The URL can be used to link to this page

2011 Budget2011 BUDGET CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA 505 WALNUT STREET, SUITE 1 MONTICELLO, MN 55362 PHONE: (763) 295 -2711 FAX: (763) 295 -4404 WEB SITE: www.ci.monticello.mn.us CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 2011 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................... ............................... A 2011 City Officials ...................... ............................... A -1 How to Read the Budget ............... ............................... A -2 Mayor's Letter ........................... ............................... A -3 Transmittal Letter ....................... ............................... A -5 Distinguished Budget Presentation Award ........................ A -15 Organizational Chart ................... ............................... A -16 Fund Structure and Budget Basis ..... ............................... A -17 Fund Organizational Chart ............ ............................... A -19 Budget Calendar ........................ ............................... A -20 Budget Process ........................... ............................... A -20 Other Planning Processes .............. ............................... A -21 Financial Management Policies ....... ............................... A -22 Budget Assumptions, Trends and Sources .......................... A -31 Schedule of Budgeted Operating Transfers ......................... A -38 Combined Budgetary Fund Summary . ............................... A -39 Projected Fund Balance Summary ..... ............................... A -41 GENERAL FUND ............................... ............................... B General Fund Summary ................. ............................... B -2 General Fund Revenues ................. ............................... B -5 Mayor and City Council ................ ............................... B -8 City Administration ...................... ............................... B -10 Elections.................................. ............................... B -12 Financial Administration ................ ............................... B -13 Audit....................................... ............................... B -15 City Assessing ............................ ............................... B -16 Legal....................................... ............................... B -17 Human Resources ........................ ............................... B -18 Planning, Zoning, and Community Development .................. B -20 Information Systems Administration .. ............................... B -22 CityHall ................................... ............................... B -24 Prairie Center Building ................. ............................... B -25 Law Enforcement ........................ ............................... B -26 Fire Department .......................... ............................... B -27 FireRelief ................................. ............................... B -29 Building Inspections ..................... ............................... B -30 Civil Defense ............................. ............................... B -32 Animal Control ........................... ............................... B -33 National Guard ........................... ............................... B -34 11 CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 2011 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED Public Works — Administration ........ ............................... B -35 Public Works — Engineering ............ ............................... B -37 Public Works — Inspections .............. ............................... B -39 Public Works — Streets and Alleys ...... ............................... B -41 Public Works — Ice and Snow ........... ............................... B -43 Public Works — Shop and Garage ....... ............................... B -45 Public Works — Storm Water ............. ............................... B -46 Public Works — Parking Lots ............ ............................... B -47 Public Works — Street Lighting .......... ............................... B -48 Public Works — Refuse Collection ...... ............................... B -49 Community Celebrations ................. ............................... B -50 Senior Center .............................. ............................... B -51 Community Education .................... ............................... B -52 Y. M. C. A .................................... ............................... B -53 Transit....................................... ............................... B -54 IceArena ................................... ............................... B -55 Public Works — Parks Administration .. ............................... B -56 Public Works — Parks Improvements ... ............ .... .. ............. B -58 Public Works — Parks Ball Fields ...... ............................... B -59 Economic Development .................. ............................... B -60 Unallocated................................ ............................... B -62 Unallocated Insurance .................... ............................... B -63 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS ............................... ............................... C Special Revenue Fund Summary ....... ............................... C -2 LibraryFund ........................ ............................... . ..... C -4 Street Reconstruction Fund ............. ............................... C -6 Economic Development Fund .......... ............................... C -8 Deputy Registrar Fund .................. ............................... C -10 Minnesota Investment Fund ............ ............................... C -12 Economic Recovery Grant Fund ....... ............................... C -14 Shade Tree Fund ......................... ............................... C -16 Community Center Fund ................ ............................... C -18 Park and Pathway Dedication Fund ... ............................... C -22 Orderly Annexation Area Fund ........ ............................... C -24 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund ........ ............................... C -26 Street Lighting Improvement Fund .... ............................... C -28 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund ........... ............................... C -30 Storm Sewer Access Fund .............. ............................... C -32 Water Access Fund ....................... ............................... C -34 iii CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 2011 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED DEBT SERVICE FUNDS ....................... ............................... D Debt Service Fund Summary ............. ............................... D -2 Legal Debt Limit ........................... ............................... D -3 Debt Schedule .............................. ............................... D -3 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond Fund ..... ............................... D -4 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .... ............................... D -6 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -8 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -10 2007A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -12 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond Fund ................. D -14 Consolidated Bond Fund ................... ............................... D -16 Waste Water Treatment Plant Note Fund .............................. D -18 1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond Fund ................... D -20 1999 G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .... ............................... D -22 2000A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -24 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bond Fund ..................... D -26 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -28 1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond Fund ... ............................... D -30 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond Fund ... ............................... D -32 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond Fund ...................... D -34 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond Fund .......................... D -36 2010A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -38 Schedule of Outstanding Bonds ........... ............................... D -40 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS ................... ............................... E Capital Project Fund ........................ ............................... E -2 Capital Improvement Plan .................. ............................... E -4 ENTERPRISE FUNDS ............................ ............................... F Enterprise Fund Summary ................. ............................... F -2 WaterFund ................................... ............................... F -3 SewerFund ................................... ............................... F -5 LiquorFund .................................. ............................... F -10 Cemetery Fund .............................. ............................... F -12 Fiber Optics Fund ........................... ............................... F -14 iv CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 2011 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED APPENDIX............................................................... ............................... G General Information ...................... ............................... G -1 Monticello City Map ..................... ............................... G -2 Historical Property Tax Information ... ............................... G -3 Summary of Tax Levies, Payment Provisions, And Minnesota Real Property Valuation .................... G -3 Conversion Formula for EMV to Net Tax Capacity ................ G -7 City Personnel Count ..................... ............................... G -8 GLOSSARY.............................................................. ............................... H Glossary of Terms ......................... ............................... H -1 List of Acronyms .......................... ............................... H -8 v THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK vi 2011 CITY OFFICIALS City Council Clint Herbst Mayor Tom Perrault Glen Posusta Council Member Council Member Brian Stumpf Lloyd Hilgart Council Member Council Member City Department Heads Jeff O'Neill — City Administrator Cathy Shuman — Deputy City Clerk Tracy Ergen — Human Resource Manager Angela Schumann — Community Development Director Megan Barnett — Economic Development Director Bruce Westby — City Engineer Ron Hackenrnueller — Chief Building Official Tom Kelly — Finance Director Steve Joerg — Fire Chief Ann Johnson - Deputy Registrar Manager Kitty Baltos — Community Center Director Randall Johnsen — Liquor Store Manager Bob Pascbke — Public Works Director Tom Moores — Street Superintendent Tom Pawelk — Parks Superintendent Matt Theisen — Water & Sewer Superintendent Don Patten — FiberNet Monticello General Manager FEW HOW TO READ THE BUDGET The budget document serves two distinct purposes. One purpose is to present the city council, staff members, residents and other interested readers, concise and readable information about the City of Monticello. The other purpose is the management of the City with a financial and operating plan that conforms to the City's accounting system. The budget balances City revenues with community priorities and requirements. The annual budget serves as a communication device, a policy document, a resource allocation tool, an accountability tool, and a management tool. The budget grants spending authority to City Staff, as well as providing the spending plan for the City of Monticello. The budget message provides an overview of the key policy issues and programs in the budget, and presents major areas of emphasis. The schedules and summaries provide the heart of the document as an operating and financial plan. Each fund section contains revenue and expenditure summaries, overview of major revenue and expenditures information, department descriptions, service level objectives and issues and workload data. The appendix includes other important financial and City information, such as, community profile, City statistics, description of property tax system, general information, and a glossary of terms. A -2 City Council Members, Citizens and Staff; It is my privilege to present the 2011 budget for the City of Monticello. This budget, as adopted by the City Council, identifies how the City resources will be spent in 2011. This budget is the City's financial management plan and has been designed to be responsive to public service demands and carrying out service over the coming year. It is the City's intent to submit and manage the budget in the most open and straightforward manner possible, which will allow consistent and careful management of all resources. The City of Monticello continually faces many challenges which draw upon the resources and value judgments of all of us. This budget recognizes the effects that the slumping housing market and State economy has on resources, yet the 2011 budget maintains services and addresses current and future infrastructure needs. From 2005 through 2007 the City's tax levy was reduced or maintained at the previous year's levy, with reserves or revenues from new development used to balance the budget. Beginning in 2008, and continuing with the 2011 budget the City has reduced the dependency on reserves to fund City operations, while balancing the effects of an increased property tax levy. The biggest issue facing the City of Monticello's revenue sources is the decline in market values of property in the City. The County Assessor estimates the average homes market value declined 11% between 2010 and 2011, while commercial values declined 8 %. This has caused the City's tax capacity to decline to $16,434,254 and the City's tax rate to increase to 46.715 %. Thus property owners would be paying more in 2011 in order to generate the same amount of tax dollars as it did in 2010. In addition the City's 2011 revenue budget continues to reflect decreased revenues from new building permits and new developments because of the current housing market. The City was issuing around 530 new home permits in 2004, but has only issued 2 in 2010. Due to the housing market this number is not expected to increase much in 2011 and as such the revenue budget for building activities is reduced. Within the enterprise funds the 2011 budget includes revenues and expenditures for a full year of operating the City's fiber optic system (FiberNet Monticello, FNM). The City began construction of the fiber optic system in 2008 and 2009 and in mid -2010 the system began to provide telephone, internet, and cable television services. 2011 will be the first full year of operation of the system and should bring the completion of construction of the system in all areas of the City. As in the past, no property taxes will be used to fund the operations of FNM. A -3 The City's department of motor vehicle (DMV) expanded its service hours to include Saturday hours in 2008 and in 2009 begin limited driver license service. This has the DMV in very good position to be able to offer full driver license services beginning in 2011. Finally, in order maintain property taxes at current levels and not place extra burdens onto property owners during these tough economic times, the 2011 budget does maintain funds and service levels at 2010 levels with few exceptions. The City will not operate the warming house at West Bridge Park for ice skating in 2011. Also to maintain costs the City will offer three options for health care benefits for employees which will limit the City's premium increase to around 6% for 2011. Lastly, the City is freezing cost of living and step increases for all employees for 2011. These budget reductions will allow the City to limit the property tax increase to approximately $29,000 and not use reserves for 2011, which will limit the impact on the tax payers as much as possible. It is my hope the 2011 budget will meet the expectations and needs of Monticello residents. My sincere thanks are extended to the City Council and staff for their time and effort in preparation of this document. Sincerely Clint Herbst Mayor City of Monticello FEW INTRODUCTION This budget document should be viewed as more than just a collection of financial data. In addition to the financial data contained herein, it includes information on the City of Monticello's organization, descriptions of programs and services, and a variety of statistics related to activity workload measures. Furthermore, the budget is a reflection of the City's plans, policies, procedures, and objectives regarding the services to be provided in the coming fiscal year and future. BUDGET POLICY AND STRATEGY The budget document has been prepared after analyzing and evaluating requests from the various departments, and represents the requested financial support for the operation of the City of Monticello for the upcoming fiscal year. Revenue estimates are conservative. The importance of a sound revenue picture cannot be overstated. Revenues must be estimated realistically. Revenue estimates are based on historical and current trends and projected conservatively. The City of Monticello provides a range of services to the community, including police and fire protection, street and park maintenance, snow and ice removal, water and sewer utility services, and administrative and planning services. In addition the City owns and operates a Community Center (MCC), Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) center, Municipal Off -Sale Liquor operation, and a fiber optic network (FiberNet Monticello). The level of service provided by the proposed budget is similar to that currently enjoyed by the community. MAJOR INITIATIVES The City of Monticello provides a full range of municipal services, as listed in the previous paragraph and as authorized by State Statute. Monticello has been blessed with many assets, including beautiful setting, an excellent location, a rich heritage, and a talented population. The City seeks to use, preserve and enhance these assets in building a great place to live, work, shop, and play. The City will fulfill the goals below to achieve this mission: 1. Continue to maintain the lowest possible tax rate while providing the highest possible City services. 2. Continue to develop and provide an unequaled system of parks, trails and recreational facilities, including the unique assets of the Monticello Community Center, the Mississippi River and conversion of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property into a regional park. 3. Continue to maintain the City streets by following an annual seal coat and crack seal program and overlaying streets before they are beyond repair and need replacing. 4. Develop and adopt a long -range transportation plan which will improve traffic flow around and through the City. 5. Develop a downtown redevelopment plan which will maintain a downtown area that combines a successful commercial district, community identity and heritage and connection with the Mississippi River. A -5 6. Seek to expand the supply of "move up" housing that allows people to upgrade their home without leaving the community. 7. Seek to develop and attract a wide range of employment opportunities with a growing emphasis on jobs at higher wage levels. 8. Continue to maintain high quality water and waster water treatment facilities. 9. Provide unequaled access to data through high speed internet, phone and television through its fiber optic network. City Council and Staff used these goals to direct the development of the City's 2011 budget. TOTAL BUDGET The City of Monticello's 2011 budget includes all fund types and funds of the City. Each fund is responsible to account for a particular activity or activities. Each fund type will be discussed within this letter and in the budget document. The following 2011 budget was established for the City: Funds General Special Revenue Debt Service Capital Project Enterprise Total Revenue 2010 2011 $ 6,329,450 $ 6,393,620 6,110,647 6,421,694 6,064,497 6,322,683 5,602,320 4,752,002 8,620,167 12,138,168 $32,727,081 $36,028,167 PROPERTY TAXES Expenditures 2010 $ 6,329,450 7,521,338 6,845,275 4,289,220 9,909,829 $34,895,112 2011 $ 6,393,620 9,042,560 6,904,275 4,739,500 15,880,783 $42,960,738 The State of Minnesota has granted local municipalities the authority to levy taxes to fund operations and debt payments. For the City of Monticello, the property tax levy accounts for approximately 83% of the General Fund revenues and 19% of the Special Revenue Funds revenues. The Debt Service Funds, in 2011, will levy $1,144,437 in property taxes for debt service payments, and will no longer be using reserves to pay the City's debt payments. For 2011, the City's property tax levy will be increased to $7,677,309, an increase of 0.38% from 2010. In the past, the City has used reserves to fund operations and debt payment instead of increasing property taxes. Beginning in 2008 the City increased property taxes and started to reduce the amount of reserves needed to balance the City's budget. The 2011 budget does not use reserves to fund operation or debt service expenditures. The table on the following page provides a historical view of the City's property tax levies: A -6 The Wright County Assessor values all property in the City. It is this market value that is applied to the class rates assigned by the State to determine a property's tax capacity. The County estimates the City's tax capacity for taxes payable in 2011 at $16,434,254, which is a 01.5% decrease. The City's property tax levy is divided by the tax capacity to determine the City's tax rate, which is applied to each property's tax capacity to determine that property's City property tax amount before any credits are applied. For 2011, the City's tax rate is expected to increase from 45.822% up to 46.715 %. The City at this time does not have the authority to levy or collect local sales taxes or other types of taxes under the State's tax system. A summary of the State's property tax system is in the appendix of this document. PERSONNEL SERVICES The City's 2011 budget does not include a cost -of- living increase for City staff or step increases for 2011 for those employees who are still moving up the City's pay scale system. In the past employees were eligible for a one step increase based on satisfactory performance. The City's public works employees are union employees. The City's union contract won't expire until March 31, 2011. The City's health insurance premiums increased approximately 6% for 2011 but the City changed its plan to offer employees the choice from three health plans. The city is offering its current plan with the employees contributing more towards the premium, a plan with a slightly higher deductible and copay with the employee contributing approximately 20% of the premium, which is what the employee contributed towards health insurance in the past, or a high deductible plan with an HSA option with the employee contributing nothing towards the premium. By offering this option the City avoided a 15% health insurance premium increase. The City's dental insurance policy increase approximately 10 %. The City pays approximately 80% of the dental premiums for family coverage. Staff will continue working with the City's insurance agent to find ways to reduce future premium increase to both the City and employees. A -7 Year Tax Levy Change 2002 $6,498,079 - 2003 6,782,018 4% 2004 6,957,915 3% 2005 6,957,915 0% 2006 6,750,000 (3 %) 2007 6,500,000 (4 %) 2008 7,600,000 17% 2009 7,750,000 2% 2010 7,648,272 (1 %) 2011 7,667,309 0% The Wright County Assessor values all property in the City. It is this market value that is applied to the class rates assigned by the State to determine a property's tax capacity. The County estimates the City's tax capacity for taxes payable in 2011 at $16,434,254, which is a 01.5% decrease. The City's property tax levy is divided by the tax capacity to determine the City's tax rate, which is applied to each property's tax capacity to determine that property's City property tax amount before any credits are applied. For 2011, the City's tax rate is expected to increase from 45.822% up to 46.715 %. The City at this time does not have the authority to levy or collect local sales taxes or other types of taxes under the State's tax system. A summary of the State's property tax system is in the appendix of this document. PERSONNEL SERVICES The City's 2011 budget does not include a cost -of- living increase for City staff or step increases for 2011 for those employees who are still moving up the City's pay scale system. In the past employees were eligible for a one step increase based on satisfactory performance. The City's public works employees are union employees. The City's union contract won't expire until March 31, 2011. The City's health insurance premiums increased approximately 6% for 2011 but the City changed its plan to offer employees the choice from three health plans. The city is offering its current plan with the employees contributing more towards the premium, a plan with a slightly higher deductible and copay with the employee contributing approximately 20% of the premium, which is what the employee contributed towards health insurance in the past, or a high deductible plan with an HSA option with the employee contributing nothing towards the premium. By offering this option the City avoided a 15% health insurance premium increase. The City's dental insurance policy increase approximately 10 %. The City pays approximately 80% of the dental premiums for family coverage. Staff will continue working with the City's insurance agent to find ways to reduce future premium increase to both the City and employees. A -7 For 2011, there are no new position budgeted however as the City's fiber optic network (FNC) continues add customers in 2011 there could be a need to add positions to maintain customer service and/or technical support. Finally, in 2005 the State Legislature passed a pension bill, which phased in increases for both the employee and employer contributions to the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA). For 2011 the employee contribution rate will increase to 6.25% of wages, while the employer contribution rate will increase from 7.00% to 7.25 %. The remainder of this letter will describe the major initiatives for 2011 for each of the fund types and their activities. GENERAL FUND Expenditures The 2011 budget increased 1.03% from the 2010 budget. The City has decreased its General Fund operating budget approximately 13.70% from 2008. The General Fund expenditure budget consists of the following departments: 2010 2009 % Budget General Government $1,441,245 Public Safety 1,977,996 Public Works 2,524,092 Culture & Recreation 989,790 Economic Development 74,714 Miscellaneous 149,765 Total General Fund $7,157,601 2010 2011 % Budget Budget Change $1,372,973 $1,403,829 2.3% 1,697,794 1,710,383 0.7% 2,275,156 2,299,770 1.1% 744,590 732,500 (1.6 %) 73,344 153,075 108.7% 165,593 94,063 41.8% $6,329,450 $6,393,620 1.0% The Public Works Department is the largest department in terms of budgeted expenditures and the street and alleys activity budget is the largest activity within the department. The budget for the street and alleys activity was decreased 1.6% as a smaller seal coat project is budget in 2011 than in 2010 and all equipment purchases now being funded from the Capital Revolving Fund. Also a same portion of salaries is now budgeted in the storm water maintenance activity. Other changes to activities within the Public Works Department include a decrease in the engineering activity to reflect the need for consultant engineering less than previous years due to less new development and performing more tasks in- house. The public works administrative budget decreased because more of the staff time is being allocated to the Water and Sewer Operating Funds instead of in this activity to reflect a more accurate picture of where their time is spent. Beginning in 2011 the City will budget and account for funds spent on maintaining the City's storm water drainage system. For 2011 the City is budgeting for the cleaning of one drainage pond and its restoration in the amount of $39,129. The street light activity's budget was increased to reflect past expenditures. Finally, the refuse collection activity budget is increased 5.9% to reflect the City's contract with its waste hauler and the transfer of the hauler being responsible for garbage and recycling carts instead of the City staff. The second largest department based on expenditures is the Public Safety Department. Activities budgeted in the Public Safety Department include law enforcement, fire, building inspections, civil defense, national guard, and animal control. The City of Monticello contracts with the Wright County Sheriff's department for law enforcement. The 2011 contract includes an increase in the hourly rate and maintaining service levels at current levels. The fire activity budget pays for the operations of the City's paid volunteer fire department. The biggest change is the addition of $7,245 for maintenance agreements for the department's 800MH radios, which were purchased in 2009. The reduction in the building inspection's budget is due to moving equipment purchases to the Capital Revolving Fund in 2011. All other activities in the Public Safety Department have minor adjustments based on current and past expenditures. Changes to the General Government Department include the continued adjusting of the human resource activity to reflect actual past expenditures and having a better understanding of budgetary needs of the human resource activity. In late 2008 the City hired its first part -time human resource manager, which was changed to full -time in late 2009. The activity not only account for the personnel services of this position, but account for the cost of activities associated with human resource managements, such as safety training or other City -wide programs related to personnel. The other big change is the decrease to the election activity since there are no elections planned in 2011, and national, state, and local elections took place in 2010 this activities budget went from $14,531 in 2010 to $1,230 in 2011. The increase in the administration activity is due to more time being allocated to this activity for the special projects /deputy clerk position in 2011 and membership dues increasing to reflect past expenditures. The increase to the planning & zoning budget is due to administrative assistant position, which will allow staff to do work which was previously contacted out. The audit activity reflect the City's new three -year contract with its audit firm and some of the cost being allocated to FNM in 2011 as the audit will spend more time on this activity. Finally, in late 2009 the City acquired the Prairie Center Office building and is leasing office space to FNM for its business office. The 2011 budget includes the maintenance and operations cost of this building for the first time. The budget increase in the Economic Development Department is the result of the City budgeting $80,000 to complete the downtown study, which will layout the future design and improvements needed for downtown Monticello to flourish. A -9 The budgets for the Culture and Recreation and Miscellaneous Departments were adjusted based on past expenditure history, planned activities and equipment and facility improvement needs in 2011. The decrease in the Parks & Recreation Activity is from a decrease in park improvements and equipment purchases. Revenues The revenues to support these expenditures are classified as follows: The budget for Licenses & Permits reflect an increase which is from using $75,000 of the City's electric franchise fees to help fund street light electric costs in 2011. Without this change the licenses & permits would have a $400 decrease to reflect the slow new residential housing construction based on the current housing market and economic condition of the State and Country. The City also expects this slow down to affect commercial /industrial construction also. Thus, the City expects 2011 building permit revenues to be lower than recent history as they were in 2010. The decrease in Inter - Governmental Revenues is due to the State's budget problems and the fact the Stated has already cut the $277,629 Market Value Homestead Credit Aid the City that the City received prior to 2010. The City built this decrease into the 2010 and 2011 revenue budgets. The City has also built into the 2011 budget that the City will no longer receive the Utility Valuation Transition Aid. This aid was to help cities with utility plant transition from past property tax valuations to the state's new valuation. This new system reduced the property taxes paid by utility facilities however the Monticello nuclear power plant has completed sufficient improvements which will generate property taxes equal or greater than the taxes generated prior to the devaluation. The Transfer from Other Funds in the past was from the City's Capital Revolving Fund where money for the purchase of the new equipment had been previously budgeted and reserved for these purchases. In 2011 these purchases will be made directly from the Capital Revolving Fund, so no transfers are budgeted in 2011. A -10 2009 2010 2011 % Budget Budget Budget Change Property Taxes $5,272,379 $5,297,065 $5,362,622 1.2% Licenses & Permits 891,900 296,650 371,250 25.2% Inter- Governmental 498,056 114,801 64,740 (43.6°/x) Charges for Services 383,950 306,023 330,096 7.9% Fines & Forfeits 750 300 200 0.0% Special Assessments 00 00 00 0.0% Miscellaneous Revenue 291,452 269,611 264,712 (1.8 %) Transfer from Other Funds 119,114 45,000 00 100.0% Total $7,157,601 $6,329,450 $6,393,620 1.0% The budget for Licenses & Permits reflect an increase which is from using $75,000 of the City's electric franchise fees to help fund street light electric costs in 2011. Without this change the licenses & permits would have a $400 decrease to reflect the slow new residential housing construction based on the current housing market and economic condition of the State and Country. The City also expects this slow down to affect commercial /industrial construction also. Thus, the City expects 2011 building permit revenues to be lower than recent history as they were in 2010. The decrease in Inter - Governmental Revenues is due to the State's budget problems and the fact the Stated has already cut the $277,629 Market Value Homestead Credit Aid the City that the City received prior to 2010. The City built this decrease into the 2010 and 2011 revenue budgets. The City has also built into the 2011 budget that the City will no longer receive the Utility Valuation Transition Aid. This aid was to help cities with utility plant transition from past property tax valuations to the state's new valuation. This new system reduced the property taxes paid by utility facilities however the Monticello nuclear power plant has completed sufficient improvements which will generate property taxes equal or greater than the taxes generated prior to the devaluation. The Transfer from Other Funds in the past was from the City's Capital Revolving Fund where money for the purchase of the new equipment had been previously budgeted and reserved for these purchases. In 2011 these purchases will be made directly from the Capital Revolving Fund, so no transfers are budgeted in 2011. A -10 The Property Tax Levy now generates 83% of the revenues in the General Fund and was based on the operating needs of the City after all other revenues have been subtracted from expenditures. In 2010 the property tax levy accounted for 84% of General Fund revenues. The City does not have the ability to use other taxing methods, such as local sales taxes or income taxes as a revenue source. Therefore, the City will continue to be dependant on its property tax revenue as its major revenue source into the future. For this reason, City Council must use its judgment as to the proper level of service and which services to provide when determining the proper level of property taxes to levy. SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS The City of Monticello's currently operates Special Revenue Funds for its Library, Street Reconstruction, EDA, Shade Tree, Parks and Pathway Dedication, Street Light Improvement, Community Center, Deputy Registrar, and Sewer, Water and Storm Water Access activities. In the past other Special Revenue Funds included the Minnesota Investment Fund, Environment Clean-Up Fund, Economic Recovery Grant Fund, CMIF Fund, Orderly Annexation Fund and Capital Outlay Revolving Fund. Some of these funds are still active or could become active in the future, but have had or will have very minor to no activity in 2011. Like the General Fund, the Special Revenue Fund budgets are set at a level to maintain services while, budgeting revenues coming in conservatively, including property taxes for those funds that are partially supported through a tax levy. The 2011 property tax levy (including tax increments) for the Special Revenue Funds total $2,306,050 compared to $2,349,381 in 2010 or a 1.8% decrease. Other funds such as the Sewer and Water Access Funds and Park and Pathway Dedication Funds have less revenues coming in because of less new development taking place and paying the fees associated with the development. Expenditures are for debt service payments due in 2011. The Community Center Fund's 2011 budget increased 5.4% due increased capital needs (equipment replacements and building improvements) in the amount of $125,000 and debt service payments. Revenues generated by the community center are budgeted at amounts similar to 2010 with the tax levy decreased $49,449. This will require the Community Center fund to use $256,455 of reserves in 2011. The Deputy Registrar Fund budget expenditure budget is very similar to 2010 with a decrease of less than 1%. The revenue budget was increased 4% because the customer base continues to grow due to good customer service and the continued efforts to add additional services, such as driver licenses. Due to past programs of inspecting elm trees for Dutch elm disease and discovered a very large number of elm trees affected by the disease. The City has begun removing these trees, of which the process continued into 2010 but at a lesser activity. Also in 2010 the City began inspecting for the Emerald Ash Beatle in an effort to control the Beatle and save trees. Due to the success of these programs, activities and the need to remove trees has been reduced and therefore the A -11 2011 Shade Tree Fund budget is being decreased 12% to cover the cost of inspecting, removing and replacing these diseased elm trees. The large decrease in the Economic Development Fund is due to the operating transfer for its share of debt service payments in 2011. However the capital outlay for pay -as- you -go developer payments is scheduled to increase based on tax increments received and current contracts with developers. Also, while there is a street reconstruction project planned for 2011, the City plans to issue debt to pay project costs and will use the Street Reconstruction Fund to repay the City's share of the debt beginning in 2012. Which are how the 2010 street reconstruction project was funded and therefore, the Street Reconstruction Fund expenditures in 2011 is for its share of the 2010 improvement bond debt payment. The expenditures in the Park and Pathway Dedication Fund are for the City share of land purchase cost for the Bertram Chain of Lakes property, which the City along with Wright County is purchasing from the Y.M.C.A. The land purchases have also been made possible through the use of various grant proceeds from various State resources, a practice that should continue into the future until all the property is acquired. DEBT SERVICE FUNDS The City's debt obligation for 2011 is $6,429,275 with the funding coming through the collection of special assessments, tax increments, and the use of $581,592 of reserves. The reserves are available because of prepayments of special assessments and available interest earnings. If the City had not received these prepaid special assessments, more of the funding would be coming from special assessment collections. The City is currently planning on issuing around $4,590,000 new debt in 2011 to fund the 2011 street reconstruction project. The City has debt outstanding of $64,964,000 as of 12/31/10. The City's bond rating of "A2" was upgrades to "Aa3" from Moody's Investors in 2010. CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS The budget for the Capital Project Funds are based on the 2011 project expenditures listed in the City's five -year capital improvement plan for City buildings, parks, and infrastructure improvements. The main revenue source for 2011 is a proposed bond issue and transfers from other City funds. Projects to be funded in 2011 include the 2011 street reconstruction project, the overlaying of outlaying street which borders the City and Monticello Township, preliminary work for the Fallon Avenue overpass, and the continuation of the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. ENTERPRISE FUNDS The largest change in the Enterprise Funds is the first full year of operating revenue and expenses of the City's fiber optic network FiberNet Monticello (FNM). The system provides phone, internet, and cable TV to residents and businesses in Monticello that sign up for the A -12 services. Construction of the system should also be completed in 2011. The expense budget for FNM, which includes both construction and operation of the system are estimated at $7,476,274 with revenues of $5,062,191. The major change to the City Water and Sewer Funds is a rate increase to cover operating expenses and some of the depreciation of the systems. The rate increases should increase revenues approximately 10% and a new three tiered water rate system could help encourage water conservation, which could result into reducing expenses. Water Fund revenues are budgeted at $990,434 while the expense budget, including depreciation is $1,393,330. Sewer revenues are $1,558,180 compared to expenses of $2,579,029. The Liquor Fund operating transfer to help support other City activities and reduce the tax levy is budgeted at $250,000 compared to the $266,000 in 2010 and $250,000 as it was in previous years. Sales continue to increase at the store and the 2011 budget reflects increased revenues from sales and a corresponding increase in supplies (cost of goods sold). FUND BALANCES The 2011 budget proposes that expenditures exceed revenues by $6,962,571 compared to $1,587,222 in 2010. However, in the Enterprise funds, reserves will be used to fund depreciation of assets as revenue levels are sufficient to cover operating expenses and some, but not all depreciation. The exception is FNM which is in the startup phase of operations and was anticipated that reserves would be needed to fund operations until a customer base can be established. The City's 2011 General Fund's budget is a balanced budget, meaning revenues, including operating transfers in from other funds equal expenditures including any operating transfers out to other funds. The General Fund's fund balance is projected at 79.7% of 2011 budgeted expenditures; however much of the fund balance is designated for other purposes. The City maintains the General Fund's working capital fund balance at 45% of the next year's operating budget because the City receives its tax payments in July and December and need this fiend balance to pay for City operations. The General Funds unreserved/ undesignated fund balance is estimated at 26.9% of 2011 budgeted expenditures. Much of the reserves of the Special Revenue Funds in 2011 are reserved for the purpose of the Fund. Other Special Revenue Funds, such as, the Community Center, Library, and Deputy Registrar try and maintain a fund balance of 25 %. The 2011 budget decreases fund balance of the Special Revenue Funds by $2,620,866. Fund balances in the City's Debt Service Funds are used to retire the City's debt on a timely basis. For 2010 the City proposes to use $106,592 to pay off its 2011 debt obligations. The City will also use $475,000 of reserves to fund proposed Bertram Chain of Lakes land purchase in 2011. This will leave a fund balance of $3,178,172, all of which would be designated for future debt payments. A -13 Overall the City's fund balances are within City guide lines and are sufficient to meet current and future operations and obligations of the City DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARD The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to the City of Monticello, Minnesota for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2010. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan, and a communications device. This award is valid for a period of one year only. We believe our current budget continues to conform to program requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award. CONCLUSION Conserving the financial resources of the City continues to be very important. The budgeting function is the prime tool to make sure the City's limited resources are wisely utilized. It is my belief that the 2011 budget allows the City to deliver the finest municipal services in the most cost effective and efficient manner, and in so doing, ensure the highest quality of life for our residents. The 2011 budget is the product of the collective efforts of the City Council and City staff. I am appreciative of the commitment, good judgment and expertise each of them contributes to the budget process. Respectfully submitted, Thomas Kelly Finance Director A -14 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Distinguished Budget Presentation Award PRESENTED TO City of Monticello Minnesota For the Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2010 President Executive Director A -15 a FUND STRUCTURE AND BUDGET BASIS The financial structure of the City is similar to other governments with the use of funds. Funds are the control structures that ensure that public moneys are spent only for those purposes authorized and within amounts authorized. Funds are established to account for different types of activities and legal restrictions that are associated with a particular government function. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) defines a fund as: A fiscal and accounting entity with a self - balancing set of accounts recording cash and other financial resources, together with all related liabilities and residual equities or balances, and changes therein, which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining certain objectives in accordance with special regulations, restrictions, or limitations. All of the funds used by the City must be classified into one of seven "fund types ". Four of these fined types are used to account for the City's "governmental- type" activities and are know as "governmental funds ". Two of these fund types are used to account for a government's "business- type" activities and are know as "proprietary funds ". Finally, the seventh fund type is reserved for a government's "fiduciary activities ". The City does not currently operate any fiduciary activities. Governmental Fund types are used to account for governmental -type activities. These are the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service Funds, and Capital Project Funds. These are the funds through which functions of the City are financed and budgets are appropriated. The General Fund is used to account for most of the day -to -day operations of the City, which are financed from property taxes and other general revenues. Activities financed by the General Fund are those not accounted for in other funds. The City can only have one General Fund. Special Revenue Funds are used to account for revenues derived from specific taxes or other earmarked revenue sources which, by law, are designated to finance particular functions or activities of the City and which therefore cannot be diverted to other uses. Debt Service Funds are used to account for the payment of interest and principal on general and special obligation debts other than debt issued for and serviced by a government enterprise. The Capital Project Funds account for all resources used for the acquisition and /or construction of capital equipment and facilities except those financed by Enterprise and Internal Service Funds. One Proprietary Fund Type is used to account for the City's business -type activities. The City uses Enterprise Funds. Enterprise Funds are used to account for operations (a) that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private business — where the intent of the governing body is that the costs (expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods or services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges, or (b) A -17 where the governing body has decided that periodic determination of revenues earned, expenses incurred, and /or net income is appropriate for capital maintenance, public policy, management control, accountability or other purposes. Internal Service funds are used to account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department to other departments of the City. The City currently does not operate any internal service funds. Fiduciary Funds are used when a government holds or manages financial resources in an agent or fiduciary capacity. The City of Monticello does not operate any of these funds at the current time. The Budget Basis used by the City of Monticello is the modified accrual basis of accounting for governmental fund types (for example, the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service, and Capital Project Funds). Under this accounting method, revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they become available and measurable. Available means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period. Expenditures are recognized in the period in which the fund liability is incurred, except for outstanding interest on general long -term debt, which is recognized when due. Enterprise and Internal Service Funds use the accrual basis of accounting. Under the accrual basis revenues are recognized when they are measurable and earned. Expenses are recognized in the period incurred, if measurable. The budget basis for Enterprise and Internal Service Funds is also the accrual basis with the exception noted below. The City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) shows the status of the City's finances on the basis of "generally accepted accounting principles" (GAAP). In most cases this conforms to the way the City prepares its budget. The exceptions are: 1. Compensated absences liabilities that are expected to be liquidated with expendable available financial resources are accrued as earned by employees (GAAP) as opposed to being expended when paid (budget). 2. Capital outlay within the Enterprise Funds are recorded as assets on a GAAP basis and expended on a budget basis. The CAFR shows fund expenditures on both a GAAP basis and budget basis for comparison purposes. Fund Structure General Fund Mayor & Council Administration Elections Financial Admin. Audit City Assessing Legal Human Resources Planning & Zoning Data Processing City Hall Law Enforcement Fire Department Fire Relief Building Inspect. Civil Defense Animal Control National Guard Public Works Admin. Engineering Public Works Inspec. Streets & Alleys Ice & Snow Shop & Garage Parking Lots Street Lighting Refuse Collection Community Celebration Information Center Senior Center Community Education Y.M.C.A. Transit Swan River School Ice Arena Parks Administration Park Improvements Parks Ball fields Econ. Develop. Unallocated Unallocated Ins. Governmental Special Revenue Library Street Reconstruction Economic Development Environment Clean -Up Deputy Registrar MN Investment Econ. Recovery Grant CMIF Fund Shade Tree Community Center Park & Path Dedication Orderly Annexation Area Capital Revolving Street Light Improv. Sanitary Sewer Access Storm Sewer Access Water Access City of Monticello Debt Service Funds 1994 Refunding Bond 1995 Refunding Bond 1997 Improvement Bond 2002 Improvement Bond 2003 Improvement Bond 2005 Improvement Bond 2007 Improvement Bond 2008 Sewer Refunding Bd Consolidated Bond Fund WWTP Note 1998 Water Refunding Bd 1999 Improvement Bond 2000 Improvement Bond 2000 Public Proj. Rev. Bd 20008 Improvement Bond 1985 Tax Increment Bond 1989 Tax Increment Bond 2004 Tax Increment Bond 2008 Rev. Refunding Bd 2010 Improvement and Refunding Bond OWE Capital Projects Water Sewer Liquor Cemetery FiberNet Proprietary Funds Capital Enterprise Project Funds Capital Projects Water Sewer Liquor Cemetery FiberNet May 20, 2010 June, 2010 June 10, 2010 June 18, 2010 June /July, 2010 July 23, 2010 July- August, 2010 August 9, 2010 August 23, 2010 End of August, 2010 September 13, 2010 September 15, 2010 October/November, 2010 November 22, 2010 December 13, 2010 Prior to Dec. 29, 2010 January 1, 2011 2011 BUDGET CALENDAR 2011 -2015 Capital Equipment /Projects (CIP) Worksheets to Department Heads. Workshop with City Council and Staff to Set Goals and Priorities. 2011 Budget Worksheets to Department Heads. 2011 -2015 CIP Worksheets are due to Finance Department. Department Heads Meet with Various Advisory Boards and Commissions For 2011 Preliminary Budget Input. Department Heads return worksheets to Finance Department, Department Heads meet with City Administrator and Finance Staff to Develop 2011 Preliminary Budget. Council Workshop to review 2011 Capital Equipment /Project Plan and Financing Plan. Budget Workshop with City Council and Staff. Finance Department Develop Revenue Estimates and 2011 Preliminary Property Tax Levy. Budget Workshop with City Council and Staff. 2011 Preliminary Property Tax Levy Certified to County Auditor. Department Heads meet with City Administrator and Finance Staff to Develop 2011 Proposed Budget and Property Tax Levy. Budget Workshop with City Council and Staff. City Council Adopts 2011 Budget and Property Tax Levy. City Certifies Final 2011 Property Tax Levy to County Auditor. 2011 Fiscal Year Begins. BUDGET PROCESS The City of Monticello's budget process begins in May when Department Heads begin reviewing and adjusting the City's 5 -year CIP. In June the City Council and staff meet in a workshop setting to set goals and priorities for the up coming fiscal year. After the workshop in June budget worksheets along with the goals and priorities are distributed to department heads for completion. During June and July department heads complete their various budget worksheets, which may include meeting with advisory boards to develop their budget requests for the upcoming fiscal year. During August, department heads meet with the finance staff and City Administrator to develop a draft preliminary budget and the finance staff develops revenue estimates. Also in August staff and City Council review and make changes to the proposed budget and 5 -year CIP. By September 15`x' the City Council must approve a preliminary tax levy based on preliminary budget information, which is certified to the County Auditor for tax notifications to residents. Once this preliminary levy is approved, the Council can lower the levy during additional budget meetings, but cannot exceed the preliminary tax levy that was approved and certified to the County Auditor. A -20 During September through November staff and Council meet to finalize the budget and tax levy for the coming fiscal year. Finally, prior to December 29th the City Council must hold a public hearing and adopt a final budget and property tax levy, which is certified to the County Auditor for collection on the next year's property tax statements. During the course of the fiscal year department heads can overspend line items as long as funds are available in the activity. If funds are not available, staff can recommend changes or amendments to the budget to the City Council. The City Council can than approve or disapprove the recommended changes. Only with City Council approval can an activity be overspent and only if funding is available. However, the property tax levy cannot be amended. OTHER PLANNING PROCESSES There are no other government agencies, commissions, or advisory boards that have direct roll in the City's budget process. However, there are government agencies, commissions, and /or advisory which play a roll in the City's budget process. Minnesota State Statutes provide the steps the City must follow to pass the budget including when the City must certify its levies to the County Auditor and when public hearings must be held. In addition the State may pass laws governing the City's budget, such as cities are currently under levy limits, which restricts the possible increase of property tax levies from one year to the next. The State must also approve by mid - November any City levies which fall outside the levy limit. Finally the State must certify to the City the amoimts of State aids the City will receive, if any, by mid - August. The only affect the County has on the City's budget would be if the County or City was planning any road improvement projects that would require joint cooperation. The City would work with the County to budget any City share of costs and any additional improvements the City would like included in the project. Finally, the City itself has various advisory boards and commissions, such as the park commission, MCC advisory board, planning commission, economic development authority, FiberNet advisory board, and police commission. These advisory boards and commissions as part of their charge, work with staff to set priorities and goals for the coming year. Based on their goals and priorities, along with the City Council's goals and priorities, the various advisory boards or commissions work with the staff during the month of July to make funding recommendations for programs and /or improvements they would like to see included in or removed from the budget. These boards and commissions are only advisory and the City Council may or may not include recommendations by these boards and commissions in the final budget depending on available funds or other criteria. A -21 CITY OF MONTICELLO FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES The City of Monticello has an important responsibility to its citizens to plan the adequate funding of services desired by the public, including the provision and maintenance of public facilities, to manage municipal finances wisely, and to carefully account for public funds. The City strives to ensure that it is capable of adequately funding and providing local government services needed by the community. The City will maintain or improve its infrastructure on a systematic basis to insure its citizens will maintain quality neighborhoods. In order to achieve this purpose, this plan has the following objectives for the City of Monticello's fiscal performance: 1. To protect the City Council's policy - making ability by ensuring that important decisions are not controlled by financial problems or emergencies. 2. To enhance the City Council's policy - making ability by providing accurate information on the full cost of various authority or service levels. 3. To assist sound management of the City government by providing accurate and timely information on financial condition. 4. To provide sound principles to guide the important decisions of the City Council and of management which have significant fiscal impact. 5. To set forth - operational principals which minimize the cost of local government, to the extent consistent with services desired by the public, and which minimize financial risk. 6. To employ revenue policies and forecasting tools to prevent undue or unbalanced reliance on certain revenues, especially property taxes, which distribute the cost of municipal services fairly, and provide adequate funds to operate desired programs. 7. To provide essential public infrastructure, including buildings and property, and prevent deterioration of this infrastructure. 8. To protect and enhance the City's credit rating and prevent default on any municipal debts. 9. Ensure the legal use and protection of all City funds through a good system of financial and accounting controls. 10. Record expenditures in a manner, which allocates to current taxpayers and /or users the full cost of providing current services. To achieve these objectives the following fiscal policies have been adopted by the City to guide the City's budgeting and financial planning process. The City recognizes that additional policies need to be adopted in the future to reflect on going procedures and City practices that have never been written down or formally approved by City Council. Each fiscal policy section includes the purpose and a description. The policies below are summaries of the actual adopted policies, which will be available on the City's web site in the future. A -22 A. Operating Budget Policy Purpose: The operating budget policy ensures that the City's annual operating expenditures are consistent with past expenditures and respond to long -term objectives rather than short-term benefits. The policy allows the City to maintain a stable level of service, expenditures and tax levies over time. The policy is most critical to programs funded with property tax revenue because accommodating large fluctuations in this revenue source can be difficult. Goals: 1. Maintain a stable level of City services. 2. Avoid large property tax fluctuations. 3. Maintain sound budgetary controls. Policy: The City will always adopt a balanced budget for the General Fund. The definition of a balanced budget is that budgeted revenues equal budgeted expenditures and thus, creating no change to the fund balance for the fund. The City's various other funds may have unbalanced budgets based on the timing of revenues and expenditures. The City will pay for current expenditures with current revenues. The City will avoid balancing current revenues with funds required for future expenses. The City will not budget to accrue future revenues. Revenues in excess of expenditures from a given fiscal year will be placed into the City's reserves according to the City's reserve policies. The City will avoid postponing expenditures, rolling over short-term debt and /or using reserves to balance the operating budget. To protect against unforeseen events (emergencies), the City will maintain a contingency reserve in the General Fund of 5% of budgeted expenditures. The City staff will monitor revenues and departmental expenditures to adhere to their budgeted amounts. Line items within an activity may be overspent as long as the total activity budget is not overspent. Only with City Council approval can an activity be overspent and only if funding is available. City staff will prepare for Council review quarterly financial summary report. A -23 B. Revenue Policy Purpose: The revenue policy is designed to ensure 1) diversified and stable revenue sources, 2) adequate long -term funding by using specific revenue sources to fund related programs and services, and 3) funding levels to accommodate all City services and programs equitable. Goals: 1. Provide adequate funding sources for funding City services and programs. 2. Avoid large budget fluctuations. 3. Provide a diversified revenue source and limit dependency on one or two revenue MINJI ORM Policy: The City will maintain a diversified and stable revenue system in order to avoid short -tenn fluctuations in a single revenue source. The City will conservatively estimate its annual revenues by an objective, analytical process. All existing and potential revenue sources will be re- examined annually. The City will use one -time or special purpose revenue for capital expenditures or for expenditures required by the revenue, and not to subsidize recurring personnel, operation and maintenance costs. The City will establish all fees and charges at a level related to the cost of providing the services, or as adjusted for particular program goals. Each year, the City will review the full cost of activities supported by fees and charges to identify the impact of inflation and other cost increases and will review these fees and charges along with resulting net tax cost with the City Council. The City will seek a balanced tax base through support of a sound mix of residential, commercial, and industrial development. The City will offset reduced revenues with reduced expenditures. C. Expenditure Policy Purpose: The expenditure policy is designed to ensure proper Rinding of services. A -24 Goals: 1. Maintain a stable level of services provided. 2. Respond to long -tern objectives of the City. Policy: The City will adopt and maintain a balanced General Fund budget, in which expenditures will not exceed reasonable estimated resources and revenue. The City will pay for all current operation and maintenance expenses from current revenue sources. The operating budget will provide for the adequate maintenance of capital assets and equipment. The City will maintain a budgetary control system, which will enable it to adhere to the adopted budget. This includes a centralized record keeping system to be adhered to by all programs and activities receiving annual appropriations. Proposed major budgeted expenditures such as new positions, equipment acquisitions, and capital improvements will have prior City Council approval. The finance department will prepare and maintain at least quarterly financial reports comparing actual revenues and expenditures to budgeted amount for Council review. The City will develop and implement an effective risk management program to minimize losses and reduce costs. The City will cooperate with other governmental agencies in an effort to provide maximum services at minimum costs. D. Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting Policy Purpose: The accounting, auditing and financial reporting policy is designed to maintain a system of financial monitoring, control, and reporting for all operations and funds in order to provide effective means of ensuring that overall City goals and objectives will be met and to assure the City residents and investors that the City is well managed and fiscally sound. Goals: Maintain a financial system that is sound, effective, well managed, and open to City staff, Council, and residents. Policy: The City will adhere to a policy of fall and open public discourse of all financial activity. The proposed budget will be prepared in a manner to maximize its understanding by citizens and elected officials. Financial documents will be available to all interested parties on the City's web site or copies can be provided. Opportunities will be provided for full citizen participation prior to adopting the budget. The City will maintain its accounting records and report on its financial condition and results of operations in accordance with City, State and Federal laws and regulations, and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and standards established by the Governmental Accounting Standard Board (GASB). Budgetary reporting will be in accordance with City and State budget laws, regulations, and guidelines. An independent firm of certified public accountants will annually perform a financial and compliance audit of the City's financial statements. Their opinions will be contained in the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). As an additional independent confirmation of the quality of the City's financial reporting, the City will annually seek to obtain the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. The CAFR will be presented in a way designed to communicate with citizens about the financial affairs of the City. E. Reserve Policy Purpose: The purpose of the City's reserve funds are to provide 1) a stable funding source for expenditures that fluctuate significantly each year, for example equipment acquisitions and replacements, 2) working capital to maintain a sufficient cash flow, 3) provide funding of services during periods of budget shortfalls or other revenue reductions during a budget year, and 4) a stable or improved credit rating. Goals: 1. Maintain a stable level of services provided by the City. 2. Provide working capital during the fiscal year. 3. Maintain or improve the City's credit rating. Policy: The City's goal is to maintain a General Fund, fund balance reserve of 45% of the General Fund's operating budget for working capital to provide cash flow between its two serni- annual tax payments (July and December). UNWI At the end of the fiscal year, if the General Fund's fund balance has a reserve for working capital at a minimum balance of 45% of next year's operating budget, the remaining reserves will be designated for a specific use or transferred to other funds for the funding of future improvement projects or equipment purchases as approved by the City Council, The Consolidated Bond Fund will receive any fund balances remaining in any debt service fund once the debt is fully retired. Excess balances in Capital Project Funds will be used to reduce debt issues or be used to fund future capital projects. The fund balances in these funds will fluctuate based on the timing of funding sources and expenditures. Enterprise Funds shall maintain a fund balance to help finance infrastructure replacements and the addition of new capital facilities, such as, wells, water towers, or lift stations. F. Purchasing Policy Purpose: The purchasing policy is designed to provide guidance to City staff in the purchasing process by specifying procedures to be followed. Goals: 1. Obtain supplies, equipment, and service as economically as possible. 2. To purchase items that is best suited to the specific needs of the City. 3. To promote fair competition among bidders. 4. Provide effective controls. 5. To comply with all statutes and regulations of the City, State, and Federal governments. Policy: City employees will be allowed to make purchases of less than $500 without additional approval or without obtaining price quotes. For purchases of $500 to $1,000, when possible, price quotes should be obtained from various vendors and kept on file with the finance department. Purchases over $1,000 but less than $5,000 require at least two quotations and can be purchased without City Council approval provided the item was budgeted; fm2ds are available, and approved by the Administrator or Finance Director. Quotes shall be kept on file with the finance department. Purchases over $5,000 require at least two quotations and City Council approval. Quotes shall be kept on file with the finance department. A -27 All purchases over $50,000 require formal specifications and advertised bids. Bids will be publicly opened and approved by Council. All bids will be kept on file. G. Capital Asset Policy Purpose: The Capital Asset Policy is designed to provide guidance to City staff involved in purchasing, recording, tracking, and disposing of capital assets by specifying procedures to be followed. Goals: To ensure that capital assets are tracked and recorded consistently and according to policy. To provide an internal control structure over capital assets. To provide accurate capital asset values and records to annual financial statements and reporting. Policy: A capital asset is an asset or item with a cost of at least $5,000 per asset and a life expectancy of greater than one year. The classes of capital assets will be: land, parking lots, buildings, infrastructure, improvements (other than buildings), machinery and equipment, office equipment and furniture, and motor vehicles. Donations of capital assets are recorded at estimated fair market value at the date of acquisition. Depreciation is the allocation of the cost of a depreciable capitalized asset over its estimated useful life. Straight -line depreciation will be the method used to allocate the cost on a monthly basis. Land, easements and construction in progress are not considered depreciable assets. Department heads shall be responsible for reporting disposal of capital assets to the finance department. The finance department will distribute a list of inventory, by department, to each department head annually during the fall of each year for the purpose of conducting an inventory. Physical inventory will be conducted at least every four years by the finance department staff. Random inventories maybe conducted at any time. A -28 H. Capital Improvement Program Policy Purpose: The purpose of the capital improvement program policy is to plan for the construction and replacement of infrastructure, along with the purchase and replacement of capital equipment of the City with as little impact to the City's funds and tax payers as possible. Goals: 1. Avoid large budget and property tax fluctuations due to capital improvements and equipment purchase. 2. Strategically plan the replacement and construction of infrastructure and the purchase or replacement of capital equipment so that improvements and purchases are not needed in one fiscal year but spread out over time. Policy: The City will annually update a multi -year plan for capital improvements and equipment. The multi -year plan will identify the estimated cost, potential funding sources, and firture operational impacts for each capital item. The City will coordinate the plan update with the City's annual budget process. The City will maintain all of its assets at a level adequate to protect the City's and its citizens' capital investment and to minimize future maintenance and replacement costs. Federal, State and other intergovernmental and private funding sources of a special revenue nature shall be sought out and used as available to assist in financing capital improvements. I. Investment Policy Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to set forth the investment objectives and parameters for the management of public funds. Goals: 1. Safeguard funds on behalf of the City. 2. Meet the daily operating cash flow demands. 3. Assure the availability of capital funds when needed. 4. Conform to all applicable federal, state and/or local statutes governing the investment of public funds. 5. Invest public fimds in a manner which maximizes return. A -29 Policy: The City will consolidate (pool) cash and reserve balances from all funds, except for those legally restricted by statutes, to maximize investment earnings. The City of Monticello will only invest in securities authorized by Minnesota Statute 475.66 The City will not purchase securities that are considered highly sensitive or that could expose the City to foreign currency risk. The City will obtain collateral or a bond for all uninsured amounts on deposit to minimize risk of loss of failure of the depository bank. No more than 5% of the overall portfolio may be invested in the securities of a single issuer, except for securities of the U. S. Government and its agencies or an external investment pool. The City Council will be provided a listing of the City's investment portfolio at the end of each quarter. J. Debt Policy Purpose: The debt policy ensures that the City's debt 1) does not weaken the City's financial structure; and 2) provide limits on debt to avoid problems in servicing debt. This policy is critical for maintaining the best possible credit rating. Goals: 1. Maintain the City's financial integrity. 2. Maintain or improve the City's credit rating. 3. Avoid large property tax increases due to debt payment requirements. Policy: The City will not use long -tern debt to fund current operations. The City will avoid the issuance of short-term debt, such as, budget, tax and revenue anticipation notes. The City will confine long -tern borrowing to capital improvements, equipment or projects that have a life of more than 5 years and cannot be financed from current revenues. A -30 The City of Monticello will use special assessments, revenue bonds, and /or any other available self - liquidating debt measures instead of general obligation bonds where and when possible, applicable and practical. The City will pay back debt within a period not to exceed the expected life of the project. The City will not exceed 3 percent of the market value of taxable property for general obligation debt per state statutes. The City will maintain good communications with bond rating agencies about its financial condition and will follow a policy of full disclosure in every financial report and bond prospectus. The City will comply with Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) reporting requirements. The City will refinance or call any debt issue when beneficial for future savings. Besides these policies, the City follows many unwritten practices and procedures when it comes to handling the City's finances and budgeting. In the future more of these unwritten practices will be formatted into written formally policies to guide current and future City staff and Councils. BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS, TRENDS AND SOURCES The City of Monticello maintains a number of funds for recording fiscal transactions to meet legal accounting requirements. Certain assumptions are decided on as a foundation for developing a budget. These assumptions guide the City in determining the level of service that will be provided to residents and how those services will be funded. The City's budget practice is to use conservative revenue estimates to assure adequate funding of expenditures. The following is a summary of major budget assumptions and trends for the upcoming fiscal year. Property taxes — The City relies on property taxes to support such functions as general government, public safety, public works, street improvements, library activities and debt service. The property tax levy funds 83.5% of General Fund operations for 2011. The 2011 property tax levy is $7,677,309 including the Market Value Homestead Credit for all funds, which is 21.3% of all revenues. The City tries to maintain the lowest possible property tax levy and has used what was deemed excess reserves in the past to maintain or lower the levy. The 2011 levy does not require the use of reserves to fund debt expenditures or operations. The chart on the next page demonstrates the change in the City's property levy. A -31 When determining the property tax levy, the City Council and staff consider the effects the levy will have on property owners. The effects the levy will have on property owners are then balanced against services provided and service levels. The City was able to fund services at current levels while reducing the levy in past years due to a growing economy and increased property values. However, property value began decreasing in 2010 due to the housing market and the City growth has also slowed resulting in a decrease in City tax capacity in 2010 and it is anticipated to decrease again for taxes payable in 2011, as shown in the chart below. The City's tax rate, which is used to determine what property taxes each property owes is determined by dividing the City's property tax levy against the City's tax capacity. As the property tax levy increases and tax capacities remain the unchange or are reduced, the tax rate increases. However if the property tax levy remains uncharged or reduced from one year to the A -32 next and tax capacities increase, the tax rate will decrease. For property taxes payable in 2011 the tax rate is expected to increase because of an increase in the property tax levy and a decrease in the City's tax capacity. The table below show the change in tax rates for the City the past 14 years (the sharp increase in 2002 was due to a change in the State's property tax system). / 111 / 111 . . ■ ,rum NONE ON m m m NON 1 1 1 1 :.. . . . ■ . . . ■ . ■ ■ . / 111 Property taxes are only one revenue source for the City. Licenses and Permits — Building permits are the largest category and account in the licenses and permits and account for $235,000 (3.7 %) of the 2011 General Fund revenues. In 2009 only 9 new residential construction permits were issued and in 2010 only 3 new residential construction permits were issued as a result of the economy and the housing market, a trend that is expected to continue into 2011. The spike in permit activity in 2008 was caused by a hail storm which caused almost every home and business to require new roofs and siding, which resulted in increased revenues. New residential construction has been low due to economic conditions in the housing and financial sectors and is expected to continue into 2011. As a result, the number of building permits issued and the building permit revenues are estimated to continue to be low in the coming year. However the City has still experienced some growth in commercial constructions in 2010. The chart below demonstrates the permit activity of the City. A -33 Intergovernmental Revenues — The intergovernmental revenue classifications consist of grants and aids from the Federal and State governments. The City of Monticello has received very little in the way of these grants and aids in the past. However, in 2010 the City is scheduled to receive $421,515 from the State of Minnesota for the Utility Valuation Transition Aid that was created in 2009. However, due to improvements at the power plant the City will no longer be eligible for this aid in 2011. Also if the City moves forward with the proposed 2011 street improvement project, the City would be eligible for reimbursement through State aid street maintenance funding for some of the project costs. Charges for Services — This classification includes user charges or reimbursements received from those who benefited from services provided such as community center programs, general government services, and public works related revenues. Revenues which are highly sensitive to construction and development (i.e. planning and engineering fees) are estimated to decline in the coming year due to the housing markets and economy of the State and Country. The chart below demonstrates this trend for the City. Charges for Services 4,500,000 4,000,000 ._._ 3,500,000 - - - - -- - 3,000, 000 - 2,500,000 - - - 2.,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 ' 500,000 '- 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Charges for services related to the Community Center have increased modestly each year in the recent past. The 2011 budget reflects a modest increase to continue this trend, in part because of adding wedding decorating to the list of services provided. Revenues are estimated at $2,499,221 or a 10% decrease from 2010. Special Assessments — A portion of the cost for public improvements are recovered by assessment charges to the benefiting property owners. These collections are typically appropriated to the payment of debt service. 2011 revenue estimates are based on the balance of the assessments as of 12/31/2009 (last available figures from Wright County) and divided over the remaining life of the assessment including interest charged. Revenue estimate assume there will be no prepayment of assessments by property owners during the year, thus creating a conservative revenue source. A -34 Investment Income and Miscellaneous Revenues — The General Fund has $264,712 budgeted in 2011 for Miscellaneous Revenues of which $193,469 is interest earnings. This is down from the last year because of lower interest rates in 2010 and anticipated in 2011. Similar reduction can be found in the Special Revenue, Debt Service and Capital Project Funds. The increase in Miscellaneous Revenues is due to the FiberNet Monticello having a full year of revenues in 2011. It also was the reason for the increase in 2010. Miscellaneous Revenues 7,000,000 - - - _.- ...---- - -- - -- -- 6,000,000 5,000,000 - -- — — -- - 4,000,000 - -- - -- 3,000, 000 - - - - -- 2,000,000 - -- - -- - - 1,000,000 -- -- - O ---------` r- ---- r- --- -- .--r- -- --__r- -_- - -r- _-ter - ---� 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Special Revenue Funds Monticello Community Center — Memberships and Fees — The Monticello Community Center (MCC) charges gym memberships to its users. Over the years these memberships have stayed fairly consistent with slight increases in memberships over the years. In addition the MCC rents rooms for meetings and wedding receptions. Finally there are fees for program activities and concession sales. All of which have maintained a steady income as demonstrated in the graph below. A -35 Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) — The City is authorized to operate a DMV from the State of Minnesota. The main revenue source is the fees the City collects from the issuance of motor vehicle licenses and DNR licenses. The fees charged are regulated by the State. There has been no fee increases in recent years allowed by the State, which has left revenues ranging from $276,919 and $299,168 in 2008 and 2009 respectively. In 2010 the City has collected $306,782 and the 2011 budget is estimated at $290,000. Enterprise Funds — Use Collections Water and Sewer Funds — Charges for services are primarily comprised of providing Monticello residents and businesses with water and sanitary sewer treatment services. The utility funds charges separately for these services based on individual consumption. The City has set rates to cover all operating costs and a portion of depreciation. As new development has slowed, the burden on infrastructure replacement costs has been shifting more on to the utility rates charged. The graph below illustrates revenue trends for Water Fund. Revenue from Water Charges 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Water Use Collections — Water rates were increased approximately 10% for 2011 and include adding an additional rate tier for high volume users. The recent history of rate increases includes a 15% increase in each of 2007 and 2008. For 2009 and again in 2010 the rates were increased 5 %. Prior to 2007 the water rates had not been increased for a number of years. As the rates have increased, water consumption has no increased as demonstrated in the chart on the next page. Trends that are expected to continue in 2011. Even with these rate increases the revenues for the Water Fund should be sufficient to cover operating costs and part of the depreciation costs of the system. A -36 Water Usage trillions of gallons) 500 450 400 350 — 300 _ 250 200 _ 150 _ 100 50 _ 0 11 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Sewer Use Collections — The rate increases the water rates have had the last few years have also applied to the City's sewer rates. Similarly the revenues of the Sewer Fund are sufficient to cover operating costs and debt service of the Sewer Fund but not all of the depreciation costs of the system. Revenue from serer Charges 1,600,000 -� 1,400, 000 1,200,000 ° 1,000, 000 800,000 600,000 _ 400,000 200,000 "1H -i 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Liquor Fund Sales — Liquor sales have increased over the last five years and the budget reflects this trend. Gross profits are estimated at $989,533 for 2011 based on sales of $4,404,781 and costs of $3,415,248. This is an increase of 11% in gross profit from 2010. Beer continues to be the stores best - selling product line, but wines and spirits sales have also increased over the past few years as shown in the graph on the following page. A -37 FiberNet Monticello — In 2010 the City constructed the majority of its fiber optic network to provide high speed internet, phone and cable TV services to property owners. Along with the construction of the system the City began operating the system and began charging customers for internet, phone, and /or cable television services based on services ordered. The City estimates revenues from the sale of services at $3,791,379 for 2011 based on preliminary data of those who are currently taking the services and said they would take the service once available. Interfund Transfers — These reflect transfers between City Funds. Most of the transfers represent the City's share of capital projects or a Funds share of debt service payments. The following schedule represents the proposed 2011 transfers. Total Transfers In 4,472,516 Transfers In Fund # Fund Amount 317 2010A Improvement Bond 42,625 212 Street Reconstruction Fund 250,000 213 EDA Fund 443,336 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 316,279 314 2008A Revenue Refunding Bond 815,000 229 Park Dedication 475,000 400 Capital Project Fund 185,000 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 706,249 315 2008 Sewer Refunding Bond Fund 524,590 317 2010A Improvement Bond 78,364 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 261,299 317 2010A Improvement Bond 34,471 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 309,803 317 2010A Improvement Bond 30,500 Total Transfers In 4,472,516 Total Transfers Out 4,472,516 Other revenue and expenditure trends are detailed throughout this budget document. Consolidated financial summaries of all funds are provided on the following two pages. Transfer Out Fund # Fund Amount 212 Street Reconstruction 42,625 609 Liquor Fund 250,000 400 Capital Project Fund 443,336 213 EDA Fund 316,279 226 Community Center 815,000 300 Consolidated Bond Fund 475,000 245 Street Light Improvement 185,000 262 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 706,249 262 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 524,590 262 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 78,364 263 Storm Sewer Access Fund 261,299 263 Storm Sewer Access Fund 34,471 265 Water Access Fund 309,803 265 Water Access Fund 30,500 Total Transfers Out 4,472,516 Other revenue and expenditure trends are detailed throughout this budget document. Consolidated financial summaries of all funds are provided on the following two pages. O O r N M o- N W r m O M- W W r W V V O O V V O O N W M rMm O m W o W O W r r W d' m W V N M M M O W M O N V OM N V (O V (O V V V V V aD M M N O N IN pI NV NNON W N t0 M I I Mw0 w mm VV N m O N Or W r r f D M r r M N M W W N t 0 N r W 1� ow O N NV m- Vow N W NN N N mm V V r V N W N Q N r M � N M- N-m V -7 Ni O N M r O O V V W r W N N r W M N W W O N V W N M N (O (O r N m V V W N N O W W W O N m W m O N W N m N M W r N O O W m N O O N r 0 M m� N W M W N O r N W N r M W t0 W oo M N O N O 0 0 O m N V N m •- VON m r NOM 0 N N n Q W W O V W O W V' V N r O O m W MV M - V r M r O W N O W M m N W W r �- O W V W W M W W m O m N O M N r W V N N N M N OCl (•SV N niV V NNO O�- N O r 9 fl V N O V m O O- W m N W V W W m N r r W W N W O W V O t0 W r m N O O M W N Ow O M W W N N N m M M N V m u W W N W M V O m r M N M N r W W N N N V r V V W N W p W W NN m W m- W N W -MO N N NN N m O O rW r M VMONMN M N N V r N N W N W N�--M w (O N N M N N¢ m W M N m N M M M W V r M M W W r V N W W V N N N N N N V N N r N 0 a 0 N V r � N W W N O m� -rN00 W W V W �- W �-00r0 V N rP000 V W Ul W W W r W M m r N O N O W N M O W O N W V N r 0 O r O r 00 O Om O m W V r Mrwmi WrMrg OnirNrmoi rr O 41 N -r -Mm W r M W W- m M me� mm N N W V N Q N V W M N O O N M W W.-- M V r V cc N N W W 4. V NV N N N N �4)N rW r(f V V M(M O M- D W m N fA O m 0 0 0 r O N O M V N M V WV 9 N N r V m A 0 cc m a} (O r mN� O N VV V m •tNNM� O N O N N V M ONm m 0 V_NNM r W M r ap W 00 O W o N p( M O r(a�} MOM M O� O N (V 00 (V a N W eVVe}}O O N V I� O N E V V' I (WO m �N}ON M {ay} N N O O N N (NO M N F m V W V V N (4 V � NNW -"0 V m OW M M N W fA N N W (A W m O N O 0 a O r N N M N W N m O N W (O O 00 N (u W V r O W r N Cl[ m O W O N W W N O O N r M N W W N W M W N O r N N -NN O N N M O 00 O r N N o m V M V O OW r O O V MNNVN r r W O O 666 M � r Voi W N NN W m CI m NN r r 00 mm r M V' o m W W V M N M M N m r m m r W M V O W V V V N N m m M N V N c- (V N d d N V V V V N N m 11 N M V @ r W r O 0 r N O O N< O W W M M W M W r O O O O W 0 W O W vv 0 W N N O O (V C Q c N O V r r r m m N M W M MOM O M W N N V W W a] @> V V W N M N r CO W N N r W O d LL C W LL N V M N M Nmi(i M N O O O O O O O O O W O W O O O O O O O O O O O O O N jp w m m m m m m O O O N O Iq O O cc O O O N W V @ N N r M'ff W m r m N r m O E LL e- M. N N V V V N J O LU on d' r O O O O O V O N O M O O O O N O O N O O O O O N N F LL m W O W O O O r r W O W m V Z O N Z N G 7 V N W N m V N WOO N W N M N m N N m N - M O O r yy O N W N m N MV y❑ U l LL M V' V r NN V V - V W N LL m C (n M N N M ... N O a m i �_ lD 0 1p C O o o N 0 o N rN N 0 0 0 M mqN r W r'O N r W W •- ONO W V V W W L o 0 W W @ >@ V O W m V o M W N W O W N W N a W W mm of ui M M (6 .- M ui N n m ai o V E E @�� V o WW NMN r MM N m WV r N O @ a@ r M N N M W N N r N W U o(n� W �M N N N M W V N O O O W O O O m M O N M W O O O V O 0 0 0 0 0 O V a N N N V m 0 WAN N W O m W M W r O N OWN O O W N N NV N V O M M b O r N V M V LL N N W M r M W M M ml�m M N r mM r O mm M N N N O A uS (d N (6 vi W N M N @ @ m o n c ` @ @ O W y @ C N@ C N Z c Z E@ o c a ex- ° @ a w m Z W c v am a E(� p@ E OW O c c c E °N w o v k o o s w N N 0 N O OM L IO CN .@w N E p P@ @ O O a C7 mJ2C)LLy n S 2 m ? a O LL ..TOTAL ALL FUNDS 2007 j 2008 2009 2010 2010 2.011 `REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET � � PROJECTED i- , � BUDGET j _ _ _ E CHANGE , PROPERTY TAXES 1 $7015,310 I $8406,029 $8,695,865 ` $8,880,979 1 $8,831,227 $8,813109 - 076% SALES OF GOODS _ 3,769,077 _� 4,085,682 4,352,570 4,044,500 j 4,477 651 4,404 781 1 8 91 o% LICENSES & PERMffS 78,992 _ 1 1,188,884 566,894 570,150 518 607 600 250 I 5 n6i. iINTEF2GOVERNMENfAL REVENUES _ 1364633 411,044 921,391 5 407,4401 699752 - _10444 %0l CHARGES FOR SERVICES _ , _ _ 2 775,850 � _ 2 140,953 2,267,400 j 4,821,546 ( 2,597,610 _(18085) 6,411 103 I 32.97% 0704 ' 0 SNENiS �-_ 111 MISCFI�LANEO ( 3 371 - 7 87 838 4 1 413,057 -1,469,4-95- 469 495 2,03-2--.8-9-2-1-- 032 892 2,-,6--02-,5-7-9 - 78 �o USE COLLECTIONS _ I 1,882,6_76 2 120 788 ( 2,200,300 f 2,277 986 j 2,278 050 3.53"o �coNTRIBYTED CAPfTAL I -4E2,412 ._?1005,284 17 722 0 0�_- 0 0 OPERATING TRANSFERS 5-,223,464 16 807 286 � 10 182,416 � 62 5 0,849 I -4,0_37,707- 037 707 j, 4,472,9-16 � -11 66 %� BOND PF2OCEEDS 4 44 ,484,4 15,685,262' 1,4361 3,230,000 3,255000 4,590,0001 - TOTAL REVENUES j $34 384,338 $61 314,102 $32,846,716 i $32,726,981 f $28,796,828 I $36,028,167 10.09% EXPENDITURES $4,165,992 $4-,649-,496--'- 4 649 496 $4 880 844 $5,228,168 1 $5,263,214 $5,228,73 o -o .m PERSONNEL SERVICES SUPPIES 3 548 777 3 646,T02 4 325 308 --4,03-d'666-' 5 308 322 4,422 495 L 9.55%1 OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES. _ 12,062,166 _ i_ 7,700,156 8 239 090 1 9,119,427 8,988,939 13,326 202 1 . 46 13% CAPf -AL OUTLAY 1 7 911 565 27 980 008 17 676,986 10 901,629 1 15,880 540 j 15,515 795 42.33%1 _ _ (OPERATING TRANSFERS j 5,223,464 -16,642. 