9-09-91 aqgenda
CITY OF RICHFIELD,'MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 241
Agenda September 9, 1991
Issue Statement:
Consideration of a resolution to amend the Letter of
Understanding between the City of Richfield and the City Manager,.
adjusting compensation.
Background:
Mayor Kirsch has requested that a resolution adjusting the
compensation of the City Manager be placed on the September 9,
1991 Council agenda.. The current salary of 575,801 was effective
September 1, 1989. The Council was unable to reach agreement on
salary changes in .1990. The City Manager was appointed to the
position in July, 1986.
Recommended Motion:
Basis for Recommendation:
Alternative Recommendation:
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This has been placed on the September 9, 1991 agenda for Council
consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
CAK:ttf
~-~
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE ~LETTER.OF~UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND JAMES D. PROSSER, CITY MANAGER
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
The following sections of the Letter of Understanding
between the City of Richfield., Minnesota and James D. Prosser,
dated July 14, 1986, is amended as follows:
Section 5, Salary: Employer agrees to increase the City
Manager's annual base salary of $75,801 by ~ retroactive to
September 1, 1990, and to increase the revised base salary by
~ effective September 1, 1991, payable in installments at
the same time as other employees of the .employer are paid.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota, this 9th day of September, 1991.
Martin J. Kirsch Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
VJ
CITY. OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 240_
Agenda September 9, 1991
Issue Statement:
City Council adoption of a resolution awarding the sale of
$5,580,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds of 1991.
Background• .
On August 26, 1991,. the City Council authorized the sale of
$5,580,000 Advance Refunding Bonds. These .bonds were .issued to
complete the advanced refunding of the following issues:
56,265,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds of 1985
$1,940,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1985
The resolutions awarding the sale of the refunding bonds are
extremely complex. Thus, the exact text of the resolutions will
not be available until after the sale of the bonds. Resolutions
will be distributed just prior to the September 9 Council
meeting.
The resolutions will not only provide authority for awarding the
sale of-the bond issues, but will also give authority to fix the
form and specification of the bonds, direct their execution and
delivery, and provide for payment.
After completing all necessary presale procedures, including
legal notice of bond reading information, interviews and legal
opinion, the bond sale is ready to take place on September 9,
1991 as authorized and advertised.
Bids and relevant data-will be compiled by representatives of
Evenson-Dodge, Inc. for presentation to the City Council at the
regular City Council meeting of September 9, 1991.
In order to have the most current bond quotation possible prior
to the bid award, it is customary practice to open bids the day
of the award. The bond sale opening will take place at 1:00 p.m.
on September 9. Sale results, plus recommendations, will be
reported at the City Council meeting of September 9, 1991.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolutions awarding the sale of $5,580,000
General Obligation Refunding Bonds of 1991.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The bond sale was authorized by the City Council on August
26, 1991.
2. The bond sale has been conducted pursuant Minnesota Statutes
and Internal Revenue Code.
(~ `
3. Advanced refunding of the bond issues will provide a net
present value savings for the City of Richfield.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. There is no alternative recommendation if the .City wishes to
continue with the bond sale.
2. The City may decide to not sell these advanced refunding
bonds if the interest rate is an unfavorable one..
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The City Council should act immediately to confirm the bond sale,
if it is decided favorable, and a bid opening was conducted
earlier on September 9, 1991.
Respectfully submitted,
James Prosser
City nager
JDP:cak
1 \ D O D ~ ~ ' 1 \ ~
E
~ 650 Town Center Drive
•
1 \ J L. Suite 430
F I N A N C I A L C O N S U L T A N T S
Costa Mesa CA 92626
714/545-1212
800/322-0171
714/557-9126 Fax
44 Montgomery Street
Suite 500
- - San Francisco CA 94104
415/955-2675
September 5, 1991 415/955-2676 Fax
255 South Orange Avenue
Mayor Martin J. Kirsch and Members of Council ~ Swte 888
FL 32801
l
d
O
Mr. James Prosser, City Manager r
an
o
4
84
0757
Mr. Steven L. Devich, Administrative Services Director 07/
1-
City Hall 800/624-8222
407
872
2326 F
6700 Portland Avenue S. -
ax
/
Richfield, MN 55423
100 Court Avenue
RE: $5,580,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, suite 215
Series 1991 Des Moines IA 50309
City of Richfield, Minnesota 515/282-6138
515/282-0252 Fax
Gentlemen and Ms. Stokes:
Attached is our Presale Analysis prepared In connection with the City's 135 N. Pennsylvania Street
- roposed issuance of $5,580,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds on
1991
b
9
S Suite 2015
Indianapolis IN 46204
.
er
,
eptem 317/684-6000
_ The Presale Analysis summarizes the purpose of the Bond issue, descnbes 317/684-6004 Fax
how the Bond issue has been structured, and discusses other aspects
related to the marketing of the Bonds. 17370 North Laurel Park Drive
Suite 400E -
-- We look forward to a successful offering. Livonia MI 48152
313/591-4040
Sincerely, 800/589-2800
313/59!-4554 Fax
DGE, INC.
