Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 08-13-1984AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL August 13, 1984 - 7:30 P.M. Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo Council Members: Fran Fair, Jack Maxwell, Ken Maus, Dan Blonigen 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting Held July 23, 1984. 3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests and Complaints. Public Hearings 4. Public Hearing - Cable Communications Franchising. 5. Public Hearing - Proposed Assessment Roll on the Improvements of Hart and Cedar Street. Old Business 6. Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Assessment Roll Cfor the Improvement of Hart and Cedar. 7. Consideration of a R000lution Ordering the Improvement of Hart Boulevard and Cedar Strout. B. Consideration of a Resolution Ordering the Sale of Public Improvement Bonds for the Improvement of Hart and Cedar. 9. Consideration of a Resolution Ordering the Improvement of County Road 75. 10. Conoideratlon of a Resolution Awarding the Contract for the Improvement of Hart Boulevard, Cedar Street, and County Road 75. 11. Consideration of a Resolution Sailing Tax Increment Financing Bonds - Key Tool 6 Plastic, Inc. Now Business 12. Consideration of Approving a Proposed Farmers Home Administration Elderly Housing Project. 13. Consideration of Rankings and Bids from Architectural Firms. 14. Consideration of a Special Meeting to Interview Architectural Firma. 15. Adjournment. MINUTES C REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL July 23, 1984 - 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Arve A. Grimsmo, Jack Maxwell, Fran Fair, Dan Blonigon, Ken Maus. Members Absent: None. I. Call to Order. 2. Approval of Minutes. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maxwell, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held July 9, 1984. Voting in favor as Fair, Maxwell, Grimsmo. Abstaining: Blonlgen and Maus due to absence at. the last meeting. 4. Public Hearing - Requeut to Redesignate Zoning in Par West Prior to Plat Recordinq, AND 12. Consideration of Grantinq a Rodesignation from R-1 to R-2 for Portions of Par West. r 1LN An part of the development of Par west, ownor John Sandberg had proposed some mixed ::onus that would allow multiple family development in portiono of the plat. During the subdivision and zoning hearings, a compromise was arrived at whereby approximately half of the property woo zoned R-2 for single and two-family duplexes along with some possihlo 4-ploxaa and 8 -unit townhouooa, with the balance of the plat being single family residential. The single family zoning would be that property adjacent to County Road 75. Mr. Sandberg now roqueotad that the entire plat be rezoned to R-2 to allow for duploxon and up to 4 -unit buildings on Conditional Uses. The Planning Commission recommended that approval be granted allowing the entire plat to be zoned R-2 before final recording and passed the item on to City Council for the public hearing on the matter. Mr. Larry Nolan oxpreouod concorno on the number of possible housing units or danaity that Could result from this plat it' tho ontirn plat to ronud 11.-2. Mr. Nolan also questioned whether tho City would plata a limit on the number of individual 4-plaxns or duplexas that could ho davolopnd within the subdiviuton, as that as hie main concern In the City rezoning the entire Council Minutes - 7/23/84 plat to R-2. It was noted by the City staff that although no limit on the number of units was recommended, the majority of the properties would not be large enough in square footage to allow for 4-plaxes but could allow duplexes. Mr. Jerry Dirks, property owner in Hillcrest Addition, expressed opposition to the rezoning request, as he felt that this issue had been resolved by previous public hearings. Mr. Dirks noted that when the original public hearings were held on the rezoning for this development, many citizens objected to the entire plat being R-2 zoning, and a compromise had been reached by the City allowing part o1 the property to be R-2, with the property adjacent to the railroad tracks and closest to other single family zoning remaining single family in nature. Mr. Dirks felt that the Council would now be going against what compromise had resulted from the previous public hearings. 4 letter was also acknowledged and received from Mr. and Mrs. Mike Beck, property owners in Anders Wilhelm Estates, who also objected to R-2 zoning. The Council majority felt that the R-2 zoning for this area would be appropriate in that this is the least likely area to cause problems with abutting property owners, as it seems to be wall buffered from other residential zones. As a result, motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously t carried to approve the rezoning request to allow that the entire Par Wast plat be developed as R-2 zoning. 5. Public Hearing - Adoption of Tax Increment Finance Plan #5 for Kay Tool 6 Plastics, AND 13. Consideration of Resolutions Adopting Tax Increment District 15 and Requesting Certification by County Auditor. Last December, the Council passed a resolution of preliminary approval for Key Tool 6 Plastica to issue $850,000.00 In Industrial Ruvenuo Bonds. As part of the overall financing package, a tax Increment financing diotrict has also been propoaod to write down the coat of the land. Briefly, the City will iaoue $100,000.00 in Tax Increment Ceneral Obligation Bonds and acquire land for 590,500.00 and, in turn, sell the land for $20,700.00, making a not roduction lot, the developer Of 569,600.00. The $69,800.00 write down plus capitalized interest and other legal coot will be recovered through the additional taxes generated by the Kay Tool dovolopannt equaling $10,000.00 list year. 0 Council Minutes - 7/23/84 ThuTax Increment District 05 has been approved by the School District and the County, and adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, with recent approval by the Planning Commission. Hearing no comments from the public, the public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Maus, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution establishing the Tax Increment Financing District 05 and adopting a resolution requeating the County Auditor to certify the original assessed value of the District 05. See Resolutions 1984 030 and 1904 031 . G. Consideration of an Amendment to City Code of Ordinances, Title 7, chapter 2. It was recommended by the City staff that an Ordinance Amendment be adopted by the City Council that would require each individual building or each individual unit of a duplex or multiple family dwelling that can be sold off individually have separate sewer and water services. It was noted by the Public works Director that the City currently requires separate water shut-offa for each separately owned building or part thereof. But the City's current Ordinance does not specifically require separate sewer connectiOnS. j Tho Public works Director noted that the City has had problems with shared services in the past and that this change in the Ordinance would eliminate possible problomo in the future. A second change recommended that the minimum size of water linos serving individual properties be 1 -Inch rather than the currant requirement of 3/4 -inch copper. Motion woo made by Maxwoll, seconded by Fair, and unanimously carried to adopt the Ordinance Amendment to Title 7, Chapter 2, that would roquir.e each individual property or building that can be sold to have a separate sewer and water service connection and to also require 1 -inch water linos. Sao Ordinance Amendment No. 139. 7. Conaidotation of an Amendment to tho Toning Ordinance to Allow Boarding Renese ou d Cendilienal Uou in a 11-4 Zone, AND 15. Considuration of a Conditional Use tot a Boarding house in a 13-4 'hone, Applicant - Tom hummer. Air. Tom hummer proviouoly purchased what to known as t.ho Frionda Cafe building a few years ago tot the purpose of rohoblliLOLing fthe building into all upartmont COMI)Lox. The building at the ly - 3 - 11 Council Minutes - 7/23/84 3s � time Mr. tiammor purchased it was in substantial need of repairs, 15 with the upper floor of the building previously having been used as apartments. The property is located in the D-4 zoning district, which does not allow residential uses; and as a result, the previous apartments were non -conforming uses. A building permit was granted to Mr. Hammer to rehabilitate the upper floor of the building into 10 apartment units. Mr. Hammer also at that time thought he was getting permission to add an additional five apartment units in the lower level, which he felt was the best use of the building. However, the City Ordinances do not allow a non -conforming use to expand or be enlarged, which required Mr. Hammer to stop work on the lower unit apartments. It was recommended by City staff, Consulting Planner, and the Planning Commission that the City consider adopting an Ordinance Amendment that would allow boarding houses as a Conditional Use in a 8-4 commercial zone and to establish specific conditions that must be mot in order for a conditional Use Permit to be granted under this now proposed zoning change. If adopted, it appeared that Mr. Hammor*s proposed development may be the only property in the 8-4 zoning district that would meet all of the conditions of a boarding house, which would require remodeling of an existing building and also requiring that the building have a complete restaurant facility in the same structure. ) Fiction was made by Maxwell, seconded by Fair, and unanimously -J carried to adopt Ordinance Amendment No. 138 adding a boarding house as a Conditional Use within a B-4 commercial zone. Motion was then made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to approve the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit to Mr. Tom Hammer to allow a (wording house to exist in a B-4 commorcial zone pursuant to the newly adopted Ordinance Amendment. S. Consideration and Review of Hido for the Improvement of County Road 75, Hart Boulevard, and Cedar Street. Bids were received tram thrue construction firma on this improvement project an follows: NAME Buffalo Bituminous, Inc I1. 6 S. Asphalt Co. Hardrlvea, Inc. -4- A, B.C,DI A,.B,C,D2 5611.083.50 S604,523.50 $678,045.80 $671,116.05 $614,628.40 $606,041.90 Council Minutes - 7/23/84 The City's Consulting Engineer had estimated the total project Cost to amount to 5561 324-00, which was 8.9% lower than the bids actually came in at. Approxinatcly $125,000.00 of the contract price is for Hart and Cedar Street improvements, with the balance for Broadway improvements. No action was taken on this item other than review of the bids, as the item will be scheduled for the August 13 Council meeting. 9. Consideration of a Resolution Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessment. Because previously the property owners affected by the proposed improvements on Hart and Cedar Streets have come before the Council to express their concern about being assessed 1008 of the project cost, and because there is some question concerning the amount of benefit derived vs. the value of the assessment, it was recommended by the City staff that an assessment hearing be held prior to the granting of the contract for the improvements. Any challenges to the propoued aaseasments would have to be mado at this time, thus allowing the City to know whether or t-.. not they will have sufficient revenues to cover its coat. Previously, the property owners affected by the dart and Cedar Street improvements tequested th,ut they be anseased similar to what the majority of the former City wan assessed under the '77 Street Improvement Project, which was 2oa of the coat. Their reasoning was that they had initially requuctad improvements an part of the 077 Street Project but wera denied the improvements due to future construction requirements along those streets. The property owners indicated they felt it woo unfair to be assessed 1001 now for the came improvements they could have had in 1977 for only 20%. Motion wan made by Fair, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to Adopt Resolution 1984 #32 declaring coat to be assessed and ordering preparation of proposed aaaaaamont roll using a 200 assessment factor. voting in favor was Grimsmo, Fair, Maxwell, Maus. Voting in the opposition wan Blonigon. 10. Consideration of a Ranolution Setting a nearing on the Proposed Assessment. Motion was made by Maua, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution setting August 13, 1904, as the data of the aouoaoment hearing for Hart and Coder Street improvements. Soo Resolution 1984 #33. I� 5. 0 Council Minutes - 7/23/84 11. Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing Sale of Bonds - Hart and Cedar, AMD L� 14. Consideration of Resolutions Authorizing the Sale of Tax Increment G.O. Bonds. Mr. Jerry Shannon of the City's Bonding Consulting Firm of Springsted, Inc., was present at the Council meeting to review recommendations for the negotiation and placement of two bond issues relating to the improvement of Hart and Cedar Streets and Tax Increment Financing District 05. Mr. Shannon proposed a bond issue in the amount of $170,000.00 to cover the cost of improvements to Hart Boulevard and Cedar Street and recommended a $100,000.00 Tax Increment Bond to cover the Tax Increment Financing District 05 project for Key Tool 6 plastics. It was noted by Mr. Shannon that the private placement could occur as a single issue, although there would be two separate bonds, and recommended that August 13 be the sale date to award the bond sale. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to adopt a resolution authorizing Springsted, Inc., to solicit bids on $100,000.00 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds and $170,000.00 G.O. Improvement Bonds. See Resolution 1584 034. 16. Consideration of a Request for a Conditional Use to Allow More than 12 Unite in a Multiple Dwelling, Applicant - Construction 5, Inc. Construction 5, Inc., requested a Conditional Una Permit to build another 24 -unit apartment building adjacent to their other proportion along Lauring Lane. Currently, a 24 -unit apartment building is under construction and near completion. The now proposed building would have 18 two-bedroom and G ono -bedroom units and meets all the City's requirements as far an land area, etc. Motion van made by Kaxwsll, nocondad by Blonigon, and unanimously carried to approve the Conditional Use Request to allow a 24 -unit apartment building to be built in on 11-3 Zone for Construction 5. Inc. 17. Consideration of a Roauuat ioc a Simple Subdivinion. Applicant. - Montieello-Big Lake Community licauit.ol. Monticello -Big Lake Community ilospitol han recently purchased the format' E.M. Wulf property wit.h plans to demoliah the okisting house and make the sits available for a proposed new ambulance yarago. As part of the puichnso agreement., the Monticello-Ilig Council Minutes - 7/23/84 (\_ Lake Hospital requested approval to subdivide a 10 -foot strip along the westerly side of Lot 2 and deed this 10 feet to Mr. Wulf for access to the rear portion of their lot. The subdivision of the 10 feet requires Council approval, as the lot would still have the required 12,000 square feet minimum for an R-1 residential zone but would be less than the 60 -foot front width required in that the lot would then be 79.16 feet in length. Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Fair, and unanimously carried to approve the simple subdivision request of the Monticello -Big Lake Community Hospital allowing a subdivision of a 10 -foot strip along the westerly side of Lot 2, Block 24, Lower Monticello. 