HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.a. Air Cargo RDC/IEDZ Application Resolution of SupportAGENDA ITEM: Air Cargo RDC /IEDZ Application
Resolution of Support
AGENDA SECTION:
New Business
PREPARED BY: Jamie Verbrugge, City Administrator
AGEIjsi f, A
ATTACHMENTS: Joint Resolution; Revised Engineering
Estimate of Costs to Extend
Infrastructure
APPROVED BY:� /y,
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the Joint Resolution
4 ROSE MOUNT
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Regular Meeting: December 20, 2005
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
Direction was give to staff at the December 6, 2005 regular meeting of the Rosemount
Port Authority to continue work necessary to meet the December 30, 2005 deadline to
submit an application to the Greater Metropolitan Area Foreign Trade Zone to be host
community for an International Economic Development Zone (IEDZ) and international
air cargo Regional Distribution Center (RDC) An outline of the draft application was
reviewed at that meeting.
The formal application must include a resolution from the interested city and county
agreeing to provide all local tax exemptions in statute, and for the applicant city to agree
to treat incentives (tax exemptions) as business subsidies for compliance and reporting
purposes related to the State of Minnesota Business Subsidies Law.
DISCUSSION
City staff has been working closely with County staff to seek a County Board resolution
agreeing to provide all local tax exemptions as required under State law. On Tuesday,
December 13, the Dakota County Physical Development Committee voted unanimously
to approve a resolution. The committee recommendation will be considered by the
Dakota County Board of Commissioners at its meeting on Tuesday, December 20. The
results of the vote will be known at the time of the Port Authority meeting.
The County Board resolution is heavily conditioned so that certain performance and
policy criterion, at both the State and local levels, must be attained before final
agreement to provide the tax exemptions will be satisfied. Among the requirements of
the County Board is full funding and construction of the County State Aid Highway (CR)
42 and U.S. Highway (US) 52 interchange, as well as the U S Highway 55 /CR 42
December 20, 2005
City Council Executive Summary
Page 2
realignment east of the interchange; inclusion in the GMAFTZ business plan of an
economic impact analysis related to the relocation of businesses from northern Dakota
County communities; resolutions of support from impacted communities; a
socioeconomic analysis of the project's impact on affordable housing, livable wages and
County services, and, traffic and environmental studies
The County Board resolution also limits its support for property tax exemptions to the
RDC only and further states that the County share of property taxes for development
beyond the RDC will be reimbursed if the City of Rosemount establishes a Tax
Increment Financing District within the IEDZ
Although the County Board conditions of support are substantial, staff does not believe
the conditions are insurmountable. It will however increase the amount of work to be
done as part of the business plan process by GMAFTZ if Rosemount/Dakota County is
selected as host community
In addition to having apparently been successful in receiving the necessary County
resolution and drafting a Joint Resolution of the Rosemount Port Authority and
Rosemount City Council, staff has continued to evaluate the policies that should be
adopted by the City as part of the application process Those issues are framed below
Project Management
The City Council discussed the proposed terms of the application, specifically the
involvement of the City Administrator as project manager, at its meeting on December
14, 2005 The City Council supports the approach and recognizes that the dedication of
staff time to this project may result in the delay of some other issues Staff has
committed to keeping the Council and Port Authority apprised of anticipated workloads
and issue management.
IEDZ Incentives
Staff recommends that the Port Authority encourage the GMAFTZ to continue seeking
legislative support to extend the non property tax exemptions to qualifying businesses
within the IEDZ In addition to qualifying businesses having relevant international and
foreign trade involvement, staff is recommending that the City support expansion of
eligible incentive recipients to include businesses involved in the biotechnology and
nanotechnology industries.
City Contributions
1. Staff recommends that the application indicate the City's willingness to consider tax
abatement or tax increment financing within the IEDZ not including the RDC As
discussed at the December 6 meeting, and as alluded to in the paragraph above,
staff believes the best way to encourage development in the IEDZ will be through a
combination of State and local incentives. Encouraging the State to provide
exemptions, while not including property taxes, leaves flexibility for the host
community to help underwrite the cost of leapfrog development necessary to serve
SUMMARY
Staff recommends that the attached resolution be adopted.
December 20, 2005
City Council Executive Summary
Page 3
the proposed project area. This can be accomplished without County participation,
although the extent of its applicability and attractiveness cannot fully be measured
until the business plan is flushed out.
2 On the issue of extending City services to the project area, staff is recommending
that the Port Authority and City Council indicate a willingness to carry some of the
cost of extending services in advance of development occurring. However, because
of the size of our community and financial position, our ability to carry a cost in
excess of $2 million is unreasonable. Staff has been working to re- evaluate the
project costs for service extensions in light of the application being specific to a 100
acre project area, rather than the originally presumed 1,000 -acre area. The
application will include language making clear that it is the City's expectation that the
State of Minnesota will consider funding costs above that as a reasonable
investment in leapfrog development for State and regional economic interest, similar
to the required funding of the 42/52 interchange. The application will also detail all
planning and engineering costs for the development, as requested in the Request for
Proposals.
Site Selection and Designation
Although staff has prepared the application with the area south of CR 42 and east of
Hwy 52 as the proposed project site, staff still firmly believes that the application should
clearly forecast that this is only one of several sites that will be considered if Rosemount
is selected. After reviewing the legislative language, it appears that this approach is not
prohibited in the application process. The statutory language states'
Sec '14. [469.3215] [APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION.]
Subdivision 1. [WHO MAY APPLY.] One or more local government
units, or a joint powers board under section 471.59, acting on
behalf of two or more units, may apply for designation of an area as
an international economic development zone All or part of the
area proposed for designation as a zone must be located within the
boundaries of each of the governmental units. A local government
unit may not submit or have submitted on its behalf more than one
application for designation of an international economic
development zone.
In addition to including the language that leaves open the possibility of considering more
than one site, staff recommends that the Port Authority encourage GMAFTZ and the
Legislature to extend the deadline by which the IEDZ must be designated. The current
June 30, 2006 deadline does not provide nearly enough time to thoroughly conduct the
business plan (especially in light of Dakota County's requirements) and to fully evaluate
the benefits and disadvantages of various project site alternatives.
To: Andy Bretzler
City of Rosemount
From: Joe Ward
WSB Assocaites, Inc.
cc: Dave Hutton
WSB Assocaites, Inc.
Date: December 15, 2005
Technical Memorandum
Re: Analysis of Concepts to Provide Sanitary Sewer, Water, and Storm Sewer Services to
the Proposed Air Cargo Facility Sites
WSB Project No. 1556 -54
Introduction
The following technical memorandum summarizes the results of our analysis of the revised 100
acre Air Cargo Facility sites. The analysis was initiated by the Commission in response to the
Study dated December 5, 2005. The purpose of this technical memorandum is to present
information regarding the cost of providing water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and
transportation access to the two proposed Air Cargo Facility sites and within each if a 100 acre
parcel were initially developed.
Infrastructure to the Proposed Sites
The cost to provide water and sanitary sewer service to both sites was developed and shown in
Tables 1 and 2 of the study. Figure 1 shows the location of the two sites. Initial sanitary sewer
and water improvements within and to the sites are shown in Figures 2 and 3 respectively for a
100 acre parcel.
Sanitary sewer costs to provide service to the site remained the same as the study, but water
infrastructure costs to Site 2 were decreased. Costs for service are shown in Table 1 below. The
larger water demand in the original study would require two separate water mains to transport
water to the site to conform to the Comprehensive Water System Plan. By decreasing the size of
the site 100 acres, only one 16 -inch main from the west (Figure 3) would be needed to provide
adequate service. However, once approximately 200 acres are developed then the second 12 -inch
transmission main from the northwest would need to be constructed to maintain adequate service.