O
EVENSEND
^
`
~ 1726 Prairie Lane
- ~
~ 1.1 Fargo ND 58103
Wayne S. Burggraaff 701/235-4416
Senior Vice President 800/328 82°0
and Principal 701/239-4597 Fax
/dl 701 Brazos
Suite 500
Austin TX 78701
512/320-9047
800/284-5612
512/320-1419 Fax
222 South Ninth Street, Suite 3800
Minneapolis, MN 55402
612/338-3535 800/328-8200
FAX 612/338-7264
283004/2
TABLE OF .CONTENTS
Page
Purpose of Sale .................................................................................1
Estimated Sources and Uses of Funds ..........................................2
Proposed Terms and Conditions of Sale ......................................3
Preliminary Debt Schedule and Savings Program .......................4
Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligation .................................................5
Rating ................................................................................................5
General Market Conditions ...........................................................5
Financing Timetable ........................................................................6
283004/3
PURPOSE OF THE SALE
The issuance of the Bonds has been proposed to lower debt service costs of the
City by replacing high interest rate debt with debt at current lower interest rates.
The Bonds will be used to refund portions of the following bond issues:
1. General Obligation Refunding Bonds of 1985 dated December 1,
1985.
2. General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1985 dated December
1, 1985.
The Bonds will refund non-callable portions of the General Obligation
Improvement Bonds maturing February 1, 1992 and 1993 to maximize savings in
1992 and 1993. The Bonds will also refund in advance of their maturity, the
callable portions of the General Obligation Refunding Bonds and General
Obligation Improvement Bonds. The Refunded Bonds, which are outstanding in
the amount of $5,135,000, will be replaced with the Bonds.
283004/1 1
ESTIl~IATED SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS
Sources of Funds:
Par Amount of Bonds $5,580,000.00
Non-Bond Proceeds 0.00
Accrued Interest 12,521.35
Total Sources of Funds $5.592,521.35
Uses of Funds•
Cost of Escrow:
Purchase Price of SLGS $5,471,800.00
Purchase Price of U.S. Treasury Bill 0.00
Beginning Cash Balance 50.45
Costs of Issuance 50,000.00
Underwriter's Discount ($10/$1,000) 55,800.00
Accrued Interest 12,521.35
Miscellaneous (Rounding) 2.349.46
Total Uses of Funds $5.592.521.35
283004/2 2
PROPOSED TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE
General Obliastion Refunding Bonds, Series 1991
Principal Amount of Issue: $5,580,000*
Dated Date of Bonds: September 1,1991
Proposed Sale Date: September 9, 1991
Type of Sale: Competitive Bid
First Interest Payment: February 1,1992
Maturity Dates: February 1,1992/2006
Maturity Amounts: Year Amount ea ount
1992 $175,000 2000 830,000
1993 165,000 2001 835,000
1994 70,000 2002 845,000
1995 70,000 2003 25,000
1996 600,000 2004 25,000
1997 620,000 2005 25,000
1998 615,000 2006 $25,000
1999 655,000
Call Feature: Bonds maturing in the years 2000 and
thereafter are callable at the option of the
City, on February 1, 1999 and semiannually
thereafter at a price of Par and accrued
interest.
Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations: Yes
Security: General Obligation
* The issue size may be adjusted after receipt of bids to reflect escrow
requirements based upon the actual interest rates on the Bonds.
283004/3 3
PRELIMINARY DEBT SCHEDULE AND SAVINGS PROGRAM
The refunding is estimated to generate actual cumulative savings based on a
conservative estimate of current market conditions of $210,714 and present value
savings of $187,098. The City has selected a savings program which produces the
greatest savings during the first two years of the issue. The somewhat irregular
savings which occurs over the remainder of the issue life is caused by the need to
structure principal payments in $5,000 increments.
The savings occur by replacing interest rates that range from 6.8% to 8.3% on the
Refunded Bonds vv~th interest rates that are expected to range from 4.55% to
6.45% on the refunding bonds. A summary of savings information follows:
Savings Summary
Total Debt Service Savings $210,714.06
Total Savings as a % of Refunded Interest 6.96%
Present Value of Debt Service Savings 187,098.93
PV Savings as a % of Refunded Interest 6.18%
The following schedules present principal and interest payments for the Bonds
based upon estunated market rates and estimated debt service savings based on
these rates. The rates used for this schedule are a conservative estimate of the
rates the Bonds might receive if the Bonds were sold today. Actual rates,
however, will vary depending upon the rating received for this issue and upon the
tax-exempt market on the day the Bonds are sold.
