Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-11-08 - Council AgendaAgenda Corcoran City Council November 8, 2012 - 7:00 PM 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Approval 4. Open Forum 5. Presentations 6. Planning Business - None 7. Engineering / Wenck a. Bakke Grading Permit* b. Discussions with Medina on Hackamore 8. Public Hearing- Certifying Delinquent Fees to Hennepin County* 9. Consent Agenda a. Draft Minutes of October 25, 2012 Council Meeting* 10. Staff Reports / Memos /Commissions a. Range User Agreement* b. Traffic and Noise Concerns* 11. Unfinished Business a. Sewer and Water Project i. Verbal Update ii. Pay Request #3 b. PW Facility c. Trail Haven Rd Paving Project* d. Bond Rating e. Bond Sale f. Hazardous Building Update g. 2013 Draft Budget Discussion h. Hennepin Youth Sports Grants Update i. Performance Review Process for Police Chief and Administrator -Next Steps 12. New Business a. Discuss Idea for Loretto and Hamel Fire Departments Collaborative Study Implementation 13. Claims as Presented * a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500) b. Building Inspections Claims c. All Other Claims As Presented 14. Closed Meeting a. To consider sewer and water easement negotiations 15. Unscheduled Items 16. Review of Upcoming Council Meeting Agenda 17. Adjournment *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. Administrator's City Council Meeting Agenda Memo November 8, 2012 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Approval 4. Open Forum 5. Presentations 6. Planning Business -None 7. Engineering / Wenck a. Bakke Grading Permit. Grading permits are normally handled as an administrative matter. In this case, we have a long standing and running complaint from neighboring property owner about the fill being brought in to the Bakke property and other issues. The city engineer has been involved in monitoring the fill and its impact on drainage. We will most likely get at least one concerned neighbor at the council meeting. The memo from the city engineer dated October 26th provides staff recommendations on conditions that Mr. Bakke should meet. Council is asked to approve the permit with the conditions listed or add conditions you might see as proper. b. Discussion with Medina on Hackamore. The staffs of Medina and Corcoran (administrators, city engineers, planners, and PW superintendents) met on Monday, October 29th to discuss Hackamore between Co Rd 101 and Co Rd 116. They have a big residential development starting this coming spring that will impact the roadway. In addition to Medina's agenda, we added our concerns about Hackamore west of Co Rd 116 and the unpaved portion of the road. The city engineer will update the council on those discussions and possible actions to be taken. 8. Public Hearing. Delinquent Fee. This is the annual hearing to consider assessing unpaid fee to the tax rolls. All property owners have been notified of the hearing. No information received on citizens contesting the fees. 9. Consent Agenda a. Draft Minutes of October 25, 2012 Council Meeting 10. Staff Reports / Memos /Commissions a. Range User Agreement. See Report b. Noise Complaint. See report 11. Unfinished Business a. Sewer and Water Project. Staff will have a verbal update at the meeting. Also Pay Request #3. The city attorney is requesting a closed meeting to consider the final easement and assess negotiating strategy. b. PW Facility. There will be a construction meeting on November 9th with the architect and construction manager. This is after the bond sale. The intent is to proceed with the design phase based on the concept that the council has tentatively agreed to over the past two months. Work continues on exploring a joint project with Three Rivers Park District on the Trail Head Facility. The city attorney will update the council on his discussions with the attorney for Three Rivers on a draft agreement. Also, we can talk about how the additional property can be procured for the Trail Head. c. Trail Haven Paving Project. See memo from City Engineer. We have put together a draft of a newsletter which would be sent out to impacted residents in the project. Those residents are expected to respond by completing the questionnaire. Also in the packet is the letter 11 Administrator's City Council Meeting Agenda Memo November 8, 2012 appraisal from Bill Waytas and the original memo (with updates) from the city engineer. Staff is looking for direction on setting up the neighborhood meeting. d. Bond Rating. We have received a bond rating of A2. According to Paul Donna of Northland Securities this rating vs non - rating will save the city approximately $185,000 in total interest costs over the life of the debt. I have included in your packet a guide on the determinants used by Moody's to come up with the rating. Paul Donna is going to recommend acceptance and going public with the rating. To be included as part of the council agenda packet is the report on Corcoran from Moody's. The report was not ready by the time this agenda packet was out the door on Friday. I will email you the report on Monday, November 5th. Given that this is the first time Corcoran has ever been rated. I think this is a terrific rating and very pleased. Northland securities can answer questions you might have on the rating process and the terms at the council meeting. You can always email Paul Donna with questions. e. Bond Sale. The sale of the two bond issues is taking place the morning of November 8th Northland Securities is handling the sale. Representatives will be at the council meeting to advise the council on the sale. The council action will be to consider approving the sale f. Hazardous Building. This issue has previously been discussed by the council. See the memo on the time line of actions taken to date. It appears that the property owner's efforts to remove the building have stalled due to cost. The city attorney will be prepared to advise the council and staff on the next steps for the city to take control of the removal and assessing costs g. 2013 Budget. See my report. h. Hennepin Youth Sports Grant Update i. Joint cities and school district application. Although not official, the joint application was awarded $110,000. The request was for $325,000. At this time, no action is needed as there are other funding sources yet to come through. ii. City equipment grant. Again not official but we apparently were awarded $10,000 for the field mower. I advised the council that if we were given this amount, we would have to contribute $7,000 of our funds toward the purchase off of the state equipment bid list. The PW Superintendent and I would like to see if we can pay this amount from the 2012 Budget. We will have a recommendation at the meeting. Performance Review Process. The city attorney has collected from the city council members the rating forms. Council needs to determine the next steps in the process. The council did indicate that the mayor and one other council member could meet with the police chief and me and review the results. 12. New Business a. Loretto and Hamel Fire Department Collaborative Services Study. The council will recall that one year ago, this study was released. It made many recommendations on options and ways for the two fire departments to be more collaborative. It has been one year and nothing of substance has been accomplished. The fire chiefs, the police chiefs, and the administrators of Medina and Corcoran agreed earlier this year that the best way to move this process along is to have a facilitator on board that could "drive" the process. I have been thinking about this need and have come up with the idea of utilizing the skills of a retired city administrator (I have one in mind) who is very qualified to assist and is interested. If this is done, the first effort in the process is to have this facilitator work six months, three to 2I Administrator's City Council Meeting Agenda Memo November 8, 2012 five hours per month, at a cost of about $2,000. Medina is interested and the administrator is talking with his council about sharing half of this cost. I have included $1,000 in the budget. There is a chance of some grant money from the State Fire Marshall's office but that is tenuous at best. Corcoran can't move ahead with our plans to provide better fire services for the future until this Loretto /Hamel collaboration is settled. If it can't then we need to move ahead with putting our Request for Proposals (RFP) for fire services out on the street. 13. Claims as Presented * a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500) b. Building Inspections Claims c. All Other Claims As Presented 14. Unscheduled Items 15. Closed Meeting. You will be receiving a confidential memo from the city attorney next week. He asks that you hold a closed meeting to consider the easement negotiations for the final easement needed for the sewer and water project. 16. Review of Upcoming Council Meeting Agenda Council Calendar Planning Commission 11/1/12 12/6/12 1/4/13 2/7/13 3/7/13 4/4/13 Cossette Gmach Asleson Milbrandt Guenthner Cossette Parks and Trails Commission 10/16/12 11/20/12 12/18/12 1/15/13 2/19/13 3/19/13 Cossette Gmach Asleson Milbrandt Guenthner Cossette Ag•- Wenck TO: Dan Donahue, City Administrator FROM: Kent Torve, P.E. DATE: October 26, 2012 SUBJECT: Second Bakke Grading Permit Wenck Associates, Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Ctr. P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, MN 55359 -0249 (763) 479 -4200 Fax (763) 479 -4242 E -mail: wenckmp @wenck.com The resident (David Bakke) at 23805 County Road 10 has applied for a grading permit to complete topsoil restoration at an adjacent property on County Road 19. Recommendation It is recommended to authorize 500 CY (50 trucks) of topsoil be approved based on following conditions (Council may wish to edit or add conditions): 1. City should be notified 24 hours before hauling begins, 2. Installation of a rock construction entrance is necessary along CR 19, 3. Pay Fill /Grading permit fee of $300, 4. Deposit escrow of $750, 5. No hauling is allowed if dust could be windblown to the north resident (south wind), 6. Permitted hours of hauling are 8 am to 5 pm, Monday through Friday. No weekend hauling is allowed. Background The site has a prior approval of fill and grading that was administratively approved in February of 2012. The grading permit was applied for retroactively after a stop work order was issued due to sediment on County Road 19. A site visit was conducted where potential drainage and erosion were reviewed and no impacts to adjacent properties were apparent. The permit limit was placed at 4,000 cubic yards, to allow for the topsoil /sand mix from winter pond dredgings to be placed in a hobby /garden area. Staff was again called to the site in August of 2012 due to nuisance truck noise and the dry, summer hauling caused dust problems to the neighbor to the north. The site was again inspected and it was noticed the 4,000 CY was exceeded as a clay "pad" was being filled on the west edge of the lot. A small berm was also being constructed along County Road 19 and topsoil was being placed on the clay. A field decision was made to allow for the Contractor to finish hauling topsoil for the rest of the day, to allow for sufficient topsoil to cover the berm. The applicant is asking for additional topsoil to cover the pad to the west, and the aerial photo shows 6 inches of clay to be placed on a 150 by 200 foot area, which equals 555 cubic yards (about 50 trucks). The application is requesting 250 cubic yards (about 3 inches of topsoil on clay). Overall the request is reasonable from a grading /filling and site work viewpoint, however the adjacent resident concerns and sediment tracking on County Road 19 need to be addressed. Ag•- Wenck TO: Dan Donahue, City Administrator FROM: Kent Torve, P.E. DATE: February 2, 2012 SUBJECT: Bakke Grading Permit Wenck Associates, Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Ctr. P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, MN 55359 -0249 (763) 479 -4200 Fax (763) 479 -4242 E -mail: wenckmp @wenck.com A site visit was conducted today with landowner and hauling Contractor (Bollig) and resulted in the following observations and recommendation. Recommendation It is recommended to authorize 4,000 CY of fill to be placed under this permit according to the following summary and conditions. Fill • An approximate 2.5 acre site is the identified active area for fill and grading. • The quantity of 4,000 CY is equivalent to 2.0 acres at an average depth of 1.25 feet. • The two acres is split between sandy /loam/peat for a cropped area and clay for a future building site. • Approximately 1,000 CY has been placed on site. • An additional 3,000 CY is recommended for approval under this permit o Future permit applications will also need to be reviewed for grading, drainage and erosion control. Drainage • Drainage pattern (west to east) was reviewed with the owner and will not be modified under activities identified with this permit. Erosion Control • Fill areas are interior to the site and sediment runoff was not apparent and grass buffer exists downgradient of the active fill areas. • Owner remains responsible for any offsite sediment transport through tiles, ditches, etc. County Road 19 • A minimum of 50 -feet of rock construction entrance shall be installed and maintained. • Daily road cleaning of tracked material is required. Other Regulatory Agencies • Owner remains responsible for any and all requirements from other regulatory agencies such as the County, watershed (wetlands) and MPCA (erosion). CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763.420.2288 - Office 763.420.6056 - Fax Permit # GR 1X-U65 Related to Land Use Project # FILL /GRADING PERMIT APPLICATION The undersigned hereby applies for a permit to haul fill /grade in the City of Corcoran on (Date) Restoration must be completed in (days or months) (Date to be completed) (It is the applicants responsibility to call for an inspection) APPLICANT AND /OR COMPANY: /� j c 4- /3 IC td ADDRESS: - 3 $U � Cc R d 10 c_c ki S �3 ■fl PHONE NUMBER: 7 C3 Z� J� �`(3 LOCATION OF THE GRADING: Piro /R(1 92 2 Cad /7 PURPOSE OF THE GRADING: 110 17 3,00 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL TO BE GRADED: PROPOSED EROSION CONTROL: (IE: SILT FENCE) Gf'0,63 L✓ CVd c Jo e co cky ct.t Via. ; t r o b �- rcovee.cd L,.LTvr b lck-iL T CE./ u" ix ,o o4 %C ) INFORMATION FOR APPLICANT: Applicant shall submit plans indicating the existing and proposed elevations of the site as well as the source and disposal areas of borrow or fill and proposed haul route for fill or excavated materials. Accompanying the application shall be a fee for processing the permit as identified in the fee schedule. Any incomplete permit will not be processed until all information required has been submitted. In conjunction with the application fee there shall be a form of surety, as required by ordinance. Fee Under 300 Cubic Yards $ 35.00 No Surety Fee Over 300 Cubic Yards $300.00 $250 /Acre Surety Fee* *In the event that there are critical conditions or concerns with the area to be graded or reclaimed the City Engineer or other designated City Staff shall determined an amount to be secured to assure the completion of the project. In the event that there are unique circumstances to the site additional fees may be imposed to cover additional time negessary to process the permit. Applicant Signature s ► �t� Dated: %ok CGT I2 Application Reviewed & Approved by: (Authorized Representative) Dated Applicant has met resolution requirements ❑ N/A ❑ Yes ❑ No If NO explain: OFFICE USE ONLY - DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE Permit Fee Paid Surety Amount Deposit (Check # / Date) (Check # / Date) Date Deposit Returned (Signature below authorizes to release of any surety balance and meets City requirement) Sites Final Inspection By: (Authorized Representative) Dated 11CSBSIcityhall\City Hall Information\PERMITS1Grading Permits\GRADING -FILL APPLICATION.doc REV.3 /2012 § ) School Dist: ( Watershed Dist: 0 R,; co §§}) 0 t \ Zo)ci 2 | Q Q E ! / < \ it Parcel Area: 3 3m Metes & Bounds: Tax Data (Payable 2012) Market Value: k. ) )I CI. J ( k g z ; ® - � � ! : I City of Corcoran County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -61 November 8,2012 8a. Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE 2012 DELINQUENT RECYCLING FEES TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY AUDITOR FOR COLLECTION IN 2013 WHEREAS, the records of the City of Corcoran list certain properties as being delinquent; and WHEREAS, the property owners have been notified of the due date through a direct mailing; and WHEREAS, The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment with late charge, to the city treasurer, except that no late charge shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with late charge, to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. WHEREAS, City of Corcoran Ordinance No. 2012 -261 authorizes certification of such delinquent properties to the Hennepin County Auditor for collection along with an administrative fee. Levy # 18350 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Corcoran, City Council hereby directs the Hennepin County Auditor to place upon the tax rolls for taxes payable in 2013 the delinquent accounts which are listed in Exhibit "A" who have not resolved the fees by close of business on November 15, 2012, attached hereto. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota, does hereby find as follows: VOTING AYE ❑ Guenthner, Ken ❑ Asleson, Rich ❑ Cossette, Tom ❑ Gmach, George ❑ Milbrandt, Rosalyn VOTING NAY ❑ Guenthner, Ken ❑ Asleson, Rich ❑ Cossette, Tom ❑ Gmach, George ❑ Milbrandt, Rosalyn Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 8th day of November 2012. ATTEST: Jeanie Heinecke — City Clerk Kenneth Guenthner - Mayor Page 1 of 1 City Seal 8a. Bill Addressl Billing City Billing State Billing Zip PIN Service Name Sery Balance Pen Bal Balance 22322 COUNTY RD 30 ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -14 -0006 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 22410 COUNTY RD 30 ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -14 -0009 RECYCLING 10.00 43.00 22600 COUNTY RD 30 ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -13 -0016 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20101 COUNTY RD 50 CORCORAN MN 55340 26- 119 -23 -11 -0009 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20113 COUNTY RD 50 CORCORAN MN 55340 26- 119 -23 -12 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20137 COUNTY RD 50 CORCORAN MN 55340 26- 119 -23 -12 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20801 COUNTY RD 50 CORCORAN MN 55340 27- 119 -23 -11 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20925 COUNTY RD 50 CORCORAN MN 55340 22- 119 -23-43 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10721 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 05- 119 -23 -11 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10895 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 05- 119 -23 -11 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6294 BLUESTEM RD S CORCORAN MN 55340 34- 119 -23 -34 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9115 BRANDYWINE RD CORCORAN MN 55340 13- 119 -23 -12 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9237 BRANDYWINE RD CORCORAN MN 55340 13- 119 -23 -12 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 7120 BUCKSKIN TRL CORCORAN MN 55340 26- 119 -23 -42 -0017 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 8270 CAIN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -22 -0010 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10125 CAIN RD ROGERS MN 55374 03- 119 -23 -44 -0021 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10450 CAIN RD ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -32 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10580 CAIN RD ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -23 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 22112 CHAPARRAL CIR ROGERS MN 55374 04- 119 -23 -33 -0017 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9320 CHERRY LN CORCORAN MN 55340 12- 119 -23 -43 -0013 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9810 CHISHOLM TRL CORCORAN MN 55340 09- 119 -23 -13 -0011 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 7710 CORCORAN TRL W CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -33 -0013 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 7798 CORCORAN TRL W CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -33 -0022 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20123 HILLSIDE DR ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23-43 -0017 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20833 70TH AVE CORCORAN MN 55340 27- 119 -23 -44 -0023 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 21200 93RD AVE CORCORAN MN 55340 10- 119 -23-43 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 21280 93RD AVE CORCORAN MN 55340 10- 119 -23 -34 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 19928 ABILENE LN CORCORAN MN 55340 26- 119 - 23-41 -0009 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9785 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -14 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9820 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 09- 119 -23 -23 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9847 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -14 -0014 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10206 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 04- 119 -23 -33 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10290 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 04- 119 -23 -32 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 7915 CORCORAN TRL W CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -32 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 8055 CORCORAN TRL W CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -32 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 21875 COUNTRY HILLS DR ROGERS MN 55374 04- 119 -23 -13 -0006 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 21887 COUNTRY HILLS DR ROGERS MN 55374 04- 119 -23 -13 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 19615 COUNTRY RD ROGERS MN 55374 01- 119 -23 -24 -0017 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 19760 COUNTRY RD ROGERS MN 55374 01- 119 -23 -23 -0008 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 19860 COUNTRY RD ROGERS MN 55374 01- 119 -23 -23 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 19400 COUNTY RD 10 CORCORAN MN 55340 25- 119 -23 -13 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20045 COUNTY RD 10 CORCORAN MN 55340 26- 119 -23 -11 -0008 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20400 COUNTY RD 10 CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -42 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20439 COUNTY RD 10 CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -32 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20475 COUNTY RD 10 CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -23 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 7760 CORCORAN TRL E CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -33 -0010 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 8a. Bill Addressl Billing City