Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 07-25-2011AGENDA REGULARMEETING–MONTICELLOCITYCOUNCIL Monday,July25,2011–7p.m. Mayor:ClintHerbst CouncilMembers:LloydHilgart,TomPerrault,GlenPosusta,BrianStumpf 1.CalltoOrderandPledgeofAllegiance 2A.ApprovalofMinutes–July11,2011SpecialMeetingWorkshop 2B.ApprovalofMinutes–July11,2011RegularMeeting 3.Considerationofaddingitemstotheagenda 4.Citizencomments,publicserviceannouncements,andstaffupdates a.CitizenComments: b.PublicServiceAnnouncements: 1)NationalNightOut(8/2) 2)MoviesinthePark(8/5) 3)HiWayLiquorsBeerTasting(8/12) c.StaffUpdates: 1)LawEnforcementupdate-SheriffJoeHagerty 5.ConsentAgenda: A.ConsiderationofapprovingpaymentofbillsforJuly25th B.ConsiderationofapprovingnewhiresanddeparturesforCitydepartments C.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2011-66approvingcontributionfromTom PerraultfortheGeneralFund D.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2011-67toacceptcontributionsfromLand ofLakesChoirboysfortheCSAH75PedestrianUnderpass,CityProjectNo. 10C010 E.Considerationofapproving2012-2013lawenforcementcontractwithWright CountySheriff’sOffice F.Thisitemhasbeenremovedfromtheagenda. G.Considerationofaccepting2nd QuarterFinancialReport H.ConsiderationofapprovingreconstructionoftwocrosswalkswithWalnutStreet BoulevardImprovements,CityProjectNo.11C003 I.ConsiderationofapprovingdraftCableFranchiseOrdinanceforBridgewater TelephoneCompany,LLC,dbaTDSTelecom J.Considerationofgrantinganindividualpensioncontributionincreasefor VolunteerFirefighterReliefAssociationmembers K.ConsiderationofapprovingawaiveroftheBuildingPlanReviewFeeforthe MonticelloBigLakePetHospitalinaccordancewiththeBusinessExpansion IncentivePilotProgram 6.Considerationofitemsremovedfromtheconsentagendafordiscussion 7.ConsiderationofacceptingquotesandawardingcontractforreplacementofHVACunits fortheMonticelloHelpCenter(FoodshelfandClothing) 8.ConsiderationofapprovingpurchaseofMinervaequipmentforwhole-homeDVR servicebyFiberNet 9.ConsiderationofapprovingpurchaseofaRedundancyRouterbyFiberNet 10.Addeditems 11.Adjournment City Council Agenda: 07/25/11 1 5A. Consideration of approving payment of bill registers for July 25th (TK) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The attached bill registers contain all invoices processed since the last Council meeting. Subject to MN Statutes, most invoices require Council approval prior to releasing checks for payment. The day following Council approval, payments will be released unless directed otherwise. If Council has no questions or comments on the bill registers, these can be approved with the consent agenda. If requested, this item can be removed from consent and discussed prior to making a motion for approval. A1. Budget Impact: None A2. Staff Workload Impact: No additional work required B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Motion to approve the bill registers for a total amount of $916,247.47. 2. Motion to approve the bill registers with changes directed by Council. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends Alternative #1 or #2, per direction of Council. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Bill registers CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/11 1 5B.ConsiderationofapprovingnewhiresanddeparturesforCitydepartments (TE) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: TheCouncilisaskedtoratifythehiringanddeparturesofemployeesthathaveoccurred recentlyinthedepartmentslisted.ItisrecommendedthattheCouncilofficiallyratifythe hiring/departureofalllistedemployeesincludingpart-timeandseasonalworkers. A1.BudgetImpact:(positionsaregenerallyincludedinbudget) A2.StaffWorkLoadImpact:Ifnewpositions,theremaybesometraining involved.Ifterminatedpositions,existingstaffwouldpickupthosehours,as needed,untilreplaced. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiontoratifythehire/departuresoftheemployeesasidentifiedontheattached list. 2.Motiontodenytherecommendedhiresanddepartures. C.RECOMMENDATION: BystatutetheCityCouncilhastheauthoritytoapproveallhires/departures.Citystaff recommendsAlternative#1,fortheCounciltoapprovethehiresand/ordeparturesas listed. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: Listofnew/terminatedemployees Name Title Department Hire Date Class Name Reason Department Last Day Class Joel Jacobson Voluntary Liquor Store 2/24 PT Tim Alberts Voluntary Liquor Store 3/5 PT NEW EMPLOYEES TERMINATING EMPLOYEES Book1: 7/19/2011 CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/11 1 5C.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2011-66toacceptacontributionfromTom PerraultfortheGeneralFund (CS) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: TomPerraultiscontributing$250forJulytogointotheGeneralFund.Asrequiredby statestatute,iftheCityacceptsthedonationoffunds,theCityCouncilneedstoadopta resolutionspecifyingtheamountofthedonationanditsuse. A1.BudgetImpact:None A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Staffaccountsforandreconcilesdonationscontributed throughtheCity. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Approvethecontributionsandauthorizeuseoffundsasspecified. 2.Donotapprovethecontributionsandreturnthefundstothedonors. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommendationistoadopttheresolutionacceptingthecontributions. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: Resolution#2011-66 CityofMonticello RESOLUTIONNO.2011-66 APPROVINGCONTRIBUTIONS WHEREAS,theCityofMonticelloisgenerallyauthorizedtoaccept contributionsofrealandpersonalpropertypursuanttoMinnesotaStatutesSections 465.03and465.04forthebenefitofitscitizensandisspecificallyauthorizedtomaintain suchpropertyforthebenefitofitscitizensinaccordancewiththetermsprescribedbythe donor.SaidgiftsmaybelimitedunderprovisionsofMNStatutesSection471.895. WHEREAS,thefollowingpersonsandorentitieshaveofferedtocontribute contributionsorgiftstotheCityaslisted: DONOR/ENTITYDESCRIPTIONVALUE TomPerraultCash$250 WHEREAS,allsaidcontributionsareintendedtoaidtheCityinestablishing facilities,operationsorprogramswithinthecity’sjurisdictioneitheraloneorin cooperationwithothers,asallowedbylaw;and WHEREAS,theCityCouncilherebyfindsthatitisappropriatetoacceptthe contributionsoffered. NOWTHEREFOREBEITRESOLVED bytheCityCouncilofMonticelloas follows: 1.ThecontributionsdescribedaboveareherebyacceptedbytheCityof Monticello. 2.Thecontributionsdescribedabovewillbeusedasdesignatedbythe donor.Thismayentailreimbursingorallocatingthemoneytoanother entitythatwillutilizethefundsforthefollowingstatedpurpose: DONOR/ENTITYRECIPIENTPURPOSE TomPerraultCityofMonticelloGeneralfund(July) AdoptedbytheCityCouncilofMonticellothis25thdayofJuly,2011. CITYOFMONTICELLO ______________________________ ClintHerbst,Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/11 1 5D.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2011-67toacceptcontributionsfromLand ofLakesChoirboysfortheCSAH75PedestrianUnderpass,CityProjectNo. 10C010 (BW/JO) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: OnJuly11,2011,CouncilapprovedmovingforwardwiththereducedscopeCSAH75 PedestrianUnderpassImprovementsandacceptedcontributionsfromVeoliaEsSolid WasteMidwestandXcelEnergytohelpfundthecostoftheproject.TheCityalso receivedapledgefromtheLandofLakesChoirboysfor$15,000tohelpdefraythecost ofconstructingthepedestrianunderpassimprovements. TheLandofLakesChoirboysBoardformallyratifiedtheGamblingManager’s recommendationtodonate$15,000attheirregularmeetingonJuly12th.Theyprovided acheckof$5,000onJuly15th andwillmake2morepaymentsof$5,000fortheir commitmenttothisproject. Asrequiredbystatestatute,iftheCityacceptsthedonationoffunds,theCityCouncil needstoadoptaresolutionspecifyingtheamountofthedonationanditsuse. A1.BudgetImpact:ThesecontributionswillreducetheCity’scontributionneeded toconstructtheproposedpedestrianunderpassimprovements. A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Staffaccountsforandreconcilesdonationscontributed throughtheCity. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiontoapprovethecontributionandauthorizeuseoffundsasspecified. 2.Motiontodenyacceptingthecontributionandtoreturnthefundstothedonor. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommendationistoadopttheresolutionacceptingthecontributions. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: Resolution#2011-67 CITYOFMONTICELLO RESOLUTIONNO.2011-67 APPROVINGCONTRIBUTIONS WHEREAS,theCityofMonticelloisgenerallyauthorizedtoaccept contributionsofrealandpersonalpropertypursuanttoMinnesotaStatutesSections 465.03and465.04forthebenefitofitscitizensandisspecificallyauthorizedtomaintain suchpropertyforthebenefitofitscitizensinaccordancewiththetermsprescribedbythe donor.SaidgiftsmaybelimitedunderprovisionsofMNStatutesSection471.895. WHEREAS,thefollowingpersonsandorentitieshaveofferedtocontribute contributionsorgiftstotheCityaslisted: DONOR/ENTITYDESCRIPTIONVALUE LandofLakesChoirboysCash$15,000* *(tobemadein3payments) WHEREAS,allsaidcontributionsareintendedtoaidtheCityinestablishing facilities,operationsorprogramswithinthecity’sjurisdictioneitheraloneorin cooperationwithothers,asallowedbylaw;and WHEREAS,theCityCouncilherebyfindsthatitisappropriatetoacceptthe contributionsoffered. NOWTHEREFOREBEITRESOLVED bytheCityCouncilofMonticelloas follows: 1.ThecontributionsdescribedaboveareherebyacceptedbytheCityof Monticello. 