Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 10-10 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER OCTOBER 10, 1995 7 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call .b5 �� �LU'4 -c t�'_ 3. Opening Ceremonies �-� °'" ��• 4. Council Report 5. Approval of Agenda enda and Consent t Agenda -The following items are considered to be routine t ne b the City Council cil n Y ty a n d 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 g at the end of Council ncil Con ' sideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes � . Councilmembers not resent at p meetings will be recorded ed as abstaining rom the vote e on the minutes. 1. August 14, 1995 - Executive Session (6:09 p.m.) 2. August 14 1995 - Executive � � e Session 9:15 .m. ( P ) 3. August 14, 1995 - Regular Session 4. August 21, 1995 - Special Work S Q p Session � 5. _ �,� August 2 �.� <� gu 8, 1995 Regular Session � 6. September 6, 1995 - Special Work Session 7. September 11, 1995 - Regular Session Cf9Lt�1'1 J 8. September 13, 1995 - Special Session September 18, 1995 Special Work Session 10. September 23, 1995 - Special Work Session 11. September 25, 1995 - Special Work Session 12. September 25, 1995 - Regular Session . 13. September 27, 1995 - Special Work Session 14. September 29, 1995 - Special Work Session 15. September 30, 1995 - Special Work Session b. Proclamation Declaring the Month of October, 1995, as National Arts and Humanities Month C. Proclamation Declaring October 16 -20, 1995, as Manufacturers Week q5-2j8 d. Resolution Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of 0 Diseased Trees Order No. DST 10/10/9 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- October 10, 1995 Ae. Approval of Contract with Frank Madden & Associates for Management Union Contract Negotiations Licenses 6. Open Forum 7. Council Consideration Items gS ,Zjq a. Resolution Providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Tax ` Increment Bonds, Series 1995A ,) f �� q5— ZZO b. Resoluti n Providing for the Issuance and Sale of Gen ral Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995B P� qs� �� f C. Resolution Authorizing Issuance of a Lawful Gambling License to the } Brooklyn Center Lions Club to Operate a Pull -Tab Booth at the Lynbrook t Bowl 2)i4 � .:> & 6V -eL� 9 ,5—LEEd. Resolution Authorizing Issuance of a Lawful Gambling License to the �tt Brooklyn Center Lions Club to Operate a Pull -Tab Booth at the Earle Brown Bowl kc.), 1 )14 -':� a)(L (S2.,U-� • e. Setting Meeting Dates for December 1995 2W kC!, f. Private Kennel Lice Renewal wal - 6312 Fr ce Avenue North "O - l5 � g. Resolution Amending fie 1995 General Fund Budget to Provide for epairs t to the Civic Center Plaza Fountain Kb Del m"k. h. 1996 Public Utility Rate Studies 24 1. Resolution Adopting the 1996 Water Utility Rate Schedule 2. Resolution Adoptin the 1996 Sanitary Sewer Utility Rate chedule , 3. RAoM on opting the 1996 Storm Drainage Utility Rate Schedule 4. Resolution Adopting the 1996 Recycling Rates ,t&5. Resolution Adopting the 1996 and Sanitary Sewer Hookup Rates �� for 1996 i. Items Removed from the Consent Agenda . `7 � • �6'��tg /') vhf �t�-C���-Q',a �� / �8. Adjournment� �! kt 7J. J.A CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- October 10, 1995 EDA AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER OCTOBER 10, 1995 (following adjournment of City Council meeting) 1. Call to Order '7 qI3�/{�� 2. Roll Call ,b6 l �� ah4- --km's gk 3. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda -The following items are considered to be routine by the Economic Development Authority and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Commission Consideration Items. ",,) 2)H a. Approval of Minutes: Commissioners not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from the vote on the minutes. 1. September 11, 1995 - Regular Session 2. September 13, 1995 - Special Session 3. September 25, 1995 - Regular Session b. Resolution Electing Officers for the ono c Develo meet Auth rity in and for the City of Brooklyn Center C. Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Tax Increment Pledge Agreement with the City of Brooklyn Center Relating to $4,560,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995A 4. Commission Consideration Items Y3) a. Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract for Residential Structure Removal at Willow River Apartments, the EDA -Owned Property at 6637 Humboldt Avenue North ) Lg- 5. Adjournment Council Meeting Date October 10, 1995 31 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number S� Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: City Council Minutes August 14, 1995- Executive Session (6:09 p.m.), August 14, 1995- Executive Session (9:15 p.m.) August 14, 1995- Regular Session, August 21, 1995 - Special Work Session, August 28, 1995 - Regular Session, September 6, 1995 - Special Work Session, September 11, 1995 - Regular Session, September 13, 1995 - Special Session, September 18, 1995- Special Work Session, September 23, 1995- Special Work Session, September 25, 1995 - Special Work Session, September 25, 1995 - Regular Session, September 27, 1995 - Special Work Session, September 29, 1995- Special Work Session, September 30, 1995- Special Work Session Department Approval: A D6pttty City Clerk Manager's Review /Recommendation: ` No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached • Recommended City Council Action: Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) 1. August 14, 1995 - Executive Session (6:09 p.m.) Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. 2. August 14, 1995 - Executive Session (9:15 p.m.) Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. 3. August 14, 1995 - Regular Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. 4. August 21, 1995 - Special Work Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention on these minutes. 5. August 28, 1995 - Regular Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the • vote on these minutes. 6. September 6, 1995 - Special Work Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. Request For Council Consideration Page 2 7. September 11, 1995 - Regular Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the • vote on these minutes. 8. September 13, 1995 - Special Session All Councilmembers were present. 9. September 18, 1995 Special Work Session Barb Kalligher and Kristen Mann were absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect their abstention from the vote on these minutes. 10. September 23, 1995 - Special Work Session Barb Kalligher and Kristen Mann were absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect their abstention from the vote on these minutes. 11. September 25, 1995 - Special Work Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. 12. September 25, 1995 - Regular Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. 13. September 27, 1995 - Special Work Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. 14. September 29, 1995 - Special Work Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. 15. September 30, 1995 - Special Work Session • Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. • MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. • OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA EXECUTIVE SESSION AUGUST 14, 1995 BROOKLYN CENTER CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in executive session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 6:09 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, special counsel Sue Van Dyke and Kathy Constantine, and Brad Hoffman, Director of Community Development. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. DISCUSSION OF EARLE BROWN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP BANKRUPTCY FILING The status of the proposed settlement in the Earle Brown limited partnership H bankruptcy filing e was explained by community development director, Brad Hoffman, and special counsel Sue Van Dyke and Cathy Constantine. The city council discussed with legal counsel the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed settlement. No action was taken by the city council. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Kragness adjourned the meeting of the Brooklyn Center City Council at 7:00 p.m. Deputy er Mayor e MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL • OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA EXECUTIVE SESSION AUGUST 14, 1995 BROOKLYN CENTER CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in executive session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 9:15 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present Were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, and City Attorney Charlie LeFevere. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. DISCUSSION OF METROPOLITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION MTC VS. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER The City Attorney, Charles LeFevere, explained the status of the case of MTV' v. Brooklyn Center and the need for the city council to determine whether to appeal the ruling of the district court. • After discussions by the city council and legal counsel of the advantages and disadvantages of appealing the case, the city council determined that the city would not appeal the case from district court to the court of appeals. DISCUSSION OF MORTON VS. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Interim City Manager, Cam Andre, explained that a decision had been made to attempt mediation of the complaint filed with the state human rights department by Tim Morton. The city council discussed the status of the case and the appropriateness of mediation to resolve the dispute. No action was taken. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Kragness adjourned the meeting of the Brooklyn Center City Council at 9:38 p.m. eputy ty uerk Mayor • .4 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION AUGUST 14, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Director of Community Development Brad Hoffman, City Engineer Scott Brink, Communications Coordinator Terri Swanson, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. Councilmember Barb Kalliaher was absent. OPENING CEREMONIES • Dean Nyquist offered the invocation. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Mann reported that the 1995 Metro Paint- A -Thon held on August 5 was great. She noted there were many participants including volunteers from the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee, Housing Commission, City Council, and employees. PRESENTATION - HENNEPIN COUNTY LIBRARY BOARD Milton Goldstein, past president of the Hennepin County Library Board, introduced Charles Brown, the new director of the Hennepin County Library system, who talked about the library system and its reputation. Mr. Brown introduced Patricia Chisenhall, principal librarian of the Brookdale Library, who distributed information to Councilmembers about library activities. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the August 14, 1995, agendas with the removal of Items 6(f), (g), and (h) from the consent agenda. The motion passed unanimously. 8/14;95 - 1 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 10 199 REGULAR SESS ION A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the minutes of the July 10, 1995, regular session as printed passed unanimously. JULY 17 1995 - SPECIAL WORK SESSION, 6 p.m. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember, Hilstrom to approve the minutes of the July 17, 1995, special work session as printed passed unanimously. JULY 17 1995 - SPECIAL WORK SESSION, 712.m. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the minutes of the July 17, 1995, special work session as printed passed unanimously. JULY 24 1995 - REGULAR SESSION A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the minutes of the July 24, 1995, regular session as printed passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 95 -174 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING AND INSPECTION FEES • The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -175 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS, HOUSING COMMISSION MEMBERS, BROOKLYN CENTER CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER EMPLOYEES FOR THEIR WORK ON THE 1995 METRO PAINT- A -THON The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -176 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: S/14/95 - - RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROJECT, ACCEPTING QUOTE, AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -16, CONTRACT 1995 -H, BRYANT • AVENUE SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann, and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -177 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO 95 -178 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -31, PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT AT WILLOW LANE PARK. CONTRACT 1994 -I . The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve the following list of licenses: MECHANICAL SYSTEMS A -ABC Appliance and Heating '2638 Lyndale Ave S Anderson Heatina and A/C 4347 Central Ave NE Hokanson Plumbing & Heating, Inc. 9174 Isanti St NE Nimis Newman Mech, Inc. 1400 E Hwy 36 Peterson Bros. Sheetmetal 4110 Central Ave NE #106 RENTAL DWELLINGS - INITIAL Sondra Jones 7236 Noble Ave N RENTAL DWELLINGS - RENEWAL Ralph C. Johnson 5444 Bryant Ave N Michael and Jane Danielson 4216 Lakebreeze Ave N Fred and Judie Swenson 5340 -44 Russell Ave N 8/14/95 - 3 - John and Marlys Pepera 6142 Scott Ave N David Wagtskjold 6845 Willow Lane • The motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM Mayor Kragness noted the Council had received no requests to use the open forum session this evening. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS RESOLUTION NO. 95 -179 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF MYRNA KRAGNESS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -180 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF JACK KELLY t FOR HIS DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE HOUSING COMMISSION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. APPOINTMENT OF A COUNCILMEMBER TO SERVE ON A CUSTOMER SERVICE TRAINING SUBCOMMITTEE Councilmember Hilstrom inquired when the subcommittee would meet. The Communications Coordinator said the subcommittee would meet at a time convenient to the consensus of the subcommittee. Councilmember Carmody indicated she did not see the need for hiring a trainer but instead utilize current City employees to facilitate anv needed training. She feels that forming quality circles among staff would be a Good wav to assess what's good and bad about service at the City and would be more cost efficient. The Communications Coordinator said that the main purpose of the subcommittee is to solicit input from council and staff regarding needs in the customer service area. The subcommittee consists of four or five staff, members and a council member for the purpose of planning a customer service program for the Citv. Customer service training was placed in the 1995 budget 8; lY - l9� 4 - as a result of a recommendation by the communications task force. Still in planning stages, the committee is looking at an ongoing program not a one -time shot. The subcommittee will make . recommendations on customer service training and will update the council at a later date. Councilmember Hilstrom reconfirmed her desire to participate on the subcommittee, and council affirmed her desire accordingly. Mayor Kragness also indicated a desire to attend the meetings, if held in the evenings. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND The Interim City Manager indicated a staff desire to have the ordinance tabled. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Zoning Classification of Certain Land. The City Attorney explained notification regarding a public hearing pertaining to the ordinance had been done and suggested Council proceed with reconsideration and conduct a hearing for the ordinance to eliminate the need for rescheduling a public hearing. Councilmembers Mann and Hilstrom withdrew their motion to table the ordinance and respective public hearing. • Mayor Kragness opened the public hearing at 7:27 p.m. and inquired if there was any public input regarding the ordinance at hand. On the advice of the City Attorney, Councilmember Carmody moved and Councilmember Hilstrom seconded that the public hearing be closed. The motion passed unanimously. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Zoning Classification of Certain Land passed unanimously. IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -11 Staff recommended that the bids previously submitted be rejected and the project rebid with revised specifications. Councilmember Mann asked if the new specifications will be written so only one company can bid. The City Manager stated this will absolutely not occur, and the revised specifications will change the kind of materials to be used in the project. Councilmember Hilstrom asked if Lametti and Sons, Inc. has had the opportunity to review staff's report and respond. The City Engineer indicated staff sent them a copy. 8/14/95 - 5 - Vic Lametti, representing Lametti and Sons, Inc., said he received the report this morning and has not had the opportunity to properly review and prepare a response. Councilmember Hilstrom asked if the Council will have the opportunity to review the revised plans and specifications before they are sent out. The City Engineer advised he has a set of revised specifications available for the Council's review. Councilmember Hilstrom asked if Lametti and Sons, Inc. has done work in Brooklyn Center in the past. Mr. Lametti informed this is a third generation construction company with a long history of extensive work in Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park. He advised his father installed this sewer line in the early 1950's. Councilmember Hilstrom questioned implications involved with rejecting the bids and ordering new plans and specifications. The City Attorney conceded that in the public arena, you can get sued for anything you do, but in this case staff became aware some of the specifications were not adequate and determined how they could be rewritten to better serve the City. The City Attorney noted the City is already involved in litigation with this project and perhaps this action will result in litigation as well, but he felt comfortable with the City's position should that happen. Councilmember Hilstrom asked if the Council will receive copies of the new plans and specifications before it goes out for new bids. The City Engineer reiterated specifications are • ready and available for Council's review. RESOLUTIOi NO. 9.. 5 - 181 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO 1995 -11, CONTRACT 1995 -E CORRUGATED METAL PIPE SANITARY SEWER TRUNK RELINING The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. STAFF REPORT RE: PROPOSED 1996 STREET PROJECTS The Director of Public Services explained at the July 31, 1995 work session, Council reviewed proposed 1996 street and utility projects and the purpose of tonight's discussion is to establish potential 1996 projects and begin the process of preparing feasibility studies and receiving public input. Improvement Project Nos 19 -01 02 and 03 /Orchard Lane East Area 8/141 6 The Director of Public Services began her report by reviewing the boundaries and details of Project Nos. 1996 -01, 02, and 03, for street, utility and drainage improvements in the Orchard • Lane east area. It is proposed to reconstruct all streets in this area. Drainage issues are very important in this area. The proposed pond at Orchard Lane Park would provide a substantial improvement in both storm water quantity and quality. Staff suggests the ball diamond be moved to the approximate location of the ice rink and the pond area be used for the skating rink in the winter. The Director of Public Services detailed the three recommendations for action should the Council desire to further consider this area for 1996. Councilmember Carmody commented on the importance of locating the bathroom facilities so they are more accessible to those using the ballfield and playground. The Director of Public Services indicated she will look at that in more detail during the feasibility study phase. Improvement Pro No. 1996 -04 /James /67th Avenues Mill and Overlay The Director of Public Services next reviewed the boundaries and details of Project No. 1996 -04 for overlay of James Avenue from Freeway Boulevard to 67th and 67th from James Avenue to Shingle Creek Parkway. She advised these streets are in poor condition according to the Pavement Management Program, can no longer benefit from sealcoating and recommended they be overlaid at an estimated cost of $145,000. The cost would be assessed to abutting owners in commercial districts at 70% of the non - utility portion with the balance funded by either regular or local state aid funds. Improvement Project No. 1996 -05 /John Martin /Earle Brown Drives Mill and Overlay The Director of Public Services then reviewed the boundaries and details of Project No. 1996 -05 for the mill and overlay of John Martin Drive and Earle Brown Drive from John Martin to Summit. She advised these streets are in poor condition according to the Pavement Management Program, can no longer benefit from sealcoating and should be overlaid at an estimated cost of 5160,000. According to the City's Assessment Policy, abutting property owners in commercial districts would be assessed 70% of the non - utility portion of the project cost. The balance will be funded by either regular or local state aid funds. In reviewing the MSA system, staff believes it is appropriate to undesignate 62nd Avenue as an MSA route and to instead designate Summit, John Martin and Earle Brown Drives as MSA routes. If the Council desires to further consider this area for 1996, they should adopt a resolution establishing the project and direct staff to prepare a feasibility report and direct the City Engineer to contact the Metro State Aid Engineer requesting the redesignation of MSA routes. Councilmember Hilstrom questioned how quickly the MSA redesignation can be accomplished. The Director of Public Services explained it depends on how quickly the MSA Engineer responds to the request. Councilmember Mann reviewed the Council's discussion at the last work session regarding the neud to avoid a crisis situation with regard to keeping streets well - maintained. The Director of Public Services agreed if the Council wants to minimize the long -term impact, a greater percentage of streets will need to be upgraded each year. The staff is trying to concentrate on areas with streets in the poorest condition and still address storm sewer needs, but the Council can accelerate the street project program. • The Director of Public Services explained City engineering staff is able to process a limited mileage of street work. An accelerated programs would require hiring consulting firms. Councilmember Mann noted that the City has been on a 20 year program during which all of the streets would be reconstructed. However, in the beginning of the program, the City did not do enough mileage to follow that program so it will now take 3 to 35 years to complete all streets. The Director of Public Services said that by reconstructing five to six miles per year, we would be back on track for the 20 year program. It is also important to note that there is a tax levy increase associated with these projects. The more miles are done each year, the bigger the tax increase. Improvement Proiect No. 1996 -06. 07. and 08/57th Avenue and Logan /James /Knox The Director of Public Services reviewed Project Nos. 1996 -06, 07, and 08 for street, utility and drainage improvements to James and Knox Avenues, 55th to 57th, and Logan Avenue, 53rd to 57th Avenue which is tentatively scheduled for 1996. Because the area of Irving /Humboldt/ Girard from 53rd to 57th is currently being studied as a part of the Hennepin Community Works Humboldt Parkway proposal, staff proposes no improvements on those streets for 1996. • The Director of Public Services stressed the importance of improving the residential streets in the southeast area. SEH has already completed much of the storm drainage analysis for this area so it may be more cost effective to request a proposal from them to extend their contract to cover professional design services for this area as well. The estimated cost of this project is $550,000. Both 57th and Logan Avenues are State Aid routes so funding is available from regular state aid and the remainder could be financed through a combination of special assessment, public utility funds, and bond funds. She suggested a resolution expanding the 57th Avenue project and obtaining a proposal from SEH for professional services for design and construction management of area. Councilmember Hilstrom expressed concern that the 20 year program not fall further behind and inquired whether there is another project that could be constructed should it happen that this one does not proceed in 1996. The Director of Public Services advised that if 57th Avenue is tabled again, the neighborhood streets could stand alone and be constructed in 1996. Councilmember Hilstrom commented on the contention that if the City proceeds with the path previously taken, the Maintenance Department will be spending all of their time patching streets, and asked if staff is recommending the City concentrate more on reconstruction of streets. The Director of Public Services explained would reduce maintenance requirements. The Maintenance 8/ - 8 - r Department can turn its attention to other types of maintenance. She explained this issue will be further evaluated and more information provided to the Council to help make that decision. r Councilmember Hilstrom asked if more ro'ects could be added. The Director of Public P J Services said that the City of Minneapolis has asked whether Brooklyn Center is interested in "piggy- backing" with their 1996 project in the neighborhood south of the golf course. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -182 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1996 -01, 02, 03, STREET, UTILITY, AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, ORCHARD LANE EAST AREA, ACCEPTING QUOTES FOR SEWER TELEVISING AND SOIL BORINGS, AND DIRECTING DEVELOPMENT OF A PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY REPORT. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody directing staff to specifically review the proposed changes to Orchard Lane Park with the Park and Recreation Commission and the neighborhood residents passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -183 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved for it's adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1996 -04, JANIES /67TH AVENUES MILL AND OVERLAY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -184 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved for it's adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1996 -05, JOHN MARTIN /EARLS BROWN DRIVES MILL AND OVERLAY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom and passed unanimously. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom directing the Citv Engineer to contact the Metro State Aid Engineer and request undesignating 62nd Avenue as an MSA route, and designating Summit, John Martin, and Earle Brown Drives as MSA routes passed unanimously. 8/14/95 - 9 - RESOLUTION NO. 95 -185 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved for it's adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1996 -06, 07, AND 08, STREET, UTILITY, AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, JAMES AND KNOX AVENUES, 55TH TO 57TH, AND LOGAN AVENUE, 53RD TO 57TH, ACCEPTING QUOTES FOR SEWER TELEVISING AND SOIL BORINGS, AND DIRECTING DEVELOPMENT OF A PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY REPORT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom directing staff to obtain a proposal from SEH for professional services for design and construction management of the additional residential area, and to hold informational meetings with the neighborhood passed unanimously. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody directing staff to review options with the City of Minneapolis and bring those options and a recommendation to the Council for its consideration passed unanimously. RESOLUTION COMMENDING THE WINNERS OF THE 1995 CITYWIDE LANDSCAPING CONTEST Councilmember Carmody extended her appreciation to Administrative Aide Joyce Gulseth who came up with the idea of a landscape contest and coordinated it. The Director of Public Services provided a brief slide show and details of each property winning the 1995 Citywide Landscaping Contest. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -186 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION COMMENDING THE `INNERS OF THE 1995 CITYWIDE LANDSCAPING CONTEST The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded b member Kristen P � Y Y Mann and passed unanimously. r� " ILi�1�i IBER I y T NC DISCUSSION OF STAFF REPORTS AND POLICY (REQUESTED BY COU E MANN) (Verbatim transcript begin-s.) Councilmember Mann - Yes. Your Honor, the reason I had P laced this on the agenda tonight was I'm concerned a number of incidences have been happening and I guess the bottom line is I truly believe it gets 8/14/ - 10 - down to communication. Just as the Council is accountable to the tax payers, we also rely very heavily on our staff and the information that they provide to us when we set policy and direction. And this isn't the time or the place to be placing the blame; that is not my intent tonight. What I am concerned about though is that there's been a pattern. Decisions have been made based on information provided to the Council and then the information provided to us changes. I can't believe I'm the only one concerned about this. Um, a most recent incident would involve the ah new management union and negotiation representation from the Council. Ah, it illustrates the importance of communication and where we're going with this. On June 12th, we had an initial discussion at the Council table regarding labor representative firms to address our new bargain unit. Unanimous vote said to go out for an RFP and five firms were listed. On July 24th, an update on the labor negotiations and the new management union, the Council was informed that, for no additional cost, the firm that is currently doing our labor relations would also represent the new unit. Ah, consensus of the Council at the July 24th meeting was, yeah let's look into this a little further, at least that's the way I understood it to be from the Council members that since there was not going to be an additional charge to have this group represent us, let's - -at the very least - -meet this individual and see how they would represent us with this new unit. Well, then on July 31st, the representative from Labor Relations, Karen Olson, came out, gave us a nice presentation and where she saw the City going, how she would handle this, but it was going to cost an additional seventy, approximately seventy dollars an hour in addition to what we are already paying them to do our current labor relations negotiations. And I just, I question where is this RFP at this point. Is this gonna move forward? What's happened to it? Cam? • Interim City Manager Cam Andre - The idea behind that was to attempt to save the City money and not spend as much on hiring an outside negotiator. However, whatever the preference of the Council is, we will proceed on that basis. I wasn't trying to pre -empt the Council in that respect. I just brought to your attention the possibility of using Labor Relations at a lesser cost or no cost. And if you want to go ahead with an RFP for attorneys I think you ought to and I'm sorry I gave you the wrong impression. Councilmember Mann - Well, I'm not here to point the blame, Cam, and I understand we all want to save money where we O I a a p ss bly can, but this is a new contract. My understandin is everythin is open: salary, uh benefits, everything. And I think an RFP doesn't cost anything. We already voted on it. I would like to see it move forward. Councilmember Hilstrom - Madam Mayor? Mayor Kragness - Yes Debra? Councilmember Hilstrom - 8/14/95 Well I have a concern I would like to bring up that is off the topic of labor negotiations, but it does also deal with communication. After I saw it on the agenda, I thought this was the perfect • time to discuss (interrupted by Mayor Kragness) Mayor Kragness - Maybe we could finish with the one item first before we go onto the second one? Uh Cam, at this point then would you follow through on that RFP and we'll get more quotes. My understanding is that we are looking at a minimum of 120 dollars an hour if we go with a legal firm. Interim Citv Manager Cam Andre - Well, I'm not sure about that, but it'll probably vary according to the firm. Mayor Kragness - Yeah, I'm sure and also the amount of time involved, but as Kristen said, it isn't going to cost us anything to go for the RFP. So we will do that and we'll have something to compare. Thank you. Debra. Councilmember Hilstrom - Okay, um, there are three areas that, that I briefly have some concerns about. One was on April 10th, the Interim City Modeling, Interim City Hall Remodeling. I felt there was some information presented and if you want me to be specific I will, otherwise I'll just briefly state the three items, kinda make a brief summary and then we can talk at a work session, (interrupted by Councilmember Carmody) Councilmember Carmody - Can I ask why none of this was included in our packet? I mean when I have brought stuff forward usually put in the packet. Councilmember Hilstrom - Well, I did this in response to the item on the agenda. Councilmember Carmody - Well, maybe you would like to get your stuff together so that I can read it first? I don't really like - Mayor Kragness - I think maybe if she could bring the idea forward, we could ask for this to be tabled then until a further time with some backup information. Would that be (interrupted by Councilmember Carmody) Councilmember Carmody 8/11'9- - 12 - Well, I mean you know this was brought up under the guise of communication. Communication • means both ways and it doesn't sound like we are communicating with each other, if we're trying to just bring it up here at Council without any preparation. Councilmember Hilstrom - Well ultimately, I'm willing to bring it up anywhere, I just believe that I have some concerns about communication and information where we've been told one thing. And then ultimately we take a vote and then things unravel two weeks later where you receive other information and then ultimately you have to turn around and look at the vote that you made and whether or not that was the correct vote to make given the new information. I have three incidences that I am more than willing to state, with Cam, with the Council, whatever, but I really believe that this issue needs to be addressed. Councilmember Mann - Point of order Your Honor, Kathleen, I requested this put on the agenda this evening stating discussion of staff reports and policy. After mulling it over and giving deep consideration to this, I am not here tonight to point fingers. I am trying to tie this back to that there is a communication problem and I called you this afternoon to let you know that's where I see the problems in communications, and you didn't return my call. Councilmember Carmody - You know I hate to tell you, my life does not revolve around your schedule Kristen and I was busy from that time. I didn't get the message until 4:30. Councilmember Mann - But to say that you were not given a clue is inaccurate Councilmember Carmody. Councilmember Carmody - I think there's no problem with putting a memorandum in the agenda packet that explains it. Mayor Kragness - I think at this time I'd like to see this tabled. This is not the place for this kind of discussion. And if we could table this until the next work session. And Debra if you would get the information that you have and let us tackle it at that time, and we'll be glad to get whatever answers that we can from staff and I'm sure Cam or whoever would be happy to do that. Are there any other questions that you want to bring forward? Let's do that and we'll tit this into our next work session where we can discuss it. Any other comments at this time on this one? (Verbatim transcript ends.) SPECIAL REQUEST FROM GREG LUTGEN TO APPROACH COUNCIL REGARDING HIS RESIDENCE AT 7216 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD 8/14/95 Mayor Kragness indicated what Mr. Lutgen would present should have been done during the Council's designated open forum. However, she would make an exception since the item had • been brought before Council previously for consideration. Mr. Lutgen referred to a street change proposal submitted to the City after June 26, 1995, and response received accordingly from the Director of Public Services. He commented the respective response was very professional, however, he stated he saw something that just did not add up, and felt compelled to share his views with Council. He stated the proposal he had submitted was similar to a half - bubble cul -de -sac located on June and 69th. Councilmember Carmody clarified Council's decision to not approve Mr. Lutgen's street change proposal was strictly cost related and not based on numbers of residences which would be affected by approval of his proposed change. She inquired whether Mr. Lutgen would present cost related information to Council in such a manner that it would incline Council to reconsider its decision. Mr. Lutgen stated he was prepared to present information to Council that was related to cost factors and very much his concern. Mr. Lutgen submitted a newspaper article from the Post which contained information pertaining to current traffic flows (47,000 cars per day) and projected traffic flow increases (54,000 cars per day) contingent upon completion of a current road project located by his property. Given projected traffic flow increases, Mr. Lutgen indicated this would surely affect the traffic flow on his street as well. Mr. Lutaen stated his four boys are suffering from lung problems (chronic wheezing and coughing) and provided a letter of confirmation from the boys' physician. Mr. Lutgen offered the location of his house is a unique situation in that after full completion of the 96 -97 development, his house would be the only one on Brooklyn Boulevard that is north of 694 and on the downward side where the wind would primarily blow. He acknowledged understanding Council's decision as being cost related, however, his situation was one that required a solution as well. Mr. Lutaen requested Council study the effects of turning his residence area into a commercial zone. He also sighted the potential increase in tax dollar revenue associated with commercial property versus residential property. Mavor Kra -ness stated the Director of Community Development had talked with Mr. Lutgen. She explained future plans appeared to include the area Mr. Lutaen was speaking on, but Council had to work within financial constraints as well as this type of project being ongoing and Council could offer no time line guarantees. Mr. Lutaen stressed he was unable to sell his home for residential value as it has decreased and the busier the road nets, the more commercial development, the less and less chances he has of selling his home. He added that Given publishing of traffic flow numbers in the Post article, the chances of selling his property have been greatly hindered. Again, he stated health concerns relating to his family and requested a study be done of the area to better project future zoning of his property. �iavor Kragness referred him to Mr. Hoffman. 