Billing State Billing Zip PIN Service Name Sery Balance Pen Bal Balance 7800 CORCORAN TRL E CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -33 -0017 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 21719 COUNTY RD 10 ROGERS MN 55374 16- 119 -23-42 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 21723 COUNTY RD 10 ROGERS MN 55374 16- 119 -23 -42 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 22455 COUNTY RD 10 ROGERS MN 55374 17- 119 -23 -11 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 22945 COUNTY RD 10 ROGERS MN 55374 17- 119 -23 -22 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 23044 COUNTY RD 10 ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -33 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 23150 COUNTY RD 10 ROGERS MN 55374 07- 119 -23 -44 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 23190 COUNTY RD 10 ROGERS MN 55374 07- 119 -23-44 -0013 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 23525 COUNTY RD 10 LORETTO MN 55357 18- 119 -23 -21 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 23805 COUNTY RD 10 LORETTO MN 55357 18- 119 -23 -23 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 23890 COUNTY RD 10 LORETTO MN 55357 07- 119 -23 -33 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 7270 COUNTY RD 19 LORETTO MN 55357 30- 119 -23-42 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0e 9220 COUNTY RD 19 LORETTO MN 55357 18- 119 -23 -12 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 10185 COUNTY RD 19 LORETTO MN 55357 06- 119 -23 -34 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10435 COUNTY RD 19 ROGERS MN 55374 06- 119 -23 -31 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 20941 COUNTY RD 30 CORCORAN MN 55340 10- 119 -23 -42 -0009 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 21401 COUNTY RD 30 CORCORAN MN 55340 10- 119 -23 -32 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 21525 COUNTY RD 30 CORCORAN MN 55340 09- 119 -23-41 -0009 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 21200 COUNTY RD 50 CORCORAN MN 55340 22- 119 -23 -31 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 21400 COUNTY RD 50 CORCORAN MN 55340 22- 119 -23 -23 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 22415 COUNTY RD 50 CORCORAN MN 55340 29- 119 -23 -11 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 22613 COUNTY RD 50 CORCORAN MN 55340 29- 119 -23 -12 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 22966 COUNTY RD 50 CORCORAN MN 55340 20- 119 -23 -32 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6801 COUNTY RD 101 CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -11 -0009 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 6819 COUNTY RD 101 CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -11 -0010 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9435 COUNTY RD 101 CORCORAN MN 55340 12- 119 -23-44 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 10300 COUNTY RD 116 ROGERS MN 55374 01- 119 -23 -32 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10515 COUNTY RD 116 ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -14 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0e 10535 COUNTY RD 116 ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -14 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20205 COUNTY RD 117 ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -12 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 21405 COUNTY RD 117 ROGERS MN 55374 03- 119 -23 -22 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 21920 COUNTY RD 117 ROGERS MN 55374 04- 119 -23 -21 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 22015 COUNTY RD 117 ROGERS MN 55374 04- 119 -23 -21 -0006 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20080 DASSEL LN ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23-42 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 20400 DUFFNEY CIR ROGERS MN 55374 11- 119 -23 -31 -0006 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 7955 EAGLE RIDGE RD CORCORAN MN 55340 22- 119 -23 -42 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 6410 ELM ST CORCORAN MN 55340 35- 119 -23 -42 -0036 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6460 ELM ST CORCORAN MN 55340 35- 119 -23 -42 -0009 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6485 ELM ST CORCORAN MN 55340 35- 119 -23 -42 -0027 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9500 FOX VALLEY DR CORCORAN MN 55340 09- 119 -23-43 -0010 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 9536 FOX VALLEY DR CORCORAN MN 55340 09- 119 -23 -42 -0011 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 19204 GLEASON RD CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -14 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 19240 GLEASON RD CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -14 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6216 HACKAMORE CIR CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -34 -0010 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0e 6219 HACKAMORE CIR CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -34 -0011 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 19710 HACKAMORE RD CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -33 -0009 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 8a. Bill Addressl Billing City Billing State Billing Zip PIN Service Name Sery Balance Pen Bal Balance 20020 HACKAMORE RD CORCORAN MN 55340 35- 119 -23 -44 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 20240 HACKAMORE RD CORCORAN MN 55340 35- 119 -23-43 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 10332 HAGE DR ROGERS MN 55374 05- 119 -23 -31 -0006 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 10205 HEATHER LN ROGERS MN 55374 05- 119 -23 -33 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 10480 HEATHER LN ROGERS MN 55374 05- 119 -23 -32 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 10510 HIDDEN VALLEY DR ROGERS MN 55374 05- 119 -23 -24 -0008 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9940 HIGH BLUFF LN CORCORAN MN 55340 09- 119 -23 -12 -0010 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 19913 HILLSIDE DR ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -44 -0018 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 6300 HORSESHOE BEND DR CORCORAN MN 55340 32- 119 -23 -44 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 6329 HORSESHOE BEND DR CORCORAN MN 55340 32- 119 -23-41 -0012 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0e 6330 HORSESHOE BEND DR CORCORAN MN 55340 32- 119 -23 -41 -0008 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 6536 HUNTER LN CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -31 -0019 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0e 6260 HUNTER RD CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -34 -0014 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 19717 JACKIE LN ROGERS MN 55374 01- 119 -23 -22 -0021 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 19720 JACKIE LN ROGERS MN 55374 01- 119 -23 -22 -0011 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0' 19725 JACKIE LN ROGERS MN 55374 01- 119 -23 -22 -0020 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 19817 JACKIE LN CORCORAN MN 55374 01- 119 -23 -22 -0016 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6951 JUBERT LN CORCORAN MN 55340 29- 119 -23-43 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 19927 LARKIN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 26- 119 -23 -41 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20424 LARKIN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 26- 119 -23 -24 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 20525 LARKIN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 26- 119 -23 -32 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 23315 LARSEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 18- 119 -23-43 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 7940 MAPLE HILL RD CORCORAN MN 55340 24- 119 -23 -31 -0009 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10642 MAPLE LN ROGERS MN 55374 06- 119 -23 -13 -0020 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 21414 MEADOW LN CORCORAN MN 55340 10- 119 -23 -22 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 23140 MEADOWVIEW DR ROGERS MN 55374 06- 119 -23-41 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 20455 MEISTER RD CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -22 -0008 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20602 MEISTER RD CORCORAN MN 55340 14- 119 -23 -33 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0e 21617 NYSTROM LN CORCORAN MN 55340 28- 119 -23 -44 -0019 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 21101 OAKDALE DR ROGERS MN 55374 10- 119 -23 -24 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0e 21375 OAKDALE DR ROGERS MN 55374 10- 119 -23 -21 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 22660 OAKDALE DR ROGERS MN 55374 05- 119 -23 -13 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 6245 OLD SETTLERS RD CORCORAN MN 55340 35- 119 -23 -34 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 7121 OLD SETTLERS RD CORCORAN MN 55340 27- 119 -23-43 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 6820 OLDE STURBRIDGE DR CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -22 -0012 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6860 OLDE STURBRIDGE DR CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -22 -0014 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 6450 PIONEER TRL LORETTO MN 55357 32- 119 -23 -32 -0013 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6520 PIONEER TRL LORETTO MN 55357 32- 119 -23 -32 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.0e 23825 TESSMER RD LORETTO MN 55357 07- 119 -23 -21 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 8400 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 22- 119 -23 -21 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 8401 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 21- 119 -23 -11 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9035 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 16- 119 -23 -14 -0014 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 6310 ROLLING HILLS RD CORCORAN MN 55340 33- 119 -23 -33 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 6419 ROLLING HILLS RD CORCORAN MN 55340 32- 119 - 23-41 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 6440 ROLLING HILLS RD CORCORAN MN 55340 33- 119 -23 -32 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6504 ROLLING HILLS RD CORCORAN MN 55340 33- 119 -23 -32 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.01 8a. Bill Addressl Billing City Billing State Billing Zip PIN Service Name Sery Balance Pen Bal Balance 7310 ROLLING HILLS RD CORCORAN MN 55340 28- 119 -23 -22 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 7320 ROLLING HILLS RD CORCORAN MN 55340 28- 119 -23 -22 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9710 RUSH CREEK BLVD ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -24 -0008 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9733 RUSH CREEK BLVD ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -23 -0016 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9750 RUSH CREEK BLVD ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -23 -0008 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20610 RUSH MEADOW LN ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -22 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 20624 RUSH MEADOW LN ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -22 -0002 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9105 SCHUTTE LN CORCORAN MN 55340 13- 119 -23 -23 -0017 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 19100 SCHUTTE RD CORCORAN MN 55340 13- 119 -23 -14 -0010 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9009 SHANNON LN CORCORAN MN 55340 13- 119 -23 -14 -0012 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 22900 STREHLER RD CORCORAN MN 55340 17- 119 -23 -32 -0004 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 23212 STREHLER RD CORCORAN MN 55340 18- 119 -23-44 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 23785 STREHLER RD LORETTO MN 55357 19- 119 -23 -23 -0003 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 23817 STREHLER RD LORETTO MN 55357 19- 119 -23 -22 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 9837 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 09- 119 -23 -14 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 10035 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 10- 119 -23 -22 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6488 TRAIL LN CORCORAN MN 55340 35- 119 -23 -42 -0017 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6508 TRAIL LN CORCORAN MN 55340 35- 119 -23-42 -0019 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 22730 WAGON WHEEL LN CORCORAN MN 55357 32- 119 -23 -34 -0006 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 22836 WAGON WHEEL LN LORETTO MN 55357 32- 119 -23 -34 -0001 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6705 WILLOW DR CORCORAN MN 55340 33- 119 -23 -13 -0005 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 6715 WILLOW DR CORCORAN MN 55340 33- 119 -23 -13 -0007 RECYCLING 33.00 10.00 43.00 TOTAL DUE 5,280.00 1,600.00 6,880.00 City of Corcoran County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -62 Motion By: Seconded By: November 8, 2012 8b. A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE 2012 DELINQUENT DUST CONTROL FEES TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY AUDITOR FOR COLLECTION IN 2013 WHEREAS, the records of the City of Corcoran list certain properties as being delinquent; and WHEREAS, the property owners have been notified of the due date through a direct mailing; and WHEREAS, The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued, to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. The rate of interest that will apply will be 5.50% per annum. WHEREAS, City of Corcoran Ordinance No. 2012 -261 authorizes certification of such delinquent properties to the Hennepin County Auditor for collection along with an administrative fee. Levy # 18351. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Corcoran, City Council hereby directs the Hennepin County Auditor to place upon the tax rolls for taxes payable in 2013 the delinquent accounts which are listed in Exhibit "A" who have not resolved the fees by close of business on November 15, 2012, attached hereto. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota, does hereby find as follows: VOTING AYE ❑ Guenthner, Ken ❑ Asleson, Rich ❑ Cossette, Tom ❑ Gmach, George ❑ Milbrandt, Rosalyn VOTING NAY ❑ Guenthner, Ken ❑ Asleson, Rich ❑ Cossette, Tom ❑ Gmach, George ❑ Milbrandt, Rosalyn Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 8th day of November 2012. ATTEST: Jeanie Heinecke — City Clerk Kenneth Guenthner - Mayor Page 1 of 1 City Seal 8b. Bill Addressl Billing City Billing State Billing Zip PIN Service Name Sery Balance Pen Bal Balance 10720 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 04- 119 -23 -21 -0005 DUST CONTROL 118.00 6.49 124.45 8270 CAIN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -22 -0010 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.70 147.7C 10450 CAIN RD ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -32 -0004 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C 10580 CAIN RD ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -23 -0004 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.70 147.7C 7900 CORCORAN TRL E CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -32 -0009 DUST CONTROL 29.98 1.65 31.63 7710 CORCORAN TRL W CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -33 -0013 DUST CONTROL 59.95 3.30 63.25 7798 CORCORAN TRL W CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -33 -0022 DUST CONTROL 29.98 1.65 31.63 21536 HOMESTEAD TRL CORCORAN MN 55340 28- 119 -23 -41 -0007 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.70 147.7C 20833 70TH AVE CORCORAN MN 55340 27- 119 -23 -44 -0023 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C 9785 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -14 -0002 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C 9820 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 09- 119 -23 -23 -0007 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C 9847 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -14 -0014 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.70 147.7C 10206 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 04- 119 -23 -33 -0002 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.70 147.7C 10290 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 04- 119 -23 -32 -0003 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C 10515 BECHTOLD RD ROGERS MN 55374 05- 119 -23 -14 -0014 DUST CONTROL 118.0C 6.49 124.45 7915 CORCORAN TRL W CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -32 -0002 DUST CONTROL 29.98 1.65 31.63 8055 CORCORAN TRL W CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -32 -0004 DUST CONTROL 29.98 1.65 31.63 7760 CORCORAN TRL E CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -33 -0010 DUST CONTROL 59.95 3.30 63.25 7800 CORCORAN TRL E CORCORAN MN 55340 23- 119 -23 -33 -0017 DUST CONTROL 29.98 1.65 31.63 9500 FOX VALLEY DR CORCORAN MN 55340 09- 119 -23-43 -0010 DUST CONTROL 116.64 6.42 123.0E 9536 FOX VALLEY DR CORCORAN MN 55340 09- 119 -23 -42 -0011 DUST CONTROL 116.64 6.42 123.0E 9259 FOXLINE DR CORCORAN MN 55340 16- 119 -23 -11 -0016 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.71 147.7C 9800 GARDEN LN ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -13 -0006 DUST CONTROL 121.0C 6.6: 127.6E 9817 GARDEN LN ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -13 -0012 DUST CONTROL 121.00 6.6: 127.6E 9927 GARDEN LN ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -12 -0004 DUST CONTROL 121.0C 6.6: 127.6E 8715 GARRISON LN CORCORAN MN 55340 18- 119 -23-41 -0002 DUST CONTROL 117.42 6.4: 123.8E 19240 GLEASON RD CORCORAN MN 55340 36- 119 -23 -14 -0005 DUST CONTROL 210.25 11.5 221.8E 10205 HIGHLAND RIDGE RD. CORCORAN MN 55374 03- 119 -23 -44 -0012 DUST CONTROL 35.0C 1.9 36.93 21801 HORSESHOE TRL CORCORAN MN 55340 33- 119 -23 -42 -0006 DUST CONTROL 280.00 15.41 295.4C 23315 LARSEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 18- 119 -23 -43 -0007 DUST CONTROL 117.42 6.4: 123.82 10642 MAPLE LN ROGERS MN 55374 06- 119 -23 -13 -0020 DUST CONTROL 88.55 4.8 93.42 21414 MEADOW LN CORCORAN MN 55340 10- 119 -23 -22 -0004 DUST CONTROL 114.00 6.2 120.27 21617 NYSTROM LN CORCORAN MN 55340 28- 119 -23 -44 -0019 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.71 147.7C 7200 OLD SETTLERS RD CORCORAN MN 55340 27- 119 -23 -41 -0007 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.71 147.7C 8400 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 22- 119 -23 -21 -0002 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.71 147.7C 8401 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 21- 119 -23 -11 -0002 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.70 147.7C 8900 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 15- 119 -23 -32 -0001 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.71 147.7C 9035 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 16- 119 -23 -14 -0014 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.71 147.7C 9710 RUSH CREEK BLVD ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -24 -0008 DUST CONTROL 124.12 6.8 130.9E 9733 RUSH CREEK BLVD ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -23 -0016 DUST CONTROL 124.12 6.8 130.9E 9750 RUSH CREEK BLVD ROGERS MN 55374 08- 119 -23 -23 -0008 DUST CONTROL 124.12 6.8 130.9E 20610 RUSH MEADOW LN ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -22 -0003 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.71 147.7C 20624 RUSH MEADOW LN ROGERS MN 55374 02- 119 -23 -22 -0002 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.71 147.7C 19100 SCHUTTE RD CORCORAN MN 55340 13- 119 -23 -14 -0010 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.71 147.7C 23212 STREHLER RD CORCORAN MN 55340 18- 119 -23-44 -0007 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.71 147.7C 23651 STREHLER RD LORETTO MN 55357 19- 119 -23 -21 -0010 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.71 147.70 8b. Bill Addressl Billing City LORETTO Billing State Billing Zip PIN Service Name Sery Balance Pen Bal Balance 23750 STREHLER RD MN 55357 18- 119 -23 -33 -0001 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C 23785 STREHLER RD LORETTO MN 55357 19- 119 -23 -23 -0003 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C 23817 STREHLER RD LORETTO MN 55357 19- 119 -23 -22 -0001 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C 9837 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 09- 119 -23 -14 -0001 DUST CONTROL 114.0C 6.27 120.27 10035 TRAIL HAVEN RD CORCORAN MN 55340 10- 119 -23 -22 -0005 DUST CONTROL 114.0C 6.27 120.27 10800 TRAIL HAVEN RD ROGERS MN 55374 03- 119 -23 -22 -0005 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C 6705 WILLOW DR CORCORAN MN 55340 33- 119 -23 -13 -0005 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C 6715 WILLOW DR CORCORAN MN 55340 33- 119 -23 -13 -0007 DUST CONTROL 140.00 7.70 147.7C 6721 WILLOW DR CORCORAN MN 55340 33- 119 -23 -12 -0001 DUST CONTROL 140.0C 7.70 147.7C TOTAL DUE 6,725.15 369.8E 7,095.0: City of Corcoran County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -63 Motion By: Seconded By: November 08, 2012 8c. A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE 2012 DELINQUENT PROPERTY MAINTENANCE FEES TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY AUDITOR FOR COLLECTION IN 2013 WHEREAS, the records of the City of Corcoran list certain properties as being delinquent; and WHEREAS, the property owners have been notified of the due date through a direct mailing; and WHEREAS, The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued, to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. The rate of interest that will apply will be 6.75% per annum. WHEREAS, City of Corcoran Ordinance No. 2011 -261 authorizes certification of such delinquent properties to the Hennepin County Auditor for collection along with an administrative fee. Levy # 18352. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Corcoran, City Council hereby directs the Hennepin County Auditor to place upon the tax rolls for taxes payable in 2013 the delinquent accounts which are listed in Exhibit "A" who have not resolved the fees by close of business on November 15, 2012, attached hereto. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota, does hereby find as follows: VOTING AYE ❑ Guenthner, Ken ❑ Asleson, Rich ❑ Cossette, Tom ❑ Gmach, George ❑ Milbrandt, Rosalyn VOTING NAY ❑ Guenthner, Ken ❑ Asleson, Rich ❑ Cossette, Tom ❑ Gmach, George ❑ Milbrandt, Rosalyn Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 8th day of November 2012. ATTEST: Jeanie Heinecke — City Clerk Kenneth Guenthner - Mayor Page 1 of 1 City Seal Bill Addressl Billing City I Billing State' Billing Zip LPIN [.service Name I Sery Balance I Pen Bal NKUvLK 1 Y 55340 23- 119- 23- 33- 0013IMGMT Balance 7710 CORCORAN TRL W ICORCORAN IMN 1,550.01 104.61 1,654.61 8c. City of Corcoran City Council Meeting Minutes October 25, 2012 - 7:00 PM 9a. The Corcoran City Council met on October 25, 2012, at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were, Mayor Guenthner, Councilor Asleson, Councilor Cossette, Councilor Gmach, and Councilor Milbrandt. Also present were City Administrator Donahue, City Attorney Carson, City Engineer VanderTop, Director of Public Safety Gormley, and City Clerk Heinecke. Mayor Guenthner called the regular meeting to order at 7:00 pm. 