2011 Budget2011
BUDGET
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
505 WALNUT STREET, SUITE 1
MONTICELLO, MN 55362
PHONE: (763) 295 -2711
FAX: (763) 295 -4404
WEB SITE: www.ci.monticello.mn.us
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN
2011 BUDGET
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................... ...............................
A
2011 City Officials ...................... ...............................
A -1
How to Read the Budget ............... ...............................
A -2
Mayor's Letter ........................... ...............................
A -3
Transmittal Letter ....................... ...............................
A -5
Distinguished Budget Presentation Award ........................
A -15
Organizational Chart ................... ...............................
A -16
Fund Structure and Budget Basis ..... ...............................
A -17
Fund Organizational Chart ............ ...............................
A -19
Budget Calendar ........................ ...............................
A -20
Budget Process ........................... ...............................
A -20
Other Planning Processes .............. ...............................
A -21
Financial Management Policies ....... ...............................
A -22
Budget Assumptions, Trends and Sources ..........................
A -31
Schedule of Budgeted Operating Transfers .........................
A -38
Combined Budgetary Fund Summary . ...............................
A -39
Projected Fund Balance Summary ..... ...............................
A -41
GENERAL FUND ............................... ...............................
B
General Fund Summary ................. ...............................
B -2
General Fund Revenues ................. ...............................
B -5
Mayor and City Council ................ ...............................
B -8
City Administration ...................... ...............................
B -10
Elections.................................. ...............................
B -12
Financial Administration ................ ...............................
B -13
Audit....................................... ...............................
B -15
City Assessing ............................ ...............................
B -16
Legal....................................... ...............................
B -17
Human Resources ........................ ...............................
B -18
Planning, Zoning, and Community Development ..................
B -20
Information Systems Administration .. ...............................
B -22
CityHall ................................... ...............................
B -24
Prairie Center Building ................. ...............................
B -25
Law Enforcement ........................ ...............................
B -26
Fire Department .......................... ...............................
B -27
FireRelief ................................. ...............................
B -29
Building Inspections ..................... ...............................
B -30
Civil Defense ............................. ...............................
B -32
Animal Control ........................... ...............................
B -33
National Guard ........................... ...............................
B -34
11
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN
2011 BUDGET
TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED
Public Works — Administration ........ ............................... B -35
Public Works — Engineering ............ ...............................
B -37
Public Works — Inspections .............. ...............................
B -39
Public Works — Streets and Alleys ...... ...............................
B -41
Public Works — Ice and Snow ........... ...............................
B -43
Public Works — Shop and Garage ....... ...............................
B -45
Public Works — Storm Water ............. ...............................
B -46
Public Works — Parking Lots ............ ...............................
B -47
Public Works — Street Lighting .......... ...............................
B -48
Public Works — Refuse Collection ...... ...............................
B -49
Community Celebrations ................. ...............................
B -50
Senior Center .............................. ...............................
B -51
Community Education .................... ...............................
B -52
Y. M. C. A .................................... ...............................
B -53
Transit....................................... ...............................
B -54
IceArena ................................... ...............................
B -55
Public Works — Parks Administration .. ...............................
B -56
Public Works — Parks Improvements ... ............ .... .. .............
B -58
Public Works — Parks Ball Fields ...... ...............................
B -59
Economic Development .................. ...............................
B -60
Unallocated................................ ...............................
B -62
Unallocated Insurance .................... ...............................
B -63
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS ............................... ...............................
C
Special Revenue Fund Summary ....... ...............................
C -2
LibraryFund ........................ ............................... . .....
C -4
Street Reconstruction Fund ............. ...............................
C -6
Economic Development Fund .......... ...............................
C -8
Deputy Registrar Fund .................. ...............................
C -10
Minnesota Investment Fund ............ ...............................
C -12
Economic Recovery Grant Fund ....... ...............................
C -14
Shade Tree Fund ......................... ...............................
C -16
Community Center Fund ................ ...............................
C -18
Park and Pathway Dedication Fund ... ...............................
C -22
Orderly Annexation Area Fund ........ ...............................
C -24
Capital Outlay Revolving Fund ........ ...............................
C -26
Street Lighting Improvement Fund .... ...............................
C -28
Sanitary Sewer Access Fund ........... ...............................
C -30
Storm Sewer Access Fund .............. ...............................
C -32
Water Access Fund ....................... ...............................
C -34
iii
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN
2011 BUDGET
TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS ....................... ...............................
D
Debt Service Fund Summary ............. ...............................
D -2
Legal Debt Limit ........................... ...............................
D -3
Debt Schedule .............................. ...............................
D -3
1994A G. O. Refunding Bond Fund ..... ...............................
D -4
2002 G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .... ...............................
D -6
2003A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ...............................
D -8
2005A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ...............................
D -10
2007A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ...............................
D -12
2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond Fund .................
D -14
Consolidated Bond Fund ................... ...............................
D -16
Waste Water Treatment Plant Note Fund ..............................
D -18
1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond Fund ...................
D -20
1999 G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .... ...............................
D -22
2000A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ...............................
D -24
2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bond Fund .....................
D -26
2000B G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ...............................
D -28
1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond Fund ... ...............................
D -30
1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond Fund ... ...............................
D -32
2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond Fund ......................
D -34
2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond Fund ..........................
D -36
2010A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ...............................
D -38
Schedule of Outstanding Bonds ........... ...............................
D -40
CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS ................... ...............................
E
Capital Project Fund ........................ ............................... E -2
Capital Improvement Plan .................. ............................... E -4
ENTERPRISE FUNDS ............................ ............................... F
Enterprise Fund Summary ................. ............................... F -2
WaterFund ...................................
............................... F -3
SewerFund ...................................
............................... F -5
LiquorFund ..................................
............................... F -10
Cemetery Fund ..............................
............................... F -12
Fiber Optics Fund ...........................
............................... F -14
iv
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN
2011 BUDGET
TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED
APPENDIX............................................................... ............................... G
General Information ...................... ............................... G -1
Monticello City Map ..................... ............................... G -2
Historical Property Tax Information ... ............................... G -3
Summary of Tax Levies, Payment Provisions,
And Minnesota Real Property Valuation .................... G -3
Conversion Formula for EMV to Net Tax Capacity ................ G -7
City Personnel Count ..................... ............................... G -8
GLOSSARY.............................................................. ............................... H
Glossary of Terms ......................... ............................... H -1
List of Acronyms .......................... ............................... H -8
v
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
vi
2011 CITY OFFICIALS
City Council
Clint Herbst
Mayor
Tom Perrault Glen Posusta
Council Member Council Member
Brian Stumpf Lloyd Hilgart
Council Member Council Member
City Department Heads
Jeff O'Neill — City Administrator
Cathy Shuman — Deputy City Clerk
Tracy Ergen — Human Resource Manager
Angela Schumann — Community Development Director
Megan Barnett — Economic Development Director
Bruce Westby — City Engineer
Ron Hackenrnueller — Chief Building Official
Tom Kelly — Finance Director
Steve Joerg — Fire Chief
Ann Johnson - Deputy Registrar Manager
Kitty Baltos — Community Center Director
Randall Johnsen — Liquor Store Manager
Bob Pascbke — Public Works Director
Tom Moores — Street Superintendent
Tom Pawelk — Parks Superintendent
Matt Theisen — Water & Sewer Superintendent
Don Patten — FiberNet Monticello General Manager
FEW
HOW TO READ THE BUDGET
The budget document serves two distinct purposes. One purpose is to present the city council,
staff members, residents and other interested readers, concise and readable information about the
City of Monticello. The other purpose is the management of the City with a financial and
operating plan that conforms to the City's accounting system. The budget balances City
revenues with community priorities and requirements. The annual budget serves as a
communication device, a policy document, a resource allocation tool, an accountability tool, and
a management tool. The budget grants spending authority to City Staff, as well as providing the
spending plan for the City of Monticello.
The budget message provides an overview of the key policy issues and programs in the budget,
and presents major areas of emphasis.
The schedules and summaries provide the heart of the document as an operating and financial
plan. Each fund section contains revenue and expenditure summaries, overview of major
revenue and expenditures information, department descriptions, service level objectives and
issues and workload data.
The appendix includes other important financial and City information, such as, community
profile, City statistics, description of property tax system, general information, and a glossary of
terms.
A -2
City Council Members, Citizens and Staff;
It is my privilege to present the 2011 budget for the City of Monticello. This budget, as adopted
by the City Council, identifies how the City resources will be spent in 2011. This budget is the
City's financial management plan and has been designed to be responsive to public service
demands and carrying out service over the coming year. It is the City's intent to submit and
manage the budget in the most open and straightforward manner possible, which will allow
consistent and careful management of all resources. The City of Monticello continually faces
many challenges which draw upon the resources and value judgments of all of us.
This budget recognizes the effects that the slumping housing market and State economy has on
resources, yet the 2011 budget maintains services and addresses current and future infrastructure
needs.
From 2005 through 2007 the City's tax levy was reduced or maintained at the previous year's
levy, with reserves or revenues from new development used to balance the budget. Beginning in
2008, and continuing with the 2011 budget the City has reduced the dependency on reserves to
fund City operations, while balancing the effects of an increased property tax levy.
The biggest issue facing the City of Monticello's revenue sources is the decline in market values
of property in the City. The County Assessor estimates the average homes market value declined
11% between 2010 and 2011, while commercial values declined 8 %. This has caused the City's
tax capacity to decline to $16,434,254 and the City's tax rate to increase to 46.715 %. Thus
property owners would be paying more in 2011 in order to generate the same amount of tax
dollars as it did in 2010.
In addition the City's 2011 revenue budget continues to reflect decreased revenues from new
building permits and new developments because of the current housing market. The City was
issuing around 530 new home permits in 2004, but has only issued 2 in 2010. Due to the
housing market this number is not expected to increase much in 2011 and as such the revenue
budget for building activities is reduced.
Within the enterprise funds the 2011 budget includes revenues and expenditures for a full year of
operating the City's fiber optic system (FiberNet Monticello, FNM). The City began
construction of the fiber optic system in 2008 and 2009 and in mid -2010 the system began to
provide telephone, internet, and cable television services. 2011 will be the first full year of
operation of the system and should bring the completion of construction of the system in all areas
of the City. As in the past, no property taxes will be used to fund the operations of FNM.
A -3
The City's department of motor vehicle (DMV) expanded its service hours to include Saturday
hours in 2008 and in 2009 begin limited driver license service. This has the DMV in very good
position to be able to offer full driver license services beginning in 2011.
Finally, in order maintain property taxes at current levels and not place extra burdens onto
property owners during these tough economic times, the 2011 budget does maintain funds and
service levels at 2010 levels with few exceptions. The City will not operate the warming house
at West Bridge Park for ice skating in 2011. Also to maintain costs the City will offer three
options for health care benefits for employees which will limit the City's premium increase to
around 6% for 2011. Lastly, the City is freezing cost of living and step increases for all
employees for 2011.
These budget reductions will allow the City to limit the property tax increase to approximately
$29,000 and not use reserves for 2011, which will limit the impact on the tax payers as much as
possible.
It is my hope the 2011 budget will meet the expectations and needs of Monticello residents. My
sincere thanks are extended to the City Council and staff for their time and effort in preparation
of this document.
Sincerely
Clint Herbst
Mayor
City of Monticello
FEW
INTRODUCTION
This budget document should be viewed as more than just a collection of financial data. In
addition to the financial data contained herein, it includes information on the City of
Monticello's organization, descriptions of programs and services, and a variety of statistics
related to activity workload measures. Furthermore, the budget is a reflection of the City's plans,
policies, procedures, and objectives regarding the services to be provided in the coming fiscal
year and future.
BUDGET POLICY AND STRATEGY
The budget document has been prepared after analyzing and evaluating requests from the various
departments, and represents the requested financial support for the operation of the City of
Monticello for the upcoming fiscal year. Revenue estimates are conservative. The importance
of a sound revenue picture cannot be overstated. Revenues must be estimated realistically.
Revenue estimates are based on historical and current trends and projected conservatively.
The City of Monticello provides a range of services to the community, including police and fire
protection, street and park maintenance, snow and ice removal, water and sewer utility services,
and administrative and planning services. In addition the City owns and operates a Community
Center (MCC), Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) center, Municipal Off -Sale Liquor
operation, and a fiber optic network (FiberNet Monticello). The level of service provided by the
proposed budget is similar to that currently enjoyed by the community.
MAJOR INITIATIVES
The City of Monticello provides a full range of municipal services, as listed in the previous
paragraph and as authorized by State Statute. Monticello has been blessed with many assets,
including beautiful setting, an excellent location, a rich heritage, and a talented population. The
City seeks to use, preserve and enhance these assets in building a great place to live, work, shop,
and play. The City will fulfill the goals below to achieve this mission:
1. Continue to maintain the lowest possible tax rate while providing the highest
possible City services.
2. Continue to develop and provide an unequaled system of parks, trails and
recreational facilities, including the unique assets of the Monticello Community
Center, the Mississippi River and conversion of the Bertram Chain of Lakes
property into a regional park.
3. Continue to maintain the City streets by following an annual seal coat and crack seal
program and overlaying streets before they are beyond repair and need replacing.
4. Develop and adopt a long -range transportation plan which will improve traffic flow
around and through the City.
5. Develop a downtown redevelopment plan which will maintain a downtown area that
combines a successful commercial district, community identity and heritage and
connection with the Mississippi River.
A -5
6. Seek to expand the supply of "move up" housing that allows people to upgrade their
home without leaving the community.
7. Seek to develop and attract a wide range of employment opportunities with a
growing emphasis on jobs at higher wage levels.
8. Continue to maintain high quality water and waster water treatment facilities.
9. Provide unequaled access to data through high speed internet, phone and television
through its fiber optic network.
City Council and Staff used these goals to direct the development of the City's 2011 budget.
TOTAL BUDGET
The City of Monticello's 2011 budget includes all fund types and funds of the City. Each fund is
responsible to account for a particular activity or activities. Each fund type will be discussed
within this letter and in the budget document.
The following 2011 budget was established for the City:
Funds
General
Special Revenue
Debt Service
Capital Project
Enterprise
Total
Revenue
2010
2011
$ 6,329,450
$ 6,393,620
6,110,647
6,421,694
6,064,497
6,322,683
5,602,320
4,752,002
8,620,167
12,138,168
$32,727,081
$36,028,167
PROPERTY TAXES
Expenditures
2010
$ 6,329,450
7,521,338
6,845,275
4,289,220
9,909,829
$34,895,112
2011
$ 6,393,620
9,042,560
6,904,275
4,739,500
15,880,783
$42,960,738
The State of Minnesota has granted local municipalities the authority to levy taxes to fund
operations and debt payments. For the City of Monticello, the property tax levy accounts for
approximately 83% of the General Fund revenues and 19% of the Special Revenue Funds
revenues. The Debt Service Funds, in 2011, will levy $1,144,437 in property taxes for debt
service payments, and will no longer be using reserves to pay the City's debt payments. For
2011, the City's property tax levy will be increased to $7,677,309, an increase of 0.38% from
2010. In the past, the City has used reserves to fund operations and debt payment instead of
increasing property taxes. Beginning in 2008 the City increased property taxes and started to
reduce the amount of reserves needed to balance the City's budget. The 2011 budget does not
use reserves to fund operation or debt service expenditures. The table on the following page
provides a historical view of the City's property tax levies:
A -6
The Wright County Assessor values all property in the City. It is this market value that is
applied to the class rates assigned by the State to determine a property's tax capacity. The
County estimates the City's tax capacity for taxes payable in 2011 at $16,434,254, which is a
01.5% decrease. The City's property tax levy is divided by the tax capacity to determine the
City's tax rate, which is applied to each property's tax capacity to determine that property's City
property tax amount before any credits are applied. For 2011, the City's tax rate is expected to
increase from 45.822% up to 46.715 %.
The City at this time does not have the authority to levy or collect local sales taxes or other types
of taxes under the State's tax system. A summary of the State's property tax system is in the
appendix of this document.
PERSONNEL SERVICES
The City's 2011 budget does not include a cost -of- living increase for City staff or step increases
for 2011 for those employees who are still moving up the City's pay scale system. In the past
employees were eligible for a one step increase based on satisfactory performance. The City's
public works employees are union employees. The City's union contract won't expire until
March 31, 2011.
The City's health insurance premiums increased approximately 6% for 2011 but the City
changed its plan to offer employees the choice from three health plans. The city is offering its
current plan with the employees contributing more towards the premium, a plan with a slightly
higher deductible and copay with the employee contributing approximately 20% of the premium,
which is what the employee contributed towards health insurance in the past, or a high deductible
plan with an HSA option with the employee contributing nothing towards the premium. By
offering this option the City avoided a 15% health insurance premium increase. The City's
dental insurance policy increase approximately 10 %. The City pays approximately 80% of the
dental premiums for family coverage. Staff will continue working with the City's insurance
agent to find ways to reduce future premium increase to both the City and employees.
A -7
Year
Tax Levy
Change
2002
$6,498,079
-
2003
6,782,018
4%
2004
6,957,915
3%
2005
6,957,915
0%
2006
6,750,000
(3 %)
2007
6,500,000
(4 %)
2008
7,600,000
17%
2009
7,750,000
2%
2010
7,648,272
(1 %)
2011
7,667,309
0%
The Wright County Assessor values all property in the City. It is this market value that is
applied to the class rates assigned by the State to determine a property's tax capacity. The
County estimates the City's tax capacity for taxes payable in 2011 at $16,434,254, which is a
01.5% decrease. The City's property tax levy is divided by the tax capacity to determine the
City's tax rate, which is applied to each property's tax capacity to determine that property's City
property tax amount before any credits are applied. For 2011, the City's tax rate is expected to
increase from 45.822% up to 46.715 %.
The City at this time does not have the authority to levy or collect local sales taxes or other types
of taxes under the State's tax system. A summary of the State's property tax system is in the
appendix of this document.
PERSONNEL SERVICES
The City's 2011 budget does not include a cost -of- living increase for City staff or step increases
for 2011 for those employees who are still moving up the City's pay scale system. In the past
employees were eligible for a one step increase based on satisfactory performance. The City's
public works employees are union employees. The City's union contract won't expire until
March 31, 2011.
The City's health insurance premiums increased approximately 6% for 2011 but the City
changed its plan to offer employees the choice from three health plans. The city is offering its
current plan with the employees contributing more towards the premium, a plan with a slightly
higher deductible and copay with the employee contributing approximately 20% of the premium,
which is what the employee contributed towards health insurance in the past, or a high deductible
plan with an HSA option with the employee contributing nothing towards the premium. By
offering this option the City avoided a 15% health insurance premium increase. The City's
dental insurance policy increase approximately 10 %. The City pays approximately 80% of the
dental premiums for family coverage. Staff will continue working with the City's insurance
agent to find ways to reduce future premium increase to both the City and employees.
A -7
For 2011, there are no new position budgeted however as the City's fiber optic network (FNC)
continues add customers in 2011 there could be a need to add positions to maintain customer
service and/or technical support.
Finally, in 2005 the State Legislature passed a pension bill, which phased in increases for both
the employee and employer contributions to the Public Employees Retirement Association
(PERA). For 2011 the employee contribution rate will increase to 6.25% of wages, while the
employer contribution rate will increase from 7.00% to 7.25 %.
The remainder of this letter will describe the major initiatives for 2011 for each of the fund types
and their activities.
GENERAL FUND
Expenditures
The 2011 budget increased 1.03% from the 2010 budget. The City has decreased its General
Fund operating budget approximately 13.70% from 2008. The General Fund expenditure budget
consists of the following departments:
2010
2009
%
Budget
General Government
$1,441,245
Public Safety
1,977,996
Public Works
2,524,092
Culture & Recreation
989,790
Economic Development
74,714
Miscellaneous
149,765
Total General Fund
$7,157,601
2010
2011
%
Budget
Budget
Change
$1,372,973
$1,403,829
2.3%
1,697,794
1,710,383
0.7%
2,275,156
2,299,770
1.1%
744,590
732,500
(1.6 %)
73,344
153,075
108.7%
165,593
94,063
41.8%
$6,329,450
$6,393,620
1.0%
The Public Works Department is the largest department in terms of budgeted expenditures and
the street and alleys activity budget is the largest activity within the department. The budget for
the street and alleys activity was decreased 1.6% as a smaller seal coat project is budget in 2011
than in 2010 and all equipment purchases now being funded from the Capital Revolving Fund.
Also a same portion of salaries is now budgeted in the storm water maintenance activity.
Other changes to activities within the Public Works Department include a decrease in the
engineering activity to reflect the need for consultant engineering less than previous years due to
less new development and performing more tasks in- house. The public works administrative
budget decreased because more of the staff time is being allocated to the Water and Sewer
Operating Funds instead of in this activity to reflect a more accurate picture of where their time
is spent.
Beginning in 2011 the City will budget and account for funds spent on maintaining the City's
storm water drainage system. For 2011 the City is budgeting for the cleaning of one drainage
pond and its restoration in the amount of $39,129. The street light activity's budget was
increased to reflect past expenditures.
Finally, the refuse collection activity budget is increased 5.9% to reflect the City's contract with
its waste hauler and the transfer of the hauler being responsible for garbage and recycling carts
instead of the City staff.
The second largest department based on expenditures is the Public Safety Department. Activities
budgeted in the Public Safety Department include law enforcement, fire, building inspections,
civil defense, national guard, and animal control. The City of Monticello contracts with the
Wright County Sheriff's department for law enforcement. The 2011 contract includes an
increase in the hourly rate and maintaining service levels at current levels.
The fire activity budget pays for the operations of the City's paid volunteer fire department. The
biggest change is the addition of $7,245 for maintenance agreements for the department's
800MH radios, which were purchased in 2009.
The reduction in the building inspection's budget is due to moving equipment purchases to the
Capital Revolving Fund in 2011. All other activities in the Public Safety Department have minor
adjustments based on current and past expenditures.
Changes to the General Government Department include the continued adjusting of the human
resource activity to reflect actual past expenditures and having a better understanding of
budgetary needs of the human resource activity. In late 2008 the City hired its first part -time
human resource manager, which was changed to full -time in late 2009. The activity not only
account for the personnel services of this position, but account for the cost of activities
associated with human resource managements, such as safety training or other City -wide
programs related to personnel.
The other big change is the decrease to the election activity since there are no elections planned
in 2011, and national, state, and local elections took place in 2010 this activities budget went
from $14,531 in 2010 to $1,230 in 2011.
The increase in the administration activity is due to more time being allocated to this activity for
the special projects /deputy clerk position in 2011 and membership dues increasing to reflect past
expenditures. The increase to the planning & zoning budget is due to administrative assistant
position, which will allow staff to do work which was previously contacted out. The audit
activity reflect the City's new three -year contract with its audit firm and some of the cost being
allocated to FNM in 2011 as the audit will spend more time on this activity.
Finally, in late 2009 the City acquired the Prairie Center Office building and is leasing office
space to FNM for its business office. The 2011 budget includes the maintenance and operations
cost of this building for the first time.
The budget increase in the Economic Development Department is the result of the City
budgeting $80,000 to complete the downtown study, which will layout the future design and
improvements needed for downtown Monticello to flourish.
A -9
The budgets for the Culture and Recreation and Miscellaneous Departments were adjusted based
on past expenditure history, planned activities and equipment and facility improvement needs in
2011. The decrease in the Parks & Recreation Activity is from a decrease in park improvements
and equipment purchases.
Revenues
The revenues to support these expenditures are classified as follows:
The budget for Licenses & Permits reflect an increase which is from using $75,000 of the City's
electric franchise fees to help fund street light electric costs in 2011. Without this change the
licenses & permits would have a $400 decrease to reflect the slow new residential housing
construction based on the current housing market and economic condition of the State and
Country. The City also expects this slow down to affect commercial /industrial construction also.
Thus, the City expects 2011 building permit revenues to be lower than recent history as they
were in 2010.
The decrease in Inter - Governmental Revenues is due to the State's budget problems and the fact
the Stated has already cut the $277,629 Market Value Homestead Credit Aid the City that the
City received prior to 2010. The City built this decrease into the 2010 and 2011 revenue
budgets. The City has also built into the 2011 budget that the City will no longer receive the
Utility Valuation Transition Aid. This aid was to help cities with utility plant transition from
past property tax valuations to the state's new valuation. This new system reduced the property
taxes paid by utility facilities however the Monticello nuclear power plant has completed
sufficient improvements which will generate property taxes equal or greater than the taxes
generated prior to the devaluation.
The Transfer from Other Funds in the past was from the City's Capital Revolving Fund where
money for the purchase of the new equipment had been previously budgeted and reserved for
these purchases. In 2011 these purchases will be made directly from the Capital Revolving
Fund, so no transfers are budgeted in 2011.
A -10
2009
2010
2011
%
Budget
Budget
Budget
Change
Property Taxes
$5,272,379
$5,297,065
$5,362,622
1.2%
Licenses & Permits
891,900
296,650
371,250
25.2%
Inter- Governmental
498,056
114,801
64,740
(43.6°/x)
Charges for Services
383,950
306,023
330,096
7.9%
Fines & Forfeits
750
300
200
0.0%
Special Assessments
00
00
00
0.0%
Miscellaneous Revenue
291,452
269,611
264,712
(1.8 %)
Transfer from Other Funds
119,114
45,000
00
100.0%
Total
$7,157,601
$6,329,450
$6,393,620
1.0%
The budget for Licenses & Permits reflect an increase which is from using $75,000 of the City's
electric franchise fees to help fund street light electric costs in 2011. Without this change the
licenses & permits would have a $400 decrease to reflect the slow new residential housing
construction based on the current housing market and economic condition of the State and
Country. The City also expects this slow down to affect commercial /industrial construction also.
Thus, the City expects 2011 building permit revenues to be lower than recent history as they
were in 2010.
The decrease in Inter - Governmental Revenues is due to the State's budget problems and the fact
the Stated has already cut the $277,629 Market Value Homestead Credit Aid the City that the
City received prior to 2010. The City built this decrease into the 2010 and 2011 revenue
budgets. The City has also built into the 2011 budget that the City will no longer receive the
Utility Valuation Transition Aid. This aid was to help cities with utility plant transition from
past property tax valuations to the state's new valuation. This new system reduced the property
taxes paid by utility facilities however the Monticello nuclear power plant has completed
sufficient improvements which will generate property taxes equal or greater than the taxes
generated prior to the devaluation.
The Transfer from Other Funds in the past was from the City's Capital Revolving Fund where
money for the purchase of the new equipment had been previously budgeted and reserved for
these purchases. In 2011 these purchases will be made directly from the Capital Revolving
Fund, so no transfers are budgeted in 2011.
A -10
The Property Tax Levy now generates 83% of the revenues in the General Fund and was based
on the operating needs of the City after all other revenues have been subtracted from
expenditures. In 2010 the property tax levy accounted for 84% of General Fund revenues. The
City does not have the ability to use other taxing methods, such as local sales taxes or income
taxes as a revenue source. Therefore, the City will continue to be dependant on its property tax
revenue as its major revenue source into the future. For this reason, City Council must use its
judgment as to the proper level of service and which services to provide when determining the
proper level of property taxes to levy.
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
The City of Monticello's currently operates Special Revenue Funds for its Library, Street
Reconstruction, EDA, Shade Tree, Parks and Pathway Dedication, Street Light Improvement,
Community Center, Deputy Registrar, and Sewer, Water and Storm Water Access activities. In
the past other Special Revenue Funds included the Minnesota Investment Fund, Environment
Clean-Up Fund, Economic Recovery Grant Fund, CMIF Fund, Orderly Annexation Fund and
Capital Outlay Revolving Fund. Some of these funds are still active or could become active in
the future, but have had or will have very minor to no activity in 2011.
Like the General Fund, the Special Revenue Fund budgets are set at a level to maintain services
while, budgeting revenues coming in conservatively, including property taxes for those funds
that are partially supported through a tax levy. The 2011 property tax levy (including tax
increments) for the Special Revenue Funds total $2,306,050 compared to $2,349,381 in 2010 or
a 1.8% decrease.
Other funds such as the Sewer and Water Access Funds and Park and Pathway Dedication Funds
have less revenues coming in because of less new development taking place and paying the fees
associated with the development. Expenditures are for debt service payments due in 2011.
The Community Center Fund's 2011 budget increased 5.4% due increased capital needs
(equipment replacements and building improvements) in the amount of $125,000 and debt
service payments. Revenues generated by the community center are budgeted at amounts similar
to 2010 with the tax levy decreased $49,449. This will require the Community Center fund to
use $256,455 of reserves in 2011.
The Deputy Registrar Fund budget expenditure budget is very similar to 2010 with a decrease of
less than 1%. The revenue budget was increased 4% because the customer base continues to
grow due to good customer service and the continued efforts to add additional services, such as
driver licenses.
Due to past programs of inspecting elm trees for Dutch elm disease and discovered a very large
number of elm trees affected by the disease. The City has begun removing these trees, of which
the process continued into 2010 but at a lesser activity. Also in 2010 the City began inspecting
for the Emerald Ash Beatle in an effort to control the Beatle and save trees. Due to the success
of these programs, activities and the need to remove trees has been reduced and therefore the
A -11
2011 Shade Tree Fund budget is being decreased 12% to cover the cost of inspecting, removing
and replacing these diseased elm trees.
The large decrease in the Economic Development Fund is due to the operating transfer for its
share of debt service payments in 2011. However the capital outlay for pay -as- you -go developer
payments is scheduled to increase based on tax increments received and current contracts with
developers.
Also, while there is a street reconstruction project planned for 2011, the City plans to issue debt
to pay project costs and will use the Street Reconstruction Fund to repay the City's share of the
debt beginning in 2012. Which are how the 2010 street reconstruction project was funded and
therefore, the Street Reconstruction Fund expenditures in 2011 is for its share of the 2010
improvement bond debt payment.
The expenditures in the Park and Pathway Dedication Fund are for the City share of land
purchase cost for the Bertram Chain of Lakes property, which the City along with Wright County
is purchasing from the Y.M.C.A. The land purchases have also been made possible through the
use of various grant proceeds from various State resources, a practice that should continue into
the future until all the property is acquired.
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
The City's debt obligation for 2011 is $6,429,275 with the funding coming through the collection
of special assessments, tax increments, and the use of $581,592 of reserves. The reserves are
available because of prepayments of special assessments and available interest earnings. If the
City had not received these prepaid special assessments, more of the funding would be coming
from special assessment collections. The City is currently planning on issuing around
$4,590,000 new debt in 2011 to fund the 2011 street reconstruction project. The City has debt
outstanding of $64,964,000 as of 12/31/10. The City's bond rating of "A2" was upgrades to
"Aa3" from Moody's Investors in 2010.
CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS
The budget for the Capital Project Funds are based on the 2011 project expenditures listed in the
City's five -year capital improvement plan for City buildings, parks, and infrastructure
improvements. The main revenue source for 2011 is a proposed bond issue and transfers from
other City funds. Projects to be funded in 2011 include the 2011 street reconstruction project,
the overlaying of outlaying street which borders the City and Monticello Township, preliminary
work for the Fallon Avenue overpass, and the continuation of the purchase of the Bertram Chain
of Lakes property.
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
The largest change in the Enterprise Funds is the first full year of operating revenue and
expenses of the City's fiber optic network FiberNet Monticello (FNM). The system provides
phone, internet, and cable TV to residents and businesses in Monticello that sign up for the
A -12
services. Construction of the system should also be completed in 2011. The expense budget for
FNM, which includes both construction and operation of the system are estimated at $7,476,274
with revenues of $5,062,191.
The major change to the City Water and Sewer Funds is a rate increase to cover operating
expenses and some of the depreciation of the systems. The rate increases should increase
revenues approximately 10% and a new three tiered water rate system could help encourage
water conservation, which could result into reducing expenses. Water Fund revenues are
budgeted at $990,434 while the expense budget, including depreciation is $1,393,330. Sewer
revenues are $1,558,180 compared to expenses of $2,579,029.
The Liquor Fund operating transfer to help support other City activities and reduce the tax levy is
budgeted at $250,000 compared to the $266,000 in 2010 and $250,000 as it was in previous
years. Sales continue to increase at the store and the 2011 budget reflects increased revenues
from sales and a corresponding increase in supplies (cost of goods sold).
FUND BALANCES
The 2011 budget proposes that expenditures exceed revenues by $6,962,571 compared to
$1,587,222 in 2010. However, in the Enterprise funds, reserves will be used to fund depreciation
of assets as revenue levels are sufficient to cover operating expenses and some, but not all
depreciation. The exception is FNM which is in the startup phase of operations and was
anticipated that reserves would be needed to fund operations until a customer base can be
established.
The City's 2011 General Fund's budget is a balanced budget, meaning revenues, including
operating transfers in from other funds equal expenditures including any operating transfers out
to other funds. The General Fund's fund balance is projected at 79.7% of 2011 budgeted
expenditures; however much of the fund balance is designated for other purposes. The City
maintains the General Fund's working capital fund balance at 45% of the next year's operating
budget because the City receives its tax payments in July and December and need this fiend
balance to pay for City operations. The General Funds unreserved/ undesignated fund balance is
estimated at 26.9% of 2011 budgeted expenditures.
Much of the reserves of the Special Revenue Funds in 2011 are reserved for the purpose of the
Fund. Other Special Revenue Funds, such as, the Community Center, Library, and Deputy
Registrar try and maintain a fund balance of 25 %. The 2011 budget decreases fund balance of
the Special Revenue Funds by $2,620,866.
Fund balances in the City's Debt Service Funds are used to retire the City's debt on a timely
basis. For 2010 the City proposes to use $106,592 to pay off its 2011 debt obligations. The City
will also use $475,000 of reserves to fund proposed Bertram Chain of Lakes land purchase in
2011. This will leave a fund balance of $3,178,172, all of which would be designated for future
debt payments.
A -13
Overall the City's fund balances are within City guide lines and are sufficient to meet current and
future operations and obligations of the City
DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARD
The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA)
presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to the City of Monticello, Minnesota for
its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2010. In order to receive this award, a
governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy
document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan, and a communications device.
This award is valid for a period of one year only. We believe our current budget continues to
conform to program requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA to determine its eligibility
for another award.
CONCLUSION
Conserving the financial resources of the City continues to be very important. The budgeting
function is the prime tool to make sure the City's limited resources are wisely utilized. It is my
belief that the 2011 budget allows the City to deliver the finest municipal services in the most
cost effective and efficient manner, and in so doing, ensure the highest quality of life for our
residents.
The 2011 budget is the product of the collective efforts of the City Council and City staff. I am
appreciative of the commitment, good judgment and expertise each of them contributes to the
budget process.
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas Kelly
Finance Director
A -14
GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
Distinguished
Budget Presentation
Award
PRESENTED TO
City of Monticello
Minnesota
For the Fiscal Year Beginning
January 1, 2010
President Executive Director
A -15
a
FUND STRUCTURE AND BUDGET BASIS
The financial structure of the City is similar to other governments with the use of funds. Funds
are the control structures that ensure that public moneys are spent only for those purposes
authorized and within amounts authorized. Funds are established to account for different types
of activities and legal restrictions that are associated with a particular government function. The
Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) defines a fund as:
A fiscal and accounting entity with a self - balancing set of accounts recording cash and
other financial resources, together with all related liabilities and residual equities or
balances, and changes therein, which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on
specific activities or attaining certain objectives in accordance with special regulations,
restrictions, or limitations.
All of the funds used by the City must be classified into one of seven "fund types ". Four of these
fined types are used to account for the City's "governmental- type" activities and are know as
"governmental funds ". Two of these fund types are used to account for a government's
"business- type" activities and are know as "proprietary funds ". Finally, the seventh fund type is
reserved for a government's "fiduciary activities ". The City does not currently operate any
fiduciary activities.
Governmental Fund types are used to account for governmental -type activities. These are the
General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service Funds, and Capital Project Funds. These
are the funds through which functions of the City are financed and budgets are appropriated.
The General Fund is used to account for most of the day -to -day operations of the City, which are
financed from property taxes and other general revenues. Activities financed by the General
Fund are those not accounted for in other funds. The City can only have one General Fund.
Special Revenue Funds are used to account for revenues derived from specific taxes or other
earmarked revenue sources which, by law, are designated to finance particular functions or
activities of the City and which therefore cannot be diverted to other uses.
Debt Service Funds are used to account for the payment of interest and principal on general and
special obligation debts other than debt issued for and serviced by a government enterprise.
The Capital Project Funds account for all resources used for the acquisition and /or construction
of capital equipment and facilities except those financed by Enterprise and Internal Service
Funds.
One Proprietary Fund Type is used to account for the City's business -type activities. The City
uses Enterprise Funds. Enterprise Funds are used to account for operations (a) that are financed
and operated in a manner similar to private business — where the intent of the governing body is
that the costs (expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods or services to the general
public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges, or (b)
A -17
where the governing body has decided that periodic determination of revenues earned, expenses
incurred, and /or net income is appropriate for capital maintenance, public policy, management
control, accountability or other purposes.
Internal Service funds are used to account for the financing of goods or services provided by one
department to other departments of the City. The City currently does not operate any internal
service funds.
Fiduciary Funds are used when a government holds or manages financial resources in an agent
or fiduciary capacity. The City of Monticello does not operate any of these funds at the current
time.
The Budget Basis used by the City of Monticello is the modified accrual basis of accounting for
governmental fund types (for example, the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service,
and Capital Project Funds). Under this accounting method, revenues are recognized in the
accounting period in which they become available and measurable. Available means collectible
within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current
period. Expenditures are recognized in the period in which the fund liability is incurred, except
for outstanding interest on general long -term debt, which is recognized when due.
Enterprise and Internal Service Funds use the accrual basis of accounting. Under the accrual
basis revenues are recognized when they are measurable and earned. Expenses are recognized in
the period incurred, if measurable. The budget basis for Enterprise and Internal Service Funds is
also the accrual basis with the exception noted below.
The City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) shows the status of the City's
finances on the basis of "generally accepted accounting principles" (GAAP). In most cases this
conforms to the way the City prepares its budget. The exceptions are:
1. Compensated absences liabilities that are expected to be liquidated with expendable
available financial resources are accrued as earned by employees (GAAP) as opposed
to being expended when paid (budget).
2. Capital outlay within the Enterprise Funds are recorded as assets on a GAAP basis
and expended on a budget basis.
The CAFR shows fund expenditures on both a GAAP basis and budget basis for comparison
purposes.
Fund Structure
General
Fund
Mayor & Council
Administration
Elections
Financial Admin.
Audit
City Assessing
Legal
Human Resources
Planning & Zoning
Data Processing
City Hall
Law Enforcement
Fire Department
Fire Relief
Building Inspect.
Civil Defense
Animal Control
National Guard
Public Works Admin.
Engineering
Public Works Inspec.
