loans outstanding which are supported by system revenues.
Debt Ratios
G.O. Net G.O. Indirect &
Direct Debt Net Direct Debt
To 1995 Indicated Market Value 1.38% 3.00%
Per Capita (28,463 - 1995 Metropolitan Council Estimate) $521 $1,136
Excludes general obligation debt supported by other sources (state aid allotments and revenues).
-10-
CITY TAX RATES, LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS
Tax Capacity Rates for a City Resident in ISD 286
1995/96
For
1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 1995/96 Total Debt Only
Hennepin County 34.327% 35.839 37.441% 37.454% 37.270% 2.375%
City of Brooklyn Center 21.487 24.545 27.603 31.091 30.344 0.650
ISD 286 (Brooklyn
Center) 54.696 67.008 56.614 78.861 58.682 7.308
Special Districts* 5.996 6.042 6.234 6.357 6.900 1.312
Total 116.506% 133.434% 127.892% 153.763% 133.196% 11.645%
Special Districts include Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Transit District, Metropolitan Mosquito
Control, Hennepin County Technical College, Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority, and Hennepin
County Parks.
NOTE. Property taxes are determined by multiplying the net tax capacity by the tax capacity rate
expressed as a percentage. (See Appendix lll.)
Tax Levies and Collections
Collected During Collected
Gross Net Collection Year As of 12 -31 -95
Levy /Collect Levy Levy Amount Percent Amount Percent
1995/96 $7,644,882 $6,371,870 (In Process of Collection)
1994/95 7,801,664 6,501,554 $6,362,402 97.9% $6,362,402 97.9%
1993/94 7,192,475 5,857,554 5,634,155 96.2 5,782,499 98.7
1992/93 6,764,875 5,491,707 5,204,146 94.8 5,444,166 99.1
1991/92 6,277,140 5,072,385 4,817,736 95.0 5,039,453 99.4
The net tax levy excludes Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid ( "HACA'). Beginning in 9993194, the
net levy is the basis for computing tax capacity rates. The gross levy was the basis for computing tax
capacity rates in prior years.
FUNDS ON HAND
As of July 31, 1996
Fund Cash and Investments
General $ 6,269,447
Special Revenue 460,402
Capital Projects 10,707,092
Debt Service:
Special Assessment 597,279
Tax Increment 752,439
Enterprise 8,721,421
Internal Service 4,099,949
Total $31,608,029
-11-
CITY INVESTMENTS
It is the policy of the City that available funds be invested to the maximum extent possible, at
the highest rates obtainable at the time of investment, in conformance with the legal and
administrative guidelines.
Minnesota Statutes authorize and define an investment program for municipal governments.
The City shall invest in the following instruments allowed by Minnesota Statutes:
1) United States Treasury obligations
2) Federal Agency issues
3) Repurchase Agreements
4) Certificates of Deposit
5) Commercial Paper - prime
6) Banker's Acceptances - prime
7) Money Market Funds whose portfolios consist of United States Treasury obligations and
Federal Agency issues
Investments of the City shall be undertaken in a manner which seeks to insure the preservation
of capital in the overall portfolio. Safety of principal is the foremost objective. Liquidity and
yield are also important considerations. It is essential that money is always available when
needed, therefore, the investment goal is to maximize yield while seeing that the maturity dates
coincide with expenditure needs.
The investment portfolio of the City shall be designed to attain a market - average rate of return
during budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the City's investment risk constraint
and the cash flow characteristics of the portfolio.
All participating in the investment process shall seek to act responsibly as custodians of the
public trust. Investment officials shall avoid any transactions that might impair public
confidence in the City's ability to govern effectively.
As of July 31, 1996 the City had $1,492,125, or 4.7 %, invested in commercial paper.
U.S. Treasury notes represented 36.8% of the City's portfolio with $11,621,315 invested.
Government securities totaled $14,715,595, representing 46.5% of the portfolio. The remaining
12 %, or $3,778,990, of the portfolio is invested in money market and mutual funds. All total the
City has $31,608,028 in the above - mentioned investments.
72.76% of the portfolio matures within three years or less and none of the securities held by the
City have maturity greater than ten years. The market value of the portfolio is currently 99.77%
of the original cost to the City.
GENERAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THE CITY
The City of Brooklyn Center is a northern suburb of the Minneapolis /Saint Paul metropolitan
area, lying adjacent to the City of Minneapolis. The City is wholly within Hennepin County and
encompasses an area of approximately 8.5 square miles. The Mississippi River forms the
City's eastern boundary.
The City experienced its most rapid growth from 1950 to 1970 when the City's population grew
from 4,300 to its peak of 35,173. The 1990 U.S. Census count for the City is 28,887, a 7.5%
decline from the 1980 Census. The 1995 population, as estimated by the Metropolitan Council,
-12-
is 28,463. In contrast to the decline in population (which is due almost entirely to fewer persons
per household), the number of housing units has generally continued to increase from 10,493 in
1970 to 11,035 in 1980 and 11,370 in 1990. The number dropped slightly in 1996 to 11,133
housing units. This was due to the removal of some units by the City in accordance with a pre -
planned redevelopment effort.
Major transportation routes in and through the City, including Interstate Highways 94 and 694,
and State Highways 100 and 252, have provided a continued impetus for development of a
strong commercial tax base in the City.
Growth and Development
Commercial and industrial property comprises 55.1% of the City's taxable net tax capacity.
There are five major shopping centers located in the City in addition to a large number of retail
establishments including K -Mart, Kohl's Department Store, Toys R Us and Jerry's New Market.
The largest commercial property in the City is Brookdale Mall, an 1,000,000 square -foot
regional shopping center anchored by Dayton's, Sears, Penney's and Mervyn's of California.
Brookdale Square, a 125,000 square -foot strip center plus an 8- screen theater, had a 36,000
square foot addition completed in 1989 which is occupied by Circuit City, Drug Emporium and
Office Depot. The remaining three major retail shopping centers include Shingle Creek Center,
a 157,000 square -foot three building center anchored by Target; Westbrook Mall, an 88,000
square -foot center anchored by Dayton's Home Store; and Brookview Plaza, a 70,000 square -
foot center anchored by Best Buy.
In 1994, Evergreen Homes, a senior citizens development of 90 units with an estimated
construction cost of $2,500,000, was completed. In addition, Brookdale Mall completed a
$500,000 renovation project in 1994.
The building activity in 1995 included the construction of a 60 -unit $1,200,000 Comfort Inn Hotel
(28,000 square feet) and a Fuddruckers Restaurant (10,000 square feet). In Brookdale Mall,
Mervyn's renovated the former Carson Pirie Scott store at an estimated cost of $4,000,000.
New construction in 1996 includes an 84 -room Country Suites Hotel with two attached
restaurants. One of these will be a TGI Fridays valued at $900,000 and the other will be
determined later. A free standing Denny's restaurant seating 146 people and costing $390,000
is also under construction.
Summary of Building Permits
New Residential
Total Permits Permits only
Number Value Number Value
1996 (at 7 -31) 361 $ 4,514,920 15 $ 868,000
1995 603 11,945,264 2 153,000
1994 604 13,038,263 9 587,000
1993 520 11,437,250 7 505,000
1992 549 14,249,265 14 948,810
1991 466 8,800,980 7 450,745
1990 504 8,035,605 1 65,249
-13-
Major Employers in the City
Approximate
Number
Employer Product /Service of Employees
Brookdale Center Shopping Center 1,700
Promeon, Div. of Medtronics Medical Components 450
City of Brooklyn Center Government 335*
Ault, Inc. Manufacturing 270
Hoffman Engineering Electrical Enclosure 175
Graco, Inc. Spray Paint Equipment 100
TCR Corporation Metal Components 85
Highway 100 Sports Club Health Club 75
Hiawatha Rubber Company Custom Rubber Molder 65
Cass Screw Machine Products Screw Machine Parts 50
* Includes full- and part-time employees.
Source: Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development 1995 Community Profile and
individual employers.
Labor Force Data
June 1996 June 1995
Civilian Unemployment Civilian Unemployment
Labor Force Rate Labor Force Rate
Hennepin County 651,149 3.2% 641,990 3.4%
Minneapolis /St. Paul MSA 1,620,761 3.1 1,597,246 3.3
Minnesota 2,641,514 3.9 2,597,921 4.1
Source: Minnesota Department of Economic Security. June 1996 data is preliminary.
Financial Institutions
Branch facilities of financial institutions located in Brooklyn Center include: Marquette Bank,
National Association (Golden Valley), Norwest Bank Minnesota (Minneapolis), Firstar Bank of
Minnesota (Bloomington), and TCF Bank Minnesota FSB (Minneapolis).
Source: Northwestern Financial Review Directory, Spring 1996.
Education
The City is served by four independent school districts: ISD 11 (Anoka- Hennepin), ISD 279
(Osseo), ISD 281 (Robbinsdale) and ISD 286 (Brooklyn Center). The City's taxable net tax
capacity is attributable to each of the four school districts as follows:
Portion of 1995 Taxable Net Tax
Capacity Located in the City % of Total
ISD 286 (Brooklyn Center)* $ 7,245,363 33.99%
ISD 281 (Robbinsdale) 6,761,363 31.72
ISD 279 (Osseo) 5,116,431 24.00
ISD 11 (Anoka - Hennepin) 2.194,614 10.29
Total $21,317,771 100.00%
*
ISD 286 is located entirely within the City of Brooklyn Center
-14-
Medical
s Major medical facilities in the Minneapolis /St. Paul metropolitan area are easily accessible to all
City residents. North Memorial Medical located in the adjacent City of Robbinsdale has 518
acute care beds and Unity Medical Center located in the adjacent City of Fridley has 275 acute
care beds.
Source: Minnesota Department of Health, Directory of Licensed and Certified Health Care Facilities
and Services, 1995.
GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION AND SERVICES
Organization
Brooklyn Center has been a municipal corporation since 1911, and is governed under a Home
Rule Charter adopted in 1966 and subsequently amended. The City has a Council- Manager
form of government. The Mayor and four Council Members are elected to serve overlapping
four -year terms.
Individuals comprising the current City Council are listed below:
Expiration of Term
Myrna Kragness Mayor December 31, 1998
Charles F. Nichols, Sr. Council Member December 31, 1996
Kristen Mann Council Member December 31, 1996
Kathleen Carmody Council Member December 31, 1998
Debra Hilstrom Council Member December 31, 1998
The City Manager, Mr. Michael J. McCauley, is responsible for the administration of Council
policy and the daily management of the City. The Manager is appointed by the Council and
serves at its discretion. Mr. McCauley has served the City in the position of Manager since
December of 1995. The Director of Finance, Mr. Charles R. Hansen, is responsible for
directing the City's financial operations, including preparation of the annual financial report and
interim reports, and the investment of City funds. Mr. Hansen has served the City as Director of
Finance since 1993 and was previously assistant to the City Director of Finance for seven
years.
Services
The City has budget authorization for 158 full -time and 177 part-time employees serving in
various departments. Forty -four full -time police officers and a support staff of 15 provide
protective services in the City. Fire protection is provided by one full -time member and a 40-
member volunteer force. The City has two fire stations and a class 5 insurance rating.
All areas of the City are serviced by municipal water and sewer systems. Water is supplied by
nine wells and storage is provided by three elevated tanks with a combined total capacity of
3.0 million gallons. The municipal water system has a pumping capacity of 17.6 million gallons
per day (mgd). The average daily water demand is estimated to be 3.5 mgd and peak demand
is estimated to be 8.6 mgd. Water connections totaled 8,773 as of December 31, 1995.
Although the City owns and maintains its own sanitary and storm sewer collection systems,
wastewater treatment facilities are owned and operated by the Metropolitan Council's Office of
-15-
Wastewater Services ( "OWS "). The City is billed an annual service charge by OWS, which
charge is adjusted the subsequent year based on actual usage. The City had 8,773 sewer
connections at the end of 1995.
The City owns three off -sale liquor stores. Two of the facilities are owned by the City and the
third facility is leased. Under the City's current five -year lease, which expires in 1999, minimum
annual rental payments are $24,933. In 1995 the Liquor Fund transferred $100,000 into the
City's General Fund.
City offices are located in the Brooklyn Center Civic Center which was constructed in 1971.
The Civic Center has a 300 -seat hall, a 50 meter indoor /outdoor swimming pool and exercise
and game rooms. The City maintains 522 acres of parkland, much of which is located along
Shingle Creek forming a "green way" north to south through the City. Recreational facilities
include a par 3 9 -hole golf course, 17 playgrounds, softball and baseball diamonds, tennis
courts, hockey and skating rinks, nature areas, trails and an arboretum.
Budget Summary
1996 General Fund 1996 General Fund
Revenues: Appropriations:
Property Taxes $ 5,875,958 General Government $ 1,825,246
Sales Tax (Lodging) 480,000 Public Safety 5,049,179
Fines and Forfeitures 144,000 Public Works 1,545,021
Licenses & Permits 348,850 Health and Social Services 78,547
Intergovernmental Revenue 3,540,018 Recreation 2,450,915
Service Charges 886,068 Economic Development 228,000
Interest Earnings 250,000 Unallocated Expenses 455,986
Miscellaneous Revenue 8,000
Transfers from Other Funds 100,000
Total Revenues $11,632,894 Total Appropriations $11,632,894
Employee Pension Plans
All full -time and certain part-time employees of the City of Brooklyn Center are covered by
defined benefit pension plans administered by the Public Employees Retirement Association of
Minnesota (PERA). PERA administers the Public Employees Retirement Fund (PERF) and the
Public Employees Police and Fire Fund (PEPFF) which are cost - sharing multiple - Employer
retirement plans. PERF members belong to either the Coordinated Plan or the Basic Plan.
