City Council Agenda Packet 04-27-1987AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, April 27, 1987 - 7:30 p.m.
Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo
Council Members: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, warren Smith, Dan Blonigen
1. Call to Order.
2. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held April 13, 1987,
and the Special Meeting Held April 20, 1987.
3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests, and Complaints.
Public Hearings
4. Public Hearing on a Proposal to Apply for a Small Cities Economic
Development Grant.
5. Public Hearing on Tax Increment District #7 and Finance Plan.
Old Business
6. Consideration of a Resolution Awarding Sale of $365,000 G.O.
LTax Increment Bonds.
7. Consideration of a Resolution Accepting Bid and Authorizing the
Execution of a Contract for the Making of Public Improvements
In Construction 5 Subdivision.
S. Consideration of Authorizing the Preparation of Topographic Maps.
9. Consideration of Bills for the Month of April.
10. Adjourn.
r14L
MINUTES
V_ REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, April 13, 1987 - 7:30 p.m.
Members Present: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen.
Members Absent: Arve A. Grimemo
2. Approval of Minutes.
Motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously
carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held March 23,
1987.
4. Consideration of Entering a Fire Training Mutual Aid Association.
Approximately a month ago, representatives of the Monticello Fire
Department requested the City enter into a joint powers agreement
with the cities of Becker, Big Lake, Elk River, Zimmerman, and the
Township of Backer for the purpose of sharing the cost associated
with video training tapes for all fire departments. The Monticello
Fire Department'a share of the tapes would have been $216.20.
The joint powers agreement presented by the Fire Department was reviewed
by the City Attorney, Gary Pringle, who recommended against entering
into a joint powers agreement creating another level of government
with its own independent budget and decision-making authority. It
was recommended by the City Attorney that if the primary reason for
the agreement was to jointly participate in the purchase of vidoo
cassettes only, then a simple one page agreement allowing for joint
and cooperative purchase of th000 items would be sufficient and that
a nine page joint powers agreement setting up a separate association
would not be necessary.
As a result, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen,
and unanimously carried to not approve entering into a joint powers
agreement for the purpose of mutual fire training.
The Council members confirmed that the idea of contributing towards
the purchase of video cassettes for training purposes was a good
idea; and as a result, a motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by
Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to approve the expenditure
of 4216.20 as Monticello's share of the training tapes.
5. Consideration of Endorsinq the Motto "Gateway to the Twin Cities"
as a Commercial Markatinq Concept.
W.J. Murphy, owner of the Monticello AmericInn Motel, appeared before
the Council requesting endorsement of a commercial marketing concept
-1-
(0)
Council Minutes - 4/13/87
j that would include a series of billboards along I-94 in the area
r_ of Melrose and Albany which would utilize the concept that Monticello
is the gateway to the Twin Cities. Some of the billboards would
be advertising Monticello in general without a specific business
being mentioned.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously
carried to endorse the motto "Gateway to the Twin Cities" as a commercial
marketing concept.
6. Consideration of Adopting an Ordinance Regulating Sidewalks.
Currently, the only reference in the City ordinances regarding sidewalks
is a requirement that abutting property owners must clear their walks
of ice and snow by 10:00 a.m. each day. The Public Works Director
recommended that the City adopt a new ordinance regulating sidewalks
which would cover repair responsibility along with maintenance and
procedures for special assessments if sidewalks are replaced or added
within the community. The new ordinance would allow for the Public
Works Director to inspect annually the sidewalk conditions within
the City and make recommendations for required improvements.
An ordinance amendment was also recommended that makes sidewalks
an allowable use within a boulevard and a final ordinance amendment
would recode an existing ordinance regarding vehicles parked on streets
after snow falls.
Councilmen Blonigan questioned the ordinance's requirement that residents
would be responsible for snow removal from sidewalks abutting their
property and felt that in some cases, depending on the location of
the sidewalk, this may be hard to enforce or be an unfair burden
on the property owner. The Public Works Director noted that the
City currently has ordinances requiring snow removal by the property
owner and that the now recommended ordinance would actually extend
the time period to 24 hours after a snow fall.
After furthor discussion, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded
by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to adopt Ordinance Amendment
Numbers 153, 154, and 155, pertaining to repair and maintenance of
sidewalks, allowable uses within a boulevard, and rocodification
of parking after a snow fall. Bee Ordinance Amendments No. 153, 154, 155.
7. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Authorizing the Making of
an Application for Community Development Block Grant Funds, and Setting
a Public Hearing.
Nov that the North American window Company hes selected Monticello
as a site for its Minnesota plant, the City of Monticello is attempting
to structure an attractive financial package that will assist in
their location. As part of the financial package, the City is considering
applying for a Community Development Block Grant in the amount of
$250,000.00 that could be loaned to the window Company at a reduced
interest rata.
Council Minutes - 4/13/87
One of the requirements for applying for the Block Grant from the
State of Minnesota is that the City must hold a public hearing to
explain how the City intends to use its funds.
AS a result, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Warren Smith,
and unanimously carried to adopt the resolution authorizing the application
for a Community Development Block Grant from the Department of Energy
and Economic Development and to hold a public hearing on the proposed
uses of the Block Grant April 27, 1987. See Resolution 87-10.
The Council further discussed the interest rate that would be charged
on the Block Grant loan to the Window Company should the City receive
the Grant. It was noted that the State of Minnesota does not regulate
the amount of interest that could be charged, and the City Administrator
noted that the Window Company was under the impression from a state
representative that the interest rate could be as low as 1 percent
or 15 percent. In light of the fact that the money would be used
to entice a foreign firm to locate in Monticello and that the money
is a grant from the State, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded
by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to indicate to the Window
Company that the interest rate on the $250,000.00 loan would be ly percent
annus 11 y.
8. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing on a Proposed Tax Increment
Finance Plan and Project.
i
An additional pert of the financial package being prepared for the
Norwegian Window Company location in Monticello is a Tax Increment
Finance Plan which would help write down the cost of the land acquisition.
The finance plan as presented reflects an acquisition price for the
two lore in the industrial park needed by the Window Company of approximately
5104,000.00. A total bond issue in the range of $155,000.00 to $160,000.00
could be financed entirely from tax increments generated by the project
and would result in the write down of the land cost to approximately
55,000.00 for the Window Company.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously
carried to set a public hearing for April 27, 1987, to consider the
proposed Tax Increment Finance Plan for. Project 47.
9. Consideration of a Statement Charging the City for Video Cassette
Recorder Rental for the Monticello Fire Department.
As pert of the 1987 preliminary budget request by the Fire Department,
a VCR to be used for training purposes was requested by the department
for 5400.00. Prior to the adoption of the final budget for 1987,
the item pertaining to the VCR was eliminated from the budget. Fire
Chief, Willard Farnick, indicated that he was not aware of the budget
cut and had purchased a VCR in January of 1987 assuming it was still
in the budget. After the Fire Department wes informed that the purchase
would not be authorised, the City Administrator allowed the Fire
Department to rant a VCR on an as -needed basis for training purposes
until rho amount could be included in next years budget.
Oai
Council Minutes - 4/13/87
-� The City recently received a bill from Flicker's TV and Appliance
y for a six month rental of a VCR totaling $87.00. The rental was
for the entire six months from November through April, 1987, whereas
the City Administrator thought the rental charges should apply only
to when the department actually needed a VCR for training purposes.
The Council then discussed whether the department should continue
renting a VCR on a month -by -month basis or consider the actual purchase
of the VCR, as the rental charges would soon exceed the value of
a VCR purchased. The Council did note that it was the Fire Department's
obligation to know what the final budget adopted was and that hopefully
in the future similar problems would not arise regarding unauthorized
purchases. Councilmember Blonigen again questioned whether a VCR
for the Fire Department was a necessity and questioned its value.
After further discussion on purchasing policies in the future, motion
was made by Bill Fair, seconded by warren Smith, to authorize up
to $300.00 for the purchase of the VCR currently being rented provided
no rental charge is incurred for the past usage. Voting in favor
was Bill Fair, Fran Fair, warren Smith. Voting in opposition was
Blonigen.
10. Consideration of Grantinq a Seasonal 3.2 Beer License to the Monticello
Softball Association.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by warren Smith, and unanimously
carried to approve issuing a seasonal 3.2 beer license to the Monticello
Softball Association contingent upon proper certificate of insurance
for liquor liability and the fee of $125.00.
11. Consideration of Awarding a Contract for Cleaning Services for City
Hall.
Recently, the cleaning service at the Monticello City Hall indicated
a desire to resign their duties, and the City advertised for sealed
bide for custodial service for City Hall. The following two bide
were received.
1. Barbara Gardin 2. Federal Maintenance and Cleaning
Maple Lake, MN Michael Chandler --Contact Person
Annual Bid: $7,400 Monticello, MN
Monthly Payment: 5616.66 Annual Bid: 57,096.92
Monthly Payment: 5591.41
It was noted that the low bid received is approximately $2,200.00
higher than the City is currently paying, but one of the primary
reasons for the increase has to do with the City now requiring liability
and casualty insurance along with a security bond.
Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Siontgen, and unanimously
carried to award a cleaning contract to the low bidder, Federal Maintenance
and Cleaning, in the amount of $7,096.92 per year.
-4-
Council Minutes - 4/13/87
12. Discussion on Proposed Legislation to Allow Sale of Wine in Grocery
Stores.
Administrator Eidem noted that the Municipal Liquor Store Association
requested the City Council oppose recent legislation introduced that
would allow for wine to be sold in grocery stores. It was noted
that previously when this law was being considered by the legislature.
the City had opposed the sale of wine in grocery stores, and the
Association again recommended the City draft a letter in opposition.
Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously
carried to authorize the City Administrator to draft a letter stating
the City's opposition to the proposed legislation allowing for wine
to be sold in grocery stores.
14. Cancellation of Recent Purchase Agreement on Former Fire Hall Site.
Administrator Eidem noted that the City has received a cancellation
request on the purchase agreement from Curt Markling for the purchase
of the old fire hall building. It was noted that the primary reason
for the purchase agreement being cancelled was that the developers
did not feel they would be able to meet the parking requirements
necessary for the proposed bar/restaurant proposal.
i
Rick Wolfstel er
Assistant Administrator
r1
L
.g_
0
MINUTES
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL AND MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP BOARD
Monday, April 20, 1987 - 9:00 a.m.
Monticello Township Hall
Council Members Present: Mayor Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill
Fair, Dan Blonigen, Warren Smith.
Township Board Members Present: Darlene Sawatzke, Stuart Hoglund,
Charles Holthaus, Franklin Denn,
Ted Holker, Jr., and Marjorie Goetzke.
Also Present: Terrence Merritt, Executive Director of Minnesota
Municipal Board; and Pat Lundy, Assistant Director
of Minnesota Municipal Board.
1. Call to Order.
2. Consideration of an Offer from the City of Monticello to Enter a
Joint Resolution Pertaining to the Planning, Development, and Annexation
of Certain Lands.