18. Consideration of a Request for a Conditional Use to Allow an Ambulance Garage in an R-1 Zone, Applicant - Monticello -Big Lake Community Hospital. The Monticello -Big Lake Community Hospital requested a Conditional Use to build an ambulance garage on the newly purchased residential lot next to the Monticello Dental Clinic, just west of the existing Dental Clinic building. Public uses such as a hospital ambulance garage arc allowed in residential zones provided a Conditional Use Permit is granted. A is iter from an area property owner, Julia Finley, was entered into the record opposing the Conditional Use Request, as Mo. Finlay felt the hospital has enough property closer to the actual hospital facility that could be used for an ambulance garage and felt that such a structure in a residential area may he a detriment to property values, etc. Mayor Crimamo also felt that the hospital should have considered attaching an ambulance garage to the hospital facility rather than having a separate structure away from the hospital. After reviewing the item, motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen, to approve the Conditional Una Request for an ambulance garage on Lot 2, Block 24. Voting in favor was Maxwell, Blonigon, Maus, Fair. Voting in the opposition was Crimamo. 19. Consideration of Authorizinq the Purchnoo of an Air Dryer for Wastewater Treatment Plant. Public Works Director, John Simola, roquostod approval to purchase a now air dryer for the WWTP to replace the existing one that recently failed. Two quotas were received, one from MinneoAa Industrial Tools in the amount of $2,430.00, and a second quote from Sullair North Central in the amount of $2,200.00. _ 7 O Council Minutes - 7/23/84 Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Fair, and unanimously carried to authorize the purchase of an air dryer from Sullair r' North Central in the amount of $2,200.00 to replace the existing malfunctioning air dryer at the WWTP. 20. Consideration of Authorizing the Purchase of a Snowplow from STP. RoCently, the City of Monticello has been in contact with a company in Norway which manufactures snowplows, truck bodies, and tire chains. The company has expressed interest in locating a manufacturing plant in the State of Minnesota and has considered Monticello as a possible. site. This Norwegian firm has previously provided the State of Minnesota with six snowplows that the State has tested in different areas. Thin particular type of plow has a trippablo cutting edge, and only the cutting edge folds back when the plow strikes an object and immediately snaps forward to its original position. The plows currently used by the City require the entire plow to trip forward and lift up to clear the object. The Public Works Department is not entirely satisfied with its current plows being used and Colt that the trippablo cutting edge type plow would be a good experiment for the City of Monticello. In comparing the cost of a plow from the STP Corporation with I4 J1 another quoto received from MacQueen Equipment Company, the STP Corporation plow was approximately $1,900.00 cheaper. As a result, motion was made byMaus, seconded by Olonigen, and unanimously carried to authorize the Public Works Department to purchase a plow from the STP Corporation at a coat of $2,675.00. 21. Consideration of Issuing a Request for Proposals for Architectural Services for Now Fire its 11. Over the past several months, the City staff, along with the Fire Department personnel, have been reviewing possible s.i.teo that could be used for a now Piro [fall and have narrowed it down to two sites that would be suitable. The primary site being proposed: Lots 1-5, Black 13, located directly wast of the present Municipal Liquor Stora. it was noted that if construction is to proceed in the near future, a bond referendum will have to be held to approve the sale of bonds to finance the eventual. construction. it is recommended that a bond referendum be hold in conjunction with the General clsction on Novamber G. thus requiring immediate otopo to select a design, etc., along with coot estimates that can be made ovailnble to the public prior to the election. Council Agenda - 7/23/84 r it was recommended. by the Administrator that the City consider requesting proposals from architectural firms for services of designing a now Piro Hall, etc. The Request for Proposals (RFP)' generally Is -asking architectural firms interested in providing services for the new Fire Hall to provide three proliminary designs and floor plans of a new Fire Hall, and provide cost estimates, etc. The City Council and staff could than review any proposals received to narrow down and interview possible applicants for the architectural job. Some concerns were expressed by Council members Maus and Blonigan_ concerning whether the City should got involved with another, architect to design a Fire Hall. Questions were raised as to whether the expense of an architect is warranted for a structure such as a Fire Hall when many designs are currently available from construction firms who have built many fire halls. After considerable discussion regarding architects, motion was made by Fair, seconded by Crimsmo, to authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposals for Fire Hail services from architectural firms. Voting in favor was Pair, Crimamo, Maxwell. Voting In the, opposition were Maus and Blonigan. s 22. puartarly Dooartmerif Head Reports. A Quartarly Department Head meeting was hold by the Council u with Fire Chief Willard Farnick; Senior Citizen Director, Karen Hanson; Wright County Sheriffs Deputy, Buddy Gay; and YMCA :Detached Worker, Mika Malstad. Firs Chief Willard Farnick again requested Council permission to authorize the Fire Dapartment to sell the 1946 Pumper. Truck that Is not used by the Fire Department and to use the money. for other needed equipment. Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded. by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to authorize the lira Department to advertise the •46 Chevrolet Truck for sale. 23. Consideration of Bills for the Month .of July. Motion was made by Maus, seconded by lair, and unanimously carried to approve' the bills for the month of July as presented. See Exhibit 01. Rlck`Wolfstolla Assistant Admin strator - 9 - U C Council Agenda - 8/13/84 4. Public Hearing - Cable Communications Franchising. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This hearing is required by the Minnesota Cable Communications Board. At the last meeting of the Cable Commission, Rite Cable Company was unanimously selected to be recommended to the individual City Councils as the approved cable company. At that time, the Commission directed Tom Creighton, Legal Counsel, to prepare a strict franchise ordinance for the regulation of a cable company. That process is underway currently. when the franchise ordinance is complete, the Commission will again meet as a whole to see if there are any discrepancy items or restrictions that would prohibit Rite Cable from effectively delivering their services. When the franchise ordinance is put into its final form, it will come to each of the individual ten councils for adoption. Hence, it is the City who actually grants the franchise and not the Commission. The City has not relinquished its power or authority to the Commission, but rather has delegated its exercise of powers. The Commission anticipates completion of the first draft of the ordinance within the next 2-3 weeks. The Rita Cable Company's proposal was far superior to Dowden's, but It did have some questionable data. Each of the ten communities Cunanimously expressed concern over the levels of penetration that Rita Cable projected. The problem, of course, is that if they do not achieve the level of penetration that they projected, then they do not generate the revenue projected, and they very probably will coma to the Commission to ask for permission to reduce services. This is the very concern that is being built into the ordinance. It is the Commisoion's wish and desire that the request for reduction of services simply dean not occur. Legal Counsel advises that practically speaking this cannot really be prevented, but at boat we can make ouch a reduction In service very difficult and vary uncomfortable. The Commission members atill fool that Rita Cable has made us the superior offer. I doubt that anyone will appear at the public hearing. It is. however, necessary to open the hearing and enter it into the official record. if no one is present to make public comment, you may simply close the hearing after a few minutes. Thorn Is no other action required of the Council at this time. Your next official action will be when the franchise ordinance has boon drafted and reviewed. As 1 mentioned in the beginning, this is strictly a State requirement that this hearing be hold. No alternative actions, recommendation, or supporting data on ( this matter. - 1 - (` Council Agenda - 8/13/84 5. Public Hearing - Proposed Assessment Roll on the Improvements of Hart and Cedar Street. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This is the hearing required under M.S. 429. This is the hearing where anyone aggrieved by their proposed assessment may file their formal objection. If no formal objection is filed at this time, then the assessment roll will stand as proposed. The property owner who may later change his mind and wish to object has forfeited that right. As you recall, we have elected to hold this hearing and the assessment roll adoption prior to the formal ordering of the improvement and awarding of the contract. This was to protect the City in the event that severe objections would result in the City paying for the entire project. Because we have assessed only 20% of the overall project, I anticipate no objections. After the mailing of the formal notice of hearing and proposed assessment, only Wilbur Eck stopped in to sae me. When I explained how we arrived at the figure and his final assessment, he left without objection. I do not anticipate him objecting to his proposed assessment at this time. The immediate next Stem on the agenda ie the resolution adopting t the assessment roll. Upon the closo of the hearing, the resolution will come immediately before you. There being no objections, we recommend that the resolution be adopted so we can get on with the business of the improvement. As directed by the Council, we have assessed 20% of the total project coot, including certain City property that qualifies as assessable. The total project coat that we used is the 5170,000.00 Bond issuance. We use this amount because all expenses that rolato to the Bond sale, including the capitalized interest, are project related and are legally assessable. We have assessed a total amount of $34,000.00. I will have available at the mooting public copies of the worksheots that you have attached as supporting data. If you wish, I can make a public presentation on how we arrived at the assessment roll. 2 - Council Agenda - 8/13/84 t 6. Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Assessment Roll for the Improvement of Hart and Cedar. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Most background has been provided for you in the previous item. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Anticipating that there is no objection to the proposed assessment, the only real alternative is to adopt the assessment roll, unless you wish to halt the project. 2. If there is objection to the assessment roll, you may review the possibility of lowering the assessments before adoption. The difficulty with any lowering of assessments at this time, however, is that any reduction would put us under the 20% threshold and thereby make us ineligible for the selling of Bonds and consequently, we would have no money to pay for the job. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the resolution be adopted. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copies of the computations and workaheets; Copy of the complete assessment roll; Copy of resolution for adoption. C Total Project Coat (Bond Issue) Hart Blvd (65.6%) Cedar St. (34.4%) HART BOULEVARD Total Project Cost Street Coot 97,973 20% 19,595 Assessable FTG 1,947 Cost/FT S10.06 1,947 19,595 5111,468 S 58,532 $170,000 C 6 G + 13,495 a 2,699 1,512 $ 1.79 1,5122r 699 CEDAR STREET Total Project Coot Loco (savor 6 voter -deterred asaaaament) Adjusted Total 20% ( to be aoaoosed ) Assessable Footage Coat per Foot 31 $170,000.00 $111,468.00 $111,468.00 S 22,294.00 $ 56,532.00 3,600.00 S 54,932.00 S 10,986.40 1,037 FT 10.06 1,037 110,986.40 0 ASSESSMENT BREAKDOWN 0 Street @ S10.06 C 6 0 E1 S1.79 Total Kruse 125' 1,257.50 -0- -0- 1,257.50 Soltis 198, 1,991.88 198, 354.42 2,346.30 Hospital (north side) 99' 995.94 99, 177.21 Hospital (south side) 2501 2,515.00 -0- -0- Hospital (total) 349' 3,510.94 99, 177.21 3,668.15 Clinic 40' 402.40 40' 71.60 474.00 Bondhua (north side) 225- 2,263.50 225' 402.75 Bondhuo (south aide) 335' 3,370.10 535' 957.65 (y total footage) Bondhuo (total) 560- 5,633.60 760' 1,360.40 6,994.00 McConnon 66' 663.96 66' 118.14 782.10 Kasper 99, 995.94 99, 177.21 1,173.15 City 510, 5,130.60 250, 447.50 5,578.10 Total 1947- 19,586.82 1512' 2,706.48 22,293.30 0 ASSESSMENT BREAKDOWN C Of AHaeaeable Ft K Coat/Ft Total Eck 802 R 10.60 8,501.20 Reinert 70 K 10.60 742.00 City 165 X 10.60 1,749.00 Total 10,992.20 Plun 53,600.00 Deferred 3,600.00 $14,592.20 C Of RESOLUTION 1984 9_ RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by lav, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the improvements of Cedar Street between the Burlington Northern right-of-way and Lauring Lane and for Hart Boulevard between the Monticello -Big Lake Hospital and East County Road 39 by installing hard surfacing, curb and gutter, and other appurtenant work. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: 1. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the spacial assessments against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 1 2. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of _ years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 19_, and shall bear interest at the rate of t per annum from the data of the adoption of this aosoaemsnt resolution. To the first installation shall be added interest on the entire asoosament from the date of this resolution until December 31, 19 To each subsequent installment when duo shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on ouch property with interest accrued to the data of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no intoract shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of thio resolution; and he/she may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which ouch payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. INS Resolution 1984 9_ Page 2 4. The City Administrator shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted by the Council this 13 day of August, 1984. A[Ve A. Grimsmo, Mayor Thomas A. Cidam City Administrator 0 C Council Agenda - 8/13/84 7. Consideration of a Resolution Ordering the Improvement of Hart Boulevard and Cedar Street. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Having adopted the assessment roll, and there being no objections, we are now clear to officially order the making of the improvement. The attached resolution is required for the complete Bond sale. I presume at this point there is little further debate required. The engineering and bidding is complete. The assessment roll now is complete and adopted. If we wish to complete the job in 1984, then, in reality, there really is only one action to take. I am presenting no alternative actions or staff recommendations on this item. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the resolution for adoption. C -4- RESOLUTION 1984 #_ RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT TO CEDAR STREET AND HART BOULEVARD WHEREAS, a Resolution of the City Council adopted the 23rd day of April, 1984, accepted a feasibility report on the proposed improvement of Hart Boulevard between the west intersection with Broadway and the east intersection with Broadway and to the improvement of Cedar Street between the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way and the north Line of Lauring Lane by installing new hard surfacing, curb and gutter, and other appurtenant work, and WHEREAS, said Resolution also ordered the preparation of plans by the Consulting Engineering Firm of Orr-Scholen-Mayeron 6 Associates and said plane and specifications have been received by the Council, and WHEREAS, said April 23 Resolution fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed improvement, and WHEREAS, ten (10) days' published notice of the hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was held thereon on the 14th day of May, 1984, at which all persons desiring to be heard wore given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO. MINNESOTA, THAT such improvements aro hereby ordered as proposed in the Council Resolution adopted the 23rd day of April, 1984. Adopted by the Council this 13th day of August, 1904. Arvo A. Grlmomo, Mayor Thomas A. Eidem City Administrator 0 Council Agenda - 8/13/84 S. Consideration of a Resolution Ordering the Sale of Public Improvement Bonds for the Improvement of Hart and Cedar. (T.E.) �!!•i �J9�T�Mtlu Z TS�Srliidnil�F At the last meeting, the Council authorized Springsted to solicit Bond bide. Those numbers will be called in to me on Monday afternoon for me to present Monday evening to you. A representative of Holmes 6 Graven, who are acting as Bond Counsel, will be present at the meeting to review both this Bond issue as well as the later one with respect to tax increment finance. Again, like the previous items, there is little discussion or alternative actions with this item. If we are still committed to going ahead with the project, then clearly we must sell the Bonds to pay for it. Unless the Bond bide are so totally out of line and unworkable that we cannot justify the sale, I recommend we proceed with the sale to the best bidder. we will have Springsted's recommendation in hand by Monday night. I am presenting no alternative actions or staff recommendations for this item. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the resolution for adoption. - 5 - RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $170,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1984 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. On the 13th day of August, 1984, the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Monticello (the "City") adopted Resolution No. ordering the improvement of Hart Boulevard between the west Intersection with Broadway and the east intersection with Broadway and the improvement of Cedar Street between the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way and the north line of Lauring Lane by installing new hard surfacing and curb and gutter (the "Project"). Section 2. Authorization. It is hereby determined that it is necessary and expedient for the City of Monticello (the "Issuer") to Issue and sell, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475, its General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1984 (the "Bonds") in the aggregate principal amount of $170,000 for the purpose of financing certain costs of the Project. The sale of the Bonds has been negotiated pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subd. 2(2), and the Issuer has issued no other general obligation bonds in the three-month period preceeding the date hereof, and will issue no other general obligation bonds prior to the delivery of the Bonds, other than its $100,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1984B, dated September 1, 1984. Section 3. Sale, Terms. 3.01. The Issuer hereby accepts the offer of to purchase the Bonds at the rate of interest hereinafter set forth, and to pay therefore the sum of 3 plus accrued interest to the date of delivery. The Bonds shall be payable as to principal at the office of , in , Minnesota (the "Registrar") or any successor Registrar duly appointed by the Issuer. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable by check or draft mailed from the office of the Registrar to the registered owners of the Bonds. 3.02. The Bands shall be dnted September 1, 1984 and shall be Issued forthwith as fully registered bonds without coupons in denominations of $5,000 or any nulhorired integral multiple thereof. The Bonds shall mature on February 1 in the years emd nmounts ret forth below, and shnil bear interest, pnynble on each August 1 and each February 1 at the following rates per annum for the following years of maturity stnrting on August 1, 1985: Year A mount Interest Rate 1986 15,000 % 1987 15,000 1988 15,000 1989 15,000 1990 15,000 1991' 15,000 1992 20,000 1993 20,000 1994 20,000 1995 2 0, 000 3.03. The Bonds are being issued for the purpose of financing the Project consisting of the Improvements designated as Project Numbers 84-3 and 84-4. Special assessments levied against benefited property will be pledged to the payment of principal of, premium, if any, and Interest on the Bonds. In compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.58, the estimated collection of special assessments from benefited property Is not less than 20% of the cost of the Project. The costs of the Project shall include the costs enumerated in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 475.65, and it is estimated that said costs will be at least equal to the amount of the Bonds herein authorized. Work on the Project shall be commenced within 6 months from the date of delivery of the Bonds and shall proceed with due diligence to completion. 3.04. Bonds of this Issue maturing on or after February 1, 1992 will be subject to redemption prior to maturity at the option of the issuer in inverse order J of maturities, and by lot within a single maturity on February 1, 1991, and any Interestpa ment date thereafter at a price equal to par, plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. Notice of redemption shall in each case be published not less than thirty (30) days prior to the redemption date In a daily or weekly periodical published in a Minnesota city of the first class, or Its metropolitan area, which circulates throughout the State of Minnesota and furnishes financial news as part of its service, and at least thirty (30) days prior to the redemption date a copy of the redemption notice shall be mailed by first class mail to the registered holders of the Bonds. Section 4. Form of the Bonds. 4.01. The Bonds shall be in substantially the following form, with the necessary variations as to number, CUSIP Number, rate of interest and date of maturity, the blanks to be properly filled in: STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF WRIGHT CITY OF MONTICELLO No. R - GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BOND, SERIES 1984 Rnte Maturity Date of Original Issue CUSIP September 1, 1984 The City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "Issuer") for value received, hereby certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to or registered assigns, the principal sum of dollars ($ ) on the maturity date specified above, upon the presentation and surrender hereof, and to pay to the registered owner hereof interest on such principal sum at the interest rate specified above from September 1, 1984, or the most recent interest payment date to which Interest has been paid or duly provided for as specified below, on August 1 and February 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1985, until said principal sum is paid. Principal and the redemption price are pnyable In lawful money of the United States of America at , as Registrar, Transfer Agent and Paying Agent, In Minnesota, or at the office of such successor agent as the Issuer may designate upon GO days notice to the registered owners at their registered addresses (the "Registrar"). Interest shall be paid on each August 1 and February 1 by check or draft mailed to the person In whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the preceding July 15 and January 15 (whether or not a business day) at his or her address set forth on the bond register maintained by the Registrar. Any such interest not punctually paid or provided for will be paid to the person In whose name this Bond Is registered at the close of business on a special record date established by the Registrar for the payment of such defaulted Interest. The nonds of this series maturing on or after Pehruary 1, 1992, are subject to redemption at the option of the Issuer, In whole or In part in Inverse order of maturityand by lot within n mnturity, on February 1, 1991 and any interest payment ,Into thereafter at n prier, equal to par and accrued Interest. Thirty days' prior notice of redemption will he [oven by mull to the Registrar and to the registered owners, and notice of redemption will be published in the manner provided by M innesotn Stntules, Chapter 475. This nond is one of a series of Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of One Hundred and Seventy Thousand Dollars (:170,000), nil of like date and tenor except for number, Interest rate, denomination, date of maturity and redemption privilege, find Is Issued for the purpose of providing funds to finance costs of certain improvements within the City and is issued pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the "Resolution") duly adopted by the Issuer on August 13, 1984, and pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475. The Bonds of this series are payable from the General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1984 Fund of the Issuer. All taxable property within the Lssuer is subject to the levy of ad valorem taxes required by law to be levied and extended if needed for this purpose, without limitation of rate or amount. The issuance of this bond does not cause the indebtedness of the Issuer to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation thereon. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the Issuer kept for that purpose at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by such owner's attorney duly eathorized in writing, upon surrender of this Bond together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or such owner's duly authorized attorney. Upon such transfer and the payment of any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid by the Issuer or the Registrar with respect to such transfer, there will be issued in the name of the transferee a new Bond or Bonds of the same aggregate principal amount as the surrendered Bond. The Bonds of this series are issuable only as fully registered bonds without coupons in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof not exceeding the principal amount maturing in any one year. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations therein set forth, the Bonds of this series are exchangeable for a like aggrcgnle principal nmount of Bonds of this series of a different authorized denomination, as requested by the registered owner or his duly authorized attorney, upon surrender thereof to the Registrar. It is hereby cert ified and recited thnt all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to hnppen and to be performed in order to make this Bond a valid and binding genernl obligation of the Issuer according to its terms, hnve been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed In due form, time end manner as so required. This Bond shnll not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose until the Authentication Certificate hereon shall have been manually signed by o person authorized to sign on behalf of the Registrar. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Monticello has caused this Bond to be executed with the facsimile signatures of its Mayor and its City Administrator, all as of the Date of Original issue specified above. Da t ed: THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA By (Facsimile) Mayor (Facsimile) City Administrator BOND REGISTRAR'S AUTHENTICATION CERTIFICATE This is one of the Bonds described in the within mentioned Resolution. By Bond Registrar Authorized Signature The following provisions for abbreviations shall be printed on each Bond In substantially the following form: The following abbreviations, when used In the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to Applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM - as tenants In common TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties JT TEN - as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants In common uN1F GIFT MIN ACT - Custodian (Cust) (Minor) Under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act (State) -5 0? - ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto (Please Print or Typewrite Name and Address of Transferee. Include Information for all joint owners if the Bonds are held by joint account.) the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints attorney to transfer the within Bond on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed by: Signature(s) must be guarnmeed by a Notice: The signature(s) on this commercial bank or trust company or assignment must correspond with the by a brokerage firm having name(s) which appear on the face of membership in one of the major stock this Bond in every particular, without exchanges. alteration or any change whatever. Please Insert Social Security Number or Other Identifying Number of Assignee (Form of Certificate) CERTIFICATE AS TO LEGAL OPINION 1, Thomas Eidem, City Administrator of the City of Monticello, hereby certify that except for the date line, the above is a full, true and compared copy of the legal opinion of Holmes h Graven, Chartered, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which was delivered to me upon delivery of the bonds and is now on file in my office. (Facsimile) City Administrator City of Monticello, Minnesota 4.02. As long as any of the Bonds issued hereunder shall remain outstandnig, the Issuer shall cause to be kept at the principal office of the Registrar the Register In which, subject to such reasonnble regulntions as the Registrar may prescribe, the Registrar shall provide for the registration of Bonds and the registration of transfers of Bonds. Is hereby appointed Registrar for the purpose of registering Bonds and registering transfers of Bonds as herein provided. Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory 10 the Reglstrnr, duly executed by the registered owner or his duly authorized attorney, and upon payment of any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer, the Issuer shall execute and the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more fully registered Bonds of any authorized denominations and of a like aggregate principal amount, interest rate and maturity. Any Bonds, upon surrender thereof at the office of the Registrar, at the option of the registered owner thereof, may be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal amount of Bonds of the same maturity and interest rate of any authorized denominations. In all cases in which the privilege of exchanging or transferring fully registered Bonds is exercised, the Issuer shall execute and the Registrar shall deliver Bonds in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. For every such exchange or transfer of Bonds, whether temporary or definitive, the Issuer or the Registrar may make a charge sufficient to reimburse it for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such exchange or transfer, which sum or sums shall be paid by the person requesting such exchange or transfer as a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege of making such exchange or transfer. Notwithstanding uny other provision of this Resolution, the cost of preparing each new Bond upon each exchange or transfer, and any other expenses of the Issuer or the Registrar incurred in connection therewith (except any applicable tax, fee or other governmental charge) shall be paid by the Issuer. The Issuer shall not be obligated to make any such exchange or transfer of Bonds during the fifteen 05) days next preceding the date of the first publication or the mailing (if there is no publication) of notice of redemption in the case of a proposed redemption of Bonds. The Issuer and the Registrar shall not be required to make any transfer or exchange of any Bonds called for redemption. 4.03. Interest on any Bond which is payable, and is punctually paid or duly provided for, on any interest pnyment date shall be paid to the person in whose name that Bond (or one or more Bonds for which such bond was exchanged) is registered at the close of business on the preceding January 15 or July 15, as the case may be. Any interest on any Road which is payable, but is not punctually paid or duly provided for, on any interest payment date shall forthwith cease to be payable to the registered holder on the relevant regiilnr record date solely by virtue of such holder having been such holder; and such defaulted interest may be paid by the Issuer to the person in whose name such Bond is registered fit the close of business on a special record date established by the Registrar for the payment of such defaulted interest. Subject to the foregoing provisions of this paragraph, each Bond delivered under this Resolution upon transfer of or in exchange for or in lieu of any other Bond shall carry all the rights to interest accrued and unpaid, and to accrue, which were carried by such other Bond and each such Bond shall bear interest from such date that neither gain nor loss in interest shall result from such transfer, exchange or substitution. 4.04. As to tiny Bond, the Issuer and the Registrar and their respective successors, cacti in Its discretion, may deem and trent the person In whose name the same for the time being shall be registered as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes and neither the Issuer nor the Registrar nor their respective successors shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Payment of or on account of the principal of any such Bond shall be made only to or upon the order of the registered owner thereof, but such registration may be changed as above provided. All such payments shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or ruins so paid. 4.05. If (i) any mutilated Bond is surrendered to the Registrar, and the issuer anTthe Registrar receive evidence to their satisfaction of the destruction, loss, or theft of any Bond, and (ii) there is delivered to the Issuer and the Registrar such security or indemnity as may be required by them to save each of them harmless, then, in the absence of notice to the issuer or the Registrar that such Bond has been acquired by a bona fide purchaser, the issuer shall execute, and upon its request the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in exchange for or in lieu of any such mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond, a new Bond of like tenor and principal amount, bearing a number not contemporaneously outstanding. in case any such mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond has become or is about to become due and payable, the issuer in its discretion, instead of issuing a new Bond, may pay such Bond. Upon the issuance of any new Bond under this subsection, the Issuer may require the payment of a sum sufficient to cover any tax or other governmental charge that may be imposed in relation thereto. Every new Bond issued pursuant to this subsection in lieu of any destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond shall constitute an original additional contractual obligation of the Issuer, whether or not the destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond shall be at any time enforceable by anyone, and shall be entitled to all the benefits of this Resolution equally and proportionately with any and all other Bonds duly issued hereunder. The provisions of this Section are exclusive and shall preclude (to the extent lawful) all other rights and remedies with respect to the replacement or payment of mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bonds. Section 5. Execution and Delivery 5.01. The Bonds shall be executed by the respective facsimile signatures of the Mayor and the City Administrator of the issuer as set forth in the form of Bond. The text of the approving legal opinion of Holmes h Graven, Chartered, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, as bond counsel, shall be printed on the reverse side of ench Bond and shall be certified by the facsimile signature of the City Administrator. The Scat of the issuer shall be omitted from the Bonds as permitted by law. When said Bonds shall have been duly executed and authenticated by the Registrar in accordance with this resolution, the same shall be delivered to the Purchaser upon pnyment of the purchase price, and the receipt of the City Administrator to the Purchnser thereof shall be a full acquittance; and the Purchaser shall not be bound to see to the application of the purchase money. The Bonds shall not be valid for any purpose until nuthentiented by the Registrar. 5.02. Unless litigation shall have been commenced and be pending qucstlon(ng the Bonds, revenues pledged for payment of the bonds, or the organization of the Issuer or incumbency of Its officers, at the closing, the Mayor and the City Administrator shall execute and deliver to the Purchaser a suitable certificate as to absence of matcrinl litigation, and a certificate as to payment for and delivery of the Bonds, together with the arbitrnge certificate referred to below and the signed approving legal opinion of Holmes h Craven, Chartered as to the validity and enforceability of the Bonds and the exemption of interest thereon from federal and Minnesota Income taxntlon (other than Minnesota corporate and bank excise taxes measured by income) under present laws and rulings. Section 6. Funds and Accounts. 6.01. There is hereby created a special fund designated "General Obligation improvement Bonds, Series 1984 Fund" (the "Bond Fund") held and administered by the Finance Director of the Issuer separate and apart from all other Funds of the issuer. The Bond Fund shall be maintained in the manner specified until all of the Bonds herein authorized, any refunding bonds issued to refund the Bonds, and any other general obligation improvement bonds hereafter issued and made payable from the Fund, and the interest thereon, have been fully paid. In the Bond Fund there shall be maintained three separate accounts, to be designated as the "Capital Account", the "Debt Service Account" and the "Reserve Account", respectively. Capital Account. The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds, less any accrued interest and unused discount received thereon deposited in the Debt Service Account, plus any special assessments levied with respect to the Improvements and collected prior to completion of the Improvements and payment of the costs thereof shall be credited to the Capital Account. All costs and expenses of the Project, including the cost of any construction contracts heretofore let and all other costs incurred and to be incurred, of the kind authorized in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.65, shall be paid from the Capital Account. in addition, monies in the' Capital Account may be used, if necessary, to pay interest on the Bonds prior to the anticipated date of commencement of the collection of sufficient taxes or special assessments herein levied or covenanted to be levied nnd, if upon completion of the Improvements there shall remain any unexpended monies in the Capital Account, such monies (other than special assessments) may be transferred by Council to the account of any other improvement undertaken pursuant to Minnesota Statues, Chapter 429. Any such unexpended monies which are attributable to specinl assessments credited to the Capital Account shall be used only to pay principal and interest on the Bonds. Moneys In the Capital Account shall be used for no other purpose except as provided by law. Debt Service Account. There is hereby pledged and there shall be credited to the Debt Service Account (a) all accrued interest and any unused discount received upon delivery of and payment for the Bonds, (b) collections of special assessments levied with respect to the Improvements and collected after completion of the improvements (except for any prepayment of special assessments deposited In the Reserve Account), (e) collections of general ad valorem taxes levied for the payment of the Bonds, and (d) all funds remaining In the Capital Account niter completion of the Project and payment of the costs thereof, not transferred to the fund of another improvement ns provided herein. The Debt Service Account herein crcnted shall be used solely to pay principal of, premium, if any, and Interest on the Bonds and any other general obligation improvement bonds of the Issuer hereafter Issued by the issuer and made pnyablo from said Debt Service Account, as provided by lnw. Reserve Account. All prepayments of special assessments levied with respect to the Improvements shall be credited to the Reserve Account. Moneys In the Reserve Account may be used, if neecssnry, to pay principal of or interest on the Bonds on any interest payment date and shall be used to redeem outstanding Bonds on the first possible redemption dntc. -B- OF 6.02. To provide moneys for the payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds tt ere is hereby levied upon all of the taxable property in the Issuer a direct annual ad valorem tax which shall be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of, other general property taxes In said Issuer for the years and in the amounts as follows: Levy Year Collection Year Amount Levied 1984 1985 1985 1986 1986 1987 1987 1988 1988 1989 1989 1990 1990 1991 1991 1992 1992 1993 1993 1994 Said tax levies are such that if collected in full, they, together with collections of special, assessments, will produce at least five percent (5%) in excess of the amount ,needed to meet when due the principal and Interest payments on the Bonds (except for interest payable from funds which shall be on hand and irrevocably deposited to the Debt Service Account as of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds). Said tax levies shall be irrevocable so long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the issuer reserves the right and power to reduce the levies in the manner and to the extent permitted by Minnesota Statutes Section 475.61, subdivision 3. The full faith, credit and taxing powers of the issuer shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged for the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due and payable. 6.03. Interest earnings from the Investment of money In the Capital Account shall be deposited in the Capital Account. interest earnings from the Investment of money in the Debt Service Account shall be deposited in the Debt Service Account. interest earnings from the Investment of money in the Reserve Account shall be deposited in the Reserve Account. 6.04. The Issuer hereby convenants and agrees that it will let all constru tc ion contracts not heretofore let, within one year after ordering each Improvement project financed hereunder unless the resolution ordering the improvement project specifies a different time limit for the letting of construction contracts, and will do And perform as soon ns they may be done, nil acts and things necessary for the final And valid levy of such specinl assessments, and In the event that any such Assessment be at any time held Invalid with respect to Any lot, piece or pnrcel of land due to any error, defect, or irregularity, in Any action or proceedings taken or to he taken by the issuer or this Council or any of the issuer's officers or employees, either in the tanking of such assessments of In the performance of any condition precedent thereto, the issuer and this Council will forthwith do all such further nets and take all such further proceedings as may be required by law to make such assessments a valid and binding lien upon such property. 6) -10- 6.05. The Finance Director of the Issuer is directed to keep on file in his office a tabulation of the dates and amounts of the principal and Interest payments to become due, on the Bonds, and amounts of the principal and interest payments to become due on any other bonds made payable from the Bond Fund, and of the balance required in the Bond Fund on October 1 In each year in order to cancel the taxes levied pursuant to this Resolution for collection the following year. Section 7. Miscellaneous. 7.01. The Issuer covenants and agrees with the Purchaser and holders of the Bonds that the Investments of proceeds of the Bonds, including the Investment of any revenues pledged to the Bonds which are considered proceeds under the applicable regulations, and accumulated sinking funds, If any, shall be limited as to amount and yield in such manner that the Bonds shall not be arbitrage bonds within the meaning of Section 103(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and regulations thereunder. On the basis of the existing facts, estimates and circumstances, including the foregoing findings and covenants, the Issuer hereby certifies that It is not expected that the proceeds of the Bonds will be used In such manner as to cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds under Section 103(c) and regulations thereunder. The Mayor and the City Administrator shall furnish an arbitrage certificate to the Purchaser embracing or based on the foregoing certification at the time of delivery of the Bonds to the Purchaser. The proceeds of the Bonds will likewise be used in such manner that the Bonds are not industrial development bonds under Section 103(b) of the internal Revenue Code. 7.02. The City Administrator Is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy obis Resolution and to cause the same to be filed In the office of the county auditor of Wright County together with such other Information as the county auditor may require, and to obtain from the county auditor a certificate that the Bonds have been entered upon its bond register and that the levy contained in this Resolution has been made. 7.03. The officers of the Issuer are authorized and directed to prepare and furnishto the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the Issuer relating to the power and authority of the Issuer to issue the Bonds within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and control, and such certified copies and certificates shall be deemed representations of the Issuer as 10 the facts stated therein. Adopted this day of , 1084. City Administrator Mayor -11- O?i Council Agenda - 8/13/84 Consideration of a Resolution Ordering the Improvement of County Road 75. (T.E.) (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Throughout the course of preparing this project, the figures have gone back and forth between the City and the County in a