8/14/95 - 14 - Councilmember Hilstrom added Mr. Lutuen might confer with City staff to assess his place on a priority list to hopefully provide him with time lines or future plans. Mr. Lutgen introduced Jeff Li ma neighbor re iding at 4727 Wingard Lane. Mr. Li p a ma residing b Lip ma verbal support on behalf of Mr. Lutgen's proposal and indicated some same concerns for his family too. Mayor Kragness thanked both residents for their input. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -04 REPLACEMENT OF LIFT STATION NO. 1 AND ASSOCIATED FORCE MAIN Councilmember Hilstrom requested removal of the resolution because inadequate information was provided on the bids and the selection process. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table the resolution contingent upon more information being provided to Council passed unanimously. IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1995 -06 1995 -15. 1994 -23 AND 1994 -M Councilmember Hilstrom inquired about procedure if the cost of work performed is higher than the original contract. The Director of Public Services explained in this case, the number of quantities was established by staff and if an overage occurs, it is usually because the contractor encounters unanticipated conditions in the field that requires a change in plans and specifications. • Councilmember Hilstrom uestioned the threshold before Council approval is required. The q PP q Director of Public Services advised the threshold is if the overage is in excess of 5% of the contract cost. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -187 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, 1995 SEALCOAT PROGRAM, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -06, CONTRACT 1995 -A The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -188 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYti1ENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 1994 -15, ADA TRAILS, CURB CUTS, AND 8/14/95 - 15 - PEDESTRIAN RAMPS AND 1994 -23, MISCELLANEOUS SIDEWALK REPAIRS, CONTRACT 1994 -M The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT OU RNME Mayor Kragness declared the meeting adjourned at 8:57 p.m. stating the Brooklyn Center City Council reconvene Executive ouncil would in E Session following the EDA meeting to address litigation b issues. Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial • • 8 %i4/95 - 16 - j MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY t OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL WORK SESSION AUGUST 21, 1995 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, Director of Finance Charlie Hansen, Financial Commission members Donn Escher, Ron Christensen, Ned Storla, and Jay Hruska. Also present was Council Secretary Connie Beckman. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. JOINT DISCUSSION WITH FINANCIAL COMMISSION 1996 PRELIMINARY BUDGET The Interim City Manager in presenting the preliminary budget noted no major changes were • being proposed in program areas and anticipated only moderate increases in revenues. no increased revenues. There is still uncertainty with regard to federal subsidies. The Director of Finance presented the proposed City 1996 Budget Calendar. Information received from the state indicates the City's share of HACA, higher than estimated in the budget. The Director of Finance suggested September 6, 1995, for additional consideration of the proposed budget. The deadline for certification of a chosen property tax levy amount is September 15, 1995. Additional work sessions in November may be necessary to further discuss the budget and allow for public hearings. A final budget could not be adopted until public hearings are conducted. The Director of Finance discussed the five funds with property tax levies. General Fund, E.D.A., H.R.A., Special Assessment Bonds of the previous year, and Special Assessment Bonds of the current year. A figure of three percent is used to estimate taxes. The levy will be going up about 3.8 percent, State Local Government Aid going up about 3.7 percent. Tax based revenues are estimated at an increase of 2.61 percent. A typical rule -of -thumb in determining an actual dollar amount increase to residents would be $4 for every $100,000 levied. Councilmember Hilstrom questioned the organizational structure chart on page five of the proposed budget as compared to the organizational structure chart on the 1995 budget. The Director of Finance answered there are no changes. 8/21/95 - 1 - i The Director of Finance explained the equipment revolving fund in the Central Garage amortizes equipment of all departments. Increased proposed expenditures are necessary because of (1) new • additional equipment and (2) increased costs of replaced equipment because of inflated costs. The Interim City Manager said the Council should have a report on the subject of liquor store operation and prospects in six to seven weeks. The memo indicating the City Manager department budget requests was distributed. Councilmember Mann requested a report on the use of staff vehicles. Councilmember Mann left the meeting at 8:14 p.m. Councilmember Hilstrom requested information on comparisons about legal fees other governments /communities are paying for services similar to the City. The Interim City Manager indicated the City was slightly lower because most attorneys require a retainer and hourly rate; the City's hourly rate is lower. Councilmember Mann returned to the meeting at 8:25 p.m. In response to Councilmember Carmody, the Director of Finance indicated that the cost of improving the existing council sound system and acoustics would be approximately $200,000, and noted previous Councils did not express interest in this project. • In response to a question by Council Hilstrom, the Director of Finance assured that all costs were included in the liquor store fund. Ned Storla added he suspected the new accounting approach would provide better detail. Councilmember Carmody inquired about the allocation of Data Processing Costs. The Director of Finance clarified ordinary costs are charged to the activity but a larger cost (i.e. mobile police units) is charged to the using department in the budget. In response to an inquiry from Councilmember Carmody, the Director of Finance said the school which utilizes the School Liaison Officer reimburses the City about seventy -five percent. Councilmembers Hilstrom and Carmody requested more information on the Code Enforcement Officer job description and activities. Councilmember Carmody asked for more information regarding the animal control program. The Interim City Manager promised to report on this program. The Council asked for more information on Capital Outlay. 8/21/95 - ? - f It was decided the next Budget Work Session was scheduled for Wednesday, September 6, 1995. . OTHER BUSINESS EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER Councilmember Hilstrom expressed concern regarding financial status of the Center. Mayor Kragness indicated she had talked with Judith Bergeland and the Director of Community Development. Both people suggested the Council hold a work session at the Center which would provide Council with an opportunity to view the Center. Councilmember Hilstrom stated Council needs to have proper information and /or futures planning in hand to make an informed vote regarding budget items for the Center. She added refusal to approve any budget until concrete ideas are provided about the Center's financial stability. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:44 P. M. . Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 8/21/95 - 3 - MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY • OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION AUGUST 28, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Communications Coordinator Terri Swanson, Planning and Zoning Specialist Ron Warren, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. OPENING CEREMONIES A moment of silence was observed in place of the invocation. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Hilstrom noted an open house to be held on Thursday, August 31, 1995, from 5:30 -8:30 p.m. at the Humboldt Substation. PRESENTATION Mayor Kragness presented a plaque of appreciation to Mr. Ed Badgley, Store Manager for the Brooklyn Center Target, on behalf of the Brooklyn Center Recreation Programs. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve the August 28, 1995, agenda with the removal of Items 6(a), and (b) from the consent agenda and the addition of Item 9(h) under Council Consideration Items passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 95 -189 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 8/28/95 - 1 - RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -18, NEW ELECTRIC CONTROLS AT WELLS 5, 6, AND 7, APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS, AND • AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -190 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 08/28/95) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve the following list of licenses: AMUSEMENT DEVICES - OPERATOR Chuckwagon Grill 1928 57th Ave. N. Rookies Bar & Grill 1501 Freeway Blvd. • AMUSEMENT DEVICES - VENDOR Marcus Vending Inc. 1945 Lochaven Place MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Advanced Energy Services 3650 Annapolis Lane RENTAL DWELLINGS - INITIAL Welcome Home Inc. 819 -21 55th Ave. N. Alvin J. Moline, Jr. 7106 France Ave. N. Raymond & Rosanne Marshal"L 5637 Northport Dr. RENTAL DWELLINGS - RENEWAL George and Ethel McMullen 2401 -03 54th Ave. N. Keith Nordb_v 5960 Brooklyn Blvd. George Shimshock 5900 Colfax Ave. N. Heinz Pollinger 4207 Lakeside Ave. N. #320 TOBACCO RELATED PRODUCT Value Food Market 6804 Humboldt Ave. N. 8/28/95 - 2 - 0 } TAXICAB . Town Taxi 2500 Washington Ave. N. The motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM Mayor Kragness noted the Council had received no requests to use the open forum session this evening. PUBLIC HEARING - EARLE BROWN COMMONS The following people were introduced as being available to provide information at the public hearing this evening: Cathy Constantine (bankruptcy), Sue Van Dyke (bond attorney), Bill Jones (counsel for owners), John Persanen (counsel for bond holders), and Clark Whitmore (representing the general partners). Ms. Van Dyke said the Earle Brown Commons' bonds were first issued in 1986 and replacement bonds were issued in 1990. Original issue and current value of the bonds is estimated at $8.8 million. Owners of the Earle Brown Commons are seeking approval from the City to restructure the bonds under tax exempt status. Mayor Kragness opened the public hearing on the Earle Brown Commons at 7:13 p.m. Tim Willson, 6718 Colfax Avenue North, expressed confusion around defaulting on previous • bonds and proposed reorganization of the bonds. Ms. Van Dyke explained the current reorganized bonds and indicated that the City would recoup back owed property taxes received in payment installments over the next ten years. Mr. Jones explained that more was owed on the Commons ($6.1 million) as compared to it's appraised value of $4.4 million requiring more dramatic measures to be taken by owners of the Commons; filing through Chapter Eleven. He added current proposed reorganization of the bonds has been designed in an assertive yet conservative enough manner to ensure success of future payments. Additionally, Mr. Jones informed Council that a payment of $186,000 in first half taxes had been made and it appears there will be enough to pay the second half taxes. Mayor Kragness inquired about changes that have been made to guarantee success of the reorganization. Mr. Jones explained the original bonds were financed on a fixed rate whereas the minimum valuation was bought down on the reorganized bonds producing a reduced and variable rate (maximum of two percent increase) to service the bond debt as well as real estate taxes. The owners have had to prove the reorganized plan is feasible and will avoid inability to pay current obligations as well as real estate taxes. 8/28/95 - 3 - i In response to a question by Councilmember Hilstrom, Mr. Jones indicated there are so many other costs involved, a personal guarantee could not be made to pay the taxes, but the proposed • reorganization included every intention to pay them. Mr. Whitmore indicated that current bond holders had voted in favor of the proposed reorganization and that the value of the Commons property not designated to taxes will go towards bond debt retirement versus back tax debt retirement. Councilmember Hilstrom wondered about the repayment of $1.7 million in back taxes. The Interim City Manager said that if the property foreclosured the City would recover taxes at that time. If Council chooses to approve tax exempt status for the Commons, the proposed reorganization would go forward and the City would receive back taxes in payments over the next ten years with ten percent interest annually. Mr. Jones reiterated that under proposed reorganization, the owners would have the ability to make bond and property tax payments. He also stated the owners are not asking the City for money, but for the City's support to obtain bonds under tax exempt status, adding $11,000 per year is planned to be paid to the City in the form of an administrative fee. He indicated that new bonds have been issued to replace old bonds and utilizing bankruptcy, amounts paid out on bonds is commensurate with bond payment amounts. Mr. Jones said the management level has not been cited for nonpayment of back property taxes. Income of the Commons is sufficient, but problems and /or mistakes were made with the original development of the project. He added occupancy rates have been at a good level, rentals are optimal, and operating expenses are in line. Councilmember Hilstrom asked about a lockbox or third party arrangement regarding incoming funds collected on behalf of the Commons. Mr. Jones viewed a lockbox or third party situation more appropriate in a commercial setting. He further explained there is documentation for certification of funds, monthly amounts are being escrowed, and certain safeguards have been built in to ensure the Commons' ability to meet its financial obligations. Mr. Jones informed Council a disclaimer was sent to bond holders stating the City would not be fiscally responsible for the bonds based on approval of the proposed bond reorganization. Mr. Whitmore informed Council that less than 80 percent of the bond holders voted in favor of the reorganization. He also indicated that bond holders want a pledge from the Commons' owners regarding reserve funds, a lien on reserve monies, and cited there is no mechanism in place for control of monies. Mr. Whitmore also cited there are other areas of concern present which include distribution of monies to primaries (limited and /or general partners), that bond holders don't want payments made to primaries until debt retirement is complete, and concerns of courts about proceeding further with the proposed bond reorganization without obtained tax exempt status. 8/28/95 -4- { Mayor Kragness suggested that in light of need for more information around the City's bond rating, Council should consider tabling any action for two weeks. Mr. Whitmore and Mr. Jones emphasized the urgency with which Council needed to move regarding tax exempt status as the courts were waiting to proceed based on Council's decision. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to close the public hearing on the Earle Brown Commons passed unanimously. The hearing closed at 8:18 p. M. EARLE BROWN COMMONS The City Attorney stated the three options Council had: approve tax exempt status, deny tax exempt status, or table a decision for an additional two weeks. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table for two weeks approval of a resolution providing for the issuance of housing facilities refunding revenue bonds to provide funds for a project on behalf of Earle Brown Commons Limited Partnership II passed unanimously. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 95011 This application, submitted by Robert L. and Marlene A. Overpeck, and presented to Council by the Planning and Zoning Specialist was a request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into two lots the parcel of land addressed as 5500 Emerson Avenue North. The Planning Commission had recommended approval of this application at its August 17, 1995, meeting. Councilmember Hilstrom left the meeting at 7:31 p.m. The Planning and Zoning Specialist stated the two lots (originally known as Lots Seven and Eight, Block Two, Littell Addition) were originally joined for tax purposes and contain a large, old two -story frame house and a three -car Garage. The size of the combined lot is 195 feet (along Emerson Avenue) by approximately 135.4 feet deep (a total of approximately 26,400 square feet). The proposed legal description of the new lots is Lots One and Two, Block One, Overpeck Addition. The lots would be divided as follows: Lot One (Interior) = 107.40 feet wide by 135.44 feet deep; Lot Two (Corner) = 87.60 feet wide by 135.41 feet wide. Lot Two would be approximately 2.4 feet short in required width. A decision for approval of the proposed planning application would allow the current house on the land to remain with variance issues being addressed accordingly. The Plannin- and Zoning Specialist also noted condition Number Eight of the Special Use Permit held by Harron Methodist Church for an off -site accessory parking lot. It is possible with the development of the corner lot for a single family home that the shrubs which serve to • 8/28/95 - 5 - s screen this parking lot might be removed. This would mean that the church would be responsible for screening its parking lot from this residential property. Councilmember Hilstrom returned to the meeting at 8:36 p.m. Councilmember Mann left the meeting at 8:39 p.m. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve Planning Commission Application No. 95011 submitted by Robert L. and Marlene A. Overpeck passed unanimously subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the final provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. Councilmember Mann was absent from the vote. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 95012 This application, submitted by Robert L. and Marlene A. Overpeck, and presented to Council by the Planning and Zoning Specialist was a request for a variance from Section 35 -400 of the Zoning Ordinance and Section 15 -106- of the Subdivision Ordinance to create a corner lot in the R -1 zoning district less than 90' in width. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its August 17, 1995, meeting. Creation of Lot Two, Block One, Overpeck Addition would result in the creation of a corner lot less than 90 feet in width (87.60 feet wide by 135.41 feet wide). The property in question is located at the northeast corner of 55th and Emerson Avenues. Mr. and Mrs. Overpeck state it is their intention to sell this lot or place a single family residence on it. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve Planning Commission Application No. 95012 submitted by Robert L. and Marlene A. Overpeck for a variance from Section 35 -400 and Section 15 -106-, of the City ordinances to create a corner lot in the R -1 District less than 90 feet on the grounds that the Standards for Variance contained in the zoning and Subdivision Ordinances are met as well as the long - standing City policy for granting minor lot variances passed unanimously. Councilmember Mann was absent from the vote. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT EXPANDING THE CITY'S INTER -CITY SEWER AGREEMENT WITH BROOKLYN PARK Three ro erties on N 1 Shingle reek p p Noble Avenue in Brooklyn Park, which are located south of Creek, have not previously been hooked up to city water and sewer. Since it would be cost prohibitive to extend water and sewer south across the creek to serve these three homes, Brooklyn Park proposed to extend this service from Brooklyn Center's mains at Noble Avenue and Woodbine Lane. • 8/28/95 - 6 - t Brooklyn Park agrees to pay all costs associated with the extension of service; agrees to maintain the leads and services; agrees to pay hookup charges for the three properties; and guarantees that the property owners will pay water and sanitary sewer fees under the same rate structure as other Brooklyn Center utility customers. Brooklyn Park further agrees that even though the agreement stipulates that each City owns the facilities located in their communities, Brooklyn Park will be responsible for the repair and replacement, should it become necessary, of the lead all the way to its connection at Woodbine. The Director of Public Services indicated other properties which have entered into agreements such as the ones described have worked out to her knowledge with no problems. She also indicated Brooklyn Park would be responsible for it's own assessments. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -191 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONNECTION OF THREE PROPERTIES ON NOBLE AVENUE IN BROOKLYN PARK TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER SANITARY SEWER AND WATER SYSTEMS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. Member Kristen Mann was absent from the vote. Mayor Kragness declared a recess at 8:53 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:05 p.m. Councilmember Carmody was absent at reconvening of the meeting. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -05 The Interim City Manager informed Council five City staff members evaluated all proposals individually and met as a group to jointly evaluate the proposals and narrow the field to a final selection. Based on criteria, Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH) stood out highest among all of the submittals. Further justification around selection of SEH was provided by the Interim City Manager. Councilmember Carmody returned to the meeting at 9:07 p.m. The Interim City Manager noted funds are available to complete the project. The Director of Public Services noted 69th Avenue is a Municipal State Aid street and would be funded through a combination of funding sources including MSA supported bonds. • 8/28/95 - 7- ' r RESOLUTION NO.95 -192 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 0 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -05, 69TH AVENUE NORTH (SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY TO DUPONT AVENUE), ROADWAY, BRIDGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. MEMORANDUM FROM COUNCILMEMBER CARMODY ON TEAM BUILDING Councilmember Carmody presented a memo addressing the subject of possible team building ideas to improve communications between Council members. She explained that through facilitation of improved communications, Council could be more efficient. Councilmember Mann acknowledged what is ultimately envisioned is agreed by all Council members and felt the process of better communication amongst Council members had already begun the past week. Mayor Kragness indicated Council should have an ongoing project and felt this would be especially appropriate once a new City Manager was hired. MEMORANDUM FROM COUNCILMEMBER HILSTROM ON COMMUNICATIONS i Councilmember Hilstrom presented a memo addressing concern around communications between the Council and staff and /or commissions. She requested that Council consider developing guidelines and policies in respect to these communications being disseminated with the best information in a timely manner. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to direct staff to study and report to Council on possible improvements in respect to communications between the Council and staff and /or commissions passed unanimously. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES JULY 31 1995 - SPECIAL WORK SESSION Councilmember Mann felt excused and unexcused absences should be defined. The Interim City Manager will contact additional resources in order to provide further information to Council. 8/28/95 - 8 - The City Attorney provided insight relating to the City and Home Rule Charter and its implications. He suggested Council would need to define policy pertaining to absences -- excused and unexcused- -prior to declaring any further specific absences of a Council member. He also stated instances of where and when a person could be legally removed from a given position. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the minutes of the July 31, 1995, special work session with the deletion of "unexcused" referring to Councilmember Kalligher under Roll Call passed unanimously. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -04 Lift Station Number One and associated force main are located in Garden City Park near Brooklyn Drive and 62nd Avenue. This lift station was built in 1955 and pumps approximately forty percent of the City's sanitary waste water flow. The lift station and its pumps date from 1955, are no longer replaceable, and are difficult to repair. MSA Consulting Engineers was chosen by a team of six staff members who evaluated all proposals individually and met as a group to jointly evaluate the proposals and narrow the field to two finalists. Councilmember Mann requested clarification regarding the differences in prices and contracts by the six RFP's submitted. The Director of Public Services indicated it is difficult to project certain types of construction services. Some of those were costs associated with the following: • having an inspector on site to ensure quality assurance during construction; time for having an inspector involved in the project. The Director of Public Services also offered that once an RFP is awarded, further contract details are then determined, based on a specific design selection. RESOLUTION NO.95 -193 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -04, REPLACEMENT OF LIFT STATION NO. 1 AND ASSOCIATED FORCE MAIN The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. SECRETARIAL RECORDING REQUEST PERTAINING TO AMOUNT OF INFORMATION INCLUDED IN COUNCIL MINUTES Councilmembers requested future Council minutes reflect a more abbreviated version. The City Attorney noted some information needs to remain more detailed as some circumstances (i.e. property rights) require litigation /court involvement and Council minutes are relied upon when legal decisions are made. He added Council decisions are typically stated in a resolution, 8/28/95 - 9 - however, not having specifics reflecting reason(s) of denial is reflective in minutes which is the official document approved by Council. Upon further discussion, it was determined the City Attorney would advise the Council secretary accordingly about needed detail on a specific agenda item when appropriate. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman Timesaver Off Site Secretarial • 8/28/95 - 10- { 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 WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 6, 1995 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Pro tem Mayor Kristen Mann at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness (arrived at 7:45 p.m.), Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, Director of Finance Director Charlie Hansen, Director of Community Development Brad Hoffman, Financial Commissioners Ned Storla, Jay Hruska, Donn H. Escher, and Lee Anderson, and Council Secretary Debbie Wolfe. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. • CONTINUATION OF BUDGET REVIEW Fire Department - 1996 Budget Councilmember Carmody asked if other positions will be reduced. The Finance Director stated if one full -time inspector was added, the staff would be reduced by one part-time inspector position. Councilmember Carmody stated she believes it would be better to use the funds to reduce the number of fire fighters sleeping at the fire station and have the additional inspector to try to reduce the number of fires. She questioned how much would a full -time inspector cost. The Finance Director responded $42,000 which includes benefits. Councilmember Mann asked how the additions would affect the levy Council is attempting to control. The Finance Director stated the 3.9% increase would become a 4.0% increase. He reminded the Council when the preliminary levy is set, it is a ceiling which cannot be raised but could be reduced. Councilmember Mann stated fire and public safety are important but she does not want to raise the levy percentage. Community Development Department - 1996 Budge Councilmember Carmody questioned code enforcement. She stated code enforcement has not improved; however, an extra person is requested. The Finance Director stated the priority was to till the officer positions and code enforcement fell behind. There is a great potential for . 9/6/95 - 1 - i improvement. He stated Council may wish to see how much benefit was received from the last person hired before approving another addition. Councilmember Carmody suggested the code enforcement officer utilization be looked at. In response to a question by Councilmember Mann, the Interim City Manager stated that approximately 40 percent of the work done by code enforcement is exclusively for code enforcement. Councilmember Carmody suggested the Police Chief review and make suggestions to Council in 30 days. Emergency Preparedness - 1996 Budget Councilmember Mann asked what the encoder /decoder was. The Finance Director stated the system allows the Dispatch Center to receive broadcasts from the Emergency Broadcast System. Engineering Department - 1996 Budget No comments from Council. Street Maintenance Department - 1996 Budget Councilmember Hilstrom asked why the street lights were being changed from NSP lights to City -owned lights. The Finance Director stated a different style is desired. Councilmember Hilstrom asked if there would be a budget increase in the future when Brooklyn Boulevard • changes. The Finance Director stated construction of new light poles would be part of the Brooklyn Boulevard project cost. Maintenance and upkeep is included in this budget. The City carries the risk itself to cover repairs and damage. The Interim City Manager stated the NSP rate is higher for the NSP poles than for city -owned poles. Councilmember Mann asked if snow and ice control is increased and Councilmember Hilstrom stated there is a $20,000 increase from last year. The Finance Director stated the staff reallocation may have changed to account for some of that. Councilmember Hilstrom asked if plowing for the liquor store and farm are included. The Finance Director stated there is $1,000 per year for the liquor store and the farm is under contract. Social Services - 1996 Budget Councilmember Mann asked if there was any duplication of County services included. The Interim City Manager stated he does not believe there is any duplication and added the City transportation program supplements the Met Council services. Recreation Administration Department - 1996 Budget 9/6/95 - 2 - Councilmember Hilstrom questioned who directs the activities of this department. The Finance Director stated the Director of Public Services with the Recreation Director handling the day-to- day services. Councilmember Hilstrom noted none of the Director of Public Services salary is included in the Recreation budget. The Finance Director stated no percentage of time spent on recreation was submitted. Councilmember Hilstrom noted the programs should be made self supporting or the statement in the budget stating such should be removed. The Finance Director stated the Recreation Department has internal guidelines and they attempt to make them cover as much cost as possible. The adult programs pay more of the costs based on their ability to pay more. Councilmember Hilstrom questioned on page 104 "transportation for City- sponsored clubs, grocery and mall shopping, and special events" and whether this wasn't a duplication of the Met Council Transportation Program. Councilmember Mann asked if a senior citizen has to a for a trip to the g store. PY P grocery Y Councilmember Carmody stated the fee is subsidized by the participants. Councilmember Mann suggested the City look at charging non- residents more for programs. The Interim City Manager stated for the youth programs it is difficult to determine residency. It can be easier done for the adult programs. Councilmember Mann suggested it be discussed by the Council at an upcoming meeting. • Teen Recreation Department - 1996 Budget Councilmember Hilstrom asked if the Teen Recreation Department is a duplication of what the schools should be doing. The Finance Director stated the City works in cooperation with the schools on programs. Mayor Kragness arrived at 7:45 p.m. Children's Recreation Department - 1996 Budget No comments from Council. Community Center. Department - 1996 Budget Councilmember Hilstrom stated the water slide was supposed to make money and questioned the status and projections for earnings. The Finance Director stated the original projections were optimistic. Last year, the slide generated enough additional revenues to pay for the operation of the slide and maintenance but not pay for the construction or other costs. Councilmember Hilstrom stated the pool budget increases every year and questioned what can be done. The Finance Director stated the other cities do not seem to be doing much better. The private health clubs have taken some of the business. 