It is possible to upsize the 12 -inch main from the northwest (dashed line in Figure 3) to 16 -inch
and provide water for up to 300 acres with service initially at a lower cost of $520,000.
However, for the ultimate system design reviewed in the Comprehensive Water System Plan this
main would be oversized.
C (Documents and Settings jdvlLocal Setungs\Temporary Internet Files1OLKBD \Technecal Memorandum 1 Mac doc
Off-site stormwater infrastructure improvements to serve the site will be funded by the developer
paying trunk fees to the City as a part of developing the site. The estimated trunk fees that would
be charged to the developer for developing a 100 -acre site is approximately $634,000. This
number is based on assumptions stated in Appendix B of the study and the 2005 Storm Water
Lateral Trunk Conveyance and Ponding Fee Calculation Worksheet. Once a specific site is
chosen, a feasibility study will need to be performed to determine if the site's characteristics
favor off -site infrastructure at this time. If not, the developer will need to discharge water to an
existing drainage course or retain all stormwater on -site until construction of downstream storm
sewer becomes economically feasible.
Transportation access would need to be provided to both sites. The street design requirements
would be similar to the City's collector streets in order to handle the increased traffic caused by
the facility and be 48 feet in width. For Site 1, CSAH 42 provides adequate service to the site,
but one new signalized intersection would need to be constructed for access. Site 2 would
require reconstruction of Audrey Avenue from the site to CSAH 42 or approximately 1 /2 mile and
a new signalized intersection. It was assumed the existing Audrey Avenue is not designed for the
traffic loads generated by the Air Cargo Facility and would need to be widened regardless.
Table 1— Infrastructure Costs Required for Service to Air Cargo Facility Sites
Infrastructure within the Proposed Sites
Water and sanitary sewer costs were greatly reduced from the study since the amount of land
required serve initially would be much less. Both water and sanitary sewer mains would initially
be constructed with the capacity to serve the entire development once completely built out.
Water mains would be constructed in accordance with the Comprehensive Water System Plan.
The cost and construction of stormwater retention and treatment ponds as well as internal
drainage systems on -site will be the responsibility of the developer. The requirements for on -site
stormwater facilities are listed in the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan
(2003).
For street improvements it was assumed that the City would install one loop road around the
perimeter of the proposed 100 acre site, along the same alignment as the water main. The design
of this road would be similar to a collector street as described in the preceding section. Street
improvement costs include storm water collection and laterals, but not ponding or trunk facilities.
C Documents and SettrngslidvlLocal SetungslTemporary Internet Fi1es'OLKBDITechneca ]Memorandum 100ac doc
Site 1
Site 2
Street
600,000
$1,590,000
Sanitary Sewer
$2,011,000
$1,775,000
Water
962,000
689,000
Storm Sewer
634,000
634,000
Total Cost
$4,207,000
$4,688,000
Off-site stormwater infrastructure improvements to serve the site will be funded by the developer
paying trunk fees to the City as a part of developing the site. The estimated trunk fees that would
be charged to the developer for developing a 100 -acre site is approximately $634,000. This
number is based on assumptions stated in Appendix B of the study and the 2005 Storm Water
Lateral Trunk Conveyance and Ponding Fee Calculation Worksheet. Once a specific site is
chosen, a feasibility study will need to be performed to determine if the site's characteristics
favor off -site infrastructure at this time. If not, the developer will need to discharge water to an
existing drainage course or retain all stormwater on -site until construction of downstream storm
sewer becomes economically feasible.
Transportation access would need to be provided to both sites. The street design requirements
would be similar to the City's collector streets in order to handle the increased traffic caused by
the facility and be 48 feet in width. For Site 1, CSAH 42 provides adequate service to the site,
but one new signalized intersection would need to be constructed for access. Site 2 would
require reconstruction of Audrey Avenue from the site to CSAH 42 or approximately 1 /2 mile and
a new signalized intersection. It was assumed the existing Audrey Avenue is not designed for the
traffic loads generated by the Air Cargo Facility and would need to be widened regardless.
Table 1— Infrastructure Costs Required for Service to Air Cargo Facility Sites
Infrastructure within the Proposed Sites
Water and sanitary sewer costs were greatly reduced from the study since the amount of land
required serve initially would be much less. Both water and sanitary sewer mains would initially
be constructed with the capacity to serve the entire development once completely built out.
Water mains would be constructed in accordance with the Comprehensive Water System Plan.
The cost and construction of stormwater retention and treatment ponds as well as internal
drainage systems on -site will be the responsibility of the developer. The requirements for on -site
stormwater facilities are listed in the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan
(2003).
For street improvements it was assumed that the City would install one loop road around the
perimeter of the proposed 100 acre site, along the same alignment as the water main. The design
of this road would be similar to a collector street as described in the preceding section. Street
improvement costs include storm water collection and laterals, but not ponding or trunk facilities.
C Documents and SettrngslidvlLocal SetungslTemporary Internet Fi1es'OLKBDITechneca ]Memorandum 100ac doc
Table 2 Infrastructure Costs Required for Service within Air Cargo Facility Sites
Summary
The cost to provide service to and within both sites are very similar for the initial improvements.
Transportation costs for Site 1 are less than Site 2 because of its proximity to CSAH 42, but
water and sanitary sewer costs for Site 2 are less than Site 1 because of its proximity to existing
City water and sewer service. Full development costs between the two sites are similar as shown
in the study. The total initial cost to provide infrastructure to and serve a 100 acre site would be
$8,378,000 for Site 1 and $8,815,000 for Site 2.
C Documents and SethngsldvkLocal Settmgs\Temporary Internet Fdes1OLKBDITechmcat Memorandum 100ac doc
Site 1
Site 2
Street
$3,192,000
$3,192,000
Sanitary Sewer
475,000
454,000
Water
504,000
481,000
Storm Sewer
Developer
Developer
Total Cost
$4,171,000
$4,127,000
Table 2 Infrastructure Costs Required for Service within Air Cargo Facility Sites
Summary
The cost to provide service to and within both sites are very similar for the initial improvements.
Transportation costs for Site 1 are less than Site 2 because of its proximity to CSAH 42, but
water and sanitary sewer costs for Site 2 are less than Site 1 because of its proximity to existing
City water and sewer service. Full development costs between the two sites are similar as shown
in the study. The total initial cost to provide infrastructure to and serve a 100 acre site would be
$8,378,000 for Site 1 and $8,815,000 for Site 2.
C Documents and SethngsldvkLocal Settmgs\Temporary Internet Fdes1OLKBDITechmcat Memorandum 100ac doc
4 ROSEMOUNT 1
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
To: Jamie Verbrugge, City Administrator
From: Andrew J Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer
Date: December 15, 2005
Subject: Estimated City Fees for Air Cargo for 100 Acre Site
Following are the estunated fees that associated with the development of the air cargo facility. For
the purpose of the estimate, the site area has been assumed to be 100 acres.
I. Development Fees with Final Plat
M E M O R A N D U M
Rate Area
Total
GIS Fees
Trunk Area Sanitary
Trunk Area Water
Trunk Area Storm
$120.00 /acre
$1,075.00 /acre
$4,420.00 /acre
100 acres
100 acres
100 acres
$12,000
$107,500
$442,000
$0
The trunk area storm fee has been reflected m the WSB memorandum as the cost to extend
storm sewer service to the site.
