Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 04-27-1987AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Monday, April 27, 1987 - 7:30 p.m. Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo Council Members: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, warren Smith, Dan Blonigen 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held April 13, 1987, and the Special Meeting Held April 20, 1987. 3. Citizens Comments/Petitions, Requests, and Complaints. Public Hearings 4. Public Hearing on a Proposal to Apply for a Small Cities Economic Development Grant. 5. Public Hearing on Tax Increment District #7 and Finance Plan. Old Business 6. Consideration of a Resolution Awarding Sale of $365,000 G.O. LTax Increment Bonds. 7. Consideration of a Resolution Accepting Bid and Authorizing the Execution of a Contract for the Making of Public Improvements In Construction 5 Subdivision. S. Consideration of Authorizing the Preparation of Topographic Maps. 9. Consideration of Bills for the Month of April. 10. Adjourn. r14L MINUTES V_ REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, April 13, 1987 - 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen. Members Absent: Arve A. Grimemo 2. Approval of Minutes. Motion was made by Warren Smith, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held March 23, 1987. 4. Consideration of Entering a Fire Training Mutual Aid Association. Approximately a month ago, representatives of the Monticello Fire Department requested the City enter into a joint powers agreement with the cities of Becker, Big Lake, Elk River, Zimmerman, and the Township of Backer for the purpose of sharing the cost associated with video training tapes for all fire departments. The Monticello Fire Department'a share of the tapes would have been $216.20. The joint powers agreement presented by the Fire Department was reviewed by the City Attorney, Gary Pringle, who recommended against entering into a joint powers agreement creating another level of government with its own independent budget and decision-making authority. It was recommended by the City Attorney that if the primary reason for the agreement was to jointly participate in the purchase of vidoo cassettes only, then a simple one page agreement allowing for joint and cooperative purchase of th000 items would be sufficient and that a nine page joint powers agreement setting up a separate association would not be necessary. As a result, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Dan Blonigen, and unanimously carried to not approve entering into a joint powers agreement for the purpose of mutual fire training. The Council members confirmed that the idea of contributing towards the purchase of video cassettes for training purposes was a good idea; and as a result, a motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to approve the expenditure of 4216.20 as Monticello's share of the training tapes. 5. Consideration of Endorsinq the Motto "Gateway to the Twin Cities" as a Commercial Markatinq Concept. W.J. Murphy, owner of the Monticello AmericInn Motel, appeared before the Council requesting endorsement of a commercial marketing concept -1- (0) Council Minutes - 4/13/87 j that would include a series of billboards along I-94 in the area r_ of Melrose and Albany which would utilize the concept that Monticello is the gateway to the Twin Cities. Some of the billboards would be advertising Monticello in general without a specific business being mentioned. Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to endorse the motto "Gateway to the Twin Cities" as a commercial marketing concept. 6. Consideration of Adopting an Ordinance Regulating Sidewalks. Currently, the only reference in the City ordinances regarding sidewalks is a requirement that abutting property owners must clear their walks of ice and snow by 10:00 a.m. each day. The Public Works Director recommended that the City adopt a new ordinance regulating sidewalks which would cover repair responsibility along with maintenance and procedures for special assessments if sidewalks are replaced or added within the community. The new ordinance would allow for the Public Works Director to inspect annually the sidewalk conditions within the City and make recommendations for required improvements. An ordinance amendment was also recommended that makes sidewalks an allowable use within a boulevard and a final ordinance amendment would recode an existing ordinance regarding vehicles parked on streets after snow falls. Councilmen Blonigan questioned the ordinance's requirement that residents would be responsible for snow removal from sidewalks abutting their property and felt that in some cases, depending on the location of the sidewalk, this may be hard to enforce or be an unfair burden on the property owner. The Public Works Director noted that the City currently has ordinances requiring snow removal by the property owner and that the now recommended ordinance would actually extend the time period to 24 hours after a snow fall. After furthor discussion, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to adopt Ordinance Amendment Numbers 153, 154, and 155, pertaining to repair and maintenance of sidewalks, allowable uses within a boulevard, and rocodification of parking after a snow fall. Bee Ordinance Amendments No. 153, 154, 155. 7. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Authorizing the Making of an Application for Community Development Block Grant Funds, and Setting a Public Hearing. Nov that the North American window Company hes selected Monticello as a site for its Minnesota plant, the City of Monticello is attempting to structure an attractive financial package that will assist in their location. As part of the financial package, the City is considering applying for a Community Development Block Grant in the amount of $250,000.00 that could be loaned to the window Company at a reduced interest rata. Council Minutes - 4/13/87 One of the requirements for applying for the Block Grant from the State of Minnesota is that the City must hold a public hearing to explain how the City intends to use its funds. AS a result, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to adopt the resolution authorizing the application for a Community Development Block Grant from the Department of Energy and Economic Development and to hold a public hearing on the proposed uses of the Block Grant April 27, 1987. See Resolution 87-10. The Council further discussed the interest rate that would be charged on the Block Grant loan to the Window Company should the City receive the Grant. It was noted that the State of Minnesota does not regulate the amount of interest that could be charged, and the City Administrator noted that the Window Company was under the impression from a state representative that the interest rate could be as low as 1 percent or 15 percent. In light of the fact that the money would be used to entice a foreign firm to locate in Monticello and that the money is a grant from the State, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Warren Smith, and unanimously carried to indicate to the Window Company that the interest rate on the $250,000.00 loan would be ly percent annus 11 y. 8. Consideration of Setting a Public Hearing on a Proposed Tax Increment Finance Plan and Project. i An additional pert of the financial package being prepared for the Norwegian Window Company location in Monticello is a Tax Increment Finance Plan which would help write down the cost of the land acquisition. The finance plan as presented reflects an acquisition price for the two lore in the industrial park needed by the Window Company of approximately 5104,000.00. A total bond issue in the range of $155,000.00 to $160,000.00 could be financed entirely from tax increments generated by the project and would result in the write down of the land cost to approximately 55,000.00 for the Window Company. Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to set a public hearing for April 27, 1987, to consider the proposed Tax Increment Finance Plan for. Project 47. 9. Consideration of a Statement Charging the City for Video Cassette Recorder Rental for the Monticello Fire Department. As pert of the 1987 preliminary budget request by the Fire Department, a VCR to be used for training purposes was requested by the department for 5400.00. Prior to the adoption of the final budget for 1987, the item pertaining to the VCR was eliminated from the budget. Fire Chief, Willard Farnick, indicated that he was not aware of the budget cut and had purchased a VCR in January of 1987 assuming it was still in the budget. After the Fire Department wes informed that the purchase would not be authorised, the City Administrator allowed the Fire Department to rant a VCR on an as -needed basis for training purposes until rho amount could be included in next years budget. Oai Council Minutes - 4/13/87 -� The City recently received a bill from Flicker's TV and Appliance y for a six month rental of a VCR totaling $87.00. The rental was for the entire six months from November through April, 1987, whereas the City Administrator thought the rental charges should apply only to when the department actually needed a VCR for training purposes. The Council then discussed whether the department should continue renting a VCR on a month -by -month basis or consider the actual purchase of the VCR, as the rental charges would soon exceed the value of a VCR purchased. The Council did note that it was the Fire Department's obligation to know what the final budget adopted was and that hopefully in the future similar problems would not arise regarding unauthorized purchases. Councilmember Blonigen again questioned whether a VCR for the Fire Department was a necessity and questioned its value. After further discussion on purchasing policies in the future, motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by warren Smith, to authorize up to $300.00 for the purchase of the VCR currently being rented provided no rental charge is incurred for the past usage. Voting in favor was Bill Fair, Fran Fair, warren Smith. Voting in opposition was Blonigen. 10. Consideration of Grantinq a Seasonal 3.2 Beer License to the Monticello Softball Association. Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by warren Smith, and unanimously carried to approve issuing a seasonal 3.2 beer license to the Monticello Softball Association contingent upon proper certificate of insurance for liquor liability and the fee of $125.00. 11. Consideration of Awarding a Contract for Cleaning Services for City Hall. Recently, the cleaning service at the Monticello City Hall indicated a desire to resign their duties, and the City advertised for sealed bide for custodial service for City Hall. The following two bide were received. 1. Barbara Gardin 2. Federal Maintenance and Cleaning Maple Lake, MN Michael Chandler --Contact Person Annual Bid: $7,400 Monticello, MN Monthly Payment: 5616.66 Annual Bid: 57,096.92 Monthly Payment: 5591.41 It was noted that the low bid received is approximately $2,200.00 higher than the City is currently paying, but one of the primary reasons for the increase has to do with the City now requiring liability and casualty insurance along with a security bond. Motion was made by Bill Fair, seconded by Siontgen, and unanimously carried to award a cleaning contract to the low bidder, Federal Maintenance and Cleaning, in the amount of $7,096.92 per year. -4- Council Minutes - 4/13/87 12. Discussion on Proposed Legislation to Allow Sale of Wine in Grocery Stores. Administrator Eidem noted that the Municipal Liquor Store Association requested the City Council oppose recent legislation introduced that would allow for wine to be sold in grocery stores. It was noted that previously when this law was being considered by the legislature. the City had opposed the sale of wine in grocery stores, and the Association again recommended the City draft a letter in opposition. Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Bill Fair, and unanimously carried to authorize the City Administrator to draft a letter stating the City's opposition to the proposed legislation allowing for wine to be sold in grocery stores. 14. Cancellation of Recent Purchase Agreement on Former Fire Hall Site. Administrator Eidem noted that the City has received a cancellation request on the purchase agreement from Curt Markling for the purchase of the old fire hall building. It was noted that the primary reason for the purchase agreement being cancelled was that the developers did not feel they would be able to meet the parking requirements necessary for the proposed bar/restaurant proposal. i Rick Wolfstel er Assistant Administrator r1 L .g_ 0 MINUTES SPECIAL JOINT MEETING MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL AND MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP BOARD Monday, April 20, 1987 - 9:00 a.m. Monticello Township Hall Council Members Present: Mayor Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Dan Blonigen, Warren Smith. Township Board Members Present: Darlene Sawatzke, Stuart Hoglund, Charles Holthaus, Franklin Denn, Ted Holker, Jr., and Marjorie Goetzke. Also Present: Terrence Merritt, Executive Director of Minnesota Municipal Board; and Pat Lundy, Assistant Director of Minnesota Municipal Board. 1. Call to Order. 