106 10,182,712 5,062,849 4,037,707 ; 4,472,516 j -_ - 1166% iTOTAL EXPENDITURES j $32 911 958 $61 021,468 j $45 304,940 1 ! $34 349,023 1 $39,478 722 i $42,965,738 25 09 %� `FUND BALANCE- JANUARY 1 $75 216 850,__$76 689 230 j $76 981 864 ($64 523,640 s $64,523 640 $53,841 746 1 'IX FRIX CESSREVENUEOVPENDfTURE j $1472,380 $292,634 58 ($12,4,224){ ($1,622,042)i($10,681,894)j ($6,937,571). -- FUND BALANCE- DECEMBFJ?31 $76,689,230 1 $76,981,864 j $64,523,640 j$62,901,599 ($53,841,746 i $46,904,175 MEN Projected Fund Balance Summary FUND BALANCE (DEFICIT) 1213112009 BUDGETS ESTIMATED FUND BALANCE (DEFICIT) 1213112011 FUND 2010 Budget 2011 Budget Amount Designated or Restricted Amount Undesignated or Unrestricted General Fund 5,097,632.00 950.00 5,098,582.00 3,531,285.00 1,567,297.00 Special Revenue Funds: Library 3,610.00 6,441.00 (282.00) 9,769.00 142.00 9,627.00 Street Reconstruction 2,641,176.00 370,228.00 320,258.00 3,331,662.00 1,756,769.00 1,574,893.00 EDA 7,393,705.00 (1,134,073.00) (377,825.00) 5,881,807.00 3,235,659.00 2,646,148.00 Environmental Clean Up - - - - - MN Investment 918,996.00 34,101.00 31,709.00 984,806.00 984,806.00 - SCERG (Econ Recovery Grant) - - - - CMIF (Central MN Init) - - - - ShadeTree 69,606.00 (6,419.00 ) 357.00 63,544.00 - 63,544.00 Street Lighting Improvements 604,079.00 280,606.00 62,987.00 947,672.00 947,672.00 - Community Center 958,751.00 78,641.00 (256,445.00) 623,665.00 623,665.00 - Deputy Registrar 164,670.00 3,466.00 15,510.00 183,646.00 93,616.00 90,030.00 Park & Pathway Dedication 420,846.00 (71,380.00) (406,700.00) (57,234.00) - (57,234.00) Orderly Annexation Area 7,287.00 291.00 (804.00) 6,774.00 6,774.00 - Capital Revolving Fund_____ 3,854,899.00 73,089.00 (610,639.00) 3,317,349.00 3,300,276.00 17,073.00 Sanitary Sewer Access 4,987,353.00 (618,113.00) (908,108.00 ) 3,461,132.00 3,461,132.00 - Storm Water Access _ 2,291,081.00_ 54,078.00) X254,986 0 _ 1,982,017.00 1,661,823.00 320194.00 Water Access 820,356.00 216,209.00 235,899.00 366,248.00 368,248.00 TOTAL - Special Rev Funds: 25,136,415.00 1,410,691.00 2,620,867.00 21,104,857.00 16,440,582.00 4166412-75-00- Debt Service Funds: 1994A GO Refunding Bond - _ 1995A GO Bond - 1997A GO Improvement - - 2002 GO Bond 399,252.00 (399,252.00) - _ 2003A GO Bond 310,257.00 (310,257.00) - - - - 2005AGOBond 1,771,440.00 (274884.00) (344,419.00) 1,152,137.00 1,152,137.00 - Consolidated Bond _7771627.00) _ (158,146 00) 245,521.00 (690,252.00) - (690,252.00) 2007A G. O. Bond 1_74,148.00 9A __(36,560) __109,252.00 28,327.00 28,327.00 - 19988 GO Water System Ref. - - - _ 2010 GO Im rovement - - 15,015.00 15,015.00 _ 15,015.00 - - - - - _2000AGOImprovement 2000A MCClPublic Proj Rev _ 20008 GO Improvement - - 2008 Sewer Refunding Bond 919,568.00 (139,143.00) (117,626.00)_ 662,799.00 662,799.00 - 2008A EDA MCC Refunding 655,408.00 7,622.00 (270,831.00) ... 392,199.00 392,199.00 - 1989 TIF (ELDERLY) Bond - - 2004A Taxable TIF 142,782.00 142,782.00 TOTAL - Debt Service Funds: 3,595,228.00 1,453,411.00 581,592.00 1,560,225.00 2,250,477.00 690,252.00 ,TOTAL-Ca Project Funds:_ (2,124,392.00) 1,313,100.00 12,502.00 (798,790.00) - 798,790.00) Enterprise Water 12,510,429.00 (317,899.00) (402,896.00) 11,789,634.00 1,500,283.00 10,289,351.00 Sewer 20,281,682.00 (940,495.00) (1,020,849.00) 18,320,338.00 1,607,952.00 16,712,386.00 Liquor 3,129,315.00 14,136.00 94,899.00 3,238,350.00 12,876.00 3,225,474.00 Transportation - - - - - _ Cemetery 649,796.00 (14,949.00) 315.00 635,162.00 635,162.00 - Fiber 3,752,465.00 514,584.00 2,419,083.00 5,656,964.00 _ 5,656,964.00 _ TOTAL - Enterprise Funds: 744,623.00 3,747,614.00 28,326,520.00 3,756,273.00 24,570,247.00 Investment Holding TOTAL -All Funds: 64,523,640.00 2,294,675.00 6,937,571.00 55,291,394.00 25,978,617.00 29,312,777.00 A -41 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK F.19 M, i GENERAL FUND IM GENERAL FUND SUMMARY FUND DESCRIPTION: The General Fund is used to account for the ordinary operations of the City, which are financed from property taxes and other general revenues, which are not accounted for in another fund. The modified accrual basis of accounting is used in the General Fund. That is, expenditures are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are recorded when received. However, compensated absences are expended when paid for budgetary purposes. The General Fund budget is a balanced budget, meaning current revenues equal current expenditures. 2010 BUDGET ISSUES: Property taxes are the largest revenue source of the General Fund. The City still has levy limits for 2011, which restricts the amount the City can increase its property tax levies from one year to the next. Slowed growth in tax capacity will also place pressure on the City's property tax levy. The public works department is the largest expenditure area for the 2011 budget. GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $4;433,359 $5,460,543 $5,106,682 $5,297,065 $5,289,218 $5,362,622 1.24% LICENSES & PERMITS 773,797 917,539 266,797 296,650 217,184 371,250 25.15% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 436,588 368,938 553,093 114,801 317,957 64,740 - 43.61% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 944,422 402,557 694,759 306,023 561,034 330,096 7.87% FINES & FORFEITS 4,875 1,951 1,000 200 0 200 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 1,644 5,970 7,763 0 118 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 626,165 430,656 375,870 269,611 383,622 264,712 -1.82% OPERATING TRANSFERS 80,938 46,390 469,114 45,000 45,000 0 - 100.00% TOTAL REVENUES $7,301,788 $7,634,544 $7,475,078 $6,329,350 $6,814,133 $6,393,620 1.02% EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT GENERAL GOVERNMENT MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL $33,858 $34,589 $60,492 $53,500 $52,633 $61,768 15.45% ADMINISTRATION 282,693 260,622 278,810 204,819 211,365 225,402 10.05% ELECTIONS 140 19,764 955 14,531 36,620 1,230 - 91.54% FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 454,448 428,634 393,885 357,434 376,649 354,699 -0.77% AUDIT 43,200 43,375 41,000 36,100 37,600 28,625 - 20.71% CITYASSESSING 52,744 51,413 50,518 51,175 49,598 50,475 -1.37% LEGAL 96,701 73,556 71,039 57,000 103,288 57,000 0.00% HUMAN RESOURCES 0 15,730 63,902 81,930 80,663 86,509 100.00% PLANNING & ZONING 254,319 205,163 145,367 157,801 161,617 166,900 5.77% DATA PROCESSING 216,716 107,392 239,059 150,225 105,911 149,838 -0.26% CITY HALL 130,173 182,586 229,058 207,408 269,262 200,209 -3.47% PRAIRIE CENTER BUILDING 0 0 617,230 0 39,250 21,175 #DIV /0! TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT $1,564,992 $1,422,824 $2,191,315 $1,371,923 $1,524,456 $1,403,829 2.33% M. GENERAL FUND CONTINUED 2007 ACTUAL 2008 ACTUAL 2009 ACTUAL 2010 BUDGET 2010 PROJECTED 2011 BUDGET % CHANGE PUBLIC SAFETY 347,359 318,151 245,232 245,180 230,433 217,741 - 11.19% LAW ENFORCEMENT 923,113 990,621 1,064,389 1,096,000 1,093,658 1,121,200 2.30% FIRE DEPARTMENT 296,127 217,181 775,821 197,210 195,512 207,214 5.07% FIRE RELIEF 0 74,110 80,127 80,000 66,758 65,000 - 18.75% BUILDING INSPECTIONS 323,821 405,779 306,897 254,434 249,771 245,212 -3.62% CIVIL DEFENSE 8,023 4,136 7,893 1,400 5,084 1,400 0.00% ANIMAL CONTROL 45,057 48,272 57,089 45,400 44,560 46,057 1.45% NATIONAL GUARD 12,644 12,607 20,638 23,350 27,458 24,300 4.07% TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY $1,608,785 $1,752,706 $2,312,854 $1,697,794 $1,682,801 $1,710,383 0.74% PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION 726,827 281,630 238,794 219,531 236,132 208,373 -5.08% ENGINEERING 347,359 318,151 245,232 245,180 230,433 217,741 - 11.19% PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS 145,663 135,176 119,275 111,275 91,986 112,272 0.90% STREETS & ALLEYS 652,074 724,620 778,648 686,579 578,292 675,390 -1.63% ICE & SNOW 118,441 269,002 170,694 140,974 168,982 141,253 0.20% SHOP & GARAGE 161,706 163,410 176,773 177,389 180,023 174,563 -1.59% STORM WATER MAINTANCE 0 0 30,548 0 23,448 39,129 #DIV /01 PARKING LOTS 2,367 3,222 3,630 13,800 5,194 13,800 0.00% STREET LIGHTING 222,187 229,509 202,772 168,500 197,467 175,000 3.86% REFUSE COLLECTION 509,208 514,308 547,160 511,929 534,904 542,247 5.92% TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS $2,885,832 $2,639,028 $2,513,526 $2,275,156 $2,266,861 $2,299,770 1.08% CULTURE AND RECREATION COMMUNITY CELEBRATIONS 3,110 2,252 2,072 3,000 1,359 2,300 - 23.33% INFORMATION CENTER 126 79 65 0 25 0 0.00% SENIOR CENTER 56,212 58,132 93,302 96,144 73,111 94,945 -1.25% COMMUNITY EDUCATION 12,740 12,740 12,740 0 0 0 #DIV /01 Y.M.C.A. 5,460 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TRANSIT 0 0 0 5,000 0 3,000 - 40.00% SWAN RIVER SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% ICE ARENA 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 0.00% PARKS ADMINISTRATION 477,944 680,914 635,012 543,646 450,776 536,684 -1.28% PARKS IMPROVEMENTS 145,807 105,116 76,258 5,000 3,398 0 - 100.00% PARKS BALLFIELDS 79,952 16,702 29,514 16,800 14,187 20,571 22.45% TOTAL CULTURE AND RECREATION $856,351 $950,935 $923,963 $744,590 $617,856 $732,500 -1.62% MISCELLANEOUS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 79,781 79,646 78,574 73,344 60,252 153,075 108.71% UNALLOCATED 88,548 0 345,313 4,000 5,339 0 0.00% UNALLOCATED INSURANCE 165,114 161,536 190,454 161,593 229,676 94,063 - 41.79% TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS $333,443 $241,182 $614,341 $238,937 $295,267 $247,138 3.43% TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES $7,249,403 $7,006,675 $8,555,999 $6,328,400 $6,387,241 $6,393,620 1.03% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $5,498,298 $52,385 $5,550,683 $627,869 $6,178,552 ($1,080,921) $5,097,632 $950 $5,097,632 $426,892 $5,524,524 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $5,550,683 $6,178,552 $5,097,632 $5,098,581 $5,524,524 $5,524,524 The previous table summarizes the General Fund revenues by classification and expenditures by activities and departments. With the table below summarizes the General Fund revenues and expenditures both by classification. GENERALFUND FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $4,433,359 $5,460,543 $5,106,682 $5,297,065 $5,289,218 $5,362,622 1.24% LICENSES & PERMITS 773,797 917,539 266,797 296,650 217,184 371,250 25.15% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 436,588 368,938 553,093 114,801 317,957 64,740 - 43.61% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 944,422 402,557 694,759 306,023 561,034 330,096 7.87% FINES & FORFEITS 4,875 1,951 1,000 200 0 200 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 1,644 5,970 7,763 0 118 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 626,165 430,656 375,870 269,611 383,622 264,712 -1.82% OPERATING TRANSFERS 80,938 46,390 469,114 45,000 45,000 0 - 100.00% TOTAL REVENUES $7,301,788 $7,634,544 $7,475,078 $6,329,350 $6,814,133 $6,393,620 1.02% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $2,465,992 $2,732,863 $2,774,161 $2,622,862 $2,731,236 $2,662,848 1.52% SUPPIES 420,658 470,098 448,312 478,100 395,386 465,695 -2.59% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,375,143 3,226,550 3,488,316 3,092,638 3,172,813 3,163,077 2.28% CAPITAL OUTLAY 828,154 377,164 1,349,897 130,800 83,806 102,000 - 22.02% OPERATING TRANSFERS 159,456 200,000 495,313 4,000 4,000 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $7,249,403 $7,006,675 $8,555,999 $6,328,400 $6,387,241 $6,393,620 1.03% FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $5,498,298 $52,385 $5,550,683 $627,869 $6,178,552 ($1,080,921) $5,097,632 $950 $5,097,632 $426,892 $5,524,524 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $5,550,683 $6,178,552 $5,097,632 $5,098,581 $5,524,524 $5,524,524 AI REVENUES ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION: To record and maintain all general operating revenues of the City. The general fund is used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. OBJECTIVES: Maintain stable, constant revenue sources. Maintain low property taxes and tax rate, by reviewing the costs of services provided and charge appropriately for those services. BUDGET ISSUES: The General Fund's main revenue source continues to be property taxes with 2011 property taxes making up 84% of the total General Fund revenues. The Minnesota State property tax system is described in more detail on pages G -3 through G -7. Beginning in 2009 and continuing in 2011, Cities in Minnesota have had their property tax increases limited to the lesser of inflation or 3.9% plus growth less State Aids. Also in 2009 the City began receiving Utility Valuation Transition Aid (UVTA) which is intended to offset the loss of property tax dollars due to the reduction of property value on utility facilities. The Xcell power plant continues to be the largest property tax payer in the City of Monticello. For 2009 the City receive $241,316 in UVTA and $50,466 in 2010, but with the improvements constructed at the power plant, which increased its value back up above the 2009 value, the City is not eligible for UVTA in 2011. Revenue collected for building permit activity were dramatically reduced in 2009 and 2010 and are expected to be similar in 2011, therefore the City is maintain the budget for permits at the $235,000 level that was budgeted in 2010. Beginning in 2010 the City's waste hauler took over the maintenance and replacement of garbage and recycling carts, therefore the City is no longer budgeting revenues received for preforming this activity. Interest earnings are expected to be lower in 2011 due to low interest rates and lower fund balances in the General Fund. The General Fund will receive an operating transfer of $45,000 from the Capital Revolving Fund for the purchase of equipment which was budgeted in prior years and was to be purchase in 2010 by the General Fund. For 2011 all equipment purchase will be budgeted and purchased in the Capital Revolving Fund. :, BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE CURRENT AD VALOREM TAXES $4,323,306 $5,366,419 $4,910,343 $5,272,065 $5,272,822 $5,337,622 1.24% DELINQUENT AD VALOREM TAXES 67,929 35,480 177,849 0 0 0 0.00% MOBILE HOME TAX 14,225 14,404 15,132 0 12,379 0 0.00% PENALTY &INTEREST -TAXES 27,899 44,240 3,358 25,000 4,017 25,000 0.00% LIQUOR LICENSE 50,774 52,962 50,060 51,000 56,429 51,000 0.00% BEER LICENSE 1,381 977 887 900 1,087 900 0.00% OTHER BUS LIC & PEMITS 3,803 4,115 3,202 3,000 3,893 3,000 0.00% BUILDING PERMITS 555,900 848,566 205,508 235,000 149,639 235,000 0.00% VARIANCES /CONDITIONAL USES 4,100 3,900 950 1,000 400 750 - 25.00% DRIVEWAY PERMIT 25 75 125 200 75 50 - 75.00% GRADING PERMIT 150 450 0 300 0 300 0.00% SIGN /BANNER PERMIT 8,330 5,410 4,025 4,000 4,975 4,000 0.00% MOBILE HOME PERMIT 570 380 475 350 285 350 0.00% ANIMAL LICENSES 800 204 565 400 401 400 0.00% FIBER OPTIC FRANCHISE FEE 0 500 1,000 500 0 500 0.00% ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE 146,046 0 0 0 0 75,000 100.00% NON -BUS LIC & PERMITS 1,918 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% HOMESTEAD CREDIT(HACA/MV) 179,790 100,653 10,867 (178,924) 6,249 (180,000) 0.60 % MOBILE HOME HOMESTEAD CR 11,341 8,840 6,134 0 0 0 0.00% PERA INCREASE AID 6,741 6,741 6,741 6,740 6,741 6,740 0.00% UTILITY VALUATION AID 0 0 241,316 49,985 50,466 0 - 100.00% STATE HWY AID - OPERATING 78,568 93,512 122,478 85,000 87,425 85,000 0.00% FIRE DEPT AID - OPERATING 86,740 74,110 64,549 80,000 65,774 65,000 - 18.75% POLICE DEPT AID - OPERATING 47,063 54,761 61,789 50,000 60,869 50,000 0.00% COUNTY OPER GRANT - STR /HWY 14,318 14,020 15,676 12,000 19,059 15,000 25.00% COUNTY OPER GRANT - CIVIL DEF 0 0 9,984 0 21,366 10,000 100.00% CO OPER GRANT - RECYCLING 12,027 16,301 13,559 10,000 8 13,000 30.00% ZONING /SUBDIVISION FEES 4,275 1,260 200 500 0 200 - 60.00% SALE OF MAPS & PUBLICATIONS 261 114 39 75 45 25 - 66.67% ASSESSMENT SEARCHES 3,325 2,575 2,850 1,750 2,200 1,000 - 42.86% RESTOCKIBILLING FEE 1,610 2,450 0 0 2,535 0 0.00% FINAL PLAT FEE 400 250 50 0 0 0 0.00% PLANNING ADMIN FEE 27,307 21,400 19,898 5,000 40,838 6,000 20.00% NSF FEE 275 303 190 100 75 100 0.00% INSPECTION FEES /CONST OBS 54,543 35,739 0 0 968 0 0.00% INSPECTION FEES /BLDG 80,261 3,556 6,531 2,000 0 3,000 50.00% CONTRACTOR LICENSING FEE 1,100 325 225 250 50 200 - 20.00% FIRE PROTECTION TWP CONTR 53,193 53,346 59,160 53,000 53,499 130,000 145.28% FIRE -EMERG RESPONSE CALLS 7,150 10,650 7,750 5,000 6,500 7,000 40.00% FIRE - OTHER FEES 4,599 3,109 1,250 500 550 1,000 100.00% BLIGHT /MOWING FEES 4,197 771 1,143 500 3,691 700 40.00% RENTAL HOUSING FEES 28,745 5,545 58,525 30,000 45,150 25,000 - 16.67% ANIMAL CONTROL FEES 28,044 32,442 29,452 20,000 33,159 25,000 25.00% INVESTMENT ADMIN FEE 0 78,176 32,834 40,298 15,666 33,371 - 17.19% STIR, SIDEWALK,CURB REPAIR 80 70 0 0 0 0 0.00% EQUIP. -OPER FEE /RE[AIR 330 120 0 0 0 0 0.00% IC JUNK AMNESTY FEES 10,169 9,176 10,493 9,000 0 0 - 100.00% RECYCLING BINS /PROCESSING 1,111 586 586 500 637 500 0.00% GARBAGE FEE- TAXABLE 66,069 64,823 95,441 60,000 98,559 64,000 6.67% GARBAGE CART /RENTAL 46,630 47,706 52,943 45,000 58,413 0 - 100.00% GARBAGE SURCHARGE - NO TAX 2,891 2,814 7,656 1,500 7,778 1,500 0.00% CONCESSIONS - PW (5,266) 1,585 1,206 1,000 326 1,000 0.00% TEAM /LEAGUE FEES 3,680 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FIELD/TOURNEY FEES 14,472 0 4,930 0 4,209 2,000 100.00% PARK RENTAL FEES 3,929 3,889 3,682 5,000 4,508 3,500 - 30.00% CONST /ENGIN COST REIMB 441,683 17,504 161,975 20,000 181,628 20,000 0.00% DEVELOPER COST REIMS 59,359 1,592 135,271 5,000 50 5,000 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES GEN 0 681 479 50 0 0 - 100.00% ANIMAL IMPOUND FINES 152 265 220 100 205 200 100.00% LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION 4,500 1,500 0 200 0 0 - 100.00% ADMIN OFFENSE FINE 375 451 1,000 0 0 0 0.00% S.A. PRINCIPAL- COUNTY 1,644 5,970 7,763 0 118 0 0.00% I NTEREST EARNINGS 467,575 309,836 163,547 246,339 205,501 193,469 - 21.46% INT EARN - ANDERSON /SR CIT B 5,280 4,873 4,383 3,876 3,876 3,332 - 14.04% INT EARN - DANNER TRKING 3,035 2,555 377 0 0 0 0.00% INT EARN -SWAN RIVER 11,297 10,930 11,404 10,134 9,273 9,661 -4.67% GEN CITY PROPERTY RENTAL 41,276 41,630 23,020 0 36,792 15,000 100.00% RENTAL OF PW EQUIPMENT 0 0 0 0 112 0 0.00% LEASE REVENUE 0 0 19,080 0 47,204 34,000 100.00% CONTRIBUTIONS 0 27,706 20,186 0 5,050 0 0.00% SALE OF GEN CITY PROPERTY 0 5,020 3,196 0 663 0 0.00% SALE OF LOCK BOXES /PUB SAF 3,067 1,727 1,898 1,000 1,968 1,200 20.00% SIGNS & INSTALL 476 494 105 0 0 0 0.00% SALE OF PW PROPERTY 18,100 0 12,001 0 663 0 0.00% SALE OF RECREATION PROP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% COPIES /LISTS (TAXABLE) 690 - 287 245 100 90 50 - 50.00% REFUNDS /REIMBURSEMENTS 15,630 18,733 21,536 2,000 29,524 2,000 0.00% ASSESSMENT FEE REIMBURS 258 115 19,600 0 34,100 0 0.00% DISCOUNT 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER MISC REVENUE 59,481 6,750 75,292 6,162 8,806 6,000 -2.63% TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FOS 80,938 46,390 469,114 45,000 45,000 0 - 100.00% TOTAL REVENUES $7,301,940 $7,634,809 $7,475,298 $6,329,450 $6,814,338 $6,393,620 1.01% IC DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL General Government Mayor & City Council 101 41110 The Mayor and City Council provide elected representation to the community with control over matters of policy, budget, administration, and operations of the City. Members participate in various committees, as well as direct staff, through the City Administrator, as to their overall goals for the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Adopt policies and ordinances consistent with Council's position on growth, zoning, and financial strategy. 2. Continue to work on the completion of the City's natural resource inventory and traffic plan. 3. Examine City facility needs to meet future City operations. 4. Continue to work with City Administrator on succession planning for the City. ISSUES: 1. Reduced tax capacity and levy limits which place pressure on the ability to finance City operations at current levels. 2. Succession planning of City staff. 3. Operation of the City's new fiber optic network. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of City Council meetings 23 23 23 23 23 # of City Council workshops and special meetings 49 61 27 20 15 # of City Council resolutions 105 96 80 80 75 . BUDGET COMMENTARY: Council's budget remains consistent with that of previous years. The increase in other services and charges is due to budgeting room rental for council meetings from the Community Center. This was not budgeted or charged in the past. Dues and memberships consist of the Mayor's Association and League of Minnesota Cities. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2006 2009 2010 2010 2011 % COUNCIL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $26,180 $24,062 $39,772 $41,600 $40,659 $40,443 -2.78% SUPPLIES 171 0 118 0 578 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 7,507 10,527 20,602 11,900 11,396 21,325 79.20% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $33,858 $34,589 $60,492 $53,500 $52,633 $61,768 15.45% i � DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: CITY ADMINISTRATION General Government City Administration 101 41301 City Administration provides the overall direction of the City, as determined by Council and Mayor. The City Administrator serves as Chief Administrative Officer for the City, ensuring that laws, ordinances, and resolutions of the City Council are enforced and implemented. The City Administrator is responsible for managing the overall operations of all City departments. The Deputy City Clerk's responsibilities involve the management and retention of all official records and documents of the City. The Clerk is also responsible for all election procedures. OBJECTIVES: 1. Assist City Council in setting policies and procedures in accordance with Council's position. 2. Provide direction and leadership on major city projects, budget management; oversee performance evaluation and long -range plaming. 3. Continue with proactive succession planning regarding key staffing rolls within the City's organization. 4. Continue converting City permanent paper documents to electronic format. ISSUES: Implications due to the decrease in tax capacity and levy limits for the City. 2. Long -range comprehensive and succession planning. 3. Long -range comprehensive traffic planning. 4. Operation of the City's new fiber optic network. Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Council meeting agendas prepared 48 55 32 43 38 Records converted to electronic 15% 35% 75% 75% 80% Council minutes approved 58 48 41 43 38 an BUDGET COMMENTARY: The budget amount are based on past expenditure levels with the following exceptions. Personnel services includes a 0% cost of living increase and no step adjustments for employees, but show an increase to reflect the deputy clerk position and administrative assistant position which were not in the 2010 budget. All other items were held at or very close to 2010 budget levels. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % ADMINISTRATIVE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $240,792 $223,674 $250,568 $191,711 $189,266 $209,752 9.41% SUPPLIES 53 5,799 214 250 95 200 - 20.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 41,848 31,149 13,336 12,658 22,004 15,450 20.16% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 14,692 0 0 0 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $282,693 $260,622 $278,810 $204,819 $211,365 $225,402 10.05% B-11 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: ELECTIONS General Government Deputy City Clerk 101 41410 The Election activity provides the preparation of any and all elections, including organizing the polling places, election judges, and vote tabulations. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to research a possible second polling precinct. 2. Prepare and stay current of election law changes for the 2012 elections. ISSUES: 1. Stay current on election laws. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 #of voters 1,409 5,379 0 3,360 0 # of registered voters N/A N/A N/A 6,734 6,734 # of polling precincts 1 1 1 1 1 # of election judges 20 40 0 48 0 BUDGET COMMENTARY: There will be no elections held in 2011, so the funds budgeted were for maintenance contracts of the City's voting machines and miscellaneous expenses. For 2010 funds were spent to hold State and Local elections in the fall including primaries. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % ELECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $3,082 $88 $2,981 $21,185 $230 - 92.29% SUPPLIES 0 417 0 450 2,437 0 - 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 140 10,866 867 10,800 12,998 1,000 - 90.74% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 5,399 0 300 0 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $140 $19,764 $955 $14,531 $36,620 $1,230 - 91.54% B-12 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION General Government Finance Director 101 41520 The Finance Department conducts the financial affairs of the City of Monticello in accordance with the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principals (GAAP). This includes protecting the assets of the City, the initiation of financial plans, investment and debt management, review and implementation of internal controls, and accounting for every financial transaction of the City including accounts payable, accounts receivable, payroll, and accounting control. The preparation of the annual audited financial report and annual budget document are also facilitated through finance. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue working to develop a financial management plan for the City. 2. Develop financial documents in a format to be eligible for review and award of GFOA's award programs. 3. Provide meaningful and timely financial reports and information to Council, Commissions and other City Departments. 4. Complete financial, payroll and utility billing software conversions. 5. Coordinate a central purchasing system including developing the use of purchase orders. ISSUES: 1. Complete implementation of new software systems for financial, payroll and utility billing with integration of new processes for purchase orders, web based applications and remote time card entry. 2. Implement improved reporting procedures to inform Council, Commissions, and Departments. 3. Work with other Departments to find ways to reduce costs of City Operations. B -13 MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 of accts. payable checks 3,335 3,465 3,575 3,862 3,600 Awarded GFOA's Budget Award No No Yes Yes Yes Awarded GFOA's Certificate of $359,208 $328,684 $338,675 $325,424 -0.99% Achievement No No Yes Yes Yes Bond Rating A2 A2 A2 Aa3 Aa3 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Finance budget includes funds to handle the financial transactions of the City, in an efficient manner, while maintaining the highest level of internal controls and segregation of duties. 2011 budgets are very seminal to the 2010 budget however the small increase in supplies is for the purchase of a desk top scanner to improve efficiencies of the accounts payable function of the department. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 FINANCE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $426,449 $392,410 $359,208 $328,684 $338,675 $325,424 -0.99% SUPPLIES 2,344 2,021 1,276 1,750 1,286 1,900 8.57% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 25,655 34,203 33,401 27,000 36,688 27,375 1.39% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $454,448 $428,634 $393,885 $357,434 $376,649 $354,699 -0.77% B -14 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: AUDIT General Government Finance Director 101 41540 An audit of the City's finances must be completed on an annual basis for the City to remain in compliance with Federal and State accounting practices. OBJECTIVES: 1. Complete the financial audit in a timely fashion. 2. Continue to reduce the number of audit findings and adjustments. ISSUES: 1. Reduction of audit findings and adjustments. 2. Increasing reporting requirements and auditing standards. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Audit submittal date to State 6/26 6/27 6/24 6/17 6/15 # of audit findings 10 6 2 0 0 Achieved GFOA award No No Yes Yes Yes BUDGET COMMENTARY: The budget for auditing consists entirely of the expenses associated with the required audit process. In late 2007, a Request For Proposal (RFP) for audit services was sent to several firms. The RFP guaranteed the cost for audit services for the years ended 2007 through 2009 and resulted in a cost decrease from previous years. This contract was extended for years ending 2010, 2011, and 2012. A portion of the 2011 audit costs will be paid from the FiberNet Fund since it is a new City operation and will have more time spent on it as part of this audit cycle. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % AUDIT ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 43,200 43,375 41,000 36,100 37,600 28,625 - 20.71% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $43,200 $43,375 $41,000 $36,100 $37,600 $28,625 - 20.71% B -15 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: CITY ASSESSING General Government Finance Director 101 41550 Assessing requirements are handled through a contract the City holds with the Wright County Assessor. There are no plans to alter this activity. OBJECTIVES: 1. To assess new and existing parcels within the City as required. ISSUES: 1. Pressure of fairly appraising properties under current market trends. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # New home construction 43 20 9 9 20 # New commercial construction 7 8 5 5 5 Total # of city parcels assessed 4,682 4,684 4,684 4,676 4,700 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Assessing services are contracted with the Wright County Assessor. The estimated costs for assessments are: 4,700 existing parcels @ $10.50, new construction; homes 20 @ $25.00, 3 commercial under $500,000 @ $25.00, and 2 commercial over $500,000 @ @100.00. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % ASSESSING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 52,744 51,413 50,518 51,175 49,598 50,475 -1.37% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $52,744 $51,413 $50,518 $51,175 $49,598 $50,475 -1.37% i e DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: LEGAL General Government City Administrator 101 41601 All legal services are currently contracted with a private legal firm. Activities included are the issuance of legal opinions, preparation of ordinances, resolutions, contracts, and agreements, and the conduct of civil litigation. Additional legal requirements, such as publications, and dues are also directed to legal activities. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue contracting for legal council. ISSUES: 1. Rising costs associated with legal council. 2. Increased need for legal council's involved in issues. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: Legal services are contracted with a private legal firm. Additionally, legal notice publications and membership dues to the Coalition of Utility Cities are based out of this activity, hi 2010, the City of Monticello and Red Wing teamed up to hire a lobbyist to lobby the State for funds for nuclear storage emergency planning due to the closure of Yucca Mountain by the Federal Government. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % LEGAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 96,701 73,556 71,039 57,000 103,288 57,000 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $96,701 $73;556 $71,039 $57,000 $103,288 $57,000 0.00% B-17 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: HUMAN RESOURCES General Government City Administrator 101 41801 Human Resources activities support the primary mission of the City through the effective recruitment, selection, development, training and assessment of appropriate human resource needs. Employee benefits and compensation administration, implementation of, and compliance with Federal and State employment laws, labor negotiations, processing of employee grievances, and development of personnel policies are major human resource functions. OBJECTIVES: 1. Provide recruiting, interviewing, and other personnel services for all City departments. 2. Administer classification and compensation system for all employees in compliance with pay equity. 3. Plan and coordinate in- house training programs for City staff. 4. Administer City benefit plans. ISSUES: 1. Develop City personnel handbook. 2. Develop various personnel policies. 3. Develop and implement City drug and alcohol testing program. 4. Negotiate new union contract for public works employees. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement # of full -time positions # of part -time positions # of full -time positions filled # of other positions filled Average # of employees 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 50 50 52 61 65 N/A 71 73 75 80 N/A 6 7 8 5 N/A 26 50 49 25 N/A 120 125 136 140 It BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Human Resource Activity was a new activity in 2009 for the City since the part-time position of hurnan resource manager was created and filled in 2008. In 2010 the position was changed to a full -time position. The 2011 budget reflect estimated costs for setting up trainings, providing City staff with benefit and compensation information and miscellaneous expenses based on past expenditures. The budget for consultant to provide training to employees was increase for 2011. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % HUMAN RESOURCES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $15,698 $54,777 $70,280 $71,249 $73,959 5.23% SUPPLIES 0 32 0 2,000 353 1,000 - 50.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 9,125 9,650 9,061 11,550 19.69% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $15,730 $63,902 $81,930 $80,663 $86,509 5.59% B -19 PLANNING, ZONING, & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT: General Government SUPERVISOR: Community Development Director FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 41910 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Community Development and Planning Department is responsible for long -range and current planning efforts for Monticello. The Department is responsible for regulating development and use standards as outlined in the zoning and subdivision ordinance; these standards are aimed at protecting and promoting public health, safety, and welfare. The Department oversees coordination with regional planning and service providers including Monticello Township Board, Wright County Planning & Zoning, Sherburne County Planning and Zoning and regional transit entities. The Department also provides citizens, business owners, and developers with current, easily accessible information about Monticello's planning process and what's happening in their community. OBJECTIVES: 1. Completion of zoning ordinance update. 2. Implementation of Comprehensive Plan objectives. 3. Support for downtown redevelopment and revitalization, including the Embracing Downtown Monticello project. 4. Involvement in regional transportation planning and its impact on land use and growth objectives. 5. Bertram Chain of Lakes acquisition and master planning. 6. Implementation of more e- government options for permitting and development. 7. Continued implementation and training on the City's GIS. 8. Continued improvements of the City's development and planning process. ISSUES: 1. Implementation of amended City zoning ordinance. 2. Conditional Use Permit tracking and audits. 3. Review of current/future development financing policies. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 # ofplarming applications 37 35 29 17 20 # of project reconciliations 14 19 21 4 15 # of planning commission meetings 12 12 14 24* 15 *Zoning Ordinance Revision required additional monthly meetings. MW BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Planning, Zoning and Community Development budget was decreased for 2011 to reflect less development activity taking place base on current activity and the economic state of the area, state, and nation. Also the majority of the Zoning Ordinance Revision work was completed in 2010 and therefore the consultants will not be needed as much, reducing those costs. Personnel services include funds for an administrative assistant position in 2010, as the position was filled in 2010. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % PLANNING & ZONING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $67,750 $80,992 $82,376 $63,801 $85,259 $100,700 20.17% SUPPLIES 0 2,044 51 550 3,431 200 - 63.64% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 186,569 122,127 62,940 73,450 72,927 66,000 - 10.14% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $254,319 $205,163 $145,367 $157,801 $161,617 $166,900 5.77% B -21 INFORMATION SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: General Government Finance Director 101 41920 This activity manages the data processing and computer needs for all departments of the City. It provides for maintenance of existing computer equipment and servers, upgrades to hardware and software, and installation of new computer equipment and software. In addition, electronic surveillance /security, wireless technology, telecommunications, electronic storage and recovery, and other technology needs are covered under this area. OBJECTIVES: 1. Purchase /upgrade computer hardware and software to keep pace with City technology needs in accordance with replacement cycle. 2. Implement computer security to meet audit standards and requirements. 3. Update information systems disaster recovery plan for the City. 4. Respond to data processing requests within 30 -60 minutes and develop action plan to resolve issue, if necessary. ISSUES: 1. Update lists and develop a master inventory of personal computers, software and peripherals used in the City. 2. Develop filing system for work requests and other data processing records. 3. Identify and develop plans for the many components associated with a fiber optics network and service enterprise. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time B -22 BUDGET COMMENTARY: This activity purchases all hardware and software equipment for the City, based on an annual replacement schedule. In 2011, $16,900 has been budgeted for the replacement and addition of computer equipment. Professional services for website maintenance were decreased for 2011 as more of the web site will be maintained by City staff. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % DATA PROCESSING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $31,650 $31,250 $26,124 $33,088 5.88% SUPPLIES 29,550 32,118 15,133 20,000 17,001 20,900 4.50% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 174,936 75,274 192,276 98,975 62,786 95,850 -3.16% CAPITAL OUTLAY 12,230 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $216,716 $107,392 $239,059 $150,225 $105,911 $149,838 -0.26% B -23 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: CITY HALL General Government City Administrator 101 41940 The activity for this department is to allow City Hall to run smoothly, by providing supplies, customer service, and staffing resources for the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. To provide fhendly, knowledgeable customer service to the public. 2. Provide adequate and consistent hours of business throughout the year. 3. Maintain a reputable facility to house meetings and staff. 4. Expansion of resources for information distribution. ISSUES: 1. Maintaining current, accurate information for all public sources. 2. Continuing to improve internal and external communication systems. 3. Management of Citizen Service Desk with continued growth of inquiries and need to improve response times. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of newsletters published 3 3 3 2 2 # of utility inserts published N/A N/A 2 2 3 Service desk data entry N/A 294 365 392 400 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Items budgeted for the City Hall Activity are commonly shared among all departments operating out of City Hall, as well as some supplies used by the Community Center. 2011 budget amounts are consistent with 2010 budgets and estimated expenditures. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % CITY HALL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $3,012 $43,003 $42,415 $57,383 $83,899 $55,059 -4.05% SUPPLIES 19,594 23,786 18,246 25,400 22,035 22,050 - 13.19% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 107,567 115,797 168,397 124,625 163,328 123,100 -1.22% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $130,173 $182,586 $229,058 $207,408 $269,262 $200,209 -3.47% B -24 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: PRAIRE CENTER BUILDING General Government City Administrator 101 41941 The Prairie Center Building is a City owned building which the City leases space to its FiberNet Monticello operations, a non - profit group and provides office space for the Wright County Sheriff's Department. This activity is for the maintenance of this facility. OBJECTIVES: 1. To provide a well maintain facility. ISSUES: 1. Maintain facility with current staff and available funds. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Prairie Center Building was purchased in 2009 and the 2011 budget was estimated using 2009 actual expenditures. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % PRAIRIE CENTER BUILDING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 1,155 0 1,188 1,500 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 19,314 0 38,062 19,675 100.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 596,761 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $617,230 $0 $39,250 $21,175 100.00% 1=1 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: LAW ENFORCEMENT Public Safety City Administrator 101 42101 All law enforcement services are contracted with the Wright County Sheriff's Department. The Sheriff's Department maintains a local office in City Hall, and is contracted by the City for approximately 19,000 hours annually. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue contracting for law enforcement services through the Wright County Sheriffs Department. ISSUES: 1. Residents concerns regarding having our own police force. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of service calls 2,812 .2,505 2,946 2,600 2,600 # of traffic calls 2,185 2,128 1,614 1,800 1,800 # of motor vehicle crashes 376 386 402 375 375 # of crimes 1,472 1,310 1,520 1,300 1,300 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Law enforcement services are contracted with Wright County Sheriffs Department. The 2011 hourly rate is $59.00 compared to $57.50 in 2010, an increase of 2.6 %. The City has budgeted for 18,980 hours of law enforcement services. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 917,659 990,621 1,064,389 1,096,000 1,093,658 1,121,200 2.30% CAPITAL OUTLAY 5,454 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $923,113 $990,621 $1,064,389 $1,096,000 $1,093,658 $1,121,200 2.30% B -26 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: FIRE DEPARTMENT Public Safety Fire Chief 101 42201 The Fire Department response to all fire, rescue, hazardous material and some medical and accident incidents within the City of Monticello and surrounding Townships. It also provides fire inspection services. The department is a paid on call volunteer department. OBJECTIVES: 1. Assemble a confined space entry team and equipment. 2. Purchase and put into place a "Duty Officer" command vehicle. 3. Purchase and place into service a new pumper truck. 4. Develop NIMS training for all city departments. ISSUES: 1. Improve response times. 2. Develop and implement NIMS training for all staff and council. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of responses 339 402 202 282 275 # of firefighters 30 30 30 30 30 B -27 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Fire Department consists of paid volunteers. For 2011, firefighters will be paid $10.00 per hour, which is the same hourly rate received since 2008. Other Fire Department expenditures budgeted similarly as in 2010. There is a new expenditure for the annual maintenance and licensing of the department's 80OMH radios in the amount of $7,245. Capital Outlay expenditures for 2011 are included in the City's capital improvement plan (Capital Project Funds section of this document) and budgeted in the Capital Revolving Fund on page C -26 and C -27. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % FIRE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $90,594 $113,979 $99,790 $99,108 $111,332 $106,892 7.85% SUPPLIES 60,701 29,870 53,014 25,100 21,141 34,095 35.84% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 144,832 57,586 95,647 60,502 63,039 66,227 9.46% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 15,746 527,370 12,500 0 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $296,127 $217,181 $775,821 $197,210 $195,512 $207,214 5.07% B -28 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: FIRE RELIEF Public Safety City Administrator 101 42202 The Fire Relief Activity is specifically designed to track the City's contribution to the Relief Association of the State Aid Fire Relief fund, which must be contributed to the Relief Association. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Provide pension funds for the Monticello Fire Relief Association. To become full funded. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 Pension assets (liability) $1,133,822 $740,263 $1,010,161 $1,015,000 $1,025,000 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The fire relief budget consists of expenditures specifically related to the Monticello Fire Relief Association. The funds budgeted is the estimated aid received from the State, then expensed to the Association. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % FIRE RELIEF ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 74,110 80,127 80,000 66,758 65,000 - 18.75% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $74,110 $80,127 $80,000 $66,758 $65,000 - 18.75% C DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: BUILDING INSPECTIONS Public Safety Community Development Director 101 42401 The Building Department inspects all new and remodeled construction within the City by a state certified building inspector. The department also initiates all building permits, as well as overseeing the enforcement of all public nuisance and ordinance issues. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue implementation of the rental licensing program. 2. Continue implementation of zoning ordinance changes. 3. Continue sign ordinance update. 4. Implement yearly contractor, realtor, and rental property owner workshops. 5. Continue public relations contact. Improve City's public perception image. 6. Continue implementation of the building codes. ISSUES: 1. Managing and prioritizing department workloads. 2. Facing the challenges of a growing regional center city and the possible rebound of residential property growth. 3. Keep up with rental license inspections of investor owned residential properties. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement # of building permits issued Valuation of permits issued (in 1,000's) # of public nuisance notices # of rental units 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 962 3,681 879 607 600 $45,917 $45,950 $11,630 $9,033 $12,000 377 504 351 519 300 N/A 1,194 1,194 B -30 1,200 1,200 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Building Department has budgeted $5,000 in 2010 to cover the replacement of department vehicles in the future compared to $18,000 in 2009 and $28,500 in 2008. This vehicle will be purchased from the Capital Revolving Fund in 2011. In 2009 the Chief Building Official retired and was replaced by one of the City's other building inspectors at a lower salary. The building inspector position vacated has been left vacant due to decreased building activity due to the economy and lack of building activity estimated for 2011. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % BUILDING INSPECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $274,796 $343,440 $288,217 $227,334 $233,847 $226,462 -0.38% SUPPLIES 11,717 12,294 8,128 8,700 3,541 7,100 - 18.39% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 37,308 50,045 10,552 13,400 12,383 11,650 - 13.06% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 5,000 0 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $323,821 $405,779 $306,897 $254,434 $249,771 $245,212 - 3.62% B -31 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: CIVIL DEFENSE Public Safety Chief Building Official 101 42501 The department of Civil Defense provides constant defense coverage for all weather and power plant related emergency situations within the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Implement city hall, community center, and national guard emergency preparedness. ISSUES: 1. Little or no warning when an emergency occurs. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2011 budget is based on the 2010 budget, since the retirement of the City's previous Chief Building Official, much of this activity's responsibilities have been transferred to Wright County with the City participating as part of the emergency management team. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % CIVIL DEFENSE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $238 $3,571 $6,653 $0 $1,120 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 122 0 100 2,025 100 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 7,785 443 1,240 1,300 1,939 1,300 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $8,023 $4,136 $7,893 $1,400 $5,084 $1,400 0.00% B -32 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: ANIMAL CONTROL Public Safety Project Coordinator 101 42701 The City contracts with a private individual for their animal control services. The City owns and maintains the building the animal control facility operates from. The City also contracts to nearby communities, allowing them to use our services and facility for a fee. OBJECTIVES: 1. To address issues within the City and surrounding communities in a timely and courteous manner. 2. Continue to improve animal control response time. 3. Continue to improve billing procedures for animal control issues. ISSUES: 1. To provide quick response to residents on animal control concerns. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The largest budgeted item is for the $37,500 budgeted for the professional service contract to handle all animal control issues for the City of Monticello. The remaining budgeted items are for maintaining the animal control facility and miscellaneous expenses related to animal control. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % ANIMAL CONTROL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE .PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES $2,105 $5,022 $1,558 $1,900 $1,901 $1;875 -1.32% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 42,952 43,250 55,531 43,500 42,659 44,182 1.57% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $45,057 $48,272 $57,089 $45,400 $44,560 $46,057 1.45% B -33 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Public Safety City Administrator 101 42810 The City's National Guard facility is housed in the Community Center Complex. The City maintains the facility for the Guard. OBJECTIVES: 1. To maintain a clean, modern facility for use by the National Guard. ISSUES: There are no issues currently for maintaining the National Guard facility. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time. BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City rents the National Guard Area from the Community Center Complex. The area's operating costs are paid with City funds. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % NATIONAL GUARD ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 111 0 232 1,600 449 1,000 - 37.50% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 12,533 12,607 20,406 21,750 27,009 23,300 7.13% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $12,644 $12,607 $20,638 $23,350 $27,458 $24,300 4.07% 1: 1 PUBLIC WORKS - ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43110 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Public Works Administration (PW Administration) activity oversees the daily operations of the Street, Parks, Water, Sewer, Wastewater Treatment Plant, and Inspection activities. PW Administration also manages all large City projects, and implements all changes to operations and policy the City has in place for public works. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue the implementation of a biosolids management system. 2. Implement major street lighting project plan. 3. Continue implementing the wellhead protection plan. 4. Manage the development of a new public works facility and expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. ISSUES: 1. Balance the public works department needs with available funds. 2. Manage of City's wastewater treatment system. 3. Implement a capital improvement program for City infrastructure. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of City projects started 18 15 10 3 5 # of City projects completed N/A 12 12 4 5 B -35 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Personnel services for 2011 reduces the public works director's time from 70% to 60% spent on this activity and more time spent on water and sewer fund activities. For 2011 the biggest change is the budgeting of insurance costs in the various activities, instead of just in the General Fund as unallocated insurance. This results in the increase in other service and charges for 2011. All other items budgeted at 2010 levels. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % PW /ADMINISTRATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $198,702 $236,103 $212,476 $191,826 $214,125 $167,955 - 12,44% SUPPLIES 4,184 5,089 5,233 4,030 4,411 3,950 -1.99% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 57,085 34,648 17,976 23,675 17,596 36,468 54.04% CAPITAL OUTLAY 466,856 5,790 3,109 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $726,827 $281,630 $238,794 $219,531 $236,132 $208,373 - 5.08% 1 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43111 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Engineering activity reviews and approves commercial and industrial site plans and residential development plans, and assists with the development and review of City codes and ordinances. The Engineering activity also assists with the development and management of the City's stone water pollution prevention program, City improvement projects, and miscellaneous mapping. In addition, the Engineering activity responds to residents with issues related to storm water drainage and pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic, and reviews, updates and supports the City's general specifications and standard detail plates for street and utility construction and our plan requirements and design guidelines. OBJECTIVES: 1. Improve ability to assist other departments with CADD and GIS related requests. 2. Implement new Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP). 3. Continue to implement and improve the City's new Geographic Information System (GIS). 4. Continue to educate the public on purposes and practices associated with conservation and drainage easements and stone water ponds. ISSUES: 1. Increasing restrictions for storm water runoff by MPCA. 2. Lack of knowledge regarding purposes and practices associated with conservation and drainage easements and storm water ponds. 3. Increased phosphorus restrictions for wastewater effluent by MPCA. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Response to service requests 50 60 60 75 100 Response to on -line requests N/A 60 60 85 125 B -37 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The budget for the Engineering activity predominantly consists of engineering and other professional service fees. These expenditures consist of both reimbursable and non- reimbursable expenditures. For 2011 the only significant budget change is that since new development activity has not occurred in 2010 and is anticipated to be very slow in 2011, the budget has been decreased for engineering services related to new development. Funds are budgeted for continued improvements and development of the City's GIS system. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 PWIENGINEERING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $92,294 $119,150 $133,455 $139,450 $157,527 $147,441 5.73% SUPPLIES 150 638 2,674 5,170 1,392 100 - 98.07% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 254,915 198,363 109,103 100,560 71,514 70,200 - 30.19% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $347,359 $318,151 $245,232 $245,180 $230,433 $217,741 - 11.19% ff- , PUBLIC WORKS - INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43115 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The inspection activity is responsible to observe and inspect City infrastructure projects. Personnel are also responsible for recording as- builts, design assistance, locating and inspecting City utilities, and sidewalk inspections. OBJECTIVES: Learn and use the City's GIS system. 2. Maintain certifications and attend appropriate classes and workshops. 3. Provide support for the engineering activity. 4. Improve communication between public works, engineering and inspection activities. ISSUES: 1. Utilizing the GIS system to its full potential and train others staff on its uses. 2. Workload issues. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time. M BUDGET COMMENTARY: There are no major changes to the public works inspection activity for 2011. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % PW /INSPECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $114,197 $117,578 $110,496 $98,575 $86,395 $99,917 1.36% SUPPLIES 5,761 12,637 2,466 8,050 2,743 6,825 - 15.22% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 4,405 4,961 6,313 4,650 2,848 5,530 18.92% CAPITAL OUTLAY 21,300 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $145,663 $135,176 $119,275 $111,275 $91,986 $112,272 0.90% i I PUBLIC WORKS - STREETS & ALLEYS DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Public Works Streets Superintendent 101 43120 The foremost responsibility of the streets division is to perform the necessary tasks to reduce the depreciation of the city streets and uphold the desirable standards of appearance, serviceability, and safety. This includes upkeep such as street sweeping, repair of roadway surface areas, medians, sidewalks, boulevards, alleys, catch basins, and storm sewers. OBJECTIVES: Continue street reconstruction of older road surfaces by evaluating road wear. 2. Increase street chip seal coating projects. 3. Maintain and update equipment and vehicles. 4. Help maintain and use City GIS system. 5. Continue street crack sealing program. ISSUES: 1. Educate the public on what the boulevards are to be used for. 2. Educating the public on storm water operations. 3. Increased costs of fuel and street products due to fuel costs. 4. Educate the public on the value of good maintenance programs for our infrastructure. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 Pounds of crack sealer 14,200 18,150 Sq. yards of chip sealing 37,294 101,442 Miles of streets 67.64 67.64 Tons of blacktop patching 330 200 B -41 2009 2010 2011 24,160 20,000 20,000 58,000 75,000 75,000 68.00 68.00 68.00 200 200 200 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Budget changes for 2011 include a decrease in overtime salaries and health insurance costs based on the City's new insurance coverage. Charges for services included insurance cost for vehicles and property in the open which was previously budgeted in unallocated insurance. All equipment purchases for 2011 will be purchased from the Capital Revolving Fund and is outlined in the Capital Project Fund section of this document. For 2011 only a $70,000 seal coat project is budgeted, which is a decrease of $10,000 from the 2010 budget. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % PW /STREETS &ALLEYS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $368,066 $402,202 $369,526 $433,254 $368,343 $428,552 -1.09% SUPPLIES 100,533 121,257 117,009 127,425 125,667 130,325 2.28% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 20,037 104,228 112,019 25,400 10,361 46,513 83.12% CAPITAL OUTLAY 163,438 96,933 180,094 100,500 73,921 70,000 - 30.35% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $652,074 $724,620 $778,648 $686,579 $578,292 $675,390 -1.63% B -42 PUBLIC WORKS - ICE & SNOW DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43125 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The City's Ice & Snow activity is responsible for the control of ice and snow on City streets, sidewalks and City owned public parking lots. The activity provides control in a safe and cost effective manner, keeping in mind safety, budget, personnel, and environmental concerns. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to maintain and update equipment and vehicles in a timely manner. 2. Learn ways to effectively use the City's GIS system. ISSUES: 1. Staffing and budgeting for unpredictable circumstances. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Inches of snow 37.25 42 50 60 50 # of plowing events 11 15 20 30 20 Tons of salt used 274 474 475 450 400 Tons of sand used 347 611 800 700 650 B -43 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Ice and Snow activity budget for 2011 has no major changes from 2010. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % PW /ICE & SNOW ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $83,147 $77,026 $116,200 $65,624 $124,913 $67,303 2.56% SUPPLIES 32,124 59,662 53,551 71,550 63,788 70,650 -1.26% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,170 2,798 943 3,800 281 3,300 - 13.16% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 129,516 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $118,441 $269,002 $170,694 $140,974 $188,982 $141,253 0.20% Ii PUBLIC WORKS - SHOP & GARAGE DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43127 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Shop & Garage activity maintains all City vehicles and equipment for the Streets, Ice & Snow, Parks, Water and Sewer activities in a safe and efficient manner. OBJECTIVES: 1. Update equipment and vehicles. 2. Maintain equipment and vehicles to operate efficiently and safely. ISSUES: 1. Aging equipment. 2. Increased safety regulation for equipment and vehicles. 111 ff7.Y117\:- 4 0 1 V.YI] F7:4 9 [I7,11 17110111 Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: For 2011 there were no significant budget changes for the Shop & Garage activity. The budget consists of equipment parts, lubricants, and other repair supplies and the costs to heat/cool and supply electricity to the City shop and garage area. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 PW /SHOP & GARAGE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $68,380 $78,354 $87,007 $84,439 $96,443 $84,963 0.62% SUPPLIES 40,607 37,584 43,964 38,100 27,533 39,300 3.15% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 52,719 47,472 45,802 54,350 56,047 50,300 -7.45% CAPITAL OUTLAY 500 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $161,706 $163,410 $176,773 $177,389 $180,023 $174,563 -1.59% m PUBLIC WORKS — STORM WATER DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43130 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Storm Water activity is responsible for expenditures related to the maintenance of the City's storm water system. This consists of inspections and cleaning of all storm water mains, ditches, and ponds, and repairing damaged mains. OBJECTIVES: 1. Monitor, repair, and clean storm water holding ponds. 2. Monitor, repair, and clean storm water mains and ditches. ISSUES: 1. Continued deterioration of storm water system, without proper funding for repairs, replacement or improvements. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of miles of storm water mains N/A N/A / City / City /4 City Clean septor manholes N/A N/A 4 4 4 GPS storm structures N/A N/A '/ City / City /a City Storm water manhole maintenance N/A N/A / City / City / City Storm water system locates N/A N/A 100 100 100 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2011 budget form the storm water activity is for general maintenance of the City's storm water system and the cleaning and restoration of one holding pond. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % STORMWATER MAINTANANCE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $16,635 $0 $13,079 $4,129 100.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 2,073 4,000 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 13,913 0 1,041 6,000 100.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 7,255 25,000 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $30,548 $0 $23,448 $39,129 #DIV /01 I: c DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43140 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Parking Lot activity is responsible for reducing the depreciation of the City owned parking lots. This includes patching, striping, repairing, and resurfacing as needed. OBJECTIVES: 3. Monitor parking lots and patch and stripe as needed. 4. Continue adding minor plantings to parking lots. ISSUES: 2. Continued deterioration of parking lots, without proper funding for replacement. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of City owned parking lots 5 5 5 5 5 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Parking Lot activity's budget includes $7,000 for parking lot improvements in 2011 as there was in 2010 and there are no other significant budget changes for 2011. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % PW /PARKING LOTS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $1,008 $217 $0 $869 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 746 107 2,800 50 2,800 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 2,367 1,468 3,306 4,000 4,275 4,000 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 7,000 0 7,000 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,367 $3,222 $3,630 $13,800 $5,194 $13,800 0.00% B -47 PUBLIC WORKS - STREET LIGHTING DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43160 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Street Lighting activity is to maintain the new and existing street lighting within the City. This includes maintaining the bulbs and fixtures once they have been installed, as well as the electrical used for the lighting. OBJECTIVES: 1. Work with MNDOT to add battery back -up to signals on TH 25 in the future. 2. Daft a complete new street lighting policy encompassing all changes to existing policy. ISSUES: 1. Increased electrical costs and budget constraints. 2. Verify lamp and fixtures maintenance by utility companies. 3. Need maintenance and upgrades on several signal systems and the lack of assistance form Wright County, MNDOT and consulting engineer. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement # of street lights maintained # of street scape lights BUDGET COMMENTARY: 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 84 94 94 100 120 40 40 40 50 60 This department accounts for the maintenance and daily expenses of the City's street lights, of which, electrical costs are the largest expenditure at $150,000. The remaining funds are for repair items and supplies for maintaining the street lights. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND PW /STREET LIGHTING 2007 ACTUAL 2008 ACTUAL 2009 ACTUAL 2010 BUDGET 2010 PROJECTED 2011 BUDGET % CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES (165) 1,952 17,931 2,500 12,618 2,500 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 154,260 227,557 184,841 166,000 184,849 172,500 3.92% CAPITAL OUTLAY 68,092 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $222,187 $229,509 $202,772 $168,500 $197,467 $175,000 3.86% 11-mm PUBLIC WORKS - REFUSE COLLECTION DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Sanitation Public Works Director 101 43230 The City contracts with a private company to pick up refuse and recycling for residents within the City. Residents pay a quarterly rental fee on their garbage cart, as well as a one time charge for a recycling bin. All other costs are negotiated, and paid by the City. The City also holds a Junk Amnesty day, in which residents can drop off any unwanted items, for a small fee. OBJECTIVES: Develop a more efficient system in repairing garbage carts. Implement a new recycling system to increase recycling and decrease refuse. ISSUES: 1. The amount of time spent on repairing of garbage carts. 2. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The largest budget change is that the City's refuse hauler took over the recycling and garbage cart maintenance and replacement in 2010, so for 2011 no funds were budgeted in the supply budget for carts. The balance of the expenditures is based on the contract the City has with its refuse hauler. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REFUSE COLLECTION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $6,393 $9,152 $14,029 $10,429 $1,760 $3,447 - 66.95% SUPPLIES 24735 17,228 3,038 11,200 2,822 2,100 - 81.25% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 478,080 487,928 530,093 490,300 530,322 536,700 9.46% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $509,208 $514,308 $547,160 $511,929 $534,904 $542,247 5.92% COMMUNITY CELEBRATIONS DEPARTMENT: Culture and Recreation SUPERVISOR: Community Development Director FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 45130 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The activity of Community Celebrations is to coordinate and participate in the City's celebrations, as well as share holiday spirit throughout the community. OBJECTIVES: 1. Increase the participation of Walk and Roll. 2. Increase the participation of Riverfest. 3. Maintain Holiday decorations throughout the City. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of participants in Walk & Roll: Community (Walkers) 300 500 500 500 550 Business (Booths) 62 66 75 55 70 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Community Celebrations budget includes expenditures for Walk and Roll, the Riverfest Block Park, and to maintain Holiday decorations. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 COMMUNITY CELEBRATIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,110 2,252 2,072 3,000 1,359 2,300 - 23.33% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,110 $2,252 $2,072 $3,000 $1,359 $2,300 - 23.33% i it DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: SENIOR CENTER Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45175 The City's Senior Center facility is housed in the Community Center Complex. The City maintains the facility for the Senior Center. OBJECTIVES: 1. To maintain a clean, modern facility for use by the Seniors of Monticello. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City rents the Senior Center area from the Community Center Complex. The area is maintained and insured by City funds. In addition, the City gives an annual contribution to the Senior Center. In 2011, the contribution amount is $49,750, as it has been the previous two years. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % SENIOR CENTER ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $7 $133 $131 $344 $428 $345 0.22% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 750 0 250 - 66.67% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 56,205 57,999 93,171 95,050 72,683 94,350 -0.74% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $56,212 $58,132 $93,302 $96,144 $73,111 $94,945 -1.25% B-51 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: COMMUNITY EDUCATION Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45176 The City has, for several years, contributed to the community education program in the Monticello school district. This annual contribution is given to help subsidize summer recreational activities, such as little league and T -ball. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to subsidize the Community Education program with an annual contribution. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City in the past contributed, on an annual basis, $12,740 to the local community education program to help subsidize summer recreational programs. However, due to budget constraints this was cut from the 2010 budget as a cost savings and also was not included in 2011 budget. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % COMMUNITY EDUCATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 12,740 12,740 12,740 0 0 0 #DIV /OI CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $12,740 $12.,740 $12,740 $0 $0 $0 #DIV /01 B -52 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Y.M.C.A. Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45177 The City has, for several years, contributed to the Y.M.C.A. This annual contribution was given to help subsidize activities that members of the community may take advantage o£ OBJECTIVES: There are no objectives for the Y.M.C.A., since the City elected to stop funding this activity in 2008. ISSUES: 1. The City and County are working to purchase the Y.M.C.A, property and therefore will not fund this activity. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City and County are currently working on purchasing the 1,200 acre Y.M.C.A.. site (known as Bertram Chain of Lakes) and as such the City has elected not to fund this activity beginning in 2008. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % Y.M.C.A. ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 5,460 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $5,460 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% B -53 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: TRANSIT Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45178 Currently, transit services are by dial -a -ride bus service only. Bus services in the City are provided by River Rider Bus Company. However, Monticello will need to monitor and evaluate needed involvement in transit as related to the Northstar Commuter Rail system and increasing traffic congestion on Interstate 94. OBJECTIVES: 1. To continue contributing to the River Rider transportation system. 2. Evaluation of service enhancement needs due to implementation of the Northstar Commuter Rail system. 3. Review of need for involvement in I -94 Commuter Study for service options. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Adult Rides N/A N/A 2,534 1,804 2,000 60+ Rides N/A N/A 2,738 2,350 2,400 Dis /WC Rides N/A N/A 237 253 275 Student Rides N/A N/A 1,392 1,361 1,400 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City contributes $3,000 in 2011 to River Rider, for a future bus purchase for the Monticello route. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % TRANSIT -RIVER RIDER ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 5,000 0 3,000 - 40.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $0 $5,000 $0 $3,000 - 40.00% B -54 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: ICE ARENA Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45198 The City has agreed to a ten year contribution commitment to the Community Ice Arena, agreeing to contribute $75,000 annually. The agreed upon contribution began in 2004, and will terminate after 2013. OBJECTIVES: 1. Contribute $75,000, as previously committed. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City has committed $75,000 per year for ten years, beginning in 2004 and ending after 2013. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % COMMUNITY ICE ARENA ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 0.00% B -55 PUBLIC WORKS - PARKS - ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Culture and Recreation Parks Superintendent 101 45201 The Parks Administration activity maintains the parks and trails within the City. This includes maintaining and improving playground and picnic facilities, fertilizing and mowing of grass, maintaining athletic fields, flooding and maintenance of outdoor ice rinks, snow and ice removal, and tree preservation within the parks system of the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue pathway maintenance. 2. Use the City's GIS to improve activity efficiencies. 3. Continue implementing park plan for regional park at current YMCA land. ISSUES: 1. Other maintenance concerns coming up and not allowing completion of existing projects. 2. Budget constraints for future and existing projects. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Acres of park land maintained N/A 100 180 180 180 Miles of trails maintained N/A 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 # of events held in parks N/A 129 130 130 130 # of winter skating days 42 91 100 120 125 RM BUDGET COMMENTARY: The parks budget consists of expenses needed to maintain the City's parks and trails. The 2011 budget is consistent with the 2010 budget and past expenditure levels except for a decrease in budget for landscape materials. The capital equipment budget for 2011 included the Capital Projects section of this document with funding coming from the Capital Revolving Fund. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 PARKS/ADMINISTRATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $304,780 $332,407 $344,255 $365,496 $331,319 $365,445 -0.01% SUPPLIES 65,485 84,309 78,174 107,525 69,290 99,675 - 7.30% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 61,657 32,248 88,990 70,625 47,537 71,564 1.33% CAPITAL OUTLAY 46,022 31,950 23,593 0 2,630 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 200,000 100,000 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $477,944 $680,914 $635,012 $543,646 $450,776 $536,684 -1.28% B-$7 PUBLIC WORKS - PARKS - IMPROVEMENTS DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Culture and Recreation Parks Superintendent 101 45202 The Parks Improvement activity improves the parks and trails within the City. This includes improving playground and picnic facilities and pathways. These assets of the City are extensively used by residents, and improvements must be made to uphold the safety, functionality, and beauty the City represents. OBJECTIVES: Restore or replace cemetery grave stones at Hillside Cemetery. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. 2. Other maintenance concerns not allowing time to complete projects. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Park Improvement budget designates monies to improve the City's parks and pathways. Past budgets have included $9,000 for picnic tables, BBQ grills, and benches. 2009 capital outlay expenditures include $20,000 for improvements to Sunset Ponds Park, $20,000 for improvements to the Ellison Park shelter, $20,000 for trail and pathway improvements, and $15,000 for the installation of a patio and/or irrigation system at Hillerest Park. Due to the economy and budget constraints there are no park improvements planned for 2011. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 PARKS /IMPROVEMENTS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 12,802 10,046 12,449 0 0 0 #DIV /0! OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 88,243 3,240 9,531 0 3,398 0 #DIV /01 CAPITAL OUTLAY 44,762 91,830 4,278 5,000 0 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 50,000 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $145,807 $105,116 $76,258 $5,000 $3,398 $0 - 100.00% IM PUBLIC WORKS - PARKS - BALLFIELDS DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Culture and Recreation Parks Superintendent 101 45203 The NSP Ball field activity incorporates all City owned athletic fields. The activity prepares and maintains the fields and facilities for athletic events. OBJECTIVES: 1. Prepare and maintain the City's athletic fields. 2. Improve the structures at the ball fields. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of ballgames played 502 530 550 550 550 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2011 budget reflect past expenditure levels and is similar to the 2010 budget for maintaining the fields. The increase in other services and charges is for City water and sewer charges which had not been budgeted in the past. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % PARKS /NSP BALLFIELDS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 7,991 5,377 12,490 9,650 5,491 11,250 16.58% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,053 11,325 17,024 7,150 8,696 9,321 30.36% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV /01 OPERATING TRANSFERS 70,908 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $79,952 $16,702 $29,514 $16,800 $14,187 $20,571 22.45% e DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Economic Development Community Development Director 101 46501 The Economic Development activity of the General Fund is to create and maintain a clear focus of objectives which foster a pro- business environment and community amenities to attract and retain job growth at wage - levels that support the conummity. In addition, networking with organizations and individuals to create good -will and promote the City of Monticello as a place to work and live. OBJECTIVES: 1. Encourage retention and expansion of existing businesses. 2. Explore higher education programs with existing businesses and surrounding educational facilities, which will help facilitate opportunities for Monticello to provide jobs, with increasing opportunities for people to work and live in Monticello, promoting wages that provide incomes to purchase decent housing, support businesses, and local government services. 3. Explore opportunities to attract corporate headquarters, campuses, and businesses. 4. Work with the Downtown Business Association to create a vision and plan to create a downtown that is unique, to attract people to downtown. Connecting public spaces to the river, and pedestrian- oriented place through housing and retail redevelopment. 5. Develop a "Branding" or image for the City based upon the vision of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 6. Analyze competiveness of City based on surrounding Cities fees, taxes, and development standards. 7. Implement a Business Retention and Expansion Program utilizing a program through the University of Minnesota Extension Services. 8. Create a marketing piece to utilize via web and print that features the City's assets. ISSUE: Consistent administration of the City's policies, plans, ordinances, guidelines, statutes, etc. 2. The new Economic Development Director becoming familiar with existing City programs and development of new programs to attract new businesses and retain and expand existing businesses. C 1 MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Economic Development budget includes a portion of the salary and operating costs for the Economic Development Director. The large increase in other services is for the planning consultant to complete the Embracing Downtown Monticello study. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $55,070 $73,948 $67,157 $54,294 $49,066 $64,025 17.92% SUPPLIES 54 48 101 1,550 47 50 - 96.77% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 24,657 5,650 11,316 17,500 11,139 89,000 408.57% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $79,781 $79,646 $78,574 $73,344 $60,252 $153,075 108.71% C 4_ DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: UNALLOCATED Unallocated Finance Director 101 49200 The activity of Unallocated is to account for all miscellaneous unanticipated costs that are not specifically allocated or planned to other activities. OBJECTIVES: 1. Cover miscellaneous unanticipated costs. ISSUES: 1. The funding of unanticipated cost are those not associated with one activity or department. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The budget for Unallocated consists of operating transfers to maintain the City's General Fund balance within acceptable levels as outlined in the City's reserve policies. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % UNALLOCATED ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,339 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 88,548 0 345,313 4,000 4,000 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $88,548 $0 $345,313 $4,000 $5,339 $0 0.00% F-1 M9 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: UNALLOCATEDINSURANCE Unallocated Insurance Finance Director 101 49240 The activity of Unallocated Insurance is to account for all miscellaneous insurance costs that are not specifically allocated to other activities. OBJECTIVES: 1. Cover miscellaneous insurance costs. ISSUES: 2. Maintain the proper level of insurance coverage and deductibles to assure the best possible coverage at the lowest possible cost. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The budget for Unallocated Insurance beginning in 2011 is only for insurance cost which cannot easily be charged to a specific fund, department or activity. The charges to personnel services are for the City's workers compensation insurance. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % INSURANCE - UNALLOCATED ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $45,092 $41,837 $47,023 $45,000 $83,015 $57,316 27.37% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES &CHARGES 120,022 119,699 143,431 116,593 146,661 36,747 - 68.48% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $165,114 $161,536 $190,454 $161,593 $229,676 $94,063 - 41.79% B -63 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK e] MONDCELLO SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS C-1 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: The City of Monticello currently maintains 14 active Special Revenue Funds. A special revenue fund is used to account for revenue sources that are legally restricted for a specific purpose. The modified accrual basis of accounting is used for special revenue funds. That is, expenditures are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are recorded when received. However, compensated absences are expended when paid for budgetary purposes. Special revenue funds budgets are not always balanced, meaning budgeted revenues may be greater or less then budgeted expenditures. In these circumstances reserves will be used and show an increase or decrease in the fund balance of the fund. BUDGET ISSUES: See individual fund's for budget issues, because each fund will have its own unique budget issues. BUDGET SUMMARY: C -2 i REVENUES BYSOURCE Expenditures by Classification -- BOND Total Revenues $6,421,694 Total Expenditures $9,042,560 PROCEEDS i_ 0% PROPERTY j -- TAXES 36% -- LICENSES & PERMITS 3% PERSONNEL SERVICES, SUPPLIES, }_._. o 3/ OPERATING _ 1 - TRANSFERS INTERGOVERN. OPERATING OTHER 18% _— REVENUES TRANSFERS, SERVICES & �- 0% 41% CHARGES, 7% MISC. j REVENUE CHARGES FOR 9% SERVICES - -� / SPECIAL - FINES & ASSESSMENTS CAPITAL FORFEITS 0% OUTLAY, 0% 36% i C -2 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS REVENUES 2007 ACTUAL 2008 ACTUAL 2009 ACTUAL 2010 BUDGET 2010 PROJECTED 2011 BUDGET % CHANGE LIBRARY FUND $36,087 $37,100 $37,540 $40,184 $43,613 $36,461 -9.26% STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUND 753,997 597,423 1,220,682 370,228 358,716 362,883 -1.98% ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND 1,057,420 1,414,546 3,771,361 1,253,752 1,437,830 1,681,017 34.08% ENVIRONMENT CLEAN -UP FUND 0 D 188,054 0 0 0 0.00% DEPUTY REGISTRAR FUND 0 357,474 306,175 284,613 310,856 296,070 4.03% MINNESOTA INVESTMENT FUND 62,380 43,933 28,472 34,101 34,950 31,709 -7.01% ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT FUND 544 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CMIF FUND 100 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SHADE TREE FUND 26,762 47,658 41,934 34,704 36,252 36,544 5.30% COMMUNITY CENTER FUND 2,503,102 2,502,394 2,485,297 2,325,490 2,329,497 2,278,330 -2.03% PARK & PATHWAY DEDICATION FUND 195,489 139,082 510,580 403,620 23,511 668,548 65.64% ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA FUND 984 5,208 388 291 265 251 - 13.75% CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND 332,662 240,102 818,216 283,089 351,352 35,611 - 87.42% STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT FUND 0 272,090 331,988 280,606 322,347 247,987 - 11.62% SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FUND 1,175,783 986,979 1,175,669 494,883 212,669 401,095 - 18.95% STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND 429,217 323,788 837,759 210,521 84,969 240,784 14.38% WATER ACCESS FUND 214,692 844,716 296,114 94,565 28,939 104,404 10.40% TOTAL $6,789,220 $7,812,493 $12,050,229 $6,110,647 $5,575,766 $6,421,694 5.09% EXPENDITURES LIBRARY FUND $35,333 $39,228 $42,665 $33,743 $37,578 $36,743 8.89% STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUND 564,009 818 30,346 0 0 42,625 #DIV /01 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND 1,805,951 1,073,656 1,542,809 2,387,825 1,343,341 2,058,842 - 13.78% ENVIRONMENT CLEAN -UP FUND 48 0 188,054 0 0 0 0.00% DEPUTY REGISTRAR FUND 0 236,516 262,463 281,147 273,956 280,560 -0.21% MINNESOTA INVESTMENT FUND 0 190,000 0 0 0 0 0.00% ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT FUND 17,485 544 0 0 0 0 0.00% CMIF FUND 3,103 100 0 0 0 0 0.00% SHADE TREE FUND 13,756 41,725 22,983 41,123 34,559 36,187 - 12.00% COMMUNITY CENTER FUND 2,328,110 2,246,101 2,273,263 2,404,131 2,278,825 2,534,775 5.43% PARK & PATHWAY DEDICATION FUND 2,620 1,206,688 0 475,000 294,206 1,075,248 126.37% ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA FUND 1,355 360 1,043 0 717 1,1)55 #DIV /01 CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND 486,381 850,496 2,238,775 210,000 27,854 646,250 100.00% STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT FUND 0 0 0 0 0 185,000 #DIV /01 SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FUND 2,238,494 1,958,494 1,213,342 1,112,996 1,112,996 1,309,203 17.63% STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND 694,886 286,126 269,361 264,599 251,876 495,770 87.37% WATER ACCESS FUND 571,752 312,679 311,510 310,774 310,874 340,303 9.50% TOTAL $8,763,283 $8,443,531 $8,396,614 $7,521,338 $5,966,782 $9,042,56D 20.23% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $16,562,196 $14,588,133 $13,957,095 $17,610,710 $17,610,710 $17,219,694 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($1,974,063) ($631,038) $3,653,615 ($1,410,691) ($391,016) ($2,620,866) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $14,588,133 $13,957,095 $17,610,710 $16,200,019 $17,219,694 $14,598,827 C -3 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: LAI11I.MVIVUH) Library City Administrator 211 45501 The Library Services are contracted through the Great River Regional Library system. The City owns and maintains the building the Library operates out of, as well as providing programs through the library to participating residents. OBJECTIVES: 1. To provide residents life long learning opportunities. 2. To provide the availability of global information resources. 3. To provide quality programs for all ages. ISSUES: L Keeping information stocked as needed. 2. Budget constraints of the City and Great River Regional Library. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of items "Checked out' 209,174 216,599 219,694 220,000 220,000 # of programs offered 145 155 170 125 125 # of program participants enrolled 3,537 3,869 4,100 3,800 3,800 C -4 BUDGET COMMENTARY: This budget represents the Monticello Library. The City contracts with Great River Regional Library for all information sources and operations. The City owns and maintains the building the Library is housed in. The main revenue source for the Library Fund is property taxes. In 2010 there was a $20,000 operating transfer from the City's Liquor Fund ($16,000) and General Fund ($4,000) to help finance library program costs. For 2011 property taxes were increased so no transfers are necessary. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $34,668 $36,021 $35,408 $19,321 $19,410 $36,750 90.21% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 1,418 668 1,786 750 1,304 (525) 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 50 90 40 0 60 50 #DIV /O! FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS (49) 321 306 113 2,839 186 64.60% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 20,000 20,000 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $36,087 $37,100 $37,540 $40,184 $43,613 $36,461 -9.26% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $5,650 $7,873 $10,764 $9,368 $7,910 $10,642 13.60% SUPPIES 2,258 3,688 2,354 1,900 5,139 1,600 - 15.79% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 27,425 27,543 29,446 22,475 24,529 24,501 9.01% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 124 101 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $35,333 $39,228 $42,665 $33,743 $37,578 $36,743 8.89% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $10,108 $754 $10,862 ($2,128) $8,734 ($5,125) $3,609 $6,441 $3,609 $6,035 $9,644 ($282) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $10,862 $8,734 $3,609 $10,050 $9,644 $9,362 C -$ STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUND DEPTMENT: Street Reconstruction SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 212 ACTIVITY #: 43121 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Street Reconstruction Fund was established to track the annual improvements made to the City's infrastructure based on an annual reconstruction schedule. OBJECTIVES: 1. To improve a portion of the City's infrastructure based on an annual schedule. ISSUES: 1. Funding needed to update infrastructure. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time C -6 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources for 2011 will be special assessments, interest earnings, and an operating transfer from the Liquor Fund. The only expenditure is an operating transfer to the 2010 Improvement and Refinancing Bond for its share of costs related to the 2010 street reconstruction project. For 2011 no projects will be funded from this fund directly, as the City may issue bonds to finance any possible street reconstruction project and then the Street Reconstruction Fund will transfer its share of future debt payments to the Debt Services Fund beginning in 2012. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $517,498 $337,296 $283,713 $0 $546 $25,000 #DIV /01 LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 21,155 6,222 14,094 0 0 0 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 43,951 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 105,890 56,571 0 56,378 1,887 0 - 100.00% MISCELLANEOUS 65,503 52,105 60,069 63,850 106,283 87,883 37.64% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 145,229 862,806 250,000 250,000 250,000 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $753,997 $597,423 $1,220,682 $370,228 $358,716 $362,883 -1.98% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 564,009 818 30,346 0 0 42,625 #DIV /0! TOTAL EXPENDITURES $564,009 $818 $30,346 $0 $0 $42,625 #DIV /01 FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $664,247 $189,988 $854,235 $596,605 $1,450,840 $1,190,336 $2,641,176 $370,228 $2,641,176 $358,716 $2,999,892 $320,258 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $854,235 $1,450,840 $2,641,176 $3,011,404 $2,999,892 $3,320,150 C-7 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND DEPTMENT: Economic Development SUPERVISOR: Community Development Director FUND #: 212 ACTIVITY #: 46301- 46538 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Monticello Economic Development Authority (EDA) is responsible for the continued redevelopment efforts within the City. This consists of housing and businesses, including all related public improvements and land acquisitions. These programs are administered, based on direction of the EDA, and by the Director of Economic Development. In addition, all tax increment financing districts are initiated and administered by the EDA. There are currently 14 active tax increment districts. The EDA also administers loans to businesses in the City, based on local, state, and federal requirements. These loans are done on the premise that the business will generate higher paying jobs in the community. OBJECTIVES: 1. Explore Bio- Science and medical manufacturing facilities for Monticello. 2. Promote City's fiber optics network to attract and retain businesses. 3. Implement short, intermediate, and long -term objectives outlined in the TIE Analysis and Management Plan, 4. Continue redevelopment of downtown. 5. Continue to market the Monticello Business Center. ISSUES: Consistent administration of the City's policies, plans, ordinances, guidelines, statutes, etc. 2. Need for higher wage jobs in the community. 3. Promotion of City's new fiber optic network. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Tax increment collected 824,364 1,172,386 1,191,552 1,159,432 1,110,800 C -8 BUDGET COMMENTARY: This budget represents the Monticello Economic Development Authority programs and general administration activities. The detail of each individual tax increment district is included in the appendix of this document. The main revenue source for the EDA Fund is tax increments from the various districts. Expenditures include cost to administration costs, current tax increment pay -as- you -go payment to the various development projects and a transfer to the debt service funds for its share of the 2005 improvement bond, which financed an interchange project within a tax increment district. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $824,713 $1,172,447 $1,193,021 $1,150,611 $1,159,432 $1,110,800 -3.46% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 19,490 9,231 9,219 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 6,768 15,875 5,000 10,000 0 5,000 - 50.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 95,713 196,291 261,289 93,141 273,097 121,881 30.86% OPERATING TRANSFERS 110,736 20,702 2,302,832 0 5,301 443,336 #DIVl01 TOTAL REVENUES $1,057,420 $1,414,546 $3,771,361 $1,253,752 $1,437,830 $1,681,017 34.08% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $23,736 $18,984 $1,051 $23,436 $25,673 $22,692 -3.18% SUPPIES 0 288 0 50 0 50 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 387,645 83,797 28,621 40,225 161,861 69,300 72.28% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,256,670 501,820 1,149,425 1,075,554 482,352 1,207,185 12,24% OPERATING TRANSFERS 137,900 468,767 363,712 1,248,560 673,455 759,615 - 39.16% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,805,951 $1,073,656 $1,542,809 $2,387,825 $1,343,341 $2,058,842 - 13.78% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $5,572,794 ($748,531) $4,824,263 $340,890 $5,165,153 $2,228,552 $7,393,705 ($1,134,073) $7,393,705 $94,489 $7,488,194 ($377,825) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $4,824,263 $5,165,153 $7,393,705 $6,259,632 $7,488,194 $7,110,370 C -9 DEPUTY REGISTRAR FUND DEPTMENT: Deputy Registrar (DMV) SUPERVISOR: Deputy Registrar Manager FUND #: 217 ACTIVITY #: 41990 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Deputy Registrar (DMV) is a service based entity for the City, which assists customers in the purchase of vehicle license plants and tabs, DNR licenses and other licenses as required by the State of Minnesota. OBJECTIVES: 1. Marketing of DMV service available to the public. 2. Continue to add and improve services. 3. Improved customer service. 4. Provide notary services. ISSUES: 1. Addition of driver licenses renewal service is dependent on State of Minnesota equipment availability. 2. Changes in State regulations surrounding licensing. 3. Providing services which have no charge. 4. Dealership closings and decrease car sales due to the economy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of motor vehicle transactions 40,950 45,595 49,439 45,721 56,000 # of DNR transactions 5,580 5,129 5,401 5,428 5,600 # Game /Fish transactions 167 235 268 300 350 # of dealerships serviced 14 21 25 31 35 # of driver licenses transactions N/A N/A 450 576 620 C -10 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue source for the DMV is the fees charged for the various licenses issued. In 2009 the DMV began partial drive license services and the hope is that in 2011 the DMV will be granted full driver license capabilities, which should increase revenues. Expenditures should remain near 2010 budget amounts. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 276,919 299,201 280,000 303,839 290,025 3.58% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0100 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 5,555 4,657 4,613 7,017 6,045 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 75,000 2,317 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $357,474 $306,175 $284,613 $310,856 $296,070 4.03% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $195,843 $238,024 $252,922 $252,820 $253,418 0.20% SUPPIES 0 8,651 9,519 5,425 6,736 9,875 82.03% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 17,758 14,920 16,300 14,400 17,267 5.93% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 14,264 0 6,500 0 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $236,516 $262,463 $281,147 $273,956 $280,560 -0.21% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $0 $0 $120,958 $120,958 $43,712 $164,670 $3,466 $164,670 $36,900 $201,570 $15,510 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $120,958 $164,670 $168,136 $201,570 $217,080 C -11 kukl IIYrs11 \•IY�l�lrJl DEPTMENT: Minnesota Investment Fund SUPERVISOR: Economic Development Director FUND #: 221 ACTIVITY #: 46526 - 46528 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Minnesota Investment Fund is designated to administer loans to local businesses, following state and federal guidelines. OBJECTIVES- 1 . To match available funds with qualifying businesses in Monticello. ISSUES: 1. Number of qualified available businesses in Monticello. Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time C -12 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Interest earned from loans initiated through the Minnesota Investment Fund is the only activity anticipated in 2011 for this Fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 62,380 43,933 28,472 34,101 34,950 31,709 -7.01% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $62,380 $43,933 $28,472 $34,101 $34,950 $31,709 -7.01% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 190,000 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $190,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $974,211 $62,380 $1,036,591 ($146,067) $890,524 $28,472 $918,996 $34,101 $918,996 $34,950 $953,946 $31,709 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,036,591 $890,524 $918,996 $953,097 $953,946 $985,655 C -13 ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANT FUND DEPTMENT: Economic Recovery Grant (S.C.E.R.G.) Fund SUPERVISOR: Economic Development Director FUND #: 222 ACTIVITY #: 46501 ACTIVITY SCOPE: This Fund was closed into the EDA Fund in 2008. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time C -14 BUDGET COMMENTARY: In 2008 the S.C.E.R.G. Fund was closed into the EDA Fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 544 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $544 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 17,485 544 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $17,485 $544 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $17,485 ($16,941) $544 ($544) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $544 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C-I5 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: SHADE TREE FUND Shade Tree Fund Parks Superintendent 224 46102 The Shade Tree Fund supports planting and maintaining trees and shrubbery within the limits of the City. The Fund is in place for the purpose of regulating, developing, and providing for the planting, maintenance and removal of trees and stumps in any street, park, right -of -way or other public place within the City, in order to better serve the needs of soil conservation, climate moderation, air quality, noise, etc., and to provide the mechanisms for funding a uniform program for the purpose of beautifying the community as a whole, and increasing property values within the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Provide trees for spring tree planting. 2. Continue with Shade Tree Disease Control Program. 3. Replace dead and diseased trees throughout the City and Parks. 4. Continue chipping program. 5. Continue education program. 6. Begin a boulevard tree planting program. ISSUES: 1. Weather which places stress on trees. 2. Diseased trees. 3. Availability of funding. Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 # of trees planted 384 410 425 425 425 # of diseased trees removed N/A 868 200 200 200 # of students attending programs 271 365 375 375 375 C -16 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The major revenue source is property taxes. A portion of the park employee's time is allocated to the Shade Tree Fund. The 2011 budget reflects having a smaller budget for tree removal cost due to disease as the City has removed the majority of diseased trees over the last few years to where it is now a program of prevention than removal. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $19,176 $32,112 $35,821 $30,000 $30,100 $33,500 11.67% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 773 601 1,833 913 1,738 (800) 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 1,892 7,130 2,653 2,000 2,230 2,000 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 4,921 7,815 1,627 1,791 2,184 1,844 2.96% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $26,762 $47,658 $41,934 $34,704 $36,252 $36,544 5.30% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $9,342 $19,493 $12,971 $25,848 $27,189 $26,212 1.41% SUPPIES 607 934 5,691 1,675 922 1,875 11.94% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,807 21,298 4,321 13,600 6,448 8,100 - 40.44% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $13,756 $41,725 $22,983 $41,123 $34,559 $36,187 - 12.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $31,716 $44,722 $50,655 $69,606 $69,606 $71,299 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $13,006 $5,933 $18,951 ($6,419) $1,693 $357 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $44,722 $50,655 $69,606 $63,187 $71,299 $71,656 C -17 COMMUNITY CENTER FUND DEPTMENT: Community Center SUPERVISOR: Community Center Director FUND #: 226 ACTIVITY #: N/A ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Monticello Community Center provides a facility with space for a variety of recreational, professional, and educational opportunities. The expenditures for the Community Center are divided into three activities, administration, programming, and NSP ball field concessions. OBJECTIVES: 1. Develop a plan for the future use of the area which was used as a wheel park (skateboard, bike, and rollerblade), including design, financing, construction, and marketing. 2. Develop an on -line registration system for program and membership sign up. 3. Provide facility improvements to increase customers. 4. Maintain the community garden. 5. Improve ball fields. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. 2. Limits due to facility size, available space, and available parking. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 # of customer visits 168,923 186,429 Gross Program Sales 88,412 129,339 Rental Revenue 143,479 149,323 C -18 2009 2010 2011 186,279 183,527 185,000 149,829 167,723 170,000 163,252 151,414 167,300 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The revenue budget for Community Center - Administration included all revenues of the Fund. The largest revenue sources are property taxes ($1,100,000) and memberships ($640,000). Other revenues include concession sales, room rentals, and program fees. This activity also includes all personnel service expenditures for the Fund. Expenditures for operating and maintaining the facility for 2011 are similar to the 2010 budget. In 2010 the capital outlay budget included expenditures for carpet, replacement of the gym floor, energy upgrades, replacement of workout equipment, front counter improvements, and replacement of bathroom vanities and partitions, where as the only 2010 expenditure was for an office expansion/improvements. Finally there is an operating transfer for the 2011 payment of the debt issued for the constriction of the facility. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $1,176,130 $1,360,350 $1,260,940 $1,149,449 $1,096,049 $1,100,000 -4.30% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 48,207 25,290 63,708 23,082 61,274 (40,000) 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 1,000,662 1,056,257 1,103,851 1,109,100 1,102,142 1,174,500 5.90% FINES & FORFEITS 136 16 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 27,967 60,481 56,798 43,859 70,032 43,830 -0.07% OPERATING TRANSFERS 250,000 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $2,503,102 $2,502,394 $2,485,297 $2,325,490 $2,329,497 $2,278,330 -2.03% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $827,643 $887,124 $915,041 $865,456 $886,333 $867,430 0.23% SUPPIES 218,234 191,450 191,174 211,200 183,018 215,475 2.02% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 424,483 472,303 461,233 492,475 394,442 511,870 3.94% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 5,224 5,815 30,000 0 125,000 316.67% OPERATING TRANSFERS 857,750 690,000 700,000 805,000 815,032 815,000 1.24% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,328,110 $2,246,101 $2,273,263 $2,404,131 $2,278,825 $2,534,775 5.43% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $315,432 $174,992 $490,424 $256,293 $746,717 $212,034 $958,751 ($78,641) $958,751 $50,672 $1,009,423 ($256,445) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $490,424 $746,717 $958,751 $880,109 $1,009,423 $752,978 The expenditures above are divided into three activities, which the details of each are shown on page C -20 and C -21. C -19 COMMUNITY CENTER FUND DEPTMENT: Community Center - Administration SUPERVISOR: Community Center Director FUND #: 226 ACTIVITY #: 45122 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Monticello Community Center provides a facility with space for a variety of recreational, professional, and educational opportunities. The Administration Activity manages and tracks payroll, maintenance, and all expenses that are building wide, including debt service, utilities, and insurance. This is the general operating activity for the Community Center. BUDGET: SPECIAL REVENUE FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % COMM CENTER /ADMINISTRATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $827,643 $887,124 $915,041 $865,456 $886,333 $867,430 0.23% SUPPLIES 102,871 82,567 91,413 97,600 97,095 94,875 -2.79% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 386,380 419,094 407,175 441,575 336,351 449,370 1.77% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 30,000 0 95,000 216.67% OPERATING TRANSFERS 857,750 690,000 700,000 805,000 815,032 815,000 1.24% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,174,644 $2,078,785 $2,113,629 $2,239,631 $2,134,811 $2,321,675 3.66% DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: COMMUNITY CENTER FUND Community Center - Programming Community Center Director 226 45127 The Community Center Programming activity provides educational, recreational, and professional activities for all users, including concession food, within and outside the Monticello community. The programming activity manages specific costs that pertain to programs offered at the Community Center, as well as expenditures directly attributable to programmed areas of the facility, i.e. indoor play, fitness area, and pool. Facility concession expenditures are also included. C -20 BUDGET: SPECIAL REVENUE FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % COMM CENTERIPROGRAMMING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $O $0 #DIV /O! SUPPLIES 86,982 83,768 82,057 98,300 67,647 103,300 5.09% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 29,148 45,012 49,087 46,000 51,297 56,300 22.39% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 5,224 5,815 0 0 30,000 #DIV /O! OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV /01 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $116,130 $134,004 $136,959 $144,300 $118,944 $189,600 31.39% COMMUNITY CENTER FUND DEPTMENT: Community Center - NSP Ball Field Concessions SUPERVISOR: Community Center Director FUND #: 226 ACTIVITY #: 45203 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Community Center Ball Field Concessions manages and tracks the expenditures, except payroll and employee expenditures, for the ball field concessions, which at this time are only located at the NSP (Xcel) City Ball Fields. We provide snack food items during scheduled softball, baseball, and football games and /or practices. BUDGET: SPECIAL REVENUE FUND 2007 2008 2009 2010 . 2010 2011 % NSP BALLFIELD CONCESS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #DIV 101 SUPPLIES 28,381 25,115 17,704 15,300 18,276 17,300 13.07% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 8,955 6,197 4,971 4,900 6,794 6,200 26.53% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV /01 OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV 101 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $37,336 $33,312 $22,675 $20,200 $25,070 $23,500 16.34% C -21 PARK & PATHWAY DEDICATION FUND DEPTMENT: Park & Pathway Dedication Fund SUPERVISOR: Parks Superintendent FUND #: 229 ACTIVITY #: 45202 ACTIVITY SCOPE: Activities of the Park and Pathway Dedication Fund include updating and maintaining the City's pathway system, as well as designating funds for future parks and pathways within the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to maintain existing pathways of the City. 2. Plan for integration of funds toward park land purchases. 3. Continue the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes (fonnerly the Y.M.C.A.) property. ISSUES: 1. Tune constraints with other projects. 2. Economic slow down of new development and home construction activities. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time C -22 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The major revenue source is normally park dedication fees. However due to the economic conditions and lack of new development, for 2011 the main revenue source will be an operating transfer to help fund the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. The only expenditure for 2011 is the City's payment for the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 40,000 0 175,000 337.50% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 130,640 91,885 0 63,720 3,379 0 - 100.00% MISCELLANEOUS 64,849 47,197 13,953 24,900 20,132 18,548 - 25.51% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 496,627 275,000 0 475,000 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $195,489 $139,082 $510,580 $403,620 $23,511 $668,548 65.64% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 2,620 3,232 0 0 5,022 0 #DIV /01 CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 1,203,456 0 475,000 289,184 1,075,248 126.37% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,620 $1,206,688 $0 $475,000 $294,206 $1,075,248 126.37% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $785,003 $192,869 $977,872 ($1,067,606) ($89,734) $510,580 $420,846 ($71,380) $420,846 ($270,695) $150,151 ($406,700) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $977,872 ($89,734) $420,846 $349,466 $150,151 ($256,549) C -23 ORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA FUND DEPTMENT: Orderly Annexation Area (OAA) Fund SUPERVISOR: City Administrator FUND #: 230 ACTIVITY #: 46401 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Orderly Annexation Area (OAA) Fund is designed to fund annexation transactions for the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Provide smooth transition of property into the City from the Township when ever annexation occurs. ISSUES: 1. Slow economy. 2. Traffic congestion on TH25. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time C -24 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The only revenue source for 2011 is interest earnings. Based on the annexation agreement with the Township and due to no new parcels being annexed into the City the expenditure budget for 2011 is for meeting and travel expenditures for the annexation board meetings during the year. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $669 $4,884 $103 $0 $0 $0 #DIV /01 LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 25 94 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 290 230 285 291 265 251 - 13.75% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $984 $5,208 $388 $291 $265 $251 - 13.75% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 #DIV 101 SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,355 360 1,043 0 717 1,055 #DIV /01 CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,355 $360 $1,043 $0 $717 $1,055 #DIV /01 FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $3,465 ($371) $3,094 $4,848 $7,942 ($655) $7,287 $291 $7,287 ($452) $6,835 ($804) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $3,094 $7,942 $7,287 $7,578 $6,835 $6,031 C -25 CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND DEPTMENT: Capital Outlay Revolving Fund SUPERVISOR: City Administrator FUND #: 240 ACTIVITY #: 49201 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Capital Outlay Fund was established to acquire and hold properties as well as make any necessary improvements, while being held for resale. The Fund has also, in unique circumstances, been used to budget and purchase large equipment and vehicles for departments. OBJECTIVES: 1. Make necessary improvements to land held for resale. 2. To acquire properties at present market value to address future comprehensive plan needs when necessary. 3. Make equipment purchases. ISSUES: Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time C -26 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The revenue activity for 2011 includes interest earnings, which because of interest rates and lower cash balances is projected lower in 2011 than in the past. The expenditures in 2011 is for the purchase of equipment as outlined in the City's capital improvement plan and outlined in the Capital Project Section of this document. The operating transfer in 2010 was to funded General Fund equipment purchases and past transfers were to other special revenue or capital project funds for land purchases or other improvements. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $146 $263 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 48,517 242,125 244,457 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 6,000 0 0 0 73,674 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 147,384 139,498 0 0 5,431 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 99,917 100,341 (3,689) 40,964 27,790 35,611 - 13.07% OPERATING TRANSFERS 79,215 0 773,388 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $332,662 $240,102 $818,216 $283,089 $351,352 $35,611 - 87.42% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 189 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 476,276 55,762 5,889 0 794 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 103,581 165,000 (17,940) 646,250 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 10,105 794,545 2,129,305 45,000 45,000 0 100.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $486,381 $850,496 $2,238,775 $210,000 $27,854 $646,250 100.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $6,039,571 ($153,719) $5,885,852 ($610,394) $5,275,458 ($1,420,559) $3,854,899 $73,089 $3,854,899 $323,498 $4,178,397 ($610,639) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $5,885,852 $5,275,458 $3,854,899 $3,927,988 $4,178,397 $3,567,758 C-27 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT FUND DEPTMENT: Street Lighting Improvement Fund SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 245 ACTIVITY #: 43162 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The activity of the Street Lighting Improvement Fund is to incorporate street lighting into designated areas of the City, as pre - determined by Council. This Fund's revenue consists of franchise fees specifically designated for street lighting improvement projects. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to upgrade old traditional lights to colonial style and add lights to older systems. 2. Work with MNDOT to add battery back -up to signal on TH 25 in the future. 3. Replace and modify the old lighting system in the downtown area. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. 2. Develop replacement light program with Wright Hennepin and Xcel Energy. 3. Verify lamp and fixture maintenance by utility companies. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2000 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time C -28 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The revenue source for the Street Light Improvement Fund is the electric franchise fee the City collects. The expenditures are an operating transfer to the Capital Improvement Funds for street light improvements as listed in the Capital Project Section of this document. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 267,630 286,869 270,000 293,547 225,000 - 16.67% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 4,460 15,119 10,606 28,800 22,987 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 30,000 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $272,090 $331,988 $280,606 $322,347 $247,987 - 11.62% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 185,000 100.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $185,000 100.00% FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $272,090 $604,078 $604,078 $926,425 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $272,090 $331,988 $280,606 $322,347 $62,987 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $272,090 $604,078 $884,684 $926,425 $989,412 C -29 SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FUND DEPTMENT: Sanitary Sewer Access Fund SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 262 ACTIVITY #: 49201 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Sanitary Sewer Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's sewer services. Fees are collected on building permits for new construction and lot developments. These fees are dedicated for the purpose of sanitary sewer improvements, and to cover debt related to these improvements. OBJECTIVES: 1. To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of sanitary sewer improvements for the City. 2. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner. ISSUES: 1. Number of building permits has declined. 2. Slow economy. MEASURABLE WORI{LOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time C -30 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources are sanitary sewer access and trunk fees on new construction or special assessments of past access and trunk fees. The operating transfer is to 2008 Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond, which refinanced the bond for the construction of the Waste Water Treatment Plant, 2005A Improvement Bond for this Fund's share of the interchange project, and to the 2010A Improvement and Refinancing Bond for its share of the 2010 street reconstruction project. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 448,583 270,753 80,720 130,000 61,631 262,650 102.04% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 260,097 257,896 0 198,075 1,043 0 - 100.00% MISCELLANEOUS 467,103 254,622 111,304 166,808 149,995 138,445 - 17.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 203,708 983,645 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $1,175,783 $986,979 $1,175,669 $494,883 $212,669 $401,095 - 18.95% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 160 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 292,156 7,584 312 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 67,329 10,711 0 0 0 0 0.00 ° /a OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,879,009 1,940,039 1,213,030 1,112,996 1,112,996 1,309,203 17.63% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,238,494 $1,958,494 $1,213,342 $1,112,996 $1,112,996 $1,309,203 17.63% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $7,059,252 $5,996,541 $5,025,026 $4,987,353 $4,987,353 $4,087,026 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($1,062,711) ($971,515) ($37,673) ($618,113) ($900,327) ($908,108) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $5,996,541 $5,025,026 $4,987,353 $4,369,240 $4,087,026 $3,178,918 C -31 STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND DEPTMENT: Storm Sewer Access Fund SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 263 ACTIVITY #: 49201 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Storm Sewer Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's Storm Sewer services. Fees are collected on building permits for new construction and lot development. These fees are dedicated for the purpose of storm sewer improvements. OBJECTIVES: 1. To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of storm sewer improvements for the City. 2. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner. ISSUES: Number of building permits has declined. Slow economy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time C -32 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources are storm sewer access and trunk fees on new construction or special assessments of past access and trunk fees. The only expenditure for 2011 is an operating transfer to 2005A Improvement Bond and the 2010A Improvement and Refinancing Bond for this Fund's share of the project costs. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,950,690 $1,685,021 $1,722,683 $2,291,081 $2,291,081 $2,124,174 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($265,669) $37,662 $568,398 ($54,078) ($166,907) ($254,986) FUND BALANCE- DECEMBER 31 $1,685,021 $1,722,683 $2,291,081 $2,237,003 $2,124,174 $1,869,188 C -33 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 75,231 24,959 3,343 20,000 7,169 174,500 772.50% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 212,666 155,900 0 130,406 1,253 0 - 100.00% MISCELLANEOUS 141,320 77,550 47,154 60,115 76,547 66,284 10.26% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 65,379 787,262 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $429,217 $323,788 $837,759 $210,521 $84,969 $240,784 14.38% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 432,186 9,520 1,770 0 599 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 11,830 0 0 (13,322) 200,000 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 262,700 264,776 267,591 264,599 264,599 295,770 11.78% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $694,886 $286,126 $269,361 $264,599 $251,876 $495,770 87.37% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,950,690 $1,685,021 $1,722,683 $2,291,081 $2,291,081 $2,124,174 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($265,669) $37,662 $568,398 ($54,078) ($166,907) ($254,986) FUND BALANCE- DECEMBER 31 $1,685,021 $1,722,683 $2,291,081 $2,237,003 $2,124,174 $1,869,188 C -33 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: WATER ACCESS FUND Water Access Fund Public Works Director 265 49201 The Water Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's water system. Fees are collected on building permits for new construction and lot development. These fees are dedicated for the purpose of water improvements: OBJECTIVES: 1. To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of water improvements for the City. 2. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner. ISSUES: 1. Number of building permits has declined. 2. Slow economy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time C -34 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources are water access and trunk fees on new construction or special assessments of past access and trunk fees. The operating transfer is to 2005A Improvement Bond and the 2010A Improvement and Refinancing Bond for this Fund's share of the project costs. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 91,008 35,319 19,784 30,000 8,292 85,400 184.67% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 72,918 74,274 0 44,040 438 0 - 100.00% MISCELLANEOUS 40,661 11,271 21,734 20,525 20,209 19,004 -7.41% OPERATING TRANSFERS 10,105 723,852 254,596 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $214,692 $844,716 $296,114 $94,565 $28,939 $104,404 10.40% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 32,855 1,459 264 0 100 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 228,202 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 310,695 311,220 311,246 310,774 310,774 340,303 9.50% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $571,752 $312,679 $311,510 $310,774 $310,874 $340,303 9.50% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $660,775 ($357,060) $303,715 $532,037 $835,752 ($15,396) $820,356 ($216,209) $820,356 ($281,935) $538,421 ($235,899) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $303,715 $835,752 $820,356 $604,147 $538,421 $302,522 C -35 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C -36 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS D-1 DEBT SERVICE FUND SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: The City currently has 6 active debt service funds. Debt services fiords are used to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of general long -term debt, excluding debt issued for and serviced by an Enterprise Fund. Debt service funds use the modified accrual basis of accounting however, the cash basis of accounting will be used for budgetary purposes only. The cash basis is used for budgeting to ensure that sufficient cash will be available to make required payments on the City's bonded indebtedness. BUDGET ISSUES: The City's bond rating was upgraded to Aa3 from A2 in 2010 from Moody's Investor Services. The City issued debt in 2010 and plans to issue additional debt in 2011 to finance the 2010 and 2011 street reconstruction project respectfully as listed in the Capital Projects Fund section of this document. The 2011 debt issue is estimated at $4,590,000. See individual funds for the budget issues facing the City's debt service funds. BUDGET SUMMARY: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $9,244,977 $11,911,744 $9,572,738 $3,595,228 $3,595,228 $1,311,134 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $2,666,767 ($2,339,006) ($5,977,510) ($780,778) ($2,284,094) ($581,592) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $11,911,744 $9,572,738 $3,595,228 $2,814,450 $1,311,134 $729,542 D -2 2D07 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $8,951 $2,113 $780,177 $1,234,533 $1,236,472 $1,144,437 100.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 41,055 25,769 64,953 (41,500) 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 2,159,226 1,697,990 2,254,910 1,421,903 52,428 1,798,664 26.50% MISCELLANEOUS 1,223,970 421,307 167,083 460,446 68,037 301,902 - 34.43% OPERATING TRANSFERS 4,059,300 14,117,459 3,140,563 2,921,846 3,697,343 3,119,180 6.75% BOND PROCEEDS 737,169 15,685,262 0 0 510,000 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $8,188,616 $31,924,131 $6,383,788 $6,064,497 $5,649,233 $6,322,683 4.26% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 D 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 5,729 821 38 0 1,451 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 5,493,107 23,384,076 7,950,069 6,270,275 7,396,056 6,429,275 2,54% OPERATING TRANSFERS 23,013 10,878,240 4,411,191 575,000 535,820 475,000 100.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $5,521,849 $34,263,137 $12,361,298 $6,845,275 $7,933,327 $6,904,275 0.86% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $9,244,977 $11,911,744 $9,572,738 $3,595,228 $3,595,228 $1,311,134 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $2,666,767 ($2,339,006) ($5,977,510) ($780,778) ($2,284,094) ($581,592) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $11,911,744 $9,572,738 $3,595,228 $2,814,450 $1,311,134 $729,542 D -2 LEGAL DEBT LIMIT: All Minnesota municipalities (counties, cities, towns, and school districts) are subject to statutory "net debt" limitations under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.53. Under this provision, beginning with issues having a settlement date after June 30, 2008, the State of Minnesota increased the legal debt limit from 2% to 3% of the City's taxable market value. Below is the City's current net debt levy calculation: 3% Market Value $37,362,228 Less: Outstanding Debt Subject to Limit (4,920,000) Legal debt margin $32,442,228 DEBTSCHEDULE: Below is the City's outstanding debt as of December 31, 2010: Interest Maturity Authorized Debt * Rate % Date & Issued Retired Outstandine 1,260,000 4,920,000 Total supported by revenues 15,450,000 2005A Improvement Bonds 4.00 -4.75 2/1/23 25,150,000 7,085,000 18,065,000 2007A Improvement Bonds 4.00 2/1/18 6,045,000 1,060,000 4,985,000 2010A Improvement and Refunding Bonds 0.40 -2.70 2/1/21 Total supported by special assessments 3,255,000 00 3,255,000 34,450,000 8,145,000 26,305,000 2008 Sewer Refunding Bond 3.40 8/1/18 9,270,000 1,976,000 7,294,000 2008A Revenue Refunding 3.20 2/1/15 6,180,000 1,260,000 4,920,000 Total supported by revenues 15,450,000 3,236,000 12,214,000 2008 Telecommunications Revenue Bond 6.50 -6.75 6/1/31 26,445,000 00 26,445,000 Total Debt Outstanding 76.455.000 $11,381.000 $64.964.000 * All debt issued except for the 2008 Telecommunications Revenue Bonds are General Obligation debt issues, which are backed by the full -faith and credit of the City. D -3 1994A G. O. REFUNDING BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 301 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond was retired in 2004. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 NA D -4 2011 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1994A G. O. Refunding Bond was retired in 2004. Since that time the only revenue source has been interest earnings and operating transfers out to close the bond fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 2007 2006 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 4,429 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $4,429 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $4,429 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($4,429) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -5 2002 G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 310 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2014, however the City refinanced these bonds as part of the 2010 G. O. Improvement and Refinancing Bonds. The average interest rate was 3.67 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: 1. Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manner. ISSUES: 1. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA D -6 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond's main two revenue sources are special assessments and a property tax levy. In 2009 the City used reserves instead of a property tax levy to pay this debt, but in 2010 will once again use a property tax levy, along with the special assessments collected to make its annual debt payments, which are the only expenditure, budgeted. The City refinance this bond in 2010. BUDGET: REVENUES 2007 ACTUAL 2008 ACTUAL 2009 ACTUAL 2010 BUDGET 2010 PROJECTED 2011 BUDGET % CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $2,433 $356 $0 $74,798 $74,798 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 4,021 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 165,501 154,563 114,334 119,695 2,225 0 - 100.00% MISCELLANEOUS 38,632 21,768 8,657 13,930 1,360 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 174,600 1,136 0 0 187,317 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 510,000 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $381,166 $177,823 $122,991 $212,444 $775,700 $0 - 100.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 292,061 290,256 292,510 293,835 1,174,952 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 6,151 199 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $292,061 $296,407 $292,709 $293,835 $1,174,952 $0 - 100.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $598,449 $687,554 $568,970 $399,252 $399,252 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $89,105 ($118,584) ($169,718) ($81,391) ($399,252) $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $687,554 $568,970 $399,252 $317,861 $0 $0 D -% 2003A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 311 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2015, with a call feature on February, 2009. This bond was redeemed in February, 2009. The average interest rate was 3.71 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond was redeemed in February 2009 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $47 $14 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES &FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 160,807 147,120 319,989 0 31,129 0 #DIV /01 MISCELLANEOUS 96,830 68,395 (11,797) 0 2,083 0 #DIV 101 OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 654,086 210,299 0 0 0 100.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $257,684 $869,615 $518,491 $0 $33,212 $0 #DIV /01 EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 288,476 292,526 1,802,468 0 268 0 #DIV 101 OPERATING TRANSFERS 12,087 403,973 0 0 343,201 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $300,563 $696,499 $1,802,468 $0 $343,469 $0 #DIV 101 FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 $1,463,997 $1,421,118 $1,594,234 $310,257 $310,257 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($42,879) $173,116 ($1,283,977) $0 ($310,257) $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,421,118 $1,594,234 $310,257 $310,257 $0 $0 D -9 2005A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 312 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including Highway 18 interchange and other street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2023, with a call feature on February, 2013. The average interest rate is 3.82 %. The revenue source will be special assessments against benefited properties, tax increments, transfers from City utility access funds and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. ISSUES: 1. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA D -10 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources for the 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond include special assessments collected from benefited properties, transfers from the City's utility access funds, tax increments and a property tax levy. The only expenditures are for the 2011 principal and interest payments for this debt issue. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $410 $51 $150,306 $248,724 $249,312 $244,131 -1.85% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 7,887 13,404 13,819 0 - 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 1,598,722 868,084 625,735 733,129 2,938 683,368 -6.79% MISCELLANEOUS 662,615 141,284 95,089 303,262 52,769 255,433 - 15.77% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,484,225 1,636,424 1,610,141 1,605,509 1,605,509 1,593,630 -0.74% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $3,745,972 $2,645,843 $2,489,158 $2,904,028 $1,924,347 $2,776,562 -4.39% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 2,095,563 2,457,688 3,238,181 3,178,912 3,179,130 3,120,981 -1.82% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 579,590 157,722 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,095,563 $3,037,278 $3,395,903 $3,178,912 $3,179,130 $3,120,981 -1.82% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,419,211 $3,069,620 $2,678,185 $1,771,440 $1,771,440 $516,657 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $1,650,409 ($391,435) ($906,745) ($274,884) ($1,254,783) ($344,419) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $3,069,620 $2,678,185 $1,771,440 $1,496,556 $516,657 $172,238 D -11 2007A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2007A G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 313 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2007A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements, refunded the 2000A Improvement Bond, and Finance a storage building and mixing equipment at the Waste Water Treatment Plant.. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2018, with a call feature on February, 2016. The average interest rate is 3.68 %. The revenue source will be special assessments against benefited properties, sewer revenues and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA D -12 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources for the 2007A G. O. hnprovement Bond include special assessments collected, transfers from the City's Sewer Fund, and a property tax levy. The only expenditures are for the 2011 principal and interest payments for this debt issue. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $312,906 $174,148 $174,148 ($82,609) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $312,906 ($138,758) ($36,569) ($256,757) ($109,252) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $312,906 $174,148 $137,579 ($82,609) ($191,861) D -13 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $314 $182,422 $414,780 $415,726 $418,306 0.85% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 9,681 22,787 23,497 0 - 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 321,928 260,760 227,439 8,837 176,634 - 22.34% MISCELLANEOUS 0 0 1,377 (875) (14,604) (9,672) 1005.37% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 135,000 104,200 111,200 0 0 - 100.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $0 $457,242 $558,440 $775,331 $433,456 $585,268 - 24.51% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 268 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 144,336 609,289 811,900 689,945 694,520 - 14.46% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 87,909 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $144,336 $697,198 $811,900 $690,213 $694,520 - 14.46% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $312,906 $174,148 $174,148 ($82,609) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $312,906 ($138,758) ($36,569) ($256,757) ($109,252) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $312,906 $174,148 $137,579 ($82,609) ($191,861) D -13 I 1 ::�l�i�. _ :/_ � : ,111��i1►17LC : iAI�OLi�71 DEPTMENT: 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 315 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds refinanced the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) Note, which financed the construction of the WWTP. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2018, with a call feature on February, 2016. The average interest rate is 3.40 %. The revenue source will be a transfer from the Sewer Access Fund and a property tax levy. By refinancing the notes, the City will have an estimated savings of $270,404. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA D -14 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources for the 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds include a transfer from the City's Sewer Access Fund and a property tax levy. The only expenditures are for the 2011 principal and interest payments for this debt issue. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $486 $447,449 $496,231 $496,485 $430,000 - 13.35% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 23,487 (14,443) 27,637 (41,500) 187.34% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 28,684 23,509 28,403 21,301 18,963 - 33.24% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 1,445,554 500,000 400,137 400,137 524,590 31.10% BOND PROCEEDS 0 9,300,295 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $10,775,019 $994,445 $910,328 $945,560 $932,053 2.39% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 572,202 1,048,862 1,049,471 1,049,239 1,049,679 0.02% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 9,228,832 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $9,801,034 $1,048,862 $1,049,471 $1,049,239 $1,049,679 0.02% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $973,985 $919,568 $919,568 $815,889 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $973,985 ($54,417) ($139,143) ($103,679) ($117,626) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $973,985 $919,568 $780,425 $815,889 $698,263 D -15 CONSOLIDATED BOND FUND DEPTMENT: Consolidated Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 300 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Consolidated Bond Fund has no debt obligations it is responsible for. It does collect and record special assessments of projects that were funded internally by this fund or who debt requirements have been satisfied. OBJECTIVES: 1. Help finance future City projects. ISSUES: 1. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA Imuo BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Consolidated Bond Fund receives revenue from special assessments from project funded internally by the City or from retired bond funds. The transfer out is to help finance the 2010 street reconstruction project, to finance the City's share of the battery back up system for traffic signals and to finance the next land purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $56 $412 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 342 14,002 934,092 341,640 6,892 702,915 105.75% MISCELLANEOUS 155,471 92,230 34,322 75,214 5,216 17,606 - 76.59% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 8,066 0 343,201 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $155,869 $106,644 $976,480 $416,854 $355,309 $720,521 72.85% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 14 10,423 0 1,930 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 214,081 3,257,045 575,000 0 475,000 - 17.39% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $214,095 $3,267,468 $575,000 $1,930 $475,000 - 17.39% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,464,943 $1,620,812 $1,513,361 ($777,627) ($777,627) ($424,248) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $155,869 ($107,451) ($2,290,988) ($158,146) $353,379 $245,521 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,620,812 $1,513,361 ($777,627) ($935,773) ($424,248) ($178,727) D -17 WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WWTP) NOTE FUND DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: WWTP Note Finance Director 303 47000 The WWTP Note financed the construction of the treatment plant and was refinanced in 2008 by the 2008A Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA BUDGET COMMENTARY: There will be no revenue or expenditure activity for the WWTP Note since the note was refinance and the fund closed to the 2008A Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond. i 91 !1W EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $1,211 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 65,833 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,082,293 9,456,859 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $1,149,337 $9,456,859 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,082,293 9,769,979 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 445,554 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,082,293 $10,215,533 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $691,630 $758,674 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $67,044 ($758,674) $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $758,674 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -19 1998B G. O. WATER SYSTEM REFUNDING BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 305 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond was retired in 2004. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA R D -20 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1998B G. O. Water System Refunding Bond was retired in 2004. Since that time the only revenue source has been interest earnings and operating transfers out to close the bond fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $4,793 ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) D -21 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $17 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 187 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $204 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 4,997 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $4,997 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $4,793 ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) ($0) D -21 1999 G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1999 G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 306 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1999 G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2010, with a call feature on February, 2005. This bond was redeemed in December, 2008. The average interest rate was 4.16 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA D -22 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1999 G. O. Improvement Bond was redeemed in December 2008 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $884,334 $869,679 $15,924 ($0) ($0) ($0) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($14,655) ($853,755) ($15,924) $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $869,679 $15,924 ($0) ($0) ($O) ($O) D -23 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $2,816 $470 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 136,703 131,150 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 13,359 760 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 182,200 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $335,078 $132,380 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 349,733 986,135 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 15,924 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $349,733 $986,135 $15,924 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $884,334 $869,679 $15,924 ($0) ($0) ($0) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($14,655) ($853,755) ($15,924) $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $869,679 $15,924 ($0) ($0) ($O) ($O) D -23 2000A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2000A G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 307 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2000A G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2016, with a call feature on February, 2008. These bonds were redeemed in February, 2008. The average interest rate is 5.38 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORE LOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA D -24 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2000A G. O. Improvement Bonds were redeemed in February 2008 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $1,949 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 32,682 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 19,206 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 133,300 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 737,169 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $924,306 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 5,729 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 216,119 1,180,894 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $221,848 $1,180,894 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 $478,436 $1,180,894 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $702,458 ($1,180,894) $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,180,894 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -25 2000A G. O. PUBLIC PROJECT REVENUE BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 308 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bond financed the construction of the City's Community Center (MCC) building. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2015, with a call feature on February, 2008. These bonds were redeemed in February, 2008. The average interest rate was 6.27 %. The revenue source was revenues generated by the MCC. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA D -26 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bonds were redeemed in February 2008 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0,00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 54,049 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 857,750 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 6,180,000 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $911,799 $6,180,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 822,183 6,848,477 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $822,183 $6,848,477 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $578,861 $668,477 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $89,616 ($668,477) $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $668,477 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D-27 2000B G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 309 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond financed various infrastructure improvements including street and utilities improvements. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2011, with a call feature on August, 2007. This bond was redeemed in December, 2008. The average interest rate was 5.00 %. The revenue source was special assessments against benefited properties and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond was redeemed in December 2008 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $12 $10 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 64,469 61,143 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 38,640 13,290 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 7,857 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $103,121 $74,443 $7,857 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 177,476 612,658 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $177,476 $612,658 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $604,713 $530,358 ($7,857) $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($74,355) ($538,215) $7,857 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $530,358 ($7,857) $0 $0 $0 $0 D -29 1985 G. O. TAX INCREMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 376 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond helped provide financing in the City's downtown area. The debt service schedule called for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2006. The average interest rate was 8.29 %. The revenue source was tax increments from the benefited district. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA D -30 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1985 G. O. Tax Increment Bond was redeemed in February 2006 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,500 59 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,500 $59 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,559 $59 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($1,500) ($59) $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $59 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -31 1989 G. O. TAX INCREMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 377 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond helped provide financing of a senior housing facility. The debt service schedule called for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2007. The average interest rate was 7.25 %. The revenue source was tax increments from the benefited district. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORI{LOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 NA D -32 2009 2010 2011 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond was redeemed in February 2007 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $33,658 $2,271 $2,381 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($31,387) $110 ($2,381) $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $2,271 $2,381 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -33 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 171 110 11 0 0 0 0.00 % OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $171 $110 $11 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 31,558 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 2,392 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $31,558 $0 $2,392 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $33,658 $2,271 $2,381 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($31,387) $110 ($2,381) $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $2,271 $2,381 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -33 2004A G. O. TAXABLE TAX INCREMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 379 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond helped provide financing for new development in the City's downtown district. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2013, however this bond was called on August 2010. The average interest rate was 5.18 %. The revenue source was tax increments from the benefited district. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payment as scheduled in a timely manor. Generation of sufficient tax increment for debt retirement. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA D -34 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond's main revenue source was tax increments received from the downtown district. This bond was called in 2010 and thus have no additional revenue or expenditures in 2011. BUDGET: 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 78,977 49,531 14,314 34,790 213 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 144,932 138,400 0 0 356,179 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $223,909 $187,931 $14,314 $34,790 $356,392 $0 - 100.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 915 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 137,645 138,358 133,333 133,057 492,957 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 890,000 0 5,301 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $137,645 $138,358 $1,023,333 $133,057 $499,173 $0 - 100.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,015,963 $1,102,227 $1,151,800 $142,781 $142,781 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $86,264 $49,573 ($1,009,019) ($98,267) ($142,781) $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,102,227 $1,151,800 $142,781 $44,514 $0 $0 D -35 2008A G. O. REVENUE REFUNDING BOND FUND DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond Finance Director 314 47000 The 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond refinanced the 2000A Public Project Revenue Bond. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2015. The average interest rate is 3.20 %. The revenue source is revenues generated from the Monticello Community Center. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. Generation of revenues by the Community Center to fund operations and repay debt service with as low of property tax levy as possible. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA D -36 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond's revenue source is a transfer from the Community Center Fund, while the expenditures consist of the 2011 debt payment. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS D 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 5,255 1,601 5,722 22,493 16,749 192.71% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 650,000 700,000 805,000 805,000 815,000 1.24% BOND PROCEEDS 0 204,967 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $0 $860,222 $701,601 $810,722 $827,493 $831,749 2.59% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 821 38 0 268 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 90,553 815,003 803,100 807,635 1,102,560 37.29% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $91,374 $815,041 $803,100 $807,903 $1,102,580 37.29% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $768,848 $655,408 $655,408 $674,998 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $768,848 ($113,440) $7,622 $19,590 ($270,831) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $768,848 $655,408 $663,030 $674,998 $404,167 D -37 2010A G. O. IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2010A G. O. Improvement and Refinancing Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 317 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2010A G. O. Improvement and Refinancing Bond finance capital projects approve and started in 2010 and refinanced the 2002 G. O. Improvement Bonds. The debt service schedule calls for semi - annual payments on February and August 1 st. The average interest rate is 2.0047 %. The revenue sources include a combination of existing City funds, a property tax levy, and special assessments. OBJECTIVES: 1. Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. ISSUES: 1. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 NA r BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City issued the 2010 G. O. Improvement and Refunding Bond in the amount of $3,255,000 to finance the reconstruction of West River Street, intersection improvements on the Northeast corners of Highway 25 and Broadway and East River Streets and to refinance the G. O. Improvement Bonds of 2002. The 2010A G. O. Improvement Bond's revenue source will be a combination of existing City funds, including the Consolidated Bond Fund, Street Light Improvement Fund, Street Reconstruction Fund, the three Access Funds and Economic Development Fund, a small property tax levy, and special assessments, while the expenditures consist of the debt payments. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $151 $52,000 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS $0 $0 $0 $0 $407 $235,747 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS $0 $0 $0 $0 ($2,794) $2,823 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $185,960 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 ($2,236) $476,530 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 461,515 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 187,318 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $0 $0 $187,318 $461,515 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($189,554) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $0 $0 $0 ($189,554) $15,015 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($189,554) ($174,539) D -39 O A 0 �ls+i NiN sI2RMRg2q SNS?SS e4SN @NN�§'iiSS�SSSSiSNS @NN @CS iSSSS55S 4"SQSNiNN P a� �.99gRyg o ' 2 N q 8 8 8 8s 8 a 8 8 @ J-�3 M 8 8 8 $ 8 8 8 8 $ 8 8 8 8 8 8 k 8 8 d d It g M d M d $ e 8 d d b N d b k$ N a 8 8 8 8 °a Sa8 8 8 8 8 0 �a 8 x$ �a 8 8 8 "s 8 8$ 8 a 8 $ k 8 a 8$ 8 a 8 $ 8 8 k 'a a $ 'a $a F �8 8 $ 8 $'8 B a 8� °s 8 8 B B s a 8 8 B k a 8 8$ 8 8 k$ a x o$ 8 8 0 8a.� 9' p d= k 's k k k$ s s s s k o o � d $ 8$ S 8 8 8 $e 8_ B a _ s $$g$asddk�dbd ue Paa�$daN8$S� a ^- 888888$8$888888 ooko 8,80, 8888$8 8Gq 8'a 88a 8&�$8$g88�88g88r$dP8°8°8gm8s8$0a 8a o 8a oea�„$ E$� 88d o$S�$8Sb o8S1 88Ne a8�888 , 889@8 �3 [ $ e9 �8a$d, g' �S WII$99 ba a e lBll a8� sad h � • $k8isp8$8�$�o888NWp8''�8tlo88��os8�8$'�'9"" d da�a" @ � ®babda$�8�a$�e �dM8Gb8 "BSSpdababbaz� 88888'$$BBkd bb 8N8aa I 5N�$ b�N88� llvmVw1tw:lpB� CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS E-1 CAPITAL PROJECT FUND DESCRIPTION: Capital Project Funds account for the financial resources and appropriations of constructing and replacing the City's infrastructure including streets and City buildings or facilities, except those financed by Enterprise Funds. Capital Project Funds use the modified accrual basis of accounting however, the cash basis of accounting will be used for budgetary purposes only. The cash basis is used for budgeting to ensure that sufficient cash will be available to make all required payments. BUDGET ISSUES: Prior to 2006, the City would create a new capital project fund for each project being constructed. Now the City uses one fund to account for all projects and separates resources and expenditures using project numbers and account codes. The major issue with the City's capital project funds is finding adequate funding resources for the various projects with as small of impact on tax payers and property owners as possible. BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City currently has the following active projects; • West School Boulevard Extension • 95tt' Street Northeast Extension • Chelsea Road /Fallon Avenue to County Road 18 Improvements • I94 Twin Bridge Reconstruction (State Project) • Dalton Avenue Extension • 2010 Street Reconstruction • Highway 25 and East River Street /West Broadway Intersection Improvements The projects listed are street improvement projects with some utility improvements when necessary. 2011 projects include the reconstruction of East River Street and the various surrounding side streets leading into East River Street, Intersection improvements at Walnut Street and 7th Street, restoration of storm water ponds, parking lot reconstruction, construction of storm water lift station, reconstruction on rural outlaying streets, the beginning of construction of Fallon Avenue overpass and some smaller miscellaneous projects. Funding sources for these projects include special assessments to benefitted properties and transfers from other City funds. At this time the City anticipates issuing debt to finance these projects. E -2 The current fund balance deficit will be eliminated from a transfer of funds from the City's Debt Service Funds in the future. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 ($1,805,366) ($595,359) ($1,839,443) ($2,124,392) ($2,124,392) ($2,167,990) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $1,210,007 ($1,244,084) ($284,949) $1,313,100 ($43,598) $12,502 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($595,359) ($1,839,443) ($2,124,392) ($811,292) ($2,167,990) ($2,155,488) The rest of this section is the first year (2011) of the City's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which includes capital equipment purchases for the various funds, facility improvements for the City and infrastructure improvements. The City Council approved the CIP on December 13, 2010. The full five -year adopted CIP is available as a separate document or on the City's web site. E -3 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 836,977 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 91,806 0 20,125 840,000 0 0 0.00% FINES &FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS (184,659) (44,554) (14,312) (18,683) 366,700 (22,998) 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 632,908 1,409,567 69,462 1.,551,003 0 185,000 100.00% BOND PROCEEDS - 3,747,275 0 0 3,230,000 2,745,000 4,590,000 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $5,124,307 $1,365,013 $75,275 $5,602,320 $3,111,700 $4,752,002 100.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 3,807 9,511 0 0 896 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,907,216 205,880 97,309 1,643,000 411,735 1,805,000 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 3,277 1,493,453 262,872 2,326,500 2,742,667 2,934,500 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 900,253 43 319,720 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,914,300 $2,609,097 $360,224 $4,289,220 $3,155,298 $4,739,500 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 ($1,805,366) ($595,359) ($1,839,443) ($2,124,392) ($2,124,392) ($2,167,990) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $1,210,007 ($1,244,084) ($284,949) $1,313,100 ($43,598) $12,502 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($595,359) ($1,839,443) ($2,124,392) ($811,292) ($2,167,990) ($2,155,488) The rest of this section is the first year (2011) of the City's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which includes capital equipment purchases for the various funds, facility improvements for the City and infrastructure improvements. The City Council approved the CIP on December 13, 2010. The full five -year adopted CIP is available as a separate document or on the City's web site. E -3 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Expenditures: Project Name 2011 Personal Computer Replacement 16,900 Server Component Upgrades 4,000 Security Camera Systems 15,000 Laptop Computer Replacement 2,500 Portable Radios 12,500 Retrofit scba Packs 14,000 Duty Officer Vehicle 35,000 Building Inspection Vehicle 20,000 Public Works Garage Area Remodel 14,000 GIS Hardware & Software 2,500 Pavement Management Software 2,000 Public Works Staff Car 17,000 Ditch Mower Tractor 80,000 Mid -Size Tractor /Loader 70,000 One -Ton Truck Replacement 60,000 Hook Dump Truck Replacement 248,250 Utility Mule /Small Truck Replacement 9,500 Park Shop Remodel 4,000 Bertram Lakes Property Acquisition 475,000 Purchase a Skid Loader Trailer 6,000 West & East Bridge Park Lighting 65,000 East Bridge Park Landscaping 3,500 Storm Water Pond Restoration 25,000 MCC Carpet 5,000 Energy Management Upgrades 30,000 Recreation Equipment Replacement 30,000 Replace Gym Floor 50,000 Vanity & Partition Replacement 10,000 MCC Front Counter Improvements 6,000 Table Covering Replacement 3,000 Community Signs 30,000 Intersection Improv. - Walnut/7th Str. 140,000 Walnut Street Crosswalk /Blvd. Impr. 10,000 Parking Lot Reconstruction 80,000 Signal Light Battery Backups 70,000 Street Reconstruction - Area 4A 87,250 Overlay Rural Outlaying Streets 450,000 Fallon Overpass Construction 500,000 Street Reconstruction - Area 5 3,420,000 Street Light Improvements 120,000 Storm Water Pond Lining 200,000 Trunk Sewer Improvements 150,000 Remove Impro Heat Sewage Pasturization 25,000 SCADA System Installation 150,000 Water System Improvements 150,000 Cash Register System 15,000 Liquor Store Carpet Replacement 38,000 Liquor Store Security Cameras 3,000 DMV Security Cameras 1,500 DMV Credit Card Processing System 2,500 Sign Lab System 30,000 Total Expenditures: E-4 7,007,900 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Revenue Source Revenue Description 2011 General Fund Property Taxes 41,900 Capital Revolving Fund 646,250 DMV Fund 4,000 Street Light Improvement Fund 185,000 Shade Tree Fund 0 Community Center Fund 134,000 Economic Development Fund 0 Park & Pathway Dedication Fund 475,000 Consolidated Bond Fund 21,250 Sewer Fund 250,000 Water Fund 225,000 Liquor Fund 56,000 Storm Sewer Access Fund 200,000 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 0 Water Access Fund 0 Street Reconstruction Fund 10,000 2010 Improvement Bonds 90,750 2011 Improvement Bonds 4,590,000 2012 Improvement Bonds 0 Bond Funds - Special Assessments 0 MN /DOT Participation 43,750 Wright County Participation 5,000 Unspecified Funding Source 30,000 Total Revenue Sources 7,007,900 E -5 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Personal Computer Replacement Priority Ranking: 29.85 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 4 years Responsible Dept.: Information Technology Replace personnel computers of staff based on a four -year life cycle. Replace computers to maintain updated technology software and hardware resulting in staff efficiencies. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 3,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 75,400 Total 16,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 75,400 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Capital Revolving Fund 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 58,500 Total 16,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 75,400 as a result of having up to technology. Ti 4111 )mputers verses any efficiencies 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 16,900 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 5 5.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 5 5.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 29.85 E -6 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Multi Server Component Upgrades Priority Ranking: 28.60 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 5 years Responsible Dept.: Information Technology computer network servers with new, more efficient multi server Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total General Fund /MIS 4,000 4,000 8,000 Total 4,000 0 0 0 4,000 8,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 4,000 0 0 0 4,000 8,000 servers with new ones. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /MIS 4,000 0 0 0 4,000 Total 4,000 0 0 0 4,000 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 5 5.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 5 5.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 28.60 E -7 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Security Camera Systems Priority Ranking: 39.55 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept: Information Technology hase and install security camera systems City -wide and upgrade existing City facility ;ra systems. Improve safety around City and help prevent crime and if crime occurs law enforcement officials indentify individuals committing the offenses. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 15,000 10,000 0 0 0 25,000 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Capital Revolving Fund 15,000 10,000 25,000 Total 15,000 10,000 0 0 0 25,000 maintenance of the Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /MIS 10 20 20 20 20 Total 10 20 20 20 20 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 5 6.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 5 5.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 39.55 Ill CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Replace Laptop Computer Priority Ranking: 29.85 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 3 years Responsible Dept.: Information Technology more efficient com Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total General Fund /MIS 2,500 2,500 5,000 Total 2,500 0 0 0 2,500 5,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 2,500 0 0 0 2,500 5,000 Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 No future dollar impact. Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 5 5.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 5 5.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 29.85 E -9 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Purchase of 800 MHz Radios Priority Ranking: 36.40 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Fire nnase 5 additional 6oU MHz radios. Keplacement of old radios with new io technology, so that all radios are the same and all fire fighters and ergency personnel can communicate with one another. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 12,500 0 0 0 0 12,500 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 12,500 0 0 0 0 12,500 an annual m radio. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Fire 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 Total 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 1,250 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 4 5.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 5 7.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 36.40 E -10 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Replace scba packs Priority Ranking: 26.70 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Fire to their own mask. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 14,000 9,000 0 0 0 23,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 14,000 9,000 0 0 0 23,000 urchase is a replacement of old equipment and there for will have very budget impacts. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority 1.10 Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 5 6.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 3 4.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 Synergywith Other Projects 1.10 Strategic Goal 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 Total Score E -11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.70 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Duty Officer Vehicle Priority Ranking: 31.35 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 7 years Responsible Dept.: Fire Purchase of a Fire department duty officer vehicle to reduce response time to tire emergencies and the ability to establish an incident command center at fire emergencies. Finally, it will provide the department with a vehicle to use for nonemergency responses or 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 35,000 0 0 0 0 35,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 3b,000 Total 35,000 0 0 0 0 35,000 I his new vehicle will maintenance ($200). Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Fire 900 920 940 960 980 Total 900 920 940 960 980 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 5 6.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 0 0.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 31.35 E -12 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Replace Building Inspection Vehicle Priority Ranking: 27.05 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 8 years Responsible Dept.: Building Inspections Replace vehicles used by City building inspectors for building insp Replacement of old worn vehicles will reduce maintenance costs. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total ),000 22,000 42,000 Total 20,000 0 22,000 0 0 42,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 20,000 0 22,000 0 0 42,000 )lacement of older vehicles should reduce maintenance and repair c vehicles are more fuel efficient, which should reduce fuel costs also. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total (2,000) (1,800) (2,800) (1,600) (1,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 27.05 E -13 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Public Works Garage Area Remodel Priority Ranking: 38.30 Project Type: Building Improvement Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Public Works Administration a ventilation system removal. garage are Tor weiaing gas Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Public Works Shop & Garage 14,000 14,000 Total 14,000 0 0 0 0 14,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 14,000 0 0 0 0 14,000 create a so on system. energy costs through more Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Shop & Garage (50) (50) (50) Total (50) (50) (50) 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 2 3.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 5 6.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 3 4.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 0 0.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 38.30 E -14 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 20.11 Thru 2015 Project Name: Purchase GIS Hardware & Software Priority Ranking: 37.25 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 5 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering unue to purcnase ana implement a city -wide uis system. Uis allows start etticiencie better communications with the public and other government agencies. Reduces the mdency of consultants for maps and other property related needs. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 2.500 3.000 15.000 5.000 5.000 30 5nn Total 2,500 3,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 30,500 Fundina Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 2,500 3,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 30,500 Ii ne purcnase ana implementation or t;i6 snouia provide start witn a getter, more etticient system for tracking, viewing, mapping property related information, existing utilities and other pertinent data. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 No future dollar impact. Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 1 1.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 3 4.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergywith Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 37.25 E -15 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Purchase Pavement Management Software Priority Ranking: 60.70 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 5 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering ;vase software wnicn wui neap manage the recoras of Vity street maintenance replacement. Allows staff to maintain pavement cost effectively, saving money, providing safe roads for residents. Synchs with City's GIS system. res 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 2,000 0 0 2,000 0 4,000 Fundina Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 2,000 0 0 2,000 0 4,000 ;duce the amount of staff time it takes to maintain, schedt the City's street maintenance and replacement programs. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Engineering (500) (500) (1,000) (5,000) (2,500) Total (500) (500) (1,000) (5,000) (2,500) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 4 5.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 3 4.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 3 3.60 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 3 3.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 60.70 E -16 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Purchase Public Work Staff Car Priority Ranking: 39.50 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Public Works Administration IPurchase a high mileage, four door car for public works staff to commute from public works office /garage to meetings, conferences, schools, and other training. A more economical way for public works to move around the City and to meetings compared to a pick up truck Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total General Fund /P W Administration 17,000 17,000 Total 17,000 0 0 0 0 17,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 17,000 0 0 0 0 17,000 na require same maintenance as costs savings. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /P W Administration (150) (150) (150) (150) Total 0 (150) (150) (150) (150) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 1 1.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 5 6.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 1 1.10 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 35.90 E -17 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Replace the Ditch Mower Tractor Priority Ranking: 42.85 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys Kepiace me tractor usea Tor mowing ana maintaining aitcnes ana Doutevaras arouna i Reduce maintenance and repair costs and improve equipment safety by replacing old equipment. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total General Fund /Streets 80,000 80,000 Total 80,000 0 0 0 0 80,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 80,000 0 0 0 0 80,000 e repair and maintenance costs by replacing old equipments and provide better to employees using the equipment with improved safety equipment on the equipment. Operating Budget impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Streets (200) (200) (200) (200) (200) Total (200) (200) (200) (200) (200) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 5 6.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 5 6.25 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 42.85 E -18 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Replacement of Mid -Size Tractor /Loader Priority Ranking: 29.20 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 20 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys ;e me unys mia -size tractor toaaer. nepiacing an oia mia -size m has exceeded its useful life will reduce repair maintenance costs. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total General Fund /Streets 70,000 70,000 Total 70,000 0 0 0 0 70,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 0 Total 70,000 0 0 0 0 70,000 a new m costs Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Streets (300) (300) (300) (300) 0 Total (300) (300) (300) (300) 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 2 3.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 29.20 E -19 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: One -Ton Truck Replacement Priority Ranking: 30.50 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 7 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys maintenance costs on City vehicles and reduce staff down time due to equipment repairs. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 60,000 0 0 0 65,000 125,000 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total l']A19g Total 60,000 0 0 0 65,000 125,000 Keduce repair maintenance cost on city vehicles and reduce staff dawn time due to equipment repairs. The replacement of trucks in 2011 includes a one -ton truck and a' pick -uD truck. For 2012 another one -ton truck will be replaced. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total (2,200) (2,000) (1,500) (1,800) (1,500) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 2 3.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 4 5.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 1 1.10 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 30.50 E -20 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Hook Dump truck Replacement Priority Ranking: 40.00 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys and Ice & Snow dace the City's hook dump truck used by the streets department. Replac worn equipment should reduce repair maintenance costs and staff down due to equipment being out of service. res 2011 2012 General Fund /Snow & Ice 124,125 2013 2014 2015 Total 124,125 248,250 124,125 248,250 Total 248,250 0 0 0 248,250 496,500 Fundina Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 248,250 0 0 0 248,250 496,500 ace old worn out equipment should reduce repair down time due to equipment being out of service. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Streets (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) (800) (800) General Fund /Snow & Ice (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) (800) (800) Total -2,000 (2,000) (2,000) (1,600) (1,600) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 4 5.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 5 6.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 40.00 E -21 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Utility Mule /Small Truck Replacement/Purchase Priority Ranking: 24.80 Project Type: Equipment Replacement/Purchase Useful Life: 7 years Responsible Dept.: Parks lace the City's current utility ATV (utility mule) and purchase a second utility AT V. uce repair maintenance cost and reduce staff down time due to equipment repairs provide a second utility mule to increase efficiencies. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total General Fund /Parks 9,500 9,500 Total 9,500 0 0 0 0 9,500 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Capital Revolving Fund 9,500 9,500 Total 9,500 0 0 0 0 9,500 ace repair maintenance cost and reduce staff down ti provide a second utility mule to increase efficiencies. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 (150) (50) (50) 0 0 Total (150) (50) (50) 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 1 1.10 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 24.80 E -22 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Park Shop Remodel Priority Ranking: 22.25 Project Type: Building Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Parks nsulation and improve work and storage space. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 1 nnn nnn Total 4,000 0 0 0 0 4,000 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Capital Revolving Fund 4,000 4,000 Total 4,000 0 0 0 0 4,000 This project will have very little future operational impact, however the project should improve operational efficiency and the added insulation should save some heating costs. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 3 3.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 22.25 E -23 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Bertram Lakes Property Acquisition Priority Ranking: 29.95 Project Type: Park Improvement Useful Life: 100 years Responsible Dept.: Parks Purchase the 12UU acre Bertram Uhain of Lakes property from the Y.M.U.A. along with Wright County and possible the State of Minnesota. Development of a large regional park to help provide needed park space and attract new development within the area and preserve the natural area around the lakes. res 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 2,375,000 Source 2011 i.000 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 475,000 475,000 Total 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 2,375,000 funding source would need to be found because this purchase we City reserves. The land purchase it self has no operating impact. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Minimum Maintenance 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Total 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 0 0.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 1 1.00 Cost of Project 1.00 1 1.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 5 6.25 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 29.95 E -24 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Purchase a Skid Loader Trailer Priority Ranking: 12.40 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Parks Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total General Fund /Parks 6,000 6,000 Total 6,000 0 0 0 0 6,000 Fundina Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total �71!NJ9 Total 6,000 0 0 0 0 6,000 purchase of the trailer will provide for sater, more efficient tra equipment and may reduce trailer maintenance cost slightly. Budget Im 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total (10) (10) 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 0 0.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 12.40 E -25 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: West and East Bridge Park Lighting Project Priority Ranking: 37.40 Project Type: Park Improvement Useful Life: 20 years Responsible Dept.: Parks safe walking system. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 65,000 0 0 0 0 65,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total bb,000 Total 65,000 0 0 0 0 65,000 Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Parks 50 50 50 50 50 Total 50 50 50 50 50 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 37.40 E -26 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: East Bridge Park Landscaping Priority Ranking: 36.45 Project Type: Park Improvement Useful Life: 20 years Responsible Dept.: Parks res 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 3,500 0 0 0 0 3,500 ;0 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 3,500 Total 3,500 0 0 0 0 3,500 Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Parks Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 2 3.