Streets & Alleys
Ice & Snow
Shop & Garage
Parking Lots
Street Lighting
Refuse Collection
Community
Celebration
Information Center
Senior Center
Community
Education
Y.M.C.A.
Transit
Swan River School
Ice Arena
Parks Administration
Park Improvements
Parks Ball fields
Econ. Develop.
Unallocated
Unallocated Ins.
Governmental
Special
Revenue
Library
Street Reconstruction
Economic Development
Environment Clean -Up
Deputy Registrar
MN Investment
Econ. Recovery Grant
CMIF Fund
Shade Tree
Community Center
Park & Path Dedication
Orderly Annexation Area
Capital Revolving
Street Light Improv.
Sanitary Sewer Access
Storm Sewer Access
Water Access
City of Monticello
Debt Service
Funds
1994 Refunding Bond
1995 Refunding Bond
1997 Improvement Bond
2002 Improvement Bond
2003 Improvement Bond
2005 Improvement Bond
2007 Improvement Bond
2008 Sewer Refunding Bd
Consolidated Bond Fund
WWTP Note
1998 Water Refunding Bd
1999 Improvement Bond
2000 Improvement Bond
2000 Public Proj. Rev. Bd
20008 Improvement Bond
1985 Tax Increment Bond
1989 Tax Increment Bond
2004 Tax Increment Bond
2008 Rev. Refunding Bd
2010 Improvement and
Refunding Bond
OWE
Capital
Projects
Water
Sewer
Liquor
Cemetery
FiberNet
Proprietary
Funds
Capital
Enterprise
Project
Funds
Capital
Projects
Water
Sewer
Liquor
Cemetery
FiberNet
May 20, 2010
June, 2010
June 10, 2010
June 18, 2010
June /July, 2010
July 23, 2010
July- August, 2010
August 9, 2010
August 23, 2010
End of August, 2010
September 13, 2010
September 15, 2010
October/November, 2010
November 22, 2010
December 13, 2010
Prior to Dec. 29, 2010
January 1, 2011
2011 BUDGET CALENDAR
2011 -2015 Capital Equipment /Projects (CIP) Worksheets to
Department Heads.
Workshop with City Council and Staff to Set Goals and Priorities.
2011 Budget Worksheets to Department Heads.
2011 -2015 CIP Worksheets are due to Finance Department.
Department Heads Meet with Various Advisory Boards and
Commissions For 2011 Preliminary Budget Input.
Department Heads return worksheets to Finance Department,
Department Heads meet with City Administrator and Finance Staff
to Develop 2011 Preliminary Budget.
Council Workshop to review 2011 Capital Equipment /Project Plan
and Financing Plan.
Budget Workshop with City Council and Staff.
Finance Department Develop Revenue Estimates and 2011
Preliminary Property Tax Levy.
Budget Workshop with City Council and Staff.
2011 Preliminary Property Tax Levy Certified to County Auditor.
Department Heads meet with City Administrator and Finance Staff
to Develop 2011 Proposed Budget and Property Tax Levy.
Budget Workshop with City Council and Staff.
City Council Adopts 2011 Budget and Property Tax Levy.
City Certifies Final 2011 Property Tax Levy to County Auditor.
2011 Fiscal Year Begins.
BUDGET PROCESS
The City of Monticello's budget process begins in May when Department Heads begin
reviewing and adjusting the City's 5 -year CIP. In June the City Council and staff meet in a
workshop setting to set goals and priorities for the up coming fiscal year. After the workshop in
June budget worksheets along with the goals and priorities are distributed to department heads
for completion. During June and July department heads complete their various budget
worksheets, which may include meeting with advisory boards to develop their budget requests
for the upcoming fiscal year. During August, department heads meet with the finance staff and
City Administrator to develop a draft preliminary budget and the finance staff develops revenue
estimates. Also in August staff and City Council review and make changes to the proposed
budget and 5 -year CIP.
By September 15`x' the City Council must approve a preliminary tax levy based on preliminary
budget information, which is certified to the County Auditor for tax notifications to residents.
Once this preliminary levy is approved, the Council can lower the levy during additional budget
meetings, but cannot exceed the preliminary tax levy that was approved and certified to the
County Auditor.
A -20
During September through November staff and Council meet to finalize the budget and tax levy
for the coming fiscal year. Finally, prior to December 29th the City Council must hold a public
hearing and adopt a final budget and property tax levy, which is certified to the County Auditor
for collection on the next year's property tax statements.
During the course of the fiscal year department heads can overspend line items as long as funds
are available in the activity. If funds are not available, staff can recommend changes or
amendments to the budget to the City Council. The City Council can than approve or disapprove
the recommended changes. Only with City Council approval can an activity be overspent and
only if funding is available. However, the property tax levy cannot be amended.
OTHER PLANNING PROCESSES
There are no other government agencies, commissions, or advisory boards that have direct roll in
the City's budget process. However, there are government agencies, commissions, and /or
advisory which play a roll in the City's budget process.
Minnesota State Statutes provide the steps the City must follow to pass the budget including
when the City must certify its levies to the County Auditor and when public hearings must be
held. In addition the State may pass laws governing the City's budget, such as cities are
currently under levy limits, which restricts the possible increase of property tax levies from one
year to the next. The State must also approve by mid - November any City levies which fall
outside the levy limit. Finally the State must certify to the City the amoimts of State aids the
City will receive, if any, by mid - August.
The only affect the County has on the City's budget would be if the County or City was planning
any road improvement projects that would require joint cooperation. The City would work with
the County to budget any City share of costs and any additional improvements the City would
like included in the project.
Finally, the City itself has various advisory boards and commissions, such as the park
commission, MCC advisory board, planning commission, economic development authority,
FiberNet advisory board, and police commission. These advisory boards and commissions as
part of their charge, work with staff to set priorities and goals for the coming year. Based on
their goals and priorities, along with the City Council's goals and priorities, the various advisory
boards or commissions work with the staff during the month of July to make funding
recommendations for programs and /or improvements they would like to see included in or
removed from the budget. These boards and commissions are only advisory and the City
Council may or may not include recommendations by these boards and commissions in the final
budget depending on available funds or other criteria.
A -21
CITY OF MONTICELLO
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES
The City of Monticello has an important responsibility to its citizens to plan the adequate
funding of services desired by the public, including the provision and maintenance of public
facilities, to manage municipal finances wisely, and to carefully account for public funds. The
City strives to ensure that it is capable of adequately funding and providing local government
services needed by the community. The City will maintain or improve its infrastructure on a
systematic basis to insure its citizens will maintain quality neighborhoods.
In order to achieve this purpose, this plan has the following objectives for the City of
Monticello's fiscal performance:
1. To protect the City Council's policy - making ability by ensuring that important
decisions are not controlled by financial problems or emergencies.
2. To enhance the City Council's policy - making ability by providing accurate
information on the full cost of various authority or service levels.
3. To assist sound management of the City government by providing accurate and
timely information on financial condition.
4. To provide sound principles to guide the important decisions of the City Council and
of management which have significant fiscal impact.
5. To set forth - operational principals which minimize the cost of local government, to
the extent consistent with services desired by the public, and which minimize
financial risk.
6. To employ revenue policies and forecasting tools to prevent undue or unbalanced
reliance on certain revenues, especially property taxes, which distribute the cost of
municipal services fairly, and provide adequate funds to operate desired programs.
7. To provide essential public infrastructure, including buildings and property, and
prevent deterioration of this infrastructure.
8. To protect and enhance the City's credit rating and prevent default on any municipal
debts.
9. Ensure the legal use and protection of all City funds through a good system of
financial and accounting controls.
10. Record expenditures in a manner, which allocates to current taxpayers and /or users
the full cost of providing current services.
To achieve these objectives the following fiscal policies have been adopted by the City to
guide the City's budgeting and financial planning process. The City recognizes that
additional policies need to be adopted in the future to reflect on going procedures and City
practices that have never been written down or formally approved by City Council. Each
fiscal policy section includes the purpose and a description. The policies below are
summaries of the actual adopted policies, which will be available on the City's web site in
the future.
A -22
A. Operating Budget Policy
Purpose:
The operating budget policy ensures that the City's annual operating expenditures are
consistent with past expenditures and respond to long -term objectives rather than short-term
benefits. The policy allows the City to maintain a stable level of service, expenditures and
tax levies over time. The policy is most critical to programs funded with property tax
revenue because accommodating large fluctuations in this revenue source can be difficult.
Goals:
1. Maintain a stable level of City services.
2. Avoid large property tax fluctuations.
3. Maintain sound budgetary controls.
Policy:
The City will always adopt a balanced budget for the General Fund. The definition of a
balanced budget is that budgeted revenues equal budgeted expenditures and thus, creating no
change to the fund balance for the fund. The City's various other funds may have
unbalanced budgets based on the timing of revenues and expenditures.
The City will pay for current expenditures with current revenues.
The City will avoid balancing current revenues with funds required for future expenses.
The City will not budget to accrue future revenues.
Revenues in excess of expenditures from a given fiscal year will be placed into the City's
reserves according to the City's reserve policies.
The City will avoid postponing expenditures, rolling over short-term debt and /or using
reserves to balance the operating budget.
To protect against unforeseen events (emergencies), the City will maintain a contingency
reserve in the General Fund of 5% of budgeted expenditures.
The City staff will monitor revenues and departmental expenditures to adhere to their
budgeted amounts. Line items within an activity may be overspent as long as the total
activity budget is not overspent. Only with City Council approval can an activity be
overspent and only if funding is available.
City staff will prepare for Council review quarterly financial summary report.
A -23
B. Revenue Policy
Purpose:
The revenue policy is designed to ensure 1) diversified and stable revenue sources, 2)
adequate long -term funding by using specific revenue sources to fund related programs and
services, and 3) funding levels to accommodate all City services and programs equitable.
Goals:
1. Provide adequate funding sources for funding City services and programs.
2. Avoid large budget fluctuations.
3. Provide a diversified revenue source and limit dependency on one or two revenue
MINJI ORM
Policy:
The City will maintain a diversified and stable revenue system in order to avoid short -tenn
fluctuations in a single revenue source.
The City will conservatively estimate its annual revenues by an objective, analytical process.
All existing and potential revenue sources will be re- examined annually.
The City will use one -time or special purpose revenue for capital expenditures or for
expenditures required by the revenue, and not to subsidize recurring personnel, operation and
maintenance costs.
The City will establish all fees and charges at a level related to the cost of providing the
services, or as adjusted for particular program goals. Each year, the City will review the full
cost of activities supported by fees and charges to identify the impact of inflation and other
cost increases and will review these fees and charges along with resulting net tax cost with
the City Council.
The City will seek a balanced tax base through support of a sound mix of residential,
commercial, and industrial development.
The City will offset reduced revenues with reduced expenditures.
C. Expenditure Policy
Purpose:
The expenditure policy is designed to ensure proper Rinding of services.
A -24
Goals:
1. Maintain a stable level of services provided.
2. Respond to long -tern objectives of the City.
Policy:
The City will adopt and maintain a balanced General Fund budget, in which expenditures
will not exceed reasonable estimated resources and revenue.
The City will pay for all current operation and maintenance expenses from current revenue
sources.
The operating budget will provide for the adequate maintenance of capital assets and
equipment.
The City will maintain a budgetary control system, which will enable it to adhere to the
adopted budget. This includes a centralized record keeping system to be adhered to by all
programs and activities receiving annual appropriations. Proposed major budgeted
expenditures such as new positions, equipment acquisitions, and capital improvements will
have prior City Council approval.
The finance department will prepare and maintain at least quarterly financial reports
comparing actual revenues and expenditures to budgeted amount for Council review.
The City will develop and implement an effective risk management program to minimize
losses and reduce costs.
The City will cooperate with other governmental agencies in an effort to provide maximum
services at minimum costs.
D. Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting Policy
Purpose:
The accounting, auditing and financial reporting policy is designed to maintain a system of
financial monitoring, control, and reporting for all operations and funds in order to provide
effective means of ensuring that overall City goals and objectives will be met and to assure
the City residents and investors that the City is well managed and fiscally sound.
Goals:
Maintain a financial system that is sound, effective, well managed, and open to City staff,
Council, and residents.
Policy:
The City will adhere to a policy of fall and open public discourse of all financial activity.
The proposed budget will be prepared in a manner to maximize its understanding by citizens
and elected officials. Financial documents will be available to all interested parties on the
City's web site or copies can be provided. Opportunities will be provided for full citizen
participation prior to adopting the budget.
The City will maintain its accounting records and report on its financial condition and results
of operations in accordance with City, State and Federal laws and regulations, and Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and standards established by the Governmental
Accounting Standard Board (GASB). Budgetary reporting will be in accordance with City
and State budget laws, regulations, and guidelines.
An independent firm of certified public accountants will annually perform a financial and
compliance audit of the City's financial statements. Their opinions will be contained in the
City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR).
As an additional independent confirmation of the quality of the City's financial reporting, the
City will annually seek to obtain the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA)
Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. The CAFR will be
presented in a way designed to communicate with citizens about the financial affairs of the
City.
E. Reserve Policy
Purpose:
The purpose of the City's reserve funds are to provide 1) a stable funding source for
expenditures that fluctuate significantly each year, for example equipment acquisitions and
replacements, 2) working capital to maintain a sufficient cash flow, 3) provide funding of
services during periods of budget shortfalls or other revenue reductions during a budget year,
and 4) a stable or improved credit rating.
Goals:
1. Maintain a stable level of services provided by the City.
2. Provide working capital during the fiscal year.
3. Maintain or improve the City's credit rating.
Policy:
The City's goal is to maintain a General Fund, fund balance reserve of 45% of the General
Fund's operating budget for working capital to provide cash flow between its two serni-
annual tax payments (July and December).
UNWI
At the end of the fiscal year, if the General Fund's fund balance has a reserve for working
capital at a minimum balance of 45% of next year's operating budget, the remaining reserves
will be designated for a specific use or transferred to other funds for the funding of future
improvement projects or equipment purchases as approved by the City Council,
The Consolidated Bond Fund will receive any fund balances remaining in any debt service
fund once the debt is fully retired.
Excess balances in Capital Project Funds will be used to reduce debt issues or be used to
fund future capital projects. The fund balances in these funds will fluctuate based on the
timing of funding sources and expenditures.
Enterprise Funds shall maintain a fund balance to help finance infrastructure replacements
and the addition of new capital facilities, such as, wells, water towers, or lift stations.
F. Purchasing Policy
Purpose:
The purchasing policy is designed to provide guidance to City staff in the purchasing process
by specifying procedures to be followed.
Goals:
1. Obtain supplies, equipment, and service as economically as possible.
2. To purchase items that is best suited to the specific needs of the City.
3. To promote fair competition among bidders.
4. Provide effective controls.
5. To comply with all statutes and regulations of the City, State, and Federal governments.
Policy:
City employees will be allowed to make purchases of less than $500 without additional
approval or without obtaining price quotes.
For purchases of $500 to $1,000, when possible, price quotes should be obtained from
various vendors and kept on file with the finance department.
Purchases over $1,000 but less than $5,000 require at least two quotations and can be
purchased without City Council approval provided the item was budgeted; fm2ds are
available, and approved by the Administrator or Finance Director. Quotes shall be kept on
file with the finance department.
Purchases over $5,000 require at least two quotations and City Council approval. Quotes
shall be kept on file with the finance department.
A -27
All purchases over $50,000 require formal specifications and advertised bids. Bids will be
publicly opened and approved by Council. All bids will be kept on file.
G. Capital Asset Policy
Purpose:
The Capital Asset Policy is designed to provide guidance to City staff involved in
purchasing, recording, tracking, and disposing of capital assets by specifying procedures to
be followed.
Goals:
To ensure that capital assets are tracked and recorded consistently and according to
policy.
To provide an internal control structure over capital assets.
To provide accurate capital asset values and records to annual financial statements and
reporting.
Policy:
A capital asset is an asset or item with a cost of at least $5,000 per asset and a life expectancy
of greater than one year.
The classes of capital assets will be: land, parking lots, buildings, infrastructure,
improvements (other than buildings), machinery and equipment, office equipment and
furniture, and motor vehicles.
Donations of capital assets are recorded at estimated fair market value at the date of
acquisition.
Depreciation is the allocation of the cost of a depreciable capitalized asset over its estimated
useful life. Straight -line depreciation will be the method used to allocate the cost on a
monthly basis. Land, easements and construction in progress are not considered depreciable
assets.
Department heads shall be responsible for reporting disposal of capital assets to the finance
department.
The finance department will distribute a list of inventory, by department, to each department
head annually during the fall of each year for the purpose of conducting an inventory.
Physical inventory will be conducted at least every four years by the finance department
staff. Random inventories maybe conducted at any time.
A -28
H. Capital Improvement Program Policy
Purpose:
The purpose of the capital improvement program policy is to plan for the construction and
replacement of infrastructure, along with the purchase and replacement of capital equipment
of the City with as little impact to the City's funds and tax payers as possible.
Goals:
1. Avoid large budget and property tax fluctuations due to capital improvements and
equipment purchase.
2. Strategically plan the replacement and construction of infrastructure and the purchase or
replacement of capital equipment so that improvements and purchases are not needed in
one fiscal year but spread out over time.
Policy:
The City will annually update a multi -year plan for capital improvements and equipment.
The multi -year plan will identify the estimated cost, potential funding sources, and firture
operational impacts for each capital item.
The City will coordinate the plan update with the City's annual budget process.
The City will maintain all of its assets at a level adequate to protect the City's and its
citizens' capital investment and to minimize future maintenance and replacement costs.
Federal, State and other intergovernmental and private funding sources of a special revenue
nature shall be sought out and used as available to assist in financing capital improvements.
I. Investment Policy
Purpose:
The purpose of this policy is to set forth the investment objectives and parameters for the
management of public funds.
Goals:
1. Safeguard funds on behalf of the City.
2. Meet the daily operating cash flow demands.
3. Assure the availability of capital funds when needed.
4. Conform to all applicable federal, state and/or local statutes governing the investment of
public funds.
5. Invest public fimds in a manner which maximizes return.
A -29
Policy:
The City will consolidate (pool) cash and reserve balances from all funds, except for those
legally restricted by statutes, to maximize investment earnings.
The City of Monticello will only invest in securities authorized by Minnesota Statute 475.66
The City will not purchase securities that are considered highly sensitive or that could expose
the City to foreign currency risk.
The City will obtain collateral or a bond for all uninsured amounts on deposit to minimize
risk of loss of failure of the depository bank.
No more than 5% of the overall portfolio may be invested in the securities of a single issuer,
except for securities of the U. S. Government and its agencies or an external investment pool.
The City Council will be provided a listing of the City's investment portfolio at the end of
each quarter.
J. Debt Policy
Purpose:
The debt policy ensures that the City's debt 1) does not weaken the City's financial structure;
and 2) provide limits on debt to avoid problems in servicing debt. This policy is critical for
maintaining the best possible credit rating.
Goals:
1. Maintain the City's financial integrity.
2. Maintain or improve the City's credit rating.
3. Avoid large property tax increases due to debt payment requirements.
Policy:
The City will not use long -tern debt to fund current operations.
The City will avoid the issuance of short-term debt, such as, budget, tax and revenue
anticipation notes.
The City will confine long -tern borrowing to capital improvements, equipment or projects
that have a life of more than 5 years and cannot be financed from current revenues.
A -30
The City of Monticello will use special assessments, revenue bonds, and /or any other
available self - liquidating debt measures instead of general obligation bonds where and when
possible, applicable and practical.
The City will pay back debt within a period not to exceed the expected life of the project.
The City will not exceed 3 percent of the market value of taxable property for general
obligation debt per state statutes.
The City will maintain good communications with bond rating agencies about its financial
condition and will follow a policy of full disclosure in every financial report and bond
prospectus. The City will comply with Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) reporting
requirements.
The City will refinance or call any debt issue when beneficial for future savings.
Besides these policies, the City follows many unwritten practices and procedures when it
comes to handling the City's finances and budgeting. In the future more of these unwritten
practices will be formatted into written formally policies to guide current and future City
staff and Councils.
BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS, TRENDS AND SOURCES
The City of Monticello maintains a number of funds for recording fiscal transactions to meet
legal accounting requirements. Certain assumptions are decided on as a foundation for
developing a budget. These assumptions guide the City in determining the level of service
that will be provided to residents and how those services will be funded. The City's budget
practice is to use conservative revenue estimates to assure adequate funding of expenditures.
The following is a summary of major budget assumptions and trends for the upcoming fiscal
year.
Property taxes — The City relies on property taxes to support such functions as general
government, public safety, public works, street improvements, library activities and debt
service. The property tax levy funds 83.5% of General Fund operations for 2011. The 2011
property tax levy is $7,677,309 including the Market Value Homestead Credit for all funds,
which is 21.3% of all revenues. The City tries to maintain the lowest possible property tax
levy and has used what was deemed excess reserves in the past to maintain or lower the levy.
The 2011 levy does not require the use of reserves to fund debt expenditures or operations.
The chart on the next page demonstrates the change in the City's property levy.
A -31
When determining the property tax levy, the City Council and staff consider the effects the levy
will have on property owners. The effects the levy will have on property owners are then
balanced against services provided and service levels. The City was able to fund services at
current levels while reducing the levy in past years due to a growing economy and increased
property values. However, property value began decreasing in 2010 due to the housing market
and the City growth has also slowed resulting in a decrease in City tax capacity in 2010 and it is
anticipated to decrease again for taxes payable in 2011, as shown in the chart below.
The City's tax rate, which is used to determine what property taxes each property owes is
determined by dividing the City's property tax levy against the City's tax capacity. As the
property tax levy increases and tax capacities remain the unchange or are reduced, the tax rate
increases. However if the property tax levy remains uncharged or reduced from one year to the
A -32
next and tax capacities increase, the tax rate will decrease. For property taxes payable in 2011
the tax rate is expected to increase because of an increase in the property tax levy and a decrease
in the City's tax capacity. The table below show the change in tax rates for the City the past 14
years (the sharp increase in 2002 was due to a change in the State's property tax system).
/ 111
/ 111 . . ■
,rum NONE ON m m m NON
1 1 1 1 :.. . . . ■ . . . ■
. ■ ■ .
/ 111
Property taxes are only one revenue source for the City.
Licenses and Permits — Building permits are the largest category and account in the licenses
and permits and account for $235,000 (3.7 %) of the 2011 General Fund revenues. In 2009 only
9 new residential construction permits were issued and in 2010 only 3 new residential
construction permits were issued as a result of the economy and the housing market, a trend that
is expected to continue into 2011. The spike in permit activity in 2008 was caused by a hail
storm which caused almost every home and business to require new roofs and siding, which
resulted in increased revenues. New residential construction has been low due to economic
conditions in the housing and financial sectors and is expected to continue into 2011. As a
result, the number of building permits issued and the building permit revenues are estimated to
continue to be low in the coming year. However the City has still experienced some growth in
commercial constructions in 2010. The chart below demonstrates the permit activity of the City.
A -33
Intergovernmental Revenues — The intergovernmental revenue classifications consist of grants
and aids from the Federal and State governments. The City of Monticello has received very little
in the way of these grants and aids in the past. However, in 2010 the City is scheduled to receive
$421,515 from the State of Minnesota for the Utility Valuation Transition Aid that was created in
2009. However, due to improvements at the power plant the City will no longer be eligible for
this aid in 2011. Also if the City moves forward with the proposed 2011 street improvement
project, the City would be eligible for reimbursement through State aid street maintenance
funding for some of the project costs.
Charges for Services — This classification includes user charges or reimbursements received
from those who benefited from services provided such as community center programs, general
government services, and public works related revenues. Revenues which are highly sensitive to
construction and development (i.e. planning and engineering fees) are estimated to decline in the
coming year due to the housing markets and economy of the State and Country. The chart below
demonstrates this trend for the City.
Charges for Services
4,500,000
4,000,000 ._._
3,500,000 - - - - -- -
3,000, 000 -
2,500,000 - - -
2.,000,000 1,500,000
1,000,000 '
500,000 '-
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Charges for services related to the Community Center have increased modestly each year in the
recent past. The 2011 budget reflects a modest increase to continue this trend, in part because of
adding wedding decorating to the list of services provided. Revenues are estimated at
$2,499,221 or a 10% decrease from 2010.
Special Assessments — A portion of the cost for public improvements are recovered by
assessment charges to the benefiting property owners. These collections are typically
appropriated to the payment of debt service. 2011 revenue estimates are based on the balance of
the assessments as of 12/31/2009 (last available figures from Wright County) and divided over
the remaining life of the assessment including interest charged. Revenue estimate assume there
will be no prepayment of assessments by property owners during the year, thus creating a
conservative revenue source.
A -34
Investment Income and Miscellaneous Revenues — The General Fund has $264,712 budgeted
in 2011 for Miscellaneous Revenues of which $193,469 is interest earnings. This is down from
the last year because of lower interest rates in 2010 and anticipated in 2011. Similar reduction
can be found in the Special Revenue, Debt Service and Capital Project Funds. The increase in
Miscellaneous Revenues is due to the FiberNet Monticello having a full year of revenues in
2011. It also was the reason for the increase in 2010.
Miscellaneous Revenues
7,000,000 - - - _.- ...---- - -- - -- --
6,000,000
5,000,000 - -- — — -- -
4,000,000 - -- - --
3,000, 000 - - - - --
2,000,000 - -- - -- - -
1,000,000 -- -- -
O ---------` r- ---- r- --- -- .--r- -- --__r- -_- - -r- _-ter - ---�
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Special Revenue Funds
Monticello Community Center — Memberships and Fees — The Monticello Community
Center (MCC) charges gym memberships to its users. Over the years these memberships have
stayed fairly consistent with slight increases in memberships over the years. In addition the
MCC rents rooms for meetings and wedding receptions. Finally there are fees for program
activities and concession sales. All of which have maintained a steady income as demonstrated
in the graph below.
A -35
Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) — The City is authorized to operate a DMV from the
State of Minnesota. The main revenue source is the fees the City collects from the issuance of
motor vehicle licenses and DNR licenses. The fees charged are regulated by the State. There
has been no fee increases in recent years allowed by the State, which has left revenues ranging
from $276,919 and $299,168 in 2008 and 2009 respectively. In 2010 the City has collected
$306,782 and the 2011 budget is estimated at $290,000.
Enterprise Funds — Use Collections
Water and Sewer Funds — Charges for services are primarily comprised of providing
Monticello residents and businesses with water and sanitary sewer treatment services. The utility
funds charges separately for these services based on individual consumption. The City has set
rates to cover all operating costs and a portion of depreciation. As new development has slowed,
the burden on infrastructure replacement costs has been shifting more on to the utility rates
charged. The graph below illustrates revenue trends for Water Fund.
Revenue from Water Charges
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Water Use Collections — Water rates were increased approximately 10% for 2011 and include
adding an additional rate tier for high volume users. The recent history of rate increases includes
a 15% increase in each of 2007 and 2008. For 2009 and again in 2010 the rates were increased
5 %. Prior to 2007 the water rates had not been increased for a number of years. As the rates
have increased, water consumption has no increased as demonstrated in the chart on the next
page. Trends that are expected to continue in 2011. Even with these rate increases the revenues
for the Water Fund should be sufficient to cover operating costs and part of the depreciation
costs of the system.
A -36
Water Usage trillions of gallons)
500
450
400
350 —
300 _
250
200 _
150 _
100
50 _
0 11
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Sewer Use Collections — The rate increases the water rates have had the last few years have also
applied to the City's sewer rates. Similarly the revenues of the Sewer Fund are sufficient to
cover operating costs and debt service of the Sewer Fund but not all of the depreciation costs of
the system.
Revenue from serer Charges
1,600,000 -�
1,400, 000
1,200,000 °
1,000, 000
800,000
600,000 _
400,000
200,000
"1H -i
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Liquor Fund Sales — Liquor sales have increased over the last five years and the budget reflects
this trend. Gross profits are estimated at $989,533 for 2011 based on sales of $4,404,781 and
costs of $3,415,248. This is an increase of 11% in gross profit from 2010. Beer continues to be
the stores best - selling product line, but wines and spirits sales have also increased over the past
few years as shown in the graph on the following page.
A -37
FiberNet Monticello — In 2010 the City constructed the majority of its fiber optic network to
provide high speed internet, phone and cable TV services to property owners. Along with the
construction of the system the City began operating the system and began charging customers for
internet, phone, and /or cable television services based on services ordered. The City estimates
revenues from the sale of services at $3,791,379 for 2011 based on preliminary data of those who
are currently taking the services and said they would take the service once available.
Interfund Transfers — These reflect transfers between City Funds. Most of the transfers
represent the City's share of capital projects or a Funds share of debt service payments. The
following schedule represents the proposed 2011 transfers.
Total Transfers In 4,472,516
Transfers In
Fund #
Fund
Amount
317
2010A Improvement Bond
42,625
212
Street Reconstruction Fund
250,000
213
EDA Fund
443,336
312
2005A G. O. Bond Fund
316,279
314
2008A Revenue Refunding Bond
815,000
229
Park Dedication
475,000
400
Capital Project Fund
185,000
312
2005A G. O. Bond Fund
706,249
315
2008 Sewer Refunding Bond Fund
524,590
317
2010A Improvement Bond
78,364
312
2005A G. O. Bond Fund
261,299
317
2010A Improvement Bond
34,471
312
2005A G. O. Bond Fund
309,803
317
2010A Improvement Bond
30,500
Total Transfers In 4,472,516
Total Transfers Out 4,472,516
Other revenue and expenditure trends are detailed throughout this budget document.
Consolidated financial summaries of all funds are provided on the following two pages.
Transfer Out
Fund #
Fund
Amount
212
Street Reconstruction
42,625
609
Liquor Fund
250,000
400
Capital Project Fund
443,336
213
EDA Fund
316,279
226
Community Center
815,000
300
Consolidated Bond Fund
475,000
245
Street Light Improvement
185,000
262
Sanitary Sewer Access Fund
706,249
262
Sanitary Sewer Access Fund
524,590
262
Sanitary Sewer Access Fund
78,364
263
Storm Sewer Access Fund
261,299
263
Storm Sewer Access Fund
34,471
265
Water Access Fund
309,803
265
Water Access Fund
30,500
Total Transfers Out 4,472,516
Other revenue and expenditure trends are detailed throughout this budget document.
Consolidated financial summaries of all funds are provided on the following two pages.
O
O
r
N
M
o-
N
W
r
m
O
M-
W
W
r
W
V
V
O
O
V
V
O
O
N
W
M
rMm
O
m
W
o
W
O
W
r
r
W
d'
m
W
V
N
M
M
M
O
W
M
O
N
V
OM
N
V
(O
V
(O
V
V
V
V
V
aD
M
M
N
O
N
IN
pI
NV
NNON
W
N
t0
M
I
I
Mw0
w
mm
VV
N
m
O
N
Or
W
r
r
f D
M
r
r
M
N
M
W
W
N
t 0
N
r
W
1�
ow
O
N
NV
m-
Vow
N
W
NN
N
N
mm
V
V
r
V
N
W
N
Q
N
r
M
�
N
M-
N-m
V
-7
Ni
O
N
M
r
O
O
V
V
W
r
W
N
N
r
W
M
N
W
W
O
N
V
W
N
M
N
(O
(O
r
N
m
V
V
W
N
N
O
W
W
W
O
N
m
W
m
O
N
W
N
m
N
M
W
r
N
O
O
W
m
N
O
O
N
r
0
M
m�
N
W
M
W
N
O
r
N
W
N
r
M
W
t0
W
oo
M
N
O
N
O
0
0
O
m
N
V
N
m
•-
VON
m
r
NOM
0
N
N
n
Q
W
W
O
V
W
O
W
V'
V
N
r
O
O
m
W
MV
M
-
V
r
M
r
O
W
N
O
W
M
m
N
W
W
r
�-
O
W
V
W
W
M
W
W
m
O
m
N
O
M
N
r
W
V
N
N
N
M
N
OCl
(•SV
N
niV
V
NNO
O�-
N
O
r
9
fl
V
N
O
V
m
O
O-
W
m
N
W
V
W
W
m
N
r
r
W
W
N
W
O
W
V
O
t0
W
r
m
N
O
O
M
W
N
Ow
O
M
W
W
N
N
N
m
M
M
N
V
m
u
W
W
N
W
M
V
O
m
r
M
N
M
N
r
W
W
N
N
N
V
r
V
V
W
N
W
p
W
W
NN
m
W
m-
W
N
W
-MO
N
N
NN
N
m
O
O
rW
r
M
VMONMN
M
N
N
V
r
N
N
W
N
W
N�--M
w
(O
N
N
M
N
N¢
m
W
M
N
m
N
M
M
M
W
V
r
M
M
W
W
r
V
N
W
W
V
N
N
N
N
N
N
V
N
N
r
N
0
a
0
N
V
r
�
N
W
W
N
O
m�
-rN00
W
W
V
W
�-
W
�-00r0
V
N
rP000
V
W
Ul
W
W
W
r
W
M
m
r
N
O
N
O
W
N
M
O
W
O
N
W
V
N
r
0
O
r
O
r
00
O
Om
O
m
W
V
r
Mrwmi
WrMrg
OnirNrmoi
rr
O
41
N
-r
-Mm
W
r
M
W
W-
m
M
me�
mm
N
N
W
V
N
Q
N
V
W
M
N
O
O
N
M
W
W.--
M
V
r
V
cc
N
N
W
W
4.
V
NV
N
N
N
N
�4)N
rW
r(f
V
V
M(M
O
M-
D
W
m
N
fA
O
m
0
0
0
r
O
N
O
M
V
N
M
V
WV
9
N
N
r
V
m
A
0
cc
m
a}
(O
r
mN�
O
N
VV
V
m
•tNNM�
O
N
O
N
N
V
M
ONm
m
0
V_NNM
r
W
M
r
ap
W
00
O
W
o
N
p(
M
O
r(a�}
MOM
M
O�
O
N
(V
00
(V
a
N
W
eVVe}}O
O
N
V
I�
O
N
E
V
V'
I
(WO
m
�N}ON
M
{ay}
N
N
O
O
N
N
(NO
M
N
F
m
V
W
V
V
N
(4
V
�
NNW
-"0
V
m
OW
M
M
N
W
fA
N
N
W
(A
W
m
O
N
O
0
a
O
r
N
N
M
N
W
N
m
O
N
W
(O
O
00
N
(u
W
V
r
O
W
r
N
Cl[
m
O
W
O
N
W
W
N
O
O
N
r
M
N
W
W
N
W
M
W
N
O
r
N
N -NN
O
N
N
M
O
00
O
r
N
N
o
m
V
M
V
O
OW
r
O
O
V
MNNVN
r
r
W
O
O
666
M
�
r
Voi
W
N
NN
W
m
CI
m
NN
r
r
00
mm
r
M
V'
o
m
W
W
V
M
N
M
M
N
m
r
m
m
r
W
M
V
O
W
V
V
V
N
N
m
m
M
N
V
N
c-
(V
N
d
d
N
V
V
V
V
N
N
m
11
N
M
V
@
r
W
r
O
0
r
N
O
O
N<
O
W
W
M
M
W
M
W
r
O
O
O
O
W
0 W
O
W
vv
0
W
N
N
O
O
(V
C
Q
c
N
O
V
r
r
r
m m
N
M
W
M
MOM
O
M
W
N
N
V
W
W
a]
@>
V
V
W
N
M
N
r
CO
W
N
N
r
W
O
d
LL
C
W
LL
N
V
M
N
M
Nmi(i
M
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
W
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
jp
w
m
m
m
m
m
m
O
O
O
N
O
Iq
O
O
cc
O
O
O
N
W
V
@
N
N
r
M'ff
W
m
r
m
N
r
m
O
E
LL
e-
M.
N
N
V
V
V
N
J
O
LU
on
d'
r
O
O
O
O
O
V
O
N
O
M
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
F
LL
m
W
O
W
O
O
O
r
r
W
O
W
m
V
Z
O
N
Z
N
G
7
V
N
W
N
m
V
N
WOO
N
W
N
M
N
m
N
N
m
N
-
M
O
O
r
yy
O
N
W
N
m
N
MV
y❑
U l
LL
M
V'
V
r
NN
V
V
-
V
W
N
LL
m
C
(n
M
N
N
M
...
N
O
a
m
i
�_
lD
0
1p
C
O
o
o
N
0
o
N
rN
N
0
0
0
M
mqN
r
W
r'O
N
r
W
W
•-
ONO
W
V
V
W
W
L
o
0
W
W
@
>@
V
O
W
m
V
o
M
W
N
W
O
W
N
W
N
a
W
W
mm
of
ui
M
M
(6
.-
M
ui
N
n
m
ai
o
V
E
E
@��
V
o
WW
NMN
r
MM
N
m
WV
r
N
O
@
a@
r
M
N
N
M
W
N
N
r
N
W
U
o(n�
W
�M
N
N
N
M
W
V
N
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
m
M
O
N
M
W
O
O
O
V
O
0
0
0
0
0
O
V
a
N
N
N
V
m
0
WAN
N
W
O
m
W
M
W
r
O
N
OWN
O
O
W
N
N
NV
N
V
O
M
M
b
O
r
N
V
M
V
LL
N
N
W
M
r
M
W
M
M
ml�m
M
N
r
mM
r
O
mm
M
N
N
N
O
A
uS
(d
N
(6
vi
W
N
M
N
@
@
m
o
n
c
`
@
@
O
W
y
@
C
N@
C
N
Z
c
Z
E@
o
c
a
ex-
°
@
a
w
m
Z
W
c
v
am
a
E(�
p@
E
OW
O
c
c
c
E
°N
w
o
v
k
o
o
s
w
N
N
0
N
O
OM
L
IO
CN
.@w
N
E
p
P@
@
O
O
a
C7
mJ2C)LLy
n
S
2
m
?
a
O
LL
..TOTAL ALL FUNDS
2007
j 2008
2009
2010
2010
2.011
`REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
� �
PROJECTED i-
,
�
BUDGET j
_ _ _ E
CHANGE ,
PROPERTY TAXES
1 $7015,310
I $8406,029
$8,695,865
` $8,880,979 1
$8,831,227
$8,813109
- 076%
SALES OF GOODS
_
3,769,077
_�
4,085,682
4,352,570
4,044,500 j
4,477 651
4,404 781 1
8 91 o%
LICENSES & PERMffS
78,992
_
1 1,188,884
566,894
570,150
518 607
600 250 I
5 n6i.
iINTEF2GOVERNMENfAL REVENUES
_
1364633
411,044
921,391
5
407,4401
699752
-
_10444 %0l
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
_
, _ _ 2 775,850
� _ 2 140,953
2,267,400
j 4,821,546 (
2,597,610
_(18085)
6,411 103 I
32.97%
0704
'
0
SNENiS
�-_
111
MISCFI�LANEO
( 3 371
- 7 87 838 4
1 413,057
-1,469,4-95-
469 495
2,03-2--.8-9-2-1--
032 892
2,-,6--02-,5-7-9
- 78
�o
USE COLLECTIONS
_
I 1,882,6_76
2 120 788
( 2,200,300 f
2,277 986 j
2,278 050
3.53"o
�coNTRIBYTED CAPfTAL
I -4E2,412
._?1005,284
17 722
0
0�_-
0
0
OPERATING TRANSFERS
5-,223,464
16 807 286
� 10 182,416 �
62
5 0,849 I
-4,0_37,707-
037 707 j,
4,472,9-16 �
-11 66 %�
BOND PF2OCEEDS
4 44 ,484,4
15,685,262'
1,4361
3,230,000
3,255000
4,590,0001
-
TOTAL REVENUES
j $34 384,338
$61 314,102
$32,846,716
i $32,726,981 f $28,796,828 I
$36,028,167
10.09%
EXPENDITURES
$4,165,992
$4-,649-,496--'-
4 649 496
$4 880 844
$5,228,168 1
$5,263,214
$5,228,73 o
-o .m
PERSONNEL SERVICES
SUPPIES
3 548 777
3 646,T02
4 325 308
--4,03-d'666-'
5 308 322
4,422 495 L
9.55%1
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES.