9/6/95 - 3 - Councilmember Hilstrom stated other cities advertise their pools more than Brooklyn Center does and she sees the possibility of losing more revenues. • Councilmember Hilstrom stated she believes the City should at least break even on concessions. Mayor Kragness stated concessions are needed to make the pool operational. The service needs to be offered to the patrons of the pool. Councilmember Carmody agreed the concessions should at least break even. Financial Commissioner Storla suggested the Council consider a private party leasing the space or using vending machines. Councilmember Carmody suggested the Recreation Department consider these options also in their research. Councilmember Hilstrom asked why no staff time is allocated for merchandise sales. She stated this is another area that should break even. The Finance Director agreed some staff time should be included. Councilmember Hilstrom asked why arts and crafts classes are not included in the Recreation Department budget. She believes the City should also break even from these classes. The question was raised regarding the rental fees for Constitutional Hall. The Finance Director stated the City does not pay for rental but does not use the facility if another paying renter has it reserved. Financial Commissioner Storla suggested the option of leasing the Civic Center be brought to • the voters. Councilmember Hilstrom stated the Council needs to decide how they want to handle the City Center. Financial Commissioner Storla stated the Council needs to determine the worth of the City Center to the City. Mayor Kragness suggested the Council meet with Mr. Mavis to review. Councilmember Hilstrom stated the Council needs to determine when a critical point is reached. Parks Maintenance Department - 1996 Budget Councilmember Hilstrom asked how many ice /hockey rinks are covered by the budget. The Finance Director stated four ice rinks and four hockey rinks. Councilmember Hilstrom asked if the use of the rinks is increasing. The Finance Director stated the usage changes but it is difficult to move rinks to other locations in the City. Mayor Kragness stated she believes the hockey rink usage is increasing. The Interim City Manager suggested an estimated participation rate by rink be obtained. Councilmember Mann asked if North Court Tennis Court would be closed again this year. The Finance Director stated there is no request for resurfacing the court this year. 9/6/95 - 4 - Councilmember Hilstrom asked if the City is looking at the big picture concerning park maintenance. She believes the maintenance of the City parks is a priority for the City and suggested a plan be made to improve at least one park per year. The Finance Director stated the City is attempting to do that already. Councilmember Hilstrom stated she would like to see a comprehensive plan for the parks. The Interim City Manager stated the parks will be included in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Financial Commissioner Storla stated the equipment in the parks should be kept at least operable. The Finance Director stated a survey is being done and should be completed in October. Councilmember Hilstrom stated the City cannot wait for a bond referendum to pass before improving the parks. The Finance Director stated there are seven parks maintenance personnel who are also utilized in the street maintenance department when needed. Councilmember Hilstrom stated parks and streets should be a priority for the City. Councilmember Carmody noted the objectives shown by some of the Departments do not list goals. She suggested staff work on the task of writing objectives. Financial Commissioner Storla stated the Council needs to set some of the objectives. Councilmember Carmody stated she wants to put the responsibility in the departments for writing their objectives. Financial Commissioner Escher suggested next year the City staff receive management by objectives training prior to this process beginning. Councilmember Hilstrom suggested the volunteer commissions work on goals for the • departments. Financial Commissioner Escher recommended the parks commission work with the parks department on the parks department budget. Financial Commissioner Anderson asked if the City has pursued getting businesses to donate equipment for the parks. Mayor Kragness suggested the Parks and Recreation Commission write letters asking for donations. Some private citizens may wish to donate money for such a cause. The Finance Director stated the City needs to be careful about doing this as the code of ethics may be in jeopardy. The businesses who may donate to the City may very well come before the Council asking for some Council action. Councilmember Hilstrom suggested the staff look at the program Brooklyn Park uses for donations. Financial Commissioner Storla suggested such a program be citizen initiated. The Finance Director reminded the Council on Monday, at the Council meeting, they need to determine the preliminary tax levy since Hennepin County needs the amount by Friday. Convention & Tourism Bureau - 1996 Budaet Mavor Kragness asked if the other cities are contributing the same amount as Brooklyn Center. The Finance Director stated the City collects the tax proceeds from the operators (6%) and forwards 95 % of the first three percent to the North Metro Convention and Tourism Bureau for 9/6/95 - 5 - marketing and promotion of the City. The City also retains 5% of the first 3% to reimburse itself for the cost of administering the program. Since Brooklyn Center has more hotels /motels than the other communities, its amount is higher. Councilmember Carmody asked how the City knows it is receiving a benefit from this service. The Director of Community Development Hoffman stated the Bureau presents to the Council once a year its activities on behalf of the City. The Council can look at it as an extension of its advertising budget. Councilmember Hilstrom questioned page 141, insurance premiums. The Finance Director stated this is only the insurance for the general fund departments. The rest of the insurance costs are charged to the different activities. Councilmember Mann asked if the City uses one agent or do they shop around. The Finance Director stated the City currently uses one agent and pays $8,000 - $9,000 as a flat fee versus a percentage of premiums which could be $25,000. If the insurance is rebid and given to another agent, the City may lose some of the service it is accustomed to getting. Councilmember Mann stated she would like to look at other agents. Financial Commissioner Storla questioned the benefit of having an agent. The Finance Director stated the agents helps the City get the correct information to make sure all risks are covered. The agent also identifies solutions to problems. The agent shops for the best insurance for the City. General Comments • Councilmember Hilstrom asked what the effect on the budget would be if $65,000 were added for the fire inspector. The Finance Director stated it would go from a 3.9 % increase to a 4.9 % increase. She asked what the trend has been for amount of budget each year. The Finance Director stated for the past several years, the City has been levying the maximum amount possible. He recommended the maximum be levied this year also. Councilmember Hilstrom questioned for TIF what percentage is residential and commercial. The Finance Director stated 58 % redevelopment (commercial), 15 % residential, and 5 % special projects (commercial /industrial). The Director of Community Development stated the mix of projects changes from year to year. The Finance Director stated any EDA excess funds go into the EDA fund balance. Councilmember Carmody stated regarding the general levy she would prefer to have the fire inspector and increase the budget $30,000. Councilmember Hilstrom stated her priorities are parks and streets. Councilmember Carmody asked which is more important. Mayor Kragness stated she would like to see a priority in the parks, education and recreation programs, fire and police protection. 9/6/95 - 6 - Councilmember Mann stated it is difficult to provide the same services for the same money. Councilmember Hilstrom suggested the Council address the issues. The budget does not fix problems the City already has. Councilmember Carmody stated the police building is a higher priority for her at this time. Financial Commissioner Escher suggested after the Truth in Taxation Hearings are held, the Council start planning for next year's goals and objectives and priorities. Councilmember Mann suggested a public information meeting be held to get resident input. She does not believe a lot of residents would consider parks a basic public service and does not want to see the budget raised more than 3.91 %. Councilmember Hilstrom stated the Council priorities should be set according to the findings of the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Hilstrom requested staff update a chart titled "General Fund Selected Balances" before she commits to a percentage. The Finance Director stated he will provide the updated information at the Council Meeting and to the Financial Commission on September 14. He will prepare draft resolutions for Council approval of the preliminary levy. ADJOURNMENT The motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the meeting passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:45 p.m. i Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Debbie Wolfe TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial • 9/6/95 - 7 - I MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 11, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen i Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, City Y Attorne Charlie LeFevere, Communications Coordinator Terri Swanson, Director of Finance Charlie Hansen, Director of Community Development Brad Hoffman, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. OPENING CEREMONIES A moment of silence was observed in place of the invocation. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Mann noted a meeting to be held at Constitution Hall in Brooklyn Center on Wednesday, September 13, 1995, at 7 p.m. Interested parties from Crystal, Robbinsdale, and Brooklyn Center were encouraged to attend the meeting in order to review and /or express input regarding proposed motoring regulations for middle and upper Twin Lake. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the September 11, 1995, agenda with removal of Items 6(a), (b), (d) from the consent agenda passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 95 -194 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 09/11/95) 9/11/95 -1- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom and passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Kathleen Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Debra Hilstrom to approve the following list of licenses: MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Triple D Heating & A/C Co Inc. P.O. Box 113 RENTAL DWELLINGS Renewal: Norton Rockler 1329 63rd Lane N. Dale Wegner 5935 Dupont Ave. N. J. G. Strand 5329 Penn Ave. N. Carin L. Rudolph 5315 Queen Ave. N. Mike Hasse 5337 -39 Queen Ave. N. SIGN HANGERS Topline Advertising 1471 92nd Lane NE The motion passes unanimously. OPEN FORUM Mayor Kragness noted the Council had received no requests to use the open forum session this evening. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING 1995 PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to open the hearing at 7:05 p.m. passed unanimously. A motion b Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded b Councilmember Carmody to close the Y Y hearing at 7:06 p.m. passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. " -1 O 9� 95 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS 9/11/95 -2- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR WEED REMOVAL A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to open the hearing at 7:07 p.m. passed unanimously. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to close the hearing at 7:08 p.m. passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -196 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIALS ASSESSMENTS FOR WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to open the hearing at 7:09 p.m. passed unanimously. 40 A motion b_v Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to close the hearing at 7:10 p.m. passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -197 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY REPAIR ACCOUNTS A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to open the hearing at 7:10 p.m. passed unanimously. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to close the hearing at 7:11 p.m. passed unanimously. ! 9/11/95 -3- RESOLUTION NO. 95 -198 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY REPAIR ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS RESOLUTION NO. 95 -199 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF MATTHEW ANDERLE'S EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT AT CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION 95 -200 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF JOSIAH FILSON'S EAGLE SCOUT PR PROJECT AT EVERGREEN PARK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS The Director of Finance informed Council that the City had contracted with Springsted Incorporated for financial advisory service in the sale of the proposed bonds. Mr. Allen Erickson, representing Springsted Incorporated, and the Director of Finance answered questions about the proposed bond issues. Mr. Erickson and the Director of Finance addressed Council's questions and /or concerns regarding healthy indebtedness percentages, specific plans of property acquisition and corresponding dollar amounts, and assigned TIF district debt. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $4,560,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995A 9/11/95 -4- I� The Director of Finance stated monies obtained from the sale of these bonds would be used for property acquisition in the areas of Brooklyn Boulevard and 69th Avenue, and in the Lyndale area. Mr. Erickson explained maturation of the proposed bonds under tax exempt status would begin on February 1, 1999, and continue through February 1, 2011. The bonds could be called in as early as February 1, 2005. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -201 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $4,560,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995A The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $780,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995B The Director of Finance stated monies obtained from the sale of these bonds would be used for special assessment street improvements to cover construction costs in the Woodbine area. Mr. Erickson explained maturation of the proposed bonds under tax exempt status would begin on February 1, 1997, and continue through February 1, 2006. The bonds could be called in as early as February 1, 2004. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -202 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $780,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995B The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF HOUSING FACILITIES REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF EARLE BROWN COMMONS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II The Director of Community Development informed Council that four issues which were unresolved at the time of the August 28, 1995, Council meeting had since been resolved, and recommended Council approve the bond issuance accordingly. The four issues previously unresolved included environmental factors, annual fee to the City, property taxes, and personal guarantee of the owners. 9/11/95 -5- Councilmember Hilstrom inquired about details of the 1992 bonding of the Commons, wondered what guarantees the City has that the present scenario will not reoccur in two y ears, and asked about the City's efforts to collect back taxes. The Director Community Development did not recall specifics of the 1992 bonding. In response to Councilmember Carmody, the Director of Community Development addressed the pros of Council approving the bond issuance. He indicated some of the bond holders were residents who had invested retirement monies in the Commons, and most likely disapproval of the bond issuance would result in the property going into foreclosure which would represent a possible loss of $700,000 to the City. Councilmember Mann stated concerns of approving the bond issuance which included the impression the City would be part of the chain title which would indicate a fiscal responsibility should a future fiscal default occur. The Director of Community Development responded accordingly. Sue Van Dyke of Dorsey and Whitney clarified the City could end up with the property in event of foreclosure if the City bid on the property, and was the top bidder. She was certain the City would not desire to bid on the property given its financial implications. The Director of Community Development indicated that in the event future taxes on the Commons are unpaid the property would go into foreclosure sale. Councilmembers Hilstrom and Mann expressed concerns that a number of assumptions are being made with the bond issuance and Council approval was postponing the inevitable. Bill Jones (counsel for Commons' owners) reiterated they were not asking for financial backing, but the City's support and approval of obtaining bond monies under tax exempt status. He stated there had been financial restructuring in such a manner that respective payments can be made. Councilmember Hilstrom interjected the City would be lending it's "good name" as well as tax exempt status backing to the project. Councilmember Carmody agreed with the Director of Community Development that the City would realize benefits of additional monies and it would be in the City's best interest to approve the project versus denial. Mr. Jones explained corresponding information relating to the A and B bonds and identified dollar amounts the City would receive over the next ten years in interest and administrative fees. Ms. Van Dyke outlined information regarding time lines and dollar amounts if Council approved the project. She indicated the City would not realize any monies from the project for at least two years should Council deny the bond issuance request. Councilmember Hilstrom inquired how much of the Commons' $1.7 million debt was owed to the City's General Fund. The Director of Community Development indicated about $60,000. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF HOUSING FACILITIES REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF EARLE BROWN COMMONS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II - 0 9l11/95 -- Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its denial: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF HOUSING FACILITIES REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF EARLE BROWN COMMONS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II The motion for the denial of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Mann and failed. Members Carmody and Kragness voted against the motion. The City Attorney suggested introducing a different motion for Council consideration. Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF HOUSING FACILITIES REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF EARLE BROWN COMMONS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kragness and failed with Members Hilstrom and Mann voting against. CITIES WEEK /CENTRAL GARAGE OPEN HOUSE PLAN FOR OCTOBER 5 1995 A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve the Cities Week /Central Garage Open House Plan for October 5, 1995, and that future projects related to the Cities Week Plan should be presented to Council and approved accordingly passed unanimously. REQUEST FOR CHANGE IN ORDINANCE RELATING TO PULL -TAB OPERATIONS The Interim City Manager talked about the history behind wording of the ordinance and suggested Council approve a wording change to the ordinance as follows: delete "$700 per month" and substitute "would be allowed by state statute." A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the Request for Change in Ordinance Relating to Pull -tab Operations passed unanimously. APPOINTMENT TO HOUSING COMMISSION Mayor Kragness recommended appointment of Lloyd Deuel to the Housing Commission and stated supporting reasons for his appointment. Councilmembers Carmody and Mann stated Naomi Ische's experience as a housing inspector was more appropriate and would bring more to the position. Councilmember Hilstrom stated Mr. Deuel has expressed previous interest in service on various commissions and /or committees and felt his desire to serve the City needed to be a consideration factor. 9/11/95 -7- Councilmember Carmody felt the City needed to solicit for more information on future applications to include the extent of the applicant's desire to serve and supporting reasons. 0 Councilmember Hilstrom suggested each Council member personally contact the four applicants in order for Council to make an informed appointment to the Housing Commission. Mayor Kragness asked that each applicant submit a letter indicating his /her desire to serve and supporting reasons. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve Lloyd Deuel as an Appointment to the Housing Commission failed as follows: Councilmembers Kragness and Hilstrom (yes); Councilmembers Carmody and Mann (no). RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -11 CONTRACT 1995 -E CMP SANITARY SEWER RELINING The Director of Public Services presented information to Council regarding this project and answered questions accordingly. She also indicated litigation with Lametti & Sons had been dismissed. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -203 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -11, CONTRACT 1995 -E, CMP SANITARY SEWER RELINING The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1995 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR EMERGENCY REPAIR OF A GATE VALVE AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER SWIMMING POOL For the past few months, maintenance staff have been experiencing operational problems with the swimming pool's gate valve. The gate valve closes off the pool's filtration system when staff needs to backwash (clean) the filters. Closing this valve prevents dirt and debris from being washed back into the pool. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -204 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1995 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR EMERGENCY REPAIR OF A GATE VALVE AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER SWIMMING POOL 9/11/95 -8- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The affected property owner has waived her right to a public hearing regarding this special assessment. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -205 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. DISCUSSION REGARDING NEW HOPE PROPOSAL ON ICE ARENA The Interim City Manager presented information on the proposal. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to decline participation in the New Hope Proposal project passed unanimously. Mayor Kragness declared a recess at 9:30 p. m. Mayor Kragness declared the Council meeting reconvened at 9:45 p.m. DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSALS FOR MANAGEMENT UNION NEGOTIATOR The Interim City Manager presented Council with proposals for union negotiator and said a contract proposal from the union has been received. PROPOSALS FOR MANAGEMENT UNION NEGOTIATOR Councilmember Mann felt the hourly differences between Labor Relations Associates and attorneys were comparable and inquired whether Council could have additional time to consider information submitted. The Interim City Manager indicated he foresaw no problem with Council postponing a decision for two weeks. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table for two weeks consideration of Proposals for Management Union Negotiator passed unanimously. Council will meet at 6 p.m. in Executive Session prior to its next scheduled Regular Session on September 25, 1995. 1996 PRELIMINARY BUDGET AND PROPERTY TAX LEVY REPORT 9/11/95 -9- The following resolutions were prepared based upon the Proposed 1996 Budget as recommended by the Interim City Manager. This was done so Council would see examples of the resolutions in their entirety. Councilmember Hilstrom expressed concern about any increase in the tax levy stating issues she wanted to see the City move towards were not being addressed and cited duplication of some services by the County. She indicated Council needed to approve a zero percent increase. Councilmember Mann concurred, but didn't see that a zero percent increase was enough and wanted to see an approved one percent decrease in the tax levy. Councilmember Carmody acknowledged concerns of Councilmembers Hilstrom and Mann. She added any issues should be presented to all of Council. Then, Council could direct staff to respond accordingly. She proposed each Council member present their budget ideas in a group setting enabling Council to make decisions on cuts and /or reapportionment of City budget monies. Discussion ensued around the pros and cons, and potential impressions of City constituents relating to a percentage increase or decrease to the tax levy. The Interim City Manager indicated he and the Director of Finance had met and were able to identify potential areas for budget cuts equaling approximately $200,000. He also cautioned Council about unforeseen emergencies and gave examples. oun ilm tuber Mann re r vi wal of those potential cuts and cited them accordingly. C c e quested e e p The Director of Finance provided clarification to Council regarding tax rates and their represented percentages ($100,000 = two percent) Councilmembers agreed to meet on Wednesday, September 13, 1995 at 5 p.m. at City Hall to discuss four agenda items relating the 1996 Preliminary Budget and Property Tax Levy Report. RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1996 PRELIMINARY BUDGET Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1996 PRELIMINARY BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and failed as follows: Members Hilstrom and Mann (yes); Members Carmody and Kragness (no). Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its tabling: RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1996 PRELIMINARY BUDGET 9/11/95 -10- The motion for the tabling of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A PRELIMINARY TAX LEVY FOR 1996 APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND, THE STREET IMPROVEMENT DEBT SERVICE FUNDS, THE E.D.A. FUND, AND THE H.R.A. FUND BUDGETS Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A PRELIMINARY TAX LEVY FOR 1996 APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND, THE STREET IMPROVEMENT DEBT SERVICE FUNDS, THE E.D.A. FUND, AND THE H.R.A. FUND BUDGETS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and failed as follows: Members Hilstrom and Mann (yes); Members Carmody and Kragness (no). Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its tabling: RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A PRELIMINARY TAX LEVY FOR 1996 APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND, THE STREET IMPROVEMENT DEBT SERVICE FUNDS, THE E.D.A. FUND, AND THE H.R.A. FUND BUDGETS The motion for the tabling of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY TAX CAPACITY LEVY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PROVIDING INFORMATION SERVICE, AND RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469.001 THROUGH 469.047 OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE YEAR 1996 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY TAX CAPACITY LEVY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PROVIDING INFORMATION SERVICE, AND RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469.001 THROUGH 469.047 OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE YEAR 1996 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and failed as follows: Members Hilstrom and Mann (yes); Members Carmody and Kragness (no). 9/11/95 -11- Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its tabling: RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY TAX CAPACITY LEVY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PROVIDING INFORMATION SERVICE, AND RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469.001 THROUGH 469.047 OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE YEAR 1996 The motion for the tabling of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. SET DATES FOR TRUTH IN TAXATION PUBLIC HEARINGS A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve Setting Dates for Truth in Taxation Public Hearings failed as follows: Councilmembers Hilstrom and Mann (yes); Councilmembers Carmody and Kragness (no). A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to table Setting Dates for Truth in Taxation Public Hearings passed unanimously. I PROCESS TO STUDY ORGANIZED COLLECTION A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Council Mann to decline participation in the Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG) study passed unanimously. RESOLUTION REQUESTING MN /DOT FOR A LIMITED USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A BICYCLE /PEDESTRIAN TRAIL ON MN /DOT RIGHT OF WAY Councilmembers indicated concern about exposure to uninsured liabilities as described by the City Attorney in a letter to the Director of Public Services dated September 6, 1995. The Director of Public Services informed Council the City has to have a limited use permit in order to complete construction of the trail. She urged Council to approve the resolution stating she did not foresee the State having a problem with the City Attorney's proposed language changes in the agreement. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -206 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its approval contingent upon an agreement being reached that addresses the City's concerns: RESOLUTION REQUESTING MN /DOT FOR A LIMITED USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A BICYCLE /PEDESTRIAN TRAIL ON MN /DOT RIGHT OF WAY The motion for approval of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 9/11/95 - L `'- 0 III APPROVAL OF MINUTES AUGUST 14, 1995 - REGULAR SESSION A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table approval of the August 14, 1995, Regular Session minutes until the next Council Work Session passed unanimously. AUGUST 21 1995 - SPECIAL WORK SESSION A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table approval of the August 21, 1995, Regular Session minutes until the next Council Work Session passed unanimously. PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPTEMBER 17 -23 1995 AS CONSTITUTION WEEK A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve a Proclamation Declaring September 17 -23, 1995, as Constitution Week passed unanimously. RESOLUTION AMENDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY ROLL NOS. 13372 AND 13373 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AWARD OF ASSESSMENT STABILIZATION GRANTS FOR THE WOODBINE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS Councilmember Carmody questioned the Director of Public Services regarding deadlines for approval of such a grant. The Director of Public Services indicated May 31, 1995, was the deadline. Councilmembers Carmody and Mann suggested proposing future deadline dates be established to accommodate for project planning /completion purposes, etc. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -207 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY ROLL NOS. 13372 AND 13373 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AWARD OF ASSESSMENT STABILIZATION GRANTS FOR THE WOODBINE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to adjourn the meeting passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:56 p.m. 9/11/95 -13- Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial I 9/11/95 -14- 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 13, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 5:05 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody (arrived at 5:08 p.m.), Debra Hilstrom, Barb Kalligher, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, Director of Finance Charlie Hansen, and Council Secretary Lorri Kopischke. i COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS Mayor Kragness introduced a n property tax levy re ess t oduced the 1996 preliminary budget and roe o Y a P Y b P P Y Y P rt. Councilmember Mann stated over the last few days she has scrutinized the budget to find areas to cut and keep the property tax levy to a zero increase and the general budget fund to a zero increase and provide the improvements to the parks and tennis courts needed. She stated there was a simple choice, to cut the North Metro Mayors Association by $20,000. Councilmember Carmody arrived at 5:08 p.m. Councilmember Mann indicated she would be happy to discuss each item listed for reduction on a proposed list she had distributed to the Council. She indicated it was important to not duplicate items in the Human Services area of the budget which were also provided by the County. Councilmember Hilstrom recommended the Council look into Social Services and ask the Human Rights and Resources Committee for recommendations. Councilmember Mann suggested it was also appropriate to make cuts in the Police Department Budget. Councilmember Carmody stated she did not feel it appropriate to cut the contingency fund because in two of the last three years. the City had used more than $100,000. 9/13/95 - 1 - I The Director of Finance stated the proposed budget amount for the contingency fund was $200,000. Monday night it was suggested this be reduced to $100,000 but two of the past three 0 years the City has used more than $100,000. Councilmember Kalligher indicated she had a hard time with eliminating all of the Social Services Budget. She would like to see a breakdown to determine how much was a duplication of County programs. Councilmember Mann stated the amount budgeted for social services was $35,413. She recommended cutting $30,000 and letting Human Rights and Resources determine where those cuts would be made. Mayor Kragness asked where social service programs were available to Brooklyn Center residents other than the City, and if they were provided at no charge or on a sliding fee. Councilmember Mann suggested the services were available on Shingle Creek Parkway and also the library or through the court system. Councilmember Kalligher stated mediation is provided on a sliding scale basis and there is a domestic abuse program offered through the County. She questioned Mann's proposed cut of the chairs for the Council Chambers. Councilmember Mann acknowledged the chairs are "ratty" and need to be replaced but suggested this be postponed until the Council determined a permanent location for the Chambers. Mayor Kragness indicated she agreed. She questioned cutting the air rescue knife from the Fire Department Budget. Councilmember Mann stated this was a new item which was almost $2,000 and the City simply could not afford it. She explained it was a specialized piece of equipment used for auto extrication. Hil tr m sta ted he would like to make a motion to ag to cut out $�70 Co uncilmember s o sta s g , 000 or $250,000 from the general budget and then determine what had to be cut. Councilmember Carmody agreed but stated she did not want to make that decision until it was determined what would be cut. Councilmember Mann stated she was concerned that the Park Commission had not evaluated the park and recreation programs. She reported she had conferred with Arnie Mavis and he believed the general admission rate for the community center could be raised by $0.25 and the same level of attendance would continue. This would generate approximately $20,000 in revenue per year. 9/13/95 - ? - There was a motion by Councilmember Hilstrom, seconded by Councilmember Mann for a 0% increase in the property tax levy to maintain the same levy. The Director of Finance reported State Law and City Charter requires the City not merely set the levy but also adopt a budget identifying the cuts made to specific departments. If the City fails to set the levy, the County would probably certify the same levy as the previous year and there would probably no levy increase for the next year. He advised the Council would definitely want to set the levy. Councilmember Hilstrom clarified it would be sufficient to make a motion to have a 0% increase in the levy over last year and then specify the items to consider as brought forward by Councilmembers Mann and Carmody. The Director of Finance indicated the motion to set the levy itself is fine but the Council also needs to adopt a budget. The motion passed with Mayor Kragness and Councilmember Carmody voting against. The Director of Finance indicated those items will come before the Council as capital improvement projects. He was concerned with the proposed cuts to data processing in the budget. The budget proposes a five year replacement schedule. If the proposed cuts are approved, the computers would be replaced on a ten year cycle. Councilmember Mann acknowledged the concerns but indicated funds are limited. Mayor Kragness questioned the enhanced computer for the engineering department. The Director of Finance indicated the functions the engineering department performs such as geographical mapping and autocadd require a larger monitor and more memory. There was a motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to cut the Data Processing Department Budget by 550,000. The motion passed with Councilmember Carmody voting against. There was a motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to cut the Streets and Parks Budget by 57,700. The motion passed with Mayor Kragness and Councilmember Carmody voting against. The motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to cut the Police Department Budget by $2,125 passed unanimously. The motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to cut the Government Building Budget by 513,500 passed unanimously. 9/13/95 - 3 - The motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Kalligher to cut the Community Development Budget by $21,300 passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Mann to increase revenues by $20,000 in recreation. The motion died for lack of a second. There was a motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to increase revenues in the Community Center by $20,000 by increasing fees by $0.25. The motion passed with Councilmember Carmody voting against. There was a motion by Councilmember Mann, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to cut the Social Services Budget by $35,413. Councilmember Carmody stated she would not vote in favor of this motion because several of the services in the budget were not duplicated by the County. Councilmember Hilstrom requested two items, Project Peace in the amount of $50,636 and Youth Diversion Program in the amount of $30,900 be removed from the Police Department Budget and moved to the Social Services Budget. Councilmember Mann withdrew her motion. Councilmember Hilstrom concurred and withdrew her second. There was a motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to reduce the Social Services Budget by $50,000 and shift INVITE, INC., and Project Peace from the Police Department Budget to the Social Services Budget. The motion passed with Councilmember Carmody voting against. There was a motion by Mayor Kragness and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to cut $78,000.00 from the Contingency Fund Budget. The motion passed with Councilmember Carmody voting against. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -208 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A PRELIMINARY TAX LEVY FOR 1996 APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND, THE STREET IMPROVEMENT DEBT SERVICE FUNDS, THE E.D.A. FUND. AND THE H.R.A. BUDGETS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom, and the motion passed with Councilmember Carmody voting against. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -209 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 9/13/95 -4- RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1996 PRELIMINARY BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom, and the motion passed with Mayor Kragness and Councilmember Carmody voting against. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -210 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY TAX CAPACITY LEVY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PROVIDING INFORMATIONAL SERVICE, AND RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 469.001 THROUGH 469.047 OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE YEAR 1996 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom, and the motion passed unanimously. SET DATES FOR THE TRUTH IN TAXATION PUBLIC HEARINGS There wa a motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to schedule the truth in taxation public hearings for December 6, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. and December 13, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT The motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to adjourn the meeting at 6:41 p.m. passed unanimously. Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Lorri Kopischke TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 9/13/95 - 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 WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 18, 1995 INN ON THE FARM CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7:13 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Carmody and Hilstrom. Also present were Director of Community Development Brad Hoffman, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. Councilmembers Barb Kalligher and Kristen Mann were absent. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PRESENTATION A presentation was made by Sid Inman and Mark Ruff of Publicorp regarding Tax Increment Financing (TIF) basics. Basically, a tax increment is related to the incremental value increase of a given property when additional improvement(s) is /are done to that property which increases its value. The property's present value is the most important when evaluating use of a TIF. Mr. Inman and Mr. Ruff provided written and verbal information on the following: implications of TIF, general background, and current happenings in the area(s) of TIF terminology relating to TIF and how it relates to projects and /or districts; names of the five different districts, their qualifications, and term and restrictions; how an increment may be used and works; types of financing; and local government aid penalty. Questions posed by Council members to Mr. Inman and Mr. Ruff were answered and additional insight provided accordingly by the Director of Community Development. OTHER BUSINESS EARLE BROWN COMMONS Councilmember Hilstrom informed those present about information being turned over to City staff relating to the Earle Brown Commons Limited Partnership II. MISCELLANEOUS CITY DEVELOPMENT PLANS /ISSUES The Director of Community Development talked about plans and process of assigning various City staff to respective development projects. He indicated this would benefit the City in addressing numerous projects at the same time. 9/18/95 1 Councilmember Carmody questioned the Director of Community Development regarding prioritizing of projects and existence of a related master plan. The Director of Community Development talked about his plan of action and associated reasoning behind certain project decisions. Councilmember Hilstrom requested information be disseminated to Council members comprised of a brief statement or synopsis as RFPs or newsworthy items happen. Councilmember Hilstrom also asked about installing a street lamp in the Willow Lane area and about excessive water standing in the street at 65th and Brooklyn Boulevard. The Director of Community Development will follow up. A potential project located at 63rd and Brooklyn Boulevard was discussed. The Director of Community Development informed Council that Brookdale will be going to auction on September 29, 1995. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to adjourn the meeting passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman Timesaver Off Site Secretarial 9/18/95 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 WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 23, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 9:10 a.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody and Debra Hilstrom. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre and Kay McAloney from the League of Minnesota Cities. Councilmembers Barb Kalligher and Kristen Mann were absent. It was noted that Ms. McAloney would act as Council Secretary for this meeting. REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS FOR CITY MANAGER The City Council proceeded to review the applications for the position of City Manager and directed that six applicants be scheduled for interviews on Wednesday, Friday and Saturday of the coming week. Council also noted that out of state applicants would be reimbursed up to $350 for travel expenses. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 11:05 a.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor 9/23/95 1 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY S OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 25, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. INTERVIEWS WITH MANAGEMENT UNION LABOR NEGOTIATORS BARNEY, GUZY & STEFFEN, LTD. Bernie Steffen, Scott Lepack, and Craig Ayres represented their firm during the interview. Mr. ® Steffen talked about his and each of his co- workers' qualifications and lengths of employment with the firm as well as providing names of cities the firm currently represents. In total, there are 28 lawyers in the firm. FRANK MADDEN & ASSOCIATES Pamela R. Galanter represented her firm during the interview. There are three attorneys in the firm as well as a law clerk, and secretary. She provided names of cities the firm currently represents and emphasized their firm specifically represents employers. RATWIK ROSZAK BERGSTROM & MALONEY PA Paul Ratwik and John Roszak represented their firm during the interview. Mr. Ratwik and Mr. Roszak talked about processes they use when facilitating labor negotiations and cited associated laws when conducting negotiations. LABOR RELATIONS ASSOCIATES INC. Karen Olsen represented her organization during the interview. She provided Council with Appendix A which contained a listing of cities Labor Relations Associates, Inc. serves. Ms. Olsen restated her approach when facilitating labor negotiations and specific items she addresses when conducting negotiations. 9/25/95 - 1 - INVESTIGATION REQUEST BY COUNCILMEMBER HILSTROM Councilmember Hilstrom inquired of the Interim City Manager the possibility of Council utilizing a law firm in a consulting capacity in conjunction with use of a negotiator. The Interim City Manager indicated this was feasible and will pursue obtaining further information accordingly. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Kragness adjourned the meeting at 6:53 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 9/25/95 - 2 - MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY • OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 25, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, Director of Community Development Brad Hoffman, Community Development Specialist Tom Bublitz, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. Councilmember Barb K llia a S her was absent. OPENING CEREMONIES Mr. Ulysses Boyd offered the invocation. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Carmody informed those present about the status of the new City Manager selection process. PRESENTATION None were made. I APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA A motion b Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded b Councilmember Mann to a �i Y approve P rove the September 25, 1995, agenda with the removal of Items 80), (1) from the consent agenda passed unanimously. DEVELOPMENT PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE RELEASE /REDUCTION A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve the Development Performance Guarantee Release/Reduction n for O mni Tool Inc. located at 3500 o O , 48th Avenue North passed unanimously. A motion b Councilmember Hilstrom n Councilmember M nn approve h e and seconded b a to a o e t Y Y PP Development Performance Guarantee Release /Reduction for Randy Rau located at 6849 Brooklyn Boulevard passed unanimously. 9/25/95 - 1 - A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve the Development Performance Guarantee Release /Reduction for Lutheran Church of the Master • located at 1200 69th Avenue North passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -211 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 0925/95) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann, and passed unanimously. LICENSES A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve the following list of licenses passed unanimously: MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Kalmes Mechanical Inc. 15440 Silverod Street NW Northwestern Service Inc. 791 Hampden Avenue RENTAL DWELLINGS - INITIAL Greg & Kathleen Voge 5018 Ewing Ave. N. Tracy Rice 7037 Logan Ave. N. RENTAL DWELLINGS - RENEWAL Casmir & Doris Stachowski 5329 Queen Ave. N. Scot & Michal Frenzel 5256 E. Twin Lake Blvd. Arlene Johnson 7218 -24 W. River Rd. SIGN HANGERS Imaginality 6182 Olson Memorial Hwy. OPEN FORUM Resident Irving Kopenen, a sixteen -year resident who resides at 6707 Dupont Avenue North, addressed Council regarding two issues: 1) Concern about Councilmember Barb Kalligher's absences since the July 10, 1995, meeting with exception of one budget meeting; and 2) Concern about Council business being attended to in an unprofessional manner. Upon Council discussion, the City Attorney suggested Council establish rules and regulations regarding absences which could - -in turn -- determine non - feasance. Mayor Kragness indicated desire to utilize the City Attorney's suggestion via Council's adoption of a formal resolution addressing Council absences. The Interim City Manager will formulate a resolution with the 09/25/95 -2- City Attorney's assistance for presentation to Council for approval at its next regularly scheduled meeting. • Resident Closter who resides at 7220 Lee Avenue North addressed Council regarding h Roger o a t t h e Woodbine project and associated assessment taxes. The Director of Public Services responded to Mr. Closter's concerns accordingly. Resident and municipal liquor store employee John Lechant who resides at 6912 Halifax expressed concerns regarding the possible selling /closing municipal liquor stores located within Brooklyn Center and offered related information to this subject. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS RESOLUTION NO.95 -212 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -18, CONTRACT 1995 -I, NEW ELECTRIC CONTROLS AT WELLS 5, 6, AND 7 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann, and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT The public hearing is to be held on November 13, 1995 at 7 :00 p.m. RESOLUTION NO.95 -213 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom, and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO.95 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SCHEDULE FOR ANIMAL IMPOUND FEES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom, and passed unanimously. 09/25/95 -3- RESOLUTION NO.95 -215 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: • RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXTENSION OF THE ANOKA HENNEPIN EM NARCOTICS VIOLENT CRIME TASK FORCE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom, and passed unanimously. STAFF REPORT ON THE METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT The Community Development Specialist requested concurrence of the Housing Commission to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. This Act was passed by the 1995 legislature and is the state's major piece of legislation addressing affordable housing. The primary goal of the Act is to provide a mechanism whereby each community in the seven county metropolitan area addresses the issue of affordable housing. The Community Development Specialist outlined incentives for communities to participate in the Act and talked about potential future grants programs to assist cities in meeting their affordable housing goals and dealing with other issues in the city, etc. Date deadlines for participation of Brooklyn Center in the Act were discussed as follows: By November 15, 1995, the city would need to pass a resolution of intent to participate in the Act; By December 14, 1995, the city would need to adopt a housing goals agreement with the Metropolitan Council; By June 30, 1996, the city would have to have an action plan in place. RESOLUTION NO.95 -216 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING DISCOVER THE CENTER RALLY NIGHTS AS A CIVIC EVENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann, and passed unanimously. APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER TO THE AD HOC COMMUNICATIONS TASK FORCE A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to appoint Melody Hanna to the Ad Hoc Communications Task Force passed unanimously. APPOINTMENT TO HOUSING COMMISSION A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to appoint Lloyd Deuel to the Housing Commission passed unanimously. PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSE RENEWAL AT 6421 BRYANT AVENUE NORTH A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve a private kennel license renewal at 6421 Bryant Avenue North passed unanimously. 09/25/95 -4- Nancy Gohman presented Council with an overview of the police labor agreement contract and respective compensation amounts. RESOLUTION NO.95 -217 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 1995 -96 LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND LELS \82 (POLICE OFFICERS AND SERGEANTS) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann, and passed unanimously. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Mann requested that the following items be discussed at a Council Work Session: Item 80) Report on the Analysis of Liquor Store Operations; Item 8(1) Discussion Item: Earle Brown Heritage Center. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to adjourn the meeting at 7:53 p.m. passed unanimously. Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TiineSaver Off Site Secretarial • 09/25/95 -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 WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 27, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Kragness at 5:40 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom and Kristen Mann, Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre and Kay McAloney from the League of Minnesota Cities. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. It was noted that Ms. McAloney would act as Council Secretary for this meeting. CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS • The City Council interviewed Gregory Withers for the position of City Manager. The City Council recessed at 7 p.m. and reconvened at 7:35 p.m. The City Council interviewed Patrick McGarvey for the position of City Manager. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Carmody nd seconded by Councilmember Mann to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor 9/27/95 1 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 WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 29, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Kragness at 5:20 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre and Kay McAloney from the League of Minnesota Cities. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. It was noted that Ms. McAloney would act as Council Secretary for this meeting. CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS The City Council interviewed Carl Ramey for the position of City Manager. • ADJOURNMENT JOUR MENT There was a motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to adjourn the meeting: The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 7:06 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor • 9/29/95 1 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 WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 30, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Kragness at 8:05 a.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre and Kay McAloney from the League of Minnesota Cities. Councilmember Barb Kallicher was absent. It was noted that Ms. McAloney would act as Council Secretary for this meeting. CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS The City Council interviewed William Ross for the position of City Manager. The City Council recessed at 10 a.m. and reconvened 10:10 a.m. The City Council interviewed James Willis for the position of City Manager. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 12:10 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor • 93095 / / 1 Council Meeting Date 10/10/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Ag.W. Item Numbe Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE MONTH OF OCTOBER, 1995, AS NATIONAL ARTS AND HUMANITIES MONTH Department Approval: fi't� C1 Patti Page, Interim Adlinistrative Assistant Manager's Review/Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approval of attached proclamation. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached ) • Attached is a roclamation which was sent to the City b P ty y the United States Conference of Mayors. • • PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE MONTH OF OCTOBER, 1995, AS NATIONAL ARTS AND HUMANITIES MONTH WHEREAS, the arts and humanities enhance and enrich the lives of all Americans; and WHEREAS, the arts and humanities affect every aspect of life in America today including the economy, social problem solving, job creation, education, creativity, and community liveability; and WHEREAS, local arts agencies across America have joined with the National Assembly of Local Arts Agencies (NALAA), National Assembly of State Arts Agencies and a coalition of over fifty national arts and humanities WHEREAS, the nations's 23,000 cultural organizations, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the nation's 3,800 local arts agencies, the arts and humanities councils of the 50 states and U.S. jurisdictions, and the President of the United States will be encouraged to participate in this celebration and in the public awareness campaign; and WHEREAS, the month of October has been designated as National Arts and Humanities Month. • NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER State eo Minnesota, do hereby proclaim the month of October, 1995, as National Arts and Humanities Month in Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor Attest: Deputy Clerk • Council Meeting Date 10/10/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center A g enda lien Number -sue Request For Council Consideration is Item Description: PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER 16 - 20, 1995, AS MANUFACTURERS WEEK Department Approval: Patti Page, Interim AWninistrative Assistant Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approval of attached proclamation. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached ) • Attached is a proclamation which was sent to the City by Mary Welch of the Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce. • • PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER 16 - 20, 1995 AS MANUFACTURERS WEEK WHEREAS, Manufacturing has the largest total payroll of any business sector in Minnesota, providing $13.5 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 $7.3 billion into the Minnesota economy in 1994; 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 $54 million more in corporate income taxes than any other business sector; NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of Minnesota, do hereby proclaim the week of October 16 - 20, 1995, to be MANUFACTURERS WEEK in the City of Brooklyn Center. • Date Mayor Attest: Deputy Clerk • Council Meeting Date 10 /10 /95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES Department Approval: Spector, D75or of Public Services Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: It is recommended the Council adopt the attached resolution. • Summary Explanation: su ortin documentation attached ( PP g � The attached resolution represents the official Council action required to expedite removal of the trees most recently marked by the City tree inspector, in accordance with approved procedures. It is anticipated that this resolution will be submitted for council consideration each meeting during the summer and fall as new trees are marked. • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 10/10/95 ) WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and Diseased Tree Removal Agreement has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of Brooklyn Center giving the owners twenty (20) days to remove diseased trees on the owners' property; and WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of these diseased trees by declaring them a public nuisance: NOW, THEREFOR, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The diseased trees at the following addresses are hereby declared to be a public nuisance: TREE PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS NUMBER ---------------------- - - - - -- ----------------------- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- • PAUL & LINDA BARLI 7028 DALLAS RD 126 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owner(s) will receive a second written notice providing five (5) business days in which to contest the determination of the City Council by requesting, in writing, a hearing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. All removal costs, including legal, financing, and administrative charges, shall be specially assessed against the property. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy 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 - Cmwil Meng Doe lala9s City of Brooldyn Center AS=& *a xb. -6,6 Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Approval of Contract with Frank Madden & Associates for Management Union Contract Negotiations Department Approval: Cam Andre, Interim City Manager Y g Manager's Review/Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action. Motion to approve the contract with Frank Madden &Associates. Summary Explanation: su ( pporting documentation attached c ed YES • CONSULTING SERVICES CONTRACT This Agreement, by and between City of Brooklyn Center, hereinafter referred to as "City," and Frank Madden & Associates, Attorneys at Law, Suite 650, 505 North Highway 169, Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 -6448, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant." RECITALS WHEREAS, the City is required under the Minnesota Public Employment Labor Relations Act (PELRA) to undertake the negotiation of contracts with employees represented by exclusive representatives unions and P a WHEREAS, the City has determined that retaining a consultant to assist it in its negotiations with the unions best fulfills its obligations with respect to labor negotiations. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements contained within this Contract, the City and the Consultant agree as follows: A. Scope of Services 1. Representation, with the labor negotiating team, in labor negotiations as chief management negotiator for a confidential employee unit and a supervisory /department head unit. Services may include any or all of the following at the request of the City. a. Analysis of existing policies and administration problems; b. Preparation of management negotiations strategy; C. Management spokesperson for "at the table" labor negotiations, mediation, and interest arbitration; d. Preparation of management proposals and timely drafting of final labor bargaining agreement and finalization; e. Pre -labor negotiation briefings, settlement summaries and appropriate status reports for City Council information and action as necessary or as requested. B. Consideration and Terms of Payment 1. Consideration for all services performed shall be as follows: Provisions of labor negotiation, mediation and interest . arbitration services at the rate of $90.00 per hour. 1 2. Consultant will also be reimbursed for expenses, • including mileage at the rate established by the City Council for City employees, photocopying charges at $.15 per page, charges for facsimile transmissions at the rate of $1.00 per page, and reimbursement of long distance telephone charges. 3. The Consultant will submit invoices on a monthly basis to the City for payment for services performed. Payment shall be made within thirty days after receipt of invoices for services performed. C. Changes The City and the Consultant may, from time to time, require changes in the terms of this Contract. Any such changes that are mutually agreed to by the parties shall be incorporated as written amendments to this Agreement and attached hereto. D. Independent Contractor It is agreed by the parties that at all times and for all purposes hereunder, that Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. E. Equal Employment and Non - Discrimination In connection with the work under this Contract, Consultant agrees to comply with the applicable provisions of Federal and State Equal Employment Opportunity and Non - Discrimination Statutes, Regulations and Executive Orders. F. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT This contract may be terminated at any time by either party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Contract to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. City of Brooklyn, Center Date: By: ATTEST: Frank Madden & Associates Date: By: Pamela R. Galanter Its Partner i 2 i camcit AAWfing Dare l a l a9s City of Brooklyn Center n ft. xmb, S � Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Licenses Department Approval: P Patti Page, Interim dministrative Assistant Manager's Review/Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approve attached list of licenses. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached No • MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Sharp Heating & A/C 4854 Central Ave. NE LL . n n ,off a Building Official R? RENTAL DWELLINGS Renewal: Robert Messersmith 5338 Queen Ave. N. , Director of C )YiWmunity F9 Development TAXICAB Town Taxi 2500 Wash Ave. Deputy City Clerk jr • Council Meeting Date 10/10/95 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number 7 Qi Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Resolution Providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995A. Department Approval: C��arve i 1� a�►t.Q,,ert Charlie Hansen, Finance Director Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Adoption of the resolution which will be handed out at the meeting. Summary Explanation: Y P (supporting documentation attached YES ) • This resolution awards the sale of tax increment bonds to be supported by the new tax increment district #3. Proceeds of this issue will be used for projects such as the purchase of the Atkins property, purchase of the Brookdale Motel, and purchase of properties required for the reconstruction of Brooklyn Boulevard. Proposals will be opened on October 10, 1995 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. Attached is a notification from Moody's Investors Service that they have reaffirmed the City's Al bonds rating. Brooklyn Center has held this rating since 1980. I highly recommend that you read the attached Rating Recap since it provides insight into how others view our city. �� �- -� •-�� _��� u�c .iu� .iz�z nuuu9 S 111VGSLU1'S rage 00J ■ ■ 0 Moody Municipal Daily Rati Rec Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Rating date October 5 , 1995 Moody's rating: Al $4,560,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995A $780,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995B Sale: $5,340,000 Mature Minneapolis Suburb Experiencing Some Date of Sale: October 10 Erosion in Tax Base and Socioeconomic Profile Type Competitive The economic base of this first tier suburb of Minneapo- Security: General obligation, unlimited tax. Tax incre- lis has experienced some erosion over the past several ments are also pledged to the Series A Bonds. Special years, as evidenced by a weakened socioeconomic pro - assessments levied on property specially benefitted are file and a decline in taxable values. While the 1990 additionally pledged to the Series B Bonds. census revealed that city housing values and resident Use of Proceeds Proceeds of Series A finances vari- income levels were still above average, their growth ous redevelopment projects within city. Series B will during the previous decade had lagged behind that of fund street improvements. both Hennepin County and the state. As is typical of i Last Rating change August 1980: From Ato Al. many mature communities, a decline in the city's popu- Update of related ratings: lation is principally due to the smaller number of persons Brooklyn Center, Minnesota per household. Of increasing concern is the continued Moody's rating Al slide in the city's taxable valuation, primarily due to a General Obligation State Aid Road Bonds significant number of property tax appeals by the sizable Credit Comment The Al rating on the general obliga- commercial sector. While the overall number of out - tion bonds of the City of Brooklyn Center has been standing appeals has reportedly declined, a claim by confirmed based upon the following factors: Brooklyn Center's largest taxpayer, a regional shopping Maintenance of Healthy General Fund Position mall, has not yet been resolved. Alleviates Concern Over Other Operational Increasing, Though Still Manageable Level of Debt Weaknesses Debt ratios have risen in recent years as the city has Conservative budgeting has enabled the city to accumu- financed various redevelopment and infrastructure late a sizable General Fund balance over the last two improvements. Some comfort stems from the city's years. Additionally, officials indicate that year -to -date aggressive amortization schedule, as well as the signifi- results are outperforming budgeted expectations; conse- cant support for debt service requirements from tax quently, another General Fund surplus is expected. The increments, special assessments, and enterprise revenues. maintenance of a healthy General Fund balance is a key The city's annually updated ten -year capital plan indi- rating factor, given the weak condition of other operating cates that continued borrowing for redevelopment funds, a decline in property tax collections since the projects is likely to continue at the same pace of recent early 1990s, and the city's liquidity requirements. years; however, voter approval will be required to under- take several previously identified facility improvements. Uit. JLJ J UUUUy J LIIvr-SLUr, rage OOY 2 As of October 5, 1995 Mood y's Municipal Daily Rating Recap Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (continued) • At this time, we have also reviewed and confirmed the bonds, which is secured by both the city's general obli- A 1 rating on the city's general obligation state aid road gation pledge and state aid road appropriations. I analyst: Steven J. Bocamazo (212) 553 -7168 I i • 'I p Copyright 1995 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 OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY'S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. All infomhation contained herein is obtained by MOODY'S from sources believed by it to be accntate and reliable. Because of de possibility of humour or mechanical error as well as other radon;, however, such information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind and MOODY'S. in particulr, wakes no representation or warranty, express or imhplied, as to to accuracy, timeliness, completeness. merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose of any such information. Under no circumstances slhall MOODY'S lhave any liability to any person or entity for (a) any loss or damage in whole or in part caused by, resulting front or relating to. any error (negligent or otherwise) or other circumstance or contingency widhin or outside the control of MOODY'S or any of its directors, officers, employees or agents in connection with due 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, lost profits), even if MOODY'S is advised in advance of the possibility of such damages, resulting from the use of or inability to use, any such information. The credit ratings, if any, constituting part of the infouuution contained herein are, and must be construed ued solely as, statements of opinion and not statements of fact or recommendations to rclhase sell ell or hold an securities. NO WARRANTY • Y , EMPRESS 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 purclhasing, holding or selling. Pursuant to Section 17(b) of due Securities Act of 1933, MOODY'S ]hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and muuucipal bonds, debentures, notes and ccmunercial 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. Council Meeting Date 10/10/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Resolution Providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995B. Department Approval: Charlie Hansen, Finance irector Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Adoption of the resolution which will be handed out at the meeting. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached YES ) This resolution awards the sale of improvement bonds to be supported by general property taxes and special assessments on benefited property . Proceeds of this issue will be used to reimburse the city for the reconstruction of streets in the Woodbine area. Resolution 95 -93 certified the special assessment of benefited properties as provided by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. The special assessments equal 37% of the total project costs and will be collected over a 10 year period. Property taxes will be responsible for the remaining 63% of the costs. Proposals will be opened on October 10, 1995 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. • OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 25, 1995 Ratings: Requested from Moody's NEW ISSUES Investors Service ion of Kennedy & Graven Chartered, Bond Counsel, under existing laws, regulations, rulings and decisions, assuming compliance with the covenants set forth in the 01"t the interest on the Improvement 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 altemative minimum tax or the computation of Minnesota alternative minimum tax imposed on individuals, trusts and estates. Interest on the Improvement Bonds is includable in the calculation of certain federal and Minnesota taxes imposed on corporations. (See "Tax Exemption - The Improvement Bonds" herein.) Interest on the Tax Increment Bonds is includable in the gross income of the recipient for United States and State of Minnesota income tax purposes, and is subject to Minnesota corporate and bank excise taxes measured by net income. (See "Taxability of Interest - The Tax Increment Bonds" herein.) City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota $4,560,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995A (the "Tax Increment Bonds ") $780,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995B (the "Improvement Bonds ") (collectively referred to as the "Bonds" or the "Issues ") (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Dated Date: November 1, 1995 Interest Due: Each February 1 and August 1, commencing August 1, 1996 The Tax Increment Bonds will mature February 1 as follows: 1999 $225,000 2002 $330,000 2005 $360,000 2008 $385,000 2010 $415,000 2000 $265,000 2003 $330,000 2004 $360,000 2009 $400,000 2011 $425,000 2001 $330,000 2004 $350,000 2007 $385,000 The City may elect on February 1, 2005, and on any day thereafter, to prepay the Tax Increment Bonds due on or after February 1, 2006 at a price of par and accrued interest. posals for the Tax Increment Bonds may contain a maturity schedule providing for any combination of serial bonds and m bonds, subject to mandatory redemption, so long as the amounts of principal maturing or subject to mandatory redemption in each year conform to the maturity schedule set forth above. The Improvement Bonds will mature February 1 as follows: 1997 $65,000 1999 $75,000 2001 $75,000 2003 $80,000 2005 $85,000 1998 $70,000 2000 $75,000 2002 $80,000 2004 $85,000 2006 $90,000 The City may elect on February 1, 2004, and on any day thereafter, to prepay the Improvement Bonds due on or after February 1, 2005 at a price of par plus accrued interest. The Improvement 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. Common to Both Issues A separate proposal for not less than the amounts shown below must be submitted for each Issue, along with a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond, 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. Award of the Bonds will be made on the basis of True Interest Cost (TIC). Minimum Bid Good Faith Deposit The Tax Increment Bonds $4,505,280 $45,600 The Improvement Bonds $ 770,640 $ 7,800 The Bonds will be issued as fully registered Bonds without coupons and, when issued, will be registered in the name of Kray & Co., as nominee of Midwest Securities Trust Company ( "MSTC "). MSTC 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 "Global Book Entry Form of Ownership" herein.) The Bonds will be available for delivery at MSTC within 40 days after award. PROPOSALS RECEIVED: October 10, 1995 (Tuesday) at 11 :00 A.M., Central Time is AWARD: October 10, 1995 (Tuesday) at 7:00 P.M., Central Time SPRINGSTED Further information may be obtained from SPRINGSTED Incorporated, Financial Advisor to the Issuer, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS (612) 223 -3000 For purposes of compliance with Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission, +0 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 Pa e Us $4,560,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995A Termsof Proposal ....................................................................... ............................... i -iv Scheduleof Bond Years ............................................................. ............................... v $780,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995B Termsof Proposal ....................................................................... ............................... vi -iv Scheduleof Bond Years ............................................................. ............................... x Introductory Statement ............. ............................... 