283004/4 4
CITT Of RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
15,580,000 G.O. REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1991
SCENARIO: ACCELERATED SAVINGS
:aass:aaaass
SAVINGS REPORT
ssaaasossssaa '
~
-
- - - - - - - - PROPOSED OEBT SERVICE - - - - - - - - PRIOR CUMULATIVE
DATE PRINCIPAL COUPON INTEREST. TOTAL D/S SAVINGS SAVINGS
12/ 1/91 12,521.35 12,521.35
2/ 1/92 175,000.00 4.550000 131,157.29
8/ 1/92 ~ 157,007.50 466,164.79. 562,215.00 %,050.21 108,571.56
2/ 1/93 165,000.00 4.850000 157,007.50
8/ 1/93 153,006.25 475,013.75 550,485.00 75,471.25 184,042.81
2/ 1/91 70,000.00 5.150000 153,006.25
8/ 1/94 151,203.75 374,210.00 374,535.00 325.00. 184,367.81
2/ 1/95
g/ 1/qS 70,000.00 5.400000 151,203.75
149,313.75
370,517.50
371,535.00
4,017.50
188,385.31
2/ 1/%
8/ 1/% 600,000.00 5.600000 149,313.75
132,513.75
881,827.50
884,760.00
2,932.50
191,317.81
2/ 1/97
8/ 1/97 620,000.00 5.650000 132,513.75
114,99'8.75
867,512.50
868,925.00
1,412.50
192,730.31
- 2/ 1/98
8/ 1/98 615,000.00 5.700000 114,998.75
97,471.25
827,170.00
831,517.50
4,077.50
1%,807.81
2/ 1/99 655,000.00 5.800000 97,471.25
8/ 1/99 78,476.25 830,947.50 831,755.00 807.50 197,615.31
2/ 1/ 0
- 8/ 1/ 0 830,000.00 5.900000 78,476.25
53,991.25
962,467.50
966,852.50
4,385.00
202,000.31
2/ 1/ 1
8/ 1/ 1 835,000.00 6.000000 53,991.25
28,441.25
917,932.50
918,000.00
67.50
202,067.81
2/ 1/ 2
- 8/ 1/ 2 845,000.00 6.100000 28,441.25
3,168.75
877,110.00
881,937.50
4,827.50
206,895.31
2/ 1/ 3
8/ 1/ 3 25,000.00 6.200000 3,168.75
2,393.75
30,562.50
32,262.50
1,700.00
208,595.31
2/ 1/ 4
8/ 1/ 4 25,000.00 6.300000 2,393.75
1,606.25
29,000.00
30,187.50
1,187.50
209,782.81
_ 2/ 1/ 5
8/ 1/ S 25,000.00 6.400000 1,606.25
806.25
27,412.50
28,112.50
700.00
210,482.51
2/ 1/ 6
8/ 1/ 6 25,000.00 6.150000 806.25
25,806.25
26,037.50
231.25
210,714.06
5,580,000.00 2,383,951.79 7,963,954.79 8,162,147.50 210,714.06
ACCRUED
5,580,000.00
- 12,521.35
2,371,433.44 12,521.35
7,951,433.44
8,162,147.50
210,714.06
xxssassssa::s: s a s sasssssasssss sassssasssasaa
Dated 9/ 1/91 with Delivery of 9/15/91
Bond Years 40,470.000
Average Coupon 5.890672
• Average li fe 7.252688 '
N I C % _ 6.028551 % Uaino 99.0000000
N 0 T E Savings an 12/ 1/91 Include Accrued Interest of 12,521.35
Net Present Valve Swinge at: 5.8790x Egwls 187,098.93 or 3.3530X of Par of the Currant Issw
or 3.6436x of Par of the Prior Issw
Prepared by Evensan Dodoe, Inc.
RUNOATE: OS-13-1991 a 10:59:23 FILENAME: RICH KEY: REF- X
CITT OF RICNFIELD, MINNESOTA
lS,580,000 G.O. REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1991
SCENARIO: ACCELERATED SAVINGS
ssassa
DEBT SERVICE SCNEOUIE
a:asaunasssra:as
DATE PRINCIPAL COUPON INTEREST PERIOD TOTAL FISCAL TOTAL
2/ 1/92 175,000.00 4.550000 134,157.29 309,157.29
8/ 1/92 157,007.50 157,007.50 466,164.79 •
2/ 1/93 ~ 165,000.00 4.850000 157,007.50 322,007.50
8/ 1/93 153,006.25 153,006.25 475,013.75
2/ 1/94 70,000.00 5.150000 153,006.25 223,006.25
8/ 1/94 151,203.75 151,203.75 374,210.00
2/ 1/9S 70,000.00 5.400000 151,203.75 ~ 221,203.75
8/ 1/95 149,313.75 149,313.75 370,517.50
2/ 1/% 600,000.00 5.600000 149,313.75 749,313.75 _
8/ 1/% 132,513.75 132,513.75 881,827.50
2/ 1/97 620,000.00 5.650000 132,513.75 752,513.75
8/ 1/97 114,998.75 114,998.75 867,512.50
2/ 1/9'8 615,000.00 5.700000 114,998.75 729,998.75
_ 8/ 1/98 97,471.25 97,471.25 827,470.00
2/ 1/99 655,000.00 5.800000 97,471.25 752,471.25
8/ 1/99 78,476.25 78,476.25 830,947.50
2/ 1/ 0 830,000.00 5.900000 78,476.25 908,476.25
8/ 1/ 0 53,991.25 53,991.25 962,467.50
2/ 1/ 1 835,000.00 6.000000 53,991.25 888,991.25
8/ 1/ 1 28,941.25 28,941.25 917,932.50
2/ 1/ 2 845,000.00 6.100000 28,941.25 873,941.25
8/ 1/ 2 3,168.75 3,168.75 877,110.00
2/ 1/ 3 25,000.00 6.200000 3,168.75 28,168.75
8/ 1/ 3 2,393.75 2,393.75 30,562.50
2/ 1/ 4 25,000.00 6.300000 2,393.75 27,393.75
8/ 1/ 4 1,606.25 1,606.25 29,000.00
2/ 1/ 5 25,000.00 6.400000 1,606.25 26,606.25
8/ 1/ S 806.25 806.25 27,412.50
2/ 1/ 6 25,000.00 6.450000 806.25 25,806.25
8/ 1/ 6 25,806.25
-------------- -------------- --------------
5,580,000.00 2,383,954.79 7,963,954.79
ACCRUED 12,521.35 12,521.35
5,580,000.00 2,371,433.44 7,951,433.44
~~~~
Dated 9/ 1/91 with Delivery of 9/15/91
Band Years 40,<T0.000
Average Coupon 5.890672
Average life 7.252688
. N I C X 6.028551 X Usine 99.0000000
Prepared by Evensen Dodge, Ine.