_ 12,062,166
_
i_ 7,700,156
8 239 090
1 9,119,427
8,988,939
13,326 202 1
.
46 13%
CAPf -AL OUTLAY
1 7 911 565
27 980 008
17 676,986
10 901,629 1
15,880 540 j
15,515 795
42.33%1
_ _
(OPERATING TRANSFERS
j 5,223,464
-16,642. 106
10,182,712
5,062,849
4,037,707 ;
4,472,516 j
-_
- 1166%
iTOTAL EXPENDITURES
j $32 911 958
$61 021,468
j $45 304,940
1
! $34 349,023 1
$39,478 722 i
$42,965,738
25 09 %�
`FUND BALANCE- JANUARY 1
$75 216 850,__$76
689 230
j $76 981 864
($64 523,640 s
$64,523 640
$53,841 746 1
'IX FRIX
CESSREVENUEOVPENDfTURE
j $1472,380
$292,634
58
($12,4,224){
($1,622,042)i($10,681,894)j
($6,937,571).
--
FUND BALANCE- DECEMBFJ?31
$76,689,230
1 $76,981,864
j $64,523,640
j$62,901,599 ($53,841,746
i
$46,904,175
MEN
Projected Fund Balance Summary
FUND
BALANCE
(DEFICIT)
1213112009
BUDGETS
ESTIMATED
FUND
BALANCE
(DEFICIT)
1213112011
FUND
2010 Budget
2011 Budget
Amount
Designated or
Restricted
Amount
Undesignated
or Unrestricted
General Fund
5,097,632.00
950.00
5,098,582.00
3,531,285.00
1,567,297.00
Special Revenue Funds:
Library
3,610.00
6,441.00
(282.00)
9,769.00
142.00
9,627.00
Street Reconstruction
2,641,176.00
370,228.00
320,258.00
3,331,662.00
1,756,769.00
1,574,893.00
EDA
7,393,705.00
(1,134,073.00)
(377,825.00)
5,881,807.00
3,235,659.00
2,646,148.00
Environmental Clean Up
-
-
-
-
-
MN Investment
918,996.00
34,101.00
31,709.00
984,806.00
984,806.00
-
SCERG (Econ Recovery Grant)
-
-
-
-
CMIF (Central MN Init)
-
-
-
-
ShadeTree
69,606.00
(6,419.00 )
357.00
63,544.00
-
63,544.00
Street Lighting Improvements
604,079.00
280,606.00
62,987.00
947,672.00
947,672.00
-
Community Center
958,751.00
78,641.00
(256,445.00)
623,665.00
623,665.00
-
Deputy Registrar
164,670.00
3,466.00
15,510.00
183,646.00
93,616.00
90,030.00
Park & Pathway Dedication
420,846.00
(71,380.00)
(406,700.00)
(57,234.00)
-
(57,234.00)
Orderly Annexation Area
7,287.00
291.00
(804.00)
6,774.00
6,774.00
-
Capital Revolving Fund_____
3,854,899.00
73,089.00
(610,639.00)
3,317,349.00
3,300,276.00
17,073.00
Sanitary Sewer Access
4,987,353.00
(618,113.00)
(908,108.00 )
3,461,132.00
3,461,132.00
-
Storm Water Access
_ 2,291,081.00_
54,078.00)
X254,986 0
_ 1,982,017.00
1,661,823.00
320194.00
Water Access
820,356.00
216,209.00
235,899.00
366,248.00
368,248.00
TOTAL - Special Rev Funds:
25,136,415.00
1,410,691.00
2,620,867.00
21,104,857.00
16,440,582.00
4166412-75-00-
Debt Service Funds:
1994A GO Refunding Bond
-
_
1995A GO Bond
-
1997A GO Improvement
-
-
2002 GO Bond
399,252.00
(399,252.00)
-
_
2003A GO Bond
310,257.00
(310,257.00)
-
-
-
-
2005AGOBond
1,771,440.00
(274884.00)
(344,419.00)
1,152,137.00
1,152,137.00
-
Consolidated Bond
_7771627.00)
_ (158,146 00)
245,521.00
(690,252.00)
-
(690,252.00)
2007A G. O. Bond
1_74,148.00
9A
__(36,560)
__109,252.00
28,327.00
28,327.00
-
19988 GO Water System Ref.
-
-
-
_
2010 GO Im rovement
-
-
15,015.00
15,015.00
_
15,015.00
-
-
-
-
-
_2000AGOImprovement
2000A MCClPublic Proj Rev
_
20008 GO Improvement
-
-
2008 Sewer Refunding Bond
919,568.00
(139,143.00)
(117,626.00)_
662,799.00
662,799.00
-
2008A EDA MCC Refunding
655,408.00
7,622.00
(270,831.00)
... 392,199.00
392,199.00
-
1989 TIF (ELDERLY) Bond
-
-
2004A Taxable TIF
142,782.00
142,782.00
TOTAL - Debt Service Funds:
3,595,228.00
1,453,411.00
581,592.00
1,560,225.00
2,250,477.00
690,252.00
,TOTAL-Ca Project Funds:_
(2,124,392.00)
1,313,100.00
12,502.00
(798,790.00)
-
798,790.00)
Enterprise
Water
12,510,429.00
(317,899.00)
(402,896.00)
11,789,634.00
1,500,283.00
10,289,351.00
Sewer
20,281,682.00
(940,495.00)
(1,020,849.00)
18,320,338.00
1,607,952.00
16,712,386.00
Liquor
3,129,315.00
14,136.00
94,899.00
3,238,350.00
12,876.00
3,225,474.00
Transportation
-
-
-
-
-
_
Cemetery
649,796.00
(14,949.00)
315.00
635,162.00
635,162.00
-
Fiber
3,752,465.00
514,584.00
2,419,083.00
5,656,964.00
_
5,656,964.00
_
TOTAL - Enterprise Funds:
744,623.00
3,747,614.00
28,326,520.00
3,756,273.00
24,570,247.00
Investment Holding
TOTAL -All Funds:
64,523,640.00
2,294,675.00
6,937,571.00
55,291,394.00
25,978,617.00
29,312,777.00
A -41
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
F.19 M,
i
GENERAL FUND
IM
GENERAL FUND SUMMARY
FUND DESCRIPTION:
The General Fund is used to account for the ordinary operations of the City, which are
financed from property taxes and other general revenues, which are not accounted for in
another fund. The modified accrual basis of accounting is used in the General Fund.
That is, expenditures are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are
recorded when received. However, compensated absences are expended when paid for
budgetary purposes. The General Fund budget is a balanced budget, meaning current
revenues equal current expenditures.
2010 BUDGET ISSUES:
Property taxes are the largest revenue source of the General Fund. The City still has levy
limits for 2011, which restricts the amount the City can increase its property tax levies
from one year to the next. Slowed growth in tax capacity will also place pressure on the
City's property tax levy. The public works department is the largest expenditure area for
the 2011 budget.
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTYTAXES
$4;433,359
$5,460,543
$5,106,682
$5,297,065
$5,289,218
$5,362,622
1.24%
LICENSES & PERMITS
773,797
917,539
266,797
296,650
217,184
371,250
25.15%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
436,588
368,938
553,093
114,801
317,957
64,740
- 43.61%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
944,422
402,557
694,759
306,023
561,034
330,096
7.87%
FINES & FORFEITS
4,875
1,951
1,000
200
0
200
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
1,644
5,970
7,763
0
118
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
626,165
430,656
375,870
269,611
383,622
264,712
-1.82%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
80,938
46,390
469,114
45,000
45,000
0
- 100.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$7,301,788
$7,634,544
$7,475,078
$6,329,350
$6,814,133
$6,393,620
1.02%
EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL
$33,858
$34,589
$60,492
$53,500
$52,633
$61,768
15.45%
ADMINISTRATION
282,693
260,622
278,810
204,819
211,365
225,402
10.05%
ELECTIONS
140
19,764
955
14,531
36,620
1,230
- 91.54%
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION
454,448
428,634
393,885
357,434
376,649
354,699
-0.77%
AUDIT
43,200
43,375
41,000
36,100
37,600
28,625
- 20.71%
CITYASSESSING
52,744
51,413
50,518
51,175
49,598
50,475
-1.37%
LEGAL
96,701
73,556
71,039
57,000
103,288
57,000
0.00%
HUMAN RESOURCES
0
15,730
63,902
81,930
80,663
86,509
100.00%
PLANNING & ZONING
254,319
205,163
145,367
157,801
161,617
166,900
5.77%
DATA PROCESSING
216,716
107,392
239,059
150,225
105,911
149,838
-0.26%
CITY HALL
130,173
182,586
229,058
207,408
269,262
200,209
-3.47%
PRAIRIE CENTER BUILDING
0
0
617,230
0
39,250
21,175
#DIV /0!
TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT
$1,564,992
$1,422,824
$2,191,315
$1,371,923
$1,524,456
$1,403,829
2.33%
M.
GENERAL FUND CONTINUED
2007
ACTUAL
2008
ACTUAL
2009
ACTUAL
2010
BUDGET
2010
PROJECTED
2011
BUDGET
%
CHANGE
PUBLIC SAFETY
347,359
318,151
245,232
245,180
230,433
217,741
- 11.19%
LAW ENFORCEMENT
923,113
990,621
1,064,389
1,096,000
1,093,658
1,121,200
2.30%
FIRE DEPARTMENT
296,127
217,181
775,821
197,210
195,512
207,214
5.07%
FIRE RELIEF
0
74,110
80,127
80,000
66,758
65,000
- 18.75%
BUILDING INSPECTIONS
323,821
405,779
306,897
254,434
249,771
245,212
-3.62%
CIVIL DEFENSE
8,023
4,136
7,893
1,400
5,084
1,400
0.00%
ANIMAL CONTROL
45,057
48,272
57,089
45,400
44,560
46,057
1.45%
NATIONAL GUARD
12,644
12,607
20,638
23,350
27,458
24,300
4.07%
TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY
$1,608,785
$1,752,706
$2,312,854
$1,697,794
$1,682,801
$1,710,383
0.74%
PUBLIC WORKS
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
726,827
281,630
238,794
219,531
236,132
208,373
-5.08%
ENGINEERING
347,359
318,151
245,232
245,180
230,433
217,741
- 11.19%
PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS
145,663
135,176
119,275
111,275
91,986
112,272
0.90%
STREETS & ALLEYS
652,074
724,620
778,648
686,579
578,292
675,390
-1.63%
ICE & SNOW
118,441
269,002
170,694
140,974
168,982
141,253
0.20%
SHOP & GARAGE
161,706
163,410
176,773
177,389
180,023
174,563
-1.59%
STORM WATER MAINTANCE
0
0
30,548
0
23,448
39,129
#DIV /01
PARKING LOTS
2,367
3,222
3,630
13,800
5,194
13,800
0.00%
STREET LIGHTING
222,187
229,509
202,772
168,500
197,467
175,000
3.86%
REFUSE COLLECTION
509,208
514,308
547,160
511,929
534,904
542,247
5.92%
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS
$2,885,832
$2,639,028
$2,513,526
$2,275,156
$2,266,861
$2,299,770
1.08%
CULTURE AND RECREATION
COMMUNITY CELEBRATIONS
3,110
2,252
2,072
3,000
1,359
2,300
- 23.33%
INFORMATION CENTER
126
79
65
0
25
0
0.00%
SENIOR CENTER
56,212
58,132
93,302
96,144
73,111
94,945
-1.25%
COMMUNITY EDUCATION
12,740
12,740
12,740
0
0
0
#DIV /01
Y.M.C.A.
5,460
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TRANSIT
0
0
0
5,000
0
3,000
- 40.00%
SWAN RIVER SCHOOL
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
ICE ARENA
75,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
0.00%
PARKS ADMINISTRATION
477,944
680,914
635,012
543,646
450,776
536,684
-1.28%
PARKS IMPROVEMENTS
145,807
105,116
76,258
5,000
3,398
0
- 100.00%
PARKS BALLFIELDS
79,952
16,702
29,514
16,800
14,187
20,571
22.45%
TOTAL CULTURE AND RECREATION
$856,351
$950,935
$923,963
$744,590
$617,856
$732,500
-1.62%
MISCELLANEOUS
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
79,781
79,646
78,574
73,344
60,252
153,075
108.71%
UNALLOCATED
88,548
0
345,313
4,000
5,339
0
0.00%
UNALLOCATED INSURANCE
165,114
161,536
190,454
161,593
229,676
94,063
- 41.79%
TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS
$333,443
$241,182
$614,341
$238,937
$295,267
$247,138
3.43%
TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES $7,249,403 $7,006,675 $8,555,999 $6,328,400 $6,387,241 $6,393,620 1.03%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$5,498,298
$52,385
$5,550,683
$627,869
$6,178,552
($1,080,921)
$5,097,632
$950
$5,097,632
$426,892
$5,524,524
$0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$5,550,683
$6,178,552
$5,097,632
$5,098,581
$5,524,524
$5,524,524
The previous table summarizes the General Fund revenues by classification and
expenditures by activities and departments. With the table below summarizes the
General Fund revenues and expenditures both by classification.
GENERALFUND
FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTYTAXES
$4,433,359
$5,460,543
$5,106,682
$5,297,065
$5,289,218
$5,362,622
1.24%
LICENSES & PERMITS
773,797
917,539
266,797
296,650
217,184
371,250
25.15%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
436,588
368,938
553,093
114,801
317,957
64,740
- 43.61%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
944,422
402,557
694,759
306,023
561,034
330,096
7.87%
FINES & FORFEITS
4,875
1,951
1,000
200
0
200
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
1,644
5,970
7,763
0
118
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
626,165
430,656
375,870
269,611
383,622
264,712
-1.82%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
80,938
46,390
469,114
45,000
45,000
0
- 100.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$7,301,788
$7,634,544
$7,475,078
$6,329,350
$6,814,133
$6,393,620
1.02%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$2,465,992
$2,732,863
$2,774,161
$2,622,862
$2,731,236
$2,662,848
1.52%
SUPPIES
420,658
470,098
448,312
478,100
395,386
465,695
-2.59%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
3,375,143
3,226,550
3,488,316
3,092,638
3,172,813
3,163,077
2.28%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
828,154
377,164
1,349,897
130,800
83,806
102,000
- 22.02%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
159,456
200,000
495,313
4,000
4,000
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$7,249,403
$7,006,675
$8,555,999
$6,328,400
$6,387,241
$6,393,620
1.03%
FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$5,498,298
$52,385
$5,550,683
$627,869
$6,178,552
($1,080,921)
$5,097,632
$950
$5,097,632
$426,892
$5,524,524
$0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$5,550,683
$6,178,552
$5,097,632
$5,098,581
$5,524,524
$5,524,524
AI
REVENUES
ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION:
To record and maintain all general operating revenues of the City. The general fund is
used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted for in
another fund.
OBJECTIVES:
Maintain stable, constant revenue sources.
Maintain low property taxes and tax rate, by reviewing the costs of services
provided and charge appropriately for those services.
BUDGET ISSUES:
The General Fund's main revenue source continues to be property taxes with 2011
property taxes making up 84% of the total General Fund revenues. The Minnesota State
property tax system is described in more detail on pages G -3 through G -7. Beginning in
2009 and continuing in 2011, Cities in Minnesota have had their property tax increases
limited to the lesser of inflation or 3.9% plus growth less State Aids.
Also in 2009 the City began receiving Utility Valuation Transition Aid (UVTA) which is
intended to offset the loss of property tax dollars due to the reduction of property value
on utility facilities. The Xcell power plant continues to be the largest property tax payer
in the City of Monticello. For 2009 the City receive $241,316 in UVTA and $50,466 in
2010, but with the improvements constructed at the power plant, which increased its
value back up above the 2009 value, the City is not eligible for UVTA in 2011.
Revenue collected for building permit activity were dramatically reduced in 2009 and
2010 and are expected to be similar in 2011, therefore the City is maintain the budget for
permits at the $235,000 level that was budgeted in 2010.
Beginning in 2010 the City's waste hauler took over the maintenance and replacement of
garbage and recycling carts, therefore the City is no longer budgeting revenues received
for preforming this activity.
Interest earnings are expected to be lower in 2011 due to low interest rates and lower
fund balances in the General Fund.
The General Fund will receive an operating transfer of $45,000 from the Capital
Revolving Fund for the purchase of equipment which was budgeted in prior years and
was to be purchase in 2010 by the General Fund. For 2011 all equipment purchase will
be budgeted and purchased in the Capital Revolving Fund.
:,
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
CURRENT AD VALOREM TAXES
$4,323,306
$5,366,419
$4,910,343
$5,272,065
$5,272,822
$5,337,622
1.24%
DELINQUENT AD VALOREM TAXES
67,929
35,480
177,849
0
0
0
0.00%
MOBILE HOME TAX
14,225
14,404
15,132
0
12,379
0
0.00%
PENALTY &INTEREST -TAXES
27,899
44,240
3,358
25,000
4,017
25,000
0.00%
LIQUOR LICENSE
50,774
52,962
50,060
51,000
56,429
51,000
0.00%
BEER LICENSE
1,381
977
887
900
1,087
900
0.00%
OTHER BUS LIC & PEMITS
3,803
4,115
3,202
3,000
3,893
3,000
0.00%
BUILDING PERMITS
555,900
848,566
205,508
235,000
149,639
235,000
0.00%
VARIANCES /CONDITIONAL USES
4,100
3,900
950
1,000
400
750
- 25.00%
DRIVEWAY PERMIT
25
75
125
200
75
50
- 75.00%
GRADING PERMIT
150
450
0
300
0
300
0.00%
SIGN /BANNER PERMIT
8,330
5,410
4,025
4,000
4,975
4,000
0.00%
MOBILE HOME PERMIT
570
380
475
350
285
350
0.00%
ANIMAL LICENSES
800
204
565
400
401
400
0.00%
FIBER OPTIC FRANCHISE FEE
0
500
1,000
500
0
500
0.00%
ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE
146,046
0
0
0
0
75,000
100.00%
NON -BUS LIC & PERMITS
1,918
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
HOMESTEAD CREDIT(HACA/MV)
179,790
100,653
10,867
(178,924)
6,249
(180,000)
0.60 %
MOBILE HOME HOMESTEAD CR
11,341
8,840
6,134
0
0
0
0.00%
PERA INCREASE AID
6,741
6,741
6,741
6,740
6,741
6,740
0.00%
UTILITY VALUATION AID
0
0
241,316
49,985
50,466
0
- 100.00%
STATE HWY AID - OPERATING
78,568
93,512
122,478
85,000
87,425
85,000
0.00%
FIRE DEPT AID - OPERATING
86,740
74,110
64,549
80,000
65,774
65,000
- 18.75%
POLICE DEPT AID - OPERATING
47,063
54,761
61,789
50,000
60,869
50,000
0.00%
COUNTY OPER GRANT - STR /HWY
14,318
14,020
15,676
12,000
19,059
15,000
25.00%
COUNTY OPER GRANT - CIVIL DEF
0
0
9,984
0
21,366
10,000
100.00%
CO OPER GRANT - RECYCLING
12,027
16,301
13,559
10,000
8
13,000
30.00%
ZONING /SUBDIVISION FEES
4,275
1,260
200
500
0
200
- 60.00%
SALE OF MAPS & PUBLICATIONS
261
114
39
75
45
25
- 66.67%
ASSESSMENT SEARCHES
3,325
2,575
2,850
1,750
2,200
1,000
- 42.86%
RESTOCKIBILLING FEE
1,610
2,450
0
0
2,535
0
0.00%
FINAL PLAT FEE
400
250
50
0
0
0
0.00%
PLANNING ADMIN FEE
27,307
21,400
19,898
5,000
40,838
6,000
20.00%
NSF FEE
275
303
190
100
75
100
0.00%
INSPECTION FEES /CONST OBS
54,543
35,739
0
0
968
0
0.00%
INSPECTION FEES /BLDG
80,261
3,556
6,531
2,000
0
3,000
50.00%
CONTRACTOR LICENSING FEE
1,100
325
225
250
50
200
- 20.00%
FIRE PROTECTION TWP CONTR
53,193
53,346
59,160
53,000
53,499
130,000
145.28%
FIRE -EMERG RESPONSE CALLS
7,150
10,650
7,750
5,000
6,500
7,000
40.00%
FIRE - OTHER FEES
4,599
3,109
1,250
500
550
1,000
100.00%
BLIGHT /MOWING FEES
4,197
771
1,143
500
3,691
700
40.00%
RENTAL HOUSING FEES
28,745
5,545
58,525
30,000
45,150
25,000
- 16.67%
ANIMAL CONTROL FEES
28,044
32,442
29,452
20,000
33,159
25,000
25.00%
INVESTMENT ADMIN FEE
0
78,176
32,834
40,298
15,666
33,371
- 17.19%
STIR, SIDEWALK,CURB REPAIR
80
70
0
0
0
0
0.00%
EQUIP. -OPER FEE /RE[AIR
330
120
0
0
0
0
0.00%
IC
JUNK AMNESTY FEES
10,169
9,176
10,493
9,000
0
0
- 100.00%
RECYCLING BINS /PROCESSING
1,111
586
586
500
637
500
0.00%
GARBAGE FEE- TAXABLE
66,069
64,823
95,441
60,000
98,559
64,000
6.67%
GARBAGE CART /RENTAL
46,630
47,706
52,943
45,000
58,413
0
- 100.00%
GARBAGE SURCHARGE - NO TAX
2,891
2,814
7,656
1,500
7,778
1,500
0.00%
CONCESSIONS - PW
(5,266)
1,585
1,206
1,000
326
1,000
0.00%
TEAM /LEAGUE FEES
3,680
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FIELD/TOURNEY FEES
14,472
0
4,930
0
4,209
2,000
100.00%
PARK RENTAL FEES
3,929
3,889
3,682
5,000
4,508
3,500
- 30.00%
CONST /ENGIN COST REIMB
441,683
17,504
161,975
20,000
181,628
20,000
0.00%
DEVELOPER COST REIMS
59,359
1,592
135,271
5,000
50
5,000
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES GEN
0
681
479
50
0
0
- 100.00%
ANIMAL IMPOUND FINES
152
265
220
100
205
200
100.00%
LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION
4,500
1,500
0
200
0
0
- 100.00%
ADMIN OFFENSE FINE
375
451
1,000
0
0
0
0.00%
S.A. PRINCIPAL- COUNTY
1,644
5,970
7,763
0
118
0
0.00%
I NTEREST EARNINGS
467,575
309,836
163,547
246,339
205,501
193,469
- 21.46%
INT EARN - ANDERSON /SR CIT B
5,280
4,873
4,383
3,876
3,876
3,332
- 14.04%
INT EARN - DANNER TRKING
3,035
2,555
377
0
0
0
0.00%
INT EARN -SWAN RIVER
11,297
10,930
11,404
10,134
9,273
9,661
-4.67%
GEN CITY PROPERTY RENTAL
41,276
41,630
23,020
0
36,792
15,000
100.00%
RENTAL OF PW EQUIPMENT
0
0
0
0
112
0
0.00%
LEASE REVENUE
0
0
19,080
0
47,204
34,000
100.00%
CONTRIBUTIONS
0
27,706
20,186
0
5,050
0
0.00%
SALE OF GEN CITY PROPERTY
0
5,020
3,196
0
663
0
0.00%
SALE OF LOCK BOXES /PUB SAF
3,067
1,727
1,898
1,000
1,968
1,200
20.00%
SIGNS & INSTALL
476
494
105
0
0
0
0.00%
SALE OF PW PROPERTY
18,100
0
12,001
0
663
0
0.00%
SALE OF RECREATION PROP
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
COPIES /LISTS (TAXABLE)
690
- 287
245
100
90
50
- 50.00%
REFUNDS /REIMBURSEMENTS
15,630
18,733
21,536
2,000
29,524
2,000
0.00%
ASSESSMENT FEE REIMBURS
258
115
19,600
0
34,100
0
0.00%
DISCOUNT
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER MISC REVENUE
59,481
6,750
75,292
6,162
8,806
6,000
-2.63%
TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FOS
80,938
46,390
469,114
45,000
45,000
0
- 100.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$7,301,940
$7,634,809
$7,475,298
$6,329,450
$6,814,338
$6,393,620
1.01%
IC
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
General Government
Mayor & City Council
101
41110
The Mayor and City Council provide elected representation to the community with
control over matters of policy, budget, administration, and operations of the City.
Members participate in various committees, as well as direct staff, through the City
Administrator, as to their overall goals for the City.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Adopt policies and ordinances consistent with Council's position on growth,
zoning, and financial strategy.
2. Continue to work on the completion of the City's natural resource inventory
and traffic plan.
3. Examine City facility needs to meet future City operations.
4. Continue to work with City Administrator on succession planning for the City.
ISSUES:
1. Reduced tax capacity and levy limits which place pressure on the ability to
finance City operations at current levels.
2. Succession planning of City staff.
3. Operation of the City's new fiber optic network.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
# of City Council meetings
23
23
23
23
23
# of City Council workshops
and special meetings
49
61
27
20
15
# of City Council resolutions
105
96
80
80
75
.
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
Council's budget remains consistent with that of previous years. The increase in other
services and charges is due to budgeting room rental for council meetings from the
Community Center. This was not budgeted or charged in the past. Dues and
memberships consist of the Mayor's Association and League of Minnesota Cities.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007
2006
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
COUNCIL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$26,180
$24,062
$39,772
$41,600
$40,659
$40,443
-2.78%
SUPPLIES
171
0
118
0
578
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
7,507
10,527
20,602
11,900
11,396
21,325
79.20%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$33,858
$34,589
$60,492
$53,500
$52,633
$61,768
15.45%
i �
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
CITY ADMINISTRATION
General Government
City Administration
101
41301
City Administration provides the overall direction of the City, as determined by Council
and Mayor. The City Administrator serves as Chief Administrative Officer for the City,
ensuring that laws, ordinances, and resolutions of the City Council are enforced and
implemented. The City Administrator is responsible for managing the overall operations
of all City departments. The Deputy City Clerk's responsibilities involve the
management and retention of all official records and documents of the City. The Clerk is
also responsible for all election procedures.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Assist City Council in setting policies and procedures in accordance with
Council's position.
2. Provide direction and leadership on major city projects, budget management;
oversee performance evaluation and long -range plaming.
3. Continue with proactive succession planning regarding key staffing rolls
within the City's organization.
4. Continue converting City permanent paper documents to electronic format.
ISSUES:
Implications due to the decrease in tax capacity and levy limits for the City.
2. Long -range comprehensive and succession planning.
3. Long -range comprehensive traffic planning.
4. Operation of the City's new fiber optic network.
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Council meeting agendas prepared
48
55
32
43
38
Records converted to electronic
15%
35%
75%
75%
80%
Council minutes approved
58
48
41
43
38
an
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The budget amount are based on past expenditure levels with the following exceptions.
Personnel services includes a 0% cost of living increase and no step adjustments for
employees, but show an increase to reflect the deputy clerk position and administrative
assistant position which were not in the 2010 budget. All other items were held at or very
close to 2010 budget levels.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 %
ADMINISTRATIVE
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$240,792
$223,674
$250,568
$191,711
$189,266
$209,752
9.41%
SUPPLIES
53
5,799
214
250
95
200
- 20.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
41,848
31,149
13,336
12,658
22,004
15,450
20.16%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
14,692
0
0
0
100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$282,693
$260,622
$278,810
$204,819
$211,365
$225,402
10.05%
B-11
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
ELECTIONS
General Government
Deputy City Clerk
101
41410
The Election activity provides the preparation of any and all elections, including
organizing the polling places, election judges, and vote tabulations.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue to research a possible second polling precinct.
2. Prepare and stay current of election law changes for the 2012 elections.
ISSUES:
1. Stay current on election laws.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
#of voters
1,409
5,379
0
3,360
0
# of registered voters
N/A
N/A
N/A
6,734
6,734
# of polling precincts
1
1
1
1
1
# of election judges
20
40
0
48
0
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
There will be no elections held in 2011, so the funds budgeted were for maintenance
contracts of the City's voting machines and miscellaneous expenses. For 2010 funds
were spent to hold State and Local elections in the fall including primaries.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 %
ELECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$3,082
$88
$2,981
$21,185
$230
- 92.29%
SUPPLIES
0
417
0
450
2,437
0
- 100.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
140
10,866
867
10,800
12,998
1,000
- 90.74%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
5,399
0
300
0
0
- 100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$140
$19,764
$955
$14,531
$36,620
$1,230
- 91.54%
B-12
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION
General Government
Finance Director
101
41520
The Finance Department conducts the financial affairs of the City of Monticello in
accordance with the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and Generally
Accepted Accounting Principals (GAAP). This includes protecting the assets of the City,
the initiation of financial plans, investment and debt management, review and
implementation of internal controls, and accounting for every financial transaction of the
City including accounts payable, accounts receivable, payroll, and accounting control.
The preparation of the annual audited financial report and annual budget document are
also facilitated through finance.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue working to develop a financial management plan for the City.
2. Develop financial documents in a format to be eligible for review and award
of GFOA's award programs.
3. Provide meaningful and timely financial reports and information to Council,
Commissions and other City Departments.
4. Complete financial, payroll and utility billing software conversions.
5. Coordinate a central purchasing system including developing the use of
purchase orders.
ISSUES:
1. Complete implementation of new software systems for financial, payroll and
utility billing with integration of new processes for purchase orders, web
based applications and remote time card entry.
2. Implement improved reporting procedures to inform Council, Commissions,
and Departments.
3. Work with other Departments to find ways to reduce costs of City Operations.
B -13
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
of accts. payable checks
3,335
3,465
3,575
3,862
3,600
Awarded GFOA's Budget Award
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Awarded GFOA's Certificate of
$359,208
$328,684
$338,675
$325,424
-0.99%
Achievement
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Bond Rating
A2
A2
A2
Aa3
Aa3
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Finance budget includes funds to handle the financial transactions of the City, in an
efficient manner, while maintaining the highest level of internal controls and segregation
of duties. 2011 budgets are very seminal to the 2010 budget however the small increase
in supplies is for the purchase of a desk top scanner to improve efficiencies of the
accounts payable function of the department.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
FINANCE
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$426,449
$392,410
$359,208
$328,684
$338,675
$325,424
-0.99%
SUPPLIES
2,344
2,021
1,276
1,750
1,286
1,900
8.57%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
25,655
34,203
33,401
27,000
36,688
27,375
1.39%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$454,448
$428,634
$393,885
$357,434
$376,649
$354,699
-0.77%
B -14
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
AUDIT
General Government
Finance Director
101
41540
An audit of the City's finances must be completed on an annual basis for the City to
remain in compliance with Federal and State accounting practices.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Complete the financial audit in a timely fashion.
2. Continue to reduce the number of audit findings and adjustments.
ISSUES:
1. Reduction of audit findings and adjustments.
2. Increasing reporting requirements and auditing standards.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Audit submittal date to State
6/26
6/27
6/24
6/17
6/15
# of audit findings
10
6
2
0
0
Achieved GFOA award
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The budget for auditing consists entirely of the expenses associated with the required
audit process. In late 2007, a Request For Proposal (RFP) for audit services was sent to
several firms. The RFP guaranteed the cost for audit services for the years ended 2007
through 2009 and resulted in a cost decrease from previous years. This contract was
extended for years ending 2010, 2011, and 2012. A portion of the 2011 audit costs will
be paid from the FiberNet Fund since it is a new City operation and will have more time
spent on it as part of this audit cycle.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
AUDIT
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
43,200
43,375
41,000
36,100
37,600
28,625
- 20.71%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$43,200
$43,375
$41,000
$36,100
$37,600
$28,625
- 20.71%
B -15
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
CITY ASSESSING
General Government
Finance Director
101
41550
Assessing requirements are handled through a contract the City holds with the Wright
County Assessor. There are no plans to alter this activity.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To assess new and existing parcels within the City as required.
ISSUES:
1. Pressure of fairly appraising properties under current market trends.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
# New home construction
43
20
9
9
20
# New commercial construction
7
8
5
5
5
Total # of city parcels assessed
4,682
4,684
4,684
4,676
4,700
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
Assessing services are contracted with the Wright County Assessor. The estimated costs
for assessments are: 4,700 existing parcels @ $10.50, new construction; homes 20 @
$25.00, 3 commercial under $500,000 @ $25.00, and 2 commercial over $500,000 @
@100.00.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
ASSESSING
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
52,744
51,413
50,518
51,175
49,598
50,475
-1.37%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$52,744
$51,413
$50,518
$51,175
$49,598
$50,475
-1.37%
i e
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
LEGAL
General Government
City Administrator
101
41601
All legal services are currently contracted with a private legal firm. Activities included
are the issuance of legal opinions, preparation of ordinances, resolutions, contracts, and
agreements, and the conduct of civil litigation. Additional legal requirements, such as
publications, and dues are also directed to legal activities.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue contracting for legal council.
ISSUES:
1. Rising costs associated with legal council.
2. Increased need for legal council's involved in issues.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
Legal services are contracted with a private legal firm. Additionally, legal notice
publications and membership dues to the Coalition of Utility Cities are based out of this
activity, hi 2010, the City of Monticello and Red Wing teamed up to hire a lobbyist to
lobby the State for funds for nuclear storage emergency planning due to the closure of
Yucca Mountain by the Federal Government.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
LEGAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
96,701
73,556
71,039
57,000
103,288
57,000
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$96,701
$73;556
$71,039
$57,000
$103,288
$57,000
0.00%
B-17
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
HUMAN RESOURCES
General Government
City Administrator
101
41801
Human Resources activities support the primary mission of the City through the effective
recruitment, selection, development, training and assessment of appropriate human
resource needs. Employee benefits and compensation administration, implementation of,
and compliance with Federal and State employment laws, labor negotiations, processing
of employee grievances, and development of personnel policies are major human
resource functions.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Provide recruiting, interviewing, and other personnel services for all City
departments.
2. Administer classification and compensation system for all employees in
compliance with pay equity.
3. Plan and coordinate in- house training programs for City staff.
4. Administer City benefit plans.
ISSUES:
1. Develop City personnel handbook.
2. Develop various personnel policies.
3. Develop and implement City drug and alcohol testing program.
4. Negotiate new union contract for public works employees.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
# of full -time positions
# of part -time positions
# of full -time positions filled
# of other positions filled
Average # of employees
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
50
50
52
61
65
N/A
71
73
75
80
N/A
6
7
8
5
N/A
26
50
49
25
N/A
120
125
136
140
It
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Human Resource Activity was a new activity in 2009 for the City since the part-time
position of hurnan resource manager was created and filled in 2008. In 2010 the position
was changed to a full -time position. The 2011 budget reflect estimated costs for setting
up trainings, providing City staff with benefit and compensation information and
miscellaneous expenses based on past expenditures. The budget for consultant to provide
training to employees was increase for 2011.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
HUMAN RESOURCES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$15,698
$54,777
$70,280
$71,249
$73,959
5.23%
SUPPLIES
0
32
0
2,000
353
1,000
- 50.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
9,125
9,650
9,061
11,550
19.69%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $15,730 $63,902 $81,930 $80,663 $86,509 5.59%
B -19
PLANNING, ZONING, & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT: General Government
SUPERVISOR: Community Development Director
FUND #: 101
ACTIVITY #: 41910
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Community Development and Planning Department is responsible for long -range
and current planning efforts for Monticello. The Department is responsible for regulating
development and use standards as outlined in the zoning and subdivision ordinance; these
standards are aimed at protecting and promoting public health, safety, and welfare. The
Department oversees coordination with regional planning and service providers including
Monticello Township Board, Wright County Planning & Zoning, Sherburne County
Planning and Zoning and regional transit entities. The Department also provides citizens,
business owners, and developers with current, easily accessible information about
Monticello's planning process and what's happening in their community.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Completion of zoning ordinance update.
2. Implementation of Comprehensive Plan objectives.
3. Support for downtown redevelopment and revitalization, including the
Embracing Downtown Monticello project.
4. Involvement in regional transportation planning and its impact on land use
and growth objectives.
5. Bertram Chain of Lakes acquisition and master planning.
6. Implementation of more e- government options for permitting and
development.
7. Continued implementation and training on the City's GIS.
8. Continued improvements of the City's development and planning process.
ISSUES:
1. Implementation of amended City zoning ordinance.
2. Conditional Use Permit tracking and audits.
3. Review of current/future development financing policies.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010
# ofplarming applications 37 35 29 17 20
# of project reconciliations 14 19 21 4 15
# of planning commission meetings 12 12 14 24* 15
*Zoning Ordinance Revision required additional monthly meetings.
MW
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Planning, Zoning and Community Development budget was decreased for 2011 to
reflect less development activity taking place base on current activity and the economic
state of the area, state, and nation. Also the majority of the Zoning Ordinance Revision
work was completed in 2010 and therefore the consultants will not be needed as much,
reducing those costs. Personnel services include funds for an administrative assistant
position in 2010, as the position was filled in 2010.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
PLANNING & ZONING
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$67,750
$80,992
$82,376
$63,801
$85,259
$100,700
20.17%
SUPPLIES
0
2,044
51
550
3,431
200
- 63.64%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
186,569
122,127
62,940
73,450
72,927
66,000
- 10.14%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$254,319
$205,163
$145,367
$157,801
$161,617
$166,900
5.77%
B -21
INFORMATION SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
General Government
Finance Director
101
41920
This activity manages the data processing and computer needs for all departments of the
City. It provides for maintenance of existing computer equipment and servers, upgrades
to hardware and software, and installation of new computer equipment and software. In
addition, electronic surveillance /security, wireless technology, telecommunications,
electronic storage and recovery, and other technology needs are covered under this area.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Purchase /upgrade computer hardware and software to keep pace with City
technology needs in accordance with replacement cycle.