2. Consideration of an Offer from the City of Monticello to Enter a Joint Resolution Pertaining to the Planning, Development, and Annexation of Certain Lands. Mayor Arve Grimsmo made opening comments regarding the background of the annexation proposals and maps. The City Council proposes /I immediate annexation of the orange area on the map; the yellow area 4 would be called the development area and would consist of approximately 2,100 acres. The City Council proposes the basic Lerma shown on the agreement, including the revised payment schedule. They would like to discuss one area of the map, that being the balance of the OAA shown as the white area on the map. Would that be the future planning area, or would the OAA be eliminated. Mr. Franklin Denn, Chair for the Monticello Township Board, requested better clarification on immediate annexation. He pointed out that maybe the name of the OAA should be changed to Joint Planning Board. The Township is interested in some control of the development area. There are concerns about cities dissolving and going back to the townships, as wall as concerns regarding aid to local government. Mr. Terrence Merritt, Executive Director of the Minnesota Municipal Board, asked what role he and Pat Lundy, Assistant Director, should play during this meeting. He stated they would be happy to help with the discussion if so desired. It was agreed that the Council and Township were here to negotiate and discuss an agreement. If Mr. Merritt or Me. Lundy had suggestions, they would be appreciated. Mayor Grimsmo stated that the City was set on the currant map and agreement and wanted to negotiate only the balance and whet to call It (the white area on the map). -1- 101 Special Council Minutes - 4/20/87 1 A discussion then centered around the original proposal and counter V proposal. Members also discussed the maps before them and how this joint meeting came about. Mayor Grimsmo explained that the basis for the City Council drawing lines on the development area comes from petitions received from Kjellberg, Sandberg, and a petition for the Momsen/Tozer area. The balance on the map is for the City to plan utilities. The City believes it's a fair proposal, and the City Council is firm on the proposal. He stated there is not much room for negotiation. A letter was then read into the record by Mr. Merritt which was written by Mr. Radzwill. Attorney for the Township, to Gary Pringle, City Attorney. The letter was dated April 17, 1987, and stated that the only item to be discussed at this joint meeting was the original proposal from the Township to the City. Councilmember Bill Fair pointed out that this meeting was in the process of being organized prior to the letter being written. A discussion was then hold regarding the yellow area shown on the map referred to as the development area. A short break was taken to review the maps, atc. The meeting resumed at 9:52 a.m. Mr. Merritt discussed the areas of the Dunes, the Klein property. Prairie Acres, and the east portion of the Fuller property and just south of the Fuller property. He also discussed the timetable of development in the development area. The Township Board agreed that when talking about immediate development, they are looking at things happening within ono to two years, not speculation of development. Councilmember Bill Fair noted that the developers would petition for annexation, and the development proposal would conform to City Ordinance. If it didn•t conform, it wouldn't be annexed. Township Board Member, Stuart Hoglund, raised a question on the water line and that that was the reason for immediate annexation. The area surrounding the Monte Club was discussed concerning assessments and development occurring in that area to help pay for assessments. Mayor Grimamo stated that they had never had an area assessment in the past but will be looking into that possibility. Councllmembor Bill Fair questioned Mr. Merritt if the City Council could act by statute to annex land if the land is approximately two-thirds surrounded by land within the city limits. Mr. Merritt illustrated examples of that situation and clarified the statute. Mr. Merritt then clarified the proposals from both the Township and the City Council in terms of property description of the development area. He stated that the Fuller property and Klein property could be included or left out of the development area. Either way would be okay with the Township. However, they did not want the Dunes or Prairie Acres included. The Township had stated that those land owners could petition for annexation if they desired to do no. -2- n--)- Special Council Minutes - 4/20/87 Mayor Grimsmo then requested a break to meet with the City Council. The joint meeting resumed at 10:40 a.m. Mayor Grimsmo stated it was the opinion of the City Council that the Dunes and Prairie Acres should stay in the planning area because with 100+ homes, they may need services in the future, and the City should have that information for planning purposes, for instance, what size line to place on Highway 25, etc. Mr. Franklin Denn, Township Board Chair, noted that there is no need for those areas to be included for planning purposes, as they will not increase or decrease, so there is nothing to be concerned about. Mr. Merritt suggested they put the discussion regarding the Dunes and Prairie Acres aside and move onto the immediate annexation area (the orange area on the map). Mr. Franklin Denn stated the Township is not opposed to annexation of the school property (80 acres) or the I-94 corridor. However, they would not consider the balance for annexation. He also stated it was not necessary to annex land to put the water tower on Monte Hill. Therefore, there was not sufficient reason for annexation. Councilmember Bill Fair noted that the benefit would be increased land value. Mr. Dean countered that it would be disastrous to the Schultz property, as he intends to keep farming. The discussion then centered on whether to continue negotiations since no agreement had yet been reached. Mayor Grimsmo made closing i commonts stating that the City wouldn't hurt any of the property owners and that the City Council felt their offer was a fair one. Mr. Franklin Dann noted in his closing comments that the City can place the water tower on Monta Hill without annexation by obtaining easements. There would be no need to annex if the City wasn't going to assess the people. Councilmember Fran Fair pointed out that the City didn't say they wouldn't assess; there would be total assessment. Since no agreement was reached at this time, Fran Fair noted that these proceedings would go to the hearing as scheduled for Tuesday, April 21, 1987, for total annexation. The,, meeting adjourned at/11:24 a.m. I O Council Agenda - 6/27/87 t 4. Public Hearing on a Proposal to Apply for a Small Cities Economic Development Grant. (O.K.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: On April 13, 1987, the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing execution of a Small Cities Economic Development Grant for the NAwCO Minnesota, Inc., and set a public hearing for April 27, 1987. This public hearing is to accept public comment and questions on the Small Cities Economic Development Grant which is to assist private business in getting started or expanding, while benefiting low and moderate income persons. The $250,000 grant is awarded to the City, which the City can in turn pass through to private business as a low interest loan. The City Council approved a 1; percent interest rate with the term of payment to be negotiated. Said public hearing opened, comments received and without contentment, the public hearing may be closed. This being a public hearing, no alternative action or staff recommendation is needed. D. SUPPORTING DATA: None. 4- QD Council Agenda - 4/27/87 5. Public Nearing on the Tex Increment District N7 and Finance Plan. (O.K.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: NAWCO Minnesota, Inc., proposes to construct a 28,400 sq ft office/ manufacturing facility on Lot 12, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park, City of Monticello. The manufacturing area will consist of 25,000 sq ft, and the office/showcase/conference room will consist of 3,400 aq ft to be completed in October, 1987. Lot 11, Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park, City of Monticello, is for future expansion. Twenty-one jobs are projected to be created the first two years with a total five year projection of 40 jobs. The estimated annual tax increment to be generated from this district is sufficient to retire a bond indebtedness of $155,000. District life is eight years at 8 percent interest. The difference between the bond indebtedness ($155,000) and the estimated budget (S170,000) is $15,000. This the said public hearing for Tax Increment District 47, having been opened, received no comment and closed, the City Council may consider adoption of the Tax Increment Finance Plan for Tax Increment District V. in order to beet accommodate NAWCO Minnesota, Inc., timetable of a beginning construction date of June 1, 1987, and to accommodate the time element involved in the TIF process, I suggest adopting the finance plan contingent upon the approval of the building and site plans by the HRA, the Planning Commission, and the City Council, and upon the assumption of no public contentment on the disposition of public lands. Mr. F3erdingetad and Mr. Starheim will receive proposals from three contractors/builders (Veit Construction, Winkelman Building Corporation, and Paterson Construction) the week of April 27. The two H -Window representatives will accept one of the proposals the week of May 11, at which time the building and site plane will be available. The HRA -6 May 13 agenda will authorize the acquisition of land and set a public hearing for the disposition of public lands on May 27, 1987. The Planning Commission will review plans May 12. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Assuming the public hearing is not contented, the City Council may adopt the Tax Increment Finance Plan for Tax Increment District 47. 2. Assuming the public hearing is not contested, the City Council may deny adoption of the Tax Increment Finance Plan for Tax Increment Watrict 07. 3. Assuming the public hearing is contested, adoption of the Tax increment Finance Plan would not be necessary. -2- Council Agenda - 4/27/87 t- C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends, with the assumption of a closed public hearing, that the City Council adopt the Tax Increment Finance Plan for Tax Increment District R7 based on the approval of building and site plane by the HRA, the Planning Commission, and the City Council, and with the assumption of no public contentment of the disposition of public lands. This recommendation to accommodate the timetable of the said project. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Tax Increment Finance Plan; County Property Evaluation; Resolution adopting the Tax Increment Finance Plan. 1. Elll TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 7 CITY OF MONTICELLO a TABLE OF CONTENTS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN Page A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY B. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES C. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT I D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY IN THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT I E. CLASSIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT 2 F. ESTIMATE OF COSTS 2 G. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF LOAN/BONDED INDEBTEDNESS 2 H. SOURCES OF REVENUE 3 I. ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE 3 J. ESTIMATED CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE G K. DURATION OF THE DISTRICT i L. ESTIMATED IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS d M. MODIFICATIONS OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT OR PLAN 6 N. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES 6 0. LIMITATION ON DURATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS 6 P. LIMITATION ON QUALIFICATION OF PROPERTY IN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NOT SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT 7 Q. LIMITATION ON THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT 7 R. NOTIFICATION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS B S. EXCESS TAX INCREMENTS g T. REQUIREMENT FOR AGREEMENTS WITH THE DEVELOPER B U. ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS B V. ADMINISTRATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TAX INCREMENT ACCOUNT g W. ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS 9 :50 I TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PIAN A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY The Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") and the City of Monticello are authorized to create and establish a tax increment financing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.71 through 273.78. B. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES 1. To provide opportunities for development and expansion of new business; 2. To provide employment opportunities through the creation of new jobs; 3. To provide opportunities for growth in the tax base; 4. To provide redevelopment sites of such sire and character to assure the redevelopment of the area. C. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT 1. Property to be Acquired by the Authority: Lot 11 and Lot 12, 1 Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park, City of Monticello, has been K identified for acquisition by the Authority for this Tax Increment Plan. 2. Description of the Development Activities: NAWCO Minnesota, Inc., (the "Developer") plans to construct a 28,600 aq ft office/manufacturing facility. The office, showcase, and conference room will include approximately 3,400 eq ft and the manufacturing area 25,000 eq ft. The developer will be assisted with the development facility through three sources of revenue described on Section H. 3. Other Development Not Under Contract Reasonably Expected to Occur in the Project: The development program may include future expansion of the original office/manufacturing facility located in the Tax Increment Economic District. The geographical boundaries of the district are not expected to change due to this development. D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY IN THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT Legal Description District. Plat 6 Parcel Number Oakwood industrial Park 155-OIB-002110 Block 2, Lot 11 Oakwood Industrial Park 155-018-002120 Block 2, Lot 12 I t C A map revealing the location of the two parcels within the project is provided on the following page. E. CLASSIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT The tax increment financing district to be established in the City of Monticello within the project designated as the Redevelopment Project may be classified as an economic development district. The property to be included in the proposed tax increment financing district consists of two vacant parcels upon which a new structure will be constructed. The proposal does not involve the substantial renovation or clearance of blighted buildings or land as is required in Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision 10, and the proposal does not involve the construction or substantial renovation of housing for low to moderate income persons as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision 11. However, the proposal has been found to be in the public interest because it will discourage commerce, industry, or manufacturing from moving their operations to another state, it will result in increased employment in the municipality, and it will result in the preservation and enhancement of the tax base of the municipality. The construction of the office/manufacturing facility will add approximately 65 jobs and increase the assessed value of the City by $346,710. Therefore, the tax increment financing district will be classified as a tax increment financing economic development district. F. ESTIMATE OF COSTS The estimate of public costa associated with the tax increment financing economic development district are outlined in the following line item budget. Budget Land 5104,000.00 Current Assessment 6,600.00 Future Assessment 11,600.00 Plan/Agreement 5,000.00 City Contig. 8,200.00 Discount 2,000.00 Fin/Bond Counsel 12,100.00 Cap. Interest 20,500.00 Total 5170,000.00 G. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF LOAN/BONDED INDEBTEDNESS An estimate of the maximum amount of bonded indebtedness is expected to be $155,000. The maximum term of the issue is B years, and the Interest rate is expected to be B percent. The capitalised interest amount for approximately 18 months is estimated to be $20,500. The difference between the project cost (5170,000) and the indebtedness (5155,000) is $15,000. -2- C � H. SOURCES OF REVENUE The three sources of revenue used to finance public costs associated with the public development projects in the redevelopment project are a $250,000 Small Cities Economic Development Grant, a $15,000 land sale, and the tax increment generated as a result of the taxation of the land and building expansion in the tax increment financing economic development district. Tax increment financing refers to a funding technique that utilizes increases in assessed valuation and the property taxes attributed to new development to finance, or assist in the financing of public development costs. The improvements to the land acquired by NAWCO Minnesota, Inc., are expected to generate an average annual tax increment of $30,900 beginning in 1989. I. ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.74, Subdivision 1, and Section 273.76, Subdivision 1, the Original Assessed Value (OAV) for the City of Monticello tax increment financing economic development district is based on the value placed on the property by the County Assessor, in 1987. This assessed value is $18,240. Each year, with the exception of 1988 (the new assessed value in 1988 will be "passed through" to the taxing jurisdictions when payable in 1989), the Office of the County Auditor will measure the amount of increase or decrease in the total assessed value of the tax increment economic development district to calculate the tax increment payable to the Monticello economic development district fund. Each year the County Auditor shall also add to the original assessed value of the economic development district an amount equal to the original assessed value for the preceding year multiplied by the average increase in the assessed valuation of all property included in the economic development district during the five years prior to certification of the district. The estimated percentage of average increase for this economic development district is to be dotormined each year. In any year in which there is an increase in total assessed valuation in the tax increment economic development district above the annual percentage of annual increase, a tax increment will be payable. In any year in which the total assessed valuation in the tax increment financing economic development district declines below the original assessed valuation, no assessed valuation will be captured and no tax increment will be payable. The County Auditor •hall certify in each year after the date the Original Assessed Value was certified, the amount the OAV has increased or decreased as a result of: 1. change in tax exempt status of property; 2. reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district; 3. change due to stipulations, adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered shatemonts. -3- J. ESTIMATED CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE .'i Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 1, and Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 2, the estimated Captured Assessed Value (CAV) of the tax increment financing economic development district will annually approximate $344,710. This amount will be captured for up to eight years. The Authority requests 100 percent of the available increase in assessed value commencing in 1988 for taxes payable in 1989 as well as seven subsequent years for repayment of debt and current expenditures. K. DURATION OF THE DISTRICT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 1, the duration of the tax increment district within the Redevelopment Project must be indicated within the finance plan. The duration of the tax increment district will be eight yea -re from the date of receipt of the first tax increment or ten years from approval of the tax increment financing plan, whichever is less. Thus, the City requests the available tax increment for the maximum term possible, and requests the Wright County Auditor and Treasurer to take such steps as may be necessary to pass through the possible tax increments which may otherwise be received by the City in 1988 and distribute the 1988 tax increment to all taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their respective tax levies for taxes payable in 1988. Based on discussions with the County assessor, it is expected that there will be $18,240 of now assessed value in 1987 payable 1988. It is this assessed value that will be "passed through" to the taxing jurisdictions. This action will delay by one year the collection of any tax increment to 1989 and thus will permit the City to collect eight annual increments from the time the development in the project is first paying taxes. The collection of the eight increments is required to fully fund the development costs which will be financed with the proceeds of the Tax Increment Bonds. L. ESTIMATED IMPACT ON OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS The impact of the lose of tax dollars represented as tax increments is estimated below for each taxing jurisdiction. This estimate is based on the existing redevelopment proposals and does not include the possible tax increments derived from any other future development, mill changes, or inflation factors. Total Assessed Value Tax Increment Finance District 1/2/86 Total $18,240 Latest Assessed Value of Each Government Body: • of District to Total Wright County $398,556,135 .005 School District 6882 5128,901,301 .014 City of Monticello 3106,722,013 .017 Other 5144,501,538 .013 -4- ( D!�- Considering all the districts, it can be seen from the above that the school, city, and county districts will have over 99% of each respective district available for normal growth of tax base or valuation. Applying the percentage of the total mill rate in 1987 levied by each taxing jurisdiction to the projected mill rate and the estimated tax Increment received reveals the annual loss of tax dollars by each taxing jurisdiction as listed in the table below assuming development would occur without public assistance. The finance plan indicates we anticipate a tax increment at build out as follows: Captured Assessed Estimated Tax valuation Increment Received Tax Increment Finance District $344,710 $30,900 Based on the current mill rate, the estimated taxes received would be as follows for the taxing bodies: Mills Percent Tax Increment City 15.715 17.53 S 5,417 County 21.332 23.80 7,354 School District #882 48.148 53.72 16,600 Other 4.438 4.95 1,529 Total 89. 333 100.001 $30,900 The following table represents the additional mills that would have to be levied to compensate for the lose of tax dollars in estimated tax increments for each taxing jurisdiction. The tax increments derived from the NAwCp Minnesota, Inc., facility alluded to In the tax Increment district would not be availab.1a to any of the taxing jurisdictions were it not for public intervention by the City. Although the increases in assessed value due to development will not be available for the application of the mill levy for the duration of the tax increment financing district, this new assessed value could eventually permit a mill levy decrease. If it could be assumed that the captured assessed value was available for each taxing jurisdiction. the non -receipt of tax dollars represented as tax increments may be determined. This determination is facilitated by estimating how much the mill levy for property outside of the tax increment financing district would have to be increased to raise the same amount of tax dollars in each taxing jurisdiction that would be available if the projects occurred without the assistance of the City. Adjusted• Required Tax Assessed Value Mille Increment School District 5128,883,061 .13 S 16,600 County $398,537,895 .02 $ 7,354 City $106,703,773 .05 S 5,417 •Tax Increment District assessed valuation subtracted M. MODIFICATIONS OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT OR PLAN In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 4, any reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the project or tax increment financing district, increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred, including a determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original plan, or to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized, increase in the portion of the captured assessed value to be retained by the Authority, increase in total estimated tax increment expenditures or designation of additional property to be acquired by the authority shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original plan. The geographic area of a tax increment financing district may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original assessed value by the county auditor. The tax increment financing economic development district may therefore be expanded until 1992. N. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision 13, and Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 3, administrative expenses means all expenditures of an authority other than amounts paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the district, relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the district or amounts used to pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to Section 273.77. Administrative expenses includes amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning of economic development consultants. No tax increment shall be used to pay any administrative expenses for a project which exceeds ten percent of the total tax increment expenditures authorized by the tax increment financing plan or the total tax increment expenditures for the project, whichever is less. O. LIMITATION ON DURATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 1, "no tax increment shall be paid to an authority three years from 05— the date of certification by the County Auditor unless within the three-year period (1) bonds have been issued pursuant to Section 273.77 or in aid of a project pursuant to any other lav, except revenue bonds issued pursuant to Chapter 474, prior to the effective date of the Act; or (2) the authority has acquired property within the district; or (3) the authority has constructed or caused to be constructed public improvements within the district...,- The Authority must therefore issue bonds, or acquire property, or construct or cause public improvements to be constructed by 1990 or the Office of the County Auditor may dissolve the tax increment financing district. P. LIMITATION ON QUALIFICATION OF PROPERTY IN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NOT SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.75. Subdivision 6, ^if, after four years from the date of certification of the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district..., no demolition, rehabilitation, or renovation of parcel or other site preparation including improvement of a street adjacent to a property but not installation of utility service including sever or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no'addi tional tax increment may be taken from that parcel and the original assessed value of that parcel shall be excluded from the origins 1 assessed value of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commencos demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of other site preparation on that parcel including improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor in the annual disclosure report that the activity has commenced. The county auditor shall certify the assessed value thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add to it the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district." Q. LIMITATION ON THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT All revenues derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the tax increment financing plan. The revenues shall be used to finance or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent existing levy limit lay. No revenues derived from tax increment shall be used for the construction or renovation of a municipally owned building used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of the municipality; thie provision shall not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure, a commons area used as a public park or a facility used for social, recreational, or conference purposes and not primarily for conducting the business Of the municipality. -7- R. NOTIFICATION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS V. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 4, the City hes reviewed and searched the properties to be included in the tax increment financing economic development district and found no properties for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the tax increment financing plan by the county. If the building permit had been issued within the 18 month period preceding approval of the tax increment financing pian by the city, the county auditor shall increase the original assessed value of the district by the assessed valuation of the improvements for which the building permit was issued, excluding the assessed valuation of improvements for which a building permit was issued during the three month period immediately preceding said approval of the tax increment financing plan, as certified by the assessor. S. EXCESS TAX INCREMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 2, in any year in which the tax increment exceeds the amount necessary to pay the costs authorized by the tax increment plan, including the amount necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, Subdivision 3, the City shall use the excess amount to: 1. prepay the outstanding bonds; n 2. discharge the pledge of tax increment therefore; 3. pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of such bond; d. repay any loans including interest on these loans; or 5. return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their mill rate. T. REQUIREMENT FOR AGREEMENTS WITH THE DEVELOPER Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75. Subdivision 5, no more than 10 percent by acreage of the property to be acquired by the City in the economic development district shall be owned by the city as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to Section 273.77 without the Authority having prior to acquisition in excess of 10 percent of the acreage, concluded an agreement for the development of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the Authority should the development not be completed. U. ASSESSMENT AGREEMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 8. the City may, upon entering into s development agreement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 5, enter into 1 an agreement in recordable form with the developer of property `1 within the tax increment financing district which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the tax increment economic development district. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the county assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the assessor may certify the minimum market value agreement. V. ADMINISTRATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TAX INCREMENT ACCOUNT Administration of the tax increment financing economic development district will be handled by the Executive Director of the Authority and the Office of the City Administrator. The tax increment received as a result of increases in the assessed value of the tax increment financing economic development district will be maintained in a special account separate from all other municipal accounts and Authority accounts and expended only upon sanctioned municipal activities identified in the finance plan as amended. W. ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 5, an authority must file an annual disclosure report for all tax increment financing districts. The report shall be filed with the school board, county board, and the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development. The report shall include the following information: 1. The amount and source of revenue in the account: 2. The amount and purpose of expenditures from the account; 3. The amount of any pledge of revenues, including principal and interest on any outstanding bonded indebtedness; 4. The original assessed value of the district; 5. The captured asseaeed value retained by the authority; 6. The captured assessed value shared with other taxing districts; 7. The tax increment received. The annual disclosure report is designed to be A twc-way medium of information dissemination for both the Office of the County Auditor `1 and the Authority. Should the auditor vont additional information from the city regarding its tax increment financing activities, such information should be requested prior to submission of the annual disclosure report by the city. Similarly, the city council may utilize the annual disclosure report as a means for requesting information from the Office of the County Auditor. Additionally, the authority must annually publish a statement in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality shoving the tax increment received and expended in that year, the original assessed value, the captured assessed value, amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness, and any additional information the authority deems necessary. -10- C' l NAWCO MINNESOTA INC. Proposed Tax Increment District 17 Block 2, Oakwood Industrial Park, City of Monticello Lot 11 - 0155-018-002110 Lot 12 - #155-018-002120 61/62 82/83 83/84 84/85 85/86 86/87 Lot 11 4,410 4,410 4,400 7,040 7,040 8,840 Lot 12 9,488 9,488 9,480 7,520 7,520 9,400 TOTALS 13,898 13,898 13,880 14,560 14,560 18,240 A. 4/87 Estimated date B. 1/2/86 Base year date C. 18,240 Base year assessed value D. 1/2/81 5th year preceding year assessment date E. 13,898 5th year preceding year assessed value F. 4,342 5 year assessed value increase (C - E) G. .3124 5 year total increase ratio (F divided by E) H. .06248 5 year average income ratio (G divided by 5) I. 1.06248 Annual base year adjustment tactor (1.000 • H) New Captured Mill Adjustment Adjusted Assessed Assessed Rate Tax Year Factor OAV Value Value Estimate Increment 87/8G 18,240 x 1.062 $19,371 88/89 18,240 x 1.062 20,572 $362,950 $342,378 x 89.633 5 30,688 89/90 18,240 x 1.062 21,847 362,950 341,103 x 89.633 30,574 90/91 18,240 x 1,062 23,202 362,950 339,748 x 89.633 30,452 91/92 18,240 x 1.062 24,641 362,950 338,309 x 69.633 30,323 92/93 18,240 x 1.062 26,169 362,950 336,781 x 89.633 30,186 93/94 18,240 x 1.062 27,791 362,950 335,159 x 89.633 30,041 94/95 18,240 x 1.062 29,514 362,950 333,436 x 89.633 29,687 95/96 18,240 x 1.062 31,344 362,950 331,606 x 89.633 29,723 $241,874 $241,874 divided by 8 • 530,234 average 0 RESOLUTION 87- A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 97 PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTIONS 273.71 TO 273.78 INCLUSIVE, AND ADOPTING A FINANCE PLAN FOR SAID TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello. Minnesota, has determined that it is necessary to create a tax increment financing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to 273.78 inclusive, within the existing redevelopment project created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 et seg. . the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota finds that the tax increment district to be established is an economic development district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision 12, and that the project will provide additional jobs, increase the tax base, and prevent commerce and industry from leaving the State; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has received a copy of the proposed tax increment financing plan and hag been given the opportunity to review and comment upon said tax increment financing plan and the tax increment financing district; and WHEREAS, the City of Monticello hes informed the members of the Local School Board of the Independent School District and the Board of Commissioners of Wright County of the fiscal and economic implications of the proposed tax increment financing district and invited said School Board members and County Commissioners to the public hearing. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on April 27, 1987, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. before the City Council in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, in Monticello, Minnesota, notice of which has been published once in the official newspaper for the City, not less than ten, nor more than thirty days prior to April 27, 1987; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing all persons and parties were given full opportunity to present written or oral testimony, comments, objections, suggestions, and other matters, all of which were duly considered by the Council; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO. (1) That the tax increment district to be established is an economic development district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, Subdivision 12, and will result in increased i employment in the City and in the preservation and enhancement y of the tax base of the City. Resolution 87 - Page 2 (2) That the proposed development would not occur solely through priva to investment within the reasonable foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of tax increment financing is deemed neces nary. (3) That the Planning Commission has reviewed the tax increment financing plan and it conforms to the general plan for the development of the municipality as a whole. (4) That the proposed economic development involves a substantial commitment of private investment and in conjunction with tax increments as identified in the tax increment financing plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with sound needs of the City for the economic development of the project by private enterprise. The City Council of the City of Monticello, Minnesota, does hereby approve the tax increment financing plan and the creation of a tax Increment financing district as described in said tax increment financing plan. Adopted by the City Council this 27th day of April, 1987. t Thomas A. Eidem City Administrator 4 Arve A. Grimamo, Mayor Council Agenda - 4/27/87 6. Consideration of a Resolution Awarding Sale of $365,000 G.O. Tax I I_ Increment Bonds. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: At the March 23 City Council meeting, the Council authorized to Springsted to set the sale of $365,000 in General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds for this meeting of April 27. The bonds are to be used for the improvements made in Construction 5 Subdivision. The bonds are anticipated to be fully retired by the increment generated by the construction of multiple family dwellings within Construction 5 Subdivision. The next item on the agenda is the final award of the contract for the public improvements, the bide for which were reviewed back on the 23rd of March. It is important that the Council award the bond sale prior to awarding the construction contract. Jerry Shannon will be opening the bide for the sale of bonds at 12:30 p.m. on Monday. Since I will be in the annexation hearings, I have named Springsted as the official designee for receiving the bide. Upon opening and tabulation, Springsted will prepare a written recommendation which will be delivered to us by meeting time. It is my understanding that Mr. Shannon will not be in attendance at our meeting, but will present the bid tabs with a formal statement of recommendation of award. The resolution for award is being prepared by Holmes 6 Graven and will be here for the meeting. In addition, as we have done with ell other tax increment districts, it is easentie 1 to executo a pledge agreement between the City end the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The HRA has already adopted its half of the pledge agreement whereby they are pledging 100 percent of the increment they colloct to the City for the retirement of those bonds. In order to keep this as clean and concise as possible. I racommond that a single motion be made that offers the adoption of the resolution awarding the sale of the bonds and authorizos the execution of a pledge agreement with the Monticello Housing and Redevelopment Authority. D. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Award the sale of bonds and execute a pledge agreement. 2. Do not award the sale of the bonds, discontinue the project. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the bond sale be awarded and the pledge agreement be adopted. This, of course, presumes that the interest rate is not absurd. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copyof the pledge agreement; Copy of the resolution for adoption; Tabulation of the bids will be presented at the meeting with a letter of recommendation from Springsted. -4- TAX INCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT by and between THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA and THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO. MINNESOTA THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on or as Of the day of , 1987, by and between the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City"), and The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "HRA"). WHEREAS, the HRA established Redevelopment District No. 5 (the - Diatrict"), prepared the Tax Increment Financing Plan No. 5 (the "Plan") for the District, and approved the Plan on January 7, 1987; at nd WHEREAS, the City Council of the City approved the Plan on Fabruary 9, 1987; and WHEREAS, pursuant to authority conferred by Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77, and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, the City has agreed to finance certain public redevelopment costa to be incurred by the HRA in the District through the issuance of general obligation bonds of the City, designated the $365,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1987A, and hereinafter referred to as the A "Bonds"; and WHEREAS, the HRA has agreed to pledge certain tax increment revenues to the City for the payment of the principal of and interest an the Bonds; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(a), any agreement to pledge tax increment revenues must be made by written agreement by and between the HRA and the City and must be filed with the County Auditor of Wright County; NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the HRA mutually agree to the following: (1) The City will Boll the Bonds. (2) The proceeds from the sale of the bonds and the earnings from the investment of such proceeds will be made available to the HRA to pay or reimburse the HRA for public redevelopment costo paid, incurred, or to be paid or incurred, by the HRA in the District. (3) All tax increment generated by the District from and after the date of this Agreement shall be deposited in a special fund (the "Project Fund") held by the NRA. The HRA hereby pledges to the payment of the principal and interest on the Bonds, tax increment from the Project Fund in an amount equal to 105% of the annual principal and interest due on the Bonds. 04- Tax Increment Pledge Agreement Page 2 (4) Before the date of certification of City taxes in each year for collection by Wright County (such date being hereinafter referred to as the "Certification Date"), there shall be transferred from the Project Fund to the Debt Service Account maintained by the City for the payment of the Bonds, an amount which when taken together with amounts already on deposit in the Debt Service Account, is equal to 105% of all principal and interest then due or to become due on the Bonds on the following three debt service payment dates. If, prior to any Certification Date the Project Fund contains an amount in excess of the amount to be transferred to the Debt Service Account maintained by the City for the payment of the Bonds before such Certification Date, then such excess amounts shall be available to the HRA to pay or reimburse the HRA for public redevelopment costs paid, incurred, or to be paid or incurred by the HRA in the District. (5) Without regard to anything in this Agreement to the contrary, tax increment generated by the District shall be available to pay principal of and interest on both the Bonds and any other obligations issued by the City. HRA, or any other public body to finance public redevelopment costa paid or incurred by the HRA in the District. (6) When the entire public redevelopment costs of the District have been paid and all principal and interest on the Bonds t and other obligations issued to finance the public redevelopment costs of the District have been paid, and the City has been reimbursed from collections of tax increment from the Project for collections of general ad valorem taxes used to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds, then the HRA shall report such fact to the City Council of the City and the HRA shall submit a final statement of such payments. Upon audit of this statement and approval thereof by the City Council, the payment of the expenditures of the HRA in the Project shall be reported to tho County Auditor of Wright County. (7) An Executed copy of this Agreement shall be filed with the County Auditor of Wright County pursuant to the requirement contained in Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(a). (2, Tax Increment Pledge Agreement Page 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the HRA have caused this Agreement to be duly executed on their behalf and their seals to be hereunto affixed and such signatures and seals to be attested, as of the day and year first above written. ATTEST: Clark -Administrator (SEAL) ATTEST: O4_:... �.. \<ILr b�t4.