The URL can be used to link to this page

2012 Budget2012 BUDGET MONTICELLO 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 2012 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................... ............................... A 2012 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 -39 Combined Budgetary Fund Summary . ............................... A -40 Projected Fund Balance Summary ..... ............................... A -42 GENERALFUND ............................... ............................... 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 CityAssessing ............................ ............................... 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 -26 Law Enforcement ........................ ............................... B -27 Fire Department .......................... ............................... B -28 FireRelief ................................. ............................... B -30 Building Inspections ..................... ............................... B -31 Civil Defense ............................. ............................... B -33 Animal Control ........................... ............................... B -34 National Guard ........................... ............................... B -35 ii CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 2012 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED GENERAL FUND CONTINUED Public Works — Administration ........ ............................... B -36 Public Works — Engineering ............ ............................... B -38 Public Works — Inspections .............. ............................... B -40 Public Works — Streets and Alleys ...... ............................... B -43 Public Works — Ice and Snow ........... ............................... B -44 Public Works — Shop and Garage ....... ............................... B -46 Public Works — Storm Water ............ ............................... B -47 Public Works — Parking Lots ............ ............................... B -48 Public Works — Street Lighting .......... ............................... B -49 Public Works — Refuse Collection ...... ............................... B -50 Community Celebrations ................. ............................... B -51 Senior Center .............................. ............................... B -52 Community Education .................... ............................... 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 ShadeTree ................................. ............................... B -60 Library...................................... ............................... B -62 Orderly Annexation Area ................. ............................... B -64 Economic Development .................. ............................... B -65 Unallocated................................ ............................... B -67 Unallocated Insurance .................... ............................... B -68 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS ............................... ............................... C Special Revenue Fund Summary ....... ............................... C -2 Economic Development Fund .......... ............................... C -3 Deputy Registrar Fund .................. ............................... C -5 Minnesota Investment Fund ............ ............................... C -7 Economic Recovery Grant Fund ....... ............................... C -9 Community Center Fund ................ ............................... C -11 Park and Pathway Dedication Fund ... ............................... C -15 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS ....................... ............................... D Debt Service Fund Summary ............. ............................... D -2 LegalDebt Limit ........................... ............................... D -3 Debt Schedule .............................. ............................... D -3 2002 G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .... ............................... D -4 iii CITY OF MONTICELLO, MN 2012 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED 2003A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... 2005A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... 2007A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond Fund ................. Consolidated Bond Fund ................... ............................... Waste Water Treatment Plant Note Fund .............................. 1999 G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .... ............................... 2000A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... 2000A G. O. Public Project Revenue Bond Fund ..................... D -6 D -8 D -10 D -12 D -14 D -16 D -18 D -20 D -22 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -24 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond Fund ... ............................... D -26 2004A G. O. Taxable Tax Increment Bond Fund ...................... D -28 2008A G. O. Revenue Refunding Bond Fund .......................... D -30 2010A G. O. Improvement Bond Fund .. ............................... D -32 2011A G. O. Refunding Bond Fund ..... ............................... D -34 Schedule of Outstanding Bonds ........... ............................... D -36 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS ................... ............................... E Capital Project Fund Summary ............ ............................... E -2 Capital Project Fund ........................ ............................... E -3 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund .............. ............................... E -5 Storm Sewer Access Fund ................. ............................... E -7 Water Access Fund .......................... ............................... E -9 Street Lighting Improvement Fund ....... ............................... E -11 Street Reconstruction Fund ................ ............................... E -13 Capital Outlay Revolving Fund ........... ............................... E -15 Closed Construction Funds ................ ............................... E -17 I94 /CSAH 18 Interstate Construction Fund ........................... E -19 Completed Core Street Reconstruction Fund .......................... E -21 Water Tower Construction Fund ......... ............................... E -23 School Blvd. Construction Fund ......... ............................... E -25 Capital Improvement Plan .................. ............................... E -27 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 2012 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED APPENDIX............................................................... ............................... G General Information ...................... ............................... G -1 Monticello City Map ..... ............................... . ............... G -2 U.S. Census Data ......................... ............................... G -3 Historical Employment/Unemployment Data ....................... G -3 Historical Tax Rates ..................... ............................... G -3 Historical Property Tax Information ... ............................... G -4 Historical City Building Permit Activity ............................. G -4 Summary of Tax Levies, Payment Provisions, And Minnesota Real Property Valuation .................... G -4 Conversion Formula for EMV to Net Tax Capacity ................ G -8 City Personnel Count ..................... ............................... G -8 GLOSSARY.............................................................. ............................... H Glossary of Terms ......................... ............................... H -1 List of Acronyms .......................... ............................... H -9 v THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK vi 2012 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 Cleric Tracy Ergen — Human Resource Manager Angela Schumann — Community Development Director Megan Barnett — Economic Development Director Bruce Westby — City Engineer Ron Hackemaueller — 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 Paschke — Public Works Director Tom Moores — Street Superintendent Tom Pawelk — Parks Superintendent Matt Theisen — Water & Sewer Superintendent Ben Ranft — FiberNet Monticello General Manager A -1 HOW TO READ THE BUDGET The budget document serves two distinct purposes. One purpose is to present the city council, staff members, residents and other interested readers, concise and readable information about the City of Monticello. The other purpose is the management of the City with a financial and operating plan that 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 2012 budget for the City of Monticello. This budget, as adopted by the City Council, identifies how the City resources will be spent in 2012. 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 2012 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 2012 budget the City has reduced the dependency on reserves to fund City operations, while balancing the effects of an increased property tax levy. The one issue still facing the City of Monticello's revenue sources is the decline in market values of property in the City. The County Assessor estimates a taxable market value declined of 4.39% between 2012 and 2011, this on top of a 4.59 %decrease between 2011 and 2010 and a 2.88% decline between 2010 and 2009. This has caused the City's tax capacity to decline to $15,708,796 and the City's tax rate to increase to 49.972 %. Thus property owners would be paying more in 2012 in order to generate the same amount of tax dollars as it did in 2011. Not all if the taxable market value decrease is caused by declining market values. For 2012 the State's Market Value Homestead Credit program was eliminated and replaced with a Market Value Homestead Exclusion. This exclusion reduces a properties taxable market value, which in turn reduces the City's tax capacity and thus increasing the City's tax rate. This again would result in property owners paying more in 2012 in order to generate the same amount of tax dollars as it did in 2011 and it shifts tax burden from residential homesteaded properties to non- homestead properties, including commercial and industrial properties. For example a homesteaded residential property valued at $300,000 would pay approximately $1,448 in City property taxes in 2012, which is an increase of 3.29 %, while a commercial/industrial property valued at $300,000 would pay approximately $2,624, which is an increase of 6.94 %. r.W In addition the City's 2012 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 and 2011. This number is not expected to increase much in 2012 and as such the revenue budget for building activities is reduced. Another big change between the City's 2011 and 2012 budgets is the Community Center natatorium and building improvements. This project is estimated to cost $1,621,000 and includes improvements to the outside of the building and the swimming pool area, and an addition to the fitness area. Community Center and Liquor Fund reserves, along with 2012 revenues will be used to fund this project. Within the enterprise funds the City's fiber optic system (FiberNet Monticello, FNM) is still budgeting an operating loss for 2012. 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 was the first full year of operation of the system and brought the completion of construction of the system in all areas of the City. As in the past, the systems only revenues source will be from user fees for services provided to customers with no property taxes being used to fund the operations of FNM. Finally, in order maintain to not place extra burdens onto property owners during these tough economic times, the 2012 budget does maintain funds and service levels at 2011 levels. The City will add any new positions in 2012 and to maintain costs the City will continue to offer three options for health care benefits for employees which will limit the City's premium increase to around 5% for 2012. Lastly, the City is budgeting a 2% cost of living for all employees for 2012 and half -step increases for those employees eligible for step increases. This budget will mean the City will have a property tax increase of $172,691 and not use reserves in the General Fund for 2012, but will use reserves in the Community Center Fund and Debt Service Funds which will limit the impact on the tax payers as much as possible. It is my hope the 2012 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 A -4 INTRODUCTION This budget document should be viewed as more than just a collection of financial data. In addition to the financial data contained herein, it includes information on the City of Monticello's organization, descriptions of programs and services, and a variety of statistics related to activity workload measures. Furthermore, the budget is a reflection of the City's plans, policies, procedures, and objectives regarding the services to be provided in 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. Implement the downtown redevelopment plan which will maintain a downtown area that combines a successful commercial district, community identity and heritage and connection with the Mississippi River. 6. Seek to expand the supply of "move up" housing that allows people to upgrade their home without leaving the community. 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 2012 budget. TOTAL BUDGET The City of Monticello's 2012 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 2012 budget was established for the City: PROPERTY TAXES The State of Minnesota has granted local municipalities the authority to levy taxes to fund operations and debt payments. For the City of Monticello, the property tax levy accounts for approximately 81% of the General Fund revenues and 23% of the Special Revenue Funds revenues. The Debt Service Funds, in 2011, will levy $1,218,752 in property taxes for debt service payments, which is based on the original bond issuance cash flow budgets and will use reserves to pay the City's debt payments. For 2012, the City's property tax levy will be increased to $7,850,000, an increase of 2.25% from 2011. In the past, the City has used reserves to fund operations and debt payment instead of increasing property taxes. In 2012 the City property taxes and other revenues will fund General Fund operations, but reserves will be used to help fund the Community Center improvements and retire principal and interest of Debt Service Funds as required in the bond issuance cash flow budgets. Finally, the City will not use a tax levy to support operation of FiberNet Monticello, which will require the use of reserves in 2012. The table on the following page provides a historical view of the City's property tax levies: A -6 Revenue Expenditures Funds 2011 2012 2011 2012 General $ 6,466,876 $ 6,748,398 $ 6,467,604 $ 6,748,398 Special Revenue 4,955,674 4,937,610 5,975,925 5,817,911 Debt Service 6,322,683 6,618,325 6,904,275 6,693,202 Capital Project 6,144,766 8,890,799 7,758,651 8,794,719 Enterprise 12,138,168 10,022,071 15,885,783 15,222,515 Total $36,028,167 $37,217,203 $42,992,238 $43,276,745 PROPERTY TAXES The State of Minnesota has granted local municipalities the authority to levy taxes to fund operations and debt payments. For the City of Monticello, the property tax levy accounts for approximately 81% of the General Fund revenues and 23% of the Special Revenue Funds revenues. The Debt Service Funds, in 2011, will levy $1,218,752 in property taxes for debt service payments, which is based on the original bond issuance cash flow budgets and will use reserves to pay the City's debt payments. For 2012, the City's property tax levy will be increased to $7,850,000, an increase of 2.25% from 2011. In the past, the City has used reserves to fund operations and debt payment instead of increasing property taxes. In 2012 the City property taxes and other revenues will fund General Fund operations, but reserves will be used to help fund the Community Center improvements and retire principal and interest of Debt Service Funds as required in the bond issuance cash flow budgets. Finally, the City will not use a tax levy to support operation of FiberNet Monticello, which will require the use of reserves in 2012. 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 2012 at $15,708,796 which is a 04.39% 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 2012, the City's tax rate is expected to increase from 46.729% up to 49.972 %. 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 2012 budget does not include any new positions, but does include a possible 2% cost - of- living increase for City staff and half step increases for 2012 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. In 2011 the City froze all wages at 2010 wage levels. The City's public works employees are union employees. The City's union contract won't expire until March 31, 2013. The City's health insurance premiums increased approximately 5% for 2012 and the City will continue to offer employees the choice from three health plans. The city is offering its original 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 has been able to offer employees quality health care coverage at affordable premiums to both the City and employees. The City's dental insurance policy increase approximately 3 %. 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 fature 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% 2012 7,850,000 2% 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 2012 at $15,708,796 which is a 04.39% 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 2012, the City's tax rate is expected to increase from 46.729% up to 49.972 %. 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 2012 budget does not include any new positions, but does include a possible 2% cost - of- living increase for City staff and half step increases for 2012 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. In 2011 the City froze all wages at 2010 wage levels. The City's public works employees are union employees. The City's union contract won't expire until March 31, 2013. The City's health insurance premiums increased approximately 5% for 2012 and the City will continue to offer employees the choice from three health plans. The city is offering its original 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 has been able to offer employees quality health care coverage at affordable premiums to both the City and employees. The City's dental insurance policy increase approximately 3 %. 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 fature premium increase to both the City and employees. A -7 For 2012, there are no new position budgeted however as the City's fiber optic network (FNM) continues add customers in 2012 there could be a need to add positions to maintain customer service and /or technical support. Finally, the contribution rates to the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) for 2012 for both the City and employees will remain at 6.25% of wages for employees and 7.25% for the City. The budget also estimates FICA and Medicare taxes at 6.20% and 1.45% respectively for 2012. The remainder of this letter will describe the major initiatives for 2012 for each of the fund types and their activities. GENERAL FUND Expenditures The 2012 budget increased 4.34% from the 2011 budget. The City has decreased its General Fund operating budget approximately 10.15% from 2008. The General Fund expenditure budget consists of the following departments: 2011 2010 % Budget General Government $1,372,973 Public Safety 1,697,794 Public Works 2,275,156 Culture & Recreation 819,456 Economic Development 73,344 Miscellaneous 165,593 Total General Fund $6,404,316 2011 2012 % Budget Budget Change $1,403,829 $1,499,715 6.8% 1 ,710,383 1 ,743,299 1.9 % 2,299,770 2,430,124 5.7% 805,429 912,887 13.3% 153,075 81,100 (47.0 %) 95.118 81,273 14.6% $6,467,604 $6,748,398 4.34% 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 increased 3.7% for 2012. This increase is necessary to fluid a larger seal coat and crack seal project for City streets in 2012. Fuel costs were also increased based on past expenditures and current fiiel costs. Additional fimds were also budgeted in 2012 for replacing old, faded street signs around the City. Finally, the street and alley activity budget includes $30,491 for its share of worker's compensation insurance premiums which were previously budgeted in the unallocated insurance activity. The snow and ice activity had a significant increase over 2011, as more staff time was allocated to this activity based on past staff involvement with snow and ice control activities. This increase in staff time allocation also resulted in a decrease in staff time for the shop and garage activity which is why the shop and garage budget has a 2.6% decrease. I:w� 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 increased because property insurance for the public works buildings are budgeted here and based on current premiums, which had a large increase for 2012. For 2012 the City is budgeting for the minor maintenance of its storm water system, with funds to clean and restore a storm water pond coming from the Storm Water Access Fund in 2012. The street light activity's budget was increased to reflect past expenditures and the addition of the new street lights on School Boulevard and 7"' Street. 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 Comity Sheriff's department for law enforcement. The 2012 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 $8,000 for city equipment rental to fund replacement of equipment and vehicles used by the department. hi addition supplies and repair budgets were increased to reflect past expenditure levels. The increase in the building inspection's budget is due to the wage and benefit increases and budgeting $1,500 for city equipment rental to fund replacement of equipment and vehicles used by the building department. The National Guard activity was decreased based on past expenditure levels and all other activities in the Public Safety Department have minor adjustments based on their current and past expenditures. Changes to the General Govermnent 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 fall -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 increase to the election activity to hold the national, state, and local elections that will place in 2012 compared to no election activity in 2011. This causes the election activity's budget to increase from $1,230 in 2011 to $41,358 in 2012. The decrease in the administration activity is due to more time being allocated to the election activity for the special projects /deputy clerk, who is responsible for election activities. The increase to the planning & zoning budget is due to the proposed wage and benefit increases. The audit activity reflect the City's second year of a three -year contract with its audit firm and some of the cost being allocated to FNM in 2012 as the audit will spend more time on this activity. Gam!] Finally, the city hall and Prairie Center Office building activities are increased to reflect special assessments that are due against the properties and paid yearly. These were not budgeted previously. The budget decrease in the Economic Development Department is the result of the City not budgeting $80,000 for the Embracing Downtown study, which provides for the future design and improvements needed for downtown Monticello to flourish. This study was completed in 2011. 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 2012. The increases in the park administration activity is for sealing pathways and park improvement activities is for lighting improvements and constructing dugout roofs at the City's ball field complex. Revenues The revenues to support these expenditures are classified as follows: The budget for Licenses & Permits reflect an increase which is from using $195,000 of the City's electric franchise fees to help fund street light electric costs in 2012 compared to $75,000 in 2011. Without this change the licenses & permits would have a $54,350 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 constriction also. Thus, the City expects 2012 building permit revenues to be lower than recent history as they been the past 3 years. The increase in Inter - Governmental Revenues is due to the State's budget problems and the Stated had cut the $181,325 in Market Value Homestead Credit Aid the City that the City received in 2011. The City had to build this decrease into the 2011 revenue budget in order to receive its full property tax levy (the aid was a reduction of the levy even though the State wasn't funding the program). The Market Value Homestead Credit Aid program was discontinued and replaced with a Market Value Exclusion program beginning in 2012, which means the City no longer needs to budget a negative revenue source to receive its full property tax levy in 2012. A -10 2010 2011 2012 % Budget Budget Budget Change Property Taxes $5,346,386 $5,432,872 $5,461,248 0.5% Licenses & Permits 296,650 371,250 436,900 17.7% Inter - Governmental 116,464 63,415 252,240 297.8% Charges for Services 308,023 332,146 355,455 7.0% Fines & Forfeits 300 200 150 (25.0 %) Special Assessments 00 00 00 0.0% Miscellaneous Revenue 271,806 266,993 242,405 (9.2 %) Transfer from Other Funds 65,000 00 00 0.0% Total $6,404,629 $6,466,876 $6,748,398 4.4% The budget for Licenses & Permits reflect an increase which is from using $195,000 of the City's electric franchise fees to help fund street light electric costs in 2012 compared to $75,000 in 2011. Without this change the licenses & permits would have a $54,350 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 constriction also. Thus, the City expects 2012 building permit revenues to be lower than recent history as they been the past 3 years. The increase in Inter - Governmental Revenues is due to the State's budget problems and the Stated had cut the $181,325 in Market Value Homestead Credit Aid the City that the City received in 2011. The City had to build this decrease into the 2011 revenue budget in order to receive its full property tax levy (the aid was a reduction of the levy even though the State wasn't funding the program). The Market Value Homestead Credit Aid program was discontinued and replaced with a Market Value Exclusion program beginning in 2012, which means the City no longer needs to budget a negative revenue source to receive its full property tax levy in 2012. A -10 The Property Tax Levy now generates 80.9% 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 2011 the property tax levy accounted for 83.6% 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 EDA, Parks and Pathway Dedication, Community Center, and Deputy Registrar activities. In the past other Special Revenue Funds included the Minnesota Investment Fund, Environment Clean -Up Fund, Economic Recovery Grant Fund, and CMIF 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 2012. 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 2012 property tax levy, of which the majority is tax increments for the Special Revenue Funds total $2,031,630 compared to $2,210,800 in 2011 or an 8.1 % decrease. In addition, Park and Pathway Dedication Fund has less revenues corning in because of less new development taking place and paying the fees associated with the development. 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. Expenditures are for the Park and Pathway Dedication Fund share of the 2012 Bertram Chain of Lakes land purchase based on previous purchase agreements. The largest budget change of all the City funds would be the Community Center Fund for its building and natatorium improvements. The improvements consist of replacing air handlers /exchangers and monitoring devices in the pool area, an expansion of the fitness area, and outside building improvements around the pool area. The budgeted cost of the improvements is $1,621,000 with all of the work to be completed in 2012. The improvements will be funded through an operating transfer of $700,000 from the Liquor Fund and the use of Community Center Fund reserves. The property tax levy for the Community Center fund will increase $50,000 to $1,150,000. The Community Center Fund still has four more years of debt services payments including the $890,000 budgeted for 2012's debt payment. All other revenues and expenditures are based on past and current revenue and expenditure levels. A -11 The Deputy Registrar Fund budget expenditure budget also has some changes for 2012. Wages and benefits are expected to decrease as one Rill -time position was replaced by two part-time non- benefited positions. Also based on the City's revised fund balance policy the Deputy Registrar Fund will transfer $25,000 to other City Funds. The revenue budget was increased 10.6% because the customer base, including car dealerships, continues to grow due to good customer service and the continued efforts to add additional services, such as full driver license capabilities. The large decrease in the Economic Development Fund is due to the decertification of a number of Tax Increment Districts in the City. This affects both revenues and expenditures for 2012. In addition the amount the EDA Fund owes for debt service payments has declined significantly with the retirement of the 2004 Tax Increment Bond and the calling of other debt issues the EDA contributed to in the past. DEBT SERVICE FUNDS The City's debt obligation for 2012 is $6,293,202 with the funding corning through the collection of special assessments, tax increments, and the use of $74,877 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 has budgeted to issue new debt in 2012 to fluid improvement projects, however if not all projects are approve, the City could fund the smaller projects internally and not issue debt. The City has debt outstanding of $60,056,000 as of 12/31/11, which takes into account the 2011 advance crossover refunding bond retiring the 2005 improvement bond in 2014. The City's bond rating of "A2" was upgrades to "Aa3" from Moody's hlvestors in 2010. The City has maintained this rating. CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS The budget for the Capital Project Funds are based on the 2012 project expenditures listed in the City's five -year capital improvement plan for City buildings, parks, and infrastructure improvements. The City's five -year capital improvement plan is available to view on the City's web site. The main revenue source for 2012 is the issuance of debt and transfers from other City funds. Projects to be funded in 2012 include the overlaying of outlaying street which borders the City and Monticello Township, preliminary work for the Fallon Avenue overpass, 7`" Street Extension, some street light improvements and the continuation of the purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. ENTERPRISE FUNDS The largest Fund within the Enterprise Funds is the City's fiber optic network FiberNet Monticello (FNM). The system provides phone, interest, and cable TV to residents and businesses in Monticello that sign up for the services. Construction of the system was completed in 2011. The expense budget for FNM, which includes construction (installations), debt service, and operation of the system are estimated at $5,907,071 with revenues of $2,533,592. A -12 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 11 % and the three tiered water rate system continues to encourage water conservation, which could result into reducing expenses. Water Fund revenues are budgeted at $1,179,825 while the expense budget, including depreciation is $1,356,571. Sewer revenues are $1,701,762 compared to expenses of $2,735,564. The Liquor Fund operating transfer to help support other City activities and reduce the tax levy is budgeted at $250,000 for street improvements and $700,000 for the community center improvements, for a total of $950,000 compared to the $250,000 in 2011. Sales continue to increase at the store and the 2012 budget reflects increased revenues from sales and a corresponding increase in supplies (cost of goods sold). FUND BALANCES The 2012 budget proposes that expenditures exceed revenues by $6,059,542 compared to $6,964,071 in 2011. 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 2012 General Fund's budget is a balanced budget, meaning all revenues, including operating transfers in from other funds equal all expenditures including any operating transfers out to other funds. The General Fund's fund balance is projected at 81.3% of 2012 budgeted expenditures; however much of the fund balance is committed for other purposes. The City maintains the General Fund's working capital fiord balance at 45% of the next year's operating budget because the City receives its tax payments in July and December and need this fund balance to pay for City operations. The General Funds unassigned fund balance is estimated at 25.6% of 2012 budgeted expenditures. By their nature, the reserves of the Special Revenue Funds in 2012 are committed for the purpose of the Fund. The City's new fund balance policy states that the DMV Fund will use its fund balance to fund the operation the DMV until the fluid balance reaches $250,000. Once it has a fund balance of $250,000 or above 50% of profits will be transferred to other funds to finance other City projects or needs. If the fiend balance reaches $400,000 or more 100% of the profits can be transferred to other funds. For 2012 it is estimated that $25,000 will be transferred to other funds based on this criteria and the DMV Fund will have a committed fiend balance of $262,900 remaining. The Community Center fund will use all of its fund balance on the capital improvements proposed in 2012. Overall the Special Revenue Funds will spend $880,301 of reserves in 2012. Fund balances in the City's Debt Service Funds are used to retire the City's debt on a timely basis. For 2012 the City proposes to use $74,877 to pay off its 2012 debt obligations. The City will also transfer $400,000 to fiord the proposed Bertram Chain of Lakes land purchase in 2012. A -13 This will leave a Rind balance of $2,006,125, all of which would be restricted for future debt payments. 