2. Implement computer security to meet audit standards and requirements.
3. Update information systems disaster recovery plan for the City.
4. Respond to data processing requests within 30 -60 minutes and develop action
plan to resolve issue, if necessary.
ISSUES:
1. Update lists and develop a master inventory of personal computers, software
and peripherals used in the City.
2. Develop filing system for work requests and other data processing records.
3. Identify and develop plans for the many components associated with a fiber
optics network and service enterprise.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
B -22
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
This activity purchases all hardware and software equipment for the City, based on an
annual replacement schedule. In 2011, $16,900 has been budgeted for the replacement
and addition of computer equipment. Professional services for website maintenance were
decreased for 2011 as more of the web site will be maintained by City staff.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 %
DATA PROCESSING
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$31,650
$31,250
$26,124
$33,088
5.88%
SUPPLIES
29,550
32,118
15,133
20,000
17,001
20,900
4.50%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
174,936
75,274
192,276
98,975
62,786
95,850
-3.16%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
12,230
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$216,716
$107,392
$239,059
$150,225
$105,911
$149,838
-0.26%
B -23
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
CITY HALL
General Government
City Administrator
101
41940
The activity for this department is to allow City Hall to run smoothly, by providing
supplies, customer service, and staffing resources for the City.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To provide fhendly, knowledgeable customer service to the public.
2. Provide adequate and consistent hours of business throughout the year.
3. Maintain a reputable facility to house meetings and staff.
4. Expansion of resources for information distribution.
ISSUES:
1. Maintaining current, accurate information for all public sources.
2. Continuing to improve internal and external communication systems.
3. Management of Citizen Service Desk with continued growth of inquiries and
need to improve response times.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
# of newsletters published
3
3
3
2
2
# of utility inserts published
N/A
N/A
2
2
3
Service desk data entry
N/A
294
365
392
400
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
Items budgeted for the City Hall Activity are commonly shared among all departments
operating out of City Hall, as well as some supplies used by the Community Center.
2011 budget amounts are consistent with 2010 budgets and estimated expenditures.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
CITY HALL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$3,012
$43,003
$42,415
$57,383
$83,899
$55,059
-4.05%
SUPPLIES
19,594
23,786
18,246
25,400
22,035
22,050
- 13.19%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
107,567
115,797
168,397
124,625
163,328
123,100
-1.22%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$130,173
$182,586
$229,058
$207,408
$269,262
$200,209
-3.47%
B -24
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
PRAIRE CENTER BUILDING
General Government
City Administrator
101
41941
The Prairie Center Building is a City owned building which the City leases space to its
FiberNet Monticello operations, a non - profit group and provides office space for the
Wright County Sheriff's Department. This activity is for the maintenance of this facility.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To provide a well maintain facility.
ISSUES:
1. Maintain facility with current staff and available funds.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Prairie Center Building was purchased in 2009 and the 2011 budget was estimated
using 2009 actual expenditures.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
PRAIRIE CENTER BUILDING
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
1,155
0
1,188
1,500
100.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
19,314
0
38,062
19,675
100.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
596,761
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$0
$0
$617,230
$0
$39,250
$21,175
100.00%
1=1
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
LAW ENFORCEMENT
Public Safety
City Administrator
101
42101
All law enforcement services are contracted with the Wright County Sheriff's
Department. The Sheriff's Department maintains a local office in City Hall, and is
contracted by the City for approximately 19,000 hours annually.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue contracting for law enforcement services through the Wright County
Sheriffs Department.
ISSUES:
1. Residents concerns regarding having our own police force.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
# of service calls
2,812
.2,505
2,946
2,600
2,600
# of traffic calls
2,185
2,128
1,614
1,800
1,800
# of motor vehicle crashes
376
386
402
375
375
# of crimes
1,472
1,310
1,520
1,300
1,300
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
Law enforcement services are contracted with Wright County Sheriffs Department. The
2011 hourly rate is $59.00 compared to $57.50 in 2010, an increase of 2.6 %. The City
has budgeted for 18,980 hours of law enforcement services.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
LAW ENFORCEMENT
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
917,659
990,621
1,064,389
1,096,000
1,093,658
1,121,200
2.30%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
5,454
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$923,113
$990,621
$1,064,389
$1,096,000
$1,093,658
$1,121,200
2.30%
B -26
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Public Safety
Fire Chief
101
42201
The Fire Department response to all fire, rescue, hazardous material and some medical
and accident incidents within the City of Monticello and surrounding Townships. It also
provides fire inspection services. The department is a paid on call volunteer department.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Assemble a confined space entry team and equipment.
2. Purchase and put into place a "Duty Officer" command vehicle.
3. Purchase and place into service a new pumper truck.
4. Develop NIMS training for all city departments.
ISSUES:
1. Improve response times.
2. Develop and implement NIMS training for all staff and council.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
# of responses 339 402 202 282 275
# of firefighters 30 30 30 30 30
B -27
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Fire Department consists of paid volunteers. For 2011, firefighters will be paid
$10.00 per hour, which is the same hourly rate received since 2008. Other Fire
Department expenditures budgeted similarly as in 2010. There is a new expenditure for
the annual maintenance and licensing of the department's 80OMH radios in the amount of
$7,245. Capital Outlay expenditures for 2011 are included in the City's capital
improvement plan (Capital Project Funds section of this document) and budgeted in the
Capital Revolving Fund on page C -26 and C -27.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
FIRE
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$90,594
$113,979
$99,790
$99,108
$111,332
$106,892
7.85%
SUPPLIES
60,701
29,870
53,014
25,100
21,141
34,095
35.84%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
144,832
57,586
95,647
60,502
63,039
66,227
9.46%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
15,746
527,370
12,500
0
0
- 100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$296,127
$217,181
$775,821
$197,210
$195,512
$207,214
5.07%
B -28
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
FIRE RELIEF
Public Safety
City Administrator
101
42202
The Fire Relief Activity is specifically designed to track the City's contribution to the
Relief Association of the State Aid Fire Relief fund, which must be contributed to the
Relief Association.
OBJECTIVES:
ISSUES:
Provide pension funds for the Monticello Fire Relief Association.
To become full funded.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010
Pension assets (liability) $1,133,822 $740,263 $1,010,161 $1,015,000 $1,025,000
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The fire relief budget consists of expenditures specifically related to the Monticello Fire
Relief Association. The funds budgeted is the estimated aid received from the State, then
expensed to the Association.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 %
FIRE RELIEF
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
74,110
80,127
80,000
66,758
65,000
- 18.75%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $74,110 $80,127 $80,000 $66,758 $65,000 - 18.75%
C
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
BUILDING INSPECTIONS
Public Safety
Community Development Director
101
42401
The Building Department inspects all new and remodeled construction within the City by
a state certified building inspector. The department also initiates all building permits, as
well as overseeing the enforcement of all public nuisance and ordinance issues.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue implementation of the rental licensing program.
2. Continue implementation of zoning ordinance changes.
3. Continue sign ordinance update.
4. Implement yearly contractor, realtor, and rental property owner workshops.
5. Continue public relations contact. Improve City's public perception image.
6. Continue implementation of the building codes.
ISSUES:
1. Managing and prioritizing department workloads.
2. Facing the challenges of a growing regional center city and the possible
rebound of residential property growth.
3. Keep up with rental license inspections of investor owned residential
properties.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
# of building permits issued
Valuation of permits issued
(in 1,000's)
# of public nuisance notices
# of rental units
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
962 3,681 879 607 600
$45,917 $45,950 $11,630 $9,033 $12,000
377 504 351 519 300
N/A 1,194 1,194
B -30
1,200 1,200
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Building Department has budgeted $5,000 in 2010 to cover the replacement of
department vehicles in the future compared to $18,000 in 2009 and $28,500 in 2008.
This vehicle will be purchased from the Capital Revolving Fund in 2011. In 2009 the
Chief Building Official retired and was replaced by one of the City's other building
inspectors at a lower salary. The building inspector position vacated has been left vacant
due to decreased building activity due to the economy and lack of building activity
estimated for 2011.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
BUILDING INSPECTIONS
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$274,796
$343,440
$288,217
$227,334
$233,847
$226,462
-0.38%
SUPPLIES
11,717
12,294
8,128
8,700
3,541
7,100
- 18.39%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
37,308
50,045
10,552
13,400
12,383
11,650
- 13.06%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
5,000
0
0
- 100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$323,821
$405,779
$306,897
$254,434
$249,771
$245,212
- 3.62%
B -31
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
CIVIL DEFENSE
Public Safety
Chief Building Official
101
42501
The department of Civil Defense provides constant defense coverage for all weather and
power plant related emergency situations within the City.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Implement city hall, community center, and national guard emergency
preparedness.
ISSUES:
1. Little or no warning when an emergency occurs.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2011 budget is based on the 2010 budget, since the retirement of the City's previous
Chief Building Official, much of this activity's responsibilities have been transferred to
Wright County with the City participating as part of the emergency management team.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
CIVIL DEFENSE
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$238
$3,571
$6,653
$0
$1,120
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
122
0
100
2,025
100
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
7,785
443
1,240
1,300
1,939
1,300
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$8,023
$4,136
$7,893
$1,400
$5,084
$1,400
0.00%
B -32
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
ANIMAL CONTROL
Public Safety
Project Coordinator
101
42701
The City contracts with a private individual for their animal control services. The City
owns and maintains the building the animal control facility operates from. The City also
contracts to nearby communities, allowing them to use our services and facility for a fee.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To address issues within the City and surrounding communities in a timely
and courteous manner.
2. Continue to improve animal control response time.
3. Continue to improve billing procedures for animal control issues.
ISSUES:
1. To provide quick response to residents on animal control concerns.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The largest budgeted item is for the $37,500 budgeted for the professional service
contract to handle all animal control issues for the City of Monticello. The remaining
budgeted items are for maintaining the animal control facility and miscellaneous
expenses related to animal control.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
ANIMAL CONTROL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
.PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
$2,105
$5,022
$1,558
$1,900
$1,901
$1;875
-1.32%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
42,952
43,250
55,531
43,500
42,659
44,182
1.57%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $45,057 $48,272 $57,089 $45,400 $44,560 $46,057 1.45%
B -33
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
Public Safety
City Administrator
101
42810
The City's National Guard facility is housed in the Community Center Complex. The
City maintains the facility for the Guard.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To maintain a clean, modern facility for use by the National Guard.
ISSUES:
There are no issues currently for maintaining the National Guard facility.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time.
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The City rents the National Guard Area from the Community Center Complex. The
area's operating costs are paid with City funds.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
NATIONAL GUARD
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
111
0
232
1,600
449
1,000
- 37.50%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
12,533
12,607
20,406
21,750
27,009
23,300
7.13%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$12,644
$12,607
$20,638
$23,350
$27,458
$24,300
4.07%
1: 1
PUBLIC WORKS - ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director
FUND #: 101
ACTIVITY #: 43110
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Public Works Administration (PW Administration) activity oversees the daily
operations of the Street, Parks, Water, Sewer, Wastewater Treatment Plant, and
Inspection activities. PW Administration also manages all large City projects, and
implements all changes to operations and policy the City has in place for public works.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue the implementation of a biosolids management system.
2. Implement major street lighting project plan.
3. Continue implementing the wellhead protection plan.
4. Manage the development of a new public works facility and expansion of the
wastewater treatment plant.
ISSUES:
1. Balance the public works department needs with available funds.
2. Manage of City's wastewater treatment system.
3. Implement a capital improvement program for City infrastructure.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
# of City projects started 18 15 10 3 5
# of City projects completed N/A 12 12 4 5
B -35
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
Personnel services for 2011 reduces the public works director's time from 70% to 60%
spent on this activity and more time spent on water and sewer fund activities.
For 2011 the biggest change is the budgeting of insurance costs in the various activities,
instead of just in the General Fund as unallocated insurance. This results in the increase
in other service and charges for 2011. All other items budgeted at 2010 levels.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
PW /ADMINISTRATION
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$198,702
$236,103
$212,476
$191,826
$214,125
$167,955
- 12,44%
SUPPLIES
4,184
5,089
5,233
4,030
4,411
3,950
-1.99%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
57,085
34,648
17,976
23,675
17,596
36,468
54.04%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
466,856
5,790
3,109
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$726,827
$281,630
$238,794
$219,531
$236,132
$208,373
- 5.08%
1
PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT:
Public Works
SUPERVISOR:
City Engineer
FUND #:
101
ACTIVITY #:
43111
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Engineering activity reviews and approves commercial and industrial site plans and
residential development plans, and assists with the development and review of City codes
and ordinances. The Engineering activity also assists with the development and
management of the City's stone water pollution prevention program, City improvement
projects, and miscellaneous mapping. In addition, the Engineering activity responds to
residents with issues related to storm water drainage and pedestrian, bicycle, and
vehicular traffic, and reviews, updates and supports the City's general specifications and
standard detail plates for street and utility construction and our plan requirements and
design guidelines.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Improve ability to assist other departments with CADD and GIS related
requests.
2. Implement new Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP).
3. Continue to implement and improve the City's new Geographic Information
System (GIS).
4. Continue to educate the public on purposes and practices associated with
conservation and drainage easements and stone water ponds.
ISSUES:
1. Increasing restrictions for storm water runoff by MPCA.
2. Lack of knowledge regarding purposes and practices associated with
conservation and drainage easements and storm water ponds.
3. Increased phosphorus restrictions for wastewater effluent by MPCA.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Response to service requests 50 60 60 75 100
Response to on -line requests N/A 60 60 85 125
B -37
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The budget for the Engineering activity predominantly consists of engineering and other
professional service fees. These expenditures consist of both reimbursable and non-
reimbursable expenditures. For 2011 the only significant budget change is that since new
development activity has not occurred in 2010 and is anticipated to be very slow in 2011,
the budget has been decreased for engineering services related to new development.
Funds are budgeted for continued improvements and development of the City's GIS
system.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
PWIENGINEERING
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$92,294
$119,150
$133,455
$139,450
$157,527
$147,441
5.73%
SUPPLIES
150
638
2,674
5,170
1,392
100
- 98.07%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
254,915
198,363
109,103
100,560
71,514
70,200
- 30.19%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$347,359
$318,151
$245,232
$245,180
$230,433
$217,741
- 11.19%
ff- ,
PUBLIC WORKS - INSPECTIONS
DEPARTMENT:
Public Works
SUPERVISOR:
City Engineer
FUND #:
101
ACTIVITY #:
43115
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The inspection activity is responsible to observe and inspect City infrastructure projects.
Personnel are also responsible for recording as- builts, design assistance, locating and
inspecting City utilities, and sidewalk inspections.
OBJECTIVES:
Learn and use the City's GIS system.
2. Maintain certifications and attend appropriate classes and workshops.
3. Provide support for the engineering activity.
4. Improve communication between public works, engineering and inspection
activities.
ISSUES:
1. Utilizing the GIS system to its full potential and train others staff on its uses.
2. Workload issues.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time.
M
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
There are no major changes to the public works inspection activity for 2011.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 %
PW /INSPECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$114,197
$117,578
$110,496
$98,575
$86,395
$99,917
1.36%
SUPPLIES
5,761
12,637
2,466
8,050
2,743
6,825
- 15.22%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
4,405
4,961
6,313
4,650
2,848
5,530
18.92%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
21,300
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$145,663
$135,176
$119,275
$111,275
$91,986
$112,272
0.90%
i I
PUBLIC WORKS - STREETS & ALLEYS
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
Public Works
Streets Superintendent
101
43120
The foremost responsibility of the streets division is to perform the necessary tasks to
reduce the depreciation of the city streets and uphold the desirable standards of
appearance, serviceability, and safety. This includes upkeep such as street sweeping,
repair of roadway surface areas, medians, sidewalks, boulevards, alleys, catch basins, and
storm sewers.
OBJECTIVES:
Continue street reconstruction of older road surfaces by evaluating road wear.
2. Increase street chip seal coating projects.
3. Maintain and update equipment and vehicles.
4. Help maintain and use City GIS system.
5. Continue street crack sealing program.
ISSUES:
1. Educate the public on what the boulevards are to be used for.
2. Educating the public on storm water operations.
3. Increased costs of fuel and street products due to fuel costs.
4. Educate the public on the value of good maintenance programs for our
infrastructure.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
Pounds of crack sealer
14,200
18,150
Sq. yards of chip sealing
37,294
101,442
Miles of streets
67.64
67.64
Tons of blacktop patching
330
200
B -41
2009
2010
2011
24,160
20,000
20,000
58,000
75,000
75,000
68.00
68.00
68.00
200
200
200
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
Budget changes for 2011 include a decrease in overtime salaries and health insurance
costs based on the City's new insurance coverage. Charges for services included
insurance cost for vehicles and property in the open which was previously budgeted in
unallocated insurance. All equipment purchases for 2011 will be purchased from the
Capital Revolving Fund and is outlined in the Capital Project Fund section of this
document. For 2011 only a $70,000 seal coat project is budgeted, which is a decrease of
$10,000 from the 2010 budget.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
PW /STREETS &ALLEYS
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$368,066
$402,202
$369,526
$433,254
$368,343
$428,552
-1.09%
SUPPLIES
100,533
121,257
117,009
127,425
125,667
130,325
2.28%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
20,037
104,228
112,019
25,400
10,361
46,513
83.12%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
163,438
96,933
180,094
100,500
73,921
70,000
- 30.35%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$652,074
$724,620
$778,648
$686,579
$578,292
$675,390
-1.63%
B -42
PUBLIC WORKS - ICE & SNOW
DEPARTMENT:
Public Works
SUPERVISOR:
Streets Superintendent
FUND #:
101
ACTIVITY #:
43125
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The City's Ice & Snow activity is responsible for the control of ice and snow on City
streets, sidewalks and City owned public parking lots. The activity provides control in a
safe and cost effective manner, keeping in mind safety, budget, personnel, and
environmental concerns.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue to maintain and update equipment and vehicles in a timely manner.
2. Learn ways to effectively use the City's GIS system.
ISSUES:
1. Staffing and budgeting for unpredictable circumstances.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Inches of snow
37.25
42
50
60
50
# of plowing events
11
15
20
30
20
Tons of salt used
274
474
475
450
400
Tons of sand used
347
611
800
700
650
B -43
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Ice and Snow activity budget for 2011 has no major changes from 2010.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
PW /ICE & SNOW
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$83,147
$77,026
$116,200
$65,624
$124,913
$67,303
2.56%
SUPPLIES
32,124
59,662
53,551
71,550
63,788
70,650
-1.26%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
3,170
2,798
943
3,800
281
3,300
- 13.16%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
129,516
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$118,441
$269,002
$170,694
$140,974
$188,982
$141,253
0.20%
Ii
PUBLIC WORKS - SHOP & GARAGE
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent
FUND #: 101
ACTIVITY #: 43127
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Shop & Garage activity maintains all City vehicles and equipment for the Streets, Ice
& Snow, Parks, Water and Sewer activities in a safe and efficient manner.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Update equipment and vehicles.
2. Maintain equipment and vehicles to operate efficiently and safely.
ISSUES:
1. Aging equipment.
2. Increased safety regulation for equipment and vehicles.
111 ff7.Y117\:- 4 0 1 V.YI] F7:4 9 [I7,11 17110111
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
For 2011 there were no significant budget changes for the Shop & Garage activity. The
budget consists of equipment parts, lubricants, and other repair supplies and the costs to
heat/cool and supply electricity to the City shop and garage area.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
PW /SHOP & GARAGE
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$68,380
$78,354
$87,007
$84,439
$96,443
$84,963
0.62%
SUPPLIES
40,607
37,584
43,964
38,100
27,533
39,300
3.15%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
52,719
47,472
45,802
54,350
56,047
50,300
-7.45%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
500
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $161,706 $163,410 $176,773 $177,389 $180,023 $174,563 -1.59%
m
PUBLIC WORKS — STORM WATER
DEPARTMENT:
Public Works
SUPERVISOR:
City Engineer
FUND #:
101
ACTIVITY #:
43130
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Storm Water activity is responsible for expenditures related to the maintenance of
the City's storm water system. This consists of inspections and cleaning of all storm
water mains, ditches, and ponds, and repairing damaged mains.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Monitor, repair, and clean storm water holding ponds.
2. Monitor, repair, and clean storm water mains and ditches.
ISSUES:
1. Continued deterioration of storm water system, without proper funding for
repairs, replacement or improvements.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
# of miles of storm water mains
N/A
N/A
/ City
/ City
/4 City
Clean septor manholes
N/A
N/A
4
4
4
GPS storm structures
N/A
N/A
'/ City
/ City
/a City
Storm water manhole maintenance
N/A
N/A
/ City
/ City
/ City
Storm water system locates
N/A
N/A
100
100
100
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2011 budget form the storm water activity is for general maintenance of the City's
storm water system and the cleaning and restoration of one holding pond.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
STORMWATER MAINTANANCE
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$16,635
$0
$13,079
$4,129
100.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
2,073
4,000
100.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
13,913
0
1,041
6,000
100.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
7,255
25,000
100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $30,548 $0 $23,448 $39,129 #DIV /01
I: c
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent
FUND #: 101
ACTIVITY #: 43140
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Parking Lot activity is responsible for reducing the depreciation of the City owned
parking lots. This includes patching, striping, repairing, and resurfacing as needed.
OBJECTIVES:
3. Monitor parking lots and patch and stripe as needed.
4. Continue adding minor plantings to parking lots.
ISSUES:
2. Continued deterioration of parking lots, without proper funding for
replacement.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
# of City owned parking lots 5 5 5 5 5
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Parking Lot activity's budget includes $7,000 for parking lot improvements in 2011
as there was in 2010 and there are no other significant budget changes for 2011.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
PW /PARKING LOTS
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$1,008
$217
$0
$869
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
746
107
2,800
50
2,800
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
2,367
1,468
3,306
4,000
4,275
4,000
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
7,000
0
7,000
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$2,367
$3,222
$3,630
$13,800
$5,194
$13,800
0.00%
B -47
PUBLIC WORKS - STREET LIGHTING
DEPARTMENT:
Public Works
SUPERVISOR:
Public Works Director
FUND #:
101
ACTIVITY #:
43160
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Street Lighting activity is to maintain the new and existing street lighting within the
City. This includes maintaining the bulbs and fixtures once they have been installed, as
well as the electrical used for the lighting.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Work with MNDOT to add battery back -up to signals on TH 25 in the future.
2. Daft a complete new street lighting policy encompassing all changes to
existing policy.
ISSUES:
1. Increased electrical costs and budget constraints.
2. Verify lamp and fixtures maintenance by utility companies.
3. Need maintenance and upgrades on several signal systems and the lack of
assistance form Wright County, MNDOT and consulting engineer.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
# of street lights maintained
# of street scape lights
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
84 94 94 100 120
40 40 40 50 60
This department accounts for the maintenance and daily expenses of the City's street
lights, of which, electrical costs are the largest expenditure at $150,000. The remaining
funds are for repair items and supplies for maintaining the street lights.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
PW /STREET LIGHTING
2007
ACTUAL
2008
ACTUAL
2009
ACTUAL
2010
BUDGET
2010
PROJECTED
2011
BUDGET
%
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
(165)
1,952
17,931
2,500
12,618
2,500
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
154,260
227,557
184,841
166,000
184,849
172,500
3.92%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
68,092
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$222,187
$229,509
$202,772
$168,500
$197,467
$175,000
3.86%
11-mm
PUBLIC WORKS - REFUSE COLLECTION
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
Sanitation
Public Works Director
101
43230
The City contracts with a private company to pick up refuse and recycling for residents
within the City. Residents pay a quarterly rental fee on their garbage cart, as well as a
one time charge for a recycling bin. All other costs are negotiated, and paid by the City.
The City also holds a Junk Amnesty day, in which residents can drop off any unwanted
items, for a small fee.
OBJECTIVES:
Develop a more efficient system in repairing garbage carts.
Implement a new recycling system to increase recycling and decrease refuse.
ISSUES:
1. The amount of time spent on repairing of garbage carts.
2. Budget constraints.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The largest budget change is that the City's refuse hauler took over the recycling and
garbage cart maintenance and replacement in 2010, so for 2011 no funds were budgeted
in the supply budget for carts. The balance of the expenditures is based on the contract
the City has with its refuse hauler.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REFUSE COLLECTION
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$6,393
$9,152
$14,029
$10,429
$1,760
$3,447
- 66.95%
SUPPLIES
24735
17,228
3,038
11,200
2,822
2,100
- 81.25%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
478,080
487,928
530,093
490,300
530,322
536,700
9.46%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $509,208 $514,308 $547,160 $511,929 $534,904 $542,247 5.92%
COMMUNITY CELEBRATIONS
DEPARTMENT: Culture and Recreation
SUPERVISOR: Community Development Director
FUND #: 101
ACTIVITY #: 45130
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The activity of Community Celebrations is to coordinate and participate in the City's
celebrations, as well as share holiday spirit throughout the community.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Increase the participation of Walk and Roll.
2. Increase the participation of Riverfest.
3. Maintain Holiday decorations throughout the City.
ISSUES:
1. Budget constraints.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
# of participants in Walk & Roll:
Community (Walkers) 300 500 500 500 550
Business (Booths) 62 66 75 55 70
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Community Celebrations budget includes expenditures for Walk and Roll, the
Riverfest Block Park, and to maintain Holiday decorations.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
COMMUNITY CELEBRATIONS
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
3,110
2,252
2,072
3,000
1,359
2,300
- 23.33%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$3,110
$2,252
$2,072
$3,000
$1,359
$2,300
- 23.33%
i it
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
SENIOR CENTER
Culture and Recreation
City Administrator
101
45175
The City's Senior Center facility is housed in the Community Center Complex. The City
maintains the facility for the Senior Center.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To maintain a clean, modern facility for use by the Seniors of Monticello.
ISSUES:
1. Budget constraints.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The City rents the Senior Center area from the Community Center Complex. The area is
maintained and insured by City funds. In addition, the City gives an annual contribution
to the Senior Center. In 2011, the contribution amount is $49,750, as it has been the
previous two years.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
SENIOR CENTER
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$7
$133
$131
$344
$428
$345
0.22%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
750
0
250
- 66.67%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
56,205
57,999
93,171
95,050
72,683
94,350
-0.74%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$56,212
$58,132
$93,302
$96,144
$73,111
$94,945
-1.25%
B-51
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
COMMUNITY EDUCATION
Culture and Recreation
City Administrator
101
45176
The City has, for several years, contributed to the community education program in the
Monticello school district. This annual contribution is given to help subsidize summer
recreational activities, such as little league and T -ball.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue to subsidize the Community Education program with an annual
contribution.
ISSUES:
1. Budget constraints.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The City in the past contributed, on an annual basis, $12,740 to the local community
education program to help subsidize summer recreational programs. However, due to
budget constraints this was cut from the 2010 budget as a cost savings and also was not
included in 2011 budget.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
COMMUNITY EDUCATION
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
12,740
12,740
12,740
0
0
0
#DIV /OI
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$12,740
$12.,740
$12,740
$0
$0
$0
#DIV /01
B -52
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
Y.M.C.A.
Culture and Recreation
City Administrator
101
45177
The City has, for several years, contributed to the Y.M.C.A. This annual contribution
was given to help subsidize activities that members of the community may take
advantage o£
OBJECTIVES:
There are no objectives for the Y.M.C.A., since the City elected to stop funding this
activity in 2008.
ISSUES:
1. The City and County are working to purchase the Y.M.C.A, property and
therefore will not fund this activity.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The City and County are currently working on purchasing the 1,200 acre Y.M.C.A.. site
(known as Bertram Chain of Lakes) and as such the City has elected not to fund this
activity beginning in 2008.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
Y.M.C.A.
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
5,460
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$5,460
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
B -53
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
TRANSIT
Culture and Recreation
City Administrator
101
45178
Currently, transit services are by dial -a -ride bus service only. Bus services in the City are
provided by River Rider Bus Company. However, Monticello will need to monitor and
evaluate needed involvement in transit as related to the Northstar Commuter Rail system
and increasing traffic congestion on Interstate 94.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To continue contributing to the River Rider transportation system.
2. Evaluation of service enhancement needs due to implementation of the
Northstar Commuter Rail system.
3. Review of need for involvement in I -94 Commuter Study for service options.
ISSUES:
1. Budget constraints.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Adult Rides
N/A
N/A
2,534
1,804
2,000
60+ Rides
N/A
N/A
2,738
2,350
2,400
Dis /WC Rides
N/A
N/A
237
253
275
Student Rides
N/A
N/A
1,392
1,361
1,400
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The City contributes $3,000 in 2011 to River Rider, for a future bus purchase for the
Monticello route.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
TRANSIT -RIVER RIDER
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
5,000
0
3,000
- 40.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$0
$0
$0
$5,000
$0
$3,000
- 40.00%
B -54
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
ICE ARENA
Culture and Recreation
City Administrator
101
45198
The City has agreed to a ten year contribution commitment to the Community Ice Arena,
agreeing to contribute $75,000 annually. The agreed upon contribution began in 2004,
and will terminate after 2013.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Contribute $75,000, as previously committed.
ISSUES:
1. Budget constraints.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The City has committed $75,000 per year for ten years, beginning in 2004 and ending
after 2013.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 %
COMMUNITY ICE ARENA ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
75,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
75,000
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
0.00%
B -55
PUBLIC WORKS - PARKS - ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
Culture and Recreation
Parks Superintendent
101
45201
The Parks Administration activity maintains the parks and trails within the City. This
includes maintaining and improving playground and picnic facilities, fertilizing and
mowing of grass, maintaining athletic fields, flooding and maintenance of outdoor ice
rinks, snow and ice removal, and tree preservation within the parks system of the City.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue pathway maintenance.
2. Use the City's GIS to improve activity efficiencies.
3. Continue implementing park plan for regional park at current YMCA land.
ISSUES:
1. Other maintenance concerns coming up and not allowing completion of
existing projects.
2. Budget constraints for future and existing projects.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Acres of park land maintained
N/A
100
180
180
180
Miles of trails maintained
N/A
16.5
16.5
16.5
16.5
# of events held in parks
N/A
129
130
130
130
# of winter skating days
42
91
100
120
125
RM
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The parks budget consists of expenses needed to maintain the City's parks and trails. The
2011 budget is consistent with the 2010 budget and past expenditure levels except for a
decrease in budget for landscape materials. The capital equipment budget for 2011
included the Capital Projects section of this document with funding coming from the
Capital Revolving Fund.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011
PARKS/ADMINISTRATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$304,780
$332,407
$344,255
$365,496
$331,319
$365,445
-0.01%
SUPPLIES
65,485
84,309
78,174
107,525
69,290
99,675
- 7.30%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
61,657
32,248
88,990
70,625
47,537
71,564
1.33%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
46,022
31,950
23,593
0
2,630
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
200,000
100,000
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$477,944
$680,914
$635,012
$543,646
$450,776
$536,684
-1.28%
B-$7
PUBLIC WORKS - PARKS - IMPROVEMENTS
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
Culture and Recreation
Parks Superintendent
101
45202
The Parks Improvement activity improves the parks and trails within the City. This
includes improving playground and picnic facilities and pathways. These assets of the
City are extensively used by residents, and improvements must be made to uphold the
safety, functionality, and beauty the City represents.
OBJECTIVES:
Restore or replace cemetery grave stones at Hillside Cemetery.
ISSUES:
1. Budget constraints.
2. Other maintenance concerns not allowing time to complete projects.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Park Improvement budget designates monies to improve the City's parks and
pathways. Past budgets have included $9,000 for picnic tables, BBQ grills, and benches.
2009 capital outlay expenditures include $20,000 for improvements to Sunset Ponds
Park, $20,000 for improvements to the Ellison Park shelter, $20,000 for trail and pathway
improvements, and $15,000 for the installation of a patio and/or irrigation system at
Hillerest Park. Due to the economy and budget constraints there are no park
improvements planned for 2011.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011
PARKS /IMPROVEMENTS
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
12,802
10,046
12,449
0
0
0
#DIV /0!
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
88,243
3,240
9,531
0
3,398
0
#DIV /01
CAPITAL OUTLAY
44,762
91,830
4,278
5,000
0
0
- 100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
50,000
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$145,807
$105,116
$76,258
$5,000
$3,398
$0
- 100.00%
IM
PUBLIC WORKS - PARKS - BALLFIELDS
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
Culture and Recreation
Parks Superintendent
101
45203
The NSP Ball field activity incorporates all City owned athletic fields. The activity
prepares and maintains the fields and facilities for athletic events.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Prepare and maintain the City's athletic fields.
2. Improve the structures at the ball fields.
ISSUES:
1. Budget constraints.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
# of ballgames played 502 530 550 550 550
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2011 budget reflect past expenditure levels and is similar to the 2010 budget for
maintaining the fields. The increase in other services and charges is for City water and
sewer charges which had not been budgeted in the past.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
PARKS /NSP BALLFIELDS
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
7,991
5,377
12,490
9,650
5,491
11,250
16.58%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
1,053
11,325
17,024
7,150
8,696
9,321
30.36%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
#DIV /01
OPERATING TRANSFERS
70,908
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$79,952
$16,702
$29,514
$16,800
$14,187
$20,571
22.45%
e
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Economic Development
Community Development Director
101
46501
The Economic Development activity of the General Fund is to create and maintain a clear
focus of objectives which foster a pro- business environment and community amenities to
attract and retain job growth at wage - levels that support the conummity. In addition,
networking with organizations and individuals to create good -will and promote the City
of Monticello as a place to work and live.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Encourage retention and expansion of existing businesses.
2. Explore higher education programs with existing businesses and surrounding
educational facilities, which will help facilitate opportunities for Monticello to
provide jobs, with increasing opportunities for people to work and live in
Monticello, promoting wages that provide incomes to purchase decent
housing, support businesses, and local government services.
3. Explore opportunities to attract corporate headquarters, campuses, and
businesses.
4. Work with the Downtown Business Association to create a vision and plan to
create a downtown that is unique, to attract people to downtown. Connecting
public spaces to the river, and pedestrian- oriented place through housing and
retail redevelopment.
5. Develop a "Branding" or image for the City based upon the vision of the
City's Comprehensive Plan.
6. Analyze competiveness of City based on surrounding Cities fees, taxes, and
development standards.
7. Implement a Business Retention and Expansion Program utilizing a program
through the University of Minnesota Extension Services.
8. Create a marketing piece to utilize via web and print that features the City's
assets.
ISSUE:
Consistent administration of the City's policies, plans, ordinances, guidelines,
statutes, etc.
2. The new Economic Development Director becoming familiar with existing
City programs and development of new programs to attract new businesses
and retain and expand existing businesses.
C 1
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Economic Development budget includes a portion of the salary and operating costs
for the Economic Development Director. The large increase in other services is for the
planning consultant to complete the Embracing Downtown Monticello study.
BUDGET:
GENERALFUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$55,070
$73,948
$67,157
$54,294
$49,066
$64,025
17.92%
SUPPLIES
54
48
101
1,550
47
50
- 96.77%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
24,657
5,650
11,316
17,500
11,139
89,000
408.57%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$79,781
$79,646
$78,574
$73,344
$60,252
$153,075
108.71%
C 4_
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
UNALLOCATED
Unallocated
Finance Director
101
49200
The activity of Unallocated is to account for all miscellaneous unanticipated costs that are
not specifically allocated or planned to other activities.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Cover miscellaneous unanticipated costs.
ISSUES:
1. The funding of unanticipated cost are those not associated with one activity or
department.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The budget for Unallocated consists of operating transfers to maintain the City's General
Fund balance within acceptable levels as outlined in the City's reserve policies.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
UNALLOCATED
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$1,339
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
88,548
0
345,313
4,000
4,000
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$88,548
$0
$345,313
$4,000
$5,339
$0
0.00%
F-1 M9
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
UNALLOCATEDINSURANCE
Unallocated Insurance
Finance Director
101
49240
The activity of Unallocated Insurance is to account for all miscellaneous insurance costs
that are not specifically allocated to other activities.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Cover miscellaneous insurance costs.
ISSUES:
2. Maintain the proper level of insurance coverage and deductibles to assure the
best possible coverage at the lowest possible cost.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The budget for Unallocated Insurance beginning in 2011 is only for insurance cost which
cannot easily be charged to a specific fund, department or activity. The charges to
personnel services are for the City's workers compensation insurance.
BUDGET:
GENERAL FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
INSURANCE - UNALLOCATED
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$45,092
$41,837
$47,023
$45,000
$83,015
$57,316
27.37%
SUPPLIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES &CHARGES
120,022
119,699
143,431
116,593
146,661
36,747
- 68.48%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$165,114
$161,536
$190,454
$161,593
$229,676
$94,063
- 41.79%
B -63
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
e]
MONDCELLO
SPECIAL REVENUE
FUNDS
C-1
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION:
The City of Monticello currently maintains 14 active Special Revenue Funds. A special revenue
fund is used to account for revenue sources that are legally restricted for a specific purpose. The
modified accrual basis of accounting is used for special revenue funds. That is, expenditures are
recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are recorded when received. However,
compensated absences are expended when paid for budgetary purposes. Special revenue funds
budgets are not always balanced, meaning budgeted revenues may be greater or less then
budgeted expenditures. In these circumstances reserves will be used and show an increase or
decrease in the fund balance of the fund.
BUDGET ISSUES:
See individual fund's for budget issues, because each fund will have its own unique budget
issues.
BUDGET SUMMARY:
C -2
i
REVENUES BYSOURCE
Expenditures by Classification
--
BOND Total Revenues $6,421,694
Total Expenditures $9,042,560
PROCEEDS
i_
0%
PROPERTY
j --
TAXES
36%
--
LICENSES &
PERMITS
3%
PERSONNEL
SERVICES,
SUPPLIES,
}_._.
o
3/
OPERATING _
1 -
TRANSFERS
INTERGOVERN.