1 .......................... ............................... Continuing Disclosure ............... ...................... 1 ................................... ............................... The Bonds ......... 1 -4 ................................................................................ ............................... TheTax Increment Bonds ................................................................. ............................... 4 The Improvement Bonds ................................................................... ............................... 4 -5 FutureFinancing ................................................................................ ............................... 5 Litigation............................................................................................ ............................... 5 Legality.............................................................................................. ............................... 5 Taxability of Interest - The Tax Increment Bonds ............................... ............................... 5 Tax Exemption - The Improvement Bonds ......................................... ............................... 5 -6 Bank - Qualified Tax - Exempt Obligations - The Improvement Bonds .. ............................... 6 Ratings.............................................................................................. ............................... 6 FinancialAdvisor ............................................................................... ............................... 6 -7 Certification........................................................................................ ............................... 7 CityProperty Values .......................................................................... ............................... 7 -8 CityIndebtedness .............................................................................. ............................... 8 -11 City Tax Rates, Levies and Collections .............................................. ............................... 11 -12 Fundson Hand .................................................................................. ............................... 12 General Information Concerning the City ........................................... ............................... 12 -14 ► Governmental Organization and Services .......................................... ............................... 14 -16 Proposed Form of Legal Opinions ........................................... ............................... Appendix I Continuing Disclosure Certificates ............................................ ............................... Appendix II Summary of Tax Levies, Payment Provisions, and Minnesota Real Property Valuation ....................................... ............................... Appendix III Annual Financial Statements ................................................... ............................... Appendix IV Proposal Forms ....................................................................... ............................... Inserted i (This page was left blank intentionally.) THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: TERMS OF PROPOSAL $4,560,000 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995A (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, October 10, 1995, until 11 :00 A.M., 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. 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, 1995, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1,1996. 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: 1999 $225,000 2004 $350,000 2008 $385,000 2000 $265,000 2005 $360,000 2009 $400,000 2001 $330,000 2006 $360,000 2010 $415,000 2002 $330,000 2007 $385,000 2011 $425,000 2003 $330,000 Proposals for the Bonds may contain a maturity schedule providing for any combination of serial obligations and term obligations so long as the amount of principal maturing or subject to mandatory redemption in each year conforms to the maturity schedule set forth above. -i- BOO K 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, representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be registered in the name of Kray & Co. as nominee of Midwest Securities Trust Company ( "MSTC "), Chicago, Illinois, 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 MSTC and its participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to MSTC or its nominee as registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of MSTC will be the responsibility t payments to onsibilit of MSTC transfer of principal and es P Y � P P PY 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 MSTC. 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 MSTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. MSTC 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. MANDATORY REDEMPTION Any term obligations issued shall be subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption in part prior to their scheduled maturity dates on February 1 of certain years, as more fully described in the Details of the Bonds section herein at a par rice of plus accrued interest to the date of P P redemption. I SECURITY AND PURPOSE 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 tax increment revenues from Tax Increment District Number 3. The proceeds will be used for various economic development projects within the City. TAXABILITY OF INTEREST The interest to be paid on the Bonds is includable in gross income of the recipient for United States and State of Minnesota income tax purposes, and is subject to Minnesota Corporate and bank excise taxes measured by net income. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $4,505,280 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied b a Good Faith Deposit ("Deposit") P p Y " P ( P ) in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $45,600, -ii- 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 rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be i accepted. In order to designate term obligations, the proposal must specify "Last Year of Serial Maturities" and "Years of Term Maturities" in the spaces provided on the Proposal Form. All principal payments scheduled to be made in and before the year specified as the "Last Year of Serial Maturities" shall be designated as maturity amounts of serial obligations; all principal payments scheduled to be made after the year specified as "Last Year of Serial Maturities" and through each year specified under "Years of Term Maturities" shall be designated as mandatory sinking 40 fund redemptions of term obligations maturing in the year(s) so designated. 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 40 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 180 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 September 11, 1995 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Cam Andre Acting City Manager -iv- SCHEDULE OF BOND YEARS $4,560,000 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS SERIES 1995A Cumulative Year Principal Bond Years Bond Years 1999 $225,000 731.2500 731.2500 2000 $265,000 1,126.2500 1,857.5000 2001 $330 1,732.5000 3,590.0000 2002 $330,000 2,062.5000 5,652.5000 2003 $330 2,392.5000 8,045.0000 2004 $350,000 2,887.5000 10,932.5000 2005 $360,000 3,330.0000 14,262.5000 2006 $360 c 3,690.0000 17,952.5000 2007 $385,000 c 4,331.2500 22 2008 $385,000 c 4 27,000.0000 2009 $400,000 c 5,300.0000 32,300.0000 2010 $415 c 5,913.7500 38 2011 $425 c 6,481.2500 44,695.0000 Average Maturity: 9.80 Years Bonds Dated: November 1, 1995 Interest Due: August 1, 1996 and each February 1 and August 1 to maturity. Principal Due: February 1, 1999 -2011 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 s -v- THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: TERMS OF PROPOSAL $780,000 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1996B (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, October 10, 1995, until 11:00 A.M., 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. 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, 1995, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1996. 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: 1997 $65,000 2002 $80,000 1998 $70,000 2003 $80,000 1999 $75,000 2004 $85,000 2000 $75,000 2005 $85,000 2001 $75,000 2006 $90,000 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, -vi- representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be registered in the name of Kray & Co. as nominee of Midwest Securities Trust Company ( "MSTC "), Chicago, Illinois, 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 MSTC and its participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to MSTC or its nominee as registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of MSTC will be the responsibility of MSTC; 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 MSTC. 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, 2004, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2005. 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 MSTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. MSTC 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 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 $770,640 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 $7,800, 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 y u ed 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 rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. - vii - 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. - viii - 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 30 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 September 11, 1995 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Cam Andre Acting City Manager -ix- 1 SCHEDULE OF BOND YEARS S $780,000 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS i SERIES 1995B Cumulative Year Principal Bond Years Bond Years 1997 $65 81.2500 81.2500 1998 $70,000 157.5000 238.7500 1999 $75,000 243.7500 482.5000 2000 $75,000 318.7500 801.2500 2001 $75,000 393.7500 1,195.0000 2002 $80,000 500.0000 1 2003 $80,000 580.0000 2,275.0000 2004 $85,000 701.2500 2 2005 $85,000 c 786.2500 3,762.5000 2006 $90,000 c 922.5000 4,685.0000 Average Maturity: 6.01 Years Bonds Dated: November 1, 1995 Interest Due: August 1, 1996 and each February 1 and August 1 to maturity. Principal Due: February 1, 1997 -2006 inclusive. Optional Call: Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 2005 are callable commencing February 1, 2004 and any date thereafter at par. (See Terms of Proposal.) c: subject to optional call I -X- OFFICIAL STATEMENT CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA $4,560,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995A $780,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995B Introductory Statement This Official Statement contains certain information regarding the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the "City ") and its issuance of $4,560,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995A (the "Tax Increment Bonds ") and $780,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995B (the "Improvement Bonds "), together referred to as the "Bonds" or the "Issues." 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. The purpose and additional sources of pledged security for each Issue are discussed further herein. 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 can also be obtained from Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101, or by telephoning (612) 223 -3000. 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. The Bonds General Description The Bonds are dated as of November 1, 1995 and will mature annually on February 1, as set forth on the cover of this Official Statement. The Bonds are issued in global book entry form. - 1 - Interest on the Bonds is payable August 1, 1996 and semi - annually thereafter on February 1 and August 1. Interest will be payable to the holder (initially Kray & Co.) registered on the books of the registrar to be named by the City (the 'Registrar ") as of the fifteenth day of the calendar month next preceding each interest payment date. Principal of and interest on the Bonds will be paid as described in the section herein entitled 'Payments to Owners." Global Book Entry Form of Ownership The Bonds will be fully registered as to principal and interest in the name of Kray & Co. as nominee of the Midwest Securities Trust Company (the "Depository"), an Illinois trust company, a member of the Federal Reserve System and a "clearing corporation" within the meaning of the Illinois Uniform Commercial Code, as registered owner of the Bonds, and immobilized in the custody of the Depository or its agent. Accordingly, as used in this Official Statement, "Owners" means the beneficial owners of the Bonds, who, subject to certain exceptions described in the following sections, will not receive physical delivery of the Bond certificates. Purchases of Bonds may be made through banks, brokers and dealers who are, or who act through, participants of the Depository (the 'Participants "). The beneficial ownership of Bonds will be shown on, and transfer of beneficial ownership will be effected through, records maintained b the Depository, the Partici ants and others, who collective) comprise the Y p Participants Y National Clearance and Settlement System (the "National System "). The National System enables banks, brokers and dealers to immobilize securities certificates in registered depositories and to process and settle securities transactions by computerized book entry. Responsibility for maintaining, reviewing and supervising records of transactions rests with the specific bank, broker or dealer nominee from whom an Owner receives payment of interest, principal and any premium. The Depository, its Participants and other banks, brokers and dealers participating in the National System, act pursuant to laws and regulations governing the National System. The Purchaser of the Bonds, as a Participant in the National System, will 40 h B w' deposit t e Bonds with the Depository. The City will name a bank or trust company p rY Y p Y to act as Registrar for the Bonds. Subject to certain exceptions described in the following sections, all purchases, sales or other transfers of beneficial ownership in the Bonds are to be made by book entry only, and no Owner will receive, hold or deliver any certificates as long as the Depository or any successor securities depository is the registered owner of the Bonds. For every transfer or exchange by + the Owners, the Depository may charge a sum sufficient to cover any tax, fee or other governmental charge that may be imposed in relation thereto. Owners who desire to purchase, sell or otherwise transfer ownership of the Bonds may do so only through banks, brokers, and dealers who are, or who act through, Participants. The Depository has no lines of communication or other arrangements relating to the Bonds between itself and Owners and others who are not Participants. The City assumes no responsibility or liability concerning the relationships between the Depository and the Participants and between the Participants and the Owners. Payments to Owners Payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds will be made by the City to the Depository through its nominee Kray & Co., the registered owner of the Global Certificates. The Depository will credit payments on the Bonds to the Participants, as listed on the records of the Depository on the fifteenth day of the calendar month next preceding each interest payment date. Transfer of such payments to the Participants is the responsibility of the Depository. Transfer of such payments by the Participants is the responsibility of the Participants. Owners will receive interest and principal payments through their bank, broker or dealer nominees. The bank, broker or dealer nominees, if not Participants, will receive payments from Participants or others who received payments directly or indirectly from Participants. -2- Replacement Obligations In the event that (1) the Depository discontinues servicing the Bonds or the City determines that the Depository is incapable of discharging its duties, and if the City fails to identify a qualified replacement depository, or (2) the City, in its sole discretion, determines that the interest of the Owners might be adversely affected if the Global Book Entry System is continued or that it is in the best interest of the beneficial owners of the Bonds that they be able to obtain certificated bonds, the City may authenticate and deliver Replacement Bonds in the form of fully registered certificated bonds or bonds, which would be available for distribution to Owners or their nominees. In such event, the Replacement Bonds will be issued in denominations of $5,000 or integral multiples thereof, interest on the Replacement Bonds will be payable by check or draft mailed to the registered holder by the Registrar, and the payment of principal of the Replacement Bonds will be made upon presentment of the Bonds to the Registrar. Global Certificates The Depository will designate the Bonds as eligible securities under its by -laws and rules. As part of the Global Book Entry System, the Bonds are authorized only in the denomination of the entire outstanding principal amount of a given maturity and are not exchangeable for bonds of smaller denominations, unless Replacement Bonds are authorized as noted above (the "Global Certificates "). The Registrar or any alternative person designated by the City (or any successor registrar) will register on the registration books maintained for the Global Certificates any transfer requested by the registered owner. Initially, the owner registered on the Registrar's registration books will be Kray & Co. Despite the larger authorized denomination of the Global i Certificates, the Depository will recognize and enter on its books in the National System interests in each Global Certificate in $5,000 increments. Optional Redemption The City may elect on February 1, 2005, and on any business day thereafter, to prepay the Tax Increment Bonds due on or after February 1, 2006. The City may elect on February 1, 2004, and on any business day thereafter, to prepay the Improvement Bonds due on or after February 1, 2005. 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. Prepayments Assigned To Owners Prepayments of a part of a maturity may be made in $5,000 increments. If a maturity is partially prepaid, the Registrar will notify the Depository of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. The Depository 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 Owner's interest in such maturity to be redeemed. Notice of Redemption t The Registrar, so long as the Global Book Entry System is used for recording ownership of the Bonds, shall send any notice of redemption to the Depository. Any such notice of redemption shall be in the possession of the Depository no less than thirty days before the redemption date. Any failure of the Depository to mail such notice to any Participant shall not affect the validity of the redemption of the Bonds. In the case of certificated bonds, the Registrar shall give notice of redemption of any bonds by registered or certified mail to the owners thereof registered on its books not less than thirty days prior to the date fixed for redemption. The City can make no assurances that the Depository, Participants or other nominees of the Owners will distribute such redemption notices to the Owners, or that they will do so on a timely -3- basis, nor that the Depository will act in the manner described in this Official Statement. The rules and procedures of the Depository do, however, require the Depository to act in the foregoing manner. The Tax Increment Bonds Authority and Purpose The Tax Increment Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 469 and 475. Proceeds will be used to finance various redevelopment projects within the City. The composition of the Tax Increment Bonds is as follows: Project Costs $4,000,000 Costs of Issuance 45,280 Allowance for Discount Bidding 54,720 Capitalized Interest 460,000 Total Tax Increment Bond Issue $4.560.000 Security and Financing In addition to the City's general obligation pledge, the Tax Increment Bonds are secured by a pledge of the net revenues from Tax Increment District Number 3 administered by the Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority. Capitalized interest will pay the majority of debt service in 1997 and 1998. Revenues from Tax Increment District Number 3 are anticipated to fully cover debt service costs due and payable beginning in 1999. Tax increments generated each year in District Number 3 will be used to make the next year's August 1 interest payments and the subsequent February 1 principal and interest payments for the life of the Tax Increment Bonds. The Improvement Bonds Authority and Purpose The Improvement 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 Improvement Bonds is as follows: Project Costs* $ 917,072 Allowance for Discount Bidding 9,380 Costs of Issuance 14,700 Less: Investment Earnings (1,685) Assessment Stabilization Funds and Prepaid Assessments (159,467) Total Improvement Bond Issue 780 000 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 Improvement Bonds. Special assessments totaling approximately $238,333 are expected to be filed on or before November 15, 1995 for first collection in 1996. All assessments will be spread over a term of ten years with equal -4- 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 $72,200 annually, for repayment of the Improvement Bonds. Each August 1 interest payment will be made from first -half collections of special assessments and tax collections 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. f 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. Y Y 9 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 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 in this official Statement and will express no opinion with respect thereto. Legal opinions in substantially the form set out as Appendix I to this Official Statement, will be delivered at closing. Taxability of Interest - The Tax Increment Bonds The interest to be paid on the Tax Increment Bonds is includable in the income of the recipient for purposes of United States and State of Minnesota income taxation and is subject to Minnesota corporate franchise and bank excise taxes measured by net income. Tax Exemption - The Improvement Bonds In the opinion of Bond Counsel, under existing statutes, regulations, rulings and decisions, interest on the Improvement 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 Improvement Bonds with certain requirements of r 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 Improvement 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 Improvement Bonds, or for an increase in the interest rate on the Improvement Bonds, in the event that interest on the Improvement 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 Improvement Bonds will not be treated as a preference item in calculating alternative minimum taxable income. The Code provides, -5- 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 Improvement 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 Improvement Bonds that is received or accrued during the taxable year. Interest on the Improvement 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 Improvement Bonds may be subject to the tax on "excess net passive income" of Subchapter 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 Improvement Bonds. The receipt of interest on the Improvement 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 Improvement Bonds are advised to consult their own tax advisors as to the tax consequences of, or tax considerations for, purchasing or holding the Improvement Bonds. Bank - Qualified Tax - Exempt Obligations - The Improvement Bonds The City will designate the Improvement 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. Ratings An application for ratings of the Bonds has been made to Moody's Investors Service ( "Moody's "), 99 Church Street, New York, New York. If ratings are assigned, they will reflect only the opinion of Moody's. Any explanation of the significance of the ratings may be obtained only from Moody's. There is no assurance that the ratings, if assigned, will continue for any given period of time, or that such ratings will not be revised or withdrawn, if in the judgment of Moody's, circumstances so warrant. A revision or withdrawal of the ratings 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 -6- 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 40 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 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(s) 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, it 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. CITY PROPERTY VALUES 1994 Indicated Market Value of Taxable Property: $1,018,184,211 Calculated by dividing the county assessor's estimated market value of $986,620,500 by the 1994 sales ratio of 96.9% for the City as determined by the State Department of Revenue. 1994 Taxable Net Tax Capacity: $21,277,190 1994 Net Tax Capacity $23,397,739 Less: Captured Tax Increment Tax Capacity (1,165,933) Contribution to Fiscal Disparities (4,215,440) Plus: Distribution from Fiscal Disparities 3,260,824 1994 Taxable Net Tax Capacity $21,277,190 1994 Taxable Net Tax Capacity by Class of Property Residential Homestead $ 6,436,046 30.2% Commercial /Industrial, Public Utility, Railroad, Agricultural and Personal Property' 12,210,375 57.4 Residential Non - Homestead 2.630.769 12.4 Total $21,277,190 100.0% Reflects adjustments for fiscal disparities and captured tax increment tax capacity. -7- Trend of Values Indicated Estimated Taxable Tax Year Market Value Market Value Capacity 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 1990 1, 090, 295, 620 1, 045, 593, 500 24, 577, 373 (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. A partments and (b ) i v have been i stable throughout this period. Residential property values h e a fairly g p p commerciallindustrial 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. Ten of the Largest Taxpayers in the City 1994 Net Taxpayer Type of Property Tax Capacity General Growth Company, Inc. Brookdale Mall $2,185,906 Dayton Hudson Corporation Retail 537,689 Commercial Partners Brookdale Square Shopping Center 472,200 Sears Roebuck and Company Retail 405,991 Brookdale Limited Partners Office 294,142 Northwest Racquet Swim and Health Clubs, Inc. Health Club 292,983 Mervyn's of California Retail 286,709 Plaza Real Estate Hotel 230,736 Brookdale 11 Ltd. Partnership Retail 228,031 JC Penney Company Retail 216,122 Total $5,150,509 Represents 24.2% of the City's 1994 taxable net tax capacity. CITY INDEBTEDNESS Legal Debt Limit Legal Debt Limit 2% of Estimated Market Value $19 732 410 9 ( ) , f Less: Outstanding D S 0 g et Debt S to Limit (� Legal Debt Margin as of August 2, 1995 $19,732,410 General Obligation Debt Supported Primarily by Special Assessments Principal Date Original Final Outstanding of Issue Amount Purpose Maturity As of 8 -2 -95 3 -1 -87 $1,200,000 Refunding 2 -1 -1997 $ 90,000 8 -1 -94 835,000 Improvement 2 -1 -2005 835,000 11 -1 -95 780,000 Improvement (this Issue) 2 -1 -2006 780,000 Total $1,705,000 -8- General Obligation Debt Supported by Tax Increments Principal Date Original Final Outstanding of Issue Amount Purpose Maturit As of 8 -2 -95 12 -1 -85 $5,250,000 Tax Increment 2 -1 -1996 $ 295,000 3 -1 -91 6,050,000 Tax Increment 2 -1 -2003 4,750,000 2 -1 -92 4,275,000 Refunding 2 -1 -2003 4,270,000 11 -1 -95 4,560,000 Tax Increment (this Issue) 2 -1 -2011 4,560.000 Total $13,875,000 General Obligation Debt Supported by Other Sources (State Allocations and Enterprise Revenues) Principal Date Original Final Outstanding of Issue Amount Purpose Maturit y As of 8 -2 -95 9 -1 -91 $3,000,000 State Aid Road 4 -1 -2006 $2,455,000 8 -1 -94 1,830,000 Storm Sewer 2 -1 -2005 1330.000 Total $4,285,000 i Annual Calendar Year Debt Service Payments Including These Issues G.O. Debt Supported Primarily by Special Assessments(a)_ Principal Year Principal & Interest 1995 (at 8 -2) (Paid) (Paid) 1996 $ 115,000 $ 185, 815.63 1997 185,000 258,042.50 1998 150,000 215, 572.50 1999 155,000 213,711.25 2000 160,000 211, 347.50 2001 160,000 203,663.75 2002 1 65,000 200,723.75 2003 170,000 197, 372.50 2004 175,000 193,600.00 2005 180,000 189, 372.50 2006 90,000 92 317.50 Total $1,705,000(b) $2,161,539.38 (a) Includes the Improvement Bonds at an assumed average annual interest rate of 4.80 %. (b) 95% of this debt will be retired in ten years. -9- i h Annual Calendar Year Debt Service Payments Including These Issues (Continued) G.O. Debt Supported G.O. Debt Supported by Tax Increments by Other Sources Principal Principal Year Principal & Interest Principal & Interest 1995 (at 8 -2) (Paid) (Paid) (Paid) $ 76,156.25 1996 $ 670,000 $ 1,459,020.25 $ 270,000 506,187.50 1997 780,000 1,549,002.50 325,000 546,182.50 1998 840,000 1,568,150.00 345,000 548,867.50 1999 1,165,000 1,840,230.50 360,000 545,117.50 2000 1,280,000 1,888,240.00 385,000 549,816.25 2001 1,450,000 1,981,401.25 410,000 552,690.00 2002 1,540,000 1,985,390.00 430,000 548,887.50 2003 1,645,000 1,996,910.00 455,000 548,361.25 2004 1,775,000 2,023,625.00 485,000 550,746.25 2005 360,000 541,910-00 515,000 550, 826.25 2006 360,000 517,250.00 305,000 315,141.25 2007 385,000 516,355.00 2008 385,000 489,212.00 2009 400,000 476,145.00 2010 415,000 461, 597.00 2011 425,000 440,725.00 Total $13,875,000(b) $19,735,163.75 $4,285,000(c) $5,838,980.00 (a) Includes the Tax Increment Bonds at an assumed average annual interest rate of 7.00 %. (b) 82.9% of this debt will be retired within ten years. (c) 81.5% of this debt will be retired within ten years. Summary of General Obligation Direct Debt Net Gross Less. Debt N e Debt Service Funds Direct Debt Supported Primarily by Special Assessments $ 1,705,000 $ (278,661) $1,426,339 Supported by Tax Increments 13,875,000 (4,182,933) 9,692,067 Supported by Other Sources(b) 4,285,000 (b) 4,285,000 (a) Debt service funds are as of July 31, 1995 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. -10- Indirect General Obligation Debt Debt Applicable to 1994 Taxable G.O. Debt Value in City Taxing Unit Net Tax Capacity As of 8- 2 -95 Percent Amount Hennepin County $ 966,907,816 $ 77,205,000 2.20% $ 1,698,510 Hennepin Parks 682,858,515 15,660,000 3.12 488,592 ISD 11 (Anoka- Hennepin) 98,948,812 86,598,002 2.16 1,870,517 ISD 279 (Osseo) 68,292,374 122,070,000 7.40 9,033,180 ISD 286 (Brooklyn Center) 7,229,349 4,650,000 100.00 4,650,000 Metropolitan Council 1,839,547,184(x) 22,470,000( 1.16 260,652 Regional Transit District 1,674,881,722(x) 58,070,000 1.27 737,489 Total $18,738,940 (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) Represents 1993 taxable net tax capacity. The 1994 values are not yet available. (d) Excludes $490,210,000 of general obligation sanitary sewer revenue bonds and loans issued by the Metropolitan Council and by various municipalities and sewer districts which have now been assumed by the Council. These sewer bonds and loans are supported from sewer charges paid by the governmental units within the Metropolitan Waste Control System. Debt Ratios G.O. Net G.O. Indirect & Direct Debt Net Direct Debt To 1994 Indicated Market Value 1.09% 2.93% Per Capita (28,533 - 1994 Metropolitan Council Estimate) $390 $1,046 Excludes general obligation debt supported by other sources (state aid allotments and revenues). CITY TAX RATES, LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS Tax Capacity Rates for a City Resident in ISD 286 1994/95 For 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 Total Debt Only Hennepin County 30.114% 34.327% 35.839 37.441% 37.454% 2.157% City of Brooklyn Center 19.208 21.487 24.545 27.603 31.091 0.344 ISD 286 (Brooklyn Center) 46.207 54.696 67.008 56.614 78.861 9.305 Special Districts' 8.411 5.996 6.042 6.234 6.357 1.075 Total 103.940% 116.506% 133.434% 127.892% 153.763% 12.881% Special Districts include Metropolitan Council, Regional 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. This replaced the use of assessed value multiplied by mill rates (see Appendix -11- Tax Levies and Collections Collected During Collected Gross Net Collection Year As of 12 -31 -94 Levy /Collect Levy Levy Amount Percent Amount Percent 1994/95 $7,801,664 $6,501,554 (In Process of Collection) 1993/94 7,192,475 5,857,554 $5,634,155 96.2% $5,611,956 95.8% 1992/93 6,764,875 5,491,707 5,204,146 94.8 5,080,215 92.5 1991/92 6,277,140 5,072,385 4,817,736 95.0 4,730,857 93.3 1990/91 5,770,397 4,670,606 4,478,463 95.9 4,400,731 94.2 (a) The net tax levy excludes Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid ( "HACA'). The net levy is the basis for computing the 1994195 and 1993194 tax capacity rates. The gross levy is the basis for computing tax capacity rates in prior years. (b) The decrease in tax collections, subsequent to the first collection year, resulted from refunds to taxpayers, based on count rulings of petitions and abatements, which were not finalized until after the collection year FUNDS ON HAND As of July 31, 1995 Fund Cash and Investments General $ 5,748,176 Special Revenue (572,371) Capital Projects 9,595,873 Debt Service: Special Assessment 278,661 Tax Increment 4,182,933 Enterprise 10,054,352 Internal Service 3,828.532 Total $33,116,156 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 p PP Y q pp 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 1994 population, as estimated by the Metropolitan Council, is 28,533. 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 11,704 in 1990. The number dropped slightly in 1994 to 11,467 housing units. This was due to the removal of some units by the City in accordance with a preplanned 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. -12- Growth and Development Commercial and industrial property comprises 57.4% 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, Jerry's New Market, and Builders Square. 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 includes 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 Carson Pirie Scott store at an estimated cost of $4,000,000 Summary of Building Permits New Residential Total Permits Permits only Number Value Number Value 1995 (at 8-4) 351 $ 9,555,575 1 $ 65,000 1994 607 13,418,453 4 425,000 1993 520 11,437,250 7 505,000 1992 549 14,249,265 15 1,018,710 1991 466 8,800,980 7 450,745 1990 504 8,035,605 1 65,249 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 358* Ault, Inc. Manufacturing 270 Hoffman Engineering Electrical Enclosure 175 Graco, Inc. Spray Paint Equip. 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 Is * Includes full- and part-time employees. Source: Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development and individual employers. -13- Labor Force Data June 1995 June 1994 Civilian Unemployment Civilian Unemployment Labor Force Rate Labor Force Rate Hennepin County 649,959 3.5% 652,049 3.8% Minneapolis /St. Paul MSA 1,589,968 3.5 1,593,026 3.7 Minnesota 2,562,181 3.8 2,559,396 4.0 Source: Minnesota Department of Economic Security, June 1995 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), Investors Savings Bank, FSB (Wayzata), Metropolitan Federal Bank (Fargo), and TCF Bank Minnesota FSB (Minneapolis). Source: Northwestern Financial Review Directory, Spring 1995. 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 1994 Taxable Net Tax Capacity Located in the City % of Total ISD 286 (Brooklyn Center)` $ 7,229,349 33.98% ISD 281 (Robbinsdale) 6,860,940 32.25 ISD 279 (Osseo) 5,052,568 23.75 ISD 11 (Anoka - Hennepin) 2.134,333 10.02 Total $21,277,190 100.00% ISD 286 is located entirely within the City of Brooklyn Center. Medical Major medical facilities in the Minneapolis /St. Paul metropolitan area are easily accessible to all City residents. North Memorial Medical in the adjacent City of Robbinsdale has 518 acute care beds and Unity Medical Center 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, 1994. 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. -14- Individuals comprising the current City Council are listed below: Expiration of Term Myrna Kragness Mayor December 31, 1998 Barbara Kalligher 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 Acting City Manager, Mr. Cam Andre, 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. Andre has served the City in the position of Acting Manager since June of 1995. He is serving while the Council conducts a national search for a new City Manager. 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 149 full -time and 209 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 3.6 mgd and peak demand is estimated to be 7.8 mgd. Water connections totaled 8,880 as of December 31, 1994. 