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, 2011. 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 detennine 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 2012 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 2012 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 there contributes to the budget process. Respectfully submitted, Thomas Kelly Finance Director A -14 0 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Distinguished Budget Presentation Award PRESENTED TO City of Monticello Minnesota For the Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2011 President Executive Director A -15 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 fiords used by the City must be classified into one of seven "fiend types ". Four of these fund types are used to account for the City's "governmental- type" activities and are know as "governmental fiords ". Two of these fiend 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 fiinds. 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 find liability is incurred, except for outstanding interest on general long -tern debt, which is recognized when due. Enterprise and Internal Service Funds use the accrual basis of accounting. Under the accrual basis revenues are recognized when they are measurable and earned. Expenses are recognized in the period incurred, if measurable. The budget basis for Enterprise and Internal Service Funds is also the accrual basis with the exception noted below. The City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) shows the status of the City's finances on the basis of "generally accepted accounting principles" (GAAP). In most cases this conforms to the way the City prepares its budget. The exceptions are: 1. Compensated absences liabilities that are expected to be liquidated with expendable available financial resources are accrued as earned by employees (GAAP) as opposed to being expended when paid (budget). 2. Capital outlay within the Enterprise Funds are recorded as assets on a GAAP basis and expended on a budget basis. The CAFR shows fund expenditures on both a GAAP basis and budget basis for comparison proposes. A -18 Fund Structure General Fund Mayor & Council Administration Elections Financial Admin. Audit City Assessing Legal Human Resources Planning & Zoning Data Processing Prairie Center Bldg. 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 Storm Water Maint. Parking Lots Street Lighting Refuse Collection Comm. Celebration Information Center Senior Center Comm. Education Transit Ice Arena Parks Administration Park Improvements Parks Ball fields Shade Tree Library OAA Econ. Develop. Unallocated Unallocated Ins. Governmental Special Revenue Economic Development Deputy Registrar MN Investment Econ. Recovery Grant Community Center Park & Path Dedication City of Monticello Budgeted Funds Debt Service Funds 2002 Improvement Bond 2003 Improvement Bond 2005 Improvement Bond 2007 Improvement Bond 2008 Sewer Refunding Bd Consolidated Bond Fund W WTP Note 1999 Improvement Bond 2000 Improvement Bond 2000 Public Proj. Rev. Bd. 2000B Improvement Bond 1989 Tax Increment Bond 2004 Tax Increment Bond 2008 Rev. Refunding Bd 2010 Improvement Bond 2011 Refunding Bond A -19 Capital Project Funds Capital Projects Sanitary Sewer Access Storm Sewer Access Water Access Street Light Improv. Street Recon Capital Revolving Closed Constr. 194 /CSAH 18 Const. Closed Str. Reconst. Water Tower Const. School Blvd. Const. Proprietary Funds Enterprise Funds Water Sewer Liquor Cemetery FiberNet 2012 BUDGET CALENDAR June 3, 2011 2012 -2016 Capital Equipment/Projects (CIP) Worksheets and September 12, 2011 Budget Worksheets to Department Heads. June 13, 2011 Workshop with City Council and Staff to Set 2011/12 Goals and Priorities. June, 2011 Department Heads Meet with Various Advisory Boards and Commissions for input into 2012 Preliminary Budget and CIP. July 1, 2011 2012 -2016 CIP and Budget Worksheets Due to Finance Department July 27, 2011 Department Heads meet with City Administrator, and Finance December 30, 2011 Staff to Develop 2012 Preliminary Budget and CIP. August 3, 2011 Preliminary Council packets developed. July /August, 2011 Council Workshops to review draft department budgets. August 8, 2011 Council Workshop to review various departments' goals, budgets, and CIP. Middle of August, 2011 Finance Department Develop Revenue Estimates and 2012 Preliminary Property Tax Levy. August 25, 2011 Council Workshop to review various departments' goals, budgets, and CIP continued. September 12, 2011 Budget Workshop with City Council and Staff. September 12, 2011 City Council Adopts 2012 Preliminary Property Tax Levy. September 15, 2011 2012 Preliminary Property Tax Levy Certified to Wright County Auditor. October/November, 2011 Department Heads meet with City Administrator and Finance Staff to Develop 2012 Proposed Budget and Property Tax Levy. October/November, 2011 Budget Workshops with City Council and Staff to finalize 2012 Budget and Property Tax Levy. December 12, 2011 City Council Adopts 2012 Budget and Property Tax Levy. December 30, 2011 City Certifies Final 2012 Property Tax Levy to Wright County Auditor. January 1, 2012 2012 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. A -20 By September 15t" the City Council must approve a preliminary tax levy based on preliminary budget infonnation, 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. During September through November staff and Council meet to finalize the budget and tax levy for the coming fiscal year. Finally, prior to December 291h 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 finding 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 amounts 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 fiords. The City strives to ensure that it is capable of adequately funding and providing local goverrunent 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 fiords 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 fluids 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 this, 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 -teen 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 sources. Policy: The City will maintain a diversified and stable revenue system in order to avoid short-tern 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 Rill 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 funding of services. A -24 Goals: 1. Maintain a stable level of services provided. 2. Respond to long -term 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 fimds 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. A -25 Policy: The City will adhere to a policy of full 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 of 45% of the General Fund's operating budget as assigned for working capital to provide cash flow between its two semi- A -26 annual tax payments (July and December) and 5% committed for emergencies (contingencies). 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 fund balance can be assigned 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. Special Revenue Funds will commit fund balances for the intended use that created the fund. Committed fund balance will be used first when paying expenditures. If the committed fund balance of the Community Center Fund exceeds a level to fund all operations, maintenance and asset replacement, the City may transfer funds to other City Funds or projects. Should the DMV committed fund balance exceed $250,000 in a given year 50% of the net profit shall be transferred to other City Funds or projects and should the fund balance exceed $400,000 in a given year, 100% of the profit shall be transferred. 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 fimd 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. A -27 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; fiends 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. 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: 1. To ensure that capital assets are tracked and recorded consistently and according to policy. 2. To provide an internal control structure over capital assets. 3. To provide accurate capital asset values and records to annual financial statements and reporting. Policy: A capital asset is an asset or item with a cost of at least $5,000 per asset and a life expectancy of greater than one year. The classes of capital assets will be: land, parking lots, buildings, infrastructure, improvements (other than buildings), machinery and equipment, office equipment and fi rniture, 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. A -28 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. 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 constriction 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 finding sources, and future 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 finding 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. A -29 Goals: 1. Safeguard Rinds 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 fiords in a manner which maximizes return. Policy: The City will consolidate (pool) cash and reserve balances from all fluids, 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 -term debt to fluid current operations. A -30 The City will avoid the issuance of short-tern debt, such as, budget, tax and revenue anticipation notes. The City will confine long -term borrowing to capital improvements, equipment or projects that have a life of more than 5 years and cannot be financed from current revenues. 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 80.9% of General Fund operations for 2012. The 2011 property tax levy is $7,850,000 for all funds. 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 2012 levy limits the use of reserves to fund debt and capital expenditures A -31 but not operations. The chart below demonstrates the change in the City's property levy since 2006. $8,000,000 $7,500,000 $7,000,000 $6,500,000 $6,000,000 $5,500,000 $5,000,000 City Prop" Tax Levy $7,750,000 $7,677,809 $7,850,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 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 beginning in 2010. In addition commercial /industrial property values have also decreased the past few years. For taxes payable in 2012 the State enacted a new market value exclusion system, which provides home owners an exclusion from property taxes for part of the home value based on a formula. This further decreases the City's tax capacity for 2012 as shown in the chart below. A -32 The City's tax rate, which is used to determine what property taxes each property owes is detennined 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 next and tax capacities increase, the tax rate will decrease. For property taxes payable in 2012 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). City Tax Rates 80.000 70.000 t.0 0 ■ ■ ONION :1:; MI■■■■w -1 n■■■■■■■■■■■■■, Property taxes are only one revenue source for the City. Licenses and Permits — Building pen-nits are the largest category and account in the licenses and permits and account for $436,900 (6.5 %) of the 2012 General Fund revenues. In 2009 only 9 new residential construction permits were issued and in for both 2010 and 2011 only 2 new residential construction permits were issued as a result of the economy and the housing market, a trend that is expected to continue into 2012, although the City does expect to issue more than 2 new pennits in 2012. 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. 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 and 2011. The chart on the following page 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. h1 the past the City did receive funds 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 was no longer eligible for this aid beginning in 2011. Also when the City has done some street improvement projects, such as in 2011, the City was eligible for reimbursement through State aid street maintenance funding for some of the project costs. The City does not expect to receive State aid street maintenance funding in 2012. 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 remain low 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 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 - - 3,000,000 - 2,000,000 -'- 1,000,000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 A -34 Charges for services related to the Community Center have increased modestly each year in the recent past. The 2012 budget reflects a modest increase to continue this trend, in part because of adding wedding decorating to the list of services provided. Revenues are estimated at $1,201,100 or a 2.3% increase from 2011. 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. 2012 revenue estimates are based on the balance of the assessments as of 12/31/2010 (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. Investment Income and Miscellaneous Revenues — The General Fund has $242,405 budgeted in 2012 for Miscellaneous Revenues of which $158,880 is interest earnings. This is down from the last few years because interest rates remain low and lower cash balances projected in the General Fund in 2012. Similar reductions can be found in the Special Revenue, Debt Service and Capital Project Funds. Miscellaneous Revenues 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 - A 4,000,000 - 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Special Revenue Funds Monticello Community Center — Memberships and Fees — The Monticello Community Center (MCC) charges fitness /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 on the following page. 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 was fee increase authorized in 2011 by the State, which should result in increased revenues for 2012. In 2010 the City has collected $330,677 and the 2011 budget was $290,000, with actual sales of $332,493. The chart below shows the history of DMV license sales. 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.,000,000 900,000 800,000 _ 700,000 _ 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 _ 200,000 _ 100,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Water Use Collections — Water rates were increased approximately 10% for 2011, which included an additional rate tier for high volume users. Staff is currently reviewing City water rates and will be proposing an increase of less than 10% for 2012. Recent history of rate increases includes a 15% increase in each of 2007 and 2008. For 2009 and 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 not increased as seen in the chart below. Trends that are expected to continue in 2012. With these rate increases the Water Fund revenue should be sufficient to cover operating costs and part of the depreciation costs of the system. A -37 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. Staff is also reviewing sewer rates and expects increases to be below 10 %. Revenue from Sewer Charges 1,800,000 1,600,000 _ 1,200,000 1,000,000 _ 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 _ o 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Liquor Fund Sales — Liquor sales have increased over the last six years and the budget reflects this trend. Gross profits are estimated at $951,750 for 2012 based on sales of $4,418,500 and costs of $3,466,750. 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. 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 A -38 Liquor Store 2,500,000 •• 2,000,000 IN 2007 1,500,000 3 N 2008 2009 a a U2010 500,000 �r I N 2011 • • Beer Sales Wine Sales Liquor Sales 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 A -38 revenues from the sale of services at $2,627,568 for 2012 based on current subscribers and projected new customers. 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 2012 transfers. Other revenue and expenditure trends are detailed throughout this budget document. Consolidated financial summaries of all fiords are provided on the following pages. A -39 Transfers In Transfer Out Fund # Fund Amount Fund # Fund Amount 212 Street Reconstruction Fund 250,000 609 Liquor Fund 250,000 226 Community Center 700,000 609 Liquor Fund 700,000 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 320,584 213 EDA Fund 320,584 212 Street Reconstruction Fund 25,000 217 DMV Fund 25,000 2008A Revenue Refunding 314 Bond 890,000 226 Community Center 890,000 229 Park Dedication 400,000 300 Consolidated Bond Fund 400,000 2008 Sewer Refunding Bond 315 Fund 450,000 262 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 450,000 317 2010A Improvement Bond 69,000 212 Street Reconstruction 69,000 400 Capital Project Fund 200,000 245 Street Light Improvement 200,000 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 706,618 262 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 706,618 400 Capital Project Fund 1,770,000 212 Street Reconstruction 1,770,000 317 2010A Improvement Bond 128,795 262 Sanitary Sewer Access Fund 128,795 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 262,243 263 Storm Sewer Access Fund 262,243 317 2010A Improvement Bond 59,800 263 Storm Sewer Access Fund 59,800 312 2005A G. O. Bond Fund 308,963 265 Water Access Fund 308,963 317 2010A Improvement Bond 50,600 265 Water Access Fund 50,600 Total Transfers In 6,591,603 Total Transfers Out 6,591,603 Other revenue and expenditure trends are detailed throughout this budget document. Consolidated financial summaries of all fiords are provided on the following pages. A -39 I O OOOO V a O A T C J J N a 0• M o a N � Cl (l NNNl7/f/1� =gyp °.2.j 00{0 =�µNN� J ?n o � °c'�' a, °jn° o m o.Fm m0 ' S F3 N N N N d N j N N C N N N J W N W O N W U (Wl t O — Ol W IV U N 01 W OJ m O (ll C a N O E3 N O U U O N N O W V W W Oi W t0 W U <T O W W (O (O m m V m m N N C N N 7 Q W O W W O N W W W f0 W N W W N W W O W iJ fJ �I m l0 CJ V O N U V W O O O W N O O N O O O O N O N O W O O O O O N N CO O O UU N N 3 j O WO OA W W U AWW `2 N W w O O O O O f0 O W OJ O O A UNi U A —> U N fo (O IV m J tp W O UN W A V C �p c a W M M Oo O O O N O N t0 W N A (O OI O W N A O O j f0 W � UN G (n Cb N O RJR f)N tO W A A O O O O O O O N O U O W V O W tO O A tD V -� 0 O N 0 O 0 O O U f0 O 0 O 0 O O W V N 1a O O O UI U Oi � N O U OD V V OI A W U O V A p� V fli C �I O N O N V N t0 O O O O O] N U N W W O W Ol lO A W N N N N O O W N N W N V O N A O pin W Ol (y (O y N N O O Oi Ol + W O N W N N N CI � N GO w W M A N Of N o m Cf V K- N W A O O O O A V A W- l A O V O U O A O O W W OJ N O O O W W N W N lD W W ID N O U W O w W O A= O Om O N W V fN O p O O O U fIN N N N I O M W U A W U O W N W I mV— m N W V O O O O O ,TM N N O O o f O V U m W W U W W m N U "0V V O U O W A O O O O — 0 U U O W -+ O (O t0 V W N U N W J UU 4I Gt W U V V l0 NAB IV U V7 W (NIiN m� W N-+ A J A W U W A w M m IV �. j W (O N tD U V O A A W W W U W N U N V tO V V mU N Ot0 (O jm(°� A W O m W A U O 4 7 N W O O O O U O U W M W N W O (O O N (O O- O W W O NN N W O M W O O A W V U W U O U W V N V U W N Ili U T fD (O N U V W N W A N N D N W m N W N N W N W N— V m I V MO O V m V O N A A W N U W U N A O U W W W W V W V W A �O N N O N A U W O N. WW O W w O N l0 O W V" V U N N V V m 01 AAtDV V OW J WOIJ.N V 1p (O (Tm,p NWWmmm CJ — f0 V W W N V W D7 t0 -+ 0 0 N- A A W W N W V -� V W (D U O A U f W N V O A W—,w A U N O U (0 W w w U N N _O O tWT W V W N A N N N N N N A -w W 'm N D N 0) A V W W U U W U W W V W A V W W t0 O W W CJ A l0 V- W" W m W V IJ U I W V I A fJ W m W U — W U (O W a O W W W W W N W W A N V W W W U a (O w W W W W A W W O U U W W W" W w N 0 O 0 U t0 O A V O W U N W W U W N+ +UUmOI A A W A N W W U-�-� N (O W ANN N A W V W D O W 4 t0 U A W t0 A O V W N N O W A W N O O N A V N W O W W O W W U W N V (D W U A N cp W A pp -� U U N O W U W W N IV N cn N l0 m IJ W O U — N W N W V O W W N W V O U W O V W (O O W U V W N (O W O O N W W W N t0 N W A U O 0 N W (O N N W A N l0 W TOTAL ALL FUNDS FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $8,406,029 $8,695,865 $8,477,831 $8,813,109 $8,623,028 $8,736,630 - 0.87% SALES OF GOODS 4,085,682 4,352,570 4,477,651 4,404,781 4,536,605 4,418,500 0.31% LICENSES & PERMITS 921,254 280,025 225,059 375,250 352,490 440,600 17.42% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 678,674 1,208,228 1,021,801 206,915 531,315 402,240 94.40% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 2,140,953 2,267,400 3,755,823 6,411,103 4,318,516 4,776,604 - 25.49% FINES & FORFEITS 2,232 1,220 255 200 105 150 - 25.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 2,725,502 2,323,931 1,621,441 1,873,664 1,746,287 2,035,388 8.63% MISCELLANEOUS 13,904,478 1,413,524 2,033,552 2,602,579 2,987,061 1,288,688 - 50.48% USE COLLECTIONS 2,005,284 2,120,788 2,277,546 2,278,050 2,494,023 2,526,800 10.92% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 17,722 0 2,383,991 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 16,807,286 10,182,416 5,237,710 4,472,516 5,325,502 6,591,603 47.38% BOND PROCEEDS 15,685,262 1,436 3,256,436 4,590,000 2,708 6,000,000 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $67,380,358 $32,847,403 $34,769,096 $36,028,167 $30,917,640 $37,217,203 3.30% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $4.,649,496 $4,880,844 $5,266,582 $5,228,730 $5,362,764 $5,537,881 5.91% SUPPIES 3,846,556 4,325,308 5,263,389 4,422,495 4,816,011 4,697,371 6.22% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 7,701,816 8,057,365 9,315,177 13,326,202 10,154,964 9,791,809 - 26.52% CAPITAL OUTLAY 4,601,038 9,936,627 9,660,565 9,113,020 5,794,844 10,364,879 13.74% DEBT SERVICE 23,382,416 7,943,740 7,395,089 6,429,275 6,205,472 6,293,202 -2.12% OPERATING TRANSFERS 16,842,106 10,182,712 5,220,932 4,472,516 5,325,502 6,591.,603 47.38% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $61,023,428 $45,326,596 $42,121,734 $42.,992,238 $37,659,557 $43,276,745 0.66% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $84,226,705 $6,356,930 $90,583,635 ($12,479,193) $78,104,443 ($7,352,638) $70,751,805 ($6,964,071) $70,751,805 ($6,741,917) $64,009,887 ($6,059,542L FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $90,583,635 $78,104,443 $70,751,805 $63,787,734 $64,009,887 $57,950,345 A -41 Fund Balance Trends Projected Fund Balance Summary : BUDGETS ESTIMATED FUND 1,220,149 (344,419_), FUND Amounts 66.4,773: 0 BALANCE 315,891 245,521 BALANCE Assigned, 978,801 (DEFICIT) 126,500 - (DEFICIT) Committed Amounts 'FUND 1 213112 01 0 :2011 Budget_ 2012 Budget 1213112011 or Restricted Unassigned 0 '2011 G. O. Refunding Bond 0 2,708 0 2,708 2,708 General Fund 5,067,070' (728)' 0' 5,066,342: 3,374,200'. 1,692,142.; Special Revenue Funds: - 674,417 I (270,831)' (201,020)'. 202,566 202,566 'EDA 7,343,732 (404,325) 322,511 7,261,918 7,261,918 0 :Deputy Registrar 228,246 ! 15,510 29,583: 273,339 273,339 0 MN Investment 952,907 31,709' 30,591 1,015,207 1,015,207' 0 Community Center 1,155,851 (256,445), (1,129,889) (230,483) 0 (230,463). Park & Pathway Dedication 446,187 - (406,700), (133,097), (93,610); 0 ` (93,610) TOTAL- Special Rev Funds: 10,126,923; (1,020,251): (880,301) -:, 8,226,371 8,550,464' (324,093) 'Debt Service Funds: _ 2005A GO Bond 1,220,149 (344,419_), (210,957); 664,773- 66.4,773: 0 Consolidated Bond 315,891 245,521 417,389 - 978,801 ! 978,801 :2007A G. O. Bond 126,500 (109,252): (57,765): (40,517)', (40, 517): _ 0 2010 GO Improvement (89,955). 15,015, 56,186 -. 18,754 (18,754): 0 '2011 G. O. Refunding Bond 0 2,708 0 2,708 2,708 _ _ 0 -'- 2008 Sewer Refunding Bond 790,797 (117,626). (78,710)1 594,461 ; 594,461 :. 0 . .2008A EDA MCC Refunding 674,417 I (270,831)' (201,020)'. 202,566 202,566 0 TOTAL- be bt Service Funds: 3,037,7991 (578,884) (74,877). 2,384,038! 1,405,236 978,801 - Capital Project Funds: ::Capital Projects (78,313). 12,502. 3,866,791. 3,800,980: 3,800,980 0 Sanitary Sewer Access 4081,376 (908,108)_ (1,104,261), 2,069,0071 7,437,861 (5,368,854)' 'Storm Water Access 2,113,459 (254,986); (358,033)`, 1,500,440:. 1,495,512 4,928 Water Access 537,371 (235,899); (324,195)' (22,723)! 1,617 406 (1,640,129). Street Lighting Improvements 929,677 62,987 (19,490), 973,174 992,664 (19,490), Street Reconstruction 3,000,827 320,258: (1,439,039)_ 1,882,046 '.. 1,837,865 44,181 :.Capital RevolNng Fund 2,296,787 -:.. (610,639)_ 1,213,321 -. 3,197943 (1,984,622)'. - 1941CSAH 18 Interchange (2,739,416) 0 1 (94,142)1 (2,833,558)! _ (_2,833,558) .Water Tower (2004-30C) 1,017,042; u, 32,650' 1,049,692 1,049,692 !:School BI d W Ext (2005 -02C) 268,468: 0', 8,626 4 277,094 277,094 TOTAL - Capital Project Funds: 11,427,277 (1,613,885), 96,080 9,909,472 0' 9,909,472 Enterprise Funds: - -- 'Water 14,767,459 (402,896)1 (176,746)'_ 14,187,817 12,518,804 1,669,012. :Sewer 23,141,722 I (1,020,849) (1,033,802) 21,087,071 20,289,399: 797,672 - Liquor 3,519,710 94,899 (690,189); 2_,924,420' 3,142191 ! (217,771)' Cemetery 632,743. 315- (2,663)i 630,3951 650,016' (19,620 'Fiber (7,122,781), (2,419,083)! (3,373,479). (12,915,343)1 51,576,994 (64,492,336), TOTAL- Enterprise Funds: 34,938,853'. (3,747,614): (5,276,879)! 88,177,404! (62,263,043) TOTAL - All Funds: 64,597,921 (6,961,362)' (6,135,977) 51.500.582 101.507.304 - (50.006.7211 A -42 Fund Balance History 6,245,664.00 301,596.00 4,739,105.00 5,074,889.00 _ 120,958.00 (16,86000), 1,036,591.00 ESTIMATED ESTIMATED _ FUND - FUND FUND FUND FUND FUND BALANCE BALANCE BALANCE BALANCE BALANCE BALANCE (DEFICIT) (DEFICIT) (DEFICIT) (DEFICIT) (DEFICIT) (DEFICIT) 'FUND 12131/2007 12/3112008 1213112009 12/3112010 1213112011 12131/2012 General Fund Special Revenue Funds: EDA 'Deputy Registrar MN Investment Community Center 'Park & Pathway Dedication TOTAL -Special Rev Funds: :Debt Service Funds: ;2002 GO Bond 2003A GO Bond '2005A GO Bond (Consolidated Bond_ 2007A G. O. Bond :2010A G. O. Bond 2011A GG. O. Refunding Bond - _ __ ,1999 O Ira_ proeemenl 20006 GO Improvement 2008 Sewer Refunding Bond 2008A EDA MCC Refunding 1989 TIF (ELDERLY) Bond '2004A Taxable TIF - TOTAL - Debt Service Funds: i Capital Project Funds: :Capital Projects 'Sanitary Sewer Access ;Storm Water Access - iWater Access `Street Lighting Improvements ;Street Reconstruction :Capital Rewiring Fund 1941CSAH 18 Interchange i W aler Tower (2004 -30C) _._ W _ (School Bhd W Ext (2005-02C) :TOTAL - Capital Project Funds: Enterprise Funds: ':Water_ 'Sewer _ Liquor Transportation Cemetery Fiber TOTAL - Enterprise Funds: TOTAL -All Funds: 5,608,877.00- 6,245,664.00 301,596.00 4,739,105.00 5,074,889.00 - 120,958.00 (16,86000), 1,036,591.00 890,524.00 487,277.00 746,716.00 477,927.00 977,872.00 - (89.734.00) 687,553.00 568,969.00 1,421,118.00. 1,594,234.00 3,069,620.00 2,678 185.00 1,620,812.00 - 1,513,361.00 - 312,906.00 i 869,678.00; 15,923.00 530,358.00 (7,857.00); 973,985.00 - - 768,848.00! 2,330.00 2,381.00 1.102.228.00 ! 1.151.801.00 -i 834,175.00 160,228.00 5,996,541.00 _ 5,025026.00' 1,685,021.00: 1_,722,683.00 303,715.00 835,752.00 - 272,090.00 854,239.00. 1,450 844 00 4,010,515.00. 3,400,121.00 (2,984,68200) (3,14260800)!. 910,365.00 953_,882.00 241,694.00 251,898.00: 11,851,583.00. 10,929,916.00 ! 12,751,331.00- 12,644,013.00;, 24,936,260.00 24,332,767.00; 2,510,706.00: 21863,531.00!. 656,501 00 656,040.00 .00 5,178,134.00 5,067,070.00 5,488,741.00 5,488,741.00 7,281,758.00 7,343,732.00 164,670.00 228,246.00. 918,996.00 952,906.85 958, 750.00 1,155, 851.00 420.846.00. 446.187.00 399,252.00 - 310,257.00 - 1,771,440.00 1 1,220,149.47 (777627.00) 315,891.28 174 148.00 126,499.75 - - (89,956.00). 919,568 00 790, 797.00 655,408.00 674,416.62' iao 7no nn _ (123,925.00) 4,987,353.00 2,291,081.00 820,356.00 604,078.00 2,641,180.00 1,979,562.00 (3,240,932.00) 980,850.00 259,616.00 11,199,219.00 (78,314.00) 4,081,376.00 2,113,459.00 537,370.00 929,677.00 3,000,830.00 2,296,787.00 (2,739,417.00) 1,017,042.00 268,468.00 11,427,278.00 7,351,755.00 7,674,266.00 233, 317.00. 262, 900.00 983,239.00 1,013,830.00 . 990,512.00 (139,377.00) 512,553.00 301,596.00 52,027.00 469,416.00 (16,86000), (74,625.00) 421,741.00 477,927.00 2,708.00 2,708.00 708,124.00 629,414.00 400,709.00 199,689.00 2,081,002.00 2,006,125.00 (280,656.00), 3,586,135.00 3,011,49300- 1,907,232.00. 1,823,299.00 1,465,266.00 243,803.00 (80,392.00). 924,575.00 905,085.00 3,335,515.00 1,896,476.00 2, 025, 917.00 1, 553, 090.00 (2,785,339.00) (2,879,481.00) 1,049,416 00 1,082,066.00 277,01700 285,643.00 91625,040.00 9,721,120.00 12,510,429.00; 14,767,459.00'. 14,784,672.00 14,607,926.00 23,602,206.00 23,141,722.00 22,320,266.00 21,286,464.00 3,162,275.00 - 3,519,710.00 3,764,153.00 3,073,964.00 649,79600: 632,744.00: 634,510.00 631,847.00 A -43 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK A -44 GENERAL FUND GENERAL FUND SUMMARY FUND DESCRIPTION: The General Fund is used to account for the ordinary operations of the City, which are financed from property taxes and other general revenues, which are not accounted for in another fund. The modified accrual basis of accounting is used in the General Fund. That is, expenditures are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are recorded when received. However, compensated absences are expended when paid for budgetary purposes. The General Fund budget is a balanced budget, meaning current revenues equal current expenditures. ISSUES: Property taxes are the largest revenue source of the General Fund. The new State market value exclusion program, declining property values and slow growth in tax capacity place pressure on the City's property tax levy by reducing the City's tax capacity, which increases the tax rate and therefore increases property taxes to individuals. The public works department is the largest expenditure area for the 2012 budget. GENERAL.FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $5,533,560 $5,178,014 $5,093,683 $5,432,872 $5,312,190 $5,461,248 0.52% LICENSES & PERMITS 917,539 266,797 217,183 371,250 352,205 436,900 17.68% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 370,301 556,712 335,068 63,415 260,228 252,240 297.76% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 409,777 697,452 1,342,545 332,146 317,682 355,455 7.02% FINES & FORFEITS 2,216 1,220 255 200 105 150 - 25.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 5,970 7,763 5,116 0 4,024 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 439,022 378,088 373,946 266,993 270,509 242,405 -9.21% OPERATING TRANSFERS 46,390 469,114 65,000 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $7,724,775 $7,555,160 $7,432,796 $6,466,876 $6,516,943 $6,748,398 4.35% EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL $34,589 $60,492 $52,653 $61,768 $52,106 $63,379 2.61% ADMINISTRATION 260,622 278,810 212,246 225,402 230,407 214,143 -4.99% ELECTIONS 19,764 955 37,257 1,230 1,000 41,358 3262.95% FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION 428,634 393,885 376,650 354,699 338,739 349,774 -1.39% AUDIT 43,375 41.,000 37,600 28,625 42,720 29,000 1.31% CITYASSESSING 51,413 50,518 49,598 50,475 49,033 50,250 -0.45% LEGAL 73,556 71,039 103,288 57,000 41,733 56,000 -1.75% HUMAN RESOURCES 15,730 63,902 80,664 86,509 73,905 90,132 4.19% PLANNING & ZONING 205,163 145,367 108,966 166,900 180,306 170,252 2.01% DATA PROCESSING 107,392 239,059 105,911 149,838 122,540 148,497 -0.89% CITY HALL 182,586 229,058 269,262 200,209 220,752 253,355 26.55% PRAIRIE CENTER BUILDING 0 617,230 39,251 21,175 25,616 33,575 58.56% TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT $1,422,824 $2,191,315 $1,473,346 $1,403,829 $1,378,857 $1,499,715 6.83% i GENERAL FUND CONTINUED 2008 ACTUAL 2009 ACTUAL 2010 ACTUAL 2011 BUDGET 2011 PROJECTED 2012 BUDGET % CHANGE PUBLIC SAFETY 318,151 245,232 168,095 .217,741 238,345 216,737 -0.46% LAW ENFORCEMENT 990,621 1,064,389 1,093,658 1,121,200 1,120,961 1,139,600 1.64% FIRE DEPARTMENT 217,181 775,821 196,997 207,214 179,702 215,157 3.83% FIRE RELIEF 74,110 80,127 66,758 65,000 72,647 67,000 3.08% BUILDING INSPECTIONS 405,779 306,897 249,771 245,212 232,630 250,832 2.29% CIVIL DEFENSE 4,136 7,893 5,092 1,400 25,537 1,400 0.00% ANIMAL CONTROL 48,272 57,089 44,561 46,057 44,246 46,261 0.44% NATIONAL GUARD 12,607 20,638 27,458 24,300 21,233 23,050 -5.14% TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY $1,752,706 $2,312,854 $1,684,295 $1,710,383 $1,696,956 $1,743,299 1.92% PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION 281,630 238,794 236,134 208,373 191,844 221,678 6.38% ENGINEERING 318,151 245,232 168,095 .217,741 238,345 216,737 -0.46% PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTIONS 135,176 119,275 91,986 112,272 92,101 116,856 4.08% STREETS &ALLEYS 724,620 778,648 578,716 675,390 582,013 700,049 3.65% ICE & SNOW 269,002 170,694 189,119 141,253 166,444 220,880 56.37% SHOP & GARAGE 163,410 176,773 180,051 174,563 167,333 170,010 -2.61% STORM WATER MAINTANCE 0 30,548 16,194 39,129 8,356 27,738 - 29.11% PARKING LOTS 3,222 3,630 5,194 13,800 6,454 14,404 4.38% STREET LIGHTING 229,509 202,772 198,893 175,000 176,907 197,600 12.91% REFUSE COLLECTION 514,308 547,160 534,903 542,247 440,498 544,174 0.36% TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS $2,639,028 $2,513,526 $2,199,285 $2,299,770 $22070,295 $2,430,124 5.67% CULTURE AND RECREATION COMMUNITY CELEBRATIONS 2,252 2,072 1,359 2,300 39 2,450 6.52% SENIOR CENTER 58,211 93,367 73,136 94,945 93,416 90,021 -5.19% COMMUNITY EDUCATION 12,740 12,740 0 0 0 0 0.00% TRANSIT 0 0 0 3,000 0 3,000 0.00% ICE ARENA 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 0.00% PARKS ADMINISTRATION 680,914 635,012 451,201 536,684 466,755 611,769 13.99% PARKS IMPROVEMENTS 105,116 76,258 3,398 0 80,245 8,500 8500.00% PARKS BALLFIELDS 16,,702 29,514 14,188 20,571 142819 42,300 105.63% SHADE TREE 41,725 22,983 34,460 36,187 41,169 41,462 14.58% LIBRARY 39,228 42,665 37,578 36,743 30,805 38,385 4.47% TOTAL CULTURE AND RECREATION $1,031,888 $989,611 $690,320 $805,429 $802,248 $912,887 13.34% MISCELLANEOUS OAA $360 $1,043 $717 $1,055 $0 $830 - 21.33% ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 79,646 78,574 60,252 153,075 146,290 81,100 - 47.02% UNALLOCATED 0 345,313 1,204,000 0 0 0 0.00% UNALLOCATED INSURANCE 161,536 190,454 231,645 94,063 626 80,443 - 14.48% TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS $241,542 $615,384 $1,496,614 $248,193 $146,916 $162,373 - 34.58% TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES $7,087,988 $8,622,690 $7,543,860 $6,467,604 $6,095,272 $6,748,398 4.34% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $5,608,877 $636,787 $6,245,664 ($1,067,530) $5,178,134 ($111,064) $5,067,070 ($728) $5,067,070 $421,671 $5,488,741 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $6,245,664 $5,178,134 $5,067,070 $5,066,343 $5,488,741 $5,488,741 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. FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $5,533,560 $5,178,014 $5,093,683 $5,432,872 $5,312,190 $5,461,248 0.52% LICENSES & PERMITS 917,539 266,797 217,183 371,250 352,205 436,900 17.68% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 370,301 556,712 335,068 63,415 260,228 252,240 297.76% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 409,777 697,452 1,342,545 332,146 317,682 355,455 7.02% FINES & FORFEITS 2,216 1,220 255 200 105 150 - 25.