Mayor Arve Grimsmo made opening comments regarding the background
of the annexation proposals and maps. The City Council proposes
/I immediate annexation of the orange area on the map; the yellow area
4 would be called the development area and would consist of approximately
2,100 acres. The City Council proposes the basic Lerma shown on
the agreement, including the revised payment schedule. They would
like to discuss one area of the map, that being the balance of the
OAA shown as the white area on the map. Would that be the future
planning area, or would the OAA be eliminated.
Mr. Franklin Denn, Chair for the Monticello Township Board, requested
better clarification on immediate annexation. He pointed out that
maybe the name of the OAA should be changed to Joint Planning Board.
The Township is interested in some control of the development area.
There are concerns about cities dissolving and going back to the
townships, as wall as concerns regarding aid to local government.
Mr. Terrence Merritt, Executive Director of the Minnesota Municipal
Board, asked what role he and Pat Lundy, Assistant Director, should
play during this meeting. He stated they would be happy to help
with the discussion if so desired. It was agreed that the Council
and Township were here to negotiate and discuss an agreement. If
Mr. Merritt or Me. Lundy had suggestions, they would be appreciated.
Mayor Grimsmo stated that the City was set on the currant map and
agreement and wanted to negotiate only the balance and whet to call
It (the white area on the map).
-1-
101
Special Council Minutes - 4/20/87
1 A discussion then centered around the original proposal and counter
V proposal. Members also discussed the maps before them and how this
joint meeting came about. Mayor Grimsmo explained that the basis
for the City Council drawing lines on the development area comes
from petitions received from Kjellberg, Sandberg, and a petition
for the Momsen/Tozer area. The balance on the map is for the City
to plan utilities. The City believes it's a fair proposal, and the
City Council is firm on the proposal. He stated there is not much
room for negotiation.
A letter was then read into the record by Mr. Merritt which was written
by Mr. Radzwill. Attorney for the Township, to Gary Pringle, City
Attorney. The letter was dated April 17, 1987, and stated that the
only item to be discussed at this joint meeting was the original
proposal from the Township to the City. Councilmember Bill Fair
pointed out that this meeting was in the process of being organized
prior to the letter being written.
A discussion was then hold regarding the yellow area shown on the
map referred to as the development area.
A short break was taken to review the maps, atc.
The meeting resumed at 9:52 a.m. Mr. Merritt discussed the areas
of the Dunes, the Klein property. Prairie Acres, and the east portion
of the Fuller property and just south of the Fuller property. He
also discussed the timetable of development in the development area.
The Township Board agreed that when talking about immediate development,
they are looking at things happening within ono to two years, not
speculation of development. Councilmember Bill Fair noted that the
developers would petition for annexation, and the development proposal
would conform to City Ordinance. If it didn•t conform, it wouldn't
be annexed.
Township Board Member, Stuart Hoglund, raised a question on the water
line and that that was the reason for immediate annexation. The
area surrounding the Monte Club was discussed concerning assessments
and development occurring in that area to help pay for assessments.
Mayor Grimamo stated that they had never had an area assessment in
the past but will be looking into that possibility.
Councllmembor Bill Fair questioned Mr. Merritt if the City Council
could act by statute to annex land if the land is approximately two-thirds
surrounded by land within the city limits. Mr. Merritt illustrated
examples of that situation and clarified the statute.
Mr. Merritt then clarified the proposals from both the Township and
the City Council in terms of property description of the development
area. He stated that the Fuller property and Klein property could
be included or left out of the development area. Either way would
be okay with the Township. However, they did not want the Dunes
or Prairie Acres included. The Township had stated that those land
owners could petition for annexation if they desired to do no.
-2- n--)-
Special Council Minutes - 4/20/87
Mayor Grimsmo then requested a break to meet with the City Council.
The joint meeting resumed at 10:40 a.m. Mayor Grimsmo stated it
was the opinion of the City Council that the Dunes and Prairie Acres
should stay in the planning area because with 100+ homes, they may
need services in the future, and the City should have that information
for planning purposes, for instance, what size line to place on Highway 25,
etc. Mr. Franklin Denn, Township Board Chair, noted that there is
no need for those areas to be included for planning purposes, as
they will not increase or decrease, so there is nothing to be concerned
about.
Mr. Merritt suggested they put the discussion regarding the Dunes
and Prairie Acres aside and move onto the immediate annexation area
(the orange area on the map). Mr. Franklin Denn stated the Township
is not opposed to annexation of the school property (80 acres) or
the I-94 corridor. However, they would not consider the balance
for annexation. He also stated it was not necessary to annex land
to put the water tower on Monte Hill. Therefore, there was not sufficient
reason for annexation. Councilmember Bill Fair noted that the benefit
would be increased land value. Mr. Dean countered that it would
be disastrous to the Schultz property, as he intends to keep farming.
The discussion then centered on whether to continue negotiations
since no agreement had yet been reached. Mayor Grimsmo made closing
i commonts stating that the City wouldn't hurt any of the property
owners and that the City Council felt their offer was a fair one.
Mr. Franklin Dann noted in his closing comments that the City can
place the water tower on Monta Hill without annexation by obtaining
easements. There would be no need to annex if the City wasn't going
to assess the people. Councilmember Fran Fair pointed out that the
City didn't say they wouldn't assess; there would be total assessment.
Since no agreement was reached at this time, Fran Fair noted that
these proceedings would go to the hearing as scheduled for Tuesday,
April 21, 1987, for total annexation.
The,, meeting adjourned at/11:24 a.m.
I
O
Council Agenda - 6/27/87
t
4. Public Hearing on a Proposal to Apply for a Small Cities Economic
Development Grant. (O.K.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
On April 13, 1987, the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing
execution of a Small Cities Economic Development Grant for the NAwCO
Minnesota, Inc., and set a public hearing for April 27, 1987. This
public hearing is to accept public comment and questions on the Small
Cities Economic Development Grant which is to assist private business
in getting started or expanding, while benefiting low and moderate
income persons. The $250,000 grant is awarded to the City, which
the City can in turn pass through to private business as a low interest
loan. The City Council approved a 1; percent interest rate with
the term of payment to be negotiated.
Said public hearing opened, comments received and without contentment,
the public hearing may be closed. This being a public hearing, no
alternative action or staff recommendation is needed.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
None.
4-
QD
Council Agenda - 4/27/87
5. Public Nearing on the Tex Increment District N7 and Finance Plan. (O.K.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
NAWCO Minnesota, Inc., proposes to construct a 28,400 sq ft office/
manufacturing facility on Lot 12, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park,
City of Monticello. The manufacturing area will consist of 25,000 sq ft,
and the office/showcase/conference room will consist of 3,400 aq ft
to be completed in October, 1987. Lot 11, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial
Park, City of Monticello, is for future expansion. Twenty-one jobs
are projected to be created the first two years with a total five
year projection of 40 jobs. The estimated annual tax increment to
be generated from this district is sufficient to retire a bond indebtedness
of $155,000. District life is eight years at 8 percent interest.
The difference between the bond indebtedness ($155,000) and the estimated
budget (S170,000) is $15,000.
This the said public hearing for Tax Increment District 47, having
been opened, received no comment and closed, the City Council may
consider adoption of the Tax Increment Finance Plan for Tax Increment
District V. in order to beet accommodate NAWCO Minnesota, Inc.,
timetable of a beginning construction date of June 1, 1987, and to
accommodate the time element involved in the TIF process, I suggest
adopting the finance plan contingent upon the approval of the building
and site plans by the HRA, the Planning Commission, and the City
Council, and upon the assumption of no public contentment on the
disposition of public lands. Mr. F3erdingetad and Mr. Starheim will
receive proposals from three contractors/builders (Veit Construction,
Winkelman Building Corporation, and Paterson Construction) the week
of April 27. The two H -Window representatives will accept one of
the proposals the week of May 11, at which time the building and
site plane will be available. The HRA -6 May 13 agenda will authorize
the acquisition of land and set a public hearing for the disposition
of public lands on May 27, 1987. The Planning Commission will review
plans May 12.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Assuming the public hearing is not contented, the City Council
may adopt the Tax Increment Finance Plan for Tax Increment District 47.
2. Assuming the public hearing is not contested, the City Council
may deny adoption of the Tax Increment Finance Plan for Tax Increment
Watrict 07.
3. Assuming the public hearing is contested, adoption of the Tax
increment Finance Plan would not be necessary.
-2-
Council Agenda - 4/27/87
t- C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends, with the assumption of a closed public hearing,
that the City Council adopt the Tax Increment Finance Plan for Tax
Increment District R7 based on the approval of building and site
plane by the HRA, the Planning Commission, and the City Council,
and with the assumption of no public contentment of the disposition
of public lands. This recommendation to accommodate the timetable
of the said project.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Tax Increment Finance Plan; County Property Evaluation; Resolution
adopting the Tax Increment Finance Plan.
1.
Elll
TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 7
CITY OF
MONTICELLO
a
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
Page
A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY
B. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
C. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT
I
D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY IN THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
DISTRICT
I
E. CLASSIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
2
F. ESTIMATE OF COSTS
2
G. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF LOAN/BONDED INDEBTEDNESS
2
H. SOURCES OF REVENUE
3
I. ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE
3
J. ESTIMATED CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE
G
K. DURATION OF THE DISTRICT
i
L. ESTIMATED IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS
d
M. MODIFICATIONS OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
OR PLAN
6
N. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
6
0. LIMITATION ON DURATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS
6
P. LIMITATION ON QUALIFICATION OF PROPERTY IN TAX INCREMENT
DISTRICT NOT SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT
7
Q. LIMITATION ON THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT
7
R. NOTIFICATION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
B
S. EXCESS TAX INCREMENTS
g
T. REQUIREMENT FOR AGREEMENTS WITH THE DEVELOPER
B
U. ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS
B
V. ADMINISTRATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TAX INCREMENT
ACCOUNT
g
W. ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS
9
:50
I
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PIAN
A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority")
and the City of Monticello are authorized to create and establish
a tax increment financing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 273.71 through 273.78.
B. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
1. To provide opportunities for development and expansion of new
business;
2. To provide employment opportunities through the creation of
new jobs;
3. To provide opportunities for growth in the tax base;
4. To provide redevelopment sites of such sire and character to
assure the redevelopment of the area.
C. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT
1. Property to be Acquired by the Authority: Lot 11 and Lot 12, 1
Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park, City of Monticello, has been
K identified for acquisition by the Authority for this Tax Increment
Plan.
2. Description of the Development Activities:
NAWCO Minnesota, Inc., (the "Developer") plans to construct
a 28,600 aq ft office/manufacturing facility. The office,
showcase, and conference room will include approximately 3,400 eq ft
and the manufacturing area 25,000 eq ft. The developer will
be assisted with the development facility through three sources
of revenue described on Section H.
3. Other Development Not Under Contract Reasonably Expected to
Occur in the Project: The development program may include
future expansion of the original office/manufacturing facility
located in the Tax Increment Economic District. The geographical
boundaries of the district are not expected to change due to
this development.