RUNDATE: 08-13-1991 a 10:52:32 FILENAME: RICN 10?T: REF-X
QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATION
A major provision of the Internal Revenue Code of .1986 is the 100%
disallowance of the interest deduction for banks which purchase tax-exempt
bonds. An exception to this provision allows banks to deduct interest earned on
governmental bonds when the jurisdiction issues no more than $10 million in the
calendar year. When possible, it is to the City's advantage to designate its bonds
as Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations because such. bonds are slightly more
marketable under current market conditions.
The City will designate the bonds as Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations.
RATING
_ The City will request a ratin~ on the Bonds. The City's outstanding general
obligation bonds are rated "Aa' by Moody's Investors Service.
Evensen Dodge will assist the City with its application to the rating agency.
GENERAL MARI~T CONDITIONS
The municipal market has experienced an unusually long period of stability at
. relatively low rates over the past three years. Since the beginning of 1988, The
Bond Buyer's Index, which is the primary indicator of municipal bond interest
" ' rates, has varied from a low of 6.81% in February, 1991, to a high of 7.97% in
.. May, 1988. It is currently at 6.86%.
Under current market conditions we estimate that the Bonds would receive an
interest rate of between 6.00% and 6.25%. A schedule which reports the
movement of The Bond Buyer's Index follows.
283004/5 5
~ !'~'~
!~'~
~.i
~I
~~
~1 Q
o ~
Q~
Q~
O~
01
Q~
CO ~
Q1
.-a
1f~
di
CO
~~
z
w
A
o
a A
c
0
z
U
w
7
O r~
fn Frl
o
~ua~.zad
FINANCING TIlViETABLE
$5,580,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds
City of Richfield, Minnesota
283004/6
Date as
August 26 Draft of Official Statement delivered to the City and to
Bond Counsel for review.
August 28 City and Bond counsel complete comments on the draft
O cial Statement.
August 28 Notice of Sale appears in Richfield Sun and Finance and
Commerce.
August 29 Application for rating submitted to Moody's Investors
Service, Inc.
August 29 Official Statement mailed to underwriters.
September 3-6 Potential bidders contacted; answer questions from rating
agency.
September 9 Bond sale at 1:00 P.M. Consideration at 7:00 p.m. that
evening.
September 10-27 Evensen Dodge coordinates printing of the Bonds and
closing arrangements.
October 1 Closing.
6
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 23'9
Agenda September 9, 1991
Issue Statement:
Consideration of an application for a renewal of a residential
kennel license for Tony Neubauer, 6401 22nd Avenue, Richfield.
Background:
On August 28, 1991, Tony Neubauer submitted an application for a
residential kennel license. He owns three dogs. Mr. Neubauer's
application had all contiguous property owner's signatures on it.
On August 30, 1991, an inspection of the property was conducted
by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems
found at that time.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel
license be approved.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. It is up to the animal owner to prove that .the keeping
of more than two dogs ,does not have an adverse effect
on the neighborhood. Mr. Neubauer has been able to do
this.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide to deny Mr. Neubauer's residential
kennel license. This would mean that he would have to
reduce the number of dogs he has from three to two.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Recommendation to approve the application for a residential
kennel license for Tony Neubauer, 6401 22nd Avenue, is presented
for Council consideration at this time.
y submitted,
Jam ID/. Prosser
Cit naQer
JDP:ds
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ~~
Council Letter No. 238"
Agenda September 9, 1991
Issue Statement:
Resolution certifying delinquent sewer and water utility accounts
to the County .Auditor.