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 1 1.25 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 5 5.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 36.45 E -27 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Storm Water Pond Restoration /Maintenance Priority Ranking: 49.65 Project Type: Storm Water Improvement Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Public Works Administration Restore storm water pond areas by cleaning out soils and poor vegetation. Provide an adequate storm water drainage system by maintaining capacity and reducing sediment transported between ponds and the river. Comply with storm water pollution prevention program (SWPPP) requirements. res 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 25,000 25,000 40,000 20,000 40,000 150,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 25,000 25,000 40,000 20,000 40,000 150,000 Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Total 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 5 7.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 5 6.25 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 49.65 E -28 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Community Center Carpet Priority Ranking: 36.00 Project Type: Building Improvements Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center or rooms or in carpeted areas munity Center. To make the meeting rooms of the Community Center attractive for room rentals and replace old worn carpet. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total mu Total 5,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 65,000 Funding Source om 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total b,uuu I b,000 I b,000 Total 5,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 65,000 in some areas of the facility and areas without carpet require mopping and other Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 No future dollar impact. Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 1 1.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 5 5.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 36.00 E -29 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Energy Management Upgrades Priority Ranking: 31.05 Project Type: Building Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center N and update/improve energy using, including lighting, heating and gas usage the Community Center. Reduce energy costs of operating the Community Center. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 30,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 70,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 30,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 70,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total (200) (500) (1,000) (3,000) (6,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 5 6.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 5 5.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 31.05 E -30 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Recreation Equipment Replacement/Purchase Priority Ranking: 36.30 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center fireplace recreation equipment used in the fitness ci usage and memberships of the Community Center. 2011 2012 m area, and Nomp N Stomp area. 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 30,000 0 30,000 0 30,000 90,000 Funding Source H 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 30,000 Total 30,000 0 30,000 0 30,000 90,000 cost r be m 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 200 200 200 200 Total 200 200 200 200 200 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 4 4.80 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 36.30 E -31 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Replace Gym Floor Priority Ranking: 30.45 Project Type: Building Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center ace community Center gym boor. Keouce m and maintain the gyms usability for activities. worn gym Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Community Center 50,000 50,000 Total 50,000 0 0 0 0 50,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 50,000 0 0 0 0 50,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 (150) (150) (100) (50) 0 Total (150) (150) (100) (50) 0 Priority Ranking Criteria Weighting Factor Priority Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 1 1.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 1 1.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 3 3.60 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 1 1.10 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 30.45 E -32 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Vanity and Partition Replacement Priority Ranking: 31.00 Project Type: Building Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center (Replace the restroom and locker room vanities and partitions in the Community Center. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Community Center 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 Total 10,000 10,000 10,000 0 0 30,000 Source 2011 2012 2014 2015 Total Total 10,000 10,000 10,000 0 0 30,000 Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Community Center (50) (50) (50) (50) 0 Total (50) (50) (50) (50) 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 1 1.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergywith Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 31.00 E -33 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Community Center Front Counter Improvements Priority Ranking: 26.65 Project Type: Building Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center could include pro -shop display area for increased product sales. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Community Center 6,000 6,000 Total 6,000 0 0 0 0 6,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 6,000 0 0 0 0 6,000 ;ments to the front counter of the C area could increase product sales. a Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Community Center (50) (50) (50) (50) (50) Total (50) (50) (50) (50) (50) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 1 1.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 0 0.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 3 3.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 26.65 E -34 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Table Covering Replacement Priority Ranking: 29.40 Project Type: Building Improvement Useful Life: 7 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center top covers used during room 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 6,000 Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 covers will have no impact on Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Community Center Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Criteria Weighting Factor Priority Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 0 0.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 29.40 E -35 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Community Identification Signs Priority Ranking: 27.85 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Economic Development services and businesses are available. Promote and attract le and businesses to the City of Monticello. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Capital Project Fund 30,000 30,000 30,000 90,000 Total 30,000 30,000 0 0 30,000 90,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 30,000 30,000 0 0 30,000 90,000 areas will require very low maintenance. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund 150 250 250 250 250 Total 150 250 250 250 250 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 1 1.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 27.85 E -36 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Intersection Improvements - Walnut Street and 7th Street Priority Ranking: 44.30 Project Type: Street Improvements Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys mprove on 7th Street with improved turn lanes and traffic lanes. Provide for safer and improved vehicle and pedestrian flows at the intersection. itures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 140,000 0 0 0 0 140,000 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 2011 Improvement Bonds 140,000 140,000 Total 140,000 0 0 0 0 140,000 add cost for snow plowing and future maintenance. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund 100 500 1,000 1,000 1,000 Total 100 500 1,000 1,000 1,000 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 3 4.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 1 1.10 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 44.30 E -37 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Walnut Street Crosswalk & Boulevard Improvements Priority Ranking: 45.45 Project Type: Street Improvements Useful Life: 20 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys ce worn DricK ano aspnait crosswaiKS ano auapiaatea oouievara areas Walnut Street. Improve pedestrian safety in the area. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total General Fund /Streets 10,000 10,000 Total 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Street Reconstruction Fund 10,000 10,000 Total 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 maintenance stripping and cleaning of brick and asphalt areas. 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 100 250 250 250 250 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 45.45 E -38 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Parking Lot Reconstruction Priority Ranking: 40.10 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys the City's downtown areas. Reconstruct DMV lot in conjunction with 2011 street reconstruction, area 5 project. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 80,000 0 0 0 0 80,000 1 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 52AWA Total 80,000 0 0 0 0 80,000 time the parking lots will need some patching, seal coating, restriping, but should be minimal compared to current maintenance levels. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 300 500 300 500 Total 100 300 500 300 500 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 1 1.00 Cost of Project 1.00 1 1.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 40.10 E -39 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Battery Backup Systems for Traffic Signals Priority Ranking: 48.05 Project Type: Street Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys battery backup systems to the traffic signals along Highway 25 busy traffic areas of the City. Improve and maintain traffic flows power outages occur in the area. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Capital Project Fund 70,000 20,000 90,000 Total 70,000 20,000 0 0 0 90,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total MN /DOT Participation 43,750 Wright County Participation 5,000 43,750 Total 70,000 20,000 0 0 0 85,000 Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Streets & Alleys 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Total 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 3 3.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 48.05 E -40 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Street Reconstruction Program - Area 4A Priority Ranking: 43.55 Project Type: Street Reconstruction Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys -inn, Locust, Maple, Minnesota, Vine, and Walnut Streets. Improvements include; replacing curb, ,treets, storm sewer, water mains, sewer mains, replacing the Chestnut lift station, pathway lighting improvements on Front Str., and adding sidewalks and underground fiber optic lines. The project >hould reduce street maintenance costs and make it easier to remove snow and improve oedestriai Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Capital Project Fund 87,250 87,250 Total 87,250 0 0 0 0 87,250 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 2010 Improvement Bonds 87,250 87,250 Total 87,250 0 0 0 0 87,250 (Reconstructing streets should reduce street maintenance costs for patching material. However these streets will need to be maintained in the future to help maintain them as Iona as Dossible. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total (500) (200) (200) 100,000 (200) Priority Ranking Criteria Weighting Factor Priority Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 43.55 E -41 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Overlay Rural Outlying Streets Priority Ranking: 43.55 Project Type: Street Reconstruction Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys instruct a 3' overlay on the various streets surrounding the Uity and I owns[ Monticello and restrip them. This project would reduce maintenance costs d make it easier to remove snow. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 450,000 0 0 0 0 450,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total :• t` Total 450,000 0 0 0 0 450,000 (Reconstructing streets should reduce street maintenance costs for patching material. However these streets will need to be maintained in the future to help maintain them as long as possible. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Streets & Alleys (500) (200) (200) 100,000 (200) Total (500) (200) (200) 100,000 (200) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 43.55 E -42 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Construction of Fallon Avenue Overpass Priority Ranking: 47.10 Project Type: Street Improvement Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys Lonstruct an overpass (onage) over 194 connecting norm ana soutn i-allon Avei Provide better traffic flows from the north and south sided of 194, which will help develop and improve business opportunities on both sides of the freeway. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total bUU,000 4,000,UUU 'I Total 500,000 4,000,000 1,500,000 0 0 6,000,000 ng Source mprovemei 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 500,000 4,000,000 1,500,000 0 0 6,000,000 overpass Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund /Streets & Alleys 1,000 1,000 Total 0 0 0 1,000 1,000 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 1 1.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 5 5.25 Total Score 47.10 E -43 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Street Reconstruction Program - Area 5 Priority Ranking: 43.55 Project Type: Street Reconstruction Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys yI., L - IL-y, I.-I�''.J".1, u'1.. Washington between Broadway to either Pine, 4th, or 7th Streets. Improvements will include replacing curb, gutters, storm sewer, water mains, and sanitary sewer and install underground fiber optic lines. Reduce maintenance costs and improve snow removal. res 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 3,420,000 180,000 0 0 0 3,600,000 Revenues 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 2011 Improvement Bonds 3,420,000 180,000 3,600,000 Total 3,420,000 180,000 0 0 0 3,600,000 .acting streets should reduce street maintenance costs for patching material. these streets will need to be maintained in the future to help maintain them as as 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Total 0 (500) (200) (200) (200) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score E -44 43.55 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Street Light Improvements Priority Ranking: 53.95 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys Improve night time visibility and reduce electrical cost by installing more energy efficient street lights. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 120,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 420,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 120,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 420,000 This improvement should reduce electric cost when old street lights are replaced with more energy efficient street lights. When street lights are added to an area which currently does not have street light, the area will be more visible at night which could reduce traffic accidents or criminal activitv in the area. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total (150) (275) (400) (500) (600) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 4 4.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 53.95 E -45 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Storm Water Pond Lining Priority Ranking: 49.30 Project Type: Storm Water Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Public Works Administration nue and between 7th Street and 1 -94. Line ponds to address wellhead ection criteria and increase holding capacity in conjunction with Mills Fleet Farm Develonment. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 200,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 200,000 0 0 0 0 200,000 Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund (2,000) (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) Total (2,000) (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) (1,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 4 6.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 3 3.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 49.30 E -46 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Trunk Sewer Improvements Priority Ranking: 46.65 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Public Works Sewer Iimprove existing sewer system. rtecuce the mtiow, of clean water into the sanitary sewer system and reduce the chances of sewer back ups by replacing mains that are cracked, leaking, or have tree roots infiltrated into them with new mains. In 2012 it is anticipated that a new sewer trunk will be needed in the Featherstone addition. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 1,000 650,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,250,000 Total 150,000 650,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,250,000 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Sewer Fund 150,000 650,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,250,000 Total 150,000 650,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,250,000 of clean water, which is being treated at the plant, because it has leaked into the mains through cracks. Could also reduce the risk of sewer back ups by providing clean sewer mains. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Sewer Fund (500) (1,000) (1,200) (1,300) (1,500) Total (500) (1,000) (1,200) (1,300) (1,500) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 5 7.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 3 3.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 46.65 E -47 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Removal of Impro Heat Sewage Pasturization System Priority Ranking: 24.55 Project Type: Waste Water Treatment Plant Improvement Useful Life: 0 years Responsible Dept.: Public Works Administration /Public Works Sewer not being used and salvage for scrap. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Sewer Fund 25,000 25,000 Total 25,000 0 0 0 0 25,000 Source Sewer 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 25,000 0 0 0 0 25,000 no not being used. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 5 6.25 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 5 5.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 0 0.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 24.55 E -48 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Install SCADA System Priority Ranking: 55.40 Project Type: Water and Sewer Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Public Works Sewer /Public Works Water a SCADA system of monitoring all of the Gity's water and sewer facilities including wells, houses, and lift stations electronically. Improve response time to system problems which a the chance of sewer backups or low water levels of the City's systems. Water Fund 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 75,000 75,000 Total 150,000 0 0 0 0 150,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Sewer Fund 75,000 Water Fund 75,000 75,000 Total 150,000 0 0 0 0 150,000 before they become more problematic. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Water Fund (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) Sewer Fund (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) Total (200) (200) (200) (200) (200) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 1 1.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 3 3.60 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 5 6.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 55.40 E -49 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Existing Water System Improvements Priority Ranking: 56.95 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Public Works Water Improve existing water system and reduce the number of water main breaks and reduce water system related problems which may affect the City's ability to provide clean water to residents and businesses. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total I SU,000 Total 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 the City from providing clean water to residents and businesses. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total (1,000) (3,000) (3,000) (5,000) (5,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority 1.00 Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 5 6.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 Public Benefit 1.10 Public Demand 1.25 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 Strategic Goal 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 Total Score E -50 4 4.80 2 2.00 4 4.00 4 4.40 2 2.50 4 4.40 3 3.15 4 4.20 56.95 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Replace Cash Register System Priority Ranking: 25.45 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Liquor Operations Replace the cash register system at the City's municipal liqu Improve efficiencies and take advantage of new technology. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total 5,000 15,000 Total 15,000 0 0 0 0 15,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total b,000 Total 15,000 0 0 0 0 15,000 moact on could improve efficiencies of maintaining inventories and reordering of goods. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total (50) (100) (100) (100) (100) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 1 1.10 Public Demand 1.25 1 1.25 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 25.45 E -51 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Replace Liquor Store Carpet Priority Ranking: 26.40 Project Type: Improvement Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Liquor Operations ice wore out carpet in the City liquor store. Make the liquor store a more aatractive to shop. Over the years spills from breakage can seep onto carpet and lie underneath threat of mold and mildew. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Liquor Fund 38,000 38,000 Total 38,000 0 0 0 0 38,000 Source 2611 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total nd 38,000 38,000 Total 38,000 0 0 0 0 38,000 would reduce future budgets because it would no longer require carpete cleaning services. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total (350) (350) (350) (350) (350) Priority Ranking Criteria Public Health & Safety Employee Health & Safety Regulatory Mandate Frequent Problems Ability to Finance Cost of Project Generates Revenue Generates Cost Savings Ongoing Operation Costs Age or Condition of Existing Public Benefit Public Demand Synergy with Other Projects Strategic Goal Comprehensive Plan Component Total Score Weighting Priority Factor Factor Score 1.50 3 4.50 1.25 3 3.75 1.50 0 0.00 1.25 4 5.00 1.00 2 2.00 1.00 2 2.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.00 3 3.00 1.00 4 4.00 1.10 0 0.00 1.25 0 0.00 1.10 1 1.10 1.05 1 1.05 1.05 0 0.00 E -52 001121 It, CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Purchase Additional Security Cameras Priority Ranking: 34.20 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Liquor Operations Purchase additional security cameras and replace analog and dummy cameras for the City's liquor operation. Provide a safe environment in and outside the City liquor store and to reduce theft of items through monitoring of the store Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Liquor Fund 3,000 3,000 Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total uor Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 Naaitionai securty cameras wm proviae oeuer score coverage, wnicn cowa ieaa co less loss through customer theft. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Liquor Fund (150) (150) (150) (150) (150) Total (150) (150) (150) (150) (150) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 4 5.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 4 4.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 38.40 E -53 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Purchase Additional Security Cameras Priority Ranking: 38.40 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Department of Motor Vehicles )dditional security cameras to existing system to provide better building and lot coverage. Provide a safe work environment for employees and customers. Expenditures 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total DMV Funds 1,500 1,500 Total 1,500 0 0 0 0 1,500 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total DMV Funds 1,500 1,500 Total 1,500 0 0 0 0 1,500 icionai security cameras win provace Der[er coverage of break -ins or poor behavior of customers. Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 No future dollar impact. Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 4 5.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 4 4.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 38.40 E -54 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Purchase Five Credit Card Processing Machines for DMV Priority Ranking: 21.50 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: DMV approves the use of credit cards at uMV's, purchase Live a for the workstations at the DMV. More efficient processing licenses at the DMV to attract additional customers. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 2,500 0 0 0 0 2,500 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 2,500 0 0 0 0 2,500 reduce the number of NSF checks and their related fees. 2011 2012 additional revenues 2013 2014 2015 Total (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 0 0.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 5 5.00 Cost of Project 1.00 0 0.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 5 6.25 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 21.50 E -55 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2011 Thru 2015 Project Name: Sign Lab System Priority Ranking: 30.05 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys ;hase the equipment and software system to produce street signs and other signs and banners in- house. Reducing the cost of signs by producing them compared to outsourcing. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 30,000 0 0 0 0 30,000 Funding Source 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Total 30,000 0 Operational Impact /Other Comments: 0 0 0 30,000 Will reduce the cost of street signs and other City signs. Factor Factor Score Operating Budget Impact 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 General Fund (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) Total (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 2 3.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 1 1.25 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 5 6.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 5 5.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score E -56 30.05 MONTICELLO ENTERPRISE FUNDS F-1 ENTERPRISE FUND SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: Enterprise fund are established to finance and account for the acquisition, operation, and maintenance of governmental facilities and services, which are entirely or predominantly self - supporting through retail sales or user charges. The City accounts for liquor (Hi- Way Liquors), water, sewer, cemetery, and fiber optic network (FiberNet Monticello) operations as enterprise funds. The accrual basis of accounting is used for enterprise funds. BUDGET ISSUES: See individual funds for the various budget issues facing each fund. BUDGET SUMMARY: TOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS $38,191,039 ($482,716) $37,708,323 $3,878,893 $41,587,216 ($8,768,459) $32,818,757 ($744,622) $32,818,757 ($8,390,078) $24,428,679 ($3,747,615) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $37,708,323 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SALES OF GOODS 3,769,077 4,085,682 4,352,570 4,044,500 4,477,651 4,404,781 8.91% LICENSES & PERMITS 5,195 3,715 13,228 3,500 7,876 4,000 14.29% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 8,069 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 65,477 51,094 37,924 2,054,423 477,539 3,911,882 90.41% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 140,299 245,518 61,258 125,000 2,419 75,000 - 40.00% MISCELLANEOUS 635,009 6,168,906 265,338 192,444 374,393 1,464,455 660.98% USE COLLECTIONS 1,882,676 2,005,284 2,120,788 2,200,300 2,277,986 2,278,050 3.53% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 482,412 17,722 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 262 0 9,804 0 20,063 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 1,436 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $6,980,407 $12,577,921 $6,862,346 $8,620,167 $7,645,996 $12,138,168 40.81% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $833,629 $787,316 $928,832 $1,428,275 $1,332,053 $1,385,489 -3.00% SUPPIES 2,903,213 3,164,733 3,668,258 3,338,600 4,716,225 3,727,925 11.66% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 2,693,264 3,566,289 3,917,554 3,798,714 4,794,028 7,726,032 103.39% CAPITAL OUTLAY 34,826 787,886 6,855,226 422,000 4,917,737 2,796,337 562.64% OPERATING TRANSFERS 998,191 392,804 260,935 377,200 276,031 250,000 - 33.72% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $7,463,123 $8,699,028 $15,630,805 $9,364,789 $16,036,074 $15,885,783 69.63% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $38,191,039 ($482,716) $37,708,323 $3,878,893 $41,587,216 ($8,768,459) $32,818,757 ($744,622) $32,818,757 ($8,390,078) $24,428,679 ($3,747,615) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $37,708,323 $41,587,216 $32,818,757 $32,074,134 $24,428,679 $20,681,064 F -2 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: WATER FUND Water Fund Water Superintendent 601 49440 The Water Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund for the City. The Water Department manages the water system so that a continuous, quality supply of water is furnished to customers at a reasonable cost. The water supply is maintained at proper pressure levels and bacteria free. Metering devices are also maintained to account for usage. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to GPS system. 2. Continue well head protection program. 3. Continue to change out and install radio reader devices on water meters. ISSUES: 1. Staff time demands on many projects. 2. Aging water controlling system. 3. Increased State and Federal regulations. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Water accounts read 15,000 15,000 16,000 16,000 16,000 Water meters replaced 94 111 280 135 300 New water meters installed 44 18 10 2 10 Water locates 1,991 1,652 1,000 500 500 Gallons of water pumped (MG) 701 710 715 660 700 Water valves maintained /4 City /4 City /4 City /4 City '/4 City Water hydrants maintained /4 City /4 City /4 City /4 City '/4 City # of times water mains flushed 2 2 2 2 2 Rebuilding main lines /wells 0 1 0 1 2 Water tower cleaned /inspected 2 2 2 2 2 Water reservoir cleaned /inspected 0 1 0 1 0 # of water samples to State 250 175 175 250 175 New water services inspected 44 17 9 2 10 GPS water system '/4 City /4 City /4 City /4 City /4 City Water services turned on /off 100 100 100 100 100 F -3 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue source for the Water Fund is the water use charges to customers. For 2011 these charge are budgeted to increase and a new tiered rate structure will be implemented as required by the State of Minnesota. The rate increase will be to cover increased operating costs and some asset depreciation. The State of Minnesota is requiring water systems to implement a tiered rate structure where the more water used, the higher the per gallon rate as a means to encourage water conservation. Expenditure changes include the increasing of funds for facility maintenance. Capital outlay expenses include the purchase and installation of an electronic monitoring system of City wells, pump houses and other facilities. Other expense items remained at 2010 budget levels or past expenditure levels. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 5,195 3,715 13,228 3,500 7,876 4,000 14.29% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 13,360 8,438 500 5,000 0 1,000 - 80.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 140,299 245,518 61,258 125,000 2,419 75,000 - 40.00% MISCELLANEOUS 155,524 116,005 84,825 89,377 119,831 97,584 9.18% USE COLLECTIONS 708,965 716,037 766,426 767,100 826,805 812,850 5.96% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 303,284 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 6,643 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $1,326,627 $1,089,713 $932,880 $989,977 $956,931 $990,434 0.05% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $241,556 $240,259 $241,662 $239,346 $188,423 $269,214 12.48% SUPPIES 121,903 117,808 133,439 174,750 84,971 1652575 -5.25% OTHER SERVICES &CHARGES 609,961 617,779 674,254 687,780 630,524 733,541 6.65% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 13,948 206,000 0 225,000 9.22% OPERATING TRANSFERS 267,000 221,185 3,161 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,240,420 $1,197,031 $1,066,464 $1,307,876 $903,918 $1,393,330 6.53% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $12,665,124 $86,207 $12,751,331 ($107,318) $12,644,013 ($133,584) $12,510,429 ($317,899) $12,510,429 $53,013 $12,563,442 ($402,896) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $12,751,331 $12,644,013 $12,510,429 $12,192,530 $12,563,442 $12,160,546 F -4 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: SEWER FUND Sewer Fund Water Superintendent 602 49480 & 49490 The Sewer Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund of the City. Expenditures are divided between the wastewater treatment plant (W WTP) and sanitary sewer system (lines, mains, and lift stations) activities. OBJECTIVES: See individual activity pages for sewer fund objectives. ISSUES: See individual activity pages for sewer fund issues. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 None Developed at this time F -5 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue source for the Sewer Fund is the sewer use charges to customers. For 2011 these charges are being increased to cover increased operating costs and some of the asset depreciation. Capital outlay was increased for the purchase and installation of electronic monitoring equipment of the sewer facilities and the Sewer Fund's share of the 2007A improvement bond payment for 2011. BUDGET: SEWER FUND $153,598 $167,108 $138,853 $243,385 $246,754 $272,245 12.94% SUPPIES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 23,287 17,981 17,429 12,000 19,357 15,000 25.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 128,473 137,792 67,158 91,425 97,880 77,980 - 14.71% USE COLLECTIONS 1,173,711 1,289,247 1,354,362 1,433,200 1,451,181 1,465,200 2.23% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 179,128 15,413 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 262 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 1,436 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $1,504,861 $1,460,433 $1,440,385 $1,536,625 $1,568,418 $1,558,1 B0 1.40% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $153,598 $167,108 $138,853 $243,385 $246,754 $272,245 12.94% SUPPIES 23,894 26,837 12,160 25,100 30,465 24,950 -0.60% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,831,379 1,871,417 1,836,107 1,884,435 1,880,284 2,031,834 25.94% CAPITAL OUTLAY (8,264) (1,436) 76,313 213,000 31,905 250,000 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 400,300 0 107,513 111,200 0 0 100.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,400,907 $2,063,926 $2,170,946 $2,477,120 $2,189,408 $2,579,029 8.49% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $22,511,782 $21,615,736 $21,012,243 $20,281,682 $20,281,682 $19,660,692 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($896,046) ($603,493) ($730,561) ($940;495) ($620,990) ($1,020,849) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $21,615,736 $21,012,243 $20,281,682 $19,341,187 $19,660,692 $18,639,842 wrl DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: SEWER FUND Sewer/Waste Water Treatment Plant Water Superintendent 602 49480 The Sewer Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund of the City. The Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) activity provides for the operation of the facility that collects and treats all sewage from the City's sanitary sewer system, The WWTP is owned and maintained by the City, while the operations are contracted out to a private company. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to GPS the City sanitary sewer system. 2. Continue researching alternative waste disposal and costing options. 3. Continue long -range planning of plant capacities and possible need for expansion. ISSUES: 1. Near capacity levels of waste. 2. Cost for new treatment alternatives. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Gallons of wastewater treated (MG) 419 420 420 425 425 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main expense item is the professional service contract for the operation of the WWTP which will remain at 2010 rates for 2011. Depreciation of the plant is also included in this budget at $520,000. BUDGET: SEWER FUND 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $214 $21 $419 $2,861 $1,212 $1,235 $1,224 1.03% SUPPLIES 162 0 950 54 250 12,339 250 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,415,711 1,277,350 1,328,051 853,942 1,343,380 1,326,445 1,355,224 0.88% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 (8,264) (1,436) 69,346 0 31,905 25,000 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,416,087 $1,269,107 $1,327,984 $926,203 $1,344,842 $1,371,924 $1,381,698 2.74% F -7 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: SEWER FUND Sewer Operations Water Superintendent 602 49490 The Sewer Fund is a self - sustaining fund, or enterprise fund of the City. The sewer activity provides for the operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer system, which consists of the sewer mains and lift stations that transport waste to the WWTP. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to GPS the City sanitary sewer system. 2. Monitor infiltration of ground water into the sanitary sewer system. ISSUES: 1. Ground water infiltration problems. 2. Aging system. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Miles of sewer mains cleaned 1/3 City 1/3 City 1/3 City 1/3 City 1/3 City Lift stations maintained 7 7 7 7 7 Sewer services located 300 300 300 300 300 GPS sewer system 0 0 1/4 City 1/4 City 1/4 City Manhole maintained 1/4 City 1/4 City 1/4 City 1/4 City 1/4 City New services hookups 44 17 9 2 10 Sewer services televised 0 0 50 100 100 F -8 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Personnel services reflect the allocation of additional staff time. Expenditures for capital outlay include the purchase and installation of electronic monitoring system of lift stations, and $150,000 for sewer main repair and /or expansion of the system. BUDGET: SEWER FUND .2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % SEWER - ADMIN /GEN OPER ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $109,979 $153,577 $166,689 $135,992 $242,174 $245,519 $271,021 11.91% SUPPLIES 23,444 23,894 25,887 12,106 24,850 18,126 24,700 -0.60% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 545,267 554,029 543,366 982,165 541,055 553,839 676,610 25.05% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 6,967 213,000 0 225,000 5.63% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 400,300 0 107,513 111,200 0 0 100.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $678,690 $1,131,800 $735,942 $1,244,743 $1,132,279 $817,484 $1,197,331 5.75% F -9 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: LIQUOR FUND Liquor Fund Liquor Store Manager 609 49750 & 49754 This enterprise activity provides customers with the opportunity to purchase alcohol, with profits going back into the community. OBJECTIVES: I. Continue to improve product selection. 2. Continue alcohol training program for all liquor store employees. 3. Improve facility as necessary to make shopping the store as attractive as possible. 4. Continue to grow customer base and sales. ISSUES: 1. Increased "requests to buy" and safety issues regarding minors. 2. Competitive pricing. 3. Staff turnover. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement Operating revenue Wine tasting tickets sold Beer tasting tickets sold 2007 2008 1,003,066 1,062,478 440 440 N/A N/A F -10 2009 2010 2011 1,042,192 1,151,279 998,533 447 309 309 202 125 125 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Hi -Way Liquors has continued to be a self - supporting enterprise for the City, with profits being used to help fund special projects and reduce property tax levies. Revenues are from the sale of alcoholic beverages and merchandise related to the liquor industry. Besides expenditures for goods to be sold budget items include personnel expenses, building maintenance and operation costs, bank charges for transactions and a transfer of $250,000 to the Street Reconstruction Fund to reduce the property tax levy. Capital outlay expenses include replacement of the stores cash register system, replacement of carpet and the purchase of additional security cameras. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE SALES OF GOODS $3,769,077 $4,085,682 $4,352,570 $4,044,500 $4,477,651 $4,404,781 8.91% LICENSES & PERMITS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS $0 $0 $0. $0 $0 $0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS $102,429 $85,709 $76,888 $77,070 $101,486 $87,317 13.30% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,063 $0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS $0 $0 $0 $0. $0 $0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $3,871,506 $4,171,391 $4,429,458 $4,121,570 $4,599,200 $4,492,098 8.99% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $421,531 $374,611 $417,189 $458,269 $409,432 $440,577 -3.86% SUPPIES 2,755,922 3,017,913 3,301,209 3,137,800 3,336,990 3,399,198 8.33% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 220,758 254,423 262,316 245,365 238,492 251;424 2.47% CAPITAL OUTLAY 12,788 0 0 0 33,248 56,000 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 330,891 171,619 150,000 266,000 266,000 250,000 -6.02% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,741,890 $3,818,566 $4,130,714 $4,107,434 $4,284,162 $4,397,199 7.05% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $2,348,130 $129,616 $2,477,746 $352,825 $2,830,571 $298,744 $3,129,315 $14,136 $3,129,315 $315,038 $3,444,353 $94,899 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $2,477,746 $2,830,571 $3,129,315 $3,143,451 $3,444,353 $3,539,251 F -11 CEMETERY FUND DEPTMENT: Cemetery Fund SUPERVISOR: Parks Superintendent FUND #: 651 ACTIVITY #: 49010 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Cemetery Fund is an Enterprise Fund, sustaining itself with revenues mainly from excavation, monument staking, memorial programs, and perpetual care. The City maintains the cemetery, as well as assisting residents in areas regarding memorials and perpetual care. OBJECTIVES: I. Continue serving the public in a courteous, professional manner. 2. Maintain the cemetery grounds and grave markers. ISSUES: Increasing maintenance costs. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time F -12 BUDGET COMMENTARY: There are no substantial changes to either the revenue or expenditure budgets for 2011. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 28,830 24,475 19,995 22,600 8,620 34,200 51.33% FINES &FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 2,980 2,023 1,291 1,621 1,019 1,065 - 34.30% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 0 2,309 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $31,810 $28,807 $21,286 $24,221 $9,639 $35,265 45.60% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $16,944 $5,338 $3,914 $5,181 $3,090 $3,261 - 37.05% SUPPIES 1,199 92 52 950 201 950 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 23,169 23,838 23,564 30,039 22,838 30,739 2.33% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 3,000 0 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $41,312 $29,268 $27,530 $39,170 $26,129 $34,950 - 10.77% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $666,003 ($9,502) $656,501 ($461) $656,040 ($6,244) $649,796 ($14,949) $649,796 ($16,490) $633,306 $315 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $656,501 $656,040 $649,796 $634,847 $633,306 $633,620 F -13 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: FIBER OPTICS FUND Fiber Optics Fund City Administrator 655 49871 The Fiber Optics Fund will be a self - sustaining fund for the City's FiberNet Monticello Business, which will bring state of the art, high speed internet, phone and cable television to the City. Residents and businesses who subscribe for service will be able to choose the services desired and for internet service the speed desired. OBJECTIVES: 1. Construct a fiber optic network through out the entire City, able to reach every home and business. 2. Offer a variety of internet speeds and cable television channels to customers. ISSUES: 1. Business start up costs and funding, 2. Various legal aspects of the City operating this type of operation. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: 2011 1,011 Measurement 2007* 2008* 2009 # Internet subscribers NA NA 503 # Phone subscribers NA NA 323 # Cable TV subscribers NA NA 415 * system is not available at this time. F -14 2010 2011 1,011 1,300 562 1,000 758 1,200 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2011 budget for the Fiber Optics Fund is based on the feasibility model, which was updated in late 2009. Revenues are from charges to subscribers and expenditures include both system operating casts and construction cost of the system. 2011 will be the first year with the system available to the entire City with the completion of construction, which should results in the increased revenues. Also expense will shift from constructing the system to operating the system. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2010 2011 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 8,069 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 200 0 2,014,823 449,562 3,861,682 100.