II. Development Fees with Building Permit
MCES Sewer Access Charge (SAC)
City SAC
City Water Access Charge (WAG)
City Storm Access Charge (STAC)
$1,550 per SAC unit
$1,200 per SAC unit
$26,810 for 6" meter
$2,065 per acre
C \Documents and Settings \Idv\Local Setimgs \Temporary Internet Files \OLKBD \121505 avcargof )vmemo doe
4 ROSEMOUNT
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
The above estimated fees represent development fees associated with Public Works /Engineering
charges only. Should you have questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact me.
C \Documents and Seongslids'd.otai Settings \Temporary Internet Fats sOLKSD\12150S encargoftes jvmemo doc
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2005-
JOINT RESOLUTION of the ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL
and
ROSEMOUNT PORT AUTHORITY
Agreeing to Provide Local Tax Exemptions and to Treat Same Incentives as Business Subsidies in
Apphcanon as Host Community for an International Economic Development Zone and Regional
Distribution Center of An Cargo
WHEREAS, m July 2005 the Minnesota Legislature passed and Governor Pawlenty signed into law
the establishment of an International Economic Development Zone (IEDZ) for the purpose of
creating an international air cargo Regional Distribution Center (RDC); and
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has authorized the IEDZ m recognition of the significant
statewide and regional economic and security interests the project will serve to increase the global
competitive position of Minnesota busmesses, to prevent the out- rmgrauon of jobs and industry to
other states, and to provide for the effecnve and efficient secunty screening of air cargo; and
WHEREAS, the law provides for qualifying businesses locating within the RDC and IEDZ to
receive certain tax exemptions as incentives to facilitate the project, and
WHEREAS, the Greater Metropolitan Area Foreign Trade Zone (GMAFTZ) has been designated
by the State of Minnesota as the responsible governmental unit to operate the IEDZ as a Foreign
Trade Zone, as approved by the United States Department of Commerce, for the purpose of
providing customs and duty benefits to businesses engaging m international trade; and
WHEREAS, GMAFTZ is also responsible for soliciting host community applications, conducting
business analyses to demonstrate the financial feasibility of the project, and designating a site as an
IEDZ; and
WHEREAS, the Rosemount Port Authority joined the Greater Metropohtan Area Foreign Trade
Zone in March 2004 as an indication of the community's interest and support for this State- mitiated
econorxuc development project, and
WHEREAS, the Rosemount City Council and Rosemount Port Authority have estabhshed as goals
for the community to attract commercial development and to broaden the community's tax base;
and
WHEREAS, the Rosemount City Council and Rosemount Port Authority have preliminarily
identified a project area of nearly 600 acres in an area east of U S. Highway 52 and south of County
State Aid Highway 42, but believes that other site locations m Rosemount may be equal to or
superior to the preliminary site in terms of project suitability; and
WHEREAS, the City has cooperated with the Dakota County Board of Commissioners to receive
County support to provide the applicable tax exemptions, subject to specific policy and performance
conditions as determined necessary by the County Board;
ATTEST:
Linda J. Jentink, City Clerk
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rosemount City Council and the
Rosemount Port Authonty agree to provide all -cif the local tax exemptions provided under
Minnesota Statutes Section 469.315, and agree to treat incentives provided under the zone
designation as business subsidies under Minnesota Statutes Sections 1165.993 to 1165.995 and to
comply with the requirements of the law; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Rosemount City Council and Rosemount Port
Authority have determined that specific commitments to local project contributions cannot
reasonably be made until the business plan and other relevant and required studies have been
completed, and retains the option of withdrawing from the project if the economic feasibility is
determined by the Rosemount Port Authonty to not be m the best financial and /or socioeconomic
interests of the community, especially as it pertains to potential future development within the
IEDZ, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Rosemount City Council and Rosemount Port
Authority strongly encourage the Board of Directors of the Greater Metropolitan Area Foreign
Trade Zone to seek from the Minnesota Legislature in 2006 extensions to the timelines for IEDZ
establishment and to seek expansion of non property tax exemptions to the entire area designated as
an IEDZ for qualifying businesses engaged in foreign trade and for businesses engaged in the
research, manufacture, and /or distribution of biotechnology and nanotechnology materials or
finished goods
ADOPTED December 20, 2005, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
William H Droste, Mayor
RESOLUTION 2005
Motion by: Second by:
Voted in favor:
Voted against:
Member absent:
2
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2005-
JOINT RESOLUTION of the ROSEMOUNT CITY COUNCIL
and
ROSEMOUNT PORT AUTHORITY
R eil :J" c
Agreeing to Provide Local Tax Exemptions and to Treat Same Incentives as Business Subsidies in
Application as Host Community for an International Economic Development Zone and
Regional Distribution Center of Air Cargo
WHEREAS, in July 2005 the Minnesota Legislature passed and Governor Pawlenty signed into law
the establishment of an International Econonuc Development Zone (IEDZ) for the purpose of
creating an international air cargo Regional Distribution Center (RDC); and
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has authorized the IEDZ m recognition of the significant
statewide and regional economic and security interests the project will serve to increase the global
competitive position of Minnesota businesses, to prevent the out- nugration of jobs and industry to
other states, and to provide for the effective and efficient security screening of an cargo; and
WHEREAS, the law provides for qualifying businesses locating within the RDC and IEDZ to
receive certain tax exemptions as incentives to facilitate the project; and
WHEREAS, the Greater Metropolitan Area Foreign Trade Zone (GM AFTZ) has been designated
by the State of Minnesota as the responsible governmental unit to operate the IEDZ as a Foreign
Trade Zone, as approved by the United States Department of Commerce, for the purpose of
providing customs and duty benefits to businesses engaging in international trade; and
WHEREAS, G'VIAFTZ is also responsible for soliciting host community applications, conducting
business analyses to demonstrate the financial feasibility of the project, and designating a site as an
IEDZ; and
WHEREAS, the Rosemount Port Authority joined the Greater Metropolitan Area Foreign Trade
Zone in March 2004 as an indication of the community's interest and support for this State initiated
economic development project; and
WHEREAS, the Rosemount City Council and Rosemount Port Authority have established as goals
for the community to attract commercial development and to broaden the community's tax base;
and
WHEREAS, the Rosemount City Council and Rosemount Port Authority have prelmi.inarily
identified a project area of nearly 600 acres in an area east of U.S. Highway 52 and south of County
State Aid Highway 42, but believes that other site locations m Rosemount may be equal to or
superior to the prehminary site m terms of project suitability; and
WHEREAS, the City has cooperated with the Dakota County Board of Commissioners to receive
County support to provide the applicable tax exemptions, subject to specific policy and performance
conditions as determined necessary by the County Board;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rosemount City Council and the
Rosemount Port Authority agree to provide the local tax exemptions provided under Minnesota
Statutes Section 469.315, and agree to treat incentives provided under the zone designation as
business subsidies under Minnesota Statutes Sections 116J 993 to 116J 995 and to comply with the
requirements of the law; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Rosemount City Council and Rosemount Port
Authority have determined that specific commitments to local project contributions cannot
reasonably be made until the business plan and other relevant and required studies have been
completed, and retains the option of withdrawing from the project if the economic feasibility is
determined by the Rosemount Port Authority to not be in the best financial and /or socioeconomic
interests of the community, especially as it pertains to potential future development within the
IEDZ; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Rosemount City Council and Rosemount Port
Authority strongly encourage the Board of Directors of the Greater Metropolitan Area Foreign
Trade Zone to seek from the Minnesota Legislature m 2006 extensions to the timelines for IEDZ
establishment and to seek expansion of non property tax exemptions to the entire area designated as
an IEDZ for qualifying businesses engaged in foreign trade and for businesses engaged m the
research, manufacture, and /or distribution of biotechnology and nanotechnology materials or
finished goods
ADOPTED December 20, 2005, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount.