Coordinated members are covered by Social Security and Basic members are not. All new
members must participate in the Coordinated Plan. All police officers, fire fighters and peace
officers who qualify for membership by statute are covered by the PEPFF. City contributions to
PERA totaled $435,443 in 1995.
The City contributes to the Brooklyn Center Fire Department Relief Association, a single -
Employer public employee retirement system. The City levies property taxes at the direction of
and for the benefit of the Association and passes through State -aids allocated to the
Association, all in accordance with enabling State statutes. City and State -aid contributions
totaled $42,092 and $69,299, respectively, in 1995. The contributions represented $68,698 of
normal costs and $26,241 for the amortization of the unfunded actuarial accrued liability.
-16-
APPENDIX I
PROPOSED FORM OF LEGAL OPINION
is KENNEDY & GRAVEN
CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Telephone (612) 337 -9300
Facsimile (612) 337 -9310
$1,440,000
General Obligation Improvement
Bonds, Series 1996A
City of Brooklyn Center
Hennepin County, Minnesota
We have acted as bond counsel in connection with the issuance by the City of
Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota, of its General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 1996A, originally dated as of November 1, 1996, in the
total principal amount of $1,440,000. For the purpose of rendering this opinion we
have examined certified copies of certain proceedings taken by the City in the
authorization, sale and issuance of the Bonds, including the form of the Bonds, and
certain other proceedings and documents furnished by the City. From our
examination of such proceedings and other documents, assuming the genuineness of
the signatures thereon and the accuracy of the facts stated therein and continuing
compliance by the City with its covenants to comply with the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended, and based upon laws, regulations, rulings and decisions in
effect on the date hereof, it is our opinion as of the date hereof that:
1. The Bonds are in due form, have been duly executed and delivered, and
are valid and binding general obligations of the City, enforceable in accordance with
their terms, except as such enforcement may be limited by Minnesota or United
States laws relating to bankruptcy, reorganization, moratorium or creditors' rights .
2. The principal of and interest on the Bonds are payable from special
assessments levied or to be levied on property specially benefitted by local
improvements and ad valorem taxes for the City's share of the cost of the
improvements, but if necessary for the payment thereof additional ad valorem taxes
are required by law to be levied on all taxable property in the City, which taxes are
not subject to any limitation as to rate or amount.
3. Interest on the Bonds is not includable in gross income of the recipient
for federal income tax purposes or in taxable net income for Minnesota income tax
purposes, and is not a preference item for purposes of the computation of the federal
i alternative minimum tax, or the computation of the Minnesota alternative minimum tax
imposed on individuals, trusts and estates, but such interest is includable in the
computation of "adjusted current earnings," used in the calculation of federal
alternative minimum taxable income of corporations, and is subject to Minnesota
franchise taxes on corporations (including financial institutions) measured by income
and the alternative minimum tax base. We express no opinion regarding other
federal or state tax consequences arising with respect to the Bonds. The Bonds are
not arbitrage bonds and are not private activity bonds.
S We have not been asked and have not undertaken to review the accuracy,
completeness or sufficiency of the Official Statement or other offering material
relating to the Bonds, and accordingly we express no opinion with respect thereto.
Dated at Minneapolis, Minnesota,
SJB109125 - �
BR291 -160
I
(This page was left blank intentionally.) '
a
e
APPENDIX II
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE
This Continuing Disclosure Certificate (the "Disclosure Certificate ") is
executed and delivered by the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the "Issuer ")
in connection with the issuance of $1,440, 000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds,
Series 1996A (the "Securities ") . The Securities are being issued pursuant to
Authorizing Resolutions adopted by the City Council of the Issuer on August 26,
1996 and Award Resolutions adopted by the City Council of the Issuer on September
23, 1996 (collectively, the "Resolutions ") and delivered to the Purchaser(s) on the
date hereof. Pursuant to the Resolutions, the Issuer has covenanted and agreed to
provide continuing disclosure of certain financial information and operating data and
timely notices of the occurrence of certain events. In addition, the Issuer hereby
covenants and agrees as follows:
Section 1. Purpose of the Disclosure Certificate This Disclosure Certificate
is being executed and delivered by the Issuer for the benefit of the Holders of the
Securities in order to assist the Participating Underwriters within the meaning of the
Rule (defined herein) in complying with SEC Rule 15c2- 12(b) (5). This Disclosure
Certificate, together with the Resolutions, constitutes the written Undertaking
required by the Rule.
Section 2. Definitions In addition to the defined terms set forth in the
Resolutions, which apply to any capitalized term used in this Disclosure Certificate
unless otherwise defined in this Section, the following capitalized terms shall have
the following meanings:
"Annual Report" means any annual report provided by the Issuer pursuant to,
and as described in, Sections 3 and 4 of this Disclosure Certificate.
"Audited Financial Statements" means the Issuer's annual financial statements,
prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP ") for
Governmental Units as Prescribed by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board
("GASB ") .
i
"Fiscal Year" means the fiscal year of the Issuer.
"Final Official Statement" means the deemed final official statement dated
1996 plus the addendum thereto which together constitute the
final official statement delivered in connection with the Securities, which is available
from the MSRB .
"Holder" means the person in whose name a security is registered or a
beneficial owner of such a security.
"Issuer" means the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota which is the obligated
person with respect to the Securities.
"Material Event" means any of the events listed in Section 5(a) of this
Disclosure Certificate.
SJB109124
BR291 -160
II -1
"MSRB" means the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board located at 1150 18th
Street, N. W. , Suite 400, Washington, D . C. 20036.
"NRMSIR" means any nationally recognized municipal securities information
repository as recognized from time to time by the SEC for purposes of the Rule.
"Participating Underwriter" means any of the original underwriter (s) of the
Securities (including the Purchaser(s)) required to comply with the Rule in
connection with the offering of the Securities.
"Repository" means each NRMSIR and each SID, if any.
"Rule" means SEC Rule 15c2 -12(b) (5) promulgated by the SEC under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as the same may be amended from time to time, and
including written interpretations thereof by the SEC.
"SEC" means Securities and Exchange Commission.
"SID" means any public or private repository or entity designated by the State
of Minnesota as a state information depository for the purpose of the Rule. As of the
date of this Certificate, there is no SID.
Section 3. Provision of Annual Financial Information and Audited Financial
Statements
(a) The Issuer shall, as soon as available, but not later than 12 months
after the end of the Fiscal Year commencing with the year that ends
December 31, 1996, provide each Repository with an Annual Report
which is consistent with the requirements of Section 4 of this Disclosure
Certificate. The Annual Report may be submitted as a single document
or as separate documents comprising a package, and may cross -
reference other information as provided in Section 4 of this Disclosure
Certificate; provided that the Audited Financial Statements of the
Issuer may be submitted separately from the balance of the Annual
Report and will be submitted as soon as available.
(b) If the Issuer is unable or fails to provide to the Repositories an Annual
Report by the date required in subsection (a) , the Issuer shall send a
notice of that fact to the NRMSIRs, the MSRB and SID.
(c) The Issuer shall the determine and address of each NRMSIR. and the providing D,
A Report name if
any.
Section 4. Content of Annual Reports . The Issuer's Annual Report shall
contain or incorporate by reference the following sections of the Final Official
Statement:
1. City Property Values.
2.' City Indebtedness.
SJB109124
BR291 -160
1{ -2
3. City Tax Rates, Levies and Collections.
4. Budget Summary.
In addition to the items listed above, the Annual Report shall include Audited
Financial Statements submitted in accordance with Section 3 of this Disclosure
Certificate.
Any or all of the items listed above may be incorporated by reference from other
documents, including official statements of debt issues of the Issuer or related public
entities, which have been submitted to each of the Repositories or the SEC. If the
document incorporated by reference is a final official statement, it must also be
available from the MSRB . The Issuer shall clearly identify each such other document
so incorporated by reference.
Section 5. Reporting of Material Events
(a) This Section 5 shall govern the giving of notices of the occurrence of
any of the following events if material with respect to the Securities:
I
1. Principal and interest payment delinquencies;
` 2. Non - payment related defaults;
3. Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial
difficulties;
4. Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial
difficulties;
5. Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to
perform;
6. Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax - exempt status
of the Securities;
7. Modification to rights of Holders of the Securities;
8. Securities calls;
9. Defeasances -
10. Release, substitution or sale of property securing repayment of
the Securities; and
11. Rating changes.
(b) Whenever the Issuer obtains knowledge of the occurrence of a Material
Event, the Issuer shall promptly file a notice of such occurrence with
either all NRMSIRs or with the MSRB and with any SID.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, notice of Material Events described in
subsections (a) (8) and (9) need not be given under this subsection any
SJB109124
BR291 -160
11 -3
earlier than the notice (if any) of the underlying event is given to
Holders of affected Securities pursuant to the Resolutions.
(c) Unless otherwise required by law and subject to technical and economic
feasibility, the Issuer shall employ such methods of information
transmission as shall be requested or recommended by the designated
recipients of the Issuer's information.
Section 6. Termination of Reporting Obligation The Issuer's obligations
under the Resolutions and this Disclosure Certificate shall terminate upon the
defeasance, prior redemption or payment in full of all the Securities.
Section 7. Agent The Issuer may, from time to time, appoint or engage a
dissemination agent to assist it in carrying out its obligations under the Resolutions
and this Disclosure Certificate, and may discharge any such agent, with or without
appointing a successor dissemination agent.
Section S. Amendment; Waiver Notwithstanding any other provision of the
Resolutions or this Disclosure Certificate, the Issuer may amend this Disclosure
Certificate, and any provision of this Disclosure Certificate may be waived, if such
amendment or waiver is supported by an opinion of nationally recognized bond
counsel to the effect that such amendment or waiver would not, if and of itself, cause
the undertakings to violate the Rule. The provisions of the Resolutions constituting
the Undertaking and this Disclosure Certificate, or any provision hereof, shall be
null and void in the event that the Issuer delivers to each then existing NRMSIR and
the SID, if any, an opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel to the effect that
those portions of the Rule which require the Resolutions and this Certificate are
invalid, have been repealed retroactively or otherwise do not apply to the Securities .
The provisions of the Resolutions constituting the Undertaking and this Disclosure
Certificate may be amended without the consent of the Holders of the Securities,
only upon the delivery by the Issuer to each then existing NRMSIR and the SID, if
any, of the proposed amendment and an opinion of nationally recognized bond
counsel to the effect that such amendment, and giving effect thereto, will not
adversely affect the compliance of the Resolutions and this Disclosure Certificate and
by the Issuer with the Rule.
Section 9. Additional Information Nothing in this Disclosure Certificate shall
be deemed to prevent the Issuer from disseminating any other information, using the
means of dissemination set forth in this Disclosure Certificate or any other means of
communication, or including any other information in any Annual Report or notice
of occurrence of a Material Event, in addition to that which is required by this
Disclosure Certificate. If the Issuer chooses to include any information in any
Annual Report or notice of occurrence of a Material Event in addition to that which
is specifically required by this Disclosure Certificate, the Issuer shall have no
obligation under this Certificate to update such information or include it in any
future Annual Report or notice of occurrence of a Material Event.
Section 10. Default In the event of a failure of the Issuer to comply with any
provision of this Disclosure Certificate any Holder of the Securities may take such
actions as may be necessary and appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific
performance by court order, to cause the Issuer to comply with its obligations under
SJB109124
BR291 -160
11 -4
the Resolutions and this Disclosure Certificate. A default under this Disclosure
Certificate shall not be deemed an event of default with respect to the Securities and
the sole remedy under this Disclosure Certificate in the event of any failure of the
Issuer to comply with this Disclosure Certificate shall be an action to compel
performance.
Section 11. Beneficiaries This Disclosure Certificate shall inure solely to the
benefit of the Issuer, the Participating Underwriters and Holders from time to time
of the Securities, and shall create no rights in any other person or entity.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have executed this Certificate in our official
capacities effective the day of , 1996.
Mayor
( SEAL)
City Clerk
SJB109124
BR291 -160
II -5
i
(This page was left blank intentionally.)
APPENDIX III
SUMMARY OF TAX LEVIES, PAYMENT PROVISIONS, AND
is MINNESOTA REAL PROPERTY VALUATION
Following is a summary of certain statutory provisions effective through 1995 relative to tax levy
procedures, tax payment and credit procedures, and the mechanics of real property valuation.
The summary does not purport to be inclusive of all such provisions or of the specific provisions
discussed, and is qualified by reference to the complete text of applicable statutes, rules and
regulations of the State of Minnesota in reference thereto. This summary reflects changes to
Minnesota property tax laws enacted by the State Legislature during the 1995 Regular Session.
Property Valuations (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes)
Assessor's Estimated Market Value
Each parcel of real property subject to taxation must, by statute, be appraised at least once
every four years as of January 2 of the year of appraisal. With certain exceptions, all property
is valued at its market value which is the value the assessor determines to be the price the
property to be fairly worth, and which is referred to as the "Estimated Market Value."