D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY IN THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
Legal Description District. Plat 6 Parcel Number
Oakwood industrial Park 155-OIB-002110
Block 2, Lot 11
Oakwood Industrial Park 155-018-002120
Block 2, Lot 12
I
t
C
A map revealing the location of the two parcels within the project
is provided on the following page.
E. CLASSIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
The tax increment financing district to be established in the City
of Monticello within the project designated as the Redevelopment
Project may be classified as an economic development district.
The property to be included in the proposed tax increment financing
district consists of two vacant parcels upon which a new structure
will be constructed. The proposal does not involve the substantial
renovation or clearance of blighted buildings or land as is required
in Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision 10, and the
proposal does not involve the construction or substantial renovation
of housing for low to moderate income persons as defined in Minnesota
Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision 11.
However, the proposal has been found to be in the public interest
because it will discourage commerce, industry, or manufacturing
from moving their operations to another state, it will result in
increased employment in the municipality, and it will result in
the preservation and enhancement of the tax base of the municipality.
The construction of the office/manufacturing facility will add
approximately 65 jobs and increase the assessed value of the City
by $346,710. Therefore, the tax increment financing district will
be classified as a tax increment financing economic development
district.
F. ESTIMATE OF COSTS
The estimate of public costa associated with the tax increment
financing economic development district are outlined in the following
line item budget.
Budget
Land
5104,000.00
Current Assessment
6,600.00
Future Assessment
11,600.00
Plan/Agreement
5,000.00
City Contig.
8,200.00
Discount
2,000.00
Fin/Bond Counsel
12,100.00
Cap. Interest
20,500.00
Total
5170,000.00
G. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF LOAN/BONDED INDEBTEDNESS
An estimate of the maximum amount of bonded indebtedness is expected
to be $155,000. The maximum term of the issue is B years, and
the Interest rate is expected to be B percent. The capitalised
interest amount for approximately 18 months is estimated to be
$20,500. The difference between the project cost (5170,000) and
the indebtedness (5155,000) is $15,000.
-2-
C
�
H. SOURCES OF REVENUE
The three sources of revenue used to finance public costs associated
with the public development projects in the redevelopment project
are a $250,000 Small Cities Economic Development Grant, a $15,000
land sale, and the tax increment generated as a result of the taxation
of the land and building expansion in the tax increment financing
economic development district. Tax increment financing refers
to a funding technique that utilizes increases in assessed valuation
and the property taxes attributed to new development to finance,
or assist in the financing of public development costs.
The improvements to the land acquired by NAWCO Minnesota, Inc.,
are expected to generate an average annual tax increment of $30,900
beginning in 1989.
I. ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.74, Subdivision 1, and
Section 273.76, Subdivision 1, the Original Assessed Value (OAV)
for the City of Monticello tax increment financing economic development
district is based on the value placed on the property by the County
Assessor, in 1987. This assessed value is $18,240. Each year,
with the exception of 1988 (the new assessed value in 1988 will
be "passed through" to the taxing jurisdictions when payable in
1989), the Office of the County Auditor will measure the amount
of increase or decrease in the total assessed value of the tax
increment economic development district to calculate the tax increment
payable to the Monticello economic development district fund.
Each year the County Auditor shall also add to the original assessed
value of the economic development district an amount equal to the
original assessed value for the preceding year multiplied by the
average increase in the assessed valuation of all property included
in the economic development district during the five years prior
to certification of the district. The estimated percentage of
average increase for this economic development district is to be
dotormined each year. In any year in which there is an increase
in total assessed valuation in the tax increment economic development
district above the annual percentage of annual increase, a tax
increment will be payable. In any year in which the total assessed
valuation in the tax increment financing economic development district
declines below the original assessed valuation, no assessed valuation
will be captured and no tax increment will be payable.
The County Auditor •hall certify in each year after the date the
Original Assessed Value was certified, the amount the OAV has increased
or decreased as a result of:
1. change in tax exempt status of property;
2. reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the
district;
3. change due to stipulations, adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered
shatemonts.
-3-
J. ESTIMATED CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE
.'i Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 1,
and Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 2, the estimated
Captured Assessed Value (CAV) of the tax increment financing economic
development district will annually approximate $344,710. This
amount will be captured for up to eight years. The Authority requests
100 percent of the available increase in assessed value commencing
in 1988 for taxes payable in 1989 as well as seven subsequent years
for repayment of debt and current expenditures.
K. DURATION OF THE DISTRICT
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 1,
the duration of the tax increment district within the Redevelopment
Project must be indicated within the finance plan. The duration
of the tax increment district will be eight yea -re from the date
of receipt of the first tax increment or ten years from approval
of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is less. Thus,
the City requests the available tax increment for the maximum term
possible, and requests the Wright County Auditor and Treasurer
to take such steps as may be necessary to pass through the possible
tax increments which may otherwise be received by the City in 1988
and distribute the 1988 tax increment to all taxing jurisdictions
in proportion to their respective tax levies for taxes payable
in 1988. Based on discussions with the County assessor, it is
expected that there will be $18,240 of now assessed value in 1987
payable 1988. It is this assessed value that will be "passed through"
to the taxing jurisdictions. This action will delay by one year
the collection of any tax increment to 1989 and thus will permit
the City to collect eight annual increments from the time the development
in the project is first paying taxes. The collection of the eight
increments is required to fully fund the development costs which
will be financed with the proceeds of the Tax Increment Bonds.
L. ESTIMATED IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS
The impact of the lose of tax dollars represented as tax increments
is estimated below for each taxing jurisdiction. This estimate
is based on the existing redevelopment proposals and does not include
the possible tax increments derived from any other future development,
mill changes, or inflation factors.
Total Assessed Value
Tax Increment Finance District 1/2/86 Total $18,240
Latest Assessed Value of Each Government Body:
• of District
to Total
Wright County $398,556,135 .005
School District 6882 5128,901,301 .014
City of Monticello 3106,722,013 .017
Other 5144,501,538 .013
-4- ( D!�-
Considering all the districts, it can be seen from the above that
the school, city, and county districts will have over 99% of each
respective district available for normal growth of tax base or
valuation. Applying the percentage of the total mill rate in 1987
levied by each taxing jurisdiction to the projected mill rate and
the estimated tax Increment received reveals the annual loss of
tax dollars by each taxing jurisdiction as listed in the table
below assuming development would occur without public assistance.
The finance plan indicates we anticipate a tax increment at build
out as follows:
Captured Assessed Estimated Tax
valuation Increment Received
Tax Increment Finance District $344,710 $30,900
Based on the current mill rate, the estimated taxes received would
be as follows for the taxing bodies:
Mills Percent Tax Increment
City 15.715 17.53 S 5,417
County 21.332 23.80 7,354
School District #882 48.148 53.72 16,600
Other 4.438 4.95 1,529
Total 89. 333 100.001 $30,900
The following table represents the additional mills that would
have to be levied to compensate for the lose of tax dollars in
estimated tax increments for each taxing jurisdiction. The tax
increments derived from the NAwCp Minnesota, Inc., facility alluded
to In the tax Increment district would not be availab.1a to any
of the taxing jurisdictions were it not for public intervention
by the City. Although the increases in assessed value due to development
will not be available for the application of the mill levy for
the duration of the tax increment financing district, this new
assessed value could eventually permit a mill levy decrease. If
it could be assumed that the captured assessed value was available
for each taxing jurisdiction. the non -receipt of tax dollars represented
as tax increments may be determined. This determination is facilitated
by estimating how much the mill levy for property outside of the
tax increment financing district would have to be increased to
raise the same amount of tax dollars in each taxing jurisdiction
that would be available if the projects occurred without the assistance
of the City.
Adjusted• Required Tax
Assessed Value Mille Increment
School District 5128,883,061 .13 S 16,600
County $398,537,895 .02 $ 7,354
City $106,703,773 .05 S 5,417
•Tax Increment District assessed valuation subtracted
M. MODIFICATIONS OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT OR PLAN
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 4,
any reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the project
or tax increment financing district, increase in amount of bonded
indebtedness to be incurred, including a determination to capitalize
interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original
plan, or to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the
debt to be capitalized, increase in the portion of the captured
assessed value to be retained by the Authority, increase in total
estimated tax increment expenditures or designation of additional
property to be acquired by the authority shall be approved upon
the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings
required for approval of the original plan. The geographic area
of a tax increment financing district may be reduced, but shall
not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification
of the original assessed value by the county auditor. The tax
increment financing economic development district may therefore
be expanded until 1992.
N. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision 13,
and Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 3, administrative
expenses means all expenditures of an authority other than amounts
paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or
others providing materials and services, including architectural
and engineering services, directly connected with the physical
development of the real property in the district, relocation benefits
paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses
located in the district or amounts used to pay interest on, fund
a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to Section
273.77. Administrative expenses includes amounts paid for services
provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning of economic
development consultants. No tax increment shall be used to pay
any administrative expenses for a project which exceeds ten percent
of the total tax increment expenditures authorized by the tax increment
financing plan or the total tax increment expenditures for the
project, whichever is less.
O. LIMITATION ON DURATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 1,
"no tax increment shall be paid to an authority three years from
05—
the date of certification by the County Auditor unless within the
three-year period (1) bonds have been issued pursuant to Section 273.77
or in aid of a project pursuant to any other lav, except revenue
bonds issued pursuant to Chapter 474, prior to the effective date
of the Act; or (2) the authority has acquired property within the
district; or (3) the authority has constructed or caused to be
constructed public improvements within the district...,- The Authority
must therefore issue bonds, or acquire property, or construct or
cause public improvements to be constructed by 1990 or the Office
of the County Auditor may dissolve the tax increment financing
district.
P. LIMITATION ON QUALIFICATION OF PROPERTY IN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT
NOT SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.75. Subdivision 6,
^if, after four years from the date of certification of the original
assessed value of the tax increment financing district..., no demolition,
rehabilitation, or renovation of parcel or other site preparation
including improvement of a street adjacent to a property but not
installation of utility service including sever or water systems,
has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing
district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance
with the tax increment financing plan, no'addi tional tax increment
may be taken from that parcel and the original assessed value of
that parcel shall be excluded from the origins 1 assessed value
of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the
owner of the parcel subsequently commencos demolition, rehabilitation
or renovation of other site preparation on that parcel including
improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance
with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify
to the county auditor in the annual disclosure report that the
activity has commenced. The county auditor shall certify the assessed
value thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of
revenue and add to it the original assessed value of the tax increment
financing district."
Q. LIMITATION ON THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT
All revenues derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance
with the tax increment financing plan. The revenues shall be used
to finance or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462. These revenues shall not be
used to circumvent existing levy limit lay. No revenues derived
from tax increment shall be used for the construction or renovation
of a municipally owned building used primarily and regularly for
conducting the business of the municipality; thie provision shall
not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for
the construction or renovation of a parking structure, a commons
area used as a public park or a facility used for social, recreational,
or conference purposes and not primarily for conducting the business
Of the municipality.