ATTEST:
Linda Jentink, City Clerk
Motion by: Second by:
Voted in favor:
Voted against:
Member absent:
William H. Droste, Mayor
2
RESOLUTION 2005
STATE OF MINNESOTA
GRANT CONTRACT
This grant contract is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Public Safety,
Division of Homeland Securi and Emer enc Mana• ement, 444 Cedar Street Suite 223 St. Paul Minnesota
55101-6223 "State and City of Rosemount, 2875 West 145 Street, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068
"Grantee
Recitals
1 Under Minn. Stat. 12.22 and 299A.01 Subd 2 (4) the State is empowered to allocate and disburse federal
funds made available through the Department of Homeland Security and is empowered to enter into this
grant contract.
2 The State is in need of the distribution of federal funds to eligible grant recipients pertaining to the 2005
Buffer Zone Protection Program, Award Number 2005 -GR -T5 -0015, to provide protective action funding to
protect and secure critical infrastructure and key resource sites in Minnesota.
3 The Grantee represents that it is duly qualified and agrees to perform all services described in this grant
contract to the satisfaction of the State.
Grant Contract
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
1 Term of Grant Contract
1.1 Effective date: July 1, 2005, or the date the State obtains all required signatures under Minnesota
Statutes Section 16C.05, subdivision 2, whichever is later. Once this grant contract is fully executed,
the Grantee may claim reimbursement for expenditures incurred pursuant to Clause 4.2 of this grant
contract. Reimbursements will only be made for those expenditures made according to the terms of this
grant contract.
1.2 Expiration date: March 31, 2006, or until all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever
occurs first.
1.3 Survival of Terms. The following clauses survive the expiration or cancellation of this grant contract:
8. Liability; 9. State Audits, 10. Government Data Practices; 12. Publicity and Endorsement; 13.
Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue; and 15. Data Disclosure.
2 Grantee's Duties
The Grantee, who is not a state employee, will:
2.1 Perform the work in the Grantee's 2005 Buffer Zone Protection Grant Program Application,
Attachment A, which is attached and incorporated into this grant contract. Approved equipment and/or
management and administration costs identified in Attachment A were approved from the 2005 Buffer
Zone Protection Program Guidelines incorporated into this grant contract by reference.
2.2 Comply with all program guidelines specified in the 2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program Grant
Application Packet provided to the Grantee by the State, and will comply with the standards and
requirements attached and incorporated into this grant contract. These additional standards and
requirements are the following:
a. Federal Audit Requirements, labeled Attachment B, which is attached and incorporated into this grant
contract.
b. Federal Assurances, labeled Attachment C, which is attached and incorporated into this grant
contract.
c. Grantees receiving $100,000 00 or more must complete and return the Certification Regarding
Lobbying form, labeled Attaclunent D, which is attached and incorporated into this grant contract.
2.3 Funds approved under this grant contract shall be used to supplement, and shall not be used to supplant,
non federal funds dedicated to this effort. The Grantee may be required to supply documentation
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (11/05) Page 1
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
certifying that a reduction in non federal resources occurred for reasons other than the receipt or
expected receipt of federal funds.
2.4 Provide all necessary training to their employees concerning the use of equipment purchased through
this grant contract, and shall not permit the equipment to be tampered with or operated by individuals
who are not properly trained.
2.5 Assume total responsibility of the proper handling, use, and maintenance of the equipment and bear all
costs of maintenance, repair and/or replacement related to equipment. Equipment purchased through
this grant contract is the property of the Grantee.
2.6 When practicable, any equipment purchased with grant funding shall be prominently marked as follows:
"Purchased with funds provided by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security".
2.7 Comply with all program guidelines specified in the 2005 Buffer Zone Protection Grant Program
Guidelines provided to the Grantee by the State and incorporated into this grant contract by reference,
and must support the goals and objectives included in the State and/or Urban Area Homeland Security
Strategies
3 Time
The Grantee must comply with all the time requirements described in this grant contract. In the
performance of this grant contract, time is of the essence.
4 Consideration and Payment
4.1 Consideration. The State will pay for all services performed by the Grantee under this grant contract as
follows:
(1) Compensation. The Grantee will be reimbursed an amount not to exceed $145,134.00 according to
the breakdown of costs specified in Grantee's 2005 Buffer Zone Protection Grant Program
Application, Attachment A, which is attached and incorporated into this grant contract.
The Grantee will submit a written change request for any substitution of budget items in Attachment
A, or any deviation of more than 15% from the approved budget category amounts in Attachment A.
Change requests for substitutions of budget items, or a deviation of more than 15% from the
approved budget category amount must be given in writing to the State's Authorized Representative
and at least 60 days prior to the Expiration date of this grant contract. Grantees whose requests have
been approved will be notified in writing by the State's Authorized Representative to the Grantee's
Authorized Representative. Requests must be approved prior to any expenditure by the Grantee.
(2) Matching Requirements. (If Applicable.) Grantee certifies that the following matching
requirement, for the grant contract, will be met by the Grantee. $0,000.00.
(3) Total Obligation. The total obligation of the State for all compensation and reimbursements to the
Grantee under this grant contract will not exceed $145,134.00
4.2 Payment
(1) Grant Billing Form. The State will promptly pay the Grantee after the Grantee presents a Grant
Billing Form for the services actually performed and the State's Authorized Representative accepts
the invoiced services. Grant Billing Form must be submitted timely and according to the following
schedule:
a. Grantee will submit the Grant Billing Form along with copies of Grantee's itemized invoices for
actual costs incurred quarterly, but not more often than monthly and within 30 days of the period
covered by the Grant Billing Form.
b. Expenditures for each state fiscal year (July through June) of this grant contract must be for
services satisfactorily performed within applicable state fiscal year Final Grant Billing Form
pertaining to the first state fiscal year of this grant contract must be received by the State no later
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (11/05) Page 2
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
than 45 days of the Expiration date of this grant contract.
c. Grantee will submit financial and narrative performance reports at least quarterly, but not more
often than monthly. The narrative performance report shall consist of a comparison of actual
accomplislunents to the approved work plan in Attachment A. These reports must be submitted
before reimbursement will be paid.
(2) Federal funds. (Where applicable, if blank this section does not apply) Payments under this grant
contract will be made from federal funds obtained by the State through CFDA 97.078, Department
of Homeland Security Fiscal Year 2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program. The Grantee is
responsible for compliance with all federal requirements imposed on these funds and accepts full
financial responsibility for any requirements imposed by the Grantee's failure to comply with federal
requirements.
5 Conditions of Payment
All services provided by the Grantee under this grant contract must be performed to the State's
satisfaction, as determined at the sole discretion of the State's Authorized Representative and in
accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. The
Grantee will not receive payment for work found by the State to be unsatisfactory or performed in
violation of federal, state, or Local law.
6 Authorized Representative
The State's Authorized Representative is Kristen Sailer, Grants Specialist, Division of Homeland
Security and Emergency Management, 444 Cedar Street, Suite 223. St. Paul MN 55101 (651) 215-
6939, or his /her successor, and has the responsibility to monitor the Grantee's performance and the
authority to accept the services provided under this grant contract. If the services are satisfactory, the
State's Authorized Representative will certify acceptance on each Grant Billing Form submitted for
payment.
The Grantee's Authorized Representative is Gary Kalstabakken, Chief, Rosemount Police Department,
2875 West 145 Street Rosemount Minnesota 55068 (6511322 -2010. If the Grantee's Authorized
Representative changes at any time during this grant contract, the Grantee must immediately notify the
State.