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 5,970 7,763 5,116 0 4;024 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 439,022 378,088 373,946 266,993 270,509 242,405 -9.21% OPERATING TRANSFERS 46,390 469,114 65,000 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $7,724,775 $7,555,160 $7,432,796 $6,466,876 $6,516,943 $6,748,398 4.35% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $2,760,229 $2,797,896 $2,764,180 $2,699,701 $2,608,785 $2,771,340 2.65% SUPPIES 474,720 456,357 402,628 469,170 385,847 504,700 7.57% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,275,751 3,523,126 3,173,052 3,196,733 3,022,257 3,302,358 3.30% CAPITAL OUTLAY 377,288 1,349,998 0 102,000 0 170,000 66.67% OPERATING TRANSFERS 200,000 495,313 1,204,000 0 78,383 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $7,087,988 $8,622,690 $7,543,860 $6,467,604 $6,095,272 $6,748,398 4.34% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $5,608,877 $636,787 $6,245,664 ($1,067,530) $5,178,134 ($111,064) $5,067,070 ($728) $5,067,070 $421,671 $5,488,741 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $6,245,664 $5,178,134 $5,067,070 $5,066,343 $5,488,741 $5,488,741 E REVENUES ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION: To record and maintain all general operating revenues of the City. The general find is used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. OBJECTIVES: 1. Maintain stable, constant revenue sources. 2. Maintain low property taxes and tax rate, by reviewing the costs of services provided and charge appropriately for those services. BUDGET ISSUES: The General Fund's main revenue source continues to be property taxes with 2012 property taxes making up 81 % of the total General Fund revenues. The Minnesota State property tax system is described in more detail on pages G -4 through G -8. From 2009 through 2011, Cities in Minnesota have had their property tax increases limited to the lesser of inflation or 3.9% plus growth less State Aids. Levy limits are no longer in effect for 2012 taxes 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 or 2012. Revenue collected for building permit activity were dramatically reduced in 2009 through 2011, therefore the City is reduced the budget for permits from $235,000 to $180,000. 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 2012 due to low interest rates and lower fund balances in the General Fund. M. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE CURRENT AD VALOREM TAXES $5,438,762 $4,979,139 $4,978,951 $5,407,872 $5,208,155 $5,456,248 0.89% DELINQUENT AD VALOREM TAXES 35,957 180,135 96,555 0 87,134 0 0.00% MOBILE HOME TAX 14,601 15,337 14,069 0 12,775 0 0.00% PENALTY &INTEREST - TAXES 44,240 3,403 4,108 25,000 4,126 5,000 - 80.00% LIQUOR LICENSE 52,962 50,060 56,429 51,000 51,033 52,000 1.96% BEER LICENSE 977 887 1,087 900 912 900 0.00% OTHER BUS LIC & PEMITS 4,115 3,202 3,892 3,000 3,718 3,000 0.00% BUILDING PERMITS 848,566 205,508 149,639 235,000 192,726 180,000 - 23.40% VARIANCES /CONDITIONAL USES 3,900 950 400 750 1,000 400 - 46.67% DRIVEWAY PERMIT 75 125 75 50 125 50 0.00% GRADING PERMIT 450 0 0 300 4,350 0 - 100.00% SIGN /BANNER PERMIT 5,410 4,025 4,975 4,000 3,935 4,500 12.50% MOBILE HOME PERMIT 380 475 285 350 190 200 - 42.86% ANIMAL LICENSES 204 565 401 400 595 350 - 12.50% FIBER OPTIC FRANCHISE FEE 500 1,000 0 500 500 500 0.00% ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE 0 0 0 75,000 75,000 195,000 160.00% CABLE FRANCHISE FEE 0 0 0 0 18,121 0 0.00% HOMESTEAD CREDIT (HACA/MV) 102,016 11,106 6,311 (181,325) 0 0 - 100.00% MOBILE HOME HOMESTEAD CR 8,840 6,134 0 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 0 244,696 53,445 0 0 0 0.00% STATE HWY AID - OPERATING 93,512 122,478 87,425 85,000 96,957 85,000 0.00% FIRE DEPT AID - OPERATING 74,110 64,549 65,774 65,000 72,647 67,000 3.08% POLICE DEPT AID - OPERATING 54,761 61.,789 60,869 50,000 60,700 55,000 10.00% COUNTY OPER GRANT -STR /HWY 14,020 15,676 19,059 15,000 0 15,000 0.00% COUNTY OPER GRANT - CIVIL DEF 0 9,984 20,866 10,000 23,183 10,000 0.00% CO OPER GRANT - RECYCLING 16,301 13,559 14,578 13,000 0 13,500 3.85% ZONING /SUBDIVISION FEES 1,260 200 0 200 925 200 0.00% SALE OF MAPS & PUBLICATIONS 114 39 45 25 27 25 0.00% ASSESSMENT SEARCHES 2,575 2,850 2,200 1,000 1,750 1,500 50.00% RESTOCK/BILLING FEE 2,450 0 2,535 0 0 0 0.00% FINAL PLAT FEE 250 50 0 0 175 0 0.00% PLANNING ADMIN FEE 21,400 19,898 0 6,000 594 5,000 - 16.67% NSF FEE 303 190 75 100 85 50 - 50.00% INSPECTION FEES /CONST OBS 35,739 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INSPECTION FEES /BLDG 3,556 6,531 0 3,000 1,050 1,000 - 66.67% CONTRACTOR LICENSING FEE 325 225 50 200 5 0 - 100.00% FIRE PROTECTION TWP CONTR 53,346 59,160 53,499 130,000 130,000 130,000 0.00% FIRE -EMERG RESPONSE CALLS 10,650 7,750 6,500 7,000 452 5,000 - 28.57% FIRE - OTHER FEES 3,109 1,250 550 1,000 250 500 - 50.00% BLIGHT /MOWING FEES 771 1,143 3,691 700 0 1,000 42.86% RENTAL HOUSING FEES 5,545 58,525 45,150 25,000 14,479 25,000 0.00% ANIMAL CONTROL FEES 32,442 29,452 33,159 25,000 44,273 25,000 0.00% INVESTMENT ADMIN FEE 78,176 32,834 15,666 33,371 30,931 31,605 -5.29% STIR, SIDEWALK,CURB REPAIR 70 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% m. EQUIP: OPER FEE /RE[AIR 120 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TREE & BRUSH REMOVAL CHARGE 7,130 2,653 2,230 2,000 1,120 2,000 0.00% JUNK AMNESTY FEES 9,176 10,493 0 0 0 0 0.00% RECYCLING BINS /PROCESSING 586 586 637 500 269 0 - 100.00% GARBAGE FEE - TAXABLE 64,823 95,441 98,559 64,000 72,628 60,000 -6.25% GARBAGE CART /RENTAL 47,706 52,943 58,413 0 564 0 0.00% GARBAGE SURCHARGE - NO TAX 2,814 7,656 7,778 1,500 7,819 1,500 0.00% CONCESSIONS - PW 1,585 1,206 326 1,000 0 500 - 50.00% TEAM /LEAGUE FEES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FIELD/TOURNEY FEES 0 4,930 4,209 2,000 4,973 2,000 100.00% PARK RENTAL FEES 3,889 3,682 4,508 3,500 5,153 3,500 0.00% LIBRARY ROOM RENTAL 90 40 60 50 160 75 50.00% CONST /ENGIN COST REIMB 17,504 161,975 182,596 20,000 0 50,000 150.00% DEVELOPER COST REIMB 1,592 135,271 820,109 5,000 0 10,000 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES GEN 681 479 0 0 0 0 0.00% ANIMAL IMPOUND FINES 265 220 205 200 105 150 - 25.00% LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION 1,500 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% ADMIN OFFENSE FINE 451 1,000 50 0 0 0 0.00% S.A. PRINCIPAL - COUNTY 5,970 7,763 5,116 0 4,024 0 0.00% INTEREST EARNINGS 312,406 165,328 201,685 195,750 146,941 158,880 - 18.84% INT EARN - ANDERSON /SR CIT B 4,873 4,383 3,875 3,332 3,332 2,740 - 17.77% INT EARN - DANNER TRKING 2,555 377 0 0 0 0 0.00% INT EARN - SWAN RIVER 10,930 11,404 9,273 9,661 9,661 9,235 -4.41% GEN CITY PROPERTY RENTAL 41,630 23,020 36,792 15,000 19,053 20,000 33.33% RENTAL OF PW EQUIPMENT 0 0 112 0 1,776 0 0.00% LEASE REVENUE 0 19,080 47,204 34,000 37,689 38,000 11.76% CONTRIBUTIONS 27,706 20,186 5,050 0 8,750 1,000 100.00% SALE OF GEN CITY PROPERTY 5,020 3,196 663 0 122 0 0.00% SALE OF LOCK BOXES /PUB SAF 1,727 1,898 1,968 1,200 1,390 1,500 25.00% SIGNS & INSTALL 494 105 0 0 0 0 0.00% SALE OF PW PROPERTY 0 12,001 0 0 0 0 0.00% SALE OF RECREATION PROP 5,791 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% COPIES /LISTS(TAXABLE) 287 245 90 50 64 50 0.00% REFUNDS /REIMBURSEMENTS 18,733 21,536 30,185 2,000 3,650 5,000 150.00% ASSESSMENT FEE REIMBURS 115 19,600 25,279 0 29,281 0 0.00% DISCOUNT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER MISC REVENUE 6,755 75,729 11,770 6,000 8,800 6,000 0.00% TRANSFERS FROM OTHER FDS 46,390 469,114 65,000 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $7,724,775 $7,555,160 $7,432,796 $6,466,876 $6,516,943 $6,748,398 4.35% li 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 fiber optic network. MEASURABLE WORELOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of City Council meetings 23 23 23 23 23 # of City Council workshops and special meetings 61 27 20 25 20 # of City Council resolutions 96 80 80 93 85 M. BUDGET COMMENTARY: Council's budget remains consistent with that of previous years. The increase in other services and charges is due to an increase in the budget for room rental for council meetings from the Community Center and increases in dues and memberships which consist of the Mayor's Association and League of Minnesota Cities. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % COUNCIL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $24,062 $39,772 $39,873 $40,443 $39,683 $40,479 0.09% SUPPLIES 0 118 0 0 19 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 10,527 20,602 12,780 21,325 12,404 22,900 7.39% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $34,589 $60,492 $52,653 $61,768 $52,106 $63,379 2.61% 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 planning. 3. Continue with proactive succession planning regarding key staffing rolls within the City's organization. 4. Continue converting City permanent paper documents to electronic format. ISSUES: 1. 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 fiber optic network. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Council meeting agendas prepared 55 32 43 48 43 Records converted to electronic 35% 75% 75% 75% 75% Council minutes approved 48 41 43 48 43 C 1 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The budget amount are based on past expenditure levels with the following exceptions. Personnel services includes a 2% cost of living increase and half step adjustments for employees and a 5% increase in employee benefit costs. Personnel Services budget reflects a decrease however due to benefit estimates in 2011 being higher than actual costs. All other items were held at or very close to 2011 budget levels. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % ADMINISTRATIVE ACTUAL ACTUAL .ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $223,674 $250,568 $189,266 $209,752 $204,593 $197,393 -5.89% SUPPLIES 5,799 214 94 200 1,619 200 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 31,149 13,336 22,886 15,450 24,195 16,550 7.12% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 14,692 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $260,622 $278,810 $212,246 $225,402 $230,407 $214,143 -4.99% 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 #of voters 5,379 0 3,360 0 5,500 # of registered voters N/A N/A 6,734 6,184 6,900 # of polling precincts 1 1 1 1 1 # of election judges 40 0 48 0 50 BUDGET COMMENTARY: There were no elections held in 2011, so the funds budgeted were for maintenance contracts of the City's voting machines and miscellaneous expenses only. For 2012 funds are budgeted to hold Federal, State, and Local elections in the fall including primaries. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % ELECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $3,082 $88 $21,186 $230 $103 $23,108 9955.48% SUPPLIES 417 0 2,072 0 0 2,300 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 10,866 867 13,999 1,000 897 15,950 1495.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 5,399 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $19,764 $955 $37,257 $1,230 $1,000 $41,358 3262.95% B -12 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT: General Government SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 41520 ACTIVITY SCOPE: 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of accts. payable checks 3,465 3,575 3,862 7,253 7,000 Awarded GFOA's Budget Award No Yes Yes Yes Yes Awarded GFOA's Certificate of Achievement Bond Rating BUDGET COMMENTARY: No Yes Yes Yes Yes A2 A2 Aa3 Aa3 Aa3 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. 2012 budgets are very seminal to the 2011 budget however the decrease in personnel services is due to allocating more staff time to the Enterprise Funds for FiberNet. The decrease in supplies is from budgeting a small scanner in 2011 and having no scanner budgeted for 2012. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % FINANCE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $392,410 $359,208 $338,675 $325,424 $308,213 $321,527 -1.20% SUPPLIES 2,021 1,276 1,286 1,900 1,509 1,450 - 23.68% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 34,203 33,401 36,689 27,375 29,017 26,797 -2.11% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $428,634 $393,885 $376,650 $354,699 $338,739 $349,774 -1.39% 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 WORI LOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Audit submittal date to State 6/27 6/24 6/17 6/29 6/15 # of audit findings 6 2 3 0 0 Achieved GFOA award No Yes 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. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 43,375 41,000 37,600 28,625 42,720 29,000 1.31% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $43,375 $41,000 $37,600 $28,625 $42,720 $29,000 1.31% 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # New home construction 20 9 2 2 10 # New commercial construction 8 5 5 6 7 Total # of city parcels assessed 4,684 4,684 4,676 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 10 @ $25.00, 5 commercial under $500,000 @ $25.00, and 2 commercial over $500,000 @ @100.00. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 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 51,413 50,518 49,598 50,475 49,033 50,250 -0.45% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $51,413 $50,518 $49,598 $50,475 $49,033 $50,250 -0.45% 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. Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 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. In 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 73,556 71,039 103,288 57,000 41,733 56,000 -1.75% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $73,556 $71,039 $103,288 $57,000 $41,733 $56,000 -1.75% 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 50 52 61 61 62 71 73 75 80 95 6 7 8 5 3 26 50 49 25 64 120 125 136 141 157 IC BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Human Resource Activity was a new activity in 2009 for the City since the part-time position of human resource manager was created and filled in 2008. In 2010 the position was changed to a full -time position. The 2012 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 2012. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % HUMAN RESOURCES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $15,698 $54,777 $71,247 $73,959 $62,663 $76,677 3.67% SUPPLIES 32 0 353 1,000 73 800 - 20.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 9,125 9,064 11,550 11,169 12,655 9.57% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $15,730 $63,902 $80,664 $86,509 $73,905 $90,132 4.19% 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. Continued code monitoring as related to implementation of new zoning ordinance. 2. Implementation of Comprehensive Plan objectives. 3. Completion of CCD Zoning regulations in concurrence with Embracing Downtown Monticello goals. 4. Support for downtown redevelopment and revitalization, including the Embracing Downtown Monticello project. 5. Involvement in regional transportation planning and its impact on land use and growth objectives. 6. Bertram Chain of Lakes acquisition and master planning. 7. Implementation of more e- government options for permitting and development. 8. Continued implementation and training on the City's GIS. 9. Continued improvements of the City's development and planning process. 10. Increased support for neighborhood organizations and involvement. ISSUES: 1. Implementation of amended City zoning ordinance. 2. Conditional Use Permit tracking and audits. 3. Review of current/future development financing policies. 1 MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of planning applications 35 29 17 12 15 # of project reconciliations 19 21 4 4 5 # of planning commission meetings 12 14 24* 14 14 *Zoning Ordinance Revision required additional monthly meetings. BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Planning, Zoning and Community Development budget was decreased in 2011 to reflect less development activity taking place base on current activity and the economic state of the area, state, and nation. The 2012 budget is based on 2011 activity and budget, along with wage and benefit increases. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % PLANNING &ZONING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $80,992 $82,376 $85,259 $100,700 $103,968 $104,002 3.28% SUPPLIES 2,044 51 3,431 200 481 400 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 122,127 62,940 20,276 66,000 75,857 65,850 -0.23% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $205,163 $145,367 $108,966 $166,900 $180,306 $170,252 2.01% 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. Maintain computer security to meet audit standards and requirements. 3. Coordinate IT processes with FiberNet Monticello, as applicable. Complete implementation and training for new city phone system for all departments and uses. 4. Respond to emergency data processing requests within 30 -60 minutes and develop action plan to resolve other issue, if necessary. ISSUES: Continue development of a master inventory of personal computers, software and peripherals used in the City. 2. Develop IT systems disaster recovery plan for the City. 3. Complete off -site backup system. 4. Implement gigabit connection between City buildings. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time 1 J BUDGET COMMENTARY: This activity purchases all hardware and software equipment for the City, based on an annual replacement schedule. In 2012, $21,400 has been budgeted for the replacement and addition of computer equipment and $25,650 for software and licenses. Professional services include year 4 of 5 for Springbrook financial /payroll /utility billing software license agreement, IT software system maintenance agreements, and technical services for a total of $79,000. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % DATA PROCESSING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $31,650 $26,124 $33,088 $31,788 $34,197 3.35% SUPPLIES 32,118 15,133 17,001 20,900 20,431 4,000 - 80.86% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 75,274 192,276 62,786 95,850 70,321 110,300 15.08% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $107,392 $239,059 $105,911 $149,838 $122,540 $148,497 -0.89% 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 friendly, knowledgeable customer service to the public. 2. Provide adequate and consistent hours of business throughout the year. 3. Maintain a reputable facility to house meetings and staff. 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. 4. Assistance with phone system upgrade and training. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of newsletters published 3 3 2 2 2 # of utility inserts published N/A 2 2 2 2 # of promo Pak inserts published 0 0 0 4 4 Service desk data entry 294 365 392 476 550 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. 2012 budget amounts are consistent with 2011 budgets and estimated expenditures. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % CITY HALL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $43,003 $42,415 $83,899 $55,059 $58,095 $57,030 3.58% SUPPLIES 23,786 18,246 22,035 22,050 16,210 26,325 19.39% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 115,797 168,397 163,328 123,100 146,447 170,000 38.10% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $182,586 $229,058 $269,262 $200,209 $220,752 $253,355 26.55% B -25 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. 11 i DI:RY11:7 \�71 ��i'L177;i/C17: \717:r II_\i Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Prairie Center Building was purchased in 2009 by the City to house the FiberNet Monticello business office and Wright County Sheriff's Office. The 2012 budget was based on 2010 and 2011 actual expenditures. The budget increase in other services and charges are for special assessments levied against the property. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % PRAIRIE CENTER BUILDING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 1,155 1,188 1,500 476 1,300 - 13.33% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 19,314 38,063 19,675 25,140 32,275 64.04% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 596,761 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $617,230 $39,251 $21,175 $25,616 $33,575 58.56% _g 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 Sheriff's Department. ISSUES: 1. Residents concerns regarding having our own police force. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of service calls 3,080 2,878 2,971 2,976 2,500 # of traffic calls 1,880 1,620 2,263 2,343 2,500 # of motor vehicle crashes 449 322 315 298 250 # of crimes 1,499 1,244 1,222 1,218 1,175 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Law enforcement services are contracted with Wright County Sheriff's Department. The 2012 hourly rate is $59.75 compared to $59.00 in 2011, an increase of 1.3 %. The City has budgeted for 18,980 hours of law enforcement services in 2012, which equal to the number of hours provided in 2011. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 990,621 1,064,389 1,093,658 1,121,200 1,120,961 1,139,600 1.64% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $990,621 $1,064,389 $1,093,658 $1,121,200 $1,120,961 $1,139,600 1.64% B-27 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. Develop NIMS training for all city departments. ISSUES: L Improve response times. 2. Develop and implement NIMS training for all staff and council. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement # of responses # of firefighters 2008 2009 2010 402 202 348 30 30 30 MEW., 2011 2012 318 300 30 30 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 equipment replacement (City equipment rental) in the amount of $8,000. Capital Outlay expenditures for 2012 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 E -15 and E -16. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % FIRE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $113,979 $99,790 $111,332 $106,892 $106,614 $111,377 4.20% SUPPLIES 29,870 53,014 21,260 34,095 24,158 27,450 - 19.49% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 57,586 95,647 64,405 66,227 48,930 76,330 15.26% CAPITAL OUTLAY 15,746 527,370 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $217,181 $775,821 $196,997 $207,214 $179,702 $215,157 3.83% IC DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY th ACTIVITY SCOPE: FIRE RELIEF Public Safety City Administrator 101 42202 The Fire Relief Activity is specifically designed to track the City's contribution to the Relief Association of the State Aid Fire Relief fund, which must be contributed to the Relief Association. OBJECTIVES: 1. Provide pension funds for the Monticello Fire Relief Association. ISSUES: 1. To become full funded. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Pension assets (liability) $740,263 $1,010,161 $1,136,892 $1,066,945 $1,149,280 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: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 74,110 80,127 66,758 65,000 72,647 67,000 3.08% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $74,110 $80,127 $66,758 $65,000 $72,647 $67,000 3.08% 5M DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY th 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: Managing and prioritizing department workloads. Facing the challenges of a growing regional center city and the possible rebound of residential property growth. 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 3,681 879 607 423 450 $45,950 $11,630 $9,033 $12,238 504 351 519 300 1,194 1,194 1,200 1,200 B -31 $20,000 250 1,200 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Building Department has budgeted $1,500 for City equipment rental in 2012 to fund the replacement of department vehicles over time. The 2012 budget also includes $1,000 for computer and software replacements. Other line -items adjusted based on past expenditure history. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % BUILDING INSPECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $343,440 $288,217 $233,847 $226,462 $217,682 $228,617 0.95% SUPPLIES 12,294 8,128 3,542 7,100 4,558 6,650 -6.34% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 50,045 10,552 12,382 11,650 10,390 15,565 33.61% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $405,779 $306,897 $249,771 $245,212 $232,630 $250,832 2.29% B -32 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. Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2012 budget is based on the 2011 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: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % CIVIL DEFENSE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $3,571 $6,653 $1,120 $0 $1,264 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 122 0 2,025 100 23,749 100 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 443 1,240 1,947 1,300 524 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 $4,136 $7,893 $5,092 $1,400 $25,537 $1,400 0.00% B -33 DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: ANIMAL CONTROL Public Safety Project Coordinator 101 42701 The City contracts with a private individual for their animal control services. The City owns and maintains the building the animal control facility operates from. The City also contracts to nearby communities, allowing them to use our services and facility for a fee. OBJECTIVES: 1. To address issues within the City and surrounding communities in a timely and courteous manner. 2. Continue to improve animal control response time. 3. Continue to improve billing procedures for animal control issues. ISSUES: To provide quick response to residents on animal control concerns. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 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: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % ANIMAL CONTROL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES $5,022 $1,558 $1,901 $1,875 $2,204 $2,300 22.67% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 43,250 55,531 42,660 44,182 42,042 43,961 -0.50% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $48,272 $57,089 $44,561 $46,057 $44,246 $46,261 0.44% DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: NATIONAL GUARD Public Safety City Administrator 101 42810 The City's National Guard facility is housed in the Community Center Complex. The City maintains the facility for the Guard. OBJECTIVES: 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time. BUDGET COMMENTARY: The National Guard operates a security division within the Community Center Complex. The area's operating costs are paid with City funds. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND NATIONAL GUARD 2008 ACTUAL 2009 ACTUAL 2010 ACTUAL 2011 BUDGET 2011 PROJECTED 2012 BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 0 232 448 1,000 211 300 - 70.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 12,607 20,406 27,010 23,300 21,022 22,750 -2.36% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $12,607 $20,638 $27,458 $24,300 $21,233 $23,050 -5.14% mi �,, 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. 5. Determine location for future wells utilizing information gathered from various sources including grants. 6. Develop a program to lease antenna space on elevated water towers, thus generating a new revenue source. 7. Implement a new SCADA system as budgeted in the Water and Sewer Operating Funds. 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of City projects started 15 10 3 4 10 # of City projects completed 12 12 4 4 5 B -36 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2012 budget is very similar to 2011 based on past expenditures. Wages were increased based on a 2% cost -of- living adjustment and half -step increases for those employees eligible for step increases. Benefits were increased 5% based on insurance renewal costs. For 2012 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 2012. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % PMADMINISTRATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $236,103 $212,476 $214,125 $167,955 $180,662 $175,228 4.33% SUPPLIES 5,089 5,233 4,411 3,950 2,863 4,300 8.86% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 34,648 17,976 17,598 36,468 8,319 42,150 15.58% CAPITAL OUTLAY 5,790 3,109 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $281,630 $238,794 $236,134 $208,373 $191,844 $221,678 6.38% B -37 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, assists with the development, review of City codes and ordinances, issues grading and right -of -way excavation/obstruction permits, and manages the City's State Aid Road accounts. The Engineering activity also assists with the development and management of the City's street, public utilities systems, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP), City improvement projects, and miscellaneous mapping. In addition, the Engineering activity responds to residents with issues related to storm water drainage and/or 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: I. Improve ability to assist other departments with CADD and GIS related requests. 2. Continue to administer and maintain the City's SWPPP. 3. Continue to implement and improve the City's GIS. 4. Continue to educate the public on purposes and practices associated with conservation and drainage easements and storm water ponds. 5. Create a one -stop shop process for the City's right -of -way excavation/obstruction permitting process. 6. Continue to develop an in -house Pavement Management Program. ISSUES: 1. Increasing restrictions for storm water runoff by MPCA. 2. Lack of public knowledge regarding purposes and practices associated with conservation and drainage easements and storm water ponds. 3. Increased phosphorus restrictions for wastewater effluent by MPCA. 4. City's right -of -way excavation/obstruction permit process is cumbersome, with too many individuals involved in too many places. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Response to service requests 60 60 75 85 100 Response to on -line requests 60 60 85 70 100 # of active improvement projects 9 7 7 8 10 # of grading permits issued 1 2 2 2 10 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 2012 the Engineering budget will remain about the same as in 2011 because new residential development activity has not occurred in 2011 and is anticipated to be very slow once again in 2012. The budget will therefore remain relatively stable for engineering services related to new development. Funds are budgeted for continued improvements and development of the City's GIS system. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % PW /ENGINEERING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $119,150 $133,455 $157,527 $147,441 $166,018 $151,112 2.49% SUPPLIES 638 2,674 1,770 100 78 250 150.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 198,363 109,103 8,798 70,200 72,249 65,375 -6.87% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $318,151 $245,232 $168,095 $217,741 $238,345 $216,737 - 0.46% PUBLIC WORKS - INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43115 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The inspection activity is responsible to design and inspect City infrastructure projects, and to review and approve right -of -way excavation/obstruction permit applications. Personnel are also responsible for recording as- builts, design and mapping assistance, and administering, managing and using various computer software programs including ArcGIS, AutoCADm and CarteGraph. OBJECTIVES: 1. Maintain, improve, and train staff on using the City's GIS system to allow everyone to use it to its fullest potential. 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. 5. Improve knowledge, skills, and ability in using CarteGraph software for development of an in -house Pavement Management Program. 6. Improve knowledge, skills, and ability in using AutoCAD Software for assisting other departments with their drafting and mapping needs. 7. Assist other City departments in acquiring utility information not readily available from other sources, including GIS. 8. Assist with design and implementation of solutions to drainage issues. ISSUES: 1. Access to City vehicles housed in cold storage at public works is difficult, limiting ability to quickly respond to issues. 