OPERATING OTHER
18%
_— REVENUES
TRANSFERS, SERVICES &
�-
0%
41% CHARGES,
7%
MISC.
j
REVENUE CHARGES FOR
9% SERVICES
- -�
/
SPECIAL
-
FINES & ASSESSMENTS
CAPITAL
FORFEITS 0%
OUTLAY,
0%
36%
i
C -2
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
REVENUES
2007
ACTUAL
2008
ACTUAL
2009
ACTUAL
2010
BUDGET
2010
PROJECTED
2011
BUDGET
%
CHANGE
LIBRARY FUND
$36,087
$37,100
$37,540
$40,184
$43,613
$36,461
-9.26%
STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUND
753,997
597,423
1,220,682
370,228
358,716
362,883
-1.98%
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND
1,057,420
1,414,546
3,771,361
1,253,752
1,437,830
1,681,017
34.08%
ENVIRONMENT CLEAN -UP FUND
0
D
188,054
0
0
0
0.00%
DEPUTY REGISTRAR FUND
0
357,474
306,175
284,613
310,856
296,070
4.03%
MINNESOTA INVESTMENT FUND
62,380
43,933
28,472
34,101
34,950
31,709
-7.01%
ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT FUND
544
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CMIF FUND
100
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SHADE TREE FUND
26,762
47,658
41,934
34,704
36,252
36,544
5.30%
COMMUNITY CENTER FUND
2,503,102
2,502,394
2,485,297
2,325,490
2,329,497
2,278,330
-2.03%
PARK & PATHWAY DEDICATION FUND
195,489
139,082
510,580
403,620
23,511
668,548
65.64%
ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA FUND
984
5,208
388
291
265
251
- 13.75%
CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND
332,662
240,102
818,216
283,089
351,352
35,611
- 87.42%
STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT FUND
0
272,090
331,988
280,606
322,347
247,987
- 11.62%
SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FUND
1,175,783
986,979
1,175,669
494,883
212,669
401,095
- 18.95%
STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND
429,217
323,788
837,759
210,521
84,969
240,784
14.38%
WATER ACCESS FUND
214,692
844,716
296,114
94,565
28,939
104,404
10.40%
TOTAL
$6,789,220
$7,812,493
$12,050,229
$6,110,647
$5,575,766
$6,421,694
5.09%
EXPENDITURES
LIBRARY FUND
$35,333
$39,228
$42,665
$33,743
$37,578
$36,743
8.89%
STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUND
564,009
818
30,346
0
0
42,625
#DIV /01
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND
1,805,951
1,073,656
1,542,809
2,387,825
1,343,341
2,058,842
- 13.78%
ENVIRONMENT CLEAN -UP FUND
48
0
188,054
0
0
0
0.00%
DEPUTY REGISTRAR FUND
0
236,516
262,463
281,147
273,956
280,560
-0.21%
MINNESOTA INVESTMENT FUND
0
190,000
0
0
0
0
0.00%
ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT FUND
17,485
544
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CMIF FUND
3,103
100
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SHADE TREE FUND
13,756
41,725
22,983
41,123
34,559
36,187
- 12.00%
COMMUNITY CENTER FUND
2,328,110
2,246,101
2,273,263
2,404,131
2,278,825
2,534,775
5.43%
PARK & PATHWAY DEDICATION FUND
2,620
1,206,688
0
475,000
294,206
1,075,248
126.37%
ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA FUND
1,355
360
1,043
0
717
1,1)55
#DIV /01
CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND
486,381
850,496
2,238,775
210,000
27,854
646,250
100.00%
STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT FUND
0
0
0
0
0
185,000
#DIV /01
SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FUND
2,238,494
1,958,494
1,213,342
1,112,996
1,112,996
1,309,203
17.63%
STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND
694,886
286,126
269,361
264,599
251,876
495,770
87.37%
WATER ACCESS FUND
571,752
312,679
311,510
310,774
310,874
340,303
9.50%
TOTAL
$8,763,283
$8,443,531
$8,396,614
$7,521,338
$5,966,782
$9,042,56D
20.23%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$16,562,196
$14,588,133
$13,957,095
$17,610,710
$17,610,710
$17,219,694
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
($1,974,063)
($631,038)
$3,653,615
($1,410,691)
($391,016)
($2,620,866)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$14,588,133
$13,957,095
$17,610,710
$16,200,019
$17,219,694
$14,598,827
C -3
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
LAI11I.MVIVUH)
Library
City Administrator
211
45501
The Library Services are contracted through the Great River Regional Library system. The City
owns and maintains the building the Library operates out of, as well as providing programs
through the library to participating residents.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To provide residents life long learning opportunities.
2. To provide the availability of global information resources.
3. To provide quality programs for all ages.
ISSUES:
L Keeping information stocked as needed.
2. Budget constraints of the City and Great River Regional Library.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
# of items "Checked out'
209,174
216,599
219,694
220,000
220,000
# of programs offered
145
155
170
125
125
# of program participants enrolled
3,537
3,869
4,100
3,800
3,800
C -4
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
This budget represents the Monticello Library. The City contracts with Great River Regional
Library for all information sources and operations. The City owns and maintains the building the
Library is housed in. The main revenue source for the Library Fund is property taxes. In 2010
there was a $20,000 operating transfer from the City's Liquor Fund ($16,000) and General Fund
($4,000) to help finance library program costs. For 2011 property taxes were increased so no
transfers are necessary.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$34,668
$36,021
$35,408
$19,321
$19,410
$36,750
90.21%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
1,418
668
1,786
750
1,304
(525)
100.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
50
90
40
0
60
50
#DIV /O!
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
(49)
321
306
113
2,839
186
64.60%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
20,000
20,000
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$36,087
$37,100
$37,540
$40,184
$43,613
$36,461
-9.26%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$5,650
$7,873
$10,764
$9,368
$7,910
$10,642
13.60%
SUPPIES
2,258
3,688
2,354
1,900
5,139
1,600
- 15.79%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
27,425
27,543
29,446
22,475
24,529
24,501
9.01%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
124
101
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$35,333
$39,228
$42,665
$33,743
$37,578
$36,743
8.89%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$10,108
$754
$10,862
($2,128)
$8,734
($5,125)
$3,609
$6,441
$3,609
$6,035
$9,644
($282)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$10,862
$8,734
$3,609
$10,050
$9,644
$9,362
C -$
STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUND
DEPTMENT:
Street Reconstruction
SUPERVISOR:
Public Works Director
FUND #:
212
ACTIVITY #:
43121
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Street Reconstruction Fund was established to track the annual improvements made to the
City's infrastructure based on an annual reconstruction schedule.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To improve a portion of the City's infrastructure based on an annual schedule.
ISSUES:
1. Funding needed to update infrastructure.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
C -6
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main revenue sources for 2011 will be special assessments, interest earnings, and an
operating transfer from the Liquor Fund. The only expenditure is an operating transfer to the
2010 Improvement and Refinancing Bond for its share of costs related to the 2010 street
reconstruction project. For 2011 no projects will be funded from this fund directly, as the City
may issue bonds to finance any possible street reconstruction project and then the Street
Reconstruction Fund will transfer its share of future debt payments to the Debt Services Fund
beginning in 2012.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTYTAXES
$517,498
$337,296
$283,713
$0
$546
$25,000
#DIV /01
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
21,155
6,222
14,094
0
0
0
100.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
43,951
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
105,890
56,571
0
56,378
1,887
0
- 100.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
65,503
52,105
60,069
63,850
106,283
87,883
37.64%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
145,229
862,806
250,000
250,000
250,000
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$753,997
$597,423
$1,220,682
$370,228
$358,716
$362,883
-1.98%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
564,009
818
30,346
0
0
42,625
#DIV /0!
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$564,009
$818
$30,346
$0
$0
$42,625
#DIV /01
FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$664,247
$189,988
$854,235
$596,605
$1,450,840
$1,190,336
$2,641,176
$370,228
$2,641,176
$358,716
$2,999,892
$320,258
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$854,235
$1,450,840
$2,641,176
$3,011,404
$2,999,892
$3,320,150
C-7
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND
DEPTMENT: Economic Development
SUPERVISOR: Community Development Director
FUND #: 212
ACTIVITY #: 46301- 46538
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Monticello Economic Development Authority (EDA) is responsible for the continued
redevelopment efforts within the City. This consists of housing and businesses, including all
related public improvements and land acquisitions. These programs are administered, based on
direction of the EDA, and by the Director of Economic Development. In addition, all tax
increment financing districts are initiated and administered by the EDA. There are currently 14
active tax increment districts. The EDA also administers loans to businesses in the City, based
on local, state, and federal requirements. These loans are done on the premise that the business
will generate higher paying jobs in the community.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Explore Bio- Science and medical manufacturing facilities for Monticello.
2. Promote City's fiber optics network to attract and retain businesses.
3. Implement short, intermediate, and long -term objectives outlined in the TIE Analysis
and Management Plan,
4. Continue redevelopment of downtown.
5. Continue to market the Monticello Business Center.
ISSUES:
Consistent administration of the City's policies, plans, ordinances, guidelines,
statutes, etc.
2. Need for higher wage jobs in the community.
3. Promotion of City's new fiber optic network.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Tax increment collected 824,364 1,172,386 1,191,552 1,159,432 1,110,800
C -8
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
This budget represents the Monticello Economic Development Authority programs and general
administration activities. The detail of each individual tax increment district is included in the
appendix of this document. The main revenue source for the EDA Fund is tax increments from
the various districts. Expenditures include cost to administration costs, current tax increment
pay -as- you -go payment to the various development projects and a transfer to the debt service
funds for its share of the 2005 improvement bond, which financed an interchange project within
a tax increment district.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$824,713
$1,172,447
$1,193,021
$1,150,611
$1,159,432
$1,110,800
-3.46%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
19,490
9,231
9,219
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
6,768
15,875
5,000
10,000
0
5,000
- 50.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
95,713
196,291
261,289
93,141
273,097
121,881
30.86%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
110,736
20,702
2,302,832
0
5,301
443,336
#DIVl01
TOTAL REVENUES
$1,057,420
$1,414,546
$3,771,361
$1,253,752
$1,437,830
$1,681,017
34.08%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$23,736
$18,984
$1,051
$23,436
$25,673
$22,692
-3.18%
SUPPIES
0
288
0
50
0
50
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
387,645
83,797
28,621
40,225
161,861
69,300
72.28%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
1,256,670
501,820
1,149,425
1,075,554
482,352
1,207,185
12,24%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
137,900
468,767
363,712
1,248,560
673,455
759,615
- 39.16%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$1,805,951
$1,073,656
$1,542,809
$2,387,825
$1,343,341
$2,058,842
- 13.78%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$5,572,794
($748,531)
$4,824,263
$340,890
$5,165,153
$2,228,552
$7,393,705
($1,134,073)
$7,393,705
$94,489
$7,488,194
($377,825)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$4,824,263
$5,165,153
$7,393,705
$6,259,632
$7,488,194
$7,110,370
C -9
DEPUTY REGISTRAR FUND
DEPTMENT:
Deputy Registrar (DMV)
SUPERVISOR:
Deputy Registrar Manager
FUND #:
217
ACTIVITY #:
41990
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Deputy Registrar (DMV) is a service based entity for the City, which assists customers in
the purchase of vehicle license plants and tabs, DNR licenses and other licenses as required by
the State of Minnesota.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Marketing of DMV service available to the public.
2. Continue to add and improve services.
3. Improved customer service.
4. Provide notary services.
ISSUES:
1. Addition of driver licenses renewal service is dependent on State of Minnesota
equipment availability.
2. Changes in State regulations surrounding licensing.
3. Providing services which have no charge.
4. Dealership closings and decrease car sales due to the economy.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009
2010
2011
# of motor vehicle transactions 40,950 45,595 49,439
45,721
56,000
# of DNR transactions 5,580 5,129 5,401
5,428
5,600
# Game /Fish transactions 167 235 268
300
350
# of dealerships serviced 14 21 25
31
35
# of driver licenses transactions N/A N/A 450
576
620
C -10
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main revenue source for the DMV is the fees charged for the various licenses issued. In
2009 the DMV began partial drive license services and the hope is that in 2011 the DMV will be
granted full driver license capabilities, which should increase revenues. Expenditures should
remain near 2010 budget amounts.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
276,919
299,201
280,000
303,839
290,025
3.58%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0100
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
0
5,555
4,657
4,613
7,017
6,045
100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
75,000
2,317
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$0
$357,474
$306,175
$284,613
$310,856
$296,070
4.03%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$195,843
$238,024
$252,922
$252,820
$253,418
0.20%
SUPPIES
0
8,651
9,519
5,425
6,736
9,875
82.03%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
17,758
14,920
16,300
14,400
17,267
5.93%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
14,264
0
6,500
0
0
- 100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$0
$236,516
$262,463
$281,147
$273,956
$280,560
-0.21%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$0
$0
$0
$120,958
$120,958
$43,712
$164,670
$3,466
$164,670
$36,900
$201,570
$15,510
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$0
$120,958
$164,670
$168,136
$201,570
$217,080
C -11
kukl
IIYrs11 \•IY�l�lrJl
DEPTMENT: Minnesota Investment Fund
SUPERVISOR: Economic Development Director
FUND #: 221
ACTIVITY #: 46526 - 46528
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Minnesota Investment Fund is designated to administer loans to local businesses, following
state and federal guidelines.
OBJECTIVES-
1 . To match available funds with qualifying businesses in Monticello.
ISSUES:
1. Number of qualified available businesses in Monticello.
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
C -12
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
Interest earned from loans initiated through the Minnesota Investment Fund is the only activity
anticipated in 2011 for this Fund.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
62,380
43,933
28,472
34,101
34,950
31,709
-7.01%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$62,380
$43,933
$28,472
$34,101
$34,950
$31,709
-7.01%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
190,000
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$0
$190,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$974,211
$62,380
$1,036,591
($146,067)
$890,524
$28,472
$918,996
$34,101
$918,996
$34,950
$953,946
$31,709
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$1,036,591
$890,524
$918,996
$953,097
$953,946
$985,655
C -13
ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT FUND
DEPTMENT: Economic Recovery Grant (S.C.E.R.G.) Fund
SUPERVISOR: Economic Development Director
FUND #: 222
ACTIVITY #: 46501
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
This Fund was closed into the EDA Fund in 2008.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
C -14
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
In 2008 the S.C.E.R.G. Fund was closed into the EDA Fund.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
544
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$544
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
17,485
544
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$17,485
$544
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$17,485
($16,941)
$544
($544)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$544
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
C-I5
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
SHADE TREE FUND
Shade Tree Fund
Parks Superintendent
224
46102
The Shade Tree Fund supports planting and maintaining trees and shrubbery within the limits of
the City. The Fund is in place for the purpose of regulating, developing, and providing for the
planting, maintenance and removal of trees and stumps in any street, park, right -of -way or other
public place within the City, in order to better serve the needs of soil conservation, climate
moderation, air quality, noise, etc., and to provide the mechanisms for funding a uniform
program for the purpose of beautifying the community as a whole, and increasing property
values within the City.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Provide trees for spring tree planting.
2. Continue with Shade Tree Disease Control Program.
3. Replace dead and diseased trees throughout the City and Parks.
4. Continue chipping program.
5. Continue education program.
6. Begin a boulevard tree planting program.
ISSUES:
1. Weather which places stress on trees.
2. Diseased trees.
3. Availability of funding.
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
# of trees planted
384
410
425
425
425
# of diseased trees removed
N/A
868
200
200
200
# of students attending programs
271
365
375
375
375
C -16
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The major revenue source is property taxes. A portion of the park employee's time is allocated
to the Shade Tree Fund. The 2011 budget reflects having a smaller budget for tree removal cost
due to disease as the City has removed the majority of diseased trees over the last few years to
where it is now a program of prevention than removal.
BUDGET:
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$19,176
$32,112
$35,821
$30,000
$30,100
$33,500
11.67%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
773
601
1,833
913
1,738
(800)
100.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
1,892
7,130
2,653
2,000
2,230
2,000
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
4,921
7,815
1,627
1,791
2,184
1,844
2.96%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$26,762
$47,658
$41,934
$34,704
$36,252
$36,544
5.30%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$9,342
$19,493
$12,971
$25,848
$27,189
$26,212
1.41%
SUPPIES
607
934
5,691
1,675
922
1,875
11.94%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
3,807
21,298
4,321
13,600
6,448
8,100
- 40.44%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$13,756
$41,725
$22,983
$41,123
$34,559
$36,187
- 12.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$31,716
$44,722
$50,655
$69,606
$69,606
$71,299
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$13,006
$5,933
$18,951
($6,419)
$1,693
$357
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$44,722
$50,655
$69,606
$63,187
$71,299
$71,656
C -17
COMMUNITY CENTER FUND
DEPTMENT: Community Center
SUPERVISOR: Community Center Director
FUND #: 226
ACTIVITY #: N/A
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Monticello Community Center provides a facility with space for a variety of recreational,
professional, and educational opportunities. The expenditures for the Community Center are
divided into three activities, administration, programming, and NSP ball field concessions.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Develop a plan for the future use of the area which was used as a wheel park
(skateboard, bike, and rollerblade), including design, financing, construction, and
marketing.
2. Develop an on -line registration system for program and membership sign up.
3. Provide facility improvements to increase customers.
4. Maintain the community garden.
5. Improve ball fields.
ISSUES:
1. Budget constraints.
2. Limits due to facility size, available space, and available parking.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008
# of customer visits 168,923 186,429
Gross Program Sales 88,412 129,339
Rental Revenue 143,479 149,323
C -18
2009
2010
2011
186,279
183,527
185,000
149,829
167,723
170,000
163,252
151,414
167,300
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The revenue budget for Community Center - Administration included all revenues of the Fund.
The largest revenue sources are property taxes ($1,100,000) and memberships ($640,000). Other
revenues include concession sales, room rentals, and program fees. This activity also includes
all personnel service expenditures for the Fund. Expenditures for operating and maintaining the
facility for 2011 are similar to the 2010 budget. In 2010 the capital outlay budget included
expenditures for carpet, replacement of the gym floor, energy upgrades, replacement of workout
equipment, front counter improvements, and replacement of bathroom vanities and partitions,
where as the only 2010 expenditure was for an office expansion/improvements. Finally there is
an operating transfer for the 2011 payment of the debt issued for the constriction of the facility.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTYTAXES
$1,176,130
$1,360,350
$1,260,940
$1,149,449
$1,096,049
$1,100,000
-4.30%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
48,207
25,290
63,708
23,082
61,274
(40,000)
100.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
1,000,662
1,056,257
1,103,851
1,109,100
1,102,142
1,174,500
5.90%
FINES & FORFEITS
136
16
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
27,967
60,481
56,798
43,859
70,032
43,830
-0.07%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
250,000
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$2,503,102
$2,502,394
$2,485,297
$2,325,490
$2,329,497
$2,278,330
-2.03%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$827,643
$887,124
$915,041
$865,456
$886,333
$867,430
0.23%
SUPPIES
218,234
191,450
191,174
211,200
183,018
215,475
2.02%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
424,483
472,303
461,233
492,475
394,442
511,870
3.94%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
5,224
5,815
30,000
0
125,000
316.67%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
857,750
690,000
700,000
805,000
815,032
815,000
1.24%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$2,328,110
$2,246,101
$2,273,263
$2,404,131
$2,278,825
$2,534,775
5.43%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$315,432
$174,992
$490,424
$256,293
$746,717
$212,034
$958,751
($78,641)
$958,751
$50,672
$1,009,423
($256,445)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$490,424
$746,717
$958,751
$880,109
$1,009,423
$752,978
The expenditures above are divided into three activities, which the details of each are shown on
page C -20 and C -21.
C -19
COMMUNITY CENTER FUND
DEPTMENT: Community Center - Administration
SUPERVISOR: Community Center Director
FUND #: 226
ACTIVITY #: 45122
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Monticello Community Center provides a facility with space for a variety of recreational,
professional, and educational opportunities. The Administration Activity manages and tracks
payroll, maintenance, and all expenses that are building wide, including debt service, utilities,
and insurance. This is the general operating activity for the Community Center.
BUDGET:
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
COMM
CENTER /ADMINISTRATION
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$827,643
$887,124
$915,041
$865,456
$886,333
$867,430
0.23%
SUPPLIES
102,871
82,567
91,413
97,600
97,095
94,875
-2.79%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
386,380
419,094
407,175
441,575
336,351
449,370
1.77%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
30,000
0
95,000
216.67%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
857,750
690,000
700,000
805,000
815,032
815,000
1.24%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$2,174,644
$2,078,785
$2,113,629
$2,239,631
$2,134,811
$2,321,675
3.66%
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
COMMUNITY CENTER FUND
Community Center - Programming
Community Center Director
226
45127
The Community Center Programming activity provides educational, recreational, and
professional activities for all users, including concession food, within and outside the Monticello
community. The programming activity manages specific costs that pertain to programs offered
at the Community Center, as well as expenditures directly attributable to programmed areas of
the facility, i.e. indoor play, fitness area, and pool. Facility concession expenditures are also
included.
C -20
BUDGET:
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
COMM CENTERIPROGRAMMING
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$O
$0
#DIV /O!
SUPPLIES
86,982
83,768
82,057
98,300
67,647
103,300
5.09%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
29,148
45,012
49,087
46,000
51,297
56,300
22.39%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
5,224
5,815
0
0
30,000
#DIV /O!
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
#DIV /01
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$116,130
$134,004
$136,959
$144,300
$118,944
$189,600
31.39%
COMMUNITY CENTER FUND
DEPTMENT: Community Center - NSP Ball Field Concessions
SUPERVISOR: Community Center Director
FUND #: 226
ACTIVITY #: 45203
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Community Center Ball Field Concessions manages and tracks the expenditures, except
payroll and employee expenditures, for the ball field concessions, which at this time are only
located at the NSP (Xcel) City Ball Fields. We provide snack food items during scheduled
softball, baseball, and football games and /or practices.
BUDGET:
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
2007
2008
2009
2010
. 2010
2011
%
NSP BALLFIELD CONCESS
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
#DIV 101
SUPPLIES
28,381
25,115
17,704
15,300
18,276
17,300
13.07%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
8,955
6,197
4,971
4,900
6,794
6,200
26.53%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
#DIV /01
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
#DIV 101
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$37,336
$33,312
$22,675
$20,200
$25,070
$23,500
16.34%
C -21
PARK & PATHWAY DEDICATION FUND
DEPTMENT:
Park & Pathway Dedication Fund
SUPERVISOR:
Parks Superintendent
FUND #:
229
ACTIVITY #:
45202
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
Activities of the Park and Pathway Dedication Fund include updating and maintaining the City's
pathway system, as well as designating funds for future parks and pathways within the City.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue to maintain existing pathways of the City.
2. Plan for integration of funds toward park land purchases.
3. Continue the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes (fonnerly the Y.M.C.A.)
property.
ISSUES:
1. Tune constraints with other projects.
2. Economic slow down of new development and home construction activities.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
C -22
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The major revenue source is normally park dedication fees. However due to the economic
conditions and lack of new development, for 2011 the main revenue source will be an operating
transfer to help fund the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. The only expenditure
for 2011 is the City's payment for the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTYTAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
40,000
0
175,000
337.50%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
130,640
91,885
0
63,720
3,379
0
- 100.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
64,849
47,197
13,953
24,900
20,132
18,548
- 25.51%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
496,627
275,000
0
475,000
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$195,489
$139,082
$510,580
$403,620
$23,511
$668,548
65.64%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
2,620
3,232
0
0
5,022
0
#DIV /01
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
1,203,456
0
475,000
289,184
1,075,248
126.37%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$2,620
$1,206,688
$0
$475,000
$294,206
$1,075,248
126.37%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$785,003
$192,869
$977,872
($1,067,606)
($89,734)
$510,580
$420,846
($71,380)
$420,846
($270,695)
$150,151
($406,700)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$977,872
($89,734)
$420,846
$349,466
$150,151
($256,549)
C -23
ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA FUND
DEPTMENT:
Orderly Annexation Area (OAA) Fund
SUPERVISOR:
City Administrator
FUND #:
230
ACTIVITY #:
46401
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Orderly Annexation Area (OAA) Fund is designed to fund annexation transactions for the
City.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Provide smooth transition of property into the City from the Township when ever
annexation occurs.
ISSUES:
1. Slow economy.
2. Traffic congestion on TH25.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
C -24
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The only revenue source for 2011 is interest earnings. Based on the annexation agreement with
the Township and due to no new parcels being annexed into the City the expenditure budget for
2011 is for meeting and travel expenditures for the annexation board meetings during the year.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$669
$4,884
$103
$0
$0
$0
#DIV /01
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
25
94
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
290
230
285
291
265
251
- 13.75%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$984
$5,208
$388
$291
$265
$251
- 13.75%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
#DIV 101
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
1,355
360
1,043
0
717
1,055
#DIV /01
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$1,355
$360
$1,043
$0
$717
$1,055
#DIV /01
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$3,465
($371)
$3,094
$4,848
$7,942
($655)
$7,287
$291
$7,287
($452)
$6,835
($804)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$3,094
$7,942
$7,287
$7,578
$6,835
$6,031
C -25
CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND
DEPTMENT:
Capital Outlay Revolving Fund
SUPERVISOR:
City Administrator
FUND #:
240
ACTIVITY #:
49201
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Capital Outlay Fund was established to acquire and hold properties as well as make any
necessary improvements, while being held for resale. The Fund has also, in unique
circumstances, been used to budget and purchase large equipment and vehicles for departments.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Make necessary improvements to land held for resale.
2. To acquire properties at present market value to address future comprehensive plan
needs when necessary.
3. Make equipment purchases.
ISSUES:
Budget constraints.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
C -26
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The revenue activity for 2011 includes interest earnings, which because of interest rates and
lower cash balances is projected lower in 2011 than in the past. The expenditures in 2011 is for
the purchase of equipment as outlined in the City's capital improvement plan and outlined in the
Capital Project Section of this document. The operating transfer in 2010 was to funded General
Fund equipment purchases and past transfers were to other special revenue or capital project
funds for land purchases or other improvements.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$146
$263
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
48,517
242,125
244,457
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
6,000
0
0
0
73,674
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
147,384
139,498
0
0
5,431
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
99,917
100,341
(3,689)
40,964
27,790
35,611
- 13.07%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
79,215
0
773,388
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$332,662
$240,102
$818,216
$283,089
$351,352
$35,611
- 87.42%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
189
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
476,276
55,762
5,889
0
794
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
103,581
165,000
(17,940)
646,250
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
10,105
794,545
2,129,305
45,000
45,000
0
100.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$486,381
$850,496
$2,238,775
$210,000
$27,854
$646,250
100.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$6,039,571
($153,719)
$5,885,852
($610,394)
$5,275,458
($1,420,559)
$3,854,899
$73,089
$3,854,899
$323,498
$4,178,397
($610,639)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$5,885,852
$5,275,458
$3,854,899
$3,927,988
$4,178,397
$3,567,758
C-27
STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT FUND
DEPTMENT: Street Lighting Improvement Fund
SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director
FUND #: 245
ACTIVITY #: 43162
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The activity of the Street Lighting Improvement Fund is to incorporate street lighting into
designated areas of the City, as pre - determined by Council. This Fund's revenue consists of
franchise fees specifically designated for street lighting improvement projects.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue to upgrade old traditional lights to colonial style and add lights to older
systems.
2. Work with MNDOT to add battery back -up to signal on TH 25 in the future.
3. Replace and modify the old lighting system in the downtown area.
ISSUES:
1. Budget constraints.
2. Develop replacement light program with Wright Hennepin and Xcel Energy.
3. Verify lamp and fixture maintenance by utility companies.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2000 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
C -28
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The revenue source for the Street Light Improvement Fund is the electric franchise fee the City
collects. The expenditures are an operating transfer to the Capital Improvement Funds for street
light improvements as listed in the Capital Project Section of this document.
BUDGET:
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
267,630
286,869
270,000
293,547
225,000
- 16.67%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
0
4,460
15,119
10,606
28,800
22,987
100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
30,000
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$0
$272,090
$331,988
$280,606
$322,347
$247,987
- 11.62%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
185,000
100.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$185,000
100.00%
FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1
$0
$0
$272,090
$604,078
$604,078
$926,425
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$0
$272,090
$331,988
$280,606
$322,347
$62,987
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$0
$272,090
$604,078
$884,684
$926,425
$989,412
C -29
SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FUND
DEPTMENT:
Sanitary Sewer Access Fund
SUPERVISOR:
Public Works Director
FUND #:
262
ACTIVITY #:
49201
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Sanitary Sewer Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's sewer services.
Fees are collected on building permits for new construction and lot developments. These fees
are dedicated for the purpose of sanitary sewer improvements, and to cover debt related to these
improvements.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of sanitary sewer improvements
for the City.
2. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner.
ISSUES:
1. Number of building permits has declined.
2. Slow economy.
MEASURABLE WORI{LOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
C -30
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main revenue sources are sanitary sewer access and trunk fees on new construction or
special assessments of past access and trunk fees. The operating transfer is to 2008 Sewer
Revenue Refunding Bond, which refinanced the bond for the construction of the Waste Water
Treatment Plant, 2005A Improvement Bond for this Fund's share of the interchange project, and
to the 2010A Improvement and Refinancing Bond for its share of the 2010 street reconstruction
project.
BUDGET:
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTYTAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
448,583
270,753
80,720
130,000
61,631
262,650
102.04%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
260,097
257,896
0
198,075
1,043
0
- 100.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
467,103
254,622
111,304
166,808
149,995
138,445
- 17.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
203,708
983,645
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$1,175,783
$986,979
$1,175,669
$494,883
$212,669
$401,095
- 18.95%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
160
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
292,156
7,584
312
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
67,329
10,711
0
0
0
0
0.00 ° /a
OPERATING TRANSFERS
1,879,009
1,940,039
1,213,030
1,112,996
1,112,996
1,309,203
17.63%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$2,238,494
$1,958,494
$1,213,342
$1,112,996
$1,112,996
$1,309,203
17.63%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$7,059,252
$5,996,541
$5,025,026
$4,987,353
$4,987,353
$4,087,026
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
($1,062,711)
($971,515)
($37,673)
($618,113)
($900,327)
($908,108)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$5,996,541
$5,025,026
$4,987,353
$4,369,240
$4,087,026
$3,178,918
C -31
STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND
DEPTMENT:
Storm Sewer Access Fund
SUPERVISOR:
Public Works Director
FUND #:
263
ACTIVITY #:
49201
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Storm Sewer Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's Storm Sewer
services. Fees are collected on building permits for new construction and lot development.
These fees are dedicated for the purpose of storm sewer improvements.
OBJECTIVES:
1. To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of storm sewer improvements for
the City.
2. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner.
ISSUES:
Number of building permits has declined.
Slow economy.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
C -32
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main revenue sources are storm sewer access and trunk fees on new construction or special
assessments of past access and trunk fees. The only expenditure for 2011 is an operating transfer
to 2005A Improvement Bond and the 2010A Improvement and Refinancing Bond for this Fund's
share of the project costs.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,950,690 $1,685,021 $1,722,683 $2,291,081 $2,291,081 $2,124,174
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE ($265,669) $37,662 $568,398 ($54,078) ($166,907) ($254,986)
FUND BALANCE- DECEMBER 31 $1,685,021 $1,722,683 $2,291,081 $2,237,003 $2,124,174 $1,869,188
C -33
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
75,231
24,959
3,343
20,000
7,169
174,500
772.50%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
212,666
155,900
0
130,406
1,253
0
- 100.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
141,320
77,550
47,154
60,115
76,547
66,284
10.26%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
65,379
787,262
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$429,217
$323,788
$837,759
$210,521
$84,969
$240,784
14.38%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
432,186
9,520
1,770
0
599
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
11,830
0
0
(13,322)
200,000
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
262,700
264,776
267,591
264,599
264,599
295,770
11.78%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$694,886
$286,126
$269,361
$264,599
$251,876
$495,770
87.37%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,950,690 $1,685,021 $1,722,683 $2,291,081 $2,291,081 $2,124,174
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE ($265,669) $37,662 $568,398 ($54,078) ($166,907) ($254,986)
FUND BALANCE- DECEMBER 31 $1,685,021 $1,722,683 $2,291,081 $2,237,003 $2,124,174 $1,869,188
C -33
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
WATER ACCESS FUND
Water Access Fund
Public Works Director
265
49201
The Water Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's water system. Fees are
collected on building permits for new construction and lot development. These fees are
dedicated for the purpose of water improvements:
OBJECTIVES:
1. To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of water improvements for the
City.
2. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner.
ISSUES:
1. Number of building permits has declined.
2. Slow economy.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
C -34
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main revenue sources are water access and trunk fees on new construction or special
assessments of past access and trunk fees. The operating transfer is to 2005A Improvement
Bond and the 2010A Improvement and Refinancing Bond for this Fund's share of the project
costs.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTYTAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
91,008
35,319
19,784
30,000
8,292
85,400
184.67%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
72,918
74,274
0
44,040
438
0
- 100.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
40,661
11,271
21,734
20,525
20,209
19,004
-7.41%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
10,105
723,852
254,596
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$214,692
$844,716
$296,114
$94,565
$28,939
$104,404
10.40%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
32,855
1,459
264
0
100
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
228,202
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
310,695
311,220
311,246
310,774
310,774
340,303
9.50%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$571,752
$312,679
$311,510
$310,774
$310,874
$340,303
9.50%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$660,775
($357,060)
$303,715
$532,037
$835,752
($15,396)
$820,356
($216,209)
$820,356
($281,935)
$538,421
($235,899)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$303,715
$835,752
$820,356
$604,147
$538,421
$302,522
C -35
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
C -36
DEBT SERVICE
FUNDS
D-1
DEBT SERVICE FUND SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION:
The City currently has 6 active debt service funds. Debt services fiords are used to account for
the accumulation of resources for the payment of general long -term debt, excluding debt issued
for and serviced by an Enterprise Fund. Debt service funds use the modified accrual basis of
accounting however, the cash basis of accounting will be used for budgetary purposes only. The
cash basis is used for budgeting to ensure that sufficient cash will be available to make required
payments on the City's bonded indebtedness.
BUDGET ISSUES:
The City's bond rating was upgraded to Aa3 from A2 in 2010 from Moody's Investor Services.
The City issued debt in 2010 and plans to issue additional debt in 2011 to finance the 2010 and
2011 street reconstruction project respectfully as listed in the Capital Projects Fund section of
this document. The 2011 debt issue is estimated at $4,590,000. See individual funds for the
budget issues facing the City's debt service funds.
BUDGET SUMMARY:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $9,244,977 $11,911,744 $9,572,738 $3,595,228 $3,595,228 $1,311,134
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE $2,666,767 ($2,339,006) ($5,977,510) ($780,778) ($2,284,094) ($581,592)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $11,911,744 $9,572,738 $3,595,228 $2,814,450 $1,311,134 $729,542
D -2
2D07
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$8,951
$2,113
$780,177
$1,234,533
$1,236,472
$1,144,437
100.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
41,055
25,769
64,953
(41,500)
100.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
2,159,226
1,697,990
2,254,910
1,421,903
52,428
1,798,664
26.50%
MISCELLANEOUS
1,223,970
421,307
167,083
460,446
68,037
301,902
- 34.43%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
4,059,300
14,117,459
3,140,563
2,921,846
3,697,343
3,119,180
6.75%
BOND PROCEEDS
737,169
15,685,262
0
0
510,000
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$8,188,616
$31,924,131
$6,383,788
$6,064,497
$5,649,233
$6,322,683
4.26%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
D
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
5,729
821
38
0
1,451
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
5,493,107
23,384,076
7,950,069
6,270,275
7,396,056
6,429,275
2,54%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
23,013
10,878,240
4,411,191
575,000
535,820
475,000
100.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$5,521,849
$34,263,137
$12,361,298
$6,845,275
$7,933,327
$6,904,275
0.86%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $9,244,977 $11,911,744 $9,572,738 $3,595,228 $3,595,228 $1,311,134
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE $2,666,767 ($2,339,006) ($5,977,510) ($780,778) ($2,284,094) ($581,592)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $11,911,744 $9,572,738 $3,595,228 $2,814,450 $1,311,134 $729,542
D -2
LEGAL DEBT LIMIT:
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. Under this
provision, beginning with issues having a settlement date after June 30, 2008, the State of
Minnesota increased the legal debt limit from 2% to 3% of the City's taxable market value.
Below is the City's current net debt levy calculation:
3% Market Value $37,362,228
Less: Outstanding Debt Subject to Limit (4,920,000)
Legal debt margin $32,442,228
DEBTSCHEDULE:
Below is the City's outstanding debt as of December 31, 2010:
Interest Maturity Authorized
Debt *
Rate %
Date
& Issued
Retired
Outstandine
1,260,000
4,920,000
Total supported by revenues
15,450,000
2005A Improvement Bonds
4.00 -4.75
2/1/23
25,150,000
7,085,000
18,065,000
2007A Improvement Bonds
4.00
2/1/18
6,045,000
1,060,000
4,985,000
2010A Improvement and
Refunding Bonds 0.40 -2.70 2/1/21
Total supported by special assessments
3,255,000 00 3,255,000
34,450,000 8,145,000 26,305,000
2008 Sewer Refunding Bond 3.40 8/1/18
9,270,000
1,976,000
7,294,000
2008A Revenue Refunding 3.20 2/1/15
6,180,000
1,260,000
4,920,000
Total supported by revenues
15,450,000
3,236,000
12,214,000
2008 Telecommunications
Revenue Bond 6.50 -6.75 6/1/31
26,445,000
00
26,445,000
Total Debt Outstanding 76.455.000 $11,381.000 $64.964.000
* All debt issued except for the 2008 Telecommunications Revenue Bonds are General
Obligation debt issues, which are backed by the full -faith and credit of the City.
D -3
1994A G. O. REFUNDING BOND FUND
DEPTMENT: 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond
SUPERVISOR: Finance Director
FUND #: 301
ACTIVITY #: 47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond was retired in 2004.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010
NA
D -4
2011
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond was retired in 2004. Since that time the only revenue source
has been interest earnings and operating transfers out to close the bond fund.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
2007
2006
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTYTAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
- 0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
4,429
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$4,429
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$4,429
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
($4,429)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
D -5
2002 G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
2002 G. O. Improvement Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
310
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including
street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal
payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2014, however the City
refinanced these bonds as part of the 2010 G. O. Improvement and Refinancing Bonds. The
average interest rate was 3.67 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited
properties and a property tax levy.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manner.
ISSUES:
1. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
D -6
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond's main two revenue sources are special assessments and a
property tax levy. In 2009 the City used reserves instead of a property tax levy to pay this debt,
but in 2010 will once again use a property tax levy, along with the special assessments collected
to make its annual debt payments, which are the only expenditure, budgeted. The City refinance
this bond in 2010.
BUDGET:
REVENUES
2007
ACTUAL
2008
ACTUAL
2009
ACTUAL
2010
BUDGET
2010
PROJECTED
2011
BUDGET
%
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$2,433
$356
$0
$74,798
$74,798
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
4,021
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS -
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
165,501
154,563
114,334
119,695
2,225
0
- 100.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
38,632
21,768
8,657
13,930
1,360
0
- 100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
174,600
1,136
0
0
187,317
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
510,000
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$381,166
$177,823
$122,991
$212,444
$775,700
$0
- 100.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
292,061
290,256
292,510
293,835
1,174,952
0
- 100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
6,151
199
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$292,061
$296,407
$292,709
$293,835
$1,174,952
$0
- 100.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$598,449
$687,554
$568,970
$399,252
$399,252
$0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
$89,105
($118,584)
($169,718)
($81,391)
($399,252)
$0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$687,554
$568,970
$399,252
$317,861
$0
$0
D -%
2003A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
2003A G. O. Improvement Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
311
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including
street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal
payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2015, with a call feature
on February, 2009. This bond was redeemed in February, 2009. The average interest rate was
3.71 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond was redeemed in February 2009 and should have no future
revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund.