-7-
R. NOTIFICATION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
V.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 4,
the City hes reviewed and searched the properties to be included
in the tax increment financing economic development district and
found no properties for which building permits have been issued
during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the tax
increment financing plan by the county. If the building permit
had been issued within the 18 month period preceding approval of
the tax increment financing pian by the city, the county auditor
shall increase the original assessed value of the district by the
assessed valuation of the improvements for which the building permit
was issued, excluding the assessed valuation of improvements for
which a building permit was issued during the three month period
immediately preceding said approval of the tax increment financing
plan, as certified by the assessor.
S. EXCESS TAX INCREMENTS
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 2,
in any year in which the tax increment exceeds the amount necessary
to pay the costs authorized by the tax increment plan, including
the amount necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in Minnesota
Statutes, Section 475.61, Subdivision 3, the City shall use the
excess amount to:
1. prepay the outstanding bonds;
n
2. discharge the pledge of tax increment therefore;
3. pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of such
bond;
d. repay any loans including interest on these loans; or
5. return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution
to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their
mill rate.
T. REQUIREMENT FOR AGREEMENTS WITH THE DEVELOPER
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75. Subdivision 5,
no more than 10 percent by acreage of the property to be acquired
by the City in the economic development district shall be owned
by the city as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds
issued pursuant to Section 273.77 without the Authority having
prior to acquisition in excess of 10 percent of the acreage, concluded
an agreement for the development of the property acquired and which
provides recourse for the Authority should the development not
be completed.
U. ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 8.
the City may, upon entering into s development agreement pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 5, enter into
1 an agreement in recordable form with the developer of property
`1 within the tax increment financing district which establishes a
minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for
the duration of the tax increment economic development district.
The assessment agreement shall be presented to the county assessor
who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements
constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the
land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and so long
as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement
appears in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate,
the assessor may certify the minimum market value agreement.
V. ADMINISTRATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TAX INCREMENT ACCOUNT
Administration of the tax increment financing economic development
district will be handled by the Executive Director of the Authority
and the Office of the City Administrator.
The tax increment received as a result of increases in the assessed
value of the tax increment financing economic development district
will be maintained in a special account separate from all other
municipal accounts and Authority accounts and expended only upon
sanctioned municipal activities identified in the finance plan
as amended.
W. ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 5,
an authority must file an annual disclosure report for all tax
increment financing districts. The report shall be filed with
the school board, county board, and the Minnesota Department of
Energy and Economic Development. The report shall include the
following information:
1. The amount and source of revenue in the account:
2. The amount and purpose of expenditures from the account;
3. The amount of any pledge of revenues, including principal and
interest on any outstanding bonded indebtedness;
4. The original assessed value of the district;
5. The captured asseaeed value retained by the authority;
6. The captured assessed value shared with other taxing districts;
7. The tax increment received.
The annual disclosure report is designed to be A twc-way medium
of information dissemination for both the Office of the County Auditor
`1
and the Authority. Should the auditor vont additional information
from the city regarding its tax increment financing activities,
such information should be requested prior to submission of the
annual disclosure report by the city. Similarly, the city council
may utilize the annual disclosure report as a means for requesting
information from the Office of the County Auditor.
Additionally, the authority must annually publish a statement in
a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality shoving
the tax increment received and expended in that year, the original
assessed value, the captured assessed value, amount of outstanding
bonded indebtedness, and any additional information the authority
deems necessary.
-10-
C'
l
NAWCO MINNESOTA INC.
Proposed Tax Increment District 17
Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park, City of Monticello
Lot 11 - 0155-018-002110
Lot 12 - #155-018-002120
61/62 82/83 83/84 84/85 85/86 86/87
Lot 11 4,410 4,410 4,400 7,040 7,040 8,840
Lot 12 9,488 9,488 9,480 7,520 7,520 9,400
TOTALS 13,898 13,898 13,880 14,560 14,560 18,240
A. 4/87 Estimated date
B. 1/2/86 Base year date
C. 18,240 Base year assessed value
D. 1/2/81 5th year preceding year assessment date
E. 13,898 5th year preceding year assessed value
F. 4,342 5 year assessed value increase (C - E)
G. .3124 5 year total increase ratio (F divided by E)
H. .06248 5 year average income ratio (G divided by 5)
I. 1.06248 Annual base year adjustment tactor (1.000 • H)
New Captured Mill
Adjustment Adjusted Assessed Assessed Rate Tax
Year Factor OAV Value Value Estimate Increment
87/8G 18,240 x 1.062 $19,371
88/89 18,240 x 1.062 20,572 $362,950 $342,378 x 89.633 5 30,688
89/90 18,240 x 1.062 21,847 362,950 341,103 x 89.633 30,574
90/91 18,240 x 1,062 23,202 362,950 339,748 x 89.633 30,452
91/92 18,240 x 1.062 24,641 362,950 338,309 x 69.633 30,323
92/93 18,240 x 1.062 26,169 362,950 336,781 x 89.633 30,186
93/94 18,240 x 1.062 27,791 362,950 335,159 x 89.633 30,041
94/95 18,240 x 1.062 29,514 362,950 333,436 x 89.633 29,687
95/96 18,240 x 1.062 31,344 362,950 331,606 x 89.633 29,723
$241,874
$241,874 divided by 8 • 530,234 average
0
RESOLUTION 87-
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 97
PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTIONS
273.71 TO 273.78 INCLUSIVE, AND ADOPTING A
FINANCE PLAN FOR SAID TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello. Minnesota,
has determined that it is necessary to create a tax increment financing
district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to 273.78
inclusive, within the existing redevelopment project created pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 et seg. . the Municipal Housing
and Redevelopment Act; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota
finds that the tax increment district to be established is an economic
development district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73,
Subdivision 12, and that the project will provide additional jobs,
increase the tax base, and prevent commerce and industry from leaving
the State; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has received a copy of
the proposed tax increment financing plan and hag been given the
opportunity to review and comment upon said tax increment financing
plan and the tax increment financing district; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monticello hes informed the members of
the Local School Board of the Independent School District and the
Board of Commissioners of Wright County of the fiscal and economic
implications of the proposed tax increment financing district and
invited said School Board members and County Commissioners to the
public hearing.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on April 27, 1987, at 7:30 o'clock p.m.
before the City Council in the Council Chambers in the City Hall,
in Monticello, Minnesota, notice of which has been published once
in the official newspaper for the City, not less than ten, nor more
than thirty days prior to April 27, 1987; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing all persons and parties were given
full opportunity to present written or oral testimony, comments,
objections, suggestions, and other matters, all of which were duly
considered by the Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF MONTICELLO.
(1) That the tax increment district to be established is an
economic development district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 273.73, Subdivision 12, and will result in increased
i employment in the City and in the preservation and enhancement
y of the tax base of the City.
Resolution 87 -
Page 2
(2) That the proposed development would not occur solely through
priva to investment within the reasonable foreseeable future
and, therefore, the use of tax increment financing is deemed
neces nary.
(3) That the Planning Commission has reviewed the tax increment
financing plan and it conforms to the general plan for
the development of the municipality as a whole.
(4) That the proposed economic development involves a substantial
commitment of private investment and in conjunction with
tax increments as identified in the tax increment financing
plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with sound
needs of the City for the economic development of the project
by private enterprise.
The City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, does
hereby approve the tax increment financing plan and the creation
of a tax Increment financing district as described in said tax increment
financing plan.
Adopted by the City Council this 27th day of April, 1987.
t
Thomas A. Eidem
City Administrator
4
Arve A. Grimamo, Mayor
Council Agenda - 4/27/87
6. Consideration of a Resolution Awarding Sale of $365,000 G.O. Tax
I I_ Increment Bonds. (T.E.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
At the March 23 City Council meeting, the Council authorized to Springsted
to set the sale of $365,000 in General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds
for this meeting of April 27. The bonds are to be used for the improvements
made in Construction 5 Subdivision. The bonds are anticipated to
be fully retired by the increment generated by the construction of
multiple family dwellings within Construction 5 Subdivision. The
next item on the agenda is the final award of the contract for the
public improvements, the bide for which were reviewed back on the
23rd of March. It is important that the Council award the bond sale
prior to awarding the construction contract.
Jerry Shannon will be opening the bide for the sale of bonds at 12:30 p.m.
on Monday. Since I will be in the annexation hearings, I have named
Springsted as the official designee for receiving the bide. Upon
opening and tabulation, Springsted will prepare a written recommendation
which will be delivered to us by meeting time. It is my understanding
that Mr. Shannon will not be in attendance at our meeting, but will
present the bid tabs with a formal statement of recommendation of
award. The resolution for award is being prepared by Holmes 6 Graven
and will be here for the meeting.
In addition, as we have done with ell other tax increment districts,
it is easentie
1 to executo a pledge agreement between the City end
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The HRA has already adopted
its half of the pledge agreement whereby they are pledging 100 percent
of the increment they colloct to the City for the retirement of those
bonds. In order to keep this as clean and concise as possible. I
racommond that a single motion be made that offers the adoption of
the resolution awarding the sale of the bonds and authorizos the
execution of a pledge agreement with the Monticello Housing and Redevelopment
Authority.
D. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. Award the sale of bonds and execute a pledge agreement.
2. Do not award the sale of the bonds, discontinue the project.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the bond sale be awarded and the pledge agreement
be adopted. This, of course, presumes that the interest rate is
not absurd.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
Copyof the pledge agreement; Copy of the resolution for adoption;
Tabulation of the bids will be presented at the meeting with a letter
of recommendation from Springsted.
-4-
TAX 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 , 1987, 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 "HRA").
WHEREAS, the HRA established Redevelopment District No. 5 (the
- Diatrict"), prepared the Tax Increment Financing Plan No. 5 (the
"Plan") for the District, and approved the Plan on January 7, 1987;
at nd
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City approved the Plan on
Fabruary 9, 1987; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to authority conferred by Minnesota Statutes,
Section 273.77, and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, the City has
agreed to finance certain public redevelopment costa to be incurred
by the HRA in the District through the issuance of general obligation
bonds of the City, designated the $365,000 General Obligation Tax
Increment Bonds, Series 1987A, and hereinafter referred to as the
A
"Bonds"; and
WHEREAS, the HRA has agreed to pledge certain tax increment
revenues to the City for the payment of the principal of and interest
an the Bonds; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(a),
any agreement to pledge tax increment revenues must be made by written
agreement by and between the HRA and the City and must be filed with
the County Auditor of Wright County;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the HRA mutually agree to the following:
(1) The City will Boll the Bonds.
(2) The proceeds from the sale of the bonds and the earnings
from the investment of such proceeds will be made available
to the HRA to pay or reimburse the HRA for public redevelopment
costo paid, incurred, or to be paid or incurred, by the
HRA in the District.