cooperative effort. At the last meeting, you reviewed the construction figures and found them to be acceptable, but elected to send them on to the County for final approval since they were substantially higher than the estimated cost. John, in the following paragraphs, will point out the discussions he had with the County Engineer. As I understand it, this matter was not required to go back before the County Board since it did fall within the approved budget. John's narrative will highlight the development of the project to this point. The City of Monticello received a low bid for the County Road 75 project from Buffalo Bituminous of Buffalo, Minnesota, on July 20, 1984. The bid for the 4 -lane portion of County Road 75 from Chestnut Street to the high school in which the City will participate was $376,970.00. On Monday, July 30, the City staff mat with the Wright County Highway Engineer, Wayne Fingalson; his assistant, Dick Marquette; and the proposed Project Engineer, Charles Lepak from OSM. We discussed the City's share of the proposed project. The City must pay 1001 of all gate valve adjustment for the project, which is $5,200.00. The City must also pay for 50% of the concrete curb work. Our share would be $6,370.00. In addition, we must pay for 30% of the roadway cost. The City's share of this portion would be $107,709.00. This brings the total City share of construction costo to $119,279.00. Initial face for engineering from OSM and their outside consultants totaled $25,628.63. The County will reimburse us up to a maximum of 50 of the bid or a maximum of $18,846.50. This loaves us with a coot of preliminary ongincoring on the project of $6,780.13. During our meeting with the County Engineer. Mr. Fingalson indicated that the County'o work load was such that they could not perform the inspection on the project. They, thoreforo, requested that OSM perform the inspection and have the necessary tooting performed by an outside laboratory. The County will reimburse up to 5% of the construction coot for these inspection services or a total of 518,848.50. The actual coot is expected to be much loan than that figure, no the City should not have to pay for the inspection services. The project itself shall consist of complete removal of the existing pavement in all of the 4-lano portion except that which in castbound from Highway 25 to the high school and was repaired - 6 - It Council Agenda - 8/13/84 a few years ago. After removal of the bituminous material, the Claes V shall be leveled and compacted and added to as necessary. It will then receive 2 inches of bituminous base course, 14 inches of bituminous binder course, and a final 1 -inch lift of modified bituminous wearing course, with the total thickness of the asphalt being 4y inches. Along with the street, there will be approximately 690 feet of curbing and 10 feet of concrete center island replaced. The project is expected to start later than Hart Boulevard and Cedar Street, but the bituminous portion should be completed by October 15 and the entire project by October 31. I am presenting no alternative actions or staff recommendation for this particular item. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the resolution to be adopted. - 7 . RESOLUTION 1984 RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT OF COUNTY ROAD 75 WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 23rd day of April, 1984, accepted a feasibility report on the proposed improvement of County Road 75 from East County Road 39 to Otter Creek Road by installing new hard surfacing, curb and gutter, and other appurtenant work, and WHEREAS, said resolution also ordered the preparation of plane and specifications by the Consulting Engineering Firm of Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 6 Associates, and said plans and specifications have been received by the Council, and WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution passed by the City Council on June 25, 1984, said plans and specifications were approved by the Council, and WHEREAS, this improvement project being a joint project with Wright County and Wright County has given their approval to said plans and specifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO,MINNESOTA, THAT ouch improvements aro hereby ordered as proposed In the plane and specifications accepted by Council Resolution the 25th day of June, 1984. Adopted by the Council this 13th day of August, 1984. Arve A. Grimsmo, Mayor Thomas A. Eidom City Administrator 0 Council Agenda - 8/13/84 10. Consideration of a Resolution Awarding the Contract for the Improvement of Hart Boulevard, Cedar Street, and County Road 75. (T.E.,J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This is the last resolution in the chain of resolutions required to initiate this project. Having adopted the assessment roll, ordered the improvement, and secured the financing through the sale of Bonds, we are now prepared to award the contract. The following information has been prepared by John Simola to give you a brief description of the extent of the project and the bidding process as we went through it. The bids for this project were received on July 20, 1984. The low bidder was Buffalo Bituminous of Buffalo, Minnesota. The low bid received for the Hart Boulevard portion of the project was $81,741.00. This project will consist of paving the entire portion of Hart Boulevard from the crosswalk in front of the Monticello Specialty Clinic eastward to County Road 75. The width on the westerly portion of the project will be approximately 40 foot tapering to a width of 33 fact on the easterly and of the project. Curb and gutter will extend on the north aide from the Monticello Specialty Clinic to the Lindberg property on the cast side of the wastewater Treatment Plant. on the south aide curb and gutter will extend from the hospital parking lot easterly to a point approximately 50 foot beyond the Bondhuo sidewalk. Storm drainage for Hart Boulevard will be handled through the installation of four catch baoino located on the western portion of Hart Boulevard. Approximately 360 foot of 6 -Inch water main will be added to the eastern and of Hart Boulevard, with a hydrant being located near the intorsectlon of Hart Boulevard and County Road 75. We have also provided in the contract for a too to be placed just east of the Hart Boulevard intersection for the purp000 of crossing County Road 75 In the future. The bid received for Cedar Strout utilizing an urban type section with curb and guitar was $42,932.50. This project will consist of paving Cedar Strout from the Burlington Northern Railroad to Louring Lane. The width of the street itself would be 36 foot. A small amount of storm newer work, including two catch basins, would be necessary to provide for drainage. A 6 -inch water service would be placed to the Wilbur Eck property on the eastern aide of Cedar Street for the purpose of serving any largo future development In that area. On the western portion of the street a too will be provided near the hydrant for the purpose of adding services to the western aide of Cedar Strout - B - I Council Agenda - 8/13/84 at a later date. Approximately 60 feet of 8 -inch sanitary sever will be placed underneath Cedar Street for the purposes of serving the Wilbur Eck property at a later date. The bide for Cedar Street also included a bid for a narrower rural type of street without curb and gutter. There would be a deduction of approximately $6,000.00 for a rural section street. Due to the expected traffic in the area and the nature of the adjoining streets, 7th Street and Cedar Street, the staff feels that the rural street should not be considered. The work on Cedar Street and Hart Boulevard is expected to start shortly after award of the contract. Completion date for the bituminous portion is October 15, with completion of the entire project by October 31. I am presenting no alternative actions or staff recommendation for this particular item. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the resolution awarding the contract for the improvement of Hart and Cedar. - 9 - RESOLUTION 1984 1_ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Hart Boulevard between the vest intersection with Broadway and the east intersection with Broadway and for the improvement of Cedar Street between the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way and the north line of Lauring Lane and for the improvement of County Road 75 (Broadway) from East County Road 39 to Otter Creek Road by installing new hard surfacing, curb and gutter, and other appurtenant work, bids were received, opened, and tabulated according to lav, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. $611,083.50 Buffalo, MN H. 6 S. Asphalt Co. $678,045.80 Anoka, MN Hardrivee, Inc. $614,628.40 Maple Grove. MN and WHEREAS, it appears that Buffalo Bituminous of Buffalo. Minnesota, ie the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: 1. The Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Buffalo Bituminous of Buffalo. Minnesota, in the name of the City of Monticello for the improvement of Hart Boulevard between the want intersection with Broadway and the cast intersection with Broadway and for the improvement of Cedar street between the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way and the north line of Lauring Lana and for the improvement of County Road 75 (Broadway) from East County Road 39 to Otter Crook Road by installing now hard surfacing, curb and gutter, and other appurtenant work, according to the plane and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Administrator. 2. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all biCdaro the doposito made with their bide, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has boon signed. Adopted by the City Council this 13th day of August, 1984. Arve A. Grimamo, Mayor l Thomas A. Eldem City Administrator L Council Agenda - 8/13/64 11. Consideration of a Resolution Selling Tax Increment Financing Bonds - Key Tool 6 Plastic, Inc. (T. E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the last Council meeting you adopted a resolution establishing Tax Increment District 05 and requesting the County Auditor to certify the assessed value. You also adopted a resolution authorizing Springsted to prepare bids for Tax Increment Finance Bonds in the amount of $100,000.00. On Wednesday, August 1, the HRA adopted a resolution entering into a Pledge Agreement, as we have done in the past. Thin Agreement pledges all tax increment to the retirement of the Tax Increment Bonds. Also, during the interim since the last meeting, we have been working on the Development Contract with Key Properties. That Agreement, as of this writing, is not signed and completed as yet. I have been in touch with Holmes and Graven, who have advised me that we are nearing the signing and hopefully will have that Contract signed by Monday night. We have advised Kay Tool that if the Agreement has not been entered into, it might be very difficult to sell the Bonds. If we sell the Bonds and aro unable to reach an agreement for development thereafter, then the City is left with a debt that it must retire, but no project to generate thetax increment. Consequently, the debt would have to be ��rati red 0ithor by tax levy or by the creation of a brand now project that we could dedicate the money to. I believe we would have three years to generate a now project if the Key Tool project did not develop. Holmes and Graven have advised me that the Development Contract is near signing and that conceivably we would have a complete signed letter of intent if we do not have the formal contract, and ouch a letter would suffice for the authorization of Bonds. A representative of Holmes and Graven will be in attendance at the meeting to discuss both the Bond issues. We will know more at that time whether or not to proceed with respect to the Tax Increment Bonds. If we have a firm commitment to a Development Contract, then it would be wise for us to sell the Bonds and proceed with the project and got them under construction. If, however, we are in a position where wo have absolutely no guarantees that the project will occur, than we have the option of rejecting all bids and thereby stopping the project. Holmes and Graven have also advised me that if we adopt the resolution issuing the Bonds, than we have, in oaaonee, entered a purchase agreement and must follow through. We do not have the option of cancelling the Bond sale after the adoption of this resolution. - 10 - Council Agenda - 8/13/84 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Having already adopted the Tax Increment Finance Plan and requested certification of the District, I assume that our intentions are to proceed with the project, thus, alternative actions are limited. 1. Assuming the Development Contract is entermd into, adopt the resolution authorizing the sale of Bonds. 2. If the Contract is not complete, you may wish to reject all bids or adopt the resolution authorizing the sale and take a chance on the Contract being completed or a new developer being found. 3. Regardless of the status of the Contract, if the bid proposals are out of line, you may wish to reject all bide as well. Springsted has advised me that they will be sending a recommendation at the time they inform me of the actual bide. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Providing the Contract is closed and the bide are found to be acceptable by Springeted, staff recommends the adoption of the ( resolution authorizing the sale of Bonds so that the project may proceed. If the Contract has not been signed, staff recommends getting further advice from legal counsel so to whether or not to proceed with the sale. As I noted above, a representative from Holmes and Graven will be in attendance at the meeting. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the resolution for adoption. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $100,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 19848, PLEDGING FOR THE SECURITY THEREOF TAX INCREMENT FROM TAX INCREMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 5 AND AUTHORIZING F.XECUTiON OF A TAX INCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT BE iT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello (the "NRA") has heretofore adopted and this City Council (this "Council") has duly approved the Central Monticello Redevelopment Pian, and Modification No. One thereto, for the Central Monticello Redevelopment Project (the "Project"). 1.02. The HRA has established and this Council has duly approved Tax Increment Economic Development District No. 5 (the "District"), and the HRA has requested the County Auditor of Wright County to certify the Original Assessed Value of nil taxnble property in the District as of Jnnuary 2, 1984, and to certify to the IIRA each year hereafter the Current Assessed Value of all taxable property in the District (the Current Assessed Value). The Original Assessed Value of the District is expected to be $4,800, and will be adjusted each year in accordance with .Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 1. 