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Approval MOTION: made by Milbrandt, seconded by Gmach to approve the agenda as presented with the following addition. 11a.i. Property Easement Voting Aye: Guenthner, Asleson, Cossette, Gmach, and Milbrandt. (Motion carried 5:0) 4. Open Forum -None 5. Presentations -None 6. Planning Business -None 7. Engineering / Wenck -None 8. Public Hearing -None 9. Consent Agenda a. Draft Minutes of October 11, 2012 Council Meeting MOTION: made by Cossette, seconded by Milbrandt to approve October 11, 2012 council meeting minutes as presented. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Asleson, Cossette, Gmach, and Milbrandt. (Motion carried 5:0) b. 2012 -60 Designating Deputy City Clerk MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Milbrandt to approve Resolution 2012 -60 "Appointing City Administrator Deputy Clerk" as presented. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Asleson, Cossette, Gmach, and Milbrandt. (Motion carried 5:0) 10. Staff Reports / Memos /Commissions a. Financial Performance Report received — no action taken b. Planning Project Update received — no action taken c. Code Enforcement Update received — no action taken d. Project Performance Report received — no action taken e. Metro Housing Update received — no action taken 11. Unfinished Business a. Sewer and Water Project, verbal update from Engineer VanderTop indicating the project is on schedule. i. City Attorney Carson requested the council to consider adding $3, 440.00 to the offer or the Schommer property at the request of the Metropolitan Council. MOTION: made by Asleson, seconded by Milbrandt to approve an additional $3,440 to settle the Schommer property easement. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Asleson, Cossette, Gmach, and Milbrandt. (Motion carried 5:0) City of Corcoran City Council Meeting Minutes October 25, 2012 - 7:00 PM 9a. b. PW Facility, verbal update by Administrator Donahue. Three Rivers Park District is interested in a trailhead on the Public Works site. Staff to continue discussions. c. 2013 Budget, Council Cossette presented a report on property tax collections. Council discussed and directed staff to address the property tax potential shortfall on the 2013 Budget document. d. Employee 2013 Wage and Benefits Package, Administrator Donahue verbal report of recommendations for 2013. Council discussed. MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Milbrandt to adjust the pay structure upward 2 %, and pick up 70% of the increased premium for health care. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Asleson, Cossette, Gmach, and Milbrandt. (Motion carried 5:0) e. Bond Sale Certificate Authorization MOTION: made by Asleson, seconded by Cossette to authorize Administrator Donahue to sign the bond sale certificates with updates as discussed. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Asleson, Cossette, Gmach, and Milbrandt. (Motion carried 5:0) 12. New Business a. Assessment Policy, verbal report by Engineer VanderTop. Council discussed. Staff directed to 1.) Identify areas that have not been addressed, 2.) review and update areas that have been addressed and use LMC template. 13. Claims as Presented a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500) MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Milbrandt to approve escrow claims as presented. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Asleson, Cossette, Gmach, and Milbrandt. (Motion carried 5:0) b. Building Inspections Claims MOTION: made by Milbrandt, seconded by Gmach to approve building inspection claims as presented. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Asleson, Cossette, Gmach, and Milbrandt. (Motion carried 5:0) c. All Other Claims As Presented MOTION: made by Milbrandt, seconded by Asleson to approve all other claims as presented. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Asleson, Cossette, Gmach, and Milbrandt. (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Milbrandt to adjourn. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Asleson, Cossette, Gmach, and Milbrandt. (Motion carried 5:0) Meeting adjourned at 8:47 STAFF REPORT / POLICE DEPARTMENT Agenda Item 10a. Council Meeting: November 8, 2012 Prepared By: Chief Sean Gormley Topic: Range User Agreement Action Required: Approve Agreement Usage Process Background- As part of the Range Upgrade Project, the department looked to improve the process of our neighboring law enforcement partners request to use the range. The process which has been in place for years is a phone call to request availability. Discussion- Add structure and a formal process to the request for Range Use by our neighboring law enforcement partners. The "Agency Agreement For Use Of Outdoor Firing Range" was a combined effort from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) legal department and Corcoran City Attorney. In addition, Exhibit A (Range Rules and Regulations) and Exhibit B (Firearms Course Safety Guidelines and Officer Agreement) will be provided. The proposed process — 1. Requesting Law Enforcement Agency completes the User Agreement a. Signed by that Agencies Mayor or who is authorized to engage in a contract 2. City of Corcoran Resolution approved as Consent Agenda item a. Most agreements will be on an annual schedule DNR Training Instructor is exempt from the User Agreement as the State of Minnesota indemnifies the City and MN State Statute mandates this usage. However, the City will still furnish the Exhibits A & B. Financial Impact- Public Safety will be recommending adding the $50 per day "user fee" to the City of Corcoran Fee Schedule 2013 amendment / update which is currently under review. DNR Training program will incur no user fee. Staff Report / Police Department — Page 2 Attachments — 1. Agency Agreement For Use Of Outdoor Firing Range 2. Exhibit A — Range Rules and Regulations 3. Exhibit B — Firearms Course Safety Guidelines and Officer Safety Agreement Recommendation- Approve the User Agreement application process "AGENCY" AGREEMENT FOR USE OF OUTDOOR FIRING RANGE THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of the day of , 20_, by and between the CITY OF CORCORAN ( "Corcoran "), a municipal corporation, and the , a contracting agency ( "Agency "). RECITALS WHEREAS, the City of Corcoran owns and operates an outdoor firing range located at 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, Minnesota WHEREAS, "Agency" wishes to use the firing range for training and/or other approved purposes; and WHEREAS, the City Corcoran has designated an employee as a Training Coordinator responsible for the scheduling of the outdoor range; and WHEREAS, the City Corcoran has promulgated certain rules and regulations concerning safety, hours of operation, and general use of the outdoor range; and WHEREAS, "Agency" seeks to use the outdoor training range at such times specified; WHEREAS, Corcoran desires to allow "Agency" to use the outdoor range in accordance with the Corcoran Police Department's range rules and regulations, which are attached as Exhibit A and made a part of this Agreement. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants, the City of Corcoran and "Agency" agrees as follows: 1. The City of Corcoran will allow "Agency" to use the outdoor firing range for training and other uses authorized by Corcoran. 2. Use of the outdoor firing range is subject to availability in the sole discretion of the Corcoran Police Department in collaboration with the assigned Training Coordinator. 3. "Agency" agrees to pay $50 per day to the City of Corcoran for the use of the outdoor range for the effective period of this Agreement. 4. "Agency" will at all times be under the direction, control, and supervision of authorized and qualified "Agency's" instructors. 5. All officers, employees and agents of said "Agency" shall strictly comply with all published rules and regulations of the Corcoran Police Department and with any order or directive of Corcoran's Firearms and Training Coordinator. 6. The Chief of Police and/or Corcoran's Firearms and Training Coordinator shall have full authority to close the facility and range at any time for any purpose. The Corcoran's Firearms and Training Coordinator shall have full authority to exclude any person from use of the facility for violation of any rules or regulations relating to safety. 7. "Agency" agrees to provide Corcoran with a list of all persons authorized to use the facilities as an officer, employee, or agent of the "Agency ". The lists are provided to Corcoran for informational purposes only and Corcoran shall have no obligation to screen or to otherwise evaluate the qualifications of the listed persons to use the outdoor range. Such screening procedures shall be the sole responsibility of the "Agency ". 8. "Agency" also agrees to provide all items for training including, but not limited to, ammunition, targets, weapons, etc. 9. "Agency" shall take any and all reasonable measures to assure that only persons specified on the authorization list shall be permitted to use the outdoor training range. 10. This Agreement shall be effective for use of the outdoor range by the "Agency" for the time period from through 11. Liability under this agreement shall be governed by the provisions of the Hennepin County Chief's of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact, as amended. The Agency using the firing range shall be the "Requesting Party" and Corcoran shall be the "Responding Party." The terms of the Mutual Aid Pact shall also control in regard to workers' compensation and damage to equipment. 12. The "Agency" shall be and shall have: A. Member of the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) and in good standing. B. Adopted a resolution approving the Joint and Cooperative Agreement for Use of Law Enforcement Personnel and Equipment in Hennepin County, from the Hennepin County Chief's of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact (Current version, July 2009). 13. Agency agrees that use of the outdoor range under the terms of this Agreement is only available to its employees and that before using the outdoor range all such individuals shall sign, without exception, the waiver form attached hereto as Exhibit B. 14. All notices required in this Agreement shall be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, addressed /or hand delivered as follows: To CORCORAN POLICE: Chief of Police Corcoran Police Department 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 To CONTRACTING AGENCY: -2- 15. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between Corcoran and Contracting Agency ( "Agency ") and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and agreements, either written or oral. 16. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument, signed by both Corcoran and the "Agency ". 17. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota and, in the event of litigation; venue will be in the County of Hennepin. 18. The undersigned expressly represents that he or she is authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contracting Agency ( "Agency ") and that he or she meets each of the requirements set forth in the Agreement, including but not limited to the insurance and worker's compensation requirements. 19. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and, when fully signed, such counterparts shall have the same effect as if signed in one document. 20. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon 20 days of written notice. Dated: Dated: "Agency" "Corcoran" CONTRACTING AGENCY CITY OF CORCORAN Authorized Signature Print Name and Title of Authorized Person Ken Guenthner, Its Mayor Jeanie Heinecke Its City Clerk Exhibit A Corcoran Police Dept. — Range Rules and Regulations This announcement is to be read before the start of each firearms classroom portion of the course and / or at the start of each days training program regardless if it has been read previously in a class or course. These rule WILL NOT BE VIOLATED and students risk removal or dismissal from the course for violation of theses standards. 1. Loaded Duty Weapons in the classroom MUST be secured or remain holstered at all times. 2. No live weapons will be handled at any time. 3. DO NOT handle a weapon ON RANGE until told to do so by the Firearms Instructor. 4. All weapons are to be handled only at the direction of the Firearms Instructor. 5. DO NOT HANDLE THE WEAPON OFF LINE AT ANY TIME unless by direction of the Firearms Instructor or Safety Officer. 6. Remediation — during all Drills Solve the problem, you are responsible for your weapon and its function. If you can not solve it raise your hand and work with the Firearms Instructor or Safety Officer — DO NOT STEP OFF LINE 7. ONLY Load / Unload or Reload your weapon system either on line or in the designated safety area. — No exceptions 8. IF the weapon system needs to be reloaded between drills do it ADMINSTRATIVELY — at the direction of the Firearms Instructor. 9. All weapons clearing will take place at the direction of Firearms Instructor in the designated clearing area. 10.All weapon system Clearing, Loading and Unloading will be conducted on the firing range only, under the direct supervision of the firearms instructor. 11.The Firearms Instructor may direct or change these orders as needed for operational or training safety. ACCIDENTAL DISCHARGES ARE NO ACCIDENT, THEY ARE NEGLIGENT DISCHARGES; YOU MUST KNOW THE STATUS OF YOUR WEAPON AT ALL TIMES. ONE ON RANGE NON - INTENTIONAL DISCHARGE IS GROUNDS FOR IMMEDIATE REMOVAL FROM THIS COURSE. 1 Exhibit B Firearms Course Safety Guidelines and Officer Agreement FIVE BASIC FIREARM SAFETY RULES - Treat all firearms as if they are loaded - Always - Never point the weapon at anything you don't intend to shoot. - Always point the weapon in a safe direction or down range. Finger off the trigger until ready to fire Be sure of your target and backdrop o Remember the "Laser Rule "; Treat the muzzle as if it is a cutting laser gun with the beam always on cutting what it crosses or touches. o All participants in this training course are Safety Officers'; If at any time or any reason a participant perceives or believes that a situation is hazardous or dangerous, they are to shout "Cease Fire" until everyone complies. Upon hearing the "cease fire" all participants and observers will immediately STOP all actions and remain in place keeping all weapons pointed down range or in a safe direction until receiving further instructions from the firearms instructor. o Unsafe or frivolous behavior will not be tolerated and is grounds for removal from the range. o If there is any activity that you feel uncomfortable with participating in for any reason, it is your responsibility to bring the issue to the firearms instructor. o If in doubt about anything, ask..... The only stupid question is one that is not asked and results in an accident or injury. o Injuries on a firing range can and do occur, they can include ricochets, bounce backs, hot brass and other hazards, be aware of all safety issues. o Report any and all injuries to the firearms instructor immediately. o It is the responsibility of the participants to disclose any existing health conditions or concerns to the firearms instructor prior to the beginning of the class. o Activities that may aggravate a health condition or chronic injury are to be avoided. o When offline during the training program, handguns will be on safe and in a locked holster. Rifles or long guns will be slung with safety "ON" and the muzzles down at all times. I have carefully read and understand the safety rules and regulations above. And will abide by these rules for the entire length of the training program. Printed Name: Signature: Firearms Instructor: Date: 1 STAFF REPORT / POLICE DEPARTMENT Agenda Item 10b. Council Meeting: November 8, 2012 Prepared By: Chief Sean Gormley Topic: Traffic & Noise Concern Action Required: Information Only Background- On July 26, 2012 - Corcoran Code Enforcement Official Mike Pritchard received an e- mail from Mr. Tony Barden — 7909 County Road 116. In addition, Public Safety was advised of the concern. On July 27, 2012 — Code Enforcement Pritchard and Lieutenant Hamilton responded to Mr. Tony Barden. Late August — Chief Gormley and Lieutenant Hamilton met with Mr. Barden and thought we had worked through this issue. On September 25, 2012 — Mr. Barden send an additional e -mail to Lieutenant Hamilton, which was promptly replied to on September 26. Unfortunately, our attempts to assist with this issue became unsatisfactory to Mr. Barden. On September 27, Mr. Barden sent Lieutenant Hamilton a non - favorable e- mail, with the request to not respond back to him. In addition, Mr. Barden sent Code Enforcement Official Pritchard with additional comments. On October 12, 2012 — Mr. Barden sent an additional e -mail to Code Enforcement Official Pritchard. On October 26, 2012 — Mr. Barden submitted to Corcoran Police Department a petition. Discussion- Corcoran Police Department is committed to safe travels on our roadways and a wonderful quality of life for our residents and businesses. 1. In 2011 Corcoran Police Department initiated over 1,800 traffic stops. 2. Year to date for 2012, Corcoran Police Department has initiated over 1,750 traffic stops. 3. County Road 116 is the most traveled section of roadway by out patrol officers. Staff Report / Police Department — Page 2 4. Tony Barden is the only resident on the submitted petition that that has expressed a noise or traffic concern to the police department. Corcoran Police Department will continue to enforce State of Minnesota Traffic Laws and City of Corcoran Ordinances. Financial Impact - N/A Attachments — 1. Submitted Petition 2. String of e -mails Recommendation- Information Only We the undersigned would like more done From the City of Corcoran and the Corcoran police department to enforce the Miailalli.and city laws on noise, to combat the ongoing and future traffic and noise problems on county road 116 between Larkin Ave. and the city hall to the north and Brockton Ave and one mile from town to the west from Jake braking, Compression braking, Loud thumping music, Loud altered exhaust cars and trucks, altered piped motorcycles, Speeding, Drag racing motorcycles and cars. _name address 0 g /M.' el q Cv.BCD //G /4A/ 2 y< 14 z a /2 1( 6;441 (//y A Si, 4 l�+tr.Q r cL WR Sc,he,k Fc7) 5 (jj- c) . I 7%.3T < ,,?j. 7 5/011- " ,tL i in sign �, it-6Z' gels- ; C1 PSY� �z tin r ZZ �/ i cs L Z4 ,z / Dated 10/11/ 2012 From: someguyhamel @yahoo.com [mailto:someguyhamel @ yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 7:43 PM To: general Subject: Noise I live at 7909 county road 116.1 was wondering what we can do about the noise on the highway. 1 Have built a berm landscaped and put quarter inch plexiglass on my windows to try to stop the highway noise. I Figure I've spent about 7000 dollars. It's the constant boom boom boom of music the motorcycles, the 4 wheel drive trucks and cars with altered exhaust. The semi and dump trucks jake braking or compression braking as they call it . I can't have my windows open at night to enjoy the quiet because of the constant highway noise. What I want to know is can we put a noise restriction in the city of corcoran. 1 know there are federal, state and city laws about excessive noise. What I'm asking from you can you get the police department to start enforcing it. I'm getting really tired of the harley davidsons leaving the stanchion in the middle of the night roaring down the street and the loud thumping music and the constant Jake breaking all day long. Please can you help it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Tony Barden. Sorry I wrote this on my phone That's why nothings punctuated that looks the way it is. Sent from Samsung Mobile From: Michael Pritchard <mpritchard @ci.corcoran.mn.us> To: "someguyhamel @yahoo.com" <someguyhamel @yahoo.com> Cc: Paula Steelman <psteelman @ci.corcoran.mn.us> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 8:54 AM Subject: RE: Noise Concern Hello Mr. Barden, First of all, I would like to thank you for making us aware of your concern. The City of Corcoran takes these concerns seriously and does in fact have a Noise Ordinance in place: Chapter 82: Nuisances; Part 4: Noise. This can be viewed in the Municipal Code anytime online at www.ci.corcoran.mn.us, or at City Hall: Monday - Friday 8a -4p. CITY OF CORCORAN MUNICIPAL CODE: http: / /www.ci.corcoran.mn.us /vertical /sites / %7BA13DB5FF- 43A9- 4A27- A5A0- 44E78D9C28BC %7D/uploads/2011 -12 -19 City Code Update.pdf I am forwarding your concern to our Police Department so they may make a plan of action to help mitigate this issue. (Paula, please see below.) Thank you, Mike Pritchard Code Enforcement From: John Hamilton <jhamilton @ci.corcoran.mn.us> To: "someguyhamel @yahoo.com" <someguyhamel@yahoo.com> Cc: Michael Pritchard <mpritchard @ci.corcoran.mn.us >; Sean Gormley <sgormley @ci.corcoran.mn.us >; Paula Steelman <psteelman @ci.corcoran.mn.us> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 10:46 AM Subject: FW: Noise Concern Mr. Barden, I will make our patrol officers aware of your noise concerns. Thank you and have a safe weekend. Lieutenant John Hamilton jhamilton @ci.corcoran.mn.us Corcoran Police Department Office (763) 420 -8966 ext. 7005 Desk (763) 400 -7005 From: Tony Barden [mailto:someguyhamel@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 11:46 AM To: Michael Pritchard Subject: Re: Noise Concern Dear Mr Pritchard, It has been almost a month now since i voiced my concern with the police dept. about the problems with the noise and the speeding on county road 116 and 10. 