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 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 8,797 sewer connections at the end of 1994. The City owns three off -sale liquor stores. Two of the facilities are operated 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 1994 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. -15- 1995 Adopted General Fund Budget Summary Revenues: Appropriations: Property Taxes $ 5,981,165 General Government $ 1,882,240 Sales Tax (Lodging) 395,000 Public Safety 4,882,085 Fines and Forfeitures 112,000 Public Works 1,560,386 Licenses & Permits 296,400 Health and Social Services 40,860 Intergovernmental Revenue 3,479,626 Recreation 2,333,701 Service Charges 893,732 Economic Development 187,625 Interest Earnings 186,000 Unallocated Expenses 571,026 Miscellaneous Revenue 14,000 Transfers from Other Funds 100 000 Total Revenues $11,457,923 Total Appropriations $11,457,923 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 $416,544 in 1994. 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 $36,092 and $66,803, respectively, in 1994. The contributions represented $68,698 of normal costs and $26,241 for the amortization of the unfunded actuarial accrued liability. Regional Government - Metropolitan Council � N The Metropolitan Council is comprised of 17 members who are appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the State Senate. Sixteen members are appointed to four -year terms from districts of equal population size within the Seven - County Metropolitan Area. The Council Chair, the 17th member, represents the Region as a whole and serves at the pleasure of the governor. The Council is accountable, in law, to the State Legislature. The Council's primary mission, as described in the 1967 Council enabling act, is to undertake those planning and coordinative actions that are necessary to insure the "orderly and economic" development of the Twin Cities Area. In addition, the Legislature has instructed the Council to assist local communities in their planning and provide information to the public on matters pertaining to the Region and its development. The Council has 12 citizen advisory committees at present. -16- APPENDIX 1 PROPOSED FORM OF LEGAL OPINIONS KENNEDY & GRAVEN CHARTERED 470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Telephone (612) 337 -9300 Facsimile (612) 337 -9310 $4,560,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995A 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 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995A, originally dated as of November 1, 1995, in the total principal amount of $4,560, 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 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 primarily from tax increments resulting from increases in the taxable value of real property in a tax increment financing district in the City, but if necessary for the payment thereof 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. We express no opinion as to the status of the interest on the Bonds for federal or state income tax purposes. 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, SJB94456 BR291 -151 I -1 KENNEDY & GRAVEN CHARTERED 470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Telephone (612) 337 -9300 Facsimile (612) 337 -9310 $780,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995B 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 1995B, originally dated as of November 1, 1995, in the total principal amount of $780,000. 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 rovements and ad valorem taxes for the City's share of the cost of the f additional ad valorem taxes tthereo the amen improvements, but if necessary for pa 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 alternative minimum tax, or the computation of the Minnesota alternative minimum tax imposed on individuals, trusts and estates, but such interest is includable in federal alternative minimum taxable income of corporations, and Minnesota taxes on banks and corporations measured by income. 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. 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, SJB94456 BR291 -151 1 -2 APPENDIX it 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 $4,560,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1995A (the "Securities ") . The Securities are being issued pursuant to Authorizing Resolutions adopted by the City Council of the Issuer on September 11, 1995 and Award Resolutions adopted by the City Council of the Issuer on October 10, 1995 ( 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 M 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 , 1995 plus the addendum which constitutes the final official statement delivered in connection with the Securities, which is available from the MSRB. "Holder" means the person in wholse 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. SJB94470 BR291 -151 II -1 "MSRB" means the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board located at 115018th 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. "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, 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. (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 determine each year prior to the date for providing the Annual Report the name and address of each NRMSIR and the SID, 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. 3. City Tax Rates, Levies and Collections. 4. Funds on Hand. SJB94470 BR291 -151 11 -2 5 . Major Employers in the City. 6. Labor Force Data. 7. Building Permits. 8. Current Budget. 9. Selected Annual Financial Statements. 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: 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 as soon as possible determine under applicable legal standards if such event would constitute material information for Holders of Securities, provided that any event under subsection (a) (8) (9) or (11) will always be deemed to be material. SJB94470 BR291 -151 11 -3 (c) If the issuer determines that knowledge of the occurrence of a Material Event would be material, 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 earlier than the notice (if any) of the underlying event is given to Holders of affected Securities pursuant to the Resolutions. (d) 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 8. 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 'se do not apply to the Securities. erv�n have been repealed retroactively PP Y invalid, ha p Y or otherwise The provisions of the Resolutions constituting the Undertaking and this Disclosure Certificate may be amended without the consent of the Holders of the Securities, but 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 form 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. SJB94470 BR291 -151 11 -4 I r 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 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 1995. Acting City Manager City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 87894470 BR291 -151 it -5 1 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 $780, 000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995B (the "Securities "). The Securities are being issued pursuant to Authorizing Resolutions adopted by the City Council of the Issuer on September 11, 1995 and Award Resolutions adopted by the City Council of the Issuer on October 10, 1995 ( 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 ") . "Fiscal Year" means the fiscal year of the Issuer. "Final Official Statement" means the deemed final official statement dated , 1995 plus the addendum which constitutes the final official statement delivered in connection with the Securities, which is available from the MSRB. "Holder" means the P erson in wholse 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. WILLEC91877 FORMS-FORMS 11 -6 I "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. "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, 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. (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 determine each year prior to the date for providing the Annual Report the name and address of each NRMSIR and the SID, 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. 3. City Tax Rates, Levies and Collections. 4. Funds on Hand. WILLEC91877 FORMS -FORMS II -7 5 . Major Employers in the City . 6. Labor Force Data . 7. Building Permits. 8. Current Budget. 9. Selected Annual Financial Statements. I 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 as soon as possible determine under applicable legal standards if such event would constitute material information for Holders of Securities, provided that any event under subsection (a) (8) (9) or (11) will always be deemed to be material. wm=91s77 FORMS -FORMS (c) If the issuer determines that knowledge of the occurrence of a Material Event would be material, 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 earlier than the notice (if any) of the underlying event is given to Holders of affected Securities pursuant to the Resolutions. (d) 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. A ent. 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 8. 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, but 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 form 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. WILLEC91877 FORMS -FORMS II -9 i 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 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 , 1995. Acting City Manager City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota WILLEC91877 FORMS -FORMS II -10 APPENDIX 111 SUMMARY OF TAX LEVIES, PAYMENT PROVISIONS, AND MINNESOTA REAL PROPERTY VALUATION Following is a summary of certain statutory provisions effective through 1994 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 1994 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 he believes 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 1998, 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. Ii! -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 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 but which is treated as aid tam. � personal property owned b atax exempt entity P However, pers p p Y Y 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 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. Levies for General Obligation Debt (Sections 475.61 and 475.74, Minnesota Statutes) 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. Ili -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 1990 Levy Year 1991 Levy Year 1992 Levy Year 1993 Levy Year 1994 Residential Homestead First $68,000 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% Next $43,000 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 $110,000 EMV in excess of $115,000 at 2.00% at 2.00% at 2.00% at 3.00% at 2.5% Residential Non- Homestead 4 or more units 3.60% 3.50% 3.40% 3.40% 3.40% Agricultural Homestead First $68,000 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% Excess to 320 acres at 0.45% 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% Excess over 320 acres at 0.45% house, garage and 1 acre at house, garage and 1 acre at Next $42,000 EMV at 2.00% Next $43,000 EMV at 2.00% Next $43,000 EMV at 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% Excess to 320 acres at 0.45% Excess to 320 acres at 0.45% Excess to 320 acres at 0.45% Remaining Property: Remaining Property: Excess over 320 acres at 0.45% 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 EMV in excess of $110,000 EMV in excess of $115,000 EMV in excess of $115,000 first 320 acres at 0.45% first 320 acres at 0.45% at 3.00% at 2.5% at 2.00% EMV in excess of $115,000 on EMV in excess of $115,000 on first Excess to 320 acres at 1.30% Excess to 320 acres at 1.30% Excess to 320 acres at 1.30% first 320 acres at 1.00% 320 acres at 1.00% Excess over 320 acres at 1.60% 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 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 3.00% 1 acre at 2.80% 1 acre at 2.50% 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 1.60% at 1.50% at 1.50% Commercial- Industrial First $100,000 of EMV at 3.20% 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% 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 4.95% at 4.75% at 4.70% at 4.60% at 4.60% Seasonal /Recreational 2.30% Non- Commercial - 2.20% 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% 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% Commercial - 2.30% Commercial - 2.30% Commercial - 2.30% Commercial - 2.30% Vacant Land 4.95% 4.75% N/A N/A N/A (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 pursuant to local zoning pursuant to local zoning pursuant to local zoning 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, 1994, 1993 and 1992. 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. IV -1 city or Bmoi yn Center AN Fund Types and Account Groups COMBINED BALANCE SHEET December 31, 1994 Fduiry Totefa Goyerrnmerttel Ftl1d Types Pntlxetry F Types F A Gloupa _ _ aw n � General General Spsdal Debt Capital Iraemal Feed Lang -Term December 31, Garners( Revenue Serice PWcts Enterprise SeMOe Agency Assets Debt 1994 1993 ASSETS AND OTHER DEBITS Cash, cash egWSknts Ind irwastmenta (f4otes2 &3) $6,01P1,449 553,189 $1, 506,385 59,845,647 $4,922,337 $3,610,501 $26,238,506 $24,311,333 Recaiaabks: Accounts 42,150 280,572 69.192 970,738 3,027 1,365,679 1,082,393 Delinquent tetes Note 1K) 237,996 9,648 247,644 191,149 SPsual l sswmants'. Deferred 21,010 415,415 1,018,095 61.886 1,546,406 1,536,827 Delinquent 1,145 7,922 46,181 3,590 5S•W 43,058 Dueflan ado funds (Note 11) 103,066 103,066 147,564 Due from other pvrartxnarb 21,841 65,816 1,968,764 940,091 2,998.512 1,90,190 Itilivirtories and supplies, Note 1G) 328,575 17,874 � 743. 153,342 qd OQWNM 143,157 Intefund adiA noes (Nate 11) 105,074 1,902,053 2,007,927 1,958,067 Restricted knvsatnissi a(Note IN) 4,182,719 1,000,000 4,000.000 9,182,719 9,184,451 Restricted ra0alsattes 473,344 473,344 Irnaaamrnte for deft miganestlon plan - at marfmt (Nate 13) $2.635,725 2,635,726 2,532,735 Property, plant and squapmert (Note 4) 36,170,982 3.936,720 512,963,809 53,093.491 49,921,592 Low atnclaraAated dapraotation (8.203,431) (1,982,949) (10,186.380) (9,396,500) Amount visiMble in Debt SWAM Funds 55 ,666.104 5,6118,104 5,816719 Amotst to be prow for Gerund Long. Tom DOW 12,011,896 12,011,896 11,796,281 Tote AMda and OlMr Debits $ 6,178,310 5427,732 $6,141,441 S15, 962, 646 $39.811,219 $ 5, 6 15,173 f2,635.728 $72,9$73,609 s 17,7011,000 $ 1 0 7,962,286 $101,600,261 » ®� ao LIABILITIES, EQUITY AND OTHER CREDITS _'aoinmes Accounts payable 5266,152 $114 $72,258 $383,627 $15,759 $757,202 $746,72 9,4 Contracts payable 127,485 127,485 m Due to other govements 44,132 97.973 142,105 81.9 Due to other funds (Note 11) 65,816 37,250 103,066 147,584 Accrued salaries and wages 109,902 4.585 32,329 209,441 356,249 387,445 ACcnM.W vacation & sick pay (Note 11) 526,755 18,640 48,399 21,099 614,893 598,591 37,760 Accrued interest payable 37,760 3,121 090 2,713,882 Temporary improvement: notes (Note 3) 9,624,341 1,107,541 369,205 Deferred revenue 317,156 22,155 $453,337 3,042,688 3,835,336 3,442,432 tntedur bans (Note 11) 698,143 1,306,964 2,007 127 1,958,087 Lwdlfte payable from restricted assets 54,710 54,710 State aid street bonds payable (Note 5) $2,605,000 2.605,000 2,750,000 Specal assessment debt with gwemmeM 1,010,000 4,010,000 275,000 commitment (Note 5) Tax increment bonds Payable (Nate 5) 14,085,000 11,085,000 14,820,000 Revenue ports 00 payable (Note 5) 1,830,0 9,830,000 Deferred compensation tunas hed for participants (Note 13) $2,635,726 2,635 2,532,735 Tsai Lebdrtes 1,264,097 2,527.845 453.337 4,110,447 4,085,006 246,291 2.635,726 17,700,000 33,322,749 30.254,393 Fd m when C2dits Ckxtnbuted CapRan (Nee 6) 21,187,660 4,114,355 25,302,015 24,718,109 Investment in general Nee assets 512,985.809 12965,809 12,260,340 Retained es -rigs' Reserved. Debt Serrice 90,625 90,625 Special assessments 65 ,476 65,476 90,148 Plant expansion (Note 1H) 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 Unreserved 10,362,482 1,454,527 11,837,009 90,432,117 Fund Balances (Deficits) Reserved: D WrAm 5,688,104 5,1786904 5,648.719 223,951 223,951 679.551 Unexpended ap account 1,000,000 1,000,000 Dedicated houatlp account (Nate t H) 1.000,000 Interlund loans 105,074 1,902,053 2,007,127 1,958,087 Unreserved. Designated. 5,052,687 4,466,375 Wor" capital 5.052,687 56,652 39.260 Unexpended appropriations 56 ,652 end 6,320,082 S,B55, 142 Undesignated (2,106,113) 8,426,195 Total Equity and Other Credits 5,214.413 (2,106,113) 5.688.104 11,552,199 35,726,243 5,566882 12,965,809 74,629.537 71,345. Total Liabilities, Equey &Other Credits 36.478,510 5424,732 $6,141,441 s15,962,646 $39811.2499 S5.8�75,173 $2,635,726 $12.985,80 $17,700000 $107,952.286 5101,600,26 IV-2 City of Brooklyn Center All Fund Types and Account Groups COMBINED BALANCE SHEEP December 31, 1080 Fiduclary Totale Govommerdal Fund Types Proprietary Fund Types Fund Types Account Groups (Memorandum Only) General General Special Debt Capital Infernal Fixed Long - Term December 31, General Revenue Service Projects EnterEiee Service Aaa nc Assets Debt 1080 1982 ASSETS Cash, cash equivalents and investments 35,525,420 810,528 $1,687,2!18 $0,575,138 $4,810,827 1112,886,363 121,311,653 $28,540,tfe8 Receivables: Accounts 50,968 400 16,202 1,016,743 1,082,393 868,374 Delinquent toffee - 163,967 7,152 191,148 361,189 Special •nsssments: W Detained 26,430 426,905 967,804 89,288 1,638,827 1,806,061 Detinqua►hl 1,100 6,666 31,423 3,660 43,068 46,044 Due from other funds 147,584 147,684 206,389 Due from other governments 11,027 148,006 1,644,536 164,721 1,068.190 1,260,807 Inventories and supplies 319,700 319,790 263,961 Prepaid expen see 153,342 153,342 148,688 Interfund advances 105,074 1,853,013 1,058,067 1,077,344 Reetrictedinvestments 4,184.451 1,000,000 4,000,000 0,184,451 5,000,000 Investments lot deferred compensation plan - at market $2,632,735 2,532,736 2,241,152 Properly, plant and equipment 34,524,&66 3,136,507 $12,260,340 49,921,502 48,742,346 Lass accumulated depreclation (7, 763,063) (1,635,437) (9,398,500) (7, 284,190) Amount avallable In Debt Service Funds $6,84.719 6,846,718 7,270,029 Amount to be provided for General Long- Term Debt 11,796,281 11,786,261 11,966,071 Total Assets $5, 3216,624 $6,261,708 $16,271 $37,316 „163 $4,199,523 $2,532,735 $12,260,340 $17,!145,000 $101,600,281 $104,432,576 tiiApp� ........ ii iii.. ...... City of Brooklyn Center All Fund Types and Account Groups COMBINED BALANCE SHEET December 31. 1983 Fiduciary Totele Governmental Fund Types Proprietary Fund Types Fund Types Account Groups (Memorandum Only) General General Spacial Debt Capital Internal Fixed Lore -Term December 31, LIABILMES. EQUITY AND OTHER CREDRS General Revenue Service Pro acts Enterprise Service Agenc Assets Debt 1683 1662 Liabilities Acoounts payable $277,268 $2, 002 !62,032 $404.212 $748,724 $054,770 Due to other funds 147,584 147,584 205,386 Accrued salaries and wages 123,328 2,400 45,171 3216,644 387.445 322,005 Accrued vacation & sick pay 637,1112 17,516 43.900 566,561 668,161 Intergovemmental payable 4,661 75.404 548 81,913 61,077 Temporary Improvement rates 1.971,744 1,036,666 305,476 2,713,562 2,636,957 Deferred revenue 323,657 27,630 3434,660 2.556,625 1,442,432 3,215,600 Inlerfund loans 665,149 1,250,044 1,668,087 1,677,344 Cent- of Indebtedness & Q.O. bards payable 0 856,000 G.O. stale aid street bonds payable $2 ,760,000 2,750,000 2,585,000 Speclal assessment bonds payable 275,000 276,000 385,000 Tax Increment bonde payable 14,620,000 14,520,000 16,110,000 Deferred oompensation funds held la participants 52,532,735 2,552,735 2,241,152 Total liabilities 1,268,575 2,324,007 494,660 3,776,073 2,058.765 210,544 2,532,735 17,645,000 30,254,363 31,462,276 Equity and Other Credits A Conoribuledcapital 21,581,512 3,130,567 24,718,100 21,874,5(10 Investment In general fixed mass% $12,250.340 17,250,340 15.161,551 Retained earnings. Reserved: Special assesamente 60,148 60,148 65.546 Plantexpansion 4,000,000 4.000,000 4,000.000 Unreserved 6,585,736 846,982 10,432,117 6,137,472 Fund Balances (Deficits): Reserved: Debt service 5.545,710 5.846,710 7,278.026 Unexpended appropriations 676,551 578,5511 1,067,958 Dedicated housing account 1,000,000 1.000,000 1,000.000 Inferfund loans 106,074 1,853,013 1.858,087 1.977.344 Bond proceeds 0 552.130 Unreserved: Designated: 4.455.375 4,869,498 Working capita 4,465,376 39,280 35,076 Unexpended appropriations 30,290 Undesignated (2,108,483) 7,653,525 5,555,142 5,868.402 Total Equity and Other Credits 4,810,726 (2,108,483) 5,846,710 11,498,189 35,257,386 3,052,978 12,200,940 71,345.888 72.870,289 TOTAL LIABILITIES, EQUm6OTHERCREDITS $5,977,406 $215.524 $8,251,709 $15,271,862 S37 ,315,103 $4.106,523 $2,532.735 $12,200,340 $17,845,000 $101,500.241 $104,432,575 ................ R ..till ii iisiii ........ Fat..... ti IIII. SCII . =..=... ... . visa is.iii- ....... iii isi:=IIi ........ (See notes to find statemenle) City of Brooklyn Center All Fund Types and Account Groups COMBINED BALANCE SHEET December 31, 1992 Fiduciary Totals Governmental Fund Types Proprietary Fund Types Fund Types Account Groups (Memorandum Only) General General Special Debt Capital Internal Fixed Long -Term December 31, ASSETS General Revenue Service Projects Enterprise Service Aflenc Assets Debt 1992 1991 Cash, cash equivalents and investments $5,939,004 $37,303 $7,279,029 $11,075,818 $4,201,398 $1,017,036 $29,549,588 $27,772,330 Receivables: Accounts 74,079 719 1,745 791,831 888,374 752,241 Delinquent Taxes 319,112 21,019 11,068 351,199 249,882 Special assessments: Deferred 31,639 586,902 1,095,734 91,808 CIl Delinquent 1,767 16,016 24,422 3,839 1,808,0 2,287,454 48,04 4 35,058 Due from other funds 206.389 206,389 66,922 Due from other governments 9,561 206,389 939,788 104,959 1,260,697 1,010,882 Inventories and supplies 283,981 283,881 315,085 Prepaid expenses 148,588 5,188 148,588 12 Interfund advances 105,074 1,872,270 1,977,344 2, Restricted investments 1,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 5,121,755 Investments for deterred compensation plan - at market $2,241,152 2,241,152 2,046,095 Property, plant and equipment 33,590,497 $15,151,851 48,742,348 46,535,093 Less accumulated depreciation (7,284,190) (7,284,190) (6,462,657) Amount available in Debt Service Funds $7,279,029 7,279,029 3,634,878 Amount to be provided for General Long - Term Debt 11,955,971 11,955,971 12,730,122 Total Assets $6,446,830 $277,817 $7,902,968 $16,227,234 $35,932,689 $1,017,036 $2,241,152 $15,151,851 $19,235,000 $104,432,575 $98,235,362 City of Biooklyn Center All Fund Types and Account Groups COMBINED BALANCE SHEET December 31, 1992 Fiduciary Totals Governmental Fund Types P roprietary Fund Types Fund Types Accoun Groups (Memorandum Only) General General Special Debt Capital Internal Fixed Long -Term December 31, LIABILITIES, EQUITY AND OTHER CREDITS General Revenue Service Projects Enterprise Service Agency Assets Debt 1992 1991 Liabilities Accounts payable $277,406 $6,533 r $86,654 $294,177 $664,770 $1,237,828 Due to other funds 206,389. 206,389 66,922 Accrued salaries and wages 111,371 1,522 18,023 $191,090 322,006 512,841 Accrued vacation d sick pay 528,290 39,901 568,191 559,497 Inter governmenlal payable 49,671 22,880 19,326 91,877 0 Temporary improvement notes 1,525,000 1,414,857 2,939,857 3,413,461 Deferred revenue 489,111 33,407 $623,937 2,069,235 3,215,690 3,192,899 Interfund loans 698,143 1,279,201 1,977,344 2,035,037 Revenue bonds payable 0 45,000 Cert. of indebtedness d G.O. bonds payable 855,000 855,000 1,060,000 G.O. slate aid street bonds payable 2,885,000 2,885,000 3,000,000 Special assessment bonds payable 385,000 385,000 530,000 Tax increment bonds payable 15,110,000 15,110,000 11,775,000 Deterred compensation funds held for participants $2,241,152 2.241,152 2,046,095 --- ------ -- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - --- --- -- - - -- - - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- -- - - -- ---- - - - --- ---- - - - - -- Total Liabilities 1,406,178 2,519,143 623,937 3,595,148 1,650,628 191,090 2,241,152 19,235,000 31,462,278 29,474,580 --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- -- - - -- --- - - -- -- - - - - - -- --- -- - --- --- - - - - -- - --- - - - --- ---- - - - --- Equity and Other Credits Contributed capital 21,874,890 21,874,890 22,067,103 Investment in general fixed assets $15,151,851 15,151,851 14,243,174 Retained earnings: Reserved: Debt retirement 0 121,755 Special assessments 95,645 95,645 108,378 Plant expansion 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 Unreserved 8,311.526 825,946 9,137,472 8,115,774 Fund Balances (Deficits): Reserved: Debt service 7,279,029 7,279,029 3,634,878 Unexpended appropriations 1,057,958 1,057,958 1,142,651 Dedicated housing account 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000.000 Interfund loans 105,074 1,872,270 1,977,344 2,035,038 Bond proceeds 562,130 562,130 2,062,073 Unreserved: Designated: Working capital 4,899,499 4,899,499 4,656,444 Unexpended appropriations 36,079 36,079 347,057 Undesignaled (2,241,326) 8.139,728 5,898,402 5.226.457 Total Equity and Other Credits 5,040,652 (2,241,326) 7,279,029 12,632,086 34.282,061 825,946 15,151.851 72 970,299 68.760,782 --- - - - - -- --- - -- - -- --- --- - -- - - - - - -- ---- - --- -- - -- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - -- - -- -- -- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - -- --- TOTAL I* IES. EQUITY & OTHER CREDITS $6,446.830 $277,817 $7,902,966 $16,227,2 $35,932.689 $1,017.036 $2,241.152 $15,151,851 $19,235,000 $104,43 S98 235.362 City of Brooklyn Center AN Gcvemrnental 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 R General Revenue Service Projects Taxes and special assessments $5,703,773 $1,529,651 :326,696 $491,057 $8,053,177 $7,571,724 Licenses and permits 317,620 317,620 300,480 Intergovernmental 3,353,247 184,836 812,098 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 2,233 261,876 694,490 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 Expenditures 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 rotlrement 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 Financina Sources or Uses: -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 out (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 64,068 1,161,527 (1,229,850) Fund Balances (Deficits) 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) (O6,078) (1,835,437) Fund Balances (Deficits) December 31 $5,214,413 ($2,106,113) $5,688,104 $11,552,199 $20,348,603 $19,845,154 IV -7 City of Brooklyn Center EXHIBIT 2 All Governmental Fund Types COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES For the Year Ended December 31, 1993 Totals "lal Debt Capital (Memorandum Only) Revenues General Revenue Service pro ' to tm 1 902 Taxes and special assessments $5,006,710 $1,526,425 $454,085 $584,504 $7,571,724 17,089,428 Licenser. and permits 300,480 300,480 332.188 Intergovernmental 3,167,214 240,781 58,410 213,458 3,670,863 4,337,059 Charges for services 838,883 11,483 850,388 813,648 Court fines 140,104 140,104 148,701 Investment earnings 249,688 1,898 332,322 748,020 1,330,788 1,430,982 Miscellaneous 20,523 894,144 728,887 827,972 Total Revenues 9,732,602 1,780,527 844,817 2,244,028 14,801.972 14,979,974 Expenditures Current: general government 1,580,674 1,560,674 1,707.895 Public safety 3,870,583 3,870,563 3,938,920 Public works 1,758,187 1,756,187 1,504,190 Community hoahh services 41,325 41,328 114,579 Parks and roctoation 1,990,270 23,308 2.022.686 1,812.933 Eeonomlc developmont 178,703 1,042. 495,405 676,150 811,293 Nondopartmontai 300,803 300,803 273,273 Capital outlay 2.829,938 2.829,938 3,324,164 Debt sorvlce: Principal refirement 1,710.000 1,710,000 1,880,00 Interest and fiscal charges 97,853 1,188,270 113.781 1.399.704 1,507.15 Total bc�enditures 9.707,525 122,093 2,898,270 3,239,124 15,967,012 18,854,404 Excess or De liciv ncy( ] of Revenues Over Expenditure 25,077 1,656,434 (2,053,453) (995,098) (1,36.5.040) (1,874,430) Other Financing Sources or Ussef -) Operating transfers in 175.000 1,746,580 305,221 2,316,801 3,641,226 Operating transfors out (1,525,591) (240,000) (638,020) (2,301.811) (3,810,963) Proceeds from sale of refunding bonds 4.270,000 sale of certificates of Indebtedness 120,000 120.000 480.000 Total Other Financ Sources or Uses( -) 206 (1,625,591) 1,508,580 (140,799) 135.190 4,480,273 Excess or Dollcloncv( :) of Revenues and Other Sources Over Expenditures and Other Uses 320.077 132,843 (548.873) (1.135,897) (1.229,850) 2,605,843 Fund Balances (Deficit;) January 1 5,040,852 (2,241,328) 7,279,029 12,632,088 22.710,441 20.104,588 Equity Transfers Out (750.000) 4885,437) (1,835,437) ,�.��, .... �..��.. ...�..�. mss. Fund Balances (Deficits) December 31 !4.610.729 ($2,108,483) $6,848,719 $11,498,189 $19.945,154 $22,710,441 szcsssaasssxasasxsszzssxasz Maass"&% szasazss ssxssssx sszszsszs ssazsxasx sssssssss IV -8 City of Brooklyn Center All Governmental Fund Types COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES For the Year Ended December 31, 1992 Totals Special Debt Capital (Memorandum Only) Revenues General Revenue Service Projects 1992 1991 Taxes and special assessments $4,291,322 $1,397,075 $898,227 $502,804 $7,089,428 $7,181,185 Licenses and permits 332,186 332,186 311,751 Intergovernmental 3,133,495 251,747 157,200 794,617 4,337,059 5,072,162 Charges for services 794,876 18,770 813,646 930,957 Court fines 148,701 148,701 202,090 Investment earnings 262,347 1,205 244,852 922,578 1,430,982 1,415,141 Miscellaneous 39,424 336,327 452,221 827,972 290,763 Total Revenues 9,002,351 2,005,124 1,300,279 2,672,220 14,979,974 15,404,049 Expenditures - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - -- Current: General government 1,797,895 1,797,895 1,591,108 Public safety 3,938,920 3,938,920 3,950,862 Public works 1,594,190 1,594,190 1,827,052 Community health services 114,579 114,579 104,706 Parks and recreation 1,783,811 29,122 1,812,933 1,926,695 Economic development 187,606 25,681 398,006 611,293 578,042 Nondepartmental 273,273 273,273 414,149 Capital outlay 137,590 3,186,574 3,324,164 2,796,918 Debt service: Principal retirement 1,880,000 . 1,880,000 940,000 Interest and fiscal charges 119,511 1,282,135 105,511 1,507,157 1,115,027 • Total Expenditures 9.690,274 311,904 3,162,135 3,690,091 16,854,404 15,244,559 Excess or Deficiency( -) of Revenues Over Expenditure (687,923) 1,693,220 (1,861,856) (1,017,871) (1,874,430) 159,490 Other Financing Sources or Uses( -) - - - Operating transfers in 140,000 1,236,007 2,165,219 3,541,226 2,073,031 Operating transfers out (1,514,826) (2,296,127) (3,810,953) (2,284,261) Proceeds from sale of refunding bonds 4,270,000 4,270,000 8,996,855 Sale of certificates of indebtedness 480,000 480,000 700,000 I Total Other Financing Sources or Uses( -) 620,000 (1,514,826) 5,506,007 (130,908) 4,480,273 9,485,625 -- -- - -- -- - -- --- - - - - -- -- -- - - - - -- Excess or Deficiency( -) of Revenues and Other Sources Over Expenditures and Other Uses (67,923) 178,394 3,644,151 (1,148,779) 2,605,843 9,645,115 Fund Balances (Deficits) January 1 5,108,575 (2,419,720) 3,634,878 13,780,865 20,104,598 10,459,483 Fund Balances (Deficits) December 31 $5,040,652 ($2,241,326) $7,279,029 $12,632,086 $22,710,441 $20,104,598 IV -9 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( -) Under(-) Budget Actual Budget Budget Actual Bu Revenues Property taxes $5,884,414 $5,703,773 ($180,641) $1,365,000 $1,529,861 $164,651 Licenses and permits 289,300 317,620 28,320 Intergovemmental 3,320,818 3,353,247 32,429 235,827 184,836 (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 2,233 733 Miscellaneous 14,500 22,899 8,399 Total Revenues 10,766,165 10,555,742 (210,473) 1,617,127 1,735,133 118,006 Expenditures General government 1,808,919 1,692,268 (116,651) Public safety 4,675,502 4,409,490 (266,012) Public works 1,562,401 1,230,565 (331.836) Community services 41,572 41,495 (77) Parks and recreation 2,205,448 2,055,479 (149,969) 28,000 19,159 (8,841) Economic development 206,000 199,982 (6,018) 1,100 72,270 71,170 Nonrdepartrnerdal 456,323 312,779 (143,544) Interest and fiscal charges 104,000 81,656 (22,344) Total Expenditures 10,956,165 9,942,058 (1,014,107) 133,100 173,085 39,985 Excess or Deficiency( -) of Revenues Over Expenditures (190,000) 613,684 803,684 1,484,027 1,562A48 78,021 Other Financing Sources or U121d --) Operating transfers in 190,000 190,000 Operating transfers out (1.638,806) (1.556,678) 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 Expenditures 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 (2,108,483) (2,108,483) Equity Transfer Out (200,000) (200,000) Fund Balances ( Deficits) December 31 $4,410,729 $5,214,413 5803,684 (52� (52 1 $157,149 IV -10 City of Brooklyn Center General and Special Revenue Funds COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL Fw ilia Tear Ended December 31, 1903 General Fund _ Special Revenue F u n ds Actual Over Actual Over Under(-) Under( -) B udget Actual Budget Budget Actual Budget Revenues Propenytaxos :5,35.325 $5,006,710 ($343,615) $1.213,750 $1,526.425 $312,675 Licensee and permits 300,230 300,480 250 Intergovernmental 3,168,489 3,167,214 8,725 217,491 240,781 23,280 Charge for services 1,072,816 838,883 (233,933) 10,000 11,483 1,483 Court fines 200,000 140.104 (50.896) Investment earnings 210.000 249,688 30,688 1,500 1,838 338 Miscellaneous 11,659 29,523 17,884 Total Revenues 10,303,519 9,732,602 (570,917) 1,442,741 1,780,527 337,788 ftendituros General government 1,885,051 1.680,874 (124,377) Public safety 4,160,472 3,870,563 (279,909) Public works 1,941,380 1,766,187 (66,193) Community hoalth services $1,326 41,326 (10,000) Parke and recreation 2,192,127 1,909,270 (192,857) 25,000 23,398 (1,802) Economic development 190,000 179,703 (11,297) 1 1,042 (59) NOndepartmental 488,164 300,803 (187,361) Interest and fiscal charges 170,000 #7,653 (72,347) Total Expendi 10,608,610 9,707,625 (890,994) 18e,100 122,093 (74,007) Excess or Deficiency{) of Revenues � Over Expenditures (295,000) 25,077 320,077 1,246,641 1,658,434 411,793 Other Financing Sources or Uws( ) Operating transfers in 175,000 176,000 Operating transfors out (1,614,493) (1,626,691) 88,872 Sale of certificates of indebtedness 120,000 120,000 Total Other Financing Sources or Usast -) 295,000 205,000 0 (1,614,463) (1,626,601) 98,872 seas q, Daficiencyi - ) of Revenues and Other Sources Over Exflendfturee and Othor Use 0 320,077 320,077 (367,822) 132,943 50.686 Fund Balances (Deficits! January 1 6,040,662 6.040,652 (2,241,326) (2,241,326) Equity Transfer Out (750,000) (750,000) Fund &- larrees(Deficits.)December 31 $4,20.662 $4,670,729 $320,077 ($2,608,148) ($2,108.483) 5500,665 itsssssssasaxsxxxxxsxsxxsas ixsssiii iiiaGiL'zi sczzzzz sz_zzzzz z zzzzz xzzzzzz N -11 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, 1992 General Fund Special Revenue Funds Actual Over Actual Over Under( -) Under( -) Budget Actual Budget Budget Actual Budget Revenues Property taxes $4.689,933 $4,291,322 ($398,611) $1,323,500 $1,397,075 $73,575 Licenses and permits 294,836 332,186 37,350 Intergovernmental 2,955,970 3,133,495 177,525 215,761 251,747 35,986 Charge for services 1,012,980 794,876 (218,104) 49,500 18,770 (30,730) Court fines 210,000 148,701 (61,299) Investment earnings 350,000 262,347 (87,653) 1,205 1,205 Miscellaneous 33,741 39,424 5,683 336,327 336,327 Total Revenues 9,547,460 9,002,351 (545,109) 1,588,761 2,005,124 416,363 Expenditures General government 1,874,155 1,797.895 (76,260) Public safety 4,127,528 3,938,920 (188,608) Public works 1,794,743 1,594,190 (200,553) Community health services 119,440 114,579 (4,861) Parks and recreation 2,006,373 1,783,811 (222,562) 65,000 29,122 (35,878) Economic development 182.000 187.606 5,606 53,032 25,681 (27,351) Nondepartmental 378,834 273,273 (105,561) Capital outlay 146,370 137,590 (8,780) Interest and fiscal charges -- 160,000 119,511 °- (40,489) . Total Expenditures 10,483,073 9,690,274 (792,799) 424,402 311,904 (112,498) Excess or Deficiency( -) of Revenues Over Expenditures (935,613) (687,923) 247,690 1,164,359 1,693,220 528,861 Other Financing Sources or Uses( -) Operating transfers in 140,000 140,000 Operating transfers out (1,330,535) (1,514,826) (184,291) Sale of certificates of indebtedness 480,000 480,000 Total Other Financing Sources or Uses( -) 620,000 620,000 0 (1,330,535) (1,514,826) - (184,291) Excess or Deficiency( -) of Revenues and Other Sources Over Expenditures and Other Uses (315,613) (67,923) 247,690 (166,176) 178,394 344,570 Fund Balances (Deficits) January 1 5,108,575 5,108,575 (2,419,720) (2,419,720) Fund Balances (Deficits) December 31 $4,792,962 $5,040,652 $247,690 ($2,585,896) ($2,241,326) $344,570 i N -12 Council Meeting Date 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Numbe Request For Council Consideration Item Description: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER LIONS CLUB TO OPERATE A PULL -TAB BOOTH AT THE LYNBROOK BOWL Department Approval: Scott Kline, Chief of Police ry Manager's Review /Recommendation: , I V No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: The City Council approve the Lions Club permit renewal application for the operation of a pull -tab • booth at the Lynbrook Bowl, 6357 North Lilac Drive. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached The City of Brooklyn Center has received a permit renewal application from the Lions Club for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling License to operate a pull -tab booth at the Lynbrook Bowl. The Lions presently operate pull -tab booths at both Lynbrook Bowl and the Earle Brown Bowl. A special search of calls for service to the Lynbrook Bowl for the past year has not indicated any illegal activity with regards to the gambling activities at the Lynbrook Bowl address, 6357 North Lilac Drive in Brooklyn Center. Background checks were conducted on John Russell, Gambling Manager, Thomas Shinnick and Milt Fogel, Board Member. Nothing was found during those checks that would preclude approval of the permit renewal application under State Statute or City Ordinance at this time. • 7� ® Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER LIONS CLUB TO OPERATE A PULL -TAB BOOTH AT THE LYNBROOK BOWL WHEREAS, the Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board requires a municipality to submit a resolution authorizing issuance of any lawful gambling license within its borders; and WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Lions Club has held and currently holds such license within the City of Brooklyn Center and there has been no illegal activity with regards to the gambling activities at that location; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center allows for such conduct on premises within the City of Brooklyn Center. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the issuance of a lawful gambling license to the Brooklyn Center Lions Club to operate a pull -tab booth at the Lynbrook Bowl is hereby approved. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy 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. Council Meeting Daze /O % /9_� City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number 7 cl is Request For Council Consideration Item Description: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER LIONS CLUB TO OPERATE A PULL -TAB BOOTH AT THE EARLE BROWN BOWL Department Approval: Scott Kline, Chief of Police Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: The City Council approve the Lions Club permit renewal application for the operation of a pull -tab • booth at the Earle Brown Bowl, ' 6440 James Circle North. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached The City of Brooklyn Center has received a permit renewal application from the Lions Club for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling License to operate a pull -tab booth at the Earle Brown Bowl. The Lions presently operate pull -tab booths at both Lynbrook Bowl and the Earle Brown Bowl. A special search of calls for service to the Earle Brown Bowl for the past year has not indicated any illegal activity with regards to the gambling activities at the Earle Brown Bowl address, 6440 James Circle North in Brooklyn Center. Background checks were e conducted on John Russell, Gamblin g Manager, er, Thomas Shinnick and Milt Fogel, Board Member. Nothing was found during those checks that would preclude approval of the permit renewal application under State Statute or City Ordinance at this time. 7Q 1 • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER LIONS CLUB TO OPERATE A PULL -TAB BOOTH AT THE EARLE BROWN BOWL WHEREAS, the Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board requires a municipality to submit a resolution authorizing issuance of any lawful gambling license within its borders; and WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Lions Club has held and currently holds such license within the City of Brooklyn Center and there has been no illegal activity with regards to the gambling activities at that location; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center allows for such conduct on premises within the City of Brooklyn Center. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the issuance of a lawful gambling license to the Brooklyn Center Lions Club to operate a pull -tab booth at the Earle Brown Bowl is hereby approved. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy 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. • Council Meeting Date X 1 00 /10/95 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number Req F Co uncil Co n s ideration Item Description: Setting Meeting Dates for December Department Approval: i Cam Andre, Interim City Manager Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Motion approving suggested or modified meeting schedule. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached When the meeting schedule for 1995 was approved there were no meeting dates scheduled for the month of December. This was done to allow some flexibility in scheduling for the Truth in Taxation public hearings. As you know December 6 and December 13 have been scheduled as the Truth in Taxation public hearing dates for the 1996 budget process. I recommend scheduling December 11, 1995, as a regular City Council meeting and December 18, 1995, as a special session to approve the 1996 budget and levy. • Council Meeting Date 10/10/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number 7 Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Private Kennel License Renewal - 6312 France Avenue North Department Approval: Patti Page, Intenm Acknistrative Assistant } Manager's Review/Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached PP Po Recommended City Council Action: Council discuss approval of this license renewal. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached no ) • On December 19 1994, the City Council approved a private kennel license for the keeping of three dogs at the residence located at 6312 France Avenue North. The applicants, Patricia Shogren and Bradley Shogren, have applied for the second year renewal. Private kennel licenses are limited to three years. The Police Department has indicated there have been no complaints from the neighborhood regarding this license. If approved, this license would expire on September 30, 1996, at which time the applicant could apply for the final renewal of this license. • Council Meeting Date 10/10/95 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number — 7 Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1995 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR REPAIRS TO THE CIVIC CENTER PLAZA FOUNTAIN Department Approval: C ` Jim Glas qe, is ervices Coordinator ly Manager's Review /Recomme ation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approve the resolution for repair of the Civic Center plaza fountain, to be funded from the General • Fund contingency account. summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached ) In 1992, it was determined that the civic center plaza fountain was in need of replacement. Accordingly, it was approved as a capital expense item in the 1993 budget. As scheduled, Flair Fountain (the lowest bidder) attempted to replace the fountain in late summer. During that installation, it was determined that the pond depth was too shallow to allow the fountain to operate effectively. Accumulation of sediment had reduced the depth of the pond in excess of four inches. In the Spring of 1994, Flair Fountain provided a temporary fountain until the city could better regulate the depth of the pond. Once this stabilization was completed in the Fall of 1994, Flair Fountain began to build the permanent replacement pump. The pump was not completed until the Winter of 1994, making installation impossible. The pump was finally installed this summer. The cost to replace the pump is $5,483.76. That includes the cost to build and then re -build the pump, plus miscellaneous materials. Flair Fountain did not charge the city for providing a temporary pump for all of 1994. It should be noted that the original quote to replace the pump was in excess of $6,100.00. Staff requests Council approve the resolution for repair of the plaza fountain, to be funded from the • General Fund contingency account. 7t • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1995 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR REPAIRS TO THE CIVIC CENTER PLAZA FOUNTAIN WHEREAS, it was determined in 1992 that the plaza fountain was in need of replacement; and WHEREAS, this expense was approved in the 1993 budget; and WHEREAS, unforeseen difficulties prevented the installation of the fountain in the year in which it was approved; and WHEREAS, replacing the plaza fountain was not inc'uded or approved in the 1995 general fund budget; and WHEREAS, Section 7.09 of the City Charter of the City of Brooklyn Center does • provide for a contingency appropriation as part of the General Fund Budget, and further provides that the contingency appropriation may be transferred to any other appropriation by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The emergency replacement of the plaza fountain by Flair Fountain is hereby approved. 2. The 1995 Proposed General Fund budget be amended as follows: Increase the appropriation for the following line item: Government Buildings Maintenance - No. 119, Object No. 4520 $5,483.76 Decrease the appropriation for the following line item: Unallocated Dept. Expense - No. 182, Object No. 4995 $5,483.76 • RESOLUTION NO. • Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy 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. • Council Meeting Date 10/10/95 3 C4 of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number 7// Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: 1996 PUBLIC UTILITY RATE STUDIES Department Approval: blarfe"Spector, Director f Public Services (—{ Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: WATER UTILITY Resolution 94 -209 increased the rates from $0.82 per 1000 gallons in 1994 to $0.86 in 1995. This rate • is adequate to fund operating costs, and I recommend that the Council reaffirm this rate. A resolution establishing the 1996 water utility rate schedule is provided for Council consideration. SANITARY SEWER UTILITY Resolution 94 -210 maintained the residential quarterly rate of $42.50 in 1995, and the non - residential rate of $1.70 per 1000 gallons. I recommend that the Council maintain this rate for 1996. These rates are sufficient to meet utility financial goals. I recommend that the Council consider: 1) Maintaining the 1995 rate, resulting in no increase in 1996; and 2) Directing staff to develop a financing plan using cash reserves, prepare a financing plan for capital improvements utilizing GO revenue bonds, or a combination of the two. A resolution establishing the 1996 sanitary sewer utility rate schedule is provided for Council consideration. STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY Resolution 94 -211 increased the residential quarterly rate from $6.75 per lot to $7.50 per lot and the base rate from $27 per REF acre to $30 per REF acre. These rates are marginally sufficient to meet utility financial goals. I recommend that the Council consider: Request For Council Consideration Page 2 1) Raising the quarterly rate from 7.50 per 8.00 per lot, and the base rate from $30.00 per REF • acre to $32.00 A resolution establishing the 1996 storm drainage utility rate schedule is provided for Council consideration. UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES Resolution 94 -212 states charges are increased annually based on inflation. I recommend increasing charges 2.6 percent, based on the increase in the CPI from July 1994 to July 1995. A resolution establishing he 1995 utility hookup charges is included for Council i g y p g consideration. RECYCLING UTILITY Resolution 94 -213 established a rate of $2.15 per month per household for recycling services beginning January 1, 1995. HRG has indicated that the above rates are sufficient to meet utility financial goals. I recommend that the Council reaffirm this rate for 1996. A resolution establishing the 1996 recycling rate is included for Council consideration. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) The City Council annually reviews water, sanitary sewer, recycling and storm drainage utility rates to ensure that the utilities' financial goals are met. Attached to this item is the 1996 rate review. The rates of each of the four utilities are reviewed in individual papers. A fifth paper addresses the water and sanitary sewer hookup charges. The Council in 1994 reviewed rates and established rates for 1995. It is my recommendation that the Council adopt the following 1996 rates. These rates are necessary fora number of reasons. Although utility staff strive to operate and maintain the utility systems as efficiently as possible, the cost of materials such as water treatment chemical continues to rise, as does the cost of electricity used to power well and lift station pumps and natural gas to heat well houses. ■ A program of capital projects intended to increase capacity or maintain the integrity of the systems continues to draw down cash reserves. Council needs to provide direction in how they would like these capital projects funded. Do they prefer to use cash reserves, do they prefer consideration of issuing general obligation (GO) revenue bonds to "even out" capital expenditures, or would they prefer a combination of the two. • ■ A policy change was recommended by the City's auditor, and approved by the Council three years ago. This change phases out the long - standing policy of subsidizing rates by using some interest earnings to pay operating costs. This phase out is complete this year, when rates will Request For Council Consideration Page 3 fully fund operating costs. Until that time, rates will continue to rise a little faster than • expected. If the recommended rates are adopted the annual utility bill of the average residential customer would increase less than 1.0 percent, or roughly $2.00. The annual bill of the average senior customer would increase about 1.0 percent, or about $2.00. Table 1 AVERAGE ANNUAL UTILITY COSTS, TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS 1995 RATES COMPARED TO RECOMMENDED 1996 RATES Residential Senior 1995 1996 1995 1996 Recycling $25.80 $25.80 $25.80 $25.80 Water $110.80 $110.80 $28.00 $28.00 Sanitary Sewer $170.00 $170.00 $93.60 $93.60 • Storm Drainage $30.00 $32.00 $30.00 $32.00 TOTAL $336.60 $338.60 $177.40 $179.40 Percent Increase < 1.0% 1.0% s 7H, Member introduced the following resolution and • moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1996 WATER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, a municipal Public Utilities Division exists for the purpose of providing and maintaining water and sanitary sewer facilities for the citizens of the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is a requirement of the City Charter that the Public Utilities Division be a self - sustaining entity through revenue provided by a uniform schedule of rates, fees and charges; and WHEREAS, City of Brooklyn Center Ordinances state, "The City Council shall adopt by resolution schedules of water and sanitary sewer rates, fees, and charges which schedules shall be known as the Public Utilities Rate Schedule "; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that it is necessary to restrict $3.7 million of reserved investments within the Public Utilities Fund for the purpose of partial • payment of the cost of constructing a water treatment facility. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the following Water Utility Rate Schedule be adopted with the current rate maintained effective for all billings issued after January 1, 1996. WATER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE 1. WATER RATES BASE RATE AMOUNT PER YEAR 1,000 GALLONS 1993 $0.73 1994 $0.82 1995 $0.86 1996 Proposed $0.86 RESOLUTION NO. • QUARTERLY MINIMUM RATE 1995 QUARTERLY 1996 METER SIZE MINIMUM CHARGE CHARGE 5/8" x 3/4" $ 7 Same 3/4" $ 11 it 1„ $ 14 it 1 1/2" $ 18 If 2„ $ 35 it 3 $ 70 It 4" $119 It 6„ $273 If 8„ $515 it 10" $686 to 2. FEES PRESENT PROPOSED Water Meters • 5/8" x 3/4" $50.00 Same 3/4" or larger Cost Plus $2.00 Same Fire Protection Inspection $50.00 Same Private Fire Hydrant Maintenance Labor, Materials Same Equipment and Overhead 3. CHARGES PRESENT PROPOSED Delinquent Account Greater of Quarterly $3.00 or 10% Same Certification to Taxes Per Account $30.00 Same Restoration of Service Monday to Friday Except Holidays Between the Hours of 7:30 A.M. and 3:00 P.M. $25.00 Same RESOLUTION NO. 3. CHARGES (continued) PRESENT PROPOSED Restoration of Service Anytime Saturday, Sunday and Holidays and Between the Hours of 3:00 P.M. and 7:30 A.M. on Monday Through Friday Except Holidays $75.00 Same Delinquent Meter Reading $2.00 1st & 2nd qtr. Same Per Account $5.00 3rd quarter $10.00 4th quarter (consecutive) Curb Stop Stand Pipe p Repair $ 40.00 Same Hydrant Meters 5/8" x 3/4" Deposit $100.00 Same Daily Rental $ 1.00 Same • Minimum Rental $ 20.00 Same 2 1/2 Deposit $700.00 Same Daily Rental $ 7.00 Same Monthly Rental $100.00 Same Minimum Rental $ 35.00 Same Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy 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. 7�a • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1996 SANITARY SEWER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, a municipal Public Utilities Division exists for the purpose of providing and maintaining water and sanitary sewer facilities for the citizens of the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is a requirement of the City Charter that the Public Utilities Division be a self - sustaining entity through revenue provided by a uniform schedule of rates, fees and charges; and WHEREAS, City of Brooklyn Center Ordinances state, "The City Council shall adopt by resolution schedules of water and sanitary sewer rates, fees, and charges which schedules shall be known as the Public Utilities Rate Schedule "; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that it is necessary to restrict • $300,000 of reserved investments within the Public Utilities Fund for the purpose of paying the cost of unanticipated capital improvement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the following Sanitary Sewer Utility Rate Schedule be adopted with the proposed rate effective for all billings issued after January 1, 1996. SANITARY SEWER UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE 1. RATES QUARTERLY RESIDENTIAL RATES SINGLE SENIOR YEAR FAMILY APARTMENT CITIZEN 1994 $42.50 $29.75 $23.40 1995 $42.50 $29.75 $23.40 1996 Proposed $42.50 $29.75 $23.40 • RESOLUTION NO. NON - RESIDENTIAL RATES PER 1,000 FIXTURE YEAR GALLONS UNITS 1993 $1.60 $2.50 1994 $1.70 $2.65 1995 $1.70 $2.65 1996 Proposed $1.70 $2.65 2. FEE PRESENT PROPOSED SAC Charge Set by MWCC Set by MWCC 3. CHARGES PRESENT PROPOSED Delinquent Account Greater of Quarterly $3.00 or 10% Same • Certification to Taxes Per Account $30.00 Same Line Cleaning Charge Labor, Materials Labor, Materials Equipment and Equipment and Overhead Overhead Sanitary Sewer Hookup Established Established Annually by Annually by Resolution Resolution Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy 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. 7113 • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1996 STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, it is a requirement of the Brooklyn Center City Charter that Brooklyn Center's municipal utilities be self - sustaining entities through revenue provided by a uniform schedule of rates, fees, and charges; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Services has reviewed the financial requirements of the Storm Drainage Utility and has developed a recommended rate schedule. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the following schedule of Storm Drainage fees will be in effect as of January 1, 1996: • CHARGE PER QUARTER PER ACRE Classification/Land Use 1995 1996 BASE RATE $30.00 $32.00 1. Cemeteries, Golf Courses 7.50 8.00 2. Parks 14.85 15.75 3. Single Family, Duplex, Townhouse 7.50 /lot 8.00 /lot 4. Schools, Government Buildings 37.50 40.00 5. Multiple Family, Churches 90.00 96.00 6. Commercial and Industrial 150.00 160.00 7. Vacant Land As Assigned As Assigned • RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy 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. • • 7HAI Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1996 RECYCLING RATES WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is a member of the Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG), which is a joint powers group formed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, 1987, Section 471.59; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the joint powers agreement was to create an organization by which the member cities may jointly and cooperatively provide for the efficient and economical collection, recycling, and disposal of solid waste within and without their respective corporate boundaries, all in compliance with Minnesota Waste Management Act, Minnesota Statutes, 1987, Chapter 115A; and WHEREAS, the HRG has established a curbside recycling program for its member cities to meet the requirements of Hennepin County Ordinance No. 13, Solid Waste Source Separation for Hennepin County; P P and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center Ordinance No. 89-11 authorizes the City to establish rates for recycling services; and • WHEREAS, the HRG has established a rate of $2.15 per month per household for recycling services beginning January 1, 1996; and WHEREAS, the rates for recycling services established by the HRG reflect the amount needed to fund the City's curbside recycling program after the projected reimbursement of recycling program costs from Hennepin County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the above described rates established by the HRG for recycling services are hereby approved. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy 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: a whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 7/s Member introduced the following resolution and • moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1996 WATER AND SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP RATES WHEREAS, Resolution Nos. 74 -45 and 77 -113 provided for the annual adjustment of water assessment rates for non - single - family residential and single - family residential rates, respectively; and WHEREAS, said adjustment in water hookup rates is to be effective January 1 of each year; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 88 -05 changed the month from which the annual price index change is to be calculated from October to July; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported to the City Council that the change in the Twin Cities Consumer Price Index from July, 1994 to July, 1995 was an increase of 2.6 percent; and WHEREAS, City policy, based on Village policy established in April, 1956 is YP Y g P Y P> to calculate the cost of sanitary sewer hookup based on the average cost of a lateral system of sanitary sewers for a standard Village lot. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the water and sanitary sewer hookup rates effective January 1, 1996 shall be as follows: Type of Property /Assessment 1996 Rate WATER HOOKUP Single Family Residence with Service $3,500.00 Single Family Residence without Service $2,675.00 Frontage (front 135 feet) $35.65 per front ft. Area (area outside front 135 feet) $11.00 per 100 sq. ft. Service Hookup $ 825.00 SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP Frontage $20.72 per front foot • Service Hookup $825.00 RESOLUTION NO. • Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member on vote being taken thereon the following p g voted in g favor thereof: and u and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly assed and adopted. P P • • 1996 Utility Rate Study • Prepared for Brooklyn Center City Council by • Public Services Department September 27, 1995 t BROOKLYN CENTER WATER UTILITY 1996 RATE REVIEW BACKGROUND The City Council on September 26, 1994 adopted Resolution 94 -209, which established water rates for 1995. The Council annually reviews established rates for their adequacy and makes adjustments as necessary. In 1992, the Council approved a policy change regarding the use of interest earnings to subsidize rates. Previously, one half of interest earnings were used to offset operating costs; starting in 1992, this subsidy is being phased out 20 percent per year. This year the phase out is complete, and no interest earnings will be used to offset operating costs. WATER UTILITY FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE, 1994 The water utility's financial performance in 1994 was better than expected: projected incomes were slightly higher than expected and expenditures were lower than expected in 1994 as a vacant Maintenance II position in the water /sanitary sewer utilities, created when that person was promoted to Public Utilities Supervisor, has not yet been refilled. The resulting net operating income, (operating revenues minus operating expenditures) was about $95,866 It is estimated that revenues and expenditures in 1995 will be about as projected. While it is estimated that operating costs will be up slightly, revenues should be sufficient to cover the increases, the net impact is an expected operating balance of about $11,700. CAPITAL OUTLAYS The major capital improvement projects planned for 1996 include water main improvements associated with the 69th Avenue street project, improvements associated with the neighborhood street improvement program and other infrastructure repairs. With the exception of painting water towers and the possible need for a water treatment facility in the future, most capital outlays in the water utility will be main replacements associated with neighborhood street improvements and other infrastructure repair. PROJECTED EXPENSES Personnel and utility expenses are projected to increase at three percent per year, while other operating expenses are projected to increase five percent per year. A new expense for 1994 was vehicle operations cost. In previous years, the General Fund subsidized the operation and maintenance of utility -owned vehicles. The cost shown on the rate - setting schedules is an estimate of both the vehicle operations (fuel and maintenance) and rental (depreciation, insurance, license, etc.) costs generated by the vehicles considered to be assets of the water utility. TABLE 1 - Capital Improvement FOgram - Detail of Capital Outlays Water Utility Capital Improvements 04- Oct -95 EXPENDITURES: WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 69th Avenue, Shingle Creek Pkwy to Dupont 300,000 $0 Neighborhood Street Improvements 65,780 140,000 300,000 120,000 150,000 $750,000 State Aid Street Improvements 0 167,000 10,875 70,000 10,000 112,000 WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM 2 MG Reservoir & Pumping Station $3,300,000 Construct Well #11 $1,000,000 MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS New Electric Controls at Wells 5, 6, 7 30,000 $0 Emergency tie -in to Brooklyn Park 225,000 $0 WATER TOWERS Repair Paint on Tower #1 180,000 $0 Repair Paint on Tower #2 225,000 $0 Replace Paint on Tower #3 625,000 $0 Landscape Tower #1 10,000 $0 MISCELLANEOUS Routine Well Maintenance 50,000 50,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 $275,000 SCADA Hardware & Software Update 20,000 $0 SCADA Replacement 125,000 $0 Central Garage Fuel System 81,250 Water Meters & Equipment 55,000 288,000 260,000 250,000 0 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $220,780 $1,036,250 $975,875 $1,345,000 $395,000 $5,437,000 FUND SOURCES: Water Utility 220,780 1,036,250 975,875 1,345,000 395,000 $5,437,000 TOTAL $220,780 $1,036,250 $975,875 $1,345,000 $395,000 $5,437,000 RATE SETTING CONSIDERATIONS The schedule at the end of this report labeled Option 1 shows the projected effect of maintaining the existing rate schedule. This option meets all utility financial requirements. Option 2 shows a continuation of minimal rate increases. RECOMMENDATION To preserve flexibility and to provide for a revenue cushion, it is recommended that the Council adopt the rates shown on Option 1. This would result in No increase in rates in 1996, with rate remaining at $0.86 per 1000 gallons. IMPACT OF RECOMMENDED RATE INCREASE Table 2 below illustrates the impact the recommended rate increase would have on the summer water bills of various types of customers. The summer bill is typically the highest bill of the year. TABLE 2 IMPACT OF RECOMMENDED WATER BASE RATE INCREASE SUMMER WATER BILLS OF VARIOUS CUSTOMERS Type of ;Customer 1995 1996 Charge Charge RESIDENTIAL Low Use (Minimum) $7.00 $7.00 Average Use (38) 32.68 32.68 High Use (116) 99.76 99.76 Apartment, 36 Units (630) 541.80 541.80 COMMERCIAL Car Dealership (235) $202.10 $202.10 Heavy Commercial Use 743.04 743.04 i . Table 4 is a summary of 1996 water rates per 1000 gallons for a number of Metro area cities. Brooklyn Center continues to have one of the lower rates in the area. TABLE 4 1996 WATER RATES OF VARIOUS METRO AREA CITIES i CITY PER CITY PER 1000:::G" > 1000 G Minneapolis $1.59 Brooklyn Park $0.95 I'I Bloomington 1.65 Maple Grove 0.90 Robbinsdale 1.42 Fridley 0.90 New Hope 1.40 Blaine 0.88 Crystal 1.40 Brooklyn Center 0.86 Golden Valley 1.40 Anoka 0.85 Richfield T 1.37 Plymouth 0.75 OTHER FEES AND CHARGES The water utility rate schedule contains a number of fees and charges in addition to rates for service. The following list describes each fee or charge and its current level. FEES A. 5/8" x 3/4" WATER METER Property owners are currently charged $50.00 for a water meter when a water account is opened with the City. The City then buys the water meter from the property owner when the water account is closed, and the new owner is then charged for the water meter when the new account is opened. Since most of the water meters in the City are of this size, it is administratively convenient to charge the same fee to all accounts. B. 3/4" OR LARGER WATER METER Property owners requiring water meters larger than the standard residential water meter are charged the cost of the meter plus a $2.00 administrative fee. Since there are far fewer of the larger meters, it is not as difficult to administer the buy -back of the water meters. C. FIRE PROTECTION INSPECTION Property owners with fire sprinkler systems are charged an annual fire inspection fee of $50.00 to test the fire sprinkler system. D. PRIVATE FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE Property owners who have privately owned fire hydrants located on their property are billed the cost of labor, materials, equipment and overhead whenever the City performs maintenance of their fire hydrants. CHARGES A. DELINQUENT ACCOUNT CHARGE The present delinquent account charge is $3.00 or 10 percent of the utility bill, whichever is greater. It applies to the bill as a whole. B. CERTIFICATION TO TAXES The special assessment service charge for delinquent accounts recovers the cost of certification with the County Auditor of the delinquent amounts to taxes. It is recommended that this fee remain at $30.00, which is consistent with the certification fee for diseased tree and weed destruction. C. RESTORATION OF SERVICE - MONDAY TO FRIDAY, EXCEPT HOLIDAYS, BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:30 A.M. TO 3:00 P.M. The restoration of service charge during working hours is $25.00, and includes the cost of one hour labor, labor additive, and vehicle rental. It is charged in all instances where a customer's water has been turned off, whether by a customer's request or for non - payment of utility bills. D. RESTORATION OF SERVICE - ANYTIME SATURDAYS, SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS AND BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 3:00 P.M. AND 7:30 A.M. ON MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY EXCEPT HOLIDAYS Restoration of service during off hours is much more expensive because Public Utility employees are called back to work for a minimum of two hours at overtime pay. The restoration of service charge is $75.00 during these hours. E. DELINQUENT METER READING The delinquent meter reading charge is designed to motivate water customers into reading their own meter and forwarding the meter reading card to the City for billing. The current charge is: $2.00 the first and second consecutive time a reading card is not returned. The charge increases to $5.00 the third time, and to $10 the fourth time. After four quarters, the customer must either submit a reading card or schedule a meter reading, or face water shutoff. F. WATER HOOKUP CHARGE Properties that have never been assessed, or not fully assessed for water are charged a hookup charge when water hookup is requested. The charge is intended to cover the cost of the lateral water main, supply, and trunk capital investment in the water system. It is calculated on a per lot basis for single family residential and on a linear foot plus square foot basis for all other properties. It is established annually by resolution. G. HYDRANT METER CHARGES The hydrant meter charges are for meters that attach to fire hydrants used as a temporary water connection, usually for construction projects. The City has two sizes of hydrant meters, 5/8" x 3/4" and 2' /a ". The charges for the smaller meter include $100.00 deposit, $1.00 per day rental, $20.00 minimum charge, and the cost of the water used at the prevailing water rate. The charges for the larger meter include $700.00 deposit, $7.00 per day rental or $100.00 per month rental, $35.00 minimum charge and the cost of water used at the prevailing water rate. H. CURB STOP STAND PIPE REPAIR City crews are called on to repair curb stop stand pipes for private properties due to damage or settling. In cases where the curb stop stand pipe is bent or otherwise damaged, a substantial amount of time can be involved in repair. A standard charge of $40.00 is charged for each curb stop stand pipe repair. e:\eng\pubufi1\rates\watrat96 WATER U�ITY RATE STUDY: 1996 ON 1 Publutillwatrat96 7VehI ns Personal Service 348,313 317,283 319,984 330,845 347,050 357,842 368,577 C ontractual 173, 799 144,216 136,830 199,099 144, 769 149,112 153, 585 Supplies & Materials 105,388 68,699 79,614 92,700 95,165 98,020 100,961 Heat, Light & Power 134,905 128,901 148,962 142,113 162,649 170,781 179,321 Interest on Debt 1 665 0 0 0 p 0 Operating Costs 40,646 43,218 61,208 49,000 54,000 State Connection Surcharge 0 0 46,100 46,100 46,000 46,000 Depreciation Expense 233,447 267,279 236,850 260,000 248,000 275,000 295,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $997,707 $926,378 $962,886 $1,114,075 $1,094,941 $1,145,755 $1,197,444 REVENUES 2) Billing Revenues $843,697 $772,401 $962,369 1,032,000 1,032,000 1,080,000 1,128,000 Water in MGAL 1,320,000 11150,000 1,150,000 1,200,000 1,20 �Yy 1111 1,200,000 1,200,000 � i >;; .. : , ;`.;.`•i;i:i;:: :5: >::;: i;;;:;::r;:.:3i::£:f[ %� � .. :,•" `� ::iS::::::::ii::: >': isiii: isi:' �; °, : ..... : i::>::: iisi:';:itgi:ii::;i >::; ;:,:.;�:.;;;� ::: Miscellaneous Operating 53,160 75,733 91,320 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 4) Miscellaneous Non - operating 30,050 30,921 17,608 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 5) 1/2 Interest Earnings (Phased Out By 1996) 114,600 84,258 66,640 1 23,776 0 0 0 TOTAL REVENUES $1,041,507 $963,313 $1,137,937 $1,125,776 $1,102,000 $1,150,000 $1,198,000 I PRO EGT A _..._.....:.., .. .:............................. LASS..........:.:..:::,.. ..:::::::...::.:::::::::::..... :.... :: .._............................ ... S 844::; ::: »:: >:::.: >;;:<.;:. :::::::;;:.:.:::::. .:::::::::.:::::..:.... ................ .. :.:.::.:::.:.:.,;: .;;;;; >;;:..:..:.. :..•..:..:... 6) 1/2 Interest Earnings (100% By 1996) 171,901 196,602 199,921 275,798 294,748 266,534 ....::...:.::.. IVE 1 I1iCME.OR :LOSS ..:: :: >:.; .,. �( 241,589 I _.:.: ,.:. ..., .....::...::: :...:... :. ::.;.:...::.::.:.::.. 5 74'x... +�+ >: >: >:: >:: >;::;:; >:: (� /� :... ;:.:.:. >:;;.::.�.::........: ..... .................................::.: �::/...:�����F '?';�y::: 1:IJV:.F. :• ::::.::::::: :::::: :::::: .1L.��:ti:S::::::i::i ... ............ .. . :' i:::' si::::::': �')�:�K': ':::::: ji:::::''•:: � :::: �:::::i:::: :::::. y �'�}::::'::i::::::::::j: ::ii::::::::::ii: ''�y' .ii ::.:::.::.::.i:: .:jry.. .:�4.:.�::::::::::. .::::::::::::::. .. EFFECT ON CASH & INVESTMENTS: 7) Start of Year Cash & Inv $4,450,204 $4,665,394 $4,752,886 $4,755,146 $5,081,865 $4,595,422 $4,165,326 8) Capital Outlay (188,958) (413,324) (829,420) (220,780) (1,036,250) (975,875) (1,345,000) 9) Net Income or Loss 215,701 233,537 374,972 287,499 301,807 270,779 242,145 10) Bond Debt Retired (45,000) 1 1) Depeciation Add back 233,447 267,279 236 260,000 248,000 275,000 295,000 ?) >_rtd of Year Oash.& - ::::. . .................. Irlu K3 a4.TS: R estricted Inv 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 Unrestricted Inv 965,394 1,052,886 1,055,146 1,381,865 895,422 465,326 (342,528) WATER ALiTY RATE STUDY: 1996 O$DN 2: Publutillwatrat9 #. ............. ::::: :.:::::.:1:5$4.::::::::.;:.:.;' .;•.:. >;:.;'.;:.:::.t..9 :>:. ;::<.::.:;:::.:..;'::::.::.::.: ;<.; :; ::::::::..:.:::.::::.;:;..:.' ; :: .::.:::.::..:.:;;:.:;::;:.;:..: ::::.:::::.: EXPENDITURES 1) Operations Personal Service 348,313 317,283 319,984 330,845 347,050 357,842 368,577 Contractual 173,799 144,216 136,830 199,099 144,769 149,112 153,585 Supplies & Materials 105,388 68,699 79,614 92,700 95,165 98,020 100,961 Heat, Light & Power 134,905 128,901 148,962 142,113 162,649 170,781 179,321 Interest on Debt 1,855 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle Operating Costs 40,646 43,218 51,208 43,000 54,000 State Connection Surcharge 0 0 46,100 46,100 46,000 46,000 Depreciation Expense 233,447 267,279 236,850 260,000 248,000 275,000 295,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $997,707 26,378 $962,886 $1,114,075 $1,094,941 $1,145,755 $1,197,444 RE 59 VENUES 2) Billing Revenues $843,697 $772,401 $962,369 1,032,000 1,056,000 1,080,000 1,104,000 Water in MGAL 1,320,000 1,150,000 1,150,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 PE 1,200,000 1,200,000 3) Miscellaneous Operating 53,160 75,733 91,320 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 4) Miscellaneous Non - operating 30,050 30,921 17,608 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 5) 112 Interest Earnings (Phased Out By 1996) 114,600 84,258 66,640 1 23,776 0 0 0 TOTAL REVENUES 51,041,507 $963,313 $1,137,937 $1,125,776 S1,126,000 $1,150,000 $1,174,000 I :Q� cosy ::::....:.......... . 6 1/2 Interest 0 iii: 11 F 7Q7 ;::::;::: >::.