2.Thecontributionsdescribedabovewillbeusedasdesignatedbythe donor.Thismayentailreimbursingorallocatingthemoneytoanother entitythatwillutilizethefundsforthefollowingstatedpurpose: DONOR/ENTITYRECIPIENTPURPOSE LandofLakesChoirboysCityofMonticelloCSAH75PedestrianUnderpass ADOPTEDBY theCityCouncilofMonticellothis25thdayofJuly,2011. CITYOFMONTICELLO ______________________________ ClintHerbst,Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator CityCouncilAgenda:7/25/11 1 5E.Considerationofapproving2012-2013LawEnforcementContractwithWright CountySheriff’sOffice (BW/JO) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: Thecurrent2010–2011LawEnforcementContractwiththeWrightCountySheriff’s OfficeexpiresonDecember31,2011.WrightCountyhasthereforepreparedanew contractforthe2012-2013contractperiod,whichtheCityCouncilisbeingaskedto approve. Underthenewcontract,thehourlyrateforlawenforcementservicesforcalendaryear 2012willbe$59.75perhourwhichisanincreaseof1.27%.Thisratewillthenincrease andadditional1.25%to$60.50perhourincalendaryear2013.Belowisatable comparingthehourlyrates,numberofcontracthoursperday,andthecorresponding budgetforourcontractedlawenforcementservicesfrom2008to2011. YearHourlyRateHoursperDayBudget 2011$59.0052$1,119,820 2010$57.5052$1,091,350 2009$56.0052$1,062,880 2008(July–December)$54.0052$512,460 2008(January–June)$54.0048$473,040 Ascanbeseen,theannuallevelofincreaseinhourlyrateshasbeensteadilydecreasing overthelastfewcontractperiods,andthisnewestcontractcontainsarateincreaseof only$0.75perhourcomparedto$1.50perhourfrom2009to2011,and$2.00perhour from2008to2009. Thenewcontractprovidesforlawenforcementcoverageintheamountof52hoursper day,or18,980hoursannually.Thisisthesamenumberofcontracthoursthatweare currentlyreceiving.TheWrightCountySheriff’sOfficehasindicatedthat52hoursper dayshouldbeadequatecoveragetoallowthemtocontinuetoprovidebasiclaw enforcementservicesin2012and2013,butshouldtheCitydesireenhancedlaw enforcementservicestheywouldlikelynotbeabletoprovidesuchserviceswithout additionalhours.ThelastincreaseincoverageoccurredinJulyof2008whentheCity requestedanadditional4hoursperday,therebyincreasingourcoveragefrom48hoursto 52hoursperday.CouncilshouldbeawarethattheSheriff’sOfficecanonlyadjusttheir hourlycoveragein4hourincrements. AttheJuly20,2011PoliceAdvisoryCommissionmeeting,thedailyhourlycoverage andhourlyratesforcalendaryears2012and2013werediscussed.SheriffJoeHagerty attendedthemeetingandinformedtheCommissionthattheSheriff’sOfficedoesnot recommendreducingthenumberofcontracthours,andthattheyaredoingtheirbestto keeptheirhourlyratesaslowaspossiblebyconservingongasolineandotherresources wheneverpossible.TheSheriffalsomentionedthatheisnotanticipatingwageincreases thisyearformostofthedeputieshowever,thiswillbedeterminedduringunioncontract CityCouncilAgenda:7/25/11 2 negotiations.Assuch,thePoliceAdvisoryCommissionvotedunanimouslyto recommendtotheCityCouncilthattheCitycontinuecontractingforlawenforcement servicesatthecurrentcoverageof52hoursperday,whichisreflectedinthe2012budget forlawenforcementservices. Attachedassupportingdataisthedraft2012-2013LawEnforcementContractwhichwas draftedandsubmittedtotheCitybyWrightCounty.Councilshouldnotethatstaffhas contactedtheCountytorequesttheyincludeasentenceinsection7stating“An additional52hourswillbeprovidedin2012becauseitisaleapyear.”tomatchthe languageincludedinthe2008–2009LawEnforcementContractas2008wasalsoaleap year. ItshouldbenotedthattheWrightCountySheriffwillbeinattendanceattonight’s CouncilmeetingtopresentthemostrecentreportoncrimestatisticsinMonticello,andto respondtoanyCouncilinquiries,includinganyquestionsrelatedtothe2012-2013Law EnforcementContract. Althoughtherehasbeenadeclineinthedemandforserviceoverthepastfewyears,it hasclearlybeenthepositionofthePoliceCommissionandCityCounciltomaintain patrollevelsthesame.Giventhispriority,staffisnotprovidinganoptionforreducing service. A.1BudgetImpact:Asindicatedabove,theCity’s2012budgetincludes52hours perdaycoverageatthehourlyrateof$59.75perhour.Thisresultsina2012 budgetamountof$1,137,162.Thisisanincreaseof$17,342fromtheamount budgetedin2011forlawenforcementservices,although$3,107ofthisisdueto thefactthat2012isaleapyearsowearepayingforanadditional52hoursof coverage. A.2StaffWorkload:Approvalofthe2012–2013LawEnforcementContractfor policeprotectionserviceswillhavenoimpactontheworkloadofCitystaff. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiontoapprovethe2012-2013LawEnforcementContractwithWrightCountyfor lawenforcementservicesasdraftedbyWrightCountybutwiththeadditionofthe leapyearlanguagerecommendedbystaff. 2.Motiontodenyapprovalofthe2012-2013LawEnforcementContractwithWright Countyforlawenforcementservicesatthistime. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: StaffandthePoliceAdvisoryCommissionrecommendthattheCityCouncilapprove AlternativeAction#1whichmaintainslawenforcementcoverageintheamountof52 hoursperday. CityCouncilAgenda:7/25/11 3 D.SUPPORTINGDATA: 2012-2013LawEnforcementContractasdraftedbyWrightCounty CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/2011 1 5G.Considerationofaccepting2nd QuarterFinancialReport (TK) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: Attachedisthe20112nd quarterfinancialstatusreport.Thereporthasseenactivitypick up,asmoreactivityoccursduringthe2nd and3rd quartersoftheyearthaninthefirst quarter.ThroughthesecondquartertheCityisingoodshapecomparedtobudgetandis verysimilartolastyear’srevenueandexpenditureactivity. Theconcernthroughthesecondquarteroftheyearisstillbuildingpermitrevenue comparedtobudgetappearstobefallingshortandwillneedmonitoringoverthenext fewmonths.Alsointerestratesarebelowbudgetandremainverylowassomeofthe City’sgovernmentsecuritieswithinterestratesat3%orabovecontinuetobecalled, whichforcesustoreinvestatlowerratesorextendthelengthofmaturitiestoachieve similarrates. Ontheexpendituresideoftheledger,lineitemsforiceandsnowactivityarealittlehigh, butshouldbeoffsetbyotheractivitiesbeingunderbudget. FiberNetrevenuesarebelowexpensesasexpectedandwiththeescrowfundsbeing depletedwillcreateanegativecashflowforthisfundthatwillrequiremonitoringinto thefuture. Allotherrevenueandexpendituresappeartobein-linewithbudgetamounts. A1.BudgetImpact:Thequarterlyreportshaveverylittlebudgetimpactotherthan stafftimetopreparethereport. A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Thereporttakesstaffacoupleofhourstoprepare,but thehopeisthenewsoftwaresystemwillreducethistimeinthefuture. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS 1.Motiontoacceptthe20112nd quarterfinancialstatusreport. 2.Motiontonotacceptthe20112nd quarterfinancialstatusreport. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffsupportsAlternative#1. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: 20112nd QuarterFinancialStatusReport JuneInvestmentSchedule 1 20112nd QuarterFinancialStatusReport Withthe2010auditbehindusandthe2012budgetstaringusintheface,it’shardtobelievewe arehalfwaythroughtheCity’sfiscalyear.IftheCitycollectedrevenuesandspentfunds equallyallyeartheCityshouldhavecollected50%ofitsrevenuesandspent50%ofourbudget. However,thatisnothowthingswork.TheCity’ssummerconstructionprojectsarejust beginningandpropertytaxesarenotcollecteduntilthe3rd quarteroftheyear. Overall Financially,thingshavepickedupforthesecondquarter.TheCityhascollected29.2%ofits budgetedrevenuethroughthe2nd quartercomparedtoonly14.6%thoughthe1st quarter.Having collected29.2%ofrevenuesthroughthe1st halfoftheyearisverysimilarto2010whentheCity collected29.1%ofrevenues.Unfortunately,expendituresalsowentfrom27.4%to41.8%spent throughthefirsthalfoftheyear.In2010atthistimetheCityhadalreadyspent51.5%ofits budget. Ontherevenuesideofthings,interestratesremainlow,permitrevenuesremainlowanditwill beinterestingtoseewhatthedelinquencyrateonpropertytaxeswillbe.NormallytheCity collects99%ofitspropertytaxlevy.In2010theCitycollectedabout96%ofitspropertytax levy.Astheeconomystrugglestorecover,staffwillwatchtoseeifthedelinquencyrate increasesonceagainandifsotakeactionnecessarytomeetdebtobligationsandoperations. Interestratescontinuetobeverylow,withshort-termratesstillbelow1%andlong-termratesin the3%range.CityinvestmentsheldinJuneof2010wereearninganaverageinterestrateof 3.681%comparedto3.083%thisyear. Finally,FiberNethasexhaustedsomeoftheirescrowfundsandbasedonthebondindenturenow hasmonthlypaymentsintoescrowaccountsfordebtservicesandsystem maintenance/replacement.Thus,FiberNetwillcontinuetohaveanegativecashflowandplacea largerburdenonotherCityfundstosupporttheoperations.Thistoowillrequirestafftomonitor theFiberNetfundactivitythroughtherestoftheyear. Thetableonthenextpagecomparesbudgettoactualrevenueandexpendituresforboth2010 and2011andasyoucanseebothrevenuesandexpendituresarebelowbudgetandbelowlast year’sactual. 2 Revenues:2010 2010 %20112011 % Budget 2ndQTRYTD Received Budget2ndQTRYTD Received GeneralFund6,329,450 400,292 6.32%6,393,620461,656 7.22% SpecialRevenueFunds6,110,647 2,387,560 39.07%6,421,6941,251,340 19.49% DebtServiceFunds6,064,497 4,096,764 67.55%6,322,6833,132,573 49.54% CapitalImprovementFunds5,602,320 7,604 0.14%4,752,002620,982 13.07% EnterpriseFunds8,620,167 2,634,746 30.56%12,138,1685,037,627 41.50% TotalRevenues32,727,081 9,526,966 29.11%36,028,16710,504,178 29.16% Expenditures:2010 2010 %20112011 % Budget 2ndQTRYTD Spent Budget 2ndQTRYTD Spent GeneralFund6,329,450 2,971,517 46.95%6,393,6202,830,753 44.27% SpecialRevenueFunds7,521,338 4,271,893 56.80%9,042,5604,322,149 47.80% DebtServiceFunds 6,845,275 5,052,465 73.81%6,904,275 5,259,098 76.17% CapitalImprovementFunds4,289,220 243,062 5.67%4,744,500350,517 7.39% EnterpriseFunds9,909,830 5,428,467 54.78%15,880,7835,189,862 32.68% TotalExpenditures34,895,113 17,967,404 51.49%42,965,73817,952,379 41.78% Therestofthisreportwillsummarizetheactivityofeachfundtype. GeneralFund GeneralFundrevenuesfor2011areforthemostpartverysimilartorevenuesfor2010asshown inthechartbelow. 