1 am disapointed at the results as i have yet to see ANY action taken whats so ever. I just witenessed a dumptruck from Hassen trucking almost hit a guy on a bicycle, gwad it was close. I promise you if someone gets hurt because of any of this i will be in court testefing on the victums behalf and will in volve the city of corcoran. The motorcycles and there altered exhaust drag racing from the lights all hours of the dqy and night and the BOOM BOOM BOOM music. What do your officers do all of the time? All they have to do is sit at the end of your driveway to cutch them. From: Tony Barden [mailto:someguyhamel @yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 4:19 PM To: John Hamilton Subject: Re: Noise Concern Dear Mr. Hamilton, Just off with the phone with Hennepin county DOT and was told that you and the city council can get in touch with Eric Drager and submit a request for noise law enforcement signage and that they will review it with the police department and the city's recommendation. I am getting close to my wits end and have even wrote the governor and our legislators. I also was told that the signage will not work if the city does not in force the law. I feel enough has not been done and have resorted to ear plugs. I still have the loud trucks, motorcycles and cars with altered exhaust and have yet to see any officer's pull anyone over for it. Come sit in my driveway and hand out tickets, is the city that rich where it does not need the extra revenue? You know its not going to get better only worse and a lot more complaints so why not nip it in the bud ? All i am asking you is to enforce the law that the state,county and city has on the books. I have read most of them and know what the laws are. I am to the point you will be very happy to here i am looking at moving but do not have many nice things to say about your Department and have expressed that in my emails to the state officials. This will be a huge expense and financial loss for me but might be worth my peace of mind. Thank you Tony Barden From: John Hamilton Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8:08 AM To: 'Tony Barden' Cc: Sean Gormley (sgormleyOci.corcoran.mn.us); Michael Pritchard Subject: RE: Noise Concern Thank you Mr. Barden. I must remind you that our officers have spent time with extra patrol and enforcement in the general area of Co 10 /Co 116 and Co50 /Co 10. The department also placed our message board in your area for an extended period of time. The Chief and I spent nearly 30 minutes with you at CPD to discuss this issue of noise and large trucks. Corcoran's Code Enforcement Official has reviewed your concerns. Our officers work very hard to ensure a wonderful "quality of life" for our citizens. We also work on our traffic issues to ensure safe passage. It is unfortunate that your home is extremely close to one of the most heavily traveled County Roads in Corcoran. There are many homes like yours with close proximity of a major collector road. We have only received your concerns along Co 116. Again, we have heard your concerns and respect your communications with other government agencies. I agree with you that County Road 116 will continue to move more vehicles each year, thus, I don't see the general noises which occur on such a busy road decreasing. I am sorry that you do not have many nice things to say about your Corcoran Police Department. Again, all members of the Corcoran Police Department do strive to provide excellent service. We also understand that there simply are times which Corcoran Police Department is unable to reach an outcome that is requested. No, I am not happy that you are looking at moving. However, should you, I wish you safe travels. Respectfully, John Lieutenant John Hamilton jhamilton@ci.corcoran.mn.us Corcoran Police Department Office (763) 420 -8966 Desk (763) 400 -7005 From: someguyhamel @yahoo.com [mailto:someguyhamel @yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 5:21 AM To: John Hamilton Subject: Re: FW: Noise Concern Mr Hamilton, I have asked for help and received attitudes and brush offs I personally think you guys are lazy. I look at how long it took you to get that 4 wheel drive situation on Co rd 10 under control now they roar by my house, it's like you're afraid to give out tickets I talk to quite a few people around here. I guess I'll just start getting a petition together and explain how unwilling the police department is to help the citizens of Corcoran. Again all I have asked you to do is inforce the law nothing more, that is my right as a citizen and a taxpayer just remember we pay your wages and you work for us and if I'm not mistaken it's your job to inforce the law. I drive around here all the time or spend time in my yard and I don't see your officers doing anything to stop or combat any of it. I expect some letter from you again making excuses why you won't take action against these vehicles. It's always easier to blame someone else take the easy way out than take action. If I could I know I would be pulling over and giving out 15 -20 tickets a day and more on the weekend. Again its being lazy. I have watched one of your officers, as the motorcycles were roaring down 116 and he just ignored the whole situation Straight pipes at all. Lazy. Enough said I'll do what I have to do. Please do not write me back as I care not to here more excuses. Thank you Sent from Samsung Mobile From: someguyhamel @yahoo.com [mailto:someguyhamel @yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 7:14 AM To: Michael Pritchard Subject: Noise Why do you have federal, state and city noise laws when the police department does not enforce them? The police are well aware of this but has been brought back to me that I am the only one complaining. What does that matter I am a tax payer and a residence of the city and should be treated as such. The motorcycles, trucks and cars with loud altered exhaust should be warned and or ticketed along with the boom boom boom music and the loud deep throated trucks along with the Jake breaking. 90% of the traffic is good but that 10% should be ticked or warned. I know this is going to be forwarded to the do nothing police department which I think is a waste of time as they are way to busy with other things than to try to eliminate a problem that will be getting worse in the upcoming years with the sewer and water, developing and more people and traffic. I just wish I knew the police were going to be this receptive before I spent thousands of dollars building a noise burn, planting trees and bushes and trying to sound proof my house. I want to say thanks for nothing I have to live here and put up with it not any of you people. Sent from Samsung Mobile From: someguyhamel @yahoo.com [mailto:someguyhamel @yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 10:29 AM To: Michael Pritchard Subject: RE: Noise Concern You know I am and some of my neighbors are getting really tired of the Jake breaking, compression braking or deep throating as I call it down here on 116 and 10. When are the city and police department going to do something about it. All you do is write emails and give lip service. I have never in my life seen such a lazy bunch of people. Its not you that has to put up with it so who cares. Do I need to get all of the neighbors together or hire an attorney? What will you respond to. Again its mostly during the day as that is when they do most of the hauling. We are tax payers and we should have rights as to some satisfaction in this matter. 75% of the trucks are hassen trucking that just pass through our city. When they remove there foot from the gas peddle it rumbles and vibrates our homes. Do they have more rights then the people that pay your wages. I would hope not but its like politics the people with the most money wins. I said this before if Mark Dayton was livng down here and complainted the issue would have already been resolved. If we could hold back paying our taxes we could get it resolved but we can't and all we can do is ask and kiss your ass and hope someone gets off there ass and does something. I am going to get a petition together and send copies to the city. But like I said to the police department what does it matter if one person complaints or a hundred its your job to do something not lie and say we will do something. What ever if you could not force me to pay taxes I would have everyone talked into withholding them tell we received action. It says on every police car to protect and serve. But that only applys if you feel its important enough. If we could we would do something about it. To bad police are not elected into office !for one would be pushing hard against there re- election. They have done very little to resolve this situation. Tony Barden Sent from Samsung Mobile From: John Hamilton Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 9:07 AM To: CPD Cc: Michael Pritchard Subject: FW: Noise Concern - Co 116 Hello CPD, Please continue to monitor and enforce any traffic issue on Co 116 and the entire community. The Chief and I appreciate your enforcement actions and your continued efforts. It is important to note, that while Corcoran Police Department strives to provide the highest quality of service, listen to concerns, work on solutions to these concerns and address quality of life issues, there are times that we simply cannot meet the unachievable expectation of every citizen. And our citizens do have their right to express their opinion - even at times when their opinion may not be based on fact. Again, thank you for all your efforts to work towards this citizens compliant. Respectfully, Lieutenant John Hamilton jhamilton @ci.corcoran.mn.us Corcoran Police Department Office (763) 420 -8966 Desk (763) 400 -7005 TO: FROM: DATE: Wenck SUBJECT: Dan Donahue, City Administrator Kent Torve, P.E., Heather Libby P.E. November 1, 2012 Sewer and Water Pay Request No. 3 Wenck Associates, Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Ctr. P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, MN 55359 -0249 (763) 479 -4200 Fax (763) 479 -4242 E -mail: wenckmp @wenck.com Council Action Requested Approve Pay Request No. 3 in the amount of $ 215,279.12. Project Update The sewer and water pipe and valve installation is complete with • Complete the water pressure testing • Complete the sewer testing • Install heavy duty erosion control to the Gueher property • Add erosion control blanket along County Road 10 • Install the water meter and electrical service, and • Seeding and final grading. the following items remaining: near the golf course Next Steps Overall the project will come in close to the original bid price. A change order will be created to reconcile final quantities in November. PAYMENT REQUEST FORM OWNER: City of Corcoran PROJECT: Corcoran Sewer and Water Utility Project CONTRACTOR: SR Weidema: 17600 113th Ave N, Maple Grove, MN 55369 PAY ESTIMATE NO. 3 Original Contract Amount (with Maple Grove water) $ 1,173,054.30 Contract Changes approved to Date (Change Order 1 & 2) $ 2,642.52 Revised Contract Price $ 1,175,696.82 Work Completed to Date (see attached) $ 1,098,100.81 Retainage to Date, 5% $ 54,905.04 Work Completed to Date less Retainage to Date $ 1,043,195.77 Total Amount Previously Certified $ 827,916.65 Payment Request This Estimate $ 215,279.12 CERTIFICATE OF CONTRACTOR I declare under penalty of perjury that this account, claim, or demand is just and correct and that no part of it has been paid. I hereby certify that the work and the materials supplied to date, as shown on the request for payment, represents the actual value of accomplishment under the terms of the contract dated July 17, 2012 between CITY OF CORCORAN (OWNER) and SR WEIDEMA (CONTRACTOR) and all authorized changes thereto. CONTRACTOR Date Title Approval: WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. CITY OF CORCORAN Date Kenton C. Torve, P.E. 00530 -1 Payment Request Form H: \City Hall Information \CITY GOVERNMENT\ Council, Commissions & Committees \Council Information \Council Agendas \2012 \11.08.12 \1 la.ii. pay request 3.doc Date Wenck TO: Dan Donahue FROM: Vince Vander Top DATE: November 2, 2012 SUBJECT: Trail Haven, Foxline, and Treeline Newsletter Wenck Associates, Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Ctr. P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, MN 55359 -0249 (763) 479 -4200 Fax (763) 479 -4242 E -mail: wenckmp @wenck.com The City Council requested a draft neighborhood newsletter at the September 27 meeting. This newsletter is attached. We ask that the Council review this letter, discuss objectives for an additional neighborhood meeting, and set a date for the meeting. We also received a draft "Real Estate Consulting Letter" from Nagell Appraisal. I have asked Bill to update and clarify the benefit range for Foxline /Treeline properties. I expect the updated letter today or Monday. The current draft letter is attached and referenced in the neighborhood newsletter. November 2012 City of Corcoran, 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 Web: www.ci.corcoran.mn.us Email: qeneral@ci.corcoran.mn.us Phone: 763 - 420 -2288 Trail Haven Road Improvement Information Dear Resident, The Corcoran City Council asked that an informational letter be prepared for residents of Trail Haven Road, Treeline Drive, and Fox line Drive who may be affected by a potential road improvement project. This letter briefly summarizes the project's history, presents cost estimates and assessment options, and announces opportunities to ask questions and provide opinions regarding the project. Project History The Trail Haven Road Improvement Project proposes widening and paving this collector road between County Road 10 and County Road 30. The project also proposes similar improvements for two neighboring roads, Treeline Drive, and Foxline Drive. Cost estimates and potential assessment values for improving all three roads were presented to residents at an August 22, 2012, neighborhood meeting at City Hall. About one -third of impacted properties were represented at that meeting. Because some residents attending the meeting considered the proposed assessment values too high, the City Council asked its engineering staff to recalculate the project costs and assessments to improve Trail Haven Road only. The recalculated values were presented at the September 27, 2012, Council meeting. The estimated costs and assessed values for both potential projects are presented on the next page. Trail Haven Road improvements are eligible for municipal state aid funding (MSA). The MSA funds and potential assessment revenues for this improvement would exceed the cost of the project, with the balance NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Time, Date Corcoran City Hall 8200 County Road 116 This meeting will provide an opportunity for residents to ask questions and express opinions about the potential improvements to Trail Haven Road, Treeline Drive, and Foxline Drive. If you cannot attend the meeting but would like to provide input, please fill out the survey on the second page of this letter and return it to City Hall by DATE. You may also call City Hall at 420 -2288 or City Engineer Vince Vander Top at 763 - 479 -5124. to be directed to improving other roads in Corcoran that are not eligible for state aid. Benefitting properties on other roads would also be assessed. If the cost of the Trail Haven project is prohibitive to its residents, the City Council will consider using state aid to improve other eligible roads while seeking alternative solutions for Trail Haven. Please take advantage of the opportunities to ask questions and share your opinions about these potential improvements. (See box above.) Your feedback is important in guiding the Council's decisions. Trail Haven Road Improvement Information, November 2012 Trail Haven Road Improvement Survey All residents are invited to attend the neighborhood meeting on DATE to ask questions and share opinions about these potential road improvements. If you prefer, you can also provide input by returning this page to City Hall by DATE. Please include your address. If you have questions, call City Hall at 420 -2288. Project Options and Cost Estimates The City has not yet authorized the design or construction of road improvements, but it seeks feedback about the two potential projects described in this letter and summarized below. Potential improvement project Trail Haven, Foxline, and Treeline Trail Haven Only Estimated cost $1,105,000 $695,000 Potential assessment per lot equivalent $12,750 on Trail Haven $15,950 on Foxline or Treeline $12,750 on Trail Haven $3,200 on Foxline or Treeline Approximate annual cost per lot equivalent on Trail Haven (over 20 years at 5.5% interest) $1,338.75 (yr. 1) to $672.56 (yr. 20) $1,338.75 (yr. 1) to $672.56 (yr. 20) Approximate annual cost per lot equivalent on Foxline or Treeline (over 20 years at 5.5% interest) $1,674.75 (yr. 1 to $841.36 (yr. 20 (y 1) (y 20) $336 (yr. 1 to $168.80 r. 20 (y 1) (y ) Appraised Benefit The City hired William Waytas, a professional real estate appraiser with Nagell Appraisal and Consulting, to give a professional opinion regarding sustainable assessments for properties along Foxline /Treeline and Trail Haven. Mr. Waytas' report identifies an average benefit and therefore sustainable assessment could be set around $15,000 to $20,000 per property. Survey Address: ❑ I favor improving Trail Haven, Foxline, and Treeline at the assessed values in the table above. ❑ I favor improving only Trail Haven at the assessed values in the table above. ❑ I favor improving Trail Haven, Foxline, and Treeline at an assessed value of $ per lot equivalent.* ❑ 1 favor improving only Trail Haven at an assessed value of $ per lot equivalent. * ❑ 1 favor no improvements ❑ Other (please explain): Questions, comments, suggestions: * An assessment value too far below the figures in the table may not be feasible. Real Estate Consulting Letter " ON an Old . Thomas cemetery s3N Ave N coraoran Property: Paved Road Project on Trail Haven (Red) & Side Street Access for Foxline & Treeline (Blue) Corcoran, MN 55340 Client: City of Corcoran Attn: Vincent Vander Top, P.E. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center Corcoran, MN 55359 Effective Date: October 10, 2012 Prepared By: William R. Waytas, Appraiser NAGELL APPRAISAL & CONSULTING 7515 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55426 Telephone: (952) 544 -8966 Fax No. (952) 544 -8969 File #G1210001 NAGELL APPRAISAL & CONSULTING 7515 Wayzata Blvd. #115 Minneapolis, MN 55426 Established in 1968 Minneapolis: 952 - 544 -8966 St. Paul: 651 - 209 -6159 Central Fax: 952 - 544 -8969 City of Corcoran Attn: Vincent Vander Top, P.E. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center P.O. Box 249 Corcoran, MN 55359 Dear Mr. Vander Top: October 27, 2012 Project: The City of Corcoran is proposing to make street improvements (in 2013) to Trail Haven Road from a gravel road to a paved street within the city (see attached map for the location). The city has been paving gravel roads throughout the city over the years. Assignment: Per your request, you desire to know the benefit (if any) as it impacts properties along Trail Haven and if there is any benefit to Foxline and Treeline Road which use Trail Haven for side street access. Scope: In accordance with your request, a drive -by viewing of the properties has been made along with some general market comments regarding benefit (if any) for the proposed project above as it relates to the subject market. As discussed, no specific sales data has been collected for this assignment. The general market comments herein are based on past appraisals, experience, and market information. The project area was viewed on October 25, 2012 by William R. Waytas, Certified General Appraiser, MN. The existing road condition and project information was provided by Vince Vander Top of Wenck Associates. Area Description: The City of Corcoran is a western outlying suburban community located approximately 35 minutes northwest of Downtown Minneapolis. Access is considered average to good, as many county roads run through the area. The commercial portion of Corcoran is located at the intersection of County Road 10 & 116. The remainder of the city is mostly made up of rural residential, large estate -sized residential and newer scattered single - family residential developments. Nearby /competing communities include the western Hennepin County Area; Medina, Hanover, Greenfield, Hassan, Independence, Dayton, etc. Subject Properties: The properties that border Trail Haven Road along with side streets (Foxline and Treeline) primarily consist of detached single family residential homes on small acreage parcels. Also located in the project area are some larger acreage parcels and farm properties. Most of the residential dwellings are average quality with 1- story, 1 '/2 -story or two -story design and appear to have been built within in the past 100 years. It is interesting to note although the subject properties are on gravel roads about half of the property owners have a paved or concrete driveways. Nagel) Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com 2 Letter — continued Existing Road Situation and Condition: Physical Condition of the Road: The existing road is currently gravel. The road requires continuous and costly maintenance as the subgrade appears to be susceptible to moisture. The existing road appears to have exceeded the original expected life and is not up to current road standards. Functional Design of the Road: The existing gravel design is dated and the base material no longer appears to provide adequate support for the road bed. Drainage appears to be compromised as a result of the design. Gravel roads do not meet the expectations of typical market participants in this suburban market for re- development, resale value, and /or updating the current uses. Overall, the existing street improvements are in fair to poor condition, look dated and reflect likewise on the adjoining and side street properties. Gravel roads create significantly more dust and require users of the road to wash their cars more. Proposed Road Improvements: The city is proposing to upgrade Trail Haven Road from gravel to a paved surface road. It will be a 9 ton road between County Road 30 to County Road 10 which is just over 1 mile. It will be 24' wide plus 4' gravel shoulders on each side. The foundation and base of the road will also be improved to current standards to facilitate better drainage, keep the road base dry and provide safer road conditions. Reportedly, the new street improvements are to last for over 20+ years. Discussion of Market Benefit: Listed below are the factors that will be taken into consideration concerning the potential benefit to the properties. Descri •tion Existing Improvements Change 1) Road Surface Gravel Paved 2) Base Condition Poor New 3) Curb N/A N/A 4) Drainage Poor Adequate 5) Storm Sewer Surface Surface 6) City water N/A N/A 7) City sewer N/A N/A 8) Sidewalk N/A N/A 9) Street Lights N/A N/A 10) Functional Design of Road Dated New 11) Traffic Management Fair Average 12) Pedestrian Use (biking, walking etc.) Fair Good 13) Median N/A N/A 14) Road Proximity to properties N/A N/A 15) Dust Yes Nil 16) Visual Impact on Properties Poor New 17) Side Street Users (Foxline, Treeline) Gravel Paved 3 Nagell Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com Letter — continued Based on the preceding grid, the subject properties will improve in 9 of the 17 categories. Market participants generally recognize that streets like many home components (heating, siding, driveways, patios, etc.) need replacing when nearing the end of their economic life. A typical buyer in the subject market commonly prefers a paved road surface road versus a gravel road. In addition to visual benefit, new paved street improvements provide better and safer use for pedestrians (biking, walking, stroller, rollerblading, etc.) and drivers, also, less dust and need for washing the car). The new street will enhance potential for re- development and /or updating the current properties. Properties that directly abut and side streets that use and /or could use (future development) Trail Haven will benefit. Based on past appraisals and market information, it is not uncommon for properties like those in the competing markets like the subject to realize an increase in price for new street improvements. For most properties (depending on site size, building quality, type of use and overall appeal) the average benefit for a buildable /existing lot with frontage on Trail Haven could be around $15,000 to $20,000 per property. For existing side street users along Foxline, Treeline and potential future lots on side streets off Trail Haven the average