<: » >;'3f,0:ra9 s4F2A6523;4.4A} / Int Earnings E rn ngs (100 /o By 199 171,901 196,602 199,921 275,798 294,748 267,926 243,062 NEB. ..._ ........:. t1. FilOSS .............:...... .....................:.......:. :::.:::... ..:. _ :::,:: _.:,::.::::::::::::::::::::::: ::...::......::::::::::: :..21 :5 7 . �....:::::::::: ::.: :.::::::::.::. .. :.:.::..::::....:Q...::::::.X233 53..7...::.. .: :. :: ..:..::...:...... .....:...: _ ..............................:::::•.:? >: 745 : 5 : ' a S .::.: >; >;;:<.;;;;;; :::::::•. ;:.;;;:.;;;;:.:::. ;.:.. ..::.; >;::::n:::: :>.;.:. �:;::::.: .:::•::.>:o::o>:: : : ::::::::::::. ..� .:::.: �::::::.: :.:::::::::.:�: .... :. ::::>::.::::::. .::::::::::.::�..: .... .:....... .. EFFECT ON CASH & INVESTMENTS. 7) Start 6f Year Cash & Inv $4,450,204 $4,665,394 $4,752,886 $4,755,146 $5,081,865 $4,619,422 $4,190,718 8) Capital Outlay (188,958) (413,324) (829,420) (220,780) (1,036,250) (975,875) (1,345,000) 9) Net Income or Loss 215,701 233,537 374,972 287,499 325,807 272,171 219,618 10) Bond Debt Retired (45,000) 1 1) Depeciation Add back 233,447 267,279 236,850 260 000 248,000 275,000 295,000 1) Lrrd v &Inv ...............................:. .....�:::::.�:::::::::::::>:::. �:::::�::o-o->:a;:::::::: :.:.� �::.::: ��.�:> ^.�::: �:::.: ��FV; _h�F!!F�G::::::::::9�.:1.�J.V. �•.. -c ' :.+� -: Qo: R estricted Inv 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,700,000 Unrestricted Inv 965,394 1,052,886 1,055,146 1,381,865 919,422 490,718 (339,664) BROOKLYN CENTER SANITARY SEWER UTILITY 1996 RATE REVIEW BACKGROUND The City Council on September 26, 1994 adopted Resolution 94 -210, which established sanitary sewer rates for 1995. The Council annually reviews established rates for their adequacy and makes adjustments as necessary. In 1992, the Council approved a policy change regarding the use of interest earnings to subsidize rates. Previously, one half of interest earnings were used to offset operating costs; starting in 1992, this subsidy is being phased out 20 percent per year. The phase out of this subsidy is complete this ear, and no interest earnings expenditures. s are shown to offset ex Y g P SANITARY SEWER UTILITY FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE, 1994 AND 1995 The sanitary sewer utility's financial performance in 1994 was about as expected, due to an underestimation of billing revenues, offset by lower than anticipated charges for MCES services, which are the largest portion of the sanitary sewer expenditures. Revenues for 1995 are coming in as expected and should be sufficient to cover expenditures. PROJECTED EXPENSES Personnel and utility expenses are projected to increase at three percent per year, while other operating expenses are projected to increase five percent per year. The MCES charge for 1995 is estimated to increase at five percent. CAPITAL OUTLAYS Substantial outlays were made in 1992 and 1993 for the completion of Lift Station #2, for the repair of two segments of CMP trunk sewers, and for the sanitary main improvements associated with the 69th Avenue street improvement project. Projects for 1994 were mainly associated with the neighborhood street improvements. In 1995, the major project to be completed is the lining of 6,000 feet of Corrugated Metal Pipe. Anticipated projects for 1996 include the replacement of Lift Station #1, replacement of some sanitary sewer lines as a part of the 1996 neighborhood street improvement program, and for the sanitary main improvements associated with the 69th Avenue street improvement project. REVIEW OF ESTABLISHED RATE INCREASES, 1994 AND 1995 RATE SETTING CONSIDERATIONS Option 1 and 2 shows the projected effect of maintaining the existing rate schedule. 0 TABLE 1 - Capital Improvement Program - Detail of Capital Outlays Sanitary Sewer Utility Capital Improvements 04-Oct-95 .......... I. Z ... ... 0.... EXPENDITURES: LIFT STATIONS Replace Lift #1 and Forcemain 50,000 1,100,000 $0 Replace Lifts 10 & 11 100,000 120,000 $0 SEWER REPLACEMENT Trunk line, 69th Avenue to Lift Station #1 800,000 $0 Neighborhood Street Improvements 132,300 150,000 200,000 300,000 250,000 $1,250,000 State Aid Street Improvements 22,870 34,000 10,875 34,000 51,000 39,000 MISCELLANEOUS INTRAC Replacement 125,000 125,000 $0 Central Garage Fuel System 81,250 Data Processing Equipment 13,000 10,000 0 0 0 — I - I I I I TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,005,170T $1,378,250 $445,875 $334,000 $546,000 $1,289,000 FUND SOURCES: Sanitary Sewer Utility 1,005,170 1,378,250 445,875 334,000 546,000 $1,289,000 TOTAL $1,005,170 $1,378,250 $445,875 $334,000 $546,000 $:�,:2=89,000 Option 1 includes selling bonds to even out capital expenditures over the next few years. Option 2 would pay for capital expenditures using cash reserves. Both options provide for no rate increases for 1996. If adopted, this will be the third year that there will be no increase in rates. This has been made possible in large part due to lower than expected charges from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (previously known as MWCQ due to rate restructuring. The most important consideration regarding the sanitary sewer rates is the need for capital improvements. The sanitary sewer fund has financed several major capital improvements in the past few years, and several major projects are contemplated for the coming few years. Each of these projects are necessary improvements. While in preparing a capital improvement program they may be moved from one year to another, these major projects must be undertaken in order to maintain the integrity of the system. Among these improvements are the reconstruction or replacement of another aging lift station and replacement, or re- lining in place, of considerable sections of corrugated metal sewer main. This main is of the same type as that collapsed near lift station #1 and which was replaced under I94/694 and near Brookdale Shopping Center. Complicating the matter is that these two major capital improvement projects are very costly compared to the rest of the capital improvement program. As the attached schedules indicate, an "average" year of capital improvements can range from $300,00041,500,000. If rates were raised high enough to finance the improvements while monitoring cash reserves, then when capital outlays are "over the hump" the rates would generate much more revenue than could be justified. The question then is how should these capital outlays be funded. Is it most appropriate to continue raising rates? Should bonding be considered to "even out" the cash flow, or, should cash reserves be used to partially or wholly fund the expenditures? The sanitary sewer utility fund is in a comfortable position, and wholly funding the two $1 million dollar projects from reserves would be an acceptable alternative from an financial management perspective. RECOMMENDATION Staff makes no recommendation and asks Council's direction in determining how they would prefer capital expenditures be funded. Again, Option 1 would include a financing plan utilizing GO revenue bonds to finance major capital improvements and Option 2 would pay for capital projects from cash reserves. The Council's level of comfort with the cash reserve would be the deciding factor between the two options. Either option would result in no increase in rates for 1996. IMPACT OF RECOMMENDED RATE INCREASE Table 2 below illustrates the impact the recommended rate increase would have on the summer sanitary sewer bills of various types of customers. The summer bill is typically the highest of the four quarters. TABLE 2 IMPACT OF RECOMMENDED SANITARY SEWER BASE RATE INCREASE SUMMER QUARTERLY UTILITY BILLS OF VARIOUS CUSTOMERS Type of Customer 1995 Charge 1996 Charge RESIDENTIAL Senior $23.40 $23.40 Residential 42.50 42.50 Apartment, 36 Units 1,071.00 1,071.00 COMMERCIAL Car Dealership $399.00 $399.50 Heavy Commercial Use 1,468.80 1,468.80 Table 3 is a summary of 1996 sanitary sewer rates per 1000 gallons for a number of Metro area cities. Brooklyn Center is in about the middle of the range of rates in the area. TABLE 3 1996 QUARTERLY SANITARY SEWER CHARGES OF VARIOUS METRO AREA CITIES (CONVERTED TO QUARTERLY RATE WHERE NECESSARY) CITY PER CITY PER QUARTER QUARTER Hopkins $61.60 Blaine 40.80 Fridley 56.25 Anoka 40.00 New Hope 56.25 Crystal 38.10 Champlin 56.00 Bloomington 34.80 Brooklyn Park 50.00 Golden Valley 32.00 Maple Grove 44.00 Robbinsdale 25.00 Brooklyn Center 42.50 • Plymouth 42.30 OTHER FEES AND CHARGES The sanitary sewer utility rate schedule contains a number of fees and charges in addition to rates for service. The following list describes each fee or charge and its current level and describes any recommended amendment. FEES The only fee for sanitary sewer service is the SAC (Service Availability Charge) unit charge, which is established by Metropolitan Council, Environmental Services. This fee goes directly to MCES. CHARGES A. DELINQUENT ACCOUNT CHARGE The present delinquent account charge is $3.00 or 10 percent of the utility bill. It applies to the bill as a whole. B. CERTIFICATION TO TAXES S The special assessment service charge for delinquent accounts recovers the cost of certification with the County Auditor of the delinquent amounts to taxes. The charge is currently $30 which matches the certification fee for diseased tree and weed destruction accounts. C. LINE CLEANING CHARGE The line cleaning charge recovers the cost of cleaning City sanitary sewer lines due to misuse by the property owner. The most common infraction is grease build -up due to improper sewering of restaurant greases. The charge is actual labor, materials, equipment, and overhead. D. SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP CHARGE Properties that have never been assessed, or not fully assessed for sanitary sewer, are charged a hookup charge when water hookup is requested. The charge is intended to cover the cost of the lateral sanitary sewer main and is calculated on a linear foot basis. It is established annually by resolution. e: \eng \pubutil\rates\sewrat96 SANITASEWER RATE STUDY: 1996 OPT 1: PURateslsewrat 96 .. EXPENDITURES 1) Operations Personal Service 199,990 182,430 186,623 200,798 194,690 200,428 206,441 Contractual Service 71,898 75,240 50,869 53,412 63,859 67,052 70,405 Supplies & Materials 12,995 13,999 18,330 19,247 19,470 20,444 21,466 Heat, Light, & Power 16,889 17,762 19,891 20,886 20,562 21,590 22,670 Vehicle Operating Costs 27,508 68,237 71,649 75,231 78,993 Depreciation Expense 194,879 126,055 110,855 152,000 175,000 244,000 235,000 Capital Outlay 3,650 Subtotal: City 0 &M Expense $496,651.00 $415,486.00 4413,076.00 $514,579.50 $548,779.85 $628,744.54 $634,973.22 MCES Charges $1,411,582.00 $1,379,868.00 $1,297,134.00 $1,341,312.00 $1,431,659.00 $1,488,925.36 $1,548,482.37 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,908,233.00 $1,795,354.00 $1,710,210.00 $1,855,891.50 $1,980,438.85 REVENUES $2,117,669.90 $2,183,455.59 2) Billing Revenues $1,920,796 $2,114,429 $2,126,822 $2,237,415 $2,237,415 $2,326,185 $2,463,160 Residential Accts 6,845 6,827 6,650 6,610 6 610 . ,305 6,280 Y ...............................:.:::::.::......................•..................:.::.:.::....................5 40 .13R.•:.:.................now 4 Senior Accts 1,625 2,170 2,100 2,160 2 75 2,200 ........ .............. r.. n...............•.:.•:::::::::::::.•.•.•:::::::::::::: :.:.•;:::: w::::::.: �:::: �' X, �, T• 7 ,. �y M.. �:. isi :.i:.i:::::::.:�:•::::.���,�.: :tititivvL:.i'. �:: :.:::::::: ': :::: ::.::::::: :•::: :.:::.� :.. ::. Apartment Accts 3,523 3,545 3, 3,515 3,515 3,510 3,500 Quarterly Charge $25.03 $28.00 $29.75 $29.75 $29.75 $31.50 $33.25 Non - residential Water 234,600 285,000 285,000 290,700 290 700 ::::::::.:�.�::. .. . :::.::::::::::. �::::::::::. ,.............................. 96,500 302 400 a. E Atra..� 00.0. ��1L ........::::.:::::.:... ............................... :.:......................... ..:.. .:.: ...........................:.:. . .........................::..:. . ....................:::.:::.... ................:.::.::.............. ...::::::::.::,.::::::......... - ....... .............................. ::......................... : . s. s� ........................... .. :....... J 3) Miscellaneous Operating 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4) Miscellaneous Non - operating 560 921 11,961 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5) Interest Earnings (Phased Out By 1996) 88,619 60,327 50,744 17,096 TOTAL REVENUES $2,009,975 $2,175,677 52,189,527 $2,255,511 52,238,415 $2,327,185 $2,464,160 G f X00 6) ...... ...............:..:............ :..:....... ::...::::: >:::<;:. >;::.::. >: > ... ::: :.::: ..::........................... ..........::................................. ....:....:.............'1.IC1`t X42.........::...... ....:.:.......... .........:........ ................. .: .. :. ............... . '.:: :..::::::::::. .::::..,...:..:.. : :..:...::.::. X1'79.3..:.:..::::::::::::. :. 6) Interest Earnings (100% By 1996) 132,928 140,764 152,233 198,313 183,509 203,127 127 2 .... :::::!:: >' >:: » >::::: >::' >i•: » >:<:: •:';::>::::::::>::»; i:::::::::>:::::::>::::> ...... ....................:. :::.::.:. ::::....,.....1.191.:::.: �:::::::.:......... :::::. �:::.............:.:. �:... .:::...............::.:::. �:.: ................:::::.:::::::.. ....::::::::: ::::...............::::::..::.: ............... ......................:..:.::.. �. 994:::::::::::.:•;:.:::::::::.: �:::: �. 95. 6..: ::.;:.;..;,�::.::.�:::::::::::: :. � :: ::.:::::.:.::::::.:::::::.:.. .:: :::.:::::.:: :::::«.:.;:::::.::. EFFECT ON CASH & INVESTMENTS 7) Start of Year Cash & Inv $3,566,312 $3,060,463 $3,307,320 $3,419,193 $3,163,956 $3,502,191 $3,452,957 8) Capital Outlay (935,398) (400,285) (965,070) (1,005,170) (1,378,250) (445,876) (334,000) 9) Net Income or Loss 234,670 521,087 631,550 597,933 441,486 412,642 480,976 10) Debt Service 1,100,000 (260,000) (251,000) 11) Depreciation Add -back 194,879 126,055 110,855 »;::::>:j :j :j' : <: >:;::;; >: >:::::;:< :;;:.; ::::.>;:.;;;;;>:<.;:;;;:. :::::::::.:::.::::::::::::::..:.: :::............................ 152 00 ::.::.: ' ::..::::::::.:::::.::::::::::::::::::.::.::....::...:..:. ....:,::::,::.:.:::::::.:::::.: :::::::::::.::::::::.:::: ,::.:.......................... 0 175 000 :.:........:.::::.:::::::: ,:::::. ... :::::::::.::. :.:.....;:..:.......::.:::::......:.:.:::::.::::::::::::::..:.::::::::::::.::::. ::::::......................... 244,000 2 A 35,000 ...:::::::ems:;::::::::. �:::::»>::: i:: a:• r :::::::::I 1 ! [7 !• ::::::::w7�N:1(iF:. ?.+,�a>•:.:. : ..2•. .................. •..........::::. .:. .... .. ; :.., .; .: .... :.. :...,... : . ; .FJ:: iris ?iii`Nai�.:7.(73.�r,�3U..:,. Restricted Investments 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 Unrestricted Investments 2,760,463 3,007,320 3,119,193 2,863,956 3,202,191 3,152,957 3,283,933 I SANITARSEWER RATE STUDY: 1996 OPT& 2: No Bonding PURates \sewrat96 9 S 3.99 ..................... 1.5E 3 >::> :: >:: >:::<: >:::::::<:: >: » »::::;.:_ ..; .. .. .... ............................' t��4............................. 38�b: ::.::::::::::.:.:::::.::.:::.1. X98.................. ..........'t.'�97.::::::::::::: >:<::: >::: EXPENDITURES 1) Operations Personal Service 199,990 182,430 185,623 200,798 194,590 200,428 206,441 Contractual Service 71,898 75,240 50,869 53,412 63,859 67,052 70,405 Supplies & Materials 12,995 13,999 18,330 19,247 19,470 20,444 21,466 Heat, Light, & Power 16,889 17,762 19,891 20,886 20,562 21,590 22,670 Vehicle Operating Costs 27,508 68,237 71,649 75,231 78,993 Depreciation Expense 194,879 126,055 110,855 152,000 175,000 244,000 235,000 Capital Outlay 3,650 Subtotal: City O &M Expense $496,651.00 $415,486.00 $413,076.00 $514,579.50 $548,779.85 $628,744.54 $634,973.22 MCES Charges $1,411,582.00 $1,379,868.00 $1,297,134.00 $1,341,312.00 $1,431,659.00 $1,488,925.36 $1,548,482.37 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,908,233.00 $1,795,354.00 $1,710,210.00 $1,855,891.50 $1,980,438.85 $2,117,669.90 $2,183,455.59 REVENUES 2) Billing Revenues $1,920,796 $2,114,429 $2,126,822 $2,237,415 $2,237,415 $2,326,185 $2,463,160 Residential Accts 6,845 6,827 6,650 6,610 6,610 6,305 6,280 #fit rte t .G 3 #}.. 4 ..tl..... ri2 . f1... €:: »: >' >'.:i >: >r' ? > :t z::; >i ':: >: »:::: >.46 y ........... ................................................................................................................................. ..............................: . ............................... . Senior Accts 1,625 2,170 2,100 2,150 2,150 2,175 2,200 ...... ::::.. ... :::. ........ :.. _. .. fSziarta . i.har .. e::::::>€:> f ::<:<::<::::: >:::::::: »:: »::... ..... ;: ;::::::: >:::: >:::::'.:: >:: >:: >: 19:66:: »<> > ? »; > >: >S 2S43(#<s :> ::: >::: >: >: >. >::::: >:::x: 3 4(t ::`:::! >:: >:::::s:::: "s.>::':':'.5 3 40... > €::::: >::::;: ?[;....523,40 >:z" : ; :>::< <> 4 75::::• $2 3: X.::.. _ _ ... _. .,,........ Apartment Accts 3,523 3,545 3,515 3,515 3,515 3,510 3,500 Quarterly Charge $25.03 $28.00 $29.75 $29.75 $29.75 $31.50 $33.25 Non - residential Water 234,600 285,000 285,000 290,700 290,700 296,500 302,400 .. ....:::::.:.:.::: A : >::::: :: >:3:'i:E'si >:::: >::::::.::: RA.f1*..P1tR:.1:69Q.f >~ . ................:.............. ...................51 ?✓ (>. 6{ f..:::..;:.;:.:::.;:.;:.;::.;:.:::::: :..,?�?..:::...::...:::.::::..: ::_.1.,74 ......................... 3.,?.;.:.;:. f. Q:.:;.:: .;..:.::.:.:.;..:.:.:...1..9Q.. 3) Miscellaneous Operating 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4) Miscellaneous Non - operating 560 921 11,961 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5) Interest Earnings (Phased Out By 1996) 88,619 60,327 50,744 17,096 TOTAL REVENUES $2,009,975 $2,175,677 $2,189,527 $2,255,511 $2,238,415 $2,327,185 $2,464,160 ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..:..,.........:............... 6) Interest Earnings (100% By 1996) 132,928 140,764 152,233 198,313 183,509 139,327 1 147,851 A" S 1.89Ei........... .. ......1.997. 893 EFFECT ON CASH & INVESTMENTS 7) Start of Year Cash & Inv $3,566,312 $3,060,463 $3,307,320 $3,419,193 $3,163,956 $2,402,191 $2,549,157 8) Capital Outlay (935,398) (400,285) (965,070) (1,005,170) (1,378,250) (445,876) (334,000) 9) Net Income or Loss 234,670 521,087 631,550 597,933 441,486 348,842 428,556 1 O) Debt Service 11) Depreciation Add -back 194,879 126,055 110,855 152,000 175,000 244,000 235,000 .. 41:; i ..1:...........3.....: »:::'4t�2 '19"C::::':': < ><:49'<.7<`<:8 ................................................................................... ............................... /..........l........................... r.......................................l................................................ I........................... I...... ... r........................... f...... ....r........:..........:...... �......... f............ Unrric ed Investments ::::.................... 3:. 060. 463,:::..........:::::.3 307 . 320 .::..........::::: 3 419 193 :.::..........::.: 3 , 163 956 :::.:........: 2 , 2 : 8 ::::: 49,157 78,713 • BROOKLYN CENTER STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY 1996 RATE REVIEW BACKGROUND The City Council on September 26, 1995 adopted Resolution 94 -211, which established storm drainage utility rates for 1995. The Council annually reviews established rates for their adequacy and makes adjustments as necessary. The Phase I study of the City's storm drainage system, the Storm Water Management Plan, has been substantially completed. A Phase II study needs to be initiated and with council approval, will be completed on an as needed, per project basis. An essential part of this process will be the development of a financial plan, which will be implemented in 1996 and subsequent years. Some major projects have already been identified. The Council has already determined that a high priority project is addressing the severe drainage problems in the 63rd /Halifax /Indiana Avenues area. The Council has already approved the construction of a storm drainage pond in the southwest quadrant of the I -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard interchange (the Park and Ride Pond). Storm drainage components of several street improvement projects have also been identified. Table 1 on the following page details the program of capital improvements outlined in the Capital Improvements Program. s OPTIONS The schedule labeled Option 1 and 2 shows the financial impact of the existing rate schedule. Option 1 provides for no increase in rates for 1996. Option 2 would include a minimal rate increase in 1996. Given the uncertainty regarding what types of future requirements and projects will need to be funded from the utility, along with the volume of work already identified, staff recommends Council adopt the rates shown in Option 2. This would provide a revenue cushion and insure the integrity of the fund. Adopting Option 2 would result in a rate increase from $30.00 per base acre in 1995 to $32.00 per acre in 1996. The average residential quarterly rate per lot would increase from $7.50 in 1995, to $8.00 in 1996. Capital improvements scheduled for 1996 include: Construction of the Shingle Creek Regional Pond, storm sewer work associated with the neighborhood street reconstruction and other water quality improvements. It should be noted that the attached spread sheets do not include any costs associated with the Shingle Creek Regional Pond. Staff is pursuing several funding options regarding this $3.1 million dollar project. It is probable that most or all of the cost would be paid for by sources other than the utility. +� TABLE C - Capital Improvement *gram - Detail of Capital Outlays Storm Drainage Utility Capital Improvements 04- Oct -95 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 -2004 EXPENDITURES: STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Repair or Replace Defective Sections 0 100,000 50,000 100,000 50,000 $250,000 Neighborhood Street Improvements 530,000 400,000 210,000 150,000 300,000 $1,375,000 State Aid Street Improvements 590,000 102,150 10,000 0 0 WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS 1694 /Brooklyn Boulevard Pond /65th Ave 1,245,000 $0 Shingle Creek Regional Pond" 3,100,000 $0 Brooklyn Boulevard Redevelopment Pond 250,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,775,000 $4,190,000 $612,150 $260,000 $350,000 $1,625,000 FUND SOURCES: Storm Drainage Utility 1,775,000 1,090,000 487,150 260,000 350,000 1,625,000 Special Assessments /Other 3,100,000 125,000 TOTAL $1,775,000 $4,190,000 $612,150 $260,000 $350,000 $1,625,000 *Precise funding split as yet unknown. May have a Storm Drainage Utility component. • RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the rate increase established for 1995 in option 2, be implemented as planned, Rates for the various classes of property would be increased as follows: TABLE 2 RECOMMENDED QUARTERLY 1996 STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATES Classification/Land Use 1995 1996 BASE RATE $30.00 $32.00 1: Cemeteries, Golf Courses 7.50 8.00 2: Parks 14.85 15.75 3: Single Family, Duplex, Townhouse 7.50 /lot 8.00 /lot 4: Schools, Government Buildings 37.50 40.00 5: Multiple Family, Churches 90.00 96.00 6: Commercial and Industrial 150.00 160.00 7: Vacant Land As As Assigned Assigned The tablebelow details the 1996 storm drainage charges of area cities for residential properties. 1996 RESIDENTIAL STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATES CITY QUARTERLY CITY QUARTERLY RATE RATE Bloomington $9.70 New Hope $4.80 Hopkins 9.50 Robbinsdale 3.10 Richfield 8.55 Crystal 2.95 Brooklyn Center 8.00 Fridley 2.50 Roseville 4.90 Golden Valley 2.00 Note: Cities on the lower end of the quarterly rate scale typically fund only their watershed district dues, and in some cases some other minor operational costs for the utility. Cities on the upper end are actively constructing storm drainage improvements from the fund. e:\eng\pubuti1\mtes\sdurat96 • • • STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATE STUDY: 1996 OPTION 1: PLI RATES: sdurat96 EXPENDITURES 1) Operations $203,469 $166,729 $204,885 $220,000 $208,918 $161,000 $163,000 Storm Sewer Maintenance 62,388 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 Street Sweeping 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Watershed District Dues 34,868 33,581 45,000 49,500 60,120 50,000 50,000 Local Plan 66,213 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 Other Operating Costs 6,685 7,000 11,728 22,298 11,000 13,000 Depreciation 6685 888 29,000 32,000 121,000 136,000 2) Capital Outlay $3,402 $394,662 $685,000 $1,755,170 $1,090,000 $487,149 $260,000 Repair or Replace Defective Sections 0 10,000 0 0 100,000 50,000 100,000 Water Quality Improvement Projects 3,402 20,000 0 0 0 0 0 Facilities & Equipment 0 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 Improvement Projects 0 300,000 685,000 1,755,170 990,000 437,149 160,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $206,871 $561,391 $889,885 $2,004,170 $1,330,918 $769,149 $559,000 REVENUES 3) Billing Revenues $494,456 $639,837 $685,011 $780,000 $780,000 $832,000 $858,000 REF Acres 6,500 6,500 6,500 6,500 6,500 6 500 •;;>::;> p ;; r .> A ;>; � ;;:,;;.>;;>;;:,;;;>:;;: � . I ; . :< ::::. :::.:::.:::: >;;;;;:.;::.,;; »; >; ..500 Residential rate per lot $4.50 $6.00 $6.76 $7.50 $7.50 $8.00 $8.25 Schools & govt buildings per acre $22.50 $30.00 $33.75 $37.50 $37.50 $40.00 $41.25 Multiple family & churches per acre $54.00 $72.00 $81.00 $90.00 $90.00 $96.00 $99.00 Commercial and industrial per acre $90.00 $120.00 $135.00 $150.00 $150.00 $160.00 $165.00 4) Interest Earnings 14,030 28,138 2,294 22,675 117,117 43,856 9,020 TOTAL REVENUES $508,486 $667,975 $687,305 1 $802,675 $897,117 $875,856 $867,020 .::.. .::: ::.. .....:: F... ,. . X.. • :.. •: ,�...;: <:::; k�: x. F�V, �. �!h 7. �F...: :.:::::::. {�!���tf7.t7!;l:J: ;.>::.: �: o;:: o-o-:: f 7:. 1 ; �JS7h..(: 1{.L:.>�.::;::;;:.:::o>!7n7�1F7 iJ�3l;: :.;;:.;::.;:.; ::.: .....::.: ::.::. •. �:::::::::::::.: .....:::.:::::::::::::::: ::::::::..:......::;;r:;;::ii;: >:;i::::5;:2;:::.;:......::::: .77 ;.....; . ::.:..:....;::::;:;>::;:;:q::: EFFECT ON CASH & INVESTMENTS ... ............................. 9 1. (3....:: <:...:... 5) Start of Year Cash & Inv $24,093 $325,708 $390,943 $2,019,251 $756,131 $155,514 $141,626 6) Net Income or Loss 301,615 106,584 (202,580) (1,201,495) (433,801) 106,707 308,020 7) Debt Service 1,830,000 (90,625) (198,815) (241,595) (243,520) 8) Special Assessment /Other 9) Depreciation Add Back 6685 888 29,000 32,000 121,000 136,000 w. 5 7 ! i • STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY RATE STUDY: 1996 OPTION 2: PURATES:sdurat96 :; i;: yi: irC.,...,>;:.:::::;::;.;: :: :::.:•.:::: .....:i;Y;;: %;:;;: :`i:; F %E ?� > ?: {; >. f2; >.2:::i:it2ii; ..::::.;•;::::,;; :::::.; ::.;..;:. :;: ,. ...: . :. ::.;:.,:•.;;.;:.:>:<:::.>:;:.;:...,;»;>;;:.>::::.;.;>:;.:; ,;; >;:;;:;.,..._ >; >;:<.:� >;; >;; EXPENDITURES 1) Operations $203,469 $166,729 $204,885 $220,000 $208,918 $161,000 $163,000 Storm Sewer Maintenance 62,388 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 Street Sweeping 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Watershed District Dues 34,868 33,581 45,000 49,500 60,120 60,000 50,000 Local Plan 66,213 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 Other Operating Costs 6,685 7,000 11,728 22,298 11,000 13,000 Depreciation 6685 888 29,000 32,000 121,000 136,000 2) Capital Outlay $3,402 $394,662 $685,000 $1,755,170 $1,090,000 $487,149 $260,000 Repair or Replace Defective Sections 0 10,000 0 0 100,000 50,000 100,000 Water Quality Improvement Projects 3,402 20,000 0 0 0 0 0 Facilities & Equipment 0 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 Improvement Projects 0 300,000 685,000 1,755,170 990,000 437,149 160,000 TOTAL EXPEN DITURES $206,871 $561,391 $889,885 $2,004,170 $1,330,918 $769,149 $559,000 REVENUES 3) Billing Revenues $494,456 $639,837 $685,011 $780,000 $832,000 $858,000 $884,000 REF Acres 6,500 6,500 6,500 6,500 6,500 6,500 6,500 .................. a , tw.:..::.:.......... . . ...................... .......... ��� . Ott ................. 4 Residential rate per lot $4.50 $6.00 $6.76 : $7.50 :::...................,: :.,. $8.00 $8.25 $8.50 Schools & govt buildings per acre $22.50 $30.00 $33.75 $37.50 $40.00 $41.25 $42.50 Multiple family & churches per acre $54.00 $72.00 $81.00 $90.00 $96.00 $99.00 $102.00 Commercial and industrial per acre $90.00 $120.00 $135.00 $150.00 $160.00 $165.00 $170.00 4) Interest Earnings 14,030 28,138 2,294 22,675 117,117 1 43,856 12,036 TOTAL REVENUES $508,486 $667,975 . $687,3051 $802,675 $949,117 $901,856 $896,036 :.:..::.:::::... :: >:; ». :....:... ..................::::.:•.....5 .::.::::::::::::: .It# 8 .:............. . (�yyq �. /... �..ynam ::...........:.::..:: � . ...:. Y...1...:. .: �:::::.f...::.... i..:...... �:.:::::::. :::: {��.:3F�;�.�8?�;�:1: A . 1;49 ..................... ......1.$ >::::.;:: >::: >; a: r; :;:>::>:: t: 99, �y .::.:...::::.................. :: >:::::::::: ^:::......:: EFFECT ON CASH & INVESTMENTS 5) Start of Year Cash & Inv $24,093 $325,708 $390,943 $2,019,251 $756,131 $207,514 $219,626 6) Net Income or Loss 301,615 106,584 (202,580) (1,201,495) (381,801) 132,707 337,036 7) Debt Service 1,830,000 (90,625) (198,815) (241,595) (243,520) 8) Special Assessment /Other 9► Depreciation Add Back 6685 888 29,000 32,000 121,000 136,000 '' >?��.'r� ..;:: � : % ?,' }:Y ° �:::::::> �:`: ` •» � 2 � ` " " i'i ?i' <'EE # #'i'i' � i #'i3 # ? ?' , '".:..:, ;...`::;. "isf:`'''''3i'':.,,::. � ;::.:, ` � »' " ;i #i' ii? � ' > �`� �� �� ``r �'.:� ' �`:>3i:ii i:i:!: •.;,,::;:..;�:.i`;`.::>•�i:ii is is i:,''•: >ii:':.y,:.;, :,.,:ii �� �i� �::: `:' i� >iii:ai ^iii':` :: �,:,::. .;:: ;::..;•: ;i� ?;'•: ?; ?ii �;�.:::::.; :,,..,:.::;,...: ; . ... :.................:......................................................... ....�:............:............ i3 J�1............?511.; �a 1................ 7 BROOKLYN CENTER RECYCLING UTILITY 1996 RATE REVIEW BACKGROUND The City Council on September 26, 1994 adopted Resolution 94 -213, which established recycling utility rates for 1995. The Council annually reviews established rates for their adequacy and makes adjustments as necessary. RECYCLING FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE The recycling fund is primarily comprised of fees paid to Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG) for recycling services and, the charges to individual households to cover those costs. Some incidental expenditures and revenues are included for container sales and supplies. The recycling utility's financial performance was about as expected for 1994 with net operating income (revenues minus expenditures) ending at $15,868. Performance for 1995 is projected to provide for a net operating income of approximately $14,000. RATE REVIEW 1996 The Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG) has established and approved their 1996 operating budget. In that budget, HRG has indicated that Hennepin County will not decrease the recycling entitlement currently given to all HRG Communities. As a result, HRG has indicated that there will be no need for an increase in fees for 1996. The rate will be maintained at $2.15 per household per month. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the rate increase established for 1996 in table 1, be implemented as planned, Rates would be maintained as follows: TABLE 1 RECOMMENDED RECYCLING UTILITY RATES Recycling Rate Per Month 1995 1996 Residential Households (Per Month) $2.15 $2.15 Residential Households (Annual) $25.80 $25.80 i WATER AND SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP RATES BACKGROUND Utility hookup rates are adjusted annually to account for inflation. This year the change in the Twin Cities Consumer Price Index was 2.6 percent. Accordingly, the proposed water and sanitary sewer hookup rates for calendar year 1996 have been increased 2.6 percent. RECOMMENDATION Approve the following hookup rates: Current Rates Proposed Rates Type of Property /Assessment 1995 1996 WATER HOOKUP . Single Family Residence With $3,410.20 $3,500.00 Service Single Family Residence Without 2,607.00 2,675.00 Service Frontage (front 135 feet) $34.75 per front foot $35.65 per front foot Area (area outside front 135 feet) $10.80 per 100 square feet $11.00 per 100 square feet Service Hookup $803.25 $825.00 SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP ': Frontage $20.20 per front foot $20.72 per front foot Service Hookup $803.25 $825.00 City of Brooklyn Center 1996 Utility Rate Study Summary The City Council annually reviews established public utility rates to ensure their adequacy in meeting financial goals. The Public Services Department strives to meet these goals while keeping rates as affordable as possible. The total utility bill paid by a resident of Brooklyn Center continues to be lower than in most area communities. Water Utility: The schedule at the end of this report labeled Option 1 shows the projected effect of maintaining the existing rate schedule. This option meets all utility financial requirements. Option 2 shows a continuation of minimal rate increases. With the exception of painting water towers and the possible need for a water treatment facility in the future, most capital outlays in the water utility will be main replacements associated with neighborhood street improvements and other infrastructure repair. - To preserve flexibility and to provide for a revenue cushion, it is recommended that the Council adopt the <: Average Restdenfial 199s i99& rates shown on Option 1. This would result in No UtcG1y Customer Charge 6harge increase in rates in 1996, with rates remaining at ;:. $0.86 per 1000 gallons. Major improvement projects scheduled for 1996 include: iecychng 525 6p :25 gn water main replacement as a part of the 69th Avenue reconstruction, water main replacements associated with �flaterIIflSQ 5t1t?8D the 1996 neighborhood street reconstruction and other Samtar SeweriDE10 $1EI#1D water quality projects. Storm Ot'arnage S3tl OQ32Ua XXX X . wx Sanitary Sewer Utility: X . No increase in the sewer utility rates for 1996. Dial 533fi 6Q 5338 6Q - The schedules at the end of this report labeled Percent lnccease ; 19 Option 1 and 2 shows the projected effect of maintaining the existing rate schedule. Option 1 includes selling bonds to even out capital expenditures over the next few years. Option 2 would pay for capital expenditures using cash reserves. Both options provide for no rate increases for 1996. If adopted, this will be the third year that there will be no increase in rates. This has been made possible in large part due to lower than expected charges from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (previously known as MWCQ due to rate restructuring. Staff makes no recommendation and asks Council's direction in determining how they would prefer capital expenditures be funded. Again, Option 1 would include a financing plan utilizing GO revenue bonds to finance major capital improvements and Option 2 would pay for capital projects from cash reserves. The Council's level of comfort with the cash reserve would be the deciding factor between the two options. Capital improvements for 1996 will include; replacement of lift station #1 and associated force main work and . trunk line relining from 69th Avenue to lift #1. Storm Drainage Utility: The schedule labeled Option 1 and 2 shows the financial impact of the existing rate schedule. Option 1 provides for no increase in rates for 1996. Option 2 would include a minimal rate increase in 1996. The Phase I study of the City's storm drainage system, the Storm Water Management Plan, has been substantially completed. A Phase II study needs to be initiated and with council approval, will be completed • on an as needed, per project basis. An essential part of this process will be the development of a financial plan, which will be implemented in 1996 and subsequent years. Given the uncertainty regarding hat types of future requirements and projects g YP q will need to be funded from the ili ut , along with the volume of tY g work already identified, staff recommends Council adopt the rates shown in Option 2. This would provide a revenue cushion and insure the integrity of the fund. Adopting Option 2 would result in a rate increase from $30.00 per base acre in 1995 to $32.00 per acre in 1996. The average residential quarterly rate per lot would increase from $7.50 in 1995, to $8.00 in 1996. Capital improvements scheduled for 1996 include: Construction of the Shingle Creek Regional Pond, storm sewer work associated Average Senor UVhty 199,.. 1896 . with the neighborhood street reconstruction andCustomer Charge Charge other water quality improvements. It should be noted that the attached spread sheets do not include any costs associated with Recychng S25 80 SZ5 80 the Shingle e r Ce ek Regional g 8 Pond. Staff is pursuing several funding options regarding this Water X28 00 $2$ 00 $3.1 million dollar project. It is probable that 3anita ry Seaver $93 60 X93 60 most or all of the cost would be paid for by sources other than the utility. Storm Drainage $30 00 X32 00 • Recycling Utility: 1 atai Si!77 40 $179 4E) The Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG) has adopted their budget for 1996 and it maintains Percent Increase 146 current service levels with no increase in fees for 1996. Rates will remain at $2.15 per month in 1996. Utility Hook Up Charges Hook up charges are increased annually based on inflation. Charges were increased 2.6 percent, based on the increase in the Consumer Price Index from August 1994 to July 1995. Summary: Staff recommends no increase in water, recycling or sanitary sewer rates for 1996. Although, staff does seek Council's direction in determining how they would prefer capital expenditures be funded in the sanitary sewer utility. Staff does recommend a small increase in the storm drainage utility to insure an adequate fund balance given the amount of capital projects for 1996. If the recommended rates are adopted, the annual utility bill of the average residential customer would increase less than one percent, or roughly $2.00. The annual bill of the average senior would also increase by $2.00, approximately 1.0 %. •