(3) All tax increment generated by the District from and after
the date of this Agreement shall be deposited in a special
fund (the "Project Fund") held by the NRA. The HRA hereby
pledges to the payment of the principal and interest on
the Bonds, tax increment from the Project Fund in an amount
equal to 105% of the annual principal and interest due
on the Bonds.
04-
Tax Increment Pledge Agreement
Page 2
(4)
Before the date of certification of City taxes in each
year for collection by Wright County (such date being hereinafter
referred to as the "Certification Date"), there shall be
transferred from the Project Fund 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 105% of
all principal and interest then due or to become due on
the Bonds on the following three debt service payment dates.
If, prior to any Certification Date the Project Fund 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 before such Certification Date, then
such excess amounts shall be available to the HRA to pay
or reimburse the HRA for public redevelopment costs paid,
incurred, or to be paid or incurred by the HRA in the District.
(5)
Without regard 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. HRA, or any other
public body to finance public redevelopment costa paid
or incurred by the HRA in the District.
(6)
When the entire public redevelopment costs of the District
have been paid and all principal and interest on the Bonds
t
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 Project for collections of general ad valorem taxes
used to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds, then
the HRA shall report such fact to the City Council of the
City and the HRA 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 HRA in the Project shall be reported to tho 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 Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(a).
(2,
Tax Increment Pledge Agreement
Page 3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the HRA 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:
Clark -Administrator
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
O4_:... �.. \<ILr b�t4.�
Secretary
CITY OF MONTICELLO
By
Mayor
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CI OF MONTICELLO,�INNESOTA
wn
'Chairman U
ral
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
BEING A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND AWARDING THE
SALE OF, AND PROVIDING THE FORMS, TERMS,
COVENANTS AND DIRECTIONS FOR $385,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS,
SERIES 1987A, PLEDGING FOR THE SECURITY THEREOF
TAR INCREMENT FROM TAX INCREMENT REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
NO. 5, AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A
TAX INCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL (THE "COUNCIL") OF THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA (THE "ISSUER") AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01 The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Monticello (the "HRA") has heretofore adopted and this Council has duly approved
a modification to Tax Increment Redevelopment District No. 5 pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to 273.78, within the modified Central
Monticello Redevelopment Project created and modified pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 482.411, et seq., for the purpose of financing or otherwise paying
public redevelopment costs pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 482.
1.02 The Issuer has heretofore adopted a modification to the Tax
Increment Financing Plan for Its Tax Increment Redevelopment District No. 5
within the modified Central Monticello Redevelopment Project. The County
Auditor of Wright County has certified the Original Assessed Value of all taxable
property In the Tax Increment Redevelopment District as of January 2, 1984. The
original assessed value of the District Is $13,980.00.
1.03 Based upon present and anticipated mill rates for ad valorem taxes to
be levied on taxable property In Tax Increment Redevelopment District No. 5 (the
"District"), the Council hereby determine$ that the total annual tax Increment to
be derived by the HRA from the District commencing in 1989 will be
approximately $54,710.
Section 2. Award of Sales Terms of Bonds.
1.01. The City of Monticello (the "Issuer") hereby awards the sale of the
$385,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1987A (the "Bonds") to
(the
"Purchaser") as the bidder offering the lowest net Interest cost by Its bid to
purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued Interest to the date of
delivery, the Bonds to bear Interest at the rates per annum as follows
0
Year of Interest Year of Interest
Maturity Rate Maturity Rate
1990
1995
1991
1996
1992
1997
1993
1998
1994
1999
The Clerk -Administrator of the Issuer is directed to retain the good faith check of
the Purchaser pending delivery of and payment for the Bonds, and to return the
checks of the unsuccessful bidders.
2.02. The Issuer shall issue the Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of
$365,000 dated June 1, 1987 as fully registered bonds without coupons. The Bonds
shall be in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof not exceeding
the principal amount of a single maturity, shall be numbered from R -I upwards in
order of issuance, and shall bear interest at the rates set forth above, payable
February 1, 1988 and semiannually thereafter on each February I and August 1, and
shall mature on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
Year Amount Year Amount
1990 $30,000 1995 $35,000
1991 30,000 1996 40,000
1992 30,000 1997 40,000
1993 35,000 1998 45,000
1994 35,000 1999 45.000
2.03. All Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 1996, shall be subject to
redemption and prior payment in whole or in part in Inverse order of maturity and
by lot within maturity at the option of the City on February 1, 1995, and any
interest payment date thereafter at a price of per plus accrued Interest. Thirty
days' prior notice of redemption shall be given by first-class mail to the Registrar
and to the registered owners of the Bonds, and notice of redemption will be
published in the manner provided by Chapter 475, Minnesota Statutes. Upon notice
having been so given, the Bonds or portions of Bonds th4rein specified shall be due
and payable at the stated redemption date and price with accrued Interest to the
redemption date, and upon funds for such payment being held by or on behalf of the
Registrar for such payment on the specified redemption date, Interest thereon shall
cease to accrue after such redemption date. No defect in the mailed notice of
redemption shall affect the validity of the call for redemption of any Bond.
2.04. The Bonds shall be payable as to principal upon presentation at the
main office of (the
"Registrar'), or at the office of such other successor registrar as the Issuer may
hereafter designate upon 60 days mailed notice to the registered owners. interest
on each Bond shall be payable by check or draft of the Registrar mailed the last
business day prior to the Interest payment date to the registered holder thereof at
his or her address as It appears on the bond register at the close of business on the
15th day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month nest preceding the
Interest payment date.
a
Section 3. Form and Execution of the Bonds.
3.01. 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 -
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
CITY OF MONTICELLO
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BOND, SERIES 1987A
Rate Maturity Nominal Date of Original Issue CUSIP
June 1, 1987
The City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City"), 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 June 1, 1987, 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 I of each year, commencing February 1, 1988, until said principal
sum is paid. 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 offices of such successor agent as the City may designate upon 60 days notice
to the registered owners at their registered addresses (the "Registrar"). Interest
shall be paid on each February 1 and August 1 by check or draft of the Registrar
mailed the last business day prior to the Interest payment date to the person in
whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the preceding
January 15 and July 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 Bonds of this series maturing on or after February 1, 1998, are subject
to redemption at the option of the City, In whole or In part in Inverse order of
maturity and by lot within a maturity, on February 1, 1995 and any interest
payment date thereafter at a price equal to par and accrued Interest. Thirty days'
prior notice of redemption will be given by first-class mail to the Registrar and to
the registered owners, and notice of redemption will be published in the manner
provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 075. No defect In mailed notice will
affect the validity of the call for redemption of any Bond.
This Bond Is one of a series of Bonds In the aggregate principal amount of
Three Hundred Sixty-five Thousand Dollars ($385,000) of like date and tenor except
Z
for number, interest rate, denomination, date of maturity and redemption
privilege, and is issued for the purpose of providing funds to finance or otherwise
pay public redevelopment costs, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 482, of
Tax Increment Redevelopment District No. 5 established by the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello (the "Authority")
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, and pursuant to an authorizing
resolution (the "Resolution") adopted by the City Council of the City on April 27,
1987, 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 1987A Fund of the City (the "Bond Fund") to which has
been pledged certain tax increment generated from the tax increment financing
district. All taxable property within the City is also subject to the levy of direct
general 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 City 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 City 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 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 City 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 aeries 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 City 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 shell not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose until the
Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been manually signed by a person
authorized to sign on behalf of the Registrar.
C4-
14
7
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The City of Monticello, Minnesota has caused this
Bond to be executed with the facsimile signatures of its Mayor and its Clerk -
Administrator, both as of the Nominal Date of Original Issue specified above.
Dated:
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
By
(Facsimile)
Mayor
(Facsimile)
Clerk -Administrator
Certificate of Authentication
This la one of the Bonds described in the within mentioned Resolution.
By
Bond Registrar
Authorized Signature
0"
V
ASSIGNMENT
FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby sella, 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
prem ises.
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) appearing on the face of this
Bond In every particular, without
alteration or any change whatever.
(Form of Certificate)
CERTIFICATE AS TO LEGAL OPINION
1, Thomas Eldem, Clerk -Administrator of the City of Monticello. Minnesota.
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.
SFecsi mile)
Clerk -Administrator
3.02. 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 reasonable regulations 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, Transfer Agent and Paying Agent with respect to the
Bonds.
0
Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond with a written instrument of
v transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or his
duly authorized attorney, and upon payment of any tax, lee 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 may, at the option
of the registered owner thereof, 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
bond 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 Bond 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
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
j Bonds called for redemption.
5.03. 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 1n whose
name that Bond (or one or more Bonds for which such bond was exchanged) 1s
registered at the close of business on the preceding January 15 and 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 holders 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 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 Rond shell 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.
3.04. As to any Bond, the Issuer and the Registrar and their respective
successors, each in Its discretion, may 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
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
9
j 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.
3.05. If (1) any mutilated Bond Is surrendered to the Registrar, and the
issuer and the Registrar receive evidence to their satisfaction of the destruction,
loss, or theft of any Bond, and 01) 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 may, instead of issuing a new
Bond, 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 4. Execution and Delivery
4.01. The Bonds shall be executed by the respective facsimile signatures of
Mayor and the Clerk -Administrator as set forth In the form of Bond. The seal of
the Issuer shall be omitted from the Bonds as permitted by law. The text of the
approving legal opinion of Holmes B Graven, Chartered, of Minneapolis, Minnesota,
as bond counsel, shall be printed on the reverse side of each Bond and shall be
certified by the facsimile signature of the Clerk -Ad ministrotor. 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 payment of
the purchase price, and the receipt of the Clerk -Administrator delivered 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.
4.02. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds, on file with the Clerk -
Administrator presented to this meeting, Is hereby approved, and the furnishing
thereof to prospective bidders for the Bonds is hereby ratified and confirmed,
Insofar as the same relates to the Bonds and the sale thereof.
4.03. If such officers find the same to be accurate, the Mayor and the
Clerk -Administrator are authorized and directed to furnish to the Purchaser at the
closing a certificate that, to the best of the knowledge of such officers, the
0
Official Statement does not, at the date of closing, and did not, at the time of sale
of the Bonds, contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any
material fact necessary in order to make the statements made therein, in the light
of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. Unless
litigation shall have been commenced and be pending questioning the Bonds,
revenues pledged for payments of the bonds, or the organization of the Issuer or
incumbency of its officers, at the closing, the Mayor and the Clerk -Administrator
shall execute and deliver to the successful bidder a suitable certificate as to
absence of material litigation, and a certificate as to payment for and delivery of
the Bonds, together with the arbitrage certificate referred to below and the signed
approving legal opinion of Holmes & Graven, Chartered, as to the validity and
enforceability of the Bonds and the exemption of Interest thereon from federal and
Minnesota income taxation (other than Minnesota corporate and bank excise taxes
measured by income) under present laws and rulings.
Section 5. Bond Fund and Accounts, Appropriations, Pledge.