benefit for a buildable /existing lot could be around $3,000 to $4,000 per property. Significantly oversized or undersized properties with respect to land and /or building improvements could be outside this range. Conclusion: The benefit amount above should not be construed or relied on as being an appraisal, but are observations based on the overall market. If an appraisal were made on the individual properties, the actual benefit amount could vary and /or differ. If you have additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, William R. Waytas, SRA, CRP Certified General MN 4000813 Enclosures: Location Map, Aerial Map, Project Map, Subject Photos, Qualifications, Engagement Letter www.callnagell.com Nagel) Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com 4 5 LOCATION MAP Trail Haven is in Red (To be Paved), Foxline and Treeline are in Blue (Side Street Users) Sul Bechtold Rd m o Old St Thomas Cemetery 93rd Ave N Meister Rd 0 Nagell Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com PROJECT MAP Far left blue vertical line is Foxline Drive (existing gravel surface). Far right red vertical line is Trail Haven Road (to be paved). Blue horizontal line is Treeline Drive (existing gravel surface). Nagel) Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com 6 7 SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Looking North on Trail Haven Looking North on Trail Haven NagelI Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS House on Trail Haven House on Trail Haven NagelI Appraisal & Consulting 1 952- 544 -8966 1 www.callnagell.com 8 9 SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Looking North on Trail Haven Looking North on Trail Haven NagelI Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Far north end of Trail Haven (not included in project, Grove Nursery at right) Looking South on Trail Haven NagelI Appraisal & Consulting 1 952- 544 -8966 1 www.callnagell.com 10 11 SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Looking South on Trail Haven Looking West on Treeline (side street access to Trail Haven) NagelI Appraisal & Consulting 1 952- 544 -8966 1 www.callnagell.com SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS House on Treeline Looking South on Foxline NagelI Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com 12 13 SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Looking North on Foxline (side street access to Trail Haven) House on Foxline NagelI Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Looking North on Foxline Looking South on Foxline NagelI Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com 14 15 SUBJECT PHOTOGRAPHS House on Foxline Looking East on Treeline NagelI Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com CURRICULUM VITAE Appraisal Experience Presently and since 1985, William R. Waytas has been employed as a full time real estate appraiser. Currently a partner and President of the Nagell Appraisal & Consulting, an independent appraisal firm (13 employees) who annually prepare 1,500 +/- appraisal reports of all types. Mr. Waytas was employed with Iver C. Johnson & Company, Ltd., Phoenix, AZ from 1985 to 1987. Properties appraised: Commercial - low and high- density multi - family, retail, office, industrial, restaurant, church, strip -mall, fast -food, convenience stores, auto - service and repair, hotel, hotel water park, bed & breakfast, senior /assisted living, treatment centers, schools /colleges, cinema, marina, resorts, campground, lumberyards, numerous special use properties (including historical), and subdivision analysis. Residential — single - family residences, hobby farms, lakeshore, condominiums, townhouses, OREO, historical and land. Eminent Domain — extensive partial and total acquisition appraisal services provided to numerous governmental agencies and private owners. Special Assessment — numerous street improvement and utilities projects for both governmental and private owners. Review — residential, commercial and land development. Clients - served include banks, savings and loan associations, trust companies, corporations, governmental bodies, schools /colleges (University of Minnesota, Metro State University, St. Mary's College), relocation companies, attorneys, REO companies, accountants and private individuals. Area of Service - most appraisal experience is in the greater /metro area (typically within 2 hours of downtown metro) of Minneapolis /St. Paul, MN. Numerous assignments throughout Minnesota. Professional Membership, Associations & Affiliations License: Certified General Real Property Appraiser, MN License #4000813. Appraisal Institute: SRA, Senior Residential Appraiser Designation, General Associate Member of Appraisal Institute Employee Relocation Council: CRP Certified Relocation Professional Designation. International Right -Of -Way Association: Member HUD /FHA: On Lender Selection Roster and Review Appraiser DNR: Approved appraiser for Department of Natural Resources Testimony -- Court, deposition, commission, arbitration & administrative testimony given. Mediator Court appointed in Wright County. Committees President of Metro /Minnesota Chapter, 2002, Appraisal Institute. Chairman of Residential Admissions, Metro /MN Chapter, Al. Chairman Residential Candidate Guidance, Metro /Minnesota Chapter, Al. Elm Creek Watershed Commission, Medina representative 3 years. Park Commission, Medina, current Nagell Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 1 www.callnagell.com 16 Education Graduate of Bemidji State University, Minnesota. B.S. degree in Bus. Ad. During college, summer employment in building trades (residential and commercial). Graduate of Cecil Lawter Real Estate School. Past Arizona Real Estate License. General & Professional Practice Courses & Seminars Course 101 - Introduction to Appraising Real Property. Numerous Standards of Professional Practice Seminar. Fair Lending Seminar. Eminent Domain & Condemnation Appraising. Eminent Domain (An In -Depth Analysis) Property Tax Appeal Eminent Domain Business Practices and Ethics Scope of Work Construction Disturbances and Temporary Loss of Going Concern Uniform Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions (Yellow Book Seminar) Partial Interest Valuation Divided (Conservation Easements, Historic Preservation Easements, Life Estates, Subsurface Rights, Access Easements, Air Rights, Water Rights, Transferable Development Rights) Commercial /Industrial /Subdivision Courses & Seminars Capitalization Theory & Techniques Highest & Best Use Seminar General & Residential State Certification Review Seminar Subdivision Analysis Seminar. Narrative Report Writing Seminar (general) Advanced Income Capitalization Seminar Advanced Industrial Valuation Appraisal of Local Retail Properties Appraising Convenience Stores Analyzing Distressed Real Estate Evaluating Commercial Construction Appraising Distressed Commercial Real Estate Fundamentals of Separating Real Property, Personal Property, & Intangible Business Assets Residential Courses & Seminars Course 102 - Applied Residential Appraising Narrative Report Writing Seminar (residential) HUD Training session local office for FHA appraisals Familiar with HUD Handbook 4150.1 REV -1 & other material from local FHA office. Appraiser /Underwriter FHA Training Residential Property Construction and Inspection Numerous other continuing education seminars for state licensing & Al Appraising Waterfront and Lakeshore Property Youth Soccer and Basketball Coach Speaking Engagements Bankers Auditors Assessors Relocation (Panel Discussion) 17 www.callnagell.com NagelI Appraisal & Consulting 1 952- 544 -8966 1 www.callnagell.com NAGELL APPRAISAL & CONSULTING 7515 Wayzata Blvd 4116 Minneapolis, MN 55425 .Established in 1968 Minneapolis: 952- 544 - &965 St. Paul 651.295 -6159 Central Fax 952 - 544-8969 City Engineer of Corcoran Attu: Vincent Vander Top, P.E, at Wenck 1800 Pioneer Creek Center P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain. MN 55359 October 3, 2912 RE: Tw Igtl4r reports regard jog the Special Bengt! if arty foy a atredl irihorfvernt.m projext 1) Trail Haven ad front Counr% Read 90 to County Road 10 (new asphe It alreet, turraIlly gravel) 2) Fax Line and Tree Line Roads The sidle streak ber.enk ttaolh use TraiI Harven Road leraetesa). Comecon, MN Gear Viinrent: Thank you for yosir interest in obtaining services regarding the properties above_ Per our conversation, you indicated a preliminary opinion of market benefit if any to the adjoining properties in the above project_ Report Use, The report use is to assist the city for guidance regarding assessment determination. Value Type: This report is nal an appraisal, but rather provides a preliminary letter giving a general rang of market benefit If any to the general ranges of properties in the project. Property Description: Residential properties with varying acreage sizes along Trail Haven. Contact far access, NfA, Scope of Report: (1) Drive by viewing of the subject properties and view the n +ighborhoad. (2) Note the physical ander economic factors that could affect the propertes. () Comment on marJtei benefit if any based an observations of the market (4) Provide a general range of benefit if any for the properties In the project. Report Format: A Latter Report will be used_ It lies short statements and descriptions including appropriate photos, maps and exhibits are included. Ti o- hem' papies of spoil provided. Fee: The fors is ! I_ Any meetings., owner contact or appraisal reports would be extra and billed al per hour. Any hearing preparation artdfor testifying would also be axis and would he billed al per hour_ City named above Is responsittfe for payment Due Delft: Tha report can be completed in but y from signed confirmation, Information ileo:lell by the appraiser: Maps and description of before and after conditions_ Our company has 13 employees and has been in business since 9986 and has sufficient knowledge, experience, education, resources and contacts to competently complete this assignment. Neither the emproyment to make this repori, nor the compensation far it, is contingent upon the findings, If you agree to the above terms, please sign below and returri by fax or mail_ If you have any additional que=stions, please do not hesilate to contact me. SSincerery, William R. Waytas, SRA, CRP Certified General 4990613, MN Signature:-'( Date e Nagell Appraisal & Consulting 1 952 - 544 -8966 I www.callnagell.com 18 r-rWencl< TO: Dan Donahue FROM: Vince Vander Top DATE: September 19, 2012 (Update of prior Memo) SUBJECT: Trail Haven, Foxline, and Treeline Street Project Wenck Associates, Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Ctr. P.O. Box 249 Maple Plain, MN 55359 -0249 (763) 479 -4200 Fax (763) 479 -4242 E -mail: wenckmp @wenck.com A neighborhood meeting was held on August 22 and the City Council discussed this project at the regular August 23 meeting. It was determined that the neighborhood was reluctant to participate in an improvement project with assessments at the levels presented. The improvement of Trail Haven was briefly discussed at the September 13 regular council meeting. Subsequently, the City Council requested information to evaluate the option of "Trail Haven Only ". This memo modifies previously issued project memos to provide this information. We will present this information at the next Council meeting. Cost Estimate The estimated street improvement expense breakdown is summarized in the table below. The number of lot equivalents (LEs) along each street is also shown. ESTIMATED STREET IMPROVEMENT COSTS ROAD CONSTRUCTION INDIRECT (20%0) TOTAL CURRENT DIRECT ACCESS LEs Trail Haven Road (CR 10 to CR 30) $695,000 $139,000 $834,000 31.5 31.0 Fox line Drive $305,000 $-6-1700-0 $46-67000 2-0 Tree line Drive $105,000 $21,000 $126,000 7 $1,105,000 $695,000 $221,000 $139,000 $1,326,000 $834,000 585 31.0 The costs of improving Foxline and Treeline are deleted, shown as "strike throughs" in table above. Therefore, the projected costs only include the improvement of Trial Haven Road. The Lot Equivalents (LEs) along Trail Haven were reduced to 31.0 from 31.5 sine it has been determined that an assessment cannot be levied against the cemetery at 93rd and Trail Haven. 8aa8a Assessments Direct access and side street access lot equivalents were previously determined for properties adjacent to each street in the proposed project area. Assessment values shared at the neighborhood meeting were $12,750 per LE and $3,200 per side street access LE (Total of $15,950 for LEs along Foxline and Treeline) and $12,750 assessment per LE along Trail Haven. A base assessment of $12,750 was used as it equated to 70% of the total cost to improve the Foxline /Treeline residential streets per LE. This assessment is proposed for all properties along Foxline, Treeline, and Trail Haven. A $3,200 assessment per side street access LE was used as it is 25% of the $12,750 per LE assessment. The tables below assume the same level of assessment. The Council could consider a reduced assessment value (e.g $10K /LE). All assessment revenues would be reduced proportionately. ROAD Trail Haven Road (CR 10 to CR 30) Foxline Drive Treeline Drive ASSESSMENTS DIRECT ASSESSMENT SIDE STREET ASSESSMENT TOTAL TOTAL ASSESSMENT SIDE STREET CITY CONTRIBUTION ROAD DIRECT Trail Haven Road $188,025 ASSESSMENT ($488,025) ACCESS LEs TO ($12,750/LE) ($3,200 /LE) $834,000 ACCESS LEs TRAIL HAVEN ($395,250) X008 315 - $101,625 $0 $101,625 Foxline Drive $0 $64,000 31.0 ($64,000) $395,250 $126,000 $395,250 $36,750 $64,000 $319,000 Treeline Drive 9 20.0 $255,000 $64,000 $64,000 $1,326,000 $832,275 ($340,275) $22,100 $111,650 $834,000 $481,650 $834,000 7 $89,250 $22,400 $22,400 X875 $745,875 $86,400 $832,275 31.0 27.0 $395,250 $86,400 $481,650 The table below compares the project expenses with the revenue sources. This project should result in an anticipated surplus of around $377,500 after assessments due and state aid funds are included. Any adjustments to the improvement or amount of the assessments will impact the end result. REVENUES EXPENSES TOTAL ASSESSMENT MSA ELIGIBLE AMOUNT CITY CONTRIBUTION ROAD TOTAL Trail Haven Road $188,025 ($488,025) (CR 10 to CR 30) $834,000 $395,250 $834,000 ($395,250) X008 $255,000 $111,000 Foxline Drive $0 $64,000 $0 ($64,000) $126,000 $89,250 $36,750 Treeline Drive $0 $22,400 $0 ($22,400) $1,326,000 $832,275 ($340,275) $834,000 $481,650 $834,000 ($481,650) 8aa8a Potential Changes to City Contribution As discussed previously, the potential project surplus could be reduced based on the following factors: Side Street Assessments Lots along Foxline and Treeline will benefit from the improvement of Trail Haven. A $3,200 /LE assessment was assumed for this memo. While this assessment can be justified, it must be confirmed with an appraiser as sustainable. If the side street assessment is not pursued, the project net surplus would be reduced by $86,400. Agricultural Assessments Assessment Policy Section K "Postponed Assessments of Land in Agricultural Use" states in summary that agricultural parcels may have all but one assessment per 40 acres postponed with interest. In other words, one assessment per 40 acres is levied with the project while remaining assessments are deferred and become payable with the improvement of the property. Refer to Section K for more detail. Potentially 7.5 LEs could be deferred on the Trail Haven project. This would defer $95,625 of the potential project surplus until the future. Reduced Assessment Rate All assessment amounts must be sustainable according to the MN Chapter 429 assessment requirements. The Council could discuss a reduced assessment rate. The project surplus would be reduced accordingly. A reduced assessment amount could lead to a higher city participation rate on non -state aid roads also. 8aa8a Projected Cash Flow Summarized in the table below is a general outline of the cash flow required to finance the project. PROJECTED CASH FLOW DATE ACTIVITY EXPENSE REVENUE BALANCE Indirect cost for design and October - Feb /Mar public process. This cost would $110,500 $(110,500) 2013 be incurred from project inception up thru the bid $69,500 $(69,500) $792,300 $6847800 March 2013 After the bid /Contract award: $792,300 $722,800 Encumber State Aid funds (95 %) $832,275 $1,51'1,075 Issue assessment bonds $481,650 $1,204,450 Construction costs will be $4400 $409,075 realized in summer of 2013 $695,000 $509,450 April to Nov. 2013 Indirect costs for construction engineering and public process $110,500 $298,575 would be incurred in fall and spring $69,500 $439,950 The project would be closed in Spring 2013 the spring /summer of 2013. $41,700 $340,275 The final 5% of MSA funds would be collected. $481,650 Collect current 2013 -2033 assessments /Pay bond. Assessments would be collected $832,275 $736,650 $244,650 over a 10 to 20 -year period and used to make bond payments. $481,650 $386,025 $386,025 Collect deferred assessments Undefined (timing of collection would $95,625 $340,275 depend on property improvement) $481,650 Other Points Other project information including the advancement of Municipal State Aid funding and the project schedule have not changed. Next Steps The next step to initiate an assessment project is to request an Engineer's Report per Ch. 429 statute. This would include coordination with an assessor. This could be brought back for an October or November Council meeting. Moody's Investors Service Municipal Credit Research November 1999 Rating Methodology Contact Phone New York Linda Hird Lipnick Yaffo Rattner Linda Ebrahim Steve Levine 1 212,553,1617 1 212.553.4429 1,212.553 4132 1 212,553 4097 The Determinants of Credit Quality A FOCUS ON MOODY'S METHODOLOGY FOR RATING GENERAL OBLIGATION, LEASE-BACKED AND REVENUE BONDS SUMEllary Issuers, investors and intermediaries often ask Moody's the same thought provoking questions. These questions generally focus on which factors will be predominant in assigning a Moody's credit rating, which credit factors will most likely drive a future rating upgrade or downgrade, and how rating levels on proposed Certificates of Participation (COPs) and revenue secured transac- tions can be gauged. This article is a response to these questions and will focus on four key issues: 1. The rating factors that support a General Obligation (GO) rating assignment 2. Rating levels for leases and COPs 3. Factors that drive rating upgrades or downgrades 4. Credit fundamentals used to assign ratings on municipal water, wastewater, and stormwa- ter systems continued on page 3 Authors Production Associate Linda Hird Lipnick Yaffa Rattner Linda Ebrahim Alba Ruiz © Copyright 1999 by Moody's Investors Service, Inc., 99 Church Street, New York, New York 10007, All rights reserved. ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS COPYRIGHTED IN THE NAME OF MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE, INC. ( "MOODY'S "), AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY'S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY'S from sources believed by it to he accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors. however. such information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind and MOODY'S. in particular. makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, timeliness. completeness, merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose of any such information. Under no circumstances shall MOODY'S have any liability to any person or entity for (a) any loss or damage in whole or in part caused by, resulting from, or relating to, any error (negligent or otherwise) or other circumstance or contingency within or outside the control of MOODY'S or any of its directors, officers, employees or agents in connection with the procurement. collection. compilation. analysis, interpretation, communication. publication or delivery of any such information, or (b) any direct, indirect, special, consequential, compensatory or incidental damages whatsoever (including without limitation, lost profits), even if MOODY'S is advised in advance of the possibility of such damages, resulting from the use of or inability to use, any such information. The credit ratings, if any, constituting part of the information contained herein are, and must be construed solely as, statements of opinion and not statements of fact or recommendations to purchase, sell or hold any securities. NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY'S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER. Each rating or other opinion must be weighed solely as one factor in any investment decision made by or on behalf of any user of the information contained herein. and each such user must accordingly make its own study and evaluation of each security and of each issuer and guarantor of, and each provider of credit support for, each security that it may consider purchasing, holding or selling. Pursuant to Section 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933, MOODY'S hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures. notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MOODY'S have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MOODY'S for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from $.1,000 to 51,500.000. PRINTED IN U.S..A 2 Moody's Special Comment Understanding The Primary Rating Factors And How They Support A Rating Assignment Municipal entities raise funds for a variety of capital purposes, such as the building and maintenance of roads and bridges; affordable housing; facilities for health care and social services; courts and correctional facilities; and water and sewer systems. The types and scope of capital needs that municipal governments are responsible for vary widely, depending on the governmental unit (county, city, school district, etc.) involved and the state in which the entity is located. Therefore, there is always some variation in credit factors evaluated; but in general, factors considered by Moody's in assigning a credit rating cover four pri- mary areas: economy; debt; finances; and administration/ management strategies. STATISTICS MUST BE VIEWED IN CONTEXT Although the various statistics discussed throughout this article play a significant role in Moody's evalua- tion of credit risk, data and ratio analysis is certainly not the sole determinant of a rating. As a result, there is no algebraic formula by which a rating can be determined. At the start of the analysis, each of the four credit - categories carry equal weight and many qualitative factors are considered including administration/ management strategies (discussed in the section below). As analysis of an issue proceeds, however, one fac- tor may become more important because it represents a particular strength or weakness for the credit or is more likely to have a significant impact on credit quality in the near -term. In our view, the most useful tool for evaluating credit risk is through examining the way that the four credit analysis areas interact. Economic, Factors The economy, while probably the least controllable of the four credit factors, remains critical to Moody's analysis because the economic base is what ultimately generates the resources to repay municipal debt. During the economic evaluation, Moody's analysts assess the current economic profile, as well gauge spe- cific economic strengths and weaknesses, to better understand and set expectations for future perfor- mance. Ultimately, a clear