The URL can be used to link to this page

2010 Budget2010 BUDGET CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 505 WALNUT STREET, SUITE 1 MONTICELLO, MN 55362 PHONE: (763) 295 -2711 FAX: (763) 295 -4404 WEB SITE: www.ci.monticello.mn.us CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 2010 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................... ............................... A 2010 City Officials ...................... ............................... A -1 How to Read the Budget ............... ............................... A -2 Mayor's Letter ........................... ............................... A -3 Transmittal Letter ....................... ............................... A -5 Distinguished Budget Presentation Award ........................ A -15 Organizational Chart ................... ............................... A -16 Fund Structure and Budget Basis ..... ............................... A -17 Fund Organizational Chart ............ ............................... A -19 Budget Calendar ........................ ............................... A -20 Budget Process ........................... ............................... A -20 Other Planning Processes .............. ............................... A -21 Financial Management Policies ....... ............................... A -22 Budget Assumptions, Trends and Sources .......................... A -26 Schedule of Budgeted Operating Transfers ......................... A -31 Combined Budgetary Fund Summary . ............................... A -32 Projected Fund Balance Summary ..... ............................... A -34 GENERAL FUND ............................... ............................... B General Fund Summary ................. ............................... B -2 General Fund Revenues ................. ............................... B -5 Mayor and City Council ................ ............................... B -8 City Administration ...................... ............................... B -10 Elections.................................. ............................... B -12 Financial Administration ................ ............................... B -13 Audit....................................... ............................... B -15 City Assessing ............................ ............................... B -16 Legal....................................... ............................... B -17 Human Resources ........................ ............................... B -18 Planning, Zoning, and Community Development .................. B -20 Information Systems Administration .. ............................... B -22 CityHall ................................... ............................... B -24 Law Enforcement ........................ ............................... B -25 Fire Department .......................... ............................... B -26 Fire Relief ................................. ............................... B -28 Building Inspections ..................... ............................... B -29 Civil Defense ............................. ............................... B -31 Animal Control ........................... ............................... B -32 National Guard ........................... ............................... B -33 Public Works — Administration ........ ............................... B -34 ii CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 2010 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED GENERAL FUND CONTINUED Public Works — Engineering ............ ............................... B -36 Public Works — Inspections .............. ............................... B -38 Public Works — Streets and Alleys ...... ............................... B -40 Public Works — Ice and Snow ........... ............................... B -42 Public Works — Shop and Garage ....... ............................... B -44 Public Works — Parking Lots ............ ............................... B -45 Public Works — Street Lighting .......... ............................... B -46 Public Works — Refuse Collection ...... ............................... B -47 Community Celebrations ................. ............................... B -48 Senior Center .............................. ............................... B -49 Community Education .................... ............................... B -50 Y. M. C. A .................................... ............................... B -51 Transit....................................... ............................... B -52 IceArena ................................... ............................... B -53 Public Works — Parks Administration .. ............................... B -54 Public Works — Parks Improvements ... ............................... B -56 Public Works — Parks Ball Fields ...... ............................... B -57 Economic Development .................. ............................... B -58 Unallocated................................ ............................... B -60 Unallocated Insurance .................... ............................... B -61 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS ............................... ............................... C Special Revenue Fund Summary ....... ............................... C -2 LibraryFund .............................. ............................... C -4 Street Reconstruction Fund ............. ............................... C -6 Economic Development Fund .......... ............................... C -8 Deputy Registrar Fund .................. ............................... C -10 Minnesota Investment Fund ............ ............................... C -12 Economic Recovery Grant Fund ....... ............................... C -14 Shade Tree Fund ......................... ............................... C -16 Community Center Fund ................ ............................... C -18 Park and Pathway Dedication Fund ... ............................... C -22 Orderly Annexation Area Fund ........ ............................... C -24 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund ........ ............................... C -26 Street Lighting Improvement Fund .... ............................... C -28 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund ........... ............................... C -30 Storm Sewer Access Fund .............. ............................... C -32 Water Access Fund ....................... ............................... C -34 iii CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 2010 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED DEBT SERVICE FUNDS ....................... ............................... D Debt Service Fund Summary ............. ............................... D -2 Legal Debt Limit ........................... ............................... D -3 Debt Schedule .............................. ............................... D -3 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond Fund ..... ............................... D -4 1995A G. O. Refunding Bond Fund ...... ............................... D -6 1997A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -8 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .... ............................... D -10 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -12 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -14 2007A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -16 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond Fund ................. D -18 Consolidated Bond Fund ................... ............................... D -20 Waste Water Treatment Plant Note Fund .............................. D -22 1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond Fund ................... D -24 1999 G. O, hnprovement Bond Fund .... ............................... D -26 2000A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -28 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bond Fund ..................... D -30 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -32 1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond Fund ... ............................... D -34 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond Fund ... ............................... D -36 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond Fund ...................... D -38 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond Fund .......................... D -40 2010A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -42 Schedule of Outstanding Bonds ........... ............................... D -44 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS ................... ............................... E Capital Project Fund ........................ ............................... E -2 Capital Improvement Plan .................. ............................... E -4 ENTERPRISE FUNDS ............................ ............................... F Enterprise Fund Summary ................. ............................... F -2 WaterFund ................................... ............................... F -3 SewerFund ................................... ............................... F -5 LiquorFund .................................. ............................... F -9 Cemetery Fund .............................. ............................... F -11 Fiber Optics Fund ........................... ............................... F -13 1v CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 2010 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED APPENDIX............................................................... ...........................I... G General Information ...................... ............................... G -1 Monticello City Map ..................... ............................... G -2 Historical Property Tax Information ... ............................... G -3 Summary of Tax Levies, Payment Provisions, And Minnesota Real Property Valuation .................... G -3 Conversion Formula for EMV to Net Tax Capacity ................ G -7 City Personnel Count ..................... ............................... G -8 GLOSSARY.............................................................. ............................... H Glossaryof Terns ......................... ............................... H -1 List of Acronyms .......................... ............................... H -8 v 2010 CITY OFFICIALS City Council Clint Herbst Mayor Tom Perrault Glen Posusta Council Member Council Member Brian Stumpf Susie Wojchouski Council Member Council Member City Department Heads Jeff O'Neill — City Administrator Cathy Shuman — Deputy City Clerk Tracy Ergen — Hunan Resource Manager Angela Schumann — Community Development Director Megan Barnett — Economic Development Director Bruce Westby — City Engineer Ron Hackemnueller — Chief Building Official Torn Kelly — Finance Director Steve Joerg — Fire Chief Ann Johnson - Deputy Registrar Manager Kitty Baltos — Community Center Director Randall Johnsen — Liquor Store Manager Bob Paschke — Public Works Director Tom Moores — Street Superintendent Tom Pawelk — Parks Superintendent Matt Theisen — Water & Sewer Superintendent A -1 HOW TO READ THE BUDGET The budget document serves two distinct purposes. One purpose is to present the city council, staff members, residents and other interested readers, concise and readable information about the City of Monticello. The other purpose is the management of the City with a financial and operating plan that confonns to the City's accounting system. The budget balances City revenues with community priorities and requirements. The annual budget serves as a communication device, a policy document, a resource allocation tool, an accountability tool, and a management tool. The budget grants spending authority to City Staff, as well as providing the spending plan for the City of Monticello. The budget message provides an overview of the key policy issues and programs in the budget, and presents major areas of emphasis. The schedules and summaries provide the heart of the document as an operating and financial plan. Each fund section contains revenue and expenditure summaries, overview of major revenue and expenditures information, department descriptions, service level objectives and issues and workload data. The appendix includes other important financial and City information, such as, community profile, City statistics, description of property tax system, general information, and a glossary of terms. A -2 City Council Members, Citizens and Staff; It is my privilege to present the 2010 budget for the City of Monticello. This budget, as adopted by the City Council, identifies how the City resources will be spent in 2010. This budget is the City's financial management plan and has been designed to be responsive to public service demands and carrying out service over the coming year. It is the City's intent to submit and manage the budget in the most open and straightforward manner possible, which will allow consistent and careful management of all resources. The City of Monticello continually faces many challenges which draw upon the resources and value judgments of all of us. This budget recognizes the effects that the slumping housing market and State economy has on resources, yet the 2010 budget maintains services and addresses current and future infrastructure needs. From 2005 through 2007 the City's tax levy was reduced or maintained at the previous year's levy, with reserves or revenues from new development used to balance the budget. The 2008, 2009, and 2010 budgets reduced the dependency on reserves to fund City operations, while balancing the effects of an increased property tax levy. The biggest issue facing the City of Monticello's revenue sources is the State's economy and the State's projected budget shortfall for next year. The City was scheduled to receive $277,629 in Market Value Homestead Credit. As the State balanced its budget all of this revenue sources was cut by the State. However the 2010 budget anticipated this reduction and reduced City revenues by this amount. hi addition the City is scheduled to receive $421,515 in utility valuation transition aid in 2010. This still could be cut by the State as it deals with balancing it budget. In anticipation of possible cuts to this aid the 2010 budget did not use this revenue source to fund operation, but to fund possible capital equipment purchases, so any reduction in this aid should not affect 2010 operations but may force the delay of some equipment purchases. The City's 2010 revenue budget continues to reflect decreased revenues from new building permits and new developments because of the current housing market. The housing foreclosure issue also requires enforcement of City codes and monitoring of vacant properties for blight issues, which places pressure on the City's code enforcement budget. The enterprise fund for the City's fiber optic system (FiberNet Monticello) is included in the 2010 budget. The City began construction of the fiber optic system and began providing service for internet in some areas of the City in late 2009. In early 2010 the system will begin to provide A -3 The enterprise fund for the City's fiber optic system (FiberNet Monticello) is included in the 2010 budget. The City began construction of the fiber optic system and began providing service for internet in some areas of the City in late 2009. In early 2010 the system will begin to provide telephone and cable televisions services and the City will complete construction of the system in all areas of the City. As in the past, no property taxes will be used to fund the operations of FiberNet Monticello. The City's department of motor vehicle (DMV) expanded its service hours to include Saturday hours in 2008 and in 2009 begin limited driver license service. This has the DMV in very good position to be able to offer full driver license services beginning in 2010. Finally, in order maintain property taxes at current levels and not place extra burdens onto property owners during these tough economic times, the 2010 budget does reduce the funds and service levels in some areas. The City reduced the number of hours warming houses will be open for ice skating. The City is also revising its lawn mowing practices to reduce costs and improve efficiencies. In addition the City reduce the funds for library programming for 2010 and the City did not replace one of its building inspectors after the chief building official retired. The City is also replacing the deputy city cleric position, who retired in the summer of 2009, with a lower paid administrative assistant position. Lastly, the City is freezing cost of living increases and reducing the step increases for all employees for 2010. These budget reductions will allow the City to reduce property taxes and not use reserves for 2010 with having as little impact on the tax payers as possible. It is my hope the 2010 budget will meet the expectations and needs of Monticello residents. My sincere thanks are extended to the City Council and staff for their time and effort in preparation of this document. Sincerely l.. Clint Herbst Mayor City of Monticello A -4 INTRODUCTION This budget document should be viewed as more than just a collection of financial data. In addition to the financial data contained herein, it includes information on the City of Monticello's organization, descriptions of programs and services, and a variety of statistics related to activity workload measures. Furthermore, the budget is a reflection of the City's plans, policies, procedures, and objectives regarding the services to be provided in 2010. BUDGET POLICY AND STRATEGY The 2010 budget document has been prepared after analyzing and evaluating requests from the various departments, and represents the requested financial support for the operation of the City of Monticello for the upcoming fiscal year. Revenue estimates are conservative. The importance of a sound revenue picture cannot be overstated. Revenues must be estimated realistically. Revenue estimates are based on historical trends and projected conservatively. The City of Monticello provides a range of services to the community, including police and fire protection, street and park maintenance, snow and ice removal, water and sewer utility services, and administrative and planning services. In addition the City owns and operates a Community Center (MCC), Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) center, Municipal Off -Sale Liquor operation, and a fiber optic network (FiberNet Monticello). The level of service provided by the proposed budget is similar to that currently enjoyed by the community. MAJOR INITIATIVES The City of Monticello provides a full range of municipal services, as listed in the previous paragraph and as authorized by State Statute. Monticello has been blessed with many assets, including beautiful setting, an excellent location, a rich heritage, and a talented population. The City seeks to use, preserve and enhance these assets in building a great place to live, work, shop, and play. The City will fulfill the goals below to achieve this mission: 1. Continue to maintain the lowest possible tax rate while providing the highest possible City services. 2. Continue to develop and provide an unequaled system of parks, trails and recreational facilities, including the unique assets of the Monticello Community Center, the Mississippi River and conversion of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property into a regional park. 3. Continue to maintain the City streets by following an annual seal coat and crack seal program and overlaying streets before they are beyond repair and need replacing. 4. Develop and adopt a long -range transportation plan which will improve traffic flow around and through the City. 5. Develop a downtown redevelopment plan which will maintain a downtown area that combines a successful commercial district, community identity and heritage and connection with the Mississippi River. 6. Seek to expand the supply of "move up" housing that allows people to upgrade their home without leaving the community. NMI 7. Seek to develop and attract a wide range of employment opportunities with a growing emphasis on jobs at higher wage levels. 8. Continue to maintain high quality water and waster water treatment facilities. 9. Provide unequaled access to data through high speed internet, phone and television through its fiber optic network. City Council and Staff used these goals to direct the development of the City's 2010 budget. TOTAL BUDGET The City of Monticello's 2010 budget includes all fund types and funds of the City. Prior to 2009 the City did not include Capital Project Funds as part of their budget process or document. Each is responsible to account for a particular activity or activities. Each fund type will be discussed within this letter and in the budget document. The following 2010 budget was established for the City: PROPERTY TAXES The State of Minnesota has granted local municipalities the authority to levy taxes to fund operations and debt payments. For the City of Monticello, the property tax levy accounts for approximately 84% of the General Fund revenues and 33% of the Special Revenue Funds revenues. The Debt Service Funds, in 2010, will levy $1,234,533 in property taxes for debt service payments, compared to using reserves to pay the City's debt payments. For 2010, the City's property tax levy will be reduced to $7,648,272, a decrease of 1.31% from 2009. In the past, the City has used reserves to fund operations and debt payment instead of increasing property taxes. Beginning in 2008 the City increased property taxes and started to reduce the amount of reserves needed to balance the City's budget. The 2010 budget does not use reserves instead of the tax levy need to fund debt service where as the 2009 budget used $509,643 of debt service reserves and $751,105 of reserves were used in 2008. The table on the following page provides a historical view of the City's property tax levies: NEC Revenue Expenditures Funds 2009 2010 2009 2010 General $ 7,157,601 $ 6,329,450 $ 7,157,601 $ 6,329,450 Special Revenue 6,632,144 6,110,647 9,065,960 7,521,338 Debt Service 6,192,140 6,064,497 9,134,080 6,845,275 Capital Project 4,495,643 5,602,320 4,715,000 4,289,220 Enterprise 6,257,325 8,620,167 7,960,543 9,909,829 Total $30,734,853 $32,727,081 $38,033,184 $34,895,112 PROPERTY TAXES The State of Minnesota has granted local municipalities the authority to levy taxes to fund operations and debt payments. For the City of Monticello, the property tax levy accounts for approximately 84% of the General Fund revenues and 33% of the Special Revenue Funds revenues. The Debt Service Funds, in 2010, will levy $1,234,533 in property taxes for debt service payments, compared to using reserves to pay the City's debt payments. For 2010, the City's property tax levy will be reduced to $7,648,272, a decrease of 1.31% from 2009. In the past, the City has used reserves to fund operations and debt payment instead of increasing property taxes. Beginning in 2008 the City increased property taxes and started to reduce the amount of reserves needed to balance the City's budget. The 2010 budget does not use reserves instead of the tax levy need to fund debt service where as the 2009 budget used $509,643 of debt service reserves and $751,105 of reserves were used in 2008. The table on the following page provides a historical view of the City's property tax levies: NEC The Wright County Assessor values all property in the City. It is this market value that is applied to the class rates assigned by the State to determine a property's tax capacity. The County estimates the City's tax capacity for taxes payable in 2010 at $16,726,905, which is a 0.34% decrease. The City's property tax levy is divided by the tax capacity to determine the City's tax rate, which is applied to each property's tax capacity to determine that property's City property tax amount before any credits are applied. For 2010, the City's tax rate is expected to decrease from 46.191% down to 45.724 %. The City at this time does not have the authority to levy or collect local sales taxes or other types of taxes under the State's tax system. A summary of the State's properly tax system is in the appendix of this document. PERSONNEL SERVICES The City's 2010 budget does not include a cost -of- living increase for City staff. However city council approved a half step increase for 2010 for those employees who are still moving up the City's pay scale system. In the past employees were eligible for a one step increase based on satisfactory performance. The City's public works employees are union employees. The City's union contract won't expire until March 31, 2011. The City's health insurance premiums increased 7% for 2010 and the City's dental insurance policy increase 10 %. The City pays approximately 80% of these premiums. Staff will continue working with the City's insurance agent to find ways to reduce future premium increase to both the City and employees. For 2010, there was no new position budgeted however the City is currently adding an administrative assistant position in place of the deputy clerk position that is currently vacant. The cost of this position would be more than offset by reduced consulting cost to the City. This will be done by freeing up some of the economic development director and community development director and possible the city administrator's time from performing routine tasks to performing more complicated tasks that the City currently contracts out for due to a shortage of time. A -7 Year Tax Levy Change 2002 $6,498,079 - 2003 6,782,018 4% 2004 6,957,915 3% 2005 6,957,915 0% 2006 6,750,000 (3 %) 2007 6,500,000 (4 %) 2008 7,600,000 17% 2009 7,750,000 2% 2010 7,648,272 (1 %) The Wright County Assessor values all property in the City. It is this market value that is applied to the class rates assigned by the State to determine a property's tax capacity. The County estimates the City's tax capacity for taxes payable in 2010 at $16,726,905, which is a 0.34% decrease. The City's property tax levy is divided by the tax capacity to determine the City's tax rate, which is applied to each property's tax capacity to determine that property's City property tax amount before any credits are applied. For 2010, the City's tax rate is expected to decrease from 46.191% down to 45.724 %. The City at this time does not have the authority to levy or collect local sales taxes or other types of taxes under the State's tax system. A summary of the State's properly tax system is in the appendix of this document. PERSONNEL SERVICES The City's 2010 budget does not include a cost -of- living increase for City staff. However city council approved a half step increase for 2010 for those employees who are still moving up the City's pay scale system. In the past employees were eligible for a one step increase based on satisfactory performance. The City's public works employees are union employees. The City's union contract won't expire until March 31, 2011. The City's health insurance premiums increased 7% for 2010 and the City's dental insurance policy increase 10 %. The City pays approximately 80% of these premiums. Staff will continue working with the City's insurance agent to find ways to reduce future premium increase to both the City and employees. For 2010, there was no new position budgeted however the City is currently adding an administrative assistant position in place of the deputy clerk position that is currently vacant. The cost of this position would be more than offset by reduced consulting cost to the City. This will be done by freeing up some of the economic development director and community development director and possible the city administrator's time from performing routine tasks to performing more complicated tasks that the City currently contracts out for due to a shortage of time. A -7 Also as the City's fiber optic network (FiberNet Monticello) becomes fully operational in 2010 there will be a number of positions need with duties ranging from customer service to technical support. Finally, in 2005 the State Legislature passed a pension bill, which phased in increases for both the employee and employer contributions to the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA). For 20.10 the employee contribution rate will increase to 6.50% of wages, while the employer contribution rate will increase from 6.75% to 7.00 %. The remainder of this letter will describe the major initiatives for 2010 for each of the fund types and their activities. GENERAL FUND Expenditures The 2010 budget decreased 11.57% from the 2009 budget. The City has decreased its General Fund operating budget 14.75% from 2008. The General Fund expenditure budget consists of the following departments: The Public Works Department is the largest department in terms of budgeted expenditures and the street and alleys activity budget is the largest activity within the department. The budget for the street and alleys activity was decreased 21% as a smaller seal coat project is budget in 2010 than in 2009 and the only equipment budgeted for replacement is an air compressor compared to the replacement of a ditch tractor mower and mid -sized loader in 2009. The budget for seasonal /temporary employee was also reduced in the street and alley activity for 2010. Other changes to activities within the Public Works Department include a decrease in the engineering activity to reflect the need for consultant engineering less than previous years due to less new development and performing more tasks in- house. The decrease in other activities in the Public Works Department are from less equipment purchases or small improvement projects taking place in 2010 or decreasing items based on past expenditures. The only activity with a budget increase would be the refuse collection activity and the increase is from an increase in the City contract with the refuse and recycling hauler's contracts and an increase in materials dispose. 2009 2010 % Budget Budget Change General Govenunent $1,441,245 $1,372,973 (4.7 %) Public Safety 1,977,996 1,697,794 (14.2 %) Public Works 2,524,092 2,275,156 (9.9 %) Culture & Recreation 989,790 744,590 (24.8 %) Economic Development 74,714 73,344 (1.8 %) Miscellaneous 149,765 165,593 10.1% Total General Fund $7,157,601 $6,329,450 (11.8 %) The Public Works Department is the largest department in terms of budgeted expenditures and the street and alleys activity budget is the largest activity within the department. The budget for the street and alleys activity was decreased 21% as a smaller seal coat project is budget in 2010 than in 2009 and the only equipment budgeted for replacement is an air compressor compared to the replacement of a ditch tractor mower and mid -sized loader in 2009. The budget for seasonal /temporary employee was also reduced in the street and alley activity for 2010. Other changes to activities within the Public Works Department include a decrease in the engineering activity to reflect the need for consultant engineering less than previous years due to less new development and performing more tasks in- house. The decrease in other activities in the Public Works Department are from less equipment purchases or small improvement projects taking place in 2010 or decreasing items based on past expenditures. The only activity with a budget increase would be the refuse collection activity and the increase is from an increase in the City contract with the refuse and recycling hauler's contracts and an increase in materials dispose. The second largest department based on expenditures is the Public Safety Department. Activities budgeted in the Public Safety Department include law enforcement, fire, building inspections, civil defense, national guard, and animal control. The City of Monticello contracts with the Wright County Sheriff's department for law enforcement. The 2010 contract includes an increase in the hourly rate and maintaining service levels at current levels. The fire activity budget pays for the operations of the City's paid volunteer fire department. The largest reduction is once again in the area of equipment purchases. In 2009 the budget included the purchase of the new pumper truck in the amount of $141,000 with the balance to be paid from reserves. Other equipment purchases included new 800MH radios for the department. Since both of these items were purchased in 2009 and not included in the 2010 budget, there is a 44% decrease in the fire department activity budget. The reduction in the civil defense budget is due to removing the building official's time from this activity. The chief building official was responsible for this activity, but with his retirement the City is looking into other ways, such as the County providing this service instead of the City duplicating the activity. So for 2010 no personnel services are being budgeted here. The two biggest changes to the General Government Department is the adjusting of the human resource manager from part -time to full -time and having a better understanding of budgetary needs of the human resource activity. In late 2008 the City hired its first part-time human resource manager. The activity not only account for the personnel services of this position, but account for the cost of activities associated with human resource managements, such as safety training or other City -wide programs related to personnel. The other big change is the increase to the election activity since there were no elections held in 2009, and national, state, and local elections taking place in 2010 this activities budget went from $605 in 2009 to $14,531 in 2010. The decrease in the administration activity is because the City's deputy city clerk retired in 2009 and was not replace, but is now being replaced by an administrative assistant position, which will be at a lower pay level. The decrease to the planning & zoning budget is due to less consulting planner time because of the economy creating less new development activity and the new administrative assistant position, which will allow staff to do work which was previously contacted out. The city hall activity budget increased as the result of the City purchasing and occupying a new facility across the street for the community center /city hall facility. The budget decrease in the Economic Development Department is due to decreased in new development activities and less use of consultants. The budgets for the Culture and Recreation and Miscellaneous Departments were adjusted based on past expenditure history, planned activities and equipment and facility improvement needs in 2010. The decrease in the Parks & Recreation Activity is from a decrease in park improvements and equipment purchases. A -9 Revenues The revenues to support these expenditures are classified as follows: The budget for Licenses & Permits and Charges for Services are decreased to reflect the slow down in new residential housing construction based on the current housing market and economic condition of the State and Country. The City also expects this slow down to affect commercial/industrial construction also. Thus, the City expects 2010 building permit revenues to be lower than recent history. The decrease in Inter - Governmental Revenues is due to the State's budget problems and the fact the Stated has already cut the $277,629 Market Value Homestead Credit Aid the City was to receive in 2010. The City has built this decrease into the 2010 revenue budget. The City has also built into the 2010 budget that the City may receive only part or none of the Utility Valuation Transition Aid. It did that by not including it as a revenue source in the General Fund but as a revenue source in the Capital Revolving Fund for future equipment purchases. The Transfer from Other Funds is from the City's Capital Revolving Fund where money for the purchase of the new equipment, such as the replacement of building inspector vehicle, SCBA packs, and others, had been previously budgeted and reserved for these purchases. The Property Tax Levy now generates 84% of the revenues in the General Fund and was based on the operating needs of the City after all other revenues have been subtracted from expenditures. In 2009 the property tax levy accounted for 74% of General Fund revenues. The City does not have the ability to use other taxing methods, such as local sales taxes or income taxes as a revenue source. Therefore, the City will continue to be dependant on its property tax revenue as its major revenue source into the future. For this reason, City Council must use its judgment as to the proper level of service and which services to provide when determining the proper level of property taxes to levy. P 1 2009 2010 % Budget Budget Change Property Taxes $5,272,379 $5,297,065 0.5% Licenses & Permits 891,900 296,650 (49.9 %) Inter - Governmental 498,056 114,801 (77.0 %) Charges for Services 383,950 306,023 (20.3 %) Fines & Forfeits 750 300 (53.9 %) Special Assessments 00 00 0.0% Miscellaneous Revenue 291,452 269,611 (7.5 %) Transfer from Other Funds 119,114 45,000 62.2% Total $7,157,601 $6,329,450 (11.6 %) The budget for Licenses & Permits and Charges for Services are decreased to reflect the slow down in new residential housing construction based on the current housing market and economic condition of the State and Country. The City also expects this slow down to affect commercial/industrial construction also. Thus, the City expects 2010 building permit revenues to be lower than recent history. The decrease in Inter - Governmental Revenues is due to the State's budget problems and the fact the Stated has already cut the $277,629 Market Value Homestead Credit Aid the City was to receive in 2010. The City has built this decrease into the 2010 revenue budget. The City has also built into the 2010 budget that the City may receive only part or none of the Utility Valuation Transition Aid. It did that by not including it as a revenue source in the General Fund but as a revenue source in the Capital Revolving Fund for future equipment purchases. The Transfer from Other Funds is from the City's Capital Revolving Fund where money for the purchase of the new equipment, such as the replacement of building inspector vehicle, SCBA packs, and others, had been previously budgeted and reserved for these purchases. The Property Tax Levy now generates 84% of the revenues in the General Fund and was based on the operating needs of the City after all other revenues have been subtracted from expenditures. In 2009 the property tax levy accounted for 74% of General Fund revenues. The City does not have the ability to use other taxing methods, such as local sales taxes or income taxes as a revenue source. Therefore, the City will continue to be dependant on its property tax revenue as its major revenue source into the future. For this reason, City Council must use its judgment as to the proper level of service and which services to provide when determining the proper level of property taxes to levy. P 1 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS The City of Monticello's currently operates Special Revenue Funds for its Library, Street Reconstruction, EDA, Shade Tree, Parks and Pathway Dedication, Street Light Improvement, Community Center, Deputy Registrar, and Sewer, Water and Storm Water Access activities. In the past other Special Revenue Funds included the Minnesota Investment Fund, Environment Clean-Up Fund, Economic Recovery Grant Fund, CMIF Fund, Orderly Annexation Fund and Capital Outlay Revolving Fund. Some of these funds are still active or could become active in the future, but have had or will have very minor to no activity in 2010. Like the General Fund, the Special Revenue Fund budgets are set at a level to maintain service while having less revenues coming in, including property taxes for those funds that are partially supported through a tax levy. The 2010 property tax levy for the Special Revenue Funds total $2,349,381 compared to $2,853,065 in 2009 or a 17.7% decrease. Other funds such as the Sewer and Water Access Funds and Park and Pathway Dedication Funds have less revenues coming in because of less new development taking place and paying the fees associated with the development. Another budget change affects the Community Center Fund, In 2008 the City refinanced the bonds which financed the construction of the Community Center, thus reducing this funds operating transfer to the debt service funds. For 2010 the saving total $30,000 and the new debt issue is projected to save the Community Center $228,569 over the next 6 years. Also the Community Center Fund will spend less on equipment and facility improvements in 2010 compared to 2009. The Deputy Registrar Fund budget increased for 2010 because to provide better service and to continue adding services, such as driver licenses, a third full -time staff person with benefits was add at the DMV. In 2008 the City began inspecting elm trees for Dutch elm disease and discovered a very large munber of elm trees affected by the disease. The City has begun removing these trees, of which the process will continue into 2010 but at a lesser activity. In addition the City has a program in place where resident can replace removed trees at discounted prices. Therefore, the 2010 Shade Tree Fund budget is being decreased almost 18% to cover the cost of inspecting, removing and replacing these diseased elm trees. The City does not expect to have as large a cost associated with this disease as we have it under control. However the City will be monitoring for the Emerald Ash Beatle in 2010. The large increase in the Economic Development Fund is due to the operating transfer for its share of debt service payments in 2010. Transfers for debt services payments are also the reason for the changes in three Access Funds. Finally, while there is a street reconstruction project planned for 2010, the City will issue debt to pay project costs and will use the Street Reconstruction Fund to repay the City's share of the debt beginning in 2011. Therefore, the Street Reconstruction Fund shows no expenditures in 2010. A -11 The expenditures in the Park and Pathway Dedication Fund are for the City share of land purchase cost for the Bertram Chain of Lakes property, which the City along with Wright County is purchasing from the Y.M.C.A. DEBT SERVICE FUNDS The City's debt obligation for 2010 is $6,033,752 with the funding coming through the collection of special assessments, tax increments, and the use of $780,778 of reserves. The reserves are available because of prepayments of special assessments and available interest earnings. If the City had not received these prepaid special assessments, more of the funding would be coming from special assessment collections. Included in the City's 2010 debt obligation are plans to redeem the 2004A G. O. Tax Increment Bond in August of 2010 in the amount of $470,000. The City is currently planning on issuing around $3,000,000 new debt in 2010 to fund the 2010 street reconstruction project. The City's bond rating of "A2" was confirmed from Moody's Investors in 2008. CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS Beginning with the 2009 budget the City began to include the Capital Project Funds in the budget. The budget for the Capital Project Funds are based on the 2010 project expenditures listed in the City's five -year capital improvement plan for City buildings, parks, and infrastructure improvements. The main revenue source for 2010 is a proposed bond issue and transfers from other City funds. Projects to be funded in 2010 include the 2010 street reconstruction project and the continuation of the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. ENTERPRISE FUNDS The largest change in the Enterprise Funds is the completion of construction of the City fiber optic network (FiberNet Monticello) operations in 2010. This system construction was begin in late 2008 however the funding source was to be revenue bonds, which are were tied up in escrow pending a court case bought forth by the local phone service provider. Still the City was able to use Liquor Fund reserves to begin construction of the fiber backbone in 2008. In 2009 the City prevailed in the litigation and the bond processes become available to begin construction of the system, with service beginning in late 2009 for internet services. Phone and cable TV should be available in early 2010. Construction of the system should also be completed in 2010. The expense budget for FiberNet Monticello, which includes both construction and operation of the system are estimated at $1,978,230 with revenues of $1,947,774. The major change to the City Water and Sewer Funds is the 5% rate increase to cover operating expenses and some of the depreciation of the systems. Water Fund revenues are budgeted at $989,977 while the expense budget, including depreciation is $1,307,876. Sewer revenues are $1,536,625 compared to expenses of $2,402,753. A -12 The Liquor Fund operating transfer to help support other City activities and reduce the tax levy is budgeted at $266,000 compared to the $150,000 in 2009 and $250,000 as it was in previous years. FUND BALANCES The 2010 budget proposes that expenditures exceed revenues by $2,168,032 compared to $7,298,331 in 2009. However, in the Enterprise funds, reserves will be used to fund depreciation of assets as revenue levels are sufficient to cover operating expenses and some, but not all depreciation. The City's 2010 General Fund's budget is a balanced budget, meaning revenues, including operating transfers in from other funds equal expenditures including any operating transfers out to other funds. The General Fund's fund balance is projected at 77.6% of 2010 budgeted expenditures; however most of the fund balance is designated for future capital expenditures, such as, park improvements. The City maintains the General Fund's working capital fund balance at 45% of the next year's operating budget because the City receives its tax payments in July and December and need this fund balance to pay for City operations. The General Funds unreserved/ undesignated fund balance is estimated at 17.6% of 2010 budgeted expenditures. Much of the reserves of the Special Revenue Funds in 2010 are reserved for the purpose of the Fund. Other Special Revenue Funds, such as, the Community Center, Library, and Deputy Registrar try and maintain a fund balance of 25 %. The 2010 budget decreases fund balance of the Special Revenue Funds by $1,410,691. Fund balances in the City's Debt Service Funds are used to retire the City's debt on a timely basis. For 2010 the City proposes to use $205,778 to payoff its 2010 debt obligations. The City will also use $575,000 of reserves to fund proposed capital projects in 2009. Overall the City's fund balances are within City guide lines and are sufficient to meet current and future operations and obligations of the City DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARD The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to the City of Monticello, Minnesota for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2009. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan, and a communications device. This award is valid for a period of one year only. We believe our current budget continues to conform to program requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award. A -13 CONCLUSION Conserving the financial resources of the City continues to be very important. The budgeting function is the prime tool to make sure the City's limited resources are wisely utilized. It is my belief that the 2010 budget allows the City to deliver the finest municipal services in the most cost effective and efficient manner, and in so doing, ensure the highest quality of life for our residents. The 2010 budget is the product of the collective efforts of the City Council and City staff. lam appreciative of the commitment, good judgment and expertise each of them contributes to the budget process. Respectfully submitted, Thomas Kelly Finance Director A -14 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Distinguished Budget Presentation Award PRESENTED TO City of Monticello Minnesota For the Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2009 President Executive Director A -15 FUND STRUCTURE AND BUDGET BASIS The financial structure of the City is similar to other goverrunents with the use of funds. Funds are the control structures that ensure that public moneys are spent only for those purposes authorized and within amounts authorized. Funds are established to account for different types of activities and legal restrictions that are associated with a particular government function. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) defines a fund as: A fiscal and accounting entity with a self - balancing set of accounts recording cash and other financial resources, together with all related liabilities and residual equities or balances, and changes therein, which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining certain objectives in accordance with special regulations, restrictions, or limitations. All of the funds used by the City must be classified into one of seven "fund types ". Four of these fund types are used to account for the City's "governmental- type" activities and are know as "governmental funds ". Two of these fund types are used to account for a government's "business- type" activities and are know as "proprietary funds ". Finally, the seventh fund type is reserved for a government's "fiduciary activities ". The City does not currently operate any fiduciary activities. Governmental Fund types are used to account for governmental -type activities. These are the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service Funds, and Capital Project Funds. These are the funds through which functions of the City are financed and budgets are appropriated. The General Fund is used to account for most of the day -to -day operations of the City, which are financed from property taxes and other general revenues. Activities financed by the General Fund are those not accounted for in other fluids. The City can only have one General Fund. Special Revenue Funds are used to account for revenues derived from specific taxes or other earmarked revenue sources which, by law, are designated to finance particular functions or activities of the City and which therefore cannot be diverted to other uses. Debt Service Funds are used to account for the payment of interest and principal on general and special obligation debts other than debt issued for and serviced by a government enterprise. The Capital Project Funds account for all resources used for the acquisition and /or construction of capital equipment and facilities except those financed by Enterprise and Internal Service Funds. One Proprietary Fund Type is used to account for the City's business -type activities. The City uses Enterprise Funds. Enterprise Funds are used to account for operations (a) that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private business — where the intent of the governing body is that the costs (expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods or services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges, or (b) A -17 where the governing body has decided that periodic determination of revenues earned, expenses incurred, and /or net income is appropriate for capital maintenance, public policy, management control, accountability or other purposes. Internal Service funds are used to account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department to other departments of the City. The City currently does not operate any internal service funds. Fiduciary Funds are used when a government holds or manages financial resources in an agent or fiduciary capacity. The City of Monticello does not operate any of these funds at the current time. The Budget Basis used by the City of Monticello is the modified accrual basis of accounting for governmental fund types (for example, the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service, and Capital Project Funds). Under this accounting method, revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they become available and measurable. Available means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period. Expenditures are recognized in the period in which the fund liability is incurred, except for outstanding interest on general long -tern debt, which is recognized when due. Enterprise and Internal Service Funds use the accrual basis of accounting. Under the accrual basis revenues are recognized when they are measurable and earned. Expenses are recognized in the period incurred, if measurable. The budget basis for Enterprise and Internal Service Funds is also the accrual basis with the exception noted below. The City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) shows the status of the City's finances on the basis of "generally accepted accounting principles" (GAAP). In most cases this conforms to the way the City prepares its budget. The exceptions are: 1. Compensated absences liabilities that are expected to be liquidated with expendable available financial resources are accrued as earned by employees (GAAP) as opposed to being expended when paid (budget). 2. Capital outlay within the Enterprise Funds are recorded as assets on a GAAP basis and expended on a budget basis. The CAFR shows fund expenditures on both a GAAP basis and budget basis for comparison purposes. A -18 Fund Structure General Fund Mayor & Council Administration Elections Financial Admin. Audit City Assessing Legal Human Resources Planning & Zoning Data Processing City Hall Law Enforcement Fire Department Fire Relief Building Inspect. Civil Defense Animal Control National Guard Public Works Admin. Engineering Public Works Inspec. Streets & Alleys Ice & Snow Shop & Garage Parking Lots Street Lighting Refuse Collection Community Celebration Information Center Senior Center Community Education Y.M.C.A. Transit Swan River School Ice Arena Parks Administration Park Improvements Parks Ball fields Econ. Develop. Unallocated Unallocated Ins. Governmental Funds Special Revenue Library Street Reconstruction Economic Development Environment Clean -Up Deputy Registrar MN Investment Econ. Recovery Grant CMIF Fund Shade Tree Community Center Park & Path Dedication Orderly Annexation Area Capital Revolving Street Light Improv. Sanitary Sewer Access Storm Sewer Access Water Access City of Monticello Debt Service Funds 1994 Refunding Bond 1995 Refunding Bond 1997 Improvement Bond 2002 Improvement Bond 2003 Improvement Bond 2005 Improvement Bond 2007 Improvement Bond 2008 Sewer Refunding Bd Consolidated Bond Fund WWTP Note 1998 Water Refunding Bd 1999 Improvement Bond 2000 Improvement Bond 2000 Public Pro. Rev. Bd 20008 Improvement Bond 1985 Tax Increment Bond 1989 Tax Increment Bond 2004 Tax Increment Bond 2008 Rev. Refunding Bd A -19 Capital Projects Water Sewer Liquor Cemetery FiberNet Proprietary Funds Capital Enterprise Project Funds Capital Projects Water Sewer Liquor Cemetery FiberNet 2010 BUDGET CALENDAR May 26, 2009 Workshop with City Council and Staff to Set Goals and Priorities. End -June, 2009 2010 Budget and Capital Equipment /Projects Worksheets to Department Heads. June, 2009 Department Heads Meet with Various Advisory Boards and Commissions For 2010 Preliminary Budget hip Lit. July 17, 2009 Department Heads return worksheets to Finance Department. July- August, 2009 Department Heads meet with City Administrator and Finance Staff to Develop 2010 Preliminary Budget. August 24, 2009 Council Workshop to review 2010 Capital Equipment /Project Plan and Financing Plan. End of August, 2009 Finance Department Develop Revenue Estimates and 2010 Preliminary Property Tax Levy. September 14, 2009 Budget Workshop with City Council and Staff. September 15, 2009 2010 Preliminary Property Tax Levy Certified to County Auditor. October /November, 2009 Department Heads meet with City Administrator and Finance Staff to Develop 2010 Proposed Budget and Property Tax Levy. December 7, 2009 City Council Adopts 2010 Budget and Property Tax Levy. December 29, 2009 City Certifies Final 2010 Property Tax Levy to County Auditor. January 1, 2010 2010 Fiscal Year Begins. BUDGET PROCESS The City of Monticello's budget process begins in May when the City Council and staff meet in a workshop setting to set goals and priorities for the up corning fiscal year. At the end of June budget worksheets along with the goals and priorities are distributed to department heads for completion. During July department heads complete their various budget worksheets, which may include meeting with advisory boards to develop their budget requests for the upcoming fiscal year. During August, department heads meet with the finance staff and City Administrator to develop a draft preliminary budget and the finance staff develops revenue estimates. Also in August staff and City Council review and make changes to the draft proposed budget. By September 15"' the City Council roust approve a preliminary tax levy based on preliminary budget information and is certified to the County Auditor for tax notifications to residents. Once this preliminary levy is approved, the Council can lower the levy during additional budget meetings, but can not exceed what was approved and certified to the County Auditor. During September through November staff and Council meet to finalize the budget and tax levy for the coming fiscal year. Finally, prior to December 29t" the City Council must adopt a final budget and property tax levy, which is certifies to the County Auditor for collection on the next year's property tax statements. During the course of the fiscal year department heads can overspend line items as long as funds are available in the activity. If funds are not available, staff can recommend changes or amendments to the budget to the City Council. The City Council can than approve or disapprove A -20 the recommended changes. Only with City Council approval can an activity be overspent and only if funding is available. However, the property tax levy cannot be amended. OTHER PLANNING PROCESSES There are no other government agencies or City commissions or advisory boards that have direct roll in the City's budget process. However, there are government agencies and City . commissions or advisory which play a roll in the City's budget process. Minnesota State Statutes provide the steps the City must follow to pass the budget including when the City must certify its levies to the County Auditor and when public hearings must be held. In addition the State may pass laws governing the City's budget, such as, City are currently under levy limits, which restricts the possible increase for property tax levies from one year to the next. The State must also approve by mid - November any City levies which fall outside the levy limit. Finally the State must certify to the City the amounts, if any, State aids the City will receive by mid- August. The only affect the County has on the City's budget would be if the County was planning any County road improvement projects within the City limits. The City would work with the County to budget any City share of costs and any additional improvements the City would like included in the project. Finally, the City itself has various advisory boards and commissions that work with staff during the month of July to make recommendations for programs and /or improvements they would like to see included in or removed from the budget. These boards and commissions are only advisory and the City Council may or may not include the changes recommended by these boards and commissions based on funds available or other criteria. A -21 CITY OF MONTICELLO FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES The City of Monticello has an important responsibility to its citizens to plan the adequate funding of services desired by the public, including the provision and maintenance of public facilities, to manage municipal finances wisely, and to carefully account for public funds. The City strives to ensure that it is capable of adequately funding and providing local government services needed by the community. The City will maintain or improve its infrastructure on a systematic basis to insure its citizens will maintain quality neighborhoods. In order to achieve this purpose, this plan has the following objectives for the City of Monticello's fiscal performance: 1. To protect the City Couuncil's policy - making ability by ensuring that important decisions are not controlled by financial problems or emergencies. 2. To enhance the City Council's policy - malting ability by providing accurate information on the full cost of various authority or service levels. 3. To assist sound management of the City government by providing accurate and timely information on financial condition. 4. To provide sound principles to guide the important decisions of the City Council and of management which have significant fiscal impact. 5. To set forth - operational principals which minimize the cost of local government, to the extent consistent with services desired by the public, and which minimize financial risk. 6. To employ revenue policies and forecasting tools to prevent undue or unbalanced reliance on certain revenues, especially property taxes, which distribute the cost of municipal services fairly, and provide adequate funds to operate desired programs. 7. To provide essential public facilities and prevent deterioration of the City's infrastructure including its various facilities. 8. To protect and enhance the City's credit rating and prevent default on any municipal debts. 9. Ensure the legal use and protection of all City funds through a good system of financial and accounting controls. 10. Record expenditures in a manner, which allocates to current taxpayers and /or users the full cost of providing current services. To achieve these objectives the following fiscal policies have been adopted by the City to guide the City's budgeting and financial planning process. The City recognizes that additional policies need to be adopted in the future to reflect on going procedures and City practices that have never been written down or formally approved by City Council. Each fiscal policy section includes the purpose and a description. The policies below are summaries of the actual adopted policies, which will be available on the City's web site in the future. A -22 A. Purchasing Policy Purpose: The purchasing policy is designed to provide guidance to City staff in the purchasing process by specifying procedures to be followed. Goals: 1. Obtain supplies, equipment, and service as economically as possible. 2. To purchase items that is best suited to the specific needs of the City. 3. To promote fair competition among bidders. 4. Provide effective controls. 5. To comply with all statutes and regulations of the City, State, and Federal governments. Policy: City employees will be allowed to make purchases of less than $500 without additional approval or without obtaining price quotes. For purchases of $500 to $1,000, when possible, price quotes should be obtained from various vendors and kept on file with the finance department. Purchases over $1,000 but less than $10,000 require at least two quotations and can be purchased without City Council approval provided the item was budgeted; funds are available, and approved by the Administrator or Finance Director. Quotes shall be kept on file with the finance department. Purchases over $10,000 require at least two quotations and City Council approval. Quotes shall be kept on file with the finance department. All purchases over $50,000 require formal specifications and advertised bids. Bids will be publicly opened and approved by Council. All bids will be kept on file. B. Capital Asset Policy Purpose: The Capital Asset Policy is designed to provide guidance to City staff involved in purchasing, recording, tracking, and disposing of capital assets by specifying procedures to be followed. Goals: To ensure that capital assets are tracked and recorded consistently and according to policy. A -23 2. To provide an internal control structure over capital assets. 3. To provide accurate capital asset values and records to annual financial statements and reporting. Policy: A capital asset is an asset or item with a cost of at least $5,000 per asset and a life expectancy of greater than one year. The classes of capital assets will be: land, parking lots, buildings, infrastructure, improvements (other than buildings), machinery and equipment, office equipment and furniture, and motor vehicles. Donations of capital assets are recorded at estimated fair market value at the date of acquisition. Depreciation is the allocation of the cost of a depreciable capitalized asset over its estimated useful life. Straight -line depreciation will be the method used to allocate the cost on a monthly basis. Land, easements and construction in progress are not considered depreciable assets. Department heads shall be responsible for reporting disposal of capital assets to the finance department. The finance department will distribute a list of inventory, by department, to each department head annually during the fall of each year for the purpose of conducting an inventory. Physical inventory will be conducted at least every four years by the finance department staff. Random inventories maybe conducted at any time. Investment Policy Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to set forth the investment objectives and parameters for the management of public funds. Goals: 1. Safeguard funds on behalf of the City. 2. Meet the daily operating cash flow demands. 3. Assure the availability of capital funds when needed. 4. Conform to all applicable federal, state and /or local statutes governing the investment of public funds. 5. Invest public funds in a manner which maximizes return. A -24 Policy: The City will consolidate (pool) cash and reserve balances from all fiords, except for those legally restricted by statutes, to maximize investment earnings. The City of Monticello will only invest in securities authorized by Minnesota Statute 475.66 The City will not purchase securities that are considered highly sensitive or that could expose the City to foreign currency risk. The City will obtain collateral or a bond for all uninsured amounts on deposit to minimize risk of loss of failure of the depository bank. No more than 5% of the overall portfolio may be invested in the securities of a single issuer, except for securities of the U. S. Government and its agencies or an external investment pool. The City Council will be provided a listing of the City's investment portfolio at the end of each quarter. Debt Policy Purpose: The debt policy ensures that the City's debt 1) does not weaken the City's financial structure; and 2) provide limits on debt to avoid problems in servicing debt. This policy is critical for maintaining the best possible credit rating. Goals: 1. Maintain the City's financial integrity. 2. Maintain or improve the City's credit rating. 3. Avoid large property tax increases due to debt payment requirements. Policy: The City will not use long -term debt to fund current operations. The City will avoid the issuance of short-term debt, such as, budget, tax and revenue anticipation notes. The City will confine long -term borrowing to capital improvements, equipment or projects that have a life of more than 5 years and cannot be financed from current revenues. A -25 The City of Monticello will use special assessments, revenue bonds, and /or any other available self - liquidating debt measures instead of general obligation bonds where and when possible, applicable and practical. The City will pay back debt within a period not to exceed the expected life of the project. The City will not exceed 3 percent of the market value of taxable property for general obligation debt per state statutes. The City will maintain good communications with bond rating agencies about its financial condition and will follow a policy of fall disclosure in every financial report and bond prospectus. The City will comply with Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) reporting requirements. The City will refinance or call any debt issue when beneficial for future savings. Besides these policies, the City follows many unwritten practices and procedures when it comes to handling the City's finances and budgeting. In the future more of these unwritten practices will be formatted into written formally policies to guide current and future City staff and Councils. BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS, TRENDS AND SOURCES The City of Monticello maintains a number of finds for recording fiscal transactions to meet legal accounting requirements. Certain assumptions are decided on as a fotndation for developing a budget. These assumptions guide the City in determining the level of service that will be provided to residents and how those services will be funded. The City's budget practice is to use conservative revenue estimates to assure adequate funding of expenditures. The following is a summary of major budget assumptions and trends for the upcoming fiscal year. Property taxes — The City relies on property taxes to support such functions as general government, public safety, public works, street improvements, library activities and debt service. The 2010 tax levy is $7,648,272 including the Market Value Homestead Credit. The City tries to maintain the lowest possible property tax levy and has used what was deemed excess reserves in the past to maintain or lower the levy. The 2010 levy no longer requires the use of reserves to help fund debt expenditures or operations. The chart on the next page demonstrates the change in the City's property levy. A -26 Licenses and Permits — Building permits are the largest category and account in the licenses and permits and account for $235,000 (3.7 %) of the 2010 General Fund revenues. h1 2008 only 20 new residential construction permits were issued, however a hail storm caused almost every home and business to new roofs and siding, which resulted in increased revenues. In 2009 only 9 new residential construction permits were issued. New residential construction has been low due to economic conditions in the housing and financial sectors and is expected to continue into 2010. As a result, the number of building permits issued and the building pen-nit revenues are estimated to continue to be low in the coming year. A -27 Intergovernmental Revenues — The intergovernmental revenue classifications consist of grants and aids from the Federal and State governments. The City of Monticello has received very little in the way of these grants and aids in the past. However, in 2010 the City is scheduled to receive $421,515 from the State of Minnesota for the Utility Valuation Transition Aid that was created in 2009. However, given the States current budget issues the City did not use this aid as a revenue source for operations, but as a source to fund equipment purchases. This way if the State were to reduce this aid for 2010 the City could absorb the lost of funds by delaying equipment purchase instead of cutting services. Also if the City moves forward with the proposed 2010 street improvement project, the City would be eligible for reimbursement through State aid street maintenance funding for some of the project costs. Charges for Services — This classification includes user charges or reimbursements received from those who benefited from services provided such as community center programs, general government services, and public works related revenues. Revenues which are highly sensitive to construction and development (i.e. planning and engineering fees) are estimated to decline in the coming year due to the housing markets and economy of the State and Country. The chart below demonstrates this trend for the City. Charges for services related to the Community Center have increased modestly each year in the recent past. The 2010 budget reflects a modest increase to continue this trend, in part because of adding wedding decorating to the list of services provided. Revenues are estimated at $1,109,100 or a 1.7% increase from 2009. Special Assessments — A portion of the cost for public improvements are recovered by assessment charges to the benefiting property owners. These collections are typically appropriated to the payment of debt service. 2010 revenue estimates are based on the balance of the assessments as of 12/31/2008 (last available figures from Wright County) and divided over the remaining life of the assessment including interest charged. Revenue estimate assume there A -28 will be no prepayment of assessments by property owners during the year, thus creating a conservative revenue source. Investment Income and Miscellaneous Revenues — The General Fund has $269,611 budgeted in 2010 for Miscellaneous Revenues of which $246,339 is interest earnings. This is up from the last year even though lower interest rates are anticipated in 2010, but a higher cash balance projected. Similar reduction can be found in the Special Revenue, Debt Service and Capital Project Funds. Enterprise Funds — Use Collections Water and Sewer Funds — Charges for services are primarily comprised of providing Monticello residents and businesses with water and sanitary sewer treatment services. The utility fiords charges separately for these services based on individual consumption. The City has set rates to cover all operating costs and only a portion of depreciation. As new development has slowed, the burden on infrastructure replacement costs has been shifting more on to the utility rates charged. The graph on the following page, illustrates revenue trends for water usages and sanitary sewer treatment. A -29 MISCELLANEOUS 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 ACTUAL 2006 ACTUAL 2007 ACTUAL 2008 BUDGET 2009 PROJECTED 2009 BUDGET 2010 t MISCELLANEOUS Enterprise Funds — Use Collections Water and Sewer Funds — Charges for services are primarily comprised of providing Monticello residents and businesses with water and sanitary sewer treatment services. The utility fiords charges separately for these services based on individual consumption. The City has set rates to cover all operating costs and only a portion of depreciation. As new development has slowed, the burden on infrastructure replacement costs has been shifting more on to the utility rates charged. The graph on the following page, illustrates revenue trends for water usages and sanitary sewer treatment. A -29 Water Use Collections — Water rates were increased 15% in each of 2007 and 2008. For 2009 and again in 2010 the rates are being increased 5 %. Prior to 2007 the water rates had not been increased for a number of years. Even with these rate increases the revenues for the Water Fund should be sufficient to cover operating costs and part of the depreciation costs of the system. Sewer Use Collections — The rate increases the water rates have had the last three years have also applied to the City's sewer rates. Similarly the revenues of the Sewer Fund are sufficient to cover operating costs and debt service of the Sewer Fund but no all of the depreciation costs of the system. Liquor Fund Sales — Liquor sales have increased over the last five years and the budget reflects this trend. Gross profits are estimated at $889,500 for 2010 based on sales of $4,044,500 and costs of $3,155,000. This is an increase of 10.0% in gross profit from 2009. A -30 Revenues from Sewer Charges 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 — 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 USE COLLECTIONS Liquor Fund Sales — Liquor sales have increased over the last five years and the budget reflects this trend. Gross profits are estimated at $889,500 for 2010 based on sales of $4,044,500 and costs of $3,155,000. This is an increase of 10.0% in gross profit from 2009. A -30 FiberNet Sales - Beginning in 2010 the City will begin charging customers for internet, phone, and /or cable television services based on services ordered. This is a new enterprise for the City beginning service in 2010. The City estimates revenues from the sale of services at $2,014,823 for 2010 based on preliminary data of those who said they would take the service. Interfund Transfers - These reflect transfers between City Funds. Most of the transfers represent the City's share of capital projects or a Funds share of debt service payments. The following schedule represents the proposed 2010 transfers. Transfers In Fund # Fund Amount 101 General Fund 45,000 211 Library Fund 4,000 211 Library Fund 16,000 212 Street Reconstruction Fund 250,000 400 Capital Project Fund 251,898 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 317,277 213 2008A Revenue Refunding 317,277 314 Bond 805,000 400 Capital Project Fund 931,283 229 Park Dedication 275,000 400 Capital Project Fund 300,000 400 Capital Project Fund 162 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 712,859 262 2008 Sewer Refunding Bond 400,137 315 Fund 400,137 400 Capital Project Fund 32,840 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 264,599 400 Capital Project Fund 29,854 400 Capital Project Fund 4,966 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 310,774 313 2007A Improvement Bond 111,200 Total Transfers In 5,062,849 Other revenue and expenditure trends are detailed throughout this budget document. Consolidated financial summaries of all funds are provided on the following two pages. A -31 Transfer Out Fund # Fund Amount 240 Capital Revolving Fund 45,000 101 General Fund 4,000 609 Liquor Fund 16,000 609 Liquor Fund 250,000 400 Capital Project Fund 251,898 213 EDA Fund 317,277 226 Community Center 805,000 213 EDA Fund 931,283 300 Consolidated Bond Fund 275,000 300 Consolidated Bond Fund 300,000 400 Capital Project Fund 162 262 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 712,859 262 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 400,137 400 Capital Project Fund 32,840 263 Storm Sewer Access Fund 264,599 400 Capital Project Fund 29,854 400 Capital Project Fund 4,966 265 Water Access Fund 310,774 602 Sewer Fund 111,200 Total Transfers Out 5,062,849 Other revenue and expenditure trends are detailed throughout this budget document. Consolidated financial summaries of all funds are provided on the following two pages. A -31 a W N T O ;o c qt N N Z N N O N �. '-i _ N (OJ N N N 3 6.5 0 v�O zmoni � m »_ ^_mm°�Nmm'°°�N �m � O W G C N W f° 3 N N N 0 3 'a j O N N N N 3 N (D 3 m 3 03 m m N —0 N I 3 � OC tii IO N 3 C N N N NCI y N p N V+ C'. N N d 3 Ni N w N N) lfl W O A A LJ N N� W W V� W m Ol Of W N IV m N N A W O A N !J f0 LJ m T N A N N A O V ON A W m O A M m V D o O O O A W 0 U 5 N, A N W W O W O N W O O O O O SO O N ON W W O O O (O O a( O) A N W O O V N W ID O O O O N W— O m O O O m N N W T O .P N V N V W J w N A m N N (�J A N a N O j O A W ° A N A N N O N A W W a O) N -� -� N A (O N N O) O) J O A N 0.3 OJ OI (O O Ja O OJ M w O) O? O) -00 w w N j p� N c N Q N (O N (O o Mn N t0 o O fD O ((II�� A O V A N W O N w A V O O V V O t0 O O N O 0 0 w N N o 0 -+ {3 (?Ay In W a A J Gt tO N IJ N N A N W Ol N ? O y 2 N A m W T O O A W W N w r m W A IJ W U) O W m w m w T T n c 0 , A N A m A W c O d 3 3 (O N O IV w O O J N O O U) O a O O O Gf O O w O O O N O W O OW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V O W O O O O O O O O A NI IV'i W 'WI N "P' i NNaON O O O CN C'O N N 'J w N N N O' O f0 N O N' Mi a IV � N O) O O) n O A N N M N y N d (O M °1 N O O O O O O N f0 O O O O O N (O O O m N O O .P A t O O O O O N W O O O O O O m O N t0 N a W W NN (O Am N NN» m y A -ANN N A Aw - N O A m N W N W O m O O W w N W w W V W A (O w w A W W" N O 0 W w "ON A N o A w w C� p,O O W w O ON N N A O N O A w w W O J O N m O W O O O O w A w A N O W w N m N N A m (O 0 N f0 O W N W CJ N N CJ O (I) m N W O tt�� A ..pp �P -� N (P O (p V U) t0 - O O O l0 N W V A N A m A� N N W O N O w O O O t0 m W N N W O mOww-m N W -AN N N W w J_ �p m W W W TNNONwwrn W e NmwmtO m c �N N o W W t0 m W W A m (O (O A OO(D 0 0 0 W A w m N A m O wm J J mOOmN N !J V IV f)) W N m O) V IJ m O W IP O(O N W l0 W V mN N A AN l0 0 0 A w � Mn y� N N N N N W O w O m c0 A l0 O W O (O N N m 0 0 0 O w W OAm t0 mm N W O, N <O ( w.. V Omc �N IV mNmA N AA W a m m m V V V —w W m O m W (O cO A J m O N N N (� `O gyp' O 0 m A N m O N N w W N N O O m N A N (P IJ m UI A N m( O N — m m W N M m M� (p (O Ott; A t A W M m M( m W A W n O m w W O o- N V W W O A N W w N N m O N A O (O (O N m f0 N N O N N N O V O. - JNaa W W N�A N O NNmm m m w m A -� W W A N W W O m.--+ w J� I A N :INN f 0 O V m W �NJ N A m m w N m N O V O N V fo w m (O N w A N O f0 W m N mw-mm N O O N A O -� -� m m m N O m w N.'O M m N N N N w tD O IV O (D O A W N !J N (O W O <b m O A O N m m m m m N W V O N m 0 V W V A N N m m N( N m A m O m m N (O A N V W P A N tp J A N W N N N O- -- A �Gn N A O J J J wWW � O w w w V c O N A» OCw o wN OW ] tf00 6J o d V O W m ttJJ 2 V w O V N A N -� N P - N W W m a D V U) V J m A m W 0 f0 tT V W- w a- -MA W O t0 (O N N W N V m W 10 O m W W N m W j tp w C V N mm W w a Om(Om V N(D OwO W NON V w N t0 d m O Oo O O -� A (JI N W IV O) W m W N IV t0 j O fJ -� J w m O N aO4 W Nm mN m(O V Am V Otte °, W O w A N On" v V W" V V V V V am A MW O MV O V m TOTAL ALL FUNDS EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $6,492,707 $7,015,310 $8,406,029 $8,961,000 $8,455,555 $8,880,979 -0.89% SALES OF GOODS 3,618,130 3,769,077 4,085,682 3,682,000 4,624,307 4,044,500 9.85 %. LICENSES & PERMITS 771,254 778,992 1,188,884 844,900 559,552 570,150 - 32.52% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 937,007 1,364,633 411,044 612,469 695,159 407,440 - 33.48% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 3,285,416 2,775,850 2,140,953 2,536,250 2,288,199 4,821,546 90.11% FINES & FORFEITS 1,970 5,011 1,967 650 0 300 - 53.85% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 2,155,263 3,230,765 2,725,502 2,299,394 576,274 2,039,522 - 11.30% MISCELLANEOUS 6,316,398 3,371,704 2,442,409 2,349,736 1,688,615 1,469,495 - 37.46% USE COLLECTIONS 1,533,546 1,882,676 2,005,284 2,109,600 2,146,086 2,200,300 4.30% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 2,188,675 482,412 17,722 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 11,726,027 5,223,464 16,807,286 7,338,754 6,660,543 5,062,849 - 31.01% BOND PROCEEDS 0 4,484,444 15,685,262 0 0 3,230,000 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $39,026,393 $34,384,338 $55,918,024 $30,734,753 $27,694,290 $32,727,081 6.48% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $3,844,151 $4,165,992 $4,649,496 $4,811,637 $4,919,508 $5,229,218 8.68% SUPPIES 3,333,643 3,548,777 3,849,702 3,771,305 4,486,344 4,581,990 21.50% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 23,717,726 12,108,193 7,700,156 7,864,303 7,622,061 9,119,427 15.96% CAPITAL OUTLAY 6,997,648 7,911,565 27,980,008 14,248,982 13,949,049 10,901,629 - 23.49% OPERATING TRANSFERS 11,726,027 5,223,464 16,807,286 7,338,754 6,660,543 5,062,849 - 31.01% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $49,619,195 $32,957,991 $60,986,648 $38,034,981 $37,637,505 $34,895,113 -8.26% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY I. $85,389,886 $74,797,084 $76,223,431 $71,154,807 $71,154,807 $61,211,592 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($10,592,802) $1,426,347 ($5,068,624) ($7,300,228) ($9,943,215) ($2,168,032) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $74,797,084 $76,223,431 $71,154,807 $63,854,579 $61,211,592 $59,043,560 A -33 Projected Fund Balance Summary FUND BALANCE (DEFICIT) 12/3112008 BUDGETS ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE (DEFICIT) 12/3112010 FUND 2009 Net Projected 2010 Net Budget Amount Designated or Restricted Amount Undesignated or Unrestricted General Fund 6,178,552.00 (817,424.00) - 5,361,128.00 3,745,320.00 1,615,808.00 Special Revenue Funds: Library 8,734.00 (5,309.00) 6,441.00 9,866.00 136.00 9,730.00 Street Reconstruction 1,450,840.00 833,219.00 370,228.00 2,654,287.00 1,330,520.00 1,323,767.00 EDA 5,165,154.00 2,163,478.00 (1,134,073.00 _ 6,194,559.00 3,516,677.00 2,677,882.00 Environmental Clean Up - - - -- _ MN Investment 890,524.00 28,626.00 34,101 00 953,251.00 953,251.00 SCERG(Econ Recovery Grant) CMIF (Central MN ht) Shade Tree 50,655.00 17,043.00 6,419.00) 61,279.00 - 61,279.00 _ Street Lighting Improvements 272,090.00 289,264.00 280,606.00 841,960.00 841,960.00 - Community Center 746,715.00 43,695.00) (78,640.00) 624,380.00 74,105.00 550,275.00 Deputy Registrar 120,958.00 1 17,212.00 3,466.00 141,636.00 1,427.00 140,209.00 Park & Pathway Dedication (89 734.00) _ 36,387.00 (71,380.00) 122,727.00 - (122,727.00) _ Orderly Annexation Area 7,942.00 (877.00) 291.00 7,356.00 7,357.00 (1.00 Capital Revolving Fund 5,275,457.00 (1,973,400.00) 73,089.00 3,375,146.00 3,314,414.00 60,732.00 SanitarySewerAccess 5,025,027.00 (952,739.00) 618,113.00) 3,454,175.00 7,241,212.00 (3,787,037.00) Storm Water Access 1,722,683.00 (169,600.00 .00) 1,499,005.00 1,317,112.00 181,893.00 Water Access 835,752.00 (261,891.00) __(54,07 - 276,209.00 357,652.00 1,555,156.00 1,197,504.00 TOTAL - Special Rev Funds: 21,482,797.00 20,282.00 1,410,690.00 20,051,825.00 20,153,327.00 101,502.00 Debt Service Funds: 1994A GO Refunding Bond 1995A GO Bond 1997A GO_ Improvement_ 2 GO Bond 002 568,970.00 (260,080.00) (81,391.00) 227,499.00 227,499.00 - _ __ _ _ _ 2003AGOBOnd - 1,594,234.00 (1,594,234.00) - - 2005AGOBond 2,478,186.00 (982,784.00) (274,884.00) 1,220,518.00 1_,220,518.00 - Consolidated Bond 1,513,361.00 (14,055.00) (158,146.00) 1,341,160.00 - 1,3_41,160.00 2007A G. O. Bond 312,906.00 (223,106.00) (36,569.00) 53,231.00 53,231.00 - 1998B GO Water System Ref. - - - _ - 1999 GO Improvement 15,923.00 (15,923.00) - 2000AGOImprovement 2000A MCC /Public Proj Rev - - - - - - - 2000B GO Improvement (7,857.00) 7,857.00 - - _ - - _ 2008 Sewer Refunding Bond 973,985.00 (52,808.00 _ (139 143.00) 782,034 00 782,034.00 _- - 2008A EDA MCC Refunding 768,848.00 21,624.00 7,622.00 798,094.00 798,094.00 - 1989 TIF E( LDERLY ) Bond 2,381.00 - 2004A Taxable TlF 1,151,801.00 989,836.00 98,267.00 63,698.00 63,698.00 TOTAL - Debt Service Funds: 9,372,738.00 4,105,726.00 780,778.00 4,486,234.00 3,145,074.00 1,341,160.00 TOTAL - Capital Project Funds: (1,804,654.00) (129,370.00) 1,313,100.00 (620,924.00) - (620,924.00) Enterprise Funds: Water 12,424,248.00 (67,484.00) 317,899.00 12,038,865.00 12,038,865.00 Sewer 21,012,243.00 (794,098.00 ) (940,495.00) 19,277,650.00 879,200.00 18,398,450.00 Liquor 2,830,571.00 363,291.00 14,136.00 3,207,998.00 3,2.07,998.00 Transportation - - - _ _ - Cemetery 656,040.00 (4,774.00) (14,949.00 636,317.00 _ 636,317.00 Fiber 997,729.00 4,367,348,00 (30,456.00 ) (5,395,533.00 _ - 5,395,533.00 TOTAL - Enterprise Funds: 35,925,373.00 4870,413.00 1,289,663.00 29,765,297.00 1 879,200.00 28,886,097.00 Investment Holding - TOTAL -All Funds: 71,154,806.00 9,943,215.00) (2,168,031.00) 59,043,560.00 1 27,922,921.00 31,120,639.00 A -34 GENERAL FUND GENERAL FUND SUMMARY FUND DESCRIPTION: The General Fund is used to account for the ordinary operations of the City, which are financed from property taxes and other general revenues, which are not accounted for in another fund. The modified accrual basis of accounting is used in the General Fund. That is, expenditures are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are recorded when received. However, compensated absences are expended when paid for budgetary purposes. The General Fund budget is a balanced budget, meaning current revenues equal current expenditures. 