5.01. There is hereby created a special fund of the Issuer designated
"General—Obligation Tax increment Bonds, Series 1987A Fund" (the "Bond Fund")
held and administered by the Clerk -Administrator 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 and made payable from the Bond Fund, and the Interest thereon, have been
fully paid and the Issuer has been fully reimbursed from the pledge of tax
increment for any of the principal and interest of the Bonds paid by the Issuer from
general ad valorem taxes levied on property in the Issuer. In the 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, and less any
accrued Interest received thereon, shall be credited to the Capital Account, from
which there shall be paid all costs and expenses of the District, 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 475.85, 273.75,
subdivision 4, and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.411 et seg.
Debt Servire Account. There Is hereby pledged and there shall be credited
to the Debt Service Account (a) all unused discount and accrued Interest received
upon delivery of and payment for the Bonds, (b) collections of tax Increment
derived from. the District and pledged to the payment of principal of and Interest
on the Bonds, any taxes levied for the payment of the Bonds, and revenues derived
from any other sources available and pledged to pay principal, premium, If any, and
interest on the Bonds, (c) $15,000 to be used to pay Interest on the Bonds prior to
the collection of tax Increment and other revenues sufficient to pay debt service
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 Donds 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 any
+ remaining funds In the Debt Service Account to reimburse the issuer as provided
above.
5.02. To provide additional moneys for the payment of principal and
Interest on the Bonds there 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:
Levv Year Collection Year Amount Levied
[See Attached]
Said tax levies are such that if collected in full, they, together with estimated
collections of tax increment from the District and the other amounts therein
pledged to the payment of the Bonds, 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 375.81, subdivision 9. The Issuer hereby determines that the
estimated collections of tax Increment and other pledged amounts, together with
the above levy, if collected In full, will produce at least five percent (5%) In excess
of the amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the
7 Bonds (except for interest and principal payable from funds, which are on hand and
Irrevocably deposited to the Debt Service Account as of the date of delivery of and
payment for the Bonds). The full faith and credit and taxing powers of the Issuer
are hereby irrevocably pledged for the prompt and full payment of the principal of
and Interest on the Bonds and such other general obligation Indebtedness as may be
made payable from the Bond Fund, as such principal and interest respectively
become due.
5.05. The Clerk -Administrator 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 and amounts of the principal and Interest payments to become due on
bonds payable from the Bond Fund, and of the balance required in the Bond Fund
on October i In each year In order to cancel the taxes levied pursuant to this
Resolution for collection the following year.
Section &. Tax increment Pledge Agreement.
6.01. The County Auditor of Wright County (the "County Auditor") has
certified that the original assessed value of real property within the
District established pursuant to a Tax Increment Financing Pian, originally adopted
as of March 25, 1985, as determined according to the assessment as of January 2,
1983, and certified by the County Auditor on , 1985 Is $13,980,00.
Under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, the County Auditor will Include only
the original assessed value In the assessed valuation upon which the County
Auditor computes the rate of all state. county, city, school district and other
taxes, but will extend the rates so determined against the entire assessed valuation
of such real property in each subsequent year, and the County Treasurer of Wright
County will remit to the HRA that proportion of the taxes paid each year on such
real property which the excess of the assessed valuation over the original taxable
value bears to such original value.
6.02. The HRA has agreed to segregate the tax increment derived from the
District on its official books and records and to remit to the Debt Service Account
of the Bond Fund the amount of tax increment required to be remitted to the Issuer
pursuant to a Tax Increment Pledge Agreement in substantially the form attached
hereto as Exhibit A. Such Tax Increment Pledge Agreement is hereby approved,
and the Mayor and Clerk -Administrator of the Issuer are hereby authorized to
execute the same on behalf of the Issuer with such necessary and appropriate
variations, omissions and insertions as are not materially inconsistent with such
form as the Mayor, in his discretion, shall determine; provided that the execution
thereof by the Mayor shall be conclusive evidence of such determination.
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 168 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1988, as amended (the
"Code"), 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 148 and
regulations thereunder. The Mayor and Clerk -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 Private
Activity bonds under Section 109(b) of the Code.
7.02. The Issuer hereby designates the Bonds as "Qualified Tax -Exempt
Obligations" within the meaning of Section 265 of the Code. With respect to such
delsgnation, the Issuer covenants that it does not reasonably anticipate Issuing
qualified tax-exempt obligations in an amount greater than $10,000,000 In calendar
year 1987.
7.03. The Clerk -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
Wright County Auditor, together with such other Information as such auditor may
require, and to obtain from the county auditor a certificate that the Bonds have
been entered upon his bond register.
7.04. 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
S be deemed representations of the Issuer as to the facts slated therein.
Adopted this 27th day of April, 1987.
11 0&
TATTACHMENT
Lew Year Collection Year Amount Levied
f—
v
I EXHIBIT A
14
TAXINCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT
by and between
THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
and
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELL0, MINNESOTA
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on or as of the day of
, 1987, 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 "HRA").
WHEREAS, the HRA established Tax Increment Redevelopment District No.
5 (the "District"), prepared the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Plan") for the
District, and approved the modification of the Plan on January 7, 1987; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City approved the modification of the
Plan on February 9, 1987; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to authority conferred by Minnesota Statutes, Section
27.77, and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 675, the City has agreed to finance
certain public redevelopment costs to be Incurred by the HRA in the District
through the issuance of general obligation bonds of the City, designated the
�-
$985,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1987A, and hereinafter
referred to as the "Bonds"; and
WHEREAS, the HRA 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 275.77(,), any
agreement to pledge tax increment revenues must be made by written agreement
by and between the HRA and the City and must be filed with the County Auditor of
Wright Countyl
NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the HRA mutually agree to the following:
(1) The City will sell the Bonds.
(2) The proceeds from the sale of the bonds and the earnings from
the Investment of such proceeds will be made available to the HRA to pay
or reimburse the HRA for public redevelopment costs paid, incurred, or to
be paid or Incurred, by the HRA In the District.
(J) All tax Increment generated by the District from and after the
date of this Agreement shall be deposited In a special fund (the "Project
Fund") held by the HRA. The HRA hereby pledges to the payment of the
principal and Interest on the Bonds, tax increment from the Project Fund In
an amount equal to 105% of the annual principal and interest due on the
Bonds.
(4) Before the date of certification of City taxes in each year for
collection by Wright County (such date being hereinafter referred to as the
"Certification Date'), there shall be transferred from the Project Fund 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 105% of all principal and
Interest then due or to become due on the Bonds on the following three debt
service payment dates. if, prior to any Certification Date the Project Fund
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
before such Certification Date, then such excess amounts shall be available
to the HRA to pay or reimburse the NRA for public redevelopment costs
paid, incurred, or to be paid or incurred, by the HRA In the District.
(5) Without regard 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, HRA or any other public body to finance public redevelopment costs
paid or incurred by the HRA 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 Project for collections of general ad valorem taxes used
to pay principal of and Interest on the Bonds, then the HRA shall report such
fact to the City Council of the City and the HRA 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 HRA in
the Project 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 to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(a).
' IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the HRA 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
Clerk -Administrator Mayor
(SEAL)
ATTESTS THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA
By
Secretary Chairman
I
Council Agenda - 4/27/87
7. Consideration of a Resolution Accepting Bid and Authorizing the Execution
o f a Contract for the Making of Public Improvements in Construction 5
Subdivision. U.S. )
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As you may recall, the City received bide on March 17, 1987, for
the 66-7 Project. This project included not only the area around
Washington Street and Lauring Lane, but also approximately 700 feet
of 16 -inch water main out on County Road 118. The low bidder on
the project was S S L Excavating from St. Cloud, Minnesota, at a
2 -ow bidl of 5280,436.60. John Badalich has checked the bide and made
a recommendation that we award to S 6 L Excavating. The City staff
concure with John's recommendation.
The Construction 5 Project is wall underway, and we recommend the
award of the bid to S 6 L Excavating. we would expect construction
to start on the project within the next week after all the contracts,
bonds, and insurances have been taken care of, as well as the necessary
permits.
-5-
14
RESOLUTION 87 -
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AUTHORIZING CONTRACT
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement
of Lauring Lane, Fallon Avenue, and Washington Street lying within
Construction 5 Subdivision by installing sewer. Water, storm sewer,
street surfacing and curb and gutter, bids were received, opened,
and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received
complying with the advertisement:
Burschville Construction, Inc. $307,137.50
J. P. Norex $354,026.25
LaTour Construction $298.615.45
L 6 0 Rehbein, Inc. $306,771.00
Molitor Excavating, Inc. $310.103.50
Northdale Construction Co. $317.426.05
Redstone Construction $323,793.00
Rice Lake Contracting Corp. $327,528.05
S 6 L Excavating $280,436.60
and WHEREAS, it appears that S 6 L Excavating of St. Cloud is
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 anter into the attached contract with S S L Excavating
of St. Cloud in the name of the City of Monticello for the
improvement of Lauring Lane. Fallon Avenue, and Washington
Street lying within Construction 5 Subdivision by installing
sewer, water, storm sewer, street improvements and curb
and gutter according to the plans 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 bidders the deposit made with
their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder
and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract
has been signed.
Adopted by the City Council this 27th day of April, 1967.
Thomas A. Eidem
City Administrator
Arve A. Grimamo, Mayor
8
Council Agenda - 4/27/87
-i B. Consideration of Authorizing the Preparation of Topographic Maps. (J.S.)
I
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
As part of the requirements for a preliminary plat and a final plat
for those individuals wishing to develop property in the city of
Monticello, the developer must prepare a topographic map of the area
which would include vertical contours of not more than two feet.
This map should include all water courses, marshes, rock outcrops,
power transmission poles, lines, and the size and location and elevation
of all appurtenances of existing public utilities and all quasi -public
utilities. In addition, the flood elevation of all lakes, rivers,
and wetlands needs to be shown. This information is utilized in
determining proper development for a piece of property in relationship
to the location of roads and the balancing of cut and fill areae
for grading. In addition, it is utilized to design storm sewer systems
and holding ponds, as well as the utilities. The City Engineer utilizes
this information to look at the effect of a subdivision on the surrounding
area.
The City has older topographic data for a major portion of the city.
This was prepared in the mid -70's through the use of aerial photography.
In addition, many of the later plate have topographic information.
On the eastern and of the community, however, and in the OAA, the
City lacks good topographic information. Recently, the City was
approachod by Mr. Jim Boyle and Bill Block, his engineer, in regard:
to topographic information for the Boyle property. The developer
found It very expensive to got topographic information on ouch a
large piece of property. Mr. Block asked if the City could provide
the topographic information and charge the developers for use of
that information as is the case with other cities. In discussing
thin with John Badalich, we both find merit in doing this. By having
a larger area mapped out topographically, the City can better plan
for future improvements. In addition, there are economies of scale
by doing larger areae, and we therefore can have the work done at
a lower unit coat price and the developers can then achieve a lower
development coot per acre.
We would propose to map approximately 2,000 acres in the eastern
part of the community and the OAA utilizing 1987 aerial photography.