Background:
Chapter VII of the Richfield Ordinance Code provides that unpaid
water and sewer charges may be certified to the County Auditor to
be included in a property owner's annual property tax bill. The
Ordinance Code also authorizes a $20.00 certification fee to be
charged against each delinquent account. By certifying the
delinquent charges to the property taxes of the delinquent
properties, the .City is assured of ultimately collecting the
delinquent charges.
In 1991, the water certificates were significantly increased.
In 1990, the City Council certified $128,420.97 of delinquent
charges for 548 properties, an average of $234.00 per account.
The 1991 certification currently under consideration totals
$155,707.14 for 409 properties, an average of $381.00 per
account.
Property owners owing water and sewer charges are notified on
their summer quarter water bill that failure to pay the amount
owed will result in certification to the property owner's taxes,
plus a 520.00 certification fee.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the resolution certifying unpaid sewer and water service
charges to the County Auditor to be collected with other taxes on
said properties.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. State Statute and City Ordinance provide that delinquent
utility charges may be collected in this manner.
2. The delinquent accounts must be certified to the County
Auditor in order for the City to collect the charges through
the property tax process.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not approve the resolution. However, the certification
process is the only process the City has to collect these
delinquent charges.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This matter has been placed on
agenda to allow sufficient time
to the County Auditor.
JDP:ds
the September 9, 1991 City Council
for the charges to be certified
Respect ly submitted,
James Prosser
City a ager
F!
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION CERTIFYING UNPAID SEWER AND WATER SERVICE
CHARGES TO-THE-COUNTY.-AUDITOR TO BE.COLLECTED.WITH
OTHER TAXES ON SAID PROPERTIES
WHEREAS, Ordinance Code 715 establishes rules, rates and
charges for water service in the .City of Richfield; and.
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 44.075, subd. 3, provides that
all delinquent water service charges not paid may be certified to
the County Auditor and shall be collected with other taxes on
such property; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance Code 705 established rules, rates and
charges for sanitary sewer service in the City of Richfield; and
WHEREAS, 705.19 thereof provides that all sewer services
charges not paid within fifteen (15) days after the quarterly due
date may be certified to the County Auditor with taxes against
such property, and shall be collected with other taxes on such
property; and
WHEREAS, an assessment roll has been prepared specifying the
amount which shall be certified against each particular property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota that:
1. There is hereby determined to be a total uncollected
amount for water and sanitary sewer of 5147,527.14.
2. That a 520.00 certification charge shall be levied
against each delinquent account; such charges totalling
$8,180.00.
3. That such amount be hereby certified to the County
Auditor for collection with other taxes on said
properties.
4. That a copy of the resolution shall be sent to the
Hennepin County Auditor.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 9th day of September, 1991.
Martin J. Kirsch Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
J~=-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 23Z
Agenda September 9, 1991
Issue Statement:
Resolution levying a special assessment for weed destruction.
Background:
Each year the City of Richfield hires contractors to cut weeds on
certain properties in the City not properly maintained by the
owners. If the owner fails to cut the weeds in a timely manner.
after notification by the City, the City undertakes the weed
destruction and bills the property owner for the service. If the
cost of the weed destruction is not paid by the property owner it
may be assessed against the property for a one year period. The
attached resolution provides for this assessment against five
properties in the total amount of $726.84. In addition, the
resolution provides for an 8% penalty.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution levying a special assessment for
weed destruction against the listed property owners in the total
amount of $726.84.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The properties were not maintained by the owners and the City
incurred costs to abate the weed nuisance.
2. Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may levy a
special one year assessment for these costs.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not approve the resolution, and have the costs absorbed by
the City.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the September 9, 1991 agenda so that
this assessment may be filed with Hennepin County along with the
other special assessments.
Respe ly submitted,
Jame Prosser
City anager
JDP:ds
5~l
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT FOR WEED DESTRUCTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. The following described properties are hereby specially
assessed in the following amounts for expense incurred
by the City in connection with abatement of a nuisance
health hazard pursuant to provisions of Minnesota
Statutes, Section 145.23, to wit:
PROPERTY ID ADDITION ADDRESS AMOUNT
29-028-24-41-0162 46790 6636 Sheridan $ 53.00
28-028-24-22-0038 45340 6344 Newton 80.24
35-028-24-44-0029 46790 1600 E 77th St 74.20
34-028-24-33-0015. 46710 66th Pleasant- 371.00
27-028-24-21-0001 44827 78th Pleasant 148.40
Total $726.84
2. The above listed assessment be spread over a period of
one year at the rate of 8~ interest per annum.
3. That the City Clerk. is hereby authorized and directed to
certify a copy of this resolution to the County Auditor
of Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota,
this 9th day of September, 1991.
Martin J. Kirsch Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber- City Clerk
~1J
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 236
Agenda September 9, 1991
Issue Statement:
Resolution levying a special assessment for nuisance abatement.