2010 BUDGET ISSUES: Property taxes are the largest revenue source of the General Fund. The City still has levy limits for 2010, which restricts the amount the City can increase its property tax levies from one year to the next. Slowed growth in tax capacity will also place pressure on the City's property tax levy. The public works department is the largest expenditure area for the 2010 budget. GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $3,774,186 $4,433,359 $5,460,543 $5,272,379 $4,926,809 $5,297,065 0.47% LICENSES & PERMITS 762,769 773,797 917,539 591,900 265,909 296,650 - 49,88% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 283,597 436,588 368,938 498,056 479,006 114,801 - 76.95% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 809,288 944,422 402,557 383,950 800,806 306,023 - 20.30% FINES & FORFEITS 1,750 4,875 1,951 650 0 300 - 53.85% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 2,101 1,644 5,970 0 232 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 177,738 626,165 430,656 291,452 458,005 269,611 -7.49% OPERATING TRANSFERS 667 80,938 46,390 119,114 469,114 45,000 - 62.22% TOTALREVENUES $5,812,096 $7,301,788 $7,634,544 $7,157,501 $7,399,881 $6,329,450 - 11.57% EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT GENERAL GOVERNMENT MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL $31,837 $33,858 $34,589 $54,802 $49,157 $54,550 -0.46% ADMINISTRATION 303,592 282,693 260,622 268,360 280,431 204,819 - 23.68% ELECTIONS 13,770 140 19,764 605 955 14,531 2301.80% FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 269,715 454,448 428,634 373,648 394,703 357,434 -4.34% AUDIT 42,480 43,200 43,375 35,500 41,000 36,100 1.69% CITYASSESSING 55,156 52,744 51,413 52,275 50,518 51,175 -2.10% LEGAL 130,524 96,701 73,556 63,000 64,822 57,000 -9.52% HUMAN RESOURCES 0 0 15,730 55,589 63,394 81,930 100.00% PLANNING & ZONING 312,978 254,319 205,163 187,915 140,602 157,801 - 16.03% DATAPROCESSING 90,137 216,716 107,392 145,598 161,789 150,225 3.18% CITY HALL 142,081 130,173 182,586 203,953 926,861 207,408 1.69% TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT $1,392,270 $1,564,992 $1,422,824 $1,441,245 $2,174,232 $1,372,973 -4.74% 1i GENERAL FUND CONTINUED 2006 ACTUAL 2007 ACTUAL 2008 ACTUAL 2009 BUDGET 2009 PROJECTED 2010 BUDGET % CHANGE PUBLIC SAFETY 649,404 347,359 318,151 296,619 251,336 245,180 - 17.34% LAW ENFORCEMENT 880,310 923,113 990,621 1,066,000 1,064,095 1,096,000 2.81% FIRE DEPARTMENT 253,124 296,127 217,181 353,025 795,353 197,210 - 44.14% FIRE RELIEF 0 0 74,110 101,000 80,127 80,000 - 20.79% BUILDING INSPECTIONS 334,031 323,821 405,779 379,170 307,962 254,434 - 32.90% CIVIL DEFENSE 1,035 8,023 4,136 9,616 7,998 1,400 - 85.44% ANIMAL CONTROL 48,643 45,057 48,272 45,410 56,553 45,400 - 0.02% NATIONAL GUARD 24,088 12,644 12,607 23,775 20,695 23,350 A.79% TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY $1,541,231 $1,608,785 $1,752,706 $1,977,996 $2,332,783 $1,697,794 - 14.17% PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION 206,887 726,827 281,630 229,460 237,898 219,531 -4.33% ENGINEERING 649,404 347,359 318,151 296,619 251,336 245,180 - 17.34% PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS 140,401 145,663 135,176 113,040 119,578 111,275 -1.56% STREETS & ALLEYS 506,859 652,074 724,620 872,002 802,932 686,579 - 21.26% ICE & SNOW 68,081 118,441 269,002 152,635 155,489 140,974 - 7.64% SHOP & GARAGE 150,982 161,706 163,410 183,917 174,183 177,389 -3.55% PARKING LOTS 3,969 2,367 3,222 13,850 3,668 13,800 -0.36% STREET LIGHTING 164,079 222,187 229,509 169,500 201,094 168,500 -0.59% REFUSE COLLECTION 474,047 509,208 514,308 493,068 531,951 511,929 3.83% TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS $2,364,710 $2,885,832 $2,639,028 $2,524,092 $2,478,129 $2,275,156 -9.86% CULTURE AND RECREATION COMMUNITY CELEBRATIONS 3,899 3,110 2,252 6,300 2,072 3,000 - 52.38% INFORMATION CENTER 144 126 79 0 65 0 0.00% SENIOR CENTER 91,502 56,212 58,132 96,775 94,213 96,144 -0.65% COMMUNITY EDUCATION 12,740 12,740 12,740 12,740 12,740 0 - 100.00% Y.M.C.A. 5,460 5,460 0 0 0 0 0.00% TRANSIT 0 0 0 5,000 5,000 5,000 0.00% SWAN RIVER SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% ICEARENA 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 0.00% PARKS ADMINISTRATION 531,703 477,944 680,914 674,575 528,629 543,646 - 19.41% PARKS IMPROVEMENTS 130,291 145,807 105,116 89,000 26,258 5,000 - 94.38% PARKS BALLFIELDS 34,924 79,952 16,702 30,400 29,454 16,800 - 44.74% TOTAL CULTURE AND RECREATION $885,663 $856,351 $950,935 $989,790 $773,431 $744,590 - 24.77% MISCELLANEOUS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 87,522 79,781 79,646 74,714 77,360 73,344 -1.83% UNALLOCATED 12,861 88,548 0 0 223,793 4,000 0.00% UNALLOCATED INSURANCE 123,898 165,114 161,536 149,765 157,577 161,593 7,90% TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS $224,281 $333,443 $241,182 $224,479 $458,730 $238,937 6.44% TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES $6,408,154 $7,249,403 $7,006,675 $7,157,601 $8,217,305 $6,329,450 - 11.57% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $6,094,357 ($596,059) $5,498,298 $52,385 $5,550,683 $627,869 $6,178,552 ($100) $6,178,552 ($817,424) $5,361,128 ($0) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $5,498,298 $5,550,683 $6,178,552 $6,178,452 $5,361,128 $5,361,128 B -3 The previous table summarizes the General Fund revenues by classification and expenditures by activities and departments. While the table below summarizes the General Fund revenues and expenditures both by classification. FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $3,774,186 $4,433,359 $5,460,543 $5,272,379 $4,926,809 $5,297,065 0.47% LICENSES & PERMITS 762,769 773,797 917,539 591,900 265,909 296,650 - 49.88% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 283,597 436,588 368,938 498,056 479,006 114,801 - 76.95% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 809,288 944,422 402,557 383,950 800,806 306,023 - 20.30% FINES & FORFEITS 1,750 4,875 1,951 650 0 300 - 53.85% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 2,101 1,644 5,970 0 232 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 177,738 626,165 430,656 291,452 458,005 269,611 -7.49% OPERATING TRANSFERS 667 80,938 46,390 119,114 469,114 45,000 - 62.22% TOTAL REVENUES $5,812,096 $7,301,788 $7,634,544 $7,157,501 $7,399,881 $6,329,450 - 11.57% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $2,294,808 $2,465,992 $2,732,863 $2,773,313 $2,838,046 $2,623,912 -5.39% SUPPIES 340,159 420,658 470,098 476,280 430,270 478,100 0.38% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,431,102 3,375,143 3,226,550 3,158,158 3,358,101 3,092,638 -2.07% CAPITAL OUTLAY 240,580 828,154 377,164 749,850 1,430,888 130,800 - 82.56% OPERATING TRANSFERS 101,506 159,456 200,000 0 160,000 4,000 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $6,408,154 $7,249,403 $7,006,675 $7,157,601 $8,217,305 $6,329,450 - 11.57% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $6,094,357 ($596,059) $5,498,298 $52,385 $5,550,683 $627,869 $6,178,552 ($100) $6,178,552 ($817,424) $5,361,128 ($0) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $5,498,298 $5,550,683 $6,178,552 $6,178,452 $5,361,128 $5,361,128 B -4 REVENUES ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION: To record and maintain all general operating revenues of the City. The general fund is used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. 2010 OBJECTIVES: 1. Maintain stable, constant revenue sources. 2. Maintain low property taxes and tax rate, by reviewing the costs of services provided and charge appropriately for those services. 2010 BUDGET ISSUES: The General Fund's main revenue source is property taxes. Property taxes made up 77% of the 2008 budget and 74% of the 2009 budget. For 2010 property taxes makeup 84% of the total General Fund revenues. The Minnesota State property tax system is described in more detail on pages G -3 through G -7. Beginning in 2009 and continuing in 2010, Cities in Minnesota have had their property tax increases limited to the lesser of inflation or 3.9% plus growth less State Aids. Also beginning in 2009 the City began receiving Utility Valuation Transition Aid (UVTA) which is intended to offset the loss of property tax dollars due to the reduction of property value on utility facilities. The Xcell power plant continues to be the largest property tax payer in the City of Monticello. For 2009 the City receive $241,316 in UVTA and it is estimated the City will receive $292,110, but since the State has not solved its budget problems, it is expected the City will not receive all if its UVTA and therefore the City is only budgeting $49,985 for UVTA in 2010. Revenue collected for building permit activity were dramatically reduced in 2009 and are expected to be similar in 2010, therefore the City is reducing the budget for permits from $525,000 in 2009 to $235,000 in 2010. The General Fund will receive an operating transfer of $45,000 from the Capital Revolving Fund for the purchase of equipment which was budgeted in prior years and is being purchased in 2010 by the General Fund. BUDGET: See next two pages. C GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE CURRENT AD VALOREM TAXES $3,692,979 $4,323,306 $5,366,419 $5,257,379 $4,909,684 $5,272,065 0.28% DELINQUENT AD VALOREM TAXES 44,261 67,929 35,480 0 0 0 #DIV /01 MOBILE HOME TAX 14,705 14,225 14,404 0 14,425 0 #DIV 101 PENALTY &INTEREST - TAXES 22,241 27,899 44,240 15,000 2,700 25,000 66.67% LIQUOR LICENSE 42,720 50,774 52,962 50,000 50,060 51,000 2.00% BEER LICENSE 1,067 1,381 977 1,000 888 900 - 10.00% OTHER BUS LIC & PEMITS 3,025 3,803 4,115 3,000 3,202 3,000 0.00% BUILDING PERMITS 697,373 555,900 848,566 525,000 205,119 235,000 - 55.24% VARIANCES /CONDITIONAL USES 4,175 4,100 3,900 3,000 950 1,000 - 66.67% DRIVEWAY PERMIT 0 25 75 200 125 200 0.00% GRADING PERMIT 4,500 150 450 1,000 0 300 - 70.00% SIGN /BANNER PERMIT 7,400 8,330 5,410 6,000 4,025 4,000 - 33.33% MOBILE HOME PERMIT 760 570 380 350 475 350 0.00% ANIMAL LICENSES 195 800 204 350 565 400 14.29% FIBER OPTIC FRANCHISE FEE 500 0 500 500 500 500 0.00% ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE 0 146,046 0 0 0 0 #DIV /01 NON -BUS LIC & PERMITS 1,054 1,918 0 1,500 0 0 - 100.00% HOMESTEAD CREDIT(HACA/MV) 17,090 179,790 100,653 0 5,433 (178,924) #DIV 101 MOBILE HOME HOMESTEAD CR 13,879 11,341 8,840 0 8,240 0 #DIV /01 PERA INCREASE AID 6,741 6,741 6,741 6,740 6,741 6,740 0.00% UTILITY VALUATION AID 0 0 0 241,316 241,316 49,985 - 79.29% STATE HWY AID - OPERATING 77,449 78,568 93,512 75,000 38,187 85,000 13.33% FIRE DEPT AID - OPERATING 98,518 86,740 74,110 100,000 64,549 80,000 - 20.00% POLICE DEPT AID - OPERATING 43,322 47,063 54,761 47,000 61,789 50,000 6.38% COUNTY OPER GRANT - STR /HWY 16,979 14,318 14,020 13,000 52,751 12,000 -7.69% COUNTY OPER GRANT - CIVIL DEF 0 0 0 5,000 0 0 - 100.00% CO OPER GRANT - RECYCLING 9,619 12,027 16,301 10,000 0 10,000 0.00% ZONING /SUBDIVISION FEES 2,125 4,275 1,260 1,000 200 500 - 50.00% SALE OF MAPS & PUBLICATIONS 314 261 114 150 36 75 - 50.00% ASSESSMENTSEARCHES 5,045 3,325 2,575 2,500 2,850 1,750 - 30.00% RESTOCK/BILLING FEE 150 1,610 2,450 0 0 0 #DIV /01 FINAL PLAT FEE 175 400 250 0 50 0 #DIV /0! PLANNING ADMIN FEE 49,898 27,307 21,400 15,000 21,530 5,000 - 66.67% NSF FEE 150 275 303 150 185 100 - 33.33% INSPECTION FEES /CONST OBS 47,021 54,543 35,739 0 0 0 #DIV /GI INSPECTION FEES /BLDG 221,668 80,261 3,556 30,000 6,303 2,000 - 93.33% CONTRACTOR LICENSING FEE 2,025 1,100 325 500 225 250 - 50.00% FIRE PROTECTION TWP CONTR 46,890 53,193 53,346 53,150 53,499 53,000 -0.28% FIRE -EMERG RESPONSE CALLS 16.,908 7,150 10,650 5,500 7,250 5,000 -9.09% FIRE - OTHER FEES 6,657 4,599 3,109 3,000 1,250 500 - 83.33% BLIGHT /MOWING FEES 4,463 4,197 771 500 1,143 500 0.00% RENTAL HOUSING FEES 0 28,745 5,545 25,000 47,885 30,000 20.00% ANIMAL CONTROL FEES 23,920 28,044 32,442 20,000 27,427 20,000 0.00% INVESTMENTADMIN FEE 0 0 78,176 44,500 42,187 40,298 -9.44% STIR, SIDEWALK,CURB REPAIR 0 80 70 0 0 0 #DIV /01 EQUIP. -OPER FEE /RE[AIR 0 330 120 0 0 0 #DIV /01 JUNK AMNESTY FEES 9,292 10,169 9,176 8,000 10,493 9,000 12.50% i � RECYCLING BINS /PROCESSING 1,005 1,111 586 500 578 500 0.00% GARBAGE FEE - TAXABLE 70,838 66,069 64,823 60,000 71,527 60,000 0.00% GARBAGE CART /RENTAL 43,430 46,630 47,706 45,000 41,353 45,000 0.00% GARBAGE SURCHARGE - NO TAX 4,357 2,891 2,814 1,000 5,698 1,500 50.00% CONCESSIONS - PW 1,327 (5,266) 1,585 1,000 1,206 1,000 0.00% TEAM /LEAGUE FEES 0 3,680 0 0 0 0 #DIV /01 FIELD/TOURNEY FEES 0 14,472 0 2,000 1,900 0 - 100.00% PARK RENTAL FEES 0 3,929 3,889 3,000 3,682 5,000 66.67% CONSWENGIN COST REIMB 200,282 441,683 17,504 50,000 315,254 20,000 - 60.00% DEVELOPER COST REIMB 51,150 59,359 1,592 12,400 136,966 5,000 - 59.68% CHARGES FOR SERVICES GEN 197 0 681 100 129 50 - 50.00% ANIMAL IMPOUND FINES 0 152 265 100 220 100 0.00% LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION 1,750 4,500 1,500 500 0 200 - 60.00% ADMIN OFFENSE FINE 0 375 451 150 0 0 - 100.00% S.A. PRINCIPAL - COUNTY 2,101 1,644 5,970 0 232 0 #DIV /01 INTEREST EARNINGS 249,147 467,575 309,836 240,981 227,028 246,339 2.22% INT EARN - ANDERSON /SR CIT B 5,709 5,280 4,873 4,383 4,383 3,876 - 11.57% INT EARN - DANNER TRKING 3,484 3,035 2,555 2,044 377 0 - 100.00% INT EARN - SWAN RIVER 11,637 11,297 10,930 10,544 10,544 10,134 -3.89% GEN CITY PROPERTY RENTAL 61,638 41,276 41,630 20,000 42,678 0 - 100.00% RENTAL OF PW EQUIPMENT 240 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV /01 CONTRIBUTIONS - EDA 0 0 27,706 0 19,786 0 #DIV /0! SALE OF GEN CITY PROPERTY 0 0 5,020 0 12,483 0 #DIV /01 SALE OF LOCK BOXES /PUB SAF 1,711 3,067 1,727 1,000 1,898 1,000 0.00% SIGNS & INSTALL 0 476 494 0 105 0 #DIV /01 SALE OF PW PROPERTY 47 18,100 0 0 12,697 0 #DIV /01 SALE OF RECREATION PROP 0 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV /O! COPIES /LISTS (TAXABLE) 190 690 287 0 245 100 #DIV /01 REFUNDS /REIMBURSEMENTS 9,631 15,630 18,733 7,500 99,621 2,000 - 73.33% ASSESSMENT FEE REIMBURS 276 258 115 0 19,600 0 #DIV 101 DISCOUNT 41 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV /O! OTHER MISC REVENUE (166,012) 59,481 6,760 5,000 6,560 6,162 23.24% TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FDS 667 80,938 46,390 119,114 469,114 45,000 - 62.22% TOTAL REVENUES $5,812,096 $7,301,940 $7,634,809 $7,157,601 $7,400,101 $6,329,450 - 11.57% i DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL General Government Mayor & City Council 101 41110 The Mayor and City Council provide elected representation to the community with control over matters of policy, budget, administration, and operations of the City. Members participate in various committees, as well as direct staff, through the City Administrator, as to their overall goals for the City. OBJECTIVES: Adopt policies and ordinances consistent with Council's position on growth, zoning, and financial strategy. Continue to work on the completion of the City's natural resource inventory and traffic plan. Examine City facility needs to meet future City operations. Continue to work with City Administrator on succession planning for the City. ISSUES: 1. Reduced tax capacity and levy limits which place pressure on the ability to finance City operations at current levels. 2. Succession planning of City staff. 3. Operation of the City's new fiber optic network. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of City Council meetings 23 23 23 23 23 # of City Council workshops and special meetings 24 49 61 27 15 # of City Council resolutions 124 105 96 80 80 [11W. BUDGET COMMENTARY: Council's budget remains consistent with that of previous years. In 2008 the Council approved an increase of Council wages beginning in 2009. Dues and memberships consist of the Mayor's Association and League of Minnesota Cities. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % COUNCIL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $26,057 $26,180 $24,062 $42,557 $39,772 $42,650 0.22% SUPPLIES 0 171 0 0 41 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 5,780 7,507 10,527 12,245 9,344 11,900 -2.82% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $31,837 $33,858 $34,589 $54,802 $49,157 $54,550 -0.46% i DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ECW1C IIIyJIWK1 CITY ADMINISTRATION General Government City Administration 101 41301 City Administration provides the overall direction of the City, as determined by Council and Mayor. The City Administrator serves as Chief Administrative Officer for the City, ensuring that laws, ordinances, and resolutions of the City Council are enforced and implemented. The City Administrator is responsible for managing the overall operations of all City departments. The Deputy City Clerk's responsibilities involve the management and retention of all official records and documents of the City. The Clerk is also responsible for all election procedures. OBJECTIVES: 1. Assist City Council in setting policies and procedures in accordance with Council's position. 2. Provide direction and leadership on major city projects, budget management; oversee performance evaluation and long -range planning. 3. Continue with proactive succession planning regarding key staffing rolls within the City's organization. 4. Continue converting City permanent paper documents to electronic format. ISSUES: Implications due to the decrease in tax capacity and levy limits for the City. 2. Long -range comprehensive and succession planning. 3. Long -range comprehensive traffic planning. 4. Operation of the City's new fiber optic network. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Council meeting agendas prepared 38 48 55 32 34 Records converted to electronic 5% 15% 35% 75% 75% Council minutes approved 44 58 48 41 34 B -10 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The budget amount are based on past expenditure levels with the following exceptions. Personnel services includes a 0% cost of living increase and step adjustments for employees, but show a decrease because in 2009 the full -time deputy cleric retired and was not replaced but the duties were absorbed by existing staff. Also the safety program /AWAIR budget was moved to the Human Resource budget for 2010. Finally, in 2009 $13,000 was budgeted for the purchase of a scanner /printer /copier for building plan/maps and other oversized paper documents, where as no equipment is budgeted for purchase in 2010. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % ADMINISTRATIVE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $291,117 $240,792 $223,674 $240,705 $251,344 $191,711 - 20.35% SUPPLIES 264 53 5,799 150 262 250 66.67% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 12,211 41,848 31,149 14,505 14,133 12,858 - 11.35% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 13,000 14,692 0 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $303,592 $282,693 $260,622 $268,360 $280,431 $204,819 - 23.68% B -tt DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: ELECTIONS General Government Deputy City Cleric 101 41410 The Election activity provides the preparation of any and all elections, including organizing the polling places, election judges, and vote tabulations. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to research a possible second polling precinct. 2. Conduct the 2010 State and Local elections. ISSUES: 1. Stay current on election laws. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 #of voters 4,028 1,409 5,379 0 5,400 # of polling precincts 1 1 1 1 1 # of election judges 23 20 40 0 40 BUDGET COMMENTARY: There were no elections held in 2009, so the funds budgeted were for maintenance contracts of the City's voting machines and miscellaneous expenses. For 2010 funds are budgeted to hold State and Local elections in the fall including primaries. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % ELECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $6,388 $0 $3,082 $0 $88 $2,981 #DIV /01 SUPPLIES 246 0 417 0 0 450 #DIV /01 OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,523 140 10,866 305 867 10,800 3440.98% CAPITAL OUTLAY 5,614 0 5,399 300 0 300 0,00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $13,770 $140 $19,764 $605 $955 $14,531 2301.80% B -12 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION General Government Finance Director 101 41520 The Finance Department conducts the financial affairs of the City of Monticello in accordance with the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principals (GAAP). This includes protecting the assets of the City, the initiation of financial plans, investment and debt management, review and implementation of internal controls, and accounting for every financial transaction of the City including accounts payable, accounts receivable, payroll, and accounting control. The preparation of the annual audited financial report and annual budget document are also facilitated through finance. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue working to develop a financial management plan for the City. 2. Develop an audit document in a format to be eligible for review and award of GFOA's award programs. 3. Provide meaningful and timely financial reports and information to Council, Commissions and other City Departments. 4. Complete financial, payroll and utility billing software conversions. 5. Coordinate a central purchasing system including developing the use of purchase orders. ISSUES: 1. Complete implementation of new software systems for financial, payroll and utility billing with integration of new processes for purchase orders, web based applications and remote time card entry. 2. Implement improved reporting procedures to inform Council, Commissions, and Departments. 3. Work with other Departments to find ways to reduce costs of City Operations. B -13 MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of accts. payable checks 3,432 3,335 3,465 3,575 3,200 # of accts. receivable invoices 352 537 369 784 400 Funds collect from accts. recbl. $260,554 $279,650 $280,000 $269,228 $300,000 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Finance budget includes funds to handle the financial transactions of the City, in an efficient manner, while maintaining the highest level of internal controls and segregation of duties. Budget changes for 2010 include an increase in full -time salaries, which is offset by a reduction in part -time salaries to reflect the change of the payroll clerk from a part-time to full -time position. The budget for banks charges was also reduced to reflect the new credit card processer for the City at a reduced cost. All other budgeted items were adjusted based on need and past expenditure levels. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % FINANCE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $260,016 $426,449 $392,410 $346,123 $361,114 $328,684 -5.04% SUPPLIES 504 2,344 2,021 1,750 1,325 1,750 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 9,194 25,655 34,203 25,775 32,264 27,000 4.75% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $269,715 $454,448 $428,634 $373,648 $394,703 $357,434 -4.34% B -14 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: AUDIT General Government Finance Director 101 41540 An audit of the City's finances must be completed on an amival basis for the City to remain in compliance with Federal and State accounting practices. OBJECTIVES: 1. Complete the financial audit in a timely fashion. 2. Reduce the number of audit findings and adjustments. 3. Work with audit firm to bring CAFR publication in -house and to award status. ISSUES: 1. Reduction of audit findings and adjustments. 2. Increasing reporting requirements and auditing standards. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Audit submittal date to State 6/28 6/26 6/27 6/25 6/26 # of audit findings N/A 10 6 3 0 Achieved GFOA award No No No Yes Yes BUDGET COMMENTARY: The budget for auditing consists entirely of the expenses associated with the required audit process. In late 2007, a Request For Proposal (RFP) for audit services was sent to several firms. The RFP guarantees the cost for audit services for the years ended 2007 through 2009 and resulted in a cost decrease from previous years. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % AUDIT ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 42,480 43,200 43,375 35,500 41,000 36,100 1.69% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $42,480 $43,200 $43,375 $35,500 $41,000 $36,100 1.69% B -15 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: CITY ASSESSING General Government Finance Director 101 41550 Assessing requirements are handled through a contract the City holds with the Wright County Assessor. There are no plans to alter this activity. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: To assess new and existing parcels within the City as required. Pressure of fairly appraising properties under current market trends. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 # New home construction 263 # New commercial construction 8 Total # of city parcels assessed 4,572 BUDGET COMMENTARY: 2007 2008 2009 2010 43 20 9 20 4,682 4,684 4,684 4,715 Assessing services are contracted with the Wright County Assessor. The estimated costs for assessments are: 4,715 existing parcels @ $10.50, new construction; homes 20 @ $25.00, 5 commercial under $500,000 @ $25.00, and 5 commercial over $500,000 @ @100.00. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % ASSESSING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 55,156 52,744 51,413 52,275 50,518 51,175 -2.10% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $55,156 $52,744 $51,413 $52,275 $50,518 $51,175 -2.10% MW DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: LEGAL General Government City Administrator 101 41601 All legal services are currently contracted with a private legal firm. Activities included are the issuance of legal opinions, preparation of ordinances, resolutions, contracts, and agreements, and the conduct of civil litigation. Additional legal requirements, such as publications, and dues are also directed to legal activities. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue contracting for legal council. ISSUES: 1. Rising costs associated with legal council. 2. Increased need for legal council's involved in issues. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of legal notices published N/A N/A 94 87 85 # of legal hours billed N/A N/A 733.20 495.65 450.00 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Legal services are contracted with a private legal firm. Additionally, legal notice publications and membership dues to the Coalition of Utility Cities are based out of this activity. The line item expense for legal notice publication was decreased to reflect 2009 expenditure levels. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % LEGAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 130,524 96,701 73,556 63,000 64,822 57,000 -9.52% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $130,524 $96,701 $73,556 $63,000 $64,822 $57,000 -9.52% B -17 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: HUMAN RESOURCES General Government City Administrator 101 41801 Human Resources activities support the primary mission of the City through the effective recruitment, selection, development, training and assessment of appropriate human resource needs. Employee benefits and compensation administration, implementation of, and compliance with Federal and State employment laws, labor negotiations, processing of employee grievances, and development of personnel policies are major human resource functions. OBJECTIVES: 1. Provide recruiting, interviewing, and other personnel services for all City departments. 2. Administer classification and compensation system for all employees in compliance with pay equity. 3. Plan and coordinate in -house training programs for City staff. 4. Administer City benefit plans. ISSUES: 1. Develop City personnel handbook. 2. Develop various personnel policies. 3. Develop and implement City drug and alcohol testing program. 4. Negotiate new union contract for public works employees. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement # of frill -time positions # of part -time positions # of full -time positions filled # of other positions filled Average # of employees 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 50 50 50 52 57 N/A N/A 71 73 78 N/A N/A 6 7 3 N/A N/A 26 50 3 N/A N/A 120 125 135 . ., BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Human Resource Activity was a new activity for 2009 for the City since the part- time position of human resource manager was created and filled in 2008. The 2010 budget reflect estimated costs for setting up trainings, providing City staff with benefit and compensation information and miscellaneous expenses based on 2009 expenditures. 11Z17" GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % HUMAN RESOURCES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $15,698 $51,339 $53,919 $70,280 100.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 32 1,500 0 2,000 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 2,750 9,475 9,650 100.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $15,730 $55,589 $63,394 $81,930 100.00% B -19 PLANNING, ZONING, & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT: General Government SUPERVISOR: Community Development Director FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 41910 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Community Development and Planning Department is responsible for long -range and current planning efforts for Monticello. The Department is responsible for regulating development and use standards as outlined in the zoning and subdivision ordinance; these standards are aimed at protecting and promoting public health, safety, and welfare. The Department oversees coordination with regional planning and service providers including Monticello Township Board, Wright County Planning & Zoning, Sherburne County Planning and Zoning and regional transit entities. The Department also provides citizens, business owners, and developers with current, easily accessible information about Monticello's planning process and what's happening in their community. OBJECTIVES: 1. Completion of zoning ordinance update. 2. Consider development incentive program and review of current /future development financing policies. 3. Support for downtown redevelopment and revitalization, including the possible management of an update to the 1997 Downtown Revitalization Plan. 4. Involvement in regional transportation planning and its impact on land use and growth objectives. 5. Bertram Chain of Lakes acquisition and master planning. 6. Conditional Use Permit tracking and audits. 7. Continued implementation and training on the City's GIS 8. Continued improvements of the City's development and planning process ISSUES: 1. Implementation of Comprehensive Plan objectives. 2. Management of oversight of Citizen Service Desk with continued growth of inquiries and needed response. 3. Implementation of City zoning ordinance. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of planning applications 34 37 35 29 15 # of project reconciliations 16 14 19 21 15 # of planning commission meetings 12 12 12 14 20 MM It il7ef�K�]��J� 1�►fl1T:li'il The Planning, Zoning and Community Development budget was decreased for 2010 to reflect less development activity taking place base on current activity and the economic state of the area, state, and nation. Personnel services include funds for an administrative assistant position in 2009, but the position was never filled. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PLANNING &ZONING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $98,972 $67,750 $80,992 $99,665 $82,514 $83,601 - 16.92% SUPPLIES 784 0 2,044 550 51 550 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 213,223 186,569 122,127 87,450 58,037 73,450 - 16.01% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 250 0 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $312,978 $254,319 $205,163 $187,915 $140,602 $157,801 - 16.03% B -21 INFORMATION SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: General Government Finance Director 101 41920 This activity manages the data processing and computer needs for all departments of the City. It provides for maintenance of existing computer equipment and servers, upgrades to hardware and software, and installation of new computer equipment and software. In addition, electronic surveillance /security, wireless technology, telecommunications, electronic storage and recovery, and other technology needs are covered under this area. OBJECTIVES: 1. Complete implementation new financial, payroll, utility billing and other related software systems. 2. Purchase /upgrade computer hardware and software to keep pace with City technology needs in accordance with replacement cycle. 3. Implement computer security to meet audit standards and requirements. 4. Update information systems disaster recovery plan for the City. 5. Respond to data processing requests within 30 -60 minutes and develop action plan to resolve issue, if necessary. ISSUES: 1. Develop plan for implementation and training for new software systems. 2. Update lists and develop a master inventory of personal computers, software and peripherals used in the City. 3. Develop filing system for work requests and other data processing records. 4. Identify and develop plans for the many components associated with a fiber optics network and service enterprise. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time B -22 BUDGET COMMENTARY: This activity purchases all hardware and software equipment for the City, based on an annual replacement schedule. In 2010, $16,000 has been budgeted for the replacement and addition of computer equipment. Professional service /maintenance agreements was decreased from $78,000 to $77,000 for the City's Information Technician Consultant. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % DATA PROCESSING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $25,798 $32,625 $31,250 100.00% SUPPLIES 18,409 29,550 32,118 21,400 15,133 20,000 - 6.54% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 71,729 174,936 75,274 98,400 114,031 98,975 0.58% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 12,230 0 0 0 0 #DIV 101 OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $90,137 $216,716 $107,392 $145,598 $161,789 $150,225 3.18% B -23 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: CITY HALL General Government City Administrator 101 41940 The activity for this department is to allow City Hall to run smoothly, by providing supplies, customer service, and staffing resources for the City. OBJECTIVES: I . To provide friendly, knowledgeable customer service to the public. 2. Provide adequate and consistent hours of business throughout the year. 3. Maintain a reputable facility to house meetings and staff. ISSUES: 1. Staffing reception area for adequate hours of business with little back up. 2. Provide customers with meaningful information. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of newsletters published 4 3 3 3 2 # of utility inserts published N/A N/A N/A 2 3 Service desk data entry N/A N/A 294 365 400 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Items budgeted for the City Hall Activity are commonly shared among all departments operating out of City Hall, as well as some supplies used by the Community Center. The 2010 budget includes $2,000 for water and sewer utility costs and $7,000 for publishing public information, both which were budgeted in other activities previously. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % CITY HALL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $8,617 $3,012 $43,003 $57,903 $42,516 $57,383 -0.90% SUPPLIES 17,705 19,594 23,786 24,900 19,047 25,400 2.01% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 115,759 107,567 115,797 121,150 188,536 124,625 2.87% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 676,762 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $142,081 $130,173 $182,586 $203,953 $926,861 $207,408 1.69% i I DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: LAW ENFORCEMENT Public Safety City Administrator 101 42101 All law enforcement services are contracted with the Wright County Sheriff's Department, The Sheriff's Department maintains a local office in City Hall, and is contracted by the City for approximately 19,000 hours annually, OBJECTIVES: Continue contracting for law enforcement services through the Wright County Sheriff s Department. ISSUES: 1. Residents concerns regarding having our own police force. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of service calls 2,709 2,812 2,505 2,946 2,600 # of traffic calls 2,353 2,185 2,128 1,614 1,800 of motor vehicle crashes 338 376 386 402 375 # of crimes 1,326 1,472 1,310 1,520 1,300 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Law enforcement services are contracted with Wright County Sheriffs Department. The 2010 hourly rate is $57.50 compared to $56.00 in 2009, an increase of 2.7 %. The City has budgeted for 18,980 hours of law enforcement services. Additionally, funds have been budgeted for other law enforcement programs, such as speed trailer operations. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 880,310 917,659 990,621 1,066,000 1,064,095 1,096,000 2.81% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 5,454 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $880,310 $923,113 $990,621 $1,066,000 $1,064,095 $1,096,000 2.81% B -25 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: FIRE DEPARTMENT Public Safety Fire Chief 101 42201 The Fire Department response to all fire, rescue, hazardous material and some medical and accident incidents within the City of Monticello and surrounding Townships. It also provides fire inspection services. The department is a paid on call volunteer department. OBJECTIVES: 1. Assemble a confined space entry team and equipment. 2. Purchase and put into place a "Duty Officer" command vehicle. 3. Purchase and place into service a new pumper truck. 4. Develop NIMS training for all city departments. ISSUES: 1. Improve response times. 2. Develop and implement NIMS training for all staff and council. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of responses 298 339 402 302 280 # of firefighters 30 30 30 30 30 B -26 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Fire Department consists of paid volunteers. For 2010, firefighters will be paid $10.00 per hour, which is the same hourly rate received in 2008 and 2009. The contract for cleaning the fire hall was increased to $100 per month. Capital Outlay expenditures are for the purchase of 800MH radio replacements at an estimated cost of $12,500 for 2010. The 2009 capital outlay budget included funds for a "Duty Officer" vehicle which is also proposed to be purchased in 2010 for reserves. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % FIRE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $74,890 $90,594 $113,979 $96,970 $107,866 $99,108 2.20% SUPPLIES 23,961 60,701 29,870 28,250 37,762 25,100 - 11.15% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 154,137 144,832 57,586 56,505 122,365 60,502 7.07% CAPITAL OUTLAY 136 0 15,746 171,300 527,370 12,500 - 92.70% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $253,124 $296,127 $217,181 $353,025 $795,353 $197,210 - 44.14% B -27 DEPARTMENT SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: FIRE RELIEF Public Safety City Administrator 101 42202 The Fire Relief Activity is specifically designed to track the City's contribution to the Relief Association of the State Aid Fire Relief fund, which must be contributed to the Relief Association. OBJECTIVES: 1. Provide pension funds for the Monticello Fire Relief Association. ISSUES: 1. To become full funded. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Pension assets (liability) $1,067,833 $1,133,822 $740,263 $917,161 $1,000,000 BUDGET COMME NTARY: The fire relief budget consists of expenditures specifically related to the Monticello Fire Relief Association. The funds budgeted is the estimated aid received from the State, then expensed to the Association. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % FIRE RELIEF ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 74,110 101,000 80,127 80,000 - 20.79% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $74,110 $101,000 $80,127 $80,000 - 20.79% i i DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: BUILDING INSPECTIONS Public Safety Community Development Director 101 42401 The Building Department inspects all new and remodeled construction within the City by a state certified building inspector. The department also initiates all building permits, as well as overseeing the enforcement of all public nuisance and ordinance issues. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue implementation of the rental licensing program. 2. Continue implementation of zoning ordinance changes. 3. Continue sign ordinance update. 4. Implement yearly contractor, realtor, and rental property owner workshops. 5. Continue public relations contact. Improve City's public perception image. 6. Continue implementation of the building codes. ISSUES: 1. Managing and prioritizing department workloads. 2. Facing the challenges of a growing regional center city and the possible rebound of residential property growth. 3. Keep up with rental license inspections of investor owned residential properties. MEASURABLE WORI {LOAD DATA: Measurement # of building permits issued Valuation of permits issued (in 1,000's) # of public nuisance notices # of rental units 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 691 962 3,681 879 900 $45,573 388 N/A B -29 $45,917 $45,950 $11,630 $20,000 377 504 351 300 N/A 1,194 1,194 1,200 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Building Department has budgeted $5,000 in 2010 to cover the replacement of department vehicles in the future compared to $18,000 in 2009 and $28,500 in 2008. In 2009 the Chief Building Official retired and was replaced by one of the City's other building inspectors at a lower salary. The building inspector position vacated has been left vacant due to decreased building activity in 2009 and anticipated 2010 activity. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % BUILDING INSPECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $266,324 $274,796 $343,440 $302,670 $289,182 $227,334 - 24.89% SUPPLIES 10,148 11,717 12,294 10,000 7,900 8,700 - 13.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 51,595 37,308 50,045 48,500 10,880 13,400 - 72.37% CAPITAL OUTLAY 5,964 0 0 18,000 0 5,000 - 72.22% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $334,031 $323,821 $405,779 $379,170 $307,962 $254,434 - 32.90% B -30 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY ff: ACTIVITY SCOPE: CIVIL DEFENSE Public Safety Chief Building Official 101 42501 The department of Civil Defense provides constant defense coverage for all weather and power plant related emergency situations within the City. OBJECTIVES: Implement city hall, community center, and national guard emergency preparedness. ISSUES: 1. Little or no warning when an emergency occurs. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: With the retirement of the City's chief building official, the City is reviewing how it provides civil defense services and by what City or County departments should be most responsible for this service. For this reason no salaries were budgeted in 2010 for this department and other expenditures were kept at a minimum. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % CIVIL DEFENSE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $238 $3,571 $4,216 $6,757 $0 - 100.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 122 3,900 0 100 - 97.44% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,035 7,785 443 1,500 1,241 1,300 - 13,33% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,035 $8,023 $4,136 $9,616 $7,998 $1,400 - 85.44% B -31 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: ANIMAL CONTROL Public Safety Project Coordinator 101 42701 The City contracts with a private individual for their animal control services. The City owns and maintains the building the animal control facility operates from. The City also contracts to nearby communities, allowing them to use our services and facility for a fee. OBJECTIVES: 1. To address issues within the City and surrounding communities in a timely and courteous manner. 2. Continue to improve animal control response time. 3. Continue to improve billing procedures for animal control issues. ISSUES: To provide quick response to residents on animal control concerns. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The largest budgeted item is for the $37,000 budgeted for the professional service contract to handle all animal control issues for the City of Monticello. The remaining budgeted items are for maintaining the animal control facility and miscellaneous expenses related to animal control. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % ANIMAL CONTROL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES $2,374 $2.,105 $5,022 $2,100 $1,385 $1,900 -9.52% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 46,269 42,952 43,250 43,310 55,168 43,500 0.44% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $48,643 $45,057 $48,272 $45,410 $56,553 $45,400 -0.02% B -32 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: NATIONAL GUARD Public Safety City Administrator 101 42810 The City's National Guard facility is housed in the Community Center Complex. The City maintains the facility for the Guard. OBJECTIVES: To maintain a clean, modern facility for use by the National Guard. ISSUES: There are no issues currently for maintaining the National Guard facility. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time. BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City rents the National Guard Area from the Community Center Complex. The area is maintained and insured by City funds. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % NATIONAL GUARD ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $1,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #DIVf01 SUPPLIES 2,525 111 0 2,500 232 1,600 - 36.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 20,062 12,533 12,607 21,275 20,463 21,750 2.23% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $24,088 $12,644 $12,607 $23,775 $20,695 $23,350 -1.79% B -33 PUBLIC WORKS - ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43110 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Public Works Administration (PW Administration) activity oversees the daily operations of the Street, Parks, Water, Sewer, Wastewater Treatment Plant, and Inspection activities. PW Administration also manages all large City projects, and implements all changes to operations and policy the City has in place for public works. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue the implementation of a biosolids management system. 2. Implement major street lighting project plan. 3. Continue implementing the wellhead protection plan. 4. Manage the development of a new public works facility and expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. ISSUES: 1. Balance the public works department needs with available funds. 2. Manage of City's wastewater treatment system. 3. Implement a capital improvement program for City infrastructure. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of City projects started 27 18 15 10 10 # of City projects completed N/A N/A 12 12 10 l BUDGET COMMENTARY: Personnel services includes 70% of the public works director's time, 20% of one of the construction inspector's time, and 100% of the two public works secretaries' time. For 2010 there are no major changes to the public works administration activity. A-111][1111101-9 GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PW/ADMINISTRATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $186,724 $198,702 $236,103 $199,522 $215,413 $191,826 -3.86% SUPPLIES 5,633 4,184 5,089 4,280 4,703 4,030 -5.84% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 14,530 57,085 34,648 25,658 17,782 23,675 -7.73% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 466,856 5,790 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $206,887 $726,827 $281,630 $229,460 $237,898 $219,531 -4.33% B -35 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: City Administrator FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43111 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Engineering activity reviews and approves commercial and industrial site plans and residential development plans, and assists with the development and review of City codes and ordinances. The Engineering activity also assists with the development and management of the City's storm water pollution prevention program, City improvement projects, and miscellaneous mapping. In addition, the Engineering activity responds to residents with issues related to storm water drainage and pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic, and reviews, updates and supports the City's general specifications and standard detail plates for street and utility construction and our plan requirements and design guidelines. OBJECTIVES: 1. Improve ability to assist other departments with CADD and GIS related requests. 2. Implement new Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (S WPPP). 3. Continue to implement and improve the City's new Geographic Information System (GIS). 4. Continue to educate the public on purposes and practices associated with conservation and drainage easements and storm water ponds. ISSUES: 1. Increasing restrictions for storm water runoff by MPCA. 2. Lack of knowledge regarding purposes and practices associated with conservation and drainage easements and storm water ponds. 3. Increased phosphorus restrictions for wastewater effluent by MPCA. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Response to service requests 30 50 60 60 75 Response to on -line requests N/A N/A 60 60 85 RIM e � ei�1 K�7� I►T�o�.Erl�i� The budget for the Engineering activity predominantly consists of engineering and other professional service fees. These expenditures consist of both reimbursable and non- reimbursable expenditures. For 2010 the only significant budget change is that since new development activity has not occurred in 2009 and is anticipated to be very slow in 2010, the budget has been decreased for engineering services related to new development to $90,000. Funds are budgeted for continued improvements and development of the City's GIS system. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PW /ENGINEERING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $93,351 $92,294 $119,150 $142,994 $133,412 $139,450 -2.48% SUPPLIES 0 150 638 100 2,674 5,170 5070.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 556,053 254,915 198,363 153,525 115,250 100,560 - 34.50% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $649,404 $347,359 $318,151 $296,619 $251,336 $245,180 - 17.34% B -37 PUBLIC WORKS - INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43115 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The inspection activity is responsible to observe and inspect City infrastructure projects. Personnel are also responsible for recording as- builts, design assistance, locating and inspecting City utilities, and sidewalk inspections. OBJECTIVES: 1. Learn and use the City's GIS system. 2. Maintain certifications and attend appropriate classes and workshops. 3. Provide support for the engineering activity. 4. Improve communication between public works, engineering and inspection activities. ISSUES: 1. Utilizing the GIS system to its full potential and train others staff on its uses. 2. Workload issues. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time. MM BUDGET COMMENTARY: There are no major changes to the public works inspection activity for 2010.. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PWlINSPECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $127,209 $114,197 $117,578 $100,340 $111,131 $98,575 -1.76% SUPPLIES 8,509 5,761 12,637 8,100 2,056 8,050 -0.62% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 4,682 4,405 4,961 4,600 6,391 4,650 1.09% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 21,300 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $140,401 $145;663 $135,176 $113,040 $119,578 $111,275 -1.56% B -39 PUBLIC WORKS - STREETS & ALLEYS DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Public Works Streets Superintendent 101 43120 The foremost responsibility of the streets division is to perform the necessary tasks to reduce the depreciation of the city streets and uphold the desirable standards of appearance, serviceability, and safety. This includes upkeep such as street sweeping, repair of roadway surface areas, medians, sidewalks, boulevards, alleys, catch basins, and storm sewers. OBJECTIVES: Continue street reconstruction of older road surfaces by evaluating road wear. 2. Increase street chip seal coating projects. 3. Maintain and update equipment and vehicles. 4. Help maintain and use City GIS system. 5. Continue street crack sealing program. 1. Educate the public on what the boulevards are to be used for. 2. Educating the public on storm water operations. 3. Increased costs of fuel and street products due to fuel costs. 4. Educate the public on the value of good maintenance programs for our infrastructure. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 Pounds of crack sealer 11,115 Sq. yards of chip sealing 50,526 Miles of streets 65.70 Tons of blacktop patching 300 1 2007 2008 2009 2010 14,200 18,150 24,160 20,000 37,294 101,422 58,000 75,000 67.64 67.64 68.00 68.00 330 200 200 200 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Budget changes for 2010 include a decrease in temporary salaries, which will result in less seasonal or part -time employees in the street department. A decrease of $4,000 for motor fuel, but the budgets for repair parts is being increased $4,500 to reflect the delay in equipment purchases in 2009 and 2010. The City is also budgeting $20,000 in 2010 to replace one of its air compressors. Finally, in 2009 the City budgeted $70,000 for street improvements and $80,000 for the annual seal coat project. For 2010 only a $80,000 seal coat project is budgeted. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PW /STREETS & ALLEYS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $350,704 $368,066 $402,202 $426,127 $378,253 $433,254 1.67% SUPPLIES 81,513 100,533 121,257 123,575 132,739 127,425 3.12% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 17,867 20,037 104,228 27,300 111,846 25,400 -6.96% CAPITAL OUTLAY 56,776 163,438 96,933 295,000 180,094 100,500 - 65.93% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $506,859 $652,074 $724,620 $872,002 $802,932 $686,579 - 21.26% M PUBLIC WORKS - ICE & SNOW DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43125 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The City's Ice & Snow activity is responsible for the control of ice and snow on City streets, sidewalks and City owned public parking lots. The activity provides control in a safe and cost effective manner, keeping in mind safety, budget, personnel, and environmental concerns. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to maintain and update equipment and vehicles in a timely manner. 2. Learn ways to effectively use the City's GIS system. ISSUES: 1. Staffing and budgeting for unpredictable circumstances. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Inches of snow 41 37.25 42 50 50 # of plowing events 11 11 15 20 20 Tons of salt used 164 274 474 475 400 Tons of sand used 319 347 611 800 700 B -42 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Ice and Snow activity has increased their budget for sand and salt from $41,000 to $50,000. The increase is needed due to increased cost due to higher fuel costs and past expenditures for this item. This increase is offset by having no capital outlay costs in 2010 for equipment purchases. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PW /ICE &SNOW ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $33,109 $83,147 $77,026 $63,585 $102,928 $65,624 3.21% SUPPLIES 34,081 32,124 59,662 56,050 47,712 71,550 27.65% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 892 3,170 2,798 3,000 943 3,800 26.67% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 129,516 30,000 3,906 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $68,081 $118,441 $269,002 $152,635 $155,489 $140,974 -7.64% B -43 PUBLIC WORKS - SHOP & GARAGE DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43127 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Shop & Garage activity maintains all City vehicles and equipment for the Streets, Ice & Snow, Parks, Water and Sewer activities in a safe and efficient manner. OBJECTIVES: 1. Update equipment and vehicles. 2. Maintain equipment and vehicles to operate efficiently and safely. ISSUES: 1. Aging equipment. 2. Increased safety regulation for equipment and vehicles. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: For 2010 there were no significant budget changes for the Shop & Garage activity. The budget consists of equipment parts, lubricants, and other repair supplies and the costs to heat/cool and supply electricity to the City shop and garage area. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PW /SHOP & GARAGE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $69,055 $68,380 $78,354 $83,367 $88,691 $84,439 1.29% SUPPLIES 38,167 40,607 37,584 41,250 39,612 38,100 -7.64% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 43,760 52,719 47,472 59,300 44,614 54,350 -8.35% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 1,266 500 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $150,982 $161,706 $163,410 $183,917 $174,183 $177,389 -3.55% B -44 PUBLIC WORKS - PARKING LOTS DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43140 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Parking Lot activity is responsible for reducing the depreciation of the City owned parking lots. This includes patching, striping, repairing, and resurfacing as needed. OBJECTIVES: 1. Monitor parking lots and patch and stripe as needed. 2. Continue adding minor plantings to parking lots. ISSUES: Continued deterioration of parking lots, without proper funding for replacement. IL�I I D/:�YI1��LC ��i�L1727:� 1[17_\ I717:Y 1I� Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of City owned parking lots 5 5 5 5 5 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Panting Lot activity's budget includes $7,000 for parking lot improvements in 2010. There are no significant budget changes for 2010. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PWIPARKING LOTS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED_ BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $94 $0 $1,008 $0 $217 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 746 3,000 106 2,800 -6.67% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,875 2,367 1,468 3,850 3,345 4,000 3.90% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 7,000 0 7,000 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,969 $2,367 $3,222 $13,850 $3,668 $13,800 -0.36% B -45 PUBLIC WORKS - STREET LIGHTING DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43160 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Street Lighting activity is to maintain the new and existing street lighting within the City. This includes maintaining the bulbs and fixtures once they have been installed, as well as the electrical used for the lighting. OBJECTIVES: 1. Work with MNDOT to add battery back -up to signals on TH 25 in the fixture. 2. Daft a complete new street lighting policy encompassing all changes to existing policy. ISSUES: 1. Increased electrical costs and budget constraints. 2. Verify lamp and fixtures maintenance by utility companies. 3. Need maintenance and upgrades on several signal systems and the lack of assistance form Wright County, MNDOT and consulting engineer. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 # of street lights maintained 70 84 # of street scape lights 40 40 BUDGET COMMENTARY: 2008 2009 2010 94 94 100 40 40 40 This department accounts for the maintenance and daily expenses of the City's street lights, of which, electrical costs are the largest expenditure at $150,000. The remaining funds are for repair items and supplies for maintaining the street lights. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND PW /STREET LIGHTING 2006 ACTUAL 2007 ACTUAL 2008 ACTUAL 2009 BUDGET 2009 PROJECTED 2010 BUDGET % CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 799 (165) 1,952 2,500 18,610 2,500 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 163,280 154,260 227,557 167,000 182,484 166,000 -0.60% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 68,092 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $164,079 $222,187 $229,509 $169,500 $201,094 $168,500 -0.59% B -46 PUBLIC WORKS - REFUSE COLLECTION DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Sanitation Public Works Director 101 43230 The City contracts with a private company to pick up refuse and recycling for residents within the City. Residents pay a quarterly rental fee on their garbage cart, as well as a one time charge for a recycling bin. All other costs are negotiated, and paid by the City. The City also holds a Junk Amnesty day, in which residents can drop off any unwanted items, for a small fee. OBJECTIVES: Develop a more efficient system in repairing garbage carts. Implement a new recycling system to increase recycling and decrease refuse. ISSUES: 1. The amount of time spent on repairing of garbage carts. 2. Budget constraints, MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: There are no substantial changes in the 2010 budget for the Refuse Collection activity, which the majority of expenditures is based on the contract the City has with its refuse hauler. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REFUSE COLLECTION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $7,389 $6,393 $9,152 $9,818 $14,199 $10,429 6,22% SUPPLIES 3,746 24,735 17,228 6,750 3,038 11,200 65.93% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 462,911 478,080 487,928 476,500 514,714 490,300 2.90% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $474,047 $509,208 $514,308 $493,068 $531,951 $511,929 3.83% B -47 COMMUNITY CELEBRATIONS DEPARTMENT: Culture and Recreation SUPERVISOR: Community Development Director FUND th 101 ACTIVITY #: 45130 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The activity of Community Celebrations is to coordinate and participate in the City's celebrations, as well as share holiday spirit throughout the community. OBJECTIVES: 1. Increase the participation of Walk and Roll. 2. Increase the participation of Riverfest. 3. Maintain Holiday decorations throughout the City. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of participants in Walk & Roll: Community (Walkers) 300 500 500 500 500 Business (Booths) 52 62 66 75 75 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Community Celebrations budget includes expenditures for Walk and Roll, the Riverfest Block Park, and to maintain Holiday decorations. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % COMMUNITY CELEBRATIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,899 3,110 2,252 6,300 2,072 3,000 - 52.38% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,899 $3,110 $2,252 $6,300 $2,072 $3,000 - 52.38% Em DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: SENIOR CENTER Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45175 The City's Senior Center facility is housed in the Community Center Complex. The City maintains the facility for the Senior Center. OBJECTIVES: 1. To maintain a clean, modern facility for use by the Seniors of Monticello. ISSUES: I . Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City rents the Senior Center area from the Community Center Complex. The area is maintained and insured by City funds. In addition, the City gives an annual contribution to the Senior Center. In 2010, the contribution amount is $49,750, as it was in 2009. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % SENIOR CENTER ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $1,335 $7 $133 $0 $493 $344 #DIV /01 SUPPLIES 1,486 0 0 1,500 0 750 - 50,00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 88,682 56,205 57,999 95,275 93,720 95,050 -0.24% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $91,502 $56,212 $58,132 $96,775 $94,213 $96,144 -0.65% i LS DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: COMMUNITY EDUCATION Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45176 The City has, for several years, contributed to the community education program in the Monticello school district. This annual contribution is given to help subsidize summer recreational activities, such as little league and T -ball. OBJECTIVES: Continue to subsidize the Community Education program with an annual contribution. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City in the past contributed, on an annual basis, $12,740 to the local community education program to help subsidize summer recreational programs. However, due to budget constraints this was cut from the 2010 budget as a cost savings. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % COMMUNITY EDUCATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 12,740 12,740 12,740 12,740 12,740 0 - 100.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $12,740 $12,740 $12,740 $12,740 $12,740 $0 - 100.00% i DEPARTMENT SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Y.M.C.A. Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45177 The City has, for several years, contributed to the Y.M.C.A. This annual contribution was given to help subsidize activities that members of the community may take advantage of. OBJECTIVES: There are no objectives for the Y.M.C.A., since the City elected to stop funding this activity in 2008. ISSUES: 1. The City and County are working to purchase the Y.M.C.A. property and therefore will not fund this activity. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City and County are currently working on purchasing the 1,200 acre Y.M.C.A. site and as such the City has elected not to fund this activity beginning in 2008 BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2006 2009 2009 2010 % Y.M.C.A. ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 5,460 5,460 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $5,460 $5,460 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% B -51 DEPARTMENT SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: TRANSIT Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45178 Currently, transit services are by dial -a -ride bus service only. Bus services in the City are provided by River Rider Bus Company. However, Monticello will need to monitor and evaluate needed involvement in transit as related to the Northstar Commuter Rail system and increasing traffic congestion on Interstate 94, OBJECTIVES: I . To continue contributing to the River Rider transportation system. 2. Evaluation of service enhancement needs due to implementation of the Northstar Commuter Rail system. 3. Review of need for involvement in I -94 Commuter Study for service options. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City has agreed to a contribution of $5,000 to River Rider, for a future bus purchase for the Monticello route. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % TRANSIT -RIVER RIDER ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 5,000 5,000 5,000 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $0 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 0.00% B -52 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: ICE ARENA Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45198 The City has agreed to a ten year contribution commitment to the Community Ice Arena, agreeing to contribute $75,000 annually, The agreed upon contribution began in 2004, and will terminate after 2013. OBJECTIVES: 1. Contribute $75,000, as previously committed. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City has committed $75,000 per year for ten years, beginning in 2004 and ending after 2013. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % COMMUNITY ICE ARENA ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 0.00% B -53 PUBLIC WORKS - PARKS - ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Culture and Recreation Parks Superintendent 101 45201 The Parks Administration activity maintains the parks and trails within the City. This includes maintaining and improving playground and picnic facilities, fertilizing and mowing of grass, maintaining athletic fields, flooding and maintenance of outdoor ice rinks, snow and ice removal, and tree preservation within the parks system of the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue pathway maintenance. 2. Use the City's GIS to improve activity efficiencies. 3. Continue implementing park plan for regional park at current YMCA land. ISSUES: 1. Other maintenance concerns coming up and not allowing completion of existing projects. 2. Budget constraints for future and existing projects. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Acres of park land maintained N/A N/A 100 180.06 180.06 Miles of trails maintained N/A N/A 16.5 16.5 16.5 # of events held in parks N/A N/A 129 130 130 # of winter skating days 53 42 91 50 50 B -54 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The parks budget consists of expenses needed to maintain the City's parks and trails. The 2010 budget is consistent with the 2009 budget and past expenditure levels except for a decrease in budget for temporary salaries resulting less part -time and seasonal employees and reduced warming house operations at the ice rinks. The capital equipment budget for 2009 included $130,000 for the replacement of 1 -ton truck, a bobcat and 72" mower. There is no equipment or other capital outlay included in the 2010 budget. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PARKS /ADMINISTRATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $301,441 $304,780 $332,407 $372,600 $347,499 $365,496 -1.91% SUPPLIES 63,545 65,485 84,309 103,725 70,842 107,525 3.66% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 40,751 61,657 32,248 68,250 87,768 70,625 3.48% CAPITAL OUTLAY 37,320 46,022 31,950 130,000 22,520 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 88,645 0 200,000 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $531,703 $477,944 $680,914 $674,575 $528,629 $543,646 - 19.41% �i PUBLIC WORKS - PARKS - IMPROVEMENTS DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Culture and Recreation Parrs Superintendent 101 45202 The Parks Improvement activity improves the parks and trails within the City. This includes improving playground and picnic facilities and pathways. These assets of the City are extensively used by residents, and improvements must be made to uphold the safety, functionality, and beauty the City represents. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Restore or replace cemetery grave stones at Hillside Cemetery. Budget constraints. Other maintenance concerns not allowing time to complete projects. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Park Improvement budget designates monies to improve the City's parks and pathways. Past budgets have included $9,000 for picnic tables, BBQ grills, and benches. 2009 capital outlay expenditures include $20,000 for improvements to Sunset Ponds Park, $20,000 for improvements to the Ellison Park shelter, $20,000 for trail and pathway improvements, and $15,000 for the installation of a patio and /or irrigation system at Hillerest Park. The only capital outlay expenditure for 2010 is for grave stone restoration at Hillside Cemetery. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PARKS /IMPROVEMENTS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 10,402 12,802 10,046 14,000 12,449 0 - 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,835 88,243 3,240 0 9,531 0 #DIV 101 CAPITAL OUTLAY 116,053 44,762 91,830 75,000 4,278 5,000 - 93.33% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $130,291 $145,807 $105,116 $89,000 $26,258 $5,000 - 94.38% B -56 PUBLIC WORKS — PARKS - BALLFIELDS DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Culture and Recreation Parks Superintendent 101 45203 The NSP Ball field activity incorporates all City owned athletic fields. The activity prepares and maintains the fields and facilities for athletic events. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Prepare and maintain the City's athletic fields. Improve the structures at the ball fields. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of ballgames played 438 502 530 550 550 t 1 eiDlll[K11TiLTU�`►rr:�;a•� The 2010 budget reflect past expenditure levels and is similar to the 2009 budget for maintaining the fields. The 2009 capital improvement budget consists of $10,000 for roof replacement of the concession stand at the NSP Ball fields and for 2010 no capital improvements are currently planned at the fields. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % PARKS /NSP BALLFIELDS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 8,528 7,991 5,377 14,400 12,490 9,650 - 32.99% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 7,679 1,053 11,325 6,000 16,964 7,150 19.17% CAPITAL OUTLAY 18,717 0 0 10,000 0 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 70,908 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $34,924 $79,952 $16,702 $30,400 $29,454 $16,800 - 44.74% B -57 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Economic Development Community Development Director 101 46501 The Economic Development activity of the General Fund is to create and maintain a clear focus of objectives which foster a pro- business environment and community amenities to attract and retain job growth at wage - levels that support the community. In addition, networking with organizations and individuals to create good -will and promote the City of Monticello as a place to work and live. OBJECTIVES: 1. Encourage retention and expansion of existing businesses. 2. Explore higher education programs with existing businesses and surrounding educational facilities, which will help facilitate opportunities for Monticello to provide jobs, with increasing opportunities for people to work and live in Monticello, promoting wages that provide incomes to purchase decent housing, support businesses, and local government sei vices. 3. Explore opportunities to attract corporate headquarters, campuses, and businesses. 4. Work with the Downtown Business Association to create a vision and plan to create a downtown that is unique, to attract people to downtown. Connecting public spaces to the river, and pedestrian- oriented place through housing and retail redevelopment. 5. Develop a `Branding" or image for the City based upon the vision of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 6. Explore opportunities to attract data centers. 7. Work with Community Development through the Zoning Re -write process to ensure attractable development standards. 8. Analyze competiveness of City based on surrounding Cities fees, taxes, and development standards. 9. Implement a Business Retention and Expansion Program utilizing a program through the University of Minnesota Extension Services, 10. Create a marketing piece to utilize via web and print that features the City's assets. IC ISSUE: 1. Consistent administration of the City's policies, plans, ordinances, guidelines, statutes, etc. 2. The new Economic Development Director becoming familiar with existing City programs and development of new programs to attract new businesses and retain and expand existing businesses. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Economic Development budget includes a portion of the salary and operating costs for the Economic Development Director. The budget for general public information material was increased $5,000 to reflect additional communication material being made available to residents and businesses. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $56,234 $55,070 $73,948 $59,414 $67,267 $54,294 -8.62% SUPPLIES 6,829 54 48 50 101 1,550 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 24,460 24,657 5,650 15,250 9,992 17,500 14.75% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $87,522 $79,781 $79,646 $74,714 $77,360 $73,344 -1.83% B-59 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: UNALLOCATED Unallocated Finance Director 101 49200 The activity of Unallocated is to account for all miscellaneous unanticipated costs that are not specifically allocated or planned to other activities. OBJECTIVES: 1. Cover miscellaneous unanticipated costs. ISSUES: 1. The funding of unanticipated cost that are not associated with one activity or department. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The budget for Unallocated consists of an operating transfer to the Library Fund to help fund 2010 library programs. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % UNALLOCATED ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $63,793 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 12,861 88,548 0 0 160,000 4,000 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $12,861 $88,548 $0 $0 $223,793 $4,000 0.00% I= DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: UNALLOCATEDINSURANCE Unallocated Insurance Finance Director 101 49240 The activity of Unallocated Insurance is to account for all miscellaneous insurance costs that are not specifically allocated to other activities. OBJECTIVES: 1. Cover miscellaneous insurance costs. ISSUES: 2. Maintain the proper level of insurance coverage and deductibles to assure the best possible coverage at the lowest possible cost. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The budget for Unallocated Insurance was increased based on past expenditure levels and current deductibles in. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % INSURANCE - UNALLOCATED ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $34,162 $45,092 $41,837 $47,600 $47,023 $45,000 -5.46% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 89,735 120,022 119,699 102,165 110,554 116,593 14.12% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $123,898 $165,114 $161,536 $149,765 $157,577 $161,593 7.90% B -61 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK B -62 MONTICELLO SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS C-1 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: The City of Monticello currently maintains 14 active Special Revenue Funds. A special revenue fund is used to account for revenue sources that are legally restricted for a specific purpose. The modified accrual basis of accounting is used for special revenue fluids. That is, expenditures are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are recorded when received. However, compensated absences are expended when paid for budgetary purposes. Special revenue funds budgets are not always balanced, meaning budgeted revenues may be greater or less then budgeted expenditures. In these circumstances reserves will show an increase or decrease in the fund's fund balances. BUDGET ISSUES: See individual fund's for budget issues, because each fund will have its own unique budget issues. BUDGET SUMMARY: REUEIRIES BY SOURCE Expenditures by Classification BOND Total Revenues $6;116,647 Total Expendittires $7,521,336 PROCEEDS 0% PROPERTY TAXES 38k PERSONNEL SERVICES, OPERATING LICENSES & 16/. TRANSFERS % PERMITS 8k / 4% SUPPLIES, 3'/. OTHER SERVICES misc. OPERATING CHARGES, REVENUE _ IMERGOVERN. TRANSFERS, 8% BypECIAL 50% ASSESSMEMSI REVENUES 8k qk ++ CHARGES FOR FINES f SERVICES CAPITAL FORFEITS 27k OUTLAY, 23% 0% C -2 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE LIBRARY FUND $35,549 $36,087 $37,100 $38,225 $35,374 $40,184 5.12% STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUND 1,179,333 753,997 597,423 541,104 833,219 370,228 - 31.58% ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND 3,544,262 1,057,420 1,414,546 1,261,270 3,652,070 1,253,752 - 0.60% ENVIRONMENT CLEAN -UP FUND 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% DEPUTY REGISTRAR FUND 0 0 357,474 282,460 277,895 284,613 0.76% MINNESOTA INVESTMENT FUND 50,926 62,380 43,933 32,884 28,626 34,101 3.70% ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT FUND 1,254 544 0 0 0 0 0.00% CMIF FUND 230 100 0 0 0 0 0.00% SHADE TREE FUND 31,486 26,762 47,658 50,134 40,276 34,704 - 30.78% COMMUNITY CENTER FUND 2,127,643 2,503,102 2,502,394 2,472,716 2,356,738 2,325,490 -5.95% PARK & PATHWAY DEDICATION FUND 248,431 195,489 139,082 286,634 38,387 403,620 40.81% ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA FUND 13,294 984 5,208 125 166 291 132.80% CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND 4,473,764 332,662 240,102 182,825 227,116 283,089 54.84% STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT FUND 0 0 272,090 251,275 289,264 280,606 11.67% SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FUND 1,613,150 1,175,783 986,979 697,455 260,603 494,883 - 29.04% STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND 621,088 429,217 323,788 386,030 86,439 210,521 - 45.47% WATER ACCESS FUND 334,348 214,692 844,716 149,007 49,619 94,565 - 36.54% TOTAL $14,274,758 $6,789,220 $7,812,493 $6,632,144 $8,175,792 $6,110,647 -7.86% EXPENDITURES LIBRARY FUND $38,338 $35,333 $39,228 $38,225 $40,683 $33,743 - 11.73% STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUND 1,158,993 564,009 818 320,000 0 0 - 100.00% ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND 3,494,112 1,805,951 1,073,656 1,354,876 1,488,592 2,387,825 76.24% ENVIRONMENT CLEAN -UP FUND 667 48 0 0 0 0 0.00% DEPUTY REGISTRAR FUND 0 0 236,516 231,325 260,683 281,147 21.54% MINNESOTA INVESTMENT FUND 0 0 190,000 0 0 0 0.00% ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT FUND 0 17,485 544 0 0 0 0.00% CMIF FUND 0 3,103 100 0 0 0 0.00% SHADETREEFUND 24,668 13,756 41,725 50,134 23,233 41,123 - 17.97% COMMUNITY CENTER FUND 2,052,951 2,328,110 2,246,101 2,472,716 2,400,433 2,404,131 -2.77% PARK & PATHWAY DEDICATION FUND 73,582 2,620 1,206,688 580,000 0 475,000 - 18.10% ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA FUND 322 1,355 360 0 1,043 0 #DIV /01 CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND 3,385,547 486,381 850,496 119,114 2,200,516 210,000 100.00% STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT FUND 0 0 0 15,000 0 0 - 100.00% SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FUND 3,213,946 2,238,494 1,958,494 1,853,530 1,213,342 1,112,996 - 39.95% STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND 940,731 694,886 286,126 1,392,591 256,039 264,599 - 81.00% WATER ACCESS FUND 407,871 571,752 312,679 640,246 311,510 310,774 - 51.46% TOTAL $14,791,727 $8,763,283 $8,443,531 $9,067,757 $8,196,074 $7,521,338 - 17.05% FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 $25,662,565 $25,145,596 $23,171,533 $22,540,495 $22,540,495 $22,520,213 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($516,969) ($1,974,063) ($631,038) ($2,435,613) ($20,282) ($1,410,691) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $25,145,596 $23,171,533 $22,540,495 $20,104,882 $22,520,213 $21,109,522 C -3 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: LIBRARY FUND Library City Administrator 211 45501 The Library Services are contracted through the Great River Regional Library system. The City owns and maintains the building the Library operates out of, as well as providing programs through the library to participating residents. OBJECTIVES: 1. To provide residents life long learning opportunities. 2. To provide the availability of global information resources. 3. To provide quality programs for all ages. ISSUES: 1. Keeping information stocked as needed. 2. Budget constraints of the City and Great River Regional Library. AI-DEI.011MR] J0 RAM :" 170.0 VF Measurement 2 2006 2 C -4 BUDGET COMMENTARY: This budget represents the Monticello Library. The City contracts with Great River Regional Library for all information sources and operations. The City owns and maintains the building the Library is housed in. The main revenue source for the Library Fund is property taxes. In 2009 there is a $20,000 operating transfer from the City's Liquor Fund ($16,000) and General Fund ($4,000) to help finance library program costs. BUDGET: LIBRARY FUND FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $35,061 $34,668 $36,021 $36,332 $34,018 $19,321 - 46.82% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 1,418 668 1,668 872 750 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 120 50 90 100 40 0 - 100.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 368 (49) 321 125 444 113 -9.60% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 20,000 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $35,549 $36,087 $37,100 $38,225 $35,374 $40,184 5.12% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $8,455 $5,650 $7,873 $9,548 $10,662 $9,368 -1.89% SUPPIES 3,526 2,258 3,688 3,100 2,230 1,900 - 38.71% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 26,358 27,425 27,543 25,577 27,646 22,475 - 12.13% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 124 0 145 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $38,338 $35,333 $39,228 $38,225 $40,683 $33,743 - 11.73% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $12,897 ($2,789) $10,108 $754 $10,862 ($2,128) $8,734 ($0) $8,734 ($5,309) $3,425 $6,441 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $10,108 $10,862 $8,734 $8,734 $3,425 $9,866 C -5 STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUND DEPTMENT: Street Reconstruction SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 212 ACTIVITY #: 43121 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Street Reconstruction Fund was established to track the annual improvements made to the City's infrastructure based on an annual reconstruction schedule. OBJECTIVES: 1. To improve a portion of the City's infrastructure based on an annual schedule. ISSUES: 1. Funding needed to update infrastructure. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time C -6 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources for 2010 will be, special assessments and an operating transfer from the Liquor Fund. The only expenditure have been an operating transfer to the Capital Improvement Funds for the reconstruction costs of the project to be funded by this fund. For 2010 no projects will be funded from this fund directly, as the City will issue bonds to finance the street reconstruction project and then the Street Reconstruction Fund will transfer its share of future debt payments to the Debt Services Fund beginning in 2011 BUDGET: STREET RECONSTRUCTION FD FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $478,163 $517,498 $337,296 $286,634 $268,097 $0 - 100.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 523,410 21,155 6,222 13,166 64,079 0 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 43,951 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 120,945 105,890 56,571 60,029 8,541 56,378 -6.08% MISCELLANEOUS 56,815 65,503 52,105 31,075 49,628 63,850 105.47% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 145,229 150,000 442,874 250,000 66.67% TOTAL REVENUES $1,179,333 $753,997 $597,423 $541,104 $833,219 $370,228 - 31.58% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 7,500 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,151,493 564,009 818 320,000 0 0 - 100.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,158,993 $564,009 $818 $320,000 $0 $0 - 100.00% FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $643,907 $20,340 $664,247 $189,988 $854,235 $596,605 $1,450,840 $221,104 $1,450,840 $833,219 $2,284,059 $370,228 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $664,247 $854,235 $1,450,840 $1,671,944 $2,284,059 .$2,654,287 C -7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND DEPTMENT: Economic Development SUPERVISOR: Community Development Director FUND #: 212 ACTIVITY #: 46301- 46538 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Monticello Economic Development Authority (EDA) is responsible for the continued redevelopment efforts within the City. This consists of housing and businesses, including all related public improvements and land acquisitions. These programs are administered, based on direction of the EDA, and by the Director of Economic Development. In addition, all tax increment financing districts are initiated and administered by the EDA. There are currently 19 active tax increment districts. The EDA also administers loans to businesses in the City, based on- local, state, and federal requirements. These loans are done on the premise that the business will generate higher paying jobs in the community. OBJECTIVES: 1. Explore Bio- Science and medical manufacturing facilities for Monticello. 2. Promote City's fiber optics network to attract and retain businesses. 3. Implement short, intermediate, and long -tern objectives outlined in the TIF Analysis and Management Plan. 4. Continue redevelopment of downtown. 