7 Assignment, Amendments, Waiver, and Grant Contract Complete
7.1 Assignment. The Grantee may neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this grant
contract without the prior consent of the State and a fully executed Assignment Agreement,
executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved this grant contract, or their
successors in office.
7.2 Amendments. Any amendment to this grant contract must be in writing and will not be effective
until it has been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the
original grant contract, or their successors in office.
7.3 Waiver. If the State fails to enforce any provision of this grant contract, that failure does not waive
the provision or its right to enforce it.
7.4 Grant Contract Complete. This grant contract contains all negotiations and agreements between
the State and the Grantee, No other understanding regarding this grant contract, whether written or
oral, may be used to bind either party.
8 Liability
The Grantee must indemnify, save, and hold the State, its agents, and employees harmless from any
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (11/05) Page 3
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
claims or causes of action, including attorney's fees incurred by the State, arising from the performance
of this grant contract by the Grantee or the Grantee's agents or employees. This clause will not be
construed to bar any legal remedies the Grantee may have for the State's failure to fulfill its obligations
under this grant contract.
9 State Audits
Under Minn Stat. 16C.05, subd. 5, the Grantee's books, records, documents, and accounting
procedures and practices relevant to this grant contract are subject to examination by the State and /or the
State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end of this
grant contract.
10 Government Data Practices
The Grantee and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat.
Ch. 13, as it applies to all data provided by the State under this grant contract, and as it applies to all
data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Grantee under this
grant contract. The civil remedies of Minn. Stat 13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in
this clause by either the Grantee or the State
If the Grantee receives a request to release the data referred to in this Clause, the Grantee must
immediately notify the State. The State will give the Grantee instructions concerning the release of the
data to the requesting party before the data is released.
11 Workers' Compensation
The Grantee certifies that it is in compliance with Minn. Stat. 176.181, subd. 2, pertaining to workers'
compensation insurance coverage. The Grantee's employees and agents will not be considered State
employees. Any claims that may arise under the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act on behalf of
these employees and any claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the
part of these employees are in no way the State's obligation or responsibility.
12 Publicity and Endorsement
12.1 Publicity. Any publicity regarding the subject matter of this grant contract must identify the State
and the Department of Homeland Security as the sponsoring agency and must not be released
without prior written approval from the State's Authorized Representative. All publications
created with funding under this grant contract shall prominently contain the following statement:
"This document was prepared under a grant from the Office of State and Local Government
Coordination and Preparedness (SLGCP), U S. Department of Homeland Security. Points of view
or opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the
official position or policies of SLGCP or the U S. Department of Homeland Security." For
purposes of this provision, publicity includes notices, informational pamphlets, press releases,
research, reports, signs, and similar public notices prepared by or for the Grantee individually or
jointly with others, or any subcontractors, with respect to the program, publications, or services
provided resulting from this grant contract Recipient acknowledges that SLGCP reserves a
royalty -free, non exclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and
authorize others to use, for federal government purposes: (1) the copyright in any work developed
under an award or sub award; and (2) any rights of copyright to which a recipient or subrecipient
purchases ownership with Federal support. The Recipient agrees to consult with SLGCP regarding
the allocation of any patent rights that arise from, or are purchased with, this funding.
12.2Endorsement. The Grantee must not claim that the State endorses its products or services.
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (11/05) Page 4
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
13 Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue
Minnesota law, without regard to its choice -of -law provisions, governs this grant contract. Venue for all
legal proceedings out of this grant contract, or its breach, must be m the appropriate state or federal court
with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
14 Termination
14.1 Termination by the State. The State may cancel this grant contract at any time, with or without
cause, upon 30 days' written notice to the Grantee. Upon termination, the Grantee will be entitled
to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed.
14.2 Termination for Insufficient Funding. The State may immediately terminate this grant contract if
it does not obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source; or if funding
cannot be continued at a level sufficient to allow for the payment of the services covered here.
Termination must be by written or fax notice to the Grantee. The State is not obligated to pay for
any services that are provided after notice and effective date of termination. However, the Grantee
will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed to
the extent that funds are available. The State will not be assessed any penalty if the grant contract
is terminated because of the decision of the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source, not to
appropriate funds. The State must provide the Grantee notice of the lack of funding within a
reasonable time of the State receiving that notice.
14.3 Termination for Failure to Comply. The State may cancel this grant contract immediately if the
State finds that there has been a failure to comply with the provisions of this grant, that reasonable
progress has not been made or that the purpose for which the funds were granted have not been or
will not be fulfilled. The State may take action to protect the interests of the State of Minnesota,
including the refusal to disburse additional funds and requiring the return of all or part of the funds
already disbursed.
15 Data Disclosure
Under Minn Stat. 270.66, and other applicable law, the Grantee consents to disclosure of its social
security number, federal employer tax identification number, and/or Minnesota tax identification
number, already provided to the State, to federal and state tax agencies and state personnel involved in
the payment of state obligations. These identification numbers may be used in the enforcement of
federal and state tax laws which could result in action requiring the Grantee to file state tax retums and
pay delinquent state tax liabilities, if any, or pay other state liabilities.
REST OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (11/05) Page 5
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
1. ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION 3. STATE AGENCY
Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as
required by Minn. Stat 164 15 and I 6 05 By
(with delegated authority)
Signed' Title'
Date Date
Grant Contract No 2005 -BZPP- 00715 2000 -10679
2. GRANTEE
The Grantee certifies that the appropnate person(s)
have executed the grant contract on behalf of the Grantee as
required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions, or ordinances
By Distribution
DPS /FAS
Title Grantee
State's Authonzed Representative
Date'
By
Title
Date'
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (11/05) Page 6
Nov•21. 2005 1:33Pt0
No.6641 P. 2
ATTACHMENT A
20 05 B ZON
PROTECTION GRANT PROGRAM
ZOOS- $ZPP- DD -7z-
Must be submitted by close of business Septanber 2005
urisdiction 7 4 Qarl]otlrit:P O v i a> ?ex?
Contact Name :.0aKalstaba* *ETT
ale tofPoaice
Address -28761fVest'I?[StfT Stref:t
County flakota- State: MN Zip x.:.:55068
City -i�osernoixnk_.
E -mail Address a r S�tabaill -Q. ri rosisrrfotan =mn Fax Number t-51242 C.ai
Please enter the amount awarded to your jurisdiction for
ward Amount this grant Contact HSEM staff if this amount is not known.
MAJOR OBJECTIVES Please explain how the resources requested in this application wt-enhanotrour
"urisdiction's ability to prevent a terrorist act and be prepared to demonstrate how homeland security will be
improved. Also, please indicate how the specific items requested support and are consistent with the overall
State Homeland Security Strategy.
btlye Band or
at #he=crifcal infrastri;cfure identified itrciutiurisdiatio
STATE STRATEGY LINK Explain how resources requested support the overail State Homeland Security
Strategy. In addition, please reference the specific goals and objectives Identified in the State Strategy that
these requested equipment needs address:
isv�3r.F„
Phone :651 322.201TY
Page A -1
z. txpiosive uevice Mitigation @k KemeOiatlon equipment {State authorized Bomb Squads only)
Item
Unit Price*
QTY
Total
Disc'
ODP Project
Receiving Jurisdiction
1
g_ .r._
11,000
--r
Q
Page
a...:_.
._vS.
Sustainmant Costs
Sustainment Costs
r:
Subtotal
Item
Unit Price
QTY
Total
Disc'
ODP Protect
Receiving Jurisdiction
Ra ligarabtlity Kiif
11,000
LE
=T.-':
113-1;900:00
Rose ifouni- splice Department
w J
Q
Page
a...:_.
._vS.