Limitation of Market Value Increases
Effective for assessment years 1993 through 1997, the amount of increase in market value for
all property classified as agricultural homestead and non - homestead, residential homestead
and non - homestead, or non - commercial seasonable recreational residential, which is entered
by the assessor in the current assessment year, may not exceed the greater of (i) 10% of the
preceding year's market value or (ii) 1/3 of the difference between the current assessment and
the preceding assessment.
Indicated Market Value
Because the Estimated Market Value as determined by an assessor may not represent the
price of real property in the marketplace, the "Indicated Market Value" is generally regarded as
more representative of full value. The Indicated Market Value is determined by dividing the
Estimated Market Value of a given year by the same year's sales ratio determined by the State
Department of Revenue. The sales ratio represents the overall relationship between the
Estimated Market Value of property within the taxing unit and actual selling price.
Net Tax Capacity
The Net Tax Capacity is the value upon which net taxes are levied, extended and collected.
The Net Tax Capacity is computed by applying the class rate percentages specific to each type
of property classification against the Estimated Market Value. Class rate percentages vary
depending on the type of property as shown on the last page of this Appendix II. The formulas
and class rates for converting Estimated Market Value to Net Tax Capacity represent a basic
element of the State's property tax relief system and are subject to annual revisions by the
State Legislature.
Property taxes are determined by multiplying the Net Tax Capacity by the tax capacity rate,
expressed as a percentage.
Property Tax Payments and Delinquencies
(Chapters 276, 279 -282 and 549, Minnesota Statutes)
Ad valorem property taxes levied by local governments in Minnesota are extended and
• collected by the various counties within the State. Each taxing jurisdiction is required to certify
the annual tax levy to the county auditor within five (5) working days after December 20 of the
year preceding the collection year. A listing of property taxes due is prepared by the county
auditor and turned over to the county treasurer on or before the first business day in March.
III -1
The county treasurer is responsible for collecting all property taxes within the county. Real
estate and personal property tax statements are mailed out by March 31. One -half (1/2) of the
taxes on real property is due on or before May 15. The remainder is due on or before
October 15. Real property taxes not paid by their due date are assessed a penalty which,
depending on the type of property, increases from 2% to 4% on the day after the due date. In r
the case of the first installment of real property taxes due May 15, the penalty increases to 4%
or 8% on June 1. Thereafter, an additional 1% penalty shall accrue each month through
October 1 of the collection year for unpaid real property taxes. In the case of the second
installment of real property taxes due October 15, the penalty increases to 6% or 8% on
November 1 and increases again to 8% or 12% on December 1. Personal property taxes
remaining unpaid on May 16 are deemed to be delinquent and a penalty of 8% attaches to the
unpaid tax. However, personal property owned by a tax - exempt entity, but which is treated as
taxable by virtue of a lease agreement, is subject to the same delinquent property tax penalties
as real property.
On the first business day of January of the year following collection all delinquencies are
subject to an additional 2% penalty, and those delinquencies outstanding as of February 15 are
filed for a tax lien judgment with the district court. By March 20 the clerk of court files a
publication of legal action and a mailing of notice of action to delinquent parties. Those
property interests not responding to this notice have judgment entered for the amount of the
delinquency and associated penalties. The amount of the judgment is subject to a variable
interest determined annually by the Department of Revenue, and equal to the adjusted prime
rate charged by banks, but in no event is the rate less than 10% or more than 14 %.
Property owners subject to a tax lien judgment generally have five years (5) in the case of all
property located outside of cities or in the case of residential homestead, agricultural
homestead and seasonal residential recreational property located within cities or three (3) years
with respect to other types of property to redeem the property. After expiration of the
redemption period, unredeemed properties are declared tax forfeit with title held in trust by the
State of Minnesota for the respective taxing districts. The county auditor, or equivalent thereof,
then sells those properties not claimed for a public purpose at auction. The net proceeds of the
sale are first dedicated to the satisfaction of outstanding special assessments on the parcel,
with any remaining balance in most cases being divided on the following basis: county - 40 %;
town or city - 20 %; and school district - 40 %.
Property Tax Credits (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes)
In addition to adjusting the taxable value for various property types, primary elements of
Minnesota's property tax relief system are: property tax levy reduction aids; the circuit breaker
credit, which relates property taxes to income and provides relief on a sliding income scale; and
targeted tax relief, which is aimed primarily at easing the effect of significant tax increases. The
circuit breaker credit and targeted credits are reimbursed to the taxpayer upon application by
the taxpayer. Property tax levy reduction aid includes educational aids, local governmental aid,
equalization aid, homestead and agricultural credit aid (HACA) and disparity reduction aid.
Levy Limitations
Historically, the ability of local governments in Minnesota to levy property taxes was controlled
by various statutory limitations. These limitations have expired for taxes payable in 1993 and
future years, but may be reinstated in the future. Under prior law the limitations generally did
not affect debt service levies. For county governments, cities of 2,500 population or more, and
smaller cities and towns that receive taconite municipal aid, taxes could be levied outside the
overall levy limitation for, among others, bonded indebtedness and certificates of indebtedness,
unfunded accrued pension liability, social service programs and the residual income
maintenance program for which the county share of costs has not been taken over by the State.
III -2
Debt Limitations
All Minnesota municipalities (counties, cities, towns and school districts) are subject to statutory
"net debt" limitations under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.53. Net debt is
defined as the amount remaining after deducting from gross debt the amount of current
revenues which are applicable within the current fiscal year to the payment of any debt and the
aggregation of the principal of the following:
1. Obligations issued for improvements which are payable wholly or partially from the
proceeds of special assessments levied upon benefited property.
2. Warrants or orders having no definite or fixed maturity.
3. Obligations payable wholly from the income from revenue producing conveniences.
4. Obligations issued to create or maintain a permanent improvement revolving fund.
5. Obligations issued for the acquisition and betterment of public waterworks systems, and
public lighting, heating or power systems, and any combination thereof, or for any other
public convenience from which revenue is or may be derived.
6. Certain debt service loans and capital loans made to school districts.
7. Certain obligations to repay loans.
8. Obligations specifically excluded under the provisions of law authorizing their issuance.
9. Debt service funds for the payment of principal and interest on obligations other than those
described above.
10. Certain obligations to pay pension fund liabilities.
I Levies for General Obligation Debt
(Sections 475.61 and 475.74, Minnesota Statutes)
r Any municipality which issues general obligation debt must, at the time of issuance, certify
levies to the county auditor of the county(ies) within which the municipality is situated. Such
levies shall be in an amount that if collected in full will, together with estimates of other
revenues pledged for payment of the obligations, produce at least five percent in excess of the
amount needed to pay principal and interest when due.
Notwithstanding any other limitations upon the ability of a taxing unit to levy taxes, its ability to
levy taxes for a deficiency in prior levies for payment of general obligation indebtedness is
without limitation as to rate or amount.
Metropolitan Revenue Distribution (Chapter 473F, Minnesota Statutes)
"Fiscal Disparities Law"
The Charles R. Weaver Metropolitan Revenue Distribution Act, more commonly known as
"Fiscal Disparities," was first implemented for taxes payable in 1975. Forty percent of the
increase in commercial - industrial (including public utility and railroad) net tax capacity valuation
since 1971 in each assessment district in the Minneapolis /St. Paul seven - county metropolitan
area (Anoka, Carver, Dakota, excluding the City of Northfield, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott,
excluding the City of New Prague, and Washington Counties) is contributed to an area -wide tax
base. A distribution index, based on the factors of population and real property market value
per capita, is employed in determining what proportion of the net tax capacity value in the area -
wide tax base shall be distributed back to each assessment district.
III -3
STATUTORY FORMULAE
CONVERSION OF ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE (EMV) TO NET TAX CAPACITY FOR
MAJOR PROPERTY CLASSIFICATIONS
Net Tax Capacity Net Tax Capacity Net Tax Capacity Net Tax Capacity Net Tax Capacity
General Classifications Levy Year 1991 Levy Year 1992 Levy Year 1993 Levy Year 1994 Levy Year 1995
Residential Homestead First $72,000 of EMV at 1.00 % First $72,000 of EMV at 1.00% First $72,000 of EMV at 1.00% First $72,000 of EMV at 1.00% First $72,000 of EMV at 1.00%
Next $42,000 of EMV at 2.00% EMV in excess of $72,000 EMV in excess of $72,000 EMV in excess of $72,000 EMV in excess of $72,000
EMV in excess of $115,000 at 2.00% at 2.00% at 2.00% at 2.00%
at 2.5%
Residential Non - Homestead 3.50% 3.40% 3.40% 3.40% 3.40 %; except certain cities of
4 or more units 5,000 population or less at 2.30%
Agricultural Homestead First $72,000 EMV of house, First $72,000 EMV of house, First $72,000 EMV of house, First $72,000 EMV of house, First $72,000 EMV of house,
garage and 1 acre at 1.00% garage and 1 acre at 1.00% garage and 1 acre at 1.00% garage and 1 acre at 1.00% garage and 1 acre at 1.00%
Excess to 320 acres at 0.45% Excess to 320 acres at 0.45% EMV in excess of $72,000 of EMV in excess of $72,000 of EMV in excess of $72,000 of
Excess over 320 acres at 0.45% Excess over 320 acres at 0.45% house, garage and 1 acre at house, garage and 1 acre at house, garage and 1 acre at
2.00% 2.00% 2.00%
Next $43,000 EMV at 2.00% Next $43,000 EMV at 2.00%
Excess to 320 acres at 0.45% Excess to 320 acres at 0.45% Remaining Property: Remaining Property: Remaining Property:
Excess over 320 acres at 0.45% Excess over 320 acres at 0.45% First $115,000 of EMV on First $115,000 of EMV on First $115,000 of EMV on
EMV in excess of $115,000 EMV in excess of $115,000 first 320 acres at 0.45% first 320 acres at 0.45% first 320 acres at 0.45%
at 2.5% at 2.00% EMV in excess of $115,000 on EMV in excess of $115,000 on EMV in excess of $115,000 on
Excess to 320 acres at 1.30% Excess to 320 acres at 1.30% first 320 acres at 1.00% first 320 acres at 1.00% first 320 acres at 1.00%
Excess over 320 acres at 1.60% Excess over 320 acres at 1.60% EMV in excess of $115,000 over EMV in excess of $115,000 over EMV in excess of $115,000 over
320 acres at 1.50% 320 acres at 1.50% 320 acres at 1.50%
Agricultural Non - Homestead EMV of house, garage and EMV of house, garage and EMV of house, garage and EMV of house, garage and EMV of house, garage and
1 acre at 2.80% 1 acre at 2.50% 1 acre at 2.30% 1 acre at 2.30% 1 acre at 2.30%
EMV of land and other buildings EMV of land and other buildings EMV of land and other buildings EMV of land and other buildings EMV of land and other buildings
at 1.60% at 1.60% at 1.50% at 1.50% at 1.50%
Commercial - industrial First $100,000 of EMV at 3.10% First $100,000 of EMV at 3.00% First $100,000 of EMV at 3.00% First $100,000 of EMV at 3.00% First $100,000 of EMV at 3.00%
EMV in excess of $100,000 EMV in excess of $100,000 EMV in excess of $100,000 EMV in excess of $100,000 EMV in excess of $100,000
at 4.75% at 4.70% at 4.60% at 4.60% at 4.60%
Seasonal /Recreational Non - Commercial - 2.20% Non - Commercial Non - Commercial Non - Commercial Non - Commercial
Residential First $72,000 of EMV at 2.00% First $72,000 of EMV at 2.00% First $72,000 of EMV at 2.00% First $72,000 of EMV at 2.00%
EMV in excess of $72,000 EMV in excess of $72,000 EMV in excess of $72,000 EMV in excess of $72,000
at 2.50% at 2.50% at 2.50% at 2.50%
Commercial - 2.30% Commercial - 2.30% Commercial - 2.30% Commercial - 2.30%
Vacant Land 4.75% N/A N/A N/A N/A
(Ail vacant land is reclassified (All vacant land is reclassified (All vacant land is reclassified (All vacant land is reclassified
to highest and best use to highest and best use to highest and best use to highest and best use
pursuant to local zoning pursuant to local zoning pursuant to local zoning pursuant to local zoning
ordinance) ordinance) ordinance) ordinance)
APPENDIX IV
ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The City is audited annually by an independent certified public accounting firm. Data on the
following pages has been extracted from the City's financial audited statements for years
ending December 31, 1995, 1994 and 1993. Governmental funds and expendable trust funds
are accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting. Proprietary funds are
accounted for using the accrual basis of accounting. The reader should be aware that the
complete audited financial statements may contain additional data relating to the information
presented here, which may interpret, explain or modify it.
The City's comprehensive annual financial reports for the years ending 1983 through 1995 were
awarded the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting by the
Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA). The
Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition for excellence in state and local
government financial reporting.
In order to be awarded the Certificate of Achievement, a government unit must publish an easily
readable and efficiently organized comprehensive annual financial report, whose contents
conform to program standards. Such CAFR must satisfy both generally accepted accounting
principles and applicable legal requirements.