� Secretary CITY OF MONTICELLO By Mayor THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CI OF MONTICELLO,�INNESOTA wn 'Chairman U ral CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. BEING A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND AWARDING THE SALE OF, AND PROVIDING THE FORMS, TERMS, COVENANTS AND DIRECTIONS FOR $385,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1987A, PLEDGING FOR THE SECURITY THEREOF TAR INCREMENT FROM TAX INCREMENT REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 5, AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A TAX INCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL (THE "COUNCIL") OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA (THE "ISSUER") AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01 The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello (the "HRA") has heretofore adopted and this Council has duly approved a modification to Tax Increment Redevelopment District No. 5 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to 273.78, within the modified Central Monticello Redevelopment Project created and modified pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 482.411, et seq., for the purpose of financing or otherwise paying public redevelopment costs pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 482. 1.02 The Issuer has heretofore adopted a modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Its Tax Increment Redevelopment District No. 5 within the modified Central Monticello Redevelopment Project. The County Auditor of Wright County has certified the Original Assessed Value of all taxable property In the Tax Increment Redevelopment District as of January 2, 1984. The original assessed value of the District Is $13,980.00. 1.03 Based upon present and anticipated mill rates for ad valorem taxes to be levied on taxable property In Tax Increment Redevelopment District No. 5 (the "District"), the Council hereby determine$ that the total annual tax Increment to be derived by the HRA from the District commencing in 1989 will be approximately $54,710. Section 2. Award of Sales Terms of Bonds. 1.01. The City of Monticello (the "Issuer") hereby awards the sale of the $385,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1987A (the "Bonds") to (the "Purchaser") as the bidder offering the lowest net Interest cost by Its bid to purchase the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued Interest to the date of delivery, the Bonds to bear Interest at the rates per annum as follows 0 Year of Interest Year of Interest Maturity Rate Maturity Rate 1990 1995 1991 1996 1992 1997 1993 1998 1994 1999 The Clerk -Administrator of the Issuer is directed to retain the good faith check of the Purchaser pending delivery of and payment for the Bonds, and to return the checks of the unsuccessful bidders. 2.02. The Issuer shall issue the Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of $365,000 dated June 1, 1987 as fully registered bonds without coupons. The Bonds shall be in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof not exceeding the principal amount of a single maturity, shall be numbered from R -I upwards in order of issuance, and shall bear interest at the rates set forth above, payable February 1, 1988 and semiannually thereafter on each February I and August 1, and shall mature on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: Year Amount Year Amount 1990 $30,000 1995 $35,000 1991 30,000 1996 40,000 1992 30,000 1997 40,000 1993 35,000 1998 45,000 1994 35,000 1999 45.000 2.03. All Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 1996, shall be subject to redemption and prior payment in whole or in part in Inverse order of maturity and by lot within maturity at the option of the City on February 1, 1995, and any interest payment date thereafter at a price of per plus accrued Interest. Thirty days' prior notice of redemption shall be given by first-class mail to the Registrar and to the registered owners of the Bonds, and notice of redemption will be published in the manner provided by Chapter 475, Minnesota Statutes. Upon notice having been so given, the Bonds or portions of Bonds th4rein specified shall be due and payable at the stated redemption date and price with accrued Interest to the redemption date, and upon funds for such payment being held by or on behalf of the Registrar for such payment on the specified redemption date, Interest thereon shall cease to accrue after such redemption date. No defect in the mailed notice of redemption shall affect the validity of the call for redemption of any Bond. 2.04. The Bonds shall be payable as to principal upon presentation at the main office of (the "Registrar'), or at the office of such other successor registrar as the Issuer may hereafter designate upon 60 days mailed notice to the registered owners. interest on each Bond shall be payable by check or draft of the Registrar mailed the last business day prior to the Interest payment date to the registered holder thereof at his or her address as It appears on the bond register at the close of business on the 15th day (whether or not a business day) of the calendar month nest preceding the Interest payment date. a Section 3. Form and Execution of the Bonds. 3.01. The Bonds shall be in substantially the following form, with the necessary variations as to number, CUSIP Number, rate of interest and date of maturity, the blanks to be properly filled in: No. R - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF MONTICELLO GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BOND, SERIES 1987A Rate Maturity Nominal Date of Original Issue CUSIP June 1, 1987 The City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City"), for value received, hereby certifies that it is Indebted and hereby promises to pay to or registered assigns, the principal sum of Dollars ($ ) on the maturity date specified above, upon the presentation and surrender hereof, and to pay to the registered owner hereof Interest on such principal sum at the Interest rate specified above from June 1, 1987, or the most recent interest payment date to which Interest has been paid or duly provided for as specified below, on August 1 and February I of each year, commencing February 1, 1988, until said principal sum is paid. Principal and the redemption price are payable In lawful money of the United States of America at , as Registrar, Transfer Agent and Paying Agent, In Minnesota, or at the offices of such successor agent as the City may designate upon 60 days notice to the registered owners at their registered addresses (the "Registrar"). Interest shall be paid on each February 1 and August 1 by check or draft of the Registrar mailed the last business day prior to the Interest payment date to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the preceding January 15 and July 15 (whether or not a business day) at his or her address set forth on the bond register maintained by the Registrar. Any such Interest not punctually paid or provided for will be paid to the person in whose name this Bond Is registered at the close of business on a special record date established by the Registrar for the payment of such defaulted interest. The Bonds of this series maturing on or after February 1, 1998, are subject to redemption at the option of the City, In whole or In part in Inverse order of maturity and by lot within a maturity, on February 1, 1995 and any interest payment date thereafter at a price equal to par and accrued Interest. Thirty days' prior notice of redemption will be given by first-class mail to the Registrar and to the registered owners, and notice of redemption will be published in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 075. No defect In mailed notice will affect the validity of the call for redemption of any Bond. This Bond Is one of a series of Bonds In the aggregate principal amount of Three Hundred Sixty-five Thousand Dollars ($385,000) of like date and tenor except Z for number, interest rate, denomination, date of maturity and redemption privilege, and is issued for the purpose of providing funds to finance or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 482, of Tax Increment Redevelopment District No. 5 established by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello (the "Authority") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73, and pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the "Resolution") adopted by the City Council of the City on April 27, 1987, pursuant to and In full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475 and Sections 273.71 through 273.78. The Bonds of this series are payable from the General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1987A Fund of the City (the "Bond Fund") to which has been pledged certain tax increment generated from the tax increment financing district. All taxable property within the City is also subject to the levy of direct general ad valorem taxes required by law to be levied and extended If needed for this purpose, without limitation of rate or amount. The Issuance of this Bond does not cause the Indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation thereon. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City kept for that purpose at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner hereof In person or by such owner's attorney duly authorized In writing, upon surrender of this Bond together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or such owner's duly authorized attorney. Upon such transfer and the payment of any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid by the City or the Registrar with respect to such transfer, there will be Issued In the name of the transferee a new Bond or Bonds of the same aggregate principal amount as the surrendered Bond. The Bonds of this series are Issuable only as fully registered bonds without coupons In denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof not exceeding the principal amount maturing In any one year. As provided In the Resolution and subject to certain limitations therein set forth, the Bonds of this aeries are exchangeable for a like aggregate principal amount of Bonds of this series of a different authorized denomination, as requested by the registered owner or his duly authorized attorney, upon surrender thereof to the Registrar. It is hereby Certified and Recited that all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed In order to make this Bond a valid and binding general obligation of the City according to Its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed In due form, time and manner as so required. This Bond shell not be valid or become obligatory for any purpose until the Certificate of Authentication hereon shall have been manually signed by a person authorized to sign on behalf of the Registrar. C4- 14 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The City of Monticello, Minnesota has caused this Bond to be executed with the facsimile signatures of its Mayor and its Clerk - Administrator, both as of the Nominal Date of Original Issue specified above. Dated: THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA By (Facsimile) Mayor (Facsimile) Clerk -Administrator Certificate of Authentication This la one of the Bonds described in the within mentioned Resolution. By Bond Registrar Authorized Signature 0" V ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned hereby sella, assigns and transfers unto ( Please Print or Typewrite Name and Address of Transferee. Include information for all joint owners If the Bonds are held by joint account.) the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints attorney to transfer the within Bond on the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the prem ises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed by: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a commercial bank or trust company or by a brokerage firm having membership in one of the major stock exchanges. Please Insert Social Security Number or Other Identifying Number of Assignee Notice: The signature(s) on this assignment must correspond with the name(s) appearing on the face of this Bond In every particular, without alteration or any change whatever. (Form of Certificate) CERTIFICATE AS TO LEGAL OPINION 1, Thomas Eldem, Clerk -Administrator of the City of Monticello. Minnesota. hereby certify that except for the date line, the above Is a full, true and compared copy of the legal opinion of Holmes h Graven, Chartered, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which was delivered to me upon delivery of the bonds and Is now on file In my office. SFecsi mile) Clerk -Administrator 3.02. As long as any of the Bonds Issued hereunder shall remain outstanding, the Issuer shall cause to be kept at the principal office of the Registrar the Register in which, subject to such reasonable regulations as the Registrar may prescribe, the Registrar shall provide for the registration of Bonds and the registration of transfers of Bonds. is hereby appointed Registrar, Transfer Agent and Paying Agent with respect to the Bonds. 0 Upon surrender for transfer of any Bond with a written instrument of v transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or his duly authorized attorney, and upon payment of any tax, lee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer, the Issuer shall execute and the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more fully registered Bonds of any authorized denominations and of a like aggregate principal amount, interest rate and maturity. Any Bonds, upon surrender thereof at the office of the Registrar may, at the option of the registered owner thereof, be exchanged for an equal aggregate principal amount of Bonds of the same maturity and interest rate of any authorized denominations. In all cases in which the privilege of exchanging or transferring fully registered Bonds is exercised, the Issuer shall execute and the Registrar shall deliver Bonds in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. For every such exchange or transfer of Bonds, whether temporary or definitive, the Issuer or the bond Registrar may make a charge sufficient to reimburse it for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such exchange or transfer, which sum or sums shall be paid by the person requesting such exchange or transfer as a condition precedent to the exercise of the privilege of making such exchange or transfer. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution, the cost of preparing each new Bond upon each exchange or transfer, and any other expenses of the Issuer or the Bond Registrar incurred in connection therewith (except any applicable tax, fee or other governmental charge) shall be paid by the Issuer. The Issuer shall not be obligated to make any such exchange or transfer of Bonds during the fifteen (15) days next preceding the date of the first publication of notice of redemption in the case of a proposed redemption of Bonds. The Issuer and the Registrar shall not be required to make any transfer or exchange of any j Bonds called for redemption. 