20102010 %20112011 % Budget2ndQTRYTD Received Budget2ndQTRYTD Received PropertyTaxes 5,297,065 0 0.00%5,362,622 41,354 0.77% Licenses&Permits296,650116,584 39.30%296,250112,586 38.00% IntergovernmentalRevenues114,80143,720 38.08%139,74097,317 69.64% ChargesforServices306,023105,341 34.42%330,096126,349 38.28% Fines&Forfeits30095 31.67%200500 250.00% Miscellaneous269,611134,552 49.91%264,71283,550 31.56% TransfersfromOtherFunds45,0000 0.00%00 0.00% TotalGeneralFundRevenues6,329,450400,292 6.32%6,393,620461,656 7.22% Buildingpermitrevenuesarestilllaggingbehindwith$53,773takeninsofarandabudgetof $235,000.Howeverthebuildingdepartmentshouldhavesomecommercial/industrialpermitsin thenextfewmonths.TheCityhasreceived70%ofitsintergovernmentalrevenuesdueto MNDOTpayingtheCityitsstreetmaintenanceaidearlyinanticipationoftheStateshutdown. Otherareaswhererevenuesappeartobeshortofbudgetareplanningandzoningfeesand engineeringfees.TheCitybudgeted$31,950andhastakeninonly$725sofar. 3 OntheexpendituresidetheCityhasspent44%ofitsbudgetcomparedto47%lastyearatthis time.Thetablebelowcompares2010and2011budgettoactualexpendituresbydepartment. 2010 2010 %20112011 % Budget 2ndQTRYTD Spent Budget2ndQTRYTD Spent GeneralGovernment1,372,973 780,946 56.88%1,403,829691,688 49.27% PublicSafety1,697,794 795,429 46.85%1,710,383789,304 46.15% PublicWorks2,275,156 949,778 41.75%2,299,770962,338 41.84% Miscellaneous165,593 185,909 112.27%94,063116,181 123.51% Parks744,590 229,931 30.88%732,500239,606 32.71% EconomicDevelopment73,344 29,524 40.25%153,07531,636 20.67% TotalGeneralFdExpenditures6,329,450 2,971,517 46.95%6,393,6202,830,753 44.27% The generalgovernmentdepartment appearstobeslightlyunderbudgetamounts(49%spent), butthisisduetoanumberofone-timeexpenditureswhichwerepaidinthe1st twoquarters. Theseincludepayingforauditservices,assessingservicesandcomputerequipment.However, overthecourseoftheyearIfeelthisdepartmentwillendupclosetobudgetedamounts. The publicsafetydepartment hasspent46%ofitsbudget,withthesheriff’scontractbeingpaid throughJuneandthefirebudgetbeingonly42%spentsofarandtheone-timereliefassociate paymentwhichwillbeprocessedlaterthisyear.Fornowitwouldappearthisdepartmentwould finishtheyearunderbudget. The publicworksdepartment hasspent42%oftheirbudgetsofar.Someitemsthatarebelow budgetincludeengineeringservices(27%),buttheyhaveonlybeenpaidforservicesthrough Aprilandtheinspectionactivityhasonlyspent33%ofitsbudgetasmuchofthisactivityhas beenchargeddirectlytoconstructionprojects.. TheStreetactivityisbelowbudgetbutthatisbecausethe2011sealcoatprojectwillbepaidin July.Theexpectationwouldbeforthisdepartmenttofinishtheyearatorbelowbudget. Theoneareaofconcernistheiceandsnowactivitywhichis84%spentduetothesnow receivedinthe1st quarteroftheyear.Thisactivitymostlikelywillbeoverbudgetbyyear-end unlesswereceiveaverylatestarttothesnowseason,buttheotheractivitiesinthepublicworks areashouldfinishbelowbudgettooffsetthisactivity. Thebudgetforthe miscellaneousdepartment is124%spentbutshouldhaveveryfewexpenses left.ThisismainlyfortheCity’svariousinsurancecostsandallwerepaidduringthesecond quarter,sotheonlyexpensesleftwouldbeforanyfuturedeductiblesandsomeoftheexpenses willbeallocatedtootheractivities. The parksdepartment appearstobeconsiderablybelowbudget,buttheCity’ssharefortheIce ArenawillbepaidinJulyandmuchoftheparkmaintenanceitemswillbespentinJulyand August.Stillthisdepartmentshouldfinishtheyearbelowbudget. 4 Finally,the economicdevelopmentdepartment hasspent21%ofitsbudgetandshouldfinish theyearbelowbudget. InsummaryIbelievetheGeneralFundisontargettoendtheyearatorbelowbudgetedexpense amounts.Ialsobelieverevenuesshouldalsofinishtheyearnearbudgetedamountsunless propertytaxcollectionsarebelownormalcollectionrates,whichstaffwillmonitoroverthenext fewmonthtoseeifanyadjustmentneedtobemadetoCitybudgetsduetorevenueshortfalls. SpecialRevenueFunds SpecialRevenueFundsarefundswhichtheusesoftheirrevenuesarerestrictedforspecific purposesbyagoverningbody.TheCitycurrentlyoperates17specialrevenuefunds,eachwith theirownbudget.FundssuchastheLibrary,ShadeTree,StreetReconstructionandCommunity Centeralldependonapropertytaxlevytohelpsupporttheiractivities.Thetablebelow compareseachSpecialRevenueFund’srevenuebudgettoactualrevenuesfor2010and2011. SpecialRevenueFunds20102010 %20112011 % Budget2ndQTRYTD Received Budget2ndQTRYTD Received LibraryFund40,18439,367 97.97%36,461227 0.62% StreetReconstructionFund 370,228 14,722 3.98%362,883 261,210 71.98% MinnInvestmentFund34,1015,669 16.62%31,7093,377 10.65% EDAFund1,253,75235,250 2.81%1,681,01732,809 1.95% NSPFund0160,936 0.00%02 100.00% DeputyRegistrarFund284,613148,396 52.14%296,070149,379 50.45% ShadeTreeFund34,70430,923 89.11%36,544726 1.99% BertramChainofLakesFund03,226 0.00%06,052 100.00% CommunityCenterFund2,325,4901,756,731 75.54%2,278,330666,145 29.24% Park/PathwayDedication Fund403,6206,572 1.63%668,5481,599 0.24% OAAFund29145 15.46%25124 9.56% CapitalProjectsRevolving Fund283,08954,836 19.37%35,6118,547 24.00% GrantFunding0138 100.00%01 100.00% StreetLightImprovement Fund280,60676,990 27.44%247,98778,799 31.78% WaterAccessFund94,5656,837 7.23%104,4042,028 1.94% SanitarySewerAccessFund494,88335,346 7.14%401,09528,807 7.18% StormSewerAccessFund210,52111,576 5.50%240,78411,608 4.82% Total6,110,6472,387,560 39.07%6,421,6941,251,340 19.49% TheLibrary,StreetReconstruction,andShadeTreeFundsmajorrevenuesourceisproperty taxesandtransfersfromotherfunds,andtheCommunityCenterandEDAalsoreceiveproperty taxes,whichwillnotbereceiveduntilJuly.TheStreetReconstructionFundhasreceivedits one-timeoperatingtransferfromtheLiquorFund,whichiswhyithasalreadyreceived72%of itsbudgetedrevenues. 5 ThemainrevenuesourceattheDMVisthefeesfromthesalelicensesandpermits.Thesefees willbeincreasingbeginninginJuly,whichshouldresultinrevenuesexceedingbudgeted amountsfortheyear.TheCommunityCenterhascollected57%ofitsmembershipfeesand 84%ofitsactivityrelatedfeessofar. OntheExpendituresideallfundshavespentonly48%oftheirbudget,butmostofthebudgetis fortransferstoDebtServiceFundsfortheirshareofthe2011debtpayments.Thesetransfers wererecordedatthebeginningoftheyear.Howtheactualexpendituresfinishtheyear comparedtobudgetwilldependonvariouscapitalprojectsapprovedbyCouncilduringthe summer.ThechartbelowshowstheSpecialRevenueFundsbudgettoexpenditures. DebtServiceFunds TheCityhasmadeitsdebtpaymentforFebruary,whichgenerallyincludedtheprincipal paymentduefortheyearandonlyleavesaninterestpaymentinAugusttobepaid.Onthe revenuesidethetransfersofCityfundsfortheCityshareofdebtpaymentweremadeduringthe secondquarterandthefirsthalfspecialassessmentscollectionwilltakeplaceinJuly. 6 OveralltheCityhasoutstandingdebtof$60,418,000,whichincludedthe$26,445,000theCity hasinescrowfortheTelecommunicationsRevenueBond.ThisnumberishighforaCityofour size,butithasalottoduewiththefinancingoftheinterchangeproject,whichstillhasbonds outstandingof$15,660,000andtheTelecommunicationRevenueBondslistedabove.Isaythis becausethecommontoolforcomparingdebtfromoneCitytoanotherisdebtpercapitaandI oftenseetheserangingfrom$700to$1,500,butifweusedapopulationof12,759(2010census) forMonticello,ourdebtpercapitawouldbejustover$4,735.Butagainyoucanpointtothe interchange,wastewatertreatmentplant,fiberproject,andcommunitycenterprojectsasgood reasonstobehighanddoesnotmeantheCityisinbadfinancialhealth. TheCity’snextdebtpaymentisdueAugust1st,2011intheamountof$1,027,029.75,ofwhich only$407,000isfortheretirementofbondprincipalandthebalanceforinterest. CapitalProjectFunds Thelargestexpendituresofarisforengineeringfeesforthe2011streetreconstructionproject andsomepaymentsonthe2010streetreconstructionproject.Beginninginthethirdquarter,the Cityshouldstartreceivingandmakingpaymentstothecontractorfortheconstructionofthe project.The2011streetreconstructionprojectwillbefundedinternally,whichwouldresultin transfersfromthevariousfundingsourcespriortoyear-end.Expendituresandrevenuesforthe paverprojectandstreetlightingprojectwillalsostartupinthethirdandfourthquarterofthis yearalso. EnterpriseFunds TheCityhasfiveEnterpriseFundsthatitoperates.TheseareoperationsthattheCityrunslikea businessactivity.TheCitybilledfirstquarterwaterandsewerchargesinApril,withthesecond quarterbeingbilledinJuly.TheLiquorandCemeteryFundsreceivetheirrevenuesonapretty consistentbasisthroughouttheyear,withDecemberfortheLiquorFundbeingitsbusiestperiod. Liquorrevenuesareabove2010revenuesatthissametimeperiod.Thelargestchangein revenuesoftheenterprisefundsisthebillingofFiberNetcustomers.Onthefollowingpageis thetableofbudgettoactualfortheEnterpriseFundrevenuesforthepasttwoyears: 20102010%20112011% Budget2ndQTRYTDReceived Budget2ndQTRYTDReceived WaterFund989,977156,31415.79%990,434177,09617.88% SewerFund1,536,625386,13625.13%1,558,180455,79129.25% LiquorFund 4,121,570 2,071,630 50.26%4,492,098 2,165,181 48.20% CemeteryFund24,2211,7787.34%35,26512,84036.41% FiberNetMonticelloFund1,947,77418,8880.00%5,062,1912,226,71943.99% Total8,620,1672,634,74630.56%12,138,1685,037,62741.50% 