A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only.
i
IV -1
I
City of Brooklyn Center
Ail Fund Types and Account Groups
COMBINED BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 1995
Fiduciary 1 Try"
Governmental Fund Types Proprietary Fu T ypes Fund Types Account Groups (Marnm Orly)
General General
Special Debt Capital Internal Fixed Long-Teim December 31,
General Revenue Service Projects Enlerpnse Service Agency Assets Debt 1995 1994
ASSETS AND OTHER DEBITS
Cash and cash equivalents (Note 2) $615,176 $5,411 $450,390 $1,116,024 $1.037,573 $433,818 $3,658,392 $2,336,919
Invemments(Note 2) 5,660,356 50,571 1,579,090 10,430,686 8,333,420 4,054,588 30,108,711 24,780,489
Receivables
Accounts 41,955 364 30,904 1,166,134 13.569 1,253006 1,365,679
Delinquent taxes (Note 1L) 282,251 936 12,158 295.345 247.644
Special assessments
N Detained 12,691 465,750 905,638 131,422 9,515,501 1,546,406
Detslquenl 654 7,757 57,976 3,148 69,537 58,838
Due hom other funds (Note 8) 662,831 240,707 1,887,677 2,991,215 3,224,156
Due from other governments 18,399 236,106 1,465,341 611,594 2,331,440 2.996,512
Inventories and supplies (Note 111) 356.589 10,045 366,634 346.449
Prepaid expenses 143,211 143,211 143,151
Advances to otlnet funds (Note 8) 105,074 1,890,741 1,995,815 2,007,127
Restricted enveslments (Note 11) 4.180.920 1.000,000 5,180,920 5.182,719
Restricted receivables 473.344.
Investments for defened compensation
plan - at Markel (Note 12) $3,174,761 3,174.761 2,635,726
Propeny, plant and equipment (Note 3) 39081,292 4,190.101 514,085.155 57,356,548 53,093,491
Less accunlulaled depiecialion (8,861698) (2,205.353) (11067,051) (10,186,380)
Amount evadable in Debt Service Funds $6,451,107 6,451,107 5.688.104
Amount to be provided for General Long-
Tenn Debt 15,763,893 15,763,893 12.011, am
Total Assets and Other Debits 57,586,042 $305,797 $6,925.550 $18,797,227 $42002685 56,496,768 S3,174,761 $14,085,155 522.215,000 S121.588.985 5107,952.286
City of Brooklyn Center
All Fund Types and Account Groups
COMBINED BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 1995
Fiduciary Totals
Guvemmenial Fund Types Prop rietary Fund Types Fun Types Ac coun t Groups M- Aridlum Only
General Genual
Special Debt Capital Internal Fixed Long.Term December 31,
LIABILITIES, EQUITY AND OTHER CREDITS General Revenue Snmce Projects Enterprise Semce Agency Assets Debt 1995 1994
Liab ilitie s
Accounts payable $245.562 $1,373 $8866 $217.528 $103.362 $636,711 11767,202
Contracts payable 347,132 952.564 1,2 AIIII{ ; 127,485
Due to that governments 17.785 /7,785 141,105
Due to other funds (Note 8) 1344.983 1050477 595,155 2.991.215 3,224.156
Accrued salaries and wages 134,852 4.140 37.763 3.837 180.392 150.313
Accrued vacation 6 sick pay (Nola 1J) 583 171 21,970 52.459 23,725 661,325 814,693
Accrued health m intime 987 081 987.081 205.876
Accrued mtarest payable 37,760 37.760 37,760
Advances horn other funds (Note 6) 698.143 1 291,672 1,995 815 2,007.127
06feuedrevenue 790.000 13.345 $474,443 2,432115 3,709,963 3835,336
04bihues payable hum rcslncled essels 54'710
State aid street bonds payable (Nole 5) $2.455,000 2.455,000 2605800
Special assessment debt with government
commdmenl(Note 5) 805 5,000 1,705.000 4 ,010000
T 1B 055,000 116,055.000 t4 065.000
Tax increment bonds payable (Note 5)
Revenue bonds payable (Note 5) 1.630.000 1,830,000 1,830.000
Detested compensation funds held for
W S3,174,761 781 3,174.761 2.635.726
participants (Note 12)
Total Liabilities 1,751,250 2.057,844 474,443 3.864,700 5.081,501 1,118,005 3,174,761 22.215,000 39,737,504 33,322.749
founv _Lrd O het
!S'
Conlubuled captal (Not. 6) 20997,801 3.8581406 24,658,207 25,302.015
Investment n1 general fixed assets S14.085 155 11 085.155 12.985809
Retained earnings
Reserved
Debt Service 198 315 108.315 90.625
Special astessmenls 134 510 134 570 65,476
Uneserved 15 590 498 1.520,357 17.110655 15137,009
Fund Balances (Deficits)
Reserved
Debt service 6451 101 8.451,107 5,686.104
Bond pracoeds 3,477,619 3.477,619
Dedicated housing account (Nee U) 1.000,000 1,000 1 000,000
Advances to other funds 105.074 1.890.741 1,985,815 2.001,127
Unexpended spptopnatwns 223.951
Unreserved
Designated
Working capital 5.276.757 5,276.757 5.052.687
Unexpended appropoalrons 109.750 109,750 56.652
Undesignated 343.211 (1,752,047) 8.584,187 7.155,331 6,320,062
loNl Egmty end Other Credits 5834,792 (1 6 14,932,527 380921,184 5 14.085155 81,651,461 74,629.537
total Egany & Other Credits $7,5 86,042 5305.797 $6. 925,550 $18,797.227 $42002.685 56.49 6,788 $3. 114 761 $14 065,155 622,2 15.000 6121,566,965 1107, 95 2.266
City of Brooklyn Center
All Fund Types and Account Groups
COMBINED BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 1994
Fiduciary Tola%
Governmental Fund Types Proprietary Fund Types Fund Types Account Groups (Memorandum Only
General General
Special Debt Capital Internal Fixed Long -Term December 31,
General Revenue Service Projects Enterprise Service Agency Assets Debt 1994 1993
ASSETS AND OTHER DEBITS
Cash, cash equivalents and
Investments $6,071,449 $53,189 51,505,385 $9,845.641 $4,922,337 $3,840,501 $26,238,508 $24,311,553
Receivables
Accounts 42,150 280,572 69,192 970,738 3,027 1,365,679 1,082,393
Delinquent taxes 237,996 9,648 247,644 191,149
Special assessments
1i Deferred 21,010 445,415 1,018,095 61,686 1,546,406 1,538,827
Delinquent 1,145 7,922 46,181 3,590 58,836 43,068
Due from other funds 103.066 103,066 147,584
Due from other governments 21,841 65,816 1,966,764 940,091 2,9911,512 1,969,190
Irnentones and supplies 328 575 17,874 348,449 319,790
Prepaid expenses 143,157 143,157 153,342
Interfund advances 105,074 1,902,053 2,007,127 1,958,087
Restricted investments 4,182,719 1,000,000 4,000,000 9,182,719 9,184,451
Restricted receivables 473,344 473,344
Investments for defamed compensation
Man - at market $2,635,726 2,835,726 2,532,735
Property, plant and equipment 36,170,962 3,936,720 $12,985,809 53,093,491 49,921,592
Less aocumulateddepredation (8,203,431) (1,982,949) (10,186,380) (9,396,500)
Amount available In Debt Servcee Funds $5,688,104 5,688,104 5,810,719
Amount to be provided for General Long-
Term Debt 12,011,696 12,011,896 11,796,281
Total Assets and Other Debits $6,4�� $421,732 $6,141,441 $15,962,646 $39,811,249 $5,815,173 $2,635,726 $12.985,609 $17� 700,000 $107,952,286 $101,600,261
§§ ! k4 ® &§
. / k
# f# 1 # #
k {7 k ` E /
k ( { {
; �k
I v
!� «»
}!&+
\\\ \
/ \
! k
10 } }
! |
) ! |(ƒ \)f {!.}7) k ƒi !�' �■ ! £� i� / !
- �,t!` =�■�_� °.. �!§! §' 22 � 2 ® 2� !
2z■ i - ;!| 1 ;` , #_
�f;[ ; | >! ) !!l / |f| | °! |�!!\
/ \ } / \ } \})!}!\\ \ °& }$� \ %f7il!# A /
! «
� .
�
1-
City of Brooklyn Center
All Fund Types and Account Groups
COMBINED BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 1040
Fiduciary Totole
G Fund Types Proprietary Fund Type Fund Types Account Groups _ (Memorandum Only)
General General
Special Debt Capital Internal Fixed Long -Term December 31,
Gornerat Hevenua Service Pr�cts Enterpllse Setvlce Ationc Assets Debt 1400 1042
ASSETS
Cash, cash equivalents and
Investmems $5,525,420 $30,528 $1,6612,266 $8,575,138 $4,810,827 $2,648,363 $24,311,653 111120,540,586
Receivables:
Accounts 50,468 460 16,202 1,015,743 1,062,343 868,374
Delinquent taxes 183,487 7,152 101,144 351,140
Special assessments:
Ql Delsned 20,430 428,306 407,804 86,268 1,538,827 1,806,061
Delinquent 1,100 8,886 31,423 3,600 43,068 46,044
Duo from otter funds 147,584 147,684 206,380
Due from other governments 11,027 148,000 1,644,539 164,721 1,469,140 1,260,647
Inventaiss and supplies 310,700 314,700 263,461
Prepaid oWenses 153,342 153,342 146,S88
Intetfund advances 105,074 1,853,013 1,658,087 1,477,344
Restricted investments 4,184,451 1,000,000 4,000,000 0,184,451 5,000,000
Investments lot deferred compensation
plan - at market $2,532,735 2,532,735 2,241,152
Property. plant and equipment 34,524.6% 3,136,507 $12,260,940 49,021,502 48,742,348
Less accumulated depreciation (7,7133.063) (1.635,437) (4,358,500) (7,2114.190)
Amount available In Debt Service Funds $6,846,714 5,646,714 7,279,029
Amount to be provided for General Long -
Tom Deb 11,798,281 11,7".261 11,466,471
Total Assets $5, 877 ,405 $216,624 $0,281,700 $16,271,662 $37,316 „189 $4,190,523 $2,532,735 $12,260,340 817,"3,000 $101,600,261 $104,432,575
..aar.s.r ar.r.ror aara.aa .....arid. raa.ra rid rrrrss :aid •rraaaar rw us:rrr .arras... a-ar aaaraaora - rasa -o
City of Brooklyn
All Fund Types and Account Groups
COMBINED BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 1993
Fiduciary Totals
Gowrnmental fu nd Types Proprietary Fund Types _ Fund Types Account Groups _ (Memorandum Only)
General Genstal
Spectral Debt Capital lntemd Fixed Lore -Term December 31,
LIABILITIES, EQUITY AND OTHER CREDITS Genaral Revenue Service Pro acts ErdorpiW Service AAgencY Assets Debt 1093 11192
Liabilities
Accounts payable $277.268 $2,002 $82,6= $404.212 $718,724 $864,770
Ous to other funds 147,584 147,564 206,389
Accrued ealwies and wagea 123,328 2, 400 45,173 $216,644 387,445 322,006
Accrued vacation d mok pay 637,112 17,510 43,900 506,501 598,191
Inwrgovemmental payable 4,061 79,404 548
81,913 91,677
Temporary Improvement note, 1,371,744 1,039,960 306,479 2,713,602 2,639,657
Deterred revenue 323,067 27,530 $434,990 2,056,025
Interfund bane 906 143 1 3.442,432 3,215,600
,?50,$$44 1.956,087 1.077,344
Cart. of Indebtedness 6 G.O. bonds payable 0 B66 000
G.O. elate aid street bonds payable 82 ,750,000 2,750,000 2;865,000
Special assessrnenl bonds payable 275,000 276,000 385,000
Tax increment bonds payable 14,920,000 14,020,000 16,110,000
Deferred oompsneMion (undo hold lor participants $2,532,735 2,532,735 2,241,152
Total Liabilities 1,298,876 2,324,007 434,900 3,776,073 2,058,768 210,544 2,532,736 17,045,000 30,254,303 31,462,270
Equity and Other Credits
v Owlillwtedcapital 21,581,612 3,139,567 24,716,100 21,874,660
Investment In general fixed aasous $12,280,340 12',200,340 15,161,661
ReWned earnings:
Reserved:
Special asssssmente 90,148 90,148 05,646
Plant expansion 4,000,000 4,000.000 4,000,000
Unreserved 0,585,736 845,362 10,432,117 9,137,472
Fund Balances (Deficile):
Reserved:
Debt service 5,640,710 5,849,719 7,279,029
Unexpended appropriations 970,561 679.551 1,067,956
Dedicated housing aocourH 1,000,000 1.000,000 1,000,000
Inlertund loans 105,074 1,853,013 1,958,087 1,977,344
Bond proceeds 0 502.130
Unreserved:
Designated:
Working capital 4,488,376
4,499,375 4,809,490
Unexpended appropriations 30,280
38,260 36,070
Undeslgnated (2.108,463) 7,963,025 5.656, 142 5,608,402
Total Ertuhy and Other Credits 4,610,729 (2,108,483) 5,849,710 11,496,189 35,257,306 3,982,979 12.200,340 71,345,696 72,070,299
TOTAL LIABILITIES , EQUITY &OTHERCREDITS $6 ,877,406 $215,524 $9,261,709 615, 271,1182 537,316,193 $4,$99,523 $2,532,735 $12,290,340 617,645,000 $101,600,261 $104,432,575
. r. r.c.rnra.aac ................rsr crcrr»rr ...... ........ c....... ........ ........ .......... r.......