BUDGET:
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTYTAXES
$47
$14
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES &FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
160,807
147,120
319,989
0
31,129
0
#DIV /01
MISCELLANEOUS
96,830
68,395
(11,797)
0
2,083
0
#DIV 101
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
654,086
210,299
0
0
0
100.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$257,684
$869,615
$518,491
$0
$33,212
$0
#DIV /01
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
288,476
292,526
1,802,468
0
268
0
#DIV 101
OPERATING TRANSFERS
12,087
403,973
0
0
343,201
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$300,563
$696,499
$1,802,468
$0
$343,469
$0
#DIV 101
FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 $1,463,997 $1,421,118 $1,594,234 $310,257 $310,257 $0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE ($42,879) $173,116 ($1,283,977) $0 ($310,257) $0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,421,118 $1,594,234 $310,257 $310,257 $0 $0
D -9
2005A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
2005A G. O. Improvement Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
312
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including
Highway 18 interchange and other street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule
calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the
year 2023, with a call feature on February, 2013. The average interest rate is 3.82 %. The
revenue source will be special assessments against benefited properties, tax increments, transfers
from City utility access funds and a property tax levy.
OBJECTIVES:
Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor.
ISSUES:
1. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
D -10
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main revenue sources for the 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond include special assessments
collected from benefited properties, transfers from the City's utility access funds, tax increments
and a property tax levy. The only expenditures are for the 2011 principal and interest payments
for this debt issue.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$410
$51
$150,306
$248,724
$249,312
$244,131
-1.85%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
7,887
13,404
13,819
0
- 100.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
1,598,722
868,084
625,735
733,129
2,938
683,368
-6.79%
MISCELLANEOUS
662,615
141,284
95,089
303,262
52,769
255,433
- 15.77%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
1,484,225
1,636,424
1,610,141
1,605,509
1,605,509
1,593,630
-0.74%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$3,745,972
$2,645,843
$2,489,158
$2,904,028
$1,924,347
$2,776,562
-4.39%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
2,095,563
2,457,688
3,238,181
3,178,912
3,179,130
3,120,981
-1.82%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
579,590
157,722
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$2,095,563
$3,037,278
$3,395,903
$3,178,912
$3,179,130
$3,120,981
-1.82%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$1,419,211 $3,069,620
$2,678,185 $1,771,440
$1,771,440
$516,657
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
$1,650,409 ($391,435)
($906,745) ($274,884)
($1,254,783)
($344,419)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$3,069,620 $2,678,185
$1,771,440 $1,496,556
$516,657
$172,238
D -11
2007A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
2007A G. O. Improvement Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
313
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 2007A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including
street and utilities improvements, refunded the 2000A Improvement Bond, and Finance a storage
building and mixing equipment at the Waste Water Treatment Plant.. The debt service schedule
calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the
year 2018, with a call feature on February, 2016. The average interest rate is 3.68 %. The
revenue source will be special assessments against benefited properties, sewer revenues and a
property tax levy.
OBJECTIVES:
ISSUES:
Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor.
Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
D -12
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main revenue sources for the 2007A G. O. hnprovement Bond include special assessments
collected, transfers from the City's Sewer Fund, and a property tax levy. The only expenditures
are for the 2011 principal and interest payments for this debt issue.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $312,906 $174,148 $174,148 ($82,609)
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE $0 $312,906 ($138,758) ($36,569) ($256,757) ($109,252)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $312,906 $174,148 $137,579 ($82,609) ($191,861)
D -13
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$314
$182,422
$414,780
$415,726
$418,306
0.85%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
9,681
22,787
23,497
0
- 100.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
321,928
260,760
227,439
8,837
176,634
- 22.34%
MISCELLANEOUS
0
0
1,377
(875)
(14,604)
(9,672)
1005.37%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
135,000
104,200
111,200
0
0
- 100.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$0
$457,242
$558,440
$775,331
$433,456
$585,268
- 24.51%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
268
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
144,336
609,289
811,900
689,945
694,520
- 14.46%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
87,909
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$0
$144,336
$697,198
$811,900
$690,213
$694,520
- 14.46%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $312,906 $174,148 $174,148 ($82,609)
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE $0 $312,906 ($138,758) ($36,569) ($256,757) ($109,252)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $312,906 $174,148 $137,579 ($82,609) ($191,861)
D -13
I 1 ::�l�i�. _ :/_ � : ,111��i1►17LC : iAI�OLi�71
DEPTMENT:
2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
315
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds refinanced the Waste Water Treatment Plant
(WWTP) Note, which financed the construction of the WWTP. The debt service schedule calls
for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year
2018, with a call feature on February, 2016. The average interest rate is 3.40 %. The revenue
source will be a transfer from the Sewer Access Fund and a property tax levy. By refinancing
the notes, the City will have an estimated savings of $270,404.
OBJECTIVES:
ISSUES:
Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor.
Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
D -14
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main revenue sources for the 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds include a
transfer from the City's Sewer Access Fund and a property tax levy. The only expenditures are
for the 2011 principal and interest payments for this debt issue.
BUDGET:
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$486
$447,449
$496,231
$496,485
$430,000
- 13.35%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
23,487
(14,443)
27,637
(41,500)
187.34%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
0
28,684
23,509
28,403
21,301
18,963
- 33.24%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
1,445,554
500,000
400,137
400,137
524,590
31.10%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
9,300,295
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$0
$10,775,019
$994,445
$910,328
$945,560
$932,053
2.39%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
572,202
1,048,862
1,049,471
1,049,239
1,049,679
0.02%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
9,228,832
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$0
$9,801,034
$1,048,862
$1,049,471
$1,049,239
$1,049,679
0.02%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $973,985 $919,568 $919,568 $815,889
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE $0 $973,985 ($54,417) ($139,143) ($103,679) ($117,626)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $973,985 $919,568 $780,425 $815,889 $698,263
D -15
CONSOLIDATED BOND FUND
DEPTMENT: Consolidated Bond
SUPERVISOR: Finance Director
FUND #: 300
ACTIVITY #: 47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Consolidated Bond Fund has no debt obligations it is responsible for. It does collect and
record special assessments of projects that were funded internally by this fund or who debt
requirements have been satisfied.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Help finance future City projects.
ISSUES:
1. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
Imuo
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The Consolidated Bond Fund receives revenue from special assessments from project funded
internally by the City or from retired bond funds. The transfer out is to help finance the 2010
street reconstruction project, to finance the City's share of the battery back up system for traffic
signals and to finance the next land purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$56
$412
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
342
14,002
934,092
341,640
6,892
702,915
105.75%
MISCELLANEOUS
155,471
92,230
34,322
75,214
5,216
17,606
- 76.59%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
8,066
0
343,201
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$155,869
$106,644
$976,480
$416,854
$355,309
$720,521
72.85%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
14
10,423
0
1,930
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
214,081
3,257,045
575,000
0
475,000
- 17.39%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$0
$214,095
$3,267,468
$575,000
$1,930
$475,000
- 17.39%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$1,464,943 $1,620,812 $1,513,361 ($777,627)
($777,627)
($424,248)
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
$155,869 ($107,451) ($2,290,988) ($158,146)
$353,379
$245,521
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$1,620,812 $1,513,361 ($777,627) ($935,773)
($424,248)
($178,727)
D -17
WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WWTP) NOTE FUND
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
WWTP Note
Finance Director
303
47000
The WWTP Note financed the construction of the treatment plant and was refinanced in 2008 by
the 2008A Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
There will be no revenue or expenditure activity for the WWTP Note since the note was
refinance and the fund closed to the 2008A Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond.
i 91 !1W
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$1,211
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
65,833
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
1,082,293
9,456,859
0
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$1,149,337
$9,456,859
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
1,082,293
9,769,979
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
445,554
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$1,082,293
$10,215,533
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$691,630
$758,674
$0
$0
$0
$0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
$67,044
($758,674)
$0
$0
$0
$0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$758,674
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
D -19
1998B G. O. WATER SYSTEM REFUNDING BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
305
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond was retired in 2004.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
R
D -20
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond was retired in 2004. Since that time the only
revenue source has been interest earnings and operating transfers out to close the bond fund.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$4,793 ($0) ($0) ($0)
($0) ($0)
($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0)
D -21
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$17
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
187
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$204
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
4,997
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$4,997
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$4,793 ($0) ($0) ($0)
($0) ($0)
($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0)
D -21
1999 G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
1999 G. O. Improvement Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
306
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 1999 G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including
street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal
payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2010, with a call feature
on February, 2005. This bond was redeemed in December, 2008. The average interest rate was
4.16 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties and a property
tax levy.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
D -22
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 1999 G. O. Improvement Bond was redeemed in December 2008 and should have no future
revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $884,334 $869,679 $15,924 ($0) ($0) ($0)
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE ($14,655) ($853,755) ($15,924) $0 $0 $0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $869,679 $15,924 ($0) ($0) ($O) ($O)
D -23
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$2,816
$470
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
136,703
131,150
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
13,359
760
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
182,200
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$335,078
$132,380
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
349,733
986,135
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
15,924
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$349,733
$986,135
$15,924
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $884,334 $869,679 $15,924 ($0) ($0) ($0)
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE ($14,655) ($853,755) ($15,924) $0 $0 $0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $869,679 $15,924 ($0) ($0) ($O) ($O)
D -23
2000A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT: 2000A G. O. Improvement Bond
SUPERVISOR: Finance Director
FUND #: 307
ACTIVITY #: 47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 2000A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including
street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal
payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2016, with a call feature
on February, 2008. These bonds were redeemed in February, 2008. The average interest rate is
5.38 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties and a property
tax levy.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORE LOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
D -24
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2000A G. O. Improvement Bonds were redeemed in February 2008 and should have no
future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$1,949
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
32,682
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
19,206
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
133,300
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
737,169
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$924,306
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
5,729
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
216,119
1,180,894
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$221,848
$1,180,894
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1
$478,436
$1,180,894
$0
$0
$0
$0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
$702,458
($1,180,894)
$0
$0
$0
$0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$1,180,894
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
D -25
2000A G. O. PUBLIC PROJECT REVENUE BOND FUND
DEPTMENT: 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bond
SUPERVISOR: Finance Director
FUND #: 308
ACTIVITY #: 47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bond financed the construction of the City's
Community Center (MCC) building. The debt service schedule calls for February principal
payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2015, with a call feature
on February, 2008. These bonds were redeemed in February, 2008. The average interest rate
was 6.27 %. The revenue source was revenues generated by the MCC.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
D -26
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bonds were redeemed in February 2008 and should
have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund.
BUDGET:
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0,00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
54,049
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
857,750
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
6,180,000
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$911,799
$6,180,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
822,183
6,848,477
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$822,183
$6,848,477
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $578,861 $668,477 $0 $0 $0 $0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE $89,616 ($668,477) $0 $0 $0 $0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $668,477 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
D-27
2000B G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
2000B G. O. Improvement Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
309
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including
street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal
payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2011, with a call feature
on August, 2007. This bond was redeemed in December, 2008. The average interest rate was
5.00 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties and a property
tax levy.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond was redeemed in December 2008 and should have no
future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund.
BUDGET:
2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011
REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$12
$10
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
64,469
61,143
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
38,640
13,290
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
7,857
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$103,121
$74,443
$7,857
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
177,476
612,658
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$177,476
$612,658
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $604,713 $530,358 ($7,857) $0 $0 $0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE ($74,355) ($538,215) $7,857 $0 $0 $0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $530,358 ($7,857) $0 $0 $0 $0
D -29
1985 G. O. TAX INCREMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
376
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond helped provide financing in the City's downtown area. The
debt service schedule called for February principal payments and February and August interest
payments through the year 2006. The average interest rate was 8.29 %. The revenue source was
tax increments from the benefited district.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
D -30
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond was redeemed in February 2006 and should have no future
revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund.
BUDGET:
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
1,500
59
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$1,500
$59
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$1,559
$59
$0
$0
$0
$0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
($1,500)
($59)
$0
$0
$0
$0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$59
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
D -31
1989 G. O. TAX INCREMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
377
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond helped provide financing of a senior housing facility. The
debt service schedule called for February principal payments and February and August interest
payments through the year 2007. The average interest rate was 7.25 %. The revenue source was
tax increments from the benefited district.
OBJECTIVES:
NA
ISSUES:
NA
MEASURABLE WORI{LOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008
NA
D -32
2009 2010 2011
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond was redeemed in February 2007 and should have no future
revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $33,658 $2,271 $2,381 $0 $0 $0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE ($31,387) $110 ($2,381) $0 $0 $0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $2,271 $2,381 $0 $0 $0 $0
D -33
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
171
110
11
0
0
0
0.00 %
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$171
$110
$11
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
31,558
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
2,392
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$31,558
$0
$2,392
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $33,658 $2,271 $2,381 $0 $0 $0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE ($31,387) $110 ($2,381) $0 $0 $0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $2,271 $2,381 $0 $0 $0 $0
D -33
2004A G. O. TAXABLE TAX INCREMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
379
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond helped provide financing for new development in
the City's downtown district. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments
and February and August interest payments through the year 2013, however this bond was called
on August 2010. The average interest rate was 5.18 %. The revenue source was tax increments
from the benefited district.
OBJECTIVES:
ISSUES:
Make debt payment as scheduled in a timely manor.
Generation of sufficient tax increment for debt retirement.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
D -34
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond's main revenue source was tax increments
received from the downtown district. This bond was called in 2010 and thus have no additional
revenue or expenditures in 2011.
BUDGET:
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
78,977
49,531
14,314
34,790
213
0
- 100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
144,932
138,400
0
0
356,179
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$223,909
$187,931
$14,314
$34,790
$356,392
$0
- 100.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
915
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
137,645
138,358
133,333
133,057
492,957
0
- 100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
890,000
0
5,301
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$137,645
$138,358
$1,023,333
$133,057
$499,173
$0
- 100.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,015,963 $1,102,227 $1,151,800 $142,781 $142,781 $0
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE $86,264 $49,573 ($1,009,019) ($98,267) ($142,781) $0
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,102,227 $1,151,800 $142,781 $44,514 $0 $0
D -35
2008A G. O. REVENUE REFUNDING BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond
Finance Director
314
47000
The 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond refinanced the 2000A Public Project Revenue Bond.
The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August
interest payments through the year 2015. The average interest rate is 3.20 %. The revenue
source is revenues generated from the Monticello Community Center.
OBJECTIVES:
ISSUES:
Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor.
Generation of revenues by the Community Center to fund operations and repay debt
service with as low of property tax levy as possible.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
D -36
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond's revenue source is a transfer from the Community
Center Fund, while the expenditures consist of the 2011 debt payment.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
D
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
0
5,255
1,601
5,722
22,493
16,749
192.71%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
650,000
700,000
805,000
805,000
815,000
1.24%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
204,967
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$0
$860,222
$701,601
$810,722
$827,493
$831,749
2.59%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
821
38
0
268
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
90,553
815,003
803,100
807,635
1,102,560
37.29%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$0
$91,374
$815,041
$803,100
$807,903
$1,102,580
37.29%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$0 $0 $768,848 $655,408
$655,408
$674,998
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
$0 $768,848 ($113,440) $7,622
$19,590
($270,831)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$0 $768,848 $655,408 $663,030
$674,998
$404,167
D -37
2010A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND
DEPTMENT:
2010A G. O. Improvement and Refinancing Bond
SUPERVISOR:
Finance Director
FUND #:
317
ACTIVITY #:
47000
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The 2010A G. O. Improvement and Refinancing Bond finance capital projects approve and
started in 2010 and refinanced the 2002 G. O. Improvement Bonds. The debt service schedule
calls for semi - annual payments on February and August 1 st. The average interest rate is
2.0047 %. The revenue sources include a combination of existing City funds, a property tax levy,
and special assessments.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor.
ISSUES:
1. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
NA
r
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The City issued the 2010 G. O. Improvement and Refunding Bond in the amount of $3,255,000
to finance the reconstruction of West River Street, intersection improvements on the Northeast
corners of Highway 25 and Broadway and East River Streets and to refinance the G. O.
Improvement Bonds of 2002.
The 2010A G. O. Improvement Bond's revenue source will be a combination of existing City
funds, including the Consolidated Bond Fund, Street Light Improvement Fund, Street
Reconstruction Fund, the three Access Funds and Economic Development Fund, a small
property tax levy, and special assessments, while the expenditures consist of the debt payments.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$151
$52,000
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
$0
$0
$0
$0
$407
$235,747
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
$0
$0
$0
$0
($2,794)
$2,823
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$185,960
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$0
$0
$0
$0
($2,236)
$476,530
0.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPIES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
0
0
461,515
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
187,318
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$187,318
$461,515
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
($189,554)
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE
$0
$0
$0
$0
($189,554)
$15,015
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$0
$0
$0
$0
($189,554)
($174,539)
D -39
O
A
0
�ls+i
NiN
sI2RMRg2q
SNS?SS
e4SN
@NN�§'iiSS�SSSSiSNS
@NN
@CS
iSSSS55S
4"SQSNiNN
P
a�
�.99gRyg
o '
2
N
q
8
8
8
8s
8
a
8
8
@
J-�3
M
8
8
8
$
8
8
8
8
$
8
8
8
8
8
8
k
8
8
d
d
It
g
M
d
M
d
$
e
8
d
d
b
N
d
b
k$
N
a
8
8
8
8
°a
Sa8
8
8
8
8
0
�a
8
x$
�a
8
8
8
"s
8
8$
8
a
8
$
k
8
a
8$
8
a
8
$
8
8
k
'a
a
$
'a
$a
F
�8
8
$
8
$'8
B
a
8�
°s
8
8
B
B
s
a
8
8
B
k
a
8
8$
8
8
k$
a
x
o$
8
8
0
8a.�
9'
p
d=
k
's
k
k
k$
s
s
s
s
k
o
o
�
d
$
8$
S
8
8
8
$e
8_
B
a
_
s
$$g$asddk�dbd
ue
Paa�$daN8$S�
a
^-
888888$8$888888
ooko
8,80,
8888$8
8Gq
8'a 88a
8&�$8$g88�88g88r$dP8°8°8gm8s8$0a
8a o
8a oea�„$
E$�
88d o$S�$8Sb
o8S1
88Ne a8�888
, 889@8
�3
[
$
e9
�8a$d,
g'
�S
WII$99
ba
a
e
lBll
a8�
sad
h
� •
$k8isp8$8�$�o888NWp8''�8tlo88���os8�8$'�'9""
d
da�a"
@
�
®babda$�8�a$�e
�dM8Gb8
"BSSpdababbaz�
88888'$$BBkd
bb
8N8aa
I
5N�$
b�N88�
llvmVw1tw:lpB�
CAPITAL
PROJECT
FUNDS
E-1
CAPITAL PROJECT FUND
DESCRIPTION:
Capital Project Funds account for the financial resources and appropriations of
constructing and replacing the City's infrastructure including streets and City buildings or
facilities, except those financed by Enterprise Funds. Capital Project Funds use the
modified accrual basis of accounting however, the cash basis of accounting will be used
for budgetary purposes only. The cash basis is used for budgeting to ensure that
sufficient cash will be available to make all required payments.
BUDGET ISSUES:
Prior to 2006, the City would create a new capital project fund for each project being
constructed. Now the City uses one fund to account for all projects and separates
resources and expenditures using project numbers and account codes.
The major issue with the City's capital project funds is finding adequate funding
resources for the various projects with as small of impact on tax payers and property
owners as possible.
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The City currently has the following active projects;
• West School Boulevard Extension
• 95tt' Street Northeast Extension
• Chelsea Road /Fallon Avenue to County Road 18 Improvements
• I94 Twin Bridge Reconstruction (State Project)
• Dalton Avenue Extension
• 2010 Street Reconstruction
• Highway 25 and East River Street /West Broadway Intersection Improvements
The projects listed are street improvement projects with some utility improvements when
necessary.
2011 projects include the reconstruction of East River Street and the various surrounding
side streets leading into East River Street, Intersection improvements at Walnut Street
and 7th Street, restoration of storm water ponds, parking lot reconstruction, construction
of storm water lift station, reconstruction on rural outlaying streets, the beginning of
construction of Fallon Avenue overpass and some smaller miscellaneous projects.
Funding sources for these projects include special assessments to benefitted properties
and transfers from other City funds. At this time the City anticipates issuing debt to
finance these projects.
E -2
The current fund balance deficit will be eliminated from a transfer of funds from the
City's Debt Service Funds in the future.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 ($1,805,366) ($595,359) ($1,839,443) ($2,124,392) ($2,124,392) ($2,167,990)
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE $1,210,007 ($1,244,084) ($284,949) $1,313,100 ($43,598) $12,502
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($595,359) ($1,839,443) ($2,124,392) ($811,292) ($2,167,990) ($2,155,488)
The rest of this section is the first year (2011) of the City's Five -Year Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP), which includes capital equipment purchases for the various
funds, facility improvements for the City and infrastructure improvements. The City
Council approved the CIP on December 13, 2010. The full five -year adopted CIP is
available as a separate document or on the City's web site.
E -3
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
836,977
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
91,806
0
20,125
840,000
0
0
0.00%
FINES &FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
(184,659)
(44,554)
(14,312)
(18,683)
366,700
(22,998)
100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
632,908
1,409,567
69,462
1.,551,003
0
185,000
100.00%
BOND PROCEEDS -
3,747,275
0
0
3,230,000
2,745,000
4,590,000
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$5,124,307
$1,365,013
$75,275
$5,602,320
$3,111,700
$4,752,002
100.00%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SUPPLIES
3,807
9,511
0
0
896
0
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
3,907,216
205,880
97,309
1,643,000
411,735
1,805,000
0.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
3,277
1,493,453
262,872
2,326,500
2,742,667
2,934,500
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
900,253
43
319,720
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$3,914,300
$2,609,097
$360,224
$4,289,220
$3,155,298
$4,739,500
0.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 ($1,805,366) ($595,359) ($1,839,443) ($2,124,392) ($2,124,392) ($2,167,990)
EXCESS REVENUE OVER
EXPENDITURE $1,210,007 ($1,244,084) ($284,949) $1,313,100 ($43,598) $12,502
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($595,359) ($1,839,443) ($2,124,392) ($811,292) ($2,167,990) ($2,155,488)
The rest of this section is the first year (2011) of the City's Five -Year Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP), which includes capital equipment purchases for the various
funds, facility improvements for the City and infrastructure improvements. The City
Council approved the CIP on December 13, 2010. The full five -year adopted CIP is
available as a separate document or on the City's web site.
E -3
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Expenditures:
Project Name
2011
Personal Computer Replacement
16,900
Server Component Upgrades
4,000
Security Camera Systems
15,000
Laptop Computer Replacement
2,500
Portable Radios
12,500
Retrofit scba Packs
14,000
Duty Officer Vehicle
35,000
Building Inspection Vehicle
20,000
Public Works Garage Area Remodel
14,000
GIS Hardware & Software
2,500
Pavement Management Software
2,000
Public Works Staff Car
17,000
Ditch Mower Tractor
80,000
Mid -Size Tractor /Loader
70,000
One -Ton Truck Replacement
60,000
Hook Dump Truck Replacement
248,250
Utility Mule /Small Truck Replacement
9,500
Park Shop Remodel
4,000
Bertram Lakes Property Acquisition
475,000
Purchase a Skid Loader Trailer
6,000
West & East Bridge Park Lighting
65,000
East Bridge Park Landscaping
3,500
Storm Water Pond Restoration
25,000
MCC Carpet
5,000
Energy Management Upgrades
30,000
Recreation Equipment Replacement
30,000
Replace Gym Floor
50,000
Vanity & Partition Replacement
10,000
MCC Front Counter Improvements
6,000
Table Covering Replacement
3,000
Community Signs
30,000
Intersection Improv. - Walnut/7th Str.
140,000
Walnut Street Crosswalk /Blvd. Impr.
10,000
Parking Lot Reconstruction
80,000
Signal Light Battery Backups
70,000
Street Reconstruction - Area 4A
87,250
Overlay Rural Outlaying Streets
450,000
Fallon Overpass Construction
500,000
Street Reconstruction - Area 5
3,420,000
Street Light Improvements
120,000
Storm Water Pond Lining
200,000
Trunk Sewer Improvements
150,000
Remove Impro Heat Sewage Pasturization
25,000
SCADA System Installation
150,000
Water System Improvements
150,000
Cash Register System
15,000
Liquor Store Carpet Replacement
38,000
Liquor Store Security Cameras
3,000
DMV Security Cameras
1,500
DMV Credit Card Processing System
2,500
Sign Lab System
30,000
Total Expenditures: E-4
7,007,900
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Revenue Source
Revenue Description
2011
General Fund Property Taxes
41,900
Capital Revolving Fund
646,250
DMV Fund
4,000
Street Light Improvement Fund
185,000
Shade Tree Fund
0
Community Center Fund
134,000
Economic Development Fund
0
Park & Pathway Dedication Fund
475,000
Consolidated Bond Fund
21,250
Sewer Fund
250,000
Water Fund
225,000
Liquor Fund
56,000
Storm Sewer Access Fund
200,000
Sanitary Sewer Access Fund
0
Water Access Fund
0
Street Reconstruction Fund
10,000
2010 Improvement Bonds
90,750
2011 Improvement Bonds
4,590,000
2012 Improvement Bonds
0
Bond Funds - Special Assessments
0
MN /DOT Participation
43,750
Wright County Participation
5,000
Unspecified Funding Source
30,000
Total Revenue Sources 7,007,900
E -5
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Personal Computer Replacement
Priority Ranking:
29.85
Project Type:
Equipment Replacement
Useful Life:
4 years
Responsible Dept.:
Information Technology
Replace personnel computers of staff based on a four -year life cycle.
Replace computers to maintain updated technology software and hardware
resulting in staff efficiencies.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
3,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 75,400
Total 16,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 75,400
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Capital Revolving Fund
11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 58,500
Total 16,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 75,400
as a result of having up to technology.
Ti
4111
)mputers verses any efficiencies
2012 2013 2014 2015
Total 16,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
4
5.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
5
5.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
3
3.60
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
5
5.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
0
0.00
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
29.85
E -6
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Multi Server Component Upgrades
Priority Ranking:
28.60
Project Type:
Equipment Replacement
Useful Life:
5 years
Responsible Dept.:
Information Technology
computer network servers with new, more efficient multi server
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
General Fund /MIS 4,000 4,000 8,000
Total 4,000 0 0 0 4,000 8,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 4,000 0 0 0 4,000 8,000
servers with new ones.
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General Fund /MIS 4,000 0 0 0 4,000
Total 4,000 0 0 0 4,000
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
4
5.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
5
5.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
3
3.60
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
5
5.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
0
0.00
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
28.60
E -7
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Security Camera Systems
Priority Ranking:
39.55
Project Type:
Equipment Purchase
Useful Life:
10 years
Responsible Dept:
Information Technology
hase and install security camera systems City -wide and upgrade existing City facility
;ra systems. Improve safety around City and help prevent crime and if crime occurs
law enforcement officials indentify individuals committing the offenses.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 15,000 10,000 0 0 0 25,000
Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Capital Revolving Fund 15,000 10,000 25,000
Total 15,000 10,000 0 0 0 25,000
maintenance of the
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General Fund /MIS 10 20 20 20 20
Total 10 20 20 20 20
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
5
7.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
5
6.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
5
5.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
2
2.40
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
2
2.00
Public Benefit
1.10
4
4.40
Public Demand
1.25
2
2.50
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
39.55
Ill
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Replace Laptop Computer
Priority Ranking:
29.85
Project Type:
Equipment Replacement
Useful Life:
3 years
Responsible Dept.:
Information Technology
more efficient com
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
General Fund /MIS 2,500 2,500 5,000
Total 2,500 0 0 0 2,500 5,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 2,500 0 0 0 2,500 5,000
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012 2013
2014 2015
No future dollar impact.
Total
0
0 0
0 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
4
5.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
5
5.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
3
3.60
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
5
5.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
0
0.00
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
29.85
E -9
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Purchase of 800 MHz Radios
Priority Ranking:
36.40
Project Type:
Equipment Purchase
Useful Life:
25 years
Responsible Dept.:
Fire
nnase 5 additional 6oU MHz radios. Keplacement of old radios with new
io technology, so that all radios are the same and all fire fighters and
ergency personnel can communicate with one another.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 12,500 0 0 0 0 12,500
Funding Source
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 12,500 0 0 0 0 12,500
an annual m
radio.
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General Fund /Fire 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250
Total 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
4
5.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
5
7.50
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
1
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
3
3.30
Public Demand
1.25
3
3.75
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
2
2.10
Total Score
36.40
E -10
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Replace scba packs
Priority Ranking:
26.70
Project Type:
Equipment Replacement
Useful Life:
25 years
Responsible Dept.:
Fire
to
their own mask.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 14,000 9,000 0 0 0 23,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 14,000 9,000 0 0 0 23,000
urchase is a replacement of old equipment and there for will have very
budget impacts.
2011 2012 2013
2014 2015
Total 0 0 0 0 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
1.10
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
5
6.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
3
4.50
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
2
2.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
1
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
0
0.00
Public Demand
1.25
Synergywith Other Projects
1.10
Strategic Goal
1.05
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
Total Score
E -11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
26.70
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Duty Officer Vehicle
Priority Ranking:
31.35
Project Type:
Equipment Purchase
Useful Life:
7 years
Responsible Dept.:
Fire
Purchase of a Fire department duty officer vehicle to reduce response time to tire
emergencies and the ability to establish an incident command center at fire emergencies.
Finally, it will provide the department with a vehicle to use for nonemergency responses or
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 35,000 0 0 0 0 35,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
3b,000
Total 35,000 0 0 0 0 35,000
I his new vehicle will
maintenance ($200).
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General Fund /Fire 900 920 940 960 980
Total 900 920 940 960 980
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
5
6.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
0
0.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
4
4.80
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
3
3.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
0
0.00
Public Benefit
1.10
2
2.20
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
2
2.10
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
31.35
E -12
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Replace Building Inspection Vehicle
Priority Ranking:
27.05
Project Type:
Equipment Replacement
Useful Life:
8 years
Responsible Dept.:
Building Inspections
Replace vehicles used by City building inspectors for building insp
Replacement of old worn vehicles will reduce maintenance costs.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
),000 22,000 42,000
Total 20,000 0 22,000 0 0 42,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 20,000 0 22,000 0 0 42,000
)lacement of older vehicles should reduce maintenance and repair c
vehicles are more fuel efficient, which should reduce fuel costs also.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total (2,000) (1,800) (2,800) (1,600) (1,000)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
4
5.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
4
4.80
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
0
0.00
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
27.05
E -13
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Public Works Garage Area Remodel
Priority Ranking: 38.30
Project Type: Building Improvement
Useful Life: 50 years
Responsible Dept.: Public Works Administration
a ventilation system
removal.
garage are Tor weiaing gas
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Public Works Shop & Garage 14,000 14,000
Total 14,000 0 0 0 0 14,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 14,000 0 0 0 0 14,000
create a so
on system.
energy costs through more
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014 2015
General Fund /Shop & Garage
(50)
(50)
(50)
Total
(50)
(50)
(50)
0 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
2
3.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
5
6.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
3
4.50
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
4
4.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
2
2.40
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
0
0.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
0
0.00
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
4
4.20
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
38.30
E -14
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 20.11 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Purchase GIS Hardware & Software
Priority Ranking:
37.25
Project Type:
Equipment Purchase
Useful Life:
5 years
Responsible Dept.:
Engineering
unue to purcnase ana implement a city -wide uis system. Uis allows start etticiencie
better communications with the public and other government agencies. Reduces the
mdency of consultants for maps and other property related needs.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
2.500 3.000 15.000 5.000 5.000 30 5nn
Total 2,500 3,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 30,500
Fundina Source
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 2,500 3,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 30,500
Ii ne purcnase ana implementation or t;i6 snouia provide start witn a getter, more etticient
system for tracking, viewing, mapping property related information, existing utilities and
other pertinent data.
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
No future dollar impact.
Total 0 0 0 0 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
1
1.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
3
4.50
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
2
2.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
4
4.80
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
2
2.00
Public Benefit
1.10
3
3.30
Public Demand
1.25
3
3.75
Synergywith Other Projects
1.10
3
3.30
Strategic Goal
1.05
1
1.05
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
1
1.05
Total Score
37.25
E -15
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Purchase Pavement Management Software
Priority Ranking: 60.70
Project Type: Equipment Purchase
Useful Life: 5 years
Responsible Dept.: Engineering
;vase software wnicn wui neap manage the recoras of Vity street maintenance
replacement. Allows staff to maintain pavement cost effectively, saving money,
providing safe roads for residents. Synchs with City's GIS system.
res
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 2,000 0 0 2,000 0 4,000
Fundina Source
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 2,000 0 0 2,000 0 4,000
;duce the amount of staff time it takes to maintain, schedt
the City's street maintenance and replacement programs.
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
General Fund /Engineering
(500)
(500)
(1,000)
(5,000)
(2,500)
Total
(500)
(500)
(1,000)
(5,000)
(2,500)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
4
5.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
3
4.50
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
3
3.60
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
4
4.80
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
3
3.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
3
3.00
Public Benefit
1.10
4
4.40
Public Demand
1.25
4
5.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
3
3.30
Strategic Goal
1.05
4
4.20
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
3
3.15
Total Score
60.70
E -16
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Purchase Public Work Staff Car
Priority Ranking: 39.50
Project Type: Equipment Purchase
Useful Life: 10 years
Responsible Dept.: Public Works Administration
IPurchase a high mileage, four door car for public works staff to commute from public works
office /garage to meetings, conferences, schools, and other training.
A more economical way for public works to move around the City and to meetings compared to
a pick up truck
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
General Fund /P W Administration 17,000 17,000
Total 17,000 0 0 0 0 17,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 17,000 0 0 0 0 17,000
na require same maintenance as
costs savings.
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
General Fund /P W Administration
(150)
(150)
(150)
(150)
Total
0
(150)
(150)
(150)
(150)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
3
4.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
3
3.75
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
1
1.50
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
1
1.20
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
5
6.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
1
1.10
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
2
2.10
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
35.90
E -17
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Replace the Ditch Mower Tractor
Priority Ranking:
42.85
Project Type:
Equipment Replacement
Useful Life:
15 years
Responsible Dept.:
Streets & Alleys
Kepiace me tractor usea Tor mowing ana maintaining aitcnes ana Doutevaras arouna i
Reduce maintenance and repair costs and improve equipment safety by replacing old
equipment.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
General Fund /Streets 80,000 80,000
Total 80,000 0 0 0 0 80,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 80,000 0 0 0 0 80,000
e repair and maintenance costs by replacing old equipments and provide better
to employees using the equipment with improved safety equipment on the equipment.
Operating Budget impact
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
General Fund /Streets
(200)
(200)
(200)
(200)
(200)
Total
(200)
(200)
(200)
(200)
(200)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
5
6.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
5
6.25
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
1
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
2
2.20
Public Demand
1.25
3
3.75
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
42.85
E -18
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Replacement of Mid -Size Tractor /Loader
Priority Ranking: 29.20
Project Type: Equipment Replacement
Useful Life: 20 years
Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys
;e me unys mia -size tractor toaaer. nepiacing an oia mia -size m
has exceeded its useful life will reduce repair maintenance costs.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
General Fund /Streets 70,000 70,000
Total 70,000 0 0 0 0 70,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
0
Total 70,000 0 0 0 0 70,000
a new m
costs
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
General Fund /Streets
(300)
(300)
(300)
(300)
0
Total
(300)
(300)
(300)
(300)
0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
2
3.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
3
3.75
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
2
2.40
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
3
3.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
0
0.00
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
3
3.30
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
29.20
E -19
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
One -Ton Truck Replacement
Priority Ranking:
30.50
Project Type:
Equipment Replacement
Useful Life:
7 years
Responsible Dept.:
Streets & Alleys
maintenance costs on City vehicles and reduce staff down time due to equipment repairs.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 60,000 0 0 0 65,000 125,000
Funding Source
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
l']A19g
Total 60,000 0 0 0 65,000 125,000
Keduce repair maintenance cost on city vehicles and reduce staff dawn time due to
equipment repairs. The replacement of trucks in 2011 includes a one -ton truck and a'
pick -uD truck. For 2012 another one -ton truck will be replaced.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total (2,200) (2,000) (1,500) (1,800) (1,500)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
2
3.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
4
5.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
4
5.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
2
2.40
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
3
3.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
1
1.10
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
30.50
E -20
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Hook Dump truck Replacement
Priority Ranking:
40.00
Project Type:
Equipment Replacement
Useful Life:
15 years
Responsible Dept.:
Streets & Alleys and Ice & Snow
dace the City's hook dump truck used by the streets department. Replac
worn equipment should reduce repair maintenance costs and staff down
due to equipment being out of service.
res
2011 2012
General Fund /Snow & Ice 124,125
2013 2014 2015 Total
124,125 248,250
124,125 248,250
Total 248,250 0 0 0 248,250 496,500
Fundina Source
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 248,250 0 0 0 248,250 496,500
ace old worn out equipment should reduce repair
down time due to equipment being out of service.