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00°% MISCELLANEOUS 245,603 5,827,377 35,176 (67,049) 54,177 1,200,509 1890.50% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 3,161 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $245,603 $5,827,577 $38,337 $1,947,774 $511,808 $5,062,191 159.90% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $127,214 $482,095 $484,354 $400,191 0.00% SUPPIES $295 $2,083 $221,398 $0 $1,263,598 $137,252 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES $7,997 $798,832 $1,121,313 $951,095 $2,021,890 $4,678,494 100.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY $30,302 $789,322 $6,764,965 $0 $4,852,584 $2,265,337 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS $0 $0 $261 $0 $10,031 $0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $38,594 $1,590,237 $8,235,151 $1,433,190 $8,632,457 $7,481,274 100.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $207,009 $207,009 $4,237,340 $4,444,349 ($8,196,814) ($3,752,465) $514,584 ($3,752,465) ($8,120,649) ($11,873,114) ($2,419;083) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $207,009 $4,444,349 ($3,752,465) ($3,237,881) ($11,873,114) ($14,292,197) F -15 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK F -16 CITY OF MONTICELLO GENERAL INFORMATION The City of Monticello was organized as a municipality in 1856. The City of Monticello is located approximately 45 miles northwest of the Minneapolis -St. Paul metropolitan area along the 1 -94 corridor in Wright County. The City's estimated population is 11,136 and comprises an area of 5.37 square miles. The City operates under a statutory form of government. The Mayor and a City Council (the "City Council ") govern the City. The City Council is composed of four members, each elected for four -year terms. The Mayor presides over and is a voting member of the City Council. The Mayor is the chief authority for administering city government and appoints department heads, various board members and commission members. The City Council is the legislative body and meets regularly twice a month. The City Council's main responsibilities are to appropriate funds, fix salaries, adopt ordinances, and approve budgets. MAJOR EMPLOYERS Firm Type of Business /Product No. of Employees I.S.D. No. 882 (Monticello) Elementary and secondary education 875 New River Medical Center Hospital, nursing home & counseling center 550 Cargill Kitchen Solutions Egg processing plant 465 Xcel Energy * Utility 450 Wal -Mart Supercenter Discount retail store 375 City of Monticello Municipal government and services 151 Denny Hecker Monticello Automobile dealership 150 Ultra Machine Corporation Machine job shop 135 Cub Foods Retail grocery store 123 Monticello Clinic Clinic 98 Bondhus Corporation Cutlery and hand -tool manufacturing 75 *Xcel Energy numbers does not include employees reported during outage. During outage the number grows to around 2,000 employees. Taxoaver Xcel Energy Target Corporation Wal -Mart Real Estate Business Trust New River Medical Center Home Depot USA Inc. Ryan Companies Jacob Holdings of Sandberg Road L &P Ventures LLC Jacob Holdings of Monticello LLC Muller Family Theatres MAJOR TAXPAYERS Type of Property Utility Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial G -1 2010 Taxable 2010 Net Market Value Tax Capacity $264,106,700 $5,275,739 13,161,600 262,482 12,954,100 255,996 9,706,800 193,386 8,263,000 164,510 8,742,900 147,516 7,419,000 146,880 7,416,600 140,374 6,483,900 127,936 6,419,200 127,226 UNNIVIUM I RUM Im R U.S. CENSUS DATA City of Monticello Population Trend: 1990 U. S. Census 4,941 2000 U. S. Census 7,868 Current State Demographer's Estimate 11,476 Income and Age Statistics HISTORICAL EMPLOYMENT /UNEMPLOYMENT DATA (Rates are not compiled for individual communities within counties) Averaae EmDlovment Year City of Wright State of 2002 Monticello County Minnesota 1999 per capita income $19,229 $21,844 $23,198 1999 median household income $45,384 $53,945 $47,111 1999 median family income $53,566 $60,940 $56,874 2000 median gross rent $571 $526 $566 2000 median value owner 28.940% 3.039% Occupied housing $130,200 $135,300 $122,400 2000 median age 29.8 yrs. 33.1 yrs. 35.4 yrs. HISTORICAL EMPLOYMENT /UNEMPLOYMENT DATA (Rates are not compiled for individual communities within counties) Averaae EmDlovment Year Wright County 2001 50,363 2002 50,937 2003 56,542 2004 58,825 2005 60,825 2006 61,967 2007 62,826 2008 62,641 2009 62,114 2010 63,437 Averaae UnemDlovment Wright County State of Minnesota 3.9% 3.7% 5.1% 4.4% 5.1% 4.8% 4.8% 4.6% 4.3% 4.1% 4.4% 4.1% 5.1% 4.6% 6.2% 5.4% 9.2% 8.0% 7.3% 6.8% HISTORICAL TAX RATES (ALL TAXING JURISDICTIONS) " Proposed rate G-3 City of Wright I.S.D. #882 Hospital Year Monticello County (Monticello) District Total 2003 65.218% 36.863% 31.897% 3.479% 137.457% 2004 62.421% 35.633% 28.940% 3.039% 130.033% 2005 58.651% 34.414% 26.379% 2.667% 122.111% 2006 51.028% 32.567% 24.372% 2.330% 110.297% 2007 42.458% 30.714% 23.146% 2.951% 99.269% 2008 46.942% 31.648% 25.254% 2.520% 106.364% 2009 46.191% 32.567% 26.083% 2.067% 106.908% 2010 45.822% 35.819% 24.948% 1.754% 108.343% 2011' 46.716% 39.535% 27.019% 1.500% 114.770% " Proposed rate G-3 HISTORICAL CITY PROPERTY TAX INFORMATION SUMMARY OF TAX LEVIES, PAYMENT PROVISIONS, AND MINNESOTA REAL PROPERTY VALUATION The following is a summary of certain statutory provisions effective beginning 2005 relative to tax levy procedures, tax payment and credit procedures, and the mechanics of real property valuation. The summary does not purport to be inclusive of all such provisions or of the specific provisions discussed, and is qualified by reference to the complete text of applicable statutes, rules and regulations of the State of Minnesota. Chapter 21, Laws of Minnesota Special Session 2003 -1 was passed by the 2003 Minnesota Legislature and signed by the Governor on June 8, 2003. The enactment of this legislation caused changes for payable years 2003 and thereafter. These changes are incorporated in the following discussions. Property Valuations (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes) Assessor's Estimated Market Value Each parcel of real property subject to taxation must, by statute, be appraised at least once every five years as of January 2 of the year of appraisal. With certain exceptions, all property is valued at its market value, which is the value the assessor determines to be the price the property to be fairly worth, and which is referred to as the "Estimated Market Value." ITIC�Fit�e��iF.Ti'd- �itF1l1E! Because the Estimated Market Value as determined by an assessor may not represent the price of real property in the marketplace, the "Indicated Market Value" is generally regarded as more representative of full value. The Indicated Market Value is determined by dividing the Estimated Market Value of a given year by the same year's sales ratio determined by the State Department of Revenue. The sales ratio represents the overall relationship between the Estimated Market Value of property within the taxing unit and actual selling price. Net Tax Caoacit The Net Tax Capacity is the value upon which net taxes are levied, extended and collected. The Net Tax Capacity is computed by applying the class rate percentages specific to each type of property classification against the Estimated Market Value. Class rate percentages vary depending G-4 Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Tax Year Value Rate Levy 2002 9,606,212 67.645 6,498,079 2003 10,344,950 65.558 6,782,018 2004 11,141,052 62.452 6,957,915 2005 11,840,000 58.760 6,957,915 2006 13,224,144 51.040 6,750,000 2007 15,257,996 42.601 6,500,000 2008 16,190,597 46.942 7,600,000 2009 16,783,843 46.191 7,750,000 2010 16,691,266 45.822 7,648,272 2011 16,434,254 46.715 7,677,309 SUMMARY OF TAX LEVIES, PAYMENT PROVISIONS, AND MINNESOTA REAL PROPERTY VALUATION The following is a summary of certain statutory provisions effective beginning 2005 relative to tax levy procedures, tax payment and credit procedures, and the mechanics of real property valuation. The summary does not purport to be inclusive of all such provisions or of the specific provisions discussed, and is qualified by reference to the complete text of applicable statutes, rules and regulations of the State of Minnesota. Chapter 21, Laws of Minnesota Special Session 2003 -1 was passed by the 2003 Minnesota Legislature and signed by the Governor on June 8, 2003. The enactment of this legislation caused changes for payable years 2003 and thereafter. These changes are incorporated in the following discussions. Property Valuations (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes) Assessor's Estimated Market Value Each parcel of real property subject to taxation must, by statute, be appraised at least once every five years as of January 2 of the year of appraisal. With certain exceptions, all property is valued at its market value, which is the value the assessor determines to be the price the property to be fairly worth, and which is referred to as the "Estimated Market Value." ITIC�Fit�e��iF.Ti'd- �itF1l1E! Because the Estimated Market Value as determined by an assessor may not represent the price of real property in the marketplace, the "Indicated Market Value" is generally regarded as more representative of full value. The Indicated Market Value is determined by dividing the Estimated Market Value of a given year by the same year's sales ratio determined by the State Department of Revenue. The sales ratio represents the overall relationship between the Estimated Market Value of property within the taxing unit and actual selling price. Net Tax Caoacit The Net Tax Capacity is the value upon which net taxes are levied, extended and collected. The Net Tax Capacity is computed by applying the class rate percentages specific to each type of property classification against the Estimated Market Value. Class rate percentages vary depending G-4 on the type of property as shown on the 101 page of the Appendix. The formulas and class rates for converting Estimated Market Value to Net Tax Capacity represent a basic element of the State's property tax relief system and are subject to annual revisions by the State Legislature. Property taxes are determined by multiplying the Net Tax Capacity by the tax capacity rate, expressed as a percentage. Property Tax Payments and Delinquencies (Chapters 276, 279 -282 and 549, Minnesota Statutes) Ad valorem property taxes levied by local governments in Minnesota are extended and collected by the various counties within the State. Each taxing jurisdiction is required to certify the annual tax levy to the county auditor within five (5) working days after December 20 of the year proceeding the collection year. A listing of property taxes due is prepared by the county auditor and turned over to the county treasurer on or before the first business day in March. The county treasurer is responsible for collecting all property taxes within the county. Real estate and personal property tax statements are mailed out by March 31. One -half (112) of the taxes on real property is due on or before May 15. The remainder is due on or before October 15. Real property taxes not paid by their due date are assessed a penalty which, depending on the type of property, increases from 2% to 4% on the day after the due date. In the case of the first installment of real property taxes due May 15, the penalty increases to 4% or 8% on June 1. Thereafter, an additional 1% penalty shall accrue each month through October 1 of the collection year for unpaid real property taxes. In the case of the second installment of real property taxes due October 15, the penalty increases to 6% or 8% on November 1 and increases again to 8% or 12% on December 1. Personal property taxes remaining unpaid on May 16 are deemed to be delinquent and a penalty of 8% attaches to the unpaid tax. However, personal property owned by a tax - exempt entity, but which is treated as taxable by virtue of a lease agreement, is subject to the same delinquent property tax penalties as real property. On the first business day of January of the year following collection all delinquencies are subject to an additional 2% penalty, and those delinquencies outstanding as of February 15 are filed for a tax lien judgment with the district court. By March 20 the clerk of court files a publication of legal action and a mailing notice of action to delinquent parties. Those property interests not responding to this notice have judgment entered for the amount of the delinquency and associated penalties. The amount of the judgment is subject to a variable interest determined annually by the Department of Revenue, and equal to the adjusted prime rate charged by banks, but in no event is the rate less than 10% or more than 14 %. Property owners subject to a tax lien judgment generally have five years (5) in the case of all property located outside of cities or in the case of residential homestead, agricultural homestead and seasonal residential recreational property located within cities or three (3) years with respect to other types of property to redeem the property. After expiration of the redemption period, unredeemed properties are declared tax forfeit with title held in trust by the State of Minnesota for the respective taxing districts. The county auditor, or equivalent thereof, then sells those properties not claimed for a public purpose at auction. The net proceeds of the sale are first dedicated to the satisfaction of outstanding special assessments on the parcel, with any remaining balance in most cases being divided on the following basis: county - 40 %; Township or city - 20 %; and school district - 40 %. Property Tax Credits (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes) In addition to adjusting the taxable value for various property types, primary elements of Minnesota's G -5 property tax relief system are: property tax levy reduction aids; the circuit breaker credit, which relates property taxes to income and provides relief on a sliding income scale; and targeted tax relief, which is aimed primarily at easing the effect of significant tax increases. The circuit breaker credit and targeted credits are reimbursed to the taxpayer upon application by the taxpayer. Property tax levy reduction aid includes educational aids, local governmental aid, equalization aid, market value homestead credit and disparity reduction aid. Beginning in 2009 a new State Aid program will begin to equalize the loss of tax revenue on utility property due to a State reduction in the class rate on utility property. The Utility Valuation Transition Aid will be in affect for taxes payable in 2009 and 2010. The aid is based on current utility property value less any improvements to the property which add taxable value. Levy Limitations for Counties and Cities (M.S. 275.70 to 275.74) The 2008 State Governor and Legislature re- imposed levy limits for the budget years 2009, 2010 and 2011. Tax increases are limited to 3.9% or the increase in the implicit price deflator — whichever is less. The tax levy can also be increased by Y� the increase in growth. As the residential construction industry recovers, this levy limit constraint could be an ominous factor for financing future operating costs. Certain property tax levies are authorized outside of the new overall levy limitation ( "special levies "). Special levies do not include levies for bonded indebtedness on installment payments on conditional sales contracts, state -aid road bonds, contracts for deed, tax increment revenue bonds, and lease payments under certificates of participation. In order to receive approval for any special levy claims outside of the overall levy limitation, requests for such special levies must be submitted to the Property Tax Division of the Department of Revenue on or before September 15th in the year in which the levy is to be made for collection in the following year. The Department of Revenue has the authority to approve, reduce or deny a special levy request. Home -rule charter cities are authorized to exceed any levy limits and referendum requirements contained in their city charters and increase their property tax levies if such increases are necessary to offset the 2004 LGA reductions. Final adjustment to all levies must be made to the Department of Revenue on or before December 10th. Debt Limitations All Minnesota municipalities (county, cities, townships and school districts) are subject to statutory "net debt" limitations under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.53. Net debt is defined as the amount remaining after deducting from gross debt the amount of current revenues which are applicable within the current fiscal year to the payment of any debt and the aggregation of the principal of the following: 1. Obligations issued for improvements which are payable wholly or partially from the proceeds of special assessments levied upon benefited property. 2. Warrants or orders having no definite or fixed maturity. 3. Obligations payable wholly from the income from revenue producing conveniences. 4. Obligations issued to create or maintain a permanent improvement revolving fund. 5. Obligations issued for the acquisition and betterment of public waterworks systems and public lighting, heating or power systems, and any combination thereof, or for any other public convenience from which revenue is or may be derived. 6. Certain debt service loans and capital loans made to school districts. 7. Certain obligations to repay loans. 8. Obligations specifically excluded under the provision of law authorizing their issuance. 9. Certain obligations to pay pension fund liabilities. G- 6 10. Debt service funds for the payment of principal and interest on obligations other than those described above. Levies for General Obligation Debt (Sections 475.61 and 475.74, Minnesota Statutes) Any municipality which issues general obligation debt must, at the time of issuance, certify levies to the county auditor of the county(ies) within which the municipality is situated. Such levies shall be in an amount that if collected in full will, together with estimates of other revenues pledged for payment of the obligations, produce at least five percent in excess of the amount needed to pay principal and interest when due. Notwithstanding any other limitations upon the ability of a taxing unit to levy taxes, its ability to levy taxes for a deficiency in prior levies for payment of general obligation indebtedness is without limitation as to rate or amount. Metropolitan Revenue Distribution (Chapter 473F, Minnesota Statutes) "Fiscal Disparities Law" The City of Monticello is outside the seven - county Metropolitan Area and is not subject to Fiscal Disparities. The Charles R. Weaver Metropolitan Revenue Distribution Act, more commonly know as "Fiscal Disparities" was first implemented for taxes payable in 1975. Forty percent of the increase in commercial - industrial (including public utility and railroad) net tax capacity valuation since 1971 in each assessment district in the Minneapolis /St. Paul seven - county metropolitan area (Anoka, Carver, Dakota, excluding the City of Northfield, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, excluding the City of New Prague, and Washington Counties) is contributed to an area -wide tax base. A distribution index, based on the factors of population and real property market value per capita, is employed in determining what proportion of the net tax capacity value in the area -wide tax base shall be distributed back to each assessment district. STATUTORY FORMULAE CONVERSION OF ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE (EMV) TO NET TAX CAPACITY FOR MAJOR PROPERTY CLASSIFICATIONS General Classification Residential Homestead Residential Non - Homestead Agricultural Land Homestead Agricultural Land Non - Homestead Commercial/ Industrial /Utility Net Tax Capacity Levy Year 1999 First $75,000 of EMV at 1 %. EMV in excess of $75,000 at 1.7 %. 2.5% of EMV Net Tax Capacity Levy Year 2000 & 2001 First $76,000 of EMV at 1 %. EMV in excess of $76,000 at 1.65 %. 2.4% of EMV. First $115,000 of EMV First $115,000 of EMV on first 320 acres at on first 320 acres at .35 %. EMV in excess of $115,000 on first 320 acres at .8 %. EMV in excess of $115,000 over 320 acres at 1.25 %. 1.25% of EMV First $150,000 of EMV at 2.45 %. EMV in excess of $150,000 at 3.5 %. .35 %. EMV in excess of $115,000 on first 320 acres at .8 %. EMV in excess of $115,000 over 320 acres at .80 %. 1.20% of EMV. First $150,000 of EMV at 2.40 %. EMV in excess of $150,000 at 3.4 %. G -7 Net Tax Capacity Levv Year 2002 — 2011 First $500,000 of EMV at 11%. Over $500,000 at 1.25 %. 1.8 % of EMV. First $600,000 of EMV at .55 %. Over $600,000 at 1 %. 1.00% of EMV. First $150,000 of EMV at 1.5 %. EMV in excess of $150,000 at 2.0 %. FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS LOCATED IN THE CITY First Minnesota Bank (Branch of Minnetonka) Liberty Savings Bank, FSB (Branch of St. Cloud) Premier Bank Minnesota (Branch of Farmington) RiverWood Bank (Branch of Baxter) TCF National Bank (Branch of Sioux Falls, South Dakota) U.S. Bank National Association (Branch of Cincinnati, Ohio) Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (Branch of Sioux Falls, South Dakota) CITY OF MONTICELLO Number of City Employees (Full -Time Equivalent) 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Position Title Actual Actual Actual Actual Proposed City Administrator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Deputy City Clerk 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 HR Manager 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Finance Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Senior Accountant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Finance Assistant/AP 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Finance Clerk 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.0 Payroll Clerk 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Utility Billing Specialist 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Program & Proj. Coord. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Community Dev. Dir. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Economic Dev. Dir. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Building Official 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Building Inspector 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Bldg. Permit Tech. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Receptionist 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assist. 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 City Engineer 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Engineering Assistant 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Engineering Tech. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Public Works Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Street Superintendent 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Str. Maint. Operator 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Park Superintendent 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Park Maint Operator 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Utility Superintendent 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Utility Operator 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Shop Mechanic 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Public Works Maint. 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 PW Office Specialist 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Admin. Assist. PW 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 PW Part -Time Summer 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 PW Seasonal Help 8.5 8.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 DMV Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Full -Time DMV Clerk 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 Part -Time DMV Clerk 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Liquor Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Assist. Liquor Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 CITY OF MONTICELLO Number of City Employees (Full -Time Equivalent) (Continued) In addition to the positions listed the City's fire service is provided by the City's volunteer fire department which currently has 30 members, including officers. The Community Center (MCC) employs 65 to 75 pat -time employees for its swimming pool operations, service counter, recreation programs and other operations. Finally the increase in full -time equivalents beginning in 2009 is due to the City starting its fiber optic network for providing internet, phone, and cable TV service to City residents and businesses. 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Position Title Actual Actual Actual Actual Proposed Liquor Supervisor 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FT Liquor Store Clerk 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 PT Liquor Store Clerk 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MCC Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 MCC Event Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Program Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Aquatic Director 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Bldg. Mntc. Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lead Custodial /Mtnc. 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Bldg. Custodian 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Fiber Office Manager 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Fiber Customer Service 0.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 Account Manager 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Tech. Serv. Supervisor 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Field Operation Tech. 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 CO /HE Technicians 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Installation Technicians 0.0 0.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 Seasonal Instal. Tech. 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.5 Locator 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 Total City Employees 69.6 69.6 75.1 81.5 82.0 In addition to the positions listed the City's fire service is provided by the City's volunteer fire department which currently has 30 members, including officers. The Community Center (MCC) employs 65 to 75 pat -time employees for its swimming pool operations, service counter, recreation programs and other operations. Finally the increase in full -time equivalents beginning in 2009 is due to the City starting its fiber optic network for providing internet, phone, and cable TV service to City residents and businesses. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK G -10 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ACCOUNT: A term used to identify an individual asset, liability, expenditure control, revenue control, or fund balance. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: Amounts owed to others for goods or services received. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE: Amounts due from others for goods furnished or services rendered. ACCOUNTING SYSTEM: The total set of records and procedures which are used to record, classify and report information on financial status and operations of an entity. ACCRUAL BASIS OF ACCOUNTING: The method of accounting under which revenues are recorded when they are earned and expenditures are recorded when goods and services are received. ACTIVITY: A specific and distinguishable line of work performed by one or more organizational components of a governmental unit for the purpose of accomplishing a function for which the governmental unit is responsible. For example "Ice & Snow Removal" is an activity performed in the discharge of the "Public Works" function. ADOPTION: The formal action taken by the City Council to authorize or approve the budget. AD VALOREM: In proportion to value. A basis for levying taxes upon property. AGENCY FUND: A fund consisting of resources received and held by the governmental unit as an agent for others or other funds of the governmental unit. APPROPRIATION: An authorization granted by a legislative body to make expenditures and to incur obligations for specific purposes. An appropriation is limited in amount to the time it may be expended. ASSESSED VALUATION: Value placed upon real estate or other property as a basis for levying taxes. ASSESSMENTS: Charges made to parties for actual services or benefits received. ASSETS: Property owned by a governmental unit, which has a monetary value. AUDIT: The examination of documents, records, reports, systems of internal control, accounting and financial procedures, and other evidence for one or more of the following purposes: (a) To ascertain whether the statements prepared from the accounts present fairly the financial position and the results of financial operations of the constituent funds and balanced account groups of the governmental unit in accordance with generally accepted accounting principals applicable to governmental units and on a basis consistent with that of the preceding year. (b) To determine the propriety, legality and mathematical accuracy of a governmental unit's financial transactions. (c) To ascertain whether all financial transactions have been properly recorded. (d) To ascertain the stewardship of public officials who handle and are responsible for the financial resources of a governmental unit. BALANCED BUDGET: A budget in which estimated revenues equal estimated expenditures including operating transfers. A balanced budget cannot use reserves or retained earnings to fund expenditures. H -1 BOND: A written promise, generally under seal, to pay a specified sum of money, called the face value or principal amount, at a fixed time in the future, called the date of maturity, and carrying interest at a fixed rate, usually payable periodically. BONDED INDEBTEDNESS: Outstanding debt by issues of bonds, which are repaid by ad valorem or other revenue. BUDGET: A plan of financial operation embodying an estimate of proposed expenditures for a given period and the proposed means of financing them. BUDGET DOCUMENT: The official written statement prepared by the Finance Department and Finance Director of the City which presents the proposed budget to the City Council. BUDGET BODY MESSAGE: A general discussion of the proposed budget presented in writing as a part of the budget document. The budget message explains principal budget issues against the background of financial experience in recent years and presents recommendations made by the City Staff. BUDGET CALENDAR: The schedule of key dates, which a government follows in the preparation and adoption of the budget. BUDGETARY CONTROL: The control or management of a governmental unit or enterprise in accordance with an approved budget for the purpose of keeping expenditures within the limitation of available appropriations and available revenues. CAPITAL ASSETS: Assets with a value of $5,000 or more. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET: A plan of proposed capital expenditures and a means of financing them. The capital budget is enacted as part of the complete annual budget. CAPITAL PROGRAM: A plan for capital expenditures to be incurred each year over a fixed period of years to meet capital needs arising from the long -term work program or otherwise. It sets forth each project or other contemplated expenditure in which the government is to have a part and specifies the full resources estimated to be available to finance the projected expenditures. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS: To account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities. CASH BASIS: The method of accounting under which revenues are recorded when received in cash and expenditures are recorded when paid. CERTIFIED LEVY: Total tax levy of a jurisdiction, which is certified to the County Auditor. CHARGES FOR SERVICES: Charges for current services rendered. CHART OF ACCOUNTS: The classification system used by a government entity to organize the accounting for various funds. CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (CPI): A statistical description of price levels provided by the U.S. Department of Labor. The index is used as a measure of the increase in the cost of living (i.e., economic inflation). H -2 CONTINGENCY: Budget for expenditures which cannot be placed in departmental budgets, primarily due to uncertainty about the level or timing of expenditures when the budget is adopted. The contingency also serves as a hedge against shortfalls in revenues or unexpected expenditures. CURRENT: A term which, applied to budgeting and accounting, designates the operations of the present fiscal period as opposed to past or future periods. DEBT: An obligation resulting from the borrowing of money or from the purchase of goods and services. DEBT LIMIT: The maximum amount of gross or net debt, which is legally permitted. DEBT MARGIN: The amount of available debt, which may be issued by a governmental unit before reaching its debt limit. DEBT SERVICE FUNDS: To account for the accumulation of resources for payment of general long -term debt. DEPARTMENT: Basic organizational unit of government, responsible for carrying out related functions. DEPRECIATION: Expiration in the service life of capital assets attributable to wear and tear, deterioration, action of the physical elements, inadequacy or obsolescence. DEPUTY REGISTRAR (DMV): City service of issuing State issued licenses for motor vehicles and equipment, such as license plates and tabs for cars, trucks, trailers, and recreational vehicles. DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARDS PROGRAM: A voluntary awards program administered by the Government Finance Officers Association to encourage governments to prepare effective budget documents. EFFECTIVE BUYING INCOME (EBI): A statistical measure of buying power of an area or group of individuals. ENTERPRISE FUNDS: To account for operations that are financed and operated in a manner similar to a private business enterprises, where the intent of the governing body is that the cost of providing services are to be recovered primarily on a user - charge basis to the general public. ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE: Represents the selling price of a property if it were on the market. Estimated market value is converted to tax capacity before property taxes are levied. EXPENDITURE: Where accounts are kept on the accrual or modified accrual basis of accounting, the cost of goods received or services rendered whether cash payment have been made or not. Where accounts are kept on a cash basis, expenditures are recognized only when the cash payments for the above purposes are made. FIBERNET MONTICELLO (FNM): The name of the City's fiber optic network, which provides internet, phone, and cable television to residents and businesses of Monticello as a City run enterprise. FINES: Revenues from penalties imposed for violation of laws or regulations H -3 FISCAL POLICY: A government's policies with respect to revenues, spending, and debt management as these relate to government services, programs and capital investment. Fiscal Policy provides an agreed -upon set of principles for the planning and programming of budgets and their funding. FISCAL YEAR: The budget and accounting year that begins on the first day of January and ends on the last day of December of each year. FIXED ASSETS: Assets of a long -term character which are intended to continue to be held or used, such as land, buildings, machinery, furniture, and other equipment. FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE): The number of employee hours (2,080) needed to be equal to one full time employee. Several part time employees may be combined to make one full time equivalent. FUNCTION: A group of related activities aimed at accomplishing a major service or regulatory program for which the government unit is responsible. FUND: An independent fiscal and accounting entity with a self - balancing set of accounts recording cash and/or other resources together with all related liabilities, obligations, reserves, and equities which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining certain objectives. FUND BALANCE: The difference between fund's assets and fund liabilities (the equity) in governmental funds. GENERAL FUND: Accounts for the general operation of the City and all financial resources except those to be accounted for in another fund. GENERAL GOVERNMENT: Expenditures, which represents a set of accounts, to which are charged the expenditures for operating the City. GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS: When a government pledges its full faith and credit to the repayment of the bonds it issues, than those bonds are general obligation (GO) bonds. GOAL: A statement of broad direction, purpose or intent based on the need of a community. A goal is general and timeless; that is, it is not concerned with a specific achievement in a given period. GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING: The composite of analyzing, recording, summarizing, reporting, and interpreting the financial transactions of governmental units and agencies. GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES: Funds used to account for the acquisition, use and balances of expendable financial resources and the related current liabilities - except those accounted for in proprietary funds and fiduciary funds. In essence, these funds are accounting segregation of financial resources. Under current GAAP, there are four governmental fund types: general, special revenue, debt service and capital projects. GRANT: A contribution of assets by one governmental unit or other organization to another. Grants are usually made for specified purposes. HOMESTEAD AND AGRICULTURAL CREDIT (HACA): A form of state paid property tax relief for farm property and owner occupied homes. H -4 IMPROVEMENT BONDS: Bonds payable from the proceeds of special assessments from properties benefiting from an improvement. IMPROVEMENTS: Buildings, other structures, and other attachments or annexations to land which are intended to remain so attached or annexed, such as sidewalks, trees, drains, and sewers. INFLOW /INFILTRATION (Ill): The term used to describe clean water entering into the sanitary sewer system. INTERFUND TRANSFERS: Amounts transferred from one fund to another. INFRASTRUCTURE: Assets which are immovable and of value only to the governmental unit (i.e. roads, gutters, sewer lines). INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES: Revenues from other governments in the form of grants, entitlement, or shared revenues. INVESTMENTS: Securities held for the production of income in the form of interest. LEVY: (Verb) To impose taxes, special assessments, or service charges for the support of governmental activities. (Noun) The total amount of taxes, special assessments, or service charges imposed by a governmental unit. LEVY LIMIT: The defined increase the City's property tax levy can't not exceed without special authorization as defined by Minnesota State Statue. LICENSES: Revenues received from the sale of business and non - business licenses. LIMITED MARKET VALUE: The amount the market value of a property can increase from one year to the next for calculating property taxes. The limited market value system is currently being phase -out by the State of Minnesota. LINE ITEM: A specific item or group of similar items defined by detail in a unique account in the financial records. LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID (LGA): Intergovernmental revenue from the state to municipalities to help fund general expenditures. LONG -TERM DEBT: Debt with a maturity of more than one year after the date of issuance. MAINTENANCE: The upkeep of physical properties in condition for use or occupancy. MARKET VALUE HOMESTEAD CREDIT (MVHC): State paid property tax reduction on owner occupied homes based on the properties market value. MISCELLANEOUS: Revenues or expenditures not classified in any other revenue or expenditure category. MODIFIED ACCRUAL BASIS: The basis of accounting under which expenditures other than accrued interest on general long -term debt are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are recorded when received in cash except for material and /or available revenues, which should be accrued to reflect properly the tax levied and revenue earned. H -5 OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE: Expenditure classifications based upon the types or categories of goods and services purchased. OBJECTIVE: Desired output oriented accomplishments, which can be measured and achieved within a given time frame. OPERATING BUDGET: A plan of financial operation embodying an estimate of proposed expenditures for the calendar year and the proposed means of financing them. OPERATING EXPENSE: The cost for personnel, material and equipment required for a department to function. OPERATING REVENUE: Funds that the government receives as income to pay for ongoing operations. Operating revenues are used to pay for day -to -day services. OPERATING TRANSFERS: Amounts transferred from one fund to another, shown as expenditure in the originating fund and revenue in the receiving fund. ORDINANCE: A formal legislative enactment by the City Council. PAY -AS- YOU -GO BASIS: A term used to describe a financial policy by which capital outlays are financed from current revenues rather than through borrowing. PERFORMANCE MEASURE: See Service Levels. PERSONAL SERVICES: Expenditures for salaries, wages, and fringe benefits of employees. PROGRAM: A group of related activities performed by one or more organizational units for the purpose of accomplishing a function for which the governmental unit is responsible. PROJECT: A plan of work, job assignment, or task. PROPRIETARY ACCOUNTS: Those accounts which show actual financial position and operation, such as actual assets, liabilities, reserves, fund balances, revenues, and expenditures, as distinguished from budgetary accounts. PUBLIC SAFETY: To account for expenditures related to the protection of persons and property. PUBLIC WORKS: To account for expenditures for the maintenance of City property and infrastructure. PURPOSE: A broad statement of the goals, in terms of meeting public service needs, that a department is organized to meet. REFUNDING BONDS: Bonds issued to retire bonds already outstanding. REIMBURSEMENT: Cash or other assets received as a repayment of the cost of work or services performed or of other expenditures made for or on behalf of another governmental unit or department or for an individual, firm, or corporation. f:0, RESERVE: An account which records a portion of the fund balance which must be segregated for some future use and which is, therefore, not available for further appropriation or expenditure. RESOLUTION: A special or temporary order of a legislative body; an order of a legislative body requiring less legal formality than an ordinance or statute. RESOURCES: The actual assets of a governmental unit, such as cash, plus contingent assets such as estimated revenues applying to the current fiscal year not accrued or collected, and bonds authorized and not issued. REVENUE: The term designates an increase to a fund's assets which: 1) does not increase a liability; 2) does not represent a repayment of an expenditure already made; 3) does not represent a cancellation of certain liabilities; and 4) does not represent an increase in contributed capital. REVENUE BOND: A bond that is backed by a particular revenue source such as water user fees. SERVICE LEVELS: Data to determine how effective or efficient a program is in achieving its objective. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT: A compulsory levy made by a local government against certain properties to defray part or all of the cost of a specific improvement or service which is presumed to be of general benefit to the public and of special benefit to such properties. SPECIAL REVENUE FUND: To account for revenue derived from specific revenue sources that are legally restricted for specific purposes. SY: Abbreviation for square yard, which is how sealcoating and street overlay projects are measured. TAX CAPACITY: An amount determined by a percentage of a property's market value, which is than applied to the tax rates of taxing jurisdictions affecting the property to determine the amount of property taxes owed. TAX CAPACITY RATE: Tax rate applied to tax capacity to generate property tax revenue. The rate is obtained by dividing the property tax levy by the available tax capacity. TAX CLASSIFICATION RATE: Rate at which estimated market values are converted into the property tax base. The classification rates are assigned to properties depending on their type (residential, commercial, farm, etc.) and, in some cases there are two tiers of classification rates, with the rate increasing as the estimated market values increases. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF): Financing tool originally intended to combat severe blight in areas, which would not be redeveloped "but for" the availability of government subsidies derived from locally generated property tax revenues. TAX LEVY: The total amount to be raised by general property taxes for the purpose stated in the resolution certified to the county auditor. TAX RATE: The amount applied to tax capacity to determine the taxes generated by the property. TAXES: Compulsory charges levied by a governmental unit for the purpose of financing services performed for the common benefit. H -7 TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS: Funds used to account for assets held by a government in a trust capacity or as an agent for individuals, private organizations, other governments and /or other funds. TRUST FUND: A fund consisting of resources received and held by the governmental unit as trustee, to be expended or invested in accordance with the conditions of the trust. UNBALANCED BUDGET: A budget which undesignated fund balance or reserves are used or increased, in order to balance estimated revenues to estimated expenditures or expenses. UNRESERVED FUND BALANCE: The portion of a fund's balance that is not restricted for a specific purpose and is available for general appropriation. USER FEES: The payment of a charge for direct receipt of a public service by the party benefiting from the service. UTILTY VALUATION TRANSITION AID (UVTA): A State financial aid program for 2009 and 2010 paid to local governments to offset the reduced property tax revenue generated by utility properties due to the State reducing the tax rate paid on utility property. WORKLOAD DATA: A unit of work to be done. ACRONYMS CAFR Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CD Certificate of Deposit CIP Capital Improvement Plan CID Commercial Paper CPI Consumer Price Index DMV Department of Motor Vehicle or Deputy Registrar HACA Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid EBI Effective Buying Income EDA Economic Development Authority EMV Estimated Market Value FHLB Federal Home Loan Bank FNM FiberNet Monticello FNMA Federal National Mortgage Association FTE Full Time Equivalent GAAP Generally Accepted Accounting Principals GASB Governmental Accounting Standards Board GFOA Government Finance Officer's Association GO General Obligation I/1 Inflow /Infiltration LGA Local Government Aid MCC Monticello Community Center MCES Metropolitan Council Environmental Services MVHC Market Value Homestead Credit SAC Sewer Availability Charge SY Square Yard TIF Tax Increment Financing UVTA Utility Valuation Transition Aid WAC Water Availability Charge H -8