Sustainmant Costs
Subtotal
11.000
Item U
Unit Price* Q
QTY T
Total D
Disc* O
ODP Project R
Receiving Jurisdiction
Page
Nov.21. 2065 1'3441 No•6641 P. 3
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program Grant
EQUIPMENT WORKSHEET
Please use the highlighted lines below each category to indicate intended equipment purchases_ If more lines are
required, use those provided on the "Add`I Eqpt Lines° tab.
UNIT PRICE SHOULD INtr_LUDE TAX AND SHIPPINGMANDLING EXPFNSFS
DISCIPLINE ALLOCATION: Please use the drop down list to indicate th®Ilocated discipline tor the units (QTY) to be purchased. For
example. if seven units are to be purchased for Hazardous Matei t3-, select the HZ value If more than one discipline is receiving
purchased units, specify the allocation using subsequet lines as shown in the example.
Dmciogne LE Law Enforcement FS Are Service PS Public Health
Abbreviations: EMS Emergency Mescal Services Hz Hazardous Matenals GA Governmental Administrative
EMA Emergency Management PW Public Works HC HeelU Care
PSC Putt Safety Communications
"'ODP P _TO...(J^CT: Please use the drno-dnwn list to select the ODP predefined Drolert title fnr earhr nuiomentrequested
6. Interoperable Communications Equipment
7. Detection Equipment
-2
Nov.21. 2005 I:35PM
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program Grant
No.664I P. 4
14. Ph ic& Securi Enhancement ED ui•ment
QTV
Item
Vid eb:Stildiftance_EcitAi_ portable
itcR;TraniroitterSameras
s rec:antlItembto Digital Recorde
it tilartrarni5131urveillance EqUiPinent.
Unit Price'
4 7 1.00:00
Ina
RIZ
IIM
MINIMEMEIG
11111
Mil
Sustainment Costs
la=
OEM
RIO
Total
13,050
4,100
31200
s
48,350
ODP Pp:Jed
gelienTorilif.P-OliceDepartmen
Rosemount-Police De artme
Rosemonni-Police Departmen
Disc'
=Si
Receivin Jurisdiction
7
15. Inspection and Screening S stems
Item Unit Price'
yehicleinsp_ecticinttWith-Jactical camera
and-ataisliteba-1-7,:-.-t.4\---:-..32- $-:-:--.10,000:00--
Vehicle_inipectieakit--13ustc- --i.5. -S---.:--7,700100
CITY
Sustalnment Costs
Subtotal
Total
10.000
7,700
17,700
Disc`
ODP Project
InfrastalctUrd
Receiving Jurisdiction
m
RoseoUrit Police Department
ko Deo
=7-
iTotal Equipment Amount Requested
f2453/3
of Rented
111
a_.
DC
age A 3
Nov.21. 2005 1:35PM
5
E
a
m 5
c
m
m m
c a
O
y n
O R
o
m L
m 0
ma
co E
1-
m c
L c
m
C
cE
O 0 O
o as
C N O-
fa m O
CO
e .c
z m
a sL-
c O
O a
E y 0
Q C c..
y o E
N o_
c -p W
ro
o
b
C .C;
a
o
3
0 0 N
m E m
JD o-
CO fl
o a
m m
d O
c
0 0
o) al
N V
L a)
H 0 o
W
co
C
a1 v
a E 2
c
c
al=
o
m s
wL e a
k. 'c E
al a
M M <E qq
U N
n Y E .c
2 25 g
o A
y a ria
f c
d a
m
'd
a
W
O w aj
C
c E
C o- E
U: w V
N
ED
a O c
G C.
th
m m c
o E.
0 o E
1 "5 1
N
V E
E y w it x a
N u 2 k
u o c
G C
w
Ni
N
O V N
9
O H
o
N I.)
o gp
:Fa S
m E
D
Z 3* 3'
p- s
W C
0 3 ww
O R w
J w ww
a
111
2
2
a. 5
U d
N m C
0 ,H a:
C V
h
No.6641 P. 5
Page A -4
Cost 1 Disc** Jurisdiction Receiving
I
I
I I
I I i 'ji
i %in'I ly
I
Ifrl.i;;:TiilH1iHk'
I i I 1,:1;;I; i "I,I Ili i I I'
r I i
$I
Avg. Rate*
I'i'i 1
ffJ
I
I
luevelopmenl of operating plans for information collection and processing
1
I ravel expenses
r
I lvleeting- related expenses
c
Acquisition of authorized office equipment
f
irtecurnng Equipment Fees /charges
pace Rental/Leasing for newly hired personnel to administer programs Wthin
FY05 HSGP. 1
(TOTAL MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATIVE AMOUNT
_-I
C6
I
Number*
Expense Category
Hiring of full or part -time staff
slue }insuo3 /sjoneJtuo7I
'Hiring of full- or part -time staff
lContractors /Consultants
Contractors /Consultants
Nov.21. 20 1:36PM
c
t
CD
ID
c
C
ca
co
C co
to
CU 0
co M
CD "jk
CD 0
LO
a
0
E
O
Z
1
i
e
E
3
F
F
o
CD 0
0 06
cu
o
rx
c
No.6641 P. 6
8
w
Page A -5
LL
W
a
MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET WORKSHEET
Current expenditures listed sum to $143,590, so the 'current' available M&A amount is $3,590
2005 BUFFER ZONE PIROTECTION PROGRAM GRANT
ALLOWABLE MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
dice Dep
Name of Jurisdiction:
VVIth an award amount of
FEDERAL AUDIT REQUIREMENTS
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
1. For subrecipients that are state or local governments, non -profit organizations, or Indian tribes
For subrecipients that are institutions of hi her education or hospitals
ATTACHMENT B
If the grantee expends total federal assistance of $500,000 or more per year, the grantee agrees to obtain
either a single audit or a program specific audit made for the fiscal year in accordance with the terms of the
Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996.
Audits shall be made annually unless the state or local government has, by January 1. 1987, a constitutional
or statutory requirement for less frequent audits For those governments, the federal cognizant agency shall
permit biennial audits, covering both years, if the government so requests. It shall also honor requests for
biennial audits by governments that have an administrative policy calling for audits less frequent than
annual, but only audits prior to 1987 or administrative policies in place prior to January 1, 1987.
If the grantee expends total direct and indirect federal assistance of $500,000 or more per year, the grantee
agrees to obtain a financial and compliance audit made in accordance with OMB Circular A -110
"Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Universities, Hospitals and Other Nonprofit
Organizations" as applicable. The audit shall cover either the entire organization or all federal funds of the
organization.
The audit must determine whether the subrecipient spent federal assistance funds in accordance with
applicable laws and regulations.
2. The audit shall be made by an independent auditor. An independent auditor is a state or local government
auditor or a public accountant who meets the independence standards specified in the General Accounting
Office's "Standards for Audit of Governmental Organizations, Programs, Activities, and Functions."
3. The audit report shall state that the audit was performed in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular
A -133 (or A -110 as applicable).
The reporting requirements for audit reports shall be in accordance with the American Institute of Certified
Public Accounts' (AICPA) audit guide, "Audits of State and Local Governmental Units," issued in 1986.
The federal government has approved the use of the audit guide.
In addition to the audit report, the recipient shall provide comments on the findings and recommendations
in the report, including a plan for corrective action taken or planned and comments on the status of
corrective action taken on prior findings. If corrective action is not necessary, a statement describing the
reason it is not should accompany the audit report.
4. The grantee agrees that the grantor, the Legislative Auditor, the State Auditor, and any independent auditor
designated by the grantor shall have such access to grantee's records and financial statements as may be
necessary for the grantor to comply with the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and OMB Circular
A -133.