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
General Fund /Streets
(1,000)
(1,000)
(1,000)
(800)
(800)
General Fund /Snow & Ice
(1,000)
(1,000)
(1,000)
(800)
(800)
Total
-2,000
(2,000)
(2,000)
(1,600)
(1,600)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
3
4.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
4
5.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
4
5.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
5
6.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
3
3.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
2
2.20
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
3
3.30
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
40.00
E -21
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Utility Mule /Small Truck Replacement/Purchase
Priority Ranking:
24.80
Project Type:
Equipment Replacement/Purchase
Useful Life:
7 years
Responsible Dept.:
Parks
lace the City's current utility ATV (utility mule) and purchase a second utility AT V.
uce repair maintenance cost and reduce staff down time due to equipment repairs
provide a second utility mule to increase efficiencies.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
General Fund /Parks 9,500 9,500
Total 9,500 0 0 0 0 9,500
Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Capital Revolving Fund 9,500 9,500
Total 9,500 0 0 0 0 9,500
ace repair maintenance cost and reduce staff down ti
provide a second utility mule to increase efficiencies.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
(150) (50) (50) 0 0
Total (150) (50) (50) 0 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
3
3.60
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
2
2.00
Public Benefit
1.10
1
1.10
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
1
1.05
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
1
1.05
Total Score
24.80
E -22
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Park Shop Remodel
Priority Ranking:
22.25
Project Type:
Building Improvement
Useful Life:
25 years
Responsible Dept.:
Parks
nsulation and improve work and storage space.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
1 nnn nnn
Total 4,000 0 0 0 0 4,000
Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Capital Revolving Fund 4,000 4,000
Total 4,000 0 0 0 0 4,000
This project will have very little future operational impact, however the project should
improve operational efficiency and the added insulation should save some heating costs.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total (100) (100) (100) (100) (100)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
2
2.40
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
3
3.00
Public Benefit
1.10
0
0.00
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
1
1.05
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
1
1.05
Total Score
22.25
E -23
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Bertram Lakes Property Acquisition
Priority Ranking: 29.95
Project Type: Park Improvement
Useful Life: 100 years
Responsible Dept.: Parks
Purchase the 12UU acre Bertram Uhain of Lakes property from the Y.M.U.A. along
with Wright County and possible the State of Minnesota. Development of a large regional park
to help provide needed park space and attract new development within the area and preserve the
natural area around the lakes.
res 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 2,375,000
Source
2011
i.000
2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
475,000 475,000
Total 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 2,375,000
funding source would need to be found because this purchase we
City reserves. The land purchase it self has no operating impact.
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Minimum Maintenance 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000
Total 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
0
0.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
1
1.00
Cost of Project
1.00
1
1.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
2
2.40
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
1
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
0
0.00
Public Benefit
1.10
5
5.50
Public Demand
1.25
5
6.25
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
4
4.40
Strategic Goal
1.05
4
4.20
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
4
4.20
Total Score
29.95
E -24
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Purchase a Skid Loader Trailer
Priority Ranking:
12.40
Project Type:
Equipment Purchase
Useful Life:
10 years
Responsible Dept.:
Parks
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
General Fund /Parks 6,000 6,000
Total 6,000 0 0 0 0 6,000
Fundina Source
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
�71!NJ9
Total 6,000 0 0 0 0 6,000
purchase of the trailer will provide for sater, more efficient tra
equipment and may reduce trailer maintenance cost slightly.
Budget Im
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total (10) (10) 0 0 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
0
0.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
2
2.40
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
1
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
0
0.00
Public Benefit
1.10
0
0.00
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
12.40
E -25
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: West and East Bridge Park Lighting Project
Priority Ranking: 37.40
Project Type: Park Improvement
Useful Life: 20 years
Responsible Dept.: Parks
safe walking system.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 65,000 0 0 0 0 65,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
bb,000
Total 65,000 0 0 0 0 65,000
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General Fund /Parks 50 50 50 50 50
Total 50 50 50 50 50
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
5
7.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
3
3.75
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
0
0.00
Public Benefit
1.10
5
5.50
Public Demand
1.25
3
3.75
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
2
2.10
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
2
2.10
Total Score
37.40
E -26
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
East Bridge Park Landscaping
Priority Ranking:
36.45
Project Type:
Park Improvement
Useful Life:
20 years
Responsible Dept.:
Parks
res
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 3,500 0 0 0 0 3,500
;0
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
3,500
Total 3,500 0 0 0 0 3,500
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General Fund /Parks
Total 0 0 0 0 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
2
3.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
1
1.25
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
5
5.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
1
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
0
0.00
Public Benefit
1.10
5
5.50
Public Demand
1.25
3
3.75
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
4
4.40
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
3
3.15
Total Score
36.45
E -27
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Storm Water Pond Restoration /Maintenance
Priority Ranking: 49.65
Project Type: Storm Water Improvement
Useful Life: 50 years
Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Public Works Administration
Restore storm water pond areas by cleaning out soils and poor vegetation.
Provide an adequate storm water drainage system by maintaining capacity
and reducing sediment transported between ponds and the river. Comply
with storm water pollution prevention program (SWPPP) requirements.
res
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 25,000 25,000 40,000 20,000 40,000 150,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 25,000 25,000 40,000 20,000 40,000 150,000
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014 2015
General Fund
20,000
20,000
20,000
20,000 20,000
Total
20,000
20,000
20,000
20,000 20,000
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
5
7.50
Frequent Problems
1.25
5
6.25
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
3
3.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
4
4.40
Public Demand
1.25
3
3.75
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
3
3.30
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
1
1.05
Total Score
49.65
E -28
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Community Center Carpet
Priority Ranking: 36.00
Project Type: Building Improvements
Useful Life: 10 years
Responsible Dept.: Community Center
or
rooms or in carpeted areas
munity Center. To make the meeting rooms of the Community Center
attractive for room rentals and replace old worn carpet.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
mu
Total 5,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 65,000
Funding Source
om
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
b,uuu I b,000 I b,000
Total 5,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 65,000
in some areas of the facility and areas without carpet require mopping and other
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
No future dollar impact.
Total 0 0 0 0 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
1
1.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
5
5.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
2
2.40
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
3
3.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
2
2.20
Public Demand
1.25
4
5.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
36.00
E -29
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Energy Management Upgrades
Priority Ranking:
31.05
Project Type:
Building Improvements
Useful Life:
25 years
Responsible Dept.:
Community Center
N and update/improve energy using, including lighting, heating and gas usage
the Community Center. Reduce energy costs of operating the Community Center.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 30,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 70,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 30,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 70,000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total (200) (500) (1,000) (3,000) (6,000)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
4
4.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
5
6.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
5
5.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
2
2.20
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
1
1.05
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
1
1.05
Total Score
31.05
E -30
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Recreation Equipment Replacement/Purchase
Priority Ranking:
36.30
Project Type:
Equipment Purchase
Useful Life:
10 years
Responsible Dept.:
Community Center
fireplace recreation equipment used in the fitness ci
usage and memberships of the Community Center.
2011 2012
m
area, and Nomp N Stomp area.
2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 30,000 0 30,000 0 30,000 90,000
Funding Source
H
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
30,000
Total 30,000 0 30,000 0 30,000 90,000
cost
r
be m
2011
2012 2013 2014 2015
200 200 200 200
Total 200 200 200 200 200
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
2
2.00
Cost of Project
1.00
2
2.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
4
4.80
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
5
5.50
Public Demand
1.25
4
5.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
3
3.15
Total Score
36.30
E -31
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Replace Gym Floor
Priority Ranking:
30.45
Project Type:
Building Improvement
Useful Life:
25 years
Responsible Dept.:
Community Center
ace community Center gym boor. Keouce m
and maintain the gyms usability for activities.
worn gym
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Community Center 50,000 50,000
Total 50,000 0 0 0 0 50,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 50,000 0 0 0 0 50,000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
(150) (150) (100) (50) 0
Total (150) (150) (100) (50) 0
Priority Ranking
Criteria
Weighting
Factor
Priority
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
1
1.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
2
2.00
Cost of Project
1.00
1
1.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
3
3.60
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
2
2.40
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
1
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
5
5.50
Public Demand
1.25
2
2.50
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
1
1.10
Strategic Goal
1.05
1
1.05
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
1
1.05
Total Score
30.45
E -32
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Vanity and Partition Replacement
Priority Ranking:
31.00
Project Type:
Building Improvement
Useful Life:
25 years
Responsible Dept.:
Community Center
(Replace the restroom and locker room vanities and partitions in the Community Center.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Community Center 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000
Total 10,000 10,000 10,000 0 0 30,000
Source
2011 2012
2014 2015 Total
Total 10,000 10,000 10,000 0 0 30,000
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Community Center (50) (50) (50) (50) 0
Total (50) (50) (50) (50) 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
3
4.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
4
4.00
Cost of Project
1.00
1
1.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
2
2.40
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
1
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
1
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
3
3.30
Public Demand
1.25
2
2.50
Synergywith Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
1
1.05
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
1
1.05
Total Score
31.00
E -33
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Community Center Front Counter Improvements
Priority Ranking: 26.65
Project Type: Building Improvement
Useful Life: 25 years
Responsible Dept.: Community Center
could include pro -shop display area for increased product sales.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Community Center 6,000 6,000
Total 6,000 0 0 0 0 6,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 6,000 0 0 0 0 6,000
;ments to the front counter of the C
area could increase product sales.
a
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Community Center
(50)
(50)
(50)
(50)
(50)
Total
(50)
(50)
(50)
(50)
(50)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
1
1.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
4
4.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
2
2.40
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
1
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
0
0.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
3
3.00
Public Benefit
1.10
2
2.20
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
1
1.05
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
1
1.05
Total Score
26.65
E -34
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Table Covering Replacement
Priority Ranking:
29.40
Project Type:
Building Improvement
Useful Life:
7 years
Responsible Dept.:
Community Center
top covers used during room
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
6,000
Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000
covers will have no impact on
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Community Center
Total 0 0 0 0 0
Priority Ranking
Criteria
Weighting
Factor
Priority
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
3
4.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
1
1.20
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
0
0.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
2
2.20
Public Demand
1.25
3
3.75
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
29.40
E -35
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Community Identification Signs
Priority Ranking:
27.85
Project Type:
Infrastructure Improvements
Useful Life:
25 years
Responsible Dept.:
Economic Development
services and businesses are available. Promote and attract
le and businesses to the City of Monticello.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Capital Project Fund 30,000 30,000 30,000 90,000
Total 30,000 30,000 0 0 30,000 90,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 30,000 30,000 0 0 30,000 90,000
areas
will require very low maintenance.
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General Fund 150 250 250 250 250
Total 150 250 250 250 250
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
1
1.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
1
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
0
0.00
Public Benefit
1.10
5
5.50
Public Demand
1.25
4
5.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
4
4.40
Strategic Goal
1.05
2
2.10
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
2
2.10
Total Score
27.85
E -36
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Intersection Improvements - Walnut Street and 7th Street
Priority Ranking: 44.30
Project Type: Street Improvements
Useful Life: 30 years
Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys
mprove
on
7th Street with improved turn lanes and traffic lanes. Provide for safer and improved
vehicle and pedestrian flows at the intersection.
itures
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 140,000 0 0 0 0 140,000
Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
2011 Improvement Bonds 140,000 140,000
Total 140,000 0 0 0 0 140,000
add cost for snow plowing and future maintenance.
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General Fund 100 500 1,000 1,000 1,000
Total 100 500 1,000 1,000 1,000
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
5
7.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
3
4.50
Frequent Problems
1.25
4
5.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
2
2.00
Cost of Project
1.00
2
2.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
2
2.00
Public Benefit
1.10
4
4.40
Public Demand
1.25
4
5.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
1
1.10
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
3
3.15
Total Score
44.30
E -37
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Walnut Street Crosswalk & Boulevard Improvements
Priority Ranking: 45.45
Project Type: Street Improvements
Useful Life: 20 years
Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys
ce worn DricK ano aspnait crosswaiKS ano auapiaatea oouievara areas
Walnut Street. Improve pedestrian safety in the area.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
General Fund /Streets 10,000 10,000
Total 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000
Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Street Reconstruction Fund 10,000 10,000
Total 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000
maintenance
stripping and cleaning of brick and asphalt areas.
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Total 100 250 250 250 250
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
3
3.75
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
4
4.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
1
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
5
5.50
Public Demand
1.25
3
3.75
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
3
3.30
Strategic Goal
1.05
2
2.10
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
2
2.10
Total Score
45.45
E -38
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Parking Lot Reconstruction
Priority Ranking:
40.10
Project Type:
Infrastructure Improvement
Useful Life:
25 years
Responsible Dept.:
Streets & Alleys
the City's downtown areas. Reconstruct DMV lot in conjunction with
2011 street reconstruction, area 5 project.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 80,000 0 0 0 0 80,000
1
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
52AWA
Total 80,000 0 0 0 0 80,000
time the parking lots will need some patching, seal coating,
restriping, but should be minimal compared to current maintenance levels.
2011
2012 2013 2014 2015
300 500 300 500
Total 100 300 500 300 500
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
3
4.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
1
1.00
Cost of Project
1.00
1
1.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
3
3.60
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
4
4.40
Public Demand
1.25
4
5.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
4
4.40
Strategic Goal
1.05
2
2.10
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
2
2.10
Total Score
40.10
E -39
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Battery Backup Systems for Traffic Signals
Priority Ranking: 48.05
Project Type: Street Improvements
Useful Life: 25 years
Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys
battery backup systems to the traffic signals along Highway 25
busy traffic areas of the City. Improve and maintain traffic flows
power outages occur in the area.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Capital Project Fund 70,000 20,000 90,000
Total 70,000 20,000 0 0 0 90,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
MN /DOT Participation 43,750
Wright County Participation 5,000
43,750
Total 70,000 20,000 0 0 0 85,000
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014 2015
General Fund /Streets & Alleys
500
1,000
1,500
2,000 2,500
Total
500
1,000
1,500
2,000 2,500
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
5
7.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
3
3.75
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
2
3.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
1
1.20
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
2
2.40
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
3
3.00
Public Benefit
1.10
5
5.50
Public Demand
1.25
2
2.50
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
2
2.10
Total Score
48.05
E -40
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Street Reconstruction Program - Area 4A
Priority Ranking: 43.55
Project Type: Street Reconstruction
Useful Life: 30 years
Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys
-inn, Locust, Maple, Minnesota, Vine, and Walnut Streets. Improvements include; replacing curb,
,treets, storm sewer, water mains, sewer mains, replacing the Chestnut lift station, pathway lighting
improvements on Front Str., and adding sidewalks and underground fiber optic lines. The project
>hould reduce street maintenance costs and make it easier to remove snow and improve oedestriai
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Capital Project Fund 87,250 87,250
Total 87,250 0 0 0 0 87,250
Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
2010 Improvement Bonds 87,250 87,250
Total 87,250 0 0 0 0 87,250
(Reconstructing streets should reduce street maintenance costs for patching material.
However these streets will need to be maintained in the future to help maintain them as
Iona as Dossible.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total (500) (200) (200) 100,000 (200)
Priority Ranking
Criteria
Weighting
Factor
Priority
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
2
3.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
2
2.00
Cost of Project
1.00
2
2.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
1
1.20
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
1
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
2
2.00
Public Benefit
1.10
4
4.40
Public Demand
1.25
4
5.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
3
3.15
Total Score
43.55
E -41
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Overlay Rural Outlying Streets
Priority Ranking:
43.55
Project Type:
Street Reconstruction
Useful Life:
15 years
Responsible Dept.:
Engineering /Streets & Alleys
instruct a 3' overlay on the various streets surrounding the Uity and I owns[
Monticello and restrip them. This project would reduce maintenance costs
d make it easier to remove snow.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 450,000 0 0 0 0 450,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
:• t`
Total 450,000 0 0 0 0 450,000
(Reconstructing streets should reduce street maintenance costs for patching material.
However these streets will need to be maintained in the future to help maintain them as
long as possible.
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General Fund /Streets & Alleys (500) (200) (200) 100,000 (200)
Total (500) (200) (200) 100,000 (200)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
2
3.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
2
2.00
Cost of Project
1.00
2
2.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
1
1.20
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
1
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
2
2.00
Public Benefit
1.10
4
4.40
Public Demand
1.25
4
5.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
3
3.15
Total Score
43.55
E -42
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Construction of Fallon Avenue Overpass
Priority Ranking: 47.10
Project Type: Street Improvement
Useful Life: 50 years
Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys
Lonstruct an overpass (onage) over 194 connecting norm ana soutn i-allon Avei
Provide better traffic flows from the north and south sided of 194, which will help
develop and improve business opportunities on both sides of the freeway.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
bUU,000 4,000,UUU 'I
Total 500,000 4,000,000 1,500,000 0 0 6,000,000
ng Source
mprovemei
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 500,000 4,000,000 1,500,000 0 0 6,000,000
overpass
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General Fund /Streets & Alleys 1,000 1,000
Total 0 0 0 1,000 1,000
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
2
3.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
2
2.00
Cost of Project
1.00
1
1.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
2
2.40
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
1
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
0
0.00
Public Benefit
1.10
4
4.40
Public Demand
1.25
4
5.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
4
4.40
Strategic Goal
1.05
4
4.20
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
5
5.25
Total Score
47.10
E -43
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Street Reconstruction Program - Area 5
Priority Ranking:
43.55
Project Type:
Street Reconstruction
Useful Life:
30 years
Responsible Dept.:
Engineering /Streets & Alleys
yI., L - IL-y, I.-I�''.J".1, u'1..
Washington between Broadway to either Pine, 4th, or 7th Streets. Improvements will
include replacing curb, gutters, storm sewer, water mains, and sanitary sewer and install
underground fiber optic lines. Reduce maintenance costs and improve snow removal.
res 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 3,420,000 180,000 0 0 0 3,600,000
Revenues 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
2011 Improvement Bonds 3,420,000 180,000 3,600,000
Total 3,420,000 180,000 0 0 0 3,600,000
.acting streets should reduce street maintenance costs for patching material.
these streets will need to be maintained in the future to help maintain them as
as
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
General
Total 0 (500) (200) (200) (200)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
2
3.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
2
2.00
Cost of Project
1.00
2
2.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
1
1.20
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
1
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
2
2.00
Public Benefit
1.10
4
4.40
Public Demand
1.25
4
5.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
3
3.15
Total Score
E -44
43.55
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Street Light Improvements
Priority Ranking:
53.95
Project Type:
Infrastructure Improvements
Useful Life:
50 years
Responsible Dept.:
Streets & Alleys
Improve night time visibility and reduce electrical cost by installing more
energy efficient street lights.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 120,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 420,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 120,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 420,000
This improvement should reduce electric cost when old street lights are replaced with
more energy efficient street lights. When street lights are added to an area which currently
does not have street light, the area will be more visible at night which could reduce
traffic accidents or criminal activitv in the area.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total (150) (275) (400) (500) (600)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
2
3.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
4
5.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
4
4.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
1
1.20
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
4
4.80
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
4
4.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
4
4.40
Public Demand
1.25
2
2.50
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
4
4.20
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
3
3.15
Total Score
53.95
E -45
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Storm Water Pond Lining
Priority Ranking:
49.30
Project Type:
Storm Water Improvement
Useful Life:
25 years
Responsible Dept.:
Engineering /Public Works Administration
nue and between 7th Street and 1 -94. Line ponds to address wellhead
ection criteria and increase holding capacity in conjunction with
Mills Fleet Farm Develonment.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 200,000 0 0 0 0 200,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 200,000 0 0 0 0 200,000
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
General Fund
(2,000)
(1,000)
(1,000)
(1,000)
(1,000)
Total
(2,000)
(1,000)
(1,000)
(1,000)
(1,000)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
4
6.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
1
1.20
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
1
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
1
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
3
3.00
Public Benefit
1.10
5
5.50
Public Demand
1.25
3
3.75
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
3
3.30
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
4
4.20
Total Score
49.30
E -46
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Trunk Sewer Improvements
Priority Ranking:
46.65
Project Type:
Infrastructure Improvements
Useful Life:
50 years
Responsible Dept.:
Engineering /Public Works Sewer
Iimprove existing sewer system. rtecuce the mtiow, of clean water into the sanitary
sewer system and reduce the chances of sewer back ups by replacing mains that
are cracked, leaking, or have tree roots infiltrated into them with new mains.
In 2012 it is anticipated that a new sewer trunk will be needed in the Featherstone addition.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
1,000 650,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,250,000
Total 150,000 650,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,250,000
Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Sewer Fund 150,000 650,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,250,000
Total 150,000 650,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,250,000
of clean water, which is being treated at the plant, because it has leaked into the
mains through cracks. Could also reduce the risk of sewer back ups by providing
clean sewer mains.
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Sewer Fund (500) (1,000) (1,200) (1,300) (1,500)
Total (500) (1,000) (1,200) (1,300) (1,500)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
5
7.50
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
2
2.00
Cost of Project
1.00
2
2.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
1
1.20
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
3
3.60
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
3
3.00
Public Benefit
1.10
3
3.30
Public Demand
1.25
2
2.50
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
3
3.30
Strategic Goal
1.05
3
3.15
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
2
2.10
Total Score
46.65
E -47
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Removal of Impro Heat Sewage Pasturization System
Priority Ranking:
24.55
Project Type:
Waste Water Treatment Plant Improvement
Useful Life:
0 years
Responsible Dept.:
Public Works Administration /Public Works Sewer
not being used and salvage for scrap.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Sewer Fund 25,000 25,000
Total 25,000 0 0 0 0 25,000
Source
Sewer
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 25,000 0 0 0 0 25,000
no
not being used.
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total 0 0 0 0 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
5
6.25
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
5
5.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
0
0.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
5
5.00
Public Benefit
1.10
0
0.00
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
3
3.30
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
24.55
E -48
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Install SCADA System
Priority Ranking: 55.40
Project Type: Water and Sewer Improvement
Useful Life: 25 years
Responsible Dept.: Public Works Sewer /Public Works Water
a SCADA system of monitoring all of the Gity's water and sewer facilities including wells,
houses, and lift stations electronically. Improve response time to system problems which
a the chance of sewer backups or low water levels of the City's systems.
Water Fund
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
75,000
75,000
Total 150,000 0 0 0 0 150,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Sewer Fund 75,000
Water Fund 75,000
75,000
Total 150,000 0 0 0 0 150,000
before they become more problematic.
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Water Fund
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
Sewer Fund
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
(100)
Total
(200)
(200)
(200)
(200)
(200)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
4
6.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
3
3.75
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
1
1.50
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
3
3.60
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
5
6.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
2
2.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
2
2.00
Public Benefit
1.10
5
5.50
Public Demand
1.25
2
2.50
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
4
4.40
Strategic Goal
1.05
4
4.20
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
4
4.20
Total Score
55.40
E -49
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Existing Water System Improvements
Priority Ranking: 56.95
Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements
Useful Life: 50 years
Responsible Dept.: Public Works Water
Improve existing water system and reduce the number of water main breaks and reduce water system
related problems which may affect the City's ability to provide clean water to residents and businesses.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
I SU,000
Total 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000
the City from providing clean water to residents and businesses.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total (1,000) (3,000) (3,000) (5,000) (5,000)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
1.00
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
5
7.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
2
2.50
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
2
3.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
5
6.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
Public Benefit
1.10
Public Demand
1.25
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
Strategic Goal
1.05
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
Total Score
E -50
4 4.80
2 2.00
4 4.00
4 4.40
2 2.50
4 4.40
3 3.15
4 4.20
56.95
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Replace Cash Register System
Priority Ranking: 25.45
Project Type: Equipment Replacement
Useful Life: 10 years
Responsible Dept.: Liquor Operations
Replace the cash register system at the City's municipal liqu
Improve efficiencies and take advantage of new technology.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
5,000 15,000
Total 15,000 0 0 0 0 15,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
b,000
Total 15,000 0 0 0 0 15,000
moact on
could improve efficiencies of maintaining inventories and reordering of goods.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total (50) (100) (100) (100) (100)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
1
1.25
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
4
5.00
Ability to Finance
1.00
3
3.00
Cost of Project
1.00
3
3.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
4
4.80
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
1
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
4
4.00
Public Benefit
1.10
1
1.10
Public Demand
1.25
1
1.25
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
1
1.05
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
25.45
E -51
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Replace Liquor Store Carpet
Priority Ranking:
26.40
Project Type:
Improvement
Useful Life:
15 years
Responsible Dept.:
Liquor Operations
ice wore out carpet in the City liquor store. Make the liquor store a more aatractive
to shop. Over the years spills from breakage can seep onto carpet and lie underneath
threat of mold and mildew.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Liquor Fund 38,000 38,000
Total 38,000 0 0 0 0 38,000
Source 2611 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
nd 38,000 38,000
Total 38,000 0 0 0 0 38,000
would reduce future budgets because it would no longer require carpete cleaning services.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Total (350) (350) (350) (350) (350)
Priority Ranking
Criteria
Public Health & Safety
Employee Health & Safety
Regulatory Mandate
Frequent Problems
Ability to Finance
Cost of Project
Generates Revenue
Generates Cost Savings
Ongoing Operation Costs
Age or Condition of Existing
Public Benefit
Public Demand
Synergy with Other Projects
Strategic Goal
Comprehensive Plan Component
Total Score
Weighting Priority
Factor Factor
Score
1.50
3
4.50
1.25
3
3.75
1.50
0
0.00
1.25
4
5.00
1.00
2
2.00
1.00
2
2.00
1.20
0
0.00
1.20
0
0.00
1.00
3
3.00
1.00
4
4.00
1.10
0
0.00
1.25
0
0.00
1.10
1
1.10
1.05
1
1.05
1.05
0
0.00
E -52
001121 It,
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name: Purchase Additional Security Cameras
Priority Ranking: 34.20
Project Type: Equipment Purchase
Useful Life: 10 years
Responsible Dept.: Liquor Operations
Purchase additional security cameras and replace analog and dummy cameras
for the City's liquor operation. Provide a safe environment in and outside the City
liquor store and to reduce theft of items through monitoring of the store
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Liquor Fund 3,000 3,000
Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000
Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
uor
Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000
Naaitionai securty cameras wm proviae oeuer score coverage, wnicn cowa ieaa co
less loss through customer theft.
Operating Budget Impact
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Liquor Fund
(150)
(150)
(150)
(150)
(150)
Total
(150)
(150)
(150)
(150)
(150)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
3
4.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
4
5.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
4
4.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
2
2.40
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
4
4.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
2
2.00
Public Benefit
1.10
3
3.30
Public Demand
1.25
2
2.50
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
4
4.20
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
38.40
E -53
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Purchase Additional Security Cameras
Priority Ranking:
38.40
Project Type:
Equipment Purchase
Useful Life:
10 years
Responsible Dept.:
Department of Motor Vehicles
)dditional security cameras to existing system to provide better building and
lot coverage. Provide a safe work environment for employees and customers.
Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
DMV Funds 1,500 1,500
Total 1,500 0 0 0 0 1,500
Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
DMV Funds 1,500 1,500
Total 1,500 0 0 0 0 1,500
icionai security cameras win provace Der[er coverage
of break -ins or poor behavior of customers.
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
No future dollar impact.
Total 0 0 0 0 0
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
3
4.50
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
4
5.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
2
2.50
Ability to Finance
1.00
4
4.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
2
2.40
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
4
4.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
2
2.00
Public Benefit
1.10
3
3.30
Public Demand
1.25
2
2.50
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
0
0.00
Strategic Goal
1.05
4
4.20
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
38.40
E -54
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Purchase Five Credit Card Processing Machines for DMV
Priority Ranking:
21.50
Project Type:
Equipment Purchase
Useful Life:
10 years
Responsible Dept.:
DMV
approves the use of credit cards at uMV's, purchase Live a
for the workstations at the DMV. More efficient processing
licenses at the DMV to attract additional customers.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 2,500 0 0 0 0 2,500
Funding Source
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 2,500 0 0 0 0 2,500
reduce the number of NSF checks and their related fees.
2011 2012
additional revenues
2013 2014 2015
Total (100) (100) (100) (100) (100)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
0
0.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
3
3.75
Ability to Finance
1.00
5
5.00
Cost of Project
1.00
0
0.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
0
0.00
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
0
0.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
1
1.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
0
0.00
Public Benefit
1.10
3
3.30
Public Demand
1.25
5
6.25
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
21.50
E -55
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015
Project Name:
Sign Lab System
Priority Ranking:
30.05
Project Type:
Equipment Purchase
Useful Life:
10 years
Responsible Dept.:
Streets & Alleys
;hase the equipment and software system to produce street signs and other
signs and banners in- house. Reducing the cost of signs by producing them
compared to outsourcing.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 30,000 0 0 0 0 30,000
Funding Source
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Total 30,000 0
Operational Impact /Other Comments:
0
0
0 30,000
Will reduce the cost of street signs and other City signs.
Factor
Factor
Score
Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012
2013
2014
2015
General Fund (3,000) (3,000)
(3,000)
(3,000)
(3,000)
Total (3,000) (3,000)
(3,000)
(3,000)
(3,000)
Priority Ranking
Weighting
Priority
Criteria
Factor
Factor
Score
Public Health & Safety
1.50
2
3.00
Employee Health & Safety
1.25
0
0.00
Regulatory Mandate
1.50
0
0.00
Frequent Problems
1.25
1
1.25
Ability to Finance
1.00
4
4.00
Cost of Project
1.00
4
4.00
Generates Revenue
1.20
2
2.40
Generates Cost Savings
1.20
5
6.00
Ongoing Operation Costs
1.00
5
5.00
Age or Condition of Existing
1.00
0
0.00
Public Benefit
1.10
2
2.20
Public Demand
1.25
0
0.00
Synergy with Other Projects
1.10
2
2.20
Strategic Goal
1.05
0
0.00
Comprehensive Plan Component
1.05
0
0.00
Total Score
E -56
30.05
MONTICELLO
ENTERPRISE
FUNDS
F-1
ENTERPRISE FUND SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION:
Enterprise fund are established to finance and account for the acquisition, operation, and
maintenance of governmental facilities and services, which are entirely or predominantly
self - supporting through retail sales or user charges. The City accounts for liquor (Hi-
Way Liquors), water, sewer, cemetery, and fiber optic network (FiberNet Monticello)
operations as enterprise funds. The accrual basis of accounting is used for enterprise
funds.
BUDGET ISSUES:
See individual funds for the various budget issues facing each fund.
BUDGET SUMMARY:
TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS
$38,191,039
($482,716)
$37,708,323
$3,878,893
$41,587,216
($8,768,459)
$32,818,757
($744,622)
$32,818,757
($8,390,078)
$24,428,679
($3,747,615)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$37,708,323
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SALES OF GOODS
3,769,077
4,085,682
4,352,570
4,044,500
4,477,651
4,404,781
8.91%
LICENSES & PERMITS
5,195
3,715
13,228
3,500
7,876
4,000
14.29%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
8,069
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
65,477
51,094
37,924
2,054,423
477,539
3,911,882
90.41%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
140,299
245,518
61,258
125,000
2,419
75,000
- 40.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
635,009
6,168,906
265,338
192,444
374,393
1,464,455
660.98%
USE COLLECTIONS
1,882,676
2,005,284
2,120,788
2,200,300
2,277,986
2,278,050
3.53%
CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL
482,412
17,722
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
262
0
9,804
0
20,063
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
1,436
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$6,980,407
$12,577,921
$6,862,346
$8,620,167
$7,645,996
$12,138,168
40.81%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$833,629
$787,316
$928,832
$1,428,275
$1,332,053
$1,385,489
-3.00%
SUPPIES
2,903,213
3,164,733
3,668,258
3,338,600
4,716,225
3,727,925
11.66%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
2,693,264
3,566,289
3,917,554
3,798,714
4,794,028
7,726,032
103.39%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
34,826
787,886
6,855,226
422,000
4,917,737
2,796,337
562.64%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
998,191
392,804
260,935
377,200
276,031
250,000
- 33.72%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$7,463,123
$8,699,028
$15,630,805
$9,364,789
$16,036,074
$15,885,783
69.63%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$38,191,039
($482,716)
$37,708,323
$3,878,893
$41,587,216
($8,768,459)
$32,818,757
($744,622)
$32,818,757
($8,390,078)
$24,428,679
($3,747,615)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$37,708,323
$41,587,216
$32,818,757
$32,074,134
$24,428,679
$20,681,064
F -2
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
WATER FUND
Water Fund
Water Superintendent
601
49440
The Water Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund for the City. The Water
Department manages the water system so that a continuous, quality supply of water is
furnished to customers at a reasonable cost. The water supply is maintained at proper
pressure levels and bacteria free. Metering devices are also maintained to account for
usage.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue to GPS system.
2. Continue well head protection program.
3. Continue to change out and install radio reader devices on water meters.
ISSUES:
1. Staff time demands on many projects.
2. Aging water controlling system.
3. Increased State and Federal regulations.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Water accounts read
15,000
15,000
16,000
16,000
16,000
Water meters replaced
94
111
280
135
300
New water meters installed
44
18
10
2
10
Water locates
1,991
1,652
1,000
500
500
Gallons of water pumped (MG)
701
710
715
660
700
Water valves maintained
/4 City
/4 City
/4 City
/4 City
'/4 City
Water hydrants maintained
/4 City
/4 City
/4 City
/4 City
'/4 City
# of times water mains flushed
2
2
2
2
2
Rebuilding main lines /wells
0
1
0
1
2
Water tower cleaned /inspected
2
2
2
2
2
Water reservoir cleaned /inspected
0
1
0
1
0
# of water samples to State
250
175
175
250
175
New water services inspected
44
17
9
2
10
GPS water system
'/4 City
/4 City
/4 City
/4 City
/4 City
Water services turned on /off
100
100
100
100
100
F -3
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main revenue source for the Water Fund is the water use charges to customers. For
2011 these charge are budgeted to increase and a new tiered rate structure will be
implemented as required by the State of Minnesota. The rate increase will be to cover
increased operating costs and some asset depreciation. The State of Minnesota is
requiring water systems to implement a tiered rate structure where the more water used,
the higher the per gallon rate as a means to encourage water conservation. Expenditure
changes include the increasing of funds for facility maintenance. Capital outlay expenses
include the purchase and installation of an electronic monitoring system of City wells,
pump houses and other facilities. Other expense items remained at 2010 budget levels or
past expenditure levels.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTYTAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
5,195
3,715
13,228
3,500
7,876
4,000
14.29%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
13,360
8,438
500
5,000
0
1,000
- 80.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
140,299
245,518
61,258
125,000
2,419
75,000
- 40.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
155,524
116,005
84,825
89,377
119,831
97,584
9.18%
USE COLLECTIONS
708,965
716,037
766,426
767,100
826,805
812,850
5.96%
CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL
303,284
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
6,643
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$1,326,627
$1,089,713
$932,880
$989,977
$956,931
$990,434
0.05%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$241,556
$240,259
$241,662
$239,346
$188,423
$269,214
12.48%
SUPPIES
121,903
117,808
133,439
174,750
84,971
1652575
-5.25%
OTHER SERVICES &CHARGES
609,961
617,779
674,254
687,780
630,524
733,541
6.65%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
13,948
206,000
0
225,000
9.22%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
267,000
221,185
3,161
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$1,240,420
$1,197,031
$1,066,464
$1,307,876
$903,918
$1,393,330
6.53%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$12,665,124
$86,207
$12,751,331
($107,318)
$12,644,013
($133,584)
$12,510,429
($317,899)
$12,510,429
$53,013
$12,563,442
($402,896)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$12,751,331
$12,644,013
$12,510,429
$12,192,530
$12,563,442
$12,160,546
F -4
DEPARTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
SEWER FUND
Sewer Fund
Water Superintendent
602
49480 & 49490
The Sewer Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund of the City. Expenditures
are divided between the wastewater treatment plant (W WTP) and sanitary sewer system
(lines, mains, and lift stations) activities.
OBJECTIVES:
See individual activity pages for sewer fund objectives.
ISSUES:
See individual activity pages for sewer fund issues.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
None Developed at this time
F -5
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main revenue source for the Sewer Fund is the sewer use charges to customers. For
2011 these charges are being increased to cover increased operating costs and some of the
asset depreciation. Capital outlay was increased for the purchase and installation of
electronic monitoring equipment of the sewer facilities and the Sewer Fund's share of the
2007A improvement bond payment for 2011.
BUDGET:
SEWER FUND
$153,598
$167,108
$138,853
$243,385
$246,754
$272,245
12.94%
SUPPIES
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
23,287
17,981
17,429
12,000
19,357
15,000
25.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
128,473
137,792
67,158
91,425
97,880
77,980
- 14.71%
USE COLLECTIONS
1,173,711
1,289,247
1,354,362
1,433,200
1,451,181
1,465,200
2.23%
CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL
179,128
15,413
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
262
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
1,436
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$1,504,861
$1,460,433
$1,440,385
$1,536,625
$1,568,418
$1,558,1 B0
1.40%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$153,598
$167,108
$138,853
$243,385
$246,754
$272,245
12.94%
SUPPIES
23,894
26,837
12,160
25,100
30,465
24,950
-0.60%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
1,831,379
1,871,417
1,836,107
1,884,435
1,880,284
2,031,834
25.94%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
(8,264)
(1,436)
76,313
213,000
31,905
250,000
100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
400,300
0
107,513
111,200
0
0
100.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$2,400,907
$2,063,926
$2,170,946
$2,477,120
$2,189,408
$2,579,029
8.49%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
$22,511,782
$21,615,736
$21,012,243
$20,281,682
$20,281,682
$19,660,692
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
($896,046)
($603,493)
($730,561)
($940;495)
($620,990)
($1,020,849)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$21,615,736
$21,012,243
$20,281,682
$19,341,187
$19,660,692
$18,639,842
wrl
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
SEWER FUND
Sewer/Waste Water Treatment Plant
Water Superintendent
602
49480
The Sewer Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund of the City. The Wastewater
Treatment Plant (WWTP) activity provides for the operation of the facility that collects
and treats all sewage from the City's sanitary sewer system, The WWTP is owned and
maintained by the City, while the operations are contracted out to a private company.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue to GPS the City sanitary sewer system.
2. Continue researching alternative waste disposal and costing options.
3. Continue long -range planning of plant capacities and possible need for
expansion.
ISSUES:
1. Near capacity levels of waste.
2. Cost for new treatment alternatives.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Gallons of wastewater treated (MG) 419 420 420 425 425
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The main expense item is the professional service contract for the operation of the
WWTP which will remain at 2010 rates for 2011. Depreciation of the plant is also
included in this budget at $520,000.
BUDGET:
SEWER FUND
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 %
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$214
$21
$419
$2,861
$1,212
$1,235
$1,224
1.03%
SUPPLIES
162
0
950
54
250
12,339
250
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
1,415,711
1,277,350
1,328,051
853,942
1,343,380
1,326,445
1,355,224
0.88%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
(8,264)
(1,436)
69,346
0
31,905
25,000
100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$1,416,087
$1,269,107
$1,327,984
$926,203
$1,344,842
$1,371,924
$1,381,698
2.74%
F -7
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
SEWER FUND
Sewer Operations
Water Superintendent
602
49490
The Sewer Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund of the City. The sewer
activity provides for the operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer system, which
consists of the sewer mains and lift stations that transport waste to the WWTP.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Continue to GPS the City sanitary sewer system.
2. Monitor infiltration of ground water into the sanitary sewer system.
ISSUES:
1. Ground water infiltration problems.
2. Aging system.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Miles of sewer mains cleaned
1/3 City
1/3 City
1/3 City
1/3 City
1/3 City
Lift stations maintained
7
7
7
7
7
Sewer services located
300
300
300
300
300
GPS sewer system
0
0
1/4 City
1/4 City
1/4 City
Manhole maintained
1/4 City
1/4 City
1/4 City
1/4 City
1/4 City
New services hookups
44
17
9
2
10
Sewer services televised
0
0
50
100
100
F -8
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
Personnel services reflect the allocation of additional staff time. Expenditures for capital
outlay include the purchase and installation of electronic monitoring system of lift
stations, and $150,000 for sewer main repair and /or expansion of the system.