(See notes to financial statenwnle)
City of Brooklyn Center
All Governmental Fund Types
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES (DEFICITS)
For the Year Ended December 31, 1995
Totals
Special Debt Capital Memo r a ndum Only
Re General Revenue Service Projects 1995 1994
Taxes and special assessments $5.946,363 $1,766,376 $351,890 $653.623 $8,718,252 $8.053.17'_
318,202 318,202 317,62
Licenses and ntal permits
Intergovernmental 3,543,009 264,641 1,342,397 5.150,047 4,350.181
Charges (or services 822,530 6,264 828.794 844,377.
Court fines 178,263 178.263 113,57:
Investment earnings 256,304 3.114 253.540 702,273 1,215.231 1,177.2%
Miscellaneous 15,205 16,820 32,025 50,730
Total Revenues 11 079,876 2,040,395 605,430 2,715,113 16.440.814 14.906,92:
Expenditures
Current:
1.831,045 1. 409,49 0
General government 1.831,045
4.598,618 4.598.618 4.409.490
Public safety 1.363.244 1.230.565
Public works 1.363,244 -
Community services 41,146 41.146 41.49E
Parks and recreation 2.226,121 14.386 2.240,507 2,074,631,
Economic development 209.576 44,025 522,931 776.532 1.001,991
OD Non - departmental 288,747 289 312,774
Capital outlay
3,493,127 3.493.127 1,732.86:
Debi service:
Principal retirement 825.000 825,000 784000
Interest and fiscal charges 78.277 1,077,985 92,563 1,248,825 1,272.970
Total Expenditures 10.559,497 136.688 1,902,985 4,108,621 16,707.791 14.549.067
Excess or Deficiency(-) of Revenues Over Expenditures 520,379 1,903,707 (1,297,555) (1,393,508) (266,977) 357.850
Other Financing Sources or Uses( -)
Proceeds from sale al bonds 468.833 4,815.920 5.284.753 828.513
100,000 1.591,725 408.736 2,100.461 2.673.99(
Operating transfers in
Operating transfers out (1.549,641) (450,820) (2.000.461) (2,698.832
Total Other Financing Sources or Uses( -) 100,000 (1,549,641) 2.060,558 4,773.836 5,384,753 801671
Excess or Deficiency( -) of Revenues and Other
620,379 754 066 763.003 7.780,328 5,117,776 1.161.521
Sources Over Expenditures and Other Uses
Fund Balances (Deficits) January 1 5,214.413 (2.106.113) 5.688.104 17.552.199 20.348,603 19,945.15•
1658.078
Equity Transfers Out
Fund Balances (Deficits) December 31 $5.834,792 ($1,752. $6� $14.932,52 $25,466,3 $2
City of Brooklyn Center
AN Governmental Fund Types
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
For the Year Ended December 31, 1994
Totals
Special Debt Capital Memorandum Only
Revenues General Revenue Service Propels 19N 1993
Taxes and special assessments $5,703,773 $1,529,651 $328,696 $491,057 $8,053,177 $7,571,724
Licenses and permits 317,620 317,620 300,480
Intergovernmerrtai 3,353,247 184,836 812,096 4,350,181 3,679,863
Charges for services 825,959 18,413 844,372 850,366
Court fines 113,573 113,573 140,104
Investment earnings 218,671 2,233 261,876 894,490 1,177,270 1,330,768
Miscellaneous 22 ,899 27,831 50,730 728,667
Total Revenues 10,555,742 1,735,133 590,572 2,025,476 14,906,923 14,601,972
Excenditures
Current:
General government 1,692,268 1,692,268 1,560,674
Public safety 4,409,490 4,409,490 3,870,563
Public works 1,230,565 1,230,565 1,756,187
Community services 41,495 41,495 41,325
Parks and recreation 2,055,479 19,159 2,074,638 2,022,668
Economic development 199,982 72,270 729,739 1,001,991 675,150
Non - departmental 312,779 312,779 300,803
Capital outlay 1,732,862 1,732,862 2,629,938
Debt service:
Principal retirement 780,000 780,000 1,710,000
Interest and fiscal charges 81,656 1,082,191 109,132 1,272,979 1,399,704
Total Expenditures 9,942,058 173,085 1,862,191 2,571,733 14,549,067 15,967,012
Excess or Deficiency( -) of Revenues Over Expendit 613,684 1,562,048 (1,271,619) (546,257) 357,856 (1,365,040)
Other Financing Sources or U0s( -1
Proceeds from sale of bonds 3,533 824,980 828,513
Operating transfers in 190,000 1,559,471 1,014,519 2,763,990 2,316,801
Operating transfers ouI (1,559,678) (1,229,154) (2,788,832) (2,301,611)
Sale of certificates of indebtedness 120,000
Total Other Financing Sources or Uses(-) 190,000 (1,559,678) 1,563,004 610,345 803,671 135,190
Excess or Deficiency(-) of Revenues and Other
Sources Over Expenditures and Other Uses 803,684 2,370 291,385 64.088 1,161,527 (1,229,850)
Fund Balances (Defiafs) January 1 4,610,729 (2,108,483) 5,846,719 11,496,189 19,845,154 22.710,441
Equity Transfers Out (200,000) (450,000) (8,078) (868.078) (1,635,437)
Fund Balances (Deficits) December 31 $5,214,413 ($2,106,113) $5,688,104 $11,552,199 $20,348,603 $19,845,154
•
IV -9
City of Brooklyn Center WXHiBi
All Governmental Fund Types
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES. AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
For the Year Ended December 31. 1993
Totals
spacial Debt Capital (Memorandum Only)
Revenues General Revenue Service Projects 2 L
Taxes and special assessments 55,006,710 :1,526,425 $454,085 $594,504 57,571,724 $1,089,428
Licenses and permits 300,480 300.480 332.186
Intergovernmental 3,157,214 240,781 59.410 213,458 3,670,853 4,337,059
Charges for services 838,883 11,483 850.366 813.846
Court fines 140,104 140.104 148.701
Investment earnings 249,688 1,838 332,522 748,920 1,330,768 1,430,982
Miscellaneous 20,523 099,144 728.667 827,972
Total Revenues 9.732,602 1,780,527 844,917 2,244.028 14,801.972 14,979,974
Eir endlturea
Current:
General government 1,560,674 1,560,674 1,797,895
Public safety 3,970,583 3,870,503 3,938,920
Public works 1,758,187 1,756,187 1,594,190
Community health services 41,325 41,325 114,579
Parks and recreation 1,990,270 23,398 2.022.608 1,812, WI
Economic development 179,703 1,042, 495,405 676.150 611,293
Nondepartmontal 300,903 300.803 273,273
Capital outlay 2,829,938 2.829,938 3,324,164
Debt sorvice:
Principal retirement 1,710,000 1.710,000 100,00
Interest and fiscal charges 07,853 1,188,270 113,781 1,399,704 1,507,1
Total MKpenditures 9,707,525 122,093 2,898,270 3,239,124 15,967,012 18,854,404
Excess or De of Revenues Over Expenditure 25.077 1.656.434 (2,053,453) (995,098) (1,365,0410) (1,874,430)
Other Financing Sources or Usee( -)
Operating transfers in 175,000 1,746,580 305,221 2.516,80 t 3,541,226
Operating transfers out (1,526,591) (240,000) (536,020) (2,301,611) (3,810,963)
Proceeds from sale of refunding bonds 4.279.000
Sale of certificates of Indebtedness 120,000 120.000 480,000
Total Other Financ Sources or Uses( -) 206,000 (1.525,591) 1,506,580 (140,79" 135,190 4,480,273
Excess or Doflcloncr( -) of Revenues and Other
Sources Over Expenditures and Other Uses 320,077 132,843 (546,873) (1,135,897) (1,229,850) 2,605,643
Fund Balances (Deficits) January 1 5,040,652 (2,241,328) 7,279,029 12,032.088 22,710,441 20.104,598
Equity Transfers Out (750,000) (885,437) (1,635,437)
Fund Dalwices (Deficits) December 31 $4.010,729 ($2,108,483) $5,846.719 $11,496,189 519,845.154 $22,710,441
a�cczssasxzx:sxazzzaxzz :zxz iite���a acasazaz sszzxx saazzzzsx xxzzxxazz cn.zazzax
•
IV °10
•
City of Biouklyn Center
General, Special Revenue and Annually Budgeted Capital Projects Funds
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES. EXPENDITURES,
AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
For the Year Ended December 31, 1995
Annually Budgeted
General Fund Special Revenue Funds Capital Projec Fun
Actual Over Actual Over Actual Over
Under( -) Under( -) Under( -)
Budget Actual Budget Budget Actual Budget Budget lua) BudRal
Rev en 1
Taxes and special assessments $6,398,165 $5,946,363 ($451,802) $1,408,724 $1.766,376 $357,652 $291,527 $290,151 ($1,376)
Licenses and permits 296,400 318,202 21,802
Intergovernmental 3,489,876 3,543,009 53,133 253,334 264,641 11,307 18,304 18,304
Charges (or services 897,732 822,530 (75,202) 12,000 6,264 (5,736)
Court lines 112,000 178,263 66,263
Invasimenlearnings 186,000 256,304 70,304 1,000 3,114 2,114 62,500 142,218 79,718
Miscellaneous 14,000 15,205 1,205 23,500 12,845 (10,655)
Total Revenues 11,394,173 11,079,876 (314,297) 1,675,058 2,040,395 365,337 395,831 463,518 67,667
x e 1115 ..
General government 1,966,016 1,831,045 (134,971)
Public safety 4,862,748 4,598,618 (264,130)
Public works 1,56,386 1,363,244 (197,142)
.a Community services 41,146 41,146
Parks and recreation 2,401,651 2,226,121 (175,530) 30,000 14,386 (15,614)
Economic development 209,625 209,576 (49) 42,824 44,025 1,201 4,694,445 1,023,194 (3,671,251)
Non- depadmenlat 405,351 289,747 (115,604)
Interest and fiscal charges 98,000 76,277 (19,723)
Total Expenditures 11,446,923 10,559,497 (887,426) 170,824 136,688 (34,136) 4,694,445 1,023,194 (3,671,251)
Excess or Deficiency( -) of Revenues
Over Expenditures (52,750) 520,379 573,129 1,504,234 1,903,707 399,473 (4.298,614) (559,676) 3,738,938
Oltmer Financing Sources or Uses( -)
Sale of bonds 4.045,280 4,045,280
Operating transfers In 100,000 100,000 390,308 401,379 11,071
Operating transfers out (1,538,334) (1,549,641) (11,307) (136,974) (136,738) 236
Total Other Financing Sources or Uses( -) 100,000 100,000 0 (1,538,334) (1,549,841) (11,307) 4,298,614 4,309,921 11,307
Excess or Deficiency( -) of Revenues and Other
Sources Over Expenditures and Other Uses 47,250 620,379 573,129 (34,100) 354,066 388,166 0 3,750,245 3,750,245
Fund Balances (Deficits) January 1 5,214,413 5,214,413 (2,106,113) (2,106,113) 2,216,176 2,216,176
Fund Balances (Deficits) December 31 $5,261,663 $5,834,792 $573,129 ($2,140,213) ($1,752,047) $388,166 $2,216,176 $5,966,421 $3,750.245
City of Brooklyn Center
General and Special Revenue Funds
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES,
AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
For the Year Ended December 31, 1964
General Fund Special Revenue Funds
Actual Over Actual Over
Under( -) Undsr(-)
Budge! Actual Budget Budget Acxtsl Bud"
Revenues
Property taxes $5,884,414 $5,703,773 ($180.641) $1,355,000 $1,529,8fi1 $164,651
Licenses and permits 289,300 317,620 28,320
Intergovernmental 3,320,818 3,353,247 32,429 235,627 184,836 (50,791)
Charge for services 943,133 825,959 (117,174) 15,000 18,413 3,413
Court fines 144,000 113,573 (30,427)
Investment earnings 170,000 218,671 48,671 1,500 2233 733
Miscellaneous 14,500 22,899 8,396
Total Revenues 10,766,165 10,555,742 (210,423) 1,617,127 1,735,133 118,006
Exze_nditures
General government 1,808,919 1,692,268 (116,651)
Public safety 4,675,502 4,409,490 (286,012)
Public works 1,562,401 1,230,565 (331,836)
Community services 41,572 41,495 (77)
Parka and recreation 2.205,448 2,055,479 (149,9W) 28,000 19,159 (8,841)
Economic development 206,000 199,982 (6,018) 1,100 72,270 71,170
Non-departmental 456,323 312,779 (143,544)
Interest and fiscal charges 104,000 81,6W (22,344)
Total Expenditures 10,956,165 9,942,066 (1,014,107) 133,100 173,085 39,985
Excess or Deficiency( -) of Revenues
Over E (190,000) 613,884 803,684 1,484,027 1,562,048 78,021
Other Financing Sources or Used -)
Operating transfers in 190,000 190,000
Operating transfers out (1,638,808} (1,559,678) 79,128
Total Other Financing Sources or Uses(-) 190,000 190,000 0 (1,638,806) (1,559,678) 79,128
Excess or Deficiency(-) of Revenues and Other
Sources Over Expendihrss and Other Uses 0 803,684 803,684 (154,779) 2,370 157,149
Fund Balances (Deficits) January 1 4,610,729 4,610,729 (2, ( 2 , 108 . 483 )
Equity Transfer Out (200.000) (200,000)
Fund Balances (Deficits) December 31 $4,410,729 $5,214,413 $803,684 ($2,263,262) ($2,106,113) $157,149
•
IV-12
City of Brooklyn Cantor
General and Special Revenue Funds
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES. EXPENDITURES,
AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
For the Year Ended December 31, 1903
General Fund Sp Revenue F unds _
Actual Over Actual Ovor
Under( -) Under(-)
B udget Actual Budget lagod Actual Budget
!Revenues
Propertytaxos $5,350,325 $5,006,710 (5343,815) 81.213,750 51526,425 $312.675
Licenses and permits 300,230 300,480 250
Intergovernmental 3,158.489 3,167.214 6,725 217,491 240,781 23,200
Charge for services 1,072.816 838,883 (233,993) 10,000 11,483 1,483
Court fines 200,000 140.104 (69,898)
Investment eamings 210,000 249,898 39,888 1,500 1,838 338
Miscollanoous 11,650 20,523 17,884
Total Rownues 10,903,St9 0,732,802 (570,9.7) 1,442,741 1,780,527 337,788
Expenditures
General government 1,885,061 1.680.674 (124,377)
Public safety 4,160,472 7.870,565 (279.909)
Public works 1,641,380 1.768,187 (86,193)
Community health services 51,326 41,626 (10,000)
Parks and recreation 2,192,127 1,900,270 (192,857) 25,000 23,306 (1,802)
Economic development 190,000 178,703 (11,297) 1,100 1,042 (58)
Nondapartmontal 488,164 300.803 (187,361)
Interest and fiscal charges 170,000 $7,853 (72,347)
Total Expendi 10,696,610 9,707,626 (890.994) 19e,100 122,093 (74,007)
&cesc or Deficiency(-) of Ravenur•s
Over Expenditures (295.000) 25,077 320,077 1,246,641 1,658,434 411,793
O_ ther Financing Sources or Uses(
Operating transfers in 179,000 176,000
Operating transfers out (1,614,463) (1.626,691) 68,872
Sale of certificates of Indebtedness 120,000 120,000
Total Other Financina Sources or Uses( -) 295.000 295,000 0 (1,614,463) (1,626,691) 88,872
Z?Lc- or,D eficiency( -) of Revenues and Other
Sources Over Expenditures and Other Uses 0 320,077 320,077
(367,822) 132,813 300,.186
Fund Balances (Deficits) January 1 6,040,862 6.040.652 (2.241,326) (2.241,320)
Equity transfer Out (750,000) (750,000)
Fund Balances (Deficits) December 31 $4,290.662 $4,010.729 $320,077 ($2,609.148) (52.108.483) 5500,865
faccccaccssccacxzsc : smazcas a --mass zzz*4u'w czszzzz czszszz- zzzzz -_:z c_zzzzz
•
IV -13
City of Brooklyn Center
A great place to start. A great place to stay.