1.03. The HRA expects to enter Into a Contract for Private Hedevelopmcnt with Key Properties, Inc. (the "Developer") prior to delivery of the Bonds issued pursuant to this Resolution, whereby the HRA will agree to sell to the Developer certain property within the District, and the Developer will Agree to construct certain minimum Improvements (the "Improvements"), all as more particularly described In the agreement, on or before January 1, 1985. It Is expected that upon completion of the Improvements the assessed value assigned by the County Assessor to the property and the Improvements will be not less than $224,800 which would result In a Captured Assessed Value of $220,000. if these expectations prove true, based upon present and anticipated mill rates for ad valorem taxes to be levied on taxable property In the District, the Council hereby determines thnt the Annual tax Increment to be derived by the HRA from the District commencing in 1986 will be npproximetcly $18,000. Section 2. Autboriaation. It is hereby determined that it is necessary and expedient for the City of Monticello (the "Issuer") to Issue and sell, pursuant to Minnesotn Statutes, Sections 273.71 to 273.78, Its General Obligation Tax increment Bonds, Series 1984H (the "13onds") in the aggregate principal amount of $100,000 for the purpose of financing certain public redevelopment costs of the Project. The snie of the Bonds has been negotiated pursuant to Minnesota Stntutes, Section 475.60, Subd. 2(2), and the issuer has issued no other general obligation bonds in the three-month period precceding the dote hereof, And will issue no other general o:)ligation twrods prior to the delivery of the Rands, other than its $170,000 Cenernl Obligation Improvements ilonds, Scries 1984, doted September 1, 1984.. Section 3. Sale. Terms. 3.01. The Issuer hereby accepts the offer of to purchase the Bonds at the rate of interest hereinafter set forth, And to pay therefore the sum of $ plus accrued interest to the date of delivery. The Bonds shall be payable as to principal at the office of I in Minnesota (the "Registrar") or any successor Registrar duly appointed by the Issuer. Interest on the Bonds shall be payable by check or draft mailed from the office of the Registrar to the registered owners of the Bonds. 3.02. The Bonds shall be dated September 1, 1984 and shall be issued forthwith as fully registered bonds without coupons in denominations of $5,000 or any authorized integral multiple thereof. The Bonds shall mature on February 1 in the years and amounts set forth below, and shall bear interest, payable on each August I and each February 1 at the following rates per annum for the following years of maturity starting on August 1, 1985: Year Amount Interest Rate 1987 10,000 % 1988 10,000 2989 10,000 1990 10,000 1991 10,000 1992 15,000 1993 15,000 1994 20,000 3.03. Pursuant to the terms of the pledge agreement described below to be entered into the IIRA and the lscucr pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77, lax Increment derived from the Project area will be pledged to the payment of principal of, premium, If any, and interest on the Bonds. in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.58, the estimated collection of tax increment from the Project area is not less than 20% of the cost of the Project. The costs of the Project shall include the costs enumerated in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 475.65, 273.75, subdivision 4, and Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 et sc�c . and It is estimated that said costs will be at least equal to the amount of the Nonds herein Authorized. 3.04. Bonds of this Issue maturing on or after February 1, 1992 will be subject to redemption prior to maturity at the option of the issuer In inverse order of maturities, and by lot within a single maturity on February 1, 1991, And Any Interest payment date thereafter At a price equal to par, plus accrued interest to the date of redemption. Notice of redemption shall in each case be published not less than thirty (30) days prior to the redemption date in a doily or weekly periodical published in a Minnesota city of the first class, or its metropolitan Arcs, which circulates throughout the State of Minnesota and furnishes financial news as part of Its service, And at least thirty (30) days prior to the redemption date A copy of the redemption notice shall be mailed by first class mail to the registered holders of the Ronds. Section 4. Form of the Bonds. 4.01. The Bonds shall be in substantially the following form, with the necessary variations as to number, CUSIP Number, rate of interest and date of maturity, the blanks to be properly filled in: No. R - STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF WRIGHT CITY OF MONTICELLO GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BOND, SERIES 1984B Rate Maturity Date of Original Issue CUSIP September 1, 1984 The City of Monticello, Minnesota (the 'Issuer") for value received, hereby certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to or registered assigns, the principal sum of dollars($ ) on the maturity date specified above, upon the presentation and surrender hereof, and to pay to the registered owner hereof interest on such principal sum at the interest rate specified above from September 1, 1984, or the most recent Interest payment date { to which interest hos been paid or duly provided for as specified below, on August 1 �. and February 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1985, until said principal sum Is pnid. Principal and the redemption price are payable in lawful money of the United States of America at , as Registrar, Transfer Agent and Paying Agent, in Minnesota, or at the office of such successor agent as the issuer may designate upon 00 days notice to the registered owners at their registered addresses (the "Registrar"). interest shall be paid on each August 1 and February 1 by check or draft mailed to the person in whose name this Bond Is registered at the close of business on the preceding July 15 and January 15 (whether or not a business day) at his or her address set forth on the bond register mnintalned by the Registrar. Any such interest not punctually paid or provided for will be paid to the person in whose name this Bond Is registered at the close of business on .a special recurd date established by the Registrar for the payment of such defaulted Interest. The Bonds of this series maturing on or after February 1, 1992, are subject to redemption at the option of the Issuer, In whole or in part In Inverse order of maturity and by lot within a maturity, on February 1, 1991 and any Interest payment date thereafter at a price equal to par and accrued Interest. Thirty daye prior notice of redemption will be given by mail to the Registrar and to the registered owners, and notice of redemption will be published In the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chnpter 475. This Bond Is one of a wrles of Bonds In the Aggregate principal amount of One Ilundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000), All of like date and tenor except for number, interest rate, denomination, date of maturity and redemption privilege, and is issued for the purpose of prodding funds to finance certnin public redevelopment costs of the Central Monticello Redevelopment Project, as modified, and is issued pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the "Resolution") duly adopted by the Issuer on August 13, 1984, and pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 and Sections 273.71 through 273.78. The Bonds of this series are payable from the General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1984B Fund of the issuer. All taxable property within the Issuer is subject to the levy of ad valorem taxes required by law to be levied and extended if needed for this purpose, without limitation of rate or amount. The issuance of this bond does not cause the indebtedness of the Issuer to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation thereon. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the issuer kept for thnt purpose at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by such owner's attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of this Bond together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or such owner's duly authorized attorney. Upon such transfer and the payment of any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid by the Issuer or the Registrar with respect to such transfer, there will be issued in the name of the transferee a new Bond or Bonds of the same aggregate principal amount as the surrendered Bond. The Bonds of this series nre issuable only as fully registered bonds without coupons in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof not exceeding the principal amount maturing In any one year. -As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations therein set forth, the Bonds of this series are exchangeable for a like aggregate principal amount of Bonds of this series of a different authorized denomination, as requested by the registered owner or his duly authorized attorney, upon surrender thereof to the Registrar. It Is hereby certified and recited that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed In order to make this Bond a valid and binding general obligation of the Issuer according to its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed in due form, time and manner as so required. This Bond shall not he valid or become obligatory for any purpose until the Authentication Certificate hereon shall have been manually signed by a person authorized to sign on behalf of the Registrar. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Monticello has caused this Bond to be executed with the facsimile signatures of its Mayor and its City Administrator, all as of the Date of Original issue specified above. Dated: THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA By (Facsimile) Mayor (Facsimile) City Administrator BOND REGISTRARS AUTHENTICATION CERTIFICATE This is one of the Bonds described in the within mentioned Resolution. Bond Registrar By Authorized Signature The following provisions for abbreviations shall be printed on each Bond in substantially the following form: The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out In full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM - as tenons In common 'rEN ENT - as tenants by the entlrelies TI' TEN - as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT - Custodian -�ust) (Minor) Under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act (State) -5- 0// ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto (Please Print or Typewrite Name and Address of Transferee. Include information for all joint owners if the Bonds are held by joint account.) the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints attorney to transfer the within Bond on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed by: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a commercial bank or trust company or by a brokerage firm having membership in one of the major stock exchanges. Please Insert Social Security Number or Other Identifying Number of Assignee Notice: The signature(s) on this assignment must correspond with the name(s) which appear on the face of this Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change whatever. (Form of Certificntc) CERTIFICATE AS TO LEGAL OPINION 1, Thomas Eidem, City Adminisirntor of the City of Monticello, hereby certify that except for the dale line, the above is a full, true and compared copy of the legal opinion of Holmes k Graven, Chartered, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which was delivered to me upon delivery of the bonds and is now on file In my office. (Fnesimile) City Administrator City of Monticello, Minnesota 4.02. As long as any of the Bonds issued hereunder shall remain outstanding, the Issuer shall cause to be kept at the principal office of the Registrar the Register In which, subject to such reasonnble regulations as the Registrar may prescribe, the Registrar shnll provide for the registration of Bonds and the registration of transfers of Bonds. Is hereby appointed Registrar for the purpose of registering Bonds and registering transfers of Ponds ns herein provided. Upon surrender for transfer of any Road with a written Instrument of transfer satisfnelory to the Registrar, duly c.cruled by the registered owner or his 6- 0 duly authorized attorney, and upon payment of any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer, the issuer shall execute and the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more fully registered Bonds of any authorized denominations and of a like aggregate principal amount, interest rate and maturity. Any Bonds, upon surrender thereof at the office of the Registrar, at the option of the registered owner thereof, may be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal amount of Bonds of the some maturity and interest rate of any authorized denominations. In all cases in which the privilege of exchanging or transferring fully registered [fonds is exercised, the Issuer shall execute and the Registrar shall deliver Bonds in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. For every such exchange or transfer of Bonds, whether temporary or definitive, the Issuer or the Registrar may make a charge sufficient to reimburse it for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such exchange or transfer, which sum or sums shall be paid by the person requesting such exchange or transfer as a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege of making such exchange or transfer. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution, the cost of preparing each new Bond upon each exchange or transfer, and any other expenses of the issuer or the Registrar Incurred in connection therewith (except any applicable tax, fee or other governmental charge) shall be paid by the issuer. The Issuer shall not be obligated to make any such exchange or transfer of Bonds during the fifteen (15) days next preceding the date of the first publication or the mailing (if there is no publication) of notice of redemption in the case of a proposed redemption of Bonds. The issuer and the Registrar shall not be required to make any transfer or exchange of any Bonds called for redemption. 4.03. Interest on any Bond which Is payable, and is punctually paid or duly provided for, on any interest payment date shall be paid to the person In whose name that Bond (or one or more Bonds for which such bond was exchanged) is registered at the close of business on the preceding January 15 or July 15, as the case may be. Any interest on any Bond which Is payable, but Is not punctually paid or duly provided for, on any interest payment date shall forthwith cease to be payable to the registered holder on the relevant regular record date solely by virtue of such holder having been such holder; And such defaulted Interest may be paid by the issuer to the person in whose name such Bond is registered at the close of business on A special record dote established by the Registrar for the payment of such defuulted interest. Subject to the foregoing provisions of this paragraph, each Ilond delivered under this Resolution upon transfer of or In exchange for or in lieu of Any other Bond shall carry all the rights to Interest accrued and unpaid, And to Accrue, which were carried by such other Rond and each such Bond shall bear interest from such date thnt neither gain nor loss in interest shall result from such transfer, cxchnnge or substitution. 4.04. As to Any Bond, the Issuer and the Registrar and their respective succcssors, each in its discretion, cony deem and treat the person in whose name the same for the time being shall be registered as the Absolute owner thereof for all purposes and neither the Issuer nor the Registrar nor their respective successors shsll he Affected by any notice to the contrary. Payment of or on account of the principal of Any such Bond shall be made only to or upon the order of the registered owner thereof, but such registration may be changed as above provided. All such payments shall be vAlid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. 