5. Grantees of federal financial assistance from subrecipients are also required to comply with the Single
Audit Act and OMB Circular A -133.
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (10/05) Page B -1
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
6. The Statement of Expenditures form can be used for the schedule of federal assistance.
7. The grantee agrees to retain documentation to support the schedule of federal assistance for at least four
years.
8. Required audit reports must be filed with the State Auditor's Office, Single Audit Division, and with
federal and state agencies providing federal assistance, within nine months of the grantee's fiscal
year end.
OMB Circular A -I33 requires recipients of more than $500,000 in federal funds to submit one copy of the
audit report within 30 days after issuance to the central clearinghouse at the following address
Bureau of the Census
Data Preparation Division
1201 East 10th Street
Jeffersonville, Indiana 47132
Attn: Single Audit Clearinghouse
The Department of Public Safety's audit report should be addressed to:
Minnesota Department of Public Safety
Office of Fiscal and Administrative Services
444 Cedar Street
Suite 126, Town Square
St. Paul, MN 55101 -5126
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (10/05) Page B -2
FEDERAL ASSURANCES
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
ATTACHMENT C
The Applicant hereby assures and certifies compliance with all Federal statutes, regulations, policies, guidelines
and requirements, including OMB Circulars No. A -21, A -110, A -122, A -128, A -87; E.0 12372 and Uniform
Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements 28 CFR, Part 66, Common rule, that
govern the application, acceptance and use of Federal funds for this federally- assisted project. Also the
Applicant assures and certifies that:
1. It possesses legal authority to apply for the grant; that a resolution, motion or similar action has been duly
adopted or passed as an official act of the applicant's governing body, authorizing the filing of the application,
including all understandings and assurances contained therein, and directing and authorizing the person
identified as the official representative of the applicant to act in connection with the application and to provide
such additional information may be required.
2. It will comply with requirements of the provisions of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property
Acquisitions Act of 1970 (P.L. 91 -646) which provides for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced as
a result of Federal and federally- assisted programs.
3. It will comply with provisions of Federal law which limit certain political activities of employees of a State
or local unit of government whose principal employment is in connection with an activity financed in whole or
in part by Federal grants (5 USC 1501, et seq.).
4. It will comply with the minimum wage and maximum hours provisions of the Federal Fair Labor Standards
Act.
5. It will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using their positions for a purpose that is or gives the
appearance of being motivated by a desire for private gain for themselves or others, particularly those with
whom they have family, business, or other ties.
6. It will give the sponsoring agency or the Comptroller General, through any authorized representative, access
to and the right to examine all records, books, papers, or documents related to the grant.
7. It will comply with all requirements imposed by the Federal sponsoring agency concerning special
requirements of law, program requirements, and other administrative requirements.
8. It will insure that the facilities under its ownership, lease or supervision which shall be utilized in the
accomplishment of the project are not listed on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) list of
Violating Facilities and that it will notify the Federal grantor agency of the receipt of any communication
from the Director of the EPA Office of Federal Activities indicating that a facility to be used in the project is
under consideration for listing by the EPA.
9. It will comply with the flood insurance purchase requirements of Section 102(a) of the Flood Disaster
Protection Act of 1973, Public Law 93 -234, 87 Stat. 975, approved December 31, 1976, Section 102(a)
requires on and after March 2, 1975, the purchase of flood insurance in communities where such insurance
is available as a condition for the receipt of any Federal financial assistance for construction or acquisition
purposes for use in any area that has been identified by the Secretary of the Department of Housing and
Urban Development as an area having special flood hazards The phrase "Federal financial assistance"
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (10/05) Page C -1
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
includes any form of loan, grant, guaranty, insurance payment, rebate, subsidy, disaster assistance loan or
grant, or any other form of direct or indirect Federal assistance.
10. It will assist the Federal grantor agency in its compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 as amended (16 USC 470), Executive Order 11593, and the Archeological and
Historical Preservation Act of 1966 (16 USC 569a -1 et seq.) by (a) consulting with the State Historic
Preservation Officer on the conduct of Investigations, as necessary, to identify properties listed in or
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places that are subject to adverse effects (see 36
CFR Part 800.8) by the activity, and notifying the Federal grantor agency of the existence of any such
properties and by (b) complying with all requirements established by the Federal grantor agency to avoid or
mitigate adverse effects upon such properties.
11. It will comply, and assure the compliance of all its sub grantees and contractors, with the applicable
provisions of Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended, the Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, or the Victims of Crime Act, as appropriate; the provisions of the
current edition of the Office of Justice Programs Financial and Administrative Guide for Grants, M7100.1;
and all other applicable Federal laws, orders, circulars, or regulations.
12. It will comply with the provisions of 28 CFR applicable to grants and cooperative agreements including
Part 18, Administrative Review Procedure; Part 20, Criminal Justice Information Systems; Part 22,
Confidentiality of Identifiable Research and Statistical Information; Part 23, Criminal Intelligence Systems
Operating Policies; Part 30, Intergovernmental Review of Department of Justice Programs and Activities;
Part 42, Nondiscrimination /Equal Employment Opportunity Policies and Procedures; Part 61, Procedures
for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act; Part 63. Floodplain Management and Wetland
Protection Procedures; and Federal laws or regulations applicable to Federal Assistance Programs.
13. It will comply, and all its contractors will comply, with the non discrimination requirements of the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended, 42 USC 3789(d), or Victims of Crime
Act (as appropriate); Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended; Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; Subtitle A, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
(1990); Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972; the Age Discrimination Act of 1975; Department
of Justice Non Discrimination Regulations, 28 CFR Part 42, Subparts C,D,E, and G; and Department of
Justice regulations on disability discrimination, 28 CFR Part 35 and Part 39.
14. In the event a Federal or State court or Federal or State administrative agency makes a finding of
discrimination after a due process hearing on the grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or
disability against a recipient of funds, the recipient will forward a copy of the finding to the Office for Civil
Rights, Office of Justice Programs.
15. It will provide an Equal Employment Opportunity Program if required to maintain one, where the
application is for $500,000 or more.
16. It will comply with the provisions of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (P.L. 97 -348) dated October 19,
1982 (16 USC 3501 et seq.) which prohibits the expenditure of most new Federal funds within the units of
the Coastal Barrier Resources System.
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (10 /05) Page C -2
CERTIFICATION REGARDING LOBBYING
For State of Minnesota Contracts and Grants over $100,000
The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief that:
Organization Name
Name and Title of Official Signing for Organization
By:
Signature of Official
Date
Grant Contract 2005 -BZPP -00727
ATTACHMENT D
(1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to
any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a member of
Congress. an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the
awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering
into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any
Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
(2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for
influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, A Member of Congress, an officer
or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract,
grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form -LLL,
Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying in accordance with its instructions.
(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award
documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans and
cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.
This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was
made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this
transaction imposed by 31 U.S.C. 1352. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject
to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.
2005 Buffer Zone Protection Program (10/05) Page D -1
Verbrugge,Jamie
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
En
air cargo 1 XLS (31 air cargo 2 XLS (31
KB) KB)
The City or the Port Authority have the power to issue general
obligation bonds to support some or all of the infrastructure needs for the potential air
cargo facility and associated development. The costs of carrying 100% of the
infrastructure would likely place a strain upon the existing cash flow for the City
enterprise funds or upon the property tax levy.
The City could limit the amount of debt it should carry for this project and ask the
state to up -front the remainder of the infrastructure costs. One option to consider is an
City issuance of debt in the amount of $2,000,000 for infrastructure costs. The debt
could be issued for a term of 20 years (the legal maximum is 30 years) at a current
interest currently estimated at 4.5%. Principal on such debt could be payable on a
current basis or it could be deferred for five to ten years until development would occur,
either in the air cargo facility itself or the property along CR 42 which would also
benefit from the utility extension. The annual interest cost on the debt at this interest
rate would be $92,250 (with bond costs added the pond issue is $2.G5M). Attached are two
sample amortization schedules, one with deferred principal and one with current principal
payments.