•
To: Mayor Kragness and Council Members Carmody, Hilstrom, Mann, and Nichols
From: Michael J. McCaule
City Manager
Date: September 19, 1996
Re: Discussion of Capital Improvement Projects
The attached materials from Ms. Spector outline potential street projects for 1997. The costs and
funding outlined in the memo provide a basis for discussion with the City Council. If we were to
proceed with the Orchard Lane project it would use all of the funds anticipated to be generated in
1997 in the General Fund not designated for operations and any under spent appropriations in the
1996 budget. Approximately $100,000 +/- might also be required from fund balance in the
Capital Improvement Fund. The implication of that undertaking would result in no other capital
projects such as park improvements in 1997. The discussion on the potential projects is to obtain
direction from the City Council as the recommended 1997 project list is prepared for further
• consideration.
Ms. Spector also raises the issue of assessment stabilization and the special assessment rate. She
suggests discontinuance of the stabilization program. At this point, I have not formulated a
recommendation for the council on assessment stabilization pending a discussion of the council's
objectives and thoughts. I think we should increase the amount charged property owners for
special assessments to keep the charge adjusted over time.
6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300
Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494
An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 18, 1996
TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager
l O/
FROM: Diane Spector, Director of Public ServicesC W
SUBJECT: Staff Report Regarding Potential 1997 Neighborhood Street Projects
Three street projects are proposed for consideration in 1997. One of these projects is a
neighborhood street and utility improvement project; one is a regular Municipal State Aid
project; and the third is a commercial street project.
How Are Projects Selected
Neighborhood street projects are prioritized based on a qualitative and quantitative evaluation of
conditions, with areas which have multiple needs being of higher priority. Also a factor in
designating areas as being of higher priority are: reduction of operating costs;. completion of
regional improvements; receipt of petition; and redevelopment issues.
• A common thread in all the neighborhood projects undertaken so far have been storm drainage
needs. Major drainage improvements were made on eve project, including the construction of
P every
p J g
six wet and one dry detention ponds, and major trunk storm sewer capacity improvements. As
was detailed in the development of the City's Local Storm Water Management Plan, Brooklyn
Center was constructed with only a skeletal storm drainage system, which is severely under
capacity. Most of the attention has been on correcting the wort f the g s o h local flooding problems.
Another thread is the replacement of a significant amount of sanitary sewer main. A large
portion of our system was constructed during a time when it was standard practice to use
ungasketed pipe. Over the years, we have experienced a high amount of root infiltration in the
sewers. This leads to two sources of increased operating costs: first, it requires a significant
investment in time and equipment to root saw or treat sewer mains to keep them clear of roots.
Second, where roots infiltrate, so can ground water. We pay for sewage treatment based on the
flow of everything that comes through our pipes through the MCES meter stations, whether it is
sewage or groundwater. We know we have infiltration, because every time it rains our lift
stations run longer than usual, and during rainy years our pumpage measured by MCES is higher
than in dry years. We have prioritized areas which we know have required a significant amount
of root sawing or other sewer maintenance. Replacing the sanitary sewer with new pipe
eliminates the infiltration problem, and over time should reduce operating costs.
Finally, the project areas have all had other needs as well, such as the replacement of the bridge
• over Shingle Creek, revitalization issues, potential redevelopment issues, regular rehabilitation of
• Page 2
a state aid street, etc. All the problem areas cited so far would justify an improvement project on
their own if the problem were severe enough. All the project areas selected so far have been a
high priority in several of the problem areas.
Orchard Lane West
The neighborhood project proposed for 1997 is called Orchard Lane West. At 4.5 miles of
streets this would be the largest contiguous area undertaken so far in the neighborhood Street and
Utility Improvement Program. Continuing in the area begun in 1996 with the Orchard Lane East
project, Orchard West would reconstruct all neighborhood streets west of Orchard Avenue, from
61 st Avenue to I -694 (see Map 1), to a neighborhood standard of 30 feet wide with concrete curb
and gutter. This would complete drainage improvements begun with the Cahlander Park pond
and the Orchard Lane East project. There is additional "downstream" work which is necessary to
complete all the major drainage needs in the subwatershed, but those are of a lower priority.
However, the major focus of this project would be on improving drinking water quality. This
area has for many years had the worst water quality in the city and most complaints from
residents. This is due mainly to two factors: the area is a hydraulic "dead end," essentially the
area farthest from the well field and the transmission loop; and the watermain was constructed of
unlined cast iron pipe. After much study (including the option of reconstructing the streets and
replacing the watermain), in 1985 three circulating pumps were installed at various points in the
system, and the City began to add a new chemical treatment, zinc orthophosphate, to the water
supply. These actions reduced the number of complaints, but added a maintenance burden and
significant operating cost.
The condition of the streets in the proposed project area varies, but most are aging and
deteriorating. The streets south of 63rd are in the poorest condition, while Winchester, 66th, and
Howe are in relatively better shape. As conceptualized in 1996, the proposed project excluded
those three streets. However, on further review they have been added to the proposed project so
as to complete the drainage and utility improvements in the middle -west subwatershed.
As noted above, there are two main reasons for considering this area at this time: drinking water
quality, and completion of area drainage improvements. Televised inspection has shown that the
sanitary sewer is in need of replacement in many areas as well. The proposed project would
replace nearly one -half of the remaining unlined cast iron water main in the City and provide a
major improvement to the quality of drinking water in the neighborhood.
Table 1 below shows a preliminary estimate of the cost of the project. The assessment figures
assume that street assessments will rise from $1,850 to $2,000 and storm drainage assessments
will rise from $625 to $650. The street light replacements assume replacement of existing lights,
and installation of mid -block lights in a few locations on long blocks which meet the current
street light location policy.
CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK W0 501 DIST 279 UN SO 1 ,
J3- 119- z1- trollz. g ° O
BROOKLYN CENTER CITY LIMITS
° & 3 V
p �.• p! � $ w ° � � � $ `" 0324
5401 S s u o �i v L $ g 6318
��;i i C n : Li CJ 2
- 6313 � w _� g N 5312
p ' •°u• G a u i o 5307 5308 5307 3308 5307 5306
T w o 5300
w w — 6307
5310 N n 5130 5331 5330 ° w w u' w 6301 5300 6301 5300 6m1 6300
63]1 w 3 5300 1�
:i�F1k3 6324 °
1 O 3231 6230 3231 6230
5325 6324 6325 § `� 5230 5231 5230
6310 ::; ! �R 6118 6225
5319 6770 ate 5309 w w o w ; 5224 6220 0224 0224
_ i% '�! ° 041, 6223 6224
6313 6312 6312 w o + 5210 6218 0279 5218
6312 6313 7 aJ17 8300 5710 6219 21
bT p) v
6307 6 ;08 ;:'2!19 t r
_ 6308 6307 ;js:s�; ;$ ¢; 5307 8308 6301 Woo 52 6219 5211 3712 53 6277 6213 5212
5301 5300 ;;d}i�i :• 6]00 5300 5213 6212 6213 6212
-- 6300 aJOt 6213 5207 0200 5707 5206 .6207 6208
5219 5212�+�: �i s212 0207 02 5207 02 6200
8213. i:;:;+., b,t�. 6ZI3 5717 - 6200 0201 3200 6201
az12 _ .p.37aX s2o> w w C Y ° 5200 ezot
8213 5207 Sz08 6208 w -- _ = bl]0 �•.
O -- n2 ? azo7 -4 u �' 6131 6130 3131 8130 6131 O
5207 1D 1
6130 6124 .P
0201 N 5125
6200 s o P w j 3120 6124 6125 5124
.� 0 0 3 + N 6124 6118
5 AVE. N.
c N 51,9 �
SC01 t w o q �i 5118 m19 6ne 5119 a17s 6119 slts 5112
0 5112 5113 '1 p 5113 5113 3112 5113
X o + D 5112 6112 5113 5113 5112
(A sloe
o .0. :U
D s 0 5108 6107 ' rtl 5107 x100 3107
0 5106 3107 llli 5107 5 th 3100
r- 3+ N ° ° ° ° 101 Sup 5107 § atos 5101 slop 5101
v 3+ 3 D slot a v u 5100 0101 . 5100 3101 5100
c1 y �+ EioRi 6012
+ 5013 X73 6012 3013 5070 sou
� • i • f yr� }y�� w w a
— 0019 3 3 E� EN N p ^ 1 w 7R Z 44 444:1,- 3 G N + 5007
3007 001: 0007 a01s 3008
0 301 o w 3000 5001 6000
o t '�)� o 5001
p O
5013 "' w w ? �' w w 3 + cool 5000 5001 Solt 4919 4918
g 3 w 500 a d e 4918 300 004 ooe
5007 3 o u m u e j. 4919 4912
4913
5001 D ?1Qj + p� p! ° + = �°, ? 4912 4913 r r. -- w ° ° w ri;f;•' ~ o c N 4906 �' 4901 4006
4919 go 3 ° 1 °1 N N ^3 ^� �+ !'t 49211x:;:. — 4907 9! v 901 �' —
4913 o N a + g o # -- 4906 w r—, i ° 4900
4819 u
pp!! gg!! q�!! q• q
---�---.'- - + .°+ N � ° N w w ° w ° 490 � � �+' � � Ci �• � � s u u yi � � Y 4810
4907
__ O V 4 G w p
_ PERRY AVE. N. ° f $:
qA� y� Ti 13 4012
4901 a G O '+' g N 5F
m
y . N N o a
- - -- - - _ w • 4811 1 _ 4807 4806
N [?
� # p u a�G �p ••144,,..•,,,•x,,•• - -- -- - 4801 4a00
O 4601 ..
CG (2
0
Page 3
Table 1
Preliminary Estimated Cost, Orchard Lane West Project
COSTS
Construction (incl 25 %) $3,303,000
Staff Engineering 180,000
Professional Services 15,000
Admin, Legal 50,000
Street Light Replacements 102,500
Tree Replacements 25,000
TOTAL COST $3,675,500
FUNDING
Water Utility $1,001,050
Sanitary Sewer Utility 514,750
Storm Drainage Utility 229,650
Assessments - Street 1,028,000
Assessments - Storm Drainage 334,100
Other 567,950
TOTAL FUNDING $3,675,500
Crews have already begun field work for this project. We have sent an introductory letter to the
neighborhood, notifying them that this project is in the very early stages of consideration. We
also included a survey form which allowed residents to comment on their perceptions of needs in
the neighborhood. The results so far of that survey are attached.
France Avenue, 69th to N City Limits
France Avenue from 69th to the north city limits (see Map 2) is a major collector route serving
approximately 6500 vehicles daily. It is a Municipal State Aid route. As such, it should be
maintained in reasonable condition. It was last reconstructed in 1956. France Avenue has
• reached the end of its useful life. It is in poor condition, and requires drainage improvements.