7 Ontheexpendituresidetherearenobigsurpriseseither.Allthefundsarebelowbudget. Liquorstoreexpensesarealsoup,butthatisduetoincreasedsalesandtheneedtokeepthestore supplied.BelowaretheexpensesfortheEnterpriseFundscomparedtobudgetfor2010and 2011: AlloftheCity’senterprisefundsappeartobeonpacetofinishtheyearatorbelowbudgeted expenditures,withrevenuescoveringalloftheoperationsandsomeofthedepreciationofthe systemassets. TheFiberNetMonticelloFundistheoneexception,whereasexpectedandprojectedinthe businessmodel,itwillgeneratealoss.ForthesecondquarterFiberNetgeneratedrevenuesof $1,901,584,includingthelawsuitsettlement,whileexpending$2,195,734.Forthemonthof Junerevenueswere$136,804,mostofwhichisfromcustomerbillings.Juneexpendituresfrom operationswere$170,487andbasedonthebondindentureFiberNetisrequiredtopaymonthly intoadebtserviceescrowintheamountof$147,111and$75,000intoamaintenanceescrow beginninginJune.TheescrowfordebtservicewasusedupwiththeJune1st bondpaymentand theconstructionescrowwillbeusedupeitherinJulyorthefirstpartofAugust.Thus FiberNet’sonlyrevenuesourcewillbefrombillingcustomers.Thisisaconcernbecauseusing June’srevenuesandexpenses,FiberNetwillhaveoperatingexpensesofabout$400,000per monthandrevenuesofonly$150,000permonth,leavingaboutamonthlygapof$250,000. Investments Finally,theCity’sinvestmentactivityhasbeenrelativelyminor.AttheendoftheJunetheCity had$23,828,642investedatanaverageinterestrateof3.083%andanaverageyieldof2.969%. Thiscomparesto$23,146,431atanaverageinterestrateof3.681%andaverageyieldof3.649% attheendofJune2010.TheCityisstillhavingsomeofitsgovernmentsecuritieswithinterest rates3%orhigherbeingcalled,whichforcestheCitytoeitherreinvestatlowerratesorextend outmaturities.Thebudgetusedanestimatedinterestrateof3.35%,whichiswhytheinterest revenuewillbebelowbudgetformostfunds.ThebreakdownoftheCity’sinvestmentsisas follows: 2010 2010 %2011 2011 % Budget 2ndQTRYTD Spent Budget 2ndQTRYTD Spent WaterFund1,307,876 207,433 15.86%1,393,330 231,343 16.60% SewerFund2,477,121 574,905 23.21%2,579,030 585,226 22.69% LiquorFund4,107,434 1,817,647 44.25%4,397,199 2,065,874 46.98% CemeteryFund39,169 8,418 21.49%34,950 9,481 27.13% FiberNetMonticelloFund1,978,230 2,820,064 0.00%7,476,274 2,297,938 30.74% Total9,909,830 5,428,467 54.78%15,880,783 5,189,862 32.68% 8 FHL=FederalHomeLoan;MoneyMarkets=GovernmentSecurityMoneyMarketFunds;CD’s=Certificateof Deposits;FNMA=FederalNationalMortgageAssociation;FFCB=FederalFarmCreditBank;FHLMC= FederalHomeLoanMortgageCorporation. AlloftheseinvestmentsmeetStateandCityinvestmentrequirements.Attachedarethe investmentholdingsoftheCityasofJune30th. Conclusion CollectionofrevenuesthroughJuneof2011isabove2010.Themajordifferenceisthe revenuesgeneratedbyFiberNet.Anothersimilarityto2010istherevenuesreceivedforbuilding permits,whichisbelowanticipatedlevelsagainandwillneedtobemonitoredoverthenext coupleofmonths. Expendituresareontargetthroughthefirsthalfoftheyeartoendtheyearatbudgetedamounts andinmostcasesbelowbudgetedamounts.HowevertheIceandSnowactivitydoesappearit willbeoverspentfortheyear,butwiththeotheractivitiesbeingunderbudgetshouldoffsetthis. InadditionwewillneedtokeeptrackofrevenueandexpensesforFiberNetasrevenuesare belowexpenseswhichwereprojectedbythebusinessmodel. Overall,IfeeltheCityisinagoodfinancialpositionthroughthefirsttwoquartersoftheyear. CityCouncilAgenda:7/25/11 1 5H.ConsiderationofapprovingreconstructionoftwocrosswalkswithWalnutStreet BoulevardImprovements,CityProjectNo.11C003 (BW/BP) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: OnJuly11th CouncilacceptedtheFeasibilityReportforCityProjectNo.11C003,which includedthreequotesforconstructingstamped,coloredconcreteintenareasalongthe WalnutStreetcorridor.Councilalsoawardedthecontractfortheconcreteworkto StraightLineConcretewhoprovidedthelowestquote.However,Council’smotiondid notincludeapprovingtheinstallationoftwoaggregatereinforcedthermoplastic crosswalkmarkingsoverstampedbituminouspavementforthetwopedestrian crosswalksattheintersectionofWalnutand5½Streets.Thesecrosswalkmarkings, whosebrandnamechangedfromStreetPrintXDtoTrafficPatternsXDrecently,werenot approvedbecauseCouncilwantedstafftoresearchthewarrantyperiodandthenpresent thisinformationtothemonJuly25,2011beforeconsideringforapproval. WithintheFeasibilityReport,staffrecommendedreplacingthetwobrickpaverand concreteedgestripcrosswalkswiththermoplasticmarkingcrosswalks.Thisisbecause theproductisreportedlyverydurable,requireslittleornomaintenance,andhasthesame lookandfeeloftheexistingbrickpaverswhich,accordingtoJohnTwardy,isimportant toMr.Veitwhohadsignificantinputintheinstallationoftheoriginalbrickpavers.In addition,thesemarkingscanbeappliedoveranyexistingbituminouspavementingood conditionwhichwouldallowustoinstalltheminonotherstreetsaroundtheCityif Councilsochooses.Thethermoplasticmarkingsbeingrecommendedarethesame markingsrecentlyinstalledattheintersectionofHighways10&25inBigLake.Two picturesofthenewcrosswalkmarkingsinBigLakeareattachedassupportingdata. OnJuly12th staffcontactedDecorativePavementMarkings(DPM),whoinstalledthe newcrosswalkmarkingsinBigLake,toinquireaboutthetermsandconditionsofthe warrantyofferedwiththisproductperCouncildirection.Attached,assupportingdata,is aletteroutliningthewarrantytermsandconditionsfortheTrafficPatternsXDcrosswalk treatments.Thewarrantyperiodisone-yearfromthedateofinstallation,andduringthis periodDPMwillreplaceanylossofproductaslongasthefailureisnotthedirectresult ofanyworn,damaged,oroilstainedpavement. DPMalsoinformedstaffthattheywouldbewillingtoreducetheircostforinstallingthe twocrosswalktreatmentsonaone-timeonly,pilotprojectbasis.Attachedistheirquote forinstallingeithertheTrafficPatternsXDorDuraThermtreatments.Thecosttoinstall theTrafficPatternsXDmarkingsinthetwocrosswalkswouldbe$8,745.Thecostto installtheDuraThermtreatmentswouldbe$7,420.Staffrecommendsinstallingthe TrafficPatternsXDmarkinginsteadoftheDuraThermbrandsinceitmoreclosely resemblesthestamped,coloredconcreteinstallationsalongtheboulevards.Theprimary differencebetweenthetwoisthattheDuraThermmarkingsareonlyappliedwithinthe recessedgroovesofthepavement,whereastheTrafficPatternsXDmarkingisapplied overtheentirepavementsurface.ApictureoftheDuraThermbrandmarkingisalso attachedforcomparisonpurposes. CityCouncilAgenda:7/25/11 2 StaffisawareofseveralTrafficPatternsXDcrosswalkmarkingsthathavebeeninusefor severalyears,andtothebestofourknowledgetherehaven’tbeenanyissueswithareas ofthemarkingswearingofforpiecesbeingremovedbynormaltrafficorbyplows, sweepersorothersuchstreetandsidewalkmaintenanceequipment. IfCouncilapprovesthereconstructionofthetwocrosswalksthisevening,constructionof theimprovementswouldlikelybegininlateAugust.ThiswillallowthePublicWorks Departmentafewweekstoremovetheexistingpaverbricksandconcreteedgingfrom withintheexistingcrosswalks,compactthesubgrade,thenpavethevoidareaswith bituminouspavementmatchingtheexistingpavementsection.Thescheduleforthese improvementswillthereforedependontheavailabilityofPublicWorksstafftocomplete theremovalsandpavingoperations. ItshouldbenotedthattheTrafficPatternsXDthermoplasticcrosswalkmarkingcouldalso beinstalledinthetwocrosswalksattheintersectionofWalnutand7th Streetsshould Councilwanttoreplacetheproposedwhitezebracrosswalkstripingwiththistypeof markingtoprovideconsistentcrosswalktreatmentsalongtheWalnutStreetcorridor. Thismarkingmayalsobemorevisibletomotorists,makingitasafertreatmentforthe intersectionofWalnutand7th Streetwhichcarriesasignificantvolumeoftraffic.This willbediscussedinmoredetailattheAugust8th CouncilmeetingincaseCouncilwants toaddthisasachangeordertothe2011StreetReconstructionproject.Additionally,it haslongbeenagoaloftheCounciltocomeupwitheconomicalandeffectivemarkings forothercross-walklocations.Perhapsthismethodcouldbelookedatinthefuturefor utilizationinotherhighvehicle/pedestrianconflictlocations. A1.BudgetImpact:BasedonthequotereceivedfromDecorativePavement Markings,replacingtheexistingbrickpaversandconcreteedgestripswiththe stampedbituminouspavementoverlaidwiththeTrafficPatternsXDthermoplastic markingsinbothcrosswalkswillcostabout$8,750.ItisestimatedthatPublic Workswillalsoneedtospendabout$2,500removingtheexistingcrosswalk paversandconcreteedgestripsandpavingthevoids.Itshouldbenotedthatthe City’s2011budgetincludes$10,000forreconstructingthesingleWalnutStreet crosswalk.Fundsfortheseimprovementswouldcomefromthesamesource(s) usedfortheoverallWalnutStreetBoulevardImprovementsproject. A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:IfCouncilapprovesthiswork,variousstafffromthe PublicWorksandEngineeringDepartmentswillbeimpacted. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.MotiontoapprovereconstructionofthetwopedestriancrosswalksatWalnutand 5½StreetswiththeWalnutStreetBoulevardImprovements,CityProjectNo. 11C003,usingTrafficPatternsXDthermoplasticmarkings. 2.Motiondenyingapprovaltoreconstructthetwocrosswalksatthistime. CityCouncilAgenda:7/25/11 3 C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsapprovingAlternativeAction#1forthereasonsnotedherein. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: QuotefromDecorativePavementMarkingLLC WarrantyTermsandConditionsfromDecorativePavementMarkingLLC TwopicturesofTrafficPatternsXDcrosswalksatTH25&Hwy10 TwopicturesofDuraThermbrandcrosswalkmarkings CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/11 1 5I.ConsiderationofapprovingdraftCableFranchiseOrdinanceforBridgewater TelephoneCompanyLLC,dbaTDSTelecom (JJ,JO) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: AttheJuly11th meeting,Councilheldapublichearingandgrantedacablefranchiseto BridgewaterTelephoneCompanyLLC,dbaTDSTelecom.UnderMNStateStatutes Chapter238,acablefranchiseagreementmustbepresentedforapproval7daysormore afterthepublichearing.CouncilisnowaskedtoapproveapreliminaryCableFranchise Ordinance,whichoutlinesthecablefranchiseagreementbetweentheCityofMonticello andBridgewater/TDSTelecom.Afterapproval,thisCableFranchiseOrdinancewillbe presentedtotheSherburneWrightCableCommission(SWCC)onAugust4th fortheir approvalasrequiredbythecommissionagreementwithitsmembercities. Inkeepingwiththestaterequirementthatnoagreementcanhavetermsandconditions morefavorableorlessburdensomethananexistingagreement,AttorneyJoelJamnik craftedtheBridgewater/TDSCableFranchiseOrdinancetobealmostidenticaltothe CableFranchiseOrdinancethatwasapprovedwithCharterCommunicationsand FiberNetMonticello.ThisdoesnotlimitBridgewater/TDSfromexceedingthe provisionsasstatedintheordinance.However,ataminimum,theymustprovide equitableservicesinthesameareacoveredbytheothertwoserviceproviders. TheproposedordinanceoutlinestheabilityforBridgewater/TDStobuildacablesystem andoffercableservice,setsafranchisetermofabout10years,andestablishesthe serviceareaasthecorporateboundariesoftheCity.Therearesectionsdescribingthe systemcapacity,communityserviceprogramming,dropsandservicestopublic buildings,andprovisionsrelatedtofranchiseandPEG(public,educational& government)capitalfees. TheCableFranchiseOrdinancewillbesenttotheSherburneWrightCableCommission membersfortheirreviewinadvanceoftheAugust4th Commissionmeeting.Itislikely thattheCommissionwouldgrantapprovalwithnochanges.However,ifthereshouldbe arequestforanychanges,thosewouldbeforwardedtoourCityAttorneyfor consultationwithBridgewater/TDSstaff.Anychangeswouldbeincorporatedintothe finalordinancedocumenttobepresentedforadoptionattheAugust22nd council meeting. A1.BudgetImpact:TDSTelecomhaspaidafranchisefeeof$2500whichis expectedtocovermostexpenses. A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:CityAttorneyJoelJamnikpreparedthedraftordinance. CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/11 2 B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.MotiontoapprovedraftCableFranchiseOrdinanceforBridgewaterTelephone CompanyLLC,dbaTDSTelecomandauthorizestafftopresentfranchise agreementtotheSWCCfortheirapprovalonAugust4,2011. 2.MotiontodenyapprovalofthedraftCableFranchiseOrdinanceforBridgewater TelephoneCompanyLLC,dbaTDSTelecomatthistime. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: DraftCableFranchiseOrdinanceforBridgewaterTelephoneCompanyLLC,dbaTDS Telecom ORDINANCENO.____ Page1 CITYOFMONTICELLO WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA ANORDINANCEGRANTINGAFRANCHISETOBRIDGEWATER TELEPHONECOMPANYD/B/ATDSTELECOMTOCONSTRUCT, OPERATE,ANDMAINTAINACABLESYSTEMANDPROVIDE CABLESERVICEINTHECITYOFMONTICELLO,MINNESOTA RECITALS 1.ThisCableFranchiseOrdinance(“Franchise”)ismadeandenteredintobyandbetween theCityofMonticello,amunicipalcorporationoftheStateofMinnesota(“City”)and TDSBridgeWaterTelephoneCompanyd/b/aTDSTelecom(“TDS”). 2.PursuanttoMinnesotaStatutesChapter238,inparticular§238.08andCityOrdinance No.419(“CableOrdinance”),theCityisauthorizedtograntandissueanon-exclusive franchiseauthorizingTDStoprovidecableserviceandconstruct,operate,andmaintaina cablesystemintheCitysubjecttoChapter238. 3.UponevaluationofTDS’stechnical,financial,legalqualifications,completionof franchisenegotiations,andasaresultofapublichearing,theCityfindsthatitisinthe bestinterestsoftheCityanditsresidentstograntandissuetheFranchisetoTDS. 4.ThisFranchiseisnonexclusiveandisintendedtocomplywithapplicablelawsand regulations.AnyapplicablerequirementestablishedbyMinn.Stat.238.084orotherstate orfederallawnotexpresslyincorporatedinthisFranchiseshallbedeemedincorporated byreferenceasthoughfullysetforthherein. 5.ThisFranchiseisnotintendedtograntafranchisetoTDSontermsthataremore favorableorlessburdensomethanthoseintheexistingcablefranchisewithCharter Communications,FiberNet,oranyfuturefranchisee.ShouldCharterCommunications, FiberNetoranyfuturefranchiseebelievethatanycablefranchiseissuedbytheCityis morefavorableorlessburdensomethanthoseinanexistingfranchise,thatfranchisee shallhavetherightprovidedbyOrdinance419topetitiontheCityCouncilforfranchise amendmentstorelievethefranchiseeofprovisionsmakingitsfranchiselessfavorableor moreburdensome.Thoseproposalsmayincluderequestsforamendmentstoeithertheir franchiseorthisFranchise,andtheCityCouncilreservestherighttoamendthis ordinanceortoseektoamendotherfranchiseordinancestocomplywiththisstandard. 2 THECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFMONTICELLOHEREBYORDAINS: SECTION1.GENERALPROVISIONS Section1.1 Definitions.Unlessotherwisedefinedherein,theterms,phrases,and wordscontainedinthisFranchisehavethemeaningprovidedintheCableOrdinance.Terms, phrasesandwordscontainedinthisFranchisethatarenotdefinedhereorintheCableOrdinance willhavetheirnormalandcustomarymeaning. Section1.2 WrittenNotice.Allnotices,reports,ordemandsrequiredtobegivenin writingunderthisFranchiseortheCableOrdinancemustbedeliveredpersonallytotheGeneral ManagerofTDSortheCityAdministratorordepositedintheUnitedStatesmailinasealed envelope,withregisteredorcertifiedmailpostageprepaidthereon,addressedtothepartyto whomnoticeisbeinggiven,asfollows: IftoCity:CityofMonticello Attn:CityAdministrator 505WalnutAvenue,Suite1 Monticello,Minnesota55362-8822 Withcopiesto:Chair,Sherburne/WrightCountiesCableCommunications Commission c/oCityofBuffalo 212CentralAvenue Buffalo,Minnesota55313 IftoTDS:TDSTelecomAttn:Manager-VideoServices 525JunctionRoad Madison,WI53717 Suchaddressesmaybechangedbyeitherpartyuponnoticetotheotherpartygivenas providedinthisSection. SECTION2.GRANTOFFRANCHISE Section2.1 Grant. a.TDSisauthorizedtoerect,construct,operateandmaintainin,along, across,above,overandundertherights-of-way,nowinexistenceandasmaybecreated orestablishedduringthetermofthisFranchiseanypoles,wires,cable,underground conduits,manholes,andotherconductorsandfixturesnecessaryforthemaintenanceand operationofaCableSystemintheCity.NothinginthisFranchiseshallbeconstruedto prohibitTDSfromofferinganyserviceoveritsCableSystemthatisnotprohibitedby federal,stateorlocallaw. b.ThisFranchiseisgrantedpursuanttotheMonticelloCableOrdinance.By acceptingthisFranchise,TDSagreestobeboundbythetermsoftheMonticelloCable OrdinanceandthisFranchise.Intheeventofanyconflictbetweentheprovisionsofthis 3 FranchiseandtheMonticelloCableOrdinance,theprovisionsofthisFranchiseshall govern. c.ThisFranchiseshallbenonexclusiveandCitymaygrantadditional franchisesatanytime.TheCitywillnotgrantanadditionalfranchiseontermsand conditionsmorefavorableorlessburdensomethanthoseinthisFranchise.TheCitymay imposeadditionaltermsandconditionsinanyadditionalfranchise. d.IntheeventtheCitygrantsanadditionalfranchisethatTDSbelievesis morefavorableorlessburdensomethaninthisFranchise,TDSshallhavearightto petitionforfranchiseamendmentstorelieveTDSofprovisionsmakingitsFranchiseless favorableormoreburdensome.TDSshallfileapetitionthat: 1.Identifiesthecompetitor(s); 2.IdentifiesthebasisforTDS’sbeliefthatcertainprovisionsofthe additionalfranchisearemorefavorableorlessburdensomethanits existingFranchise; 3.Identifiesthefranchiseprovisionstobeamended. Section2.2 FranchiseTerm.ThisFranchiseisgrantedforatermthatwillexpireon March29,2020(the“ExpirationDate”),unlesssoonerrenewedorrevoked.TheExpiration DatematchestheexpirationdatefortheotherfranchisedcableoperatorsintheCityanditisthe City’sintenttoaddressfranchiserenewalrequestsofCharter,FiberNetandTDSatthesame timepriortotheExpirationDate.AnyrenewalofthisFranchiseshallbeperformedin accordancewithapplicablefederal,stateandlocallawsandregulations.Pursuantto47U.S.C. 546,TDSshallprovidenoticeofitsintenttoseekrenewalofthisFranchise36-30monthsprior totheFranchiseExpirationDate. Section2.3 ServiceArea. a.ThisFranchiseisgrantedforthecorporateboundariesoftheCity,asit existsfromtimetotime,subjecttothedensityrequirementofSection2.3.bbelow.The CitywillnotifyTDSinwritingintheeventtheCityannexesanyareasthatTDSwillbe requiredtoserve. b.TDSwillextenditsCableSystemandoffercableservice,withina reasonabletime,afterarequestforservice,toareaswithadensityofatleastnine(9) residentialunitsperone-quarter(1/4)cablemileofsystem,asmeasuredfromthenearest CableSystemtrunklineordistributioncableasofthedateofsuchrequestforservice. Wherethedensityislessthanthatspecifiedabove,TDSmayrequirethatpersons requestingservicepayaportionofthecostofthecapitalcostofthelineextensionin advance.TDSshallprovideafreewrittenestimateofthetotalcostforextensionandthe requiredpaymentamountwithinfifteen(15)daysoftherequestforservice.Thecharge forinstallationorextensionforeachpersonrequestingserviceshallnotexceedaprorata shareoftheactualcostofextendingtheservice.Subscribersshallalsoberesponsiblefor 4 anystandard/non-standardinstallationchargestoextendtheCableSystemfromthetapto theresidence. SECTION3.SYSTEM Section3.1 SystemCapacity.TDScurrentlyoperatesandmaintainsa communicationssystemwhichprovidestelecommunicationsandinformationservicesto residentsandbusinesses(“TelecommunicationsNetwork”)withintheCitypursuanttoauthority