A policy issue to consider is whether the carrying costs between now and development
should be included in the assessment costs wnich could repay enterprise funds /general fund
at the time of development.
Mark Ruff [mark @ehlers -inc com]
Monday, December 19, 2005 6.09 PM
Verbrugge,Jamie
Air Cargo
air cargo 1.XLS, air cargo 2 XLS
g a-,
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
Rosemount, MN
Proposed G.O. Bonds for Air Cargo Infrastructure
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I Fiscal Total
02/01/2007
02/01/2008 65,000 00 4 500% 92,250 00 157,250 00 157,250 00
08/01/2008 44,662 50 44.662 50
02/01/2009 70,000 00 4 500% 44.662 50 114,662 50 159,325 00
08/01/2009 43,087 50 43,087 50
02/01/2010 70,000 00 4 500% 43,087 50 113,087 50 156,175 00
08/01 /2010 41,512 50 41,512 50
02/01/2011 75,000 00 4 500% 41,512 50 116 512 50 158,025 00
08/01/2011 39 825 00 39,825 00
02/01/2012 80,000 00 4.500% 39,825 00 119,825 00 159,650 00
08/01/2012 38,025 00 38,025 00
02/01/2013 80,000 00 4 500% 38,025 00 118,025 00 156,050 00
08/01/2013 36,225 00 36,225 00
02/01/2014 85,000.00 4 500% 36,225 00 121.225 00 157,450 00
08/01/2014 34,312 50 34,312 50
02/01/2015 90,000 00 4 500% 34,312 50 124,312 50 158,625 00
08/01/2015 32,287 50 32,287 50
02/01/2016 95,000 00 4 500% 32,287 50 127,287 50 159,575 00
08/01/2016 30,150 00 30 150 00
02/01/2017 95,000 00 4 500% 30 150 00 125,150 (It 155,300 00
08/01/2017 28,012 50 28,012 50
02/01/2018 100,000 00 4 500% 28,012 50 128,012 50 156,025 00
08/01/2018 25,762 50 25,762 50
02/01/2019 105,000 00 4 500% 25,762 50 130,762 50 156,525 00
08/01/2019 23,400 00 21400 00
02/01/2020 110,000 00 4 500% 23 400 00 133,400 00 156,800 00
08/01/2020 20,925 00 20,925 00
02/01/2021 115,000 00 4 500% 20,925 00 135,925 00 156,850 00
08/01/2021 18,337 50 18,337 50
02/01/2022 120,000 00 4 500% 18,337 50 138,337 50 156,675 00
08/01/2022 15,637 50 15,637 50
02/01/2023 125,000 00 4 500% 15,637 50 140,637 50 156,275 00
08/01/2023 12,825 00 12,825 00
02/01/2024 135,000 00 4 500% 12,825 00 147,825 00 160,650 00
08101/2024 9,787 50 9,787 50
02/01/2025 140,000 00 4 500% 9,787 50 149,787 50 159,575 00
08/01/2025 6,637 50 6,637 50
02/01/2026 145,000 00 4 500% 6,637 50 151,637 50 158,275 00
08/01/2026 3,375 00 3,375 00
02/01/2027 150 000 00 4 500% 3,375 00 153,375 00 156,750 00
total 52.050,000.00 $1.101,825.00 $3.151,825.00
aircargo t 1 SINGLE PURPOSE 1 12119/2005 1 6 06 PM
Part 1 of 2
piers oSIBt
rating Aigr$$Dthv
44
Rosemount, MN
Proposed G.O. Bonds for Air Cargo Infrastructure
Debt Service Schedule
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars
Average Life
Average Coupon
Net Interest Cost (NIC)
True Interest Cost (TIC)
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes
All Inclusive Cost (AEC)
IRS Form 8038
Nct Interest Cost
Weighted Average Maturity
air cargo 1 1 SINGLE PURPOSE 1 12/19,2005 1 6 06 PM
Part 2 of 2
$24,A85 00
11 944 Years
4 5000000%
4 6046559%
4 6386652%
4 4944631%
4 7646149%
4 5000000%
11 944 Years
Proposed G.O. Bonds for Air Cargo Infrastructure
Debt Service Schedule
Part 1 of 2
Rosemount, MN
Date
Principal Coupon Interest Total P +I Fiscal Total
02/01/2007
02/01/2008 92,250 00 92,250 00 92,250 00
08/01/2008 46,125 00 46.125 00
02/01/2009 46,125 00 46,125 00 92,25000
08/01/2009 46,125 00 46 125 00
02/01/2010 46,125 00 46,125 00 92,25000
08/01/2010 46,125 00 46,12500
02/01/2011 46,125 00 46,125 00 92,250 00
08/01/2011 46,12500 46,12500
02/01/2012 46,125 00 46,125 00 92,250 00
08/01/2012 46,125 00 46.25 00
02/01/2013 46,125 00 46,125 00 92,250 00
08/01/2013 46,125 00 46,125 00
02/012014 46,125 00 46,125 00 92,250 00
08/01/2014 46,125 00 46,125 00
02/01/2015 46,125 00 46,125 00 92,250 00
08/01 /2015 46.125 00 46,125 00
02/01/2016 46,12500 46,12500 92,250
08/01/2016 46,125 00 46,125 00
02/01/2017 46,125 00 46,125 00 92,250 00
08/01/2017 46,125 00 46,125 00
02/01/2018 165,000 00 4 500% 46,125 00 211,125 00 257,250 00
08/012018 42,412 50 42,412 50
02/01/2019 175,000 00 4 500% 42,412 50 217,412 50 259,825 00
08/01/2019 38,475 00 38,475 00
02/012020 180,000 00 4 500% 38 475 00 218,475 00 256,950 00
08/01/2020 34,425 00 34A25 00
02/01/2021 190,000 00 4 500% 34,425 00 224,425 00 258,850 00
08/01/2021 30,15000 30,15000
02/01/2022 200,000 00 4 500% 30,150 00 230,150 00 260,300 00
08/01/2022 25,650 00 25,650 00
02/01/2023 210,000 00 4 500% 25,650 00 235,650 00 261,300 00
08/01/2023 20,925 00 20,925 00
02/01/2024 220,000 00 4 500% 20,925 00 240,925 00 261,850 00
08/01/2024 15,975 00 15,975 00
02/01/2025 225,000 00 4 500% 15,975 00 240 975 00 256,950 00
08/01/2025 10,912 50 10 912 50
02/01/2026 235,000 00 4 500% 10,912 50 245,912 50 256,825.00
08/01/2026 5,625 00 5,625 00
02/01/2027 250,000 00 4 500% 5,625 00 255,625 00 261,250 00
Total $2,050.000.00 51,463,850.00 S3,513,850.00
air cargo 2 1 SINGLE PURPOSE 1 12/19/2005 1 6 05 PM
Rosemount, MN
Proposed G.O. Bonds for Air Cargo Infrastructure
Debt Service Schedule
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars
Average Life
Average Coupon
Net Interest Cost (NIC)
True Interest Cost (TIC)
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost
Weighted Average Maturity
elr cargo 2 I SINGLE PURPOSE 1 12/192005 605 PM
Part 2 of 2
$32,530 00
15 868 Years
4 5000000
4 5787734%
4 6083574%
4 4956686%
4 7065833%
4 5000000%
15 868 Years