5.03. Interest on any Bond which Is payable, and Is punctually paid or duly provided for, on any Interest payment date shall be paid to the person 1n whose name that Bond (or one or more Bonds for which such bond was exchanged) 1s registered at the close of business on the preceding January 15 and July 15, as the case may be. Any Interest on any Bond which is payable, but Is not punctually paid or duly provided for, on any Interest payment date shall forthwith cease to be payable to the registered holder on the relevant regular record date solely by virtue of such holder having been such holders and such defaulted Interest may be paid by the Issuer to the person In whose name such Bond Is registered at the close of business on a special record date established by the Registrar for the payment of such defaulted Interest. Subject to the foregoing provisions of this paragraph, each Bond delivered under this Resolution upon transfer of or In exchange for or In lieu of any other Rond shell carry all the rights to Interest accrued and unpaid, and to accrue, which were carried by such other Bond and each such Bond shall bear Interest from such date that neither gain nor loss In Interest shall result from such transfer, exchange or substitution. 3.04. As to any Bond, the Issuer and the Registrar and their respective successors, each in Its discretion, may deem and treat the person In whose name the same for the time being shall be registered as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes and neither the Issuer nor the Registrar nor their respective successors shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Payment of or on account of the principal of any such Bond shall be made only to or upon the order of the registered owner thereof, but such registration may be changed as above provided. All such 9 j payments shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon �+ such Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. 3.05. If (1) any mutilated Bond Is surrendered to the Registrar, and the issuer and the Registrar receive evidence to their satisfaction of the destruction, loss, or theft of any Bond, and 01) there is delivered to the Issuer and the Registrar such security or indemnity as may be required by them to save each of them harmless, then, in the absence of notice to the Issuer or the Registrar that such Bond has been acquired by a bona fide purchaser, the Issuer shall execute, and upon its request the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in exchange for or in lieu of any such mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond, a new Bond of like tenor and principal amount, bearing a number not contemporaneously outstanding. In case any such mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond has become or is about to become due and payable, the Issuer in its discretion may, instead of issuing a new Bond, pay such Bond. Upon the issuance of any new Bond under this subsection, the Issuer may require the payment of a sum sufficient to cover any tax or other governmental charge that may be Imposed in relation thereto. Every new Bond issued pursuant to this subsection in lieu of any destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond shall constitute an original additional contractual obligation of the Issuer, whether or not the destroyed, lost, or stolen Bond shall be at any time enforceable by anyone, and shall be entitled to all the benefits of this Resolution equally and proportionately with any and all other Bonds duly issued hereunder. The provisions of this Section are exclusive and shall preclude (to the extent lawful) all other rights and remedies with respect to the replacement or payment of mutilated, destroyed, lost, or stolen Bonds. Section 4. Execution and Delivery 4.01. The Bonds shall be executed by the respective facsimile signatures of Mayor and the Clerk -Administrator as set forth In the form of Bond. The seal of the Issuer shall be omitted from the Bonds as permitted by law. The text of the approving legal opinion of Holmes B Graven, Chartered, of Minneapolis, Minnesota, as bond counsel, shall be printed on the reverse side of each Bond and shall be certified by the facsimile signature of the Clerk -Ad ministrotor. When said Bonds shall have been duly executed and authenticated by the Registrar In accordance with this resolution, the same shall be delivered to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price, and the receipt of the Clerk -Administrator delivered to the Purchaser thereof shall be a full acquittance; and the Purchaser shall not be bound to see to the application of the purchase money. The Bonds shall not be valid for any purpose until authenticated by the Registrar. 4.02. The Official Statement relating to the Bonds, on file with the Clerk - Administrator presented to this meeting, Is hereby approved, and the furnishing thereof to prospective bidders for the Bonds is hereby ratified and confirmed, Insofar as the same relates to the Bonds and the sale thereof. 4.03. If such officers find the same to be accurate, the Mayor and the Clerk -Administrator are authorized and directed to furnish to the Purchaser at the closing a certificate that, to the best of the knowledge of such officers, the 0 Official Statement does not, at the date of closing, and did not, at the time of sale of the Bonds, contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statements made therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. Unless litigation shall have been commenced and be pending questioning the Bonds, revenues pledged for payments of the bonds, or the organization of the Issuer or incumbency of its officers, at the closing, the Mayor and the Clerk -Administrator shall execute and deliver to the successful bidder a suitable certificate as to absence of material litigation, and a certificate as to payment for and delivery of the Bonds, together with the arbitrage certificate referred to below and the signed approving legal opinion of Holmes & Graven, Chartered, as to the validity and enforceability of the Bonds and the exemption of Interest thereon from federal and Minnesota income taxation (other than Minnesota corporate and bank excise taxes measured by income) under present laws and rulings. Section 5. Bond Fund and Accounts, Appropriations, Pledge. 5.01. There is hereby created a special fund of the Issuer designated "General—Obligation Tax increment Bonds, Series 1987A Fund" (the "Bond Fund") held and administered by the Clerk -Administrator separate and apart from all other Funds of the Issuer. The Bond Fund shall be maintained in the manner specified until all of the Bonds herein authorized, any refunding bonds issued to refund the Bonds, and any other general obligation tax increment bonds hereafter issued and made payable from the Bond Fund, and the Interest thereon, have been fully paid and the Issuer has been fully reimbursed from the pledge of tax increment for any of the principal and interest of the Bonds paid by the Issuer from general ad valorem taxes levied on property in the Issuer. In the Fund there shall be maintained two separate accounts, to be designated as the "Capital Account" and the "Debt Service Account," respectively. Capital Account. The proceeds from the sale of the bonds, less the amount of the proceeds of the Bonds deposited in the Debt Service Account, and less any accrued Interest received thereon, shall be credited to the Capital Account, from which there shall be paid all costs and expenses of the District, including the cost of any construction contracts heretofore let and all other costs Incurred and to be incurred, of the kind authorized In Minnesota Statutes, Sections 475.85, 273.75, subdivision 4, and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.411 et seg. Debt Servire Account. There Is hereby pledged and there shall be credited to the Debt Service Account (a) all unused discount and accrued Interest received upon delivery of and payment for the Bonds, (b) collections of tax Increment derived from. the District and pledged to the payment of principal of and Interest on the Bonds, any taxes levied for the payment of the Bonds, and revenues derived from any other sources available and pledged to pay principal, premium, If any, and interest on the Bonds, (c) $15,000 to be used to pay Interest on the Bonds prior to the collection of tax Increment and other revenues sufficient to pay debt service on the Bonds, and (d) all funds remaining In the Capital Account after completion of the Project and payment of the costs thereof. The Debt Service Account herein created shall be used solely to pay principal of, premium, If any, and Interest on the Donds and any other general obligation tax increment bonds hereafter Issued and made payable from said Debt Service Account. except that upon discharge of the Bonds and such already outstanding or additional Bonds, the Issuer may use any + remaining funds In the Debt Service Account to reimburse the issuer as provided above. 5.02. To provide additional moneys for the payment of principal and Interest on the Bonds there Is hereby levied upon all of the taxable property in the Issuer a direct annual ad valorem tax which shall be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of, other general property taxes in said issuer for the years and in the amounts as follows: Levv Year Collection Year Amount Levied [See Attached] Said tax levies are such that if collected in full, they, together with estimated collections of tax increment from the District and the other amounts therein pledged to the payment of the Bonds, will produce at least five percent (5%) in excess of the amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds (except for interest payable from funds which shall be on hand and Irrevocably deposited to the Debt Service Account as of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds). Said tax levies shall be irrevocable so long as any of the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the issuer reserves the right and power to reduce the levies in the manner and to the extent permitted by Minnesota Statutes Section 375.81, subdivision 9. The Issuer hereby determines that the estimated collections of tax Increment and other pledged amounts, together with the above levy, if collected In full, will produce at least five percent (5%) In excess of the amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the 7 Bonds (except for interest and principal payable from funds, which are on hand and Irrevocably deposited to the Debt Service Account as of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds). The full faith and credit and taxing powers of the Issuer are hereby irrevocably pledged for the prompt and full payment of the principal of and Interest on the Bonds and such other general obligation Indebtedness as may be made payable from the Bond Fund, as such principal and interest respectively become due. 5.05. The Clerk -Administrator Is directed to keep on file in his office a tabulation of the dates and amounts of the principal and Interest payments to become due and amounts of the principal and Interest payments to become due on bonds payable from the Bond Fund, and of the balance required in the Bond Fund on October i In each year In order to cancel the taxes levied pursuant to this Resolution for collection the following year. Section &. Tax increment Pledge Agreement. 6.01. The County Auditor of Wright County (the "County Auditor") has certified that the original assessed value of real property within the District established pursuant to a Tax Increment Financing Pian, originally adopted as of March 25, 1985, as determined according to the assessment as of January 2, 1983, and certified by the County Auditor on , 1985 Is $13,980,00. Under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, the County Auditor will Include only the original assessed value In the assessed valuation upon which the County Auditor computes the rate of all state. county, city, school district and other taxes, but will extend the rates so determined against the entire assessed valuation of such real property in each subsequent year, and the County Treasurer of Wright County will remit to the HRA that proportion of the taxes paid each year on such real property which the excess of the assessed valuation over the original taxable value bears to such original value. 6.02. The HRA has agreed to segregate the tax increment derived from the District on its official books and records and to remit to the Debt Service Account of the Bond Fund the amount of tax increment required to be remitted to the Issuer pursuant to a Tax Increment Pledge Agreement in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. Such Tax Increment Pledge Agreement is hereby approved, and the Mayor and Clerk -Administrator of the Issuer are hereby authorized to execute the same on behalf of the Issuer with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as are not materially inconsistent with such form as the Mayor, in his discretion, shall determine; provided that the execution thereof by the Mayor shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. Section 7. Miscellaneous. 7.01. The Issuer covenants and agrees with the Purchaser and holders of the Bonds that the Investments of proceeds of the Bonds, including the Investment of any revenues pledged to the Bonds which are considered proceeds under the applicable regulations, and accumulated sinking funds, if any, shall be limited as to amount and yield in such manner that the Bonds shall not be arbitrage bonds within the meaning of Section 168 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1988, as amended (the "Code"), and regulations thereunder. On the basis of the existing facts, estimates and circumstances, including the foregoing findings and covenants, the Issuer hereby certifies that It is not expected that the proceeds of the Bonds will be used In such manner as to cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds under Section 148 and regulations thereunder. The Mayor and Clerk -Administrator shall furnish an arbitrage certificate to the Purchaser embracing or based on the foregoing certification at the time of delivery of the Bonds to the Purchaser. The proceeds of the Bonds will likewise be used In such manner that the Bonds are not Private Activity bonds under Section 109(b) of the Code. 7.02. The Issuer hereby designates the Bonds as "Qualified Tax -Exempt Obligations" within the meaning of Section 265 of the Code. With respect to such delsgnation, the Issuer covenants that it does not reasonably anticipate Issuing qualified tax-exempt obligations in an amount greater than $10,000,000 In calendar year 1987. 7.03. The Clerk -Administrator Is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this Resolution and to cause the same to be filed In the office of the Wright County Auditor, together with such other Information as such auditor may require, and to obtain from the county auditor a certificate that the Bonds have been entered upon his bond register. 7.04. The officers of the issuer are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the Issuer relating to the power and authority of the Issuer to Issue the Bonds within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records In their custody and control, and such certified copies and certificates shall S be deemed representations of the Issuer as to the facts slated therein. Adopted this 27th day of April, 1987. 