Unlined water main is also in poor condition.
SURVEY
40
This survey will help us better understand needs in your neighborhood. Please return this
survey by September 27, 1996. You may also call us at 569 -3340 to talk about these issues.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Scott Brink, City Engineer
1. Our sewer televising shows a number of sanitary sewer services with moderate to severe
root infiltration. Have you experienced any problems with sanitary sewer service, such
as having the service cleaned out to the street? How often? Do you have boulevard
trees near your service?
• 2. Our
evaluation of the storm drainage system is that it is inadequate or undersized. Do
you have a problem with drainage or flooding? In the street, your yard, your
basement?
3. In the past, there have been some complaints regarding the domestic water distribution
system in your neighborhood. Are you currently experiencing any problems or concerns
with the following: water pressure, water quality, etc? Any additional comments or
concerns?
•
4. We have been referring to this project as the "Orchard Lane West" improvement, for
lack of anything better to call it. Does the neighborhood have a name for itself that you
• would prefer?
5. What other concerns do you have? Are there traffic problems? Specific code
enforcement needs? Street lighting? What kinds of ideas do you have for neighborhood
beautification? Are you interested in workshops on topics such as landscaping, ideas
for home remodeling, etc. ? Do you need blockwatch group information?
•
Should you have questions or need more information, please contact the engineering
department at 569 -3340.
Your name:
Address:
Please return by September 27, 1996 to:
Engineering Department
• City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
..... .. ::::': ::::i:::.'''
i;i %:; iii;
2':::g:;:•v '::::::::::: >• : ::::: i ........ ';.+ i:... i:ifi;o6y;`;.:::i.
lrf..
5007 61 st Ave No No No Happy with neighborhood now. Hope it
doesn't deteriorate.
5212 62nd Ave No l No No Unhappy with airport.
4811 63rd Ave No No No Speeding on 63rd
5207 64th Ave Once a year Flooding after Poor pressure, smells, rusty Very supportive of project, "should be
heavy rain commended for a fine job"
5300 64th Ave About 10 yrs ago No. Occasional No Husband is handicapped & wheel chair
backup at corner of bound. Will have special needs.
Scott & 64th if rain
is extremely heavy.
5000 65th Ave Every 2 years I No Buy bottled water, concerned about Speeding, increase street lighting. Strong
water quality. concerns about blvd tree removal. Review
survey.
5007 65th Ave No No Quality not good. Installed softener Appreciate code enforcement efforts
& drinking water system
5012 65th Ave Twice in 15 yrs 2 No Had pipes replaced 2 yrs ago None
5013 65th Ave Once a year 1 No Water pressure, rust Noise pollution, speeding on 65th, more
street lighting, better snow removal.
5100 65th Ave Every 5 years Drainage slow from Yes (no additional comments) Enforce speed limit, more street lighting and
drains in house code enforcement for yards and buildings.
5130 65th Ave New resident, Just New resident "Fishy" taste, low pressure Want block watch info. Would like to see
don't know removed stop sign on Scott at 65th. Barking and
one crying dog —all night long.
5206 65th Ave No Back yard drainage Smells, bad taste Speeding
during spring melt
5313 65th Ave No Corner of 65th & Terrible taste Street light between 65th & 63rd on Unity
Unity
5013 66th Ave No No Low pressure Improve street lighting by 3 or 4 times over
existing conditions. Requests block watch
information.
5020 66th Ave Twice in 10 yrs 1 No No None
.. . . . ........... ... »<
.............
....... . ...........
R :: »<:: >::;::::
..........
F . . ..
........ ...
5124 66th Ave Every 2 years Water in basement No Traffic too fast.
after heavy rain.
5125 66th Ave Once a year Water at end of Low pressure Too much traffic, need more street lights and
driveway code enforcement
5130 66th Ave No Yes, (no comments No None
written)
5219 66th Ave Every two years Only with hard rain, No Sidewalk maintenance during winter is
if outlet is clogged deteriorating
with leaves,
branches
5300 66th Ave Yes "Trees" "lake" after heavy No More code enforcement
rain on 66th—have
seen canoe in street
5307 66th Ave Once a year No Occasional problem Junk cars - more code enforcement
5301 Boulder Ln No No No Street lighting
5307 Boulder Ln Once I No Water pressure Speeding, street lights, speed limit signs
5330 Boulder Ln No No No Don't want any improvements.
5 101 Eleanor Ln Once a year Small amount of Tastes bad Speeding
flooding
5108 Eleanor Ln Twice in 20 years I No Low pressure, bad taste Barking dogs, untrimmed trees, speed limit
signs
5307 Eleanor Ln No No Terrible water Snowplowing
5324 Eleanor Ln 3 times in 32 yrs Good drainage Poor pressure, bad taste, orange in More street lighting. Beautification-get
color. Have purchased bottled people to repair homes
water for 10 years
4806 Howe Ln Twice in 30 years I Some buildup after No More code enforcement, requesting light on
heavy rain at 65th & telephone pole near freeway wall between
Perry 4806 and 4800
4807 Howe Ln Yes (no comments) No Low pressure when everyone is Requesting street lighting at east cul-de-sac
sprinkling. of Howe Lane and halfway point of walking
path of Orchard Lane Park.
.... .. ...
. ........
....... .... .
..........
. ... ...... ...
...........
4919 Howe Ln No No No More street lights on Perry between 63rd &
65th. Concerns about parking during
construction.
5012 Howe Ln Once a year 2 No Pressure not great, quality not None
good, lot of black specks
5112 Howe Ln Annually "Trees" No No Wants rental property maintained.
Workshops a good idea!
5212 Howe Ln No "Trees" Deep water after No Street lighting would be nice on Howe Lane.
heavy rain.
5231 Howe Ln No No No "Cut & dry project," very unhappy, thinks
they were lied to.
5324 Howe Ln No No No Too many to mention. See survey!
5106 Paul Dr No No No None
5112 Paul Dr Cleaned out twice I Drainage problems Water pressure, smell None
on Scott between
63rd & Paul Dr
5218 Paul Dr No problem since No No Happy fire hydrant was moved from
elm was removed driveway to corner
.6107 Perry Ave No I Drainage a problem No Why does a project take so long?
in street after
extremely heavy
rain.
6231 Perry Ave No No No Street lighting
6318 Perry Ave No 2 Water backs up No Traffic, street lights
after heavy rains -10
times in 29 years
6406 Perry Ave No I Lot of water in back No None
yard after heavy
rain. Installed
basement drain tile.
. ........ ...
............................. ....
.. ... ....
xi:i ...... .. ..
..........
f
.. ....... . . ... .
6419 Perry Ave Once every 3-5 1 No Sandy water at times, must run tub Street lighting on Perry between 63rd & 65th
years long time before water before
bathing.
6430 Perry Ave Three times Corner of Perry & No Speeding and failure to stop on 65th
65th
6543 Perry Ave No No No None
6100 Quail Ave Twice No Bad pressure None
6118 Quail Ave Annually I Water holes after Low pressure, some rust Replace street lights at existing locations
continuous, heavy with new type.
rain, some seepage
into basement
6200 Quail Ave No No Brown water. Drink bottled water. None
6207 Quail Ave Once in 30 years 2 No No None
6213 Quail Ave No No No Street lighting
6224 Quail Ave No No No None
6230 Quail Ave Once No No None
6320 Quail Ave No "Trees" No Some odor None
6321 Quail Ave Frequent clogged Basement flooding Water pressure, smell None
drains
6324 Quail Ave No comments Some water in Low water pressure. Hopes Selling home next year.
basement after improvements will help.
heavy rain or snow
melt.
6337 Quail Ave Every other year Flooding sometimes Brown water Block watch, landscaping workshop desired
6344 Quail Ave No I No No None
6400 Quail Ave No No No None
6412 Quail Ave No No Low pressure None
6424 Quail Ave No No No None
6430 Quail Ave No 1 No No Street lighting
... .............
........... ......... ....... ............ d.
.. .... . ..... ..
X..
.. . ........ .
...... . . . .
.....................
XX`
r
. . .. .....
..........
tbrm
IP7
..... ... ....... 0 ...
6436 Quail Ave Annually I Some basement Not very good, purchase bottled More street lighting. Additional code
flooding in heavy water enforcement needed in 2 or 3 homes in
rains neighborhood
6136 Regent Ave Once Some in basement, No Satisfied with traffic and lighting. Not
came in window interested in workshops
wells
6137 Regent Ave Twice in 25 years No Water pressure Happy about recent code enforcement
6200 Regent Ave Every 3 years "Trees" No No More code enforcement.
6201 Regent Ave No Backyard LoW pressure None
6314 Regent Ave No Storm drain backs Pressure, just changed pipes No
up - 64th/Regent
6412 Regent Ave No No No No Length of construction time too long,
concerned about access to their home, don't
want curbs, don't want 35 yr old tree
removed, no unnecessary boulevard tree
removal
6224 Scott Ave No No No None
6225 Scott Ave No I (needs No No 63rd Ave is a race track.
trimming)
6241 Scott Ave Twice in 25 years "Trees" No No How much is it going to cost me?
6324 Scott Ave A year ago "Trees" Flooding in the Bad smell Concerned about parking and vehicle
street after a hard security during construction, also-who
rain. determines blvd tree removal.
6401 Toledo Ave "Trees" Yes (no additional Water pressure, smelly water None
comments)
6412 Toledo Ave Yearly before tree I 64th & Scott floods Occasional odor, some All for the project. "Keep up the good
removal. Planted after heavy rains discoloration. work!"
green ash as
replacement.
6418 Toledo Ave A few times No Smelly water and lots of rust Street lighting. Homes and yards need to be
fixed up.
.... ........... .
............ ...........
on:
0 ........... ..... .. .. .... ..
Lo
6425 Toledo Ave No No 7 w pressure, smells bad Happy!
6436 Toledo Ave Once I No Bad taste, low pressure More code enforcement. Wants Unity done
last.
6213 Unity Ave Every 3 years "Trees" Backyard flooding Very poor pressure, rust County drainage ditch S & W of
in heavy rain, property—wants answers
basement water
6331 Unity Ave No I No No Appreciates reduced bus traffic
6337 Unity Ave Not since trees Flooding and water Smelly water Late night traffic. Wants block watch info.
were removed in basement Wants to know what sanitary sewer looks
following rains like after televising.
6419 Unity Ave 2 years ago No Low pressure, iron Speeding. Leash dogs and pick Lip after
them. More street lighting.
6424 Unity Ave No 3 Flooding in Stinks, tastes bad, rusty, low More street lighting, more code enforcement
basement after pressure
heavy rains last 2
years
6425 Unity Ave No I Severe problem in Poor pressure, buy bottled water, Request stop sign at 65th & Unity. Slow
side street. It floods rusty water ruins laundry, dark down speeding MTC buses and trucks.
& the street in back brown like Coke or Pepsi at times, House shakes, pictures are always crooked.
of property floods stinky water
up into yard-looks
like a river
6437 Unity Ave Once since 1958 No storm sewers on Bad taste Noted that traffic problems have improved
street. Basement since gates were installed at Fair Oaks
water problems. school.
6612 Unity Ave No No No None
4913 Winchester No No No None
5001 Winchester Twice in 37 years No No None
5007 Winchester No I No Pressure is poor and quality is Better street lighting. Strongly supports
horrid. project and offered to help in any way.
r 5101 Winchester i Every two years No Low pressure Street lighting, more code enforcement
......................... .. ..........
............................ ........................ ......
V0, .... ......
..........
...........
. . . .... ....
I M-I
..... .... .........
.. ... ....... ................
5113 Winchester 2 or 3 times in 20 1 No Wants to know about chemicals in Traffic too fast down Winchester. People
years BC water. don't pick up after their dogs.
5206 Winchester Two years ago I No No None
5219 Winchester Every two years No Not good, strong odor Have block watch now
The following suggestions were offered for naming the project area:
Dormay's Brook Lyn Gardens
Fair Oaks Neighborhood
Fair Oaks Area
Unity Avenue
City Limits West
Brooklyn Center City Limits West (BCCLW)
Brooklyn Gardens
The Slums
Orchard Lane West is ok with many residents.
•
It is proposed to reconstruct France Avenue in accordance with State Aid standards, with Page 4
concrete curb and gutter. Water main would be replaced, with sanitary and storm sewer repaired
or replaced as necessary.
As identified in the City's Emergency and Water Conservation Plan, during construction of this
project, an emergency connection to the Brooklyn Park water system would also be constructed.
This tie -in would provide a back -up source of drinking water should certain types of emergency
situations occur, such as a major power outage affecting the well field; loss of one or more wells
during peak usage periods; a major fire; loss of a tower, etc. Brooklyn Center does not currently
have an emergency connection to any other City.
It may not be possible to provide fieldwork, design, and construction engineering for both the
Orchard West and this project using in -house staff. It is therefore proposed to consider engaging
the services of an engineering consultant for at least a portion of this work. An RFP has been
prepared to solicit proposals, should the Council so direct.