4.05. if (i) any mutilated Bond is surrendered to the Registrar, and the issuer enTthe Registrar receive evidence to their satisfaction of the destruction, loss, or theft of any Bond, and (ii) there is delivered to the Issuer and the Registrar such security or indemnity as may be required by them to save each of them harmless, then, in the absence of notice to the Issuer or the Registrar that such Bond has been acquired by a bona fide purchaser, the Issuer shall execute, and upon its request the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in exchange for or in lieu of any such mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond, a new Bond of like tenor and principal amount, bearing a number not contemporaneously outstanding. In case any such mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond has become or is about to become due and payable, the issuer in its discretion, instead of issuing a new Bond, may pay such Bond. Upon the issuance of any new Bond under this subsection, the Issuer may require the payment of a sum sufficient to cover any tax or other governmental charge that may be imposed in relation thereto. Every new Bond issued pursuant to this subsection in lieu of any destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond shall constitute an original additional contractual obligation of the Issuer, whether or not the destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond shall be at any time enforceable by anyone, and shell be entitled to all the benefits of this Resolution equally and proportionately with any and all other Bonds duty issued hereunder. The provisions of this Section are exclusive and shall preclude (to the extent lawful) all other rights and remedies with respect to the replacement or payment of mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bonds. Section 5. Execution and Delivery 5.01. The Bonds shall be executed by the respective facsimile signatures of the Mayor and the City Administrator of the issuer as set forth in the form of Bond. The text of the approving legal opinion of Holmes h Graven, Chartered, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, as bond counsel, shall be printed on the reverse side of ench Bond and shall be certified by the facsimile signature of the City Administrator. The Scot of the Issuer shall be omitted from the Bonds as permitted by law. When said Bonds shalt have been duly executed and authenticated by the Registrar in accordance with this resolution, the same shall be delivered to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price, and the receipt of the City Administrator to the Purchaser thereof shall be a full Acquittance; and the Purchaser shall not be bound to see to the application of the purchase money. The Bonds shall not be valid for any purpose until authenticated by the Registrar. 5.02. Unless litigation shall have been commenced and be pending questioning the Bonds, revenues pledged for payment of the bonds, or the orghniaation of the Issuer or incumbency of Its officers, At the closing, the Mayor and the City Administrator shall execute and deliver to the Purchaser a suitable certificate As to Absence of material litigation, and n certificate no to payment for and delivery of the Bonds, together with the arbitrage certificate referred to below and the signed approving legal opinion of Ilolmes be Craven, Chartered as to the validity and enforceability of the Bonds and the exemption of interest thereon from federal and Mlnncsotn income taxation (other thin A1tnncsota corporate and bank excise taxes measured by Income) under present iaws And rulings. Section 6. Funds and Accounts. 6.01. There is hereby created a special fund designated "General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1984B Fund" (the 'Bond Fund") held and administered by the Finance Director of the Issuer separate and apart from all other Funds of the Issuer. The Bond Fund shall be maintained in the manner specified until all of the Bonds herein authorized, any refunding bonds issued to refund the Bonds, and any other general obligation tax increment bonds hereafter issued to complete the Project, including any modifications or additions thereto, and the Interest thereon, have been fully paid and the Issuer has been fully reimbursed from the pledge of tax increment for all of the principal and interest of the Bonds paid by the Issuer from taxes levied on property in the City other than the Project area. In the Bond Fund there shall be maintained two separate accounts, to be designated as the "Capital Account" and the "Debt Service Account", respectively. Capital Account. The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds, less the amount of the proceeds of the Bonds deposited in the Debt Service Account for capitalized interest, and less any accrued interest and unused discount received thereon deposited in the Debt Service Account, shall be credited to the Capital Account, from which there shall be paid all costs and expenses of the Project, Including the cost of any construction contracts heretofore let and all other costs incurred and to be incurred, of the kind authorized in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 475.65, 273.75, subdivision 4, and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.411 et se9.; and the moneys in the Capital Account shall be used for no other purpose. Debt Service Account. There is hereby pledged end there shall be credited to the Debt Service Account (a) all accrued interest received upon delivery of and payment for the Bonds, (b) An amount equal to $ to pay Interest on the Bonds prior to the anticipated date of collection of tax increment pledged for the payment of the Bonds, (c) collections of tax Increment derived from the District and pledged to the payment of principal and interest on the Bonds, all taxes herein levied for the payment of the Bonds, and revenues derived from other sources and available and pledged to pay principal, premium, if any, and Interest on the Bonds, and (d) all funds remaining in the Capital Account after completion of the Project and payment of the costs thereof. The Debt Service Account herein created shall be used solely to pay principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds and any other general obligation tax increment bonds hereafter issued and made payable from said Debt Service Account, except that upon discharge of the Bonds and such already outstanding or additional Bonds, the Issuer may use the remaining funds in the Debt Service Account to reimburse the Issuer ns provided above. 6_02. The IIRA will agree to segregate the lax Increment derived from the District on its official books and records and to remit to the Bond Fund of the Issuer the Amount of tax increment required to be remitted to the Issuer pursuant ton Tax Increment Pledge Agreement in substantlally lhe'form Attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Mayor and City Administrator of the Issuer are hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the Issuer a Tax Increment Pledge Agreement In substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. To provide additional moneys for the payment of said principal and interest there Is hereby levied upon all of the taxable property In the Issuer a direct annual ad valorem tax which, together with estimated collections of tax Increment, shall be equal to 105% of the amount necessary to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds and shall be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of, other general property taxes in said issuer for the years and in the amounts as follows: Levy Year • Collection Year Amount Levied 1985 1986 1986 1987 1987 1988 1988 1989 1989 1991 1990 1991 1991 1992 1992 1993 1993 1994 Said tax levies are such that if collected in full, they, together with estimated collections of tax increment, will produce at least five percent (5%) in excess of the amount needed to meet when.due the principal and interest payments on the bonds (except for Interest payable from funds which shall be on hand and irrevocably deposited to the Debt Service Account ns of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds). Said tax, levies shall be Irrevocable so long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the Issuer reserves the right and power to reduce the levies in the manner and to the extent permitted by Minnesota Statutes Section 475.61, subdivision 3. The full faith, credit and tnxing powers of the Issuer shall be and are hereby irrevocably pledged for the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due and payable. 6_03. Interest earnings from the investment of money In the Capital Account shall be deposited in the Capital Account. Interest earnings from the investment of money in the Debt Service Account shall be deposited in the Debt Service Account. G_04. The Finance Director of the Issuer is directed to keep on file in his office a tabulation of the dates and amounts of the principal and Interest payments to become due, on the Bonds, and amounts of the principal And Interest payments to become due on any other bonds made payable from the Bond Fund, and of the balance required in the Bond Fund on October 1 In each year in order to cancel the taxes levied pursuant to this Resolution for collection the following year. Section 7. Miscellaneous. 7.01. The Issuer covenants and agrees with the Purchaser and holders of the Bonds that the investments of proceeds of the Bonds, including the Investment of nay revenues pledged to the Bonds which are considered proceeds under the applicable regulations, Avid accumulated sinking funds, if tiny, shall be limited as to amount and yield In such manner that the Bonds shall not be Arbitrage bonds within the meaning of Section 103(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1854, as amended, and regulations thereunder. On the basis of the existing facts, estimates And -10- 0 ATTACHMENT A TAR INCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT by and between THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA and THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on or as of the day of , 1984, by and between the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City"), and The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "Authority"). WHEREAS, the Authority established the Central Monticello Redevelopment Project (the "Project"), prepared the Central Monticello Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan") for the Project, and approved the Plan on November 23, 1982, and has since approved Modification No. 1 to the Plan on March 19, 1984; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City approved the Plan on December 13, 1982, and has since approved Modification No. 1 to the Plan; and WHEREAS, the Authority and the City have established Economic Development District 05 (the "District") and approved a Tax Increment Financing Plan for the District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to authority conferred by Minnesota Stntutes, Section 273.77, and Minnesota Stnlutes, Chaptcr 475, the City has agreed to finance certain public redevelopment costs to be Incurred by the Authority in the District through the issuance of general obligntion bonds of the City, designated the $100,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Donds, Series 1984, and hereinafter referred to as the "Bonds"; and WHEREAS, the Authority has agreed to pledge certain tax increment revenues to the City for the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(x), any agreement to pledge tax increment revenues must be made by written ngreement by and between the Authority and the City and must be filed with the County Auditor of Wright County; NOW, THEREFORE. the City and the Authority mutually agree to the following: (1) The City will sell the Bonds. (2) The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds and the enrnings from the Investment of such proceeds will be made available to the Authority to pay or reimburse the Authority for public redevelopment costs paid. Incurred, or to be paid or Incurred, by the Authority In the District. G/ circumstances, including the foregoing findings and covenants, the Issuer hereby certifies that it is not expected that the proceeds of the Bonds will be used in such manner as to cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds under Section 103(c) and regulations thereunder. The Mayor and the City Administrator shall furnish an arbitrage certificate to the Purchaser embracing or based on the foregoing certification at the time of delivery of the Bonds to the Purchaser. The proceeds of the Bonds will likewise be used in such manner that the Bonds are not industrial development bonds under Section 103(b) of the Internal Revenue Code. 7.02. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this Resolution and to cause the same to be filed in the office of the county auditor of Wright County together with the executed Pledge Agreement and such other Information as the county auditor may require, and to obtain from the county auditor a certificate that the Bonds have been entered upon its bond register and that the levy contained in this Resolution has been made. 7.03. The officers of the Issuer are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the Issuer relating to the power and authority of the Issuer to issue the Bonds within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and control, and such certified copies and certificates shall be deemed representations of the Issuer as to the facts stated therein. Adopted this day of , 1984. City Administrator Mayor (3) All tax increment generated by the District, from and after the date of this Agreement shall be deposited In an account (the 'Tax Increment District /5 Account") held by the Authority. The Authority hereby pledges to the payment of the principal and interest on the Bonds, tax Increment from the Tax Increment District 05 Account in an amount equal to 105% of the annual principal and interest due on the Bonds. (4) Not later than five (5) business days prior to each debt service payment date for the Bonds, there shall be transferred from the Tax Increment District 15 Account to the Debt Service Account maintained by the City for the payment of the Bonds, an amount which, when taken together with amounts already on deposit in the Debt Service Account, is equal to the payment of principal and Interest next due on the Bonds. If at any time the Tax Increment District 05 'Account contains an amount In excess of the amount to be transferred to the Debt Service Account maintained by the City for the payment of the Bonds on the following two debt service payment dates (excluding debt service payment dates for which interest is payable from proceeds of the Bonds deposited in the Debt Service Account), then such excess amounts shall be available to the Authority to pay or reimburse the Authority for public redevelopment costs paid, incurred, or to be paid or incurred, by the Authority in the District. (5) Without regnrd to anything in this Agreement to the contrary, tax increment generated by the District shall be available to pay principal of and Interest on both the Bonds and any other obligations issued by the City, Authority or any other public body to finance public redevelopment costs paid or incurred by the Authority In the District. (6) When the entire public redevelopment costs of the District have been paid and all principal and interest on the Bonds and other obligations issued to finance the public redevelopment costs of the District have been paid, and the City has been reimbursed from collections of tax increment from the District for collections of general ad valorem taxes used to pay principal of and Interest on the Bonds, then the Authority shall report such fact to the City Council of the City and the Authority shall submit a final statement of such payments. Upon audit of this statement and approval thereof by the City Council, the payment of the expenditures of the Authority in the District shall be reported to the County Auditor of Wright County. (7) An executed copy of this Agreement shall be filed with the County Auditor of Wright County pursuant to the requirement contained In llinncsoto Statutes, Section 273.77(n). 0// IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Authority have caused this Agreement to be duly executed on their behalf and their seals to be hereunto affixed and such signatures and seals to be attested, as of the day and year first above written. ATTEST: CITY OF MONTICELLO By City Administrator Mayor ATTEST: THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA By Secretary Chair (SEAL) 0 C Council Agenda - 8/13/84 12. Consideration of Approving a Proposed Farmers Home Administration Elderly Housing Project. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: For nearly two years, we have had a proposal to develop an elderly housing project through Farmers Home Administration on Lots 13-15, Block 51. This in the site that the HRA purchased from the old Development Corporation and had the houses demolished. It is the land right behind the old Flake Garage and Jones Manufacturing. Farmers Home Administration refused to approve any applications for a long period of time until the project that they had built in Big Lake reached capacity rent up. Last fall, Farmers Home Administration approved the 'Big Lake project for rental to anyone who qualified and not just elderly. Shortly after they opened the eligibility to all persons, the project did fill up, and the Monticello project came to life again. During the period that Farmers Home Administration would not act on Monticello's application, the option agreement with Joe Poehler expired. At the beginning of 1984, Brad Larson, Jim Metcalf, and Barthel Homes, as a partnorehip, approached the NRA to request an option on the same land. They went into a competitive process with Mr. Poehler, who still intended to complete the housing project. The RRA, having spent substantial money on interest payments, demolition, and other rolated cost, stated that an option would coat $2,400.00 for six months, would be non-refundable, would not apply to a purchase price, and then set the purchase price at approximately $62,000.00. They also withdraw the offer of tax increment financing for this particular project. When all of that information had bean presented, Mr. Poehler withdraw saying that the land coat had become unworkable. Essentially what had happened is that the land cost had nearly doubled duo to Farm Homo delay. At a price of nearly $70,000.00, Mr. Poohlor withdraw and the Metcalf, Larson, Barthel partnership accepted the terms of the option. In order to put their application into Farmorn Homo, the partnership requires a latter of support from the City Council. Thin is required because a Farmers dome project is accessed at a 20% level rather than the 34% level. The north half of Blocks 50 and 51 aro being proposed to the Planning Commission for rezoning. This matter was dincuossd shortly after I arrived in the City and received approval from Howard Dahlgron. It seems highly unlikely that tho north half of those blocks will dovolop commercially an they ara currently coned and would, in fact, present themselves as an excellent buffer botwoon the commercial and the single family housing. Thus, we coo no difficulty with the land use planning aspect of the proposal. We further think that the site would be excellent. - 12 - N C Council Agenda - 8/13/84 Another matter the Planning Commission will be addressing will be a conditional use in excess of 12 unite, since the project is proposing 31 unite. As an elderly housing project, they are allowed to have less parking spaces than for a regular or conventional housing project. They have not, however, indicated that they can create the extra parking places:should their elderly designation be removed. We find this to be somewhat troublesome but also have little doubt that the project will fill itself up with elderly. The site being as good as it is and there being a demonstrated need for elderly housing for moderate income people, we think that 1008 occupancy will occur very quickly upon completion. The action required after completion of a review of the data is simply a motion directing staff to send a letter to Farm Home Administration endorsing the project. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Adopt a motion directing staff to submit letter endorsing the project - this is a required part of the application packet and the project will not receive approval unless given City approval. 2. Deny the letter - this should be based on sound judgement that we are sacrificing prime tax property and that the reduced assessment is not beneficial to the City or that the provision of elderly housing does not outweigh the lose of tax baso to the City. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that, in spite of the reduced assessed value, the City, by granting approval, addresses a vary real need with respect to quality elderly housing. Recall also that this area was considered substantially blighted when the HRA first made its initial acquisition. This is the completion of a process that began nearly two years ago with the intent of eliminating blight and creating some downtown elderly housing. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of comparative data and other information about the reduced aaaossed value; Copy of the letter drafted by the Secretary of the HRA to be cant to Farm Home Administration. - 13 - FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION i ELDERLY HOUSING PROJECT RULES OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 1. FmHA 515 are assessed under the following formula: Est. Market Value X t - Assessed Value Land 408 - ••• Building 20% - ••• THIS PROPOSAL (Land) 62,000 X .40 - 24,800.00 (Bldg) 900,000 X .20 - 180,000.00 Total Assessed Value 204,800.00 Mill Rate X .081956 Total Tax 16,675.00 If the project wore conventional (non-FmHA) and thus not receiving ` reduced asecosment, the following would apply: Eat. Market Value Assessed Value (Land 6 Bldg)962,000 X .34 - 327,080.00 Mill Rate X .081956 Total Tax 26,806.00 Tax Savings to Developer - $10,021.00 to offer lover rentals 2. Reduced a000eoment benefit lost for either: 1. 15 years from data of construction, or 2. 15 years from data of origination of loan, whichever 10 longer. 3. Reduced assessment benefit travels with the property, not the owner. 4. Since the 1982 legislature raised the assessed value from 5% to 20%, the State no longer provides a "reduced assessment credit" for projects built after June 30, 1983. we do still receive our—reducod assessment credit" for prior projects, however, that amount has been folded in to our Local Government Aid and no longer is shown as an individual line item. City o/ onfi"110 wry_. CJI r_ r MONTICELLO. MN 55362 July 19, 1984 Plane (812) 285.2711 Metro (812(333-5739 Respectfully, 09S��� Allen L. Pelvlt Director of Economic Development and Executive Secretary for NRA ALP/kad CC: ALP 250 East Broa&"y Routo 4. Boa 63A / 1 Monticab. MN 55362 d� Riverview Manor Mayor: e Anncity Attention: Brad Larson counce: P.O. Box 446 Dan Bbnlpun Monticello, MN 55362 Fren Fetr Kenneth Maus Jack Ma—en Re: Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) Proposed Elderly Housing Project for Monticello Elderly Partners on Lots 13, 14, and 15, Except the Southerly 15 Feet Administrator: of Lot 15, Block 51, Monticello. Tom Eldom FlnancO Director: Gentlemen: Rick W01151eeer Public Warks: John Slmots Please be advised that the City of Monticello is happy Ptaro,un9aZoning: to see an elderly housing project, funded through FmHA, Oar? Anderson will be constructed in Monticello on the site proposed. We recognize the need for ouch a project, we welcome it, and would ask that you contact the City for any assistance ( we may give you or any questions you may need answered. Respectfully, 09S��� Allen L. Pelvlt Director of Economic Development and Executive Secretary for NRA ALP/kad CC: ALP 250 East Broa&"y Routo 4. Boa 63A / 1 Monticab. MN 55362 d� Council Agenda - 8/13/84 L 13. Consideration of Rankings and Bide from Architectural Firms. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Having done the preliminary ranking based on credentials and presentations, we should now re-evaluate the overall ranking to include their bid prices. When the final ranking is complete, I suggest we select a certain number of firms you wishto interview at a special meeting. The call for a special meeting to interview is the next item on the agenda and will not have a specific supplement for it. It would be desirable to interview no more than three, but depending on the ranking, including bids, and any Council debate, you may wish to invite more than three. If you do elect to invite more than three, I recommend that we not go more than five under any circumstances. I think it would be desirable if we are going to proceed with having an architect do the work that we make our selection as early as possible so that we may proceed toward the bond referendum. Again, as I noted earlier, it is desirable to hold the bond referendum in concert with the November General Election. First, we save the expense of conducting a special election; and second, a General Election draws out many, many voters, whereas a special election on a bond issue has the tendency to draw only the negative votora. If we have proceeded far enough to take this to a bond reforendum, I am making the assumption that we have identified the need for a Fire Hall and, in fact, support such construction. If that assumption is incorrect and there is still thoughts that a Fire Hall is not required, than financially we would be boat off to dispense .with plans and drawings and not conduct the referendum. I think it is essential that the Council take the position of supporting the Fire Hall construction. I wish to also stress that if we choose to proceed, onto an architect is elected, we or a building committeo must sit down with the architect to define the limits of acceptable structure. I think it should be stressed that one of the real possibilities that may occur is the re -opening of the possibility of a remodeling of the existing Piro [fall. Jack Maxwell, on Council directive, has contacted the owner of the property we have identified as the most acceptable. Besides expressing an unwillingness to sell, Jack, in his role as an appraiser, has valued the property at a number in excess of $100,000.00. While we had pretty much diamissod the notion of renovating the existing Fire Hall because of expense, if land value for a now Fire [tall is so high, it might be. in fact, cheaper to do a major renovation. Utilizing the money that would ordinarily go into a land sale for conversion would than allow us to do an expansion of the existing Fire C Council Agenda - 8/13/84 Hall for substantially less than all new construction and the end resu it would still be beneficial. Because this might be a very real possibility, we may wish to ask the architects we interview whether or not this will affect their bid prices. Clearly, if this is the final selection, it should have a definite bearing on the architectural rates for Phase II as laid out in the Request for Proposals. It may not have much bearing on the Phase I proposal and what it might cost to prepare renderings and assist with the referendum. Because this is an important matter, and at least two persons were to be absent this past Wednesday, I have elected to move this item to the regular agenda and request that you set a special meeting for the interview of architectural firms. I know that everyone wishes to be closely involved with this particular decision making process. As a final note, I realize that there is some concern about tho expense of utilizing an architect for a project such as this and whether or not it wouldn't be more beneficial to the City to utilize a design/build typo of bidding method. This is a very realistic and sensible approach as well. It is entirely conceivable that after seeing the bide you may wish to reject all arch1toctural firms and pursue a now course. The only difference L in a process of that sort would be that we construct an acceptable budget and then request design and build bids to moot that budget. It is conceivable also that we conduct a referendum without a design in mind but only with a expenditure amount established. If the amount is approved by the voters, we would then enter the design and build bidding process. This is a realistic and accepted approach. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: I. Select 3 to 9 architectural firms to interview at a special mooting - this again still does not commit you to hiring a firm after the Interview. It simply eliminates the root of the firma from further consideration. 2. Rojo ct all proposals - if the proposals are rejected, but you still support the notion of constructing a now Piro Hall , this action would prompt pursuing the project from a different angle, perhaps the donign/build prospect. I should note that just because we have pursued the Request for Proposolo does not obligate the City in any way to select a firm and proceed with the project. - 15 Council Agenda - 8/13/84 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that we do proceed with the selection of people to interview. Even after the interview, the Council is not obligated to select a firm and proceed with the project. I think that overall we would have a better feel for the services that would be rendered by an architect by going through the interview process. With respect to the special meeting, I suggest we set aside 30 minutes per candidate, allowing them each 15 minutes to discuss their firm and 15 minutes for questions. In order to expedite the manner, I encourage you to set the special meeting for the week immediately following the Monday night meeting. I think it would be most desirable to conduct the special meeting in the late afternoon on Wednesday or Thursday. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the compiled ranking shoot including bid information. - 16 - 1.� FIRM FRAN ARVE JACK KEN DAN FIRE GARY JOHN RICK TOM TOTAL COMBINED BID BID -,� NA:M FAIR GRIMSMO 6U\XWELL 14AUS BLONIGEN DEPT ANDERSON SIRALA 1iOLFSTELLER EIDEM POINTS RANK PHASE I FINAL PHASE II 1. Bernard Jacob Architects 6 9 12 9 14 8 10 12 13 93 13 55500 7.65% + 10% Furnishings 2. Korngeibel 10 3 5 8 2 12 14 10 9 73 9 1500 7% 3. Carlson Mjorud Architecture Ltd. 5 5 2 7 12 3 6 4 4 48 4 6000 7.51 4. Erickson-Nolfgra= Architects B 2 13 5 5 9 5 11 8 66 '6 4500 7% less 4,500 5. Station 19 Architects 2 4 10 2 13 13 11 13 14 82 11 7500 8% I 6. The Zack Johnson Group 1 8 9 4 1 10 1 4 3 2 43 2T 6970 $35,930 7. BWOR Architects 9 6 6 10 7 7 13 8 6 72 B 5-8000 y$35K-$45K 8. TKDA 7 12 4 1 6 1 2 3 1 3 40 1 0000 50K - Based on S750K project I 9. George Klein 6 Co. 12 1 3 3 13 4 6 8 9 12 71 7 8500 25,000 10. Richard Engan Aseoeiatoe 13 11 14 d 11 td 12 14 10 103 14 2000 7% 1 1 11. Ninsor/Faricy Architects 3 10 1 3 9 10 9 7 11 63 5 8000 21.000 12. Boorman Architects, 4 7 8 2 11 3 4 1 2 1 43 2T 2100 6.6% loos 2,100 13. Kodet Architectural Group Ltd. 11 - 14 11 12 6 5 2 6 7 74 10 9750 6.45% loss 4,875 14. Kirkham, Michael i Associates 14 13 7 14 B 11 7 5 5 84 12 12,500 6%