Background•
There is a•resolution on the September 9, 1991, City Council
agenda certifying a special assessment for nuisance abatement to
Hennepin County. This assessment is for costs incurred by the
City in connection with abatement for nuisances on certain
properties in the City which are not properly maintained by their
owners. In each case the owner of the subject property was
notified by the City to correct the nuisance and failed to do so
within a timely limit. Property owners were .notified that if the
nuisance was not abated within the proper time limit, the City
would take the corrective action necessary and bill the property
owner. When the cost of the nuisance abatement provided by the
City is not paid by the property owner,~it can be assessed
against the property tax for a one year period.
The attached resolution provides for this assessment against five
properties in the total amount of $724.60.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution levying a special assessment for
nuisance abatement against the listed property owners in the
total amount of $724.60.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The properties were not maintained by the owners and the City
incurred costs to abate the nuisance.
2. Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may .levy a
special one year assessment for these costs.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not approve the resolution and have the costs absorbed by
the City.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the September 9, 1991 agenda so that
this assessment may be filed with Hennepin County along with the
other special assessments.
Resp t ly submitted,
Jam s Prosser
Cit anager
JDP:ds
~~~
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the .City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
1. The following described properties are hereby specially
assessed in the following amounts for expense incurred
by the City in connection with abatement of a nuisance
health hazard pursuant to provisions of Minnesota
Statutes, Section 145.23, to wit:
PROPERTY ID ADDITION ADDRESS AMOUNT
27-028-24-41-0162 46790 6636 Sheridan $ 47.70
28-028-24-22-0038 45340 6344 Newton 393.35
35-028-24-44-0029 46139 1600 E 77th St 124.55
25-028-24-21-0019 45880 6325 22nd Ave 58.30
33-028-24-21-0004 45410- 7020 Lakeshore Dr 100.70
Total $724.60
2. The above special assessments are to be spread over one
year at no interest.
3. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
certify a copy of-this resolution to the County Auditor
of Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota
this 9th day of September, 1991.
Martin J. Kirsch Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
~C
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No.2$5
Agenda September 9, 1991
Issue Statement•
Purchase in excess of $5,000 for asphalt paths at the Rich Acres
Golf Course.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution in purchasing provides that
when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or
construction exceeds the amount of $5,000 authority to purchase
shall be submitted to the. City Council for consideration.
It is proposed that asphalt cart paths be constructed on the
front 9 of the Rich Acres Golf Course. This is necessary due to
the cart path washout and weed problems. The asphalt paths will
also be extended in problem areas and will give the course a more
professional look.
This purchase will include the asphalting of golf car paths on
the #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10 & #11 holes of the
regulation course and a wash area in the maintenance yard.
The following quotes have been received:
Plehal - $26,715 (includes grading & rock)
Bituminous Roadways - 516,520 + approximately $6,000 for
grading/rock
Barber Construction - $14,995 (includes grading & rock)
Recommended Motion:
Approve the purchase of the asphalting for golf car paths at a
cost of $14,995 from Barber Construction Company, Inc.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The golf car paths are much needed as existing rock paths
have an erosion problem. The aesthetics of the course will
be greatly improved.
2. The quality of work by the contractor is of a high quality.
3. There are sufficient funds in the Golf Course Enterprise Fund
to cover this expense.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could choose to continue existing conditions.
2. The Council could select another contractor. However, costs
of other contractors were investigated and are more costly.
~C-I
3. The Council could direct staff to look for alternatives, but
staff has researched the project and feels this is the best
choice for the City.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is scheduled for the September 9, 1991 regular City
Council meeting.
Respec ly submitted,
James Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 23-4
Agenda September 9, 1991
Issue Statement:
Adoption of a resolution authorizing the submittal of preliminary
Right-Of-Way Acquisition Loan Fund (RALF) loan application for
the purchase of property at 7644 Nicollet Avenue.
Background• .
The City Council has approved the official map which calls for
the upgrading of 77th Street between 135W and TH77. The
upgrading will necessitate the purchase of property. At present,
the timing of the construction of these improvements is
uncertain. However, people who. own and reside in these .homes
must continue to make decisions about their lives. In some
instances, these people must sell their home; but the pending
project may make it extremely difficult to sell. Buyers do not
want to purchase uncertainty. To meet this need, the
Metropolitan Council has established the Right-Of-Way Acquisition
Loan Fund (RALF). The fund is designed to permit cities to
purchase owner-occupied dwellings when continued ownership of the
property would be a hardship for the owner. The loan bears no
interest. A loan would be equal to the value of the real estate,
plus relocation benefits minus the salvage value of the houses.
The City would pay back the loan when funding for the 77th Street
project became available.
The process for securing a loan is generally as follows:
s After the owner of a property has listed their home for sale
for a period of at least 90 days, a preliminary application is
submitted to the Metropolitan Council. The attached resolution
is part of the preliminary application. (Because of the nature
of the hardship of this family, the Metropolitan Council and
MNDOT have agreed to initiate processing prior to the
expiration of the 90 day listing period with the property
continuing to be listed in the "for sale" market. The
property has been listed for approximately 45 days).
s The Metropolitan Council then reviews the preliminary
application.
e If the preliminary application is approved, negotiations for
the purchase of the property may commence and a loan agreement
with Metropolitan Council must be drafted.