BUDGET:
SEWER FUND
.2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
SEWER - ADMIN /GEN OPER
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$109,979
$153,577
$166,689
$135,992
$242,174
$245,519
$271,021
11.91%
SUPPLIES
23,444
23,894
25,887
12,106
24,850
18,126
24,700
-0.60%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
545,267
554,029
543,366
982,165
541,055
553,839
676,610
25.05%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
6,967
213,000
0
225,000
5.63%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
400,300
0
107,513
111,200
0
0
100.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$678,690
$1,131,800
$735,942
$1,244,743
$1,132,279
$817,484
$1,197,331
5.75%
F -9
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
LIQUOR FUND
Liquor Fund
Liquor Store Manager
609
49750 & 49754
This enterprise activity provides customers with the opportunity to purchase alcohol, with
profits going back into the community.
OBJECTIVES:
I. Continue to improve product selection.
2. Continue alcohol training program for all liquor store employees.
3. Improve facility as necessary to make shopping the store as attractive as
possible.
4. Continue to grow customer base and sales.
ISSUES:
1. Increased "requests to buy" and safety issues regarding minors.
2. Competitive pricing.
3. Staff turnover.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement
Operating revenue
Wine tasting tickets sold
Beer tasting tickets sold
2007
2008
1,003,066
1,062,478
440
440
N/A
N/A
F -10
2009
2010
2011
1,042,192
1,151,279
998,533
447
309
309
202
125
125
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
Hi -Way Liquors has continued to be a self - supporting enterprise for the City, with profits
being used to help fund special projects and reduce property tax levies. Revenues are
from the sale of alcoholic beverages and merchandise related to the liquor industry.
Besides expenditures for goods to be sold budget items include personnel expenses,
building maintenance and operation costs, bank charges for transactions and a transfer of
$250,000 to the Street Reconstruction Fund to reduce the property tax levy. Capital
outlay expenses include replacement of the stores cash register system, replacement of
carpet and the purchase of additional security cameras.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
SALES OF GOODS
$3,769,077
$4,085,682
$4,352,570
$4,044,500
$4,477,651
$4,404,781
8.91%
LICENSES & PERMITS
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
$0
$0
$0.
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
$102,429
$85,709
$76,888
$77,070
$101,486
$87,317
13.30%
CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
$0
$0
$0
$0
$20,063
$0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
$0
$0
$0
$0.
$0
$0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$3,871,506
$4,171,391
$4,429,458
$4,121,570
$4,599,200
$4,492,098
8.99%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$421,531
$374,611
$417,189
$458,269
$409,432
$440,577
-3.86%
SUPPIES
2,755,922
3,017,913
3,301,209
3,137,800
3,336,990
3,399,198
8.33%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
220,758
254,423
262,316
245,365
238,492
251;424
2.47%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
12,788
0
0
0
33,248
56,000
100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
330,891
171,619
150,000
266,000
266,000
250,000
-6.02%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$3,741,890
$3,818,566
$4,130,714
$4,107,434
$4,284,162
$4,397,199
7.05%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$2,348,130
$129,616
$2,477,746
$352,825
$2,830,571
$298,744
$3,129,315
$14,136
$3,129,315
$315,038
$3,444,353
$94,899
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$2,477,746
$2,830,571
$3,129,315
$3,143,451
$3,444,353
$3,539,251
F -11
CEMETERY FUND
DEPTMENT:
Cemetery Fund
SUPERVISOR:
Parks Superintendent
FUND #:
651
ACTIVITY #:
49010
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
The Cemetery Fund is an Enterprise Fund, sustaining itself with revenues mainly from
excavation, monument staking, memorial programs, and perpetual care. The City
maintains the cemetery, as well as assisting residents in areas regarding memorials and
perpetual care.
OBJECTIVES:
I. Continue serving the public in a courteous, professional manner.
2. Maintain the cemetery grounds and grave markers.
ISSUES:
Increasing maintenance costs.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
None developed at this time
F -12
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
There are no substantial changes to either the revenue or expenditure budgets for 2011.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
28,830
24,475
19,995
22,600
8,620
34,200
51.33%
FINES &FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
MISCELLANEOUS
2,980
2,023
1,291
1,621
1,019
1,065
- 34.30%
CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL
0
2,309
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTALREVENUES
$31,810
$28,807
$21,286
$24,221
$9,639
$35,265
45.60%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$16,944
$5,338
$3,914
$5,181
$3,090
$3,261
- 37.05%
SUPPIES
1,199
92
52
950
201
950
0.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
23,169
23,838
23,564
30,039
22,838
30,739
2.33%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
0
0
0
3,000
0
0
- 100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$41,312
$29,268
$27,530
$39,170
$26,129
$34,950
- 10.77%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$666,003
($9,502)
$656,501
($461)
$656,040
($6,244)
$649,796
($14,949)
$649,796
($16,490)
$633,306
$315
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$656,501
$656,040
$649,796
$634,847
$633,306
$633,620
F -13
DEPTMENT:
SUPERVISOR:
FUND #:
ACTIVITY #:
ACTIVITY SCOPE:
FIBER OPTICS FUND
Fiber Optics Fund
City Administrator
655
49871
The Fiber Optics Fund will be a self - sustaining fund for the City's FiberNet Monticello
Business, which will bring state of the art, high speed internet, phone and cable television
to the City. Residents and businesses who subscribe for service will be able to choose the
services desired and for internet service the speed desired.
OBJECTIVES:
1. Construct a fiber optic network through out the entire City, able to reach every
home and business.
2. Offer a variety of internet speeds and cable television channels to customers.
ISSUES:
1. Business start up costs and funding,
2. Various legal aspects of the City operating this type of operation.
MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA:
2011
1,011
Measurement
2007*
2008*
2009
# Internet subscribers
NA
NA
503
# Phone subscribers
NA
NA
323
# Cable TV subscribers
NA
NA
415
* system is not available at this time.
F -14
2010
2011
1,011
1,300
562
1,000
758
1,200
BUDGET COMMENTARY:
The 2011 budget for the Fiber Optics Fund is based on the feasibility model, which was
updated in late 2009. Revenues are from charges to subscribers and expenditures include
both system operating casts and construction cost of the system. 2011 will be the first
year with the system available to the entire City with the completion of construction,
which should results in the increased revenues. Also expense will shift from constructing
the system to operating the system.
BUDGET:
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
2011
%
REVENUES
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET
PROJECTED
BUDGET
CHANGE
PROPERTY TAXES
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.00%
LICENSES & PERMITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES
0
0
0
0
8,069
0
0.00%
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
0
200
0
2,014,823
449,562
3,861,682
100.00%
FINES & FORFEITS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00°%
MISCELLANEOUS
245,603
5,827,377
35,176
(67,049)
54,177
1,200,509
1890.50%
CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
0
0
3,161
0
0
0
0.00%
BOND PROCEEDS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.00%
TOTAL REVENUES
$245,603
$5,827,577
$38,337
$1,947,774
$511,808
$5,062,191
159.90%
EXPENDITURES
PERSONNEL SERVICES
$0
$0
$127,214
$482,095
$484,354
$400,191
0.00%
SUPPIES
$295
$2,083
$221,398
$0
$1,263,598
$137,252
100.00%
OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES
$7,997
$798,832
$1,121,313
$951,095
$2,021,890
$4,678,494
100.00%
CAPITAL OUTLAY
$30,302
$789,322
$6,764,965
$0
$4,852,584
$2,265,337
100.00%
OPERATING TRANSFERS
$0
$0
$261
$0
$10,031
$0
0.00%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$38,594
$1,590,237
$8,235,151
$1,433,190
$8,632,457
$7,481,274
100.00%
FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1
EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE
$0
$207,009
$207,009
$4,237,340
$4,444,349
($8,196,814)
($3,752,465)
$514,584
($3,752,465)
($8,120,649)
($11,873,114)
($2,419;083)
FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31
$207,009
$4,444,349
($3,752,465)
($3,237,881)
($11,873,114)
($14,292,197)
F -15
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
F -16
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GENERAL INFORMATION
The City of Monticello was organized as a municipality in 1856. The City of Monticello is located
approximately 45 miles northwest of the Minneapolis -St. Paul metropolitan area along the 1 -94 corridor in
Wright County. The City's estimated population is 11,136 and comprises an area of 5.37 square miles.
The City operates under a statutory form of government. The Mayor and a City Council (the "City
Council ") govern the City. The City Council is composed of four members, each elected for four -year
terms. The Mayor presides over and is a voting member of the City Council. The Mayor is the chief
authority for administering city government and appoints department heads, various board members and
commission members. The City Council is the legislative body and meets regularly twice a month. The
City Council's main responsibilities are to appropriate funds, fix salaries, adopt ordinances, and approve
budgets.
MAJOR EMPLOYERS
Firm
Type of Business /Product
No. of Employees
I.S.D. No. 882 (Monticello)
Elementary and secondary education
875
New River Medical Center
Hospital, nursing home & counseling center
550
Cargill Kitchen Solutions
Egg processing plant
465
Xcel Energy *
Utility
450
Wal -Mart Supercenter
Discount retail store
375
City of Monticello
Municipal government and services
151
Denny Hecker Monticello
Automobile dealership
150
Ultra Machine Corporation
Machine job shop
135
Cub Foods
Retail grocery store
123
Monticello Clinic
Clinic
98
Bondhus Corporation
Cutlery and hand -tool manufacturing
75
*Xcel Energy numbers does not include employees reported during outage. During outage the number
grows to around 2,000 employees.
Taxoaver
Xcel Energy
Target Corporation
Wal -Mart Real Estate
Business Trust
New River Medical Center
Home Depot USA Inc.
Ryan Companies
Jacob Holdings of
Sandberg Road
L &P Ventures LLC
Jacob Holdings of
Monticello LLC
Muller Family Theatres
MAJOR TAXPAYERS
Type of Property
Utility
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
G -1
2010 Taxable 2010 Net
Market Value Tax Capacity
$264,106,700 $5,275,739
13,161,600 262,482
12,954,100
255,996
9,706,800
193,386
8,263,000
164,510
8,742,900
147,516
7,419,000 146,880
7,416,600 140,374
6,483,900 127,936
6,419,200 127,226
UNNIVIUM
I
RUM
Im
R
U.S. CENSUS DATA
City of Monticello Population Trend:
1990 U. S. Census 4,941
2000 U. S. Census 7,868
Current State Demographer's Estimate 11,476
Income and Age Statistics
HISTORICAL EMPLOYMENT /UNEMPLOYMENT DATA
(Rates are not compiled for individual communities within counties)
Averaae EmDlovment
Year
City of
Wright
State of
2002
Monticello
County
Minnesota
1999 per capita income
$19,229
$21,844
$23,198
1999 median household income
$45,384
$53,945
$47,111
1999 median family income
$53,566
$60,940
$56,874
2000 median gross rent
$571
$526
$566
2000 median value owner
28.940%
3.039%
Occupied housing
$130,200
$135,300
$122,400
2000 median age
29.8 yrs.
33.1 yrs.
35.4 yrs.
HISTORICAL EMPLOYMENT /UNEMPLOYMENT DATA
(Rates are not compiled for individual communities within counties)
Averaae EmDlovment
Year
Wright County
2001
50,363
2002
50,937
2003
56,542
2004
58,825
2005
60,825
2006
61,967
2007
62,826
2008
62,641
2009
62,114
2010
63,437
Averaae UnemDlovment
Wright County
State of Minnesota
3.9%
3.7%
5.1%
4.4%
5.1%
4.8%
4.8%
4.6%
4.3%
4.1%
4.4%
4.1%
5.1%
4.6%
6.2%
5.4%
9.2%
8.0%
7.3%
6.8%
HISTORICAL TAX RATES
(ALL TAXING JURISDICTIONS)
" Proposed rate
G-3
City of
Wright
I.S.D.
#882
Hospital
Year
Monticello
County
(Monticello)
District
Total
2003
65.218%
36.863%
31.897%
3.479%
137.457%
2004
62.421%
35.633%
28.940%
3.039%
130.033%
2005
58.651%
34.414%
26.379%
2.667%
122.111%
2006
51.028%
32.567%
24.372%
2.330%
110.297%
2007
42.458%
30.714%
23.146%
2.951%
99.269%
2008
46.942%
31.648%
25.254%
2.520%
106.364%
2009
46.191%
32.567%
26.083%
2.067%
106.908%
2010
45.822%
35.819%
24.948%
1.754%
108.343%
2011'
46.716%
39.535%
27.019%
1.500%
114.770%
" Proposed rate
G-3
HISTORICAL CITY PROPERTY TAX INFORMATION
SUMMARY OF TAX LEVIES, PAYMENT PROVISIONS,
AND MINNESOTA REAL PROPERTY VALUATION
The following is a summary of certain statutory provisions effective beginning 2005 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.
Chapter 21, Laws of Minnesota Special Session 2003 -1 was passed by the 2003 Minnesota
Legislature and signed by the Governor on June 8, 2003. The enactment of this legislation caused
changes for payable years 2003 and thereafter. These changes are incorporated in the following
discussions.
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
five years as of January 2 of the year of appraisal. With certain exceptions, all property is valued at
its market value, which is the value the assessor determines to be the price the property to be fairly
worth, and which is referred to as the "Estimated Market Value."
ITIC�Fit�e���iF.Ti'd- �itF1l1E!
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 Caoacit
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
G-4
Tax Capacity
Tax Capacity
Tax
Year
Value
Rate
Levy
2002
9,606,212
67.645
6,498,079
2003
10,344,950
65.558
6,782,018
2004
11,141,052
62.452
6,957,915
2005
11,840,000
58.760
6,957,915
2006
13,224,144
51.040
6,750,000
2007
15,257,996
42.601
6,500,000
2008
16,190,597
46.942
7,600,000
2009
16,783,843
46.191
7,750,000
2010
16,691,266
45.822
7,648,272
2011
16,434,254
46.715
7,677,309
SUMMARY OF TAX LEVIES, PAYMENT PROVISIONS,
AND MINNESOTA REAL PROPERTY VALUATION
The following is a summary of certain statutory provisions effective beginning 2005 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.
Chapter 21, Laws of Minnesota Special Session 2003 -1 was passed by the 2003 Minnesota
Legislature and signed by the Governor on June 8, 2003. The enactment of this legislation caused
changes for payable years 2003 and thereafter. These changes are incorporated in the following
discussions.
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
five years as of January 2 of the year of appraisal. With certain exceptions, all property is valued at
its market value, which is the value the assessor determines to be the price the property to be fairly
worth, and which is referred to as the "Estimated Market Value."
ITIC�Fit�e���iF.Ti'd- �itF1l1E!
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 Caoacit
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
G-4
on the type of property as shown on the 101 page of the Appendix. 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 proceeding 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.
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 (112) 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 tax. However, personal property owned by a tax - exempt entity, but which
is treated as taxable by virtue of a lease agreement, is subject to the same delinquent property tax
penalties as real property.
On the first business day of January of the year following collection all delinquencies are subject to
an additional 2% penalty, and those delinquencies outstanding as of February 15 are filed for a tax
lien judgment with the district court. By March 20 the clerk of court files a publication of legal action
and a mailing 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 %; Township 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
G -5
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,
market value homestead credit and disparity reduction aid.
Beginning in 2009 a new State Aid program will begin to equalize the loss of tax revenue on utility
property due to a State reduction in the class rate on utility property. The Utility Valuation Transition
Aid will be in affect for taxes payable in 2009 and 2010. The aid is based on current utility property
value less any improvements to the property which add taxable value.
Levy Limitations for Counties and Cities (M.S. 275.70 to 275.74)
The 2008 State Governor and Legislature re- imposed levy limits for the budget years 2009, 2010
and 2011. Tax increases are limited to 3.9% or the increase in the implicit price deflator —
whichever is less. The tax levy can also be increased by Y� the increase in growth. As the
residential construction industry recovers, this levy limit constraint could be an ominous factor for
financing future operating costs.
Certain property tax levies are authorized outside of the new overall levy limitation ( "special levies ").
Special levies do not include levies for bonded indebtedness on installment payments on conditional
sales contracts, state -aid road bonds, contracts for deed, tax increment revenue bonds, and lease
payments under certificates of participation. In order to receive approval for any special levy claims
outside of the overall levy limitation, requests for such special levies must be submitted to the
Property Tax Division of the Department of Revenue on or before September 15th in the year in
which the levy is to be made for collection in the following year. The Department of Revenue has
the authority to approve, reduce or deny a special levy request. Home -rule charter cities are
authorized to exceed any levy limits and referendum requirements contained in their city charters
and increase their property tax levies if such increases are necessary to offset the 2004 LGA
reductions. Final adjustment to all levies must be made to the Department of Revenue on or before
December 10th.
Debt Limitations
All Minnesota municipalities (county, cities, townships and school districts) are subject to statutory
"net debt" limitations under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.53. Net debt is
defined as the amount remaining after deducting from gross debt the amount of current revenues
which are applicable within the current fiscal year to the payment of any debt and the aggregation of
the principal of the following:
1. Obligations issued for improvements which are payable wholly or partially from the
proceeds of special assessments levied upon benefited property.
2. Warrants or orders having no definite or fixed maturity.
3. Obligations payable wholly from the income from revenue producing conveniences.
4. Obligations issued to create or maintain a permanent improvement revolving fund.
5. Obligations issued for the acquisition and betterment of public waterworks systems and
public lighting, heating or power systems, and any combination thereof, or for any other
public convenience from which revenue is or may be derived.
6. Certain debt service loans and capital loans made to school districts.
7. Certain obligations to repay loans.
8. Obligations specifically excluded under the provision of law authorizing their issuance.
9. Certain obligations to pay pension fund liabilities.
G- 6
10. 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 City of Monticello is outside the seven - county Metropolitan Area and is not subject to Fiscal
Disparities. The Charles R. Weaver Metropolitan Revenue Distribution Act, more commonly know
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.
STATUTORY FORMULAE CONVERSION OF ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE (EMV) TO NET TAX
CAPACITY FOR MAJOR PROPERTY CLASSIFICATIONS
General
Classification
Residential
Homestead
Residential
Non - Homestead
Agricultural Land
Homestead
Agricultural Land
Non - Homestead
Commercial/
Industrial /Utility
Net Tax Capacity
Levy Year 1999
First $75,000 of EMV
at 1 %. EMV in excess
of $75,000 at 1.7 %.
2.5% of EMV
Net Tax Capacity
Levy Year 2000 & 2001
First $76,000 of EMV
at 1 %. EMV in excess
of $76,000 at 1.65 %.
2.4% of EMV.
First $115,000 of EMV First $115,000 of EMV
on first 320 acres at on first 320 acres at
.35 %. EMV in excess
of $115,000 on first
320 acres at .8 %.
EMV in excess of
$115,000 over 320
acres at 1.25 %.
1.25% of EMV
First $150,000 of
EMV at 2.45 %.
EMV in excess
of $150,000
at 3.5 %.
.35 %. EMV in excess
of $115,000 on first 320
acres at .8 %. EMV in
excess of $115,000
over 320 acres at
.80 %.
1.20% of EMV.
First $150,000 of
EMV at 2.40 %.
EMV in excess
of $150,000
at 3.4 %.
G -7
Net Tax Capacity
Levv Year 2002 — 2011
First $500,000 of EMV
at 11%. Over $500,000
at 1.25 %.
1.8 % of EMV.
First $600,000 of EMV
at .55 %. Over $600,000
at 1 %.
1.00% of EMV.
First $150,000 of
EMV at 1.5 %.
EMV in excess
of $150,000
at 2.0 %.
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS LOCATED IN THE CITY
First Minnesota Bank (Branch of Minnetonka)
Liberty Savings Bank, FSB (Branch of St. Cloud)
Premier Bank Minnesota (Branch of Farmington)
RiverWood Bank (Branch of Baxter)
TCF National Bank (Branch of Sioux Falls, South Dakota)
U.S. Bank National Association (Branch of Cincinnati, Ohio)
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (Branch of Sioux Falls, South Dakota)
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Number of City Employees (Full -Time Equivalent)
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Position Title
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Proposed
City Administrator
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Deputy City Clerk
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
HR Manager
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Finance Director
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Senior Accountant
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Finance Assistant/AP
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Finance Clerk
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.0
1.0
Payroll Clerk
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Utility Billing Specialist
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Program & Proj. Coord.
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Community Dev. Dir.
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Economic Dev. Dir.
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Building Official
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Building Inspector
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Bldg. Permit Tech.
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Receptionist
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Administrative Assist.
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
City Engineer
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Engineering Assistant
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Engineering Tech.
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Public Works Director
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Street Superintendent
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Str. Maint. Operator
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Park Superintendent
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Park Maint Operator
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Utility Superintendent
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Utility Operator
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Shop Mechanic
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Public Works Maint.
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
PW Office Specialist
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Admin. Assist. PW
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
PW Part -Time Summer
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
PW Seasonal Help
8.5
8.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
DMV Manager
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Full -Time DMV Clerk
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
2.0
Part -Time DMV Clerk
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Liquor Manager
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Assist. Liquor Manager
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
CITY OF MONTICELLO
Number of City Employees (Full -Time Equivalent)
(Continued)
In addition to the positions listed the City's fire service is provided by the City's volunteer fire department
which currently has 30 members, including officers.
The Community Center (MCC) employs 65 to 75 pat -time employees for its swimming pool operations,
service counter, recreation programs and other operations.
Finally the increase in full -time equivalents beginning in 2009 is due to the City starting its fiber optic
network for providing internet, phone, and cable TV service to City residents and businesses.
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Position Title
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Proposed
Liquor Supervisor
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
FT Liquor Store Clerk
2.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
PT Liquor Store Clerk
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
MCC Director
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
MCC Event Coordinator
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Program Coordinator
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Aquatic Director
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Bldg. Mntc. Supervisor
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Lead Custodial /Mtnc.
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Bldg. Custodian
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
Fiber Office Manager
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
Fiber Customer Service
0.0
0.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
Account Manager
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
Tech. Serv. Supervisor
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Field Operation Tech.
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
CO /HE Technicians
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
Installation Technicians
0.0
0.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
Seasonal Instal. Tech.
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.5
Locator
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
Total City Employees
69.6
69.6
75.1
81.5
82.0
In addition to the positions listed the City's fire service is provided by the City's volunteer fire department
which currently has 30 members, including officers.
The Community Center (MCC) employs 65 to 75 pat -time employees for its swimming pool operations,
service counter, recreation programs and other operations.
Finally the increase in full -time equivalents beginning in 2009 is due to the City starting its fiber optic
network for providing internet, phone, and cable TV service to City residents and businesses.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
G -10
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
ACCOUNT: A term used to identify an individual asset, liability, expenditure control, revenue control,
or fund balance.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: Amounts owed to others for goods or services received.
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE: Amounts due from others for goods furnished or services rendered.
ACCOUNTING SYSTEM: The total set of records and procedures which are used to record, classify
and report information on financial status and operations of an entity.
ACCRUAL BASIS OF ACCOUNTING: The method of accounting under which revenues are recorded
when they are earned and expenditures are recorded when goods and services are received.
ACTIVITY: A specific and distinguishable line of work performed by one or more organizational
components of a governmental unit for the purpose of accomplishing a function for which the
governmental unit is responsible. For example "Ice & Snow Removal" is an activity performed in the
discharge of the "Public Works" function.
ADOPTION: The formal action taken by the City Council to authorize or approve the budget.
AD VALOREM: In proportion to value. A basis for levying taxes upon property.
AGENCY FUND: A fund consisting of resources received and held by the governmental unit as an
agent for others or other funds of the governmental unit.
APPROPRIATION: An authorization granted by a legislative body to make expenditures and to incur
obligations for specific purposes. An appropriation is limited in amount to the time it may be expended.
ASSESSED VALUATION: Value placed upon real estate or other property as a basis for levying
taxes.
ASSESSMENTS: Charges made to parties for actual services or benefits received.
ASSETS: Property owned by a governmental unit, which has a monetary value.
AUDIT: The examination of documents, records, reports, systems of internal control, accounting
and financial procedures, and other evidence for one or more of the following purposes:
(a) To ascertain whether the statements prepared from the accounts present fairly the
financial position and the results of financial operations of the constituent funds and
balanced account groups of the governmental unit in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principals applicable to governmental units and on a basis
consistent with that of the preceding year.
(b) To determine the propriety, legality and mathematical accuracy of a governmental
unit's financial transactions.
(c) To ascertain whether all financial transactions have been properly recorded.
(d) To ascertain the stewardship of public officials who handle and are responsible for
the financial resources of a governmental unit.
BALANCED BUDGET: A budget in which estimated revenues equal estimated expenditures including
operating transfers. A balanced budget cannot use reserves or retained earnings to fund expenditures.
H -1
BOND: A written promise, generally under seal, to pay a specified sum of money, called the face
value or principal amount, at a fixed time in the future, called the date of maturity, and carrying interest at
a fixed rate, usually payable periodically.
BONDED INDEBTEDNESS: Outstanding debt by issues of bonds, which are repaid by ad valorem or
other revenue.
BUDGET: A plan of financial operation embodying an estimate of proposed expenditures for a given
period and the proposed means of financing them.
BUDGET DOCUMENT: The official written statement prepared by the Finance Department and
Finance Director of the City which presents the proposed budget to the City Council.
BUDGET BODY MESSAGE: A general discussion of the proposed budget presented in writing as a
part of the budget document. The budget message explains principal budget issues against the
background of financial experience in recent years and presents recommendations made by the City Staff.
BUDGET CALENDAR: The schedule of key dates, which a government follows in the preparation and
adoption of the budget.
BUDGETARY CONTROL: The control or management of a governmental unit or enterprise in
accordance with an approved budget for the purpose of keeping expenditures within the limitation of
available appropriations and available revenues.
CAPITAL ASSETS: Assets with a value of $5,000 or more.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET: A plan of proposed capital expenditures and a means of
financing them. The capital budget is enacted as part of the complete annual budget.
CAPITAL PROGRAM: A plan for capital expenditures to be incurred each year over a fixed period of
years to meet capital needs arising from the long -term work program or otherwise. It sets forth each
project or other contemplated expenditure in which the government is to have a part and specifies the full
resources estimated to be available to finance the projected expenditures.
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS: To account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or
construction of major capital facilities.
CASH BASIS: The method of accounting under which revenues are recorded when received in cash and
expenditures are recorded when paid.
CERTIFIED LEVY: Total tax levy of a jurisdiction, which is certified to the County Auditor.
CHARGES FOR SERVICES: Charges for current services rendered.
CHART OF ACCOUNTS: The classification system used by a government entity to organize the
accounting for various funds.
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (CPI): A statistical description of price levels provided by the U.S.
Department of Labor. The index is used as a measure of the increase in the cost of living (i.e., economic
inflation).
H -2
CONTINGENCY: Budget for expenditures which cannot be placed in departmental budgets,
primarily due to uncertainty about the level or timing of expenditures when the budget is adopted. The
contingency also serves as a hedge against shortfalls in revenues or unexpected expenditures.
CURRENT: A term which, applied to budgeting and accounting, designates the operations of the
present fiscal period as opposed to past or future periods.
DEBT: An obligation resulting from the borrowing of money or from the purchase of goods and services.
DEBT LIMIT: The maximum amount of gross or net debt, which is legally permitted.
DEBT MARGIN: The amount of available debt, which may be issued by a governmental unit
before reaching its debt limit.
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS: To account for the accumulation of resources for payment of general
long -term debt.
DEPARTMENT: Basic organizational unit of government, responsible for carrying out related
functions.
DEPRECIATION: Expiration in the service life of capital assets attributable to wear and tear,
deterioration, action of the physical elements, inadequacy or obsolescence.
DEPUTY REGISTRAR (DMV): City service of issuing State issued licenses for motor vehicles and
equipment, such as license plates and tabs for cars, trucks, trailers, and recreational vehicles.
DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARDS PROGRAM: A voluntary awards program
administered by the Government Finance Officers Association to encourage governments to prepare
effective budget documents.
EFFECTIVE BUYING INCOME (EBI): A statistical measure of buying power of an area or group of
individuals.
ENTERPRISE FUNDS: To account for operations that are financed and operated in a manner
similar to a private business enterprises, where the intent of the governing body is that the cost of
providing services are to be recovered primarily on a user - charge basis to the general public.
ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE: Represents the selling price of a property if it were on the market.
Estimated market value is converted to tax capacity before property taxes are levied.
EXPENDITURE: Where accounts are kept on the accrual or modified accrual basis of accounting,
the cost of goods received or services rendered whether cash payment have been made or not. Where
accounts are kept on a cash basis, expenditures are recognized only when the cash payments for the
above purposes are made.
FIBERNET MONTICELLO (FNM): The name of the City's fiber optic network, which provides
internet, phone, and cable television to residents and businesses of Monticello as a City run enterprise.
FINES: Revenues from penalties imposed for violation of laws or regulations
H -3
FISCAL POLICY: A government's policies with respect to revenues, spending, and debt
management as these relate to government services, programs and capital investment. Fiscal Policy
provides an agreed -upon set of principles for the planning and programming of budgets and their funding.
FISCAL YEAR: The budget and accounting year that begins on the first day of January and ends
on the last day of December of each year.
FIXED ASSETS: Assets of a long -term character which are intended to continue to be held or
used, such as land, buildings, machinery, furniture, and other equipment.
FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE): The number of employee hours (2,080) needed to be equal to
one full time employee. Several part time employees may be combined to make one full time equivalent.
FUNCTION: A group of related activities aimed at accomplishing a major service or regulatory program
for which the government unit is responsible.
FUND: An independent fiscal and accounting entity with a self - balancing set of accounts recording cash
and/or other resources together with all related liabilities, obligations, reserves, and equities which are
segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining certain objectives.
FUND BALANCE: The difference between fund's assets and fund liabilities (the equity) in
governmental funds.
GENERAL FUND: Accounts for the general operation of the City and all financial resources except
those to be accounted for in another fund.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT: Expenditures, which represents a set of accounts, to which are charged
the expenditures for operating the City.
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS: When a government pledges its full faith and credit to the
repayment of the bonds it issues, than those bonds are general obligation (GO) bonds.
GOAL: A statement of broad direction, purpose or intent based on the need of a community. A
goal is general and timeless; that is, it is not concerned with a specific achievement in a given period.
GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING: The composite of analyzing, recording, summarizing, reporting,
and interpreting the financial transactions of governmental units and agencies.
GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES: Funds used to account for the acquisition, use and balances of
expendable financial resources and the related current liabilities - except those accounted for in
proprietary funds and fiduciary funds. In essence, these funds are accounting segregation of financial
resources. Under current GAAP, there are four governmental fund types: general, special revenue, debt
service and capital projects.
GRANT: A contribution of assets by one governmental unit or other organization to another.
Grants are usually made for specified purposes.
HOMESTEAD AND AGRICULTURAL CREDIT (HACA): A form of state paid property tax relief
for farm property and owner occupied homes.
H -4
IMPROVEMENT BONDS: Bonds payable from the proceeds of special assessments from
properties benefiting from an improvement.
IMPROVEMENTS: Buildings, other structures, and other attachments or annexations to land which
are intended to remain so attached or annexed, such as sidewalks, trees, drains, and sewers.
INFLOW /INFILTRATION (Ill): The term used to describe clean water entering into the sanitary sewer
system.
INTERFUND TRANSFERS: Amounts transferred from one fund to another.
INFRASTRUCTURE: Assets which are immovable and of value only to the governmental unit (i.e.
roads, gutters, sewer lines).
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES: Revenues from other governments in the form of grants,
entitlement, or shared revenues.
INVESTMENTS: Securities held for the production of income in the form of interest.
LEVY: (Verb) To impose taxes, special assessments, or service charges for the support of governmental
activities. (Noun) The total amount of taxes, special assessments, or service charges imposed by a
governmental unit.
LEVY LIMIT: The defined increase the City's property tax levy can't not exceed without special
authorization as defined by Minnesota State Statue.
LICENSES: Revenues received from the sale of business and non - business licenses.
LIMITED MARKET VALUE: The amount the market value of a property can increase from one year to
the next for calculating property taxes. The limited market value system is currently being phase -out by
the State of Minnesota.
LINE ITEM: A specific item or group of similar items defined by detail in a unique account in the
financial records.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID (LGA): Intergovernmental revenue from the state to municipalities to
help fund general expenditures.
LONG -TERM DEBT: Debt with a maturity of more than one year after the date of issuance.
MAINTENANCE: The upkeep of physical properties in condition for use or occupancy.
MARKET VALUE HOMESTEAD CREDIT (MVHC): State paid property tax reduction on owner
occupied homes based on the properties market value.
MISCELLANEOUS: Revenues or expenditures not classified in any other revenue or expenditure
category.
MODIFIED ACCRUAL BASIS: The basis of accounting under which expenditures other than accrued
interest on general long -term debt are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are
recorded when received in cash except for material and /or available revenues, which should be accrued to
reflect properly the tax levied and revenue earned.
H -5
OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE: Expenditure classifications based upon the types or categories of goods
and services purchased.
OBJECTIVE: Desired output oriented accomplishments, which can be measured and achieved within a
given time frame.
OPERATING BUDGET: A plan of financial operation embodying an estimate of proposed
expenditures for the calendar year and the proposed means of financing them.
OPERATING EXPENSE: The cost for personnel, material and equipment required for a
department to function.
OPERATING REVENUE: Funds that the government receives as income to pay for ongoing
operations. Operating revenues are used to pay for day -to -day services.
OPERATING TRANSFERS: Amounts transferred from one fund to another, shown as expenditure in
the originating fund and revenue in the receiving fund.
ORDINANCE: A formal legislative enactment by the City Council.
PAY -AS- YOU -GO BASIS: A term used to describe a financial policy by which capital outlays are
financed from current revenues rather than through borrowing.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE: See Service Levels.
PERSONAL SERVICES: Expenditures for salaries, wages, and fringe benefits of employees.
PROGRAM: A group of related activities performed by one or more organizational units for the purpose
of accomplishing a function for which the governmental unit is responsible.
PROJECT: A plan of work, job assignment, or task.
PROPRIETARY ACCOUNTS: Those accounts which show actual financial position and operation, such
as actual assets, liabilities, reserves, fund balances, revenues, and expenditures, as distinguished from
budgetary accounts.
PUBLIC SAFETY: To account for expenditures related to the protection of persons and property.
PUBLIC WORKS: To account for expenditures for the maintenance of City property and
infrastructure.
PURPOSE: A broad statement of the goals, in terms of meeting public service needs, that a
department is organized to meet.
REFUNDING BONDS: Bonds issued to retire bonds already outstanding.
REIMBURSEMENT: Cash or other assets received as a repayment of the cost of work or services
performed or of other expenditures made for or on behalf of another governmental unit or department or
for an individual, firm, or corporation.
f:0,
RESERVE: An account which records a portion of the fund balance which must be segregated for
some future use and which is, therefore, not available for further appropriation or expenditure.
RESOLUTION: A special or temporary order of a legislative body; an order of a legislative body
requiring less legal formality than an ordinance or statute.
RESOURCES: The actual assets of a governmental unit, such as cash, plus contingent assets such as
estimated revenues applying to the current fiscal year not accrued or collected, and bonds authorized and
not issued.
REVENUE: The term designates an increase to a fund's assets which: 1) does not increase a liability;
2) does not represent a repayment of an expenditure already made; 3) does not represent a cancellation
of certain liabilities; and 4) does not represent an increase in contributed capital.
REVENUE BOND: A bond that is backed by a particular revenue source such as water user fees.
SERVICE LEVELS: Data to determine how effective or efficient a program is in achieving its objective.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT: A compulsory levy made by a local government against certain properties
to defray part or all of the cost of a specific improvement or service which is presumed to be of general
benefit to the public and of special benefit to such properties.
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND: To account for revenue derived from specific revenue sources that are
legally restricted for specific purposes.
SY: Abbreviation for square yard, which is how sealcoating and street overlay projects are measured.
TAX CAPACITY: An amount determined by a percentage of a property's market value, which is
than applied to the tax rates of taxing jurisdictions affecting the property to determine the amount of
property taxes owed.
TAX CAPACITY RATE: Tax rate applied to tax capacity to generate property tax revenue. The
rate is obtained by dividing the property tax levy by the available tax capacity.
TAX CLASSIFICATION RATE: Rate at which estimated market values are converted into the
property tax base. The classification rates are assigned to properties depending on their type (residential,
commercial, farm, etc.) and, in some cases there are two tiers of classification rates, with the rate
increasing as the estimated market values increases.
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF): Financing tool originally intended to combat severe blight in
areas, which would not be redeveloped "but for" the availability of government subsidies derived from
locally generated property tax revenues.
TAX LEVY: The total amount to be raised by general property taxes for the purpose stated in the
resolution certified to the county auditor.
TAX RATE: The amount applied to tax capacity to determine the taxes generated by the property.
TAXES: Compulsory charges levied by a governmental unit for the purpose of financing services
performed for the common benefit.
H -7
TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS: Funds used to account for assets held by a government in a trust
capacity or as an agent for individuals, private organizations, other governments and /or other funds.
TRUST FUND: A fund consisting of resources received and held by the governmental unit as
trustee, to be expended or invested in accordance with the conditions of the trust.
UNBALANCED BUDGET: A budget which undesignated fund balance or reserves are used or
increased, in order to balance estimated revenues to estimated expenditures or expenses.
UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE: The portion of a fund's balance that is not restricted for a specific
purpose and is available for general appropriation.
USER FEES: The payment of a charge for direct receipt of a public service by the party
benefiting from the service.
UTILTY VALUATION TRANSITION AID (UVTA): A State financial aid program for 2009 and 2010
paid to local governments to offset the reduced property tax revenue generated by utility properties due to
the State reducing the tax rate paid on utility property.
WORKLOAD DATA: A unit of work to be done.
ACRONYMS
CAFR
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
CD
Certificate of Deposit
CIP
Capital Improvement Plan
CID
Commercial Paper
CPI
Consumer Price Index
DMV
Department of Motor Vehicle or Deputy Registrar
HACA
Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid
EBI
Effective Buying Income
EDA
Economic Development Authority
EMV
Estimated Market Value
FHLB
Federal Home Loan Bank
FNM
FiberNet Monticello
FNMA
Federal National Mortgage Association
FTE
Full Time Equivalent
GAAP
Generally Accepted Accounting Principals
GASB
Governmental Accounting Standards Board
GFOA
Government Finance Officer's Association
GO
General Obligation
I/1
Inflow /Infiltration
LGA
Local Government Aid
MCC
Monticello Community Center
MCES
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services
MVHC
Market Value Homestead Credit
SAC
Sewer Availability Charge
SY
Square Yard
TIF
Tax Increment Financing
UVTA
Utility Valuation Transition Aid
WAC
Water Availability Charge
H -8