Table 2
Preliminary Estimated Cost, France Avenue, 69th to N City Limits
COST
® Construction (incl 25 % contingency) $435,000
Professional Services 10,000
Engineering 45,000
Administration, Legal (3 % of 13,000
construction)
TOTAL COST $503,000
FUNDING
Water Utility $118,700
Sanitary Sewer Utility 31,500
Storm Drainage Utility (33,150)
Regular MSA 288,400
Local State Aid (29,950)
Special Assessments 127,500
TOTAL FUNDING $503,000
•
•
France Avenue y
France Avenue
Proposed Project Area
•
• Page 5
48th Avenue
This roadway (see Map 3), which serves a commercial area in the southwestern part of the city,
is in poor condition, and also experiences moderate to severe drainage problems. It is proposed
to reconstruct the street, and to construct a treatment pond to treat stormwater prior to discharge
into Ryan Lake. 48th Avenue is a street solely used by the commercial properties which abut it;
there is no through traffic. It is proposed to assess 100 percent of the cost of this improvement to
the benefitting property owners. The total estimated cost is $350,000.
Property owners are aware of the street and drainage conditions; this proposed project has been
g P P P J
discussed several times before with them. One issue which would need to be addressed prior to
construction is street width and need to accommodate on- street parking. Previous discussions
with the property owners have failed to reach a consensus; those discussions are being reopened
but it is likely that discussions with the affected property owners and the hearing process would
be so lengthy that the project may be delayed to 1998.
Assessment Stabilization Program
b
• Each year since this program's inception in 1993, staff and the Council have discussed whether
the city can afford to continue providing this type of financial assistance. As you recall, the
grants which are awarded are funded from the Local State Aid fund and the Storm Drainage
Utility Fund. At the level of grants awarded in 1996, we could expect an expenditure of about
$100,000 per year. Neither of these funds are able to serve as a permanent source of funding.
We have explored other financing options. The city of St. Cloud, which also provides such a
program, rolls the grant financing into the GO bonds which finance the improvement projects.
Our City Attorney has expressed some reservations about the legality and desirability of pursing
this option, but in any event it is moot if we no longer depend on GO bond financing for
improvement projects. The city of Bloomington, when it had a similar program, financed the
grants with CDBG funds. While this may be a possibility, other higher priority uses have been
identified for our CDBG funds.
We have tightened financial guidelines to keep program costs low. We could continue to do so,
but we run into two difficulties: first, the more we modify the eligibility requirements, the harder
it is to explain to people and for residents to understand. And second, continually changing rules
will result in situations where people with like financial circumstances will be treated differently.
For example, one person might complain that a friend who lives in a neighborhood improved one
or two years ago got a grant, but `I get less in Social Security and pension than she does, and I
didn't qualify.' I believe a decision must now be made whether to commit to keep the program
and identify a permanent funding source or to discontinue the program and l to • ( .fY P ,f g ) o p gr look ther 0
existing opportunities to provide relieffor financially vulnerable homeowners.
•
France AVen
L—t I 1 11 - ff7r% h Avenue
48th Avenue
� Proposed Project Area
Page 6
• DI
SCUSSION
One such existing opportunity is the senior deferral program. State statutes allow cities to
establish programs to allow qualifying senior citizens, and persons who are retired due to a
disability, to defer some part of their assessment until such time as the property is sold.
Brooklyn Center has such a program, but it has been superseded by the Assessment Stabilization
program. At this time I'm not aware of existing programs which might provide funding for
property owners who don't qualify for the deferral program, other than emergency loans.
Attached is a review of the financial characteristics of persons /families which have received
Assessment Stabilization grants in the past three years. As you can see, 63 percent of the
recipients were seniors, and 37 percent were not. Only 16 households out of the 203 receiving
grants in the past three years had incomes less than $10,000; 14 of those 16 were seniors.
Almost half of all the recipients had household incomes in the $20- 30,000 range.
OPTIONS
♦ Totally discontinue Assessment Stabilization, and direct senior property owners to the
existing deferral program. While this would provide relief for many vulnerable property
owners, it would not provide relief for property owners who are not seniors.
• ♦ Direct seniors to the deferral ro
p gram, but continue the Assessment Stabilization program
for non - seniors. Seniors would likely consider this unfair because their assessments
would have to be paid in full eventually, out of the proceeds of sale of their home, but
younger property owners would get an outright grant.
♦ Continue the Assessment Stabilization program, but make dramatic changes in its
implementation so that only property owners making less than $x would receive a grant.
Even if that cutoff were $20,000, 94 out of the 203 recipients would still have been
eligible, halving the cost of the program. This would still require an investment of
perhaps $50,000 per year.
RECOMMENDATION
After careful consideration, I recommend the Council consider the first option. While
Assessment Stabilization provides relief to many property owners, Brooklyn Center cannot
afford at this time to continue such a broad based program. The Senior Deferral program will
still be available to a large portion of the most financial vulnerable property owners. In addition,
to assist other property owners to prepare for special assessments, I also recommend that the
Council consider adopting a definite, rolling five year plan of neighborhoods to be considered
for improvement. In this way, property owners can start to save money to help pay for
• assessments, or can make other financial decisions knowing that such an expense is likely to
come up.
• Page 7
Staff has developed an internal five year plan for street replacement projects which is used to
schedule maintenance activities. During the development of the City's overall five year plan,
this will be reviewed in light of financial considerations, and a more definite plan would be
prepared for adoption by the council.
The current policy guiding the senior deferral program would require a qualifying senior
household to pay no more than 1 -1/2 percent of their annual income towards an assessment. In
other words, if the annual income is $10,000, the assessment payment cannot exceed $150. A
new assessment amount is calculated from this, and the difference between this assessment and
the total assessment is deferred as a lien against the property, which must be settled at the time
the property changes hands. The deferred amount accrues interest until it is paid off.
For example, at 7 percent interest, $150 would pay for an $882 assessment. If $1,850 is the total
assessed, $968 would be deferred, and $882 would be certified. This program is less generous
than providing outright grants, but it does provide an option for seniors who may have difficulty
paying an assessment.
Changes to the City's Special Assessment Policy should be done by resolution. Staff requests
Council discussion and direction.
•
•
All Grand eci ients, Senior Status 6 Income Range • •
P Y
PROJECT (All)
RANGE
SENIOR Data <$10,000 $10- 20,000 $20- 30,000 30- 40,000 >$40,000 Grand Total
N Average of INCOM $ 8,749 $ 16,392 $ 25,013 $ 34,595 $ 42,374 $ 24,402
C ount of INCOME2 2 18 41 13 1 75
Count of INCOME3 13% 23% 44% 93% 100% 37%
Y Avera of INCOM $ 8,211 $ 14,733 $ 23,553 $ 31,025 #DIV /0! $ 17,799
Count of INCOME2 14 60 53 1 0 128
Count of INCOMES 88% 77% 56% 7% 0% 63%
Total Average of INCOME $ 8,278 $ 15,116 $ 24,190 $ 34,340 $ 42,374 $ 20,239
Total Count of INCOME2 16 78 94 14 1 203
Total Count of INCOMES 100% 100 % 100% 100% 100% 100%
9/18/96
Grants awarded to All Households
PROJECT (All)
SENIOR (All)
RANGE
SIZE Data <$10,000 $10- 20,000 $20- 30,000 $30- 40,000 >$40,000 Grand Total
1 Average of IN $ 8, 233 $ 14,655 $ 21,902 #DIV /0! #DIV /0! $ 14,875
% of Total 17 65% 18% 0% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 15 58 16 0 0 89
2 Average of INCOM $ 8,957 $ 16,432 $ 24,108 $ 31,025 #DIV /0! $ 22,179
% of Total 2% 23% 73% 2% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 1 14 44 1 0 60
3 Average of INCOM #DIV /01 $ 14,594 $ 25,139 $ 32,049 #DIV /0! $ 24,091
% of Total 0% 18% 71% 12% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 3 12 2 0 17
4 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! $ 18,041 $ 25,159 $ 34,166 #DIV /0! $ 27,919
% of Total 0% 6% 59% 35% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 1 10 6 0 17
5 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! $ 19,371 $ 25,681 $ 35,826 $ 42,374 $ 28,748
% of Total 0% 10% 60% 20% 10% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 1 6 2 1 10
6 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! #DIV /0! $ 25,489 #DIV /0! #DIV /0! $ 25,489
% of Total 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 0 5 0 0 5
7 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! #DIV /01 $ 27,877 $ 36,329 #DIV /0! $ 34,216
% of Total 0% 0% 25% 75% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 0 1 3 0 4
10 Average of INCOME #DIV /0! 17837 #DIV /0! #DIV /0! #DIV /0! 17837
% of Total 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00 % 0.00% 100.00%
Count of INCOME 0 1 0 0 0 1
Total Average of INCOME $ 8,278 $ 15,116 $ 24,190 $ 34,340 $ 42,374 $ 20,239
Total % of Total 8 % 38% 46% 7% 0 % 100%
Total Count of INCOME 16 78 94 14 1 203
9/18/96
Grants r,vvarded to Senior Households
PROJECT (All)
SENIOR Y
RANGE
SIZE Data <$10,000 $10- 20,000 $20- 30,000 $30- 40,000 Grand Total
1 Average of INCOM $ 8,211 $ 14,505 $ 21,614 #DIV /0! $ 14,467
% of Total 19% 65% 16% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 14 49 12 0 75
2 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! $ 15,906 $ 23,797 $ 31,025 $ 22,272
% of Total 0% 21% 77% 2% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 10 36 1 47
3 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! $ 14,195 $ 27,053 #DIV /0! $ 24,481
% of Total 0% 20% 80% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 1 4 0 5
4 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! #DIV /0! $ 24,057 #DIV /0! $ 24,057
% of Total _ 0% 0 100 % 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 0 1 0 1
Total Average of INCOME $ 8,211 $ 14,733 $ 23,553 $ 31,025 $ 17,799
Total % of Total 11% 47% 41% 1% 100%
Total Count of INCOME 14 60 53 1 128
9/18/96
Grants awarded to Non - Senior Households
PROJECT (All)
SENIOR N
RANGE
SIZE Data <$10,000 $10- 20,000 $20- 30,000 $30- 40,000 >$40,000 Grand Total
1 Average of INCOM $ 8,541 $ 15,471 $ 22,766 #DIV /0! #DIV /0! $ 17,060
% of Total 7% 64% 29% 0% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 1 9 4 0 0 14
2 Average of INCOM $ 8,957 $ 17,747 $ 25,507 #DIV /0! #DIV /01 $ 21,846
% of Total 8% 31% 62% 0% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 1 4 8 0 0 13
3 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! $ 14,794 $ 24,182 $ 32,049 #DIV /0! $ 23,928
% of Total 0% 17% 67% 17% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 2 8 2 0 12
4 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! $ 18,041 $ 25,281 $ 34,166 #DIV /0! $ 28,160
% of T otal 0% 6% 56% 38% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 1 9 6 0 16
5 Average of INCOM #DIV /01 $ 19,371 $ 25,681 $ 35,826 $ 42,374 $ 28,748
% of Total 0% 10 % 60% 20% 10% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 1 6 2 1 10
6 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! #DIV /0! $ 25,489 #DIV /0! #DIV /01 $ 25,489
% of Total 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 0 5 0 0 5
7 Average of INCOM #DIV /0! #DIV /0! $ 27,877 $ 36,329 #DIV /0! $ 34,216
% of Total 0% 0 % 25% 75% 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 0 1 3 0 4
10 Average of INCOM #DIV /0 ! $ 17,837 #DIV /0! #DIV /0! #DIV /0! $ 17,837
% of Total 0% 100% 0 0 % 0% 100%
Count of INCOME 0 1 0 0 0 1
Total Average of INCOME $ 8,749 $ 16,392 $ 25,013 $ 34,595 $ 42,374 $ 24,402
Total % of Total 3% 24% 55% 17% 1% 100%
Total Count of INCOME 2 18 41 13 1 75
9/18/96
Average incomes By Project, All Grant Recipients
SENIOR (All)
SIZE (All)
RANGE
PROJECT Data <$10,000 $10- 20,000 $20- 30,000 $30- 40,000 >$40,000 Grand Total
53rd /Xer Average of INCOM $ 8,234 $ 16,114 $ 22,258 #DIV /0! #DIV /0! $ 17,216
Count of INCOME2 1 1 2 0 . 0 4
57 /L /K/J Average of INCOM $ 8,643 $ 15,519 $ 23,683 $ 34,230 #DIV /0! $ 19,782
Count of INCOME2 5 9 13 3 0 30
69th Ave. Average of IN #DIV /0! $ 15,644 $ 21,369 #DIV /0! #DIV/0! $ 17,075
Count of INCOME2 0 3 1 0 0 4
Knox /Jm _A verage of INCOM $ 8,250 $ 14,897 $ 26,824 $ 38,932 #DIV /0! $ 20,806
Count of INCOME2 2 9 10 1 0 22
NWest Average of INCOM $ 9,041 $ 14,998 $ 24,860 $ 33,992 $ 42,374 $ 23,854
Count of INCOME2 2 8 21 6 1 38
Orchard Average of INCOM $ 7,71 $ 15,311 $ 23,999 $ 33,796 #DIV /0! $ 19,096
Count of INCOME2 4 32 22 4 0 62
Woodbine Average of INCOM $ 7,788 $ 14,520 $ 23,272 #DIV /0! #DIV /0! $ 19,295
Count of INCOME2 2 16 25 0 0 43
Total Average of INCOME $ 8,278 $ 15,116 $ 24,190 $ 34,340 $ 42,374 $ 20,239
Total Count of INCOME2 16 781 94 141 11 203
9/17/96