prescribedintheCertificateofNeedissuedbytheMinnesotaPublicUtilitiesCommission. UtilizingitsTelecommunicationsNetwork,GranteeshallmaintainandoperatewithintheCity anInternetProtocoltelevision(IPTV)applicationthroughwhich Internettelevision servicesare deliveredusingthearchitectureandnetworkingmethodsof InternetProtocol overapacket- switchednetworkinfrastructuresystem,generallyreferredtointhisFranchisehereinasa“Cable System”providingaminimumofatleast75videoprogrammedchannelsthroughoutthetermof thisFranchise.TheCableSystemmusthavereturncapabilityandpermit“narrowcasting”as providedinSection4.2(c)unlesssufficientchannelsareavailableasspecifiedinthatSection. Section3.2 ConstructionDeadline.ExceptforTDS’sCableSystemextension obligationspursuanttoSection2.3,systemconstructionissubstantiallycomplete.Exceptas otherwiserequiredbyaRight-ofWayOrdinance,TDSwillusebesteffortstocompleteany CableSystemextensionandconstructionofnewfacilitiesfornewdevelopments contemporaneouswithinstallationofotherutilities.TheCityshallprovidereasonableandtimely advancewrittennoticeofthelocationofallnewdevelopmentstoTDS. SECTION4.COMMUNITYSERVICES Section4.1 CommercialVideoProgramming.TDSwillprovidebroadcategoriesof videoprogramming,includingnews,sportsandentertainment. Section4.2 PEGAccessFacilities. a.AccessChannels.TDSmustdedicateaminimumoftwo(2)channelsfor PEGAccessprogramming.Thetwo(2)PEGAccessChannelsmustbecablecastonthe BasicCableServicetier.AllsubscriberswhoreceiveCableServicesofferedontheCable SystemmustreceivethePEGAccessChannelsatnoadditionalcharge.Nothingherein shalldiminishtheCity’srightstosecureadditionalchannelspursuanttoMinn.Stat.§ 238.084,Subd.1(z),andapplicableFCCregulations. b.ResponsibilityforPEGAccess.TheCitywilloperate,administer,and managePEGAccessprogrammingpursuanttothisSection4.2.TheCitywillbe responsibleforthechannelcurrentlyusedforpublicaccessprogramming.TheCitymay delegateitsPEGAccessauthorityandresponsibilitiestotheSherburneWrightCable Commission.TDSacknowledgesthattheCommissionmaycoordinatethecollectionand expenditureofFranchiseFeesandPEGCapitalFeesbyandamongtheCommission’s membermunicipalities.NothinghereinshallobligatetheCitytomakeequipmentor channelsavailableforpublicaccessprogrammingortoanyparticularprogrammer. 5 c.Narrowcast.IfinthefutureTDSservesareasoutsidetheCity,atleastone (1)PEGAccessChannelmustpermittheCitytoprovide“narrowcast”programmingof events;i.e.permitsaprogramtobecablecastonsuchchannelforviewingsolelybyCity residentswhileresidentsinadjoiningtownshipsorcitiesservedbyTDSsimultaneously viewotherprogrammingonthatchannel.ThisprovisionmaybewaivedbytheCityif TDSprovidessufficientchannelstoallowallservedareastoviewallprogrammed events. d.LiveOrigination.TDSmustensurethatliveprogrammingmaybe originatedandcablecastfromthepublicinstitutionalsiteslistedinExhibitAattached heretoprovidedhowever,thatTDSshallonlyberequiredtopaythecostofthefirstone hundredandfifty(150)feetofanynewsystemconstructionnecessarytopermitlive originationatsuchsiteandshallnotberequiredtoprovideend-userequipment.TheCity maydesignateadditionalliveprogrammingsites.TheCityshallpayanyadditional, actualconstructioncostspriortoadditionalconstructionandshallberesponsibleforthe provisionofend-userequipment.TDSmustensurethatthesystemmeetsthetechnical standardsattachedheretoasExhibitBatallliveoriginationsites.TDSmustfurther ensurethattheCitycan“narrowcast”programmingoriginatedfromallofthesites designatedpursuanttothisparagraphunlessTDSprovidessufficientchannelstoallow allservedareastoviewallprogrammedevents. e.PEGAccessCapitalSupport.InadditiontotherequirementsofSection 4.2(a)-(d)above,theCitymayrequireTDStocollectandremitaPEGCapitalFeeofup toeighty-fivecents($.85)persubscriber,permonthtosupportcommunityprogramming. TDSshallremitsuchpaymentsonthesamescheduleastheFranchiseFee.Allamounts paidshallbesubjecttoauditandrecomputationandacceptancethereofdoesnot constituteanaccordthatamountspaidarecorrect.TDSmustbenotifiedinwritingonor beforeOctober1stoftheamountofthePEGCapitalFeetobeeffectiveonJanuary1stof thefollowingyear.IftheCityfailstoprovidethewrittennotificationrequiredhereinby October1st,thenthePEGCapitalFeeforthefollowingcalendaryearshallremainasset thepreviousyear.TDSmayitemizeanyPEGCapitalFeeonsubscriber’sbills.Payment byTDSmustbeseparatefromandinadditiontoanyFranchiseFee.TheCity,TDSand othercablefranchiseesshalljointlyfundandsponsorasubscribersurveyapproximately duringthefifthandtenthyearsoftheFiberNetfranchiseforthepurposeofassessing subscribersatisfactionwithPEGAccessprogrammingandthelevelsoffinancialsupport thatsubscribersarewillingtoprovide.Uponcompletionofthesurvey,theCityandTDS shallmeettodiscussthelevelofsupportforPEGAccessprogrammingandenterinto goodfaithdiscussionsregardingrevisionstothisSectionthatmaybeappropriateinlight ofthesurvey. f.UseofPEGCapitalFee.TheCityandTDSagreethattheCitywill expendthePEGCapitalFeessolelyforcapitalcosts(consistentwithGAAP)associated withPEGAccess.HistoricallytheCityhasprovided,onanannualbasis,substantial financialsupportforPEGAccessprogramming.InconsiderationforTDS’sobligationto remitthePEGCapitalFee,theCityagreestoprovidefinancialsupportforPEGAccess thatisequivalenttotheamountofPEGCapitalFeescollectedandprovidedtotheCity. ByMarch31stofeachyear,theCityshallprovideTDSwithanannualreportofany 6 expendituresofthePEGAccessCapitalFeetoinsuresuchfeesareusedforcapitalcosts relatedtoPEGAccess.TheannualreportshallalsodemonstratehowtheCityfulfilledits requirementtoprovidematchingsupportforPEGAccess.Basedonthereport,TDSmay sendawrittennoticetotheCityallegingthattheCityfailedtodemonstratethatthePEG CapitalFeewasusedforcapitalorthatmatchingPEGAccesssupportwasprovided.The Cityshallhavethirty(30)daysafterreceiptofthewrittennoticetoprovideadditional informationdemonstratingcompliancewiththerequirementsofthisSection.IfTDS continuestoallegethattheCityhasnotcompliedwithitsobligationsherein,TDSmay providewrittennoticeofitsintenttoreduceand/ordiscontinuecollectingandremitting thePEGCapitalFee.IftheCitydisputesTDS’sactions,itmayinitiateanyenforcement actionundertheCableOrdinanceitdeemsappropriate. g.AccessRules.TheCitymayimplementrulesgoverningPEGAccess channelsandprogramming. h.ParityofObligations.TheCitywillimposeequivalentPEGAccess obligationsonanyotherfranchisedproviderofCableServiceintheCitytotheextent providedbylaw. Section4.3 DropsandServicetoPublicBuildings. a.TDSmustprovidemonthlyBasicCableServiceandCableProgramming Service(excludingpay-per-channelorpay-per-program)andinstallone(1)Dropandone (1)outletwithoutchargetothepublicinstitutionalsiteslistedinExhibitAattached hereto.TheprogrammingprovidedbyTDSisnotforpublicdisplay.TheCityshallhold TDSharmlessforanycopyright,orotherpenalties,incurredduetoimproperuseoffree service.TDSshallnotberequiredtoprovideconverters. b.TDSmustprovideaDrop,outletandBasicCableServiceandCable ProgrammingServicetosuchotheraccreditedpublicschoolsorpublicadministration buildingsastheCitymaysubsequentlydesignate,providedhowever,thatTDSshallonly berequiredtopaythecostofthefirstonehundredandfifty(150)feetofanynecessary CableSystemconstruction.TheCityorinstitutionshallpayanyadditionalactual constructioncost.TDSwillhaveareasonabletimefromthedesignationofadditional sitestocompleteextension.AdditionalDropsand/oroutletsatinstitutionallocations mustbeprovidedbyTDSatthecostofTDS’stimeandmaterial.Alternatively, institutionsmayaddoutletsattheirownexpense. Section4.4 DropBox.TDSmustmaintainalocaldropboxforreceivingsubscriber paymentsintheCity. SECTION5.ADMINISTRATIONPROVISIONS Section5.1 FranchiseFee. a.TDSshallpayaFranchiseFeetotheCityinanamountequaltofive percent(5%)ofitsgrossrevenues.TDSshallremitFranchiseFeepaymentstotheCity 7 onaquarterlybasiswithin60daysofthecloseoftheprecedingcalendarquarter. Paymentsshallbebasedongrossrevenuesgeneratedduringtheprecedingquarter. b.EachFranchiseFeepaymentmustbeaccompaniedbyareportinform reasonablyacceptabletotheCitydetailingthecomputationofthepayment.Allamounts paidaresubjecttoauditandrecomputationbytheCity,andacceptanceofanypayment mustnotbeconstruedasanaccordthattheamountpaidisinfactthecorrectamount.In accordancewithMinn.Stat.§541.05,anyactiontorecoverFranchiseFeesmustbe commencedwithinsix(6)yearsofreceiptoftheFranchiseFeepaymentorduedatefor suchpayment. c.IntheeventthatanyFranchiseFeepaymentorrecomputedpaymentisnot madeonorbeforethedatesspecifiedherein,TDSshallpayaninterestcharge,computed fromsuchduedate,attheannualrateofonepercentovertheprimeinterestrate. Section5.2 RulesofTDS.TDSmaypromulgatesuchrules,termsandconditions governingtheconductofitsbusinessprovidedthatsuchrules,termsandconditionsmustnotbe inconflictwiththeprovisionsofthisFranchise,theCableOrdinance,orapplicablelawsor regulations. SECTION6.INDEMNIFICATION,INSURANCE,BONDSANDSECURITYFUND Section6.1 Indemnification.ByacceptanceofthisFranchise,TDSagreesto indemnify,defend,andholdtheCityharmlessinaccordancewiththeCableOrdinance. Section6.2 Insurance.AtthetimeofacceptanceofthisFranchise,TDSwillfilewith theCityaCertificateofInsuranceinaccordancewiththeCableOrdinance.TDSmustmaintain suchinsurancefortheentiretermofthisFranchise.TheinsuranceforTDSmaybepurchased andmaintainedjointlywiththeCity’sotherinsurancecoverage. Section6.3 SecurityforPerformance. a.AtthetimeofacceptanceofthisFranchise,TDSshalldelivertoCitya performancebond,informandsubstanceacceptabletoCity,fromaNationalorState bankapprovedbyCity,intheamountof$50,000. b.TheperformancebondshallensureTDS’sfaithfulperformancein accordancewiththetermsofthisFranchise,theCableOrdinance,andapplicablelaws andregulations.AfterprovidingTDSwithnoticeandanopportunitytocurein accordancewithSection14oftheCableOrdinance,theCitymaydrawonthe performancebondintheeventTDSfailstocomplywithanylaw,ordinanceor regulation,tocompensatetheCityforanydamagesorlosssufferedbytheCityasa result,andfurtherguaranteeingpaymentbyTDSofclaims,liensandfeesduetheCity whicharise.IntheeventthisFranchiseisrevokedortherightshereunderrelinquishedor abandonedbyTDS,theCityisentitledtocollectanyresultantdamages,costsor liabilitiesincurredbytheCity. 