11 0& TATTACHMENT Lew Year Collection Year Amount Levied f— v I EXHIBIT A 14 TAXINCREMENT PLEDGE AGREEMENT by and between THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA and THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELL0, MINNESOTA THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on or as of the day of , 1987, by and between the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "City"), and The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Monticello, Minnesota (the "HRA"). WHEREAS, the HRA established Tax Increment Redevelopment District No. 5 (the "District"), prepared the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Plan") for the District, and approved the modification of the Plan on January 7, 1987; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City approved the modification of the Plan on February 9, 1987; and WHEREAS, pursuant to authority conferred by Minnesota Statutes, Section 27.77, and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 675, the City has agreed to finance certain public redevelopment costs to be Incurred by the HRA in the District through the issuance of general obligation bonds of the City, designated the �- $985,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1987A, and hereinafter referred to as the "Bonds"; and WHEREAS, the HRA has agreed to pledge certain tax Increment revenues to the City for the payment of the principal of and Interest on the Bonds; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.77(,), any agreement to pledge tax increment revenues must be made by written agreement by and between the HRA and the City and must be filed with the County Auditor of Wright Countyl NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the HRA mutually agree to the following: (1) The City will sell the Bonds. (2) The proceeds from the sale of the bonds and the earnings from the Investment of such proceeds will be made available to the HRA to pay or reimburse the HRA for public redevelopment costs paid, incurred, or to be paid or Incurred, by the HRA In the District. (J) All tax Increment generated by the District from and after the date of this Agreement shall be deposited In a special fund (the "Project Fund") held by the HRA. The HRA hereby pledges to the payment of the principal and Interest on the Bonds, tax increment from the Project Fund In an amount equal to 105% of the annual principal and interest due on the Bonds. (4) Before the date of certification of City taxes in each year for collection by Wright County (such date being hereinafter referred to as the "Certification Date'), there shall be transferred from the Project Fund to the Debt Service Account maintained by the City for the payment of the Bonds, an amount which when taken together with amounts already on deposit in the Debt Service Account, is equal to 105% of all principal and Interest then due or to become due on the Bonds on the following three debt service payment dates. if, prior to any Certification Date the Project Fund contains an amount In excess of the amount to be transferred to the Debt Service Account maintained by the City for the payment of the Bonds before such Certification Date, then such excess amounts shall be available to the HRA to pay or reimburse the NRA for public redevelopment costs paid, incurred, or to be paid or incurred, by the HRA In the District. (5) Without regard to anything In this Agreement to the contrary, tax Increment generated by the District shall be available to pay principal of and interest on both the Bonds and any other obligations Issued by the City, HRA or any other public body to finance public redevelopment costs paid or incurred by the HRA in the District. (6) When the entire public redevelopment costs of the District have been paid and all principal and Interest on the Bonds and other obligations Issued to finance the public redevelopment costs of the District have been paid, and the City has been reimbursed from collections of tax Increment from the Project for collections of general ad valorem taxes used to pay principal of and Interest on the Bonds, then the HRA shall report such fact to the City Council of the City and the HRA shall submit a final statement of such payments. Upon audit of this statement and approval thereof by the City Council, the payment of the expenditures of the HRA in the Project shall be reported to the County Auditor of Wright County. (7) An executed copy of this Agreement shall be filed with the County Auditor of Wright County pursuant to the requirement contained to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.77(a). ' IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the HRA have caused this Agreement to be duly executed on their behalf and their seals to be hereunto affixed and such signatures and seals to be attested, as of the day and year first above written. ATTEST: CITY OF MONTICELLO BY Clerk -Administrator Mayor (SEAL) ATTESTS THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA By Secretary Chairman I Council Agenda - 4/27/87 7. Consideration of a Resolution Accepting Bid and Authorizing the Execution o f a Contract for the Making of Public Improvements in Construction 5 Subdivision. U.S. ) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As you may recall, the City received bide on March 17, 1987, for the 66-7 Project. This project included not only the area around Washington Street and Lauring Lane, but also approximately 700 feet of 16 -inch water main out on County Road 118. The low bidder on the project was S S L Excavating from St. Cloud, Minnesota, at a 2 -ow bidl of 5280,436.60. John Badalich has checked the bide and made a recommendation that we award to S 6 L Excavating. The City staff concure with John's recommendation. The Construction 5 Project is wall underway, and we recommend the award of the bid to S 6 L Excavating. we would expect construction to start on the project within the next week after all the contracts, bonds, and insurances have been taken care of, as well as the necessary permits. -5- 14 RESOLUTION 87 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AUTHORIZING CONTRACT WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the improvement of Lauring Lane, Fallon Avenue, and Washington Street lying within Construction 5 Subdivision by installing sewer. Water, storm sewer, street surfacing and curb and gutter, bids were received, opened, and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Burschville Construction, Inc. $307,137.50 J. P. Norex $354,026.25 LaTour Construction $298.615.45 L 6 0 Rehbein, Inc. $306,771.00 Molitor Excavating, Inc. $310.103.50 Northdale Construction Co. $317.426.05 Redstone Construction $323,793.00 Rice Lake Contracting Corp. $327,528.05 S 6 L Excavating $280,436.60 and WHEREAS, it appears that S 6 L Excavating of St. Cloud is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: 1. The Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized and directed to anter into the attached contract with S S L Excavating of St. Cloud in the name of the City of Monticello for the improvement of Lauring Lane. Fallon Avenue, and Washington Street lying within Construction 5 Subdivision by installing sewer, water, storm sewer, street improvements and curb and gutter according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Administrator 2. The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposit made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted by the City Council this 27th day of April, 1967. Thomas A. Eidem City Administrator Arve A. Grimamo, Mayor 8 Council Agenda - 4/27/87 -i B. Consideration of Authorizing the Preparation of Topographic Maps. (J.S.) I A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As part of the requirements for a preliminary plat and a final plat for those individuals wishing to develop property in the city of Monticello, the developer must prepare a topographic map of the area which would include vertical contours of not more than two feet. This map should include all water courses, marshes, rock outcrops, power transmission poles, lines, and the size and location and elevation of all appurtenances of existing public utilities and all quasi -public utilities. In addition, the flood elevation of all lakes, rivers, and wetlands needs to be shown. This information is utilized in determining proper development for a piece of property in relationship to the location of roads and the balancing of cut and fill areae for grading. In addition, it is utilized to design storm sewer systems and holding ponds, as well as the utilities. The City Engineer utilizes this information to look at the effect of a subdivision on the surrounding area. The City has older topographic data for a major portion of the city. This was prepared in the mid -70's through the use of aerial photography. In addition, many of the later plate have topographic information. On the eastern and of the community, however, and in the OAA, the City lacks good topographic information. Recently, the City was approachod by Mr. Jim Boyle and Bill Block, his engineer, in regard: to topographic information for the Boyle property. The developer found It very expensive to got topographic information on ouch a large piece of property. Mr. Block asked if the City could provide the topographic information and charge the developers for use of that information as is the case with other cities. In discussing thin with John Badalich, we both find merit in doing this. By having a larger area mapped out topographically, the City can better plan for future improvements. In addition, there are economies of scale by doing larger areae, and we therefore can have the work done at a lower unit coat price and the developers can then achieve a lower development coot per acre. We would propose to map approximately 2,000 acres in the eastern part of the community and the OAA utilizing 1987 aerial photography. With an area the size of 2,000 acres, we would expect the coat to be in the area of 44.50 to $5.00 par acre. John Badalich will have more precise cost data for Monday ovening'a mooting. we would propose to charge each developer by the acre for use of this topographic Information in preparing preliminary and final plate. In doing thio, the city would recover the majority of the money spent in the original mapping. Thera would be smaller areas in which developers would choose to do their own topographic mapping, and there would be areae that may or may not be developed prior to the need to remap the area. -6- Council Agenda - 4/27/87 11 B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative would be to authorize the topographic mapping of an area of approximately 2,000 acres as outlined by John Badalich at the cost provided by him. In addition, this alternative would include a charge back to those developers wishing to utilize that information. The charge back would be actual cost of mapping plus any administration costs the City occurs. 2. The second alternative would be to require each developer in this area to continue mapping on an individual parcel basis. While this alternative may suffice for the immediate future, it does not allow the City to have insight as to the overall effect of a specific subdivision in an area and could result in a higher development cost of subdivisions. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: It is the staff recommendation of the Public Works Director and City Engineer that the City Council authorize mapping by aerial photography of at least 2,000 acres as outlined by John Badalich at Monday evening's meeting. D. SUPPORTING DATA: a. None. I -7- ORR•SCHEIEN • MAYERON & ASSOCIATES. INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors 1; April 27, 1981 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Monti Cello 250 East Broadway Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Attn: Mr. Thomas Eidem City Administrator Re: Topographic Mapping for OAA Area Deer Ton: As a follow-up to my recent discussion with John Simola. I have received quo- tations to undertake aerial photography and topographic mapping of a part of the OAA area adjacent to Monticello from three firms. I requested a quotation on two areas: Area A (approximately 3,200 acres) and Area 8 (approximately 2.000 acres). Both of the areas are primarily south of the south city limits of Monticello covering the Boyle property, Monti Hill and further southwest covering the Kjellberg property. I have enclosed a map to show the two respective areas. The three firms contacted and their quotes to do the work are as follows: Martinet Corporation Horizons, Inc. Mark Hurd Aerial (dapping AREA A (3.200 ACRES) $10.465 $10.570 $21.000 AREA B (2.000 ACRES) S 6.550 S 7.400 $15.000 Added to the above would be the cost of $2.000 for ground control to be furnished by OSM. Horizons. Inc. will be using 1987 aerial photography just flown this past week. Martinet will be also be using 1987 photos to be flown this Tuesday or Wednesday. Mark Hurd will be using the 1984 photography OSM purchased from Park Hurd in May of 1984. 2021 Cast Hennepin Avenue • Suite 238 • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 • 6121331- 8560 Page Two ' City of Monticello April 27, 1987 I would recommend purchasing the mapping for Area A (3,200 acres), the cost being $3.90 per acre including ground control versus $4.28 per acre for Area B (2.000 acres) including ground control. I would further recommend the work be given to either Horizon, Inc. or Martinez Corp. which includes or will include 1987 aerial photography and topographic mapping of 3.200 acres. An additional cost of $2.000 is needed for ground control to be furnished by OSM. I have attached copies of the correspondence and telecom received from the firms noted above. Yours very truly, ORR-SCHELEN-MAIERON 6ASSOCIATES. INC. t� I John P. Bada11ch. P. . City Engineer JPB:mlj enclosures MLTAAIZnNeZ PO am 7017 81. PdC. ww 53107 L 0 A P 0 A A 7 1 0 N /127Y AW April 20, 1987 Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 8 Assoc. Inc. 2021 East Hennepin Ave. Suite 238 Minneapolis, MN 55413 Attn: Mr. John Badalich Dear Mr. Badalich: Martinez Corporation is pleased to quote the following prices for aerial photography and topographic mapping in Monticello. Minnesota. We would acquire new photography this Spring (if award is made soon enough to permit) at a scale suitable for providing 2 foot contours for either area A or B. We would provide plotter drafted manuscripts at a scale of 1"°1001 and plot contours at two foot intervals. Delivery of the mapping would be made no later than 21 days after receipt of satisfactory ground control from OSM Inc. Charges for our services are as follows: Area A $ 10.465.00 Area B $ 6.550.00 We look forward to the opportunity of working with you, and hope you will consider us favorably. Sincerely, MARTINEZ CORPORATION ,l cc�1llls-,. j �J✓oa� Sidney Wood, Technical Representative SW/rb OW&IP1o10pMMWA"-a1ow1"np- aV"* An EyW c4vonlw"Y E"gge H O R I Z O N S9 INC. PO �a,105DE AVE. ;�,�OR AERIAL SURVEYS Er DIGITAL PHOTOGRAMMETRY PHO t -M-3-4 M. s�CnE:Ietil0.T4 April 21 , 1987 City of Monticello RECEIVED c/o Mr. John Radalich ORR SCHELEN IAAYflt$N 9 AS= Orr-Schelen-Mayeron dr Assoc., Inc. 2021 East Hennepin Ave., Suite 298 COMM. Minneapolis, MN 55119 APR 2 2 1987 Re: HE -IN I I Deer Mr. Radalich: lieference Is made to Mr. Ed Ame's letter of April 18, 1987. Accordingly, we are pleased to furnish our proposal for aerial survey services of two areas near Monticello, MN. ARRA The areas covered by this proposal were furnished with the above letter. One area contains approximately 9,200 acres and the other area approximately 2,000 acres. ARRIAI. PIIOTOCRAPIIY We will utilize new aerial photography obtained on April 17, 1987. This photography was obtained with a precision mapping camera suitable for preparing the topographic mapping described below. CROUNII CONTROI, 11 Is understood that Orr-Schclen-Mayeron b Assoc., Inc, will furnish all the ground control necessary for controlling the topographic mapping. We. will furnish you with points which will require elevations and horizontal positions. *MPOCRAPIIIC MAPPINt1 We will furnish the (napping at a scale of V=100' showing contours at two foot intervals. In addition to contours, the maps will include spot elevations, roads, building, railroads, major fences, drainage, shorelines, swamps and tree outlines to the extent these features aro visible on the photography. If areas are obscured, the contours will be dashed to indi- ente they are approximate. 