2. Workload and budget issues created by mandatory MPCA compliance requirements in relation to City SWPPP. IC MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Project inspection hours N/A 1,100 1,200 1,200 1,400 Project pre - design hours N/A 35 80 80 80 Snow & ice removal N/A 12 20 8 10 Scanning of project files /plans N/A N/A 30 150 200 Excavation permit application N/A 30 38 40 50 Review /update design specifications N/A N/A 20 30 40 Plotting maps for other staff N/A 126 300 84 100 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Increased budget for vehicle maintenance for 2012. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % PMINSPECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET - PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $117,578 $110,496 $86,395 $99,917 $83,775 $104,675 4.969/. SUPPLIES 12,637 2,466 2,744 6,825 3,336 5,600 - 17.95% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 4,961 6,313 2,847 5,530 4,990 6,381 15.39% .CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $135,176 $119,275 $91,986 $112,272 $92,101 $116,856 4.08% B -41 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 Pomnds of crack sealer Sq. yards of chip sealing Miles of streets Tons of blacktop patching 2008 2009 18,150 24,160 101,442 58,000 67.64 68.00 200 200 B -42 2010 2011 2012 20,000 15,000 20,000 75,000 60,000 75,000 68.00 68.00 68.00 200 200 200 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Budget changes for 2012 include a decrease in overtime salaries and health insurance costs based on the City's 5% insurance rate increase. More wages and benefits were allocated to the snow and ice activity based on past expenditures, which results in the 3.02% decrease in personnel services for 2012. Charges for services included insurance cost for vehicles and property in the open which was previously budgeted in unallocated insurance. All equipment purchases for 2012 will be purchased from the Capital Revolving Fund and is outlined in the Capital Project Fund section of this document. The City equipment rental charge was increased to $18,150 for 2012 from 15,677 in 2011. For 2012 a $90,000 seal coat project is budgeted, which is an increase of $20,000 from the 2011 budget. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % PW /STREETS &ALLEYS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $402,202 $369,526 $368,342 $428,552 $376,086 $415,597 -3.02% SUPPLIES 121,257 117,009 126,089 130,325 113,660 147,275 13.01% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 104,228 112,019 84,285 46,513 92,267 47,177 1.43% CAPITAL OUTLAY 96,933 180,094 0 70,000 0 90,000 28.57% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $724,620 $778,648 $578,716 $675,390 $582,013 $700,049 3.65% M PUBLIC WORKS - ICE & SNOW DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43125 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The City's Ice & Snow activity is responsible for the control of ice and snow on City streets, sidewalks and City owned public parking lots. The activity provides control in a safe and cost effective manner, keeping in mind safety, budget, personnel, and environmental concerns. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to maintain and update equipment and vehicles in a timely manner. 2. Learn ways to effectively use the City's GIS system. ISSUES: 1. Staffing and budgeting for unpredictable circumstances. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Inches of snow 42 50 40 75 50 # of plowing events 15 20 20 30 20 Tons of salt used 474 475 400 450 400 Tons of sand used 611 800 600 600 600 B -44 BUDGET COMMENTARY: For 2012 more staff tune is being allocated to the snow and ice activity based on past expenditures, which is the reason for the large increase in personnel services. All other expenditure line -item budget amounts are similar to 2011. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 PW /ICE & SNOW ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $77,026 $116,200 $124,885 $67,303 $108,339 $134,080 99.22% SUPPLIES 59,662 53,551 63,953 70,650 57,587 84,500 19.60% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 2,798 943 281 3,300 518 2,300 - 30.30% CAPITAL OUTLAY 129,516 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $269,002 $170,694 $189,119 $141,253 $166,444 $220,880 56.37% um PUBLIC WORKS - SHOP & GARAGE DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43127 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Shop & Garage activity maintains all City vehicles and equipment for the Streets, Ice & Snow, Parks, Water and Sewer activities in a safe and efficient manner. OBJECTIVES: 1. Update equipment and vehicles. 2. Maintain equipment and vehicles to operate efficiently and safely. ISSUES: 1. Aging equipment. 2. Increased safety regulation for equipment and vehicles. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at. this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: For 2012 there were no significant budget changes for the Shop & Garage activity. The budget consists of equipment parts, lubricants, and other repair supplies and the costs to heat/cool and supply electricity to the City shop and garage area. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 PW /SHOP& GARAGE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $78,354 $87,007 $96,443 $84,963 $96,445 $79,160 -6.83% SUPPLIES 37,584 43,964 27,561 39,300 33,108 40,550 3.18% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 47,472 45,802 56,047 50,300 37,780 50,300 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $163,410 $176,773 $180,051 $174,563 $167,333 $170,010 -2.61% i s 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 trunks, ditches, and ponds, and repairing damaged trunk lines. OBJECTIVES: 1. Monitor, repair, and clean storm water trunk lines, laterals, structures, ditches, holding ponds and structural pollution control devices. ISSUES: 1. Continued deterioration of storm water system, without proper funding for repairs, replacement or improvements. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of miles of storm water mains N/A / City / City '/ City 1/o City Clean septor manholes N/A 4 4 4 4 GPS storm structures N/A / City / City / City '/ City Storm water manhole maintenance N/A / City / City / City / City Storm water system locates N/A 100 100 100 100 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2012 budget form the storm water activity is for general maintenance of the City's stone water system. The cleaning and restoration of holding ponds will be paid from the Stone Water Access Fund in 2012. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % STORMWATER MAINTANANCE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $16,635 $13,079 $4,129 $5,278 $17,088 313.85% SUPPLIES 0 0 2,073 4,000 1,932 4,000 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 13,913 1,042 6,000 1,146 6,650 10.83% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 25,000 0 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $30,548 $16,194 $39,129 $8,356 $27,738 - 29.11% B -47 PUBLIC WORKS - PARKING LOTS DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUPERVISOR: Streets Superintendent FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 43140 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Parking Lot activity is responsible for reducing the depreciation of the City owned parking lots. This includes patching, striping, repairing, and resurfacing as needed. OBJECTIVES: 2. Monitor parking lots and patch and stripe as needed. 3. Continue adding minor plantings to parking lots. ISSUES: 2. Continued deterioration of parking lots, without proper funding for replacement. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of City owned parking lots 5 5 5 5 5 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Parking Lot activity's budget includes some charges for personnel services based on past expenditures and $6,000 for parking lot improvements in 2012 compared to $7,000 in 2011 and there are no other significant budget changes for 2012. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 PWIPARKING LOTS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $1,008 $217 $868 $0 $0 $804 100.00% SUPPLIES 746 107 50 2,800 284 3,000 7.14% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,468 3,306 4,276 4,000 6,170 4,600 15.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 7,000 6,000 - 14.29% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,222 $3,630 $5,194 $13,800 $6,454 $14,404 4.38% A 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of street lights maintained 94 94 100 126 150 # of street scape lights 40 40 50 50 60 BUDGET COMMENTARY: This department accounts for the maintenance and daily expenses of the City's street lights, of which, electrical costs are the largest expenditure at $160,000. The remaining funds are for repair items and supplies for maintaining the street lights. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % PW /STREET LIGHTING ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 1,952 17,931 13,287 2,500 862 12,000 380.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 227,557 184,841 185,606 172,500 176,045 185,600 7.59% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $229,509 $202,772 $198,893 $175,000 $176,907 $197,600 12.91% B -49 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. All other costs are negotiated, and paid by the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Research expanding City haulers contracted service prices to business and determine the percentage of participation to achieve a desirable rate. ISSUES: 1. Wear on the City streets. 2. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 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 2012 fewer funds were budgeted for personnel services and supplies associated with this activity. The balance of the expenditures is based on the contract the City has with its refuse hauler. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND REFUSE COLLECTION 2008 ACTUAL 2009 ACTUAL 2010 ACTUAL 2011 BUDGET 2011 PROJECTED 2012 BUDGET % CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $9,152 $14,029 $1,760 $3,447 $0 $1,724 - 50.00% SUPPLIES 17,228 3,038 2,822 2,100 0 1,100 - 47.62% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 487,928 530,093 530,321 536,700 440,498 541,350 0.87% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $514,308 $547,160 $534,903 $542,247 $440,498 $544,174 0,36% i m 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. Vary activities and increase the participation of Walk `n' Roll. 2. Expand on City presence and infonnation at Walk `n' Roll. 3. Maintain Holiday decorations throughout the City. 4. Research involvement in swan feeding and Swan Park activities in conjunction with the Chamber of Commerce. ISSUES: 1. Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of participants in Walk & Roll: Community (Walkers) 500 500 500 700 750 Business (Booths) 66 75 55 60 70 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Community Celebrations budget includes expenditures for Walk `n' Roll, the Riverfest Block Park, and to maintain Holiday decorations. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 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 2,252 2,072 1,359 2,300 39 2,450 6.52% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,252 $2,072 $1,359 $2,300 $39 $2,450 6.52% B -51 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Senior Center rents an area within 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 2012, the budgeted contribution amount is $50,500. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 SENIOR CENTER ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $187 $171 $428 $345 $365 $546 58.33% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 250 0 0 - 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 58,024 93,196 72,708 94,350 93,051 89,475 -5.17% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $58,211 $93,367 $73,136 $94,945 $93,416 $90,021 -5.19% B-52 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City in the past contributed, on an annual basis, $12,740 to the local cormmunity 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 is also not included in 2012 budget. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 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 $12,740 $12,740 $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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Adult Rides N/A 2,534 1,804 1,984 2,000 60+ Rides N/A 2,738 2,350 2,720 3,000 Dis /WC Rides N/A 237 253 146 250 Student Rides N/A 1,392 1,361 1,768 2,000 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City contributes $3,000 in 2012 to River Rider, for a future bus purchase for the Monticello route. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 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 3,000 0 3,000 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $0 $3,000 $0 $3,000 0.00% 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Acres of park I and maintained 100 180 180 180 180 Miles of trails maintained 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 # of events held in parks 129 130 130 130 150 # of winter skating days 91 100 120 90 125 B -56 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The parks budget consists of expenses needed to maintain the City's parks and trails. The 2012 budget is consistent with the 2011 budget and past expenditure levels except for an increase in budget for landscape materials and park supplies. The capital equipment budget for 2012 included the Capital Projects section of this document with funding coming from the Capital Revolving Fund. In addition there is $50,000 to sealcoat a section of pathways. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % PARKS /ADMINISTRATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $332,407 $344,255 $331,320 $365,445 $356,357 $373,632 2.24% SUPPLIES 84,309 78,174 69,633 99,675 64,240 109,675 10.03% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 32,248 88,990 50,248 71,564 46,158 78,462 9.64% CAPITAL OUTLAY 31,950 23,593 0 0 0 50,000 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 200,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $680,914 $635,012 $451,201 $536,684 $466,755 $611,769 13.99% B -57 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: 1. 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Park Improvement budget designates monies to improve the City's parks and pathways. Past budgets have included $9,000 for picnic tables, BBQ grills, and benches. 2009 capital outlay expenditures include $20,000 for improvements to Sunset Ponds Park, $20,000 for improvements to the Ellison Park shelter, $20,000 for trail and pathway improvements, and $15,000 for the installation of a patio and /or irrigation system at Hillerest Park. The 2012 budget includes landscaping improvement at East Bridge Park and pathway signage. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % PARKS /IMPROVEMENTS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 10,046 12,449 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,240 9,531 3,398 0 1,862 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 91,830 4,278 0 0 0 8,500 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 50,000 0 0 78,383 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $105,116 $76,258 $3,398 $0 $80,245 $8,500 100.00% Q 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: Budget constraints. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of ballgames played 530 550 550 580 600 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2012 budget reflect past expenditure levels and is similar to the 2011 budget for maintaining the fields and concession activities plus increases for increased park activity. The capital outlay expenditures are for lighting improvements to the ball fields and the addition of dugout roofs. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND PARKS /NSP BALLFIELDS 2008 ACTUAL 2009 ACTUAL 2010 ACTUAL 2011 BUDGET 2011 PROJECTED 2012 BUDGET % CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 5,377 12,490 5,491 11,250 8,291 14,850 32.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 11,325 17,024 8,697 9,321 6,528 11,950 28.21% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 15,500 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $16,702 $29,514 $14,188 $20,571 $14,819 $42,300 105.63% [me DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: SHADE TREE Culture and Recreation Parks Superintendent 101 46102 The Shade Tree Activity supports planting and maintaining trees and shrubbery within the limits of the City. The activity 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. Storms. 4. Chipper replacement. 5. Availability of funding. Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of trees planted 410 425 425 265 450 # of diseased trees removed 868 200 200 225 200 # of students attending programs 365 375 375 400 425 IC 1 BUDGET COMMENTARY: A portion of the park employee's time is allocated to the Shade Tree Fund. The 2012 budget reflects having a larger budget for tree replacements program. $27,189 BUDGET: $33,252 GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % SHADE TREE ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $19,493 $12,971 $27,189 $26,212 $33,252 $26,337 0.48% SUPPLIES 934 5,691 922 1,875 1,849 2,325 24.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 21,298 4,321 6,349 8,100 6,068 12,800 58.02% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $41,725 $22,983 $34,460 $36,187 $41,169 $41,462 14.58% i DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: LIBRARY Culture and Recreation City Administrator 101 45501 The Library Services are contracted through the Great River Regional Library system. The City owns and maintains the building the Library operates out of, as well as providing programs through the library to participating residents. OBJECTIVES: 1. To provide residents life -long learning opportunities. 2. To provide the availability of global information resources. 3. To provide quality programs for all ages. ISSUES: 1. Keeping information stocked as needed. 2. Budget constraints of the City and Great River Regional Library. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 # of items "Checked out' 216,599 # of programs offered 155 # of program participants enrolled 3,869 B -62 2009 2010 219,694 248,327 170 164 4,100 4,536 2011 2012 250,000 260,000 175 200 4,600 4,700 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 and funds some youth programs at the library. The 2012 budget is similar to the 2011 budget and past expenditures. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 LIBRARY ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $7,873 $10,764 $7,910 $10,642 $7,127 $10,642 0.00% SUPPLIES 3,688 2,354 5,139 1,600 1,781 1,700 6.25% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 27,543 29,446 24,529 24,501 21,897 26,043 6.29% CAPITAL OUTLAY 124 101 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $39,228 $42,665 $37,578 $36,743 $30,805 $38,385 4.47% B -63 LI IN 1104 19 Wall I 01XV4 Y o] L, L� RM, DEPTMENT: Miscellaneous SUPERVISOR: City Administrator FUND #: 101 ACTIVITY #: 46401 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Orderly Annexation Area (OAA) is designed to fund annexation transactions for the City. OBJECTIVES: 1. Provide smooth transition of property into the City from the Township whenever annexation occurs. ISSUES: 1. Slow economy. 2. Traffic congestion on TH25. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: Based on the annexation agreement with the Township and due to no new parcels being annexed into the City the expenditure budget for 2012 is for meeting and travel expenditures for the annexation board meetings during the year. BUDGET: GENERALFUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % OAA 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 360 1,043 717 1,055 0 830 - 21.33% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $360 $1,043 $717 $1,055 $0 $830 - 21.33% DEPARTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Economic Development Community Development Director 101 46501 The Economic Development activity of the General Fund is to create and maintain a clear focus of objectives which foster a pro- business environment and community amenities to attract and retain job growth at wage - levels that support the community. In addition, networking with organizations and individuals to create good -will and promote the City of Monticello as a place to work and live. OBJECTIVES: 1. Encourage retention and expansion of existing businesses. 2. Explore education and training course 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. 3. Explore opportunities to attract corporate headquarters, campuses, and businesses. 4. Work with the downtown stakeholders and City officials to implement the Embracing Downtown Plan. 5. Develop a "Branding" image for the City based upon the vision of the City's Comprehensive Plan and outcome of the Embracing Downtown Plan. 6. Analyze competiveness of City based on surrounding Cities fees, taxes, and development standards. 7. Continue to implement a Business Retention and Expansion Program. 8. Engage in the Greater MSP Organization. 9. Continue to explore option to create a second industrial park. 10. Develop monitoring process to determine success of various programs. 11. Enhance Industry of Year event/Manufacturing month. ISSUE: Consistent administration of the City's policies, plans, ordinances, guidelines, statutes, etc. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time B -65 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Economic Development budget includes a portion of the salary and operating costs for the Economic Development Director. The large decrease in other services was due to the planning consultant in 2011 to complete the Embracing Downtown Monticello study, which is not budgeted in 2012. BUDGET: GENERAL FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $73,948 $67,157 $49,066 $64,025 $60,415 $66,100 3.24% SUPPLIES 48 101 47 50 278 0 - 100.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 5,650 11,316 11,139 89,000 85,597 15,000 - 83.15% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $79,646 $78,574 $60,252 $153,075 $146,290 $81,100 - 47.02% B -66 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 UNALLOCATED 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 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 345,313 1,204,000 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $345,313 $1,204,000 $0 $0 $0 0.00% B-6% 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % INSURANCE - UNALLOCATED ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $41,837 $47,023 $83,015 $57,316 $0 $20,011 - 65.09% SUPPLIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 119,699 143,431 148,630 36,747 626 60,432 64.45% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $161,536 $190,454 $231,645 $94,063 $626 $80,443 - 14.48% IS . c SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS C-1 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: The City of Monticello currently maintains 6 Special Revenue Funds, of which 5 still have activity. A special revenue fund is used to account for revenue sources that are legally restricted for a specific purpose. The modified accrual basis of accounting is used for special revenue fluids. That is, expenditures are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred and revenues are recorded when received. However, compensated absences are expended when paid for budgetary purposes. Special revenue funds budgets are not always balanced, meaning budgeted revenues may be greater or less then budgeted expenditures. In these circumstances reserves will 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: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $2,532,797 $2,453,961 $2,205,043 $2,210,800 $2,094,779 $2,031,630 - 8.10% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 34,521 260,981 71,092 (40,000) 0 0 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 1,349,051 1,408,052 1,428,398 1,644,525 1,477,511 1,575,625 -4.19% FINES & FORFEITS 16 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 91,885 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 353,457 365,636 410,482 222,013 326,516 230,355 3.76% OPERATING TRANSFERS 95,702 2,801,776 505,301 918,336 475,000 1,100,000 19.78% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $4,457,429 $7,290,406 $4,620,316 $4,955,674 $4,373,806 $4,937,610 -0.36% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $1,101,951 $1,154,116 $1,164,826 $1,143,540 $1,185,610 $1,189,254 4.00% SUPPIES 197,243 200,693 189,803 225,400 209,917 231,400 2.66% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 577,090 692,828 613,903 598,437 626,709 599,291 0.14% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,919,870 1,176,896 781,420 2,433,933 1,389,729 2,562,382 5.28% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,159,411 1,063,712 1,488,488 1,574,615 1,206,279 1,235,584 - 21.53% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $4,955,565 $4,288,245 $4,238,440 $5,975,925 $4,618,244 $5,817,911 -2,64% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $7,901,797 ($498,136) $7,403,661 $3,002,161 $10,405,822 $381876 $10,787,698 ($1020251) $10,787,698 ($244438) $10,543,261 ($880301) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $7,403,661 $10,405,822 $10,787,698 $9,767,447 $10,543,261 $9,662,959 C-2 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 medical manufacturing, food related, and data center 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 TIF Analysis and Management Plan. 4. Implement Embracing Downtown Plan. 5. Continue to purchase land that makes sense for redevelopment purposes. 6. Continue to market the Monticello Business Center. 7. Implement training/education program for existing businesses and future workforce. 8. Utilize Jobs Bill to initiate private development/redevelopment. 9. Work with community development and developers to create upper -end housing in Monticello to attract CEO's 10. Explore options to generate additional electrical supply to City industrial areas. 11. Explore options to relocate electrical substation from Cargill's downtown site to create expansion opportunities. 12. Decertify appropriate TIF Districts. 13. Implement recommendations from consultants regarding uses of funds available in TIF District 1 -22. 14. Engage in the Greater MSP organization. 15. Implement monitoring/tracking methods for EDA programs. 16. Continue to build a more robust website and marketing brand. C -3 ISSUES: 1. 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Tax increment collected 1,172,386 1,192,987 1,155,385 1,013,490 881,630 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. On 12/31/2011, Tax Increment Districts 1 -5 and 1 -31 were decertified and placed back onto the general tax roll and thus, will no longer be generating tax increments. 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $1,172,447 $1,193,021 $1,155,385 $1,110,800 $1,013,490 $881,630 - 20.63% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 9,231 9,219 9,818 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 15,875 5,000 0 5,000 0 2,000 - 60.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 196,291 261,289 280,923 121,881 227,445 146,882 20.51% OPERATING TRANSFERS 20,702 2,302,832 5,301 443,336 0 0 - 100.00% TOTAL REVENUES $1,414,546 $3,771,361 $1,451,427 $1,681,017 $1,240,935 $1,030,512 - 38.70% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $18,984 $1,051 $25,673 $22,692 $26,026 $23,560 3.83% SUPPIES 288 0 0 50 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 83,797 28,621 198,115 69,300 165,095 66,975 -3.35% CAPITAL OUTLAY 506,926 1,171,081 492,236 1,233,685 725,513 296,882 - 75.94% OPERATING TRANSFERS 468,767 363,712 673,456 759,615 316,279 320,584 - 57.80% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,078,762 $1,564,465 $1,389,480 $2,085,342 $1,232,913 $708,001 - 66.05% FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $4,739,105 $335,784 $5,074,889 $2,206,896 $7,281,785 $61,947 $7,343,732 ($404,325) $7,343,732 $8,022 $7,351,755 $322,511 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $5,074,889 $7,281,785 $7,343,732 $6,939,408 $7,351,755 $7,674,266 C -4 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 # of motor vehicle transactions 45,595 49,439 51,250 53,953 58,000 # of DNR transactions 5,129 5,401 5,982 5,621 5,700 # Game /Fish transactions 235 268 350 376 400 # of dealerships serviced 21 25 35 35 38 # of driver licenses transactions N/A 450 605 326 650 C -5 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 future the DMV will be granted full driver license capabilities, which should increase revenues into the future. For 2012 revenues are projected to increase as they have in the past. In 2012 the personnel services are decreased to reflect one -full -time benefited position being changed to two part-time non- benefitted positions. Also under the City's new fund balance policy, any time the DMV fund has a fund balance of $250,000 or more the City will transfer 50% of gross profits to other funds, which in 2012 the City estimated the transfer to be $25,000. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 276,919 299,201 330,733 290,025 330,645 320,025 10.34% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 5,555 4,657 6,814 6,045 8,092 7,504 24.14% OPERATING TRANSFERS 75,000 2,317 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $357,474 $306,175 $337,547 $296,070 $338,737 $327,529 10.63% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $195,843 $238,024 $252,820 $253,418 $241,550 $240,316 -5.17% SUPPIES 8,651 9,519 6,740 9,875 4,923 9,100 -7.85% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 17,758 14,920 14,411 17,267 12,193 19,030 10.21% CAPITAL OUTLAY 14,264 0 0 0 0 4,500 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 75,000 25,000 100.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $236,516 $262,463 $273,971 $280,560 $333,666 $297,946 6.20% FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $120,958 $120,958 $43,712 $164,670 $63,576 $228,246 $15,510 $228,246 $5,071 $233,317 $29,583 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $120,958 $164,670 $228,246 $243,756 $233,317 $262,900 C-6 MINNESOTA INVESTMENT FUND DEPTMENT: Minnesota Investment Fund SUPERVISOR: Economic Development Director FUND #: 221 ACTIVITY #: 46526 - 46528 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The Minnesota Investment Fund is designated to administer loans to local businesses, following state and federal guidelines. OBJECTIVES: 1. To match available funds with qualifying businesses in Monticello. ISSUES: 1. Number of qualified available businesses in Monticello. [Ora,F•Y177 \�71��.I177 � 1CI7_ \717_r117_\I Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time C -7 BUDGET COMMENTARY: Interest earned from loans initiated through the Minnesota Investment Fund is the only activity anticipated in 2012 for this Fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 43,933 28,472 33,911 31,709 30,332 30,591 -3.53% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $43,933 $28,472 $33,911 $31,709 $30,332 $30,591 -3.53% 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 190,000 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $190,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $1,036,591 ($146,067) $890,524 $28,472 $918,996 $33,911 $952,907 $31,709 $952,907 $30,332 $983,239 $30,591 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $890,524 $918,996 $952,907 $984,616 $983,239 $1,013,830 C-8 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time C -9 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 0 188,054 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 0 467 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $0 $188,521 $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 0 188,054 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 644 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $644 $188,054 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $177 ($644) ($467) $467 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($467) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C-10 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 2008 # of customer visits 186,429 Gross Program Sales 129,340 Rental Revenue 149,323 2009 2010 186,279 183,527 149,829 167,723 163,441 157,481 C -11 2011 2012 179,889 185,000 168,569 185,000 178,492 182,300 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The revenue budget for Community Center - Administration included all revenues of the Fund. The largest revenue sources are property taxes ($1,150,000) and memberships ($700,000). Other revenues include concession sales, room rentals, and program fees. In 2012 the Community Center Fund will also receive a transfer from the Liquor Fund to help fund the building/natatorium improvements. This activity also includes all personnel service expenditures for the Fund. Expenditures for operating and maintaining the facility for 2012 are similar to the 2011 budget. In 2012 the largest change is in the capital outlay budget which includes expenditures for the cost of the building/natatorimn improvements ($1,621,000), replace carpet $15,000), and replacement of movable walls /partitions. The building/natatorium improvements will improve energy efficiencies of the building, improve air handling of the swimming pool area, improve the exterior look of the swimming pool area, and expand the fitness area of the building. Finally there is an operating transfer for the 2012 payment of the debt issued for the construction of the facility. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $1,360,350 $1,260,940 $1,049,658 $1,100,000 $1,081,289 $1,150,000 4.55 % LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 25,290 63,708 61,274 (40,000) 0 0 100.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 1,056,257 1,103,851 1,097,665 1,174,500 1,146,866 1,201,100 2.26% FINES & FORFEITS 16 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 60,481 56,798 69,287 43,830 46,575 30,975 - 29.33% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 200,000 0 0 700,000 100.00% TOTAL REVENUES $2,502,394 $2,485,297 $2,477,884 $2,278,330 $2,274,730 $3,082,075 35.28% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $887,124 $915,041 $886,333 $867,430 $918,034 $925,378 6.68% SUPPIES 188,304 191,174 183,063 215,475 204,994 222,300 3.17% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 472,303 461,233 396,355 511,870 440,825 513,286 0.28% CAPITAL OUTLAY 5,224 5,815 0 125,000 61,216 1,661,000 1228.80% OPERATING TRANSFERS 690,000 700,000 815,032 815,000 815,000 890,000 9.20% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,242,955 $2,273,263 $2,280,783 $2,534,775 $2,440,069 $4,211,964 66.17% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $487,277 $259,439 $746,716 $212,034 $958,750 $197,101 $1,155,851 ($256,445) $1,155,851 ($165,339) $990,512 ($1,129,889) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $746,716 $958,750 $1,155,851 $899,406 $990,512 ($139,377) The expenditures above are divided into three activities, which the details of each are shown on page C -13 and C -14. C -12 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % COMM CENTER /ADMINISTRATION ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $887,124 $915,041 $886,333 $867,430 $918,034 $925,378 6.68 % SUPPLIES 82,567 91,413 97,139 94,875 96,651 99,700 5.09% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 419,094 407,175 338,052 449,370 396,186 443,086 - 1.40% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 95,000 43,960 1,661,000 1648.42% OPERATING TRANSFERS 690,000 700,000 815,032 815,000 815,000 890,000 9.20% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,078,785 $2,113,629 $2,136,556 $2,321,675 $2,269,831 $4,019,164 73.11% 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 -13 BUDGET: SPECIAL REVENUE FUND COMM CENTER /PROGRAMMING 2008 ACTUAL 2009 ACTUAL 2010 ACTUAL 2011 BUDGET 2011 PROJECTED 2012 BUDGET % CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 83,768 82,057 67,648 103,300 91.,517 105,000 1.65% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 45,012 49,087 51,509 56,300 39,711 61,500 9.24% CAPITAL OUTLAY 5,224 5,815 0 30,000 17,256 0 - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $134,004 $136,959 $119,157 $189,600 $148,484 $166,500 - 12.18% 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % NSP BALLFIELD CONCESS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 21,969 17,704 18,276 17,300 16,826 17,600 1.73% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 8,197 4,971 6,794 6,200 4,928 8,700 40.32% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $30,166 $22,675 $25,070 $23,500 $21,754 $26,300 11.91% C -14 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 (formerly the Y.M.C.A.) property. ISSUES: 1. Time constraints with other projects. 2. Economic slow down of new development and home construction activities. Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time C -15 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The major revenue source is normally park dedication fees. However due to the economic conditions and lack of new development, for 2012 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 2012 is the City's payment for the next purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 0 175,000 0 52,500 - 70.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 91,885 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 47,197 13,953 19,547 18,548 14,072 14,403 - 22.35% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 496,627 300,000 475,000 475,000 400,000 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $139,082 $510,580 $319,547 $668,548 $489,072 $466,903 - 30.16% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,232 0 5,022 0 8,596 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,203,456 0 289,184 1,075,248 603,000 600,000 - 44.20% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,206,688 $0 $294,206 $1,075,248 $611,596 $600,000 - 44.20% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $977,872 ($1,067,606) ($89,734) $510,580 $420,846 $25,341 $446,187 ($406,700) $446,187 ($122,524) $323,663 ($133,097) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($89,734) $420,846 $446,187 $39,487 $323,663 $190,566 C-16 MO TI LL DEBT SERVICE FUNDS D_1 DEBT SERVICE FUND SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: The City currently has 6 active debt service funds. Debt services funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources for the payment of general long -tern 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 only City issued debt in 2011 was an advanced cross over refunding of the 2005A G. O. Improvement Bonds, which has a call feature of February, 2013. Based on the infrastructure /improvement projects yet to be approved by the City Council for 2012, the City could possibly issue new debt or internally fund the projects. See individual funds for the budget issues facing the City's debt service fiords. BUDGET SUMMARY: TOTAL DEBT SERVICE FUNDS 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $2,113 $780,177 $1,172,896 $1,144,437 $1,190,296 $1,218,752 6.49% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 41.,055 65,531 (41,500) 0 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 1,697,990 2,254,910 1,456,008 1,798,664 1,585,223 1,885,388 4.82% MISCELLANEOUS 421,307 167,083 486,228 301,902 278,270 267,582 - 11.37% OPERATING TRANSFERS 14,117,459 3,140,563 3,697,344 3,119,180 3,119,180 3,246,603 4.09% BOND PROCEEDS 15,685,262 0 510,000 0 2,708 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $31,924,131 $6,383,788 $7,388,007 $6,322,683 $6,175,677 $6,618,325 4.68% EXPENDITURES $11,906,444 $9,567,438 $3,589,928 $3,037,797 $3,037,797 $2,081,002 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 2,481 6,367 14,530 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 D 0 0.00% DEBT SERVICE 23,382,416 7,943,740 7,395,089 6,429,275 6,205,472 6,293,202 -2.12% OPERATING TRANSFERS 10,878,240 4,411,191 530,519 475,000 927,000 400,000 - 15.79% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $34,263,137 $12,361,298 $7,940,138 $6,904,275 $7,132,472 $6,693,202 -3.06% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $11,906,444 $9,567,438 $3,589,928 $3,037,797 $3,037,797 $2,081,002 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($2,339,006) ($5,977,510) ($552,131) ($581,592) ($956,795) ($74,877) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $9,567,438 $3,589,928 $3,037,797 $2,456,205 $2,081,002 $2,006,125 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: Assessor's Taxable Market Value 3% Market Value Less: Outstanding Debt Subject to Limit Legal debt margin DEBT SCHEDULE: Below is the City's outstanding debt as of December 31, 2011: Interest Maturity Authorized $1,188,222,100 $35,646,663 (3,960,000) $31,686,663 Debt * Rate % Date & Issued Retired Outstanding 2,220,000 3,960,000 Total supported by revenues 15,450,000 5,004,000 2005A Improvement Bonds 4.00 -4.75 2/1/23 25,150,000 9,490,000 15,660,000 2007A Improvement Bonds 4.00 2/1/18 6,045,000 1,680,000 4,365,000 2010A Improvement and Refunding Bonds 0.40 -2.70 2/1/21 2011A Refunding Bonds (a) 2.00 -3.00 2/1/23 Total supported by special assessments 3,255,000 160,000 3,095,000 10,735,000 00 10,735,000 34,450,000 11,330,000 33,855,000 2008 Sewer Refunding Bond 3.40 8/1/18 9,270,000 2,784,000 6,486,000 2008A Revenue Refunding 3.20 2/1/15 6,180,000 2,220,000 3,960,000 Total supported by revenues 15,450,000 5,004,000 10,446,000 2008 Telecommnunications Revenue Bond 6.50 -6.75 6/1/31 26,445,000 00 26,445,000 Total Debt Outstanding $70,746,00 0 * 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. (a) The 2011A refunding bond is an advance crossover refunding bond and will retire the 2005A Improvement Bonds in 2013. D -3 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: ISSUES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manner. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA M, 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 beginning in 2010 the City 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 refinanced this bond in 2010 and is now shown for historical purposes and to tie individual debt funds to total debt service fund totals. BUDGET: REVENUES 2008 ACTUAL 2009 ACTUAL 2010 ACTUAL 2011 BUDGET 2011 PROJECTED 2012 BUDGET % CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $356 $0 $75,189 $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 154,563 114,334 1,834 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 21,768 8,657 1,359 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,136 0 187,318 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 510,000 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $177,823 $122,991 $775,700 $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 9,019 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% DEBTSERVICE 290,256 292,510 1,165,933 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 6,151 199 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $296,407 $292,709 $1,174,952 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $687,554 $568,970 $399,252 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($118,584) ($169,718) ($399,252) $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $568,970 $399,252 $0 $0 $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. This fund is now shown for historical purposes and to tie individual debt funds to total debt service fund totals OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA [we] 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $14 $0 $90 $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 147,120 319,989 31,039 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 68,395 (11,797) 2,083 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 654,086 210,299 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $869,615 $518,491 $33,212 $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 0 552 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% DEBT SERVICE 292,526 1,801,916 268 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 403,973 0 343,201 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $696,499 $1,802,468 $343,469 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,421,118 $1,594,234 $310,257 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $173,116 ($1,283,977) ($310,257) $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,594,234 $310,257 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -7 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. The City has issued debt to refund this bond in 2013 when it can be called. OBJECTIVES: 1. Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. ISSUES: 1. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA �:� 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 2012 principal and interest payments for this debt issue. This debt will be retired with proceeds from the 2011A Refunding Bond in 2013. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $51 $150,306 $234,780 $244,131 $237,747 $251,906 3.18% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 7,887 14,337 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 868,084 625,735 324,831 683,368 350,046 760,514 11.29% MISCELLANEOUS 141,284 95,089 452,316 255,433 238,027 231,953 -9.19% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,636,424 1,610,141 1,605,509 1,593,630 1,593,630 1,598,408 0.30% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $2,645,843 $2,489,158 $2,631,773 $2,776,562 $2,419,450 $2,842,781 2.38% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 4,000 4,201 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% DEBT SERVICE 2,457,688 3,234,181 3,178,863 3,120,981 3,127,046 3,053,738 -2.15% OPERATING TRANSFERS 579,590 157,722 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,037,278 $3,395,903 $3,183,064 $3,120,981 $3,127,046 $3,053,738 -2.15% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $3,069,620 ($391,435) $2,678,185 ($906,745) $1,771,440 ($551,291) $1,220,149 ($344,419) $1,220,149 ($707,596) $512,553 ($210,957) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $2,678,185 $1,771,440 $1,220,149 $875,730 $512,553 $301,596 1 � 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- OBJECTIVE S: 1. Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. ISSUES: Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORELOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -10 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue sources for the 2007A G. O. Improvement Bond include special assessments collected, transfers from the City's Sewer Fund, and a property tax levy. The only expenditures are for the 2012 principal and interest payments for this debt issue. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $314 $182,422 $391,843 $418,306 $405,693 $416,846 - 0.35% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 9,681 23,654 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 321,928 260,760 241,200 176,634 155,127 160,365 -9.21% MISCELLANEOUS 0 1,377 (14,274) (9,672) (9,710) (11,256) 16.38% OPERATING TRANSFERS 135,000 104,200 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $457,242 $556,440 $642,423 $585,268 $551,110 $565,955 - 3.30% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 412 1,777 126 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% DEBT SERVICE 143,924 607,512 689,945 694,520 694,470 623,720 - 10.19% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 87,909 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $144,336 $697,198 $690,071 $694,520 $694,470 $623,720 - 10.19% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $312,906 $312,906 ($138,758) $174,148 ($47,648) $126,500 ($109,252) $126,500 ($143,360) ($16,860) ($57,765) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $312,906 $174,148 $126,500 $17,248 ($16,862L__($74,625) D -11 2008A G. O. SEWER REVENUE REFUNDING BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 315 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2008A G. O. Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds refinanced the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) Note, which financed the construction of the WWTP. The debt service schedule calls for February principal payments and February and August interest payments through the year 2018, with a call feature on February, 2016. The average interest rate is 3.40 %. The revenue source will be a transfer from the Sewer Access Fund and a property tax levy. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -12 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 2012 principal and interest payments for this debt issue. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $486 $447,449 $472,120 $430,000 $421,596 $500,000 16.28% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 23,487 27,540 (41,500) 0 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 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 28,684 23,509 20,671 18,963 20,588 20,176 6.40% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,445,554 500,000 400,137 524,590 524,590 450,000 - 14.22% BOND PROCEEDS 9,300,295 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $10,775,019 $994,445 $920,468 $932,053 $966,774 $970,176 4.09% 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% DEBT SERVICE 572,202 1,048,862 1,049,239 1,049,679 1,049,447 1,048,886 -0.08% OPERATING TRANSFERS 9,228,832 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $9,801,034 $1,048,862 $1,049,239 $1,049,679 $1,049,447 $1,048,886 -0.08% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $973,985 $973,985 ($54,417) $919,568 ($128,771) $790,797 ($117,626) $790,797 ($82,673) $708,124 ($78,710) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $973,985 $919,568 $790,797 $673,171 $708,124 $629,414 D -13 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -14 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 next land purchase of the Bertram Chain of Lakes property. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $412 $0 $2,699 $0 $75,018 $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 14,002 934,092 753,076 702,915 603,524 802,701 14.20% MISCELLANEOUS 92,230 34,322 4,790 17,606 15,811 14,688 - 16.57% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 8,066 343,201 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $106,644 $976,480 $1,103,766 $720,521 $694,353 $817,389 13.44% 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% DEBT SERVICE 14 10,423 10,248 0 31,217 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 214,081 3,257,045 0 475,000 927,000 400,000 - 15.79% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $214,095 $3,267,468 $10,248 $475,000 $958,217 $400,000 - 15.79% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,620,812 $1,513,361 ($777,627) $315,891 $315,891 $52,027 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($107,451) ($2,290,988) $1,093,518 $245,521 ($263,864) $417.389 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,513,361 ($777,627) $315,891 $561,412 $52,027 $469,416 D -15 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. This fund is now shown for historical purposes and to tie individual debt funds to total debt service fund totals. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -16 BUDGET COMMENTARY: There will be no revenue or expenditure activity for the WWTP Note since the note was refinance and the fund closed to the 2008A Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 9,456,859 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $9,456,859 $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% DEBT SERVICE 9,769,979 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 445,554 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $10,215,533 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $758,674 ($758,674) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -17 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. This fund is now shown for historical purposes and to tie individual debt funds to total debt service fund totals. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA E 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 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $470 $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 131,150 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 760 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 $132,380 $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% DEBT SERVICE 986,135 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 15,924 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $986,135 $15,924 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $869,679 ($853,755) $15,924 ($15,924) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $15.,924 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -19 �IZIIIL�0�1 _ l!_I_' ' 1 ►l ► : 17� 1[7�i1�i] 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. This fund is now shown for historical purposes and to tie individual debt funds to total debt service fund totals. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -20 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2000A G. O. hnprovement Bonds were redeemed in February 2008 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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% DEBT SERVICE 1,180,894 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,180,894 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $1,180,894 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($1,180,894) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -21 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. This fund is now shown for historical purposes and to tie individual debt funds to total debt service fund totals. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -22 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: 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 6,180,000 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $6,180,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES $668,477 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 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% DEBT SERVICE 6,848,477 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $6,848,477 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $668,477 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($668,477) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -23 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. This fund is now shown for historical purposes and to tie individual debt funds to total debt service fund totals. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -24 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 2000B G. O. Improvement Bond was redeemed in December 2008 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $10 $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 61,143 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 13,290 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 7,857 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $74,443 $7,857 $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% DEBT SERVICE 612,658 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $612,658 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $530,358 ($538,215) ($7,857) $7,857 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($7,857) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -2$ 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. This fund is now shown for historical purposes and to tie individual debt funds to total debt service fund totals. OBJECTIVES: NA ISSUES: NA MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -26 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The 1989 G. O. Tax Increment Bond was redeemed in February 2007 and should have no future revenues or expenditures recorded in this fund. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 110 11 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 $110 $11 $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% DEBT SERVICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 59 2,392 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $59 $2,392 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $2,330 $2,381 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $51 ($2,381) $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $2,381 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -27 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. This fund is now shown for historical purposes and to tie individual debt funds to total debt service fund totals. OBJECTIVES: ISSUES: Make debt payment as scheduled in a timely manor. Generation of sufficient tax increment for debt retirement. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA s 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 has no additional revenue or expenditures. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 49,531 14,314 213 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 138,400 0 356,179 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $187,931 $14,314 $356,392 $0 $0 $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 0 916 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% DEBT SERVICE 138,358 133,333 492,958 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 890,000 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $138,358 $1,023,333 $493,874 $0 $0 $0 #DIV /01 FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $1,096,928 $49,573 $1,146,501 ($1,009,019) $137,482 ($137,482) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,146,501 $137,482 $0 $0 $0 $0 D -29 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: 1. Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manor. ISSUES: 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -30 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 2012 debt payment. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 5,255 1,601 21,911 16,749 13,373 14,860 - 11.28% OPERATING TRANSFERS 650,000 700,000 805,000 815,000 815,000 890,000 9.20% BOND PROCEEDS 204,967 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $860,222 $701,601 $826,911 $831,749 $828,373 $904,860 8.79% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 2,069 38 268 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% DEBT SERVICE 89,305 815,003 807,635 1,102,580 1,102,080 1,105,880 0.30% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $91,374 $815,041 $807,903 $1,102,580 $1,102,080 $1,105,880 0.30% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $0 $768,848 $655,408 $674,416 $674,416 $400,709 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $768,848 ($113,440) $19,008 ($270,831) ($273,707) ($201,020) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $768,848 $655,408 $674,416 $403,585 $400,709 $199,689 D -31 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. 1111- �/:kY11:7: \'t311 ��.Y17:1:\ r[17_\ 1717Y II_\� Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -32 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: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 ($3,825) $52,000 $50,242 $50,000 - 3.85% 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 $104,028 $235,747 $476,526 $161,808 - 31.36% MISCELLANEOUS $0 $0 ($2,841) $2,823 $181 ($2,839) - 200.57% OPERATING TRANSFERS $0 $0 $0 $185,960 $185,960 $308,195 65.73% BOND PROCEEDS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $0 $97,362 $476,530 $712,909 $517,164 8.53% 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% DEBT SERVICE 0 0 0 461,515 201,212 460,978 -0.12% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 187,318 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $187,318 $461,515 $201,212 $460,978 - 0.12% FUND BALANCE -JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($89,956) ($89,956) $15,015 ($89,956) $511,697 $421,741 $56,186 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 ($89,956) ($74,941) $421,741 $477,927 D -33 2011A G. O. REFUNDING BOND FUND DEPTMENT: 2011A G. O. Refunding Bond SUPERVISOR: Finance Director FUND #: 318 ACTIVITY #: 47000 ACTIVITY SCOPE: The 2011A G. O. Refunding Bond finance will refinance the 2005A G. O. Improvement Bonds. The debt service schedule calls for semi - annual payments on February and August 1 st. The average interest rate is 1.6112 %. The revenue sources include a combination of existing City funds, a property tax levy, and special assessments. OBJECTIVES: 2. Make debt payments as scheduled in a timely manner. ISSUES: 2. Maintaining the lowest possible property tax levy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 NA D -34 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City issued the 2011 G. O. Refunding Bond in the amount of $10,735,000 as an advance refund of the 2005A G. O. Improvement Bonds in 2013. The 2011A G. O. Refunding Bond's revenue source will be a combination of existing City funds, including transfers from the three Utility Access Funds and Economic Development Fund, a property tax levy, and special assessments, while the expenditures consist of the debt payments. No expenditures are budgeted in 2012 since debt payments will be made from escrow accounts on behalf of the City. Revenues will still be recorded in the 2005A G. O. Improvement Bonds Fund. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 %a 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 2,708 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,708 $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% DEBT SERVICE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,708 $2,708 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,708 $2,708 D -35 /!!t ■4 ■■ „ � ;!!; � / § §() §)() § \) \\ \ \ \ \ \ §(( ƒ) - - \))}((( - - - - -- - -- § - ) - - -- } \�} �- H. « -- — - - -._ |\ ! a q [ \;| | ; — —�— /§ —a - - -- ,§ ! § - - - - - -- } In In \\ /((( $)( \(\( \� \�\�\ \ ! ---- IN R) - -a —a- - - - -- - -- - IN IN .- - -- - I !; ii\$\((0—In ; „ ;,..;.,.,,!(§)(§ ({ \ ;)! \ §)) \\}\(( § § § §( \\() §)§(}))§ 1. s "^ o �r{,° nn° OOn° o�° oo,°° o�nnnnn, ni- ',ncmi,ryry°n,ry.°n,�°n,n °m,n °a n8n °on °on °on °onnn�r%ry rmi,nnnryry °a, °o,n$n °n °o, °o °o,� r��SmP2o mm �o��F{mSm�<$<�J.o dom o.°ram��$.�°M� wNa TQ7 or°, °nn, °n °OO,n °o,n °o,rmi,oN,n,nn,n rynnnnryryr�°q�°gry°q n,�n °oo n °on °on on°mn °- nn,- --I w000we0000eoosaae °............... s000° $s�°o. aoo aoo 0 0 00 as's 00 00 0 0 n g ¢ v� KHI= "fr °NR U m m m g m A g$ S @ =R E_ .gym -- ___.._.__o_ mE3' m o`a ° N°C �CaNmNCaNCeNCaNC�N�am a m °°Cr� CC2 C?Cm Ca �a CaCm°Cmn C? CaCwCaw C? �A��m1Ca� �amL3`�C�m Ca �A�u gL C C 10 CC rv�°?' � g Cya p d l, reCwV 3 cl aCm$�a�eC�Na m 'a THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK D MONTICELLO CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS E-1 CAPITAL PROJECT FUND SUMMARY 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. In addition Capital Project Funds account for the purchasing and replacement of City equipment that meets the City's criteria of a capital asset. The City defines a capital asset as an asset that cost $5,000 or more and has a life expectance of one year or more. 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: 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. See individual fund's for any budget issue unique to that fund. The current fund balance deficit will be eliminated from a transfer of funds from the City's Debt Service Funds in the future. BUDGET SUMMARY: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $337,559 $283,713 $6,209 $25,000 $25,763 $25,000 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 273,852 349,480 542,041 225,000 271,087 150,000 - 33.33% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 331,031 123,972 522,857 522,550 888,930 156,765 - 70.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 684,139 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 455,795 237,379 394,700 347,216 333,469 314,034 -9.56% OPERATING TRANSFERS 2,547,735 3,761,159 950,000 435,000 1,731,322 2,245,000 416.09% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 2,745,000 4,590,000 0 6,000,000 30.72% TOTAL REVENUES $4,630,111 $4,755,703 $5,160,807 $6,144,766 $3,250,571 $8,890,799 44.69% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPLIES 9,860 0 896 0 151 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 280,205 105,544 425,161 1,805,000 32,883 555,500 - 69.22% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,515,994 366,453 2,773,322 3,780,750 2,619,590 4,233,200 11.97% OPERATING TRANSFERS 4,211,651 3,951,561 1,733,369 2,172,901 2,400,185 4,006,019 84.36% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $6,017,710 $4,423,558 $4,932,748 $7,758,651 $5,052,809 $8,794,719 13.35% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $12,254,673 ($1,387,599) $10,867,074 $332,145 $11,199,219 $228,059 $11,427,278 ($1,613,885) $11,427,278 ($1,802,238) $9,625,040 $96,080 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $10,867,074 $11,199,219 $11,427,278 $9,813,393 $9,625,040 $9,721,120 E -2 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: CAPITAL PROJECT FUND Capital Project Fund City Engineer 401 433000 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. OBJECTIVES: 1. Maintain City infrastructure. 2. Extend City infrastructure into new developments. 3. Upgrade infrastructure to meet new demands. ISSUES: Prior to 2006, the City would create a new capital project fund for each proj ect 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. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time BUDGET COMMENTARY: The City currently has the following active projects; • Chelsea Road /Fallon Avenue to County Road 18 Improvements • I94 Twin Bridge Reconstruction (State Project) • 2010 Street Reconstruction • Highway 25 and East River Street /West Broadway Intersection Improvements • 2011 Street Reconstruction E -3 The projects listed were street improvement projects with some utility improvements where necessary. 2012 projects include the possible reconstruction on rural outlaying streets, the beginning of construction of Fallon Avenue overpass, East 7th Street and Highway 25 intersection improvements, 7th Street road construction/extension, a street light improvement project 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 the Fallon Avenue overpass and 7th Street road construction/extension. If the City does not move forward on these two projects the City will fund the other projects with reserves on hand. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 20,125 445,762 0 593,623 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS (99,166) (2,032) (871) (22,998) 40,684 (3,209) - 86.05% OPERATING TRANSFERS 204,898 0 0 185,000 1,481,322 1,970,000 964.86% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 2,745,000 4,590,000 0 6,000,000 30.72% TOTAL REVENUES $105,732 $18,093 $3,189,891 $4,752,002 $2,115,629 $7,966,791 67.65% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 375 0 896 0 28 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 187,346 87,073 421,251 1,805,000 333 540,000 - 70.08% CAPITAL OUTLAY 557,136 215,173 2,722,133 2,934,500 2,317,610 3,560,000 21.32% OPERATING TRANSFERS 34,822 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $779,679 $302,246 $3,144,280 $4,739,500 $2,317,971 $4,100,000 - 13.49% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $834,175 $160,228 ($123,925) ($78,314) ($78,314) ($280,656) EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($673,947) ($284,153) $45,611 $12,502 ($202,342) $3,866,791 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $160,228 ($123,925) ($78,314) ($65,812) ($280,656) $3,586,135 E -4 SANITARY SEWER ACCESS FUND DEPTMENT: Sanitary Sewer Access Fund SUPERVISOR: Public Works Director FUND #: 401 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: To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of sanitary sewer improvements for the City. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner. ISSUES: 1. Number of building permits has declined. 2. Slow economy. Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -5 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: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 ($101) $0 $101 $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 270,753 80,720 61,631 262,650 144,520 78,795 - 70.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 257,896 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 254,622 111,304 145,489 138,445 95,740 102,357 - 26.07% OPERATING TRANSFERS 203,708 983,645 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $986,979 $1,175,669 $207,019 $401,095 $240,361 $181,152 - 54.84% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 160 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES &CHARGES 7,584 312 0 0 1,041 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 10,711 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 1,940,039 1,213,030 1,112,996 1,309,203 1,309,203 1,285,413 -1.82% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,958,494 $1,213,342 $1,112,996 $1,309,203 $1,310,244 $1,285,413 -1.82% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $5,996,541 ($971,515) $5,025,026 ($37,673) $4,987,353 ($905,977) $4,081,376 ($908,108) $4,081,376 ($1,069,883) $3,011,493 ($1,104,261) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $5,025,026 $4,987,353 $4,081,376 $3,173,268 $3,011,493 $1,907,232 E -6 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: STORM SEWER ACCESS FUND Storm Sewer Access Fund Public Works Director 402 49201 The Storm Sewer Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's Storm Sewer services. Fees are collected on building permits for new construction and lot development. These fees are dedicated for the purpose of storm sewer improvements. OBJECTIVES: 1. To continue to utilize collected fees for the purpose of storm sewer improvements for the City. 2. To retire the debt service payments in a timely manner. ISSUES: 1. Number of building permits has declined. 2. Slow economy. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -7 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 expenditures for 2012 are for placing drain tile along existing streets to allow proper storm water runoff and 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 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 24,959 3,343 7,169 174,500 108,698 52,350 - 70.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 155,900 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 77,550 47,154 74,340 66,284 59,056 61,660 -6.98% OPERATING TRANSFERS 65,379 787,262 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $323,788 $837,759 $81,509 $240,784 $167,754 $114,010 - 52.65% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 9,520 1,770 599 0 14,860 15,500 100.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 11,830 0 (6,067) 200,000 0 134,500 - 32.75% OPERATING TRANSFERS 264,776 267,591 264,599 295,770 443,054 322,043 8.88% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $286,126 $269,361 $259,131 $495,770 $457,914 $472,043 -4.79% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $1,685,021 $37,662 $1,722,683 $568,398 $2,291,081 ($177,622) $2,113,459 ($254,986) $2,113,459 ($290,160) $1,823,299 ($358,033) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,722,683 $2,291,081 $2,113,459 $1,858,473 $1,823,299 $1,465,266 E -8 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: WATER ACCESS FUND Water Access Fund Public Works Director 403 49201 The Water Access Fund provides for major improvements for the City's water system. Fees are collected on building pen-nits 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -9 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 35,319 19,784 8,292 85,400 39,589 25,620 - 70.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 74,274 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 11,271 21,734 19,596 19,004 8,169 9,748 - 48.71% OPERATING TRANSFERS 723,852 254,596 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $844,716 $296,114 $27,888 $104,404 $47,758 $35,368 - 66.12% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,459 264 100 0 1,022 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 311.,220 311,246 310,774 340,303 340,303 359,563 5.66% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $312,679 $311,510 $310,874 $340,303 $341,325 $359,563 5.66% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $303,715 $532,037 $835,752 ($15,396) $820,356 ($282,986) $537,370 ($235,899) $537,370 ($293,567) $243,803 ($324,195) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $835,752 $820,356 $537,370 $301,471 $243,803 ($80,392) E -10 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT FUND DEPTMENT: Street Lighting Improvement Fund SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: 405 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -11 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: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 267,630 286,869 297,584 225,000 227,713 150,000 - 33.33% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 4,460 15,119 28,015 22,987 32,185 30,510 32.73% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 30,000 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $272,090 $331,988 $325,599 $247,987 $259,898 $180,510 - 27.21% 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 0 185,000 265,000 200,000 8.11% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $0 $0 $0 $185,000 $265,000 $200,000 8.11% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $0 $272,090 $272,090 $331,988 $604,078 $325,599 $929,677 $62,987 $929,677 ($5,102) $924,575 ($19,490) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $272,090 $604,078 $929,677 $992,664 $924,575 $905,085 E -12 STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUND DEPTMENT: Street Reconstruction SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: 406 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -13 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The revenue sources for 2012 will be property taxes, 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 and a transfer to the Construction Fund for the 7`1i Street construction/extension, overlaying rural outlaying streets, and pedestrian crossing improvement projects. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $337,296 $283,713 $6,310 $25,000 $25,662 $25,000 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 6,222 14,094 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 3 0 0 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 56,571 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 52,105 60,069 103,337 87,883 101,648 99,961 13.74% OPERATING TRANSFERS 145,229 862,806 250,000 250,000 250,000 275,000 10.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $597,423 $1,220,682 $359,650 $362,883 $377,310 $399,961 10.22% 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 818 30,346 0 42,625 42,625 1,839,000 4214.37% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $818 $30,346 $0 $42,625 $42,625 $1,839,000 4214.37% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $854,239 $1,450,844 $2,641,180 $3,000,830 $3,000,830 $3,335,515 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $596,605 $1,190,336 $359,650 $320,258 $334,685 ($1,439,039) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $1,450,844 $2,641,180 $3,000,830 $3,321,088 $3,335,515 $1,896,476 E -14 CAPITAL OUTLAY REVOLVING FUND DEPTMENT: Capital Outlay Revolving Fund SUPERVISOR: City Administrator /Finance Director FUND #: 407 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -15 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The revenue activity for 2012 includes city equipment rental fee and interest earnings, which because of interest rates and lower cash balances is projected lower in 2012 than in the past. The expenditures in 2012 are 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $263 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 48,517 244,457 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 0 0 0 0 2,500 0 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 139,498 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 100,341 (3,689) 100,622 35,611 44,360 65,873 84.98% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 773,388 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $240,102 $818,216 $345,079 $35,611 $46,860 $65,873 84.98% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 189 0 0 0 123 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 55,762 5,889 794 0 15,627 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 103,581 (17,940) 646,250 301,980 538,700 - 16.64% OPERATING TRANSFERS 794,545 2,129,305 45,000 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $850,496 $2,238,775 $27,854 $646,250 $317,730 $538,700 - 16.64% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $4,010,515 ($610,394) $3,400,121 ($1.,420,559) $1,979,562 $317,225 $2,296,787 ($610,639) $2,296,787 ($270,870) $2,025,917 ($472,827) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $3,400,121 $1,979,562 $2,296,787 $1,686,148 $2,025,917 $1,553,090 E -16 CLOSED CONSTRUCTION FUNDS DEPTMENT: Various Closed Construction Funds SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: ACTIVITY #: 43300 ACTIVITY SCOPE: Previously the City opened a new fund for every construction project undertaken. As a result there are make funds where the project is complete and the fund has been closed and fund balances transferred out to other funds. Because these projects were completed and the fund was closed in prior year, this information is shown for historical reason so that the Capital Project Fund summary balance page to individual fund pages. OBJECTIVES: None. ISSUES: None. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -17 BUDGET COMMENTARY: These projects were completed and the fluids were closed in prior years and are shown for historical reason so that the Capital Project Fund summary balance page to individual fund pages. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 800,663 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $800,663 $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 793,759 5 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 273,510 9 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,067,269 $14 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $266,620 $14 $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($266,606) ($14) $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $14 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 E -18 I94 /CSAH 18 INTERSTATE CONSTRUCTION FUND DEPTMENT: I94 /CSAH 18 Interstate Construction SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: 486 ACTIVITY #: 43300 ACTIVITY SCOPE: Funded the construction of an interchange on I94 and CSAH 18. This project was completed and the fund was closed in 2010, but was underfunded and still maintains a negative cash balance. OBJECTIVES: 1. Fund remaining balance. ISSUES: 1. Finding available resources to retire remaining balance. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -19 BUDGET COMMENTARY: This project was completed and the fund was closed in 2010, but was underfunded and still maintains a negative cash balance. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 43,374 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 (50,924) (121,598) 0 (89,296) (94,142) - 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 700,000 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $0 ($50,924) $578,402 $0 ($45,922) ($94,142) - 100.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 8,929 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 10,598 665 1,691 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 138,399 46,735 75,196 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $157,926 $47,400 $76,887 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($2,984,682) ($157,926) ($3,142,608) ($98,324) ($3,240,932) $501,515 ($2,739,417) $0 ($2,739,417) ($45,922) ($2,785,339) ($94,142) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($3,142,608) ($3,240,932) ($2,739,417) ($2,739,417) ($2,785,339) ($2,879,481) E -20 COMPLETED CORE STREET RECONSTRUCTION FUNDS DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: Closed Core Street Reconstruction Funds City Engineer 43300 The City has a reconstruction program for streets in the older north side of the City, in which the City reconstructs an area each year. A number of these projects have been completed and the funds were closed and the fund balances were transferred to other funds. Therefore this fund is shown for historical reason so that the Capital Project Fund summary balance page to individual fund pages. OBJECTIVES: None. ISSUES: None. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -21 BUDGET COMMENTARY: These projects were completed in prior years and the funds were closed and shown for historical reason so that the Capital Project Fund summary balance page to individual fund pages. BUDGET: EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 0 123 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 404,006 63,726 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $404,006 $63,849 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 207 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 7,045 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CAPITAL OUTLAY 4,159 959 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 591,921 34 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $603,332 $993 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $136,470 ($62,856) $0 $0 $0 $0 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE ($199,326) $62,856 $0 $0 $0 $0 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 ($62,856) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 E -22 WATER TOWER CONSTRUCTION FUND DEPTMENT: Water Tower Construction Fund SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: 495 ACTIVITY #: 43300 ACTIVITY SCOPE: In 2004 the City constructed a new water tower in the Jefferson Cormnons area. Some of the work was not completed and the contractor was not paid for this unfinished work. City Council has elected to keep this fund active for fixture water tower improvements. OBJECTIVES: 1. Maintain the fund for future water tower improvements. ISSUES: None. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -23 BUDGET COMMENTARY: This fund is from unspent water tower construction funds and will be used for future water tower improvements. For 2012 the only activity in this fund will be interest earnings. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 43,517 30,474 36,192 0 32,374 32,650 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 5,736 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $43,517 $36,210 $36,192 $0 $32,374 $32,650 100.00% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SUPPIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 0 9,242 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 $0 $9,242 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $910,365 $43,517 $953,882 $26,968 $980,850 $36,192 $1,017,042 $0 $1,017,042 $32,374 $1,049,416 $32,650 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $953,882 $980,850 $1,017,042 $1,017,042 $1,049,416 $1,082,066 E -24 SCHOOL BLVD. CONSTRUCTION FUND DEPTMENT: West School Boulevard Construction Fund SUPERVISOR: City Engineer FUND #: 498 ACTIVITY #: 43300 ACTIVITY SCOPE: This fund accounts for the resources and costs associated with extending School Boulevard west of State Highway 25. OBJECTIVES: 1. Complete the project and close any balances to other funds. ISSUES: None. I1 /__:_. Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time E -25 BUDGET COMMENTARY: This fund is to account for resources and costs associated with extending School Boulevard West of Highway 25. For 2012 the only activity in this fund will be interest earnings. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 11,095 8,047 9,578 0 8,549 8,626 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $11,095 $8,047 $9,578 $0 $8,549 $8,626 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 891 329 726 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 $891 $329 $726 $0 $0 $0 0.00% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $241,694 $10,204 $251,898 $7,718 $259,616 $8,852 $268,466 $0 $268,468 $8,549 $277,017 $8,626 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $251,898 $259,616 $268,468 $268,468 $277,017 $285,643 E -26 2012 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN ACTIVITY ACTIVITY SCOPE: The City annually adopts a five -year capital improvement plan (CIP) that includes infrastructure additions and improvements and capital asset purchases and replacements. The City defines a capital asset as an asset costing $5,000 or more with a useful life of one year or longer. The CIP defines the scope of the improvement or asset along with the justification. It provides cost estimate and funding sources and any future operational impacts on activities of the City and budgets. There is also a priority ranking for the item. The rest of this section is the infrastructure improvements and asset replacement/purchases for 2012 as included in the 2012 -2016 CIP as adopted by the City Council on December 12, 2011. The full 2012 -2016 CIP documents can be found on the City website at www.ci.monticello.mn.us. E -27 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Personal Computer Replacement Priority Ranking: 29.85 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 4 years Responsible Dept.: Information Technology personnel computers of staff based on a tour -year Ilte cycle, computers to maintain updated technology software and hardware in staff efficiencies. itures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total ),800 15,600 12,000 15,600 10,800 64,800 Total 10,800 15,600 12,000 15,600 10,800 64,800 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 10,800 15,600 12,000 15,600 10,800 64,800 Total 10,800 15,600 12,000 15,600 10,800 64,800 verses any as a result of having up to technology. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund /MIS 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 10,800 Total 11,700 15,600 15,600 15,600 10,800 Priority Ranking Criteria Weighting Factor Priority 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 -28 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Multi Server Component Upgrades Priority Ranking: 28.60 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 5 years Responsible Dept.: Information Technology (Replace old computer network servers with new, more efficient multi server components. I Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /MIS 7,600 2,000 4,000 13,600 Total 7,600 0 2,000 0 4,000 13,600 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 7,600 2,000 4,000 13,600 Total 7,600 0 2,000 0 4,000 13,600 the cost to replace /upgrade the servers with new ones. )act 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 7,600 0 2,000 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 -29 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Replace Mobile Devices Priority Ranking: 29.85 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 3 years Responsible Dept.: Information Technology more efficient com Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /MIS 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 15,000 Total 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 15;000 Fundino Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 1 Total 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 15,000 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 re 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 -30 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Purchase of Laserfiche System Priority Ranking: 41.10 Project Type: Software Purchase Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Information Technology itures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total !,135 62,135 Total 62,135 0 0 0 0 62,135 Fundina Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 62,135 0 0 0 0 62,135 Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 2 3.00 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 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 5 5.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 1 1.25 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 41.10 E -31 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Replace scba packs Priority Ranking: 26.70 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Fire to meet current their own mask. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Fire 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 25,000 Total 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 25,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 25,000 Total 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 25,000 urchase is a replacement of old equipment and there for will have very budget impacts. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 0 0 0 0 0 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 0 0.00 1.25 5 6.25 1.50 3 4.50 1.25 3 3.75 1.00 3 3.00 1.00 2 2.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.20 1 1.20 1.00 2 2.00 1.00 4 4.00 1.10 0 0.00 1.25 0 0.00 1.10 0 0.00 1.05 0 0.00 1.05 0 0.00 E -32 WWI CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Replace Building Inspection Vehicle Priority Ranking: 27.05 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 8 years Responsible Dept.: Building Inspections :les used by City building inspectors for building inspections of old worn vehicles will reduce maintenance costs. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Bldg. Inspections 20,000 22,000 42,000 Total 20,000 0 22,000 0 0 42,000 Fundina Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 20,000 0 22,000 0 0 42,000 Nacement of older vehicles should reduce maintenance and repair costs. vehicles are more fuel efficient, which should reduce fuel costs also. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 Synergywith 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 -33 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Purchase GIS Hardware & Software Priority Ranking: 37.25 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 5 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering Continue to purchase and implement a City -wide GIS system. GIS allows staff efficiencies and better communications with the public and other government agencies. Reduces City's dependency on consultants for maps and other infrastructure and property data related needs. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Engineering 3,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 33,000 Total 3,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 33,000 Fundina Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 3,000 15,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 33,000 ne purcnase ana impiememauon or ioia snouia proviae siarr win a Detter, more erricient system for tracking, viewing, mapping property related information, existing utilities and other Dertinent data. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 1 1.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 3 4.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 3 3.75 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 37.25 E -34 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 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, tour 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 17,000 0 0 0 0 17,000 Fundinq Source 2012 7,000 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 17 Total 17,000 0 0 0 0 17,000 ild require same maintenance as costs savings. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 -35 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Public Works Shop Remodel Priority Ranking: 38.30 Project Type: Building Improvement Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Public Works Administration Improve the shop area of the public works garage to improve efficiencies. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 5,000 0 0 0 0 5,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 5,000 5,000 Total 5,000 0 0 0 0 5,000 create a energy costs through more Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund /Shop & Garage 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 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 -36 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 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 the t;ity's mia -size tractor ioaaer. rtepiacing an oia mia -size m has exceeded its useful life will reduce repair maintenance costs. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Streets 75,000 75,000 Total 75,000 0 0 0 0 75,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 75,000 75,000 Total 75,000 0 0 0 0 75,000 a new mid -size tractor repair maintenance costs in Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 Synergywith 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 -37 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Paint Striping Sprayer Priority Ranking: 33.90 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 5 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys Replace the streets and alley activities paint striping sprayer. Provide staff with good equipment to complete needed tasks without a lot of breakdowns. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Streets 10,000 10,000 Total 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 Fund Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 10,000 10,000 Total 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total (25) (25) (25) (25) (25) 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 2 3.00 1.25 5 6.25 1.50 0 0.00 1.25 3 3.75 1.00 3 3.00 1.00 3 3.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.20 3 3.60 1.00 3 3.00 1.00 5 5.00 1.10 1 1.10 1.25 0 0.00 1.10 2 2.20 1.05 0 0.00 1.05 0 0.00 E -38 0110611, CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Generator Replacement Priority Ranking: 27.80 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys Provide staff with good equipment to complete needed tasks without a lot of breakdowns. itures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 4,000 0 6,500 0 0 10,500 Fund Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 4,000 6,500 10,500 Total 4,000 0 6,500 0 0 10,500 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total (10) (10) (25) (25) (25) 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 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 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 2 2.20 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 27.80 E -39 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: One -Ton Truck Replacement Priority Ranking: 30.50 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 7 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys costs on City vehicles and reduce staff down time due to equipment repairs. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Streets 65,000 65,000 130,000 Total 65,000 0 0 0 65,000 130,000 Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 65,000 0 0 0 65,000 130,000 Reduce repair maintenance cost on City vehicles and reduce staff down time due to equipment repairs. The replacement of trucks in 2011 includes a one -ton truck and a pick -up truck. For 2012 another one -ton truck will be replaced. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund /Streets (2,200) (2,000) (1,500) (1,800) (1,500) 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 -40 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Mini Tack Trailer Priority Ranking: 32.10 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys down time of staff due to equipment being repaired and improve ant safety. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Streets 20,000 20,000 Total 20,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Fu 20,000 20,000 Total 20,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 uce being repaired. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund /Streets (50) (50) (50) (25) (25) Total (50) (50) (50) (25) (25) Priority Ranking Criteria Weighting Factor Priority Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 2 3.00 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 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 3 3.60 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 0 0.00 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 32.10 E -41 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Sign Lab System Priority Ranking: 41.65 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys City signs and banners in- house. Reducing the cost of signs by producing them in -house compared to outsourcing. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Public Works Streets & Alleys 30,000 30,000 Total 30,000 0 0 0 0 30,000 g Source Revolving 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 30,000 Total 30,000 0 0 0 0 30,000 cost of street Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 5 7.50 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 3 3.30 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 41.65 E -42 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Replace City Street Signs Priority Ranking: 43.95 Project Type: Infrastructure Replacement Useful Life: 13 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys signs throughout the City to meet the new itures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 40,000 40,000 Total 5,000 30,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 155,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Property Taxes 5,000 30,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 155,000 Total 5,000 30,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 155,000 improve retoretiectivity during night time hours. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund 5,000 30,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Total 5,000 30,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Priority Ranking Criteria Weighting Factor Priority Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 5 7.50 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 4 4.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 43.95 E -43 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Truck Replacement Priority Ranking: 25.65 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 7 years Responsible Dept.: Parks Reduce repair maintenance cost on City trucks and reduce staff down time due to equipment repairs. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Parks 68,000 22,000 65,000 80,000 235,000 Total 68,000 22,000 65,000 0 80,000 235,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 68,000 22,000 65,000 80,000 235,000 Total 68,000 22,000 65,000 0 80,000 235,000 Irepair maintenance costs ana scan aown time aue to equipment repairs. The trucks budget for replacement in 2009 and 2010 are one -ton trucks and the truck budgeted for replacement in 2011 is a three auarter -ton truck. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total (600) (500) (800) (500) (200) 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 1 1.50 1.25 1 1.25 1.50 0 0.00 1.25 4 5.00 1.00 2 2.00 1.00 4 4.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.20 4 4.80 1.00 2 2.00 1.00 4 4.00 1.10 1 1.10 1.25 0 0.00 1.10 0 0.00 1.05 0 0.00 1.05 0 0.00 25.65 E -44 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Replacement of Mowers Priority Ranking: 31.85 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Parks Nepiace Lity mowers in me parKS aepartmem. Reduce repair maintenance costs and staff down time due to equipment repairs. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Parks 77,200 20,000 97,200 Total 77,200 0 20,000 0 0 97,200 Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total r � 97,200 Total 77,200 0 20,000 0 0 97,200 Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund /Parks (7,000) (10,000) (8,000) (5,000) (2,500) Total (7,000) (10,000) (8,000) (5,000) (2,500) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Public Health & Safety 1.50 2 3.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 1 1.25 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 31.85 E -45 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Utility Mule /Small Truck Replacement/Purchase Priority Ranking: 24.80 Project Type: Equipment Replacement/Purchase Useful Life: 7 years Responsible Dept.: Parks Replace the City's current utility ATV (utility mule) and purchase a second utility ATV. Reduce repair maintenance cost and reduce staff down time due to equipment repairs and provide a second utility mule to increase efficiencies. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 10,000 10,000 Total 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 cost time due to provide a second utility mule to increase efficiencies. Im 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 -46 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Playground Equipment Replacement Priority Ranking: 37.00 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Parks 1 worn playground equipment. Pr by replacing old worn equipment. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 5,500 0 10,000 0 0 15,500 Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 5,500 Total 5,500 0 10,000 0 0 15,500 ig oia recreation equipment may reauc safe equipment for children to play on. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund /Parks (50) (50) (100) (100) (100) Total (50) (50) (100) (100) (100) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 0 0.00 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 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 1 1.20 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 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 37.00 E -47 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Replace Brush Chipper Priority Ranking: 40.20 Project Type: Equipment Replacement Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Parks /Shade Tree of staff due to equipment being repaired and improve equipment safety. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 35,000 0 0 0 0 35,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 35,000 35,000 Total 35,000 0 0 0 0 35,000 repaired. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Shade Tree Fund (500) (200) (150) (100) Total (500) (200) (150) (100) 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 1 1.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 5 6.25 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 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 2 2.40 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 2 2.40 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 1 1.25 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 40.20 E -48 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Pathway Construction Priority Ranking: 35.60 Project Type: Park Improvement Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Parks for people to exercise and use to get safely from one area of the City to other areas in the City. itures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 50,000 Total 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 repairs. As the City expands its pathway system, the budget for maintenance may need to be rased. The current budget impact will be for time spent mowing along the additional miles of r Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund /Parks 200 300 500 700 700 Total 200 300 500 700 700 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 2 2.50 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 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 4 5.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 3 3.30 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 35.60 E -49 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Bertram Lakes Property Acquisition Priority Ranking: 29.95 Project Type: Park Improvement Useful Life: 100 years Responsible Dept.: Parks Purchase the 1200 acre Bertram Chain of Lakes property from the Y.M.C.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. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 0 1,900,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Park & Pathway Dedication Fund 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 1,900,000 Total 475,000 475,000 475,000 475,000 0 1,900,000 IA future funding source would need to be found because this purchase would I exhaust City reserves. The land purchase it self has no operating impact at this time. Park would be left as wooded natural area with little to no maintenance require. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 -50 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Purchase a Skid Loader Trailer Priority Ranking: 12.40 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Parks transporting Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Parks 6,250 6,250 Total 6,250 0 0 0 0 6,250 Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 6,250 Total 6,250 0 0 0 0 6,250 1 he purchase of the trailer will provide Tar sater, more efficient tr; City equipment and may reduce trailer maintenance cost slightly. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total (10) (10) 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Scare 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 -51 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 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. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Parks 70,000 70,000 Total 70,000 0 0 0 0 70,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Street Light Improvement Fund 70,000 70,000 Total 70,000 0 0 0 0 70,000 cost to operate the lights. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 -52 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: East Bridge Park Landscaping Priority Ranking: 36.45 Project Type: Park Improvement Useful Life: 20 years Responsible Dept.: Parks Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Parks 3,500 3,500 Total 3,500 0 0 0 0 3,500 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Property Taxes 3,500 3,500 Total 3,500 0 0 0 0 3,500 Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 -53 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Xcel Ball Field Dugout Roofs Priority Ranking: 19.80 Project Type: Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Parks and sun and to improve increase team participation. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Parks 7,500 7,500 Total 7,500 0 0 0 0 7,500 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Property Taxes 7,500 7,500 Total 7,500 0 0 0 0 7,500 ntenance on the roof would be minimual. However the roof improvements could provi City the opportunity to host additional tournaments which bring in additional revenues. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total (150) (150) (150) (150) 0 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 0 0.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 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 1 1.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 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 2 2.10 Total Score 19.80 E -54 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 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 Kestore storm water pond areas oy cleaning out sous anc poor vegetation. Provide an adequate storm water drainage system by maintaining capacity and reducing sediment transported between ponds and the river. Comply storm water ents. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total ).000 40.000 40.000 40.000 40.000 200.000 Total 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 200,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Property Taxes 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 160,000 Storm Water Access Fund 40,000 Total 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 160,000 require on -going maintenance, 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 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 -55 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Purchase a Tack Trailer for Pathways Priority Ranking: 34.70 Project Type: Park Equipment Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Parks Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Parks 17,500 17,500 Total 17,500 0 0 0 0 17,500 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Revolving Fund 17,500 17,500 Total 17,500 0 0 0 0 17,500 are unkown based on type nu Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General FundParks Total 0 0 0 0 0 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 5 7.50 1.25 0 0.00 1.50 0 0.00 1.25 2 2.50 1.00 3 3.00 1.00 2 2.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.00 3 3.00 1.00 0 0.00 1.10 5 5.50 1.25 3 3.75 1.10 2 2.20 1.05 3 3.15 1.05 2 2.10 34.70 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Relamp Xcel Ball Field Lights Priority Ranking: 28.05 Project Type: Park Equipment Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Parks existing lights at Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Parks 8,000 8,000 16,000 Total 8,000 8,000 0 0 0 16,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Property Taxes 8,000 8,000 16,000 Total 8,000 8,000 0 0 0 16,000 Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General FundParks (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) Total (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) 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 3 3.75 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 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 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 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 28.05 E -57 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Pathway Signage Priority Ranking: 38.15 Project Type: Park Equipment Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Parks /Community Development 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 5,000 0 0 0 0 5,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Property Taxes 5,000 5,000 Total 5,000 0 0 0 0 5,000 Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General FundParks 25 25 25 25 25 Total 25 25 25 25 25 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 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 0 0.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 Cost of Project 1.00 4 4.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 0 0.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 4 4.00 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 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 3 3.15 Total Score 38.15 E -58 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Replace Movable Walls Priority Ranking: 24.55 Project Type: Building Improvements Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center Kepiace me Toiaing movaDie waits wnicn aiviae large rooms in both the Mississippi (2012) and Bridge Room (2013). rooms Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Community Center 25,000 10,000 35,000 Total 25,000 10,000 0 0 0 35,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Community Center Fund 25,000 10,000 35,000 Total 25,000 10,000 0 0 0 35,000 nance is very minimuai, DUI Dy Deing ; could increase room rental revenues. [15010]"9 Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Community Center 50 50 50 50 Total 50 50 50 50 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 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 4 4.00 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 0 0.00 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 0 0.00 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 1 1.05 Total Score 24.55 E -59 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Community Center Carpet Priority Ranking: 36.00 Project Type: Building Improvements Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center or I1101071iI.YHMMWI11I: ei$W -1M-9 Community Center. To make the meeting rooms of the Community Center more attractive for room rentals and replace old worn carpet. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Community Center 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 75,000 Total 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 75,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Community Center Fund 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 75,000 Total 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 75,000 carpet in some areas of the facility and areas without carpet require mopping and other maintenance. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 -60 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Natatorium Improvements Priority Ranking: 41.1 Project Type: Building Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Community Center ace the community centers pool area air nanaieing systems inaua umidifaction systems, duct work, pool filtering systems, exterior wall ovements and widow improvements. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Community Center 1,621,000 1,621,000 Total 1,621,000 0 0 0 0 1,621,000 Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 1,621,000 0 0 0 0 1,621,000 Im 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total (2,000) (2,000) (2,000) (2,000) (2,000) 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 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 1 1.00 Cost of Project 1.00 1 1.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 1 1.20 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 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 1 1.10 Strategic Goal 1.05 2 2.10 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 41.10 E -61 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Community Identification Signs Priority Ranking: 27.85 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Economic Development what services and businesses are available. Promote and attract people and businesses to the City of Monticello. itures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total ),000 90,000 Total 30,000 30,000 0 0 30,000 90,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Unspecified Funding Source 30,000 30,000 30,000 90,000 Total 30,000 30,000 0 0 30,000 90,000 The areas around the signs will need to be me themselves will require very low maintenance. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 -62 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Business Park Monument Sign Construction Priority Ranking: 19.40 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvement Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Economic Development area. Help encourage businesses into the area by providing an attractive business park area. itures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 'roject Fund 20,000 20,000 Total 20,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Economic Development Fund 20,000 20,000 Total 20,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 signs and areas around the signs Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund 200 200 200 200 200 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 1 1.25 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 3 3.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 3 3.30 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 2 2.10 Total Score 19.40 E -63 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Battery Backup Systems for Traffic Signals Priority Ranking: 48.05 Project Type: Street Improvements Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys insrau oauery DacKUp systems io me rraTric signals along rngnway zo other busy traffic areas of the City. Improve and maintain traffic flows when power outages occur in the area. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Project Fund 70,000 20,000 90,000 Total 70,000 20,000 0 0 0 90,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Consolidated Bond Fund 21,250 20,000 41,250 MN /DOT Participation 43,750 43,750 Wright County Participation 5,000 5,000 Total 70,000 20,000 0 0 0 90,000 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 500 2,000 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 -64 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 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 s' ovenay on me various streets surrounaing me cny ana i ownsi Monticello and restrip them. This project would reduce maintenance costs d make it easier to remove snow. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 500,000 500,000 Total 500,000 0 0 0 0 500,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Construction Funds 500,000 500,000 Total 500,000 0 0 0 0 500,000 However these streets will need to be maintained in the future to help maintain them as Iona as possible. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 -65 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: E. 7th str. /Highway 25 Intersection Improvements Priority Ranking: 43.55 Project Type: Street Reconstruction Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys including the area around the intersection. res 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 350,000 0 0 0 0 350,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Construction Funds 350,000 350,000 0 0 0 0 0 Total 350,000 0 0 0 0 350,000 (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 Iona as Dossible. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Alleys Total (500) (200) (200) 0 0 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 Synergywith Other Projects Strategic Goal Comprehensive Plan Component Total Score Weighting Priority Factor Factor Score 1.50 4 6.00 1.25 2 2.50 1.50 2 3.00 1.25 3 3.75 1.00 2 2.00 1.00 2 2.00 1.20 1 1.20 1.20 1 1.20 1.00 2 2.00 1.00 2 2.00 1.10 4 4.40 1.25 4 5.00 1.10 2 2.20 1.05 3 3.15 1.05 3 3.15 43.55 E -66 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: 7th Street Construction Priority Ranking: 42.85 Project Type: Street Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys Extension of 7th Street from Minnesota to Elm Street, including water, sewer, storm water drainage, pathway /sidewalk, street lighting, and grading. Improve traffic flows in the City by providing a connection from the west side of the City to the east side of the City. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 1,250,000 0 0 0 0 1,250,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Construction Funds 1,250,000 1,250,000 Total 1,250,000 0 0 0 0 1,250,000 increase the miles of streets Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund /Streets & Alleys 500 500 500 500 65,000 Total 500 500 500 500 65,000 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 3 4.50 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 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 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 42.85 E -67 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Construction of Fallon Avenue Overpass Priority Ranking: 47.10 Project Type: Street Improvement Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys -t an overpass tonage/ over ia4 connecting norm ana soutn rauon Aver better traffic flows from the north and south sided of 194, which will help and improve business opportunities on both sides of the freeway. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Project Fund 2,000,000 3,000,000 1,000,000 6,000,000 Total 2,000,000 3,000,000 1,000,000 0 0 6,000,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Construction Fund 2,000,000 3,000,000 1,000,000 6,000,000 Total 2,000,000 3,000,000 1,000,000 0 0 6,000,000 overpass Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund /Streets & Alleys 500 750 1,000 1,000 Total 0 500 750 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 -68 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Street Light Improvements Priority Ranking: 53.95 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys Add and/or replace street lights around the City. Improve nighttime visibility for drivers and pedestrians and reduce electrical costs by installing more energy efficient street lights. itures 2012 2013 200,000 200,000 2014 2015 2016 Total i,000 75,000 75,000 625,000 Total 200,000 200,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 625,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Street Light Improvement Fund 200,000 200,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 625,000 Total 200,000 200,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 625,000 (This improvement should reduce electric cost when old street lights are replaced with I more energy efficient street lights. When street lights are added to an area which currently does not have street light, the area will be more visible at night which increases safety and reduces traffic accidents or criminal activity in the area. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 General Fund (150) (275) (400) (500) (600) 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 Synergywith 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 -69 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Pedestrian Crossing Improvements - Highways Priority Ranking: 53.80 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvement Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Streets & Alleys Improve pedestrian crossings across Provide safe pedestrian crosswalks. ume Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Capital Project Fund 20,000 20,000 40,000 Total 20,000 20,000 0 0 0 40,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Street Reconstruction Fund 20,000 20,000 40,000 Total 20,000 20,000 0 0 0 40,000 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 on Total 0 0 0 0 0 Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 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 5 5.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 5 6.25 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 53.80 E -70 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Boulevard Drainage Tile Improvements Priority Ranking: 20.30 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvement Useful Life: 30 years Responsible Dept.: Streets & Alleys streets to help collect storm water sump pumps, thus preserving the streets and curbs. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total General Fund /Storm Water 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 Total 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 250,000 ese improvements will nave very little impact on replace roadways and curbs. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 1 1.25 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 4 5.00 Ability to Finance 1.00 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 0 0.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 1 1.20 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 0 0.00 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 1 1.10 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 20.30 E -71 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Trunk Sewer Improvements Priority Ranking: 46.65 Project Type: Infrastructure Improvements Useful Life: 50 years Responsible Dept.: Engineering /Public Works Sewer prove existing sewer wer system and reduce the chances of sewer back ups by replacing mains that a cracked, leaking, or have tree roots infiltrated into them with new mains. 2012 it is anticipated that a new sewer trunk will be needed in the Featherstone addition. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 Could reduce cost of operating waste water treatment plant by reducing the flows 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 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Sewer Fund (1,000) (1,400) (1,400) (1,500) (1,500) Total (1,000) (1,400) (1,400) (1,500) (1,500) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority 1.00 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 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 -72 3 3.60 2 2.00 3 3.00 3 3.30 2 2.50 3 3.30 3 3.15 2 2.10 46.65 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Replace SBR Blower Priority Ranking: 19.95 Project Type: Waste Water Treatment Plant Improvement Useful Life: 20 years Responsible Dept.: Public Works Administration /Public Works Sewer IRemove and replace one of the three 100 hp SBR blower motors with a high efficiency blower motor. Original motor was oversized and inefficent which causes it to produce too large of air volume making it difficult in controlling oxygen levels for consistent batch reaction to occur. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 100,000 100,000 Total 100,000 0 0 0 0 100,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total rLL1A119 Total 100,000 0 0 0 0 100,000 wer electric consum effluent to the river. a more level processing Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Sewer Fund 100 100 100 100 100 Total 100 100 100 100 100 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 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 0 0.00 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 0 0.00 Public Benefit 1.10 2 2.20 Public Demand 1.25 0 0.00 Synergywith Other Projects 1.10 2 2.20 Strategic Goal 1.05 0 0.00 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 19.95 E -73 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 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 system not being used and salvage for scrap. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 25,000 25,000 Total 25,000 0 0 0 0 25,000 Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 25,000 0 0 0 0 25,000 no being used. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 -74 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 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 monitoring all of the City's water and sewer facilities including houses, and lift stations electronically. Improve response time to system problems which the chance of sewer backups or low water levels of the City's systems. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 75,000 75,000 Water Fund 75,000 75,000 Total 150,000 0 0 0 0 150,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Sewer Fund 75,000 75,000 Water Fund 75,000 75,000 Total 150,000 0 0 0 0 150,000 before they become more problematic. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Sewer Fund Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 4 6.00 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 1 1.50 Frequent Problems 1.25 3 3.75 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 3 3.60 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 5 6.00 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 2 2.00 Public Benefit 1.10 5 5.50 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 4 4.20 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 55.40 E -75 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 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. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total I bu,uuu Total 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Water Fund 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 Total 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 prevent the City from providing clean water to residents and businesses. Im 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total (1,000) (3,000) (3,000) (5,000) (5,000) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 5 7.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 2 2.50 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 2 3.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 2 2.50 Ability to Finance 1.00 3 3.00 Cost of Project 1.00 3 3.00 Generates Revenue 1.20 5 6.00 Generates Cost Savings 1.20 4 4.80 Ongoing Operation Costs 1.00 2 2.00 Age or Condition of Existing 1.00 4 4.00 Public Benefit 1.10 4 4.40 Public Demand 1.25 2 2.50 Synergy with Other Projects 1.10 4 4.40 Strategic Goal 1.05 3 3.15 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 4 4.20 Total Score 56.95 E -76 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Replace Liquor Store Carpet Priority Ranking: 26.40 Project Type: Improvement Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Liquor Operations wore a more to shop. Over the years spills from breakage can seep onto carpet and lie underneath threat of mold and mildew. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Liquor Fund 38,000 38,000 Total 38,000 0 0 0 0 38,000 Source uor 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 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. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total (350) (350) (350) (350) (350) Priority Ranking Weighting Priority Criteria Factor Factor Score Public Health & Safety 1.50 3 4.50 Employee Health & Safety 1.25 3 3.75 Regulatory Mandate 1.50 0 0.00 Frequent Problems 1.25 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 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 1 1.10 Strategic Goal 1.05 1 1.05 Comprehensive Plan Component 1.05 0 0.00 Total Score 26.40 E -77 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Replace and Redesign Checkout Counters Priority Ranking: 17.15 Project Type: Improvement Useful Life: 25 years Responsible Dept.: Liquor Operations IKeplace the current wore checkout counters in the liquor store and redesign I the checkout area to improve efficiencies and attractiveness of the store. Improved efficiency of the checkout process and improve the look of the liquor store. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 45,000 0 0 0 0 45,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 45,000 0 0 0 0 45,000 prove etticlencles in the checkout process, reduce clutter, and Improve ackout area to the store floor, which could result in less product theft. Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Liquor Fund (100) (150) (150) (150) (150) Total (100) (150) (150) (150) (150) 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 2 2.00 Cost of Project 1.00 2 2.00 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 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 17.15 E -7S CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Purchase Additional Security Cameras Priority Ranking: 34.20 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Liquor Operations 'chase additional security cameras and replace analog and dummy cameras the City's liquor operation. Provide a safe environment in and outside the City for store and to reduce theft of items through monitoring of the store 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Liquor Fund 3,000 3,000 Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 Additional security cameras will provide better store coverage, less loss through customer theft. 2012 Fund to 2013 2014 2015 2016 !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 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 3 330 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 -79 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Purchase Additional Security Cameras Priority Ranking: 38.40 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 10 years Responsible Dept.: Department of Motor Vehicles iaaiuonai security cameras to exisung system to proviae oeuer ouuaing ana lot coverage. Provide a safe work environment for employees and customers. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total DMV Funds 1,500 1,500 Total 1,500 0 0 0 0 1,500 Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total 1111I.9I11 Total 1,500 0 0 0 0 1,500 cameras coverage risk of break -ins or poor behavior of customers. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 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 -80 CITY OF MONTICELLO Capital Improvement Plan 2012 Thru 2016 Project Name: Purchase a Cash Register System for the Motor Vehicle Department Priority Ranking: 15.75 Project Type: Equipment Purchase Useful Life: 15 years Responsible Dept.: Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) Purchase five cash registers and related software for the front counters of th Improve efficiencies of processing DMV transactions and provide for a safer storage of operating funds at the counter area. Expenditures 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total DMV Funds 3,000 3,000 Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 Funding Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total DMV Funds 3,000 3,000 Total 3,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 pact would be the cost use Operating Budget Impact 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 DMV Fund 10 10 10 10 10 Total 10 10 10 10 10 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 0 0.00 1.25 3 3.75 1.50 0 0.00 1.25 0 0.00 1.00 5 5.00 1.00 2 2.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.20 0 0.00 1.00 5 5.00 1.00 0 0.00 1.10 0 0.00 1.25 0 0.00 1.10 0 0.00 1.05 0 0.00 1.05 0 0.00 E -81 15.75 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK E -82 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: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTY TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% SALES OF GOODS 4,085,682 4,352,570 4,477,651 4,404,781 4,536,605 4,418,500 0.31% LICENSES & PERMITS 3,715 13,228 7,876 4,000 285 3,700 - 7.50% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 8,069 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 51,094 37,924 462,023 3,911,882 1,634,393 2,688,759 - 31.27% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 245,518 61,258 160,317 75,000 157,040 150,000 100.00 % MISCELLANEOUS 12,234,897 265,338 368,196 1,464,455 1,778,297 234,312 - 84.00% USE COLLECTIONS 2,005,284 2,120,788 2,277,546 2,278,050 2,494,023 2,526,800 10.92 % CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 17,722 0 2,383,991 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 9,804 20,065 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 1,436 1,436 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $18,643,912 $6,862,346 $10,167,170 $12,138,168 $10,600,643 $10,022,071 - 17.43% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $787,316 $928,832 $1,337,576 $1,385,489 $1,568,369 $1,577,287 13.84 % SUPPIES 3,164,733 3,668,258 4,670,062 3,727,925 4,220,096 3,961,271 6.26% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 3,566,289 3,917,554 5,088,531 7,726,032 6,473,115 5,334,660 - 30.95% CAPITAL OUTLAY 787,886 6,855,226 6,105,823 2,796,337 1,785,525 3,399,297 21.56% OPERATING TRANSFERS 392,804 260,935 264,556 250,000 713,655 950,000 280.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $8,699,028 $15,630,805 $17,466,548 $15,885,783 $14,760,760 $15,222,515 - 4.18% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $41,061,807 $9,944,884 $51,006,691 ($8,768,459) $42,238,232 ($7,299,378) $34,938,854 ($3,747,615) $34,938,854 ($4,160,117) $30,778,737 ($5,200,444) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $51,006,691 $42,238,232 $34,938,854 $31,191,239 $30,778,737 $25,578,293 F -2 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: WATER FUND Water Fund Water Superintendent 601 49440 The Water Fund is a self - sustaining, 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. 