Staff has been working with the owner of the property at 7644
Nicollet Avenue which appears to qualify for RALF. The property
has been listed with a realtor.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution which authorizes staff to proceed
with the filing of a preliminary RALF application.
5 ~ -~
Basis of Recommendation:
1. -The City Council has approved the official map for
upgrading 77th Street . "
2. The upgrading will require the purchase of the property.
3. The City has no funds currently available to purchase this
property.
4. The. Metropolitan Council operates RALF and has previously
approved the purchase of four properties under the program
and is now processing a fifth.
5. The owner of the subject property appears to have an
eligible hardship.
6. The City Council, during deliberations on the 77th Street
project, indicated they would assist property owners in
minimizing the difficulties this project imposed on them.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Refuse to authorize the application.
2. Delay action until a future date.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
While the RALF program provides assistance, it does not provide
immediate relief. Several months are required to complete the
process. Action to adopt the resolution on September 9 would
facilitate the processing.
y submitted,
James~~ Prosser
City ager
JDP:ds
~j -~.,
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LOAN APPLICATION
FOR ACQUISITION OF 77TH STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY;
7644 NICOLLET AVENUE
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has adopted an official map
for improvements to 77th Street; and
WHEREAS, the improvements to 77th Street necessitate the
purchase of real estate including the property at 7644 Nicollet
Avenue; and
WHEREAS, City funds are presently not available for purchase
of real estate; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council under Minnesota Statute
473.167, Subd. 1 a. administers the Right-Of-Way Acquisition Loan
Fund (RALF) to acquire properties so situated with owners who are
experiencing a hardship; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has indicated that RALF
monies would be made available for the purchase of "hardship
properties" along 77th Street; and
WHEREAS, the owner of this property may qualify for purchase
under the hardship provisions of RALF.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota, that the City Manager submit an
application to the Metropolitan Council under the RALF program
for purposes of initiating the process which may result in the
acquisition of the property at 7644 Nicollet Avenue.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 9th day of September, 1991.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 233
Agenda September 9, 1991
Issue Statement:
Adoption of a resolution declaring the official intent of the
City of Richfield to reimburse certain expenditures from the
proceeds of taxable or tax-exempt bonds to be issued'by the City.
Background:
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has issued proposed
regulations that regulate the proceeds of tax-exempt governmental
bonds used to reimburse the issuer for prior expenditures. The
rules apply to bonds issued after Sept. 7, 1991.
In general terms, the reimbursement rules provide that:
(i) a declaration of "official intent" by the City be made
not more than two years prior to the reimbursement of
expenditures from bond proceeds;
(ii) the reimbursement from bond proceeds must be made within.
a) one year after the expenditure or b) one year after the
project financed was "placed in service" whichever date
is later; and
(iii) "official intent" during the period from September 8, 1989
and September 7, 1991 can be shown by "objective" evidence
that the issuer intended at the time of the expenditure to
reimburse itself from bond proceeds.
The attached resolution will place the City in compliance with
the proposed rules if they are adopted prior to the expenditure
to be reimbursed. The resolution sets forth the following four
points:
- states a general intent to reimburse;
- designates the chief financial officer of the City as
the person to declare official intent with regard to
expenditures;
- sets up a system for recording expenditures and tracking
the one year period; and
- establishes objective evidence of the City's practice of
reimbursing expenditures.
Exhibit A which accompanies the resolution will specifically
describe the project(s) which is being considered for inclusion
in such a reimbursement process.
~R -~
In the past, the City has used this type of financing method to
pay for certain special assessment projects which were
accumulated over a period of two or three years, then bonded for.
The interim financing in-those cases comes from the City's
Permanent Improvement Revolving (PIR) Fund.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution declaring official intent of tax-
exempt bond proceeds.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Proposed federal IRS rules will, if adopted, affect the
ability. of cities such as Richfield, to sell tax-exempt bonds
to reimburse the City for work previously completed and paid
for through other temporary funding sources.
2. Adoption of this resolution will likely place the City in
compliance with the rules if adopted as now proposed.
3. Adoption of this resolution will allow the City to operate
within IRS rules when bonding for public improvements under
this method of temporary financing prior to a permanent
funding through a bond sale.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could opt not to adopt the resolution.
However, it would not place the City in a position of
compliance with the new IRS rules if they are adopted.
2. The City Council could modify the resolution proposed herein.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
If the City Council wishes to take action on this matter, it must
be done at the August 26 City Council meeting.
Respectfu y submitted,
James Prosser
City pager
JDP:ds
Attachment
~ ~-~
CITY OF ,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
DECLARING THE OFFICIAL INTENT OF THE CITY OF
TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN
EXPENDITURES FROM THE PROCEEDS OF TAXABLE OR
TAX-EXEMPT BONDS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CITY
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of ,
Minnesota (the "City") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01 The Internal Revenue Service has issued proposed new Tres. Reg.