vision of an issuer's current economic profile coupled with anticipated future economic trends is a key credit measure. Our analysts consider the credit quality and market position of a region's largest employers, and the strength as well as diversity of its largest taxpayers. Moody's Public Finance Group (PFG) analysts consult regularly with analysts in Moody's Corporate Finance Group (CFG) for information on the performance of an issuer's largest corporate employers or taxpayers, and/or for an overview of a particularly dominant industry. Especially critical in this evaluation are indicators of economic growth, such as retail sales, building permits, employment data, and other indicators that measure various aspects of economic activity. The economic statistics that Moody's examines for any credit will vary, depending upon the forces that drive the area's economy. Our analysts also evaluate demographic and other economic statistics in order to assess the vitality of a given area's economy. A diverse economic base (one that is not highly concentrated in a single employer or type of industry) will be more likely to steadily expand and keep pace (or even exceed) that of the national economy. An economy that is highly dependent on a cyclical industry may periodically surge, stagnate, or even experience declines. Unemployment rates are perhaps the most cur- rent measure of an area's economic health. Equally important are the unemployment trends over a period of time, which illustrate a municipality's demonstrated ability to withstand changes in national or regional economic fortunes and may provide an indication of future employment performance. When examining an issuer's ability to tap resources to support debt and pay for services, we also evalu- ate the extent of a community's overall wealth. Although no single aggregate measure fully quantifies a community's wealth, the full value per capita — which is the full valuation of taxable property divided by a given population — is an important indicator. In addition to these figures, Moody's examines trends in full value as well as full value relative to such factors as a community's population and debt outstanding to bet- ter gauge leveraging of the local tax base and of the residents and businesses paying the tax bills. Moody's Special Comment 3 In addition to examining overall measures of the economic base, Moody's also evaluates the resident population's socioeconomic characteristics. Moody's relies on a variety of data, some of which is provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. Additional information is also provided on behalf of local jurisdictions by vari- ous state agencies. One of the most useful statistics for determining an area's economic well-being is per capita and median family income. In our opinion, because significant variations in state and regional cost- of-living exist, it is important to compare these figures with state as well as national averages. Changing Market Dynamics Support An Investors Need To Determine Drivers Of Rating Changes The $1.5 trillion municipal market place has shifted from the early 1980's in which commercial banks were the dominant purchasers of tax-exempt securities to an environment in which money market and mutual funds and households collectively hold more than two-thirds of outstanding municipal paper. Banks purchasing municipal debt up until the 1980's, often did so with the intention of holding the securities to maturity as they were afforded certain tax preferences. Now however, given various tax reform initiatives, the market is dominated by funds and individual (retail) investors. Unlike the "buy and hold" mentality of the regional and national banking concerns, mutual funds are driven by the need to generate return for their clients. As a result the municipal market has now evolved to include a more frequently traded liquid secondary market with a correlating need for accurate and consistent credit evaluation during the life of an issue. (See chart below). 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Segmendng The Buyside Holders Of The $1.5 TriHion Outstanding Municipal Debt 00" 0 CYO 1 I I 3 0...b stilt 4.3 A N%'t soY so`bs • 3°5 4, _01 .= • • wow • • • pi ! • • I 1 csebrl, c:603`b 4* 43 4) 4) 03 ---- Households Funds Banks With every new issuance of debt, Moody's re-evaluates the issuer's debt position in order to determine the impact of the increased debt on credit quality. In rating debt, analysts calculate numerous ratios, which are detailed in Appendix B: ..VIzinzczpal Tax-Backed Debt: Components and Ratios. For General Obligation tax-sup- ported or General Fund—supported debt, analysts evaluate all the debt for which the issuer's tax base or citizens are the source of repayment, whether or not that issuer actually issued the debt. Therefore, in addition to reviewing debt obligations of the issuer, we also consider overlapping debt in determining the overall debt burden to the taxpayers. 4 Moody's Special Comment Overlapping debt is debt issued by municipal entities that have geographic boundaries that overlap (in part or whole) those of the issuer whose debt is being analyzed. For example, the debt of a city within a given county will be considered as overlapping debt for that county because the same tax base is responsible for supporting the debt. For measuring the burden of all tax - supported debt on the tax base, we calculate "over- all net debt," which excludes self - supporting debt that is unlikely to be paid from the tax base itself because it has its own revenue stream (i.e., from water and sewer fees or other self - supporting enterprise earnings). In general, counties have the lowest debt ratios among the three primary groups of issuers (counties, cities, and school districts). This is because even though underlying debt of cities and school districts is considered, counties often contain unincorporated areas that provide some support to the tax base but are generally not authorized to issue debt. Debt structure is another area of focus when examining the issuer's credit profile. Moody's examines such debt characteristics as the amount of short-term debt an issuer has outstanding, the extent of reliance on variable rate debt obligations, and the overall structure of debt service payments. One key debt factor is the rate of debt repayment or payout. This statistic measures the rate of princi- pal retirement within a given period of time and can sometimes be indicative of an issuer's willingness to pay. If retirement is rapid, the issuer may be viewed as very willing to draw upon its resources to pay its obligations. Conversely, if debt is structured for a very slow payout, the opposite may be true. Debt struc- ture, including the rate of retirement, can also reflect such considerations as debt limits, future bon-owing plans, and political factors related to tax levies. As a general rule, issuers usually structure their issues so that all debt is repaid within the useful life of the asset(s) being financed. Defining Moody's Watchlist And Outlooks Investors have told Moody's that in order to optimize trading decisions, buy and sell side analysts desire to have qualitative insights into our thinking to better comprehend what potential rating assignments will be as well as to appreciate what drives a Moody's upgrade or downgrade. In order to give the market an indica- tion of the short term and medium term direction of a particular rating, Moody's employs "watchlist" and "outlooks" — to flag investors, issuers, and intermediaries of potential rating action. During a rating review there are only three discrete outcomes - the rating is confirmed, upgraded or downgraded. The placement of a particular credit on "Watchlist" for possible upgrade or downgrade clearly signals the marketplace that Moody's believes a rating could change within a short period of time — typically not greater than 90 days. The reason that rating action is not immediately taken is because a situation may be evolving (such as potential loss of a major tax payer or litigation that may be pending) and decisive information will not be known for a short period of time Therefore, the Watchlist designation represents our timely notifica- tion to the capital markets that the changing credit fundamentals -- positive or negative — will be resolved . within three months. To compare, Moody's use of an outlook (positive, negative, or stable) signals to the market place our belief that trends or events effecting a particular issuer's credit profile, over the medium term, (six months to thirty -six months) may place pressure on the current rating assignment. As a result, the outlook tells the issuer, intermediary, and investor the probable direction of a potential rating change — up, down, or stay the same - within three years of the initial assignment give the expectation that current trends continue or anticipated events occur. Moody's Special Comment 5 Finandiai Factors w Financial analysis involves a great deal more than just reviewing year -end financial statements. Although statements of operating results and year end financial position are important, they reflect only a snapshot of time; these indicators only have analytic significance when placed in a proper context. For example, a large budget surplus may appear impressive, but could actually have negative implications if it results from a municipality's inability to execute certain spending programs, or results in taxpayers' taking legislative action to limit taxation. Conversely, a planned draw -down of a prior surplus (particularly to fund one -time expendi- tures such as capital or year 2000 projects) may not signify fiscal problems. In fact, an established trend of financial performance and control is more important to Moody's than year -end figures alone. Budgetary planning and projecting, in conjunction with daily spending control, as well as an issuer's policies on spend- ing growth, use of surplus, and shortfall contingency plans are all incorporated into our credit analysis. One financial statistic that is key to evaluating financial strength is the General Fund balance as percent of revenues. This ratio provides a measure of the financial reserves potentially available to fund unforeseen contingencies. The level of fund balance should be related to the likelihood that such reserves will be need- ed, as well as the issuer's revenue raising flexibility. Larger balances may be warranted if budgeted revenues and expenditures are economically sensitive and therefore not easily forecasted. Moodv's likes to see a General Fund balance sufficient to address normal contingencies which, as a general guideline, is typically between 5 -10% of annual revenues. It is important to emphasize, however, that the appropriate level of fund balance varies depending upon the particular issuer and its respective operating environment. Moodv's examines a range of other financial data, such as annual growth in revenues and expenditures; the amounts of and reasons for interfund transfers; primary revenue sources and expenditures items; the composition of assets and liabilities; cash position; and actual financial performance relative to budget. Although General Fund operations are often a key focus in the analysis of general obligation debt, Moody's analysts are interested in the financial position of all funds, including special revenue funds and enterprise funds. Moody's analysts particularly focus on how an issuer funds expenditures from its own resources. Therefore, in the analysis of financial operations, we place special emphasis on those funds over which the issuer has discretion, rather than funds that are simply state or federal pass - throughs. Management_ Strategies/Administrative .,Factors__ Administrative factors are perhaps the most difficult credit fundamentals to assess because they are not easily quantifiable. An evaluation of management is, however, crucial because ultimately it will be manage- ment's responsibility to seize upon economic opportunities, adopt a budget, and take corrective action as may be necessary, to realize targeted results. Despite the qualitative nature of a management assessment, there are a number of elements that Moody's regards as indicators of management strength which are important to our evaluation. They are: an issuer's organization; division of responsibilities; professional qualifications; and, sufficiency of power to perform its functions. In many ways, management strength can he judged from looking at the other three factors: 1. Good management strategies will help ensure that financial practices, such as tax collection proce- dures, budgeting and investments, are appropriate and responsive to the municipality's needs 2. Debt practices will be thoughtfully structured and in line with statutory and voter prescribed debt limits 3. Good economic development policies will be adopted and government officials will be balanced in response to the demands for services relative to the needs of business and residential taxpayers In addition, strong management strategies often include institutionalized means of coordinating and/or cooperating with other government agencies, particularly if those agencies must come together to provide services to a common group of citizens. It should be noted that most issuers, both large and small, are well managed. Despite this fact, they may not all achieve high ratings because there are many aspects of credit quality that management simply cannot control — most notably a locality's economy. 6 Moody's Special Comment Assignment Of Lease Revenue Or Ce cafe Of Participation (COP) Ratings And Their,- Linkages To An Issuer. Or General Obligation Rating Lease revenue obligations while linked to the overall general obligation (GO) credit worthiness of an issuer, are fundamentally different than security on a GO bond. This is because the issuer's full faith and credit secures the GO bond while only annual budget appropriations gener- ally secure associated debt service payments on the lease. Furthermore, Why Issuers Sell Lease in the case of a voter approved GO issue, there is typically a dedicated Revenue Debt Or COPS To revenue stream (often property taxes or user fees) isolated to fund debt service. Conversely, in the case of a lease, a dedicated revenue stream Finance Projects is generally not available and lease payments, which are often subject The difficulty in garnering to annual appropriation, are carved from operating revenues. As a result, although issuers have very strong motives to honor lease backed voter approval for the issuance obligations, lease payments compete with other government priorities. of general obligation debt and the need to fund necessary, EVALUATION OF APPROPRIATION RISK AND PROJECT but unpopular, projects (such ESSENTIALITY IS CRITICAL TO LEASE RATINGS as jails) has led to increased utilization of lease debt to When assigning a rating to an issue secured by a lease revenue pledge finance city, county, school dis- or a Certification of Participation (COP), it is particularly important trict infrastructure, and even to assess the fundamental credit quality of the issuer. Lease ratings will then be assigned by factoring legal ties (such as appropriation risk equipment programs. Because and flow of funds) to the issuer and project essentiality (which will leases typically do not require focus on the importance of the asset financed to the government voter approval and do not typi- operation). cally count toward statutory debt limitations, lease issuance To the extent that the lease payments are subject to annual appro- can enable governments to priation, the rating will typically start one notch lower than the enti generate capital funds despite tv's general obligation or issuer rating - with the rating distinction constraints upon the issuance capturing the increased risk associated with the annual appropriation of GO bonds. process. Essentiality of the project or asset being financed is the another fundamental factor used to determine a rating outcome. If the project is deemed crucial to the obligor's operations and service provision (such as school buildings, courthouse facilities or municipal offices), the obligor would more likely feel compelled to make the annual appropriation to ensure continued use of the facility. Conversely, if the project is not deemed as critical (such as leases for athletic fields, vehicles, or equipment), there can be greater credit risk because the obligor may feel less compelled to make an annual appropriation if the equipment fails or if the obligor experiences budgetary pressures. Therefore, in the case of many equipment leases or leases for non - essential purposes (that are also subject to annual appropriation), a two notch rating distinction, rela- tive to the obligor's general obligation bond rating is often warranted. Additionally, and subject to signifi- cant analysis, issuers with unusually strong or particularly weak financial position may warrant lesser or greater notching. The notching convention discussed in the preceding paragraph is not an absolute rule but rather should be viewed as a guideline to gauging rating outcomes. We believe that exceptions to the guideline may arise in the case that dedicated revenues sources have been isolated - thereby eliminating competition for payment of debt service with payment of other program priorities. Another exception to the notching convention may arise in the case of clear and demonstrated political support for a project that, while important, may not be defined as essential to overall municipal operations. Moody's Special Comment 7 Ii actors.That Drive. Rating.,Blpgrades,And. Downgrades This section discusses typical issues that most often drive rating changes – either up or down. It will refer to the credit fundamentals depicted in the preceding sections and describe how these issues are actually synthesized to support a rating change. Ultimately, a rating will be driven up or down when one or more credit factors are significantly altered from the time of the last rating assignment. VIBRANT NATIONAL ECONOMY FUELS STRONG FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AND MANY RATING UPGRADES In Moody's opinion, the strength of the national economy continues to benefit local governmental units including counties, school districts, and cities. The nation's low unemployment rates and healthy econo- my have resulted in strong growth in the sectors underlying the primary sources of municipal tax receipts- - property, income, and sales taxes — without a commensurate increase in expenditures resulting in many cases of large budget surpluses. The trend of economic prosperity has manifested itself in a trend of continued credit quality improve- ment. In fact, in 1997 and 1998 combined there were 659 rating upgrades on $160 billion outstanding general obligation bonds compared to 108 downgrades affecting $9 billion of debt. Projections for 1999 indicate a continuation of this trend with more than 350 upgrades year -to -date affecting $56 billion of outstanding debt compared to 47 issuer downgrades affecting $7 billion in debt. Potential Signs of Credit Distress o Declines or large swings in collection of economically sensitive taxes – e.g. sales and income tax collections o Trend of operating losses; fund balance draw down • Declining financial margins o Deficit ending; fund balance o Increasing reliance on operating transfers o Rising, mandated or fixed cost:as % of budget • At or close to tax ceiling (no margin) o Increasing employee benefits o Pension deferrals or assumption changes o Decreasing capital project outlay Self- insured with no corresponding reserves Significant litigation or settlement o Sale of asset for operating revenue • Interest earnings as %o of cash on hand Current tax collections less than 95% or declining trend o Declining taxable values o Loss of major employer o Sharply increased debt obligations o Debt structure not consistent with useful life of financed asset A STRENGTHENING, DIVERSIFYING, OR GROWING LOCAL ECONOMY CAN PLACE UPWARD PRESSURE ON A RATING Location, size, and diversity of the local tax base are the predominant factors assessed when looking at the issuer's fundamental economy. These factors, however, are certainly not static and will most likely change over the life of the bond rating. That being said, significant growth in assessed values could eventually drive ratings up – simply because the growth results in a larger tax base supporting debt obligations – with a correlating decrease in debt burden (assuming additional debt to meet development needs is not grow- ing at the same or a faster pace than the tax base). 