Loading...
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