~ 1.103-17 (the "Reimbursement Rules") .providing that proceeds of tax-exempt
bonds used to reimburse prior expenditures will not be deemed spent unless certain
requirements are met.
1.02 The City has incurred certain expenditures since September 8, 1989
and expects to incur certain additional expenditures, all of which may be financed
temporarily from sources other than taxable or tax-exempt bonds, and reimbursed
from the proceeds of a taxable or tax-exempt bond.
1.03 The new reimbursement rules will apply to bonds issued after
September 7, 1991.
1.04 The Reimbursement Rules require that the allocation of proceeds of
the bonds to be issued to reimburse any expenditures will be made not later than
the later of one year after the expenditure was paid or one year after the property
was placed in service.
1.05 The expenditures to be reimbursed must have a reasonably expected
economic life of at least one year, in that they are, or are to be incorporated in or
become a part of, a facility, are properly changeable to or may be capitalized as
part of the basis of the facility, and if the City were subject to federal income
taxation, would be depreciable over the facility's economic life.
1.06 Expenditures made between September 8, 1989 and September 7,
1991, may be reimbursed as described in Section 1.02 herein only if there is
objective evidence that, at the time the expenditures were paid, the City
reasonably expected to reimburse such expenditures with proceeds of a taxable or
tax exempt borrowing.
1.0? If any future expenditure to be reimbursed is not made within two
years of the date of this Resolution, this Resolution may be updated to the extent
such expenditure is still expected to be reimbursed with bond proceeds at a later
date.
1.08 Proceeds of the bonds issued to reimburse the expenditures described
in Exhibit A will be deemed spent only when (1) an allocation entry is made on the
~A-3
books or records of the City with respect to the bonds; (2) the entry specifically
identifies an actual expenditure to be reimbursed; and (3) the allocation is
effective to relieve the bond proceeds from restrictions on unspent proceeds under
applicable documents and state laws.
1.09 None of the proceeds of the bonds issued to reimburse the City for
expenditures will be used (i) to refund another tax-exempt governmental issue or
(ii) to create or increase the balance in a sinking fund or replace funds used for
such purpose, or (iii) to create or increase the balance in a reserve or replacement
fund or replace funds used for such purposes, or (iv) to reimburse an expenditure
originally paid with the proceeds of another tax-exempt bond obligation; unless (i)
such amounts are deposited in a bona fide debt service fund, or (ii) the original tax-
exempt issue was not reasonably expected to be used to finance the expenditure.
Section 2. Intent Declared.
2.01 The City reasonably expects to expend moneys after the date hereof
from the sources described in Exhibit A on a temporary basis to pay the
expenditures described in Exhibit A. The City reasonably expects to reimburse
itself for such expenditures from the proceeds of taxable or tax-exempt bonds, the
debt service for which is expected to be paid from the sources described in Exhibit
A.
2.02 The City also expended certain moneys between September 8, 1989
and the date hereof from the sources described in Exhibit A. At the time of those
expenditures, the City reasonably expected to reimburse the expenditures from the
proceeds of taxable or tax exempt bonds, the debt service for which is expected to
be paid from the sources described in Exhibit A. Objective evidence of the City's
reasonable expectations regarding such reimbursement is summarized in Exhibit B.
2.03 The City Administrator is authorized to designate appropriate
additions to Exhibit A in circumstances where time is of the essence, and any such
designation shall be reported to the City Council at the earliest practicable date
and shall be filed with the official books and records of the City at the times and in
the manner provided in Section 2.04.
2.04 This resolution shall be maintained as part of the books and records
of the City at City Hall, and shall be continuously available during normal business
hours of the City on every business day of the period beginning not more than 10
days after adoption of this resolution and ending on the last date of issue of any
bonds issued to reimburse expenditures described in Exhibit A.
2.05. This Resolution is an expression of the reasonable expectations of the
City based on the facts and circumstances known to the City as of the date hereof.
The anticipated reimbursements set forth at Exhibit A are consistent with the
City's budgetary and financial circumstances. No sources other than those
described at Exhibit A are expected to be allocated to such expenditures on a long
term basis pursuant ~ to the City's budget. The City has not made any allocation,
budget, or restriction of moneys or adopted any requirement or policy to reimburse
a fund, the primary purpose of which is to prevent moneys from being deemed to be
available to pay an expenditure the City intends to reimburse with proceeds of a
borrowing. .
2
5A-~
2.06 This Resolution is intended to constitute official intent for purposes
of proposed Tres. Reg. ~ 1.103-17 and any successor law, regulation or ruling. This
resolution shall be modified to the extent required or permitted by Tres. Reg.
~ 1.103-17 as finally adopted, or any successor law, regulation or ruling.
Approved by the City Council of the City of this
_ day of , 1991.
Attest:
Mayor
City
3
~~-5
EX~IIBIT A
TO OFFICIAL INTENT RESOLUTION
ADOPTED ,= 1991
Expected
Description of Estimated Size, Temporary
Property or Quantity Financing
Project or Cost Source
Expected
Source to
pay Bond
Debt Service
4