8 Moody's Special Comment Furthermore, in addition to the absolute advantages in terms of decreasing debt burden and typically greater revenue generation brought by a growing tax base, continued valuation growth can also yield addi- tional tax base diversification in certain cases. This may offset a previous economic weakness such as con- centration in one industry or one particular business as the predominant employer and tax paver. For example, when economic development efforts by a city dominated by a particular industry (such as auto- motive or steel) are successful in attracting various support businesses to the area, many positive benefits occur. This is because while the new businesses are often connected to the original industry, they typically have components in entirely new or simply related business enterprises. The presence of the additional business benefits the local economy through new jobs and municipal tax revenues (including income, sales and property taxes). Additionally, they also provide a more positive operating and economic environment for the original industry and the regional as a whole. Although many may believe that the issue of location cannot be surmounted when considering a potential credit upgrade, this, Moody's would argue, is not the case. Over the past several years, the nation has benefited from interest rates that have been at record lows and, as a result, growth in annual new housing starts have been significant. Because many large cities and regional hubs are fully devel- oped or are subject to relatively strict zoning laws, some residents and businesses have chosen to devel- op properties in areas previously considered primarily agricultural or remote. Local, state and federal governments have responded, in turn, with grants and loans to construct new arteries connecting the previously developed areas with the developing areas. Therefore, location, while fixed in absolute terms, can experience significant economic changes that can lead to strong development and improved transportation networks. Together, this key credit factor, along with expectations that the trend in a particular area continue, can place upward pressure on a rating assignment. The absolute size of a mtmicipality — whether it is valued in dollars or in population — is a tangible fac- tor. However, the function of size and its correlating implications (potentially stronger for mid-to- large- sized entities and perhaps somewhat weaker for particularly small credits) is also, in our opinion, fluid. Issuers, intermediaries and investors may concur that a municipality with an extremely modest tax base, has fewer taxable resources supporting its general obligation debt than another municipality with the same debt (in an absolute dollar amount) and a larger tax base. The smaller issuer may also face certain challenges that a neighboring but larger entity will not face. This includes the ability to generate greater tax revenues or flexibility in expenditure reduction, which often results in the need for even stronger management strate- gies. However, in our opinion, the prospects for rating upgrades are certainly present if economic trends point to continued valuation or population growth. Conversely, the issuer may feel downward rating pres- sure if confronted with the dual obstacle of a declining revenue base in a modest or limited Local economy. A TREND OF PRUDENT AND SUSTAINABLE FISCAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES COUPLED WITH CAREFULLY MANAGED RESERVE LEVELS CAN PLACE UPWARD PRESSURE ON A RATING Moody's believes that careful, institutionalized budgeting policies, contribute to an issuer's ability to with- stand economic downturns without compromising recurring structural balance (annual revenues equal to or greater than annual expenditures). We also believe that cautious financial policies enable many local issuers to maintain or build their reserves and invest in technologies which, in turn, support more timely and accurate accounting, reporting, and oversight procedures. Because Moody's focuses on expected financial trends and anticipated fiscal flexibility (often deter- mined by state legislation and type of governmental unit), Moody's does not prescribe that cash or fund balance be augmented to a particular level prior to a rating upgrade. However, we do focus on the factors that resulted in a particular level of reserves with careful scrutiny placed on an issuer's expected ability to maintain the higher level of financial cushion in the future. To the extent that reserves are bolstered and are expected to be maintained (and the prior financial position detracted from other favorable credit fun- damentals), a rating upgrade may be warranted. Similarly, a change in management strategies or political environment that supports expectations for future reserve augmentation or depletion could also be suffi- cient to drive a rating change. A rating upgrade is not only warranted when Fund Balance increases. In fact, a rating upgrade could also be driven by the ability of the issuer to aggressively manage and limit fiscal volatility or augment financial flexibility - without changing reserve levels. An ability of an issuer to decrease volatility may occur if the issuer gains greater expenditure control or decreases financial vulnerability perhaps through the elimination of a service that historically proved to be expensive and difficult to budget such as a nurs- Moody's Special Comment 9 ing home or hospital. In our opinion, this could be a key credit strength that could result in a rating upgrade. Similarly, the ability of an issuer to garner additional fiscal resources and promote future fiscal flexibility — perhaps through referendum approval of a dedicated property tax millage or through council approval to augment certain fees or taxes — could also result in a rating upgrade. Both of these issues (decreasing fiscal vulnerability or increasing financial flexibility) could drive a rating upgrade without a corresponding increase in reserve levels because by limiting vulnerabilities or augmenting flexibility, the need for larger reserves is decreased. Table: Factors That Drive Rating Changes Credit Factor: Potential Rating Change Driver Economy • Significant development in the local tax base driving continued growth in total property values • Increased or decreased diversification of local economic base • Loss of key industry or employer with no work out plan Finances • Expected augmentation or loss of financial flexibility • Expectation that significant growth or dedine of reserves will continue Debt • Significant increase in debt obligations without correlating development to off- set tax-base leveraging • Utilization of debt structure not appropriately matched to asset's useful life Administration / Management • implementation of new strategies that are expected to augment or Strategies detract from operating flexibility • Change in political environment which affects ability to react to unanticipated events. THE PRESENCE OR ELIMINATION OF A MAJOR VULNERABILITY MAY DRIVE A FUTURE RATING CHANGE In addition to the upward credit pressure that strengthening economic and financial position may place on a particular issuer rating, Moody's believes that the presence or elimination of a major vulnerability can also drive a rating change. The vulnerability can come in the form of litigation, implementation of electric deregulation (which could potentially and significantly reduce valuable taxable resources and user generat- ed revenues) and various tax appeals. For example, when a municipality is involved in litigation on a con- troversial issue, significant resources (both dollars and time) may be allocated to the cause and projects may be delayed until a municipality is more confident of a projected outcome. Therefore, when a ruling is eventually rendered, a municipality could re- allocate resources previously dedicated to litigation to improving its credit- worthiness. Although a municipality may be the beneficiary of a significant cash pay- ment at the conclusion of litigation, receipt of the settlement will probably not drive an immediate rating upgrade since an analytic determination assessing the future availability of those funds to provide overall financial cushion must be made. Ultimately, any rating action will synthesize the decisions of local officials with the rest of the issuer's credit profile. While a significant and favorable outcome to years of litigation may drive upward rating pressure, not all adverse settlements will drive a rating downgrade. This is because the Moody's analyst will want to ascertain the implications of the judgment. Will there be a one -time draw in Fund Balance to meet settle- ment costs or a one -time increase in debt burden if judgment - funding bonds are issued? In most cases of an adverse settlement, issuers typically have some time and some flexibility in repaving settlements. For example, an issuer may not be forced to spend its entire fund balance repaving a tax -payer who successful- ly appealed its assessments over a prolonged period of time. Rather, an issuer, with the court's permission, may orchestrate some repayment scenario (perhaps a credit against future taxes, repayment over time, or even funding through issuance of judgment bonds) that is agreeable to all involved parties; therefore, the issuer would not alter its credit profile sufficiently to warrant a downgrade. However, if the issuer is afforded no flexibility or chose not to prepare in advance, (for example by saving and designating reserves) for a worst -case scenario outcome, a rating downgrade may be warranted. 10 Moody's Special Comment Understanding, The Revenue_ Bond Rating Factors Revenue bonds have been issued since the 1930's to finance many purposes including environmental needs (water, sewer, storm water and solid waste), transportation facilities (airports, toll roads, parking facilities, rapid transit, ports, etc.) and a myriad of other activities (stadiums, hospitals, convention centers, higher education, etc.). Although once considered highly innovative securities, the capital intensive nature of most enterprise systems, in conjunction with growing government mandates, have made revenue bonds the predominant financing vehicle accounting for 67% of 1998's new long -term issuance. Unlike general obligation bonds, revenue bonds pledge repayment from a limited source typically revenues generated by an enterprise system such as water, sewer, electric, and, solid waste. While ratings on these bonds generally trend near the general obligation ratings in the systems' service areas, there is no rule that the rating assignment be capped by an issuer's general obligation rating. In fact, ratings on municipal enterprise systems can be higher, lower, or even the same as an issuer's general oblig- ation bond rating. Moody's average rating for water and/or wastewarer systems is an A2, which largely reflects the essential nature of these enterprise systems as well as extensive capital requirements driven by intergovernmental regulation. This section will focus on water and sewer bonds that, by far, constitute the largest category of rev- enue bonds. The issuance of water and/or sewer revenue bonds has been largely driven by government regulations and mandates arising from the Clean Water Act (1972) and the Safe Drinking Water Act (1974) and subsequent amendments. Meeting federal and state standards on issues such as wastewater treatment or drinking water filtration is always costly and often complicated. Many older, urban sewer enterprises must address problems stem- ming from their combined stormwater and wastewater systems, which create serious overflow problems during stormy weather. Separation of the systems is often not economical; thus system administrators often look for alternative measures to reduce overflows. Ultimately, in the case of sewer systems, the abili- ty for plants to create sufficient capacity, is a critical determinant of future area development. To compare, for water systems, the ability to secure and retain water rights sufficient to meet current, as well as future needs while maintaining water quality, is of paramount. importance. Water and sewer ratings are based on the following factors: System Size, Local Economy, Customer Base — Generally, stronger systems that benefit from a robust local economy are better positioned to meet the ongoing capital requirements of the enterprise venture. Economic strength can also be imputed from a diverse customer base, which can insulate the system from the risks that are evident when a few customers or a single industry dominates. Management and Strategic Planning — Management's skill in adapting to a dynamic regulatory envi- ronment, while making the capital investments which will maintain the system's long -term viability, are key to the assignment of higher -grade ratings. Moody's believes these factors are reflected in effective multi -year plans, which encompass ongoing capital needs and anticipated system upgrades or expansions. Operations and Rates — Smooth operations reflect management's expertise in maximizing efficiencies despite its inevitably politicized environment. Management has to meet the ongoing practical needs of its system while balancing the political limitation of raising rates and charges. This process includes the maintenance of sufficient operating capacity at periods of peak usage and flexibility to raise rates in order to maintain facilities or handle unanticipated requirements. Debt Levels and Structure — Moody's utilizes several ratios to determine how heavily the system is leveraged. Debt structures usually reflect the useful life of the assets being financed, thereby creating a payment schedule in which future required debt does not unduly stress system revenues or system cus- tomers (via excessive rate increases). Legal Provisions — These include the following: pledge of gross or net revenues; flow of funds; size and structure of reserves; rate covenant; and, additional bonds test. Moody's Special Comment 11 MOODY'S APPROACH TO REVENUE BONDS INCORPORATES ASPECTS OF STRUCTURE, LEGAL PROVISIONS, DEBT PROFILE, RATE SETTING AUTONOMY, MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES, AND PERFORMANCE Legal Provisions The primary legal document defining a revenue bond structure is the "indenture" or "master res- olution". This document specifies the assets pledged to debt service (principal and interest) requirements. Generally, these are revenues generated by the service provided by the system for which debt is being issued; they are typically sufficient to cover both operations and dept service. As a rule, net revenues (those remaining after operating and maintenance [O&M] expenses are paid) are pledged first to debt service. An important credit factor addressed in the indenture is the rate covenant. The rate covenant mandates that the governing body assess rates sufficient to generate revenues at a designated threshold level. For instance, a system with a net revenue pledge of 1.1 times, covenants that net system revenues will be sufficient (during every year in which bonds are outstanding) to cover O&M expenses with a multiple of $1.10 of net revenues available for every $1.00 of debt service due. Vloody's generally views covenanted requirements as a "floor" and looks for greater flexibili- ty for high -grade ratings; exceptions can be made for very large or primarily wholesale systems. The additional bonds test (ABT) is another legal provision. The ABT specifies that the issuer's revenue stream must demonstrate sufficiency to provide coverage of both existing and proposed debt service. The most conservative ABT is purely historical in nature, however, it is not uncommon for the ABT to factor in adjustments for future rate increases. The ABT is important because its intent is to ensure that future debt issuance does not erode bondholder security by creating too great a burden on the system's revenue stream. While not legally required, the ABT is often expressed as a coverage level equivalent to the rate covenant discussed above. Municipal Enterprise Components And Ratios Balance Sheet Components and Net fixed assets Net working capita, Long -term debt Net funded debt Debt ratio ( %) Projected debt ratio ( %) Ratios Fixed assets, less accumulated depreciation Net current assets and net assets of all funds and accounts not devoted to debt service Gross long -term debt, plus the current portion of long -term debt Long -term debt, plus accrued interest payable, less the balance in both the debt service reserve fund and the debt service fund Net funded debt, divided by the sum of net fixed assets, plus net working capital Pro forma net funded debt, divided by the sum of projected net fixed assets, plus projected net fixed assets, plus projected networking capital for the first full fiscal year following completion of the capital project financed from the new bonds Income Statement Components and Ra Gross revenue and income Operating and Maintenance expenses Net revenues Operating; ratio (%) Net take -down (%) Interest coverage (x) Debt - service coverage (x) Debt- service safety margin ( %) Peak debt- service coverage by historical net revenues (x) Peak debt - service coverage by projected net revenues (x) 12 Moody's Special Comment tios Operating revenue, plus non - operating revenue Operating and maintenance expenses net of depreciation, amortization, and interest requirements Gross revenue and income, less operating and maintenance expenses Operating and maintenance expenses, divided by total operating revenues Net revenues, divided by gross revenues and income Net revenues, divided by interest requirements for year Net revenues, divided by principal and interest requirements for year Net revenues, less principal and interest requirements for year divided by gross rev - enue and income Net revenues, divided' by estimated maximum annual principal and interest requirements on all outstanding debt and the bonds to be issued Projected net revenues for the first full fiscal year, following completion of the capital project financed from the new bonds, divided by estimated maximum annual principal and interest requirements on all outstand- ing debt and the bonds to be issued The flow of funds requirements reflect the process by which revenues are allocated to various sys- tem funds created within the indenture Usually, monies are deposited into a general revenue fund from which monies flow into other funds. This generally occurs in the following order: first, O &M; second, debt service; third, debt service reserve fund replenishment; and, fourth, any other authorized system uses. Even gross pledges, when debt service is paid first, are evaluated on a net basis because Moody's views operations as paramount to longer -term viability. It is important to note that, if allowed, unrestricted transfers to funds outside the system (particularly to the issuers's G- eneral Fund) should be closely monitored as they can diminish system liquidity. The debt service reserve fund (DSRF) is another important structural component of a revenue bond. First, the DSRF creates a fiscal cushion substantial enough to prevent an immediate default when revenues are insufficient to cover debt service requirements. Second, utilization of the DSRF serves as a warning that operations and /or service rates may not be sufficient. The DSRF is typically funded in one of three ways: 1. from bond proceeds 2. incrementally from system revenues over a pre - determined period (traditionally 5- years) 3, with a surety bond. The size of the debt service reserve fund is limited by provisions of the 1986 Tax Reform Act which reduced the maximum amount to be funded from bond proceeds to 10% of issue size. As a result, the DSRF is often maintained at a level equivalent to the lesser of 10% of bond proceeds, Average Annual Debt Service, or Maximum Annual Debt Service (MADS). • Debt Levels and Structure of Debt A common measurement for evaluating the debt load of an enterprise system is the "debt ratio" which is derived by dividing total outstanding system debt (net of the DSRF) by its fixed assets and net work- ing capital. This ratio reflects the system's reliance on debt relative to its asset base. The debt ratio also reflects the system's ability to support future debt. Generally speaking, the lower this ratio, the less leveraged is the system. Debt structure is as important as debt levels. Debt structures that are heavily reliant on short -term or variable rate debt can subject the system to fluctuating interest rate environments, which can make planning, forecasting, and rate setting more difficult. In addition, both short -term and variable -rate debt necessitate greater flexibility and autonomy to set rates. • Rate Structure In general, Moodv's believes that systems which are able to set rates and charges independently of regu- latory bodies or local government boards are better positioned to meet the ongoing needs of their sys- tem because of their greater autonomy. Moodv's believes that risk is reduced when rates are sufficient to support the costs associated with maintenance and operations, debt service, and to a certain extent, ongoing improvements as well as funding needs arising from unanticipated events. Though water and sewer systems generally function as monopolies within their service areas, relatively high rates can increase risk by limiting management's future flexibility to raise rates. In addition, unusually high rates could mask inefficiencies within the system or diminish the potential for future expansion. Conversely, unusually low rates could reflect a trend of deferred maintenance or result in extremely narrow debt ser- vice coverage levels —both factors often reflect management flexibility and political environment. MANAGEMENT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING ARE IMPORTANT FACTORS IN EVALUATING OPERATIONS • Management In Moody's view, management is an important factor in the analysis of credit quality; management's flexibility to create an adequate rate structure and effectively dictate the direction of the enterprise despite the existence of political pressures is always an analytic focal point. Given these inherent pres- sures, water and sewer systems are often administered by independent boards. Thus, management's skill in interacting with both political and regulatory agents, while maintaining an agenda focused on best practices, is a key credit consideration. The institutionalization of good management practices can diminish the impact of a change in key personnel as reflected in budgeting techniques, methodologies used for capital planning, and responsiveness to regulatory shifts. Moody's Special Comment 13 ® Operations Though management is a critical credit factor, a number of practical points must also be examined. For example, water systems, that are simply distribution conduits, are far less capital intensive than sys- tems that treat water. Regardless of the type of operation, management considers whether the enter- prise has sufficient water rights to meet both current and reasonably projected near -term demands. Wastewater operations also range from simple collection systems to collection, treatment, and disposal systems. Though collection systems lack the heavy capital requirements associated with treatment sys- tems, they face additional risks associated with unanticipated rate increases from their treatment providers. Because a water or sewer system can be either a wholesale client or wholesale service provider, an important factor in the operational analysis is the number, structure, and length of any service agreements. • Systems and Service Area Considerations Moody's believes that water enterprises are essential components of a community's economic health as the availability of water can dictate an area's rate of growth. Similarly, if a wastewater system is at or /near capacity, moratoriums may preclude new construction (housing developments, food processing plants, etc.). In its analysis of the service area, Moody's assesses the local economy's continued ability to support system operations. This includes analysis of the customer profiles and whether the system's clients are residential, commercial. or industrial. A key consideration is the degree of concentration in the user - base as this lessens the system's susceptibility to economic shifts or downturns. Resident wealth levels are also analyzed to determine the local population's ability to pay the system's rates. Excessive growth in a service area could tax a system's capacity. Conversely, a decline in customer base could leave the system with excess capacity, which could undermine finances. For additional information refer to Moody's rating methodology piece titled "Analytical Framework for Water and Sewer System Ratings" dated August 1999. 14 Moody's Special Comment Appendix A WHAT IS A MOODY'S CREDIT RATING? Moody's ratings are intended to provide capital market parucipants with a framework for comparing the credit quality of debt securities. A credit rating compresses an enormous amount of diverse information into a single symbol. Credit quality embraces relative default probability, loss severity, "financial strength", and "transition risk"' Bonds with the same credit rating, therefore, may be comparable with respect to overall credit quality but may differ with respect to specific credit quality characteristics. Aaa Bonds rated Aaa are iuJQ,6 to be of the best quality. Thev cam, the smallest degree of investment risk and are gener- ally referred ro^s "gilt e6Xe.