5. Continue to market the Monticello Business Center. ISSUES: Consistent administration of the City's policies, plans, ordinances, guidelines, statutes, etc. 2. Need for higher wage jobs in the community. 3. Promotion of City's new fiber optic network. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Tax increment collected 770,177 824,364 1,172,386 1,191,552 1,150,611 C -8 BUDGET COMMENTARY: This budget represents the Monticello Economic Development Authority programs and general administration activities. The detail of each individual tax increment district is included in the appendix of this document. The main revenue source for the EDA Fund is tax increments from the various districts. Expenditures include cost to administration costs, principal and interest payments associated with the land purchases for the Monticello Business Center, current tax increment pay -as- you -go payment to the various development projects and a transfer to the debt service funds for its share of the 2005 improvement bond, which financed an interchange project within a tax increment district. BUDGET: EDA FUND $24,037 $23,736 $18,984 $22,576 $1,081 $23,436 3.81% SUPPIES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $791,810 $824,713 $1,172,447 $1,196,000 $1,191,552 $1,150,611 -3.80% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 19,490 9,231 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 17,581 6,768 15,875 10,000 0 10,000 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 128,734 95,713 196,291 55,270 157,686 93,141 68.52% OPERATING TRANSFERS 2,606,137 110,736 20,702 0 2,302,832 0 #DIV /0! TOTALREVENUES $3,544,262 $1,057,420 $1,414,546 $1,261,270 $3,652,070 $1,253,752 -0.60% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $24,037 $23,736 $18,984 $22,576 $1,081 $23,436 3.81% SUPPIES 45 0 288 50 0 50 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,377,778 387,645 83,797 33,125 22,742 40,225 21.43% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,922,527 1,256,670 501,820 980,851 1.,101,057 1,075,554 9.66% OPERATING TRANSFERS 169,725 137,900 468,767 318,274 363,712 1,248,560 292.29% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,494,112 $1,805,951 $1,073,656 $1,354,876 $1,488,592 $2,387,825 76.24% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $5,522,644 $5,572,794 $4,824,264 $5,165,154 $5,165,154 $7,328,632 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $50,150 ($748,531) $340,890 ($93,606) $2,163,478 ($1,134,073) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $5,572,794 $4,824,264 $5,165,154 $5,071,548 $7,328,632 $6,194,558 C -9 DEPUTY REGISTRAR FUND DEPTMENT: Deputy Registrar (DMV) SUPERVISOR: Deputy Registrar Manager FUND #: 217 ACTIVITY #: 41990 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Deputy Registrar (DMV) is a service based entity for the City, which assists customers in the purchase of vehicle license plants and tabs, DNR licenses and other licenses as required by the State of Minnesota. OBJECTIVES: 1. Marketing of DMV service available to the public. 2. Continue to add and improve services. 3. Improved customer service. ISSUES: 1. Addition of driver licenses service is dependent on State of Minnesota equipment availability. 2. Changes in State regulations surrounding licensing. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 # of motor vehicle transactions 45,225 40,950 45,595 48,000 50,000 # of DNR transactions 5,307 5,580 6,000 6,500 6,700 # Game/Fisb transactions N/A 167 235 250 300 # of dealerships serviced 18 14 21 25 27 # of driver licenses transactions N/A N/A N/A 450 600 C -10 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue source for the DMV is the fees charged for the various licenses issued. In 2009 the DMV began partial drive license services, which should increase revenues. Personnel services was increased slightly from 2009 due to hiring additional a full -time employee to replace a part-time position at the end of 2009. BUDGET: DEPUTY REGISTRAR $0 $0 $195,843 $206,405 $236,859 $252,922 22.54% SUPPIES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 276,919 280,000 272,648 280,000 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 0 5,555 2,460 2,931 4,613 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 75,000 0 2,316 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $0 $357,474 $282,460 $277,895 $284,613 0.76% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $195,843 $206,405 $236,859 $252,922 22.54% SUPPIES 0 0 8,651 8,450 8,672 5,425 - 35.80% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 17,758 16,470 15,152 16,300 -1.03% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 14,264 0 0 6,500 #DIV 101 OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $236,516 $231,325 $260,683 $281,147 21.54% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $0 $120,958 $120,958 $138,170 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $0 $120,958 $51,135 $17,212 $3,466 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $120,958 $172,093 $138,170 $141,636 C-11 MINNESOTA INVESTMENT FUND DEPTMENT: Minnesota Investment Fund SUPERVISOR: Economic Development Director FUND #: 221 ACTIVITY #: 46526 - 46528 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Minnesota Investment Fund is designated to administer loans to local businesses, following state and federal guidelines. OBJECTIVES: 1. To match available funds with qualifying businesses in Monticello. ISSUES: 1. Number of qualified available businesses in Monticello. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time C -12 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Interest earned from loans initiated through the Minnesota Investment Fund is the only activity anticipated in 2010 for this Fund. BUDGET: MINN INVESTMENT FUND FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 50,926 62,380 43,933 32,884 28,626 34,101 3.70% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $50,926 $62,380 $43,933 $32,884 $28,626 $34,101 3.70% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 190,000 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $190,000 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $923,285 $50,926 $974,211 $62,380 $1,036,591 ($146,067) $890,524 $32,884 $890,524 $28,626 $919,150 $34,101 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $974,211 $1,036,591 $890,524 $923,408 $919,150 $953,251 C -13 ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT FUND DEPTMENT: Economic Recovery Grant (S.C.E.R.G.) Fund SUPERVISOR: Economic Development Director FUND #: 222 ACTIVITY #: 46501 ACTIVITY SCOPE: This Fund was closed into the EDA Fund in 2007. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this tune C -14 BUDGET COMMENTARY: In 2007 the S.C.E.R.G. Fund was closed into the EDA Fund. BUDGET: SCERG (ECON RECOVERY GRANT) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 1,254 544 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $1,254 $544 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 17,485 544 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $17,485 $544 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $16,231 $17,485 $544 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $1,254 ($16,941) ($544) $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $17,485 $544 $0 $0 $0 $0 C -15 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: SHADE TREE FUND Shade Tree Fund Parks Superintendent 224 46102 The Shade Tree Fund supports planting and maintaining trees and shrubbery within the limits of the City. The Fund is in place for the purpose of regulating, developing, and providing for the planting, maintenance and removal of trees and stumps in any street, park, right -of -way or other public place within the City, in order to better serve the needs of soil conservation, climate moderation, air quality, noise, etc., and to provide the mechanisms for funding a uniform program for the purpose of beautifying the community as a whole, and increasing property values within the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Provide trees for spring tree planting. 2. Continue with Dutch Elm Disease Control Program. 3. Start an Emerald Ash Bore Disease Control Program 4. Replace dead and diseased trees throughout the City and Parks. 5. Continue chipping program. 6. Continue education program. ISSUES: 1. Weather which places stress on trees. 2. Prevent the spread of the Emerald Ash Bore. 3. Availability of funding. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement # of trees planted # of diseased trees removed # of students attending programs 2006 2007 N/A 384 N/A N/A N/A 271 C -16 2008 2009 2010 410 425 425 868 200 200 365 375 375 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The major revenue source is property taxes. A portion of the park employee's time is allocated to the Shade Tree Fund. The 2010 budget reflects having a smaller budget for tree removal cost due to disease as the City has removed the majority of diseased trees over the last few years to where it is now a program of prevention than removal. BUDGET: SHADETREE $24,898 $6,818 $31,716 $13,006 $44,722 $5,933 $50,655 $0 $50,655 $17,043 $67,698 ($6,419) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $31,716 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $28,629 $19,176 $32,112 $37,298 $34,861 $30,000 - 19.57% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 773 601 1,712 1,751 913 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 1,480 1,892 7,130 1,600 2,640 2,000 25.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 1,377 4,921 7,815 9,524 1,024 1,791 - 81.19% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $31,486 $26,762 $47,658 $50,134 $40,276 $34,704 - 30.78% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $21,321 $9,342 $19,493 $25,934 $13,220 $25,848 -0.33% SUPPIES 812 607 934 1,750 1,028 1,675 -4.29% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 2,535 3,807 21,298 22,450 8,985 13,600 - 39.42% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $24,668 $13,756 $41,725 $50,134 $23,233 $41,123 - 17.97% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $24,898 $6,818 $31,716 $13,006 $44,722 $5,933 $50,655 $0 $50,655 $17,043 $67,698 ($6,419) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $31,716 $44,722 $50,655 $50,655 $67,698 $61,279 C -17 COMMUNITY CENTER FUND DEPTMENT: Community Center SUPERVISOR: Community Center Director FUND #: 226 ACTIVITY #: N/A ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Monticello Community Center provides a facility with space for a variety of recreational, professional, and educational opportunities. The expenditures for the Community Center are divided into three activities, administration, programming, and NSP ball field concessions. OBJECTIVES: 1. Develop a plan for the future use of the area which was used as a wheel park (skateboard, bike, and rollerblade), including design, financing, construction, and marketing. 2. Develop an on -line registration system for program and membership sign up. 3. Provide facility improvements to increase customers. 4. Maintain the coimnunity garden. 5. Improve ball fields. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. 2. Limits due to facility size, available space, and available parking. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 # of customer visits 145,700 168,923 Gross Program Sales 67,021 88,412 Rental Revenue 148,533 139,096 C -18 2008 2009 2010 186,429 186,279 187,000 129,339 149,829 150,000 136,547 127,612 130,000 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The revenue budget for Community Center - Administration included all revenues of the Fund. The largest revenue sources are property taxes ($1,149,449) and memberships ($600,000). Other revenues include concession sales, room rentals, and program fees. This activity also includes all personnel service expenditures for the Fund. Expenditures for operating and maintaining the facility for 2010 are similar to the 2009 budget. In 2009 the capital outlay budget included expenditures for carpet, office expansion, energy upgrades, chemical room addition, electronic reader board and an outdoor acid container shed, where as the only 2010 expenditures are for an office expansion/improvements and energy management upgrades. Finally there is an operating transfer for the 2010 payment of the debt issued for the construction of the facility. This debt was refinance in 2008 which has resulted in a decrease for the transfer to debt service funds. BUDGET: COMMUNITY CENTER $240,740 $315,431 $490,423 $746,716 $746,716 $703,021 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $74,692 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $870,762 $1,176,130 $1,360,350 $1,296,601 $1,214,955 $1,149,449 - 11.35% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 48,207 25,290 59,515 60,855 23,082 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 982,896 1,000,662 1,056,257 1,090,600 1,038,897 1,109,100 1.70% FINES & FORFEITS 220 136 16 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 23,765 27,967 60,481 26,000 42,031 43,859 68.69% OPERATING TRANSFERS 250,000 250,000 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $2,127,643 $2,503,102 $2,502,394 $2,472,716 $2,356,738 $2,325,490 -5.95% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $777,635 $827,643 $887,124 $873,016 $920,521 $865,456 - 0.87% SUPPIES 187,465 218,234 191,450 221,400 183,280 211,200 -4.61% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 376,617 424,483 472,303 463,300 455,817 492,475 6.30% CAPITAL OUTLAY 41,285 0 5,224 80,000 5,815 30,000 - 62.50% OPERATING TRANSFERS 669,950 857,750 690,000 835,000 835,000 805,000 -3.59% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,052,951 $2,328,110 $2,246,101 $2,472,716 $2,400,433 $2,404,131 -2.77% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $240,740 $315,431 $490,423 $746,716 $746,716 $703,021 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $74,692 $174,992 $256,293 $0 ($43,695) ($78,641) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $315,431 $490,423 $746,716 $746,717 $703,021 $624,380 The expenditures above are divided into three activities, which the details of each are shown on page D -19 through D -20. C -19 COMMUNITY CENTER FUND DEPTMENT: Community Center - Administration SUPERVISOR: Community Center Director FUND #: 226 ACTIVITY #: 45122 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Monticello Community Center provides a facility with space for a variety of recreational, professional, and educational opportunities. The Administration Activity manages and tracks payroll, maintenance, and all expenses that are building wide, including debt service, utilities, and insurance. This is the general operating activity for the Community Center. BUDGET: SPECIAL REVENUE FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % COMM CENTER /ADMINISTRATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $777,635 $827,643 $887,124 $873,016 $920,521 $865,456 -0.87% SUPPLIES 83,798 102,871 82,567 94,600 85,215 97,600 3.17% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 356,489 386,380 419,094 412,900 401,307 441,575 6.94% CAPITAL OUTLAY 34,900 0 0 80,000 0 30,000 - 62.50% OPERATING TRANSFERS 669,950 857,750 690,000 835,000 835,000 805,000 -3.59% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1;922,771 $2,174,644 $2,078,785 $2,295,516 $2,242,043 $2,239,631 -2.43% DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: COMMUNITY CENTER FUND Community Center - Programming Community Center Director 226 45127 The Community Center Programming activity provides educational, recreational, and professional activities for all users, including concession food, within and outside the Monticello community. The programming activity manages specific costs that pertain to programs offered at the Community Center, as well as expenditures directly attributable to programmed areas of the facility, i.e. indoor play, fitness area, and pool. Facility concession expenditures are also included. C -20 BUDGET: SPECIAL REVENUE FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % COMM CENTER /PROGRAMMING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #DIV /01 SUPPLIES 103,667 86,982 83,768 109,200 80,361 98,300 -9.98% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 20,128 29,148 45,012 45,000 48,580 46,000 2.22% CAPITAL OUTLAY 6,385 0 5,224 0 5,815 0 #DIV 101 OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV /01 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $130,180 $116,130 $134,004 $154,200 $134,756 $144,300 -6.42% COMMUNITY CENTER FUND DEPTMENT: Community Center - NSP Ball Field Concessions SUPERVISOR: Community Center Director FUND #: 226 ACTIVITY #: 45203 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Community Center Ball Field Concessions manages and tracks the expenditures, except payroll and employee expenditures, for the ball field concessions, which at this time are only located at the NSP (Xcel) City Ball Fields. We provide snack food items during scheduled softball, baseball, and football games and/or practices. BUDGET: SPECIAL REVENUE FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % NSP BALLFIELD CONCESS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #DIV /01 SUPPLIES 0 28,381 25,115 17,600 17,704 15,300 - 13.07% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 8,955 8,197 5,400 5,930 4,900 -9.26% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV /01 OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV /01 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $37,336 $33,312 $23,000 $23,634 $20,200 - 12.17% C -21 PARK & PATHWAY DEDICATION FUND DEPTMENT: Park & Pathway Dedication Fund SUPERVISOR: Parks Superintendent FUND #: 229 ACTIVITY #: 45202 ACTIVITY SCOPE: Activities of the Park and Pathway Dedication Fund include updating and maintaining the City's pathway system, as well as designating funds for future parks and pathways within the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to maintain existing pathways of the City. 2. Plan for integration of funds toward park land purchases. 3. Begin purchase of Y.M.C.A. property. ISSUES: 1. Time constraints with other projects. 2. Economic slow down of new development and home construction activities. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time C -22 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The major revenue source is normally park dedication fees. However due to the economic conditions and lack of new development, for 2010 the main revenue source will be an operating transfer to help fund the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. The only expenditure for 2010 is the City's payment for the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. BUDGET: PARK/PATHWAY DEDICATION $610,153 $174,849 $785,003 $192,869 $977,872 ($1,067,606) ($89,734) ($293,366) ($89,734) $38,387 ($51,347) ($71,380) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $785,003 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 33,961 0 0 175,000 0 40,000 - 77.14% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 159,515 130,640 91,885 74,384 19,843 63,720 - 14.34% MISCELLANEOUS 54,955 64,849 47,197 37,250 18,544 24,900 - 33.15% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 275,000 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $248,431 $195,489 $139,082 $286,634 $38,387 $403,620 40.81% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 71,989 2,620 3,232 5,000 0 0 - 100.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,593 0 1,203,456 100,000 0 475,000 375.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 475,000 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $73,582 $2,620 $1,206,688 $580,000 $0 $475,000 - 18.10% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $610,153 $174,849 $785,003 $192,869 $977,872 ($1,067,606) ($89,734) ($293,366) ($89,734) $38,387 ($51,347) ($71,380) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $785,003 $977,872 ($89,734) ($383,100) ($51,347) ($122 727) C -23 ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA FUND DEPTMENT: Orderly Annexation Area (OAA) Fund SUPERVISOR: City Administrator FUND #: 230 ACTIVITY #: 46401 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Orderly Annexation Area (OAA) Fund is designed to fund annexation transactions for the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Provide smooth transition of property into the City from the Township when ever annexation occurs. ISSUES: 1. Slow economy. 2. Traffic congestion on TH25. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time C -24 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The only revenue source for 2010 is interest earnings. Based on the annexation agreement with the Township and due to no new parcels being annexed into the City the expenditure budget for 2010 is zero. BUDGET: OAA FUND $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #DIV /0! SUPPIES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $6,794 $669 $4,884 $0 $2 $0 #DIV /O! LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 25 94 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 290 230 125 164 291 132.80% OPERATING TRANSFERS 6,500 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $13,294 $984 $5,208 $125 $166 $291 132.80% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #DIV /0! SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 44 1,355 360 0 1,043 0 #DIV /01 CAPITAL OUTLAY 278 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $322 $1,355 $360 $0 $1,043 $0 #DIV /01 FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 ($9,507) $3,465 $3,094 $7,942 $7,942 $7,065 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $12,972 ($371) $4,848 $125 ($877) $291 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $3,465 $3,094 $7,942 $8,067 $7,065 $7,356 C-25 CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND DEPTMENT: Capital Outlay Revolving Fund SUPERVISOR: City Administrator FUND #: 240 ACTIVITY #: 49201 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Capital Outlay Fund was established to acquire and hold properties as well as make any necessary improvements, while being held for resale. The Fund has also, in unique circumstances, been used to budget and purchase large equipment and vehicles for departments. OBJECTIVES: 1. Make necessary improvements to land held for resale. 2. To acquire properties at present market value to address future comprehensive plan needs when necessary. 3. Make equipment purchases. ISSUES: Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time C -26 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The revenue activity for 2010 includes interest earnings and the utility transition aid that was to be allocated to the General Fund, but since the State has budget issues there is no guarantee the City will receive this aid, it was included in this fund where it could easily be removed without affecting services. The expenditures in 2010 is for the purchase of equipment as outlined in the City's capital improvement plan and an operating transfer of funds to the General Fund for the purchase of equipment. BUDGET: CAPITAL PROJ REVOLVING FD FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $1,498 $146 $263 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 130,000 0 0 0 48,517 242,125 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 6,000 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 121,722 147,384 139,498 106,850 6,347 0 - 100.00% MISCELLANEOUS 4,007,164 99,917 100,341 75,975 12,243 40,964 - 46.08% OPERATING TRANSFERS 213,380 79,215 0 0 160,009 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $4,473,764 $332,662 $240,102 $182,825 $227,116 $283,089 54.84% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 92 0 189 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,349,076 476,276 55,762 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 203,243 0 0 0 71,212 165,000 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,833,136 10,105 794,545 119,114 2,129,304 45,000 100.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,385,547 $486,381 $850,496 $119,114 $2,200,516 $210,000 100.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $4,951,353 $1,088,217 $6,039,570 ($153,719) $5,885,851 ($610,394) $5,275,457 $63,711 $5,275,457 ($1,973,400) $3,302,057 $73,089 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $6,039,570 $5,885,851 $5,275,457 $5,339,168 $3,302,057 $3,375,146 C -27 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT FUND DEPTMENT: Street Lighting Improvement Fund SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 245 ACTIVITY #: 43162 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The activity of the Street Lighting Improvement Fund is to incorporate street lighting into designated areas of the City, as pre - determined by Council. This Fund's revenue consists of franchise fees specifically designated for street lighting improvement projects. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to upgrade old traditional lights to colonial style and add lights to older systems. 2. Work with MNDOT to add battery back -up to signal on TH 25 in the future. 3. Replace and modify the old lighting system in the downtown area. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. 2. Develop replacement light program with Wright Hennepin and Xcel Energy. 3. Verify lamp and fixture maintenance by utility companies. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time [ 0 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The revenue source for the Street Light Improvement Fund is the electric franchise fee the City collects. The expenditures are an operating transfer to the Capital Improvement Funds for street light improvements, however at the time this budget was developed no street lighting projects for 2010 have been identified. BUDGET: STREET LIGHT IMPROVEMENTS EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 267,630 250,000 282,415 270,000 8.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 0 4,460 1,275 6,849 10,606 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $0 $272,090 $251,275 $289,264 $280,606 11.67% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV 101 OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 15,000 0 0 100.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $0 $15,000 $0 $0 - 100.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $0 $272,090 $272,090 $561,354 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $0 $272,090 $236,275 $289,264 $280,606 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $272,090 $508,365 $561,354 $841,960 C-29 SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FUND DEPTMENT: Sanitary Sewer Access Fund SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 262 ACTIVITY #: 49201 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Sanitary Sewer Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's sewer services. Fees are collected on building permits for new construction and lot developments. These fees are dedicated for the purpose of sanitary sewer improvements, and to cover debt related to these improvements. OBJECTIVES: 1. To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of sanitary sewer improvements for the City. 2. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner. ISSUES: 1. Number of building permits has declined. 2. Slow economy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time C -30 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources are sanitary sewer access and trunk fees on new construction or special assessments of past access and trunk fees. There are no projects to be funded in 2010 from the Sanitary Sewer Access Fund, but there is an operating transfer to 2008 Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond, which refinanced the bond for the construction of the Waste Water Treatment Plant and 2005A Improvement Bond for this Fund's share of the interchange project. BUDGET: SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FD FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 794,259 448,583 270,753 262,650 116,628 130,000 - 50.50% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 324,341 260,097 257,896 211,010 37,145 198,075 -6.13% MISCELLANEOUS 494,550 467,103 254,622 223,795 106,830 166,808 - 25.46% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 203,708 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $1,613,150 $1,175,783 $986,979 $697,455 $260,603 $494,683 - 29.04% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 22 0 160 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,761,753 292,156 7,584 0 312 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 67,329 10,711 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,452,171 1,879,009 1,940,039 1,853,530 1,213,030 1,112,996 - 39.95% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,213,946 $2,238,494 $1,958,494 $1,853,530 $1,213,342 $1,112,996 - 39.95% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $8,660,048 ($1,600,796) $7,059,253 ($1,062,711) $5,996,542 ($971,515) $5,025,027 ($1,156,075) $5,025,027 ($952,739) $4,072,288 ($618,113) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $7,059,253 $5,996,542 $5,025,027 $3,868,952 $4,072,288 $3,454,175 C -31 STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND DEPTMENT: Storm Sewer Access Fund SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 263 ACTIVITY #: 49201 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Storm Sewer Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's Storm Sewer services. Fees are collected on building permits for new construction and lot development. These fees are dedicated for the purpose of storm sewer improvements. OBJECTIVES: 1. To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of storm sewer improvements for the City. 2. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner. ISSUES: 1. Number of building permits has declined. 2. Slow economy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time C -32 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources are storm sewer access and trunk fees on new construction or special assessments of past access and trunk fees. The only expenditure for 2010 is an operating transfer to 2005A Improvement Bond for this Fund's share of the interchange project. BUDGET: STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 182,122 75,231 24,959 174,500 3,342 20,000 - 88.54% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 310,276 212,666 155,900 147,280 30,945 130,406 - 11.46% MISCELLANEOUS 121,981 141,320 77,550 64,250 52,152 60,115 -6.44% OPERATING TRANSFERS 6,709 0 65,379 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $621,088 $429,217 $323,788 $386,030 $86,439 $210,521 - 45.47% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 115,934 432,186 9,520 0 1,770 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 65,238 0 11,830 0 (13,322) 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 759,559 262,700 264,776 1,392,591 267,591 264,599 - 81.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $940,731 $694,886 $286,126 $1,392,591 $256,039 $264,599 - 81.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $2,270,333 ($319,643) $1,950,691 ($265,669) $1,685,021 $37,662 $1,722,683 ($1,006,561) $1,722,683 ($169,600) $1,553,083 ($54,078) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 • $1,950,691 $1,685,021 $1,722,683 $716,122 $1,553,083 $1,499,005 C -33 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: WATER ACCESS FUND Water Access Fund Public Works Director 265 49201 The Water Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's water system. Fees are collected on building permits for new construction and lot development. These fees are dedicated for the purpose of water improvements: OBJECTIVES: 1. To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of water improvements for the City. 2. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner. ISSUES: 1. Number of building permits has declined. 2. Slow economy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time C -34 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources are water access and trunk fees on new construction or special assessments of past access and trunk fees. There are no projects to be funded in 2010 from the Water Access Fund, but there is an operating transfer to 2005A Improvement Bond for this Fund's share of the interchange project. BUDGET: WATER ACCESS FUND FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 161,204 91,008 35,319 85,400 19,984 30,000 - 64.87% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 106,328 72,918 74,274 52,323 10,809 44,040 - 15.83% MISCELLANEOUS 66,816 40,661 11,271 11,284 18,826 20,525 81.89% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 10,105 723,852 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $334,348 $214,692 $844,716 $149,007 $49,619 $94,565 - 36.54% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 262 32,855 1,459 0 264 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 228,202 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 407,609 310,695 311,220 640,246 311,246 310,774 - 51.46% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $407,871 $571,752 $312,679 $640,246 $311,510 $310,774 - 51.46% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $734,297 ($73,523) $660,775 ($357,060) $303,715 $532,037 $835,752 ($491,239) $835,752 ($261.,891) $573,861 ($216,209) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $660,775 $303,715 $835,752 $344,513 $573,861 $357,652 C -35 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C -36 MONTICELLO DEBT SERVICE FUNDS D-1 DEBT SERVICE FUND SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: The City currently has 6 active debt service funds. Debt services funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of general long -term debt, excluding debt issued for and serviced by an Enterprise Fund. Debt service funds use the modified accrual basis of accounting however, the cash basis of accounting will be used for budgetary purposes only. The cash basis is used for budgeting to ensure that sufficient cash will be available to make required payments on the City's bonded indebtedness. BUDGET ISSUES: The City has maintained a bond rating of A2 since 2004 from Moody's Investor Services. The City will issue debt in 2010 to finance the 2010 street reconstruction project as listed in the Capital Projects Fund section of this document. The debt issue is estimated at $3,230,000, See individual funds for the budget issues facing the City's debt service funds. BUDGET SUMMARY: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $505,804 $8,951 $2,113 $835,556 $785,261 $1,234,533 100.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 38,352 40,079 25,769 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 885,304 2,159,226 1,697,990 1,522,518 430,658 1,421,903 -6.61% MISCELLANEOUS 378,951 1,223,970 421,307 536,074 423,218 460,446 - 14.11% OPERATING TRANSFERS 4,041,032 4,059,300 14,117,459 3,259,640 3,277,629 2,921,846 - 10.36% BOND PROCEEDS 0 737,169 15,685,262 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $5,811,091 $8,188,616 $31,924,131 $6,192,140 $4,956,845 $6,064,497 -2:06% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 5,729 821 0 38 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 4,359,131 5,493,107 23,384,076 8,018,281 7,936,106 6,270,275 - 21.80% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,408,294 23,013 10.,878,240 1,115,799 1,126,427 575,000 100.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $5,767,426 $5,521,849 $34,263,137 $9,134,080 $9,062,571 $6,845,275 - 25.06% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $9,001,312 $43,666 $9,044,978 $2,666,767 $11.,711,745 ($2,339,006) $9,372,738 ($2,941,940) $9,372,738 ($4,105,726) $5,267,012 ($780.778) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $9,044,978 $11,711,745 $9,372,738 $6,430,798 $5,267,012 $4,486,234 D -2 LEGAL DEBT LIMIT: All Minnesota municipalities (counties, cities, towns, and school districts) are subject to statutory "net debt" limitations under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.53. Under this provision, beginning with issues having a settlement date after June 30, 2008, the State of Minnesota increased the legal debt limit from 2% to 3% of the City's taxable market value. Below is the City's current net debt levy calculation: 3% Market Value $38,074,842 Less: Outstanding Debt Subject to Limit (5,555,000) Legal debt margin $32,519,842 DEBTSCHEDULE: Below is the City's outstanding debt as of December 31, 2009: Interest Maturity Authorized Debt * Rate % Date & Issued Retired Outstanding 2002 Improvement Bonds 3.50 -4.00 2/1/14 $2,420,000 $1,300,000 $1,120,000 2005A Improvement Bonds 4.00 -4.75 2/1/23 25,150,000 4,735,000 20,415,000 2007A Improvement Bonds 4.00 2/1/18 6,045,000 460,000 5,585,000 Total supported by special assessments 33,615,000 6,495,000 27,120,000 2004A Tax Increment Bond 5.00 -5.60 2/1/13 945,000 475,000 470,000 2008 Sewer Refunding Bond 3.40 8/1/18 9,270,000 1,195,000 8,075,000 2008A Revenue Refunding 3.20 2/1/15 6,180,000 625,000 5,555,000 Total supported by revenues 15,450,000 1,820,000 13,630,000 2008 Telecommunications Revenue Bond 6.50 -6.75 6/1/31 26,445,000 00 26,445,000 Total Debt Outstanding $76.455.000 $67,665,000 * All debt issued except for the 2008 Telecommunications Revenue Bonds are General Obligation debt issues, which are backed by the full -faith and credit of the City. D -3 1994A G. O. REFUNDING BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 301 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond was retired in 2004. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA Li, BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond was retired in 2004. Since that time the only revenue source has been interest earnings and operating transfers out to close the bond fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS - 5,599 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $5,599 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 156,219 4,429 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $158,219 $4,429 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $157,049 ($152,620) $4,429 ($4,429) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $4,429 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -S 1995A G. O. REFUNDING BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1995A G. O. Refunding Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 302 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1995A G. O. Refunding Bond was retired in 2002. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA [Mel BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1995A G. O. Refunding Bond was retired in 2002. Since that time the only revenue source has been interest earnings and operating transfers out to close the bond fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 33,260 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $33,260 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 978,255 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $978,255 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $944,995 ($944,995) ($0) $0 ($0) $0 ($O) $0 ($0) $0 ($O) $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($0) ($0) ($0) ($O) ($0) ($O) D -7 1997A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1997A G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 304 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1997A G. O. Improvement Bond was retired in 2004. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA m. BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1997A G. O. Improvement Bond was retired in 2004. Since that time the only revenue source has been interest earnings and operating transfers out to close the bond fand. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 4,899 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $4,899 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 137,397 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $137,397 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $132,498 ($132,498) ($0) $0 ($0) $0 ($0) $0 ($0) $0 ($0) $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 _ ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) D -9 2002 G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 310 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2014, with a call feature on February, 2010. The average interest rate is 3.67 %. The revenue source will be special assessments against benefited properties and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manner. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORELOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -10 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond's main two revenue sources are special assessments and a property tax levy. In 2009 the City used reserves instead of a property tax levy to pay this debt, but in 2010 will once again use a property tax levy, along with the special assessments collected to make its annual debt payments, which are the only expenditure, budgeted for 2010. BUDGET: D -11 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $170,001 $2,433 $356 $0 $0 $74,798 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 4,021 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 210,889 165,501 154,563 132,548 23,584 119,695 -9.70% MISCELLANEOUS 27,155 38,632 21,768 16,491 9,045 13,930 - 15.53% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 174,600 1,136 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $408,045 $381,166 $177,823 $149,039 $32,629 $212,444 42.54% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 287,809 292,061 290,256 292,529 292,510 293,835 0.45% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 6,151 0 199 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $287,809 $292,061 $296,407 $292.,529 $292,709 $293,835 0.45% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $478,213 $598,449 $687,554 $568,970 $568,970 $308,890 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $120,236 $89,105 ($118,584) ($143,490) ($260,080) ($81,391) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $598,449 $687,554 $568,970 $425,480 $308,890 $227,499 D -11 2003A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 311 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2015, with a call feature on February, 2009. This bond will be redeemed in February, 2009. The average interest rate is 3.71 %. The revenue source will be special assessments against benefited properties. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -12 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond was redeemed in February 2009 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $47 $14 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 194,605 160,807 147,120 167,815 0 0 - 100.00% MISCELLANEOUS 85,222 96,830 68,395 43,870 0 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 398,614 0 654,086 210,299 210,299 0 100.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $678,441 $257,684 $869,615 $421,984 $210,299 $0 - 100.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 288,264 288,476 292,526 1,802,366 1,802,467 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 12,087 403,973 0 2,066 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $288,264 $300,563 $696,499 $1,802,366 $1,804,533 $0 - 100.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $1,073,820 $390,177 $1,463,997 ($42,879) $1,421,118 $173,116 $1,594,234 ($1,380,382) $1,594,234 ($1,594,234) $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,463,997 $1,421,118 $1,594,234 $213,852 $0 $0 D -13 2005A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 312 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including Highway 18 interchange and other street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2023, with a call feature on February, 2013. The average interest rate is 3.82 %. The revenue source will be special assessments against benefited properties, tax increments, transfers from City utility access fiords and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -14 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources for the 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond include special assessments collected, transfers from the City's utility access funds, tax increments and a property tax levy. The only expenditures are for the 2010 principal and interest payments for this debt issue. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $29,488 $410 $51 $160,590 $150,923 $248,724 54.88% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 7,364 7,696 13,404 82.02% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 52,947 1,598,722 868,084 795,750 185,422 733,129 -7.87% MISCELLANEOUS 0 662,615 141,284 298,315 302,951 303,262 1.66% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,660,425 1,484,225 1,636,424 1,610,141 1,610,141 1,605,509 -0.29% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $1,742,860 $3,745,972 $2,645,843 $2,872,160 $2,257,133 $2,904,028 1.11% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,061,718 2,095,563 2,457,688 3,234,231 3,234,181 3,178,912 -1.71% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 579,590 0 5,736 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,061,718 $2,095,563 $3,037,278 $3,234,231 $3,239,917 $3,178,912 -1.71% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $538,069 $681,143 $1,219,212 $1,650,409 $2,869,621 ($391,435) $2,478,186 ($362,071) $2,478,186 ($982,784) $1,495,402 ($274,884) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,219,212 $2,869,621 $2,478,186 $2,116,115 $1,495,402 $1,220,518 D -15 2007A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2007A G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 313 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2007A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements, refunded the 2000A Improvement Bond, and Finance a storage building and mixing equipment at the Waste Water Treatment Plant.. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2018, with a call feature on February, 2016. The average interest rate is 3.68 %. The revenue source will be special assessments against benefited properties, sewer revenues and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -16 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources for the 2007A G. O. Improvement Bond include special assessments collected, transfers from the City's Sewer Fund, and a property tax levy. The only expenditures are for the 2010 principal and interest payments for this debt issue. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $314 $196,903 $185,051 $414,780 110.65% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 9,051 9,458 22,787 151.76% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 321,928 240,310 87,053 227,439 -5.36% MISCELLANEOUS 0 0 0 7,400 421 (875) - 111.82% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 135,000 104,200 104,200 111,200 6.72% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $0 $0 $457,242 $557,864 $386,183 $775,331 38.98% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 144,336 693,100 609,289 811,900 17.14% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $144,336 $693,100 $609,289 $811,900 17.14% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $312,906 $312,906 ($135,236) $312,906 ($223,106) $89,800 ($36,569) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $312,906 $177,670 $89,800 $53,231 D-17 2008A G. O. SEWER REVENUE REFUNDING BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 315 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds refinanced the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) Note, which financed the construction of the WWTP. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2018, with a call feature on February, 2016. The average interest rate is 3.40 %. The revenue source will be a transfer from the Sewer Access Fund and a property tax levy. By refinancing the notes, the City will have an estimated savings of $270,404. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -18 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources for the 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds include a transfer from the City's Sewer Access Fund and a property tax levy. The only expenditures are for the 2010 principal and interest payments for this debt issue. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $486 $478,063 $449,287 $496,231 3.80% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 21,937 22,925 (14,443) - 165.84% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 0 28,684 7,828 24,304 28,403 262.84% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 1,445,554 500,000 500,000 400,137 - 19.97°% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 9,300,295 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $0 $10,775,019 $1,007,828 $996,516 $910,328 -9.67% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 572,202 1,049,362 1,049,324 1,049,471 0.01% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 9,228,832 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $9,801,034 $1,049,362 $1,049,324 $1,049,471 0.01% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $0 $973,985 $973,985 $921,177 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $0 $973,985 ($41,534) ($52,808) ($139,143) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $973,985 $932,451 $921,177 $782,034 D -19 CONSOLIDATED BOND FUND DEPTMENT: Consolidated Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 300 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Consolidated Bond Fund has no debt obligations it is responsible for. It does collect and record special assessments of projects that were funded internally by this fund or who debt requirements have been satisfied. OBJECTIVES: 1. Help finance future City projects. ISSUES: I . Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -20 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Consolidated Bond Fund receives revenue from special assessments from project funded internally by the City or from retired bond funds. The transfer out is to help finance the 2010 street reconstruction project, to finance the City's share of the battery back up system for traffic signals and to finance the next land purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $56 $412 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 26,313 342 14,002 186,095 134,599 341,640 83.58% MISCELLANEOUS 81,267 155,471 92,230 97,760 51,336 75,214 - 23.06% OPERATING TRANSFERS 46,518 0 0 0 10,132 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $154,098 $155,869 $106,644 $283,855 $196,067 $416,854 46.85% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 14 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 214,081 1,115,799 210,122 575,000 - 48.47% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $214,095 $1,115,799 $210,122 $575,000 - 48.47% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,310,845 $1,464,943 $1,620,812 $1,513,361 $1,513,361 $1,499,306 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $154,098 $155,869 ($107,451) ($831,944) ($14,055) ($158,146) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,464,943 $1,620,812 $1,513,361 $681,417 $1,499,306 $1,341,160 D -21 WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WWTP) NOTE FUND. DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: WWTP Note Finance Director 303 47000 The WWTP Note financed the construction of the treatment plant and was refinanced in 2008 by the 2008A Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -22 BUDGET COMMENTARY: There will be no revenue or expenditure activity for the WWTP Note since the note was refinance and the fund closed to the 2008A Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond, BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $1,211 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 29,212 65,833 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,082,293 1,082,293 9,456,859 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $1,111,505 $1,149,337 $9,456,859 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,082,293 1,082,293 9,769,979 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 445,554 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,082,293 $1,082,293 $10,215,533 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $662,417 $29,212 $691,630 $67,044 $758,674 ($758,674) ($0) $0 ($0) $0 ($0) $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $691,630 $758,674 ($0) ($0) ($0) ($O) D -23 1998B G. O. WATER SYSTEM REFUNDING BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 305 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond was retired in 2004. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -24 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond was retired in 2004. Since that time the only revenue source has been interest earnings and operating transfers out to close the bond fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $17 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 4,793 187 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $4,793 $204 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 134,423 4,997 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $134,423 $4,997 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $134,423 ($129,630) $4,793 ($4,793) ($0) $0 ($O) $0 ($0) $0 ($0) $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $4,793 ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) D-25 1999 G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1999 G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 306 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1999 G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2010, with a call feature on February, 2005. This bond will be redeemed in December, 2008. The average interest rate is 4.16 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA P BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1999 G. O. Improvement Bond was redeemed in December 2008 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $174,654 $2,816 $470 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 180,025 136,703 131,150 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 10,248 13,359 760 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 182,200 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $364,927 $335,078 $132,380 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 356,606 349,733 986,135 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 15,923 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $356,606 $349,733 $986,135 $0 $15,923 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $876,013 $884,333 $869,678 $15,923 $15,923 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $8,321 ($14,655) ($853,755) $0 ($15,923) $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $884,333 $869,678 $15,923 $15,923 $0 $0 D-27 2000A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2000A G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 307 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2000A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2016, with a call feature on February, 2008. These bonds were redeemed in February, 2008. The average interest rate is 5.38 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2000A G. O. Improvement Bonds were redeemed in February 2008 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $131,661 $1,949 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 152,730 32,662 0 0 0 0 0.00 % MISCELLANEOUS 19,010 19,206 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 133,300 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 737,169 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $303,401 $924,306 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 5,729 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 219,274 216,119 1,180,894 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $219,274 $221,848 $1,180,894 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $394,308 $84,127 $478,436 $702,458 $1,180,894 ($1,180,894) ($0) $0 ($0) $0 ($0) $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $478,436 $1,180,894 ($0) ($0) ($0) ($O) D-29 ►U : IX11I] 200 DEPTMENT: 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 308 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bond financed the construction of the City's Community Center (MCC) building. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2015, with a call feature on February, 2008. These bonds were redeemed in February, 2008. The average interest rate was 6.27 %. The revenue source was revenues generated by the MCC. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -30 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bonds were redeemed in February 2008 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES .PERSONNEL SERVICES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 22,234 54,049 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 669,950 857,750 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 6,180,000 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $692,184 $911,799 $6,180,000 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES .PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 670,985 822,183 6,848,477 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $670,985 $822,183 $6,848,477 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $557,662 $578,861 $668,477 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $21,199 $89,616 ($668,477) $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $578,861 $668,477 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -31 i�IIIII C l�1��1 � � �P7�11/1�► : �J�17 011�►L1. DEPTMENT: 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 309 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2011, with a call feature on August, 2007. This bond was redeemed in December, 2008. The average interest rate was 5.00 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -32 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond was redeemed in December 2008 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $12 $10 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 67,795 64,469 61,143 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 44,252 38,640 13,290 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 7,857 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $112,047 $103,121 $74,443 $0 $7,857 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 184,400 177,476 612,658 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $184,400 $177,476 $612,658 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $677,066 ($72,353) $604,713 ($74,355) $530,358 ($538,215) ($7,857) $0 ($7,857) $7,857 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $604,713 $530,358 ($7,857) ($7,857) $0 $0 D -33 iNTREli<�Al��:i 1�C�17 X11 1 �1► - : I 151"12 I: DEPTMENT: 1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 376 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond helped provide financing in the City's downtown area. The debt service schedule called for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2006. The average interest rate was 8.29 %. The revenue source was tax increments from the benefited district. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -34 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond was redeemed in February 2006 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 313 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $313 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 36,758 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 1,500 59 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $36,758 $1,500 $59 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $38,004 ($36,445) $1,559 ($1,500) $59 ($59) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,559 $59 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -35 1989 G. O. TAX INCREMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 377 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond helped provide financing of a senior housing facility. The debt service schedule called for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2007. The average interest rate was 7.25 %. The revenue source was tax increments from the benefited district. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -36 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond was redeemed in February 2007 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 544 171 110 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 31,975 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $32,519 $171 $110 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 34,443 31,558 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 2,381 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $34,443 $31,558 $0 $0 $2,381 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $35,582 $33,658 $2,271 $2,381 $2,381 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($1,924) ($31,387) $110 $0 ($2,381) $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $33,658 $2,271 $2,381 $2,381 $0 $0 D -37 2004A G. O. TAXABLE TAX INCREMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 379 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond helped provide financing for new development in the City's downtown district. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2013, with a call feature on August 2010. The average interest rate is 5.18 %. The revenue source is tax increments from the benefited district. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payment as scheduled in a timely manor. Generation of sufficient tax increment for debt retirement. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond's main revenue source is tax increments received from the downtown district. The only expenditures planned are the 2010 principal and interest payments of the debt. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 10,943 78,977 49,531 34,730 33,497 34,790 0.17% OPERATING TRANSFERS 151,257 144,932 138,400 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $162,200 $223,909 $187,931 $34,730 $33,497 $34,790 0.17% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 136,583 137,645 138,358 133,433 133,333 133,057 -0.28% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 890,000 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $136,583 $137,645 $138,358 $133,433 $1,023,333 $133,057 -0.28% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $990,346 $1,015,964 $1,102,228 $1,151,801 $1,151,801 $161,965 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $25,618 $86,264 $49,573 ($98,703) ($989,836) ($98,267) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,015,964 $1,102,228 $1,151,801 $1,053,098 $161,965 $63,698 D -39 2008A G. O. REVENUE REFUNDING BOND FUND DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond Finance Director 314 47000 The 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond refinanced the 2000A Public Project Revenue Bond. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2015. The average interest rate is 3.20 %. The revenue source is revenues generated from the Monticello Connnunity Center. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. Generation of revenues by the Community Center to fund operations and repay debt service with as low of property tax levy as possible. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA NMI BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond's revenue source is a transfer from the Colmnunity Center Fund, while the expenditures consist of the 2010 debt payment. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% .FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 0 5,255 29,680 1,664 5,722 - 80.72% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 650,000 835,000 835,000 805,000 -3.59% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 204,967 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $0 $860,222 $864,680 $836,664 $810,722 -6.24% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 821 0 38 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 90,553 813,260 815,002 803,100 -1.25% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $91,374 $813,260 $815,040 $803,100 -1.25% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $768,848 $768,848 $51,420 $768,848 $21,624 $790,472 $7,622 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $768,848 $820,268 $790,472 $798,094 D -41 2010A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2010A G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 317 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2010A G. O. Improvement Bond finance capital projects approve and started in 2010. The debt service schedule will call for semi - annual payments. The revenue sources would include a combination of existing City funds and special assessments. OBJECTIVES: 1. Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. ISSUES: 1. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -42 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City would issue debt in 2010 if the proposed 2010 street reconstruction project is approved. It is estimated that the City would need to issue approximately $3,230,000 in new debt to fund the 2010 street reconstruction project and other smaller projects proposed in 2010. The 2010A G. O. Improvement Bond's revenue source will be a combination of existing City funds, including the Consolidated Bond Fund, Street Light Improvement Fund, Street Reconstruction Fund, the three Access Funds and Economic Development Fund and special assessments, while the expenditures consist of the debt payments. Both the revenue sources and expenditures are currently projected to begin in 2011. BUDGET: BOND PROCEEDS TOTALREVENUES EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES SUPPIES OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES CAPITAL OUTLAY $0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS TOTALREVENUES EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES SUPPIES OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES CAPITAL OUTLAY $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00°% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -43 D -44 City of Mnnticello Minnesota Schedule of OulstandinB General ObliBallon Bonds As Of December 31 2009 O.O. Improvement G.O. Im mvemenl G.O. Im mvemenl G.O. Tex lacremenl Date Bonds series 2002 let erost Bonds Berles 2005A Interest Bonds Serles 2007A Interest Bond 200477 Inleresl Payable Princid al Interest Rate Total Pdncici el Interest R.I. Total Pdncici aI Interest Rate Total Pdncicl al Interest R.I. Total 21112010 255000.00 21487.50 SAW 2]640].50 2350000.00 442112.50 4.750 2792112.50 600000.00 111700.00 4.000 711,700.00 110000.00 12620 .75 5.000 122628.7 5 01112010 8I112010 1689].50 1609].50 388300.00 388300.00 00700.00 99]00.00 98]8.]5 9.878 J5 121112010 21112011 266000.00 18897.50 3.800 281097.50 2405000.00 388300.00 4.]50 2791300.00 620000.00 98700.00 4000 ]19]00.00 11500000 98]8]5 5.260 1248]815 Wv2ogt _- _ W112011 1186250 11082.50 32918125 329.181.25 87300.00 87300.00_.__6,86000 -� 6860.00 --- 121112011 _ 21112012 Wvzotz 276000.00 11082.50 3.M 286862.50 2_450 000.00 320181.25 4.500 2779181.25 57000000 8].300.00 4.000 65]300.0012097000 8,880:00 6.800+128860.00 61112012 8500.00 8600.00 274056.26 274058.25 75900.00 ]5900.00 3500.00. 3600.00 12/112012 -- -- - W112013 285000.00 8600.00 4.000 2915`.00 2520000.00 274055.25 4.500 2794056.25 595000.00 7500`.00 4.000 8]0800.00 125000.00 3,500.00 5.500 126,500.00 6/112013 W112013 800.00 800.00 817356,26 21],35625 - 04000.00 64000.00 12 /1 @013 2/1/2014 40000.00 800.00 4.000 40.800.00 26]5,000.00 217356.25 4.000 2]92356.25 620000.00 84000.00 4,000 6840`.00 6/1/2014 8112014 15585625 _ 165056.25 51600.00 51800.00 12112014 2/1/2015 2265000.00 18585625 4.000 2420855.25 540000.00 51000.00 4.000 691600.00 6/12015 9712015 12G.756 25 120 756.25 38 000.00 38800.0 12/12015 W112016 2310000,00 12G.756 25 4.000 2430756.25 665000,00 36800.00 4.000 ]03000.00 6112016 8/12018 74558.25 ]4558.25 25500,00 25500.00_ 12112016 211/2017 705000,00 74656.25 4.000__ ]]9556,25 6250_ 0.00 26600.00 4.000 850500.00 81112017 004562 5 60458.25 1300000 --13 13000,00 12MM7 2110018 ]30000.00 60956.25 9.250 ]90,458.26_850 ,000.00 13,000.00_4.000_ 66300y0,00 8112018 8/1120 44 943.]5 44 B43.I5 _ 12112016 - - -- 2110019 390000.00 94993.75 4250 439943.]5 8112019 WWII - -- -- 8112018 3665626 36, 658.25.._. .... _.______.. _ __. 12112019 2112020 0.00 _405_20 _ -- 36650.25 4.250 441650.26 81112020 -- 81112020 28050.00 28050.00 12112020" 21112021 420000.00 2805000 4.260 440050.00 6/112021 1212021 19,125.00 18,12600 12/12021 .._ "_._.. _.. _ - 211202,2„ 440000.00 19125.00 4.250 46912500 9712022 12/12022 9]]5,00 9]]500 21112023_ _ 480000.00 9]]500 4,250 469]]5.00 61112023 - ...... W112024 -. _.__.._- 121112024 _ -- - -- - - - - - -- -- - _ _N112025 121112025 97112028 121112026 - - -" 6n2027 1v12oz7 971 - 12112026 611 9 12/120T20 29 97112030 121112030 8112031 Totals 1120000.00 9n.607.801 1 121360],50 20415000.00 3978250.00 24 391 250.00 5 585 000.00 1023300.00 6608300.00 470,000001 63108.25 523106.25 _.. Amount M21CM. 001 1 25150,00000 804500000 94500000 -- Interest Rate 004 004 0.04 0,05 D -44 D -45 Monticello Schedule ndlim a General Obligaticn Bonds - -- As Of e December As Of December 31 2009 G.O. Sewer I Revenue RefundinA Teleocmmunications Revenue Tolel Bond Data Refunding Bontl 2008 Inleresl Bonds 2008A Inleresl Bonds 2000 Inleresl Indebtedness Pe able Princicl al Interest Rate Total Princicl al Interest Rate Tolel Pdncici el lot eresl Role Total Pdncici el Interest Total 21112010 _387,000.00 13],2]5.DD 3.400 524275.00X35000,00 88880.00 3.200 723880.00 4337000.00 814083.75 5.16108376 6/112010 882 668.70 882660.70 0,00 882668,70 882888.70 0/112010 394000.00 1306%.DD 3.400 524696.00 78720.00 78720.00 39400000 722192.25 1116192.25 12/112010 882668.70 882668.70 0.00 882668.70 882668.70 21112011 401OD.00 123 )98.0D 3.400 524998.00 96000000 78720.00 3.200 1038720.00 4785000.00 715494,25 5481,94.26 61112011 682 668.70 882 668.70 0,00 882 668.70 882 888.70 01112011 407ODD.00 11]181.00 3.400 529181.00 63380.00 63360.00 40700000 615744.75 1, 22.744.75 121112011 882 668.70 882&66.70 0.00 882 66610 882,06830 21112012 414 OD5.D0 110 262.0D 3.400 524262.00 990000.00 63360.00 3.200 1,053360,00 401900000 608825.75 5427825.75 61112012 882668,70 882688.70 0.00 882668.70 882668.70 0/112012 421000.00 103224.DD 3.400 524224.00 4]520.00 4]520.00 42100000 510700.25 931300.26 121112012 882668.70 682668,70 0.00 882868.70 882668.70 21112013 4290D500 96057.00 3.400 525067.00 995000.00 47520.00 3.200 1042520,00 4949000.00 50$543.25 5462643.26 6/112013 86000,00 882668,70 6,500 967668,70 85000.00 88266a.70 96786810 0/112013 436000.00 08774.DD 3.400 524774.00 31,600 00 31,6000 43600000 402530.25 838630.25 121112013 87990825 879906.25 0.00 8]9906.25 879906.25 21112014 443000.00_ 11352.00 3.400 5243fi2.00 990000.00 _ 31 fi00,00 3.200 1021 00,00 4886000.00 396118.25 5063118.26 61112014 24000000 879906.25 6.500 1119906,20 240000.00 879906.25 1119906.25 0112014 451000.00 73831.00 3.400 524831.00 15760,00 15760,00 45100000 307047.25 758047.25 121112014 8]2.106.258]2105.25 0.00 872106.26 872106.25 L1/2016 45600`.00 66164.00 3.400 524164.00 98500000 15760.00 3.200 1000760.00 4338000.00 299380.25 4637180.25 fi112016 395000.00 872108.25 6.500 128]108.25 395000.00 872106.25 126]106.]6 8172015 468000.00 58370.00 3.400 624 37a.00 468000.00 21793425 683934.25 12112015 B59260.75 859268.7 5 0.00 85928875 05926076 21112016 474000.00 50466.00 3.400 524466.00 3449000.00 210012.25 3.659012.26 61112016 460000.00 85926875 6.500 1319260,]5__460000.00 859,26875 1.31 268,76 81112016 482.000.00 42 398.00 3.400 624 390.00 402 000.00 142,454,25 25 624 454.25 12110016 __ 844,318,76 _ _644,318.75 0.00 044 310.75 844 310]5 2112017 490000.00 34204.00 3400 _524,204.00 1,020,000.00 139260.25 195426025 fi112017 811208 1211201] 499,000,00 -.._ _. 25 74.00 3400 529874.00 625000.00 844318.75 ___ _ 02400fi 25 6.600 ___ 1469315.7 824006.25_ 625000.00 49900000 000 84431.8]511,469318]5 9933026 02400625 590,330.25 824846.25 21112010 507000.00 1]391.00 3,400_ 524391.00 _. _._._ __- 870000.00 824008.25 8,500 149400a 2@ 167000000 _ 5]000 0 51 0 2400625 _ 828716.76 52]15750 1,9]],84].25 1494006.25 669]15]5 0112018 8/72018 516,000.00 8772.00 3.400 524]]2.00 12/1/2018 _...._.__ __._ -_ 002 231.2fi 5 0.00 802 231 25 032,231.26 _. 390 000.00 993.76 434 943.75 W12019 035,000.00 802,231.25 6.500 6 835000.00 02 802231.25 163]231.25 3/1/2079 8/12019 0.00 36656.25 38850212/12019 7]5093]5 5 000 ]7509375 ]45093.]2112020 N775093,76 40500000 3885025 441 fi66.R6 6/1/2020 ___,_____ 900000.00 775093.75 6.500 5 900000.00 ]]5093.75 1,87609, 5]5 81112022 000 28050.00 28050.00 121112020 ]4 §,843.]5 ., 5___0,00,__74 @,843]5 ]45.84375 21112021 420000.00 28063.00 448,050.00 61112021 1100000.00 745843 .75 6.500 5. 1100000.00 745843]5 1845049.75 81112021 ._____ 0.00 191_5.00 19.12500 121112021 71009175 75 6.00 710093.76 710,003_75 21112022 - - 44000D.00 1912500 459126.00 6/112022 _. _.- 1180000.00 710093.]_58.500 __ 1890093.76 1,100,000.00_]10,093.]5 1,980093]5 8/112022 __._.. _.....__ 0.00 9.775.00 9,745.00 12/112022 fi71 743.75 841 ]43.]5 0.00 6)1 ]43.05 671 12 2/023 - - - 460,00000___ 0,775.00 716.7b 1390000.00_,_626,668.75 6.500 2061]43.]6 1390000,00 2061]48.75 212023 12112023 828560.]5 0.00 021668.75 026568.)5 626560.76 611/2024 _____ 1470000.00 62fi600.76 828580.)5 6 75 2, 209858625 12112024 5]0,950.25 676,956.25_1470000,00_626668.]5 27fi96625 000 67fi056.25 576957.25 8110025_ _,_1,]00,000.00 61fi601.25 6.750 29fi066.25 1]0000000 618601.26 22]6956.25 12112026 - 619501.25 619501,25 0.00 519507.25 51958120 6112026 ..,_ 1790000.00 519501.25 6.750 230950`.25 1]9000000 519,501.25 230956125 12112028 - -070,060-. _._. 459160.75 46916875 0.00 459160.76 459,18875 _ _. _. 2 0 459106.2 6,750 2.62916875 2,070,000.0 459106.75 2 529168.75 121209 12111202] 389308.25 __, _ ,-- 38930625 .0,,00.._,38_9,,300,_25 .,0 00 389.306.25 81112028 _.._ _. 2,1,9,6000.00 38930625 6,700 258430825 2195000.00 389306.25 25043`8.25 12!12028 315225.00 31512500_ 000 31522500 316226.00 8112029 2530000.00 315,225.00 6.750 2845225.00 2530,000.00 316220.00__ 2,845225.00 VAMP _. _. _- 229837.60 22983].50 0.00 229837.50 229,037.50 6112030 __. 2640000.00 22983].50 6.]50 2889,03],50,2640000.00 22983].50 286983L512/12030 14075]50 140737.53 _ 0.00 140,737.50 140]37.60 8112031 4,1 000000 140]37.50 6.750 4310737.50 41]0000.00 14073750 4310737.50 __.. __0.00 DoD 0.00 0.00 o.aor 0.00 0.00 Totals j 944130700 555500000 55280000 611 7800.001 28 445 000 001 28 602 668.40 5510]fifi8.40 67665000.00 35738039.15 103403039.15 6Ainal Amuunl 8180000.00 2fi 445000.00 .... Av res InR rest Fate 006 _._..._ _ 8.83 D -45 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK D -46 MONTICELLO CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS E-1 CAPITAL PROJECT FUND DESCRIPTION: Capital Project Funds account for the financial resources and appropriations of constructing and replacing the City's infrastructure including streets and City buildings or facilities, except those financed by Enterprise Funds. Capital Project Funds use the modified accrual basis of accounting however, the cash basis of accounting will be used for budgetary purposes only. The cash basis is used for budgeting to ensure that sufficient cash will be available to make all required payments. BUDGET ISSUES: Prior to 2006, the City would create a new capital project fund for each project being constructed. Now the City uses one fund to account for all projects and separates resources and expenditures using project numbers and account codes. The major issue with the City's capital project funds is finding adequate funding resources for the various projects with as small of impact on tax payers and property owners as possible. BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City currently has the following active projects; • 2007 & 2009 Street Reconstruction Projects • West School Boulevard Extension • 95`x' Street Northeast Extension • Chelsea Road/Fallon Avenue to County Road 18 Improvements • I94 Twin Bridge Reconstruction (State Project) • Monticello Marketplace Improvements • Dalton Avenue Extension The projects listed are street improvement projects and the Monticello Marketplace improvements project is to extend City infrastructure into a small new business park. 2010 projects include the reconstruction of West River Street and the various surrounding side streets leading into West River Street, School Boulevard improvements, restoration of storm water ponds, parking lot reconstruction, construction of storm water lift station, beginning of construction of Fallon Avenue overpass and some smaller miscellaneous projects. Funding sources for these projects include special assessments to benefitted properties and transfers from other City funds. At this time the City anticipates issuing debt to finance these projects. E -2 The current fund balance deficit will be eliminated from a transfer of funds from the City's Debt Service Funds in the future. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $9,076,213 ($1,805,364) ($595,390) ($1,804,654) ($1,804,654) ($1,934,024) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($10881578) $1209974 ($1209264) ($219,357) ($129,370) $1,313,100 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($1 805 364) ($595,390) ($1,804,654) ($2,024,011) ($1,934,024) ($620,924) The rest of this section is the first year (20 10) of the City's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which includes capital equipment purchases for the various funds, facility improvements for the City and infrastructure improvements. The City Council approved the CIP on December 14, 2009. The full five -year adopted CIP is available as a separate document or on the City's web site. E -3 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 836,977 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 191,166 91,806 0 0 0 840,000 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 351,431 (184,659) (44,554) 685,643 55,528 (18,683) 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 4,601,602 632,908 1,409,567 3,810,000 5,769 1,551,003 100.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 3,747,275 0 0 0 3,230,000 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $5,144,199 $5,124,307 $1,365,013 $4,495,643 $61,297 $5,602,320 100.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 6,529 3,807 9,511 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 12,393,896 3,907,249 205,880 1,101,000 59,802 1,643,000 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 103,435 3,277 1,493,453 3,614,000 130,832 2,326,500 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 3,521,917 0 865,433 0 33 319,720 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $16,025,777 $3,914,333 $2,574,277 $4,715,000 $190,667 $4,289,220 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $9,076,213 ($1,805,364) ($595,390) ($1,804,654) ($1,804,654) ($1,934,024) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($10881578) $1209974 ($1209264) ($219,357) ($129,370) $1,313,100 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($1 805 364) ($595,390) ($1,804,654) ($2,024,011) ($1,934,024) ($620,924) The rest of this section is the first year (20 10) of the City's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which includes capital equipment purchases for the various funds, facility improvements for the City and infrastructure improvements. The City Council approved the CIP on December 14, 2009. The full five -year adopted CIP is available as a separate document or on the City's web site. E -3 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Expenditures: Project Name 2010 Personal Computer Replacement 13,500 Server Component Upgrades 2,500 Portable Radios 12,500 Retrofit scba Packs 14,000 Duty Officer Vehicle 35,000 Building Inspection Vehicle 20,000 Public Works Garage Area Remodel 21,000 GIS Hardware & Software 2,370 Air Compressor 20,000 Truck Replacement 42,000 Utility Mule /Small Truck 15,000 Bertram Lakes Property Acquisition 475,000 Purchase a Skid Loader Trailer 8,000 Hillside Cemetery Grave Stone Restoration 5,000 Storm Water Pond Restoration 20,000 MCC Office Expansion 20,000 Energy Management Upgrades 10,000 Community Signs 30,000 School Blvd. Improvements 150,000 Walnut Street Crosswalk/Blvd. Impr. 10,000 Parking Lot Reconstruction 110,000 Signal Light Battery Backups 70,000 Street Reconstruction - Area 4A 1,809,500 Fallon Overpass Construction 500,000 Street Light Improvements 100,000 Storm Water Lift Station Const. 1,000,000 Storm Water Pond Lining 200,000 Trunk Sewer Improvements 150,000 SCAD System Installation 100,000 Water System Improvements 150,000 DMV Computer Purchase 4,000 DMV Credit Card Processing System 2,500 Sign Lab System 15,000 E -4 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Revenue Source Revenue Description 2010 General Fund Property Taxes 60,870 General Fund Reserves 0 Capital Equipment Revolving Fund 165,000 DMV Fund 6,500 Street Light Improvement Fund 100,000 Shade Tree Fund Property Taxes 0 Shade Tree Fund Reserves 0 Community Center Revenues 30,000 Economic Development Fund 0 Park & Pathway Dedication Fund 200,000 Consolidated Bond Fund 300,000 Sewer Fund User Fees 200,000 Sewer Fund Reserves 0 Water Fund User Fees 200,000 Water Fund Reserves 0 Liquor Fund Reserves 0 Storm Sewer Access Fund 1,200,000 Water Access Fund 0 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 0 Street Reconstruction Fund 0 2010 Improvement Bonds 2,079,500 2011 Improvement Bonds 500,000 2012 Improvement Bonds 0 Bond Funds - Special Assessments 0 Street State Aid 0 MN /DOT Participation 45,000 Unspecified Funding Source 50,000 Total Revenue Sources 5,136,870 E -5 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Personal Computer Replacement Priority Ranking: 29.85 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 4 years Responsible Dept.: Information Technology person on a Replace computers to maintain updated technology software and hardware resulting in staff efficiencies. res 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 13,500 16,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 73,300 Source Capital Revolving Fund 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 13,500 11,700 15,600 15,600 42,900 Total 13,500 16,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 73,300 verses any as a result of having up to technology. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund /MIS 13,500 16,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 Total 13,500 16,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 5 5.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 5 5.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 29.85 E -6 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Multi Server Component Upgrades Priority Ranking: 28.60 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 5 years Responsible Dept.: Information Technology servers with new, more efficient multi server 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 2,500 4,000 0 0 0 6,500 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total General Fund /Property Taxes 2,500 4,000 6,500 Total 2,500 4,000 0 0 0 6,500 to servers wim new ones. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund /MIS 2,500 4,000 0 0 0 Total 2,500 4,000 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Criteria Weighting Factor Priority Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 5 5.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 5 5.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 28.60 E -7 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Purchase of 800 MHz Radios Priority Ranking: 27.25 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Fire new technology, so that all radios are the same and all fire fighters and aency personnel can communicate with one another. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 12,500 0 0 0 0 12,500 Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 12,500 0 0 0 0 12,500 an radio. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund /Fire 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 Total 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 4 5.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 5 7.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 27.25 E -8 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Replace scba packs Priority Ranking: 26.70 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Fire their own mask. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total General Fund /Fire 14,000 14,000 Total 14,000 0 0 0 0 14,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 14,000 0 0 0 0 14,000 budget impacts. pmenT ana mere Tor wm nave very ume 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 5 6.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 3 4.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 26.70 E -9 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Duty Officer Vehicle Priority Ranking: 27.35 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 7 years Responsible Dept.: Fire se of a Fire Department duty officer vehicle to reduce response time to fire ncies and the ability to establish an incident command center at fire emergencies. it will provide the department with a vehicle to use for nonemergency responses or 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 35,000 0 0 0 0 35,000 Source General Fund Property Taxes 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total :sb,uuu Total 35,000 0 0 0 0 35,000 new ($200). Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund /Fire 900 920 940 960 980 Total 900 920 940 960 980 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 0 0.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 27.35 E -10 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Replace Building Inspection Vehicle Priority Ranking: 27.05 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 8 years Responsible Dept.: Building Inspections of old worn vehicles will reduce maintenance costs. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total General Fund /Bldg. Inspections 20,000 22,000 42,000 Total 20,000 0 22,000 0 0 42,000 Source Capital Revolving Fund 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 15,000 22,000 37,000 Total 20,000 0 22,000 0 0 42,000 vehicles are more fuel efficient, which should reduce fuel costs also. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total (2,000) (1,800) (2,800) (1,600) (1,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 27.05 E -11 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Public Works Garage Area Remodel Priority Ranking: 48.00 Project Type: Building Improvement Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Public Works Administration Kemodel existing garage /shop space at the Public Works Facility. Improve the operation and efficiency of the existing garage /shop area where vehicles and equipment is maintained by the public works department and to meet safety standards of the shop area. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 21,000 0 0 0 0 21,000 Source Capital Revolving Fund 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 21,000 21.000 Total 21,000 0 0 0 0 21,000 energy costs through more heating and cooling systems. Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total (1,500) (1,200) (1,200) (1,000) (1,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 5 6.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 4 6.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 5 6.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 1 1.10 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 48.00 E -12 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Purchase GIS Hardware & Software Priority Ranking: 37.25 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 5 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering tinue to purchase and implement a city -wide U16 system. Uls allows start ettic encie better communications with the public and other government agencies. Reduces the )ndency of consultants for maps and other property related needs. 2010 2011 2012 ?,370 2,500 3,000 2013 2014 Total 15,000 5,000 27,870 Total 2,370 2,500 3,000 15,000 5,000 27,870 Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 2,370 2,500 3,000 15,000 5,000 27,870 , more for tracking property related information. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 No future dollar impact. Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 1 1.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 3 4.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 37.25 E -13 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Air Compressor Replacement Priority Ranking: 22.85 Project Type: Equipment Replacement (Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys the streets and alley activities large air compressor. staff with good equipment to complete needed tasks without a lot of breakdowns. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total General Fund /Streets 20,000 20,000 Total 20,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 Fund Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total General Fund /Property Taxes 20,000 20,000 Total 20,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 down time due to equipment Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund /Streets (25) (25) (25) (25) (25) Total (25) (25) (25) (25) (25) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 125 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 22.85 E -14 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Truck Replacement Priority Ranking: 25.65 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 7 years Responsible Dept.: Parks :duce repair maintenance cost on City trucks and reduce staff down time due to uipment repairs. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total General Fund /Parks 42,000 67,000 109,000 Total 42,000 67,000 0 0 0 109,000 Funding Source Capital Revolving Fund 2010 2011 42,000 2012 2013 2014 Total 67,000 42,000 Total 42,000 67,000 0 0 0 109,000 IKecluce repair maintenance costs and start clown time clue to equipment repairs. The trucks budget for replacement in 2009 and 2010 are one -ton trucks and the truck budgeted for replacement in 2011 is a three quarter -ton truck. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund /Parks (250) (600) (500) (200) 0 Total (250) (600) (500) (200) 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Factor Priority Factor Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 1 1.10 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 25.65 E -15 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Utility Mule /Small Truck Replacement/Purchase Priority Ranking: 24.80 Project Type: Equipment Replacement/Purchase Useful Life: 7 years Responsible Dept.: Parks ace the City's current utility ATV (utility mule) and purchase a second utility ATV. ace repair maintenance cost and reduce staff down time due to equipment repairs provide a second utility mule to increase efficiencies. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total General Fund /Parks 15,000 15,000 30,000 Total 15,000 15,000 0 0 0 30,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Capital Revolving Fund 15,000 15,000 30,000 Total 15,000 15,000 0 0 0 30,000 .ace repair maintenance cost and reduce staff down time due to equipment provide a second utility mule to increase efficiencies. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund /Parks (150) (50) (50) 0 0 Total (150) (50) (50) 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 1 1.10 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 24.80 E -16 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Bertram Lakes Property Acquisition Priority Ranking: 29.95 Project Type: Park Improvement Useful Life: 100 years Responsible Dept.: Parks rurcnase the i2uu acre bertram unain of Lakes propertytrom the Y.m,U A. along with Wright County and possible the State of Minnesota. Development of a large regional park to help provide needed park space and attract new development within the area and preserve the natural area around the lakes. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 2,375,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Park & Pathway Dedication Fund 200,000 200,000 Consolidated Bond Fund 275,000 475,000 475,000 1,225,000 Unspecified Funding Source 475,000 475,000 950,000 Total 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 2,375,000 source would need to City reserves. The land purchase it self has no operating impact. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 No future dollar impact. Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 0 0.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 1 1.00 Cost of Project 1.00 1 1.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 5 6.25 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 29.95 E -17 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Purchase a Skid Loader Trailer Priority Ranking: 12.40 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Parks Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total General Fund /Parks 8,000 8,000 Total 8,000 0 0 0 0 8,000 Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 8,000 0 0 0 0 8,000 purchase of the trailer will provice for safer, more etticient to equipment and may reduce trailer maintenance cost slightly. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund /Parks (10) (10) 0 0 0 Total (10) (10) 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 0 0.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 12.40 E -18 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Hillside Cemetery Grave Stone Restoration Priority Ranking: 22.50 Project Type: Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Parks grave site head stones cemetery sites. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total General Fund /Parks 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 Total 5,000 5,000 5,000 0 0 15,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total General Fund /Property Taxes 5,000 5,000 5,000 15,000 Total 5,000 5,000 5,000 0 0 15,000 Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 No future dollar impact. Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 22.50 E -19 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Storm Water Pond Restoration /Maintenance Priority Ranking: 49.65 Project Type: Storm Water Improvement Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Public Works Administration Restore storm water pond areas by cleaning out soils and poor vegetation. Provide an adequate storm water drainage system by maintaining capacity and reducing sediment transported between ponds and the river. Comply with storm water pollution prevention program (SWPPP) reauirements. itures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Unspecified Funding Source 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 Total 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Total 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Priority Ranking Criteria Public Health & Safety Employee Health & Safety Regulatory Mandate Frequent Problems Ability to Finance Cost of Project Generates Revenue Generates Cost Savings Ongoing Operation Costs Age or Condition of Existing Public Benefit Public Demand Synergy with Other Projects Strategic Goal Comprehensive Plan Component Total Score Weighting Priority Factor Factor Score 1.50 4 6.00 1.25 1 1.25 1.50 5 7.50 1.25 5 6.25 1.00 3 3.00 1.00 3 3.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.00 3 3.00 1.00 4 4.00 1.10 4 4.40 1.25 3 3.75 1.10 3 3.30 1.05 3 3.15 1.05 1 1.05 E -20 2111 -V CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Office Expansion Priority Ranking: 30.15 Project Type: Building Improvement Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center :pans ana improve communny center orrice space. ie current office space for the Community Center is too small and requires some staff share offices and provides no privacy for staff or for meetings. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Community Center 20,000 20,000 Total 20,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 20,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 completed the new area Tne purcnase OT some orrice Turniture ana 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 5,000 500 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 30.15 E -21 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Energy Management Upgrades Priority Ranking: 31.05 Project Type: Building Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center N and update /improve energy using, including lighting, heating and gas usage the Community Center. Reduce energy costs of operating the Community Center. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total ),000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,000 Total 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Community Center Revenues 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,000 Total 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,000 energy costs Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Community Center (200) (500) (1,000) (3,000) (6,000) Total (200) (500) (1,000) (3,000) (6,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 5 6.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 5 5.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 31.05 E -22 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Community Signs Priority Ranking: 27.85 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Economic Development services and businesses are available. Promote and attract Is and businesses to the City of Monticello. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Capital Project Fund 30,000 30,000 30,000 90,000 Total 30,000 30,000 0 0 30,000 90,000 Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Source 30,000 30,000 Total 30,000 30,000 0 0 30,000 90,000 areas will require very low maintenance. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund 150 250 250 250 250 Total 150 250 250 250 250 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 1 1.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 27.85 E -23 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: School Boulevard Improvements Priority Ranking: 39.8 Project Type: Street Improvements Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys prove vemcie ana pedestrian trattic bows and satety on School bouievara tnrougr proved lighting and pathways along the roadway. Provide for safer and improved hicle and pedestrian flows along School Boulevard. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 150,000 200,000 0 0 0 350,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 2010 Improvement Bonds 150,000 150,000 2011 Improvement Bonds 200,000 200,000 Total 150,000 200,000 0 0 0 350,000 'ease in electrical cost for lighting improvements ani add cost for snow plowing and future maintenance. l'u' 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 100 500 1,000 1,000 1,000 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 3 4.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 1 1.00 Cost of Project 1.00 1 1.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 1 1.10 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 39.80 E -24 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Walnut Street Crosswalk & Boulevard Improvements Priority Ranking: 45.45 Project Type: Street Improvements Useful Life: 20 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys Kepiace worn bncK ana aspnait crosswaiKS ana dilapidated boulevard areas along Walnut Street. Improve pedestrian safety in the area. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 2010 Improvement Bonds 10,000 10,000 Total 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 Operating Budget Impact 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 General Fund /Streets & Alleys 100 250 250 250 250 Total 100 250 250 250 250 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 45.45 E -25 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Parking Lot Reconstruction Priority Ranking: 40.10 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys the City's downtown areas. itures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 110,000 0 0 0 0 110,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 2010 Improvement Bonds 110,000 110,000 Total 110,000 0 0 0 0 110,000 r time me parKing lots win neea some patcning, seal coating, restriping, but should be minimal compared to current maintenance levels. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund /Streets & Alleys 100 300 500 300 500 Total 100 300 500 300 500 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 1 1.00 Cost of Project 1.00 1 1.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 40.10 E -26 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Battery Backup Systems for Traffic Signals Priority Ranking: 48.05 Project Type: Street Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys busy traffic areas of the City. Improve and maintain traffic flows power outages occur in the area. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total ),000 20,000 90,000 Total 70,000 20,000 0 0 0 90,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Consolidated Bond Fund 25,000 20,000 45,000 MN /DOT Participation 45,000 45,000 Total 70,000 20,000 0 0 0 90,000 testing and regular maintenance. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 3 3.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergywith Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 48.05 E -27 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Street Reconstruction Program - Area 4A Priority Ranking: 43.55 Project Type: Street Reconstruction Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys to TH 25 Linn, Locust, Maple, Minnesota, Vine, and Walnut Streets. Improvements include; replacing curb, streets, storm sewer, water mains, sewer mains, replacing the Chestnut lift station, pathway lighting improvements on Front Str., and adding sidewalks and underground fiber optic lines. The project should reduce street maintenance costs and make it easier to remove snow and improve pedestriai res 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 1,809,500 87,250 0 0 0 1,896,750 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 2010 Improvement Bonds 1,809,500 87,250 1,896,750 Total 1,809,500 87,250 0 0 0 1,896,750 However these streets will need to be seal coated in the future to help maintain them as lonq as possible. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total (500) (200) (200) 100,000 (200) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 43.55 E -28 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Construction of Fallon Avenue Overpass Priority Ranking: 47.10 Project Type: Street Improvement Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys ct an overpass toriage/ over 194 connecting noun ana soutn t-anon Hvei better traffic flows from the north and south sided of 194, which will help and improve business opportunities on both sides of the freeway. res 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 500,000 4,000,000 1,500,000 0 0 6,000,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 2011 Improvement Bonds 500,000 4,000,000 1,500,000 6,000,000 Total 500,000 4,000,000 1,500,000 0 0 6,000,000 overpass wou Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund /Streets & Alleys 1,000 1,000 Total 0 0 0 1,000 1,000 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 1 1.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 5 5.25 Total Score 47.10 E -29 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Street Light Improvements Priority Ranking: 53.95 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys night time visibility and reduce electrical cost by installing more efficient street lights. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Street Light Improvement Fund 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 400,000 Total 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 400,000 Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Total 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 400,000 This improvement should reduce electric cost when old street lights are replaced with I more energy efficient street lights. When street lights are added to an area which currently does not have street light, the area will be more visible at night which could reduce traffic accidents or criminal activity in the area. Im 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total (150) (275) (400) (500) (600) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 4 4.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 53.95 E -30 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Storm Water Lift Station Construction (TH 25 pond) Priority Ranking: 49.60 Project Type: Storm Water Improvement Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Public Works Administration 1410 remove :r from holding ponds so they can flow through the City's storm water system into the Mississippi River. Reduce the risk of flooding. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Capital Project Fund 1,000,000 1,000,000 Total 1,000,000 0 0 0 0 1,000,000 Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 1,000,000 0 0 0 0 1,000,000 sewer stations. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund 1,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Total 1,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 4 6.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 3 3.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 49.60 E -31 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Storm Water Pond Lining Priority Ranking: 49.30 Project Type: Storm Water Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Public Works Administration Avenue and between 7th Street and 1 -94. Line ponds to address wellhead protection criteria and increase holding capacity in conjunction with the Mills Fleet Farm Development. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Capital Project Fund 200,000 200,000 Total 200,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Storm Water Access Fund 200,000 200,000 Total 200,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund (2,000) (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) Total (2,000) (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 4 6.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 3 3.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 49.30 E -32 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Trunk Sewer Improvements Priority Ranking: 46.65 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Public Works Sewer mprove existing sewer sewer system and reduce the chances of sewer back ups by replacing mains that are cracked, leaking, or have tree roots infiltrated into them with new mains. In 2011 it is anticipated that a new sewer trunk will be needed in the Featherstone addition. itures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 150,000 650,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,250,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Sewer Fund /User Fees 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 500,000 Total 150,000 650,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 clean water, which is being treated at the plant, because it has leaked into the sins through cracks. Could also reduce the risk of sewer back ups by providing ;an sewer mains. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Sewer Fund (500) (1,000) (1,200) (1,300) (1,500) Total (500) (1,000) (1,200) (1,300) (1,500) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 5 7.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 3 3.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 46.65 E -33 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Install SCAD System Priority Ranking: 55.40 Project Type: Water and Sewer Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Public Works Sewer /Public Works Water ill a bUAU system of monitoring all of the Glty's water and sewer tacilities including wells, p houses, and lift stations electronically. Improve response time to system problems which ce the chance of sewer backups or low water levels of the City's systems. Water Fund 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 50,000 Total 100,000 0 0 0 0 100,000 Funding Source Water Fund Revenues 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total -2= 50,000 Total 100,000 0 0 0 0 100,000 they become more problematic. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Sewer Fund Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 1 1.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 3 3.60 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 5 6.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 55.40 E -34 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Existing Water System Improvements Priority Ranking: 56.95 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Public Works Water existing water system and reduce the number of water main brakes and reduce water system problems which may affect the City's ability to provide clean water to residents and businesses. Expenditures 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Water Fund 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 Total 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 Fundina Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 possible water main breaks and other water problems which cc the City from providing clean water to residents and businesses. Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Water Fund (1,000) (3,000) (3,000) (5,000) (5,000) Total (1,000) (3,000) (3,000) (5,000) (5,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 5 6.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 56.95 E -35 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Purchase Two Computers for Motor Vehicle Operations Priority Ranking: 22.50 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 5 years Responsible Dept.: Department of Motor Vehicles new corn new at the City operated Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Provide functioning front counter windows to wait on customers at the DMV. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 4,000 0 0 0 0 4,000 Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total eL411111 Total 4,000 0 0 0 0 4,000 Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 No future dollar impact. Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 22.50 E -36 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Purchase Five Credit Card Processing Machines for DMV Priority Ranking: 21.50 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: DMV he State approves the use of credit cards at uNi V's, purchase five ci rcessors for the workstations at the DMV. More efficient processing licenses at the DMV to attract additional customers. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total 2,500 2,500 Total 2,500 0 0 0 0 2,500 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total DMV Fund 2,500 2,500 Total 2,500 0 0 0 0 2,500 acceptance of credit cards could increase business and bring reduce the number of NSF checks and their related fees. 2010 2011 revenues 2012 2013 2014 Total (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 0 0.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 5 6.25 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 21.50 E -37 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2010 Thru 2014 Project Name: Sign Lab System Priority Ranking: 30.05 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys :hase the equipment and software system to produce street signs and other signs and banners in- house. Reducing the cost of signs by producing them )use compared to outsourcing. 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Total 15,000 0 0 0 0 15,000 Funding Source 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Total Capital Revolving Fund 15,000 15,000 Total 15,000 0 0 0 0 15,000 cost of street Operating Budget Impact 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 General Fund (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) Total (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 2 3.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 1 1.25 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 5 6.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 5 5.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergywith Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 30.05 E -38 ENTERPRISE FUNDS F-1 ENTERPRISE FUND SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: Enterprise find are established to finance and account for the acquisition, operation, and maintenance of governmental facilities and services, which are entirely or predominantly self- supporting through retail sales or user charges. The City accounts for liquor (Hi- Way Liquors), water, sewer, cemetery, and fiber optic network (FiberNet Monticello) operations as enterprise funds. The accrual basis of accounting is used for enterprise funds. BUDGET ISSUES: See individual funds for the various budget issues facing each fund. BUDGET SUMMARY: TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS $36,613,137 $1 358,138 $37,971,274 ($528,716) $37,442,558 ($1,517.185) $35,925,373 ($1,703,218) $35,925,373 ($4,870,413) $31,054,960 ($1,289,662) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $37,971,274 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SALES OF GOODS 3,618,130 3,769,077 4,085,682 3,682,000 4,624,307 4,044,500 9.85% LICENSES & PERMITS 8,485 5,195 3,715 3,000 11,228 3,500 16.67% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 111,339 65,477 51,094 72,450 33,214 2,054,423 2735.64% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 124,731 140,299 245,518 125,000 31,754 125,000 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 399,343 635,009 772,828 265,275 253,886 192,444 - 27.45% USE COLLECTIONS 1,533,546 1,882,676 2,005,284 2,109,600 2,146,086 2,200,300 4.30% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 2,188,675 482,412 17,722 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 262 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $7,984,249 $6,980,407 $7,181,843 $6,257,325 $7,100,475 $8,620,167 37.76% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $717,897 $833,629 $787,316 $900,845 $899,119 $1,428,275 58.55% SUPPIES 2,794,994 2,903,213 3,164,733 3,060,275 3,860,864 3,883,640 26.90% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 2,802,883 2,739,264 3,566,289 3,039,223 3,670,389 3,798,714 24.99% CAPITAL OUTLAY 60,338 34,826 787,886 706,000 3,286,316 422,000 - 40.23% OPERATING TRANSFERS 250,000 998,191 392,804 254,200 254,200 377,200 48.39% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $6,626,111 $7,509,123 $8,699,028 $7,960,543 $11,970,888 $9,909,829 24A9% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $36,613,137 $1 358,138 $37,971,274 ($528,716) $37,442,558 ($1,517.185) $35,925,373 ($1,703,218) $35,925,373 ($4,870,413) $31,054,960 ($1,289,662) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $37,971,274 $37,442,558 $35,925,373 $34,222,156 $31,054,960 $29,765,298 F -2 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: /[�1I1�/ Y 1lL,YKIJ�DH WATER FUND Water Fund Water Superintendent 601 49440 The Water Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund for the City. The Water Department manages the water system so that a continuous, quality supply of water is furnished to customers at a reasonable cost. The water supply is maintained at proper pressure levels and bacteria free. Metering devices are also maintained to account for usage. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to GPS system. 2. Continue well head protection program. 3. Continue to change out and install radio reader devices on water meters. ISSUES: 1. Staff time demands on many projects. 2. Aging water controlling system. 3. Increased State and Federal regulations. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Water accounts read 15,304 15,000 15,000 16,000 16,000 Water meters replaced 109 97 250 300 400 New water meters installed 120 44 18 10 10 Water locates 2,814 1,991 1,652 1,000 1,000 Gallons of water pumped (MG) 665 701 710 715 715 Water valves maintained '/4 City /4 City Y4 City Y4 City Y4 City Water hydrants maintained Y4 City /4 City /4 City /4 City /4 City # of times water mains flushed 2 2 2 2 2 F -3 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue source for the Water Fund is the water use charges to customers. For 2010 these charge will increase 5% to cover increased operating costs and asset depreciation. Expenditure changes include the increasing of fund to replace old manual read water meters with new radio read meters. Capital outlay expenses include the purchase and installation of an electronic monitoring system of City wells, pump houses and other facilities. Other expense items remained at 2009 budget levels or past expenditure levels. BUDGET: WATER FUND $10,910,612 $1,534,747 $12,445,359 $86,207 $12,531,566 ($107,318) $12,424,248 ($191,992) $12,424,248 ($67,484) $12,356,764 ($317,899) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $12,445,359 2006 .2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 8,485 5,195 3,715 3,000 11,228 3,500 16.67% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 36,945 13,360 8,438 10,000 500 5,000 - 50.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 124,731 140,299 245,518 125,000 31,754 125,000 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 140,668 155,524 116,005 91,975 86,684 89,377 -2.82% USE COLLECTIONS 536,216 708,965 716,037 743,400 796,951 767,100 3.19% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 1,601,341 303,284 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $2,448,386 $1,326,627 $1,089,713 $973,375 $927,117 $989,977 1.71% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $183,737 $241,556 $240,259 $220,630 $239,349 $239,346 8.48% SUPPIES 111,535 121,903 117,808 130,775 143,718 174,750 33.63% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 596,273 609,961 617,779 663,962 605,060 687,780 3.59% CAPITAL OUTLAY 22,094 0 0 150,000 6,474 206,000 37.33% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 267,000 221,185 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $913,639 $1,240,420 $1.,197,031 $1,165,367 $994,601 $1,307,876 12.23% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $10,910,612 $1,534,747 $12,445,359 $86,207 $12,531,566 ($107,318) $12,424,248 ($191,992) $12,424,248 ($67,484) $12,356,764 ($317,899) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $12,445,359 $12,531,566 $12,424,248 $12,232,256 $12,356,764 $12,038,865 F -4 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: SEWER FUND Sewer Fund Water Superintendent 602 49480 & 49490 The Sewer Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund of the City. Expenditures are divided between the wastewater treatment plant (W WTP) and sanitary sewer system (lines, mains, and lift stations) activities. OBJECTIVES: See individual activity pages for sewer find objectives. ISSUES: See individual activity pages for sewer fund issues. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None Developed at this time F -5 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue source for the Sewer Fund is the sewer use charges to customers. For 2010 these charges are being increased 5% to cover increased operating costs and some of the asset depreciation. Capital outlay was increased for the purchase and installation of electronic monitoring equipment of the sewer facilities and the operating transfer is the Sewer Fund's share of the 2007A improvement bond payment for 2010. BUDGET: SEWER FUND $22,863,153 ($351,371) $22,511,782 ($896,046) $21,615,736 ($603,493) $21,012,243 ($916,803) $21,012,243 ($794,098) $20,218,145 ($940,495) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $22,511,782 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 45,129 23,287 17,981 8,000 12,789 12,000 50.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 151,276 128,473 137,792 111,750 98,424 91,425 - 18.19% USE COLLECTIONS 997,330 1,173,711 1,289,247 1,366,200 1,349,135 1,433,200 4.90% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 549,671 179,128 15,413 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 262 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $1.,743,406 $1,504,861 $1,460,433 $1,485,950 $1,460,348 $1,536,625 3.41% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $110,193 $153,598 $167,108 $217,578 $140,881 $243,385 12.13% SUPPIES 23,606 23,894 26,837 30,450 14,183 25,100 - 17.72% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,960,978 1,831,379 1,871,417 1,855,525 1,915,556 1,884,435 2.30% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 (8,264) (1,436) 195,000 79,626 213,000 9.23% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 400,300 0 104,200 104,200 111,200 6.72% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,094,777 $2,400,907 $2,063,926 $2,402,753 $2,254,446 $2,477,120 6.40% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $22,863,153 ($351,371) $22,511,782 ($896,046) $21,615,736 ($603,493) $21,012,243 ($916,803) $21,012,243 ($794,098) $20,218,145 ($940,495) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $22,511,782 $21,615,736 $21,012,243 $20,095,440 $20,218,145 $19,277,650 F -6 SEWER/WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WWTP) FUND DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Sewer/WWTP Fund Water Superintendent 602 49480 The Sewer Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund of the City. The Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) activity provides for the operation of the facility that collects and treats all sewage from the City's sanitary sewer system. The WWTP is owned and maintained by the City, while the operations are contracted out to a private company. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to GPS the City sanitary sewer system. 2. Continue researching alternative waste disposal and costing options. 3. Continue long -range planning of plant capacities and possible need for expansion. ISSUES: 1. Near capacity levels of waste. 2. Cost for new treatment alternatives. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Gallons of wastewater treated (MG) 414 419 420 425 425 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main expense item is the professional service contract for the operation of the WWTP which will increase to $750,300 for 2010. Depreciation of the plant is also included in this budget at $520,000. BUDGET: ENTERPRISE FUNDS SEWERFUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $214 $21 $419 $1,209 $2,863 $1,212 0.21% SUPPLIES 162 0 950 250 73 250 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,415,711 1,277,350 1,328,051 1,315,375 1,344,806 1,343,380 2.13% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 (8,264) (1,436) 0 69,346 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,416,087 $1,269,107 $1,327,984 $1,316,834 $1,417,088 $1,344,842 2.13% F -7 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: SEWER FUND Sewer Fund Water Superintendent 602 49490 The Sewer Fund is a self- sustaining fund, or enterprise fund of the City. The sewer activity provides for the operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer system, which consists of the sewer mains and lift stations that transport waste to the W WTP. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to GPS the City sanitary sewer system, 2. Monitor infiltration of ground water into the sanitary sewer system. ISSUES: 1. Ground water infiltration problems. 2. Aging system. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Miles of sewer mains cleaned 1/3 City 1/3 City 1/3 City 1/3 City 1/3 City Lift stations maintained 7 7 7 7 7 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Personnel service includes the allocation of 25% of the part -time accounting clerk to the Sewer Fund. Expenditures for capital outlay include the purchase and installation of electronic monitoring system of liftstations, and $150,000 for sewer main repair and/or expansion of the system. BUDGET: ENTERPRISE FUNDS SEWER FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 SEWER - ADMIN /GEN OPER ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $109,979 $153,577 $166,689 $216,369 $138,018 $242,174 11.93% SUPPLIES 23,444 23,894 25,887 30,200 14,110 24,850 - 17.72% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 545,267 554,029 543,366 540,150 570,750 541,055 017% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 195,000 10,280 213,000 9.23% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 400,300 0 104,200 104,200 111,200 6.72% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $678,690 $1,131,800 $735,942 $1,085,919 $837,358 $1,132,279 4.27% F -8 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: LIQUOR FUND Liquor Fund Liquor Store Manager 609 49750 & 49754 This enterprise activity provides customers with the opportunity to purchase alcohol, with profits going back into the community. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to improve product selection. 2. Continue alcohol training program for all liquor store employees. 3. Improve facility as necessary to make shopping the store as attractive as possible. 4. Continue to grow customer base and sales. ISSUES: 1. Increased "requests to buy" and safety issues regarding minors. 2. Competitive pricing. 3. Staff turnover. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 Operating revenue 951,307 1,003,066 1,062,478 Wine tasting tickets sold 428 440 440 Beer tasting tickets sold N/A N/A N/A F -9 2009 2010 1,040,510 1,050,000 386 440 200 200 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Hi -Way Liquors has continued to be a self- supporting enterprise for the City, with profits being used to help fund special projects and reduce property tax levies. Revenues are from the sale of alcoholic beverages and merchandise related to the liquor industry. Besides expenditures for goods to be sold budget items include personnel expenses, building maintenance and operation costs, bank charges for transactions and a transfer of $266,000 to the Library and Street Reconstruction Fund to reduce the property tax levy. BUDGET: LIQUOR FUND REVENUES 2006 2007 2008 ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL 2009 2009 2010 % BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE SALES OF GOODS $3,618,130 $3,769,077 $4,085,682 $3,682,000 $4,624,307 $4,044,500 9.85% LICENSES & PERMITS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS $101,977 $102,429 $85,709 $60,000 $65,237 $77,070 28.45% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $3,720,107 $3,871,506 $4,171,391 $3,742,000 $4,689,544 $4,121,570 10.14% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES SUPPIES OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES CAPITAL OUTLAY $417,634 $421,531 $374,611 $457,676 2,659,152 2,755,922 3,017,913 2,853,100 208,197 220,758 254,423 254,150 0 12,788 0 0 $402,430 $458,269 0.13% 3,526,159 3,137,800 9.98% 247,664 245,365 -3.46% 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 250,000 330,891 171,619 150,000 150,000 266,000 77.33% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,534,982 $3,741,890 $3,818,566 $3,714,926 $4,326,253 $4,107,434 10.57% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $2,163,006 $2,348,130 $2,477,746 $2,830,571 $2,830,571 $3,193,862 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $185,125 $129,616 $352,825 $27,074 $363,291 $14,136 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $2,348,130 $2,477,746 $2,830,571 $2,857,646 $3,193,862 $3,207,999 F -10 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: CEMETERY FUND Cemetery Fund Parks Superintendent 651 49010 The Cemetery Fund is an Enterprise Fund, sustaining itself with revenues mainly from excavation, monument staking, memorial programs, and perpetual care. The City maintains the cemetery, as well as assisting residents in areas regarding memorials and perpetual care. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue serving the public in a courteous, professional manner. 2. Maintain the cemetery grounds and grave markers. ISSUES: 1. Increasing maintenance costs. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None developed at this time F -11 BUDGET COMMENTARY: There are no substantial changes to either the revenue or expenditure budgets for 2010. BUDGET: RIVERSIDE CEMETERY FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 29,265 28,830 24,475 29,450 19,925 22,600 - 23.26% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 5,422 2,980 2,023 1,550 1,267 1,621 4.58% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 37,663 0 2,309 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $72,350 $31,810 $28,807 $31,000 $21,192 $24,221 - 21.87% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $6,245 $16,944 $5,338 $4,961 $4,044 $5,181 4.43% SUPPIES 700 1,199 92 950 52 950 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 26,435 23,169 23,838 26,586 21,870 30,039 12.99% CAPITAL OUTLAY 37,664 0 0 3,000 0 3,000 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $71,044 $41,312 $29,268 $35,497 $25,966 $39,170 10.35% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $664,697 $1,306 $666,003 ($9,502) $656,501 ($461) $656,040 ($4,497) $656,040 ($4,774) $651,266 ($14,949) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $666,003 $656,501 $656,040 $651,543 $651,266 $636,317 F -12 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: FIBER OPTICS FUND Fiber Optics Fund City Administrator 655 49871 The Fiber Optics Fund will be a self - sustaining fund for the City's FiberNet Monticello Business, which will bring state of the art, high speed internet, phone and cable television to the City. Residents and businesses who subscribe for service will be able to choose the services desired and for internet service the speed desired. OBJECTIVES: 1. Construct a fiber optic network through out the entire City, able to reach every home and business. 2. Offer a variety of internet speeds and cable television channels to customers. ISSUES: 1. Business start up costs and funding. 2. Various legal aspects of the City operating this type of operation. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006* 2007* 2008* 2009 2010 # Internet subscribers NA NA NA 503 1,000 # Phone subscribers NA NA NA 323 700 # Cable TV subscribers NA NA NA 415 950 * system is not available at this time. F -13 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2010 budget for the Fiber Optics Fund is based on the feasibility model, which was updated in late 2009. Revenues are from charges to subscribers and expenditures include both system operating costs and construction cost of the system. 2010 will be the first year of operation for all three (internet, cable TV, and phone) services, which results in the increased revenue source. Also expense will shift from constructing the system to operating the system. BUDGET: FIBER OPTICS FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 2010 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 200 25,000 0 2,014,823 100.