With an area the size of 2,000 acres, we would expect the coat to
be in the area of 44.50 to $5.00 par acre. John Badalich will have
more precise cost data for Monday ovening'a mooting. we would propose
to charge each developer by the acre for use of this topographic
Information in preparing preliminary and final plate. In doing thio,
the city would recover the majority of the money spent in the original
mapping. Thera would be smaller areas in which developers would
choose to do their own topographic mapping, and there would be areae
that may or may not be developed prior to the need to remap the area.
-6-
Council Agenda - 4/27/87
11 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
1. The first alternative would be to authorize the topographic mapping
of an area of approximately 2,000 acres as outlined by John Badalich
at the cost provided by him. In addition, this alternative would
include a charge back to those developers wishing to utilize
that information. The charge back would be actual cost of mapping
plus any administration costs the City occurs.
2. The second alternative would be to require each developer in
this area to continue mapping on an individual parcel basis.
While this alternative may suffice for the immediate future,
it does not allow the City to have insight as to the overall
effect of a specific subdivision in an area and could result
in a higher development cost of subdivisions.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is the staff recommendation of the Public Works Director and City
Engineer that the City Council authorize mapping by aerial photography
of at least 2,000 acres as outlined by John Badalich at Monday evening's
meeting.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
a. None.
I
-7-
ORR•SCHEIEN • MAYERON & ASSOCIATES. INC.
Consulting Engineers
Land Surveyors
1;
April 27, 1981
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Monti Cello
250 East Broadway
Monticello, Minnesota 55362
Attn: Mr. Thomas Eidem
City Administrator
Re: Topographic Mapping for OAA Area
Deer Ton:
As a follow-up to my recent discussion with John Simola. I have received quo-
tations to undertake aerial photography and topographic mapping of a part of the
OAA area adjacent to Monticello from three firms.
I requested a quotation on two areas: Area A (approximately 3,200 acres) and Area
8 (approximately 2.000 acres). Both of the areas are primarily south of the south
city limits of Monticello covering the Boyle property, Monti Hill and further
southwest covering the Kjellberg property. I have enclosed a map to show the two
respective areas.
The three firms contacted and their quotes to do the work are as follows:
Martinet Corporation
Horizons, Inc.
Mark Hurd Aerial (dapping
AREA A (3.200 ACRES)
$10.465
$10.570
$21.000
AREA B (2.000 ACRES)
S 6.550
S 7.400
$15.000
Added to the above would be the cost of $2.000 for ground control to be furnished
by OSM. Horizons. Inc. will be using 1987 aerial photography just flown this past
week. Martinet will be also be using 1987 photos to be flown this Tuesday or
Wednesday. Mark Hurd will be using the 1984 photography OSM purchased from Park
Hurd in May of 1984.
2021 Cast Hennepin Avenue • Suite 238 • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 • 6121331- 8560
Page Two
' City of Monticello
April 27, 1987
I would recommend purchasing the mapping for Area A (3,200 acres), the cost being
$3.90 per acre including ground control versus $4.28 per acre for Area B (2.000
acres) including ground control.
I would further recommend the work be given to either Horizon, Inc. or Martinez
Corp. which includes or will include 1987 aerial photography and topographic
mapping of 3.200 acres. An additional cost of $2.000 is needed for ground
control to be furnished by OSM.
I have attached copies of the correspondence and telecom received from the firms
noted above.
Yours very truly,
ORR-SCHELEN-MAIERON
6ASSOCIATES. INC.
t� I
John P. Bada11ch. P. .
City Engineer
JPB:mlj
enclosures
MLTAAIZnNeZ PO am 7017
81. PdC. ww 53107
L 0 A P 0 A A 7 1 0 N /127Y AW
April 20, 1987
Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 8 Assoc. Inc.
2021 East Hennepin Ave.
Suite 238
Minneapolis, MN 55413
Attn: Mr. John Badalich
Dear Mr. Badalich:
Martinez Corporation is pleased to quote the following prices for
aerial photography and topographic mapping in Monticello.
Minnesota.
We would acquire new photography this Spring (if award is made
soon enough to permit) at a scale suitable for providing 2 foot
contours for either area A or B.
We would provide plotter drafted manuscripts at a scale of
1"°1001 and plot contours at two foot intervals.
Delivery of the mapping would be made no later than 21 days after
receipt of satisfactory ground control from OSM Inc.
Charges for our services are as follows:
Area A $ 10.465.00
Area B $ 6.550.00
We look forward to the opportunity of working with you, and hope
you will consider us favorably.
Sincerely,
MARTINEZ CORPORATION
,l cc�1llls-,. j �J✓oa�
Sidney Wood,
Technical Representative
SW/rb
OW&IP1o10pMMWA"-a1ow1"np- aV"*
An EyW c4vonlw"Y E"gge
H O R I Z O N S9 INC. PO �a,105DE AVE. ;�,�OR
AERIAL SURVEYS Er DIGITAL PHOTOGRAMMETRY PHO t -M-3-4 M. s�CnE:Ietil0.T4
April 21 , 1987
City of Monticello RECEIVED
c/o Mr. John Radalich ORR SCHELEN IAAYflt$N 9 AS=
Orr-Schelen-Mayeron dr Assoc., Inc.
2021 East Hennepin Ave., Suite 298 COMM.
Minneapolis, MN 55119 APR 2 2 1987
Re: HE -IN I I
Deer Mr. Radalich:
lieference Is made to Mr. Ed Ame's letter of April 18, 1987. Accordingly, we are pleased
to furnish our proposal for aerial survey services of two areas near Monticello, MN.
ARRA
The areas covered by this proposal were furnished with the above letter. One area contains
approximately 9,200 acres and the other area approximately 2,000 acres.
ARRIAI. PIIOTOCRAPIIY
We will utilize new aerial photography obtained on April 17, 1987. This photography was
obtained with a precision mapping camera suitable for preparing the topographic mapping
described below.
CROUNII CONTROI,
11 Is understood that Orr-Schclen-Mayeron b Assoc., Inc, will furnish all the ground control
necessary for controlling the topographic mapping. We. will furnish you with points which
will require elevations and horizontal positions.
*MPOCRAPIIIC MAPPINt1
We will furnish the (napping at a scale of V=100' showing contours at two foot intervals.
In addition to contours, the maps will include spot elevations, roads, building, railroads,
major fences, drainage, shorelines, swamps and tree outlines to the extent these features
aro visible on the photography. If areas are obscured, the contours will be dashed to indi-
ente they are approximate.
1PIdr MM to the Wrrr1ol*8 atbl
City of Monticello, c/o Mr. John Badalich
April 21, 1987
Page 2
Delivery will consist of a reproducible positives on stable base material made directly
from the pencil plotted manuscripts.
PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE
We estimate the ground control requirements will be furnished within 10 days after notice
to proceed Is given.
The topographic mapping will be delivered progressively from 21 to 80 days, depending
on the size of the area ordered, after receipt of ground control information. The mapping
will be delivered to Orr-Schelen-Mayeron at Assoc., Inc.
PAYMENT
Our charge for the services described above will be as follows:
3,200 Acre Area $11,035.00 lump sum
2,000 Acre Area $7,885.00 lump sum
Payment of our Invoice will be due within 30 days after delivery and invoicing. When
using control information provided by other than our own forces, an additional charge
of $30.00 per hour will be made for excess office time, if any, due to erroneous control.
We appreciate the opportunity of furnishing this proposal and look forward to being of
service. An authorized signature on the enclosed acceptance copy of this proposal will
serve as our contract. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact
US.
Respectfully submitted,
OJNU'C-4-7-�
Daryl D. gather
Technical Representative
DDS/dm m /8
Encl.
proposal accepted for the City of Monticello by:
Signature
Title
Date
Map Title Desired
MUM r%um mu CON
.anaro.
"mm"emR �6 99f
er
cor►rw,ose0n 0;�oc.�a00
"CoonA
�� el awl■ psrs� e� ��� rd
Th hue- T+UL
As Aka— Q s'e a o-4� k o An-'e, r
(PrIC -S
mow �
T 2-00 ff4ro c
ZdOO Ac .V. 41(00
� r
i►.t G d �,,.,�.- a � M� /a� .! +s a 1� o.. era_ s _
Al t% A(a 424�rr Q Gra- Cox M.
Fro.Ow%a_ 2060 /%a,�r (a7 7, -loo a f7.70 PAT ar_,f
o
i $Zoo ��- (�% 10.S-70 ► 3.30
//o..re..w CX• n�a.am#a 00 0 -.4 fir, /70 aw s2.6
rmo aarumwrs.�e I" cow
x*na►«a aan "� °sOM"iD M0'�"NO
Ate/ ! / G% d
aca.o�oe Arel e,.s it
a,as=
�'r { 3z'oo��
.,
2f1/10 Ftoias a /5; /00
u
0
I
0
N
LIQUOR FUND
AMOUNT
CNCK
LIQUOR DISBURSEMENTS FOR APRIL
NOO..
Griggs, Cooper 6 Co. - Liquor
3,093.86
12994
Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT
597.28
12995
Commissioner of Revenue - SWT
214.00
12996
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll dad.
170.00
12997
State Treasurer - PERA W/H
180.16
12998
Johnson Bro. Co. - Wine purchase
4.101.63
12999
Johnson Bro. Co. - Liquor purchase
440.99
13000
Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor purchase
234.88
13001
Eagle Wine Co. - Liquor
757.71
13002
Quality Wine 6 Spirits - Liquor
623.14
13003
Northern States Power - Utilities
495.85
13004
North Central Public Service - Utilities
105.65
13004
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone
73.53
13006
McDowall Co. - Repairs at Liquor Store
473.92
13007
Dahlheimer Dist. Co. - Beer
10,753.30
13008
Stromquist Diet. Co. - Misc. mdse.
37.15
13009
Cloudy Town Dist. - Misc. mdse.
91.55
13010
Grosslein Beverage - Beer
11,267.17
13011
Rubald Beverage Co. - Wine
95.01
13012
Thorpe Dist. Co. - Beer
5.942.05
13013
Ron's Ice Co. - Ice purchases
109.80
13014
Servicemaster - Carpet cleaning
150.00
13015
Seven Up Bottling - Misc. mdae.
208.00
13016
Viking Coca Cola - Misc. mdso.
376.20
13017
Superior Products - Store expense
38.50
13018
Day Dist. Co. - Misc. mdse.
628.20
13019
Jude Candy 6 Tobacco - Misc. mdse.
587.40
13020
Maus Foods - Store expense
15.23
13021
Kolles Sanitation - Garbage service
133.50
13022
Monticello Times - Adv.
110.00
13023
Dick Beverage Co. - Beer
809.05
13024
Coast to Coast - Store supplies
42.70
13025
Bernick's Pepsi Cola - Pop purchases
405.05
13026
Old Dutch Foods - Misc. mdse.
99.67
13027
Liefert Trucking - Freight
302.75
13028
State Treasurer - PERA WIN
90.75
13029
Griggs, Cooper 6 Co. - Liquor
3,304.54
13030
League of MN. Cities Ins. Trust - Insurance premium
2,366.00
13031
Banker's Life - Group Ins.