1PIdr MM to the Wrrr1ol*8 atbl City of Monticello, c/o Mr. John Badalich April 21, 1987 Page 2 Delivery will consist of a reproducible positives on stable base material made directly from the pencil plotted manuscripts. PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE We estimate the ground control requirements will be furnished within 10 days after notice to proceed Is given. The topographic mapping will be delivered progressively from 21 to 80 days, depending on the size of the area ordered, after receipt of ground control information. The mapping will be delivered to Orr-Schelen-Mayeron at Assoc., Inc. PAYMENT Our charge for the services described above will be as follows: 3,200 Acre Area $11,035.00 lump sum 2,000 Acre Area $7,885.00 lump sum Payment of our Invoice will be due within 30 days after delivery and invoicing. When using control information provided by other than our own forces, an additional charge of $30.00 per hour will be made for excess office time, if any, due to erroneous control. We appreciate the opportunity of furnishing this proposal and look forward to being of service. An authorized signature on the enclosed acceptance copy of this proposal will serve as our contract. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact US. Respectfully submitted, OJNU'C-4-7-� Daryl D. gather Technical Representative DDS/dm m /8 Encl. proposal accepted for the City of Monticello by: Signature Title Date Map Title Desired MUM r%um mu CON .anaro. "mm"emR �6 99f er cor►rw,ose0n 0;�oc.�a00 "CoonA �� el awl■ psrs� e� ��� rd Th hue- T+UL As Aka— Q s'e a o-4� k o An-'e, r (PrIC -S mow � T 2-00 ff4ro c ZdOO Ac .V. 41(00 � r i►.t G d �,,.,�.- a � M� /a� .! +s a 1� o.. era_ s _ Al t% A(a 424�rr Q Gra- Cox M. Fro.Ow%a_ 2060 /%a,�r (a7 7, -loo a f7.70 PAT ar_,f o i $Zoo ��- (�% 10.S-70 ► 3.30 //o..re..w CX• n�a.am#a 00 0 -.4 fir, /70 aw s2.6 rmo aarumwrs.�e I" cow x*na►«a aan "� °sOM"iD M0'�"NO Ate/ ! / G% d aca.o�oe Arel e,.s it a,as= �'r { 3z'oo�� ., 2f1/10 Ftoias a /5; /00 u 0 I 0 N LIQUOR FUND AMOUNT CNCK LIQUOR DISBURSEMENTS FOR APRIL NOO.. Griggs, Cooper 6 Co. - Liquor 3,093.86 12994 Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT 597.28 12995 Commissioner of Revenue - SWT 214.00 12996 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll dad. 170.00 12997 State Treasurer - PERA W/H 180.16 12998 Johnson Bro. Co. - Wine purchase 4.101.63 12999 Johnson Bro. Co. - Liquor purchase 440.99 13000 Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor purchase 234.88 13001 Eagle Wine Co. - Liquor 757.71 13002 Quality Wine 6 Spirits - Liquor 623.14 13003 Northern States Power - Utilities 495.85 13004 North Central Public Service - Utilities 105.65 13004 Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone 73.53 13006 McDowall Co. - Repairs at Liquor Store 473.92 13007 Dahlheimer Dist. Co. - Beer 10,753.30 13008 Stromquist Diet. Co. - Misc. mdse. 37.15 13009 Cloudy Town Dist. - Misc. mdse. 91.55 13010 Grosslein Beverage - Beer 11,267.17 13011 Rubald Beverage Co. - Wine 95.01 13012 Thorpe Dist. Co. - Beer 5.942.05 13013 Ron's Ice Co. - Ice purchases 109.80 13014 Servicemaster - Carpet cleaning 150.00 13015 Seven Up Bottling - Misc. mdae. 208.00 13016 Viking Coca Cola - Misc. mdso. 376.20 13017 Superior Products - Store expense 38.50 13018 Day Dist. Co. - Misc. mdse. 628.20 13019 Jude Candy 6 Tobacco - Misc. mdse. 587.40 13020 Maus Foods - Store expense 15.23 13021 Kolles Sanitation - Garbage service 133.50 13022 Monticello Times - Adv. 110.00 13023 Dick Beverage Co. - Beer 809.05 13024 Coast to Coast - Store supplies 42.70 13025 Bernick's Pepsi Cola - Pop purchases 405.05 13026 Old Dutch Foods - Misc. mdse. 99.67 13027 Liefert Trucking - Freight 302.75 13028 State Treasurer - PERA WIN 90.75 13029 Griggs, Cooper 6 Co. - Liquor 3,304.54 13030 League of MN. Cities Ins. Trust - Insurance premium 2,366.00 13031 Banker's Life - Group Ins. 321.94 13032 Quality Wine Spirits - Liquor 375.70 13033 Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT 875.66 13034 Olson 6 Sone Electric - Repairs at store 346.57 13035 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll dad. 170.00 13036 Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor 1.338.17 13037 Eagle Wino Co. - Liquor 434.77 13038 General Fund - Purchase of 1/3 C. D. 33,000.00 13039 State Treasurer - PERA WIN 184.24 13060 Johnson Bro. Co. - Liquor 1,484.16 13041 Ed Phillips 6 Sons - Liquor 1.082.07 13042 Griggs. Cooper 6 Sons - Liquor 5,377.70 13043 Payroll for March 3,701.36 TOTAL LIQUOR DISBURSEMENTS - APRIL $98,218.51 f.ENERAL FUND - APRIL AMOUNT CHECK NO. Tom Eidem - Meal expenses 10.20 24021 Automatic Systems Co. - Water Dept. services 52.00 24022 Trueman Welters - Parts for equipment 135.91 24023 Melchert/Block Assoc. - Eng. fees for Chelsea Road ext. 996.74 24024 MonticelloTimes - Legal publications 1,028.31 24025 Walt Mack - Travel expense for seminar 75.00 24026 Commissioner of Revenue - State tax due on 1986 fuel 199.24 24027 Data Management Design - Payment for computer supplies 23,103.05 24028 Dept. of Labor 4 Industry - Penalty fee - OSHA 441.00 24029 Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg, fees 283.00 24030 Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees 36.00 24031 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded. 123.04 24032 ICMA Retirement Corp. - Payroll ded. 564.34 24033 Corrow Sanitation - Contract services for March 6,612.40 24034 David Stromberg - Animal control services 287.50 24035 Jerry Hermes - Janitorial services at Library 216.67 24036 James Preusse - Cleaning city hall 358.33 24037 YMCA of Mpls. - Monthly contract payment 583.33 24038 Mrs. Beverly Johnson - ANimal control services 275.00 24039 Mr. Arve Grimsmo - Mayor salary 175.00 24040 Mr. Dan Blonigen - Council salary 125.00 24041 Mrs. Fran Fair - Council salary 125.00 24042 Mr. William Fair - Council salary 125.00 24043 Mr. Warren Smith - Council salary 123.19 24044 Mr. James Ridgeway - Planning Comm. salary 49.27 24045 Mrs. Joyce Dowling - Planning Comm. salary 49.27 24046 Mr. Richard Carlson - Planning Comm. salary 49.27 24047 Mrs. Barbara Koropchak - Planning Comm. salary 49.27 24048 State Treasurer - PERA W/H 1.470.25 24049 Anoka County Social Services - Payroll ded. 204.00 24050 Commissioner of Revenue - SWT - March 2.138.00 24051 Wright County State Bank - FICA 6 FWT 5.124.58 24052 Corrow Sanitation - Additional landfill costs 1,242.80 24053 Cragun's Conference Center - Dep. for City Man. Conf. 70.00 24054 Government Training Service - Reg. fee for City Man. Conf. 125.00 24055 College of St. Thomas - Reg. fee for seminar for M. Hellma1 175.00 24056 EMED Co. - Safety equipment purchases 180.85 24057 State Treasurer - State Bldg. Ins. - Surcharge - lot qtr. 640.09 24058 Liquor Fund - Relmb. for int. on C. D. 166.44 24059 Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees 410.00 24060 Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees 54.00 24061 North Central Public Service - Utilities 964.73 24062 Professional Services Group - WWTP contract payment - April 22,083.35 24063 North Central Section AWWA - Reg. fee - M. Theisen 21.00 24064 Cragun's - Room deposit - M. Theisen - Waterworks school 50.00 24065 Northern States Power - Utilities 6,540.79 24066 Bridgewater Telephone - Telephone 1.221.58 24067 State Treasurer - PERA W /H 447.13 24068 Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees 285.00 24069 League of MN. Cities Ins. Trust - Insurance premium 48.868.00 24070 Banker's Life - Group Ins. 3,914.87 24071 PERA - Ins. premiums 27.00 24072 State Capitol Credit Union - Payroll ded. 123.04 24073 ICMA Retirement Corp. - Payroll dad. 564.34 24074 Phillipe 66 - Gas - Walt 31.30 24075 AT 6 T Inf. System - Fire phone chargee 3.96 24076 Marco Business Products - Office supplies 98.65 24077 GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NO. National Life Ins. - Ins. premium for T. Eidem 100.00 24078 Smith, Pringle 6 Hayes - Legal for March 5,110.00 24079 Oxford Chemicals - Surfactent for Parks 77.28 24080 Ted Farnum - Reimb. for Fire Dept. supplies 30.61 24081 Vance's Service Center - Gas for Fire Dept. 64.64 24082 Wright County Recorder - Quit claims recorded 11.00 24083 Wright County Auditor - 1987 tax book run 35.50 24084 Data Processing Dept. - Special assessment tax book run 24.30 24085 Adam's Pest Control - Library contract 42.00 24086 Meyer Rohlin - Prints 4.50 24087 Suburban Gas - Gas 216.95 24088 Monticello Printing - Misc. printing 23.10 24089 Feedrite Controls - Potable sample 10.00 24090 Unocal - Gas - Fire Dept. 43.89 24091 Monticello Chamber of Commerce - City's membership dues 250.00 24092 Plymouth Industrial Supply - Ladder. shovels, paint, etc. 412.18 24093 Fair's Garden Center - Supplies 6.99 24094 Wright County Auditor - Sheriff's contract - April 10.645.21 24095 Viking Pipe Services - T. V. inspection 720.00 24096 Monti Truck Repairs - Parts for sludge truck 4.00 24097 Persian's Business - Repair dictating machine 91.45 24098 St. Cloud Fire Equip. - Recharge fire extinguishers 110.50 24099 Simonson Lumber - Misc. materials 343.65 24100 Scharber 4 Sone - Parts for sludge truck 54.54 24101 Snyder Drug - Frames. film, etc. 58.10 24102 Purcell Plumbing - Misc. supplies 60.09 24103 Maus Foods - Supplies 133.02 24104 National Bushing - Pressure Washer 4 steam cleaner 2,732.44 24105 Monticello Office Products - Chairs, computer furn., etc. 2,342.87 24106 Gruys, Johnson - Computer services 580.00 24107 Hoglund Bus - Parts for sludge truck 31.36 24108 General Rental Center - Dolly rental 10.60 24109 Clutch b U -Joint - Sludge truck axle parts 185.01 24110 DYNA Systems - Nuts S bolts for Mtce. Bldg. 301.31 24111 Bareness Drug- Film b batteries for St. Dept. 17.77 24112 Wright County Journal Press - Sub. renewal 15.00 24113 Martie's Farm Service - Dog food 21.99 24114 Servi Star Hdwe. - Supplies for all Depts. 225.41 26115 Coast to Coast - Portable radio, drill, etc. 143.52 24116 Local 149 - Union dues 105.00 24117 L 4 G Rehboin - Payment d2 - Chelsea Road project 47,893.27 24118 David Stromberg - Animal control expense 287.50 24119 Jerry Hermes - Library janitorial 216.0 24120 Thomas Eidem - Mileage expense for April 300.00 24121 Wright County State Bank - FICA b FWT 6,404.60 24122 Soil Testing Lab. - Soil sample info. 15.00 24123 Monticello Fire Dept. - March salaries 3,070.25 24124 Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees 582.00 24125 Dept. of Nat. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees 4.00 24126 Dept. of Not. Res. - Dep. Reg. fees 36.00 24127 State Treasurer - PF.RA WIH 1,481.57 24128 Olson 6 Sons Electric - Computer, pump houses. etc. 4,500.30 26129 P b H. Warehouse Sales - Softball fields supplies 11.26 24130 General Industrial Supply - Gas cane (3) 239.01 24131 Automatic Garage Door - Repairs - Mtes. bldg. 50.00 24132 Chemsearch - Parka supplies 131.82 24133 Ruff Auto Parte - Radio - Mtce. Dept. 20.00 24134 Safety Kleen - Equipment mtce. - Shop 40.00 24135 -2- F" J n GENERAL FUND AMOUNT CHECK NO. Monticello Times - Adv. 490.21 24136 Flicker's T. V. - V. C. R. for Fire Dept. 299.00 24137 MN. U. C. Fund - Unemployment benefits 44.89 24138 OSM - Misc. eng. fees 5,001.62 24139 Humane Society of Wright County - Animal control expense 95.00 24140 Motorola, Inc. - 28 pagers for Fire Dept. 11,985.00 24141 West Central Ind. - Stakes and lath 88.80 24142 Mobil Oil - Gas for Fire Dept. 31.02 24143 Zoning Bulletin - Sub. to Zoning Bulletin mag. 59.95 24144 St. Cloud Restaurant Supply - Garbage liners 17.18 24145 West Publishing Co. - 1987 MN. Session Lav Books 87.50 24146 Elk River Machine Co. - Sludge truck parts 46.20 24147 Elk River Concrete Products - 25 manhole steps 150.00 24148 MacQueen Equip. - Supplies - St. Dept. 43.63 24149 Little Mountain Electric - City house repairs - River St., 244.51 24150 Mtce. Bldg. and Sen. Cit. bldg. Mid Central - Nozzle and adapter for Fire Dept. 922.40 24151 Davis Electronic Service - Pager repairs for Fire Dept. 47.44 24152 Holmes 6 Graven - Raindance project services 3,821.30 24153 Braun Engineering - Compaction test - Boyle project 198.00 24154 Water Products - Water Dept. supplies 4,761.64 24155 AME Ready Mix - Cement for streets 394.52 24156 Tom Eidem - Travel expense - DEED Comm. 6 H Window 64.07 24157 Ben Franklin - Supplies 52.32 24158 J M Oil Co. - Gas for St. Dept. 360.68 24159 Monticello TW Hdwe. - Misc. supplies 45.25 24160 Harry's Auto Supply - Sludge truck repairs, filler, etc. 463.13 24161 Maus Tire Service - Tire repairs, etc. 191.22 24162 Unitog Rental Service - Uniform rental 102.40 24163 Wright County Treasurer - Property taxes 2,598.18 24164 Gould Bros. - Repairs - Fire Dept. - Van 188.36 24165 N B Instruments - Strip chart - Water Dept. 51.73 24166 011ie Koropchak - Travel expense 89.25 24167 U. S. Postmaster - Postage machine re -fill 500.00 24168 Commissioner of Revenue - Water sales tax - lot qtr. 246.22 24169 Dept. of Nat. Ree. - Dep. Reg. fees 216.00 24170 Rick Walfatelier - Mileage expense 79.00 24171 Peterson Fire 6 Safety - Boom hoist, safety hook, block 2,009.36 24172 Meridian Aggregates Co. - Gravel 22.44 24173 Barco Products - Cloves for Water Dept. 80.11 24174 American National Bank - TIF bond fees 107.02 24175 Gary Anderson - Mileage expense 214.79 24176 Walters Cabinet Shop - Computer counter 6 shelf 1,256.50 24177 Duane Knutson - Mayor dues 10.00 24178 Data Management - Computer charges - connectors 6 cable 588.14 24179 Payroll for March 25,380.98 TOTAL GENERAL DISBURSEMENTS - APRIL 287. 923.26