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 245,603 431,299 0 2,274 (67,049) - 100.00% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $245,603 $431,499 $25,000 $2,274 $1,947,774 7691.10% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $112,415 $482,095 100.00% SUPPIES 0 295 2,083 45,000 176,752 545,040 1111.20% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 53,997 798,832 239,000 880,239 951,095 297.95% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 30,302 789,322 358,000 3,200,216 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $84,594 $1,590,237 $642,000 $4,369,622 $1,978,230 100.00% FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $0 $0 $161,009 $161,009 ($1,158,738) ($997,729) ($617,000) ($997,729) ($4,367,348) ($5,365,077) ($30,456) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $161 009 ($997,729) ($1,614,729) ($5,365,077) ($5,395,533) F -14 CITY OF MONTICELLO GENERAL INFORMATION The City of Monticello was organized as a municipality in 1856. The City of Monticello is located approximately 45 miles northwest of the Minneapolis -St. Paul metropolitan area along the 1 -94 corridor in Wright County. The City's estimated population is 11,136 and comprises an area of 5.37 square miles. The City operates under a statutory form of government. The Mayor and a City Council (the "City Council ") govern the City. The City Council is composed of four members, each elected for four -year terms. The Mayor presides over and is a voting member of the City Council, The Mayor is the chief authority for administering city government and appoints department heads, various board members and commission members. The City Council is the legislative body and meets regularly twice a month. The City Council's main responsibilities are to appropriate funds, fix salaries, adopt ordinances, and approve budgets. Firm I.S.D. No. 882 (Monticello) New River Medical Center Cargill Kitchen Solutions Xcel Energy Wal -Mart Supercenter City of Monticello Denny Hecker Monticello Ultra Machine Corporation Cub Foods Monticello Clinic Bondhus Corporation Taxpayer Xcel Energy Target Corporation Wal -Mart Real Estate Business Trust Ocello LLC Home Depot USA Inc. Muller Family Theatres Ryan Companies Jacob Holdings of Sandberg Road L &P Ventures LLC Jacob Holdings of Monticello LLC MAJOR EMPLOYERS Type of Business /Product Elementary and secondary education Hospital, nursing home & counseling center Egg processing plant Utility Discount retail store Municipal government and services Automobile dealership Machine job shop Retail grocery store Clinic Cutlery and hand -tool manufacturing MAJOR TAXPAYERS No. of Employees 875 550 465 450 365 151 150 135 123 98 75 2009 Taxable 2009 Net Type of Property Market Value Tax Capacity Utility $251,650,100 $5,025,557 Commercial 13,161,600 262,482 Commercial 12,869,100 253,830 Commercial 10,766,300 116,661 Commercial 8,263,000 164,510 Commercial 7,844,000 155,602 Commercial 7,843,800 133,904 Commercial 7,783,500 154,170 Commercial 7,639,100 143,022 Commercial 7,527,500 148,476 G -1 IN a +1 r @f IN I 3 /i7f� F HISTORICAL TAX RATES (ALL TAXING JURISDICTIONS) * Proposed rate HISTORICAL CITY PROPERTY TAX INFORMATION City of Wright I.S.D. #882 Hospital Value Year Monticello County (Monticello) District Total 2003 65.218% 36.863% 31.897% 3.479% 137.457% 2004 62.421% 35.633% 28.940% 3.039% 130.033% 2005 58.651% 34.414% 26.379% 2.667% 122111% 2006 51.028% 32.567% 24.372% 2.330% 110.297% 2007 42.458% 30.714% 23.146% 2.951% 99.269% 2008 46.942% 31.648% 25.254% 2.520% 106.364% 2009 46.191% 32.567% 26.083% 2.067% 106.908% 2010 * 45.724% 36.049% 25.820% 1.753% 109.346% * Proposed rate HISTORICAL CITY PROPERTY TAX INFORMATION SUMMARY OF TAX LEVIES, PAYMENT PROVISIONS, AND MINNESOTA REAL PROPERTY VALUATION The following is a summary of certain statutory provisions effective beginning 2005 relative to tax levy procedures, tax payment and credit procedures, and the mechanics of real property valuation. The summary does not purport to be inclusive of all such provisions or of the specific provisions discussed, and is qualified by reference to the complete text of applicable statutes, rules and regulations of the State of Minnesota. Chapter 21, Laws of Minnesota Special Session 2003 -1 was passed by the 2003 Minnesota Legislature and signed by the Governor on June 8, 2003. The enactment of this legislation caused changes for payable years 2003 and thereafter. These changes are incorporated in the following discussions. Property Valuations (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes) Assessor's Estimated Market Value Each parcel of real property subject to taxation must, by statute, be appraised at least once every five years as of January 2 of the year of appraisal. With certain exceptions, all property is valued at its market value, which is the value the assessor determines to be the price the property to be fairly worth, and which is referred to as the "Estimated Market Value." G- 3 Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Tax Year Value Rate Levy 2001 13,641,431 37.146 5,067,342 2002 9,606,212 67.645 6,498,079 2003 10,344,950 65.558 6,782,018 2004 11,141,052 62.452 6,957,915 2005 11,840,000 58.760 6,957,915 2006 13,224,144 51.040 6,750,000 2007 15,257,996 42.601 6,500,000 2008 16,190,597 46.942 7,600,000 2009 16,781,096 46.183 7,750,000 2010 16,726,905 45.724 7,648,272 SUMMARY OF TAX LEVIES, PAYMENT PROVISIONS, AND MINNESOTA REAL PROPERTY VALUATION The following is a summary of certain statutory provisions effective beginning 2005 relative to tax levy procedures, tax payment and credit procedures, and the mechanics of real property valuation. The summary does not purport to be inclusive of all such provisions or of the specific provisions discussed, and is qualified by reference to the complete text of applicable statutes, rules and regulations of the State of Minnesota. Chapter 21, Laws of Minnesota Special Session 2003 -1 was passed by the 2003 Minnesota Legislature and signed by the Governor on June 8, 2003. The enactment of this legislation caused changes for payable years 2003 and thereafter. These changes are incorporated in the following discussions. Property Valuations (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes) Assessor's Estimated Market Value Each parcel of real property subject to taxation must, by statute, be appraised at least once every five years as of January 2 of the year of appraisal. With certain exceptions, all property is valued at its market value, which is the value the assessor determines to be the price the property to be fairly worth, and which is referred to as the "Estimated Market Value." G- 3 Limitation of Market Value Increases Effective through assessment year 2001 for taxes payable in 2002, the amount of increase in market value for all property classified as agricultural homestead and non - homestead, residential homestead and non - homestead, or non - commercial seasonable recreational residential, which is entered by the assessor in the current assessment year, may not exceed the greater of (1) 10% of the preceding year's market value or (ii) 1/4 of the difference between the current assessment and the preceding assessment. Beginning with assessments in 2002 for taxes payable in 2003 the limitations on market value increases will be phased -out over a period of six years, however this was amended in 2005 to the following: Assessment Year/ Taxes Payable Year Phase -in equal to the greater of: 2002/2003 2003/2004 2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 2007/2008 2008/2009 Indicated Market Value 10% of previous value or 15% of the difference between the current and preceding assessments 12% of previous value or 20% of the difference between the current and preceding assessments 15% of previous value or 25% of the difference between the current and preceding assessments 15% of previous value or 25% of the difference between the current and preceding assessments 15% of previous value or 33% of the difference between the current and preceding assessments 15% of previous value or 50% of the difference between the current and preceding assessments 100% of assessor's estimated market value Because the Estimated Market Value as determined by an assessor may not represent the price of real property in the marketplace, the "Indicated Market Value" is generally regarded as more representative of full value. The Indicated Market Value is determined by dividing the Estimated Market Value of a given year by the same year's sales ratio determined by the State Department of Revenue. The sales ratio represents the overall relationship between the Estimated Market Value of property within the taxing unit and actual selling price. Net Tax Capacity The Net Tax Capacity is the value upon which net taxes are levied, extended and collected. The Net Tax Capacity is computed by applying the class rate percentages specific to each type of property classification against the Estimated Market Value. Class rate percentages vary depending on the type of property as shown on the 101 page of the Appendix. The formulas and class rates for converting Estimated Market Value to Net Tax Capacity represent a basic element of the State's property tax relief system and are subject to annual revisions by the State Legislature. Property taxes are determined by multiplying the Net Tax Capacity by the tax capacity rate, expressed as a percentage. G -4 Property Tax Payments and Delinquencies (Chapters 276, 279 -282 and 549, Minnesota Statutes) Ad valorem property taxes levied by local governments in Minnesota are extended and collected by the various counties within the State, Each taxing jurisdiction is required to certify the annual tax levy to the county auditor within five (5) working days after December 20 of the year proceeding the collection year. A listing of property taxes due is prepared by the county auditor and turned over to the county treasurer on or before the first business day in March. The county treasurer is responsible for collecting all property taxes within the county. Real estate and personal property tax statements are mailed out by March 31. One -half (1/2) of the taxes on real property is due on or before May 15. The remainder is due on or before October 15. Real property taxes not paid by their due date are assessed a penalty which, depending on the type of property, increases from 2% to 4% on the day after the due date. In the case of the first installment of real property taxes due May 15, the penalty increases to 4% or 8% on June 1. Thereafter, an additional 1% penalty shall accrue each month through October 1 of the collection year for unpaid real property taxes. In the case of the second installment of real property taxes due October 15, the penalty increases to 6% or 8% on November 1 and increases again to 8% or 12% on December 1. Personal property taxes remaining unpaid on May 16 are deemed to be delinquent and a penalty of 8% attaches to the unpaid tax. However, personal property owned by a tax - exempt entity, but which is treated as taxable by virtue of a lease agreement, is subject to the same delinquent property tax penalties as real property. On the first business day of January of the year following collection all delinquencies are subject to an additional 2% penalty, and those delinquencies outstanding as of February 15 are filed for a tax lien judgment with the district court. By March 20 the clerk of court files a publication of legal action and a mailing notice of action to delinquent parties. Those property interests not responding to this notice have judgment entered for the amount of the delinquency and associated penalties. The amount of the judgment is subject to a variable interest determined annually by the Department of Revenue, and equal to the adjusted prime rate charged by banks, but in no event is the rate less than 10% or more than 14 %. Property owners subject to a tax lien judgment generally have five years (5) in the case of all property located outside of cities or in the case of residential homestead, agricultural homestead and seasonal residential recreational property located within cities or three (3) years with respect to other types of property to redeem the property. After expiration of the redemption period, unredeemed properties are declared tax forfeit with title held in trust by the State of Minnesota for the respective taxing districts. The county auditor, or equivalent thereof, then sells those properties not claimed for a public purpose at auction. The net proceeds of the sale are first dedicated to the satisfaction of outstanding special assessments on the parcel, with any remaining balance in most cases being divided on the following basis: county - 40 %; Township or city - 20 %; and school district - 40 %. Property Tax Credits (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes) In addition to adjusting the taxable value for various property types, primary elements of Minnesota's property tax relief system are: property tax levy reduction aids; the circuit breaker credit, which relates property taxes to income and provides relief on a sliding income scale; and targeted tax relief, which is aimed primarily at easing the effect of significant tax increases. The circuit breaker credit and targeted credits are reimbursed to the taxpayer upon application by the taxpayer. Property tax levy reduction aid includes educational aids, local governmental aid, equalization aid, market value homestead credit and disparity reduction aid. G- 5 Beginning in 2009 a new State Aid program will begin to equalize the loss of tax revenue on utility property due to a State reduction in the class rate on utility property. The Utility Valuation Transition Aid will be in affect for taxes payable in 2009 and 2010. The aid is based on current utility property value less any improvements to the property which add taxable value. Levy Limitations for Counties and Cities (M.S. 275.70 to 275.74) The 2008 State Governor and Legislature re- imposed levy limits for the budget years 2009, 2010 and 2011. Tax increases are limited to 3.9% or the increase in the implicit price deflator — whichever is less. The tax levy can also be increased by 1/2 the increase in growth. As the residential construction industry recovers, this levy limit constraint could be an ominous factor for financing future operating costs. Certain property tax levies are authorized outside of the new overall levy limitation ( "special levies "), Special levies do not include levies for bonded indebtedness on installment payments on conditional sales contracts, state -aid road bonds, contracts for deed, tax increment revenue bonds, and lease payments under certificates of participation. In order to receive approval for any special levy claims outside of the overall levy limitation, requests for such special levies must be submitted to the Property Tax Division of the Department of Revenue on or before September 15th in the year in which the levy is to be made for collection in the following year. The Department of Revenue has the authority to approve, reduce or deny a special levy request. Home -rule charter cities are authorized to exceed any levy limits and referendum requirements contained in their city charters and increase their property tax levies if such increases are necessary to offset the 2004 LGA reductions. Final adjustment to all levies must be made to the Department of Revenue on or before December 10th. Debt Limitations All Minnesota municipalities (county, cities, townships and school districts) are subject to statutory "net debt" limitations under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.53. Net debt is defined as the amount remaining after deducting from gross debt the amount of current revenues which are applicable within the current fiscal year to the payment of any debt and the aggregation of the principal of the following: 1. Obligations issued for improvements which are payable wholly or partially from the proceeds of special assessments levied upon benefited property. 2. Warrants or orders having no definite or fixed maturity. 3. Obligations payable wholly from the income from revenue producing conveniences. 4. Obligations issued to create or maintain a permanent improvement revolving fund. 5. Obligations issued for the acquisition and betterment of public waterworks systems and public lighting, heating or power systems, and any combination thereof, or for any other public convenience from which revenue is or may be derived. 6. Certain debt service loans and capital loans made to school districts. 7. Certain obligations to repay loans. 8. Obligations specifically excluded under the provision of law authorizing their issuance. 9. Certain obligations to pay pension fund liabilities. 10. Debt service funds for the payment of principal and interest on obligations other than those described above. M. Levies for General Obligation Debt (Sections 476.61 and 476.74, Minnesota Statutes) Any municipality which issues general obligation debt must, at the time of issuance, certify levies to the county auditor of the county(ies) within which the municipality is situated. Such levies shall be in an amount that if collected in full will, together with estimates of other revenues pledged for payment of the obligations, produce at least five percent in excess of the amount needed to pay principal and interest when due. Notwithstanding any other limitations upon the ability of a taxing unit to levy taxes, its ability to levy taxes for a deficiency in prior levies for payment of general obligation indebtedness is without limitation as to rate or amount. Metropolitan Revenue Distribution (Chapter 473F, Minnesota Statutes) "Fiscal Disparities Law" The City of Monticello is outside the seven - county Metropolitan Area and is not subject to Fiscal Disparities. The Charles R. Weaver Metropolitan Revenue Distribution Act, more commonly know as "Fiscal Disparities" was first implemented for taxes payable in 1975. Forty percent of the increase in commercial - industrial (including public utility and railroad) net tax capacity valuation since 1971 in each assessment district in the Minneapolis /St. Paul seven - county metropolitan area (Anoka, Carver, Dakota, excluding the City of Northfield, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, excluding the City of New Prague, and Washington Counties) is contributed to an area -wide tax base. A distribution index, based on the factors of population and real property market value per capita, is employed in determining what proportion of the net tax capacity value in the area -wide tax base shall be distributed back to each assessment district. STATUTORY FORMULAE CONVERSION OF ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE (EMV) TO NET TAX CAPACITY FOR MAJOR PROPERTY CLASSIFICATIONS General Net Tax Capacity Net Tax Capacity Net Tax Capacity Classification Levy Year 1999 Levy Year 2000 & 2001 Levv Year 2002 — 2010 Residential Homestead First $75,000 of EMV First $76,000 of EMV First $500,000 of EMV at 1 %. EMV in excess at 1 %, EMV in excess at 1%. Over $500,000 of $75,000 at 1.7 %. of $76,000 at 1.65 %. at 1.25 %. Residential Non - Homestead 2.5% of EMV. 2.4% of EMV. 1.8% of EMV. Agricultural Land Homestead First $115,000 of EMV First $115,000 of EMV First $600,000 of EMV on first 320 acres at on first 320 acres at at .55 %, Over $600,000 .35 %. EMV in excess .35 %. EMV in excess at 1 %. of $115,000 on first of $115,000 on first 320 320 acres at .8 %. acres at .8 %. EMV in EMV in excess of excess of $115,000 $115,000 over 320 over 320 acres at acres at 1.25 %. .80 %. Agricultural Land Non - Homestead 1.25% of EMV. 1.20% of EMV. 1.00% of EMV. Commercial/ Industrial /Utility First $150,000 of First $150,000 of First $150,000 of EMV at 2.45 %. EMV at 2.40 %. EMV at 1.5 %. EMV in excess EMV in excess EMV in excess of $150,000 of $150,000 of $150,000 at 3.5 %. at 3.4 %. at 2.0 %. G-7 CITY OF MONTICELLO Number of City Employees (Full -Time Equivalent) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Position Title Actual Actual Actual Actual Proposed City Administrator 1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Deputy City Clerk 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 HR Manager 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Finance Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Senior Accountant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Finance Assistant/AP 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Finance Clerk 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Payroll Clerk 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Utility Billing Specialist 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Program & Proj. Coord. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Community Dev. Dir. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Economic Dev. Dir. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Building Official 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Building Inspector 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 Bldg. Permit Tech. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Receptionist 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assist. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 City Engineer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Engineering Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Engineering Tech, 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Public Works Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Street Superintendent 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Str. Maint. Operator 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Park Superintendent 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Park Maint Operator 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Utility Superintendent 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Utility Operator 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Shop Mechanic 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Public Works Maint. 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 PW Office Specialist 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Admin, Assist, PW 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 PW Part -Time Summer 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 PW Seasonal Help 8.5 8.5 8.5 6.5 6.5 DMV Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Full -Time DMV Clerk 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 Part -Time DMV Clerk 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Liquor Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Assist. Liquor Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Liquor Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 FT Liquor Store Clerk 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 PT Liquor Store Clerk 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MCC Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 MCC Event Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Program Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Aquatic Director 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Bldg. Mntc. Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lead Custodial /Mtnc. 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Bldg. Custodian 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Fiber Office Manager 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 CITY OF MONTICELLO Number of City Employees (Full -Time Equivalent) (Continued) In addition to the positions listed the City's fire service is provided by the City's volunteer fire department which currently has 30 members, including officers. The Community Center (MCC) employs 65 to 75 pat -time employees for its swimming pool operations, service counter, recreation programs and other operations. Finally the increase in full -time equivalents in 2009 and 2010 is due to the City starting its fiber optic network for providing internet, phone, and cable TV service to City residents and businesses. G- 9 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Position Title Actual Actual Actual Actual Proposed Fiber Customer Service 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 Sales Manager 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Service Technicians 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 6.0 Total City Employees 69.6 69.6 69.6 75.1 81.1 In addition to the positions listed the City's fire service is provided by the City's volunteer fire department which currently has 30 members, including officers. The Community Center (MCC) employs 65 to 75 pat -time employees for its swimming pool operations, service counter, recreation programs and other operations. Finally the increase in full -time equivalents in 2009 and 2010 is due to the City starting its fiber optic network for providing internet, phone, and cable TV service to City residents and businesses. G- 9 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK G -10 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ACCOUNT: A term used to identify an individual asset, liability, expenditure control, revenue control, or fund balance. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: Amounts owed to others for goods or services received. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE: Amounts due from others for goods furnished or services rendered. ACCOUNTING SYSTEM: The total set of records and procedures which are used to record, classify and report information on financial status and operations of an entity. ACCRUAL BASIS OF ACCOUNTING: The method of accounting under which revenues are recorded when they are earned and expenditures are recorded when goods and services are received. ACTIVITY: A specific and distinguishable line of work performed by one or more organizational components of a governmental unit for the purpose of accomplishing a function for which the governmental unit is responsible. For example "Ice & Snow Removal" is an activity performed in the discharge of the "Public Works" function. ADOPTION: The formal action taken by the City Council to authorize or approve the budget. AD VALOREM: In proportion to value. A basis for levying taxes upon property. AGENCY FUND: A fund consisting of resources received and held by the governmental unit as an agent for others or other funds of the governmental unit. APPROPRIATION: An authorization granted by a legislative body to make expenditures and to incur obligations for specific purposes. An appropriation is limited in amount to the time it may be expended. ASSESSED VALUATION: Value placed upon real estate or other property as a basis for levying taxes. ASSESSMENTS: Charges made to parties for actual services or benefits received. ASSETS: Property owned by a governmental unit, which has a monetary value. AUDIT: The examination of documents, records, reports, systems of internal control, accounting and financial procedures, and other evidence for one or more of the following purposes: (a) To ascertain whether the statements prepared from the accounts present fairly the financial position and the results of financial operations of the constituent funds and balanced account groups of the governmental unit in accordance with generally accepted accounting principals applicable to governmental units and on a basis consistent with that of the preceding year. (b) To determine the propriety, legality and mathematical accuracy of a governmental unit's financial transactions. (c) To ascertain whether all financial transactions have been properly recorded. (d) To ascertain the stewardship of public officials who handle and are responsible for the financial resources of a governmental unit. BALANCED BUDGET: A budget in which estimated revenues equal estimated expenditures. H — I BOND: A written promise, generally under seal, to pay a specified sum of money, called the face value or principal amount, at a fixed time in the future, called the date of maturity, and carrying interest at a fixed rate, usually payable periodically. BONDED INDEBTEDNESS: Outstanding debt by issues of bonds, which are repaid by ad valorem or other revenue. BUDGET: A plan of financial operation embodying an estimate of proposed expenditures for a given period and the proposed means of financing them. BUDGET DOCUMENT: The official written statement prepared by the Finance Department and Finance Director of the City which presents the proposed budget to the City Council. BUDGET BODY MESSAGE: A general discussion of the proposed budget presented in writing as a part of the budget document. The budget message explains principal budget issues against the background of financial experience in recent years and presents recommendations made by the City Staff. BUDGET CALENDAR: The schedule of key dates, which a government follows in the preparation and adoption of the budget. BUDGETARY CONTROL: The control or management of a governmental unit or enterprise in accordance with an approved budget for the purpose of keeping expenditures within the limitation of available appropriations and available revenues. CAPITAL ASSETS: Assets with a value of $5,000 or more. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET: A plan of proposed capital expenditures and a means of financing them. The capital budget is enacted as part of the complete annual budget. CAPITAL PROGRAM: A plan for capital expenditures to be incurred each year over a fixed period of years to meet capital needs arising from the long -term work program or otherwise. It sets forth each project or other contemplated expenditure in which the government is to have a part and specifies the full resources estimated to be available to finance the projected expenditures. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS: To account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities. CASH BASIS: The method of accounting under which revenues are recorded when received in cash and expenditures are recorded when paid. CERTIFIED LEVY: Total tax levy of a jurisdiction, which is certified to the County Auditor, CHARGES FOR SERVICES: Charges for current services rendered. CHART OF ACCOUNTS: The classification system used by a government entity to organize the accounting for various funds. CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (CPI): A statistical description of price levels provided by the U.S. Department of Labor. The index is used as a measure of the increase in the cost of living (i.e.. economic inflation). 1-1-2 CONTINGENCY: Budget for expenditures which cannot be placed in departmental budgets, primarily due to uncertainty about the level or timing of expenditures when the budget is adopted. The contingency also serves as a hedge against shortfalls in revenues or unexpected expenditures. CURRENT: A term which, applied to budgeting and accounting, designates the operations of the present fiscal period as opposed to past or future periods. DEBT: An obligation resulting from the borrowing of money or from the purchase of goods and services. DEBT LIMIT: The maximum amount of gross or net debt, which is legally permitted. DEBT MARGIN: The amount of available debt, which may be issued by a governmental unit before reaching its debt limit. DEBT SERVICE FUNDS: To account for the accumulation of resources for payment of general long -term debt. DEPARTMENT: Basic organizational unit of government, responsible for carrying out related functions. DEPRECIATION: Expiration in the service life of capital assets attributable to wear and tear, deterioration, action of the physical elements, inadequacy or obsolescence. DEPUTY REGISTRAR (DMV): City service of issuing State issued licenses for motor vehicles and equipment, such as license plates and tabs for cars, trucks, trailers, and recreational vehicles. DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARDS PROGRAM: A voluntary awards program administered by the Government Finance Officers Association to encourage governments to prepare effective budget documents. EFFECTIVE BUYING INCOME (EBI): A statistical measure of buying power of an area or group of individuals. ENTERPRISE FUNDS: To account for operations that are financed and operated in a manner similar to a private business enterprises, where the intent of the governing body is that the cost of providing services are to be recovered primarily on a user - charge basis to the general public. ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE: Represents the selling price of a property if it were on the market. Estimated market value is converted to tax capacity before property taxes are levied. EXPENDITURE: Where accounts are kept on the accrual or modified accrual basis of accounting, the cost of goods received or services rendered whether cash payment have been made or not. Where accounts are kept on a cash basis, expenditures are recognized only when the cash payments for the above purposes are made. FiberNet Monticello: The name of the City's fiber optic network, which provides internet, phone, and cable television to residents and businesses of Monticello as a City run enterprise. FINES: Revenues from penalties imposed for violation of laws or regulations H -3 FISCAL POLICY: A government's policies with respect to revenues, spending, and debt management as these relate to government services, programs and capital investment. Fiscal Policy provides an agreed -upon set of principles for the planning and programming of budgets and their funding. FISCAL YEAR: The budget and accounting year that begins on the first day of January and ends on the last day of December of each year. FIXED ASSETS: Assets of a long -term character which are intended to continue to be held or used, such as land, buildings, machinery, furniture, and other equipment. FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE): The number of employee hours (2,080) needed to be equal to one full time employee. Several part time employees may be combined to make one full time equivalent. FUNCTION: A group of related activities aimed at accomplishing a major service or regulatory program for which the government unit is responsible. FUND: An independent fiscal and accounting entity with a self - balancing set of accounts recording cash and /or other resources together with all related liabilities, obligations, reserves, and equities which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining certain objectives. FUND BALANCE: The difference between fund's assets and fund liabilities (the equity) in governmental funds. GENERAL FUND: Accounts for the general operation of the City and all financial resources except those to be accounted for in another fund. GENERAL GOVERNMENT: Expenditures, which represents a set of accounts, to which are charged the expenditures for operating the City. GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS: When a government pledges its full faith and credit to the repayment of the bonds it issues, than those bonds are general obligation (GO) bonds. GOAL: A statement of broad direction, purpose or intent based on the need of a community. A goal is general and timeless; that is, it is not concerned with a specific achievement in a given period. GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING: The composite of analyzing, recording, summarizing, reporting, and interpreting the financial transactions of governmental units and agencies. GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES: Funds used to account for the acquisition, use and balances of expendable financial resources and the related current liabilities - except those accounted for in proprietary funds and fiduciary funds. In essence, these funds are accounting segregation of financial resources. Under current GAAP, there are four governmental fund types: general, special revenue, debt service and capital projects. GRANT: A contribution of assets by one governmental unit or other organization to another. Grants are usually made for specified purposes. HOMESTEAD AND AGRICULTURAL CREDIT (HACA): A form of state paid property tax relief for farm property and owner occupied homes. IMPROVEMENT BONDS: Bonds payable from the proceeds of special assessments from properties benefiting from an improvement. H -4 IMPROVEMENTS: Buildings, other structures, and other attachments or annexations to land which are intended to remain so attached or annexed, such as sidewalks, trees, drains, and sewers. INFLOW/INFILTRATION (Ill): The term used to describe clean water entering into the sanitary sewer system. INTERFUND TRANSFERS: Amounts transferred from one fund to another. INFRASTRUCTURE: Assets which are immovable and of value only to the governmental unit (i.e. roads, gutters, sewer lines). INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES: Revenues from other governments in the form of grants, entitlement, or shared revenues. INVESTMENTS: Securities held for the production of income in the form of interest. LEVY: (Verb) To impose taxes, special assessments, or service charges for the support of governmental activities. (Noun) The total amount of taxes, special assessments, or service charges imposed by a governmental unit. LICENSES: Revenues received from the sale of business and non - business licenses. LIMITED MARKET VALUE: The amount the market value of a property can increase from one year to the next for calculating property taxes. The limited market value system is currently being phase -out by the State of Minnesota. LINE ITEM: A specific item or group of similar items defined by detail in a unique account in the financial records. LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID (LGA): Intergovernmental revenue from the state to municipalities to help fund general expenditures. LONG -TERM DEBT: Debt with a maturity of more than one year after the date of issuance. MAINTENANCE: The upkeep of physical properties in condition for use or occupancy. MARKET VALUE HOMESTEAD CREDIT (MVHC): State paid property tax reduction on owner occupied homes based on the properties market value. MISCELLANEOUS: Revenues or expenditures not classified in any other revenue or expenditure category. MODIFIED ACCRUAL BASIS: The basis of accounting under which expenditures other than accrued interest on general long -term debt are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are recorded when received in cash except for material and /or available revenues, which should be accrued to reflect properly the tax levied and revenue earned. OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE: Expenditure classifications based upon the types or categories of goods and services purchased. OBJECTIVE: Desired output oriented accomplishments, which can be measured and achieved within a given time frame. H -5 OPERATING BUDGET: A plan of financial operation embodying an estimate of proposed expenditures for the calendar year and the proposed means of financing them. OPERATING EXPENSE: The cost for personnel, material and equipment required for a department to function. OPERATING REVENUE: Funds that the government receives as income to pay for ongoing operations. Operating revenues are used to pay for day -to -day services. OPERATING TRANSFERS: Amounts transferred from one fund to another, shown as expenditure in the originating fund and revenue in the receiving fund. ORDINANCE: A formal legislative enactment by the City Council. PAY -AS- YOU -GO BASIS: A term used to describe a financial policy by which capital outlays are financed from current revenues rather than through borrowing. PERFORMANCE MEASURE: See Service Levels. PERSONAL SERVICES: Expenditures for salaries, wages, and fringe benefits of employees. PROGRAM: A group of related activities performed by one or more organizational units for the purpose of accomplishing a function for which the governmental unit is responsible. PROJECT: A plan of work, job assignment, or task. PROPRIETARY ACCOUNTS: Those accounts which show actual financial position and operation, such as actual assets, liabilities, reserves, fund balances, revenues, and expenditures, as distinguished from budgetary accounts. PUBLIC SAFETY: To account for expenditures related to the protection of persons and property. PUBLIC WORKS: To account for expenditures for the maintenance of City property and infrastructure. PURPOSE: A broad statement of the goals, in terms of meeting public service needs, that a department is organized to meet. REFUNDING BONDS: Bonds issued to retire bonds already outstanding REIMBURSEMENT: Cash or other assets received as a repayment of the cost of work or services performed or of other expenditures made for or on behalf of another governmental unit or department or for an individual, firm, or corporation. RESERVE: An account which records a portion of the fund balance which must be segregated for some future use and which is, therefore, not available for further appropriation or expenditure. RESOLUTION: A special or temporary order of a legislative body; an order of a legislative body requiring less legal formality than an ordinance or statute. H -6 RESOURCES: The actual assets of a governmental unit, such as cash, plus contingent assets such as estimated revenues applying to the current fiscal year not accrued or collected, and bonds authorized and not issued. REVENUE: The term designates an increase to a fund's assets which: 1) does not increase a liability; 2) does not represent a repayment of an expenditure already made; 3) does not represent a cancellation of certain liabilities; and 4) does not represent an increase in contributed capital. REVENUE BOND: A bond that is backed by a particular revenue source such as water user fees. SERVICE LEVELS: Data to determine how effective or efficient a program is in achieving its objective SPECIAL ASSESSMENT: A compulsory levy made by a local government against certain properties to defray part or all of the cost of a specific improvement or service which is presumed to be of general benefit to the public and of special benefit to such properties. SPECIAL REVENUE FUND: To account for revenue derived from specific revenue sources that are legally restricted for specific purposes. SY: Abbreviation for square yard, which is how sealcoating and street overlay projects are measured TAX CAPACITY: An amount determined by a percentage of a property's market value, which is than applied to the tax rates of taxing jurisdictions affecting the property to determine the amount of property taxes owed. TAX CAPACITY RATE: Tax rate applied to tax capacity to generate property tax revenue. The rate is obtained by dividing the property tax levy by the available tax capacity. TAX CLASSIFICATION RATE: Rate at which estimated market values are converted into the property tax base. The classification rates are assigned to properties depending on their type (residential, commercial, farm, etc.) and, in some cases there are two tiers of classification rates, with the rate increasing as the estimated market values increases. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF): Financing tool originally intended to combat severe blight in areas, which would not be redeveloped "but for" the availability of government subsidies derived from locally generated property tax revenues. TAX LEVY: The total amount to be raised by general property taxes for the purpose stated in the resolution certified to the county auditor. TAX RATE: The amount applied to tax capacity to determine the taxes generated by the property. TAXES: Compulsory charges levied by a governmental unit for the purpose of financing services performed for the common benefit. TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS: Funds used to account for assets held by a government in a trust capacity or as an agent for individuals, private organizations, other governments and /or other funds. TRUST FUND: A fund consisting of resources received and held by the governmental unit as trustee, to be expended or invested in accordance with the conditions of the trust. H -7 UNBALANCED BUDGET: A budget which undesignated fund balance or reserves are used or increased, in order to balance estimated revenues to estimated expenditures or expenses. UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE: The portion of a fund's balance that is not restricted for a specific purpose and is available for general appropriation. USER FEES: The payment of a charge for direct receipt of a public service by the party benefiting from the service. UTILTY VALUATION TRANSITION AID (UVTA): A State financial aid program for 2009 and 2010 paid to local governments to offset the reduced property tax revenue generated by utility properties due to the State reducing the tax rate paid on utility property. WORKLOAD DATA: A unit of work to be done. ACRONYMS CAFR Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CD Certificate of Deposit CIP Capital Improvement Plan CID Commercial Paper CPI Consumer Price Index DMV Department of Motor Vehicle or Deputy Registrar HACA Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid EBI Effective Buying Income EDA Economic Development Authority EMV Estimated Market Value FHLB Federal Home Loan Bank FNMA Federal National Mortgage Association FTE Full Time Equivalent GAAP Generally Accepted Accounting Principals GASB Governmental Accounting Standards Board GFOA Government Finance Officer's Association GO General Obligation 1/1 Inflow /Infiltration LGA Local Government Aid MCC Monticello Community Center MCES Metropolitan Council Environmental Services MVHC Market Value Homestead Credit SAC Sewer Availability Charge SY Square Yard TIF Tax Increment Financing UVTA Utility Valuation Transition Aid WAC Water Availability Charge II -8