8 c.TheCityandTDSacknowledgethatitmaybedifficultorimpossibleto accuratelyquantifyactualdamagesorlossessufferedbytheCityduetoaviolationor unsatisfiedobligationunderthisFranchise,theCableOrdinance,orapplicablelawsor regulations.Suchviolationsorunsatisfiedobligationsmay,however,bepresumedto harmtheCityandthepublic’sinterest.Accordingly,theCitymay,initsreasonable discretion,collectliquidateddamagesinanamountofuptoTwoHundredandFifty Dollars($250.00)perviolationofanyprovisionofthisFranchise,theCableOrdinance, orapplicablelawsorregulations.Eachviolationmaybeconsideredaseparateviolation forwhichseparateliquidateddamagescanbeimposed. d.IntheeventtheCitywillmakeanyclaimagainstthefund,theCitymust complywithSection14oftheCableOrdinancegoverningenforcementofthisFranchise. e.TheCity’srightshereinareinadditiontoallotherrightstheCitymay haveandtheCity’sexerciseofsuchrightsdoesnotconstituteanexclusiveremedynor limitanyotherright. Section6.4 ConstructionSecurity. a.TDSshallcomplywithMinnesotaStatutes§574.26whenundertakingany constructionprojectsorenteringintoanyconstructioncontracts.Anyperformanceor paymentbondsobtainedshallnametheCityofMonticelloaswellasTDS. b.IfTDSoranyofitscontractorsfailtoperforminaccordancewiththe termsofthisFranchise,theCableOrdinance,andapplicablelawsandregulations,the CitymaydrawontheperformancebondestablishedinSection6.3.IntheeventtheCity willmakeanyclaimagainsttheperformancebond,theCitymustcomplywithSection14 oftheCableOrdinancegoverningenforcementofthisFranchise. c.TheCity’srightspursuanttothisSectionareinadditiontoallotherrights theCitymayhave.Anyactionwithrespecttothesecurityfunddoesnotconstitutean exclusiveremedynorlimitanyotherright. SECTION7.MISCELLANEOUSREQUIREMENTS Section7.1 AmendmentofFranchiseOrdinance.TDSandtheCitymaymutually agree,fromtimetotime,toamendthisFranchise.Anychanges,modificationsoramendmentsto thisFranchisemustbemadeinwriting,signedbytheCityandTDS.Nothinghereinisintended toexpandordiminishtherightsgiventoCityunderstatelaw.TheCityreservesitslawfulrights, includingitspolicepowersandordinance-makingauthority. Section7.2 ForceMajeure.IntheeventTDS’sperformanceofthisFranchiseis preventedduetoacausebeyonditsreasonablecontrol,suchfailuretoperformmustbeexcused fortheperiodofsuchinabilitytoperform. Section7.3 Severability.Ifanyterm,conditionorprovisionofthisFranchiseorthe applicationthereoftoanypersonorcircumstanceisheld,toanyextent,invalid,preemptedor unenforceable,theremainderandalltheterms,provisionsandconditionshereinmust,inall 9 otherrespects,continuetobeeffectiveprovidedthelossoftheinvalid,preemptedor unenforceableprovisionsdonotsubstantiallyaltertheagreementbetweentheparties.Inthe eventalaw,ruleorregulationissubsequentlyrepealed,rescinded,amendedorotherwise changedsothattheFranchiseprovisionwhichhadbeenheldinvalid,preemptedormodifiedis nolongerinconflicttherewith,suchFranchiseprovisionwillreturntofullforceandeffectand thereafterbebindinguponthirty(30)dayswrittennoticetoTDS. Section7.4 NonenforcementbyCity.TDSisnotrelievedofitsobligationsto complywiththisFranchiseortheCableOrdinanceduetoanyfailureordelayoftheCityto enforcepromptcompliance.TheCityandTDSmayeachonlywaiveitsrightsbyexpresslyso statinginwriting. Section7.5 RightsCumulative.AlloftheCity’sandTDS’srightsandremedies pursuanttothisFranchiseareinadditiontoandnotexclusiveofanyandallotherrightsand remediesavailabletotheCityorTDS. Section7.6 WorkPerformedbyOthers.AllobligationsofthisFranchiseapplyto workperformedbyanyagent,subcontractororotherpersonperforminganyworkorserviceson behalfofTDSpursuanttothisFranchisetotheextentapplicable,however,innoeventwillany suchpersonobtainanyrightstomaintainandoperateaCableSystemorprovideCableService. Section7.7 EntireAgreement.ThisFranchisesetsforththeentireagreement betweenthepartiesrespectingthesubjectmatterhereof.Allagreements,covenants, representations,andwarranties,expressandimplied,oralandwritten,ofthepartieswithregard tothesubjectmatterhereofarecontainedherein.Nootheragreements,covenants, representationsorwarranties,expressorimplied,oralorwritten,havebeenmadebyanypartyto anotherwithrespecttothematterofthisFranchise.Allpriorandcontemporaneous conversations,negotiations,possibleandallegedagreements,representations,covenantsand warrantieswithrespecttothesubjectmatterhereofarewaived,mergedhereinandthereinand aresupersededherebyandthereby. Section7.8 TerminationandAbandonment.Notwithstandinganythingfoundin Sections11.2,11.3(d),14.1or14.2oftheCableOrdinance,TDSshallnotberequiredto removeitsTelecommunicationsNetworkortorelocatetheTelecommunicationsNetworkorany portionthereof,ortosellanyright,titleandinterestinitsTelecommunicationsNetworktothe City,asaresultofanytermination,revocationorforfeitureofthisFranchiseorabandonmentof theCableSystemprovidedtheCableSystemorTelecommunicationsNetworkisbeingusedoris usablebyTDSfortheprovisionofTelecommunicationsServicesorbroadbandservicesas definedbyapplicablestateandfederallaw.TDSshallhavetherighttoterminatethisFranchise uponninety(90)daysadvancewrittennoticetotheCityandanysuchterminationshallnot impactTDSrighttocontinuetheprovisionofTelecommunicationsservicesandbroadband servicesovertheTelecommunicationsNetwork. 10 SECTION8.ACCEPTANCEOFFRANCHISE Section8.1 PublicationandEffectiveDate.ThisFranchisewillbeeffectiveonthe dateofacceptancebyTDS.ThisFranchiseshallbeenactedandpublishedinaccordancewith applicablelocalandMinnesotalaw. Section8.2 TimeforAcceptance. a.TDSmustacceptthisFranchisewithinsixty(60)daysofenactmentbythe City,unlessthetimeforacceptanceisextendedbytheCity.AcceptancebyTDSwillbe deemedthegrantofthisFranchiseforallpurposes. b.UponacceptanceofthisFranchise,TDSandCitywillbeboundbyallthe terms,conditionsandobligationscontainedherein. Section8.3 MannerforAcceptance.TDSmustacceptthisFranchiseinthefollowing manner: a.TheFranchisemustbefullyexecutedandacknowledgedbyTDSand deliveredtotheCity. b.TDSmustalsodeliveranyconstructionbondandinsurancecertificates requiredhereinthathavenotpreviouslybeendelivered,withitsacceptance. Section8.4 FailuretoAccept.IntheeventTDSdoesnottimelyacceptthisFranchise inaccordancewiththerequirementsherein,thisFranchiseandallrightsgrantedhereinarenull andvoid. ADOPTEDBY theMonticelloCityCouncilthis______dayof_______________,2011. CITYOFMONTICELLO ______________________________ MayorClintHerbst ATTEST: JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator ACCEPTED:ThisFranchiseisacceptedandTDSTelecomagreestobeboundbyitsterms andconditions. BridgeWaterTelephoneCompanyd/b/a TDSTelecom Date:_______________,2011By: [TBD],Manager-VideoServices 11 EXHIBITA (LiveOriginationandFreeServiceSites) Monticello MunicipalLiquorStore545Hwy25Monticello55362Drop EllisonPark825EastRiverStreetMonticello55362Live/Drop SwanPark121MississippiDriveMonticello55362Live/Drop MonticelloPublicLibrary2006thStreetwestMonticello55362Live/Drop XcelBallfieldComplex2171W.RiverStreetMonticello55362Live/Drop SoccerPark5550SchoolBlvd.Monticello55362Live/Drop HockeyArena1000EastBroadwayMonticello55362Live/Drop CityHall/CommunityCenter505WalnutStreetMonticello55362Live/Drop HighSchool5225SchoolBlvd.Monticello55362Live/Drop 12 EXHIBITB (TechnicalStandards-LiveOriginationSites) WithrespecttoallsiteslistedinExhibitA,theCableSystemshallmeetorexceedthefollowing requirements: 1.TheCableSystemshalloperateinconformancewiththetechnicalstandardspromulgated bytheFCCpursuanttoTitle47,Sections76.601to76.617,asmaybeamendedor modifiedfromtimetotime. 2.TheCableSystemshallbecapableofcontinuous24-houroperationwithoutsignal degradation. 3.TheCableSystemshallbecapableofoperationwithoutfailure,materialperformance changesorsignaldegradationoveranoutdoortemperaturerangeof-40degreesFto +130degreesFandoveravariationinsupplyvoltagesfrom105to130voltsAC. 