321.94
13032
Quality Wine Spirits - Liquor
375.70
13033
Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT
875.66
13034
Olson 6 Sone Electric - Repairs at store
346.57
13035
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll dad.
170.00
13036
Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor
1.338.17
13037
Eagle Wino Co. - Liquor
434.77
13038
General Fund - Purchase of 1/3 C. D.
33,000.00
13039
State Treasurer - PERA WIN
184.24
13060
Johnson Bro. Co. - Liquor
1,484.16
13041
Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor
1.082.07
13042
Griggs. Cooper 6 Sons - Liquor
5,377.70
13043
Payroll for March
3,701.36
TOTAL LIQUOR DISBURSEMENTS - APRIL
$98,218.51
f.ENERAL FUND - APRIL
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
Tom Eidem - Meal expenses
10.20
24021
Automatic Systems Co. - Water Dept. services
52.00
24022
Trueman Welters - Parts for equipment
135.91
24023
Melchert/Block Assoc. - Eng. fees for Chelsea Road ext.
996.74
24024
MonticelloTimes - Legal publications
1,028.31
24025
Walt Mack - Travel expense for seminar
75.00
24026
Commissioner of Revenue - State tax due on 1986 fuel
199.24
24027
Data Management Design - Payment for computer supplies
23,103.05
24028
Dept. of Labor 4 Industry - Penalty fee - OSHA
441.00
24029
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg, fees
283.00
24030
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
36.00
24031
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
123.04
24032
ICMA Retirement Corp. - Payroll ded.
564.34
24033
Corrow Sanitation - Contract services for March
6,612.40
24034
David Stromberg - Animal control services
287.50
24035
Jerry Hermes - Janitorial services at Library
216.67
24036
James Preusse - Cleaning city hall
358.33
24037
YMCA of Mpls. - Monthly contract payment
583.33
24038
Mrs. Beverly Johnson - ANimal control services
275.00
24039
Mr. Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary
175.00
24040
Mr. Dan Blonigen - Council salary
125.00
24041
Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary
125.00
24042
Mr. William Fair - Council salary
125.00
24043
Mr. Warren Smith - Council salary
123.19
24044
Mr. James Ridgeway - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24045
Mrs. Joyce Dowling - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24046
Mr. Richard Carlson - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24047
Mrs. Barbara Koropchak - Planning Comm. salary
49.27
24048
State Treasurer - PERA W/H
1.470.25
24049
Anoka County Social Services - Payroll ded.
204.00
24050
Commissioner of Revenue - SWT - March
2.138.00
24051
Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT
5.124.58
24052
Corrow Sanitation - Additional landfill costs
1,242.80
24053
Cragun's Conference Center - Dep. for City Man. Conf.
70.00
24054
Government Training Service - Reg. fee for City Man. Conf.
125.00
24055
College of St. Thomas - Reg. fee for seminar for M. Hellma1
175.00
24056
EMED Co. - Safety equipment purchases
180.85
24057
State Treasurer - State Bldg. Ins. - Surcharge - lot qtr.
640.09
24058
Liquor Fund - Relmb. for int. on C. D.
166.44
24059
Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees
410.00
24060
Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees
54.00
24061
North Central Public Service - Utilities
964.73
24062
Professional Services Group - WWTP contract payment - April
22,083.35
24063
North Central Section AWWA - Reg. fee - M. Theisen
21.00
24064
Cragun's - Room deposit - M. Theisen - Waterworks school
50.00
24065
Northern States Power - Utilities
6,540.79
24066
Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone
1.221.58
24067
State Treasurer - PERA W /H
447.13
24068
Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees
285.00
24069
League of MN. Cities Ins. Trust - Insurance premium
48.868.00
24070
Banker's Life - Group Ins.
3,914.87
24071
PERA - Ins. premiums
27.00
24072
State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded.
123.04
24073
ICMA Retirement Corp. - Payroll dad.
564.34
24074
Phillipe 66 - Gas - Walt
31.30
24075
AT 6 T Inf. System - Fire phone chargee
3.96
24076
Marco Business Products - Office supplies
98.65
24077
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
National Life Ins. - Ins. premium for T. Eidem
100.00
24078
Smith, Pringle 6 Hayes - Legal for March
5,110.00
24079
Oxford Chemicals - Surfactent for Parks
77.28
24080
Ted Farnum - Reimb. for Fire Dept. supplies
30.61
24081
Vance's Service Center - Gas for Fire Dept.
64.64
24082
Wright County Recorder - Quit claims recorded
11.00
24083
Wright County Auditor - 1987 tax book run
35.50
24084
Data Processing Dept. - Special assessment tax book run
24.30
24085
Adam's Pest Control - Library contract
42.00
24086
Meyer Rohlin - Prints
4.50
24087
Suburban Gas - Gas
216.95
24088
Monticello Printing - Misc. printing
23.10
24089
Feedrite Controls - Potable sample
10.00
24090
Unocal - Gas - Fire Dept.
43.89
24091
Monticello Chamber of Commerce - City's membership dues
250.00
24092
Plymouth Industrial Supply - Ladder. shovels, paint, etc.
412.18
24093
Fair's Garden Center - Supplies
6.99
24094
Wright County Auditor - Sheriff's contract - April
10.645.21
24095
Viking Pipe Services - T. V. inspection
720.00
24096
Monti Truck Repairs - Parts for sludge truck
4.00
24097
Persian's Business - Repair dictating machine
91.45
24098
St. Cloud Fire Equip. - Recharge fire extinguishers
110.50
24099
Simonson Lumber - Misc. materials
343.65
24100
Scharber 4 Sone - Parts for sludge truck
54.54
24101
Snyder Drug - Frames. film, etc.
58.10
24102
Purcell Plumbing - Misc. supplies
60.09
24103
Maus Foods - Supplies
133.02
24104
National Bushing - Pressure Washer 4 steam cleaner
2,732.44
24105
Monticello Office Products - Chairs, computer furn., etc.
2,342.87
24106
Gruys, Johnson - Computer services
580.00
24107
Hoglund Bus - Parts for sludge truck
31.36
24108
General Rental Center - Dolly rental
10.60
24109
Clutch b U -Joint - Sludge truck axle parts
185.01
24110
DYNA Systems - Nuts S bolts for Mtce. Bldg.
301.31
24111
Bareness Drug- Film b batteries for St. Dept.
17.77
24112
Wright County Journal Press - Sub. renewal
15.00
24113
Martie's Farm Service - Dog food
21.99
24114
Servi Star Hdwe. - Supplies for all Depts.
225.41
26115
Coast to Coast - Portable radio, drill, etc.
143.52
24116
Local 149 - Union dues
105.00
24117
L 4 G Rehboin - Payment d2 - Chelsea Road project
47,893.27
24118
David Stromberg - Animal control expense
287.50
24119
Jerry Hermes - Library janitorial
216.0
24120
Thomas Eidem - Mileage expense for April
300.00
24121
Wright County State Bank - FICA b FWT
6,404.60
24122
Soil Testing Lab. - Soil sample info.
15.00
24123
Monticello Fire Dept. - March salaries
3,070.25
24124
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
582.00
24125
Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
4.00
24126
Dept. of Not. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees
36.00
24127
State Treasurer - PF.RA WIH
1,481.57
24128
Olson 6 Sons Electric - Computer, pump houses. etc.
4,500.30
26129
P b H. Warehouse Sales - Softball fields supplies
11.26
24130
General Industrial Supply - Gas cane (3)
239.01
24131
Automatic Garage Door - Repairs - Mtes. bldg.
50.00
24132
Chemsearch - Parka supplies
131.82
24133
Ruff Auto Parte - Radio - Mtce. Dept.
20.00
24134
Safety Kleen - Equipment mtce. - Shop
40.00
24135
-2-
F" J
n
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
CHECK NO.
Monticello Times - Adv.
490.21
24136
Flicker's T. V. - V. C. R. for Fire Dept.
299.00
24137
MN. U. C. Fund - Unemployment benefits
44.89
24138
OSM - Misc. eng. fees
5,001.62
24139
Humane Society of Wright County - Animal control expense
95.00
24140
Motorola, Inc. - 28 pagers for Fire Dept.
11,985.00
24141
West Central Ind. - Stakes and lath
88.80
24142
Mobil Oil - Gas for Fire Dept.
31.02
24143
Zoning Bulletin - Sub. to Zoning Bulletin mag.
59.95
24144
St. Cloud Restaurant Supply - Garbage liners
17.18
24145
West Publishing Co. - 1987 MN. Session Lav Books
87.50
24146
Elk River Machine Co. - Sludge truck parts
46.20
24147
Elk River Concrete Products - 25 manhole steps
150.00
24148
MacQueen Equip. - Supplies - St. Dept.
43.63
24149
Little Mountain Electric - City house repairs - River St.,
244.51
24150
Mtce. Bldg. and Sen. Cit. bldg.
Mid Central - Nozzle and adapter for Fire Dept.
922.40
24151
Davis Electronic Service - Pager repairs for Fire Dept.
47.44
24152
Holmes 6 Graven - Raindance project services
3,821.30
24153
Braun Engineering - Compaction test - Boyle project
198.00
24154
Water Products - Water Dept. supplies
4,761.64
24155
AME Ready Mix - Cement for streets
394.52
24156
Tom Eidem - Travel expense - DEED Comm. 6 H Window
64.07
24157
Ben Franklin - Supplies
52.32
24158
J M Oil Co. - Gas for St. Dept.
360.68
24159
Monticello TW Hdwe. - Misc. supplies
45.25
24160
Harry's Auto Supply - Sludge truck repairs, filler, etc.
463.13
24161
Maus Tire Service - Tire repairs, etc.
191.22
24162
Unitog Rental Service - Uniform rental
102.40
24163
Wright County Treasurer - Property taxes
2,598.18
24164
Gould Bros. - Repairs - Fire Dept. - Van
188.36
24165
N B Instruments - Strip chart - Water Dept.
51.73
24166
011ie Koropchak - Travel expense
89.25
24167
U. S. Postmaster - Postage machine re -fill
500.00
24168
Commissioner of Revenue - Water sales tax - lot qtr.
246.22
24169
Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees
216.00
24170
Rick Walfatelier - Mileage expense
79.00
24171
Peterson Fire 6 Safety - Boom hoist, safety hook, block
2,009.36
24172
Meridian Aggregates Co. - Gravel
22.44
24173
Barco Products - Cloves for Water Dept.
80.11
24174
American National Bank - TIF bond fees
107.02
24175
Gary Anderson - Mileage expense
214.79
24176
Walters Cabinet Shop - Computer counter 6 shelf
1,256.50
24177
Duane Knutson - Mayor dues
10.00
24178
Data Management - Computer charges - connectors 6 cable
588.14
24179
Payroll for March 25,380.98
TOTAL GENERAL DISBURSEMENTS - APRIL 287. 923.26