11�/ I DI:�YI1Z:_ C �i�Z1]7 Cf1[17_ \717V 1I_\i Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Water accounts read 15,000 16,000 16,000 17,000 17,000 Water meters replaced 111 280 135 200 200 New water meters installed 18 10 2 2 10 Water locates 1,652 1,000 500 500 500 Gallons of water pumped (MG) 710 715 660 650 600 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 1 0 1 2 2 Water tower cleaned /inspected 2 2 2 2 2 Water reservoir cleaned /inspected 1 0 1 1 1 # of water samples to State 175 175 250 250 250 New water services inspected 17 9 2 1 5 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 2012 these charge are budgeted to increase. The rate increase will be to cover increased operating costs and some asset depreciation. The State of Minnesota requires water systems to have a tiered rate structure where the more water used, the higher the per gallon rate as a means to encourage water conservation. 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 2011 budget levels or past expenditure levels. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PROPERTYTAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% LICENSES & PERMITS 3,715 13,228 7,876 4,000 285 3,700 -7.50% INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 8,438 500 0 1,000 0 500 - 50.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 245,518 61,258 160,317 75,000 157,040 150,000 100.00% MISCELLANEOUS 116,005 84,825 116,633 97,584 111,556 104,325 6.91% USE COLLECTIONS 716,037 766,426 826,321 812,850 887,900 921,300 13.34% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 0 0 2,240,558 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 6,643 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $1,089,713 $932,880 $3,351,705 $990,434 $1,156,781 $1,179,825 19.12% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $240,259 $241,662 $190,809 $269,214 $217,152 $267,898 -0.49% SUPPIES 117,808 133,439 84,971 165,575 98,660 163,900 -1.01% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 617,779 674,254 818,895 733,541 679,038 699,773 -4.60% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 13,948 0 225,000 0 225,000 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 221,185 3,161 0 0 144,718 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,197,031 $1,066,464 $1,094,675 $1,393,330 $1,139,568 $1,356,571 -2.64% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $12,751,331 ($107,318) $12,644,013 ($133,584) $12,510,429 $2,257,030 $14,767,459 ($402,896) $14,767,459 $17,213 $14,784,672 ($176,746) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $12,644,013 $12,510,429 $14,767,459 $14,364,563 $14,784,672 $14,607,926 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 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 None developed at this time Val BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main revenue source for the Sewer Fund is the sewer use charges to customers. For 2012 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 2012. I; 11Ze?1F FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS. REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 17,981 17,429 19,357 15,000 14,972 15,000 0.00% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 137,792 67,158 95,764 77,980 91,117 81,262 4.21% USE COLLECTIONS 1,289,247 1 „354,362 1,451,225 1,465,200 1,606,123 1,605,500 9.58% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 15,413 0 143,433 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 1,436 1,436 0 0 0 0.00% TOTALREVENUES $1,460,433 $1,440,385 $1,711,215 $1,558,180 $1,712,212 $1,701,762 9.21% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $167,108 $136,853 $246,754 $272,245 $274,917 $270,168 -0.77% SUPPIES 26,837 12,160 30,516 24,950 19,506 26,450 6.07% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,871,417 1,836,107 1,863,968 2,031,834 1,920,308 2,088,946 4.55% CAPITAL OUTLAY (1,436) 76,313 31,905 250,000 0 350,000 100.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 107,513 (1,444) 0 318,937 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $2,063,926 $2,170,946 $2,171,699 $2,579,029 $2,533,668 $2,735,564 11.37% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS. REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $24,936,260 ($603,493) $24,332,767 ($730,561) $23,602,206 ($460,484) $23,141,722 ($1,020,849) $23,141,722 ($821,456) $22,320,266 ($1,033,802) FUND BALANCE- DECEMBER 31 $24,332,767 $23,602,206 $23,141,722 $22,120,873 $22,320,266 $21,286,464 F -6 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Gallons of wastewater treated (MG) 420 420 425 425 425 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The main expense item is the professional service contract for the operation of the WWTP which increased 3% for 2012 to $772,789. Depreciation of the plant is also included in this budget at $520,000. BUDGET: SEWER FUND 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $419 $2,861 $1,235 $1,224 $83 $1,224 0.00% SUPPLIES 950 54 12,339 250 57 250 0.00% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 1,328,051 853,942 908,450 1,355,224 957,366 1,407,852 3.88% CAPITAL OUTLAY (1,436) 69,346 31,905 25,000 0 125,000 400.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,327,984 $926,203 $953,929 $1,381,698 $957,506 $1,534,326 11.05% 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 W WTP. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to GPS the City sanitary sewer system. 2. Monitor infiltration of ground water into the sanitary sewer system. ISSUES: 1. Ground water infiltration problems. 2. Aging system. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 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 1/4 City 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 17 9 2 1 5 Sewer services televised 0 50 100 150 200 I�:i BUDGET COMMENTARY: 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 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % SEWER - ADMINIGEN OPER ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE PERSONNEL SERVICES $166,689 $135,992 $245,519 $271,021 $274,834 $268,944 -0.77% SUPPLIES 25,887 12,106 18,177 24,700 19,449 26,200 6.07% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 543,366 982,165 955,518 676,610 962,942 681,094 0.66% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 6,967 0 225,000 0 225,000 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 107,513 (1,444) 0 318,937 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $735,942 $1,244,743 $1,217,770 $1,197,331 $1,576,162 $1,201,238 0.33% I= DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: LIQUOR FUND Liquor Fund Liquor Store Manager 609 49750 & 49754 This enterprise activity provides customers with the opportunity to purchase alcohol, with profits going back into the community. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue to improve product selection. 2. Continue alcohol training program for all liquor store employees. 3. Improve facility as necessary to make shopping the store as attractive as possible. 4. Continue to grow customer base and sales. ISSUES: 1. Increased "requests to buy" and safety issues regarding minors. 2. Competitive pricing. 3. Staff turnover. Measurement 2008 2009 Operating revenue 1,062,478 1,042,192 Wine tasting tickets sold 440 447 Beer tasting tickets sold N/A 202 F -10 2010 2011 2012 1,201,927 1,073,096 959,750 309 440 440 125 220 220 I f111" I1[K11hJO WeN_1 -1 A!E 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 transfers of $250,000 to the Street Reconstruction Fund and $700,000 to the Community Center Fund to reduce the property tax levy and fund building improvements. Capital outlay expenses include replacement of the store's checkout areas, replacement of carpet and the purchase of additional security cameras. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % REVENUES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTED BUDGET CHANGE SALES OF GOODS $4,085,682 $4,352,570 $4,477,651 $4,404,781 $4,536,605 $4,418,500 0.31% 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 $85,709 $76,888 $99,139 $87,317 $86,313 $86,348 -1.11% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS $0 $0 $20,065 $0 $0 $0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $4,171,391 $4,429,458 $4,596,855 $4,492,098 $4,622,918 $4,504,848 0.28% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $374,611 $417,189 $408,093 $440,577 $423,296 $448,804 1.87% SUPPIES 3,017,913 3,301,209 3,286,867 3,399,198 3,451,511 3,455,650 1.66% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 254,423 262,316 244,692 251,424 236,571 257,583 2.45% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 33,768 56,000 17,097 83,000 48.21% OPERATING TRANSFERS 171,619 150,000 266,000 250,000 250,000 950,000 280.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $3,818,566 $4,130,714 $4,239,420 $4,397,199 $4,378,475 $5,195,037 18.14% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 $2,510,706 $2,863,531 $3,162,275 $3,519,710 $3,519,710 $3,764,153 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $352,825 $298,744 $357,435 $94,899 $244,443 ($690,189) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $2,863,531 $3,162,275 $3,519,710 $3,614,609 $3,764,153 $3,073,964 F -11 DEPTMENT: SUPERVISOR: FUND #: ACTIVITY #: ACTIVITY SCOPE: CEMETERY FUND Cemetery Fund Parks Superintendent 651 49010 The Cemetery Fund is an Enterprise Fund, sustaining itself with revenues mainly from excavation, monument staking, memorial programs, and perpetual care. The City maintains the cemetery, as well as assisting residents in areas regarding memorials and perpetual care. OBJECTIVES: 1. Continue serving the public in a courteous, professional manner. 2. Maintain the cemetery grounds and grave markers. ISSUES: I . Increasing maintenance costs. hr /III:F•YIlt7_ \.i/1�610Il7 41017:1 1 LIVIM Measurement 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 None developed at this time F -12 BUDGET COMMENTARY: There are no substantial changes to either the revenue or expenditure budgets for 2012. BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 24,475 19,995 8,620 34,200 22,390 24,800 - 27.49% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 2,023 1,291 986 1,065 960 808 - 24.13% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 2,309 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 $28,807 $21,286 $9,606 $35,265 $23,350 $25,608 - 27.38% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $5,338 $3,914 $3,090 $3,261 $6,329 $3,261 0.00% SUPPIES 92 52 201 950 24 775 - 18.42% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 23,838 23,564 23,367 30,739 15,231 24,235 - 21.16% CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $29,268 $27,530 $26,658 $34,950 $21,584 $28,271 - 19.11% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $656,501 ($461) $656,040 ($6,244) $649,796 ($17,052) $632,744 $315 $632,744 $1,766 $634,510 ($2,663) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $656,040 $649,796 $632,744 $633,059 $634,510 $631,847 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: Offer a variety of internet speeds and cable television channels to customers. ISSUES: 1. Continue to grow customer base to generate sufficient revenues to cover cost of operation. 2. Various legal aspects of the City operating this type of operation. MEASURABLE WORKLOAD DATA: Measurement 2008* # Internet subscribers NA # Phone subscribers NA # Cable TV subscribers NA * System was not available at this time. F -14 2009 2010 503 1,011 323 562 415 758 2011 2012 1,634 1,900 974 1,250 1,302 1,650 BUDGET COMMENTARY: The Fiber Optics Fund began operations in 2009 with construction being completed in 2010. Revenues are from charges to subscribers and expenditures from operating the system and installation of services to new customers. The 2012 budgets are based on 2011 revenue and expenditure adjusted for estimated customer growth. The City issued revenue bonds to construct the system and has budgeted $1,768,337 for the payment of interest on this bond for 2012. No principal is due in 2012 BUDGET: FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 % 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 8,069 0 0 0 0.00% CHARGES FOR SERVICES 200 0 434,046 3,861,682 1,597,031 2,648,459 - 31.42% FINES & FORFEITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS 11,893,368 35,176 55,674 1,200,509 1,488,351 (38,431) - 103.20% CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% OPERATING TRANSFERS 0 3,161 0 0 0 0 0.00% BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES $11,893,568 $38,337 $497,789 $5,062,191 $3,085,382 $2,610,028 - 48.44% EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL SERVICES $0 $127,214 $488,830 $400,191 $646,675 $587,155 46.72% SUPPIES $2,083 $221,398 $1,267,507 $137,252 $650,395 $314,496 129.14% OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES $798,832 $1,121,313 $2,137,609 $4,678,494 $3,621,967 $2,264,123 - 51.61% CAPITAL OUTLAY $789,322 $6,764,965 $6,040,150 $2,265,337 $1,768,428 $2,741,297 21.01% OPERATING TRANSFERS $0 $261 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $1,590,237 $8,235,151 $9,934,096 $7,481,274 $6,687,465 $5,907,071 - 21.04% FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 EXCESS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURE $207,009 $10,303,331 $10,510,340 ($8,196,814) $2,313,526 ($9,436,307) ($7,122,781) ($2,419,083) ($7,122,781) ($3.,602,083) ($10,724,864) ($3,297,043) FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 $10,510,340 $2,313,526 ($7,122,781) ($9,541,864) ($10,724,864) ($14,021,907) 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 2010 U. S. Census estimated Monticello's population at 12,759 and the City 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 Xcel Energy" Utility 2,000 I.S.D. No. 882 (Monticello) Elementary and secondary education 544 New River Medical Center Hospital, nursing home & counseling center 500 Wal -Mart Supercenter Discount retail store 325 Cargill Kitchen Solutions Egg processing plant 250 Cub Foods Retail grocery store 180 Home Depot Home improvement store 160 City of Monticello Municipal government and services 147 Ultra Machine Corporation Machine job shop 140 Standard Iron & Wire Works Custom metal fabrication products 100 *Xcel Energy numbers do include employees reported during outage. TaxDaver Xcel Energy Wal -Mart Real Estate Business Trust Target Corporation New River Medical Center Ryan Companies Home Depot USA Inc. L &P Ventures LLC Muller Family Theatres CF Monticello II Tapper's Holdings LLC Total MAJOR TAXPAYERS % of City's 2010111 Net Total Net Type of Property Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Utility $6,078,545 34.93% Commercial 256,464 1.47% Commercial 235,606 1.35% Commercial 193,010 1.11% Commercial 149,822 0.86% Commercial 146,756 0.84% Commercial 109,740 0.63% Commercial 109,597 0.63% Commercial 85,288 0.49% Industrial 82.558 0.47% $7,447,386 42.80% City's total 2010/11 net tax capacity G -1 $17,400,280 11110 ®0c j I F ' MIA NA t , 1� M U.S. CENSUS DATA City of Monticello Population Trend: 1990 U. S. Census 4,941 2000 U. S. Census 7,868 2010 U. S. Census 12,759 % of change 2000 - 2010 +62.16% Income and Age Statistics HISTORICAL EMPLOYMENT /UNEMPLOYMENT DATA (Rates are not compiled for individual communities within counties) City of Wright State of Average Unemployment 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 4.8% 4.6% 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) * Proposed rate G- 3 Average Employment Average Unemployment Year Wright County Wright County State of Minnesota 2002 50,937 5.1% 4.4% 2003 56,542 5.1% 4.8% 2004 58,825 4.8% 4.6% 2005 60,825 4.3% 4.1% 2006 61,967 4.4% 4.1% 2007 62,826 5.1% 4.6% 2008 62,641 6.2% 5.4% 2009 62,114 9.2% 8.0% 2010 63,437 7.3% 6.8% 2011 63,256 6.9% 7.4% HISTORICAL TAX RATES (ALL TAXING JURISDICTIONS) City of Wright I.S.D. #882 Hospital Year Monticello County (Monticello) District Total 2003 65.218 ° /a 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 46.729% 39.306% 27.029% 1.501% 114.565% 2012* 49.972% 43.482% 28.334% 1.240% 123.028% * Proposed rate G- 3 HISTORICAL CITY PROPERTY TAX INFORMATION Tax Capacity Year Value 2003 10,344,950 2004 11,141,052 2005 11, 840, 000 2006 13, 224,144 2007 15,257,996 2008 16,190, 597 2009 16,783,843 2010 16, 691,266 2011 16,429,431 2012 15,708,796 Tax Capacity Tax Rate Levy 65.558 6,782,018 62.452 6,957,915 58.760 6,957,915 51.040 6,750,000 42.601 6,500,000 46.942 7,600,000 46.191 7,750,000 45.822 7,648,272 46.729 7,677,309 49.972 7,850,000 HISTORICAL CITY BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY Total All Building Permits Valuation All Building Permits New $40,187,772 New Commercial Year Residential Industrial 2002 549 65 2003 508 60 2004 532 54 2005 273 0 2006 85 17 2007 47 15 2008 20 11 2009 9 5 2010 2 5 2011 2 6 Total All Building Permits Valuation All Building Permits 1,182 $40,187,772 1,156 $39,599,263 1,199 $62,300,360 594 $23,860,039 1,323 $45,572,690 962 $45,917,862 3,681 $45,949,479 879 $11,630,272 607 $9,033,078 423 $12,238,242 SUMMARY OF TAX LEVIES, PAYMENT PROVISIONS, AND MINNESOTA REAL PROPERTY VALUATION The following is a summary of certain statutory provisions effective beginning 2005 relative to tax levy procedures, tax payment and credit procedures, and the mechanics of real property valuation. The summary does not purport to be inclusive of all such provisions or of the specific provisions discussed, and is qualified by reference to the complete text of applicable statutes, rules and regulations of the State of Minnesota. Chapter 21, Laws of Minnesota Special Session 2003 -1 was passed by the 2003 Minnesota Legislature and signed by the Governor on June 8, 2003. The enactment of this legislation caused changes for payable years 2003 and thereafter. These changes are incorporated in the following discussions. Property Valuations (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes) Assessor's Estimated Market Value Each parcel of real property subject to taxation must, by statute, be appraised at least once every five years as of January 2 of the year of appraisal. With certain exceptions, all property is valued at its market value, which is the value the assessor determines to be the price the property to be fairly worth, and which is referred to as the "Estimated Market Value." G- 4 Indicated Market Value Because the Estimated Market Value as determined by an assessor may not represent the price of real property in the marketplace, the "Indicated Market Value" is generally regarded as more representative of full value. The Indicated Market Value is determined by dividing the Estimated Market Value of a given year by the same year's sales ratio determined by the State Department of Revenue. The sales ratio represents the overall relationship between the Estimated Market Value of property within the taxing unit and actual selling price. Net Tax Capacity The Net Tax Capacity is the value upon which net taxes are levied, extended and collected. The Net Tax Capacity is computed by applying the class rate percentages specific to each type of property classification against the Estimated Market Value. Class rate percentages vary depending on the type of property as shown on the 101 page of the Appendix. The formulas and class rates for converting Estimated Market Value to Net Tax Capacity represent a basic element of the State's property tax relief system and are subject to annual revisions by the State Legislature. Property taxes are determined by multiplying the Net Tax Capacity by the tax capacity rate, expressed as a percentage. Property Tax Payments and Delinquencies (Chapters 276, 279 -282 and 549, Minnesota Statutes) Ad valorem property taxes levied by local governments in Minnesota are extended and collected by the various counties within the State. Each taxing jurisdiction is required to certify the annual tax levy to the county auditor within five (5) working days after December 20 of the year proceeding the collection year. A listing of property taxes due is prepared by the county auditor and turned over to the county treasurer on or before the first business day in March. The county treasurer is responsible for collecting all property taxes within the county. Real estate and personal property tax statements are mailed out by March 31. One -half (1/2) of the taxes on real property is due on or before May 15. The remainder is due on or before October 15. Real property taxes not paid by their due date are assessed a penalty which, depending on the type of property, increases from 2% to 4% on the day after the due date. In the case of the first installment of real property taxes due May 15, the penalty increases to 4% or 8% on June 1. Thereafter, an additional 1% penalty shall accrue each month through October 1 of the collection year for unpaid real property taxes. In the case of the second installment of real property taxes due October 15, the penalty increases to 6% or 8% on November 1 and increases again to 8% or 12% on December 1. Personal property taxes remaining unpaid on May 16 are deemed to be delinquent and a penalty of 8% attaches to the unpaid tax. However, personal property owned by a tax - exempt entity, but which is treated as taxable by virtue of a lease agreement, is subject to the same delinquent property tax penalties as real property. On the first business day of January of the year following collection all delinquencies are subject to an additional 2% penalty, and those delinquencies outstanding as of February 15 are filed for a tax lien judgment with the district court. By March 20 the clerk of court files a publication of legal action and a mailing notice of action to delinquent parties. Those property interests not responding to this notice have judgment entered for the amount of the delinquency and associated penalties. The amount of the judgment is subject to a variable interest determined annually by the Department of Revenue, and equal to the adjusted prime rate charged by banks, but in no event is the rate less than 10% or more than 14 %. G- 5 Property owners subject to a tax lien judgment generally have five years (5) in the case of all property located outside of cities or in the case of residential homestead, agricultural homestead and seasonal residential recreational property located within cities or three (3) years with respect to other types of property to redeem the property. After expiration of the redemption period, unredeemed properties are declared tax forfeit with title held in trust by the State of Minnesota for the respective taxing districts. The county auditor, or equivalent thereof, then sells those properties not claimed for a public purpose at auction. The net proceeds of the sale are first dedicated to the satisfaction of outstanding special assessments on the parcel, with any remaining balance in most cases being divided on the following basis: county - 40 %; Township or city - 20 %; and school district - 40 %. Property Tax Credits (Chapter 273, Minnesota Statutes) In addition to adjusting the taxable value for various property types, primary elements of Minnesota's property tax relief system are: property tax levy reduction aids; the circuit breaker credit, which relates property taxes to income and provides relief on a sliding income scale; and targeted tax relief, which is aimed primarily at easing the effect of significant tax increases. The circuit breaker credit and targeted credits are reimbursed to the taxpayer upon application by the taxpayer. Property tax levy reduction aid includes educational aids, local governmental aid, equalization aid, market value homestead credit and disparity reduction aid. Beginning in 2012 the State has eliminated the market value homestead credit (MVHC) program and replaced it with a market value exclusion (MVE) program. Under the MVHC, local governments levied the amount needed in property taxes to operate their jurisdiction. The State then provided residential property owners a credit of $304 on homes valued $76,000 or less in market value and decreased the credit by 0.09% of market value until $0 credit was provided on homes valued $413,800 or above. The State then reimbursed the local government for the total credit amount. However the State only fully funded the program twice in the ten years the program existed. The MVE will exclude a portion of a homestead market value from taxation. The exclusion equals 40% of the first $76,000 in market value and is reduced by 9% of the market value over $76,000 until it hits $0 at $413,800 of market 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 were limited to 3.9% or the increase in the implicit price deflator — whichever is less. The tax levy could also be increased by 1/2 the increase in growth. Certain property tax levies were authorized outside of the new overall levy limitation ( "special levies "). Special levies did 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 had to 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 had the authority to approve, reduce or deny a special levy request. Home -rule charter cities were 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. Levy limits were removed for taxes payable beginning in 2012, but could be reinstated in future G -6 years. Debt Limitations All Minnesota municipalities (county, cities, townships and school districts) are subject to statutory "net debt" limitations under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.53. Net debt is defined as the amount remaining after deducting from gross debt the amount of current revenues which are applicable within the current fiscal year to the payment of any debt and the aggregation of the principal of the following: 1. Obligations issued for improvements which are payable wholly or partially from the proceeds of special assessments levied upon benefited property. 2. Warrants or orders having no definite or fixed maturity. 3. Obligations payable wholly from the income from revenue producing conveniences. 4. Obligations issued to create or maintain a permanent improvement revolving fund. 5. Obligations issued for the acquisition and betterment of public waterworks systems and public lighting, heating or power systems, and any combination thereof, or for any other public convenience from which revenue is or may be derived. 6. Certain debt service loans and capital loans made to school districts. 7. Certain obligations to repay loans. 8. Obligations specifically excluded under the provision of law authorizing their issuance. 9. Certain obligations to pay pension fund liabilities. 10. Debt service funds for the payment of principal and interest on obligations other than those described above. 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. G -7 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. First $115,000 of EMV 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 Net Tax Capacity LevV 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 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 .80 %. 1.20% of EMV. Net Tax Capacity Levy Year 2002 - 2012 First $500,000 of EMV at 1 %. 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 First $150,000 of First $150,000 of EMV at 2.45 %. EMV at 2.40 %. EMV at 1.5 %. EMV in excess EMV in excess EMV in excess of $150,000 of $150,000 of $150,000 at 3.5 %. at 3.4 %. at 2.0 %. 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) Position Title City Administrator Deputy City Clerk HR Manager Finance Director Assistant Finance Dir. Finance AssistantlAP Finance Clerk Payroll Clerk Utility Billing Specialist Program & Proj. Coord. Community Dev. Dir. CITY OF MONTICELLO Number of City Employees (Full -Time Equivalent) 2008 2009 2010 2011 Actual Actual Actual Actual 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ME 2012 Proposed 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 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 G- 9 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011 Position Title Actual Actual Actual Actual Proposed 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 1.0 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 1.0 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 6.5 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 2.0 1.0 1.0 Part-Time DMV Clerk 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 Liquor Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Assist. Liquor Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Liquor Supervisor 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FT Liquor Store Clerk 2.0 3.0 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 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Fiber Customer Service 0.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Account Manager 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Tech. Serv. Supervisor 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Field Operation Tech. 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 CO /HE Technicians 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Installation Technicians 0.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Seasonal Install Tech. 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 Locator 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total City Employees 69.6 75.1 81.5 82.0 82.5 In addition to the positions listed the City's fire service is provided by the City's volunteer fire department G- 9 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. 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. The basis for levying taxes on 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. ASSIGNED FUND BALANCE: Resources that are constrained by the government's intent to be used for specific purposes, but are neither restricted nor committed. 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. H -1 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. 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. COMMITTED FUND BALANCE: Resources used for specific purposes pursuant to constraints imposed by formal action of the government's highest level of decision - making authority. H -2 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). 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. H -3 FINES: Revenues from penalties imposed for violation of laws or regulations 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 a 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: The value a property is worth. MARKET VALUE HOMESTEAD CREDIT (MVHC): State paid property tax reduction on owner occupied homes based on the properties market value. MARKET VALUE EXCLUSION (MVE): Provision in the State property tax system which exempts or removes a portion of a properties market value from property taxes. MISCELLANEOUS: Revenues or expenditures not classified in any other revenue or expenditure category. H -5 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. NONSPENDABLE FUND BALANCE: Amounts that cannot be spent because they are either (a0 not in spendable form or (b) legally or contractually required to be maintained intact. 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. H -6 REFUNDING BONDS: Bonds issued to retire bonds already outstanding REIMBURSEMENT: Cash or other assets received as a repayment of the cost of work or services performed or of other expenditures made for or on behalf of another governmental unit or department or for an individual, firm, or corporation. RESERVE: An account which records a portion of the fund balance which must be segregated for some future use and which is, therefore, not available for further appropriation or expenditure. RESOLUTION: A special or temporary order of a legislative body; an order of a legislative body requiring less legal formality than an ordinance or statute. 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. RESTRICTED FUND BALANCE: Fund balance should be reported as restricted when constraints placed on the use of resources are either: a. Externally imposed by creditors (such as through debt covenants), grantors, contributors, or laws or regulations of other governments; or b. Imposed by law through constitutional provisions or enabling legislation. 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. H -7 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. TAXABLE MARKET VALUE: The market value of a property less the market value exclusion. This is the value used to calculate property taxes on a property. TAXES: Compulsory charges levied by a governmental unit for the purpose of financing services performed for the common benefit. TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS: Funds used to account for assets held by a government in a trust capacity or as an agent for individuals, private organizations, other governments and/or other funds. TRUST FUND: A fund consisting of resources received and held by the governmental unit as trustee, to be expended or invested in accordance with the conditions of the trust. UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE: This is the residual classification for the General Fund. This is fund balance that has not been reported in any other classification. The General Fund is the only fund that can report a positive unassigned fund balance. Other governmental funds would report deficit fund balances as unassigned. 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. H -8 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 MVE Market Value Exclusion EMV Estimated Market Value FHLB Federal Home Loan Bank FNC Financial Northeastern Companies 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/I 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 -9 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK H -10