^ Interest payments are protected by large or bv rn exceptionativ stable margin and pnncipal is secure. \,Vhile the vanous protective elements are !ikelv to change, such changes as can be visualized are most unlikely to impair the fundamentally strong position of such issues. &u Bonds rated Aa are judged to be ot high qualiry bv all standards, Together witb the Aaa group thev compnse what are generally known as high grade bonds. They are rated lower than the best borids because margins ot protection may not be as large as in Aai securines or fluctuaaon o protective elements mav be of reater amplirude or there rnay be other elements present which make the long-term risks appear somewhat larger than in Aaa securities. A Bonds rated A possess many favorable investment attributes and are to be considered as upper medium grade obliga- tions. Factors giving security to principal and interest are considered adequate, but elements may be present which suggest a suscepribilitv to impairment sometime in the future. Baa Bonds rated Baa are considered as medium grade obliganons, ic' they are neither highly protected nor poorly secured. Interest payments and principal security appear adequate for the present but certain protective elements may be lacking or may be characteristically unreliable over any great leng-th of time. Such bonds lack outstanding invest- ment c6aracccri,tio and in fact have speculative characteristics as well. Ba Bonds rated Ba are iu6Ac6 to have speculative elements; their future cannor be considered as well assured. Often the protection of interest and principal payments may be very moderate and n6eze6y not well xu6c0pur6eJ during both good and bad times over the future. Uncertainty of position characterizes bonds in this class. 8 Bonds rated B generally lack characteristics of the desirable investment. Assurance of interest and principal payments or of maintenance of other terms of the contract over any long period of rime may he small. Caa Bonds rated Caa are ot poor standing. Such issues rnav be in default or there rnav be present elements of danger with respect to principai or interest. Cu Bonds rared Ca represenr obligauons which are specuiative in a hjgh degree .,Such iosuuzreo6roioJcfauJto,6uvr other ma ked shortcomings. C Bonds rared C are inc lowest rared class ot bonds, and issues so rated can be regarded as havirig extremely poor prospects of ever attaining any real investment standing. Bonds for which the security depends upon the completion of some act or inc fulfillment "f some condition are rated conditionallv. These are bonds secured by (a) earnings of projects under construction, (h) earnings ofprojects unseasoned in operation experience, (c) rentals which begin when facilities are comp|co,6, or (d) payments to which some other limiting condition attaches. Parenthetical rating denotes probable credit stature upon completion nf construction vr elimination of basis ofcondition. Note: applies and each r� ' ^m(a^. The 1 indi- cates �oth,umer^nbin6,,6�6m-,vd�� generic the the modijer 2 indicates a mzd range ranking; and the modifier 3 indicates that the issue ranks in the lower end of' its generic category. 1 Financial stren refers to intrinsic creditworthiness, which abstracts from potential (and uncertain) external support elements (such as a rescue by a third parly).. Transition risk, refers to uncertainty with respect to the levels and timing of credit events: high transition risk credits have relatively high probabilities of large rating movements. Examples of sectors subject to high transition risk are banks, sovereigns, investor-owned utilities and local government authorities, Issuers in tfiese sectors derive significant credit strength from external sources of support bank regulators, multilateral institutions, rate commissions and state governments. Furthermore, confidence-sensitive issuers with high levels of short term funding, such as securities firms, also face high transition risk Moody's Special Commen 1 5 Appendix E MUNICIPAL TAX - BACKED COMPONENTS AND RATIOS: Components: Direct Debt or Gross Bonded Debt — The sum of the total bonded debt and any unfunded debt (typically short-term notes) of the issuer. Direct debt may he incurred in the government's own name or assumed through the annexation of territory or consolidation with another gov- ernmental unit. Net Direct Debt or Net Bonded Debt — Net direct debt less sinking fund accumulations and all self supporting debt. Total Overall Debt — Net direct debt plus the issuer's applicable share of the net direct debt of all overlapping jurisdictions. Net Overall Debt — Net direct debt plus the issuer's applicable share of the net direct debt of all overlapping jurisdictions. Overlapping Debt -- The issuer's proportionate share of the debt of other local governmental units which either overlap it (the issuer is located either wholly or partly within the geographic limits of the other units) or underlie it (the other unit are located within the geographic limits of the issuer). The debt is generally apportioned based upon relative assessed value. Key Debt and Economic Ratios: Net Direct Debt Burden — Net direct debt, divided by the estimated full value of taxable property Net Overall Debt Burden — Net overall debt, divided by the estimated full value of taxable property Net Direct Debt per Capita — Net direct debt, divided by total population Net Overall Debt per Capita — Net overall debt, divided by total population Full Value per Capita — Estimated full value of taxable property, divided by total population To order reprints of this report (100 copies minimum), please call 800.811.6980 toll free in the USA. Outside the LIS, please call 1.212.5-53.16W. Report Number: 50131 16 Moody's Special Comment STAFF REPORT Document No. 11 f. Council Meeting: November 8, 2012 Prepared By: Mike Pritchard Topic: Hazardous Building: 20112 County Road 10 Action Required: Discussion Summary: On June 28, 2012 a site inspection was conducted at the above referenced property by Loren Kohnen - Building Official, and myself. It was determined that the building was unsafe and was declared as Hazardous. On June 29, with the permission of the property owner, the electrical power was terminated and the building was secured by the City. On July 12, the matter was before Council, at which time the property owners agreed to take the next steps to have the building razed and removed. On July 26, a Resolution (2012 -39) for an Order of Removal was passed. (See attached) I again spoke with the property owner at which time they were working with a contractor to remove the building. In July, there was death in the family of the property owner(s). Enforcement and action was suspended. On September 27, no updates had been received from the property owner, so a letter requesting a plan of action for removal was sent. On November 1, contact was made with the property owner, at which time I was advised that a Hazardous Waste Inspection and Report was completed. The property owner received a quote to raze and remove the building in the upper $20,000 range. Although the property owner wants to comply, the property owner stated that they simply cannot afford this cost and would like to know their options if the City were to demolish and remove the building. City of Corcoran County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -39 Motion By: Gmach Seconded By: Cossette A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE BUILDING LOCATED AT 20112 COUNTY ROAD 10, CORCORAN, HENNEPIN COUNTY, AS HAZARDOUS July 26, 2012 WHEREAS, the City of Corcoran has received complaints about the condition of the building located at 20112 County Road 10, within the City of Corcoran; and WHEREAS, the City Council directed the building inspector to conduct an inspection of the building and report back to the Council the condition of the building as it relates to hazardous conditions and safety; and WHEREAS, the building official conducted his inspection on June 28, 2012 and found the following conditions: See attached Exhibit A. WHEREAS, the building official has concluded that the building located at the above - address is a safety hazard to the community and is hazardous within the meaning of Minn. Stat. §463.15- 463.26; and WHEREAS, further, the building official indicates the building is in such disrepair that it must be removed for the safety and welfare of the general public. NOW, THEREFORE, the Corcoran City Council RESOLVES as follows: 1. The building located at 20112 County Road 10 is hereby declared a hazardous building within the meaning of Minn. Stat. §463.15 - 463.26; further that the building must be razed and removed for the safety and welfare of the general public. 2. City staff is directed to serve a copy of this Resolution and the attached Order for removal on all owners of record. 3. Should owners fail to demolish and remove said building within the thirty day (30) period indicated in the Order, staff is directed to proceed with enforcement of the Order in Hennepin County District Court. 4. Following demolition removal, City staff is directed to accumulate all costs associated with removal of the hazardous building and is further directed to assess the costs against City of Corcoran County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -39 July 26, 2012 the property located at 20112 County Road 10 in accordance with Minn. Stat. §429.061 — 429.081. VOTING AYE ▪ Guenthner, Ken Asleson, Rich • Cossette, Tom ▪ Gmach, George ® Milbrandt, Rosalyn VOTING NAY ❑ Guenthner, Ken ❑ Asleson, Rich ❑ Cossette, Tom ❑ Gmach, George ❑ Milbrandt, Rosalyn Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 26th day of July 2012. Kenneth Guenthner - Mayor ATTEST: City Seal Jeanie Heinecke — City Clerk ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Agenda Item No. l l g. Council Meeting: November 8, 2012 Prepared By: Dan Donahue, Administrator Topic: 2013 Draft Budget Action Required: Discussion Policy: 2013 Annual Budget to be approved by December 20, 2012 Budget Impact: Summary: The city council and staff continue discussions and review of the draft 2013 Budget. The city council has until December 13th in which to prepare a budget for public review and input. At the council meeting of October 25th, the city council discussed ways to better document: the certified tax levy revenues, amounts actually expected to be received and, delinquencies both subtracted from expected tax revenue receipts and actually received from previous years. Below, I have itemized all line item changes (both revenue and expenditures) from Version 6 that was passed out at the council: Line Description Amount 43190 -300 Add - Professional Services -Wage and Benefit Market Study $3,000* 41900 -300 Add - Professional Services -Hamel and Loretto Collaboration $1,000 ** Line 55 (Spreadsheet) Add -1 % reduction of Certified Tax Levy (expected shortfall in collections) 26,044 41900 -31020 Removal of Delinquent Property Tax revenue ($40,000) The net of these changes is expenses exceeding revenues by $4,500. It should be noted that employee expenses will be lowered by $2,800 with the city picking up 70% of the Health Insurance premium increase instead of 100% of the increase. This will be Administrator's Report— Agenda Item 11g, November 8, 2012 Council Meeting Page 2 reflected in the next version of the draft budget. This would bring the net down to a negative $1,700. *I have added a $3,000 line item expenditure for a Wage and Benefit Market Study. This has been brought up that last couple of years. By my estimate, it has been at least eight years since a study of the marketplace has been conducted. This is needed periodically to determine where we are relative to "our" market as to wages and benefits. One of the reasons for bring this up at this time is a request by the Police Union. They are asking for a "market" adjustment for those long tenured officers who are already at the top of the wage scale. Since such an adjustment could not be supported by good data, and since this study needs to be done city wide for all wages and benefits, I have included in the 2013 Budget. ** See Agenda Item 12a. CLAIMS LISTING CHECK RANGE 20156 - 20193 Agenda Item: Agenda Item: Agenda Item: Date 13a. Paid to NONE Total 13b. Paid To NONE Agenda Item 13 a -c. Council Meeting Date: 11/8/2012 Prepared By: jheinecke FUND #500 Escrow Claims Amount Project name Total Funds #500 = (See attached Check Detail Register) Building Inspection Claims Amount Total Building Inspections Claims = $ (See attached Check Detail Register) 13c. All Other Claims (See attached Check Detail Register) Total of Auto Deductions TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR APPROVAL 13c. Auto Deductions / Electronic Fund Transfer / Other Disbursements Paid to Amount 10/23/12 PERA 7,901.22 10/22/12 Citi Street - Health Care Savings 1,492.18 10/22/12 US Bank -I-1 5 A 1,403.70 10/22/12 MN Dept Rev -Fuel Tax 82.08 10/31/12 Blue Cross Blue Shield 8,992.50 11/1/12 Net Pay PR21 28,615.75 11/2/12 Payroll Taxes 10,030.76 11/2/12 Paychex Fee 256.08 Total 58,774.27 445,904.82 58,774.27 $ 504,679.09 H: \City Hat Information \CITY GOVERNMENT \Council, Commissions & Committees \Council Information \Council Claims \2012 Claims CORCORAN, MN Cash Balances Current Period: November 2012 FUND Descr Account mi otatimummxsamva cew .wmvwv�u+,:eem, ,,,,,.,., xn;soszmac,..garmian . Cash GENERAL FUND RESERVES DONATION FUND POLICE DONATION FUND FIREARMS SAFETY DWI FORFEITURE FUND DRUG FORFEITURE FUND TRUCK SAFETY ASPHALT MAINTENANCE POLICE CAPITAL FUND D /S- EQUIPMENT CERTS CO. RD. 19 IMPROVEMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING FACILITY EXPANSION D/S PW CAPITAL FUND PARK CAPITAL FUND CAPITAL- EQUIPMENT CERTS SHANNON LANE ESCROW HOLDING FUND CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS INVESTMENT CONTROL Total Cash Farmers Savings Acct PARK CAPITAL FUND Total Farmers Savings Acct Change in Market Value GENERAL FUND G 100 -10100 G 201 -10100 G 202 -10100 G 204 -10100 G 205 -10100 G 206 -10100 G 207 -10100 G 305 -10100 G 308 -10100 G 309 -10100 G 310 -10100 G 401 -10100 G 402 -10100 G 407 -10100 G 410 -10100 G 415 -10100 G 416 -10100 G 417 -10100 G 500 -10100 G 501 -10100 G 999 -10100 MTD Debit MTD Credit $586.25 $18,456.31 50.00 $1,600.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $781.25 50.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 $0.00 $2,292.39 50.00 599,460.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $312,719.12 $0.00 50.00 $0.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 50.00 $11,182.00 50.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 5586.25 5446,491.07 G 415 -10102 50.00 50.00 G 100 -10105 $0.00 Total Change in Market Value $0.00 Grand Total 11/02/12 12:59 PM Page 1 Current Balance - $312,589.77 $23,615.42 51, 594.47 4962.53 $11,583.38 $1,168.12 $3,346.29 $71,423.30 537,422.70 469,152.00 $134,088.12 $1,455,072.00 - 51,879.58 - $15,680.74 51,311.23 5332,1 15.99 - $320,688.64 59,367.21 $15,236.20 56,000.09 581.73 $1,382,472.99 $0.00 $10,656.03 $0.00 510,656.03 50.00 $6,168.30 50.00 56,168.30 $586.25 5446,491.07 $1,399,297.32 �LN <:idrD';21 10100 Farmers State Bank Paid Chk# 020150 11/8/2012 ASS T ri 9w_., URANT EMPLOYEE BENEFITS u Svkv Wile/ CORCORAN, MN *Check Detail Register© November 2012 11/02/12 11:58 AM Page 1 Check Amt Invoice Comment at" `531`tn' r ll1: aiCY. xRr ;tk?R.',auSYeaAYr„"„1�*."^ mt\115,A4aTA .Sw1v2?WW U h 3178 `Y?s;Z,.? i?:„ 1@ tlq?Ozlti'W ....W E 100 - 41300 -131 Employer Paid Health E 100- 41400 -131 Employer Paid Health E 100 - 42102 -131 Employer Paid Health E 100 - 43100 -131 Employer Paid Health E 100 - 42100 -131 Employer Paid Health Total ASSURANT EMPLOYEE BENEFITS Paid Chk # - 0201'87 �' 11/8/2012 BANKWEST E 309 - 47000 -600 Debt Sry Principal (GENERAL) E 309 - 47000 -610 Interest Total BANKWEST Paid Chk# 020158 11/8/2012 CENTURY LINK E 100- 45200 -321 Telephone Total CENTURY LINK 0;11 644 020159 E 100 - 41941 -210 E 100 - 42100 -223 E 100- 43100 -417 E 100 - 41941 -210 E 100- 43100 -210 E 100 - 43100 -417 11/8/2012 CINTAS -470N Operating Supplies (GENERAL) Building Repair Supplies Uniforms Operating Supplies (GENERAL) Operating Supplies (GENERAL) Uniforms Total CINTAS - 470 $29.18 110112 $46.68 110112 $12.74 110112 $85.70 110112 $159.60 110112 $333.90 $48,500.00 1212 -2006A $1,230.00 1212 -2006A $49,730.00 $54.25 102112 $54.25 $127.95 470144928 $40.41 470144928 $93.96 470144929 $35.69 470148167 $27.66 470148168 $73.75 4_70148169 $399.42 Paid Chk# 020160 11/8/2012 CLARENCE J SCHOMMER ET AL E 401 -41900 -530 Improvements Other Than Bldgs $97,440.00 EASEMENT Total CLARENCE J SCHOMMER ET AL $97,440.00 Paid Chk# 020161 11/8/2012 COMCAST- 902943336 E 100- 41941 -321 Telephone E 100- 42100 -321 Telephone E 100 - 43100 -321 Telephone Total COMCAST- 902943336 Paid Chk# 020162 11/8/2012 DONAHUE DANIEL E 100- 41300 -208 E 100 - 41300 -210 Training and Instruction Operating Supplies (GENERAL) Total DONAHUE, DANIEL $118.82 23229189 $118.81 23229189 $118.81 23229189 $356.44 $299.00 103112 $17.21 103112 $316.21 Paid Chk# 020163 11/8 2012 FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL E 309 - 47000 -610 Interest $1,230.00 1212 -2006A E 309- 47000 -600 Debt Sry Principal (GENERAL) $48,500.00 1212 -2006A Total FARMERS STATE BANK OF HAMEL $49,730.00 Paid 020164 11/8/2012 'GARY'S DIESEL SERVICE INC Insurance Premium Insurance Premium Insurance Premium Insurance Premium Insurance Premium DS Principal Pymt -Equip CIP DS Interest Pymt -Equip CIP LAND LINE City Hall Scraper Mat FLOOR MATS PW Uniforms City Hall Scraper Mat PW Towels PW Uniforms SWUP EASEMENT LAND LINE LAND LINE LAND LINE ICMA TRAINING MILEAGE DS Interest Pymt -Equip CIP DS Principal Pymt -Equip CIP CORCORAN, MN *Check Detail Register© dskla }v1`#Y% ' "v",.5'#!?' ll1'} ''"meTiSi"aL`iSNkn"zvwk5 E 100- 43100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply (GENERAL) E 100- 43100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply (GENERAL) E 100 - 43100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply (GENERAL) E 100 - 43100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply (GENERAL) E 100- 43100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply (GENERAL) E 100 - 43100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply (GENERAL) Total GARY S DIESEL SERVICE INC ....E Paid Chk# 02011 65 718%2012 HENN CO SHERIFF E 100- 42100 -301 Prisoner Total HENN CO SHERIFF November 2012 Check Amt Invoice Comment "m^'.111?cw+rr611",'�1tti.Ul ,„ vasit.+ xi+, .viat'"u'alklita1} „,1.,,c yt t ssiliwAt., „tdtic.,t ":ii. $80.00 17842 DOT INSPECTION $80.00 $125.00 $80.00 $471.43 $171.40 $1,007.83 17850 17851 17852 17855 17862 DOT INSPECTION DOT INSPECTION /REPAIR DOT INSPECTION DOT INSPECTION /REPAIR DOT INSPECTION /REPAIR $732.00 CCR 85 HCSO BOOKING FEE $732.00 VICES $25.00 2012 -76 LABELS - KOHNEN CUP $25.00 MEDICAL FSA REIMB SQUAD MAINT #556 Paid Chk# 020166 11/8/2012 "'HENN CO TAXPAYER SER E 100 - 41900 -210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL) Total HENN CO TAXPAYER SERVICES Paid Chk# 020167 11/8/2012 JOSH HUNTER G 100 -21710 Medical FSA Withholding Total JOSH HUNTER $204.56 1012 $204 56 Paid Chk# 020168 11/8/2012 KUSTOM SIGNALS, INC. E 100- 42100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply (GENERAL) Total KUSTOM SIGNALS, INC. P.a.i„ /8/2 .. ...... -,. Paid Chk# 020169 11/8/2012 LOFFLER E 100- 41951 -207 E 100- 41951 -207 E 100 - 41951 -207 E 100 -41951 -207 Computer Supplies Computer Supplies Computer Supplies Computer Supplies Total LOFFLER $206.46 471143 $206.46 $150.00 1452758 $150.00 1467138 $482.74 1476734 ($586.25) CW16588 -CM $196.49 Paid Chk# 020170 11/8/2012 MEDINA .V.N. NA REERVE E 201 - 42100 -210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL) $1,600.00 2012 $..__.. 0 _— _.. Total MEDINA POLICE RESERVE $1,600.00 Paid Chk# 020171 11/8/2012 MENARDS MAPLE GROVE E 100- 42100 -200 Office Supplies (GENERAL) E 100 -43100 -210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL) Total MENARDS MAPLE GROVE Paid Chk# 020172 11/8/2012 MIKES FIX IT m �� E 100 - 42100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply (GENERAL) Total MIKES FIX IT $24.14 5448 $31.07 5493 $55.21 $48.21 3782 $48.21 , „,.N., ..�0,,..7 .8., 0 N.. ,. I, - „... ..,..,..�, .. ., ...x.. ,..NN Paid Chk# 020173 11/8/2012 MIMBACH FLEETSU�PPLY INC E 100 -43100 -220 Repair /Maint Supply (GENERAL) $141.05 75354 Total MIMBACH FLEET SUPPLY INC $141.05 Paid Chk# 020174 11/8/2012 MINI BIFF LLC CSBS MAINTENANCE CSBS SERVER MAINTENANCE ANNUAL UCC CERTIFICATE CREDIT MEDINA PD RESERVE EVENT ASSIST SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SQUAD REPAIR #555 SUPPLIES 11/02/12 11:58 AM Page 2 CORCORAN, MN *Check Detail Register© titlynntintannalanttkinnt November 2012 Check Amt Invoice Comment v"ik"i1",nettneneR4t?SS Portable 4hnallnfs- Cii1?,r;�ina West Total MINI BIFF, LLC $161.08 Paid Chk# 020175 11/8/2012 MN DEPT LABOR `INDUSTRY F LABOR & E 100 - 42400 -437 Surcharges __$587.32 15423053030 3RD QTR SURCHARGE Total MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY $587.32 Paid Chk# 020176 11/8/2012 MORRIS ELECTRONICS E 308- 42100 -210 E 308 - 42100 -210 E 308 - 42100 -210 Paid Chk# 020177 - E 416 - 41951 -207 E 416- 41951 -207 Operating Supplies (GENERAL) Operating Supplies (GENERAL) Operating Supplies (GENERAL) Total MORRIS ELECTRONICS 11/8/201.2' '-' P'ERMIT WORKSP '.x... Computer Supplies Computer Supplies Total PERMIT WORKS Paid Chk# 020178 11/8/2012 RANDYS SANITATION E 100 - 43232 -300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL) E 100- 43100 -210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL) E 100 -45200 -380 Utility & Services (GENERAL) E 100 - 41941 -380 Utility & Services (GENERAL) Total RANDYS SANITATION $563.39 20119096 $910.00 20119102 $819.00 20119108 $2,292.39 $10,676.81 2012 -27 $505.19 2012 -28 $11,182.00 $5,312.95 $138.48 $178.82 $185.07 $5,815.32 11013 -10 11039 -10 1280351 -10 Paid Chk# 020179 11/8L /2012 ROLE ERICKSOWENTERPRISES INC E 100 - 41550 -300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL) $4,107.00 103012 E 100 - 41550 -210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL) $258.32 103012 Total ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES INC $4,365.32 Paid Chk# 020180 11/8/2012 SPRINT E 100 - 41300 -210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL) E 100 - 41920 -210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL) E 100- 42100 -321 Telephone E 100 - 43100 -321 Telephone Total SPRINT E 100- 42100 -323 Radio Units Total SPRINT Paid Chk# 020182 11/8/2012 SR WEIDEMAV��� E 401 - 41900 -530 Improvements Other Than Bldgs Total SR WEIDEMA RMS PROJECT RMS NETWORK SERVICES RMS ACCESS MAINTENANCE PERMIT WORKS SOFTWARE PERMIT WORKS SUPPORT MONTHLY RECYCLING PUBLIC WORKS GARBAGE PARKS GARBAGE CITY HALL GARBAGE MONTHLY ASSESSING FEE FORMS AND SUPPLIES $17.57 391283315131 CELL SERVICE $17.57 391283315131 CELL SERVICE $244.59 391283315131 CELL SERVICE $451.09 391283315131 CELL SERVICE $730.82 $156.00193109814 -05 AIR CARDS MDC $156.00 $215,279.12 #3 $215,279.12 Paid Chk# 020183 11/8/2012 STREICHER S POLICE EQUIPMENT E 100- 42100 -209 E 100- 42100 -417 E 100 - 42100 -417 Police Reserves Uniforms Uniforms $17.08 1966598 $139.98 1968344 5149.98 1968346 SEWER AND WATER PROJECT NAME PLATE PT OFFICER UNIFORM PT OFFICE UNIFORM 11/02/12 11:58 AM Page 3 ask Name Rolf Erickson Enterprises Inc City of Corcoran Consultant Summary 11/8/2012 Invoice Date Check # Amount Due 10/30/12 20179 4,365.32 Total 4,365.32 H: \City Hall Information \CITY GOVERNMENT \Council, Commissions & Committees \Council Information \Council Claims\2012 Claims STATEMENT 30- Oct -12 ROLF ERICKSON ENTERPRISES, INC. SOUTWEST ASSESSING P 0 BOX 47841 PLYMOUTH, MN 55447 CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 Co. Rd. 116 CORCORAN, MN 55340 OCTOBER 2012 ASSESSING FEE $4,107.00 COUNTY DATA FEE $16.39 REVALUATION AND NEW CONSTRUCTION SUPPLIES $232.13 COPIES AND FORMS $9.80 TOTAL $4,365.32