4.TheCableSystemwillprovideaccesschannelconnectionsuptothedemarcationpoint, bothupstreamanddownstream,withoutmaterialsignaldegradationordeteriorationand withsignalqualityequaltoorbetterthananyotherchannels.Materialsignaldegradation ordeteriorationwhereanysignalproblemincludingghostingorotheraudioorvisual distortionorinterferenceisapparentwithoutspecialtesting.TDSshallnotberesponsible fortechnicalproblemsderivingfromfacilitiesorequipmentlocatedbeyondthe demarcationpoint,withintheinstitutionalsite. CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/11 1 5J.ConsiderationofgrantinganindividualpensioncontributionincreaseforVolunteer FirefighterReliefAssociationmembers (JohnBauer,TK) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: TheMonticelloVolunteerFirefightersReliefAssociationmembershipisrequestingthat CityCouncilincreasetheirretirementbenefitfromthepresent$2,650peryearto$2,750 peryearformorethan20yearsofserviceonthefiredepartment.Byincreasingthe benefitlevelsto$2,750theCitywouldnotberequiredtocontributeadditionalfundsto theReliefAssociation;however,theAssociationwouldcarrya$463deficitonthebooks intonextyear. TheReliefAssociationalsocalculatedwhattheCityrequiredcontributionwouldbeif thebenefitamountremainedat$2,650peryearandincreasedto$2,700peryear.Under bothofthesebenefitlevelsnoadditionalcontributionbytheCitywouldberequired. Thefollowingisasummaryofthepreviousbenefitchangesthathavebeenapproved: Year BenefitAmount 2000 $2,085 2001 $2,175 2003$2,225 2004$2,625 2005$3,050 2006$3,275 2007$3,950 2008$3,500 2009$2,650 2010$2,650 2011proposed$2,750 ByAugust1st ofeachyear,theFireReliefAssociationistopresenttotheCityCouncila scheduleoftheproposedbenefitsandthetotalliabilitiesassociatedwiththeproposed benefitincomparisontotheassetsoftheassociation.Theschedulesenclosedwiththis agenda,indicatesthethreebenefitamountstomembersplustherequiredCity contribution. Basedonabenefitof$2,750asproposed,thefinancialreportshowsthetotalamountof liabilitythatwouldexistforthepensionamountforthenexttwoyearsandalsoincludes informationontheAssociation’scurrentassetsandprojectedincomeforthenextyear. MostoftheincomefromtheAssociationrelatestoaround$65,774peryearinStateAid, thatmustbeusedentirelyfortheirpensionsupport,andinvestmentearningsof$31,900 fromtheAssociation’sassets. Inthepast,ithasbeenCityCouncil’spolicythattheywouldonlyconsideradjustmentto theyearlypensioniftheassociationhassufficientincomeprojectedtocovertheincrease. CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/11 2 Inotherwords,theStateAidandinterestearningsoninvestmentsneedtobeata sufficientleveltocovernormalcostsofthepensioncalculations.The$2,750benefit doescreateasmalldeficitof$463,whilethe$2,650and$2,700benefitwouldresultina surplus. A1.BudgetImpact:AllthreebenefitlevelswouldhavenoimpactontheCity’s budget. A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Thereisnostaffimpactwiththisdecision. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiontograntthebenefitlevelincreaseto$2,750for2011. 2.Motiontograntanalternativebenefitslevel. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffsupportsAlternative#1. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: ScheduleFormsSC-11forLumpSumPensionPlans,ReportingYear2011forthethree benefitlevels CityCouncilAgenda:7/25/11 1 5K.ConsiderationofapprovingawaiveroftheBuildingPlanReviewFeeforthe MonticelloBigLakePetHospitalinaccordancewiththeBusinessExpansion IncentivePilotProgram (MB) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: TheCouncilauthorizedaBusinessExpansionIncentiveprograminJanuaryof2011. Theapprovedprogramstructureallowedforapplicantstoreceiveupto$5,000in buildingorplanningfeereductions.Theassistancewouldbeappliedonlytotheplan reviewcomponentofthebuildingpermitcost,planningapplication,ordemolition permits. Toqualifyfortheprogram,applicantsneedtobeanexistingbusinessseekingtoexpand attheircurrentlocationorexpandatanewlocationnMonticello.Theapplicantalso needstodemonstrateanabilitytomeetatleasttwoofthefollowingcriteria: 1.Createorretainjobs. 2.Redevelopment,expansion,orrenewalofexistingvacantunderutilized existingcommercialorindustrialproperties/buildings,includingoneofthe following: a)Increasebuildingsquarefootage b)Increasebuildingvaluation c)Increasedvisualappearanceorfunctionoffacility d)Productorserviceexpansion e)OccurswithintheCentralCommunityDistrict CityStaffreceivedanapplicationfromtheMonticello-BigLakePetHospitalrequesting toutilizethebusinessexpansionincentiveprogramtoreceiveawaiverofthebuilding permitplanreviewfeefortheconstructionofanewveterinaryhospital.Theapplicantis proposingtoconstructa7,000squarefootfullservicepethospitalatthepropertyknown as4134SchoolBoulevard(adjacenttoWalmart).Itisanticipatedthenewfacilitywill generatetwoadditionaljobsinMonticello. TheBuildingOfficialhasestimatedthebuildingpermitplanreviewfeeat$3,292.76.Itis anticipatedconstructionwillcommenceinAugustandbecompletedinDecemberofthis year. A1.BudgetImpact:ThecurrentcashbalanceoftheBusinessExpansionaccountin theLiquorStoreFundis$23,057.68.UponapprovaloftheMonticelloBigLake PetHospitalapplication,thefundbalancewillbe$19,764.92. A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Staffworkloadrequirementsconsistedofwritingthe Councilstaffreport. CityCouncilAgenda:7/25/11 2 B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiontoapprovewaivingtheestimated$3,292.76dollarbuildingplanreview feeonthebuildingpermitfortheMonticello-BigLakePetHospitalaspartofthe BusinessExpansionIncentivePilotProgram. 2.Motiontodenywaivingthebuildingpermitplanreviewfee. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: StaffrecommendsAlternative#1.Theproposedprojectmeetstheobjectivesofthe approvedBusinessExpansionIncentivePilotprogrambyaddingsquarefootage,creating additionaljobs,andincreasingbuildingvaluationinMonticello.Furthermore,theCity Councilhasapprovedthreepreviouswaiverrequests(Belde,Aroplax,DLLK). D.SUPPORTINGDATA: BusinessExpansionIncentivePilotApplication CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/2011 1 7.ConsiderationofacceptingquotesandawardingcontractforreplacementofHVAC unitsfortheMonticelloHelpCenter(FoodshelfandClothing)(TK,BW) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: CityCouncilisaskedtoreviewthequotesandawardacontractforreplacementthe HVACunitsattheMonticelloHelpCenter.Thecurrentsystemshaverustedoutheat exchangersandarepullingintoomanyampscausingthebreakerstotrip.Itshouldbe notedthat,withtheconditionthattheheatexchangersarein,itcouldbeunsafetoheat thefacilitythiswinterduetofumesbeingreleased.Staffsentrequestsforproposalsto localcompaniesandadvertisedtherequestforquotesontheCity’swebsiteforreplacing bothHVACsystemsandreceivedthreequotesasfollows: WilsonHVACCompany(Becker)$6,550.00 CustomSheetmetalofMonticello$7,612.00 CobraMechanicalServices(Richmond)$7,868.40 BasedonthequotesreceivedandtheCity’spurchasingpolicy,staffwouldrecommend awardingthecontracttoWilsonHVACCompany.Thisisbecausethelocalbidisin excessof5%overthelowestnon-localbid.Ourpolicyallowsthepurchasefromalocal providerifitisnomorethan5%higherthanthenon-localbid. A1.BudgetImpact:Thesefundswerenotincludedinthe2011budgetandwould comefromthereservesfromtheCapitalRevolvingFundwithpossiblecost sharingfromChristianSocialServices A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Staffhasbeencalledovertothehelpcenterseveral timestorestoreheat/airconditioning,thusthisrepairwouldfreeupstafftimefor otherduties. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.MotiontoacceptquotesandawardcontracttoWilsonHVACCompanyinthe amountof$6,550.00forreplacementofHVACunitsfortheMonticelloHelp Center. 2.MotiontodenyquotesandnotawardacontractforreplacingHVACunitsatthis time. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: Threequotes CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/11 1 8.ConsiderationofapprovingpurchaseofMinervaequipmentforwhole-homeDVR servicebyFiberNet (BR) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: CityCouncilisaskedtoapprovethepurchaseofMinervavideoequipmentenabling whole-homeDVRService.Theequipmentproposedwillallowourcustomerstowatch recordedprogramsonsettopboxesintheirhomeswhileonlyhavingoneDVR.This meansthatifsomethingisrecordedinthelivingroomitcouldbewatchedinthe bedroomoranyotherroomofthehouseaslongasthereisanotherboxinthatroom. Alsothecustomerwillbeabletowatchmorethanoneprogramthatwasrecordedonthe DVRindifferentroomsatthesametime.Thisequipmentissomethingthatisinstalledin ourheadendlocationanddoesnotrequireanydifferentequipmentforthecustomer. ThisproductandfeaturewillallowFiberNettostayaheadofthecompetitionandprovide stateoftheartvideoservicetoournewandexistingcustomers. A1.BudgetImpact:$14,250 A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Therewillbeminimalstaffworkloadimpact. Installationoftheunitandimplementationshouldnottakelongerthan2days. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiontoapprovepurchasingequipmenttoprovidewhole-homeDVRserviceat anestimatedcostof$14,250. 2.Motiontodenythepurchaseatthistime. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1.TheFiberNetAdvisoryBoardunanimously recommendedthepurchaseofthisequipmentattheirJuly12th meeting. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: None CityCouncilAgenda:07/25/11 1 9.ConsiderationofapprovingpurchaseofaRedundancyRouterbyFiberNet (BR) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: CityCouncilisaskedtoapprovethepurchaseofaredundancyrouter.Thisrouter includesafeaturethatwillallowcustomerstoutilizeeitheroneoftheredundantdata connections.Forinstance,ifoneofthetwodataservicelinesservingthecityiscut,the routerwillshiftcustomerstotheoperationalcircuit.Therouternotonlyservestoenable instantaneoususeofaredundantsystembutalsoallowssharingavailablebandwidth betweenthetwocircuitsthusmaximizingcollectivecapacityofthetwocircuitsand maximizingperformance. Thisequipmentshouldbeconsideredasanecessaryelementoftheoriginalproject. A1.BudgetImpact:Thecostoftherouteris$18,516.70andwouldbepaidfromthe FiberNetFund. A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Minimalworktoinstalltherouter. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiontoapprovepurchasingaredundancyrouteratanestimatedcostof $8,516.70. 2.Motiontodenythepurchaseatthistime. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1.TheFiberNetAdvisoryBoardunanimously recommendedthepurchaseofthisequipmentattheirJuly12th meeting. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: None